t
. RECEIPT OF REGULATORY REQUESTED DOCUMENTS

C~u t ~ll'! ~u
i'ile ?Jn.u: _ _ __

TITLE: (CHPRC) RESPONSE TO EPA/ECOLOGY REQUEST FORn~ ~,-~:- PLUTONIUM FINISHING PLANT WORK RESUMPTION PLAN, CHPRC-03689 Rev. 0

REGULATORY AGENCY: Ecology

COPY
Review & Recycle

DOE/RL: Eric Faust
CH2M HILL PRC REPRESENTATIVE: Linda Petersen/Noah Cruz
INSPECTION NUMBER: NA

RECEIVED
REGULATOR I.D. NUMBER: NA

Requested Information:

JUN 29 2018
Department of Ecology
NWP - Richland

-Copy of CHPRC-03689, Rev. 0 - PFP Work Resumption Plan

REPRESENTATIVE NAME AND TITLE:

:::A:;;,~~ {'1itd@ vlda'aj DATE: to ·:/9-15
CHPRC REPRESENTATIVE NAME AND TITLE:

 CHPRC-03689
Revision 0

Plutonium Finishing Plant Work Resumption Plan

Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy
Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management
Contractor for the U.S. Department of Energy
under Contract DE-AC06-08RL 14788

CH2MHILL
Plateau Remediation Company

P.O. Box 1600
Richland, Washington 99352

Approved for Public Release;
Further Dissemination Unlimited

 CHPRC-03689
Revision 0

Plutonium Finishing Plant Work Resumption Plan
Program/Project: PFP

M. T. Hughey
CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company

Date Published

June 2018
Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy
Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management
Contractor for the U.S. Department of Energy
under Contract DE-AC06-0BRL 14788

CH2MHILL
Plateau Remediation Company

P.O. Box 1600
Richland, Washington 99352

APPROVED

I By Julia Raymer at 4:02 pm, Jun 28, 2018
Release Approval

Date

Approved for Public Release;
Further Dissemination Unlimited

 CHPRC-03689
Revision 0

TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER
Reference herein to any spec1f1c commercial product, process, or service by
tradename, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily
constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the
United States Government or any agency thereof or its contractors or
subcontractors.

This report has been reproduced from the best available copy.

Printed in the United States of America

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Executive Summary

1

2

This plan summarizes CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company (CHPRC) actions

3

to resume demolition activities at the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) Complex.

4

The remaining work is divided into four phases. The first two phases encompass

5

low-risk activities to include the 234-5Z Building debris, and the remaining 234-5Z

6

Building, vault and associated tunnels outside of the A and C lines footprint. Resuming

7

demolition activities at facilities that involve relatively small amounts of plutonium will

8

enable the verification of the model and established controls to be implemented and

9

understood by the demolition teams. The third and fourth phases encompass high-risk

10

work 234-5Z A and C lines and tunnels associated with the A and C lines, and the

11

Plutonium Reclamation Facility (PRF) rubble pile. Corrective actions from the root cause

12

evaluation, independent assessment ofradiological control and Integrated Safety

13

Management System review were screened to identify pre-start actions that will be

14

completed prior to resuming demolition activities. Two independent management

15

assessments will be conducted: one prior to the low-risk work and one prior to the high-

16

risk work.

17

CHPRC will ensure that a field work supervisor at PFP is responsible for conducting

18

demolition in accordance with the established work documents. Strictly following the

19

work documents, the supervisor will ensure that demolition activities remain within the

20

bounds of the air dispersion model by monitoring radiological control activities, wind

21

conditions, and demolition progress for the proper control of work. At the end of each

22

shift, the supervisor will ensure that appropriate contamination controls are established

23

prior to departing the site and that contamination monitoring has been completed. While

24

the intention is to minimize debris pile accumulation at the end of the shift, it is

25

acceptable that debris piles be left over from the previous shift as long as fixative has

26

been applied prior to leaving and thereafter in accordance with current procedures. There

27

is no time restriction regarding how long a debris pile may be left, but the debris piles

28

must be size reduced and staged for waste loadout prior to resuming building demolition.

29

All work activities will be performed under the control, release, and acceptance of the

30

PFP operations office. The PFP operations team is responsible for all work evolutions

31

that are released and performed on the PFP Project. These activities will be overseen by

32

the senior supervisory watches (SSWs) to ensure adherence to established controls.

iii

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1

The resumption of work plan details the phased approach to completing demolition of

2

PFP and PRF and outlines the enhanced controls to be implemented to ensure safe

3

completion of the project.

iv

  REV. 0
JUNE 2018

This page intentionally left blank.

CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Contents
1

2

Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1

1.1

Purpooe ............................................. ...... ........................ .. ....................................... 1

1. 2

Background .............. ................. ... .. .. .. ...................... ... ......... ... ....... .. ... .......... ........... 1

1.3

Scope.... ...................................................................................... ............................. 2

Facility Description........................................................................................................... 2

2.1
2.2
3

4

236-2 Building and Remaining Rubble Pile ............................................................. ...... 2
234-52 Debris Pile and Remaining Structure.. .... ....................... .. ......... ... ...................... .4

Event Actions and Subsequent Assessments ........................................................................ 7

3.1

Root Cause Analysis ................................................ ............ ..... ....... .. ........... ... ......... .7

3.2

Independent Radiological Control Assessment ........................... .. ....................... ......... ..7

3. 3

Management Assessment Report for Implementation of Integrated Safety
Management System (ISMS) .. ............. ................................. .. .... ... ...... ...... .............. .. .. 7

Demolition Resumption Approach ..................................................................................... 8

4.1

Stabilization and Current Site Condition ............ ........... .. ................................ ....... ........ 8

4.2

Demolition Readiness and Management Assessment. .................................................... 11

4.3

Options Evaluation Process .......................................... ......................................... .... 13

4.3.1 Enhanced Control Sets ............................ .......... .. .................. ................. ......... 17
4.3.2 Phase A- 234-52 Building Debris Dis positioning ................ .. .. .. ............. ........... 19
4.3.3 Phase B-Demolition of 234-52 and Vault ....................... ............. .................... 22
4.3.4 Zone and Core Stabilization Zone Descriptions ................................................... 24
4.3.5 Phase C-Demolition of A and C Line and Tunnels .............. ... ......................... .. 26
4.3.6 Ventilation Controls and Placement. ................. ............................. ................... 30
4.3. 7 Phase D - Remaining PRF Demolition and Rubble Pile .................................. .. ... 32
5

Demolition Controls........................................................................................................ 36

5.1

Safety Basis ..... ........................................... ...... .............. ................... ..................... 36

5.2

Criticality Controls .. ...................... ......................................... ..................... .. .. ...... .. 36

5.3
5.4

Facility Characterization ........................................................................................... 37

Air Dispersion Model. .............................................................................................. 37

5.5

Health and Safety Plan (HASP) ...... ..... ......... .... ....... .................................. .. .... .......... .40

5.6

Radiological Monitoring and Control.. ............................. .. .................... ...... .............. .41

5.6.1 Personnel Monitoring ..................................................................................... 41
5.6.2 Air Monitoring ..... ........................................................................... .... .......... 41
5.6.3 Surface Contamination.................................... ..... .................... .... ................... 44
5.7

Contamination Control Fixative Plan ..... ..................... ............. ..... ........ ................... .. .45

5.8

Electrical and Mechanical Isolation .. .. ..................................... ....... .. .. .. ....... ............... 47

5.9

Combustible Controls ........................ .............................. .............. ...... ..................... 48

vi

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

5.10 Waste Management, Handling, and Packaging ...... ... ....... .. .... .. .... ... ... ...... ........ .......... ... 48
5.11 Site Control Plan .... ........... .. ......... .......... ... .. ...... .... .. ................... .. ........... ............. ... 50
5.12 Tunnels , Trenches, and Subterranean Structures ............................... .......... .... ... .... ....... 52
5.13 Water Management. ....... ...... ....... ... ....... .. ............ ..... .. ...... ......... ........ .. .. .... ... .... .... .. .. 52

6

Conduct of Operations .................................................................................................... 52
6.1

Roles, Responsibilities, Authorities, and Accountabilities ..... ..... ...... .. ........... ..... ........ .. .. 53
6. 1. 1 Project Manager.. ... ..... .. ................. ..... ............ .............. ....... .............. .. .. ........ 5 3
6.1.2 Deputy Project Managers ... ...... .... .. ... ..... .. ...... ..... .... .... ......... ..... .... .... ....... .... ... 54
6.1.3 Demolition Director ..... ........ ... .. ... ........ ...... .... ... .. ...... ....... ...... ........ ............ .... 54
6.1.4 Field Work Supervisors ..................... ..... ...... .. .. ..... .... ....... ....... ............ ............ 54
6.1 .5 Facility Min-Safe, Maintenance, and Operations Director..................................... 54
6.1. 6 Safety, Health, and Radiological Protection Director ............ ......... ....... .... ........... 54
6.1. 7 Engineering, Waste, and ND A Director .......... ... ..... ..... .... ....... ...... ........ ...... ....... 55
6.1.8 Environmental Director....... .. ............. .... ... .... ............ ... ..... ....... ......... ............. . 55
6.1.9 Project Controls Director...... .. .......... ....... .. .............. ...... ............. ... ........ .......... 55

6.2

Work Package Development. ....... ............ ......... ........... ............................ .......... .. .... . 55

6.3

Employee Engagement ............. ...... ............. ............ ......... ........ ................ ... ..... ..... ... 56

6.4

Emergency Preparedness and Abnormal Conditions ........ .. ....... .. .. ............ ...... ...... ... ...... 57
6.4. 1 Emergency Preparedness .. ............... ...... ....... .... ...... ..................... ....... ..... ...... .. 57
6.4.2 Abnormal Events ............ .. ....... ............... ... ........ .. ..... ................ .. ...... ............. 59
6.4.3 Abnormal Operations ...... .... .... .... ... ..... ... ... .. .. ... ... ... ....... ..... ...... ...... ..... ... .. ... ... 59
6.4.4 Notifications ....... ........ ........... ............ ....... .. ... ..................... ..................... ... .. 59

6.5

7

Management Oversight. ........ ....... .. ..... ..... ...... .. .... .... ....... ....... .. ....... ......... .. .... ..... .. .. .. 60

6. 6 Change Management Process ........... ... .... .... .......................... ......................... ... ..... ... 60
References...................................................................................................................... 61

Appendices
A
B

Integrated Corrective Actions to Support Work Resumption Plan and Crosswalk of
Expert Panel Comments ................................... .. ........................................................ A-i
Work Packages ........................................................................................................... B-i

C

CHPRC Work Management Process ............................................................ ............... C-i

D

Logic Tree ................................................................................................................. D-i

E

Example Work Document ........................................................................................... E-i

F

Senior Supervisory Watch Expectations ....................................................................... F-i

vii

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Figures
Figure 1.

Plutonium Finishing Plant Facilities .... ...... ...... .. ........ ... ..... ............. ... .... .......... ...... ..... 1

Figure 2.

PRF Structure at 4:00 p.m on 12/15/2017 .......... ................. ...... .. .. .. ... ...... ..... .......... .. . 3

Figure 3.

PRF Rubble Pile Under Soil and Gravel- 5/14/2018.. .... ...... .... .. ... ... ....... ....... ..... ......... 3

Figure 4.

Original 234-5Z Building Configuration .. .... .... ... ..... ... ... ......... ......... ..... ...... .... .. .......... 5

Figure 5.

Current 234-5Z Building Configuration ............ ................ .......... ..... .... ............ .......... . 6

Figure 6.

Fixative Application Areas ..... .. .. ... ... .... .... ...... .. ................................... ................. .... 9

Figure 7.

Boundaries Being Evaluated .. ... ... ... .. ....... ..................... ....................................... .... 10

Figure 8.

Remaining MAR at PFP ................. ... ........................................ ... .... .. ... ... .. .. ..... ... .. 11

Figure 9.

Proposed Demolition Schedule with Management Assessments and Lessons
Learned ... ....... ..... ............ ..... ... ....... ............................ .. ... ..... .. ............ .............. ... . 12

Figure 10.

Remaining Four Demolition Scope Areas ... .. ... .... ....... .. ..... :....................................... 13

Figure 11.

Option Evaluation Process ............ .. .... .. .. .. ........................... ............... .......... .. ....... . 14

Figure 12.

Option Evaluation Weighted Factors ..... .. .... .. .. .. ........ .... ... .......... ... ... ........... .. ........ .... 14

Figure 13.

Option Scoring - Area A ..... ....... ............................. ... ....... .. ............................... .. .. 15

Figure 14.

Option Scoring -Area B .................... ........... .. .... ... .............. .. .. ...... ..... .. ... .. ... ... ....... 15

Figure 15.

Option Scoring - Area C ....................... ..... .... ....... .. ......... ............................ .... .. ... .. 16

Figure 16.

Option Scoring - Area D... .. ... .. ................ .. ....................... .............. .. ..... .... .......... ... 17

Figure 17.

Enhanced Controls for Lower and Higher Risk Scope.. ..... ........................... ...... ....... ... 18

Figure 18.

Enhanced Controls for Ventilated Modular Demolition ..... ......... ............. .. .. ... .. .... ........ 19

Figure 19.

Enhanced Controls for Saturated Soil Entrainment. .... ..................... ......... ................. .. 19

Figure 20.

Demolition Area A- Removal of 234-5Z Debris and Rubble ....... ................. .. ............. 20

Figure 21.

Previously Size-Reduced Building Debris from 234-52 ................................ ...... ... ...... 21

Figure 22.

234-5Z Building and Mobile Office Debris .... ....... ....... ........... ................... ................ 21

Figure 23.

Demolition Area B- Remaining Demolition of 234-5Z and Vault ................................. 23

Figure 24.

Depictions of Bay-by-Bay Removal of2nd Floor and Duct Level.. ...... .. ......................... 23

Figure 25.

Removal (blue) of CSZ 4.2, 2 nd Floor and Duct Level Connected to Zone 5 and
Remaining (red) A and C Lines and Tunnels .. ................... ...... ...... ... .......................... 25

Figure 26.

Demolition Area C - A and C Lines and Tunnels in 234-5Z .. .... .. .. .. ...................... .. ... ..26

Figure 27.

RMA and RMC Location in Zones 5 and 6 with CSZs .......... .. .................. .. ................. 27

Figure 28 .

First Floor RMA and RMC Location in Zones 5 and 6..... ... ........................... .. ............ 27

Figure 29.

Preparing RMA for Demolition .. .... .... .... .... .. ...... .............................. .............. .... .. .. ..28

Figure 30.

RMC Location Prepped for Demolition ..... .... ........ ... ..... ... .... .... ... .............................. 29

Figure 31.

Tunnel 4 and 5 Location Under RMA and RMC .............. .. ...................................... ... 29

Figure 32.

Tunnel 5 Looking West .. .......... .. ...... ......... ............. .... ..................... .... .. ... .. ... .... ... .. 30

Figure 33.

Identified Locations for Ventilation Attachments for A and C Lines .... .. ..................... ... 31

Figure 34.

Ventilation Shroud .. ....... ........................ ..... ..... .. ............... ... ...... .... .......... .............. 31

viii

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Figure 35.

Demolition Area D - Remaining 236-Z Demolition and Rubble Pile .. ................ ..... ...... 33

Figure 36.

PRF Rubble Pile - 04/08/2018 ...................... ......... .. ......... .............. ...... ................... 33

Figure 37.

PRF Rubble Pile - 04/08/2018 .............. ..................... ........................ .... .................. 34

Figure 38.

Trailer-Mounted HAWC 300-80-D Performance Profiles ............................... .... .......... 34

Figure 39.

Trailer-Mounted Dust Fighter 15000 Performance Profiles ... ........ ................. ............... 35

Figure 40.

Conceptual Spray Pattern Over PRF Debris Pile ... ... ........ ........ ... ............. ................. ..35

Figure 41.

Monitoring Locations After December 2017 .......... .... ............ ........... ........................ .44

Figure 42.

Waste Transfer from PFP to ERDF ........... .......................... ...................................... 49

Figure 43.

Access Control and Radiological Boundaries .................. .................................... ....... 51

Figure 44.

PFP Senior Management Team ........ ........................ .. .... ............. ..... ....................... .53

Tables
Table 1.

234-5Z Recovery Air Model Input Summary .................... .. ...... .. .................. .. ........... 39

Table 2.

Moni~oring and Response.............................................. ................................ .......... 43

Table 3.

Fixatives, Matrix, Dilution, and Reapplication Frequency .... ....... .. .............................. .45

Table 4.

Approved Fixative Applications ........... ............ ............................ .. ........... ............ .. .46

Table 5.

Approved Fixative by Application/Matrix ....................... .......................................... .47

Table 6.

ERDF Enhanced Controls for Worker Protection During Disposal of PFP Waste ............. 50

Table 7.

PFP Emergency Preparedness Program-Related Guidance............ ................................ 58

Table 8.

DOE-RL Emergency Action Levels .. ............ ................ ... .. .. ......... ................. .... ... .. ..58

ix

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Terms
AERMOD

American Meteorological Society/Environmental Protection Agency
Regulatory Model

ARA

Airborne Radioactivity Area

CA

contamination area

CHA

craft-specific hazard analyses

CHPRC

CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company

csz

cores tabilization zone

CTA

container transfer area

D&D

deactivation and decommissioning

DAC

derived airconcentration

DOE

U.S. Department ofEnergy

EMS

Environmental Management System

EOC

Emergency Operations Center

ERDF

EnvironmentalRestorationDisposalFacility

FHA

fire hazards analysis

GHA

general industrial hazard analysis

HASP

health and safety plan

HCA

high contamination area

HRB

Hazard Review Board

ISMS

Integrated Safety Management System

Jacobs

Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc.

JHA

job hazard analysis

LLW

low-level waste

MAR

material at risk

NDA

nondestructive analysis

OEP

Option Evaluation Process

PBS

polymeric barrier system

PFP

PlutoniumFinishing Plant

PNNL

Pacific Northwest National laboratory

PPE

personal protective equipment

X

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

PRF

PlutoniumReclamation Facility

RAWP

RemovalAction WorkPlan

RCT

radiological control technician

RMA

remote mechanical A line

RMC

remote mechanical Cline

SME

subject matter expert

SOI

standard operating instruction

SSW

Senior Supervisory Watch

U~s

upper95 percent confidence level

xi

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1

1 Introduction

2
3
4
5

The Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) Complex is currently undergoing deactivation and decommissioning
(D&D) activities at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford Site in Richland, Washington.
This plan describes the resumption of demolition activities after the spread of airborne radioactive
contamination outside of the established control boundaries that caused a subsequent work stoppage.

6

1.1

Purpose

7
8
9
10
11

This plan summarizes CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company (CHPRC) actions to resume
demolition activities at the PFP Complex safely and efficiently. This document also provides the
demolition resumption strategy and associated enhanced controls to the PFP Deactivation and
Decommissioning (D&D) project. Additionally, this document provides a crosswalk from the root cause
evaluation (RCE) corrective actions and expert panel comments on the RCE to the plan (Appendix A).

12

1.2 Background

13
14
15

Under its contract with the DOE, Richland Operations Office, CHPRC is demolishing the highly
contaminated PFP. The PFP produced approximately 60 percent of the plutonium for the United States
and has been de-inventorying, decommissioning, and decontaminating for the last 20 years .

16
17
18
19
20
21
22

Located in the 200 West Area of the Hanford Site, PFP commenced operations in 1949. PFP's primary
mission was processing plutonium metal, which was separated and recovered from liquid and solid
process streams, into hockey puck-sized "buttons" for defense purposes. In 1991, the mission changed to
plutonium-bearing material stabilization, cleanup, D&D, and environmental restoration. Material
stabilization campaigns and the mission for storing stabilized plutonium materials were completed in
December 2009 when the final containers of material were shipped offsite. The 2736-Z Complex facilities
that had supported that mission were demolished in 2012. PFP facilities in 2012 are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Plutonium Finishing Plant Facilities
1

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2
3
4
5

Consistent with CHPRC-02582, Plutonium Finishing Plant Demo Plan, D&D of the remaining
PFP facilities commenced in 2016. By that year's end, many of PFP's 90 buildings were demolished,
and much of the processing equipment and gloveboxes were safely size-reduced and removed from
the facilities. Open-air demolition on the first of PFP's four main process buildings began with the
236-Z Plutonium Reclamation Facility (PRF) in November 2016.

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

In June 2017, PFP demolition activities resulted in the spread of airborne radioactive contamination
outside of established control boundaries, causing exposure to nearby workers and a subsequent stop
work order. As a result, CHPRC completed a causal analysis and developed several corrective actions to
prevent recurrence. In early September 2017, demolition resumed until December 14, 2017, when another
spread of airborne contamination occurred outside of established radiological zones . On December 15,
contamination was found outside of the established radiological boundaries. On December 18, follow-up
radiological surveys found additional contamination present in the administrative office area, and work
was stopped. CHPRC conducted a root cause analysis, identified corrective actions, and worked with
DOE and the regulators to develop recovery plans to enable demolition activities to resume.

15

1.3 Scope

16
17
18
19
20

The scope of this plan includes the resumption of PFP demolition activities following the work stoppage
in December 2017. Demolition activities include demolition of remaining portions of Building 234-5Z
and removal of associated debris and 236-Z rubble pile and remaining stem wall disposition. The scope of
work is to remove the structures to slab-on-grade and fill any basement/tunnel areas exposed during
demolition using an approach that consists of four phases: two lower risk and two higher risk.

21
22
23
24
25
26

Installation of the 20-year cover cap, compilation of data to validate HNF-22401, Plutonium Finishing
Plant (PFP) Complex End Point Criteria, and turnoverof the remaining slabs and subterranean structures
to long-term surveillance to meet the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order
Milestone M-083-00A (Ecology, et al., 1989) are outside the scope of this document. The activities to
accomplish these items will be included within the field execution schedule and performed under separate
work control documents.

27

2 Facility Description

28
29

This chapter describes the demolition zone areas, including remaining structures and rubble piles that
constitute the current conditions.

30

2.1

31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43

The 236-Z structure was a roughly rectangular reinforced concrete building oriented in a north-south
direction along its major axis. The building footprint measured approximately 70 ft wide in the east-west
direction and 75 ft long along the north-south. The original building was composed of four-story levels
with a small, two-story extended penthouse segment located in the southwest quadrant. The penthouse
provided exterior stair access to all building floor levels and two working floor levels. The first floor of
the main building was located at ground level (ref. elev. 0.0), with floors 2, 3 and 4 located approximately
at elevations of 12, 24, and 34 ft, respectively. The two penthouse levels comprised a smaller footprint
measuring 20.5 by 29 ft, with penthouse levels 5 and 6 located at elevations of 56 and 66.5 ft,
respectively. The main roof system sloped from west to east and was generally located at 49.5 ft
elevation, and the upper penthouse roof was approximately 66. 5 ft. Attached to the main building on the
south side was a single-story, metal-framed airlock chamber that provided access to the main cell area.
This chamber was removed by conventional demolition means before the 236-Z Building was
demolished.

236-Z Building and Remaining Rubble Pile

2

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2
3
4

The main structural building was composed of a bearing system in which the interior and exterior
supporting walls were used to resist both vertical and horizontal loadings. The floor and lightweight
concrete roof system comprised a rigid diaphragm floor system that transfers lateral loads from each level
to the supporting shear walls and base-level foundation system.

5
6
7
8

As of December 2017, approximately 95 percent of the PRF has been demolished. The remaining
structure includes small portions of the east and west stem walls and rubble piles consisting of concrete
and metal from final demolition activities. The walls and rubble plies are covered with at least 18 in. of
clean overburden and fixative (Figures 2 and 3).

