|
|
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) |
| Line 16: |
Line 16: |
|
| |
|
| =Text= | | =Text= |
| {{#Wiki_filter:ARCADIS Appendix A Investigations of Salem Unit 1 Fuel Pool Leakage - Final Report Summary | | {{#Wiki_filter:}} |
| | |
| INVESTIGATIONS OF SALEM UNIT 1 FUEL POOL LEAKAGE FINAL REPORT
| |
| | |
| ==SUMMARY==
| |
| | |
| FEBRUARY 23, 2004 PSEG NUCLEAR LLC RADIATION PROTECTION/CHEMISTRY SUPPORT P.O. BOX 236 HANCOCKS BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY 08038
| |
| | |
| ABSTRACT On September 18, 2002 radioactive contamination in the 78-Foot Mechanical Penetration Room in the Unit 1 Auxiliary Building had characteristics of Spent Fuel Pool (SFP) water. Preliminary conclusions from sample results during the initial Phase I investigations prompted an extensive investigation to characterize the source of activity and leakage paths. This evaluation documents the pathway for leakage from the SFP to the liner surrounding the SFP; blockage in the telltale drains; seepage through construction joints in the liner into the Styrofoam Seismic Gap between the Auxiliary Building and the Fuel Handling Building. The seepage is confirmed by monitoring the 78-Foot Mechanical Penetration Room wall, the Spent Fuel Pool cooling line at the interface between the Auxiliary and Fuel Handling Building, the water stop (boot) at the penetration between the Auxiliary Building and the Fuel Handling Building, and two drill points in the Styrofoam. The testing results indicate that build-up of SFP water behind the liner has been ongoing for at least five years on the basis of cesium activity ratios, and that water from the sampling points is consistent with boron and tritium levels in the Unit I Spent Fuel Pool.
| |
| The telltale drains were snaked on January 29, 2003 and following days. Water then freely drained from the telltales, thereby reducing both the amount of water and the time that SFP water stayed in the leakage collection system (i.e. the space between the liner and the concrete enclosure). Water from the telltales (after snaking) drained at about 100 gpd and had characteristics that more closely resembled SFP water with less indication of interactions with the concrete enclosure. By February 7 th, "cleared" telltales had reduced the hydraulic pressure and effectively stopped the seepage around the Auxillary and Fuel Handling Building. In February 2003, 45 gallons of water were pumped from Drill Pont No. 1, thereby significantly reducing the amount of water in the Styrofoam Seismic Gap. Further investigation during 2003 indicated that the composition of the water that migrated back into the gap was most likely a mixture of SFP water (3%) that had migrated beyond the gap and groundwater (97%). Again, boron and tritium confirm the link to the SFP, whereas cesium and cobalt activity are at very low or non-detectable levels because of interactions with concrete and soil surfaces. Water from the SFP continues to drain through the telltales at the rate of about 130 gpd (as of January 2 9 th 2004).
| |
| Most of the water drips through Telltale No. 2 with tritium levels that reflect the changes in the SFP tritium (50% increase during 2003). Cesium activity ratios in the telltales do not change in response to introduction of SFP demineralizers, again reflecting the strong role that concrete surfaces play in controlling cesium levels.
| |
| | |
| Background for Investigation The Spent Fuel Pool (hereafter referred to as SFP) liner drains (telltale drains) are a leakage detection system designed to collect water from the SFP that migrates through the stainless steel liner into the concrete enclosure surrounding the SFP. Work orders, interim reports and discussions with Salem personnel have indicated that the Unit 1 telltale drains have performed this function since early in the operation of the plant. At some unknown point in the past, chemical deposits (originally assumed to be boric acid- now shown to be a mix of boric acid and other crystals such as calcium carbonate) began to interfere with the drainage system. The space between the stainless steel liner and concrete enclosure of the SFP began to collect water with characteristics of the SFP. On September 18, 2002, Radiation Protection reported the detection of low-level radioactivity on several technicians' shoes. Investigations indicated a "calcium-like" substance adhering to the west wall in the 78-Foot Mechanical Penetration Room had measurable radionuclide contamination (Notification No. 20114071). These deposits were removed and an active flow of water into the room was then noted. Phase I investigations indicted that the leak had characteristics of Spent Fuel Pool water (see Table 1) and more samples were collected to characterize the source of activity and possible leakage paths. Another leak was subsequently discovered around the Unit 1 Spent Fuel Pool cooling line return on the 92-Foot Elevation (relative to a plant surface elevation of 100 feet). This leak was separated into the return line at the interface between the Auxiliary Building and Fuel Handling Building and the water stop (boot) at the penetration between the Auxiliary Building and the Fuel Handling Building. The following sample points were routinely monitored for radioactivity and compared with activity in the SFP and the telltale drains:
| |
| * A drip bag was constructed on the 78-Foot Mechanical Penetration Room wall to collect water. This is the "Drip Bag" sample.
| |
| * A catch tray with a sample tube was placed under the Spent Fuel Pool cooling line at the interface between the Auxiliary and Fuel Handling Building on December 17, 2002. This sample was designated as the "Short" sample because of the length of the sample line.
| |
| * A sample tube was inserted in the water stop (boot) located at the penetration between the Auxiliary Building and the Fuel Handling Building. This sample was designated as the "Long" sample because of the length of the sample line.
| |
| * Two drill points (Drill Point No. 1 and Drill Point No. 2) were inserted into the Styrofoam between the Auxiliary Building and the Fuel Handling Building (often referred to as the Seismic Gap).
| |
| * Water that accumulated between the Unit I Containment and the Auxiliary Building (lBD41).
| |
| Because of low flow from the leakage collection system of about 6 gallons/day (as well as other factors), the telltale drains were snaked on January 29 and following days. Water then freely drained from the telltales, thereby reducing both the amount of water and the time that SFP water stayed in the leakage collection system. Water from the telltales (after snaking) drained at about 100 gpd and had characteristics that more closely resembled SFP water with less indication of interactions with the concrete enclosure. Fiber optic examinations of the telltale drains on January 31 " showed blockage in No. 4 and 5 drains beneath the welds, creating a dam effect.
| |
| The probe inserted beyond this point indicated chemical deposits (originally assumed to be boric
| |
| | |
| acid crystals) had formed. Flow from leakage of the SS liner was forced between the liner plate and concrete providing water to other channels. Rather than draining out, the blockage diverted the water along the space between the SS liner and the concrete, eventually seeping out at the 78-Foot Elevation in the Mechanical Penetration Room. Water also seeped out of the gap where the Spent Fuel Pool cooling return line intersects the wall at the 92-Foot Elevation. Over time, the water apparently migrated and reached the void space between the Auxiliary Building and Containment. Figure 4 shows these locations.
| |
| By February 7, 2003, "cleared" telltales had reduced the hydraulic pressure in the leakage collection system and samples from the Drip Bag, "Short," and "Long" sample points could not be obtained because the flow had stopped (or nearly so). Minor amounts of water could be obtained from the sampling points at infrequent intervals in 2003. In February 2003, 45 gallons of water were pumped from Drill Point No. 1, thereby significantly reducing the amount of water in the Styrofoam Seismic Gap. Some water migrated back into the gap and samples were collected when sufficient water was present or about every two months). All radionuclide characteristics from the sampling program waters supported the scenario described above.
| |
| Summary of Evaluation Methodology Characteristicsof SFP Water Radioactive water from the SFP of a PWR (Pressurized Water Reactor) will contain approximately constant levels of boron, tritium, cesium, and cobalt activities (subject to radioactive decay). To detect and quantify leakage from the Spent Fuel Pool, the results are interpreted using the assumptions that the Spent Fuel Pool water typically contains a distinctive radionuclide fingerprint and that interaction with solid surfaces (e.g. concrete) can alter the activity levels dramatically:
| |
| * Boron at approximately 2300 ppm and tritium at 0.2 ltCi/mL (increasing during 2003 to 0.3
| |
| ,uCi/mL - see Figure 1, Tables 1 and 5). These two tracers are relatively inert and typically migrate with minimal reactivity to concrete or soil ( termed "conservative" behavior in the literature).
| |
| * Cesium-134 (134Cs has a 2.062 year half-life) and 137CS (30.17 year half-life) activity in the SFP results from refueling operations and leaching from rods stored in the pool. The activity levels and ratio can change during the course of a fuel cycle. Demineralizers effectively remove cesium from the SFP and change the activity by more than a factor of ten (see Figure 1). Because of difference in half-lives but similar chemical behavior the ratio of cesium activity can provide some qualitative measure of the approximate timing of any release and migration of SFP water. However, cesium interacts strongly with both concrete and soil to retard the migration away from the SFP (i.e. most of the cesium remains sorbed on the concrete enclosure of the SFP. This strong interaction with soil and concrete surfaces also complicates the straightforward use of cesium activity ratios.
| |
| * Cobalt Activity: 58 Co (70.80 day half-life) and 60 Co (5.271 year half-life) will have a characteristic activity ratio after refueling operations that will drop rapidly as the 58Co
| |
| | |
| decays. Cobalt also interacts strongly with soil and concrete with typically a lower mobility than cesium.
| |
| * The presence of short-lived radionuclides such as 131, (a nuclide that does not adsorb to solid surfaces) would be indicative of rapid transport of SFP water from pool to sample point. Only during an October 21,2002 fuel movement (Mode 6) were any shorter-lived radionuclides (i.e., 1311) detected.
| |
| Although assumed to have a constant radionuclide inventory, activity levels in the SFP do change in response to the use of a mixed-bed resin demineralizer (to reduce radioactive cations and anions in the SFP water) and to operational events such as refueling. After an interval of time, the levels return to an approximately "steady state" condition (where production and removal rates are equivalent and levels remain constant). However, water analyzed many years after migration from the SFP (or other source) may be difficult to trace to a particular event because of non-unique activity ratios and chemical interactions with concrete and soil. Both cesium and cobalt activity levels (relative to tritium or boron) from SFP leakage will be different than activity in the Spent Fuel Pool because of these chemical and physical interactions (plus decay of short-lived cesium and cobalt). Activity ratios of a given element (i.e., cesium or cobalt) may provide an indication of the age of the leak and/or the extent of the interaction with solid surfaces because of the very different half-lives of the two isotopes. As seen in Tables 1 and 2, the cesium and cobalt activity ratios are much lower for the sampling points vs. the SFP and strongly point to both age of the leak and chemical/physical interactions with the surrounding concrete and soil. Because demineralizers reduce all reactive cations (and anions) in the SFP water, any measurable cation concentration (such as sodium) could indicate introduction of groundwater and/or leaching of sodium from the concrete. Boron and tritium levels showed a "qualitative" inverse relationship with sodium (higher sodium in some samples- e.g. lBD41- that have lower tritium) that may indicate mixing with groundwater, although the correlation is far from exact.
| |
| Conclusions from Radionuclide Evaluation The results from the radionuclide investigations produce the following conclusions about the leakage collection system (telltale drains). This system was designed to collect and drain the water that migrated through the stainless steel liner of the SFP. All available reports and data indicated that the Unit I telltale drains had performed this function since early in the operation of the plant. At some unknown point in the past, the precipitation of chemical deposits (originally assumed to be boric acid; calcium carbonate has also been detected) began to interfere with the drainage system. The space between the stainless steel liner and concrete enclosure of the SFP began to collect SFP water. In October 2002, a number of seepage points appeared in the Auxiliary Building and were collected for radionuclide analysis. They indicated that water from the leakage collection system had seeped/migrated to several sampling sites (see Figure 4 for locations and background investigation for description). Table I summarized the average results for samples collected for the Phase II investigation (prior to snaking of the telltales drains)
| |
| (Figures 5 through 10 graph the time series of the data and discussion of the individual sampling points follows this section). The following major conclusions result from the Phase II samples in January 2003 (prior to snaking):
| |
| * The samples from the Spent Fuel Pool telltale drains, the 78-Foot Elevation Drip Bag, and the water in the Styrofoam between the Fuel Handling Building and the Auxiliary Building had common isotopic characteristics. Boron and tritium levels are equivalent to SFP water (90 to 100% of SFP level). Sodium was between 2 and 15 ppm indicating minimal groundwater input and/or leaching of structural material. Cesium and cobalt absolute activities were more than a factor of five lower than the SFP (8 to 20% of SFP) and the activity ratios were indicative of extensive interaction with the concrete and structural materials.
| |
| * The samples from the canal telltale drains and the water stop (boot) located at the penetration between the Auxiliary Building and the Fuel Handling Building ("Long" sample) had common characteristics. Boron and tritium were at 60% to 70% of SFP water; elevated sodium suggested that groundwater mixed with these two sources (although the potential pathway for groundwater ingress was unclear). The canal telltales and "Long" sample also had very low 60 Co activity, suggesting a strong interaction with structural materials or soil.
| |
| * Water in the space between the Unit 1 Containment and the Auxiliary Building (lBD41 sample) had characteristics of Spent Fuel Pool water that left the pool more than five-years ago and was subject to extensive interaction with structural materials. Cesium-137 activity is nearly 70 times lower than SFP and cobalt activity is at or near ND (non-detectable) levels. Higher sodium with some chloride indicated a groundwater component and/or interaction with solid surfaces. Most likely, SFP water had migrated from the leakage collection system over time through a six-inch gap between buildings and mixed with groundwater (70% SFP- 30% groundwater) (although the pathway is not clear).
| |
| * The whole question surrounding the seepage of groundwater into the various sampling points is problematic. The pathways are not defined but average water table elevations are about 5 feet bgs (95 feet plant datum) vs. sampling points between 78 and 92 feet (plant datum). Thus for most of the past twenty years there has been a hydrostatic head driving water through cracks and construction joints into the Auxiliary and Fuel Handling Building.
| |
| In the absence of any radionuclide contamination, this small amount of water that seeps into the building would not be noticed (most or all would evaporate rather than pool). The presence of sodium in a sample does not automatically "fingerprint" groundwater as the source of the sodium. If sodium and chloride are not "balanced" and the levels of tritium and boron are near or at SFP values (e.g. Drip Bag samples), then most likely the sodium has been released from leaching of the concrete/structural materials. On the other hand if tritium and boron are at some % of SFP values (e.g. Canal Telltales and 78' Long -Table 1) and sodium is elevated, then the sodium may come from seepage of groundwater into the facility or mixing with periodic precipitation and structural concrete. A complete structural analysis of potential seepage paths is not required for analysis of the source of the SFP water.
| |
| * Iodine-I 31 in selected samples was related to Mode 6 operation (part of IR15 refueling) during October 2002. 1311 leached from rods stored in the fuel racks during the refueling operations. This water, containing 1311, leaked and mixed with existing water (1311-free) in the space between the SS liner and the concrete enclosure of the SFP. Cesium activity ratios
| |
| | |
| for the sampling points reflect water that has interacted with the concrete as opposed to "zero-age" SFP water. The 1311 activity suggests a relatively rapid migration of small amounts of SFP water to the sampling points. Iodine-1 31 activity has not been detected in samples after January 2003, supporting the link to the refueling operation and not some other leakage path.
| |
| TABLE 1: AVERAGE COMPOSITION AND ACTIVITY LEVELS DURING STABLE PERIODS FOR PHASE II SAMPLE POINTS (January 2003)
| |
| AVERAGE RESULT DURING STABLE PERIODS Constituent I SFP Pool Canal 78 "Short" Drip Bag 78 "Long" Drill Points IBD41 Telltales* Telltales*
| |
| Na, ppm 6.2 12 2.8 14.7 26.8 6.02 59.7 Cl, ppm 0.0012 0.09 0.52 10. 0.41 12.1 Iron, ppm 0.03 0.10 0.47 5.1a 0.04 Boron, ppm 2316 2257 1465 2292 2605 1365 2119 1208 H-3 1.93E-01 1.78E-01 1.31E-01 1.91 E-01 1.81 E-01 1.18E-01 1.88E-01 1.19E-01 H-3 Ratio to SFP 92% 68% 99% 94% 61% 97% 62%
| |
| 1311, Mode 6** 5.96E-04 4.25E-04 ND 4.24E-04 4.05E-04 3.12E-04 3.84E-04 1.28E-04 W4Cs 2.18E-03 5.34E-05 5.11 E-05 3.01 E-04 5.84E-05 8.62E-0 4.01 E-0 6.22E-06 137CS 2.17E-03 1.67E-04 1.87E-04 4.52E-04 1.73E-04 2.02E-04 1.31 E-04 3.06E-05 137Cs 7.7% 8.6% 20.8% 8.0% 9.3% 6.0% 1.4%
| |
| Ratio to SFP I 1
| |
| 58Mn 4.1OE-05 2.38E-06 ND 9.07E-06 1.39E-06 1.87E-06 1.22E-06 ND "Co, Mode 61 8.02E-03 2.46E-0; 2.72E-05 9.00E-04 ND 1.05E-04 8.43E-07 ND 0
| |
| b Co 9.82E-04 5.88E-05 8.06E-06 2.12E-04 3.56E-07 2.86E-0 1.02E-06 9.99E-08 125Sb 1.07E-05 2.59E-05 2.12E-06 9.40E-06 ND 3.62E-06 1.82E-06 ND l 'Cs'37Cs 1.02 0.33 0.21 0.67 0.34 0.4 0.31 0.20
| |
| ` 5WC0 8.27 0.83 2.71 4.21 0.0 3.51 0.53 NU = Not detected ir samples analyzed.
| |
| Units for concentrations of radionucdides are presented in microcuries per milliliter (?Ci/mL)
| |
| *Before snaking telltale drains.
| |
| -Shorter-lived activities were decay-corrected to October 21, 2002 22:42 when Mode 6 (fuel movement) was established.
| |
| | |
| "Snaking " of the Telltale Drains Because of low flow from the leakage collection system (as well as other factors), the telltale drains were snaked on January 29 and following days. Fiber optic inspection confirmed that the drains had been generally cleared. Water then freely drained from the telltales, thereby reducing both the amount of water and the time that SFP water stayed in the leakage collection system.
| |
| Water from the telltales (after snaking) drained at about 100 gpd and this rate has continued to the present, as measured by the building sump pump (February, 2004). Most of the water (about 500 ml/min) drained through Telltale No.2. By February 7, 2003, "cleared" telltales had reduced the hydraulic pressure and samples from the Drip Bag, "Short," and "Long" sample points could not be obtained at regular intervals because the flow had stopped (or nearly so). The results obtained during 2003 (after snaking) are summarized in Table 2:
| |
| * After the "snaking" operation, the telltale (TT) samples closely resembled the SFP water-(see time series in Figures I and 2). In boron and tritium, the match is almost exact, reflecting the fact that neither constituent reacts with the concrete materials in the SFP.
| |
| Cesium- 137 activity was 75% of SFP at No. 1 TT and 16% at No. 8 TT; the cesium activity ratios (0.89 - 0.64) and the 60Co activity (64% to 2%) also decrease in a similar fashion reflecting an increase in flow path and time for chemical interactions from No. 1 TT to No. 8 TT.
| |
| * Water from the SFP continues to drain through the telltales at the rate of about 130 gpd (as of January 2 9 th 2004). Most of the water drips through No. 2 TT and has tritium levels that reflect the changes in the SFP during 2003 (from 0.2 pCi/ml to 0.3 FtCi/ml). Cesium ratios in the telltales did not change dramatically in response to introduction of SFP demineralizers in October 2003, again reflecting the strong role that concrete surfaces play in controlling cesium levels. Figure 2 does show a consistent drop in Cesium-137 activity for Telltale No.2 during 2003 as the cesium on the surface of the concrete exchanges with low cesium in the demineralized SFP water to "buffer" the activity level.
| |
| * After "snaking of the telltales", sampling points outside the concrete enclosure had a lower overall yield as well as a lower contribution of water from the leakage collection system.
| |
| Tritium dropped to 14% (of SFP) at BD41 to 31% at the Drip Bag (Table 2). The tritium level in the Styrofoam Seismic Gap dropped to 3% of SFP levels from about 70% prior to "snaking" the drains. The low tritium level at Drill Point No. 1 resulted from inflow of groundwater or precipitation into the Seismic Gap, driven by the change in hydrostatic head when water was pumped from the Seismic Gap. Cesium-activity levels were 2 to 8% of SFP (with the exception of a single Drip Bag sample that was not replicated). Cesium activity ratios were comparable to pre-snaking ratios and reflect long-term interaction with the concrete enclosure of the SFP. Cobalt activity is at or near non-detectable (ND) and <1% of SFP because of strong adsorption to structural material.
| |
| * The interpretation and results from the individual sampling locations during 2002 and 2003
| |
| -are presented in the sections that follow and are used to support the above conclusions. The time series is typically divided into "pre and post - snaking", pre and post refueling operation.
| |
| | |
| Table 2. Activity in Selected Samples (Averages after Snaking) Ratios to Unit 1 Spent Fuel Pool.
| |
| 37 Boron, Na, 3H, 1 Cs, 134Cs/l37 Cs 60Co, 58Co/60Co Sample Date/Time ppm ppm gCilmL, +/-Ci/mL Ratio gCi/mL Ratio 1 SFP 12-Jun-03 2395 -0 2.36E-01 3.08E-03 0.75 2.42E-03 0.36 10-Jul-03 2354 -0 2.67E-01 3.48E-03 0.71 2.46E-03 0.28 17-Jul-03 - -0 3.65E-03 0.71 2.40E-03 0.29 24-Jul-03 2359 -0 3.73E-03 0.69 2.60E-03 0.24 7-Aug-03 2349 -0 4.32E-03 0.67 2.86E-03 0.21 1SFPAverage 2364 2.52E-01 3.65E-03 0.71 2.55E-03 0.28 Drill Pt 12-Jun-03 234** 38 7.71E-03 1.34E-04 0.28 2.40E-07 -
| |
| No. 1 30-Jul-03 - - 6.77E-03 1.25E-04 0.26 2.14E-07 -
| |
| Ratio to-SFP 0.10 0.029 0.035 0.38 0.000089 1 BD 41 24-Sep-03 - - - 5.49E-05 0.20 ND -
| |
| 23-Oct-03 317* 178 3.45E-02 6.99E-05 0.19 ND -
| |
| Ratio to-SFP 0.13 0.14 0.019 0.27 "Long" 1-Jul-03 332 60 5.19E-02 3-Jul-03 3.34E-04 0.36 1.72E-05 -
| |
| Ratio to-SFP 0.14 0.21 0.091 0.51 0.007 78 Drip Bag 1-Jul-03 - 2.45 7.87E-02 3-Jul-03 5.86E-03 0.30 Ratio to-SFP 0.31 1.61 0.43 No. 1 TT 27-Aug-03 2393 1.50 2.90E-01 2.84E-03 0.65 1.42E-03 0.19 24-Sep-03 2371 5.60
| |
| * 2.64E-03 0.63 1.65E-03 0.14 22-Oct-03 2364 0.94 2.61E-01 2.78E-03 0.60 1.79E-03 0.11 Ratio to-SFP 1.01 1.10 0.75 0.89 0.64 0.53 13 7 Cs, 1 Boron, Na, 3H, 34Cs/1 37Cs 60Co, 58Co/60Co Sample Date/Time ppm ppm gCi/mL gCi/mL Ratio pLCi/mL Ratio No. 2 TT 27-Aug-03 2264 4.52 3.06E-01 1.64E-03 0.62 6.99E-04 0.18 24-Sep-03 2278 14.7
| |
| * 9.59E-04 0.64 3.35E-04 0.15 22-Oct-03 2310 2.70 3.26E-01 1.33E-03 0.61 6.54E-04 0.09 Ratio to-SFP 0.97 1.26 0.36 0.88 0.22 0.51 No. 3 TT 2-Jul-03 2140 1.00 *** 3.78E-04 0.61 8.72E-05 -
| |
| 26-Sep-03 2282 -
| |
| * 5.62E-04 0.53 3.48E-05 -
| |
| 23-Oct-03 2294 2.40 2.67E-01 1.O1E-03 0.53 3.89E-05 -
| |
| Ratio to-SFP 0.95 1.06 0.18 0.79 0.021 No. 5 TT 27-Aug-03 2296 4.01 2.93E-01 8.52E-04 0.56 6.55E-05 -
| |
| 26-Sep-03 2260 24.5
| |
| * 5.95E-04 0.52 7.92E-05 -
| |
| 23-Oct-03 2054** 6.40 2.25E-01 5.26E-04 0.48 8.78E-05 -
| |
| Ratio to-SFP 0.93 1.03 0.18 0.74 0.030 No. 8 TT 27-Aug-03 2279 5.56 2.89E-01 6.63E-04 0.509 l.OOE-04 26-Sep-03 2263 - 2.97E-01 5.20E-04 0.46 1.51E-04 0.09 23-Oct-03 2159* 4.90 2.68E-01 5.19E-04 0.51 2.12E-04 0.10 Ratio to-SFP 0.94 1.13 0.16 0.68 0.061 0.34
| |
| * Suspect Value
| |
| **Re-analysis
| |
| ***Insufficient sample
| |
| | |
| RIGURE la: SALEMUNIT1 SPENT FUEL PO ELITALE IGURElb: SALEMUNIT 1 SPENTFUEL POOL/
| |
| 2600 NO.1 BOROKN CESiUM ANDIODINEACHviTY TELLTALE NO. 1 BORON AND COBALT AClIVITY 2400 tOOE-02 1.OOE-02 2400 iY r _, -tOOE-03 -e 1.00E-03 I C itates }ebd ¶1. 00E-0 o 2000-_
| |
| .° 5 . - f
| |
| \ kLwltnim llavJrj 1.00E-04' Sa lf-efe el/W03 1.0E.05 1800 - _I. ...
| |
| .Nte: I"' vas not detected in 1600 Teltale Sanle.06 1.OOE-05 II 4 II Ha I III ~ 9 R;NsSa R~ i I 11C s Af ff
| |
| * a~ I og A,O A; . R
| |
| +-SFPB ppm 0 SFPCs-134,uG//mL
| |
| - Ben,TrNal,ppm
| |
| --+--1-i34,TNo. 1,uG/nL .. ASFPCs-137,uG/mL lTSnalwd T s SFP Bomppn -0o Borm lTT a l,PY pp lTSmlwd 2l SFP~aiin M SEPCo-58, uG/fi GCoS8, TTNlol, uG/m-L
| |
| -A- CS-137, ITNa 1,uG/mL a+SFPI-131, uG/mL _ SFPCo6, uG/rrL -- --- Co60, Tl Na 1,uG/m-L_
| |
| FIGURElc SALEMUNT1 SPENTFUELPOOIJ FIGURE ld SALEM UNIT 1 TELLTALE NO. 1 TELLTALE NO. 1 BORON TRMTIUK AND SODIUM METALS AND COBALTACHIVITY 1.00E+01 10000 1c E-02
| |
| . ILast SuffiderA
| |
| . O ri T el~les ldrelymed Sample Ir/mw3 2 2000 2 0.. E 10 _-1.00E-03 E 0- 2200 z 0
| |
| 1.OOE+C0 ,
| |
| 0 2000 4 410 M fqx E c:s
| |
| .1S s \ -1.OOE 04'>
| |
| 1.00E-01 0.1-1 11 h1 1l 11 l 1 1 .11 11 -1.00E-05
| |
| -U..
| |
| ;-- 5; 21 9949- ;
| |
| l+ SFP Boran, ppm + Bo4- T ITNo. 1,ppm a TrSnaled l9
| |
| -- - Na,lTTM.1, ppm + Ca,lTo.l, ppm ^FeTlTNal,ppb l I SFP lDin * --H-3, TNo. 1, uG/mL A SFPl-3,uG/mL 0+Z,ITTo~l,ppb TTSruked +C*58, 1TN~o. 1, omL l--- a --NaTT No. 1, ppm I l- -S --- Cio I,'T No. 1, uG/ni, 10
| |
| | |
| HGURE2a SALEMUNIT1 SPENT FUEL POOI/lELLTALE FGURE 2bt SALEM UNlTl SPENT FUEL POO/
| |
| NQ 2 BORON, CESIUM ANDIODINEACIIVIIY TELLTALENQL 2 BCRCNANDCOBALTACrIVTIY 2600 o n irA -1.OOE-02 2600 1.OOE-02 Demin Resi RPoamd A bA A Denim i_ oI is T^Htid w 2400 - 290Ct-0 i - 1.OOE-03; 1.OOE-03 -j 2 E c2200 -2 - - uam &E O'2200 WedftalesHdyd 1.OOE-04 -1 OE.406 200 0 O 2000 .. _ I---IDtDemif Iow Na I sIed11).
| |
| (1'eutale wo2(D)
| |
| S f fDayblb h-f 1.0E-05 u 1.00E-05"o t8 I'l ----- IWC ml jimdeb in nlw9Xtdin ww 1800 Flwdup inTefltale NA 2Sayle Noliflcatia 70>03602 ]/OZ1 160 - 6 I Hll,0l i 1.OOE-06 1600 1.00E-06
| |
| . §0~ ~~0 9.f 0 0 0 000 f5~ 9 4 SFPBorM, ppm - BaIorTNo 2,ppm 0 TdutaleSnaked +SI Bormppn BcnxTTk2,ppm O XTrSned
| |
| * SFPCs-134,ufoi/nl ---- Cs-134,ITNQa2,uCG/mL- - A - SFP&C137,uG/nrL O SFPDayin SFPCo-8,G/n-L Co-5,TT>2,uG/n-L
| |
| _ Cs-137,TTNa 2, uG/mL - SFP -131, uG/mL + SFPG>-60, UG/nL - Co- TTNM 2, uG/ffL_
| |
| G6O, FIGURE2c: SALEMUNITlSPENTFUEL.FOOL/ FIGURE2ct SALEMUNIT1 TELLTALENQ 2 TELLTALE NOL 2 BORO!K TRMHUM AND SODIUM METAIS AND COBALT ACllVITY 1.0E+t02 100000 1.OOE-02 DpeftigalHydrdysed c, 10000 1.OOE+O1 E 1000 1.OOE+00 1.00tE-041i c
| |
| .2 100;sx:
| |
| w0 E
| |
| .:x 1.00E-M1 S .00E-05 1.00E-02 0.1 -- ... 1.00E-06 2 g 2 8 8 48 8 8 I 8 E} ot 8 8 I I I o 5; Qv . y . i . Io N mgEg 1 g RN 0 I I S R Botn ppm - Bo TNa 2, ppn
| |
| * TTSnaId I Na,TTNb.2,Fppm -CaTNO.2,ppm a FWITrb.2,ppb I SPDmin -& H-3,TTNQ2,uG/nL A S3P 1-3, tC/nt 0 Zn TT Nh 2,ppb
| |
| * TTTSnakd -U- -C58,TTNa2, uG/ntI I La -. Nab TTrN 2 ppm I 0 -----
| |
| G>W0TTN.2, sI/nt II 11
| |
| | |
| FIGURE 3A: SALEM UNIT 1 SPENT FUEL BORON, CESIUM, AND IODINE 2600 - .1 .OOE-02 Demmn.
| |
| 2400 - -A. £>a-~f=1504j l.OOE-03cii Bor Y.
| |
| 18 200 - In-180 M~ode 6, - .OOE-05
| |
| -
| |
| * Floodu
| |
| + ornpp O Cs13, ~imLA Cs13, ~imL@- I13,owim I II -:l.OOE-06 9/1/ 9/11 9/21 10/1 10/1 10/2 10/3 11/1 11/2 11/3 1211 12/2 12/3 1/9/ 1/19 1/29 2/8/ 2/18 02 /02 /02 /02 1/02 1/02 1/02 0/02 0/02 0/02 0/02 0/02 0/02 03 /03 /03 03 /03 FIGURE 3B: SALEM UNIT 1 SPENT FUEL BORON AND COBALT 2600- 1.OOE-02 L>^,,,,,+Dennin.
| |
| 2400 -
| |
| Bor cii 1.OOE-03 on,2200- ML pp m 2000 - ivit
| |
| /* Demin.OU 1.00E-04y, 1800 *Mode 6, Low F*loodu-:
| |
| 1600 1 .OOE-05 9/1/ 9/11 9/21 10/1 10/1 10/2 10/3 11/1 11/2 11/3 12/1 12/2 12/3 1/9/ 1/19 1/29 2/8/ 2/18 02 /02 /02 /02 1/02 1/02 1/02 0/02 0/02 0/02 0/02 0/02 0/02 03 /03 /03 03 /03
| |
| -+ Boron, ppm -.W- Co-58, uCi/mL -- Co-60, uCi/mL c,e-o0.
| |
| 12
| |
| | |
| Time Series of Individual Sampling Locations SALEM UNIT 1 SPENT FUEL POOL - (Recent History)
| |
| Salem performs weekly boron and gamma isotopic analyses and monthly impurity (e.g.,
| |
| chloride, fluoride, and sulfate) analyses of the Spent Fuel Pool water. The normal sample point is the Spent Fuel Pump discharge pressure tap and is representative of water re-circulated in the Spent Fuel Pool through the unit's heat exchanger (note that water beneath the fuel racks could be relatively stagnant and only mix with the rest of the SFP by thermal convection). Figures 3A and 3B show historic boron levels in the Salem Spent Fuel Pools based on routine analyses.
| |
| Salem Unit 1 prepared for a scheduled refueling outage in October 2002. Salem Chemistry personnel have noticed a faint "bathtub" ring of white crystals at the wall interface of the pool surface that suggests decreasing water level and deposition of trace levels of boric acid. Boron levels in the Unit 1 Spent Fuel Pool decreased prior to the refueling outage ; the result of a combination of evaporation, leakage of SFP water through the SS liner and makeup with de-mineralized (boron-free) water. Mass balance calculations are not sufficiently sensitive to estimate leakage rates because the evaporation term is a number of times greater than the leakage rate through the SS liner (which by October 2002 had slowed considerably (< IOgpd) as the water level in the concrete enclosure reached the level of the SFP, thereby eliminating the hydrostatic driving force).
| |
| Salem Unit 1 entered Mode 3 for IR15 (refueling operation) on October 10, 2002. The cavity was flooded on October 15th and Mode 6 was established on October 21st. During refueling, the water in the canal is connected to the Spent Fuel Pool when the gate is open, but re-circulation between the Spent Fuel Pool and the canal is limited. The significance of flooding was that reactor coolant was mixed with refueling water and activity levels in the Spent Fuel Pool increased.
| |
| Iodine- 131 and 58 Co activity reported after October 21S1 was decayed-corrected to October 21 S when Mode 6 was established to enable comparisons of isotopes with different half-lives.
| |
| Iodine- 131 was not detected in the bulk Spent Fuel Pool water after November 29th (Figure 3A);
| |
| sample size and the counting interval were not optimized to detect 13 1I prior to the recent investigation. The average decay-corrected level of 1311 was 5.96 x 1 0 -4 jCi/mL. Several samples (see Table 3) detected 1311 activity after October 21, suggesting a relatively short pathway from the SFP to sampling points such as the Styrofoam Seismic Gap.
| |
| The Spent Fuel Pool de-mineralizer was placed in service January 1, 2003. Activity levels decreased by approximately a factor of ten as the resin effectively reduced radioactive cesium and cobalt (Figures 3A and 3B). Antimony-I 25 could now be detected because spectral interferences were reduced. Cobalt and cesium activities had begun to increase because of low flow in the demineralizer and continued to increase after removal of the demineralizer on February 6'h. Prior to placing the demineralizer in service, the average 134Cs/1 37Cs activity ratio was 1.02, whereas the average decay-corrected (to Mode 6 on October 21, 2002) 58Co/60Co activity ratio was 8.27. After the demineralizer was placed in service, the cesium activity ratio 13
| |
| | |
| decreased from 1.02 to 0.80 and the cobalt activity ratio decreased from a decay-corrected value of approximately 8.27 to 2.9. This is explained by isotopic equilibration with accumulated cesium on the demineralizer resin and differences in removal efficiency for 58Co relative to 60Co with the purification media used in the demineralizer vessel.
| |
| On January 30, 2003 special sampling techniques were used to safely sample water underneath the fuel racks in the Unit 1 Spent Fuel Pool and water at the bottom of the canal. For comparison a separate sample was collected near the surface of the Spent Fuel Pool. These sample results are summarized in Table 3 and provide important conclusions:
| |
| * Water in the Unit I Spent Fuel Pool at the normal sampling point, near the pool surface, and beneath the fuel racks was homogeneous with little temperature gradient.
| |
| * The special sample analysis results do not indicate that a difference exists in the water chemistry beneath the fuel racks and the circulating water; after the demineralizer was placed in service January 1, 2003, the pool water was homogeneous by January 3 0 th.
| |
| * The special sampling did not establish that 1311 levels were higher in the bottom of the pool prior to placing the demineralizer in service. With an 8.04 day half-life, insufficient 131i activity remained by January 3 0 th to provide confirmation.
| |
| * The demineralizers were taken out of service in late January 2003. Cesium and cobalt activity levels gradually increased throughout 2003 (Figure 1). Tritium also showed a slight increase throughout 2003. Cesium and cobalt activity dropped again when the de-mineralizers were placed into service in late October 2003.
| |
| In conclusion, activity in the Unit 1 Spent Fuel Pool increased during refueling operations as expected and decreased when the demineralizer was placed in service on January 1, 2003. The expectation is that samples from leakage paths from the Spent Fuel Pool would eventually show decreasing activity levels and changing activity ratios, providing a means to estimate the migration time (however, the strong interaction of cesium and cobalt with concrete surfaces obscured any simple correlation). Temperature, boron, tritium, cesium and cobalt activity indicate homogeneity in the SFP. Activity levels from the bottom of the pool, where assemblies with defective rods are stored, were equivalent to surface SFP water at 29 days after the demineralizer was placed in service. During 2003, nuclear operations continued in a normal mode and activity levels in the SFP stabilized over the course of the year (slight increase in activity from February to October). In October, the demineralizer was returned to service and cesium and cobalt activity levels dropped dramatically in the SFP. Because of the strong interaction of cesium and cobalt with the concrete surfaces, the telltale drain samples did not show a dramatic change because the large amount of cesium present on the surfaces of structural material "buffered" the cesium activity.
| |
| SPENT FUEL POOL LINER DRAINS The Salem Unit 1 Spent Fuel Pool liner drains (e.g., telltale drains) are a leak detection/collection system designed to collect leakage beneath the stainless steel liner. Telltale drains No. I through 10 receive the leakage from the Spent Fuel Pool, whereas drains No. 11 through 17 receive the leakage from the refueling canal, which is deeper than the Spent Fuel Pool 14
| |
| | |
| (Tables 3 and 4). Three sets of samples were collected from the telltale drains (prior to the "snaking" operation. The first set was taken December 11 - 12, 2002 and the second set was taken December 14, 2002 by collecting water dripping from each drain. The average leakage was equivalent to approximately 5.8 gpd. Drains No. 1, 2, 4, and 6 of the Spent Fuel Pool and No. 14 of the canal had the highest leakage; no leakage was noted for No. 7, 10, 11, and 12.
| |
| Caps were placed on the drains and removed January 17, 2003 for the third set of samples.
| |
| Tables 2-4 summarize boron, impurities, tritium, and gamma activity from the samples collected. Time series are graphed in Figures 1 and 2. Boron and tritium levels in the telltale drain samples provided a direct correlation with the Spent Fuel Pool, whereas cesium and cobalt activities (and ratios) were expected to provide a possible indication of sample age and extent of interaction with structural material. Sodium levels may provide an indication of groundwater intrusion and/or leaching from structural materials. Chloride should balance sodium if groundwater is present. pH changes may indicate interactions of the boric acid with structural materials. On January 29, 2003 the telltale drains were individually snaked; the water collected, analyzed, and reported in Tables 2-4. Collectively, the telltale drain data indicate the following:
| |
| * Boron and tritium data from the Unit 1 Spent Fuel Pool telltale drains indicate that the pool water was the source (Figures I and 2), whereas the canal telltale drains indicate possible mixing with groundwater (10 to 20%). Sodium levels for the SFP drains were reasonably consistent at <lppm. In Telltale No. 14 and No. 16 (from the canal liner), sodium was 69.7 ppm and 329 ppm, respectively. Boron and tritium in the canal telltale drains were lower than typical levels in the pool drains, and sodium was also much higher, suggesting dilution by groundwater (although the sodium was not balanced by chloride ion) and/or release of sodium from the interactions with structural materials.
| |
| * Iodine-1 31 (8.04 day half-life), when detected, was present in selected samples from telltale samples from the Spent Fuel Pool but not present in the telltale samples from the canal area.
| |
| When decay-corrected to Mode 6 (the time of fuel movement), the average level was 71% of the average SFP decay-corrected activity of 131. This comparison strongly suggests that the Spent Fuel Pool was the source of the 31I activity. The lack of detected 131I activity in the telltale drain samples after December 14, 2002 also points to the refueling operation as the source of the activity which became too low to measure after two months of decay.
| |
| * Cobalt-58 was not detected in all samples in which 1311 was detected, suggesting interactions of cobalt with structural materials (e.g., concrete) that does not adsorb iodine. The ' 31 -to-137 Cs activity ratio corrected to Mode 6 for drains No. 3, 4, 5, and 6 was 5.2, compared to 0.36 for the Spent Fuel Pool. Substantial uptake of cesium by structural materials had occurred, to reduce cesium activity by about 90%. Cesium and cobalt activity levels in the telltale drain samples were small fractions of levels in the Spent Fuel Pool water analyzed, most likely as a result of interactions with structural materials. The 134CS1to_137Cs activity ratio (0.19 - 0.85) and 58CO-to- 60 Co activity ratio (0.20 - 2.01) in the telltale drain samples were also lower than average ratios for the Spent Fuel Pool (1.02 and 8.27, respectively).
| |
| The cesium and cobalt in telltale drain water had exchanged (to isotopic equilibration) with "old" cesium and cobalt (low 5gCo and 134Cs activity), adsorbed to the structural concrete.
| |
| Thus, even if the path is short (from SFP to telltale) the cesium and cobalt exchange rapidly with the large amount of cesium and cobalt on the concrete and will reflect the activity ratio 15
| |
| | |
| of the adsorbed fraction (i.e. "old") rather than the activity ratio of the SFP (i.e., "young").
| |
| Because 1311 only weakly adsorbs to concrete and migrates at the rate of water flow, levels of 1311 activity are present soon after the refueling operation was completed.
| |
| * Antimony-125 was detected in only one telltale drain sample from the canal and in several of the pool telltale drain samples. Antimony-125 (2.77 year half-life) is a decay product of 121Sn (9.64 day half-life), an activation product of 124Sn (5.79% in nature), which is in the zirconium alloy cladding. Leakage from water in the pool in contact with fuel rods would explain the 125Sb in the samples.
| |
| * The average pH of pool drains No. 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6 sampled January 17th was 7.10 compared to an expected pH for approximately 2,257 ppm boron of 4.56. The average pH of canal drains No. 13 and 14 was 7.79 compared to an expected pH of approximately 4.80 for 1465 ppm boron. The neutral to basic pH indicates interactions with structural materials and/or mixing with groundwater. The calcium carbonate in concrete would neutralize the hydrogen ions in boric acid to increase the pH to neutral without changing the borate content of the water. Cation exchange of hydrogen ion for sodium and potassium in the concrete would cause both an increase in the pH and in the sodium and potassium concentration.
| |
| After snaking on January 29 'h significant tan or brown debris, characteristic of rust deposits, flushed from drains No. 2, No. 3, No. 6, and No.14. The debris was not magnetic. The water initially flowed from drain No. 2 at approximately 1 gpm after snaking, decreasing to about 1 liter per minute. Telltale No. 2 continued to drain at about 0.5 liters/min through 2003. The other drains had at least a factor of ten lower flow. The data in Table 3 suggest that the operation allowed accumulated water to drain, and resulted in an increase in both the 58 Co level and 58 Co-to-6 Co activity ratio [1.5 to approximately 3.2 (decay-corrected to Mode 6)] . Fiber optic inspections on January 31, 2003 indicated deposits (originally thought to be boric acid) behind the telltale drains. The restriction of flow forced leaking water to the build up in the leakage collection system. The formation of deposits suggests that the leakage had occurred over many years, which helps to explain the age characteristics of cesium and cobalt activity in the telltale drain samples. The drip rate from telltale drains was approximately 5.8 gpd prior to snaking.
| |
| After snaking, initially water freely flowed from the telltale drains, diminishing to steady drips; however, the rate was not accurately measured for an extended period. Snaking was repeated February 21, 2003 and the flow was measured at 22 liters per hour (139 gpd) from the sump pump. This rate continued throughout 2003.
| |
| Deposits on the wall area above the pitchdown trench, which receives the drips from the telltale drains, had an average 134Cs-to- 37Cs- activity ratio of 0. 13. Decay of an initial source with an activity ratio of 1.02 (SFP water) would require 6.5 years to decrease to an activity ratio of 0. 13; an upper limit age of the activity on the wall. The calculated "age" was about three years if one used an activity ratio typical of the telltale drains (0.3 to 0.4). Cobalt activity was not detected in the white deposits, confirming the slow migration rate of cobalt in contact with concrete.
| |
| In summary, water beneath the fuel racks is postulated to be leaking into the telltale drains beneath the Unit I Spent Fuel Pool, and water beneath the canal is postulated to be leaking into the telltale drains beneath the canal area. Groundwater may be mixing with the water in the 16
| |
| | |
| drains beneath the canal based on lower tritium and higher sodium levels (although the pathway is not clear) and/or interactions with the structural concrete is occurring. Very limited mixing with groundwater in the drains beneath the Spent Fuel Pool has occurred.
| |
| * Cesium activity ratios suggested a "history" equivalent to approximately five years based on an initial 134 Cs-to-137 Cs activity of 1.02 (SFP) that decayed to 0.22 (telltales). Most of the reduction in activity has taken place through a process of isotopic exchange between cesium in the water and cesium on concrete surfaces. The chemical behavior of cesium strongly favored adsorption to solid surfaces. [Cesium- 134 decays with a 2.062 year half-life and 137 Cs decays with a 30.17 year half-life.]
| |
| * Iodine-131 was detected in selected samples after a refueling operation (only) and demonstrates that a radioisotope that only weakly adsorbs to solid surfaces can migrate rapidly in this environment from source to sampling point.
| |
| * Snaking initially increased the flow rate, allowing the accumulated water to be purged from the leakage collection system. After snaking the cobalt activity level also increased in the No. 2 drain with an increase in the 58Co-to-_6Co activity ratio, indicating a more recent history and a better comparison to cobalt activity in the Spent Fuel Pool.
| |
| * Figures 1 and 2 show the activity levels in the Telltale drains Nos. 1 and 2 through 2003.
| |
| Of particular importance was the fact that during the interval that the demineralizers were in service (January and October through December 2003) the cesium activity dropped by more than a factor of ten in the SFP; the telltale drains did not show a similar drop. This supports the hypothesis of a strong adsorbtion coefficient for cesium and that the cesium activity is buffered by interaction between the water in the leakage collection system and the concrete surfaces.
| |
| * Tritium in the SFP increased by about 50% during 2003 and Telltale No.2 displayed a similar trend to the SFP that confirmed the direct connection between the SFP and Telltale No. 2.
| |
| 78-Foot Mechanical Penetration Area Drip Bag Sampling of the 78-Foot Elevation Mechanical Penetration wall began on December 11, 2002. Tables 2 and 3 summarize results and compare average levels in the Drip Bag to the Unit I Spent Fuel Pool and telltale drains. The boron, tritium, iodine (two samples), and cesium activity for the Drip Bag is equivalent to the average telltale activity. Figures SA through SD show boron, activity levels, and sodium as a function of time. Boron and tritium gradually increased with time, whereas cesium activity was relatively constant; 58Co activity was not detected and 60 Co levels were low and only detected when the sample size and counting intervals were increased. By February 7, 2003, the snaking of the telltales had reduced the hydraulic pressure and the seepage stopped. Tables 2 and 3 and Figures 5A-D show the following:
| |
| * Boron and tritium suggest Spent Fuel Pool water migrated through the SFP leakage collection system. Boron and tritium levels in samples collected in the drip bag increased over time as indicated in Figure SA, possibly as a result of source water displacing groundwater. The boron was 2735 ppm in the most recent sample; levels that are higher than the Spent Fuel Pool; evaporation (and possible dissolution of previously deposited boric acid) may explains the elevated boron level . The increase in boron and tritium 17
| |
| | |
| corresponds to a decrease in sodium (Figure 5D), suggesting less dilution by groundwater and/or less chemical interaction with structural material over time (chloride was less than 1 ppm, a level that would support the latter conclusion).
| |
| * The extremely low cesium and cobalt activity levels compared to the Unit 1 Spent Fuel Pool levels (but similar to telltale drain samples) may be explained by interactions with structural materials; the cesium activity ratio also linked the Drip Bag samples to the telltale drain. Low sodium and chloride levels also indicate a low level of groundwater dilution (chloride was less than 1 ppm). Relatively constant cesium levels indicate equilibrium with construction materials/concrete.
| |
| * The relatively low "'Cs-to-"'Cs activity ratio in the Drip Bag samples (0.34 average) indicates "old" cesium that has adsorbed to the walls of the leakage collection system and matches the cesium ratio in the telltale drain samples (0.33 average prior to snaking).
| |
| This conclusion is supported by non-detectable 58Co (70.80 day half-life) and detectable 60Co (5.27 year half-life) only in counting large samples.
| |
| * Iodine-131 (8.04 day half-life) was detected in two samples after the drip bag was established. When decay-corrected to the time Mode 6 was established for 1R15, the activity levels match levels in the Unit 1 Spent Fuel Pool. This fact and the lack of detected 1311 activity in later samples point to the refueling operation as the source of 1311.
| |
| Iodine does not adsorb strongly to surfaces, as cesium and cobalt do, and may explain why the iodine signal reflects "young" water while the cesium activity reflects "old" water.
| |
| * Iron was measured in selected samples and present at 0.09 to 0.48 ppm. The source of iron is uncertain and two scenarios are most plausible. The concern is boric acid corrosion of rebar in the concrete. If iron rebar corrodes under reducing conditions (Fe metal would oxidize to Fe(II)aqueous; although the rate is certainly much lower than under oxidizing conditions - i.e. when oxygen is present), soluble Fe(II) is formed.
| |
| Groundwater also contains high levels of mobile Fe(II). Groundwater Fe(II) occurs when bacteria reduce FeO(OH) in soils to soluble Fe(II). The Fe acts as an electron acceptor bacterial oxidation of organic matter. Soluble Fe in groundwater can be as high as Sppm in organic rich sediments of coastal marshes. In either scenario, when soluble Fe(II) is exposed to air (oxygen), insoluble Fe(III) hydroxides form, leading to the familiar yellow to orange to red staining patterns from Fe(OH) 3 , FeOOH, and Fe2O3 . An extensive structural review is underway by plant personnel to understand the source of the iron.
| |
| * The pH of the Drip Bag sample collected January 28, 2003 was 7.16 rather than an expected pH of 4.45 for 2735 ppm boron as boric acid. The concrete can neutralize the hydrogen ions via exchange of sodium and potassium in the concrete for hydrogen ion.
| |
| In conclusion, the 78-Foot Mechanical Penetration Area Drip Bag samples match reasonably well with the Unit 1 Spent Fuel Pool telltale drains. The water in the SFP leakage collection system has been modified from the original SFP activity ratios via interaction with structural material.
| |
| Possible minor dilution with groundwater may occur for the Drip Bag sample (although chloride was less than I ppm). The cesium activity ratio and levels match, but cobalt activity levels in the drip bag are lower as explained by additional uptake (interaction) with structural materials.
| |
| Cesium and cobalt activity levels through January 28, 2003 did not decrease when the Unit 1 18
| |
| | |
| Spent Fuel Pool demineralizer was placed in service January I", suggesting that the cesium and cobalt activity in the leakage collection system are controlled by surface interactions between the concrete and the water.
| |
| 19
| |
| | |
| FIGURE 4: LOCATION OF SAMPLES TO CHARACTERIZE SALEM UNIT 1 SPENT FUEL POOL LEAKAGE I (Not to Scale) 110' -a-Fuel Handling Ground Level (100')
| |
| Aux Building 100' - _-- Building Groundwater (96')
| |
| "Long" (Boot) and "Short" (Cooling Line Fuel Pool Cooling Line Return) Samples 90' _ A, (92')
| |
| Telltale Drains on 84 Elevation at 78-Foot Elevation Weeping Wall 78' - -approximately 86 Feet Aj 84 ') A Mech Penetration b Proposed Sample Drip Bag Samples 80' _ ~---78' Elevation to~Depth (80')
| |
| 70' _
| |
| 60' _
| |
| 43' _
| |
| Concrete Z- Styrofoam 20
| |
| | |
| FIGURE 5A. 78 DRIP BAG BORON AND TRITLUM 2800 - 2.OOE-1 A
| |
| 2600 -1.80E-01 Telltale Drains ;
| |
| g 2400 Snakd 1.60E-01 o 2 200 1.40E-01 2000 ____ ___ -1.20E-01 1800 - j ' I ;.OOE-01 I I (4 g ge-a r- eg ea eS e em e c
| |
| * Boron, ppm A No Flow -.- - Tritium uCi/mL FIGURE 5B: 78 DRIP BAG BORON, 2800 CESIUM, AND IODINE ACTIVITY 1.OOE-03 2600 l.24E CO-2400 0 1.OOE-05U o 2200 E06 2000 1.OOE-06 "'
| |
| 1800 l.OOE-07 eq G N N m eq m 2 m m '2 m mq m 0- 9 - i- -4 g iZ j ;
| |
| g4 i U - - - -- -
| |
| + Boron, ppm A No Flow - 'A .. Cs-137,uCi/mLl l -_-Cs-134,uCi/mL 1-131, uCi/mL I..
| |
| 21 -cc
| |
| | |
| FIGURE 5D: 78 DRIP BAG 2800 BORON AND SODIUM
| |
| - 40 35 2600 ....... _- 30 Telltale Dk-ain Snaked C 2400 20~
| |
| no2200 --1ie ht... .J.. 1 15~
| |
| 2000 18M00
| |
| - Boron1 ppm A No Flow . E-E- Sodium, ppm 22
| |
| | |
| February 24, 2003 FIGURE 6A: 92 "SHORT" BORON AND TRITIUM FIGURE 6A: 92 "SHORT" BORON AND TRITIUM 2600 2.20E-01 2400 2.00E-01 2 1.80E-01 -
| |
| O Telltale Drains Snaked -,
| |
| c 2000 1.60E-01i 2.
| |
| 1800 -1.40E-01 1600 1.20E-01 1400 1.OOE-01
| |
| - , pm N F -,
| |
| Boron, ppm No~low .. Tritium, uCi/mLl FIGURE 6B: 92 "SHORT" BORON, CESIUM, AND IODINE ACTIVITY 2600 1.OOE-03 260 1VOE.0-
| |
| _A ......
| |
| 2400
| |
| -1.OOE-04 5 0f 2200 U
| |
| 0 Telltale Drains Snaked ._4 o 2000 1.OOE-056 1800 5.5 Day Half-Life 1600 1600 1_.O OE- 06 2ilIltIl , ,IIS' Q; Q Q Q Q Q Q Q ,Q N N ;
| |
| q qq e 0-~~~~~~~~
| |
| N M Z s e i P InX s ~
| |
| N I i
| |
| I o
| |
| l~
| |
| - Boron, ppm A No Flow A-
| |
| --- Cs-137, uCi/mL
| |
| -Cs-134, uCi/mL
| |
| * I-131, uCi/mL 23 Cci70
| |
| | |
| February 24, 2003 FIGURE 6C: 92 "SHORT" BORON 2600 AND COBALT ACTIVITY 1.OOE-03 2400 A A 2200-200 \_ oTelltale Drains
| |
| -Snaked o2000- -. ._ 9>
| |
| *. , ~--- ,
| |
| 1800 - -- - _
| |
| 1600 -1 i I1 I 1.OOE-04
| |
| * Boron, ppm A No Flow - Co-58, uCi/mL ---- Co-60, uCi/mL FIGURE 6D: 92 "SHORT" SODIUM AND TRITIUM 30- 2.20E-.01 25 - 2.OOE-01 K4A . .. A 20 W 1.80E-01 Telltale Drains Snaked
| |
| * U 15 - : t / _-1.60E 00 10 - 1._/-A40E-01 :6 5 1.20E-01 0 1.00E-01 Sodium, ppm A No Flow .--. - - Tritium, uCi/mL 24 0,"bb
| |
| | |
| February 24, 2003 Spent Fuel Pool Cooling Line Return at the Auxiliary and Fuel Handling Building Interface ("Short" Sample)
| |
| Water was dripping from the annular space around the Spent Fuel Pool cooling return line at the interface between the Auxiliary Building and Fuel Handling Building. A catch tray with a sample tube was installed on December 17, 2002 to divert and collect the water, which ranged from 0 to 0.039 gpm (14.5 gpd average) between December 22, 2002 and January 7, 2003.
| |
| Because of the length of the sample tube, the sample point was designated as the "Short" sample.
| |
| Tables 2 and 3 summarize analysis results from this sample and Figures 6A through 6D show trends over time. The analysis results indicate the following:
| |
| * The "Short" sample was not water currently re-circulating in the Unit 1 Spent Fuel Pool (i.e.,
| |
| a leak in the cooling return line is not indicated).
| |
| * Once the sample source was separated, the boron and tritium levels were relatively constant and indicate Spent Fuel Pool water modified by interaction with structural material (e.g.
| |
| concrete). Most likely this water originated in the leakage collection system of the SFP.
| |
| * Sodium levels initially were erratic, but became stable and relatively low. Sodium levels were much higher than levels expected in the Spent Fuel Pool but comparable to water in the leakage collection system. This suggested that interactions with structural materials released sodium to water in the leakage collection system (also explains the increase in pH) and this water migrated to the "Short" sample. Chloride levels were less than 0.1 ppm and suggest minimal involvement of groundwater.
| |
| * Cesium and cobalt activity levels were relatively stable and intennediate between levels in the Unit I Spent Fuel Pool and the telltale drains. The 134 Cs-to- 137 Cs activity ratio averaged 0.67 (compared to 1.02 for the Spent Fuel Pool and 0.33 for the average telltale), and the decay-corrected 58CO-to-_6Co activity averaged 4.21 compared to 8.27 for the Spent Fuel Pool. This suggests a more recent history and/or less interaction with structural concrete than the Drip Bag or telltale samples. The higher activity ratios suggest a shorter and quicker pathway for migration from the SFP to the "Short" sampler. Because both cesium and cobalt activity levels were lower than corresponding levels in the Spent Fuel Pool, both dilution and interaction with structural materials was indicated,
| |
| * Iodine-1 31 (8.04 day half-life) was detected in two samples. When decay-corrected to the time Mode 6 was established for IRI 5, the activity levels match levels in the Unit 1.Spent Fuel Pool (and the telltale drains for the pool and 78-foot elevation Drip Bag) reasonably well. This linked the iodine activity to the refueling operation and a postulated leak from areas in the Spent Fuel Pool that contained defective rods from I R15.
| |
| * Iron levels were low, indicating relatively little contact with corroding ferrous materials or iron in groundwater.
| |
| * The pH of the "Short" sample collected January 28, 2003 was 6.47 rather than an expected pH of 4.55 for 2290 ppm boron as boric acid. It is not as basic as the Drip Bag sample perhaps indicative of a shorter travel time or direct mixing of SFP water with water from the leakage collection system.
| |
| After the telltale drains were snaked on January 29, 2003, the flow from the "Short" sample decreased. When the caps were placed on the drains, the flow resumed. Radiation Protection 25
| |
| | |
| February 24, 2003 personnel noted this correlation on three occasions. By February 7, 2003, flow was insufficient to obtain a sample. This behavior supported a hypothesis that water from leakage from the pool liner was restricted and being forced into the region between the concrete and the liner, eventually issuing through the opening where the cooling line return pipe intersects the wall.
| |
| In conclusion, the "Short" sample indicated a more recent history and less interaction with the structural material than other samples (such as the Drip Bag or telltale drains) as compared with water in the Unit 1 Spent Fuel Pool after 1R15. Interactions with structural materials and dilution with an "older" source (e.g. water from the leakage collection system) can explain cesium and cobalt activity levels being lower than corresponding levels in the Spent Fuel Pool.
| |
| Cesium and cobalt activity levels in the "Short" sample were higher than corresponding levels in the telltale drain samples or the 78-Foot Elevation Drip Bag sample, suggesting less opportunity for interactions with structural materials. Cesium and cobalt activity levels in the "Short" sample were higher than corresponding levels in other samples, but below levels in the Spent Fuel Pool.
| |
| After snaking, the telltale drains showed more common characteristics with the "Short" sample (before it dried up).
| |
| Water Stop (Boot) Around the Fuel Handling Building Concrete Plug at 92-Foot Elevation ("Long" Sample)
| |
| A rupture in the boot occurred on December 14, 2002 and the flow eventually stabilized. A long tube was inserted to divert the water, hence the designation of "Long" sample. The flow rate ranged from 0 to 1 gpm, averaging approximately 51.4 gpd between December 21, 2002 and January 7, 2003. The flow appeared to be affected by rainfall (as noted by Radiation Protection personnel) because leakage from the roof between the Auxiliary Building and the Fuel Handling Building near the service water pit, resulted in rainwater in the penetrations area in the 12 Service Water Valve Room; repairs were completed January 10, 2003. Precipitation data showed a direct correlation between the daily rainfall and increasing the "Long" sample flow rate, which was not indicated for the "Short" sample. Results for the "Long" sample are summarized in Tables 2 and 3 and plotted in Figures 7A through 7D. Boron, tritium, gamma activity, and sodium levels were more variable than for other sample points, suggesting mixing with other sources (such as rainfall). Boron generally followed tritium, suggesting a common source. The following conclusions result from evaluating Table 3 data and Figures 7A through 7D:
| |
| * After the "long" tube was inserted into the "boot" on December 14th boron, tritium, and sodium increased for about three weeks. This suggests that the initial samples contained higher levels of groundwater .In early January 2003, chloride concentrations increased and tritium and boron decreased, suggesting a quick response of this sampling point to changing environmental variables.
| |
| * Cesium activity levels were relatively stable (I 37 Cs <10% of SFP water) until January 6, 2003, after which time levels increased as tritium and boron decreased. The average I34cS-to- 13 7Cs activity ratio prior to January 6, 2003 was 0.36, similar to "old" cesium activity present in the leakage collection system.
| |
| * Cobalt activity was more variable and was not detected in several samples. The average 58Co-to-_6Co activity ratio based on 58 Co activity (decay-corrected to Mode 6) was 3.59, suggesting that a small fraction of the water came from the previous refueling operation.
| |
| 26
| |
| | |
| February 24, 2003
| |
| * Iodine-1 31 was detected in four sample and related (in time) to the Mode 6 refueling operation, contributing "recent" radioisotopes to the SFP inventory.
| |
| On the average, the "Long" sample showed similar characteristics to the water in the telltale drains. A mixture of groundwater and/or rainfall reduced activity of tritium to about 70 to 90%
| |
| of the level in the leakage collection system. 1311 and 58Co activity in some samples, linked in time to Mode 6 refueling, suggested that at least a small fraction of recent SFP or canal water could migrate (through the SS liner of the SFP- most likely) to the "Long" sample at 92-foot elevation. After January 24 th the sample point dried up because of limited groundwater ingress with lack of precipitation and eventually from the "snaking" of the telltales that drained the water from the leakage collection system of the SFP.
| |
| 27
| |
| | |
| February 24, 2003 FIGURE 7A: 92 "LONG" BORON AND TRITIUM 2000 2.OOE-01 1800 1.80E-01 0f 1600 1.60E-01 E-U 0
| |
| o 1400 1.40E-01 5 I-1200 1.20E-01 1000 1.OOE-01
| |
| -6 Boron, ppm A No Flow ... ---- Tritiuwn uCi/mL FIGURE 7B: 92 "LONG" BORON, CESIUM, AND IODINE ACTIVITY 2000 1.OOE-03 1800 it ,A I
| |
| R- 1600 ,
| |
| /-.R
| |
| _1I
| |
| ."V. - 1.OOE-04 -
| |
| U 0
| |
| o 1400 4.1 I:. .
| |
| A A
| |
| - 1.OOE-05 .>
| |
| A 1200 I A worepazred Dy VIU0U03, mninarahwatr irakap.
| |
| 1000 , ., . I , . I I ., . , II. ,,iI I. ,I .
