Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Groundwater”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 505 records · Page 28
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. Here we present a new dataset of western U.S. water rights records. This dataset provides consistent unique identifiers for each spatial unit of water management across the domain, unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of 7 broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of intersectoral water allocation changes through water markets (Grogan et al., in review). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, WBM, with a water rights module (Grogan et al., in review). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, U.S. west water management is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al, 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. west. The raw downloaded data for each state is described in Lisk et al. (in review), as well as here. The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. The first two characters of each file name is the abbreviation for the state the in which the file contains data for. After the abbreviation is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file type described in detail: XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. Essentially, this file is the merging of XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv and XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv by state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state the data comes from. FIPS - The two-digit numeric state ID code. waterRightID - The unique identifying ID of the water right, the same identifier as its state uses. priorityDate - The priority date associated with the right. origWaterUse - The original stated water use(s) from the state. waterUse - The water use category under the unified use categories established here. source - Whether the right is for surface water or groundwater. basinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the WMA the record belongs to. CFS - The maximum flow of the allocation in cubic feet per second (ft3s-1). Arizona is unique among the states, as its surface and groundwater resources are managed with two different sets of boundaries. So, for Arizona, the basinNum column is missing and instead there are two columns: surBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the surface water WMA the record belongs to. grdBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the groundwater WMA the record belongs to. XXStatePOD.shp: A shapefile which identifies the location of the Points of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records in XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv have coordinates, and therefore may be missing from this file. XXStatePOU.shp: A shapefile which contains the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to include within this file. XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized groundwater rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized surface water rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. Additionally, one file, stateWMALabels.csv, is not stored within a sub-directory. While we have referred to the spatial boundaries that each state uses to manage its water resources as WMAs, this term is not shared across all states. This file lists the proper name for each boundary set, by state. For those whom may be interested in exploring our code more in depth, we are also making available an internal data file for convenience. The file is in .RData format and contains everything described above as well as some minor additional objects used within the code calculating the cumulative curves. For completeness, here is a detailed description of the various objects which can be found within the .RData file: states: A character vector containing the state names for those states in which data was collected for. More importantly, the index of the state name is also the index in which that state's data can be found in the various following list objects. For example, if California is the third index in this object, the data for California will also be in the third index for each accompanying list. rightsByState_ground: A list of data frames with the cleaned ground water rights collected from each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv files. rightsByState_surface: A list of data frames with the cleaned surface water rights collected from each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv files. fullRightsRecs: A list of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxFullHarmonizedRights.csv files. projProj: The spatial projection used for map creation in the beginning of the project. Specifically, the World Geodetic System (WGS84) as a coordinate reference system (CRS) string in PROJ.4 format. wmaStateLabel: The name and/or abbreviation for what each state legally calls their WMAs. h2oUseByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed area(s) of use in this object. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to be included in this object. h2oDivByState: A list of spatial points data frames which identifies the location of the Point of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed Point of Diversion in this object. spatialWMAByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the spatial WMA boundaries for each state. The only data contained within the table are identifiers for each polygon. It is worth reiterating that Arizona is the only state in which the surface and groundwater WMA boundaries are not the same. wmaIDByState: A list which contains the unique ID values of the WMAs for each state. plottingDim: A character vector used to inform mapping functions for internal map making. Each state is classified as either "tall" or "wide", to maximize space on a typical 8x11 page. The code related to the creation of this dataset can be viewed within HarDWR GitHub Repository/dataHarmonization.

Economics↗
NASA NTRS2023

Sewage Treatment Plant #1 Area, SWMU 117 Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Site Assessment Progress Report

This Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) Site Assessment (SA) Progress Report (SAPR) discusses the investigation activities and findings for the Sewage Treatment Plant #1 (STP1) Area located at Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Florida (Figure 1-1). This site has been designated Solid Waste Management Unit (SWMU) 117 under KSC’s Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Corrective Action Program, as the sewage treatment plant and associated areas were identified as a potential source of PFAS to the environment. This PFAS SAPR was prepared by Tetra Tech, Inc., for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) under Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity Contract 80KSC019D0011-80KSC019F0070. This is the first progress report to document on-going SA activities; supplemental progress reports will be provided as additional data is collected. PFAS SA activities were conducted between April 2020 and March 2022 to collect additional data to supplement the existing datasets to better understand the extent of PFAS impacts to the environment in the STP1 Area. The SA for the STP1 Area covers an approximately 130-acre investigation area with multiple structures and buildings. The focus of the SA is the STP1 Complex and associated structures, including the former Polishing Pond, former Sludge Disposal8 Area, and former Spray Field. The STP1 Complex is located in the KSC Industrial Area, at the southwest corner of 4th Street SE and C Avenue SE. The STP1 Complex is located approximately ¼-mile south and downgradient of the Fire Station #1 site (SWMU 116), which is also currently undergoing a PFAS SA because of potential releases of PFAS-containing aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF). During the SA, a total of seven soil, 131 groundwater direct push technology (DPT), 24 groundwater monitoring well, and 11 surface water samples were collected between April 2020 and March 2022. Monitoring well samples were analyzed for 18 PFAS compounds, with all other samples analyzed for 28 PFAS compounds. The SA sample results were used along with historical results to evaluate the extent of PFAS impacts to the environment in the STP1 Area. Data generated to date and prior results were screened against the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) May 2022 Tap Water Regional Screening Levels (RSL) for groundwater and residential RSLs for soil (hazard quotient of 0.1). Surface water results were screened against the State of Florida Human Health Surface Water Screening Levels (SWSLs). Results from the SA showed exceedances of the applicable screening criteria for groundwater and surface water. Considering the current and historical dataset, PFOS is the prevalent PFAS compound. Based on these results, additional groundwater DPT and surface water sampling should be considered for PFAS analysis, focused on evaluating surface water bodies in the southeast portion of the Industrial Area, which discharge into the Banana River. Additionally, installation of monitoring wells should be considered to evaluate the interaction between the groundwater and surface water at the site. Collection of additional samples for TOC analysis should also be considered from representative groundwater (saturated soils) and surface water locations to further evaluate potential correlations between PFAS and TOC to provide a more comprehensive dataset to assist in fate and transport analyses.

