Environmental and Other Evaluations of Alternatives for Long ...

Environmental and Other Evaluations of Alternatives for Long-Term Management of Stored INEL Transuranic Waste

;, 1 1 lLJ.&w Oapaflment of Enlergy hmisbflfi fkQr'efary for Enemy T@chn~!@gy'

DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency Thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.

DISCLAIMER

Portions of this document may be illegible in electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document.

Environmental and Qther Evaluations of Alternatives for Long-Term Management of Stored INEL Transuranic Waste

February 1979

U.S. Department of Energy \

~ssistant-secretary for Energy Technology Office of Nuclear Waste Management

Washington, D.C. 20545

NOTICE

mir q a r t w s as an account of work

,panrored by the united States Govcmment. Neither h e united slaws nor the United Stater Department of E , , ~ , ~ , nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractorr, rubcontracton, or their employees, maker any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal uiayijty or rerpondbily for the accuracy,completen~ or uvru~ncss of any in fomt ion , appmtus, P W ~ U C ~ Or proscls ,jjiwloud, or repnocnu that its uoc would not infringe privately owned righs.

2

,

NOTICE

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. Neither the United States nor the United States Department of Energy. nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process. or service by trade name, mark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement. iecommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any egency thereof.

Available from:

National Technical Information Service (NTIS) u.s'. Department of Cowerce 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, Virginia 22161

Price : Printed Copy: $19 .OO Microfiche: $ 3.00

CONTENTS

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . INTRODUCTION 1-1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 PURPOSE l . . . 1-1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 BACKGROUND 1-2 d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 SCOPE OF THE STUDY 1-4

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4 NEED FOR A FEDERAL REPOSITORY 1-6

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . SUMMARY 2-1

2.2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE INEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ANDTHERWMC 2-1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 THE RWMC AND ITS OPERATIONS 2-3

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4 EFFECTS . OF CURRENT OPERATIONS.' 2-4

2.5 WASTE MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES STUDIED . . . . . . . . . . 2-6 .

. . . . . . . . . . 2.6 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF ALTERNATIVES 2-10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.6.1 Non rad io l og i ca l ~ f f e c t s 2-10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.6.2 R a d i o l o g i c a l E f . fec ts 2-14

. . . . . . . . . . . . 2 .. 7 RADIOLOGICAL RISKS TO THE PUBLIC 2-15

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2..9 COSTS OF ALTERNATIVES 2-24

3 . PRESENT ENVIRONMENT OF THE INEL (INCLUDING RWMC. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SITE 14. AND LEMHI RANGE) 3-1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 GEOGRAPHICAL SETTING 3-1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 TOPOGRAPHY 3-3

3.3 CLIMATE AND METEOROLOGY . . . . . . ; . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-3

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.1 Temperature 3-5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.2 Wind 3-6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3.3 P r e c i p i t a t i o n 3-8

CONTENTS ..(Cant ' d)

3.3.4 Evapora t ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-8 3.3.5 R e l a t i v e Humid i t y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-8 3.3.6 Severe Weather Cond i t ions . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-8

3.4 GEOLOGY AND SEISMOLOGY . . . . . . . . \ . . . . . . . . . . 3-9

3.4.1 The INEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-9 3.4.2 The RWMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-14 3.4.3 S i t e 1 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-14 3.4.4 Lemhi Range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-14

3.5 HYDROLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-18

3.5.1 The INEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-18 3.5.2 The RWMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-20 3.5.3 S i t e 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . 3-24 3.5.4 Lemhi Range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '3-24

3.6 ECOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '3-25

3.7 ARCHAEOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-28

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.8 LAND USE 3-29

3.9 POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS AND ECONOMIC SETTING . . . . . 3-30

4 . THE RWMC AND ITS OPERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1

4.1 HISTORY AND CURRENT LAYOUT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1

4.2 OPERATIONS FOR MANAGING TRU WASTE . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-4

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3 DESCRIPTIONOFTRUWASTE 4-6

'4.3.1 Phys i ca l D e s c r i p t i o n . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . 4-6 4.3.2 Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-6 4.3.3 Rad ionuc l ide Content . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . 4-9 4.3.4 H i s t o r y o f Waste Conta iner Damage . . . . . . . . 4-12

4.4 RELATED CURRENT PROJECTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-12

4.4.1 RWMC Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-12 4.4.2' Waste Process ing R&D'Studies . . . . . . . . . . . 4-12 4.4.3 TSA Reent ry Stud ies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-15

5 . ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS FROM CURRENT OPERATIONS OF 'TRU WASTE MANAGEMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1

5.1 RADIOACTIVE EMISSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1

i i

CONTENTS ( Cont ' d ) . " .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2 AIR QUALITY

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3 SURFACEWATER

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4 GROUND SURFACE CONTAMINATION

. . . . . . . . . . . 5.5 SUBSURFACE MIGRATION OF RADIONUCLIDES

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.6 GROUNDWATER ' .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.7 FLORA AND FAUNA

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.8 NONRADIOLOGICAL EFFECTS

6 . EFFECTS OF CURRENT TRU WASTE MANAGEMENT ON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . THE WORKERS AND ON THE PUBLIC

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1 RADIOLOGICAL DOSE TO WORKERS

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1.1 Ex te rna l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1.2 1nterna. l .

6.2 RADIATION EFFECTS ON THE PUBLIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . IDENTIFICATION OF ALTERNATIVES FOR INEL' TRU WASTE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MANAGEMENT

7.1 COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO CONCERNING LONG-TERM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MANAGEMENT OF INEL TRU WASTE

7.2 THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES/NATIONAL RESEARCH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . COUNCIL STUDIES

. . 7.2.1 Shal low Land B u r i a l o f Low-Level Rad ioac t i ve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Waste 7.2.2 Management o f Rad ioac t i ve Waste a t \ . Hanford . . . .

7.3 THE DOE ALTERNATIVES STUDY AND EIS FOR INEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TRUWASTE i

. . . . . 7.3.1 DOE A l t e r n a t i v e s Study f o r INEL TRU waste 7.3.2 Environmental Impact Statement . f o r ' INEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TRU Waste Management

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4 THE CURRENT STUDY . .

CONTENTS (Cont ' d)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4.1 Guidel ines f o r t h e Study

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4.1.1 General 7.4.1.2 Waste Inven to ry and C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4.1.3 Risk Analys is . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4.1.4 Cost Est imates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4.1.5 Environmental

.7. 4.2 Terminology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4.3 A1 t e r n a t i ves and C0ncep.t~ Studied

7.4.4 A l t e r n a t i v e s and Concepts I d e n t i f i e d But . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Not Studied

8 . ALTERNATIVES INVOLVING LEAVE-IN-PLACE MANAGEMENT . . . . . . . . 8.1 ALTERNATIVE 1 : LEAVE STORED TRU WASTE I N PLACE AS I S . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.1.1 General Procedures 8.1.2 'Moni tor ing and Sampling Procedures . . . . . . . . .

8.2 ALTERNATIVE 2: LEAVEeSTORED TRU WASTE IN PLACE AND . . PROVIDE IMPROVED ENGINEERED.CONFINEMENT . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 8.2.1 Concept 2-a

8.2.2 Concept 2-b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.2.3 Concept 2-c

9 . ALTERNATIVES 'INVOLVING RETRIEVAL. PROCESSING. AND SHIPMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TO THE FEDE, RAL REPOSITORY

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.1 SHIPMENT AS SCHEDULED

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.1.1 R e t r i e v a l : '

9.1.2 Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.1.2.1 Operat ing Experience With Slagging

P y r o l y s i s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9.1. 2.2 Conceptual Processing o f INEL TRU

Waste by Slagging P y r o l y s i s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.1.2.2.1 Preprocessing . . . . . . . . . . 9.1.2.2.2 I n c i n e r a t i o n . . . . . . . . 9.1.2.2.3. Output Packaging

9.1.2.2.4 Off-Gas Treatment . . . . . . 9.1.2.2.5 Flow Rates and Volumes . . . .

CONTENTS (Cont ' d)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.1.2.3 F a c i l i t y 9 - i 9

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.1.3 O f f s i . t e Shipment : 9-20 ' I

9.1.4 Disposal a t .the Fede ra l Repos i to ry . . . . . . . . 9-22

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.2 SHIPMENT DELAYED 20 YEARS

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.3 RETRIEVAL DELAYED 20 YEARS

10 . ALTERNATIVES INVOLVING RETRIEVAL.. PROCESSING. AND DISPOSAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ON THE INEL

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.1 RETRIEVAL OF STORED WASTE . ;!

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.2 PROCESSING THE STORED WASTE

. . . . . . . . . . . 10.2.1 I n c i n e r a t i o n and .Packaging. 10.2.2 Compaction. Immobi l i za t ion * . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . and Packaging . . . . . . . . . 10.2.3. Packaging Only i *; * ; *

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.4 DISPOSAL 10-18

. . . . . . . 10.4.1 Deep Rock Disposal . Shaf t Access 10-18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.4.1.1 Assumptions 10-19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.4.1.2 Min ing Method 10-20 . . . . . . . . . . 10.4.1.3 Surface F a c i l i t i e s 10-21 . . . . . . . . 10.4.1.4 Underground F a c i l i t i e s '10-24

. . . . . . . 10.4.2 Deep ~ o c k ' Disposal . Tunnel Access 10-27

10.4.2.1 Locat ion and Rock U n i t s I nvo l ved . . . 10-27 . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.4.2.2 General Desc r i p t i on 10-28 . . . . . . . . . . . 1.0.4.2.3 Surface F a c i l i t i e s 10-30 10.4.2.4. Underground F a c i l i t i e s . . . . . . . . 10-30

10.4.3 Engineered shallow- and Disposal a t S i t e 14 . . 10-35

10.4.3.1 S i t e D e s c r i p t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . 10-35 . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.4.3.2 Disposal F a c i l i t y 10-37 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.4.3.3 Su rve i l l ance 10-41

CONTENTS (Cont ' d)

10.4.3.'4 Waste Emplacement . . . . . . . . . . 10.4.3.5 Cons t ruc t i on Technjques . . . . . . . 10.4.3.6 Engineered Shal l o w l ~ a n d Disposal a t

S l t e 14 - Less Massive V a r i a t i o n . . . 10.4.4 ~ i s ~ o s a l i n ~ n ~ i n e e r e d Su r f ace ~ a b i 1 i ty near

t h e RWMC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.4.4.1 S i t e D e s c r i p t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.4.4.2 D isposa l F a c i l i t y . . . . . . . . . . 10.4.4.3 S u r v e i l l a n c e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.4.4.4 Waste Emplacement . . . . . . . 3 '10.4.4.5 Cons t ruc t i on ~ e c h n i q u e s

. 10.5 DECONTAMINATION AN^ DECOMMISSIONING . . . . . . . . . * 1 1 . . COMBINED MANAGEMENT OF BURIED TRU WASTE AND STORED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TRU WASTE

1 2 . ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF ALTERNATIVES FOR MANAGING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TRU WASTE

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . 1 INTRODUCTION AND APPROACH n

SITE PREPARATION AND CONSTRUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.2.1 A i r Q u a l i t y . . . . ; . . . . . . . . . . . . .

I

12.2.2 Environmental Noise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.2.3 T e r r e s t r i a l Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.2.4 Water Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

12.2.4.1 Sur face Water . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.2.4.2 Groundwater . . . . . . . . . . . . .

12.2.5 Non rad io l og i ca l S o l i d Waste Disposal . . . . . . 12.2.6 Land Use Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.2.7 Socioeconomic Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

12.2.7.1 ~ m ~ l o y m e n t and Economics . . . . . . . 12.2.7.2 Housing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.2.7.3 Soc ia l Serv ices . . I . . . . . . . . .

12.2.8 Commitment o f Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . .

CONTENTS (Cont ' d)

. . . . . 12.2.9. Archaeological and Historical Sites ; 12-20 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.2.10 Aesthetics 12-21

. . . . . . . . . 12.2.11 Environmentally Sensitive Areas 12-22

. . . 12.2.12 Mitigation of Construction-Related Impacts 12-24

12.2.13 Preoperational Requirements for Environ- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . mental Monitoring 12-26

12.3 NONRADIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF OPERATIONS AND OF . . . . . . . . . . DECONTAMINATION AND'DECOMMISSIONING 12-26 I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.3.1 Air Quality 12-26

I . . . . . . . . . . . 12.3.2 Environmental Noise ; . . 12-29 . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.3.3 Terrestrial Environment 12-30

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.3.4 Water Resources

12.3.4.1 Surface Waters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.3.4.2 Groundwater

. . . . . . . . 12.3.5 Nonradiological Solid Waste Disposal

. . -1 2.3.6 . Land Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ? . . . .

. . . . . . . . .12. 3.7 ...I Ernpl oyinentq and . Economi as . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.3.7 .. 2 .Housing 12.3.7.3 Socia.1 Services . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . 12.3.8 Commitment of Resources 12-37

. . . . . . 12.3.9 Archaeological 'and -Historical Sites 12-38

. . . . . . . . . a . 12.3.11 Environmentally '~en'si tive Areas 3 2-39

12.3.12 Mitigation of ~~eratjonil and DbD Impacts . . . 12-39 12.3.13 Operational and . D&D Environmental . . . . . . . . . . . . . Monitoring Requifements 12-39

CONTENTS (Cont d)

12.4 RADIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF FACILITY OPERATIONS AND OF DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING. . . . . . . :. 12.4.1 In t roduc t i on . . . . . '. . . . . . . . . . . . .

\ 12.4.2 Human Exposure b a t hways . . . : '. . . . . . . . 1'2.4.3 Re1 eases o f Radionucl i des Dur ing ~ o r m a l

Operat ion and Dur ing Decontamination and Decommissioning . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . 12.4.3.1 Releases from R e t r i e v a l F a c i l i t y . . . 12.4.3.2 Releases f rom Slagging Pyro l 'ys is

Fac i 1 i ty. . . . . , . . . . . . . . . 12.4-.3.3 Releases f rom Compaction F a c i l i t y . . 12.4.3.4 Releases from Packaging F a c i l i t y . . . 12.4.3.5 Releases f rom Waste Disposal

F a c i l j t i e s . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 12.4.4 .Contamination o f L+and and Water . . . . . .. . . 12.4.5 Rad io log i ca l Impact on B io ta . . . . . . . . . . 12-56

12.4.6 Maximum Rad ia t i on Doses t o I n d i v i d u a l s . . . . . 12-57

12.4.7 Rad ia t ion Doses t o the Populat ion Dur ing Operations and Decommissioning. . . . . . . . . 12-60

12.4.8 ~ o " ' ~ - ~ e r m Environmental Dose Commitment . . . . 12-63

12.4.9, Rad ia t i on Doses f rom R a i l Shipment o f t he Processed.TRU Waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-67

12.4.10 Hea l th E f fec ts . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 12-69

12.,4.11 M i t i g a t i o n o f the Impacts o f Operat ional ' R a d i o a c t i v i t y Releases. . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-73

12.4.12 Requirements f o r Long-Term Mon i to r i ng . . . . . 12-73 , ~

12.5 SUMMARY.. . . . . . . , * . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-74

12.5.1 Nonradio logical Environmental E f f e c t s . . . . . 12-74 12.5.2 Rad io log i ca l Environmental Impacts. . . . . . . 12-77 12.5.3 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts . . . . . . . . . . 12-80

CONTENTS' ('Cont d)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13. RADIOLOGICAL RISKS TO THE PUBLIC 13-1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.1 ORGANIZATION OF SECTION 13-1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.2 BACKGROUND 13-2

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.2.1 Purpose and Scope 13-2 i

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.2.2 . D e f i n i t i o n of R i sk I 13-3

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.2.3 Assumptions 13-6

. . . . . . . . . . . 13.2.4 R i . sk .Ana lys is Methodology

13.2.5 Long-Tcrm Hazard Characteristics o f . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' t h e INEL TRU Waste

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.3 SUMMARY OF RESULTS

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.4 LEAVE AS I S (ALTERNATIVE 1 )

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.4.1 Summary :

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,.4.2 .Shor t-Term R isks PY . . . . . A i rbo rne Acc iden ta l . Releases

13.4.2.1.1 Exp los i ve Vo lcan ic Ac t i on . . . . . . . . . .

13.4.2.1.2 Lava Flow Over t h e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Waste . . . . . . . 13.4.2.1.3 Earthquakes . . . . . . . . 13.4.2.1.4 Tornadoes . . . . . 13.4.2.1.5 M e t e o r i t e I'mpact

. . . . 13.4'.2<2 Waterborne . . Acc iden ta l Releases

13.4.2.2.1 F lood ing f rom' P r e c i p i - , . . . . t a t i o n o r Snowmelt . . . . 13.4.2.2.2 Mackay Dam F a i 1 u r e

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.4.3 Long-Term E f f e c t s 13-52

. . . . . ! 13.4.3':l A i r bo rne Acc iden ta l Releases 13-54

13.4.3.1.1 Lava Flow Over t h e Waste . . . . . . . . . . 13-54 . . . . . . . . . 13.4.3.1.2 I n t r u s i o n 13-55 . . . . . . . . . . 13.4.3.1.3 Eros ion 13-57

' i x

CONTENTS (Cont ' d ) .

13.4.3.1.4 I n t r u s i o n F o l l o w i n g . . . . . . . . . Eros ion 13-57 13.4.3.1.5 Eros ion w i t h Tornado . . . 13-58 13.4.3.1.6 Other Events . . . . . . . 13-58

13.4.3.2 Waterborne Acc iden ta l Releases . . . . . 13-58

13.4.3.2.1 F lood ing f rom P r e c i p i - t a t i o n o r Snowmelt . . . .

13.4.3:Z.Z. Mackay Dam F a i 1 u r e . . . . 13.4.3.2.3 G l a c i a t i o n . . . . . . . . 13.4.3.2.4 Lake o r Swamp . . . . . . 13.4.3.2.5 R i v e r Channel A l t e r a - . . . . t i o n s and Eros ion 13.4.3.2.6 P e r t u r b a t i o n o f t h e . . . . Groundwater System 13.4.3.2.7 C l i m a t i c F l u c t u a t i o n s . .

13.5 IMPROVE .CONFINEMENT (ALTERNATIVE 2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.5.1 Add Top/Si de B a r r i e r (concept 2.a)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.5.1.1 Summary

13.5.1.2 Short-Term R isks . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.5.1.2.1 A i rborne Acc iden ta l

. Releases . . . . . . . . . 13.5.1.2.2 Waterborne Acc iden ta l

Releases . . . . . . . . . ,13.5.1.3 Long-Term E f f e c t s . . . . . . . . . .

13.5.1.3.1 A i rborne Acc iden ta l Re1 eases . . . . . . . . .

1.3.5.1.3.2 Waterborne Acc iden ta l Releases . . . . . . . . .

Add Top, Side. and Bottom B a r r i e r s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Concept 2-b)

13.5.2.1 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.5.2.2 Short-Term R isks . . . . . . . . . . .

13.5.2.2:l A i r bo rne Acc iden ta l . . . . . . . . . . Re1 eases 13-66 13.5.2.2.2 Waterborne Acc iden ta l

Releases . . . . . . . . . 13-66

: CONTENTS (Cont ' d )

. . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.5.2.3 Long-Term E f f e c t s 13-67 . .

a 13.5.2.3.1 A i rbo rne Acc iden ta l . . . . . . . . . Re1 eases 13-67 13.5.2.3.2 Waterborne Acc iden ta l . . . . . . . . . Releases 13-67

....

. . . . . . . 13.5.3 Immob i l i ze i n P lace (Concept 2-c) 13-67

: i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.5.3.1 Summary 13-67

. . . . . . . . . . . 1 3.5.3.2 Short-Term R i sks 13-68

13.5.3.2.1 A i rbo rne Acc iden ta l . . . . . . . . . . . Releases 13-68

13.5.3.2.2 Waterborne Acc iden ta l . . . . . . . . . Releases 13-68

. . . . . . . . . . . 13.5.3.3 Long-Term E f f e c t s

13.5.3.3.1 A i r b o r n e Acc iden ta l Re1 eases . . . . . . . . . .

13.5.3.3.2 Waterborne Acc iden ta l Releases . . . . . . . . . . .

13.6 RETRIEVE. PROCESS. 'AND SHIP TO THE FEDERAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . REPOSITORY (ALTERNATIVE 3)

. . . . . . . . . . . . 13.6.1 D i r e c t - C o n t r o l R e t r i e v a l

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.6.1.1 Summary

13.6.1.2 A i rbo rne Acc iden ta l Releases . . . . . . . . . Volcan ic A c t i v i t y

Tornado . . . . . . . . . Earthquake . . . . . . . . . Dropping o f a Waste Cont a i ner . . . . . . . . . Waste Conta iner . . . . . . . Pene t rd t i on . . . . . A i r c r a f t Impact F i r e Du r i ng R e t r i e v a l . . . . . . . . Operat ions . . . . Trans fe r Acc iden t Loss of E l e c t r i c Power . .

. . . . 13.6.1.3 waterborne Acc iden ta l Releases

CONTENTS (Cont ' d)

. .

13.6.2 Slagging P y r o l y s i s and Packaging. . . . . . . . 13.6.2.1 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . 13.6.2.2 A i rborne Accidenta l Re1 eases. . . . .

13.6.2:2.1 Dropping o f a Waste . . . . . . . . Container 13.6.2.2.2 F i r e i n t h e Pro-

cess ing F a c i l i t y . . . . . 13.6.2.2.3 Explos ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.6.2.2.4 Tornado 13.6.2.2.5 Other Events. . . . . . . . .

13.6.2.3 Waterborne Acc identa l Releases. . . . 13.6.3 Shipping o f Slag t o Federal Reposi tory . . . . .

13.6.3.1 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.6.3.2 A i rborne 'Acc identa l Releases. . . . . 13.6.3.3 Waterborne Accidenta l Releases. . . .

13.7 RETRIEVE, PROCESS, AND DELAY SHIPMENT TO THE :

FEDERAL REPOSITORY 20 YEARS (ALTERNATIVE 4) . . . . . . 13.8 RETRIEVE, PROCESS, AND DISPOSE AT THE INEL

(ALTERNATIVE 5) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.8.1 Compaction and Immob i l i za t i on . . . . . . . . .

13.8.1.1 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1318.1.2 A i rborne Acc identa l Releases. . . . . 13.8.1.3 Waterborne Accidenta l Releases. . . .

13.8.2 Packaging Only. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.8.3 Shipment o f Processed Waste t o INEL Disposal

L o c a t i o n s . . . . ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - ,

... . 13.8.4 Disposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *. . 13.8.4.1 Operat ional Phase ; . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . 13.8.4.1 .1 Summary

13.8.4.1.2 Operat ions-Related Acc identa l Releases . . .

13'.8.4.1.3 Releases Due t o . . . . . Natura l Events.

13.8.4.2 R e t r i e v a b i . l i t y Phase . . . . . . . . . 13-92 .

. . . . . . . . . . 1 13.8.4.3 Postc losure Phase ' 13-92

13.8.4.3.1 Summary . . . . . . . . . 13-92 13.8.4.3.2 Lemhi Range . . . . . . . . 13-93 13.8.4.3.3 S i t e 14 . . . . . . . . . . < 13-94 13.8.4.3.4 RWMC . . . . . . . . . . . 13-96

13.9 DELAY RETRIEVAL 20 YEARS (ALTERNATIVE 6) . . . . . . . . 13-97

13.10 DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING (D&D) . . . . . . . 13-97

13.11.1 Short-Term E f f e c t s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I. 3-98

13.11 .. 2 Long-Term E f f e c t s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-99

13.11.2.1 La ten t Somatic E f f e c t s . . . . . . . 13-99 13.11.2.2 Genet ic E f f e c t s . ...- . . . . . . . . 13-102

13.12 ENVIRONMENTAL .EFFECTS OF ACCIDENTS AND NATURAL EVENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-105

14.1 CHARACTERIZATION OF HAZARDS AFFECTING WASTE MANAGEMENT WORKERS . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . .

14.2 NONRADIOLOGICAL'HAZARDS . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . 14.2.1 Nonrad io log ica l Hazards f rom Normal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Operat ions 14.2.2 Nonrad io log ica l Hazards From P o t e n t i a l

Accidents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.3 RADIOLOGICAL HAZARDS . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . .

14.3.1 Procedures and Design ~ e a t u r e s Used t o L i m i t . Radi a t i on Exposures t o Workers . . . . . . . . .

14.3.2 Rad ia t i on Exposures Dur ing Normal Operat ions . . 14.3.3 Rad io log i ca l Hazards f rom P o t e n t i a l Acc idents .

I 14.4 SUMMARY 14-18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

CONTENTS ( C o n t ' d)

15. C O S T S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.1 BASES . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 5 . 2 . COST ESTIMATES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

> 16. REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :

1'6.1 LAND ACQUIS IT ION AND USE. . '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

16.2 REGIJLATORY REQUIREMENTS ,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.3 TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENT STUDIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 .4 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SAFETY INVESTIGATIONS . . . . . . . .

17. COMPARISONS AMONG ALTERNATIVES, CONCEPTS, AND MODULES . . . 1 7 . 1 INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ; . . . . . . 1 7 . 2 ALTERNATIVES AND CONCEPTS FOR LEAVING THE WASTE

I N PLACE (ALTERNATIVE 1, CONCEPTS 2-a , 2-b, a n d 2 - c ) . . 1 7 . 3 RETRIEVAL MODULES (FOR ALTERNATIVES 3, 4, 5, a n d 6 ) . . 17.4 PROCESSING MODULES (FOR ALTERNATIVES 3, 4, 5, a n d 6) . . 1 7 . 5 MODULES FOR DISPOSAL AT THE I N E L (FOR ALTERNATIVE 5 ) . .

I

\ 17 .6 ALTERNATIVES AND CONCEPTS FOR RETRIEVAL, PROCESSING, AND SHIPMENT TO THE FEDERAL REPOSITORY (ALTERNATIVES 3, 4, AND 6 ) . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . 17.6.1 E f f e c t s o f D e l a y i n g R e t r i e v a l . . . . . . . . . 17.6 .2 E f f e c t s o f D e l a y i n g S h i p m e n t . . . . . . . . . .

17.7 CONCEPTS FOR RETRIEVAL, PROCESSING, AND DISPOSAL OF THE WASTE AT THE INEL (ALTERNATIVE 5 ) . . . . . . . . . .

1 7 . 8 ALL ALTERN'ATI VES STUDIED, FOR LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT OF THE I N E L TRU WASTE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

R E F E R E N C E S . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX A: TEXT OF COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THE FEDERAL GOVERN-

MENT AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO CON- CERNING LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT OF I N E L TRU WASTE. . . .

x i v \

CONTENTS (Cont.! d)

APPENDIX B: ALTERNATIVES, CONCEPTS, AND IDEAS IDENTIFIED BUT NOT STUDIED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-1-

Be1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i . 6-1

8.2 'CONCEPTS AND APPROACHES NOT STUDIED FOR ALTERNATIVES 1 and 2:. LEAVE I N PLACE. . . . . , . B-3

B.2.1 Top Cover: Concrete Cover. . . . . . . . 8-5 B.2.2 Top Cover: Lapped Sur face Cover. . . . . B-5 B.2.3 Top, Side, and Bottom B a r r i e r s : Vau l ts

Const ructed Under Present S to red Waste. . B-5

B. 3 RETRIEVAL METHODS NOT STUD1 ED. . . . . ' . . . . . B-5

B.4 PROCESSING METHODS NOT STUDIED . . . . . . . . . B-6

B.4.1 Combinations o f Processes . . . . . . . . B-6 B.4.2 I n c i n e r a t i o n Processes. . . . . . . . . . B-9 8.4.3 I m m o b i l i z a t i o n Processes. . . . . .,. . . B-10

B.5 .METHODS NOT STUDIED FOR MANAGING THE EFFECTS OF A 20-YR DELAY I N THE AVAILABILITY OF THE FEDERAL REPOSITORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-11

0.5.1 Delay Shipment t o t h e Federa l . . .

. . - Repos i to ry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-11

8.5.1.1 Outdoor Storage Methods: Aboveground. . . . ' . . . . . . . B-12

B.5.1.2 Outdoor Storage Methods:' Underground. . . . . . . . . . . . B-13

B.5.1.3 Indoor Storage Methods:, Aboveground. . . . . . . . . . . 8-14

B.5.1.4 Indoor Storage Methods: \ Underground. . . . . . . . . . . B-16

B.5.2 Delay Processing. . . . . . . . . . . . . B-17

B.5.3 D e l a y R e t r i e v a l . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-17

B.6 SHIPMENT AND TRANSF.ER METHODS NOT STUDIED. . . . B-19 - B.7 LOCATIONS AND TECHNIQUES NOT STUDIED FOR WASTE

DISPOSAL AT THE INEL . . . 0 . . . . . . . . . . B-19 ,

CONTENTS (Cont ' d)

.7.1 INEL Disposal Locat ions Not Studied . . . B-20

1.1 Middle Bu t te . . . . . . . . . . B-20 8.7.1.2 C i r c u l a r Bu t te and

EBR-I1 .Ridge . . . . . . . . . . 8-21

8.7.2 Waste.Disposa1 Techniques Not Studied . . B-21

B.7.2.1 Waste Disposal i n Deep Dr i l . l ed Holes. . . . . . . . . . 8-21

B.7.2.2 Deep Well I n j e c t i o n o f L i q u i f i e d Wastes . . . . . . . . B-22

B.7.2.3 Shallow-Land Disposal a t t he RWMC . . . . . . . . . . . . B-22

8.8 OTHER ALTERNATIVES, CONCEPTS,.AND IDEAS IDENTIFIED BUT NOT STUDIED FURTHER . . . . . . . B-22

B.8.1 Postdecis ion Changes i n A l t e r n a t i v e s o r Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

B.8.2 Return , the Waste t o Po in ts o f *Or ig in. . . B.8.3 Terminate the Receipt o f Waste f rom

, Off-INEL Locat ions. .. . . . . . . . . . . B.8.4 Separat ion o f the Waste . . . . . . . . . 8.8.5 D i l u t e an3 Disperse . . . . . . . . . . . 8.8.6 Se lec t ion of a Per iod f o r Maintenance,

Survei l lance, ' and Secur i ty . . . . . . . . B.8.7 Nongeologic Disposal Methods. . . . . . . B.8.8 Separating. t h e Me l t Product During t h e

Slagging Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX C: THE EFFECTS OF TRU WASTE RECEIVED AFTER 1985

ON THE WASTE MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES STUDIED. . . . C-1

C . l INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . C-1

C.2 WASTE PROJECTIONS.TO 1985. . .. . . . . . . . C-2

C.4 EFFECTS.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-5

C.4.1 A l t e r n a t i v e 1 - Leave t h e Stored W a s t e A s I s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-5

, C.4.2 A l t e r n a t i v e 2 - Leave t h e Stored Waste I n Place and Improve Confinement. . . . . C-7

C.4.3 A l t e r n a t i v e 3 - Re t r i eve t h e Stored Waste, Process, and Ship t o the Federal Reposi tory. . . . . . . . . . . . C-7

CONTENTS (Cont ' d)

C.4.4 A l t e r n a t i v e 4 . Ret r i eve and Process the Stored Waste Between 1985 and 1995; S tore Onsite; Ship t o t h e Federal . . . . . . . . . . . . Repos i to ry i n 2005 C-8

C.4.5 A l t e r n a t i v e 5 . Ret r i eve and Process t h e . . . Stored Waste. Dispose o f a t t h e INEL C-9 ' C.4.6 A l t e r n a t i v e 6 . Delay R e t r i e v a l . Proces-

sing. and Shipment o f t h e Stored Waste t o t h e Federal Repos i to ry U n t i l 2005 . . . C-9

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C.5 CONCLUSIONS . . ; C-10

APPENDIX D: WIPP ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D-1

APPENDIX E: METHODOLOGY FOR CALCULATING DOSE COMMITMENT . . . . . E-1 .

E.l INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E-1

E.2 ATMOSPHERIC TRANSPORT AND DISPERSION . . . . . . E-1

E.3 DEPOSITION AND SCAVENGING . . . . . . . . . . . . E-4

E.4 DISTRIBUTION OF RADIONUCLIDES I N THE SOIL . . . . E-6

E . 5 RESUSPENSION OF DEPOSITED MATERIAL . . . . . . . E-8

E.6 TRANSFER TO THE HUMAN FOOD CHAIN . . . . . . . . E-11

E.7 GROUNDWATER TRANSPORT MODEL . . . . . . . . . . . E-11

E.8 DOSE CALCULATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E.8.1 Dose Ca lcu la t i ons .- General . . . . . . . . E.8.2 Models f o r C a l c u l a t i n g I n t e r n a l

Rad ia t i on Doses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E.8.3 Ex terna l Rad ia t i on E.8.4 Normal Release Dose Ca lcu la t i ons . . . . . E.8.5 Accident Dose Ca lcu la t i ons . . . . . . . . E.8.6 T ime-Integrated Risk . . . . . . . . . . .

APPENDIX F: SCIENTIFIC NOTATION . . . . . . . . . . . ; . . . . . APPENDIX G: ABBREVIATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX H: GLOSSARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . H-1

x v i i

FIGURES

2-1 A l t e r n a t i v e s and concepts s tud ied f o r loyg-term management o f s to red INEL TRU waste. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-7

3-1 Locat ion and p r i n c i p a l f ea tu res o f t h e INEL. . . . . . . . . 3-2

3-2 Topographic map o f t he INEL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-4

3-3 INEL Cent ra l F a c i l i t i e s Area (CFA) 2 0 - f t - l e v e l wind roses (January 1950-May 1962). . . . . -. . . . . . . . . . . . . , . 3-7

I 3-4 General ized geologic map of t he eastern Snake R ive r P la in ,

Idaho and v i c i n i t y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-10

3-5 INEL s o i l s map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1 1

3-6 ~ e o l o ~ i c cross sec t i on n o r t h t o south through the RWMC . . . 3-15

3-7 East-west cross s e c t i o n o f subsurface s t r a t a across S i t e 1 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-16

.3-8 Map o f INEL showing r i v e r systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-19

3-9 Locat ion o f the INEL, t he Snake R iver P la in , and general- i zed groundwater f l o w l i n e s hypothesized f o r t h e Snake R iver P l a i n Aqui fer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-21

3-10 P l o t p lan o f t h e Subsurface Disposal Area (SDA) showing p i t s , we l ls , and trenches., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . 3-23

3-11 D i s t r i b u t i o n o f vegeta t ion a t t h e INEL . . . . . . . . . . . 3-26

3-12 Permit g raz ing areas w i t h i n the INEL . . . . .. . . . . . . . 3-31

3-13 1970 popu la t i on d i s t r i b u t i o n surrounding the IMEL w i t h . center a t t he Centra l F a c i l i t i e s Area (CFA). .. . . . . . . . 3-32

3-14 INEL: . v i c i n i t y map centered a t t h e Cent ra l ?Faci 1 i t i ' e s Area (CFA) . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . ., . . . . . . . . . . 3-33

4-1 Layout .of t h e Radi-oact ive .Waste' Management Complex : . . (RWMC). . . . . . . ., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-2

4 - 2 . Storage o f t ransu ran i c waste on . the TSA pads a t t h e RWMC . . .4-5 . . .

5-1 S o i l 'sampling l o c a t i o n s and plutoniuin concentrat ions i n t h e 'Subsurface Disposal Area (SDA) . . . . . . -. . . . . . . . 5-5

5-2 I sop le ths o f contaminat ion (nci /m2) i n sur face s o i l s ' near t h e Subsurface Disposal Area (SDA) i n 1974. . . . : :. . 5-6

x v i i i

FIGURES (Cont I d)

5-3 Topographic map and w e l l mon i to r i ng l o c a t i o n s a t t h e R W M C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-9

7-1 A l t e r n a t i v e s and concepts s tud ied f o r long-term . . . . . . . . . . . . management o f s to red INEL TRU waste. 7-19 . .

8-1 Typ ica l sec t ions through waste and confinement f o r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A l t e r n a t i v e 2 8-5

. . . . . . . . . . . . 8-2 Block f l o w diagram f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 2 8-6

9-1 S i t e p lan f o r f a c i l i t i e s f o r r e t r i e v a l , o n s i t e processing, and sh ipp ing t o t h e Federal Reposi tory . . . . . . . . . . . .

9-2 Block f l o w diagram f o r r e t r i e v a l o f s to red TRU waste . . . . 9-3 Plan o f r e t r i e v a l b u i l d i n g f o r s to red TRU waste. . . . . . . 9-4 Block f l o w diagram f o r processing TRU waste by s lagg ing

p y r o l y s i s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-5 Plan o f ground l e v e l f o r s lagg ing p y r o l y s i s f a c i i i t y f o r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . stored TRU waste

\

9-6 Plan f o r second l e v e l f o r s lagg ing p y r o l y s i s f a c i l i t y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . f o r s to red TRU waste

9-7 Cross sec t i on o f s lagg ing p y r o l y s i s f a c i l i t y f o r s to red TRU waste. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

9-8 Process f l o w diagram f o r s lagg ing py ro l ' ys i s and gas, c lean ing system. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

9-9 Flow r a t e s , f o r r e t r i e v a l , o n s i t e processing, and sh ipp ing . . . . . . . . . s to red TRU waste t o t h e Federal Reposi tory

9-10 Assumed r a i l r o u t e from the INEL. to ' t he Federal Reposi- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . t o r y . I. . 9-11 Locat ion iand arrangement f o r 20-yr s torage o f processed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . waste.

9-1 2 Perspect i ve o f b u i 1 dings f o r - 20-yr s torage o f processed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . waste.

10-1 Process f low and f l o w r a t e s f o r s lagg ing py ro l ys i s o f s t o r e d T R U w a s t e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10-2 Process f l o w and . f low r a t e s f o r compaction ,and immobi 1 i za - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . t i o n o f s to red TRU waste

x i x

FIGURES (Cont 'd)

10-3 Plan of ground level of compaction and immobilization. fac'ility for stored TRU waste. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-5

10-4 Plan of second level of, compaction ,and immobil i,zati.on. . . . . . . : . . . . . . . : . , .

f aci 1 i ty for stored TRU waste. .: 10-6

I 10-5 Cross section of compaction- and immobi 1 ization faci 1 ity. .- .-. 10-7 10-6 Block flow diagram for comp'action, immobilization, and' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , packaging. ; 10-8 . .

10-7 Process flow and flow rates for' packaging only of itored waste. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-11

I . 10-8 Plan of ground level of packaging-only.facility. . . . . . . 10-12

' . , . . . . . . . . 10-9 Plan of' second level of packaging-only facility. 10-13

10-10; Cross section..of packaging-only facili,ty . . . . . . . . . . . . - 10-14 10-11 Block flow diagram of packaging-only process . . . . . . . . 10-15 10-12 site' plan for surface -facilities for deep rock disposal - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . shaft access 10-22 - r

10-13 Plan of. waste facility for deep rock disposal - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . shaft access. 10-23 . - . .

. 10-14 Plan and ventilation flow of underground facility for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . deep rock disposal - shaft access. 10-25

10-15 Cross section of 'faci 1 i ti for deep rock disposal - tunnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . access .lo-29 , . ) ' . [

10-16 Site plan for surface facilities for deep rock disposal - tunnel access. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-31

10-17 Plan of waste transfer building for deep rock dispaspl - tunnel access. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-32

10-18 Plan and ventilation flow for underground qacility for deep rock disposal - tunnel access . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-33

. : 10-19 plan' of shallow-land disposal facility for stoied .TRU

waste at Site 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-38 10-20 Cross section through typical structure at Site 14 . . . . . 10-39

P

%!

FIGURES (Cont Id)

Plan for shallow-land disposal facility (less massive variation) for stored TRU waste at Site 14 . . . . . . . . . 10-43

Cross section through typical structure (less massive variation) at Site 14. . .. . .' . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 10-45

Plan for disposal in engineered structures -for stored TRU waste near the RWMC. . . .. . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . (. 10-48 Cross section of typical structure at engineered surface disposal facility near the RWMC. . . . . . . . . . . ... . . 10-49 Isometric cutaway of engineered structure at surf,ace disposal facility near the RWMC. . . . -. . . . . . . . . . . 10-50

Potential exposure pathways for radionuclides released to the atmosphere . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . 12-42

Comparison of the cumulative lung dose commitment for the '

population within 50 miles . . :... . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-66

Seismic characteristics of the Intermountain Region. . . . . 13-37

Distribution of characterized tornadoes in 20-yr period, 1950 through. 1969. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-39

Map of flood-control diversion system. . . . . . . . '. . . . 13-41

Map of southwestern portion of INEL shpwing contours on the water table of the Snake River Plain Aquifer and inferred directions of groundwater, March 1972 . . . . . . . 13-43

INEL subsurface water'flows. . . :. . . . . . '. . . .' . . . 13-44

Map of Big Lost River Basin downstream from Mackay Reservoir showing location of streamflow stations. . . . . . 13-48

- : 1

Area' contaminated by hypothetical Mackay Dam f ai lure: . . . . .13-53

Alternatives and concepts studied for long-term management of stored IMEL TRU waste. . .' . . . . . . . . . . 8-2

Average annual time-integrated concentrations 1972-1977. . . E-3

2-1 A1 t e r n a t i v e s and Concepts Studied f o r ' ~ o n ~ - ~ e r m Management o f Stored INEL TRU Waste . . . . . . . . . . : . . 2-8

2-2 Summary o f Q u a n t i t a t i v e Nonrad io log ica l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Impacts (Const ruc t ion Phase) ; 2-11

2-3 Summary o f Q u a n t i t a t i v e Nonrad io log ica l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Impacts (Operat ions Phase) 2-12

2-4 Maximum I n d i v i d u a l L i f e t i m e Dose ~ommit"ents Resu l t i ng f rorn One Year o f Nvrrnal Operat ion . o f . Waste Management F a c i l i t i e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-15

2-5 L i f e t i m e Popu la t ion Dose Commitments Resu l t i ng f romOne . . . . . Year o f Normal Operat ion o f Waste Management F q c i l i t i e s 2-16

2-6 Summary of .E f fec ts from Short-Term Release Scenarios . . . . 2-17

2-7 Summary o f Consequences f rom Long-Term Release Scenarios . . Supplement t o Table 2.7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2. 8 Projected.Nonradio1ogical I n j u r i e s and F a t a l i t i e s t o Waste Management Workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2-9 Estimated Worker Doses f rom N.orma1 Operat ions . . . . . . . . . . \

. 2-10 Summary o f .Estimated Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . 3-1 C l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f S o i l s on t h e INEL by Mapping U n i t s

. . . . . . 3-2 County Populat ions w i t h i n a 50-mile Radius o f CFA

3-3 City ~ o p u l a t i o n s Wi th in 50-mile Radius o f CFA . ; . . . . . . 4-1 Summary o f Approximate Volumes o f TRU Waste and Associated

M a t e r i a l s . . . . . . . . ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-7 . I

4-2 Radionvcl i d e content o f ~ u r i e d ' and s to red TRU Waste . . . . . 4-10

4-3 Est imated D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Radianucl ides i n t he Beta- am ma Waste . . . . . . . . . ; . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 4-11

. 4-4 Accidents or? ' ~ n c i d e n t s 0 ; f f s i t e Shipments t o RWMC . . . . . 4-13

. 4-5 Accidents o r ~ n c i d b n t s TRU Waste ~ a n d i i n ~ a t RWMC . . . . . 4-14

5-1 1977 Surface Water Sampling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-3

x x i i

TABLES (Cont ' d )

Pu-238, Pu-239, Arn-241 Concentrat ions i n Deer Mice Tissues Co l l ec ted near t he INEL Subsurface Disposal Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '.' . . . . . . . . . . . . A l t e r n a t i v e s and.Concepts I d e n t i f i e d i n t he DOE A l t e r n a t i v e s Study f o r INEL TRU waste.' . '. . . . . . . . . . Processing Rates f o r Stored Waste f o r Several Lengths o f campa ign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A l t e r n a t i v e s and Concepts Studied f o r Long-Term Management o f Stored INEL TRU Waste. . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary o f D a i l y Ons i te shipment o f Processed Stored Waste. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' . . . . .. Size ~ e ~ u i r e m e n t s f o r Deep Rock Disposal F a c i l i t y - Shaf t Access . . . ', . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sfze Requirements f o r Deep Rock Disposal Faci 1 i t y - Tunnel A c c e s s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

S ize Requirements f o r Engineered Shallow-Land !Disposal a t S i t e 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ': . . . . . Size Requirements f o r Engineered Shallow-Land Disposal F a c i l i t y a t S i t e 14 - Less Massive V a r i a t i o n . . . . . . . . Size Requirements f o r Engineered .Surface Disposal F a c i l i t y near t h e RWMC . . . . ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Const ruc t ion A c t i v i t i ' e s . . . . .. . . . . . . ; . . . . . :. Est imated To ta l A i rborne Contaminants Released by Equipment du r i ng c o n s t r u c t i o n o f Fac i1 , i t i es . . . . . . . . . . Vegetat ion Types A f fec ted and Est imated Acreage Needed f o r F a c i l i t i e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. I

INEL Const ruc t ion ~ a b o r P r o j e c t i o n 1977-1 982 (Man-Years) . . Housing C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f INEL Employees (Percent ) . . . . . Estimated Major Requirements f o r Cons t ruc t ion Ma te r i a l s . . . Estimated A i r Emission Rates f rom Vehicu lar (D iese l ) Exhaust. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . INEL Employment 1967-1978. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

x x i i i

TABLES (Cont ' d)

12-9 ~stimated' ~esource Uses during Operations Phase. . . . . . .' . 12-35 . . I

Estimated Residence Distribution of New Employees. . . . . . Average ~ u c l i de concentrations in Stored Waste and Average Release Rates During Retrieval . . . . . . . . . . . -

Aberage Re1 ease Rates from Sl agging Pyrolysis and Packaging Facility (Processing between 1985 and 1995). . . . Average Release Rates from Slagging Pyrolysis and Packaging Facility .(Processing between 2005 and 2015 . . . . Average Release Rates from compaction Facility . . . . . . . . Maximum Soil Contamination Resulting from Airborne Effluents from Retrieval Facility. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Maximum Soil Contamination Resulting from Airborne Effluents from Slagging Pyrolysis Facility . . . . . . . . . Maximum Soil Contamination Resulting from Airborne Effluents from Compaction Facility . . . . . . . . . . . . . Maximum Soil Contamination Resulting from Normal Opera- tion of Facilities Required to Implement Alternatives. . . . Natural and Fa1 lout Radionucl i de Concentrationb in INEL Soil. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Maximum Ind'ividual Lifetime Dose Commitment Resulting from Airborne Effluents, from One Year of Operation of Waste Retrieval Facility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Maximum 1ndiri dual' Lifetime Dose Commi tmenf Resulting from Airborne Effluents from One Year of Operation of Slagging Pyrolysis Faci'lity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

a . -

Maximum Individual Lifetime Dose Commitment Resulting - from Airborne Effluents from One Year of Operation of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Compaction Facility. :

Lifetime Popul ati on Dose coinmi tment kisul t ing from One .

Year of Operation of Retrieval Facility. . . . . . . .: . . . ~ifet ime Popul at i on Dose Commitment ~esul t i dg from One Year of Operation of Slagging Pyrolysis Facility . . . . . . . .

TABLES (Cont ' d)

12-25 L i f e t i m e Popul a t i on Dose Commitment Resu l t i ng f rom One . . . . . . . . . . . . Year o f Operat ion o f Compaction F a c i l i t y 12-62

12-26 Cumulative L i f e t i m e Dose Commitments t o Local Popul a- t i o n f o r Various Times A f t e r 1995, f,or t he A l t e r n a t i v e , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Resu l t ing , i n Highest Doses . , 12-64

12-27 Cumulative L i f e t i m e Dose Commitments t o Local Populat ion . . . . . from Natura l S,ources f o r Various Times A f t e r ..1995.. :. 12-65

12-28 Cumulative L i f e t i m e Dose Commitments f o r D i s t a n t Popula- t i o n s a t Various.Times A f t e r 1995 f ,or A l t e r n a t j v e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Resu l t i ng i n Highest Doses 12-67

. , ' . 12-29 Expected Dose from ~x . te rna1 Whole-Body Exposure ~ u e - t d - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . R a i l Transport o f Stored TRU Waste. ., 12-69

12-30 Maximum ~ o t k n t i a l Number o f Heal th ~ f f e c t s per u n i t ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Populat ion Dose. 12.-71

12-31 Maximum Cumulative p o t e n t i a l ~ e a 1 t h ' ~ f f k c t s ' " f r o m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Implementation o f any A1 t e r n a t i ve.. -. '1 2-72 . *

12-32 Summary o f Q u a n t i t a t i v e ~ o n r h d i o l o ~ i c a l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Impacts (Const ruc t ion Phase) . . . .. : 12-75

12-33 ~ u m m a r ~ ' b f Qhan t i t a t i v e Nonrad ib log ica l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Impacts (Operat ions Phase) .12-76 I

' 12-34 Maximum I n d i v i d u a l L i f e t i m e Dose Commitments Resu l t i ng f rom One Year o f Normal Opera t ion ,o f Waste Management- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F a c i l i t i e s 12-78

. . . .

12-35 L i f e t i m e Populat ion Dose Commitments Resu l t i ng f rom One Year o f Normal Operat ion o f Waste Manage- . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ment: F a c i j i t i e s . . . .r 12-79

13-1 M u l t i p l i e r s f o r ~ i m e - 1 n t e g r a t e d R i s k t o S t h e ' B o n e ' . . . . . . . 13-5

13-2 ~ v e r ' a ~ e Radi onucl i d e ~ o m ~ o s i t i o n : . o f INEL TRU Waste .< . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i n 1985. : . . 13-10

13-3 Re1 a t i ve Haza,rd o f Waste. Radi onucl ides Re1 a t i ve t.0. . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Plutonium-239 i n 1985. 13-1 1

13-4 F r a c t i o n a l Change .in Re1 a t i v e Hazard o f Radionucl ides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . as a F u n c t i o n i n T i m e . 13-12

XXV

TABLES (Cont ' d)

13-5 R e l a t i v e Hazard o f Waste Radionucl ides as a Funct ion o f T ime. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-13

13-6 Tota l Concentrat ions o f Transuranic Nucl ides i n t h e Transuranic Storage Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-14

13-7 Summary o f Accident E f f e c t s f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 1: Leave AS IS. . . . . . . . . . . '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-15

13-8 Summary o f Accident E f f e c t s f o r Concept 2-a: Improve Confinement - Above and Around . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-16

13-9 Summary o f Accident E f f e c t s f o r Concept 2-b: Improve Confinement - Above, Around, and Below . . . . . . . . . . . 13-17

13-10 Summary o f Accident E f f e c t s f o r Concept 2-c: Improve Confinement - Immobi l i za t ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-18

13-11 Summary o f Accident E f fec ts : Re t r i eva l . . . . . . . . . . . 13-19

13-12 Summary o f Accident E f f e c t s : Slagging Py ro l ys i s and Packaging. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-20

13-13 Summary o f Accident E f fec ts : Shipment o f Processed Waste t o Federal Repository. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-21

13-14 Summary o f Accident E f f e c t s : Compaction and Immobi l i za t ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-22

13-15 Summary o f Accident E f fec ts : Packaging Only . . . . . . . . 13-23

13-16 Summary o f Accident E f f e c t s : Ons i te Shipment f o r A l l Processing Modules :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . 13-24

13-17 Summary o f Accident E f f e c t s : Onsi te Disposal - Operat ional Phase.. . . . . . . . i . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 13-25

13-18 Summary o f Accident E f f e c t s : Onsi te Disposal - Postc losure Phase. . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . .' . . 73-26

13-19 Summary o f E f f e c t s f rom Short-Term Release Scenarios . . . . 13-28

13-20 Summary o f Consequences f rom Long-Term Release Scenarios . . 13-30

Supplement t o Table 13-20. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-31

13-21 Concentrat ion o f P r i n c i p a l Radionucl ides i n We1 1 Water due t o Groundwater Transport Fo l lowing Mackay Dam F a i l u r e Scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-51

xxv i

TABLES (Cont d)

Projections of Cancer Cases in 50-Mile'Radius . . . . . . . . . . . . Population due to Short-Term Releases

Projections of Cancer Cases in 50-Mile Radius . . . . . . . . . . . . Population due to Long-Term Releases

. . . . . . . . . . . . Categories of Hazards to the Workers

Injury and Fatality Rates fro. Comparable Industries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transport Accident Statistics

Projected Nonradiological Injuries and Fatalities to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Waste Management Workers

Estimated Worker Doses from Normal Operations (man-rem) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary of Estimated Costs

Estimated Costs of Retrieval. Processing. and Disposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Modules . Stored TRU.Waste

summary Tables Useful for Comparisons of A1 ternat i ves . . . . . . . . for Long-Term Management of Stored TRU Waste 17-2

Selected Quantitative Comparisons of Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . and Concepts 17-'13

Waste ~arrier/~mmobi'l ization Combinations for Waste Left . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . In Place 8-4

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Waste Processing Combinations B-8

. . . . . Facilities Currently Shipping TRU Waste to the RWMC C-3

Effects of TRU Waste Generated after 1985 on ~l teina- . . . . . . . . . . . tives for Waste Management at the INEL C-6

Mean Annual X/Q (sec/m3) by Sector and Distance . . . . . . . E-5

Estimated Populations and Dispersion Factors for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Distant Locations E-19

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Geo1ogic'~ime Periods H-16

x x v i i

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 PURPOSE

The o b j e c t i v e o f t he study repo r ted .in t h i s document i s t o

p rov ide p r e l i m i n a r y eva lua t ions o f a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r long-term manage-

ment o f t ransuranic-contami nated waste (TRU waste) ( a ) s to red a t the

Rad ioac t ive Waste Management Complex (RWMC) a t t h e Idaho Nat iona l

Engineer ing Labora tory (INEL) . ( b ) The eva lua t ions inc lude envi ron-

mental e f f e c t s , costs, r a d i o l o g i c a l r i s k t o t h e pub l i c , and hazards t o

workers. This document i s intended t o provi 'de suppor t ing eva lua t ions

f o r t h e D r a f t Environmental Impact Statement, Waste I s o l a t i o n P i l o t

P lan t , Carlsbad, New Mexico (DOE 1979). App l icab le p o r t i o n s are sum- - - -

marized and inc luded as p a r t o f t h a t Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS). .The summarized p o r t i o n s r e l a t e t o the e f f e c t s i n Idaho of

several a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r managing t h e TRU waste s to red a t t h e INEL.

There i s a l so a l a r g e q u a n t i t y of t r ansu ran i c waste b u r i e d i n

pi& and trenches a t t he RWMC. (') For perspect ive and completenes,~,

t h e b u r i e d waste i s described, along w i t h the s to red waste, i n t h i s

(a ) See the Glossary i n Appendix H f o r d e f i n i t i o n s o f t ransu ran i c waste and o ther spec ia l i zed terms as used i n t h i s document. See Appendix G f o r a l i s t o f the, abbrev ia t ions used i n t h i s document.

(b ) Records show t h a t t h e ,s tored waste, whose management i s t h e sub- jec.t o f t h i h document, i s contaminated w i t h t ransu ran i c r a d i o - nuc l i des t o l e v e l s o f g rea ter than 10 nCi/g of waste. As such, t he waste- p r o p e r l y f a l l s w i t h i n the d e f i n i t i o n o f t ransuran ic - contaminated s o l i d waste (TRU waste) spec i f i ed by t h e Department o f Energy (ERDA 1973a). Note: Use of t he value o f 10 nCi/g t o def ine t ransu ran i c waste i s being reviewed and may be rev ised. The p o t e n t i a l e f f e c t s o f such a. r e v i s i o n are no t addressed i n t h i s document.

[ c ) Some o f the b u r i e d waste i s contaminated t o leveqs o f l e s s than 10 nCi/g; some i s e s s e n t i a l l y f r e e f rom t ransuran ics . Since i t may be imprac t i ca l t o s o r t t he bu r ied waste i n t o greater than 10 and l e s s than 10 nCi/g po r t i ons , t h e term, TRU waste, i s app l i ed t o a l l the waste discussed he re in unless the t e x t i nd i ca tes o ther - wise.

document. However, a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r managing t h e bu r ied TRU waste are

no t discussed i n t h i s document. Management o f bo th types of TRU waste

i s the sub jec t o f a techn ica l a l t e r n a t i v e s study (DOE 1978a) and of a

D r a f t Pr0grammati.c Environmental Impact statement, i n p repa ra t i on (See

Subsection 7.3). Hereafter, i n t h i s document, t he term TRU waste

r e f e r s t o t h e s to red waste 'only , unless - t h e contex t i n d i c a t e s o ther -

wise.

1.2 BACKGROUND

Estab l ished i n 1949 by t h e Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) f o r t he

cons t ruc t ion , operat ion, and t e s t i n g o f nuclear f a c i l i t i e s , reac tors ,

and equipment, the Idaho Nat iona l Engineer ing Labora tory ( INEL) occu-

p i e s 894 square m i l e s of semiar id p l a i n i n southeastern Idaho.

The Radioact ive Waste Management Complex (RWMC) a t t he INEL was

p u t i n t o opera t ion i n 1952 as a ' - c o n t r o l l e d area f o r b u r i a l o f s o l i d

r a d i o a c t i v e waste generated by INEL operat ions. Since 1954, waste

contaminated w i t h t ransuran i c rad ionuc l ides a1 so has been rece ived a t

t h e RWMC from the Rocky F l a t s Defense Product ion P l a n t near Golden,

Colorado, and f rom o ther operat ions of the Atomic Energy Commission

(AEC) and i t s successor agencies. I n add i t ion , a l i m i t e d amount o f

waste (predominant ly nontransuranic) generated by u n i v e r s i t i e s , hos-

p i t a l s , and p r i v a t e research organ iza t ions was accepted through 1964.

From 1954 u n t i l 1970, t h e TRU-contaminated waste was b u r i e d

i n p i t s and trenches a t the RWMC and was 'covere,d w i t h s o i l . Pre-

sen t l y , an a d d i t i o n a l cover o f h i g h l y compacted c l a y i s being p laced 3 as a moisture b a r r i e r . About 2,000,000 ft o f TRU waste i s cur-

3 r e n t l y bu r ied a t t he RWMC. (Approximately 2,200,000 f t o f TRU

waste was o r i g i n a l l y bur ied. However, experimental p r o j e c t s f o r

r e t r i e v i n g b u r i e d waste have reduced the t o t a l t o approximately 3

2,000,000 f t . ) Beta-gamma emi t t i ng , nontransuranic waste was,

in te rmixed i n t he p i t s and trenches w i t h t h e TRU waste and i s e s t i - 3

mated t o t o t a l 500,000 ft . The bur ied .waste i s discussed o n l y f o r

background. Th i s document does not develop a l t e r n a t i v e s - f o r t h e man-

agement o f b u r i e d waste.

The TRU waste received since 1970 ( the subject of t h i s document) has been aced in re t r i evab le aboveground storage. Containers of

waste are stacked on asphalt pads. The e n t i r e stack of containers i s then covered successively.with plywood, p l a s t i c sheeting, and s o i l . I t i s estimated t ha t by the beginning of 1985, about 2,000,000 f t 3

of TRU waste wil l be in aboveground storage a t the RWMC.

Environmental monitoring (Dolenc and Janke 1977, Hedahl - and

Janke 1978) over the l a s t several years has not iden t i f i ed any. near-term hazards from the TRU waste current ly buried or stored a t t he RWMC. However, the objective of the study reported here i s t o iden t i fy and evaluate f ea s ib l e technical a1 t e rna t ives fo r long-term management of the stored waste. (The buried and stored TRU waste d i f f e r from one another with respect t o r e t r i e v a l , handling, and assoc-iated hazards. Therefore, the two types of waste require sep- a ra te evaluations and may involve d i f fe ren t a l t e rna t iv'es. fo r long-term

, management. ) The r e su l t s of the evaluation a r e presented here in a format t ha t permits meaningful comparisons among the dl t e rna t ives. The document does not present recommendations.

A number of fac to rs , such as environmental e f f ec t s , r i s k s t o the

public, hazards t o .workers, technical f e a s i b i l i t y , and costs , are important in making decisions regarding the 1 ong-term management of

-

the INEL TRU waste. ' a ) The decisions must a lso b e compatible with the overall Department of Energy ( D O E ) program f o r waste management. he f ac to r s t ha t are amenable t o technical evaluation are addressed in t h i s document. '

( a ) The term, INEL TRU waste, i s used throughout t h i s report fo r s impl ic i ty . However, the reader should note tha t : ( 1 ) not

? a l l TRU waste cur ren t ly buried or stored a t the INEL o r ig i - nated from INEL operations (most i s from the Rocky F l a t s Defense P lan t ) , ( 2 ) not a l l fu tu re waste stored a t the INEL will be INEL- generated waste, and ( 3 ) buried and stored waste will not. neces- s a r i l y remain a t the INEL. I

1

At the time of this stt.ldy, the alternatives presented here were ..

considered to be qeading or representative candidates for implementa- - ,

t'ion and to represent applicati~ns of current t~chnology. . Improve-

ments in technology and changes in regulations governing waste manage-

ment may lead to modifications of t$e methods for implementing t h e

alternatives. Before a decision is made for long-term maqagement of

INEL TRU stored waste, a Programmatic EIS, covering both h~~ried and

stored waste, will be prepared (see Subsection 7.3.2). The statement

will assess in detail the potential effects of the most acceptable

methods for implementing the alternatives presented in this document.

It is anticipated that any long-term management alternative

selected as a result of this and other studies would be implemented

starting in 1985 or as soon thereafter as practicable. Research and

development studies to assist in selecting an a1 ternative are-pre-

sently being conducted.

1.3 SCOPE OF THE STUDY -

This study identifies and evaluates long-term management alter-

natives for TRU wiste presently stored at the INEC, but does not

eva'luate a1 ternatives .for h!lried TRU waste. The stud^ a1 so considers stored waste expected to be received prinr to implementing a long-term management method. Because of the man.v uncertainties in the rate of

receipt, stored waste that might be received after implementation of

an alternative is not included in the study. However, the possible

impacts of this waste are brieflv discussed in Appevdix C.