| |
| 1.OOE-06 E
| |
| CiIV ( I4 # § N RfR E f 0 0 0 t~~~~~~- nwY " ., J-V
| |
| 'E -V VN IN, CV
| |
| -V ~V l
| |
| 13 Boron, ppm Cs-134, uCi/mL A No Flow I-131, uCi/mL
| |
| -A . Cs-137, uGi/rnL I 28 070DI
| |
| | |
| February 24, 2003 STYROFOAM SEISMIC GAP- AUXILARY BUILDING AND THE FUEL HANDLING BUILDING Two drill points were installed in the Styrofoam between the Salem Auxiliary Building and the Fuel Handling Building on December 19 and 20, 2002. The drill points consisted of a 1-l/4-inch direct push sampler with a 2-foot mill-slotted well point. The samples were obtained using
| |
| '/4-inch tubing and a pump. Drill Point No. 1 was installed vertically along the northeast exterior wall of the Fuel Handling Building as shown in Figure 8. Drill Point No. 2 was installed on a 45-degree angle into the Styrofoam from the "Door to Nowhere" (100-Foot Elevation of Auxiliary Building, opening to the outside of the Fuel Handling Building on the right and Containment on the left) near the area for the 78 Drip Bag sample in the Auxiliary Building. Tables 2 and 3 summarize results through February 21, 2003. Figures 9A through 9D showed Drill Point No. 1 trends and Figures I OA through I OD showed Drill Point No. 2 trends. The Table 3 data and plots showed the following:
| |
| * The initial samples indicated groundwater mixed with water containing activity levels similar to the leakage collection system. Once purged of the groundwater component, boron, tritium, and cesium activity levels were stable and identical to water from the SFP telltales (or the 78-Foot Drip Bag sample). After stable conditions were attained, Drill Point No. 1 and Drill Point No. 2 were essentially equivalent.
| |
| X The average 134CS1to"37Cs activity ratio of 0.31 and the average decay-corrected 5 8CO-to-60Co activity ratio of 0.90 suggested "old" activity that resulted from isotopic equilibration with the concrete enclosure of the SFP.
| |
| * Iodine-1 31 was detected in selected samples up to January 9, 2003. Decay-corrected 1311 activity supports the link between 13 1I and the Mode 6 refueling operation.
| |
| * Activity levels through January 28, 2003 were reasonably stable, with no effect from use of the demineralizer after January 1, 2003. The water in the Styrofoam Seismic Gap was not directly related to the water in the Spent Fuel Pool (based on cesium and cobalt activity) but rather had flowed through the SS liner of the SFP and into the leakage collection system.
| |
| Interaction with the walls of the concrete enclosure reduced the cesium and cobalt activity.
| |
| Water in the seismic gap was a cause of concern because of its elevated tritium activity and its ability to migrate away from the Containment building and to contaminate groundwater. On February 6 through 13, 2003 , 45 gallons of water were extracted from the Styrofoam at Drill Point No. 1. As shown in Figures 9A and 1OA, boron and tritium decreased and sodium increased as shown in Figures 9D and I OD. Cesium activity remained constant and 6OCo decreased (58 Co had not been detected since January 1 6'h). Cesium adsorbs strongly onto surfaces and the cesium activity reflects an isotopic exchange between the water and structural material near the Seismic Gap. The snaking the telltale drains eliminated the source of SFP water to the Seismic Gap and removal of the water in the Seismic Gap allowed ambient groundwater to flow into the region. Boron and tritium levels dramatically dropped from SFP levels to less than 50%
| |
| of SFP activity in one week. The important conclusion was that the chemical and radionuclide characteristics for both drill points were identifiable to the Spent Fuel Pool telltale drains, and the combined effects of snaking telltale drains and pumping the water out of the Styrofoam was effective in dramatically reducing boron, tritium, and cobalt activity. Samples collected during the summer of 2003 (Table 2) at Drill Point No. 1 had decreased levels of tritium (3% of SFP),
| |
| 29
| |
| | |
| February 24, 2003 consistent with the stoppage of the leak to the Styrofoam Seismic Gap and the subsequent inflow of groundwater to the Styrofoam. Cesium and cobalt activity are also very low, near ND levels.
| |
| 30
| |
| | |
| February 24, 2003 FIGURE 8: LOCATION OF DRILL POINTS DECEMBER 19 - 20,2002 31
| |
| | |
| February 24, 2003 FIGURE 9A: PHASE II DRILL POINT NO. 1 AT 20 - 21 FEET-BORON AND TRITIUM 2300 1.90E-01 2100 1.70E-01 0 Teltae Drains 1.50E-01 Snaked 1700 1.30E-01 m 1500 Approximately45 gl 1500- -sw 0 pumped on 2/13/03. 1.10E-01 ;
| |
| 1300 9.OOE-02 E-1100 7.OOE-02 900 - i 5.00E-02 Boron, ppm - - Tritium, uCi/mL FIGURE 9B: PHASE II DRILL POINT NO. 1 AT 20 - 21 FEET- BORON, CESIUM, AND IODINE ACTIVITY 2300 - - 1.OOE-03
| |
| * ,,, - i itle Dr~ins Snaked 2100 1900____-_
| |
| 100 130 Apprndately45 go 1300 P"" OI ~1.00E-06 1100 Boron, ppm - - Cs-134, uCi/mL ... Cs-137, uCi/mL -131, uCi/mL 32 c/-to
| |
| | |
| February 24, 2003 FIGURE 9C: PHASE II DRILL POINT NO. 1 AT 20 - 21 FEET-BORON AND COBALT ACTIVITY [.OOE-05 2300 2100-Telltale Drain 1900 SnaKed 1700 l.OOE-06 m 100 o~ 1500 - __ - ___
| |
| O.O 1300 A1pproxima1 4500 \
| |
| 1100 on p103 \
| |
| 900 l.OOE-07 N
| |
| O N If" e0 N
| |
| ;~
| |
| eN "o
| |
| ~f- 9 I ~ ~~f
| |
| "_""~-"
| |
| w ""
| |
| fV I 1 N8N1; ,
| |
| - Boron, ppm -------- Co-58, uCi/mL -U- Co-60, uCi/mL FIGURE 9D: PHASE II DRILL POINT NO. 1 AT 20 - 21 FEET-BORON AND SODIUM 2300 35 2100 - 30 Tdlltale 25aisi 1900 Snae25 1700 _ - 20__
| |
| AaOxhlmately45gal\ 1 1500 -mpe\ 15 1300 - 10 1100 -\ 5 0l 0rn 000 0
| |
| --- Boron, ppm .- '.. Sodium, ppm]
| |
| 33
| |
| | |
| February 24, 2003 FIGURE 10A: PHASE II DRILL POINT NO. 2 AT 27 FEET--BORON AND TRITIUM 2300 - .
| |
| 1.90E-01 2100 2100- ~~~ + .. .. .... .............. S 1.70E-01 10 Telltale Drains Snaked 1.50E-01 1700 1.30E-01 U 1500 -Approxmiif ly4WgMpumpe : 1.10E-01 from Drill Point No. 1 on 2/13/03.
| |
| 1300 - ---- - - 9.OOE-02 1100 - -------- __- 7.OOE-02 900 . .5.00E-02 OWNBp p Nm Tritium, ui/mL Boron, ppm.. ---- Tritium, uCi/mLI FIGURE 1OC: PHASE II DRILL POINT NO. 2 AT 27 2300 - FEET- BORON AND COBALT ACTIVITY 100E-05
| |
| _ Telltale Drains Snaked 2100 1900 o 1700 -
| |
| = \ \ -1.00EE06 M
| |
| °1500 ____
| |
| 1300 _ _ -
| |
| * _ _
| |
| 1100 Approximately 45 gal pumped from Drill Point No. 1 on 2/13/03.
| |
| 90 0..0 0 0 0 0 0 01.0 0 0 N' e4 e' t~q ce e. e. e tq X t e~ ev n e n~ e~
| |
| N N. N N. Np N. N. N. NN . o N.
| |
| -+- Boron, ppm - 0 Co-58, uCi/mL -i-Co-60, uCi/mLl 34 H-It
| |
| | |
| February 24, 2003 FIGURE 1OD: PHASE II DRILL POINT NO. 2 2300 - AT 27 FEET-BORON AND SODIUM 35 Telltale Drains Snaked 2100 - 30 1900 25 C4 170
| |
| ;1700 - '- Approximately45 ga pumpe4 \ 20 2
| |
| from Drill Point No. 1 on 2/13/03. .' is
| |
| -1500 _ _15 1300 -- 10 v) 1100 -- --- - - 5 900 - 0 0 Bro 05 Zf~ 0 0 0 0 13 0 S i ZZIV0 0 0 I0 0
| |
| -- Boron, ppm ...E. Sodium, ppml 35 Cj-v~~
| |
| | |
| February 24, 2003 OTHER SAMPLE LOCATIONS Table 4 summarizes analysis results for miscellaneous samples withdrawn at various Salem Unit 1 and Unit 2 locations. Evaluation of these data indicate the following:
| |
| * The Unit 1 RWST after 1Rl 5 was not the source of contamination on the basis of tritium level (1.26 E-1 jiCi/mL versus 1.91 E-i VCi/mL average in the "Short" sample) and average 58CO-to_60Co activity ratio (1.51 versus 4.21 average in the "Short" sample, decay corrected to Mode 6).
| |
| * Although the 12 RHR floor drain indicated cesium and cobalt contamination, boron was not detected in deposits collected in the area.
| |
| * The stalactites in the RAP tank area (this the RWST, AFST, and PWST) did not contain boron; leakage from the RWST to this area was eliminated on this basis.
| |
| * Three samples of seepage water between the Unit 1 Containment and Auxiliary Building (lBD41 ) suggest a link to the leakage collection system on the basis of boron (1208 ppm average) and tritium (1.19E- IuCi/mL average). Water from the leakage collection system could possibly migrate in the void between buildings and accumulate over time. The 134 Cs-to- 137 Cs activity ratio of 0.20 indicates "old" activity, consistent with the telltale samples. A low 60Co level was detected, but interactions with structural materials will reduce cobalt in liquid samples. The 59.7-ppm sodium (average) and 12.1-ppm chloride level indicates some groundwater, and/or leaching from structural materials. The source of 1311, seen in many of the telltale, drill point and seepage samples most likely related to the refueling in October 2002.
| |
| 36
| |
| | |
| ( (
| |
| February 24, 2003 TABLE 6. SUMMMARY OF SPECIAL ANALYSIS RESULTS OF SALEM UNIT 1 FUEL POOL INVESTIGATIONS--MISCELLANEOUS SAMPLES Sample Concentration, ppm Activity at Sample Time, gCi/mL Mode 6 gCi/mL Cs-1341 Co-58/
| |
| Sample Location Date/Time Na Cl Boron H-3 1-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 Co-58 Co-60 Sb-125 1-131 Co-58 Cs-137 Co-60 I RWST 12/17/02 8:10 2367 1.26E- 3.89E- 3.61 E 3.29E- I.77E-04 5.72E-03 1.08 32.3 01 04 04 03 Puddle Around UI RWST /27/02 9:00 2.94E- 5.56E- 6.08E- 5.4 1E-05 2.99E-05 0.53
| |
| _ _ _ _ _ _ _05 05 05 Rainwater Puddle Around U 1/U2 RWSTs 9/27/02 9:00 2.90E 5.05E 1.04E 9.78E-07 0.57
| |
| _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ ___ 0 05 06 _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _
| |
| Puddle Around Ul RWST 12/15/02 8:30 0 7.81E _
| |
| 06 11 Rainwater Puddle Around UI RWST 12/21/02 17:50 0 4.45E Puddle Around Ul RWST 12/22/02 16:30 3.25E-rc n -f -e -
| |
| Units for concentrations of radionuclides are presented in microcuries per milliliter (?Ci/mL) 37
| |
| | |
| ( (
| |
| February 24, 2003 TABLE 6 (continued). SUMMMARY OF SPECIAL ANALYSIS RESULTS OF SALEM UNIT 1 FUEL POOL INVESTIGATIONS--MISCELLANEOUS SAMPLES Sample Concentration, ppm Activity at Sample Time, g+/-Ci/mL Mode 6 gCi/mL Cs-134/ Co-58/
| |
| Sample Location Date/Time Na Cl Boron H-3 1-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 Co-58 Co-60 Sb-125 1-131 Co-58 Cs-137 Co-60 Water from Void Between Aux Bldg and 1/17/03 8:35 <3.3 2.41E Unit 2 Containment (2BD41) . 05 _ _
| |
| Unit 2 Cable Tunnels Under South RAP Tank 1/9/03 10:50 0 5.49E- 1.92E 1.68E-07 0.29
| |
| . 08 07 Ut 12 RHR-Wall Across from Ladder 1/2/03 10:00 0 Ul 12 RHR--Floor Drain 1/2/03 10:02 1.42E 2.81E-03 Ul 12 RHR--12SJ147 1/2/03 10:05 = 7.83E 8 i8E-05 1.59E-04 1.94 Pipe Trench North RAP Tanks Overhead 1/15/03 13:12 Stalactites Units for concentrations of radionuclides are presented in microcuries per milliliter (?Ci/mL) 38
| |
| | |
| Summary The Salem Unit 1 Spent Fuel Pool has experienced leakage through the SS liner into the leakage collection system that surrounded the SFP. Over time chemical deposits in the telltale drains restricted flow and caused a buildup of water in the concrete enclosure surrounding the SFP. This water has seeped through the enclosure and migrated to several unexpected locations: the area behind the 78-Foot Mechanical Penetration Room wall in the Auxiliary Building, the Spent Fuel Pool cooling line at the interface between the Auxiliary and Fuel Handling Building, the water stop (boot) located at the penetration between the Auxiliary Building and the Fuel Handling Building, and Styrofoam Seismic Gap between the Fuel Handling Building and the Auxiliary Building. The water in question had many characteristics of Spent Fuel Pool water (e.g., boron and tritium levels), but low cesium and cobalt activity levels and activity ratios suggested extensive interactions with structural materials (e.g.
| |
| concrete). Iodine-1 31 in selected samples when decay corrected to Mode 6 during 1RI 5 refueling, were comparable to levels in the Spent Fuel Pool. This finding for 1311, which does not interact with concrete, suggests relatively rapid migration of SFP water through the SS liner and ultimately seeping through construction joints and/or cracks in the concrete enclosure of the SFP. Iodine- 131 activity was not detected at other times, suggesting that the refueling operations were the source. None of the samples points showed the effects of placing the Spent Fuel Pool demineralizer in service January 1, 2003 because cesium and cobalt activity levels and ratios are controlled by exchange with solid surfaces (e.g. concrete). Flow rates at seepage points dropped dramatically (or stopped) after the telltale drains were snaked and normal flow in the leakage collection system resumed (at about 100 gpd). Because of more rapid throughput of water to the telltales after snaking, the activity levels in the telltales more closely resembled SFP water (e.g. Telltale No.2 tritium level increased by about 50%
| |
| through 2003 in response to a similar increase in the SFP). In October 2003, the use of demineralizers reduced SFP cesium and cobalt by more than a factor of ten; a similar decrease was not observed in the Telltale No. 2 because of the buffering effect of the cesium that strongly sorbed to the surfaces of the SFP concrete enclosure. Removal of the water in the Styrofoam Seismic Gap on February 13,2003 reduced activity levels of tritium to 3% of SFP levels in the Gap via groundwater inflow. Less than 5 gallons of water could be withdrawn from the gap on two occasions and the activity levels were at about 3% of SFP for tritium and <<1% for cobalt and cesium activity.
| |
| 39
| |
| | |
| Feutuary 24, 2003
| |
| ((
| |
| TABLE 3. SUMMMARY OF SPECIAL ANALYSIS RESULTS OF SALEM UNIT 1 SPENT FUEL POOL LINER DRAINS PRIOR TO SNAKING (TELLTALE DRAINS)
| |
| Concentration, ppm Activity at Sample Time, plCi/mL Mode 6 lICi/mL Cs-134/ Co-58/
| |
| Sample Location Fe Na Cl Boron H-3 1-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 Co-58 Co-60 Sb-125 1-131 Co-58 Cs-137 Co-60
| |
| [1 11 n1 11 [1 n1 LI [
| |
| Average SFP 1-water 2316 1.93E-01 2.18E-03 2.17E-03 5.53E-03 9.82E-04 9.44E-06 5.96E-04 8.02E-03 1.02 8.27 Bottom of Canal 2314 2.09E-01 2.02E-03 2.04E-03 2.72E-03 8.88E-04 3.20E-05 7.28E-03 0.99 8.2 AVERAGE POOL DRAINS: 6.24 2257 1.74E-01 4.74E-06 5.34E-05 1.67E-04 1.29E-05 5.88E-05 2.59E-05 4.25E-04 2.46E-05 0.33 0.83 VERAGE CANAL DRAINS 122 1465 1.31E-01 5.11E-05 1.87E-04 1.31E-05 8.06E-06 2.12E-06 2.72E-05 0.22 2.74 Ratio Pool Drains:1 SFP 0.97 0.92 0.025 0.077 0.06 2.74 0.71 0.0031 0.33 0.1 Ratio Canal Drains:1 SFP 0.63 0.68 0.023 0.086 0.008 0.22 0.00 0.0034 0.21 0.33 VERAGE 78 MECH 0.10 14.7 0.52 2605 1.81E-01 7.04E-07 5.84E-05 1.73E-04 3.56E-07 4.05E-04 0.34 DRIP BAG Ratio 78 Drip Bag:Pool Telltale 2.36 1.15 1.02 1.09 1.04 0.006 0.95 1.02 Drains Ratio 78 Drip Bag:1 SFP 1.12 0.98 0.027 0.08 0.00036 0.68 0.33 AVERAGE "SHORT" <0.03 2.82 0.09 2292 1.91E-01 2.76E-06 3.01E-04 4.52E-04 3.74E-04 2.12E-04 9.40E-06 4.24E-04 9.OOE-04 0.67 4.21 SAMPLE Ratio to Pool Telltales 0.45 1.02 1.07 5.63 2.71 3.60 0.36 1.00 36.5 2.01 5.08 Units for concentrations of radionuclides are presented in microcuries per milliliter (?Ci/mL) 40
| |
| | |
| Few uary 24, 2003 TABLE 3 (continued). SUMMMARY OF SPECIAL ANALYSIS RESULTS OF SALEM UNIT 1 SPENT FUEL POOL LINER DRAINS PRIOR TO SNAKING (TELLTALE DRAINS)
| |
| Concentration, ppm Activity at Sample Time, hICi/mL Mode 6 4iCi/mL Cs-134/ Co-58/
| |
| Sample Location Fe Na Cl Boron H-3 1-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 Co-58 Co-60 Sb-125 1-131 Co-58 Cs-137 Co-60 Ratio to No. 2 Telltales 1.05 1.03 0.99 3.86 2.84 3.59 0.82 4.61 1.37 1.31 Ratio to 78 Drip Bag >0.33 0.19 0.18 0.88 1.05 5.15 2.62 595 1.05 1.97 Ratio to I SFP 0.99 0.99 0.14 0.21 0.22 1.00 0.71 0.11 0.66 0.51 AVERAGE"LONG" 0.47 26.8 10.6 1365 1.18E-01 1.84E-06 8.62E-05 2.02E-04 4.69E-05 2.86E-05 3.62E-06 3.12E-04 1.05E-04 0.42 3.59 Ratio to "Short" 14.4 9.9 113.2 0.60 0.62 0.29 0.45 0.13 0.39 0.74 0.12 0.63 0.85 Ratio to Canal 0.22 0.93 0.90 1.69 1.08 3.54 1.71 3.85 1.93 1.31 Ratio to I SFP 0.59 0.61 0.04 0.093 0.029 0.38 0.52 0.013 0.41 0.43 Ave. Well No. 1 (21 5.15 6.02 0.41 2119 1.88E-01 1.86E-06 4.01E-05 1.31E-04 4.29E-07 1.02E-06 1.82E-06 3.84E-04 8.43E-07 0.31 0.53 Ft), No. 2 (27 Ft)
| |
| Ratio to 78 Drip Bag 51.2 0.41 0.79 0.81 1.04 0.69 0.76 2.87 0.95 0.91 Ratio to "Short" 156 2.13 4.36 0.92 0.98 0.13 0.29 0.0048 0.19 0.91 0.00094 0.46 0.13 Ratio to "Long" 10.9 0.22 0.039 1.55 1.60 0.47 0.65 0.036 0.50 1.23 0.008 0.74 0.15 Ratio to Pool Telltales 0.97 0.94 1.06 0.75 0.78 0.017 0.07 0.90 0.034 0.93 0.64 Ratio to 1 SFP 0.91 0.97 0.018 0.06 0.001 0.64 0.000105 0.30 0.06 Units for concentrations of radionuclides are presented in microcures per milliliter (?Ci/mL) 41
| |
| | |
| ( ( (
| |
| February 24, 2003 TABLE 3 (continued). SUMMMARY OF SPECIAL ANALYSIS RESULTS OF SALEM UNIT 1 SPENT FUEL POOL LINER DRAINS PRIOR TO SNAKING (TELLTALE DRAINS)
| |
| Sample Concentration, ppm Activity at Sample Time, gCi/mL Mode 6 gCi/mL Cs-134/ Co-58/
| |
| Sample Location Date/Time Fe Na Cl Boron H-3 1-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 Co-58 Co-60 Sb-125 1-131 Co-58 Cs-137 Co-60 Trench Below Drains 9/30/02 10:35 2.34E-04 7.23E-04 IOOE-03 2.51E-04 0.32 Telltale No. I (Pool) 12/11/02 16:30 2232 7.01E-05 1.72E-04 2.14E-05 5.90E-05 3.52E-05 0.41 0.60 Telltale No. I (Pool) 12/14/02 6:00 1.86E-01 1.08E-04 2.07E-04 2.11E-05 4.65E-05 3.56E-05 0.52 0.77 Telltale No. I (Pool) 1/17/03 13:05 4.76 2355 1.95E-01 6.01E-05 1.40E-04 2.63E-05 5.66E-05 9.32E-06 6.21E-05 0.43 1.10 Telltale No. 2 (Pool) 12/11/02 16:45 2229 2.27E-04 2.68E-04 1.92E-05 1.57E-05 3.16E-05 0.85 2.01 Telltale No. 2 (Pool) 12/14/02 6:00 1.85E-01 5.71E-05 1.24E-04 9.71E-06 1.56E-05 1.83E-05 1.64E-05 0.46 1.05 Telltale No. 2 (Pool) 1/17/03 13:07 4.74 2301 3.69E-05 9.59E-05 1.33E-05 2.23E-05 1.78E-05 3.13E-05 0.38 1.40 Telltale No. 3 (Pool) 12/12/02 17:30 2263 4.83E-06 1.27E-05 4.82E-05 2.81E-05 4.20E-04 0.26 Telltale No. 3 (Pool) 12/14/02 11:45 1.64E-01 2.35E-06 1.17E-05 5.12E-05 2.42E-05 2.37E-04 0.23 felltale No. 3 (Pool) 1/1 7/03 13:09 3.44 2259 1.94E-01 1.02E-05 4.32E-05 3.22E-05 0.24 Telltale No. 4 (Pool) 12/11/02 16:45 2230 7.43E-06 2.93E-05 8.52E-05 4.32E-06 2.41E-05 2.33E-05 5.91E-04 7.10E-06 0.34 0.29 Telltale No. 4 (Pool) 12/14/02 6:00 1.65E-01 3.20E-06 5.04E-05 1.12E-04 5.79E-06 1.93E-05 2.54E-05 3.17E-04 9.76E-06 0.45 0.51 Units for concentrations of radionuclides are presented in microcuries per mitliliter (?Ci/mL) 42
| |
| | |
| Feuruary 24, 2003
| |
| ( (
| |
| TABLE 3 (continued). SUMMMARY OF SPECIAL ANALYSIS RESULTS OF SALEM UNIT 1 SPENT FUEL POOL LINER DRAINS PRIOR TO SNAKING (TELLTALE DRAINS)
| |
| Sample Concentration, ppm Activity at Sample Time, glCi/mL Mode 6 .Ci/mL Cs-134/ Co-58/
| |
| Sample Location Date/Time Fe lNa l l Boron H-3 lI1-131 l Cs-134 I Cs-137 Co-58 Co-60 Sb-125 1-131 [ Co-58 Cs-137 Co-60 Tclltale No. 4 (Pool) 1/17/03 13:12 4.56 2301 1.85E-01 2.93E-05 8.09E-05 5.OOE-06 3.19E-05 1.50E-05 1.18E-05 0.36 0.37 Tciltale No. 5 (Pool) 12/12/02 17:30 2357 2.93E-06 2.25E-05 7.38E-0; 3.78E-05 2.54E-04 0.30 Tciltale No. 5 (Pool) 12/14/02 11:45 1.34E-01 2.92E-06 2.40E-05 8.25E-0; 4.15E-05 2.95E-04 0.29 Tciltale No. 5 (Pool) 1/17/03 13:15 3.34 2232 1.90E-01 2.09E-05 6.43E-0; 4.59E-05 0.33 Tclltale No. 6 (Pool) 12/11/02 16:45 2221 8.80E-06 2.86E-05 1.07E-0 4 2.54E-05 1.48E-05 7.EOE-04 0.27 Telltale No. 6 (Pool) 12/14/02 6:00 1.35E-01 4.98E-05 1.39E-04 3.29E-06 2.80E-05 1.50E-05 5.54E-06 0.36 0.20 Telltale No. 6 (Pool) 1/17/03 13:19 7.84 2402 1.91E-0 1 2.62E-05 1.05E-0 4 1.76E-04 4.73E-05 0.25 Telltalc No. 8 (Pool) 12/12/02 17:30 2290 5.27E-06 8.05E-05 3.88E-04 2.87E-05 1.25E-0; 4.58E-04 0.21 Tclltalc No. 8 (Pool) 12/14/02 11:45 1.71E-01 5.48E-06 7.00E-05 3.38E-04 2.61E-05 5.54E-04 0.21 Telltale No. 8 (Pool) 1/17/03 13:21 12.1 2304 7.07E-05 3.48E-0 4 4.52E-04 1.05E-04 0.20 Telltale No. 9 (Pool) 12/12/02 17:30 2271 6.95E-05 3.31E-04 3.22E-05 0.21 Telltale No. 9 (Pool) 12/14/02 11:45 1.72E-01 4.24E-06 6.49E-05 3.49E-04 3.14E-05 4.29E-04 0.19 Telltale No. 9 (Pool) 1/17/03 13:23 9.16 1861 15.12E-051 2.55E-0 I1.12E-041 6.62E-0 10.20 AVERAGE POOL DRAINS: 1 6.21 2251 1.74E-011 4.74E-061 5.34E-01 1.67E-01 1.29E-051 5.88E-0512.59E-01 4.25E-0412.46E-051 0.33 0.83 Units for concentrations of radionuclides are presented in microcuries per milliliter (?Ci/mL) 43
| |
| | |
| Fe,,uary 24, 2003 TABLE 3 (continued). SUMMMARY OF SPECIAL ANALYSIS RESULTS OF SALEM UNIT 1 SPENT FUEL POOL LINER DRAINS PRIOR TO SNAKING (TELLTALE DRAINS)
| |
| Sample Concentration, ppm Activity at Sample Time, giCi/mL Mode 6 pCi/mL Cs-134/ Co-58/
| |
| Sample Location Date/Time Fe Na Cl Boron H-3 1-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 Co-58 Co-60 Sb-125 1-131 Co-58 Cs-137 Co-60 Telltale No. II (Canal) 1/17/03 13:26 3.03E-06 1.76E-05 1.66E-06 3.48E-06 3.91E-06 0.17 1.12 Telltale No. 13 (Canal) 12/12/02 17:30 2085 8.S4E-05 4.10E-04 0.21 Tciltale No. 13 (Canal) 12/14/02 11:45 1.49E-01 8.63E-05 3.68E-04 0.23 Telltale No. 13 (Canal) 1/17/03 13:28 48.4 1.92E-01 5.77E-05 2.66E-04 9.90E-07 2.12E-06 0.22 Telltale No. 14 (Canal) 12/11/02 16:50 1703 5.18E-05 2.12E-04 I.IIE-05 1.82E-05 0.24 Telltale No. 14 (Canal) 12/14/02 6:00 1.12E-01 7.11E-05 2.12E-04 9.92E-06 4.05E-06 1.67E-05 0.34 4.13 Telitale No. 14 (Canal) 1/17/03 13:30 69.7 1665 1.59E-01 5.02E-05 1.82E-04 2.97E-05 2.37E-05 7.01E-05 0.28 2.95 Telltale No. I5 (Canal) 1/17/03 13:30 40.7 7.34E-06 0.00 Telltale No. 16 (Canal) 1/17/03 13:34 329 408 4.40E-02 3.31E-06 1.29E-05 0.26 AVERAGE CANAL DRAINS 122 1465 1.31E-01 5.11E-05 1.87E-04 1.31E-05 8.06E-06 2.12E-06 2.72E-05 0.22 2.74 Ratio Pool Drains:1 SFP 0.97 0.92 0.025 0.077 0.060 2.74 0.71 0.0031 0.33 0.10 Ratio Canal Drains:1 SFP 0.63 0.68 0.023 0.086 0.008 0.22 0.00 0.0034 0.21 0.33 Note: Bolded values were used in averages. Mode 6 for IR15 was established 10/21/02 22:42.
| |
| Units for concentrations of radionuclides are presented in microcuries per milliliter (?CiimL) 44
| |
| | |
| t uary 24, ZjUU
| |
| ( (
| |
| TABLE 3B: SUMMMARY OF SPECIAL ANALYSIS RESULTS OF SALEM UNIT 1 SPENT FUEL POOL LINER DRAINS AFTER SNAKING (TELLTALE DRAINS)
| |
| Sample Concentration, ppm I Activity at Sample Time, gICi/mL Mode 6 ItCi/mL Cs-134/ Co-58/
| |
| Sample Location Date/Time Fel Cl l Boron [ H-3 ] 1-131 Cs-134 I Cs-137 I o-58 ICo-60 I Sb-125 j 1-131 Co-58 JCs-137 Co-60 Telltale No. I Ave Before Snaking 4.76 2294 1.91E-01 7.95E-05 1.73E-04 2.30E-05 5.40E-0 9.32E-06 4.43E-05 0.45 0.82 After Snaking 1/29/03 10:30 3.04 2242 7.65E-05 1.70E-04 2.91E-05 6.90E-05 2.63E-05 7.71 E-05 0.45 1.12 Telltale No. 2 Ave Before Snaking 4.74 2265 1.89E-01 1.07E-04 1.63E-04 1.41E-05 1.79E-0' 1.80E-05 2.64E-05 0.56 1.491 After Snaking 1/29/03 10:25 2.84 2229 1.97E-01 7.04E-05 1.50E-04 I .26E-05 I.46E-04 0.47 1/29/03 10:50 2.84 2230 1.76E-01 7.23E-04 1.49E-04 1.27E-05 1.24EQ5 2.45E-04 0.48 1/29/03 14:00 2.42 2237 2.01E-01 7.60E-05 1.50E-0 S.97EO 1.24E-05 1.95E-04 0.51 2/3/03 14:30 3.10 2241 2.OOE-01 9.33E-05 1.87E-04 8.27E-01 1.12E-04 0.5 (
| |
| Telltale No 3 Ave Before Snaking 3.44 2261 1.79E-01 3.59E-06 1.15E-05 4.75E-05 2.82E-0 3.29E-04 0.24 After Snaking 1/29/03 9:45 5.42 2217 3.36E-05 9.70E-05 8.44E-0 6.12E-05 1.46E-05 2.23E-05 0.35 0.3 Telltale No 5 _
| |
| Ave Before Snaking 3.34 2295 1.62E-01 2.92E-0 2.25E-05 7.35E-05 4.17E-05 2.75E-04 0.31 After Snaking 1/29/03 10:15 8.08 234 4.26E-05 1.48E-04 1.OOE-04 0.2 Units for concentrations of radionuClides are presented in microcuries per milliliter (?Ci/mL) 45
| |
| | |
| Pebruary ZUU35 (I (
| |
| TABLE 3B (continued): SUMMMARY OF SPECIAL ANALYSIS RESULTS OF SALEM UNIT 1 SPENT FUEL POOL LINER DRAINS AFTER SNAKING (TELLTALE DRAINS)
| |
| Sample Concentration, ppm Activity at Sample Time, lLCi/mL l Mode 6 iCi/mL Cs-134/ Co-58/
| |
| Sample Location Date/Time Fe [ Na ] Cl [ Boron H-3 l 1-131 l Cs-134 [ Cs-137 l Co-58 [ Co-60 I Sb-125 l 1-131 [ Co-58 Cs-137 Co-60 Telltale No 6 Ave Before Snaking 7.84 2312 1.63E-01 3.48E-05 1.17E-04 3.29E-06 7.65E-0' 2.57E-05 7.00E-04 5.54E-06 0.29 0.20 After Snaking 1/29/03 12:00 5.40 2206 3.98E-05 2.72E-04 8.48E-07 7.43E-05 7.23E-0O 2.25E-06 0.15 0.03 Telltale No 8 Ave Before Snaking 12.1 2297 1.71E-01 5.37E-06 7.37E-05 3.58E-04 1.69E-01 5.89E-0' 5.06E-04 0.21 After Snaking 1/29/03 10:25 12.4 2123 6.28E-05 2.91E-04 3.25E-05 7.74E-0( 0.22 Telltale No 9 Ave Before Snaking 9.16 2066 1.92E-01 4.24E-06 6.19E-05 3.11 E-04 5.86E-0! 6.62E-01 4.29E-04 0.20 After Snaking 1/29/03 10:35 2145 5.53E-05 3.23E-0 1.0IE-04 0.17 Telltale No 13 Ave Before Snaking 48.4 2085 1.71E-01 7.65E-05 3.48E-04 9.90E-0' 2.12E-061 0.22 After Snaking 1/29/03 13:35 1806 1.93E-01 5.19E-05 2.44E-04 2.22E-0 4.30E-Ot 0.21 Telltale No 14 Ave Before Snaking 69.7 1684 1.35E-01 5.77E-05 2.02E-04 1.69E-05 1.39E-05 3.50E-05 0.21 3.54 After Snaking 1/29/03 9:08 66.( 16371 1.79E-01 _ 3.78E-05 1.74E-04 2.18E-05 9.02E-05 2.52E-05 5.76E-05 0.22 0.6 Units for concentrations of radionuclides are presented in microcuries per milliliter (?Ci/mL) 46
| |
| | |
| t-l- r- I i1 12 Utl y /O TAcul 23 o TABLE 4: UNIT I TELLTALE ANALYSIS
| |
| | |
| ==SUMMARY==
| |
| (August 2003 to January 2004)l I
| |
| R~~~~~~~~~~~- I I I I-
| |
| _ __ II I I A_ Im .1 Telltale LR, Na, K, Ca, Mg, Zn, Cr, Ni, Fe, Boron, Activity: LtCi/mL '"'Cs/ NCo/
| |
| 37 60 134Cs 5 -:
| |
| 6UCo ' Cs Co No. Date/Time mL/min pH ppm ppm ppm ppm ppb ppb ppb ppb ppm INCo No. 1 8/27/03 8:30 6.18 1.50 15.4 32.3 0.689 288 <8.06 98.9 <7.15 2393 2.90E-01 1.86E-03 2.84E-03 2.68E-04 1.42E-03 0.65 0.19 9/24/03 9:19 5.60 4.06 28.2 0.574 312 <8.06 113 84.7 2371 1.67E-03 2.64E-03 2.24E-04 1.65E-03 0.63 0.14 10/22/03 2:20 6.19 0.94 1.55 220 0.548 316 12.2 139 395 2364 2.61E-01 1.67E-03 2.78E-03 1.88E-04 1.79E-03 0.60 0.11 11/20/03 10:30 6.06 0.65 1.34 205 0.510 414 10.6 36.7 657 2367 3.27E-01 7.51E-04 1.26E-03 3.67E-05 3.70E-04 0.59 0.10 12/22/03 9:00 No sample 1/14/04 8:45 <1 No sample No. 2 8/27/03 8:30 6.84 4.52 9.35 62.1 1.70 266 9.66 45.5 21.5 2264 3.06E-01 1.02E-03 1.64E-03 1.23E-04 6.99E-04 0.62 0.18 9/24/03 9:19 14.7 8.38 48.8 1.81 53.6 <8.06 26.0 94.3 2278 6.17E-04 9.59E-04 5.12E-05 3.35E-04 0.64 0.15 10/22/03 2:20 6.74 2.70 8.25 53.6 1.50 71.0 11.8 53.7 2155 2310 3.26E-01 8.19E-04 I.33E-03 5.60E-05 6.54E-04 0.61 0.09 11/20/03 10:30 6.19 0.79 7.34 21.3 0.60 626 13.5 33.7 2668 2347 3.20E-01 6.72E-04 1.12E-03 ND 4.OOE-04 0.60 -
| |
| 12/17/03 9:00 6.77 2.08 2274 3.21 E-01 3.46E-04 6.16E-04 ND 1.62E-04 0.56 -
| |
| 1/6/04 12:20 6.67 1.60 2268 4.36E-01 ND ND ND ND ND -
| |
| 1/6/04 13:00 500 1/14/04 8:00 500 6.66 1.70 2319 2.45E-04 4.60E-04 5.50E-06 I 29E-04 0.53 0.04 No. 3 8/27/03 8:45 No sample I 9/26/03 10:40 59.6 57.2 1.95 6196 <8.06 10.8 <7.15 2282 3.OOE-04 5.62E-04 ND 3.48E-05 0.53 -
| |
| 10/23/03 0:50 6.94 2.40 102 55.0 1.82 11,900 10.1 <10.0 53.5 2294 2.67E-01 5.33E-04 I.OIE-03 ND 3.89E-05 0.53 11/20/03 10:30 6.78 3.39 18.3 70.5 2.08 534 11.4 <10.0 1132 2463 2.93E-01 5.37E-04 8.86E-04 ND 8.68E-05 0.61 12/17/03 9:00 7.14 5.33 2210 2.38E-04 4.67E-04 ND 8.93E-05 0.51 1/14/04 8:05 0.14 No. 4 8/13/03 13:00 Insufficient sample 9/26/03 10:40 250 61.9 2.30 113 <8.06 <10.0 90.3 2279 4.05E-04 6.69E-04 ND 6.17E-05 0.61 10/23/03 0:50 7.05 4.30 15.0 83.8 2.91 954 9.91 <10.0 271 2378 2.80E-01 6.09E-04 1.03E-03 ND 9.27E-05 0.59 11/20/03 10:30 7.16 6.20 21.0 115 4.00 861 11.3 <10.0 13.5 2254 3.12E-01 2.57E-04 5.32E-04 ND 4.41E-05 0.48 12/17/03 9:00 7.33 5.73 2224 3.21E-01 2.1SE-04 4.62E-04 ND 5.85E-05 0.46 1/14/04 8:10 0.23 Units for concentrations of radionuclides are presented in microcuries per milliliter (?Ci/mL) 47
| |
| | |
| ( ( (
| |
| February 24, 2003 TABLE 4: UNIT 1 TELLTALE ANALYSIS
| |
| | |
| ==SUMMARY==
| |
| , Continued 34 Telltale LR, Na, K, Ca, Mg, Zn, Cr, Ni, Fe, Boron, Activity: liCi/mL 1 Cs/ "Co/
| |
| 3 34 5 37 60 No. Date/Time mL/min pH ppm ppm ppm ppm ppb ppb ppb ppb ppm H 1 Cs 137cs 8Co 60co 1 Cs co No. 5 8/27/03 8:30 6.90 4.01 11.7 67.5 2.36 52.8 8.71 <10.0 26.7 2296 2.93E-01 4.74E-04 8.52E-04 ND 6.55E-05 0.56 9/26/03 10:40 24.5 15.7 108 3.35 573 <8.06 <10.0 <7.15 2260 3.07E-04 5.95E-04 ND 7.92E-05 0.52 10/23/03 0:50 7.16 6.40 17.4 119 4.02 1253 10.1 <10.0 24.6 2054 2.25E-01 2.52E-04 5.26E-04 ND 8.78E-05 0.48 11/20/03 10:30 7.17 6.00 13.3 119 3.92 1514 9.62 12.2 16.4 2246 3.16E-01 2.18E-04 4.88E-04 ND 6.44E-05 0.45 12/17/03 9:00 7.64 6.70 2203 3.18E-01 1/14/04 8:15 0.18 No.6 8/27/03 8:30 7.16 7.03 15.3 99.0 3.72 <11.3 <8.06 16.7 19.3 2231 2.87E-01 2.83E-04 6.17E-04 2.14E-05 i.15E-04 0.46 0.19 9/26/03 10:40 30.8 223 220 3.82 31.6 <8.06 <10.0 <7.15 2236 2.05E-04 5.23E-04 ND 6.02E-05 0.39 -
| |
| 10/23/03 0:50 7.21 6.40 19.6 130 3.73 59.4 11.8 10.1 19.8 2124 2.17E-01 1.69E-04 4.18E-04 ND 6.30E-05 0.40 11/20/03 10:30 7.24 7.21 21.0 130 3.81 55.2 11.3 <10.0 22.0 2250 3.05E-01 2.13E-04 5.46E-04 ND 7.49E-05 0.39 12/17/03 9:00 7.59 6.68 2190 3.21 E-01 1.86E-04 4.20E-04 ND 5.80E-05 0.44 1/14/04 8:20 0.27 No. 8 8/27/03 8:30 5.56 13.6 108 3.27 534 8.28 15.5 170 2279 2.89E-01 3.33E-04 6.63E-04 ND 1.OOE-04 0.50 9/26/03 10:35 8.05 135 2.99 453 <8.06 <10.0 16.6 2263 2.97E-01 2.41E-04 5.20E-04 1.43E-05 1.51E-04 0.46 0.09 10/23/03 0:50 7.16 4.90 9.47 108 3.06 330 11.4 21.3 2114 2159 2.68E-01 2.66E-04 5.19E-04 2.22E-05 2.12E-04 0.51 0.10 11/20/03 10:30 7.18 5.98 21.2 118 3.64 309 11.6 19.0 2561 2264 3.17E-01 2.96E-04 6.49E-04 ND 1.52E-04 0.46 -
| |
| 12/17/03 9:00 7.40 5.30 2110 3.37E-01 2.65E-04 5.54E-04 ND 1.62E-04 0.48 -
| |
| 1/14/04 8:25 0.68 _
| |
| No. 9 8/27/03 8:30 15.2 185 3.70 13,390 9.97 109 <7.15 1.19E-01 7.58E-05 2.951E-04 ND 2.18E-04 0.26 -
| |
| 9/26/03 10:35 15.6 145 4.02 16,400 <8.06 91.9 19.2 2445 10/23/03 0:50 No sample 11/20/03 10:30 No sample 12/17/03 9:00 No sample 1/14/04 8:45 <I No sample No..10 1/14/04 8:45 <1 No sample No. I1 1/14/04 8:45 <I No sample No. 12 1/14/04 8:45 <1 o sample No.13 1/14/048:30 <1 Nosample No. 14 1/14/03 8:35 <1 o sample No. 15 1/14/04 8:45 <1 No sample No. 16 1/14/04 8:45 <1 o sample -
| |
| No. 17 1/14/04 8:45 <I No sample 48
| |
| | |
| February 24, 2003 TABLE 5: SALEM UNIT 1 SPENT FUEL POOL ANALYSIS
| |
| | |
| ==SUMMARY==
| |
| | |
| I Boron, 134c~
| |
| Activity. uCi/mL 6 1
| |
| 37 cs 60 Co 58Co buco 137cS "co Date/Time ppm 08/07/03 14:40 2349 2.90E-03 4.32E-03 6.12E-04 2.86E-03 0.67 0.21 08/13/03 13:13 2.88E-03 4.40E-03 6.08E-04 2.85E-03 0.66 0.21 08/14/03 9:15 2353 08/20/03 8:00 2364 3.1 OE-03 4.80E-03 5.71 E-04 2.86E-03 0.65 0.20 08/28/03 9:20 2374 3.28E-03 5.07E-03 5.36E-04 3.19E-03 0.65 0.17 09/04/03 8:00 2359 2.73E-01 3.07E-03 4.91 E-03 4.75E-04 3.05E-03 0.63 0.16 09/18/03 8:45 2370 3.39E-03 5.29E-03 4.68E-04 3.28E-03 0.64 0.14 09/25/03 10:30 2350 3.08E-03 4.75E-03 4.04E-04 2.89E-03 0.65 0.14 10/02/03 9:55 2351 2.23E-01 3.12E-03 4.92E-03 4.26E-04 2.92E-03 0.64 0.15 10/09/03 0:55 2358 3.11 E-03 4.83E-03 3.41 E-04 2.92E-03 0.64 0.12 10/16/03 8:55 2366 3.53E-03 5.45E-03 3.48E-04 3.08E-03 0.65 0.11 10/22/03 22:15 2345 10/23/03 0:05 3.39E-03 5.45E-03 3.22E-04 3.1 OE-03 0.62 0.10 10/30/03 0:30 2348 3.20E-01 6.05E-04 1.06E-03 5.83E-05 5.69E-04 0.57 0.10 11/06/03 5:35 2357 1.69E-04 3.06E-04 1.52E-05 1.79E-04 0.55 0.085 11/12/03 23:00 2375 _
| |
| 11/20/03 8:15 2383 6.94E-05 I .26E-04 6.94E-06 1.09E-04 0.55 0.063 11/26/03 12:50 2370 3.02E-0 I 12/04/03 8:45 2339 6.01 E-05 1.01 E-04 ND I.11 E-04 0.60 -
| |
| 12/11/03 9:15 2329 3.83E-05 7.53E-05 3.83E-06 6.94E-05 0.51 0.055 12/18/03 8:50 2325 3.50E-05 6.49E-05 ND 5.8 1E-05 0.54 -
| |
| 12/23/03 8:10 2336 3.74E-05 6.33E-05 ND 7.37E-05 0.59 -
| |
| 01/01/04 8:30 2307 3.87E-05 7.34E-05 ND 7.44E-05 0.53 -
| |
| 01/08/04 8:05 2327 3.32E-01 2.97E-05 4.49E-05 ND 4.06E-05 0.66 -
| |
| 01/15/04 8:05 2333 3.28E-05 4.74E-05 ND 7.89E-05 0.69 -
| |
| 01/21/04 13:15 2298 01/21/04 17:10 2299 01/22/04 8:15 3.25E-01 2.76E-05 6.13E-05 ND 7.68E-05 0.45 -
| |
| 01/29/04 8:10 2313 2.82E-05 6.36E-05 ND 9.14E-05 0.44 49
| |
| | |
| ARCADIS Appendix B Section C - ISRA Non-Applicability Application (Station Operational History)
| |
| | |
| Station Assessments Exhibit C Creek Generating Salem and Hope
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station Assessment Table of Contents
| |
| : 1. Introduction .................................................. 1
| |
| : 2. Salem Generating Station Characteristics .................................................. 2 2.1. Station Description and Setting ................................................ 2 2.2. Station Processes and Operations ................................................ 2 2.2.1. Nuclear Electric Generating Process ................................................. :.2 2.2.2. Support Processes and Operations ........................................ ........ 13 2.3. Environmental Setting ................................................ 17 2.3.1. Surrounding Land Use and Surface Waters ........................................... 17 2.3.2. Topography and Surface Drainage ....................................... ........ 18 2.3.3. Geology ................................................ 18 2.3.4. Hydrogeology ............................................... 19 2.4. Environmental Characterization and Remedial Activities ................. ............. 20
| |
| : 3. Liability Screening, Characterization, and Valuation ...................................... 21 3.1. Candidate Liability Screening and Identification ............................................ 21 3.2. Liability Characterization ................................................ 22 3.3. Liability Valuation ............................................... 22 3.3.1. Decision Tree ............................................... 22 3.3.2. Remedy Probability Assignments and Remedy Cost Calculations ....... 22 3.3.3. Liability Expected Value Computation ................................................. 23 Bibliography ............................................................ 24 Figures Figure 2-1: Map Showing the Salem and Hope Creek Generating Station .................... 28 Figure 2-2: Major Operational Features Associated with the Salem Generating Station ........................................................... 29 Figure 2-3: Pressurized Water Reactor .......................................................... 30 Figure 2-4: Salem Generating Station Operations .......................................................... 31 Tables Table 2-1: Hazardous Wastes On Site .......................................................... 32 Table 2-2: Current Hazardous Substances and Related Pollution Prevention Systems .34 Table 2-3: Historic Operations and Related Pollution Prevention Systems ................... 37 Table 2-4: Pollution Prevention Plans .......................................................... 39 Table 2-5: Summary of Discharge Investigations and Remediation Cases .................... 41 Table 3-1: Liability Screening-Salem Generating Station ........................................... 42 Table 3-2: Liability Characterization-Salem Generating Station ......................... I........ 44 Table 3-3: Liability Decision Tree-Salem Generating Station .................................... 49 Table 3-4: Liability Valuation-Salem Generating Station ........................................... 51 Appendix to Exhibit C Salem.09123/99 i
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station
| |
| : 1. Introduction Public Service Electric and Gas Company ("PSE&G") is making an application to the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection ("NJDEP") for a determination of the applicability of the requirements of the Industrial Site Recovery Act ("ISRA") with respect to PSE&G's transfer of generation-related assets to an affiliate. This application contains detailed information on PSE&G's generation-related assets, identifies potential environmental liabilities related to these assets, calculates the expected value of these liabilities, and presents relevant financial information concerning the affiliate.
| |
| PSE&G's generation-related assets include steam electric generating units and combustion turbine electric generating units. The steam electric generating units use both fossil and nuclear fuels. The Salem Generating Station ("Salem") consists of two nuclear-fueled steam electric generating units and one combustion turbine unit fueled by distillate oil. Nuclear-fueled steam electric generating units present a potential for radioactivity to impact the environment. Because of this and other potential impacts, the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("USNRC") has been empowered to strictly regulate all aspects of Salem related to radiological controls. The Appendix to this Exhibit describes this strict regulatory program and how it applies to the design, construction, licensing, operation, monitoring, and decommissioning of Salem so as to ensure that potential radiological impacts are minimized and addressed in the unlikely event that this becomes necessary. This Exhibit describes all major aspects of Salem's electric generating processes, including those associated with radioactivity. This Exhibit presents the expected value of potential environmental liabilities associated with the non-radiological aspects of Salem's electric generating process. However, the expected value of any potential environmental liabilities associated with radioactivity is not calculated for the reasons discussed in the Appendix to this Exhibit.
| |
| Although unique features exist, steam electric generating stations that use nuclear fuel employ the same basic processes as are employed by steam electric generating stations that use fossil fuels. Since many of the processes conducted at Salem are the same as those conducted at PSE&G's other steam electric generating stations, the information set forth in Exhibit B to the Memorandum in Support of Applicability Determination provides a useful reference for understanding certain processes present at Salem. Based on the station-specific information as supplemented by Exhibit B, Exhibit C to the Memorandum in Support of Applicability Determination identifies potential environmental liabilities for the processes not associated with releases of radioactivity and calculates their expected value using the methodology and approach described in Exhibit A to the Memorandum in Support of Applicability Determination.
| |
| Salem.09/23199 1
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station
| |
| : 2. Salem Generating Station Characteristics 2.1. Station Description and Setting PSE&G operates and is a part owner of Salem which is located on Artificial Island in Lower Alloways Creek Township, Salem County, New Jersey (see Figure 2-1). Salem is jointly owned as follows: PSE&G (42.59 percent), Philadelphia Electric Company
| |
| ("PECO") (42.59 percent), Atlantic Electric Company (7.41 percent), and DELMARVA Power and Light Company (7.41 percent). Salem is situated adjacent to the Hope Creek Generating Station ("Hope Creek" and together with Salem, the "Stations"), which is also located on Artificial Island. The Stations are located on the eastern bank of the Delaware River. Salem is approximately 26 acres in size. At any one time during the operational history of Salem, the electric generation and ancillary facilities occupied only a portion of the property.
| |
| PSE&G owns and controls an approximately 600-acre area of Artificial Island that is situated adjacent to and surrounds Salem and Hope Creek. This area contains certain administrative and support facilities that are used by both Salem and Hope Creek, the Hope Creek Switchyard, the Salem Switchyard, and certain undeveloped vacant land.
| |
| With the exception of the Salem Switchyard, this area is evaluated as part of the Hope Creek Generating Station.
| |
| The zoning classification for the Salem property is industrial. The land adjacent to Salem is zoned for industrial and residential or agricultural use, but falls under statutes that restrict development.
| |
| 2.2. Station Processes and Operations Salem is composed of two nuclear generating units and one combustion turbine unit fueled by distillate oil. Commercial operations of Unit 1 commenced in 1976 and commercial operations of Unit 2 commenced in 1981. The combustion turbine unit commenced operations in 1972. The nuclear generating units operate as base load units and the combustion turbine unit is a peaking unit. Salem has a combined generating capacity of approximately 2,250 MW. Over its operational life Salem has experienced no significant changes in its operation. Figure 2-2 is a site plan showing the major operational features associated with Salem.
| |
| Section 2.2.1 describes the nuclear electric generating process, while Section 2.2.2 describes the support processes and operations, including those associated with electric generation and those that support electric generation.
| |
| 2.2.1. Nuclear Electric Generating Process The primary difference between nuclear fuel electric generation and fossil-fueled electric generation is that a nuclear reactor replaces the boiler to generate heat for the production of steam to drive the turbine generator. Salem's reactors are Pressurized Salem.09/23199 2
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station Water Reactors ("PWR"), with a generating capacity of 1,106 MW each (see Figure 2-3).
| |
| Water used as reactor coolant in the production of electricity is obtained from on-site wells and demineralized using resins to remove impurities prior to introduction to the system. Reactor coolant is pumped at high pressure through the reactor core in a closed loop system called the Reactor Coolant System ("RCS"), described in further detail below. The reactor coolant is heated by the reactor core and is then pumped under high pressure from the reactor core to the steam generators, where it heats the water in the steam generator to produce steam in a second closed loop system, referred to as the secondary cooling system. The reactor coolant recirculates from the steam generators back to the reactor core to continue the cycle. Once the steam is produced in the steam generators, the nuclear generating unit processes are essentially the same as the fossil-fueled steam electric generating processes. The steam produced in the steam generators is transferred to the turbine generator to generate electricity. Exhaust steam from the turbine passes into the condensers where it is cooled and condensed using Delaware River water as non-contact cooling water in the Circulating Water System ("CWS").
| |
| The condensate is returned to the steam generators as feed to continue the cycle. After passing once through the condenser, the non-contact cooling water is returned to the River.
| |
| Gases are removed from the condenser to improve steam cycle efficiency. There are stationary radiological monitors at the condenser, which continuously monitor the removed gases for radioactivity. This monitoring is described in the Appendix to this Exhibit.
| |
| Reactor coolant becomes radioactive during this process as a result of fission products from fuel rods, activation of corrosion products, and radiolytic decomposition of the reactor coolant. Salem is designed to control this radioactivity and to provide for its appropriate management. A portion of the reactor coolant is continuously let down and treated in demineralizers to remove both radioactivity and impurities in order to maintain reactor coolant quality. Most of this reactor coolant is returned to the system, but the letdown process does generate certain liquid, solid, and gaseous radioactive wastes. Radioactive and other gases accumulate in the reactor coolant and are removed by degassing during the letdown process. These gases are managed as gaseous radioactive wastes. Small amounts of the reactor coolant are also periodically removed from the system to maintain equilibrium and are managed as a liquid radioactive waste.
| |
| The management of these and other solid, liquid, and gaseous radioactive wastes is discussed below.
| |
| Nuclear generating stations are designed and constructed to incorporate a series of overlapping physical barriers and boundaries to contain radioactivity to protect public safety and the environment. This overlapping system of barriers and boundaries embodies the "defense in depth" principle that constitutes the foundation for the USNRC licensing requirements for nuclear generating stations. Barriers are physical containments. These physical containments include various components of the Nuclear Salem.09/23199 3
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station Steam Supply System ("NSSS"), including but not limited to the fuel rods and the RCS; the reactor containment; and the Radiologically Controlled Area ("RCA"). The boundaries, which are defined areas within which specified radiological controls are required, are the Protected Area and the Owner Controlled Area ("OCA").
| |
| These barriers and boundaries are discussed below.
| |
| 2.2.1.1. Nuclear Steam Supply System The NSSS is the system by which steam is generated at Salem to produce electricity. It consists of the fuel rods and the RCS, and is designed to function as a barrier to contain radioactivity, and thereby prevent any unplanned releases. The function of the fuel rods and the RCS and associated systems as barriers is described below.
| |
| 2.2.1.1.1. Fuel Rods The PWR uses uranium dioxide as fuel. Pellets of uranium dioxide in a ceramic matrix are sealed inside 12-foot-long zirconium-alloy tubes called fuel rods, which are arranged in bundles called fuel assemblies. The fuel assemblies are inserted vertically into the reactor vessel (which is a large carbon steel tank approximately seven inches thick with a stainless steel liner, filled with water) in a precise grid pattern known as the reactor core.
| |
| The ceramic matrix provides voids that allow for thermal and gaseous expansion within the fuel rods during the fission process without deforming the fuel rods. The zirconium alloy is used for the fuel rods due to its strength and corrosion resistance. The fuel rods are designed to contain fission gasses generated during the fission process and, therefore, most of the radioactivity. The fuel rods prevent the contact of the reactor coolant water with the fuel and limit the release of fission products to the reactor coolant water. The small amounts of radioactivity released to the reactor coolant are managed as described below in connection with the letdown process for maintaining reactor coolant quality and RCS equilibrium. Thus, the fuel rods provide the first barrier for the control of radioactivity.
| |
| 2.2.1.1.2. Reactor Coolant System The RCS includes: the reactor vessel; four coolant loops connected in parallel to the reactor vessel, each of which contains a circulating pump and a steam generator; and a pressurizer. The pressurizer includes relief valves and a relief tank and appurtenant piping. These elements compose the closed loop system, in which heat is transferred from the reactor to the reactor coolant for the steam generation process. Thus, this system contains or transports all fluids coming from, or going to, the reactor core. All components of this system are constructed of or lined with corrosion-resistant stainless steel and are designed to contain the pressure of the system. The RCS is designed to accommodate water volume, temperature, and pressure changes. Protection from overpressure of the RCS is provided by the pressurizer relief system. The pressurizer relief system releases steam from the top of the pressurizer, which is quenched and directed to the pressurizer relief tank. The resultant liquid in the pressurizer relief tank is managed in the radioactive liquid waste system.
| |
| Salem.09/23/99 4
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station The RCS is a closed loop system, located entirely within the Reactor Containment Building, and constitutes the Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary ("RCPB"), the second barrier for the control of radioactivity.
| |
| 2.2.1.2. Reactor Containment Building The Reactor Containment Building contains the NSSS, which as indicated above includes the fuel rods and the RCS. It is a domed, reinforced concrete structure and extends about 190 feet above grade. The Reactor Containment Building has a 16-foot-thick concrete base, which is constructed atop a 30-foot-thick concrete foundation. The containment building is constructed of reinforced concrete; the walls are 4.5 feet thick and the hemispherical dome is 3.5 feet thick. A steel liner, ranging from 0.25 to 0.75 inches thick, is attached to the interior wall of the containment building for impact protection. The underground portion of the containment building is waterproofed with an impervious membrane to prevent seepage of groundwater.
| |
| The Reactor Containment Building, its access openings and penetrations, and related safety systems are virtually air-tight. The Reactor Containment Building is designed, consistent with applicable USNRC regulatory requirements, to contain the energy released and the resultant pressure build-up following a loss-of-coolant accident
| |
| ("LOCA") as well as to contain the atmosphere of the building under normal operating conditions. Under operating conditions, it is isolated from the ambient atmosphere, and there are no gaseous releases from the Reactor Containment Building. Periodic grab samples of the air within the Reactor Containment Building are collected and analyzed.
| |
| The Reactor Containment Building contains systems to filter the air, if necessary, and then to purge the air through the Plant Vent. Releases from the Plant Vent are continuously monitored by Salem's Radiation Monitoring System, and periodic grab samples are collected and analyzed pursuant to Salem's radiological effluent release program, as described in the Appendix to this Exhibit.
| |
| The Reactor Containment Building is specially controlled and monitored to ensure the integrity of the equipment, processes, and structures it contains, to control exposure to radioactivity, and to prevent unplanned releases of radioactivity. It has secured ingress and egress points to help achieve these objectives. Prior to leaving, personnel and equipment are monitored for radioactive contamination. This monitoring is conducted using portable survey meters. In the event of an elevated reading, the source of the contamination would be identified and the individual or equipment would be decontaminated prior to leaving the Reactor Containment Building.
| |
| The Reactor Containment Building constitutes the third barrier for the control of radioactivity.
| |
| 2.2.1.3. RadiologicallyControlled Area The Radiologically Controlled Area ("RCA") is an area at Salem that is specially designed, controlled, and monitored to ensure the integrity of the equipment, processes, and structures it contains; to control exposure to radioactivity; and to prevent transfer of radioactivity beyond the RCA. While all areas of the RCA are subject to control, most Satem.09123199 5
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station areas within the RCA do not have elevated levels of radioactivity. Those areas within the RCA that have elevated levels of radioactivity are subject to special controls related to access, as discussed below. Radiation monitoring conducted in the RCA is discussed in the Appendix to this Exhibit.
| |
| Salem.09123l99 6
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station All of the equipment, processes, and structures discussed above in Sections in 2.2.1.1 and 2.2.1.2 are located within the RCA. The RCA also contains other equipment, processes, and structures. In addition to the Reactor Containment Building, the structures within the RCA include the auxiliary buildings and the fuel handling buildings. These buildings are constructed of reinforced concrete. The auxiliary buildings house radioactive waste handling and management systems and certain safety systems, which are discussed below. The RCA also houses other auxiliary systems such as fire protection systems, component cooling systems, and ventilation systems. The auxiliary and fuel handling buildings' ventilation systems are designed to maintain a slight negative pressure within these buildings to ensure that no unmonitored releases of airborne radioactivity will occur.
| |
| All areas within the auxiliary and fuel handling buildings that potentially have radioactivity have ventilation systems that route ambient air to the Plant Vent (located at the top of the containment building) for controlled and monitored release to the environment. There are stationary radiological monitors at the Plant Vent that continuously monitor for radioactivity. Periodic grab samples are also collected from the Plant Vent and analyzed for radioactivity. These monitoring programs are described in the Appendix to this Exhibit.
| |
| The fuel handling buildings contain the new fuel storage areas and the spent fuel pools.
| |
| New fuel is stored in strategically located, separate dry concrete storage vaults in specially designed fuel storage racks. The concrete storage vaults protect the fuel from any design basis accidents. The storage racks are configured to prevent a fission chain reaction of the stored fuel. As stored, the new fuel has very low levels of natural radioactivity.
| |
| Similar to new fuel, spent fuel is stored in the strategically located pool with concrete walls that protect the spent fuel from any design basis accidents. The spent fuel is stored in a pool of borated water in specially designed storage racks configured to prevent a fission chain reaction of the stored fuel. Boron is added to the water as an additional means to absorb neutrons, further reducing the potential for fission to occur in the spent fuel pool. The borated water is recirculated to cool the spent fuel. The water from the spent fuel pool is routed to demineralizers and heat exchangers and then returned to the pool. Fuel is placed in and removed from the reactor in accordance with the operating license Technical Specifications and Station operating procedures.
| |
| Approximately every 18 months, 30 to 50 percent of fuel rods are removed from each reactor vessel and transported within enclosed structures within the RCA for storage in the spent fuel pool. Following safe shutdown of the reactors, the removal process involves the following steps: (1) the reactor vessel head is removed and stored inside the Reactor Containment Building using a specially designed, in-situ crane; (2) the reactor vessel cavity is filled with borated water; (3) the spent fuel rods are removed from the reactor vessel using the in-situ crane and placed in borated water in a specially designed canal, which is equipped with rails; (4) the spent fuel rods are directed via rail through the canal to the spent fuel pool in the fuel handling building; and (5) the spent Salem.09/23199 7
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station fuel rods are removed from the canal in the fuel handling building using a specially designed in-situ crane, which places them in the spent fuel pool. A similar process is used to move new fuel from the new fuel storage area to the reactor vessel.
| |
| Once the refueling process is complete, excess water from the reactor vessel cavity and the water from the canal are drained and stored for reuse in the fuel handling process.
| |
| Enhanced radiological controls, including enhanced radiation monitoring, are implemented throughout the refueling process pursuant to USNRC requirements.
| |
| The RCA has a single, monitored ingress and egress point (the control point) to control normal access to the RCA and to prevent the transfer of radioactivity beyond the RCA.
| |
| Controls on the ingress are discussed below. Prior to leaving, personnel and equipment are monitored for radioactive contamination. This monitoring is conducted by both radiation protection personnel and stationary electronic monitoring devices. In the event of an elevated reading, the source of the contamination would be identified and the individual or equipment would be decontaminated prior to leaving the RCA. This monitoring is discussed in the Appendix to this Exhibit.
| |
| The RCA constitutes an additional barrier for the control of radioactivity from Salem.
| |
| 2.2.1.4. Protected Area The Protected Area is an area, common to both Salem and Hope Creek, inside the established security fence line. It encompasses the entire RCAs for both Salem and Hope Creek, as well as a designated area surrounding the RCAs. The security fence line consists of two separate fences: an inner fence and an outer fence. Each fence is constructed of seven-foot-high steel chain link fencing topped with one foot of barbed wire. The two fences are separated by a 25-foot area known as the "Isolation Zone." No personnel or equipment is permitted in the Isolation Zone. There are motion sensitive detectors located in the Isolation Zone to provide a continuous alarm function.
