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

Revision No. 0 

Document Approval Form [A 1] 

Product Title: Environmental Protection Agency's Verification of the 

Department of Energy's CAP88-PC WIPP Release Dose Calculations 

Page ii 

Purpose: Corroborating calculations to provide confidence that the Department of Energy's 

Dose and Risk CAP88 Version 3 calculations for the February 141

\ 2014 fall below the 

regulatory limits. 

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, 2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 

111 

Revision No. 0 

Page 

This Quality Assurance Project 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 

l1l 
Effective Date: May 28, 2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 

IV 

Revision No. 0 

This page intentionally left blank. 

IV 

Page 
Effective Date: May 28, 201 4 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 

Revision No. 0 

Rev. DCN 

0 WIPP/QAPP-1 

Revision History 

WIPP/QAPP-1 

Revision History 

Responsible Party and Official Date 

Kathy Economy .................................................... 2014-05-28 

v 

Page v 
Effective Date: May 28, 2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 

VI 

Revision No. 0 

This page intentionally left blank. 

Vl 

Page 
Effective 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] [B1] [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] [B9] [810] ........ .................................... .......... 4 

A.3 Task Organization [A4] [A8] [BS] (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] [B10]. ........... 6 

A.S Special Training - Team Members [A8] [A9] .................................................................. 7 

A.6 Project Documentation of Results [A9] ........................................................................... 7 

B. Data Needs, Sources, and Criteria (B 1] (B2] (B3] [B9] [B 1 0] .................................................. 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] ......................................................... ........... .... ........ 11 

D. Data Quality Verification and Data Quality Reporting [BS] [D1] (D2] .................................. 11 

D.l Data Review, Verification, and Validation (BS] [D1] [D2] [03] ..................................... 12 

D.2 End Product- Use of this Analysis ................................................................................... 12 
Effective Date: May 28, 2014 Document No. WTPP/QAPP-1 Page: 2 of 16 

Revision No. 0 

0.3 Final Verification [B5] [02]. .............................................................................................. 12 

D.4 Reports to Management [B5] [C2] [Dl] ........................................................................... 13 

E. Review of QAPP ...................................................................................................................... 13 

References ............................................................................................... .... ................. ................. 16 

Distribution List [A3] 

Quality Assurance Project Plan- Environmental Protection Agency's Verification of the 

Department of Energy's Analysis Plan for Verifying DOE's CAP88-PC WTPP Release Dose 

Calculations 

Name 

Lindsey Bender 

Jonathan Edwards 

Alan Perrin 

Lee Veal 

Tom Peake 

Reid Rosnick 

Jonathan Walsh 

Jerome Puskin 

Lowell Ralston 

Daniel Schultheisz 

Supplementary Distribution List 

Title 

WIPP /QAPP-1 

Revision 0 

May 13, 2014 

Distribution List 

Quality Assurance 

Coordinator 

Director 

Deputy Director 

CREM Director 

CWMR Director 

CWMR Physical 

Scientist/Reviewer 

CWMR Physical 

Scientist/Reviewer 

CST Director 

Radiobiologist/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 Director or Deputy Director. 

Note: This Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) has been prepared in accordance with a 

checklist developed for the EPA, Office of Water, for the training "Quality Assurance Strategies 

for the Use of Existing 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." It was determined that this format was most appropriate one for this QAPP. A 

crosswalk between this "Modified" checklist and the checklist presented in EPA QA/G-5. 

