### Effective Date: May 28,2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 Revision No. 0 

# Quality Assurance Project Plan Environmental Protection Agency 's Verification of the Department of Energy's CAP88-PC WIPP Release Dose Calculations Prepared by the Office of Air and Radiation Office ofRadiation and Indoor Air Radiation Protection Division, Center for Waste Management and Regulations William J. Clinton Building 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington D.C. 20460 Kathleen Economy May 28,2014

Revision 0Effective D a te: May 28, 2014Document No. WIPP / QAPP-1 Revision N o . 0 Document Approval Form [A 1 ] Product Title: Environmental Protecti on Agency's Verif ication of the Department of E nergy's CAP88-PC WIPP Release Dose Calculations

Page ii Purpose: C orroborating calculations to provide confidence that the Department of Energy's Dose and Risk CAP88 Version 3 calculations for the February 14 1 \ 2014 fa ll below th e regulatory l im it s. Project Organization/Task (A4) Signatures: __::.::._....:..r....:.. .;_;_:._;._;;;__ ..J/....s.:...._t_ : **---'-- -~**  **-4'-.;..J(.......J~---+-r---** Date !)!) J4 dV / Y **-~-:---:-----:::-+~ ------L-.,...,-------------:-=**  **--** Date§ - .?:!1-- / f 11

### Effective Date: May 28 , 20 14 Document No. 

### WIPP /QAPP-1 111 

### Revision No . 0 Page

This Quality Assurance Proj ect Plan has been prepared in accordance with requirements described in EPA QA /G-5. Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans, EPA QA/G-5 " United States Environmental Protection Agency, EPA /240/R-02/009, Office of Environmental Information, Washington, D.C. , December 2002

l1lEffective D a te: May 28 , 2014 D ocument No. W I PP / QAPP-1 IV Revision N o. 0 This page intentionally left blank. I V

PageEffective Date: May 28, 201 4 Docu ment No. WI PP/QAPP- 1 Revision No. 0

Rev. DC N 0 WIPP/QAPP-1 

### Revision History W IPP/QAPP-1 Rev ision History Responsible Party and Offic ia l Date Kathy Economy ...... .. .................... .. .......... ........ .. .. 2014-05-28



### v Page vEffective D a te: May 28, 2014 Document No. WIPP / QAPP-1 VI Revision N o . 0 This page intentionally left blank. Vl

PageEffective Date : May 28 , 2014Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 Revision No. 0 

