December 5, 2012 

Mr. Jim Folk, Deputy Assistant Manager 

Waste Disposition Programs Division 

U.S. Department of Energy 

Savannah River Operations Office 

P.O. Box A 

Aiken, SC 29802 

SUBJECT: U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 26-27, 2012, 

ONSITE OBSERVATION REPORT FOR THE SAVANNAH RIVER SITE F-TANK 

FARM CLOSURE 

Dear Mr. Folk: 

The enclosed report describes the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC’s) onsite 

observation activities on September 26-27, 2012, at the Savannah River Site (SRS) F-Tank 

Farm performed in coordination with the South Carolina Department of Health and 

Environmental Control. This onsite observation was conducted in accordance with Section 

3116 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 

(Section 3116), which requires NRC to monitor disposal actions taken by the U.S. Department 

of Energy (DOE) for the purpose of assessing compliance with the performance objectives set 

out in 10 CFR Part 61, Subpart C. The activities conducted during the site visit were consistent 

with those described in the NRC’s observation guidance at SRS F-Tank Farm, dated 

August 23, 2012, (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System Accession No. 

ML12228A631) and NRC’s staff guidance for activities related to waste determinations 

(NUREG-1854, dated August 2007). 

This onsite observation at SRS was focused on assessing compliance with three of the four 

performance objectives contained in 10CFR Part 61: (i) protection of the general population 

from releases of radioactivity (§61.41); (ii) protection of individuals from inadvertent intrusion 

(§61.42); and (iii) protection of individuals during operations (§61.43). Meeting these 

performance objectives is predicated on the performance of the tanks and ancillary facilities as 

closed by DOE. 
J. Folk - 2 - 

If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this report, please contact 

James Shaffner of my staff at James.Shaffner@nrc.gov, or at (301) 415-5496. 

Sincerely, 

/RA/ 

Aby Mohseni, Deputy Director 

Environmental Protection 

 and Performance Assessment Directorate 

Division of Waste Management 

 and Environmental Protection 

Office of Federal and State Materials 

 and Environmental Management Programs 

Enclosures: 

1. NRC Observation Report 

2. DOE Pre-briefing 

cc w /enclosures: 

WIR Service List 
J. Folk - 2 - 

If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this report, please contact 

James Shaffner of my staff at James.Shaffner@nrc.gov, or at (301) 415-5496. 

Sincerely, 

Aby Mohseni, Deputy Director 

Environmental Protection 

 and Performance Assessment Directorate 

Division of Waste Management 

 and Environmental Protection 

Office of Federal and State Materials 

 and Environmental Management Programs 

Enclosures: 

1. NRC Observation Report 

2. DOE Pre-briefing 

cc w /enclosures: 

WIR Service List 

DISTRIBUTION: GAlexander CBarr LParks CGrossman RPabalan 

 M Fuhrman 

ML12299A190 

OFC DWMEP:PM DWMEP:LA DWMEP:BC DWMEP:BC DWMEP:DD

NAME JShaffner TMoon CMcKenney GSuber AMohseni

DATE 10/25/12 10/26/12 11/05/12 11/21/12 12/05/12

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
WIR SERVICE LIST

Glenn Carroll, Coordinator 

Nuclear Watch South 

P.O. Box 8574 

Atlanta, GA 31106 

Tom Clements, Member 

Friends of the Earth 

1112 Florence Street 

Columbia, SC 29201 

Jim Hardeman, Manager 

Environmental Radiation Program 

Environmental Protection Division 

Georgia Department of Natural Resources 

4220 International Parkway, Suite 100 

Atlanta, GA 30354 

Karen Patterson, Environmental 

Appointment 

Governors' Nuclear Advisory Council 

 and Tetra Tech NUS 

900 Trail Road 

Aiken, SC 29803-5297 

Bobbie Paul, Executive Director 

Georgia Womens Action for New Directions 

250 Georgia Ave., SE 

Suite 202 

Atlanta, GA 30312 

Robert H. Pope 

Senior Remedial, Project Manager 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Region 4, Superfund Division 

Federal Facilities Branch, Waste Division 

61 Forsyth Street 

Atlanta, GA 30303 

Jon Richards, Remedial Project Manager 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Region 4, Superfund Division 

