15-ECD-0013

Mr. John Martell, Manager

OFFICE OF RIVER PROTECTION P.O .. Box 450, MSIN HB-60

Richland, Washington 99352

MAR 1 8 Z015

Radioactive Air Emissions Section Washington State Department of Health 309 BradJey Blvd., Suite 201 Richl_a,nd, Washington 99352 (Hanford Mailstop: BLs.42)

Mr. Martell:

RECEIVED

MAR 2 3 2015 WA Dept of Health

Radioactive Air Emissions Section

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, OFFICE OF RIVER PROTECTION SUBMITS THE RADIOACTIVE AIR EMISSIONS NOTICE OF CONSTRUCTION APPLICATION/OFFsPERMIT CHANGE NOTIFICATION FOR DIFFUSE AND FUGITIVE EMISSIONS FROM TANK FARM OPERATIONS FOR INCLUSION IN THE HANFORD SITE AIR OPERATING PERMIT, PERMIT NUMBER 00-05-006, "THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY HANFORD SITE RADIOACTIVE AIR EMISSIONS LICENSE NUMBER FF-Of''

The U.S. DepartmenJ of Eni:rgy, Office of River Protection (ORP) hi:reby submits to the Washington State Department of Health (WDOH) for your review and approval, the Radioactive Air Emissions Notice of Construction (NOC) application for Diffuse and Fugitive Emissions from Tank Farin Operations, TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 (Attachment 1). Attachment l 1s submitted to WDOH consfstent with their authority to administer and enforce the state radioactive air emissions regulations, including licens_ing.

The NOC application addresses iloniotitiile diffuse and fugitive emissions associated with tank farm operations in the 200 Area of the Hanford Site. Diffuse and fugitive emissions may occur in associ_ation wi¢ a vafiety of actjvititls. The NOC appl_ication was developed in collaboration between WDOH, ORP, and Washington River Protection Solutions LLC, as part of the lean management process undertaken during the stiinriler of2014 and meetings occumilg sirice that time .. lil order to improve the permitting structure for the U.S. Department of Energy radioactive licenses, the license issuJl(l as a result of the NOC application will eventually phase ouJ existing diffuse 3Ild fugitive cm_1trols yvitJ:ij._n o¢er l_icen_ses for t~ farms activities. Exi_stillg radioactive licenses wi_llbe usable until the end of calendar year (CY) 2015. Reports of closure will be needed for the existing radioactive licenses. Washington River Protection Solutions LLC will start to prepare the reports of closure in CY 2015 and the effort will continue through CY 2016. The approach taken in the NOC application is also intended to eliminate future NOC a:ppiication needs fot diffuse and fugitive emissions. ·

Mr. John Martell 15-ECD-0013

-2- MAR 1 8 2015

Within the NOC application, ORP has also prepared a supporting document RPP-ENV-58166, Estimates of Potential Radiological Emission Associated with Diffuse and Fugitive Activi_ti~s .from Tank Farms (Attachment 2). Attachment 2 is provided to WDOH as part of the completeness review and will not.require formal approval by WDOH. The Hanford Air Openi.tii1g Penn_it Off-Permit Chan:ge Notification (AttachmentJ) is provided to WDOH to facilitate WDOH's _adrni!llstrll~ioI_l oftbe Air Operating Permit.

If you have any questions, please contact Dennis W. Bowser; E_nvironroeI_ltal Compliance Division, (509) 373-2566.

ECD:DWB

Attachments: (3)

cc w/att_achs: P.M. Gent, Ecology R.A. Kaldor, MSA R.J. Utley, WDOH Environmental Portal, LMSI WRPS Correspondence

cc w/o attachs: B.G. Erlandson, BNI i. Cox, C'rtJIR S. Harris, CTUIR S.L. Dahl, Ecology D.Zhen, EPA (Region IO, Seattle) G .. Boliliee, NPT K. Nile_s, Oregon Energy D.E. Jack_son, RL J.W. Schmidt, WDOH J.A. Joyner, WRPS R. Jim, YN

(JR,11,,-/ Manager Sr I

Attachment 1 15--ECD.;,0013

(25 Pages)

TOC-ENV-NOC,.5231, R_~dioactive Air Emissons Notice of Construction for Diffuse and Fugitive Emissions

from Tank Farm Operations

1),. =- 4 ~ ''.Y\ Dennis W. Bowser .

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 2/18/2015 - 11 :25 AM 1 of 25

- -- -- -

DOCUMENT RELEASE AND CHANGI;: _FORM 1a. Doc No: TOC0ENV-NOC-5231 ~- - - - -

Ra,,.

Prepared ·For. thl!I u,s. Department ri Energy. ~itant ~-fef Eflvl1'01'1mental Management 1 b. Project Number: IX) NIA y Wiishington"River Prot8Cllon Solutlcns, LLC.', PO aox·~. Rlc:hhm, WA 99352 'nntractor, For. U.S. I of E--- Office of RIY81' Prolaction · under Contract OE"-'C27-0BRV1-4800

. - . - Release·stamp RADEMARK _DISCl.AIMER: Refereoce herein to any lf)8Clllc commerdal ~ process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or ottiarwiae, does riot necessarily constlM9 or Imply Its endonKlment, recommeodation, or' faYOl'irig by the United Stat8s

_or any agency lhereot'orits ~or~.

Printed in the United Statei rA America.

2.- Document TlUa DATE: ~ Radioactive Air Emissions Notice of Construction for Diffuse and Fugitive Emissions from Tank Fann HANForuJ

nnerations Feb 18, 2015 RE1.EAse

3. Da_slgn '!_a_,:lfl_catlon Rac!u[rad DYes IX)No -- -

4. USQ Nu_mber D NIA I 5. _PrHA_ N_umbe_r Ill _NIA TF-15-02- Rev.

6. USQ Scnienlng:

a. _Does the change l_ntroduce any new failure mod_es to the equipment? D Yes Ll!I No Basis is required for Yes:

b. Does.the change lncrease·ttie probability of existing failure modes? D Yas!jO No B_asl~ Is requ_lrejl for Yes:

illl No C. For Safety Signific:ant equipment. does the change require a modification to Chapter 4 o_f the DSA and/or FRED? DYes D NIA Basis Is required for Yes:

7. DesC:rlptilffl of Ch8ng8·8nd JllstlflcatlOn (Use COlltinuati6n pages as ileeded)

8 .. Approvals nue Name s111natura Date

c1e~!3ri~ ~e~~ WASHINGTON, MARGUERITE WASHINGTON, MARGUERITE 02/18/2015

Design Verifier DYEKMAN, DALE L BLOC>M, IµCHA_RD W for 02/09/2015

DYEKMAN, DALE L per email Document Control Approval WASHINGTON; MARGUERITE - W ASHINGTON;MAR.GUERITE 02/18/2015

Enylronn:1ent,a1 Pr~~n JOYNER, JESSICA A BLOOM, RICHARD W for JOYNER, 02/13/2015

JESSICA A per email Ortgin~or BLOOM,.RICHARD W BLOOM, RICHARD W 02/13/2015

Other' Approver RUMBURG;BRIAN P BLOOM, RICHARD w·for - 02/17/2015

RUMBURG, BRIAN P per email R~S~9f'Sible'. ~~nage-..- JOYNER, J_ESSICA A BLOOM, RICHARD W for JOYNER, 02/13/2015

JESSICA A per email USQ Evaluator GRAHAM, _MARK GRAHAM, MARK 0211?r,2015

- . - -

9. ·c1earance RivlBW: ·

Restriction Type:

Ill Public D Official Use Only Exemption 3-Slatutory Exemption {OU0-3) D Undefined D Official Use Only Exemption 4-C_ori)mercial/Propri~tary {OU0-4) D Unclassified Controlled Nuclear Information {UCNI) D Official Use Only Exemption 5-Prlvileged lnfonnatlon {OU0-5) D Export Control Information {ECI) D Offi_clal Use Only Exemption 6-Pe<sonal Privacy {OU0-6) D Official Use Only Exemption 2-Circumventon of StaMe {OUO-2) D Official Use Only Exemption 7-Law Enforcement {OU0-7)

1 S_PF-0_01 (Rev.0)

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 2/18/2015 , 11 :25 AfJI 2 of25

10. Distribution: Name Organization

1LTBDs or Holds

12. lrilpacted DOcUnients_-_ Engllla&rlng llll NIA DCfc-um811f Number· RSV. Titl&

1). ·Other ~,fata_d Docu,m8Pts. llQ NIA

Document Number Rev. ntle

14a. Retatec1 .. Biil1dlrlg1F8cl1iiJU illl NIA 14b. Related Sysiems · · 14c. Related Equipment ID N!)S, (EI_N) llll NIA

2 SPF'001 (Rev.O)

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 2/18/2015 - 11 :25 AM 3 of25

istart Continu~tlon Here)

3 SPFCQQ1 (Rev.0)

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 2/18/201.5-11:2.5 AM

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231, Rev. 0

Radioactive Air Emissions Notice of Construction for Diffuse and Fugitive Emissions from Tank Farm Operations

Author Name: Ri_chard Bloom Richland, WA 99352 U.S. Department of Energy Contract DE-AC27-08RV14800

ORCF mw 2118'2015

EDT/EC_N: Cost Center: Ni A B&R Code: NIA

UC: N/A Charge Code: Ni A T otaf Pages_: 25

Key Words: NOC, TankFarms, Radioactive Air

Abstract: This document is a Notice of Construction (NOC) application for diffuse and fugitive emissions associated with Tanlc Farm Operations located in the 200 Area of the Hanford Site. This application addresses n_on-routine diffuse and fugifr.:e emissions associated with Tanlc Farm operations.

T~DEMAR.1$. Q_ISCLAIMER. _ Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, ~demarl:t, 1'!1&,:i_ufa_dure~, or Ot!fflrwlse, does not_ necessa_rlly constlt~te or imply its endo.rser_nent, _re:commendation, or fa'(orir:ig by the·Unite_d S_tates Government or any agency thereof or Its contradors or subcontractors.

APPROVED By marguerlte washlngton at 11 :29 am, Feb 18, 2015

Release Approval Date

DATE: HANFORD

Feb 18, 2015 liELEAsE

Release Stamp

Approved For Public Release

A-6_002-767 (REV 3)

4of25

TOC-ENV'NOC-5231 2/1812015 - 11 :25 AM 5 of 25

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 Rev. 0

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1.

2.0 FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION .................... -.......................................................... 2

3.0 RESPONSIBLE MANAGER .............................................................................................. 2

4.0 PROPOSED ACTION .......................................................................................... .-.-................. .-3

5.0 STA TE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT ......................... :·····:···:····:·:·:·:--·:···:····:··:··:··:·····'·"·····3

6.0 CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL PROCESSES ···················:··:··:··:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:·:··:··:·:·:·:···:·:·:·:-·:·:··.··:············4

7.0 EXISTING ANO PROPOSED AHA TEMENT TECHNOLOGY ·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.·.· ........... 4

7.1 GENERAL ABATEMENT TECHNOLOGY ......................................................... 5

7.2 ACTIVITY SPECIFIC ABATEMENT TECHNOLOGY ....................................... 6

7 .2.1 Excavation and Backfilling ................... _ ...................................................... 6 7.2.2 Demolition of Equipment, Vehicles, Structures, or Btiilding ...................... 6

7 .2.3 Borehole Drilling, Sampling, and Casing Removal ..................................... 7 7.2.4 Cutting.and Welding .................................................................................... 8

7 .2.5 Opening of Pits and/or Ris.ers to Access a Tank ...... :·.·:·.·.·.·.···.·.··· ·:·.···· .. _.: .................. 8 7 .2.6 Use of Air Movers to Mitigate Environmental Conditions ......................... 9

8.0 APPLICABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY DRA WINGS ............................................... 9

9.0 RADIONUCLIDES OF CONCERN-POTENTIALEMISSIONS ................................... 9

10.0 EFFLUENTMONITORING SYSTEM .............................................................................. 9

11.0 RADIONUCLIDE ANNUAL POSSESSION QUANTITY ............................................. 10

12.0 PHYSICAL FORM OF EACH RADIONUCLIDE IN THE INVENTORY ................... .! I

13.0 RELEASE FORM OF EACH RADIONUCLIDE IN THE INVENTORY ...................... I I

14.0 RELEASE RA TES ............................................................................................................ I I

15.0 RECORDKEEPING .......................................................................................................... 12

16 .. 0 DISTANCES AND DIRECTION OF THE MAXIMALLY EXPOSED INDIVIDUAL .................................................................................................................... 12

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 2/18/2015 -11:25 AM 6 of 2_5

TOC,ENV-NOC-5231 Rev. 0

I 7.0 TOTAL EFFECTIVE DOSE EQUIVALENT TO THE MAXIMALLY EXPOSED INDIVIDUAL.:,.:·:-·:·:·:·:·:·:·..:·:·:·.-,.-................................................................................... 13

18.0 COST FACTORS/BEST AVAILABLE RADIONUCLIDE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY OR AS LOW AS REASONABLY ACHIEVEABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION .......... : ............................................. J4 .

19.0 DURATION OR LIFETIME ........................................................ ;;;;; .... ; ........................... 14

20.0 CONTROL 'TECHNOLOGY STANDARDS ................... :-·:·:·:··:··:·:·:·:··:·:· .................................... 14

21.0 REFERENCES .......................................................................... : ........................................................... 16

LIST OF TAlJL.11;S

Table I. The Geodetic Coordinates of the 200 Area Tani{ Farms .................................................. 2

Table 2·. Dose t9.MJ:ll ................................................................................................ · ........••.. ,· ••••••••. :.·:·:-·:·:-·.13 fable 3. Control Technology Standards ............................. : ••..•. :,., .............................................................. 15

APPENDICIES

APPENDIX A- BE.ST BASIS TANK INVENTORY .............................................. A-1

ii

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231

ALARA ALARACT ANSI ASME BARCT CFM CFR Ci cm DOE dpm GEA HEPA HPT MEI mreril NOC NEPA PCM PTE RCW SEPA TEDE TWINS WAC

WDOH

2/18/2015 - 11 :25 AM

TOCsENV-NOC-5231 Rev. 0

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

As Low As Reasonably Achievable As Low As Reasonably Achievable Control Te<:h_nology American N1,1tio11al Standards Iilstitute American Society of Mechanical Engineers Best Avail.able Radionuclide Control Technology Cubic F~t per Minute Code of Federal Regulations Curie centimeter U,_S. Pepartnient of Energy Disintegrations per minute Gamma En_ergy Al)11lysi_s GEA High Efficiency ParticulateAir Health Physics Technici311 MaximaHy Exposed Individual Millirem Notii::e of Const_ruction National Environmental Policy Act Periodic Confirmatory Measurenie11t Potential-to-Emit Revised Code of Washington State El)vi_ronmental Policy Act Total Effective Dose Equivalent Tank W~te I_nform11tion Network System Washington Administrative Code

Washington State Department of Health

iii

7 of 25

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 2/18/2015 - 11 :25 AM

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 Rev. 0

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This document is a Notice of Construction (NOC) application for d_iffuse and fugitive emissions associated with Taruc Farm Operations located in the 200 Area of the Hanford Site. Thi_s NOC appli~.tion is being submitted in accordance with Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 246-241a060,Applications, Registrq/ion and Licel}sii'lg; and 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 61.07, National Emission Standards/or Hazardo71S Air Pollu/qn,t.

This application addresses non-routine diffuse an_d fugit_ive emissions assoc.iated with Tank Farm operations. Sorne non-routine emissions are passive in nature, while othe_rs:are the resuJt of act_ivitic:s being performed. This application is intended to replace previous approvals as well as address futµre non-routine diffuse and fugitive activities.

AH 11ctivit_ie_s pe_rforme.d inthe200 Area of the Hartford Site with potential diffuse and fugitive emissions will be evaluated under this NOC, i.i:icl.ud_i_ng, bu.t not limited to, activities in Tank Farm ojierations and activities encompassing 222-S Laboratory, evaporator (11,cilitil:s, double­shell ta:nk farms, single-shell tank farms, areas adjacent to the facilities, waste transfer lines between fa,nns @d faci_lities, valve pits, misc¢llaneous undergroiirid storage tanks and associated equipment in the area of the 200 East and 200 West AJ~ of the H1111ford site, and the corridor in-between utilized for the cross-site transfer line. Diffuse and fugitive ernissions may occur in as_sociation with storage, modifications, construction,. excavations, operation and maintenance activities, as well as duri_ng cl)_ar11cte_ri_zation and sampling, demolition of structures, instailation of equipment; mixing, transfers, retrieval of waste and ~soci_ated ac:tjviti_es.

Emissions associated with active point sou_rce vi:n_t_ilation systems are address.ed in other NOCs. ModificatioJ1S involving new or existing active point source ventilation systems wi_H be addressed in sc:parate NOCappiication or rnodifications specific to that emission source. However, this 11pplication may be applicable to these modifications to address diffuse and fugitive.emissions associated with related activit_ies, Ot)wr tha_n site: preparation activities, approvals for a new or modified point source or related facility are required prior to utilizing this NOC for associated construction activities.