## Table of Contents Page 1 of 16

Document Approval Form [A1] . .... . ... . .................................. . ....... . ... . .. ... .. .. . ... . ... . .. . ... . . .. . .. . .......... . . ii Revision History ..... . ....... .... . ... . ........................... . ... . ... . ... . ... . .. . ... ... .. ... .. .. .. .. .. . ... ... .. .. ... .. . ... ... .. .. .. .. .. . . v Distribution List [A3] ..... . ... . .................................... ....... .......... . ... . ... ... . ... . ... . ... . .. .. .. ... . . . .. ... ... .. .. . ... .. 2 A. Background (AS] [A7] [B 1] [B3] [B4] [89].. . ... . ...... . ... . .. .. .. . ... ... .. .......................... . .................. 3 A.1 Problem Definition [AS] [B2] [B3 ] (B9] .................................................... . ... . . ... .. .. .. . ...... .. . 3 A.l.l Goal (AS] [Bl] .............................. . ... . .. .. .. . ... ... . ... . ... . .. .. .. ... .. .. . ... ... .. .. ... .. .. .. . . . .. .. .. . ... . ... . .. 4 A.l.2 Objective [AS] [B1] [B3] [B4] [810] .... . ...... . ... . ...... . .......... . ................. . .... . .................. 4 A.2 Task Description [A6] (Bl] (B3 ] [B4] [B7] [B 9] [810] . ... .. .. .. ... .. .. .. ... .. .. .. ... .. ... . .. ... .. .. ... .. .. . 4 A.3 Task Organization [A4] [A8] [B S] (84]. .......... . .......... . .......... . ...... . ................... . .................. S A.3 .1 Analysts........... . ... . ... . ................................................................... . .......... . .. . .............. . S A.3.2 Management ........................................................... . ......... . ...... . ...... . ....... . .. .. .. ... .. .. . .... S A.3.3 Technical Review......... . ... . ....................................................................... . .................. S A.3.4 Quality Assurance .. . ........................................................... . ................ .. ..... . .................. 6 A.4 Overall Quality Objective and Criteria [A7] [B1] [B4] [B6] [ B7] [B8] [B9] [B 10]. . . ... . ... . . 6 A.S Special Training - Team Members [A8] [A9] ....... . ................. . ..................... . .................. 7 A.6 Project Documentation ofResults [A9] ... . ...... . ... . ...... . ... . .. . ... . ...... . ... . .. . ... . ... . . . . ................. 7 B. Data Needs, Sources, and Criteria (B 1] (B2] (B3] [B9] [B 10] ..... . ...... . .......... . ....... . .................. 7 B.l Source Term [AS] [B1] [B2] [B3] ....................................... . ... . ... . ...... . ...... . ... . .. . ... . ... . ... . .. . ... 7 B.2 Population Files [B 1] .. . .......... . ... . ... . ...... . ... . .......... . ............................................ . .................. 8 8.3 Meteorological Files [B 1] .................................................................................. ... .. .. .. ......... . 9 8.4 Population Centers and Locations [AS] [A6] [D1] [B2] . . ... ... . ... . .. . ... .. . .. .. .. .. ... . ... .. .. . ... . .. .. ... 9 C. Data Management, Control, Storage .. . ................................................. . ... . ... . ... .. . ... . . .. ... .. .. . ...... 1 0 C.1 Data Management [A9] [BlO] ... . ... . ... . .. . ....... ... . .............. . ........... .. ........................ . .......... . ..... 10 C.2 Data Entries [B 1 0] ............................................... . ... . ... ... . ... . ...... . ... ... . ................ . ..............· .. 10 C.3 Merging or Uploading Electronic Data from Existing Sources .............. . ... . ..... . ... .. .. . ... ... .. 1 0 C.4 Data Review [BS] [D 1] .................... . ... ... . ... . ... . .. . ... . ... . .. . ... . ... . ... . ....................... . ..... . .......... 11 C.S Data Storage and Manipulation [B 1 0] ......................... . ... . .................. .. ..... .. .. ... . ... .. .. .. ... ..... 1 1 D . Data Quality Verification and Data Quality Reporting [BS ] [D1] (D2] ................. . .......... ... ... 11 D.l Data Review, Verification, and Validation (BS ] [D 1] [D2] [03] .................... . .... . ........... 12 D .2 End Product- Use ofthis Analysis . . ......................................... . ... . ... . .. . ... . ... . .. . . ..... . .......... 12Effective D a te: May 28 , 2014 Document No. WTPP / QAPP - 1 Page: 2 of 16 Revision N o . 0 0.3 Final Verification [B5] [02]. ............. ..... .................... . ....................................................... 12 D.4 Rep o rts to Management [ B5] [C2] [Dl] ................................................................... . ....... 13 E. Review of QAPP .............................................................. . ... . .......... . ....... ..... ... ..... ................. ... 13 References . . ...... ... ..... ..................................................... .. .. .............. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... . .. ... ...... .. ............ .. . 16 Distribution List [A3 ] Quality Assurance Project Plan- Environmenta l Protection Agency's Verification of the Department of E nergy 's Analysis Plan for Verifying DOE's CAP88-PC WTPP Release Dos e Calculations Name Lindsey B ender J onathan Edwards Alan Perrin

Lee Veal Tom Peak e Reid Rosn i ck Jonathan Wa lsh

Jerome Pu s kin Lowell Ra l ston Daniel Schultheisz Supplementary Distribution List

Title

WIPP /QAPP-1 Revision 0 May 13 , 2014 Distribution List Quality Ass ur ance Coordinator Director Deputy Director CREM Director CWMR Director CWMR Physical Scientist/Revi ewe r CWMR Physical Scientist/Reviewer CST Director Radiobiolo gist/reviewer CWMR Associate Director

Organization ORIA RPD RPD RPD RPD RPD RPD RPD RPD RPD Other copies may be sent as necessary by the RPD Dir ecto r or Deputy Director. Note: This Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) has been prepared in accordance with a

chec klist de ve loped for the EPA, Office of Water , for the training "Quality Assurance Strategies

for the Use o f Exist in g Data (Li terature , Databa ses, Studies, etc.) presented in Fe bruary 2013 and March 2014 to EPA. This checkl ist is titled " Modified QAPP Format for Existing Data Projects ." It was determined that this format was most appropriate one for this QAPP. A crosswalk b e tween this "Mod ified" checklist and the checklist pres ented in EPA QA/G-5. 2Effective Date: May 28 , 2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 Page: 3 of 16 Revision No. 0 Guidancefor QualityAssurance Project Plans, EPA QA/G-5 "United States Environmental Protection Agency, EP A/240/R -02/009, Office ofEnvironmental Information, Washington, D.C., December 2002, was performed and all elements in the G-5 checklist are addressed. The G-5 check list references are noted in [square brackets] following the section title. The section titles are in accordance with the "Modified" checklist. 