Sewage Treatment Plant↗
NASA NTRS2024

Soil Interim Measures Implementation Report Q6 Radar Station – Solid Waste Management Unit 112 Locations of Concern 3 and 10 Kennedy Space Center, Florida

This report presents a summary of the soil interim measures (IM) implementation activities that occurred from January 23 through June 6, 2023, at the Q6 Radar Station (Q6RS) Solid Waste Management Unit (SWMU) 112, located at the John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Florida. The site is monitored under KSC’s Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Corrective Action Program, which also meets the requirements of Chapter 62-780, Florida Administrative Code. Assessment activities have previously been performed at 10 Q6RS Locations of Concern (LOCs), identified during a SWMU assessment in 2013 (NASA 2013). Since the SWMU assessment, further confirmatory sampling and assessment was conducted for each LOC, and based on the data collected during these assessments, it was determined that Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Facility Investigation to further evaluate soil and groundwater was to be conducted at two LOCs: LOC 1 – Former Underground Storage Tanks (groundwater) and LOC 3 – Radar Antenna Refurbishment Area (soil). The LOC 1 groundwater assessment is ongoing, and the results will be presented under a separate cover. It was also determined that soil IM would be completed at two of the LOCs, LOC 3 and LOC 10 – Compressor Building Condensate Discharge. A Soil IM Work Plan was prepared and submitted in October 2021 (NASA 2021). The plan proposed excavation and disposal of barium and copper impacted soil in the LOC 3 and 10 areas. This report presents a summary and results of the soil IM implementation activities conducted at LOCs 3 and 10. The site contaminates of concern for this soil IM are barium and copper. The activities presented in this report includes soil IM implementation and groundwater sampling. From January 23 through March 24, 2023, AECOM Technical Services, Inc. (AECOM) field personnel conducted IM implementation activities in the LOC 3 and 10 areas. As presented in the IM Work Plan, shallow soils, impacted with metals, were excavated to a depth of 2 feet below land surface in the central area of the site around the radar antenna and associated equipment. AECOM personnel excavated 77.43 tons of soil using hand tools and, when able, heavy equipment. The soils were placed into lined roll-off containers, which were covered and transported under manifest to the Cedar Trail Landfill in Bartow, Florida. The site was restored to original condition using certified clean backfill material (sand), with filter fabric, and gravel. Areas outside of the excavation were restored with grass seed. On June 6, 2023, AECOM field personnel conducted groundwater sampling activities within the soil IM excavation area. AECOM personnel collected one groundwater sample from monitoring well Q6RS-MW0003. The sample was submitted to a fixed-based laboratory for analysis by United States Environmental Protection Agency Method 6020B for metals (barium and copper). Barium and copper were detected at 18 micrograms per liter (µg/L) and 14 µg/L, respectively, and were below the State of Florida Groundwater Cleanup Target Levels (GCTLs) for barium at 2,000 µg/L and copper at 1,000 µg/L.

Chadwick Sloan Lee↗
NASA NTRS2024

Wilson Corners, Solid Waste Management Unit 001(SWMU 01) 2023 Annual Long-Term Monitoring Report

This report presents a summary of the long-term monitoring (LTM) activities that occurred in 2023 at Wilson Corners, Solid Waste Management Unit 001, at Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Florida. Annual LTM of groundwater is being conducted at the site. Based on results from groundwater sampling activities performed during the 2019 through 2020 LTM reporting period and the 2020 and 2021 DPT groundwater sampling, it was determined that the LTM sampling plan was no longer meeting the goal of LTM because delineation was not verified and the installation of an air sparge (AS) system to treat the area of the High Concentration Plume was recommended. The AS System was installed in late 2022 and early 2023. System start-up activities were initiated in April 2023. Following system startup, several site wells required retrofitting to equip wellheads for withstanding the air pressure released from air sparge wells during system operation. Some site wells also required repair or abandonment, and replacement. Survey of location and top-of-casing of newly installed monitoring wells was combined with scheduled AS system survey activities and was completed in January 2024. The activities presented in this report include the February and April 2023 LTM monitoring well installations; March and April 2023 LTM and performance monitoring well water level gauging and sampling; November 2023 LTM well retrofits and repairs; a summary of December 2023 LTM well abandonments and installations (complete site well abandonment activities will be presented under a separate cover); and January 2024 LTM well survey. During the March and April 2023 sampling events, the low-flow sampling method was used, and samples were analyzed for a select list of volatile organic compounds. In March 2023, groundwater flow for the site was generally to the west was generally consistent with historical observations at the site. The Low Concentration Plume (LCP) continues to extend both horizontally and vertically beyond the terminal depth of the current monitoring well network. Data, inclusive of the 2023 LTM and baseline performance monitoring sampling events, indicate that the LCP encompasses an estimated 19.5 acres, compared to the 2021 LCP footprint, inclusive of the 2020 and 2021 DPT sampling events of 20.7 acres. The vertical extent of VOCs was historically delineated by monitoring wells screened greater than 48 feet below land surface (bls). The results from the three vertical extent monitoring wells screened below 48 feet bls that were sampled during the 2023 LTM indicate that groundwater vinyl chloride concentrations in these three wells are greater than the GCTL. As presented in the 2021 Long-Term Monitoring Report (NASA 2022), the KSCRT agreed to delay deeper investigations in this area to prevent the creation of additional pathways for vertical migration. Based on groundwater sampling activities performed in 2023, recommendations are to perform the next annual LTM sampling event, scheduled for April 2024 and to conduct quarterly performance monitoring of the AS System. The current selection of monitoring wells in the recommended 2024 LTM plan will provide an adequate data set for monitoring groundwater plume behavior; however, the LTM monitoring well network will be evaluated and refined based on 2024 LTM and year one performance monitoring data.

King Linnea↗
DOE OSTI2020

A Perspective on the Successes of the NNSS Underground Test Area (UGTA) Activity - 20221

Between 1951 and 1992, 828 underground nuclear tests were performed at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). Underground testing was done in five major testing areas, which included (1) Frenchman Flat, (2) Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain, (3) Yucca Flat/Climax Mine (4) Central Pahute Mesa, and (5) Western Pahute Mesa. About one third of the underground tests were detonated near, at or below the water table, and thus radioactive contamination was introduced to the groundwater system. The U.S. Department of Energy's Underground Test Area (UGTA) Activity was established in the late 1990's to address the fate and movement of residual radioactivity in groundwater, and characterize the risk that it may pose to NNSS workers and the offsite public. It has accomplished this goal through a process of iterative groundwater sampling and numerical groundwater flow and transport modeling, and long-term monitoring. The UGTA Activity draws on the expertise of scientists in the fields of geology, hydrology, radiochemistry, and risk assessment from the U.S. DOE staff, the lead contractor (currently Navarro) and many other organizations, in cooperation with the governing regulatory body, the State of Nevada's Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP). Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) is one of the participating research organizations involved with the UGTA Activity. Under the direction of DOE and the lead contractor, LANL's role in UGTA has evolved over time from an initial focus on geologic characterization, to conducting field and laboratory experiments, and finally to its current role of providing modeling and geochemistry expertise to characterize the rates and directions of groundwater and radionuclide movement. In its current role, LANL has either developed or provided the numerical tools for developing flow and transport models in each of the four major testing areas. In addition, LANL has provided an independent assessment of future groundwater flow and transport behavior through the analysis of naturally-occurring geochemical and isotopic tracers in groundwater. The five major testing areas are now in different stages of investigation or closure: (1) Frenchman Flat is in its fifth year of post closure modeling; (2) The Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain Closure Report has been submitted to NDEP and is awaiting approval; (3) The Yucca Flat/Climax Mine Closure Report is under development; and (4) Central and (5) Western Pahute Mesa is still undergoing investigation and flow and transport model development. The success of the UGTA Activity in reaching or approaching closure in three of the five major testing areas is primarily due to the DoE's focus on regulatory closure requirements, but also is in part attributable to a rigorous internal review process and the involvement of NDEP and Nye County water professionals as participants and observers in the reviews. County and state involvement in the internal review process has promoted trust that the U.S. DOE is deeply committed to ensuring the present and future safely of NNSS workers and the surrounding communities. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Results of a Soil Flushing Treatability Test for Hanford Site Hexavalent Chromium Removal - 20446