| |
| The entire Protected Area, including the Isolation Zone, is monitored by roving security patrols and a continuously operating closed-circuit television system, which provide information on movements of individuals and vehicles to the security force, which is on duty 24 hours a day. Stationary radiation monitoring devices are located throughout the Protected Area. These are discussed in the Appendix to this Exhibit.
| |
| The Protected Area has a single, secured ingress point, the primary purpose of which is to prevent unauthorized access to the Stations. This single ingress point also serves as*
| |
| the sole egress point to prevent the transfer of radioactivity beyond the Protected Area.
| |
| Controls on ingress are discussed below. Prior to leaving, personnel and equipment are monitored for radioactive contamination. This monitoring is conducted by stationary electronic monitoring devices. In the unlikely event of an elevated reading, the source of the contamination would be identified, appropriate corrective action taken, and the incident reported to the USNRC.
| |
| Salem.09123199 8
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station 2.2.1.4.1. ProtectedArea Access As indicated above, the Protected Area is the area inside an established security fenceline, which encompasses the entire RCAs for both Salem and Hope Creek, as well as a designated area surrounding the RCAs, and which has a single, secured ingress and egress point. Personnel and vehicle access for the Stations is provided through a common point, the Security Center. Access is limited and strictly controlled in accordance with USNRC requirements. Personnel granted access to the Protected Area must be specially trained and have a security clearance or must be escorted by personnel with the required training and clearance. Escorts must remain with visitors at all times. All personnel entering the Protected Area must pass through a metal detector, an explosives detector, and sensitive radiation monitors. These devices ensure that no unauthorized materials are brought into the Protected Area. Drivers of vehicles seeking access to the Protected Area must pass through the same security systems as visitors on foot after which their vehicles are appropriately processed for entry and escorted to their destination by security personnel. As indicated above, movements of individuals and vehicles within the Protected Area are monitored by security cameras and roving patrols.
| |
| As also discussed above, ingress to the RCA is through a single point of entry (the "Control Point"). Individuals seeking access to the RCA must have first passed through the controls associated with entry to the Protected Area, discussed above. Radiation Protection Personnel are stationed at the entrance to the RCA and ensure that only authorized individuals gain access.
| |
| Individuals seeking access to the RCA must have been issued a Radiation Work Permit by Salem's Radiation Protection Department. Radiation Work Permits are issued only for specific tasks and activities and limit access to specified areas, all of which are indicated on the Permit.
| |
| Each individual entering the RCA must be equipped with a personal radiation monitoring device, the sophistication of which is dependent upon the work being performed and the areas being accessed. These monitors measure, record, and indicate a total radiation dose to which an individual is exposed while in the RCA. Certain of these monitors are equipped with an alarm function that activates when predetermined dose limits are approached.
| |
| 2.2.1.5. Owner Controlled Area The area owned and controlled by the Company outside the Protected Area is known as the Owner Controlled Area ("OCA"). The OCA contains a number of support operations, including the Stations' administrative support building, employee and visitor parking areas, contractor trailer facilities, and a network of roads. The area of the OCA immediately outside of and adjacent to the outer security fence is maintained as an "exclusion zone" by security personnel and is continuously monitored by security cameras. The OCA is also monitored by roving security patrols. This area provides an additional buffer between the Stations and the public at large.
| |
| Salem.09123/99 9
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station 2.2.1.6. Station Safety Systems Salem has several systems that are designed to safely shut down the reactor, maintain adequate reactor cooling after shutdown, and contain radioactivity primarily for the purpose of ensuring the protection of the public and the environment in the event of a design basis accident. Salem has never experienced a design basis accident. Certain of these systems may be used to support safe, normal, shutdown operations.
| |
| 2.2.1.7. Radioactive Waste Management Systems Gaseous, liquid, and solid wastes are generated within the RCA. These wastes are managed as radioactive unless and until measurements demonstrate otherwise. Salem's radioactive waste management systems, typically referred to as "radwaste systems,"
| |
| provide for the collection, processing, monitoring, and release or disposal of radioactive material in liquid, gaseous, and solid form from Salem. Salem's Operating License requires that the radwaste systems be operated and maintained to ensure that the release of radioactivity is kept as low as reasonably achievable ("ALARA"). Salem's Operating License imposes limitations on all radiological effluents, compliance with which will ensure that the ALARA standard is met. Salem's effluents are managed, monitored, released, and documented in accordance with Salem's operating procedures and the USNRC's requirements, as discussed in the Appendix to this Exhibit. A report of the monitoring results is filed with the USNRC and the BNE semi-annually. The radiological waste management system, in concert with Salem's radiation monitoring programs, ensures that any release of radioactivity is protective of public safety and the environment.
| |
| 2.2.1.7.1. Gaseous Waste Gases accumulate in the reactor coolant, are removed in the letdown process, as discussed above, and are then managed as a gaseous radioactive waste via the radioactive gaseous waste system. This system consists primarily of piping, waste gas compressors, and waste gas decay tanks. The gases removed in the letdown process are compressed and directed to the decay tanks, where they are stored for a discrete period of time to allow for decay of radionuclides. The gases in the decay tanks are sampled and analyzed pursuant to the radiological effluent release program to determine when appropriate radioactive decay has occurred. Once appropriate decay has occurred and requisite Station approvals have been received, the gases are released to the Plant Vent.
| |
| Gaseous releases from the tank are monitored continuously, and an automatic shutoff valve will activate to terminate the release if predetermined setpoints are reached. All gaseous releases are also continuously monitored at the Plant Vent for gross radioactivity pursuant to Salem's Radiation Monitoring System. Salem's radiological effluent monitoring program and Radiation Monitoring System are described in the Appendix to this Exhibit.
| |
| As previously discussed, the Reactor Containment Building purge system, and the auxiliary building and the fuel handling building ventilation systems, route and manage exhaust air (which may contain radioactivity) for release through the Plant Vent. These purge and ventilation systems include HEPA (high-efficiency particulate air) and Salem.09123/99 10
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station charcoal filtration, as necessary, to remove airborne particulates and certain gases prior to release of any gaseous effluent to the atmosphere. The management of the exhaust Salem.09123/99 11
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station air through the Reactor Containment Building purge system and the auxiliary building and fuel handling building ventilation systems includes radiation monitoring which is described in the Appendix to this Exhibit.
| |
| 2.2.1.7.2. Liquid Waste Salem generates liquid radioactive wastes in the course of ordinary operations. These wastes are generated by leakage from equipment, system water sampling, intentional system bleeds, drainage, and dewatering of solid radioactive wastes. All liquid wastes generated within the RCA are handled as radioactive and managed through the Radioactive Liquid Waste System ("RLWS"). This system collects liquid wastes through a network of drains and pipes which direct the wastes to stainless steel holding tanks for management prior to reuse or discharge.
| |
| The liquid wastes in these RLWS tanks are sampled and analyzed for levels of radioactivity. If appropriate, the liquid wastes are treated to reduce radioactivity, using primarily filtration and/or demineralization. When treatment is complete, the wastes are transferred to stainless steel monitor tanks. The monitor tanks are isolated (to prevent the addition of more wastes), recirculated to mix the contents, and sampled to measure for radioactivity. The radioactivity level is evaluated against the radioactive effluent limitations contained in the Technical Specifications. If the radioactive effluent limitations are met and requisite Station approvals are received, the radioactive liquid waste may be manually released in a controlled manner from the monitor tanks to Salem's cooling water for discharge to the Delaware River. If the effluent limitations are not met, the wastes are subjected to further treatment. The RLWS discharge piping contains radiation monitors that will activate automatic isolation valves to terminate the discharge if predetermined setpoints are reached. As discussed in the Appendix to this Exhibit, the results of this liquid effluent sampling are reported to the USNRC and the BNE semi-annually.
| |
| 2.2.1. 7.3. Solid Waste Solid radioactive wastes are generated from either dry or wet processes. Dry, solid radioactive wastes include materials such as removed components, anti-contamination clothing, ventilation filters, rags, and debris. These materials are collected throughout the RCA and accumulated in the radioactive waste handling area in the auxiliary building. These materials are then placed in USDOT-specification shipping containers (e.g., 55-gallon drums) that have been approved by the USNRC. Solid radioactive wastes generated from wet processes (e.g., demineralizer resins, water filters) are dewatered and placed in special USNRC and USDOT-specification shipping containers (e.g., casks). The area in which solid radiological waste is packaged and stored on site contains stationary instrumentation installed as part of the Radiation Monitoring System area-wide monitors that continuously measure ambient radioactivity levels. The results of this monitoring are displayed, recorded, and alarmed in Salem's Control Room. Documentation of these results is made available for USNRC inspection.
| |
| The outside of the solid radioactive waste shipping containers is surveyed for radioactive materials and radiation levels before transfer to a licensed radioactive Salem.09/23199 12
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station material transporter for delivery to the USNRC-licensed disposal site (e.g., Barnwell, S.C.). As discussed in the Appendix to this Exhibit, the volume of, and the quantity of radioactivity in, the radioactive solid waste sent off site for disposal are reported to the USNRC and the BNE semi-annually.
| |
| 2.2.2. Support Processes and Operations There are a number of processes and operations that support the nuclear electric generating process in addition to those described above. These additional processes and operations, for the most part, are located outside the RCA. Salem is designed and operated so that these additional processes and operations are not exposed to radioactive materials.
| |
| Support processes and operations began at Salem circa 1970 in connection with construction activities. The function of these operations shifted from construction support to operations support when the nuclear units began commercial operation.
| |
| Other support processes and operations that were not required for construction support became operational in 1976. There have been relatively few modifications to these processes and operations since 1976.
| |
| Sections 2.2.2.1 through 2.2.2.7 of this Exhibit describe the various auxiliary and support processes and operations employed at Salem. Exhibit B to the Memorandum in Support of Applicability Determination contains a more detailed review of certain aspects of these processes and operations.
| |
| Representative inventories of hazardous waste generated at Salem and Hope Creek are presented in Table 2-1 (PSE&G jointly manages hazardous wastes from both Stations).
| |
| The current inventory of hazardous substances at Salem is presented in Table 2-2.
| |
| Table 2-3 describes relevant information regarding Station facilities and their historic operations for each relevant potential candidate liability issue identified in Exhibit A to the Memorandum in Support of Applicability Determination. Table 2-4 provides information regarding the various pollution prevention plans developed and implemented at Salem. Figure 2-4 summarizes major operating components of Salem relative to fossil fuel use and wastewater effluents. Radioactive wastes are managed separately, as discussed above and in the Appendix to this Exhibit.
| |
| 2.2.2.1. AuxiliaryBoilers (1972-Present)
| |
| Salem has two auxiliary boilers that commenced operations circa 1972. Distillate oil has been the only fuel source for the boilers for the life of Salem. The auxiliary boilers are located in the house heating boiler building north of the turbine building. The boilers have been used as a general steam source and for building heating.
| |
| 2.2.2.2. Emergency Generators (1976-Present)
| |
| Salem has six emergency generators that were made available for operations in 1976.
| |
| Distillate oil has been the only fuel used in the generators. The generators are located in the auxiliary building. Generally, the electricity needed for normal operations of Salem Salem.09123/99 13
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station is generated by the Station itself. When Salem is not generating electricity, it obtains power from off-site sources. In the unlikely event that off-site power were not available Salem.09/23199 14
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station when Salem was not generating electricity, the emergency generators would provide electricity to Salem to maintain safe shutdown conditions. These units have not been operated other than for periodic testing to ensure operability.
| |
| 2.2.2.3. Combustion Turbine Unit (1972-Present)
| |
| There is one combustion turbine unit at Salem to provide peaking capabilities during periods of high demand. The unit was installed in a metal housing on a concrete foundation. Distillate oil is the only fuel source for the combustion turbine unit. The fuel is stored in the 840,000-gallon above ground, diked storage tank that was installed in 1970, as discussed below.
| |
| The combustion turbine unit has a purge oil collection system to collect unburned fuel that remains in the engine each time a unit is shut down. The system typically collected less than five gallons of fuel each time the unit shut down. As originally constructed, the purge oil tanks for this unit were underground. The system consisted of two 55-gallon tanks and associated valves and piping. In the early 1990s, these purge oil tanks were replaced with sumps that are routed to the high-volume oil/water separator system. Separated oil is managed in accordance with applicable regulations.
| |
| 22.2.4. Distillate Oil Storage and Handling The primary fossil fuel used at Salem has been distillate oil. This fuel is used to generate electricity at the Unit 3 combustion turbine, to power the emergency diesel generators, and in the auxiliary boilers. The distillate oil is stored in an 840,000-gallon above ground, diked storage tank, which was constructed in 1970 and remains in use.
| |
| This tank was constructed consistent with the design criteria for distillate oil tanks described in Exhibit B to the Memorandum in Support of Applicability Determination.
| |
| Distillate oil was initially delivered to Salem by barge. Since circa 1972, distillate oil has been delivered by tank truck. Distillate oil is unloaded from tank trucks at a designated area and is pumped via underground pipeline to the storage tank. The designated tank truck unloading area is currently curbed and has secondary containment. Piping from the storage tanks to the emergency generators, the boilers, and the combustion turbine unit is also underground.
| |
| 2.2.2.5. Electric Transmissionand DistributionEquipment Salem uses a switchyard that is located on property immediately adjacent to Salem property. It became operational in 1976 when Salem began commercial operation. The switchyard occupies approximately eight acres, as shown in Figure 2-1. These facilities contain mineral oil-filled transformers and other miscellaneous mineral oil-filled equipment. The switchyard has been expanded and upgraded over the life of Salem; specifically, eight of its 16 transformers were added in 1992. There are also a number of mineral oil-filled transformers located outside the switchyard, some of which are located adjacent to Salem's electric generating units. The design and operation of the electrical equipment is consistent with that discussed in Exhibit B to the Memorandum in Support of Applicability Determination.
| |
| Salem.09/23199 15
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station There are approximately 70 pieces of mineral oil-filled electrical equipment (e.g.,
| |
| transformers) at Salem. PSE&G implemented a survey of certain mineral oil-filled equipment at Salem in the late 1980s. This survey indicated that some of the mineral oil-filled equipment was PCB-contaminated. Based upon the results of this survey, in 1990, Salem initiated a comprehensive program to retrofill any mineral oil-filled electrical equipment that contained mineral oil with PCB concentrations in excess of 50 ppm, and to label the mineral oil-filled equipment pursuant to applicable regulatory requirements. This program was completed circa 1993, and currently there is no mineral oil-filled electrical equipment at Salem containing mineral oil with measured PCB concentrations in excess of 50 ppm.
| |
| Mineral oil in the electrical equipment is maintained using mobile filtering equipment, as described in Exhibit B to the Memorandum in Support of Applicability Determination.
| |
| 2.2.2.6. Wastewater Effluents Liquid radiological waste management is discussed above and in the Appendix to this Exhibit. Management of liquid radiological effluent releases including monitoring is discussed in the Appendix to the Exhibit.
| |
| The primary wastewater effluent generated at Salem has been and remains non-contact cooling water. Non-contact cooling water is discharged to the Delaware River in accordance with Salem's National or New Jersey Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NJPDES") permit. Other wastewater effluents at Salem include non-radioactive liquid waste, discharges from the high-volume oil/water separator system, and stormwater. The volumes of these other effluents are significantly lower than those of the non-contact cooling water flow. All wastewater discharges from Salem have been authorized by Salem's NJPDES permit since 1975, before Salem began commercial operation.
| |
| Wastewater treatment systems for the effluents discussed in this section were constructed at different times during the life of Salem to enable Salem to comply with the effluent limitations contained in applicable NJPDES permits. Non-radioactive liquid wastewaters include those from demineralizers, condensate polishers, the non-radioactive wastewater treatment system laboratory, building sumps, and roof drains.
| |
| Non-radioactive liquid wastewaters have always been treated in a wastewater treatment plant prior to discharge to the river in accordance with Salem's NJPDES permit. Prior to 1988, the non-radioactive liquid waste was routed to an equalization basin where the pH was increased with caustic to facilitate precipitation. Decant water from this basin was discharged with the non-contact cooling water to the river in compliance with Salem's NJPDES permit. In 1988, the non-radioactive wastewater treatment plant was upgraded and expanded. The wastewater is collected in an equalization basin where sodium hypochlorite may be added to reduce total organic carbon. The effluent from the equalization basin is routed to clarifiers for settling. If necessary, caustic may be added to promote settling. The final effluent is discharged with the non-contact cooling Salem.09123/99 16
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station water to the river in compliance with Salem's NJPDES permit. The wastewater treatment plant is operated by a licensed operator.
| |
| Prior to 1994, process water with the potential to contain oil was treated in three skim tanks. In 1994, the oil/water separator was installed. Treated water from the skim tanks and, subsequently, from the oil/water separator has been discharged to the river in accordance with Salem's NJPDES permit.
| |
| Stormwater is managed in accordance with Salem's NJPDES permit and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. Stormwater is collected in storm drains and routed to the river for discharge in accordance with Salem's NJPDES permit. Stormwater from the major petroleum storage and handling areas is routed to the oil/water separator prior to discharge.
| |
| Prior to 1990, Salem sanitary wastewater was treated in a 10,500-gallon extended aeration tank and a 20,000-gallon rotating biological contactor. In 1990, a sewage treatment plant was constructed at Hope Creek, which began receiving Salem's sanitary wastewater. All solids were removed from the sanitary treatment system and disposed in accordance with applicable regulations. The treatment system structures were removed, soil samples were collected and analyzed, and the area was graded. Closure documentation was submitted to the NJDEP in accordance with applicable regulations.
| |
| 2.2.2.7. Auxiliaryand Maintenance Processes The auxiliary and maintenance processes associated with Station operations and conducted outside the RCA are generally the same as those processes described in Exhibit B to the Memorandum in Support of Applicability Determination for steam generating units. For the nuclear electric generating unit, these processes include water conditioning, non-contact cooling, equipment cleanings, and equipment lubrication.
| |
| For the combustion turbine unit, these processes include engine cleanings, purge oil collection, and equipment lubrication.
| |
| 2.3. Environmental Setting 2.3.1. Surrounding Land Use and Surface Waters Salem is located on the Delaware Estuary. The Estuary, in the location of Salem, is a tidal, brackish river, located in an area designated as Zone 5 by the Delaware River Basin Commission.
| |
| Artificial Island was created by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, beginning early in the twentieth century. Hydraulic dredging spoils were deposited within a diked area established around a natural bar that projected into the river. Prior to construction of Salem, the property was vacant, undeveloped, low-lying land.
| |
| The zoning classification of the property is industrial. The land adjacent to the property on which Salem is located is zoned for industrial and residential or agricultural use, but Salem.09/23199 17
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station falls under statutes that restrict development. The nearest resident in New Jersey is three miles away.
| |
| 2.3.2. Topography and Surface Drainage The topography at Salem is nearly flat. Stormwater management is as described above.
| |
| There are no permanent bodies of surface water on the property.
| |
| 2.3.3. Geology Salem and Hope Creek are underlain by approximately 25 feet of engineered fill composed mainly of dredge spoils (PSE&G, 1987; PSE&G, 1999). The engineered fill consists of silt, silty clay, sand, and gravel (Dames & Moore, 1974). Due to the composition of the engineered fill, the hydraulic conductivity of this material is very low, severely limiting the extent and rate of vertical movement of liquids through the medium. Below the engineered fill there is five feet of tidal marsh deposits, consisting of silty peat and organic silt and meadow mat (Thor, 1982; Warren George, 1970). The tidal marsh deposits are semi-confining. Beneath the tidal marsh deposits are approximately ten feet of discontinuous Quaternary Age riverbed deposits of sand and gravel (Davisson, 1979; Thor, 1982). The discontinuous riverbed deposits occur from 30 to 40 feet below ground surface ("bgs"). Below the ten-foot-thick discontinuous riverbed deposits is the Miocene Kirkwood Formation. The Kirkwood Formation is dark gray clay with some silt and layers of fine-grained micaceous quartz sand. The Kirkwood Formation is approximately 15 feet thick at the property and occurs from approximately 40 to 55 feet bgs (Dames & Moore, 1970; Rosenau and others, 1969; PSE&G 1987).
| |
| Below the Kirkwood Formation, the Paleocene-Eocene Vincentown Formation is encountered at 55 feet bgs to a depth of approximately 135 feet bgs (Dames & Moore, 1970; Dames & Moore, 1974). The Vincentown Formation is a competent, greenish-gray, fine to medium sand with some silt and shell fragments and some feldspar and glauconite (Dames & Moore, 1970; PSE&G, 1987). Beneath the Vincentown Formation lies the Paleocene Hornerstown Formation. The Hornerstown Formation is primarily a glauconitic sand and occurs from 135 feet bgs to approximately 145 feet bgs (Davisson, 1979).
| |
| Beneath the Hornerstown Formation lies the Upper Cretaceous Navesink Formation, which consists of glauconitic sand. The Navesink Formation is encountered from approximately 145 to 170 feet bgs. Beneath the Navesink Formation lies the Upper Cretaceous Mount Laurel-Wenonah Formation, which is clayey medium sand with some gravel, feldspar, and glauconite (PSE&G, 1987). At the property and regionally, the Mount Laurel-Wenonah Formation is approximately 100 feet thick and occurs from approximately 170 to 270 feet bgs (Rosenau, 1969; Dames & Moore, 1974).
| |
| Regionally, over 1,000 feet of Upper Cretaceous sediments lie beneath the Mount Laurel-Wenonah Formation. These formations collectively overlie crystalline bedrock and include in descending order: the Marshalltown Formation (gray fine sand), the Englishtown Formation (yellow-brown fine sand), the Woodbury Clay (dark gray, stiff, Salem.09123199 18
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station silty clay), the Merchantville Formation (dark green clay), the Magothy Formation (coarse to fine silt with little, fine sand), and the Raritan and Potomac Formations (interbedded sand, gravelly sand, and clay) (Dames & Moore, 1974; Rosenau, 1969).
| |
| Bedrock at the property is the Late Precambrian Wissahickon Schist, which underlies the entire Upper Cretaceous sedimentary package in the region. The Wissahickon Schist is encountered at depths up to 1,500 feet bgs at the property (Rosenau, 1969).
| |
| 2.3.4. Hydrogeology There are four aquifers directly beneath the property: a shallow aquifer and three deep aquifers. The shallow aquifer occurs from 10 to 40 feet bgs. The shallow aquifer is within the engineered fill, tidal marsh sediments, and discontinuous Quaternary riverbed deposits (Dames & Moore, 1974). In general, the engineered fill and tidal marsh deposits have low permeabilities (Dames & Moore, 1974; PSE&G, 1987).
| |
| Occasional lenses of sand within the engineered fill may contain perched water within a few feet of the ground surface (Dames & Moore, 1974). The groundwater in the shallow aquifer is generally brackish, with flow to the southeast and a gradient of approximately 0.007ft/ft (Rosenau, 1969; Dames & Moore, 1974). The Kirkwood Formation, which is composed of Miocene clays, occurs from 40 to 55 feet bgs and is considered a confining layer which separates the shallow aquifer above from the first deep aquifer (PSE&G, 1984).
| |
| The first of the deep aquifers beneath the property occurs from 55 to 135 feet bgs and is the Paleocene-Eocene Vincentown Formation. The Vincentown Formation is a semi-confined to confined aquifer under artesian conditions (Dames & Moore, 1974) and is underlain by the leaky confining units in the Hornerstown and Navesink Formations.
| |
| The confining units of the Hornerstown and Navesink Formations occur from 135 to 170 feet bgs (Dames & Moore, 1974). Groundwater in the Vincentown aquifer generally flows from north to south with a gradient of approximately 0.003 ft/ft (Dames & Moore, 1974). Regionally, the Vincentown aquifer is a water-producing aquifer, which supplies some of the domestic wells within Salem County (PSE&G, 1984; Rosenau, 1969). Groundwater in this aquifer is moderately hard with a high iron content (Rosenau, 1969; Dames & Moore, 1974). However, salt-water intrusions occur within this aquifer near the Delaware River, where water quality is brackish and non-potable (Rosenau, 1969).
| |
| The second deep aquifer is confined and occurs in the Upper Cretaceous Mount Laurel-Wenonah Formations at depths from 170 to 270 ft bgs. The Mount Laurel-Wenonah aquifer is bounded above by the confining units of the Hornerstown and Navesink Formations. Two potable and fire-water supply wells at the property can produce from this aquifer, although these wells are not typically used. Below the Mount Laurel-Wenonah aquifer lies the Marshaltown Formation (Rosenau, 1969).
| |
| The third deep aquifer is confined and is the Cretaceous Potomac-Raritan-Magothy (PRM) Aquifer System, which is the primary water-producing aquifer in the State of New Jersey. In Salem County, the PRM Aquifer System occurs at depths in excess of Salem.09123199 19
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station 500 feet bgs. At the property, four potable and fire-water supply wells produce from this aquifer system at depths ranging from 800 to 1,100 feet bgs. This aquifer system is bounded above by the Merchantville Formation and below by the crystalline basement of the Wissahickon Schist.
| |
| The crystalline basement rock of the Wissahickon Schist is not considered a productive aquifer and only locally transmits water along fractures and faults (Rosenau, 1969).
| |
| Salem County has no known wells that produce water from this formation (Rosenau, 1969).
| |
| 2.4. Environmental Characterization and Remedial Activities Table 2-5 summarizes the nature of and results from environmental characterization and remedial activities conducted at the property.
| |
| Salem.09/23/99 20
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station
| |
| : 3. Liability Screening, Characterization, and Valuation The liability estimation process applied at each generation-related asset followed a step-wise procedure, as shown schematically below. This process is discussed in detail in Exhibit A to the Memorandum in Support of Applicability Determination.
| |
| Liabil ity Liability .:l .Liabiity and Identificat'on The liability estimation process produces a quantitative estimate of the expected value for Salem's potential remediation liabilities. This section presents the results of the liability screening, characterization, and valuation for this Station.
| |
| 3.1. Candidate Liability Screening and Identification Candidate Liability Issues and associated Liability Elements that are potentially applicable to all generation-related assets were developed as discussed in Exhibit A to the Memorandum in Support of Applicability Determination. Each Candidate Liability Issue and Liability Element was evaluated based on the asset-specific data collected pursuant to the data collection protocol described in Exhibit A to the Memorandum in Support of Applicability Determination to determine:
| |
| : 1. Whether the activity or source existed at this generation-related asset;
| |
| : 2. Whether an environmental investigation has been conducted or chemical data were collected that demonstrate that contamination is not present at this generation-related asset with respect to a particular activity or source; or
| |
| : 3. Whether structural or engineering systems, such as full secondary containment, could have prevented a liability from arising at this generation-related asset.
| |
| Liabilities were screened out for this generation-related asset if: (1) an activity never existed at the property; (2) there is convincing documentation that issues never existed or have been eliminated through remediation or other corrective action; or (3) there have been structural or engineering systems that would have prevented a liability issue from arising. If any of a Candidate Liability Issue's Liability Elements was determined to be applicable to this generation-related asset, it was retained for characterization and valuation.
| |
| Table 3-1 provides the results of the liability screening for this generation-related asset and the rationale for the screening decisions.
| |
| Salem.09/23199 21
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station 3.2. Liability Characterization For each retained Liability Issue and Liability Element, pertinent information collected using the data collection protocol was used to determine the number of Liability Units
| |
| ("Liability Enumeration"), the aggressiveness of remedial effort (i.e., high, medium, or low intensity) ("Remedy Intensity"), and the physical extent of remedial effort
| |
| ("Remedy Scale"). These were each determined employing the standard decision rules set forth in Exhibit A to the Memorandum in Support of Applicability Determination.
| |
| The results of the liability characterization are presented in Table 3-2.
| |
| 3.3. Liability Valuation As described in Exhibit A to the Memorandum in Support of Applicability Determination, the Liability Valuation step consists of three activities: decision tree configuration, liability evaluation, and expected value computation. This step produced a quantitative estimate of this generation-related asset's potential remediation liabilities.
| |
| 3.3.1. Decision Tree Table 3-3 is the remediation decision tree for this generation-related asset. This decision tree incorporates all Candidate Liability Issues retained for this generation-related asset as well as the investigation and monitoring activities. The decision tree is composed of a series of columns, each of which represents a Candidate Liability Issue.
| |
| Remedy scenarios available to address each Issue are arrayed vertically in each column.
| |
| Remedy scenarios consist of a number of remedial technologies. The remedy scenarios included in the decision tree for each Liability Issue are those that we determined, based on our professional judgment, to best reflect the feasible choices available to remedy that particular Liability Issue. Remedial scenarios were considered for each Liability Issue retained to address all media of concern through either institutional controls, engineering controls, or active treatment. The selection of remedy scenarios and remediation technologies is detailed in Exhibit A to the Memorandum in Support of Applicability Determination.
| |
| 3.3.2. Remedy Probability Assignments and Remedy Cost Calculations For each retained Liability Issue, a probability was assigned to each remedy scenario that represents the probability that, following a site investigation, the remedy scenario would be selected and approved by the NJDEP. These probabilities were determined employing the standard decision rules set forth in Exhibit A to the Memorandum in Support of Applicability Determination. The decision rules identify the probability allocation for each Liability Issue first by reference to investigation effort, remedial alternative, or monitoring effort, as appropriate, and then by reference to Remedy Intensity. The remedy probability allocations for this generation-related asset are presented in the decision tree, Table 3-3.
| |
| Salem.09123199 22
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station The capital and operating costs of each remedy scenario in the decision tree were determined following the procedures outlined in Exhibit A to the Memorandum in Support of Applicability Determination. The remedy scenario costs were calculated using the scale inputs set forth in Table 3-2 and Arthur D. Little's in-house remediation cost database, which is based on standard remediation engineering cost assumptions.
| |
| The present value of each remedy was calculated using accepted financial analysis principles and incorporating assumptions about the timing of remedial actions as well as discount and inflation rates. Key assumptions incorporated into the cost calculations are set forth in Exhibit A to the Memorandum in Support of Applicability Determination.
| |
| 3.3.3. Liability Expected Value Computation The liability valuation expected value computation was performed using a Microsofte Excel spreadsheet-based cost-estimating model for the decision tree shown in Table 3-3. The model calculated the expected value for this generation-related asset by multiplying the probability assigned to each remedy alternative by the cost of that alternative and adding the calculated probability-weighted cost of all the remedy alternatives for that Liability Issue. The total expected value for this generation-related asset is the sum of the expected values for each Liability Issue.
| |
| The summary spreadsheet tabulating the remedy scenarios in the decision tree, present value costs, probabilities, and expected values is shown in Table 3-4. The total expected value cost estimate for this generation-related asset is $1,901,055.
| |
| Salem.09123199 23
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station Bibliography Audits
| |
| : 1. Internal PSE&G Corporate Audit Report, October 1989.
| |
| : 2. Internal PSE&G Corporate Audit Report, July/August 1993.
| |
| : 3. Internal PSE&G Corporate Audit Report, July/August 1998.
| |
| Environmental Permits and Related Documents
| |
| : 1. Dredge and Fill Permit, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, No. NAPOR-R-970, June 23, 1975.
| |
| : 2. Dredge and Fill Permit, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, No. 85-0938-1.
| |
| : 3. Water Discharge Permit, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), No. NJ0005622, March 31, 1975.
| |
| : 4. Water Discharge Permit, New Jersey Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NJPDES), No. NJ0005622, March 6, 1981.
| |
| : 5. Water Discharge Permit, New Jersey Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NJPDES), No. NJ0005622, December 1, 1985.
| |
| : 6. Water Discharge Permit, New Jersey Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NJPDES), No. NJ0005622, September 1, 1994.
| |
| : 7. Waterfront Development Permit, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, 1704-90-0001.8, Exp. February 22, 2000.
| |
| : 8. Riparian License, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, 69-80.
| |
| : 9. Maintenance Dredging and Desilting Operations, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, CENAP-OP-R-199501755-45, April 15, 1996 Agency Enforcements
| |
| : 1. Citation from NJDEPE for water discharge violations, August 1988.
| |
| : 2. Citation from NJDEPE for water discharge violations, November 1988.
| |
| Salem.09123199 24
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station
| |
| : 3. Citation from USCG for spill discharge violations, November 1988.
| |
| : 4. Citation from NJDEPE for water discharge violations, March 1989.
| |
| : 5. Citation from USEPA for water discharge violations, June 1989.
| |
| : 6. Citation from USEPA for water discharge violations, July 1989.
| |
| : 7. Citation from USEPA for water discharge violations, September 1989.
| |
| : 8. Citation from USEPA for water discharge violations, February 1990.
| |
| : 9. Citation from USEPA for water discharge violations, April 1990.
| |
| : 10. Citation from USEPA for spill violations, February 1991.
| |
| : 11. Citation from USEPA for water discharge violations, January 1991.
| |
| : 12. Citation from USEPA for water discharge violations, March 1991.
| |
| : 13. Citation from NJDEPE for water discharge violations, August 1992.
| |
| : 14. Citation from USCG for spill violations, December 1992.
| |
| : 15. Citation from NJDEPE and USCG for spill violations, February 1993.
| |
| : 16. Citation from NJDEPE and USCG for spill violations, May 13, 1993.
| |
| : 17. Three citations from USCG for spill violations, September 1993.
| |
| : 18. Citation from USCG for spill violations, May 24, 1995.
| |
| : 19. Citation from USCG for spill violations, October 1, 1995.
| |
| : 20. Citation from USCG for spill violations, April 1997.
| |
| : 21. Citation from USCG for spill violations, June 13, 1997.
| |
| Pollution Prevention Plans
| |
| : 1. Discharge Prevention, Containment, and Countermeasures Plan; Discharge Cleanup and Removal Plan; Spill Prevention, Containment, and Countermeasures Plan (DPCC/DCR/SPCC), 1978; last updated July 1999.
| |
| Salem.09123/99 25
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station
| |
| : 2. Best Management Practices (BMP) Plan, 1985.
| |
| : 3. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, 1998.
| |
| : 4. Facility Response Plan, February 1993.
| |
| : 5. RCRA Contingency Plan, February 1998.
| |
| : 6. Wastewater Treatment Plant Operations and Maintenance Manuals, 1996.
| |
| : 7. Regulatory Reporting Guide, January 1997.
| |
| Spills and Discharges
| |
| : 1. Spill Incident Reports: 1973 to 1985 reported to U.S. Coast Guard.
| |
| : 2. Spill Incident Reports: 1988 to Present reported to NJDEP.
| |
| Maps and Photos
| |
| : 1. Aerial Viewpoint. Photograph, March 11, 1940. (1":1667').
| |
| : 2. Aerial Viewpoint. Photograph, February 18, 1951. (1":1667').
| |
| : 3. Aerial Viewpoint. Photograph, March 1, 1962. (l":1500').
| |
| : 4. Aerial Viewpoint. Photograph, March 14, 1974. (1":1500').
| |
| : 5. Aerial Viewpoint. Photograph, March 6, 1987. (Scale not available.)
| |
| : 6. Aerial Viewpoint. Photograph, March 13, 1996. (1":1000').
| |
| : 7. Aerial Viewpoint. Photograph, March 16, 1996. (1":1000').
| |
| Geology and Hydrogeology
| |
| : 1. Dames & Moore, 1970. Circulating Water Intake Structure, Service Water Intake Structure, And Circulating Water Discharge Piping for Salem Nuclear Generating Station Units No. 1 and No. 2., Detail Specification No. 70-7272. 67 borings.
| |
| : 2. Dames & Moore, 1974. Report: Foundation Studies for Proposed Hope Creek Generating Station, Lower Alloways Creek Township, NJ. For PSE&G. 43 pp.
| |
| Figures.
| |
| Salem.09/23/99 26
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station
| |
| : 3. Davisson, M. T. and Rempe, D. M., 1979. Report on Pile Load Test Program and Recommendations for Installation of Piling at Miscellaneous Structures Hope Creek Generating Station for PSE&G, Champaign, IL., July. 16 pp. Figures.
| |
| : 4. Thor Engineers, P.A., 1982. Report on Soils Investigation Hope Creek Generating Station Access Road Widening, Salem, New Jersey. Project No. 03682. 8 pp.
| |
| Figures.
| |
| : 5. PSE&G, 1984. Hope Creek Generating Station Final Environmental Statement.
| |
| : 6. PSE&G, 1987. Salem Generating Station Updated Final Safety Analysis Report Controlled Document, December 4 (last update) to Nuclear Regulatory Agency.
| |
| : 7. PSE&G, 1999. Groundwater Conservation Plan and Drought Emergency Water Supply Plan.
| |
| : 8. Richards, H. G., Olmsted, F. H., and Ruhle, J. L., 1962. Generalized Structure Contour Maps of the New Jersey Coastal Plain, NJ, Department of Conservation and Economic Development, Geological Report Series No. 4.
| |
| : 9. Rosenau, J. C., Lang, S. M., Hilton, G. S., Ronnie, J. G., 1969. Geology and Groundwater Resources of Salem County, New Jersey, U.S.G.S., Special Report No. 33, 142.
| |
| : 10. Warren George, Inc., 1970. Test Borings for Salem to New Freedom South Transmission Line. Test Boring Logs for PSE&G.
| |
| Other
| |
| : 1. PSE&G database of underground storage tanks and related files of registrations and/or removal.
| |
| Salem.09123/99 27
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station Figure 2-1: Map Showing the Salem and Hope Creek Generating Station Salem.09123199 28
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station Figure 2-2: Major Operational Features Associated with the Salem Generating Station Salem.09123/99 29
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station Figure 2-3: Pressurized Water Reactor Salem.09123/99 30
| |
| | |
| i
| |
| ( (
| |
| Salem Generating Station Figure 2-4: Salem Generating Station Operations Auxiliary Boilers and Combustion Turbine Units Point Sources Oil/Water Separator Skim Tanks Sanitary Waste Treatment System Salem and Hope Creek Non-Rad Waste Treatment I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1910 1915 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 Salem.09/23/99 31
| |
| | |
| ( ( C Salem Generating Station Table 2-1: Representative Hazardous Wastes for Salem and Hope Creek Generating Stations Contaminated solids and debris (toxic) containing benzene (D018) 413 lbs.
| |
| Contaminated solids and debris (toxic) containing chromium (D007) 1,614 lbs.
| |
| Contaminated water (toxic), containing chromium (D007) 5,572 lbs.
| |
| Oil and other liquid hydrocarbon waste (toxic), containing 1,1,1-trichloroethane (FO01) 434 lbs.
| |
| Oil and other liquid hydrocarbon waste (toxic), containing oil, benzene, and tetrachloroethylene (D018, D029, D039, D040, F001) 20,627 lbs.
| |
| Paint-related waste (ignitable) containing petroleum hydrocarbons (DO01) 739 lbs.
| |
| Paint-related waste (ignitable) debris, containing petroleum hydrocarbons (D001) 11,169 lbs.
| |
| Paint-related waste (ignitable) labpack, containing petroleum hydrocarbons (D001) 1,485 lbs.
| |
| Paint-related waste (ignitable, toxic), containing mineral spirits and methyl ethyl ketone (D001, D035) 9,025 lbs.
| |
| Photography development (reactive) waste, containing reactive sulfides (D003) 3,869 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (corrosive) in labpacks containing acid and amine solutions (D002) 208 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (corrosive) in labpacks containing hydroxides or various acids and bases (D002) 304 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (corrosive, ignitable) containing methanol and potassium hydroxide (D001, D002, F003) 125 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (corrosive, ignitable) in labpacks containing amine solutions or petroleum acids and acid (D001, D002) 134 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (corrosive, ignitable, toxic) containing acetic acid and formic acid (D001, D002, U123) 125 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (corrosive, ignitable, toxic) containing sulfuric acid, nitric acid, and silver (D001, D002, D011) 175 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (corrosive, ignitable, toxic) in labpacks containing sodium dichromate and sulfuric acid (D001, D002, D007) 40 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (corrosive, toxic) containing mercuric nitrate and sodium hydroxide (D002, D009) 8 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (corrosive, toxic) containing organic acids, inorganic acids, and chromium (D002, D007) 58 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (ignitable) containing ammonium persulfate (D001) 2 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (ignitable) containing benzyl peroxide (D001) 18 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (ignitable) containing iron and copper (D001) 25 lbs.
| |
| Salem.09123199 32
| |
| | |
| ( ( (
| |
| Salem Generating Station Table 2-1: Representative Hazardous Wastes for Salem and Hope Creek Generating Stations (continued)
| |
| Proces c =an ctn perm (DOOI)
| |
| Process chemicals (ignitable) containing permanganates (D001) 1 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (ignitable) containing peroxides (D001) 15 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (ignitable) containing petroleum distillates (DO01) 1,237 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (ignitable) containing sodium nitrite (D001) 20 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (ignitable, toxic) containing acetone and benzene (D001, D018, F003) 70 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (ignitable, toxic) containing mercuric nitrate (D001, D009) 7 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (ignitable, toxic) containing sodium hypochlorite and silver (D001) 8 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (toxic) containing arsenic (D004) 125 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (toxic) containing barium, chromium, and silver (D005, D007, D011) 41 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (toxic) containing mercuric acetate (D009) 5 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (toxic) containing mercury (D009) 16 lbs.
| |
| Process chemicals (toxic) in labpacks containing silver (D011) 5 lbs.
| |
| Solvent waste (ignitable) from cleaning and degreasing, containing mineral spirits (D001) 2,758 lbs.
| |
| Solvent waste (ignitable) from laboratory samples; containing isopropanol (D001) 826 lbs.
| |
| Solvent waste (toxic) from cleaning and degreasing in labpacks containing 1,1,1-trichloroethane (F002) 8 lbs.
| |
| Note: Hazardous wastes reported in this table are the total types and quantities of hazardous waste generated on Artificial Island. Data were obtained from the annual hazardous waste'report submitted in February 1998 to the NJDEP for calendar year 1997.
| |
| Salem.09123199 33
| |
| | |
| ( ( (
| |
| Salem Generating Station Table 2-2: Current Hazardous Substances and Related Pollution Prevention Systems Hydrocarbon Sources Main fuel oil storage tank Steel tank Distillate oil 840,000 gallons Gravel dike with and truck unloading area impermeable membrane liner 70 pieces of (active) Steel housing Mineral oil 172,647 gallons total Housekeeping; concrete outside mineral oil-filled pad and curbed with electrical equipment crushed rock bottom; diversion to oil/water separator 4 storage tanks Steel tank Distillate oil 120,000 gallons total Concrete room encloses each tank 13 lube oil storage tanks Steel tank Petroleum lube oil 101,800 gallons total Housekeeping; concrete and associated truck floor; diversion to oil/water unloading areas separator 2 oil/water separators Steel tank Oil/water mix 80,000 gallons total Concrete containment 3 tanks Concrete tank Oil/water mixtures 30,000 gallons Housekeeping 2 pieces of (inactive) spare Steel housing Mineral oil 22,500 gallons total Housekeeping; concrete mineral oil-filled pad transformers Sludge storage tank and Steel tank Oily sludge 5,000 gallons Concrete containment transfer area 2 storage tanks and Steel tank Waste oil 4,000 gallons total Integral steel inside associated transfer area concrete 6 smaller day tanks Steel tank Distillate oil 3,300 gallons total Concrete curb/floor Salem.09I23I99 34
| |
| | |
| ( (
| |
| Salem Generating Station Table 2-2: Current Hazardous Substances and Related Pollution Prevention Systems (continued)
| |
| ~SuceMK aarosPfbodo IMianr M~ QA00ti CntAirment Type:
| |
| 5 smaller storage tanks Steel tank Distillate oil 1,600 gallons total Concrete curbing; pad located in the boiler diversion to oil/water building and the pump skimmer house Chemical Sources Clarifier No. 1 and 2 Coated carbon steel tank Process wastewater 880,000 gallons Housekeeping; concrete floor Waste equalization basin Fiberglass-lined concrete Process wastewater 240,000 gallons Housekeeping; concrete tank floor 4 waste tanks (low and Coated concrete tank Process wastewater 195,000 gallons total Housekeeping; concrete high conductivity) floor; diversion to chemical waste tank 2 storage tanks (Unit Durakane fiberglass-lined Sodium hypochlorite 176,000 gallons Earth dike (sand, gravel, Nos. 1 and 2) and truck steel tank (15%) solution and clay); asphalt sprayed; unloading areas concrete/asphalt floor 5 caustic storage tanks Durakane fiberglass-lined Sodium hydroxide (50%) 17,500 gallons Caustic-resistant concrete and associated truck steel tank, epoxy enamel- solution dike/floor; diversion to unloading areas coated steel tank chemical waste tank 4 storage tanks and truck Lined or resin-coated steel Sulfuric acid (98%) 12,500 gallons total Acid-resistant dike/
| |
| unloading areas tank flooring; diversion to chemical waste tank 4 smaller tanks Fiberglass tank, coated Process wastewater 12,250 gallons total Housekeeping; concrete concrete tank, lined steel flooring diverted to larger tank process waste tanks 2 spray additive tanks and Steel tank Sodium hydroxide 8,000 gallons total Housekeeping; concrete truck unloading areas building and floor Salem.09/23199 35
| |
| | |
| ( (
| |
| Salem Generating Station Table 2-2: Current Hazardous Substances and Related Pollution Prevention Systems (continued) 1 ethylene glycol storage Steel tank Ethylene glycol 5,200 gallons Steel tank (antifreeze) 3 storage tanks at Unit Steel tank Ammonia hydroxide 4,000 gallons total Concrete curbing; No. 1 turbine, and truck (<28%) solution diversion to chemical unloading areas waste tank 2 component coolant Steel tank Potassium chromate 4,000 gallons total Housekeeping; concrete system surge/mix tanks floor (Unit Nos. 1 and 2) 4 storage tanks for the Steel tank Hydrazine (5-35%) 850 gallons total Housekeeping; concrete Unit No. 1 turbine solution floor; diversion to chemical waste tank Salem.09/23199 36
| |
| | |
| ( (
| |
| Salem Generating Station Table 2-3: Historic Operations and Related Pollution Prevention Systems Hydrocarbon Sources USTs One removed fiberglass distillate oil 2,000 gallons Unknown- None N/A storage tank, located at the TSC 1989 ASTs Salem Main Fuel Tank: Distillate Oil 840,000 gallons 1970- Concrete dike on Impermeable liner on gravel Present Delaware River dike added in 1990.
| |
| side of containment, gravel dike; periodic integrity testing Transfer All fuel oil piping from distillate oil N/A 1971- None None Pipelines tank to day tanks, generators, and Present combustion turbine unit is underground, single-walled and has no leak detection.
| |
| Combustion Unit No. 3 combustion turbine has 55 gallons 1971- Two underground Tanks replaced in 1991 with Turbine Units underground purge oil collection Present 55-gallon steel sump directed to high-volume tank that collects unburned oil when tanks oil/water separator.
| |
| engines are shut down.
| |
| Salem.09/23199 37
| |
| | |
| (I Salem Generating Station Table 2-3: Historic Operations and Related Pollution Prevention Systems (continued)
| |
| Oil-Containing One 500kv switchyard at each 7.5-8 acres 1976- Traprock; None Electric T&D generating station; mineral oil-filled Present inspection/
| |
| Equipment containers that require regular housekeeping; mineral oil changeouts via mobile generally filtering equipment. concrete containment, drain to treatment system Salem.09123199 38
| |
| | |
| ( (
| |
| Salem Generating Station Table 2-4: Pollution Prevention Plans Discharge Prevention, Containment, Management of petroleum and other hazardous substances. 1978 July 1999 and Countermeasures Plan The plans include provisions for spill prevention, spill response, Discharge Cleanup and Removal inspection of storage and containment areas, training of Plan (bPCC/SPCC/DCR) personnel, etc.
| |
| Spill Prevention Control and Approximately Countermeasures Plan 1978 Best Management Practices (BMP) Management of hazardous substances to prevent unauthorized 1985 1999 Plan discharges to ground and surface waters.
| |
| Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Management of stormwater runoff to prevent contamination. September 1998 Facility Response Plan Management of major sources of oil storage and transfer on February 1993 February 1998 navigable waters.
| |
| Underground Storage Tank Release Management of response to releases from underground storage No underground Response Plan tanks. storage tanks on site RCRA Contingency Plan Management of releases of hazardous waste. This information February 1998 is shared with Local Emergency Planning Committees.
| |
| Non-Radioactive Waste Operations Procedures for operations and maintenance of the treatment 1985 July 1996 and Maintenance Manual facility under routine and emergency conditions.
| |
| Low-Volume Oily Waste Operations Procedures for operations and maintenance of the treatment 1985 July 1996 and Maintenance Manual facility under routine and emergency conditions.
| |
| Cooling Tower Manual Operations Procedures for operations and maintenance of the treatment 1985 July 1996 and Maintenance Manual facility under routine and emergency conditions.
| |
| Sewage Treatment Plant Operations Procedures for operations and maintenance of the treatment 1985 March 1999 and Maintenance Manual facility under routine and emergency conditions.
| |
| Emergency Response Guide Substance-specific procedures for responding to releases and November 1992 ND.FP-EO.ZZ-0002(Z) spills of hazardous substances.
| |
| Salem.09/23/99 39
| |
| | |
| ( (
| |
| Salem Generating Station Table 2-4: Pollution Prevention Plans (continued)
| |
| = LE:
| |
| Regulatory Reporting Guide Reference guidelines for reporting and documenting January 1997 ECG Att. 16 environmental incidents.
| |
| Operations Manual for Fuel Transfer Management of fuel transfer operations from barges. N/A Operations By Barge Salem.09123/99 40
| |
| | |
| ( (
| |
| Salem Generating Station Table 2-5: Summary of Discharge Investigations and Remediation Cases Unit No. 3 Gas 91-01-23-1549-05 l Discharge
| |
| * MOA executed 4/93.
| |
| Turbine discovered during removal of two 55-
| |
| * Soil remediation and RAR completed.
| |
| gallon oil collection
| |
| * NJDEP issued No Further Action letter 11/5/94.
| |
| USTs.
| |
| Investigation concluded that soil contamination was result of historic discharges from Gas Turbine Unit.
| |
| Auxiliary Building 95-11-15-1210-31
| |
| * Historic leaks of
| |
| * Determination that none of the impacted area had a concentration of No. 2 fuel oil line to TPH exceeding the 10,000 ppm cleanup level.
| |
| the Auxiliary Building
| |
| * Groundwater was tested in the area of the leak and no VOCs or between 1978 and SVOCs were detected.
| |
| 1980.
| |
| * Based on TPH concentrations and the absence of impacted water, no soil was removed from the area.
| |
| * Results were submitted to the NJDEP in December 1996 and the NJDEP determined that N.J.A.C. requirements were satisfied.
| |
| Salem.09123199 41
| |
| | |
| ( (.
| |
| Salem Generating Station Table 3-1: Liability Screening-Salem Generating Station enida iabilitylssueL ; Isse 1net Ra'tioal fE Sce ntn~ ec0gQ0MSl~s0;/.a t
| |
| ,fio~iv iAf Investigation Yes V Investigation is retained as an issue at all sites where any candidate liability issue is retained.
| |
| Ash Ponds No X Issue does not exist at Salem.
| |
| Coal Pile No X Issue does not exist at Salem.
| |
| Hydrocarbon Sources Yes V One or more elements were retained.
| |
| USTs Yes V One UST was removed from Salem in 1989. There are insufficient data to warrant exclusion as an element.
| |
| ASTs-distillate oil Yes A Salem has one distillate oil AST. There are no site-specific data to warrant exclusion as an element.
| |
| ASTs-heavy oil No X Element does not exist at Salem.
| |
| Transmission pipelines No X Element does not exist at Salem.
| |
| Transfer pipelines Yes V Underground transfer pipelines exist at Salem. There are no site-specific data to warrant exclusion as an element.
| |
| Combustion turbine units No X One combustion turbine unit exists at Salem. Two former underground purge oil collection tanks were removed in 1990. Soil remediation related to purge oil tanks occurred in the area of the former tanks. In November 1994, the NJDEP issued an NFA letter for soil and groundwater at the combustion turbine unit. The existing purge oil collection tanks are contained inside a concrete vault. Therefore, the element is not retained.
| |
| Oil-containing electric T&D equipment Yes V Element exists at Salem. There are no site-specific data to warrant exclusion as an element.
| |
| Miscellaneous spills Yes / Spill records date back to 1986. There are no records of spills prior to 1986 to warrant exclusion as an element.
| |
| Salem.09123199 42
| |
| | |
| ( (
| |
| Salem Generating Station Table 3-1: Liability Screening-Salem Generating Station (continued) i.i.. -m Chemical Sources Yes V One or more elements were retained.
| |
| Boiler operations and maintenance No X The auxiliary boiler building foundation is poured concrete that provides processes containment for operations and maintenance processes.
| |
| Bulk storage and handling areas Yes v Element exists at Salem. There are no site-specific data to warrant exclusion as an element.
| |
| Waste disposal Yes / There are no site-specific data to warrant exclusion as an element.
| |
| Miscellaneous spills Yes
| |
| * Spill records date back to 1986. There are no records of spills prior to 1986 to warrant exclusion as an element.
| |
| PCB Sources Yes V One or more elements were retained.
| |
| Oil-containing electric T&D equipment Yes v Salem has oil-filled equipment that was in service when PCBs were in use.
| |
| There are insufficient site-specific data to warrant exclusion as an element.
| |
| Gas condensate blowdown No X Element does not exist at Salem.
| |
| On-Site Fill No X No elements were retained.
| |
| Historic fill No X The property was made by deposition of hydraulic fill from USACOE dredging at depth of the Delaware River channel. The majority of the filling occurred prior to 1940. Therefore, it is not retained as an element.
| |
| Ash fill No X Element does not exist at Salem.
| |
| Dredge spoils No X Element does not exist at Salem.
| |
| On-Site Surface Water, Drainages, Yes / Element exists at Salem and there are potential upgradient sources and Wetlands associated with Station operations.
| |
| Monitoring Yes / Monitoring is retained as an issue at all sites where any candidate liability issue is retained.
| |
| Salem.09/23/99 43
| |
| | |
| ( ( (
| |
| Salem Generating Station Table 3-2: Liability Characterization-Salem Generating Station Investigation N/A I N/A N/A M N/A N/A N/A (16 liability units)
| |
| Ash Ponds N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Coal Pile N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NIA NIA Hydrocarbon Sources USTs I Potential
| |
| * UST removed in 1989 in M Default scale 200 600 pathway to accordance with of 200 cy/tank.
| |
| groundwater applicable regulations. Assume depth and Delaware of 9 feet and River and Total: 1 surface area wetlands of 600 sf/ tank.
| |
| ASTs- 1 Potential
| |
| * The AST has had an M Default scale 400 3,600 distillate oil pathway to earthen dike or other of 400 cy/unit.
| |
| groundwater containment throughout Assume depth and Delaware its history, has been of 3 feet and River and upgraded to meet API surface area wetlands requirements, and an of 3,600 sf/
| |
| impermeable liner has unit.
| |
| been installed.
| |
| Total: I ASTs-heavy N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A oil Transmission N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Pipelines Salem.09123199 44
| |
| | |
| Salem Generating Station Table 3-2: Liability Characterization-Salem Generating Station (continued)
| |
| Transfer 1 Potential None M Default scale 400 3,600 Pipelines pathway to of 400 cy/unit.
| |
| groundwater Assume depth and Delaware of 3 feet and River surface area of 3,600 sf/
| |
| unit.
| |
| Combustion N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Turbine Units Oil-Containing 1 Potential
| |
| * Presence of traprock or M Default scale 200 1,800 Electric T&D pathway to containment limits impact of 200 cy/ unit.
| |
| Equipment groundwater to soil. Assume depth and Delaware Total: 1 of 3 feet and River surface area of 1,800 sf/unit.
| |
| Miscellaneous 1 Potential None M Default scale 200 1,800 Spills pathway to of 200 cy/
| |
| groundwater station.
| |
| and Delaware Assume depth River of 3 feet and surface area of 1,800 sf/
| |
| station.
| |
| Total I _ 5 _ _ _ j M I [ 1,4001 11,400 Salem.09123/99 45
| |
| | |
| ( (
| |
| Salem Generating Station Table 3-2: Liability Characterization-Salem Generating Station (continued)
| |
| Chemical Sources Boiler N/A I N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Operations and Maintenance Processes Bulk Storage I Potential
| |
| * Areas have been M Default scale 100 900 and Handling pathway to contained since circa of 100 cy/
| |
| Areas groundwater 1990. station.
| |
| and Delaware Total: Assume depth River Toa:Iof 3 feet and surface area of 900 sf/
| |
| station.
| |
| Waste 1 Potential None M Default scale 100 900 Disposal pathway to of 100 Cy/
| |
| groundwater station.
| |
| and Delaware Assume depth River of 3 feet and surface area of 900 sf/
| |
| station.
| |
| Salem.09123/99 46
| |
| | |
| ! ( (
| |
| Salem Generating Station Table 3-2: Liability Characterization-Salem Generating Station (continued)
| |
| Miscellaneous 1 Potential None M Default scale 100 900 Spills pathway to of 100 cy/
| |
| groundwater station.
| |
| and Delaware Assume depth River of 3 feet and surface area of 900 sf/
| |
| station.
| |
| Total I 1 3 l _ _ _ _ M lI_ 300J 2,700 PCB Sources Oil-Containing 7 Potential
| |
| * Presence of traprock or Electric T&D pathway to containment limits impact Equipment groundwater to soil.
| |
| and Delaware Total: 1 River and to Station personnel Gas N/A N/A N/A Condensate Blowdown Total 7 Salem.09123199 47
| |
| | |
| (,
| |
| I Salem Generating Station Table 3-2: Liability Characterization-Salem Generating Station (continued)
| |
| On-Site Fill Historic Fill N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Ash Fill N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Dredge Spoils N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total N/A N/A N/A N/A On-Site 1 Potential
| |
| * No visual indication of L 100% of on- 32 4,375 Surface Water, pathway to stress or impact. site water, Drainages, and wetland
| |
| * Receives tidal flushing. drainage, and Wetlands ecological Reevstdlfuhn.wetlands area communities Total: 2 downgradient from potential sources.
| |
| Assume depth of 2 feet and 10% of total volume for remediation.
| |
| Monitoring N/A N/A N/A M 12 wells (4 N/A N/A Average liability issues) remedy intensity is medium.
| |
| Salem.09/23/99 48
| |
| | |
| I (
| |
| Salem Generating Station Table 3-3: Liability Decision Tree-Salem Generating Station I 2 3 4 Investigation Hydrocarbon Sources Chemical Sources PCB Sources (PA/SI/RI/RAWP)
| |
| M M M Institutional Institutional Institutional 20% Controls* 40% Controls 10% Controls Deed Notice, Deed Notice, Deed Notice, Use Restrictions Use Restrictions Use Restrictions I
| |
| M Active Treatment Active Treatment 30% Low Effort
| |
| ($250K) l 40% Soil Removal/Off-Site Disposal or 30% Soil Removal/Off-Site Disposal or 20% Engineering Controls Fencing/Capping On-Site Treatment On-Site Treatment I I I Active Treatment Active Treatment 40% Medium Effort Active Treatment 20% 60%
| |
| Groundwater Soil Removal/Off-($500K) Soil Removal and Extraction and NAPL Recovery Site Disposal Treatment i
| |
| I I Active Treatment Active Treatment Engineering 10% Soil Removal and Controls & Active L30% High Effort 110% Soil Removal, NAPL Groundwater 5% Treatment
| |
| ($1 .5M) Recovery, and Groundwater Extraction/ Capping and Treatment Groundwater Extraction/ Extraction/
| |
| Treatment (Carbon)
| |
| Treatment Active Treatatment Ixcavalror I/Off-m Site Dispos; al and Groundw; ater Extracticon/
| |
| TreatmE!nt
| |
| *Institutional controls are also assumed as a component of all engineering controls and active treatment remedies.
| |
| Salem.09/23/99 49
| |
| | |
| ( (
| |
| Salem Generating Station Table 3-3: Liability Decision Tree-Salem Generating Station (continued) 5 6 On-Site Surface Water, Monitoring Drainages, and Wetlands L M Institutional 40% Controls 30% 5 Years Deed Notice, Use Restrictions I
| |
| Engineering 30% Controls 40%
| |
| 10 Years Access Controls/
| |
| Runoff Controls I I Active Treatment 30% Limited Sediment 30%
| |
| Removal/Off-Site 20 Years Disposal or On-Site Soil Treatment I
| |
| Active Treatment 0% Assessment, Dredging, and Off-Site Sediment Disposal
| |
| *Institutional controls are also assumed as a component of all engineering controls and active treatment remedies.
| |
| Salem.09/23/99 50
| |
| | |
| ( (
| |
| Salem Generating Station Table 3-4: Liability Valuation-Salem Generating Station Itim 1 -Inv-tpgatlon trn 4 -HydrocarbonSounres Scenaro Coot Pob. Eapcr-td Scnarao Coot Prob. Enpotod U.S.S M U.S.$ _ _S_ M U.S.S LoPEffort S 23.318 0.30 S 71495 InstutltionalControls $ 11,396 0.20 $ 2,279 Soil RMoal/Off-Sito Disposalo On-Sit.
| |
| Modtin Efont 476,636 0.40 $ 190.654 Troatment $ 214.070 0.40 $ 85062f Soil RovncalandNAPL Hbh015tont S 1429oS
| |
| ,907 0.20 S 428,972 toooverl S 270,202 0.30 S 8,0 rrreaamenl(nt o S 1,5556561 0.10 $ 155,666 1.00 691.X121 10 S2,S to,m . ChomlpalSour".s f0 8 . PCBSour01 Snario Coot Prob. Eapocd Stoanlr Cost Prob. Eop.ctod Vai-. Ottuo U.S. $ M U.S.S _______ U.S.S$ M - U.S.S$
| |
| U S. 11ctitu3in6Contrpn 396 0.40 U 4S 8 In[it1tional Control S 11U9 S 1S14 Soil ReovalIOt-Sita Disposalor On-Silo Treatment S 173164 0.30 S 51,949 FonolnO/COSlnO $ 41025 0.20 S 8,205 Groondwaten Extaot.io SoilRomn..1VOt.-Sit.
| |
| andTreatoont S 1,276.755 0.20 S 255,351 Disposal $ 11278 0.80 S 80167 Soil Ranovatand_ Cappingand Groundwalcn Groundwaton rEr*.dthnretam.nt S 1450,085 010 S 145008 EdractinlTraolon, 1317,781 00 60889 Eoovat6on/Off-Sita Sispocaland Grounduaton I__I_1_00 _S 456,867 _ 1 :
| |
| S .
| |
| l,392,195 005 an S 69,610 214,610 It.o 8 -On-Sit SourfcoWater. Dralnage., atdWolland. Item9 - Monitordng Toa>'
| |
| >Ego te 06x" ,,,
| |
| Soonorio Coot Prob. Eopoold 800060 Coot Prob. Eopoctod Val.0 V810
| |
| .S.$
| |
| U_______ L U.S.S$ U.S.S$ U .S.8 Inolstutlonal Controls $ 7017 0401 S 3,007 Mooltoino-5 voar l 97080 030 29274 Aaess ControlI Runorfl Control , 127,003 0, 0 0 38,102 Mnitoino-10 Var l 147,096 840 $ 68.838 lnited Sedinrw Remnoa70Ofl-Se D0s0al01
| |
| '0On-Sile Sol!Treatrent $ 67,086 0.20 $ 20126 MbnHaino- 20 210,759 0.30 S 5,028 Acc--onort, Or4dging an cnfSit SodirnorDlopoal $ 341,780 0 °° _ _ _ _
| |
| 00 $0l 61.235 1.00 $ 153.140 $ 1,901,055 Discount Rate 7%
| |
| Inflation Rate 2%
| |
| Start Year of Remediation 4 Salem.09/23199 51
| |
| | |
| ARCADIS Appendix C Well Details (Boring Logs, Well Completion Details, Well Completion Details, Well Completion Records, and Survey Form Bs)
| |
| | |
| -~ 0 ARCADIS Sample/Core Log Boring/Well Well M Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC Salem Generrating Station/NP000571.0002 Page 1 of 1 Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island. Hancock's Bridge. New Jersey Started 5/3/2003 Completetd 513/2003 Type of Samplel Total Depth Drilled 20.0 Feet Hole Diameter 5.25 inches Coring Device NA Length and Diameter of Coring Device 5.25 inches by 5.0 feet hollow-stem augers Sampling Interval NA feet Land-Surface Elev. 99.26 feet ]Surveyed ] Estimated Datum Plant Datum Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor CT&E Environmental Services, Inc. Driller Nick Helper Larry Prepared Hammer Hammer By Jon Rutledge Weight NA Drop NA inches Sample/Core Depth (feet below land surface) Core Blow PID Recovery Counts Reading From To (feet) (ppm) Sample/Core Description 0.0 10.0 Borehole advanced to 10.0 feet below ground surface using vacuum excavation.
| |
| 11.5 20.0 SAND, medium, brown, some silt, wet, slight hydrocarbon odor.
| |
| Description from cuttings.
