Chapter 2 UMTRA Project Has Grown in Size and Cost exceeds the maximum concentration levels, DOE may choose to clean up the groundwater only to the background level standard. Supplemental standards. This standard may apply at sites under special circumstances, such as the following: (1) the groundwater is not a current or potential source of drinking water because of its poor quality or limited quantity, (2) the groundwater cleanup would cause more harm than good to the environment, or (3) the cleanup is not technically feasible. In such cases, DOE may apply to NRC to use the supplemental standards and leave the groundwater as it is. After assessing the applicability of EPA's various groundwater standards at each site, DOE developed proposed cleanup strategies for 24 sites. These proposed strategies are (1) no further action at 13 sites, (2) passive remediation at 9 sites, and (3) active measures to clean up the contamination at the 2 remaining sites. 13 When no health risk is demonstrated, DOE may decide that no cleanup action is necessary. Or, depending on its assessment of risk, DOE may decide to use a passive cleanup, such as a natural flushing approach. At sites where DOE believes that it is necessary to protect health and the environment, the Department may initiate a more active cleanup strategy, such as pumping and treating the groundwater. Regardless of the strategy it chooses, DOE must obtain NRC's concurrence. At 13 sites, DOE believes that no groundwater cleanup activities are warranted and so has proposed no further action at these sites. If DOE'S proposal is accepted, the cost of the groundwater activities at these 13 sites will be primarily for activities such as studying the sites (e.g., to identify the type and level of contamination), holding public meetings, and working with NRC. DOE believes that its proposal to take no further action at these 13 sites will comply with EPA's groundwater standards as long as the groundwater contamination does not exceed the background levels or maximum concentration limits, or as long as supplemental standards are applicable on the basis of limited use of the groundwater.1 "Because the proposals shown are DOE's projections and are for planning purposes only, they are subject to agreements reached with the affected states and tribes and the completion of the final site-specific documents. "Groundwater may be classified as "limited use" if the total dissolved solids exceed 10,000 milligrams per liter, if there is widespread ambient contamination that cannot be cleaned up using treatment methods reasonably employed in public water supply systems, or if the quantity of water available is less than 150 gallons per day Chapter 2 UMTRA Project Has Grown in Size and Cost "No further action" can mean one of three things, which DOE breaks down as follows: • The site's groundwater is not contaminated. DOE characterizes this condition, which has occurred at one of the Title I sites, as "no further action." • The groundwater is contaminated, but conditions at the site warrant the use of the supplemental standards or alternate concentration limits. DOE characterizes this condition, which has occurred at six sites, as "no further action, compliance demonstration." Insufficient data on groundwater were collected at the site during the surface cleanup, so that additional data must be collected to demonstrate that the supplemental standards should be used. DOE characterizes this condition, which has occurred at six sites, as "demonstrate compliance through additional characterization." DOE believes that nine sites are candidates for passive remediation, or natural flushing. Although the cleanup of the groundwater contamination at these nine sites may take up to 100 years to complete, DOE estimates that, except for long-term monitoring, its work will be completed by 2014. By that time, DOE will need to show that the cleanup of the groundwater is occurring at such a rate that the cleanup will be completed within 100 years. As noted above, passive remediation means performing no cleanup and instead relying on natural flushing. Natural flushing cleans groundwater through the process of dilution. Over time, as the groundwater flows through the aquifer, the concentration of contaminants gradually decreases. EPA's regulations require monitoring to verify the movement of contaminants in the groundwater and the related reduction in contamination. DOE plans to continue monitoring the sites for 30 years and then demonstrate through its groundwater models that the process will result, within 100 years, in a level of cleanliness that meets the applicable EPA standard. DOE believes that natural flushing is a viable cleanup strategy when (1) it will protect human health and the environment, (2) it will reduce the concentration of contaminants to a level below that prescribed by the standards in less than 100 years, and (3) the groundwater is not used for and is not expected to be used for drinking water. If natural flushing is chosen, access to the contaminated groundwater must be restricted Chapter 2 UMTRA Project Has Grown in Size and Cost through means such as monitoring and controlling the site's boundaries and developing and enforcing land-use policies. According to a DOE official, the federal government has never used natural flushing as a cleanup strategy. However, EPA believes that natural flushing is a viable alternative when (1) water use and ecological considerations are not affected and (2) the cleanup will occur in less than 100 years. Furthermore, EPA believes that institutional controls, if enforced by governmental entities or installed with a high degree of permanence, can be relied upon for up to 100 years. Finally, at some sites a passive compliance strategy may not comply with the applicable EPA standards, may not adequately protect human health or the environment, or may not be accepted by the public or the affected community. Under these circumstances, DOE will propose an active strategy for the groundwater cleanup. For example, DOE may propose (1) pumping out the contaminated groundwater, treating