PB98-964005
EPA 541-R98-021
September 1998
EPA Superfund
Record of Decision:
Savannah River Site (USDOE)
OU 20 K-Area Bingham Pump
Outage Pit (643-1G)
Aiken, SC
3/23/98
-------
United States Department of Energy
Savannah River Site
Record of Decision
Remedial Alternative Selection for the
K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-1G) (U)
WSRC-RP-97-178
Revision 1
October 1997
Westinghouse Savannah River Company ^ g^ £•
Savannah River Site * J5i^s.s_»
, SC 29808 SAVANNAH KIVEI tnf
Prepared for the U. S. Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC09-96-SR1B500
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Binghain Pump Outage Pit (643- 1C)
Savannah River Site
October 1997
WSRC-RP-97-178
Revision 1
Disclaimer
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared by Westinghouse Savannah River Company
(WSRC) for the United States Department of Energy under Contract No.
DE-AC09-96-SR18500 and is an account of work performed under that
contract. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or
services by trademark, name, manufacturer or otherwise does not
necessarily constitute or imply endorsement, recommendation, or favoring
of same by WSRC or by the United States Government or any agency
thereof.
Printed in the United States of America
Prepared for
U. S. Department of Energy
and
Westinghouse Savannah River Company
Aiken, South Carolina
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVE SELECTION (U)
K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-1G)
WSRC-RP-97-178
Revision 1
October 1997
Savannah River Site
Aiken, South Carolina
Prepared by:
Westinghouse Savannah River Company
for the
U. S. Department of Energy Under Contract DE-AC09-96SR18500
Savannah River Operations Office
Aiken, South Carolina
-------
Record of Decision for UK K-A/ca Binghain Pump Outage Pit (643-1G) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision 1
October 1997
This page intentionally left blank.
-------
Record of Decision forlhe K-Arca Binghain Pump Outage Pit (643-1C) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 • Declaration
DECLARATION FOR THE RECORD OF DECISION
Unit Name and Location
K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit (SRS Building Number 643-1G)
Savannah River Site
Aiken, South Carolina
The K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit (KBPOP) Operable Unit (OU) is listed as a Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) unit in Appendix C of the Federal
Facility Agreement (FFA) for the Savannah River Site (SRS). This OU is comprised of source (soil)
control and groundwater units.
Statement of Basis and Purpose
This decision document presents the selected remedial alternative for the KBPOP located at the SRS in
Aiken, South Carolina. The selected alternative was developed in accordance with CERCLA, as
amended, and to the extent practicable, the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan (NCP). This decision is based on the Administrative Record File for this specific CERCLA unit.
Description of the Selected Remedy
The preferred alternative for the KBPOP operable unit is Institutional Controls which will restrict this
land to nonresidential use and preclude residential use of this area. The risk levels present at the KBPOP
are at the lower end of the risk range. However, the presence of buried debris with fixed contamination
requires Institutional Controls in order to be protective from unauthorized removal/excavation concerns.
Implementation of the Institutional Controls alternative will require both near- and long-term actions
which will be protective of human health and the environment. For the near-term, signs will be posted at
the KBPOP indicating that this area was used to manage hazardous materials. In addition, existing SRS
access controls will be used to maintain this site for nonresidential use.
In the long-term, if the property is ever transferred to non-federal ownership, the U.S. Government will
take those actions necessary pursuant to CERCLA 120(h). These actions will include a deed notification
disclosing former waste management and disposal activities as well as any remedial actions taken on the
site. The deed notification shall, in perpetuity, notify any potential purchaser that the property has been
used for the management and disposal of construction debris and other materials, including hazardous
substances.
The deed shall also include deed restrictions precluding residential use of the property. However, the need
for deed restrictions may be recvaluatcd at the time of transfer in the event that exposure assumptions
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Binghain Pump Outage Pit (643-1C) WSRC-RP-97-I78
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 Declaration
differ and/or contamination no longer poses an unacceptable risk under residential use. In addition, if the
site is ever transferred to non-federal ownership, a survey plat of the area will be prepared, certified by a
professional land surveyor, and recorded with the appropriate county recording agency.
Institutional Controls meets the remedial goals for the KBPOP operable unit by precluding future on-site
residential use of the area, buried waste contact, removal, or excavation.
The RI/BRA concludes that the KBPOP is not impacting groundwater. Constituents are not observed to
have migrated horizontally and clayey zones underneath the base of the pit will limit vertical migration
potential.
The post-Record of Decision (ROD) document, the KBPOP Corrective Measures
Implementation/Remedial Action Report (CMI/RAR), will be submitted to the regulatory agencies four
months after issuance of the ROD. The regulatory review period, SRS revision period, and final
regulatory review and approval period for the CMI/RAR will be 90 days, 60 days, and 30 days,
respectively.
The KBPOP is not subject to the requirements for Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
permit modification per Appendix C of the FFA for the SRS.
Statutory Determinations
Based on the KBPOP Remedial Investigation Report with Baseline Risk Assessment, the KBPOP poses no
significant risk to the environment and minimal risk to human health. Therefore, a determination has
been made that Institutional Controls are sufficient for protection of human health and the environment
for the KBPOP operable unit.
The selected remedy is protective of human health and the environment, complies with Federal and State
requirements that are legally applicable or relevant and appropriate to the remedial actions, and is cost-
effective. The low levels of contaminants in the soil make treatment impractical. Because treatment of
the principal threats of the site was found to be impracticable, this remedy does not satisfy the statutory
preference for treatment as a principal element.
Section 300.430 (f)(4)(ii) of the NCP requires that a five-year review of the ROD be performed if
hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain in the waste unit. The three Parties, U.S.
Department of Energy, South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, have determined that a five-year review of the ROD for the KBPOP
will be performed to ensure continued protection of human health and the environment.
-------
lUmd oTOMWM tar the K-Aim Bitten Punp Oume « (643-IG)
SmoMfe River She
OootarlM?
WSRC.RP47.17t
Revtafaal
Dedmdoa
Date
Date
Thomas F. Heenan
Assistant Manager for Environmental Quality
U. S. Department of Energy, Savannah River Operations Office
Richard D. Green
Acting Division Director
Waste Management Division
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency • Region IV
Date
R. Lewis Shaw
Deputy Commissioner
Environmental Quality Control
South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control
-------
WSROW-97-I7I
Oaober 1997 D^fantioo
This page intentionally left blank.
-------
DECISION SUMMARY
REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVE SELECTION (U)
K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-1G)
WSRC-RP-97-178
Revision 1
October 1997
Savannah River Site
Aiken, South Carolina
Prepared by:
Westinghouse Savannah River Company
for the
U. S. Department of Energy Under Contract DE-AC09-96SR18500
Savannah River Operations Office
Aiken, South Carolina
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Binghani Pump Ouugc Pi( (643-1G) ' WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 Page ii of vi
This page intentionally left blank.
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Binghain Pump Outage Pit (643-1C) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 Pageiiiofvi
DECISION SUMMARY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
I. SRS Site and Operable Unit Name, Location, Description, and Process History 1
n. Site and Operable Unit Compliance History 5
HI. Highlights of Community Participation 7
IV. Scope and Role of Operable Unit Within the Site Strategy 9
V. Summary of Operable Unit Characteristics 11
VI. Summary of Operable Unit Risks 16
VII. Remedial Action Objectives and Description of Considered Alternatives for the
KBPOP Source Control Operable Unit 25
VIII. Summary of Comparative Analysis of the Alternatives 30
IX. The Selected Remedy 40
X. Statutory Determinations 42
XI. Explanation of Significant Changes 42
XII. Responsiveness Summary 42
XHI. Post-ROD Document Schedule 43
XTV. References .'. 45
List of Figures
Figure 1. Location of the Reactor Areas at SRS 2
Figure 2. Location of the K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit 3
Figure 3. K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit Dimensions 4
Figure 4. Pen Branch Watershed and Associated Operable Units 10
Figure 5. Conceptual Site Model for the K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit 12
Figure 6. Soil Sampling Locations for the K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit 14
Figure 7. Groundwater Sampling Locations for the K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit 15
Figure 8. Post-ROD Document Schedule 44
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-IC) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision 1
October 1997 Page i v of vi
DECISION SUMMARY
TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont'd)
List of Tables Page
Table 1. Estimated Radionuclide Inventory at the K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit 6
Table 2. K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit Summary of Risk and Hazard Calculations for
Exposure of Known On-Unit Industrial Workers 19
Table 3. K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit Summary of Risk and Hazard Calculations for
Exposure of Hypothetical Future On-Unit Residents and Industrial Workers 21
Table 4. K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit Remedial Goals for Constituents of Concern by
Receptor and Medium 24
Table 5. Comparative Analysis of Remedial Alternatives Considered for the K-Area Bingham
Pump Outage Pit Source Control (Soil) Operable Unit 32
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Bingham Pump Outage Pii (6-43- 1C)
Savannah River Site
October 1997
WSRC-RP-97-178
Revision I
Page v of vi
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
ARARs Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements
ASCAD™ Approved Standardized Corrective Action Design
BRA Baseline Risk Assessment
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
CMI/RAR Corrective Measures Implementation/Remedial Action Report
COCs Constituents of Concern
COPCs Constituents of Potential Concern
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CSM Conceptual Site Model
DOE U.S. Department of Energy
EAV E-Arca Vaults
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
FFA Federal Facility Agreement
FS Feasibility Study
HI Hazard Index
KBPOP K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit
NCP National Oil and Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
OU Operable Unit
RAOs Remedial Action Objectives
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RGs Remedial Goals
RI Remedial Investigation
ROD Record of Decision
SCDHEC South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Concern
SDCF Soils/Debris Consolidation Facility
SRS Savannah River Site
WSRC Westinghouse Savannah River Company
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Bingham Pump Outage Pil (643- 1C) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site PagHiofvi
October 1997
This page intentionally left blank.
-------
Record of Decision for (he K-Arca Binghani Pump Outage Pit (643-1C) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 Page I of 46
I. SAVANNAH RIVER SITE AND OPERABLE UNIT NAME, LOCATION,
DESCRIPTION, AND PROCESS HISTORY
Savannah River Site Location, Description, and Process History
The Savannah River Site (SRS) occupies approximately 310 square miles of land adjacent to the
Savannah River, principally in Aiken and Barn well counties of western South Carolina. SRS is a
secured U.S. Government facility with no permanent residents, and is located approximately 25
miles southeast of Augusta, Georgia and 20 miles south of Aiken, South Carolina (Figure 1).
SRS is owned by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Management and operating services are
currently provided by Westinghouse Savannah River Company (WSRC). SRS has historically
produced tritium, plutonium, and other special nuclear materials for national defense and the
space program. Chemical and radioactive wastes are by-products of nuclear material production
processes.
Operable Unit Name, Location, Description, and Process History
The Federal Facility Agreement (FFA) for the SRS lists the K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit
(KBPOP), 643-1G, as a Comprehensive Environmental Response. Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA) unit requiring further evaluation, using an investigation/assessment process to
determine the actual or potential impact to human health and the environment. The KBPOP is
not subject to requirements for Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) permit
modification per Appendix C of the FFA. The K Reactor (Figure 1) is located in the west-central
part of the SRS (approximately 4 miles east of the SRS boundary). The KBPOP is located
immediately south and outside of the K Reactor fence line (Figure 2) with a surface boundary of
approximately 400 feet in length and 60 feet in width (Figure 3).
Surface water drainage ditches surround the KBPOP to the north, west, and south. These ditches
collect and redirect runoff water to reduce erosion. As depicted in Figure 2, the KBPOP is
located on the west side of a small topographical high. Consequently, surface water drainage
from other areas has little or no effect on the surface of the KBPOP. Generally, no surface water
is found in the drainage ditches.