Figure 2. PRF Structure at 4:00 p.m. on 12/15/2017

Figure 3. PRF Rubble Pile Under Soil and Gravel - 5/14/2018

3

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1

2.2 234-SZ Debris Pile and Remaining Structure

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

The original 234-5Z Building consisted of 440 ft running in an east-west direction. The length was
composed of22 equal length bays of 20 ft each (Figure 4) oriented from the east to the west end of the
building (reference labeled gridlines 1 through 23). The building contained eight bays located at the east
end of the structure, six bays in the middle, and seven bays at the west. The transverse bay layout is at the
east end of the building. The widest portion of the structure (east) had an overall width of approximately
180 ft, the middle segment was the most narrow at 138 ft, and the west end of the building was 148 ft
between column centerlines. The structure was split in the middle with an expansion joint occurring at
gridline 12, exactly one-half the length of the original.

10
11
12
13
14

The original building was composed of three floors and a roof. Floor 1 was located at ground level.
The duct level on floor 2 varied in height between 12.67 and 17.67 ft. Floor 3 was located approximately
31.5 ft above the base level. The roof level also varied in height, with the northernmost elevation at
approximately 43.25 ft above ground level and the southernmost at approximately 47.25 ft above ground
level.

15
16
17
18

The primary structure consisted of a combined shear wall and steel frame on concrete drilled shaft
foundations to provide vertical and lateral support of the wall, floor, and roof systems. The floors were
conventionally reinforced concrete slabs on metal pan deck. The exterior was metal wall panels, and the
interior was concrete and plaster/metal partition walls.

19
20
21

Demolition of the 234-5Z Building was achieved via shearing and pulverizing with high reach-type
demolition equipment by individual bays and zones, which enabled removal in mass while maintaining
the structural integrity of the remaining building segments.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36

As of December 2017, approximately 60 percent of 234-5Z Building demolition was complete.
The structure has been removed along the entire north wall to column line C, the east end to
approximately column line 3, and the west portion to between column lines 18 and 19. Key structural
references associated with facility column lines include the remnants of stairwells 1 and 2 (N-S column
lines 4 and 13, respectively), the exposure offilter room 316 (N-S column line 19), and the PRF exhaust
trunk spanning the roof (E-W column line E, which demarks the southern boundat.y of the RMC line;
Figure 4). A residual portion of Plutonium Process Support Laboratot.y roof extends to the south of
column line E; there are no remnants offilter boxes 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, and 26 stubs or the
42 in.-diameter filtered process exhaust header. Near column line 6 to 10 and E, the southern end of the
structure has also been removed, which facilitated access to support the removal of the HC227S glovebox
in room 227. This clearance affected removal of filter rooms 309 and 310, which had received filter
process system (E-4) exhaust and were areas of higher surface contamination. The vault annex structure
on the northwest side of the facility remains, along with debris piles to the north and south. Figure 5
depicts the remaining facility structures as ofF ebruary 2018. The radiological source term associated with
these remnants is discussed in Section 5.4.

4

 OfJE 2.J

T
[

1'2:
...--

~f~
~ - -i

'Y Cif er, ~ ~ 'f

(?

19

'w

T

1

i

.

I

'I

~ -~
l,.J-,-4J.,-l,.Y
r';.li-S51/~.r.r&-:I
..r.J'..f..r'_r'JtJ"'_

1

1

,__..___

IC

·"i.'\

'(
I

ZONf: 2. 4

'ONE. 2.5

EXIST. EXP. JOMi
r.\

T 1@00cpecp 1

t@G>@0;)
(~ ~' ~ '( -{)
..____ ,
J

~

>Ii

.Ac

~

1

,!

•

~

'?ffi

1

1

tu

@;- -

(s- -

~ -.,-.-_
._,

- '1

~~-=..a..·.- .,

.,.._
....~l..,;..IJ.i __ ___
- , ... ~ :,:.----:-:- · ,,. )_~
. •_ •···~---,-.~·,x.
..f ___ .. r. .• ..

r.'~-f~~·p·l,! µ~µ~~:;:;~~)I·
C11

··

l Y.JJS})))

m

' } } ~ 7 ...- .,

~ '.-..;_;

--

." ?\
.~

-~zi

@-I

' !'-"1fl7

I

I
I

I
I

I
I

I
I

@~

I

~

I
I

I

@

@)

,6
~

I

__0
'-'

I

'I

I
I

I

I

@

I

I

I

I

I

I

;hi
@ 0 ~@®
@ cb
I
I

I

I

I

I

@1

/l'E 4.2

ONE 4.

'

1

irr..-<<A•'A<< -"<<r<1+rz< ·;aq<<'q: y:rr.-r11 -- 2.)
I

I

cb cb

'ONE 4.J

0

..... I ......

.._:;

~

8
0
I

ZONE :!

-u
Note: Figure shows core stabilization zones remaining for 234-SZ.

Figure 4. Original 234-SZ Building Configuration

~0
c,.)

c..

0)

c°'

z-'°
m:::a
"'m
o<
_,,_ .
OJO

 c.-:::

., .

~

£-.

i

.

zo.-.f.

'

..:o•!l ,.,

,

I ··-I

=· ;;.'

,_;,-

I

..

.-;::--

cc-

(~}

='

.I

'11?

1"i,

1;~

--"·

... J.3

-;";'I

.K

=-

---

.. _ ™

-

-

A

• mer===~7

l

--f,.. . .

-c

~-- ~

Jr,,~

r::~
·

i-, ,.

I

a ;;., ....✓m

,s,'1:J.. --;--,.
1

0)

:--

__,.

.---J,'-,
:)

9
f •

._,
~

-.J
()

I

-u

Note: Blue highlighted areas depict the current approximate physical condition of234-5Z; non-blue areas represent demolished parts of the building. Graphic highlights
approximate location; exact building configuration is briefed daily.

0
0

Figure 5. Current 234-SZ Building Configuration

(.,.)

c....

C

z

0)

CXl

_co

m ::u
I\:> m

o<
.......
CX)

0

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

3

1

Event Actions and Subsequent Assessments

2
3
4
5
6

Between December 14 and 18, 2017, contamination was detected outside of the radiological boundary at
the PFP demolition zone, including around PFP offices and on multiple vehicles located outside the
boundary. The consequences of this event were personnel exposure and potential radiological
contamination leaving the Hanford Site. The project team immediately stopped all work at PFP and began
compensatory recovery measures.

7

3.1

Root Cause Analysis

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

Following the event, CHPRC chartered a causal analysis team consisting of facility subject matter experts
(SMEs), program representatives, independent mentors, and Hanford Atomic Metal Trades Council Safety
Representatives. Based on documentation review and expert knowledge, the team used Barrier Analysis
and Why Staircase analysis techniques to detennine causal factors. The analysis identified two root causes,
two contributing causes, and two extraneous conditions adverse to quality. Compensatory actions for these
themes focused on preventing recurrence for the rest of PFP demolition, and long-term corrective actions
are being implemented for the remaining CHPRC in-progress cleanup wmk. Corrective actions include
enhancements in radiological control technician (RCT) training, controls for protecting workers, field
implementation expectations, and processes to control contamination. Appendix A provides a crosswalk of
the pre- and post-start corrective actions and the applicable section within the work resumption plan.

18

3.2 Independent Radiological Control Assessment

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Corporate CHPRC parent company, Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. (Jacobs) chartered an independent
assessment team in response to events that culminated in the December 2017 detection of radiological
contamination outside the contamination area (CA) at the PFP demolition zone. The team was assembled
to evaluate the extent to which the causes of the PFP contamination events might be pervasive across
CHPRC and to ensure that necessary actions were taken to prevent additional events at other CHPRC
projects or ongoing operations (Phase 1). In addition, the team performed a detailed "vertical slice"
through the PFP Radiological Control (RadCon) Program (Phase 2). Phase 2 of the assessment identified
one concern, one finding, and seven opportunities for improvement in the PFP RadCon Program.
Corrective actions from these assessments have been reviewed for applicability as pre-start corrective
actions and are included in actions to be completed prior to resuming demolition.

29
30

3.3 Management Assessment Report for Implementation of Integrated Safety
Management System (ISMS)

31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38

The purpose of the assessment was to evaluate implementation of ISMS for early lessons learned from the
spread of contamination at PFP. The assessment challenged the status quo and focused on the
effectiveness of implementation in the field. The review of select safety culture processes was
included. In addition, the assessment scope included the following elements: implementation of ISMS,
conduct of operations, activity level of work planning and control, surveillance and maintenance, and
contractor assurance system (including event investigations and follow up). Corrective actions from these
assessments have been reviewed for applicability as pre-start corrective actions and included in actions to
be completed prior to resuming demolition

7

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

4 Demolition Resumption Approach

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

This chapter details the demolition resumption approach that cons is ts of four phases with pauses between
each stage to review the previous work activity and incorporate lessons learned into the next phase. The
overall plan for the demolition resumption approach detailed in this section will be refined in the specific
work package for each phase. Field conditions, engineering evaluations, post-job reviews, and other work
planning elements may drive adjustments to the demolition approach and sequencing necessary to convert
this overall plan into achievable work steps for the work team. Any adjustments to the demolition
approach will be evaluated through the change management process to ensure it will not adversely alter
the preferred demolition options, enhanced controls, and conduct of operations expectations specified in
subsequent sections of this document.

11

4.1

12
13
14
15
16
17

Stabilization activities included actions taken before demolition re-initiation to mitigate contamination
migration from project-approved boundaries to the environment. The activities required for stabilization
include application of fixatives to control the spread of contamination, a plan for ongoing maintenance
activities associated with fixatives, packaged waste shipments, up posting boundaries (radiological buffer
area, high contamination area [HCA], CA, and airborne radioactivity area) for control with associated
monitoring and radiological surveys to ensure that fixatives are functioning adequately.

18
19
20
21
22
23
24

In addition to stabilization activities, car and home surveys were completed, along with generating and
implementing a biological vector plan. Fixative application to the areas of known or suspected
contamination was completed at least every three days and will continue to be applied per the
Contamination Control Fixative Plan. Areas with this known or suspected contamination has been fixed
with at least one of the following (Figure 6): polymeric barrier system (PBS), Envirotac II® (Rhino Snot),
Soil-Sement®, or granular/native soil. Refer to Section 5.7 for detailed information about these fixative
applications.

Stabilization and Current Site Condition

® Envirotac II is a registered trademark of EP&A Envirotac, Inc., La Quinta, Galifornia.
® Soil-Sement is a registered trademark of Midwest Industrial Supply, Inc., canton, Ohio.

8

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

.

Rhino Snot

Soil Cement
0

Soll Cement & Soil Cover

Figure 6. Fixative Application Areas
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

The radiological boundary expansion and the controlled area expansions were established by a
conservative evaluation of the ground deposition model, the air dispersion model, and experience gained
through investigating the contamination events. Although there is no certainty that all particles can be
fully contained to an area due to unforeseen environmental conditions and biological vectors, the
evaluation shows the proposed boundaries (Figure 7). The project conservatively established
contamination control boundaries, active monitoring for the potential of airborne dispersion, along with
regular and active assessment for migration of contamination. Radiological practices are coupled with
work management controls, such as the application of fixatives and overburden, to reduce the potential
for future unanticipated releases.

9

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018
FINAL 234-52 AIR DISPERSION MODEL WITH PLANNED RADIOLOGICAL BOUNDARIES

;'

1

1t

Feet

H-+-+-1
O 250 500

Al::oess

::. Control

::. RBA Bounda,y

Boundary

II

Builcfll'G ['.] Structure

c]

Trailer

,,'•,,-• Fence

MipAI o(~$1 :1 9 PM e.'12/2010
MSA Cenlr .. Mtppiog Se.rrices

{Rol«onco Mar)

Figure 7. Boundaries Being Evaluated
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Waste packaged prior to the event is being removed as part of stabilization to reduce the overall potential
risk. The pre-event packaged waste containers make up 90 percent of the remaining material at risk
(MAR) for the project (Figure 8). The remaining demolition scope is divided between the lower and
higher risk based on the remaining MAR in the facility. These stabilization activities are being completed
prior to moving to the demolition activities described below to prevent further spread of contamination.
It should be recognized that some legacy and newly generated waste may be present during the start of
demolition. Contamination is validated through isotopic finger printing as necessary to distinguish
between potential spread of contamination and other Hanford activities .

10

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Lower-Risk Demolition
A: 234-52 Debris

<1 %

5g

B: 234-52 and Vault

<1%

5g

Higher-Risk Demolitlon
C: 234-52 NC Lines and %
2
Tunnel

649

D: PRF Rubble PIie

8%

238g

10%

312g

3059g

Figure 8. Remaining MAR at PFP
1

4.2 Demolition Readiness and Management Assessment

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

An evaluation was performed against PRC-PRO-OP-055, Startup Readiness, to determine the

applicability of the procedure to the remaining PFP work scope. The procedure was considered not
applicable, and the process was exited per procedure Section 3.1 step 2. As a result, an independent
management assessment will be performed using the process specified in PRC-PRO-QA-246,
Management Assessment. The assessment team will consist of individuals with varying expertise, such as
radiological protection, operations, engineering, and safety and health. Because it will be used to
determine resumption of PFP demolition activities, the assessment plan will incorporate four attributes of
the process used for start-up reviews per PRC-PRO-OP-055:

10
11

1. The qualification and independence of each assessment team member will be documented in the
assessment plan.

12
13
14

2. The performance objectives (POs) will be documented on an assessment appraisal form that identifies
the approach to be taken in assessing the PO. For each PO, the lines of inquiry are defined in one or
more of the following categories:

15
16

•

Records review - documents identified will be reviewed for completeness, evidence of closure,
proper approvals, and effectiveness in addressing the PO.

17
18
19

•

Interviews -personnel will be interviewed to determine the effectiveness of corrective actions
that were intended to improve personnel knowledge of existing or new practices and procedures
associated with the PFP demolition activities .

20
21
22

•

Observations - field observations of selected activities will be conducted to verify that actions
defined in procedures associated with PFP demolition can be performed as specified in the
procedure.

23
24
25

3. Issues identified during the independent management assessment will be documented on an
assessment issue form Issues will be screened and designated as pre-start orpost-start and will be
tracked to closure in theCHPRC IssuesManagementsystem

11

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2

4.

3

The assessment scope will include the following general topical areas:

4

•

Demolition controls

5

•

Radiological controls

6

•

Work planning and performance

7
9

•
•
•

Conduct of operations
Management oversight

10

•

Review of pre-start corrective actions

11
12

An independent management assessment will be conducted prior to the start of both low and higher risk

13
14
15
16
17
18

After each phase of demolition, a fonnal post-job review will be conducted per PRC-PRO-WKM-14047 ,
Pre-Job Briefings and Post-Job Reviews. The work team will identify the significant positive or negative
lessons learned that could be gained and incorporated into the next demolition phase of work As an
example the lessons learned may include revisions to the work documents. Figure 9 identifies
independent management assessments prior to low-hazard and high-hazard work resumption. The project
schedule has built-in reviews for lessons learned to be incorporated prior to initiating additional phases.

8

The assignment of "pre-start" designation will be performed using criteria documented in the
assessment plan.

Off-normal incident response

demolition work scopes. DOE-RL will perform oversight of the independent management assessment.

PFP Demolition Resumption
May

-2018

June
2018

July
2018

Aug.

Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

2018

2018

2018

2018

Dec.
2018

234-52:
PRF:
RSA:
HCA:

ARA:

M•@iiiM,M

Jan.
2019

Feb.

March

April

2019

2019

2019

Main Processing Facility
Plutonium Reclamation Facilit y

Radiological Buffer Area
High Contamination Area
Airborne Radioa ct~ity Area

Work Break and
R..,;ew to Apply
Lessons Learned to
Next Phase

CHP

* Completed

Figure 9. Proposed Demolition Schedule with Management Assessments and Lessons Learned

12

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1

4.3 Options Evaluation Process

2
3
4
5
6

To prepare for resumption of the PFP demolition, work teams performed options engineering evaluations
that included the Option Evaluation Process (OEP) as described in CHPRC-03673, Plutonium Finishing
Plant Demolition Option Evaluation Report. The OEP served as a problem analysis tool that evaluated
options according to their strengths and weaknesses to determine preferred choices . This OEP considered
and reviewed the entire lifecycle of each of the options generated.

7
8
9
10
11
12

The OEP applied to all aspects of demolition activities remaining for 236Z and 234-SZ, including waste
generation and disposal. The four main identified areas (Figure 10) from the OEP are (A) 234-SZ
Building debris, (B) remaining demolition of 234-SZ, vault and associated tunnels, (C) A and Clines and
associated tunnels in 234-SZ, and (D) remaining PRF demolition and rubble pile. The OEP provides
confidence that any PFP activity ( demolition, processing, conditioning, packaging, and disposal) is done
with due diligence from having considered different approaches and solutions.

Figure 10. Remaining Four Demolition Scope Areas
13
14
15
16
17
18

The OEP delivery team uses a multi-attribute analysis iterative process where options perceived to
provide issue resolution are evaluated against a select group of attributes or performance measures. The
options' performance against the attributes is graded, measured by the OEP delivery team, and performs a
standard process flow for each of the four identified areas (Figure 10). From each of the four identified
resumption areas, a preferred method was scored against selected attributes and respective weighted
factors applied (Figures 11 through 16).

13

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Identify Problem
•
•

Identify Attributes

Define Scope

Problem statement
Graded approach to
determine level of analysis

•
•
•

•

Boundaries
Constraints
Assumptions

•

Cost, logistics, health, safety,
etc.
Assign weighting factors

Score Options Against Attributes
•

Identify Options

Quantitative/qualitative scoring

•
•
•

Characterize options
Viability screening
Proportionality screening

l

Adjust Weighting Factors
•

Iterative approach to finalize
Weighting Factors

•

Sensitivity analysis

Results-

OEP Identified
~

.

Implementation, Documenting, and Monitoring/Feedback

Figure 11. Option Evaluation Process

ATTRIBUTE

WEIGHT%

HEALTH AND SAFETY

35

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

25

TECHNICAL PERFORMANCE

10

SOCIO-ECONOMIC

10

ENVIRON MENTAL OBJECTIVES

10

FINANCIAL COST

5

DURATION OBJECTIVES

5

Figure 12. Option Evaluation Weighted Factors

14

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Preferred option selected: Enhanced controls br current debris sbckpiles
Short description: Use enhanced controls identified fi"om the Root Cause Evaluation and a Jacobs corporate independent
assessment of CH PR C's radiological program to disposition debris created during pre-December 2017 demolition of lowerrisk areas of 234-52.
Options

Descriptions
Construct fully enclosed

I

2

3

Tent full coverage

Entomb

Shroud large

facility to cover the entire PFP

footprint.
Construct engineered berm
and place engineered cap
over debris.
Construct hard or soft sided
large tent cover with
dimension approxlmately
100x70 feet.

Use enhanced controls
Identified from the Root
Cause Evaluation and Jacobs'
4

Enhanced Controls for

radiological assessment to

Current Debris Stockpiles dlsposftlon debris created
during pre-December 2017

d!molitlon of lower-risk areas
of 234•5Z.
5

leave PFP rubble pl leas is
Do nothing, place in S&M with monitoring and fixative
applfcatlon on 1101n .

Key

0-1.61

---- --n
i - -- -

Health and

Environmental

Technlcal

So<lo-

Environmental

safetv

lmoacts

oerformance

economic

oblectlves

Duration
oblectlves

Financial cost

0

0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0
0

Raw

Weighted

1.9

2.4

2.4

2.9

2.5

3.0

3.3

3.7

1.8

1.9

0

0

0

I 1.7-3.31MED

Figure 13. Option Scoring -Area A

Preferred option selected: Segmenk3d modular demolition
Short description: Implement currentzone-by-zone demolition strategy with additional controls developed fi"omthe pre-start
corrective actions and a Jacobs's independentassessment of CH PR C's radiological program.
I

Options
1

Tent full coverage

2

Shroud Large

Descriptions
Construct fulty enclosed
facllity to cover the entire PFP
footprint.
Construct hard or soft sided
large tent cover with
dimension approximately
100,c70foot
Implement current :zone-by•
:zone demolttlon strategy with
additional controls developed
from the pre-start corrective
actions and radiological
assessment report.

3

Segmented Modular
Demo

4

Leave PFP rubble plle as Is
Do nothing, place in S&M with monitoring and fixative
appllcatlon on going.

~ 01.31

-- - - --- --i 1.._,Jo ,,Je
Hnlthand
safetv

Environmental
Technlcal
lmoacts
oerformance

0
0

Socio-

economic

0

Envfronmental
oblectlves

Duration
oblectlves

0
0

0

Financial cost

0

Raw

Weighted

2.0

2.5

2.1

2.5

2.8

3.2

1.7

1.8

0

0

0

0 0

I

I

Figure 14. Option Scoring -Area B

15

0

I

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Preferred option selected: Ventilated modular demolition
Short description: Currentzone-by-zone demolition strategy (supported wilh astrucb.Jral engineering anaysis) wilh additional
controls, including ventilation on lhe A and Cprocess lines and b.Jnnel corridorb enhance particulae control during demolition.
I

I

Options
Tent full coverage

I

1

Entomb

Shroud Small open ended

3

Construct fully enclosed
facility to cover the entire PFP
footprint.

0
0
0
0
0

Construct engineered berm
and place engineered cap

over debris.
Construct hard or soft sided
small tent cover with
dimension approximately

10x30feet.
Construct hard or soft sided
Shroud Large

4

s

Grout Injection

large tent cover with

dimension approximately
100x70feet.
Inject grout or like boning
agents into debris pile and
agitate; after curing time
remove In larger oortions.
Current zone-by-zone
demolition strategy

Ventilated Modular

6

Demolition

(supported with a structural
engineering analysis) with
addmonal controls, including
ventilation on A&C process
lines and tunnel corridor, to
enhance particulate control
during demolition.

Leave Pf Prubble pile as is
Do nothing, place in S&M with monitoring and fotative

7

application on going.

I

I
Health and
safetv

Descriptions

I
Key

I
Duration
oblectlves

I

0

---

0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0

I
MED

I

I

Financial cost

0 0 0

--- -----Low

I

I
I
I
Environmental Technical
Environmental
Sociolmoacts
oerformance
economic
oblectlves

0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0

I

I

0 0

I

1

I

Figure 15. Option Scoring -Area C

16

I

Weighted

3.1

3.9

2.9

3.4

3.4

4.0

3.1

3.8

3.1

3.4

4.8

5.5

1.9

2.0
I

High

I

I

Raw

I

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Preferred option selected: Saturated soil entrainment
Short description: By adding waer to the contamination-free soil that currenfly covers the PRF rubble pile, the soil will become
saturated and beter able b preventcontamination migration.
'

'

I

Descriptions

Options

Construct fully enclosed
1

2

Tent full coverage

Entomb

facility to cover the entire PFP
footprint
Construct engineered berm
and place engineered cap

over debris.
Construct engineered berm
and nood area approximately

3

Water Bath

1·3 foot with water and
remove debris from
submen1:ed surface.

Construct hard or soft sided
4

Shroud Small open ended

small tent cover with
dimension approximately

20x30feet.
Construct hard or soft sided
5

Shroud Large

large tent cover with
dimension approximately
100x70feet.
Place debris in grout mixing

containers and saturate prior
6

1

Grout Processing

Grout Injection

to loading in waste
containers. Similar to Burial
ground method.
Inject grout or like boning
agents Into debris pile and
agitate; after curing time
remove in larger oortions.
By adding water to the
contamination-free soil that
currently covers the PRF
rubble pile, the soil will
become saturated and better
able to prevent contamination
migration. Heavy equipment
will remove the wet soil and
rubble and place it In a
container for shipment to

8

Saturated Soll
Entrainment

9

leave PFP rubble pile as is
Do nothing, place In S&M with monitoring and fixative
application on going.

ERDF.