### A. Background [AS] [A7] [Bl] [B3] [B4] [B9] At the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) an airborne radionuclide release occurred on February 14th, 2014 at approximately 2314 Mountain Standard T ime. The releases triggered the Continuous Air Monitoring (CAM) probe located in the exhaust side ofPanel 7 , the current panel in which waste was being emplaced in the repository. At approximately 23 15 the ventilation system was switched from reduced ventilation (3,395 m3/m, 120,000 ft3/m) to filtration mode (1 , 699 m3/m, 60,000 

### ft3/m). The releases originated from the repository and passed up through the exhaust shaft then vented through the WIPP HEPA filtration system. High levels ofalpha and beta readings were detected at WIPP ' s Station B Fixed Air Sampling station locatedjust downstream from the HEPA filter exhaust. Elevated releases to the atmosphere lasted approximately 90 hours. Per 40 CFR 61.92, it is stated that the DOE is to assure no individual will be exposed to more than 1 0 mrem per year ofa radionuclide. Specific to radionuclide emissions, specified in 40 CFR 61.93 DOE Subpart H, the DOE is required to determine the effective dose ofexposed individuals within a 3-km radius ofthe facility using one oftwo EPA approved computer models, CAP-88 or AIRDOS-PS. And per 61.93 9 (b) (4) (i), periodic confirmatory monitoring is invoked ifreleases from a DOE facility are in excess ofthe 1 %ofthe standard (0.1 mrem/annual dose). The DOE performed dose and risk calculations for this incident using the CAP88 -PC computer model , Version 3. The source term was DOE-derived radiological data, collected from the Fixed Air Monitoring Station (FAS) located downstream from the Station B exhaust duct, and analyzed at DOE WIPP Laboratories. Results ofDOE' s modeling are reported in an March 12, 2014 email transmission, CAP88 Special Input /Output files (Stewart Jones to Tom Peake) and indicated the highest ef fective dose equivalent wasjust outside ofthe WIPP exclusive use area (the WIPP fence line). This location is 347 meters NW ofthe Station B exhaust duct. The calculated effective dose equivalent was 0.67 mrem, which is below the 10 mrem annual regulatory dose limit specified in 40 CFR 61.92. 

### A.l Problem Definition 

### [ A5] [B2] [B3] [B 9]3Effective D a te: May 28 , 2014 Document No. WIPP / QAPP-1 Page: 4 of 16 Revision N o . 0 A.l.l Goal [ A5] [B 1] Globally, the intent of this exercise is to assure DOE's reported dose is reproducible. The

Agency will perform effective dose calculations using CAP88, as specified in 40 CFR 61.92, to

assure the WIPP Station B releases do not exceed the I 0 mrem regulatory , as required in 40 CFR60.92. A.l.2 Objec t ive [AS] [Bl] [B3 ] [B 4 ] [B lO) Specific to the goal, the objective of this exercise is to use various versions of CAP88 to rep l icate DOE calcul a tions. Specifically, EPA will perform the following simulations; 1. The Ag e ncy will run a set of dose calculations using CAP88 Version 3 and use the same DOE - de r ived source term. The intent is to rep l icate DOE results. 2 . T h e Agency will run a set of dose calcu l ations using CAP88 Version 4 in addi t ion to Version 3. All i n puts, i n cluding the source term, wi ll be the same as that used by DOE i n their CAP88 Version 3 calculation. a. T he Agency will identify the target individual as an adult. In this way the Agency will be able to compare doses and risks to the results from CAP88 Version 3. Differences between Version 3 and Version 4 results will be assessed and recorded. b. The intent is to determine whether that re l eases from Station B do not do not exceed t he 10 mrem regulatory li mit as required i n 40 CFR 60.92 . A.2 Task Descr i ption [A6] [Bl] [B3) [B4) [B7] [B9] [B l O] Specifically , EPA will perform the following simulations; 1. The Agency will run a set of dose calculations using CAP88 Version 3 and use the same sou r ce DOE-derived source term, and documented in an email transmission titled, CAP88 Special l nput / Outputfiles (Jones, Stewart. March 12,2014, Email Transmiss i on t o Tom Peake). 2. The Agency will run a set of dose calcu l ations using CAP88 Version 4 in addition to Version 3 and use the same s ource term used by DO E identified in the above memo. 4Effective Date : May 28 , 2014 Document No. WIPP /QAPP-1 Page: 5 of 16 Revision No . 0 The Agency will identify the target individual as an adult. In this way the Agency will be able to compare doses and risks to the results from CAP88 Version 3. Differences between Version 3 and Version 4 results will be assessed and recorded. 