The study addresses three possibilities with respect to the (a) avai 1 abi 1 i ty of a federal repository: (1 a federal repositorv

will be available in 1985; (2) a feder2l repository will be available,

(a) Hereafter, the terms, "a federal repository" and "the Federal Repository", are used to indicate a geologic repository not located at the INEL.

h u t wil l be delayed b y 2 0 y r ( i n the expectation t ha t improved technology fo r waste management wil l be developed in the intervening

20 y r ) ; and (3 ) a federal repository will not be available.

The t h i rd possibi 1 i ty , no federal repository, would require . permanent waste disposal in Idaho. However, no waste stored or disposed of a t other DOE locations would be shipped t o Idaho fo r disposal .

The data base developed and described fo r the present study in-

cludes: (1 ) the present environment of the INEL and the RWMC, ( 2 ) t he RWMC and i t s operations, (3 ) the environmental e f f ec t s from current

I

i operations, ( 4 ) the e f f ec t s of current operations on workers and the public, and ( 5 ) the previous or current s tudies of TRU waste management. (This data base i s discussed in Sections 3 through 6 and in Subsections 7.2 and 7.3.) No experimental s tudies or other e f f o r t s were made to,develop basic s c i e n t i f i c data. Rather, the study involved'using ex i s t ing data, as well as data from ongoing p ro j ec t s , t o develop waste management concepts and t o conduit pre'l imi nary eval ua- t ions of these concepts. The experimental project most c losely linked

with t h i s study i s the Transuranic Storage Area (TSA) reentry s tudies , '.

described in Subsection 4.4.3.

-Detailed guidelines fo r t h i s study are l i s t e d in Subsec-

t ion 7.4.1. Of par t i cu la r importance are the time periods selected fo r evaluating the various e f f ec t s of the a1 ternat ives .

The long-term management a l t e rna t ives f o r the stored INEL TRU

waste are described in Sections 8, 9 , and 10. Section 12 out l ines the environmental e f f ec t s while Section 13 evaluates t he short- and long-

term r i s k s fo r the a1 ternat ives . Hazards t o operating personnel a re addressed in Section 14, and Section 15 examines the monetary costs of

the a l t e rna t ives . Implementation requirements, including land-acqui- s i t i on and use, necessary compl i ance documents, technical development

s tud ies , and required environmental and sa fe ty s tud ies are iden t i f i ed

in Section 16. Section 17 i.s a summary comparison of a l l a l t e rna t ives

studied. -

'1.4 NEED FOR A . F E D E R A L REPOSITORY

Large quan t i t i e s of so l i d TRU waste, generated by the DOE and

- i t s predecesor agencies in support of the U. S. weapons program, a re

stored a t several locations in the United Sta tes . The weapons program

i s cork.inuing, although a t a lower level than in the pas t . A method

of permanent disposal of the waste generated a t these f a c i l i t i e s i s

needed.

A major portion of the national inventory of stored defense TRU

,waste i s presently located a t - t h e RWMC. The TRU waste volume as of 3 December 31, 1977, i s approximately 1,200,000 f t in re t r i evab le

3 aboveground storage, and 2,000,000 f t in shall ow-1 and buri a1 . These volumes represent approximately 75% and 20%, respect ively , of

the t o t a l DOE inventor,^ of a the two c lasses mentioned. Additional - TRU waste i s continually being placed in to storage a t the-RWMC. I t i s

estimated t ha t , b,v, the beginning .of 1985, the t o t a l volume in storage 3 wi l l reach about 2,000,000 f t .

Commitments, made by the AEC and i t s successor agencies,

f o r removing the waste from Idaho are given in Appendix A. Develop-

ment of a reposi tory i s required t o meet the commitments, although

scheduled removal has been delayed t o the l a t e 1980s because of t he

unavai 1 abi 1 i t y of a federa l re posit or.^.

A federal reposi tory i s a lso required t o a l l e v i a t e t he need f o r '

expanding the RW.MC or es tabl ishing another waste storage location a t

t he INEL. Wastk:.volume project ions indicate t h a t the present RWMC

land area willt\.bk f i l l i d t o capaci ty i n the mid-1980s. A reposi tory ,

would receive the waste p resen t ly \ s to red a t the RWMC and would accom-

modate the waste generated in the future .

2. SUMMARY

2.1 -.- BACKGROUND

This study i d e n t i f i e s , develops, and evaluates, i n a p re l im ina ry

manner., a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r long-term management o f TRU waste s to red a t

t he Rad ioac t ive Waste Management Complex (RWMC) a t t he INEL. The

eva lua t ions concern waste c u r r e n t l y a t t h e .RWMC and waste expected t o

be rece ived by the beginning o f the year 1985. The e f f e c t s o f waste-

t h a t might be rece ived a f t e r t h a t date 'are addressed i n Appendix C: !

The technology requ i red f o r managing the waste, t he environmental

e f f e c t s , t h e r i s k s t o t h e pub l i c , t h e r a d i o l o g i c a l and non rad io log i ca l

hazards ten wnrkers, and the est imated cos ts are d i s c ~ s s e d . ~ .

\

The INEL encompasses 894 square mi' les o f semi a r i d p l a i n a t an

average e l e v a t i o n o f approximately:5,000 f t above mean sea l e v e l . The

p l a i n extends across southern Idaho and i s charac ter ized by s o i l o f

r e l a t i v e l y shal low depths under la in by b a s a l t rock.

The RWMC, S i t e 14, and the Lemhi Range s i t e considered i n t h i s

study are loca ted w i t h i n t h e boundaries o f ' the INEL. The c l o s e s t

major popu la t ion center . i s Idaho Fa1 1 s, 30 m i l e s f rom t h e eastern

boundary o f t h e INEL. The popu la t i on l i v i n g w i t h i i a 50-mile rad ius

o f the INEL i s approximately 117,000. Land uses i n ' t h e surrounding

area (50-mi le r a d i u s ) i nc lude urban, i n d u s t r i a1 , i r r i g a t e d farming,

and d r y land farming.. I n add i t ion , a small area o f t he INEL i s used

t o graze sheep and c a t t l e i n t h e sp r ing and f a l l . ,

The c l ima te a t the INEL i s semiarid. The p r e v a i l i n g weather i s

dry, sunny, and breezy. Annual p r e c i p i t a t . i o n averages 8..5 i n . Rela- . '

t i v e humid i ty ranges from an average monthly minimum o f 15% i n August

t o 89% i n February and December. Tornadoes are r a r e i n t h i s region, . .

and those occu r r i ng tend t o be small and cause l i t t l e damage. Ten

funne l clouds ( vo r tex clouds t h a t do no t reach the ground) and two

tornadoes (which caused no damage) have been documented a t t he INEL.

Located e n t i r e l y on the eastern Snake R ive r P la in , t h e INEL

ad jo ins mountains t o the northwest t h a t the nor thern boundary

o f t h e p l a i n . The INEL area i s under la in by a succession o f Pliocene,

Ple is tocene, and recent b a s a l t i c lava f lows.

The Snake R ive r P l a i n has been aseismic du r ing t h e h i s t o r i c

record. However, t he absence o f earthquakes o r microseisms does n o t

e l i m i n a t e the p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t t he e a r t h ' s c r u s t i n t h i s reg ion con-

t a i n s s to red e l a s t i c s t r a i n . Such s t r a i n might be re leased by s l i p -

page along a dormant f a u l t , t o produce an earthquake.

' No sur face streams e x i t t h e INEL. The water supply source f o r

t h e INEL i s t h e groundwater conta ined i n t h e Snake R ive r P l a i n Aqui-

f e r . The general d i r e c t i o n o f f l o w o f the aqu i fe r i s f rom nor theast

t o southwest. The depth t o t h e aqu i fe r beneath the INEL va r ies f rom

200 f t i n the nor theas t corner t o 900 f t i n the southwest corner.

. The vegeta t ion mosaic o f t h e INEL cons i s t s p r i m a r i l y of sage-

brush, l ance lea f rabb i tb rush, and a v a r i e t y o f grasses. Small mammals

are abundant. The pronghorn antelope i s t h e predominant b i g game

mammal. Sage grouse and pheasants are the o n l y res iden t game b i rds .

The on l y endangered species occas iona l l y observed a t t h e INEL are t h e

peregr ine fa lcon and t h e b a l d eagle. The INEL has been designated a

Nat iona l Environmental Research Park. Here s c i e n t i s t s f rom throughout - t h e n a t i o n can study environmental changes caused by man's a c t i v i t i e s

and can develop i n fo rma t ion t o a s s i s t i n land use decis ions.

The environmental , c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the RWMC are genera l l y s im i -

l a r t o those o f t h e INEL. The depth t o the Snake R ive r P l a i n Aqu i fe r

be .10~ the RWMC i s approximately 580 ft. The RWMC i s loca ted near two

fea tu res o f geologic o r hyd ro log i c i n t e r e s t i n t h i s study: ( 1 ) t h e

Arco R i f t Zone, an area of recurring volcanic a c t i v i t y over recent

geologic time periods; and (2 ) the Big Lost River, the principal

surface water fea tu re of the INEL.

The Radioactive Waste Management Complex (RWMC) was es.tablished

in the southwestern corner of t he INEL in 1952 as a controlled area

fo r buri a 1 of s o l j d radioactive waste generated by INEL operations.

I t encompasses about 144 acres. Since 1954, waste contaminated with

transuranic radionuclides has been received from defense-related

a c t i v i t i e s a t the Rocky F l a t s Defense Production Plant and from

other operations of the Atomic Energy Commission and i t s successor

agencles. The waste consis ts of contaminated materi a l s associated

with a var ie ty of nuclear operations. Such mater ia ls include labora-

tory equipment, process equipment, protect ive clothing, maintenance

too l s , . and building mater ia ls . ' In terms of a c t i v i t y , the principal

radionuclides in t he TRU waste are plutonium-238, -239, -240, -241, and -242, and americium-241.

3 Approximately 2,200,000 f t of TRU waste was buried in p i t s

and trenches a t the RWMC between 1954 and 1970. Additionally, about 3 500,000 f t of beta/gamma waste was mingled with the buried TRU

waste.

3 Since. 1970, about 1,100,000 f t of TRU waste has been re-

ceived and stored re t r ievably on aboveground asphalt pads a t the

RWMC. This waste has been covered with successive layers of plywood,

p l a s t i c sheeting, and s o i l . As a r e s u l t of experimental r e t r i eva l 3 projects , an additional 165,000 f t of TRU waste has been re t r ieved

from the p i t s and trenches and placed on the pads. By 1985, an addi- 3 t ional 800,000 f t i s expected to be received and stored. This wil l

3 r e s u l t in a t o t a l of approximately 2,000,000 f t of ( s to red) TRU 3 waste on the pads and approximately 2,000,000 f t of (buried) TRU I

waste in t h e . p i t s and trenches.

- .

The con ta i ners (metal b i ns and drums, and wooden boxes) f o r t h e . . s to red waste are genera l l y i n good cond i t i on . These conta iners were

in tended t o be r e t r i e v a b l e i n a contaminat ion- f ree c o n d i t i o n f o r a t

l e a s t 20 yr. However, t he conta iners f o r t he bu r ied waste have de-

t e r i o r a t e d badly. S tee l drums have corroded through; ' wood and card-

board conta iners have ;otted or d i s in teg ra ted . Some o f t he waste,

such as l a r g e pieces of equipment, was bu r ied wi thout . conta iners.

As a r e s u l t of t he d e t e r i o r a t i o n of t he conta iners, some o f t he s o i l

immediately adjacent t o tbe bu r ied waste has become contamhated. The

contaminat ion l e v e l o f most o f t h i s s o i l i s very low.

2.4 EFFECTS OF CURRENT OPERATIONS

The e f f e c t s of c u r r e n t RWMC operat ions on workers, the pub l i c ,

and the environment are minimal. There are no normal r e 1 eases o f TRU

contaminat ion. Four TRU waste hand l ing acc.idents have been recorded

a t t h e RWMC s ince t h e present management procedures were es tab l i shed

i n 1970. Only one of these accidents r e s u l t e d i n a re lease o f con-

taminat ion. A f o r k l i f t penetrated a drum, r e s u l t i n g i n t he s p i l l o f

a small amount of contaminated waste. The s p i l l e d waste was e a s i l y I

re t r i eved , repackaged, and the 1 oca l area q u i c k l y decontaminated.

There were no s i g n i f i c a n t r a d i a t i o n doses t o personnel.

Sur f ace and subsur f ace water samples are. r o u t i n e l y c o l l e c t e d a t

t he RWMC. The o n l y s i g n i f i c a n t TRU contaminat ion detected i n water

samples was i n 1962 and 1969, when l o c a l f l o o d i n g o f t he RWMC occur-

red. The f loodwaters came i n contac t w i t h bu r ied waste i n p a r t i a l l y

f i l l e d p i t s and trenche The h ighes t alpha a c t i v i t y measured i n t h e fa , r u n o f f water was I X I O - ~ nCi/ml , which i s much l ess than the

maximum concentrat ions al lowed by DOE standards f o r water re leased t o

( a ) Th is number i s expressed i n s c i e n t i f i c no ta t ion , which i s expla ined i n Appendix F.

an uncontrolled area. These flood waters, and perhaps wind t ranspor t , are believed t o be responsible fo r the spread of TRU con,tamination t o the drainage depression a t the northeastern perimeter of t he RWMC.

TRU contamination has been detected up t o 8200 f t from the RWMC, which I

i s s t i l l well within t he INEL boundary. The maximum contamination 2 l eve l s found in surface s o i l s (0-5 cm) were 2048 nCi Am-241/m ,

2 2 1377 nCi Pu-239/m , and 32 nCi Pu-238/m . Th.ese l eve l s were found

a t the northeastern perimeter of t he RWMC.

I

Subsurface migration of radionuclides from the buried TRU waste i s being monitored. Samples indicate the migration t o date i s limited

t o a few inches a t the so i l -waste in terface . The USGS has reported

detectable concentrations of radionucl i des in subsurf ace sediments a t the 11 0- and 240-ft depths. However, these s t a t i s t i c a l l y posi t ive

r e su l t s were suspected t o have resul ted from contamination of d i i l l i n g cores from surf ace iources. Subsequent d r i l l ing using s t r i c t anticon- tami,nation controls did not iden t i fy any radionucl ides in these sedimentary layers.

! The study of uptake of radionuclides by animal and plant- species. a t t he RWMC has begun recently. Results t o date indicate t h a t t he

concentrations of Pu-238, Pu-239, and Am-241 in deer.mice t i s sues are low. Many of t h e samples were near or below the minimum detection

1 imit f o r the radionucl ides.

The RWMC i s a controlled area. Consequently, the potential f o r d i r ec t radiat ion exposure to the public i s minimized and i s localized

within the controlled area.- The workers ace exposed , t o low levels of radiat ion. The highest annual whole-body dose of recent record was

1.87 rem. However, t h i s dose resul ted mainly from the handling and disposal of beta lgama waste received from current INEL operations. The maximum annual whole-body dose received during operations f o r receiving and s tor ing TRU waste i s estimated t o be 0.4 rem. These

doses are well' below the DOE standard, of 5 remlyr.

2.5 WASTE MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES STUDIED

Six a1 ternatives, designated- 1 through 6, were studied for long-. term management of the stored TRU waste (Alternatives for long-term

management of the buried TRU waste are being studied in connection with a Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for INEL TRU

. -

# , waste, in preparation. ) These a1 ternatives are identified in the simplified decision tree in Figure 2-1. For convenience, Tab.1e 2-1 , lists the waste management alternatives, and concepts within these

a1 ternatives, that were developed and evaluated.

Additional alternatives and concepts were identified, but were

not studied because they appeared to be less desirable. These alter-

natives and concepts, and reasons for not studying them, are discussed

in Appendix B.

The six major alternatives derive from three different premises:

(1) a Federal Repository will be available as scheduled, assumed for

this study to be in 1985; (2) a Federal Repository will be available

in the year 2005, and (3) a Federal Repository will not be available,

and the waste must remain at the INEL. Of the alternatives listed in

Figure 2-1 and Table 2-1, Alternative 3 falls into the first category;

Alternatives 4 and 6, the second, and Alternatives 1, 2, and 5, the third.

In Alternative 1, the TRU waste would be left in place as is.

The present cbver of plywood, polyvinyl sheeting, and 3 ft of soi 1

over the waste would be maintained. The present environmental sur-

veillance at the RWMC would be continued, with improved procedures

incorporated as they are developed. All these procedures would be

continued for 100 yr, the assumed minimum duration of sosietal~ control

over such activities. It was conservatively assumed that, after the 100-yr period, reliance would be placed entirely on the current waste

confinement system (containers, soil covering) for isolation from man

and protection of the environment.

Leave in place I I Add top 8 side barriers

I Improve confinement Add top & side & bottom concepl 2-b barriers

Alternative 2

lmmoblize in place Concept 2-c

Stored - and Federal Repository

TRU package

waste

- 20-year storage , Incinerate - Federal Repository

at the INEL ' \ . - and 4

package i

Retrieve as ' Deep rock disposal: shaft access - scheduled L Ship & dispose (in Lemhi Range) .

Direct - Compact, ' (1 985) Process on INEL I control immobilize, L

Deep rock disposal: tunnel access Alternative 5 retrieval - (in Lemhi Range)

-Engineered shallow land disposal (at Site 14)

1 Delav

Engineered surface facility (near RWMC)

Fig. 2-1 Alternatives and concepts studied for long-term management of stored INEL TRU waste.

. .

- - -, retrieval Ship & .

20 years Incinerate

and package

Direct

control retrieval

b

Process 9 Alternative 6

dispose - -

Federal Repository

TABLE 2-1

ALTERNATIVES AND CONCEPTS STUDIED FOR LONG-TERM 'MANAGEMENT OF STORED INEL TRU WASTE

A l t e r n a t i v e ~ o n c e p t D e s c r i p t i o n . .

. . 1 Leave As I s

P rov ide Improved Confinement

2-a Above and Around 2-b Above, Around, and Below 2-c I m n o b i l i z a t i o n

R e t r i e v e As Scheduled, Process, Sh ip To . . Fede ra l Repos i t o r y

D i rec t -Con t ro l R e t r i e v a l , S P ( ~ ) \ ' . . R e t r i e v e As Scheduled, process, S to re 20 Years, 1 Di rec t -Con t ro l R e t r i e v a l , SP'

R e t r i e v e As Sch'eduled, Process, Deep Rock D isposa l - Sha f t Access ( I n Lemhi Range l

D l r ec t -Con t ro l R e t r i e v a l . SP D i rec t -Con t ro l Ret r ieva l ; C P T ( ~ ) D i rec t -Con t ro l R e t r i e v a l , PKG(~ . )

R e t r i e v e As ' ~chedu led . Process. Deep Rock Disposa l - Tunnel Access . ( I n Lemhi Range)

D l r e c t - C o n t r o l R e t r i e v a l , SP D i rec t -Con t ro l R e t r i e v a l , CPT D i rec t -Con t ro l R e t r i e v a l , PKG

R e t r i e v e As Scheduled, Process, Engineered Shallow-Land Disposa l ( A t S i t e 141

D i r e c t - C o n t r o l R e t r i e v a l , SP D l rec t -Con t ro l R e t r i e v a l , CPT D i rec t -Con t ro l R e t r i e v a l , PKG

R e t r t e v e As scheduled, Process, D isposa l I n Engineered Sur face F a c i l i t y (Near RWMCL . , D i r e c t - C o n t r o l R e t r i e v a l , SP D i rec t -Con t ro l R e t r i e v a l , CPT D i rec t -Con t ro l R e t r i e v a l , PKG

. . Delay R e t r i e v a l 20 Years, Process, Sh ip To Federa l Repos i t o r y

D i rec t -Con t ro l R e t r i e v a l , SP

a) SP ,- S lagg in9 Py ro l ys i s . and Packaging [ b ) CPT - Compaction, I n m o b i l i z a t i o n , and Packaging ( c ) PKG - Packaging Only

I n A l t e r n a t i v e 2, the TRU waste would be l e f t i n place, bu t engi -

,neered confinement would be added. Three concepts.were s t yd ied as

' . ways of p r o v i d i n g t h i s a d d i t i o n a l p ro tec t i on . For a l l thr'ee concepts

o f improved confinement, t he present maintenance and s u r v e i l l a n c e a t

t he RWMC would be cont inued f o r 100 yr, as i n A l t e r n a t i v e 1, w i t h

improved procedures incorpora ted as they are developed.

I n A l t e r n a t i v e 3, the TRU,waste would be , re t r i eved as scheduled , , , (beginning i n 1985 and r e q u i r i n g 10 y r ) , i nc ine ra ted and immobi l ized

by s lagg ing p y r o l y s i s , packaged, and shipped by r a i l t o t he Federal

Repository. Each o f these operat ions ( r e t r i e v a l , processing, and

shipment) was evaluated as a separate module. 'The combination o f the

th ree modules c o n s t i t u t e s A l t e r n a t i v e 3.

I n A l t e r n a t i v e 4, the TRU waste would be r e t r i e v e d as scheduled

(beginning i n 1985 and r e q u i r i n g 10 y r ) , processed by slagg,ing py ro l y -

s i s , packaged, s to red i n a precast concrete . f a c i l i t y a t the RWMC f o r

20 y r , and shipped t o t h e (delayed) Federal Repos i to ry i n 2005.

I n A l t e r n a t i v e 5, the waste would be r e t r i e v e d as scheduled (be-

g inn ing i n 1985 and r e q u i r i n g 1 0 . y r ) , processed,'and disposed o f on

the INEL. The.concepts w i t h i n A l t e r n a t i v e 5 d i f f e r i n t he type o f

processing and i n t he method and l o c a t i o n o f d isposal . Processing

operat ions, .or .modu'les, s tud ied were the f o l l o w i n g : ( 1 ) s lagg ing p y r o l y s i s and packaging; (2 ) ' compaction, immobi l izat ion, and packag-

ing,; o r (3 ) packaging only . Disposal modules s tud ied were: . ( 1 ) deep

rock d isposal i n t he Lemhi Range w i t h access by a shaf t ; (2 ) deep rock '

d isposal i n the Lemhi Range w i t h access by a tunnel; ( 3 ) engineered

shal low-land d isposal at ' S i t e 14 (bo th massive and " l ess massive"

engineered s t r u c t u r e s were evaluated); or ( 4 ) d isposal i n an engi -

neered s u r f ace f ac i 1 i t y near t h e RWMC .

I n A l t e r n a t i v e 5, r e t r j e v a l would be delayed f o r 20 yr ( t o the

year 2005)'. Processing would i nvo l ve s l agging p y r o l y s i s and packag-

ing. The TRU waste would then be shipped t o the Federal Repository.

Exce&,for t h e 20-yr delay i n r e t r i e v a l , t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e i s i d e n t i c a l '

t o A l t e r n a t i v e 3.

Large u n c e r t a i n t i e s e x i s t i n f u t u r e r a t e s o f waste generat ion, i n

na t i ona l waste management p o l i c i e s of t h e future, and i n waste manage- e

ment p r a c t i c e s t h a t might be i n e f f e c t a f t e r implementation begins fo r

t h e se lec ted TRU waste management a l t e r n a t i v e . Therefore, t h e evalua-

t i o n s and f a c i l i t y layouts f o r t h i s study do no t r e f l e c t the e f f e c t s

o f TRU waste t h a t ,might be rece ived a t t he RWMC a f t e r t h e s t a r t o f t h e

campaign (1985). These e f f e c t s are discussed i n Appendix C. v

2.6 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF ALTERNATIVES

For each a1 t e r n a t i ve and concept, t he p o t e n t i a1 r a d i o l o g i c a l

and nonrad io log i ca l e f f e c t s o'n the envi.ronment were evaluated. These

e f fec ts would de r i ve f rom the. f o l l owing phases: s i t e prepa;ation and

cons t ruc t ion , p l a n t operat ion, and decontamination and decommission-

i n g a f t e r complet ion o f t he waste management campaign. . .

2.6.1 Nonrad io log ica l E f f e c t s . Tables 2-2 and 2-3'summarize

q u a n t i f i a b l e non rad io log i ca l e f f e c t s expected dur ing t h e . c o n s t r u c t i o n

phase and opera t ions phase, respec t i ve l y . These summary t a b l e s h igh-

l i g h t o n l y some o f the major e f fec ts . For example, p o l l u t a n t emis-

s ions are summarized by g i v i n g o n l y t h e est imates f o r p a r t i c u l a t e s ,

because t h a t i s the o n l y a i r p o l l u t a n t on the INEL t h a t i s now near

t h e a l lowab le 1 i m i t s .

For a l l a l t e r n a t i v e s and concepts except A l t e r n a t i v e 1, a i r

q u a l i t y would be impacted by increased emissions f rom cons t ruc t i on

equipment and increased generat ion of dust. These impacts would be

minor and would occur o n l y dur ing t h e cons t ruc t i on phase. None o f t h e

a i r p o l l u t a n t s would exceed o f f s i t e standards.

Several aspects of cons t ruc t i on a c t i v i t i e s cou ld cause adverse

impacts when occu r r i ng near sur face waters. Such a c t i v i t i e s inc lude:

(1 ) withdrawal o f water f o r use i n cons t ruc t i on o r f o r human in take;

(2 ) discharge o f wastewater such as s a n i t a r y wastewater; (3 ) g rave l o r

c l a y min ing f rom stream o r lake bottoms; and ( 4 ) eros ion o f construc-

t i o n areas by surface r u n o f f and r e s u l t a n t s i l t a t i o n of streams.

TABLE 2-2

SUMMARY OF QUANTITATIVE NONRADIOLOGICAL IMPACTS (CONSTRUCTION PHASE )

- --lx-w------ ------ -- P a r t i 'culate Labor - e m

I Em ss ion 1 f a )

(man- U s p e Concept C l ay Concrete (10 I b s ) years) (10 g a l )

I

5-9 L M V ( ~ )

5-h LMV

5 - i " LMV

6 0

See ~ a b l e s ' 12-6

( a ) From d iese l -powered, cons t ruc t i on equipment; assumes a1 1 cons t ruc t i on proceeding simultaneously.

( b ) LMV i d e n t i f i e s use o f the l ess massive v a r i a t i o n o f the engineered 'shal low- land d isposal f a c i l i t y a t S i t e 14.

TABLE 2-3 -- SUMMARY OF QUANTITATIVE NONRADIOLOGICAL IMPACTS

(OPERATIONS PHASE) -- ----------

E n i g y U s e d p Par t i cu l ate. Land ~ m ~ l o y m e n t ( b ) Dies51 E l e c t r i c

Emissions Usage ( 1 0 6 (10 (106 concept (10 31b ly r ) ( a ) (acres) Jobs - $ / y r ) a l l y r ) kwh ly r )

2-a 2-b 2-c

3

4

5 -a 5-b 5-c

5-d 5-e 5-f

5-9 LMV (d)

5-h LMV

5- i LMV

, . . . .

. , 6 0.95 1.9 230 3.9 88 25 '

. .

See Tables 12-7 12-3 12-9 12-9 12-9 12-9

(a ) From d iese l veh i c les or s lagg ing .py ro l ys i s f a c i l i t y stack, only .

. . ( b ) D i r e c t employment only; income i n 1977 d o l l a r s .

[c ) No incremental land usage beyond area i n the RWMC c u r r e n t l y i n u s e .

( d ) LMV i d e n t i f i e s use o f t h e l e s s massive v a r i a t i o n o f t h e engineered sh,allow-land d isposal f a c i l i t y a t S i t e 14.

Increased noise l eve l s from construction would be localized. Impacts on vegetation would be limited t o removal of natural vege-

t a t i on from the construction s i t e and from INEL areas used fo r extrac- t ion of consfruction mater ia ls , such as c lay, gravel , and basa l t .

Habitat and eover fo r w i ld l i f e would a lso be reduced, b u t even the concept resul t ing in the maximum habi ta t loss would a f f ec t only about

400 acres, or 0.07% of the t o t a l acreage of the INEL. Use of the Lemhi Range disposal s i t e s could r e s u l t in removing an additional

8,000 acres of grazing land in the form of a buffer zone. No other conf l i c t s were iden t i f i ed with any known plans or policy re la ted t o land use adjacent t o or within the boundaries of the INEL.

I Construction of waste management f a c i l i t i e s would r e su l t in

I long-term or i r r eve r s ib l e commitment of some natural resources. In

pa r t i cu l a r , the engineered shallow-land.disposa1 f a c i l i t y (except f o r :I

the l ess massive var ia t ion) and the engimeered surface disposal fa-

c i l i t y would require large quan t i t i es of concrete. Construction would a lso require the commitment of nonrenewable energy resources, such as

I -petroleum products. Commitment of labor hours and funds fo r design and construction would be unrecoverable.

Construction of any of the waste management f a c i l i t i e s would

not detr.act s i gn i f i c an t l y from the ex i s t ing aes the t ic qua1 i t y of the INEL. Retrieval and process f a c i l i t i e s constructed a t the RWMC would .

be v i s ib l e from a public roadway. The slagging pyrolysis f a c i l i t y stack would be par t i cu la r ly prominent.

Added employment during construction or operation of any of

I the f a c i l i t i e s would not be expected t o have a major socioeconomic

I impact. In June 1978, t o t a l INEL employmen't was approximately

9400 people. By comparison, the maximum d i r ec t employment during construction of waste management f a c i l i t i e s would be 435 people.

During the operational phase, d i r ec t employment would be an estimated 273 people. Idaho Fa l l s would be the major c i t y impacted by influx of

cons t ruc t i on or opera t iona l personnel. However, complet ion o f e x i s t -

i n g cons t ruc t i on p r o j e c t s dur ing the 1985 t ime frame would provide a

pool o f ava i l ab le workers w i thout a.major i n f l u x o f personnel. No

major impacts on'housing, schools, hosp i ta ls , o r rec rea t iona l f a c i l i -

t i e s were i d e n t i f i e d .

. .. . . -,- -. . ... .

Although archaeological a r t i f a c t s have been c o l l e c t e d i n the

v i c i n i t y o f each o f t h e th ree ons i te d isposal l oca t ions studied, no

d e t a i l e d archaeological surveys have been made. INEL opera t ing pro-

cedures r e q u i r e p r o t e c t i o n o f a n t i q u i t i e s . Reconnaissance would be

made by a q u a l i f i e d archaeologist p r i o r t o and dur ing excavation f o r

construct ion.

2.6.2 Rad io log ica l E f fec ts . Two t ime per iods were considered i n

eva lua t ing t h e e f f e c t s o f t he normal' opera t iona l releases o f rad io -

nucl ides: ( 1 ) t he pe r iod o f up t o 100 yr f o l l o w i n g implementation o f

an a1 t e r n a t i v e or concept; and (2) the post 100-yr period. (Acci -

denta l re leases o f rad ionuc l i des were evaluated as p a r t o f the r i s k

ana lys is i n t h e study.)

For a l l a l t e r n a t i v e s and concepts, the r a d i o l o g i c a l dose com-

m i tments(a) t o the general pub1 i c from normal opera t iona l re1 eases

would be a very small f r a c t i o n o f t he na tu ra l background dose. The

whole-body dose from na tu ra l background r a d i a t i o n i n southeastern

Idaho i s abou't 150 mremlyr. For any o f t he a l t e r n a t i v e s o r con-

cepts, t he maximum whole-body dose commitment t o an i n d i v i d u a l ,

r e s u l t i n g from one year o f normal operat ion, was ca l cu la ted t o be

1.9x10-' mren (see Table 2-4). The dose commitments t o the pop-

u l a t i o n l i v i n g w i t h i n 50 m i les are summarized i n Table 2-5.

(a) Hereaf ter , the term "dose" i s o f t e n used f o r b r e v i t y . However, . i t should be understood t h a t dose commitment i s meant, evaluated

as described i n Appendix E.

, a , * , . . . , T i , . . .. . . . ? ' TABLE 2-4 . ' ,..

, . . .

. , . '

. MAXIMUM'INDIVIDUAL LIFETIME DOSE COMMITMENTS RESULTING FROM ONE YEAR OF NORMAL' OPERATION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES

A1 t e r n a t i ve/ Maximum I n d i v i d u a l Dose Commi tment (mrem) t o Organ o r T issue Concept Whole Body Lung Bone L i v e r K i dney

TABLE 2-5 . + . . .

LIFETIME POPULATION DOSE COMMITMENTS RESULTING FROM ONE YEAR OF NORMAL OPERATION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES

L i fe t ime P o ~ u l a t i o n 'Dose Commitment A1 t e r n a t i ve/ To organ o r Tissue (man-rem)

Concept Whole Body Lung Bone L i v e r Kidney

2.7 RADIOLOGICAL RISKS TO THE PUBLIC

The same time periods were considered in evaluating the radiological e f f ec t s on the pub1 i c from uncontrolled (accidental or nature- caused) releases of radionuclides: (1 ) the period of up t o 100 yr following implementation of an a1 te rna t ive or concept, and (2 ) the

post 100-yr period. The following potential causes of re lease were studied: process and hand1 i ng accidents, natural d i s a s t e r s (e.g.,

earthquakes), and a i rplane crashes. The re1 ease consequences were calculated f o r a l l the operational s teps , or modules, making up each a l t e rna t i ve or concept.

For each a l t e rna t ive and concept, the radiological r i sk was ,

estimated f o r the short-term period. Risk was defined as the prob- a b i l i t y tha t a re lease of radioact ive material wil l occur, mult iplied by t he consequences of the re lease in terms of the radia t ion dose

commitment received. For the long-term period, only the dose commitment f o r scenarios of uncontrolled re lease was calculated. Estimates

of long-term probabi l i t i e s were considered t o be too uncertain t o be r e l i ab l e .

Table 2-6 summarizes the dose and r i sk from short-term ( u p t o

100 y r ) re lease scenarios f o r a l l ' a l t e rna t ives and concepts. For brevi ty , only calcula t ions involving dose t o the lung, the organ of

maximum dose, are presented. The scenario of g rea tes t inportance in

a l l instances i s lava flow over the waste, leading t o possible a i r -

borne relea'se of a f rac t ion of the radionuclides present. (Even f o r Alternatives 3 through 6, involving r e t r i eva l of the waste, t he lava

flow scenario i s predominant because of the pos s ib i l i t y of' lava flow disrupt ing waste t ha t would not yet have been re t r ieved. For sim-

p l i c i t y ; however, t he short-term lava Tlow scenar io ' fo r Alterna- t i v e s 3 through 6 has been deleted from the t ab l e . ) The operational scenarios of g rea tes t import (Alternatives 3 through 6) are (1 ) an explosion in the slagging pyrolysis f a c i l i t y , and (2 ) a f i r e i n the r e t r i eva l f a c i l i t y . The population r i sk from even the dominant scenar io (10 man-rem/yr) would be small compared with t h a t from natural

background radia t ion t o the same population (24,000 man-rem/yr).

TABLE 2-6

Maximum Dose To ta l R i s k , Maximum t o Maximum t o Maximum ~ o ~ u l a t i o n ' To ta l ' ~ i s k

. I nd i v i dua l . I.ndividua.1. Dose' t o Popu 1 a t i on .

A1 t e r n a t i velconcept .. . . (rem) , ( remly r ) (man-rem) (man-remlyr) . . , .

1 1 x 1 o2 6 x 1 ~ - 3 zX1o5 ' 1

. . 1x10

Natura l Background . . ~ ' ~ o x I o - ~ Radiat ion "

(a) E f f ec t s repor t& here are f o r lung dose only.

(b) Short-term accidents inc lude re lease scenarios occur r ing no more than 100 y r i n t o the f u t u r e f o r A l t e rna t i ve 1 and 2. For A l t e rna t i ves 3 through 6, en t r i e s inc lude on ly campaign-re1 ated events. En t r i e s do not inc lude poss ib le releases due t o na tu ra l events or a i r c r a f t impacts d i s r u p t i n g waste. s t i 11 unre t r ieved .dur ing r e t r i e v a l campaign (10-yr

, per iod) . I n c l us i on o f such events would cause en t r i e s t o be s i m i l a r ' t o those f o r A1 t e r n a t i v e 1. f o r t h a t ' t ime ' per iod. .For . A l t e r n a t i v e 4, -

'

e n t r i e s l i s t e d do not inc lude re lease scenarios f o r na tu ra l events occur- . ' r i n g wh i le processed waste . i s i n storage dur ing 1985-2005. I nc l us i on o f

such events would, have l i t t l e e f f ec t . For A1 t e rna t i ve ,6, e n t r i e s l i s t e d p e r t a i n t o t ime a f t e r campaign s t a r t s i n 2005. From 1985 through 2005, en t r i e s f o r AJternat ive 1 would apply. For A l t e rna t i ve 5 , on l y re leases occur r ing p r i o r t o or dur ing empl acement (10-yr per iod ) are included.

( c ) Release scenarios i nvo l v i ng sabotage have been evaluated i n a r e l a t e d ' -study. The r e s u l t s o f t h a t study have been pub1 ished i n 'a p re l im ina r y

repor t . , t h a t i s s l a s s i f i e d ... . . . .

(d) E f f ec t s of poss ib le releases , .occurr ing a t the Federal Reposi tory are not inc luded f o r A l t e rna t i ves 3, 4, and 6, because these e f f e c t s are be ing evaluated i n other DOE pro jec ts .

'(e) See Subsections 7 14.1 .and 13 .2 . fo r add i t i ona l .explanat ions o f scope and assumptions. :,

( f ) .Entries apply t o e i t h e r more massive or less massive v a r i a t i o n o f the engineered shallow-1 and disposal f a c i l i t y a t S i t e 14.

. . \ .

A summary of projected e f fec t s from long-term (greater than 100 y r ) re lease scenarios fo r each a1 te rna t ive or concept i s given in Table 2-7. All en t r i e s are calculated values of population dose to t he lung fo r the dominant re lease scenario, which i s e i t he r lava flow over the waste or a volcanic eruption up through the waste. The maxi-

5 m u m estimated population dose i s 4x10 man-rem. Double en t r i e s a t a given time indicate the e f f ec t s before and a f t e r hypothesized times of complete deter iora t ion of confinement fo r disposal . For s impl ic i ty , such deter iora t ion was assumed t o occur instantaneously ra ther than gradually. The indicated times of confinement deter iora t ion are highly conjectural .

The supplement following Table 2-7 presents the same data points in graphic form, with connecting curves through the points. The increase in dose between zero and one hundred years i s due t o the assumed population growth during the f i r s t hundred years. Also indicated i s the level of natural background radia t ion, the population dose t h a t i s ce r ta in t o accrue each year. (No e f f o r t was made t o est imate the possible decay of background radia t ion. ) By comparison, t he curves fo r the waste management a l t e rna t ives represent doses from highly ,unlikely volcanic action events.

Entries in Tables 2-6 and 2-7 have generally been rounded t o one

s i gn i f i c an t f igure . The uncer ta int ies of the calculated doses and r i s k s are estimated generally t o be f ac to r s of one to two orders of

magnitude, both upward and downward. Such uncer ta int ies do not have a major impact on the significance of doses and r i s k s t ha t are already extremely small .

The t r a i n crews involved in shipping the waste t o the Federal

Repository would comprise approximately 90 people. These people would receive a population dose of about 1 man-remlyr. The calculated dose t o a l l crew members would be well below published standards. The general public along the route would receive a population dose of about 0.05 man-remlyr .

TABLE 2-7

SUMMARY OF CONSE~UENCES FROM LONG-TERM RELEASE SCENARIOS(~)

YEARS AFTER 1985 A'1-ternat i ve/ . . 100 400 2000 25000

Concept o ACF~C BCF ACF . BC: ACF -- - - 2-a 4 x 1 0 ~ (d) 8x104 (d) 4x105 3x105 'lx105 4x104 2-b 4x104 (d) 8x104 (d) 4x105 3x105 '1 ~ 1 0 5 4x104

' 2-c .2x103 . 4x103 3x103 3x105 1x105 4 x 1 0 ~ .

3 No long-term management o f stored TRU waste a t the INEL(e)

4 No long-term management o f stored TRU waste a t the INEL(e)

5-a through 5-f ' (Lemhi Ran-ge) 4x10~ 8 x 1 0 ~ 6 x 1 0 ~ 2x10' (*I 8 x 1 0 ~

5-9 through j-i 4x1;~ ( d l ( S i t e 14) ( )

5-9 t h r ugh 5 - i (LHV)?O,~) . 1x103 (d)

- 5 - j t h r o 4 x 1 0 ~ 8 x 1 0 ~ 6 x 1 0 ~ (d) 2 x 1 0 ~ ( d l 8 x 1 0 ~ 4 x 1 0 ~

(e 1 6 No long-term management o f stored TRU waste a t the INEL

(a ) A l l en t r i es are the ca lcu la ted values of populat ion dose t o the Jung, i n man-rem, f o r the dominant release scenario.

(b ) BCF = Before Confinement Fa i lu re .

(c) ACF = A f te r Confinement Fa i lu re .

( d ) Explosive volcanic erupt ion i s dominant release scenario. For a l l other entr ies, lava f l ow i s dominant release scenario.

(e ) Long-term e f f e c t s o f ,disposal of TRU waste a t the Federal Repository are being ,evaluated i n other DOE-sponsored studies.

( f ) Resistance t o explosive volcanic erupt ion assumed t o be a fac tor o f 100 be t te r than t h a t f o r Concepts 2-a and ZTb, as . long as f a c i l i t y has not d is in tegra ted.

( g ) Resistance t o explosiBe volcanic erupt ion assumed t o be a fac tor of 40 be t te r tha.n t h a t f o r Concepts 2-a and 2-b, as long as f a c i l i t y has not d is in tegra ted.

(h) LMV i d e n t i f i e s the use o f the less massive v a r i a t i o n o f the engiqeered shallow-land disposal f a c i l i t y a t S i t e 14.

. ,

. . . .

. . .

, .

. . .

0 100 4 00 1,000 2.000 . 10,000. 25,000 100,000.

Time o f re lease scenar io (yr a f t e r 1985)

supplement t o Table 2-7 - . ' I

(summary of Consequences f rom ~ o n g - ~ e r m ke lease ,Scenario's). .

. . . . J . : ' .

Health e f f ec t s experienced by the public as a consequence of the waste management operations and of uncontroll ed re1 eases were pro-

jected. No short-term health e f f ec t s (occurring within about one year of the exposure) would be expected. Long-term e f f e c t s ( t yp i ca l l y

occurring several . years a f te r exposure) could occur. However such

e f f ec t s , both somatic and genetic, would not be expected s t a t i s t i - , ,

ca l ly . That i s , (1 ) the mathematically expected number .of. e f f ec t s ' i s nearly zero, and (2 ) t he most probable number of ' e f f ec t s i s zero.

2.8 HAZARDS TO T H E WORKERS

Both radiological and nonradiological hazards t o the workers who

would implement each a1 te rna t ive or concept were evaluated on a pre- 1 iminary basis. The nonradiological' hazards evaluated were those :

1 eading to common i f~dus t r l a1 accidents such as ' f a a l l s , burns, and 8

e l e c t r i c shock. For each a l t e rna t ive and concept, the projected numbers of i n ju r i e s and f a t a l i t i e s from such accidents a re given in Table 2-8. As .might be expected, the g rea tes t numbers of projected i n ju r i e s and f a t a l i t i e s are associated with the a l t e rna t ives and . , .

cbncepts tha t would involve r e t r i eva l and processing of the waste

(Alternatives 3 through 6) . Construction and operatSon of the slag- ;1 o

ging pyrolysis f a c i l i t y would contribute a major portion of such in- j u r i e s f o r concepts containing t h i s module. However, these numbers of i n ju r i e s are no higher than those expected in s imilar industr ia1,oper- a t ions of the same ievel of e f fo r t .

Radiological hazards t ha t were evaluated include the exposure of workers to radia t ion and possible contamination by radioact ive material s . Hazards associated with normal operations and hazards associated with potential accidents were both considered.

Conservat i ve estimates of radi a t i on exposures t o the workers

during normal operations are summarized in Table 2-9. Summed over the workers involved, the ' 1 argest exposures in man-rem would accrue t o

TABLE 2-8

PROJECTED NONRAOIOLOGICAL INJLRIES An0 FATALITIES TO UASTE WAGEHENT VORKERS ,

Manpaer Comnitm t n ar ous A c t i v i t i e s \ a l ( 1 3 m:n-lou:s) Estimated ~ k e r o f ~ n j u r i e s ( b ) Estimated Number o f ~ a t a l i t i e s ( b )

Con- ~ m - 01s- Sur- Con- Pro- Dis- Sur- Con- Pro- DiS- bur- struc- Re- cess- posal l v e i l - struc- Re- cess- posal l v e i l - ' s t ruc - Re- cess- posal l v e i l - t i o n t r i e v a l ing Storage lance t i o n t r t eva l in^ Storage lance t i o n t r i e v a l .- Storage lance -- N / A ( ~ ) NIA N/A N/A 2.1(1) N/A NlA NIA N/A 4.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0

Alterna- t i v e or Concept

1

o.o3(6i N/A N/A NIA N/A NIA N/A 4.4 <o.l(d) N/A NIA 0 O.ll(6.2) N/A NIA N/A : ) : N/A NlA NlA 4.4 c0.1 N/ A 0.00(2) NIA N/A N/A 2.1(11 0.2 N/A N/A N/A 4.4 -0.1 N/ A N/ A N/A 0

N/A N/A 0

5-fnv(f) 5-h

LMV 5-4

LMV

Alterna- t i v e or Concept

1

. .Hazards o f Truck Shipment Truck-MilesWI Accidents In ju r i es - - Hazards of Ra i l Shipment

F a t a l i t l e s tar-Miles Accidents In ju r i es F a t a l i t i e s --- N/A N/A N/A N/ A N/A

Totals (For A l l A c t i v i t i e s l I n ju r i es F a t a l i t i e s

N/ A N/ A N/A N l A N/A N/A NIA N/ A N/A

~ 0 . 1 5.3x106 0.7 2 0.1

e0.1 N/A N/A NIA NlA 4 . 1 NIA N I A NlA N/A 4. 1 N/A . MIA N/A N/A

40.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A 4 . 1 4 . 1 !5! NIA !fi N/A

N/A N/A

5-9 u v

5-h LMV

5-1 LMV

1.2~105 0.2 0.1 4 . 1 NIA NIA 1.2~105

N/A 0.2 0.1 ~ o . 1 ? I n N/ A N/A

N/A

1.0X105 0.2 <O. 1 <O. 1 NIA NIA NIA N/A NlA

1.0~105 0.2 eo. 1 <O.I N ~ A N ~ A N/A

n i~ 1 1x105 0.2 <O. 1 eO.1 NIA N/A 1:1x105

NIA 0.2 4 . 1 ~ 0 . 1 N/A N/A N/A M/A

5 - j 4 21\03 '0.1 <0.1 r0.1 NlA N/A N/ A N/ A 109 0.7 5-k 3'9x103 <O. 1 .4.1 -0.1 N/A NIA N/A NIA 44 0.3 5-1 , 4:0x103 0 . 1 4 . 1 =O. 1 N/A . N/A N/A NIA 3? 0.3

6 2.7~103 (0.1 4 . 1 0 . 5.3x106 0.7 2 0.1 lOl+NI O.B+NI

(a) Numbers i n parentheses refer t o conparable industr ies for which accident ra tes were used (see Table 14-2).

(b) Actual calculated values are reported. Fract ional values have meaning only f o r comparison purposes. Nonzero resu l t s less than 0.1 are shorn t o ind icate small hazard.

(c) N/A - Not Applicable.

(d) , - Less .than.

( e l N l = Not Included ( re lates to operations a t the Federal Repository).

( 1 ) LW = Use o f the less massive var ia t ion of engineer8d shallow-land disposhl a t S i te 14.

(9) Includes mileage from r e t r i e v a l t o processing f a c i l i t y and f r ~ ~ m processing t o onsi te disposal or storage f a c i l i t y .

TABLE 2-9

ESTIMATED WORKER DOSES FROM NORMAL OPERATIONS (man-rem)(a) ,

R e t r i e v a l Processing Onsi te Truck Shipment Disposal IStaraqe Kaintenance/Survei 11 ance Number To ta l Number To ta l Number To ta l Number To ta l Number To ta l

A1 t e r n a t i v e l o f Dose o f Dose o f Oose o f loose o f Dose Concept Workers (man-rem) Workers (man-rem) Workers (man-rem) Workers (ran-rem) ~ o r k e r s ( b ) (man-rem)

To ta l Oose f o r

Concept

5-9 L M V ( ~ )

- 5-h LMV

5 - i LMV

(a ) To ta l est imated operat ions-re lated exposure t o whole body .for du ra t ion o f operations.

(b) Surve i l l ance personnel f o r 10 y r f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 4, 20 y r f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 6, and 100 y r f o r ~ : t e r n a t i v e s 1, 2, and 5.

( c ) N/A = Not app l i cab le . . ,

( d ) Covering, g rou t ing and immobi l izat ion personnel working f o r 2 y r .

. (e ) c = Less than.

( f ) < < =Much less than.

( g ) N I = Not i-ncluded i n t h i s est imate (appl ies t o Federal Reposj tory workers).

(h ) LMV = Use o f l ess massive v a r i a t i o n o f engineered shal low-land d isposal a t S i t e 14.

workers in operations fo r waste retr ' ieval and f o r slagging pyrolysis. All. normal operational doses would be expected t o be well below the standard of 5 rem/yr.

A number of potential accidents were considered fo r t h e i r radiological e f f ec t s on the workers. I t was concluded t h a t , by use of su i t ab l e equipment and by adherence t o safe operating procedures, the . :.

hazard from radiological accidents could be controlled t o within normal 1 y accepted 1 eve1 s .

2.9 COSTS OF ALTERNATIVES

Cost estimates f o r the a1 te rna t ives and concepts studied are summarized in Table 2-10. A l l est imates are based on 1978 do l la r s . Included are capi ta l costs , operating and maintenance (O&M) cos t s , and cos t s fo r D&D of f a c i l i t i e s . Some of the ind i rec t capi ta l cos t s , such as s i t e character izat ion and environmental preparation, are not included. Where applicable, the cos t s of shipping the waste t o the Federal Repository (o r to any other disposal s i t e studied) and of long-term management of the waste a t the Federal Repository are included. The l a t t e r cost was assumed t o be applied as a one-time accept'ance cost upon receipt of the waste a t the Federal Repository. Although the cost would not be assessed in t h i s manner, the item was included here in the i n t e r e s t of presenting more complete estimates.

The cost estimates are not considered budgetary cost est imates,

because they are based on the limited amount of preconceptual design performed during the study. The est imates have large associated uncer ta int ies . No posi t ive statement of the uncer ta int ies can be given. However, experience indicate's t ha t uncer ta int ies of as much as a f ac to r of two are not unusual in t h i s type of estimate. Despite the uncertainty, the cost estimates are useful f o r comparisons of a l t e rna t ives and concepts.

- TABLE. 2-10

SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED COSTS(~)

A1 ter- Cost at native Total Shipment Costs Federal or Capital O&M Reposi- D&D ' Total

Concept Cost Cost Onsite Offsite . tory Cost Cost

5-a 161 5-b 106 5-c 95 5-d. 161 5 -e 106 5-f 96 5 -9 295 LMV(~) 155 5-h 21 1 LMV 102 5-i 420 LMV 107 5- j 227 5-k 176 5-1 .329

(a) All costs are in millions of mid-July 1978 dollars.

(b) N/A.= Not Applicable.

(c) LMV identifies the use of the less massive variation of the engineered shallow-land disposal facility at Sits 14.

Table 2-10 ind i ca tes t h a t t he lowest costs would be associated

! w i t h A l t e r n a t i v e s 1 and 2, ranging f rom $60 m i l i i ' o n t o $71 m i l l i o n .

The cos t t o r e t r i e v e and process the waste and t o sh ip i t t o the

Federal Reposi tory and dispose o f i t the re would range from $371 m i l -

l i o n t o $389 m i l l i o n ( A l t e r n a t i v e s 3, 4, and 6). The range o f costs r e f l e c t s t h e impact o f a 20-yr delay, b u t i t does no t i nc lude t h e

e f f e c t s of i n f l a t i o n . The cos t o f r e t r i e v a l , processing, and o n s i t e

d isposal would range from $228 m i l 1 i o n t o $567 m i 11 ion, depending on

t h e methods o f processing and o f disposal.

2.10 COMPARISONS

The a l t e r n a t i v e s and concepts s tud ied f o r long-term management

o f t h e s tored TRU waste were compared on t h e bas is o f environmental ' '

e f f e c t s , r i s k t o the pub l i c , hazards t o workers, costs, and o ther fac-

to rs . ' Competing modules (e.g., s l agging p y r o l y s i s versus compactiori

and immobi 1 i z a t i o n ) were a1 so compared.

The r e s u l t s o f t he comparisons are discussed i n Sect ion 17.

Because Sect ion 17 i s no t lengthy, and because the d iscussion o f com-

par isons could not r e a d i l y be abridged wi thout hazard o f m is in te rp re -

t a t i o n , t h a t d iscussion i s no t summarized here. Therefore, t h e reader

i s r e f e r r e d t o Sect ion 17 f o r t h e f u l l t e x t o f t h e comparisons~.

. .

The environmental setting of the alternative disposal sites studied for long-term management of TRU wasteistored at the INEL is described in this section. The four disposal sites, i.e., ,RWMC (pre- , .

sent location . .. . , of * the waste), Site 14, and the two, sites in the Lemhi Range, are within the INEL boundaries. General descriptions of the environmental characteristics of the INEL are given in the following subsections. Where there are local differences among these locations within the INEL, the differences are described. However, the informa tion is preliminary, and the exact facility locations at Site 14 and

. ' . , the em hi . ' ( Range have not yet been determined. Local variations may result in slightly different environments from those described here. Detailed , , . ?tudies and exploration to determine the geologic and hydrologic characteristics of Site 14 and the emh hi Range sites would be required before implementation.

The INEL is located at the foot of the Lost River, Lemhi, and Beaverhead mountain ranges along the western edge of the Eastern Snake River Plain in southeastern Idaho. Most of the INEL lies in Butte County, although it also extends into Bingham, Bonneville, Jefferson, and Clark counties. The relative location of the INEL within Idaho is shown in the upper left corner of Figure 3-1.

The four sites.within the INEL are also identified on Figure 3-1.

The Lemhi Range sites are located at the northwest edge of the INEL at the base of the Lemhi Mountain Range; Site 14 is located in the cen-

tral area of the INEL; and the RWMC is located in the southwestern part of the INEL.

MILES . . , . .

Fig. 3-1 Locat ion and p r i n c i p a l f ea tu res o f the I N E L .

. : . . . . . . . . : . $ 4 . .

The Eastern Snake R iver P l a i n i s r e l a t i v e l y f l a t , w i t h an average

e l e v a t i o n of 4900 f t above me,an sea l e v e l (MSL). W i th in t h e INEL,

e leva t i ons general l y range 'from 4.750 f t t o 5200 f t (See Figure. 3-2).

Exceptions i n c l u d e t h e Twin But tes i n t he southeastern b a r t o f t he

INEL and the I em hi . . Mountain Range, which extends i n t o the. northwestern

area o f INEL. ,The Twin But tes reach an . . . . e l e v a t i o n , o f approximately

6400 ft, and t h e Lemhi Range w i t h i n t h e INEL reaches a,rnaximum eleva-

t i o n o f approximately 6300 Pt . . . . . .

Most o f the INEL slopes s i i g h t l y t o w a r d the nor theast (see

F igu re '3 -2) . A broad topographic r i d g e e i tehds f rom the t w i n bu t tes

i n a 'northward d i r c c t i o n through . thc INEL. Th i s r i ,dge : e f f e c t i v e l y

sepacates the drainage o f t h e mountain ranges on t h e nokth and west

o f t t ie INEL f rom the Snake River , which f l ows from north. t o south

on the eastern,,edge o f ,the p l a i n . Natura l drainage on t h e INEL i s

t o the f o u r playds. in..the .northwestern p a r t o f the INEL (see,>Sub-

s e c t i o n 3.5). . ' . . .,, . .

I . ' . .

The RWMC has an a h r a g e e leva t i on o f about- 5000 f t above-:MSL . . and '. : slopes . t o . . . t h e . , nor theast . . , S i t e 14 has an .dv6rage' e l e v a t i o n o f approxi - :

a , . , . .

mate ly 4800 f t anti sibpes t o the northwest:. The ..., .,Lemhi ,I Range s i t e s are.

loca ted a t e l e v a t i ons o f approximately 5 ~ 0 0 f t ( tunne l access) and . . .

4950 f t ( s h a f t access.). . .

! . . ...( a.1 .. ..: 3.3 CLIMATE AND METEOROLOGY (Yinskey, ~ i r k i i r ,

', an.d ,.jicht'er ,.9'6.6)

The Nat ional Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin i s t ra t i on (NOAA) has

operated: a meteorological observat ion program a t t he INEL s ince 1949. . . . . . . . ...*. . . :. I . , " ' ..

I n add i t i . o n ~ ' " t o : ' ' ~ e ~ o . r d + ~ n ~ . : . ~ ~ d 8 ~ - . t ~ . :heat her data and p r o v i d i ng da i l y , : . . . . . .

. . . . . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., .. i . .

(a ) The referenced r e p o r t (Yanskey, Marker, and R ich te r 1966) covers the t ime p e r i o d from 1954 t o 1966. Data s ince 1966 have been c o l l e c t e d and w i l l be incorpora ted i n a r e p o r t t o be publ ished i n 1979.

0 5 10 15

J . . . . . .

MILES . .

pig. .- --- 3-2 - . Sp=phiic - - - . map o f *-:;IEQ

o p c r a t i o n a l fo recas ts f o r t he INEL, t h e NOAA s t a f f ma in ta i ns an exten-

s i v e research and development (R&D) program t o improve t h e r e 1 i a b i l i t y

o f p r e d i c t i o n and meas~trement o f me teo ro log i ca l parameters t h a t i n -

f l u e n c e opera t ions on t h e INEL. A number o f me teo ro log i ca l s t a t i o n s

are l o c a t e d th roughout t h e INEL t o measure s imu l taneo i~s l , y t h e v a r i a -

t i o n o f severa l me teo ro log i ca l parameters, such as temperature, wind

speed, and wind d i r e c t i o n , up t o a h e i g h t o f 250 f t above t he ground.

The c l i m a t e a t t h e INEL i s semiar id , w i t h steppe cha rac te r -

i s t i c s . The topographic f e a t u r e s t h a t a f f e c t t h e INEL weather p a t -

t e r n s a re t h e nor theast -southwest o r i e n t a t i o n o f t h e p l a i n and t h e

mountain ranges t o . t h e n o r t h and west.

The o r i e n t a t i o n o f t h e p l a i n on which t h e INEL i s situated and'

t he t r e n d o f t he mountain-ranges tend t o channel t he p r e v a i l i n g west

winds o f t h i s l a t i t u t d e so t h a t a southwest t o no r t heas t f l o w near t h e

su r f ace predominates over most o f t he INEL. A i r masses e n t e r i n g t h e

Snake R i v e r P l a i n f i r s t must c ross mountain b a r r i e r s , where a l a r g e

percentage o f a i r mo i s tu re i s p r e c i p i t a t e d . Annual r a i n f a l l a t t he .

INEL i s t h e r e f o r e l i g h t ,

~ e t e o r o l o g i c a l and c l i m a t o l o g i c a l da ta summarized. i n t h i s s e c t i o n

a re f r o m NOAA's m o n i t o r i n g program and i nc l ude : temper.ature, wind,

p r e c i p i t a t i o n , evaporat ion, r e l a t i v e humid i t y , and severe weather

cond i t i ons .

3.3.1 Temperature. Dur ing t h e 22-yr p e r i o d o f record, t h e

extremes o f temperatures have v a r i e d f rom a low o f - 4 3 ' ~ i n January

t o a h i g h o f 1 0 3 ' ~ i n Ju ly . Dur ing w i n t e r t he average maximum tem-

pe ra tu re i s approx imate ly 27OF, w i t h an average minimum o f approx i -

ma te l y 3 '~ . The summer da ta i n d i c a t e an average maximum temperature

o f 8 7 ' ~ and an average minimum o f about 50'~. Normal weather a t

t h e INEL i i i z l i i des ai l i i lba. t ic lapse c o n d i t i o n s (temperature decrease

w i t 5 h e i g h t ) d u r i n g day1 i g h t hours and i n v e r s i o n c o n d i t i o n s (tempera-

t u r e inc rease w i t h h e i g h t ) f r om about sunset u n t i l s h o r t l y a f t e r sun-

r i s e . Winds and c louds assoc ia ted w i t h stormy weather may p reven t

nighttime inversion. Daytime inversions may occur during the season of lowest sun atigle ('winter), and l a t e r if snow cover ex'ist.s.>' Annual averages show lapse conditions 52% of the time and inversion condi- t ions 48% of the. time.

3.3.2 - . ~ i ' n d . .The INEL i s in a be l t of prevail ing westerly winds, : . . .

which local l y are channeled by topography into a prevai 1 ing southwest t o northeast d i rect ion. During the summer months a very sharp diurnal reversal ' in wind direct ion occurs. Winds blowing from the southwest (upslope) predominate during day1 ight hours, and northeasterly winds p e r s i s t a t night . The reversal normally occurs a few hours a f t e r sunr ise and again , shor t ly a f t e r sunset.

Wind roses (Figure 3-3) are recorded a t the Central F a c i l i t i e s Area ( C F A ) . i n the southern portion of the INEL, approximately 5 miles northeast of t he RWMC. The wind roses indicate the percent;age of 'time t ha t the wind blows from a given direction and the associated wind speeds. The wind roses. are s imi 1 a r f o r the four seaions. sea ow ever, there i s a fundamental "d.ifference between the winds. in 'wititer aid in

the other th ree s,easons. Winter winds are controlled almost exclu- s i v e l y . by e i t he r large-scale weather systems or by stagnation, and show no s ign i f ican t diurnal charac te r i s t i cs . Winds in the other three

. . <

seasons show diurnal charac te r i s t i cs in response to r e l a t i ve ly strong local buoyancy forces resul t ing from heating of the ground. The absence of mountain-valley wind c i rcula t ion in winter allows a high

,. . . . .

frequency of calms 'during periods of high atmospheric pressure.

