The correction strategy was based on four steps: the regulation provides corrective measures for chemical contamination of soils and groundwater in Areas I, II, III and IV, including a timetable for completion and sanctions for non-compliance. The order is signed jointly by DTSC and respondents (Boeing, DOE and NASA). 3) Prioritize corrective measures for funding and work and (4) implement corrective measures and/or, if necessary, corrective measures. Corrective measurement sites are divided into four categories, which are based on the source of contamination: (1) industrial sites, (2) underground testing sites (UGTA), (3) ground sites and (4) off-site sites. Corrective actions in the nNSS and TTR, which have carried out activities that have supported core testing activities, are grouped under industrial sites. CASs, which are linked to underground nuclear tests that have or may have a local or regional impact on groundwater resources, are grouped in the form of UGTA-CAUs. CASEs in which tests have resulted in significant surface and/or surface contamination are grouped into CAUs of ground sites. Surface CASS/CAUs and underground CAUs are linked to underground nuclear testing at off-site sites, CNTA and PSA. Industrial Sites – These sites include, but not necessarily, landfills, mud pits, lizard fields with or without radiological contamination, or abandoned or abandoned materials such as drums, batteries and lead materials. As part of the FFACO procedure, some 2,000 industrial sites have been identified.
To date, two (2) industrial sites must be closed. All other CAUs sites for industrial sites have either been closed cleanly or closed, with use restrictions depending on future land use. Underground Test Zones (UGTA) – The UGTA strategy is presented in Figure 3-2 of Section 3.0 of Appendix VI of the FFACO. Three hypotheses for the UGTA strategy are described in the Nevada Environmental Management End State Vision test site (see pdf on page 52). The first hypothesis is that groundwater technologies to eliminate or stabilize radiation contamination below the surface are not cost-effective. Second, closure by monitoring and institutional controls due to these high repair costs is the only likely remedy. Finally, the potential risks of radiological groundwater contamination are significant for workers, the public and the environment; and exposure to these risks requires access to groundwater. (2) The Corrective Action Working Groups (CAUs) have signed the Department of Energy and NASA`s two approval orders (AOC) with the California Environmental Protection Agency, which define the process of characterization and final status of remediation for parts of the SSFL.
Follow the links below to check out the most important documents related to the DOE agreement. Appendix VI of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order describes the strategy that has been or will be used to plan, implement and complete NDEP-controlled environmental correction measures at facilities where nuclear operations have been conducted in Nevada.