**Brookhaven National Laboratory**

**AGS Booster Applications Facility**

**Potential Impacts to Groundwater Quality**

Prepared by:

Douglas E. Paquette, PG

Hydrogeologist

Environment, Safety and Health Services Division

November 13, 2023

**Brookhaven National Laboratory is Operated by Brookhaven Science
Associates for the US Department of Energy**

**Brookhaven National Laboratory**

**AGS Booster Applications Facility - Potential Impacts to Groundwater
Quality**

**Table of Contents**

1.0 Introduction
\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....
1

2.0 General Hydrogeology of the BNL Site and Groundwater Quality
\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\.... 1

> 2.1 Upper Pleistocene (Glacial) Deposits
> \...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...
> 1
>
> 2.2 Upper Glacial Aquifer
> \...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\.....
> 2
>
> 2.3 Groundwater Quality and Classification
> \...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\.....
> 4

3.0 AGS Booster and Booster Applications Facilities
\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...
5

> 3.1 Potential Soil Activation Areas
> \...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...
> 5
>
> 3.1.1 Activation of Soils at the AGS
> Booster\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...
> 6
>
> 3.1.2 Potential Activation of Soils at the Booster Applications
> Facility\...\...\...\...\...\..... 7
>
> 3.2 General Hydrogeology of the AGS Booster Area
> \...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...
> 7
>
> 3.3 Current Groundwater Monitoring Program
> \...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....8
>
> 3.4 Proposed Groundwater Monitoring Program
> \...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...
> 9

4.0 Well Installation Methods
\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....
9

5.0 Sample Collection and Analysis
\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...
10

> 5.1 Data Quality Objectives
> \...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...10

6.0 References
\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\...\....11

**Brookhaven National Laboratory**

**AGS Booster Applications Facility - Potential Impacts to Groundwater
Quality**

**List of Figures**

Figure 1 Generalized Hydrogeologic Cross Section

Figure 2 Location of Glacial Terminal Moraines

Figure 3 Regional Water Table Map

Figure 4 BNL Site Water Table Map for March 1997

Figure 5 BNL Site Water Table Map for August 1997

Figure 6 Map of the AGS Complex

Figure 7 Schematic of the AGS Booster.

Figure 8 Schematic of Proposed AGS Booster Modifications and New BAF
Tunnel

Figure 9 Schematic of the BAF

Figure 10 Cross Sectional View of the BAF Target Hall and Beam Stop

Figure 11 Proposed Groundwater Monitoring Wells at the AGS Booster and
BAF

**Brookhaven National Laboratory**

**AGS Booster Applications Facility - Potential Impacts to Groundwater
Quality**

**List of Tables**

Table 1 Hydrogeologic Units

Table 2 Proposed Groundwater Monitoring Wells for BAF Area

Table 3 Proposed BAF Groundwater Sampling Schedule for FY 1999

Table 4 AGS Complex Groundwater Sampling Schedule for FY 1998 and FY
1999

**1.0 Introduction**

> The Department of Energy (DOE), the National Aeronautical and Space
> Administration (NASA) and the Department of Defense (DOD) have
> identified a need for the creation of a research facility that could
> conduct space radiation research. Simulation of space radiation
> effects requires the capability to produce protons and electrons at
> relatively low energies, and heavy and light ions at energies in the
> GeV per nucleon range (BNL 1998a). In response to a July 1992
> Memorandum of Understanding between NASA and the DOE and a subsequent
> agreement between NASA and Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL), a
> high energy, heavy ion irradiation facility is to be constructed at
> the BNL site. This facility is will use a beam line diverted from the
> existing Alternating Gradient Synchrotron (AGS) Booster facility. Beam
> line interaction with test materials (i.e., targets) at the proposed
> Booster Application Facility (BAF) will produce secondary particles
> that may interact with the soils that will surround the BAF target
> room and associated beam stop. These interactions will likely result
> in the production of tritium and sodium-22 in the soils. Because the
> BNL site is located over an EPA designated sole-source aquifer system,
> an analysis of the potential impact to groundwater quality is provided
> below.

**2.0 General Hydrogeology of the BNL Site and Groundwater Quality**

> The BNL site is underlain by approximately 1,300 feet of
> unconsolidated Pleistocene and Cretaceous sediments overlying
> Precambrian bedrock (Table 1). The unconsolidated sediments,
> subdivided from youngest to oldest, are as follows:

-   Upper Pleistocene deposits (Upper Glacial aquifer),

-   Gardiners Clay (confining unit),

-   Magothy Formation (Magothy aquifer), and

-   Raritan Formation (Raritan Clay confining unit and Lloyd aquifer)

> A description of the geologic and hydraulic properties of the Upper
> Pleistocene deposits are provided below. New monitoring wells required
> for improved facility monitoring under this Groundwater Monitoring
> Improvements Plan will installed within the shallow sections of the
> Upper Glacial aquifer. Detailed discussions on Gardiners Clay, Magothy
> and Raritan formations can be found in deLaguna (1963), Faust, 1963,
> Warren *et al.* (1968), and the BNL Regional Groundwater Model Report
> (Geraghty and Miller, 1996). A generalized hydrogeologic cross section
> for the BNL site is presented in Figure 1.