. . . .

The' average hourly windspeed i s a minimum 'of about 5 mph i n ' '

December and a maximum of 9 mph in April and May. The highest maximum hourly-average speed was 51 mph (measured a t the 20-ft level a t the

CFA) from the west-southwest. Calm conditions prevail 11% of the time.

Strong wind gusts can ,occur i.n the, immedi,ate v ic in i ty of thunder- , . .. . / ' . - ,. . .

storms. These gusts are usual1 y.-qui t,e; local i zed .and: of shor t du ra - t ion. The highest instantaneous speed recorded a t 20 f t above the

ground a t CFA was 78 mph from the west-southwest.

3-6

Wl NTER

SUMMER

SPRING .. :

, . FALL

,-lo%

Fig. 3-3 INEL Central Faci 1 i t i e s Area (CFA) 20- f t - leve l . wind roses (January 1950-May 1962). . .

4

I _. . , I , . . . . " 1 . . . . . . j ;,- ';

F '. 3.3.3 Preci,pi t a t i o n . The average annual p r e c i p i t a t i o n . a t the : , :. INEL i s 8.5 i n , Maximum p r e c i p i t a t i o n occurs du r ing May and June and , :

the minimum i n Ju ly . There have been 13 occurrences o f 1.0 i n . o f

r a i n or more i n a 24-hr p e r i o d dur ing the 22 yr o f record. The

g rea tes t was 1.73 i n . i n June 1954. Only once has more than 0.5 in .

o f r a i n f a l l e n i n 1 h r . That was 1.19 i n . i n 1 h r on June 10, 1969.

Snowfal l ranges from a low o f about 12 in . /y r t o a h igh ' o f about

45 in . /y r . The average annual snowfa l l o f 28.5 i n . occurs p r i m a r i l y

du r ing November through Apr i 1, a1 though snow occas iona l l y f a1 1 s du r ing

May, June, September, and October.

3.3.4 Evaporation. The p o t e n t i a l annual evaporat ion from a

sa tu ra ted ground sur face a t t h e INEL i s approximately 36 i n . Dur ing .

t he warmest month, the p o t e n t i a l d a i l y r a t e i s approximately 0.25 i n .

Dur ing the co ldes t months evaporat ion i s small and may be i n s i g n i f i -

cant. Act.ual evaporat ion r a t e s .are much lower than p o t e n t i a l r a t e s a .

because t h e ground sur face i s r a r e l y saturated. Evapot ransp i ra t ion by .. .

t he sparse n a t i v e vegeta t ion of the Snake R ive r P l a i n i s est imated a t

6 t o 9 in . /y r . Times when the g rea tes t q u a n t i t y o f p r e c i p i t a t i o n .

water i s a v a i l ab le f o r i n f i 1 t r a t i o n ( , la te -w in ter t o sp r i ng r a i n o r

snow) co inc ide w i t h t imes o f r e 1 a t i v e l y low evapot ransp i ra t ion r a t e s

(Mundorff , Crosthwai t e , and K i 1 burn 1964).

3.3.5 R e l a t i v e Humidity. The r e l a t i v e humid i t y a t t h e INEL

ranges from a monthly average minimum o f 15% i n August t o a monthly . 6

average maximum o f 8 9 % , i n February and December. 0n.a d a i l y basis , .

humid i t y reaches a maximum j u s t be fore sunr ise a t a t ime o f minimum

temperature, and reaches a minimum l a t e i n t he afternoon near the t ime

o f maximum temperature. Large v a r i a t i o n s i n re1 a t i v e humid i ty occur

as a r e s u l t of summer th~.nderstorms and la rge-sca le storms, which

occur predomi nant 1 y from .,l ate f a1 1 through sp r ing .

3.3.6 Severe Weather Condi t ions. On the average, two o r . t h r e e , . ,

thunderstorm days occur du r ing each o f . t h e months from June through

August. The surface e f f e c t s f rom thunderstorms over t he Snake R i v e r

P l a i n are u s u a l l y much l ess severe than are experienced east o f t he

Rocky Mountains o r even i n the mountair~s surrounding the p la in .

Although small h a i l f requent ly accompanies the thunderstorms, damage

from h a i l has not occurred a t the INEL.

Ten tunnel clouds (vor tex clouds t h a t do not reach the ground)

and two tornadoes (which caused no damage) have been documented a t the

INEL since 1954.

3.4 GEOLOGY AND SEISMOLOGY (ERDA 1977c, DOE 1978a, and Kuntz 1978)

3.4.1 The INEL. The Snake River P la i n cuts a 50- t o 100-mile-

wide swath through the Rocky Mountains across the State o f Idaho. The

12,000-ft-high peaks o f the adjacent snow-tipped mountains are a sharp

cont ras t t o the p l a i n t h a t r i s e s gent ly from 2,300 ft i n the west tn

6,000 f t i n the east. Bordering ranges cons is t o f Paleozoic and

Mesozoic rocks fo lded and int ruded and l a t e r u p l i f t e d along normal

f a u l t s dur ing Basin and Range tectonism. These ranges terminate

abrupt ly against both sides o f the low- ly ing basa l t - and sediment-

f i l l e d Snake River P la in . A general ized geologic map o f the Eastern

Snake River P la i n i s shown i n Figure 3-4. A map o f INEL s o i l s i s

shown i n Figure 3-5 and described i n Table 3-1.

Except f o r small areas along the mountain f r o n t s and three

r h y o l i t e domes, a l l of which are 500,000 5 200,000 y r old, the e n t i r e

INEL area i s under la in by a succession o f Pliocene, Pleistocene, and

Recent b a s a l t i c lava f lows. The basa l t was formed c h i e f l y from f l u i d

(low v iscos i ty--approximately 1 poise), h igh temperature ( 1652 t o

2 2 8 2 ' ~ ) ~ pahoehoe-type 1 avas. The f lows have been extruded from

r i f t s and from volcanoes whose locat ions are r i f t - c o n t r o l l e d . The

f lows form layers o f hard rock whose thickness var ies from 10 t o

100 ft. The physical charac te r i s t i cs and hor i zon ta l d i s t r i b u t i o n o f

the f lows a1 so vary. Unconsol i dated mater i a1 , cinders, and brecc ia

are interbedded w i t h the basal t . The beds are near l y hor izonta l ,

w i t h no s i g n i f i c a n t s t r uc tu ra l deformation evident. The approximately

6 mile-wide Arco R i f t Zone extends 30 mi les southeastward from the

nor th margin o f the Snake River P la i n a t Arco t o the long i tud ina l axis

o f the p l a i n near Atomic Ci ty . The Arco R i f t Zone i s the locus

Surficial Deposits

N 0 - silicious Older Volcanic Rock

I

Generalized map

0 10 20 30 40 - Miles'

Detail A of above map ' showing Lemhi Range

locations of interest

Miles , .

- River ~lain,-~daho and vicinity.

//IJ//// INEL boundary

Highway

h Intermittent streams

0 Installations

kiaation, Limitations

CLASS 1 Slight

:.-..a,-. . . .* :....**, [Ti, ;::F..~:.;.: CLASS 2 qlig ht to odera rate

CLASS 3 Moderate to Severe

CLASS 4 severe

CLA& 6 Mountainous, barren land rocky or low wafer-holding capmity.

Fig. 3-5 I N E L s o i l s map (McBride e t a1. 1978); see Table 3-1 f o r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f s o i l s .

TABLE 3-1

.. .I .

Irrigation limitations slight. Soil is deep, we1 1 drained, laminated clay loam. Mod~erately calcareous. St i ghtly sodic. (Lacustrine sediments in a playa east and south of Howe,)

Sandy loam surface, low permeability clay at root zone. Sand dunes in places. (At north end of the Big Lost River flood plain continuing to Mud Lake including remanents of prehistoric Lake .

Terreton. )

Very shallow soils, very steep slopes, very rocky, mixed geologic materials of hills and mountains.

W2, W3, W4, W5, Thin loess-covered basalt plains on western W7, W8, W9, border of INEL. Small areas surrounded by WllBI, W12B bare basalt. Stoniness to rockiness.

Similar to the other W mapping ,unit soils, however, more rockiness ,

Stream bottoms of the Big Lost River on the IMEL. Moderate depth of soil and moderate water-holding capacity. In some areas the soil is shallow and has lw water-holding capacity.

Lower alluvial plains of the Little Lost River. Only slight limitations in these soils.

of extensional f ractures, a graben structure, r i f t s , and numerous

basa l t volcanoes. The youngest basa l t f lows i n the Arco R i f t Zone

are approximately 10,500 t o 12,000 y r old. It i s i n f e r red t h a t these

basa l t rocks are under la in by geo log ica l l y o lder volcanic and sedimen-

t a r y rocks, perhaps ranging from Cambrian t o Te r t i a r y ages. Rhyol i t i c

volcanic rocks, ranging i n age from approximately 4 m i l l i o n t o

10 m i l l i o n yr, are exposed along the nor th and south margins o f the

eastern Snake River Plain. These rocks are presumed t o under l ie

basa l t beneath the INEL. The most recent volcanic a c t i v i t y i n the

region occurred a t the present s i t e o f the Craters o f the Moon

National Monument, approximately 25 mi les southwest o f the INEL, about

1,500 t o 2,000 yr ago. This area l i e s outs ide t he Arco R i f t Zone.

The U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) conducted a microearthquake

study i n 1968-1969 t o determine whether the Arco o r Howe fau l t s ,

located a few mi les from the INEL boundary, o r poss ib ly other f a u l t s

i n the region are sources o f microearthquakes. No seismic a c t i v i t y

was detected i n the v i c i n i t y o f the INEL. However, the absence o f

microearthquakes does not e l i m i nate the possi b i 1 i ty t h a t the ear th ' s

c rus t i n t h i s region contains stored e l a s t i c s t ra in . Such s t r a i n

mSght be released, by sl ippage along a dormant f a u l t , t o produce an

earthquake.

Since October 1972, three v e r t i c a l -mot ion recording seismographs

have been i n operation. This seismograph network i s capable of

detect ing m i croseisms from s t r a i n accumulation along f a u l t s i n the

mountains. It w i l l a lso detect any microseisms t h a t would precede a

resumption o f volcanism on the eastern Snake River Plain. To date,

t he seismic network has detected microseisms occurr ing i n adjacent

mountains and d i s t an t locations. However, no seismic a c t i v i t y has

been ' i den t i f i ed as o r i g i na t i ng beneath the INEL.

Addi t ional discussion concerning seismic a c t i v i t y a t the INEL i s

@ presented i n Subsection 13.1.2.1.3.

3.4.2 The RWMC. At the RWMC, the depth o f the surface s o i l

ranges from 3 t o 25 ft. The average depth i s about 15 ft. Beneath

the s u r f i c i a l sedimentary layer are sucessive layers o f basa l t and

sedimentary deposits. Figure 3-6 shows a t-ypical geologic cross - sect i on through t h r --)ci+-+=+ .LW~.---, , .

--+4

The RWMC l i e s a t the edge o f the Arco R i f t Znne. Although

the most recent basa l t f lows occurred i n t h i s zone from 10,500 t o

12,000 v r ago, the basa l t f lows a t the actual l oca t ion of the

RWMC alre older'. The ages o f these f lows have been estimated a t

200,000 - + 100,000 y r and 40,000 - + 20,000 y r (EG&G 19771. A studv

t o determine the recurrence i n t e r v a l o f the basa l t f lows a t the RWMC

i s cu r ren t l y being conducted by the USGS. The study i s scheduled t o

be completed by Ju ly 1979. . . 3.4.3 S i t e 14. S i t e 14 i s tbe designation given t o an area

located i n the approximate center o f the INEL. The geology o f t h i s

s i t e has been invest igated b r i e f 1 y by bor ing shallow t e s t holes and

d r i l l i n g one t e s t wel l . Although d r i l l i n g i n the area has been

l im i ted , Figure 3-7 shows the expected geology. There i s an area of

a t l e a s t 7 square mi les where surface sediments ma,y be greater than

100 ft th ick . The t e s t wel l showed upper sediments extending down

332 ft. Much o f t h i s upper sediment zonp contains s i l t and c lay w i t h

good ion exchange propert ies. Such sediments \lirould be r e l a t i v e l y

e f f e c t i v e i n adsorbing and re ta i n i ng radionucl ides. Because o f t h i s

la rge sedimentary deposit, S i t e 14 was selected f o r f u r t he r invest iga-

ti ons f o r waste disposal operations.

S i t e 14 i s located w i t h i n 2 mi les o f a postulated volcanic r ift

zone. Volcanic eruptions near S i t e 14 have not occurred i n over

100,000 yr .

3.4.4 Lemhi Range. The northern por t ion o f the INEL includes a

small pa r t o f the Lemhi Mountain Range. This range forms p a r t o f the

northern extension o f the Basin and Range physiographic province. It

i s over 50 mi les long and, f o r the most part , i s composed o f Paleozoic

4700 fi Layers. ~ y p ~ c a ~

N THRU A-A'

Fig. 3-6 Geologic cross section north to south through the RWMC.

2c

7.4 mi.+-~-$-6.8 mi.

- - A I L -

fest Well (Typical) .-

I

Fig. 3-7 East-west cross section o f subsurface strata across S i te 14. . '

a calcareous rocks. This range runs NW-SE; on ly the southeastern-most \\

extension of the range i s p a r t o f the INEL. This i: the on ly p a r t o f

the INEL t h a t does not l i e on the Snake River Plain.

On the eastern s ide o f the INEL po r t i on o f the Lemhi Range are

Pleistocene ( less than one m i l l i o n years o ld ) basalts, and Recent

( less than 10 thousand years o ld) windblown, , a1 l u v i a l , playa, and

lake bed deposits, as shown i n De ta i l A o f Figure 3-4. I n the upper

reaches o f the gu l l i e s , t h i s mater ia l i s coarse enough t o be char-

acter ized as ta lus. This a l l u v i a l mater ia l may be 50 f t or more t h i ck

i n places. A t e levat ions higher than about 5000 t o 5200 ft above MSL,

s i l i c i c volcanic rocks are exposed. These rocks, probably Miocene

(11 m i l l i o n t o 25 m i l l i o n years old), are p r i m a r i l y welded tu f f , bu t

inc lude some ash beds and r h y o l i t e flows. The contact between the

volcanics and the sedimentary rocks i s very i r regu la r , but genera l ly

occurs w i t h i n one m i l e o f the INEL boundary i n t h i s por t ion o f the

Lemhi Range. This contact, as we1 1 as the sedimentary, rocks., s t r i k e s

north-northwest and dips 40-45' t g the east. The s t r i k e i s p a r a l l e l

t o the main t rend o f the range as a whole. To the south o f t h i s por-

t i o n o f the Lemhi Range on the INEL, the al luvium l i e s d i r e c t l y upon

t he calcareous rocks wi thout any in terven ing s i l i c i c volcanic out-

crops.

The sedimentary rocks represent the Carboniferous per iod (270 mi 1 - l i o n t o 350 m i l l i o n years old). With in _the INEL, the exposed rocks

are p r i m a r i l y f oss i l i f e rnus , massively bedded limestone. To the nor th

and west of the INEL boundary, t h i s l i t h i c sequence includes some

th i ck beds of dolomite and some qua r t z i t e layers. There i s a lso some

t h i n interbedded shale. These rocks presumably under1 i e the 1 imestone

exposed w i t h i n the INEL po r t i on o f the Lemhi Range, although a t

exact ly what depth i s uncertain.

Two Lemhi Range s i t e s were chosen f o r : (1) deep rock disposal

w i t h sha f t access, and, (2) deep rock disposal w i t h tunnel access.

The sha f t entrances have been p r e l i m i n a r i l y located on a limestone

outcrop. Because t he Carboniferous deposits are many thousands o f

f e e t th ick, a sha f t o f any reasonable depth a t t h i s loca t ion would be 3-17

e n t i v e l y i n these rocks. The tunnel entrances are located i n the

s i l i c i c va lcan i t rock. From the loca t ion o f the surface contact, i t

- 2 s estimated t -=- - - e volcanic rocks i n t o

the l lme$tone' < * - Thq rift zones on the Snake River P la in appear t o be extensions

o f the range-front f a u l t s i n the adjoin ing mountains. This suggests

t h a t the basin and range str'uctures continue beneath the p la in .

Tectonic development i n the p la in , howev'er, i s expressed i n t he form

o f volcanic rift zones and associated eruptions. I n the Lemhi Range,

tec ton ic development i s ex.pressed general ly i n the form o f range f r o n t

f au l t s . Therefore, volcanism would not be as l i k e l v i n the Lemhi

Range as on the Snake River Plain.

The Lemhi Range i s bordered by f a u l t zones along both sides, and

the range i s terminated by the f a u l t or hinge zone t h a t marks the

northern boundary o f the Snake River Plain. None o f these zones have

been located exac t l y i n t h i s area. Based on f i e l d evidence and the

age o f the f au l t ed structure, the l a s t f a u l t movement i n the Lemhi

Range i s postulated t o have occurred between 4,000 and 30,000 yr ago

(Malde 1971). The surface evidence ind icates t h a t the limestone near

t he volcanic contact has not been s i g n i f i c a n t l y f au l t ed since the

volcanic rocks were emplaced.

3.5 HYDROLOGY (ERDA 1977c, EG&G 1977, and DOE 1978a)

3.5.1 The IWEL, Surface water a t the INEL consists mainly

o f three streams dra in ing through intermountain va l levs - Big Lost

River, L i t t l e L o ~ t River, and Birch Creek. These three drainages

terminate i n the f ou r playas i n the north-central p a r t o f the INEL

(Fisure 3-8). No surface streams e x i t the INEL.

Except f o r evaporation losses, a l l f l ow o f the B ig Lost River

enter ing the Snake River P la i n i s recharged t o the subsurface.

Recharge e f f ec t s from the B ig Lost River are very pronounced i n the

Snake River P l a i n Aquifer and i n the perched water heneath the r i v e r .

a Fig. '3-8 Map o f the INEL showing r i v e r systems.

The Snake River P la in Aquifer i s approximately 200 miles long by

30 t o '60 m i 1 es wide. Groundwater f1 ow 1 i nes f o r the aquifer are

dqpfcted i n Figure 3-9. The aquifer i s composed o f th%n basal$ flows

b i 111 ty occurs a1 mg t h e upper and lower edges o f ehe ba~a.1 t ' i c flows,

which have large i r regu lar f racture f issures and other vojdt. The . -

aquifer thickness 4s not known, because no we1 1s have been . d r i l l e d -

deep enough t o pas& through it. Most evfdence indicates tha t the

aquifer i s betwsarn 1,000 and 5.000 ft thfck i n the IWR' m$I'on. Tile ' > <

depth t o the bqujfer under the IIR varies f rom 200 ft ' in the narth-

east corner t o 900 ft i n t h e southwest corner. Average f low rates i n

the aquiffir ape d i f f i c u l t t o assess. Tracer studlies at the I~EL i n d i - cate natural f low-rates i n the range o f 5 t o 20 ft/day, wfth' an aver-

age m a r 10 f t iday, However, these local. neayremm.ts are not neces- s a r i ly representative of ve loc i t i es , thr~dghout the aquifer.

r . I

As shown i n Figure 3-9, groundwa er, flows g e m ~ ~ l l y sa~thwest i n

the aquifer t o the discharge areas6 About 66.,50a;OMXl acre-ft are d is- charged by the aquifer annually i n t o :irrigation wells, i n t b springs

near tiageman, and i n a region'west pf P~qa te l l d . I ' ,

9

3.5.2 The RWMC. * ' The most importa?t element o f the surface water

hydrology Rear the RWnCa,is the I 3 i g : ~ o $ t River. I t s closest proximity t o the RWMC i s 2 mi 1es t o the northwest. A f load control system was

cons t ru~ted on the B i g L w t River i n 1958. This system consists o f

ea r th - f i l l qd embankments, which ~ b n d i ve r t par t o f the' f low o f the

r i v e r near the southwestern comer of the INEL (see Figure 3-8). During flooding, flow, i s diverted t o the, spreading area.

The largest flood since construction o f the system was i n 1965.

Durin thi's flood, the en t i re spread.ing area was not u t i l i zed . If an' % exceptionally large flood were t o occur, water would leave the spread-

i ng area-over a weir and f low out o f the INEL. The U.S. Geological

Survey has used mathematical models t o pro ject the effectiveness o f

STATE OF IDAHO 0 10 20 30 Miles w

0 15 30 45 Kilometers

EXPLANATION

Fig. 3-9 Location of the INEL', the Snake River Plain, and generalized groundwater f low1 ines hypothesized for the Snake River Plain Aquife

the f lood control system (Carrigan 1972). This analysis o f streamflow

data indicated tha t f loods i n the Big Lost River would overtop the ,--

capacity of the diversion channels t o the spreading area were doubled,

the diversion. embankments would not be overtopped by a 300-yr flood (a

f lood wi th an ekpected re tu rn per iod o f 3bO yr) . I n 1962 and 1969, loca l runoff led t o the cd l lec t ion o f surface

water i n depressions i n the RWMC. (a) water from the runof f i n

February 1962 flooded Pi'ts 2 and 3 and Trenches 24 and 25, a l l o f

which were open t o receive addit ional waste. Immediately after t h i s

loca l flooding, dikes were constructed around the pe~ imeter o f the

RWMC. I n January 1969, large snow d r i f t s tend@$ t o block the ex is t ing

drainage system. Winter ra ins and thawing snow caused runof f from the

local basin t o overflow the o l d dike and f lood P i t 10 and Trenches 48

and, 49, which were open. As a resu l t o f t h i s flood, a more extensive

d ik ing system was constructed t o protect the RWMC'from runoff i n the

l oca l drainage basin. The improved dikes and ditches were designed

t o withstand a major local flodd, even i n the presence o f deep snow

d r i f t s . Theditches arewideenauqhthatlargedriftr can becleared

w i th heavy equipment. The pits,. -trenches, and d ik ing system are shown

on Figure 3-10.

I n 1971, the RWMC was graded t o provide drainage channels f o r

surface water. An ou t l e t pipe wi th a f l a p valve was placed through the dike i n the northeast corner o f the RWMC t o all'ow surface water t o

f low outward and t o prevent outside surface water from entering.

(a) Only the buried waste was flooded. Aboveground storage of TRU waste was not i n i t i a t e d u n t i l 1970.

The depth t o the Snake River P la i n Aquifer a t the RWMC i s

approximately 580 ft. A geologic sect ion o f the RWMC, i nd ica t ing the

" - F̂a;eaMtlm of the a w + l b+yws US, depth-from the sur-

face, i s shown i n Figure 3-6. Zones of perched water e x i s t above t h e

aqui fer a t various locat ions w i t h i n the INEL. Perched water has been

found beneath t h e RWMC.

3.5.3 S i t e 14. The surface hydrology o f S i t e 14 i s t yp i ca l o f

the INEL i n general. The distance t o the nearest surface drainage

channel i s approximately 5 miles. Although the elevat ion o f S i t e 14

i s lower than t he RWMC, the po ten t ia l f o r f l ood ing i s expected t o be

much less than a t the RWMC.

During wel l d r i l l i n g a t S i t e 14, groundwater was encountered a t a

depth o f 303 ft. However, basa l t containing a large quan t i t y o f water

was not encountered u n t i l a depth o f about 490 ft was reached. The

water i n the we l l then rose t o a depth o f w i t h i n 260 f t from the

surface o f the ground. This i s the approximate depth o f the regional

water tab le i n t h a t area. These fac t s ind ica te t h a t the sediments

have invaded the basalts and reduced t h e i r permeabil i ty, forming a

r e l a t i v e l y impervious zone above the Snake River P la i n Aquifer i n the

S i t e 14 area.

3.5.4 Lemhi Range. A t e levat ions o f approximately 4950 ft and

5300 ft, these s i t es are high enough t o be safe from any f lood ing o f

the Big Lost River or Birch Creek.

I Test wel ls have not been d r i l l e d i n the area. This pa r t o f the

INEL does no t l i e d i r e c t l y over t he Snake River P la i n Aquifer, but i s

bel ieved t o be hydro log ica l l y coupled t o the aquifer. Some recharge

t o the aqui fer occurs from groundwater f l ow i n a l l u v i a l fan deposits

extending from mountains surrounding the pla in. I n many instances,

these a l l u v i a l fan deposits spread over the boundary o f the p l a i n

i t s e l f .

' @ 3.6 ECOLOGY (ERDA 1977c, McBride e t a1 1978) i The type o f s o i l , meager r a i n f a l l , and extended drouth periods

l i m i t the INEL vegetat ion t o mainly sagebrush, perennial herbs, and a

va r i e t y o f grasses. Extensive surveys o f INEL vegetat ion were ca r r i ed

ou t i n 1952, 1958, and 1967 using 150 permanent transects establ ished

and maintained f o r t h i s purpose (Harniss and West 1973). The r e s u l t s

o f t h i s work were used t o prepare a map o f INEL vegetat ion types

(Figure 3-11).

The INEL has only a few trees, located p r i n c i p a l l y along the B ig

Lost River. The most prominent ground cover i s a mixture o f vegeta-

t i o n cons is t ing o f sagebrush (Artemesia t r i den ta ta ) , lanceleaf r abb i t -

brush (Crysothamnus v i s c i d i f l o r u s ) , and a var-iely o f grasses. Approx-

imately 80% o f the s ta t i on exh ib i t s t h i s type o f ground cover.

Other types o f vegetat ion found on the INEL are as fo l lows:

(a) Grasses: Agropyron spicatum (bluebunch wheatgrass), Hordeum

jubatum, Si tanion hys t r i x , Oryzopsis hymenoides ( Ind ian

r icegrass), St ipa Agropyran smi th i i (bluestem wheatgrass),

Agropyron cr is ta tum (crested wheatgrass), Aqropyron

dasystachyun ( t h i cksp i ke wheatgrass), Agropyron deser i arun,

Elymus cinereus (g i an t w i l d r ye grass)

(b) Shrubs : A t r i p l ex c o n f e r t i f o l i a (shadscale), Chrysothamnus

nauseosus (rubber rabb i tbrush) , Gut ier rez ia sarothrae

(matchbush), Chambatiaria m i 1 l e f o l ium (fernbush), Tetradymia

spinosa, A t r i p l e x n u t t a l l i i ( N u t t a l l ' s saltbush), Eurot ia

lanata (winter fat) , Artemisia t r i p a r t i k a (three-t ipped

sagebrush), A t r i p l ex t a l c a t a

(c ) Trees: Juniperus utahensis ( jun iper ) , Populus angus t i fo l i a

(cottonwood), Sal i x sp. (w i 1 low), Juniperus osteosperma

( jun iper )

1. Artemisia tridentatalAgropyron dasystachyum 2. Artemisia tridentatdAgropyron spicclum/Chrysothamus Viscidiflorus 3. Artemisia fridentatalEruotia lanota/Chrysothamus Viscidiflorus 4. Artemisia fridentata/Sitanion hystrix 5. Artemisia tripartite/Agropyron spicatum/Chrysothamus Viscidiflorus 6. Juniperus ostebsperrna/Agropyron spicatum 7. Eurotia lanata - Atriplex flacata 8. Atriplex falcrita 9. Eerotia Canata

10. Elymus cinereus 11. Agropyron smithii 12. Agropyron desertorum 13 Playas 14 Recent lava flows

Fig. 3-11 D is t r ibu t ion o f vegetation a t the INEL ( Harnlss and West 1973).

(d) Other: Opuntia p o l y a c a n E ( p r i c k l y pear cactus), Rosa sp.

(rose), - I v a ax i 1 l a r i s (poverty weed).

The vegetat ion o f the INEL supports a v a r i e t y o f w i l d l i f e con-

s i s t i n g mainly of small mammals, b i rds, r r p t i l e s , and a few large

mammals. The small mamnals include chipmunks, ground squ i r re ls ,

several species o f mice, kangaroo rats, pygmy rabb i ts , and jack-

rabb i ts . The pronghorn antelope inhabi ts the INEL dur ing the e n t i r e

year. However, many o f the antelope are migratory and win ter south

o f the INEL and sumner nor th o f it. Antelope are occasional ly born

on the s ta t i on i n the spr ing as the herds move northward i n t o B i rch

Creek val ley. Coyotes and bobcats are seen f requent ly. Sage grouse

and pheasants are the on ly res ident game b i r d s on the INEL; however,

hunting i s not permitted. I n add i t ion t o raptors and other indigenous

and intraducerl species o f b i rds, some migrant species pass over the

area. These include doves, larks, hawks, ducks, geese, and golden and

ba ld eagles. The on ly endangered species occasional ly observed a t the

'INEL are the ba ld eagle and the peregrine falcon. The r e p t i l e s con-

s i s t mainly o f l i za rds and a few species o f snakes.

Domestic sheep and c a t t l e are allowed t o graze on the perimeter

areas o f the INEL i n the ea r l y spr ing and f a l l .

Aquatic l i f e on the INEL i s l i m i t e d and depends mainly upon the

f l ow o f the B ig Lost River, The r i ve rbed i s qu i t e permeable. During

several months o f the year, and even dur ing some e n t i r e years, the i

r i v e r does not f 1 ow. However, during spr ing runo f f and periods o f

h igh r a i n f a l l , the d ivers ion system (southern boundary o f the s i t e )

and the B ig Lost River Sinks (northern area o f the s i t e ) support

waterfowl dur ing periods o f water accumulation. This normally occurs

less than two or three months i n the spring, but, depending on annual

condit ions, water f l ow and accumul a t i on may be sustained f o r several

months. The sma l l ' l i qu i d waste disposal ponds a t the Test Reactor

Area (TRA) (see Figure 3-1) are also a hab i t a t f o r a small number o f

water-seeking animal s. These waters a1 so a t t r a c t various species o f

ducks, the great blue heron, and a var ie ty o f smaller shore birds.

Fish species observed i n the Big Lost River on the INEL include ra in -

+ ish, eastern brook trout, Yokanee salmon,

S h : %m$i,": arm *L - *- -.-.h - -

3.7 ARCHAEOLOGY ( ERDA 1977c)

- ,

The INEL operatf ng procedures prescribe measures f o r assuring

protect ion of any an t iqu i t ies o r h i s t o r i c s i t es on the INEL, as

required by the Ant iqu i t ies Act o f 1906 and the H is to r ic Sites Act

o f 1936. These procedures are applied t o avoid loss o f archaeological

and h i s to r i ca l values found a t the INEL. Archaeological surveys o f

the INEL were pe6formed during 1967-1969 and again i n 1970-1972.

These surveys have disclosed evidence that man has been i n the region

o f Eastern 1dkho f o r perhaps 10,000 t o 12,000 yr. The locat ing and surveying o f s i t es and the preservation o f ant iqui tes are continuing.

Fossils o f prehistovic mamnals have been found i n excavations a t

the INEL. It i s postulated tha t the foss i l s are from camels and

mastodons tha t inhabited the region during the l a t t e r pa r t o f the

Pleistocene epoch about 35,000 y r . ago. One f o s s i l taken from car-

bonaceous s t ra ta encountered during we1 1 dr i 11 ing a t approximately

100 ft below land surface i s . over 40,000 y r old. Areas o f special

archaelogical in te res t have been iden t i f i ed outside the west and

northwest boundaries o f the RWMC and i n the v i c i n i t y o f S i te 14.

The State o f Idaho H is to r ic Preservation Of f i cer and the State

Archaeologist were contacted t o determine the State's in te res t i n

the preservation o f cu l tu ra l resources and archeological f indings a t

the INEL. The Idaho H is to r i c Preservation Of f i cer stated that, except

f o r EBR-I, which i s designated a National H is to r ic Landmark, he knows

o f no other h i s t o r i c s i tes on the INEL worthy o f preservation. The

State Archaeologist recommended that, f o r each major construction pro ject a t the INEL, a consulting archaeologist be retained to

evaluate and protect cu l tu ra l resources unearthed. This i s being

done. To p ro tec t any archaeological resources t ha t may e x i s t on the

INEL, the Idaho Operations O f f i c e o f the DOE, i n complying w i t h a l l

appropriate federa l regulat ions, has implemented a number o f actions.

These actions are sumnarized as fo l lows:

(a) Announced t o a1 1 employees and contractors t h a t co l lec t ion ,

wi thout permit, o f archaeological items a t INEL i s prohib-

i t e d by law.

(b) I n 1961 and 1962, assisted i n issuance o f permits by the

Department o f I n t e r i o r (DOI) f o r archaeological surveys,

excavations, and co l lec t ions o f archaeological resources by

Idaho State Univers i ty. These permits have been renewed.

(c ) Erected signs a t the INEL warning against improper appropri-

at ion, excavation, i n j u r y t o o r dest ruc t ion o f ru ins, monu-

ments, or objects o f ant iqu i ty .

(d) Entered i n t o an agreement w i t h the National Park Service

(NPS), through which the NPS has surveyed a construct ion

area a t t he RWMC.

(e) St ipu la ted i n a l l construct ion contracts t h a t if, i n the

course o f excavations f o r structures, archaeological

resources are uncovered, the work w i l l ' be stopped u n t i 1

appropriate evaluations are made.

3.8 LAND USE

I

The various nuclear f ac i 1 i t i e s and numerous support f ac i 1 i t i e s

use on ly a small percentage o f the t o t a l INEL land area. The f a c i l i -

t i e s are widely separated and were s i t ed f o r maximum safety. Antelope

and mammals roam the INEL f ree ly . A large area o f the INEL i s used

f o r grazing sheep i n the spr ing and f a l l . Usage i s con t ro l led by

issuance o f grazing permits. These areas are shown i n Figure 3-12.

However, grazing does not occur w i t h i n 2 mi les o f any nuclear

$W4*, barge gqggal_s *are excluded from the immediate f ac i 1 i ty . - areas by secur i t y fences. .?

3.9 POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS AND ECONOMIC SETTING

The nearest populated area t o the INEL i s Atomic City, located

less than 1 m i l e from the southern INEL boundary, w i t h about 25 r e s i - dents. I n 1970, the populat ion res id ing w i t h i n a 50-mile radius ap-

proximated 117,000 (U.S. Bureau o f the Census 1973). The projected

populat ion i s discussed i n Subsection 12.4.7. The populat ion d i s t r i -

but ion around the INEL, as a funct ion o f distance and d i rect ibn, i s

shown i n Figure 3-13. Figure 3-14 shows thd loca t ion o f the major

populat ion centers w i t h i n a 50-mile radius o f the Central F a c i l i t i e s Area o f the INEL. Table 3-2 shows the populat ion (U.S. Bureau o f

the Census 1973) o f counties w i t h i n a 50-mile radius o f the INEL.

Table 3-3 shows the number o f people l i v i n g i n c i t i e s w i t h i n these

counties.

The growth charac te r i s t i cs o f the c i t i e s and towns around the

INEL are s im i l a r t o those o f the r e s t o f the state. According t o

the "Idaho Economic Atlas1', published by the Idaho Bureau o f Mines

and Geology, the t rend has been migrat ion from r u r a l t o urban areas

(Caldwell 1970). The net r e s u l t o f migrat ion trends near the INEL i s

movement away from the INEL boundaries and toward the c i t i e s o f Idaho

Fal ls , Blackfoot, and Pocatello. There i s aYso movement toward some ,

small towns outside the 30-mile radius and, i n some instances, outside

the SO-mile radius.

The populat ion growth assumption used f o r t h i s study (see

Subsections 7.4.1.3 and 7.4.1.5) was a (geometric) growth r a t e o f

l% /y r u n t i 1 the year 2585, w i t h a constant populat ion thereafter .

This p ro jec t ion y i e l ds 50-mi l e radius populations o f about 136,000,

150,000, 166,000, 183,000, and 367,000 i n 1985, 1995, 2005, 2015, and

5, respect ively.

To Salmon

Esl Grazing Area

Fig. 3-12 Permit grazing areas within the INEL.

[a] Includes about 39,000 residents in Pocatello, which i s located slightly beyond the 50-mi le radius.

Fig. 3-14 INEL v i c i n i t y map centered a t the Central F a c i 1 l t i . e ~ Area (CFA).

3-33

TABLE 3-2

Bi ngham

Blaine Bonnevi . Fle - .,,

Butte

C.1 ark Custer Jefferson

k";;, .-a* :% "; ,;,: ::., i ,,; -r:, . . Y < $- -...- !;,:-. 4.. 3 , , t ; m . , , > .' , .%,-+, v - , > -... ...i$ ,.

+ . 5- . - , w , r-: ..,. , -..*-,I* :-m6 #@ .. &l,h' ,. ..: .,?, * J . . , . . - - - - - - - - - - - . . - , . - . . - - $,%, -i-

,n +G ,:-, 1 ,.;;.-> ,.:. - <. 4 - a-; \.y: ,,; ;.. .. V! . . . . . 8 -. , - ., !;-I*: .. , . , : . ,tf,.&.., ..,-I, " f ..j

, - 5

.--.3 > . *. ,*,- ,-

. , . < r; -7 \ . 4 -

S%~B: -.L 1~970 U. 3; Census (0.s: B'urea;"bf the Census 1973) - 7 L' T . "

' , ' ,

(a) includes residents o f the c i t v o f ~ o c a t e i l o , which i s located st outside the -50-mile ,radius o f the CFL-, -- ...- - -

L 1 I '

TABLE 3-3

CITY POPULATIONS WITH1.N 50-MILE RADIUS OF CFA

( C i t i e s w i t h Popu la t ion over 300)"

Popu la t ion

Aberdeen

Ammon

Arco

B lack foo t

Chubbuck

F i r t h

Idaho F a l l s .

Lewisv i 11 e

Mack ay

Men an

~ o c a t e l l o ( ~ )

Rober ts

She1 l e y

Source: 1970. U. S. Census (U.S. Bureau o f the Census 1973)

( a ) ~ o c a t e l l o i s loca ted j u s t ou ts ide t h e 50-mile rad ius o f the CFA, b u t i s inc luded because p a r t o f t h e c i t y l i e s w i t h i n 50 m i l e s o f t he RWMC.

The economv of the region is supported by the activities at

the INEL. In June 1978, total INEL employment was approximately

9400 people, ahout 80% of whom were assigned to onsite activities;

The remaining 20% are employed in support activities in Idaho Falls.

Other major industries in the region include agriculture, food pro-

cessing, tourism, and phosphate mining.

4. ,THE RWMC AND ITS OPERATIONS

4.1 HISTORY AND. CURRENT' LAY OUT I

The Rad ioac t ive Waste Management Complex (RWMC) was es tab l ished

i n 1952 i n t h e southwest corner o f t h e INEL, approx imate ly 3.5 m i l e s

n o r t h o f the INEL boundary. The RWMC was requ i red f o r t he d isposal o f

s o l i d r a d i o a c t i v e waste o r i g i n a t i n g f rom Atomic Energy Commission

operat ions.

The RWMC was o r i g i n a l l y 13 acres i n area. This was expanded t o

88 acres i n 1957 and t o i t s present area o f 144 acres i n 1970. It

pr.eser~l;ly cur is is ts o f the Subsurface Disposal Area (SUH), t h e 'l'rans-

u ran i c Storage Area (TSA), and t h e Transuranic Disposal Area (TDA).

The TDA i s loca ted w i t h i n t he boundaries o f t he SDA. These areas are

shown i n -F igure 4-1. Support f a c i l i t i e s w i t h i n t h e RWMC inc lude t h e

Waste Volume Reduction Fac i 1 i ty (WVRF) and the Decontamination Fac i 1 - i t y South (DFS). -

The SDA covers approximately 88 acres and i s surrounded by a w i r e

fence. U n t i l 1970, TRU waste (and beta-gamma waste) was b u r i e d here .

i n p i t s and trenches. ( a ) There i s gene ra l l y a minimum o f 2 f t o f

s o i l below t h e waste and a minimum o f 3 f t o f s o i l over it. A 2 - f t

l aye r o f compacted c l a y i s be ing p laced over t he s o i l cover as pro-

t e c t i o n aga ins t water i n t r u s i o n . Most o f t h e center l i n e s o f t h e

trenches and boundaries o f the p i t s are i d e n t i f i e d w i t h brass data

p l a t e s embedded i n concrete markers.

( a ) This b u r i e d waste i s no t the sub jec t o f t h i s study. The b u r i e d waste i s descr ibed here f o r perspec t ive and t o g i v e t h e reader some background i n pas t TRU waste management.

SDA - Subsurface Disposal Area . I D A - Transuranic Disposal Area . TSA - Transuranic ,Storage Area

F i g . 4-1 Layout of t h e Rad ioac t ive Waste Management Complex (RWMC).

The TSA i s a 56-acre area, es tab l i shed i n 1970 f o r 20-yr r e t r i e v -

able storage o f waste contaminated w i t h more than 10 nCi t ransu ran i c

rad ionuc l i des per gram of was'te. (Th is waste i s the sub jec t o f t h i s

study.) The TSA i s surrounded by a s e c u r i t y fence and has an i n t r u -

s ion alarm system. Asphalt pads, approximately 150 by 700 ft, have

been constructed. These pads s lope toward the center and f rom one end

t o the o ther t o f a c i l i t a t e drainage du r ing waste emplacement. The

r u n o f f i s moni tored f o r r a d i o a c t i ' v i t y .

The TDA i s a smal l area w i t h i n the SDA, es tab l ished i n 1972 f o r

sur face d isposal o f waste con ta in ing l e s s than 10 nCi t ransu ran i c

a c t i v i t y per gram o f waste. (TRU waste con ta in ing more , than 10 nCi/g

a c t i v i t y i s s to red on t h e TSA.) The TDA uses e x i s t i n g space w i t h i n

the Silk t h a t i s no t s u i t a b l e f o r subsurface d isposal because o f near-

sur face b a s a l t outcroppings. An aspha l t pad was cons t ruc ted a t t h i s

- . locat ion. waste conta iners are stacked on the pad and covered w i t h

s o i l . The l o w - a c t i v i t y TRU waste i s considered t o be disposed. The

management o f t h i s waste i s no t w i t h i n the scope o f the c u r r e n t

study .

There are two a d d i t i o n a l waste management areas w i t h i n the RWMC.

One area, w i t h i n t h e SDA, i s c u r r e n t l y used f o r d isposal o f beta-gamma

waste. Th'is waste i s no t in te rmixed w i t h TRU waste. The o ther area,

w i t h i n t h e TSA, cons i s t s o f a number o f s torage v a u l t s f o r t ransu ran i c

waste having r a d i a t i o n l e v e l s t h a t prec lude d i r e c t handl ing. A r e l a -

t i v e l y small q u a n t i t y o f t h i s type o f waste (termed in te rmed ia te- leve l

t r ansu ran i c waste) i s present. Management o f bo th these types o f . . waste l i e s ou ts ide t h e scope o f t h i s study. A l i m i t e d amount o f TRU-

contaminated waste i s s to red elsewhere a t the INEL (Argonne Nat iona l

Laboratory-West) . (See ERDA 1977c, p 11-163-1 79. ) Management o f t h i s

waste i s a l so ou ts ide the scope o f t h i s study.

. %

4.2 OPERATIONS FOR MANAGING TRU WASTE

Since 1954, TRU waste has been received at the RWMC, primarily from the Rocky Flats operation near Golden, Colorado. TRU waste has also been received from INEL facilities and other DOE-sponsored facilities, such as Mound Laboratory, Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory, and Argonne National Laboratory. A 1 imi ted amount of waste (predominantly nontransuranic) was received through 1964 from sources such as univer- sities, hospitals, and private research foundations.

Changes in waste management practices at the RWMC have occurred over the years. Early shipments (1954 to 1957) of TRU waste were buried with INEL beta-gamma waste in SDA trenches. As the volume. of TRU waste received from Rocky Flats and other offsite sources increased, the use of SDA pits for burial was begun. From 1958 to November 1963, waste containers were stacked in the pits. In

November 1963, dumping of the waste into pits was begun. Dumping was continued until 1969, when the receipt of waste again increased. At that time, the policy of stacking the waste in the pits was rein- stituted because of concern for container integrity and the need to conserve RWMC space. Since November 1970, when aboveground retrievable storage was started, TRU waste has been stored on the TSA. The TSA-stored. waste is the subject of this study. (The buried waste is described for background only. )

TRU waste to be stored on the TSA is received in government-owned ATMX rail cars or commercial truck trailers. The waste is contained in 4 x 4 x 7-ft fiberglass-covered plywood boxes, 55-gal steel drums with polyethylene liners, or 4 x 5 x 6-ft steel bins, all of which are stacked on the asphalt pads. (Some of the waste placed earlier on the

TSA was stored in containers of nonstandard sizes.) The containers

are intended for 20-yr integrity. The containers are stacked in

layers with a sheet of 112-in. plywood separating each layer. When a

stack has reached a height of approximately 16 ft, a cover consisting of 518-in. plywood, nylon-reinforced polyvinyl sheeting, and about 3 ft of soil is emplaced. See Figure 4-2.

Fig. 4-2 Storage o f t r a n s u r a n i c waste on t h e TSA pads a t t h e RMWC.

4- 5

U n t i l 1972, t he plywood boxes placed on the TSA were no t covered

w i t h f iberg lass . Such boxes c o n s t i t u t e approximately 25% o f t h e boxes

p laced on the TSA through the end o f 1977. Because boxes c u r r e n t l y

rece ived are f iberg lass-covered, i t i s est imated tha t , by 1985, t h i s

percentage w i l l have been reduced t o 15%. S i m i l a r l y , u n t i l 1972, t he

s t e e l drums placed on t h e TSA had no po lye thy lene l i n e r s . The 90-mil

polyethelene l i n e r s prov ide a d d i t i o n a l containment f o r the TRU waste

and add i t i ona l assurance o f conta iner i n t e g r i t y f o r t h e 20-yr intended

l i f e . Such drums c o n s t i t u t e about 44% o f the drums on the TSA as o f

t h e end o f 1977. Because drums c u r r e n t l y rece ived are 1 ined, i t i s

est imated that , by 1985, t h i s percentage w i l l have dropped t o about

30%.

NOTE : The percent ages given f o r the un 1 i ned drums repre-

sent an update o f t he corresponding percentages

l i s t e d i n the a l t e r n a t i v e s document f o r INEL TRU

waste (DOE 1978a).

i 4.3 DESCRIPTION OF TRU WASTE

4.3.1 Physical Descr ip t ion . The TRU waste i s composed o f

severa l categor ies: #evapora tor sludge; f i l t e r sludge; decontami-

n a t i o n and decommissioning (D&D) m a t e r i a l s (lumber, concrete, e t c ) ;

l a b o r a t o r y equipment (fume hoods, glassware, etc . ) ; process equip-

ment (tanks, pumps, e tc . ) ; p r o t e c t i v e c lo th ing ; and maintenance

too l s . The waste may be hazardous chemica l ly as w e l l as r a d i o -

l o g i c a l l y . The bu r ied waite, i n p a r t i c u l a r , i s suspected o f con-

, t a i n i n g t o x i c chemicals, pyrophor ic ma te r i a l s , and o ther m a t e r i a l s .

t h a t present nonrad io l o g i c a l hazards.

4.3.2 Volumes (DOE 1978a). The volumes o f bu r ied and s to red TRU

waste and o f associated m a t e r i a l s ' a r e summarized i n Table 4-1. E s t i -

mates are g iven f o r bo th t h e volumes emplaced and the volumes a t t h e

t ime assumed f o r r e t r i e v a l (1985). The volume o f waste i s based on

t he s i z e o f t he waste conta iner shipped and no t necessa r i l y t h e volume

o f ac tua l waste. The est imated u n c e r t a i n t i e s i n t h e waste volumes

range f rom 10% t o 30%. The remainder o f t h i s subsect ion exp la ins t h e

c n t r i z s i n t h c t ab le . N

- SUMMARY OF APPROXIMATE VOLUMES OF TRU WASTE AND ASSOCIATED MATERIALS

------- IiiGitory P r o j e C t E l T t o

To ta l Em laced, January 1, 4985 Waste ( f t 4 ( f t ) --

I Bur ied TRU Waste 2,200,000 2,000,000

Bur ied eta-Gamma Waste ( I n te rm ixed With

TRU Waste) 500,000

Contaminated S o i l (Associ ated w i t h Bur ied TRU Waste)

Stored TRU Waste 1 ,200,000 2,000,000 through December 31 , 1977

i n t h e SDA. Inc luded were approx imate ly 195,000 drums, 6000 boxes, 3

and 13,000 car tons. Approximately 165,000 f t o f t he t o t a l b u r i e d

I

waste has been r e t r i e v e d i n experimental p r o j e c t s . (The exper imenta l

r e t r i e v a l p r o j e c t s are the In-Drum R e t r i e v a l (IDR) P r o j e c t and the

/

3 Before 1970, TRU waste, t o t a l i n g about 2,200,000 f t , was b u r i e d

Early-Waste R e t r i e v a l (EWR) P r o j e c t .) Thus, t h e volume o f b u r i e d 3

TRU waste has been reduced . from the o r i g i n a l 2,200,000 f t t o 3 3

2,035,000 f t , o r approx imate ly 2,000,000 f t .

Of the b u r i e d waste, an est imated 9% i s a c t u a l l y uranium waste--

e s s e n t i a l l y f r e e f rom t ransuran ics . (About 2 x 1 0 ~ Kg o f U-238 and 2 1 . 3 ~ 1 0 Kg o f U-235 are inc luded i n the bu r ied waste. However, t he

a c t i v i t y i s on l y about 67 C i , o r about 0.03% o f t h e t o t a l a c t i v i t y o f -

t he b u r i e d TRU waste. I n the s to red waste, U-235 and U-238 comprise a

f r a c t i o n o f l ess than o f t he t o t a l a c t i v i t y . ) Twenty-six per-

cent o f the b u r i e d waste i s n i t r a t e s a l t s o f low TRU content. N i t r a t e

s a l t s have a h igher l e a c h a b i l i t y and a greater p o t e n t i a l than t h e TRU

waste t o migra te f rom the immediate b u r i a l l oca t i on .

3 Before 1970, an est imated 500,000 f t o f beta-gamma waste was

b u r i e d i n t h e SDA, along w i t h t h e TRU waste. '

~ ~ o s t ' of t he cardboard cartons, wooden boxes, and metal drums

1 o r i g i n a l l y con ta in ing the b u r i e d waste have deter io ra ted . Fur ther -

I more, some o f the waste, such as l a r g e p ieces o f equipment, was

I b u r i e d w i thou t conta iners. As a r e s u l t , some o f t he s o i l adjacent

I t o t he waste has become contaminated. I f the bu r ied TRU waste were 3 r e t r i e v e d , i t i s est imated th 'at 3,750,000 f t o f contaminated s o i l

would r e q u i r e r e t r i e v a l . ( a ) The r e t r i e v a l operat ions themselves

would c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e increased volume o f s o i l t h a t would become

contaminated.

The TRU waste rece ived s ince 1970 (approximate ly 1,100,000 f t 3

through the end o f 1977) has been s tored aboveground on t h e TSA.

Through the end o f 1977, an a d d i t i o n a l 100!000 ft3 o f TRU waste

had been s tored on t h e TSA as a ' r e s u l t o f experimental p r o j e c t s f o r 3 r e t r i e v i n g t h e b u r i e d TRU waste. The 1,200,000 f t o f waste i s

(a ) The 3,750,000 ft3 o f contaminated s o i l i s based on experience f rom t h e E a r l y Waste R e t r i e v a l (EWR) p r o j e c t . Experimental r e s u l t s i n d i c a t e d an approximate r a t i o o f ontaminated s o i l t o

3 5 waste o f 1 5:1. Thus, 1.5 x (2,000,000 f t of TRU waste +

500,000 f t of beta-gamma waste) = 3,750,000 ft3 of contaminated s o i l .

stored in approximately 83,000 drums, 5000 boxes, and 170 bins. It 3 is estimated that, by the beginning of 1985, about 2,000,000 ft of

TRU waste will be in aboveground storage. Included in this total is 3 the additional 65,000 ft from 1978 experimental retrieval pro-

jects. .Waste projections beyond 1985 are discussed in Appe'ndix C.

Beta-gamma waste, as such, is not mixed with the stored TRU

waste. However, there are small quantities of beta-gamma emitting radionuclides in the stored waste. The radiation 1evels.produced at.

the surface of the steel bins average 50 mR/hr. For drums, the aver-

age is 3 mR/hr; for boxes, about 1 mR/hr.

4.3.3 Radionuclide Content. Shown in Table 4-2 are the inventories of the principal radionuclides (on the basis of TRU content)

of the buried and stored TRU waste. For buried waste, the data are . . listed both at the time of emplacement (1954 through 1970) and as

decayed to 1985. ,For stored waste, values at the time of receipt

are given for waste placed on the TSA through 1977 and for the total inventory projected to 1985. The estimates and calculations for the

projected inventory take into account both radioactive decay and an

assumption of increased waste compaction in the future by the waste

generators.

No detailed Tisting is available f,or the quantities of radionu:

clides present in the b,eta-gamma waste that is intermixed with the

buried TRU waste. Table 4-3 gives the distribution of. beta-gamma

radionucl ides in the beta-gamma waste currently being disposed in the

SDA (see the last paragraph of Subsection 4.1). This distribution is presented as an example of what the distribution might have been in

the pre-1970 buried beta-gamma waste at the time of disposal. Decay adjustment of "the distribution to 1985 is also given in Table.4-3. . .

\

TABLE 4-2

RADIONUCLIDE CONTENT OF BURIED AND STORED TRU WASTE

Buried ~aste(b) ' Stored Waste Transuranic ~alf if e(a), Empl aced As of January 1, 1985 Emplaced (through Dec. 31, 1977) As of January 1, '1985 Radionucl ide Years Curies Percent Curies Percent Curies Percent Curies Percent

Amer icium-241 45 8 48,007 18.98 46,548 37.06 45,740 26.90 133,284 31.91

Plutonium-238 86.4 571.4 0.22 462 0.37 16,120 9.48 44,223 - 10.59

Plutonium-239 24,390 21,043 8.32 19,789 15.76 11,720 6.89 34,230 8.19

Plutonium-240 6,580 4,860 1.92 .4,564 3.63 2,856 1.68 8,071 1.93

P 1 u ton i um-241 13.2 178,425 70.55 54,234 43.18 91,940 54.08 194,092 46.46

Uran ium-233 162,000 0.5 < 0.01 0.5 ~0.01 527 0.31 1,486 0.36

Curium-244 P

17.6 O - 0 0 0 1,113 0.65 2,343 0.56 I - Total Radio- 0 ~ activity 252,907 100 125,598 100 170,016 100 417,729 100 :

Total Weight of TRU, g

Total Wast Volume, ft 5 Transuran ic Activ'ty,' Ci/ft 3

I (a) Values - are taken from the Radiological Health Handbook (Bureau of Radiological Health 1970).

I (b) Does not include the beta-gamna waste present.

I

TABLE 4-3 : . .

ESTIMATED DISTRIBUTION OF RADIONUCL IDES IN THE BETA-GAMMA WASTE

% AT TIME % AT BEGIN- RADIONUCLIDE HALF-LIFE OF DISPOSAL NING OF 1985

Chromi um-51 27.7 d(a) 49.9 0

Cobal t-60 5.27' yr(b) 19.8 . 50

Zirconium-95

Iron-59

Cobal t-58

Manganese-54

Zirconium-Ni obium-95

Cerium-141

Ruthenium-103

Nickel -59

Cerium-144

Cesium-137

Stront ium-90

Ruthen ium-106

Others Identified 1;3 yr

Mixed Activation Products 1.5 yr

I Mixed Fission Products ?30 yr

Unidentified Beta-Gama 1.3 yr

(a) d = days .

(b) yr = years

4.3.4 History of Waste Container Damage.' There have been

several incidents of TRU waste container damage during shipment t o

INEL and during handling of the waste containers a t the RWMC. Con-

t a i ne r damage incidents during the TRU waste shipment are l i s t e d in

Table 4-4. Incidents during waste handling a t the.RWMC are l i s t e d in

Table 4-5. Only one incident led t o re lease of contamination. No

spread of contamination resulted.

4.4 RELATED CURRENT PROJECTS

4.4.1 RWMC Improvements. Several RWMC improvements have been

proposed or a-re current ly being implemented. The improvements include

the addition of analytical f a c i l i t i e s , improved u t i l i t y , and secur i ty

systems, improved personnel radia t ion monitors, and a c l ay cover over

the buried TRU waste.

4.4.2 Waste Processing R&D Studies. A study of waste incinera-

t o r s with application t o the buried TRU waste was completed in 1977

(FmC 1977). The objective of the incinerator study was t o evaluate

the available processes and t o iden t i fy the one t ha t appeared most "

promising for fu r ther study fo r processing the buried TRU waste.

Most of the recommendations in t he referenced study apply a lso to

the stored TRU waste. Additional d e t a i l s e o f the study are given in

Subsection 6.4.2 of Appendix 6.

, Waste treatment by slagging pyrolysis was considered the most

des i rable method to process the buried waste before shipment t o a . '

federal repos i to ry . The major advantages of t h i s incineration process

are t h a t i t wi l l accept waste as re t r ieved from the p i t s and trenches

with minimum requirements fo r segregation of the waste, and t ha t only

minimal s i z e reduction of the waste material i s required.

Slagging pyrolysis was t he .on ly process found t o meet or exceed

a l l the processing and acceptance c r i t e r i a specified in the incinera-

t ion study (FMC 1977). Based on the FMC study and on the posi t ive

" TABLE 4-4 .- -.

b Incident

Item Date Location Description. ~ffects

(1) 3/25/70 Blackfoot, ID Seal missing on a truck Load intact, trai ler'; no other prob-

b . lem. .

(2) 6/15/71 Unknown Opened ATMX car, evidence No breach, no of ;fire on piggyback contami natSon trailer inside (charred or radiation wood). Not known if there release. were signs of fire on

. , casks themselves.

(3) 8/7/73 Blackfoot, ID Derailment during switch- No release, no ing of ATMX car. apparent damage.

(4) 3/31 176 Unknown Opened ATMX car, found No breach, 9/21 176 evidence of hard bump: no breakage.

some wooden blocking was . . broken and 4--5 waste con-

tainers were dented,.

(a) .All incidents are reported to safety dersdnnel. Reports are on file at DOE Health and Safety, Idaho Operations Office, Idaho Falls, Idaho.

TABLE 4-5

ACCIDENTS OR INCIDENTS - TRU WASTE HANDLING AT RWMC

I tem - Date Incident Description Effects

(1) 12/14/72 Puncturing of barrel and No contamination. inner 1 i ner from Rocky Flats. Barrel did not con-

' tain TRU waste.

7/9/75 Sol id sewage sludge drum . No contamination. generated internal pressure causing bulging of the 1i.d.

. Drums were repacked in overpack containers

I '

Partial drum,penetration by fork-lift. No breach of inner liner.

Drum penetration by forklift; a small portion of contents were spilled . onto the cargo container floor.

,

No contami nat.i.on.

Small amount of local contamination. he contamination was immediately contained and the drum replaced in an overpack container. There was no airborne activity. After recontainment, the area was thoroughly surveyed, an,d no

was. found.

results of formulating a slagging pyrolysis concept for treatment of

buried TRU waste (Dodson, Hopper, and McCormack 1978; Kaiser Engi-

,neers 1977), this process was selected by the DOE for further development for,-treating the INEL TRU waste. The sl agging pyrolysis process

is described in Section 9.

The conceptual facility for slagging pyrolysis would involve ,-

application of existing technologies fpr use at the RWMC. However,

special devel-opment studies would be required to ensure control of the

radiological and chemical hazards in the INEL TRU waste. Because of

these development needs and the decision to perform additional studies

of the slagging pyrolysis process, a number of supportive R&D studies

are underway. Considerable interaction with other DOE 1 aboratories,

as well as with commercial chemical and waste processing companies, is

expected in the course of these studies.

The supportive R&D studies include an ongoing instrumentation I development study concerned with monitoring and assaying waste input

and effluents for curie content, fissile material content, radiation

levels, and waste composition. ,Hand1 i ng systems are being studied

for waste inspection, transfer, size reduction, remote operation,

packaging, and D&D. Components, such as refractory .l iners, waste-heat recovery systems for heating primary combustion ai rJ and off -gas con-

trol systems, are bej ng investigated. Studies are underway concerning

slag characteristics (e.g . , 1 each rates), inci neratbr jnput/output . relationships for waste of varying composit~ons, and radionuclid~

behavior in the incinerator. Regulatory requirements and administra-

tive guidelines are being investigated concerning radiological and,

environmental cont.ro1. , . ,

4.4.3 TSA Reentry Studies (Bishoff 1978). To determine the'

degree of deterioration of stored TRU waste containers at TSA (with a 20-yr intended, life), Cell 6 and Cell 1 (see Figure 3-10), were pene-

trated. Steel drums and plywood boxes, stored between 1970 and 1973,

were removed. Air monitors indicated no release of airborne con-

tami nants during the penetration,

There was f r ee r u s t on the l i d s of some of the drums. Some drums showed signs of r u s t or corrosion .on tlhe lockrings. . Generally, t he drums t h a t had been stored ve r t i c a l l y had more r u s t than those stored horizontally. However, out of t h e 70 horizontal .drums removed, two

I .

showed signs of bad rus t ing and corrosion. These two drums appeared t o have 1 eaked from ' the top. Neither -drum had completely rusted through. Both drums contained evaporated s a l t s from the .Rocky F l a t s , .

Plant. Nondestructive examination of the dr.ums i s planned t o provide, fu r ther informat ion on ,which t o base an estimate of drum 1ongevi . t~ .

, . i.

A1 1 plywood boxes, both with and without f i berg1 ass ,covering, showed no s ign i f ican t signs of .deterioration.

5. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

FROM 'CURRENT.OPERATIONS OF TRU WASTE MANAGEMENT

5 . 1 RADIOACTIVE EMISSIONS

TRU waste is received in Department of Transportation (DOT) con-

tainers and is monitored before shipment, during unloading operations, and while stored. This monitoring consists of direct radiation surveys, smears and swipes, and air monitoring during unloading and emplacement. The on1 y TRU contamination identified to date resulted from incidents outside the normal ope'rations (see Subsection 4.3.4) and from past flooding and possible wind resuspension (see Subsec- tion 5.4).

The air at the RWMC is constantly monitore'd for radioactive emissions to ensure personnel safety. Six low volume air samplers (1 cfm) surround the SDA perimeter and provide a constant surveillance on radioactive emissions to the atmosphere.. Four high-volume air samplers (10-40 cfm) are operated in the predominant wind paths from the e

areas where waste handling is conducted. Additional air monitors are

currently,being installed. The air filters are routinely collected

and analyzed to determine the amount and type of activity present. The most recent monitoring report (~edahl and Janke 1978) indicates that all measured concentrations of radionuclides in air were below

standards for uncontrol 1 ed areas (ERDA 1977a).

5.2 AIR QUALITY

There are no major activities at the RWMC that seriously impact the local or regional air qua1 ity. The primary source of pollutants -

is from motor vehicle exhaust, combustion of fuel oils for heating, and nonradioactive dust from RWMC operations.

Airborne particu1,ate matter has been r o u t i n e l y monitored a t the

RWMC since 1976. The annual average RWMC concentrat ion o f a i rborne 3 3 pa r t i cu l a te matter f o r 1977 i s 77x10 ng/m . (This average par-

t i cu l a te concentrat i on , is normal f o r ear th moving operat ions. ) This 3 3 compares w i t h a 1977 average o f 57x10 ng/m a t ;he INEL bound-.

3 3 ar ies and 50x10 ng/m a t locat ions o f f the INEL i n eastern 3 3 Idaho. The EPA annual standard i s 60x10 ng/m (40 CFR Par t 50).

Although the EPA standard i s exceeded a t the RWMC, the average con-

cent ra t ion o f a i rborne pa r t i cu l a tes a t the INEL s i t e boundaries i s be1.0~ t he EPA standard..

5.3 SURFACE WATER

Surf ace water samples from r a i n f a1 1 o r snowmel t (when present)

are r o u t i n e l y co l lec ted (Hedahl and Janke 1978). . Table 5-1 l i s t s the

r esu l t s from analyses o f the water samples taken i n 1977. For the

isotopes measured, t he highest detected concentrat ions ranged from 1

t o 5 orders o f magnitude below the DOE standards f o r uncont ro l led

areas (ERDA 1977a). Gross alpha measurements were near the detec t ion 1 im i t s . Therefore, no add i t i ona l analyses f o r plutonium o r americium

i d e n t i f i c a t i o n were made.

On two occasions (1962 and 1969), unusual ly r a p i d snow me l t i ng

and r a i n caused l o c a l f l ood ing a t t he RWMC. The f l o o d water came i n

contact w i t h bur ied TRU and other waste i n p a r t i a l l y f i l l e d p i t s and

trenches. Low concentrat ions o f contaminants were measured i n t he

r u n o f f water (e.g., 1 x 1 0 - ~ nCi/ml beta a c t i v i t y and 1x10 '~ nCi/ml

alpha a c t i v i t y ) . See Subsections 5.4 and 5.5 f o r f u r t h e r discussion.

5.4 GROUND SURFACE CONTAMINATION :

So i l samples are c u r r e n t l y co l lec ted a t the surface and a t 6 and

12 in . depths a t 25 loca t ions w i t h i n the SDA. So i l samples are ana-

lyzed f o r plutonium, major gamma emitters, and, when ind icated by .

gross alpha analysis, americium.' The primary purpose'of the surface

TABLE 5-1

1977 SURFACE WATER SAMPLING -

Hi ghost. Concentrat i ons DOE Standard Detected i n Samples . Radio- . . for, . U ~ I I ; ~ I > -

i so tope Date , Locat ion Concentrat ion t r o l l e d rea as(^)

Am-241

Ag-11 Om

Ce-141

Ce- 144

Co-60

Cr-51

Sb-125

Ta- 128

Th-232

Z r -95

SDA

SD A

TDA

TDA .

TDA

SDA '

TS A

TDA

TDA

SDA

TDA

SDA

TDA

TDA

TDA

Cont ro l (b ) .

TDA

TDA

- ( a) Source: ERDAM-0524 ( ERDA 1977a).

, (h ) The c o n t r o l sample was taken i n t h e B i g Los t R i ve r 2 .mi les f rom t.ho RWMC.

' so i l analyses i s t o determine whether the past burial and current storage operations a t the RWMC are contributing t o plutonium contamination of the surface so i l and, . i f so, t o what degree.

Figure 5-1 shows the sampling locations and plutonium concentra- t i ons within t h e SDA fo r 1977. The so i l samples show s t a t i s t i c a l l y s ign i f ican t plutonium content. The higher plutonium concentrations are located in t h h northeastern section of the SDA ( the area of lowest e levat ion) . ,

Plutonium and americium contamination levels in surface ( 0 - 5 cm) s o i l s outside t h e RWMC are shown in Figure 5-2. Flooding in 1962 and 1969 (see Section 5.3) and wind t ranspor t appear t o be the primary mechanisms t h a t transported these nuclides out of the SDA.

I The contamination leve l s of plutonium drop off sharply with distance

I from the SDA. The maximum distances from the SDA perimeter a t which concentrations of Am-241, Pu-239, and Pu-238 could be detected above

background were approximately 8200, 7900, and 3300 f t , respectively, s t i l l well within the INEL boundary. -

5.5 SUBSURFACE MIGRAT.ION OF RADIONUCLIDES

I Current pract ices a t the RWMC are designed t o minimize the possi-

1 - b i l i t y of subsurface migration of radionuclides. Drainage of surface

1 .. water i s being improved by grading and by adding 2 f t of compacted

I -c lay above the trenches and p i t s f o r buried waste. The sorpt ive capa- c i t y of the s o i l , plus t ha t in the rock Tnte rs t i ces , would minimize movement of contaminants t o the regional aquifer 580 f t below, the

nearest stock watering well 10 miles away, or the nearest pr ivate water supply 18 miles away. The v i s i t o r s center a t EBR-I ( 2 miles from the RWMC) i s supplied with drinking water from a well. However, EBR-I i s not i n . t h e aquifer flow path from the RWMC.

/

\

~adiochemical analyses of samples taken in subsurf ace sediment

beds a t the 110- and 240-ft depths and from the groundwater have shown instances of detectable contamination (Barracl ough e t a1 . 1976). Of

3 0 (surface) . (12 in); 8 (6 in) . . ..

342 (surface) 955 (6 in) @%I6 (12 in).

. .

Sample location / . .

. . . e*

8 *

8" O* e* m* e*

8" a* i * contamination levels (Pu-239/240) were below 1 d/m/g at all depths1 " loo: 0: ' l oo i 200; 300~400

FEET'

Fig. 5-1 -Soil sampling locations and plutonium concentrations i in the Subsurface Disposal Area (SDA).

N Background

SDA boundry

Feet

Fig. 5-2 I s o p l e t h s o f contaminat ion (nci /m2) i n surface s o i l s near t h e Subsurface Disposal Area (SDA) i n 1974.

t he 58 sedimentary samples taken, 27 showed de tec tab le r a d i o a c t i v i t y ,

hu t a t l e v e l s de tec tab le on l y by t h e most s e n s i t i v e radiochemical

methods. . Because o f t he techniques inheren t i n t he d r i l l i n g opera-

t i o n s , such l e p e l s cou ld have a r i s e n through contaminat ion o f t h e

dr i 11 i ng cores ,'?from s u r f ace scurces.

I n 1975, d r i l l i n g was conducted a t two a d d i t i o n a l l o c a t i o n s i n -

s i de the RWMC, near t he l o c a t i o n s w h e r ~ e a r l i e r samples showed s t a t i s -

t i c a l l y p o s i t i v e q u a n t i t i e s o f waste nuc l ides . The o b j e c t o f t h i s

s tudy was t o use improved c o r i n g techniques and improved an t icon tami -

n a t i o n measures t o sample t h e sedimentary l aye rs a t t h e 110- and

240 - f t l e v e l s f o r rad ionuc l ides. A n a l y t i c a l procedures o f h igh sensi - t i v i t y were used (Burgus and Maestes 1976) on samples taken f rom these

sedimentary 1 ayers. The ana l ys i s shower! no waste nucl i de r a d i o a c t i v -

i t y . Because o f t h e ex tens ive measures taken i n t h i s stud.y t o m i n i -

mize extraneous contami na t i on o f cores, h igh conf idence i s p laced i n

t he r e s u l t s .

Studies have r e c e n t l y been made o f t he m i g r a t i o n o f t r aosu ran i cs

i n t h e s o i l immediately below t h e RWMC (Humphrey and Tingey 1978).

,Most o f t he s o i l samples were taken f rom below P i t No. 2. (See Sub-

s e c t i o n 3.5.2, F igu re 3-10). This p i t was complete ly f l ooded i n 1962.

w h i l e i t . w a s s t i l l open. F lood ing occurred again i n 1969 be fo re t h e

most recent improvement i n t h e d i k i n g system was completed and be-

f o r e emplacement o f the c l a y cover .was begun. These s tud ies showed a

maximum concent ra t ion o f t ransurar i i c rad ionuc l ides o f 1 .1x10-~ C i l g

(11 nCi/g) o f s o i l a t a depth o f about 4 i n . below t h e hottom o f t ! ~ e

p i t . One f o o t below the bottom o f t he p i t (and s t i l l above the ba-

s a l t ) , t h e concent ra t ion was smal le r by a f a c t o r o f about one hun-

dred. Between t h i s depth and the basa l t , t h e sample concent ra t ions

ranged f rom about 1 x 1 0 - ~ ~ C i l g down t o about I X I O - ~ ~ Ci/g, t h e

approximate 1 i m i t of re! i a b l e de tec t ion . Subsurface m o n i t o r i n g i s

cont inu ing, i n order t o de tec t any m i g r a t i o n t o t he aqu i fe r t $ a t might

occur.

Although most o f t he t r a n s u r a n i c s i n t he waste are b e l i e v e d t o he

i nso lub le , t h e p o t e n t i a l e f f e c t s o f water on t h e s o l u b l e p o r t i o n were

s tud ied . Water e n t e r i n g t he p i t s and trenc'fies wotlld leach o u t t h e

s o l u b l e s,pecies of p lu ton ium and americium. The d i s s o l v p d ' t r a n s u r -

an i cs would tend t o be adsorbed' by t h e sediment and b a s a l t l a y e r s as

t h e y moved downward. Most of t h e adso rp t i on would be expected t o

occur i n t h n sedimentary l aye rs . ~ x p e r i m e n t s ( F r i e d e t a!. 19761

us ing b a s a l t f r om t h e INEL have shown t h a t i n t r u s i o n of r a d i o n u c l i d e s

i n t o t hp a q u i f e r would a l s o he mi+-timized b.v r e t e n t i o n i n t h e b a s a l t .

5.6 GROUNDWATER

The Un i t ed S ta tes ~ e o l o g i c a l Survey (USGS) and the R a d i o l o g i c a l

and Environmental Sciences Labora to ry fRESL! o f the' DOE mon i t o r t h e .@ ,

Snake R i v e r P l a i n Aqu i f e r . Chemical and r a d i o l o g i c a l analyses a re

made o f t h e groundwater samples f r om l o c a t i o n s w i t h i n t h e INEL and

o f f s i t e . Groundwater lev.el measurements and o t h e r h y d r o l o g i c and , . .

g e o l ' i g i c da ta a re ob ta ined f o r t h e a q u i f e r and r e p o r t e d by t h e USGS.

Wel ls numbered 87 through 90, l o c a t e d around t he p e r i p h e r y o f t h e

SDA, a re shown' in F i g u r e 5-3. These w e l l s a r e used t o sample tr?e

a q u i f e r a t depths appro xi mat el.^ 600 ft below the ground sur face .

A q u i f e r samples have a l s o been drawn from t h e RWMC p roduc t i on w e l l ,

and perc3ed water samples f r om Well No. 92 (about 214 f t deep). Wel l

No. 92 i s l o c a t e d w i t h i n t h e SDA. (See F i g u r e 5-31.

The r e s u l t s of the sampl ing p rov ide a reco rd o f t hp r a d i o n u c l i d e '

con ten t o f t h e subsurface wate r i n and around t h e RWMC. I n s t u d i e s

conducted f r om 1972 t o 1974, p l u ton ium and americium were de tec ted i n

aqu i f e r samples drawn f r om Wel ls No. 87 th rough No. 90 (Barrac lough

e t a1 . 1976). Perched water samples ( f rom Well No. 92) a l s o i n d i c a t e d

t h e presence o f p lu ton ium. Tests f o r t h e presence o f americium were

n o t conducted. A1 1 measured concen t ra t ions o f americium ( i n t h e

p e r i p h e r y w e l l s ) and p lu ton ium were severa l o rde rs , o f magnitude below .

t h e s tandards i n ERDAM-0524 tERDA 1977a) and t h e r e g u l a t i o n s o f t h e

6 R ~ M C production w & I ~ Monitoring Wells

0 1000 2000 feet 11111

Fig, 5-3 ~opographic map and well 'monitoring locations at the RWMC.

State. o f Idaho. I n a 1975 s tudy (Po lzer , P e r c i v a l , and Barraclough..,

19761, a q u i f e r samples f rom the RWMC p roduc t i on w e l l showed no p o s i -

t i v e i n d i c a t i o n s o f p l u t ~ n i u m o r americium. Samples drawn i n 1476

(Dolenc and Janke 1977) and 1977 (Hedahl and Janke' 1978) f r om a l l o f

t t iese w e l l s gave no p o s i t i v e i n d i c a t i o n s o f p l u ton ium o r americium.

Detec tab le t r i t i u m was p resen t i n v e r . v . 1 0 ~ concen t ra t i ons i n 1977

i n a l l t h e wate r samples f r om t h r e e w e l l s t o t h e n o r t h and eas t o f t h e

SDA (Wel l s 87 and 90 and t h e p roduc t i on w e l l ) . T r i t i u m .was no t de-

t e c t e d i n any water sample f r o m Wel l 88 b u t was de tec ted i n one' sample

f r om Well 89. The t r i t i u m i s a t t r i b u t e d t o d ischarge f r om t h e Idaho

Chemical Process ing P l a n t (ICPP) a,nd t h e Test Reactor Area (TRA), n o t

f r om the RWMC (Hedahl and Janke 1978).

5.7 FLORA AND FAUNA

The l o s s o f graz. ing o r w i l d l i f e h a b i t a t as a consequence o f

c u r r e n t waste management f a c i l i t i e s has a sma l l e f f e c t on t h e fauna i n

t h e area. Some smal l roden ts cou ld burrow down t o t h e b u r i e d wastes

and i n g e s t o r spread con tamina t ion t o t h e sur face. However, t h i s

. source o f su r f ace con tamina t ion i s p r o b a h l y v e r . y s m a l 1 and i s n o t

d is tc ingu ishah le f r om t h e s o i l con tamina t ion a t t r i b u t e d t o p a s t f l o o d -

i n g a t the RWMC (see Sec t ion 5.4). P reda to ry animals conceivab1.y

c o u l d consume contaminated rodents , b u t aga in t h e i n d i v i d u a l e f f e c t i s

p robab l y v e r y smal l .

Stud ies by RESL t o i n v e s t i g a t e r a d i o n u c l i d e uptake. and move-

ment w i t h i n t h e RWMC ecosystem began i n FY 1978. S e l e c t ~ d animals

a re be ing imp lan ted w i t h thermoluminescent dosjmeter fTLD) ch ips and

ear tagged f o r r e c o g n i t i o n . (These procedures do n o t r e s u l t i n pe r -

manent damage t o t h e animal .) Attempts are made t o recapture ' as many

animals as poss ib l e , so t h a t t h e TLD ch ips can be analyzed b y t h e RESL

Dosimetry Laboratory .

Tissue sampl ing i s uoderway main1.v f r om smal l mammals t rapped

i n t h e RWMC d u r i n g t h e s p r i n g and summer months, when animal a c t i v i t v

i s h ighes t . Bone, muscle, stomach, lung, and s k i n ,samples are c o l -

l ec ted , pooled, and analyzed f n r t r a n s u r a n i c n u c l idcs, Sr-30, and

gamma-emitt.ing i so topes . The o b j e c t i v e i s t o determine h u i l d u p o f

r a d i o n u c l i d e s w i t h i n these t i s s u e s and t o es t ima te t h e r o l e o f smal l

bur row ing mammals i n b r i n g i n g t r ansu ran i c , a c t i v a t i o n , and f i s s i o n

p roduc ts t o t h e sur face. P r e l i m i n a r y r e s u l t s f rom these s t u d i e s i n -

d i c a t e t h a t t he concent ra t ions o f Pu-238, Pu-239, an? Am-241 i n deer

mice t i s s u e s are low, w i t h many o f t h e samples near o r below t h e m i n i -

mum d e t e c t i o n l i m i t f o r t he rad ionuc l i des . The r e s u l t s o f t he s t u d i e s

t o da te a re summarized i n Table 5-2.

P l a n t spec ies growing i n t h e RWMC a re be ing i d e n t i f i e d and l i s t e d .

Species a re be ing analyzed f o r s p e c i f i c r a d i o a c t i v e isotopes, which

w i l l p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n on p l a n t uptake and ~ o s s i h l e t r a n s f e r o f

r a d i onucl ides.

5.8 NONRAD IOLOGICAL EFFECTS

Non rad io l og i ca l e f f e c t s i n c l u d e t h e impacts caused by: ( 1 ) e a r t h

moving ope ra t i ons a t t h e RWMC ( p r i m a r i l y dus t and motor v e h i c l e ex-

haust ) , f 2 ) t h e commitment o f land, and (3) . the commitment, o f resour -

ces. Ai,r q u a l i t y impacts caused by t h e earth-moving ope ra t i ons a r e

d iscussed i n Sec t ion 5.2.

Storage and b u r i a l o f TRU and beta-gamma waste a t t h e RWMC p re -

c lude o t h e r uses' o f t h e land. However, f i n a l cover and p r o t e c t i o n

methods have been p o s t u l a t e d . t h a t w i l l min imize t h e env i ronmenta l

impact r e s u l t i n g from t h e l ~ n g - t e r m commitment o f t h i s l and area !see

Subsect ions 12.2.5 and 12.3.5). Impacts due t o t b o l o s s o f w i l d l i f e

h a b i t a t a re d iscussed i n Sec t ion 5.7 .

The commitment of resources i nc l udes t he c o n s t r u c t i o n m a t e r i a l s

f o r RWMC f a c i l i t i e s and t h e use o f o i l and' f u e l f o r equipment and

heat ing.

TABLE 5-2_

Pu-238,. Pu-239, '.Am-241 CONCENTRATIONS IN DEER M I C E TISSUES COLLECTED NEAR THE ' INEL SUBSURFACE DISPOSAL AREA

------ -- - . . . -- - -- -- -- - - - ---- - - - --. - - - .- .- .' - Pu-238 Pu-239

a- --ap- -- . - .- - - -- - - , Am-241 ' - . Max - Avg . .t -- Max Avg 2 SO " Max AvqL + So

-- -- 1 C i / g wet - - - -- . ..

Perimeter transect (N = .14)(b)

Hides 4.05 0.08_+0.16(~) 25 0.63+1.26(~) 4.5 ' 0.26+0.29(~) Gastro intest inal Tract 40.5. 0.@3;~~]2(~) . 2,072 0.22+0.51(~) 274.0 0.09_+0.08(~)

- Lungs 0.05 . 0.20 BDL 0.08 BOL Carcass ' 0.07 . . ~0.01-tO.02 0.33 0.04f0.09 0.08 0.02f0.04

. .

50 m north transect (N = 4)

Hides - 0.01 ' 0.005+0.005 0.14 0.06~0.05 . 0;14 0.08_+0.05 Gastro intest inal Tract 0.09 0.02+0.05 0.48 0.13+0.23 0.59, ' 0.14t0.23 Lungs . BDi BDL 0.11 0.05_+0.05 0.01 BDL Carcass - . BOL - BDL 0.02 0.01+0.01 0.01 BDL

Hides Gastrointestinal Tract Lungs Carcass -

Hides Gastro intest inal Tract

, Lungs Carcass

100 m northeast transect (N = 8 1

BDL BDL BDL BOL

0.12 0.02+0.04 0.08 0.0?+0.03 0.17 . BDL 0.005 BDL

350 m northeast transect (N = 8)

BDL 0.q3 0.01+0.01 BDL 0.02 0.010+0.005

0.02+0.03 5.7 0.17k0.28 BOL 0.001 BDL -

0.10+0.21 0.OGf0. 10

BDL 0.005+0.010

(a) SD = Standard Deviation I .

(b) N = Number of sampling~locations. Tissue samples from each locat ion were composites from an avorage of 9.5 mice.

( c ) Sample w i th maximum concentrat ion not included i n average.

(d) BOL = A t least one-half of the samples were below detection 1 imits.

6. EFFECTS OF CURRENT TRU WASTE MANAGEMENT ON THE WORKERS AND ON THE PUBLIC

6.1 RADIOLOGICAL DOSE,TO WORKERS

6.1.1 External. The work f.orce for storage 'and disposal opera-

tions at the RWMC ranges from 15 to 20 people. Included are equipment operators, health physics technicians, laborers, and supervisors. The personnel involved ii the emplacement. of TRU waste are also involved in the emplacement of nontransuranic beta-gamma waste received from onsite operations. Radiation dosimetry exposure records are kept for each individual at the RWMC. Since these dosimetry records are for cumulative exposure, regardless of the location within the RWMC where the exposure.~occurred,-separate personnel exposure records are not

available for TRU-waste-only operations.

Health physics monitoring indicates that most personnel exposure results from handling and disposal of nontransuranic INEL waste. The radiation from many of these waste packages often exceeds several Rlhr, while the radiation 6 ft from drums or boxes of TRU waste is generally less than 1 mR/hr.

Radiation dose records from 1976 and 1977 were examined as the

most representative of current operations. These records indicate that the individual annual dose for operating personnel ranged from 40 mrem to 1870 mrem. During 1976 the average individual radiation dose for 14 workers was 694 mrem, while the average individual annual dose in 1977 was 710 mrem for 17 workers. A worker could thus expect to receive approximately 700 mremlyr whole body dose if assigned to the RWMC full time. However, only a relatively small portion of this total would be attributed to handling TRU waste.

A preliminary estimate of exposure due to handling TRU waste alone was made using an average radiation of 1 mR/hr at 6 ft from I most of the drums and from the boxes of TRU waste. When the waste

containers are stacked, addi t ive,effects could resu l t in peak radia- t ion exposure r.ates on the order of 10 mR/hr a t 6 f t from the face of the stack. More typically, the radiation level d u r i n g emplacement ,

operations would be on the order of 1 mR/hr. From available informa-

t ion, i t was estimated that an individual would receive a dose of, 10 t o 20 mrem during a f u l l week of receiving, handling, and storing the TRU waste. Based on the current ra te of TRU waste receipt, 25 weeks of operation per yr are required fo r TRU storage and handling opera- t ions. With 25 weeks of operation per yr, an individual would receive an annual dose of about 400 mrem. This dose would be received by only two or three individuals. Emplacement of TRU waste i s essent ial ly a one-man operation, with support personnel provided on an as-needed basis.

These estimated doses, as . well as the actual expos.ures, are well below the ERDAM-0524 ( E R D A .1977a) standard of 5000 mremlyr for whole- body dose. The operating contractor a t the RWMC has an active ALAP

(as low as practicable) program to minimize radiation exposure. To achieve th i s goal, the operating contractor l imits individual exposure, time and uses shielding and distance to reduce personnel exposure, whenever possible. In addition, the radiation exposure guides are continual ly assessed and future changes wil l , in a1 1 probabil i ty , be

downward. !

6.1.2 Internal. D u r i n g norma! handling and storage of TRU .

waste, there has been no ident i f iable TRU contamination available for inbal ation or ingestion. (Recorded incidents during hand1 ing of TRU waste are 1 i s t e d . i n Subsection 4.3.4. Only one in'cident resulted in loss of containment, and no effects on workers were 'identified.) Pack-ages are monitored for loose contamination before sh.ipment aqd on

receipt a t the RWMC. The a i r i s continually sampled by a i r monitors during unloading and emplacement ac t iv i t i e s . No airborne TRU ac t iv i ty has ever been detected during these operations. In addition, a whole-

body count i s required of a l l RWMC workers a t least annually. Bio- assay samples are also routinely analyzed. The water supply for the

RWMC operat ions personnel i s supp l ied by the RWMC product ion w e l l .

-However, t he re has been no t ransu ran i c contaminat ion o f t h i s water

source.

I n the EWR and I D R p r o j e c t s f o r experimental r e t r i e v a l o f b u r i e d

waste, workers may be suscept ib le t o a i rbo rne contamination., S t r i c t

contaminat ion c o n t r o l measures are p r a c t i c e d du r ing these operat ions.

Continuous mon i to r i ng o f t h e a i r i s northal opera t ing p rac t i ce , as i s '

t he t a k i n g o f smears and swipes o f exposed surfaces. I n t he IDR'pro-

gram, an t icontaminat ion c l o t h i n g i s worn i n c l u d i n g c o v e r a l l s, s a f e t y

shoes, shoe covers, gloves, and hard hats. Resp i ra tors a r e c a r r i e d by

each worker. I n t he EWR program, workers are completely p ro tec ted by

bubble s u i t s w i t h supp l ied a i r s ince the r e t r i e v e d waste conta iners

are i n a more d e t e r i o r a t e d c b n d i t i o n than those i n t he I D R p r o j e c t .

Since contaminants are l i k e l y t o become a i rborne du r ing t h e operat ions

f o r these p rb jec ts , workers supply r o u t i n e bioassay samples. Dur ing '

1977, bioassay samples i nd i ca ted t h a t four i n d i v i d u a l s might have hdd

a low l e v e l of i n t e r n a l exposure f rom t ransuran ics . However, these

' s t a t i s t i c a l l y p o s i t i v e bioassay r e s u l t s were so low t h a t i t was impos-

s i b l e t o assign dose est imates. Fu r the r samples were analyzed t o

determine uptake and e l i m i n a t i o n r a t e s . Again, because of t he very

low l e v e l s o f poss ib le i n t e r n a l depos i t i on and t h e v a r i a b i l i t y between , samples, no dose est imates cou ld be made. Follow-up sampling and

analyses are underway.

6.2 RADIATION EFFECTS ON THE PUBLIC

Rad ia t i on e f f e c t s on, t he pub1 i c f rom RWMC operat ions are i n d i s -

t i nguishable f rom the e f f e c t s due t o n a t u r a l background r a d i a t i o n .

The RWMC i s a c o n t r o l l e d area. Members of t he p u b l i c are p r o h i b i t e d

from uncon t ro l l ed entrance t o the f a c i l i t y . Signs and bar r icades are

prov ided a t t h e RWMC access road a t t he EBR-I area. A cyc lone fence

surrounding the , TSA i s equipped w i t n i n t r u s i o n a1 arms t o prec lude

unauthor ized ent ry . A barbed w i r e fence surrounds the Subsurface

Disposal Area. The entrance gate i s kept locked, and e n t r y i s admin-

i s t r a t i v e l y c o n t r o l l e d . DOE s e c u r i t y guards make r e g u l a r inspect ions

o f the f a c i l i t y . 'The c loses t p u b l i c accesses t o the RWMC a re . the

EBR-I Nat iona l Landmark, approximately 2 m i l e s nor theast , and U. S.

Highway 20, approximately 3.5 mi 1 es nor th . Consequently, the poten-

t i a l f o r d i r e c t r a d i a t i o n exposure t o t h e p u b l i c i s minimized and

l o c a l i z e d w i t h i n the c o n t r o l l e d area.

The' fence around t h e RWMC precludes graz ing on land t h a t may be

cont,aminated. Hunt ing i s n o t al lowed on the INEL. The small rodents

and t h e predatory and game animals a t t h e INEL do no t en te r d i r e c t l y

i n t o the human food chain. The deser t vegeta t ion i s no t harvested o r

used by humans, f u r t h e r p rec lud ing t h e entrance o f contaminat ion i n t o .

t he food chain.

Resuspension o f s u r f i c i a l contaminat ion represents a poss ib le

r o u t e t o man f o r t h e a1 pha-emi tti ng r a d i onucl i des. Snow cover g r e a t l y

reduces the chance o f resuspension from l a t e f a l l t o . e a r l y sp r i ng

o f each year. Measurements by alpha spectrometry on samples o f a i r -

borne dust have shown plutonium-238 and plutonium-239 concent ra t ions

a t CFA dur ing t h e most (probable t imes f o r resusperision t o be l e s s ' ,

than I X I O - ~ ~ nci/m3. Continuous exposure t o t h i s co,ncentrat ion

f o r 6 months would r e s u l t i n i n h a l a t i o n o f no more than 0.036 pCi

of each iso tope and a t o t a l lung dose of l ess than 0.05 mrem. The

longest c r e d i b l e exposure p e r i o d f o r a member of t.he p u b l i c i s . a

b r i e f stopover a t the r e s t s t a t i o n a t the Los t R ive r b r i dge on U. S . .

Highway 20. The p o t e n t i a l dose a t t h i s r e s t s t a t i o n i s l e s s than

0.002 mrem.

7. IDENTIFICATION OF ALTERNATIVES FOR INEL TRU WASTE MANAGEMENT

This s e c t i o n reviews communications between s t a t e and f e d e r a l

o f f i c i a l s concerning the INEL TRU waste and discusses e a r l i e r and

ongoing s tud ies o f INEL waste management. Guide1 ines and terminology

formulated f o r t he present s tudy are presented. The waste management

a1 t e r n a t i v e s s tud ied are b r i e f l y described. D e t a i l e d desc r i p t i ons o f

t he a l t e r n a t i v e s may be found i n Sect ions 8 through 10. I

7.1 COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND THE GOVERNMENTq

OF THE STATE OF IDAHO CONCERNING LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT OF INEL TRU..

WASTE

Since 1969,. DOE and, i t s predecessor o rgan iza t ions (ERDA and. AEC) . '

have been in.communi.cation w i t h o f f i c i a l s o f t h e Sta te o f Idaho con- . . .

ce rn ing long-term management of'TRU waste a t t h e INEL:. I n t e r e s t was

f i r s t focused on t h i s sub jec t a f t e r t h e Rocky F l a t s f i r e in.1969, when

contaminated TRU s o l i d waste r e s u l t i n g f rom the cleanup opera t ions was . .

shipped t o t h e INEL. The 1NEL.h.ad been r e c e i v i n g Rocky F l a t s waste . . , . . ,

, . s ince 1954. The p u b l i c i t y f rom the f i r e caused Idaho' . o f f i c i a l s t o .

r a i s e quest ions. concerning t h e s a f e t y o f t h e Rocky F l a t s waste i n

Idaho. The AEC made.a comi tmen t i n 1970 t o p lace t o p ' p r i o r i t y on

shipment o f t h e waste :to a. federa l ' r epos i t o ry . A summary o f t h e com-

municat ions and cop ies o f o f f i c i a l correspondence are .presente'd i n . . . . Appendix A. -.

7.2 THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCI ENCESINATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL

STUD I ES

The Comni t t e e on Rad ioac t ive Waste Management o f the Nat iona l

Research Counci l (NRC) has been conduct ing independent eva lua t ions o f

c u r r e n t and f u t u r e p lans f o r the hand l ing o f r a d i o a c t i v e s o l i d waste.

Two s tud ies w i t h p o s s i b l e i m p l i c a t i o n s a t t h e INEL are summarized

here.

7.2.1 Shallow Land Burial of Low-Level Radioactive waste.

The National Academy of Sciences Select Committee on Radioactive Waste Management evaluated current and future low-level radioactive waste management practices at DOE-controlled burial sites, including the INEL. Surrmaries of recommendations and conclusions from this report (NAS-NRC 1976) that are pertinent to TRU waste management at the INEL include:

Exhumation' of (low-level TRU) waste originally buried without any intent of later retrieval i,s a potentially very hazardous operation. Such exhumation should not' be made unless there is a credible reason to believe that (a) a significant radiation hazard could arise from leaving the waste where it is, and (b) the wastes can be exhumed safely. As a coroll ary to this recommendation, radioactive waste should not be exhumed and put into temporary engineered storage where the material must await a final decision on permanent disposal.

( 2 ) DOE has set an upper limit for burial of transuranic waste of 10 nCi/g of waste. This criterion should be evaluated further'in light of more recent data on the biol'ogical and

ecological effects of low levels of radiation.

( 3 ) A permanent final repository for solid waste contaminated with transuranic nuclides must be established without delay.

(4) Burial sites should be monitored continually with periodic reports to the public.

(5) A careful study should be made of the actual rate of migration of transuraniuc nuclides under a wide variety of field conditions.

7.2.2 Management o f Rad ioac t ive Waste a t Hanford (NRC 1978). ,

The Nat iona l Academy o f Sciences Se lec t Committee on Rad ioac t ive Waste'

Management a lso evaluated c u r r e n t and f u t u r e r a d i o a c t i v e waste manage-

ment p r a c t i c e s a t Hanford, washington. The i n t e r e s t e d reader i s r e -

f e r r e d t o t h i s document (NAS-NRC 1978). The p r i n c i p a l conc lus ion

concerning. TRU waste i s t h a t most s o i l s and sediments con ta in ing d i s -

persed rad ionuc l i des should be l e f t i n place, r a t h e r than be exhumed,

unless and u n t i l a major hazard t o t h e environment can be demonstrated.

However, because seismic, vo lcan ic , and .hydro log ic cond i t i ons a t t he

INEL are s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t f rom those a t Hanford, t h e conclu-

s ions o f the study may no t be app l i cab le t o waste management a t t he

INEL.

7.3.1 DOE A l t e r n a t i v e s Study f o r INEL TRU Waste. The DOE

has r e c e n t l y completed a r e p o r t e n t i t l e d , A l t e r n a t i v e s f o r Long-

Term Management o f Defense Transuranic Waste a t t h e Idaho Nat iona l

Engineering Laboratory (DOE 1978a). The study i d e n t i f i e d , developed,

and evaluated a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r long-term management o f bo th t h e b u r i e d

TRU waste and the s to red TRU waste a t t he INEL. The technology r e -

q u i r e d f o r managing t h e waste, t h e r i s k s t o t h e p u b l i c , t h e r a d i o -

l o g i c a l hazards t o workers, and the est imated cos ts are' discussed.

The i n i t i a l s tep i n t h e s tudy was a rev iew o f c u r r e n t waste man-

agement technology, i n c l u d i n g c u r r e n t p r o j e c t s r e l a t e d t o the RWMC.

P a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n was g iven t o - experimental r e t r i e v a l p r o j e c t s ,

waste t reatment p ro jec t s , and i n v e s t i g a t i o n s o f subsurface m i g r a t i o n

o f rad ionuc l ides . Based on t h i s review, t h r e e l.ong-term management

a l t e r n a t i v e s were i d e n t i f i e d f o r the bu r i ed TRU waste and two a l t e r n a

t i v e s were i d e n t i f i e d . f o r t h e s to red waste. These a l t e r n a t i v e s a re

summarized i n Table ,7-1.

TABLE 7-1

- - - - - . - ALTERNATIVES AND CONCEPTS IDENTIFIED IN THE DOE ALTERNATIVES STUDY FOR INEL TRU WASTE

Buried Waste

A1 ternat ives Concepts Description

Retain Exlsting Procedures

Provide Engineered Containment

Cover Cover and wall s Cover, wall s, and floor Encapsulation

Retrieve, Pro'cess, Ship

Direct retrieval, Molten Salt Incineration (MSI) Direct retrieval, In-Drum Incineration (IDI) Direct retrieval, Slagging Pyrolysis (SP) Remote retrieval, MSI Remote retrieval, ID1 Remote retrieval, SP

Retrieve, Ship

Stored Waste

Retrieve, Ship

~etrieve, Treat, Ship

a , .

( a ) These alternatives or concepts were developed in .the appendices of the alternatives document, rather than in the main body of the report.

I n the case of waste processing b.v slagging pyrolvsis, develop-

ment studies were underway during preparation of the alternatives document. Therefore, slagging pyrolysis was not inc l~~ded in the body

of the report b u t rather in an appendix.

This referenced stud.y of. a1 ternat'ives provides the b'asic informa-

tion fo r both the EIS described in Subsection .7.3,2 and. the .present

evaluations of alternatives reported in th i s document. However, both

follow-up documents are updating the concepts of the referenced study.

7.3.2 Environmental Impact Statement for INEL TRU Waste Manage- ment. An environmental impact statement i s currently in preparation

for alternatives for TRU wnste management - a t tkc.RWMC. 00th buried

. and stored TRU waste will be addressed. The projected completion datp

of the draft EIS i s l a t e in CY 1979. The study i s analyzing the environmental impact, r isks , costs, and implications of selected major

a1 ternat ives.

The EIS i s a formal, in-depth study. The resu l t s of experimental environmental studies, currently in progress, wi 11 be incorporated

into the EIS. More detail will be provided on fewer management con-

cepts than i s the case fo r the environmental studies presented in the

present document.

7.4 THE CURRENT STUDY

7.4.1 -Guidelines for the Study. For the purposes of the present study, the guidelines discussed below were formulated and followed t o

provide a common baseline. I t was recognized that revisions in regu-

lations and in national policies for waste management, occurring dur-

ing and af te r the study and the report preparation, could resul t in a

departure from these guidelines. Thus, concepts developed under the

present guidelines could require 'modification before implementation.

7.4.1.1 General

(1) The study shall identify and evaluate alterna- t ives , and concepts within these al ternat ives , for long-term management of TRU waste stored a t the RWMC. (Included i s the TRU waste that i s expected t o ' b e received until 1985 fo r storage.)

NOTE : The buried TRU waste I s not considered in th i s study.

(2) Because of large uncertainties i n waste generatian ra tes and in waste management policies and 'prac- t i ces a f t e r the s t a r t of the campaign, the principal eva.luations and faci 1 i t i e s layouts shall not r e f l ec t the effects of managing TRU waste that may be received af te r the s t a r t , of the campaign. These ef fec ts shall be addressed separately (see Appendix c ) .

(3) The study shall .address three scenarios: f 1 ) a ,

federal repository will be available; (2)' a federal repository will be avail able, b u t will be delayed by 20 years; and (3) a federal repository wi.11 not be available.

(4) Implementation of any 1 ong-term waste management al ternat ive shall be assumed to commence in 1985 or as soon thereafter as practicable.

NOTE : In this document, a l l references to operations.occurring in the year 1985

are made only for ,the purposes of the study and should be understood in the context of th i s guideline. No assurance can be given tha t the operations wi.11,

in fact, occur in 1985, even if such

operations are selected for implementa-

tion.

(5) Any concept that proposes retrieval , processing, and disposal of the waste shall be capable of

* completion within an operating period of approxi-

mately 10 yr.

NOTE : The requirement to complete the campaign

. within 10 yr is an arbitrary constraint

imposed only for convenience in the

present,study. Longer campaigns, per-

haps up to 40 yr, appear to be feasible.

A longer campaign would reduce the pro-

cessing rate requirements. Table 7-2

presents comparisons of processing rates,

given various lengths of campaigns. The

numbers in Table 7-2 can be derived from

the information in the guideTines of

Subsection 7.4.1.2. . .

(6) For the purpose of performing the shipment ,analyses

in this study, the Federal Repository shall be

assumed to be located near Carlsbad, New Mexico:-

(7) Except for possible shipment to the Federal Repos-

itory, no dispos$l shall be contemplated outside

of the INEL.

(8) Facilities for disposal of retrieved waste at

' the INEL shall be designed to a1 low the removal

of waste for a' period of 40 yr following initial emplacement, after which disposal may be irre-

trievable.

TABLE 7-2

. . STORED WASTE FOR.SEVERAL LENGTHS,OF CAMPAIGN

Processing Feed Rate

Length o f 'Campaign -

f o r Stored Waste ( 4

(a ) Process-ing r a t e s do no t inc lude coal, bark, makeup s o i l , o r concrete. ,

( b ) 220 opera t ing daysly'r.

( c ) Rates are i d e n t i c a l f o r . .a1 1 methods o f processing.

(d ) Volumes o f waste. t o be processed each year are averages and inc lude the an t i c ipa ted volumes o f waste generated by r e t r i e v a l and processing operat ions and.by r e l a t e d decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) operat ions ..(See Subsection 7..4.1.2. ).

(9 ) For any concept t h a t proposes no t sh ipp ing the

waste t o a Federal Repository, maintenance and

s u r v e i l l a n c e e f f o r t s , s h a i l ' be assumed t o cont inue

f o r 100 y r a f t e r imp'lementation o f t h e concept.

NOTE : This t i m e pe r iod has been recommended- I

(EPA 1978) as the 1, imit f o r assumed

r e l i a n c e o n . i n s t i t u t i o n a 1 c o n t r o l f o r

p r o t e c t i o n o f r a d i o a c t i v e waste. . . - A l l . .

d isposal f a c i l i t i e s would be d.esigned. t o

p rov ide passive i s o l a t i o n f o r t h e r a d i o - . I _ nuc l ides f o r t ime per iods f a r i n excess

o f t h e 100-yr per iod.

(10) Concepts t h a t would r e q u i r e development o f new

technology (as opposed t o 'appl i c a t i o n s o f present

technology) before t h e i r implementation s h a l l no t

be considered.

NOTE : Even f o r the case o f de lay ing r e t r i e v a l -

by 20 yr, t h e -development o f no new

technology i s assumed . i n th.is .study.

There i s no guarantee t h a t s i g n i f i c a n t

new techno1 ogy f o r TRU waste management

w i l l develop w i t h i n a 20-yr t ime frame.,

Furthermore, the fokm that '"any s.uch

development might , t a k e i s a mat te r o f ,

con jec ture and i s no t amenable t o s tudy , .. , . .

f o r a document such as t h i s .

(11) A l l f a c i l i t i e s s h a l l be designed so t h a t a l l e f -

f l u e n t s w i l l be l i m i t e d t o l e v e l s cons i s ten t w i t h

the requirements o f e x i s t i n g regu la t ions .

. .

(12) All facilities shall be designed to limit radiation exposures to operating personnel to levels

consistent with the requirements-of existing regulations. I

. .

(13) The waste shall be 'monitored to provide an assessment of plutonium content after retrieval, during

pr0cess.i ng, and after packaging.

(14) Any contaminated soil intermixed with the stored waste shall be treated in the same manner as the ,TRU waste.

I

(15) Concepts proposing retrieval of the stored waste

must provide a facility in which the air surrounding the waste is maintained at a subatmospheric pressure during waste retrieval.

NOTE : Because the stored waste is packaged in special containers, maintaining subat-

.. mospher ic pressure surrounding the waste may not be needed during retrieval.

-' . Imp1 ementat i on of this requirement, or

lack thereof, will be based upon continuing evaluation of the integrity of the

storage containers. In the present study, it was conservatively assumed that the subatmospheric pressure would be required.

(16)'Any processing of retrieved waste shall be per- . * formed at or near the RWMC.

(17) No concept -,shall be studied that proposes recl ama-

tion of fissile material.

(18) Any f a c i l i t y f o r t r e a t i n g o r packaging the

.TRU waste must .provide double containment ,' sup-

p l y i n g p rog ress i ve l y . 1 ower pressures i n the d i rec-

t i o n of increas ing contamination.

(19) Transfer o f unprocessed waste s h a l l be by a damage-

r e s i s t a n t vehic le, w i t h a seal able inner 1 iner .

Shipment o f processed waste w i t h i n the INEL s h a l l

be over a committed roadway and s h a l l be by con-

vent iona l semi t ra i l e rs .

(21) A l l waste shipped t o t h e Federal Reposi tory s h a l l

be processed t o s a t i s f y the D r a f t 'Acceptance C r i-

t e r i a o f t h e Waste I s o l a t i o n P i l o t P lan t (WIPP)

(see Appendix D).

NOTE : The d r a f t acceptance c r i t e r i a i n Appen-

d i x D are sub jec t t o change, which i n

t u r n cou ld a f f e c t ,the s e l e c t i o n o f the

method o f processing t h e INEL TRU waste.

(22) A l l waste shipped t o the Federal Reposi tory s h a l l

be contained t o meet Department o f Transpor ta t ion

(DOT) requirements. The use o f ATMX 600 r a i l cars

s h a l l be assumed.

MOTE : This study s h a l l no t address the a v a i l -

, a b i l i t y o f t he ATMX 600 r a i l cars f o r

shipment o f INEL TRU waste a t t h e t ime

o f i n t e r e s t . Furthermore, i t i s rec-

ognized t h a t these cars may n o t s a t i s f y

t h e sh ipp ing regu la t i ons i n ' 'e f fect a t

' the s t a r t o f t he campaign. I n t h a t

event, t h e ATMX cars would be replaced

w i t h cars t h a t would comply w i t h the

regu la t fons i n e f f e c t a t t h a t t ime.

7.4.1.2 Waste Inventory and Characteristics

(1) The volume and radionuclide content of the waste projected through January 1, 1985, (see Tables 4-1 ' and 4-2) shall be used in the study. Other characteristics assumed for the waste shall be those given in Subsection 4.3.

(2) Waste retrieval and processing operations for the stored waste shall be assumed to generate an addi- .

3 tional 200,000 ft of waste, such as contami- . . I nated hand to,ols and protective clothing. An

3 estimated 45.,000 ft of waste requiring disposal would result from Q&D of the retrieval and treatment facilities for stored waste.

NOTE : It is recognized that the quantities of self-generated waste and of D&D waste

. would depend, to some extent, on the

methods of retrieval and processing selected. However, the magnitude of this effect on the total quantity of waste to be managed is expected to be

. . less than 5%. Therefore, no allowance

for these small differences in waste

quantities was included in the evalua- 'tions in this study.

(3) The following combustible/noncombustible volume ratios shall be assumed: stored TRU waste, 25/75; self-generated waste, 9515; D&D waste, 5/95.

3 (4) The following values for density, in lb/ft ,

shall be assumed: stored TRU waste, 35 overall (13 for combustible and 42.33 for noncombustible);

self -generated waste, 8.4 overall. (8 for combust i - ble and 16 for noncombustible); D&D waste, 50

overall (15 for combustible and 51.84 for noncombustible).

NOTE: The den.sity.for each noncombustible

- portion listed was estimated based on the overall density, the density of

. . combustibles, and the percentage of

combustibles. (For self-generated waste . only, it was-the overall1 density that

was calculated. ) The 'numbers of significant digits shown above fnr such derived values do not .reflect the accuracy of the va.lues, but are- retained to ensure a closed materials balance.

I

. . "(5) The radionuclide. compositions for the self-generated.waste and the D&D waste shall be assumed to

. . !be the same as the TRU waste from which they ori-

gi nated.

.(6) For calculating releases of radionuclides, the particle size of airborne radionuclides shall be

* . assumed conservatively to be 1 micron acti,vity medi an aerodynamic diameter (AMAD) for accidental

releases.and 0.3 micron AMAD for normal operational re1 eases.

: 7.4,1.3 Risk' Analysis

. (1 ) The risk analysis shall address radiological

risks to the public from accidental releases. Normal operational releases shall be considered in the environmental impact analysis. See Guide- line (4) in Subsection 7.4.1.5.

( 2 ) he ana lys is s h a l l summarize both r a d i o l o g i c a l and

nonrad io log i ca l hazards t o the workers.

( 3 ) F,or concepts ,that propose sh ipp ing the waste t o

t h e Federal Repository, t he r i s k ana lys i s s h a l l

ex tend, f rom r e t r i e v a l through r e c e i p t a t the F,ed-

era1 ,Reposi t o ry .

NOTE : The r a d i o l o g i c a l e f f e c t s associated w i t h

long- term management a t t he Federal Re-

p o s i t o r y are being evaluated i n o ther '

s tudies. The Repos i to ry r i s k s and long-

term r a d i o l o g i c a l e f f e c t s , when evalu-

ated, should be added t o t h e r i s k s and

1 ong-term r,adiological e f f e c t s analyzed

i n t h i s study, t o o b t a i n t h e t o t a l r i s k

and e f f e c t s f o r A l t e r n a t i v e s 3, 4, and

6.

( 4 ) For concepts t h a t propose l e a v i n g the waste i n

place, w i t h or w i thou t engineered confinement,

t he r i s k ana lys is s h a l l cover two t ime periods:

, ( a ) t h e 100-yr p e r i o d f o l l o w i n g implementation,

and (b ) t h e post-100-yr per iod.

(,5) For concepts t h a t propose r e t r i e v a l , processing,

and d isposal w i t h i n the INEL, t he r i s k ana lys is

s h a l l cover: (.a) t he operat ions f rom r e t r i e v a l

a through emplacement a t the d isposal s i t e , (b) t h e

ensuing p e r i o d t o ,100 yr, and ( c ) t h e post-100-yr

per iod . . ( 6 ) For concepts t h a t propose de lay ing r e t r i e v a l f o r

20 y r or . r e t r i e v . i n g and s t o r i n g 20 y r be fore sh ip -

ment- to t h e Federal Repository, t h e r i s k ana lys is

shal l cover: ( a ) the 20-yr delay period, and (b ) the operations from r e t r i eva l through r ece ip t a t the Federal Repository.

. .

( 7 ) Risks associated w i t h the D&D of any f a c i l i t i e s

proposed in the study shal l be analyzed.

( 8 ) Estimates of the frequency of occurrence of postulate.d incidents shal l be based, where

possible, , onexperi.ence gained in handling of waste and in experimental retr ' ieval p ro jec t s a t the RWMC.

( 9 ) Risks associated w i t h sabotage shal l not be ,- ' addressed in t h i s study.

,

(10) The average csomposi tai ons , of the waste, summarized in Tables 4-2 and 4-3, sha l l be used f o r the dose and r i sk calcula t ions .

(11) Demographic project ions sha l l be based on 1978 popul a t i on es t imates , w i t h a 1% (geometric) increase per year u n t i 1 the year 2085. After 2085, t he

- . popul at ion shal l be assumed t o remain constant.

7.4.1.4 Cost Estimates

(1 ) The time ~ e r i o d s evaluated i n t h e c o s t s tud ies shall- be the same as those f o r the r i s k evalua- t ions i n Subsection 7.4.'1.3, w i t h t he fo l loying exceptions: ( a ) no c'osts sha l l be assessed f o r time periods beyond 100 yr a f t e r implementation, and (b ) the cos t s assumed t o be assessed f o r long- term management a t the Federal Repository sha l l be included.

J

, (2 ) : Estimates. o f d i r e c t c a p i t a l cos ts s h a l l be based

on p r i c e s i n mid-Ju ly 1975, t h e date of t he be-

g inn ing o f the study.

(3 ) The cos t o f labor and m a t e r i a l s i n est imates of

Operat ing and Maintenance (O&M) cos ts s h a l l be

based on 1977 data f o r the INEL, escalated t o

mid-July 1978.

. . I (4 ) F a c i l i t y t o s t est imates s h a l l n o t . i nc lude such

s i t e serv ices a s ' u t i l i t i e s , water; and sewerage

beyond the "5 ft l i n e " around the f a c i l i t y .

( 5 ) Costs associated w i t h D&D o f any f a c i l i t i e s pro-

posed b y t h e study s h a l l be inc luded i n the e s t i -

m'ates.

( 6 ) Shipment cos ts s h a l l be based on t r a n s p o r t i n g the

waste from the RWMC t o the l o c a t i o n o f concern.

(7.) T h e cos t o f DOT-approved. sh ipp ing . conta iners s h a l l

be included,where app l icab le .

(8 ) The cos t 'of ATMX r a i l cars; assumed t o be govern-

ment-owned, s h a l l n o t be ' inc luded.

7.4.1.5 Environmental- - . . . . -

(1) The environmental aspects of t h e b r o j e c t s h a l l be

descr ibed us ing a v a i l a b l e data. .

(2) No' f i e l d ' study, t e s t i n g , o r surveys (ou ts ide ' o f . those ongoing o r a l ready planned and funded) ,sh.all

be conducted du r ing t h e pe r iod o f the study.

( 3 ) The time periods evaluated for the environmental

st,udy shall be the same as those evaluated for the risk study.

( 4 ) 0nly.normal operational releases shall be consid-

' er,ed ,in# the environmental impact analysis. Acci- dents shall be analyzed in the risk analysis. See

Guideline (1) in Subsection 7.4.1.3.

(5) Shipments shall meet Department of Transportation

requirements. These requirements preclude normal operational releases. Accidents associated with shipments shall be discussed in the risk analysis.

( 6 ) Dose estimates shall be based on the current (1978)

data bank of meteorological characteristics and transfer coefficients.

(7) . Demographic. projections* shall be based on 1978 popul ation estimates, with a 1% (geometric) increase

per year until the.year 2085. After 2085, the population shall be, assumed to. remain constant.

(8). Descriptions of archaeological and historical remnants shall be derived from avail able data. The National Register of Historic Places shall be consulted along with the State Historic Preserva- tion Officer and the State Archaeologist.

I '

7.4.2 Terminology. , I'n the discussion and evaluation of long-

term management of TRU waste, the term "alternative", "concept", and "module" is used. . For ,the. present - document, these terms are defined as follows:

(1) Alternative: a general method of managing the TRU waste. For example, Alternative 5 is "Retrieve as Scheduled, Pro- cess, and Dispose of on the INEL".

(2) Concept: a more specific . . method for implementing an alter-' . , native through the use of 'a series of modules, defined be-

low. A concept is composed of one or more modules. For example; in'~1ternative 5, Concept 5-a would entail direct- control retrieval, inciner.ation by slagging pyrolysis, pack- .

aging, and deep rock disposal (shaft, access) in the Lemhi Range.

(3) Module: a specific operation, such as direct-control retr i eval or s 1 agg i ng pyrolysis :

7.4.3 Alternatives and Concepts Studied. Alternatives and concepts studied- in this document are identified in the simplified deci- -

. sion tree presented in Figure 7-1 and in Table 7-3.

The 'six major a1 ternatives, studied for managing stored TRU waste stem from * . three possibilities: (1) 'a Federal Repository will be ava.ilable as scheduled, in 1985., (2) .a Federal Repository will be available, but will be. delayed until the year 2005, and (3) a Federal Repository will not be available. Alternative 3 falls into the first category; A1 ternat i ves 4 and .6, into the second category; and A1 ternatives 1, 2, and 5, into the third.

In '~lternative 1, the TRU waste would be' left in place, as is. Existing management (e.g., monitoring of the environment for evidence of migration of the waste, maintenance of the cover over the waste, and maintenance of security systems) would be continued and upgraded for 100 yr, the assumed minimum duration of societpl control. A description of Alternative 1 is found in Subsection 8.1.

Alternative 1

. Improve confinement Add top 8 side 8 boltom

Alternative 2 barriers

b-I Immobilize in place I Concept 2-c

Stored ,-

TRU - waste

Delav

and package ederal Repository Alternative 3 '

20-year storaEe Incinerate Federal Repository

at the INEL and 2

package 1

Retrieve -as Deep rock disposal: shaft access - scheduled I Ship 8 dispose (in Lemhi Range) (1 985)

Direct Compact. Process on INEL

I control - immobilize, I

retrieval 8 package Alternative 5 Deep rock disposal: tunnel access - (in Lemhi Range) -

Package Engineered shallow land disposal . only -

(at Site 14)

Engineered surface facility (near RWMC! I

i Ship 8 Direct Incinerate dispose Federal Process control and - Repository Alternative 6 retrieval package --

Fig. 7-1 A1 ternatives and concepts studied for long-term man3genent o f stored INEL TRU waste.

TABLE 7-3

ALTERNATIVES AND CONCEPTS STUDIED FOR LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT OF STORED INEL TRU WASTE . . .

4 b . - -

A1 te rna t i ves Concepts . . Descr ip t ion

1 Leave As I s

2 Provide Improved Confinement

Above and Around 2-a \

2-b Above, Around, and Below 2-c Imnob i l i za t ion

3 Retr ieve As Scheduled, Process, Ship To Federal Keposi tory

Di rect -Contro l Retr ieval , S P ( ~ )

Retr ieve As Scheduled, Process, Store 20 Years, Ship To Federal Repository

Di rect -Contro l Retr ieval , SP

Retr ieve As Scheduled. Process, Deep Rock b isposal - Shaft Access ( I n Lemhi Rangel

5-a Di rect -Contro l Retr ieval , SP 5-b Di rect -Contro l Retr ieval , C P T ( ~ ) 5-c Di rect -Contro l Re t r ieva l , P K G ( ~ )

Retr ieve As Scheduled, Process. Deep Rock, Disposal - Tunnel Access ( I n Lemhi Ranger

Di rect -Contro l Retr ieval , SP Direct -Contro l Retr ieval , CPT Di rect -Contro l Retr ieval , PKG

Retr ieve As Scheduled. Process, Engineered 1 Direct -Contro l Retr ieval , SP Direct -Contro l Retr ieval , CPT Direct -Contro l Retr ieval , PKG

. Retr ieve As'.Scheduled, Process, Disposal I n Engineered Surf ace Faci 1 i t y (Near RWFiCl

5-3 Di rect -Contro l Retr ieval , SP 5-k . Direct-Con,trol Retr ieval , CPT 5- 1 Di rect -Contro l Retr ieval . PKG

. - Delay Re t r ieva l 20 Years, Process, Ship To Federal Repository

Di rect -Contro l Retr ieval . SP

(a) SP - s laggin9 Pyro1ys. i~ and Packaging . .

(b) CPT - Compaction, Imnobi l izat ion, and Packaging (c ) PKG - Packaging Only

In Alternative 2, the TRU waste would also be.left in place, but improved confinement would be added. Concepts within this alternative differ in the methods or combinations .of methodsfor'accomplishing the improved confinement. Alternative 2 is described in detail in Subsec- tion 8.2.

In Alternative 3, the TRU waste would be retrieved as scheduled (begi nning in 1985), processed, and shipped to the Federal Repository. Only one concept for Alternative 3 was studied: direct-control retrieval, followed by slagging pyrolysis, packaging, and shipment by rail to the Federal Repository. Reasons are given at the beginning of Section 9 for studying only these retrieval, processing, and shipment methods for alternatives (3, 4, and 6) involving waste disposal at the Federal Repository. Alternative 3 is described in Subsection 9.1.

-*

In Alternative 4, the TRU waste would be retrieved as scheduled 6

(beginning in 1985), processed by slagging pyrolysis and packaging, stored at the INEL for 20 yr, and shipped to the (delayed) Federal Repository in the year 2005. Alternative 4 is discussed in Subsec- tion 9.2.

In Alternative 5, the waste would be retrieved as scheduled in

1985, processed, and disposed of on the INEL. The concepts studied

differ in the type of processing and the method and location of dis-

posal. Processing modules may be one of the following: (1) slagging pyrolysis and packaging; (2) compaction, immobil ization, and packag-

ing; or (3) packaging only. Disposal modules include: (1) deep rock disposal in the Lemhi Range with access by a shaft, (2) deep rock

disposal in the Lemhi Range with access by a tunnel, (3) engineered shallow-land disposal at Site814, or (4) disposal in an engineered

surface facility near the RWMC. All combinations.of processing

modules with disposal modules were studied. Alternative 5 is

described further in Section 10.

The onsite disposal modules were developed by first selecting a . .

broad set of the most technically appealing disposal methods. Then each method was matched with an attractive disposal location, for that "- ' .

method, on the INEL. Although many different combinations of methods and locations could have been studied (see Appendix B for further

discussion), the modules selected for detailed analysis are representative of the preferred disposal methods and onsite locations.

In Alternative 6, retrieval would be delayed for 20 yr (to the

year 2005). Processing would involve sl agging pyrolysis and packaging, and the TRU waste would be shipped to the Federal Repository. Alter- native 6 is described in detail in Subsection 9.3. Except for the 20-yr delay in retrieval, this alternative is identical to Alterna-

tive 3.

Possible interactions between,management methods for the stored TRU waste and the buried TRU waste are mentioned in Section 11. The

estimated environmental effects of the alternatives and concepts studied are presented in Section 12. Radiological risks to the public are estimated in Section 13. Both radiological and nonradiological hazards to the workers are.'estimated in Section 14, and costs in Sec- tion 15. Section 16 discusses the requirements for implementation. The effects of implementing the various alternatives, concepts, and modules are compared in Section 17.

7.4.4 Alternatives and Conce~ts Identified But Not Studied. While the six alternatives studied for stored waste do not include all

possible combinations of concepts and modules, they are representative alternatives within the limits of the study guidelines (Subsec- tion 7.4.1). The number of possible alternatives and concepts is so

3

1 arge as to preclude developing and evaluating each to the depth of

detail presented in Sections 8 through 16. Therefore, a number of a1 ternatives, concepts, and ideas that were identified but not studied

f u r t h e r i n . the main body of the document are discussed . b r i e f l y . i n

Appendix 0 . These a l t e r n a t i v e s , concepts, and ideas inc lude:

(1 ) leave- i n p lace opt ions, ( 2 ) r e t r i e v a l methods, (3 ) processing

methods, ( 4 ) immobil i z a t i o n methods, (5 ) storage methods, (6) methods

f o r shipment, (7 ) methods and l o c a t i o n s f o r o n s i t e d isposal , and

(8 ) o ther miscel 1 aneous opt ions.

8. ALTERNATIVES INVOLVING LEAVE-IN-PLACE MANAGEMENT

I This section discusses the alternatives and concepts developed

for leaving the stored waste in place. (See Figure 7-1 .) In Alter-

native 1, the waste would be left as is. In Alternative 2, improved

confinement would be provided for the waste.

For these alternatives, existing waste management procedures,

such as maintenance, surveil 1 ance, and 'security, would be retained

or upgraded as necessary. These procedures would be modified to suit

the revised containment of Alternative 2. Guideline (9) in Subsec-

tion 7.4.1.1 specifies that the waste management procedures would be

continued for 100 yr after implementation in 1985.