Federal Facilities Branch, Waste Division 

61 Forsyth Street 

Atlanta, GA 30303 

Thomas Saporito, Executive Director 

P.O. Box 8413 

Jupiter, FL 33468 

John J. Schnabel, Saltstone Project 

 Inspector, Professional Engineer 

Division of Mining and Solid Waste 

 Management 

Bureau of Land and Waste Management 

South Carolina Department of Health 

 and Environmental Control 

2600 Bull Street 

Columbia, SC 29201-1208 

Shelly Wilson, Federal Facilities Liaison 

Environmental Quality Control Administration 

South Carolina Department of Health 

 and Environmental Control 

2600 Bull Street 

Columbia, SC 29201-1708 
Enclosure 1 

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 26-27, 2012, ONSITE 

OBSERVATION REPORT FOR THE SAVANNAH RIVER SITE F-TANK FARM 

CLOSURE 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff conducted, its second onsite observation 

visit to the F-Tank Farm (FTF) at the Savannah River Site (SRS) on September 26-27, 2012. 

The purpose of this visit was to follow-up on items related to Tank 18 and 19 grouting that arose 

from the first monitoring site visit conducted on June 12, 2012, (Agencywide Documents Access 

and Management System [ADAMS] Accession No. ML12191A210). Further, the staff was 

interested in aspects of preparation of Tanks 5 and 6 for closure and grouting, as well as 

discussing NRC reviews of several U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) technical reports. All 

issues are related to compliance with three of the four performance objectives in 10 CFR 

Part 61, Subpart C: (i) protection of the general population from releases of radioactivity 

(§61.41); (ii) protection of individuals from inadvertent intrusion (§61.42), and (iii) protection of 

individuals during operations (§61.43). During the on-site observation DOE staff conducted inbriefing presentations (Enclosure 2) related to both closure completion of Tanks 18 and 19, as 

well as sampling and analysis of Tanks 5 and 6. DOE also provided a discussion of 

groundwater monitoring in the vicinity of F-Tank Farm. NRC staff took a walking tour of closed 

Tanks 18 and 19, as well as in preparation Tanks 5 and 6. NRC staff was also given tours of 

the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) which characterizes residual tank waste. Staff 

also visited a field lysimeter test which may yield information related to radionuclide movement 

in the natural environment. 

Prior to the visit, the NRC and contractor staff reviewed a number of reports prepared by the 

DOE and its contractors related to various aspects of anticipated F-Tank Farm future 

performance. These reports are evaluated in separate technical review memoranda along with 

other technical reports previously provided to the NRC staff by DOE. 

In accordance with the onsite observation guidance (ML12228A631), NRC staff had planned 

reviews and follow-up in the following areas: Tank and Vault Grouting; Radiation Protection 

Program; Waste Retrieval and Closure; Waste Release/Solubility; and Environmental 

Monitoring of Groundwater. 

Prior to the on-site observation, DOE informed NRC that several of the observation objectives 

would not be ready for review by September 26-27, 2012. Consequently, the scope of the 

on-site observation was limited as discussed herein. 

It should be noted that this onsite observation was completed prior to the preparation of a formal 

monitoring plan. The monitoring plan is being prepared and will be used to inform onsite 

observations beginning in Fiscal Year 2013. 

NRC staff identified no open issues associated with this onsite observation. However, NRC 

staff provided several follow-up actions requesting information from DOE. 

A summary of the staff’s observations and conclusions is provided below. 
- 2 - 

Enclosure 1 

1.0 BACKGROUND: 

Section 3116 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (Section 3116) 

authorizes DOE, in consultation with the NRC, to determine that certain radioactive waste 

related to the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel is not high-level waste, provided certain criteria 

are met. Section 3116 also requires NRC to monitor DOE disposal actions to assess 

compliance with the performance objectives in 10 CFR Part 61, Subpart C. 

On September 30, 2010, DOE submitted a “Draft Basis for Section 3116 Determination Closure 

of FTF Savannah River Site” to demonstrate compliance with the Section 3116 criteria including 

demonstration of compliance with the performance objectives in 10 CFR Part 61, Subpart C 

(DOE, 2010). In its consultation role, the NRC staff reviewed the draft waste determination and 

provided a number of recommendations that staff believed would be beneficial regarding DOE’s 

demonstration of compliance with long-term performance objectives. The NRC documented the 

results of its review in a Technical Evaluation Report issued in October 2011 (NRC, 2011). 

DOE issued a final waste determination in March 2012 taking into consideration the 

assumptions, conclusions, and recommendations in NRC’s Technical Evaluation Report (DOE, 

2012). DOE began grouting operations in April 2012. 