The KBPOP is situated in the Tobacco Road formation which extends from ground surface to a
depth of 95 feet below ground surface. The Tobacco Road formation is composed of dark red to
tan, very fine to fine sandy clay and clayey sands with laminated tan and purple, silly, clayey very
fine to medium sands.
-------
Record of Decision Tor (lie K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-1C)
Savannah River Site
Ociobcr 1997
WSRC-RP-97-178
Revision I
Page 2 of 46
Figure 1. Location of the Reactor Areas at the Savannah River Site
LOCATION
OP THE
REACTOR AREAS
AT
SAVANNAH
RIVER SITE
(U)
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-IG)
Savannah River Site
October 1997
WSRC-RP-97-178
Revision I
Page 3 of 46
Figure 2. Location of the K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit
LEGEND
SRS ROAD
N50.000 SRS COORDINATE
SYSTEM
0 WELL CLUSTER
CONTOUR INTERVAL = I0FT
INTERMITTENT STREAM
LOCATION OF
K-REACTOR AREA
BINGHAU PUMP OUTAGE PIT
SCftLE:
I l i
J I
0 1000 2000 3000 FT
/SRSN
IOCATGM V
K-RDCIOR MCA
OOUU Ktf
OUT/CE PIT
-------
Record of Decision for Ihc K-Arca Bingham Pump Outage Pil (643- IG)
Savannah River Site
October 1997 _^___^^_
WSRC-RP-97-178
Revision I
Page 4 of 46
Figure 3. K-Arca Bingham Pump Outage Pit Dimensions
K-REACTOR AREA
BUILOING\ 188 -K
100-K PERIMETER FENCE
N50.000 SRS COORDINATE SYSTEM
FENCE
— eso— TOPOGRAPHICAL CONTOUR
(10 FOOT INTERVAL)
SCALE: FEET
i i i i i
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arta Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-IG) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision 1
October 1997 Page 5 of 46
The groundwater flow direction is lo the southwest across the KBPOP and the groundwater flow
rate for the water table aquifer beneath the KBPOP is estimated at approximately 91.25 ft/year.
Between 1957 and 1958, miscellaneous construction debris (pipes, cables, ladders, etc.) generated
by major modifications and repairs to the primary and secondary reactor cooling water systems
was buried in the KBPOP. There were no pumps buried and no liquid waste was disposed of in
the KBPOP. The depth of excavation at the KBPOP ranged from 9 lo 14 feet, which indicates a
sloping pit base (this is consistent with the use of the pit for disposal purposes). Low-level
radioactive debris generated by the repairs (less than 25 mR/hr with no detected alpha activity)
was buried in the KBPOP. Debris with radioactive contamination greater than 25 mR/hr was
placed at the SRS Burial Ground. Table 1 illustrates the estimated inventory of activity at the
time of burial and as of December 31, 1995. The estimated burial inventories provided in Table
1 are based on a conservative estimation from the process history of reactor operations and was
taken from the 1987 BPOPs Environmental Information Document. This list is not considered to
be an all inclusive list of radionuclides that were evaluated during the KBPOP characterization.
For complete details on the list of radionuclides that were evaluated during the unit
characterization, refer to the KBPOP RI Work Plan.
The KBPOP was backfilled with approximately four feet of fill material in 1958 and is now an
open grassy area marked by orange ball markers and concrete monuments. Annual inspections
are conducted for signs of soil subsidence; and, sunken areas are filled to grade as needed.
H. SITE AND OPERABLE UNIT COMPLIANCE HISTORY
SRS Operational History
The primary mission of SRS was to produce tritium, plutonium-239, and other special nuclear
materials for our nation's defense programs. Production of nuclear materials for the defense
program was discontinued in 1988. SRS has provided nuclear materials for the space program,
as well as for medical, industrial, and research efforts up to the present. Chemical and
radioactive wastes are by-products of nuclear material production processes. These wastes have
been treated, stored, and in some cases, disposed at SRS. Past disposal practices have resulted in
soil and groundwater contamination.
SRS Compliance History
Waste materials handled at SRS are regulated and managed under RCRA, a comprehensive law
requiring responsible management of hazardous waste. Certain SRS activities have required
-------
Record of Decision for the K- Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-1G)
Savannah River Site
October 1997
WSRC-RP-97-178
Revision 1
Page 6 of 46
Table 1. Estimated Radionuclide Inventory at the K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit
Radionuclide
Cobalt-60
Slrontium-90
Ruthenium-103/106
Cesium- 137
Promethium-147
Total
Inventory at Burial (Curies)
0.172
0.112
0.130
0.414
0.172
1.00
Inventory Corrected for Decay Through
December 31, 1995 (Curies)
1.34xlO'3
4.70x1 V2
1.12xlO'12
1.75x10-'
7.50x1 0'6
2.23x10''
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Binghain Pump Outage Pil (643-1G) WSRC-RP-97-I78
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 Page 7 of 46
Federal operating or post-closure permits under RCRA. SRS received a hazardous waste permit
from the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC); the
permit was most recently renewed on September 5, 1995. Part V of the permit mandates that
SRS establish and implement an RCRA Facility Investigation Program to fulfill the requirements
specified in Section 3004(u) of the Federal permit.
On December 21, 1989, SRS was included on the National Priorities List (NPL). The inclusion
created a need to integrate the established RCRA Facility Investigation Program with CERCLA
requirements to provide for a focused environmental program. In accordance with Section 120 of
CERCLA, DOE has negotiated a Federal Facility Agreement (FFA, 1993) with the U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the SCDHEC to coordinate remedial activities at
SRS into one comprehensive strategy which fulfills these dual regulatory requirements.
Operable Unit Compliance History
As previously stated, the KBPOP is listed in the FFA as a CERCLA unit requiring further
evaluation to determine the actual or potential impact to human health and the environment.
The KBPOP is not subject to RCRA 3004(u) permit modification requirements per Appendix C
of the FFA. The Remedial Investigation (RI) Work Plan (rev. 0) was submitted to the regulatory
agencies in June 1992. The RI Field Start occurred in January 1995. The RI characterization and
Baseline Risk Assessment (BRA) were conducted for the unit between 1995 and 1997. The
results of the RI and BRA were presented in the RI/BRA Report (WRSC, 1997b). The RI/BRA
Report was submitted in accordance with the FFA and the approved implementation schedule,
and was approved by the EPA and the SCDHEC in May 1997. The Feasibility Study (FS) was
submitted in accordance with the FFA and the approved implementation schedule, and was
approved by EPA and SCDHEC in June 1997. The Proposed Plan (PP) was also submitted in
accordance with the FFA and the approved implementation schedule, and was approved by
SCDHEC in June 1997 and EPA in July 1997.
m. HIGHLIGHTS OF COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
CERCLA requires that the public be given an opportunity to review and comment on the
proposed remedial alternative. Public participation requirements are listed in Sections 113 and
117 of CERCLA. These requirements include establishment of an Administrative Record File
that documents the investigation and selection of the remedial alternatives for addressing the
KBPOP soil and groundwater. The Administrative Record File must be established "at or near
the facility at issue". The SRS Public Involvement Plan (DOE, 1994) is designed to facilitate
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Ajca Binghoin IHimp Outage Pii (643-IG) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 Page 8 of 46
public involvement in the decision-making process for permitting, closure, and the selection of
remedial alternatives. The SRS Public Involvement Plan addresses the requirements of RCRA,
CERCLA, and the National Environmental Policy Act. Section 117(a) of CERCLA, as amended,
requires the notice of any proposed remedial action and provides the public an opportunity to
participate in the selection of the remedial action. The Proposed Plan for the K-Area Bingham
Pump Outage Pit (WSRC, 1997c), a part of the Administrative Record File, highlights key
aspects of the investigation and identifies the preferred action for addressing the KBPOP.
The FFA Administrative Record File, which contains the information pertaining to the selection
of the response action, is available at the EPA office and at the following locations:
U.S. Department of Energy
Public Reading Room
Gregg-Graniteville Library
University of South Carolina-Aiken
171 University Parkway
Aiken, South Carolina 29801
(803)641-3465
Thomas Cooper Library
Government Documents Department
University of South Carolina
Columbia, South Carolina 29208
(803) 777-4866
Reese Library
Augusta State University
2500 Walton Way
Augusta, Georgia 30910
(706)737-1744
Asa H. Gordon Library
Savannah State University
Tompkins Road
Savannah, Georgia 31404
(912)356-2183
The public was notified of the public comment period through the mailings of the SRS
Environmental Bulletin, a newsletter sent to approximately 3500 citizens in South Carolina and
Georgia, and through notices in the Aiken Standard, the Allendale Citizen Leader, the Augusta
Chronicle, the Barnwell People-Sentinel, and The State newspapers. The public comment period
was also announced on local radio stations.
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Area Binghoin I'uinp Outage Pit (643- 1C) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 Page 9 of 46
The 30-day public comment period began on July 8, 1997 and ended on August 6, 1997. A
public meeting was not requested. Since there were no comments received during the public
comment period, a Responsiveness Summary was not prepared.
IV. SCOPE AND ROLE OF OPERABLE UNIT WITHIN THE SITE STRATEGY
The overall strategy for addressing the K Bingham Pump Outage Pit (KBPOP) was to: (1)
characterize the waste unit delineating the nature and extent of contamination and identifying the
media of concern (perform the RI); (2) perform a baseline risk assessment to evaluate media of
concern, constituents of concern (COCs), exposure pathways, and characterize potential risks;
and (3) evaluate and perform a final action to remediate, as needed, the identified media of
concern.
The KBPOP is an operable unit (OU) located within the Pen Branch Watershed along with
several other K-Area waste units (Figure 4). No wetlands or creeks are adjacent to the area
surrounding the KBPOP. Several source control and ground water OUs within this watershed
will be evaluated to determine future impacts, if any, to associated streams and wetlands. It is the
intent of SRS, EPA, and SCDHEC to manage these sources of contamination to minimize impact
to the watershed.
Based on characterization and risk assessment information, the KBPOP source control unit does
not impact the watershed. Upon disposition of all source control and groundwater operable units
within this watershed, a final, comprehensive evaluation of the watershed will be conducted to
determine whether any additional actions are necessary for the watershed. The proposed action
for the KBPOP soil and groundwater aquifer is a final action.
The KBPOP is one of four Bingham Pump Outage Pit areas at the SRS, collectively referred to as
the BPOP Approved Standardized Corrective Action Design (ASCAD™) waste unit group.
ASCAD™ provides for complete characterization, technology evaluation, and remedial design of
the KBPOP lead unit within the BPOP waste unit group. This is followed by a focused
characterization, technology validation, and unit-specific design for the secondary ASCAD™
BPOP waste units (i.e., R/P/L BPOPs). ASCAD™ then provides for streamlining the design
development process and projects focused technologies for remedial action for the secondary
units based on the lead unit.
Under the ASCAD™ strategy, the information from the lead site, KBPOP, will be used to define
the site profile envelopes for comparison to the conditions that are expected to be found at the
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Oinghain l»unip Outage Pit (645- 1C)
Savannah River Site
October 1997
WSRC-RI>-97-l78
Revision 1
Page 10 of46
Figure 4. Pen Branch Watershed and Associated Operable Units
I I
I I I § I I § 8 S I 8 8 I § I I I
PEN BRANCH TATHBHtt TITH ASSOCIATED OPKABL8 OMITS
LEGEND
II l-fc-M tcio/Coatlc Basin W
ii Of PH 10
12 CU> fit II
«) OF Pit V
(4 Of Pit 41
45 (V Pit It
it or Pit w
t? or Pit MS
71 Cat Cylinder DltpOMl Facility Mi
IJ t-fc-M RlntfUB to Outoai Pit* Ul
l< l-VM Btmlna/MbeU Pit lit
IS I-ATM Coal PI I* fkroH Basin 2*7
1C, I-Ar« Contanlnat lot Basin 24(
II (-in«d So! I Is 4ran 105-* 376
CafeiiMd Spills tran tOS-t 415
Carnintd Spills «ra« tW-* 4U
Ca«>irwl Spllli l; Basin
I-*r«o Itoactor Cool Ing wt«r System
L-*r«o Croclon Control Sit*
1-4TM taactar Cooling SystM
Potential IUIMM
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Bingham Pump Oulage Pit (643- 1C) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site - Revision I
October 1997 Page 11 of 46
R/P/L BPOPs secondary sites. Envelopes are bounding conditions that should be met in order to
apply the remedial alternative used on the lead site. The general concept is that all the Bingham
Pump Outage Pits have similar operational histories, received similar wastes, and would probably
have similar contamination profiles. The secondary sites will be characterized to determine if
their site profile matches the profile of the lead site. If the secondary site(s) profiles are within
the KBPOP site envelopes, the preferred alternative selected for the KBPOP will be implemented
at the secondary site(s).