Key

Health and

Environmental

Technical

safety

impacts

performance

Socioeconomic

Environmental

Duration

objectives

obJectlves

--- ---- -- - --- -----0 0 0

Flnanclalcost

0

0

0 0 0

Raw

Wel1hted

3.5

4.5

4.9

6.1

3.7

4.1

5.1

5.7

4.7

5.5

4.7

5.4

4.3

5.2

6.3

7.0

3.3

3,3

0

0 0 0
0 0
0
0

0 0

0

0 0

0 0

0

0

0 0

I

Figure 16. Option Scoring - Area D
Enhanced Control Sets

1

4.3.1

2
3
4

A standard control set was developed for resumption of worlc during lower and higher hazard work scope.
During lower risk activities, enhanced controls will adequately protect human health and the environment
(Figure 17).

17

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018
Enhanced Controls for Lower and Higher Risk Scope
Control Set:

I

Pre-December 18

Enhanced Controls

Boundaries

• Established from predicted air
dispersion and surface deposition
models to encompass levels
requiring posting and control

• Significantly enlarged to ensure contamination, even below
posting limits, is controlled inside of boundaries

Survey Plan

• 45 cookie sheets surveyed once per
working day

• 77 cookie sheets; surveys twice per working day and during
demolition activities

• Worker-performed personal
surveys

• Access restricted until post-wind eventsurveysare complete

• Automated personal contamination monitors

• No access restriction for wind
events
Monitoring

• 14 continuous air monitors

• 14 continuous air monitors

• 22airsamplers;3-dayairsample
turn a round time

• 35 air samplers (three elevated at 20 ft); can achieve 1-day
air sample turnaround time
• Evaluating additional air samplers at radiological boundaries

Demolition

• Parallel building demolitions

Sequence
Fixatives

• Sequential demolition from lower-to higher-risk
• Opportunity for worker involvement and incorporation of
lessons learned between tasks

• 3mainfixatives
• 50%PolymericBarrierSystem

(PBS)

• Fixatives used per manufacturers'specificationswith
technical evaluations to support; Incorporated Into work
planning documents

• Soil-Sement"'
• Envirotac 11 11 ("Rhino Snot")
Waste
Packaging

• Large piles accumulated during
demolition
• Environmental Restoration Disposal
Facility (ERDF) dozer operator using
respiratory protection

Worker
Engagement

• Inconsistent face-to-face
communication and worker
involvement

• Minimize pile accumulation; ensure fixative application
• Wider use ofrespiratory protection at ERDF, based on waste
profile; multiple air samples and surveys ta ken near waste
and downwind
• Pauses incorporated into demolition sequence for worker
involvement and review of lessons learned
• Employee involvement in Root Cause Evaluation,corrective
action development, and option evaluation team for
demolition resumption
• Weekly employee roundtables scheduled with project
management

Work Package

Large work package with tasks

• Smaller work packages with limited tasks
• Rigorous documented change management process
(protects control set)
• Independent Hazard Review Board

Oversight

Hazard Review Boa rd

• Haza rd Review Board, Senior Supervisory Watch and senior
project mentors
• Roles, responsibilities,and participation criteria defined
• Process implemented to track observations, necessary
actions, and trending

Note: Surveying plan and monitoringnwnbersmay change due to final air and surface models, development of work control
documents, and lessons learned.

Figure 17. Enhanced Controls for Lower and Higher Risk Scope

18

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2
3

In addition to a standard control set, additional enhanced controls for ventilated modular demolition were
developed to ensure the protection of human health and the environment (Figure 18).
Enhanced Controls for Ventilated Modular Demolition
Additional Controls

Pre-December 18
No ventilation

• Ventilation
• Ventilation placement
• Work sequence

• Captures particulate inside RMAand RMC and tunnels that may
come loose during demolition
• Sweeps particulate away from open working surface

• East to west

• Features one-time placement in current floor plan

• Bay-by-bay

• Only one working face exposed

• Tunnel Removal

• Allows for planned stopping and starting points
• Allows for easier debris pile management
• Opens tunnels/removes pipes for backfilling
• Adds protection to the area prior to opening structure

Figure 18. Enhanced Controls for Ventilated Modular Demolition
4
5

In addition to a standard control set, additional enhanced controls for saturated soil entrainment were
developed to ensure the protection of human health and the environment (Figure 19).
Enhanced Controls for Saturated Soil Entrainment
Pre-December 18
Open air demolition/
no soil cover

Additional Controls
• Soil coverage {18 in .) on
pile

• Ensures co-located areas will not become disturbed during setup
and removal activities

• Wetting area prior
(15 minutes)

• Allows for soil to develop "mud layer" that will flow downward
once equipment breaks the surface

• Spray patterns and set
back distances

• Provides best coverage of effected areas prior and during rubble
removal activities

• Equipment placement

• Allows equipment to work beyond the arch of the spray device as
per engineering direction

• Single removal location
• Observations of dust
• Bucket load reduction
• Removal of foundation
wall at new exposed soil
level
• Soil coverage {18 in .)
and fixative a ppiication
at end of the day

• Ensures waste container availability is consistent with work
activity so no accumulation of uncovered waste can occur
• Allows constant monitoring ofremoval activity to ensure no visual
emissions are migrating from the work area
• Reduces spillage, minimizing spread of contamination
• Decreases exposed debris and permits for simple cover during
activities (e.g., reach high winds or at end of shift)
• Covers a II newly exposed areas with soil and fixative to leave in a
safe state when not actively working and allows for the cycle to
stop and start in the same condition

Figure 19. Enhanced Controls for Saturated Soil Entrainment
6

7
8
9
10

4.3.2

Phase A- 234-SZ Building Debris Dispositioning

The strategy for removing and dispositioning pre-December 2017 debris uses controls (identified from the
root cause analysis and the Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. (Jacobs) independent assessment of CHPRC's
radiological program and described in Chapter 5) for lower risk areas of234-5Z. This method is
considered low risk from an MAR standpoint and uses current established processing techniques and

19

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

requirements with proven industrial hazard mitigation. The air dispersion model allows for multiple
locations (up to four) to be worked simultaneously without exceeding assumptions or limits built into the
model during this phase.
The green highlighted areas in Figures 20 and 21 show previously size-reduced building debris from
234-52 currently located at one of the loadout areas . Loadout areas can be located anywhere within the
HCA to help facilitate waste packaging and movement. For these areas, minimal waste size reducing is
required, and waste will be packaged.

Figure 20. Demolition Area A - Removal of 234-SZ Debris and Rubble

20

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Figure 21. Previously Size-Reduced Building Debris from 234-SZ
1
2
3

The blue areas shown in Figures 20 and 22 identify previously removed mobile office debris co-located to
234-SZ and comingled building debris from demolition activities from 234-SZ. These areas of waste will
require size reduction, transfer to the loadout area, and packaging.

Figure 22. 234-SZ Building and Mobile Office Debris

21

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

l

Physical Work Activity

2
3
4
5
6

For previously size-reduced building debris, heavy equipment will be used from the outward ends of the
pile toward the center, removing waste and placing into Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility
(ERDF) approved containers. This process will minimize disturbing large portions of building debris not
being actively removed. After waste has been loaded, the waste containers will be sealed and relocated to
an assigned CTA

7
8
9
l0
11

For debris co-located to 234-52, heavy equipment will be used from the outward ends of the pile toward
the center. Large components will be size-reduced and prepared for transfer to the loadout area.
Size-reduced waste material will be placed into approved waste containers and the waste containers will
be sealed. As described in the work control document, water or approved fixatives will be applied to
debris using approved application systems and techniques during waste loadout activities.

12
13
14

For previously size-reduced building debris and debris co-located next to 234-52, fixative will be applied
to distributed debris, the rubble pile, and all newly exposed surfaces at the end of each shift as a minimum
or prior to the demolition work area is unmanned.

15

4.3.3

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37

Using additional controls from the pre-startcorrective actions and the corporate independent assessment
of CHPRC's radiological program, current zone-by-zone demolition strategy can be implemented for the
majority of 234-52, vault, and associated tunnels (Figure 23), excluding RMA and RMC lines and their
associated tunnels. Under this low-risk MAR demolition activity, the current industrial hazard controls
and structural engineering would not be altered as they address the analysis since the beginning of the
demolition process. All zones and core stabilization zones (CSZs) have multiple bays located within
them. The associated tunnels include portions of Tunnels 3, 4, and 6 that are partially under the 234-52
demolition low risk work scope. Demolition of the associated tunnels includes the tunnel roofs, and
isolation or removal of selected drain piping, and backfilling the tunnels with soil. Each bay is an
approximately 10 by 14 ft compartmentalized section supported with columns and trusses. Bays will be
removed one at a time, starting at the second floor demolishing downward through the duct level to the
floor level (Figure 24). The bay-by-bay removal method will enable the project to demolish to described
stopping points and remove debris and rubble before starting a new segment under radiological and
fixative controls . While the intention is to minimize debris pile accumulation at the end of the shift, it is
acceptable that debris piles be left over from the previous shift as long as fixative has been applied prior
to leaving and thereafter in accordance with current procedures. There is no time restriction regarding
how long a debris pile may be left, but the debris pile must be size reduced and staged for waste loadout
prior to resuming building demolition. A residual amount of debris and/or waste loadout material may be
present during building demolition. The air dispersion model allows for multiple (up to four) locations to
be worked simultaneously without exceeding assumptions or limits built into the model during this phase.
During this evolution, rubble and debris piles, residual debris, and waste loadout material from 234-52
will receive fixatives once physical demolition activities cease.

Phase B- Demolition of234-5Z, Vault, and Associated Tunnels

22

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Figure 23. Demolition Area B - Remaining Demolition of 234-SZ and Vault

Second Floor

Duct Level

Figure 24. Depictions of Bay-by-Bay Removal of Second Floor and Duct Level

23

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1

4.3.4

Zone and Core Stabilization Zone Descriptions

2
3

Zones and core stabilizations are depicted in Figure 4 for original configuration and Figure 5 for current
configuration. Below are current descriptions of zones and CSZs in their current configuration.

4
5
6
7

Zone 2 - Most of Zone 2 has been removed using the bay-by-bay demolition technique minus the
staircase adjacent to CSZ 2.5. The stairwell and staircase bays will be removed as a singular demolition in
conjunction with the removal of CSZ 2. 5. Zone 2 will be completed prior to Zone 5 and A and C lines and
tunnels demolition.

8
9

CSZ 2.1 - The remaining vault structure can be demolished as a standalone if demolition occurs before
A and C lines and tunnels demolition.

10
11

CSZ 2.3 - Currently under demolition surgically removing it from CSZ 6.1. CSZ 2.3 also contains a
stairwell and staircase bays that will be removed as a singular demolition after separation from CSZ 6.1.

12

CSZ 2.4 - This area is fully segregated from CSZs 2.3 and 6.2, and demolition is complete.

13
14

CSZ 2.5 - This area and associated tunnels has not started bay-by-bay demolition but will be
removed prior to Zone 6 and A and C lines and tunnels demolition.

15

Zone 3 -Zone 3 is fully segregated from CSZ 3, and demolition is complete.

16
17

CSZ 3 - Demolition is approximately two-thirds complete and is being isolated from Zones 4 and 5
and CSZ 2.5 and associated tunnels.

18
19
20

Zone 4 - Demolition is approximately one-third complete and will be worked in three separate areas
adjacent to CSZs 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, and portions of CSZ 3. Zone 4 will be removed prior to Zone 5 and A and
C lines and tunnels demolition.

21
22

CSZ 4.1-Demolition is approximately one-half complete and is isolated from the remaining Zone 4
in conjunction with theremovalofCSZ 7.

23
24

CSZ 4.2- This area has not started bay-by-bay demolition and will be removed once the connecting
Zone 4 has been removed, isolating it from Zone 5.

25
26

CSZ 4.3 - This area has not started bay-by-bay demolition and will be removed once the connecting
Zone 4 has been removed, isolating it from Zone 5.

27
28
29

Zone 5 - Zone 5 does not contain any CSZs in its entirety. Zone 5 will be the last demolished and can be
removed from all sides using the bay-by-bay technique, including removal of the second floor and duct
level to expose the A and C lines and tunnels area.

30
31
32

Zone 6-This zone has not started bay-by-bay demolition and will be removed prior to Zone 5 and A and C
lines and tunnels demolition. Zone 6 can be performed in two separate areas adjacent to CSZs 6.1 and 6.2,
including the removal of the second floor and duct level to expose the A and Clines and tunnels area.

33
34
35

CSZ 6.1-This area has not started bay-by-bay demolition and will be removed once the connecting
Zone 6 has been removed, isolating it from Zone 5, including the removal of the second floor and
duct level to expose the A and Clines and tunnels area.

36
37
38

CSZ 6.2-This area has not started bay-by-bay demolition and will be removed once the connecting
Zone 6 has been removed, isolating it from Zone 5, including the removal of the 2 nd floor and duct
level to expose the A and C lines and tunnels area.

24

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1

Zone 7 -This Zone is fully segregated from CSZ 7, and demolition is complete.

2
3

CSZ 7 - Demolition is approximately two-thirds complete and is isolated from Zones 5 and 6 while
working in conjunction with the removal of CSZ 4.1.

4

4.3.4.1

Preferred Demolition Sequence

5
6
7

The preferred sequence for demolishing the remaining 234-5Z structure is listed below using the
approved bay-by-bay demolition method. Any changes to the preferred method will follow the project' s
change management process.

8

•

CSZ-3 and associated tunnels

9

•

CSZ 4.1 and 7 concurrently

10

•

CSZ 2.3, plus stairwells and staircases

11

•

CSZ 2.5, plus stairwell and staircases and associated tunnels

12

•

csz 2.1

13

Remaining Zone 4

14

•

CSZ 4.2 (Figure 25)

15

•

CSZ4.3

16
17

Zone 5 - Remove only the second floor and duct level to expose A and C lines and tunnels in portions of
this zone. Note: The removal of Zone 5 second and duct level can be demolished concurrently with Zone

18

6.

19
20

Zone 6 - Remove only the second floor and duct level to expooe A and C lines and tunnels in portions of this
zone.

21
22

•

CSZ- 6.1 - removal of only the second floor and duct level to expose A and C lines and tunnels in
portions of CSZ 6.1

23
24

•

CSZ 6.2 - removal of only the second floor and duct level to expose A and Clines and tunnels in
portions of CSZ 6.2
::,

~

w

I

J

I

I

8
~

~

I

I
-

--t -~

· -·

iiiiiilii~l==il==:i:l=:!==f

ROOI-"

2 nd Floor

Duct Level

!
CSZ-4.2 and Zone 5
A&C Line Area

Figure 25. Removal (blue) of CSZ 4.2, Second Floor and Duct Level Connected to Zone 5 and
Remaining (red) A and C Lines and Tunnels

25

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

l

4.3.4.2

Physical Work Activity

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

Zones and CSZs will be removed following the preferred bay-by-bay demolition sequence. This method
will help minimize debris pile accumulation at the end of the shift, however it is acceptable that the debris
pile be left over from the previous shift as long as fixative has been applied prior to leaving and thereafter
in accordance with current procedures. There is no time restriction regarding how long a debris pile may
be left, but the debris pile must be size reduced and staged for waste loadout prior to resuming building
demolition. A residual amount of debris and/or waste loadout material may be present during building
demolition. The air dispersion model allows for multiple (up to four) locations to be worked
simultaneously without exceeding assumptions or limits built into the model during this phase. During
this evolution, rubble and debris piles, residual debris, and waste load out material from 234 5Z will
receive fixatives once physical demolition activities cease.

12

4.3.5

13
14
15

Current zone-by-zone demolition strategy with additional controls, including ventilation on A and C lines
and tunnel corridors, will enhance particulate control during demolition. Ventilation on existing A and C
lines and tunnel corridors enhances particulate control during demolition.

16
17
18
. 19
20
21
22
23
24
25

A and Clines and their associated tunnels is a generic description (also referred to as remote mechanical
A line [RMA] and remote mechanical Cline [RMC] areas and Tunnels 4 and 5) for a constellation of labs
situated in Zones 5 and 6 located on the first floor of 234-5Z. RMA consists of four individual lab areas,
whereas RMC consists of seven; these individual labs in the RMA and RMC lines are interconnected with
doorways and penetrations. These single bay high areas have already had fixative applied to their interior
and the outer concrete rooms will be exposed after the demolition of Zones 5 and 6, second floor, and
duct levels, leaving only the A and Cline areas (Figures 26 through 31). Tunnels 4 and 5 (Figures 31 and
32) are sub-level passages containing epoxy-filled process lines and drains to be mechanically removed
during RMA and RMC demolition activities, which will expose the tunnels and enable heavy equipment
to remove previously identified process piping and backfill the tunnel area during demolition activities.

Phase C - Demolition ofA and C Line and Tunnels

26

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Figure 26. Demolition Area C -A and C Lines and Tunnels in 234-5Z

Figure 27. RMA and RMC Location in Zones 5 and 6 with CSZs

Figure 28. First Floor RMA and RMC Location in Zones 5 and 6

27

  REV. 0
JUNE 2018

 

Figure 29. Preparing RMA for Demolition

28

 

CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Figure 30. RMC Location Prepped for Demolition

Figure 31. Tunnel 4 and 5 Location Under RMA and RMC

29

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
· JUNE 2018

Figure 32. Tunnel 5 Looking West
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

4.3.6

Ventilation Controls and Placement

An air mover ventilation unit may be attached to the A or C line corridors. Two air movers will be

available for use and are the IONEX exhausters already approved for use in the Removal Action Work
Plan (RAWP; DOE/RL 2011-03, Removal Action Work Planfor the Deactivation, Decontamination,
Decommissioning, and Demolition of the Plutonium Finishing Plant Complex), with the preferred
location located at room 227 in Zone 6 or Room 232 in Zone 5 to achieve a sweeping air flow through
corridors while actively demolishing from the opposite area working toward the ventilation inlet
(Figure 33). Should the preferred placement location options be unavailable, any of the alternate locations
identified in Figure 33 may be used. The application of the exhausters as descnbed in this section is
consistent with, and used in accordance with, the RAWP, and will not result in emissions outside the
RAWP requirements. The ventilation unit will consist of an air mover, flexible duct hosing, and a premade shroud assembly constructed outside the demolition zone (Figure 34). The shroud and flexible
ducting will be placed, funneling airflow into the HEP A filters in the ventilation unit, allowing capture of
particulate that may come loose to be swept toward the ventilation until the tunnel or lines can be
breached to allow appropriate fixative application (i.e. , fogging with water dogs or direct spray with water
truck or directional devices). Ventilation will aid with particulate control while opening the tunnels and
removing previous epoxy-filled process lines that will be removed in segments during demolition. Using
the bay-by-bay method will enable demolition to planned stopping points and remove debris and rubble
prior to starting a new segment under both ventilation and fixative controls. While the intention is to
minimize debris pile accumulation at the end of the shift, it is acceptable that debris piles be left over
from the previous shift as long as fixative has been applied prior to leaving and thereafter in accordance
with current procedures. There is no time restriction regarding how long a debris pile may be left, but the
debris pile must be size reduced and staged for waste loadout prior to resuming building demolition. A
residual amount of debris and/or waste loadout material may be present during building demolition. The
air dispersion model allows for multiple (up to four) locations to be worked simultaneously without
exceeding assumptions or limits built into the model during this phase. During this evolution, rubble and
debris piles, residual debris, and waste loadout material from 234 5Z will receive fixatives once physical
demolition activities cease.

30

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

_..
Note: Blue stars identify preferred locations; red circles identify alternate locations.

Figure 33. Identified Locations for Ventilation Attachments for A and C Lines

:1
Figure 34. Ventilation Shroud
1
2
3
4
5

The preferred placement of the ventilation shroud is at the opening of room 232 for the RMA and at the
opening of Room 227 for the RMC. These locations can draw air from both A and Clines and tunnels
simultaneously. Note: Even though there are preferred placement options, any doorway or opening
identified in Figure 33 can be selected to achieve ventilated demolition using sweeping air flow as long as
the demolition activities work toward the air mover inlet.

6
7
8
9
10
11
12

The field work supervisors will brief the controls for ventilation and ensure operational prior to the start
of demolition activities when required. Ventilation will be observed from the heavy equipment operator
during the removal of individual bays to ensure that airflow and water overs pray are sweeping inward. All
members of the workforce will be briefed on air flow expectations and can contact the FWS to stop the
demolition process if air flow is not being achieved. If air does not indicate inward flow by visibility of
water overspray, the FWS will stop demolition and contact the director of demolition to begin the work
control change process to allow for additional ventilation to be installed at other locations. The change

31

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2

process will included the needed disciplines to confirm additional location(s) and hazards prior to
commencing work activities.

3

Physical Work Activity

4
5
6
7
8
9

Heavy equipment shall be used for removing RMA and RMC. The air mover shall be in place at either
preferred location on the east end of the RMA and RMC, and energized. The bay-by-bay removal process
will work from west to east, with debris not exceeding more than can be removed in the subsequent shift.
Once a single bay is removed, the tunnel piping will be exposed for removal and voids would be
backfilled immediately with soil. As described in the work control document, water or approved fixatives
will be applied to debris using approved application systems and techniques during demolition activities.

10
11
12
13

Heavy equipment will size-reduce large components to prepare the material for transfer to the waste
loadout area. Size-reduced waste material will be transferred to the identified waste loading area, placed
into approved waste containers, and the waste containers sealed. Water or approved fixatives will be
applied at the work location during waste material size reduction and loadout activities.

14
15
16

At the end of each shift as a minimum (or when the demolition work area is unmanned), fixative will be
applied to all remaining debris piles and all newly exposed surfaces in RMA, RMC, or the associated
tunnels as described in the detailed work control document.

17

4.3.7

18
19
20
21
22

By adding water to the overburden soil that currently covers the 236-Z Building rubble pile, the soil will
become saturated and better able to prevent contamination migration. Heavy equipment will remove the wet
soil and rubble and place it in an approved container for shipment toERDF. Properly distributed
( approximately 18 in. or greater), the overburden would reduce dose rates from radiological sources,
stabilize the components, and reduce hazard and particulate migration in the affected areas.

23
24
25
26

The PRF rubble pile is an approximately 115 by 80 ft area covered with a minimum of 18 in. of relatively
clean soil over building debris and partially erect (4 to 8 ft tall) portions of concrete foundation wall
(Figures 35 through 37). The comingling of this rubble with fixative application is considered to be stabilized
(Section 4.1).

Phase D- Remaining PRF Demolition and Rubble Pile

32

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Figure 35. Demolition Area D - Remaining 236-Z Demolition and Rubble Pile

Figure 36. PRF Rubble Pile -04/08/2018

33

 CHPRC-03689, REV . 0
JUNE 2018

Figure 37. PRF Rubble Pile- 04/08/2018
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Adequate saturation means sufficiently mixing or penetrating with liquid to prevent the release of
particulates contained in the soil. The use of foggers in conjunction with the conceptual spray pattern for a
minimum of 15 minutes prior to the start of removal of the rubble will provide the saturation levels
needed by this option. Other fixative application devices may be used to supplement foggers including but
not limited to hand pumps, adjustable water cannons, sprinkler systems, etc. If particulate releases are
observed coming from the PRF rubble pile, then that material has not been saturated and the additional
application of water or fixatives is required. This particulate release does not include condensed
uncombined water vapor.