### A.3 Task Organization 

### [A4] [A8] [BS] [B4] A.3.1 Analysts Kathleen Economy- Project Lead (Project Analyst) This task will be coordinated by Kathleen Economy, with the EPA's Center for Waste Management and Regulations (CWMR), Radiation Protection Division (RPD). Ms. Economy will be performing some ofthe CAP88 simulations and documenting the results. Ms . Economy serves as an EPA regulator on EPA's WIPP Performance Assessment team. Ms. Economy is responsible for maintaining the officia l, approved QAPP. Ms. Economy will be running CAP88 Version 3 and Version 4 using the DOE inputs. She will ensure that all team members on the distribution list will have access to the current revision ofthe QAPP by email communication. Lowell Ralston - Radiobiologist with the EPA 's Center for Science and Technology (CST), RPD. Dr. Ralston has extensive experience investigating the hea lth effects of radionuclides given var ious exposure levels and pathways. Dr. Ralston will be participating in these CAP88 confirmation analyses. A.3.2 Management Tom Peake -Center D irection, Center for Waste Management and Regulations (CWMR), Radiation Protection Division (RPD). Mr. Peake provides management direction to the project and r eviews the QAPP development and final report. Mr. Peake ensures the project has gone through the ORIA pre-dissemination process (ORIA SOP#3, Pre-Dissemination Review) before the report is released. A.3.3 Technical Review A technical review will be performed by a staff member ofEPA's CWMR, RPD, either Mr. Daniel Schultheisz or Mr. Jonathan Walsh are slated for his task. The individual who will serve as the technical reviewer will be dependent on their individual tasks and schedules a t the time of the review. Daniel Schultheisz -Physical Scientist with the EPA ' s CWMR, RPD. 

### Mr. Schultheisz serves the Associate Center Director for CWMR. 

### Mr. Schultheisz provides ma nagement direct ion and technical support to the Center Director. 5Effective Date: May 28 , 2014 Do cument No. WIPP / QAPP-1 Page: 6 of 16 Revision N o . 0 Johnathan Walsh -Ph ysical Scientist with the EPA's CWMR, RPD. Mr. Walsh serves as an EPA

regulator on EPA's WIPP Performance Assessment team. Mr. Walsh has some exper i ence

running the CAP88 computer code and will serve as a technical reviewer for this exercise. Ind ependen t Technical ReviewerReid Rosni c k- Physical Scientist with the EPA ' s CWMR, RPD. Mr. Rosnick is the Project Manager fo r updates and revisions to the CAP88 computer model and program. Mr. Rosnick will serve as an I ndependent Technical Reviewer for the CAP88 calculations described in this activity. A.3.4 Quali t y Assurance Lindsey Bender- Quality Assurance Coordinator with the EPA's CWMR , RPD. Ms. Bender also

serves as th e WIPP QA point of contact for the Ms. Bender is not involved in this project except for the QAPP review and QA consultations and is independent from the project. A.4 Overall Quality Objective and Criteria [A7] [Bl] [B4] [B6] [B7] [B8] [B9] [BlO] This Qualit y Assurance Project Plan describes a set of calculations to be performed by the Agency tha t are expected to corroborate DOE ' s CAP88 calculations. First , the Agency will run a calcu l ation with Version 3 ofCAP88-PC and use DOE ' s derived radiological data as the source term. The A gency will rerun the same calculations but use CAP88-PC Version 4. CAP88-PC Version 4 i s an improvement from Version 3. Most notably, Version 4 is able to include more isotopes du e to ingrowth and decay, determines age-specific doses and risks from inhalation/ingestion rates, and has a more refined ground build-up and removal rate for s p ecific isotopes. Because of these improvements the doses from Version 3 will differ from that of Version 4. No difference in the re sults is expected between DOE's CAP88 Version 3 runs those performed by EPA ' s. Because CAP88 Version 4 includes incorporates age-specific inhalation and consumption r ates , differences for risk and doses between the Ve r sion 3 and Version 4 simulations are expected . The difference is not known at this time and it is premature to discuss the differen c es at this time. The Agency's intent to perform these additional calc ulations is to provide confide nce that the doses to the public are within the re gulatory li mits as spec ified in 40 CFR 61.102 (1 0 rnrem/year)

and do not e xceed 10% ofthat limit (1 rnrem/year). The Agenc y 's switch to Vers i on 4 fo r most of this exercise is based on a migration for all Agency computer from the Microsoft XP to Windows 7 operating system. Version 3 of CAP88- 6Effect ive Date: May 28, 2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 Page: 7 of 16 Revision No. 0 PC does not work on Windows 7. Doses from this set ofCAP88 Version 4 calculations will be assessed at the same populated locations that used by DOE with their 