The Tank Waste Inforination Network System (TWINS) Best,Basis Inventory Summary (Append.ix A) was usei:I to evaluate the overall radionudide Tank Farms inventory for preparation of this NOC. Assumptions were used to develop 1111 overall e_stin:rate of pote.n,tial emissions. The maximally exposed individual (MEI) was determined using dispersion factors de.rived foru_se on the Ha:nford Site and published in DOE/RL-2006-29, Rev. I, Calculating Potential-to-Emit Radiological Releases and Doses. The combined total estimated offsite unabated dose to the MEI for diffuse and fugitive emissions covered by this NOC is !ipproxi.rn.ately 0.6 rnrem/yr. No abatement credit is taken for the associated administrative controls.

8 0125

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 2/18/2015 - 11 :25 AM

TOC-ENV-NOC-5'.f3l Rev. 0

2.0 FACILITY NAME AND LOCATION

Regulatory Citation: "Name a.n.d address of the facility and location, (latitude and longitude), of the emission unit(s). "

The address for the Tank Farms is:

U,S. Department of Energy, Office of River Protection Hanford Site, 200 East/200 West Area Tank Farms Appro:x,imately 25 mil.es north of Richland, Washington 99352

Table 1 shows the geodetic locations of the center of the 200 East and 200 West Areas of the H1J11forcl Sit~.

Table 1. The Geo<letic Coordinates of the 200 Area Tank Farms

~-· ·: TimliFiirni --·-·- ~· ...... -· -,, __ • _-_ • ' •. Y :,. L_a ti_ ·tude. ·-- ·· · -- ·• ~- ,_" -.· - L · · d' · ., :• _(?Jlgltl!. e, .... , ,S .C

200 East 46° 33' 21 ;, N 119° 32' 3" w

200 West 46° 3_3' 14" N 119° 37' 31"W

3.0 RESPONSIBLE MANAGER

Regulatory Citation· "Name, title, address, and phone number of the relponsible manager. " Currently, the re_sponsible facility manager is:

Kevin Smith, Manager U.S. Department of Energy Ofli_ce of River Protection P.O. Box 550 Richland, Washington 99352

Phone:.(509) 372-2315

2

9 of 25

TOC-E_NV-NOC-5231 2/18/2015 - 11 :25 AM

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 Rev. 0

4.0 PROPOSED ACTION

Regulatory Qitation:· "Identify the type of proposed action for which .this application is submitted: (a) Construction of nt!W emission unit(s); (b) Modification of existing em_ission unit(s); identify whether this is a sigriificqnt mo<!ificatioii - sigriificant means the potential-to­emit airborne radioactivity at a rate thatcould increase the TEDE to the MEI by at least 1.0 mrem!yr as a resu_lt oft/Jeproposed modification; (c) Modification of existing un_it(s), unregistered. "

This application is submitted in accordance with WAC 246-247°060(l)(a) and 40 CFR 61 Subparts A and H for diffuse and fugitive ~mis_sions from activities conducted in support of Tank Fann operations located in the 200 Area of the Hanford Site an~ re.lated modifications that would not be considered routim: per WAC 246-247-030 (23) and subject to Washingtol) State oply licensing requirements. Routine act_ivities that are descrli,ed and performed in accordance with an approved ,;As Low as Reasonably Achiev11ble Control Technology (ALARACT)" demonstration are excluded from this scope of this licen~.

The ac.tivities described in this application represent radiologica_l a_i_r ~missions from an unregistered source, or sµpport new activities, modifications, construction, or decornmjs_sioning, as defined in WAC 246a247, which could res_u_It in a potential increase in emissions. The estimated annual poteritial-to-emit (PTE) associated w_i_th this activity is below levels that would classify it !lS a significant modification. ··

~-0 STATE ENViRONMENTAL POLICY ACT

Regulatory Citation: "If this project is subject to the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) contained in chapter 197-11 WAC, provid_e the name of the lead agency, lead agency con/act person, and their phone number. "

This project fulfills the Tequireinents of WAC 197-11 and Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 43.21 C030(2)(C), "Guicielines for state agencies, local governments - Statements -Reports­Advice ~Information," per RCW 4_3.~IC.15, "RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c) inapplicablewhen stateineritpreviously prepared pursuant to m;tional environmental policy actf' which states, "The requirements of RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c) pertaining to the preparqtion of a detailed statement by branches of governme,nt shall not apply when an adequate detailed statement hqs been previously prepared pursuant to the national environ_mental policy act of 1969, in which event said prepqredstatement may be utilized in lieu of a separately prepqreq s(a_temerit 1,inder RCW 43.2JC.030(2)(c)." The document tllat mei::ts the agencies review needs for the current proposal is:

• DOE/EISs0391, Tank Closure qriq Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement for the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington, Vol_u111~ 2, Boo_k 2, Appendix E.1.1.1.2., Operqtions an<! Mairttenailce.

The lead agency is the O:!ft<:e of River Protection, U.S. Department of Energy and the contact person is Mary Beth Burandt, Docm:nem Mapager and her phorie iiiiriiber is (509) 372°8828.

3

10 of 25

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 2/18/2015 - 11 :25 AM

TOC-ENV-NOCs5231 Rev. 0

6.0 CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL PROC)j:SSES

Regulatory Citation: "Describe the chemical and physical processes upstream of the emission unit(s)."

DiffiJse a11d fugitive radioactive air emissions are emissions which do not and could not reasonably be controHed by pliSsing t.h.rough a stack, active vent, or other fiinctiorially equivalent structure, and which are not feasible to directly ll)e11Sure a_11d qul!m.ify.

There.are not any chemical processes associated wiih d_iffuse and fugitive radioac_tive air emissions. Physical activities that could contribute to diffuse/fugitive radioactive e_missio11s addressed i_n this application may include the following:

• I_n_<:i_dental rell)ted activities: o Operations necessary to facilitate inspectio11s, sru:npling, characterization,

construction, modifications, surveillance, and maintenance of equipment; struc~res, and/or facilities.

o Management of contaniinl)ted fac__iliiies or equipm_ent, no longer under active ventilation, pending future disposition or use.

o Activities associated with decoiltaniiiiation trailers. o Waste handling operation_s_, o Installation and testing of equipment, piping, jumpers, structures, l)lld/or fac_il_ities.

• Excavation and backfilling of contaminated soil using both manual (i.e. han_d digging) and rnechanical means. Mechanical means include but.not limited to jack hammers, trenchers, scrapers, backhoes, front loaders; and excavators.

• Borehole drilling, core drilling (im:luding s_ide wa_l_l), sampling and casing removal. • Demolition and/or removal of equ_ipment, piping, jumpers, vehicles, structure, and/or

fadiities. • Cutting and welding of contaminated pipe and equipment. • Tank Access:· opening of pits and/or risers to access a tank to inspect, repair, replace

and/or rnodify equ_ipme_nt, and/or install new equipment and piping infrastructure. • U~e of air m_overs to m_itigate personnel exposure to envfronmerital conditions.

7.0 EXISTING AND PROPOSED ABATEMENT TECHNOLOGY

Regulatory Citation: ''Describe the existing and proposed (as applicable) abatement technology. Describe the bases for the use of the proposed system. l1J<:lude expec_ted efficiency of each control device, and the annual average volumetric flow rate(s) in meters3 /sec for the emission u_n_it(s)."

Th.e abateme_nt t_ech_nology described in the section below a:re adniinisttative, based oil "as low as reasonably achievable" (ALARA) principles and pfl)ctices. No specif_ic abatement credit is assigned to these controls and there is no applicable flow rate for these activities. The controls used during tank farm facility activities will be implemented during the work planning process ~ased on the specifics of the activity being conducted. Activity specific controls beyond the general controls outl_i_ned i_11 Section 7.1 are describe<! in Section 7.2. Variation from the specific controls described in Section 72; if required, woul_d be in cons~ltl!t_ion with the W11shi_11gtmJ Stl!te Department of Health (WDOH) and documented with an NOC revision; ifnecessary.

4

11 of 25

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 2/18/2015 - 11 :25 AM

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 Rev. 0

7.1 GENERAL ABATEMENT TECHNOLOGY

The foHowi_ng controls will be implemented during applfoable tank farm facility activities depending on the conditions encountc:red.

o Tank farm outdoor activities that are impacted by,.and notsheltered from the adverse effect of, wind wiU be curtlliled i_f sµst!!,ine_d wind speed excee:ds 25 miles per hour (mph).

o Planned activities where tht:re i_s 11n expectation of potentially dISturbing rad.iciactivity in the general area above 1,000 disintegrations per minute per I 00 square centimc:te_rs (1,000 dpm/100 cni2) beta/gamma cir 20 dpm/100 cm2 alpha will be subject to a radiological work pern1it that will:

0 Identify Heal_th Physics Tei:bnician (HPT) coverage for the activity.

o Specify work suspension l_i_r:nit_s for the activity.

o When contamination levels lire expec:t_ed t_o excee:d I 00,000 dpm/100 cm2 beta/gamma or 2,000 dpm/100 cm2 alpha the following controls are implemented to tbe e_xtent app)ic_11ble, consistent With the latest version of the applicable tank farm radiological control manual (e.g. HNFs5183, Tank Farms R_a_d_iologic:al Control Manual).

• Decontan:t_i_na~ion

o Wiping and rinsing prior to packaging and rer:noval o Tape o Sgippable paiIJtS

• Co_r1tlll1l_ination CoIJtrol

o Wet methods o Application of fixative o Tape

• Confinement

o Packaging o Gl_ovebags o Sleeving o Bagging o Tenting o Ground covers to prevent spread of contamination to the soil 0 w·md screens

o Covers • Taxps/pl11stic • Sand, dirt, gravel • Other cover device or structure

5

12 of 25

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 2/18/2015 • 11 :2·5 AM

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 Rev. 0

The effectiveness of these general abatement controls are monitored using hand hel_d su_rvey equipment oy the ffi>t for spread of contamination outside of an established radiological controlled area.

7.2 ACTIVITY SPECIFIC ABATEMENT TECHNOLOGY

7.2.1 Excavation and Backfiiiing

In adcl_ition to imple1I1enting the appropriate general controls described in Section 7.1, the following controls will be i1I1plemt:l)tt:d dµril)g excavation and backfilling. These controls will also be applicableto demolition, borehole drilling, sampling, and casing removal ac_tivities.

• Pl)eumatic driven_ tools/equipment will not be used if contamination levels are expected to exceed 100,000 dpm/100cm2 area beta/gamma or 2,000 dpm/100 cm2 alpl)_a. This limit does not apply to the use of electric or hydraulic driven tools or equipment.

o In process radiological.surveys of material involved in the activity will be performed to evalull.te the need to implement additional general aoatement controls,

• Suppresslll)tssµ_ch as Wllter, fixatives, covers, or wfodscreens shall be availabl_e arid will be used as necessary, including at the end of each shift or whe!l sustai_necl wil)ds are >20 mph. If contaminated (> 2,000 dpm/ 100 cm2 area beta/gamma or> 20 dpm/100 cm2

alp_l)_ll) soil and debris will remain inactive fot greater than 24 hours suppressants .shall be applied unless contaminated soils are froz_en or it is rai_ning, snowi!lg, or other freezing precipitation is falling at the end of work operations. ·

• Excavation of riidioactive material shall cease if sustained winds exceed 20 mph. A locll.l wi1_1d speed measurement device may be utffized in lieu of Hanford Meteorological Station readings.

• If material cont(1Il'.lin_ation leve_ls > 3,000,000 dpml I 00 cm2 area beta/gamma or >400 dpm/100 cm2 alpha are encountered: ·

o Excavation and.soil piles wiil be covered with plastic or fixative applied at the end of each shift and/or as necesSllfY to p_reve_nt spread of con~mil)atio11.

o Excavation and.soil piles will be containerized or covered{e.g. use of plastic or cle_lll) fiH) if it i_s to be left for greater than 48 hours.

7.2.2 Demolition of Equipment, Vehicles, Structures, or Bu_il!ling

In addition to implementing the appropriate general controls described in Section 7.1, the following controls wiU be implemented during demolition activities:

• Pneumatic driven tools/equipment will not be used if contllminlltion levels are eJ(pected to exceed I 00,000 dj>m/100 crii2 area beta-gamma or 2,000 dpm/100 cm2 alpha. This l_imit does not apply to the use of_ electric or hydrauiic driven tools or equipment.

• In process radiological surveys of material involved in the activity will be performed to evaluate the n_eed to implem.:nt gene_ra_l abatement controls.

6

13 of 25

TOC-ENV0 NOC-5231 2/18/2015 - 11 :25 AM

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 Rev. 0

• Suppressants s11c.h as water, fixatives, covers, or windscreens shall be available and will be used as necessary, including at the end of each shift or when sustained winds are >20 01p.lJ. If contlll11inated (> 2,000 dplll/ 100 cm2 area beta/gamma or >20 dpm/100 c012

alpha) debris will remain inactive for greater than 24 hours suppressants shall be applied.

• Demolition activit_ies of radioactive material shall cease if sustained winds exceed 20 mph .. A local wind speed measurement device m11y be utilized in lie.u of Hanford Meteorological Station readings.

• Ifrnaterial contammatiori levels >3,000,000 dpm/100 cm2 area beta/gam.rnaor >400 dpm/100 cm2 alplia are encountered:

o Debris piles will be covered with plastic or fixative applied at the end of each shift aiid/or as necessary to prevent spread of contami_nation.

o Debris will be containerized or covered with plastic if it is to be left for greater than 48 hours.

7.2.3 Borehole Drilling, Sampling, and Casing Removal

In addition to implementing the appropriate general controls described inSection 7.1, the following controls will be implemented \luring borehole dttlling, sampling, and casing removal activities:

• In process radiological surveys of equipment or material involved in the activity will be performed .as equipment is removed· from the borehole to ev11!11ate the need to implement general abaternent controls. · · ·

• If contlll11inated materialis expected to be brought to the surface by the activity, suppn:sS!lllts sm:h as water, fixativc::s, covers, or windscreens shall be available and will be used as necessary, including at the end of each sh_ijJ orwhen su_s(!lined wil!ds are excee:d 20 mph, unless the rnatenal is containerized. A local wind speed measurement device may be utili_z_ed in lieu of Hanford Meteorological Station readings.

• If contaminated material is expected to be brought to the surfac:e, borehole drilHng or casing removal activities of radioactive material shall cease if sustained winds exceed 20 mph. A local wind spee:d measurement device may be utilized in lieu of Hanford Meteorological Station readings.

• If liquids are to be managed as a part of drilling or•samplj_ng act_ivitjc::s, waJ~r which is c:oUectecl in passively ventilated open top ci>ritainers will either be transferred into a tal!ker truc;k for transport to an appropriate treatment /storage fae1iity or closed and transported to appropriate treatmc::l!t /st.orage facility.

• AIi cont_aminated samplc::s will b:e containerized.

• For containerized material, the exterior surface of the outer most container will be surveyed to confirm it is free of smea.rable contamination above release limits prior to shipment.

7

14 of 25

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 2/18/2015 - 11 :25 AM

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 Rev. 0

7.2.4 Cutting and Welding

In addition to implementing the appropriate general confyois described in Section 7.1, the following controls will be implemented.

• Mechanical means (shears, saws, rotating cutting kniveslwJ:teels) wiH be used when cu1:ting cm1tami11ated equipment or piping.

• When welding contaminated pipe or equipment, the heat affected areas will be decontarn_ina~d below 10,000 dpm/100 cin2 beta/gamina and.SO dpm/100 cm2 alpha removable contamination prior to welding. Fixed contaminatfo11 levels will be documented ..

7.2.5 Opening of Pits and/or Risers to Access a Tank

In addition to i_i:npleme11_ting the appropriate general controls described in Section 7.1, the following controls will be implemented priorto opening pits and/or risers to access a tank or perform other activities:

• Ground covers·will be in$.ll.ed aro_und the riser or pit.

• Splash guarcls will be i11_staJ.Jed around a ph if planned activities wiil involve use of water spray to facilitate decontamination ofequipment bei11g removed from the pit or needed to buffer areas of high co11tainimition within the pit from the general work area.

• If a laydown area will be utilized, it will be established and provided with ground cover and splash gullrd. A layer of matting will be used to protect the ground cover.

o In-pit decon.tarnination and/or application of fixative will be performed when required by section 7. I. ·

During activities tha:t.req·uire tank access via a port or a riser, the following addition/II co11trol_s wiH be impleme11ted:

• Minimize open port/riser time by use of valves, caps, or plugs.

• Perform decontamination of equipment being removed from the tank within the riser or llS close to the top of the riser as practical.

• Use appropriate containmtmt per the l_atest version ofthe,app)icable radiological containment guide.

During pit/tank access where other active ventilation is not available or judged inadequate and full containment is notprac:ticl!l, t_he above controls may be supplemented with the following:.

• Use of a:n open top bull pen provided with a licensed ventilation system that exhausts eaj:emal to thte bull p:en to control airborne levels in the bull pen work space and mitigate the diffuse and fugitive em_i_ssions_.

o Within an open top bull pen actively ventilated by a licensed ventilation system, small (<200 cubic feet per minute (CFM)) vacuums fitted with HEPA-type filters exhausting

8

15 of 25

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 2/18/2015 - 11 :25 AM

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 Rev. 0

within the bull pen rilliy be used to vacuum contaminants, collapse glove bags or provide point source contamination control.