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

The rubble should be retrieved only from beyond the crest of the spray arch as shown in Figures 38
through 40. Water or approved fixative delivery devices, as illustrated in Figures 38 and 39, should be
used in conjunction with the conceptual spray pattern for a minimum of 15 minutes prior to the start of
removal of the rubble (Figure 40). The 15-minute pre-soak time provides approximately 1,500 gal per
each waterdog trailer at full speed. Two water or fixative delivery systems provides approximately 3,000
gal of liquid, to saturate the working face. Continuous monitoring for dust during the physical demolition
activities will be performed to minimize the spread of contamination and ensure that the rubble is
adequately saturated. The air dispersion model only supports wotking at one location at a time during the
remaining PRF demolition and removal of rubble piles.
• V

UES ARE APPROXIMATE

AT NO WINO CONDmONS

135 ti'

SET-BACK
DISTANCE

:
50

;5

100

125

REVATIO

150

176

200 11•

225

250

t _ __.__
275

300

PROFILE@MAXJ UM HEJGHT (35 ')

Figure 38. Trailer-Mounted HAWC 300-80-D Performance Profiles

34

32:5

350ft

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

• VALUES AA£ A?AAO -

AT NO

TE

D COHO!TIO S

8811 '
SET-BACK

DISTANCE

50

150

17511

Figure 39. Trailer-Mounted Dust Fighter 15000 Performance Profiles

Note: Spraying from any two locations will provide saturation

Figure 40. Conceptual Spray Pattern Over PRF Debris Pile
1

Physical Work Activity

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

For the PRF rubble pile and debris, water or fixative application delivery systems must cover the area
adequately. Prior to the start ofremoval, a minimum 15-minute spray time shall be completed using a
minimum of two water or fixative application delivery systems . Heavy equipment shall be positioned to
remove rubble only beyond the arch of the application device's spray pattern. While performing the
15-minute pre-soak, heavy equipment will gently disturb the fixative-hardened planned work area to
allow for water infiltration (represented by yellow circle in Figure 40). Working from north to south,
equipment shall remove no more than an approximately three-fourths filled exactor "bucket load" for
transfer to a pre-staged approved waste container. Single removal locations shall be used to ensure that

35

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2
3

physical material removal does not exceed the available containers. Note that the controls for water and
fixative identified here will be used for removal of the foundation walls. Sequencing of demolition of the
debris pile and foundation walls will be defined in the work control document

4
5
6
7
8

Again, working from north to south, equipment shall remove foundation walls. Once exposed, the walls
shall be removed in manageable pieces using excavator attachments and close to the soil level at all times .
Once pieces are freed, the rubble and debris shall be transferred to an approved waste container. During
demolition activities per the work control document, including rubble disposition and foundation wall
removal, fixatives shall be applied continuously to the affected area.

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

As described in the work control document, water or fixatives shall be applied at work locations when
performing size reduction and waste loadout activities. For transfer to the waste loadout area, large
components shall be size reduced beyond the spray arch and placed in approved waste containers with
co-mingled wetted soil and the waste container sealed. Water or approved fixatives will be applied to
debris using approved application systems and techniques during size reduction and waste loadout
activities. RCTs will perform dust monitoring to examine dust generated in the demolition area. Field
work supervisors, heavy equipment, and water application system operators will monitor for dust at the
working interface while actively removing and packaging material at the job site. If dust generation is
observed, the demolition process will pause while additional water is applied. If dust suppression cannot
be achieved, the field work supervisor will adjust the location of the water/fixative application system per
engineering guidance to attain adequate water delivery for dust control.

20
21

Wetted soil and fixative will be applied to newly exposed rubble or foundation walls at the end of each
shift as a minimum or when the demolition work area is unmanned.

5

22

Demolition Controls

23
24
25

The controls described in this chapter and in Chapter 6 will be implemented prior to resuming demolition
activities and represent lessons learned and corrective actions developed during the PFP recovery period
since December 2017 .

26

5.1

27
28
29
30
31
32

Resumption of demolition activities at PFP will be governed by the accident analyses and controls in
HNF-15 500, Plutonium Finishing P !ant Deactivation and Decommissioning Documented Safety Analysis,
and HNF-15502, Plutonium Finishing Plant Deactivation and Decommissioning Technical Safety
Requirements, as applicable to the Documented Safety Analysis Demolition Phase. All new work
documents developed for resumption of demolition activities (see Section 6.2) will receive unreviewed
safety question review to ensure that the proposed activity is consistent with the D&D safety basis.

33

5.2 Criticality Controls

34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42

Prior to demolition, Criticality Safety Evaluation Report (CSER) 15-002, Criticality Safety Incredibility
Evaluation Report for the Final Demolition of Buildingv 234-5Z, 236-Z, and 242-Z, was developed (and
published as CHPRC-02512) to identify fissile material limits and controls that had to be met to ensure
that a criticality accident would not be credible during the demolition of each of the buildings. Criticality
Prevention Specification (CPS)-Z-165-80200, P FP Complex Demolition, was developed to implement the
CSER. Included in the CPS was a PFP Complex Criticality Incredibility Checklist to document
completion of prerequisites that had to be met to declare criticality incredibility. PFP facilities were
deemed criticality incredible through characterization, process knowledge, visual inspection, downsizing,
removal of any components and equipment that exceed nuclear criticality safety mass criteria, and

Safety Basis

36

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
3
4
5
6
7

application of encapsulation or void filling of process equipment and piping, which fixes any residual
radionuclides and precludes water entry. The CPS checklist was completed for each building. While
criticality incredibility has been declared for these facilities, waste management and demolition activities
are still subject to criticality safety work limits and process controls that maintain criticality incredibility.
This is accomplished through use of CPSs that are integrated into the work documents developed for
demolition activities, waste packaging activities, staging, storage, and shipment of wastes in containers.
No additional action is required to support demolition resumption.

8

5.3 Facility Characterization

9
10
11
12
13

Characterization activities are limited to those structures and below-grade areas in the scope of the RAWP
and are expected to occur through the balance of the D&D process. Sampling requirements are described
in DOE/RL-2004-29, Sampling and Analysis Planfor the Plutonium Finishing Plant Above-Grade
Structures. Characterization data will be collected to document end-state criteria that have been met, as
stated in HNF-22401.

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

Initial characterization was conducted in conjunction with D&D activities for .PFP Complex structures.
Prior characterization data, process knowledge, and historical information was used to identify potential
data gaps for inclusion into initial characterization activities for above- and below-grade areas. Subgrade
ductwork and drain lines (not in the current scope of work for CHPRC) are characterized at the point
where they connect to the slab or below-grade space of structures. In addition to prior data, process
know ledge, and historical information, data obtained by this characterization iteration are used for air
dispersion modeling, monitoring modeling, identification of waste disposition pathways, items requiring
special handling (i.e., cannot be rubblized during demolition) or packaging, and appropriate
demolition/dismantlement methods. The data will be compiled and documented in a report that addresses
each facility or group of facilities .

24

5.4 Air Dispersion Model

25
26
27
28

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) performed air dispersion modeling in support of
CHPRC' s demolition planning effort by making engineering estimates of potential releases during
demolition of PFP structures. The results of this modeling are intended to serve as guidance in
establishing boundaries and an air monitoring regime.

29
30
31
32
33
34
35

Atmospheric dispersion modeling using estimated release rates provided information on the location and
levels of radioactive contamination anticipated from demolition activities . The size of the original 234-52
facility had the potential to affect dispersion patterns through various meteorological phenomena,
including building wake effects . As the structures have been demolished, impacts on dispersion from
wake effects have diminished. Hourly meteorological data collected over six years (2004-2009) were
used to examine the effects of wind speed, direction, and stability on projected concentrations of
contaminants in air and deposited on nearby surfaces .

36
37
38
39

The radioactive contamination of concern for the PFP Complex is primarily transuranic contamination
from past operations. Cleanout operations have removed a large fraction of this contamination. Source
terms modeled in this report are based on the residual transuranic contamination levels anticipated for the
various sections of the structure at the time of demolition.

40
41
42
43

The radiological consequences have been established using the five-factor formula from
DOE-HDBK-3010-94, Airborne Release Fractions/Rates and Respirable Fractions for Nonreactor
Nuclear Facilities, considering MAR, damage ratio, airborne release fraction, respirable fraction, and leak
path factor. Radioactive contamination emissions have been calculated by release mechanism and

2

37

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2

demolition area for on-shift and off-shift activities. The emissions from the applicable sources have been
combined to provide emissions estimates for each day from each demolition area.

3
4
5
6
7
8
9

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's American Meteorological Society/Environmental
Protection Agency Regulatory Model (AERMOD) computer code is used to estimate atmospheric
dispersion and deposition of the released radioactive materials near the demolition activities. Modeling is
fully representative of the range of possible weather conditions (i.e., uses multiple full annual cycles of
meteorological data) and representative of the expected demolition period (i.e., models the hours of the
day that demolition activities will occur). The modeling also includes the effects of local building
structures on the near-field atmospheric dispersion rates due to wake effects.

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Both airborne and surface concentrations are modeled with AERMOD. Hourly derived air concentrations
(DAC) are also modeled for an array of receptors covering the demolition site and surrounding area. Peak
(95 111 and 991h percentiles) values of time-integrated air concentrations at these receptor points are derived
from these hourly values, with modeling results reported as total incremental air concentrations in the
integrated value DAC-hours occurring over the selected time period. Air concentrations are expected to
fluctuate during the demolition processes with transient periods of higher and lower airborne
concentrations. However, because computed doses are based on integrated intake, instantaneous airborne
concentrations are not necessary in this analysis. Total accumulated deposition amounts are also evaluated
with AERMOD using the same array ofreceptors, with results reported as dpm per 100 cm2•

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31

Each building in the PFP Complex is considered in terms of its construction and suggested target
contamination levels . The modeling effort is based on the planned sequence of demolition phases, and the
results are based on CHPRC-proposed demolition rates, schedules, and methods. The various building
zones are assumed to be demolished using hydraulic shears or mechanical hammer. Certain ductwork and
piping may remain in the building until demolition. The entire demolition process for the remaining
portions of 234-5Z is assumed to require 20 days (about four work weeks). The modeling of demolition
activities incorporates some realistic assumptions based on input from CHPRC about release mitigation;
use of fixatives and misting/spraying is included in all release estimates. Work is assumed to be
performed during a 10-hour day shift only, with concurrent demolition and rubble removal. Additional air
dispersion modeling will be performed to understand the impacts of possible backshift activities.
Including concurrent demolition and rubble removal in analysis produces a bounding result. Demolition
plans call for completion of demolition debris loadout prior to resuming activities that generate additional
debris during the current day.

32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40

The exposure results from structure demolition are presented as local-area maps of potential exposures
from demolition activities. The results are expressed as total DAC-hours for demolition activities during
the work week generating the highest source terms coupled with the bounding (95 1h and 99 111 percentiles)
meteorological conditions based on six years of hourly local climatology data. The results are based on
the highest projected emission rates related to the demolition of the RMA and RMC lines. The results
present a composite of the maximums of 95 111 percentile exposure values on the area surrounding the
demolition activity based on all the modeled total work-week exposures based on total exposures for all
the contiguous five-day periods from six years of meteorological observations. All other demolition
activities for this building will have equal or lower levels of predicted weekly peak exposures.

41
42
43
44
45

The air dispersion modeling performed indicates that some releases ofradioactive material are to be
anticipated during the demolition of the PFP structures. The results indicate that the radiological
exposures from the planned demolition efforts will be well below the designated limits for air and soil
exposures. However, demolition of the 234-5Z structures is expected to release some alpha-emitting
radionuclides. Concentrations at the PFP facilities fence line should remain well below 12 DAC-hr/week

38

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2

given the 95 th and 99 th percentile results based on six years of hourly climatological data, a representative
demolition period, realistic mitigating actions, and a bounding source term indicate.

3
4
5
6

The total source term in PFP facilities was determined by summing plutonium content attributed to the
types of residual contamination that in the air dispersion model were assigned separate emission factors.
For the air dispersion model to capture the project sequence and the rate at which sources would be
encountered, the following source types were further indexed by facility demolition:

7
8
9

•

Structural externally fixed contamination on floors and walls. The residual quantity of plutonium was
determined by statistical analysis ofradiological survey contamination data. Data collection was
guided by the application of Visual Sample Plan protocols.

10
11
12
13
14

•

Internal contamination in room exhaust (E-3) or process exhaust(E-4) ductwork. For E-3, the residual
quantity of plutonium was determined by statistical analysis. Judgmental analysis of coupon
contamination data determined holdup in E-4 ducting. As the maximum coupon contamination level
measured over a given span of ductwork characterized the surface activity over the whole span, the
judgmental analysis was conservatively biased.

15
16
17
18
19
20

•

Residual discrete sources derived from in situ nondestructive analysis (NDA) per safeguards
protocols. Such sources consisted of floor-wall ventilation stubs and segments distributed throughout
the facility and incorporated in the low-level waste (LLW) debris. NDA was also used to quantify
wall and void area residual in the recovery of uranium and plutonium by extraction area, room 221A
A surface-contaminated object characterization and engineering analysis quantified the HA-46
glovebox and associated bank tanks in room 232.

21
22
23

•

NDA quantified special handled items earmarked for surgical removal and packaging as transuranic
waste during demolition. For 234-5Z these consisted of epoxied process vacuum system segments
(removed), internally fixed E-4 segments, and gloveboxes (also removed).

24
25

With respect to source term results, an upper 95 percent confidence level (UCL9s) of the mean value was
used to quantify the air dispersion model input for PFP recovery. A summary is provided in Table 1.

Table 1. 234-SZ Recovery Air Model Input Summary
Total Pu (g)

Model Input
Rel u/µ

Nominal

±u

(%)

UCL9s

Room 221 floors and walls

0.03

0.04

149

0.10

Duct

RECUPLEX void

3.0

0.40

13

3.7

I st floor

50%E-3

0.04

0.01

29

0.06

2nd floor

E-4 stubs ( fixed)

2.1

3.98

193

8.6

Ground*

E-4 stubs (fixed and verified)

2.6

4.47

169

10.0

Floors and walls

0.2

0.18

96

0.5

I st floor

0.23

149

0.5

Duct

Zone
Z-2

Z-4

Z-5

Description

E-3 duct work
E-4 duct work

0.03

0.04

149

0.09

E-4 stubs (fixed, 5)

0.3

1.55

534

2.8

E-4 stubs (fixed and verified, 2)

0.9

1.15

135

2.7

39

Location

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Table 1. 234-SZ Recovery Air Model Input Summary
Model Input

Total Pu (g)
Rel GIµ
Zone

Z-6

Z-7

Nominal

±CJ

(%)

UCL9s

E-4 TRU removal (U leg)

5.0

0.54

11

5.9

Floors and walls

2.2

1.13

52

4.0

Zone2 Corr 2 E-3 duct work

0.04

0.01

29

0.06

E-3 ductwork

0.1

0.08

149

0.2

E-4 ductwork

0.01

0.01

E-4 stubs (fixed, 4)

1.2

0.18

15

1.5

GB LLW (fixed and verified, 1)

1.0

0.12

12

1.2

E-4 TRU removal (12 and 22 ft)

22.5

9.09

40

37.5

Duct

Vault annex

0.00

0.00

46

0.00

I st floor

Tunnels4 and 5 with Z-5, 6

247

55.32

22

339

Tunnels

0.3

0.64

189

1

128

48 .33

38

208

2

1.90

126

5

Description

Tunnels 1, 2, and 3, last removals

Nominal quantified total

1st floor

Duct

0.02

Conservative input

410.58

Location

I st floor

632.43

*The notation of ground lloor assumes that demolition has occurred.
GB

glovebox

TRU

transuranic

LLW

low-level waste

UCL.,

upper 95% confidence level

RECUPLEX

recovecy of uranium and plutonium by extraction

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

Previous dispersion model inputs used UCL9s values only for internally and externally contaminated
s true tural floors/walls and due tw ork. For sources quantified by ND A methods, the nominally measured
plutonium source was previously used as input. This convention was adopted to align with waste
management practices and recognize the capabilities of in situ NDA Most in situ measurements were
completed using the sodium-iodide detector, which was more readily deployed in areas of limited
accessibility but delivers high uncertainty in settings with low plutonium holdup. For sources quantified
by NDA methods, nominal inputs were considered appropriate through recognition of added
conservatisms incorporated by the dispersion model.

9

10

In addition, Lawrence National has conducted additional modeling of air dispersion and particle
deposition. This model is under final review and results will be incorporated into the work planning.

11

5.5 Health and Safety Plan (HASP)

12
13
14
15
16
17

The PFP Health and Safety Plan, CHPRC-00328, PFP Project Site Specific Health and Safety Plan
(HASP), addresses the health and safety requirements for demolition of buildings within the
PFP Complex. Response to upset conditions and emergency response reactions will be within the
HASP. As part of demolition preparation, a drill program as outlined PRC-PRO-EM-40317, Operational
Drill Program, will be established and initiated to demonstrate the response to upset conditions and
response readiness of personnel and equipment.

40

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2
3
4

The HASP outlines controls designed to minimize health and safety risks to workers and other onsite
personnel. The HASP also establishes requirements, provides general guidelines, and conveys
facility-specific hazard communication information to PFP personnel performing work within the
PFP demolition area.

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

The primary purpose of PFP' s HASP is to identify how the project meets the required elements of a
HASP under 29 CFR 1910.120, "Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response." These
required elements are met by the implementation of company-level procedures such as those that dictate
work planning, training, and emergency response. Project hazards are identified and evaluated per the job
hazard analysis process dictated in PRC-PRO-WKM-079, Job Hazard Analysis. Typical job hazard
analyses (JHAs) that the project uses include general industrial hazard analyses (GHAs); craft-specific
hazard analyses (CHAs); and JHAs. Mitigative controls are incorporated in hazard analyses (GHAs,
CHAs, and JHAs), work packages, and procedures, as appropriate.

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

The HASP describes the CHPRC training program, which ensures personnel are trained to safely,
competently, and effectively perform their job function while protecting themselves, fellow workers, the
public, and the environment. Personnel are trained to perform assigned tasks in accordance with federal,
state, and local regulations; DOE directives; agreements; and management-directed training. The CHPRC
training programs provide personnel with the training to meet the ISMS and Environmental Management
System (EMS) Guiding Principle of Competence Commensurate with Responsibility. In some cases (e.g.,
radiological control technicians), training includes core examinations that must be passed per criteria in
order to perform duties.

21
22
23
24
25
26

All employees exposed to hazardous substances, health hazards, or safety hazards and the site
Responsible Managers (RMs) receive the requisite training before they are permitted to engage in
Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (known as HAZWOPER) activities. CHPRC's
training process requires the development of Individual Training Plans for all employees. These plans
contain all initial and refresher training that is required for employees to perform their jobs safely and
effectively.

27

5.6 Radiological Monitoring and Control

28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35

To ensure the safety of workers, the public, and the environment, CHPRC is incorporating several
enhancements to radiological controls as a result of the December 2017 contamination spread at PFP
Increased radiological area boundaries, established from predicted air dispersion and surface deposition
models discussed above, will encompass levels requiring posting and control and will ensure
contamination remains within posted boundaries. Radiological monitoring, near-field radiation
monitoring, and personnel radiological monitoring parameters will be specified in the As Low As
Reasonably Achievable management worksheets within the specific activity work packages and
radiological work permits. Radiological personnel, air, and surface monitoring is discussed below.

36

5.6.1 Personnel Monitoring
Personnel monitoring improvements include the use of hand and foot monitors at egress locations at the
radiological buffer area boundaries to minimize errors in monitoring personnel for contamination.

37
38
39
40
41
42
43

5.6.2 Air Monitoring
Increased use of fixed air samplers along with the continuous air monitors , during both demolition and
nondemolition activities, will provide more confidence that contamination controls are effective. One
radiological control technician will be assigned to monitor CAMs remotely per shift, during demolition
activities. Field work supervisors will be notified via radio of any rate of rise that exceeds 50 percent of

41

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

the CAM chronic alarm set point and the crew directed to stop demolition and apply additional
water/fixative. In the event of a continuous air monitor alarm (not including spurious or radon related
alarms), stored continuous air monitoring data will be retrieved by the project for trending and analysis.
As entry into or near the radiological control areas will be necessary to access the continuous air monitor
data, worker safety will be a factor in retrieving this information and therefore the process of deploying
employees will be in line with current worker protection and ALARA considerations. The number,
location, monitoring frequency, turnaround times, and action levels are shown in Table 2.

42

 Table 2.Monitoring and Response
Continuous Air Monitors
Nurrber/
location'

Non-Demolition

During Demolition

• 14total
• 4 inner CAM; {closer to
demolition)
• (24 DAC-hr)

• Existing 14 CAM;
• Up to two additional CAM;
deployed near work
downwind of job site
(80 DAC-hr)

• 10 outer CAM; {farther
from demolition)
(8 DAC-hr)
rvtmitoring
frequency

Turnaround
time

• Visual once per shift
• Filter paper changed
daily or for cause (rate of
rise noted)

• Continually obseJVed by
RCTs

• Filter papers take 24 hr
to analyze•

• Results every 15 rrinutes;
can differentiate between
alpha and backgramd

Cookie Sheets
Non-Demolition

Fixed Air Samplers
During Demolition

Non-Demolition

77 total
• 47 inside HCAand CA
• 18 inside RBA
• 12 outside work control zone
• Additional deployed in proninent
downwind locatim from job site,
based on wind direction

35 total
• 15 inside HCA and
CA
• 8 inside RBA

35 total
• 15 inside HCA and
CA
• 8 inside RBA

• 3 inside work
control zone

• 3 inside work control
zone

• 9 outside work
control zone

• 9 outside work conbol
zone

• Surveyed twice per day
• Surveyed after wind events

• Near real-time surveys of cookie
sheets in prorrinent downwind
location of demolition and within
the demolition HCA boundal)' of
the HCA and CA

• Filter paper
changed daily a
for cause

• Filter paper changed
daily or for cause

• Results real time

• Results real time

• Filter papers take
24 hr to analyze•

• Filter papers take
24 hr to analyze•

• >1,600 dpm'100cm2 inside
HCA and CA

• >1 ,600 dpm'100cm2 inside HCA
and CA

• 20,000 dpm

• 20,000 dpm

• >20 dpm'100 cm2 outside the
CA

• >20 dpm'100 cm2 outside the
CA

• Any contarrination above
action levels assumed to be
alpha; further analysis may
determine it is radon

• Any contarrination above action
levels assumed to be alpha;
further analysis may deterrrine ~
is radon

• Notify Operations/RadCon
Management
• Perimn sample analysis
• Evaluate need i>r additional
water/fixative
• Evaluate need to revise
posting

• Notify Operations/RadCon
Management
• Peri>rm sample analysis
• Evaluate need i>r additional
water/fixative
• Evaluate need to revise
posting

• Notify RadCon
Management
• Evaluate need
i>r timely
sample analysis

• Notify RadCon
Management
• Evaluate need i>r
timely sample
analysis

77 total
• 47 inside HCA and CA
• 18 inside RBA
• 12 outside work control zone

• Filter paper changed daiy
or for cause (rate of rise
noted)

During Demolition

• Filter papers take 24 hrto
analyze•
Action level

• Upon alarm

~
c.,.)

Response

• Exit area/notify
management

• 50% of the chronic alarm
set point

• Notify FWS
• Stop demolition
• Apply additional
water/fixative
• Obtain/analyze data
history trend

(')

a. Numbers and location may change based on further analysis.

I

-a

b. Filter paper on CAM; and air samplel5 at ARA boundaries and downwind are counted every 24 hr, which is requredfor filter paper analysis for additimalCAM; and air samplers as needed due to equipment and
employee resources.

ARA
CA

1

=

airborne radioactivity area

CAM

contarrination area

RCT

=
=

~

6
c.,.)

continuous air monitor
radiological control technician

c:....

0)

z-ffi

C

m :;a
l'v m
0

->.

<

CX)

0

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1

5.6.3

2
3
4

Cookie sheets deployed as shown in Table 2 will provide monitoring and smear locations to validate
controls are effective. Wind survey protocols remove employees from affected work areas and assess
changes to contamination levels (if any):

5

•

Work stop at 15 miles per hour (mph)

6
7

•

Access restricted at >30 mph average or 40 mph gusts, followed by response surveys ofcookie sheets
and boundaries. The expanded monitoring locations for demolition resumption are shown in Figure
41

8

Surface Contamination

_;- /'/~-~

,.,_,.__~,
MONITORING
LOCATIONS
• Cookie Sheet

[

.t. CAM & Cookie Sheet

--~~--+-+---t •

FASelevaledat20ft.