### CAPP88 Version 3 runs. 

### A .S Special Training - Team Members 

### [A8] [A9] Team Members will include EPA analysts and scientists within the Office ofRadiation and Indoor Air, Radiation Protection Division (RPD). Members from two Centers within RPD will participate, the Centers for Waste Managment and Regulations (CWMR) and Science and Technology (CST). Individuals from the two Centers either have had experience in t he development ofCAP88 or serve as a regulator for WIPP. Details ofthe team and their experience are given in A.6 Task Organization. 

### A.6 Project Documentation ofResults 

### [A9] The final product will be a report titled Environmental Protection Agency's Verification of the Department of Energy ' s Analysis Plan CAP88-PC WIPP Release Dose Calculations. The Team Lead, Kathleen Economy, will be responsible for developing, coordinating reviews, and final production. The report will be made available to the public posted on the EPA WIPP Air-Docket. 

### B. Data Needs , Sources , and Criteria 

### [Bl] [B2] [B3 ] [B9] [BlO] All the input files used by DOE in their CAP88 simulations were electronically transmitted to EPA. The file names were identified in the EXCEL files titled Event/nput/ndex.xls. The Event/nputlndex.xls file identifies all the input files. B.l Source Term 

### [AS] [Bl] [B2] [B3] The source term is listed in DOE's EXCEL spreadsheet titled: VALDy _Rad _

B

_Compilation

_Input.xlsx DOE Data-The Agency will verify DOE's CAPP88 by conducting a replicate calculation with CAP88-PC Version 3 using the same DOE source term. The radiological isotopic data used in the DOE calculations were cumula tive activities for Pu-239, Pu-239/240, U-238, Am-241 , Cs137. This data is originally derived from the Station B Fixed Air Sample (FAS) filter . The Station B FAS filter collects the global activity, as total alpha/beta disintegrations per minute (dpm). The filter was removed from the FAS, transported to the DOE lab where it underwent laboratory analysis to determine the individual radiological components that contributed to the 7Effective D a te: May 28,2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 Page: 8 of 16 Revision N o . 0 g l oba l activ i ties. The isotopic components of subsequent filters were estimated based on laboratory analysis conducted on the first filter collected on February 15th after the incident. Note , once t h e underground CAM alann sounded (at 2313 on February 14th 2014) the undergroun d ventilation was switched to filtration mode. In filtration mode the isolation dampers, lo c ated between the ducts that separate Station A and B exhaust, are closed and redirect air to through the filter bank via the filter bank ducting. Filtered air is exhausted via Station B . The switch t o filtration mode took approximately 60 seconds and prevents no mine exhaust air to exit through the Station A ducting. It takes approximately 30 minutes for an underground 'air particle' loc a ted near the entrance to Panel 7 to travel to the Station A exhaust point. Therefore, the rapid 60 second switch to filtration mode prevented contaminated air originating at this point

to exit from the underground via the Station A exhaust. However , there were a few leaks in the isolation dampers separating Station B exhaust and the filter bank bypass ducting. This caused a

minute qua n tity qf unfiltered exhaust air to bypass the HEP A filters and exit the Station B exhaust duc t s causing a minute amount of radionuclide to be released from the Station B exhaust. B .2 Popul a tion Files [B 1] The populat i on file used by DOE w ill be the same as used by EPA in this replicate calculation

are labeled a s : WIPP2010 .p op The Agency will use the same population .files DOE used in their CAP - 88 runs. Population is taken from t he 2010 U . S. Census Bureau within an 80 km (50 mi) radius. DOE updates the 2010 census file to reflect the population that lives within a 6.4 km radius (10 mi) ofWIPP as of the

close of yea r 2012. 8Effective Date: May 28, 2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 Page: 9 of 16 Revision No. 0

B 

### .3 Meteorological Files [B 1] Meteorological data input into the model will be that data collected at the DOE meteorological tower. The tower is located 600 m (1,970 