7.2.6 Use of Air Movers to Mitigate Environmental Condi~ions

When air movers or fans are used to mitigate personnel exposure to environmental conditions, 311(j not for radiological control, the following controls will be utilized:

• The velocity of the air movement caused by the air mover in areas of con@:Ilination wiJl not exceed 25 mph, based on rilaxirilwn design capacity.

8.0 APPLICABI.E CONT~OL TECHNOLOGY DRAWINGS

Regulatory Citation: "Provide conceptual drawings showing all f:!pplic_a_b_le control technology components from the point of entry of radionuclides into the .vapor space to release to the environment. "

No specifi_c techn_ology standards apply to fugitive emissions control.. Emissions will be controlled using best applica.ble controls such a_s decontaminating, plastic barriers and applying fixatives as needed for contamination controls.

9.0 RADIONUCLIDES OF CONCERN - POTENTIAL EMISSIONS

Regulatory Citation: "ldentifji each radionuclide that could contribute greater than ten percent of the potential-to-emit TE.DE to the MEI, or greater than 0./ mreinlyrpdtential-to-einit TEDE to the MEI"

The potential dose consequence of a hypothetical rel~e of the entire tank: farm inventory based on the TWINS database best basis inventory is shown in Appendix A. Radionuclides estilll_ated to contribute greater than I 0% of the unabated Potential-To-Emit (PTE) TEDE to both the onsite and offsit.e MEI from d_iffuse and fugitive sources associated with tank Farin Operations are Strontium-90 and Cesium, 137. Emission associated with a_lph_a radionucHde_s, Plutonium-239/240, and Americium-241 have a potential to contribute less than I 0% of the unabated PTE to the offsite MEI, but are focluded due to their potential to contribute greater than I 0% of the unabated PTE to the onsite MEL Unabatc:d emiss_ioi:i.s associated \'.l'ith th.is application of thos_e radionuclides estirillited to contribute greater than 0.1 mrem/yr potential,to-erriit TEDE, to either the offsite or onsite MEI, areSr-90 :and Cs-137, as discussed in Section 17.0.

10.0 EFFLUENT MONITOIUl'IG SYSTEM

Regulatory Citation: "Describe the effl.uent mon_itoring syste.m for the proposed control system. Describe each piece of monitoring equipment and its monitoring capability, jnc/ut.f_!ng dete<:_tion limits, for each radionuclide that could contribute greater than ten percent of thepotential-to­emit tilDE to the MEI, or greater than 0.1 mrem/yr potentialsto-emit TEDE to the MEI, or greater than twenty-five percent of the TEDE to the MEI, after controls. Describe the method for

9

16 of 25

TOC-ENV-NQC-5231 2/18/2015 - 11 :25 AM

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 Rev. 0

monitoring or calculating those radionuclide emissions. Describe the method with detail sufficient to demonstrate compliance with the applicable requirements. "

I_n accordance with the definition of''Monitoring" provided in WAC246°247-030(17), required monitorh1g 11ctivitie_s include the measurement ofradionucHdesin arribientair. Samples are collected from known or expected t_ransport pathw11ys, whk:h ~e gei:ierally downwind of potential or actual airborne release points and down-gradient of liquid d_ischarges. The accepted primary method ofmonitormg diffuse and fugitive emissions is ambient air sampling, with other media s~ples ( e.g., surface soil, vegetation for deposition, radiological surveys, and them10luminescent dosimeters) used.11s qualit11tive i_n_d_icators.

The Department of Energy (DOE) mon_itors diffu_se and fugitive emissions with a network of monitors on the Hanford Site. This monitoring is subdivided into two groups: "Far-Field Monitoring" ancl "Near~Field Monitoring.'.' The Near-Field Monitoring systems will be used as the pri_mary method of monitoring the emissions described in this application and provide confirmatory measurement of low em_issions. Ne_11r-Field Monitoring locations are associated mostly with major nuclear facilities and waste storage or disposal facjlit_ies suph a_s cont11i11_er storage, burial grollilds, llilderground tanks (i.e., Tank Farms in the 200 Areas), ponds, cribs, tren_c:hes, and <iitch_es; Far-Field Monitoring results are used to estimate the resulting dose to the offsite member of the public from all Hanford Site fugit_ive e_rnissions llll:d reported on an annual basis (e.g. DOE/RL-2014°14, Rev. 0, Radionuclide AirEmissions.Reportforthe HanfordSite, Calendar Year2_013).

The Hanford Site Environmental Monitoring Program, which serves as the monitormg system for t_he activitif,l_S des_cribed in thi_s application, is described in detail in DOE/RL-91-50, Hanford Site Errvironmenial Monitoring Plan. The detection capapi_lity of the system is designed to enable a comparison to 10% of the values listed in Table 2 of 40 CFR 61, Appendix E. The capability to achieve this is dependent on the sarriple volume. meeting or exceeding a nominal volu!Ile_. Rl}d_ionu<:l_ides that cou_ld contribute greater than i 0% of the potential-to-emit TEDE, described in Section 9.0,are Sr-90, Cs-137, Pu-239/240, and A_rn-24). Specific analysis for Sr-90 and Pu-239/240 isotopes is required, while Gamma Energy Analysis (GEA) provides analysis of photon energy spectrum for individual photon-emitting radionuclides such as Cs0 137 and A.m-i4 L Ana_Iyte selection will be reviewed annually as part of the Master Samjilmg Schedule planning for each medium (e.g. DOE/RL-2013-53, Ha_nfordSite E_rrviromr;enfa_l Surveillanc_e Master Sampling Schedule for Calendar Year 2014).

11.0 RADIONUCLIDE ANNUAL POSSESSION QUANTITY

Regulatory Citation: "Indicate the annual possession qucmt1tyfor each ratl_ionuclide. "

A conservative approach isto consider the entire tank farm inventory identified in the TWINS database (see Appendix A) for the radioriuclides of concern (d°iscussed m Section 9.0) as the s_tarti11g poi_nt for eval_u11ti11g a11n_ual possession quantity a:s the source of potential fugitive emissions. The database indicates that the total act_ivity for t_he radionucl_ides of co_nc.ern is on t_ll_e order of I 08 Curies (Ci). Alpha emitters of concern, Pu-239/240 and Ams24 I, represent less than 3xl05 Ci activity whi°le beta/gamma emitters, Sr0 90 and CsaJ37, activity is approximately 9xl07

Ci.

IO

17 of 25

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 2/18/2015 - 11 :25 AM

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 Rev. 0

12,0 PHYSICAL FORM OF EACH RADIONUCLIDE IN THE INVENTORY

Regulatory Cita_tion: ''Indicate the physical form of each radionuclide in inventory: Solid, particulate solids, liquid, or gas. "

The inventory within tank fanns i_s a m_ixttire of solid, agglomerated solids, particulate, and liquid fonn. Diffuse and fugitive emissions involve management ofrad_ionudide_s in particulate, liquid, and semi-solid form resulting in particulate emissions.

13.0 RELEA,SE FORM OF EACH RADIONUCLIDE IN THE INVENTORY

Regulatory Citation: "Indicate the release form of ea_qh radionuclide in inventory: Particulate solids, vapor, or gas. Give the chemical form and ICRP 30 solubility class, if known."

The release form of the radionuclide associated with diffuse and fugitive emission will be particulate solid.

14.0 ~L:E_ASE RATES

Regulatory Citation: (a) New emission unit(s)C" Give predicted release ra_tes witho.ut any emissions control equipment (the potential-to-emit) and with the proposed control equipment using the efficiencies described in subs_ectidn (6) of this section. (b) Modified emission unit(s): Give predicted release rateswithout any emis_sions qon_trolequipment (the potential-to-emit) and with the existing and proposed control equipment using the efficiencies describe<! in subsection (6) of this section. Provide the latest year's emissions data or emissions estimates. In all cases, indicate whether the emission unit is operating in a batch or continuous mode.

As discussed in Section 11.0, the source terin withil) T1µ1k Fiµ,:ns is relatively large but only a sniall portion would be available for emission under this NOC. Many of the activities associated with this NOC are sho.rt du~tion in nature and indivtdualiy have relatively inconsequential eiilissioris on a daily basis. Detection of beta/gamma contamination usil).g field i_n~rnents is the primary tool for detecting contamination in the field. An estimate of 3.0 Ci of beta/gamma potential re.tease i_s propo~d to bound potential activities. Based on the TWINS .database the ratio of alpha activity, Pus239/240 and Am-241, would be 0.25%ofthe beta/ga111_rn_a activity, Sr-90 a:nd Cs-137. Thus, the p('.edicted annual abated and unabated potential release (the potential­toaemit) from activities covered by this.NOC is estimated not to exceed 3.0 Ci/year beta/gamma, assumed to be Sr-90, and an additional 7 .5 mCi/year alpha emitters, assumed to be Pu 239/240, frol)l 200 E_ast aJJd/or 200 West. No abatement credit is assigned to the technology described in the Section 7.0, which are administrative. Both activity specific 811d g1:n_eric potent_i_a_l em_i_ssion estimates associated With activities will be used to assure the overall emission potential is not exceeded. Tlt.e record keeping assoc_iated with emissions estimates is discussed iii Section 15.0. The potential dose consequences of this emission and the estimated emission estimate from the Hanford site is discussed in Section 17 .0.

II

18 of 25

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 2/18/2015 - 11 :25 AM

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 Rev. 0

15.0 RECORDKEEPING

Unabated emission estimates for work activities performed under this NOC, except for activities considered incidental (see Section 6.0) will be developed an:d tracked. The basis of the estimates associated with these activities will be documented. Documentation wi_H im:lu',!ti referenfe to the work document associated with the activity and an assigned unabated emission estimate for the activity using the poti:ntiaJ rele.ase e_stim_attis developed ancl documented in a c<iiitrolled document ( e.g. RPP0 ENV-S8 l 66, Estimates of Potential Radiologica_l EmJssiolJ Assoc(a_ted ',t,jth DijfuseandFugitive Actiyitiesfrom TankFarms);

The work documents associated with the activities, which lJ!e c:ithi:r repetit_ive procedures or task specific work procedures, will document.the location, description of overall activity and ALARA based controls.- The emission estimate associated with the work scope may be adjusted if necessary as the work progresses in the field and the statu.s reconciled on a calendar year basis.

16.0 DISTANCES AND DIRECTION OF THE MAXIMALLY EXPOSJ):_D I_NDIVIDUAL

Regu/atoryiCitation:. "Identify the MEI bydistance and direction from the emission unit(s). The MEI is ~tenn.i1Jedby considering distance, wind ,:'ose data,.presence of vegetable gardens, and meat or milk producing animals at unrestricted are.as surrounding the.emission unit. ''

The MEI is determ.i.ned u~ing CAP-88 dispersion factors, which are derived for ilse oii the Hanford Site and published in DOE/RL-2006-29, Rev. I, Calculating Pote1Jtial-to-ET!l.it Radiological Releases and Doses. The offsite MEI for the 200 East Area is located East-South­East 20,200 rneters away on the east side of the Columbia River. For 200 West Area the off site MEI is located Sou~h-E.ast. 2:2,000 rnete~s away on thti east stde of the Colu_mbia River. The onsite MEI for 200 East Area is located at the East.South-East 16,6_30 mete.rs away at th.e Columbia Gerieratirig .Station and for 200 West Area is located East-South-East 18,310 meters away at t):le Laser Interferometer Gravitational-wave Observatory.

12

19 of 25

TOC-E_NV-NOC-5231 2118/2015 -11:25 AM

TOCsENV-NOC-5231 Rev. 0

17.0 TOTAL EFFECTIVE DOSE EQUIVALENT TO THE MAXIMALLY EXPOSED INDIVIDUAL

Regulatory Citation: "Calculate the TEDE to the MEI using an approved procedure (see WAC 246-247-085). For each radionuclide identified in subsection (8) of this section, determine the TEDE to the MEI/orexis.ting gn_<!proposed enJission controls, and.without any emission controls (the potentiaMo-emit) using the release rates from su_bsectiOl'J (13) of this sectiorJ. Pro"vide all input data used in the calculations . . ,

The "ilJiJiroved procedure" for calculating a TEDE to the MEI is DOE/RL-2006-29, Calculating PoterJtial-to-Emit Radiological Releases and Doses. The reported estimated TEDE to the 2013 Hanford Site MEI fro111 routine a.nc:I n_o_n-routin:e fugitive emissions from fugitive emissions at the Hanford site in 2013 was 0.055 mrem and from radon emissions was 0.063mre111, DOE/RL-2014-14,.Radioactive.Air Emissions Report/or the Hanford Site, Calendar Year 2013. Th~ ma;,dmum cumulative emission over the course of a year from all project related activities is estimated not to exceed 3 Ci Beta/Gamma as.Sr-9-0 and 7:5 mCi Alpha as Pu 239/240 from both 200 East and 200 West. As shown in Table 2 below, the corresponding TEDE would be 0._50 mrem/ye:ar to the offsite MEI, if all emission came from 200 West activities or 0.60 mrem/year to the offsite MEI, i_f all emission c_ame fro111 200 East activities. For simplicity, the highest dose consequence for 200 East was used to evaluate the poti:n~ia_l em_i_ssion.

Table 2. Dose to MEI

Dose-per-Unit-Release Factors 200 East Dose to MEI

< 40 Meter 'mrem/Cil imrem) - - . --

Analvte Activitv Unit Onsite Off site Onsite Off site . -- . - ..

A B C AxB AxC

Sr-90 -200 E~ 3.00E+00 Ci 1.14E-02 l.88E-01 3.42E-02 5.64E-01 ..

Pu-239/240 -200 East 7.S0E-03 Ci 5.03E+00 4.00E+00 3.77E-02 o.30E-0I - .. - - - -

Total Dose from 200 East 7.19E-02 5.94E-01

Dose-per-Unit-Release Factors 20·0 West Dose to MEI

< 40 Meter 'mrem/Ci) imrem) . -- - -

- Actfvitv - . - - - .. - ----

Analvte Unit Orisite Off site Orisite Off site - -- -- -

A B C AxB Axe

Sr-90 -200 We_st 3.00E+00 Ci l.47E-02 l.58E-01 4.41E-02 4.74E-0l

. - - - . -· - - - -------- - -· Pu-239/240 -

200 West 7.S0E-03 Ci 5.68E+o0 3.34E+o0 4.26E-02 0.25E-0l --- ·-. - .. . - - - . -

Total Dose from 200 West 8.67E-02 4.99E,0l

l3

20 of 25

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 2/18/2015 - 11 :25 AM

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 Rev. 0

18.0 COST FACTORS/BEST AVAILABLE RADIONUCLIDE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY OR AS LOW A_S REASONABLY ACHIEVEA13LE CONTROL

TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION

R_egulatory Cita_tion: "Provide cost factors for construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed control technology componer,ts andsystem, if a BARCT or ALARACT demonstration is not submitted with the NOC. "

The project assumed that all radionuclides are released d_u_ring clesc;_ribed activities. ALARACT controls are described in Section 7.0, "Existing and Proposed Abatement Technology" of this application.

19.0 DURATION OR LIFETIME

Regulatory Citation: "Provide an estimate of the lifetime for thefqcility proce_ss with the emission rates provided in this application.

The estimated emission rates have been calculated to address the facility processthrough closure of the tanks.

20.0 CONTROL TECHNOLOGY S'fANDAROS

Regulatory Citation.• "Indicate which of the following cor,t_rol teqh_r,qlogy standards h_ave beer, considered and will be complied within the design and operation of the emission unit(s) described in this application: ASMEIANSI AG-i, Code on Nuclear Air and Gas Treatment (where there qre conflicts !n stan_d_qrds with_ the otb_er listed references, this standard shall take precedence); ASME/ANSI N509, NuclearPower Plant Air-Cleanjng Units an_d Compor,ents; ASME/ANSI NS! 0, Testing of Nuclear Air Treatment Systems; ASMEIANSI NQA-1. Quality Assurance Program Requirements for Nuclear Facilities; 40 C:FR 60, Appendix A, Methods 1, JA, 2, 2,1, 2C, 2D, 4, 5, and 17; ,1.N_SI NlJ.], Gµjd_e to Sampling Airborne Radioactive Materials in Nuclear Facilities. For each standard not so indicated, give reason(s) to support adequacy of the design and operation of the emission unit(s) as proposed."

The listed control technology has been considered in Table 3. The ALARA based emission c_ontmls are provided in Section 7.0, "Existing and Proposed Abatement Technology" of this appli¢ation.

14

21 of 25

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 2/18/2015 - 11 :25 AM

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 Rev. 0

Table 3. Control Technology Standards . -· ..

St_andard Evaluation .

AS_l,f_E/ANSJ AG-1, Code on Nuclear Air and The siand_ard appl_ies to the design and Gas Treatment (where th_ere are coiiflicts in operation and maintenance ofgas tre_iim:ient standards with the other listed reference_s, this systems. No active veritilation abatement standard shall take precedence) con):rol equipment is befog proposed by this

application . . . ---

ASMEIANSI N509, Nuclear Power Plant Air- The st_andard applies to the design and Cleaning Units and Components acceptance testing of ga,<, treatment systems.

No active ventilation abatemept control equipmerit is being proposed by this application.

-- -··- .

ASMEIANSIN510, Testing ofNuc}ea_r Air The standard applies to the field testing of Treatment Systems; gas treatment systems. No active ventilation

abatement cor:itrol equ_ip_me_n_t is being proposed by this application.