it, and discharging it on the surface or (2) adding nutrients to the groundwater to promote bacterial growth that will break down the contaminants into nonhazardous elements (known as bioremediation). DOE believes that two sites-Monument Valley and Tuba City, Arizona-are candidates for active remediation because natural flushing at these sites would not clean the groundwater within 100 years. These two sites are located on lands belonging to the Navajo and Hopi Indian tribes. According to DOE officials, tribal officials are supporting active remediation of the groundwater. In addition, although the groundwater is not currently being consumed by people, the contaminants associated with the groundwater at both sites could cause death if ingested by infants. Chapter 3 DOE's Future Costs Are Uncertain Various Factors May The ultimate extent and cost of DOE's surface and groundwater cleanups depends on the resolution of a number of issues. First, while the surface cleanup of the Title I sites is completed or progressing at the majority of the sites, it will not be completed by the end of fiscal year 1996, when DOE's legislative cleanup authority expires. Second, because the groundwater cleanup is in its early planning stages, as discussed in chapter 2, its final scope and cost depend largely on the methods chosen to conduct the cleanup and the financial participation of the affected states. If DOE's proposed least-cost approaches are not chosen, the project's costs will increase accordingly. In the event that any state is unwilling or unable to share the cost of the groundwater cleanup. DOE will notify the Congress that it cannot complete the cleanup in those locations. Third, if the Congress provides for disposal of additional tailings in Grand Junction, Colorado that are unearthed in the future, DOE will incur added costs. Finally, NRC's regulations specify that it make a one-time minimum charge to the owners/operators of Title II sites of $250,000 in 1978 dollars ($530,000 in 1995) to pay for the basic surveillance costs at each site. This amount has not been reviewed and updated since 1980 and excludes any amount for ongoing maintenance. DOE's estimates of the annual costs of surveillance and maintenance at the sites indicate that NRC's expected minimum charge may be understated. Although DOE plans to complete most of its surface cleanup by the end of fiscal year 1996—when its legislative cleanup authority expires the Department believes it unlikely that work at some sites can be completed by then. At those sites, DOE anticipates it could complete the cleanup by early 1997. The licensing of these sites will continue into 1998 and DOE has established a goal of completing all licensing activities by the end of 1998. However, NRC officials are less optimistic that all the licensing will be completed by this date. Completion of Surface According to a DOE official, if the Department receives a 2-year extension of its cleanup authority, it can complete the surface cleanup of all the Title I sites by the beginning of 1997. Work has already been completed at 15 sites, and at another 4 sites, cleanup is progressing on schedule and completion is expected before the end of fiscal year 1996. For example, at the two Rifle, Colorado, sites, hauling of the tailings is complete, the radon barrier will be completed in October 1995, and the disposal cell's rock cover should be in place by May 1996, as scheduled. The cleanup at twe other sites (Gunnison and Maybell, Colorado) is scheduled for completion Chapter 3 DOE's Future Costs Are Uncertain in November 1995 and January 1997, respectively. At the remaining five sites, however, progress has been hampered by outstanding issues. At the Naturita, Colorado, site, the cleanup is scheduled for completion during fiscal year 1997, contingent on NRC's concurrence with DOE's site cleanup and disposal plan for the site, which DOE hopes to obtain in December 1995. Work at the Naturita site was delayed when DOE, in response to public pressure, changed the location of the disposal cell. Once a new location was selected, work began on the disposal cell's design, but construction of the disposal cell cannot begin until NRC concurs with the plan. Accordingly, in an attempt to speed the process, DOE skipped the first two steps of its typical three-step process for obtaining NRC's concurrence. The first two steps essentially involve obtaining NRC's early review of the preliminary plans. Because it skipped the early review steps, however, DOE is less certain than it has been in other cases that NRC will accept the plan without major modifications. Yet DOE must obtain NRC's concurrence by December 1995 in order to begin construction in the spring of 1996 and complete the cleanup of the site in 1997. According to NRC officials, the Commission received the remedial action plan for this site on November 14, 1995. As a result, although NRC is giving this review a high priority, because of the late submission of the documentation, NRC cannot guarantee completion of the review by the end of 1995. The cleanup of the two sites located at Slick Rock, Colorado, has also been slowed by problems with a subcontractor's performance. Work at the two sites began during the spring of 1995. However, the subcontractor's poor performance resulted in slow progress, and in October 1995 a decision was made to terminate the contract. DOE estimates it will cost about $4.6 million (in 1995 dollars) to terminate the project and rebid the work.' As of September 1995, the project was 6 months behind schedule. Nonetheless, DOE currently expects the cleanup at this site to be completed in fiscal year 1997, as projected. Finally, DOE's Schedule for completing the cleanup could also be affected by its decision on whether to clean up the two North Dakota sites or "de-list" them (drop them from the program). As indicated in chapter 1, DOE added these two sites to the original list of 22 Title I sites early in the 'These costs are for the extended opening of the field office at Slick Rock, the rebidding of the contract, and attorneys' fees. |