To carry out its monitoring responsibility under Section 3116, NRC performs technical reviews 

and onsite observations related to DOE disposal activities, in coordination with the State of 

South Carolina site regulator, South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control 

(SC DHEC). Technical reviews generally focus on evaluation of information and data collected 

to provide support for key assumptions made in DOE’s FTF Performance Assessment (PA) that 

are considered important to the compliance demonstration. Onsite observations generally are 

performed to: (i) observe the collection of information and data that are the subject of the 

technical reviews (e.g., observation of waste sampling used to generate radionuclide inventory 

data); or to (ii) observe key disposal (or closure) activities related to technical review areas or 

that are otherwise important to the compliance demonstration (e.g., slag and other material 

storage, grout formulation and preparation, and grout placement). 

2.0 NRC ONSITE OBSERVATION ACTIVITIES: 

2.1 Technical Focus: 

Staff focused on long-term concerns related to grout performance and its impact on the ability to 

meet 10 CFR 61.41 and 61.42. Staff also began review of aspects of closure of Tanks 5 and 6 

and the impact of tank closure on the ability to meet 10 CFR 61.41 and 61.42. Staff also 

obtained information related to planned, current and historic groundwater monitoring activities in 

the vicinity of F-Tank Farm and the relationship of such monitoring on the ability to meet 10 CFR 

61.41 and 61.42. 
- 3 - 

2.2 Observation Scope: 

A. Tank and Vault Grouting

1. Supplemental Review video of Tanks 18 and 19 grouting - follow up from 

 June 12 visit.

2. Review of “as built” documentation of grouted tanks including estimates of void 

 volume in equipment and in tank tops. 

3. Continue discussion regarding development and testing of shrinkage compensating 

additives and testing of the potential for grout shrinkage - follow up from June 12 

visits.

4. Discuss thermal calculations conducted to support tank grouting, testing, and 

 evaluation of the potential for thermal cracking. 

5. Discuss tank vault component grouting (e.g., leak detection channels) - follow up 

 from June 12 visits. 

6. Discuss results of follow-up testing of grout (e.g. compressive strength). 

B. Radiation Protection Program

1. Review activity-specific radiation protection program and final collective dose 

 calculations. 

2. Waste Retrieval and Closure. 

3. Discuss schedule for Tanks 5 and 6 closure. 

4. Review final inventories developed for Tanks 5 and 6. 

5. Review cost benefit analysis for Tanks 5 and 6, if available. 

6. Review special analysis for Tanks 5 and 6, if available. 

7. Discuss anticipated changes in grouting operations given “lessons learned” from 

 Tanks 18 and 19 grouting. 

8. Discuss progress on cleaning of other FTF tanks. 

C. Waste Release/Solubility

1. Discuss plans for experiments to study key radionuclide solubility for key risk drivers 

 at FTF. 

2. Discuss plans for experiments to study grout conditioning of infiltrating groundwater. 
- 4 - 

D. Environmental Data

1. Discuss monitoring plan for FTF groundwater. 

2. Discuss monitoring results for FTF wells. 

3. Review historical information regarding initiating event and releases from FTF and 

 HTF tanks. 

Prior to the on-site observation, DOE informed NRC that several of the observation objectives 

would not be ready for review by September 26-27, 2012. Consequently, the scope of the 

on-site observation was limited to items A.1 and 6; C. 1and 6; and D. 1, 2 and 3. DOE provided 

a status of other items that were part of the original scope and suggested when they would be 

ready for review 

2.3 On-Site Observation

2.3.1 Recently Completed DOE Grouting Activities for Tanks 18 and 19 (A. 1,4,6)

DOE provided a status of the recently grouted Tanks 18 and 19. This included discussions of 

verification of void filling in tanks and internal equipment, riser completion and details regarding 

testing mechanical characteristics. DOE provided a schedule for completion of activities 

including the following: 

1. Final Configuration Report (March 31, 2013) 

• Summary of internal components grouted 

• Will address grouting of leak detection sump 

2. Liquid Waste Maintenance Plan (March 31, 2013) 

• Evaluation of shrinkage testing 

• Evaluation of thermal cracking 

• Key radionuclide solubility 

• Grout conditioning of infiltrating water 

2.3.2 Waste Retrieval and Closure (C.1 and 6)

DOE provided a status update and schedule for closure of Tanks 5 and 6. These are type I 

tanks and presented unique challenges vis-a-vis cleaning and sampling of residual waste. In 

particular the tanks each contained over 21,000 lineal feet of 2” ID cooling coil which presented 

significant obstacles to both cleaning and sampling equipment. 