V. SUMMARY OF OPERABLE UNIT CHARACTERISTICS
A conceptual site model (CSM) was developed for the KBPOP that identifies the primary
sources, primary contaminated media, migration pathways, exposure pathways, and potential
receptors for each unit. The CSM for the KBPOP is presented in Figure 5; and, is based on the
data that is presented in the CERCLA documentation for this unit. The Quality Control
Summary Reports (WSRC, 1995a, b) and the RI with BRA Report (WSRC, 1997b) contain
detailed analytical data for all of the environmental media samples taken in the characterization
of the KBPOP. These documents are available in the Administrative Record (see Section HI).
The primary source of contamination at the KBPOP is the buried waste. Leaching has been
defined as the primary release mechanism and provides the initial movement of constituents from
the pit into surrounding soil horizons. Dust and/or volatile emissions, a secondary release
mechanism, could be transported via the air/wind and/or stormwater runoff pathways to off-unit
locations.
The soil underneath the KBPOP would constitute the secondary source of contamination, if
impacted. For this secondary source, infiltration/percolation would provide the means for
constituents to migrate vertically, potentially reaching the groundwater. Once constituents enter
the groundwater system, movement away from the unit boundaries is certain.
The only potential risk associated with the KBPOP is restricted to the soil at the unit due to
external radiation exposure from the surface soil for both hypothetical future residents and
workers.
Media Assessment
The Remedial Investigation Report with Baseline Risk Assessment for the K-Area Bingham Pump
Outage Pit (643- 1C) (U) (WSRC, 1997b) contains detailed analytical data for all of the
environmental media samples taken in the characterization of the unit.
-------
PRIMARY
PRIMARY SECONDARY
RELEASE SECONDARY RELEASE
MF.rHAMSM snimrF. MBCHANTSM
PATHWAY
K-Arc*
Blngham
Pump Ouup
Pit Wutei
w
Innimtion/
Percolition
ROUTE
POTENTIAL RECEPTORS
HUMAN
Current
LuidUM
On-Unli
Worter
Hnxxhttfol
raluraUndUM
On-Unil
Waiter
On-Uall
Rtrideni
ECOLOGICAL
Ttrreiirli)
Aqialic
- I - i -1-1 *"T-
Inhilulon
I o I o I
Suffice Soil
(0-0.3 m)
Inftiniion/ 1
_ Pocoluon I
i
r
Excavuion/ " i
Biouubaioa L
. Subiurfice
* Soils
>•
k.
I— >
w
BiocieUpttke
w
Biou
tn|eliiun
Dermil Conuci
Exiemil Radlition
0
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
0
X
o
—
™| Inpnion
0
o
Inftnlon
InhalHlon
Dermil Conuo
—
o
—
0
o
0
o
—
—
**?
f
S
VI
n
o
o
M_
CD
s?
2
o'
i
C9
•0
•a
"8
Z^. ^L _^_ — — 3
£
UJ
5
Legend
O
X
» Pllhwtyi
» Piinciptl piihwiyt for quiniiuiiw evthiuion
• Pnhwiys for (jutlitiove evtlui6oii
• Incomplete piihwiy
in
73
. a -j
i » OQ
-------
Record or Decision for (he K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-1C) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 Page 13 of 46
The KBPOP characterization proceeded in a phased approach to collect soil and groundwater
data to evaluate the nature and extent of contamination and the potential risk. A total of 36 soil,
6 groundwater, and 6 geotechnical samples were collected. The following summaries for the soil
and groundwater are based on the screening that was completed for the remedial investigation
and not the baseline risk assessment. Baseline risk assessment results are discussed in Section
VI.
Soil
During the KBPOP remedial investigation, unit-specific background sampling was conducted at
three soil boring locations (KBP1, KBP2, and KBP3) positioned upgradient from the pit (Figure
6). For the soil borings, composite samples were collected from each of five intervals (0-1 ft, 10-
12 ft, 12-14 ft, 14-16 ft, and 16-18 ft). The background soil samples were divided into data sets:
surface soil (0-1 ft) and deep soil (>9 ft). Soil samples were not collected in the entire 0-4 ft
range since this soil interval represents the fill material that was placed at the unit in 1958.
Figure 6 also graphically depicts the thirty-six soil samples which were collected from the three
pit borings (KBP6, KBP9, and KBP11) and the six perimeter borings (KBP4, KBP5, KBP7,
KBP8, KBP10, and KBP12).
For soil, the results from the K Bingham Pump Outage Pit (KBPOP) sample analyses indicate
that minor concentrations/activities of constituents have migrated from the pit into the
surrounding soil horizons; however, horizontal migration is limited to the boundaries of the pit
and vertical migration is limited to the upper clayey zones.
The geotechnical and geologic data indicate that a less permeable zone is present underneath the
pit that will inhibit less mobile constituents from migrating vertically and potentially impacting
the groundwater.
Groundwater
A total of six groundwater samples were collected from the water table aquifer in the vicinity of
the KBPOP. These include two background samples (KH1 and KH4), an additional upgradient
sample (KH3). and three down- or sidegradient samples (KH2, KH5, and KH6) (Figure 7). The
initial groundwater samples were collected using temporary piezometers.
-------
Record of Decision for Ihc K-Arca Bingham Pump Outage Pil (643- 1C) WSRC-RP-97- 178
Savannah River Sice Revision 1
October 1997 ^Sf '4 of **
Figure 6. Soil Sampling Locations for the K-Arca Bingham Pump Outage Pit
I
H51400
MS2MO —
NSBOO —
: I
BUVMC tM*
A» BASK
\
^
^
/,
LEGEND
a SOXBORMC
1 50
1C
I I !
J
1
a
i
o
1
J
^
c
DO-KPEMCTOt FOCE
a
an
an
n
O
Oft
ani i QKBP'
„ QACXCRMOI
2 K8M
^ A D
K8P6O 3KBPC
a
an
o
am
(SMXCROUWl
OPJ
a
'
— NSMflO
— KSJMO
— NSflOO
MA
too eo 100 f\
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-IG)
Savannah River Site
October 1997
WSRC-RP-97-178
Revision I
Page IS o(46
Figure 7. Groundwater Sampling Locations for the K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit
BUILDING 188-K
ASH BASIN
LEGEND
O GROUNDWATER SAMPLE LOCATION
CONTOUR INTERVAL • 0.5 FEET
*- WATER FLOW DIRECTION
KBP-1D UPGRADIENT WELL
KBP-2D DOWNGRADIENT WELL
KH5 GROUNDWATER DATA INDICATED
SCALE FEE!
0 50 100 150
/SRSN
WTO) t
rat «•*« wor mr
ounce m us euii oownnei
-------
Record of Decision for ihc K-Arca Bingham Pump Outage Pil (W3-IG) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 Page 16 of 46
The metal concentrations were unusually high and were detected in both upgradient and
downgradient sampling locations for the KBPOP and are interpreted to be directly related to the
sampling protocol used. These unusually high metal concentrations are the indirect result of the
high turbidity associated with each sample. To demonstrate the validity of this interpretation,
Confirmatory Characterization was conducted in July 1996, during which two RCRA-standard
groundwater monitoring wells (one upgradient (KBP1D) and one downgradient (KBP2D)) were
installed at the KBPOP. Results from the sampling of these wells support the interpretation that
the KBPOP has not impacted the groundwater and that the metal constituents detected are
naturally occurring.
The detection of iodine-129 is suspect because no other fission products (i.e., technetium-99 and
strontium-90) were detected in this temporary piezometer sample and because false positives are
often associated with gamma PHA (the method used to analyze the sample). Moreover, this
detection is also suspect because iodine-129 was not detected in the groundwater samples taken
from the RCRA-standard monitoring wells which were installed and sampled during the KBPOP
Confirmatory Characterization.
Soil Leachability Analysis
Soil leachability modeling was performed with a detailed unit-specific model. The model
calculates concentrations of soil water constituents at the base of the vadose zone. Groundwater
concentrations are then calculated from these values by applying the groundwater dilution factor.
The nature of the input data and the analytical model assumptions are such that the estimates of
groundwater concentrations are conservative.
The leachable constituents of potential concern for the KBPOP include metals, inorganic
compounds, radionuclides, organics, and pesticides with the predominant risk driver for the
hypothetical future on-unit resident and on-unit worker being iodine-129. As stated previously,
the iodine-129 detection is highly questionable and below the reported detection limit for iodine-
129. Using the highly questionable value with the conservative soil leachability models
overestimates the future groundwater values. Therefore, corrective action for the groundwater is
not warranted based upon the soil leachability analysis.
VI. SUMMARY OF OPERABLE UNIT RISKS
As part of the investigation/assessment process for the KBPOP waste unit, a BRA was performed
using data gathered during the assessment phase. Detailed information regarding the
development of constituents of potential concern (COPCs), the fate and transport of
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-1G) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision 1
October 1997 ^ Page 17 of 46
contaminants, and the risk assessment can be found in the Remedial Investigation Report with
Baseline Risk Assessment for the K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-1G) (U) (WSRC,
1997b).
An exposure assessment was performed to provide an indication of the potential exposures which
could occur based on the chemical concentrations detected during the unit-specific sampling
activities. The current land use is an inactive industrial site. The only current exposure scenario
identified for the KBPOP was for on-unit workers and/or visitors, who may perform
environmental research on a limited and intermittent basis at the KBPOP. Conservative future
exposure scenarios identified for the KBPOP included future on-unit industrial workers and
future on-unit resident adults and children. The future residential scenario includes homegrown
produce as an exposure point, which is not considered under the current on-unit visitor or future
industrial worker scenarios.
The following exposure pathways were evaluated for the human receptors in the KBPOP
RI/BRA:
• The current (known) on-unit worker was evaluated for exposure to contaminated soils
through ingestion, dermal contact, inhalation of particulates in air, and direct radiation. A
drinking water pathway was determined to not be credible for the current on-unit worker
since shallow groundwater is not used as a source of drinking water at the SRS.
• The hypothetical future on-unit industrial worker was evaluated for exposure to surface soil
through incidental ingestion, inhalation of windblown dust in air, dermal contact, and direct
radiation. In addition, exposure to groundwater through ingestion and dermal contact was
evaluated. Inhalation of volatiles from groundwater was not evaluated since it was not
expected to be a significant exposure pathway for the hypothetical future on-unit industrial
worker.
• The hypothetical future on-unit resident (adult/child) was evaluated for exposure to surface
soil through incidental ingestion, inhalation of windblown dust in air, dermal contact, direct
radiation, and ingestion of homegrown produce. In addition, exposure to groundwater
through ingestion, dermal contact, and inhalation of volatiles in groundwater was evaluated.
