Ongoing environmental monitoring and assessment of the long-term impacts of the February 2014 radiological release from the waste isolation pilot plant

Research Article
  • 12 Downloads

Abstract

Three years ago, the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) experienced its first minor accident involving a radiological release. Late in the evening on February 14, 2014, a waste container in the repository underwent a chemical reaction that caused the container to overheat and breach, releasing its contents into the underground. Following a lengthy recovery process, the facility recently resumed waste disposal operations. The accident released significant levels of radioactivity into the disposal room and adjacent exhaust drifts, and although no one was present in the underground at the time of the release, a total of 22 workers tested positive for very low level of radiation, presumably from some of the radioactive material that was released above ground through a small leak in the HEPA filtration system. The dominant radionuclides released were 241Am and 239 + 240Pu in a ratio that matched the content of the drum from Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) that was eventually identified as the breached container. From the air particulate monitoring and plume modeling, it was concluded that the dose, at the nearest location accessible to the general public, from this radiation release event would have been less than 0.01 mSv (< 1 mrem/year). This level is well below the 0.1 mSv/year (10 mrem/year) regulatory limit for DOE facilities established by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

While no long-term impacts to public health or the environment are expected as a result of the WIPP radiation release, the limited ventilation and residual contamination levels in the underground are still a concern and pose a major challenge for the full recovery of WIPP. This article provides an up-to-date overview of environmental monitoring results through the WIPP recovery and an estimate of the long-term impacts of the accident on the natural and human environment.

Keywords

WIPP Radiation Release Plutonium Americium Source term Contamination level 

References

  1. ASER (2014) Waste isolation pilot plant annual site environmental report for 2014. DOE/WIPP-15-8866. www.wipp.energy.gov/library/aser/DOE
  2. ASER (2016) Waste isolation pilot plant annual site environmental report for 2016 DOE/WIPP-17-3591. www.wipp.energy.gov/library/aser/DOE
  3. Carlsbad Environmental Monitoring & Research Center (CEMRC). Annual report-2015 www.cemrc.org/annual
  4. Faller F (1994) Residual soil radioactivity at the gnome test site in Eddy County, New Mexico, report no. EPA 600/R-94/117. Washington, DC, Environmental Protection Agency http://www.wipp.energy.gov/Special/AIB_Final_WIPP_Rad_Release_Phase1_04_22_2014.pdf
  5. Giaquinto JM (2014) RE: WIPP-HEPA MOD–filter dose rate can be used to estimate release source term, e-mail communication to C.H Hunter, December 11, 2014Google Scholar
  6. Hayes RB (2014) February 14th, contamination release consequence assessment. Rev. 1,” 8 March 2014, Nuclear Waste Partnership, available online at: http://www.wipp.energy.gov/Special/Modeling%20Results.pdf
  7. Hayes RB (2016) Consequence assessment of the WIPP radiological release from February 2014. Health Phys 110:342–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hunter CH, Viner BJ (2015) Radiological source term estimates for the February 14, 2014 WIPP release event. SRNL-STI-2014-00579Google Scholar
  9. Ionization radiation exposure of the population of the United States (2009) NCRP No. 160, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Bethesda, MDGoogle Scholar
  10. Kenney JW, Downes PS, Gray DH, Ballard SC (1995) Radionuclide baseline in soil near project gnome and the waste isolation pilot plant. Environmental Evaluation Group, EEG-58Google Scholar
  11. Kenney JW, Gray DH, Ballard SC, Chaturvedi L (1999) Preoperational radiation surveillance of the WIPP Project by EEG from 1996–1998. EEG-73Google Scholar
  12. Poppiti J, Nelson R, MacMillan WJ, Scott Cunningham S (2017) Analysis of a radioactive release in a nuclear waste disposal facility. DOE-EM-4.21-02, July, 2017Google Scholar
  13. TAT-Report (2015) Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Technical Assessment Team Report. http://www.wipp.energy.gov/Special/TECHNICAL_ASSESSMENT_TEAM_REPORT.pdf
  14. Thakur P, Lemons BG, Ballard S, Hardy R (2015) Environmental and health impacts of February 14, 2014 radiation release from the nation’s only deep geologic nuclear waste repository. J Environ Radioact 146:6–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Thakur P, Lemons BG, White CR (2016) The magnitude and relevance of the February 2014 radiation release from the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant repository in New Mexico, USA. Sci Total Environ 565:1124–1137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. U.S. EPA (2000) National Primary Drinking Water Regulations; Radionuclides; Final Rule, 40 CFR Parts 9, 141, and 142. Federal Register 65, No. 236, 76708-76753Google Scholar
  17. USAEC (1963) Gnome/Coach Site Disposal Options. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission NVO-131, Las Vegas, NVGoogle Scholar
  18. US-DOE (2014) U.S. Department of Energy Accident Investigation Report, Phase-I. Radiological release event at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant on February 14, 2014. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. Accessible at: www.wipp.energy.gov/.../AIB_Final_WIPP_Rad_Release_Phase1_04_22
  19. US-DOE (2015) U.S. Department of Energy Accident Investigation Report, Phase -II. Radiological Release Event at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant on February 14, 2014. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. Accessible at: http://www.wipp.energy.gov/Special/AIB_WIPP%20Rad_Event%20Report_Phase%20II.pdf

Copyright information

© This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Carlsbad Environmental Monitoring & Research CenterCarlsbadUSA
  2. 2.Carlsbad Technical Assistance ContractorUS Department of EnergyCarlsbadUSA

Personalised recommendations