U.S. Department of Energy contractor CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Company has made significant progress remediating hexavalent chromium in groundwater near the Columbia River through the operation of pump and treat facilities and source removal activities. To mitigate risks associated with hexavalent chromium contamination, which was identified in a CERCLA interim action record of decision as the primary groundwater contaminant of concern for the 100-KR-4 Operable Unit from discharging to the Columbia River, three ion-exchange pump and treat systems were installed between 1997 and 2009. Between 2010 and 2016, operation of the K West pump and treat system, located near the former 105K West plutonium production reactor, reduced concentrations below the groundwater remediation target for hexavalent chromium. In 2016, a rebound study was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of the pump and treat remedy and assess the potential for any residual hexavalent chromium sources continuing to contribute to groundwater contamination. As a result of the rebound study, a source of continued groundwater contamination was identified. To address this condition, a soil flushing treatability test was written and approved by the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The test included saturating about a 1-acre area of soil with treated water with the goal of forcing the residual hexavalent chromium to groundwater where existing extraction wells could remove it for treatment, accelerating the cleanup process. In spring and summer 2019, CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Company installed and began operating a shallow underground leach system to support the treatability test. Preliminary sampling data show the test was effective in removing the residual contamination. Following further evaluation and analysis from the initial test, the process will be considered for implementation elsewhere on the Hanford Site, particularly at locations where there is a known or suspected continuing contamination source in the soil column. The paper will cover the goals of the study, as well as more details about the following: - Overview of pump and treat exit strategy (using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency guidance); - The design and installation of the soil flushing technology in the 100-K Area; - The testing process and results of sampling data; - Post-study evaluation and potential for implementation in other locations at the Hanford Site. Innovative solutions for cleanup, such as the soil flushing technology, have resulted in substantial progress in the removal of groundwater contaminants at the Hanford Site, potentially shortening the time frame required to meet cleanup goals and resulting in significant cost savings. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

Redefining Net-Zero Water for Resilient Aquifers

Groundwater has long been a critical source of potable water, supplying one-third of all global water withdrawals and providing strategic reserves in times of drought (Konikow, 2012; Famiglietti, 2014). The risk in relying on groundwater is that it is often pumped at rates far greater than it can be naturally replenished. With increasing population and a changing climate, the depletion of potable water supplies has become an ever-growing concern (Srinivasan et al., 2012). Recently, the concept of “resilience” has been applied to groundwater, leaving many questions to be explored in terms of what resilience should mean for aquifers (Foster and MacDonald, 2014; Grönwall and Oduro-Kwarteng, 2017). The term is commonly used to indicate resilience to impacts of climate change specifically, but here we consider resilience in the context of more general water insecurity. Relatedly, the concept of “sustainable yield” has emerged in an attempt to determine a metric that can ensure the long-term resilience of groundwater systems, but the definition is fraught with inherent uncertainties and its quantification poses challenges (Rudestam and Langridge, 2014; Grönwall and Oduro-Kwarteng, 2017). At the heart of these concepts is a focus on sustainable management of aquifers. A sustainable approach to managing groundwater resources usually involves balancing long-term abstraction with the long-term recharge taking into account the needs for environmental flows and implementing drought-preparedness measures (Robins et al. 2006; Foster and MacDonald, 2014). At a high level, a sustainable balance of groundwater abstraction versus aquifer recharge may be considered “Net Zero” (NZ) or “Net Positive” (NP) in cases where recharge is equal to or in excess of abstraction, respectively. However, NZ/NP water management programs that address these concerns have varied definitions of compliance, which include considerations for the application at hand (ILFI, 2020; USGBC, 2020). Locations with high risk of low or poor water supply may be particularly interested in pursuing NZ/NP water. The AQUEDUCT Water Risk Atlas (World Resources Institute, 2019) indicates long-term availability, providing risk levels for quantity and quality of water at specific locations across the globe, for existing and predicted future conditions. This paper follows the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) NZ water definition adopted by the U.S. Army for use at their installations, including Army Reserve Centers (ARCs). This definition also relates to the U.S. Army’s current focus on water resilience, which includes short-term and long-term availability of water resources.

net zero water, HUC12, Saipan, American Samoa, Mau↗
NASA NTRS2016

Wilson Corners SWMU 001 2015 Annual Long Term Monitoring Report Kennedy Space Center, Florida

