131 LA UR 03 5862 - National Nuclear Security Administration ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

projected by the ROD. Similarly, a total of 160 criticality experiments were conducted at Pajarito Site,compared to the 1,050 projected experiments.As in 1998 through 2001, only three of LANL’s facilities operated during 2001 at levels approximatingthose projected by the ROD—the MSL, the Bioscience Facilities (formerly HRL), and the Non-Key Facilities.The two Key Facilities (MSL and Bioscience) are more akin to the Non-Key Facilities and represent thedynamic nature of research and development at LANL. More importantly, none of these facilities are majorcontributors to the parameters that lead to significant potential environmental impacts. The remaining 13 KeyFacilities all conducted operations at or below projected activity levels.Operations Data and Environmental Parameters. This 2002 Yearbook evaluates the effects of LANLoperations in three general areas—effluents to the environment, workforce and regional consequences, andchanges to environmental areas for which the DOE has stewardship responsibility as the owner of a large tractof land.Effluents include air emissions, liquid effluents regulated through the NPDES program, and solid wastes.From 1998 through 2002, radioactive airborne emissions from point sources (i.e., stacks) have varied froma low of 1,900 curies during 1999 to a high of approximately 15,400 curies during 2001, 70 percent of the10-year average of 21,700 curies projected by the SWEIS ROD. The final dose over this same five-yearperiod has varied from a low of 0.32 millirem in 1999 to a high of 1.84 millirem during 2001 (compared to5.44 projected), with the final dose of 1.69 millirem for 2002 being reported to the EPA by June 30, 2002.Calculated NPDES discharges have ranged from a low of 124 million gallons per year in 2001 to a highof 317 million gallons per year in 1999 compared to a projected volume of 278 million gallons per year.However, the apparent decrease in flows is primarily due to the methodology by which flow was measuredand reported in the past.Historically, instantaneous flow was measured during field visits as required in the NPDES permit. Thesemeasurements were then extrapolated over a 24-hour day/seven-day week. With implementation of the newNPDES permit on February 1, 2001, data are collected and reported using actual flows recorded by flowmeters at most outfalls. At those outfalls that do not have meters, the flow is calculated as before, basedon instantaneous flow. Quantities of solid radioactive and chemical wastes generated have ranged fromapproximately 3.2 percent of the MLLW projections during both 1999 and 2002 to 1,291 percent and 1,309percent of the chemical waste projections during 2001 and 2000, respectively. The extremely large quantitiesof chemical waste (23.0 million kilograms during 2001 and 27.2 million kilograms during 2000) are a resultof ER Project activities. (For example, the remediation of MDA-P resulted in 21.5 million kilograms, or88 percent, of the 24.4 million kilograms of chemical waste generated during 2001.) Most chemical wastesare shipped offsite for disposal at commercial facilities; therefore, these large quantities of chemical wastewill not impact LANL environs. The chemical waste quantities are the only solid waste type to have met orexceeded the SWEIS ROD projections between 1998 and 2002.The workforce has been above ROD projections since 1997. The 13,524 employees at the end of CY2002 represent 2,173 more employees than projected and the highest number of employees over the period.Thus, regional socioeconomic consequences, such as salaries and procurements, also should have exceededprojections.Since 1998, the peak electricity consumption was 394 gigawatt-hours during 2002 and the peak demandwas 72 megawatts during 2001 compared to projections of 782 gigawatt-hours with a peak demand of 113megawatts. The peak water usage was 461 million gallons during 1998 (compared to 759 million gallonsprojected), and the peak natural gas consumption was 1.49 million decatherms during 2001 (compared to 1.84projected).6-4SWEIS Yearbook—2002