8.1 ALTERNATIVE 1: LEAVE STORED TRU WASTE IN PLACE AS IS

8.1.1 . General Procedures. In Alternative 1, the cover of plywood, polyvinyl sheeting, and about 3 ft of earth over the stored

TRU waste, described in Subsection 4.2, would be maintained. The

current practice of periodic visual inspection would be continued to

detect settling in the storage mound, to detect damaged fences and signs, and to survey general conditions. Procedures would be periodi-

cal ly reviewed and updated.

8.1.2 Monitoring and Sampling Procedures. The present environ-

mental monitoring and sampling procedures (Hedahl and Janke 1978,

Harness and Passmore 1976a) covering the area within the RWMC would be

continued and expanded. Monitoring would be continually improved to

identify any long-term local changes in the concentration of radio-

nuclides in the air, water, and soil. Measurements and reporting of

conditions outside the perimeter of 'the RWMC, currently performed by

the Radiological and Environmental Sciences Laboratory (RESL) of the

DOE, would be continued. The present procedures are described in the

following paragraphs. These procedures would be kept current with

developing technology and would be expanded as required.

Radiation surveys of the ground surface would be continued to

ensure that the general area of the RWMC would not present a radiological hazard. Cumulative radiation exposure data would be gath,ered..

-

The current soil sampling program at the RWMC involves tests for detecting plutonium at the surface and at depths of 6 and 12 in. Studies are made of the potential for horizontal migration near the ground surface and for vertical migration downward below the surface.

Air monitors are presently installed at several locations around the perimeter of the RWMC to determine the airborne concentration of radionuclides. Analyses have shown that the predominant radionuclides are cobalt-60 and cesium-137. At no time in the past 4 yr has the recorded air concentrat ion exceeded 10% of the a1 1 owable control led- area concentration given in ERDAM-0524 (ERDA 1977a). The results of the air sampling program at the RWMC are given in Subsection 5.1, Harness and Passmore (1976a), Harness and Passmore (1976b), Dolenc and

Janke (1977), and Hedahl and Janke (1978).

The lack of surface water near the RWMC restricts water sampling activities to collecting runoff from rainfall or melting snow. These samples are analyzed for contamination. The water sampling results are presented in the same four reports listed above for air sampling results and in Subsection 5.3.

Recently initiated monitoring by the RESL detects the accumulation of radionuclides in plants or animals. (See Subsection 5.7.) Knowledge of how various radioisotopes pass through the human food chain is used to guide the sampling. Food crops grown in offsite

areas are monitored to determine the uptake of radioisotopes from

soils. Soil samples are collected from burrows of small animals and are analyzed for the presence of radionuclides. The samples analyzed to date have generally contained quantities of radionuclides that are either below or only slightly above the limits of detection.

Currently, moisture monitoring i s accomplished by lowering a

combination neutron source and thermal neutron detector into perfo- rated pipes driven through the soi l to the basalt and by recording the reflected thermal neutron flux. A record i s thereby provided of the amount of moisture contained in the subsurface so i l . To date, no

abnormal moisture trends have been detected.

Wells No. 87 through 89, located around the periphery of the RWMC, and Well No. 90, located within the RWMC (see Figure 5-3), are used to sample the aquifer a t depths of approximately 600 f t below the ground surface. Aquifer samples have also been drawn from the RWMC

production we1 1. Perched water samples have been drawn from We1 1

No. 92 (about 214 f t deep), which i s located within the S~~hs~rrfacrl D,isposal Area (SDA). The resu l t s of the sampling provide a record of the radionuclide content of the subsurface water in and around the RWMC (see Subsection 5.6).

Monitoring of the environmental parameters w i t h i n portions of the TSA pads, in i t ia ted in ear ly 1974, would be continued. Dew point and

temperature measuring probes have been pl aced a t various depths inside the arrays of waste containers (Hedahl and Janke 1978). Metal corro-

sion coupons were placed throughout the stacked waste in March of 1975. These coupons consist of painted metal s t r i p s that are intended

t o provide information concerning the possible corrosion of the s tee l drums. In April of 1978, several coupons were retrieved from Cell 6

of TSA (see Figure 3-10). The condition of the retrieved coupons was comparable to the condition of the s teel drums removed from Cell 6 in the TSA reentry study (see Subsection 4.4.3). As on the drums,

f a i r l y large amounts of f r ee rus t were also found on the coupons. The coupons also exhibited small areas of corrosion.

The containers of stored waste would eventually deter iorate ,

allowing the soil cover to sett . le. The average density of the stored 3 waste and containers i s estimated to be 35 I b l f t . As the waste and

so i l cover compacts and s e t t l e s , i t i s assumed tha t the average den- s i t y of the waste and containers would eventually reach the natural

3 s o i l dens i t y o f about 80 I b / f t . Therefore, the waste would s e t t l e t o a l i t t l e less than h a l f t h e present he.ight. Waste has been. s to red

t o a he igh t o f approximately 16 ft. The s e t t l e d he igh t o f the waste,

i n c l u d i n g the o r i g i n a l 3 - f t s o i l cover, ,is est imated t o be a minimum

o f 10 ft. Thus, a f t e r s e t t l i n g o f the waste, the top o f the mound o f

s o i l would s t i l l be w e l l above t h e surrounding area, thereby p rov id ing

drainage.

8.2 ALTERNATIVE 2: LEAVE STORED TRU WASTE I N PLACE AND PROVIDE

IMPROVED ENGINEERED CONFINEMENT

This a l t e r n a t i v e considers the means o f p r o v i d i n g a d d i t i o n a l

in -p lace p r o t e c t i o n aga ins t pene t ra t i on o f water and i n t r u s i o n by

animals and p l a n t roo ts . Two concepts f o r cons t ruc t i ng confinement

b a r r i e r s f o r the. waste, designated 2-a (above and around) and 2-b

(above, around, and bylow), are discussed w i t h i n t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e .

One immobi 1 i z a t i o n concept (2-c) i s a1 so discussed. These concepts

are i l l u s t r a t e d i n F igure 8-1. The b lock f l o w diagrams are shown i n

F igu re 8-2.

8.2.1 Concept 2-a. I n t h i s concept, an a d d i t i o n a l 1 0 - f t cover

of compacted cJay, p l u s a 3 - f t cover o f b a s a l t r i p r a p , would be b u i l t

up over the e x i s t i n g mounds on the TSA pads (F igure 8-1). The c l a y I

would be placed i n layers, each o f which would be compacted. Clay i s

composed of smal l p a r t i c l e s t h a t pack c l o s e l y together, i n h i b i t i n g

water penet ra t ion . Clay a lso expands and con t rac ts w i thou t c rack ing

when >wet, ' thereby r e t a i n i n g i t s f l e x i b i l i t y and res i s tance t o penetra-

t i o n by water. If observat ions i n d i c a t e t h a t c l a y might no t be s a t i s -

f act0r.y f o r the 1 0 - f t mound, bentoni te, a l o c a l l y a v a i l ab le c o l l o i d a l

c lay , would he used. .Independent l abo ra to ry t e s t s o f ben ton i te have

i n d i c a t e d exce l l en t res i s tance t o moisture penetrat ion.

The c l a y mound would be sloped t o p rov ide drainage. Three f e e t

o f crushed b a s a l t r i p r a p would then be layered over the c l a y t o serve

' as' an eros ion 'deterrent . 'Both c l a y and b a s a l t are a v a i l a b l e near t h e

RWMC . 8-4

APPROX. 3 ' THICKNESS

7 EXIST ING COMPACTED

OF BASALT RIPRAP S O I L - APPROX. 3 ' THICK SLOPED TO DRAIN 7

EXIST ING GRAD

POLYVIXYL SHEETING SECTIONS OF WASTE . .

Concept 2-a - Confinement Above & Around

Typical sect ion through. the TSA pad showing mound and r i p r a p cover.

I

CLAY AND BASALT RIPRAP EMPLACED AFTER TRENCHES ARE FILLED

CONCRETE AFTER GROUT EMPLACEMENT

Concept 2- b Conf i nemen t Above, Around, & Below

..Concept 2-a w i t h grout seal o f sediment under ashpal t pad.

EXIST ING COMPACTED S O I L

PLYWOOD AND ' POLYVINYL SHEETING

STORED WASTE

EXIST ING SEDIMENTJ GROUT P I P E (TYPICAL)

Concept 2-c

Imrnobi 1 i z a t i o n w i t h grout i n j ec t i on ;

Fig. 8-1.. Typical sect ions through waste and c o i f inement f o r ~l te rna t i ve '2.

CONCEPT 2 - Q COVER

< . CONCURRENT

,

-. CONCEPT 2.b COVER PLUS GROUT UNDERNEATH PAD

PILE DRIVER LOPDER .OP BACK WE . J REPEAT FOA TRENCH SECTION BY SECTION

DRIVE IN SHEET PILING

CONCEPT 2 - C IMMOBILIZATION BY GROUT ENCAPSULATION

SMALL FRONT END

- EXCAVATE TRENCH BETWEEN PILINGS

INSERT WK)CIT WHILE WlTKlRAW-

TUBES THRU

SEUYENT BEU)

2 .

- -

REPEAT BY SECTIONS -

-

F i g . 8-2, Block flow d iag ram f o r A?Zerna t i v -e 2 .

FORCE GROUT TUBES INTO

INSERT GROUT WHILE WITHDRAW- ING TUBES

- - FILL TRENCH . WITH CONCRETE

- 7

I REMOVE SHEET

PILING

.As discussed in Subsection 8.1.2, the containers of stored

waste would eventually deteriorate, allowing the soil to settle.

The settled height. of the waste, including the original 3-ft soil

cover and the 13-ft clay and basalt cover just described, is estimated

to be a minimum of 23 ft. Thus, after settling of the .waste, the top

of the clay and' basalt cover would be well above the surrounding area,

thereby providing drainage.

8.2.2 Concept 2-b. This concept would include the clay and . riprap cover described for Concept 2-a. Increased isolation would be

provided by pressure-grout sealing of the sediments beneath the as-

phalt pad. Downward migration of the waste would thus be minimized as

long as the grout remained intact. Assurance cannot be given that the

grout would remain intact for the thousands of years required for the

radionuclides to decay to very low levels. By placing the grout

several feet below the asphalt pad, the ion retention properties of

the sediment would serve to slow the downward migration of radio-

nucl ides. # ,

The technique of pressure-grouting was recognized and used in the - 19th century (Karol 1968). Early grouting projects undoubtedly used

solids for grouting material. Sodium silicate, or water glass, the

first chemical pressure-grout additive, was introduced in the early

20th century. It was used extensively through the 1960s. In specific

applications, it is still in use. With the advent of new chemical

add it ives in the 1950s, chemical pressure-grout has become more widely

used. This grout is frequently injected into dry, granular, strati- fied, or fractured formations to increase their strength. However,

most chemical grouting applications'are related to blocking water flow

or moisture penetration, such as preventing water from seeping through

sand under waterfront structures or blocking the flow of water into

mine shafts and tunnels (Epstein and Barvenik 1975).

Pressure-grout ing- , is accomplished by f o r c i n g pipes i n t o the s o i l ,

o f t e n t o depths o f several hundred f e e t , and pumping g rou t through the-"--

p ipes i n t o t h e s o i l as t h e p ipes are withdrawn. . I n s o i l o r rock fo r -

mations too dense t o permi t the grout p ipes t o be fo rced through them,

holes are d r i l l e d and t h e p ipes i nse r ted i n t o t h e holes. As a p ipe - i s

withdrawn, pumping continues, and the grout i s fo rced outward around

t h e end o f t h e .pipe, o f ten t o a d is tance o f severa l f ee t . When t h e

end o f the p ipe has reached the surface, pumping i s stopped. The p ipe

i s then r e i n s e r t e d i n t o t h e s o i l a predetermined d is tance from i t s

f i r s t loca t ion , and pumping i s res ta r ted . By repeat ing these opera-

t i o n s , a s o l i d wall,, o r cu r ta in , o f g rou t i s formed i n t h e s o i l o r . .

rock. App l i ca t i on o f pressure-grout ing t o seal the sediments beneath .

t h e waste i n Concept 2-b woul~d be accomplished as described i n t h e . . .

f o l l o w i n g paragraphs.

Two p a r a l l e l rows o f sheet p i l i n g , 6 ft apart, would be d r i ven

down i n t o t h e sediment on each s ide o f t h e TSA pad. Excavat ion o f t h e

sediment between the sheet p i l i n g would produce a t rench along each

s ide o f the aspha l t pad. B r idg ing would be used t o prevent c o l l a p s e '

o f the p i l i n g i n t o the trench. The bottom o f the t rench would be

severa l f e e t below t h e depth a t which t h e g rou t p ipes are t o be i n - .

ser ted. The g rou t would be i nse r ted between 10 and 20 f t below grade,.

The exact depth would be determined by p r e l i m i n a r y s tud ies on t h e

depth and ion-exchange p r o p e r t i e s o f the sediment, the amount o f

ion-exchange c a p a b i l i t y desired, and t h e depth t o t h e b a s a l t beneath

the TSA. . A t the RWMC, the average sediment th ickness i s about 15 ft.

I f b a s a l t i s encountered a t shal lower depths, g rou t w i l l be i n j e c t e d

d i r e c t l y above the basa l t .

he grout p ipes would be fo rced through the sediment w i thou t

d r i l l i n g . The p ipes would be i nse r ted h o r i z o n t a l l y t o t h e center1 i r ie

o f the pad f rom each side, so t h a t the grout would form a complete

sea l under t h e pad. The g rou t would be made up of a m ix tu re o f p o r t -

land cement, f i n e l y d i v ided c lay, and one o r more o f the commercial ly

a v a i l a b l e chemical a d d i t i v e s used t o improve v i s c o s i t y and ai,d i n ' .

penet ra t ion . When the g rou t i ng i n one sec t i on i s completed, t he sheet

pilinq would 1 ) ~ removed to form the walls for a new section of the

trench. The portion of the trench where the grouting i s complete would be f i l l e d with concrete. The trench would he continued around each end of the TSA pad, so that the grout and the concrete-filled trenches would form an impervious barrier under the waste.

The groutinq would be done before the emplacement of the clay and riprap cover. - The clay would extend,out over the concrete-filled trenches, so that no water could enter the sediment.enclosed 6.v the c0ncret.e-fi 11 ed trenches and the grout floor.

8.2a.3 Concept 2-c. In th i s concept,, the waste would be immobi'l- ized in place by injecting grout into the waste and into the sediment.

,

beneath the pad. The waste would thereby be encascd in a massive ,

impermeab.le block of. grout. The grout injection woul d l he accompl i.shed as described in the following paragraphs.

Several' grout pipes would be forced through the 3-f t soil. 'cover, the waste, the asphalt pad, and skveral f ee t of the sediment below.. Figure 8-1 shows typical pipe locations. Pressure-grouting wolllc! b e

performed as described i n Concept 2-b until. the ends 'o f ' the pipe's had been withdrawn to the elevated surface of the' soi l cover. The grout pipes would then be relocated to an adjacent area'and .again forced. downward.into the underlying sediments. The procedure wo~~ld be repeated until the en t i re TSAGpad area had been treated.

The grout would form a solid mass around +he waste containers, ' .

and inside a'ny breached containers. The grout would not penetrate sound waste containers. However, the containers tkmselves would be surrounded by the grout. This immobilization method would make an.y future retr ieval extremely d i f f i cu l t .

. . . . " .

Any waste that might have been pushed downward by the' grout pipes

would also be immobilized in the grout. During i'nsert'ion and withdrawal, the. grout pipes would be provided with external containment t o , .

prevent the -spread of contamination. The -opt.imum grout mix and grout hole spacing would be determined in a t e s t .area.

8-9

The same g rou t ma te r i a l s would be used as those described i n t h e

prev ious subsection. Present ly , assurance cannot be g iven t h a t the

g rou t would remain i n t a c t f o r t h e ' thousands o f years requ i red f o r t h e

rad ionuc l i des t o decay t o very low leve l s . Tests t o determine' the

leachabi 1 i ty, permeabi 1 i ty, and s t r u c t u r a l s t a b i 1 i ty o f grouted v o l -

umes o f s o i l are planned f o r FY 1979 and 1980. Changes i n these

c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s w i t h t ime w i l l a lso be measured.

9. ALTERNATIVES INVOLVING RETRIEVAL, PROCESSING, AND SHIPMENT TO THE FEDERAL REPOSITORY

This section discusses the methods studied for (1) retrieval of TRU waste stored at the RWMC, (2) onsite processing, (3) packaging, and (4) shipment to the Federal Repository. Several options were considered for-each of these operations, but only one option for each

was evaluated further. A general layout of the current storage area and of the facilities developed for the waste management alternatives appears in Figure 9-1. The facilities to implement the alternatives have been designed, on a preconceptual basis, so that the retrieval, processing, and shtpping could be completed in a 10-yr campaign. See Guideline (5) in Subsection 7.4.1.1.

For retrieval, three methods were considered for handling the waste containers: (1) manual handling by operators; (2) handling by operator-control led equipment (direct control ); and (3) hand1 ing by remote-controlled equipment. The first method was not evaluated further because of unnecessary radiological exposure to the workers and the length of time required for retrieval. The third method was not

examined further because the results of the TSA reentry study (see Subsection 4.4.3) indicate that no significant overall advantages would accrue from remote-controlled handling of the stored TRU waste.

Four means were considered for providing confinement during waste retrieval operations: (1 ) open air retrieval (no confinement);

(2) use of a plastic-coated fabric structure supported by internal air pressure, to provide weather protection; (3) use of a moveable, solid- frame structure operating at ambient pressure; and (4) use of a moveable, sol id-frame structure, but operating at subatmospheric pressure. The fourth method was studied because, of the methods considered, only it would provide positive control against possible >

release of contamination. See Guideline (15) in Subsection 7.4.1.1.

O-

FEET

Fig . 9 -1 S i t e p lan f o r f a c i l i - t i e s f o r r e t r i e v a l , o n s i t e processing, and sh ipp ing t o t h e Federal Repository.

Four processing op t ions were considered: ( 1 ) sh ip as i s ; (2 ) r e -

package only; (3 ) compact, immobi 1 i r e , and package; and (4 ) i n c i n e r a t e

and package. Waste shipped t o the Federal Repos i to ry would have t o

s a t i s f y t h e acceptance c r i t e r i a a t the repos i to ry . D r a f t acceptance

c r i t e r i a were pub l ished i n J u l y 1977 (see Appendix D ) . These c r i -

t e r i a , which are sub jec t to, change, were used as a bas is f o r s e l e c t i n g

a processing method t o be s tud ied f o r these . a l t e r n a t i v e s (3, 4, and

6 ) . The c r i t e r i a e f f e c t i v e l y l i m i t t he waste t o 20 vo1X combust ibles

and 10 w t % gas producers. Because approximately 2 5 ~ ~ 0 1 % o f the s to red

INEL TRU waste i s combustible, i n c i n e r a t i o n of t h e waste would be

necessary t o s a t i s f y t he d r a f t c r i t e r i a . Evaluat ions o f i n c i n e r a t i o n

methods (FMC 1977, Ka iser Engineers 1977), discussed i n Subsec-

t i o n B.4.2 o f Appendix £3, have concluded t h a t s lagg ing p y r o l y s i s i s

t h e most promis ing method f o r processing t h e RWMC TRU waste (see

Subsection 4.4.2). Therefore, the s l agging p y r o l y s i s process was

se lec ted f o r study here.

The packaging fo r t h e s lag product was assumed t o be 55-gal s tee l

drums because of a v a i l a b i l i t y and pas t experience w i t h hand l ing t h i s

type o f conta iner .

, . ~ a i . 1 shipment o f the waste was assumed because o f i t s expected

cos t advantage over shipment by t ruck .

Thus, the sequence o f operat ions se lec ted f o r s tudy was (1) r e -

t r i e v a l w i t h ' ope ra to r - con t ro l l e d equipment i n s i d e a moveable, so l i d -

frame s t r u c t u r e a t subatmospheric pressure; ( 2 ) processing by s l agging

p y r o l y s i s w i t h the s lag packaged i n 55-gal drums; and (3) r a i l sh ip-

ment t o the Federal Repository. These operat ions and t h e i r e f f e c t s

are discussed b r i e f l y i n t h e f o l l o w i n g subsect ions.

9.1 SHIPMENT AS SCHEDULED

Th is sec t i on discusses A l t e r n a t i v e 3, i n which the TRU waste

s to red on the TSA pads would be re t r i eved , processed, and shipped t o ,

. .

t he Federal Repository, as scheduled.

9.1.1 Retrieval. The sequence of retrieval activities is illus-,

trated in Figure 9-2. One retrieval building would be sufficient to meet the 10-yr retrieval guideline. Retrieval rates would match the flow rates in Figure 9-9.

The retrieval building (see Figure 9-3) would be a mobile, single-wal led structure. Be1 ow' ambient air pressure would be maintained within .the building. See Guideline (15) in Subsec- tion 7.4.1.1. Thus, air leakage would be directed inward, pre- cluding the escape of contaminants to the environment. The nega-

tive pressure differential would be maintained by the ventilation system. All air removed by the ventilation system would pass through

a series of roughing filters and one bank of High Efficiency Particu- late Air (HEPA) filters. Each of the filters would remove succes-

sively smaller particles. A seal mechanism would seal the building with the TSA pad during retrieval operations. The building would be equipped with retractable wheels to support its weight during reloca-

tion operations. The wheels would be similar to those used in industry \o facilitate moving large, heavy objects. Moveable, channel-

shaped steel tracks would be provided to permit the,building to be moved on a year-round basis. One production transfer air lock, a vehicle air lock, a personnel air lock, and two emergency personnel exits would be provided through the building walls..

The retrieval building would be erected on an asphalt pad that would form an extension to the TSA pad. After the building has been

erected, most of the soil covering the waste would be removed from the area to be covered by the building. The building would then be moved

over this area; and the remainder of the soil, the polyvinyl, and the plywood cover would be removed.

Operators would control the retrieval equipment from environmen-

tally protected cabs located on the equipment. Preliminary calcula-

tions indicate that shielding of operators would not be required. However, if necessary, removable shields would be mounted on the re-

trieval equipment.

STORED WASTE RETRIEVAL

1 I SURVEY TRANSURANIC STORAGE AREA 8 SELECT AREA TO START RETRIEVAL .

I

TION OR MOVEMENT. REMOVE 8 GRADE OVER- BURDEN SOIL TO SUIT

MOVE BUILDING OVER RETRIEVAL SITE, CONNECT AUXILIARY SUPPORT SYSTEMS 8 CONFIRM BUILDING SEAL

I MOVE TRANSFER VEHICLE INTO AIR LOCK 8 SEAL CARGO ENCLOSURE AGAINST RETRIEVAL

MOVE RETRIEVAL EQUIP- MENT INTO BUILDING 8 REMOVE REMAINDER OF OVERBURDEN. PLASTIC

DAMAGED CONTAINERS A- EXAMINE 8 CONFIRM I

CONTAINERS FOR - PLACE DAMAGED CONTAIN- THEIR INTEGRITY. ERS INTO WASTE TRANSFER CONTAINER AND 1 LOAD INTO TRANSFER

INTACT CONTAINERS

VEHICLE

FROM STACK 6 LOAD INTO TRANSFER VEHICLE

DUST COLLECTION EI VENTILATION (HEPA FILTERS 8 FAN) , I'

EXHAUST

LOADED TRANSFER VEHICLE TO PROCESS FACILITY

F i g . 9-2 Block flow diagram for re t r i eva l of stored TRU . waste. . ' # ' '

1 F P C K O . ;

Fig. 9-3 Plan of re t r ieval . building f o r stored TRU waste.

The waste con ta ine rs would be moni tored and examined t o c o n f i r m

the i . r i n t e g r i t y . In tac t , ' uncontaminated con ta ine rs would be p laced

' d i r e c t l y i n t o t he t r a n s f e r veh i c l e . D e t e r i o r a t e d o r damaged con ta in -

e r s would he enclosed i n a sealed t r a n s f e r con ta ine r be fo re be ing

p laced i n the t r a n s f e r veh i c l e .

T rans fe r d f waste f rom t h e r e t r i e v a l f a c i l i t y t o t he p r o c e s s i n g

f a c i l i t y would be made i n low-speed t r a n s f e r v e h i c l e s comprised o f

s e m i t r a i l e r s , p u l l e d by convent iona l t r a c t o r s over committed roadways

w i t h i n t h e RWMC. Each s e m i t r a i l e r would be equipped w i t h a van body.

The van body would be designed t o r e s i s t r u p t u r e i n the event o f an

acc iden t and would have a r.emuvable s t a i n l e s s s t e e l l i ne r ' . To p r o v i d e

a h i g h degree o f s t a b i l i t y , t h e t r a i l e r would have a low cen te r o f I

g r a v i t y . To f u r t h e r guard aga ins t ove r tu rn i ng , t h e t r u c k speed would

he l i m i t e d by a governor t o 20 mph.

When l oad ing o r un load ing a t a f a c i l i t y a i r l ock , t h e van body

would be sealed t o the a i r l ock entrance. An a i r t i g h t ex tens ion o f

t h e a i r l ock would thereb.y be formed. Contaminat ion o f , t h e e x t e r i o r

o f t he v e h i c l e would no t be expected.

9.1.2 Processing. Th i s subsec t ion descr ibes t h e f a c i l i t y , '

equipment, and process f o r t h e chemical s t a b i 1 i z a t i o n , volume reduc-

t i o n , and i m m o b i l i z a t i o n o f . s t o r e d TRU waste. The s l agg ing p y r o l y s i s

process, discussed below, would- accompl i s k these goa ls i n one opera-

t i o n . The mo l ten s l a g p roduc t would then be c a s t and'packaged i n a

form t h a t cou ld be shipped t o the Federa l Repos i t o r y w i t h o u t f u r t h e r

t reatment .

9.1.2.1 Opera t ing Experience w i t h S l agging P y r o l y s i s .

Because l a rge -sca le i n c i n e r a t i o n of TRU waste i s s t i l l i n t h e develop-

mental stage, t h i s subsect ion b r i e f l y rev iews , t h e o p e r a t i n g e x p e r i -

ence, b s t h nuc lea r and nonnuclear, w i t h s l agg ing p y r o l y s i s . The s l a g -

g i n g p y r o l y s i s process was o r i g i n a l l y developed as a commercial method

t o generate a gas o f low Btu content from nonradioact ive munic ipal o r

. i n d u s t r i a l waste. A 76 t o n ( a ) per day p i l o t p l a n t began opera t ion

i n t h e U.S. i n 1971. Three p lan ts , each capable of i n c i n e r a t i n g about

190 t o 220 tons of munic ipal and i n d u s t r i a l waste per day, have been

b u i l t i n Europe. These p l a n t s are loca ted i n Luxemburg, Luxemburg;

F rank fu r t , Germany; and Grasse, France;

%

A 220-lb/hr s lagg ing p y r o l y s i s u n i t f o r i n c i n e r a t i n g r a d i o a c t i v e

waste i s now opera t ing i n Belgium. contaminated waste has been pro-

cessed i n t h i s i n c i n e r a t o r w i t h good r e s u l t s . The u n i t w i l l be modi-

f i e d i n 1979 t o process TRU waste. Contract nego t i a t i ons are being

conducted w i t h t h e Be lg ian government t o ob ta in data f rom t h e pro-

cess. These data from the mod i f ied u n i t would be used i n the .design

of an i n c i n e r a t o r f o r processing t h e INEL TRU Waste.

9.1.2.2 Conceptual Processing of INEL TRU Waste by Slagging

Py ro l ys i s . A conceptual f l o w diagram f o r processing of t h e s to red TRU

waste by s lagg ing p y r o l y s i s i s presented i n F igure 9-4. The p r e l i m i -

nary 1 ayou t f o r a f ac i 1 i t y i n ~ o ~ ~ o r a t i n ~ t h e necessary func t i ons i s

shown i n F igures 9-5,'9-6, and 9-7. One s lagg ing u n i t would be i nco r -

porated i n t o t h e f a c i l i t y . This. u n i t would have a capac i t y o f

41 tons/day o f waste and makeup s o i l . (Current data i n d i c a t e t h a t

approximately 1.5 l b of s o i l per 1b o f waste i s requ i red t o assure

proper s lagg ing c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . )

9.1.2.2.1 Preprocessing. Ret r ieved s to red waste would

,be t r a n s f e r r e d f rom th'e TSA t o the r e c e i v i n g a i r lock of t he process-

i n g f a c i l i t y . A l l operat ions i n t he f a c i l i t y , from waste e n t r y through

t h e a i r lock t o packaging of t h e output product, would be remotely

c o n t r o l l e d . A f t e r passing through the a i r lock, each conta iner would

(a ) sho r t ton (2000 I b )

Fig. 9-4 Block flow diagram for processing TRU waste by slagging pyrolysis.

RETRIEVAL FACILITY

i P

TRANSPORT VEHICLE - TRU WASTE PROCESSING FACILITY

6 MONITOR

.SURT,E SrORA1;t

CONTAINER

I HAZARDOUS

HAZARDOUS SPECIAL

MATERIALS HANDLING'

6XAMINC FOR LARGE ITEMS REDUCTION

, .

DECONTAMINATION DECONTAMINATION

RECYCLE 4 CHECK INCINERATOR CONTAMINATION HOPPER FEED

1

SANITARY

0 . INCINERATOR

. .

GASIFIER

SECONDARY COMBUSTION CHAMBER

CYCLONE SEPERATOR

CHEMICAL M I X I N G & STORAGE TANK

ELEVATOR

S I Z E REDUCTION E Q U I P M E N

. . . . . . F~CJ. . . 9-6 Plan fo r second level f o r slagging pyrolysis f a c i l i t y f o r stored, TRU waste.

. 'ZE R:3b(,!l9tJ klnJM

L.KUUNO L e v e L

8 G A S I F I E R

1 0 SECONDARY CHAMBER

.. 1 3 F I L T R A T I O N SYSTEM

14 CYCLONE SEPERATOR . .

1 8 INCOMING WASTE C&TAINER ELEVATOR

19 INSPECTION CONVEYOR

20 SCREEMING HOPPER

21 MANIPULATOR

22 WASTE STORAGE B I N

I

F i g . 9-7 Cross s e c t i o n o f s lagg ing p y r o l y s i s f a c i l i t y f o r s t o r e d TRU waste. .

be monitor-ed for radiation levels and for gross transuranic content. Should the monitoring indicate the need for special handling, the

container would be rodted to a special handling area. Criticality alarms would be stritegically located throughout the facility.

If the incoming waste volume exceeded the incineration capability, unopened containers wduld be placed in a temporary storage area. This

waste woujd be used to provide a continuous flow of waste to the incinerator during minor interruptions in the receipt of waste at the processing facility. Under normal operating conditions, incoming waste would be dumped onto a conveyor. Any transfer containers would

then be returned to the waste retrieval area for reuse.

Drums and other containers would be oper~ed (probably by sawing or *

ripping operations) and dumped. The inclusion of complete drums in

the feed would seriously reduce the incineration rate. The waste would be visually examined for potentially large or hazardous items. Large items would be reduced in size to a maximum dimension of about

3 ft. Suspect items would be removed for special handling.

The waste would be blended to achieve some uniformity of the feed material. Incinerator operation would be impaired if large quantities of noncombustible materials were fed into it without blending with combustible materials. Additionally, a certain minimum proportion of makeup soil (approximately 1.5 parts of soil to 1 part of waste by weight) is required. The soil contains aluminosilicates needed to form a glass-like slag and ensure minimum leachability.

The decision to add combustibles or soil would be made during the

visual inspection of the feed material.

9.1.2.2.2 Incineration. Figure 9-8 is a process.flow

diagram of the sl agging pyrolysis and off-gas treatment processes. The incinerator would be a vertical furnace composed of a gasifier and

a secondary combustion chamber. S o l i d waste mater ia l . wou!d be f e d

i n t o a hopper a t the top and in t roduced i n t o the g a s i f i e r through a

sealed a i r lock. So l ids from t h e off-gas treatment system would a l so

be in t roduced i n t h i s manner. The a i r lock would prevent blowback of

contaminated gas.

The g a s i f i e r would have th ree v e r t i c a l zones: t he d ry ing zone,

t h e p y r o l y s i s zone, and t h e combustion zone. The combustion zone,

ope ra t i ng a t about 3000°~, wou I d be r e f r n c t o r y l i n e d and cou ld be

mounted on r a i l s and prov ided w i t h f langes t o f a c i l i t a t e removal f o r

r e b r i c k i n g .

/

Because o f the r e l a t i v e l y low heat content o f the TRU waste ma-

t e r i a l , i t would be necessary t o add supplementary heat t o t h e g a s i f e r

t o produce a molten slag. This heat would be produced p r i m a r i l y by

adding coa l and bark t o t h e process feed and by us ing combustion a i r

preheated t o 1 9 0 0 ~ ~ . Even if most o f the supplementary heat were

supp l ied by f u e l o i l ; i t would be necessary t o add some q u a n t i t y o f a

bu l ky s o l i d f u e l t o increase p o r o s i t y of the feed and enhance the f l o w

o f gases upward through't 'he charge of ma te r i a l s . Coal and wood bark

would be used as the bu l ky s o l i d fuel. They would be added t o the

waste feed stream. 'Storage would be prov ided f o r these m a t e r i a l s so

t h a t they cou ld be added as needed. The coa! and bar!< add a small

amount o f ash t o t h e s lag;

I n the molten s lag p o r t i o n o f the gas i f i e r , water would f l o w

through a c o o l i n g j acke t around t h e s l a g t o prevent d e t e r i o r a t i o n o f

t he metal w a l l s o f the vessel. ,The s lag would be cooled cons iderab ly

by t h i s water, Therefore, f u e l o i l would be burned above t h e s l a g

sur face t o prevent f u r t h e r l oss o f heat by r a d i a t i o n . Excess a i r and

f u e l o i 1 would be added the re t o ensu re complete combustion of t h e

waste gas f rom the g a s i f i e r .

~ i g . 9-8 Process 'flow diagram f o r s lagging pyrblys is -and gas cleaning system.

Molten s lag would be conveyed through a heated condu i t from the

g a s i f i e r (p r imary combustor) t o t h e s l ag-cast ing chamber, where i t

would be cas t i n t o molds. Gases and p a r t i c u l a t e mattei- would 1-eave

t h e top o f the g a s i f i e r a t approximately 1 1 0 0 ~ ~ through an o u t l e t

plenum and pass i n t o the secondary combustion chamber. Here the

oxygen-def i c i en t e x i t gases waul d be m i xed wi ' th secondary combust i o n

a i r , which would be in t roduced t a n g e n t i a l l y i n t o t h i s ' r e f r a c t o r y - l i n e d

chamber. The h igh temperatures i n the secondary combustion chamber

would cause the i n e r t m a t e r i a l s t o m e l t and t o leave the bottom o f t h e

chamber as a molten slag. This s lag would be conveyed t o the s lag

cas t i ng chamber i n the same manner as the s lag f rom the g a s i f i e r .

' 9.1.2.2.3 Output Packaging. The s lag would be poured

i n t o molds 'and moved t o a c o o l i n g chamber. A f te r cool ing, t he cas t -

i ngs would be removed f rom t h e i r molds and t r a n s f e r r e d t o an assay and

i n v e n t o r y . s t a t i o n . Any de fec t i ve cas t ings would be re turned t o the

i n c i n e r a t o r feed stream f o r remel t ing . From the assay and i nven to ry

s t a t i o n , acceptable cas t ings would be packaged i n t o s t e e l drums. The

drums would be labe led and consigned t o the storage room f o r eventual

shipment t o t h e Federal Repository. A t t h e . t i m e of shipment, t h e . drums would be monitored t o ensure t h a t they meet the requirements f o r

l e v e l s o f sur face r a d i a t i o n and contaminat ion. Contaminated drums

would be rou ted t o a decontamination c e l l . A drum exceeding the r a d i -

a t i o n l e v e l f o r sh ipp ing would have a r a d i a t i o n s h i e l d p laced around

it. Drums would then be loaded i n t o ATMX r a i l r o a d cars, 74 conta iners

per car1 oad.

- 9.1.2.2.4 Off-Gas Treatment. An e f fec t i ve of f -gas

t reatment system f o r t he s lagg ing i n c i n e r a t o r would be used t o m i n i -

m i ze environmental re leases o f p a r t i c u l a t e s , aerosol s, and vo l a t i l e

compounds. A i rborne s o l i d and aerosol ma te r i a l would con ta in t h e

g rea tes t q u a n t i t y o f r a d i o a c t i v e substances i n t he e f f l u e n t gas stream;

the re fo re , t h e g rea tes t a t t e n t i o n would be g iven t o removing t h i s

m a t e r i a l . N e u t r a l i z a t i o n o f nonrad ioac t ive chemical products,.such as

HCI and SOx, would a lso be provided. All airborne releases. would be

limited to levels complying with standards s e t by the DOE,, t he Envi- ronmental Protection Agency, and other governmental agencies.

The off-gas treatment system considered the most prom4sing

a t t h i s time i s a dry process cal led the aqueous carbonate process (Estcourt e t a l . 1978). This i s e s sen t i a l l y a spray drying process in

which sodium carbonate dissolved in water i s sprayed into the off-gas stream. The temperature of the entering off-gas stream would be main-

tained high' enough t o allow t o t a l evaporation of the water and s t i l l r e su l t in a superheated gas stream. The spray dryer would: (1 ) remove

par t i cu la te materi a1 from %he incinerator by impingement upon droplets or sodium carbonate pa r t i c l e s , and (2 ) remove gaseous HCl and SOx by chemical reactions w i t h the sodium carbonate.

-

Par t icu la te matter in the gas stream leaving the spray dryer would be removed before the gas i s discharged to the atmosphere. This

would be accomplished by four par t ic le-col lect ion devices arranged in series: ' a cyclone, a cross-flow s intered metal f i l t e r , a ful l - f low s intered metal f i l t e r , and two H E P A f i l t e r s . Each of these removes

successively smaller par t i c les . All col lected so l ids would be recycled t o the incinerator feed stream. Contaminated.HEPA f i , l t e r elements

\

would a lso be fed in to the incinerator .

9.1.2.2.5 Flow Rates and Volumes. Figure 9-9 presents the estimated quan t i t i es and flow r a t e s f o r stored waste. hi's infor-

mation has been developed from the data in Table 4-1 and the guidelines f o r waste charac te r i s t i cs i n Subsection 7.4.1.2. The f a c i l i t y was

assumed t o operate 24 hr/day f o r 220 days/yr.

' The amounts of coal and bark fed t o the incinerator were determined by a simultaneous mass and energy balance such t ha t the t o t a l feed would have a heating value and moisture content comparable t o t ha t from operation of ex i s t ing slagging pyrolysis incinerators fo r municipal waste. 1 t 9 was found t h a t , f o r each 1 b of combined waste and makeup s o i l , 0.43 1 b of coal and 0.70 Ib of bark were required.

RETRIEVAL O N SITE TRANSFER

I ALTERNATIVES 3.4. 8 6

ESTIMATED QUANTITIES AN0 FLOW RATES FMI SLAGGING PYROLYSIS PROCESSING OF STORE0 TRU WASTE TO BE SENT TO THE FEDERAL REPOSITORY(~ .~~

Combus- Noncom- Makeup F u e l Waste t i b l e s b u s t i b l e s . s o i l Coal Bart Ash - -- A i r Gases T o t a l

1 WASTE FEEO ftJ/day 314 69 1 NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA N I A 1005

t o n s l d a y 1.82 14.8 N IA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA 16.4

l o3 f t 3 / 1 0 y r 691 1520 NIA NIA N IA N IA NIA NIA NIA 221 1 l o 3 tons110' y r 4 32

I NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA N I A 36

2 M A X U P S O I L N l A

i NIA 61 5 N IA NIA NIA NIA NIA . NIA

t o n s l d a y N IA N IA 615

24.6 NIA NIA NIA NIA N/A N I A 24.6

%/day N I A NIA N I A 704 1435 49.8 N I A . N/A t o n s l d a y N I A

RIA 2189 N I A N I A 17.6 28.7 1.32 NIA NIA NIA 47.6

4 AIR 7(16 f t 3 / d a y N IA . NIA N I A NIA N/A NIA NIA 15.1

t o n s l d a y N IA H I A 15.1

NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA 578 NIA 5 78

5 PRO ESS FEEO &%T-- 314 69 1 615 704 1435 49.8 NIA NIA

t o n s l d a y 1.82 MIA 3809

14.6 24.6 17.6 28.7 1.32 NIA NIA NIA 88.6

6 STA K EFFLUENT N IA N IA NIA NIA NIA NIA MIA N lA 16.3 16.3

t o n s l d a y N IA N IA NIA NIA NIA MIA NIA NIA 625 625

7 SLA OUTPUT N l A 166 280 N lA NIA MIA 23 NIA N I A 469

t o n s l d a y NIA 14.6 24.6 NIA NIA NIA 1.98 N/A NIA 41.2

8 TRANSPORTATION C o n t a i n e r s l d a y N IA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NlA NIA N lA 64 R a i l r o a d c a r s l d a y N IA NIA MIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA 1

N IA Not A p p l i c a b l e

( a l Leng th o f C a m a i g n i s 10 y r . 220 d a y s l y r .

( b l I n c l u d e s a l l t h e se l f - geneva ted waste and 110 t h e 060 waste. O t h e r 060 was te was a s s w d n o t processed. - --

Fig. 9-9 Flow rates for retr ieval , onsite processing, and sh'ipping . stored TRU waste . to . the Federal Repository.

The slag would consist of: '(1) all the makeup soil and the non-

combustible waste, since these components do not burn, and (2) ash

produced from combustible waste, coal, and bark. 6.y weight, an esti-'

mated 5% of the combustible waste, 9% of the coal, and 1% of the bark

would remain as ash. The overall slag density was assumed to be

175 1b/ft3. ..-

Fuel oil, air, and off-gas flow rates were determined by Andco-

Torrax, an incinerator vendor (Shea 1978). The calculations were made

with a computer program that has been used for the design of existing

slagging pyrolysis incinerators. Simultaneous mass and energy balances

are used for the various portions of the process.

Part of the heat from the off-gas leaving the secondary combus-

tion chamber would be captured in a waste heat boiler. The steam from

this boiler could be used for heating or for generating electricity.

The amount of steam to be produced and its use would be considered

during detailed design.

The slag would be cast and placed into Department of Transporta-

tion Specification (DOT Spec) 17C 55-gal drums without 1 iners. Each 3 drum would hold about 7.4 ft of slag and.when.ful1, would weigh '

approximately 1360 1b including the weight of the drum.

9.1.2.3 Facility. The slagging pyrolysis facility, shown

in Figures 9-5, 9-6, and 9-7, would be a reinforced concrete structure

designed with three separate air zones. The outer zone would surround

the second zone, which would surround the innermost zone, which would

comprise the waste processing areas. Each zone would be equipped with

its own vent i lation system to maintain progressively lower pressures

between the outside atmosphere and the innermost zone. All air removed

by the ventilation systems would first pass through roughing filters having efficiencies of 30% and 90% and then through HEPA filters. Air

from the innermost and middle zones would pass through two HEPA filter

hanks; air from the outer zone, through only one HEPA filter bank.

The f a c i l i t y would be subdivided genera l l y i n t o processing areas

and support areas. The support areas, loca ted i n the ou ter zone,

would prov ide space f o r admin i s t ra t i ve func t ions , conference rooms,

and storage. The processing areas would be loca ted i n the two inner

zones, w i t h t h e areas of h ighes t probable contaminat ion be ing l oca ted

w i t h i n the innermost zone. Thus, p o t e n t i a l a i r leakage w i t h i n the

f a c i l i t y would be d i r e c t e d from t h e area o f l e a s t probable contamina-

t i o n i n t o the area o f g rea tes t probable contamination. The innermost

zone would con ta in such func t i ons as t r a n s f e r conta iner opening and

emptying, open waste hand l ing and t r a n s f e r operat ions, s lagg ing p y r o l -

y s i s , s lagg ing p y r o l y s i s o f f -gas treatment, and o ther operat ions p re - \

sen t i ng a h igh p r o b a b i l i t y o f the presence of contamination. The

midd le zone would con ta in compartments, co r r i do rs , and opera t ing g a l -

l e r i e s tha t , a1 though normal ly no t contaminated, would be adjacent t o

areas o f probable contaminat ion.

There would normal ly be no personnel i n the innermost zone. A i r

locks would be prov ided between t h e middle zone and t h e innermost zone

t o permi t access fo r maintenance and r e p a i r by personnel wearing bub-

b l e s u i t s and supp l ied w i t h b reath ing a i r from a c e n t r a l source.

Passage between the middle and outer zone would be through mon i to r i ng

p o r t a1 s.

9.1.3 O f f s i t e Shipment. ATMX r a i l cars would be used t o sh ip

t h e processed s tored waste t o t h e Federal Repository. To c a l c u l a t e

the cos t and r i s k s o f waste shipment, i t was necessary t o assume a

s p e c i f i c route. The assumed route, shown i n F igure 9-10, i s one o f

several poss ib le routes. The ac tua l r o u t e t h a t would be fo l lowed has

no t y e t been selected. Denver, Colorado, i s t h e major popu la t i on

center along the assumed route, w i t h Pueblo, Colorado, and Colorado

Springs, Colorado, next i n s ize . The remainder o f t h e r o u t e i s p r i -

m a r i l y through r u r a l areas o f low popu la t ion densi ty . A one-way t r i p

o f approximate ly 1400 m i les would r e q u i r e about 6 days.

Based upon the a l lowable ne t weight per ATMX car (101,300 I b ) , i t

was c a l c u l a t e d t h a t about 74 drums cou ld be placed i n each car. The

est imated shipment r a t e would be about 190 c a r s l y r .

F i g . 9-10 Assumed rail route from the INEL to the Federal Reposi tory.

9.1.4 Disposal at the Federal Repository. A description of the Federal Repository and the waste management methods to he used there

'lies outside the scope of this document. Design studies for the re-

pository are underway in other DOE-sponsored programs.

9.1.5 Decontamination and Decommissioning. The retrieval and

processing f aci 1 it ies would be designed to make decontamination and

decommissioning (D&D) as simple and inexpensive as feasible. Included

would be such features as use of easily decontaminated surfaces, equipment designed for dismantling into easily handled components, and a

processing building arrangement permitting use of key equipment during

decommissioning.

The interior surface of the retrieval building, all equipment

located inside the building, and the transfer containers. would prob-

ably become contami nated &iring operations. Dismantl ing and shipment to the Federal Repository is assumed to he required. All retrieval ,. f aci 1 i ty materials destined for the Federal Reposi t0r.v would be pro-

cessed through the processing facility.

Decommissioning of the processing facility would be conducted so

that the slagging pyrolysis unit and associated equipment, along with the heating and ventilating s.ystem, would remain in service until.late

in the' D&D campaign. This equipment would be used to reduce the vol-

ume of D&D waste.

Much of the equipment within the inner portion of the processing

facility would probably he so contaminated that decontamination and

recovery would not be practical. The processing equipment would he reduced in volume as much as possible, packaged, and shipped to the

Federal Rep0sitor.v. The remaining equipment in the processing facility would probably be decontaminaSle, permitting normal disposal.. It

would probably be possible to decontaminate such equipment as cell

doors and the heating and ventilating equipment. Construction materials

would be decontaminated by removing a surface layer. Some miscellane- ous equipment, located outside the inner areas of the building, would

probably not. be decontaminable and would require packaging and shipment. \

The to t a l volume,of D&D waste t o be shipped, including D&D waste

from the re t r i eva l and processing f aci 1 i t i e s , would be approximately ,

45,000 f t 3 . See Guideline ( 2 ) in Subsection 7.4.1.2.

In Alternative 4, r e t r i eva l and processing of the stored waste

would proceed as scheduled. However, f o r t h i s study, a 20-yr delay was assumed in the ava i l ab i l i t y uf the Federal Repository. The pro-

cessed waste would be stored onsi te f o r 20 yr before shipment t o the

Repository. All the s teps in t h i s a l t e rna t ive are ident ical t o those

of Alternative 3 (see Subsection 9.1) with the addition of storage

between processing and shipment.

The.storage f a c i l i t y would consis t of two aboveground engineered

buildings located near khe' processing f a c i l i t y , as shown in Fig- ure 9-11. The storage f a c i l i t y would resemble a large warehouse com-

plex and would be designed to protect the processed waste f o r t he

20-yr period. The buildings would be constructed of precast concrete

panels as shown in Figure 9-12. This type of building i s exceptionally strong and r e l a t i ve ly low in cost . Each building would be approxi-

mately 192 x 384 x 20 f t high.

The use of precast , prestressed concrete panels in constructing low-cost permanent buildings i s well established. These buildings a re

constructed in the following manner: the panels are approximately' 8 f t wide; of the desired length; and contain prestressed, h igh- tensi le

s t e e l wire. They are cas t and are tran'sported to the construction s i t e a f t e r being properly aged. Steel p la tes are imbedded in each

0-

FEET

Fig. 9-11 Loca t ion and ar rangement f o r 20-yr s t o r a g e o f p r o c e s s e d was te .

Roadway t o processino f a c i l i t y

--uw-- and roof s t ructure /

- Typical 20 year storage structure

Fig. 9-12 Perspective of buildings for 20-yr storage o f processed waste.

edge of each panel, and the plates are welded together during erec-

tion. The roof and walls are formed from the same type of panels.

The steel plates in the roof slabs are welded to those in the wall

panels to form a completely sealed structure. .

Ventilation for the building wotlld be provided by a systsm that

provides a minimum of four air changes per hour in the working areas

while the building is heing filled with containers of waste. Air ' would be introduced into the building through a HEPA filter system and

exhausted through a second system containing one stage of HEPA fil-

ters. Both systems would be provided with fire protection. After the

building has been filled with waste containers, the ventilation system

blowers would be shut off and the doors sealed. Subsequent ventila-

tion, to c'ontrol moisture, would be provided by natural convection

through the filter system.

The waste containers would be delivered to the storage facility . '

and stacked on end five high, with sheets of plywood between layers.

Conventional material handling eguipment would be used to stack the

drums. The building would be designed to withstand a snow loading of 2 at least 30 lb/ft and to be tornado resistant. The facility also

would be desig'ned to' meet the requirements of the Uniform Building

Code (UBC 1961), and the' DOE level of "Improved Risk". Security

measures and the concrete building construction would protect the

waste from vandalism and access by unauthorized personnel. In

addition, the building would prevent the possible spread of con-

tamination in the unlikely event of container leakage.

After the waste has been removed at the conclusion of the interim

storage period, the bui 1 ding would be decontaminated, if necessary,

and used for other purposes. To facilitate decontamination, the' in-

ternal surfaces would have heen coated at the time of construction

w i t h an app rop r i a te paint'or r e s i n t o seal cracks and pores. The

b u i l d i n g would be d ismant led a t t h e end o f i t s u s e f u l l i f e , and t h e

area would be re tu rned t o i t s n a t u r a l s t a t e . b~ .

9.3 RETRIEVAL DELAYED 20 YEARS

I n A l t e r n a t i v e 6, r e t r i e v a l and p rocess ing o f t h e s t o r e d waste

would be delayed 20 yr and beg in i n t h e yea r 2005. The Federa l Repos-

i t o r y was assumed t o be a v a i l a b l e a t t h a t t ime so t h a t t h e waste cou ld

be sh ipped t o t h e Reposi tor.y d i r e c t l y a f t e r process ing. . ! I

Th i s a l t e r n a t i v e i s i d e n t i c a l t o A l t e r n a t i v e 3 except f o r t q e

20-yr de lay o f a l l f a c i l i t i e s and opera t ions . If waste con t inued t o

be s to red a t t he TSA d u r i n g t h e 1985 t o 2005 per iod , t h e r e would be -

more waste t o r e t r i e v e , process, and s h i p when ope ra t i ons beg in i n

2005 than t h e r e would have been i n 1985. Because wasts genera t ion

r a t e s have n o t been p r o j e c t e d beyond 1987, t 7 e e f f e c t s o f t h i s waste

a re n o t addressed here. See Appendix C f o r a d i scuss ion o f t h e impact

o f waste rece i ved a f t e r Januarv 1. 1985. I n t q i s study, t b e

f a c i l i t i e s r e q u i r e d by t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e were designed t o r e t r i e v e ,

process, and sh-ip on1.y t h e waste expected t o have acctlmulated b y

1985. If waste con t inues t o be s to red on t h e pads a t t h e TSA a f t e r

1985, e i t h e r t h e c a p a c i t y o f t h e f q c i l i t i e s descr ibed i n Subsec-

t i o n 9.1 would be increased o r t he r e t r i e v a l campaign would be ex-

tended p a s t t h e s t i p u l a t e d 10-yr pe r i od . The l a t t e r seems t h e more

l o g i c a l approach, i n v iew o f t h e u n c e r t a i n t i e s i n t h e r e c e i v i n g r a t e s

beyond 1985.

There are s i g n i f i c a n t u n c e r t a i n t i e s assoc ia ted w i t h p l ann ing f o r

a 20 yr de1a.y. If t h e ongoing m o n i t o r i n g and s u r v e i l l ance progr'am f n r

t h e s t o r e d waste were t o d e t e c t acce le ra ted degrada t ion o f t h e waste

con ta iners , t h e de lay of t h e r e t r i e v a l f o r 20 yr would have t o be

reevaluated. Excessive d e t e r i o r a t i o n o f t he s t o r e d waste con ta ine rs

might result in a requirement for improved containment during retrie-

val. If the degradation of the containers were detected early enhgh, the retrieval and processing facilities could possibly be placed in operation before a significant number of containers failed: This subject is discussed in greater detail in Subsection 8.5.3 in Appendix 6.

10. ALTERNATIVES INVULVING RETRIEVAL, PROCESSING,

AND DISPOSAL ON THE INEL

I n A l t e r n a t i v e 5, t he TRU waste would be r e t r i e v e d from i t s p re -

lsent l oca t i on , processed, and shipped t o a d isposal f a c i l i t y on t h e

INEL. Because the re are th ree processing modules (methods) and four

d isposal modules (methods), t he re are 12 poss ib le combinations w i t h i n

t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e . The 12 concepts f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 5 are l i s t e d i n

Table 7-3.

R e t r i e v a l would begin i n 1985 o r as soon t h e r e a f t e r as p r a c t i c a -

b le . Un l i ke A l t e r n a t i v e s 3 and 4, which a n t i c i p a t e sh ipp ing t h e pro-

cessed waste t o t be Federal Repositorv, t h e wa'ste would be shipped t o

a d isposa l f a c i l i t y on t h e INEL a f t e r processing.

10.1 RETRIEVAL OF STORED WASTE

The r e t r i e v a l module would be i d e n t i c a l t o t h a t f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 3,

descr ibed i n Subsect ion 9.1.1.

10.2 PROCESSING, THE STORED WASTE

Three methods were analyzed f o r processing t h e s to red waste under

A l t e r n a t i v e 5. . They are: ( 1 ) i n c i n e r a t i o n b,y s l agg ing p y r o l y s i s ,

fo l lowed by packaging; ( 2 ) compaction, immobi l i za t ion , and packaging;

and ( 3 ) packaging only .

10.2.1 I n c i n e r a t i o n and Packaging. This processing module ap-

p l i e s t o Concepts 5-a, 5-d, 5-9 and 5-3 i n Table 7-3. However, these

concepts have d i f f e r e n t d isposal methods and l o c a t i o n s .

The s l agging f a c i 1 i ty and operat ions are descr ibed i n

Subsection 9.1.2. I n c i n e r a t i o n i n A l t e r n a t i v e 5 i s i d e n t i c a l t o t h a t

i n A l t e r n a t i v e 3. The f low r a t e s a re g iven i n F igu re 10-1.

RETRIEVAL , ONSITE TRANSFER PROCESSING 8 PACKAGING ONSITE TRANSFER

J, OR SHIPMENT INEL SITE STORAGWDISPOSAL

T.

ALTERNATIVE 5

TO STACK

SLAGGING LEMHl RANGE SHAFT CONCEPT 5-a

3ATOR

\--STORED WASTE I I I I I

ESTIMATE0 QUANTITIES AND FLOW RATES FOR SLAGGING PYROLYSIS PROCESSING OF STORE0 TRU URSTE FOR DISPOSAL AT THE IN EL('.^)

Combus- Noncom- Makeup Fue l Waste t i b l e s b u s t i b l e s s o i l - - - - - A i r Coal 8ark - Gases T o t a l

1 WASTE FEE0 f t J / d a y 314 69 1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1005 t o n s l d a y 1.82 14.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ A 16.4

2 MAKEUP SOIL f tJ /nay N/A N/A 615 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ A 615 t o n s l d a y N/A N/A 24.6 N/A N/A N/A NIA N/A N/ A 24.6

3 FUE &/day N/A N/A N/A 704 1435 49.8 N/A N/A NIA 2189

t o n s l d a y N/A N/A N/A 17.6 28.7 1.32 N/A N/A N/A 47.6

ENGINEERED SHALLOW LAND DISPOSAL (SITE 14) CONCEPT 5-9

4 AIR 1T16 f t 3 / d a y N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.32 NIA 15.1 N/A 15.1

t o n s l d a y N/A N/A N/ A N/A N/A 1.32 N/A 578 N/A 578

5 PRO ESS FEED 314 69 1 615 704 1435 49.8 NIA N/A N/ A 3809

t o n s l d a y 1.82 14.6 24.6 17.6 28.7 1.32 N/A N/A N/ A 88.6 ENGINEERED SURFACE

6 STA K GASES h y NIA N/ A N/ A N/A N/A NIA N/A N/A 16.3 16.3

t o n s l d a y N/ A NIA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 625 625

7 SLA OUTPUT -*. N/A 166 280 N/ A N/A 469 N/A N/A N/A 23 t o n s l d a y N/A 14.6 N/ A 41.2 24.6 N/A N/A N/A 1.98 N/A

8 TRANSPORTATION - C o n t a i n e r s / d a y N/A N I A NIA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/ A 64

T r u c k l o a d s l d a y N/A N/ A N/A N/A MIA N/A N/A NIA N/A N/ A 1.3

N/A Not A p p l i c a b l e

( a ) Length o f Campaign i s 10 y r , 220 d a y s l y r .

( b ) I n c l u d e s a l l t h e se l f -genera ted waste and 114 t h e D&D waste. Other D&D waste was assumed n o t processed.

STORAGE FACILITY (RWMCI CONCEPT 5-j

Fig . 10-1 Process . f l o w . .. and f low r a t e s f o r s l agg ing p y r o l y s i s o f s t o red TRU waste.

10.2.2 Compaction, Immob i l i za t i on and Packaging. Th i s subsec-

t i o n descr ibes t h e processing opera t ion f o r Concepts 5-by 5-e, 5-h,

and 5-k (see Table 7-3). These concepts have d i f f e r e n t d isposal meth-

ods and l oca t i ons , bu t share t h e compaction, immobil i z a t j o n , and pack-

aging process. I n a f a c i l i t y designed f o r t h i s purpose, t he waste

would be compacted w i t h i n f iberboard conta iners . Four of t h e conta in -

e rs would be cas t i n t o a concrete 'b lock . Th is .cast ing wou ld accom-

p l i s h bo th t h e immob i l i za t i on and t h e packaging func t i ons . Flow r a t e s

i r e g iven i n F igu re 10-2.

The f a c i l i t y l a y o u t i s depic ted i n F igures 10-3 through 10-5. A

b lock f l o w diagram o f t h e process i s sh.own'in F igu re 10-6. The t rans -

f e r v e h i c l e f r om. the r e t r i e v a l area would b r i n g the waste conta iners

i n t o t h e r e c e i v i n g area. . Thc conta iners would be removed f rom t h e

t r a n s f e r v e h i c l e by a b r i dge crane. The crane would p lace t h e con-

t a i n e r s e i t h e r i n a temporary s torage area o r on a t r a n s f e r c a r t . The

conta iners wou1 d be moni tored f o r r a d i a t i o n . l e v e l and f o r gross t r a n s -

u ran i c content . The conta iners and c a r t would be r a i s e d t o t h e upper

l e v e l o f the f a c i l i t y by an e leva to r . There the contents o f t he con-

t a i n e r would be dumped on an i nspec t i on conveyor. On t h e upper l e v e l ,

l a r g e i tems obv ious l y r e q u i r i n g s i z e reduc t i on would be removed from

t h e conveyor by a monorai l h o i s t , then taken t o t h e s i z e r e d u c t i o n

equipment. The remain ing waste would be inspected v i s u a l l y . Hazard-

ous i tems would be removed by a bridge-mounted manipulator f o r spec ia l

hand1 i ng.

The conveyor would dump t h e remain ing waste i n t o . a feed b i n

through a screen. Items too l a r g e t o pass through t h e screen would

be taken t o the s i z e . reduc t ion equipment by the bridge-mounted mani-

p u l a t o r . Other manipulators would be l oca ted near t h e s i z e r e d u c t i o n

equipment t o a i d i n p iece l o c a t i o n and t rans fe r between i tems o f

equipment. A separate conveyor would take t h e ou tpu t f rom t h e s i z e

reduc t i on equipment t o a feed b i n separate f rom t h a t f e d by the i n -

spec t ion conveyor. Th i s b i n would con ta in p r i m a r i l y la rge , s o l i d

chunks o f ma te r i a l . The b i n f e d by the, i nspec t i on conveyor would

con ta in some l a r g e s o l i d pieces, b u t t h e bu l k o f i t s contents wou ld*

be smal l t rash .

10-3

I

ALTERNATIVE 5

RETRIEVAL ONSITE,TRANSFER PROCESSING 8 PACKAGING ONSITE TRANSFER

Mater ia ls Noncom-

Combustible b u s t i b l e Concrete Total

*

1 WASTE FEED f tJ /day tonslday

2 CEMENT m a y

INEL SITE STORAGVDISPOSAL a* m*

tonslday

3 PRO U C T ( ~ ) &Y

4 TRANSPOR- TATION

Blocks/day N/A N/A N/A 9 Truckloadslday N/A N/A N/A 1.1

m* 3 )*

N/A Not Appl icable

OR SHIPMENT

( a ) Includes a l l sel f -generated waste and 1/4 o f D&D waste. Other D&D waste i s assumed not processed.