As part of the in-brief on September 27, 2012, DOE provided a detailed presentation related to 

its sampling strategy and implementation challenges for both tanks. Because infrastructure was 

different for both tanks, different approaches were needed. 

DOE also provided a general overview of the schedule for overall closure of FTF. The timeline 

extended at least 10 years into the future. 
- 5 - 

NRC staff was also able to observe surface features associated with Tanks 5 and 6 including 

access risers. DOE also discussed limitations regarding the use of some risers for access for 

waste removal and sampling of residual waste. 

2.3.3 Environmental Data (D.1, 2, 3)

DOE presented information related to groundwater monitoring in the vicinity of FTF. DOE 

discussed the introduction and evolution of both up gradient and down gradient wells. DOE 

discussed external features (in particular, a leaking process sewer line near FTF) that likely will 

impact groundwater monitoring results. In conjunction with the discussion, DOE agreed to 

consider NRC’s request for specific information from its Geographic Information System (GIS) 

and Environmental Restoration Data Management System (specifically well construction and 

water elevation data from 1990 to the present) from the General Separations Area that may help 

with the interpretation of groundwater monitoring data. NRC staff also requested additional 

information regarding characterization of over-fill events that occurred at Tank 8 in FTF and 

Tank 16 in HTF that may provide information regarding engineered and natural system 

performance. 

2.3.4 Supplemental Observation Activities

NRC staff was also afforded the opportunity to tour the Savannah River National Laboratory 

(SRNL) facility that processes, characterizes and analyzes samples of residual tank waste. 

Although this tour was outside the scope of the formal monitoring site visit, it provided NRC staff 

with a perspective of the challenges inherent in these activities and therefore some of the 

limitations. 

NRC staff was afforded the opportunity to tour a long-term field lysimeter experiment in which 

DOE has placed a number of test samples to try to determine long-term performance in natural 

conditions. Again, this was outside the scope of the monitoring site visit, but future results may 

provide insight regarding expectations of both residual tank waste performance as well as 

performance of saltstone. 

2.4 Observation Results:

2.4.1 Recently Completed DOE Grouting Activities for Tanks 18 and 19 (A. 1 and 6)

NRC staff identified no new issues associated with Tanks 18 and 19 tank grouting. NRC staff 

will continue to monitor DOE activities related to the potential for shrinkage and cracking of FTF 

tank grout. NRC is concerned with tank grout shrinkage and cracking as it could lead to 

preferential or by-passing pathways through the tank grout and earlier, risk-significant release of 

key radionuclides from the grouted tanks. NRC agreed to provide DOE and SC DHEC with a 

copy of a recently completed Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analysis (CNWRA) report 

documenting the results of meso- and intermediate-scale grout monolith experiments using tank 

grouts (ML12251A305). This report provides estimates of bulk permeability and information 

about the potential for shrinkage and cracking of tank grouts proposed for use in National 

Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) tanks. DOE plans for shrinkage testing and thermal cracking 

evaluations will become clearer when the FTF Liquid Waste Maintenance Plan is issued 

(currently planned for March 2013). 
- 6 - 

With regard to the video footage of tank grouting operations provided by DOE following the 

June 12, 2012, onsite observation, NRC indicated that the video provided was consistent with 

NRC staff’s request. DOE clarified that it provided video up to the last day of tank grouting at 

the point at which the camera was removed from the Tank 18 tank riser to complete grouting. 

NRC will review the final configuration report for Tanks 18 and 19 grouting (expected to be 

completed in March 2013), including information regarding final tank and equipment void 

volume estimates. NRC evaluation of the information provided in the report will be documented 

in a technical review memorandum. With regard to the test results of grout samples that were 

taken during grouting of Tanks 18 and 19, NRC reviewed several grout test reports and 

confirmed the measured compressive strength of the samples meet the DOE specifications. 

DOE indicated that the compressive strength of all samples taken through May 25, 2012, 

grouting operations are within specifications. The remainder of the 91-day results are still 

pending. 