| |
| 20.0 End of boring. Boring completed as Monitoring Well M.
| |
| I I II I I ___
| |
| Soil Boring Logs -Wells M and R through W.xIs 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| JQ ARCADIS Sample/Core Log 1 Boring/Well Well R Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC Salem Generrating Station / NP000571.0002 Page 1 of I Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Started 6/3/2003 Completed 6/3/2003 Type of Sample/
| |
| Total Depth Drilled 19.0 Feet Hole Diameter 3.25 inches Coring Device NA Length and Diameter of Coring Device 3.25 inches by 4.0 feet Sampling Interval NA feet Land-Surface Elev. 99.82 feet M'Surveyed LEstimated Datum Plant Datum Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Direct Push Drilling Contractor CT&E Environmental Services, Inc. Driller Jeff Helper Steve Prepared Hammer Hammer By Jon Rutledge Weight NA Drop NA inches Sample/Core Depth (feet below land surface) Core Blow PlD Recovery Counts Reading From To (feet) (ppm) Sample/Core Desoiption 0.0 3.0 Description from cuttings: SAND, reddish to yellowish orange, some silt, clay and
| |
| ____ _________gravel.
| |
| 3.0 12.0 - Description from cuttings: CLAY, yellowish orange, some sand (fine to medium).
| |
| Borehole advanced to 12.0 feet below ground surface using vacuum excavation.
| |
| 12.0 19.0 - Boring advanced from 12.0 feet to 19.0 feet using direct push process.
| |
| A sample/core desription was unable to be observed between 12.0 and 19.0 due to the nature of the direct push process.
| |
| 19.0 End of boring. Boring completed as Monitoring Well R.
| |
| [
| |
| I_ _ I _ I __ I _ _ I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
| |
| Soil Boring Logs - Wells M and R through W.xs 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| f 0ARCADIS Sample/Core Log Boring/Well Well S Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC Salem Generrating Station/NP000571.0002 Page 1 of 1 Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Started 5/29/2003 Completetd 5/29/2003 Type of Sample/
| |
| Total Depth Drilled 36.0 Feet Hole Diameter 2 inches Coring Device Split-Spoon Length and Diameter of Coring Device 2 feet by 2 inches Sampling Interval 5 feet Land-Surface Elev. 99.61 feet X Surveyed D Estimated Datum Plant Datum Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor CT&E Environmental Services, Inc. Driller Marc Helper Steve Prepared Hammer Hammer By Jon Rutledge Weight 140 pounds Drop 36 inches Sample/Core Deplh (feet below land surface) Core Blow PID Recovery Counts Reading From To (feet) (ppm) Sample/Core Description 0.0 - 9.5' Vacuum excavation to identify subsurface utilities 9.5 11.5 2.0 7-9-11-15 0.0 9.5 - 14.0' orange, silty medium SAND with gravel 14.0 16.0 1.9 12-15-16-17 0.0 14.0 - 19.0' tan, clayey medium SAND with gravel 19.0 21.0 2.0 8-9-13-15 0.0 19.0 - 20.7' light brown, medium SAND with gravel 20.7 - 24.0' gray, medium SAND with gravel 24.0 26.0 2.0 140 lbs/0.9'-2-3 0.0 24.0 - 25.7' gray, CLAY with trace fine sand and mica 25.7 - 26.0' gray, fine sandy CLAY with trace mica 29.0 31.0 2.0 140 lbs/0.5'-2-1-2 1.0 26.0 - 34.4' gray, CLAY with trace fine sand and mica 34.0 36.0 2.0 2-2-8-14 0.0 34.4 - 36.0' gray, medium SAND with gravel and trace mica 36.0' End of Boring Soil Boring Logs - Wells M and R through W.xls 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| 0 ARCADIS Sample/Core Log Boring/Well Well T Projec ft/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC Salem Generrating Station/NP000571.0002 Page 1 of I Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Started 6/5/2003 Completed 6/5/2003 Type of Sample/
| |
| Total Depth Drilled 35.5 Feet Hole Diameter 2 inches Coring Device Split-Spoon Length and Diameter of Coring Device 2 feet by 2 inches Sampling Interval 5 feet Land-Surface Elev. 100.97 feet [qSurveyed l Estimated Datum Plant Datum Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor CT&E Environmental Services, Inc. Driller Marc Helper Steve Prepared Hammer Hammer By Jon Rutledge Weight 140 pounds Drop 36 inches Sample/Core Depth (feet below land surface) Core Blow PID Recovery Counts Reading From To (feet) (ppm) Sample/Core Description
| |
| =_ 0.0 - 9.5' Vacuum excavation to identify subsurface utilities 9.5 11.5 2.0 2-2-2-2 0.0 9.5 - 14.9' gray, CLAY with trace fine sand and mica 14.5 16.5 2.0 5-4-3-3 0.0 14.9 - 15.4' gray, medium SAND with trace clay and mica 19.5 21.5 2.0 1-2-2-3 0.0 15.4 - 26.0' gray, CLAY with trace fine sand and mica 24.5 26.5 2.0 1-2-2-4 0.0 26.0 - 26.5' gray, fine sandy CLAY with trace mica 29.5 31.5 2.0 3-3-21-50 0.0 31.5 33.5 2.0 25-30-20-15 0.0 26.5 - 33.2' ra, medium SAND with gravel and trace mica 33.5 35.5 0.0 140 Ibs/2.0' NA 33.2 - 33.5' gray, CLAY with trace mica 35.5' End of Boring Soil Boring Logs - Wells M and R through W.xIs 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| 0 ARCADIS Sample/Core Log Boring/Well Well U Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC Salem Generrating Station/NP000571.0002 Page 1 of 1 Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Started 5/28/2003 Completed 5/28/2003 Type of Sample/
| |
| Total Depth Drilled 36.0 Feet Hole Diameter 2 inches Coring Device Split-Spoon Length and Diameter of Coring Device 2 feet by 2 inches Sampling Interval 5 feet Land-Surface Elev. 99. 54 feet ElSurveyed FlEstimated Datum Plant Datum Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor CT&E Environmental Services, Inc. Driller Marc Helper Steve Prepared Hammer Hammer By Jon Rutledge Weight 140 pounds Drop 36 inches Sample/Core Depth (feet below land surface) Core Blow PID Recovery Counts Reading From To (feet) (ppm) Sample/Core Description l__lllo0.D - 9.0' Vacuum excavation to identify subsurface utilities 9.0 11.0 2.0 7-3-4-4 78.1 9.0 - 9.7 black, fine sandy SILT with trace mica; hydrocarbon odor 9.7 - 14.0' gray, silty fine SAND with trace mica; hydrocarbon odor 14.0 16.0 2.0 5-4-3-3 38.5 14.0 - 20.0' gray, fine SAND with trace silt and mica; hydrocarbon odor 19.0 21.0 2.0 1-2-1-2 7.6 20.0 - 29.0' gray, fine sandy CLAY with trace mica 24.0 26.0 2.0 2-2-1-2 7.2 29.0 31.0 2.0 16-20-28-30 20.2 29.0 - 32.0' gray, medium SAND with gravel 34.0 36.0 1.7 11-7-6-8 8.6 32.0 - 36.0' gray, CLAY with trace fine sand and mica 36.0' End of Boring Soil Boring Logs - Wells M and Rthrough WxIs 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| 0 ARCADIS Sample/Core Log Boring/Well Well V Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC Salem Generrating Station/NP000571.0002 Page 1 of 2 Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Started 6/6/2003 Completetd 6/12/2003 Type of Sample/
| |
| Total Depth Drilled 80.0 Feet Hole Diameter 2 inches Coring Device Split-Spoon Length and Diameter of Coring Device 2 feet by 2 inches Sampling Interval Continous Land-Surface Elev. 99.16 feet nESurveyed ] Estimated Datum Plant Datum Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Mud Rotary Drilling Contractor CT&E Environmental Services, Inc. Driller Marc Helper Steve Prepared Hammer Hammer By Jon Rutledge Weight 140 pounds Drop 36 inches Sample/Core Depth (feet below land surface) Core Blow PID Recovery Counts Reading From To (feet) (ppm) Sample/Core Description 0.0 - 10.0' Vacuum excavation to identify subsurface utilities 10.0 12.0 2.0 1-1-3-2 0.0 10.0 - 12.0' gray, fine sandy CLAY with trace mica 12.0 14.0 2.0 3-1-1-2 0.0 12.0 - 14.0' gray, fine sandy CLAY with trace mica 14.0 16.0 2.0 3-3-1/1.0' 0.0 14.0-16.0' gray, CLAY with trace medium sand and mica 16.0 18.0 2.0 3-1-1-3 0.0 16.0 - 18.0' gray, CLAY with trace fine sand and mica 18.0 20.0 2.0 140 lbs.f1.0'-2-1 0.0 18.0 - 20.0' gray, CLAY with trace fine sand and mica 20.0 22.0 2.0 1-2-2-2 0.0 20.0 - 22.0' gray, CLAY with trace fine sand and mica 22.0 24.0 2.0 140 lbs./i.0-3-3 0.0 22.0 - gray, CLAY with trace fine sand and mica 924.0' 24.0 26.0 2.0 3-2-3-2 0.0 24.0 - 26.0' gray, CLAY with trace fine sand and mica 26.0 28.0 2.0 140 lbs./i.0'-3-3 0.0 26.0 - 28.0' gray, fine sandy CLAY with trace mica 28.0 30.0 2.0 3-2-2-3 0.0 28.0 - 30.0' gray, fine sandy CLAY with trace mica 30.0 32.0 2.0 8-9-11-15 0.0 30.0 - 31.3' gray, fine sandy CLAY with organic material 31.3 - 32.0' gray, medium SAND 32.0 34.0 2.0 15-20-25-23 0.0 32.0 - 33.5' gray, silty medium SAND 33.5 - 33.6' purple, fine SAND with gravel 33.6 - 34.0' brown, medium to coarse SAND with gravel 34.0 36.0 1.0 20-18-15-9 0.0 34.0 - 36.0' gray, medium to coarse SAND with gravel 36.0 38.0 2.0 6-6-8-15 0.0 36.0 - 36.8' gray, medium to coarse SAND with gravel 36.8 - 38.0' gray, CLAY 38.0 40.0 0.5 7-8-8-10 0.0 38.0 - 40.0' gray, GRAVEL with trace clay Soil Boring Logs - Wells M and R through W.xIs 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| IQ ARCADIS GERAGHTY & MILLER Sample/Core Log (Cont.d)
| |
| BorinolWell Well V Page 2 of 2 Prepared by Jon Rutledge Sample/Core Depth (feet below land surface) Core PID Recovery Reading From To (feet) (ppm) Sample/Core Description 40.0 42.0 2.0 7-7-8-1 2 0.0 40.0 - 42.0' giray, CLAY with trace silt and gravel 42.0 .44.0 2.0 5-7-9-12 0.0 42.0 - 44.0' gray, CLAY with trace silt 44.0 46.0 2.0 7-9-12-12 0.0 44.0 - 44.6' gray, GRAVEL (cave-in) 44.6 - 46.0' gray, CLAY with trace silt 46.0 48.0 2.0 9-9-10-13 0.0 46.0 - 46.2' gray, GRAVEL (cave-in)
| |
| _ . 46.2 - 48.0' gray, CLAY with trace silt 48.0 50.0 2.0 6-8-9-10 0.0 48.0 - 50.0' gray, CLAY with trace silt 50.0 52.0 2.0 5-5-6-10 0.0 50.0 - 52.0' gray, CLAY with trace silt 52.0 54.0 2.0 10-11-12-13 0.0 52.0 - 53.6' gray, CLAY 53.6 - 54.0' dark purple, silty sandy CLAY with trace mica 54.0 56.0 2.0 10-13-17-17 0.0 54.0 - 56.0' red, clayey fine SAND with trace mica 56.0 58.0 2.0 8-11-25-22 0.0 56.0 - 57.5' reddish gray, clayey fine SAND with trace mica
| |
| =_
| |
| _57.5 __ - 58.0' reddish gray, fine SAND with trace mica 58.0 60.0 2.0 12-12-9-9 0.0 58.0 - 60.0' gray, fine SAND with trace mica 60.0 62.0 1.7 8-11-20-21 0.0 60.0 - 62.0' gray, fine SAND with trace mica 62.0 64.0 2.0 8-10-15-25 0.0 62.0 - 64.0' gray, fine SAND with trace silt and mica 64.0 66.0 0.9 24-24-18-10 0.0 64.0 - 66.0' gray, medium to coarse SAND with gravel 66.0 68.0 1.4 4-4-6-12 0.0 66.0 - 67.2' gray, medium to coarse SAND with gravel
| |
| =_ 67.2 - 68.0' green, fine SAND with trace silt 68.0 70.0 1.5 15-15-13-23 0.0 68.0 - 70.0' grayish green, fine SAND with trace silt 70.0 72.0 2.0 16-16-20-22 0.0 70.0 - 72.0' green, fine SAND with trace silt and gravel 72.0 74.0 2.0 20-20-31-20 0.0 72.0 - 74.0' greenish black, fine to medium SAND with fragments of seashells 74.0 76.0 1.5 48-50/0.3' 0.0 74.0 - 76.0' dark green, fine SAND with trace fragments of seashells 76.0 78.0 2.0 30-18-23-30 0.0 76.0 - 78.0' olive green, fine SAND with trace silt 78.0 80.0 1.0 30-70-50/0.2' 0.0 78.0 - 80.0' olive green, fine SAND with trace silt 80.0' End of Boring Soil Boring Logs - Wells M and R through W.xIs 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| 0 ARCADIS Sample/Core Log Boring/Well Well W IProject/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC Salem Generrating StationfNP000571.0002 Page 1 of 1 Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Started 6/212003 CompletEtd 6/3/2003 Type of Samplel Total Depth Drilled 36.0 Feet Hole Diameter 2 inches Coring Device Split-Spoon Length and Diameter of Coring Device 2 feet by 2 inches Sampling Interval 5 feet Land-Surface Elev. 99.36 feet MYSurveyed 1] Estimated Datum Plant Datum Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor CT&E Environmental Services, Inc. Driller Marc Helper Steve Prepared Hammer Hammer By Jon Rutledge Weight 140 pounds Drop 36 inches Sample/Core Depth (feet below land surface) Core Blow PlD Recovery Counts Reading From To (feet) (ppm) Sample/Core Description 0.0 - 9.5' Vacuum excavation to identify subsurface utilities 9.5 11.5 1.6 15-20-22-22 0.0 9.5 -16.2' brown, medium to coarse SAND With gravel 14.5 16.5 0.3 1/0.9'-2-2 0.0 16.2 - 18.0' gray, medum sandy CLAY 18.0 20.0 2.0 111.5'-2 0.0 24.0 26.0 2.0 140 lbs/0.5-1-1-2 0.0 29.0 31.0 1.9 140 lbsI2.0' 0.0 18.0 - 34.3' gray, CLAY with trace fine sand and mica 34.0 36.0 2.0 6-8-3-4 0.0 34.3 - 36.0' gray, clayey fine SAND
| |
| _ _36.0' End of Boring 4 4- * + 4-4- I- t 4- 4-I 4. -I .4-. 4.
| |
| __ __ [____ __ ________________
| |
| Soil Boring Logs - Wells M and R through W.xIs 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| --- 0ARCADIS SamplelCore Log Boring/Well Well Y Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC Salem Generating Station / NP000571 .0003 Page 1 of 1 Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Started 9/27/2003 Complete !d 9/27/2003 Type of Sample!
| |
| Total Depth Drilled 40.0 Feet Hole Diameter 9.0 inches Coring Device Split-spoon (2-inches, by 2-feet)
| |
| Length and Diameter of Coring Device 9.0-inch by 5.0-feet hollow-stem augers. Sampling Interval 5.0 feet Land-Surface Elev. 99.20 feet E]Surveyed ] Estimated Datum NAVID 1988 -
| |
| Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Hollow-Stem Auger Drilling Contractor A.C. Schultes, Inc. Driller C. Warren Helper W. Powers Prepared Hammer Hammer By Christopher Sharoe Weight 140 lbs Drop 30 inches Sample/Core Depth (feet below land surface) Core Blow PID Recovery Counts Reading From TO (feet) (ppm) Sample/Core Description 0.0 10.0 -- Borehole advanced to 10 feet below ground surface using vacuum excavation.
| |
| 140 16.0 2.0 1/0/1/0 -- SILT, dark gray, trace sand, fining with depth, wet.
| |
| 190 21.0 2.0 0/011/i - SILT, dark gray, trace sand, stiffening with depth, wet.
| |
| 24.0 26.0 1.5 1/3/4/5 -- SILT, dark gray, trace sand.
| |
| 29.0 31.0 2.0 1/2/1/2 - First 1.0 feet: SILT, dark gray; Next 1.0 feet: SILT, with clay and some sand,
| |
| -- - -- - -- sand increasing with depth.
| |
| 34.0 36.0 2.0 2/3/516 -- First 1.0 feet: SILT, dark gray; Next 1.0 feet: CLAY, gray, stiff.
| |
| 37.0 39.0 1.5 311/0/11- First 1.0 feet: SILT, dark gray; Next 0.5 feet: CLAY, gray and tan, stiff.
| |
| 40.0 - ----- End of boring. Boring completed as Monitoring Well Y.
| |
| 4 4 I 4 F + 4 I 4 4 + 4 4 4
| |
| + 4 4 4 Soil Boring Logs - Wells Y through AF.xls 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| 0-ARCADIS Sample/Core Log Boring/Well Well Z Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC Salem Generating Station / NP000571.0003 Page 1 of I Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Started 9130/2003 Completed 9/30/2003 Type of Sample/
| |
| Total Depth Drilled 38 Feet Hole Diameter 9.0 inches Coring Device Split-spoon (2-inches by 2-feet)
| |
| Length and Diameter of Coring Device 9.0-inch byy5.0-feet hollow-stem augers. Sampling Int erval 5.0 feet Land-Surface Elev. 99.3 feet ReSurveyed F Estimated Datum NAVD 1988 Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Hollow-Stem Auger Drilling Contractor A.C. Schul tes, Inc. Driller C. Warren Helper W. Powers Prepared Hammer Hammer By Christophe!rSharpe Weight 140 lbs Drop 30 inches Sample/Core Depth (feet below land surface) Core Slow PID Recovery Counts Reading Prom To (feet (nnm) Samole/Core Descriotion 0 10 Borehole advanced to 10 feet below ground surface using vacuum excavation.
| |
| 15 17 2 2/1/WWI SILT, dark gray with trace fine sand (diesel odor).
| |
| 20 22 2 0/1/0/11 SILT, dark gray with trace fine sand.
| |
| 25 27 2 0/0/2/1 CLAY, dark gray with some silt and trace fine sand.
| |
| 27 29 2 11212/2 SILT, dark gray with some clay and fine to medium sand, coarsening with depth.
| |
| 29 31 2 2/111/1 SILT, dark gray with some clay and trace sand.
| |
| -- I -- (Distict 0.05 to 0.1 foot organic horizon @ 1.2 ft) 31 33 2 15/20/44/33 - First 1.5 feet: SILT, dark gray with some clay and trace sand.
| |
| _ - Next 0.25 foot: SAND with gravel.
| |
| Next 0.25 foot: SAND, brown, medium-fine.
| |
| 33 35 2 10/11/29/44 First 0.25 foot: SAND, cemented gray
| |
| _- Next 1.75 feet: SAND, dark gray with gravel.
| |
| 35 37 2 2/9/15/25 First 1.2 feet: SAND, dark gray silty.
| |
| - - Next 0.8 foot: SAND, brown with gravel.
| |
| 37 _ End of boring. Boring completed as Monitoring Well Z.
| |
| Soil Boring Logs - Wells Y through AF.xIs 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| '- 0 ARCADIS Sample/Core Log Boring/Well Well M iProject/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC Salem Generating Station / NP0005711.0003 Page 1 of 1 Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island. Hancock's Bridge. New Jersey Started 9/30/2003 Completed 9/30/2003 Type of Sample/
| |
| Total Depth Drilled 36.5 Feet Hole Diameter 9.0 inches Coring Device Split-spool n(2-inches by 2-feet)
| |
| Length and Diameter of Coring Device 9.0-inch by 5.0-feet hollow-stem augers. Sampling Interval 5.0 feet Land-Surface Elev. 99.20 feet Fx]Surveyed [lEstimated Datum NAVD 1988 Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Hollow-Stem Auger Drilling Contractor A.C. Schultes, Inc. Driller C. Warren Helper W. Powers Prepared Hammer Hammer By Christopher Sharpe Weight 140 lbs Drop 30 in ches Sample/Core Depth (feet below land surface) Core Blow PID Recovery Counts Reading From To (feet) (DOm) Samole/Core Descdo1tion 10 -. Borehole advanced to 10 feet below ground surface using vacuum excavation.
| |
| 15 17 1.5 4/8/12/19 _ SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| 20 22 1.9 3/7/14/22 __ SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| 25 27 2 5/12/16/33 _ SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| 30 32 1.8 1/2/6/14 - SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| 35 37 2 8/6/7/8 - First 1.0 foot: SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| _ =- Next 1 foot: CLAY, stiff gray (Kirkwood).
| |
| 36.5 = = End of boring. Boring completed as Monitoring Well AA.
| |
| Soil Boring Logs - Wells Y through AF.xIs 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| '- 0 ARCADIS Sample/Core Log Boring/Well Well AB _ Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC Salem Generating Station / NP000571.0003 Page 1 of 1 Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island. Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Started 10/2/2003 Complete:d 10/212003 Type of Sample/
| |
| Total Depth Drilled 43 Feet Hole Diameter 9.0 inches Coring Device Split-spoon (2-inches by 2-feet)
| |
| Length and Diameter of Coring Device 9.0-inch by 5.0-feet hollow-stem augers. Sampling Interval 5.0 feet Land-Surface Elev. 99.10 feet X Surveyed ]Estimated Datum NAVD 1988 Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Hollow-Stem Auger Drilling Contractor A.C. Schultes, Inc. Driller C. Warren Helper W. Powers Prepared Hammer Hammer By Christopher Sharpe Weight 140 lbs Drop 30 in ches Sample/Core Depth (feet below land surface) Core Blow PID Recovery Counts Reading From To (feet) (pom) Samole/Core Description 0 10 Borehole advanced to 10 feet below ground surface using vacuum excavation.
| |
| 15 17 1.2 3/4/4/5 SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| 20 22 2 7/7/12/24 SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| 25 27 2 4/1215/7 SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| 30 32 1.2 5/4/5/3 SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| 35 37 2 5/7/7/13 First 1.8 feeet: SAND, tan, with gravel and silt .
| |
| Next 0.4 foot: SAND, dark gray, medium (petroleum odor).
| |
| 37 39 2 13/27/13/15 First 1.6 feet: SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| - Next 0.4 foot: SAND, dark gray, clayey.
| |
| 39 41 2 8/8/8/11 - First 0.3 foot: SAND, gray.
| |
| -Next 1.4 feet: SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| _- - Next 0.3 foot: SAND, gray.
| |
| 41 43 2 7/5/3/5 - First 1 foot: SLOUGH.
| |
| - - Next 0.6 foot: SAND, gray, medium.
| |
| Next 0.3 foot: CLAY, gray, stiff.
| |
| 43.0 _ End of boring. Boring completed as Monitoring Well AB.
| |
| .t- t I I
| |
| + 4- 4 4 Soil Boring Logs - Wells Y through AF.xds 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| ZW ARCADIS Sample/Core Log Boring/Well Well AC _ Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC Salem Generating Station / NP000571.0003 Page 1 of 1 Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Started 9/26/2003 Completed 9/26/2003 Type of Sample/
| |
| Total Depth Drilled 24.5 Feet Hole Diameter 9.0 inches Coring Device Split-spoor i (2-inches by 2-feet)
| |
| Length and Diameter of Coring Device 13.0-inch by 5.0-feet hollow-stem augers. Sampling Interval I _ 5.0 feet Land-Surface Elev. 99.00 feet i Surveyed RLEstimated Datum NAVD 1988 Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Hollow-Stem Auger Drilling Contractor A.C. Schultes, Inc. Driller C. Warren Helper W. Powers Prepared Hammer Hammer By Christopher Sharpe Weight 140 lbs Drop 30 in ches Sample/Core Depth (feet below land surface) Core Blow PID Recovery Counts Reading From To (feet) (ppm) Sample/Core Description 0 10 Borehole advanced to 10 feet below ground surface using vacuum excavation.
| |
| 10 12 1.6 517/6/6 SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| 15 17 1.6 4/13/10117 - SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| 20 22 2 3/5/8/10 First 1.8 feet: SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| -Next 0.2 foot: SAND, gray, coarse-medium with red-brown clay.
| |
| 22 24 2 4/3/5/6 - First 1.5 feet: SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| _ - Next 0.5 feet: SAND, gray to brown, with gravel and silt.
| |
| 24 24.5 0.2 NA First 0.2 foot: Tan silt & sand w/ gravel.
| |
| Refusal.
| |
| 24.5 End of boring. Boring completed as Monitoring Well AC.
| |
| Soil Boring Logs - Wells Y through AF.xls 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| '- 0 ARCADIS Sample/Core Log Boring/Well Well AD Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC Salem Generating Station / NP000571.0003 Page 1 of 1 Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island. Hancock's Bridge. New Jersey Started 101312003 Completed 10/3/2003 Type of Samplel Total Depth Drilled 44 Feet Hole Diameter 9.0 -
| |
| inches Coring Device Split-spoor n(2-inches by 2-feet)
| |
| Length and Diameter of Coring Device 9.0-inch by 5.0-feet hollow-stem augers. Sampling Interval I _ 3.0 feet Land-Surface Elev. 99.10 feet E]Surveyed F Estimated Datum NAVD 1988 Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Hollow-Stem Auger Drilling Contractor A.C. Schultes, Inc. Driller C.Warren Helper W. Powers Prepared Hammer Hammer By _ Christopher Sharpe Weight 140 lbs Drop 30 inches Sample/Core Depth (feet below land surface) Core Blow PID Recovery Counts Reading From To (feet) (pom) Sample/Core Description 0 10 Borehole advanced to 10 feet below ground surface using vacuum excavation.
| |
| 15 17 2 1/0/0/1 CLAY, dark gray with silt and organic material.
| |
| 20 22 2 0/0/0/0 CLAY, dark gray with silt and organic material.
| |
| 25 27 2 1/0/1/1 First 1 foot: CLAY, dark gray with silt and organic material.
| |
| _ _ -Next 1 foot: SAND, dark gray with silt.
| |
| 30 32 2 0/1/2/1 CLAY, dark gray with silt and organic material (phragmites).
| |
| - - -- - XFirst 1foot: SILT, dark gray with sand.
| |
| =- Next 1 foot: SAND, dark gray, with silt.
| |
| 37 39 2 3/7/8/5 First 1 foot: CLAY, dark gray, sandy.
| |
| Next 1 foot: SAND, gray to brown with gravel.
| |
| 39 41 2 9/12/6/5 First 0.5 foot: SLOUGH.
| |
| _- Next 0.5 foot: SAND, gray, interbedded with dark gray organic material X- X X- X X 0=X(rhythmites).
| |
| =- Next 0.5 foot: CLAY, dark gray.
| |
| -Next 0.5 foot: SAND, tan, medium.
| |
| 41 43 2 3/5/5/5 First 1 foot: SAND, gray to brown with gravel.
| |
| Next 1 foot: CLAY, dark gray, stiff.
| |
| 44.0 _ End of boring. Boring completed as Monitoring Well AD.
| |
| Soil Boring Logs - Wells Y through AF.xIs 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| J- ARCADIS Sample/Core Log Boring/Well Well AE Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC Salem Generating Station / NP000571.0003 Page 1 of 1 Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Started 10/2/2003 Completed 10/2/2003 Type of Sample/
| |
| Total Depth Drilled 28 Feet Hole Diameter 9.0 inches Coring Device Split-spoor n(2-inches by 2-feet)
| |
| Length and Diameter of Coring Device 9.0-inch by 5.0-feet hollow-stem augers. Sampling Interval 5.0 feet Land-Surface Elev. 99.30 feet [3Surveyed LEstimated Datum NAVD 1988 Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Hollow-Stem Auger Drilling Contractor A.C. Schultes, Inc. Driller C. Warren Helper W. Powers Prepared Hammer Hammer By Christopher Sharpe Weight 140 lbs Drop 30 in iches Sample/Core Depth (feet below land surface) Core Blow PID Recovery Counts Reading From To (feet) (ppm) Sample/Core Description 0 10 _ Borehole advanced to 10 feet below ground surface using vacuum excavation.
| |
| 15 17 2 8/9/18/20 SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| 20 22 2 14/14/25/32 SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| 22 24 2 10/7/13/18 SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| 24 26 2 6/13/21/20 SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| 26 28 1.5 15/16/34/30 First 1.6 feet: SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| _- Next 0.1 foot: CONCRETE chips, w gravel.
| |
| 28.0 = End of boring. Boring completed as Monitoring Well AE.
| |
| Soil Boring Logs - Wells Y through AF.xls 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| --- 0 ARCADIS Sample/Core Log Boring/Well Well AF Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC Salem Generating Station I NP000571.0003 Page 1 of 1 Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Started 10/1/2003 Complete:d 10/1/2003 Type of Sample/
| |
| Total Depth Drilled 49.0 Feet Hole Diameter 9.0 inches Coring Device Split-spoon (2-inches by 2-feet)
| |
| Length and Diameter of Coring Device 9.0-inch by 5.0-feet hollow-stem augers. Sampling Interval 5.0 feet Land-Surface Elev. 99.20 feet rjvSurveyed Estimated Datum NAVD 1988 Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Hollow-Stem Auger Drilling Contractor A.C. Schultes, Inc. Driller C. Warren Helper W. Powers Prepared Hammer Hammer By Christopher Sharpe Weight 140 lbs Drop 30 inches Sample/Core Depth (feet below land surface) Core Blow PID Recovery Counts Reading From To (feet) (ppm) Sample/Core Description 10 .
| |
| 10 Borehole advanced to 10 feet below ground surface using vacuum excavation.
| |
| 15 17 1.4 0/4/4/2 -_ SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| 20 22 1.5 4/3/8/14 __ SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| 25 27 2 3/6/10/9 _ First 0.6 foot: SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| _- Next 0.6 foot: SAND, gray, with gravel and clay.
| |
| _ Next 0.6 foot: SAND, tan, with gravel and silt.
| |
| 30 32 2 2/1/2/2 _ First 0.33 foot: Tan silt & sand w/ gravel. Nextl foot gray clay,
| |
| -- I - Next 0.66 foot gray silty sand.
| |
| 32 34 2 4/9/13/13 __ First 0.66 foot: CLAY, gray with sand.
| |
| _ -Next 0.6 foot: SAND, dark gray, clayey.
| |
| - Next 0.6 foot: SAND, gray.
| |
| 34 36 2 5/6/5/37 __ SAND, gray with red gravel at the tip.
| |
| 36 38 2 16/16/13/22 __ SAND, gray, medium.
| |
| 38 40 2 7/6/9/20 __ SAND, gray with greenish sand at tip.
| |
| 40 42 2 10/13/24/24 -_ SAND, gray with greenish sand at tip.
| |
| 43 45 2 8/8/8/6 __ SAND, dark gray with gravel.
| |
| 45 47 2 3/5/5/7 __ First 1.5 feet: SAND, silty with some gravel.
| |
| - .- -Next 0.25 foot: SAND, greenish.
| |
| Next 0.25 foot: CLAY, gray.
| |
| 47 49 2 5/4/5/6 -_ First 1 foot: SLOUGH (loose sand, silt & clay). Next 1 foot: CLAY dark gray.
| |
| 49.0 End of boring. Boring completed as Monitoring Well AF.
| |
| Soil Boring Logs - Wells Y through AF.xIs 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| fQ ARCADIS Sample/Core Log Boring/Well Well AG-Shallow and Deep Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, Salem Generating Station/NP000571.0003 Page 1 of 1 Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island. Hancock's Bridge. New Jersey Started 2/9/2004 Completetd 02/09/04 Type of Sample/
| |
| Total Depth Drilled 40.0 Feet Hole Diameter 7 inches Coring Device Split-Spoon Length and Diameter of Coring Device 2 feet by 2 inches Sampling Interval 5 feet Land-Surface Elev. feet FXSurveyed L Estimated Datum NAD 83 Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor Talon Drilling Company Driller Joe A. Helper Bill B.
| |
| Prepared Hammer Hammer By Jon Rutledge Weight 140 pounds Drop 36 inches Sample/Core Depth (feet below land surface) Core Blow PID Recovery Counts Reading From To (feet) (Dom) Samole/Core Descriotion 0.0 - 10.0' Vacuum excavation to identify subsurface utilities 10.0 12.0 NR 4-2-3-3 NA 10.0 - 18.0' Tan, fine to medium SAND, well sorted, wet 13.0 15.0 1.2 4-3-3-3 0.0 18.0 20.0 1.0 7-5-4-3 0.0 18.0 - 24.7' Tan, fine to medium SAND, well sorted, trace silt, wet 23.0 25.0 0.8 3-2-1-2 0.0 24.7 - 28.0' Black, silty fine SAND, well sorted, wet 28.0 30.0 2.0 1-2-1-2 0.0 28.0 - 29.1' Grey, fine SAND, well sorted, trace silt, wet 29.1 - 33.0' Black to grey, fine sandy, well sorted, SILT with gravel, wet, organic odor 33.0 35.0 NR 5-5-6-5 NA 33.0 - 38.0' Black, fine SAND and SILT with GRAVEL, wet 38.0 40.0 1.5 6-6-5-5 0.0 38.0 - 39.2' Dark grey, fine SAND, well sorted, trace silt, wet 39.2 - 39.6' Grey, silty fine to coarse SAND, poorly sorted, with gravel, wet 39.6 - 40.0' Grey, silty fine sandy CLAY with gravel, wet 40.0' End of boring Soil Boring Logs - Wells AG through AM.xIs 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| 0 ARCADIS Sample/Core Log Boring/Well Well AH-Shallow and Deep Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, Salem Generating Station/NP000571.0003 Page 1 of 1 Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Started 2/412004 Completetd 02/04104 Type of Sample/
| |
| Total Depth Drilled 40.0 Feet Hole Diameter 7 inches Coring Device Split-Spoon Length and Diameter of Coring Device 2 feet by 2 inches Sampling Interval 5 feet Land-Surface Elev. feet RESurveyed l Estimated Datum NAD 83 Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor Talon Drilling Company Driller Joe A. Helper Bill B.
| |
| Prepared Hammer Hammer By Jon Rutledge Weight 140 pounds Drop 36 inches Sample/Core Depth (feet below land surface) Core Blow PID Recovery Counts Reading From To .
| |
| (feet) .
| |
| (DOmt Samole/Core Descriotion 0.0 - 10.0' Vacuum excavation to identify subsurface utilities 10.0 12.0 0.9 2-2-2-2 0.0 10.0- 15.0' Tan, medium SAND, well sorted, trace silt, wet 15.0 17.0 1.5 3-2-1-2 0.0 15.0 - 25.0' Tan, medium SAND, well sorted, wet 20.0 22.0 0.8 2-2-2-140 lbs./0.5' 0.0 25.0 - 30.0' Light grey to tan, fine to medium SAND, well sorted, trace gravel, 25.0 27.0 0.7 3-2-140 lbs./1.0' 0.0 wet 30.0 32.0 2.0 Rods/0.5'-8-11-20 0.0 30.0 - 32.7' Grey, fine to medium SAND, well sorted, trace silt, wet 32.7 - 33.0' Black, GRAVEL, trace fine sand and silt, wet 33.0 35.0 0.2 4-1-2-1 0.0 33.0 - 39.5' Black, fine sandy SILT with gravel, wet 35.0 37.0 NR Rods/2.0' 0.0 38.0 40.0 1.5 3-5-6-6 0.0 39.5 - 40.0' Grey to black, medium to coarse SAND, poorly sorted, with gravel,
| |
| =_ trace silt, wet 40.0' End of boring Soil Boring Logs - Wells AG through AM.xls 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| 01 ARCADIS Sample/Core Log Boring/Well Well Al Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, Salem Generating Station/NP000571.0003 Page 1 of 1 Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island. Hancock's Bridge. New Jersey Started 1/20/2004 Completed 1/20/2004 Type of Sample/
| |
| Total Depth Drilled 22.0 Feet Hole Diameter 10 inches Coring Device Split-Spoon Length and Diameter of Coring Device 2 feet by 2 inches Sampling Interval 5 feet Land-Surface Elev. feet M'Surveyed [l Estimated Datum NAD 83 Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor Talon Drilling Company Driller Joe A. Helper Joe K.
| |
| Prepared Hammer Hammer By Jon Rutledge Weight 140 pounds Drop 30 inches Sample/Core Depth (feet below larid surface) Core Blow PID Recovery Counts Reading Fro T, If-le 1-1m Q-moe/Cr- nD.... itio-
| |
| =_ 0.0 - 10.0' Vacuum excavation to identify subsurface utilities 10.0 12.0 1.2 9-16-19-18 0.0 10.0 - 15.0' Brown, fine to medium SAND, poorly sorted, with gravel and
| |
| _trace silt, wet 15.0 17.0 1.0 4-9-12-12 88.2 15.0 - 20.0' Brown, silty fine to medium SAND, poorly sorted, wet, 20.0 22.0 1.3 7-8-9-15 5.1 diesel fuel odor, sheen from 16.5 - 17.0' 20.0 - 22.0' Brown, fine to medium SAND, poorly sorted, with trace silt, wet diesel fuel odor, sheen from 20.9 - 21.1' 22.0' Auger refusal on lean concrete Soil Boring Logs - Wells AG through AM.xIs 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| 0 ARCADIS Sample/Core Log Boring/Well Well AJ ProjEict/No. PSEG Nuclear, Salem Generating Station/NP000571.0003 Page 1 of 1 Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Started 1122/2004 Completed 1/22/2004 Type of Sample/
| |
| Total Depth Drilled 38.0 Feet Hole Diameter 10 inches Coring Device Split-Spoon Length and Diameter of Coring Device 2 feet by 2 inches Sampling Interval 5 feet Land-Surface Elev. feet jmSurveyed lEstimated Datum NAD 83 Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor Talon Drilling Company Driller Joe A. Helper Not Applicable Prepared Hammer Hammer By Jon Rutledge Weight 140 pounds Drop 30 inches Sample/Core Depth (feet below land surface) Core Blow PID Recovery Counts Reading From To (feet) (ppm) Sample/Core Description 0.0 - 10.0' Vacuum excavation to identify subsurface utilities 10.0 12.0 1.1 6-9-12-12 0.0 10.0- 15.8 Orange to tan, fine to medium SAND, poorly sorted, with gravel
| |
| _ _and trace silt, wet 15.0 17.0 1.5 2-2-2-3 0.0 15.8 - 25.0' Black to grey, clayey fine sandy SILT with trace mica, 20.0 22.0 1.0 5-5-7-4 0.0 organic odor, wet 25.0 27.0 2.0 1-1-2-2 0.0 25.0 - 28.0' Black to grey, fine sandy clayey SILT with trace mica, 27.0 29.0 2.0 3-4-4-5 0.0 organic odor, wet 28.0 30.0 2.0 1-1-2-2 0.0 28.0 - 28.4' Brown, silty fine to medium SAND, poorly sorted, with gravel, wet 30.0 32.0 2.0 6-6-7-6 0.0 28.4 - 32.0' Grey, fine sandy silty CLAY with trace mica, wet 32.0 34.0 1.1 5-5-3-3 0.0 32.0 - 34.0' Grey, fine sandy silty CLAY with trace mica and gravel, wet 34.0 36.0 2.0 6-7-8-7 0.0 34.0 - 34.9' Grey, fine sandy silty CLAY, wet 36.0 38.0 2.0 7-7-8-10 0.0 34.9 - 35.2' Grey, silty clayey fine to medium SAND, poorly sorted, with gravel, wet
| |
| =_ 35.2 - 38.0' Grey to brown, very stiff CLAY with trace mica,
| |
| __ (Kirkwood Formation), wet 38.0' End of boring Soil Boring Logs - Wells AG through AM.xIs 3118/2004
| |
| | |
| 0 ARCADIS Sample/Core Log Boring/Well Well AL Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, Salem Generating Station/NP000571.0003 Page 1 of 1 Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Started 1121/2004 Complet(ad 1/21/2004 Type of Sample/
| |
| Total Depth Drilled 26.0 Feet Hole Diameter 7 inches Coring Device Split-Spoon Length and Diameter of Coring Device 2 feet by 2 inches Sampling Interval 5 feet Land-Surface Elev. feet M'Surveyed [ Estimated Datum NAD 83 Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor Talon Drilling Company Driller Joe A. Helper Not Applicable Prepared Hammer Hammer By Jon Rutledge Weight 140 pounds Drop 30 inches Sample/Core Depth (feet below laiid surface) Core Blow PID Recovery Counts Reading
| |
| -rom I0 (Teer) (ppm) Oamplelrore Uescriplon 0.0 - 10.0' Vacuum excavation to identify subsurface utilities 9.0 11.0 0.5 2-2-4-5 0.0 11.0 - 21.0' Orange to brown, fine to medium SAND, poorly sorted, with gravel 15.0 17.0 1.2 9-7-6-5 0.0 and trace silt, wet 17.0 19.0 0.4 5-5-4-3 0.0 19.0 21.0 0.8 7-8-9-11 0.0 24.0 26.0 1.4 9-13-23-24 0.0 21.0 - 26.0' Orange to brown, silty fine to medium SAND, poorly sorted, with gravel, wet
| |
| =_ 26.0' End of boring Soil Boring Logs - Wells AG through AM.xIs 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| 0 ARCADIS Sample/Core Log Boring/Well Well AM Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, Salem Generating Station/NP000571.0003 Page 1 of 1 Site Drilling Drilling Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Brdge, New Jersey Started 1/152004 Completetd 1/1 5/2004 Type of Sample/
| |
| Total Depth Drilled 20.9 Feet Hole Diameter 10 inches Coring Device Split-Spoon Length and Diameter of Coring Device 2 feet by 2 inches Sampling Interval 5 feet Land-Surface Elev. feet E]Surveyed D Estimated Datum NAD 83 Drilling Fluid Used None Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor Talon Drilling Company Driller Joe A. Helper Joe K.
| |
| Prepared Hammer Hammer By Jon Rutledge Weight 140 pounds Drop 30 inches Sample/Core Depth (feet below land surface) Core Blow PID Recovery Counts Reading From To (feet) (opm) Sample/Core Description 0.0 - 10.0' Vacuum excavation to identify subsurface utilities 10.0 12.0 1.2 9-13-12-8 0.0 10.0- 16.5' Tan to orange, medium to coarse SAND, poorly sorted, with 15.0 17.0 1.1 4-16-17-34 0.0 gravel, wet 20.0 20.8 0.5 9-50/0.3' 0.0 16.5 - 20.0' Tan fine to medium sandy, poorly sorted, SILT, wet 20.0 - 20.9' Grey, silty medium to coarse SAND, poorly sorted, wet 20.9' Auger refusal on lean concrete I I I I I Soil Boring Logs - Wells AG through AM.xls 3/18/2004
| |
| | |
| A ARCADIS Well Construction Log Well Identification Well M (Unconsolidated)
| |
| Outer Protective Steel Well Casing Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC - Salem Generating Station/NP000571.0002 Fwkz -. Site Location Salem Generating Station - Artificial Island Town/City Hancock's Bridge County Salem State New Jersey Permit No. 3400006990 Land-Surface Elevation 99.26 feet x Surveyed Top-of-Casing Elevation 102.17 feet = Estimated Datum New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 Installation Date(s) May 5, 2003 Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor CT&E Environmental Services, Inc Dtilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA)
| |
| Development Technique(s) and Date(s) Peristaltic pump on May 5, 2003.
| |
| Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reduced/eliminated.
| |
| Fluid Loss During Drilling: 0 gallons Water Removed During Development: 10 gallons Static Depth to Water: NA feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Depth to Water: NA feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Duration: 0.75 hours Yield: NA gpm Date: NA Specific Capacity: NA gpm/tM Well Purpose Well installed to monitor groundwater quality.
| |
| Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identify potential utilities.
| |
| Prepared by: Jon Rutledge
| |
| '' M.P. Measuring Point. Top of 2-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| ' Depth Below Land Surface
| |
| | |
| 0 ARCADIS Well Construction Log Well Identification Well R (Unconsolidated)
| |
| Outer Protective Steel Well Casing Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC - Salem Generating Station/NP000571.0002 Site Location Salem Generating Station - Artifidal Island Town/City Hancock's Bridge County Salem State New Jersey Permit No. 3400006991 Land-Surface Elevation 99.82 feet FlXj l Surveyed 6 inch diameter Top-of-Casing Elevation 102.35 feet v Estimated vacuum excavation hole Datum New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 Well Casing Installation Date(s) June 6, 2003 1 inch diameter Schedule 40 PVC Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor CT&E Environmental Services, Inc
| |
| -5 Bentonite Grout Drilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA)
| |
| Development Technique(s) and Date(s) Peristaltic pump on June i5,2003.
| |
| 7 ft* Bottom of 5% Bentonite Grout Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reduced/eliminated.
| |
| XX ft*
| |
| -TTop of Pre-packed Well Screen Fluid Loss During Drilling: 0 galloi ns I- I 10.0 ft* Bottom of Vacuum Excavation Water Removed During Development: 10 galloins Static Depth to Water: 6.91 feet I,elow M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Depth to Water: NA feet Ibelow MP.**
| |
| Pre-packed Well Screen 1 inch diameter, 0.01 Slot Pumping Duration: 0.5 hour 5 Schedule 40 PVC Yield: NA gpm Date: NA 3.25 inch diameter dnilled hole Specific Capacity: NA gpm/ft LEGEND Well Purpose Well installed to monitor.groundwater quality.
| |
| = Overburden Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet 1
| |
| = No. 1More Sand below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identi bfy potential utilities.
| |
| = 5% Bentonite Grout SCALE Prepared by: Jon Rutledge Not to Scale.
| |
| 19 ft* Bottom of Well M.P. Measuring Point. Top of 2-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| Depth Below Land Surface
| |
| | |
| So ARCADIS Well Construction Log Well Identification .
| |
| Well S. _
| |
| (Unconsolidated)
| |
| Outer Protective Steel Well Casing Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC - Salem Generating Station/NP000571.0002 Site Location Salem Generating Station - Artificial Island Town/City Hancock's Bridge County Salem State New Jersey Permit No. 3400006999 Land-Surface Elevation 99.61 feet E Surveyed Top-of-Casing Elevation 102.5 feet l Estimated Datum New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 Installation Date(s) May 29 and 30, 2003 Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor CT&E Environmental Services, Inc Drilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA)
| |
| Development Technique(s) and Date(s) Peristaltic pump on June XX, 2003.
| |
| Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reducedleliminated.
| |
| Fluid Loss During Drilling: 0 gallons Water Removed During Development: 22 gallons Static Depth to Water'. NA feet below M.P.
| |
| Pumping Depth to Water: 9.77 feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Duration: 0.9 -hours Yield: NA gpm Date: NA Specific Capacity: I NA gpmlft Well Purpose Well installed to monitor groundwater quality.
| |
| Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identify potential utilities.
| |
| Prepared by: Jon Rutledge
| |
| '' M.P. Measuring Point. Top of 2-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| ' Depth Below Land Surface
| |
| | |
| o ARCADIS Well Construction Log Well Identification Well T (Unconsolidated)
| |
| Outer Protective Steel Well Casing F..z Project/No.
| |
| Site Location PSEG Nuclear, LLC - Salem Generating Station/NP000571.0002 Salem Generating Station - Artificial Island Town/City Hancock's Bridge County Salem State New Jersey Permit No. 3400006992 Land-Surface Elevation 100.97 feet X Surveyed Top-of-Casing Elevation 104.13 feet = Estimated Datum New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 Installation Date(s) June 5, 2003 Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor CT&E Environmental Services, Inc Drilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA)
| |
| Development Technique(s) and Date(s) Whale pump on June 13, 2003.
| |
| Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reduced/eliminated.
| |
| Fluid Loss During Drilling: 0 gallons Water Removed During Development: 35 gallons Static Depth to Water: _ 11.33 feet below M.P.
| |
| Pumping Depth to Water: _ NA feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Duration: 0.5 hours Yield: NA gpm Date: NA Specific Capacity: I1A gpmtft Well Purpose Well installed to monitor groundwater quality.
| |
| Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identify potential utilities.
| |
| Prepared by: Jon Rutledge
| |
| '' M.P. Measuring Point. Top of 2-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| ' Depth Below Land Surface
| |
| | |
| ARCADIS Well Construction Log Well Identification Well U (Unconsolidated)
| |
| Outer Protective Steel Well Casing Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC - Salem Generating Station/NP000571.0002 Site Location Salem Generating Station - Artificial Island Town/City Hancock's Bridge County Salem State New Jersey Permit No. 3400006994 Land-Surface Elevation 99.54 feet X Surveyed Top-of-Casing Elevation 101.54 feet = Estimated Datum New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 Installation Date(s) May 28 and 29, 2003 Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor CT&E Environmental Services, Inc Drilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA)
| |
| Development Technique(s) and Date(s) Whale pump on June 10, 2003.
| |
| Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reduced/eliminated.
| |
| Fluid Loss During Drilling: 0 gallons Water Removed During Development: 55 gallons Static Depth to Water. 8.53 feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Depth to Water: NA feet below M.P.
| |
| Pumping Duration: 1 hours Yield: NA gpm Date: NA Specific Capacity: NA gpm/ft Well Purpose Well installedIto monitor groundwater quality.
| |
| Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identify potential utilities.
| |
| Prepared by: Jon Rutledge
| |
| ^^ M.P. Measuring Point. Top of 2-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| ^ Depth Below Land Surface
| |
| | |
| f ARCADIS Well Construction Log Well Identification Well V (Unconsolidated)
| |
| Outer Protective Steel Well Casing PSEG NProject/No. PSEG Services Corporation I! < Land Surface Salem CSite Location Artificial Island Town/City Hancock's Bridge
| |
| -LOCt.Wle cnpaiiuiiiyvwellrLuy County Salem State New Jersey 10 inch diameter vacuum excavation hole Permit No. 3400006993 10.0 ft Bottom of Vacuum Excava tion Land-Surface Elevation 99.16 feet 3 Surveyed Well Casing 6 inch diameter Top-of-Casing Elevation 102.48 feet = Estimated Schedule 40 Outer PVC Casing Datum New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 Well Casing Installation Date(s) June 6 through June 12, 2003 2 inch diameter Schedule 40 Inner Drilling Method Mud Rotary PVC Casing Drilling Contractor CT&E Environmental Services, Inc
| |
| -% Bentonite Grout Drilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA)
| |
| Development Technique(s) and Date(s) 2-inch Grundfos submersible pump 51.0 ft- Bottom of Outer Casing on June 13, 2003. Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reduced/eliminated.
| |
| Fluid Loss During Drilling: 0 gallons Water Removed During Development: 40 gallons 7.25 inch diameter Static Depth to Water: 11.47 -feet below M.P.-
| |
| drilled hole Pumping Depth to Water: NA -feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Duration: 0.75 -hours Bottom of 5% Bentonite Grout Yield: NA gpm Date: NA Specific Capacity: IJA gpmtft 9.5 ft* Top of Well Screen Well Purpose Well installed to monitor groundwater qualitv.
| |
| Well Screen 2 inch diameter, 0.01 Slot Schedule 40 PVC Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet No. 1Mode Sand below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identify potential utilities.
| |
| LEGEND
| |
| = Overburden
| |
| = No. 1 Mone Sand
| |
| = 5% Bentonite Grout SCALE Prepared by: Jon Rutledge Not to Scale.
| |
| 9.5ft* Bottom of Well - M.P. Measuring Point. Top of 2-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| ' Depth Below Land Surface
| |
| | |
| t ARCADIS Well Construction Log Well Identification Well W (Unconsolidated)
| |
| Outer Protective Steel Well Casing ProjectlNo. PSEG Nuclear, LLC - Salem Generating Station/NP000571.0002 Fw ._ -I Site Location Salem Generating Station - Artificial Island TownlCity Hancock's Bridge County Salem State New Jersey Permit No. 3400006995 Land-Surface Elevation 99.36 feet l X l Surveyed Top-of-Casing Elevation 101.67 feet = Estimated Datum New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 Installation Date(s) June 2 and 3, 2003 Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor CT&E Environmental Services, Inc Drilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA)
| |
| Development Technique(s) and Date(s) Whale pump on June 11, 2003.
| |
| Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reduced/eliminated.
| |
| Fluid Loss During Drilling: 0 gallons Water Removed During Development: 15 gallons Static Depth to Water: _ 9.03 feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Depth to Water: _ NA feet below M.P.
| |
| Pumping Duration: 0.2 hours Yield: NA gpm Date: NA Specific Capacity: INA gpm/ft Well Purpose Well installed to monitor groundwater quality.
| |
| Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identify potential utilities.
| |
| Prepared by: Jon Rutledge M.P. Measuring Point. Top of 2-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| * Depth Below Land Surfacs
| |
| | |
| A ARCADIS Well Construction Log Well Identification.
| |
| Well Y (Unconsolidated)
| |
| Outer Protective Steel Well Casing 3 Feet Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC - Salem Generating Station I NP000571.0003 I, W . Site Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Town/City Hancock's Bridge
| |
| !1I~
| |
| County Salem State New Jersey Permit No. 340007078 Land-Surface Elevation 99.20 feet m Surveyed 8 inch diameter Top-of-Casing Elevation 101.81 feet = Estimated vacuum excavation hole Datum NAVD 1988 Well Casing Installation Date(s) September 27, 2003 2 inch diameter Schedule 40 PVC Drilling Method Hollow-Stem Auger Drilling Contractor A.C. Schultes, Inc.
| |
| -% Bentonite Grout Drilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA)
| |
| Development Technique(s) and Date(s): Submersible pump on 10.0 ft* Bottom of Vacuum Excavation October 7,2003. Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reduced/eliminated.
| |
| Fluid Loss During Drilling: 0 gallons Water Removed During Development: 50 gallons 6.25 inch diameter Static Depth to Water: 10 feet below M.P.-
| |
| drilled hole Pumping Depth to Water: 27 feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Duration: 2.9 hours 25.0 ft* Bottom of 5% Bentonite Grout Yield: 1 gpm Date: October 7, 2003 Specific Capacity: 0.06 gpmllt 27.0 ft- Top of Well Screen Well Purpose Well installed to monitor groundwater quality.
| |
| Well Screen 2 inch diameter, 0.01 Slot Schedule 40 PVC Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet No. 1 Morie Sand below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identify potential utilities.
| |
| LEGEND
| |
| = Overburden i No. 1 Morie Sand
| |
| = 5% Bentonite Grout SCALE Prepared by: Christopher Sharpe Not to Scale.
| |
| 37.0 ft Bottom of Well '' M.P. Measuring Point. Top of 2-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| 40.0 ft* End of Boring ' Depth Below Land Surface
| |
| | |
| 0 ARCADIS Well Construction Log Well Identification Well Z (Unconsolidated)
| |
| ---- Outer Protective Steel Well Casing 3 Feet Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC - Salem Generating Station / NP000571.0003 Site Location Artifidal Island, Hanoock's Bridge, New Jersey Town/City Hancock's Bridge County Salem State New Jersey Permit No. 340007079 Land-Surface Elevation 99.30 feet 3~x~jSurveyed Top-of-Casing Elevation 101.86 feet t Estimated Datum NAVD 1988 Installation Date(s) September 30, 2003 Drilling Method Hollow-Stem Auger Drilling Contractor A.C. Schultes, Inc.
| |
| Drilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA)
| |
| Development Technique(s) and Date(s): Submersible pump on October 7, 2003. Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reduced/eliminated.
| |
| Fluid Loss During Drilling: 0 gallons Water Removed During Development: 50 gallons Static Depth to Water. _ 10.5 feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Depth to Water: _ 24.5 feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Duration: 1 hours Yield: 2_ gpm Date: October 7, 2003 Specific Capacity: 0.14 gpm/ft Weft Purpose Well installed to monitorgroundwater quality.
| |
| Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identify potential utilities.
| |
| Prepared by: Christopher Sharpe
| |
| '^ M.P. Measuring Point. Top of 2-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| * Depth Below Land Surface
| |
| | |
| ARCADIS Well Construction Log Well Identification Well AA (Unconsolidated) uter Protective Steel Well Casing
| |
| / t 3 Feet Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC - Salem Generating Station / NP000571.0003 Ar-,,ronI Site Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Town/City Hancock's Bridge
| |
| 'lug County Salem State New Jersey Permit No. 340007080 Land-Surface Elevation 99.20 feet 3 Surveyed r Top-of-Casing Elevation 101.56 feet = Estimated n hole Datum NAVD 1988 Installation Date(s) September 30, 2003 er Drilling Method Hollow-Stem Auger Drilling Contractor A.C. Schultes, Inc.
| |
| ut Drilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA)
| |
| Development Technique(s) and Date(s): Submersible pump on
| |
| _xcavation October 7,2003. Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reduced/eliminated.
| |
| Fluid Loss During Drilling: 0 gallons Water Removed During Development: 50 gallons Static Depth to Water: 10 feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Depth to Water: _ 21.5 feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Duration: 1 hours Yield: 1.8 gpm Date: October 7, 2003 Specific Capacity: C0.16 aDm/ft Well Purpose Well installed to monitor groundwater quality.
| |
| Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identify potential utilities.
| |
| Prepared by: Christopher Sharpe
| |
| - M.P. Measuring Point. Top of 2-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| I Depth Below Land Surface
| |
| | |
| ARCADIS Well Construction Log Well Identification Well AB (Unconsolidated)
| |
| Outer Protective Steel Well Casing
| |
| / i 3 Feet Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC - Salem Generating Station I NP000571 .0003
| |
| - et
| |
| . . j uA Site Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Town/City Hancock's Bridge
| |
| -Loomawe txpanding Well Plug County Salem State New Jersey Permit No. 340007081 Land-Surface Elevation 99.10 feet [3] Surveyed 8 inch diameter Top-of-Casing Elevation 101.83 feet =j Estimated vacuum excavation hole Datum NAVD 1988 Well Casing Installation Date(s) October 2, 2003 2 inch diameter Schedule 40 PVC Drilling Method Hollow-Stem Auger Drilling Contractor A.C. Schultes, Inc.
| |
| -% Bentonite Grout Drilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA)
| |
| Development Technique(s) and Date(s): Submersible pump on 10.0 ft* Bottom of Vacuum Excavation October 7, 2003. Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reduced/eliminated.
| |
| Fluid Loss During Drilling: _ 0 gallons Water Removed During Development: 50 gallons 6.25 inch diameter Static Depth to Water. 9.5 feet below M.P.-
| |
| drilled hole Pumping Depth to Water: _ 19.7 feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Duration: 1.3 hours 30.0 ft' Bottom of 5% Bentonite Grout Yield: 1.25 gpm Date: October 7, 2003 Specific Capacity: 0.12 aDm/ft 32.0 ft' Top of Well Screen Well Purpose Well instalk ld to monitor groundwater quality.
| |
| Well Screen
| |
| .4 - 2 inch diameter, 0.01 Slot Schedule 40 PVC Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet
| |
| .4 No. 1 Morie Sand below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identify potential utilities.
| |
| LEGEND verburden
| |
| = No. 1 Morie Sand
| |
| = 5% Bentonite Grout SCALE Prepared by: Christopher Sharpe Not to Scale.
| |
| H 42.0 ft' Bottom of Well 43.0 ft' End of Boring M.P. Measuring Point. Top of 2-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| Depth Below Land Surface
| |
| | |
| 0 ARCADIS Well Construction Log Well ldentificatidn Well AC (Unconsolidated)
| |
| OOter Protective Steel Well Casing Feet Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC - Salem Generating Station / NP000571.0003 Site Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Town/City Hancock's Bridge
| |
| -lug County Salem State New Jersey Permit No. 340007082 Land-Surface Elevation 99.00 feet X Surveyed Top-of-Casing Elevation 10t .25 feet = Estimated Datum NAVD 1988 Installation Date(s) September 26, 2003 Drilling Method Hollow-Stem Auger Drilling Contractor A.C. Schultes, Inc.
| |
| Drilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA)
| |
| Development Technique(s) and Date(s): Submersible pump on October 7, 2003. Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reduced/eliminated.
| |
| Fluid Loss During Drilling: 0 gallons Water Removed During Development: 50 gallons Static Depth to Water: _ 8.2 feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Depth to Water: 19.8 feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Duration: 1 hours Yield: 1 gpm Date: October 7, 2003 Specific Capacity: ).09 arim/ft Well Purpose Well installed Ito monitor groundwater quality.
| |
| Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identify potential utilities.
| |
| Prepared by: Christopher Sharpe
| |
| - M.P. Measuring Point. Top of 2-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| ' Depth Below Land Surface
| |
| | |
| ARCADIS no Well Construction Log Well Identification Well AD (Unconsolidated)
| |
| ~Outer Protective Steel Well Casing
| |
| /' 3 Feet Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC - Salem Generating Station / NP000571.0003 Site Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Town/City Hancock's Bridge 9g County Salem State New Jersey Permit No. 340007083 Land-Surface Elevation 99.10 feet ljX Surveyed 8 inch diameter Top-of-Casing Elevation 101.35 feet =i Estimated vacuum excavation hole Datum NAVD 1988 Well Casing Installation Date(s) October 3, 2003 2 inch diameter Schedule 40 PVC Drilling Method Hollow-Stem Auger Drilling Contractor A.C. Schultes, Inc.
| |
| -% Bentonite Grout Drilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA)
| |
| Development Technique(s) and Date(s): Submersible pump on 10.0 ft* Bottom of Vacuum Excavation October 7, 2003. Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reduced/eliminated. Development was halted several times as a result of a lack of water in the well.
| |
| Fluid Loss During Drilling: 0 gallons Water Removed During Development: 64 gallons 6.25 inch diameter Static Depth to Water: 7.5 feet below M.P.-
| |
| drilled hole Pumping Depth to Water: 35.5 feet below M.P.
| |
| Pumping Duration: 5.15 hours 30.0 ft* Bottom of 5% Bentonite Grout Yield: NA gpm Date: October 7, 2003 Specific Capacity: NA gpm/ft 33.0 ft' Top of Well Screen Well Purpose Well installed to monitor groundwater quality.
| |
| Well Screen
| |
| __ 2 inch diameter, 0.01 Slot Schedule 40 PVC Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet No. 1 Mode Sand below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identify potential utilities.
| |
| I ; LEGEND
| |
| =Overburden
| |
| = No. I Mode Sand
| |
| = 5% Bentonite Grout SCALE Prepared by: Christopher Sharpe Not to Scale.
| |
| 43.0 ft* Bottom of Well M.P. Measuring Point. Top of 2-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| 10.0 ft End of Boring Depth Below Land Surface
| |
| | |
| ARCADIS Well Construction Log Well Identification Well AE (Unconsolidated)
| |
| Outer Protective Steel Well Casing FW ~ /4' . 3 Feetur r^ Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC - Salem Generating Station I NP000571.0003 Site Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Town/City Hancock's Bridge
| |
| -Lodrable County Salem State New Jersey Permit No. 340007083 Land-Surface Elevation 99.30 feet FXT7 Surveyed 8 inch diameter Top-of-Casing Elevation 10t.54 feet [ Estimated vacuum excavation hole Datum NAVD 1988 Well Casing Installation Date(s) October 2, 2003 2 inch diameter Schedule 40 PVC Drilling Method Hollow-Stem Auger Drilling Contractor A.C. Schultes, Inc.
| |
| -% Bentonite Grout Drilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA)
| |
| Development Technique(s) and Date(s): Submersible pump on 10.0 ft* Bottom of Vacuum Excavation October 7, 2003. Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reduced/eliminated.
| |
| Fluid Loss During Drilling: 0 gallons Water Removed During Development: 25 gallons 6.25 inch diameter Static Depth to Water:. 7.5 feet below M.P.-
| |
| drilled hole Pumping Depth to Water: _ 22.5 feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Duration: 1 hours 13.5 ft* Bottom of 5% Bentonite Grout Yield: 0.8 gpm Date: October 7,2003 Specific Capacity: ).05 Gomrtt 17.5 ft* Top of Well Screen Well Purpose Well installedI to monitor groundwater quality.
| |
| Well Screen 2 inch diameter, 0.01 Slot Schedule 40 PVC Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet No. 1 Morie Sand below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identify potential utilities.
| |
| _ i LEGEND Overburden No. 1 Morie Sand
| |
| =m = 5% Bentonite Grout
| |
| =
| |
| i;SCALE Prepared by: Christopher Sharpe Not to Scale.
| |
| 27.5 ft* Bottom of Well t .P. Measuring Point. Top of 2-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| 28.0 ft* End of Boring )epth Below Land Surface
| |
| | |
| ARCADIS Well Construction Log Well Identification Well AF (Unconsolidated)
| |
| Outer Protective Steel Well Casing F_ l / '3 Feet Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC - Salem Generating Station / NP000571.0003 Site Location Artificial Island, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Town/City Hancock's Bridge County Salem State New Jersey Permit No. 340007085 Land-Surface Elevation 99.20 feet 3 Surveyed Top-of-Casing Elevation 101.61 feet I Estimated Datum NAVD 1988 Installation Date(s) October 1, 2003 Drilling Method Hollow-Stem Auger Drilling Contractor A.C. Schultes, Inc.