### ft) northeast ofthe waste handling building. This station measures precipitation as well as wind speed, wind direction, relative humidity and temperature at 2, 10, and 50 m (6.5, 33, and 165 

### ft) The following meteorological files used by DOE will be the same as used by EPA in this replicate calculation: Wind files: ValDyWka.wnd Average Temperature Files: 15.39 degrees C (this value was rounded up to 15.4 degrees C in DOE's summary file) Total Precipitation for that time period: 0.00 mm (Version 4 requires a non-zero value for precipitation. A very small number approaching zero is acceptable. EPA will use 0.01 as the precipitation input value.) Absolute Humidity: 8

**gr/mete~** B.4 Population Centers and Locations [AS] [A6] [Dl] [B2] The population centers and locations for the assessed dose calculations are listed in the table below. Distance From Exhaust Shaft to Fence Line Intersect Exclusive Use Area

Direction From Exhaust Distance (m) Distance Distance Shaft (km) (mi) NW, S 347 0 .347 0 .22 SSE 376 0 .376 0.23 N,SE 490 0.490 0.30 NNW, NNE 530 0.530 0 .33 W,SSW,E 592 0 .592 0 .37 WNW, WSW, ESE , E 646 0 .646 0.40 NW, NE 691 0 .691 0.43 sw 778 0 .778 0.48 Population Centers Within 80 km of WIPP Station 8 Exhaust 

### 9Effective Date: May 28,2014 Document No . WIPP/QAPP-1 Page: 1 0 of 16 Revision N o . 0 D escription Population Distance (m) Distance Distance (km) (mi) J ames Ranch (Mills) 5 5240 5.24 3 . 26 S mith [Crawfo rd] Ranch 1 7186 7 . 19 4.47 Mobley Ranch 0 9580 9 . 58 5.95 P ue Ranch 5 15495 15.5 9.63 M alaga COP 147 32187 32. 1 9 20 L oving CCO 2179 32187 32.19 20 L oco @ 20 mi NW 150 32187 32.19 20 Li vingston Wheeler 609 45062 45 . 06 28 C arlsbad city 26138 48280 48 . 28 30 L oco Hills 149 48280 48.28 30 L oving Co ( Red Bluff & Orla) 74 51499 51 . 5 32 H appy Valley (COP) 519 56327 56.33 35 Whi te City (OP) 7 61155 61.16 38

M onument COP 206 64374 64.37 40 E unice CCO 1610 64374 64.37 40 K ermit City * 5708 67593 67 . 59 42 J AL ceo* 3220 72421 72.42 45 A toka COP* 1077 72421 72.42 45 L ovington* 5505 80467 80.47 50 Na dine COP* 376 80467 80.47 50

H obbs ceo* 21653 80467 80.47 50 *T he CAP88 code limits the predicted do se to within an 80 km rad ius . Because Lovington , Nadine , and Hobbs are slig h tly over 80 km from the WIPP r elease point, t h ei r dos e calculations will b e considered as ' qua l ified' e s tima t e s. C. Data M anagement , Control , Storage C.l Da ta M anagement [ A9 ] [BlO] Input and results will be copies of the CAP88 output files. Hard copies of each simulation will be printed and converted to a *.pdffiles. A ll results ofthese s i mulations w ill be separately stored on th e EPA G : drive (G: \ OAR-ORIA-SHARE \C WMR \C FR \ WIPP \ CAP88) . C.2 D ata E ntries [B 1 0]

Da ta entries are recorded on the C AP88 * .dat files . These will serve as t he record that th e proper and correct dat a will be input into t he mod e l. C.3 Merging or Up load ing E lectronic Data from Exi sting Sources [ BlO ) 10Effective Date: May 28> 2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 Page: 11 of 16 Revision No. 0 The executable files for CAP88 Version 3 and Version will be downloaded and installed into the appropriate analysts computers from the EPA CAPP88 website (as ofthe date ofthis QAPP the website is http://www.epa.gov /radiation/assessment!CAP88/). The DOE input files will be transferred to the appropriate directory per CAP88 executable directory structure for the specific model runs. · C.4 D ata Review 

### [BS] [D 

### 1] Input and output data will be reviewed as part ofthe technical review. The review will crosscheck that all used in the replicate simulations used the same input values as was done in the DOE CAP88 Version 3 simulations. The results ofthe output data are properly linked to the specific and appropriate input da ta. All input and output files and data are converted to ' *.pdf files and stored on EPA's "G:" drive listed in the following section. C.S Data Storage and Manipulation [B 1 