NRC requested an equipment fill mock up test report cited in SRNL-STI-2011-0056. DOE 

indicated the report was available on-line through the Office of Scientific Technical Information 

bridge. NRC staff will review the equipment fill mock up test report (SRNL-STI-2011-00564) 

and document the results of its review in a technical review memorandum 

During the onsite observation, DOE discussed a grout formulation that was not required for use 

in grouting Tanks 18 and 19. The grout formulation will be used for grouting cooling coils 

present in Tanks 5 and 6, which are Type I tanks. DOE indicated information on the cooling coil 

grout is provided in two references that supported the final Basis document (WSRC-STI-2008-

00172 and WSRC-STI-2008-00298). NRC staff will review these reports and document the 

results of its review in a technical review memorandum. 

2.4.2 Waste Retrieval and Closure (C. 1 and 6)

NRC identified no issues associated with Tank 5 and 6 sampling and analysis during the onsite 

observation. DOE provided a CD that included electronic copies of a number or reports related 

to Tank 5 and 6 final inventory developments including the following: 

1. SRR-CWDA-2012-00027 Revision 1, Tank 5 Inventory Determination. 

2. SRR-CWDA-2012-00075, Tank 6 Inventory Determination. 

3. SRR-LWE-2010-00300, Tank 6 Sampling and Analysis Plan. 

4. SRR-LWE-2010-00285, Tank 5 Sampling and Analysis Plan. 

5. SRR-LWE-2011-00235, Tank 6 Sampling and Analysis Plan Addendum 2. 

6. SRR-CWDA-2011-00050 Revision 1, Liquid Waste Tank Residuals Sampling and 

Analysis Program Plan. 

7. SRR-LWE-2010-00340, Addendum to Tank 5 Sampling and Analysis Plan. 
- 7 - 

8. SRR-LWE-2011-00209, Tank 6 Sampling and Analysis Plan Addendum. 

DOE also provided a hard copy of the following reference that contains information on 

analytical methods for analysis of the high-level waste tanks samples: 

9. SRNL-STI-2012-00365, Rev. 0, “Analysis of the Tank 6F Final Characterization 

Samples-2012 (U). 

NRC staff will review the references listed above related to development of the final 

inventory for Tanks 5 and 6 and document the results of its review in a technical review 

memorandum. 

2.4.3 Environmental Data (D. 1, 2, 3)

NRC staff identified no issues associated with environmental data collection during the onsite 

observation. With respect to the FTF groundwater monitoring plan, NRC staff noted that the 

trigger level of 50 pCi/L nonvolatile beta that would lead to radionuclide specific sampling of 

mobile beta emitters such as I-129 appears to be high given the relatively higher risk factors 

associated with I-129. However, NRC staff agreed that as long as Tc-99 continues to be 

sampled at appropriate wells, the Tc-99 measurements may provide good indicator information 

regarding I-129. NRC staff also inquired about the basis for the location of the FTF monitoring 

wells (e.g., recent PORFLOW particle tracking from FTF sources). NRC staff will review the 

monitoring well network against PORFLOW modeling results to evaluate the ability of the 

monitoring well network to detect FTF releases. 

DOE also presented information related to the Tc-99 plume at the FTF that is now thought to be 

potentially sourced from the process sewer lines that feed the F-Area seepage basins. 

Previously, the Tc-99 plume was thought to be associated with a documented release from 

Tank 8 that occurred in 1961. While historical releases from the tank farm are not under the 

scope of NRC monitoring under the NDAA, NRC staff uses information gained from review of 

information from historical releases as a means of better understanding potential engineered 

and natural system performance. While NRC agrees that some of the contaminant transport 

data may not be applicable to releases from grouted tanks, information about expected flow 

directions and vertical gradients may also be gleaned from the data. For example, well FTF-28 

is located in the lower zone of the Upper Three Runs Aquifer, while the well is located a short 

horizontal distance from the suspected source, the FTF process sewer lines. If the process 

sewer lines were the source, this would suggest a strong vertical gradient in the subsurface at 

FTF. Backwards particle tracking could be used to determine the source of the plume and 

provide validation information for the groundwater flow models used in FTF PA modeling. 

During the onsite observation, DOE provided the FTF groundwater monitoring plan and the last 

three years of monitoring data for the FTF (SRNS-RP-2011-00995 (monitoring plan), SRNS-RP2012-00022 (2011 data), SRNS-TR-2011-00038 (2010), and SRNS-TR-2010-00012 (2009)). 