ASM.E:IANSI NQA-1. Quality Assurance The -standard· provides !1 framework for the Program Requiremeritsfor Nuclear Facilities acquisition of materials on a graded

approach. The iriateria:ls used for abatement con):rol as described in Section 7.0 of the application will be procured 8.$ qua_l_ity level 0, coriuilercial quality with no specific re_quirements.

.. ----40 CFR 60, Append~A, Methods 1, JA, 2, These regulations apply to the sampling of 2A, 2C, 2D, 4, 5, and 17 active point sources. The accepted primary

method of moni_toring diffuse and fugitive emissions is near facility ambie_nt ai_r sampling.

ANSI N13.l, Guide to Sampling Airborne This standard applies to the sarr:ipHng of Radioactive Materials in Nuclear Fac.ifit!es active point sources. The· accepted primary

method of monitoring clif'fuse l(nd fugitive emissions is near facility ambient air sairipliftg.

-· . .

15

22 of 25

.

.

TOC-ENV-.NOC-5231 2/18/2015 - 11:25 AM

TOC0 ENV-NOC-5231 Rev. 0

21.0 REFERENCES

00-05-006, 2001, Hanford Air Operatjng Permit, Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, Washington. ·

40 CFR 61, '·'National Emission Standards for Hazardous Ai_r Pollutant", Code of Federal Regulations, as amended.

ANSI N 13.1, 1969, Guide to Sampling Airborne Radioactive Materials in Nuclear Facilities, American National Standards Institute, New York,.New York.

ANSI/HPS Nl3.1, 1999, Sampling and Monitoring Releases of Airborne Radioactive Substances from Stacks and Ducts ofNuclear Fa:cflitfos, American National Standards Institute/Health Physics Society, New Y o~k, New Y Clrk,.

ASMf: AG- I, 2009, Co4.e on N!!clear A_ir an_d (J.as Treatment, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, New York.

ASME N509; 2002, Nuclear Power P{an_t Air Cleqn_ing Units an<i Comporlf!nts, American Society ofMechanical Engineers, New York, New York. ·

ASME N510, 1989, Testing of Nuclear Air Treatment Systems, Ameri<:an National SWJ<lards Institute, New York, New York.

ASME NQA-1, 1989, Quality Assurance Program RequirementsforNuclearFacilities, American Society ofMechanicai Engineers, New York, New York.

DOE/EIS-0391, Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement/or the Hanford Si!.e, Richlan.d, Washington, Volume 2, Book 2, Appendix E.1.1.1.2., Operations and.Maintenance.

DOE/RL-2006-29, Ri.:v. 1, Calculating Poten_tial-to-E.mlt Radiological Releases and Doses, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office,.Richland; Washington.

DOE/RL-2014-.14; Rev. 0, Radioactive Air Emissions Report/or the Hanford Site, Calendar Year2013, U.S. Department.of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington.

DOE/RL-2013°53, Rev. 0, Hanford Site Environmental Surveillance Master Sampling Schedule for Calendar Year 2014, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington.

HNF-5183, Tank FqmJs R.adiologicq_l Control Afqnyql. R.ev I, Washington Riv~r Protection Solutions, LLC, Richland Washington

RPP0 ENV-58 I 66, Estimates of Potential Radiological Emission Associated with Diffuse and Fugitive Activities.from Tank Farms.

RCW 43.21 C, "State Environmental Policy Act of 1971," Revised Code of Washington, as amended.

Tarik Waste Information NetworkSystem (TWINS) database, [Best Basis/TCR Tank Inventory Sumtnary-10/29/2014].

WAC 197-11-845, "SEPA Rules," Washington Administration Code, as amended.

WAC 246-247, "Radiation Protection ~.Air Emissions," Washington Administrative Code, as amended.

16

23 of 25

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 2/18/2015-11:25 AM 24 of 25

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 Rev. 0

APPE_ND,X A - Bl!:~T BAS_IS T ~ INVENTORY

TANK WASTE INFORMATION NETWORK SYSTE_M (TWINS)

A-1

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231 2/18/2015 - 11 :25 Ai'll 25 of 25

TOC0 ENV-NOC-5231 Rev. 0 - ---- - --- -- . - -

BEST BASIS pose_ per Unit release Factor Poteritial Dose Conseque_nce ~00E Potential Dose Consequence 200W TANK mRem/Ci IDOE/RL,2006-29 Rev_ I) __ I mrem \ and % of totai"-...:.teniiaf ,mreml and o/o of total :..:.teniial

INVENTORY 200 E 200\v --

Off Site Onsite -

Off Site Onsite_ Tow

AnaJulil Adivi"' Unit OffSito °""'" OfTSicc Onsito - % - % - % - " JH 2.82E+Ol Ci 2.97E-0S 2.69E-0S 2.4BE..OS J.OSE-05 a.J&E--02 0.0% U9E-02 . 0.0%. .6.99£..02 • • 0.0% 8.60£.ol - 0.0% . - -14C BlE+Ol Ci I.0JE.0J. 2.47E-04 . 8.40£-04 2.92£-04 .U7E-OI 0.0% 1.36£-01 0.0% 4.63E-Ol 0.0% l.61E-01 0.0% -- -- - - - - - ---S9Ni l.62E+ol Ci 3.13£-04 l.02E-OS 2.62£-04 ),89£-05 S.07E-OI 0.0% 4.89£-02 0.0"/. 4.24£-01 0.0% 6.JOE.02 0.0%

ooc, 4.1 IE+Ol Ci 3.64£-02 2.48£-()2 3.0SE..-02 2.80E-02 I.SOE+02 0.0"/o l.02E+02 0.0"/4 l.2SE+02 0.0% LISE+ci:z 0.0%

6JNi l.44E+OS Ci 7.6s°E-04 8.84£-0S 6.42E.o4 LIJE.Q4 l.lOE+Q2 __ _Q,0% l.27E+OL .0.0%. .9.24£+01 .Q,0%_ 1.60£-tOI 0.0%

79S,. -U4E+02 Ci - I.SIE-02- 9.49E.o4. .U2£.02 I.JOE-OJ 2.61E+oo 0.0% l.37E-OI 0.0"/4 2.19E+oo 0.0% l.87E-01 0.0% - ----- - ··- --··- - - - - ----- -------- ·-:--:··~- -90S, 4.76E+G7 Ci 1.88E-Ol 1.14E-O:Z I.SSE-OJ l.47E-oi 8.9.SE+o6 64.9% __ · .S.43E+o.S 27.9%. !. 7.SZE+-06 .. 65.8%. 7.00E+o.S. 33.6%

90Y 4.76E+o7 Ci 1'.28E-04 L63E-04 1.07£.04 l.8JE-04 6.09E+o3 0.0% 7.76E+o3 0.4% .S.09E+03 o.0% 8.7JE+o.l 0.4%

91Zr 3.74E+ol Ci l.1.s'e-03 I.OJE-Ol 9.66E-04 l.17E-03 4.)0E+-00 . 0.0% • 3.8.SE+oo. .0.0% . 3.6IE+oo • .0.0% 4.l8E+oo 0.0%. - -

93mNb. - • 3.l7E+-OJ Ci 9.)9£-0.S s.&4&05 7.86E-OS 6.S9E-OS 2.98E-Ol 0.0"/4 l.85E-OI 0.0"/o 2.49E-OI 0.0•,1, 2.09£-01 0.0% - -- ----· - -- - . . - -----,.,., 2.6SE+04 Ci J.40E-02 I.OJE-03 2,86E-02 l.34E-Ol 9.0IE+-02 0.0"/4 2.73E+ol 0.0% 7..s8E+o2 0.00/4 3.S.SE+-01 0.0%

106Ru UIE+-01 Ci 8.04£-03 5.IIE-03 6.74E-0) 6.S)E--OJ 9.73E--02 0.0-/4 7.03£-02 0.0% 8.16E--02 0.0-/4 7.90£-02 0.0%

J!JmCd 3.90E+G) Ci l.24E-Ol 1.ziE-03 . .l.l4E-OL .• 9.liE-03 4.14£+-02. 0.0% .• 2.82E+Gl _ O.Oo/ •. 4.4SE-t02 .. 0.0% 3.62E+-OI 0.0% .. .. - -· - - . - .

.l2SSb _ 4.J4E+Gl Ci 4.JOE-03 4.47£-0] 3.4.SE-03 5.0]E-0] 1.70E-.-Ol (l.0-/4 1.8.SE+ol 0.0% l.43E+ol 0.0% :Z.07E+Ol 0.0% - - . ,,. .. 3.9ZE+02 Ci 2.llE-02 3.7SE--OJ 1.79£-02 4.34£-03 8.JSE+oo 0.0% J.47E+oo 0.0-/4 7.02E+OO 0.0% l.70E+OO 0.0%

1291 2.9.SE+ol Ci l.77E-01 4.07E-OJ 7.05£-02 J.7.SE-03 S.22E+OO 0.0% uoe.01 O.Oo/o 2.08E+OO 0.0% l.l lE-01 o.cw. \34C. 7.JSE+-02 Ci 2.JIE-0'.s 4.79E-06. l.94E-OS 5.60E-06 •. -l.66E-02 0.0% J.44E-03. o.ov. , l.J9E-02 -0.0% 4.0:ZE-Ol 0.0%

... . --· ·- ------ ... - --- -- - . . mes l.90E+o7 , Ci l'.04E-01 I.OSE-02 I.BE-02 6.6JE-03 4.06E+-06 29.4% 4.IOE+o.S 21'.0% J.2SE+06 28.4% 2.S9E+OS 12.4% - -- -

IJ7mBa 3.68E+07 Ci 8.I IE-07 l.04E-06 6.77E-07 l.17E-06 2.98E+ol 0:0% 3.B3E+OJ 0.0% 2.49£+-0I 0.0% 4.l!E+OI o:o¾ 1'1Sm J.S?E+-06 Ci 3.46E-04 4.00E-04 2.19E-04 4.SlE-04 1.24E+o3 0.0% I 43E+-03 0.1% LOJE+oJ 0.0% 1.6IE+ol O.Jo/o

152.Eu 9.07E+o2 Ci l.2JE-02. .uiE-02 \.OJE-02. .l.70E-02. . l.12E+ol. 0.0% l.38E+-Oi • 0.0%" . 9.34E+oo .0.0% l.54E+-Ol 0.0% - - .

.IS4Eu S.lOE+o4 Ci l.4:ZE-02 1.72&02 Ll9E-02 1.93£-02 1.SJE+-02 0.0% 9.12E+-02 0,0% 6.l!E+-02 0.t)"/4, l.O:ZE+-03 0.0% - - - -- -- - - -·· - -- - - - -

ISSEu 2.55£+04 Ci J:07E-03 l.23E-OJ 8.98£-04 1.38£-0) 2.73E+ol 0.0¾ 3.14E+-01 O.Oo/. 2.29E+-01 0.0% 3.S2E+-OI 0.0%

,,, .. _9.96£-03 - Ci S.OSE-0-1 J.69E-OI 4.22&0I 4.l7E-Ol S.OJE-03 o.w. J.68E-03 0.0% 4.20£-03 0.0% 4.ISE-03 o.w. 227Ac 4.14E+oo Ci S.84E+oo 7.32E+o0 4.87E+o0 B.26E+oo 2.42E+GI 0.0%- -3.0JE+oJ •• --0,0% :Z.02E+ol 0.0% __ J,4:ZE+ol •. . 0.0%-

,,. .. .6.77E+-00- Ci 7.41E-OI 2.B6E-O\ 6.21&01 l25E--Ol S.02E-t-OO 0.0% 1.94£400 0.0-/4 4.:ZOE+-00 00"/4 2.20£+00 o.w. -· _,. - --- - ~-

""" 1.48E+OO Ci S.78E+00 7.ISE+oO 4.&lE+-00 8.0BE+-00 8.SSE400 0.0% l.06E+-OJ 0:0% 7.13£+00 0.0% 1.20E+ol 0.0%

231Pa :i.16E+oo Ci 7.SOE+00 9.38E+OO 6.26E+OO U)6E+oi 3.87E+OI 0.0% 4:&4E-Wl 0.0% 3.23E+o1 00% :i.4-7E+GI 0.0%

2J2Th 6.77E+oo Ci 2.0JE+-00 2.49E+oo l.7riE+oo 2.8IE+oo l.37E+-01 . _0,0¾ - -1,69E+ol •. 0.0%. l.lSE+-OL .0.0%._ 1.90E+ol 0.0%

2:J2U 8.BSE+-00 Ci 7.37E-Ol 7.89£-01 6.16£-01 8.90E.OI 6.S2E+OO 0.0% 6.98E+OO 0.0% S.45E+OO 0.0-/o 7.18E+OO 0.0% -~--. ----· - ----- - - - -

"'" 6.BIE+-02 Ci 196E-OI 3.56E-OI 2.47E-OI 4:02E.01 2.02E+o:Z 0:0% 2.4:ZE+ol 0:0% l.68E+o2 0.0% 2.74E+-0:Z 0.0%

2J4U 2-37E+02 Ci 2.90£-01 3.49E.Ol 2.42£-01 J.94E-01 6.87E+01 0.0"/4 8.27E+ol 0.0% S.74E+-01 0.0% 9.34E+ol 0.0%

---235U. 9.71°E"+oo- Ci. • 2.S9E-Ol _J.I IE-01. 2.17E.Ol .• .J,52E-OJ.. . 2.SJE400 O.Oo/ ••• 3.02E+oo 0.0%-. .. 2.IIE+-00. .. 0.0%. 3.42£+00_ ...0.0%. - - -

- . 236U - • 6.SOE+oo Ci-- 2.68£-01. 3.22E-OI •. • 2,24£.01. • J.63£.0J. . l.74E+oo 0.0% .• .2.09£-t'OO. •. 0.0% - 1.46£-tOCL .0.0% 2.36£+00 0.0%

- - ·-. .. - -2J7N- 1.16£+02 Ci l.&JE+oo 2.28E+oo UJE-tOO 2.57£-tOO 1.12£+02 O.Oo/• 2.64£+02 0.0% 1.77£+02 0.0% 2.98£.f-02 0.0%

-- . - -- - -- - ---- - - - -- - ·-2JBP1.1 2.63E+-03 Ci J.69E+oo 4.64E+oo J.OBE+oo S.23£+00 9.70E+-OJ 0.lo/. l.22E+o4 0.6% l.l0E+03 0.1% 1.38£+04 0.7%

2lBU 2.ISE+o2 Ci 2.40E.Ol 2.88£-01 2.0JE-01 3.26E-Ol s.f6E+ol 0:1>"1. 6.19E+oi 0:0% 4.3:ZE+OI 0.0¾ 7.0IE+ol 0.0% - ·- - .. -2J9Pu 4.9.SE+-04 ·,ci 4.00E+oo s.O)E+oo i34E+oo S.68E-+OO J.9BE+o5 1.4% 2.491:+os 12.8% .'t.6.SE+o.S 1.4% 2.BIE+oS 13.5%

'""' _-J.OBE+-04 - :Ci'..- . 4.00E+-00. -5.0JE+oo. ~ 3.34E+oo . ~S.6BE+oo. · -4.).ii!.'!'04:. •. 0.3%,- _,S,4lE+o4. _ 2.1%.: _3.6t.°E+o4' 0.3% 6.J3E+o-4 2.9o/. .. - ... ,. -· .

_'35_7%_ 24I Am U7E+oS 'Ci J.JJE+-00 -4:19E+o0 , 2.71E+o0 4.7JE+OO 5.23E+-OS -3.8%'. "6.58E+oS 33.8% . 4.36E+oS - 3.8% --7.438+05 • - - --- -- - ---- - -· - --- - - - - -- -,., .. B.3BE+04 Ci 7.19E-Ol 9.04£-02 6.0IE-02 1.02£-01 6.0JE+OJ O.Oo/• 7.'8£+03 0.4% 5.04£+()3 0.0-/4 B.SSE+-03 0.4%

242Cm 1.i2E+-02 ,Ci 4.09E.Ol s.22E.0·1 3.42£-01 5.89£-01 4.99E+o·1 0.0"!. 6.37E+0J o:o¾ 4.17E+ol 0.0% 7.19E+OI 0.0%

,., .. . 9.0SE.OJ. --Ci. • J.80E+-OO- .4.77E+oo 3.17E+oo- S.39E+OO 3.44E+-OO. 0.0% . .4.3:ZE+oo- 0.0% 2.87E+oo . 0.0% 4.BSE+-00 o.Oo/ • - ··- - .. -

24JAm 7.2JE+-Ol Ci l29E+-OO 4.13£+00 2.74E+o0 4.67E+OO 2.JBE+-02 0.0% 2.99E+-02 0.0% l.98E+-02 0.0-/4 3.JBE+o:Z 0.0%

243Cm 1.fS-E+ol Ci 2.5JE+o0 3.!6E+00 2.IOE+OO l.S?E+-00 3.39E+ol 0.0% 4.27E+°OJ o.w. 2.84£+-0J 0.0% 4.82.E+OI 0.0"/4

- 244C.. .2.98£+02 . .Ci. .2.iiE-t-00 -2.67£+-00 l.7?£+-00. 3.0i°E+oo_ .6.32E+o2 - .0.0"/4 . 7.96E+o2 . 0.0% 5.27£.;.{)2. 0.0% 8,97E+-02 0.0% - - - - --- -

- T"" _ l.7SE+o8 - _ci l.38E.;.{)7 m= l.95E+o6 mrem l.14E+-07 m•m 2.08E+06 m-

Attachment 2 l 5-'ECD-0013

(34 Pages)

RPP-ENV-58166, Estimates of Potential Radiological Emission Associated with Diffuse and Fugitive Activities from Tan_k: Fatrtis

I RPP-E_NV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 Al\,1

DOCUMENT RELEASE AND CHANGE FORM brepared For lhe U.S. Department of Energy, "8latant Secretary for Environmental Management ~~~~oo·Rlver~~~:·LLC.,"PO Box~~~~-'!".~~

ForU.S. rA Ofl'k:eofRMlf underConlractOE-AC27.QIRV14800

lrRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Reference herein to any apeclflc commercial product, process, or serw:e by trade name. trademark, ~rer: i:ir _otherwts8, doe!("not"necessarilf COnstttutll)i' Imply. its ·enc1cnement. niOOfflmilndatlon: or favoring by the United States lr,:ivemriient o{Sny 8ge"ricy tt'liireof Of 118 CXliitractOra or ·subcontractor..