**2.1 Upper Pleistocene (Glacial) Deposits**

> The Upper Pleistocene deposits on Long Island were deposited during
> two Wisconsin glaciation events (Lubke, 1964). At BNL, the glacial
> deposits range from 130 to 200 feet in thickness, and can be divided
> into three distinctive units. From oldest to youngest, the units are:
> the basal \"Unidentified Unit\"; sand and gravel outwash and moraine
> deposits; and near surface silt and clay deposits.
>
> [Basal Unidentified Unit]{.underline}: The basal \"Unidentified Unit\"
> (first described by deLaguna, 1963), is between 25 to 50 feet thick,
> and appears to be restricted to the central and southern portions of
> the site. This unit is characterized by light green, fine to
> medium-grained sand and sandy clay (with 5 to 10% glauconitic clay).
> The Unidentified Unit is generally less permeable than the overlying
> coarse-grained glacial moraine and outwash deposits.
>
> [Outwash and Moraine Deposits]{.underline}: The Upper Pleistocene
> deposits at BNL primarily consist of 130 to 200 feet of broadly
> stratified glacio-fluvial outwash deposits composed of silica-rich
> medium to coarse-grained sand and gravel. Thin layers of silt and clay
> have been observed within the outwash deposits, but do not represent
> significant barriers to groundwater flow. Along the southwest border
> of BNL, the Ronkonkoma terminal moraine is recognized as a series of
> discontinuous hills which reach a maximum elevation of 130 feet above
> sea level (Figure 2).
>
> [Near Surface Silt and Clay]{.underline}: Near surface silt and clay
> deposits are located along the lowlands of the Peconic River
> watershed. Although the full areal extent of these deposits has not
> been determined, their presence is inferred beneath marshes and areas
> of ponded water, which are wide-spread in the eastern portion of the
> site (see Warren *et al.*, 1968). Recent drilling within the BNL
> Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) area and the Relativistic Heavy Ion
> Collider (RHIC) area has revealed that fine sand, silt and clay
> deposits occur within 30 feet of land surface. These low permeability
> deposits retard groundwater recharge, and are responsible for creating
> perched or semi-perched water table conditions. In the STP area, a
> broad groundwater mound has formed below the plant\'s filter beds,
> where it is estimated that up to 0.1 MGD of STP effluent is recharged
> directly to Upper Glacial aquifer.

**2.2 Upper Glacial Aquifer**

> The Upper Glacial aquifer is widely used on Long Island for both
> private and public water supply. Drinking water and process water
> supplies at BNL are obtained exclusively from the Upper Glacial
> aquifer. The Laboratory currently operates six potable water supply
> wells that can be pumped at rates of 1,200 gpm, and five process
> supply wells that can be pumped at rates between 50 and 1,200 gpm.
> During maximum water usage at BNL, up to 6 MGD are pumped from the
> Upper Glacial aquifer. Most of this water is returned to the aquifer
> by way of recharge basins or discharge of STP effluent to the Peconic
> River. Groundwater in the Upper Glacial aquifer beneath BNL generally
> exists under unconfined conditions. However, in the areas along the
> Peconic River where low permeability near surface silt and clay
> deposits exist, semi-confined conditions may occur. Depth to
> groundwater varies from several feet below land surface within the
> lowlands near the Peconic River, to as much as 75 feet in the higher
> elevation areas located in the central and western portions of the
> site.
>
> A main east-west trending regional groundwater divide is located
> approximately 0.5 miles north of BNL (Figure 3). A second groundwater
> divide, which transects portions of the BNL site during periods of
> high water table position (i.e., during periods of inflow from the
> aquifer to the stream bed), defines the southern boundary of the area
> contributing groundwater to the Peconic River watershed (Scorca *et
> al*., 1996, Scorca *et al*., 1997). Shallow groundwater flow
> directions across the BNL site are influenced by natural drainage
> systems, varying between being eastward along the Peconic River,
> southeastward toward the Forge River, and southward toward the Carmans
> River (Figures 3, 4 and 5). Additionally, pumping and recharge induced
> stresses on the aquifer system are considerable in the central area of
> the site. Due to variable supply well pumping schedules and rates,
> considerable variations in groundwater flow directions and velocities
> occur (compare Figures 4 and 5). Groundwater flow directions in the
> southwest corner of the site are also influenced by pumpage at the
> Suffolk County Water Authority well field located on the west side of
> the William Floyd Parkway.
>
> Aquifer pumping tests conducted at BNL indicate that the horizontal
> hydraulic conductivity of the Upper Glacial aquifer is approximately
> 1,300 gpd/ft^2^ (or 175 ft/d based upon an aquifer thickness of 145
> feet) and a specific yield (effective porosity) of 0.24 (Warren *et
> al.*, 1968; H2M/Roux Associates, 1985; CDM, 1995; P.W. Grosser, P.C.,
> 1997). Total porosity value for the Upper Glacial is estimated to be
> 0.33 (Warren *et al*., 1968). Data from aquifer pumping tests and
> infiltration tests conducted at BNL by the USGS indicate that the
> vertical to horizontal anisotropy within the Upper Glacial aquifer is
> between 1:4 to 1:18 (Warren *et al*., 1968). The average vertical to
> horizontal anisotropy within the Upper Glacial aquifer on Long Island
> has been estimated to be 1:10 (Smolensky *et al*., 1989). The
> hydraulic properties of the basal Unidentified Unit cannot be
> determined with any degree of certainty using the current well
> network. Since the Unidentified Unit contains significant clay and
> silt, it is expected that these deposits are less permeable than the
> overlying glacial outwash and morainal sand and gravel.
>
> The horizontal hydraulic gradient at BNL is typically 0.001 feet per
> foot (ft/ft). However, in recharge and pumping areas, the hydraulic
> gradient can steepen to 0.0024 ft/ft or greater. In most areas of the
> site, the natural groundwater flow velocity is estimated to be
> approximately 0.75 feet per day (ft/d). However, flow velocities in
> recharge areas may be as high as 1.45 ft/d, while velocities up to 28
> ft/d have been calculated for areas near BNL potable and process
> supply wells (Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 1993). Water-level
> measurements taken from paired water table and deep Upper Glacial
> wells located along the northern site boundary (near the regional
> groundwater divide) indicate significant deep-flow recharge
> conditions, with downward vertical hydraulic gradients of up to 0.006
> ft/ft. Head differences become negligible in paired wells located in
> the central and southern areas of the site, indicating that
> groundwater flow within the Upper Glacial aquifer is predominantly
> horizontal in these areas. The BNL site is, however, located within a
> SCDHS designated deep-flow recharge area (Hydrogeologic Zone III) for
> the Magothy and Lloyd aquifers (Koppleman, 1978; SCDHS, 1987).
> Comparison of water level measurements from Glacial aquifer and
> Magothy aquifer wells indicate significant downward flow across the
> BNL site (BNL, 1998b).