2 
Effective Date: May 28, 2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 Page: 3 of 16 

Revision No. 0 

Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans, EPA QA/G-5 "United States Environmental 

Protection Agency, EP A/240/R -02/009, Office of Environmental Information, Washington, 

D.C., December 2002, was performed and all elements in the G-5 checklist are addressed. The 

G-5 checklist 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 Time. The releases triggered the 

Continuous Air Monitoring (CAM) probe located in the exhaust side of Panel 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 of alpha and beta readings were detected at WIPP's Station B Fixed Air Sampling station 

located just downstream from the HEP A 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 of a radionuclide. Specific to radionuclide emissions, specified in 40 CFR 

61.93 DOE Subpart H, the DOE is required to determine the effective dose of exposed 

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 if releases from a DOE facility are in excess of the 1 %of the 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 of DOE'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 effective dose 

equivalent was just outside of the WIPP exclusive use area (the WIPP fence line). This location 

is 347 meters NW of the 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] [B9] 

3 
Effective Date: May 28, 2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 Page: 4 of 16 

Revision No. 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 Objective [AS] [Bl] [B3] [B4] [BlO) 

Specific to the goal, the objective of this exercise is to use various versions of CAP88 to replicate 

DOE calculations. 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 

DOE-derived source term. The intent is to replicate DOE results. 

2. The Agency will run a set of dose calculations using CAP88 Version 4 in addition to Version 

3. All inputs, including the source term, will be the same as that used by DOE in their CAP88 

Version 3 calculation. 

a. 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. 

b. The intent is to determine whether that releases from Station B do not do not exceed 

the 10 mrem regulatory limit as required in 40 CFR 60.92. 

A.2 Task Description [A6] [Bl] [B3) [B4) [B7] [B9] [Bl 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 

source DOE-derived source term, and documented in an email transmission titled, CAP88 

Special lnput/Outputfiles (Jones, Stewart. March 12,2014, Email Transmission to Tom 

Peake). 

2. The Agency will run a set of dose calculations using CAP88 Version 4 in addition to Version 

3 and use the same source term used by DOE identified in the above memo. 

4 
Effective 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 of the 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 official, 

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 of the 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 health effects of radionuclides given 

various exposure levels and pathways. Dr. Ralston will be participating in these CAP88 

confirmation analyses. 

A.3.2 Management 

Tom Peake -Center Direction, Center for Waste Management and Regulations (CWMR), 

Radiation Protection Division (RPD). Mr. Peake provides management direction to the project 

and reviews 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 of EPA'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 at 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 management direction and 

technical support to the Center Director. 

5 
Effective Date: May 28, 2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 Page: 6 of 16 

Revision No. 0 

Johnathan Walsh-Physical 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 experience 

running the CAP88 computer code and will serve as a technical reviewer for this exercise. 

Independent Technical ReviewerReid Rosnick- Physical Scientist with the EPA's CWMR, RPD. Mr. Rosnick is the Project 

Manager for updates and revisions to the CAP88 computer model and program. Mr. Rosnick will 

serve as an Independent Technical Reviewer for the CAP88 calculations described in this 

activity. 

A.3.4 Quality Assurance 

Lindsey Bender- Quality Assurance Coordinator with the EPA's CWMR, RPD. Ms. Bender also 

serves as the 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 Quality Assurance Project Plan describes a set of calculations to be performed by the 

Agency that are expected to corroborate DOE's CAP88 calculations. First, the Agency will run a 

calculation with Version 3 ofCAP88-PC and use DOE's derived radiological data as the source 

term. The Agency will rerun the same calculations but use CAP88-PC Version 4. 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 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 of 

Version 4. No difference in the results 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 rates, differences for risk and doses between the Version 3 and Version 4 

simulations are expected. The difference is not known at this time and it is premature to discuss 

the differences at this time. 

The Agency's intent to perform these additional calculations is to provide confidence that the 

doses to the public are within the regulatory limits as specified in 40 CFR 61.102 (1 0 rnrem/year) 

and do not exceed 10% ofthat limit (1 rnrem/year). 

The Agency's switch to Version 4 for 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-

6 
Effective 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 the 

development ofCAP88 or serve as a regulator for WIPP. Details of the team and their 

experience are given in A.6 Task Organization. 