FAS & Cooije Sheet

j\ Feet f-+++-1

itf

0

250 500

~

Aeons

~~:'ary

MopA1,cJ 3 :16~ PM6.111!2019
MSACemr31~1tigSe«ices
(Ref«encel.lap)

1-

..I RBA Bound,ry

Figure 41. Monitoring Locations After December 2017
9
10

Based on analysis of the potential emissions and evaluation of available control technologies, the
following techniques are examples of those that will be used to control air emissions during demolition.

11
12

•

Water or fixative will be applied for suppressing dust during any demolition and waste loadout
activity, as defined in work packages .

13
14

•

Fixative use and application will comply with manufacturer recommendations and documented
engineering evaluations.

44

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2

•

Radiological surveys (e.g., smears) will be taken on equipment, tools, and materials in areas where
there is the potential for removable contamination.

3
4

•

Demolition equipment, tools, and materials, with removable contamination above 2,000 dpm/100 cm2
alpha will be decontaminated, wrapped, or fixed in place.

5
6

•

Appropriate controls such as water, fixatives, covers, containment tents, or windscreens will be
applied as defined in project work packages and procedures.

7
8

•

Fixatives or cover material (e.g., soil, gravel, and plastic) will be applied to disturbed contaminated
soils and demolition debris associated with the PFP Complex when field activities cease for the day.

9
10

The waste packages will remain closed, except during packaging and waste inspection activities once they
are staged onsite.

11

5. 7 Contamination Control Fixative Plan

12
13
14
15
16

To evaluate effective contamination control techniques and products, CHPRC investigated alpha
contamination fixatives for use in resuming demolition of PFP and loadout of the demolition debris .
CHPRC-03653, Fixative Application Recommendationfor PFP Demolition, documents the comparisons
and recommendations to control the spread ofradioactive alpha contamination during demolition and is
summarized below.

17
18
19
20
21
22
23

The demolition operations had been applying a diluted (25 percent to 75 percent solution) PBS liquid
adhesive fixative at the time of the airborne contamination event. PBS was applied using water cannons
on waste piles being transferred into waste boxes. To facilitate application of PBS using water cannons,
the fixative was diluted beyond the manufacturer's recommendations, likely reducing the effectiveness of
PBS in controlling the spread of contamination. Following the event, other fixatives including SoilSement and Envirotac II were applied to limit the spread of contamination and have been effective to
date. Additionally, PBS has been used but in full strength per the manufacturer's recommendation.

24
25
26
27
28
29

The fixatives listed in Table 3 are approved for use at PFP, provided that they are applied per the
manufacturer's recommendations and with the limitations previously noted. The fixatives were evaluated
and are proprietary formulations of synthetic and natural polymers with varying amounts of water content
that bind or adhere to radioactive contamination. The manufacturer's recommendations regarding the type
of matrix the product can be used on and dilution are also summarized. Reapplication frequency is based
on the manufacturer's recommendation and Hanford Site experience.

Table 3. Fixatives, Matrix, Dilution, and Reapplication Frequency
Fixative (Product)

Contamination Matrix

Dilution Ratio

Reapplication Frequency

Polymeric Barrier
System

•
•

Waste piles
Vertical structures

Do not dilute

When loosened or cracked

Envirotac II®

•
•
•

Soil
Waste piles
Vertical structures

225 gal product to 1,000 gal of
water(~ l to4)

Every 30 days or when
disturbed

•

Soil

Do not dilute

•

Waste piles

Every 6 months or when
disturbed or cracked

InstaCote®
CC Demo 100

45

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Table 3. Fixatives, Matrix, Dilution, and Reapplication Frequency
Fixative (Product)

Contamination Matrix

Ames® Blue Max®

Waste piles

Soil-Sement®

•
•
•

Dilution Ratio

Reapplication Frequency
When yellowed

Soil

1 part product to 7 parts water

Waste piles
Vertical structures

Every 6 months or when
disturbed

Notes : Ames and Blue Max are registered trademarlcs of Ames Research Laboratories, Inc., Salem, Oregon.
Envirotac II is a registered trademark ofEP&A Envirotac, Inc., La Quinta, CaliDmia.
InstaCote isa registered trademark oflnstaCote, Inc. , Erie Township, Michigan.
Soil-Semen! is a registered trademark of Midwest Industrial Supply, Inc., Canton, Ohio.

1
2
3
4

Table 4 summarizes the approved applications for fixatives as applied over other foundation layer
fixatives, considering the allowed condition of the foundation layer fixative (dry, damp, or wet) to ensure
fixative effectiveness and adhesion. A summary of the approved fixatives for a proposed application and
contamination matrix is shown in Table 5.

Table 4. Approved Fixative Applications
Product to be Covered

Product to Apply
Polymeric Barrier
System
Envirotac n®
(Rhino Snot)
Instacote®
CC Demo 100
Ames® Blue Max®

Soil-Sement®

Envirotac II®
(Rhino Snot)

Soil-Sement®

lnstaCote®
CC Demo 100

Ames®
Blue Max®

Polymeric
Barrier System

Damp*

Damp*

NIA

NIA

Wet

Dry

Dry

Dry

Dry

Dry

Wet

Damp

Damp*

NIA

NIA

Dry

Dry

Dry

Dry

Dry

Damp*

Damp*

Wet

NIA

Damp*

Dry

Dry

Dry

Dry

Dry

NIA

NIA

NIA

NIA

NIA

Dry

Dry

Dry

Dry

Dry

Damp*

Wet

Damp*

NIA

Damp*

Dty

Dry

Dry

Dry

Dry

Notes: Ames and Blue Max are registered trademarks of Ames Research Laboratories, Inc., Salem, Oregon.
Envirotac II is a registered trademark ofEP&A Envirotac, Inc., La Quinta, CaliDmia.
InstaCote is a registered trademark oflnstaCote, Inc., Erie Township, Michigan.
Soil-Semen! is a registered trademark of Midwest Industrial Supply, Inc., Canton, Ohio.
*May be applied af!er a24-hour cure time.
NI A = not applicable

46

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Table 5. Approved Fixative by Application/Matrix
Application/Matrix

Contaminated soil

Fixative (Recommended Product)

Soil-Sement®
Envirotac II®
InstaCote®CC Demo 100

Structures (stable and building demolition)

Soil-Sement®
Envirotac II®
Polymeric Barrier System

Waste (debris) piles

Soil-Sement®
Envirotac II®
InstaCote®CC Demo 100
Polymeric Barrier System
Ames® BlueMax®

Notes: Ames and Blue Max are registered trademarks of Ames Research Laboratories, Inc., Salem, Oregon.
Envirotacll is a registered trademaikofEP&A Envirotac, Inc., La Quinta, California.
Inst a Cote is a registered trademarkoflnstaCote, Inc.,Erie Township,Michigan.
Soil-Semen I is a registered trademark ofMidwest Industrial Supply, Inc., Canton, Ohio.

1
2
3
4
5

Given the current facility configuration in mid-demolition with large nonhomogeneous debris piles,
Soil-Sement is the preferred application for PFP demolition. Envirotac II is equivalent to Soil-Sement but
is a less preferred alternative due to mixing ratios and cost. Both products can be applied to soil, waste
piles, and buildings, and both products use the same equipment for application. In addition, both products
can be applied over the existing debris previously sprayed with the other fixatives listed in Table 4.

6
7
8
9

Fixative will be applied during demolition to those newly exposed surfaces at the end of a work shift or
due to inclement weather regardless ofwhetherthe previous fixative application has cured for 24 hours .
The 24-hour cure time is applicable for meeting the undisturbed aspect of the fixative for reapplication
frequency (Table 3).

10
11
12
13
14
15

The selection of the fixative is only one consideration in implementing the broader contamination control
strategy during demolition of contaminated structures. Additional factors to be considered during
application are the manner of application (hosing, misting, and trawling) by Engineering Evaluation
(PFP-TE-18-0004, Technical Evaluationfor P FP Foggers, and PFP-TE-18-0005, Technical Evaluation
for PFP Water Cannons), and ambient conditions (wind speed, wind direction, air temperature, and
humidity) by field optimization.

16

5.8 Electrical and Mechanical Isolation

17
18
19
20
21

To minimize the risk from hazardous energy sources during demolition, CHPRC developed and
implemented the requirements of PRC-PRO-DD-40013, Electrical and Mechanical Isolation ofFacilities
to Support D&D Work, for each building. Electrical and mechanical (including utilities) isolations were
completed for each building for each service prior to initiation of demolition activities and no additional
action is required to support demolition resumption.

47

 CHPRC-03689, REV . 0
JUNE 2018

1

5.9 Combustible Controls

2
3
4
5

During the remaining demolition, the basic tenet of combustible controls is introducing material necessary
to accomplish the task. Unneeded materials will be removed as soon as practicable. When
noncombustible materials are available to perform a task, incorporating the material substitution will be
considered.

6
7
8
9
10
11

Control of combustible materials and flammable liquids will include prohibitions, quantity limits, spatial
separation, segregation, storage in approved containers/cabinets, ventilation, and provision of secondary
containment (e.g., berms or catch pans). Periodic inspection of active areas will be performed to ensure a
high degree of compliance. The safety function of this approach is to minimize the potential for fire
propagation, limiting the size of a fire, and preventing a potentially explosive atmosphere. The functional
intent of the combustible material control from HNF-15500 is summarized as follows:

12
13
14
15
16

•

Fuel packages will be limited in size and spaced apart to reduce the likelihood of radiant fire
propagation and flashover conditions. Fuel packages that are properly contained within a
noncombustible container, or are smaller in size than a defined de minimis value, can be excluded
from size and spacing requirements. Fuel packages are defined in the fire hazards analysis (FHA) and
its implementing documents .

17
18

•

Fuel-fired equipment and vehicle/equipment refueling will be controlled by Hanford Fire Marshal
permits and in accordance with PRC-STD-FP-40404, Fire Protection Program.

19
20

•

Combustible and flammable liquids will be properly containerized and limited in quantity in any
given room when outside a flammable liquids cabinet.

21
22

As specified in the FHA, combustible controls, Hanford Fire Marshall permits, and PRC-STD-FP-40404
will be implemented during demolition activities as a result of removal of combustible material.

23

5.10 Waste Management, Handling, and Packaging

24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31

Waste characterization is in accordance with DOE/RL-2005-13, Action Memorandum for the Plutonium
Finishing P !ant Above-Grade Structures Non-Time Critical Removal Action, and the RAWP
(DOE/RL-2011-03). The waste management and handling practices will be performed in accordance with
PFP waste handling procedures as well as federal and state requirements specified in the action
memorandum (DOE/RL-2005-13). Waste will be characterized and containerized to meet the waste
acceptance criteria identified in the regulatory documents. The waste acceptance criteria limit for
shipment is 325 g of plutonium in a Standard Large Box 2 or Standard Waste Box container. The
acceptance criterion is 200 g of plutonium for drums and items designated for Perma-Fix.

32
33
34
35
36

Characterization and handling of waste designated for disposal at ERDF are covered under separate
Waste Planning Checklists (Site Form A-6004-590) and are included within the work authorization
documentation. Separate from the work authorization documents, multiple ERDF waste profiles have
been generated for disposition of waste from the PFP Complex that has been determined to be acceptable
for ERDF disposal.

37
38
39

The process to remove waste containers from the PFP demolition area to ERDF ensures contamination is
controlled (Figure 42). Contamination surveys and monitoring will be conducted as the waste is moved
from CAs to the radiological buffer area, and then to the container transfer area (CT A).

48

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

-Zone : ContaminationArea

Zone: Airborne Radioactiv~y
Area/High Contamination
Area

Respiratory Protection :
Filtered breathing air

Respiratory Protection :
Filtered breathing air

Monitoring: Air samplers
and cookie sheets nearby

Monitoring : Continuous
air monitors , air
samplers , cookie sheets
around demolition area

Ca~ tJ rt,E.- d
tr\.1:~

-

Zone : Radiological Buffer
Area

Zone: Airborne Radioactivity
area/Contamination Area

Respiratory Protection :
None

Respiratory Protection :
Filtered breathing air

Monitoring: Truck surveyed
before leaving RSA for
release to ERDF

Monitoring: Lapel air
samplers on employees;
nearby soil surveys in
addition to existing air
samplers

!C .Jtll!? J .);J

~l- r, e, ed

t ; a r•5,p c r-: J ! :) a-- c
t; r 10, 11 t- t'J r C0r'. .1 ~ - •
- , J ,.-,, ft- r !,,.r~ J ,; • A :

Figure 42. Waste Transfer from PFP to ERDF
1
2
3
4
5
6

ERDF and PFP staff worked together to develop and review controls for transferring waste from PFP to
ERDF. Thorough reviews will ensure packaged waste meets ERDF waste disposal criteria. Extensive
surveys will be conducted before containers are transferred between areas. Prior to transferring shipping
containers from the CT A onto the roadways, surveys will ensure external contamination on the containers
is less than detectable. Transfer of the containers from PFP to ERDF occurs at the CT A immediately prior
to transport to ERDF.

7
8
9
10
11
12

At ERDF, enhanced controls will be instituted for disposal of PFP waste. The potential to exceed 20
percent DAC (CHPRC ARA posting criteria) was documented in ALARA Management Worksheet
AMW-18-ERDF-00 1. The need for respiratory protection and associated controls to be deployed at ERDF
were developed based on lessons learned from PFP and applying the hierarchy of controls with input from
the work team and SMEs as part of the job hazard analysis process. The enhanced controls include the
following:

13

•

PFP waste shall not use general purpose ramps

14

•

PFP waste will have dedicated waste placement Airborne Radioactivity Area (ARA) ramps

15

•

All waste generated from PFP will be placed only by the ARA ramp or Place-and-Cover methods

16

•

Ramp depth increased from 8 to 15 ft to increase the distance between workers and the waste

17

•

Fixative applied during waste disposal on ARA ramp

18

•

No PFP waste will be placed if wind exceeds 15 mph

19
20

•

Air sample data from PFP corresponding to that waste shipment must be analyzed to ensure that it is
within ERDF's control set

21

•

Enhanced controls to protect workers as shown in Table 6.

49

I

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Table 6. ERDF Enhanced Controls for Worker Protection During Disposal of PFP Waste

PPE

•
•
•

Air Sampling

•
•
•
•

•
Contamination
Surveys

•
•
•
•

WorkArea
Restoration

ERDF Enhanced Controls
for Place-and-Co~r Method

ERDF Enhanced
Controls at ARA Ramp

Control Set

•

•
•

PAPRand single set ofanticontamination clothing for dozer and
compactoroperators
Lapel air samplers worn by all individuals
in ARA
PAPRand single set ofanticontamination clothing for personnel in
ARA/CA on dump ramp

•
•

PAPRand single set ofanticontamination clothing fordozeroperator,
RCTs and workers
Lapel air samplers worn by all individuals
in ARA

Air samplers at the rearofthe truck

One air sampleron the bulldozer(in cell)
One air sampleron the compactor(in cell)
One air sample at RBA/CA boundary
Three air samplers at the downwind
boundary

•
•

One air sampleron the bulldozer
• One air sampler on the upwind boundary
• Three air samplers at the downwind
boundary

Technical smears taken at the dump ramp

•

Direct and transferable surveys on ground
adjacent to ramp

•

Direct and transferable on ground
adjacent to the ARA/CA boundary
Direct and transferable on ground
downwind
Inside cab and egress path ofdozer and
shuttle truck
Technical smears taken at various
locations during placement

Two air samplers at the dump ramp

Direct and transferable surveys on ground
downwind on a daily basis
Inside cab and egress path ofdozer and
compactor
Water applied to waste being placed
Fixative applied to placed waste
12 in. ofclean dirt coverplaced at the end
of the day

•
•
•

W aterapplied to waste being placed
12 in. ofclean dirt cover placed
immediately afterwaste is placed

CA

Airborne Radioactivity Area
contamination area

RBA

personal protective equipment
radiological buffer area

ERDF

Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility

RCT

radiological control technician

PFP

Plutoniwn finishing Plant

ARA

PPE

•

1

5.11 Site Control Plan

2
3
4

Following the December event, PFP expanded its work control zone. The PFP Shift Office controls the
work zone and implements access control to prevent interference with or by surrounding work. This
controlled work control zone will remain throughout the resumption of PFP demolition activities.

5
6
7
8

Inside the work control zone will be the demolition zone access boundary fence, ERDF roll-on and
roll-off loading and container transport areas, and radiological areas (Figure 43). Boundaries and traffic
pathways will be delineated by physical traffic barriers such as signage, jersey barriers, trenches, berms,
ditches, elevated locations, embankments, or spatial separation from passing traffic.

50

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

FAS & Cookie Sheet

Cl
N

Feet 1-+-+-+-f

0 250 600

r,

_.

NXM.s

,.

. . V>flPS Managed RBA

. . Builcing

~~a,y

,.j RBA Boundary

. . V>flPSManagedCA

['.J

Tra;ler

['.J
.·•· ./

Slructln
Fence

~Aso13:18.tM PM e111/2018
MSAC. nt rul Pkipping ! ervk:n
(Rof~Mlp)

Figure 43. Access Control and Radiological Boundaries
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Other Hanford Site contractors requiring access to their work areas inside the work control zone
coordinate with the PFP shift office for access authorization and understanding the nature of each other's
work and protective requirements. If the other contractor mus tenter a PFP radiological area to access
their equipment or systems, personnel would be required to gain authorization from PFP operations,
follow PFP access qualifications and personal protective equipment requirements. If the other contractor
experiences an emergency or abnormal condition in their work areas within the PFP work control zone,
they would notify the PFP operations shift office, which would then instruct PFP personnel to take the
appropriate action based on the condition. A site-level emergency within the work control zone would be
communicated to all Hanford Site employees along with required site-wide actions (e.g., evacuation, take
cover).

11
12

As the project progresses , the configuration of the site is subject to change. In addition to the work control
boundary, specific areas are described as follows:

13
14
15

•

Radiological areas - encompass the PFP footprint as well as the remaining structures and debris piles
consistent with the updated air dispersion model and are subject to radiological controls for personal
protective equipment (PPE) and monitoring.

51

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2

•

Demolition zone - based on the location of the demolition activity, minimum boundary from the
facility being demolished will be controlled.

3
4

•

Waste queues -waste container queues are provided within the perimeter fence to facilitate
management of waste containers including loadout and transport.

5
6

•

Ingress/egress and travel paths - personnel access routes for ERDF trucks, fuel trucks, maintenance
vehicles, and emergency vehicles will be established.

7

5.12 Tunnels, Trenches, and Subterranean Structures

8
9
10
11
12

The location and nature of all subterranean structures will be shown in the structural analysis to provide
coordinated protection, removal, or shoring of all subterranean structures associated with the demolition
project limits. Structures identified as "remaining" will be properly protected by use of barricades or
blockage, or by use of shoring, plating, or berm protection to ensure protection and integrity of the
remaining underground structures.

13
14
15
16

Where underground structures must be crossed or loaded for demolition purposes, these structures will be
analyzed for both vertical and horizontal soil surcharge loading to assure proper protection and integrity
of the remaining structure. Shoring, plating, or use of soil protection berms may be used to supplement or
provide s true tural protection of the remaining underground structures.

17
18
19

Where possible, crossing or loading of underground structures will be avoided, and passage over or
around these structures will be restricted by use of barricades, markers, or restricted access zones to
ensure that these structures are not loaded.

20

5.13 Water Management

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32

Water from this project will be generated from several of the following sources: dust suppression,
decontamination, and normal site precipitation runoff. Requirements for managing these water sources are
provided in the RAWP (DOE/RL-2011-03). Specifically, water will be maintained within the footprint of
the berm (Figure 43) to allow for evaporation. The primary methods for protecting runoff will be
installing a berm within the perimeter of the demolition area and plugging the ground penetrations and
drain lines . In addition to the berm, asphalt or concrete around the buildings will be broken and/or
removed to minimize water runoff. Requirements to monitor the water level within the berm will be
contained within the building demolition work packages. To assist with water control, a lined ditch may
be placed inside the berm to allow placement of water removal equipment as a response to upset
conditions involving water volume accumulation. Water collection containers (i.e., Frac or Baker Tanks)
will be staged and available to respond to localized water accumulation and excess water volume
mitigation.

33
34
35
36

Any buried piping systems, drain lines, culverts, storm drains, and other similar utilities that exit, or have
the potential to exit, the berm will be plugged or sealed to prevent water intrusion and migration offsite.
During demolition, radiological monitoring of the soil will be in accordance with controls described in
Section 5.6 and posted accordingly.

37

6 Conduct of Operations

38
39
40

The CHPRC organization structure is a traditional matrix organization, with project organizations
assigned responsibility for execution of work and functional organizations being assigned to perform
required support and overhead tasks to successfully execute scope. The mission of the PPP Project is the

52

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2

safe and compliant demolition of the facility that will eliminate major hazards on the Hanford Site and
reduce the cos ts of safe and secure surveillance.

3

6.1

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

Roles, Responsibilities, Authorities, and Accountabilities

CHPRC uses an integrated project team at PFP to enhance the delegation of work responsibility,
authority, and accountability to individual team members. The project manager retains overall
responsibility and authority for project actions and activities while delegating work to team members.
Each work element assignee has the responsibility, authority, and accountability for managing the work
element from inception to turnover with established scope, schedule, and cost baselines . The project team
will typically evolve in skill mix and size as the project evolves through the project phases. The project
manager is responsible for the identification of staffing needs and required changes through the project
life. Specialized support staffing will come from the CHPRC support organizations. The PFP senior
management organization chart is shown in Figure 44.

l

l

l

l

l

Figure 44. PFP Senior Management Team
13

6.1.1

ProjectManager

14
15

The project manager has overall responsibility for ensuring implementation and execution of the PFP
Project to include the following:

16
17

•

Identify the project team's staffing requirements, including required support from the core functional
organizations and subcontracting

18

•

Ensure adequate and timely project communications to the project team and external stakeholders

19

•

Ensure ISMS/EMS requirements and principles are integrated into all project execution activities

20
21

•

Manage developing and accepting project cost estimate, schedule, and performance measurement
baseline

53

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1

•

Ensure that CHPRC's Nuclear Safety Program is complied with, as applicable to the project

2
3

•

Ensure that applicable environmental regulatory requirements and documents are complied with
during project execution

4
5
6

•

Ensure that Hanford Site safeguards and security requirements are adhered to or integrated into the
design if the project involves work in a protected area, or involves the modification of a security
system or boundary

7
8

•

Monitor and report project cost and schedule performance, report against designated performance
indicators, and prepare or contribute to monthly and project reporting

9
10

•

Ensure that appropriate corrective actions are developed and implemented to correct unfavorable
cost/schedule variances or deviations from project technical requirements

11

•

Ensure that the worker safety requirements are adhered to during project execution

12
13

•

Engage with DOE-RL oversight to understand their field observations and take necessary actions to
address the issue

14

6.1.2

15
16
17

Deputy project managers represent the project manager in internal and external interactions and have
specific delegations to act with project manager authority in specific project scopes (e.g., demolition,
project execution, compliance).

18

6.1.3

19
20
21
22
23
24

The demolition director serves as the responsible manager for demolition activities and the
implementation of work management for the project or a specific body of work from inception to
completion by providing continuity of purpose and understanding throughout the work planning and
implementation process. The demolition director runs the plan of the day and week and ensures that teams
have necessary equipment, resources, work documents, and time to perform demolition safely and
compliantly.

25

6.1.4

26
27
28
29

The demolition field work supervisors report to the demolition director and are individuals trained and
qualified to supervise work teams to ensure the safe and compliant performance of field work within the
parameters of the work documents. Field work supervisors are given the authority for controlling work in
the field, possess the authority flow-down in multi-discipline teams, and during casualty situations.

30

6.1.5

31
32
33
34

The facility min-safe, maintenance, and operations director is responsible for both operational control of
the facility and maintenance, emergency preparedness, conduct of work, hazardous energy control,
safeguards and security, training, and quality assurance. The shift office is under the purview of this
director and is the project work release authority and is responsible for formal notifications and reporting.