**2.3 Groundwater Quality and Classification**

> In Nassau and Suffolk Counties of Long Island, New York, drinking
> water supplies are obtained exclusively from groundwater aquifers
> (e.g., the Upper Glacial aquifer, the Magothy aquifer, and to a
> limited extent the Lloyd aquifer). The Long Island aquifer system has
> been designated by the U.S. EPA as a Sole Source Aquifer System,
> pursuant to Section 1424(e) of the Safe Drinking Water Act.
> Groundwater in the sole source aquifers underlying the BNL site is
> classified as \"Class GA Fresh Groundwater\" by the State of New York
> (6NYCRR Parts 700-705). The best usage of Class GA groundwater is as a
> source of potable water supply. As such, federal drinking water
> standards, NYS Drinking Water Standards (NYS DWS), and NYS Ambient
> Water Quality Standards (NYS AWQS) for Class GA groundwater are used
> as groundwater protection and remediation goals.
>
> For drinking water supplies, the federal maximum contaminant levels
> (MCLs) set forth in 40 CFR 141 (primary MCLs) and 40 CFR 143
> (secondary MCLs) apply. The Laboratory maintains six wells and two
> water-storage tanks for supplying potable water to Laboratory
> community. In NYS, the SDWA requirements pertaining to the
> distribution and monitoring of public water supplies are promulgated
> under Part 5 of the NYS Sanitary Code, which is enforced by the SCDHS
> as an agent for the NYS Department of Health. These regulations are
> applicable to any water supply which has at least five service
> connections or regularly serves at least 25 individuals. The
> Laboratory supplies water to a population of approximately 3,500
> employees and visitors and must, therefore, comply with these
> regulations. In addition, DOE Order 5400.5, Radiation Protection of
> the Public and Environment, establishes Derived Concentration Guides
> (DCGs) for radionuclides not covered by existing federal or state
> regulations.
>
> The BNL groundwater surveillance program uses wells (which are not
> utilized for drinking water supply) that are designed to monitor
> research and support facilities where there is a potential for
> environmental impact, or in areas where past waste handling practices
> or accidental spills have already degraded groundwater quality. BNL
> evaluates the potential impact of radiological and non-radiological
> levels of contamination by comparing analytical results to NYS and DOE
> reference levels. Non-radiological data from groundwater samples
> collected from surveillance wells are usually compared to NYS AWQS (6
> NYCRR 703.5). Radiological data are compared to the NYS DWS (for
> tritium, strontium-90 and gross beta), NYS AWQS (for gross alpha and
> radium-226/228) and 40 CFR 141/DOE DCGs (for determining the 4
> mrem/year dose for other beta/gamma-emitting radionuclides).

**3.0 AGS Booster and Booster Applications Facility**

> The AGS Booster is a circular accelerator with a circumference of
> nearly 660 feet (200 meters), and is connected to the northwest
> portion of the main AGS ring and the LINAC (Figure 6). The Booster,
> which has been in operation since 1994, receives either a proton beam
> from the LINAC or heavy ions from the Tandem Van de Graaff. The
> Booster accelerates protons and heavy ions prior to injection into the
> main AGS ring. In order to dispose of the beam during studies, a beam
> scraper system consisting of a beam kicker and an absorber block was
> constructed at the 10/11 o'clock (or D-6) portion of the Booster
> (Figure 7). The beam scraper consists of a one meter long cylinder
> surrounding the beam pipe. It has a radial thickness of 19 cm, and is
> shielded by an additional 20 cm of iron in order to reduce the
> activation of nearby soil outside the tunnel enclosure (Lessard,
> 1991).
>
> The BAF will consist of a new beam tunnel branching from the AGS
> Booster ring, a target room and beam stop, and a number of associated
> support buildings. The facility will receive a proton beam from the
> AGS Booster. Once the beam is diverted out of the Booster, it will
> travel through an 88 foot (27 meter) beam line tunnel where it will be
> diverted 20 degrees. The beam will then be directed down a 282 foot
> (80 meter) long beam line tunnel where it will enter the BAF target
> room (Figures 8 and 9). In order to absorb beam during studies, a 26
> foot long concrete beam stop will be located at the north end of the
> target room. Up to 15 feet of earthen shielding will be added over the
> tunnel, target room and beam stop (Figure 10).