| |
| Drilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA)
| |
| Development Technique(s) and Date(s): Submersible pump on October 7, 2003. Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reduced/eliminated.
| |
| Fluid Loss During Drilling: 0 gallons Water Removed During Development: 50 gallons Static Depth to Water: _ 10 feet below M.P.'-
| |
| Pumping Depth to Water: 13.5 feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Duration: 0.75 hours Yield: 2.5 gpm Date: October 7, 2003 Specific Capacity: 0.71 0wmfMt Well Purpose Well instalt ld to monitor groundwater quality.
| |
| Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identify potential utilities.
| |
| Prepared by: Christopher Sharpe MP. Measuring Point. Top of 2-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| * Depth Below Land Surface
| |
| | |
| 2 ARCADIS Well Construction Log Well Identification Well AG Shallow and Deep (Unconsolidated) 8-inch Diameter Standard Flushgrade Well Vault Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC - Salem Generating Station/NP000571.0003 Land Surface Site Location Salem Generating Station - Artificial Island Town/City Hancock's Bridge County Salem Stale New Jersey Lockable Expanding Well Plug Permit No. 3400007135 (Shallow) and 3400007153 (Deep)
| |
| Land-Surface Elevation feet iX_2 Surveyed 10 inch diameter Top-of-Casing Elevation feet = Estimated vacuum excavation hole Datum New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 Well Casing Installation Date(s) February 9 and 10, 2004 1 inch diameter lSchedule 40 PVC Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor Talon Drilling Company 5% Bentonite Grout Drilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA) 10 ft, Bottom of Vacuum Excavation 12.5 ft Bottom of 5% Bentonite Grout Development Technique(s) and Date(s) February 11, 2004 13 ft Bottom of No. 00 Morie Sand Surging with 0.75-inch surge block and pumping with peristaltic pump.
| |
| 14.2 ft Top of Well Screen Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reduced/eliminated.
| |
| Well Screen Fluid Loss During Drilling: Not Applicable gallons 1 inch diameter, 0.01 Slot iSchedule 40 PVC Water Removed During Development: 16 gallons 7 inch diameter Static Depth to Water 9.52 (shallow) and 9.71 (deep) feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Depth to Water: Not Applicable feet below M.P.
| |
| 24.2 ft Bottom of Well/Top of 5% Pumping Duration: 0.75 hours Yield: Not Applicable gpm Date: February 10, 2004 5% Bentonite Grout 284 ft BottomS of 5% Bentonite Grout pecific Capacity: Not Applicable gpm/ft 29 ftr Bottom of of No. 00 Morie Sand Well Purpose Well installed to monitor groundwater quality.
| |
| 1 inch diameter, 0.01 Slot Schedule 40 PVC Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet No. 1Morie Sand below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identify potential utilities.
| |
| Molde Sand Pr e by Jo R ut l: l= 00fii 0 o Mre adPrepared by: Jon Rutledge M.P. Measuring Point. Top of 1-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| * Depth Below Land Surface
| |
| | |
| 0 ARCADIS Well Construction Log Well Identification Well AH Shallow and Deep 7C (Unconsolidated)
| |
| Outer Protective Steel Well Casing Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC - Salem Generating Station/NP000571.0003 l I . ana
| |
| - - arv Site Location Salem Generating Station - Artificial Island Town/City Hancock's Bridge County Salem State New Jersey Permit No. 3400007136 (Shallow) and 3400007154 (Deep)
| |
| Land-Surface Elevation _ feet [Is] Surveyed Top-of-Casing Elevation feet = Estimated Datum New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 Installation Date(s) February 4 and 5, 2004 Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor Talon Drilling Company Drilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA)
| |
| Development Technique(s) and Date(s) February 11, 2004 Surging with 0.75-inch surge block and pumping with peristaltic pump.
| |
| Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reduced/eliminated.
| |
| Fluid Loss During Drilling: Not Applicable gallons Water Removed During Development: 20 gallons Static Depth to Water: t3.58 (shallow) and 12.92 (deep) feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Depth to Water: Not Applicable feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Duration: 1 hours Yield: Not Applicable gpm Date: February 10, 2004 Specific Capacity: Not Applicable gpm/ft Well Purpose Well installed to monitor groundwater quality.
| |
| Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identify potential utilities.
| |
| Prepared by: Jon Rutledge
| |
| - M.P. Measuring Point. Top of 1-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| I Depth Below Land Surface
| |
| | |
| f ARCADIS Well Construction Log Well Identification .
| |
| Well Al (Unconsolidated) 2 Feet by 2 Feet Flushgrade Well Vault Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC - Salem Generating Station/NP000571.0003 z/ Land Surface Site Location Salem Generating Station - Artificial Island Town/City Hancock's Bridge County Salem State New Jersey 6 7 Lockable Expanding Well Plug Permit No. 3400007137 Land-Surface Elevation feet [3] Surveyed 16 inch diameter Top-of-Casing Elevation feet = Estimated vacuum excavation hole Datum New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 Well Casing Installation Date(s) January 20, 2004 4 inch diameter Schedule 40 PVC Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor Talon Drilling Company
| |
| -% Bentonite Grout Drilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA) 9 ft Bottom of 5% Bentonite Grout Development Technique(s) and Date(s) February 2 and 3, 2004 10 ft/ Bottom of Vacuum Excavation Surging with 4-inch surge block and pumping with 4-inch submersible.
| |
| and granular bentonite seal Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reduced/eliminated.
| |
| 11 ft* Bottom of No. 00 Morie Sand Fluid Loss During Drilling: Not Applicable gallons 12 ft* Top of Well Screen Water Removed During Development: 90 gallons 10 inch diameter Static Depth to Water 7.61 feet below M.P.-
| |
| drilled hole Pumping Depth to Water: Not Applicable feet below M.P.P Pumping Duration: 2 hours Yield: 0.5 gpm Date: February 3, 2004 Specific Capacity: Not Applicable gpm/ft Well Purpose Well installed to monitor groundwater quality.
| |
| Well Screen 4 inch diameter, 0.01 Slot Schedule 40 PVC Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet No. 1 Mode Sand below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identify potential utilities.
| |
| LEGEND
| |
| = Overburden
| |
| = 5% Bentonite Grout
| |
| = Granular Bentonite Seal
| |
| =INo. 00 Morie Sand
| |
| = No. 1 Mode Sand Prepared by: Jon Rutledge SCALE Not to Scale.
| |
| 22 ft* Bottom of Well '.P. Measuring Point. Top of 4-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| * E)epth Below Land Surface
| |
| | |
| be ARCADIS Well Construction Log Well Identification Well AJ (Unconsolidated) 2 Feet by 2Feet Flushgrade Well Vault Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC - Salem Generating Station/NP000571.0003
| |
| / .Land Surface Site Location Salem Generating Station - Artificial Island Town/City Hancock's Bridge I _ A County Salem State New Jersey
| |
| - >Lockable Expanding Well Plug Permit No. 3400007138 Land-Surface Elevation - feet [I] Surveyed 16 inch diameter Top-of-Casing Elevaton feet WEstimated vacuum excavation hole Datum New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 Well Casing Installation Date(s) January 23, 2004 4 inch diameter Schedule 40 PVC Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor Talon Drilling Company
| |
| -% Bentonite Grout Drilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA)
| |
| Development Technique(s) and Date(s) January 29 and 30, 2004
| |
| ).0 ft^ Bottom of Vacuum Excavation Surging with 4-inch surge block and pumping with 4-inch submersible.
| |
| Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reduced/eliminated.
| |
| Fluid Loss During Drilling: Not Applicable gallons Water Removed During Development: 130 gallons 10 inch diameter Static Depth to Water: 8.14 feet below M.P.-
| |
| drilled hole Pumping Depth to Water: Not Applicable feet below M.P.-
| |
| 12 ft' Bottom of 5% Bentonite Grout 13 fly Bottom of Granular Bentonite Seal Pumping Duration: 3.5 hours 14 ftl Bottom of No. 00 Morie Sand Yield: 0.25 gpm Date: Janauary 30, 2004 Specific Capacity: Not Applicable gpmlft 15.3 ft* Top of Well Screen Well Purpose Well installed to monitor groundwater quality.
| |
| Well Screen 4 inch diameter, 0.01 Slot Schedule 40 PVC Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet No. 1 Morie Sand below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identify potential utilities.
| |
| LEGEND
| |
| = Overburden I 5% Bentonite Grout
| |
| = Granular Bentonite Seal
| |
| =INo. 00 Morie Sand I = No. 1 More Sand Prepared by: Jon Rutledge SCALE Not to Scale.
| |
| 35.3 ft^ Bottom of Well M.A P. Measuring Point. Top of 4-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| * Del pth Below Land Surface
| |
| | |
| f ARCADIS Well Construction Log Well Identification Well AL (Unconsolidated) 8-inch Diameter Standard Flushgrade Well Vault Project/No. PSEG Nuclear, LLC - Salem Generating Station/NP000571.0003 Land Surface Site Location Salem Generating Station - Artificial Island Town/City Hancock's Bridge County Salem State New Jersey Lockable Expanding Well Plug Permit No. 3400007140 Land-Surface Elevation _ feet E Surveyed 10 inch diameter Top-of-Casing Elevation __ feet Estimated vacuum excavation hole Datum New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 Well Casing Installation Date(s) January 21, 2004 i 2 inch diameter iSchedule 40 PVC Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor Talon Drilling Company 6% Bentonite Grout Drilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA)
| |
| Development Technique(s) and Date(s) February 3 and 4, 2004 10.0 ft- Bottom of Vacuum Excavation Surging with 2-inch surge block and pumping with 2-inch submersible.
| |
| Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reduced/eliminated.
| |
| Fluid Loss During Drilling: Not Applicable gallons Water Removed During Development: 80 gallons 7 inch diameter Static Depth to Water: 7.09 feet below M.P.-
| |
| Pumping Depth to Water: Not Applicable feet below M.P.-
| |
| 12 ft* Bottom of 5% Bentonite Grout 13 ft* Bottom of Granular Bentonite Seal Pumping Duration: 1.5 hours 13.5 ft* Bottom of No. 00 Morie Sand Yield: 1 gpm Date: February 3, 2004 Specific Capacity: Not Applicable gpmlft E_ 1 15.3 ft* Top of Well Screen Well Purpose Well installed to monitor groundwater quality.
| |
| .2 inch diameter, 0.01 Slot Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet No. 1 More Sand below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identify potential utilities.
| |
| E -I. l= Overburden
| |
| :~~ -i5%
| |
| Bentonite Grout
| |
| = Granular Bentonite Seal
| |
| = No. 00 Morie Sand
| |
| - = No. 1 Mone Sand Prepared by: Jon Rutledge
| |
| *- M.P. Measuring Point. Top of 2-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| ' Depth Below Land Surface
| |
| | |
| ARCADIS Well Construction Log Well Identification Well AM (Unconsolidated) 2 Feet by 2 Feet Flushgrade Well Vault ProjectNo. PSEG Nuclear, LLC -Salem Generating Station/NP000571.0003 Z/ Land Surface Site Location Salem Generating Station - Artificial Island Town/City Hanoock's Bridge rr 1 County Salem State New Jersey Lockable Expanding Well Plug Permit No. 3400007141 Land-Surface Elevation feet [I] Surveyed 16 inch diameter Top-of-Casing Elevation feet = Estimated vacuum excavation hole Datum New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 Well Casing Installation Date(s) January 15, 2004 4 inch diameter Schedule 40 PVC Drilling Method Hollow Stem Auger Drilling Contractor Talon Drilling Company
| |
| -% Bentonite Grout Drilling Fluid Not Applicable (NA) 3.5 ft* Bottom of 5% Bentonite Grout t
| |
| ).5 ft Bottom of No. 00 Morie Sand Development Technique(s) and Date(s) February 2 and 3, 2004 10.0 ft* Bottom of Vacuum Excavation Surging with 4-inch surge block and pumping with 4-inch submersible.
| |
| 10.9 ft' Top of Well Screen Development was considered complete when turbidity in discharge was reduced/eliminated.
| |
| Fluid Loss During Drilling: Not Applicable gallons Water Removed During Development: 60 gallons 10 inch diameter Static Depth to Water: 6.91 feet below M.P.-
| |
| drilled hole Pumping Depth to Water: Not Applicable feet below M.P.
| |
| Pumping Duration: 2 hours Yield: 0.25 gpm Date: February 4, 2004 Specific Capacity: Not Applicable gpm/ft Well Purpose Well installed to monitor groundwater quality.
| |
| Well Screen 4 inch diameter, 0.01 Slot Schedule 40 PVC Remarks Vacuum excavation was performed to a depth of 10 feet No. 1 Mode Sand below ground surface at the location of the monitoring well to help identify potential utilities.
| |
| = Overburden
| |
| = 5% Bentonite Grout
| |
| = No. 00 Morie Sand
| |
| = No. 1 Mone Sand Prepared by: Jon Rutledge SCALE Not to Scale.
| |
| t
| |
| .9ft Bottom of Well '' M.P. Measuring Point. Top of 4-inch PVC well casing unless otherwise noted.
| |
| ' Depth Below Land Surface
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facilitk Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location._1_ Lower Allowavs Creek. Salem County UST Number: SRP Cvase No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) Well K Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 08.95" Latitude: North 390 27' 51.08" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 231.435 East_ 199.697 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) Rim 102.36 PVC 102.00 ground 99.71 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0, E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false statement that I do notbelieve to be true. I am also aware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| _ _ _ _ g6/16/2003 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET, SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating FacilitV Location Lower Allowavs Creek, Salem County UST Number: SRP C.ase No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) Well L Geographic Coordinates NAP) 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 14.41" Latitude: North 390 27' 46.07" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230.933 East 199.263 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) Rim 101.74 PVC 101.46 ground 99.34 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0, E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I makea false statementthatI donotbelievetobetrue.I amalso awarethat if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| 6/16/2003 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET. SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location L Lower Allowavs Creek. Salem Countv UST Number: SRP Case No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casinj Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MW-M Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 10.79" Latitude: North 390 27' 45.20" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230.843 East 199.546 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) Rim 102.37 PVC 102.17 ground 99.26 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0, E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false statement that I do not believe to be true. I am also aware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| 7/06/2003 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET. SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating FacilitV Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility T -r+n't T n-r-r A 11-now Cfr-e orIm tlnitix UST Number: SRP 4rase Nno.
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) Well N Geographic Coordinates NA) 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 09.31" Latitude: North 390 27' 44.57" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230.777 East 199.661 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) Rim 102.00 PVC 101.65 ground 99.41 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0. E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false statement that I do not believe to b e true. I am also aware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| _____ 6/16/2003 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET, SOMERVILLE, NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generatinn Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Lower Allowavs Creek. Salem Countv UST Number: SRP C.ase Nno.
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) Well 0 Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 07.05" Latitude: North 390 27' 44.85" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230.804 East 199.839 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) Rim 101.76 PVC 101.33 ground 99.20 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0. E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false statementthat I do notbelieve to be true. I amalso aware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| 6/16/2003 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET. SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility T n,.otn T -- ,zpA 11---t 0r-1, Qql-mN iuuVyti nuW ntayN alta i.tLAtI i
| |
| ... AJUWLX UST Number: SRP Case No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) Well P Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 04.93" Latitude: North . _
| |
| 390 27' 40.25" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230,336 East 200.000 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) Rim 101.56 PVC 101.13 ground 99.00 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0, E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I makea falsestatementthatI donotbelievetobetrue.I amalsoawarethat if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| 6/16/2003 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET, SOMERVILLE, NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Tower Allowavs Creek. Salem Countv UST Number: SRP C ase No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) Well 0 Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 31' 49.72" Latitude: North 390 27' 43.45" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230,645 East 201.196 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) Rim 107.03 PVC 106.59 ground 104.45 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0. E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all. attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false statement that I do not b elieve to be true. I am also aware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| FSIOAlC SUEY 7/1/2003 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET, SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility T n-4t-n- T r--r A llnn - r' l Cr'n-nt,,V LA , .
| |
| WwatlU^^ ^- U A-Y. y -- ,s - .S-voli~ \UDA UST Number: SRP C.Case ' AZNno.
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MW-R Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 09.60" Latitude: North 390 27' 45.84" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230.906 East AX Ad i A 199.640
| |
| / ^ @
| |
| Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01 ' in relation to permanent on-site datum) Rim 102.42 PVC 102.35 around 99.82 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0. E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false statement that I do notbelieve to be true. I am also aware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| 7/08/2003 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET, SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION
| |
| -- Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Lnwer Allowavq Creek. Salem County UST Number: SRP C nae No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MW S Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 09.92" Latitude: North 390 27' 43.92" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230,711 East..-------
| |
| 199.613 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) PVC 99.04 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0, E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false s tatement t hat I d o n ot b elieve to b e true. I a m a lso aware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| /I (
| |
| r SE L 2/23/04 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET, SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating FacilitV Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Locatior II1 T nxwpr Allawnuc ('rpplr Ralem ss\V Crvnntv
| |
| -- w -_vsr)Al UST Number: SRP C'ase No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) Well T Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 10.53" Latitude: North 390 27' 52.45" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 231.575 East 199.575 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) Rim 104.39 PVC 104.13 ground 100.97 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0, E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the informnation, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I makea falsestatementthatl donotbelievetobetrue.I amalsoawarethat if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| 6/16/2003 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET, SOMERVILLE, NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Lower Allowavs Creek. Salem County UST Number: SRP Ciase No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MWU Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 09.95" Latitude: North 390 27' 50.43" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 231,370 East 199.618 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) RIM 99.19 PVC 98.57 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0. E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false s tatement that I do not believe to be true. I am a Iso a ware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| I'.^SEAL /
| |
| 2/23/04 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET, SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generatin- Facilitv Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Lower Allowavs Creek. Salem County UST Number: SRP C ase No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MWV Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 10.83" Latitude: North 390 27' 50.27" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 231.355 East 199.548 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) RIM 99.03 PVC 98.74 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0. E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I m ake a f alse s tatement t hat I d o n ot b elieve t o b e t rue. I a m a lso a ware t hat if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| 2/23/04 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET. SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Lower Alloways Creek, Salem CounW UST Number: SRP Clase No.:_
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MW W Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 75° 32' 12.01" Latitude: North 390 27' 44.55" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230,777 East 199.450 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) RIM 98.99 PVC 98.69 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0, E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I m ake a false s tatement t hat I d o not b elieve t o b e t rue. I a m a lso a ware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| SEAL C 4:L2/23/04 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET, SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Lower Allowavs Creek. Salem County UST Number: SRP Case No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permnit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MW-Y Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 13.36" Latitude: North 390 27' 44.47" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230.771 East 199.343 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) Casing 102.31 PVC 101.81 Ground 99.2 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5 + 0. E 2 + 0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false statement that I do not believe to be true. I am also aware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| 10/22/03 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET, SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Lower Allowavs Creek. Salem Countv UST Number: SRP Case No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MW-Z Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of secon(
| |
| Longitude: West 75° 32' 12.64" Latitude: North 390 27' 44.59" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230,681 East 199.399 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01 ' in relation to permanent on-site datum) Casing 102.39 PVC 101.86 Ground 99.3 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5 + 0. E 2 + 0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the informnation, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false statement that I do not believe to be true. I am also aware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| 10/22/03 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET. SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION
| |
| _-.- Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Lower Allowavs Creek, Salem County UST Number: SRP C ase No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MW AA Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 10.81" Latitude: North 390 27' 42.83" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230.603 F.ast
| |
| . .,,, ^ _
| |
| 199I541 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) RIM 99.30 PVC 99.07 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0. E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false statement that I do not believe to be true. I am also aware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| SEAL 2/23/04 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET, SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Inwer Allnwavs Creek. Salem Countv UST Number: SRP Case No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MW AB Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 09.08" Latitude: North 390 27' 43.05" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230.623 Fast MA. s z / /
| |
| 199 677 V s s Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) PVC 98.93 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0. E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false s tatement that I do not believe to be true. I am also a ware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| SEAL 2/23/04 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET. SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION
| |
| - Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Lower Alloways Creek, Salem County UST Number: SRP Case No.:_
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be pernnanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MW AC Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 08.49" Latitude: North 390 27' 44.05" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230.724 East 199,725 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) PVC 98.77 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0. E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false statement that I do not believe to be true. I am also aware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| SEAF!.
| |
| r____
| |
| M4 2/23/04 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET, SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Lower Alloways Creek. Salem County UST Number: SRP Case No.:_
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MW AD Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 09.99" Latitude: North 390 27' 43.64" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230,684 East 199.607 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01 ' in relation to permanent on-site datum) PVC 98.99 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0. E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false s tatement that I d o n ot b elieve to b e true. I a m a lso a ware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| SEAL
| |
| , _ __ SEAL2/23/04 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET, SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Tnr-tirn.
| |
| bvwalul adorer lIiq:
| |
| TA~Vwtl r Aloulc LLV-QXO Q-sz~r 1l- -
| |
| -. 1V;;t1 abt bUIULLY UST Number: SRP Case No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MW-AE Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 06.97" Latitude: North 390 27'45.11" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230.829 East And,. 19 9.45
| |
| ., ,.v b v Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01 ' in relation to permanent on-site datum) Casing 102.07 PVC 101.54 Ground 99.3 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5 + 0. E 2 + 0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false statement that I do not believe to be true. I am also aware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| EIAN V 10/22/03 PROFESSIONAL LAN-D SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 .
| |
| PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET. SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Lower Allowavs Creek, Salem County UST Number: SRP Case No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MW-AF Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 08.75" Latitude: North 390 27' 41.74" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230.491 East 199.702 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) Casing 102.00 PVC 101.61 Ground 99.2 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5 + 0, E 2 + 0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false statement that I do not believe to be true. I am also aware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| 2/J (W$L' PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE 10/22/03 DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET, SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Lower Alloways Creek, Salem County UST Number: SRP Case No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MW AG-S Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 11.23" Latitude: North 390 27' 41.77" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230.496 East 199,508 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) PVC 99.29 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0. E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false s tatement that I do not b elieve to b e true. I a m a lso a ware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| 1')
| |
| A E f >
| |
| PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE 2/23/04 DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET. SOMERVILLE, NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Lower Alloways Creek, Salem County UST Number: SRP Case No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MW AG-D Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 11.23" Latitude: North 390 27' 41.77" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230,496 East 199.508 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) PVC 99.20 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0. E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false statement that I d o not believe to be true. I a m also a ware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| tI/ / 2/23/04 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET, SOMERVILLE, NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Lower Alloways Creek. Salem County UST Number: SRP Case No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MW AH-S Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 10.10" Latitude: North 390 27' 41.33" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230.450 East 199.596 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) PVC 102.58 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0. E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false statement that I d o not believe to b e true. I am a lso a ware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| 7 SEAL 2/23/04 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET. SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Lower Allowavs Creek, Salem County UST Number: SRP Case No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MW AH-D Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of secon Longitude: West 750 32' 10.10" Latitude: North 390 27' 41.33" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230.450 East 199.596 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) PVC 102.70 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0. E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false s tatement that I d o n ot b elieve to b e true. I a m a lso a ware t hat if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| . / SEAL ,
| |
| 2/23/04 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET, SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Lower Alloways Creek, Salem County UST Number: SRP Case No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MW AI Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 11.1 1" Latitude: North 390 27' 44.76" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230.798 East 199.521 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01 ' in relation to permanent on-site datum) PVC 98.79 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0, E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted infomlation is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false statement that I do n ot believe to be true. I am a lso a ware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| SEAL
| |
| (,/ ,S IA 2/23/04 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET, SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Lower Alloways Creek, Salem County UST Number: SRP Case No.:_
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MW AJ Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 09.24" Latitude: North 390 27' 43.51" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230,670 East 199,665 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) PVC 98.85 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0. E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am commiitting a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false statement that I do not believe to be true. I am also aware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| / l.' SEAL 2/23/04 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET, SOMERVILLE, NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Lower Alloways Creek, Salem County UST Number: SRP Clase No.:
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MW AL Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 07.44" Latitude: North 390 27' 42.78" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230,594 East 199.806 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) RIM 99.42 PVC 99.13 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0. E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all Attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree ifI make a false statement that I d o not b elieve to be true. I am also aware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| 2/23/04 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET, SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| MONITORING WELL CERTIFICATION FORM B LOCATION CERTIFICATION Name of Owner PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Name of Facility PSE&G Salem Generating Facility Location Lower Alloways Creek. Salem County UST Number: SRP Case No.:_
| |
| LAND SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATION Well Permit Number:
| |
| This number must be permanently affixed to the well casing.
| |
| Owners Well Number (As shown on application or plans) MW AM Geographic Coordinates NAD 83 (to the nearest 1/10 of second)
| |
| Longitude: West 750 32' 09.07" Latitude: North 390 27' 44.42" New Jersey State Plane Coordinates NAD 83 to nearest 10 feet:
| |
| North 230.762 East 199.680 Elevation of Top of Inner Casing (Cap off) at Reference mark (to nearest 0.01' in relation to permanent on-site datum) PVC 98.55 Source of elevation datum (benchmark, number/description and elevation/datum. If an on-site datum is used, identify here, assume datum of 100', and give approximate actual elevation. Please note that, if information from the well is to be submitted electronically, the EDSA manual specifies the well elevation to be reported according to NAVD 1988 to an accuracy of 0.2'.)
| |
| Site Monument N 5+0. E 2+0 Elevation 102.78 scaled actual elevation 10 Significant observations and notes:
| |
| AUTHENTICATION I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I believe the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false, inaccurate, and incomplete information and that I am committing a crime in the fourth degree if I make a false s tatement that I do n ot b elieve to b e true. I am a lso a ware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties.
| |
| SEAL '
| |
| _ __ _ _ _S2/23/04 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S SIGNATURE DATE RICHARD C. MATHEWS GS29353 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S NAME AND LICENSE NUMBER 43 WEST HIGH STREET, SOMERVILLE. NEW JERSEY 908 725 0230 PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER
| |
| | |
| 041 n I ;eutls :v: 4a W~bUldlY~b edh /hklbt 1 PAGE 06/10
| |
| - QJU/72003 13:32LM 686 *45 1335 I005/009 DWl-ASSM New Qey Iepartnent of EnOlamtl Pnon eO Bureau of WtrA Mcaton MONWRING YLL REORD nLne {
| |
| WeJPemntNp. .Jv i -, 3)N31 _ _
| |
| Atlos Sheot Coortinstes _ -,
| |
| OWNE IDENTIFICATION - Owner_vMW An UAR "I nr 5*U4IdI~U I-. _ -
| |
| citS " Il apcod. _
| |
| WELL LOCATION - Inot the same as owner plsase ghe addm Owners WOell No. t\ _
| |
| County t Mulnialplt - Imm Atu Ar Lot No. 4.0 Ble(k No. 2('
| |
| AddreS -D _A aWEK an. _ , . *.
| |
| DATE WCL arAMi W &..J.4 j.
| |
| DATE WEL COMPLET1 3 /- I t TYPE OF WELL (as pgr Wag PeuMt Categories)
| |
| Reguxatxy PtgamM eqd Well Cs LDJ.#_
| |
| CONSULTING F1RNWW:LD SUPERVISOR (KI applioable) , _ _ Tale.# - ' - -
| |
| Notb Meaw &atdfts Dep to D. to .tolaewe M l WgtJFafr Toul depth MIM X from knw sfac TOP () BOUMO (ft) Pne) - _ _ ich no.)
| |
| Wel %ishedp to 2 fIL alrWZ J 7af 9V1
| |
| _fr~~a _a _~l ___.__
| |
| 80" i Mpen Hle or &m Wel was frhhe&o t*a~e gmde Dfiuehmountid Open Hole or08. . .
| |
| (No. Uaed - ) b %b 8t - ,
| |
| if lshed abovegi% casing hd&A thtc
| |
| ,up) above bmI daut _.lt.L BlankCasnw.
| |
| (No. ) . __.
| |
| siWempWtomsVasing k*W d?
| |
| Tapi °.
| |
| S wdvevadMing J% IL waic Fs~v-a- -aci Wer kew) was meamumd wf eak ` O . A . L _
| |
| Neat _ Cit Wel was dveloped br hours la 7 on . Gruting Method Drilling Method - ., , . 6 _
| |
| Mefhodufdevula w ! j'i ! ._i! .._ I.. ... I Was pengrmwe pu~mpin equlpmui Jnaiiuled7 tJ~asw~o
| |
| _ - -OLGICLO PI - gp It Nlote eadt Oapli whoure Wutrww6 er~untesd hn coluoadaed Pump typ_ -
| |
| Ddkg fuid, . . Twle of E
| |
| , Heath ad So Pion subniedWi Ye*U M'' _i ',
| |
| Levei of Peon i;d an b {(ckc one) nrlyi C . A Jceflify tat I he can tutru.Meaboie rfarencediwffin avcoanme vqflh 8 weJ peiml Fqrwrs and appible SOs nes and requbatn orilong compUit. t -'rI nI_!m I L v mI f
| |
| C-.. _N
| |
| % . .% ASBUI WEL WCOA¶ION Well Dnlle (Pdrit), I_ I _ (NAD 13 H0ORIZ~hTLD-ATUM)
| |
| NJ TlA3 FaUE COOmD s l SEu E Lnilers signatum I .
| |
| RFeqsution No. bNQ iLJ L3 DaiS W fI6 NONNG_ . .. - ESIG CORE& Wiqe - DEP Caia7 Drftr Pik -owwrn ,a~ W -Hef ep
| |
| | |
| 04/07/2003 15:40 8568781206 PSEG EEP/PTS PAGE 07/10 04/07/2003 1:32 FA 855 845 1333 Q 008/009 Dt9-13B M NewC)ey Department of Ernironmental Priion am0 Bureau of Water Allocaion MONIORI WELL RECOD WuN Pem* No._ .14 - ____ ,
| |
| AtiaSheetoordnna 'ifS-., - 14v OWNER IDEIFICATION - OwWer L.%Iw ppxwII Addres -s C1V~crr ]z r=. awe -X Iat -z Co_
| |
| WELorCAT~oN - H ot 1 awuswowner please ghe ddre& Ownes Well No. Aw (-v6" Q ouTn-t-gLo Munkopily Alnj Lot No4.* .1 -Bb* No.a5 Addre ss Om we l UfkUrWELLbTAI1IU W I j W DATE WELL COMPETED A 1 t3 TYPE OF WELL (as per Wi Prmfl Categoites) - NWfP*Iw-Feguktovy ProgmgReqirh WONl CaIe l-. #
| |
| CONSULTINGi FIRM/iMELD SUPERVISOR (r app1iabl)_ Tbr. # =
| |
| iiii Memimr all depthis epsto Deto Diameter _ _ W. ag bla duo ddfed _ t. . rom land sufta Top (IL) Bo POm os.fe)
| |
| (t.h) __ h fQ)
| |
| WigftdcuditoIt 11,_ - -7 -Z Boreholb clarrmtn. Mma aNg Tip &.or ti' cased web O _ly __.._...
| |
| , _ BonownJ~u hOutlrCM Wall Wm flrsihe abawe gra%
| |
| *fk ahmiountod Open Holr BSa it&hod oba sf, o36ng bvM ! 1~
| |
| up) dxmvland Was surace_-Z_1 (No.
| |
| tanUnd Ud 0 -_ . - __
| |
| '15Y" N To Ph"c Statc WSWerI after imng JLt P Wmer levi Was emweard wtL Woq %msdeveloped for hs _ C
| |
| _ GI_ NeatCamera _
| |
| aWm -. Avm11 IA-&L,.
| |
| wlW
| |
| -r,__
| |
| Madvod of chvumwntm nnrinn
| |
| -. .Il Mehodff I-Cs L--
| |
| -i-Mae penrwrnd puwmpig e mert kl~ OYeaRNO 1GeOLOGIC LOS .__
| |
| Nde eaoh depth wam WS nconos~at Iun PUWCIPWAI .
| |
| tornrstlon.
| |
| fs-. vM.¶W'a DO Flu'd - Type of Wig £LA Z2$I WNWlu and Hammh CrnOnMA safetyMg Plain aubited Q YwR~NPo eavel of Proi wsd 9n oft (ltole ona) NohA( C B A I ceiffy th haI/ cons d te abofv derenoeWO hI ! A acondenoe *ih al wedpemvft eqademe* ad eppkbd Is5 D a a enuiaW S~ri osan9ua en ____ I n I
| |
| C A--- I d I AS-BMT WLLt iKJN Well Driller (ttD A
| |
| *u, re_ -- l- ---- - - -- QqAD SS RbRZZONr1AL!A~vmg KJ STATS PLAN F CXKRDI MM IN Us SUWIEYJ2 Drilers Sign NORMNG; __- _ __ SGi Registrawon No. M31.q'o Date ' LJI J 0
| |
| --_ . - 1ONGfum, CiPPIES: WI r DEP :c ry - Drilet Pk - Omer 601001d - H"I DOP
| |
| | |
| t-*F LL/ e t RI.
| |
| PAGE 03/1 0 04/07/2003 13:32 PAZ 8t086f 13. iA002f009 OWR-18 M NewCeY DepaRmet cofEnyironmental Pr(Idon Bureau of Wdter Allocabon MONITONRIN WiE ARECORint
| |
| __n IR Well PernimNo. 34 -
| |
| Ala ShoduCowdfineW aI 01I '
| |
| OWNER 1PENTIFICATION - Ownr _-PML -Wki FA l 1
| |
| &,. - 4V% ' I MWIty ~ ~ yV RpOYrn.D. Stt iZp Code______
| |
| WELL LOaoN - ffn v* smne as owner pwass give addr& OwneT's Well No. _
| |
| __________________Mu icpallty- tpW__flAI~ftTY Lot No. 4.(IV Elio* No lddrm FM _W- IM _!" _ _ PATE WELL STAM~M 71g -'A Aidreso __ O~DATE WELL $TARPLEIDP L1 f TYPE OF WELL (as per Well Pernirt ategoils) T 3ZI I t Alegulmyw mlm Requ Well CA lD.#__
| |
| OONSULTING FIRRFIELD SUPEV1SOR (1a Wab) Tele. #
| |
| waLGobigu~imom N~c Moawre aSU-et ht Duplh to Oialotw _
| |
| Towl dapl dWl d20 Lt trom lW anbdm= Top (IL) otl VQ fi s) .-
| |
| We*hed to s _f t 9ia. ! . v ____
| |
| Borehol damer. MMdb ca TO !Q Im. 01
| |
| __ _ w__
| |
| _d _nb Bottom c in. Outw Daft Wei W= flnbhed: bave Wgraf aS diame" k~ _~ ___ _
| |
| C]dinah mounte Open Hoe,of Scamn Wflnfrihd abovw gqmde, cai halgh (dck (M Uod_ )
| |
| UP)
| |
| V aoeland ra awdace UL v(No. fL 1l3nkUsedGoiki _o (, ~~- ' .._
| |
| Wee td m csnged? - - -:,..' __
| |
| Waflwuter law altrdllg IM k llP C) 43 B% b : -bIjd Welw deWeped Ir_ 1. hous-st nrmUng M90hnd A * .
| |
| K M.HIIIIV SAYI6U4W Melhod of dcvelopman f IVfllivMvl#l lft a=
| |
| W Pwmnets punjeqlxnant "Of3yes7RN. .
| |
| G~EOLOtiC: LOG.__
| |
| Nctsath deph wherS tatur wa$ m;nftf~d In Punlz ype -. i ;*
| |
| Dnring FlMid Typo Rig TE .A~ _
| |
| Healt midSelt Mm abuifttEd 0YesRNo Laevl d Pwoun used oae scile one) Nof*(!) O A I aetifytHa t havew oonst dIfte abmow ruerand wllIn apmakme wlh all wpaapamt anqueyis andWapp*
| |
| I Stu Mm and Mp~a4f Dfrvlnrnmrmn . ... et MC tIa W
| |
| _ __Pemheb AS-ILT WUL LWCAnON Well Driffe (Prh _ 0 OIZONTAL Y13 DM¶TI NJ STA2XKPLA3W COODD(A IN UR~FM I DritleTs SignatL As. wr I=.
| |
| WORT12INt
| |
| >']2P*D = - J
| |
| '- Regitaxt Nc 0 0- -
| |
| Pnk -D& wn______d L.nfV t __-. _ WNGffVU esi Dp CP.IES:n A W:e DE o Lwy- DrIler COPES:- Whf -EP - diinwy-Drar P~k*- OWr Gdenrod. Ite7t OG# `.
| |
| - 'I .. .
| |
| | |
| DWVR-K20 New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection 8!*7 Water Supply Element - Bureau of Water Allocation WELL ABANDONMENT REPORT MAILTO: Bureau of Water Allocation WELL PERMIT # 34-06028 of well sealed PO Box 426 Trenton, NJ 08625-0426 DATE WELL SEALED 5/6/03 PROPERTY OWNER PSE&G Serrices Corp ADDRESS 80 ParkPlace Newark, NJ 07102 WELL LOCATION Artificial Island Lower Alloway Twp., NJ Salem Street & No., Township, County Well M 4.01 26 Well No. Lot No. Block No.
| |
| USE OF WELL PRIOR TO ABANDONMENT: Monitoring REASON FOR ABANDONMENT: Decommission WAS A NEW WELL DRILLED? BYES 5 NO PERMIT # OF NEW WELL 3400006990 T Cross-section Draw a sketch showing distance and relations of well site to TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL 20 of sealed well nearest roads, buildings, etc.
| |
| DIAMETER 1" .
| |
| CASING LENGTH 10' SCREEN LENGTH 10., \
| |
| NUMBER OF CASINGS 1 L tOAJi MATERIAL USED TO DECOMMISSION WELL: 5uA hl NA Gallons of Water f Lbs. of Cement PA Lbs. of Bentonite l NA Lbs. of Sand/Gravel l C O.r.' rods + Llsb+ SO vdr-ll.eQ (none ifwell is contaminated) lrok 3'rq ods X d4M ptI.
| |
| lo+* pctewrl A Jas
| |
| * FORMATION: Consolidated -.. on wA 145pftpG..dpi . WADpSn6 4 Unconsolidated . I p N To permit adequate grouting, the casing should remain in place, but ungrouted liner pipes or any other obstructions must be removed. Pressure grouting is the only accepted method.
| |
| WAS CASING LEFT IN PLACE? D YES B NO CASING MATERIAL:_
| |
| WERE OTHER OBSTRUCTIONS LEFT IN WELL? [YES 0 NO WHAT WERE THE OBSTRUCTIONS:_
| |
| IF t YES", AUTHORIZATION GRANTED BY ON (NJDEP Official) (Date)
| |
| Was an alternative decommissioning method used? D YES BNO IF 'YES', authorization granted by ON (NJDEP Official) (Date)
| |
| I certify that this well was sealed in accordance with N.J.A.C. 7:9-9.1 et seq.
| |
| Nicholas A. Fallucca PO Box 423 West Creek, NJ 6/26/03 Performing Work (Print or Type) Ctdd Mailing Date Name of NJ Certified Well Sealer XJ1526 Signature of NJ Certified Well Sealer Registration #
| |
| Performing Work COPIES: White - Water Allocation Yellow - Owner Pink - Health Dept. Goldenrod - Driller
| |
| | |
| Bureau of Water Allocation 3400006990 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates OWNER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G Services Corp 3401635 4ddress 80 Paik Place
| |
| . ,y Newark State New Jersey Zip Code 07102 WELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address Onvner's Well No. Well M County Salem Municipality Lower Alloway Twp. LotNo. 4.01 BlockNo. 26 Address Artificial Island WELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED 5/6/03 DATE WELL COMPLETED 5/6/03 WELL CONSTRUCTION f Note: Measure all depths Del pth to Depthto loMaterial Diameter fWgt./Rati Total Depth Drilled 20 ft. from land surface Tol (.J Bottom (ft.)] (inches) _ _ _ _ _ (lbs/schno.)
| |
| Finished Well Depth 20 ft. Single/Inner Casing l 3 10 l 1 J PVC lsch4 l Borehole Diameter: Middle Casing T6(for triple cased wells only)
| |
| Top 6 m. [ Outer Casing Bottom 6 (largest diameter)
| |
| M.
| |
| -1 l IL 11I Well was finished: I above grade Open Hole or Screen _
| |
| _flush mounted (No. Used .010 ) 10 20 IX *PVC/s.s. lsc7 If finished above grade, casing height Blank Casings (stick up) above land surface 3 Steel protective casing installed?
| |
| ft.
| |
| [
| |
| (No. Used Tail Piece rail Pice
| |
| )
| |
| IF H-I 1v 1 11 q Yes [No [ Gravel Pack
| |
| -Y11 20 ll jZ wIvells l
| |
| '...tatic Water Level after drilling 6 Water Level was Measured Using ft.
| |
| Tape Grout 0 li Grouting Method l
| |
| Treimnie cement/bentonite1 ll_7____
| |
| Well was developed for I hours Drilling Method HSA at 3/4 gpm GEOLOGIC LOG Method of development Peristoltic Pump Note each depth where water was encountered in consolidated formations Pump Capacity ____ _ gpm Pump Type 0-20' fine to med orange sand, trace gravel Drilling Fluid ---- Type of Rig Geoprobe 66DT Health and Safety Plan Submitted? I0Yes QNo
| |
| * 1" PVC w/stainless steel mesh wrap (2.5" OD sand pack)
| |
| Level of Protection used on site (circle one) None © C B A
| |
| ** install sand pack around pre-packed screen I certify that I have constructed the above referenced well in accordance with all wellpermit requirements and applicableState rules and regulations.
| |
| Drilling Company C T & E ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Well Driller (Print) Nich las A. Fallucca Driller's Signature Registration No. J1526 Date k 4 /063 3550 ORIGINAL: DEP COPIES: DRILLER O WNER HEALTH DEPARTMENT A
| |
| | |
| 04/07/2003 15:40 8568781206 PSEG EEP/PTS PAGE 04/10 04/07/2003 13:3Z FAX 856 645 133t lBOO'3/0g bDWfF-1a M NWQ SY Depaybmet of Fnnnenta Pron am Bureauof WmA lcaffion MQNMNORING WELL RECORD Well PenMn A. . - rlf.1' lassheeC rdiatesa ;,
| |
| OWNER IDNTIFICATION - Owner, Add re w =
| |
| MYw --- ft t..
| |
| wbtu i I I---
| |
| .S slats 3. TS - PCode__
| |
| Ih k%37 0*
| |
| WELL LoCAtION - If not the ame as owner please gie addes. Ownaea Well No. 1 -
| |
| Co"uit . Munkipalty = *W 1 ISrVy Lot No. .. A :1 i' RBlonNno k n
| |
| _I- _
| |
| Addmes fM DE kl I MAY E wr- 22 *. WM STAM . wwuv 7*. .Z DATI DATE WYEL COMPLEM 'I I Q1 TYPE OF WELL (as per Wel Penorm C4 raB _) W1Ifl11tNC fegutory Pmgrn Reqfifng WOO _ _ case l.O# -.
| |
| CONSULTING FIRWFELD SUPERVISOR (it aWpeble) .
| |
| TWIm.8 No": MWreat depft Dept to. Dep to Diameer o r W"Dwo TOW doplh d Cd ,M% fiom land sr op (fL) SotM (k) (inchhs) Pbslsch no)
| |
| WfthoIid to doIF Okeftnercei ). _ __
| |
| Dnohok diamebr:
| |
| lbp A.L11 Boa kLI Wel WM* Unlshed Mabm mrde PammO~ dlansiw)- - -
| |
| Open H* gr Screm t finiMe e w ande. casing hvtt (sick (.Used 4 Wu) ifw Wd mom ft Wau sig hisJled?
| |
| t~U No c"Vel BddFdl Sf u ruev ttMN t IL. .~e Uesed _ Neat _r Wr l nured s uwig &L . , - _
| |
| Weiwas duvelkqd far - tono
| |
| ' 1- - lrilunng MeIrDo Ib u. __
| |
| Flrl~inn Mpthnd b - -0 Method of devxmpniuu. SarvoP - W -- I---F-p mv P"nWpu0v eq4mM Instald? I]Vstaio GEO5LOGIC LO-G
| |
| ^pCJVPB - W~M Note esch eph where wadstwso enw d Incormold
| |
| . Pumproe:, tom~fnnens D m Fluid. ,T; f Frig CAIME 175 lHb wad 5ufe Pln sumamd 0 *eskm Level of P ured on 61be (dcu 9m) None(&C. B A
| |
| _ecin 0- _ I I #Wt I ave Consct VW Sbove reftmncd v.1n Hur&f aOc'anr wM aa wesprm*t requvwente and appffcbb Sae noes ano rehumbtion rV101-WIVIUImq wfgJi5¶y BerJbm !wc. _I6. I A"UILT WELL WOCATON Well Driller (Print) 5ktx 1/4JO .p.j (NAD 3 HORIZONTADLAT'"
| |
| NJ STPJEFLAII WO MENAT~ INTX 3 VKYFIX Drilefs sianatur -Q~~ .- L' ' * . &
| |
| Rebatron No. hNFB M4 We .S4J Date I I 2i NORTEDNG: I a01
| |
| _Fe LOIaUDrk_-_
| |
| _ _a_ _
| |
| COP>fIE; V"7t -DEP Canluy-DiDdr Pbk -Ownr -1o~r-.hyAC*
| |
| | |
| Vt-EdtW { jt 1!:
| |
| 13I F PAUE 05/10 0 4/fi7/2003 13:32 FAX 850 845 1335 004D/009 DWR-138 M NewQey Pqpartmwnt of ErnonmentJ PrMoon aN Bureau of WaVrAJlooaion M.QNGLLLRD WON Permi No. - I.
| |
| AMa Sheet Coo*iftu _- 44 1 . 91 ' -q5f, OWNEB IDENDlFICATION -Owner _ _
| |
| Adress ?" _ 2'cf a SW N IZp C __ _
| |
| WgLLOCA11ON - Hnotthe same as owner pleias give addre6& Ownees Well No. )
| |
| Coun- Municipalty- LIc fo. x B kNo ._
| |
| . - - - .%MA" r t off rnT iAgurenu ri'u 1W ' 1a'i1r--~ ..
| |
| - DATE WELL STARTED jI I -A 0 DATE WELL COMPLETED I& I 90a TYPE OF WELL (as per Well Pemnit Catef) g.mI 1,11lMUL riegLdaory Progrnm Requkig Well_ _ CM LO.#
| |
| CONSULTIN6 FIRNIfIEW SUPERVSOR p applicable) - . -TeOIs# __
| |
| Note Meaow" i depft Det to t Ol0 DiametOr SqMW WgJ~al TOW dep difld _lt from land wivface TOp (L Bottom (ft) (infts) (""ch no')
| |
| WON flnished to ,a tL MEW Casho .
| |
| (for e cWas wells _M.M.
| |
| OuW0810g.
| |
| Well Ve *fnthmod: Vabo gmde phrstdamem .- -
| |
| 3lush mounled Optn Hobs ororen aD _- P1t (No. Used Z2...... -
| |
| I firished Wome gread casqing heh (Wl Blonk C&-kg.
| |
| up) above bnsud urface _.6Lt. (Nm Used kL~ - - .- .._
| |
| Wes dee pmne cashig bcst~d?
| |
| Tel Piece SlUft w&We lenvol ifter *fl o A- I
| |
| 'Waer leveld was measred usig tLSt Pc 7.0 ( et fCet-We WdeveWlpedwfor 2 .. holu . ,. , (,. aw onlie -EM NM Groutini Uethod.
| |
| UB&Ml~ rA rlm~mfinrvw e5Lh'fV Oliuing Meftod I..,__ _. -- _r-f--- . I_ _.
| |
| Was perinenpumpiro ue'mwte bowsd? Jymlo IsEOLOGIC LOG .
| |
| Pufnpcapaciy gpm Note eamh depM where watkr was allontered incorsoldad lortndone Pu Wr :
| |
| D11lr id ltdd . , ToeSof peu . M _.
| |
| Healith and abety Plan sYebtd tw
| |
| - a Levl o Proetn used on 61tu (tl oGM) Nonwt C 1 A DrIkig I oedify NW I hnve GonnWiflhe sv Wevmenoc wslf hI Conany wfthml wwllpemft mquirents and a*p&Wb Sa nAg amin and rMuaons.
| |
| ur _._e.
| |
| MS-RU92 WELL LOCATION I__
| |
| II Well Prier (PrMt. _ C xt t I (NAD 83 HORIZONTAL DATIM) ru UTAMAL UJUUIJ9A~N US bmRVEYFM tWe Signature, . _ C k.&A S.-..... __ LoR A flU W_Qz .-.-
| |
| Registadw No. - jbZ 15y -. Date J -I /.Q.3 N0IIU_'-
| |
| IAMo .. .,. __._
| |
| COPES: Wfet - DEP CaroW Dwillr P4 - OwTrer Godelnd- hW ept
| |
| | |
| r,-)ru ccr-r r i a 1f4ul oui a
| |
| _ 04/07/2003 13:3 PAZ _851 543 1335 W1007/000 DWR.1S 1M Newkey oeparbtent of EnirmOwventWA Bureau d Water Allocain ONIORNGMLL RECORD Wei Permnt No. _34- (Ie'5 Abs Sheet Coornatev 4 -
| |
| ONWNER IDEwFTION - Owner _ ;6sa PC Address r T A Zip Cod_____
| |
| WELL LOCATON . it not the samw s owner pleo gh e addres. owne?5 Weil No.
| |
| CAouty _ W Municipelfty vt rC= I uv_ Lot NO. 4L Bbok*
| |
| Adds -m in or 5Ty w- t 03 DA W TYPE OF WEl (as per WlI Pnm ategories) W2KITCf DAErLAW W COMPLETE PLED_
| |
| Ronublord l onmReauirinWell e os 1.D
| |
| 'ONSLTIN F L S'-1V'S_ -_
| |
| CONSiULTING FlRFOWIELP SUPW-RVIS0F 1"VP".) Tala.
| |
| * NOWe Meamjum ialIdeplis _Doph to Dupihto Olnee Maeti Wt~an Total i dilpdi t lM_ IT fr land XAue We fi'shed to, fL Borehoe jer Ulddl
| |
| _ 7 -~ , . ____ _
| |
| Tap _ (ftorl*ecWd we4 ON)
| |
| Bo Cm uterup W6114W fTahadt bm grade' I p m 3 ' , i Open rLe orSorme thd abiu eg I~Ll , (No.Ued 0V up) aboveld.X .JL 9Iar" Cmeke ,
| |
| (Wa9 Used
| |
| ,~~a .een . ....ha. ..
| |
| w r llp , .,i o ._ ( _a ; -- .
| |
| rdevkeloped ur PIPo ,=
| |
| oroutng Mefo1 % N_ _ . _ .
| |
| n.,i, W1511jtpuP J
| |
| -- _..1, Was pewanent pumpin equ;n;i ijtad7 bI [Y3yes ,- I R. _N- , .
| |
| GEOLOGICI-PuoapadlyOP , N61luse dept where wasw e u d In i d d DM F bkl of Twp oig . 7 Haiend8yafwbs~it ° Y"eiWN!
| |
| Lew of Pa*en usedanhaft(drdeone) N hC. B:.A L-7 .4.
| |
| I certyt I have via Above frcd w arin acovrdaW MM&dl we# pernw rv'eqn and appflm'e SW nh$ and wgaWM; WHrInn Campanyfl A 1itNIt'f hWlir AS-lUL'T WE= LIOCMON WYell D ar 1(Plint). 5C )A s -,.t.stbvs _ _
| |
| OR~b 83 EOR NISUMA3PLAM4 NA WDTvM UU RO-0NI WIJKEY FM l
| |
| Dnlle's Signatur , _ ( --.L- *z=k_0. _
| |
| Rejstration No. - Nq 1. rm Eq J 1Jj N 9R
| |
| . .. OR_
| |
| O * *~
| |
| COPME W14e DEP. Canaly- p:'l*r, Phk* - oww7r 'onro famDp
| |
| | |
| . t4111/ZIIMS lb: 4tj 8b68 781 20b PSEG EEppTS PAGE 09/10 04/0?/2003 13:32 G85645 1 L 12008/009
| |
| '1Wi-138 M Newey Pepartmnrt of Elwronmentui Prinin 00 Bureau d Wft MAocaion M-ONITORING WLL RECORD Wel P iMIftNo. _ _ I_ __ _ _ _
| |
| Atlas ShgetCooesnafts 1flL012 M OWNE IDENTIFIGC1ON - Owner pg ivr TI c _ - '
| |
| Addree3 a0, D City 1 1 _ -Zip G _t wM= q' wu StDtem- _A_
| |
| WEM LOCATION - N not the Srne as wr pase give % ssm Ownees Weill No. Mw- (Wev\
| |
| , QA County Shir
| |
| &t Munbipallty J&AnAYS Lot No. 5 Block Nojj20---
| |
| Addrmew a (MAY OEM OMI)~R Mt DATE WULL STA/TM OL -74 0 TYPE OF WELL (as perWell Penmtt Categodes). "MMIM'aI DATEWELLCOMPLETD I-Ls: I Regulato Progam Requig Wud Case I.Dt.
| |
| OONSULT1NG FIRlMFInELD SUPEVIiSCR (if appable) .Tele.# -_,- . _
| |
| NdMama WI ft Depth to Depm to Diameter W OWepdeh ed' '- .t fM ___ s__ _ To P(L) stlom (ft.) (incs) (I no.
| |
| Well khvd ID -- -a IfL Berhol dlamew hud Cang w TOp -_ 6 IIL (for lilpiecased wells ao________
| |
| ar Bottom f j Wal- aswalnhuhodhve cdgad Ofhed9morwe (No. U d. _ . '.
| |
| If fiihod *aln~greci, cm*V~tW(~t (WM Up) above Jnd MA e t WMs el c2*Vft-I_ ( da .cw* - New S bwaC wlkvl or dn~llng. &fL ?4fi Ceei __lm Wabr lVe was awd *w W~ie. . ,
| |
| Wellwas deve tar hoi nt
| |
| -l -g7~ rw-IIp.,
| |
| lr-:wn ffin iS.IMPM - rft I-MetOrdotagd_______ Ddiftg Mehod Was pwmant Pumpk eqimwi keWnlwd? OYssk,"No GROLOLIC LMA Punr copacsty ~ gVm Now -eac dept tora WMne"dcMO&Qa Puy p I ..
| |
| DillFid - Type of Mf 1: -
| |
| Helt mid Se-y Plbn 6* edl E YeLNo h_ 0riLtif u Uwe)of Proton used on oifale .one) None(q) BA I cerdV fat I have oonsbc~d ft above rabrewnvd mg in a~oirdance wh al we# pwn , reVquiments and appltbl mate f8 end & g Uatb6w.
| |
| ODiffing Companty, i _.q
| |
| _jCr...T'YI . I I
| |
| Wdll Der (Print CAIX 0NAD 83 HORZONA IDATM
| |
| . I N0 VAW11 PlAIU COiW4TI1J UVYF Dnlres 5natur ___ I - o.
| |
| _I__- .
| |
| U- ., - -
| |
| ORT Cc --- - -
| |
| Registiatlon No. JA\\15,A .tB J J- OR LA Z ___
| |
| COIS __Lni-z 4,te-DP _-_ *_ne I*_
| |
| 'InP-1Lne n 7- w COPIMS ftbe - DEP t_-.
| |
| E4Mr - Offr U~r U0XnrW ha*h Pept
| |
| | |
| -4 0II muJO3 1. 4yar 00bDfa luzab racM2 Mr-ri r pj¶407/200-3 13:34 FAX 8S6-845 1335 MIR= ia/lv DWR-¶DBM 0 Now ..- zy Department of Env~rnmentu P o6o amO Bjureau cyf V~Mr Allocation MoNffoRING WELL RIEQMRP WellPetufft No. __
| |
| OWNER IDENTIFICATION - Owier T FA-,I At See Coimte 1 ri Adrodmr I -_ e m M 3s ae,4kt - ;w . s U,I WrY_.rFrF~ y- ~ ____ _
| |
| WELL LOCATION - 1not the same as owner please give addres Owneft Well No. 76 ( it\\ *)
| |
| County t MunicipaliVy iro Aaym 4 Lot No- 4.2-1 lockNo., 2§5 Addmss tDATE _g WELL STARTED LJ.A f
| |
| TYPE OF WELL (as par We$ Pn* Ctgorles) MolW DATE WEUD COMPLETED JO1fJQ$i .
| |
| Regulatory Program Reqt 9ng Wnl - - - -. Case I.D.#
| |
| -CON~SULTING PIRMIIELD SUPER~iSOR (itAPpOWb) Teft. # . _
| |
| WELg90aRLMO Nowe Measure alt depths -t Depth
| |
| - to -
| |
| Tom depthdtINd 1rt!A - from land eurface TOP (IL.) Bofom PQL (Inch"s)_____
| |
| Wee finished to ZED t Middle Cuing (or hule cased Web MM___
| |
| Well was tInihd: aabove grade t 111nished mbmv gradm, eing hoi~i (slic (No. Used ) O '3 I up) obivvskndsuftm ..3.j
| |
| ~- W*3 VW WeMuIV CaakE MWWe?
| |
| blMi w~alr level after drilling J-f GviPack Arg -4 S VWwave hl was mmurwed using AZt Gmut (.0 Nvat Cim* f Wag was devulopod for. `4.... W=i Gmruting Method *(0-ivn ox4
| |
| - ~mmgpm Drilflng Miefthd . eIr JI f umethod of 113 Was manenpe GEOLOGIC LOG Nate such depth vhere WRtWmw mcuftsrd In emascidaedf ft anp ap ct w. tonuadons.
| |
| Drillin F d -type of Fri g Ž5 L Health and Safet Plan subMftted? 03 Ymns' No Level of Piotectio used 4on ofte (did.a one) NorCm) C 8 A I certfy that I have constucWO fthabove noftnenced wefth~
| |
| accodmnce *Wf&N*W~pem*~regublments an appik'abb Stak nibs and isW9lIofls.
| |
| Dfilling CorpnM *_0 e b ai. I.
| |
| -AS-31TILT WL LOCAT1ION _
| |
| WeR Drlfler (Pei" QIJ -XA~*. (NAD 83 ]KORIZONTAL DATUI()
| |
| I35J NJ ham"W.£'.Iunfv %APImVLU'AA& AN4 Ub DUJCVUX Registration No. WDi Ak Date .... +/-I.J..j. NlflO ~G~E R- AJ JNO i0 0oi LATnvm-- lL0NGrrsUD _ _ _-
| |
| COPIES! Wu% - DEP OOPIES:
| |
| A_ _
| |
| I~'4'A anarly- _
| |
| - DEP 0?n~eF rode_ _
| |
| Pink - Ownrei o a n d- HOSM GoWenrod ~ hDopt D
| |
| | |
| DVvRPKo2 New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Water Supply Element - Bureau of Water Allocation WELL ABANDONMENT REPORT MAIL TO: Bureau of Water Allocation WELL PERMIT 34-06042 PO Box 426 P0 Bo 426of well sealed Trenton, NJ 08625-0426 DATE WELL SEALED 6/3/03 PROPERTY OWNER PSE&G Se!Aces Corp _
| |
| ADDRESS 80 Pari Place Newair, NJ 07102 WELL LOCATION Artificial Island Lower Alloway Twp., NJ Salem Street & No., Township, County Well R 4.01 26 Well No. Lot No. Block No.
| |
| USE OF WELL PRIOR TO ABANDONMENT: Monitoring REASON FOR ABANDONMENT: Decommission WAS A NEW WELL DRILLED? EYES 0 NO PERMIT # OF NEW WELL 3400006991 TOTAL DEPTH OF WELL 20' Cross-section Draw a sketch showing distance and relations of well site to TOTALlot of sealed well nearest roads, buildings, etc.
| |
| DIAMETER 1 CASING LENGTH .10 SCREENLENGTH 10 1 lot Ii L NUMBER OF CASINGS 1 MATERIAL USED TO DECOMMISSION WELL: _ei n o b I NA Gallons of Water NA - Lbs. of Cement lo NA Lbs. of Bentonite I l J x1<
| |
| ____A_ - Lbs. of Sand/Gravel l Troit rocis+ 1 IS1 Sorb 09erdro (none if well is contaminated) l )--Q W '&t a W4CIPolA- trws reovj FORMATION: - Consolidated
| |
| - I9 o A rwealtnsvc e w iesxt .-pccxZ
| |
| -xUnconsolidated +N To permit adequate grouting, the casing should remain in place, but ungrouted liner pipes or any other obstructions must be removed. Pressure grouting is the only accepted method.
| |
| WAS CASING LEFT IN PLACE? a YES 1 NO CASING MATERIAL:
| |
| WERE OTHER OBSTRUCTIONS LEFT IN WELL? [YES s NO WHAT WERE THE OBSTRUCTIONS:
| |
| IF "YES", AUTHORIZATION GRANTED BY ON (NJDEP Official) (Date)
| |
| Was an alternative decommissioning method used? 0 YES ONO IF 'YES", authorization granted by . ON (NJDEP Official) (Date)
| |
| I certify that this well was sealed in accordance with N.J.A.C. 7:9-9.1 et seq.
| |
| Nicholas A. Fallucca PO Box 423 West Creek, NJ 6/26/03 Performing Work (Print or Type) AdgpsQ ln2 Mailing Date Name of NJ Certified Well Sealer (.-(, 1&ntp i', 11526 Signature of NJ Certified Well Sealer Registration #
| |
| Performing Work COPIES: White - Water Allocation Yellow - Owner Pink - Health Dept. Goldenrod - Driller
| |
| | |
| Bureau of Water Allocation 3400006991 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates OWNER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G Services Corp 3401635 AAdress 80 Paik Place Newark State New Jersey Zip Code 07102 WELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address 01wner's Well No. WellR County Salem Municipality Lower Alloway Twp. Lot No. 4.01 Block No. 26 Address Artificial Island WELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED 6/3/03 DATE WELL COMPLETED 6/3/03 WELL CONSTRUCTION [ Note: Measure all depths 1Del th to [FDepth to t Diameter 1 Material l Wgt ng l Total Depth Drilled 20 ft. from land surface Tol :f) Bottom (ft.) [ (inches) Mate l (bs/schno.)
| |
| Finished Well Depth 20 ft. Single/Inner Casing 10 1 PVC I[sch40 l Borehole Diameter: Middle Casing Top 6 m. (for triple cased wells only) [ I < 11 1 i
| |
| Bottom Well was finished:
| |
| 6 above grade M.
| |
| Outer Casing (largest diameter)
| |
| Open Hole or Screen i X [< 11 Rflush mounted (No. Used .010 ) 107 20 ][ ]
| |
| * PVC/S. l sch 40 If finished above grade, casing height Blank Casings (stick up) above land surface 3 ft. (No. Used )
| |
| Steel protective casing installed? [=Tai TailPicl Pice 0]
| |
| 31~ 20 l ~6 11 l#wlglvll*20b 11
| |
| " Yes QNo Gravel Pack I.5 { # I we26gra
| |
| '.Zatic Water Level after drilling 6 ft. Grout 7 . 1 6 cement/bentonitel ? b Water Level was Measured Using Tape Grouting Method Wue Trel Well was developed for 1 hours Drilling Method HSA at 3/4 gpm GEOLOGIC LOG Method of development Peristoltic Pump Note each depth where water was encountered in consolidated formations Pump Capacity _ gpm Pump Type _- -
| |
| 0-20' fine to med orange sand, trace gravel Drilling Fluid Type of Rig Geoprobe 66DT Health and Safety Plan Submitted? FMYes QNo
| |
| * 1" PVC w/stainless steel mesh wrap (2.5" OD sand pack)
| |
| Level of Protection used on site (circle one) None 0 C B A
| |
| ** install sand pack around pre-packed screen I certify that I have constructed the above referenced well in accordance with all wellpermit requirementsand applicable State rules and regulations.
| |
| Drilling Company C T & E ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Well Driller (Print) Nicholas A. Fallucca Driller's Signature 0.
| |
| igistration No. J1526 Date 1v 24{03 3550 ORIGINAL: DEP COPIES: DRILLER OWNER RE-A LTH DEPARTMEN T
| |
| | |
| Bureau of Water Allocation 3400006995 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates OWNER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G Services Corp 3401635 ss 80 Park Place city Newark State New Jersev Zip Code 07102 WELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address 01vner's Well No. GM-1 (Well S)
| |
| County Salem Municipality Lower Alloway Twp. Lot No. 4.01 Block No. 26 Address Artificial Island WELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED 5/29/03 DATE WELL COMPLETED 5/30/03 WELL CONSTRUCTION Note: Measure all depths from land surface FDepth to
| |
| [Top (ft.) j Bottom Depth to (ft.]) I (inches) IL if I11(lbs/sch no.)
| |
| MDiameter Wgt./Raring Material Total Depth Drilled 35 ft.