35

6.1.6

36
37

The safety, health, and radiological protection director is responsible for ensuring all aspects of
occupational safety, industrial hygiene, and radiological control.

DeputyProjectManagers

DemolitionDirector

Field Work Supervisors

Facility Min-Safe, Maintenance,and Operations Director

Safety, Health, and Radiological Protection Director

54

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0

JUNE 2018

1

6.1.7

Engineering, Waste, and NDA Director

2
3

The engineering, waste, and NDAdirector provides technical guidance and resources to the project,
including nuclear safety and fire protection, and is responsible for waste management and shipping,

4

6.1.8

5
6
7

The environmental director performs project environmental compliance and permitting, environmental
strategy and planning, regulatory strategy and integration, regulatory liaison, environmental risk
assessment, and environmental monitoring and reporting.

8

6.1.9

Environmental Director

Project Controls Director

9
10

The project controls director performs scheduling, cost estimating, earned value management, and project
performance reporting.

11

6.2 Work Package Development

12
13
14
15
16

Prior to resuming demolition, work instructions for future PFP demolition will be written in new work
documents to incorporate lessons learned from the December event and to provide concise steps for the
work team. All phases of work package development will involve the work team, including mock-up of
activities prior to starting work. SMEs will be involved to evaluate lessons learned and help incorporate
new ideas of completing the demolition of PRF and 234-5Z.

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32

A thorough review of the work documents and supporting attachments will be performed prior to
providing the work package to the Hazard Review Board (HRB) team comprised of a senior manager
chairperson and SMEs who provide a seasoned level of oversight to work package completion. To ensure
that the appropriate controls are captured and flowed down to the work packages, documents that support
each major workscope will undergo HRB review and approval. A HRB team has been selected from
outside of PFP to evaluate the work documents for hazard controls while ensuring that the work team
understands the scope of the work and controls to safely and compliantly execute the work. Their
perspective will provide a different look at the documents and work activities to ensure the work package
is ready for use. By charter and based on initial review, the HRB chairperson determines whether the
work package will undergo full HRB or HRB chairperson review. PFP work packages intended for
development for demolition resumption-related work have been identified and reviewed, and those work
packages designated for HRB or HRB chair review are shown in Appendix B. All changes, modifications,
and revisions to HRB-reviewed work packages must be approved by the HRB or HRB chairperson,
ensuring that hazard controls are maintained through document updates and revisions . Changes to HRBreviewed work packages are further evaluated by the PFP change management process described below in
section 6.6.

33
34
35
36

Following completion of each remaining work scope, the PFP project team will conduct a formal post-job
review per PRC-PRO-WKM-14047, Pre-Job Briefings and Post-Job Reviews, to review the completed
work evolution. Lessons learned will be discussed and documented. Opportunities for improvement will
be incorporated into the next work package prior to starting a new work scope.

37

The work planning process overview is shown in the chart in Appendix Candis as follows:

38
39

•

Identify work: All requests to perform work are reviewed by the release authority to identify impacts
to the facility for equipment/system deficiencies.

40
41
42

•

Plan work: Activities are packaged, scheduled, and released in accordance with PRC-PRO-WKM12115, Work Management. Early SME involvement from initiation of hazard analysis through work
document approval will promote work performed safely and efficiently. The effort involved in

55

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2
3
4

determining the scope of work will vary. Some tasks will have a limited scope, and others are
complex and involve numerous actions and work groups. Determining the scope of wmk may be an
iterative process. There are two forms for work documents: the short form is for low risk, low
complexity work activities and the long form is for all other work.

5
6
7

•

Schedule work: Scheduling and coordination of work activities avoids unnecessary removal of
equipment and systems from service and uses manpower effectively. Ideally, all activities that involve
critical resources should be scheduled

8
9
10

•

Pre-work review: The purpose of the pre-work review is to ensure the work package, as planned, and
including supporting documents can still be performed safely and compliantly and that the current
facility/work location conditions are valid for the assumptions used during planning

11
12
13

•

Release of work: The permission to perform work is done in two steps: release of the work package
and the authorization to perform the released work in the field. All no-release-required work must be
included on the Daily Release Sheet whenever it is to be worked

14
15
16
17
18

•

Perform work: All work steps will be followed as written, in the proper alpha-numeric sequence,
using only the flexibility built into the work document. Work instructions will be identified as
continuous or reference use and will be followed as such. All work shall be performed according to
work instructions, not per the hazard analysis or other supplemental documents. If the work cannot be
performed as written, then a stop work will be called and supervision notified

19
20

•

Work package closure/Post-work review: Closeout activities should be completed no more than
30 days after the work has been accepted

21
22
23
24

•

Work suspension or cancellation: Work documents may be suspended or cancelled by the project
manager or responsible manager. Circumstances warranting cancellation or suspension include a
package that cannot be performed safely or compliantly as written, when there is uncertainty of path
forward, or when the work will not proceed for greater than two work weeks

25
26
27
28
29
30

•

Work package change process: Two methods are available to change work instructions: editorial
change, which will be executed via pen-and-ink, and technical changes, which may be executed via
pen-and-ink change or via a work change notice. All technical changes must be reviewed for any
impacts on hazards or controls and approved by the responsible manager. Changes made using the
work package change process are further evaluated by the PFP change management process described
below in section 6.6

31
32
33

•

Transfer of responsible manager and field work supervisor responsibilities: Responsible manager
responsibilities should be transferred to another qualified responsible manager when the responsible
manager is unavailable to fulfill the position's duties

34
35
36
37

The process of planning a resolution for a work document can be relatively straightforward for simple,
routine, low-hazard work or more demanding for complex, high-hazard wotk. These areas are presented
in a pattern (i.e., logic tree as shown in Appendix D). An example showing portions of a PFP work
document is shown in Appendix E.

38

6.3 Employee Engagement

39
40
41

Workers are integral to safe, successful work planning and execution, and their input is integral to every
phase of the demolition process. The CHPRC ISMS/EMS expectations for all employees include Stop
Work authority, speaking up when things don't seem right, providing recommendations for safer and

56

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2
3
4
5

more efficient work ideas, and demonstrating a questioning attitude. In addition, employees are
encouraged to provide feedback via frequent discussions with management. With 14 SMEs from 12
different work disciplines (including nine craft personnel), the engineering review team examined and
ranked the options and provided input prior to selection. These experienced workers helped develop and
rank achievable demolition options described in Chapter 4.

6
7
8
9

•

Employees provide perspectives in work planning by helping to identify and mitigate hazards and
performing walkdowns to validate that the work scope can be completed as written. As part of work
planning, worker representatives attend the HRB, during which the chairperson relies on face-to-face
feedback about whether the work package can be followed the way it is written.

10
11
12

•

After each phase of PFP demolition, management and employees will perform a review of readiness
for the next phase. Feedback from the previous work activities will be incorporated into lessons
learned before starting the next phase.

13
14
15
16
17
18
19

•

The plan of the day and plan of the week offer structure to planning discussions by displaying various
status boards to keep the work force informed about project deliverables. These boards will provide
real-time information to employees, including project priorities, active work activities, key equipment
availability and functionality, waste shipment inventories and locations, technical safety requirement
compliance, radiological survey status, and meteorology updates. These communication tools
facilitate identification of critical-path activities so employees better understand project work status ·
and their involvement.

20
21

•

Employee input will be sought as part of change management reviews, ensuring that any potential
change does not adversely affect safety or base assumptions and documents.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

The PFP project or deputy manager meets with each work group on a rotating weekly basis in roundtable
discussions. With their commitment to communication prior to PFP demolition resumption, the PFP
management team provides sitewide employee briefings about recovery and stabilization actions that
provide an opportunity for individual interaction with workers to address questions and concerns.
Additionally, PFP has conducted briefings with PFP employees on the enhanced controls developed for
resumption of demolition activities. During these communication meetings, questions, answers, and
employee feedback are documented and tracked for follow-up.

29

6.4 Emergency Preparedness and Abnormal Conditions

30
31
32

Emergency response procedures shall identify the responsible individuals and the specific response
actions to be carried out by those individuals during an emergency drill, exercise, or in response to an
actual event.

33

6.4.1

34
35
36
37

Fully established and mature, the PFP emergency preparedness program is implemented through the use
of approved procedures and qualified personnel. Several documents flow down from DOE-0223,
Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures, including PRC-PRO-EM-060, Reporting Occurrences and
Processing Operations Information, to PFP emergency response procedures listed in Table 7.

Emergency Preparedness

57

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Table 7. PFP Emergency Preparedness Program-Related Guidance
Procedure Number

Title

ffl"ective Date

PFP-PRO-ER-50466, ZCR-001

Continuous Air Monitor Alarm

04/04/2018

PFP-PRO-ER-50467, ZCR-002

Unplanned Material Release

02/14/2018

PFP-PRO-ER-50468, ZCR-003

Personnel Contamination

06/07/2017

PFP-PRO-ER-50470, ZCR-005

Fire/Explosion

02/14/2018

PFP-PRO-ER-50473, ZCR-009

Evacuation

03/29/2018

PFP-PRO-ER-50474, ZCR-010

Take Cover

02/14/2018

PFP-PRO-ER-50477, ZCR-017

Bomb Threat/Bomb/Suspicious Object

03/06/2017

1
2
3
4
5
6

The PFP emergency response procedures include response actions for radiological incidents including the
audible/visual alarm received from a continuous air monitor, an unplanned material release, and personnel
contamination. The procedures delineate immediate actions to be taken, including those necessary to
protect workers; follow-up actions, including evaluation of the situation and development ofrestoration
plans; and roles and responsibilities of affected employees, radiological control personnel, and the building
emergency director.

7
8
9
10

At the site level, emergencies are classified and protective actions taken through implementing DOE-0223
and activating site resources and infrastructure. Credible accidents are analyzed and included in procedures
and guidance documents. With the start of demolition, the remaining emergency action level is listed in
RLEP 1.0 Appendix 1-2.Z, "Outside Releases (PFP Complex)" and covers the areas listed in Table 8.

Table 8. DOE-RL Emergency Action Levels
Facility :Emergency Ewnts

Table IA

Generic Emergency Classification Criteria

Table 1B

Fire Involving TRUWasteContainer(s)

Table IC

Explosion Involving TRU Contaminated Equipment

Table 1D

Explosion Involving TRUWaste Container(s)

Table IE

Spill InvolvingTRUWaste Container(s)/Equipment
Natural :Emergency Ewnts

Table 2A

Seismic Event

Table 2B

High Winds/Tornado

Table 2C

Aircraft Crash
Security Contingencies

Table 3A

Explosive Device

58

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2
3

The severity of the MAR and the event will determine the emergency classification level and the
associated protective actions, all of which are ultimately driven through a building emergency director
with a staffed initial command post.

4

6.4.2

Abnormal Events

An abnormal event is has the potential to escalate and result in a classified emergency or where local
residents or the media would expect offsite organizations to be aware of the event. As noted in
PRC-PRO-EM-060, Reporting Occurrences and Processing Operations Information, four categories of

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

abnormal events are classified by the emergency operations center (EOC) Shift Office after notification
by the shift manager. Fallowing notification of an event, EOC Shift Office personnel will gather
information and immediately evaluate and perform final abnormal event categorization of reported
events/conditions using specific criteria negotiated with offsite agencies and contained in EOC Shift
Office procedures. Upon declaration of an abnormal event, EOC Shift Office personnel will notify offsite
agencies of the event/condition.

14
15
16
17

Five categories of abnormal events are noted in Appendix B of PRC-PRO-EM-060: site and/or facility
condition, environmental, personnel safety, safeguards and security, and cross-category items. Each of
these categories has associated facility or sitewide emergency response procedures (e.g., fire, explosion,
spills, personnel injury, security) that will be followed to mitigate the event and protect personnel.

18

6.4.3

19
20
21
22
23
24

Non-emergency but off-normal incidents and expected response actions are identified in PFP work
documents based upon CHPRC procedures PRC-PRO-EM-40325, Radiological/Chemical Hazard Event
Response, PRC-PRO-SH-077,Reporting, Investigating, andManagingHealth, Safety and
Property/Vehicle Events, and PRC-PRO-SH-28034,Adverse Weather. Conditions such as power loss,
equipment failure, or introduction of an unexpected hazard would result in a work stoppage followed by
protecting personnel, placing the work area in a safe configuration, and performing normal exit procedures.

25
26
27
28

For abnormal radiological incidents, each work package identifies radiological indicators and actions to be
taken to protect the worker and curtail activities so radiological conditions are stabilized. Examples of
radiological indicators include reaching radiological work limits, monitoring continuous air monitors for
rate ofrise, and detection of contamination during in-process surveys.

29
30
31
32
33

PFP workers will conduct operational drills prior to demolition resumption to demonstrate that
contamination control is correctly managed by the field work supervisors and crew, that RCTs properly
respond to contamination events and promptly notify results, and to familiarize emergency responders
with the new work and radiological boundaries. The senior supervisory watch (SSW) will observe the
drills (Section 6.5) and include measurable performance objectives.

34

6.4.4

35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

Timely notifications are an expectation at PFP to ensure that operations management receives information
on incidents, emergencies, and abnormal events to protect workers, facilitate timely decision-making, and
follow-on notification to personnel on and off the project. This expectation is a reflection of CHPRC's
tenets for conduct of work. In a safety pause message in January 2018, the CHPRC president reiterated
the expectation to believe in indicators, make notifications to Operations, and to ensure the senior
manager has been notified of events and issues. In March 2018, CHPRC' s Chief Operating Officer issued
an all-employee message regarding notifications to facility operations . The message provided clear
direction that the need to notify goes well beyond emergencies and includes notifications when work
activities do not go as expected, whenever a worker identifies a problem on a job or off-normal. PFP
issued standing operating instruction (SOI) 18-001 on shift office notifications as a supplemental

Abnormal Operations

Notifications

59

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

document to FSP-PFP-5-8, 5.4 (PFP-PRO-MS-50357), On-Call and Notifications Program, which has
requirements for primary and secondary notifications. The SOI emphasizes the shift office is the first
point in the work control and emergency preparedness processes and promotes the tenet that fast
notification results in fast response. Further, the SOI highlighted benefits of timely notification, such as
allowing decisions to be made for Occurrence Reporting and Processing System reportability,
notifications to senior management, and the potential calling in of additional resources. Notifications are
made from the PFP Shift Office to CHPRC executive management and Hanford site emergency
operations for additional site level actions and notifications to external agencies as required.

9

6.5 Management Oversight

10
11
l2
13
14

PFP management oversight will have more rigor in the form of SSWs as the project works to enhance
oversight and mentoring. The deputy project manager issued interoffice memorandum CHPRC-1801076,
Updated Plutonium Finishing Plant Senior Supe,visory Watch, to provide a clear set of expectations for
SSW oversight, feedback to the project, and documentation. The PFP project manager identified 26 senior
managers and SMEs to serve as SSWs, including 17 from outside of the PFP project.

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Stationing of the SSW is at the discretion of the PFP project manager or deputy. Work activities requiring
SSW are assigned by the PFP project manager during the work planning process to identify specific tasks
such as movement and disposition of waste containers, debris/rubble size reduction and loadout,
demolition, first-time evolutions, and work conducted outside regular working hours. Assigning SSW
requires special consideration, particularly the assigned individual's prior experiences and knowledge,
evaluating the assigned task effectively, and becoming familiar with associated standards and procedures.
The assigned SSWs and the project manager will sign an expectation of understanding on SSW duties. A
PPP-specific SSW checklist facilitates consistency and documentation of SSW observations for review
and submission to the Management Observation Process . The memorandum issued by PFP to designate
SSW members as well as the SSW expectation of understanding and checklist are attached in Appendix
F.

26
27
28

PFP management oversight also includes quarterly assessments of the implemented corrective actions.
The objective of the assessments is to ensure compliance with work documents and that work
performance has been conducted safely and without incident.

29

6.6 Change Management Process

30
31
32
33

CHPRC established a process at PFP to manage planned and emergent changes. The change management
process was instituted via written direction from the PFP deputy project manager to PFP senior
management and designed to rigorously manage change so that proposed changes are evaluated,
deliberate and controlled, to ensure the following:

34

•

Changes are implemented safely, efficiently, and effectively

35

•

Nuclear safety aspects are identified and addressed

36

•

Gaps are diagnosed and corrective actions are developed and implemented

37
38

•
•

Enhanced processes are effectively implemented
Effective organizational performance is achieved

39

•

Work performance errors are reduced

40
41
42

During the execution phase of work, a recommended change needs to be reviewed against base
assumptions and documents developed during the planning phase. The PFP project manager's and deputy
project manager's roles will include having approval authority for the scope of the change and to ensure

60

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2
3
4
5

the change has one owner with decision~making authority. The change owner will need to provide
background information and facts about what the c,hange is, what the reasons for the change are, who the
change affects, how the change affects the scope of work, and when the change needs to be made. The
change owner will also recommend the nature of the change (i.e., whether the change can be made
immediately or require a phased approach).

6

Changes will be implemented formally using existing processes . Examples include the following:

7
8
9

•

Proposed changes to complex, high-hazard work activities previously approved by the HRB will go
back to the HRB for review, utilizing a HRB chairperson review or full HRB membership at the
discretion of the HRB chairperson per the HRB charter.

10
11
12

•

Changes resulting in significant corrective actions may require review and concurrence by the
Corrective Action Review Board, Radiological Control Change Management Program, HRB, or
Executive Safety Review Board.

13
14
15

•

Changes related to issues that potentially interact with safety, quality, or environmental significance
and/or have programmatic implications may require Executive Safety Review Board approval in
accordance with the Board's charter.

16
17

•

Changes associated with radiological control personnel, processes, and performance at the Program
level may use the Radiological Control Change Management process.

18
19
20
21

•

Changes made to the work instructions (statement of scope through restoration/end state) must follow
the change process outlined in PRC-PRO-WKM-12115, Work Management. Such changes or changes
editorial or technical in nature are implemented using a phased approach via pen and ink or work
change notice, and require responsible manager approval.

22
23

•

Changes need to be communicated and promoted to the workforce, the customer, and as applicable,
other CHPRC projects and Hanford Site contractors.

24
25
26
27
28

On April 23, 2018, the PFP deputy project manager performed a stand-up presentation on the thresholds
relative to change management to PFP management and supervision. The presentation consisted of
distributing the internal memorandum CHPRC-1801336, Plutonium Finishing Plant Change
Management Expectations, to each supervisor/manager discussing in detail the change management
process at PFP.

29

7 References

30
31
32
33

29 CFR 1910.120, "Occupational Safety and Health Standards," "Hazardous Waste Operations and
Emergency Response," Code of F ederal Regulations. Available
at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-201O-title29-vol5/xmVCFR-201 0-title29-vol5sec1910-120.xml.

34
35

CHPRC-00328, 2017,PFP ProjectSiteSpecificHealthandSafetyPlan (HASP),Rev. 7, CH2MHILL
Plateau Remediation Company, Richland, Washington.

36
37

CHPRC-02582, 2016, Plutonium Finishing P !ant Demo P Ian, Rev. 1, CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation
Company, Richland, Washington.

38
39

CHPRC-03653, 2018, Fixative Application Recommendation for P FP Demolition, Rev. 0,
CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company, Richland, Washington.

61

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2

CHPRC-03673, 2018, P FP Demolition Option Evaluation Report, CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation
Company, Richland, Washington.

3
4

CHPRC-1801076, 2018, Updated Plutonium Finishing Plant Senior Supervisory Watch, CH2M HILL
Plateau Remediation Company, Richland, Washington.

5
6

DOE-0223, Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures, Emergency Procedure RLEP 3.27, "Hazard
Surveys," U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington.

7
8
9

DOE-HDBK-3010-94, 1994, Airborne Release Fractions/Rates and Respirable Fractions for Nonreactor
Nuclear Facilities, Volume I- Analysis of Experimental Data, U.S. Department of Energy,
Washington, D.C. Available at: http://www.orau.gov/ddsc/dose/doehandbook.pdf.

10
11
12
13

DOE/RL-2004-29, 2005, Sampling and Analysis P Ian for the Plutonium Finishing P !ant, Above-Grade
Structures, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland,
Washington. Available at:
http://pdw.hanford.gov/arpir/index.cfm/view Doc?accession=DA236741 .

14
15
16
17

DOE/RL-2005-13, 2005, Action Memorandum for the Plutonium Finishing P !ant Above-Grade
Structures Non-Time Critical Removal Action, Rev. 0, U.S. Department of Energy, Richland
Operations Office, Richland, Washington. Available
at: http://pdw .hanford.gov/arpir/pdf.cfm?accession=DA00914 l 34.

18
19
20
21

DOE/RL-2011-03, 2014, Removal Action Work Plan/or the Deactivation, Decontamination,
Decommissioning, and Demolition of the Plutonium Finishing Plant Complex, Rev. 0,
U.S . Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington. Available
at: http://pdw.hanford.gov/arpir/index.cfin/viewDoc?accession=0084836.

22
23
24
25

Ecology, EPA, and DOE, 1989, Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, 2 vols.,
as amended, Washington State Department of Ecology, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, and U.S. Department of Energy, Olympia, Washington. Available
at: http://www .hanford.gov/?page=8 l.

26
27

FSP-PFP-5-8, 5.4 (PFP-PRO-MS-50357), On-Call and Notifrcations Program, as revised, CH2M HILL
Plateau Remediation Company, Richland, Washington.

28
29

HNF-15500, 2015, Plutonium Finishing P Ian t Deactivation and Decommissioning Documented Safety
Analysis, Rev. 12, CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company, Richland, Washington.

30
31

HNF-15 502, 2016, Plutonium Finishing P !ant Deactivation and Decommissioning Technical Safety
Requirements, Rev. 14, CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company, Richland, Washington.

32
33
34

HNF-22401, 2004, Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP) Complex End Point Criteria, NMS-16404, Rev. 0,
Fluor Hanford, Inc., Richland, Washington. Available
at: https ://pdw .hanford. gov/arpir/index. cfm/view Doc?accession=D6455017.

35
36

PFP-PRO-ER-50466, Continuous Air Monitor Alarm, Technical Procedure ZCR-001, as revised,
CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company, Richland, Washington.

37
38

PFP-PRO-ER-50467, Unplanned Material Release, Technical Procedure ZCR-002, as revised,
CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company, Richland, Washington.

39
40

PFP-PRO-ER-50468, Personnel Contamination, Technical Procedure ZCR-003, as revised, CH2M HILL
Plateau Remediation Company, Richland, Washington.

62

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

1
2

PFP-PRO-ER-50470, Fire/Explosion, Technical Procedure ZCR-005, as revised, CH2M HILL Plateau
Remediation Company, Richland, Washington.

3
4

PFP-PRO-ER-50473, Evacuation, Technical Procedure ZCR-009, as revised, CH2M HILL Plateau
Remediation Company, Richland, Washington.

5
6

PFP-PRO-ER-50474, Take Cover, Technical Procedure ZCR-010, as revised, CH2M HILL Plateau
Remediation Company, Richland, Washington.

7
8

PFP-PRO-ER-50477, Bomb Threat/Bomb/Suspicious Object, Technical Procedure ZCR-017, as revised,
CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company, Richland, Washington.

9
10

PFP-TE-18-0004, Technical Evaluation for PFP Foggers, CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company,
Richland, Washington.

11
12

PFP-TE-18-0005, Technical Evaluationfor P FP Water Cannons, CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation
Company, Richland, Washington.

13
14

PRC-PRO-DD-40013, Electrical and Mechanical Isolation ofFacilities to Support D&D Work,
as revised, CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company, Richland, Washington.

15
16

PRC-PRO-EM-060, Reporting Occurrences and Processing Operations Information, as revised,
CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company, Richland, Washington.

17
18

PRC-PRO-EM-40317, Operational Drill Program, as revised, CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation
Company, Richland, Washington.

19
20

PRC-PRO-OP-055, Startup Readiness, as revised, CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company,
Richland, Washington.