**3.1 Potential Soil Activation Areas**

> Secondary particles are created near AGS beam loss points, beam
> targets, scrapers and stops, and have the potential to escape into the
> soils surrounding the accelerator tunnels (e.g., Booster beam scraper,
> and BAF target hall beam stop) or into the soils underlying target and
> beam stop areas in the experimental hall areas (e.g., Building 912).
> Beam stops (or dumps) are the sinks used to absorb the energy and
> associated radiation from beams which have completed their utility.
> The beam stops are typically made up of ilmenite loaded concrete or
> iron. The length and dimensions of the beam stops are designed to
> assure that the radiation generated is attenuated to the greatest
> extent practicable. Beam scrapers are typically used to remove or
> "scrape" protons that wobble out of acceptable pathways. The Booster
> beam scraper is constructed of steel.
>
> Although considerable effort is taken to design appropriate shielding
> and other engineering controls into these systems, many secondary
> particles will still interact with soils surrounding the tunnels and
> underlying floors. In the soils, these secondary particles interact
> with the Si and O atoms which make up most of the quartz-rich sands
> and gravels that are native to the BNL site. The types of
> radionuclides created include tritium, beryllium-7, carbon-11,
> nitrogen-13, oxygen-15, and sodium-22 (Beavis *et al*., 1993).
> Estimates on the concentration of radionuclides produced in soils are
> made by using the computer code CASIM. Once present in the soils,
> these radionuclides can be leached downward into groundwater by means
> of rainwater percolation. These leaching processes are usually quite
> slow and, therefore, only radionuclides with long half-lives such as
> tritium (t~1/2~ = 12.3 years) and sodium-22 (t~1/2~ = 2.6 years) are
> likely to be detected in the groundwater below the AGS. The production
> of these radionuclides has been measured in experiments using soils
> native to BNL that were exposed to the AGS beam line (Gollon et al.,
> 1989). Leaching tests on these soils showed the tritium to be 100%
> leachable whereas sodium-22 is 7.5% leachable.

**3.1.1 Activation of Soils at the AGS Booster Beam Scraper**

> The AGS Booster beam scraper is an area where the interaction of
> secondary particles and soil surrounding the Booster tunnel may result
> in production of tritium and sodium-22 (Lessard, 1991). In addition to
> internal shielding, the Booster tunnel was covered with sand derived
> from the BNL site. Although the internal shielding around the beam
> scraper was designed to keep radiation levels in soils below DOE ALARA
> guidelines, a liner was constructed over the scraper to provide an
> extra margin of protection. The cap, constructed of 15 mil plastic,
> was designed to extend 15 feet upstream and 45 feet downstream of the
> beam scraper and is covered with soil (Figure 7).
>
> If the cap was not in place over the Booster beam scraper and
> approximately one-half the total annual average precipitation (55 cm)
> was able to percolate through the soils overlying the beam scraper,
> the predicted annual average tritium and sodium-22 concentrations in
> soil pore water immediately below the Booster beam scraper would be
> 100,000 pCi/l and 50,000 pCi/l, respectively (Lessard, 1991). If the
> cap, in concert with the overlying soil-crete cover, is effective at
> preventing water from leaching through the activated soils, the
> radioactivity will be confined to the region immediately outside the
> Booster tunnel, allowing for the radioactivity to decay in place.
> However, it is important to note that even if water was able to
> infiltrate the activated soils as a result of a significant cap
> failure, the maximum volume of water having high tritium and sodium-22
> concentrations would likely be less than 400 gallons annually
> (Lessard, 1998). There would also be significant dilution of this
> contaminated water during the 25 feet of migration through the vadose
> zone and upon entering the aquifer system.
>
> In order to provide space for the BAF transfer magnets and tunnel, the
> present Booster beam scraper will be relocated from its existing (D-6
> Section) location to the south side (B-6 Section) of the Booster ring
> (Figure 8). A landfill-type geomembrane cap will be placed over the
> new beam scraper location (BNL, 1997). The existing cap located over
> present beam scraper location shall remain in place to prevent water
> infiltration through any presently activated soils.