(b) Length o f campaign i s 10 y r , 220 dayslyr.

( c ) Includes volume o f containers.

LEMHI RANGE TUNNEL CONCEPT 5-e

LAND DISPOSAL (SITE 14) CONCEPT 5-h

ENGINEERED SURFACE STORAGE FACILITY (RWMC) CONCEPT 5-k

Fig. 10-2 Process flow and flow rates for compaction and immobilization of stored TRU waste.

0.rll.O. no. 7 ..,. 1 ,; 11 1 EMPTY CDNTAINER DECONTAMINATION TOOL

2 LARGE BOX CAP REMOVAL TOOL

3 WASTE TRANSFER CART WITH D U W DEVICE

4 WASTE TRANSFER CART ELEVATOR

5 COMPACTOR

6 COMPACTED WASTE TRANSFliR DEVICE

7 COMPACTED WASTE COMAIMER CAPPING DEVICE

8 COMPACTION ROOM AND C O ~ A I N E R MONITORING SYSTEM

9 BLOCK TRANSFER CART

1 0 BLOCK HONITORING AND PWIKING DEVICE

11 BLOCK VIBRATING PLATFOR*

1 2 . BLOCK FORM

1 3 CEMENT STORAGE 6 FEED STSTEM

1 4 GRAVEL STORAGE 6 FEED SYSTEM

1 5 W T E R STORAGE 6 FEED SYSTEM

16 CEMENT MIXER

1 7 CEMENT BUCKET

1 8 ELECTRICAL SUBSUB~TATIOM AND DISTRIB'JTIMI STATION

Fig'. 10-3 Plan of ground l'evel of compaction and immobilization facility for stored TRU waste. . . .

4 W T E TRAWSFER CART ELEVATOR

19 INSPECTION CONVEYOR

2 0 SCREENING HOPPER

2 1 SIZE REDUCTIOW EQUIPKNT I 2 2 SIZE-REDUCED WASTE TWNSFER CQWVEYOR

23 RADIATION KNITORING SYSTEM

24 SIZE REDUCTION EQUIPIPWT COhlROL CONSOLE

25 REDUCED WASTE OBJECTS STOIUCf B IN

. ~

/

Fig. 10-4' Plan.of second level. of compaction and i m o b i l iza t ion .

f a c i l i t y . f o r stored TRU waste.

4 WASTE TRANSFER CART ELEVATOR

: 26 ' LARGE BOX LIFT MONORAIL HOIST

27 MANIPULATOR

28 SCREENED WASTE PARTICLES STORAGE BIN

Fig. 10-5 Cross s e c t i o n of compaction and immobi 1 i z a t i o n f a c i l i t y .

FROM RETRIEVAL FACILITY

AIR LOCK RECEIVE

TRU WASTE

I 1

MONITOR

+ I 1

OPEN CONTAINER REMOVE WASTE

REMOVE LARGE ITEMS

I I SCREEN I L

I ' SIZE-REDUCED SMALL I I

PIECES PIECES I. . , .m I 1 1 - COMPACTOR I I C.0NTAINER

MONITOR. WEIGH. I AND LOG I

& DECON PACKAGE

1

DISPOSAL

LOAD TRUCKS

F i g . 10-6 Block . f l o w . diagram f o r . 4 .conpaction, immobi 1 i z a t i o n , and packaging.

CONCRETE - C FORM CONCRETE CASTING

I

A 30-in. diameter by 40-in. long fiberboard container would be

placed in to the female-hold portion of the compactor, which would be located beneath the ou t l e t par ts of the two feed bins. To gain e f f i -

ciency in f i l l i n g the containers, large pieces of .waste from the s i z e reduction feed bin would be fed in to the' container f i r s t . Smaller pieces, of waste from the inspection feed bin would then be fed in to the container to f i l l the void spaces. Compaction would be accomplished by a hydraulically actuated piston. Successive f i l l i n g and

compacting would compress the waste into a so l id cylinder within the fiberboard container. I t was estimated t ha t the compaction operation would reduce the overall volume of waste by about 40%. Therefore, the compaction operation wo,uld reduce the waste input of about 2.2 mil-

3 3 l ion f t t o about 1.3 million f t . The flow r a t e from the compac- t ion operation would be about 750 f i l l e d fiberboard containers per week.

When f u l l , the fiberboard container would he moved t o a capping s ta t ion . I t would then leave the compaction area and enter th.e immobilization area, where i t would be placed in a form with three other containers. Concrete would be addei, completely encasing the four fiberboard contdiners. The form would be vibrated during f i l l i n g t o eliminate voids. The casting operation would generate about 63 con- c r e t e blocks per week.

After the concrete pouring i s complete, a bridge crane would be used t o place the form on a t rans fe r c a r t , which would take the form to a storage area. There the concrete would 'be a1 lowed t o cure fo r about 20 days, hardening in to a block. The blocks would be about

63 in. square and 43 in. high, and would weigh about 8700 I b . When curing i s complete, the blocks would be' monitored fo r contamination. Any contamination would be removed prior t o loading. The blocks would

then be moved by the bridge crane t o a 'truck f o r shipment t o the d i s - posal location.

As with the sqagging pyrolysis f a c i l i t y (Subsection 9.1.2.3). the compaction f a c i l i t y would be a reinforced concrete s t ruc tu r e w i t h

three separate a i r zones, each based on the potential level of contami-

natjon. A l l i n l e t a i r would pass through a s i ng l e bank o f HEPA-f i l -

t e rs . A l l a i r removed by the v e n t i l a t i o n systems would pass through

roughing f i l t e r s having 30% and 90% ef f ic ienc ies , and then through

HEPA f i l t e r s . A i r from the innermost and middle zones would pass

through two HEPA f i 1 t e r . banks i n series; and a i r from the outer zone,

through .one HEPA f i l t e r bank.

10.2.3 Packaging Only. This sect ion describes the processing

operat ion f o r Concepts 5-c, 5-f, 5 - i ,. and 5-1. (Refer t o Table 7-3.)

These concepts have d i f fe ren t .disposal methods and locat ions, but

share the packaging process.

I n a f a c i l i t y designed f o r t h i s purpose, the waste would be re -

duced i n size, i f necessary, and then placed i n new 55-gal drums.

Mate r ia l . f low ra tes are given i n Figure 10-7.

The f a c i l i t y layout i s depicted i n Figures 10-8 through 10-10. A

b lock flow diagram of the process i s shown i n Figure 10-11. The re-

ce iv ing area, monitor s ta t ion, e levator , inspect ion conveyor, feed

storage bins, and s i ze reduct ion areas would a l l be the same as i n the

f a c i l i t y described i n the.prev ious subsection. The main d i f ference

would be t ha t the mate r ia l from the b ins would be fed i n t o s tee l drums

and t h a t there would be no compaction. The drums would be the f i n a l

containers, so there would be no encapsulation i n concrete. The drum

f i l l i n g would: take place on a r o t a t i n g p la t fo rm w i t h f ou r indexed

pos i t ions: (1) load empty drum onto platform, ( 2 ) f i l l drum,

(3 ) fas ten l i d on drum, and ( 4 ) unload f i l l e d drum.

The f i 11 ed drums would be removed from the f i 11 i n g area t o a

moni tor ing and decontami nat ion area through an a i r l o ck . From there

they would go t o a pa l l e t . i z i ng area where the drums would be strapped

onto pa l l e t s , two 1 ayers o f 6 drums each per p a l l e t . The pa l l e t s .

would be loaded onto t rucks using f o r k l i f t s , o r stored f o r l a t e r ship-

ment.

r 0

I I-'

ONSITE TRANSFER -

-nciRIEVAL ONSITE TRANSFER PROCESSING 8 PACKAGING

I-' --

b m a

1 UASTE FEED f tJ/day tonslday .

INEL SITE STORAGWDISPOSAL

LEHMl RANGE SHAFT CONCEPT 5-c

. -

m*

3 TRANSPOR- TATION =iners/day

Truckloadslday

Materials

OR SHIPMENT

Noncom- Combustible bustible Total

*--

- N/A Not Applicable

(a ) Includes a l l self-generated waste and 114 o f D&D waste. Other D&D waste i s assumed not pmcessed.

(b) Length o f campaign i s 10 yr. 220 dayslyr.

. (c) Includes volume o f containers.

Fig. 10-7 . Process f l o w and f l o w r a t e s f o r packaging .on l y o f s to red . . -. .

LEMHl RANGE TUVNEL CONCEPT 5-1

ENGINEERED SHALLOW LAND DISPOSAL (SITE 14) CONCEPT 5-i

ENGINEERED SURFACE STORAGE FACILIT'I (RWMC) CONCEPT 5-1

TRU waste.

EMPTY CONTAINER DECONTAMINATION TOOL

LARGE BOX CAP REMOVAL TOOL

WASTE TRANSFER CART WITH DUMP DEVICE

WASTE TRANSFER CART ELEVATOR - FOUR POSITION DRUM PACKAGING TURNTABLE

F I L L STATION

EMPTY DRUM TRANSFER WNORAIL

FULL DRUM TRANSFER MONORAIL

PALLETING MACHINE 1 CONTROL CONSOLE I

AIR LOCK

MONITORING I DECONTAMINATION ROOM

FORKLIFT

PALLETIZED DRUMS

ELECTRICAL SUB-STATION 8 DISTRIBUTION STATION

CONTAINERS OF RECEIVED WASTE

BRIDGE CRANE

FULL DRUM STORAGE .

'. Fig, 10-8- Plan of ground level of packaging-only f a c i l i ' t y . . . .

STACK n

' 4 UASTE TRAWSFER CART ELEVATOR

19 INSPECTION CONVEYOR '

2 0 SCREENING HOPPER

21 S IZE REw&IO)( EQUIP ICm

22 SIZE-REDUCED WASTE Tp lMFER CONVEYOR

' ' 23 RADIATION IIOIIITORING 6VbTEH

24 SIZE REDUCTION E Q U I P K U CONTROL . CONSOLE

25 REDUCED WASTE WJECTS STORAGE B I N

. .. ... . . .

F ig. 10-9 Plan . . of second l e v e l . . .. . o f , . . . packaging-only . . . . . . . . f a c i l i r y . . . . .. . , , . . .

. . 10-13

CONTROL ROOM

WASTE TRANSFER CART ELEVATOR

FULL DRUM TRANSFER MONORAIL

A I R LOCK,

MONITORING & DECONTAMINATION ROOM

INSPECTION CONVEYOR .

SCREENING HOPPER

SCREENED WASTE PARTICLES STORAGE B I N

ELEVATOR HOIST

LARGE BOX L I F T MONORAIL HOIST I

MANIPULATOR

F i g . 10-10 C r o s s s e c t i o n o f p a c k a g i n g - o n l y f a c i 1 i t.y. . . . . . ..

FROM 1

RETRIEVAL FACILITY

AIR LOCK RECEIVE

OPEN CONTAINER REMOVE WASTE , I ' I

I ITEMS ' I LARGE ITEMS I .OTHER WASTE

I 1 1

!

rn

LARGE PIECES SEPARATING SIZE 4

REDUCTION . . , . . SCREEN

L

I 'SIZE REDUCED SMALL 1

PIECES PIECES I !

d i

~ H - I CONTAINER

I MONITOR. WEIGH. AND LOG I

INSPECT li . I DECON PACKAGE

EXIT THROUGH I . AIR LOCK

I P~LL,ETIZE 1 , ,

DRUMS

SHIP TO DISPOSAL SITE

TRUCKS

F ig . 10-11 Block flow diagram of packaging-only process.

10.3 ONSITE SHIPMENT

Onsite shipment,of processed waste would be accomplished using

semitrailers pulled by standard, highway truck tractors. The trucks

would travel over an asphalt-surfaced road that would be committed to

traffic associated with shipment of the TRU waste. To reduce the

probability of accidents, the trucks would be limited to a speed of

35 mph and would.trave1 only 12 hr/day, primarily during daylight

hours.

The cast slag from slagging pyrolysis would he shipped in DOT

Spec 17C, 55-gal capacity drums without plastic liners. Each drum

would weigh about 1360 1b. Fifty drums would he loaded onto a low-boy

semitrailer. Because the semitrailers wduld travel only on a comrni tted

roadway at controlled speeds, normal highway load limits would not

govern.

The compacted waste would be contained in cylinders that are

3$ in. diameter by 40 in. long. Four cylinders would be immobilized

within a 63-in. square, 43'-in. tall block of concrete, as described i n

Subsection 10.2.2. Each block would weigh about 8700 Ib. Four blocks

would be loaded onto a semitrailer. Again, travel over a committed

road would waive weight limits. \

The packaged waste would be shipped in DOT Spec 17C, 55-gal

capacity drums without plastic liners. Each drum would weigh about

260 lb. To reduce the truck loading and unloading times, the drums

would be strapped onto pal lets, 12 drumslpal let. ~welve pal lets would

be loaded on a semi trai'ler for shipment.

Table 10-1 summarizes the parameters for onsite shipment. Due

to rounding of the numbers of semitrailers and of trips/semi trailer,

multiplication of the shipment rates by the container volumes will not

exactly equal the total waste volume to be shipped.

SUMMARY OF DAILY ONSITE SHIPMENT OF PROCESSED STORED WASTE

- D e s t i n a t i o n - - Deep Rock. D isposa l Shaf t Acess Deep Rock Disposal , Tunnel Access Si.te 14

60 m i l es / round t r i p ------ 60 mi les / round t r i p 40 m i l es / round t r i p

Conta iners Nu~nher of Round Containers Number o f .Round Conta iners Number o f Round Waste Pec Semi- S e m i t r a i l - T r i p s Per Semi- S e m i t r a i l - T r i p s Per Semi- S e m i t r a i l - T r i p s From: ' t r a i l e r e r s I n P e r S e m i ~ ' t r a i 1 e r e r s I n Pe rSemi - t r a i l e r e r s I n Per Semi-

- - - - - -- Operat ion t r a i l e r Operat ion T r a i l e r -- Opera t ion t r a i l e r

S l agg i ng 'Py ro l ys i s and Pack- ag ing 48(8) 2 1 48 ( a.1 2 1 48(a) 1 . 2 . .

Comp ac t I~mnobi - '

l i z e and Pack- age 8(h) 2 1 8 t h ) 2 1

Package Only 1 4 4 ( ~ ) 2 1 - 144(c! 2

-

(a) Each con ta ine r l lo lds 7.4 f t 3 of cas t s l a g . ' - (hJ Each con ta ine r ho lds G5.36 f t3 o f compacted-waste.

( c ) Each con ta ine r ho lds 5.9 f t3 o f packaged waste: .

10.4 DISPOSAL -

Four d isposal modu'les were analyzed. I n two o f the modules, t h e

processed waste would be p laced i n v a u l t s o r rooms mined out o f t h e

calcareous rocks . i n the Lemhi Morlntain Range. These rocks are not.

p a r t o f t he fo rmat ion i n which the Snake R iver P la in .Aqu. i fe r i s loca-

ted. The two. modules d i f f e r p r i m a r i l y i n the access t o t h e underground

workings - s h a f t o r tunnel . The t h i r d m o d u l e invo lves engineered

shal low-land d isposal i n l a c u s t r i n e sediments a t an area on the INEL

known as S i t e 14. Two,design vers ions o f t h i s module were s t ~ ~ d i e d ,

a f f o r d i n g d i f f e r e n t degrees o f p r o t e c t i o n f o r the waste. The f o u r t h

module i s d isposal o f t h e waste i n an aboveground concrete s t r u c t u r e

near the RWMC.

For a l l d isposal metbods and l o c a t i o n s studied, the volumes,

i n c l u d i n g conta iners, t o be disposed o f would be: (11 1.3 m i l - 3 3 l i o n f t f rom the i n c i n e r a t i o n process, 1 2 ) 1.9 m i l l i o n ft f rom

t h e compaction and immobi l i za t ion process and, (3 ) 3.4 m i l l i o n f t 3

f rom t h e p a ~ k a g i n g ~ o n l y process. .

10.4.1 Deep Rock Disposal '- Shaf t Access. Concepts 5-a, 5 4 , l

and 5-c i nvo l ve deep rock dispos,al i n t he Lemhi Range w i t h s h a f t ac-

cess. This module requ i res cons t ruc t i on o f two sha f t s t o a subsurface

repos i to ry , i n which ' t he waste would ,be stored. The. r e p o s i t o r y would

be simi lar. , i n desiign, but ' smal ler an@ l e s s complex than the Waste

I s o l a t i o n P i l o t P lan t proposed by DOE as a Federal re posit or.^.

The sur face f a c i l i t i e s and s h a f t entrances would be loca ted on

t h e INEL i n t h e lowe? ,reaches . o f t h e Cemhi Range, as shown i n F ig -

u res 3-2 and 3-4. For t h i s study, t h e s i t e has been t e n t a t i v e l y

loca ted i n t h e southern h a l f o f Sect ion 27, Township 6 N, Range 30 E.

Se lec t ion o f an ac tua l s i t e wau.ld take p lace a f t e r t he area had been

thoroughly i nves t i ga ted by core d r i 11 ing. Because the presence o f

water would be a de t r iment t o long- t&rm conta iner i n t e g r i t . ~ , t he core

holes would be tes ted f o r water i n fo rmat ion be fore proceeding w i t h

t h i s disposal module. Reports concerning old mines in other areas of

the Lemhi Range indicate that water might be a serious problem in the limestone in which the vault area would be located.

The geology of t h i s area i s br ief ly described' in Subsec-

tion 3.4.4. The upper hundred f ee t or less of the shafts would probably be in quaternary alluvial fan material. Both' shafts would

.be lined with' concrete for the i r ent i re length. The majority of the length of the shafts , as well as the mine, would be locatid in car-

I : boniferous rocks. These rocks are mostly 1 imestones and dolomites. The selection of the layer for the mine, and i t s exact depth below the surface, would depend upon the d r i l l ing resul ts .

. , ,

To protect the waste from possible surface effects , the vault area would be located a mi nimum of 800 f t , below ground. For t h i s report, i t was assumed that the shafts would he 800 f t long. The Snake River Plain in the vicini ty of the proposed s i t e i s about 200 f t below the elevation a t the entrances of the shafts. The vault area would therefore be a t !.east 600 f t below the surface bf the plain.

After waste emplacement and a 30-yr retrievabi'l i t y period; the shafts wou'ld be f i l l e d with rock and plugged with 'concrete.

I . .

10.4.1.1 Assumptions. L i t t l e 'information i's available' on '

ground conditions or groundwater problems in the area 'of interest . '

For t h i s study, the following assumptions were made. Detailed onsite studies might lead to modification of these assumptions.

(1) No unusual groundwater problems will be encountered in the underground workings.

( 2 ) Minimal ground support will be needed' in the rock type se-

lected.

(3 ) V e n t i l a t i o n w i l l be provided by i n p u t fans a t t he sur face

and c o n t r o l l e d underground by b r a t t i c e s and overpasses. ' In

the , v a u l t rooms,r t h e a i r w i l l be d i s t r i b u t e d by fans and

ducts.

( 4 ) Because of t he volume of a i r involved, the exhaust w i l l no t

normal ly pass through HEPA f i 1 te rs , b u t , w i 11 bypass them.

Whenever t h e r a d i a t i o n l e v e l i n the exhaust increases s i g n i -

f i c a n t l y , a r a d i a t i o n moni tor i n t h e exhaust stream w i l l

a c t i v a t e a motor t o c lose a door i n t h i s bypass and d i r e c t

t he exhaust a i r through t h e HEPA f i l t e r s . I n p u t and exhaust

fans w i l l be s ized t o ensure t h a t the i n f l o w a i r w i l l be a t

a h igher pressure than t h e exhaust. Thus, a i r f l o w w i l l be

toward the exhaust system.

( 5 ) Rock excavation w i 11 proceed a t approximately t h e same r a t e as emplacement of waste, so t h a t one.room w i l l be ready when

the .previous room has been f i l l e d .

(6) Emplacement of waste w i l l be c a r r i e d o u t over a 10-yr pe r iod

from t h e date o f s t a r t . The workings w i 11 be maintained f o r

,30 yr a f t e r f i n a l emplacement f o r poss ib le r e e n t r y and waste

removal. See Guidel ine (8) i n Subsection 7.4.1 .l.

. . 10.4.1.2 . Mining'Method. Excavation would be by conven-

t i o n a l min ing methods. The rock s t rength i s est imated t o be above t h e

p r a c t i c a l l i m i t f o r cont inuous mining machines. Rock-boring machines

were no t considered due $0 t h e number o f sharp ,corners i n t h e tun-

nels. D iese l powered, r u b b e r - t i r e d mine equipment would be used f o r

maneuverab,i 1 i.ty and adaptabi 1 i ty . Load-haul -dump equipment would haul 3

t h e rock t o the man/materials (m/m) sha f t s t a t i o n f o r load ing i n t o t h e

skip. Water would be used f o r d r i l l i n g and f o r we t t i ng down the rock

t o comply w i t h app l i cab le min ing laws. A l l tunnels would be d r i ven on

a +1/2% slope t o f a c i l i t a t e drainage o f mine water t o a sump f o r pump-

i n g t o the surface. The tunnels would be interconnected a t predeter-

mined p o i n t s t o f a c i l i t a t e v e n t i l a t i o n . Th is would a l so a l low t h e

\

passage o f mining equipment from one tunnel fo the other. A room-and-

p i 1 1 ar system would be used f o r the waste vau i t area. Both rooms and

p i 1 1 ars would be 20 f t wide. The e n t i r e r oo f area would be rock bo l ted

w i th w i re mesh. I n addi t ion, rock b o l t i n g on the sides o f openings

might be required.

10.4.1.3 ' S u r . f a c e ' ~ a c i l i t i e s . The repos i to ry would requ i re

both surface and subsurface f a c i l i t i e s . The surface f a c i l i t i e s , shown

on Figure 10-12, are:

waste rece iv ing and handl i ng bui 1 ding;

admin is t ra t ion f a c i l i t y ,

majntenance bui ld ing,

mine bu i ld ing,

warehol~se and shops,

sewage treatment f a c i l i t y ,

transformer yard, *and . I

rock dump area.

The waste rece iv ing and handl i ng bu i 1 d ing would provide the caps- b i l i t y t o receive and handle the incoming waste. It would a lso conta in ,!:

f a c i l i t i e s t o decontaminate containers 'and equipment and t o repackage

damaged containers. A heal th physics .area and change rooms would a lso

be provided. A p lan o f t h i s b u i l d i n g i s shown i n ~ i ~ u r e 10-13. The

waste h o i s t and ' the .exhaust fans and f i 1 t e r s ace also located ih ;his

bu i ld ing . .

The administ rat ion f a c i l i t y would contain admin is t ra t ive o f f i c e

space, a supply storage area, and repa i r and maintenance f a c i l i t i e s

fo r uncontaminated equipment. It' would a lso contain alarm and comnuni-

cat ions equipment, an emergency power 'supply, and guard f a c i l i t i es .

I The mine bu i l d i ng would be located a t the manlmaterials

I (m/m) shaf t . It would conta in the m/m ho is t , the input v e n t i l a t i o n

I equipment for . the mine, and the a i r compressors. ' Rock excavated f rom I

rWAREHOUSE & WASTE FACILITY S H ~ P S \ / SHAFT

L M/M SHAFT SEWAGE TREATMENT

1

F ig . 10-12 S i t e p l a n f o r su r f ace f a c i l i t i e s f o r deep rock d i sposa l - s h a f t access.

'ION

WASTE HANDLING AREA

Fig. 10-13 Plan of waste facility for deep rock disposal - shaft access.

t h e mine would be brought t o t h e sur face v i a t h e m/m s h a f t only.

About 60% o f the excavated rock might be used 1 a t e r f o r backf i 11. If

t h e remainder i s found use fu l as a cons t ruc t i on ma te r ia l a t some o ther

l o c a t i o n w i t h i n the INEL, i t cou ld be re leased f o r t h a t purpose.

10.4.1.4 Underground ~ a c i l i t i e s . Underground f a c i l i t i e s

would inc lude two shafts, d r i f t s o r tunnels t o the ,m in ing and v a u l t

areas, the v a u l t s o r rooms i n which t h e waste would be placed, a main-

tenance area, and an area con ta in ing ea t i ng and s a n i t a r y f a c i l ' i t i e s

f o r t h e workers. The i n i t i a l cons t ruc t i on phase would comprise t h e

two shaf ts , the d r i f t s or tunnels, t he v e n t i l a t i o n system, and s u f f i -

c i e n t v a u l t capac i ty t o accommodate t h e ou tput o f one year o f opera-

t i o n o f the process f a c i l i t y . Subsequent t o the i n i t i a l phase, addi-

t i o n a l v a u l t space would be. mined incremental ly , as p a r t o f t he opera-,

t i n g and maintenance a c t i v i t i e s , t o keep pace w i t h the process f a c i l i t y

output .

F igure 10-14 i s a sketch o f the underground layout and a lso shows

t h e v e n t i l a t i o n flow. Table 10-2 l i s t s t he approximate volumes o f

rock t o be excavated and the est imated emplacement r a t e s f o r t he th ree -

waste processing modules. The emplacement r a t e s are based upon the

assumption t h a t the underground f a c i l i t i e s would be i n opera t ion

52 weekslyr, as opposed t o t h e 220 opera t ing days/yr a t t he process

f a c i l i t y . Therefore, the waste emplacement r a t e can not be r e l a t e d

! d i r e c t l y t o t h e conta iners lday ou tpu t f rom the process f a c i l i t i e s as

shown on Figures 10-1, 10-2 and 10-7.

The mlm s h a f t would p rov ide t h e means f o r removing excavated rock

f r o m ' t h e mine and b r i n g i n g i n men and mater ia ls . I t would a lso con- '

t a i n e l e c t r i c a l cables and accommodate t h e mine i n take a i r supply.

The 'waste s h a f t would be used on1.y f o r b r i n g i n g i n waste and f o r

exhaust ing t h e a i r . Both sha f t s would be concrete l i n e d f o r t h e i r

e n t i r e depth, and would have a f i n i s h e d i n s i d e diameter o f 12 ft.

Both sha f t s would be equipped w i t h two drum h o i s t s and head frames o f

s u i t a b l e capaci ty . The m/m s h a f t would a lso be equipped w i t h a s k i p

. . ROOM BEING EXCWATED - = VENTILATION FLOW .

EXCAVATED TO LAST ROOMS AS NEEDED .

MAINTENANCE AND FACILITIES AREA

BULKHEADS PLACED TUNNELS PROCRESS

AIR LOCK DOORS

WCT OVERPASS

AIR FLOW MAINTAINED WITH MINE FANS

ROOMS FILLED

FILLED WlTH WASTE

Usable storage he igh t approx. 18' TYPICAL ROOM

Fig. 10-14 Plan and v e n t i l a t i o n f l o w o f underground f a c i l i t y f o r deep rock d isposal - I s h a f t access.

r. .

TABLE 10-2

SIZE REQUIREMENTS FOR DEEP ROCK DISPOSAL FACILITY - SHAFT ACCESS

Processing .Concept S l agging Compaction, P y r o l y s i s Imrnohi 1 izat i ,on, Packaging

I tem and -Packaging . and Packaging Only

Volumes t o be Mined, 106 ft3 3.2 3.9 6.0

Disposal volume, ~ooms(b ) 10 14 25

Excavat ion Rate(a)

Rooms l y r ( b) F t o f 'runnel / y r

Con t a,i ner 55-gal drum Concrete b lock 55-gal drum 63 i n . x 63 i n . x 43 i n . h i g h

Hand1 i n g U n i t p a l 1 e t b lock p a l l e t

ContainersIHandl i ng U n i t 6 1 12

Weight o f Handl ing Un i t , 1b 8,160 8,700 3,120

Waste Emplacement Rate(c)

Containerslweek Handl i n g U,ni ts lweek

( a ) Assumed l eng th o f campaign i s 10. yr, f o l l o w i n g 30-month mine opening

( b ) Assumed room. s i ze : 500 x 20 x 18 f t

( c ) Based on 52 weekslyr opera t ion

pocket for rock removal a t the underground s ta t ion and a rock bin a t the surface. The shaf t separation would depend on the exploratory core d r i l l i n g r e su l t s , b u t would not be l e s s than 300 f t . Tunnels

about 750 f t long would connect the shaf t s t o the vault area. These

tunnels would he 10 f t square, as would tbe tunnels within the vault area. . The vaults or rooms would be about 20 f t wide and about 500 f t long. About 18 f t of usable storage height would be provided.

A f o r k l i f t would remove the waste from the waste hois t cage a t the underground s ta t ion and place i t on a diesel -powered, rubber-tired truck fo r t rans fe r t o the vault area. This truck would be of standard mine design. In the vaul t where waste i s being emplaced, another fork- l i f t would unload the truck and p u t the waste in i t s f i n a l posit ion.

The maintenance area would hc near the base o r Ll~e m/m shaf t . Only limited maintenance operations, such as of mining equipment and waste t ranspor ters , would be conducted underground. Firs t -a id f a c i l i - t i e s and a lunch area with restrooms would also be located in t h i s area.

10.4.2 Deep Rock Disposal - Tunnel Access. Concepts 5-d, 5-e,

and 5-f involve deep rock disposal with tunnel access in the southeast portion of the Lemhi Mountain Range in the northwest part of t9e INEL. (The geology of t h i s area i s presented in Subsection 3.4.4. The tunnel entrance location i s shown in Figures 3-2 a n d 3-4.) This module requires construction of two tunnels and a subsurface repository f o r the

waste. The repository would be identical t o t ha t described in 'subsec- t ion 10.4.1.4.

After waste emplacement and a 30-yr r e t r i e v a b i l i t y period, the tunnels would be f i l l e d with rqck and plugged with concrete.

10.4.2.1 Location and Rock Units Involved. For purposes of t h i s study, the disposal vault 'area was t en ta t ive ly located in4the southeastern quarter of Section 10 of Township 6 N, Range 30 E. Selec-

t ion of an' actual disposal location would take place on13 a f t e r the area ha.d been thoroughly investigated. Based on experience a t the

l ead and s i l v e r mines elsewhere i n t h e Lemhi Range, t h e r e i s a poss i -

b i l i t y t h a t . l i m e s t o n e i n t he proposed v a u l t area would be water sa tu -

r a t e d . Because t h i s would be undes i rab le , t h e v a u l t area would be

exp lo red by core d r i l l i n g and h o l e t e s t i n g b e f o r e proceeding f u r t h e r

w i t h t h i s d isposa l concept.

Two p a r a l l e l t unne l s would,be requi red, each about 5000 f t long.

T h e i r entrances would be l o c a t e d about 527.5 f t above sea l e v e l i n t h e

sou theas te rn q u a r t e r o f Sec t ion 11 o f Township'6 N, Range 30 E. The .

v a u l t area would be l o c a t e d approx imate ly 5300 ft above sea l e v e l , and

would be more than 800 f t below the ground sur face. If needed a t a

l a t e r date, a d d i t i o n a l v a u l t area c o u l d be l o c a t e d on lower l e v e l s .

The t unne l mouth and approx imate ly t h e ou te r h a l f o f t h e t unne l

would be l o c a t e d i n s i l i c i c v o l c a n i c rocks o f P l iocene age. Th i s

p e t r o l o g i c sequence i s composed mos t l y o f r h y o l i t e s and welded t u f f s ,

which are q u i t e porous. Excavat ion o f these rocks would be compara-

t i v e l y easy, b u t c e i l i n g suppor t would be r e q u i r e d f o r much o f t he

t unne l . The v a u l t area and approx imate ly t h e l a s t h a l f o f t h e access

t unne l would be l o c a t e d i n ca rbon i f e rous sedimentary rocks. These

rocks c o n s i s t p r i m a r i l y o f l imestones and dolomi tes, w i t h in te rbedded

sha le layers . Excavat ion i n these rocks would be s lower than i n t h e

v o l c a n i c rocks, b u t much l e s s r o o f suppor t would be requ i red .

10.4.2.2 General Desc r i p t i on . The Lemhi Range d i s -

posa l f a c i l i t y would c o n s i s t o f a su r f ace f a c i l i t y , two t unne l s

approx imate ly 5000 f t l ong each, and an underground v a u l t area.

F i g u r e 10-15 shows a c ross s e c t i o n o f t h e proposed f a c i l i t y . The

assumptions used f o r t h i s d isposa l module are the same as those

l i s t e d i n Subsect ion 10.4.1.1 f o r t h e deep rock d i s p o s a l - s h a f t access

module. The m in ing method f o r t unne l access - i s s i m i l a r t o t he method

f o r s h a f t access,. g i ven i n Subsect ion 1,0.4.1.2. The major d i f f e r e n c e

i s t h a t t h e t unne l s t o the v a u l t area would be s l oped upward on a

+ l / 2 % slope, so t h a t dra inage of any mo i s tu re would be toward t unne l

entrances. Passageways w i t h i n t h e v a u l t area would a l so be s loped so

IS t o p e r m i t any m o i s t u r e t o d r a i n o u t o f t h e mine. Thus, t h e r e would

k INEL BOUNDARY

F i g . 10-15 Cross sect ion o f f a c i l i t y for deep rock disposal - tunnel access.

be no sump within the mine and no need for pumping to remove water. Any water drainage from the vault would be collected a t the tunnel entrances and monitored for radioactivity before release.

10.4.2.3 Surfa'ce Fac i l i t ies . Figure 10-16 shows the surface f a c i l i t i e s . There i s presently insufficient f l a t area for the admini- s t rat ion building and waste transfer building to be located as shown. This area would be bui l t up with rock excavated from t3e tunnel and'. .

. .

vault area. After th i s area has. been bu i l t up, the rock excavated by mining would be. hauled north and dumped in a spoil area.

Figure 10-17 i s a plan of the waste transfer building for loading and unloading. Forklifts would remove containers of waste from the transfer vehicle and place them on the mine trucks to be hauled to the vault area. Trucks would pass through an airloc,k enroute to and from each tunnel. A constant f l o ; of a i r into and out of the mine would thereby be maintained. The a i r intake would be located where i t would not pick up exhaust a i r .

. . . ,

10.4.2.4 Underground Faci l i t ies . The underground f a c i l - i t i e s would include the two access tunnels and the vault area (Fig-

. ure. 10-18). No maintenance or eating f ac i l . i t i e s would be provided I

underground. The i n i t i a l construction phase would comprise the two access tunnels and suff ic ient vault capacity to accomodate the output

from one year of operation of the process f ac i l i t y . Subsequent to the i n i t i a l phase, additional vault space would be mined incrementally, as

part of the operating and maintenance ac t iv i t i e s , to keep pace with the process f a c i l i t y output.

Volumes and emplacement rates are given i n Table 10-3. The emplacement rates are based on the assumption that the underground f a c i l i t i e s would be operated 52 weeks/yr, as opposed to the 220 operating days/yr a t the process f a c i l i t y . Therefore, the waste emplace-! ment rate cannot be related direct ly to the co'ntainers/day output from the process f a c i l i t i e s , as shown on Figures 10-1, 10-2, and 10-7.

TRANSFORMER Fj

Fig. 10-16 Site plan for surface facilities for deep rock disposal - tunnel access.

I

COVERED PASSAGE TO MINE TUNNEL

. .

HEALTH MAINTENANCE

OVERPACK

>

ELECTRICAL

F i g . 10-17 Plan of waste t ransfer building for deep rock disposal - tunnel access.

ROOM BEING EXCAVATED

EXCAVATED TO LAST ROOMS AS NEEDED

TO SURFACE - APPROXIMATELY 5000 FEET

- = VENTILATION FLW

AIR FLOW MAINTAINED WITH MINE FANS

FILLED WITH WASTE

TYPICAL ROOM

Fig. 10-18 Plan and venti'lation flow for underground faci l i ty .for deep rock disposal - tunnel access.

TABLE 10-3

SIZE REQUIREMENTS FOR DEEP ROCK DISPOSAL FACILITY - TUNNEL ACCESS

Processing Concept S1 agg"'g P.yrolysis Imnobil i za t ion , Packaging

I tem and Packaging and Packaging Only

Volumei t d he ~i ned(a), 106 f t 3

Disposal Volume, Rooms 10 14 25

Rooms l y r F t o f Tunnel/yr

Container 55-gal drum concrete block 55-gal drum 63 in. x 63 in . x 43 in. h igh '

Handl i ng Un i t

Containers/Handling Un i t

pa l 1 e t

6 .

block

1

pa l l e t

12

81 60 8700 Weight o f Handling Unit , 1b 31 20

Waste Emplacement ~ a t e ( c )

-, Contacners/week Handl i ng Uni ts/week

(a) Includes two 5000 f t long access tunnels. t '

( h ) Assumed l e n g t h o f campaign i s 10 yr , f o l l ow ing 30-month mine, opening.

(c ) Based on 52 weeks/yr operat ion. 1

Both t unne l s would be 10 f t square. T h e i r , r o o f s would be rock . .

b o l t e d w i t h w i r e mesh f o r t h e i r e n t i r e ' l eng th . The waste t unne l would

be. used only. f o r h a u l i n g waste i n t o t he mine and f o r exhaust a i r . The

m/m tunne l would be used f o r rock .rkmoval, access f o r men and m a t e r i -

' a l s , and i n t a k e v e n t i l a t i o n . Load-ban1 -dump equipment would haul t h e . . . .

rock t o t h e sur face v i a t h e m/m tunne l and dump i t i n a s p o i l area.

Trucks o f s tandard mine design would t r a n s p o r t the waste i n t o t h e ,

v a u l t area v i a t h e waste tunne l . The v a u l t area would be i d e n t i c a l

t o t he v a u l t area w i t h s h a f t access descr ibed i n Subsect ion 10.4.1.

Tunnels i n t h e v a u l t area would b~ 10 f t square. The rooms would be

about 20 f t wide and about 500 f t long. About 18 f t o f usable s to rage

h e i g h t would be p rov ided . P i l l a r w i d t h would be 20 ft. V e n t i l a t i o n ,

f l ow i s shown i n ~ i q u r e ' 10-18.

10.4.3 Engineered Shallow-Land Disposal a t S i t e 14. Con-

cep ts 5-9, 5'-h, and 5 - i i n v o l v e sha l low- land d isposa l o f processed

waste i n engineered s t r u c t u r e s a t S i t e 14. Table 10-4 l i s t s t h e

number o f con ta ine rs t o be disposed o f f o r each process module

descr ibed i n subsect ion 10.2. . . ,

Two designs were developed f o r t h e engineered disposal , s t r u c -

t u res . The b a s e l i n e des ign contemplates massive s t r u c t u r e s in tended

t o endure f o r thousands , o f years. However, t h e es t imated cos t frr t h e

massive s t r u c t u r e s i s much l a r g e r than t h a t for . t h e deep rock d isposa l

modules. Because o f t he ve ry un favorab le c o s t o f th:js design, a l e s s

massive v a r i a t i o n o f t h e des ign was a l so developed and i s discussed i n

Subsect ion 10.4.3.6.

10.4.3.1 S i t e D e s c r i ~ t i o n ; S i t e 14 i s descr ibed i n Sec-

t i o n 3. F i g u r e 3-2 shows t h e l o c a t i o n o f S i t e . 14. The l o c a t i o n con-..

s i de red i s about 1.5 m i l e s east o f L i n c o l n Boulevard and approx imate ly

20 mi l e s n o r t h o f t h e Tes t Reactor Area (TRA) . The area i s i n a s l i g h t

depmssion. The e l e v a t i o n ranges f rom 4790 t o 4795 f t above sea l e v e l , . .

w i t h t h e s lope be ing upward t o t h e southwest.

TABLE 10-4

SIZE REQUIREMENTS FOR ENGINEERED SHALLOW-LAND

DISPOSAL FACILITY AT SITE 14

Process . .

Slagging Compaction, Py ro l ys i s Immobi l izat ion, Packaging

and 'Package and Packaging Only

Container 55-gal d r~ im concrete b lock 63 i n . x 55-gal drum 63 i n . x 43 in . h igh

Approximate Number o f Containers

Disposal Room 12 f t wide 12 f t wide 12 f t wide Cross Sect ion 10 f t h igh lil ft h igh 10 ft h igh

To ta l length o f Disposal Rooms a t Above Cross Section, f t

Number o f Storage S t r u c t u r s Regui redya) 6

. ,.

(a! Each s t r u c t u r e would be about 186 f t wide and 600 f t long, and ~wou1.d con ta in s i x d isposal rooms.

10.4.3.2 Disposal Facility. The general arrangement of the

disposal facility is shown in Figure 10-19. The facility consists of

underground concrete structures arranged in a rectangular array. A

cross section through a typical structure is shown in Figure 10-20.

Each structure would be about 600 ft long, 186 ft wide, and 24 ft

thick. It would be buried so that the top of the structure would be

15 ft below the original surface of the ground. Each structure would

contain 6 rooms running the full length of the structure and having a

cross section 12 ft wide and 10 or 12 ft high depending on the waste containers to be disposed. This room cross section would enable place-

ment of standard drums 5 across and stacked 3 high, or placement of

the concrete blocks 2 across and stacked 3 high. The structural con- . . .

figuration is twypified by (1) high ratio of solid material (reinforced

concrete) to void, (2) .use of massive interlocking concrete blocks,

and (3) use of a thick layer of natural material (bentonite, clay, and

basalt riprap) to protect the concrete from the environment. This

design would protect the waste against containment failure modes that

might be anticipated over a prolonged period of time, including:

(1) gradual deterioration of the concrete, followed by tensile

failure and collapse into the void volumes;

(2) failure due to a seismic event or any other occurrence caus-

ing relative displacement of the structure;

I (3) erosion or washing away of the protective cover, followed by

deterioration and failure of the concrete structure;,and

(4) impact by large objects; e.g., aircraft.

The proposed structural arrangement would minimize the volumetric

change under completely collapsed conditions. This would maintain the

integrity of the basic structure and reduce the possibi1it.v of breach-

ing the protective cover.

ACCESS ROAD TO OFFICE 8 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE

7 . /-BUILDING ( 60 , x 7 0 ' LINCOLN BOULEVARD

UNLOADING STORAGE 8 PAD ( 60 ' x 2 0 0 ' 1

TO RWMC

TRANSFER

COVER MATERI ( 2 4 6 ' X 6 6 0 '

/ UNDERGROUND CONCRETE STORAGE STRUCTURE ( 186' X 600')

Fig. 10-19 Plan of shallow-land disposal facility for stored TRU waste ,.at-.Si.te..M,

BASALT RIPRAP (4' THICK)

CRUSHED BASALT (2 ' THICK)

I

F i g . 10-20, Cross s e c t i o n through t y p i c a l s t r u c t u r e a t S i t e 14. . . . .

The use of a structure bu i l t of interlocking blocks would provide

a high degree of f l e x i b i l i t y and would redis t r ibute the s t resses due

to re la t ive motion rather than crack or shear as might be expected in a r ig id structure. An additional desirable feature resu l t s from the high percentage of overlap of the blocks spanning the tunnels. This arrangement would provide solid beam support, so that tens i le s t resses i n the span would be smal.1.

Protection from fa i lure due to erosion, leakage, or impact would be provided by a minimum of 21 f t of clay, bentonite, and basal t covering the concrete structure. The basic approach would be t o provide an outer layer tha t i s h ighly8res is tan t t o the environment and to destructive events, and to un-derlie th i s layer with a thick impervious blanket t o provide isolation and protection against moisture penetration. To provide improved drainage, the upper surface would be graded t o provide a 10% slope from the centerline to a point 30 f t from the edge of the structure,.

- To permit emplacement of waste containers, an asphalt ramp would be constructed, extending from the.ground surface. to the f loor level, of the rooms. A temporary off ice and vehicle maintenance building

would be situated adjacent to the structures to provide space for administration ac t iv i t i e s and for servicing equipment assigned to the area.

A 24-ft wide asphalt roadway about 20 miles long worrld be constructed t o permit shipment of the processed waste from the RWMC t o S i t e 14. This comnitted roadway would not intersect the public roadway, but would pass beneath i t by means of an underpass. Tfie disposal area would also be connected to Lincoln Boulevard by a 24-ft wide asphalt roadway about 1.5 miles 1.0ng.~ A 20-ft wide gravel r0adwa.y would be constructed around and between each structure to permit surveillance. The ent i re area would be surrounded by a. 12-ft chain link . fence.

10.4.3.3 Surveillance. To facilitate continued surveil-

lance of the spaces within the structures, instrumentation would be

installed during construction. Any aSnorma1 increase in activity

would be detected and corrected. This surveillance would be contiwed

for a per%siuJ of about 100 yr.

10.4.3.4 -Waste Emplacement. containers of processed

waste would be transported to Site 14 using low-boy type trailers.

The containers would be unloaded hy forklifts and either placed on a .

temporary storage pad adjacent to the ramps leading to the rooms or

placed in their final positions within the rooms. When each room is

filled, it would be temporarily closed with a concrete barrier. Upon

completion of the 40-yr operational and observational period (during

which retrieval capability would be provided), the barrier would be

replaced with a solid concrete plug and the ramp area completely

filled.

10.4.3.5 Construction Techniques. The concrete blocks used

for construction are too large to permit prefabrication and individual placement. Therefore, it would be necessary to provide forms and pour

each block in place. .This would be done by using moveable forms and

by placing impermeable barriers on ad-jacent blocks to provide con-

trolled separation between blocks. The initial construction phase

would comprise s'i te preparation, the 20-mi le and 1.5-mile asphalt

roadways, the gravel roadways, the chain link fence, the service

facilities, and sufficient underground structures to accommodate the

output from one year of operation of the process facility. AddiJiona.1

underground structures would be constructed incrementally, as part of

the operating and maintenance activities, to keep pace with the pro-

cess facility output.

10.4.3.6 Engineered Shal low-Land Disposal at Site 14 ' - Less

Massive Variation. The less massive variation (LMV) of the engineered

structures for shallow-land disposal differs from the previously dis-

cussed design, principally in the use of 8-in. walls, rather than

approximately 8-ft walls. Only the significant differences between

the two designs are discussed here.

The f a c i 1 i t . y cons i s t s o f underground concrete s t r u c t u r e s arranged

i n a rec tangu lar a r ray (F igu re 10-21). Table 10-5 l i s t s t h e number of

conta iners t o be disposed o f f o r each processing method. A cross

s e c t i o n through a t y p i c a l s t r u c t u r e i s shown i n F igure 10-22. - Each

s t r u c t u r e would he about 500 f t long, 120 f t wide, and 14 f t t h i c k .

The top of t h e s t r u c t u r e would be 15 f t .below. the o r i g i n a l .sur face o f

t h e ground. Each s t r u c t u r e wou ld .conta in 6 rooms running the f u l l

l eng th o f t h e s t r u c t u r e and having a cross sec t i on 16.8 ft wide and

12.5 o r 11.5 f t h igh depending on the waste conta iners t o be, d i s - .

posed. This room cross sec t i on would enable placement o f standard

drums 8 across and stacked 4 high, o r placement o f the concrete' b locks

3 across and stacked 3 high.

The 500 f t s t ruc t r r re wollld be subdivided by cross w a l l s every

5 0 b f t forming i n d i v i d u a l c e l l s 50 ft long, 16.8 f t high, and 12.5 o r

11.5 f t ' wide. The stacked waste conta iner arravs would be surrounded

by a l aye r o f t a r approxima.te1.y 4 i n . ' t h i c k t o p rov ide an e l a s t i c

waterproof coat ing. The s t r u c t u r a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n i s t v p i f i e d by mu1 - t i p l e containment l a y e r s (waste conta iner , t a r , and .concrete) and a

t h i c k l a y e r o f n a t u r a l m a t e r i a l (bentoni te, cla.y, and b a s a l t r i o r a p ) . ." . t o .p ro tec t t he concrete 'from the environment. This design would pro-

v ide p r o t e c t i o n o f the waste against the containment f a i l u r e modes

l i s t e d i n Subsection 10.4.3.2.

The proposed s t r r ~ c t u r a l arrangement wo111d minimize the e f f e c t s o f

"01;metric changes under complete ly c o l lapsed cond i t ions . If a c o l -

lapse resu l ted . i n a waste volume change o f 50%, the top o f the cover

would s t i l l be a t l e a s t 10 f t above t h e surrounding area, thereby

p r o v i d i n g drainage. P ro tec t i on f rom f a i l u r e due t o erosion, leakage,

o r impact would be prov ided by the minimum o f 21 -ft la,yor o f c lay,

bentoni te, and rock cover ing the concrete s t ruc tu re .

The concrete rooms would be formed anb poured i n place.. The r o o f

s labs would be e i t h e r poured onsi te, o r f a b r i c a t e d elsewhere and t rans -

po r ted t o t h e s i t e as needed. The i n i t i a l cons t ruc t i on phase would

ACCESS ROAD TO LINCOLN BOULEVARD UNLOADING, STORAGE &

TRANSFER PAD (60' x 200')

TO RWMC OFFICE & EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE BUILDING (60' x 70')

J 1 f* 7 r

,

!

1

C

4

I '

!

4

< \ \ i

! C - \ - \ - -

1640'

COVER MATERIAL UNDERGROUND CONCRETE STORAGE (290' x 670') STRUCTURES (186' x 500')

Fig . 10-21 P lan o f shallow-'.land d i s p o s a l f a c i 1.i t y ( l e s s mass ive v a f l i a t i o n ) f o r . s t o r e d TRU w a s t e a t S i t e 14. .,

- . -

TABLE 10-5

SIZE REQUIREMENTS FOR ENGINEERED SHALLOW-LAND DISPOSAL

FACILITY AT SITE 14 - LESS MASSIVE VARIATION

Process

Slagging Compaction, Pyro lys is Immobilization, Packaging

and Packaging and Packaging Only

Container . 55-gal drum concrete block 63 in . x 55-gal drum 63 in. x 43 in . h igh

Approximate Number o f Containers 140,800

Disposal Room 16.8 f t wide '16.8 ft wide 16.8 ft wide Cross Section 12.5 f t high 11.5 f t .,high 12.5 f t high

Number o f Storage S t ruc tu r s Requ i redPa)

(a) Each s t ruc ture would be 118 f t wide and 500 f t long, and wo1l1.d contain s i x disposal rooms.

.' .

Crushed basalt (2' thick) 7 \ Ground level 7

C 16.8' r8:gpical

f :

1

Typical 4x8 drum array Typical 3x3 block array

Fig. 10-22 Cross section through typica l structure ( less massi ye var ia t ion) a t S i t e 14.

comprise s i t e preparat ion, the 20-mi l e and the 1.5-mi l e asphal t road-

ways, t he grave l roadways, t h e cha in 1 i n k fence, t h e se rv i ce f a c i l i-

t i e s , and s u f f i c i e n t underground s t ruc tu res t o accommodate the ou tput

from one year o f opera t ion o f t he process f a c i l i t y . Add i t i ona l under- , .

ground st ructu6es would be constkucted incremental ly, as p a r t o f the

opera t ing and maintenance a c t i v i t i e s , t o keep pace- w i t h the process

f a c i l i t y output.

. . . - 10.4.4 Disposal i n Engineered Surface F a c i 1 i . t ~ near t he RWMC.

Concepts 5- j , 5-k, and 5-1 i nvo l ve d isposal o f processed waste i n an

engineered sur face f a c i l i t y near, the RWMC. The' s i z e o f the f a c i 1 i t y

would be . . based . , on d isposal o f s to red waste processed by the th ree

methods discussed i n Subsection 10.2. Table 10-6 l i s t s the number o f

conta iners t o be d isposed-o f f o r each processing method.

10.4.4.; S i t e Descr ip t ion . The INEL and the RWMC are de- , .

s c r i bed i n Sect ion 3. F igu re 10-23 shows t h e RWMC and t h e l o c a t i o n o f ,

e x i s t i n g and proposed f a c i l i t i e s and disposal areas. The l o c a t i o n

s tud ied f o r t h e Engineered Surface Disposal F a c i l i t y , i s adjacent t o

the southeastern corner o f the RWMC and extends outs ide and south o f . .

t h e ' e x i i t i n g RWMC fence. ~ h e ' e l e v a t i o n i n t h i s area ranges from 5010

t o 5020 f t above sea l e v e l and slopes t o the northwest. The sur face

s o i l i s t y p i c a l l y about 15 f t th i ck , w i t h an under l y ing lay& ' o f ' b a s a l t

approximately 100 f t t h i c k . . . , I .

. . .. .

10.4.4.2 Disposal F a c i l i t y . The Engineered Surface D is - . .

posa i Faci 1 i t y would c o n s i s t . o f elongated, earth-covered, concrete

.: . . s t ruc tu res , arranged as shown i n F igure 10-23. Each s t ruc ture ,

i n c l u d i n g t h e cover ma te r i a l , would be approximately 820 f t long,

340 f t wide and 62 f t h igh (above ground l e v e l ) . F igure 10-24 shows ,

, . t h e cross s e c t i o n o f a t y p i c a l s t ruc tu re . F igure 10-25 i s an i s o -

m e t r i c cutaway . . i l l u s t r a t i n g the o v e r a l l con f i gu ra t i on .

Each s t r u c t u r e would con ta in 15 d isposal rooms. Each room would

be 12 f t wide by 10 o r 12 f t h igh depending on tbe waste conta iners t o

be disposed and extend t h e f u l l length o f t h e s t ruc tu re . The room

TABLE 10-6

,

. SIZE REQUIREMENTS FOR ENGINEERED SURFACE DISPOSAL \ '

FACILITY NEAR THE RWMC

Process - . Slagging . Compaction, Pyro 1 ys i s Imrnobil i za t ion , Packaginq

and Packaging and Packaging Only 0

Container 55-gal drum . concrete block 63 in. x 55-gal drum 63 in. x 43 in . h igh

Approximate Number o f

140,800 19,800: , , Containers 374,000

D i sposal Room 12 f t wide 12 f t wide 12 f t wide Cross. Section 10 f t high 12 ft high 10 f t h igh

1

Total length o f Disposal Rooms a t Above Cross Section, ft 18,800 18,000 49,800

i .

Number o f ,. Storage 2.02 2.0 : 5.53 Structures (use 2, fuse 2, (use 6, Required 620 f t long) 6 0 0 * f t long) . . ' 600 f t long)

Height o f . .

Structure, f t 6 2. 72 6 2

FEET

Fig. 10-23 Plan for disposal in engineered structures for. stored TRU waste- near the RWMC.

. .

lo' X 12' (TYPICAL)

I

F I G . 10- 24 Cross section of typical structure a t engineered surface dl sposal faci 1 i ty near the

~ ~ ~ - , ~ ~ - . SOIL PROTECTIVE

RAGE TUNNELS

\ -LEVEL OF NATURAL TERRAIN

LFOUNDATION SLAB

/-- BASALT Y

. ,.

Fig. 10-25 Isometric cutaway o f engineered s t ructure a t surface disposal faci 1 i ty near the RWMC.

cross sec t ion would permi t placement o f 55-gal drums 5 across and

3 high, o r concrete b locks 2 across and 3 high. The i n i t i a l construc-

t i o n phase would comprise s i t e p repara t ion and cons t ruc t i on o f s u f f i - .

c i e n t s t ruc tu res t o accommodate t h e ou tput from one year o f opera t ion

o f the processing f a c i l i t y . Add i t i ona l s t ruc tu res would be constructed

incremental ly , as p a r t o f t h e opera t ing and maintenan,ce a c t i v i t i e s , t o . .

keep pace w i t h the process f a c i l l t y output. . -.

. ? .

The s t r u c t u r a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n would .have :a h i g h r a t i o o f s o l i d . .

ma te r i a l ( re in fo rced concrete) t o v o i d because o f the u i e o f massive

i.nter.1ocking tonc re te b locks r a t h e r t h a n so l i d poured concrcte. The '

s i t e would be excavated t o permi t t h i s massive s t r u c t u r e t o r e s t on

basa l t . A 1 2 - f t l a y e r o f n a t u r a l m a t e r i a l (bentoni te, c l ay , and b a s a l t

r i p r a p ) would p r o t e c t the concrete f rom the environment. This design

would prov ide p r o t e c t i o n f o r t he waste aga ins t t h e containment f a i l u r e

modes t h a t might be an t i c i pa ted f o r a s t r u c t u r e o f t h i s type under the

l o c a l environmental cond i t i ons f o r a prolonged p e r i o d o f time, as

di'scusser! i n Subsection 10.4.3.2. Tfie maximum vo lumet r ic change under

the completely co l lapsed c o n d i t i o n would be o n l y about 25%. ,

A s t r u c t u r e b u i l t o f i n t e r l o c k i n g b locks would prov ide a h igh

degree o f f l e x i b i l i t y and would tend t o r e d i s t r i b u t e st resses due t o

r e l a t i v e motion r a t h e r than t o crack o r shear as might be expected i n

a r i g i d ' s t ruc tu re . An a d d i t i o n a l des i rab le f e a t u r e i n t h i s s t r u c t u r a l

con f i gu ra t i on r e s u l t s 'from the h igh percentage o f over lap o f the b locks

spanning t h e v o i d regions. This arrangement would prov ide s o l i d beam

support r a t h e r than simple p o i n t support. Thus, t e n s i l e s t resses i n

t h e span would be small.

I

10.4.4.3 Survei l lance.. To f a c i l i t a t e cont inued s u r v e i l lance

o f t h e spaces w i t h i n t h e s t ruc tures , ins t rumenta t ion would be i n s t a l l e d

dur ing cons t ruc t ion . Any abnormal increase i n r a d i o a c t i v i t y would be

detected and corrected. The s u r v e i l l a n c e would be cont inued f o r a

pe r iod o f about 100 yr.

10.4.4.4 Waste Emplacement. To permit emplacement of

waste containers, temporary earth-filled ramps would be constructed

from the level of natural terrain to the level of the tunnels; The

containers would,,be transferred from the.processing facility to the

disposal facility. Forklifts would be used to positjon the containers in the tunnels. As<.each.tunnel is f'illed, it would be temporarily

closed with a concrete barrier. .At the end of the 40-yr operational

and observational period during which retrieval capability would be

provided, ,the temporary barrier would be removed and replaced with a .

solid, poured-in-place concrete plug. The end of.the structure would

then be covered with the same bentonjte, clay, and basalt blanket .

described previously.

10.4.4.5 Construction '~echniques. The concrete blocks used for.construction are too large to permit prefabrication and individual

placement. Therefore, it would be necessary to provide forms and pour

each block'in place. This would be done by using moveable forms and - by placing impermeable barriers on adjacent blocks to provide con-

trolled separation between blocks.

10.5 DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING

D&D of the retrieval and slagging pyrolysis facilities is dis-

cussed in Subsection 9.1.5. In many respects, D&D of the facility to

compact, immobilize, Qnd package the waste would be similar to D&D of

the slagging facility. Equipment that is not decontaminable would be

shipped to the disposal facility.

D&D of the facility for packaging the waste would be simpler than

D&D of the other processing facilities. Again, equipment that could

not be decontaminated would be shipped to the disposal facility.

It is anticipated that disposal service facilities, such as main-

tenance shops, would not become contami nated. Therefore, D&D would be

re1 at ively simple compared with D&D of retrieval or process faci 1 it ies.

11. COMBINED MANAGEMENT OF BURIED 1'Hu

. . WASTE AND STORED TRU WASTE . .

As mentfoned i n Subsection 7.3, t he DOE a l t e r n a t i v e s study f o r '

INEL TRU waste and t h e d r a f t EIS f o r INEL TRU waste address both t h e

bur ied TRU waste and the s tored TRU waste. The s e l e c t i o n o f a par-

t i c u l a r a l t e r n a t i v e or concept f o r managing one type o f TRU'waste

could a f f e c t t he choice o f a l t e r n a t i v e or concept f o r t h e o ther type.

This sub jec t ' i s discussed i n t h e s tud ies j u s t mentioned. Because t h e

present study addresses on ly stored TRU waste, t he t o p i c o f combined

waste management i s no t addressed here. The existence o f such con-

s ide ra t i ons i s simply c a l l e d t o the readerg 's a t ten t i on .

12. ENVIRONMENTAL. FFFECTS OF ALTERNATIVES FOR MANAGING TRU WASTE'

I 12.1 INTRODUCTION AND APPROACH

Th is d iscussion o f environmental e f f e c t s i s presented i n

th ree major par ts . Subsection 12.2 discusses the p o t e n t i a l impacts,

b a s i c a l l y a l l nonrad io log ica l , o f p repar ing t h e s i t e s and cons t ruc t i ng

t h e f a c i l i t i e s described i n Sect ions 8, 9, 10. Subsection 12.3 d i s -

cusses the nonrad io log ica l impacts o f opera t ing t h e f a c i l i t i e s and

subsquently decontaminating and decommissioning (D&D) them. Subsec-

t i o n 12.4 discusses the r a d i o l o g i c a l impacts o f operat ions and D&D.

Whenever possib le, t h e environmental ef . fects are discussed gener i -

c a l l y . I n cases f o r which a gener ic d iscussion would be inadequate,

an e f f e c t ( o r impact) i s discussed by module.

I

Each impact i s genera l l y discussed f i r s t i n terms o f the leave- in-

p lace a l te rna t i ves . Then f o u r waste management operat ions are d i s -

cussed i n tu rn : r e t r i e v a l , processing, .storage ( A l t e r n a t i v e 4 on ly ) ,

and d isposal . Each major subsect ion inc ludes tabu la t i ons o f e f f e c t s

by a1 te rna t i ves and modules. The summary, Subsection 12.5,' i s a f i n a l

tabu1 a t i on by waste management concept (combinations o f var ious mod-

ules, as i n F igure 7-1 and Table 7-3), and inc ludes a r e c a p i t u l a t i o n

of unavoidable adverse impacts. \

12.2 SITE PREPARATION AND CONSTRUCTION

The waste management a l t e r n a t i v e s are def ined i n Sect ion 7, and

the f a c i l i t i e s i n Sect ions 8 through 10. E f f e c t s are discussed i n ' <

terms of t h e e x i s t i n g environment, described i n Sect ion 3. The

f a c i l i t i . e s and other cons t ruc t i on e f f o r t s would c o n s i s t o f improved

confinement (A1 t e r n a t i v e 2), r e t r i e v a l and processing f ac i 1 i t i e s

(A l te rna t i ves 3, 4, 5 , and 6), a 20-yr storage f a c i l i t y (A l te rna-

t i v e 4), waste d isposal f a c i l i t i e s ( A l t e r n a t i v e 5), and a n c i l l a r y

f a c i l i t i e s associated w i t h a l l o f the above. A l t e r n a t i v e 1 ( leave-

as- is ) would no t i nvo lve any add i t i ona l const ruc t ion .