| |
| Finished Well Depth 35 ft. Single/liner Casing + 2.5 25 2 PVC scl 40 Borehole Diameter: (for Iripleiddler casedCasing wells only) l it Top 8 in In.
| |
| 1i Bottom 8 in M.
| |
| Outer Casig (largest diameter) l l Well was finished: 0 above grade Open Hole or Screen i t lF
| |
| [
| |
| Qflush mounted If finished above grade, casing height (stick up) above land surface 2.5 ft.
| |
| 'el protective casing installed?
| |
| (No. Used .010 Blank Casings (No. Used Tail Piece
| |
| ) _
| |
| 25 j[
| |
| it It _
| |
| lI __
| |
| 35
| |
| _ __ _ __ _ _ It 2
| |
| PVC I
| |
| If f
| |
| sc 40
| |
| _ _ _ _ _ _ _ lt_
| |
| __ Yes E]No Gravel Pack If 23 35 8 #1 sand 400 lbs Static Water Level after drilling 9 ft.
| |
| Grout I f lbs I_
| |
| Grout_ llI 0 l 23 8 ICement/bentonite __ 10 lbs Water Level was Measured Using Tape Grouting Method Tremie Well was developed for 1/2 hours Drilling Method HSA at 2 gpml GEOLOGIC LOG Method of development Pump Note each depth where water was encountered in consolidated formations Pump Capacity 5 gpill Pump Type 0-10' fill Submersible 10-34' black silt & sand Drilling Fluid --- Type of Rig Mobile B-61 34-35' grey med sand Health and Safety Plan Submitted? M0Yes QNo Level of Protection used on site (circle one) None © C B A I certify that I have constructed the above referenced wvell in accordancewith all wellpernmit requirements and applicableState rules and regulations.
| |
| Drilling Company C T & E ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Well Driller (Print) Marc Hauge Triller's Signature /1g 4 , l
| |
| .gistration No. J23173 Date /a 03 3550 R HNI ORIGINAL: DEP COPIES: DRILLER OWNER HEALTH DEPARTMENxT
| |
| | |
| J4PjLPjVOyVz MQNIT!2PUNG ELL RECORD AUW Sf Coodiafs O~tMR ThDEMMFCATIOX pSE&O SeiVice Corp .. O1635- -
| |
| Addres S0 Paik Plaee City Newaik staft New Jigmy Zip Cod. 07102 L LOCATION - If not the sam as owner pios givo-addres Owner's WeliNo. Q.-1 (Wen S) Ple-LCseL
| |
| 'Ounty SSaem Municipality LowAIoway]Tp. LotNo. 4.01 m ockNo. 26 -
| |
| Address ALWnd /,W, lo1^ 7- c 1AA, A O 2@ hInt WELLUSE M ]. ATE WXM. STAXT=i) j~gM _ =
| |
| ]DATE WELL COMP'LXTE 5SO3oo -
| |
| WELL CONSTUCrrON Note: Measure all depths P Total Depth Drilled 35 from land siae To p() Bonto (fL) (tie Malaria l WgL 0.g Finished Well IDepth Borehole Diametir 35 p Single/luer Casing Middle Casing 2_ PVC Jjqh=J TOP 8uin MOuter Casing Bottom 8 in . ( arge diameter)
| |
| Well was finised: Mabove grade Open Hole or Scree I4tlush mnd (No. 1sed .010 I affnibedabovegade, caSig beiht (sb up abvIoo ifae0o.
| |
| Blank Casias Used r
| |
| 8tee Proeve ing installed?
| |
| eYes W3O QMIPck , 2 3 -3 _1=a 400 Dbs StxtcWaterLevelaf~r dr1ling 9 IL.rut Water Level was Uftsured Umg 2ape.
| |
| evoutizigNW&~ 1Wi was developed fIr 12 hovn Dr~~jdbW BSA__
| |
| 8-pm GAOLOGIC LOG Miodeofdaveloput Pump Capaity 5 PqM. I teechdpt insco.;=;I&"ae i pM PUMp TypO Subiameble 0-10' fin 10-34! Noar Silt & samd Drilling Fluid Type Rig Mobilc B61 34.35! MMC mod sai Hadh and Soft Phu Submitted? [MYes ONo Level of Ptecttioused on ske (cir& onc) None 0 C B A Icero Aa I have consftucrdthe above referencd well in accormoreW& al wepeutreqwwmna2 epad appficabeShat rulesadrdnugoLn D gDLS C Wen mlet t a Dlzs Signae _
| |
| P"ewratjon No. 323173 D ta 350 (GrGNA4Z.- DE P COPJ= DRILLER 0*?#IER HEALTH DEPAR77offiVT
| |
| | |
| Bureau of Water Allocation 3400006992 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates OWNER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G Services Corp 3401635
| |
| ' 'Iress 80 Park Place
| |
| , Newark State New Jersey Zip Code 07102 WELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address 01wner's Well No. GM-3 (Well T)
| |
| County Salem Municipality Lower Alloway Twp. LotNo. 4.01 BlockNo. 26 Address Artificial Island WELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED 6/5/03 DATE WELL COMPLETED 6/5/03 WELL CONSTRUCTION Note: Measure all depths 1Dpth to [Depth to Diameter l Material Wgt./Rating p (ft.) Bottom (ft.) (inches) l (lbs/sch no.)
| |
| Total Depth Drilled 35 ft. I ron laud surface To Finished Well Depth 35 ft. Single/Inner Casing +2.5 25 2 PVC sch40 Borehole Diameter: [ Middle Casing j[
| |
| Top 8 in m.
| |
| T(for triple cased wells only) l Outer Casing J[
| |
| if Bottom 8 in M. L (largest diameter)
| |
| Well was finished: "above grade Open Hole or Screen If fflush mounted [ (No. Used .010 ) 25 35 < PVC I sch40 If finished above grade, casing height Blank Casings_
| |
| (stick up) above land surface 2.5 ft. (No. Used )
| |
| I Tail Pee l Steel protective casing installed? [ rail Pice IL Yes No Ils E]Nrou [ Gravel Pack; Li 23 35 8 #1sand 5lbulbs "z-6tic Water Level after drilling 9 ft. Gr O 0 l 28nb 3iCement/bentortitell1 I 10 lbs b
| |
| Water Level was Measured Using Tape Grouting Method_ Tremie Well was developed for 1/2 hours Drilling Method _ HSA at 2 gpm GEOLOGIC LOG Method of development Pump Note each depth where water was encountered in consolidated formationm Pump Capacity 5 gpin 0-10' fill Pump Type Submersible 10-33' black silt & sand Drilling Fluid _ Type of Rig Mobile B-61 33-35' grey med sand Health and Safety Plan Submitted? 0Yes QNo Level of Protection used on site (circle one) None © C B A I certify that I have constructed the above referenced well in accordancewith all welipermit requirements and applicableState rules and regulations.
| |
| Drilling Company C T & E ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Well Driller (Print) Marc Hauge Driller's Signature _ _ _ _ _ _ _
| |
| I
| |
| 'gistration No. J23173 Date t/
| |
| 3550 ORIGINAL: DEP COPIES: DRILL)TR 0 91NER HEALTH DEPAR TMENT
| |
| | |
| Bureau of Water Allocation 3400006994 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates OWNER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G Services Corp 3401635
| |
| 'ess 80 Park Place b, Newark State New Jersev Zip Code 07102 WELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address 0O,vner's Well No. GM-2 (Well U)
| |
| County Salem Municipality Lowver Alloway Twp. Lot No. 4.01 Block No. 26 Address Artificial Island WELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED 5/28/03 DATE WELL COMPLETED 5/29/03 WELL CONSTRUCTION Note: Measure all depths Depth to Depth to Diameter f Material fWgt./Rating from land surface lT p (ft.) Bottom (ft.) (inches) I _I (lbs/sch no.)
| |
| Total Depth Drilled 32 ft.
| |
| Finished Well Depth 32 ft. Single/inner Casing E2.5 27 2 PVC sch40 Borehole Diameter: Middle Casing (for triole cased wells only) I Top Bottom 8 in 8 in rin.
| |
| M.
| |
| Outer Casing (largest diameter)
| |
| _ ~ __ 1 1__ _ 11__ __ _ _ 11__ _ _ 1__
| |
| Well was finished: 0above grade Open Hole or Screen Qflush mounted [(No. Used .010 ) 27 32 1 2l PVC ll sch 40 If finished above grade, casing height (stick up) above land surface 2.5 ft.
| |
| I L
| |
| Blank Casings ail Piece
| |
| _ IL(No._Used
| |
| )___
| |
| IF Steel protective casing installed? - T Yes Ye Qzo E]No Gravel Pack [_ 5 32 8 J #1 sand F200lbs 0 25 18 i 11Cemt Ibs
| |
| .Sitatic Water Level after drilling 8 ft. Grout O ll2 I8lCernent/bentonitell 1 b Water Level was Measured Using Tape Grouting Method Trelydie Well was developed for 1/2 hours Drilling Method HSA at 2 gpm GEOLOGIC LOG Method of development Pump Note each depth where water was encountered in consolidated formations Pump Capacity 5 gpm 0-10' fill Pump Type Submersible 10-28' black silt & sand Drilling Fluid - -'------- Type of Rig Mobile B-61 28-32' grey med sand Health and Safety Plan Submitted? 0Yes QNo Level of Protection used on site (circle one) None 0 C B A I certify thatI have constructed the above referenced well in accordancewith all wellpermit requirements and applicable State rules and regulations.
| |
| Drilling Company C T & E ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Well Driller (Print) Marc Hauge Driller's Signature /2 IatA<,
| |
| !gistration No. J23173 Date 'z-zc / O0 3550 I ORIGINAL: DEP COTIES: DRILLER 0 IFNER HE,4 L TH DEPA R TMENT
| |
| | |
| 34(KOO6994 MONrITOlNG WL RECOR Aths Sb%:et Coonllnaes OWNER N1TIn CAflON PSE&G Services Corp 3401635 Address 80 Pa* Place City _Nea+/- State NOW Jersey Zip Code 07102 LL LOCAl1ON - If not the same as owner please give addre uwaces Wel No. Gl-2 (WeK U) geLi CdQ tCunty Slem Municipality Lower Alloway TwL Lot No. 4.01 BRo&No. A26 Address Aifii~ci Islam 0Th, f Ile's wh b * *
| |
| * t WELL .USE ornngDTWE AE DATE WELL SOTARTEDD-s WELL CONSTRUCTION Note: Measure all depths i Depth to -Depdo I D_afiam.rA I WSRatingl Total Depth Drilled 32 ft. from land sufea l Top (ft.) Boato (kf) Ickemh llWsck a .no.)
| |
| Finisbed Well Dep 32 ft. Single/Inner Csn 1 27 2 PVC W40 Borehole Diameter; Middle Casing -3 7 (for riplecased welts -onl.) j _ I__
| |
| Top 8 in M_
| |
| Outer Caitg Bottom s in M (largest diamher) _ __ _ _
| |
| Well was finished: above grade Open Hole or Sclees (No. Used .010 ) 27 32 *l 2 ii PVC sdh4O Wflush maountcd If finished above grde, casing height Blank Casings 31 1 (stkUp) above lad surace Stee pwoective camng insUtlled?
| |
| ,7'< ni TNO-UPi ir____ir _- i P Yes MNo Gravelrd II 2S 32 l15 #1 sandi 2MO Ibs Stac WaterLevelafter drilling S ft- Grout ll neU/ enl 1 4w Ib 1 ° 2 8 ice an Waiter Lxvl Was esased Using Tape el_* _ X-A-d Tmeml I ws developed for in hours Dhng Md A
| |
| r z gpm GEOLOGIC LOG Mfdod ofevelpmat ftM NMt cm& dopkhwb whre vims ezoonute ii cioldadftluf Pump Capacity 5 gpm Pump Type Submersible 0-10' im 10-28' WMa* SRt&sad Drlling Flid _ _Type of Rig Mobile B-61 28-32' m sudd Heallh and Safety Phu Submitted? 0Yes :No Level ofPmftio u iud on site (crc[e one) None § C B A I cerrf)j tkat I have consructed the above referenced well in crsce wh* all wellpermit reiremenr and applicablaS rules andregulathon DriUling Comp *_yC
| |
| &BNR M AL SERVICES Well Driller Ptit) Ma Haugs DrillesSignatare 9 <
| |
| Registration No. J23173 Date ( I2 3550 7WNA L.- DFP CoPIEg. DRILLER 0 WNR OWNER HEALTH DZPAR27SENT
| |
| | |
| Bureau of Water Allocation 3400006993 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates OWNER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G Services Corp 3401635 A 4dress 80 Park Plaza Newark State New Jersey Zip Code 07102 WELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address 0Owner's Well No. GM-22D (Well V)
| |
| County Salem Municipality LowverAlloway Twp Lot No. 4.01 Block No. 26 Address Artificial Island WELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED 6/5/03 DATE WELL COMPLETED 6/12/03 WELL CONSTRUCTION Note: Measure all depths from land surface
| |
| [Depth to Top (ft.)
| |
| Depth to
| |
| [Bottom (ft.l
| |
| ]F Diameter (inches) i[
| |
| _ __Mateial l Ill (lbslsch no.)
| |
| Wgt./Rating Total Depth Drilled 80 ft.
| |
| Finished Well Depth 80 ft. Single/Inner Casing +2.5 70 2 PVC Sch40 Borehole Diameter: Casing _ . l l pecased wells only) _ l l Top 10 in m.
| |
| Outer Casing I Bottom 6 in M. (largest diameter) 0 53 6 PVC l sch4o Well was finished: 0above grade Open Hole or Screen l
| |
| [flush mounted (No. Used .010 ) l 70 80 2 PVC sch40 If finished above grade, casing height Blank Casings 1f (stick up) above land surface 2.5 ft. (No. Used ) 1 11 11 11 11 I Steel protective casing installed?
| |
| L_ rail Piece 11 11 _ _ __ _ _ 11 _ _ 11___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 11 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1__
| |
| I Yes QNo lGravel Pack ll 67 80 6 l WI
| |
| #1sand 14350l bs
| |
| '--itatic Water Level after drilling Water Level was Measured Using 16 ft.
| |
| Mscope lGrout I 0/0 53/67 Grouting Method j 10/6 Tremie tCement/bentonitel 49 i Well was developed for 1/2 hours Drilling Method Mud Rotary at 3 gpm GEOLOGIC LOG Method of development Pump Note each depth where water was encountered in consolidated formations Pump Capacity 5 gpmn 0-10' Fill Pump Type Submersible Pump 10-33' Black silt & sand Drilling Fluid Quick Gel Type of Rig Mobile B-61 33-36' Grey med sand Health and Safety Plan Submitted? 0yes fNo 36-54' Grey clay Level of Protection used on site (circle one) None C B A 54-80' Green & black sand I certify that I have constructed the above referenced well in accordancewith all wellpenrit requiremen7ts and applicable State rules and regulations.
| |
| Drilling Company C T & E ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Well Driller (Print) Marc Hauge Driller's Signature ___ _
| |
| .gistration No. J23173 Date 6 l&/a)J 3550 ORIGINAL: DEP COPIES: DRILLER O WNER HEALTTH DEPARTMENT
| |
| | |
| 3400006993 -
| |
| MONITORINGW = eRECOR) Ada Sbeet Cot OWNER DENTICATON S&G Seavices Cop 3401635 AddreSS 80 ParkPlaa city Newai* Statt NOW kis-ev Zip Code 07102 LL OCATION - If not the same as owner please give address 0%wnees Wel No. -ZD(Wd V) k.eui--s4 kbunty SaleM Municipality LowerAfOw*YTwPy Lnt Na 4.01 BlN&wQ 26 Address Adlicid Wand C0i aWn&a wade
| |
| * ifl IOq WELL USE! Wzito DATE WELL START=D W/s3 DATE WELL COMPLETED 6/2/03 WNE CONSIRUCTION f Note: Measure all dep4 ifD "'thtO H ed0~ Diasn~er I Wz~t~atiag1 ToW Depth Drilled so fL from laud urfac ToP() BOUtm (fI) 1 (Inchs)l h )
| |
| Finished Welllu pth 80 fh Single/luer Cag +; ._r2 W _Ialo WC Borehole Diameter To~100 i m.
| |
| [ Middle Cusing (for tricp1 eased ells only)-
| |
| Top Bottom Well wu fiished above grade in 6 in m.
| |
| L Oue=
| |
| (largest dimete)
| |
| Open Hole or Stero 53 IL 11=1 I ush xoNmttd wo. Used .010 ) II -- 2so PVC [=ci lffinid above vm&e, casing beig1t Blank COSings _
| |
| ('ll~~Pideeft_ fL (No. Used IL Std ptotective casing installed?
| |
| DIY.yes Q Omaet Pack j 67 8o 6 _im1 I 350T It S~tac WatesLevafl er drilling 16 ft. Don 531674_ 53/67 WatWLevel Grout 10 - -1 314Wb -Ibm dWaMaasred Using )sope Gmfigu, n I was doavelop for 1 hours
| |
| '-3 Spm GEOLOGIC LOG Mdetbodutfdavelopwiuit pump
| |
| ?;ofte ehdp&vhC4Wa~s,aI"'nkai coesoildad ftwum Pump Capacity S gpm Pump Type S&fbmemiblc P= 0-1w FM 10-33'Blac silt & nd Drilli]Fd QliidGj Tpe ofig Mobile B61 33,361 gne med send Hcallh and Sa Plan SubMoitd? 0ayes QNo 36-54Grey day '
| |
| Levl Of Pr umd On site (iclcon) None C B A 54.Gree & blok U.d I cefl~ thag I have cornlnwctd tht above referenced well in morw all weUpennrtreqgrirementsandppicabe rules and reguladntm Drllg Company Wel Dziles (Prt) Mac Rauge .___. HEL. I.?~li?
| |
| Dritler's Signature _ _ __ __
| |
| RegsraonNo. p2 173 Date 6,iA 1(X) 3550
| |
| ('""IAL: DE? COPIES- DRILLER OWNE:R HEAL T DEA R73dM
| |
| | |
| Bureau of Water Allocation 3400006999 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates OWNER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G Services Corp 3401635 A #ress 80 Park Place
| |
| ,. Newark State New Jersev Zip Code 07102 WELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address Owner's Well No. GM-4 (Well W)
| |
| County Salem Municipality Lower Alloway Twp. _ LotNo. 4.01 BlockNo. 26 Address Artificial Island WELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED 6/2/03 DATE WELL COMPLETED 6/3/03 WELL CONSTRUCTION Note: Measure all depths lel ah to Depth to Diameter Material Wgt./Rating Total Depth Drilled 35 ft. from land surface To? i(ft.) Bottom (ft.) (inches) l (lbs/sch no.)
| |
| Finished Well Depth Borehole Diameter:
| |
| 35 ft. l Single/Inner Casing Middle Casing
| |
| : 2. 5 i2=l 25] PVC 11sch40 Top gin m. l (for triple cased wells only)
| |
| Outer Casing Bottom 8in M. (largest diameter)
| |
| [
| |
| Well was finished: Mabove grade
| |
| []flush mounted If finished above grade, casing height Open Hole or Screen
| |
| [(No. Used .010 Blank Casings
| |
| ) ~5
| |
| ~ I~ 2 1 PVC sh0 (stick up) above land surface 2.5 ft. (No. Used )
| |
| l Tail Piee l Steel protective casing installed? T P l3 35 }l 8 #1 well gravel ll 450lbs Yes Gravel Pack if if 1 4UUI 1b
| |
| "-Fantic Water Level after drilling 8 ft. Grout 0 23 8 J]Cement/bentonite l 10 lbs j Water Level was Measured Using Tape Grouting Method Trentie Well was developed for 1/2 hours Drilling Method HSA at 2 gpm GEOLOGIC LOG Method of development Pump Note each depth where water was encountered in consolidated formations Pump Capacity 5 gpm Pump Type Submersible Pump 0-10' Fill 10-33' Black silt and sand Drilling Fluid - ---- Type of Rig Mobile B-61 33-35' Grey sand Health and Safety Plan Submitted? M0Yes QNo Level of Protection used on site (circle one) None © C B A I certify that I have constructed the above referenced well in accordance with all wellperntit requirements anad applicableState rules and regulations.
| |
| Drilling Company C T & E ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Well Driller (Print) Marc Hauge Driller's Signature _ _ __ _
| |
| -istration No. J23 173 Date C a lZ-/ 03 3550 ORIGINAL: DEP COPIES: DRILLER 0 KIINER HEAL TH DEPARTMENT
| |
| | |
| 340Q006999 MONmagIUNG WELL RECORD A, S fef OWNEMENTICAION PSE&GServcesCogR_ 3401635 Addren SD Pla*Pce city Newat Stct New JeLse Zip Code 07102 . . =
| |
| It1 LOCATION -If not the same as owner please give addrow ownessWeIiNo. Gm(4 (weIW) e-Ui5e6(
| |
| ,junty Salem Municipality Lower AfloW Twp. Lot No. 4.01 Ble& No. 26 AddrsS Aicl I 01,-aiwe LattLb4EoL-WZLLlJSE _ouho - _ DATE WELL STAkTEID 6.m3 _
| |
| 10'AT WELL COMPLETED P 33 9;ii - _-_
| |
| wAML CONSTRUCTION from hasd surface Botom (f) (incecs) (och no-)
| |
| _ _F ToWl Depth Dtilled 35 ft.
| |
| Finished Well Depth 35 ft. Single/lanerCasuin 2l _2 PVC 40 Borehoe Dianwt Middlk Casing 3 Top gjn m-06ter CanshigIl Bottom ain bc (lagestdimear). _It Well was finishbed.bove grade Opent Hole or S 0flush mottd if fiiied abovex Blanic CasingsI 1 (stick vp) abo" l¢d gde. casing height (No.Used ) 11___ ___ L__
| |
| - [1 Tail Pi=:
| |
| i i
| |
| - __ j _
| |
| Steel protective casing insted? _ __
| |
| 4YWes 8N*
| |
| StsfticWWa 1.cLvela~ficrdhillf S &t [ Grout 23 J WarLevl sstze g Tape
| |
| -1wa develped for 1i2 hoom Dril-~&
| |
| 1edhd SA 9-w SEOLOGIC LOG Moddevdconea tentPump PUmp Capeity S Spml PUMPp Typ Sbn bLPu- p 10-33' Blacsik anM d Driling Fluid ~ T~- lYPe Of Mg1 Mobile B-61 33-35' Grtry Mad Health and WAt~Y Pbus Sutnailed? elyes QDO Lewi HCPt nisei Qa skteq(cqrc) None 0 C B A I certtt I1hav constrcewd the abo&v refarencedwell in acmordiewith al wellpermitredwremeuts edappfic*6k Statf IW E E L HD P R W N rnks and _eatom Drilling C =wapa jreT_ B ~ Y RO 1~ AL SERtVIC wenl Diflw MPint) MMO Hlazug Dzidll sSiguS~t _ _ _ __,_ _ _ _ _ _
| |
| tgisrtiQon No. 231° Daze £ I 03 3550 OWW&NAL: DEP COP)V DRILLER OWERs HZL7rDPArA2
| |
| | |
| New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Well Permit Number Bureau of Water Allocation 3400007078 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates OWNER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G SERVICES CORP 3401635
| |
| .ress 80 PARK PLACE City Newark State lew Jersey Zip Code 07102 WELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address Owl ier's Well No. ,
| |
| County Salem Municipality Lower Alloways Creek I,ot No. 4.01 Block No. 26 Address ARTIFICIAL ISLAND SALEM GENERATING STATION WELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED L 3 DATE WELL COMPLETED / 7 3 WELL CONSTRUCTION Note: Measure all depths e pth to Depth to Diameter Material l Wgt./Rating from land surface I To p Bottom (ft.) j (inches) _ _ l (lbs/sch no.)
| |
| Total Depth Drilled n ft.
| |
| Single/Iner Casing Finished Well Depth _5- / ft.
| |
| Middle Casing Borehole Diameter: l {frs in -- -- 1cernnv
| |
| -hell Top Ca in. Outer Casing Bottom - in. ( (largest diameter)
| |
| Well was finished: 0above grade Open Hole or Screen Lflush mounted {(No. Used ) it _ _ = I 1 . . _ _ _ _ _ _
| |
| If finished above grade, casing height ( Blank U Casings (stick up) above land surface
| |
| ,el protective casing installed?
| |
| Use Tail Piece Gravel Pack
| |
| )1 7 3? 9- it entonite ___
| |
| Yes No Grout -c 1l l - l Nat Cement ll___ lbs Static Water Level after drillingijjj ft. -
| |
| t' lS 1l 1 N entonite IL as X lbs Water Level was Measured Using pv - Se c Grouting Method .7 A e /, t.
| |
| Well was developed for i hours Drilling Method /7. .I' at gpm GEOLOGIC LOG Method of development ,; L *' 1 i/ L-Note each depth where water was encountered in consolidated Pump Capacity (a gpm formations Pump Type O LA,/ P D /'Ad Drilling Fluid L
| |
| __TypeofRig _ _2_
| |
| Health and Safety Plan Submitted? a.Yes ONo q(5 Li-.--tig a 5/," t Level of Protection used on site (circle one) None CD) C B A 5IL! ~i /V (2 I certify that I have constructedthe above referenced well in ..
| |
| accordancewith all well permit requirementsand applicableState rules and regulations.
| |
| Drilling Company A C SCHULTES INC Well Driller (Print) ( (-{ pI s at, A 6 i- A/
| |
| iller's Signature c I,. . (:
| |
| Registration No. 11,1 - Date /"L/) /c/'
| |
| ORIGINAL: DEP COPIES: DRILLER OWNER HEAL TH DEPAR TMENT
| |
| | |
| New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Well Permit Number Bureau of Water Allocation 3400007079 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates r -'NER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G SERVICES CORP 3401635
| |
| _-_ess 80 PARK PLACE City Newark State New Jersey Zip Code 07102 WELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address Owl ier's Well No. _ z County Salem Municipality Lower Alloways Creek ILot No. 4.01 Block No. 26 Address ARTIFICIAL ISLAND SALEM GENERATING STATION WELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED / C' i DATE WELL COMPLETED /C /71C E / )A r _ r-
| |
| .. or. __
| |
| WELL CONSTRUCTION l Note: Measure all depths Deedh toII -- Depth to Diameter Material Wgt./Rating p (ft.) Bottom (ft.) (inches) (lbs/sch no.)
| |
| Total Depth Drilled from land surface Finished Well Depth ,
| |
| ft. (I I Single/lmrr Casing_
| |
| rc 0l 7, l s I !1L <. llE CC'::
| |
| Borehole Diameter:
| |
| Top in.
| |
| Middle Casing (for triple cased wells only)
| |
| Outer Casing XI 1=1 11 X1 11 -1X Bottom 6 in. (largest diameter)
| |
| Well was finished: Sabove grade Open Hole or Screen v (No. Used)i.
| |
| []flush mounted 1,_(No._Used _;_____
| |
| If finished above grade, casing height (No. Used ) l (stick up) above land surface ft. (1. Pie l Tail Piece I
| |
| -l protective casing installed? l Gravel Pack 11 I1 11 :: 11
| |
| '-Yes a No Grouav _. , ~Neat Cement l b Static Water Level after drilling /(7 ft. (J)> y ,~ Bentonite 1Ot b Water Level was Measured Using - Grouting Method is Q e rn ,7/k ! _'
| |
| Well was developed for hours Drilling Method , / mA at - gpm GEOLOGIC LOG Method of development . i /Y Pj VC Note each depth where water was encountered in consolidated Pump Capacity (G gpm formations Pump Type (u-6,A,
| |
| ) iCat Drilling Fluid x/71 Type of Rig / & E/E -2)
| |
| Health and Safety Plan Submitted? E[Yes ONo iC- i ' j\_;"'i CS/a/ SAdA- t Level of Protection used on site (circle one) None GDj C B A il-C, . ' i7C-t~~? S/1-7woes/ sags '
| |
| I certify that I have constructedthe above referenced well in 35-T.7.J' ,-T (rate.s accordance with all well permit requirements and applicableState rules andregulations.
| |
| -Isl,)
| |
| s 7-vl /9I Drilling Company A C SCHULTES INC Well Driller (Print) CA-i fZ.ti X4 4 Ata '
| |
| 1 criller's Signature L Registration No. ,OA Date /) /3 /"y A-tc ORIGINAL: DEP COPIES: DRILLER OWNER HEAL THDEPARTMENT
| |
| | |
| New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Well Permit Number Bureau of Water Allocation 3400007080 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates OWNER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G SERVICES CORP 3401635 Less 80 PARK PLACE City Newark State NNew Jersey Zip Code 07102 WELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address Owner's Well No._ AAl County Salem Municipality Lower Alloways Creek Lot No. 4.01 Block No. 26 Address ARTIFICIAL ISLAND SALEM GENERATING STATION WELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED eA--i3 DATE WELL COMPLETED /U _ 03 WELL CONSTRUCTION f Note: Measure all depths iD epth to 1 Depth to. Diameter Material 11Wgt.lRating Total Depth Drilled D ft. from land surface IL
| |
| 'p (ft.) IBottom (ft.) I(inches) ll l (lbs/sch no.)
| |
| Single/nnr Casing Finished Well Depth Q ft. C L ____- 1 9- p' L ll1fC, Borehle Dametr:
| |
| Borehole Diameter: £(for r Middle Casing triple cased wells only)
| |
| Top In. Outer Casing Bottom C in. (largest diameter)
| |
| Well was finished: Mabove grade O flush mounted f Open Hole or Screen (No. Used i NC [zc-. I11 n-ittv 1tL;zAl If finished above grade, casing height Blank Casings (stick up) above land surface b-/ (No U 1__ _ _.- __ _ _ 11 C__11
| |
| __ __ _ __________ 1___ I Tail Piece
| |
| .l protective casing installed? Gravel Pack Jo-.
| |
| M Yes ONo Grout . lf ,Neat lbs Static Water Level after drillingrf ft. () [W L.1 [ (C' (BentoniteCement f ilbs Water Level was Measured Using ,'X-*_ a 't Grouting Method X rn &- r-<e Well was developed for / hours Drilling Method at - gpm GEOLOGIC LOG Method of development .. Ok y Note each depth where water was encountered in consolidated Pump Capacity & gpm formations Pump Type As , M ct A,(
| |
| Drilling Fluid ,A, /A Type of Rig C A t=-.
| |
| 7-- /5-, 7A/W-+/-
| |
| Health and Safety Plan Submitted? E.Yes [No X;/L7 v~ S sq/L- r Level of Protection used on site (circle one) None C} C B A i A-<2L~~~o F- rn :- S/xD I certify that I have constructedthe above referenced well in .5 6' Y _-S/&ti7 54A accordancewith all well permit requirementsand applicableState TV/ .5L-7-CD Lo- -Y' r-r7 rules and regulations.
| |
| Drilling Company A C SCHULTES INC Well Driller (Print) C FlP.
| |
| Qyi( A Lee A/
| |
| .:iller's Signature , 4Aar @
| |
| Registration No met / 5-!. Date / /C0/)
| |
| C CV'(
| |
| ORIGINAL: DEP COPIES: DRILLER OWNER HEALTH DEPARTMENVT
| |
| | |
| *# - 4 _44MR1V S-ahA43%
| |
| Bureau of Water Alkcation 34000M078 MONTORING NVEL RECORD Alas Shee Comda OWNER IDENTCATION PSE&O SMVICES CORP 3401635 Address 80 PARK PLACE
| |
| ;ty Nwaik St:te New Jersey ZipCode 07102
| |
| '-WELL LOCATION - If Not tbe same as owner plemse give addres Owwes Wei I NO. _ AI4 t ej Cunmty Salem Municipalit Lower Aloways Cree Lot No. 4-X1 BlO&No 26 Addrcss ARTIICIAL ISLAND SALEM G IRATMNG STAION _
| |
| WaxJ USE Mitoring DATE S DATE WUJ. ( CDMPLE j}- @-O3 W l CONSRuCTION Note..MMa al depths Dcpth to DeihV D!iantr ii Mteil DWgr-tn Total Dhi & &
| |
| t I _orom lT(d _ _(-t Finishod Well Depth 3 C RSis_ Caiu _4 hole D _l(foris casod waes oly)
| |
| Top I_ Stoft 1-C3 Well ws finishe& V Opcz Holc ar Scn (stick t) f e Used l ILo 36
| |
| =>= KLrvc ls_____
| |
| Iffinished aboW de,casngheight (sb. up) above land sur&acef6 iT__ -
| |
| No.Used1 Tl 1i _ 11_ -I
| |
| ,,prtcvcasing instaled? I___________Q erA
| |
| - Biimft WtaterLevelafterdiigj iL ______ ______>
| |
| _ctaz I lbsB VW Lxve was Measured Usiu A-sL le Grmvbg Method - en t-%re I .e wasndevelpe for /ho DrilngMethod - _ -
| |
| at *Wpm' GEOLD=LC G Method of devlopmn f . fA; -
| |
| Pump Cpy _ _ _
| |
| PMPType Cp9 UAC. L~
| |
| DMing Fluild , I Type ofR C j-n - 5 _
| |
| Healt and Saft Pla Suitted? UYes 75' meo . AA, oA<e-EDNo Level of Protecdn usedonsite (circleone) None ) C B A I cf tfiy thI hawv corzidedtze above rqfereiiedwel in U4 4sf-acordance with aU witpermit requebwza and applicabl State //
| |
| ,r and rvwutmi Drilling Compsoz A C SCHULTES INC Wc11 Driller (Print) C 44 A N i A g epu /
| |
| Drllaes Signie RegishiationNo. mnw/ Is4- c Da I/d 3 f)
| |
| T>ap~L9 -'
| |
| ¢,GI,4- DEP COPMMS DRILER . OWNER HgEAMID2EPAUM
| |
| | |
| New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Well Permit Number Bureau of Water Allocation 3400007081 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates O"NER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G SERVICES CORP 3401635 A ._ss 80 PARK PLACE City Newark State New Jersey _ Zip Code 07102 WELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address Owl ier's Well No. A?.
| |
| County Salem Municipality Lower Alloways Creek I,ot No. 4.01 Block No. 26 Address ARTIFICIAL ISLAND SALEM GENERATING STATION WELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED / (fi - - - )
| |
| DATE WELL COMPLETED l--C 3 WELL CONSTRUCTION Note: Measure all depths lf Depth to ll Depth to 1 Diameter Material Wgt/Ratingl from land surface Top (ft.) Bottom (ft.) (inches) (lbs/sch no.)
| |
| Total Depth Drilled Finished Well Depth ft.
| |
| ft.
| |
| lSingleflnr Casing ll9 \; [ I'm '' < L.yi2..l Middle Casing l Borehole Diameter:
| |
| (for triple cased wells only)l Top C in. Outer Casing i Bottom Well was finished: Eabove grade 0 flush mounted in. (largest diameter)
| |
| Open Hole or Screen (No.UVsed )
| |
| [34.>
| |
| _ F l _
| |
| [-W~
| |
| _ I It.
| |
| ll. [1 a ? _____ll___
| |
| - l If finished above grade, casing height al(No.
| |
| l Used B lank C asings ) i [l__ _ __ _
| |
| ll __ __ _ __ _ It __ __ __ _
| |
| ll _ _ _ _ _ _ __I _ _ _ _ I__
| |
| (stick up) above land surface ft.
| |
| Tail Piece _ _ _ _ l___ _ __ l I protective casing installed?
| |
| Gravel Pack l 2f i ll J it & I( .e.'~ ![ - !
| |
| 'IZ'Yes ONo Grout i- Neat Cement [_ lbss}
| |
| Static Water Level after drilling ft. ___________ ll Chi .7k(-C' [ G- j Bentonite ll l bs Water Level was Measured Using t:,, I- Grouting Method Well was developed for hours Drilling Method I-' S; ./)
| |
| at ? gpm GEOLOGIC LOG Method of development v > 1.' & Note each depth where water was encountered in consolidated Pump Capacity _ gpm formations Pump Type I- /2 jA/?,,^ ao ,q Drilling Fluid Type of Rig C sh r- 75 Health and Safety Plan Submitted? Byes [No /4_17 , - mC 7,1/v g Level of Protection used on site (circle one) None C) C B A I certify that I have constructedthe above referencedwell in accordancewith all well permit requirements and applicable State rules and regulations. 7 -- 6-Aairs,-itan Drilling Company A C SCHULTES INC Well Driller (Print) ' 14 (5' V en fA\ 7'-'
| |
| iller's Signature 6 u /72,,,
| |
| Registration No. F - i ' By Da8 /J Dfe I 3 L ° i3 Dk 1 Y'0CreI C: f ORIGINAL: DEP COPIES: DRILLER OWNER HEALTH DEPARTMENT
| |
| | |
| Bureau of WAt Allocaion 3400007081 MONTOMG WELL RECOJD !A-A ShetCordinats OWER DRNTMCATION PSE&G SERVICES CORP 3401635 Addt= 80 PAIM PLACE_
| |
| -4v Newark Sme New Jeiey Zip Code 07102
| |
| ;-7 AJ.II "el I L ATION - If o the =ne as owner plase give addres Owner'sWelNo. . AOJ t I LI' Countmy Salm Muricipy Lowc AIbways Leek t No. 4.01 Bbd c No. 26 Addess ARTfICLAL ISLAND SALEM GENERATING STATION / ,
| |
| RATEa WELL USE Mosh _ DATE V W~SFrD j0 03 D>ATEZ v yELL START= Z f- - 3 WlEL CONSrRUCnON Notwe Measu all dept to BX Mamm Dt I al
| |
| ,t Lad SU&SOce TpL (inche)__ WSD.
| |
| Tot Depth Tiled f&
| |
| Finish Wea Depth ft Borehole Diame=
| |
| Top ____ in tipe"SWw Ima L r Botto iKL Well was fnishld: above D~ade TsE.i.ic
| |
| ...... _ . _ . . _ ,.I _ _ _ _
| |
| Elfusib mountd If finished above grade, casig height (stick up) above laud smface I
| |
| (No Usi~oed[1 r<o~t JL -I111 --
| |
| 1 .i SONel ptoective casing installed?
| |
| MYes QNo Stadc Wat Level after drilling f (
| |
| terLevelwasNMeasured Usin tR
| |
| ^-St ;9 /ta FoI I[lc J l Gfod
| |
| -,well Wus deaveloped for ,5_ hour DriffkMethod H .S'A at? gpm GWOLOGJCILOG Metbod of developimn _ ,;, 1t & No a2 diep& wb eUm end i oaumbol PumpCy Wm PumpType TR-eofot MF-C 7 4- ^OAA-/I DrilngFluid /4 ~ Typeofw Ci th __ , S6 Health and Safety Plan Subifuted? ESYes []NO Lvel ofProtctiom msd on site (cele *oe) None 6 C B
| |
| -fr~og S A
| |
| SA4-z I cerif du I have comnaedthe abe ref d wew in accordawcewth al wedl pvmk reZrnmzfart andappliccble State Dilig Compay A C SCHUL'TES INC wenl D~riMr()kt Ct R lR (-.A 1 4 I-Driud Signaa= -~o (e _. -. = W. 4 ReostrafNo. 1h i0 - /~J-_4 IDl /,~1 O
| |
| )/
| |
| , 9,,q U
| |
| ,_,,GINAL:DEP COPIS DRILER OWNE7R NEWNvDMIR71N
| |
| | |
| New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Well Permit Number Bureau of Water Allocation 3400007082 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates
| |
| `'xNER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G SERVICES CORP 3401635 Guess 80 PARK PLACE City Newark State I'4ew Jersey Zip Code 07102 WELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address Owner's Well No._ B C County Salem Municipality Lower Alloways Creek Lot No. 4.01 Block No. 26 Address ARTIFICIAL ISLAND SALEM GENERATING STATION WELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED T I?-1 DATE WELL COMPLETED / 6; - .Y c -
| |
| WELL CONSTRUCTION Note: Measure all depths lDepth to Depth to I Diarneter Material 1Wgt./Rating1 from land surface Top (f)Bottom (ft.) (inches) (lbs/sch no.)
| |
| Total Depth Drilled Finished Well Depth Xj ft.
| |
| f.
| |
| t+
| |
| f Singleffft~rCasing 4..<L 14 11 [
| |
| 11 V 1 aim; Borehole Diameter:
| |
| Middle Casing 1 1l (for triple cased wells only) l l l Top ( in. Outer Casing l Bottom - in. l (largest diaxneter)lll Open Hole or Screen il l l ,__
| |
| Well was finished: jabove grade flush mounted (No. Used j ))c'v . K l lf.11
| |
| [
| |
| a l Blank Casings if finished above grade, casing height (stick up) above land surface . . ft (No Used l
| |
| ll _ ll il
| |
| __ __ _ l
| |
| ,l protective casing installed?
| |
| Tail Piece l _ _ ll _l il _
| |
| Gravel Pack ] l Ho. l ll P-.i 1 / c Ift2 l
| |
| `1 Yes CNo lGrout if f if , fp Neat Cement il ll lbs 1 Static Water Level after drilling 5 ft. l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Il _ _ _ _ _ Lli__ IX ll In Bentonite ll l Water Level was Measured Using r-- s; ^ Grouting Method ") e,^A 11 ! i Well was developed for / hours Drilling Method at - gpm GEOLOGIC LOG Method of development -3/4 , b-Note each depth where water was encountered in consolidated Pump Capacity L gpm formations Pump Type -V . S L/'1,5 lC)-/-4, }M- ,4- ,- dAl Drilling Fluid _ _ _ Type of Rig C Er Iy -?A Health and Safety Plan Submitted? 1Yes []No Level of Protection used on site (circle one) None 0 C B A /AI-e S, 42.,l I/,- ?- ' =-M 0 :zAvaied -As-,j AI l .__ l~
| |
| l 1Pr ,AA6 -S4, l-4 I certify that I have constructedthe above referencedwell in accordancewith all well permit requirements and applicableState rules and regulations.
| |
| Drilling Company A C SCHULTES INC Well Driller (Print) C- f At j.5 iAa- Q4 / V iller's Signature > , AL-1 -
| |
| Registration No. /7/9 15-- ' Date ,/.1 3 / af)
| |
| -- I)- Ct ORIGINAL: DEP COPIES: DRILLER OWNER HEALT7H DEPART8MEN/T
| |
| | |
| Bureau of Water Allocation 3400007082 MONITORiNG WELLB EQO1I. AtbS ShetCoordinaus OWN= DENTICATnON PSE&G SERVICES CORP 3401635 Add? 80 PARK PLACE r- -.
| |
| UnoLL Cou*
| |
| Newik Stat.
| |
| CATION - If not the sam as owner please ie address Salem Muialty Lower Aelonys Cr*
| |
| New Jersey r's Wel No.
| |
| eNo.
| |
| -qVCoe Blo* No.
| |
| 010 ,
| |
| 26 J,i's ej 4_0 I Adess ARFICIAL ISLAND SALEM GENERATNG STATION WZI.L USE Monakoing DATE IT W~LSTAXE i/-3?
| |
| DATE N I 1~7 11 w V4U CONSTRUCnON jot= Me aU*p anre 1tNpjnto i+/-wo~II , ;D _e _ _
| |
| TOal Depth Dried ci IL R _ _
| |
| Finished Well Deth? &. alinCaang Borehole Diamneer. Middl.aeig Iiii TOPfo _ _in. 0awlup imiw) I Wel Ws fiAbed: ove Vnorle Scrm I(N QoU9W f )_1 _ o__ I D l______ I__ a' I proreedve cgad¢=sigiu~nled2h j~xo
| |
| ~~ i Ij Tanl MMc ~ Iiiigs) JkL~w_
| |
| 49t-Neatcem n 1P Yes Sti wodriingi v Level was Meased Using )n -ic^
| |
| ft QtvW PA
| |
| _aftr_ _ __ I- ;FFFI en 55-af
| |
| - Grouti-g Mechod I~~~ -t2~zt
| |
| 'ii was dveloped for b os Driing Method _AQSAJ4 at r PM GEOLOGIC LOG Method ofdevelopment I -- L t, Pwnp Capy P=VpTYPe LWPiAA-e, SV6 SAA-O nnln Fluid e1 TypeofRig Crik*-72 Health and Safety Plan Submiftod? YZes ONo Level ofPotection used on shte (krcl one) None ( C B A A- A-M e
| |
| . - I-£SIJ I en,#, rhcrIkham corwaucrddt cbove refer end W ll lin accwancewl of wdl pamit requowments md qfpicaM .1nte ntzdd andregdatg Drillieg Company A C SCHUL7BS INC Wel Driler(Print) CAf PU iL'i4 PAM Drilleesz Sgnature 4 -
| |
| Regsrtion No. ,- 54tCs Date 4Lt3/I t ;NMA DE t JIJV1f DEP COPUS: OAILL OWNERL R~FUMDEPARZ4EN
| |
| | |
| New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Well Permit Number Bureau of Water Allocation 3400007083 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates OW"NER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G SERVICES CORP 3401635
| |
| , .ess 80 PARK PLACE City Newark State Ilew Jersey Zip Code 07102 WELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address Owl ier's Well No. Fo D County Salem Municipality Lower Alloways Creek ILot No. 4.01 Block No. 26 Address ARTIFICIAL ISLAND SALEM GENERATING STATION WELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED i DATE WELL COMPLETED /,/(YI WELL CONSTRUCTION [ Note: Measure all depths i5 Ipthtol Depth to ll Diameter l Material ll Wgt./Rating`l
| |
| ., - ~from land surface lT p(ft.) llBottom (ft.) (inches) ll ll (lbs/sch no.)
| |
| Total Depth Drilled -fm f.
| |
| ft d a Finished Well Depth - ) ft. Ci Borehole Diameter: Middle Casing i Top ________ in. (for triple cased wells only)
| |
| Outer Casing Bottom .) in. (largest diameter)
| |
| Well was finished: Eabove grade Open Hole or Screen ir E flush mounted (N. U / S I.zNa i1 C I1 ' Le t 11 C I If finished above grade, casing height ( Blank Casings (stick up) above land surface j ft.Used I Tail Piece
| |
| -I protective casing installed? Gravel Pack [7
| |
| )4 Yes a No Grout i . Neat Cement (l
| |
| ]
| |
| ____bs Static Water Level after drilling ( ft. -____ (_;
| |
| I[ .. !I Bentonite .L *Ibs Si....
| |
| Water Level was Measured Using ;'r - Grouting Method 7' : A,2rL I'v . (-
| |
| Well was developed for . hours Drilling Method 11 -' .d~
| |
| at d~ gpm Method of development is (' rM, ' >-
| |
| GEOLOGIC LOG Note each depth where water was encountered in consolidated Pump Capacity _ gpm formations Pump Type (- :'IV
| |
| / p, -n a *H
| |
| ! '- 7d '1 /
| |
| Drilling Fluid Az Type of Rig Cr g- 2 Health and Safety Plan Submitted?9.aYes ONo Level of Protection used on site (circle one) None C B A
| |
| ~~~JA
| |
| ~
| |
| K~L-*'#~ ~ ~-v- s 47 I certify that I have constructed the above referenced well in accordance with all well permit requirementsand applicableState rules and regulations.
| |
| Drilling Company A C SCHULTES INC __ _ _
| |
| Well Driller (Print) ( t- z IS i>/ A ,. et-iller's Signature 6 & // / Ad A Registration No. /1'1i9- (3 SAC Date / /3 C9I
| |
| ,C'3 ok-c Iiq -'
| |
| ORIGINAL: DEP COPIES: DRILLER OWNER HEALTH DEPARTMENT
| |
| | |
| Bureau of Water Allocation 3400007083 MONirORNG WELL RECORD -Atlas ShetCooliues OWNER IDENTMCICAKON PSE&O SERVICES CORP 3401635 Address 80 PARK PLACE V..m, . qq4 N 4'. Ycw Jersey 'ZipCOde 07102_
| |
| 'vU.D LOCATION - If not the same s owner plase give addrm.. OWn Be$sWelno.lAh o/Cse)J Couaty Salem Muicipality Lower Alloways Crck LatNo. 4.01 BklckNo- 26 Address AXFCL ISLAND SALEM GENERATING STATION /," ,
| |
| WELLMUSE Mon2 oig WELL STA iz DATE ' WEL COOMP ED n/
| |
| WLL CONSTRUCniON Note Mesurc aRft d to Dinma-- WOJRafg ftm bnd suraceT (nt) (L h no-)
| |
| Total DP Drled £ . - ., .I ;_. .,_ ; -_ .
| |
| Finished WelI Depft Borehole Dimamwe Top f in.
| |
| (fioer4ikno) II __
| |
| WeG was finished: Xabove gae Ifuib mounted (No.tUscd j ) I' i I If finshed above gade, ca-n beit (stick up) cabe land surface A.tz.
| |
| Used se1d11 1 1'___ _1 Steel protecive cas=ing distall?
| |
| P Yes l3 No StatcWater=LwlafterdnlIi4_E &t I--iBenwnim I Level was Measured Using M Gotkg Method --- 0 ~ee as: v
| |
| *CI was developed for bours DIlinf Maetod GEOLC LOG Method ofdevelopment :P(/ P/,4 NOW cwh dep& WIWVMsinCQi idn Pulmp Cvaci:W -OgM PumnpType Icl~A Sf~ 0 -Il ' F-^ #vo -,-0 DrifgFhid TypeofRig CrMA--? s Healh and Safety Plan Svbnited?,Yes ENo Level of Proection used on sie (circlceo) None ( C B A I Cen* &W Ihave const ctd die above rvfer wwcdweHf in l s*-3' .t'-r &rtzv V-ex scry_ S Xw 7' accwrd e with ai wel permit requdremews and applicableStat Driling Compeny A C SCEITS INC WeD Driiler (Pht) Cfff ik &( /,t ge ->
| |
| Drileft Sipature 6sCVz l'- 7 -
| |
| Rq&Wtdw No. M - ( - / r
| |
| ~ALP0114 Q ()l-3
| |
| : t. N DJVA:ZEP COPLM- DRLLER 01*72 HELTRD"AIUN
| |
| | |
| New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Well Permit Number Bureau of Water Allocation 3400007084 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates
| |
| (""NER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G CORP. 3403535 A_. ess 80 PARK PLACE City Newark State New Jersey Zip Code 07102
| |
| .A IS\
| |
| WELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address Ow mner's Well No. I' & ( , A, _ ,7)
| |
| County Salem Municipality Lower Alloways Creek Lot No. 4.01 Block No. 26 Address ARTIFICAL ISLAND SALEM GENERATING STATION WELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED /1 S.' 3 DATE WELL COMPLETED j/ Ac.
| |
| WELL CONSTRUCTION Total Depth Drilled 92 v- ft Note: Measure all depths from land surface i pth to 1D eptWto 1 Viai5t ie
| |
| )p (ft.) Bottom (ft.) 11(inches) _
| |
| Matenal
| |
| _ ((lbs/sch 1Wgt./Ratngi no.)
| |
| Single/fter casing _
| |
| Finished Well Depth 3-7 ft. n Casing lde Borehole Diameter: (for triple cased wells only)
| |
| Top in. Outer Casing Bottom g in. (largest diameter)
| |
| Well was finished: E above grade open Ho e or screen (No. Used <'u )li
| |
| [flush mounted If finished above grade, casing height (stick up) above land surface I I" ft.
| |
| - I oBlak Used Tail Piecel
| |
| _AI
| |
| __7 I_ _1 el protective casing installed? ravel Packe 11_ 11__ 11' /U 11?~
| |
| 13I Yes QNo [ ravlPak 1 INeat C1ement l FFsi Static Water Level after drilling ft. ;L'Bentonite l lfbs Water Level was Measured Using rn-acspc Grouting Method . "- (' to l .'ag tA, Well was developed for / hours Drilling Method ''I bi ' '- /I at I gpm GEOLOGIC LOG Method of development . , ? ,//2 Note each depth where water was encountered in consolidated formations Pump Capacity _ gpm Pump Type C- p 0t S'oG f Drilling Fluid
| |
| * l Type of Rig C.yr I e-2-p Health and Safety Plan ubmitted? Q Yes ,MNo of 7 Or-1-Cit4 IVw e *S-1,-,
| |
| Level of Protection used on site (circle one) None 0 C B A
| |
| /7 s? J w4 I certify that I have constructedthe above referenced well in accordancewith all well permit requirementsand applicableState rules and regulations.
| |
| Drilling Company A C SCHULTES INC Well Driller (Print) (If . S v y ..
| |
| riller's Signature 1 Registration No. jh'e - bate 7 / 13/ c-,
| |
| IX ~ ' t) Cal'4' ORIGINAL: DEP COPIES: DRILLER OWNER HEALTH DEPARTMENT
| |
| | |
| New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Well Permit Number I Bureau of Water Allocation 3400007085 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates OWNER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G CORP. 3403535 ess 80 PARK PLACE City Newark State New Jersey Zip Code 07102 WELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address Omt'ner's Well No.
| |
| County Salem Municipality Lower Alloways Creek Lot No. 4.01 Block No. 26 Address ARTIFICAL ISLAND SALEM GENERATING STATION WELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED / CJX 6( 3 DATE WELL COMPLETED /C/ 3 iFtoOep1itoW I 1Dp t WELL CONSTRUCTION Note: Measure all depths from land surface Top (ft.) Bottom (ft.) J(iniarneter Ii ches) Material IWgt.Kating (lbs/sch no.)
| |
| Total Depth Drilled Finished Well Depth f ft.
| |
| ft.
| |
| J ingle/nnert asing ;)-.a illl J 'v-p _____A__l+0 Middle asing Borehole Diameter: (for triple cased wells only)
| |
| Top (. in. Uuter c asing Bottom C in. (largest d iaeter)
| |
| Well was finished: }above grade ( l)pen-lie or Screen
| |
| []flush mounted If finished above grade, casing height (stick up) above land surface
| |
| * y/ ft.
| |
| [ I(No.
| |
| (No.
| |
| Used k Casings _ _ _ _
| |
| {
| |
| l (1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ f _ _
| |
| t Tail Piece 11 11_ 1 11 11 el protective casing installed?
| |
| ]j M Yes QNo Static Water Level after drilling ilk ft.
| |
| I l
| |
| Gravel Pack Grout f ll ?
| |
| lI Ell&]
| |
| 1 l
| |
| I _, I l
| |
| [ NeatCent B entonite 'I:
| |
| fe1enbsl tIb Water Level was Measured Using > a .
| |
| Grouting Method .. . . * .
| |
| Well was developed for X hours Drilling Method at '7 gpm GEOLOGIC LOG Method of development Note each depth where water was encountered in consolidated Punp Capacity i.) gpm formations PumpType t .ec Drilling Fluid Type of Rig C rj - 2 Health and Safety Plan Cubmitted? EQYes EjNo Level of Protection used on site (circle one) None C B A I&"/~t m9-i k2I 3S14- 3 ': czenz J it- v^ 9-5v4Z t
| |
| Sz l,v I I certify that I have constructed the above referenced well in 361 S r 7-/oA)v accordance with all well permit requirementsand applicableState rules andregulations. 1A-4 1~Ve~tf.~
| |
| l l..
| |
| Drilling Company A C SCHULTES INC Well Driller (Print) C/ 1 ~-S5 I",/; PulC- ?n'A-riller's Signature USL~I- X,/ u1A .f4'
| |
| ;:; 1 Registration No. .?) I" i ) - '-.- 1 . V.Iv Date 7;.i/;P IC, i-W lq- V& 4 ORIGINAL: DEP COPIES: DRILLER OWNER HEALTH DEPARTMENT
| |
| | |
| New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Well Permit Number Bureau of Water Allocation 3400007135 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates DWNER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G SERVICES CORP 3401634 4; ;s 80 PARK PLACE A Newark State i few Jersey Zip Code 07102 WELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address Ownier's Well No. A C Sh.Cd Lo cd Tounty Salem Municipality Lower Alloways Creek I,otNo. 4.01 BlockNo. 26 Address ALLOWAY CREEK NECK RD SALEM GENERATING STATION Al WELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED .2 I C' I rO' DATE WELL COMPLETED 1 1II CQI WELL CONSTRUCTION Note: Measure all depths Depth to 11 Depth to Diameter Material Wgt./Rating from land surface ll Top (ft.) I Bottom (ft.) (inches) Kl (lbs/sch no.)
| |
| rotal Depth Drilled , - ft.
| |
| ! its Finished Well Depth . - ft.
| |
| Single/InnerCasing [2:-" r P;C][S'm3 Middle Casing ; . l Borehole Diameter: (for tripleeased1wells1only)1
| |
| __l! __ _
| |
| Top _ in. Outer Casing r i Bottom _ in. (largest diameter) _ _ .
| |
| Well was finished: Dabove grade Open Hole or Screen flush mounted (No. Used 1) ItI )I 'usS Blank Casings I If finished above grade, casing height (No. Used ) I ___..
| |
| ,stick up) above land surface ft.
| |
| Steel protective casing installed? L Tail Piece Gravel Pack 1K _ _ .
| |
| li
| |
| ' . _= _ .
| |
| 3 No - _--. Grout -
| |
| 3 j! 4 NeLattCement ji ~ lbs
| |
| -- --1 i--- -'0.
| |
| 3tatic Water Level after drilling ft. D Bentonite jIlbsi
| |
| ° i!...J Water Level was Measured Using - Grouting Meth od -Tbre-rv-)-c-~ _
| |
| Well was developed for hours Drilling Metlih id f'/Lika L C t , gpm GEOLOGIC LOG qethod of development Ql (jd. ___ _
| |
| Note each depth whicre water was encountered in consolidated Rump Capacity gpm formations
| |
| 'ump Type
| |
| )rilling Fluid Type of Rig A ~u~ -
| |
| (.s-{~t-\.?& *r)(ct t-t-z urf7 Iealth and Safety Plan Submitted? QE`es ONo +I LC I- iC(/ 1+ _Sdt aNc Avel of Protection used on site (circle one) None C B A
| |
| *certifythat I have constiruciedithe above referenced well in tccordance with all well permiit requirements and applicableState wales and regulations.
| |
| )rilling Company TALON DRI LLING CO AS-BUILT WELL LOCATION Vell Driller (Print) - LC.; { --- {) e L_ (NAD 83 HORIZONTAL DATUM)
| |
| NJ STATE PLANE COORDINATE IN US SURVEY FEET
| |
| )riller's Signature l r '
| |
| NORTIHING: EASTING:
| |
| . ationNo. )C>.k{' } Date 3i/ /C)I OR LATITUDE: LONGITUDE:
| |
| ¢3 3) o .. 0 *
| |
| )RICINAL: DEP GACOPIES: DRILLER OWNER HEALTH DEPARTMENT
| |
| | |
| New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Well Permit Number Bureau of Water Allocation 34000U7153 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates IWNER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G SERVICES CORP. 3401634 a 3 80 PARK PLACE Newark State New Jersey Zip Code 07102 VELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address OWEter's Well No. 4&z CtZ fo wrlt bAC-otkl1
| |
| :ounty Salem Municipality Lower Alloways Creek I ,ot No. 4.01 Block Wo. 26 address ALLOWAY CREEK NECK RD SALEM GENERATING STATION VELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED aklo-ij DATE WELL COMPLETED alq/0 i-VELL CONSTRUCTION Note: Measure all depths Depth to 1l Depth to Diameter Material I Wgt./Rating from land surface 1Top (f.) l Bottom (ft.) (inches) (lbsfsch no.)
| |
| .Iotal Depth Drilled LFO ft.
| |
| Single/Inner Casing IE inished Well Depth A4d) ft. 1 0 1 :PV' 1_Schiol Middle Casing 3orehole Diameter: (for triple cased wells only)
| |
| Top T o Bottom 1 n in.
| |
| in.
| |
| r
| |
| ________________ L Outer Casing (largest diameter)
| |
| ~ IL o II [ Arc- jui Well was finished: above grade Open Hole or Screen I Eflush mounted (No.Used j) )
| |
| l- Bln Casng _
| |
| m__
| |
| f finished above grade, casing height I Casings stick up) above land surface ; ft I °)
| |
| ;teel Protective casing installed?
| |
| Tail Piece Gravel Pack H 11 11 11 11 No Grout Neat Cement I __fibs
| |
| ;tatic Water Level after drilling ft. ) lJL X ll Bentonite __ $lbs Water Level was Measured Using Grouting Method i r Well was developed for hours it . S gpm Drilling Method *DhJ hi 4e)
| |
| Sk DlJ.4s GEOLOGIC LOG
| |
| ,tethod of development __§L& F w'IG Note each depth where water was encountered in consolidated lump Capacity ___ gpm formations lump Type
| |
| )rilling Fluid __ __ Type of Rig ______
| |
| 0 -10~ FlQiend Qraae 1, ; /
| |
| 4ealth and Safety Plan Submitted? Ob;es 0- 0' .2 /
| |
| [No 0- 0 ' sR -e, SN djb6J,3 t
| |
| .evel of Protection used on site (circle one) None C B A 1-0Q' (& t9, certify that I have constructed the above referencedwell in Accordance with all well permit requirements and applicableState ules and regulations.
| |
| )rilling Company TALON DRILLING CO AS-BUILT WELL LOCATION (NAD 83 HORIZONTAL DATUM)
| |
| Veil Driller (Print) _ a___
| |
| NJ STATE PLANE COORDINATE IN US SURVEY FEET
| |
| )riller's Signature 1 NORTHING: EASTING:
| |
| . ation No. Date 901 () LI OR LATITUDE: LONGITUDE:
| |
| 0 0 41 ORDIGINAL: DEP COPIES: DRILLER OWNER HEALTH DEPARTMENT
| |
| | |
| New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Well Permit Number Bureau of Water Allocation 3400007136 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates 3WNER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G SERVICES CORP 3401634 kr'
| |
| * Ss 80 PARK PLACE Newark State New Jersey _ Zip Code 07102 WELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address Owrier's Well No. A SIad L b9 Zounty Salem Municipality Lower Alloways Creek ILot No. 4.01 Block No. 26 kddress ALLOWAY CREEK NECK RD SALEM GENERATING STATION AF WELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED 2 Is-log DATE WELL COMPLETED R_ 91* '
| |
| WELL CONSTRUCTION Tote: Measure all depths Del th t ethto l Diamneter ll Material llWgt./Ratingl rotal Depth Drilled a 5j ft. from land surface Tol (ft.) l Bottom (ft) l (inches) (lbs/sch no.)
| |
| Finished Well Depth -L S ft.
| |
| f Single/lnner Casing Middle Casing Borehole Diameter:
| |
| Top Top1 in.-r-r r (for triple cased wells only)
| |
| Outer Casing 1s IL i l jiLc~jed4g6 J __
| |
| Bottom in. (largest diameter)
| |
| Well was finished: [Yabove grade Open Hole or Screen E flush mounted if finished above grade, casing height stick up) above land surface .N[
| |
| [ (No. Used (
| |
| Blank Casings T Piec
| |
| )
| |
| E- Tail Piece I steal protective casing installed? Gr v[ePack O~o [Grout Cement BeNeat J1bsx
| |
| ;tiancWater Level after drilling Cj ft. I Grout_ __ Bentonite ) Ibsl Nater Level was Measured Using f _ Grouting Method 7Freel I-Nell was developed for l hours Drilling Method +61TOLm3 -5P-/ry
| |
| . A_ ,, .
| |
| it ,, gpm GEOLOGIC LOG 1ethod of development < -'' Pt 4$ p Note each depth where water was encountered inconsolidated lump Capacity gpm formations lump Type
| |
| )rilling Fluid Ogre' 3&qld Assaud By7 Type of Rig lealth and Safety Plan Submitted? Qie ONo In-> ' MIT Ka Edo ho 55 T
| |
| .evel of Protection used on site (circle one) None (9 C B A tz0- Ioad certify that I have constructed the above referencedwell in ccordancewith all well permit requirements andapplicableState vles and regulations.
| |
| Irilling Company TALON DRILLING CO AS-BUILT WELL LOCATION (NAD 83 HORIZONTAL DATUM)
| |
| /ell Driller (Print) S p4 *1 -eal NJ STATE PLANE COORDINATE IN US SURVEY FEET riller's Signature f NORTHING: EASTING:
| |
| ation No. ()MXLW
| |
| .< W L2v . Date 3 /I o4
| |
| - - - i OR LATITUDE: LONGITUDE:
| |
| D53j 0 I
| |
| * 0 RIGINAL: DEP COPSES: DRILLER OWNVER EHEALTH DEPARTMENT
| |
| | |
| New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Well Permit Number Bureau of Water Allocation 3400007154 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates
| |
| )WNER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G SERVICES CORP. _ _ _
| |
| 3401634
| |
| ' s 80 PARK PLACE I Newark State New Jersey _ Zip Code 07102 NELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address Owlier's Well No. iL Fojrme k1lownl- QS county Salem Municipality Lower Alloways Creek I.ot No. 4.01 Block fio. 26 Ax)
| |
| Wddress ALLOWAY CREEK NECK RD SALEM GENERATING STATION A'ELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED a LI 1(4 DATE WELL COMPLETEDI2 /Iq(oL-WELL CONSTRUCTION Note: Measure all depths from land surface FlDepth to Top (f.)