21
22

PRC-PRO-QA-246, Management Assessment, as revised, CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company,
Richland, Washington.

23
24

PRC-STD-FP-40404, Fire Protection Program, as revised, CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company,
Richland, Washington.

25
26

PRC-PRO-WKM.-079, Job Hazard Analysis, as revised, CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company,
Richland, Washington.

27
28

PRC-PRO-WKM.-12115, Work Management, as revised, CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company,
Richland, Washington.

63

  REV. 0
JUNE 2018

This page intentionally left blank.

64

CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Appendix A
Integrated Corrective Actions to Support Work Resumption Plan and
Crosswalk of Expert Panel Comments

A-i

  REV. 0
JUNE 2018

This page intentionally left blank.

Anii

 

CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Contents
Al

Integrated Corrective Actions to Support Work Resumption Plan ................................... A-3

A2

Crosswalk of Expert Panel Comments.......................................................................... A-11

A-iii

  REV. 0
JUNE 2018

This page intentionally left blank.

ilk-ii:r

 

 

CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

A1 Integrated Corrective Actions to Support Work Resumption Plan

A-1

  REV. 0
JUNE 2018

This page left blank.

 

Table A-1. Integrated Corrective Actions to Support Work Resumption Plan
#

Action
No.

1

CA-01

2

CA-02

Pre- or
Post-Start

Status

Obtain analysis of samples of the contamination to support the development Interim Measure Enabling other Actions
of improved controls.

Pre

Closed

NT S - Based on engineering evaluation of fol¥mist velocities and spatial
distribution, develop dust destroyer placement to include set-back distance
and approach angles to ensure engulfing fog without providing a motive
force for contamination transport. Include foggerplacement deployment
criteria in work packages.

Pre

Closed

Action

Cross-Reference to the Work Resumption Plan
PFP Causal Analysis

a

b

4, Demolition Resumption Approach
Figure 37. Trailer-MountedHAWC300-80-D
Performance Profiles
Figure 38. Trailer-MountedDust Fighter 15000
Performance Profiles

3

CA-03

NTS - Based on engineering evaluation of the application of water or
4, Demolition Reswnption Approach
fixative through a water cannon, determine appropriate nozzle and setting to Figure 37. Trailer-MountedHAWC300-80-D
include set-back distance and approach angles to ensure water/fixative
Performance Profiles
application without providing a motive force for transport of contamination
Figure 38. Trailer-MountedDust Fighter 15000
and complete coverage of all newly exposed surfaces resulting from
Performance Profiles
demolition. Include cannon placement deployment criteria into associated
Figure 3 9. Conceptual Spray Pattern Over PRF Debris Pile
demolition work packages.

Pre

Closed

4

CA-04

NTS- Revise work package 2Z-1 8-00196, Apply Fixative to PFP
Components, 22-17-01699, Demolition of234-5Z Building, and
22-15-06342, Demolitionof236-Z Building to cease dilution of PBS
(polymeric barrier system) fixative.

6, Conduct of Operations

Pre

Open

NT S - Obtain a docwnented evaluation of the appropriate use of fixative
(i.e., type, concentration levels, and adherence properties to materials) for
PFP demolition activities.

5, Demolition Controls

Pre

Closed

)>
I
c,:,

5

CA-05

6.2, Work Package Development

5. 7, Contamination Control Fixative Plan
Table 3. Fixatives, Matrix, Dilution, and Reapplication
Frequency
Table 4 . Approved Fixative Applications
Table 5. Approved Fixative by Application/Matrix

()

6

CA-06

NT S - Develop the training on new techniques and methods for control of
airborne radioactivity and contamination.

5, Demolition Controls
5.5, Health and Safety Plan (HASP)

Pre

Open

7

CA-07

NT S - Provide training to applicable PFP personnel on improved techniques 5, Demolition Controls
and methods for control of airborne radioactivity and contamination.
5.5, Health and Safety Plan (HASP)

Pre

Open

NTS - Define the new radiological boundary for stabilization to include
criteria for expanding that boundary.

Pre

8

CA-08

4, Demolition Reswnption Approach
Figure 7. Boundaries Being Evaluated

Open

I

"U

~

0

c....

c,:,
0)

C

CX>

CX)

0

z -co
m:::o
rvm
o<
--"-.

 Table A-1 . Integrated Corrective Actions to Support Work Resumption Plan
#

Action
No.

Action

Cross-Reference to the Work Resumption Plan
PFP Causal Analysis

9

CA-09

Implement the new radiological boundary for stabilization.

a

Pre- or
Post-Start

Status

Pre

Open

Pre

Open

b

5, Demolition Controls
Figure 40 . Monitoring Locations After December 29,
2017

10

CA-10

NT S - Verify the new radiological boundary based on the revised ADM.
Refine and adjust as required

4, Demolition ReSlllilption Approach
Figure 7. Boundaries Being Evaluated
Figure 17. Enhanced Controls for Lower and Higher
Risk Scope
5, Demolition Controls
5 .4, Air Dispersion Model

Table 1. 234-5ZRecovery Air Model Input Summary
)>

11

CA-11

NT S - Revise ADM for remaining material at risk and facility configuration 5, Demolition Controls
for the remaining scope to complete slab on grade, taking into account
5 .4, Air Dispersion Model
larger particles being swept in wind-driven events.
Table 1. 234-5ZRecovery Air Model Input Summary

Pre

Open

12

CA-12

NTS - Evaluate and implement alternatemodels that take into account
larger particles being swept in wind driven events.

Pre

Closed

Pre

Closed

Pre

Closed

Pre

Closed

.I:,.

13

CA-13

NTS - Re-define the PFP HRB membership.

5, Demolition Controls
5.4, Air Dispersion Model
6, Conduction of Operations
6.2, Work Package Development

14

CA-14

NTS - Issue the expectations for implementation ofHRB program at PFP.

6, Conduct of Operations
6.2, Work Package Development

()

15

16

CA-15

CA-16

NTS- Develop and provide training to PFP radiological control
personnel/regarding to reliance on CAMs and indicators showed potential
for contamination without warning from air samplers.

5, Demolition Controls

NT S - Revise bi-annual re-qualification training for CHPRC RCTs and
Radiological Control First Line Supervisors to include lessons learned from
this event with regard to reliance on CAMs and the indicators showed
potential for contamination without warning from air samplers.

5, Demolition Controls

I

""O

g

5.5, Health and Safety Plan (HASP)

5.5, Health and Safety Plan (HASP)

Post

Open

(,)

c_

a,

C ex>

z5!'

m ::o
I\.)

m

CX)

0

o<
_,,_ .

 Table A-1 . Integrated Corrective Actions to Support Work Resumption Plan
#

Action
No.

17

CA-17

Pre- or
Cross-Reference to the Work Resumption Plan• Post-Start

Action

PFP Causal Analysis

18

19

)>
I
01

CA-18

CA-19

NTS- Revise Courses 02280 I , Initial Radiological Work Planning and
0228 3 0, Radiological Work P Janning Refresher to include lessons learned
from this event with regard to reliance on CAMs and indicators showed
potential for contamination without warning from air samplers.
NT S - Incorporate newly developed methods and controls into the
applicable work packages to address CA-02 and CA-03 . Provide specificity
to controls to allowconsistent field implementation.

Status

b

5, Demolition Controls

Post

Open

Pre

Open

Pre

Closed

5.5 , Health and Safety Plan (HASP)

6, Conduct of Operations
6.2, Work Package Development

NTS- Establish ext anal reviewandconcurrenceoutside ofPFP ( e.g., HRB
chair) for changes related to demolition work packages. Document the process.

6, Conduct of Operations
6.2, Work Package Development

20

CA-20

NT S - Document PFP expectations to utilize CHPRC change management
processes ( e.g., HRB, IP AR, informal and formal post jobs). Deviation
from change management processes are not acceptable to PFP activities.

6, Conduct of Operations
6.6, Change Management Process

Pre

Closed

21

CA-21

NT S - Perform a stand-up presentation on the thresholds described in
CA-20 to PFP Management and supervision.

6, Conduct of Operations
6.6, Change Management Process

Pre

Closed

22

CA-22

NTS - Establish A formalized radiological contamination tracking and
trending process that allows for making educated decisions during
demolition of the remainder of the PFP work scope.

5, Demolition Controls

Pre

Closed

5.6, Radiological MonitoringandControl
6, Conduct of Operations
6.5, Management Oversight

23

CA-23

NT S - Establish near real-time protocols for surveying for contamination
spread outside of the immediate demolition area.

6, Conduct of Operations
6.2, Work Package Development

Pre

Closed

24

CA-24

Provide direction for notification to the shift office for abnormal conditions
as they oc:cur.

This is a remedial action
6, Conduct of Operations

Pre

Closed

(")

I

""'O

~

6.4, Work Execution: Emergency Preparedness and
Abnormal Operations
25

CA-25

Communication expectations on notifications to Operations shift office in
PFP all hands briefing.

This is a remedial action
6, Conduct of Operations
6.4, Work Execution: Emergency Preparedness and
Abnormal Operations

6

Pre

Closed

c...

w

0)

c°'
z _co
m :::o
l\,) m
o <
....>. .

0,0

 Table A-1. lntegrated Corrective Actions to Support Work Resumption Plan
#

Action
No.

Pre- or
Cross-Reference to the Work Resumption Plan• Post-Start

Action

PFP Causal Analysis
26

CA-26

Issue expectations on notifications to Operations shift office to functional
organizations.

Status

b

This is a remedial action

Pre

Closed

Pre

Open

Pre

Closed

Pre

Closed

Pre

Closed

Pre

Closed

6, Conduct of Operations
6.4, Work Execution: Emergency Preparedness and
Abnormal Operations

27

CA-27

Provide gap training to PFP personnel regarding this event to include
notification process, response to upset conditions, new boundaries, etc.

6, Conduct of Operations
6.4.4, Notifications

28

CA-28

This is a remedial action
Revise CHPRC General Employee Training to incorporate information on
notifications to Operations Management and voice-to-voice communication 6, Conduct of Operations
during notification.
6.4, Work Execution: Emergency Preparedness and
Abnormal Operations

29

CA-29

Provide direction to the shift office to utilize PRCNS for notification of
abnormal events to off-project POCs.

•
I

0)

This is a remedial action
6, Conduct of Operations
6.4, Work Execution: Emergency Preparedness and
Abnormal Operations

31

CA-31

Re-establish routine Labor/Management meetings with the Bargaining Unit
to solicit feedback and provide updates on priorities and path forward.

This is a remedial action
6, Conduct of Operations
6.3 , Employee Engagement

37

CA-37

Provide clear set of expectations for Senior Supervisory Watch oversight,
feedback to the operations project and documentation.

This is a remedial action

()

6, Conduct of Operations

I

""CJ

6.5, Management Oversight
44

CA-44

NTS - Develop and pro vide training to the remainingPFP Radiological
Control personnel who were not available at the time the training was
provided for CA-15, regarding reliance on CAMs and the indicators
showing potential for contamination without warning from air samplers.

5, Demolition Controls
5.5, Health and Safety Plan (HASP)

Pre

Closed

~

0

w

c.,_O)

coo
z·CD

m:::o
Nm
o<
->. •

00 0

 Table A-1. Integrated Corrective Actions to Support Work Resumption Plan
#

Action
No.

Issue

Action

Pre- or
Cross-Reference to the Work Resumption Plan• Post-Start

CHPRC-03675 Jacobs
58

59

CA-101

CA-102

The PFP Team did not demonstrate the
willingness and commitment to
administer certain radiological processes,
fix problems, and establish adequate
project-specific radiological controls.

Develop a briefing to address
the updated control set; Rad
practices; Risk expectations,
e.g., contamination controls;
and procedure and work
package compliance.

The PFP Team did not demonstrate the
willingness and commitment to
administer certain radiological processes,
fix problems, and establish adequate
project-specific radiological controls.

Establish a process to ensure
timely reviews of RSRs and
develop a metric for
monitoring performance.

Status

c

6, Conduct of Operations

Pre

Open

Pre

Closed

6.6, Change Management Process

6, Conduct of Operations
6.2, Work Package Development

60

CA-01

Contrary to PRC-PRO-RP-40021 , PFP
Job-Specific RWPs do not meet
procedural intent for job-specific work or
RWP void limits.

Review all activeRWPsand
AMW s to ensure controls are
clear, technical bases are
provided (for action and void
limits).

6, Conduct of Operations
6.2, Work Package Development

Pre

Open

61

CA-02

Contrary to PRC-PRO-RP-40021 ,PFP
Job-Specific RWPs do not meet
procedural intent for job-specific work or
RWP void limits.

Review PFP demolition relatro
repetitive work packages to
ensure the packages meet the
hazard analysis standards.

6, Conduct of Operations
6.2, Work Package Development

Pre

Open

62

CA-01

Management and staff turnover is
adversely affecting compliance with
standards and enforcement of
requirements.

Update HASP to ensure all
controls are in place.

5, Demolition Controls
5. 5, Health and Safety P Ian (HASP)

Pre

Open

69

CA-02

Continued improvement in the clarity of
RWPs is warranted

Review all in-use PFP
technical procedure and ensure
they are properly classified as
either skill-based or beyond
skill-based, then verify JHA
exists for each beyond
skill-based technical
procedure.

6, Conduct of Operations

Pre

Open

)>

.....
I

6.2, Work Package Development

()

I

"U

~
I

0

w

c.. 0)
C ex,

z-'°
m:::o

Nm
o<
_,.,.
(X) 0

 Table A-1. Integrated Corrective Actions to Support Work Resumption Plan
Reference: PRC-PRO-RP-40021, Radiological Work Permits, as revised, CH2M HILL Plateau Remediation Company, Richland, Washington.
a. Cross references are to the main text of this document.
b. Condition Report CR-2018-0022, Discovery ofContamination Spread at the PFP during Demolition Activities
c. Condition Report CR-2018-1082
ADM
ALARA

=
=

air dispersion model
As Low As Reasonably Achievable

NTS
PFP

AMW

ALARA management worksheet

POC

continuous air monitor
CH2M HlLLPlateauRemediation Company

HRB

=
=
=
=

IPAR

=

in-process ALARA review

CAM
CHPRC

Hazard Review Board

=
=

noncompliance tracking system
Plutonium Finishing Plant

=
PRCNS =
RCT
=

point of contact

RSR
RWP

=

radiological survey record

=

radiation work permit

Plateau Remediation Company Notification System
radiological control technician

)>
I

co

()

I

"U

~
I

0

c.v

c.... O>
Ceo

zSo
m ::o

Nm

o<
......
coo

  REV. 0
JUNE 2013

A2 Crosswalk of Expert Panel Comments

 REV. 0
JUNE 2018

This page intentionally left blank.

A-?l 

 

-

DOE Expert Panel Comments Crosswalk to PFP Work Resumption Plan
DOE Expert Panel Comments

Corrective Actions

Eva luations for water/fixative use are n't
in clud ed in work package controls

CA"02 , CA"03 , CA--04 , CA-18

6, Con du ct of Operations
6.2, Work Package Development

2

New airborne dispersion mode:ling for the
transport of larger particles of
contamination is not inclu(!l,ed

CA-1 1, CA-12

5, Demolition Controls
5.4, Air Dispersion M•ode l
6, Conduct of Operations
6.2, Wort. Package Development

3

Hazard Review Boaro (HRB) role and
responsibility are not ,clear

CA-13 , CA-14

6, Conduct of Operations
6.2. Work Package Development

4

Unclear criteria for entering the cha nge
management process

Ca-20

6, Con du ct of Operations
6.6, Change Management Process

5

Near,real time survey protocols during
demo'lition ar,e undefined

CA-23 , CA-06

5, Demolition Controls
5.6, Radiological Monitorin g and Control
Table 2, Monitoring and Re.spons•e
Figure 40 , Monitoring Location After December 2017

6

Unclear how ,employee feedback is being
tracked to resolut ion

CA>31

6, Con du ct of Operations
6.3, Employee Engageme nt

7

Senior Supervisor Walch roles and
respons.ibitities unclear

CA-37

6, Conduct of Operations
6.5, Manageme nt Oversight

8

Unclear how As Low As Fteasonably
Achievable (ALARA) reviews are
incorporated

RPIP CA,03
CR-201~0540

5, Demolition Controls
5.6, Radiological Monitoring and Control

9

Insufficient formality in decision making and
examples of employe,es not fonow,ing
processes and procedures

CA-14, CA-20
CA-15 , CA-07, CA-23 , CA-OS

6, Conduct of Operations
6.2, Wort( Package IJevelopmenl
6.6. Change Management Proce.ss
5, Demolition Controls
5.6, Radiol ogical Monttoring and Control

)>
I

->.
->.

Section of the Demo Work Resumption Plan

--

10

Recommendation for PFP management
assessments lo include whether work
performed complied with work documents

CA--33 , CA--34, CA--35

6.5, Management Ov ersight

11

Reco mmendation ior fu.rth er analysis of the
implementation of the Integrated Safety
Management System (ISMS) al PFP

CA-1 01. CA-102 , CA-103 , CA-104,
CA-1 OS, CA-106, CA-107

The actions id,entified to support ISMS are embedded throughout 5, Demorrtion Controls and
6, ~onduct of Operations.

()

The primary areas are:
5.5, Health and Safety Plan (HASP)
5.6, Radiological Mon,ttoring and Control
6.2, Work Package Development
6.3, Employee Engagement

I

""O

~
I

0

c...

c.v
0)

CCX>

z-co
m:::o
I\Jm
o<
->. •

0)0

  REV. 0
JUNE 2018

This page intentionally left blank.

A-12

CHP REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Appendix 

Work Packages

 HIS-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 201 8

This page intentionally left blank.

B-ii

 

CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

B Work Packages

1

22-18-01396

NDA Super Sacks and Relocation PRF Waste Packages (HRB)

4

22-18-01532

Install PFP Recovery Material Storage Fencing and Gates

7

22-18-00975

Cover Exposed Pactec Bags that Contain Waste (HRB-C)

8

22-18-00819

Apply Fixative or Add Clean Fill Material to Control Contamination (HRB)

10
11

22-18-02264

Repackage Waste Containers (HRB)

5

1
13

14

22-18-02453

15
16
17

22-18-02352
22-18-0139
22-18-08487

20

22-18-XXXXX

23
24

22-18-03
22-18-XXXXX

MINOR ELECTRICAL, INTRUSIVE ELECTRICAL, INVESTIGATIONS, INSTALL
TEMP LIGHTING LOAD CENTERS, SPIDER BOXES
REMOVE OR REPAIR OR REPLACET/S FITTINGS AND
COMPONENTS
C
INSTALLATION, RELOCATION, AND REMOVAL

oil Characterization for 236-2 / 242-2 (
PFP Isolations (French Drains, UIC, etc.) (H

B-1

  REV. 0
JUNE 2018

This page intentionally left blank.

 

 REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Appendix 

CH PRC Work Management Process

 

This page intentionally left blank.

C-ii

REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Ne_...

CHPRC Work Management Process
EMS

ISMS

•

+H:+h

i
0

i

"',g
"'
~

_i;;

C:

ldenUfy/Requesl
Work

CHPR

"

lnlllale Scrans

(Rad, Env, Da1lls

•1

BacGn)

Delannlne
J
llo I Hazard
Analysls

Long
llo [ Determine
ar ShDrt Fam

Malhod

0

.,

i:1_.,
-15

~~CJ

Establish Work

"O

:a 'E

AannlngTlmn

~~

!+------------'
OHC/Subcontractor
non-PMIS Worl<

:.= m

ij

:!2

()

I
......

:c

~
~~

'i:i..!:::

!~
.
C

8

~
E

i

RMAppnml

"0
~

5
~ :c
8-

~

~~

~g

s~

Schedule Wark

:c
~~

'I:

c,:;

C:
Ca,
., E
.x
u ">

.5 >
.x
u ...

~~
., -

D

"O

.§
"'<
.,,.,

"O

=

.uu
q

I

.. 2

llo l Record Retention

()

Responsible Manager

I
'1J

l!I Work Planning Team

Q

D Scheduler

ft!II Release Authority

~B

-~~

a: CJ8

Process

PRC-PRO-WKM-12115, rev. 4, website
*Hashed boxes not required for skill-based work

Feedback

•

0

w

c... O>

FieldWorkTeam

coo

D Work Control Assignee

•

z!O

m;::o
l\)m

OHC, Subcontractor, BTR

08/27/2014

o<
.......
000

  REV. 0
JUNE 2018

This page intentionally 16ft blank.

 

 REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Appendix 

Logic Tree

 REV. 0
JUNE 2018

This page. intentionally left blank.



 

CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

D Logic Tree
Receive
NewWoll<
Request

Gather Baseline
Oda

Prepare
ResoUion

ldstity Needed
Sped el Materlels,
Equipment a Tools

Pennits and other
Speciel
Doa.mens

H&181dS Malytls
(PRC,PRO-W<M079)

Se! ect \Nod(
ooa.men Sl)le
(PRC .PRO-W<M-

Yes •

Verity M81ellflls,
Equipment or
Tools are staged

Yes

DA/TA Prepare
eBOM, Ve'lty
Materials are
Ordered

Nolity SME of
PennitsNeeded

No

12115)

Wolle ln!1JUC!ions
Fo,malend

Conens

Estimate
Personnel a
Ec,Jlpmenl
Resource
Requirements

Prepare, Gather
St4)1X)Rng

Doa.mercs

No
Assl!1 W1h
Obt~lnlng
Appr0VCIISand
Conftnril119
Reoelpt

OM A Determine
Febrlctitlon Pfllh
For\'\!ird

After Planning has been completed:

Re\oiewand
Approval

Refecenc:es
[nJCS)

Planner Actions 111'
Work Pa ck age
Changes

D-1

Woll< Padiage
Assembly an:f
Setf-Che<;mg

Olkabffity Re\oiew
for HRBWoll<
Documents

  REV. 0
JUNE 2018

This page ?ltentionally left blank.

 REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Appendix 

Example Work Document

E?i

CHP RC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

This page intentionally left blank.

E-ii

 

CHPRC-03689, REV . 0
JUNE 2018

E Example Work Document

COPY

22-18-02076/ W

Page 1 of5

Load PRFIPFP TRU Waste Bags into Shipping Containers
1.0

SCOPE

This work instruction provides direction to load demolition debris TRU/TRUM waste previously
packaged inside a PacTec "super sack" into either a top loaded SLB2 or 1800-TL Waste Container.
This work document will be used for mockup / dry-run activities to ensure equipment and materials
function as anticipated and lo provide involved workers vvilh hands on experience outside HCA/ARA.
Super sack(s) will be loaded into a waste container using a Special Lift Plan and a single crane.

The work instructions have been divided into the following tasks as listed below:
Task 1. WORK AREA SETUP and RECURRING ACTIVITIES
Task 2. PRE- START REQUIREMENTS
Task 3. RE-LOCATING WASTE PACKAGES TO SUPER SACK LOADING AREA
Task 4. LIFTING AND LOADING SUPER SACK INTO 1800-TL CONTAINER
Task 5. LIFTING AND LOADING SUPER SACK INTO SLB2 CONTAINER

2.0

3.0

SPECIAL MATERIAL, TOOLS AND EQUIPMENT
•

Hoisting and rigging equipment specified on the Special Lift Plan.

•

Forklift.

•

HexArmor 2085 or 2090 mrk gloves ....

PRECAUTIONS AND LIMITATIONS

3.1

WORKER SAFETY

3.1 .1

FWS will work vvith lndustria I Hygiene (IH) to establish work/rest requirements
in accordance with procedure PRC-PRO-SH-121, "Heat Stress Control"...

3.1.2

The area behind the engine of the crane is a high noise area. This area shall
be roped and posted as a Hearing Protection Required area . The roped and
posted area shall encompass the area behind the engine of the crane to within
25 feet as a minimum unless otherwise directed by IH based on sampling
results.