**3.1.2 Potential Activation of Soils at the Booster Applications
Facility**

> Although the shielding around the BAF target room and beam stop has
> been designed to minimize the potential for secondary particles to
> interact with soils, some small amount of radionuclides could still be
> created in soil within the first meter of soil surrounding the
> downstream portion of the target hall and the beam stop. To prevent
> surface water from leaching through these activated soils, a
> landfill-type geomembrane cap will be constructed over the BAF beam
> target and beam stop area (Figure 10).
>
> A conservative estimate on potential radionuclide concentrations in
> soil pore water can be made by assuming that the geomembrane cap was
> not in place, and that approximately one-half the total annual average
> precipitation (55 cm) was able to percolate through the activated
> soils underlying the target and beam stop. The predicted annual
> average tritium and sodium-22 concentrations in soil pore water
> immediately below the BAF target and beam stop area would be 100 pCi/l
> and 307 pCi/l, respectively (E. T. Lessard, personal communication).
> (It should be noted that the typical analytical detection limit for
> tritium is approximately 400 pCi/l.) Therefore, the maximum predicted
> tritium concentration is well below the federal and state drinking
> water standard of 20,000 pCi/l, and the maximum sodium-22
> concentration is predicted to be 77 percent of the 4% DOE Derived
> Concentration Guide limit of 400 pCi/L. (4% DCG is based upon a 4
> mrem/yr dose required under 40 CFR 141.) However, it is important to
> note that if water is able to infiltrate the activated soils as a
> result of a significant failure of the proposed capping system, the
> maximum volume of water that would leach through the activated soils
> would likely be very small, and there would be significant dilution of
> this contaminated water upon entering the aquifer system.

**3.2 General Hydrogeology of the Booster Area**

> The predominant groundwater flow direction in the AGS Booster area is
> to the south-southeast (Figure 11). Until recently, groundwater flow
> directions in the Booster area were influenced by the operations of
> AGS cooling water supply wells 101, 102, and 103, which are located
> 1,200 to 2,000 feet to the west of the Booster. During periods of
> continuous use, pumpage totaling nearly 1,200 gpm resulted in a more
> southerly groundwater flow direction in the Booster area. However, in
> July 1998 the AGS supply wells were decommissioned, and the AGS's
> cooling water is now supplied by the BNL potable water system. It is
> now expected that the groundwater flow directions in the BAF area will
> be consistently to the south-southeast. The closest BNL potable water
> supply well (Number 10) is located approximately 2,100 feet to the
> east of the BAF. Results from supply well capture zone modeling
> indicates that under certain (sustained) pumping conditions,
> approximately 8 to 10 years would be required for groundwater to
> travel from the BAF to supply well 10. The depth to groundwater in the
> BAF area is approximately 25 feet below land surface. Available
> geologic data collected during the installation of nearby wells,
> indicates that the Booster and BAF area is underlain by predominantly
> medium to coarse-grained sand and fine gravel.

**3.3 Current Groundwater Monitoring Program**

> The AGS Booster area is currently monitored by one upgradient (54-08)
> and two downgradient (64-02 and 64-03) surveillance wells (Figure 11).
> The three wells were installed in August 1993, and are screened within
> the uppermost 20 feet of the Upper Glacial aquifer. Well 54-08 is
> located downgradient of the proposed BAF target room and beam stop
> area.
>
> Although tritium and sodium-22 have been routinely detected in
> downgradient well 64-02 since its installation in August 1993, the
> tritium concentrations have been well below the NYS DWS of 20,000
> pCi/l, with concentrations generally \<1,400 pCi/l. Likewise,
> sodium-22 concentrations have been \<25 pCi/l, well below the 4% DCG
> guideline of 400 pCi/l. However, analytical results from samples
> collected in February 1998 indicated elevated tritium concentrations
> of 14,100 pCi/l and 44 pCi/l for sodium-22.
>
> Because initial beam operations within the Booster did not occur until
> almost one-half year after the installation of well 64-02, the routine
> detection of tritium and sodium-22 in groundwater suggested that these
> contaminants originated from another nearby source. In an effort to
> determine the source of the tritium contamination, BNL recently
> conducted a groundwater investigation that focussed on the Brookhaven
> LINAC Isotope Producer (BLIP) facility located upgradient of well
> 64-02. Operations at the BLIP were predicted to result in the
> activation of soils outside of the BLIP's target vessel (Mausner,
> 1985; Alessi *et al*., 1998). During this investigation, tritium and
> sodium-22 were detected in the shallow groundwater directly
> downgradient of the BLIP facility. In temporary Geoprobe wells
> installed approximately 50 feet downgradient of the BLIP target
> vessel, tritium was detected at a maximum concentration of 52,000
> pCi/l and sodium-22 detected up to 151 pCi/l. Neither tritium or
> sodium-22 were detected in Geoprobe wells installed immediately
> upgradient of the BLIP, or in a temporary well installed directly
> downgradient of the AGS Booster.
>
> Following confirmation that the BLIP facility was the source of the
> tritium and sodium-22 contamination, BNL immediately implemented a
> number of corrective actions to limit further environmental impact. In
> an effort to control water from infiltrating through the activated
> soils surrounding the BLIP target vessel: 1) the BLIP facility roof
> drains were repaired and routed away from the facility foot print; 2)
> penetrations and cracks in adjacent paved areas were repaired; and 3)
> a cement (gunnite) cap was installed over the remaining non-paved
> areas surrounding the building. For future source control, BNL will be
> evaluating the use of a liquid viscous barrier technique to reduce the
> permeability of the activated soils outside of the BLIP target vessel.
>
> Although, the solvent TCA has been routinely detected above the NYS
> AWQS of 5 μg/l in well 64-03, with a maximum observed concentration of
> 62 μg/l, only trace amounts of tritium (up to 452 pCi/l) and sodium-22
> (up to 2.8 pCi/l) have been detected in this well. Neither tritium or
> sodium-22 have ever been detected in upgradient well 54-08. The TCA is
> likely to have originated from the discharge of solvents to cesspools
> associated with Buildings 914 and 919.