A.6 Project Documentation of Results [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 cumulative 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 F AS filter collects the global activity, as total alpha/beta disintegrations per minute 

( dpm). The filter was removed from the F AS, transported to the DOE lab where it underwent 

laboratory analysis to determine the individual radiological components that contributed to the 

7 
Effective Date: May 28,2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 Page: 8 of 16 

Revision No. 0 

global activities. 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 the underground CAM alann sounded (at 2313 on February 14th 2014) the 

underground ventilation was switched to filtration mode. In filtration mode the isolation 

dampers, located 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 to 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' located 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 quantity qf unfiltered exhaust air to bypass the HEP A filters and exit the Station B 

exhaust ducts causing a minute amount of radionuclide to be released from the Station B exhaust. 

B .2 Population Files [B 1] 

The population file used by DOE will be the same as used by EPA in this replicate calculation 

are labeled as: WIPP2010.pop 

The Agency will use the same population .files DOE used in their CAP-88 runs. Population is 

taken from the 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 year 2012. 

8 
Effective 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 of the 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 

9 
Effective Date: May 28,2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 Page: 1 0 of 16 

Revision No. 0 

Description Population Distance (m) Distance Distance 

(km) (mi) 

James Ranch (Mills) 5 5240 5.24 3.26 

Smith [Crawford] Ranch 1 7186 7.19 4.47 

Mobley Ranch 0 9580 9.58 5.95 

Pue Ranch 5 15495 15.5 9.63 

Malaga COP 147 32187 32.19 20 

Loving CCO 2179 32187 32.19 20 

Loco @ 20 mi NW 150 32187 32.19 20 

Livingston Wheeler 609 45062 45.06 28 

Carlsbad city 26138 48280 48.28 30 

Loco Hills 149 48280 48.28 30 

Loving Co 

(Red Bluff & Orla) 74 51499 51 .5 32 

Happy Valley (COP) 519 56327 56.33 35 

White City (OP) 7 61155 61.16 38 

Monument COP 206 64374 64.37 40 

Eunice CCO 1610 64374 64.37 40 

Kermit City * 5708 67593 67.59 42 

JAL ceo* 3220 72421 72.42 45 

Atoka COP* 1077 72421 72.42 45 

Lovington* 5505 80467 80.47 50 

Nadine COP* 376 80467 80.47 50 

Hobbs ceo* 21653 80467 80.47 50 

*The CAP88 code limits the predicted dose to within an 80 km radius. Because 

Lovington, Nadine, and Hobbs are slightly over 80 km from the WIPP release 

point, their dose calculations will be considered as ' qualified' estimates. 

C. Data Management, Control, Storage 

C.l Data Management [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. All results ofthese simulations will be separately 

stored on the EPA G: drive (G:\OAR-ORIA-SHARE\CWMR\CFR\WIPP\CAP88). 

C.2 Data Entries [B 1 0] 

Data entries are recorded on the CAP88 * .dat files. These will serve as the record that the proper 

and correct data will be input into the model. 

C.3 Merging or Uploading Electronic Data from Existing Sources [BlO) 

10 
Effective 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 of the date of this 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 Data Review [BS] [D 1] 

Input and output data will be reviewed as part of the 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 of the output data are properly linked to the 

specific and appropriate input data. 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 lead 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 of the source term data used in these analyses is outside the 

scope of this 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 risks from inhalation/ingestion rates, and has a more refined ground build-up 

and removal rate for specific isotopes. Version 4 of CAP88 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 of Version 4. It is premature to 

discuss what these differences will be 

11 
Effective Date: May 28,2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 Page: 12 of 16 

Revision No. 0 

D.l Data Review, Verification, and Validation [B5] [Dl] [D2] [D3] 

All databases 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 team. These indiviquals, collectively, have experience and knowledge of 

NESHAP requirements and general WIPP regulatory issues. 

D.2 End Product- Use of this Analysis 

The results of this exercise is to corroborate that the DOE dose calculations are reproducible. 

These calculations will be run using the CAP88 Version 3 computer model, the output predicts 

the annual dose calculations to a maximally exposed individual given the February 14th 2014 

release incident at the WIPP site from Station B. EPA will perform additional calculations using 

Version 4 of 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 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 of Version 4. To predict how significant these differences 

will be, whether 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 the and 

whether they exceed the 0.1 mrern/year periodic confirmatory trigger value as specified in 40 

CFR 61.93 (b) (4) (i). 