Between 1998 and 2002, the highest collectiveTEDE for the LANL workforce was 196 personremduring 2000, which is considerably lowerthan the workforce dose of 704 person-remprojected by the ROD.Measured parameters for ecologicalresources and groundwater were similar to RODprojections, and measured parameters for culturalresources and land resources were below RODprojections. For land use, the ROD projectedthe disturbance of 41 acres of new land at TA-54 because of the need for additional disposalcells for LLW. As of 2002, this expansion hadnot become necessary. However, constructioncontinued on 44 acres of land that are beingdeveloped along West Jemez Road for the LosAlamos Research Park. This project has itsown NEPA documentation (an environmental Anthropomorphic petroglyphassessment), and the land is being leased to LosAlamos County for this privately owned development.Cultural resources remained protected, and no excavation of sites at TA-54 or any other part of LANLhas occurred. (The ROD projected that 15 prehistoric sites would be affected by the expansion of Area Ginto Zones 4 and 6 at TA-54.) However, there have beenexcavations related to the land transfer project under theauspices of a programmatic agreement between the DOE,the State Historic Preservation Office, and the AdvisoryCouncil on Historic Preservation. These excavationsare required before releasing these lands to Los AlamosCounty under Public Law 105-119.As projected by the ROD, water levels in wellspenetrating into the regional aquifer continue to declinein response to pumping, typically by several feet eachyear. In areas where pumping has been reduced, waterlevels show some recovery. No unexplained changesin patterns have occurred in the 1995–2002 period, andwater levels in the regional aquifer have continued agradual decline that started in about 1977.Day fl owerIn addition, ecological resources are being sustainedas a result of protection afforded by DOE ownership ofLANL. These resources include biological resourcessuch as protected sensitive species, ecological processes,and biodiversity. The recovery and response to theCerro Grande Fire of May 2000 has included a wildfirefuels reduction program, burned area rehabilitation andmonitoring efforts, and enhanced vegetation and wildlifemonitoring.SWEIS Yearbook—2002 6-5
Page 1:
SWEIS Yearbook - 2002LA-UR-03-5862
Page 5:
CONTENTSList of Tables . . . . . .
Page 11 and 12:
2.13-1. Radiochemistry Buildings wi
Page 13 and 14:
F-1. RTBF Line Item Projects . . .
Page 15 and 16:
AcronymsAFCIALARAAOCBABSLCASACDCCDI
Page 17 and 18:
PrefaceIn the Record of Decision fo
Page 19 and 20:
Executive SummaryIn 1999, the US De
Page 21 and 22:
Also, following the events of Septe
Page 23 and 24:
ReferencesDepartment of Energy, 199
Page 26 and 27:
AREA OF CONTRIBUTION (continued)Los
Page 28 and 29:
• Summary and conclusion (Chapter
Page 30 and 31:
Aerial view-North from Pajarito Roa
Page 32 and 33:
Table 2.0-2. Radiological Exposure
Page 34 and 35:
2-4Table 2.0-4. Low-Level Waste Gen
Page 36 and 37:
2-6Table 2.0-6. TRU Waste Generatio
Page 38 and 39:
2-8Table 2.0-8. Overall Solid Radio
Page 40 and 41:
In addition, the Key Facilities (as
Page 42 and 43:
2-12SWEIS Yearbook—2002Table 2.0-
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Table 2.0-12. Projected Constructio
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
This chapter also discusses Non-Key
Page 62 and 63:
SANTA FENATIONALSANTA FENATIONAL FO
Page 64 and 65:
2.1 Plutonium Complex (TA-55)The Pl
Page 66 and 67:
2-36SWEIS Yearbook—2002Table 2.1.
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
2-42Table 2.1.2-1. Plutonium Comple
Page 74 and 75:
Glovebox linesWaste transfer2.1.4 C
Page 76 and 77:
TA-16 during 1999, 2000, and 2001.