This document presents the findings of the 2015 Long Term Monitoring (LTM) that was completed at the Wilson Corners site, located at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration John F. Kennedy Space Center, Florida. The objectives of the 2015 LTM event were to evaluate the groundwater flow direction and gradient, to monitor the vertical and horizontal extent of the volatile organic compounds (VOCs; including the upgradient and sidegradient extents, which are monitored every five years), and to monitor select locations internal to the dissolved groundwater plume. The 2015 LTM event included several upgradient and sidegradient monitoring wells that are not sampled annually to verify the extent of VOCs in this portion of the site. The December 2015 LTM groundwater sampling event included, depth to groundwater measurements, 40 VOC samples collected using passive diffusion bags, and one VOC sample collected using low-flow techniques. Additionally, monitoring well MW0052DD was overdrilled and abandoned using rotasonic drilling techniques. The following conclusions can be made based on the 2015 LTM results: groundwater flow is generally to the west with northwest and southwest flow components from the water table to approximately 55 feet below land surface (ft BLS); peripheral monitoring wells generally delineate VOCs to groundwater cleanup target levels (GCTLs) except for monitoring wells MW0088, MW0090, MW0095, and NPSHMW0039, which had vinyl chloride (VC) concentrations near the GCTL and MW0062, which had trichloroethene (TCE), cis-1,2-dichloroethenen (cDCE), and VC concentrations above natural attenuation default concentrations (NADCs); VOCs in interior downgradient wells generally fluctuate within historic ranges except for monitoring wells in the north-northwest portion of the site, which have increasing VC concentrations indicating potential plume migration and expansion; Historically, the vertical extents of the VOCs were delineated by monitoring wells screened greater than 60 ft BLS (MW0083 through MW0086, and MW0078). The 2015 LTM results indicate that concentrations of daughter product cDCE is greater than the NADC in MW0078 and that cDCE and VC are greater than NADCs in MW0130. TCE was greater than the GCTL in monitoring well MW130 and not detected above method detection limits (9 micrograms per Liter) in monitoring well MW0078. No GCTL exceedances were identified in monitoring wells MW0083 or MW0086; the dissolved plume footprint appears generally stable, though not fully delineated by monitoring well data in the northeast portion of the site; and 2015 LTM results generally support the existing Conceptual Site Model. Geosyntec recommends modifying the LTM program, collecting a verification sample from monitoring well MW0062, and performing a direct push technology instigation in the northnortheastern portion of the site. A cluster of monitoring wells (MW0132 [2 to 12 ft BLS], MW0133 [15 to 25 ft BLS], and MW0134 [29 to 34 ft BLS]) is proposed to delineate impacts in the northnortheast portion of the site. Geosyntec recommends installation of a vertical extent well in the center of the site (Hot Spot 2 area) post-remediation implementation.

groundwater↗
NASA NTRS2021

Drought Variability over the Conterminous United States for the past century

We examine the drought variability over the Conterminous United States (CONUS) for 1915-2018 using the Noah-MP land-surface model. We examine different model options on drought reconstruction including optional representation of groundwater and dynamic vegetation phenology. Over our 104-year reconstruction period, we identify 12 great droughts that each covered at least 36% of CONUS and lasted for at least 5 months. The great droughts tend to have smaller areas when groundwater and/or dynamic vegetation are included in the model configuration. We detect a small decreasing trend in dry area coverage over CONUS in all configurations. We identify 45 major droughts in the baseline (with a dry area coverage greater than 23.6% of CONUS) that are, on average, somewhat less severe than great droughts. We find that representation of groundwater tends to increase drought duration for both great and major droughts, primarily by leading to earlier drought onset (some due to short-lived recovery from a previous drought) or later demise (groundwater anomalies lag precipitation anomalies). In contrast, representation of dynamic vegetation tends to shorten major droughts duration, primarily due to earlier drought demise ( closed stoma or dead vegetation reduces ET loss during droughts). On a regional basis, the U.S. Southwest (Southeast) has the longest (shortest) major drought durations. Consistent with earlier work, dry area coverage in all subregions except the Southwest has decreased. The effects of groundwater and dynamic vegetation vary regionally due to differences in groundwater depths (hence connectivity with the surface) and vegetation types.

drought↗
DOE OSTI2023

Global drivers of local water stresses and global responses to local water policies in the United States

Abstract The rapid depletion of US groundwater resources and rising number of dying wells in the Western US brings attention to the significance of groundwater governance and sustainability restrictions. However, such restrictions on groundwater withdrawals are likely to generate spillover effects causing further environmental stresses in other locations and adding to the complexity of sustainability challenges. The goal of this paper is to improve our understanding of the implications of growing global food demand for local sustainability stresses and the implications of local sustainability policies for local, regional, and global food production, land use, and prices. We employ SIMPLE-G-US (Simplified International Model of agricultural Prices, Land use, and the Environment—Gridded version for the United States) to distangle the significance or remote changes in population and income for irrigation and water resources in the US. Then we examine the local-to-global impacts of potential US groundwater sustainability policies. We find that developments in international markets are significant, as more than half of US sustainability stresses by 2050 are caused by increased commodity demand from abroad. Furthermore, a US sustainable groundwater policy can cause overseas spillovers of US production, thereby potentially contributing to environmental stresses elsewhere, even as groundwater stress in the US is alleviated. These unintended consequences could include deforestation due to cropland expansion, as well as degradation in water quality due to intensification of production in non-targeted areas.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Anaerobic benzene oxidation in Geotalea daltonii involves activation by methylation and is regulated by the transition state regulator AbrB

ABSTRACT Benzene is a widespread groundwater contaminant that persists under anoxic conditions. The aim of this study was to more accurately investigate anaerobic microbial degradation pathways to predict benzene fate and transport. Preliminary genomic analysis of Geotalea daltonii strain FRC-32, isolated from contaminated groundwater, revealed the presence of putative aromatic-degrading genes. G. daltonii was subsequently shown to conserve energy for growth on benzene as the sole electron donor and fumarate or nitrate as the electron acceptor. The hbs gene, encoding for 3-hydroxybenzylsuccinate synthase (Hbs), a homolog of the radical-forming, toluene-activating benzylsuccinate synthase (Bss), was upregulated during benzene oxidation in G. daltonii , while the bss gene was upregulated during toluene oxidation. Addition of benzene to the G. daltonii whole-cell lysate resulted in toluene formation, indicating that methylation of benzene was occurring. Complementation of σ 54 - (deficient) E. coli transformed with the bss operon restored its ability to grow in the presence of toluene, revealing bss to be regulated by σ 54 . Binding sites for σ 70 and the transition state regulator AbrB were identified in the promoter region of the σ 54 -encoding gene rpoN, and binding was confirmed. Induced expression of abrB during benzene and toluene degradation caused G. daltonii cultures to transition to the death phase. Our results suggested that G. daltonii can anaerobically oxidize benzene by methylation, which is regulated by σ 54 and AbrB. Our findings further indicated that the benzene, toluene, and benzoate degradation pathways converge into a single metabolic pathway, representing a uniquely efficient approach to anaerobic aromatic degradation in G. daltonii . IMPORTANCE The contamination of anaerobic subsurface environments including groundwater with toxic aromatic hydrocarbons, specifically benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene, has become a global issue. Subsurface groundwater is largely anoxic, and further study is needed to understand the natural attenuation of these compounds. This study elucidated a metabolic pathway utilized by the bacterium Geotalea daltonii capable of anaerobically degrading the recalcitrant molecule benzene using a unique activation mechanism involving methylation. The identification of aromatic-degrading genes and AbrB as a regulator of the anaerobic benzene and toluene degradation pathways provides insights into the mechanisms employed by G. daltonii to modulate metabolic pathways as necessary to thrive in anoxic contaminated groundwater. Our findings contribute to the understanding of novel anaerobic benzene degradation pathways that could potentially be harnessed to develop improved strategies for bioremediation of groundwater contaminants.