### 0] The results will be stored on the project lea d analysts computer, then uploaded on a dedicated hard drive space used for the sole purpose ofORIA on EPA's 'G' drive with the following directory path: G:\OAR-ORIA-SHARE\CWMR \CFR \WIPP\CAP88 D. Data Quality Verification and Data Quality Reporting [BS] [D 1] [D2] Verification and data qualification ofthe source term data used in these analyses is outside the scope ofthis exercise /project. CAP88 -PC Version 4 is an improvement from Version 3. Most notably, Version 4 is able to include more isotopes due to ingrowth and decay, determines agespecific doses and ri sks from inhalation/ingestion rates, and has a more refined ground build-up and removal rate for specific isotopes. Version 4 ofCAP88 includes more isotopes due to ingrowth and decay, determines age-specific doses and risks from inhalation/ingestion rates, and has a more refined ground build-up and removal rate for specific isotopes. Because of these improvements the doses from Version 3 will differ from that ofVersion 4. I t is premature to discuss what these differences will be

11Effective D a te: May 28,20 1 4 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 Page: 12 of 16 Revision No. 0 D.l Data R eview, Verification, and Validation [B5] [Dl] [D2] [D3] All databas e s and reports will be reviewed by technical reviewers with expertise in either radiological data analysis, EPA CAP88 developers, or technical analysts within EPA's Radiation

Protection Division t eam. These indiviquals, collectively , have experience and knowledge of NESHAP r eq uirements and general WIPP regulatory issues. D.2 End Product- Use of this Analysis

The results o f this exercise is to corroborate that the DO E dose calculations are reproducible. T hese calcu l ations will be run using the CAP88 Version 3 computer model, the output predicts the annual do se calculations to a maximally exposed individual given t he February 14th 2014 release inci de nt at the WIPP site from Station B. EPA will perform additional calculations using Version 4 o f CAP88. Version 4 is a refinement of Version 3 in that it can calculate age specific

doses. CAP88-PC Version 4 is able to include more isotopes due to ingrowth and decay, determines a ge-specific doses and risks from inhalation/ingestion rates , and has a more refined ground buil d -up and removal rate for specific isotopes. Because of these improvements the doses from Versio n 3 will differ from that of Version 4. To predict how significant these diff e rences

will be , wh et her they will increase or decrease, is premature. What is of importance is to know whether releases are below the regulatory limit of 10 rnrern/year, per 40 CFR 61.92 and t he and whether the y exceed t he 0.1 mrern/year periodic confirmatory t rigger valu e as specified in 40 CFR 61.93 ( b) (4) (i).

D.3 Final V erification [B5] [D2] The final se t of ca l culations will be double checked by a technical reviewer to assure there are no errors i n the input values. This is accompli s hed by checking the summary files for CAP88 Version 3 an d Version 4, denot e d with the *.sum suffix. The ch e ck will include the following: 1. Tim e of t he computer s i mulation 2. Specific inp u t parameter values 3. Loc at ion of input files 4. Loc at ion of output file s 5. The g oal is met: a . R e sults of E PA's separate calculation determine the effective dose equivalent of a maximally exposed individual due to the re l eases from Station B at WIPP initiated th e morning of February 14 t h, 2014 - us i ng th e computer model CAP88 Version 3 are equivalent to DOE's results. 12Effective Date: May 28,2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP- 1 Page: 13 of 16 Revision No. 0 b. Separate simulations, using the same inputs for this incident, but performed on the updated version of

### CAP88, Version 

### 4, should indicate releases from 

### WIPP Station B will be within the regulatory limit of 10 mrern!year. 6. The objective is met- Corroboration ofDOE calculations demonstrates releases from the February 14th WIPP - incident were still within the regulatory limit of 10 rnrem /year. 

### D.4 Reports to Management [BS] [C2] [Dl] This ORIA SOP#3 Pre-Dissemination Review process has been initiated for this proj ect. The project will be approved in accordance with the ORIA SOP#3. Management has been made aware ofthe project and the SOP#3 form will be processed through the appropriate channels. This process includes a concept, draft review and final phase where management sig n-off is required. The fmal report will have management review. 