**3.4 Proposed Groundwater Monitoring Program**

> The current groundwater monitoring network is inadequate to properly
> monitor BAF operations. Therefore, one upgradient (MW-BAF-01) and two
> downgradient groundwater monitoring wells (MW-BAF-02 and -03) will be
> installed south of the BAF target room and beam stop (Figure 11, Table
> 2). The wells will be screened from five feet above to ten feet below
> the water table. BNL will install the wells following construction of
> the building structures and geomembrane cap, and soil cover. It is
> anticipated that existing well 54-08 will be utilized as a
> downgradient well for the BAF. However, if construction activities
> requires the removal of well 54-08, it will be replaced with a new
> well (proposed well MW-BAF-04). It should also be noted that four new
> monitoring wells will be installed south of the AGS Booster the fall
> of 1998 as part of the BNL "Groundwater Monitoring Improvements Plan
> for FY 1998 and 1999.\" Two wells (MW-AGS-02 and MW-AGS-03) will be
> installed directly downgradient of the AGS Booster, and two wells
> (MW-AGS-04 and MW-AGS-05) will be installed directly downgradient of
> the Booster to AGS Ring transfer line (Figure 11). Wells MW-AGS-02 and
> MW-AGS-03 will be located immediately downgradient of the new Booster
> beam scraper location.
>
> Once installed, the four BAF wells and the Booster wells will be
> monitored four times per year by the BNL ES&H Services Division as
> part of the EM Program for the AGS facility (Tables 3 and 4). The
> groundwater samples will be analyzed for tritium and gamma
> spectroscopy (which is used for the detection of radionuclides such as
> sodium-22 and beryllium-7). The monitoring program will begin prior to
> the start-up of the BAF in order to fulfill DOE pre-operational
> environmental surveillance requirements.

**4.0 Well Installation Methods**

> The groundwater monitoring wells installed as part of this plan shall
> be constructed in accordance with the BNL "Technical Guide for the
> Installation of Monitoring Wells and Piezometers" (BNL, 1996). This
> specification is consistent with the well installation guidelines
> required by the USEPA and the NYSDEC for both CERCLA and RCRA
> groundwater investigations. Since the wells installed under this plan
> will be located in close proximity to a suspected source areas, the
> wells will be screened across the water table. Recent data collected
> during detailed tritium plume investigations at the BNL HFBR and BLIP
> facilities indicate that the highest tritium levels will occur close
> to the water table in wells located directly downgradient of the
> source area. The short distance traveled and lack of density
> differences between tritium and fresh water are the likely cause.
>
> Once installed the wells will be surveyed by a N.Y. State licensed
> surveyor from the BNL Plant Engineering Division to determine their
> vertical and horizontal positions. All new wells will be surveyed,
> using the BNL bench mark control system, to a horizontal accuracy of
> 0.50 feet and to a vertical accuracy of 0.01 feet.

**5.0 Sample Collection and Analysis**

> All permanent groundwater monitoring wells installed for the EM
> program will be sampled by the BNL ES&H Services Division using
> Standard Operating Procedure EM-SOP-25. Each new well will be
> completed with a new dedicated Geoguard® bladder purge pump
> (Master-Flo Model 57200M - constructed of NSF rated PVC and Teflon®).
> Dedicated pumping systems eliminate the need to decontaminate pumps
> between well sampling events, and prevent potential cross
> contamination problems if the same pump is used in multiple wells.
>
> The wells will be sampled in accordance with the schedule presented in
> Table 5. All gross alpha and beta (Method 900), gamma spectroscopy
> (Method 901.1), and tritium analyses (Method 906) will be performed by
> the ES&H Services Division's Analytical Services Laboratory (ASL).
>
> The ASL is certified by the New York State Department of Health
> Services for each of the analyses performed. The ASL also participates
> in the DOE Environmental Measurements Laboratory (EML) QA Program and
> the EPA National Exposure Research Laboratory Performance Evaluation
> Study. All contractor labs used for groundwater analyses are also
> NYSDOH certified. The BNL ASL and contractor labs have established
> standard operating procedures to calibrate instruments, analyze
> samples, and check quality control. Depending upon the analytical
> method, quality control checks include the analysis of blanks or
> background concentrations, use of Amersham or National Institute for
> Standards and Technology (NIST) traceable standards, and analysis of
> reference standards, spiked samples, and duplicate samples. All
> analytical results are reviewed by BNL ASL supervisors for
> completeness and accuracy. Quality assurance procedures for the EM
> Program are described in detail by Schroeder *et al*. (1998).