Based on the results of the risk assessment COPCs that contribute significantly to an exposure
pathway having a significant human cancer risk (>1 x 10"6) or human noncarcinogenic hazard
(>1.0), or are determined to pose unacceptable ecological risk, are designated as constituents of
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Bingham Pump Outage Pil (643-1G) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision 1
October 1997 Page 18 of 46
concern (COCs). For human health, COCs are substances associated with risks or hazards
exceeding targets for the protection of human health, as defined in the NCP and CERCLA. Human
health carcinogenic primary COCs are constituents with an individual cancer risk greater than or
equal to 1 x 10"6 in an exposure media with a cumulative excess lifetime cancer risk greater than or
equal to 1 x 10"4. Human health carcinogenic secondary COCs are constituents with an individual
cancer risk greater than or equal to 1 x 10"6 in an exposure media with a cumulative excess lifetime
cancer risk greater than or equal to 1 xlO"*. Human health primary noncancer COCs are
constituents with a hazard quotient greater than or equal to 0.1 in an exposure media with a hazard
index greater than or equal to 3. Human health secondary COCs are constituents with a hazard
quotient greater than or equal to 0.1 in an exposure media with a hazard index greater than or
equal to 1 but less than 3. For ecological resources, a weight-of-evidence type approach is
conducted to identify ecological COCs. The unit-specific risks for the KBPOP are further explained
below.
Human Health Risk Assessment Results for the KBPOP
Current Land Use
Under the current land use scenario, carcinogenic risks and noncarcinogenic hazards from
nonradiological and radiological constituents were characterized for exposure of a known
(current) on-unit industrial worker to surface soil and air. Table 2 presents the summary of risk
and hazard calculations for the known on-unit worker.
Current Land Use - Carcinogenic Risk
A total carcinogenic (cancer) risk of 7 x 10"7 was derived for the known on-unit worker. This
cancer risk is below Ix 10 6, indicating an acceptable cancer risk.
Current Land Use - Noncarcinogenic Risk and Hazard
There were no nonradiological primary or secondary constituents of concern identified for the
current on-unit industrial worker; therefore, there were no nonradiological risks or hazards for
the current on-unit worker.
Future Land Use
Under the future land use scenario, carcinogenic risks and noncarcinogenic hazards associated
with nonradiological constituents were calculated for exposure of the hypothetical worker to
surface soil, air, and groundwater. Carcinogenic risks and noncarcinogenic hazards for these
same factors, plus homegrown produce, were then calculated for the hypothetical on-unit resident
(adult and child). Radiological risks were calculated for exposure of the hypothetical resident
-------
Record of Decision Tor the K-Aica Gingham Pump Outage Pit (643- 1C)
Savannah River Site
October 1997
WSRC-RP-97-178
Revision I
Page 19 of46
Table 2. K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit Summary of Risk and Hazard Calculations for
Exposure of Known On-Unit Industrial Workers
Matrix
Soil (0-1 ft)
Totals
K BPOP Soil (0-1 ft)
Exposure
Route
Ingestion
Dermal
Inhalation
External
to Radionuclides
Risk
1.3E-11
1.6E-13
(P) 1.2E-16
7.3E-07
I 7E-07
Exposure
Route
Ingestion
Dermal
Inhalation (P)
Inhalation (V)
to Chemicals
Risk
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
Hazard
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
P - Participates
V • Volatiles
NC - Not Calculated
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Binghain Pump Outage Pit (643-1C) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision 1
October 1997 Page 20 of 46
and worker to surface soil, air, groundwater, homegrown produce (on-unil resident only), and
external radiation. Table 3 presents the summary of risk and hazard calculations for the
hypothetical future on-unit residents (adult/child) and workers. The 0-4 ft soil interval was not
sampled in its entirety during the KBPOP characterization since this interval represents backfill
soil that was placed at the unit in 1958. The 0-1 ft soil interval was sampled and is
representative of the backfill material. However, the lack of data from the entire 0-4 ft interval
may underestimate the risk of potential exposure of hypothetical future receptors to soil located in
this interval.
Future Land Use - Nonradiological Carcinogenic Risk
The total cancer risk for nonradioactive carcinogens for the future hypothetical on-unit industrial
worker and resident exposed to surface soil (0-1 ft) and groundwater was 2x10"* and 6x10"*,
respectively. Ingestion of groundwater by the hypothetical future industrial worker and resident
was the primary route for this risk level. For the worker and resident, bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
was the secondary COC which led to the nonradiological carcinogenic risk. However, its
presence is suspect since the phthalates are common laboratory contaminants.
Future Land Use - Noncarcinogenic Hazard
The total noncarcinogenic HI for the hypothetical on-unit industrial worker and resident exposed
to surface soil (0-1 ft) and groundwater was 0.7 and 4.0. For the future resident, the noncancer
hazard was due primarily to the ingestion of manganese (primary COC) in groundwater. The
maximum on-unit concentration of manganese was less than a factor of two greater than the
background screening value, indicating that the concentration likely reflects background
conditions. Although the new round of sampling did not include manganese, the results of the
other sampled metals indicated that, if sampled, the concentration would be extremely low or
non-detected.
Future Land Use - Radiological Carcinogenic Risk
The total cancer risk for radiological constituents for the hypothetical on-unit industrial worker
and resident exposed to surface soil (0-1 ft) and groundwater was IxlO'5 and 5xlO"5, respectively.
The radiological carcinogenic risk was primarily due to the ingestion of radium-228, tritium,
uranium-238; and uranium-233/234 in groundwater and external exposure to cesium-137 in
surface soil for both hypothetical future receptors. All of the constituents were secondary COCs
for ingeslion of groundwater for the future worker and resident. Tritium was also a secondary
COC for the inhalation of groundwater for the hypothetical future resident. Radium-228,
uranium-233/234, and uranium-238 were also detected in background samples which indicates
-------
tf
ff
Matrix
Soil
Produce
Groundwater
Totals
RESIDENTS (0-1 ft)
Exposure to Radionuclides
Route Risk
Ingestion 1.IE-08
Dermal 7.7E-11
Inhalation (P) 2.2E-13
External 1.4E-05
Ingestion 2.1E-07
Ingestion 3.3E-05
Dermal l.OE-08
Inhalation (V) 7.2E-06
| 5E-05
Exposure to Chemicals
Route Risk Hazard
Ingestion NC NC
Dermal NC NC
Inhalation (P) NC NC
External NC NC
Ingestion NC NC
Ingestion 5.0E-06 4.0E+00
Dermal 7.7E-07 2.0E-01
Inhalation (V) 4.7E-08 3.9E-03
| 6E-06 | 4E+00
WORKERS (0-1 ft)
Exposure (o Radionuclides
Route Risk
Ingestion 2.6E-09
Dermal 3.4E-11
Inhalation (P) 2.0E-13
External 2.8E-06
Ingestion NA
Ingestion 1.1E-05
Dermal 5.7E-09
Inhalation (V) NC
| IE-OS
Exposure to Chemicals
Route Risk Hazard
Ingestion NC NC
Dermal NC NC
Inhalation (P) NC NC
External NC NC
Ingestion NC NC
Ingestion 1.4E-06 6.1E-01
Dermal 2.9E-07 6.7E-02
Inhalation (V) NC NC
I 2E-06 | 7E-OI
Note: Groundwater risk calculations were revised to exclude samples taken using temporary piezometers which result in silly samples that elevate the results of
(he inorganic constituents.
NA - Not Applicable
NC • Not Calculated
P - Particulates
V - Volatiles
2, 5'
«f
•§ 3
|?
So
*l
3 £
O Sf
? en
El
g-'2-
I33
i-
3 P
o. a
|a
l|
§
1
1
tn
»
n
HS;
o S-
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-IG) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 .^___ Page 22 of 46
that a significant portion of the estimated risks of these naturally-occurring radionuclides is the
result of background conditions at the KBPOP. In the RI/BRA Report, the maximum
concentrations of tritium and radium-228 in the groundwater were compared to their respective
MCL values. The maximum concentrations of tritium and radium-228 were below their
respective MCL values. Based on this comparison, tritium and radium-228 were not retained as
COCs at the KBPOP and remedial goals were not developed for tritium and radium-228.
Cesium-137 in soil was observed at levels consistent with global fallout activity.
Ecological Risk Assessment Results for the KBPOP
The ecological risk assessment evaluated the likelihood of occurrence for adverse ecological
effects from exposure to chemicals associated with the KBPOP OU. The ecological setting of the
unit is not unique or significant. There are no known endangered, threatened, or special concern
species in the vicinity of the unit that are likely to be dependent on or affected by the habitat at
the unit. The species that inhabit the unit are not rare in the region nor are they considered to be
of special societal value. The area of the unit is small and the habitat is low in diversity and
productivity.
Based on the characterization of the environmental setting and identification of potential receptor
organisms, a CSM was developed to determine the complete exposure pathways through which
ecological receptors could be exposed to COPCs. The focused evaluation addressed small
mammals inhibiting the unit (represented by the oldfield mouse). The ultimate assessment
endpoint was the diversity and health of the ecological community encompassing the unit.
None of the constituents detected in the soil at the KBPOP is concluded to have the potential for
adverse effects to the oldfield mice that may use the unit as a foraging area. It is also unlikely
that the constituents would cause a significant adverse effect on the ecological community.
Therefore, there are no ecological COCS at the KBPOP.
Human Health Risk-Based Remedial Goals
Chemical-specific remedial goals (RGs) are concentration goals for individual chemicals for
specific media and land use scenarios at CERCLA sites. General sources of chemical-specific
RGs include: (1) concentrations based on Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements
(ARARs), and (2) concentrations based on risk values from the risk assessment. RGs are derived
for those contaminants in a pathway that result in an exceedance of a cancer risk of IxlO'6 or an
HI of 1.0. These constituents are defined as constituents of concern (COCs). Separate
-------
Record of Decision for iho K-Arca Gingham Pump Outage Pil (643-IG) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Silc Revision I
October 1997 Page 23 of 46
calculations arc made for each of three target risk levels for both cancer and noncancer concerns.
The target cancer risk levels are IxlO"4, IxlO"5, and IxlO"6. The target His (noncancer) are 3, 1,
and 0.1.
Table 4 provides a list of the RGs for the KBPOP by receptor and medium as identified in the
RI/BRA. Although RGs were established in the RI/BRA Report for bis(2-ethylhexyi)phthaiate,
manganese, uranium-233/234, and uranium-238 in the groundwater media, remediation of the
groundwater for these constituents was determined to be unnecessary due to (1) bis(2-
ethylhexyl)phthalate is a common laboratory artifact and its presence is suspect, (2) manganese is
suspect due to high turbidity factors at the time of sampling, and (3) uranium-233/234 and
uranium-238 were detected in background samples indicating that these constituents are present
as a result of background conditions at the unit.
Cesium-137 was determined to be the only soil COC at the KBPOP because of external radiation
exposure from the surface soil for both hypothetical future residents and workers. However, the
level of cesium-137 is consistent with global fallout. Therefore, remediation of the surface soil
for cesium-137 was determined to be unnecessary. There are no groundwater or ecological COCs
at the KBPOP.
Site-Specific Considerations
Site-specific considerations, based on the results of the conclusions of the RI/BRA, which suggest
limited or no potential for significant risk include:
1. The miscellaneous debris at the KBPOP is covered by 4 feet of clean soil which provides an
adequate barrier under the planned future use of this area.
2. Constituents detected in groundwater which led to risk and hazard exceedances for the future
on-unit worker and resident are suspect due to the use of temporary piezometers. The
temporary piezometers which were used to collect the groundwater samples did not have a
filter pack around the screen intervals. Therefore, the samples from the piezometers were
unfiltered; and. at the time of sampling, were observed to have a high turbidity factor. This
high turbidity factor was believed to have caused the unusually high metal concentrations.
In addition, there was only one elevated iodine-129 activity level which was believed to be a
false positive reading.