### E. Review of QAPP In accordance with Guidance for QualityAssurance Project Plans, EPA QNG-5, EPN240/R02/009, December 2002, the Project Lead for this QAPP (WIPP/QAPP-1) used a checklist provided by the Office ofWater for training on QA Strategies for Existing Data. The crosswalk between this QAPP and the G-5 checklist (G-5 Appendix C, Checklist Useful in QA Project Plan Review as specified in the ORIA Quality Management Plan) is provided in the table below. The ORIA Quality Management Plan requires use ofthe G-5 checklist or equivalent. This crosswalk provides the equivalence. This QAPP has the G-5 elements put in [square brackets] after the section title to track the crosscheck.

13Effective Date: May 28 , 2014 Document No. WIPP / QAPP-1 Page: 14 of 16 Revision N o . 0 WIPP/QAPP-1 G-5, Appendix C A.1 Title & Approval sheet A 1. Tit le & Approval Sheet

A Table o f Contents A2. Table of Contents Distribution list A3. Distribution L ist Task Organization A4. Project/Task Organization A Backgr o und , Goal , Objective AS. Problem Definition/Background A.2 Task Description A6. P roject/Task Description A.4 Overall Quality Objective & Criteria A 7. Quality Objectives an Criteria A.S Spec i a l Tra inin g- Team Members A8. Specia l Trainin g/Cert ifications A.6 Proje c t Documentation of Results A9. Documentation and Records B Data Needs , Sources & Criteria B2. Sampling Methods B3. Sample Handling & Custody B9. Non-direct Measurements B. I Sourc e Term B 1. Sampling Process Des i gn ( Experimental B.2 Popul a tion Files Design) B3. Sample Handling & Custody B.4 Popul a tion Centers and Locations AS. Problem Definition/Background A6. Project/Task Descript i on B2. Sampling Methods

D 1. Data Review , Verification, & Validation N/A B3. Samp le Handling & Custody A.4.2, A.S B4. Analytical Methods D.1.2, A6, C4, Dl.l, D.1.2, D.3, D.4 BS. Quality Control A .7 B6. In strument/Equipment Testing, Inspection, & Maintenance A.7 B7. Instrument/Equipment Calibrati on & F r equency N/A 88. Inspection/ Acceptance fo r Supplies & Consumables A.S B9. Non-direct Measurements C.1 , C.2 , C.3 , C.5 (data storage & B 1 0. Data Managm e nt manipulati o n ) N / A for th i s QAPP C 1. Assessments & Response Actions D.4 Reports to Managment C2 . Reports to Managment C.4 Data Review , D.l.1 Data Quality Dl. Data Re view , Verification, & Validation Verification & Data Quali ty Reporting D.1.2 D.l.2, D. 3 D2. Verification & Validation Methods D.2 D3. Reconciliation with U ser Requirements E . 1 Revie w ofQAPP E. I Crosswalk of QAPP checklist 14Effective Date: May 28,2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 Page: 15 of 16 Revision No. 0

The above is a checklist developed for t he EPA, Office ofWater, for the training "Quality Assurance Strategies for the Use ofExisting Data (Literature, Databases, Studies,-etc .) presented in February 2013 and March 2014 to EPA. This checklist is titled "Modified QAPP Format for Existing Data Projects. "

15Effective Da te: May 28 , 2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 Page: 16 of 16 Revision No. 0 Reference s Jones, Stew a rt. Email Transmission: March 12, 2014. Subject: CAP88 Special Input/Output files.

Emai l from Stewart Jones to Tom Peake. Stewart Jones , Nuclear Waste Partnership LLC, Department ofEnergy Contractor, Tom Peake, U.S. EPA (Office of Air and Radiation, Office of

Radiation and Indoor Air, Radiation Protection Division, Center for Waste Management and Regulations ) U.S. Depart me nt ofEnergy. 2014, Excess Cancer Riskfor th e February 14 1 h Contamination Release, Re v . 1. , March 10,2014 Memo U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. Title 40 CFR Part 61, Subpart H, "National Emission Standards for Emission s of Radionuclides Other Than Radon from Department of E nergy Faci l ities". Federal Regi s ter, vol. 67 (revision, September 9, 2002) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1993. Title 40 CFR Part 191 , Subpart A, "Environmental Standards for Management and Storage" Federal Register, vol. 58 (December 24 20, 1993 ) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plan s, EPA QA/G-5, EP A/240/R-02/009, December 2002. U.S. Env ironmental Pro tect ion Agency. February 2013. Office of Water. Modified QAPP Format for E xisting Data Projects, (Literature, Databases, Studies, etc.), a checklist. From

Office of Water February 2013 presentation titled , Quality Assurance Strategies for the Use of Existing Da t a (Literature, Databases , Studies, Etc). · 16