| |
| Depth to I Diameter Bottom (ft.) 11 (inches) IF Material ijWgt./Rating l
| |
| !l(lbs/sch no.)
| |
| lotal Depth Drilled Finished Well Depth U(Q GC> ft.
| |
| ft.
| |
| Single/Inn _______ 1 2)" 1 I 11 11_______ I-Borehole Diameter:
| |
| Middle Casing -i (for triple cased wells only)
| |
| Top f ]j I iL
| |
| __-_in.
| |
| Outer Casing !
| |
| Bottom _ in. <(largest diameter) _ _ _ _ _ _i _ _
| |
| Well was finished: E above grade Open Hole or Screen (No.Used I00 [;. l i_] ii& !fc _ _
| |
| O'flush mounted Blank Casings l If finished above grade, casing height stick up) above land surface ft.
| |
| (No. Used )!
| |
| 1l1 l __
| |
| r Tail Piece IL I I I =11 3teel protective casing installed?
| |
| 3 [O]No static Water Level after drillingi JS ft.
| |
| [Gru Gravel Pack 1!
| |
| 1 7 11 Neat Cement
| |
| _ _ _ _ __r _ _ _ _
| |
| Bentonite II
| |
| !i
| |
| ~_~4Ii/ lbs 3L b lbsl Water Level was Measured Using _t4 Grouting Method l__ _
| |
| Well was developed for l-hours Drilling Method it 5 gpm GEOLOGIC LOG Wethod of development LULL pt Note each depth where water was encountered in consolidated
| |
| ?ump Capacity _ gpm formations
| |
| ?ump Type Drilling Fluid _____Type of Rig Ci 0101 .9net
| |
| _Sn smo Iffh/
| |
| Iealth and Safety Plan Submitted? EQes ONo
| |
| .evel of Protection used on site (circle one) None C B A 2 -30' I56 f id, gn(lJ ( Era+
| |
| certify that I have constructedthe above referenced well in ~ 57 -'
| |
| iccordance with all well permit requirements and applicableState LQ@9CL+/-LA /0'Pedry m ~ rc
| |
| *ulesand regulations.
| |
| )rilling Company TALON DRILLING CO AS-BUILT WELL LOCATION (NAD 83 HORIZONTAL DATUM)
| |
| Well Driller (Print) Sc:5tp4 1Qi- -
| |
| NJ STATE PLANE COORDINATE IN US SURVEY FEET
| |
| )riller's Signature t -
| |
| NORTHING: EASTING:
| |
| t, .ation No. -ktA Date Q I/ G( OR LATITUDE: LONGITUDE:
| |
| 633, 0 I0 PRIGINAL: DEP COPIES:- DRILLER OWNER HEALTH DEPARTMENT
| |
| | |
| New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Well Permit Number Bureau of Water Allocation 3400067137 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates
| |
| )WNER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G SERVICES CORP 3401634 K s 80 PARK PLACE Newark State New Jersey Zip Code 07102 NELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address Owner's Well No. & r lounty Salem Municipality Lower Alloways Creek Lot No. 4.01 Block No. 26 kddress ALLOWAY CREEK NECK RD SALEM GENERATING STATION Al NELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED 1lX-O to '
| |
| DATE WELL COMPLETED l 1cOo l0 WELL CONSTRUCTION Note: Measure all depths Deepthto [l Depthto l Diameter 1 Material j[ WgtiRating 1 lotal Depth Drilled - ft. from land surface II Top (ft.) [Bottom (ft.) ft (inches) ll (lbs/sch no.)
| |
| II I Single/lnner Casing 7 Finished Well Depth , ,) ft.
| |
| 3orehole Diameter: Middle Casing (for triple cased wells only)
| |
| Top i0 in. r Outer Casing Bottom lD in. - (largestdiameter)
| |
| Well was finished: E above grade Bfiush mounted Open Hole or Screen (No. Used 0IC ) LI )> I][ J PLIC [14r
| |
| :f finished above grade, casing height (No. Used B )
| |
| stick up) above land surface ft.
| |
| Tail Piece jte-' Protective casing installed? Gravel Packe
| |
| ;i aNo GroutPc hr Neat Cement 0-&'4 lbs itatic Water Level after drilling ft.I 0' ll 9 10 J )Bentonite IJr Ilbs Water Level was Measured Using Grouting Method Well was developed for 3 hours Drilling Method dN1ow sl-&f~aua-r-it .53 gpm e GEOLOGIC LOG dethod of development _ S .. -F rlts Note each depth where water was encountered in consolidated lump Capacity gpm formations lump Type A
| |
| )rilling Fluid __Type of Rig___ f- 14 lXsaod 1s n Qa L~A-e~ -tzek iealth and Safety Plan Submitted? Yes [No
| |
| ,evel of Protection used on site (circle one) None 7 C B A certify that I have constructedthe above referencedwell in ccordance with all well permit requirements and applicableState ules and regulations.
| |
| )rilling Company TALON DRILLING CO AS-BUILT WELL LOCATION (NAD 83 HORIZONTAL DATUM)
| |
| Veil Driller (Print)_______ S NJ STATE PLANE COORDINATE IN US SURVEY FEET ril'-r's Signature , ~A x M d p 0, NORTHING: EASTING:
| |
| o
| |
| .t__ationNo. -- A WA'3 t I Date t X OR LATITUDE: LONGITUDE:
| |
| 0 9. 0e IRIGINAL: DEP COPIES: DRILLER OWNER IfEAL TH DEPARTMENT
| |
| | |
| New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Well Permit Number Bureau of Water Allocation 34000b7140 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates
| |
| )WNER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G SERVICES CORP 3401634 x s 80 PARK PLACE
| |
| .i Newark State blew Jersey Zip Code 07102 AELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address Owner's Well No._
| |
| county Salem Municipality Lower Alloways Creek Lot No. 4.01 Block No. 26 kddress ALLOWAY CREEK NECK RD SALEM GENERATING STATION AlE N9ELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED Il ( lot 4 DATE WELL COMPLETED l l,>; [ LX WELL CONSTRUCTION l Note: Measure all depths D sp olDepth to Diameter Material rWgt/Rating p (ft.) Bottom (ft.) (inches) _ (bs/sch no.)
| |
| Total Depth Drilled ,2 ft. from land surface TOI Finished Well Depth ; ft. Single/Inner Casing _' I 3orehole Diameter: r frMiddle Casing Top ?
| |
| el in.
| |
| (for triple cased wells only) -
| |
| Outer Casing l Bottom X in. (largest diameter)
| |
| Well was finished: 0 above grade glush mounted Iffinished above grade, casing height fstick up) above land surface 3t--' Protective casing installed?
| |
| NO No Open Hole or Screen (No.Used C)J
| |
| [To.Ueft.
| |
| [
| |
| FF ~
| |
| Blank Casings Tail Piece Gravel GroutPack hJ2 dsg i 9 J XI___-_
| |
| - 13 11A I __I_
| |
| 1?
| |
| 1 I .pic hr
| |
| ___4b ICL) lbsI
| |
| _ ]
| |
| static Water Level after drilling q Water Level was Measured Using ft _IL C [ [
| |
| Neat Cement Bentonite iF l
| |
| lbs lbs 1
| |
| Grouting Method Tr6rnvi
| |
| 'Nell was developed for 3 hours Drilling Method tbL) 542LaJ.Ll it < gpm GEOLOGIC LOG iethod of development _ -5, Lt- p A Note each depth where water was encountered in consolidated lump Capacity gpm formations
| |
| )ump Type
| |
| )rilling Fluid Type of Rig F Iealth and Safety Plan Submitted? El*es ONo )-j-,' Sard _,-t I+ a(ud-evel of Protection used on site (circle one) None C B A certify thatI have constructedthe above referencedwell in accordance with all well permit requirementsand applicableState odes and regulations.
| |
| )rilling Company TALON DRILLING CO AS-BUILT WELL LOCATION (NAD 83 HORIZONTAL DATUM)
| |
| Well Driller (Print) Jk tep icSb I NJ STATE PLANE COORDINATE IN US SURVEY FEET
| |
| )r:"'s Signature N___ _ _ _ __ _
| |
| NORTHING: EASTING:
| |
| St _ation No. Date OR LATITUDE: LONGITUDE:
| |
| 0 0 U IRIGINAL: DEP COPIES: DRILLER OWNER HEALTH DEPARTMENT
| |
| | |
| New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Well Permit Number Bureau of Water Allocation 3400007141 MONITORING WELL RECORD Atlas Sheet Coordinates
| |
| )WNER IDENTIFICATION PSE&G SERVICES CORP 3401634 a's 80 PARK PLACE
| |
| - Newark State New Jersey Zip Code 07102 WELL LOCATION - If not the same as owner please give address Owner's Well No. _
| |
| -ounty Salem Municipality Lower Alloways Creek Lot No. 4.01 Block No. 26 kddress ALLOWAY CREEK NECK RD SALEM GENERATING STATION Al WELL USE Monitoring DATE WELL STARTED jIjO l DATE WELL COMPLETED II j; if)n WELL CONSTRUCTION [ Note: Measure all depths fbe Rpthto if Depttoo [ Diameter Material Wgt./Rating Total Depth Drilled ft. from land surface p (fW) lBottom (ft.) (inches) ll _ll (lbs/sch no.)
| |
| , l To Single/Inner Casing _P FinishedWellDepth ft.
| |
| Borehole Diameter: Middle (for triple casedCasing wells only)_
| |
| Top iC in. Outer Casing _
| |
| Bottom j1 in. [ (largest diameter)
| |
| Well was finished: E above grade [ Open Hole or Screen 2flush mounted (No. Used 0 1 C) __ 11ii rio- S /L If finished above grade, casing height N Blank Casings (stick up) above land surface ft. =( s_
| |
| Tail Piece NeaCeen F_a_&__1s Steel protective casing installed? Gravel Pack 7 s ONo Grout Static Water Level after drilling Water Level was Measured Using l ft.
| |
| d o IF-l
| |
| ___________( )
| |
| Neat Cement
| |
| _Bentonite air 15 Ibs lbs Grouting Method lCreml ;-
| |
| Well was developed for 3 hours Drilling Method A Lf jpo -C-i at ,5 gpm GEOLOGIC LOG Method of development _ A( vip, Note each depth where water was encountered in consolidated Pump Capacity _ __ gpm formations Pump Type Drilling Fluid _ Type of Rig X f
| |
| -q' l and, ota eL( &-; Z7 /
| |
| Health and Safety Plan Submitted? 9 4 es ONo g-alr Sd, grae6LLtd, 5*-. l i/I Level of Protection used on site (circle one) None C B A certify that I have constructedthe above referenced well in accordance with all well permit requirements andapplicableState Mules andregulations.
| |
| Xrilling Company TALON DRILLING CO AS-BUILT WELL LOCATION (NAD 83 HORIZONTAL DATUM)
| |
| Wtell Driller (Print)
| |
| NJ STATE PLANE COORDINATE IN US SURVEY FEET
| |
| )riller's Signature _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
| |
| NORTHING: __ EASTING:
| |
| . _ ationNo. L(l 3 Date o 4l20/Ol4 OR LATITUDE: LONGITUDE:
| |
| 0 ., 0 I 0C33PS . _
| |
| )RIGINAL: DEP COPIES:- DRILLER O WNER OWNER HEALTH DEPARTMENT
| |
| | |
| ARCADIS Appendix D Tidal Evaluation Results
| |
| | |
| r.
| |
| z a
| |
| 0 4 . . . . . .. . .
| |
| II . .
| |
| I. .
| |
| I I .
| |
| .I I o-U'0 3
| |
| U-a:
| |
| 2 8
| |
| 0.a
| |
| 'C)
| |
| I' w
| |
| 0 yC.
| |
| w 0
| |
| i x
| |
| 8 -3 EL z9 6 -4
| |
| -5 0
| |
| z I-12-Jan 13-Jan 14-Jan 15-Jan 16-Jan 17-Jan 18-Jan 19-Jan 20-Jan Date/rime 0
| |
| U-w FIGURE i-4 AC Water Level In Well K 0
| |
| V2 ARCAD1S Tidal Assessment - 1/12 to 1/20 PSEGMJEAR LLC ARTIFICAPLISLAND,NJ D-1
| |
| | |
| z u-0 Q
| |
| U' 3
| |
| a 0.
| |
| on 2
| |
| 0 EL (0
| |
| 6 M
| |
| w LU 0
| |
| 0-CO CL0 zU]
| |
| -3
| |
| -j
| |
| -4
| |
| -5 0
| |
| U' 12-Jan 13-Jan 14-Jan 15-Jan 16-Jan 17-Jan 18-Jan 19-Jan 20-Jan z
| |
| Date/Time 0
| |
| 0~
| |
| i a
| |
| Water Level In Well L FIGURE Q ARCADIS, AI-01 i Tidal Assessment - 1/12 to 1/20 PSEG NULEAR LLC D-2 I PR1FI0CALISLAND, NJ
| |
| | |
| z I
| |
| 9 Uj k2 2..
| |
| 0) 0L 4 - I
| |
| * l l l I I I zi Ul 3
| |
| IL I- 2 0
| |
| I,-
| |
| 0 4-UJ i.
| |
| I o
| |
| -j t
| |
| L. :1 Lu R (U3 -2 w
| |
| J
| |
| -3 61 -4 z
| |
| -5 z l I I I I I j I U 0~
| |
| I-0 u- 12-Jan 13-Jan 14-Jan 15-Jan 16-Jan 17-Jan 18-Jan 19-Jan 20-Jan Date/Time 0
| |
| 0 Water Level In Well P FIGURE 0 %ARCADIS Tidal Assessment - 1/12 to 1/20 PSEMGNCEAP [[C D-3 I ARTIFICAL[ NJ ISLANJD, I.
| |
| | |
| r z
| |
| LII I.-
| |
| O-z 0
| |
| 4 I I I , i i i II I I I I I I I i a:
| |
| 6 3 2 _ _
| |
| I-I w
| |
| tI--
| |
| 0 0~
| |
| Ul 0
| |
| r- 0 U]
| |
| I Ul 0
| |
| 0 w
| |
| -J -1 I
| |
| (U)
| |
| L.
| |
| -2 CO -3 z
| |
| -4
| |
| -5 z
| |
| 0]
| |
| 0~
| |
| - I I I I I IIII I I IIIIIIIIIII II II x
| |
| a_ 12-Jan 13-Jan 14-Jan 15-Jan 16-Jan 17-Jan 18-Jan 19-Jan 20-Jan Date/Time a
| |
| i;i Water Level In Well Q FIGURE 0
| |
| 0 9
| |
| X ARCADlS Tidal Assessment - 1/12 to 1/20 PSEGNUER LLC AR)IFIFAL13.P NJ D-4
| |
| | |
| F, z
| |
| £i W
| |
| CU Q
| |
| (0) z 0
| |
| 4 I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I CL 3 -
| |
| 0 isr
| |
| - 2-lY EL 1 -
| |
| 0 w
| |
| 0i R0 w
| |
| (0 I
| |
| co
| |
| '-30
| |
| -. 4
| |
| (--
| |
| -3 V
| |
| £0 -4
| |
| -5 I
| |
| z d -o 1 I I I, - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 12-Jan 13-Jan 14-Jan 15-Jan 16-Jan 17-Jan 18-Jan 19-Jan 20-Jan Date/rime za z
| |
| 0~
| |
| a I-CD Water Level In Well V FIGURE 0
| |
| k: ARCADIS, Tidal Assessment - 1/12 to 1/20 PSEG NJ[R LLC D-5 ARTIFICPLS-uD, NJ
| |
| | |
| I 12-Jan 13-Jan 14-Jan 15-Jan 16-Jan 17-Jan 18-Jan 19-Jan 20-Jan 4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 3-2-
| |
| 1-0 -
| |
| -4
| |
| -5
| |
| -6 _i.
| |
| . . .-.I I .
| |
| I I
| |
| . . I I .
| |
| I I
| |
| . . I . . . .
| |
| I I
| |
| 12-Jan 13-Jan 14-Jan 15-Jan 16-Jan 17-Jan 18-Jan 19-Jan 20-Jan Date/Time iz 0
| |
| I- FIGURE Tide Water Level
| |
| % ARCADIS di 0
| |
| to Tidal Assessment - 1/12 to 1/20 PSEGNUCLEARLLC D-6 iARIF!AL ISLAND,IN
| |
| | |
| ARCADIS Appendix E Evaluation of Water Levels in the Vincentown Formation
| |
| | |
| I-U' U'
| |
| a Tidal Evaluation Reedy Point
| |
| --- Well L
| |
| - -- WellW Well M LU U' 10
| |
| .. .9..v..
| |
| I U
| |
| LU 0
| |
| 8 7 t f 0
| |
| : a. 4 ,-,- -.' .- } ' - ' 6 0 -s ' '
| |
| 0)
| |
| ID C-0)
| |
| C (C
| |
| -j fA I t f t t II, 0 3t I f f f f t f II L 0
| |
| z
| |
| -D U cc)
| |
| CU 0~
| |
| z 28J12-30-3 -u1Ag-g3u4Ag5u6-Aug7-Aug-Au SS, a.
| |
| Date la I.-
| |
| di FIGURE 0
| |
| 0 Z ARCADIS Tidal Evaluation PSEG NUCLEAR LLCSALEM GENERATING STATION E
| |
| HANCOCKS BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY Go14
| |
| | |
| ARCADIS Appendix F Slug Test Results
| |
| | |
| 0 w
| |
| 10.
| |
| 0 Obs. Wells 0~ a Well 0 (F)
| |
| Aquifer Model Confined Solution Bouwer-Rice iii 1.
| |
| Parameters DC- K = 3.624ft/day c:
| |
| a) yO = 1.36 ft E
| |
| 0 CI) 0 5D 0.1 6
| |
| LIi Li.
| |
| 0.01
| |
| : 0. 2. 4. 6. 8. 10.
| |
| Time (min) 8 0z 0
| |
| a-Slug Test Analysis Well 0 FIGURE X ARCADIS Falling Test PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION F-i HANCOCK'S BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY
| |
| | |
| w
| |
| * a:
| |
| 0 10.
| |
| I Obs. Wells
| |
| - Well 0 (R)
| |
| Aquifer Model Confined
| |
| : 1. Solution C)
| |
| Bouwer-Rice Parameters a-K = 4.257 ftday yO = 1.375 ft E
| |
| LU n 0.1 C)
| |
| 'I Uo Ca 111 w
| |
| 0.01 0
| |
| -J Q
| |
| z LU z
| |
| 0.001
| |
| : 0. 2. 4. 6. 8. 10.
| |
| C-Time (min) 0 0
| |
| S 0
| |
| z di Slug Test Analysis Well 0 FIGURE e
| |
| C-0 LL. %2 ARCADIS Rising Test PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION F-2 HANCOCKS BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY L J--
| |
| | |
| w I
| |
| LU I-U]
| |
| 0
| |
| : 10. Obs. Wells a Well N (f 0
| |
| Aquifer Model Li Confined Solution Bouwer-Rice Parameters Lu K = 0.1439ft/day yO = 0.834 ft I 8 1.
| |
| 0 Q a
| |
| U)
| |
| LIs Vo
| |
| -i 0.1
| |
| : 0. 6. 12. 18. 24. 30.
| |
| Time (min) 8 C0 0
| |
| F-0 I-06 0U Slug Test Analysis Well N FIGURE Z ARCADIS Falling Test PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION F-3 HANCOCK'S BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY
| |
| | |
| r I c]
| |
| X Lii Q)
| |
| : 10. Obs. Wells LI-c a Well N (r) g Aquifer Model a:
| |
| I Confined Solution Bouwer-Rice ELi I-y Z: Parameters K =0.1896ft/day Ix El c
| |
| yO= 1.024ft CD E 1.
| |
| -I 0.
| |
| ci) 0 0
| |
| z w
| |
| ' U- -
| |
| - U z
| |
| :L 0.1
| |
| : 0. 16. 24. 32. 40.
| |
| Time (min) 8 8
| |
| 0 z
| |
| 0 0
| |
| Slug Test Analysis Well N FIGURE 1 ARCADIS Rising Test PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION F-4 HANCOCK'S BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY
| |
| | |
| PI w
| |
| 10.
| |
| : a. Obs. Wells a Well U (F)
| |
| Aquifer Model 0
| |
| I Confined Solution 6 Bouwer-Rice 1.
| |
| 0- Parameters U'
| |
| K = 2.947ftlday c
| |
| yO = 0.881 ft E
| |
| a,
| |
| (,
| |
| 0 CL LU 0
| |
| 0.1 0w LII]
| |
| 0.01
| |
| : 0. 4. 8. 12. 16. 20.
| |
| Time (min) 8 a-0 Z
| |
| Slug Test Analysis Well U FIGURE
| |
| %ARCADIS Falling Test PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION F-5 HANCOCK'S BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY
| |
| | |
| ARCADIS Appendix G Pumping Test Results
| |
| | |
| I C,,
| |
| 0 0) z 0.
| |
| 100. Obs. Wells a Well AB w
| |
| to Aquifer Model
| |
| - Confined 0~ Solution Theis Parameters o5 2 Ci.
| |
| EL T = 27.67ft lday S = 0.0001249 vu
| |
| : 10. KVKr= 0.1 cJ b = 10.ft U) 1)
| |
| E al C.
| |
| co 1.
| |
| 0 z
| |
| w 0.1
| |
| : 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.OE+4 1.OE+5 Time (sec) 80 80 8q 8
| |
| U-0 z
| |
| I-0:
| |
| a I-Aquifer Pumping Test Analysis FIGURE 0
| |
| ARCADIS Well AB PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION G-1 HANCOCK'S BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY
| |
| | |
| 4.
| |
| Obs. Wells 3 Well AB Aquifer Model Confined Solution Theis (Recovery)
| |
| Parameters T = 22.69ft2/day S/S = 0.3217 0
| |
| 0 0
| |
| 0.
| |
| : 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4 1.OE+5 Time, tir 80 S
| |
| 8 z8 7-0 0
| |
| 0.
| |
| rt) 2 La$
| |
| I-Aquifer Recovery Test Analysis FIGURE 0
| |
| 0 AARCADIS Well AB PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION G-2 HANCOCKS BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY
| |
| | |
| r
| |
| -.9 r -
| |
| Uo 0
| |
| zto 0
| |
| 100.
| |
| Obs. Wells 0 a Well AC Aquifer Model Confined M
| |
| Solution Theis
| |
| : 10. Parameters T = 12.63fI2/day S = 0.0004371 KzKr= 0.1 C.)
| |
| b =10.ft Co a
| |
| 1.
| |
| U' I CO 0
| |
| 0.1 0
| |
| z U'
| |
| U-0.01
| |
| : 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4 1.OE+5 Time (sec) 0 0
| |
| I-0 3
| |
| (9 Aquifer Pumping Test Analysis FIGURE
| |
| % ARCADIS ii Well AC G-3 PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION HANCOCK'S BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY K1.-
| |
| | |
| C,,
| |
| Uo z
| |
| 0
| |
| : 20. Obs. Wells mWell AC Aquifer Model a 16. Confined Solution I
| |
| Co Theis (Recovery)
| |
| C Parameters 0
| |
| : 12. T = 1.672ft2 Iday S/S'= 14.27 a
| |
| , 00 -
| |
| E 03 8.
| |
| 15 J
| |
| C.
| |
| 4.
| |
| 0 z
| |
| 0~
| |
| 0.
| |
| I . 10. 100. 1000. 1.OE+4 1.OE+5 E:
| |
| Time, t/t' 0
| |
| z M
| |
| I=!
| |
| !R 2
| |
| 12 Aquifer Recovery Test Analysis FIGURE a
| |
| 9 0 i ARCADIS WellAC PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION G-4 HANCOCK'S BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY i..0
| |
| | |
| 03 I-U) z0 100.
| |
| Obs. Wells a Well AD Aquifer Model 0
| |
| EL EL Confined Solution 1 Theis 0L Parameters T = 0.942ft 2 /day S = 0.3757 Kz/Kr= 0.1 b = 10.ft w0 M:
| |
| a E
| |
| 03 0
| |
| 1.
| |
| 0.1 0
| |
| z U'
| |
| U.
| |
| 0.01
| |
| : 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4 1.OE+5 Time (sec) 0 80 2
| |
| 8 E
| |
| z 0
| |
| * EARLY DRAWDOWN WAS EXCESSIVE DUE TO EFFECTS FROM 26 DEVELOPMENT OF WELL AJ DURING AQUIFER PUMPING TEST.
| |
| r VI Aquifer Pumping Test Analysis FIGURE 0
| |
| 0 WARCADIS Well AD PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION G-5 HANCOCK'S BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY
| |
| | |
| r p,
| |
| I-zU, 0
| |
| : 20. Obs. Wells w
| |
| 03 Well AD f- Aquifer Model I Confined Solution Thels (Recovery)
| |
| Er Parameters 2
| |
| T = O.937ft /day S/S' 1.323 a-0 c 12.
| |
| 0 w *0
| |
| ::16
| |
| . i to0 0 8.
| |
| C-0.
| |
| : 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.OE+4 1.OE+5 Time, Vt' 8
| |
| 80 8
| |
| 0 z
| |
| I-0 CD 0~
| |
| - Aquifer Recovery Test Analysis FIGURE
| |
| % ARCADIS Well AD PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION G-6 HANCOCK'S BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY
| |
| | |
| I, L
| |
| r w
| |
| 0 i
| |
| U, (n
| |
| 0t 0
| |
| 100.
| |
| a1 Obs. Wells a: a Well Al Aquifer Model a- Confined
| |
| : 10. Solution Theis Parameters ca T = 7.97ft2 /day By c wQ S - 0.01104
| |
| : 1. Kz/Kr= 0.1 8 b = 10.ft M
| |
| 0.1 0z U,
| |
| U-0.01
| |
| : 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4 1.OE+5 ime (sec) a-0 z
| |
| H 0
| |
| 0 0
| |
| Aquifer Pumping Test Analysis FIGURE
| |
| % ARCADIS Al PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION G-7 i HANCOCK'S BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY
| |
| | |
| p C,J LI 0
| |
| n
| |
| : 20. Obs. Wells a Well Al 0
| |
| Aquifer Model Confined Solution
| |
| : 16. Theis (Recovery)
| |
| Parameters tO T = 2.101ft2/day i) S/S' = 5.308 I-12.
| |
| 0 to 8
| |
| D
| |
| *0 a: ~' 8.
| |
| :z b
| |
| EL to 4.
| |
| 0 z
| |
| U-0' 0.
| |
| : 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4 1.0E+5 Time, tit 0
| |
| a-q d
| |
| z I-C, a-a 0
| |
| Aquifer Recovery Test Analysis FIGURE 0
| |
| 9 I ARCADIS Well Al PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION G-8 HANCOCK'S BRIDGE, NEWJERSEY
| |
| | |
| I-0 2
| |
| In 0
| |
| 0 100. Obs. Wells E Well AJ Aquifer Model a- Confined 0 Solution Theis
| |
| : 10. Parameters 2
| |
| al T = 1.73ft /day r
| |
| a- S = 0.2521 Kz(Kr = 0.1 b =20.fi E
| |
| 0 3 1.
| |
| 0 0.1 5
| |
| z U-0.01
| |
| : 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4 1.OE+5 Time (see)
| |
| .0 0
| |
| 2-8 0
| |
| 0:
| |
| CD Aquifer Pumping Test Analysis FIGURE 0
| |
| X ARCADIS Well AJ PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION G-9 i HANCOCK'S BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY
| |
| | |
| PI I-z I-D 0
| |
| w
| |
| : 30. Obs. Wells 3WellAJ Aquifer Model U,
| |
| Confined U,
| |
| : a. Solution
| |
| : 24. Thels (Recovery)
| |
| M Parameters T = 0.5596ft 21day 0 S/S'= 1.519 0
| |
| IL
| |
| .i, c 18.
| |
| 0 I
| |
| ' 12.
| |
| 6.
| |
| 0.
| |
| : 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.OE+4 1.OE+5 Time, tlf 8
| |
| .0 8
| |
| 7!
| |
| In-0 z
| |
| I-0.
| |
| Iii Aquifer Recovery Test Analysis FIGURE AARCADIS tz 0
| |
| I-Well AJ G-1 0 PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION HANCOCK'S BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY
| |
| | |
| 0 A
| |
| 100.
| |
| cLI Obs. Wells
| |
| -2 o Well AM Aquifer Model al Confined Solution Theis
| |
| : 10. Parameters 2
| |
| T = 1.403fi Iday 0~ S = 0.515 0.
| |
| Kz/iKr= 0.1 b = 10.ft C
| |
| c E
| |
| CLl o 1.
| |
| 3-
| |
| .0 00 0.1 0.01
| |
| : 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.OE+4 1.OE+5 Time (sec)
| |
| Aquifer Pumping Test Analysis 6>ARCADIS Well AM - Step Drawdown Test PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION HANCOCK'S BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY
| |
| | |
| Cn
| |
| '-, 0 uJ I-
| |
| : 20. Obs. Wells a Well AM Aquifer Model Confined Solution
| |
| : 16. Theis (Recovery)
| |
| Parameters 2
| |
| T =0.5716ft 1day SS' = 2.005 c 12.
| |
| -8 C
| |
| ~0 2 8.
| |
| 4.
| |
| 0.
| |
| : 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.OE+4 Time, tir
| |
| .D 8
| |
| 2 8
| |
| 0 z
| |
| 0 0
| |
| as aii Aquifer Recovery Test Analysis FIGURE ha k 0 ARCADIS Wel AM - Step Drawdown Test PSEG NUCLEAR LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION G-1 2 HANCOCK'S BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY
| |
| | |
| r He w
| |
| I-0 rT Obs. Wells a Well AM a
| |
| 0 Aquifer Model 6 Confined Solution Theis
| |
| : a. Parameters T = 1.079ft2iday S = 0.029 Kz/Kr = 0.1 G- b =10.ft 6
| |
| E 0
| |
| a C,1 uJ
| |
| .- 0~
| |
| z U]
| |
| i:
| |
| 0.1
| |
| : 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.OE+4 Time (sec) 80 8
| |
| 0
| |
| * EARLY DRAWDOWN WAS GREATER THAN EXPECTED BECAUSE THE WELL HAD NOT RECOVERED COMPLETELY AT THE START OF 0
| |
| THIS TEST.
| |
| z H
| |
| a0 8
| |
| C, 0
| |
| Aquifer Pumping Test Analysis FIGURE Zt
| |
| %!ARCADIS Well AM - Constant Rate Test PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION G-1 3 HANCOCK'S BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY j
| |
| | |
| a)
| |
| I-a.
| |
| du 12.
| |
| n z
| |
| 0 0 16.
| |
| Obs. Wells 03 a Well AM Aquifer Model M Confined Solution 0 12.8 Theis (Recovery)
| |
| Parameters T =0.3375ft2/day ELE SIS'= 1.806 12 ei 9.6 0
| |
| 0
| |
| -0 z 0 2 N1 6.4 lU W
| |
| y Q
| |
| ~z 3.2 LLI 0.
| |
| : 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.OE'-4 Time, tf 8
| |
| R 80 q
| |
| z U)
| |
| I-ic 0
| |
| 0 C>
| |
| 0 0
| |
| Aquifer Recovery Test Analysis FIGURE Z ARCADIS Well AM - Constant Rate Test PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION G-1 4 HANCOCK'S BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY
| |
| | |
| r 0
| |
| \ I-l w
| |
| I-
| |
| :0 n
| |
| a:
| |
| 100.
| |
| Obs. Wells 6
| |
| a Well S 0 Aquifer Model
| |
| : a. Confined Solution Theis
| |
| : 10. _ Parameters 2
| |
| T = 1.701 ft /day S = 0.06051 Kz/Kr= 0.1 b = 10.ft 6
| |
| LU LU XI C- 1.
| |
| 0.1 0
| |
| z Lu U-0.01 _
| |
| : 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4 1.OE+5 Time (sec) 0 2
| |
| 80 a
| |
| 8 Lo z
| |
| as 0
| |
| a Aquifer Pumping Test Analysis FIGURE
| |
| %ARCAD I
| |
| (9 0 Well S G1 5 PSEG NUCLEAR. LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION HANCOCK'S BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY
| |
| | |
| I-0 zIO 0
| |
| 20.
| |
| Obs. Wells a Well S Aquifer Model Confined Solution al 16. Theis (Recovery)
| |
| Parameters 0 2 T = 1.096ft /day SSS = 4.723 a-C6 12.
| |
| U'i b 0a
| |
| *0 w 8.
| |
| 4.
| |
| 0 z
| |
| U' 0.
| |
| : 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.OE+4 1.0Ei-5 Time, tt' 0
| |
| S q
| |
| E0 U'
| |
| I.E q
| |
| z a:a 0
| |
| ki2 0
| |
| as I
| |
| 'a Aquifer Recovery Test Analysis FIGURE 0
| |
| fARCADIS Well S PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SALEM GENERATING STATION G-1 6 HANCOCK'S BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY
| |
| | |
| ARCADIS Appendix H Dissolved Gas, Technetium-99 and Groundwater Age Determination Results for the PSEG Nuclear, LLC Salem Generating Station
| |
| | |
| Dissolved Gas, Technetium-99 and Groundwater Age Determination Results for the PSEG Nuclear, LLC Salem GeneratingStation Prepared by Dr. Robert Poreda, University of Rochester This report details the results of the dissolved gas, technetium-99 (Tc-99), and groundwater age determination performed on groundwater samples collected through November 2003 from the monitoring well network at the PSEG Nuclear, LLC Salem Generating Station (the "Station"). The analyses were performed in accordance with the attached procedures (Attachment 1 - Groundwater Age Determination and Attachment 2
| |
| - Tc-99). Analytical results for the groundwater samples, which are summarized in the attached table, are evaluated based on the water-bearing zone where the monitoring wells are screened. The three primary water-bearing zones investigated beneath the Station are:
| |
| : 1) the Vincentown Formation; 2) the shallow, water-bearing unit within the limits of the cofferdam; and, 3) the shallow, water-bearing unit outside the limits of the cofferdam.
| |
| Hydrogeologic and geochemical data indicate that the zones of the shallow, water-bearing unit within and outside the limits of the cofferdam are hydraulically connected, but the zones are evaluated as separate units because of their relative proximity to the facility structures.
| |
| : 1. Summary of the Vincentown Formation
| |
| > Well K -The groundwater age analysis of samples from Well K indicates that tritiated water containing between 3,000 picocuries per liter (pCi/L) to 5,000 pCi/L of tritium recharged approximately 19 years ago and has traveled to the upper part of the Vincentown Formation (70 to 80 feet below ground surface).
| |
| The upper limit of 5,000 pCi/L is estimated by assuming dispersion of a slug of tritiated water over 20 years and is based on measured dispersion for non-nuclear waters from the 1963 bomb pulse at other sites (Solomon et al 1993). The most likely location for the recharge is east of Well K based on groundwater flow. Tc-99 was detected in the groundwater sample collected from this well at a concentration of 0.8 pCi/L, which is consistent with post-nuclear precipitation (i.e., background) for the eastern United States 25 years ago.
| |
| > Well L -The groundwater age analysis of Well L indicates that groundwater adjacent to this well recharged approximately 21 years ago with tritium concentrations (measured at 45 pCi/L) equivalent to local precipitation 20 to 25 years ago (based on the Szabo et al measurements at Gloucester). The background tritium concentrations indicated by Well L demonstrate that the release of tritium 20 years ago as indicated by Well K was relatively minor and did not extend over a wide area in the Vincentown Formation. Well L is located to the west and downgradient of the Station near the brackish/fresh water interface. The background concentrations of tritium detected in groundwater samples collected from Well L indicate that the clay confining-unit of the
| |
| | |
| Kirkwood Formation has effectively segregated the Vincentown Formation from the overlying shallow, water-bearing unit.
| |
| > Well P -The groundwater age analysis of Well P indicates that precipitation with background concentrations of tritium (60 pCi/L - equivalent to local precipitation 20 to 25 years ago, based on the Szabo et al measurements at Gloucester) recharged approximately 13 years ago. The methane concentration indicated by groundwater samples collected from Well P (1 cubic centimeter per kilogram
| |
| [cc/kg]) suggests that the recharge area for Well P is likely in or near the marshes to the east of the Station or that a small amount of methane has been generated within the Vincentown Formation. As with Well L, the background concentrations of tritium detected in groundwater samples collected from Well P indicate that the clay confining-unit of the Kirkwood Formation has effectively segregated the Vincentown Formation from the overlying shallow, water-bearing unit.
| |
| > Well Q -The low-level analysis for tritium in the groundwater sample from Well Q indicates a tritium concentration close to the method detection limit (1.5 pCi/L).
| |
| This low concentration of tritium suggests that groundwater in the vicinity of this well recharged close to the onset of the nuclear era (circa 1950). Dissolved methane concentrations in groundwater samples collected from Well Q (38 cc/kg or 1.7 millimoles/kg [mmol/kg]) and levels of argon and nitrogen below solubility limits indicate that the likely point of recharge is the marshes that border the Station to the east.
| |
| > Well V -The results of the groundwater age analysis of Well V are consistent with the results of Well K. Groundwater samples collected from Well V indicate a slightly elevated tritium concentration (549 pCi/L) relative to background (local precipitation). The initial tritium level in the recharge water is estimated to be approximately 3,000 pCi/L. The results of the groundwater age analysis for Well V indicate a slightly younger age relative to Well L and Well K, but the age is within the range observed for these wells (13 to 22 years). The relatively high concentration of dissolved methane detected in the groundwater sample collected from Well V indicates that the groundwater either recharged in the marshes to the east of the Station, or is from in situ biological production.
| |
| Analytical results of groundwater samples collected from monitoring wells screened in the Vincentown Formation (Wells K, L, P, Q, and V) do not indicate that tritium from the Station has migrated beyond the shallow, water-bearing unit above the Kirkwood Formation and into the deeper Vincentown Formation. Tc-99 concentrations indicated by groundwater samples collected from Well K and Well V (0.5 pCi/L and 0.8 pCi/L, respectively) are consistent with the suspected ambient concentration in precipitation recharged during the 1970s. The Tc-99 concentrations indicated by Well K and Well V are approximately 10 parts per million (100,000 times below) of Spent Fuel Pool water (based on data from Ginna station). At this concentration, Tc-99 is not an effective
| |
| | |
| indicator of Spent Fuel Pool water due to the combined effects of ambient Tc-99 and a concentration of Tc-99 near the method detection limit.
| |
| 2.0 Summary for the Shallow, Water-Bearing Formation Within the Limits of the Cofferdam.
| |
| > Well M - The groundwater age analysis of Well M indicates a relatively young age for this groundwater since it became isolated from the atmosphere (less than 0.1 years). The young age suggests that preferential pathways for fluid flow may exist in the subsurface near the plant and/or that elevated dissolved atmospheric helium concentrations have resulted in skewed age determination results.
| |
| Elevated dissolved atmospheric helium concentrations could be the result of increased gas exchange between the atmosphere and the structural fill within the cofferdam or from the introduction of atmospheric gases during the monitoring well installation activities. The Tc-99 concentration indicated by the groundwater sample collected from this well is at or near the regional background concentration of 0.5 pCi/L. The ratio of tritium/Tc-99 at Well M (280,000) is more than 100 times the estimated ratio of 2000 for the Salem Spent Fuel Pool (based on data from Ginna station). The absence of Tc-99 in groundwater from Well M indicates that the tritium detected in this well may have a source other than the Spent Fuel Pool, or that tritium migrated to Well M by aqueous diffusion.
| |
| The diffusion coefficient of tritium is approximately 0.04 square meters per year (m 2/yr) (mean diffusion length is about 0.1 m/yr), relative to an approximate Tc-99 diffusion coefficient that may be as much as an order of magnitude lower than tritium (accurate Tc-99 diffusion data does not exist). Diffusion of tritium would be several times more rapid than Tc-99 because of the smaller size of the molecule and the lack of interaction with soil (i.e., sorption).
| |
| > Well N -The groundwater age determination of the sample from Well N suggests a recharge age of approximately one year. The young age suggests that preferential pathways for fluid flow may exist in the subsurface near the plant and/or that elevated dissolved atmospheric helium concentrations have resulted in skewed age determination results. Elevated dissolved atmospheric helium concentrations could be the result of increased gas exchange between the atmosphere and the structural fill within the cofferdam or from the introduction of atmospheric gases during the monitoring well installation activities. The Tc-99 concentration for this well is at or near the regional background concentration of 0.5 pCi/L or less than 10 ppm of Spent Fuel Pool levels. The absence of Tc-99 in groundwater from Well N indicates that the tritium detected in this well may have a source other than the Spent Fuel Pool, or that tritium migrated to Well N by aqueous diffusion similar to Well M.
| |
| > Well 0 -The groundwater age determination of the sample from Well 0 indicates a relatively young age of approximately 0.22 years. The young age suggests that preferential pathways for fluid flow may exist in the subsurface near the plant
| |
| | |
| and/or that elevated dissolved atmospheric helium concentrations have resulted in skewed age determination results. The Tc-99 concentration for this well is at or near the regional background concentration of 0.5 pCi/L.
| |
| > Well R - Groundwater age results from Well R suggest an age of approximately 1.2 years. This age is consistent with the location of Well R at the maximum in hydraulic head where the flow path is almost vertical; the age is a lower limit because of loss of He-3 by diffusion and possible exchange with the atmosphere.
| |
| The Tc-99 concentration for this well is at or near the regional background concentration of 0.5 pCi/L (see discussion for Wells M and N).
| |
| > Well AC - Groundwater samples from Well AC were not submitted for analysis for dissolved gases, Tc-99, or groundwater age determination at the University of Rochester because of the elevated concentration of tritium detected in this sample by Salem Chemistry. Station protocols prohibited the transport of this sample off site.
| |
| > Well AE -The analytical result of the groundwater sample collected from Monitoring Well AE indicate a tritium concentration of 8,500 pCi/L. The groundwater age determination of the sample from Well R indicates a relatively young age of approximately 0.33 years. The recent groundwater age again suggests that preferential pathways for fluid flow may exist in the subsurface near the plant and/or that elevated dissolved atmospheric helium concentrations have resulted in skewed age determination results. The Tc-99 concentration for the sample from Well AE is at or near the regional background concentration of 0.5 pCi/L.
| |
| Analytical results of groundwater samples collected from monitoring wells screened in the shallow, water-bearing unit within the limits of the cofferdam (Wells M, N, 0, R, AC, and AE) indicate groundwater ages of less than 0.1 years to approximately 1.2 years. The recent groundwater age again suggests that preferential pathways for fluid flow may exist in the subsurface near the plant and/or that elevated dissolved atmospheric helium concentrations have resulted in skewed age determination results. Tc-99 concentrations indicated by groundwater samples collected from wells screened in this unit are consistent with the regional background concentration for this constituent. The absence of Tc-99 indicates that the tritium detected in these wells may have a source other than the Spent Fuel Pool, or that tritium migrated to the wells by aqueous diffusion
| |
| | |
| 3.0 Summary for the Shallow, Water-Bearing Formation Outside of the Limits of the Cofferdam.
| |
| Well S - The groundwater age determination of the sample from Well S indicates a relatively young age (less than one year). The recent age of this water is consistent with other shallow wells close to the plant and inside of the cofferdam.
| |
| The Tc-99 concentration for this well is at or near the regional background concentration of 0.5 pCi/L.
| |
| Well T - Analytical results of the low-level tritium analysis of the sample from Well T indicate a tritium concentration of 257 pCi/L. The groundwater age analysis for this sample indicates an age of approximately 1.6 years, which is consistent with the ages of other samples collected from this zone. The analytical results of the groundwater sample collected from Well T indicate a methane concentration and low concentrations of dissolved atmospheric gases (15% of solubility) consistent with recharge in the marshes to the east of the Station (similar to Wells Q and U). The Tc-99 concentration for the sample from Well T is at regional background concentration.
| |
| Well U - Analytical results of the low-level tritium analysis of the sample from Well U indicate a tritium concentration of 78 pCi/L. The groundwater age analysis for this sample indicates an age of approximately 4.1 years, which is consistent with the ages of other groundwater samples collected from monitoring wells screened in this zone. The analytical results of the groundwater sample collected from Well U indicate a methane concentration and low concentrations of dissolved atmospheric gases (15% of solubility) consistent with recharge in the marshes to the east of the Station (similar to Well T). The Tc-99 concentration for the sample from Well T is at regional background concentration.
| |
| OWell W -Analytical results of the groundwater sample collected from Monitoring Well W indicate a tritium concentration of 11,300 pCi/L, and the groundwater age determination for this well indicates an age of four years. The analytical results for the groundwater sample from Well W also indicate an elevated concentration of dissolved methane, which suggests that groundwater at Well W is a mixture of groundwater with characteristics similar to groundwater from Well T (or Well Z) with tritiated water from plant activity. Well W is located at or near the boundary between methane-rich water flowing from east to the south and west, and tritiated, methane free water that recharges to the south of Salem Unit #1. The Tc-99 concentration for the sample from Well W is approximately 4 pCi/L, which is above the regional background concentration (0.5 pCi/L). The ratio of tritium to Tc-99 (2700) is very close to the ratio in the Spent Fuel Pool (Tc-99 data from Ginna which has similar tritium and Spent Fuel Pool characteristics to Salem).
| |
| Although Well W is located X feet from the center of the plume, it is only a few meters outside of the cofferdam.
| |
| | |
| WELL Z - Analytical results of the groundwater sample collected from Well Z indicate a tritium concentration of 730 pCi/L. Although the tritium concentration indicated by the groundwater sample collected from Well Z is slightly elevated relative to regional precipitation (i.e., background), there is no indication that the release of water from the Spent Fuel Pool has migrated to Well Z. The relatively high concentration of dissolved methane (24 cc/kg or 1.1 mmoles/kg) detected in the groundwater sample from Well Z indicates that the groundwater recharged in the marshes to the east of the Station. Results of the groundwater age determination indicate an age of 3.2 years, which is consistent with the other wells screened in this zone (e.g., Wells U, T, and W). The relatively low concentrations of dissolved methane indicated by monitoring wells installed near the facility and the elevated tritium concentrations indicated by groundwater samples collected from Wells S and AB contrast with the methane-rich, low tritium water indicated by Well Z.
| |
| > WELL AA - Analytical results of the groundwater sample collected from Well AA indicate a tritium concentration of 734 pCi/L, which is similar to Well Z. A dissolved methane concentration of 0.22 cc/kg indicates that the site of recharge for groundwater at Well AA is likely in the vicinity of the cofferdam on the southwest side of the facility rather than the marshes to the east. Although Well AA is directly downgradient from Well S, it is apparent that groundwater with the characteristics of Spent Fuel Pool water has not migrated this far south (Well AA is located about 50 meters southwest of the cofferdam). The groundwater age analysis of the sample collected from Well AA indicates an age of 2.1 years.
| |
| > WELL AB - Analytical results of the groundwater sample collected from Well AB indicate a tritium concentration of 321,000 pCi/L. The groundwater age result for this well is 1.4 years.
| |
| > WELL AF - Analytical results of the groundwater sample collected from Well AF indicate a tritium concentration of 256 pCi/L. Groundwater age estimates for this well are about 10 years, indicating a relatively long/slow flow path (perhaps stagnant conditions) and little or no connection to contaminated waters seen close to the plant (e.g., S or AB). The groundwater at AF is methane-rich, suggesting a recharge location in the marshes to the east of the plant and similar to Wells U, T, and Z.
| |
| | |
| ( (
| |
| Corrected For Excess Air Tc-99 4 He Ne R Methane 4He Herd N2 Ar He-3* pCi/L H-3 pCi/L Age (yr)
| |
| Sample #
| |
| pCi/liter gcc/kg .cc/kg cc/kg cc/kg Ra cc/kg gcc/kg gtcc/kg Salem L-80 43.11 - 190.4 13.8 0.351 2.253 0.19 43.11 -1.39 99 45 21.03 Salem K-80b 0.8 51.90 204.3 15.2 0.333 22.475 0.46 46.08 2.18 1792 955 19.23 Salem Q-80 29.69 90.7 6.6 0.169 0.745 37.91 47.55 6.53 1.6 Salem P-80 48.10 197.4 13.6 0.316 1.718 1.03 43.30 -0.26 57 58 12.46 Salem 0-20 59.83 228.6 14.4 0.361 1.321 49.29 3.84 30 6000 0.09 Salem K-80 42.55 146.0 14.9 0.329 22.19 0.33 43.3 1662 955 18.35 Salem Well 3 337.42 281.3 12.4 0.359 0.175 5.01 309.5 264.9 <0.5 >100 PSEG Well 6 1920.21 294.6 16.5 0.501 0.062 0.05 1898.0 1849.9 <0.5 >100 Salem Well T 0.7 4.18 14.9 1.7 0.041 1.273 31.92 23 257 1.59 Salem Well U 0.5 7.57 26.7 1.5 0.041 1.226 8.16 20 78 4.10 Salem Well N 0.4 55.48 239.8 13.2 0.329 0.02 37.778 -5.525 24.2 5194 0.08 Salem Well W *****4.1 307.50 1354.7 26.6 0.390 4.225 17.26 263.9 13062 0.36 Salem Well M 0.5 53.69 215.3 15.0 0.368 2.344 0.39 46.788 2.197 132.1 142696 0.02 Salem Well 0 0.2 59.06 216.5 14.4 0.310 2.010 0.01 48.627 4.320 109.6 12963 0.15 Salem Well S 0.5 45.00 210.0 14.0 0.340 1564 0.01 126900 3480000 0.65 Salem Well R 0.4 59.37 253.92 14.5 0.320 3.103 37.38 -6.67 227.6 3447 1.16 Salem Well V 0.8 549 Salem Well Z 0.4 19.18 95.65 6.18 0.133 5.08 24.06 142 729 3.24 Salem Well AA 0.5 86.60 393.81 21.23 0.424 1.55 0.22 88 734 2.06 Salem Well AB 0.4 58.20 236.08 19.61 0.377 240.79 2.65 25261 321000 1.38 Salem Well AE 0.7 62.13 253.56 15.64 0.310 2.36 0.02 155 8558 0.33 Salem Well AF 0.2 25.60 97.14 7.17 0.169 4.83 20.98 178 256 9.61 Salem Well V 0.5 24.75 90.60 7.57 0.166 17.25 15.36 729 549 15.37 Salem Well W 2.5 20.12 80.97 7.98 0.166 80.36 28.02 2891 11305 4.14 Salem Well Y LOST
| |
| | |
| Appendix H Attachment I Research Laboratory Procedures Remedial Investigation Report PSEG Nuclear, LLC, Salem Generating Station, Salem, New Jersey Item Title 1 Hydrology of the Salem Generating Station, Proposal, 26 February 2003 2 Standard Operating Procedure, Tritium-Helium Dating of Groundwater In the event of a conflict between the Standard Operating Procedure and the Hydrology of the Salem Generating Station proposal, the Hydrology of the Salem Generating Station proposal will be followed.
| |
| g:\apmjeducpe&~gsalem\npO00571.0003
| |
| - remedial inmesigationtask 06. remediali-esegation repornvina\appendies\appendix h - mchester relstsltachrnerg 1- age daling\aftachmeet 1 . awer doc
| |
| | |
| Hydrology of the Salem GeneratingStation Proposal preparedfor PSEG by Robert J. Poreda Professorof EnvironmentalSciences University of Rochester February26, 2003
| |
| | |
| The proposed investigation will examine the potential for radionuclide migration in groundwater at the PSEG Salem Power Station. Specifically, the investigation addressed the source of the contamination, the magnitude of the release to the environment and the best methods to address long term monitoring at Salem. Standard monitoring by PSEG scientists had detected tritium at levels above environmental concentrations at several sites surrounding Salem
| |
| #1. Of particular concern is the possibility that water from the spent fuel pool has leaked or is leaking into the groundwater that surrounds the containment building.
| |
| : 1. Sites that contained elevated tritium levels would also be analyzed for 1291 (a long-lived radionuclide produced by uranium fission). The Accelerator Mass Spectrometry method has a detection limit of 106 atoms of 129I/liter of water. 1291 measurements have several distinct characteristics that make it a suitable tracer for identifying sources of radionuclide release: a) 1291 displays "conservative" behavior in groundwater (as I) so that it migrates with the flowing water rather than adsorbing on particles (as is the case for '37 Cs). b) Because 1291 is a long-lived radio-isotope, it can be used to detect any past as well as present leakage of 129 I-bearing waters into the environment (the other iodine radio-isotopes decay to background levels in less than one month and hence are only useful in assessing very recent leaks). c) Elevated levels of 129I should be characteristic of water leaking from the spent fuel pool because of the proximity to the large amount of fissionable uranium, Water that leaks from other sources (e.g. the turbine drains or steam releases) should have low 129I because the water that is used to generate the steam has extremely low concentration of dissolved ions.
| |
| : 2. Determine the residence time of groundwater in the vicinity of the containment building and the rate of possible shallow groundwater flow to the southwest (i.e. toward the river).
| |
| Evaluate flow in the upper Vincetown Formation (50 to 80') to determine: 1. flow direction and recharge estimates; 2. Evidence for or against tritium migration from the surface fill into the Vincetown Formation; 3. the "age" of any tritium release. To accomplish this task, we used the 3 He/3 H groundwater age dating method. The validity of this method has been established in a series of papers by Poreda, Solomon, and Schlosser (with co-authors) (see references and appended papers). The technique makes use of the
| |
| | |
| fact that groundwater, once it has been isolated from the atmosphere begins to accumulate 3 He from the decay of tritium. Because tritium levels in this region are elevated relative to environmental levels, the technique is extremely sensitive in establishing rates of groundwater flow. We applied this method to the "down gradient" environmental monitoring wells and to the wells that (based on hydraulic heads) flow back to a basement sumps for processing. The goal will be to establish if the rates of groundwater flow away from and toward the facility from the age dating and simple mass balance calculation (residence time = volume of water/flux) .
| |
| : 3. From this preliminary investigation and a review of the initial site survey, we will propose to PSEG an environmental well monitoring program that will provide for rapid and effective detection of the migration of any radionuclides off-site.
| |
| Tritium - Helium-3 Age Dating We can estimate the transit time of the tritium in the subsurface by measuring the amount (%) of the tritium that has decayed to 3 He [see the analytical methods section and the attached reference articles for complete procedures]. The tritium levels near the plant are typically 10 to 100 times average rainfall (1.0 vs. 0.1 pCi/g) and the likely source of the tritium is from activities at Salem (a major component is thought to have come from "events" (such as steam release into the system). To calculate a transit time for the tritium, we assume that once the water is isolated from the atmosphere (vadose zone) it begins to accumulate 3 He. Thus the ratio of 3 He*/ 3 H can be used to assess the subsurface transit time by the following equation:
| |
| time = (1/X) In [(3He*/ 3 H) + 1]
| |
| where 2 =0.0555yrf1 Because a certain percentage of the 3 He is from atmospheric solubility, we use the ratio of 3 He/Ne in "air-saturated" water to subtract the atmospheric 3He from the total. The tritium values from the University of Rochester Lab will be compared with the estimates made by PSEG's.direct counting techniques.
| |
| | |
| Iodine-129 and the Iodine - Tritium Correlation To investigate the potential sources of contamination at Salem, we extend the use of radioactive tracers to include the long-lived radioactive isotope of iodine, 129I (15.7 million year half life), a product of U fission. The ratios of "29I / 3H will help us to identify the release paths for the radionuclides. Iodine and tritium behave as "conservative" (non-reactive) tracers in groundwater. Different sources (secondary water, air-fall, spent fuel pool, natural groundwater) will have distinct ratios of 1291 / 3 H. The 129j measurement by Accelerator Mass Spectrometry can detect 129I at levels of 106 atoms and a 1291/1 ratio of 10-14. Thus, this represents an extremely sensitive and long-lived tracer for radionuclide release.
| |
| Steam is thought to have extremely low 1291 concentrations (1000 atoms/g), presumably because of the procedures used to remove ions from solution to ensure the integrity of the steam generation process. Any leakage of water between the primary and secondary systems leaks mainly tritium (1000 pCi/g) and is not a major release mechanism for other radionuclides. The Turbine Drain sample will serve as an analogue for the water that could leak during any steam release. Only the Spent Fuel Pool contains significant levels of 1291 ( approximately equivalent to the natural creeks that drain the West Valley, NY facility) although there is no evidence that significant amounts of water have leaked from the pool into the environment. There is a factor of 10000 difference between the ambient 1291 concentration in precipitation (1000 atoms/g) and Spent Fuel Pool water (10,000,000 atoms/g). A similar factor of about a million exists for tritium in precipitation (0.05pCi/g) and spent fuel water(50,000 pCi/g). From this simple comparison, one can estimate the percentage of Spent Fuel Pool water finds its way into any of the groundwater monitoring wells. Other sources of significant 29I, may come from the combined effects of "wash down" from the containment building and seepage into the Moat This washdown should be collected by the drainage system that surrounds the plant but must be evaluated as a potential source. A simple model would propose three potential "end-member" compositions for water at Salem: the Spent Fuel Pool water (high in tritium and high in 129i),
| |
| Turbine Drain Water (relatively high in tritium but very low in 1291) and local precipitation (very low in tritium and 129k .
| |
| | |
| ANALYTICAL PROCEDURESfor IODINE Water samples were prepared for 129j/I ratio measurement by an adaptation of the method described in Fehn et al., 1992. Approximately 100 mL of water was used as starting material for sample preparation except for the two samples with the highest expected ratios where 1 mL and 0.1 mL were used. Since samples were expected to have high 129I /I ratios and low iodine concentrations, carrier iodine with low 1291 content was added to each sample prior to extraction.
| |
| Addition of carrier serves the dual purpose of increasing sample bulk to facilitate measurement, as well as preventing cross-contamination in the source from "hot" samples, i.e., samples high in 1291, during Accelerator Mass Spectrometry (AMS) measurements. To achieve isotopic equilibrium between the sample and carrier KI which is added, samples and carrier were converted to 104. Iodine in the samples was then extracted into CC14 , and back-extracted into the aqueous phase, followed by precipitation as AgI powder, following standard procedures. The silver iodide was pressed into stainless steel sample holders and loaded on a sample wheel for AMS measurement.
| |
| 129I -to-stable iodine ratios (129I /I) were determined by AMS at the PRIME lab facility at Purdue University. AMS uses a tandem accelerator in conjunction with an ion source, several magnets and suitable detectors to sensitively measure atoms of choice with detection limits of one atom in i015 stable atoms, with associated removal of interfering atoms (see Elmore et al.
| |
| (1984a and 1984b), Kubik et al. (1987) for a detailed description of AMS techniques). (This facility is the only one currently in operation in the U.S that can perform the analysis at the required levels ofprecision). The 129I /I ratios were normalized to a known standard during AMS measurement. AMS has a theoretical detection limit of 129I/I ratio = 1 x 10- 5 although practical detection limits are about 50 x 10-]5, due to the lack of natural materials with lower 129i
| |
| /I ratios. Chemical blanks and carrier iodine had 1291 /I ratios of 80 x 10-15 during that AMS run.
| |
| I- content in the carrier solution was measured by ion chromatography with errors of +/- 5%.
| |
| | |
| Analytical Methodsfor Tritium and Helium Shallow wells will be sampled using a dedicated "micro-purge" bladder pump to lift the water.. Care will be taken to place the purge tube near the top of the standing water column to ensure that the well was flushed completely and that the well screen is not exposed to air. .
| |
| Dissolved gas samples were collected in 3/8" o.d. Cu tubing sealed with refrigeration clamps in accordance with standard procedures. Water is collected in 500ml glass bottles fitted with ploy-seal caps.
| |
| Gases are extracted from -25 g of water on a high vacuum line constructed of stainless steel and Coming-1724 glass to minimize helium diffusion. The non-condensable gases (He, Ne, Ar, N2 , CH 4 ) plus water vapor are transferred into a 1724 glass ampoule for subsequent analysis. The amount of non-condensable gas was measured using a calibrated gas volume fitted with a capacitance manometer. Gas ratios (N2 , Ar, CH 4 ) were analyzed on a Dycor Quadropole mass spectrometer fitted with a variable leak valve. The results are combined with the capacitance manometer measurement to obtain gas concentrations (cc STP/Kg of water (+
| |
| 2%). Prior to helium isotope analyses, N2 and 02 are removed by reaction with Zr-Al alloy (SAES-ST707), Ar and Ne are adsorbed on activated charcoal at 770 K and at 400 K, respectively. SAES-ST-I01 Getters (one in the inlet line and 2 in the mass spectrometer) reduce the HD+ background to -100 ions/sec.
| |
| Helium isotope ratios and concentrations were analyzed on a VG 5400 Rare Gas Mass Spectrometer fitted with a Faraday cup (resolution of 200) and a Johnston electron multiplier (resolution of 600) for sequential analyses of the 4 He (F-cup) and 3He (multiplier) beams. On the axial collector (resolution of 600) 3He+ is completely separated from HD+ with a baseline separation of < 2% of the HD+ peak. The contribution of HD+ to the 3 He peak if < 0.1 ion/sec at 1,000 ions/sec of HD+. For 2.0 ucc of He with an air ratio (sensitivity of 2 x 10-4 Amps/torr), the 3He signal averaged 2,000 ions/sec with a background signal of -15 cps, due to either scattered 4 He ions or the formation of 4 He ions at lower voltage potentials within the source of the mass spectrometer. All 3 He/ 4 He ratios are reported relative to the atmospheric ratio (RA), using air helium as the absolute standard. Errors in the 3 He/4 He ratios result from the precision of the sample measurement (0.2%) and
| |
| | |
| variation in the ratio measurement in air (0.2%) and give a total error of 0.3% at 2a for the reported helium isotope value. Helium concentrations (cc STP/Kg of water) are derived from comparison of a known split of the total sample to a standard of known size. The value, as measured by peak height comparison, is accurate to 2% (2cy).
| |
| Tritium values are analyzed using the 3He "in-growth" technique. 150 g of water are degassed of all He on a high vacuum line and sealed in a 3" O.D. 1724 glass ampoule for a period of 30 to 50 days (because of the high tritium levels , with respect to typical precipitation). Glass ampoules had been baked at 2500 C in a helium-free nitrogen gas to minimize the solubility of helium in the glass. After sealing, the ampoules are stored at -20° C to limit diffusion of helium into the bulb during sample storage. During this interval, 3 He produced from the decay of tritium accumulates in the flask. Typical sample blanks are 9 cc of 4 He and 10-1 5 cc of 3 He. Blank corrections to 3 He are made using the 4 He content and assuming that the blank has the air 3 He/ 4 He ratio. The 3 He content of the storage ampoule is measured on the VG 5400 using the above procedures and compared to the 3 He content of air standard. Typical 3 He signals for a sample containing 10 T.U. and stored for 90 days are _88x1 05 atoms (+/- 2%) and a blank of 3 i lxl 04 atoms of 3 He. Errors in the reported tritium value are dependent on the amount of tritium and are 2% (27) at 10 T.U. Higher precision can be achieved with larger samples and longer storage times.
| |
| | |
| Sampling Strategy
| |
| : 1. Determine the age and rate of groundwater flow in the 4 existing shallow (20 foot) near-field wells O,M,N,R. and 2 to 4 proposed shallow wells. It is hypothesized that this water should drain toward the containment building (based on hydraulic head distribution). Tritium (by PSEG) / Helium-3 (by U of Rochester) can determine this flow to +/- 20%. The flow will be compared to the tritium inventory estimates for the building sumps (pump rate x tritium level) to evaluate the flow of tritiated water back toward the containment building (cost $1500 - 2000 @$300 per sample)) (analysis time 1 month)
| |
| : 2. Measure tritium and 3 He in 4 existing far field wells that penetrate into the Vincetown Formation Aquifer: K (80), L (80), P (,80), Q(80) (both measurements to be made at Rochester). The goals are to estimate the travel times for natural groundwater in the Vincetown Fromation, determine if any significant tritium release has migrated away from containment and to determine the groundwater age of any discovered tritium release. Possible enhanced pathways for migration may exist along piping or "footings" pounded to depth. The method does not require knowledge of the tritium input function because the ratio of tritium to helium-3 establishes the age. (cost ($2400 @ 4 x$300 for tritium and 4 x $300 for 3 He) (analysis time 3 months)
| |
| : 3. Measure trtium and dissolved gases in three to five existing deep wells (300 to 800 feet) that tap two drinking water aquifers (Mt Laurel-Wenonah at 300 feet and the Upper Raritan at 800 feet). The water at depth is most likely pre-nuclear with tritium at background levels (0.3 pCi/liter). Any potential leakage of surface water can be evaluated at the Ippm level based on the significant tritium levels found in Turbine steam (1,000,000 pCi/liter) and Spent fuel pool water (100,000,000 pCi/liter) (cost $2000 -3000 at $600/sample) (analysis time 3 months)
| |
| : 4. Measure I- 129 in two background samples (precipitation and far field groundwater) and six to eight wells that contain elevated tritium (4-5 shallow (20') and 2-3 wells from 80 feet). The ratio of 1291 to 3 He will be used to evaluate whether the source is steam (low 1291) or spent fuel pool water (high 1291). (cost $7000 @ $700 per sample) (analysis time 6 months)
| |
| | |
| References Andrews, J. N., I. S. Giles, R. L. F. Kay, and D. J. Lee, Radioelements, radiogenic helium, and age relationships for groundwaters from the granites at Stripa, Sweden, Geochim.