3. Confirmatory sampling, which used permanent monitoring wells, was conducted and did not
confirm the presence of these constituents in the groundwater. Therefore, the suspect
-------
Receptor
Future Worker
Future Resident
Future Worker
Future Resident
Future Worker
Future Resident
Media
Soils
Soils
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Groundwater
Constituent
Cs-137(pCi/g)
Cs-137 (pCi/g)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
(mg/L)
Manganese (mg/L)
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate
(mg/L)
Manganese (mg/L)
Uranium-233/234(pCi/L)
Uranium-238 (pCI/L)
Uranium-233/234 (pCi/L)
Uranium-238 (pCi/L)
RME
Value in
Media
2.61E-01
2.61E-01
2.85E-02
3.05E+00
2.85E-02
3.05E+00
6.24E+00
6.S3E+00
6.24E+00
6.S3E400
Human Health Remedial Goals '
Target Cancer Risk
Ixlfl-4
1.06E+01 b
2.08E+00"
2.05E+00 b
4.95E-01 b
3.57E+02"
2.58E+026
5.87E+01 "
4.24E+01 b
IxlO'5
1.06E+00"
2.08E-01 b
2.05E-01 b
—
4.95E-02b
3.57E+01 b
2.58E+01 b
5.87E-fOOb
4.24E+00"
IxlO'6
1.06E-01"
2.08E-02"
2.05E-025
— .
4.95E-03 "
—
3.57E+00 "
2.58E+OOb
5.87E-01 b
4.24E-01 b
Target Hazard Quotient
3
.....
—
9.39E-01 b
2.35E+00 b
9.54E-01 b
2.35E+OOb
„!_
1
3.13E-01"
7.82E-01 b
3.18E-01 b
7.83E-01 b
— ..
.....
0.1
.....
3.13E-02"
7.82E-02 b
3.18E-02"
7.83E-02b
.....
.....
—
Calculation of human health remedial goals for noncancer hazards is not applicable to radionuclides.
These values represent the remedial goals in soil and groundwater for each COC required to reach the risk and hazard levels shown.
H
B
cr
JA/ |^
| ^
O
•> w
IS
11
c c
3 3
•a
0
c
ET
«
2
n?
§
a
E
n
5-
c
n
O
cr
O
3
rt
2
3
-^
Record of
Savannah
Oaober 1
8*5?
^SB.
2.
? s
?r
fff
^
§
5
3'
?
^3
9
c
•s
3
?
U*
O
?
CO
•s "
*S 75 »
10 o "0
il!
O\ — 00
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-IG) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 Page 25 of 46
contaminants were removed from the risk considerations. When they were removed from
risk consideration, the calculations fall within or below the risk range of 1x10"* to 1x10"*.
The remaining groundwater constituents are either naturally-occurring, common laboratory
artifacts, or below MCL values. There is no risk to the groundwater from a soil teachability
standpoint.
4. Cesium-137 was the primary constituent which led to exceedances in the risk calculations for
soil. The activity level at which cesium-137 (0.295 pCi/g) is present in the soil is consistent
with activity levels of global fallout; and, cesium-137 has a half-life of 30.2 years. The
KBPOP does not pose a risk to the ecological community.
5. The KBPOP is located in an area which has been recommended as an industrial zone by the
Citizens Advisory Board and the Savannah River Site Future Use Project Report (DOE,
1996), precluding future residential use.
VH. REMEDIAL ACTION OBJECTIVES AND DESCRIPTION OF CONSIDERED
ALTERNATIVES FOR THE KBPOP SOURCE CONTROL OPERABLE UNIT
Remedial Action Objectives
Remedial action objectives (RAOs) specify unit-specific contaminants, media of concern.
potential exposure pathways, and remediation goals. The RAOs are based on the nature and
extent of contamination, threatened resources, and the potential for human and environmental
exposure. Initially, preliminary remediation goals are developed based upon ARARs, or other
information from the RI/BRA. These goals are modified, as necessary, as more information
concerning the unit and potential remedial technologies become available. Final remediation
goals are determined when the remedy is selected and shall establish acceptable exposure levels
that are protective of human health and the environment.
ARARs are those cleanup standards, standards of control, and other substantive requirements,
criteria, or limitations promulgated under Federal, State, or local environmental law that
specifically address a hazardous substance, pollutant, contaminant, remedial action, location, or
other circumstance at a CERCLA site. Three types of ARARs; action-, chemical-, and location-
• *«
specific; have been developed to simplify identification and compliance with environmental
requirements. Action-specific requirements set controls on the design, performance, and other
aspects of implementation of specific remedial activities. Chemical-specific requirements are
media-specific and health-based concentration limits developed for site-specific levels of
-------
Record of Decision forlhc K-Arca Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-IG) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 Page 26 of 46
constituents in specific media. Location-specific ARARs must consider Federal, State, and local
requirements that reflect the physiographical and environmental characteristics of the unit or the
immediate area. There were no action-specific, location-specific, or chemical-specific ARARs
relevant to establishing RAOs for the KBPOP source unit.
The RJ/BRA indicates that the secondary sources (i.e., KBPOP soil) associated with the KBPOP
pose minimal carcinogenic risk to human health. Threatened, endangered, or sensitive species
are not found at the KBPOP and the unit does not offer attractive or unique cover or forage
opportunities for wildlife. Thus, ecological receptors are not at significant risk from the KBPOP
OU. The RI/BRA also indicated that the KBPOP is not impacting groundwater at the unit.
Constituents were not observed to have migrated horizontally and clayey zones underneath the
base of the pit will limit vertical migration potential. Based on these conclusions, the Feasibility
Study (FS) was conducted to consider possible actions which could reduce the risk associated
with the KBPOP soil.
Based on the risk posed by cesium-137 in the KBPOP soil, the general remedial action objectives
for the KBPOP soil are as follows:
1. Reduce risks to human health via external exposure to radiological constituents (i.e., cesium-
137) in the soil.
2. Achieve RGs (see Table 4) established for unit soil.
There were no RAOs established for ecological receptors, or soil teachability contaminants, or
groundwater contaminants since the RI/BRA data for the KBPOP indicated that these areas were
not of concern for the unit.
The four feet of fill covering the miscellaneous construction debris buried at the KBPOP is
adequate to be protective for direct radiation from the debris. At the time of burial, the
radioactive contamination was less than 25 mR/hr with no detected alpha activity. Table 1
indicates greater than a factor of four decrease in curie content (two equivalent half-life).
KBPOP Soil Alternatives
As part of the investigation/assessment process for the KBPOP waste unit, a FS was performed
using data generated during the assessment phase. Detailed information regarding the
development and evaluation of the remedial alternatives can be found in the Feasibility Study for
the K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-IG) (U) (VVSRC, 1997a).
-------
Record of Decision for Ihc K-Arca Binghain Pump Outage Pil (643-1G) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 Page 27 of 46
The RI/BRA indicates that the KBPOP soil poses minimal risk to human health. External
radiation from the KBPOP soil for the future on-unit resident and worker results in risk (i.e., 1 x
10~5 for the future resident and 3 xlO"6 for the future worker) within the range of concern (i.e., 1 x
10"4 and 1 x 10'6). Therefore, a FS was conducted which included detailed analyses of soil
alternatives. The preferred alternative for the KBPOP soil is Institutional Controls. This
alternative will restrict this land to future industrial use and limit access to the soil, which might
expose future workers to low concentrations of hazardous constituents, through use of
administrative controls such as the site use and site clearance permits.
Six alternatives were evaluated for remedial action of the KBPOP operable unit soil. Each
alternative is described below:
Alternative 1 - No Action
Under this alternative, no remedial actions would be conducted and no limitations would be
placed on future uses of the site. EPA policy and regulations require the consideration of a no
remedial action to serve as a baseline against which the other alternatives can be compared.
Because no remedial action would be taken at the unit, the KBPOP would remain in its present
condition. All contaminated soil and debris are within the KBPOP boundaries. The KBPOP is
within the SRS facility and is not accessible to the public. The debris is covered by four feet of
fill which is currently preventing direct contact. There would be no reduction of risk. The
present worth cost of this alternative is $280,000 which includes Record of Decision reviews
every five years for thirty years.
Alternative 2 • Institutional Controls
Under this alternative, Institutional Controls would be implemented at the KBPOP and the site
would remain undisturbed. Implementation of this alternative would require both near- and
long-term actions.
In the near-term, signs would be posted at the waste unit which indicate that this area was used
for disposal of waste materials and contains buried waste. In addition existing access controls
would be used to maintain the KBPOP for nonresidential use.
Periodic inspections would be conducted and maintenance would be performed to help ensure
that the cover remains intact. Maintenance, as needed, would consist primarily of mowing and
subsidence repairs. Minor drainage modifications may be conducted as needed to prevent
ponding and to promote surface water runoff.
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Binghani Pump Ouiage Pit (643-1G) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 Page 28 of 46
In the long-term, if the property is ever transferred to non-federal ownership, the U.S.
Government would lake those actions necessary pursuant to CERCLA 120(h). These actions will
include a deed notification disclosing former waste management and disposal activities as well as
remedial actions taken on the site. The deed notification would, in perpetuity, notify any
potential purchaser that the property has been used for the management and disposal of
construction debris and other materials, including hazardous substances.
The deed would also include deed restrictions precluding residential use of the property.
However, the need for these deed restrictions may be reevaluated at the time of transfer in the
event that exposure assumptions differ and/or contamination no longer poses an unacceptable
risk under residential use.
This alternative is shown to provide adequate protection of human health and the environment in
the near-term. Long-term protection of human health and the environment would be achieved
through deed restrictions and maintenance of the cover and signs. The present worth cost of this
alternative is $350,000 which includes periodic repairs to the KBPOP and Record of Decision
reviews every five years for thirty years.
Alternative 3 - Placement of a Soil Cover
Under this alternative, the KBPOP would be covered by a low permeability soil cover with a
minimum thickness of 3 feet (nominal in-place saturated hydraulic conductivity of IxlO'5 cm/sec
or less). Limited site clearing and grading might be required to place the soil cover. The soil
cover would have an upper surface with a slope of three to five percent to promote surface water
runoff and minimize surface erosion. A topsoil (vegetative soil layer - minimum thickness
between 3-6 inches) would be placed on top of the soil cover.
The topsoil (vegetative soil layer) would be added and area would be compacted and seeded. The
topsoil would be seeded with native grasses to increase evapotranspiration. The topsoil layer
would also protect the soil cover from damage due to erosion, frost, and burrowing animals. The
topsoil layer would also provide water storage capacity to reduce the rate of runoff which, if too
high, could cause erosion of the soil cover. Institutional controls would be necessary to restrict
the area to future industrial use and to prohibit excavation of the soil cover.
This alternative is shown to provide adequate protection of human health and the environment in
the near- and long-term. The contaminated material would be isolated by the soi| cover and
contaminant mobility would be minimized by reductions in infiltration and erosion. The present
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-1G) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision 1
October 1997 Page 29 of 46
worth cost of this alternative is $650,000 which includes labor and materials needed to place the
soil cover and Record of Decision reviews every five years for thirty years.
Alternative 4 - In-Situ Solidification of Soil and Debris. Soil Cover
Under this alternative, a concrete-based agent would be injected into the KBPOP and mixed with
the soil and debris to form a solidified mass. The concrete material is injected into the ground in
columns. The columns are placed in an overlapping pattern to provide treatment over the entire
target area. The solidification process would produce a monolithic structure which would
eliminate or reduce the mobility of the contaminants. A soil cover would then be placed over the
treated site.
This alternative is shown to provide adequate protection of human health and the environment in
the near- and long-term. The source of contamination would be removed from the KBPOP. The
present worth cost of this alternative is $2,920,000 wnich includes labor and equipment required
for in-situ stabilization of the KBPOP soil and debris, and construction of a soil cover. Site and
soil cover maintenance and Record of Decision reviews every five years for 30 years are also
included in the cost estimate.