12.2.1 Air Quality. The major a i r quality impacts associated with the construction of the f a c i l i t i e s would resu i t from construction vehic1.e emissions and equipment exhaust, and from generation of dust. ~ncreased dust levels would resu l t from vehicular t r a f f i c over gravel roads and construction areas as well as from wind-generated erosion of

areas s t r i pped of protective vegetative cover. Though some adverse a i r qual i t y impact i s l ike ly to occur, there'would be s t r i c t adherence to federal and s t a t e a i r qual i ty standards. Mitigative measures that can reduce the e f fec ts include: (1) application of d u s t pa l l ia t ives

to roads and construction areas, ( 2 ) limitation of disturbances of vegetative cover to only those areas necessary for construction of f aci 1 i t i e s , and ( 3 ) use of erosion control and restorat ive procedures to minimize wind-generated d u s t .

Despite these mitigative actions, some minor b u t unavoidable adverse impact would occur during construction and fo r a limited period afterwards. Construction would require operation of a number of vehicles, heavy construction equipment (bull dozers, f ront end 1 oaders, backhoes, earthmovers, e t c ) , and other motor-dri ven equipment. Columns (1) and (2 ) of able 12-1 show the estimated construc- t ion period for each f a c i l i t y and an estimate of the average number of

,equipment pieces used. Most of th i s equipment would be operated only ,

during daylight hours. However, a disposal f a c i l i t y , a t a Lemhi s i t e - would be constructed using three s h i f t s per day.

Table 12-2 l i s t s estimated total contaminants emitted by the construction equipment (Duprey 1968). Because of the isolation of the INEL and the localized nature of the e f fec ts , there would be no adverse a i r qual i t y impacts to the pub1 ic. However, local ized adverse

a i r quality would affect construction workers a t the s i t e . Most construction-related a i r qual i ty impacts would cease upon completion of

the construction, b u t wind-generated dust might continue until protec- t i v e vegetative cover had been reestablished. A 10-yr operating phase

a t any of the INEL disposal f ac i l i t i e s would include continuing expansion of the disposal capacity, as discussed i n Section 10 and foot-

note ( b ) of Table 12-1.

TABLE 12-1

CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES

(1) (2 ) ( 3 ) - ( 4 (5) Pieces o f Heavy Diese l Fuel Construct ion

Time Equipment Used Ujed Workers (months) (Average No.) (10 g a l ) Avg. Max.

LEAVE AS I S 0 0 ' 0 0 0

IMPKUVED CONFINEMENT

Above and Around 24 6 86 8 8 Above, Around

and Below ' 24 I m n o b i l i z a t i o n 24

RETRIEVAL FACILITY . 9 . 10 54 50 75

CPT PKG

Roadway

Engineered Sha l l ow- km;v;;posal a t

9 6 ' 32 2 5 35 6 4 14 20 30

~ o a d w a y ( ~ ) 8 13 62 2 1 21

Engineered Sur f ace F a c i l i t y Near RWMC 9 Service 1

20-YR RETRIEVABLE 6 STORAGE

(a) SP: Slagging Py ro l ys i s and Packaging, , CPT: Compaction, Imnobi 1 i z a t i o n , and Packaging,

PKG: Packaging Only

(b) For d isposal f a c i l i t i e s , " t ime" f o r cons t ruc t i on r e f e r s t o s i t e preparat ion and i n i t i a l ' capac i ty only. Add i t i ona l capac i t y would be added dur ing operat ions phase (see Sect ion 10).

( c ) Const ruc t ion e f f o r t a t Lemhi Range would be approximately t h e same f o r '

e i t h e r s h a f t access or tunnel access. F i r s t row o f e n t r i e s inc ludes o n l y t h e s h a f t o r tunne l and a one-yr d isposal capaci ty. Add i t i ona l capac i t y would be const ruc ted as needed and i s added i n t o operat ions a c t i v i t i e s . A s i m i l a r approach was used f o r t h e o ther d isposal f a c i l i t i e s . A two- lane conmitted roadway 30 m i l e s long would a lso be b u i l t . It i s e s t i - mated t h a t t h e cons t ruc t i on p e r i o d would extend over 18 months fo r t h i s roadway -but t h a t a c t i v i t y would be suspended f o r 4 months du r ing the . winter .

I (d) LMV r e f e r s t o the l ess massive v a r i a t i o n o f the disposal f a c i l i t y .

(e) A committed roadway t o S i t e 14 would be about 20 m i l e s long.

TABLE 12-2

ESTIMATED TOTAL AIRBORNE CONTAMINANTS RELEASED BY EQUIPMENT DURING CONSTRUCTION OF FACILITIES

- F a c i l i t y .Contaminant Released ( l o J l b )

Par- A1 de- Hydro- A c e t i r t i c u - hydes (a) CO carbons NO, SO7 Acids a) '1 ates -

LEAVE AS I S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

IMPROVED CONFINEMENT Above and Around 0.86 5.2 12 19 3.4 2.7 9.5 Above, Around, and Below 1.2 7.2 ' 16 27 4.8 '3.7 13 Immobi l i za t ion 0.29 1.7 3.9 6.4 1.2 0.9 3.2

RETRIEVAL FACILITY 0.54 3.2 7.3 12 2.2 1.8 . 5.9

PROCESS FACILITY(~) SP 3.6 22 4 9 80 14 11 40 CPT 3.0 18 4 1 6 7 12 9.3 33 PKG 2.2 13 30 49 8.8 6.8 24

DISPOSAL FACILITIES Deep Rock Disposal Lemhi S i t e - Tunnel o r Shaf t Access 2.2 13 30 49 8.8 6.8 24 TGZi5Zy 1.1 6.6 15 24 - . 4.4 3.4 12

Engineered Sha l l ow- Land Disposal a t

Roadway 0 I62

Engineered Sur f ace F a c i l i t y Near RWMC 0.65 3.9 '8.8 14 2.6 2.0 '7.2 =ice Roads 0.08 0.48 1.1 1.8 0.32 0.25 0.88

20-YR RETRI EVABLE . I

STORAGE 0.22 1.3 3.0 4.9 0.88 0.68 2.4

(a ) From a i r o x i d a t i o n o f exhaust products o f d iese l f u e l . . i

(b ) SP: Slagging ~ ~ r o l ~ s i s and Packaging, CPT: Compaction, Immobi l i za t ion , and packaging, PKG: Packaging Only

( c ) LMV i d e n t i f i e s the use. o f t he l ess massive v a r i a t i o n o f t he engineered shal low- land d isposa l f a c i l i t y a t S i t e 14.

*

12.2.2 Environmental Noise. Except fo r noise generated by

public t r a f f i c crossing the INEL and the operations of some of the INEL f a c i l i t i e s , ambient noise levels are generally very low and loca- l ized. Construction operations would r e s u l t in an increase in ambient . '

noise levels , in proportion t o the number of machines op6ratin.g and the length of the construction period. Table 12-1 l i s t s these data.

Because of the i so la t ion of the INEL, the increase in local

ambient noise levels would not impact the public. Workers would be exposed t o localized high noise l eve l s b u t would be provided, by the contractor, with hearing protection in conformance with OSHA regulations. Noise would a lso impact local wildl i f e (see ~ u c s e c - t ion 12.2.3). Construction-related noise impacts a re shor t term and wuuld cease when construction a c t l v l t y was completed.

12.2.3 Ter res t r i a l Environment. construction-related e f f ec t s on the t e r r e s t r i a l environment would include potential impacts t o vegetation and wildl i f e . The primary impact would be vegetation removal fo r f a c i l i t y construction. Table 12-3 l i s t s the vegetation types t ha t wduld be affected and the acreage of land ' that would be

committed fo r each module. Though some of the disturbed acreage could '

be revegetated, most of the area could not return t o preexist ing con- d i t ions unt i l the D&D phase of the program.,

Additional vegetation would be disturbed as. a r e s u l t of extrac- t ion of construction mater ia ls , such as c lay, gravel and basa l t , on' the INEL. Potential material s i t e s have not yet been ident i f ied b u t

some material extraction might occur in the Big Lost River area and . .

the playas to the north. Relative values of the acreage involved can be obtained by comparing the volumes of material required f o r each module (see Table 12-6 in subsection 12.2.8). After material needs have been met, these s i t e s could be rehabil itate'd and would eventually return t o t h e i r previous s t a t e .

TABLE 12-3

VEGETATION TYPES AFFECTED AND ESTIMATED ACREAGE NEEDED FOR FACILITIES

Vegetation and Requirements (Acres Facllity Conununi t y (liSi:J, s,ilL k a c i l i t y Roads ;otal

LEAVE AS IS AND IMPROVED CON- B ig FINEMENT Sagebrush N/A N/A 0 0 0

RETRIEVAL B i g FACILITY Sagebrush N/A N/ A 0.5 0 0.5

PROCE S FACILIPI t SP a) CPT

B ig . Sagebrush

PKG

DISPOSAL FACILITIES(~) D e g ~ o c k bi s6<aT Lemhi S i t e -- - - - S h a f t Access SP

Juniper (Roadwav:

CPT sagebrush PKG & playas)

Deep Rock Dis- y;;lT;;;;+ Access Juniper SP (Roadway:

CPT Sdgebrush . PKG & playas)

CPT grasses LMV

PKG LMV.

En ineered h c i l i t y

B i P CPT sageb;ush PKG

20-YR RETRIEV- B ig ABLE STORAGE Sagebrush

(a) , SP: Slagging P y r o l y s i s and Packaging, CPT: Conpaction, Imnobi l izat ion, and Packaging, PKG: Packaging Only

(b) The s i z e o f the disposal f a c i l i t i e s depends on the volume o f processed waste t o be'handled. This would be l a r g e s t f o r t h e PKG output. P r o p o r t i o n a l i t y o f SP and CPT s p o i l s and acreages i s no t necessar i ly cons is ten t because of t h e modu la r i t y o f some disposal f a c i l i t l e s (see Sect ion 10).

( c ) LMV i d e n t i f i e s the use o f the less massive v a r i a t i o n o f the engineered shal low-land disposal f a c i l i t y a t S i t e 14.

Removing natural vegetative cover increases the potenti a1 for

soil erosion by runoff and :wind, and reduces habitat and cover for

I wildlife. Erosion can be minimized by standard control techniques, but habitat lost during construction would not be returned to its natural. state until D&D.

I The maximum amount of habitat that could be lost, taking the

concept that would require the most acreage, is about 411 acres, or 0.07% 'of the total acreage of the INEL. This is the acreage required for Concept 5-i: retrieval, packaging only, and8disposal in the engineered shallow-land disposal facility at Site 14. Although a Site 14 facility for disposal of the packaging output would be the largest of

11 all those considered, the high acreage'requirement is explained mostly

by the need to dispose of spoils and by the land for a committed roadway. In Table 12-3 the spoils are assumed to be spread'5 ft deep,

11 except in the Lemhi Range where an average depth of 15 ft is assumed.

I The committed roadways, whether to Site 14 (20 miles long) o r to a

I1 Lemhi site (30 miles long), are assumed to have a fenced right-of-way

I 56 ft wide (24 ft asphalt pavement plus 16 ft width on each side for

I shoul ders and easement).

~ The vegetation and wildlife in the area of the RWMC are described in Subsection 3.6. (See also McBride et al. 1978.) New

I facilities there could result in the loss of up to 90 acres of big

11 sagebrush habitat but this is not considered a major impact because of

I the avail ability of similar habitat on -the INEL. Also, much of this

I apparent loss would be within the RWMC itself--already a disturbed

area.

The two Lemhi sites are located in the Juniperus ostcosperma - I Artemesia tridentata - - A9ropyron spicatum community dominated by dense

I , stands of .juniper trees, typical. of higher elevations on the INEL.

I Since the presence of trees on the INEL site is 1 imited, loss of part

I of this habitat would be more significant than loss of an equal area of sagebrush community. Although thi.s juniper community is only a

small part of. the INEL, i t dominates the o f f s i t e areas to the north-

west. The t rees provide shel ter and breeding areas .for manyspecies, including several species of raptors. A roadway to the Lemhi s i t e s .

would traverse mainly sagebrush community b u t would also.cross the.Big Lost River and playa area. This area i s characterized by cottonwood

I

t rees and other shrubs and by grasss species not common.in other areas, of the INEL.

A committed roadway from the RWMC to S i t e 14 would also r e su l t in

the loss of an estimated 136 acres of big sagebrush habitat.

As mentioned ea r l i e r , botential sources of construction material . ,

include the Big Lost River Valdey and playa areas. These' areas have

been identified as potential nesting habitat for several species of raptors. ' Activi t ies would be carefully planned to .avoid adverse e f fec ts on the associated fauna.

Short-term impacts to wildl i fe would occur as a resu l t of construction act ivi ty . Operation of heavy mach'inery would have , localized effects on some animal species as they migrate away from disturbances. Nests, breeding areas, and foraging-areas of some species would l ike ly be affected. For the more sensit ive species,' such as the ferruginous hawk (s ta tus undetermined), pra i r ie falcon '(once a threatened species), and others, schedul ing of construction to avoid periods of wildl i fe movements would help to minimize adverse

impact. Most species would return to the area when construction and rehabi l i ta t ion are complete.

12.2.4 Water Resources. t

i

12.2.4.1 Surface Water. Surface water on the INEL i s dis- :

cussed in Subsection 3.5. The intermittent nature of the sur6ace waters on the INEL reduces the likelihood of significant impacts to

t h i s resource.

Several aspects of construction activity could cause small

adverse effects on '~u~rface waters: (1) withdrawal of water for use in construction, (2) discharge of wastewater, such as sanitary wastewater or water from ditch dewatering operations, (3) gravel .or clay mining from stream or lake bottoms, (4) channelization or diversion of surface waters for flood control, and (5) erosion of construc-

tion areas by surface runoff and resultant siltation of stre.ams.

Since surface water is seasonal and thus is unreliable, most water would be obtained from the. more re1 i able groundwater sources. However, when convenient sources of surface water do exist, they might be used for such purposes as dust control or concrete mixing. Depending on the volume withdrawn, surface water flow could be reduced significantly, affecting downstream uses. . The Big Lost River '

supports.aquatic biota on the INEL, including rainbow.trout and ,white- fish (Overton, Grove, and Johnson 1976).. Fish kills on the site have been reported, caused by entrapment when water flow ceased. However, adverse impac.ts to biota from surface water withdrawals for construc-

tion purposes can be totally avoided if adequate planning is exercised or by using well water only.

Applicable federa,, and state water quality and effluent guide-

lines would be applied to the management of wastewatey generated from* construction activities. Sanitary wastewater'.would be treated before discharge to the environment.

. .

Other water quality impacts could result from discharge of silt- laden ditchwater, siltation of the Big Lost River from soil erosion or construction activity near streams, and minor oil spills. Such: impacts would be minimized by implementing good construction practices. The activity most -likely to result in unavoidable adverse impacts to water quality~would.be construction in or near surface waters. The

removal of gravel, soil, or clay from the Big Lost River or playa vicinity would likely result in increased silt loads. This activity

would be quite likely since significant quantities of these materials

would be requ i rea and the bes t m a t e r i a l ( p a r t i c u l a r l y c l a y ) s i t e s are

l oca ted near t he r i v e r or playas. .Construct ion o f access road stream

cross ings or cons t ruc t i on i n f l o o d p l a i n areas would a lso cause some

impacts. These impacts can b e . m i t i g a t e d by schedul ing work f o r p e r i -

ods when surface r u n o f f i s absent, then by r e s t o r i n g the d i s tu rbed

area and us ing eros ion c o n t r o l techniques. Erosion m3ght cont inue f o r

a t ime a f t e r cons t ruc t i on i s complete, b u t the area would eventua i ly

r e t u r n t o i t s e a r l i e r condit i .on.

- T h e o n l y p o t e n t i a l long-term impact t o surface water resources

would be from inadequate d r a i nage s t r u c t u r e s a t roadway r i v e r cross-

ings. Inadequate drainage would cause eros ion and poss ib le v e l o c i t y

b locks t o f i s h passage f o r t he l i f e of such a roadway (approximate ly

40 y r ) . Proper design of drainage s t r u c t u r e s would reduce ,the

l i k e l i h o o d o f t h i ~ ~ p r o b l e m .

12.2.4.2. Groundwater.. The o n l y groundwater impacts

expected as a r e s u l t o f c o n s t r u c t i o n would be increased water con-

sumption and p o t e n t i a l impacts t o water q u a l i t y from wastewater d i s -

charge. Dur ing 1974, t he t o t a l consumption o f water f r o m . t h e 24 pro- 9

duc t i on w e l l s on the INEL was 2 . 9 ~ 1 0 . gal, which was 0.1% o f the est imated t o t a l annual discharge of t h e Snake R ive r P l a i n Aqui fer

(ERDA 1 9 7 7 ~ ) . The expected increase i n water consumption would no t

apprec iab ly a f f e c t t h e aqui fer hydrology or downstream users.

Except f o r small volumes o f s a n i t a r y wastewater, t r e a t e d before

discharge, no new wastewater discharges would be expected f rom con-

s t r u c t i o n a c t i v i t i e s . Therefore,. no long-term water qua1 i ty impacts

would be expected.

12.2.5 Nonrad io log ica l S o l i d Waste Disposal. Const ruc t ion o f

t h e waste management f a c i 1 i t i es would generate considerable nonradio-

l o g i c a l s o l i d waste m a t e r i a l : scrap metal and wood, d iscarded equip-

ment par ts , o i l y wastes, s lash and t imber, excess overburden, min ing

spo i l s , and othcr construction debrtSs. Disposal of t h i s material must be done so as t o avoid nuisance, hazard t o heal th , and adverse environmental impacts.

The volume of waste i s generally proportional t o the level of

construction ac t i v i t y ( i . e . , the duration, quan t i t i es of mater ia ls , number of workers, and pieces of equipment). Excavation fo r disposal f a c i l i t i e s on the INEL could produce large amounts of overburden or mining spo i l s , as shown in Table 12-3. Since the Lemhi s i t e s would be located in the f o o t h i l l s area, where the su r f i c i a l material cons i s t s of a l luv ia l deposits , some of the material from there might be s u i t - able f o r construction of the committed roadway t o the s i t e . However, the roadway would be needed before most of the spo i l s would be available, so much of the material would s t i 11 have t o be disposed. , .

I t i s anticipated t ha t a l l sol id waste generated during construc- t ion of f a c i l i t i e s would be disposed of on the INEI, in san i ta ry land- f i l l s . To minimize environmental e f f ec t s from these disposal f a c i l i - t i e s , .all federal and s t a t e regulations regarding t h e i r s i t i n g and operation would be complied with. In conformance with the Federal :.

Resource Recovery Act of 1970, amended by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, the compliance would include evaluation of possible reuse a l t e rna t ives , such as use of Lemhi s i t e spo i l s as d is-

cussed above.

Even with the best waste management pract ices and adherence t o a l l applicable regulations, ce r ta in unavoidable adverse e f f e c t s would l i k e l y occur from so l id waste disposal . These include the commitment of land area fo r disposal a c t i v i t i e s and adverse aes the t ic impacts from disposal s i t e development. Any adverse impacts t ha t would occur would be shor t term. Landfil l s i t e s would be revegetated a f t e r use.

.l2.2.6 iand use Impacts. The IMEL land i s committed fo r the

purpose of energy research and development and re la ted program ac t i v i - ,

t i e s and i s designated as a National Environmental Research Park. I Approximately 95% of the 894 square miles in the research park has I

been withdrawn from the public domain. The remainder of the land i s

owned and controlled by the DOE. A ser ies of Public Land Orders ( P L O s ) , dating back to 1946, have established the present research park boundary and uses. Lands or iginal ly under the control of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) were withdrawn from the public domain under three principal Public Land Orders: PLO 318, 545, and 637, dated May 13, 1946; January 7 , 1949; and April 7 , 1950, respectively. Six other PLOs pertaining to INEL lands have been issued. These orders primarily concern t ransfer of manageri a1 responsi bi 1 i t i e s and do not affect the basic purpose and intent of the original PLOs.

Each of the al ternat ives and concepts studied i s 1,ocated.in the area that has been withdrawn from the public domain. The RWMC

and the Lemhi'sites l i e in the area withdrawn under PLO 637. S i t e 14 i s included in the area withdrawn under PLO 318. The PLOs, as inter-

preted, provide for nuclear energy research and development and related ac t iv i t ies . Waste processing, storage, and disposa1,are considered related ac t iv i t i e s . Therefore, such .ac t iv i t ies would be con- s i s t en t with the purpose of the orders, and land would be available for 'implementing the a1 ternat i ves. No speci a1 legis lat ion nor amend-

ment to the PLOs would be necessary to pursue e i ther short-term or long-term.use of these lands for waste management.

Existing f a c i l i t i e s on INEL lands are widely spaced for maximum safety. They occupy a very small percentage of the 894 square miles

of avail able 1 and. Examination of the existing faci 1 i t y locations, plans for new f a c i l i t i e s and the TRU waste processing, storage, and . .

disposal options, does not reveal any internal f a c i l i t y s i t i ng con- f l i c t .

Approximately 330,000 acres o f the INEL are open to control 1 ed

grazing of c a t t l e or sheep. (See Figure 3-12.) The areas allocated fo r grazing within the INEL boundary . are . mutually agreed upon by the

DOE and the Department of the In te r io r and the grazing permits are administered through .the BLM. Grazing i s prohibited within 2 miles of any nuclear fac i 1 i t y , and 1 ivestock populations are control led .

S i t e 14 and the RWMC are not included in t he grazing zone, b u t t h e RWMC i s within 2 miles; of the edge of the zone. Cat t le frequently wander to the edge of . the .RWMC, b u t the area is .fenced t o exclude them. Th,e Lemhi locations are within the 'grazing zone. Normal grazing pat terns would not be ser iously affected during the construction period b u t would be affected a f t e r .the s i t e s were in use, as discussed in Subsection 12.3.6.

Local, s t a t e , and federal agencies were consulted t o determine i f the a l t e rna t ives and concepts studied would con f l i c t with ex i s t ing plans or pol ic ies . The Office of Budget and Policy Planning, S t a t e of Idaho, indicated t ha t the s t a t e does not have plans or po l ic ies speci- f i c a l l y re la ted to land use e i t he r adjacent Fo or within the bound- a r i e s of the INEL. The East-Central Idaho Planning and Development Association (ECIPDA) i s a regional economic planning agency serving a nine county region, most of which encompasses the INEL. The ECIPDA, .

l i k e the S ta te of Idaho, does not have any po l ic ies or plans t ha t involve lands or a c t i v i t i e s near the INEL. Butte County, which encom-

passes most of the INEL land and a l l the potent ia l locations studied

f o r processing, storage, and disposal , i s sparsely populated. The county does not have a pol icy plan, comprehensive plan, or zoning ordinance, so no plans or pol ic ies spec i f i c a l l y re la ted t o land use are available from Butte County. The BL,M continues t o administer road and u t i l i t y r i g h t ~ ~ o f - w a y f o r f a c i l i t i e s other than those a t t h e INEL. The BLM has prepared a d r a f t management plan f o r the L i t t l e Lost River-Birch Creek planning un i t , which includes the northern por- t ion of the INEL. The management plan emphasizes t h a t e f fec t ive range management i s c r i t i c a l t o the livelihood of local ranchers. The .BLM

suggests t ha t economic s t a b i l i t y fo r the livestock producers i s an

important consideration in resolving grazing land conf l i c t s . The

Lemhi Range s i t e s would be t he o,nly s , i tes po ten t ia l ly in con f l i c t

with the BLM management plan.

A1 1 waste r e t r i e v a l , process i rig, and storage options would have

small requirements f o r land. The disposal options would be more land-

in tensive , as seen in Table 12-3. Additional lands, not quantif ied .in.

. the t ab l e , might be used during the construction period f o r material ,

and equipment storage and f o r construction staging. None of the pro-

posals would place pressure on the a v a i l a b i l i t y of land a t the INEL. '

As noted, the most 1 and-intensive waste manayement concept involves .

only 0.07% of the t o t a l INEL land area. None of the a l t e rna t ives or

concepts creates any par t i cu la r con f l i c t with onsi te uses during con-

s t ruc t ion .

12.2.7 Soci oeconomi c Impacts.

12.2.7.1 Employment and Economics. For perspective, 1

Table 12-4 shows the .projected number of man-years of construction .

labor needed f o r INEL construction programs already committed through

Fiscal Year 1982. Construction employment i s expected t o peak in

Fiscal Year.'1980, decreasing gradually i n 1981 and dropping s i g n i f i - .. .

can t ly i n 1982. The indicated decline of over 950 jobs in t h e , l a s t . a

two years suggests t h a t more than enough workers would be avai lable

f o r construction of waste management f a c i l i t i e s . For operations t o ,

begin i n 1985, construction of f a c i l i t i e s would s t a r t in 1982 o r

1983. The most labor-intensive concepts, 5-9 or 5- j , would employ . .

about 370 workers ("average" co1,umn'in Table 12-1) or a maximum o f . . :

456 in the unl i kely event t ha t a1 1 'the peaks occurred simultaneously. ' '

'.- -

(Those coricepts would involve f aci 1 i t y construction fo r . r e t r i eva l ; . .

slagging pyrolysis , and disposal in an engineered fac-l l i ty--about

530 man-years of e f f o r t on projects l a s t i n g 8 t o 30 months.) . a .

.. . . . -

I

. . . .

TABLE 12-4

INEL CONSTRUCTION LABOR PROJECTION 1977-1982 (MAN-YEARS) (a)

Construct ion C r a f t Labor 282 47 4 1024 1353 1282 486

Support C r a f t Labor 50 84 181 2 39 192 86

Tota l C r a f t Labor 332 558 , 1205 1592 1474 57 2

(a) Source: Popul a t i on and Economic Trends and Pro jec t ions (Bonnevi 1 l e '

Council 07 Governments 1974)

Because of scheduling problems or shortages i n some s k i l l s , p a r t

o f the const ruc t ion fo rce would be h i r ed from outs ide the area. For

convenience; these workers, and perhaps some l oca l workers, might move

c loser t o the const ruc t ion s i t e , so smaller c i t i e s i n the immediate

area, such as Arco and-Atomic City, might experience a temporary i n - I

f l u x of construct ion personnel.

\

I n add i t ion t o the const ruc t ion employment, secondary o r i n d i r e c t

employment would be created. The i n d i r e c t employment m u l t i p l i e r f o r

const ruc t ion 'work forces i s normally about 1.5. That i s , f o r each

const ruc t ion job created, an estimated 0.5 add i t iona l jobs a r i se i n

the support ing economy, r e s u l t i n g i n an overa l l increase o f 1.5 jobs. r:

Applying t h i s m u l t i p l i e r t o the (average) en t r i es i n T a b l e 12-1, con- . , .

s t r uc t i on f o r Concept 2-a would lead t o an add i t iona l 4 jobs i n the

area, o r up t o 185 f o r Concepts 5-9 and 5- j . These estimates should I

be regarded as upper l i m i t s , because o f the cur rent and pro jec ted

l eve l s of other const ruc t ion work.

The total payroll at the INEL was $112 million in 1976 and $132.6 million in 1977. The estimated 1978 payroll is $150 million. The DOE estimated that total program costs for FY 1978 would be $294 million (Idaho Falls Chamber of Commerce 1978).

Total direct earnings of construction workers would be expected to be a maximum of about $12 mi 11 ion for construction of waste management facilities, based on weighted 1978 wage rates for skilled and common construction labor in the area (LATA 1977). ~dditional income would be generated in local comunities, primarily Idaho Falls. The

earnings multiplier for the area is estimated to be about 2.2 (as opposed to the employment multiplier of 1.5), so associated indirect earnings would add about $14 million.

I '

12.2.7.2 Housing. Table 12-5 shows the housing character- I

istics of INEL employees in March 1978, as reflected iri nearly 7000 re- sponses to a DOE questionnaire (DOE 1978~). If half of the construction workers were new hires, the most labor-intensive concept could be

TABLE 12-5

HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS OF INEL EMPLOYEES (PERCENT) (a)

Single Apart- ~obile Family Duplex ment Room Home Rural Total -

Own 58 ' (b (b) (b 5. 4 68% Rent . 6 1 2 1 (b 1 ( b ) 30% Live with Parents 1 0 (b) 0 (b) ( b ) 2%

TOTAL 65 2 2 1 (b) 7 5 1 OW.,

(a) Source: Summary of INEL Personnel Data (DOE 1978b).

, (b) Less than 0.5% (totals may not check because of rounding).

expected to create a dcmsnd for 180 addilional housing units, but with

more emphasis on rented quarters and mobile homes than reflected in the table. The other half of the employment would assure continued

occupancy of the same number of units, in a pattern closer to that in Table 12-5.

12.2.7.3 Social Services. The INEL employee questionnaire ' indicated that there were approximately 1.2 school-aged chi ldren. per household. Assuming the same ratio for the construction employees, there would be a maximum increase of about 220 school children due to construction employment (assuming 50% inmigration), or an increase of up to 330 .if indirect employment is also considered. Nearly a1 1 schools are currently at capacity because of re.cent growth in the area. Several bond issues have been passed to increase capacity and facilities. By 1985, there might or might not be adequate space to handle the anticipated s'chool children. The local school districts are undertaking expansion,programs and-continually plan for future growth.

Idaho Falls is the medical center .for Southeastern Idaho.

Riverview Hospital and Parkview Hospital are the two hospitals in

Bonneville County. Butte, Fremont, Lemhi, Madison, and Teton Coun- ties have hospitals; but Clark, Custer, and Jefferson Counties do not. Each county has a Health and Welfare Department that provides some basic health services.

The impact on local health facilities would not be expected to

be significant. Population growth in smaller outlying communities and 'counties is projected to be small, with a small additional demand for health facilities. Some additional physicians and services would be required in Idaho Falls to maintain present service levels. Other services and facilities, such as police and fire protection, transportation, and water and sewer facilities, would hav-o be expanded to accommodate the projected growth. Most smaller commun.ities would

I not be noticeably affected. Idaho Fal ls , which would be expected to

accommodate about 70% of the growth, would have to provide additional services. The increased tax base and revenue from new development would help t o of fse t 'the new service and f a c i l i t y demands.

1 The anticipated population growth would not be expected to affect

regional recreational f a c i l i t i e s significantly. Tourism i s a major ;

sector of ,the local economy, and regional f a c i l i t i e s r e f l ec t th i s .

I For example, Idaho Fal ls has a golf course, zoo, museum, numerous

I parks and playgrounds and a minor league baseball park.

12.2.8 Commitment of Resources. Construction of any of the waste management f a c i l i t i e s would resu l t in a long-term commitment of resources. Consumed energy resources would be almost exclu- s ively petroleum products. Estimates of diesel fuel usage are shown in Table 12-1. There would also be other energy usage, by miscel- laneous equipment and commuting by workers. Expected water usage would be low compared with current INEL uses and should not appre- c iably affect local resources.

Commitment of labor hours and of the funds for design and construction of the f a c i l i t i e s would be i r retr ievable . Table 12-1 estimates the construction e f fo r t involved and Section 15 gives cost

estimates fo r each concept studied.

Preliminary-estimates for the quantit ies of mo'st construction

materials tha t would be used are given in Table 12-6. (The rationale - for the less massive variation (LMV) of engineered shallow-land dis-

posal a t S i t e 14 i s highlighted in t h i s table . ) Significant material usage would be required for the 20-mile roadway to S i te 14 or for the

30-mile roadway to the Cemhi Range:. Each mile of roadway would use 3 3 4,.700 yd of crushed rock", nearly 1,200 yd of asphalt, and

10,560 lineal f t of fencing.

TABLE 12-6

ESTIMATED MAJOR REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS

M a t e r i a l ( l o J y Faci 1 i t y Concrete G r o u t R i p r a p , Benton i te Clay

IMPROVED CONFINEMENT

Above and Around, 0 0 12 Above, Around,

and' Be1 ow 13 1 12 I m n o b i l i z a t i o n 0 34 0

Deep Rock Disposal Lemhi S i t e - Shaft Access

, SP 2 0 CPT ..2 0 PKG 2 0

Deep Rock Dispo'sal Lemhi S i t e - Tunnel Access

SP CPT PKG

Engineered s h a l l ow- and Disposal a t S i t e 14

SP LMV

CPT LMV

PKG LMV

Engineered Sur f ace k a c i 1 i t y Near RWMC

SP CPT PKG

20-YR RETRIEVABLE STORAGE 6

I + (a) A l l data rounded t o two s i g n i f i c a n t d i g i t s . '

.: (b) The s i z e o f t h e disposal f a c i l i t i e s depends on the volume o f processed waste t o be handled. This would be l a r g e s t f o r t he PKG output . P r o p o r t i o n a l i t y o f SP and CPT usages i s no t necessa r i l y cons i s ten t because of the modu la r i t y o f some disposal f a c i l i t i e s (See Sect ion 10).

( c ) SP: Slagging Py ro l ys i s and Packaging CPT: Compaction, I ~ o b i l i z a t i o n , and Packaging, PKG: Packaging Only LMV: Less massive v a r i a t i o n of the disposal f a c i l i t y a t S i t e 14

- \

12-1 9

12.2.9 ~rchaeolo~ical and Historical Sites.

Formal archaeological surveys of the INEL were performed during 1967-1969 and 1970-1972. Fossils dating back 40,000 yr have been found. Recovered artifacts indicate man's presence in the area

, '

approximately 12,500 yr ago.

With assistance from the office of the Idaho State Archaeologist

and with data from the previous surveys, archaeological sites were , .

identified near the locations 'of the conceptual facilities. ' The archaeological site's include a 1 ava tube with cultural' materials, campsites, finds in blowouts and sinks, rock shelters, and picto-

graphs. No attempt has been made to establish exact locations of the facilities considered, so the impact on these antiquities, re-

sulting from construction, cannot be stated with certainty. k

~egardless of the construction location, INEL operating pro- . .

cedures prescribe measures for assuring .protect ion of antiquities and (a) historic sites, as required by federal and state regulations.

The regulations require, as a minimum, a site reconnaissance project

before construction to determine the presence of antiquities and their value. Depending on the findings, further study might be necessary, followed by excavation and salvage operations if needed. During construction, a qua1 ified archaeologist would 'be on call to monitor any unforeseen finds.

The conceptual' sites considered are void of any known historical '

significance. The INEL Experimental Breeder Reactor I (EBR-I ), now

decommissioned, is listed on the National Register of Historic ~lacbs,

(a) Federal Historical and Archaeological Regulations: Antiquities - Act of 1906, Historic Sites Act of 1935, Reservoir Salvage Act of 1960, National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Executive Order 11593.. State of Idaho Regulations: Preservation of Historic Sites, 1975.

and was designated a National Historic Landmdrk in 1966. EBR-I is

located near the access road to the RWMC, so construction activity at.

the RWMC could cause minor temporary disturbance to the viewing . .

public. No other adverse impacts would be expected.

A review of the state register in'the office of the State His-

toric Preservation Officer showed several historic sites listed on the INEL. Two of the sites are remnants from the Aboriginal American

period. Neither is in the vicinity of the locations studied here. . .

The state register a1.so lists the INEL itself as playing an important role in atomic history. This listing identifies the total area of the INEL, but the state has not taken any action to designate it as a . .

historic district.

12.2.10 Aesthetics. Figure 3-1 shows that the INEL is

relatively undeveloped over most of its area. The site lies in

the broad, flat upper Snake River Plain at the foot of the Lost River, Lemhi, and Beaverhead mountain ranges. The observable presence of

man-made structures or disturbances in this setting impinges to varying degrees on individual aesthetic sensibilities. In this respect,

the INEL site has been adversely impacted by past activities and , . . : . .

facilities. Several facilities are in full view to motorists passing on a p;bl ic highway. Only limited topographic .barriers e5ist to shield these facilities from view.

Construction of the facilities studied here would not detract

significantly from the existing aesthetic quality of the INEL., How-. ever, the new facilities would have some adverse impact. ~etrieval

and process facilities would be visible from the EBR-I site and possibly from the public roadway. This impact would persist only until the facilities were dismantled. The stack for the slagging pyrolysis

facility would be particularly prominent, since there has been little development of the site south of U.S. 20 compared with the area north of this highway (Figure 3-1 ) . The engineered surface disposal facil i -

ties might be visible-from the highway. However, visual impact would

be minimized by cons id& ng aesthetic qual it ies in faci 1 i ty design: Adverse imp'acts would result from construction of the Lemhi site or Site 14 facilities, and from the committed roadways to.these sites.

12.2.11 Environmentally Sensitive Areas. Areas generally considered environmentally sensitive include: ' surface waters, marshlands

and wet1 ands," floodplains, groundwater recharge areas, forests and wood1 ands, prime agricultural 1 ands, habitat for rare or endangered species, and archaeological and historical sites.

Surface waters on the JMEL exist during only part of the year. Most flow of the major streams entering the site is lost by recharge to the groundwater. Impacts to surface water qual i ty and biota. could be avoided by schedul ing construction activities near streams during dry months.

There are no true marshlands or wetlands on the site. However, the area known as the Big Lost River Sink or playa could be considered a floodplain or intermittent wetland. During seasons of high runoff, this area may support waterfowl. The vegetation in this area provides a habitat somewhat different from that of the surrounding sagebrush plain and tends to support a locally unique assemblage of species. (The spreading areas at the diversion dam west of the RWMC also support waterfowl in the spring of the year.) Of the conceptual facilities studied, only the committed roadway to the Lemhi Range would impinge on the playa. As discussed earlier, however, the need for construction aggregate, such as gravel or clay, may entail extraction from the playa area. If this were true, precautions would tie taken to avoid or minimize adverse effects on this sensitive area.

tie' INEL is iitudted over the extensive Snake River Plain ~qii- fer. The Big and Little Lost Rivers and Birch Creek recharge to this

'

aquifer at or near the INEL boundary, providing an important 'source of water to the .system. No advers'e' impacts to this system -would be anticipated from the construction being consi'dered. *

. . + . '

Thc Targhee and Chall is National Forests border the INEL to the northwest. There would be no impact to these areas, however. The

only trees on the site are located in the Big Lost River Valley and in the higher elevations of the Lemhi foothills and Twin Buttes. These

few trees provide important habitat for raptors and other birds. Some trees would probably be lost if either of the Lemhi sites were,devel-

oped. Road construction activity or gravel extraction in the.Big Lost River or playa area could result in the loss of some trees so work

would be planned to avoid this where practicable.

Any impacts on prime agricultural lands must be considered . ,

carefully. Because the INEL is a federal reserve, public ., use . is

restricted and there is little agricultural activity. Some areas within the INEL have agricultural potential (Figure 3-5), but, his-,

torically, agricultural ventures in the area have met with little '

success. Nevertheless, potential conflicts with future agricultural use should be considered. . . . , .

Currently there are appr0,ximately 330,000 acres open to grazing on the INEL (Figure 3-12), but only the Lemhi sites overlap grazing areas. Initial, effects, during construction, . .would . affect .anl.y a. ;:. very 1 imited area, but would be more extensive later (see Subsec- tion 12.3.6). . .

The peregrine falcon (Falco peragrinus) and the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) are the only rare or endangered species observed on the INEL. Only one sighting of the peregrine falcon has been documented, however, suggesting that this species is only an occasional migrant over the area and that construction of waste management facilities would not have an impact. The prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus) is a frequent resident of the INEL, seen throughout the year. This species was designated as a threatened species in

1974, but its status was changed when populations began to stabilize. Prairie falcons are sighted mostly in areas of native vegetation. Reductions in sagebrush habitat could affect this species. However, no significant effect would be anticipated because of the small areas

involved (Table 12-3). Another sensitive raptor species, the burrow-

ing owl (Speotyto cunicularia), nests in lava burrows on the INEL. This species is classified as "status undetermined," along with the

ferruginous hawk (Buteo regal is). The decline' in the number of this latter species is attributed to recent low populations of the black- tail rabbit (Lepus californicus), its preferred prey. One of the most concentrated known nesting areas of the ferruginous hawk is the Little Lost River Valley. Impacts to these species would be avoided by careful planning. Because declines in many of these species could be par- ti a1 ly attributed to extensive agricultural development and eradica- tion of native vegetation, maintenance of the INEL as a federal reserve may be considered a beneficial impact to these and other species by preserving valuable habitat ('craig and Trost 1976, Craig 1977).

Archaeological and historical sites are considered nonrenewable resources. Their lprotection is given high priority. Subsec- tion 12.2.9 discusses those cultural resources on the INEL that could be affected by construction activity. If the mitigative measures outlined in that section are enforced, no adverse impacts would be expected. Similarly, with attention to design of facilities

proposed for the RWMC area, adverse impact to the Experimental Breeder

Reactor I (EBR-I), a national historical monument, would be avoided.

12.2.12 Mitigation of construction- elated Impacts. The most significant nonradiological environmental effects associated with construction of waste management facilities would be:

(1) commitment of land area for construction of the, facilities, disposal of sol id waste and spoil materi a1 , 'and extraction of construction materials, such as gravel and c,lay;

. .

(2) loss of wildlife habitat from the above activities; and

(3) secondary impacts resulting from the economic stimulation provided by the creation of construction jobs.

Most o f the e f f ec t s would be o f short durat ion, ceasing when

const ruc t ion was completed. Other e f fec ts , such as the commitment of

resources o r po ten t i a l disturbance t o archeological s i tes , would be

i r r eve rs i b l e . The environmental impacts vary g rea t l y w i t h the a l t e r -

na t i ve considered. Ttie a1 t e r n a t i ve judged as the pre fer red bne over-

a l l may not be the one most. environmental ly acceptable. I n t h a t i n -

stance, c e r t a i n adverse impacts would have ' to be accepted. Therefore,

where possible, measures t d avoid o r minimize adverse impacts must be

formul ated. I

Sound engineering, ' design, and const ruc t ion p rac t i ces help t o

minimize environmental impact. The p rac t i ce o f resource conservation

and reuse concepts 'also reduce impacts. Adherence t o s t a te and fed-

e ra l regu la t ions governing a i r qua l i t y , water qua l i t y , s o l i d waste

disposal, etc., ensures t h a t environmental impacts t h a t might occur

would be w i t h i n estabi ished standards. Some s p e c i f i c m i t i g a t i v e ,

act ions are l i s t e d below:

(1) A l l s i t e s d isturbed as a r e i u i t of' const ruc t ion a c t i v i t y , '

which are not t o be committed f o r f a c i l i t i e s ( f o r example,,

gravel s i t es ) , would be res tored t o ' t h e i r na tu ra l s ta te . . . ,

' where 'possible.'

( 2 ) Archaeological s i t e reconnaissance surveys would be con-

ducted t o assess po ten t i a l impacts from f a c i l i t y construc-

t i o n and t o recommend procedures t o m i t i ga te +impacts t o

important s i tes .

(3 ) ~ e s i ~ i would inc lude considerat ion o f aesthet ic impacts.

( 4 ) Impacts t o environmentally sens i t i ve areas would be min i -

mized by consider ing w i l d l i f e movements and hab i t a t loss i n

f ac i 1 i t y s i t i n g a'nd const ruc t ion scheduling.

( 5 ) Nonradiological const ruc t ion hazards would be minimized by

adherence t o OSHA 'and other occupational sa fe ty regu l a t ions

concerning const ruc t ion p ro jec ts (see Section 14).

12.2.13 Preoperational Requirements for Environmental Monitor-

-. Environmental monitoring and sampling procedures covering the RWMC and perimeter areas would be continued and updated as technology

advances. These monitoring programs focus on detection' of radiological contamination of the soil, air, water, and biota from RWMC and other INEL activities. Nonradiological parameters also are measured routinely. :These include measurements of water level, water quality, and suspended particulates in the air. In addition, special studies

are being conducted to learn more about the vegetation and wildlife on the INEL. The designation of the INEL as a National Environmental

Research Park has encouraged scientists to study this relatively un- disturbed area. Valuable information is being generated concerning

the impact of man's activities on the cool desert ecosystem. Continu- ation of these studies will provide data useful in formulating mitigating actions before construction and afterwards in monitoring the impacts on the environment .

12.3 NONRADIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF OPERATIONS AND OF DECONTAMINATION AND

DECOMMISSIONING

This subsection describes the nonradiological ,environmental impacts expected from operation and from decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) of the waste management facilities. Facility operations are assumed to last 10 yr, and ensuing D&D (for retrieval, pro-

cessing, or 20-yr storage facilities) to take 2 yr. The discussion considers each potential nonradiological environmental impact first in

general terms, and then speciFica1 ly, by a1 ternative. The out1 ine used in Subsection 12.2 is followed.

12.3.1 Air Quality. Nonradiological airborne effluents (emis-

sions) from current, operations at the INEL originate from three primary sources: combustion of fuel oils, calcination or sol idif ication

of liquid wastes at the Idaho Chemical Processing piant (ICPP), and motor vehicle exhaust. Inconsequential releases occur from evapora-

tion of organic solvents at shops and vapor drift from cooling towers'. The major contaminants are the common industrial oxides of nitrogen,

sulfur, and carbon.

Depending on the waste management a1 ternative, operation and D&D activities would increase the quantity of nonradiological airborne

effluents at the INEL site. Alternatives involving leaving the waste as is (A1 ternative 1 ) , or improving confinement (A1 ternative 2), would have little or no effect on air quality. The greatest increase in airborne releases would come from retrieval, slagging pyrolysis, and transfer to and operation of a disposal facility on the INEL. The primary effects would be from vehicular exhaust from shipping and other vehicles, as well as stack emissions from the slaggirig pyrolysis facility. Table 12-7 lists estimated emission rates of several contaminants from diesel vehicular exhaust for waste management operations. Estimated stack emissions for the slagging pyrolysis unit are given in footnote (b) of the table.

The largest emissions in Table 12-7 are nitrogen oxides. The total of these oxides would be a maximum of about 55,0'00 lb/yr for

retrieval, slagging pyrolysis, and disposal at the Lemhi site with shaft access (Concept 5-a). This total, which includes' the slagging

pyrolysis stack emissions, would amount' to 250 lblday (based on the assumed operating period of 220 days/yr). This would be a 5% to 9%

increase over current NOx discharges of,2800 to 4800 lblday from other facilities and vehicles now operating at the INEL (ERDA 1977~).

3 . a The highest observed concentration onsite has been 4.3x10-~ glm .

3' The EPA standard is 100x10-~ g/m (40 CFR 50) so a 9% increase would neither contravene EPA standards nor cause any significant environmental impact. The maximum offsite concentration, at the nearest

3 INEL boundary, would be about 3x10-~ g/m if Concept 5-a contributions were added to current emissions.

Sulfur can exist in the air in several compound forms: hydrogen

sulfide, salts, oxides, and sulfuric acid. Ultimately, all forms are oxidized to' sulfur trioxide which, when dissolved in water, forms

sulfuric acid. Monitoring at the five INEL sampling sites indicates that current concentrations of sulfur trioxide are below the detection

TABLE 12-7

Contaminant (103 l b / y r ) Alde- Hydro- Acet ic Pa r t i -

F a c i l i ty/Operation ! % hydes CO carbons ?k -- Acid culates

RETRIEVAL FACILITY 0.09 0.52 1.2 1.7 0.34 0 .27 , 0.95 , .

PROCE s FACILITY(~) SPib) 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 CPT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PKG 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

DISPOSAL FACILITIES Deep Rock Disposal Lemhi S i t e

0.94 5.7 12.7 CPT ~ I 9 4 5 I7 1217 PKG 1.7 9.8 22

Deep Rock Disposal . Lemh iS i t e '

funnel Access SP 0.84 5.1 11

CPT ' 0.84 5.1 11 PKG 1.5 8.6 , 20 ' , . ,

Engineered shallow- Land Disposal a t S i t e 14 7 0.26 i .6 . 3.5

LMV . 0.11 0.63 1.4 CPT 0.28 1.7 3.8

. . LMV 0.13 0.75 . 1.7 PKG 0.42 2.5 5.7

LMV -. 0.27 1.6 : 3.6

Engineered Surf ace k

F a c i l i t y Near RWMC SP 0.61 3.7 8.3 CP.T . . . 0.63 3.8 8.5 PKG 0.69 4.1 9.3

20-YR RETRIEVABLE . . STORAGE 0.30 1.8 4.0 6.7 1.2 0.92 3.3

(a) . SP: Slagging Pyro lys is and Packaging; . . CPT: Compaction, Imnobil izat ion, and Packaging, . . PKG: Packaging Only (No d iese l equipment i s operat ing f o r any .of these modules) . . . . . . -

(b) Although there are no emissions from .diesel exhaust, SP stack emis- . s'ions would cont r ibute 17,000 l b s l y r o f NOx; 3,000 I b s l y r S02; 1,.000 l bs / y r o f ,HCL; and 1.1, l b l y r o f pa r t i cu la tes .

( c ) Disposal operations vary w i t h the volume -of the output .from the .

processing f a c i 1 i ty, being highest fo r the least-dense ouput o f the package-only processing.

3 l imi t of 7 . 5 ~ 1 0 . ~ ~ glm . (ERDA 1 9 7 7 ~ ) . The maximum of fs i t e , concentrat ion of SO2 t h a t would be added by any waste management con-

When cept (aghin, Concept 5-a) 'would be l e s i than 0.03x10-~ g/m . 3 ' compared t o t h e EPA standard (80x10-~ g/m ) i t i s c lea r t ha t none

of the waste management concepts would contravene the EPA standard or 0 . . .

cause any s ign i f ican t e f f ec t .

3 Carbon monoxide becomes toxic a t a level of 120 mg/m . The 3 EPA a i r qua l i ty standard i s 10 mg/m . The incremental, .increase . in .

CO emissions t ha t could r e su l t from operating a c t i v i t i e s wo'uld,in-. . .

crease concentrations on the INEL.

Maximum par t i cu la te emissions would a r i s e from Concept 5-c,- t ~ t a l i n g 19,OOO Ih/yr, nr abou t 86 lb/day on a 220 qaylyr operating schedule. This would inevi tably a f f ec t pa r t i cu la te levels a t the RWMC, which have recent ly been above EPA standards (see Subsec- t ion 5 .2) , b u t should not a f f ec t a i r qua l i t y a t the s i t e boundaries. Par t i cu la te l eve l s a t d i s t an t monitoring s t a t i ons have h i s t o r i c a l l y exceeded those on the INEL and a t i t s boundaries, presumably because of urban and agr icul tura l a c t i v i t y (ERDA 1 9 7 7 ~ ) . Nevertheless, care-

fu l monitoring would be continued t o assure t ha t waste management operations did not impact o f f s i t e a i r qual i ty .

No problems would be anticipated from any of the other airborne e f f luen ts l i s t e d in Table 12-7.

I

12.3.2 Environmental Noise. Increased noise l eve l s over ambient conditions would occur i n . a localized area adjacent t o , the comrni t t e d roadway fo r those concepts involving onsi t e transf.er . Other modules involving trucking or vehicle 'movements would have similar e f f ec t s . Howkver, increased nois'e' l eve l s would impact only local wi ld l i fe , which would probably movetaway from the disturbance. Because of the t isolat ion of the INEL, the public would not be affected

i by the increased noise leveis .

12.3.3 Terrestri a1 Environment. Once construction of the facilities is completed and the disturbed areas rehabilitated, the effects of operations on the terrestrial environment would be minimal. The maximum acreage that would be committed for any alter-

native would be about 0.07% of the total acreage of the INEL. With the exception of disposal facilities, much of this land could be

returned to its previous use. Operations. and D&D would continue to cause local but temporary dispersal of some animal species. Adverse

impacts from increased air pollutant levels on vegetation and wild1 ife would probably be minimal, though the impact of air pollutants on the steppe community is still unknown.

~.

The. alternatives of leaving the TRU waste in place do not require any operational activity, except for continued environmental monitor-

ing. However, long-term effects on vegetation and wildlife cbuld occur because of contact with the waste by plant roots or burrowing animals. The waste consists not only of radiologically hazardous substances, but also substances hazardous from a nonradiological standpoint. Many of these substances persist and could be transmitted .

to the environment through biological pathways. This threat would be

reduced by'the methods studied for improved confinement, but assurance of total confinement is not possible.

f

Alternatives that entail onsite shipment would disturb wildlife,

along the roadway. Effects from the noise would be minor, as just discussed, but road kills would be expected to occur. Because of the

slow speed of the vehicles (35 mph), daytime operation, and the low traffic volume, the number of road kills would be small.

i:

12.3.4 Water Resources.

12.3.4.1 . Surf ace Waters. . The surface water hydro1,ogy - of the INEL is discussed in Sub.sections 3.5 and 12.2.4.1.. There would . ,

be no discharges to nor withdrawals from surf,ace waters during operations or D&D.

If the waste were left in place, current flood control practices

would be continued or upgraded. It is not known what effect future

flood control modifications would have' on the aquatic- environment..

12.3.4.2 Groundwater. Potential nonradiological impacts to the groundwater from operation and D&D activities include:

adverse impacts to water quality from waste discharges, increased ',

water consumption, and the possibility of nonradiological contamina- , , - ' . . tion from the hazardous substances in the waste.

, .

Current INEL wastewater discharges,on the Snake River Plain Aqui- . .

fer can be detected over an area of about 25 square miles on the INEL.

Elevated levels of dissolved solids in this area have been attributed to these wastewater discharges. Except for small volumes of' sanitary:

i ,

wastewater, treated before discharge to the environment, the alterna- . ,

tives would not result in any new discharges. ' Therefore, long-term '

. . . * . water quality impacts would not be expected. . . , .

. . . . . J ., .

It is not anticipated that the demand for water wduldsbe significant compared with the total water resource of the Snake River Plain

Aquifer. The increased demand should" not affect the avai labi 1 ity of . ,

water for downgradient users.

Leaving the waste in place would continue the possibility that hazardous substances might contaminate the groundwaterlif flooding, occurred and waste conf i nement ai 1 ed. However, the s'ubstances 'woul'd .. ' ..

have t~~migrate nearly 600 ft through. porous basalt and sedimentary." .

layers before reaching the aquifer. Much of the hazardous material

would he filtered out. Material that did reach the .aquifer would be'

very dilute, well below 0.1 g/l for nitrates (DOE 1978a). The risks from flooding are discussed in Section 13.

1'2..3.5 Nonradiological Sol id Waste Disposal. Most' of the . .

sol id waste resulting from facility operations :would .not, be contami- :

nated and would; therefore, be consigned to existing sanitary l'and- f i 11s on the INEL. All concepts under Alternative 5 . (d'i.sposa1 on the

INEL) would continue to generate excavation spoil s. The construction

phase includes only enough.site preparation to handle about six months'

output from the processing facility. Acreage for disposal of spoils, as given in Table 12-3, has been calculated to handle the total spoils, whether arising during construction or operations.

The greatest volume of solid waste to be considered would be that arising from D&D. Asphalt and gravel from D&D of a committed roadway could be recycled in theory, but it is more likely that most of the road would be adapted for other uses within the INEL. No radiological releases are expected during onsite transfer operations, so no decontami nat i on should be necessary.

The retrieval 'facility, including most of its equipment, would be contaminated. The solid waste resulting from its D&D has'been

. . included in the estimates of waste to be processed, given in Sec- tions 9 and 10. That is, the waste from D&D of the retrieval facility would be processed in the same way as the TRU waste would be processed. Solid waste resulting from D&D of a processing facility would require speci a1 planning and adherence to a1 1 applicable regulations. Uncontaminated materials and equipment would be reused or recycled.

12.3.6 Land Use. The committed land requirements during facility operation are given in Table 12-3 under construction impacts (Subsection '12.2.3). Areas required only for construction staging and for construction materials and equipment storage would be restored after the facilities were operational. All but the disposal facilities would be restored during D&D.

As discussed in Subsection 12.2.6, none of the facilities being considered competes with any planned land use except for the Lemhi sites, which would be located within currently allotted grazing areas. Surf ace facilities at a Lemhi site would occupy only about one acre (Table 12-3), but present policy would surround this area with a two- mile buffer to exclude cattle and sheep. Continuation of this policy would remove about 8,000 acres of grazing land, or about 2.5% of the total grazing area now. administered on the INEL by the BLM (approxi-

mately 330,000 acres). If a Lemhi site were adopted, the buffer zone

might be judged unnecessary, because o f t he p r n t e c t i o n a f fo rded by t h e

deep rock d isposal f ac i 1 i t y i t s e l f . A1 though 1 ivestock product i o n i s

a major economic a c t i v i t y i n the Lemhi Range area, o n l y a small por-

t i o n o f t h a t area l i e s w i t h i n t h e INEL. Even a 2.5% loss o f INEL

graz ing would have a smal ler e f f e c t when taken i n the contex t o f

ad jo in ing p u b l i c lands, which are a lso administered by t h e BLM.

12.3.7 Socioeconomic Impacts.

12.3.7.1 Employment and Economics. The p o t e n t i a1

employment impacts o f opera t ing the waste management a l t e r n a t i v e s

studied can be placed i n perspect ive by examining o v e r a l l INEL employ-

ment and i t s recent v a r i a t i o n s i n l e v e l . Table 12-8 shows t h a t em-

ployment remained r e l a t i v e l y constant from 1967 t o 1974, b u t has grown

s u b s t a n t i a l l y (43%) from 1975 t o June 1978, when t o t a l employment was

about 9400. The recent r a p i d growth r a t e i s expected t o l e v e l o f f i n

t h e near future..

TABLE 12-8

INEL EMPLOYMENT 1967-1978(~) ---

~ i n i m u m Maximum , % Increase Year - Empl oyment Emp 1 oyment I n Maximum

1967 5526 6044 --- 1968 5403 6027 -0.3 1969 5669 5996 -0.5 1970 5574 6016 0.3 1971 5324 6023 0.1 1972 5228 6237 3.6 1973 5665 61 75 -1 .O 1974 5872 6241 1 .O 1975 6343 6561' 5.1 1976 _ 6298 7499 14.3

7454 8632 15.1 i::i(b) 8515 . 9406 9 .O

-- (a) Source: Summary o f INEL Personnel Data (DOE 1978b)

(b) Through June 1978

Table 12-9 shows the expected full-time operational employment for the various waste management modujes. The leave-in-pl ace a1 terna-

tives would not require new employment, because the monitoring personnel shown in the table are already employed in that role. The balance

of this subsection, therefore, deals only with the impacts from the other alternatives and concepts.

Operating employment from the other concepts would range from

an estimated low of 97 new employees for the less massive variation of Concept 5-h (39 for retrieval, 50 for compaction, and 8 for dis-

posal at Site 14) to 273 for Concept 5-a (39 for retrieval, 195 for sl agging pyrolysis, and -39 for disposal - shaft access - in the Lemhi Range). These employment levels are lower than those estimated for the construction phase (see Table 12-1 and Subsection 12.2.7.1 ). Some individuals would probably transfer from the construction payroll to the operating payroll. (Both phases would require vehicle operators; and continued expansion of disposal capacity is really a continuation' of earlier construction work.) At a maximum, the estimated new direct employment would be a 3% increase over June 1978 levels and impose a relatively small impact compared to the recent fluctuations shown in Table 12-8.

Indirect employment resulting from new operating employment would be greater than that. from shorter-term construction payrolls. The normal multiplier for operating employment is about 2.5 (compared to the.l.5 used when discussing construction, in Subsection 12.2.7.1),

implying the creation of 140 to 400 jobs' in the supporting economy. The recent INEL personnel questionnaire (DOE 1978h) showed that about

half of the current employees had been hired from out of state. A slightly lower inmigration would be expected for the operating em-

/

ployees considered here, for the reasons discussed above. However, no data are available for the inmigrating fraction for tt5e

secondary employment.

The estimated payroll for the 97 to 273 new operating employees would total about $1.6 to $4.6 million/yr, as seen by summing the

corresponding modules in able 12-9. This would be 1% to 3% of the

-

,

TABLE 12-9

ESTIMATED RESOURCE USES DURING OPERATIONS PHASE

D i r e c t Employment Energy Usage nnual Diesel

Number :ayroll (a) Fuel Ele t r i c i t y Faci 1 it.^ o f Jobs (103 $/yr ) 5 (103 g a l / y r ) (10 ~ w h / y r )

LEAVE AS. I S AND '

.IMPR V 0 CONFINE- MENTfbf 10 160

RETRIEVAL FACILITY 39

CPT PKG

DISPOSAL FACILITIES I Deep Rock Disposal Lem i i t e S h a k SP 39

CPT 39 PKG 39

CPT PKG

Engineered Shal low Land Disposal a t w 19 304 26

LMV 10 160 11 CPT 17 272 28

LMV 8 128 13 PKG 28 448 42

LMV 19 304 27 '

Engineered Surf ace k a c i 1 i t y Near RWR

SP 21 - 336 ". . PKG

20-YR Rf 'TyI EVABLE STORAGE f 15 240

(a) 1978 rates, weighted according t o estimated s k i l l s used: S l7Klyr f o r SP processing; $16.5K/yr f o r CPT processing; $16K/yr f o r a l l others.

I (b) Emplo.vment i s f o r moni tor ing personnel on1.y and continues f o r 100 yr .

( c ) SP: Slagging Pyro lys is and Packaging, CPT: Compaction, Immobil izat ion, and Packaging, PKG: . Packaging Only

(d ) SP processing would a lso use 4,000 tons/yr o f coal and 6,000 t o n s l y r of bark.

(e) Disposal operat ions vary w i t h the volume o f the output from processing.

( f ) Employment and ener y use would cont inue f o r 20 y r . ' A l l o thers would cont inue for 10 y r ?except for moni tor ing disposal s i tes , which would cont inue f o r 100 y r ) . .