**5.1 Data Quality Objectives**

> Data Quality Objectives (DQOs) are the statements specifying the
> quality of data needed to support decisions relative to various stages
> of environmental surveillance or remedial actions. They are based upon
> the concept that different data uses require different levels of data
> quality with respect to the precision, accuracy, and completeness of
> the data. DQOs must be in place to ensure that the data obtained from
> the groundwater monitoring program are of sufficient quality, are
> scientifically defensible, and have the requisite levels of precision
> and accuracy to support any decisions regarding the assessment of
> potential impacts of facility operations on groundwater quality. The
> US EPA (1994) developed a six step DQO evaluation process which is
> intended to clarify monitoring program objectives, define data needs,
> and determine data precision and tolerance levels to support decision
> making. The seven steps are: 1) describe the problem to be studied; 2)
> identify the decision by determining questions to be answered and
> actions that may result; 3) identify the data inputs to the decision;
> 4) define study boundaries; 5) develop a decision rule that describes
> the logical basis for choosing alternative actions; 6) specify
> tolerable limits on decision errors; and 7) optimize the data
> collection process design by evaluating information gathered during
> steps 1 through 6. Although the information and proposed groundwater
> monitoring improvements provided above satisfy a number of these DQO
> steps, a more rigorous review must be performed to establish
> appropriate decision rules and decision errors for the BAF groundwater
> surveillance program.
>
> As noted above, all sample analyses are performed using standardized
> US EPA methods, and all data generated as part of the EM Program have
> full quality control documentation and data validation conducted by
> BNL and/or contractor personnel using standardized USEPA protocols.
> Quality assurance procedures for the EM Program are described in
> detail by Schroeder *et al*. (1998).

**6.0 References**

> Alessi, J., Lessard, E., and Mausner, L., 1998. Soil Activation
> Computation for BLIP: Memorandum to P. Paul dated May 7, 1998.
>
> Beavis, D., Bennett, G., Frankel, R., Lessard, E.T., and Plotkin, M.
> (Eds.). 1993, AGS Final Safety Analysis Report, August 11, 1993.
>
> BNL, 1996. Brookhaven National Laboratory - Technical Guide for the
> Installation of Monitoring Wells and Piezometers, July 24, 1996.
>
> BNL, 1997. Conceptual Design Report, Booster Applications Facility
> (BAF), October 1997.
>
> BNL, 1998a. Environmental Assessment for Proposed Booster Applications
> Facility (BAF) at Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York,
> January 1998. DOE/EA-1232.
>
> BNL, 1998b. 1997 Environmental Restoration Division Sitewide
> Groundwater Monitoring Report, June 1998.
>
> CDM Federal Programs Corporation, 1995. Technical Memorandum,
> Pre-Design Aquifer Test, October 10-20, 1995, Brookhaven national
> Laboratory, December 1995.
>
> DeLaguna, W., 1963. Geology of Brookhaven National Laboratory and
> Vicinity, Suffolk County, New York: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin
> 1156-A. 35 p.
>
> Faust, G.T., 1963. Physical Properties and Mineralogy of Selected
> Sediments form the Vicinity of the Brookhaven National Laboratory,
> Long Island, New York: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1156-B, 34 p.
>
> Geraghty and Miller, Inc., 1996. Regional Groundwater Model,
> Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York (November 1996).
>
> Gollon, P.J., Rohrig, N., Hauptmann, M.G., McIntyre, K., Miltenberger,
> R., and Naidu, J., 1989. Production of Radioactivity in Local Soil at
> AGS Fast Neutrino Beam. BNL-43558.
>
> Grosser, P.W. (Consulting Engineer and Hydrogeologist, P.C.), 1997.
> Operable Unit III Pump Test Report.
>
> Grosser, P.W. (Consulting Engineer and Hydrogeologist, P.C.), 1998.
> Preliminary Assessment / Site Inspection - 1997 Facility Review Report
> (June 1998 Draft).
>
> Holzmacher, McLendon and Murrel, P.C. (H2M), and Roux Associates,
> Inc., 1985. Waste Management Area, Aquifer Evaluation and program
> Design for Restoration. Volumes I and II.
>
> Koppelman, L.E. (Ed.), 1978. The Long Island Comprehensive Water
> Treatment Management Plan (Long Island 208 Study): Nassau-Suffolk
> Regional Planning Board. Hauppague, New York (July 1978). Volumes I
> and II.
>
> Lessard, E.T. (Ed.), 1991. AGS Booster Final Safety Analysis Report,
> February 27, 1991.
>
> Lessard, E.T., 1998. Subject: Estimated quantities of activated water
> near AGS beam dumps: Informal e-mail messages to D.E. Paquette dated
> July 27 and 28, 1998.
>
> Lubke, E.R., 1964. Hydrogeology of the Huntington-Smithtown Area,
> Suffolk County, New York: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper
> 1669-D, p. D1-D68.
>
> Mausner, L. F., 1985. BNL BLIP II Safety Analysis Report (January 20,
> 1985).
>
> Schroeder, G.L., Paquette, D.E., Naidu, J.R., Lee, R.J. and Briggs,
> S.L.K., 1998. Brookhaven National Laboratory Site Environmental Report
> for Calendar Year 1996 (January 1998). BNL-52543.
>
> Scorca, M.P., Dorsch, W.R., and Paquette, D.E., 1996. Water-Table
> Altitude Near the Brookhaven National Laboratory, Suffolk County, New
> York, in March 1995. U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet FS-128-96,
> December 1996.
>
> Scorca, M.P., Dorsch, W.R., and Paquette, D.E., 1997. Water-Table
> Altitude Near the Brookhaven National Laboratory, Suffolk County, New
> York, in August 1995. U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet FS-233-96,
> April 1997.
>
> Smolensky, D.A., Buxton, H.T., and Shernoff, P.K., 1989. Hydrogeologic
> Framework of Long Island, New York: U.S. Geological Survey,
> Hydrogeologic Investigations Atlas 709, 3 Sheets.
>
> Suffolk County Department of Health Services, 1987. Suffolk County
> Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan. Division of
> Environmental Quality. Hauppague, New York (January 1987). Volumes I
> and II.
>
> US EPA, 1994. Guidance for the Data Quality Objectives Process
> (September 1994). US EPA Washington, D.C., EPA QA/G4.
>
> Warren, M.A., deLaguna, W., and Lusczynski, N.J., 1968. Hydrogeology
> of Brookhaven National Laboratory and Vicinity, Suffolk County, New
> York: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1156-C, 127 p.
>
> Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 1993. Potable Well Study, Brookhaven
> National Laboratory, Upton, Long Island, New York. 10 p.