Alternative 5 - Excavate Soil and Debris, Solidify/Stabilize Soil, Backfill Treated Soil and
Debris. Soil Cover
Under this alternative, the identified soil and debris would be excavated by backhoe or other
similar equipment. Excavation would extend to at least four feet below the lower boundary of the
debris. The excavation could go deeper if necessary. The excavated material would then be
staged at the KBPOP. Impermeable tarps would be placed on the ground prior to placement of
the excavated material and similar tarps would be placed over individual piles to avoid producing
airborne particulates and contaminated runoff. Other containment measures would be
implemented as needed.
Debris would be separated from the soil using mechanical means such as screens and
electromagnets. The excavated soil would be treated by solidification with Portland cement. The
material would be mixed with the cement to form solid blocks that would reduce or eliminate the
mobility of the contaminants. Preliminary testing would be required to determine an appropriate
ratio of cement to soil and/or debris. The debris and treated soil would then be backfilled into the
excavation and a soil cover would be placed over the KBPOP.
This alternative is shown to provide adequate protection of human health and the environment in
the near- and long-term. The present worth cost of this alternative is $3,620,000 which includes
labor and materials needed to pre-treat the soil prior to excavation for waste handling purposes,
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Bingham Pump Ouugc Pit (643-1C) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision 1
October 1997 Page 30 of 46
to excavate and treat the soil and debris, and to construct a soil cover over the KBPOP and for
Record of Decision reviews every five years for thirty years.
Alternative 6 - Excavate Soil and Debris, Dispose in E-Area Vaults or Soil/Debris
Consolidation Facility Of applicable)
This alternative would require excavation by backhoe or similar means and removal of an
estimated 13,150 cubic yards of soil and debris. Excavation would extend to at least four feet
below the lower boundary of the debris. The excavation could go deeper if necessary. The
excavated material would be hauled from the site and disposed at either the E-Area Vaults or the
Soil/Debris Consolidation Facility (if applicable). The excavation would be backfilled with soil
and seeded.
This alternative provides overall protection of human health and the environment by removing
the contamination from the KBPOP. This alternative meets all of the RGs through complete
source removal which eliminates the potential for long-term direct contact with contaminated soil
or debris. Excavation would present limited short-term exposures to workers. The present worth
cost of this alternative is $17,000,000 which includes labor and materials needed to pre-treat soil
and subsoil for waste handling purposes, to excavate the wastes, to treat the wastes following
excavation for packaging and disposal requirements, to transport the waste, and to dispose of the
KBPOP soil. Record of Decision reviews would not be required under this alternative because
concentrations of constituents remaining at the KBPOP would not exceed RGs.
KBPOP Groundwater Alternatives
Based on the conclusion of the KBPOP RI/BRA Report (WSRC, 1997b), there was no
groundwater contamination which would pose a current or future threat to human health or the
environment. In addition, constituents from the KBPOP soil are not observed to have migrated
horizontally and clayey zones underneath the base of the pit will limit vertical migration
potential. Therefore, there were no groundwater alternatives considered in the FS.
SUMMARY OF COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE ALTERNATIVES
Each of the remedial alternatives was evaluated using the nine criteria established by the NCP.
The criteria were derived from the statutory requirements of CERCLA Section 121. The criteria
are:
• overall protection of human health and ihe environment,
• compliance with ARARs,
-------
Record of Decision for ihc K-Arca Bingham Pump Ouiagc Pit (643-1G) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 Page 31 of 46
• long-term effectiveness and permanence,
• reduction of toxicily, mobility, or volume through treatment,
• short-term effectiveness,
• implementability,
• cost,
• state acceptance, and
• community acceptance.
In selecting the preferred alternative, the above criteria were used to evaluate the alternatives
developed in the FS (WSRC, 1997a). Seven of the criteria were used to evaluate all the
alternatives, based on human health and environmental protection, cost, feasibility, and
implementability issues. The preferred alternative was further evaluated based on the final two
criteria: state acceptance and community acceptance.
Table 5 presents the evaluation of the soil remedial alternatives. A summary of the comparative
analysis of soil alternatives are provided below:
Overall Protection of Human Health and the Environment
All alternatives provide immediate protection because the debris is covered by four feet of soil
and no short-term health concerns were identified. Alternative 1 (No Action) provides the least
long-term protection because erosion or development could increase exposure. Alternatives 2
(Institutional Controls (Access and Deed Restrictions/Notifications)) and 3 (Placement of a Soil
Cover) each offer improvements in protection through reduced exposure potential. Alternatives 4
(In-Situ Solidification of Soil and Debris, Soil Cover) and 5 (Excavate Soil and Debris,
Solidify/Stabilize Soil. Backfill Treated Soil and Debris, Soil Cover) provide increased protection
because exposure pathways are limited through treatment. Alternative 6 (Excavate Soil and
Debris, Dispose in E-Area Vaults (EAV) or Soil/Debris Consolidation Facility (SDCF) (if
applicable)) provides the greatest protection of all of the alternatives because the contaminated
material is removed from the KBPOP.
Compliance with ARARs
There were no chemical- or location-specific ARARs identified for Alternatives 1 through 6. In
addition, there were no action-specific ARARs identified for Alternatives 1 and 2.
Action-specific ARARs identified for Alternatives 3 through 6 are generally similar. These
alternatives require erosion control plans, Occupational Safety and Health Administration safety
and health plans, and closure performance standards. Alternatives 4 through 6 are required to
-------
er
rt"
in
Criteria
Alternative 1
No Action
Alternative 2
Institutional
Controls
(Access & Deed
Restrictions)
Alternative 3
Placement of a
Soil Cover
Alternative 4
In-Situ
Solidification of
Soil; Backfill
Treated Soil &
Debris; Soil Cover
OVERALL PROTECTIVENESS
Human Health Protection
Environmental Protection
Provides
immediate
protection as all
other alternatives,
bul affords lower
long-term
protection due to
possibility of
cover or site
development.
Current risks are
within EPA's
acceptable limits.
Lowest degree of
environmental
protection because
cover erosion
could result in
contaminant
exposure.
Provides
immediate
protection
through access
restrictions;
provides long-
term protection
through access
and use
restrictions.
Greater long-
term protection
than Alternative
1 because site
contact would be
minimized.
Provides
immediate and
long-term
protection
through
elimination of
exposure
pathways.
More than
Alternative 2
because soil
cover would
further reduce
contact with
contaminates
material.
Same as Alternative
3, except provides
additional protection
by solidification.
More than
Alternative 3 because
solidification would
further reduce
contact with
contaminants.
Alternative 5
Excavate Soil &
Debris;
Solidification of
Soil; Backfill
Treated Soil &
Debris; Soil Cover
Alternative 6
Excavate Soil &
Debris; Dispose at E-
Area Vaults or
Soil/Debris
Consolidation Facility
(if applicable)
Same as
Alternative 4.
Same as
Alternative 4.
Provides protection of
human health by
removing contaminated
material.
Provides protection of
environment by
removing contaminated
material.
COMPLIANCE WITH ARARS
Chemical-Specific ARARs
Location-Specific ARARs
None identified.
None identified.
Same as
Alternative 1.
Same as
Alternative 1.
Same as
Alternative 1.
Same as
Alternative 1
Same as Alternative
1.
Same as Alternative
1.
Same as
Alternative 1.
Same as
Alternative 1.
Same as Alternative 1.
Same as Alternative 1.
II
£ 5
09 n
CO J-
*~* trt
C r;-
n jo
M
3 S.
-------
Criteria
Alternative 1
No Action
Alternative 2
Institutional
Controls
(Access & Deed
Restrictions)
Alternative 3
Placement of a
Soil Cover
Alternative 4
In-Situ
Solidification of
Soil; Backfill
Treated Soil &
Debris; Soil Cover
Alternative 5
Excavate Soil &
Debris;
Solidification of
Soil; Backfill
Treated Soil &
Debris; Soil Cover
Alternative 6
Excavate Soil &
Debris; Dispose at E-
Area Vaults or
Soil/Debris
Consolidation Facility
(if applicable)
COMPLIANCE WITH ARARS (cont'd)
Action-Specific ARARs
None identified.
None identified.
Meets all
identified
ARARs.
Same as Alternative
3.
Same as
Alternative 3.
Same as Alternative 3.
LONG-TERM EFFECTIVENESS AND PERMANENCE
Magnitude of Residual Risk
Adequacy and Reliability of
Controls
Need for 5-year Review
Least reduction of
all alternatives
because no
reduction would
occur and threat
could increase if
site is not
maintained.
Current risk is
within EPA's
acceptable limits.
No Controls.
All alternatives
except 6 requires
5-year review.
Slightly less
than Alternative
1 because site
would be
maintained.
Controls can
prevent contact
with
contaminated
media.
All alternatives
except 6 requires
5-year review.
Same as
Alternative 2.
More reliable
than Alternative
2.
All alternatives
except 6 requires
5-year review.
Same as Alternative
2.
More reliable than
Alternative 3.
All alternatives
except 6 requires 5-
year review.
Same as
Alternative 2.
Same as
Alternative 4.
All alternatives
except 6 requires
5-year review.
REDUCTION OF TOX1CITY, MOBILITY, AND VOLUME THROUGH TREATMENT
Treatment Process Used
None.
None.
None.
Directly treats
inorganics.
Same as
Alternative 4. :
Greatest protection
because all
contaminated material
is removed.
Greatest reliability
because all
contaminated material
is removed.
No review is necessary
because no waste would
remain at K BPOP.
None.
JSfi
i<
£3
ET -•
I*
2 K'
A 2,
I I
5 2.
2. >
||
A p^,
li
3 3
J» "*
^ SI
S 3
S S.
n
W
8
ra
?
3
E
«
2
5
§•
-------
cr
fT
O M »
5 8 8
s E! 2
Criteria
REDUCTION OFTOXICITY,
Amount Destroyed or Treated
Reduction ofToxicity. Mobility.
or Volume Through Treatment
Irreversible Treatment
Type and Quantity of Residuals
Remaining after Treatment
Alternative 1
No Action
Alternative ^
Institutional
Controls
(Access & Deed
Restrictions)
Alternative 3
Placement of a
Soil Cover
Alternative 4
In-Situ
Solidification of
Soil; Backfill
Treated Soil &
Debris; Soil Cover
Alternative 5
Excavate Soil &
Debris;
Solidification of
Soil; Backfill
Treated Soil &
Debris; Soil Cover
Alternative 6
Excavate Soil &
Debris; Dispose at E-
Area Vaults or
Soil/Debris
Consolidation Facility
(if applicable)
MOBILITY, AND VOLUME THROUGH TREATMENT (confd)
None.
None.
Not applicable; no
treatment.
Not applicable; no
treatment.
None.
None.
Not applicable;
no treatment.
Not applicable;
no treatment.
None.
Mobility of
contaminants
reduced by soil
cover.
Not applicable;
no treatment.
Not applicable;
no treatment.
Treats all inorganics
within site, but total
mass of organics
remains the same.
Volume of
contaminated
material would be
increased by up to
100% of the original
volume; mobility of
contaminants would
be less than under
Alternative 3.
No further remedies
could be undertaken
on the treated
material.
Same remaining
residuals as
Alternatives 1
through 3, but
volume would
increase & residuals
would be solidified.
Same as
Alternative 4.
Same as
Alternative 4,
except debris
would not be
treated by
solidification.
Same as
Alternative 4.
Same as
Alternative 4.
None.
None.
Material would be
removed.
Not applicable; no
treatment.
3 3
•a -a
35"
5 P.
T K
n o
« MI
n jo
O n
a g
3 a.
II
f|
er jjj
5?
2. g
^ a
W
5*
*§•
i
?
X
0
I
2
Ci
n X :
K2.,
A 3 »J
OS — 00
-------
H
er
JT
en
Criteria
Alternative 1
No Action
Alternative 2
Institutional
Controls
(Access & Deed
Restrictions)
Alternative 3
Placement of a
Soil Cover
Alternative 4
In-Situ
Solidification of
Soil; Backfill
Treated Soil &
Debris; Soil Cover
Alternative 5
Excavate Soil &
Debris;
Solidification of
Soil; Backfill
Treated Soil &
Debris; Soil Cover
Alternative 6
Excavate Soil &
Debris; Dispose at E-
Area Vaults or
Soil/Debris
Consolidation Facility
(if applicable)
SHORT-TERM EFFECTIVENESS
Community Protection
Worker Protection
Environmental Impacts
Time Until Action is Complete
No threat to
community during
implementation.