| |
| Cosmochim. Acta, 46, 1533-1543, 1982.
| |
| Elmore, D, PW Kubik, N Conard and J. Fabrika -Martin, Computer controlled isotope ratio measurements and data analysis. Nuclear Instruments and Methods. 83, 233-237, 1984.
| |
| Fehn, U, and GR Holdren, Determination of natural and anthropogenic 1291 in marine sediments, Geophysical Research Letters 13, 137-139, 1986.
| |
| Kubik, PW, D. Elmore, T.K. Hemick, H.E. Gove, U. Fehn, R.T.D. Teng, S. Jiang and S. Tullai Accelerator Mass spectrometry at the University of Rochester, Nuclear Instruments and Methods B29, 138-142, 1987.
| |
| Marine, I. W., The use of naturally occurring helium to estimate groundwater velocities for studies of geologic storage of radioactive waste, Water Resources Res., 15, 1130-1136, 1979.
| |
| Mazor, E., and A. Bosch, Helium as a semi-quantitative tool for groundwater dating in the range of 104-1 08 years, Consultants meeting on isotopes of noble gases as tracers in environmental studies, Vienna, May 29-June 2, Panel Proceedings Series International Atomic Energy Agency, p. 163-178, 1989.
| |
| Mazor, E. and A. Bosch, Dynamics of groundwater in deep basins 4 He dating, hydraulic discontinuities, and rates of drainage, Proceedings of the International conference on groundwater in large sedimentary basins, Australian Water Resources Council Conference Series, 20, 380-389, 1990.
| |
| Poreda, R. J., T. E. Cerling, and D. K. Solomon, Use of tritium and helium isotopes as hydrologic tracers in a shallow unconfined aquifer. J. Hydrology, 103: 1-9, 1988.
| |
| Poreda, R.J., and K. A. Farley, Rare gases in Samoan Xenoliths, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., 113, 129-144, 1992.
| |
| Saunders, M, R. J., Cross, H. A. Jimenez-Vasquez, and R. J. Poreda, Stable compounds of helium and neon: He:@C60 and Ne@C60, Science, 259, 1428-1429, 1993.
| |
| Schlosser, P., M. Stute, H. Dorr, I. Levin, and K. 0. Miunnich, Tritium/ 3 He dating of shallow groundwater. EPSL, 89: 353-362, 1988.
| |
| Solomon, D. K., R. J. Poreda, S. L. Schiff, and J. A. Cherry, Tritium and helium-3 as groundwater age tracers in the Borden aquifer. Water Res. Res. 28: 741-755, 1992.
| |
| Solomon, D. K., S. L. Schiff, R. J. Poreda, and W. B. Clarke, A validation of the 3 H/3 He method for determining groundwater recharge, Water Resour. Res., 29 (9), 295 1-2962, 1993.
| |
| Solomon, D. K., R. J. Poreda, P. G. Cook, and A. Hunt, Site characterization using 3 H/ 3 He ground water ages, Cape Cod MA, Ground Water, 33, 988-996, 1995.
| |
| Stute, M, C. Sonntag, J. DeAk, and P. Schlosser, Helium in deep circulating groundwater in the Great Hungarian Plain: Flow dynamics and crustal and mantle helium fluxes, Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, 56, 2051-2067, 1992.
| |
| | |
| StandardOperatingProcedure Tritium-Helium Dating of Groundwater Samples of groundwater from the Site will be provided to the noble gas laboratory at the University of Rochester. The helium samples (about 30 grams of water) will be collected in copper tubing according to standard methods (see attached instructions). Tritium samples will be collected in 0.5 liter glass bottles that are sealed with polyethylene caps. The helium and tritium samples will be analyzed at the University of Rochester according to standard methods (see Solomon et al.,1 992 and references therein). All contracted work will be performed at University of Rochester facilities. Analytical precision for the measurements are as follows:
| |
| : 1) Tritium: detection limit of 0.1 TU with a maximum uncertainty of +/- 0.1 TU.
| |
| : 2) Helium-4 concentration: Detection limit of 1 cc/kg with a maximum uncertainty of +/- 1 cc/kg.
| |
| : 3) 3 He/ 4He ratios (relative to an air helium standard) with a precision of 0.3% for samples containing 40 grams of water. (Smaller volume samples will have lower precision).
| |
| : 4) Dissolved nitrogen concentrations (detection limit of 1cc/kg) with a maximum uncertainty of +/- 1 cc/kg.
| |
| Air standards are used to calibrate the mass spectrometer with the standard procedure of one standard repeated every two samples. High vacuum blanks will be analyzed at a rate of one blank per five samples.
| |
| The results of the analyses will be synthesized and provided in tabular format. In addition, groundwater ages based on the tritium and 3 He contents of the samples will be calculated and a written report will provide the details of such calculations.
| |
| Analytical Methods for Tritium and Helium Wells are sampled using a Waterra "lift" pump or a "downhole sampler"(a length of Cu tubing fitted with a check valve) to minimize formation of bubbles in the water stream. Each well had been recently purged by extracting more than three well volumes from the standing water in the well prior to sampling. Care was taken to place the purge tube near the top of the standing water column to ensure that the well was flushed completely. During sampling, the Waterra pump was lowered to within 30cm of the bottom of the well. Samples were collected in 3/8" o.d. Cu tubing sealed with refrigeration clamps in accordance with standard oceanographic procedures.
| |
| Gases are extracted from -25 g of water on a high vacuum line constructed of stainless steel and Coming-1724 glass to minimize helium diffusion. The non-condensable gases (He, Ne, Ar, N2 , CH4 ) are transferred to a 1724-glass ampoule, filled with activated charcoal, by the
| |
| | |
| use of a "water vapor pump" .Water vapor streams off the sample from the actions of ultrasonic agitation and condenses in the ampoule which is held at -1950 C. A 2mm constriction in the sample ampoule limits the "back-streaming" of gases. After removal of H2 0 vapor and C0 2 at
| |
| - 900 C and -1950 C respectively, the non-condensable gas was measured using a calibrated gas splitter fitted with a capacitance manometer. Gas ratios (N2 , Ar, CH 4 ) were analyzed on a Dycor Quadropole mass spectrometer fitted with a variable leak valve. The results are combined with the capacitance manometer measurement to obtain gas concentrations (cc STP/Kg of water (+ 2%). Prior to helium isotope analyses, N2 and 02 are removed by reaction with Zr-Al alloy (SAES-ST707), Ar and Ne are adsorbed on activated charcoal at 770 K and at 400 K, respectively. SAES-ST-101 Getters (one in the inlet line and 2 in the mass spectrometer) reduce the HD+ background to -1,000 ions/sec.
| |
| Helium isotope ratios and concentrations were analyzed on a VG 5400 Rare Gas Mass Spectrometer fitted with a Faraday cup (resolution of 200) and a Johnston electron multiplier (resolution of 600) for sequential analyses of the 4 He (F-cup) and 3He (multiplier) beams. On the axial collector (resolution of 600) 3He+ is completely separated from HD+ with a baseline separation of < 2% of the HD+ peak. The contribution of HD+ to the 3 He peak if < 0.1 ion/sec at 1,000 ions/sec of HD+. For 2.0 ucc of He with an air ratio (sensitivity of 2 x 1O-4 Amps/torr), the 3He signal averaged 2,500 ions/sec with a background signal ofA15 cps, due to either scattered 4 He ions or the formation of 4 He ions at lower voltage potentials within the source of the mass spectrometer. All 3 He/ 4 He ratios are reported relative to the atmospheric ratio (RA), using air helium as the absolute standard. Errors in the 3 He/ 4 He ratios result from the precision of the sample measurement (0.2%) and variation in the ratio measurement in air (0.2%) and give a total error of 0.3% at 2cr for the reported helium isotope value. Helium concentrations (cc STP/Kg of water) are derived from comparison of a known split of the total sample to a standard of known size. The value, as measured by peak height comparison, is accurate to 2% (2a).
| |
| Tritium values are analyzed using the 3He "in-growth" technique. 150 g of water are degassed of all He on a high vacuum line and sealed in a 3" O.D. 1724 glass ampoule for a period of 60 to 90 days. Glass ampoules had been baked at 2500 C in a helium-free nitrogen gas to minimize the solubility of helium in the glass. After sealing, the ampoules are stored at -20° C to limit diffusion of helium into the bulb during sample storage. During this interval, 3 He produced from the decay of tritium accumulates in the flask. Typical sample blanks are _10-9 cc of 4 He and 10 1 5 cc of 3 He. Blank corrections to 3 He are made using the 4 He content and assuming that the blank has the air 3 He/ 4 He ratio. The 3 He content of the storage ampoule is measured on the VG 5400 using the above procedures and compared to the 3 He content of air standard. Typical 3 He signals for a sample containing 10 T.U. and stored for 90 days are -8x10 5 atoms (+/- 2%) and a blank of 3 +/- lx104 atoms of 3 He. Errors in the reported tritium value are dependent on the amount of tritium and are 2% (2c) at 10 T.U.
| |
| Higher precision can be achieved with larger samples and longer storage times.
| |
| | |
| Sampling Procedure for Dissolved Gas (Helium) and 3H (Tritium)
| |
| Pre-Sampling Procedures Purge the well completely prior to sampling. Purging procedures should insure complete purging of the well and allow for minimal agitation of the water column in the well annulus. Do not expose the well screen to air (i.e. do not evacuate low yielding wells to dryness). Pumps utilized for purging and sampling should not introduce gas into the well annulus, preferred are submersible pumps, peristaltic pumps and foot valve (waterra type) pumps.
| |
| A slow steady water flow during sampling produces the best results by minimizing cavitation. Cavitation occurs when flow separation forms a partial vacuum on a swiftly moving solid object such as a propeller. The partial vacuum generated strips dissolved gas from the surrounding fluid, generating small bubbles. These bubbles will corrupt the sample by concentrating helium within the bubbles and depleting the water of dissolved helium. Cavitation may occur in both submersible pumps and footvalve pumps, care should be taken for the rate at which the pumps run.
| |
| Pumps should not utilize Teflon hosing, helium diffuses very rapidly through Teflon hosing, Teflon in general should be avoided as much as possible, PVC, poly-propylene and tygon are preferred materials.
| |
| Care should be taken in purging a deep, low yielding well, purging too quickly causes a rapid pressure change on the deeper water in the well. This may cause the dissolved gas within the deep water to come out of solution and cause bubbles to form within the annulus. These bubbles will strip the water of helium generating a bad sample.
| |
| Samples from a residential/ household systems should be taken prior to any treatment system and prior to the pressure tank. If possible it is better to take the sample directly from the well annulus using an external pump. If a sample point is post pressure tank please make note in sample chain of custody.
| |
| Procedure for Dissolved Gas Sample (Helium)
| |
| Attach two segments of tygon tubing to the ends of the copper sample tube and place the open pinch clamps on the tygon tubes. Select two refrigeration clamps, making sure that they have a suitable "gap" in the fully closed position (1 -2 mm) . Do not use clamps that have no gap
| |
| (<1mm) or a spacing greater than 2 mm. Lightly tighten the refrigerator clamps to the outside of the copper sampling tube, leaving 1.5 inches of tubing on both ends.
| |
| Attach the intake of the sample apparatus to the pumping source (for waterra or submersible pumps) and carefully elevate the sample tube above the pump outlet. (If a peristaltic pump is used, it should be downstream of the Cu tube) Angle the tube at 45 degrees so that the flow of water moves upward through the sampler, carefully chase any air bubbles through the sampler so that no air bubbles are noted within the pump/sampler assembly. Continue pumping,
| |
| | |
| keeping a close eye on the downstream tygon tubing for bubbles, gently tap the copper sample tube, held in the "angled" position, with a metal wrench in order to release any bubbles that may be stuck to the side of the sampler. Continue pumping until several tube volumes have flushed through the copper tube and NO bubbles of gas are noted in the tygon lines and sample tube. A slow steady stream of water works best ( about 100 - 400 cc/min)
| |
| Note: This step can sometimes be very difficult, be patient, if it doesn't work after numerous attempts just do the best you can and make note of the problem Continue pumping and slowly close off the upstream pinch clamp on the tygon tubing, then quickly close off the downstream pinch clamp after the upstream is closed. Start to tighten the refrigerator clamps on the copper sample tube by holding the clamp with one hand and tightening the clamp nuts with the other. Tighten the clamp evenly to avoid "scissoring " of the copper tube. The clamp should be tightened to the point where the maximum force is applied to the head of the wrench while holding the clamp tight. Over tightening will breach the sample tube while under tightening will allow the sample to leak. Sometimes there will be a small gap (1-2 mm) in the clamp when it is closed, clamp gaps will vary.
| |
| Carefully remove both tygon hoses and check to see if the crimped ends are either wiggly (over tightened) or leak (under tightened), re-sample if necessary. Check that the clamps are secure by giving them a final tightening (torque of about 30 ft.lbs - force applied with a 4 to 6 inch lever arm- e.g. a box end wrench). If the ends are sealed properly, fill the ends of the copper sample tube with water and cap, keep as little headspace in the ends as possible. If possible it is a good idea to take a duplicate sample, just in case. Label the sample tube with the date, time of sampling, and sample number on a sample tag as well as directly on the copper tube with a marking pen.
| |
| Procedures For 3H Sample After taking the dissolved gas sample, simply fill a 500 ml glass sample bottle from the pump discharge and cap with a poly-propylene cap , leaving no headspace within the bottle.
| |
| Label the bottle with date, time, and sample number. Make sure the sample cap is tight, you can tape the cap to the bottle to prevent loosening with simple electrical tape.
| |
| Shipping the Samples Back to the Lab Store the copper sampling tubes in a horizontal position packed in either foam rubber on their own or encased within piece of aluminum channel stock, packed in foam rubber, pay careful attention to the sample ends, they must be protected from bumps and jars. Either package for shipping very securely or hand carry, bent tubes, mangled ends, and breached tubes are often unextractable back in the lab. As for the tritium sample bottles, pack very tight so that the glass of one bottle cannot contact the glass of another bottle. They should not be able to move or shift within the packing container, usually double boxed sample bottles fair better than single boxed samples. Again some samples have ended up on the floor of UPS due to poor packing, Over Packing Works
| |
| | |
| Ship samples back with sample identification and sampling dates and times on a separate sheet of paper. Ship to:
| |
| Dr. R. J. Poreda Dept. of Earth and Environmental Sciences Hutchinson Hall Rm. 227 University of Rochester Rochester, NY 14627 Phone 716-275-8691 (lab)
| |
| | |
| Appendix H Attachment 2 Research Laboratory Procedures Remedial Investigation Report PSEG Nuclear, LLC, Salem Generating Station, Salem, New Jersey Item Title I Technetium-99 Analysis g aprovjeW~se~gialemn\npO00571.0003 -remedial inmesigatornlaSk0. - nemedialinesgartigon repx nai\appendioeslappendixh . rohedter reSufs\2tlaChmend 2 -t-99\attadlnelat 2 - cowerdoc
| |
| | |
| Appendix H Technetium-99 Analysis Prepared for PSEG by Robert J. Poreda Professor of Environmental Sciences University of Rochester September 15, 2003
| |
| | |
| Appendix H This project will use state-of-the-art methods to determine the abundance and distribution of Technetium-99 in the Salem 1 plant environment. Technetium-99 (9 9Tc) is a radioactive by-product of nuclear power generation (in addition to other mostly "nuclear" sources). Recent analytical advances in inductively-coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) make it possible to detect sub-picogram (less than 1010 atoms) quantities of 99Tc. We will apply these methods to understanding the migration of 9 9Tc in the environment. 99 Tc levels have not been accurately monitored in low-level radioactive settings because of difficulties in detection nor have the pathways of migration in the environment been determined.
| |
| One major focus of the research plan is to understand the migration of radionuclides (especially 9 9Tc and 1291) through the groundwater/soil environment. At Rochester, Professor Udo Fehn and his students have developed and tested the state of the art methods for the determination of 1291. These analyses were successfully used at Ginna to establish the integrity of the containment system that minimized the radionuclide migration from the site. The behavior of Tc in groundwater and its interaction with soils suggests that the mobility of Tc-99 is nearly equivalent to 1-129 and tritium. The geochemistry of Tc is such that it exists as an oxyanion, TcO4 , and has limited adsorption onto soils. Thus Tc-99 could be readily adopted as a fingerprint for spent fuel pool water with the added benefit of lower analytical costs and more rapid sample throughput than I-129 (only the Purdue accelerator can achieve the LLDs necessary for this investigation).
| |
| Technetium (Tc) was detected in 1937 by C. Perrier and E. Segre in a deuteron-irradiated molybdenum sample in the cyclotron of E.O. Lawrence in California. Minute quantities of 9 9Tc (half life = 2.14 x 105yr.) are found to occur naturally as a result of spontaneous fission of uranium in uranium ore bodies. However, the largest source of the weakly radioactive isotope, 99 Tc, is from the fission of uranium in nuclear reactors. Technetium from nuclear power generating stations makes up about 6 percent of uranium fission products (Peacock, 1973), and together with 1291, represents the major long-lived radio-isotopes generated in the nuclear industry. Federal regulations (10CFR61...) specify the 99Tc and 1291 activity levels for disposal in low-level radioactive burial sites, although most waste shipments over-estimate the activity (by as much as 1OOx) and simply report the 99 Tc and 1291 levels as "upper limit values".
| |
| Technetium differs from most of the radionuclides associated with the nuclear industry (90 Sr, 137Cs, 60 Co, 63Ni) that have half lives of 30 years or less and decay to less than 0.01 percent of their original activity in 300 years (the monitoring/evaluation interval).
| |
| Because of the long half life, 9 9Tc in environmental samples is not easily measured by conventional low level counting techniques. Typical detection limit for 99Tc, obtained by 1
| |
| | |
| Appendix H counting, is about 20 pCi/L of water (or 1013 atoms of 9 9Tc). ICP-MS techniques should push this limit down by more than IO0Ox. The technetium from 1000 ml of water is collected on a TEVA disc specifically designed to adsorb Tc. The Tc is eluted from the disc with ultra-pure 2N HCI and 18 MQ water to a total volume of 10 ml. At a conservative sensitivity of 100,000 cps/ppb, a signal of 100 cps is equivalent to a concentration in the water of 0.Olppt or about 0.2 pCi/L.
| |
| The University of Rochester has established a world-class facility for the detection of extremely low levels of environmental metals, including 99 Tc, using plasma source mass spectrometry. In the 1990s, the commercialization of mass spectrometers with ICP sources and quadrupole analyzers has revolutionized the study of trace element geochemistry and environmental chemistry. These instruments have extremely low detection limits (ppt or better) due to the efficiency of the ICP source in ionizing transition metals. In addition, sample preparation is simplified compared to other analytical methods because samples are introduced to the instrument as aqueous solutions. The plasma source mass spectrometry laboratory at the University of Rochester includes a new generation Thermo X-7 instrument, and a VG Plasma 54. The X-7 is a workhorse quadrupole mass spectrometer with exceptional sensitivity and stability for trace metal detection at the ppt level.
| |
| 2
| |
| | |
| ARCADIS Appendix I Tritium Trend Plots for the Station Monitoring Wells
| |
| | |
| I z
| |
| IL I-0 0k 100,000,000 10,000,000 0
| |
| z a-2 (U
| |
| a 1,000,000 0
| |
| 20J 0.
| |
| w L..
| |
| 100,000 0
| |
| x 4..
| |
| NJ GW Quality Criterion UJ 0 10 0
| |
| C, 10,000 E Further Investigation Criterion
| |
| .2 --- - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - -
| |
| 1-- 1,000 iL 100 --
| |
| 10 - I I I I -] I jI I -T I i 2
| |
| 1/1/03 3/17/03 5/31/03 8/14/03 10/28/03 1/11/04 g
| |
| - Date z
| |
| 0 Well Summary zi 11 cIr Installation Date : Feb-2003 Monitored Unit : Vincentown a-Top of Screen : 70.0 ft bgs Bottom of Screen: 80.0 ft bgs FIGURE I-N
| |
| % ARCADIS 0
| |
| 0 Tritium Concentration in Well K 1-1 PSEGNUCLEAPR LC SALEMENERA1NG STATIC l-WHA<'S BRJDG NEWJERSEY
| |
| | |
| r ul I-100,000,000 I I I I I I TII Ir 0) 0 10,000,000 1,000,000 -
| |
| 0.
| |
| -Z LU I-M 100,000 -
| |
| *6os ci C)co NJ GW Quality Criterion t E 10,000 -
| |
| I- Further Investigation Criterion LU
| |
| .2 .- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
| |
| Z-1,000 100 10 I I3 1 I II I I I I I I I I I 8
| |
| 1/11/03 3/17/03 5/31/03 8/14/03 10/28/03 1/11/04 q
| |
| Date 0
| |
| Z Well Summary:
| |
| 0 Z
| |
| Installation Date: May-2003 Monitored Unit : Cofferdam Top of Screen : 10.0ftbgs Bottom of Screen: 20.0 ft bgs FIGURE 0
| |
| 0 0- ARCADIS, Tritium Concentration in Well M PSEGNUCtER LLC SALEMGS\ElAING STA1ICN FHWXS BRPD[E NEWJERSEY 1-2
| |
| | |
| z U-,
| |
| 100,000,000 - -
| |
| I I I I I I I I I I 0
| |
| Co a.
| |
| CU 10,000,000 a 1,000,000 -
| |
| Q I-z 0
| |
| 2 C 100,000 -,
| |
| I-w 0._
| |
| U Y
| |
| to NJ Quality Criterion C
| |
| 0 0 10,000 0.
| |
| E 4., Fu rther Investigation Criterion I-- 1,000 -
| |
| zfL CU
| |
| -J 100 -.
| |
| 10 - I I -I I I I I I I I I I 1/11/03 3/17/03 5/31/03 8/14/03 10/28/03 1/11/04 Date z
| |
| Well Summary:
| |
| 0 z
| |
| O-e Installation Date: Jan-2003 Monitored Unit : Cofferdam a Top of Screen : 10.0ftbgs Bottom of Screen: 20.0 ft bgs FIGURE (9
| |
| 0 0 ARCADiS I Tritium Concentration in Well N PSEGNJO-AR tLC SAkEMCENEROANG PANCWCK'SMIDG(ENEWJERSEY STATK 1-3
| |
| | |
| U-I (a
| |
| 100,000,000 zw I I I 1r 1 rT 0
| |
| 10,000,000-0~
| |
| 0- - 1,000,000 -
| |
| 0, C,
| |
| 0.
| |
| w U]
| |
| 0 100,000 -
| |
| 0l 4-,
| |
| iL a, NJ GW Quality Criterion --
| |
| 0 10,000 -_
| |
| 0 E Furth Investigation Criterion S
| |
| z:
| |
| i- 1,000 -
| |
| CP 100 --
| |
| 10 - I I I I I I I I I I I 1/1/03 3/17/03 5/31/03 8/14/03 10/28/03 1/11/04 8
| |
| Date z
| |
| Well Summary:
| |
| 0z R
| |
| Installation Date: Jan-2003 a- Monitored Unit : Cofferdam Top of Screen : 10.Oftbgs Bottom of Screen: 20.0 ft bgs I.j FIGURE 0
| |
| 0 O ARCADIS Tritium Concentration in Well 0 PSEGNUCLEARllC SALEMG(IERAnNG STAICN I-NHAIS ERIJD NE!NJERSEY 1-4
| |
| ____ A
| |
| | |
| r, w
| |
| U-Ci 0
| |
| 100,000,000 0
| |
| 10,000,000 -7
| |
| 'U 0
| |
| C,- 1,000,000 -:
| |
| .2 C-
| |
| : 0. 100,000 -
| |
| w le co NJ GW Quality Criterion 10,000 -
| |
| C.) Further Investigation E
| |
| .6.
| |
| I.-
| |
| 1,000 --
| |
| 0 w
| |
| -4 100 -
| |
| 10- -I-- I~ -I I- I I I i I I I I 1/1/03 3/17/03 5/31/03 8/14/03 10/28/03 1/11/04 0
| |
| Date z
| |
| Well Summary:
| |
| 5 R
| |
| z Installation Date : Jun-2003 Monitored Unit : Cofferdam I-i..
| |
| Top of Screen : 9.0 ft bgs Bottom of Screen: 19.0 ft bgs g
| |
| FIGURE
| |
| % ARCADIS 0
| |
| 0 0 Tritium Concentration in Well R PSEG MUCLME,LtC SALEM(1ERA1ThNSTAM 1-5 FW-0fCK'S B911XE NEWJERSEY
| |
| | |
| r, z
| |
| 'I-Q 0
| |
| 9 100,000,000 - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
| |
| 0 10,000,000 -
| |
| S2 42 1,000,000 -
| |
| W C._
| |
| 0 Q
| |
| I-0.
| |
| co 100,000 -
| |
| J 6
| |
| L NJ GW Quality Criterion W
| |
| .2 0
| |
| 00 10,000 -
| |
| 07 zb E Further Investigation Criterion U'
| |
| .C-I-- 1,000 -
| |
| i.
| |
| I 100 -
| |
| 0 Q
| |
| 3
| |
| : 0) 10 -. . . . . . . . . . . . .
| |
| I I I , I 5 I I I I I I I I 5 1/1//03 3/17/03 5/31/03 8/14/03 10/28/03 1/11/04 0
| |
| Date L9 FL Well Summary:
| |
| Installation Date : May-2003 Monitored Unit : Shallow, outside Cofferdam a Top of Screen : 24.7 ft bgs 0
| |
| Bottom of Screen: 34.7 ft bgs FIGURE Z ARCADIS Tritium Concentration in Well S PSEG N(JCLEARILC SALEMGENERA1NGSTATICN FICK'S BRIDGENEWJERSEY 1-6
| |
| | |
| 7.
| |
| I-100,000,000 . I I I I [ I I l-O I .
| |
| ,j 0
| |
| 0L.
| |
| 10,000,000 C- 1,000,000 -
| |
| a LI-0 .2
| |
| ('
| |
| 100,000 -
| |
| LU I-y C
| |
| 0 NJ GW Quality Criterion C
| |
| 0 10,000 -
| |
| C-)-
| |
| E Further Investigation Criterion 1,000 01 z3 U':
| |
| Erj 100 -
| |
| 10 - I I I I I I I - I - I -I - I I 1/1/03 3/17/03 5/31/03 8/14/03 10/28/03 1/11/04 8
| |
| Date CL; 0
| |
| Well Summary:
| |
| z I- Installation Date: May-2003 Monitored Unit : Shallow, outside Cofferdam Top of Screen : 27.2 ft bgs Bottom of Screen: 32.2 ft bgs ear C75 FIGURE 0
| |
| 3, 0
| |
| % ARCADIS. Tritium Concentration in Well U 1-7 PSEGNUL2EARLLC SALEMGENERA1MNG STATICT I-FACOXK'S RDCE NEWJERSEY
| |
| | |
| i I-W (jl 100,000,000 ~
| |
| _ I I II I I I z
| |
| 0 w
| |
| 0 05 10,000,000
| |
| -J 1,000,000 n
| |
| (C C.
| |
| a.
| |
| 0 0~
| |
| ci 100,000 8 .2(U C
| |
| a.
| |
| NJ GW Quality Criterion 0
| |
| 0 10,000
| |
| ;9!
| |
| E Further Investigation Criterion
| |
| .r --------------------------------------- I-I-- 1,000
| |
| -6 7
| |
| 100 10 I I I II I II I I I 1/1/03 3/17/03 5/31/03 8/14/03 10/28/03 1/11/04 i
| |
| z Date q
| |
| z Well Summary 0
| |
| Installation Date: Jun-2003 S?
| |
| 0 Monitored Unit : Vincentown Top of Screen : 69.5 ft bgs C-Bottom of Screen: 79.5 ft bgs I,-
| |
| FIGURE 0
| |
| .s 0
| |
| % ARCADIS Tritium Concentration in Wel IV PSEGNULEAR LLC SALEMCENERATING HCK'S C BPJDGENEWJERSEY STATaCN 1-8
| |
| | |
| r-z 100,000,000 z
| |
| 0 0
| |
| 10,000,000 .9 E-aL
| |
| - 1,000,000 Lii 0 CL C
| |
| 0.
| |
| 'Li 100,000
| |
| .24-
| |
| : 0) NJ GW Quality Criterion 0
| |
| 0 10,000 E Further Investigation Criterion LI-4-
| |
| I-- 1,000 100 -.
| |
| 10 - . . . .
| |
| I I
| |
| I I
| |
| I I I I , I 1/1/03 3/17/03 5/31/03 8/14/03 10128/03 1/11/04 a
| |
| Date 5
| |
| z Well Summary:
| |
| I-0 Installation Date: Jun-2003
| |
| _ Monitored Unit : Shallow, outside Cofferdam Top of Screen : 25.0 ft bgs Bottom of Screen: 35.0 ft bgs FIGURE Lii 0
| |
| 0 O. ARCADIS Tritium Concentration in Well W PSEG NUCLEARLLC SALEMGENEIRAflNG FiCK'S BRIDGENEWJERSEY STAnCN 1-9
| |
| | |
| r w
| |
| fe 100,000,000 z
| |
| 0 (0.
| |
| 0 U]
| |
| 10,000,000 0r 0L 1,000,000 2
| |
| a.
| |
| Wa U) 100,000 0
| |
| C.)
| |
| C.) NJ GW Quality Criterion o
| |
| U0 10,000 E Further Investigation Criterion 11- 1,000 100 A N
| |
| 0z 10 - I 3J-- I I I I I 1 I I 1/1/03 3/17/03 5/31/03 8/14/03 10/28J03 1/11/04 Date Well Summary:
| |
| Installation Date : Oct-2003 Monitored Unit : Shallow, outside Cofferdam Top of Screen : 61.3 ft bgs Bottom of Screen: 71.3 ft bgs FIGURE di ARCADIS A-0 0
| |
| 0 Tritium Concentration in Well Z 1-10 PSEGNJUEAR LLC SALREMENERAxNWSTATCN HANCCICK'S 8RIIX. NEWJERSEY
| |
| | |
| e z
| |
| 1- I w
| |
| I.-
| |
| a- 100,000,000 II . I I 1 I , I I -
| |
| z 0
| |
| 2 w
| |
| LU 0 10,000,000 -=
| |
| - 1,000,000 -
| |
| I-t- -I 0 C (0) 0.
| |
| .2 100,000 -
| |
| U' (a I-0 C
| |
| I NJ GW Quality Criterion 0
| |
| C b0 C.)
| |
| 10,000 -
| |
| E Further Investigation Criterion 1:
| |
| .6.
| |
| C.)
| |
| 1--
| |
| I- 1,000 --
| |
| to it a
| |
| 100
| |
| :10 I.
| |
| I I I I I I 1/1/03 3/17/03 5/31/03 8/14/03 10/28/03 1/11/04 Date Cz Well Summar 0 Installation Date : Oct-2003 0~ Monitored Unit : Shallow, outside Cofferdam Top of Screen : 63.2 ft bgs Bottom of Screen: 73.2 ft bgs FIGURE 0
| |
| % ARCADIS, Tritium Concentration in Well AA PSEGNLUER ILC SALEMGlEERAIING SIATICN RMCOCK'S EMODCNEWJERSEY 1-11
| |
| | |
| -.9 I-CD 100,000,000 _ I I I a z
| |
| 0 en 2
| |
| fl~ 10,000,000 0~
| |
| 0-
| |
| - 1,000,000 C.)
| |
| a 0.
| |
| 100,000 C.
| |
| I-.
| |
| I 0
| |
| C NJ GW Quality Criterion U 0 C
| |
| Ci 0 10,000 d
| |
| 0z E Further Investigation Criterion
| |
| .4.
| |
| e 1,000 I,
| |
| 100 -
| |
| 10 _ . .
| |
| II I
| |
| I . . . . .
| |
| I I 1/1/03 3/17/03 5/31/03 8/14/03 10/28/03 1/11/04 M
| |
| 8 Date 8
| |
| z Well Summar Installation Date: Oct-2003 Monitored Unit : Shallow, outside Cofferdam Top of Screen : 57.1 ft bgs a Bottom of Screen: 67.1 ft bgs I-FIGURE 0 ARCADiS 0
| |
| 0 Tritium Concentration in Well AB 1-1 2 PSEGNrLEAPR tLC SkEAAGCERATING STATI@
| |
| WICOWS BRIDCE NEWJERSEY
| |
| | |
| r 4
| |
| w 0
| |
| 100,000,000 _l a I l lI l l l
| |
| * U) w 0
| |
| 10,000,000 LU CL) -
| |
| 1,000,000 i]
| |
| 01 0.
| |
| 0 0 100,000 IL 0)
| |
| NJ GW Quality Criterion o
| |
| 0 C
| |
| d C) 10,000 4
| |
| E Further Investigation Criterion 7
| |
| 1..
| |
| 11- 1,000 100 10 I I I I I I I I I l I I .1 -
| |
| 1/1/03 3/17/03 5131/03 8/14/03 10/28/03 1/11/04 Date z
| |
| ;z I- Well Summary Installation Date : Oct-2003 Monitored Unit : Cofferdam Top of Screen : 74.0 ft bgs 0
| |
| 0 Bottom of Screen: 84.0 ft bgs 0
| |
| FIGURE 0 ARCADIS, Tritium Concentration in Well AC PSEG WJac°R LLCS&LEM
| |
| -WMCKx'S MDGx-GBERA1NG STAnCN NEW JERSEY 1-1 3
| |
| | |
| (
| |
| z ir I-100,000,000 -
| |
| z 0
| |
| w 0W 10,000,000
| |
| 'U r
| |
| C- 1,000,000 C.,
| |
| 0- 0.
| |
| 'U6 100,000 I-U] 4.'
| |
| C 0
| |
| C.)
| |
| NJ GW Quality Criterion W
| |
| 0 10,000 C.
| |
| X0 co Further Investigation Criterion E -
| |
| !L J
| |
| IL .r I--
| |
| 1,000 -
| |
| z CP 100 -
| |
| 10 - _ I I I I
| |
| I I
| |
| I I
| |
| 1/1103 3/17/03 5/31/03 8/14/03 10/28/03 1/11/04 Co Date 5
| |
| z Well Summary:
| |
| 0 0~
| |
| Installation Date: Oct-2003 k
| |
| Monitored Unit : Shallow, outside Cofferdam Top of Screen : 57.1 ft bgs 0 Bottom of Screen: 67.1 ft bgs 0
| |
| C-FIGURE 0
| |
| 0 ARCADIS Tritium Concentration in Well AD PSEGMJCEPR tLC SALEMGSREA1Nw STAT1CN FW$XXXS BNIGEXNEWJE1~SEY 1-1 4
| |
| | |
| I 'I
| |
| 's-,-- -,
| |
| ri 0
| |
| CoOI 3
| |
| 100,000,000 z
| |
| I-(a 6
| |
| w 10,000,000 0
| |
| 0]
| |
| a-a 1,000,000 CL)
| |
| .2 Co 6 C 100,000 I
| |
| 0 Y
| |
| NJ GW Quality Criterion C
| |
| 0 C) 10,000 U'
| |
| E Further Investigation Criterion
| |
| .C.
| |
| 1,000 -
| |
| Ui 0
| |
| z UJ 100 --
| |
| 10- I I I I I I I I I ' I I I I 1/1/03 3/17/03 5/31/03 8/14/03 10/28/03 1/11/04 Date z
| |
| Well Summary:
| |
| 0 z
| |
| tI-w q
| |
| Installation Date: Oct-2003 Monitored Unit : Cofferdam 1-Top of Screen : 71.8 ft bgs Bottom of Screen: 81.8 ft bgs R
| |
| FIGURE 0ii
| |
| % ARCADIS Q
| |
| C9 A Tritium Concentration in Well AE 1-15 PSEGNUCLEARILC SALEMGENERAflW3STATQIC HAOCKS 8RPJDG.NEWJERSEY
| |
| | |
| z 4
| |
| I-100,000,000 I I I z
| |
| 0 10,000,000 C-1,000,000 a.1 Ul I Cu C) I 0 100,000 U
| |
| O 0W U NJ GW Quality Criterion
| |
| ,, E 10,000 Y
| |
| X:
| |
| I- Further Investigation Criterion Ul .2 i
| |
| C. 1,000 L4 i-100 10 -
| |
| , I I I I I I I I I 1/1/03 3/17/03 5/31/03 8/14/03 10/28/03 1/11/04 8
| |
| a Date iFL Well Summary:
| |
| z Installation Date : Oct-2003 0 Monitored Unit : Shallow, outside Cofferdam Top of Screen : 54.2 ft bgs Bottom of Screen: 64.2 ft bgs I-FIGURE 4i Q
| |
| CS V2 ARCADIS. Tritium Concentration in Well AF PSEGMLJaLAP ILC SALEMGENERAIING L JAIXX('S EPI[DG NEWJERSEY STAfCN 1-16
| |
| | |
| lie w
| |
| a.
| |
| 9-100,000,000 - -
| |
| z 0
| |
| e' 0 10,000,000 -
| |
| 2:
| |
| a-0 2 1,000,000 -
| |
| C.)
| |
| CU 0
| |
| U]
| |
| i.. 100,000 -
| |
| I
| |
| .)
| |
| C 0 10,000 -
| |
| e i U 0 E LJ 1- 1,000 --
| |
| W M
| |
| z U
| |
| 100-10 -t-z a 1/1/03 3/17/03 5/31/03 8/14/03 10/28/03 1/11/04 Date L4 0 - - - - - Wells in Vincentown Formation z
| |
| 0 Wells inside the cofferdam
| |
| ----- Wells outside the cofferdam 0
| |
| Monitoring Wells L, P. Q and T are not shown as tritium concentrations are non detect z0 Comparison of Tritium Concentration FIGURE 5 ARCADIS in All Site Monitoring Wells PSEGNLfLEAP LLC SA"EMG(ENRE1ANSTAWM FWNXXHS BROGE.NEWJERSEY 1-1 7
| |
| - 11111
| |
| . ............I..._
| |
| | |
| ARCADIS Appendix J A Perspective on Radiation Doses and Health Risks from Ingestion of Tritium in Drinking Water and Potential Impacts on Aquatic and Terrestrial Biota
| |
| | |
| A PERSPECTIVE ON RADIATION DOSES AND HEALTH RISKS FROM INGESTION OF TRITIUM IN DRINKING WATER AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS ON AQUATIC AND TERRESTRIAL BIOTA David C. Kocher SENES Oak Ridge, Inc.
| |
| 102 Donner Drive, Oak Ridge, TN 37830 The main purpose of this discussion is to consider radiation doses and health risks to the public resulting from ingestion of tritium in drinking water. We begin by comparing the dose resulting from ingestion of a unit activity of tritium with the dose per unit activity of other radionuclides ingested to provide an indication of the radiotoxicity of tritium. We then present a simple method of estimating doses and cancer risks from ingestion of drinking water containing a known concentration of tritium. This method is illustrated by estimating the dose and risk associated with the current drinking water standard for tritium. This discussion also considers current guidance on radiation dose limits for aquatic and terrestrial biota and levels of tritium in water that would be required to potentially impact populations of species.
| |
| Dose Per Unit Activity Intake of Tritium and Other Radionuclides Of all the radionuclides of potential concern in radiation dose and risk assessments for workers and the public, tritium is among the least radiotoxic, meaning that the dose per unit activity intake by ingestion (or inhalation) is among the lowest of all man-made or naturally occurring radionuclides. This conclusion is illustrated by current estimates of doses to adults per unit activity intake of radionuclides by ingestion given in Table 1.1 Doses are given in millirem (mrem), or one-thousandth of a rem, and the assumed unit activity is 1 picocurie (pCi), which corresponds to 0.037 disintegrations per second, or approximately 130 per hour.'
| |
| Doses to adults per unit activity intake of radionuclides by ingestion given in Table 1 are values currently recommended for use in radiation protection of the public by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP).3 In addition to tritium, radionuclides listed in Table 1 include several fission and activation products of importance at nuclear reactors, isotopes
| |
| 'A few radionuclides not listed in Table 1 have estimated doses per unit activity intake by ingestion slightly lower than the value for tritium. However, these radionuclides are rarely, if ever, encountered in significant quantities in the workplace or the environment.
| |
| 2 Doses per unit activity intake by an adult in Table 1 represent an effective dose to the whole body over a period of 50 years following an intake. They are based on considerations of doses to different organs and the period of time after an intake over which radionuclides are retained in the body and continue to deliver a dose even with no further intakes; this time is many decades in some cases.
| |
| 3The ICRP has been the leading international authority on radiation protection since the late 1920's, and ICRP recommendations have formed the basis for radiation protection standards and programs throughout the world. However, many current ICRP recommendations, including doses per unit activity intake of radionuclides by ingestion or inhalation, have not yet been formally adopted by regulatory authorities in the U.S., although these authorities may accept their use in many cases.
| |
| I
| |
| | |
| of uranium found in nuclear fuel, the most important isotopes of plutonium and americium produced in reactors, and naturally occurring isotopes of potassium, radium, and thorium.
| |
| The dose per unit activity of a radionuclide ingested depends on several factors including the half-life of the radionuclide, the types and energies of radiations emitted by the radionuclide, the extent of absorption from the GI tract, the organs of the body in which the radionuclide is deposited and the extent of deposition in those organs, and the rate of elimination from the body by biological processes. The low dose per unit activity intake of tritium, compared with values for other radionuclides, is due to two factors. First, most tritium taken into the body in the form of water behaves as normal body water and is rapidly eliminated from the body with a biological half-time of about 10 days in adults, and this biological half-time is much less than values for the other radionuclides listed in Table 1. Second, the beta radiations (electrons) emitted in tritium decay have very low energies and, thus, the energy deposited in tissue, which determines the dose from decay of tritium in the body, is much lower than the energy deposited by radiations emitted by other radionuclides.
| |
| Conversely, doses per unit activity intake of isotopes of radium, thorium, uranium, plutonium, and americium listed in Table 1 are relatively high because, first, these radionuclides have relatively long retention half-times in the body, taking into account radioactive decay and biological elimination, and, second, they (or their radioactive decay products) decay by emission of alpha particles, which deposit relatively large amounts of energy per unit mass of tissue. In addition, alpha particles are biologically more effective than gamma rays and beta particles in producing health effects (cancers). That is, for the same amount of energy deposited per unit mass of tissue (absorbed dose), the probability of a health effect is much higher for alpha particles than for other radiations. 4 The increased biological effectiveness of alpha particles is taken into account in radiation protection by multiplying absorbed dose in rads by a factor of 20 to calculate dose equivalent in rem.
| |
| There is an additional consideration for tritium that is not taken into account in the dose per unit activity intake of 6.7 x 10-8 mrem per pCi currently recommended by the ICRP and given in Table 1. This value assumes that the biological effectiveness of low-energy beta particles in tritium decay is the same as that of gamma rays and higher-energy beta particles, such as those emitted in decay of Sr-90 and its decay product Y-90. However, many studies in a variety of organisms have indicated that tritium beta particles are biologically more effective than gamma rays and higher-energy beta particles. A representative factor to describe this effect that we have developed for use in human health risk assessments is about 2.4;5 this modification 4 The biological effectiveness of ionizing radiations is believed to depend on the density of ionization in tissue (i.e., the amount of energy deposited per unit path length in passing through matter),
| |
| and alpha particles have a much higher density of ionization than gamma rays and beta particles, due to their high energies and very short ranges in matter.
| |
| 5 The increased biological effectiveness of tritium beta particles has been incorporated, for example, in the methodology developed by SENES Oak Ridge for the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) for use in estimating probability of causation of cancers for the purpose of evaluating claims for compensation by workers at U.S. Department of Energy facilities who develop radiogenic cancers.
| |
| 2
| |
| | |
| of absorbed dose from exposure to tritium is analogous to the factor of 20 for alpha particles used in radiation protection, as described above. 6 Taking into account the increased biological effectiveness of tritium beta particles, the dose to an adult per unit activity intake by ingestion would be 1.6 x 10-7 mrem per pCi; this is the second value listed in Table 1.
| |
| Doses per unit activity intake given in Table 1 apply to adults. However, the general population consists of younger age groups as well as adults. Doses per unit activity intake of radionuclides by younger age groups generally are higher than values for adults, due primarily to the smaller masses of body organs and, in many cases (but not for tritium), the higher absorption of ingested radionuclides in the GI tract at younger ages. For ingestion of tritium in the form of water, doses per unit activity intake at different ages currently recommended by the ICRP are given in Table 2.' At age 1 year or less, for example, we see that doses per unit activity intake of tritium are about a factor of 3 to 4 higher than the value for adults. However, in assessing doses to the public resulting from ingestion of tritium in water, the increased dose per unit activity intake at younger ages is compensated to some extent by the generally lower intake rates of water at those ages. Therefore, the dose per unit intake is not, by itself, indicative of doses to younger age groups from intakes of water containing a known concentration of tritium compared with the dose to adults.
| |
| Even though the dose per unit activity intake of tritium (and other radionuclides) is higher at younger ages than in adults, it is nonetheless reasonable to focus on assessing exposures of adults if the objective of the assessment is to gain a general understanding of doses and risks to the public from exposure to known concentrations of radionuclides in the environment. This approach can be justified based on the consideration that if intakes over a normal lifetime of about 70 years are assumed, as is often the case in dose assessments for routine exposures of the public, the total dose and associated lifetime cancer risk usually will be dominated by the dose and risk resulting from intakes during adult years. More refined calculations that take into account the age-dependence of intakes and dose per unit activity intake do not change estimates of lifetime dose and risk by a large amount, as is illustrated by calculations of the risk from ingestion of tritium in drinking water over a lifetime in a later section. Many dose assessments for the public performed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) assume exposure of adults only.
| |
| Estimation of Dose from Ingestion of Tritium in Drinking Water Estimation of dose from ingestion of drinking water containing a known activity concentration of tritium (or any other radionuclide) is a straightforward procedure. The dose frequently calculated in an assessment of radiological impacts on workers or the public is the 6In early ICRP recommendations issued in 1960, a modifying factor of 1.7 was used to calculate dose equivalent from exposure to tritium, to account for the increased biological effectiveness of tritium beta particles, but this factor has not been retained in recommendations since 1977.
| |
| 7 Doses per unit activity intake in Table 2 represent an effective dose to the whole body over a period from the age at intake to age 70; intakes by adults are assumed to occur at age 20.
| |
| 3
| |
| | |
| dose resulting from one year's intakes of a radionuclide.8 The annual dose from a known concentration of a radionuclide in drinking water is given by Dose (mrem per year) = Concentration (pCi per liter) x Intake rate (liters per day) x Exposure frequency (days per year) x Dose per unit intake (mrem per pCi) .
| |
| As an example, consider the annual dose to an adult corresponding to the EPA's current drinking water standard for tritium; this standard is a concentration limit of 20,000 pCi per liter. 9 For purposes of estimating dose and risk corresponding to drinking water standards, an intake rate of 2 liters (L) per day often is assumed; this intake rate is a reasonable value for an adult who consumes above-average amounts of drinking water. The annual dose to an adult corresponding to 20,000 pCi/L of tritium in water then is given by Dose = (20,000 pCi/L)(2 L/day)(365 days/year)(1.6 x 10-7 mremlpCi) = 2.3 mrem/year.
| |
| This calculation assumes the higher dose per unit activity intake of tritium in Table 1, which incorporates an assumption of a higher biological effectiveness of tritium beta particles. If this assumption were not included, as is presently the case in dose assessments performed by the EPA and NRC, the annual dose would be a factor of 2.4 lower, or about I mrem per year.
| |
| To put the annual dose associated with the drinking water standard for tritium into perspective, we note that the average dose to a member of the public from exposure to natural background radiation, excluding the dose from indoor radon, is about 100 mrem per year, and that the average dose from indoor radon is about 200 mrem per year. Thus, the drinking water standard for tritium corresponds to a dose that is about 1% of the total dose from natural background. This comparison is not intended to trivialize potential exposures to tritium in groundwater, or to convince the public that they should not be concerned about such exposures.
| |
| Rather, the purpose is to illustrate that limits on acceptable exposures of the public to man-made sources of radiation often are set at a small fraction of unavoidable exposures to natural background radiation.
| |
| The procedure given above also can be used to estimate annual doses to other age groups using doses per unit activity intake given in Table 2, increased by a factor of 2.4 to account for the greater biological effectiveness of tritium beta particles. However, especially at the youngest ages, a substantially lower intake rate of water should be assumed. For example, during the first 8 Calculation of an annual dose is particularly appropriate when the purpose of the assessment is to demonstrate compliance with a limit on dose in any year. Many radiation standards for workers and the public in the U.S. are expressed in terms of limits on annual dose.
| |
| 9 The EPA's drinking water standards strictly apply at the tap (i.e., after treatment by a municipal water supply), rather than the source. However, the EPA often applies these standards to protection of groundwater resources, regardless of whether groundwater is being used to supply drinking water; see, for example, the report on Protectingthe Nation's Ground Water: EPA 's Strategyfor the 1990s (1991),
| |
| Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) Directive 9200.4-18 (1997), which applied to cleanup of radioactively contaminated sites under CERCLA (Superfund), standards for hazardous waste disposal facilities regulated under Subtitle C of RCRA (40 CFR Part 264), and standards for disposal of spent fuel, high-level radioactive waste, and transuranic waste (40 CFR Parts 191 and 197).
| |
| 4
| |
| | |
| year of life, a reasonable maximum intake rate of water is about 1 L/day. Based on doses per unit activity intake by a 3-month-old and 1-year-old in Table 2, the dose during the first year of life would be between 11 and 15 mrem.
| |
| Estimation of Lifetime Cancer Risk from Ingestion of Tritium in Drinking Water Once the annual dose from ingestion of tritium in drinking water is estimated, it is a straightforward procedure to obtain an estimate of the risk of cancer incidence that would result from exposure over a lifetime. The lifetime cancer risk is given by Risk = Annual dose (mrem per year) x Exposure duration (years) x Risk per unit dose .
| |
| As an example, radiation risk assessments for hypothetical and prospective exposures of the public often assume that exposure occurs over a 70-year lifetime. Then, using a standard assumption developed by the EPA that the risk of cancer incidence per unit dose in the general population is 7.6 x 10-7 per mrem,'" the lifetime risk of cancer incidence corresponding to the drinking water standard of 20,000 pCi/L for tritium is Risk = (2.3 mrem/y)(70 years)(7.6 x 10-7 per mrem) = 1.2 x IO'.
| |
| That is, there would be slightly more than one chance in 10,000 of a radiation-induced cancer from a lifetime's exposure to tritium in water at the drinking water standard.
| |
| The calculated lifetime risk given above is highly simplistic in that it assumes that the concentration of tritium in drinking water remains constant over 70 years. More realistically, if there were no further releases of tritium to the source of drinking water, the concentration would decrease substantially over time as a result of radioactive decay and dilution by inflow from uncontaminated sources, such as rainwater. For example, taking only radioactive decay into account, the average concentration of tritium over 70 years would be about 25% of the initial concentration, and the same reduction in lifetime risk resulting from exposure over 70 years would occur. On the other hand, the concentration could remain fairly constant or even increase over time if there were continuing releases of tritium.
| |
| The calculated lifetime risk of slightly above 1 in 10,000 corresponding to the drinking water standard for tritium is at the upper end of the range of acceptable risks of 1 in 10,000 (1 0 4) to 1 in 1,000,000 (10-6) used by the EPA to establish preliminary remediation goals (PRGs) at contaminated sites subject to cleanup under CERCLA (Superfund)." A limit on acceptable risk of about 1 in 10,000 also is incorporated in other EPA regulations that apply to releases of "0The risk of cancer incidence per unit dose estimated by the EPA is an average value in a population of all ages, and it takes into account that the risk per unit dose depends on age at time of exposure and is generally highest at the youngest ages.
| |
| "Risks corresponding to drinking water standards for radionuclides generally fall in the acceptable risk range under CERCLA when an exposure time of 70 years is assumed and risks of cancer incidence to the public per unit activity of radionuclides in drinking water are estimated in accordance with current federal guidance.
| |
| 5
| |
| | |
| radionuclides to the environment or radioactive waste disposal. We also note that risk assessments at Superfund sites often assume a shorter exposure duration of 30 years. This assumption would reduce estimates of lifetime cancer risk from ingestion of radionuclides in drinking water, assuming also that the concentration remains constant, by a factor of 0.43. To put risks corresponding to the drinking water standard for tritium in perspective, we note that the lifetime risk of cancer incidence from exposure to natural background radiation at an average dose of about 300 mrem per year, including the dose from indoor radon, is nearly 2 in 100.
| |
| The calculation of lifetime cancer risk described above ignores the age-dependence of intake rates of drinking water and doses per unit activity intake of tritium. More refined calculations that incorporate the age-dependence of intakes and dose are given in the EPA's Federal Guidaice Report No. 13, Cancer Risk Coefficientsfor Environmental Exposure to Radionuclides. For ingestion of tritium in drinking water, the EPA has estimated a lifetime risk of cancer incidence per unit activity intake in the whole population of 5.1 x 10-14 per pCi. This calculation does not incorporate an enhanced biological effectiveness of tritium beta particles by a factor of about 2.4; if this factor were included as in the dose calculations given above, the risk per unit activity intake would increase to 1.2 x 10-13 per pCi. For example, if the tritium concentration in water is at the drinking water standard of 20,000 pCi/L, the activity intake over a 70-year lifetime, assuming a water intake of 2 L/day, would be 1.0 x 109 pCi, and the resulting lifetime risk of cancer incidence would be 1.2 x 1 0 4, or slightly above 1 in 1 0,000. Thus, for tritium, the refined calculation of risk that accounts for age-dependent effects gives essentially the same answer as our calculation based on an assumption of intakes by adults only., 3 Finally, we note that the calculations of dose and risk described above involve substantial uncertainty. The uncertainty in the dose per unit activity intake of tritium recommended by the ICRP is believed to be about a factor of 2, meaning that the true value could be as much as a factor of 2 above or below the recommended values in Table 1 and 2, the uncertainty in the biological effectiveness of tritium beta particles (the factor of 2.4) used in our dose calculations is also about a factor of 2, and the uncertainty in the risk per unit dose is believed to be about a factor of 3. In addition, the uncertainty in the intake rate of drinking water by an individual is about a factor of 2 to 3, depending on age. These uncertainties generally are not taken into account in radiation protection or in dose assessments for hypothetical and prospective exposure situations. However, they are important when the purpose of an assessment is to estimate doses, cancer risks, or probability of causation of cancers in identifiable individuals.
| |
| Effects of Tritium on Aquatic and Terrestrial Biota In addition to potential effects on human health arising from the presence of tritium (and other radionuclides) in groundwater, potential impacts on aquatic and terrestrial biota are of
| |
| '2 See, for example, standards for airborne emissions of radionuclides developed under the Clean Air Act (40 CFR Part 61) and the standards for radioactive waste disposal identified in footnote 9.
| |
| '3For many radionuclides, there are differences in the two approaches to calculating risk from ingestion, although the differences usually are not large and do not exceed a factor of about 5 in the worst case. When there are differences, the refined calculations that account for the age-dependence of intakes and doses per unit activity intake generally give lower risks.
| |
| 6
| |
| | |
| concern. Approaches to radiation protection of biota differ from approaches to radiation protection of humans in two important ways.
| |
| First, a basic premise of radiation protection of humans is that all individuals should be afforded adequate protection. This objective is reflected in requirements that are intended to limit doses and health risks to individuals who could receive the highest doses. In contrast, standards for protection of biota normally focus on protection of populations of species, including species that are the most sensitive to radiation.' 4 The basic premise is that the ability of all species to reproduce and maintain viable populations, which allows them to serve their functions in an ecosystem, should not be impaired, although it is recognized that individual members of a species may be harmed.
| |
| Second, the fundamental concern in radiation protection of humans is to limit the risk of cancer in exposed individuals and populations, and the approach to limiting cancer risks is based on an assumption that there is some probability of a radiation-induced cancer at any dose.'5 In contrast, based on studies of radiation effects in many organisms, the critical biological effects on populations of species that involve impairment of reproductive capability (i.e., the effects that occur at the lowest doses) are found to occur only at doses and dose rates above a threshold.' 6 Therefore, biota are considered to be protected as long as the dose and dose rate is maintained below the threshold for impairment of reproductive capability in the most sensitive species.
| |
| Other effects on populations of species, such as a significant increase in mortality, occur only at substantially higher doses.
| |
| Although there is no formal system of radiation protection of biota similar to the system of radiation protection for humans, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) have developed recommendations on dose limits for aquatic and terrestrial biota, and the U.S. Department of Energy is applying these limits at its facilities. Specifically, it is generally considered that populations of the most sensitive species of terrestrial animals will be protected if the absorbed dose is limited to less than 0.1 rad/day, and that the absorbed dose to aquatic animals and terrestrial plants should be limited to less than 1 rad/day.'7 The recommended dose limits for "Exceptions can occur when potential exposures of individual members of threatened or endangered species are of concern.
| |
| "Radiation protection of humans also is concerned with limiting the risk of severe hereditary (genetic) effects in an exposed individual's offspring, and these effects also are assumed to occur with some probability at any dose. However, the risk of radiation-induced hereditary effects in humans is believed to be much less than the risk of cancer.
| |
| '6 The threshold doses and dose rates for impairment of reproductive capability can vary greatly (e.g., by a factor of 100 to 1,000) depending on the particular species of concern. Although there are exceptions, threshold doses and dose rates tend to be lowest in mammals and birds, intermediate in higher plants, fishes, amphibians, reptiles, and crustaceans, and highest in insects, primitive plants, mollusks, and simple life forms (bacteria, protozoans, and viruses).
| |
| 17Implicit in these daily dose limits is an assumption that exposures are occurring over a long time period (on the order of months or more), rather than over short periods of time. If exposures occur only over short time periods, species generally can tolerate higher dose rates without significant impairment of reproductive capability.
| |
| 7
| |
| | |
| biota are much higher than the current dose limit for members of the public from all controlled sources combined, which is 0.1 rem per year.' 8 It should be noted that dose limits for biota are expressed in terms of absorbed dose, rather than dose equivalent as in standards for humans. The question of the biological effectiveness of such radiations as alpha particles and low-energy tritium beta particles in inducing threshold effects that impair reproductive capabilities of biota is controversial and unresolved at the present time. One view to which we subscribe is that if there is an increased biological effectiveness of tritium beta particles in inducing threshold effects in biota, it should be less than the value that applies to induction of cancers in humans.' 9 Thus, the biological effectiveness of tritium beta particles in biota should be less than a factor of two and probably can be ignored.
| |
| Levels of tritium in water that could result in impacts on aquatic or terrestrial biota can be estimated in the following way. Since more than half of the mass of many organisms is water, it is reasonable to assume that the concentration of tritium in an organism is the same as the concentration in water to which the organism is exposed; the average concentration in all tissues of an organism generally would be lower. Then, based on the known average energy of tritium beta particles, the absorbed dose rate per unit activity concentration of tritium can be calculated; the result is 2.9 x 10-7 rad/day per pCi/gram. Since the density of water is 1,000 grams (g) per liter, the concentration of tritium in water corresponding to the dose limit for terrestrial animals of 0.1 rad/day is Concentration = [(0.1 rad/day)/(2.9 x 10-7 rad/day per pCi/g)] x (I10 g/L) = 3.4 x 1O8 pCi/L .
| |
| The concentration of tritium in water corresponding to the dose limit for aquatic animals and terrestrial plants of 1 rad/day is a factor of 10 higher, or 3.4 x 109 pCi/L. Based on this simple analysis, it is evident that concentrations of tritium in water would need to be more than a factor of 10,000 higher than the drinking water standard of 20,000 pCi/L for there to be any potential for deleterious effects on populations of terrestrial biota, and that the difference would need to be more than a factor of 100,000 to potentially affect populations of aquatic biota.
| |
| '8 The public dose limit of 0.1 rem per year is included in the NRC's radiation protection standards in 10 CFR Part 20. Although the public dose limit is intended to be applied to the total dose from all controlled sources combined, the NRC applies this dose limit to individual licensees, without regard for doses due to other controlled sources. However, other EPA regulations that apply to the Salem facility, including standards for operations of nuclear fuel-cycle facilities (40 CFR Part 190) and standards for airborne releases of radionuclides (40 CFR Part 61), limit doses to the public due to releases from the facility to a small fraction of the dose limit of 0.1 rem per year. The NRC also requires that releases of radionuclides to the environment be maintained as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA),
| |
| and application of the ALARA requirement generally reduces doses to the public from operations at nuclear power plants to a very small fraction of the dose limit.
| |
| '9This view is based on the notion that radiation effects on biota occur only at high doses where the density of ionization is high for any radiation type (including gamma rays) and, therefore, that there should be less difference in the biological effectiveness of different radiations at high doses than at the much lower doses of concern in assessing cancer risks in humans.
| |
| 8
| |
| | |
| These discussions have sought to establish the following points.
| |
| * Tritium has a substantially lower dose per unit activity intake than other radionuclides, either man-made or naturally occurring, to which workers and members of the public normally could be exposed.
| |
| * Based on many studies of the effects of tritium in various organisms, we believe that calculations of radiation doses to humans from ingestion (or inhalation) of tritium should take into account an increased biological effectiveness of beta particles emitted in tritium decay of a factor of about 2.4, even though this effect is not yet incorporated in estimates of dose per unit activity intake recommended by the ICRP or used by the EPA and NRC.
| |
| * The dose per unit activity intake of tritium is higher in younger age groups than in adults, with the increase being the highest in infants. However, when the lower intake rates of water by younger age groups are taken into account, the dose per unit activity concentration of tritium in water is less than a factor of 2 higher for infants than adults, and the total dose and cancer risk resulting from intakes of water over a lifetime are dominated by the dose from intakes during adult years.
| |
| * Doses and health risks to the public that would result from consumption of drinking water that contains tritium at concentrations equal to the EPA's drinking water standard of 20,000 pCi/L are low and are only a small fraction of the unavoidable doses and risks from exposure to natural background radiation.
| |
| * The lowest concentrations of tritium in water that could be of concern in regard to ensuring protection of populations of the most sensitive species of aquatic and terrestrial biota are more than a factor of 10,000 higher than the drinking water standard of 20,000 pCi/L.
| |
| 9
| |
| | |
| Table 1. Doses to adults per unit activity intake of radionuclides by ingestiona Radionuclide Radioactive half-life Dose per activity intake (mrem per pCi)
| |
| H-3 (tritium) 12.33 years 6.7 x 10-8 (1.6 x 10-7)b K-40 1.277 x 109 years 2.3 x I0-5 Mn-54 312.11 days 2.6 x 106 Co-58 70.86 days 2.7. x 10-6 Co-60 5.27 years 1.3 x 10 Sr-90 28.79 years 1.0 x lo, Sb-125 2.75856 years 4.1 x 10-6 1-129 1.57 x 107 years 4.1 x 104 1-131 8.0207 days 8.1 x 10-5 Cs-134 2.07 years 7.0 x I V Cs-137 30.07 years 4.8 x 10-5 Ra-226 1600 years 1.0 x 1o-Ra-228 5.75 years 2.6 x I0-3 Th-228 1.9116 years 2.7 x 104 Th-232 1.405 x 1010 years 8.5 x 104 U-234 2.455 x IO' years 1.8 x 104 U-235 7.038 x 108 years 1.7 x 104 U-238 4.468 x I09 years 1.7 x 10' Pu-239 24,110 years 9.3 x 104 Am-241 432.2 years 7.4 x 104 aExcept as noted, values are current recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) for exposure of adults in the general population (see footnote 2 in text).
| |
| Value in parentheses takes into account an assumption of an increased biological effectiveness of low-energy beta particles emitted in tritium decay by a factor of 2.4 (see text).
| |
| 10
| |
| | |
| Table 2. Doses to individuals of various ages per unit activity intake of tritium by ingestiona Dose per activity intake Age at time of intake (mrem per pCi) 3 months 2.4 x 10-7 1 year 1.8 x l0o-5 years 1.1 X l0o7 1O years 8.5 x 10.8 15 years 6.7 x 10-8 Adult 6.7 x O-'
| |
| aValues are current recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) for exposures of members of the general population (see footnotes 2 and 7 in text). If an increased biological effectiveness of tritium beta particles is assumed, values should be increased by a factor of about 2.4 (see text).
| |
| 11}}
| |