Bullows, James E.↗
DOE OSTI2020

Pahute Mesa-Oasis Valley Hydrostratigraphic Framework Model for Corrective Action Units 101 and 102: Central and Western Pahute Mesa, Nye County, Nevada (Rev. 0)

A new, revised three-dimensional (3-D) hydrostratigraphic framework model (HFM) for the Central and Western Pahute Mesa Corrective Action Units 101 and 102 was completed in 2019. The initial (Phase I) model was completed in 2002 and was documented in A Hydrostratigraphic Model and Alternatives for the Groundwater Flow and Contaminant Transport Model of Corrective Action Units 101 and 102: Central and Western Pahute Mesa, Nye County, Nevada (BN, 2002). Subsequent flow and transport modeling revealed the need to collect additional data to reduce uncertainties. The Phase II data collection and characterization effort included extensive well drilling and testing activities, and rebuilding of the Phase I 3-D HFM, resulting in the Phase II HFM (NSTec, 2014). Further drilling (Well ER-20-12), data collection, and interpretive work (e.g., Thirsty Canyon Lineament [Wurtz and Day, 2018]) were incorporated into the Pahute Mesa-Oasis Valley (PM-OV) HFM. The PM-OV HFM incorporates the area of interest from the Phase II HFM and adds additional areas, primarily to the north and west with minor additions to the south and east. The new, expanded area matches the PM-OV groundwater basin as defined in Fenelon et al. (2016) and includes Pahute Mesa, a former nuclear testing area at the Nevada National Security Site; and Oasis Valley, a groundwater discharge area downgradient from contaminant source areas on Pahute Mesa. The data and information necessary to build the PM-OV HFM are provided in Navarro (2019). The PM-OV HFM will be used by hydrologic modelers who are tasked with developing a model to determine how contaminants are transported by groundwater flow in an area of complex geology. The model area is large (more than 6,250 square kilometers) and geologically complex, including Paleozoic- to Mesozoic-age structures (e.g., thrust faults, Thirsty Canyon Lineament), at least seven Tertiary-age calderas, several intrusive bodies, and many relatively recent basin-and-range normal faults. Investigators from the U.S. Geological Survey; National Security Technologies, LLC; National Laboratories; and U.S. Department of Energy contractors have organized the more than 300 volcanic units and other rocks in the model area into 77 hydrostratigraphic units (HSUs). The volcanic rocks are subdivided into 42 aquifers, 11 confining units, and 9 composite units (containing both aquifer and confining unit rocks). The underlying pre-Tertiary rocks were divided into 5 HSUs, comprising 2 aquifers and 3 confining units. The model also includes 1 alluvial aquifer unit, 8 intrusive confining units, and 1 granite confining unit. The model depicts the thickness, extent, and geometric relationships of these HSUs (“layers” in the model) along with all the major structural features that control them, including calderas and faults. The most substantive differences between the Phase II HFM and the PM-OVHFM include (1) addition of the new data and resulting revised interpretations from the additional area encompassed by the PM-OV groundwater basin; (2) incorporation of 16 new faults; (3) 12 boreholes from the northern extension; (4) 2 additional caldera-collapse collars; and (5) correlation of the simulated faulting and hydrostratigraphy in the eastern part of the model domain with the delineations represented in the neighboring Rainier Mesa-Shoshone Mountain HFM-Prime and Yucca Flat-Climax Mine HFM. All PM-OV HFM delineations were based on published and unpublished data from geophysical investigations, surface geologic maps, and drill-hole records. Phase II approached model uncertainty using the model-building software to test model configurations and hydrologic consequences using a range of values for parameters such as fault offset amounts and HSU elevations. The PM-OV HFM expands on this approach to encompass the entire PM-OV groundwater basin.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Distribution of Infiltration in the 216-U-10 and 216-B-3 Pond Systems 1944-1997

A modeling system to simulate fate and transport of contaminant plumes in groundwater beneath the Central Plateau to support the Cumulative Impact Evaluation (CIE) and Composite Analysis (CA) is being developed. The CIE will evaluate the cumulative effect of multiple Central Plateau radiological and chemical sources on groundwater quality (DOE/RL-2018-69, Cumulative Impact Evaluation Technical Approach Document ). This will enable cleanup decisions to be evaluated in the context of all Central Plateau waste sites and existing groundwater conditions. The CA evaluates the cumulative effect of all sources of radioactive materials on radiological dose to future members of the public (DOE/RL-2018-60, Annual Status Report (FY 2018): Composite Analysis of Low Level Waste Disposal in the Central Plateau of the Hanford Site ). Fate and transport modeling will be used to forecast future groundwater concentrations for both the CIE and CA. The CIE/CA subsurface modeling system is divided into source (inventory), vadose zone, and saturated zone facets. Source inventory is a necessary input to the vadose zone facet, and releases from the vadose zone to groundwater are inputs to the saturated zone facet. The vadose zone facet simulates historical and future releases from the vadose zone to groundwater for both liquid waste and solid waste disposal sites. Effluent release volumes and radionuclide inventory estimates for liquid waste sites are contained in ECFHANFORD- 17-0079, Hanford Soil Inventory Model (SIM-v2) Calculated Radionuclide Inventory of Direct Liquid Discharges to Soil in the Hanford Site’s 200 Areas , herein referred to as SIM-v2. The liquid waste sites in SIM-v2 include the 216-B-3 Pond near 200 East Area and the 216-U-10 Pond in 200 West Area. The 216-B-3 Pond system consisted of a main pond and 3 expansion lobes that were operational during overlapping time periods. It also included influent ditches, but these are not listed as liquid waste sources in SIM-v2 and are not included in the CIE/CA modeling. The total effluent volume released to the pond system was measured, but the partitioning of this volume to the various expansion lobes was not determined and is not accounted for in SIM-v2. Regarding the 216-U-10 Pond, it received water from several influent ditches. The pond and the influent ditches are listed as liquid waste sites in SIM-v2 and are included as sources in the CIE/CA modeling. Because water in the ditches flowed into the pond, only a portion of the effluent volumes and contaminant inventories assigned to the ditches in SIM-v2 infiltrated from the ditches. Thus, partitioning of infiltration and contaminant inventories between the ditches and the pond is not fully accounted for in SIM-v2. Further, some of the water in the 216-U-10 Pond entered overflow ditches and the amount of this overflow was not recorded and is not accounted for in SIM-v2. Thus, the purpose of this Environmental Calculation File (ECF) is to partition the infiltration of wastewater and contaminant inventory between the main pond and each expansion lobe of the 216-B-3 Pond system, and to partition the infiltration of wastewater and contaminant inventory between the ditches and pond of the 216-U-10 Pond system.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2023