No threat of
exposure to
worker.
No environmental
threat during
implementation.
Immediate.
Same as
Alternative 1.
Same as
Alternative 1.
Same as
Alternative 1.
Immediate.
Same as
Alternative 1.
Same as
Alternative 1.
Same as
Alternative 1.
Immediately
effective, but
onsite action
would require 1
to 2 months after
remedial design
and contractor
selection.
Same as Alternative
1.
Greater than
Alternatives 1, 2, and
3 because treatment
would require limited
contact with
contaminate
material.
Slight environmental
threat because of
limited contact with
contaminated
materials.
Immediately
effective, but onsite
action would require
2 to 3 months after
remedial design and
contractor selection.
Same as
Alternative 1.
Greater than
Alternative 4
because treatment
would require
excavation of
contaminated
material.
Greater than
Alternative 4
because treatment
would require
excavation of
contaminated
material.
Same as
Alternative 4.
Same as Alternative 1.
Same as Alternative 5.
Same as Alternative S.
Same as Alternative 4.
3 3
•a 13
?§
fi-
ll
5 £
S S,
£>??
£ 3
3 S.
^ S'
o3 >
~ ff
P3
q§.
y
x-s Q.
n n
II
So"
T
n
w
£
r
5
v>
73
n
wi S. >o
2,3^
*. = ^
Ov — 00
-------
Criteria
IMPLEMENTABILITY
Ability to Construct and
Operate
Ease of Doing More Action if
Needed
Ability to Monitor Effectiveness
Availability of Services and
Equipment
Alternative 1
No Action
Alternative 2
Institutional
Controls
(Access & Deed
Restrictions)
No construction or
operation.
Additional action
easily
implemented.
Alternative
includes no
monitoring; future
exposure could
occur in absence
of controls.
No services or
equipment
needed.
Same as
Alternative 1.
Same as
Alternative 1.
Frequent
inspection of
property would
provide notice of
changes.
Services are
available locally.
Alternative 3
Placement of a
Soil Cover
Alternative 4
In-Situ
Solidification of
Soil; Backfill
Treated Soil &
Debris; Soil Cover
Alternative 5
Excavate Soil &
Debris;
Solidification of
Soil; Backfill
Treated Soil &
Debris; Soil Cover
Alternative 6
Excavate Soil &
Debris; Dispose at E-
Area Vaults or
Soil/Debris
Consolidation Facility
(if applicable)
Simple to
construct and
maintain.
Same as
Alternative 1.
Same as
Alternative 2.
Services and
equipment are
available.
More difficult than
Alternative 3 because
special equipment is
required for
treatment.
No further remedies
could be undertaken
on treated waste.
Same as Alternative
2, except
effectiveness of
solidification would
not be monitored.
Less than Alternative
3, longer lead time
may be needed to
secure services and
equipment.
Similar to
Alternative 4.
Same as
Alternative 4.
Same as
Alternative 4.
Same as
Alternative 4.
Requires regulatory
evaluation and
comparison to waste
acceptance criteria.
Contaminated material
would be removed from
site, so additional
remedies would not be
necessary.
No need to monitor
because waste would
not remain on site.
Same as Alternative 4.
COST
PW Capital Cost
PW 0 & M Cost (5-year)
Total PW Cost
$0
$0
$280,000
$30,000
$320,000
$350,000
$330,000
$320,000
$650,000
$2,600,000
$320,000
$2,920,000
$3,300,000
$320.000
$3,620.000
$17.000,000
$0
$17,000,000
O
i.
to
73
IM-
IV = >J
lOv — 00
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Binghoin Pump Outage Pit (643- 1C) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 Page 37 of 46
meet proper disposal and decontamination specifications as listed in 40 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) 264.114. Alternative 5 is required to meet waste pile design, operation, and
closure requirements as listed in 40 CFR 264.251 and 40 CFR 264.258(a). Alternative 6 requires
transportation of hazardous materials which would require adherence to 49 CFR 107.
Alternatives 3 through 6 would comply with the appropriate ARARs.
Long-Term Effectiveness and Permanence
Long-term effectiveness and permanence can be measured in broad terms by (1) the magnitude of
residual risk associated with the waste unit, and (2) the adequacy of controls after
implementation of the remedial alternative. Of the alternatives being considered, Alternative 1
provides the least long-term effectiveness because the threat of exposure may increase as the
cover erodes. The residual risk present at the KBPOP is the same for Alternatives 1 through 5
because contaminants will remain the KBPOP. Alternatives 2 (Institutional Controls) provide
added controls for limiting future exposures through maintenance and administrative controls.
Alternative 3 (Placement of a Soil Cover) provides added controls for limiting future exposures
through minimization of infiltration reaching the waste. However, these alternatives do not
involve any form of treatment that would permanently reduce the magnitude of residual risk.
Alternatives 4 and 5 involve treatment of contaminated media and placement of a soil cover.
Alternative 6 provides the greatest reduction in residual risk because the contaminated material is
removed from the waste unit. Alternative 4 (In-situ Solidification of Soil, backfill, and Soil
Cover), Alternative 5 (Excavation and Solidification of Soil, Backfill; and Soil Cover), and
Alternative 6 (Excavate, Dispose at EAV or SDCF (if applicable), Soil cover) offer a greater
reduction in the magnitude of residual risk than would Alternatives 1 (No Action), 2
(Institutional Controls), and 3 (Placement of a Soil Cover).
Existing SRS institutional controls would be adequate for the protection of human health as long
as the institutional controls are maintained. In the absence of existing controls, the No Action
alternative would not be protective of human health. Based upon the hypothetical scenario that
institutional controls cannot be guaranteed and/or proposed caps could be allowed to fail, the
need for institutional controls to maintain protectiveness would decrease corresponding to the
extent to which contaminated media are treated to permanently reduce the magnitude of residual
risk. Consequently, the need for controls is greatest for the alternatives that do not treat or
remove any of the contaminated media (Alternative 1 - No Action, Alternative 2 - Institutional
Controls, and Alternative 3 - Placement of a Soil Cover) followed by alternatives that treat all
known contaminated soil at the KBPOP (Alternative 4 - In-situ Solidification of Soil, Backfill
Treated Soil, Soil Cover and Alternative 5 - Excavate Soil and Debris, Solidification of Soil,
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Binghajn l*uinp Outage Pit (643-1C) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 Page 38 of 46
Backfill Treated Soil and Debris, Soil Cover). Alternative 6 (Excavate Soil and Debris, Dispose
at EAV or SDCF (if applicable), Soil Cover) would require the least controls of all alternatives
being considered since it would involve the permanent removal of all contaminated soil known to
exceed concentration-based remediation goals.
All alternatives, except Alternative 6, require 5-year review because contaminated material would
be left at the waste unit.
Reduction of Toxicitv. Mobility, or Volume Through Treatment
Alternatives I (No Action), 2 (Institutional Controls), 3 (Placement of a Soil Cover), and 6
(Excavate Soil and Debris, Dispose at EAV or SDCF (if applicable), Soil Cover) offer no form of
active treatment and, therefore, do not satisfy the NCP preference for remedial alternatives that
offer a reduction in contaminant toxicity, mobility, or volume through treatment. Alternative 6,
however, does reduce the volume of contaminated material at the KBPOP through removal to
another location. Alternative 3 provides, mobility reduction through the placement of a soil
cover. Alternatives 4 (In-situ Solidification of Soil, Backfill Treated Soil, Soil Cover) and 5
(Excavate Soil and Debris, Solidification of Soil, Backfill Treated Soil and Debris, Soil Cover)
each offer greater reduction in mobility by implementing solidification in addition to the
placement of a soil cover. However, these alternatives will increase the volume of contaminated
material by up to 100%.
Short-Term Effectiveness
. The short-term risks to remedial workers increases with the volume of contaminated media
directly handled or processed and project duration. Handling (e.g., excavating, moving) and/or
processing (e.g., treating) contaminated media increases the risk of remedial worker exposure to
radiation effects. In addition, remedial workers are exposed to potential construction-related
risks (e.g., falls, cuts, heavy equipment operation) which increases with corresponding increases
in project duration; however, potential short-term risks should be manageable for all alternatives
being considered. With strict adherence to project health and safety plans, it should be possible
to maintain short-term risks of all considered alternatives within acceptable limits.
None of the alternatives present any threats to surrounding communities during implementation.
The potential risk to remedial workers would be lowest for Alternatives 1 (No Action) and 2
(Institutional Controls) which do not require intrusive on-site work, so no worker exposure
concerns are presented by these alternatives. Alternative 3 (Placement of a Soil Cover) is not
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Area Binghajn Pump Outage Pil (643- 1C) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
Ociober 1997 Page 39 of 46
expected to present any significant worker exposure either, as soil cover construction will not
generate significant contact with the contaminated material.
Alternatives 4 (In-situ Solidification of Soil, Backfill Treated Soil, Soil Cover), 5 (Excavate Soil
and Debris, Solidification of Soil, Backfill Treated Soil and Debris, Soil Cover), and 6 (Excavate
Soil and Debris, Dispose at EAV or SDCF (if applicable), Soil Cover) each involve contact with
the contaminated material; and, therefore present some degree of worker risk. Because
Alternative 4 provides in-situ treatment, contact would be minimal and the worker risk would be
less than for Alternatives 5 and 6. Alternatives 5 and 6 each require excavation; and, therefore
present the highest level of worker exposure. Adequate personal protection could be provided for
workers under each alternative.
None of the alternatives would require significant amounts of time to complete. A maximum of 3
months after remedial design and contractor selection is estimated for completion of on-site
activities.
Implementabiliry
No major implementation problems were identified for Alternatives 1 (No Action), 2
(Institutional Controls), and 3 (Placement of a Soil Cover). Alternatives 4 (In-situ Solidification
of Soil, Backfill Treated Soil, Soil Cover) and 5 (Excavate Soil and Debris, Solidification of Soil,
Backfill Treated Soil and Debris, Soil Cover) may present minor difficulties in selection of
qualified contractors. Alternative 4 may also present potential implementation problems because
of the requirements for grouting through debris. Alternative 6 (Excavate Soil and Debris,
Dispose at EAV or SDCF (if applicable), Soil Cover) may present potential implementation
problems if the availability of space at the disposal facility hinders disposal. Evaluation of
regulatory and acceptance criteria would also be required for Alternative 6.
Cost
Total estimated present worth costs range between $280,000 for Alternative 1 (No Action) to
$17,000,000 for Alternative 6 (Excavate Soil and Debris, Dispose in E-Area Vaults or
Soil/Debris Consolidation Facility (if applicable)). Alternative 2 ($350,000) involves
institutional controls including placement of access and deed restrictions. Alternative 3
($650,000) involves placement of a soil cover. Alternative 4 ($2,920,000) involves in-situ
stabilization of the contaminated soil, backfilling the treated soil and debris, and placement of a
soil cover. Alternative 5 ($3,620,000) involves excavation of the soil and debris, solidification of
the soil, backfilling the treated soil and debris, and placement of a soil cover.
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Area Binghaju Pump Outage Pit (643-IC) WSRC-RP-97-I78
Savannah River Site Revision 1
October 1997 Page 40 of 46
With the exception of Alternatives 1 and 6, the estimated operation and maintenance of costs of
all alternatives are approximately $320,000 for the long-term (30 years) maintenance of the soil
cover and 5-year remedy reviews. The estimated operation and maintenance costs for the No
Action alternative (Alternative 1) is $280,000 because it only involves conducting 5-year remedy
reviews. Alternative 6 would have no additional operation and maintenance costs since it would
permanently remove all contaminated soil and debris from the KBPOP waste unit and would not
require 5-year remedy reviews. All cost estimates are provided for comparison purposes only and
are not intended to forecast actual budgetary expenditures.