NRC staff also requested information regarding the Tank 8 and Tank 16 historical releases to 

provide information regarding engineered and natural system performance. HTF Tank 16 

release information will be provided with the HTF Basis document. NRC staff will review the 

groundwater monitoring data and event information and document the results of its review in a 

technical review memorandum. 
- 8 - 

NRC staff also requested GIS data for the General Separations Area (GSA) as well as water 

table data from 1990 to present and well construction data for applicable tank farm wells. The 

water table data will be used to determine the likelihood of water table rise above the bottom of 

FTF tanks, a potentially risk-significant alternative conceptual model for Type IV tanks at FTF. 

NRC staff requested the GSA GIS data to support tank farm and saltstone reviews and 

monitoring. The GIS data will be used to better understand and analyze groundwater data 

collected for the FTF and saltstone disposal facilities (e.g., will help NRC evaluate: (i) the 

PORFLOW groundwater models used in the PA analyses; and (ii) the efficacy of the 

groundwater monitoring networks). 

3.0 FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS AND CONCLUSION:

DOE will provide GSA GIS water table elevation, and well construction data to NRC. 

NRC plans to review the ALARA and final collective dose calculations for Tank 18 and 19 grout 

operations that are estimated to be completed in January 2013. The results of the review will be 

documented in a technical review memorandum. 

4.0 PARTICIPANTS: 

U.S. NRC:

George Alexander

Cynthia Barr

Mark Fuhrman

Mark Roberts

James Shaffner 

Gregory Suber

Roberto Pabalan (CNWRA/SwRI)

U.S. DOE:

Sherri Ross, SRS

Dan Ferguson, SRS

Doug Gray, HQ

SRR:

Steve Thomas

Larry Romanowski

Kent Rosenberger

James Herbert 

James Rush

Andy Tisler

Mark Mahoney

Nancye Bethurem

Ron Campbell

SOUTH CAROLINA DHEC

Barry Mullinax

Byron Amick

Scott Simons

SRNS

Mike Griffith

Tom Gaughan

Gerald Blount 

Jeffrey Thibault

Catherine Lewis

5.0 REFERENCES: 

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Onsite Observation Guidance for September 26-27, 

Waste Monitoring Visit to the Savannah River Site, F Area Tank Farm. 

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), DOE/SRS-WD-2012-001, Rev.) “Basis for Section 3116 

Determination Closure of F-Tank Farm Savannah River Site,” March 27, 2012. 
- 9 - 

DOE, SRR-CWDA-2012-00137, Savannah River Site F-Tank Farm NRC Onsite Observation 

Visit: September 26 and 27, 2012. 

DOE, SRR-CWDA-2012-00027, Tank 5 Inventory Determination. 

DOE, SRR-CWDA-2012-00075, Tank 6 Inventory Determination. 

DOE, SRR-CWDA-2011-00050, Liquid Waste Tank Residuals Sampling and Analysis Program

Plan. 

DOE, SRR-LWE-2010-00285,Tank 5 Sampling and Analysis Plan. 

DOE, SRR-LWE-2010-00340, Addendum to the Tank 5 Sampling and Analysis Plan. 

DOE, SRR-LWE-2010-00300, Tank 6 Sampling and Analysis Plan. 

DOE, SRR-LWE-2011-00209, Tank 6 Sampling and Analysis Plan Addendum. 

DOE, SRR-LWE-2011-00235, Tank 6 Sampling and Analysis Plan Addendum 2. 

DOE, SRNS-RP-2011-00995, F-Area Tank Farm Groundwater Monitoring Plan. 

 

DOE, SRNS-RP-2012-00022, 2011, Annual Groundwater Monitoring Report for the F- and HArea Radioactive Liquid Waste Tank Farms. 

DOE, SRNS-TR-2011-00038 2010 Groundwater Monitoring Report for the Radioactive Liquid 

Waste Tank Farms January 2011. 

DOE SRNS-TR-2010-00012, 2009 Groundwater Monitoring Report for the Radioactive Liquid 

Waste Tank Farms February 2010. 

DOE, WSRC-STI-2008-00172, Closure of HLW Tanks- Formulation for a Cooling Coil Grout, 

April 2008. 

DOE, WSRC-STI-2008-00298, Closure of HLW Tank- Phase 2, Full Scale Cooling Coil Grout 

Fill Demonstrations, June 2008. 

Dinwiddie et al, Fiscal Year 2012 Meso- and Intermediate- Scale Grout Monolith Test Bed 

Experiments, Final Report. San Antonio Tx: Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analysis.