Hawai‘i Play Fairway (Final Report)

Most of Hawai'i's geothermal resources are blind—their manifestations, such as hot springs and steam vents, do not appear on the ground surface because the heated water flows far below. With the exception of $K\bar{i}lauea East Rift Zone$, in most areas of Hawai'i, high lateral permeability in the first kilometer below ground surface prevents surface thermal features from developing. As a methodology for discovering these blind resources, Play Fairway Analysis (PFA) involves finding potential locations of blind hydrothermal systems and describing potential geothermal sources in rift-zone settings. Using the PFA to find Hawai'i's geothermal resources, the University of Hawai'i (UH) conducted the Hawai‘i Play Fairway Project, Hawai'i's first statewide geothermal resource assessment since 1985. Sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy, the Hawai'i Play Fairway Project provided an updated resource assessment, a roadmap for additional exploration activities, and the identification of areas for further exploration. Benefitting from UH's core competency in earth sciences and experienced geothermal researchers, the project comprised three phases. During the first phase, the team identified, compiled, and ranked existing geologic, groundwater, and geophysical datasets relevant to subsurface heat, fluid and permeability. Using a Bayesian statistical approach, the team developed a statistical methodology to integrate these data into a resource probability map. The team evaluated the confidence in the probability value and considered development viability of areas with geothermal resources. With these analyses, the team identified 10 locations in the Hawaiian Islands for exploration activities. For the second phase, the team collected new groundwater data in 10 locations across the state and new geophysical data on $L\bar{a}na‘i, Maui$, and central Hawai'i Island and modeled topographically induced stress to better characterize subsurface permeability. Analyzing the subsurface stresses, the team evaluated the potential for fracture-induced permeability. The team inverted the MT and gravity data to produce 3D models of resistivity and density, respectively, on $L\bar{a}na‘i$, across $Haleakal\bar{a}'s$ SW rift (Maui), and surrounding Mauna Kea (Hawai‘i Island). The team developed and applied a new method for incorporating depth information about resistivity, density, and potential for fracture-induced permeability into the statistical method for computing resource probability in these three focus areas. The team incorporated the new groundwater results with the new geophysical results and the calculations of potential for fracture-induced permeability to produce updated maps of resource probability and confidence. Through combining data from the first and second phases, the team determined locations for further exploration during the third phase. For MT and gravity surveys, the team recommended $Kaua'i's$ $L\bar{i}hu'e$ $Basin$, the east rift of $Maui's$ $Haleakal\bar{a}$ volcano, and the southwest rift of Hawai'i Island's Mauna Loa volcano. The MT and gravity surveys aimed to enable improved confidence in the resource potential in these locations. For drilling deep groundwater well(s), the team recommended Southeast Mauna Kea and $L\bar{a}na's$ $P\bar{a}l\bar{a}wai$ $Basin$. During the third phase, further exploration involved drilling a groundwater well in $L\bar{a}na's$ $P\bar{a}l\bar{a}wai$ $Basin$ and performing more geophysical surveys. We deepened an existing water well proximal to our target area on $L\bar{a}na'i$ due to funding constraints that precluded us from spudding a new well that would exceed 1km depth. Drilling was preceded by a number of substantial elements including: writing an Environmental Assessment and the subsequent legal process, performance of deviation logging, lowering a camera down the well, coordinating site preparation with $P\bar{u}lama$ $L\bar{a}na'i$, shipping the UH-owned rig interisland, procuring supplies, and leading 3 community meetings on $L\bar{a}na'i$. Drilling occurred 24/7 the entire month of June 2019 over which time $L\bar{a}na'i$ $Well$ 10 was deepened from 427 m to 1057 m, with continuous core collected. We measured a roughly linear temperature gradient averaging 42°C/km and a maximum bottom hole temperature of 66°C. This gradient is more than twice the background for Hawai'i and within a range of gradients measured in this depth range for some exploration wells within KERZ. We consider these results encouraging for $L\bar{a}na'i's$ resource potential and recommend following with a slim hole within $L\bar{a}na'i's$ caldera (our target zone) to ~ 2 km. Further, the positive implications such results have for the island of O‘ahu are substantial - the shield stage of O'ahu's volcanoes ended 1-2 My earlier. However, O'ahu uses more electricity than the rest of the islands combined, and the utility recently called for 500-700MW of firm, dispatchable renewable electricity on O'ahu by 2033. In Phase 3, we also collected limited new encouraging groundwater data, and updated our thoughts on the probabilities of fluid and permeability at resource depths (Pr F = 1; Pr P = mostly unconstrained). Ultimately, we advocate for using our final probability of heat, and confidence in this probability, to drive the next phase of exploration. We contend further development of geothermal in Hawai‘i will enable the state to achieve its 100% renewable policy objective and Hawai'i to transition off of fossil fuels through geothermal discovery and development. The project not only produced a large amount of data and expanded the existing knowledge of Hawai'i's geothermal resources, but also produced publications, theses, presentations, core photos, datasets, media reports, television interviews, community events, and a blog. Students and new professionals benefitted from the project's hands-on research experiences and educational opportunities and earned awards and recognition.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Calendar Year 2020 Post-Closure Monitoring Report for Corrective Action Unit 99: Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain, Underground Test Area, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada (Rev. 1)

This report presents the results of monitoring conducted for water quality, water levels, and institutional controls in calendar year (CY) 2020 by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Environmental Management (EM) Nevada Program’s Underground Test Area (UGTA) Activity at Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 99, Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain (RM/SM), at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS), Nevada. This report also presents analytical laboratory results (including results of quality assurance/quality control samples, such as field duplicates [FDs]), and verification of use restrictions (URs), institutional controls, and water usage. Groundwater samples were collected; water levels were measured; and well site surveillance was conducted in support of the Underground Test Area Closure Report (CR) for Corrective Action Unit 99: Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada (DOE/EMNV, 2020). Rainier Mesa (RM) was the site of 61 underground nuclear tests, and Shoshone Mountain (SM) was the site of 6 underground nuclear tests. As a result of these activities, which took place from 1957 to 1992, radionuclides (RNs) were released in the subsurface in the vicinity of the detonations. These 67 underground nuclear tests are associated with 66 specific corrective action site (CAS) numbers, as listed in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) (1996, as amended). Two tests, HURON LANDING and DIAMOND ACE (conducted simultaneously), are included within one CAS. The CR (DOE/EMNV, 2020) establishes the regulatory boundaries and regulatory boundary objectives, monitoring program, UR boundaries and URs, and other institutional controls agreed to by EM Nevada Program and the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) for closure of CAU 99. Regulatory boundaries for the RM/SM CAU were established to protect receptors of groundwater from RN contamination within the three downgradient groundwater basins that receive recharge from RM. The SM regulatory boundary was established to verify that RN contamination does not reach the lower carbonate aquifer below SM. The UR boundaries were established based on contaminant simulation forecasts from the flow and transport simulations with consideration of site-specific topographical controls. The URs associated with the UR boundaries were identified to protect onsite workers and the public from inadvertent exposure to contaminated groundwater as forecasted to occur assuming current conditions. The UR is intended to restrict activities that might expose workers to contaminated groundwater within the UR area. In addition to the URs, other institutional controls are established to monitor and limit access to groundwater. These include federal ownership and management in perpetuity, controlled access of the NNSS and surrounding areas, and reporting water use on the NNSS and surrounding hydrographic basins.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Assessment of Potential Dose and Environmental Impacts from Proposed Testing at the INL Radiological Response Training Range