1 of 34

1a.Doc No:RPP-ENV-58166 Rev.00

1 b. Pri>ject Ninilber: QI NIA '

_Rele~se Stamp

l.,rtnted In the United States of America.

2. Document.Title. DATE: Q. -HANFORD Estimates of Potential Radiological Emission Associated with Diffuse and Fugitive Activities from Tank Feb 19, 2015 RELEAie Farms

3. Design Verification Required - -OYes IXJNo -

4. USQ Numliir' '181 NIA 15. PrHA Number 181 NIA

-- - ~ey ..

6. USQ Scraanlng:

a. Does the change Introduce any new failure modes to the eqUipment? D Yes II No

b. ~~is Is reQiJirE!d ~r ves: D.~ the change tncrease th~ p_robability of exiSting failure modes? D \'as IO No

C.

Basis is required for Yes: For Safety Significant equipr'nent, does the change reqUire a modification to Chapte·r 4 of ttie DSA and/Or FRE_D? ~a~i~ is reQu.ired fyjr Y8s:

OYiis ONo .Ki NIA

7. Description of Change and Justification (Use Continuation pages as needed)

- -B. Approvals TIiie Name . Slanatuie . Data Clearance Review !AARDAL,.JANIS D AARDAL, JANIS D 02/17/2015

Document Control Approval WASHINGTON, MARGUE_R!TE . WASHINGTON, MARGUERITE 02/1,_912015

Enyii:onmental Protection POYNER, JESSICA A BLOO_M, RICHARJ:> W for JOYNER, 02/13/2015

JESSICA A per email Originator . BLOOM, RICHARD W - "LOOM, RICHARD W 02/18/2015

other APt>ro:vei RUMBURG, BRIAN P BLOOM, RICHARD W for 02/17/2015

RUMBURG, BRIAN P per email R~spon-slble ~a_n~g~r JOYNER, JESSICA A BLOOM, RIEHARD W for JOYNER, 02/1312015

JESSICA A oer email

9.· Clearance R8Vl8W:

Restriction Type: 181 Public D Official Use Only Exemption 3-Statutory Exemption (OU0-3) D Undefined D Official Use Only Exemption 4-CommerclaVProprietary (OU0-4) D Unclassified Controlled Nuclear Information (UCNI) D Official Use Only Exemption 5-PrMleged Information (OU0-5) D ExP:Ort Co~trol Information (ECI) D Official Use Only Exemption 6-Personal Privacy (OU0-6) D Official Use Only Exemption 2-Circumventlon of Statute (OU0-2) o Official Use Only Exemption 7-law Enforcement (OU0-7)

1 SPF-001 (Rev.O)

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM 2 of 34

J 1 D .. Distribution:.

Orga·n1zatl0n .

. ...

11_. TBDs o_r Holds ~WA

12.-lmpai:tad Docum~nts - Engineering CINIA DocU:fuant NUfflbef Rav. Title

- . ,.

13. Other Related Documents illl NIA. DOCumant Number Rev.. TttlG

- - .

1_4. ·Related Sy9,targs._S_~ctures, and Components:

14a. Related Bulldlng/Facllltles Llll NIA 14b. Related Systems IIC NIA 14c. Related Equipment ID Noli. (EIN) ~ N/A

2 SPF-001 (Rev.0)

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2.015 - 7:37 AM 3 of 34

..

[Start Cori!inuatlon HereJ

3 SPF-001 (Rev.0)

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP0 ENV-S8l66, Rev. 0

EstJmate$ of PotentJal Radiological Emission Associated with Diffuse and Fugitive Activities from Tank Farms

A_uthor Name: Richard Bloom Richland, WA 99352 li.S. Department of E_nllrgy Co_ntra~_ DE-AC27-08_R_V1480_0

EDT/ECN: DRF Cost Center: N/C B_&R C_O:de: N/C

UC: N/C Charge Codi!: N/C Total Pages: 34

Key Words: Diffuse and Fugitive Emissions Tank Farms, Environmental

Abstract: Provides estimates of emissions for specific work activities which will be recurring wi(\i_iri Tank Farms.

_TRADEMARK 01.SCµ"iMER. Reference herein to any specific commerclal product, process, or service bY trade name, trademafk, rytar:i_ufact~r. or o_therwise, does not necessarily constitute or Imply-its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof or its contractors or subcontractors.

APPROVED By Janis D. Aanlal at 8:10 am, Feb 19, 2015

Date

DATE: IIANFOfill

Feb 19, 2015 RELEAse

Release Stamp

Approved For Public Release

A-6002-767 (REV 3)

4 of34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM 5 of 34

RPPcENV-58166, Rev. 0

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 PURPOSE ............................................................................................................................................. 1

2 .. 0 Dl=:FINITIONS ·········································································:··:-··:·:·:·:··:·· .... : ................................ I

3 .. 0 RE.L.EASE ESTIMATION ...........................................•••••. :·:·:·:·:·:·:-·:•:•:•:·:·:·:· .. :· .................................... 2

3 .1 ASSUMPTIONS ····················································:··:··i·:·:·:·:· .. :·:·.····· ............................................ 2

3.2 UNITIZED ACTIVITIES .......................................... : .... _._._._._._._. ........................................... 3

3.2.1 Excavation ...........•..•.....•••.•.•. : ••..................................................................... .3 3.2.2 Opi:ning of Pi~s and/or Access a Tank ......................................................... 4 3.2.3 Demolition .......................••••.•.••••••• .-•. ·.:·:···:··:············· ........... _ .. _ .... _ ...................... 5 3.2.4 Borehole DriBing, Sampling, and Casing Rerii<ival.. .................................. -5 3 .. 2.5 Cutting and Welding ........................ -.-.-•..••.••••••• .-•.................. _.._. ............ _ ........... 5

3 .. 3 INCIDENTAL ACTIVITIES ................ -..•. -.-.-.·.·.·.·.········:·'·:--·:·:·:--····· .................................... 6

3.4 SUMMARY OF RELEASE POTENTIAL TO EMIT ............................................ 6

4.0 RELEASE ESTIMATION DETAILS .......................... _.._._._._._._._. ............... _ .................................... 6

4.1 EXCAVATION ....................................................................................................... 6

4.1.1 No Risk Excavation.s .................................................................................... 7

4.1.2 Low Risk Excavations ............................................. -.... ·.·.-•. ·.·······:·:·:··:·:·:·:·:·:c·:·:·:-·:·:·:·:-·:· 7

4.1.3 Medium Risk Excavations ·i··:·:·:·:·:·:···:·.·:··.-.·.·.-.-.-.·····················································8 4.1.4 ijigh Risk Excavations .............................................................. -.-........ -.••.•.•••. 8

4.2 OPENING OF PITS AND/OR RISERS TO ACCESS A TANK ........................••. 8

4.2:,1 Cover Bloc.k Removal .................................................................................. 9 4.2.2 Pit Ecjilipriient Removal and Rehabilitation .•.• .-••••........................................ 9 4.2.3 Tank Access .........•.•..•.•.. :···:···.-.-._. .. _._._. .. _._.._._._ ... _._ ....... _._ .. _ ............................................. 10 4.2: .. 4 T~k Equipment Removal arid Packaging ................................................ .11

4.3 DEMOLITION OF EQUIPMENT, VEHICLES, STRUCTURES, OR BUILDINGS ••.••.••••••.•.•.......................................................................................... 12

4.3.1 Suspect Radiological Contamination .................................................•....... 12 4.3.2 Radiological Contamination (Low; Medium, an_d High) ............................. 12

4.4 CORE DRILLING, BOREHOLE PRILLING, AND CASING REMOVAL ........................ -..... -....... -.••••. -............. :···:·:·:--.. ·:·:·:···········································-··· 13

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM 6 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev, 0

4.5 CUTTING AND WELDING ................................................... ,., ............................ 14

4.5.1 Low Risk Cu~ing and Welding ...........................................•.•.....•....•••...... 14 4.5.2 High Risk Cutting and Welding ........................ , ........................................ 15

5.0 REFERENCES ......................................•.. -.•••••. :••:•:•:--•:•::•:•:•:•:•:•_•·-·-·-·.··············································· 15

APPENDICIES

APPENDIX A - A_PPROACH TO IMPLEMENTATION ................. ·:·.·:· .................. • ..... A-1

APPENDIX: B - QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ..... , .. , .......................................... B-1

ii

RPP-ENV-58166

LIST OF Tl!:RMS

NOC PTE TWINS WAC WDOH

2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

Notice of Construction Potential-to-Emit T~ Waste lnform.atioil Network System Washington Administrative Code Washington State Depai:tment of Health

iii

7 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

1.0 PUR,POSE

This document provides an.analysis of anticipated activities witl).in Tank Farms that have potential diffuse and fugitive emissions in support ofTOC-ENV-NOC-52.31, R_qd_ioactive Air Emissions Notice of ConstructionforD~e and Fugitive Emissions from Tank Farm Ope.ratio11s. These unabated potential-to-emit (PTE) em.ission estimates use standard release fractions of either 1 for gas, or I 0"3 for particulate/liquids per WAC 246-247 "Radiation Protection-Air Emissions." These estim~t_es do not credit any abatement associated with the applicable as low as reasonably achievable control technology con_trols implemented for the activity. '

2.0 DEFINITIONS

Demolition - The deliberate destruction ofa building, equipment, or other .structure.

Excavation = To dig a hole in the e_~h or to uncover something by removing the earth th_~t covers it.

Incidental Activity.,.. Routine ii:t n~ture, involving minimal radiological potential em_i~sions. Th"ese activities have. an inconsequential impact on estimating emission and are considered to be included in the c.~Jculation for the activity being supported.

Master Log - Diffuse and Fugitive tracking log Il1)!intained to document all work performed under the di_ffu_se and fugitive license and provide a total of emissions used.

~d10fogicai Risk - Work activities undergo a ni<iiological work screening process per TFC-ESHO-RP .- RWP-C-01, Radiological Risk Screening using form A.6003-910, resulting in a determination of low, mediuil}, or high risk.. The anticipated contamination level associ~ted with the Work is used in the screening to determine risk ~long with other considerations such as cumulatjve aJJd direct worker dose, airborne contamination potenti!!), i_nfi:equent work, or the nsk of contamination spread. For t_h"e purpose Of this document only the removable contamiJl_~t_i_oi:i level aspect of this screening is applicable_. lbe corresponding removable contamination limits are:

• Low Risk: < l 00,000 dpm/100cm2 beta-gan1_rn~ or< 840 dpmll OOcril alpha • Medium Risk: < 1,000,000 dpmll00cm2 beta-garn_ma or< 2,000 dpm/l00cm2 alpha • High Risk:~ 1,000,000 dpm/100cm2 beta-gamma or~ 2,000 dpm/100cm2 alpha

Unitized Activity - The segregation of work ac:tivitie_s (or the purpose of definition of work scope @d estimating. emission potential.

Working Day~ Includes two s_h"_ifts per work day.

1

8 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

3.0 RELE.ASE ESTIMATION

The diffuse 1µ1d fugitive iiceilse associated with TOCaENV-NOC-52.3 I has a11 overail licensed emission limit of3.0 Ci ofbeta~ga111.nia (as Sr~90) and a corresponding 7.5 mCi ofalph11 (~ Pu-239/240). Work activities which contribute to the permitted diffuse and fugitive emissions can be gener:alized into discreet activity units or "unitized activities"; e11ch with a c:orresponding radiological release potenti_a.1_. The purpose of this document is to provide pre-calculated estimates of emissions for specific work activitie.s wiJich could be recurring over the course of the year. The use of these estimates are intended both for planning purposes as well as an aid in demonstrating compliance witjl the permit. The use of these generic estimates is optional; and condition specific estimates may be used if deemed appropriate. Conditfon specific estimates will be sh.a.red witjl Washington State Department of Health (WDOH) and must be inclu.ded as an addendum to implementing tjle work: docUillent.

3.1 ASSUMPTIONS

Future unitized work activities requiring diffuse and fugitive NOC licen·sing is relatively predictable; however, past approaches to calculating emissions and correspond_i11g PTE varied greatly and caused assumptions that significantly over estimated the potential emission and required extensive documentation burden to docume.JJt compliance for emissions of little conseq11en_ce.

the assumptions for this NOC is to focus on simplifying colllplia:nce demonstration. To prepare the generic estimates of release potential, the following assumptions have been m.ade to address situations likely fo be encountere_d in the future.

1. To tjle e_xtem possible, based on anticipated radiological control levels to be encountered, Low Risk(< 100,000 dpm/100cm2

), Medium Rlsk (< 1,000,000 dpm/100cm2), and High

Rlsk (~ 1,000,000 dpm/100cni2) based on beta-gamma measurements.

2. Based on the TWINS datab~, the ratio of alpha activity (Pu-239/240 and Am-241) would be 0.25% of the beta"gamma activity (Sr-90 and Cs-13 7).

3. Only the beta-gamma release potential is assumed ne:Cessary to be tracked in the Master Log.

4. The offsite/onsite dose consequence is calculated based on the ratio of beta-gamma to alph!l activity.

Situations where alpha activity is driving the radiological risk level is not reflected in tiJese generic es_timates.1111d would require further evaluations.

The as·suinptions for each unitized activity are provided in Section 3.2 .. A detailed description of the rek:a:se estimation for each unitized activity is provided in Section 4.0.

2

9 of 34

RPP0 ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

3-2 UNITIZED ACTIVITIES

Continuing the theme of making deiiioristration of compliance simple, a unitized approach to activities allows the assignm_ent of _emission potential early in the work planning process and allows for adjustrrieht for unanticipated conditions or work scope. Ail unitized emission estimates are rounded up one. Selection of the activity unit or ''unitized activity'; and its assocfated unit of measure for a work package is described below. In some instances a work package may involve multiple unitized activities.

3.2.1 Excavation

The unit of n:ieasure for excavation is the working day. The working d_ay assumes that two shifts of activity take place. In estimating wor~ scope, it is corilmon to assume 3 yd3 of soil persh_ift ass.urning hand digging which would equate to 6 yd3 assuming tvvo shifts. Jfthe method of the dirt is mechanic.al an additional factor of IO is applied, resulting in a tp~l of 60 yd3 removal. The emission estimate is impacted by t_he rad10logical risk assigned (Table 1 ). Excavations in clean areas where no radiological controls are implemented do riot requite licensing under this NOC.

Table 1. Emission Estimate Per Unit of Measure by Activity Type and Level .. ·- -· .. . . ·7 ---- ... -· . ·" -- .. .. -• ··-· -· "· • *•tacgaifi~'.a.Pi,~: ~ ,• .• ,. ' · .. Unito'f , Activify Type ',J_I:~'. I;efeL :: . - . '

" 'i ': 1MeasUre•. , . , ~,... liiµ€1 • , :-: , .. r- ,-- - ··-· ,,

~- ---· ,. . .,. ____ .. . ,. ·---"'-" .. ' ... . . . .

' ..... ,:: --- -· -Low risk

Working day 8 (< 100,000 dpm/100 ~m2 be~,gan,111a)

Excavation Medium risk Working day 80

Hand (< 1,000,000 dpm/100 c_m' beta-gamma)

High risk Working day 800

(::: 1,000,000 dpm/100 cm' beta-gammal

Low risk Working day 80 (< 100,000 dpm/100 cm2 beta0gamma)

·-

Excavation Medium risk Wcirkingday 800

Mechanical ( < I ,000,000 dpm/100 cm2 beta0gamma) ·- -

High risk Working day 8,000 §:_ 1200_0,000 dpm/100 cm2 beta-gani111a)

. - -

Cover block .i-e111_oval - Pit 9 e-2

Pit "'l~ipment ,emova:_i• a"n:ct rehabilitation Pit 3 Opening of ..

Working day i? Pits and/or Tank access

Risers to Tani< eq1,1ipirillrit removal and packaging complex Item 700 Access a Tank (liquid hold iip like_ly)

Tank equipment removal and packaging non-complex Item 7 (!_ow potential for holdup)

. ---- - "" --

Demolition/ Suspect radiological contamination CuI:,_i_c 1111lter 5 e-4 - ··- -- -- -

3

10 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

Table 1. Emission Estimate Per Unit ofMeasiire by Activity Type and Level - .. - -. .. ··_.· F· ... :.-···--. ·c~,.<·1 ..