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
2.2.3 Operations Data for the Triti
Page 82 and 83:
Tree-thinning operations on Two-Mil
Page 84 and 85:
completed; work on the wing electri
Page 86 and 87:
2-56Table 2.3.1-1. CMR Building Con
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Table 2.3.2-1. CMR Building (TA-03)
Page 94 and 95:
Table 2.3.3-1. CMR Building (TA-03)
Page 96 and 97:
2.4.1 Construction and Modification
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
2-70Table 2.4.2-1. Pajarito Site (T
Page 102 and 103:
“Hummer”2.4.4 Cerro Grande Fire
Page 104 and 105:
2.5.1 Construction and Modification
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Table 2.5.3-1. Sigma Complex (TA-03
Page 110 and 111:
2-80Table 2.6.2-1. MSL (TA-03)/Comp
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
2.6.4 Cerro Grande Fire Effects at
Page 116 and 117:
2-86Table 2.7.2-1. TFF (TA-35)/Comp
Page 118 and 119:
Inspection of target component2.8 M
Page 120 and 121:
2.8.2 Operations at the Machine Sho
Page 122 and 123:
Table 2.8.3-1. Machine Shops (TA-03
Page 124 and 125:
Operations at this Key Facility are
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
2.9.2 Operations at High Explosives
Page 130 and 131:
2-100SWEIS Yearbook—2002Table 2.9
Page 132 and 133:
Table 2.9.3-1. High Explosives Proc
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
2.10.2 Operations at High Explosive
Page 138 and 139:
2-108Table 2.10.2-1. High Explosive
Page 140 and 141:
Table 2.10.3-1. High Explosives Tes
Page 142 and 143:
DX Division Strategic Plan for the
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
2-116Table 2.11.1-1. Los Alamos Neu
Page 148 and 149:
Table 2.11.2-1. Los Alamos Neutron
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
2-122Table 2.11.2-1. Los Alamos Neu
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
2.12 Bioscience Facilities (TA-43,
Page 158 and 159:
Because of the building’s small s
Page 160 and 161:
is expected to continue through 200
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
2-134Table 2.12.3-1. Bioscience Fac
Page 166 and 167:
Table 2.13-1. Radiochemistry Buildi
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Table 2.13.2-1. Radiochemistry Faci
Page 172 and 173:
Table 2.13.3-1. Radiochemistry Faci
Page 174 and 175:
Table 2.14-1. Radioactive Liquid Wa
Page 176 and 177:
2.14.2 Operations at the Radioactiv
Page 178 and 179:
Table 2.14.2-1. Radioactive Liquid
Page 180 and 181:
Table 2.14.3-1. Radioactive Liquid
Page 182 and 183:
Table 2.15-1. Solid Radioactive and
Page 184 and 185:
volume is an increase from the last
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
2-160Table 2.15.2-1. Solid Radioact
Page 192 and 193:
2.16 Non-Key FacilitiesThe balance,
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
2-166Table 2.16.1-1. Non-Key Facili
Page 198 and 199:
consumption would represent approxi
Page 200 and 201:
Exterior and interior views of the
Page 202 and 203:
Decision Applications Division Offi
Page 204 and 205:
k) Materials Science and Technology
Page 206 and 207:
n) NPDES Outfall ProjectDuring 1997
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
2.17 Environmental Restoration Proj
Page 212 and 213:
The sludge and water in the lagoons
Page 214 and 215:
Table 2.17.3-1. Evaluated and Stabi
Page 216 and 217:
2.18 ReferencesDepartment of Energy
Page 218 and 219:
Department of Energy, 1999d. “Cat
Page 220 and 221:
Katzman, 2000. Personal communicati
Page 222 and 223:
Los Alamos National Laboratory, 200
Page 224 and 225:
Table 3.1.1-1 summarizes the radioa
Page 226 and 227:
for reporting under Section 313 of
Page 228 and 229:
NPDES permitted outfalls, including
Page 230 and 231:
Table 3.2-4. Discharges from NPDES
Page 232 and 233:
ensures that LANL meets all require
Page 234 and 235:
3.3.3 Low-Level Radioactive WastesT
Page 236 and 237:
Table 3.3.5-1. Transuranic Waste Ge
Page 238 and 239:
Power Plant ComplexIn CY 2002, an e
Page 240 and 241:
3.4.3 WaterBefore September 8, 1998
Page 242 and 243:
Table 3.5.2-1. Radiological Exposur
Page 244 and 245:
These employees have had a positive
Page 246 and 247:
3.7.1 Land Resources—CY 1998From
Page 248 and 249:
Table 3.7.5-1. Site-wide Land UseAC
Page 250 and 251:
Table 3.8-1. Groundwater Characteri
Page 252 and 253:
captured in the Laboratory’s annu
Page 254 and 255:
828 ft. One sample of water from th
Page 256 and 257:
Table3.9-2. HistoricPeriodCulturalR
Page 258 and 259:
Traditional Cultural Properties Com
Page 260 and 261:
2002 Land TransferredNine cultural
Page 262 and 263:
During 2002, LANL completed three b
Page 264 and 265:
Lansford, R., L. Adcock, S. Ben-Dav
Page 266 and 267:
Wetland in Mortandad Canyon3-44SWEI
Page 268 and 269:
years for which data were reported;
Page 270 and 271:
Figure 4-4. Carbon monoxide emissio
Page 272 and 273: The SWEIS assumed that reducing out
Page 274 and 275: Sanitary WasteLANL sanitary waste g
Page 276 and 277: Low-Level WasteLANL generation of L
Page 278 and 279: 4.4 Utility ConsumptionConsumption
Page 280 and 281: TRI(UC Workers Only)TRI(All Workers
Page 282 and 283: Though construction and modificatio
Page 284 and 285: LANL has also increased the invento
Page 286 and 287: 4.13 ReferencesClean Air Act. 42 US
Page 288 and 289: The PastV-Site building related to
Page 290 and 291: 5.1.2 AssumptionsThe Laboratory use
Page 292 and 293: Figure 5-1. Existing land use at LA
Page 294 and 295: Table 5.2.3.1-1. Site-Wide Land Use
Page 296 and 297: • Manhattan Monument tract, a fra
Page 298 and 299: Table 5.2.4-2. Selected Proposed Co
Page 300 and 301: infrastructure required to conduct
Page 302 and 303: 5-14SWEIS Yearbook—2002Table 5.3.
Page 304 and 305: 5.4 The Plan5.4.1 Planning ProcessT
Page 306 and 307: Table 5.4.3-1. Electrical Power Con
Page 308 and 309: easily provide forecasted water dem
Page 310 and 311: • Fire Hazard Mitigation: Facilit
Page 312 and 313: Table 5.5.1-1. Funding SourcesFUNDI
Page 314 and 315: Emergency Operations Center (above
Page 316 and 317: 5.6 ReferencesAmerican Standard of
Page 318 and 319: 5-30SWEIS Yearbook—2002
Page 320 and 321: • Construction of the DecisionApp
Page 324 and 325: 6.2 ConclusionsIn conclusion, LANL
Page 326 and 327: 6-8SWEIS Yearbook—2002
Page 328 and 329: A-2Table A-1. Chemistry and Metallu
Page 330 and 331: A-4Table A-2. Bioscience Air Emissi
Page 332 and 333: A-6SWEIS Yearbook—2002Table A-3.
Page 336 and 337: A-10Table A-6. Machine Shops Air Em
Page 342 and 343: A-16SWEIS Yearbook—2002Table A-10
Page 346 and 347: A-20Table A-10. Radiochemistry Site
Page 348 and 349: A-22Table A-11. Sigma Complex Air E
Page 352 and 353: A-26Table A-13. Tritium Operations
Page 356 and 357: Table B-1. Comparison of Nuclear Fa
Page 358 and 359: B-4Table B-1. Comparison of Nuclear
Page 362 and 363: B-8SWEIS Yearbook—2002Table B-1.
Page 364 and 365: B-10SWEIS Yearbook—2002Table B-1.
Page 370 and 371: Table C-1. Radiological Facility Li
Page 372 and 373:
Appendix D. NPDES Outfall Status Su
Page 374 and 375:
Appendix D. NPDES Outfall Status Su
Page 376 and 377:
D-6SWEIS Yearbook—2002
Page 378 and 379:
Site Boundary ChangesOn December 11
Page 380 and 381:
Figure E-2a. TA-55 old evaluationbo
Page 382 and 383:
Table E-1. Land Parcels Transferred
Page 384 and 385:
Figure E-3. Location of transfer pa
Page 386 and 387:
References and Key Information Sour
Page 388 and 389:
F-2SWEIS Yearbook—2002Table F-1.
Page 390 and 391:
Page 392 and 393:
Page 394 and 395:
Page 396 and 397:
Page 398 and 399:
Page 400 and 401:
Page 402 and 403:
Page 404 and 405:
Page 406 and 407:
F-20Table F-5. Non-RTBF Non-Facilit
Page 408 and 409:
F-22Table F-6. Non-RTBF Non-Facilit
Page 410 and 411:
Page 412:
To obtain a copy of the SWEIS Yearb
show all

131 LA UR 03 5862 - National Nuclear Security Administration ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?