**BNL Groundwater Monitoring Program**

**Proposed Groundwater Monitoring Wells for the Booster Applications
Facility**

**Table 2**

  ------------- ----------- ------------ ------------ ------------- -----------
  **Well**      **Area**    **Land       **Water      **Screen      **Total
                            Surface      Table        Interval      Depth
                            (MSL)**      (MSL)**      (BLS)**       (BGS)**

  MW-BAF-01     BAF (U)     70\'         44\'         21\'-36\'     41\'

  MW-BAF-02     BAF (D)     70\'         44\'         21\'-36\'     41\'

  MW-BAF-03     BAF (D)     70\'         44\'         21\'-36\'     41\'

  MW-BAF-04\*   BAF (D)     70\'         44\'         21\'-36\'     41\'
  ------------- ----------- ------------ ------------ ------------- -----------

U = Upgradient Well D = Downgradient Well MSL = Feet Relative to Mean
Sea Level BLS = Below Land Surface

\* = MW-BAF-04 will be installed if existing well 54-08 has to be
abandoned.

**Brookhaven National Laboratory**

**Groundwater Monitoring in the AGS Booster Applications Facility Area**

**for FY 1999**

**Table 3**

**[Wells:]{.underline}** 54-08\*, MW-BAF-01, MW-BAF-02, MW-BAF-03.

**[Contaminants of Concern]{.underline}**

Tritium and Sodium-22

**[Sample Periods for CY 1999]{.underline}**

January/February, April/May, July/August, October/November

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Sample Period CY 1999** [1st Qtr.]{.underline} [2nd Qtr.]{.underline}
[3rd Qtr.]{.underline} [4th Qtr.]{.underline}

**Laboratory** ES&H ES&H ES&H ES&H

**Analysis**

*[VOCs]{.underline}*

(EPA 624) X X

[Semi-VOCs]{.underline}

(EPA 625)

[Pesticides/PCBs]{.underline}

(EPA 608)

*[Metals]{.underline}*

(EPA 200 Series)

*[Radionuclides]{.underline}*

Tritium(EPA 906) X X X X

Strontium-90 (EPA 905)

Gross alpha/beta (EPA 900)

Gamma (EPA 901.1) X X X X

*[Anions - Water Quality]{.underline}*

(EPA 300)

pH and conductivity (Field) X X X X

\* Well 54-08 also serves as an upgradient well for the AGS Booster
groundwater monitoring program.

**Brookhaven National Laboratory**

**Groundwater Monitoring Plan**

**for FY 1998 and FY 1999**

**Table 4**

**AGS Research Areas**

**[Wells:]{.underline}** 44-02, 53-01, 54-01, 54-03, 54-07, 54-08,
54-10, 64-01, 64-02, MW-AGS-01, MW-AGS-02, MW-AGS-03, MW-AGS-04,
MW-AGS-05, MW-AGS-06, MW-AGS-07, MW-AGS-08, MW-AGS-09, MW-AGS-10,
MW-AGS-11, MW-AGS-12, MW-AGS-13, MW-AGS-14, MW-AGS-15, MW-AGS-16,
MW-AGS-17, MW-AGS-18, MW-AGS-19, MW-AGS-20, MW-AGS-21, MW-AGS-22,
MW-AGS-23, MW-AGS-24, MW-AGS-25, MW-AGS-26, MW-AGS-27, MW-AGS-28,
MW-AGS-29, MW-AGS-30, MW-AGS-31, MW-AGS-32, MW-AGS-33, MW-AGS-34.

**[Contaminants of Concern]{.underline}**

Tritium, Sodium-22, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, trichloroethylene,
1,1-dichloroethane, 1,1-dichloroethylene

**[Sample Periods for CY 1998]{.underline}**

October/November

**[Sample Periods for CY 1999]{.underline}**

January/February, April/May, July/August, October/November

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Sample Period CY 1999** [1st Qtr.]{.underline} [2nd Qtr.]{.underline}
[3rd Qtr.]{.underline} [4th Qtr.]{.underline}

**Laboratory** ES&H ES&H ES&H ES&H

**Analysis**

*[VOCs]{.underline}*

(EPA 624) X X

[Semi-VOCs]{.underline}

(EPA 625)

[Pesticides/PCBs]{.underline}

(EPA 608)

*[Metals]{.underline}*

(EPA 200 Series) X X

*[Radionuclides]{.underline}*

Tritium(EPA 906) X X X X

Strontium-90 (EPA 905)

Gross alpha/beta (EPA 900) X X

Gamma (EPA 901.1) X X X X

*[Anions - Water Quality]{.underline}*

(EPA 300)

pH and conductivity (Field) X X X X