A ti -~T . . '· Unit.of ' Beta0gamma PTE ,I ' _:_::i_n );~e Level· ·. ,;, ., ··, , ... ,1,:1~~~-u_re~. . .:.'. _ _,;;_,_: __ ~--:_:.. . .:.:~---.".:-.-, , . .. : :.~~" -i.:_-~:.!.~' ,. . ... ·. i!> µC:i :: . C -' A<Jllipn'i~t -

Low risk C_ubfo meter 3 e-2 Size (< 109,000 dpm/100 cm2 beta-gamma)

Reduction .. ...

Medium risk (> 100,0_00 dpm/100 cm2 beta-gamma) Cubic m~te:r 3

High risk Cubic meter 30 P-: 1

1000,000 dpm/100 cm2 li_e_ta-gamma)

. .. Low risk

Hole 4 Borehole ~< 100:000 dpm/100 cm2 beta-gamma) r>ri(ljng, Medium risk

. - -- -

~arnpli_ng, and (> 100:ooo·dprti/lOO cm2 beta-gamma) Hole 40 Casing .

Removal High risk P-: 1,000,000 dpm/WO cm2 beta-g'artil)la)

Hole 400

Contaminated area Inch of cut or 2e-2

~u~ing an_\! (> 100,000 dpmi!OOcn\2 beta-gamma) weld

Welding High contaminateq arc:a Inch o_f cilt or P-:1,000,000 dpm/H)Ocm2 beta-_gamma) weld 6 e-1

-· " .•.. -- .. . a. The t.e~ '\vorI:t_1_ng day" assumes two.shifts are.potentially worked m tlie day. b .. Pit equipment removal includes juniifer rem9val ·_ind lo_os.e debris. If items require: size reduction, a demoiition emission estiinat_e will aj_si> b_e used.

PTE = p<itenti_al to emi_t

3.2.2 Opening of Pits. and/or Access a Tank

The.re are several subcategories' in this work activity category. The st_anq;u-d pit is assumed to be of dimensions 14 ft by IO ft by IO ft (length, width, depth).

3.2.2.1 Pit Access Plug Removal.

The unit of measure for- pit access plug removal is pit cove_r blocks. This activity involves the removal of the cove_r blocks from contaminated pits and addresses the potential rele_ase associated with the pit/cover block interface. The removal of temporary covers that have little pote_ntial of emission would be considered an incidental activity (Section 3.3).

3.2.2.2 Pit Equipment Removaland Reh~_bil_it_a_tion

The unit of measure for pit equipment removal and rehabilitation is pit. This activity involves removal of loose equipment within a pit apd refurbishing of the pit, including the preparation of the surfaces for application of a coating. If equipment is niquired fqr pipe cutting. or demolitions within the pit prior to removal, the potential to emit needs to be calculati:4 for eli_c_h separate unitized activity.

4

11 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166; Rev. 0

3.2,2_.3 Tank Access

The unit of measure for tank access is the working day. The working day assumes two shifts of activity 1*e place. No distinction is made relative to the size of the riser accessing the tank.

3.2.2.4 Tank Equipment Removal and Pa,ckaging Non-Complex

The unit of measure for t;mk equipment removal and packaging non-complex i_s item. This activity addresses the removal of contalllinated equipment from within a tank. Non-complex equipmeJJt removals are characterized as equipment re_mova_ls that have little potential for hold up and out-of-tank handiiJJg.

3.2.2._5 Ta,_gk Equipmeilt.Removal and Packaging Cornp_lex

The unit of measure for tank equipment rernoyaj and packaging complex is item. This activity address~s the removal of contarninated equipment from withi11 a tank. Complex equipment removals are characterized as e:quipment removals having a high potential fqr hold up and need for extensive out-of-tank handling. For this type of equipment, it is assumed that the potential release:d i_s JOO times greater than non-complex equipment due to the management of potential liquid holdup in the equipmtmt.

3.2.3 Demoti~ion

The unit of measure for demolition is the cµbic meter as deten:iiined prior to the demolition activity. Two l_evels of radiological conditions are addressed, sµspect radiological and radiological. The term suspect radiological addresses situations where radiologi_cal free release is JJ.ot an option and radiological controls are irnple_rnented. As discussed in Section 3.2.2.2; ''Pit Equipment Removal and Rehabilitation" demolition may be appropri_ate to include in the estimate.

3.2.4 Borel;tole Driflin·g, Sampling, and Casing Removal

The unit of meas:Ure for borehole drilling, sampling, and_ c_asing rein Oval is the hole. This activity includes a relatively bro¢ range of activities, including core drilling through cO_n_crete as well as dri[fing in sofl. Multiple consecutive days of t!J_is unitized activity on the same hole does not increase the e_111issio11 estimate. The emission estimate is impacted by the radiological risk assigned (Table I).

3.2.5 Cutting and Welding

The unit of measure for cutting and welding is the inch. This activity addresses a wide variety of cutting orwelding activities. The emission estimate is based primarily on welding, but it adequately addresses 811Y post pip:e cutting preparation activities, if necessary. As discussed iii Section 3.2.2.2, "Pit Equipment Removal and Rehabilitation" cutting and welding m11y be appropriate to include iii the estimate.

5

12 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP0 ENV-58166, Rev. 0

3.3 INCil>ENT AL ACTIVITIES

Incidental activities described in the application are routine in nature, involving minimal radiologic.al potent_i_aJ emissions. These activities have an inconsequei:itial im,pact on estimating emission and are considered to be included in the calculation for the activity being support~d. Incidental .activities include:

o Opera_tions necessary to facilitate inspections, sampling, chlll1lcterization, cOristrllcti0n, modifications, surveiU_ance, and rnaintenance of equipment, structures, and/or facili.ties.

o Mai:iagement of coritamiruited facilities or equipment, no longer under active ventilation, pending fut_ure disposi.tion or use.

• Activities associated with decon~ination traiiers.

• Waste-handling operations.

• Installation and tf.lsting of equipment, piping, jumpers, structures, ai:id/or facilities.

3.4 SUMMARY OF RELEASE POTENTIAL TO EMIT

Table I summarizes the emission estimates developed i_n Section 3.0. Refer to Appendix A for examples ofrntitllod_s ofutillzing these values to manage license compliance.

4.0 REI,EASE ESTIMATION DETAILS

The following section provides details on potential to em.it c.l!clculatiort determinations for each unitized activity 3ll_d ass.o:ciated risk levels presented in Section 3.0.

4.1 EXCAV A:rION

Two factors go into the consideration ofpotential emissions for excavat_ion act_ivities: I) volume of soil inoved and, 2) associated contamination contained in the soil. Contamination levels encountered may vary greatly within the expected excavation act_ivities and are generally categorized in three ri.s~ categories: low risk (<I 00,000 dpm/100 cm2

), medium risk (<1,000,000 dpm/lO0 cm2

) and high ris~ (2:1,000,000 dpm/100 crii2) assuming beta0gamma.

Based on these contamination levels, excavation emission estimates are subdivided into three g~era.1 categories: low risk, inediilin risk, and high risk.

Dile to the proximity of below.grade in.terferences, excavation activities in many cases involve hand digging. Meehariical equipment may be used i_n some instances ..yhere these interferences

6

13 of34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

are to be removed. The volume of material removed by hand digging is assumed to be 3 yd3 of soil per shift. Therefore, the volume estimated for one work_ing day is assumed to be 6 yd3 of soil. Personal protective radiological controls (personal protective equipment cont_ii:i_uous health physics technician coverage) are assumed to being utilized. It is recognized that in the case of very low risk exc::avations, involving only "potential" contamination or very low levels of contamination, the volume oflow act_ivity sofls handled would be higher, because of the lill)_ited pl:lrsonal protective radiological controls needed.

For sitwitions where mechanical m~all_s (ba<:khoe, loader, etc.) are being used for the ex<:ayation, the volume removed is assumed to be ten times the halld dig amount.

4.1.1 No Risk Excavations

Excavations wl)~re there is no expectations that radiological contl!mi11ation would exceed 1,000 dpm/100 cm2 betasgamma or io dpm/lOO cni2 alpha, the activity can be consid~red inci<!~ntal (Se:Ction 3.3) and not subject to release potentia_ltrac:king.

4.1.2 Low Risk Excavations

The low risk excavation estim.at_e is applicable to.situations where radiologica_l con1:amination, requiring rad1ological control, is suspect_ed and contamination levels do not exceed 100,000 dpll)I 100 cm2 beta-gamma or 840 dpm/ 100 cnl alpha. For activities where radiological conditions are suspect and field radiological surveys are used to monitor co11ditions, the activity would be assiiined.to be a low risk excavation even ifno contamination is detected.

The working day emission estj_mate will be based on the 6 yd3 hand digging volume. Tl)e con_servative average contamination level is base<! on all assumed average activity of 50,000 dpm/100 i.:m2 beta-gamma. Based on HNF-2418, Soil Contqmin_ation Standards/or Protection of Personnel, the assumed activity measurement of 50,000 dpm/100 cm2 call be used t<> e_stimate a Sr-90 activity in the 6 yd3 of soil using the factor 3 .54 (pCi/g)/cpm-probe.

Emission Estimate Calculatioi:i_:

6 yds3 * 9 ft3/yds3 * 98 lbs/ft3 * 454 glib* 3.54 (pCi/g)/cpm-probe * 50,000 dpin/100 crri2

* 1/10 cpril/dpm * 16. 7 cm2 /probe= 7.08 E+9 pCi/day

7 .08 E-3 Ci/day possessioi:i quantity.

Applying a I 0·3 release fraction the release quantity would be 7.08 E-6 Ci/day or 7.08 µCi/day.

Rounding up, PTE = 8 µCi/day for the "Excavation Hai:id-Low R_isk" unitized activity. For mechanical excava_tion where a greater volume of soil is likely hai:idled, an ad_ditional factor of IO is applied resulting in a PTE of 80 µCi/day for the "Excavation Mechanical­I,,ow Risk'' unitized activity.

7

14 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

4.1.3 M~_iu_t_n Risk Excavations

The mediUJll ri_sk excavation estimate is applicable to situations where respiratory protection for radiological purposes is requi_re<i and contamination levels could exceed I 00,000 dpm/ I 00 cm2

beta-gamma or 840 dpm/100 cm2 alpha but not to exceed 1,000,000 dpm/100 cm2 beta-gamma. The worl<ing day em_ission estimate is based on the hand digging vol_un:ie of 6 yd3 per working day assuming a contaminatipn level associated with ail assumed average activity of 500,000 dpin/100 cm2 beta0gamma.

Emission Estimate Calcul_at_ion,:

Ti)e PTE for the medium risk excavations is determined by applyi_ng a factor of IO to the low risk excavation, calc_uJation (Section 4.1.2). ··

The PTE for the ''Excavation Hand0 Medium Risk" uniti_zed ai;tivity is 80 µCi/day.

The "Excavation Mechanical-MediUIJ1 Risk" unitized activity is determined by applying an,_ ad<iitional factor of 10,. resulting in a PTE of800 µCi/(iay.

4.1.4 High Risk Excavations

The high risk excavation e_stjm_ate is applicable to situations where respiratory protection for radiological purposes is required and contai:nination levels would exceed 1,000,000 dpm/100 cm2

bet.a-gamma with no 'upper limit. The airborne concentration in th_e work 11rea could exceed IO derived air concentration. The working day emission estimate is based on the hand digging volume of6 yd3 per working day assumin~ a c;on~_in.ation level associated with an assumed average act_ivity of 5,000,000 dpm/100 cm beta-gamma.

Emission Estimate Calculation:

The PTE for the high risk excavations is determined by applying a factor of 10. to the medium risk excavation calculation (Section 4.1.3).

The PTE for the "Excavat)oi:i HMd-H.igh Risk" unitized activity is 800 µCi/day.

The ''Excavat_ioi:i Mechanical-High Risk" unitized activity is determined by applying ai:i additional factor of I 0, resulting i_n a PTE of 8,000 µCl/day.

4.2 OPENING OF PITS AND/OR RISERS TO ACCESS A TANK

Opening of pits and/orrisers to access a tank has several subcategories. A description and emission estimate calculation for eai;h subcategory is discussed below.

8

15 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

4.2.1 Cover Block Removlll

Cover block removal il)volves removing the pit cover blocks to gain access to the overall pit. Pit access through inspection ports and removal of te_mporary covers would be considered an incidental activity (Section 3.3) .. No credit is taken for any ventilation, but credifis take_n prior to removal of the pit cover for decontamination and the use of fixatives .since it involves the area beneath the coveL It is recognized that tank pits can be highly contaminated and contain contaminated equipment, but the source of contamination for the emission estima~e forthis unitized activity i_s associ~ted with contamination distiitbed around the pit/plug interface. A conservative pit dimension of 14 ft by 10 ft by 10 fJ (length, widtl1, depth) will be assumed. The plug on the pit is typically multiple sections.and stepped to engage the pit wall and ledge. For the purpose of est_ii:r:i_at_i_ng emission it is assume that 4 ft2 ofcoilfuriiinated surface is disturbed per circumference of the pit, with an average contamination l_evel of I 00,000 dpm/100 ciri2 beta­gamma.

Emission Estimate Calculation:

Circumference of¢e ph = 2 x 14 fl: + 2 x 10 ft = 48 ft.

A_rea of <;ontaminated surface distiitbed = 4 ft2 /ft x 48 ft = 192 ft2.

Contillilination disturbed removing a pit cover block =

100,000 dpm/100 cm2 x 192 ft2 x 929 crn2/ft2 x I Ci/3.7EIO dps x I miil/60 sec= 8.03 E, 5 Ci/pit..

Applying a release fra~kin of I 0-3• the release per pit cover removed is estimated at

8.03 E-8 Ci/pit.

Converting to µCi/pit aQd ro1lll4_i_ng up, the PTE for the "Cover Block Removal'' unitized activity is 9 E-2 µCi/pit.

4.2.2 Pit Equipment Removal and R,eh_abi_li(atio_n

Pit equipment removal and rehabil_itation involves rernoviiig jurnpers or loose equipment from a pit and rehabilitating a pit. Emissions·areassumed to be associated with disturbi_ng contamination that ·is either loose within the pit or imbedded in the walls of the pit. While the equipment within a pit that requires rem<>val ~ vary frorn pit to pit, it is assumed that the equipment would be removed from a pit with minimal disturbance of the equipment internals. If equipment requires size re:<foction prior to removal, an additional PTE would be calculated using the ''Demolition/Equipment Size Red11ction" lllli~i_zed activi_ty.

A conservative pitdirneiisioil of 14 ft by 10 ft by 10 ft (length, width, depth) will be assumed. The s11I:(ace l!l'ea oft_he pi~ is assumed to be 640 ft2(620 fi2(the surn of the bottom aiid the four sides 140 ft2 + 200 ft2 + 280 ft2

) plus an .~ditional 20 ft2 of equipmellt). The contamination within a pitsurface is assumed to be on average 1,000,000 dpm/100 cm2 beta-gamma to account

9

16 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

for contamination buH<i11p embedded in the surface that will potentially be disturbed by the activity.

Emission Estimate Calculation:

1,000,000 dpm/100 cni2 x 640 fr x 929 cm2/fl2 x I Ci/3.7EJ0 dps x I inin/60 sec= 2.68 E-3 Ci/pit

Applying a release fraction of I 0·3• the release per pl_ug removal is estifnated at

2.68 E-6 Ci/pit.

Converting to µCi/pit and rounding up, the PTE for th:e "Pit Equipriierit Removal and Rehabil_ita#on" ur1itized activity is 3 µCi/pit.

4,2.3 TankAccess

Accessing the tanks to facilitate equipm:ent removal or installation typically involves large <ii_ameter risers where the tank ventilation, ifso eqµipped an_d operable, is overwhelmed due to the size of the open_iQg. This can result in an unfiltered fugitive e_m_ission of head space vapor. The activity assumes the riser beiQg open for a period of approximately 2 hours of l_ess. This may correspond to the "working day" in many c_~s, but it is recognized that because of the setup and Hmit_ed physical activity both a pull-andareplaceactivity could b:e performed in the same shift but could extend into a sec:ond shift.

Passively vent_ilated tanks are estimated to have an exchapge volU1I1e through the high-efficiency particulate air filters of approx_imately 5 cubic feet per minute. To be conservative, at1 effluent flow of 10 cubic feet per minute is assumed for the two hours duririg a working day for a tot!.! volume re_lease of 1,200 ft3 per day, assuming two shifts. Di_rect meas11remehts ofthesingle­shell tank vapor space had an average of 3 pc'i/L (7 E-11 Ci/ft3) (PNNL lette_r D. Sklarew to G. Wells, dated August 27, 2001). The average a_lpha activity reported was approximately 200 timi,s wlia_t wou)d be expected based on a 0.25% alpha to beta-g.µnm_a source term. A factor of 200 is applied to accou_l)t for the potentiaUy higher alpha contribution to the off-site dos_e consequence.

Emission Estimate Calculation:

Multiplying the l!5sum_ed volumeteleased during an operating day (1,200 ft3) by

the corrected beta0 gamma concentratiol) (200 x 7 E-11 Ci per day) results in a potel)tial release of 1.7 Ec5 Ci/working day beta-gamma.

Converting to µCi/pit and rounding up, the PTE for the ''Tank Access" unitized agivity is 17 µCi/working day.