This assessment uses screening-level models to calculate potential environmental impacts from proposed tests at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Radiological Response Training Range (RRTR) site. Proposed tests could be conducted using 11 different radioactive material types that include K2O, LaBr3, KBr, Cu, Zr, F, Ga, Ga2O3, NaNO2, Ga-68, and Tc-99m. The tests could potentially release radioactive material to the atmosphere and radionuclides and other contaminants to the soil, which could leach into the unsaturated zone and migrate to the aquifer. Atmospheric transport of radionuclides to potential human receptors and time-integrated air concentrations were calculated with a Gaussian plume model and three years of hourly meteorological data. Potential surface-soil impacts were calculated with the computer program mixing-cell model (MCM). Groundwater impacts were calculated with the computer programs MCM and GWSCREEN. Radiological doses from potential atmospheric releases were calculated for public receptors off the INL Site and for workers at nearby INL facilities. Results were compared to regulatory dose limits. Maximum potential groundwater concentrations were estimated in the aquifer below the NSTR site and compared to drinking water standards or risk-based screening levels for resident tap water. Soil concentrations were calculated and compared to risk-based screening levels for workers and potential future residents. All impacts were estimated assuming 12 tests are conducted annually using all 11 material types for a period of 15 years. This document provides the resources to enable a subject matter expert in the field of environmental assessments to replicate the modeling and calculations. The methodology and parameters are presented in the text. All electronic files, including computer-code input, output, executable files, batch files, scripts, and spreadsheet files are contained in a zip file that can be accessed by selecting “Additional Information” (select Native File) in the INL Electronic Document Management System (EDMS). It is highly unlikely the test scenarios evaluated in this ECAR will adversely impact human health based on comparisons of calculated dose and concentration against regulatory standards and risk-based screening levels. Conservative estimates of dose to workers and the public from atmospheric transport of possible radionuclide releases are far below federal radiation protection standards. Conservative estimates of potential contaminant concentrations in groundwater are less than federal drinking water standards or screening levels. Predicted radionuclide concentrations in surface soils are below risk-based screening levels, except for Ge-68 (material Ga-68) for the worker. The Ge-68 soil concentration can be made less than the worker PRG, if the number of annual tests using Ga-68 is reduced from 12 to 6. However, the sum of ratios still exceeds one because of the high K-40 ratio. If the EF of the worker (number of days the worker is in the contaminated testing area) is reduced from 225 days/yr (default value for full time worker) to 112 days/yr, the Ge-68 ratio is less than one and the sum of ratios is less than one. Actual radiation doses and groundwater and surface-soil concentrations are likely to be much less than those calculated because of the conservative assumptions and parameters employed in the modeling. For example, atmospheric-transport calculations assume the entire inventory of each material type is readily released to the atmosphere and no plume deposition, depletion, or radioactive decay occurs during transport. The calculations also assume the same meteorological conditions (e.g., wind velocity, wind direction, stability class) that produce the maximum 95th percentile concentration (i.e., concentration representing the 95th percentile of a distribution of concentrations derived from 3 years of hourly meteorological data) at each receptor location are the same for all 12 tests during the year, and each receptor is assumed to be present during all 12 tests. The surface-soil assessment assumes the entire inventory of each test is deposited in the top 5 cm of soil. No atmospheric dispersal is assumed, and the radionuclides are subject only to leaching and radioactive decay. The groundwater-pathway modeling is conservative in that it is one-dimensional in the unsaturated zone (no lateral spreading/dilution) and assumes the entire inventory of contaminants infiltrates into the ground at the same location for every test. This is especially conservative for particulate radionuclides because they would have to dissolve or corrode first and some would be dispersed into the atmosphere. The groundwater receptor is also assumed to consume water directly from a hypothetical well positioned in the location of maximum concentration. In addition, conservative degradation rates were used, and volatilization was not considered for the nonradioactive chemical

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Assessment of Potential Dose and Environmental Impacts from Proposed Testing at the INL National Security Test Range