3.1 .3

Gloves vvilh a cut resistance rating of 4 or greater to the front and back
(i.e ., 360°) are required when using tools (manual or power) vvith a sharp edge,
handling sharp objects, or associated work that poses a cut hazard.

Continuous Use

E-1

Page 1 of 6

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

COPY

22-18-02076/ W

Page 2 of5

Load PRFIPFP TRU Waste Bags Into Shipping Containers
3.1.4

HexArmor 2085 or the HexArmor 2090 shall be utilized when coming in contact
with the soft sided waste packages (these gloves have a cut resistance rating
of 4 and a puncture resistant rating of 3) ...

3.1.5

Ground personnel will adhere to the following controls when accessing/working
within the demolition boundary:
•

Personnel shall use established pathways as much as possible and avoid
paths that have potential slip, trip, and fall hazards.
Personnel are not allowed within,approxlmately 50 feet of the 234-52
building or vaults unless the work activity has been approved by the
OS&IH Manager due to potential overhead hazards .. .

3.1.6

3.2

Field Work Supervisor (FWS) will monitor the weather conditions throughout the
performance of work in accordance with procedure PRC-PRO-SH-28034,
''Adverse Weather''.

EQUIPMENT OPERATIONS SAFETY

3.2.1

Equipment shall be in its lomst safe position when transiting between work
locations.

3.2.2

Equipment operator will walk-down travel paths and work area to identify
impacts and obstructions.

3.2.3

Clear travel paths will be established prior lo placing equipment in motion.

3.2.4

The FWS will ensure that areas are controlled using boundaries or spotters as
needed to ensure personnel are kept away from material handling activities and
the swng/lravel pathways of equipment.. ..

3.3

WASTE CONTAINER ACCESS

3.3.1

Top loaded waste containers are Non-Permit Confined Spaces.

3.3.2

Personnel are not allowed to make a whole body entry into a waste container
untll lH has completed Section 5 of the "Hanford Confined Space Hazard
Identification Form" (A-6005-724) and the container is posted as a
Non-Permit Confined Space ....

3.4

ASBESTOS

3.4.1

This work activity will take place inside a regulated area for Class II Asbestos
(e .g., floor tile, masti9, gaskets, packing, caulk, and roof mastic) .. ..

Continuous Use

E-2

Page 2 of5

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

COPY

Page 3 of 5

22-18-02076/ W

Load PRFIPFP TRU Waste Bags into Shipping Containers
3.5

BERYLLIUM

3.5.1

3.6

This w,rk activity will take place inside a Demolished Beryllium Facility Site
(DBFS) boundary....

LEAD

3.6.1

3,7

Lead contamination potentially exists within the Demolition Boundary

CHEMICAL HAZARDS

3.7.1

3.8

3.9

•

Envirotac II (Rhino Snot).

•

Soil-Semen!.

•

Super 77 Spray Adhesive.

•

RTV Silicone Adhesive.

•

CC Fix ...

•

Non-Locking Anaerobil Liquid Thread
Sealant.

• OptiSorb.
• Waterworks.

FIRE SAFETY

3.8.1

DSA

The following chemical products have been evaluated for use.

Flammable products shall be stored under climate control when seasonal
ambient temperatures are greater than 90°F .. ..

DOCUMENTED SAFETY ANALYSIS/TECHNICAL SAFETY REQUIREMENT
CONTROLS

3.9.1

To satisfy TSR SAC 5.24.2 b. limits, any Individual waste item, package of
waste items, or loaded waste container shall NOT exceed 400 g Pu
(criticality value) ...

3.10 CRITICALITY
3.10.1

The following criticality prevention specifications apply to all tasks :
•

CPS-Z-165-80010, "General Limits".

•

CPS-Z-165-80100, "Out-of-Hood Fissile Material Storage, Transportation
and Transition ".

•

CPS-Z-165-80200, "PFP Complex Demolition"....

Continuous Use

E-3

Page 3 of 5

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

COPY

Page 4 of 5

22-18-02076/ W

Load PRFIPFP TRU Waste Bags into Shipping Containers
3.11

4.0

RADIOLOGICAL CONTROLS

3.11.1

Work area will be up posted to a CA/ ARA prior to initiation of loading
operations at a minimum distance of 33 feet from 'Ml ere work is being
performed and ensure there is a boundary air sampler.

3.11.2

During performance of this work scope, RCT's will perform surveys of the
cookie sheets and other horizontal flat surfaces in the proximity of the work.

3.11.3

All real-time continuous air monitors (CAMs) and ARA boundary air samplers
(NS-9, NS-17, NS-29, and NS-40) shall be operational to monitor potential
airborne rad ioactivity releases ...

PREREQUISITES
4.1

NONE

Work INSTRUCTIONS

NOTE:

Task 1 work steps may be performed In any order or repeated as necessary and w:>rked
concurrently with Tasks 2 through Task 5.
4.2 TASK 1:

WORK AREA SETUP and RECURRING ACTIVITIES

4.2 .1

STAGE materials, tools, and equipment.

4.2.2

ERECT, inspect, modify, and remove scaffolding .

4.2.3

ADD clean fill material to improve vehicle travel path(s) or waste package
location surfaces as necessary.

4.2.4

UP post/ down post CA/ ARA radiological boundaries ... .

4.3 TASK 2:
4.3.1

PRE-START REQUIREMENTS

RM ensure by signing below that the mockup / dry-run has been completed.
Signature

RM Print
4.3.2

Dale

Field work per work package 22-18-01396/W, "NDA Super Sacks and Relocate
PRF Waste Packages" has been completed.

Continuous Use

E-4

Page 4 of 5

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Page 5of 5
22-18-02076/ W
Load PRFIPFP TRU Waste Bags into Shipping Containers

COPY

4.3.3

NOTE:

5.0

FWS will ensure the following are completed each IM:>rk shift PRIOR to
initiation of waste packaging activities:
•

ENSURE radiological air sampling equipment is operating.

•

ENSURE bulk fixative application equipment (i.e., water truck) is prepared
for use each work shift... .

Task 3 may be worked independently, repeated, or concurrently with Tasks 4 and Task 5.

4.4 TASK 3:

RE-LOCATE WASTE PACKAGE to CESIGNATED LOADING AREA

4.5 TASK 4:

LIFTING AND LOADING SUPER SACK into 1800-TL CONTAINER

4.6 TASK 5:

LIFTING AND LOADING SUPER SACK into SLB2 CONTAINER

END STA TE SUMMARY
5.1 WORK COMPLETION
5.1.1

Field Work Supervisor (FWS) to ensure the following have been completed .
•

Ensure waste has been packaged and disposed of in accordance with the
waste planning checklist.

•

Ensure Data Sheats from procedures ZO-170-043 and ZO-170-320 are
completed and forwarded to waste organization representative .

Continuous Use

E-5

Page 5 of 6

  REV. 0
JUNE 2018

This page intentionally left blank.

 

 REV. 0
JUNE 201 8

Appendix 

Senior Supervisory Watch Expectations

 REV. 0
JUNE 2018

This page intentionally left blank.

F-ii

CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Contents
Fl

Attachment 1................................................................................................................ F-1

F2

Attachment 2................................................................................................................ F-5

F-iii

  REV. 0
JUNE 2018

This page intentionally left blank.

F-iv

CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

F1 Attachment 1

ATTACHMENT I

CHPRC-1801076

CONTRACT NUMBER DE-AC06-08RL14788

PLUTONIUM FINISIIING PLANT
SENIOR SUP1rnv1SOR\' W ATCII gxPECl"ATIONS

Consisting of 4 pages,
including this cover page

F-1

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

GENERAL GUIDANCE
Purpose
l11e new expectations for PFP SSW establishes common competency requirement.<; and
standardizes the process for all personnel assigned to the SSW at PFP.

Mmrngcmcnt. Responsibility
1l1e PFP Project l'vlanager and/or Deputy Project Manager will interview each SSW cm1didate
using training, qualifications, and compelcncics. 'l11is evaluation can be used al the discretion of
the PFP Project Manager and/1)r Deputy Project Manager as a guide lo assess the knowledge and
skills of the candidate being interviewed. If the PFP Project Manager and/or Deputy Project
Manager detennines that other competencies need to be assessed, they will document the other
competencies in the blank spaces provided below in this attachment.

Applicahmty
·n1e new expectations for PF!' SSW is applicable lo all personnel assigned to the SSW position.
1l1e PFP Project !vlanager mid/or Deputy Project :Mmrnger shall identify individuals who are
authorized as SSW personnel.

Duties aml R~ponslhlllties
Stationing of the SSW is at the discretion of the PFP Project Mmiager and/or Deputy Project
lvlanager. 'ntis action does not relieve facility management from their responsibilities for
operations and safety. TI1c SSW should:
•
•
•
•
•

Fill out PFP SSW specific checklist for the evolutions observed.
Stop ,my evolution in progress that causes concern
Identify the concern to programmatic management
Concur with resolution of the concem, and
Allow res umption of the evolution nfier satisfactory resolution .

Individuals selected for SSW must have general knowledge of the activities being observed, and
must also have knowledge orthe safety bit5is documents for ihe facility. 'I11ey must have the
ability to recognize issues that need to be investigated or issues that require additional follow-up
and mentoring as detennined by the responsible line mnnager. TI1e SSW must infonn the
appropriate line manager of any concems that arc not satisfactorily resolved and provide a
written assessment of the assigned activities, which they observed.
Personnel assigned the PFP SSW shall be qualified lo:

•
•

Conduetjob observulions
Identify deviations from 1111m11gcmcnt cxpcclulions
Provide im111cdiatc intervention (mentoring) and communicate coneems and observations
to 111a11agement while assigned to a nuclear operations facility.

F-2

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Qunlificntion Process

111e requirements contained in the new expectations for PFP SS\\I are derived from PRC-PROOP-53077, Senior S11pervi.WIJ' Watch. The expectation is identified individuals have a familiarity
level of understanding of the aforementioned listed procedure. Familiarity level knowledge is
characterized by a conversational understanding of the subject matter and its general
applicability to job duties.
111e PFP Project fvfanager and/or Deputy Project Manager will detennine the applicability of the
requirements to the individual being interviewed. Successful completion is achieved by passing
the oral interview to the satisfaction of the PFP Project Manager and/or Deputy Project Manager
conducting the inten•iew. 'Il1ere are no written examination requirements for SSW qualification.
Records

111e following section of this document is the expectation of understanding. 111e candidate will
verify, by signature, that competency requirements have been discussed with the PFP Project
tvlmiager and/or Deputy Project !Vlanager(s). Once the PFP Project Manager and/or Deputy
Project Manager is assured that the candidate being considered for qualification meets their
knowledge and skill expectations, then they will verify, by signature, that the candidate is
qualified to pcrfonn SSW assignments. The expectation of understanding must then be tumcd
into the M. R. Oswalt-Spry to be retained accordingly.

F-3

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

Expectation of U1ule1·struuling
Othe1· Competency rcquh·ements ns deemed by the PFP
Pl'Oiect. Mmml!el' nnd/01· Depuf.y Project Mmml!er

Dntc
Discussed

Dnte
Completed

I verify that I understand the requirements of and expectations of the PFP SSW and am aware of
my roles and respon sibilities regarding assignment to th e SSW.

Candidate Signature:

Date:

I verify that the requirements and expectations have been satisfactorily completed and
understood for granting of this individual as a SSW on the PFP Project. I am assured that the
individual is capable of safely perfonning the duties associated with the SSW assignment based
on successfully passing an oral interview with me.

PFP Project rvianager and/or Deputy Project Manager Signature

F-4

Date:

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

f 2 Attachment 2

ATIACHM ENT 2
CHPRC-180 !076
CONTRACT NUMDER DE-AC06-08RL14788

PLUTONIUM FINISHING PLANT
SENIOR SUPERVISORY WATCH CHECKLIST

Consisting of9 pages,
including this cover page

F-5

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

PFP SSW Checklist
Title of Work Package

Task Title:

INSTRUCTIONS: Complete applicable checklist for the observed activity or evoll/lion . Discuss any negative results,
opportunities for improvements (OF!), and problems idenMied and corrected on the spot (COTS) in the comment section of the
checklist. If a checklist is not needed for the observed activity/evolution, document in the comment section of that checklist "Not
used for this activity." Complete the summary/recommendation section and document any corrective actions follow-up and
tracking system number. Submit the completed form lo M. R. Oswalt-Spry electronically or hard copy.

ITime Started I

SSW Observation Date{s)
SSW Name

ITime Ended I

Signature:

Activity/Evolution Description:
Activity Description:

SSW Authority:
The only operational authority that can be exercised by the S'BN'J is Stop Work in aocordance with DOE-0343. "'Stop Work" lo
identify an unsafe situation, clarify operational conditions, ensure proper operational requirements are being met, or other
applicable issues. Lifting the stop work and recommencing work will follow DOE-0343. In other lnstanoes, the SSW will not
interfere Vlilh critical operating activities and will adhere to operational and safety requirements and procedures.

Task Document No: Number

Ch&ck one os lo "fllCllhor tho m lcnon ffil ~ :;etc~bcJ,
no! SCh Slt O, en Oppon.m:ry t•or lrrC)(OYM'lonl (OFI}
vr~ l(lfOH OO, Mot Obs1mt1d (NOB ) or N9I:

AW11rotJo (NIA ) E..plJtn M'/ 0010$ Choekoa ·oFr
' No' in u~ cunm~,. S8GbOrl

Pre-Job Briefing

#

a

Yes

1

The briefing leader controls the meeting and ensures everyone is focused on the specific job.

2

Supervision makes Job assignments ba sed on the operator's proficiency ond !heir familiorily
with the assigned task.

3

All worl<ers arc engaged, familior-.vilh the wor1< scopei\ask, underst and the steps and
expected results.

4

AJl 100/s and equipment required for the job have been localed and staged,

5

Prerequlsilesnimilolionslprecoutions are reviewed as necessary.

6

A person In charge (PIC) Is Identified for the job, If applicable.

7

Previous lessons learned associated with this°' similar !asks are discussed.

8

Ouesllons from worl<ers and open Issues nre resolved prior lo completion of the briefing.

9

Critical steps or evolutions are discussed.

10

Peer check sleps were identified.

12

was there a "SAFE" discussion conducted for lhe work scope/activity?
• Summarize: What are the critical steps or phases of this lask?

• Anticipate: How could a mislake be made at those steps?
• Foresee consequences: \/\/hat is the worst thing that could go v.rong?
• Evaluate: Whal defenses ore needed?
Page 2of 9

F-6

No

OA

NOB

NIA

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

PFP SSW Checklist
Title of Work Package

Task Title:

Che>ck: ~ tis tt> l'ilt-:l ll<; r toe mliSIOnwas sat1sri£,4'J.
no! s-,,hst td, an Oppoflun ty For lrf'f10¥tmt11tl (Of ll

w~ 1deflblM, l'fol 0b-~ rved(l40 0Jor Nol
/1")11 c.t\U r, {NIA) C.1plo,n ony bor;O, Checked 'OF r

Pre-Job Briefing

#

Of ·uo·

Yes

'" tho oommort ~on

I

No

I

OFl

I NOB I

NIA

Comments:

Ct,tck one :,, k, wt lk> fU l(J 01INt0nYfil'.l sabUcd,
noil Wist &d. M Oppr,rtunry For tn,.-o/E-trltl fi (OFI)
was 1< --n blcd. NOi OME!f'll&d (11OB) ('f' Nol
AW{1a111:le IN/A) E,pllln any ~Xtl'~ ch!k:kt.d 'OF I'

•

Con Ops

#

a 'No" m ~ oomment ~on

Yes

1

2

Proper aulhorizalioo is received from Operalioos i ne management lo perform the task
(released al shttl office).
Task performance demonstrates full compliance with the technical procedure or work
document.

3

Personnel are trained and Quarified to perform work assigned,

4

Only approved and Issued procedures ere used.

5

Revisioos to technical procedures or work documents are made In full compliance with
••tablished procedures,

6

Tools and eQUlprnent required lo perform the activity are available and function as intended.

7

Needed cameras ere available and operable .

8

Equipment callbratloos, surveillances, and scheduled preventalive maintenance requirements
are currenl.

9

Conduct of Operalions activities (such as Jog keeping, communi calioos protocols, and
procedure compliance) are carried out In full compliance v.ith established procedures.

10

Support functions required for performing activities are available end carry out their
respooslbllllles as requ ired.

11

Response lo abnormal coodilions (drill or actual) discovered during operatioos Is cooducted In
full compliance with eslabtished procedures.

12

Noise levels do not affect employee coo1munlcatioo s during the activily.

Comments:

Page 3 of 9

F-7

No

OFI

NOB

NIA

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

PFP SSW Checklist
Title of Work Package

Task Title:

cne~ OM us to whellJP.r UIQ i;n!enon wus sat1sfed.
oot satishd, en Oppor1amty r or tupr<,tem«tl (OFIJ
WM t<kflbl ed, Nol Obscrvod (NOO) « Nol

Safety

#

""1f10l~e j N/A ) &pl~ n tlllybo-.:ll1thtde:OO 'OFI '

«

'No· m lho «>mmont ~ en

Yes

1

Proper body positions are used to minimize stress and overextending the body.

2

Allenlion is given to walking,worklng surfaces lo prevent falls.

3

WOll(ers stay away/stand clear fron1 po(ential sources of stored energy.

4

Appropriate/required PPE is worn for po<entlally ha2ardous environments.

5.

Required personal pro(eclive equipment Is ulllized prope~y.

No

OFI

NOB

N/A

Comments:

Cheek 0n!) "5 to riMlhc ,

l}l(,

(n{('fll)O WJS $8{1shOO.

rw. -:;:i!l~teo. ari Opponun.ryFor mr,rov~mfflt (Ofl)

#

was faootibd. t lol OIJ!>&Ned (NOB ) o, Not
,tiw!1!;'6b(e (NfA) E,,plllin eny bo:rf$ (h t>d<.ed 'OFI'

General

Q'

'No· lll lh!! oomm~nl. ~dJOIL

Yes

1

Personnel are wearing lhe correct personal protective equipment (PPE).

2

Housekeeping at job s~e Is adequate.

3

Required wori< documents (procedures , work package, elc.) ere used el job site.

4

Personnel engaged in the activity ere qualified to perform ii .

5

Personnel signed in on lhe correct RWP.

6

Required dosimetry is worn correctly by workers.

7

Postings end controls for the work area ere correct end followed.

8

The scope of work for the activity Is understood by all !he workers .

Comments:

Page 4 of 9

F-8

No

OFI

NOB

NIA

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

PFP SSW Checklist
Title of Work Package

Task Title:

Procedure Compllance

#

ChecS< ooe as 10 Wllel~ r tile OlleJIOfl WU5 sa!ISMd.
r"d sal:ill ed, a 1OpPOfkmty For h 1~0llt!mfnl (OFI )
vn,, 10!.'c1bhd, Nol Ol.iSC-N-Od (t.ZOO) or 1,#o!
/i)Pl1c:aUe INIA) U pl01n 6fl'/ bo1:c, d lLIO<od ·OF"I'

rx ·uo· mlhO C()fflmort :.ttbon

Yes

1

Procedure revision was verified es lhe mos! current revision along wilh any field changes.

2

The procedure Is complele . There are no missing pages or sleps and It Is legible.

3

The person using the procedure Is familiar wilh the task, underslends the steps end expected
resuJls.

4

PrerequlsltesAimltetlons/precaulions are reviewed prior to procedure performance.

5

Critical steps or evolutions are discussed prior to procedure performance.

6

Procedure Is present In lhe work area and in use v.i lh each step being performed as wrillen.

9

The procedure is stepped and supervision is notified if lhe validily or inlent of a slep is in
doubl.

10

A Stop Work is lnilialed for any abnormality that needs to be discussed.

11

If procedure Is slopped, THEN when wO!k wnh lhe procedure Is aulhorized lo resume, the right
level of addillonal management altenllon and authority Is present.

12

Steps can be performed as wrttten v.ilh toots, cameras, and i ghllng, etc. wilhoul lhe need lo
make an essumplion aboul any required condilion.

14

The procedure is compleled, legible and any corrections are lined oul, Initialed and dated.

16

During the performance of lhe procedure observe the use of self-checks or peer checks for
crillcal steps.

17

The correct type of procedure Is praperly used.

19

Good three -way communications are used (repeat backs).

Comments:

Page 5of9

F-9

No

OFI

NOB

NIA

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

PFP SSW Checklist
Title of Work Package

Task THle:

C~<:k on~

«

"No· in tho common! $CW On

Yes

1

·control Neas and Boundaries· are prope~y posted.

2

"Al-The-Controls· locelions ere prope~y posled.

3

The boundary of the •.Al-The-Controls" location is posted close lo the work area bot wilh
adequate space for workers.

4

us to wtie:t~ r the cnlaiM wus sal•sliOO.

rr.it !Mid~d. Ari Opp«bm ly For hijYOYe~ (OFIJ
~ 1dmll fod , Nol Ob9.:!rvcd(NOB>«Nol
l<.tlJ.,lia,til! ti.YA) & pl~n any bcn:01 d 1ctkcd 'OFI'

Control Areas

#

No

OFI

NOB

NIA

Access into ·control Areas· end ·At ..The--Conlrof' locations is proper1y authorized and

consistently implemented .

Comments:

Ched< 00!' es to l'flM!lllel UJC Q'JtEfion '1",J S: U,bsfa,d,
not ~,~,cd, bl l Oppo1tunty For "n1IovcmOnl (OF I)

PFP Environmental Considerations

#

WM IOC(lblcO, Nol O tlSlllVCd (NOD) Of Not
~tt23~& (NIA) & ·plai n MybOXv:S che<.k\:ld 'OFI'
« -~,o· Ill !he «)lllm'?l'II ~boll

Yes

1

Lighting is adequate for the performance of inspections or for working safely.

2

Nothing looks questionable. (If i doesn't look right It probably Isn't)

3

Doors !Of access and egress are functioning prcpe~y and there are no obstructions .

4

Wind speeds within tolerance .

Comments:

Page 6of 9

F-10

No

OFI

NOB

NIA

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

PFP SSW Checklist
Task Title:

#

Title of Work Package

Vehicle/Equipment usage

Ct~CI( ooe us to .,,t¥.lhr:>r tne (.Tl!Efll'Jl'l wus ~d!1sr,e-c,,
n(:( HM1ed, ~1 OpptnJo ly f or hip<ovemenl (OFI)
wM 1denbled, Nol Ob~t>d (NOD) CM' !<lot
"""•c.::ible, (NIA) (!.lpl:,in any bo•M chcdtOd 'OFr
or ·r40· mtho c.ommonl :.tt:ion

Yes

1

The operator's dally checklist associated with each mobile crane Is filled out during the
preoperalional inspection of the crane and the completed checklist Is placed with the work
control documents or left with the crane .

2

Heavy equipment usage Is coordinated with ample spacing between equipment, effective
communication s between operators. end authority lo proceed given by the PIC.

3

Government vehicles ere operated safely, including the use of 360 degree welk -erounds end
seat belts.

4

5

Page 7 of 9

F-11

No

OFI

NOB

NIA

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

PFP SSW Checklist
Title of Work Package

Task Title:

Field Observation Summary/ Recommendations
Documents Used
Personnel

lntarvtews/Dtscusslons
Good
Practices/Feedback/Mentoring

Potential actions to Improve
efficiency or OFI

Observatlon(s)
Concerns
Method for Resolutlon
(Check all that appllesliZI, and
provide detalls as necessary.)

D

SubmttWork Request

D

Initiate Document Revision:

D

Initiate Trackwise Potential Issue Report

0

CR Issued

D

other (Describe resolution method here c::>)

Addit ional Information I Comments:

Page 8 of 9

F-12

 CHPRC-03689, REV. 0
JUNE 2018

PFP SSW Checklist
Task Title:

Title of Work Package

Field Observation Summary/ Recommendations

Page 9 of 9

F-13

  REV. 0
JUNE 2018

This page intentionally left blank.

F-14