10

17 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

4.2.4 Tank Equipm_en_t Rem.oval and Packaging

Tank equipmen_t removed from a tank includes pumps, sludge distributio11 equipment, instrumentation trees, sltiicers; ancl_ tank internals. The equipment was in direct contact with tank w~e and is considered highly contaminated. The equip111ent ca:n be up to 50 ft in length and of various diaintittir and complexity .. Once removed from the tank, the equ_ipment may require additional handling to prepm:e for disp:Osal and to verify there is no free liquid. Two 1111itized actiyity levels are appropriate to best address the variability of the equipment: "Non-Complex Equipme:nt" lilld "Complex Equipment."

4.2.4.1 Non-Complex Equipment

Non-complex equipmtint removals are simplistic in nature and have little pottmti_al for hold up · and need for out-of0tank handling. This equipment is assumed to have a nominal diameter of I ft and an tl~timal/intemal area with contamination available for dispersion, depicted in the following calculatio11_. ·

Emj_ssio11 Estimate Calculation:

6 ft2 per foot of length (2 x 1t·x rad_iµs x 2) and a length of 50 ft for- a total area of 300 ft2. A removal contamination level of 5,000,000 clpm/100 cm2 is assumed.

5,000,000 dpm/100cm2 x 300 ~ x929 cni2/ft2 x l Ci/3.7El0 dps x 1 min/60 sec = 6.28 E-3 Ci/item

Applying a release fraction of I 0-3, the release per item removed is estimated at

6.28 E-6 Ci/item.

Converting to µCi/item and rou_ndi_ng up, the PTE for the "Tank Equipment Re111oval and Packaging: Non-Complex Equipment" un_itizecl activity is 7 µCi/frem.

4.2.4.2 Complex Equipmtint

Complex equipment removals have a high potential for hold up of liquids an<:! need for extensive out-of-tank handling. This equipment is assumed to have a potential release I 00 times greater that non-compltlx equipment removal due to management of pottlm.i.a_l liquid holdup in the equipment. Based on the cakulll.tion in Section 4.2.4.1, the following is estimated for complex equ_ipment

Emission Estimate Calculation:

The reltiase per item removed is estimated at 6.28 E-4 Ci/ite.m.

Converting to µCi/item and rounding up, the PTE for the "Tank Equipment Removal and Packaging: Complex Equipment" unitized activity is 700 µCi/item.

11

18 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

4.3 DEMOLITION OF EQUIPMENT, VEHICLES, STRUCTURES, OR BUILDINGS

Equ.ip_ment d.emolition or size reduction is assumed to involve relatively uncontrolled destruction of items that have known or su.spected levt!ls of radiological contamination. It is assumed that items of high contamination would be surgically removed to the extent pos.sible ~ part of the ac.tivity. For the pµrpose of estimating unabated PTE, both fixed and removable contamination has to be considered. It is ~sumed that the destru:Ctive activity could potentially negate the effectiveness of the fixative effort.

Four situations were COJ)sidei:ed in establishing PTE estimates for demolition of equipment, vehicles, structures, and buildings: suspected radiological contai:nination and three levels radiological contamination (low,medium, and high).

A cubic meter was chosen as the appropriate miriirJJ.um m:iit of measure t.o base the emission estimates. It is further assuiileo that the surfaces within each cubic meter has interior surfaces . .. . 2 ...

equating to IO m .

4.3.1 Suspect Radiological .Contamination

In many situations equipment, vehicles; structures, or bu.ildings are suspected as having p:Otential ¢ntamiriatioil due to the historic. uses. Radiological free release is not possible because of iIJacces_sibi]ity of sµrfaces. In this situation, ari average contamination of 1,000 dpm/100 cm2 is assumed.

f:rQission Estimate Calculation:

1,000 dpm/100 crii2 x 10 m2 x 10,000 cm2/m2 x I Ci/3.7EIO dps x I min/60 sec = 4.5 E~7 Ci/m3

Applying a release fraction of I o·l the release per cubic meter of material being d.emoli.shed is estimated at 4.5 E-10 Ci/ml.

Converting to µCi/m3 arid rounding up, the PTE for the "Demolition: Suspect Radiological Conta_min!ltio11" unitl.zed activity is 5 E-4 µCi/ ml.

4.3.'2 Radiological Contamination (Low, Medium, and High)

For iow risk activities where equipment, vehicles, structures, or buildings are known to be contai:n.inate4 at leveJ.s not to exceed I 00,000 dpril/100 ciil2 beta-garilrila, an average contamination of50,000 dpm/100 cm2 beta-gamm!I is ~sumed. For m.edium risk activities where coiitaiilitia:tion levels are not expected to exceed 1,000,000 dpm/100 cm2 beta-ga_mma, an average c:Ohtamination of 500,000 dpiil/100 cri12 beta-gamma is assumed. For high risk derJJoJjt_ion or equipment s_ize reduction, where contamination levels are expected to exceed 1,000,000 dpm/100 cm2 beta.gamma, an 11-verage cont!lffiin_atio11 of5,000,000 dpm/100 cm2 beta­ganinia 1s assliined.

12

19 of34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV0 58166, Rev. 0

Low Risk Emission Estimate Calculation:

50,000 dpm/100 cm2 x 10 nix 10,000 cm2/m2 x I Ci/3.7EIO dps x I min/60 sec= 2.25 E-5 Ci/m3

Applying a release fraction of I 0·3, the release pet cubic meter of material being demolished is estimated at 2.25 E-8 Cilnt

Convert,i_ng tc:> µCi/i:n3 and rounding up, the PTE for the "Demolition: Low Risk Radiological Contamination" unitized activity is 3 E-2 µCi/m 3 beta-gamma.

Medium Risk Em_igsion E~imate Calculation:

For medium risk activities, the PTE would increase proportional to the ass11med level of contamination.

The PTE for the "Demolition: Medium Risk Radiological Con~in_at_ior:i" unitized ac~ivity is 3 E-1 µCi/m 3 beta-gamma.

High Risk Emission.Estimate Calculation:

For high risk activities; the PTE wol[ld inc_rease proportional to the assumed level of contamination. ·

The PTE for the ''Demo!_ition: High Risk Radiological Contamination'' ilriitized activity is 3 µCi/m 3 beta-gamma.

4.4 CORE.DRILLING, BOREHOLE DRILLING, AND CASING REMOVAL

Core drilling, borehole driUi_ng, !!Jld casing removal activities are equivalent to controlled excavation. Core drilling a short distance through contaminatc:d cor:icre~e. l;Jorehole driHing is di:j_fling or pushing through soil. A typical borehole will involve removing less than 3 yd3• The same approach for determining emission estii:n_ates is useq as for excavation in Section 4.1, but assumes 3 yd3 of contaminated soil..

Emission Estimate Calculation:

Low Risk ( < I 00,000 dpi:n/100cni2 beta-gamma): The PTE for the "Low Risk: Core Drilling, Borehole Drilling, and Casing Removal" unitized a~tivity is 4 µCi/hoie beta-gamma.

Medium Risk (> I 00,000 dpm/100ci:n2 bet;i-gamma): The PTE for the "Medium Risk: Core Drilling, Borehole Drilling, and Casing Removal" unitized activity is 40 µCi/hole beta-gamma.

13

20 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

High Risk(> 1,000,000 dpr:nfl 00cm2 beta-gamma}: The PTE for the "High Risk: Core Drilling, Borehole Drilling, and Casing Removal" unitizt:d activity i_s 400 µCilllole beta-gamrna.

The act ofpuiling a casing or push rod might occur as part of the inst_aHatioi:i ac:tivities. In_ insta11ces where rem_oyal of the casing occurs in the same calendar year as the installation, the installation PTE covers the removal ac_tivity. I_f the casing removal occurs in a different calendar year, the PTE from this .section would apply to the activity.

4.5 CUTTING AND WELDING

Cutting and welding iiwolve_s the cutting, preparation, and welding of pipe or other structural material. Cutting of pipes or structural material alone, by methods specified in the application (shears, saws, rotating cutting knives/wheels), involve minimal disturbance of the contamin_ated surface. Therefore, a PTE ~sociated with the cutting activity is considered incidental and no separate calculation is provided. For situations where equ_ipmei:it is being s_ize reduc:ed, refer to the PTE estimate uhder demolition.

Surface preparation prior to welding will involve di_sturbi_ng contami_n.ation, which wo_uld otherwise 1101 be available for release. The welding activity can further vaporize the remaining con~ination at the poii:it of the weld. It is assumed that the welding will involve an area 2 in. on either side of the weld and the surface preparation ac:tivity will involve an area 5 in. 011 either side of the area to be welded. The ability to characterize contamination levels within a paii:ited surfa~e o_rwitl)_i_n a pipe is limited. Per inch ofwelci, an area of 64.5 crri2 (IO iri2) is assumed to be subjected to surface preparation.ang25.8 cm2 (4 in2

) wiH be heated by the welding activity. Orily two.situations are considered due to the potential difficulties performing radioiogic_a_l surveys on internals ofa pipe: low risk(< 100,000 dpm/100 cm2 beta-gamma) and high risk (> 100,000 dpm/100 c1112 beta-ga_rnma).

4.5.1 Low Risk Cutting arid Welding

Iii areas where the total (fixed and removable) contamination is not anticipated to be above 100,000 dpm/100 cm2 be_ta-ga[IJJlla, the C:ontarriination will be assumed to be 100,000 dpm/100 cm2 betaagamma.

For each inch of weld, thi: poti:i:itial release from the activity would involve the sum of the surface preparation activities and welding activity, as follows: an area of size 64.5 cm2 with an assumed release fraction of 10·3, plus an area of size 25.8 cm2 with an assumed release fraction of I.

Emission Estimate Calculation:

(64.-5cm2 x 10·3 + 25.8 cm2 x I) x 100,000 dpi:n/100 cm2 x I Ci/3.7EI0 dps x I min/60 sec = 1.17 E-8 Ci/inch of weld.

14

21 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166 2119/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV•58166, Rev. 0

Converting to µCi per inch and rounding up, tl:i.e PTE for the "Low Risk: Cutting and Welding'' unitized activity is 2 E-2 µCi/inch.

4.5.2 High Risk Cutting and Welding

In areas where the total (fixed an<l ren:iov3cble) contamination is anticipated to be above 100,000 dpm/100 crri2 beta0 gamma, the contamination will be ass11med to be 5,000,000 dpny( 00 Cll\

2 beta-gamma.

For each inch of weld, the potential release from the activity would involve the sum of the surface prep~Iion 11,.c;tivities and welding activity, as follows: an area of size 64.5 cm2 with an assumed release fraction ofl0"3

, plu_s ap. area of size 25.8 cm2 with a:n asswned release fraction of I.

Emission Estimate Calculation:

64.5 cn:i2 x 10·3 + 25.8 cm.2 x I) x 5,000,000 dpm/100 cm2 x I Ci/3.7El0 dpsx I min/ 60 sec = 5 .83 E-7 Ci/inc::h of we(d.

Converting to µCi per inch.and rounding up, the PTE for the,"High Risk: Cutting anci Welding" un_itized Bcetivity is 6 E-1 µCi/inch.

5.0 REFERENCES

00-05-006, 2001, Hanford Air Operating Permit, Washington State Department of Ecology, Olympia, Wash_i_ngton.

HNF-2418, 1998, Soil Contamination Standards for Protection of Personnel, Fluor Daniel Hanford, Inc., R_ichlan<l, W astiington.

PNNL letter, D. Sklarew to G. Wells, dated August 27, 2001.

TOC-ENV-NOC-5231, Radioactive Air Emissions Notice of Construction for Diffuse gnd Fugi_tive E"1iss/on.sfrom Ta.nk Farm OjJerations, Rev. 0.

is

22 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

APPENDIX A

APPROACl;I TO IMPLEMENTATION

A-1

23 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

A.I APPROACH TO IMPLEMENTATION

The unabated emission estimate_s for work activities performed under the notice of construction (NOC)(TOC-ENV-NOC-5231, Radioactive Air Emissions Notice of Construction for Diffuse and Fugitive Emissions from Tank Farm Operations), except for activities considered incidental (Section 3.3), will be tracked. This docu1T1ent provides the basis of the estimates as_sociated with these a<:tivities, which has been subject to review by t_he Washington State Department ofHealtlt (WDOH).

To assure c:o111plia:nce with permit conditions, documentation that. includes reference to the work document and an assigm:d u11abated emission estimate for the act_ivity lJSing the potential release e~imate:S developed in this document nwst be maintained. If the generic potential-to-emit (PTE) estimates ir:i this document ate not adequate to address the work activity,.a.scope specific estimate would be developed, and shared with WDOH as discussed i_n App:endix 8.

The work documents associated with the activit_ies, which are either repetitive procedures or task specific work procedµres, will document the location, descdptior:i of overall activity, and as low as reasonably achievable based controls. It is recognized that the emission estim_arc: associated with t_he wo.rk scope may be adjusted if neces§ary as thework progresses in the field and the status reconciled on a callmdar year basis.

Managing work activities that could result in diffilse and fugitive radioactive emission under TOC-ENVaNOC-52_3 I requires evaluation of the potential to emir. Some activities are routine in nature arid do not support a modification as defined by W AC246a247 ''Radi_ation Protection-Air Emis_sions." Other activities, in support ofa modifica#on, can be either incidental with little emission consequence or necessary With required emission estirr:i.ates. In any case, appropriate abatement controls specified in the li_cense or outlined in the as low as reasonably achievable control t!)chnology (ALARACT) must be implemented via the work document. Figure A. I provides a flow chart tha( outlines the overall process. Appendix B provides hypothetical work package examples.

A-2

24 of34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP0 ENV-58166, Rev. 0

Figure A.I. Diffuse and Fugitive Process Flow Chart

Does the activity require NOC coverage

vs. historic a.ctivity?

Is the activity defined as

incidental in D/FNOC?

No

Estimate PTE for proposed a.ctivities

using RPP-ENV-58166 and submit tistim~e to D/F

NOC Log

Log WP #as tracked. under

NOC with assigned PTE

Work package contains

- information to - demonstrate

No compiiance with ALARACT

-- --

Yes Work pac~ge

contains information to demonstra~e

compliance with NOC controls

Work package contains information to demonstrate

cpmpliance With NOC controls and tracks PTE

assumptions with not_ification to Environmental

Update Log if PTE is in.::reased

due to assumptions

change a:nd/or package ckised

out

Yes

-No

flirt.her action

-----

No further action

Work package

assumptions change

No further ac_tion

25 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

Examples of implementation are provicled below:

Example I~ Routine A<:t_ivities

Work package scope:

Excavate and replace the power cable to equipment withi_n a Wt!s: fam_i. The activity is routine and includes excavating through areas of existing contamination.

Disposition:

Scope would be considered routine ffl).<i covere<i by ALARACT 5.1 arid not subject to tracking. iinder the Diffuse and Fugitive NOC(D/F NOC). The work pa_<,:kage in$Uctions wou_ld include controls specified in ALARACT 5.1.

Example.2-Activities Related to another NOC Approval

Work package scope:

Excavate and replace the p:ower cable to equipment within a tank farm. The activity is expected to involve eight shifts of work and is relatively routine in nature biit is intended as an iipgrade to support the insulation of a new portable exhauster u11<ier ffl).Ot_her NOC.

Disposition:

A~sum_i_ng _tl:u: NOC:: for the new exhauster has been approved, the work could proceed and the scope would be considered non-routine 311<1 s_ubject to b:etracked under this NOC. The work package instructions would include controls specified in D/F NOC. The work package also would_ track the number of shifts that excavation occurred and instructions to notify environmental ifcont_ami_nat_ion levels i_n excess of 100,000 dpm/100 ciri2 beta­gainnia or 840 dpm/100 cni2 alpha are encountered or more than eight days of exc_avat_ion was needed. The D/F NOC coordinator would update the log, as necessary.

Table A-I provides an example worksheet that would be submitted to the NOC coordinator reflecti11g tlie eight days of excavation. If during the work perforrilarice or at the completion of the job, the number ofdays of excavation needed to be i_11creased, (111

1,1pdateo PTE estimate would be provided to the NOC coordinator.

The D/F NOC Coordinator will log the work package information into the Master Log. The PTE of 64 µCi would be de<i_u<:t_ed fro111 the remaining PTE allotment iinder'the D/F NOC.

A-4

26 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM 27 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

Table A-1. Example 2 Emission Estimate Per Unit of Measure by Activity Type aild Level -- - . --- ---·- - --

befca-ga1111!ia beta-gamma

Activity Type Level #of Un.it of Emission bi

Em_issi<in Units Measure•

,.ciiunit estimate

-· pCi - -

Low risk(< 100,000 dpmitoo cm') 8 Working day 8 64 -Excavation _Med_ium risk(< t,000,000 dpm/100 cm') Working day 80 Hand High risk ~ 1,0_00,000 dpm/100 cm')

-- - ·- -

Workingday 800 -

· Lo,v risk(< 100,000 dpm/100 cm2) Working day 80

Exc:iavaticin Medium risk(< 1,000,000 dpm/100 cm2) Working day 800 Me<:hani_cal - -

High risk (?. 1,000,000 dpm/100 cm') Workit1g day 8,000

Pit access cover block removal Pit 9Ec2 - -

Pit equipment removal and rehabilitation Pit 3 ·- -

Opening of Pits Tank access Working day 17 and/or Risers to - . -

Access a Tank Tank equipment removal and packaging not1- [_tern 7 complex -- . - . . . - -- -

Tank equipment removal and packaging It¢, 700 complex

. -- -

Suspect radiologica_l contamina~on Cubic meter 5 E-4 Demolition -

Radiological contaminated Cubic meter 3 E-2

Borehole Low risk Hole 8 ·- - . ·-Drilling, - -

Sampling and MedilllU ri_sk Hole 80 ---- -- . - .