This assessment uses screening-level models to calculate potential environmental impacts from proposed tests at two locations at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) National Security Test Range (NSTR) site. Proposed tests could be conducted using 11 different radioactive material types that include K 2 O, LaBr 3 , KBr, Cu, Zr, F, Ga, Ga 2 O 3 , NaNO 2 , Ga-68, and Tc-99m. The tests could potentially release radioactive material to the atmosphere and radionuclides and other contaminants to the soil, which could leach into the unsaturated zone and migrate to the aquifer. Atmospheric transport of radionuclides to potential human receptors and time-integrated air concentrations were calculated with a Gaussian plume model and three years of hourly meteorological data. Potential surface-soil impacts were calculated with the computer program mixing-cell model (MCM). Groundwater impacts were calculated with the computer programs MCM and GWSCREEN. Radiological doses from potential atmospheric releases were calculated for public receptors off the INL Site and for workers at nearby INL facilities. Results were compared to regulatory dose limits. Maximum potential groundwater concentrations were estimated in the aquifer below the NSTR site and compared to drinking water standards or risk-based screening levels for resident tap water. Soil concentrations were calculated and compared to risk-based screening levels for workers and potential future residents. All impacts were estimated based on the assumption that 12 tests are conducted annually using all 11 material types for 15 years. This document provides the resources to enable a subject matter expert in the field of environmental assessments to replicate the modeling and calculations. The methodology and parameters are presented in the text. All electronic files, including computer-code input, output, executable files, batch files, scripts, and spreadsheet files, are contained in a zip file that can be accessed by selecting “Additional Information” (select Native File) in the INL Electronic Document Management System (EDMS). It is highly unlikely the test scenarios evaluated in this ECAR will adversely impact human health based on comparisons of calculated dose and concentration against regulatory standards and risk-based screening levels. Conservative estimates of dose to workers and the public from atmospheric transport of possible radionuclide releases are far below federal radiation protection standards. Conservative estimates of potential contaminant concentrations in groundwater are less than federal drinking water standards or screening levels. Predicted radionuclide concentrations in surface soils are below risk-based screening levels, except for Ge-68 (material Ga-68) for the worker. The Ge-68 soil concentration can be made less than the worker PRG, if the number of annual tests using Ga-68 is reduced from 12 to 6. However, the sum of ratios still exceeds one because of the high K-40 ratio. If the EF of the worker (number of days the worker is in the contaminated testing area) is reduced from 225 days/yr (default value for full time worker) to 112 days/yr, the Ge-68 ratio is less than one and the sum of ratios is less than one. Actual radiation doses and groundwater and surface-soil concentrations are likely to be much less than those calculated because of the conservative assumptions and parameters employed in the modeling. For example, atmospheric-transport calculations assume the entire inventory of each material type is readily released to the atmosphere and no plume deposition, depletion, or radioactive decay occurs during transport. The calculations also assume the same meteorological conditions (e.g., wind velocity, wind direction, stability class) that produce the maximum 95th percentile concentration (i.e., concentration representing the 95th percentile of a distribution of concentrations derived from 3 years of hourly meteorological data) at each receptor location are the same for all 12 tests during the year, and each receptor is assumed to be present during all 12 tests. The surface-soil assessment assumes the entire inventory of each test is deposited in the top 5 cm of soil. No atmospheric dispersal is assumed, and the radionuclides are subject only to leaching and radioactive decay. The groundwater-pathway modeling is conservative in that it is one-dimensional in the unsaturated zone (no lateral spreading/dilution) and assumes the entire inventory of contaminants infiltrates into the ground at the same location for every test. This is especially conservative for particulate radionuclides because they would have to dissolve or corrode first and some would be dispersed into the atmosphere. The groundwater receptor is also assumed to consume water directly from a hypothetical well positioned in the location of maximum concentration. In addition, conservative degradation rates were used, and volatilization was not considered for the nonradradioactive chemicals modeled. And finally, the calculations assume all 12 tests will be performed at the same place at both locations, and all 11 radioactive material types will be used for each test. This is conservative because it is anticipated that no more than two material types will be used per test.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Composite Analysis for Low-Level Waste Disposal in the Hanford Site Central Plateau (FY 2020) (Rev. 2)

This document provides an updated Hanford Site composite analysis (CA). A Hanford Site CA was prepared and issued in 1998 (PNNL-11800) with an addendum provided in 2002 (PNNL-11800 Addendum 1). The CA was approved in 2002 (Frei, 2002) and has been maintained (DOE/RL-2000-29 and subsequent revisions) to support low-level waste disposal performance assessments (PAs) and disposal authorizations for facilities at the Hanford Site, including the following: Continued operation of the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) and the 200 East and 200 West Low-Level Burial Grounds; Construction of the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF); Forthcoming closure of tank residual waste systems such as Waste Management Area (WMA) C. The CA maintenance program resulted in a determination in 2015 (DOE/RL-2015-66) that the Hanford Site CA needed an update for the following reasons: While the initial Hanford Site CA has been maintained since 2001, the accumulation of basis changes reported in the annual summary reports over the succeeding 14 years merit evaluation in an updated analysis; The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Headquarters requested in a memorandum in 2015 (Gilbertson and Marcinowski, 2015) that “as soon as the relevant PAs are complete, the CA will be revised to account for all of the new information.” This updated Hanford Site CA accounts for the following new information: 1. Inclusion of a detailed Hanford Site baseline disposition that projects remedial activities through site closure. There have been significant changes through decision making in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) process that were not available when the original CA was produced; 2. Inclusion of an updated inventory basis, new modeling capabilities, and new decisions reached in the associated record of decision (ROD) that was provided by issuance of DOE/EIS-0391 in fiscal year (FY) 2013. Development of a Hanford Site groundwater model from the baseline provided in a technical transfer of models for the Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0391) commenced in FY 2014 and resulted in the plateau-to-river (P2R) groundwater flow model that is used in this updated Hanford Site CA; 3. Accounting for pump and treat systems, which were not evaluated in the initial CA. Pump and treat systems have had significant impact on groundwater flow system behavior, contaminant transport, and contaminant removal from Hanford Site groundwater. This process is accounted for in the use of the P2R model for this updated Hanford Site CA; 4. Inclusion of water-level data collected since the initial CA was completed. Data collected as the unconfined aquifer water levels continue to recede since the cessation of large liquid discharges in the late 1990s have led to marked improvement in understanding of the flow system for future conditions, particularly regarding northward flow potential in the critical Gable Gap area. The calibration in the latest version of the P2R model accounts for this information; 5. Inclusion of results from the revised ERDF PA completed in 2013 (WCH-5209) that account for updated inventory and expansion of the ERDF facility to about twice the size that was evaluated in the original CA; 6. Use of updated geoframeworks to provide the structural basis for numerical fate and transport models in the groundwater pathway of this updated CA. The geologic basis for groundwater models has continued to improve with additional data collection and interpretation with the creation and maintenance of the Hanford South Geoframework and the Central Plateau Vadose Zone Geoframework tools; 7. Incorporation of updated tank residual inventory estimates. Tank residual inventory estimates have improved with the incorporation of tank retrieval inventory data for those tanks that have completed retrieval. The CA inventory data package includes this updated information; 8. Incorporation of WMA C PA results. Two additional PAs for tank farm closure decisions are in preparation during the period required to prepare an updated Hanford Site CA: WMA C (FY 2016) and WMA A-AX (in preparation). The WMA C PA results are incorporated into the updated Hanford Site CA, and its grouted residuals model is used as the basis for a release model to account for the other tank farm systems modeling in this updated CA; 9. An update to the IDF PA was submitted in FY 2017 and has been reviewed and approved. The results of the IDF PA are incorporated into this updated CA; 10. Updated risk assessment scenarios. The risk assessment scenarios currently in use for Hanford Site CERCLA and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) analyses differ from those evaluated in the initial Hanford Site CA. The representative person exposure scenario evaluated in this updated Hanford Site CA is consistent with recent PAs and CERCLA and RCRA analyses as the Hanford Site. This updated Hanford Site CA provides the following: A comparison of the updated Hanford Site CA all-pathway dose results with the performance measures during the compliance period, which is assumed to begin with site closure in calendar 2070 with the last scheduled disposal action and continue for 1,000 years postclosure (to calendar year 3069); A comparison of Hanford Site CA all-pathway dose results with the performance measures during the postcompliance period to address potential peaks beyond the compliance period. This is accomplished by evaluating dose in the period for 9,000 years following the compliance period (i.e., from calendar year 3070 to 12070).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