State and Community Acceptance
The Slate and Federal regulatory agencies have accepted and approved Alternative 2
(Institutional Controls) primarily because it is the least expensive alternative that is still
protective of human health and the environment since the waste unit poses minimal risk to the
hypothetical future industrial worker and future resident and no risk to the current worker. The
KBPOP Proposed Plan public comment period ended on August 6, 1997 and there were no public
comments received. Therefore, the community has shown acceptance of Alternative 2 as the
final remedial alternative for the KBPOP.
IX. THE SELECTED REMEDY
The miscellaneous construction debris (i.e., pipes, cables, ladders, etc.) with fixed contamination
(primary source) has been buried in the KBPOP since 1958. The presence of the debris plays a
primary role in the remedy selection. There was no indication from the characterization data that
the contamination present on the debris has moved and the level of radioactivity as shown in
Table 1 has diminished over the years. The degree of exposure toxicity to the waste is considered
minimal and the potential for exposure is also considered to be minimal.
In addition, based on the risks identified in Section VI, the KBPOP soil poses minimal risk to
human health. Carcinogenic risks to the potential future worker (3 x 10"*) or resident (1 x 10'5)
are driven by external exposure to the soil at 0-1 ft. which is contaminated with cesium-137.
Since the entire 0-4 ft soil interval was not sampled, the risk present at the unit may be
underestimated.
In order to manage the uncertainty associated with the possibility of direct exposure and
unrestricted excavation, probable underestimation of risk, and to ensure that the degree of and
the potential for exposure remain minimal, institutional controls are appropriate for the KBPOP
operable unit..
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Bingham Pump Outage Pil (643-1G) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site ' Revision 1
October 1997 ^_^ Page 41 of 46
An evaluation of potential alternatives was performed in accordance with the NCP as
summarized in Section VIII. Based on this evaluation, the selective alternative for the KBPOP
operable unit is Alternative 2 - Institutional Controls. Institutional Controls meets the remedial
action objectives (i.e., reduction of risk to human health via external exposure to cesium-137 in
the soil) and remedial goals (see Table 4) for the KBPOP operable unit by precluding future on-
site residential use of the area, buried waste contact, removal, or excavation.
Based on the RI/BRA, there is no need for remediation of the KBPOP from an ecological
standpoint.
The Institutional Controls alternative is intended (o be permanent and effective in the near- and
long-term. Alternative 2 is considered to have the lowest cost option which is still protective of
human health and the environment.
Implementation of this alternative will require both near- and long-term actions. For the near-
term, signs will be posted at the KBPOP indicating that this area was used to manage hazardous
materials. In addition, existing SRS access controls will be used to maintain this site for
nonresidential use.
In the long-term, if the property is ever transferred to non-federal ownership, the U.S.
Government will take those actions necessary pursuant to CERCLA 120(h). These actions will
include a deed notification disclosing former waste management and disposal activities as well as
remedial actions taken on the site. The deed notification shall, in perpetuity, notify any potential
purchaser that the property has been used for the management and disposal of construction debris
and other materials, including hazardous substances.
The deed shall also include deed restrictions precluding residential use of the property. However,
the need for deed restrictions may be reevaluated at the time of transfer in the event that exposure
assumptions differ and/or contamination no longer poses an unacceptable risk under residential
use.
Throughout the period of Federal ownership, as well as for any future ownership, under
Institutional Controls (Alternative 2), there will be no risk greater than 3xl06 to the future
industrial worker. Furthermore, there will be no appreciable risk to the environment.
Based on the conclusions of the RI/BRA, the KBPOP is not impacting groundwater.
Constituents are not observed to have migrated horizontally and clayey zones underneath the
base of the pit will limit vertical migration potential.
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Binpham Pump Ouiagc Pil (643-IG) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 Page 42 of 46
This proposal is consistent with EPA guidance and is an effective use of risk management
principles.
X. STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS
Based on the KBPOP Remedial Investigation Report with Baseline Risk Assessment, the KBPOP
poses no significant risk to the environment and minimal risk to human health. Therefore, a
determination has been made that Institutional Controls are sufficient for protection of human
health and the environment for the KBPOP operable unit.
The selected remedy is protective of human health and the environment, complies with Federal
and State requirements that are legally applicable or relevant and appropriate to the remedial
actions, and is cost-effective. The low levels of contaminants in the soil make treatment
impractical. Because treatment of the principal threats of the site was found to be impracticable,
this remedy does not satisfy the statutory preference for treatment as a principal element.
Section 300.430 (f)(4)(ii) of the NCP requires that a five-year review of the ROD be performed if
hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants remain in the waste unit. The three Parties,
DOE, SCDHEC, and EPA, have determined that a five-year review of the ROD for the KBPOP
will be performed to ensure continued protection of human health and the environment.
XL EXPLANATION OF SIGNIFICANT CHANGES
The Proposed Plan for the K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-IG) provided for
involvement with the community through a document review process and a public comment
period. No comments were received during the 30-day public comment period (July 8, 1997 -
August 6, 1997). There were no changes made to the preferred alternative as presented in the
Proposed Plan; therefore, there were no significant changes made to the presentation of the
alternative in this Record of Decision.
XH. RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY
A public meeting was not requested during the PP public comment period and there were no
comments received during the public comment period; therefore, a Responsiveness Summary is
not required for the KBPOP.
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Binghain Pump Outage Pit (643-IC) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 Page 43 of 46
POST-ROD DOCUMENT SCHEDULE
Due to the limited actions (i.e., posting signs, use of existing access controls, site maintenance,
etc.) involved with the implementation of the Institutional Controls alternative, a streamlined
post-ROD document is appropriate for the KBPOP. The actions involved with implementation of
the selected remedy do not require any design.
The post-ROD document and implementation schedule is summarized below and is illustrated in
Figure 8:
1. Corrective Measures Implementation/Remedial Action Report (CMI/RAR) (rev. 0) for the
KBPOP will be submitted for EPA and SCDHEC review four months after issuance of the
ROD.
2. EPA and SCDHEC have 90 days to review the KBPOP CMI/RAR (rev. 0).
3. SRS has 60 days to revise the KBPOP CMI/RAR (rev. 0) after receipt of regulatory
comments.
4. EPA and SCDHEC have 30 days for final review and approval of the KBPOP CMI/RAR
(rev. 1).
-------
ACTIVITY ORIO
DESCRIPTION OUR
EPA/SCDHEC ROD ISSUANCE 0
DEVELOP CMI/RAR 120
SRS SUBMITTAL OF REV.O CMI/RAR 0
EPA/SCDHEC REVIEW 90
SRS INCORPORATE EPA/SCHDEC COMMENTS CO
SRS SUBMITTAL OF REV.l CMI/RAR 0
EPS/SCHDEC FINAL REVIEN I APPROVAL 10
EPA/SCDHEC APPROVAL 0
D«t« D«l« IOCT98 ^^^^==3 JlUJUl !£•""'
Project Stirt IOCTS6 <><"• mu««./»itt "«""•
Project flnlih I7JULS1
*
— n — | — i — i — 5 — i — s —
CORR
<
ECTIVE MEASUR
>
K337BS ' — —
1 J I 5 1 ? 1 i l — I — I — » — i — n — i — n — i — n —
ES IMP./REMEI
i
O
llAL ACTION RI
i i
it.*** i *i i
ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION
K-AREA BINGHAM PUMP OUTAGE PIT
>OST ROD IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE _~
i
C
c
>*t* Hevlt'ien
. 1 ' "
SlPORT
1
0
Clitcked Tpprovji)
•*)
f
3
08
O
O
on
r>
n
O.
u
f
Vt
O
<5 58 »
-------
Record of Decision for the K-Arca Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-1C) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
October 1997 Page 45 of 46
XIV. REFERENCES
DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1994. Public Involvement. A Plan for the Savannah River Site.
Savannah River Operations Office, Aiken, South Carolina (1994).
DOE, 1996. Savannah River Site Future Use Project Report, Stakeholder Recommendations for
Savannah River Site Land and Facilities (U). Savannah River Operations Office, Aiken, South
Carolina (January 1996).
FFA, 1993. Federal Facility Agreement for the Savannah River Site, Administrative Docket No.
89-05-FF, (Effective Date: August 16, 1993).
WSRC (Westinghouse Savannah River Company), 1995a. Quality Control Summary Report for
the K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit, Stage 3 and 4. ESH-EMS-950561, Environmental
Protection Department (Environmental Monitoring Section), Westinghouse Savannah River
Company, Aiken, South Carolina (June 1995).
WSRC (Westinghouse Savannah River Company), 1995b. Quality Control Summary Report for
the RFI/R1 Assessment of the K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit, Stage 1. ESH-EMS-950392,
Environmental Protection Department (Environmental Monitoring Section), Westinghouse
Savannah River Company, Aiken, South Carolina (June 1995).
WSRC (Westinghouse Savannah River Company), 1997a. Feasibility Study for the K-Area
Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-JG) (U). WSRC-RP-96-831, Rev. 1.1, Westinghouse
Savannah River Company, Aiken, South Carolina (May 1997).
WSRC (Westinghouse Savannah River Company), 1997b. Remedial Investigation Report with
Baseline Risk Assessment for the K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit (643-JG) (U). WSRC-RP-
95-1555, Rev. 1.2, Westinghouse Savannah River Company, Aiken, South Carolina (February
1997).
WSRC (Westinghouse Savannah River Company), 1997c. Proposed Plan for the K-Area Bingham
Pump Outage Pit (643-1G) (U). WSRC-RP-97-106, Rev. 1.1, Westinghouse Savannah River
Company, Aiken, South Carolina (June 1997).
-------
Record of Decision forlhc K-Area Ringham Pump Outage Pit (643-1G) WSRC-RP-97-178
Savannah River Site Revision I
Ociober 1997 Page 46 of 46
This page intentionally left blank.
-------
Department of Energy
Savannah River Operations Office
P.O. Box A
Aiken, South Carolina 29802
,. . HV 28 1398
Mr. K. A. Collinsworth, Manager
Federal Facility Agreement Section
Division of Site Assessment and Remediation
Bureau of Land and Waste Management
South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control
2600 Bull Street
Columbia, SC 29201
Mr. J. L. Crane
SRS Remedial Project Manager
Waste Management Division
Environmental Protection Agency, Region IV
61 Forsyth Street, SW
Atlanta, GA 30303
Dear Mr. Collinsworth and Mr. Crane:
SUBJECT: Transmittal of the Issued Record of Decision (ROD) for the K-Area
Bingham Pump Outage Pit
In accordance with the terms of the Federal Facility Agreement (FFA), the Department of
Energy (DOE) is transmitting the ROD for the K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit which
was signed by DOE (10/14/97) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 3/23/98 and
South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC) 4/14/98.
Questions from you or your staff may be directed to me at (803) 725-7032.
Sincerely,
Brian T. Hennessey
Environmental Restoration Division
FFA Project Manager
BTH/CLM:ed
OD-98-216
-------
Mr. Collingsworth and Mr. Crane 2 MIV 28 1998
Enclosure
I. Signed Record of Decision (ROD) for the K-Area Bingham Pump Outage Pit
c: A. B. Gould, DOE-ECD, 703-A
C. V. Anderson, DOE-ERD, 703-A
C. B. Warren, EPA-IV
K. B. Feely, EPA-IV*
J. K. Lindler, SCDHEC-Columbia
J. T. Litton, SCDHEC-Columbia
G. K. Taylor, SCDHEC-Columbia
M. D. Sherritt. SCDHEC-Columbia
SRS Administrative Record Files (Palmer, 730-2B. 1000)*
*w/enclosure
------- |