Casing High risk Hole 800 Removal - . - .

-

Contaminated area Inch of cut qr

2 E-2 Cutting and weld -We_lding --

High contaminated area Inch of cut cir 6 E-1 weld - - -

a. The teim ~orking day~ assi.imes two s_~i.~s ~ po~e1_1~ia~ly "Y.Or:ked in th_e day.

A-5

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

Example 3 -A Complex Work with Multiple Work Ele~ents

Work package scope:

A work activity may i_1_1volve multiple activities covered by the generic estimates. Pit work could involve multiple elements such as shield plµg remoya_l, pit cleanout, e_xcavating an area next to the pit, demolition of equipment within the pit core drilli_ng a hole fora new penetr;i.tio1_1, pipe cll).ting and welding.

l)isposition:

Table A.2 provides an example worksheet that would be subrnittE:d to the N0C coor<i_in_~tor retltlcting the Overall activity.

the contaminated pit plug will only be removed once. The rein$_1_1_~tion of the pit plug would be considered covered by the removal estimate. Installation and removal of temporary covers would be considered incidental.

Assuming a 3 in diameter pipe, the length of the cut and weld would be calculated as using the equation 2m, where r is tlie radi_us of the pipe or half of the pipe diameter. 2 xJ.14159 x 1.5 = 9.4 in which would be rounded to 10 in. Bec~µS(l the pipe will be t,,oth cut and welded the emis·sioil estimate would be based on 20 in.

Since the work.scope involves the removal of a hydraulic unit within th_e pit which is estimated to be less than I m3 in size, the demolition estimate would be included.

The core drilling will be considered medium risk.

Jumpers and miscellaneous loose equipm(l_l_lt removal within the pit would be covered by the Pit Equipment Removal and Rehabilitation.

Since excavation near the pit is required, 5 days of 111_ed_ium risk hand digging is assumed.

I_f during the work performance or at the completion of the job the number of days of excavation needed to be increased, an updated PTE estim~te would be proyid_ed tp the NOC coordinator.

the D/F NOC Coordinator will log the project information into the Master Log. The PTE would be rounded up to 456 µCi would be deducted from the remairiiftg PTE allotment.

28 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM 29 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev .. O

Table A z. Example 3 Emission Estimate Per Unit of Measure by Activity Type and Level . ~ .. ····r ·- -- - - .. - .. · . . . . . .. ;C[ ;~( : ,- U!!itof beta-gamma , beta-gamma '

,_. "

t A,c#v.ity Type '. ~' ' _. . · .~ve·t/t;~:;!- " · Em~slon in' : ,; . Emission· ,.- . ' •., ,- ' ,'µg):~· , __ . ·M~~y.,-e• ., l.'CilU'!it ... es~~te_~i - . -- .. - ·- .. .. ... . .

Low risk(< 100,000 <lprn/100~;;,,) Working day 8 Excavation M.ed_ium risk ( < i ,000,000 dpm/100crit2

) s Working day 80 400 Hand High ri.s~. i 1,000,000 dpm/IOO.cm2

) Workin_g day 800

L~w risk(< 100,0.00 dpm/100cm2) Working day 80 E_xca:xation Medium risk(< 1,000,000 dpm/100cm2) Working day 800 M~hajlical ...

High risk (?_ 1,000,000 dpm/100cm2) Working day 8,000

. . ... . .

Pit access plug removal I Pit 9 E-2 9 E-2 . .

Pit equipment removal and rehabilitation I Pit 3 3 - .

Opening of Pits Tank access Working~ay 17 ... and/or Risers to Access a Tank Tank equipment removal and packaging non-

Item 7 complex . - ..

Tank equipment removal and packaging Item 700 complex - . ---· . .

Suspect radiological contamination Cubic rite_ter S E-4 Demolition

RadI(}logical_ ~ntaminated --- -

I Cubi_c rit_e_t_er 3E02 3E-2 - .. . --

Borehole Low risk H_ole 4 Drilling, . - . - .

Sampling and M_eflium ris_k I Hole 40 40 - - -- .

Casing ' Removal High risk Hole 400

Contaminated area Inch of cut or 2 E-2 Cutting and weld

Welding High contaminated area 20

Inch of cut or 6 E-1 12 weld

A-7

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

APPENDIXB

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

B-1

30 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

When iniJiating any new approaches to compliance, questions are inevitable. The purpose <if this section is to provide clarification of the proc:ess using a Q&A (Question and Answer) approach.

QI. What is WDOH's expe:ctation relative to implementation and what wou_ld an inspector wa·nno review?

A I. The notice of construction (NOC) application clarifies that the record keeping associated With this license consists of a Master Log @4 work doc.1:iments. The Master Log is intended to provide the link to the work .documents. An inspector would be expected to request a copy of the current log and to review work documents to assure that applicable abatement controls from the iiceilse have been specified in tJ:ie worl< gocument. In situations where.alpha contamination gi:ives radiological risk, rather than betasgamma contmn.i.nJ1tio11, and the alpha to beta-gamma activity ratio exceeds 2%, the license requires a calculation showing how compliance with the alpha release limit is met The C;ilculation shall b.e iiiairttaiiled for WDOH review.

Q2. How aci:.~.rate of an emission estimate must be made when reviewi11g work documents?

A2. Tile unabated emission estimate is intended to de111on.strate that the overall activity being performed witllj11 Tank Farms is Within the bounds of the license, not to estimate actual emission. The emission limit of 3 Ci beta-gamma provides a sufficiently large '·'emission ban.k:,'' Over estimation should not be an issue. Eniissiqn estimates from completed work packages are retllllre<i tot.he "emission bank" at.the end of the calendar year. It is sµgge.sted that when reviewing a work pac~ge, a conservative approach be taken to minimize the need to ch!lllge information in.the Master Log.

As an example, for a work: p11c.k:age involving. excavation, an estimate of 5. to IO days for a s1IiJJile job would be appropriate, even if it is on.ly expected to take a single shift. This provides an ample number of days to account for potential work disruptions.

Q3. Is it expected that the work document 11s.su.re tha.t the assumptions iii the unitized e111issJon calc11lation ate met? For example, the unitized calcul.a.tio11 for emissions from an open riser assum.es th.e riser is Open for 2 hours during the work day.

A3. There is no c:.xpectatioh that .the time a riser is open is documented or that th.e volume of dirt excavated is tracked. The intent ofth.i.s NOC approach is to reduce the documentation burden on the field work supervisor.

There are inany assumptions used in the wiitize(! c.aJculations and ideally "typical" values would be use<i rather than the l!istoric approach of using "bounding" values. In some i.r:1st:a)'lces, vaJues were used that are ''well above typical'' in or.der to address situations where having agreement on a"typical'; value is not likely. The time a riser i.s ope.n over a working day is an example ofa vaJue tllat is more of a typical va:Iue, as compared to the assumed contamination level in a low risk radiologic11l excavation. The goal is t<i create a reasonable estimate of emissions t.I:i.11t i.s .sufficiently conservative to boun<i the "average'' situation over the course of the calendar year. Some variation from job to job is anticipated an<i the unitized emission approach assumes that it will be applied a n:umbet of times over a variety of situations.

31 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

As experience is gained in using this approach, if sit_uatioi:is wh_ere assumptions are foiind inadequate to facilitate ~unding the average work activities in the field, revision to this docurilerit would be necessary. ·

Q4. When the work is co_mpleted, is there a:n expectation to review the work package and adjust.the emission estimate downward?

A4. No, while it could be revised to re.fleet actual activities, revising the. emission estimate would only be necessary if the assumptions changes and tile emission estimate must be increased. This would nC>n:r:ia_lly occur while the work is in progress and unexpected conditi_oi:i.s aris_e typically requiring a change to the work document.

Q~. How is compliance with the alpha emission limit demonst~t_ed wb_ei, only beta-gamma emission estimates _11re 11sed?

A~. The alpha release limit is 0.25% of the beta-gamma release limit. The overaJ_l approach of this process is focused oi:i ass_u_ri_i:ig that beta-gamma emission value encompasses the alpha emission based on this 0.25% ratio ofalpha to beta-gamma. If the beta-garnma PTE does riot exceed the specified limit of 3 Ci liniit, the alpha limit of7.5 mCi will not be exceeded_. As discussed in later questions, as Jong a:s the alpha contamination is not driving the radiological risk arid the ratio of alpha to betasgamma ratio i_s not greater tllan 2%, the methodology of using racl_iologic_al risk to drive the emission estimate will result in an inflated beta-gamma estimate for the situation to effectively reestl!blish the 0.25% ratio.

Addition_a))y, the 3 Ci beta-garnma limit is assumed robust enough to include the flexibi_lity to include planned work that are n_ot going to be worked in the same calendar year. It is anticipated that the PTE associated with work packages actually worked in a calendar year will neve'r approach tile 3 Ci limit.

Q6. The management of the emission is based on an overall assumption of the ratio of 0.25% alpha to beta-gam_ma, wt,_11t i_f a job involves an area which does not conform to that ratio?

A. Beta-gamma contamination within tank farms represents :1_ prevalent radiological risk that is reacl_i_ly d_etected with hand held instrumentation. -Based on the TWINS database, the ratio of alpha isotopes ofconcern (Pu-239/240 and A.m-24-1) to beta-gamma.of coricern (Sr-90 and Cs-137) is 0.25% .. While it is recognized that within Tank Farms there i_s variation of the isotopic ratios, unle_ss a s[t:uation arises where the alpha to beta-gamma ratio is above 2% and alpha activity drives the radiological risk (e.g. > 840 dpm/1O0cm2 alpha while< 100,000 dpm/100crri2

beta-glinirriil or > 2,000 dpm/100cm2 alpha while< 1,000,000 dpm/100cni2 beta-gamma) the ass11cmption is that it wifl average out over the eritire scope of work activities.

32 of 34

RPP-E-NV-58166 2/19/2015 • 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

Q7. What wool~ be the approach in an instance where alpha is dominant?

A 7. In the inst;mce where the alpha activity drives the radiological risk and the alpha/beta­gamma is greater than 2%, a project specific emission estimate would be required and submitted to WDOH for 30 day completeness review.

To simplify Master Log management of the ~C1:ivity, the estimated alpha emission should be converted to an equivalent beta-gamma emission consistent with the assume 0.25% alpha/bet_a­gamma. In many instances, no correction to the tabli:s wou_Jd be 11_ec_ess_ary because the proc_ess automatically adjusts. Two examples are provided:

Example I. If field surveys for a11 excavation indic_ated alpha contamination at 1,000 dplllfl 00cni2 alpha and only 50,000 dpm/100cm2 beta-gamma, the actual alpha/betas gamma ratio would be 2% ( I ,000/50,000). Because the work would be classified as mediiim risk, based on the alpha activity, the medium risk potential-to-emit (PTE) is 80 µCi/day be~­gamma which is based on an average beta-gamma activity of500,000 dpm/100cm2 beta­gamma. This shifting in radiological risk level makes the effective alpha/beta-gamm_a rat_io 0.2% (I ,000/500,000) and no adjustment is required. In this instance, since the original ratio was not gr~ti:r th_.µ, 2%, no supplemental evaluation would be required to be mairitairied for WDOH review.

Ex!1111ple 2_. If fieJd surveys for an exc_avation indicated alpha contamination at 300 dpm/10Qcm2 alpha and 1,000 dpm/100cm2 beta-gamma, the actual alpha/beta-gamma ratio would be 3% (300/1,000). Because the work would not be classified as low risk based on the alpha activity < 840 dpm/jOOcm2, the average beta-gamm_a activity of 50,000 dpm/100cm2 beta-gamma would be the basis of the release estimate. This lack ofshifting in radiological risk l_evel effect_ively makes the effe:Ctive alpha/beta-gamma ratio Q.6% (300/50,000). The alpha driven radioactive risk could be compensated by applyi_ng a factor of2.4 (0.6%/0.25%) to the beta-gamma PTE resulting in an assigned PTE of 19.2 µCi/day (2 .. 4 x 8 µCi/day). In tb_is ins~nce, whe_re the alpha contrunination drives radiological risk rather, than beta-gamma contamination, and the alpha to betaagamma activity ratio exceeds 2%, a calculation .showing how compliance with the alpha release limit is met shall be maintained for WDOH review.

Q(i. What is the rationale for the 2% alpha to beta-gamma ratio as the threshold for reevaluating the PTE?

A6. As discussed in question 4, the use of an 'average' ratio inherently accep_ts the concept that some variation in the ration can be expected from tank to tank as well as within areas of a tank, but in the aggregate over the course of the work in a year itvviil average out.

As pointed out in question 5 example I above, due to the lower value used to assign radiological risk for alpha contamination (20, 840 and 2000 dpm/100cm2

) as compared to beta-gamma (1000, 100,000 and 1,000,000 dpm/lOOcm2

), the methodology has soine automatic correction built i11 to ~- l_imited extent.

8-4

33 of 34

RPP-ENV-58166 2/19/2015 - 7:37 AM

RPP-ENV-58166, Rev. 0

In a situlltions where the alpha contliillina:tions is sufficiently high to drive the risk level to h_igh risk (>2,000 dpm/100cm2

) when the beta-ga111ma risk is low(< 100,.000 dpm/100ciri2), the selfs correcti_ng aspect of the-approach could potentially be inadequate to assure the alpha.rel1:11Se lim_i_t is not exceeded. So the ra~ion of these two limits (2,000/100,000 = 2%) was used to choose a threshold for further evaluation.

Q7_ Does WDOH have to approve em_issi_on estimates?

A. WDOH approval of the emission estimate is not required. Emission esti111ated area llleans of tracking work activities to SlJpport compliance certification with the emission limits of 3Ci beta­ganirria and 7.5 mCi alpha per year. The license requires th_at the "assigned. unabated emission es~imate for the activity using the potential release estimates be developed and docu111emed in a controlled documC:Jnt." As part of the NOC application process, this document was submitted to WDOH for a JO day completeness review. The docu111ent RPP-ENV-58166 was a reference in the NOC application a:s being the typical "controlled document," describing how emission estimates were developed in the NOC application to meet the requirement described in the license conditions. It would be appropriate to fonnally Sll_bmit any future revision of the document to WDOH for a.30 day completeness review.

As stated in the assumptions section of this document, si_tµations where alpha activity is driving thti ra_d_iological risk level is riot reflected in these generic estimates and would requ_i_re further evaluations. The license ad_ch:e~ses this situation by requiring that in situations where the alpha contliilliriation drives radiological risk, rather tl)an betll-gamma contaminaticin, and the alpha to beta-ga111ma activity ratio exceeds 2%, a calculation showing how com.plianc:e with th_e alpha release limit is met shaB be ma_intained for WDOH. review. Submittal of this calculation to WDOH is not.required under the license.

Q8. The decontamin_a_ti9n trailers have a vent fan in the shower area which is fitted with a HEPA like filter, isn't this a point source?

A. The vent fan in the shower area meets the definition of an air mover used to mitigate environmental conditions, in this case high hurni_dity, not for control cifradioactive emissions. O~ration of the deccintliillirurtion trailer is considered an incidentlll act:ivity.

B-5

34 of 34

Attachment 3 15--ECD .. QO 13

(1 Page)

Hanford Air Operating Permit Off-Permit Change Notification

NOTIFiCATION OF OFF-PERMIT CHANGE Permit Number: 00-05-006, Renew_a_l ~

This notification is provided to the Washington State Department of Ecology, Washington State Department of Health, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency·as a nptice of an off-permit change described as foilows.

The following changes are allowed pursuant to WAC 173-401-724(1 ), WAC 173-401-724(2), and WAC 173-401-724(6): I. Change is not specifically addressed or prohibited by the AOP terms and conditions; 2. Change does not weaken the enforceability of the existing AOP conditions; 3. Change is not a Title I modification or subject.to the acid rain requirements.under Title IV of the FCAA; 4. Change meets an applicable requirements ·and does not violate an existing permit term or condition; 5. Ch®ge has complied .,;jth applicable preconstruction review requirements established pursuant.to

RCW 70.9<1.J52. .

Descrintion of the chan.,e: - - ~ - -- -

A Notice of Construct_ion application is being submitted to the State of Washington Depl!l"llll~nt of Hc;aJm (WDQH) for d_i_ff'use ancl fugitive activities from the Hanford Site Tank Farms. The new license will eventually replace existing licenses contained in the FF-01.

- - -Date of chanae:(To be orovided in the soencv annroval order.) The~effective date will be determined when WDOH issues the license .

. - .. ..

Describe the emissions resultin" from the chan11e: . .

There will be no change in emissions from this permitting action.

·oescnbe the ·oew applicable requirements that will apply as a result of the change: .(To be,nrovidedjn the.s0 encv annroval order.) . A new diffuse and fugitive licerise will be issued by WDOffin the FF-01 license.

.