D.3 Final Verification [B5] [D2] 

The final set of calculations will be double checked by a technical reviewer to assure there are no 

errors in the input values. This is accomplished by checking the summary files for CAP88 

Version 3 and Version 4, denoted with the *.sum suffix. The check will include the following: 

1. Time of the computer simulation 

2. Specific input parameter values 

3. Location of input files 

4. Location of output files 

5. The goal is met: 

a. Results of EPA's separate calculation determine the effective dose equivalent of a 

maximally exposed individual due to the releases from Station B at WIPPinitiated the morning of February 14th, 2014 - using the computer model CAP88 

Version 3 are equivalent to DOE's results. 

12 
Effective 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 of DOE 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 project. The 

project will be approved in accordance with the ORIA SOP#3. Management has been made 

aware of the 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 sign-off is 

required. The fmal report will have management review. 

E. Review of QAPP 

In accordance with Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans, EPA QNG-5, EP N240/R02/009, December 2002, the Project Lead for this QAPP (WIPP/QAPP-1) used a checklist 

provided by the Office of Water 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 of the 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. 

13 
Effective Date: May 28, 2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 Page: 14 of 16 

Revision No. 0 

WIPP/QAPP-1 G-5, Appendix C 

A.1 Title & Approval sheet A 1. Title & Approval Sheet 

A Table of Contents A2. Table of Contents 

Distribution list A3. Distribution List 

Task Organization A4. Project/Task Organization 

A Background, Goal, Objective AS. Problem Definition/Background 

A.2 Task Description A6. Project/Task Description 

A.4 Overall Quality Objective & Criteria A 7. Quality Objectives an Criteria 

A.S Special Training-Team Members A8. Special Training/Certifications 

A.6 Project 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 Source Term B 1. Sampling Process Design (Experimental 

B.2 Population Files Design) 

B3. Sample Handling & Custody 

B.4 Population Centers and Locations AS. Problem Definition/Background 

A6. Project/Task Description 

B2. Sampling Methods 

D 1. Data Review, Verification, & Validation 

N/A B3. Sample 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. Instrument/Equipment Testing, 

Inspection, & Maintenance 

A.7 B7. Instrument/Equipment Calibration & 

Frequency 

N/A 88. Inspection/ Acceptance for Supplies & 

Consumables 

A.S B9. Non-direct Measurements 

C.1 , C.2, C.3, C.5 (data storage & B 1 0. Data Managment 

manipulation) 

N/A for this 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 Review, Verification, & Validation 

Verification & Data Quality Reporting D.1.2 

D.l.2, D.3 D2. Verification & Validation Methods 

D.2 D3. Reconciliation with User Requirements 

E.1 Review ofQAPP E. I Crosswalk of QAPP checklist 

14 
Effective Date: May 28,2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 Page: 15 of 16 

Revision No. 0 

The above is a checklist developed for the EPA, Office of Water, for the training "Quality 

Assurance Strategies for the Use of Existing 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." 

15 
Effective Date: May 28, 2014 Document No. WIPP/QAPP-1 Page: 16 of 16 

Revision No. 0 

References 

Jones, Stewart. Email Transmission: March 12, 2014. Subject: CAP88 Special Input/Output files. 

Email 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. Department ofEnergy. 2014, Excess Cancer Riskfor the February 141

h Contamination 

Release, Rev. 1., March 10,2014 Memo 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. Title 40 CFR Part 61, Subpart H, "National 

Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other Than Radon from Department of 

Energy Facilities". Federal Register, 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 Plans, 

EPA QA/G-5, EP A/240/R-02/009, December 2002. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. February 2013. Office of Water. Modified QAPP 

Format for Existing Data Projects, (Literature, Databases, Studies, etc.), a checklist. From 

Office of Water February 2013 presentation titled, Quality Assurance Strategies for the Use of 

Existing Data (Literature, Databases, Studies, Etc). · 

16