1978 INEC payroll. Using the earnings multiplier of 2.2, the'total economic impact on the area could be $3.5 to $10.1 million/yr, when

'

secondary income is included.

The questionnaire developed by the INEL showed that the average

employee household size was 3.1 persons. Assuming the same average household size, the new population (assuming 50% inmigration) would be a maximum of 420 due to direct employment for waste management.

12.3.7.2 Housing. The first column of Table 12-10 - shows the March 1978 residence pattern of INEL employees. Assuming the same general distribution for the.employees needed to operate the waste management concepts being studied (st i 11 excluding the 1 eave-in-place a.l ternatives because of their negl igihle employment), local communities could expect the impacts shown in the center column

of the table. The last column shows the possible total impact, including that from indirect employment.

TABLE 12-10

ESTIMATED RESIDENCE DISTRIBUTION OF NEW EMPLOYEES ---- ---

--lFEec t Total New City percent fa) Empl oyment Emp 1 oymen t

Idaho Falls Blackfoot Pocatel 1 o She1 1 e.y Arco Rigby Ucon Others

TOTALS 100% 97-273(b) 244-685

( a ) ' Source: Summary of INEL Personnel Data - (DOE 1978b). .

(b) See Subsection 12.3.7.1 for range, low to high, of employment (excludes Alternatives 1 and 2, which involve only 10 direct employees).

Assumi nq a continuation of the existing patterns for residence

location and housing style, discussed earlier (Table 12-5), the maxi-

mum housing demand would be for single-family units in Idaho Falls.

That demand would be approximately 60 single-family units. Secondary

employment would require additional housing, presumably proportion-

ately. At most, an estimated 670 units would be required for direct

plus indirect workers. This number is less than the number of units

on the market in Idaho Falls, alone, in 1978. Thus, the housing im- ,

pact appears to be within the capacity of local communities.

Social Services. Subsection 12.2.7.3 dis-

cusses the construction employment impacts on, schools, medical care,

fire and police protecti.on, and recreation facilities. Direct employ-

ment during operations wou1.d place fewer demands on local social ser-

vices than would arise during construction, because the number of employees would generally be smaller. However, impacts from the oper-

at ing phase would 1 ast longer, and be 1 arger overall, because of the higher employment multiplier (2.5 versus only 1.5 for the construction

phase).

At an average of 1.2 school children/employee (DOE 1978b), the

maximum impact would be the addition of 800 pupils to local schools,

if all 670 new jobs (270 direct plus 400 indirect) were filled by inmigrants. It is more likely that at least half the positions would

be filled locally. In any case, some school expansion would be neces-

sary under all except the leave-in-place alternatives. Proportional

adjustments in other services would also be necessary. In no case do

they exceed the scale of increased demands placed on'local communities

by. the growth in ,recent years (Table 12-8).

12.3.8 Commitment of Resources. Operation and D&D of the

alternative waste management facilities would result in both retriev-

able and irretrievable commitments of resources. Retrievable resources that would be cornmi-tted for the life of the project include some

land, uncontaminated equipment, and some building materials. .These

resources could be reclaimed upon p r o j e c t terminat ion. I r r e t r i e v a b l e

commi tments would i nc lude 1 and f o r d isposal f a c i 1 i t i e s , contaminated

mater i a1 s and f ac i 1 i t.i es, 1 abor hours, pub1 i c funds, and energy.

Table 12-9 i nd i ca tes t h e number o f p,ersonnel requ i red f o r

each module considered f o r s tored waste management. The most labor -

i n t e n s i v e con,cepts are those t h a t e n t a i l waste r e t r i e v a l , processing,

and o n s i t e d isposal . The leave- in-p lace a l t e r n a t i v e s i nvo lve the

1 east 1 abor f o r operat ions.

Estimated energy requirements f o r opera t ing the f a c i l i t i e s are

a l so g iven i n Table 12-9. The most energy- intensive a c t i v i t i e s are

processing by s lagg ing p y r o l y s i s and onsi t e disposal. The s l agging

p y r o l y s i s . f a c i l i t y would use some wood bark, a l o c a l l y a v a i l a b l e waste

by-product o f lumber processing. Current ly , most waste bark i s i n c i n -

erated. The environmental impacts o f bark u t i l i z a t i o n cou ld be bene-

f i c i a l . Using a waste by-product as an a l t e r n a t e energy source would

reduce t h e demand ' f o r other energy sources and reduce a i r qua1 i t y

impacts from the cu r ren t i n c i n e r a t i o n o f bark.

12.3.9 Archaeological and H i s t o r i c a l S i tes . Measures as-

s u r i n g p r o t e c t i o n o f a n t i q u i t i e s and h i s t o r i c s i t e s du r ing construc-

t i o n should reduce t h e p o s s i b j l i t y o f impacts dur ing operat ion. Con-

s t r u c t i o n impacts, are discussed i n Subsection 12.2.9.

12.3.10 Aesthet ics. Aesthet ic impacts f rom opera t ion

and maintenance of f a c i l i t i e s would be an extension of cons t ruc t i on

impacts t o r , t h e l i f e , o f t h e p r o j e c t . A d d i t i o n a l l y , a v i s , i b l e plume . , ,

f rom the s l aggi ng f a c i 1 i t y stack could cause adverse aes the t i c impact

t o passersby. Fo l lowing te rm ina t ion of use of most of t h e f a c i l i -

t i e s , previous aesthet ic qua1,ity co,uld be rees tab l ished through D&D

and r e h a b i l i t a t i o n of d i s tu rbed areas. However, t h e d isposal f a c i l i - . .

t i e s would impose long-term impaclt on aesthet ics. Given t h e e x i s t i n g

development on t h e ,INEL,. t h i s impact i s considered minor. .

12'.'3.11 ~nvironmental ly Sensi t:ive Areas. The only operations that might adversely aff kct environmental ly sensitive areas are activities at the em hi Range sites, 'transfer 'activities, and disposal of solid waste. Maintenance of a Lemhi site disposal facility would affect grazing if i t were decidedthat a 2-mile buffer

zone was needed. ~ransfer activities would'cause localized disturbance to wild1 ife along roadways and potential increases in road kills. Sol.id waste disposal from operations and D&D could 'impact environmentally sensitive areas, so careful siting would be' needed to minimize this impact.

he .potential .t'hreat of contamination of the Snake River Plain

Aquifer by hazardous agents...in"the waste would remain if Alternative 1

were selected. his potential would be reduced by the confinement ::

concepts under A1 ternati'ue 2. . .. . . , . .

'12.3.12 Mitigation of operational land D&D Imp-acts. Adverse operational inb D & D environmentdl impatts would be minimized :by adherence to all applicable federal and state regulations. Water and air pollution would be further avoided by employing state-of-the-art pol-

lution control techno1 bgy on potential eff lue'nts and emissions. En- . .

vironmental mdrii'torincj would be maintained to detect radiological and nonradiblogical. effects of operations and D&D activities. Restoration + and rehabilitation, foliowing dr as $ part of D&D activities, would

.

help mitigate many long-term adverse impacts. To minimize energy consumption, operations design would: include uti 1 ization of alternative enerLgy sources; e;.$. , waste' bark for use as fuel in the slagging pyrolysis f aci 1 ity. Additional l'y, 1 atest' st'ate-of -the-art technology woul d be employed' to ensure maximum 'energy efficiency .

12.3.13 Operational and D&D ~n'vironmental Monitoring Re- quirements. "Environmental monitoring of radiological and nonradio-

logical. contam'inants would be continued, with methodology updated as .- technology advanced. ' For concepts and a1 ternati ves involving disposal onsite or leaving waste in place, monitoring would continue for 100 yr as discussed in Section 7.4.1.

, . 12.4 RADIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF FACILITY OPERATIONS' AND OF DECONTAMINA- '

TION AND DECOMMISSIONING

1

This section discusses the radiological effects of a1 ternatives

for long-term management of stored INEL TRU waste. Only the effects of normal operations are presented in this section. Accidental releases and attendant risks are discus'sed in section 13, as are the

effects of long-term mechanisms for re1 ease of radi onucl ides (e. g.,

erosion). The material in this subsection is organized in the follow- . '

ing manner. Introductory material is ' pres&nted 'in Subsection 12.4.1. '

The human exposure pathways and cal cul at ional mid61 d are presented in Subsection 12.4.2. The releases from facilities associated with each. alternative are discussed in Subsection 12.4.3. The impact on land

. '

and water, impait on biota, radiological doses to individuals, and' radiological doses to populations from these releases are then discussed in subsection.^ 12.4.4 through 12.4.7, respectively. The long-

I term endironmental ddse commitment is given in subsection 12.4.8. . .

Radiation dose from +ail shipment of the processed TRU waste is given ' I

I in Subsection 12.4.9. The projected health effects from all of these

I radiation doses are summarized in Subsection 12.4.10. Mitigation of radioactive release impacts and long-term monitoring requirements are

I discussed in Subsections 12.4.11 and 12.4.12, respectively.

12.4.1 Introduction. ' The asskssment of environmental effects

is based on expected airborne releases of small quantities of radioactive materials from retrieval, processing, storage, and disposal

facilities'. (No liquid effluents would be anticipated from normal I

1 operations.) Assessment of these effects is complicated 'by the fact that the expected releases would be in addition to waste discharges

'

, .

from other INEL facilities. Such discharges are discussed in the Environmental Impact Statement for INEL Waste Management Operations (ERDA 1977~). Furthermore, a1 1 INEL releases are superimposed 'on the natural levels of radioactivity present in soil, water, and air at the *

INEL. Also present is radioactivity from nuclear weapons testing con-

ducted at' the Nevada Test' Site and elsewhere in the world. ~ o s t of

the deposited fallout activity resulted from nuclear explosions in the. . .

atmosphere i n the ea r l y . l960q. However, one o r more aboveground

detonations has occurred i n each o f t h e 1 as t .few years. A p a r t i a1

r a d i a t i o n dose assessment f o r two such events i n 1976 has been

pub1 ished (Strong, Smith, and Johnson 1977).

12.4.2 Human Exposure Pathways. The analyses o f r a d i o l o g i c a l

impacts considered the d i r e c t and i n d i r e c t rou tes by which re leased

r a d i o a c t i v i t y can be t ranspor ted t o man. The 1mpor.tance o f each

exposure , route depends on many fac tors , i ,ncluding t h e chemical and

b i o l o g i c a l behavior o f the r a d i o a c t i v e mater i a1 , the d is tance t o

a g r i c u l t u r a l : areas, a g r i c u l t u r a l management methods, r e c r e a t i o n use

pa t te rns around the f a c i l i t y , and l o c a l meteorology and hydrology. . .

F igu re 12-1 i l 1 " s t r a t e s t h e p o t e n t i a l human exposure pathways con-

s idered f o r a i rborne r a d i o a c t i v e emissions re leased from, waste manage-

ment f a c i l i t i e s . The models used t o p r e d i c t env-ironmental t ranspor t

o f t he a i rborne e f f l u e n t s and t h e r e s u l t a n t r a d i a t i o n doses t o humans , and b i o t a are de ic r i bed i n ~ ~ ~ e n d i x E. The pathway f o r t h e

t ransu ran ic . . nuc l ides i s i n h a l a t i o n o f dispersed a i rborne e f f l u e n t s

and resuspended m a t e r i a l p rev ious l y deposited on t h e ,ground. D i r e c t

r a d i a t i o n f rom the e f f l u e n t , plume and, f rom mate r ia l deposited on t h e

ground i s negl i g i b l e f o r these alpha-emi t t i n g rad ionuc l ides. Uptake

by crops and t r a n s f e r f rom a i r o r vegeta t ion t o animal t i s s u e are a l so

minor pathways because o f small . s o i 1 - to -p l ant and i n t e s t ine- to-b lood

t r a n s f e r f a c t o r s f o r t he t ransuran ic elements.

No 1 i q u i d ' e f f luents -would be a n t i c i p a t e d f rom normal operat ions

o f f a c i l i t i e s f o r any o f t h e waste management a1 t e r n a t i ves. Theref ore,

exposure pathways ,involving l i q u i d discharges have n o t been considered

i n the analys is . ,

I

12.4.3, el eases o f ~ a d i o n u c l i d e s Dur ing Normal Operat ion and ; , Dur ing ~ e c o n t a m i n a t i o n 'and Decommissioning.,

, .

12.4.3.1 Releases f rom R e t r i e v a l F a c i l i t y . It i s expected

(a l though not c e r t a i n ) t h a t t h e t ' ransuranic waste s tored a t t h e TSA

w i l l a l l be f u l l y contained a t t he t ime o f r e t r i e v a l . (See Subsec-

Fig . 12-1 Potential exposure pathways for radionucl ides released to the atmosphere.

Airborne Radbc t i ve merials

Direct Radiation from Cloud

~ i r - t o - ~ u r f o c e Transfer ----------, lnges t ion and Precipitotion Scavenging of Plants

@ Food Crops and -e

Other Plants

I :

.

External o i Internal

Irradiation of Human Tissues Air-to-Surface ~ n m s f e r ~

and Precipitation

lnhalotion . ' @

'

Soil

Inhalation 9

Domestic Ond Wild Animols

Direct Radlarlon from . / Deposited ~ a t e r i o l @ ' Excreta

Scavenging I I

Resuspension

Ingestion of Meat

'and Animal Products@

*

tion 4.4.3.) ~ l t h o u ~ h the retrieval process would generate dust,

the dust would probably not be a source of contamination within the facility or a source of radioactive waste effluents. ow ever, for the purposes of this analysis, it was assumed that 1% of the containers (containing a representative fraction of the stored waste inventory) were breached before retrieval began. (There is no es-

tablished technical basis for this value. It is considered to be

reasonable, yet conservative.) It was further assumed that 0.1% of the activity in each breached container was released into the retrieval facility (Smith and ROS'S 1975). The fraction of the released

activity which was assumed to become airborne within the facility, because of movement of machinery, containers, and personnel, was

1 x10-~ (Mishima 1974; Mishima and Schwendiman 1970, 1973a, 1973b; Selby et al. 1973; Sehmel 1977; ORNL 1970b). Facility ventilation air would pass through one HEPA filter before discharge. The decontamina-

3 tion factor (DF) for the HEPA filter was estimated to be 10 for air-

borne particulates. Table 12-11 contains the average rates of release to the environment during retrieval between 1985 and 1995, and between 2005 -and 2015 (delayed retrieval ) .

Radionuclide releases to the atmosphere during decommissioning of

the retrieval facility would be expected to be less than 1% of those in Table 12-11. There would be a requirement to maintain radiation

doses as low as practicable within the facility during operations. That requirement would limit the amount of internal contamination of

the facility and thereby limit the decommissioning releases.

12.4.3.2 Releases from Slagging Pyrolysis Facility. There are two sources of airborne radioactive effluents from a slagging pyrolysis facility. One is the dust generated when material is being prepared for pyrolysis. In estimating the release rate from

this source, it was conservatively assumed that the maximum stable' ' 3 aerosol concentration of 100 mg/m (Mishima and Schwendiman 1973b,

Mishima 1974) was maintained at all times. The airborne dust would be carried by the building ventilation system to HEPA filters (two in

I series), which would reduce the effluent concentrations by a factor of

, .

TABLE 12-11

AVERAGE NUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS'IN STORED WASTE AND AVERAGE

RELEASE RATES DURING RETRIEVAL

Average ele ease Rates t o the Envi-

Radi onucl i de Content ronment During R e t r i e v a l ( p ~ i /sec)

o f Stored TRU Waste Schedu 1 ed Del ayed

Nucl i de (C i ) (1985-1995) (2005-201 5)

6 1x10 before discharge. (The value used fo r t h i s fac to r i s conservat ive and r e f l e c t s possible minor bypa'ss leakage around one f i l t e r . F i l t e r t e s t i ng a t the time of i n s t a l l a t i on and per iodical ly

during operation would minimize the possibi 1 i t y of bypass leakage.) The re lease r a t e s are given in Table 12-12.

The second source of airborne e f f luen ts i s the process off-gas,

which contains par t i cu la te and (possibly) vo la t i l i zed radionucl ides. Release r a t e s f o r these e f f luen ts a lso are given in Table 12-12. I t

was conservatively assumed tha t the off-gas treatment system would 5 a decontamination fac tor of 10 fo r v o l a t i l e species. (How-

ever, recent studies suggest t ha t v o l a t i l e radionucl ides' in the o f f - gas stream would be removed pr ior t o re lease from the stack. The

vo la t i l e5 would be expecled lo condense and nucleate on off-gas par- t i c u l a t e material or on equipment surfaces, as the temperature of the off-gas stream i s reduced. In Table 12-12 the contribution from the vol a t i l e s i s conservatively added d i r ec t l y in to the average re lease

r a t e t o t a l .) The off-gas stream would pass through the v o l a t i l e o f f - gas treatment system, s intered metal f i l t e r s , and two HEPA f i l t e r systems before discharge. The overall DF f o r par t i cu la tes would be

8 expected t o be a t l e a s t 10 . The eff luent concentrations upstream of the f i l t r a t i o n systems were based on an evaluation of probable off -gas concentrations (Chris t ian , Kirs te in , and Pence 1978), scaled -for the s i ze of t he f a c i l i t y under consideration and the expected 1985 waste concentrations. The referenced calcula t ions used a flow r a t e

3 of 5.47 m Isec through the secondary combustion chamber. The design flow r a t e r e f l e c t s the da i ly mass of waste processed and

3 i s 3.7 m Isec fo r a f a c i l i t y processing the stored TRU waste.

For the two processing periods studied, Tables 12-12 and 12-13 contain the projected re lease r a t e s of radionuclides from both dust

generation and system off-gas. Any v o l a t i l e radioactive component would consis t of oxides of the elements l i s t e d .

'TABLE 12-12

(PROCESSING BETWEEN 1985 AND 1995)

Average Release Rates to the Environment During Processing . -

- . (pCi Isec) -.------A-

Processing

Preparation Cell Off-gas Stream

~ u c l ide(a) Particulate Particulate Volatile Total

(a) All radionuclides are assumed to be in the oxide form.

. . TABLE 12-13

AVERAGE RELEASE RATES FROM SLAGGING PYROLYSIS AND PACKAGING FACILITY

(PROCESSING BETWEEN 2005 AND 2015)

%. . .

Average Release Ra tes , to the Environment During Processing

('pCi /sec) '

, Process

Preparat ion C e l l O f f -gas Stream

~ u c l i d e ( a ) P a r t i c u l a t e P a r t i c u l a t e V o l a t i l e Tot a'1

(a ) A l l rad ionuc l ides l i s t e d are assumed t o be i n the oxide form.

12.4.3.3 Releases from Compaction Facil ity. Generation of airborne dust containing radionuclides would be the only source of airborne releases from the compaction facility. The anticipated release rates are given in Table 12-14.

Health physics considerations would limit the amount of contamination within the building. Thus, the release rates during decommissioning would be limited to less than 1% of those in Table 12-14.

12.4.3.4 el eases from Packaging Faci 1 ity. Airborne releases froma facility for packaging waste would result only from dust generation during operation. These releases would be about the same as for the compaction facility, given in Table 12-14.

12.4.3.5 Releases from Waste Disposal Faci 1 ities. No releases of radioactivity would be expected during normal operation of the waste disposal facilities or during transfer to them.

12.4.4 Contamination of Land and Water. One consequence of

normal operation of the facilities described above would be the gradual buildup of released radioactivity in the environment. No liquid waste discharges would be anticipated, so this discussion centers on the accumulation of materi a1 deposited on* the ground sur-' face. The air-to-surface transport model described in Appendix E was used for all calculations. The results of computations of ground

2 surface concentrations (the quantity S, in units of nCi/m ) at the end of the 10-yr operating period are given in the several t8bles that follow.

'. Table 12-15 lists the maximum expected soil contamination following 10 yr of waste retrieval. For each nuclide, the average concentration within 50 miles of the representative site was calculated

to be about 1/13 of the maximum value shown in the table. This maximum-to-average relationship holds for all tables in this subsection.

TABLE 12-14

Average Release Rates t o t h e Environment

During Processing (pCi/sec)

Fo l lowing

Scheduled R e t r i e v a l . .

Nuc l ide

TABLE 12-15

MAXIMUM SOIL CONTAMINATION RESULT1 NG FROM AIRBORNE EFFLUENTS

FROM RETRIEVAL FACILITY

I Maximum S o i l Concentrat ions (a ) 2 (nCi/m )

R e t r i e v a l as Delayed

Schedu 1 ed, Re t r i eva l ,

Nuc 1 i de 1985-1995' 2005-201 5

'(a) These concentrat ions would be found o n l y a t the p o i n t o f maximum a i r concent ra t ion (see F igure E-1) . The average concentrat:ons w i t h i n a 50-mile c i r c l e around the r e t r i e v a l f a c i l i t y would be 1/13 o f the tab- u l ated values.

Table 12-16 shows the maximum expected soil contamination following 10 yr of operating the slagging pyrolysis facility. Table 12-17 shows the maximum expected soil contamination expected from '10 y'r of operating the waste compaction facility. Maximum soil

contamination levels expected from 10 yr of operating a waste packaging facility would be about the same as those given above for the

compaction facility.

The amount of surface soil contamination from normal operations would be independent of the time and method of shipment to the disposal site, and the location of the disposal site, whether at the Federal Repository or at the INEL. Table 12-18 summarizes the maximum

expected soil contamination, by management alternative or concept.

For comparison, the concentrations of some natural and fallout

radionucli'des in soil are given in Table 12-19. The projected maximum total concentration of alpha-emi tters resulting from any a1 ternative

2 is about 2 nCi/m ; the corresponding average concentration would be 2 about 0.15 nCi/m . This average is about 10% of the mean concentra-

tion of alpha-emitting fallout radionuclides. The data also show that

concentrations of major long-lived alpha-emitting fallout radionucl ides are considerably smaller than the concentrations of naturally occurring alpha-emitters.

The radiological doses resulting from the projected concentra- ti ons of transuranic ,nucl ides are discussed below. The imp1 i cations

of these soil concentration projections can best b e understood in that context.

The radi.ologica1 status of land in the RWMC and in adjacent areas

must be discussed also in the context of anticipated future land use patterns. The expected continuation of the RWMC as a disposal area

for fission product wastes (see Section 4) represents a long-term commitment of that land. This commitment is independent of the

selection of a TRU waste management a1 ternative.

TABLE 12-16

MAXIMUM SOIL CONTAMINATION RESULTING FROM AIR,BORNE EFFLUENTS

FROM; , . . SLAGGING , PYROLYSIS FACILITY

Maximum S o i l Concentrat ions ( a )

Nuc l ide ,

(a) These con ten t ra t i ons would be found o n l y 'at the po in t : of'mdximum air- concen t ra t i on ( s e e F i g u r e ' E-'1) . The average concent ra t ions h i t h i n a 50-mile c i r c l e around. the s lagg ing ' p y r o l y s i s f a c i l i t y would be 1/13 o f t h e tabu la ted values.

TABLE 12-17

MAXIMUM SOIL CONTAMINATION RESULTING FROM AIRBORNE EFFLUENTS

FROM COMPACTION FACILITY

Nuc l i de *

Maximum S o i l Concentrat ions ( a )

( a ) These concen t ra t i ons would be found o n l y a t t he p o i o t o f maximum a i r c o n c e n t r a t i o n (see F i g u r e E-1). The average concen t ra t i ons w i t h i n 'a 50-mi,le c i r c l e around the compaction f a c i l i t y would be 1/13 o f t he t a b u l a t e d values.

TABLE 12-18

MAXIMUM SOIL CONTAMINATION RESULTING FROM NORMAL OPERATION . . OF FACILITIES REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT ALTERNATIVES

. . . .

:,Management . Radionuciide on cent ration(^) o f ~ u r f a c e S o i l ( n ~ i / m 2 ) A1 t e rna t i ve

.- . o r Concept Pu-238 Pu-239 Pu-240 Pu-241 ' Pu-242 Am-241 Cm-244 U-233 1

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,

. (a) ' These concentrations would be found on ly a t the po in t o f maximum a i r concentrat ion f See Figure E-1) . The .. average -concentrations w i t h i n - a 50-mi l e c i r c l e around the RWMC would be 1 /13 o f the tabulated values.

TABLE 12-19

NATURAL AND FALLOUT RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS IN INEL SOIL - Nucl i d e Source . . Average Concentrat i o n (nCi lmL)

A1 pha Emi t te rs

U-238 & alpha- be ta e m i t t i n g daughters . .

Th-232 & alpha- be ta e m i t t i n g daughters.

Beta-Gamma Emi t te rs

CS-137

F a l l o u t

Fa1 1 ou t

F a l l o u t

Natura l

Natura l

Natura l

Natura l

FalA ou t

Fa1 l o u t

Natura l

Bet a-gamma e m i t t i n g daughters o f U-238 Natura l . . . 80

Bet a-gamma e m i t t i n g daughters of Th-232 Nat~1ra1 . . .. 140 .

( a ) The concent ra t ion shown f o r n a t u r a l l y occukr i n g nucl ides . i s o n l y t h a t i n the top cm o f t he s o i l . The valugs f o r f a l l o u t nuc l i des :are t h e t o t a l deposi t ion, which i s ma in ly d i s t r i b u t e d i n the top 10 cm.

As a p o i n t of reference, a comparison o f the s o i l r a d i o a c t i v i t y

l e v e l s w i t h t h e €PA screening l e v e l (EPA 1977) i s appropr iate. The

EPA recommendation i s t h a t the group o f people exposed t o the h ighes t

r a d i a t i o n dose r a t e should not rece i ve more than 1 mrad/yr t o t h e

pulmonary reg ion o f the l ung o r 3 mrad/yr t o the bone. The der ived 2

s o i l screening l e v e l i s 200 nCi/m fo r p a r t i c l e s i zes l e s s than

2 microns i n t h e top cm of s o i l (EPA 1977).

There are areas w i t h i n and immediately adjacent t o t he Subsurface

Disposal Area a t t h e RWMC t h a t now con ta in t ransu ran i c concent ra t ions . ,

i n excess o f , , t he screening l e v e l . These areas would no t be re leased . ,

f o r u n r e s t r i c t e d use w i thou t care fu l eva lua t i on t o assure t h a t t he EPA

dose gu ide l ine , described above, cou ld he met. This land has a l ready

been committed f o r an i n d e f i n i t e p e r i o d f o r waste d isposa l . The,waste

r e t r i e v a l and processing a c t i v i t i e s under cons idera t ion would r e s u l t

i n some sur face s o i l contaminat ion, as described i n t h e prev ious sub- . .

sec t ion . However, t h e maximum a n t i c i p a t e d concentrat ions o f t ransu r - ,,.

anics i n s o i l are l e s s than 2% o f t h e EPA screening value (EPA 1977). , .

Thus, no r a d i o l o g i c a l r e s t r i c t i o n s on land i n the surrounding areas

would r e s u l t f rom t ransuran ics re leased dur ing normal opera t ion o f .,

waste r e t r i e v a l and .processi.ng f a c i 1 i t i e s . . . . I

. t .

12.4.5 R a d i ~ l o g i c ~ a l Impact on iota. Both small and l a r g e mam- , . . . -- . , . .

m a l s ~ w o u l d have contac t w i t h a i r , s o i l , and vegeta t ion bear ing contam- ,

i n a n t s re leased dur ing normal opera t ion o f waste r e t r i e v a l and proces-

s i n g f a c i l i t i e s . The smal l m a k a l s inc lude chipmunks, ground s q u i r - .

r e l s , kangaroo r a t s , mice, and r a b b i t s . The l a r g e mammals i nc lude

pronghorn antelope, deer, and domestic sheep and ca t - t l e .

The p r i n c i p a l pathways by which a i rborne r a d i o a c t i v i t y can reach

l a r g e animals are shown i n F igu re 12-1. Plutonium-238 and -239 have

been detected i n antelope lung t i ssue, r e f l e c t i n g bo th f a l l o u t and

INEL re leases. The'annual lung dose t o l a r g e animals from the t rans -

u r a n i c nuc l i des re leased i n waste processing would be l e s s than

0.1 mrad. Th is dose a d d i t i o n would pose no thre.at t o the h e a l t h o f

i n d i v i d u a l animals o r t o t h e popu la t ions o f these species. . '

Small 'mammals wi 11 a1 so ingest contaminated soi 1 , a pathway not

shown in Figure' 12-1. Plutonium-238, -239, and Am-241 have been found in small mammals res iding in and near the' Subsurface Disposal Area of

the RWMC. (ERDA 1977a; Markham,' Puphal, and F i l e r 1978). Doses t o

the lung a"d other t i s sues of small mammdl s (mainly mice) 'would be a maximum of 2-3 mradlyr. 'This observation i s based on measurement of mice now inhabit ing the RWMC, where maximum soi 1 concentrationsr of

t ransuranics are up t o 2000 ncilm2, or about 100 times larger than .

the highest so i l concentrations expected from normal TRU waste management operations. ' Neither individual nor e f f ec t s would b e expected among small mammals inhabit ing areas with the ant ic ipated ' so i l contamination levels .

. .

12.4.6 ~ a x i i u m Radiation ~ o s e s ( ~ ) t o ~ n d i v i d i a l s . ' he maximum ~. '

annual radia t ion dose commitments f o r any individual as the r e s u l t of normal operat ions of 'waste management' f a c i 1 i t i e s are discussed here. The inhalation and external radia t ion dose calcula t ions assume'.that an '

individual res ides a t the point of maximum a i r concentration (and I

surf ace deposit ion) throughout the year. Few, i f any, individuals would receive doses as large as the maximum values presented. Herds- '.

men tending domestic stock could be located a t the pbint of maximum concentration fo r a par t of the year. I t i s a lso possible t ha t a few people could es tab l i sh residence near - the southern INEL boundary before s t a r t up o f new waste management f a c i l i t i e s . Themaximum annual radia- t ion dose commitment f o r e i t he r of these groups of people would be l e s s than half dt the dose 6ommit.ments presented in t h i s subsection. '

For t he two re t r i eva l times considered, the maximum individual dose commitments from one year of stored waste r e t r i eva l operations

- . are shown in Table 12-20.

( a ) The radia t ion doses presented in Section 12 assume an average 1 ifetime of 70 yr. Dose commitments were calculated by in tegra t ing over the time period from the i n i t i a l exposure t o the end of t he remaining l i f e of t he individual (see Appendix E).

TABLE 12-20

MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL LIFETIME DOSE COMMITMENT RESULTING FROM AIRBORNE

EFFLUENTS FROM ONE YEAR OF OPERATION OF WASTE RETRIEVAL FACILITY I

Maximum L i f e t i m e Dose Comrni tment (mrem)

Per Year o f R e t r i e v a l Fac i1 i t . v O ~ e r a t i n n

Organ o r

T issue --

As Scheduled ~ e l ayed(a)

Whole Body 2 .4x10- '~ 2 .1x10-~

Lung 4 .5x10-~ 4 .3x10-~

Bone 4.6~10- ' 4 .3x10-~

L i ver 3 .4x10 -~ , 3 . ~ ~ 1 0 - ~

K i dney 1 1 . 6 x l ~ - 7

(a) ' Dose commitments f o r "Delayed" r e t r i e v a l a re lower than those f o r "As Scheduled" r e t r i e v a l , p r i m a r i l y because of r a d i o a c t i v e decay o f Pu-241 d u r i n g t h e 20-yr de lay pe r i od .

The l i f e t i m e dose commitments r e s u l t i n g f r om one year o f opera-

t i o n o f a s l a g g i n g p y r o l y s i s f a c i l i t y a re shown i n Tab le 12-21. The

whole-body dose commitments l i s t e d i n t h e t a b l e a re smal l because ve ry

l i t t l e (60 KeV f o r a gamma r a y r e l e a s e c o i n c i d e n t w i t h a lpha decay o f

Am-241) o f t h e decay energy i s r e l eased as p e n e t r a t i n g r a d i a t i o n .

The r a d i a t i o n dose commitments f,rom a i r b o r n e e f f l u e n t s f rom a

compaction f a c i l i t y are shown i n able 12-22. The dose commitments J

f rom e f f l u e n t s f r om a waste packaging f a c i l i t y would be about t h e same

as those f o r t he compaction f a c i l i t y .

I TABLE 12-21

MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL LIFETIME DOSE COMMITMENT RESULTING FROM

I SLAGGING PYROLYSIS FACILITY

Maximum L i f e t i m e Dose Commitment (mrem) I

Per Year o f S lagg ing P y r o l y s i s Opera t ion

Organ o r As Scheduled el ayed(a)

T issue , (1985-1995) (2005-2015)

Whole Body 1 : 9 x 1 0 - ~ l . 6 x l 0 - ~

Lung 3 . 5 ~ 1 0 ' ~ 3 .4x10 -~

Bone 3 .6x10 -~ 3 .4x10 -~

L i v e r 2. ~ X I O - ~ 2. ~ X I O - ~

K idney 1 . 3 ~ 1 0 ' ~ 1 . Z ~ I O - ~

( a ) Dose commitments f o r "Delayed" a re l e s s than those f o r "As Scheduled" p r i m a r i l y because o f r a d i o a c t i v e decay o f Pu-241 d u r i n g t h e 20-yr de lay per iod .

TABLE 12-22. '

c .

I . .

MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL LIFETIME DOSE COMMITMENT RESULTING FROM

AIRBORNE. EFFLUENTS FROM ONE YEAR OF OPERATION OFa

COMPACTION FACILITY , ,

, ~ . . ----- , . . ------ , .

Maximum L i f e t i m e Dose Commitment

Organ o r ' (mrem) Per Year, o f Compact i o n

T i ssue Fac i 1 i ty Operat ion (1985- 1995).

Whole Body 2 . 6 ~ 1 0 ' ~

Lung 4 . 9 ~ 1 0 ~ ~

Bone 5.0x10-~

L i ver 3.7x10-~ i

K i dney . . . . . . -1 .&10-4,

t .

12.4.7 Rad ia t i on Doses t o t h e Populat ion Dur ing Operations and

~ecommi ssioning. -., The short - term (,operating phase) r a d i a t i o n d,ose . . , commitments. to : t he popu la t ion l i ' v i n g w i t h i n 50 m i l e s of t h e waste

management A s.i.te are described i n t h i s subsect ion. The long-term dose

commitments from environmental contaminat ion associated w i t h the waste

management a l t e r n a t i v e s are discussed i n Subsection 12.4.8.

. . The popul a t i o n doses t o employees who' work a t t he var ious INEL

f a c i l i t i e s are no t inc luded i n t h i s discussion. However, t h e dose

commitment t o t h i s popu la t ion group would be about 70% of the dose

commitment t o .the populat ions 1 i v i n g w i t h i n a 50-mile rad ius o f t h e , . 9

waste management s i t e . The c a l c u l a t i o n s of 50-mile popu la t ion dose, . . . I I ,*

commitments are b a ~ e d on 1970. . . census data (see subsect ion 3.9),,.,modi-,. . . . .

f i e d by an.. assumed. growth . . r a t e guide1 i n e ,(see Guidel ine (7) i n Sub-.,, , .

s e c t i o n 7.4.1.5 and Appendix E). . .

Lifetime dose commitments per year of operation of the waste

management facilities under consideration are presented below.

Inhalation is the only important exposure pathway. (No liquid waste

eFf 1 uents are anticipated during normal operation; hence a1 1 the. pop-

ulation dose commitments discussed below would result from airborne effluents from the facilities.) Whole-body doses are very small

because the nuclides involved become localized in specific tissues

and the principal emissions are o f nonpenetrating radiation.

.The lifetime population dose.commitment resulting from the

release o f airborne' . . . effluents during one year of operation of the . .

retrieval facility is shown in Table 12-23.

TABLE 12-23

LIFETIME POPULATION DOSE COMMITMENT RESULTING FROM ONE YEAR OF OPERATION OF RETRIEVAL FACILITY

Lifetime Population Dose Commitment .(man-rem) Per Year of Facility Operation

Organ or As Scheduled Del ayed Tissue . . (1985-1995) 1 (2005-2015)

- 10 . . . Whole Body 2.9x10-~O ". 3.1~10 . .

Lung ' 4.1 x10-~, 4.8x10-~ , ' ' Bone . 4.2x10-~ I 4.9x10'-~ .

3.6x10-~' $ ' . . 3.1x10-~. L i ver

Ki dney 1 .5x10e6 1 .8il oe6

' " I ;

Tables 12-24 and 12-25 contain the lifetime population dose com-

mitments from one year of operation of" the slagging pyrolysis facility

and compaction facility, respectively. The lifetime population dose

commitments for the packaging facility would be about the same as

those given in Table 12-25 for' the compaction facility.

' ' TABLE 12-24 . , , . I

LIFETIME POPULATION DOSE COMMITMENT RESULTING FROM ONE YEAROF OPERATION OF SLAGGING PYROLYSIS FACILITY

. ,

L i f e t i m e Popul a t ion ' Dose omm mi tment (man-rem) Per Year o f Faci 1 i ty Operat ion'.,

Organ o r As Schedu 1 ed De 1 ayed . Tissue ( 1985-'1995)- (2005-201 5)

Who1 e Body 2.3x10-~. 2 . 4 ~

Lung. 3; 3x10-' 3.8x10-'

Bone '. .. . t s s 3.3x10-' . . 3.8x10-' . . .' ,

~ i v e r 2.5x10-~ 2 .9x10-~

K i dney _ . , . . . 1.2x10-~ 1.4x10-~

, TABLE 12-25

LIFETIME POPULATION DOSE COMMITMENT RESULTING FROM ONE YEAR OF OPERATION OF COMPACTION FACILITY

Organ o r Tissue

L i f e t i m e Populat ion Dose Commitment - -

(man-rem) Per Year o f F a c i l i t y Operat ion .

(1985-1995)

Whole Body: . . . . . 3 . 2 ~ 1 0 - ~

Lung . 4 .5x10-~

Bone ,. . .. 4 . 6 ~ 1 o - ~ L i v e r . . , . . ;. 3,4x10-~

K i dney, a . ., , , , . . , , 1 . 7 ~ 1 0 - ~ . i.

-. 12.4.8 Long-Tern Er~v ironmental Dose Commitment. l his subsec-

tion discusses the long-term dose commitment from normal operations of waste management facilities to: (1) the population living within 50 miles, and (2) the entire U.S. population. The long-term dose comni tments result from the expected environmental contami nation due to 10 yr of waste management facility operations. As can be seen from

Table 12-18, the alternatives resulting in the largest amount of soil contamination from routine operations involve waste retrieval and slagging pyrolysis in 1985-1995. The lifetime dose commitments from inhalation of airborne materials during the 10-yr operating period were summarized in the previous sub'section. The following discussion is confined to the long-term consequences of the contamination of th'e2 environment. The principal pathway of concern is inhalation of resuspended radionuclides from the soil contamination.

In estimating doses from resuspension of surface deposits, it was assumed that all radioactivity deposited was contained in the top cm of soil at the end of facility operations in 1995. The average areal concentrations are obtained by dividing the maximum values in Table 12-18 by 13, the peak-to-mean concentration ratio for the 50-mile circle. Three processes subsequently reduce the resus- pendable surface activity: migration downward out of the top cm of soil, radioactive decay, and the resuspension process itself. Thus, the resuspension source term decreases expon,entially with time' (see Appendix E) . The mass loading approach was used with the calculated source term to compute the air concentrations to which individuals within the 50-mile circle would be exposed at various times after 1 995.

' .. Table 12-26 contains the cumulative lifetime population5dose

commitments from retrieval and slagging pyrolysis of TRU waste for various times after. 1985. The doses shown do not include the .':

operational phase 1 ifetime population dose commitments discussed in '

Section 12.4.7. Again, the population was assumed to grow exponen-* tially at the rate of 1%/yr from 1985 to 2085 and to remain' constant thereafter. , . . . . . s

The maximum long-term whole-body and i n d i v i d u a l organ dose

commitments are about 10 t o 20 t imes those f o r t h e 10-yr opera t ing

per iod. These maxima are a very smal l f r a c t i o n o f the popu la t ion

dose from na tu ra l sources and are, i n f a c t , l ess than the annual

v a r i a t i o n i n popul a t i o n dose from na tu ra l sources. (No est imates

were made o f long-term decay of t h e sources o f n a t u r a l background

r a d i a t i o n . However, such decay i s be l ieved t o be r e l a t i v e l y small

over t he m i l l i on -yea r p e r i o d studied.) Dur ing t h e f i r s t 10 yr, t h e

average annual whole-body dose commitment f o r the popu la t ion would be

4 x 1 0 - ~ man-rem. This dose comni tment would be spread over a mean

popu la t ion o f n e a r l y 158,000 persons; hence, t h e average annual i n d i -

v i dua l dose would be 2.5x10'-~ rnrem dur ing t h a t per iod. '

TABLE 12-26

CUMULATIVE LIFETIME DOSE COMMITMENTS TO LOCAL POPULATION FOR VARIOUS TIMES AFTER 1995, FOR THE ALTERNATIVE RESULTING IN HIGHEST DOSES

Cumulative L i f e t i m e Popu la t ion Dose Commitment To Organ o r Time ( y r ) Tissue (man-rem) t o Spec i f i ed Year

A f t e r 1995 Whole. Body Lung Bone L i v e r Kidney

1 For cbmiarison, the local cumul it ive whole.-bidy and lung doses . . . to

the local population from natural sources are shown in Table 12-27. Figure 12-2 compares the 50-mi le cumulative population dose comni t- ments to lung tissue from normal operati& of the wdrst-case alterna- ti ve and from natu,ial background radiation.

'.. ' .

TABLE 12-27 + .

CUMULATIVE. LIFETIME DOSE COMMITMENTS-.TO. LOCAL POPULATION . , ' '

FROM NATURAL SOUeCES FOR .VARIO,US TIMES AFTER 1995 . -

Cumulative Whole-Body and Lung Population Doses Time (Yr) (man-rem) To Specified Year After 1995 Who1 e .Body Lung

. .

The long-term environmental dose commitments for-the U.S. population as the result of normal operation of the facilities were evaluated. as described in Appendix E. Populaf ions were again assumed to

grow exponentially at l%/yr until 2085 and to remain constant after that time. Table 12-28 contains the cumulative lifetime dose comnit-

meits for distant populations as the result .of normal operations.

-- -

Inc ludes 10-yr Opera- t i o n a l Per iod and Ex- posure t o Radionucl ides Resuspended During Post-Operat ional Period. -

'(Operat ional Phase Dose Commitments Are Less Than 1 man-rem)

1.0 I I + 10 100 1000 10,000

TIME' (years)

F ig. 12-2 Comparison o f cumulat ive l ung dose commitment f o r t he popu la t i on w i t h i n 50 mi les .

TABLE 12-28

CUMULATIVE LIFETIME DOSE COMMITMENTS FOR DISTANT POPULATIONS AT.VARIOUS

TI'MES A ~ T E R 1995 FOR ALTERNATIVES RESULTING IN HIGHEST DOSES

Cumulative L i f e t i m e . Populat ion Dose Commitment To Organ o r

Tissue (man-rem) t o Speci f ied Year '

Time (Yr )

A f t e r 1995 Whole Body Lung ' Bone L i v e r Kidney ,

12.4.9 Rad ia t i on Doses FromlRai 1 Shipment' o f t h e Processed TRU

Waste. The t r a n s p o r t o f prccessed TRU waste t o a d isposal l o c a t i o n

o n s i t e o r o f f s i t e would r e s u l t i n doses t o t r a n s p o r t a t i o n workers,

and t o t h e genera l p u b l i c near t h e rou te . This subsect ion discusses

expected doses f rom the o f f s i t e shipment o f waste by r a i l . The waste

i s assumed t o be processed by s lagg ing p y r o l y s i s and packaged f o r

d e l i v e r y t o the Federal Repository. 'Expected doses t o o n s i t e workers

due t o o n s i t e t r a n s p o r t o f waste by t r u c k are presented i n Sec-

t i o n 14. I

Most of the radionuclides in the stored TRU waste are alpha-

emit ters . Because of t he nature of alpha radia t ion, no external whole-body exposure would r e s u l t from r a i l shipment of waste con-

t a in ing only alpha-emi t t e r s . However, small quan t i t i es of beta- gamma emitting radionuclides ex i s t in the stored TRU waste. For t h i s reason, r a i l shipment of the waste would r e su l t in small whole-body doses t o the t r a i n crews and t o the public near the rbute.

The radiat ion levels from the processed waste would generally be low enough t o preclude the need fo r 'shielded containers. Pre- 1 iminary calcula t ions show t h a t , averaged over a l l shipments, the dose r a t e a t 6 f t from the external surface of the r a i l ca rs would be about 7x10-I mR1hr (DOE 1978a). ' The value permitted by federal regulations i s 10 mR/hr (49 CFR 173.393). A few of the containers might require shielding t o meet t h i s requirement. However, the number of containers in t h i s category i s expected to be ins ign i f ican t .

Figure 9-10 i l l u s t r a t e s the shipment route assumed fo r t h i s study. A one-way t r i p would take 6 days. The t r a i n would be manned 24 hr/day. Each crew would consis t of 5 members; s h i f t s would be

changed every 8 hr. The t o t a l number of crew members would be about

90 ( 6 days x 3 sh i f t s lday x 5 memberslshift). The estimated shipping r a t e i s 190 r a i l cars /yr .

The population dens i t i es along the postulated ra i l road route were

categorized as urban f o r the Denver-Boulder area, suburban f o r t he Colorado Springs and Pueblo area, and rural f o r the remainder of the route. Distances through urban, suburban, and rural areas were e s t i - mated t o be 35, 50, and 1326 miles, respectively.

External who1 e-body exposure from normal operational shipment of

t he waste could be received tjy the general publi'c, passing t r a f f i c , s t a t i on personnel, and t r a i n crews. The maximum annual dose t o an individual crew member was calculated t o be approximately 25 mrem (DOE 1978a). T h i s ' i s well 'below the allowable l imi t of 500 mrem/yr f o r individuals in u n r e s t r i c t e b a r e a s (10 CFR 20.105). 1'n the same

dy, the dose t o a ra i l road s ta t ion employee was estimated t o be

7 mremlyr. The maximum dosc t o a member o f t he genera l pub1 i c was

es t imated a t 6 x 1 0 - ~ mremlyr. Table 12-29 i 11 u s t r a t e s the expected

p o p u l a t i o n dose f rom e x t e r n a l whole body exposure f r om shipment o f

190 ca r loads of waste per y r . The shipments would t ake p l ace a t t h i s

r a t e f o r 10 yr i n A l t e r n a t i v e s 3, 4, and 6. The e f f e c t o f t h e 20-yr

de lay i n A l t e r n a t i v e s 4 and 6 would be t o reduce t he c a l c u l a t e d doses

f rom e x t e r n a l exposure by approx imate ly a f a c t o r o f 2.

TABLE 12-29

EXPECTED DOSE FROM EXTERNAL WHOLE-BODY EXPOSURE

DUE TO RAIL TRANSPORT OF STORED TRU WASTE

Group Annual Popu la t i on Dose (man-remlyr)

General Pub1 i c 0.05

Pass i ng T r a f f i c <0.005

S t a t i o n Personnel 0.1

T r a i n Crews 1 .O

12.4.10 Hea l t h E f f e c t s . The h e a l t h e f f e c t s o f t he i n d i v i d u a l

and p o p u l a t i o n doses presented p r e v i o u s l y a re now discussed. The

impacts, on i n d i v i d u a l s , ev,en those who r e c e i v e , the maximum doses,

would be smal l . The maximum i n d i v i d u a l whole-body doses f rom normal

operat ions, f r om s o i l contaminat ion, and f rom sh ipp ing i s c a l c u l a t e d

t o be 2 x l 0 - ~ mremlyr, 3 x 1 0 - ~ mremlyr, and 25 mremlyr, r e s p e c t i v e l y .

These doses are approx imate ly 10'~%, and 20%, r e s p e c t i v e l y o f

t h e annual i n d i v i d u a l whole-body doses rece i ved f rom n a t u r a l sources.

I n es t imat ing h e a l t h e f fec ts , t he populat ion dose i n man-rem

has been used as a measure o f t h e detr iment t o t h e exposed group.

The populat ion dose i s the i n teg ra l , over the appropr iate range of

doses, o f t he product o f t h e number o f i n d i v i d u a l s r e c e i v i n g a

s p e c i f i c dose times t h a t dose.

To est imate the maximum p o t e n t i a l number o f h e a l t h e f f e c t s

. t h a t might r e s u l t from normal opera t ion o f t h e highest-dose modules, .;

t he r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n Table 12-30 were used (NAS-NRC 1972, Uni ted . . Nat ions 1972, I C R P 1966, and I C R P 1969). These are upper 1 i m i t s .

A l i ' near r e l a t i o n s h i p between dose and h e a l t h e f f e c t s i s assumed even

a t very low doses and dose r a t e s (NRC 1975, Appendix 6; NAS-NRC 1972;

Uni ted Nations 1972; NCRPM 1975).

For operat ion o f r e t r i e v a l and s lagging p y r o l y s i s f a c i l i t i e s ,

Table 12-31 shows t h e cumulat ive maximum p o t e n t i a l number o f h e a l t h .

e f f e c t s as a func t i on o f t ime a f t e r 1985. These e f f e c t s have been

summed over a l l f i v e t i ssues o f concern. The values i n Table 12-31

inc lude the long-term e f f e c t s o f the resuspension o f rad ionuc l ides

t h a t were deposited' i n ' s o i l s from re leases t o t h e environment dur ing

the o r i g i n a l 10-yr r e t r i e v a l and processing campaign. The popu la t ion

group inc ludes both l o c a l and d i s t a n t populat ions.

.

The dose o f concern f o r genet ic e f f e c t s i s the gonadal dose, a l so

c a l l ed the gene t i ca l l y s i g n i f i c a n t whole-body dose. Genetic e f f e c t s

were determined by m u l t i p l y i n g the sum o f the whole-body doses t o

l o c a l and d i s t a n t popu la t ions by t h e genet ic damage i n c i d e n t r a t e

shown i n Table 12-30. Less than one hea l th e f f e c t i s p ro jec ted t o

r e s u l t from normal opera t ion o f any combination o f f a c i l i t i e s con-

sidered, even when consider ing the whole popu la t ion o f the Uni ted

States over a p e r i o d o f a m i l l i o n years.

The maximum p o t e n t i a l number o f h e a l t h e f f e c t s from sh ipp ing the

waste t o t h e Federal Reposi tory was a lso estimated. The popu la t ion

group exposed t o r a d i a t i o n dur ing r a i l shipment o f t he waste i nc ludes

. . TABLE 12-30

. .

MAXIMUM POTENTIAL NUMBER OF. HEALTH EFFECTS

PER UNIT POPULATION DOSE(^)

Maximum P o t e n t i a l Heal th E f f e c t s

. ( Numberlman-rem .popul.at ion dose)

Organ !or I . : . .Total

Tissue a t Risk - Incidence , F a t a l . . Nonfata l , . I . . , .

Whole Body . : ' ': 4x 1 o - ~ . . . 2 x l ~ - 4

Lung 6 x 1 0 ~ ~ 6x 1 oY5 (b) 2 X 1 0 - ~ 5~ 1 o - ~ 3~ 1 o - ~ . . Bone

L i ver 3x 1 o - ~ 3x 1 o - ~ ,(b)

1 ~ 1 0 - ~ 1 ~ 1 0 - ~ . (b) K i dneys

Genetic Damage. . . a 3 x l ~ - 4 ( C ) , ( b '. .:: i . . . : . ' . . ,', ! . .$ . . . ' , . , . - ? ': ,

. . . .

(a ) Source: . NAS-NRC . (1972), Uni ted Nations . . (1972), ICRP . , (1966), and ICRPt %. :

( 1969). . . I

. . . . . .

(b) A1 1 are assumed t o be ' f a t a l . ,

( c ) Assumes deaths are t o fe tuses i n e a r l y steps o f development.

TABLE 12-31

MAXIMUM CUMULATIVE POTENTIAL HEALTH EFFECTS

FROM IMPLEMENTATION OF ANY ALTERNATIVE

Time ( y r )

A f t e r 1985

Maximum Cumulat ive P o t e n t i a l Hea l t h E f f e c t s

Cancers

F a t a l Nonfa ta l Genet ic

t he general p u b l i c i n the v i c i n i t y o f t h e r a i l r o a d route, passing

t r a f f i c , s t a t i o n personnel, and t r a i n crews. Heal th e f f e c t s were

determined by mu1 t i p l y i ng the who1 e-body popu la t ion dose by the f a t a l

and nonfa ta l inc idence r a t e s shown i n Table 12-30. Less than one -3 . ( 2 . 3 ~ 1 0 ~ ~ ) f a t a l and l e s s than one ( 2 . 3 ~ 1 0 ) non fa ta l h e a l t h

e f f e c t are p ro jec ted as a r e s u i t o f sh ipp ing the waste t o t h e Federal

Repository.

12.4.11 M i t i g a t i o n o f t h e Impacts o f Operat ional R a d i o a c t i v i t y

Releases. The p ro jec ted r a d i a t i o n doses t o i n d i v i d u a l s and t o t h e

general popul a t i o n p ro jec ted f o r t he a1 t e r n a t i ves are small . The

maximum i n d i v i d u a l whole-body dose f rom r e t r i e v a l and processing

opt ions i s o n l y about 2 x 1 0 ~ ~ mremlyr, o r about o n e - b i l l i o n t h

o f t h e annual background dose o f 150 mremlyr. Populat ion doses

w i t h i n 50 m i les o f t he waste. management s i t e are an even smal ler

f r a c t i o n of t h e annual background dose. These very small doses

i n d i c a t e t h a t a d d i t i o n a l expenditures f o r f i l t r a t i o n o r o ther

cleanup systems would be quest ionable. I n d i v i d u a l whole-body

doses f rom the shipment o f waste t o t h e Federal Reposi tory i s

comparat ive ly much h igher than doses rece ived f rom t h e r e t r i e v a l ,

processing, and packaging a l t e r n a t i v e s . However, these doses,

25 mrem/yr t o t h e maximum i n d i v i d u a l , are s t i l ' l o n l y about 20%

o f the i n d i v i d u a l dose rece ived f rom n a t u r a l sources and 5% of

t h e dose al lowed by fede ra l standards (10 CFR 20.,105). Therefore,

m i t i g a t i v e measures would probably not be necessary.

12.4.12 Requirements f o r Long-Term Moni tor ing. Moni to r ing o f

f a c i l i t y e f f l u e n t s and the l o c a l environment would be c a r r i e d ou t

throughout t h e opera t ion and decommissioning phase o f any a l t e r n a t i v e

selected. Th is moni to r ing would prov ide d e t a i l e d data o f t reatment

system performance and o f environmental r a d i o a c t i v i t y l e v e l s r e s u l t i n g

f rom operat ions. It i s expected t h a t opera t iona l re leases would no t

r e s u l t i n any environmental contaminat ion above guide1 i nes r e c e n t l y

es tab l ished (see Subsection 12.4.4).

12.5 SUMMARY

12- 5.1 Nonradiological Environmental Effects. Environmental e f fec ts are inevitable from any action tha t changes the management of the stored TRU waste. On the other hand, concern has been expressed about the environment i f no action i s taken.

Earlier discussions in t h i s section tabulated the estimates of

nonradiologi cal e f fec ts from ' the modules considered. Tables 12-32 and 12-33 s u d a r i z e the major quantitative effects for construction and operations, respectively, fo r each concept.

Each column in each table ends with a reference to the more complete tabulation and accompanying discussio,n i n Subsections 12.2 and

12.3. The summary tables highlight only some of the major e f fec ts . ,

o or example, pollutant emissions are summarized by giving only the estimates for par t iculates , because that i s the only a i r pollutant on ,

the INEL tha t i s now near the allowable 1 imits. More detailed data, for other pollutants, are given by module in the referenced tables.

Similarly, construction material usage i s summarized only in terms of clay and concrete, because of the dominance of these

3 3 3 3 materials, e.g., 990x10 yd of clay and 1200x10 yd of concrete fo r Concept 5-i (shallow disposal of the least-dense

packaging output). The consequences of these materi a1 usages are reflected in the cost estimates of Section 15.

Socioeconomic effects are roughly proportional to changes in d i rec t employment. The summary tables show t h i s as man-years of e f fo r t for the short-term construction work b u t as new jobs for the 1 onger-term operating phase. The direct e f fec ts (new employment, increased income) can be seen as benefits to the local economy, b u t

the labor usage i s an, i r reversible commitment of resources. Secondary employment woul d a1 so cause increased demands for soci a1 services: school ing, health care, recreation, e tc .

TABLE 12-32

SUMMARY OF QUANTITATIVE NONRADIOLOGICAL #IMPACTS (CONSTRUCTION PHASE)

- - Usage (10 jydd) P a r t i c u l a t e , Labor D iese l Fuel

Emission? (man- Usage

Concept .Clay ' Concrete (103 l b s ) a yea rs ) ( 1 0 3 ~ a l )

5-h LMV

5 - i LMV

See Tables 12-6 12-6

I ( a ) From diesel-powered c o n s t r u c t i o n equipment; assumes a l l c o n s t r u c t i o n I p roceeding s imul taneously . 1

( b ) LMV i d e n t i f i e s use o f t he l e s s massive v a r i a t i o n o f t he engineered shal1ow;land d isposa l f a c i l i t y a t S i t e 14.

TABLE 12-33

.SUMMARY OF QUANTITATIVE NONRAD IOLOG ICAL IMPACTS. . (OPERAT IONS PHASE)

Energy Used Particulate Land Em lo ent(b) Diesel

Usage .+06 Electric

( 103 (106 Concept 1 ) . (acres) ~ o b s $/yr) a Y kwh/~r)

5-9 3.9' LMV(~) 2.2 5-h 4.1 LMV 2.4 5-i , 5.6 LMV 3.9

See Tables 12-7

(a) From diesel vehicles or sl agging pyrolysis faci 1 ity stack, only.

( b ) Direct employment only; income in 1977 dollars.

(c) No incremental land usage beyond area in the RWMC currently inause. .

(d) LMV identifies use of the less massive variation of the engineered shallow-land disposal facility at Site 14.

It has been noted, in Subsections 12.2.1 and 12.3.1, that none

I of the air pollutants would exceed existing offsite standards. Most

1 of the effects are . . temporary, limited to the construction period, or

I ceasing after D&D. A significant portion of the land usage would be

I associated with the committed roadway to either Site 14 or to the

I Lemhi. Range. Either roadway could be decommissioned (and the land

I restored to its previous condition), or dedicated to public usage

over most of its length. Although an effect may be measurable, as listed in the summary tables, its impact may be almost unnoticeable,

I or within acceptable standards in terms of the gain to be achieved. These tradeoffs are a matter of judgement and public perception.

12.5.2 Radiological Environmental Impacts. The maximum indi- . __ _I----

vi'dual doses resulting from normal operations of the waste management activities are summarized by a1 ternative or concept in Table 12-34.

I The maximum radiation doses are very small. Doses for a1 ternatives

I 'involving slagging pyrolysis are the highest. However, the annual

whole-body dose from natural sources is approximately 150 mrem/yr, so the small increment of about Z X I O - ~ mrem associated with slagging pyrolysis is not significant.

The calculated doses are so small it would not be cost-effective to pursue mitigating actions beyond those already incorporated in the

.designs being evaluated.. For example, the maximum individual whole- body dose for one year of operation for any of the alternatives is

less than ZXIO-' mrem, compared to the annual natural background doses of 150 mrem (ERDA 1977~). In none of the concepts is there any

cause.for concern about significant radiological environmental impacts from normal operations. (Abnormal operat ions and 1 ong-term re1 ease

scenari-os are discussed in Sections 13 and 14.)

The annual population dose commitments associated with normal waste management operations are sumrnar ized by a1 ternative or concept in Table 12-35.

TABLE 12-34

------- - --- Man agemen t

A1 t e r n a t i ve Maximum I n d i v i d u a l Dose Commitment (mreml t o Oraan o r Tissue . . ..

o r Concept Whole! Body Lung Bone ' ' .- ~ . i ver K i.dney ',

( a ) Values would be unchanged f o r t h e l e s s massive v a r i a t i o n o f the engi- .' .

neered shallow-land disposal f a c i l i t y a t S j t e 14.

TABLE 12-35

LIFETIME POPULATION DOSE COMMITMENTS RESULTING FROM

ONE. YEAR . . OF . NORMAL OPERATION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITIES

I L i f e t i m e Populat ion Dose Commitment

A1 t e r n a t i v e . . . t o Organ o r Tissue (man-rem) . . .

.------- -- o r C,o,ncept' Whole Body Lung - Bone L i ver K i dney

. .

(a) . Values would b e unchanged f o r the l ess massive, v a r i a t i o n o f t he engineered shal low-land d isposal , , f a c i l i t y a t S i t e 14..

The annual popu la t ion dose commitments f rom opera t ion o f the

waste management f ac i 1 i t i e s can be compared w i t h t h e annual popu la t i on

doses f rom.externa1 and i n t e r n a l r a d i a t i o n f rom n a t u r a l sources. I n

1985, t h e p o p u l a t i o n . o f about 136,000 w i t h i n 50 m i les would a l l 2 r e c e i v e approximately 1 . 5 ~ 1 0 mrem/yr f rom n a t u r a l sources.

4 The est imated popu la t ion dose would be about 2x10 man-rem i n

t h a t year. .The l a r g e s t whole-body popuqation dose f rom p u r s u i t

of any waste management a l t e r n a t i v e o r concept .would be about

2 .4x10-~ man-rem, o r 10 orders d f magnitude lower than the pop-

u l a t i on dose f rom na tu ra l sources.

The t o t a l l i f e t i m e popu la t ion dose commitments f rom 10 y r o f

opera t ion o f t he f a c i l i t i e s , du r ing t h e 1985-1995 o r 2005-2015 t ime

per iods, are approximately ten t imes the values tabu la ted above. The

1 arges t p ro jec ted t o t a l dose commitment i s 2 . 4 x 1 0 - , ~ man-+em. Th is

value i s 10 orders o f magnitude lower than t h e .populat ion dose from

n a t u r a l sources rece ived by the l o c a l popu la t i on i n the same 10-yr

ope ra t i ng per iod.

12.5.3 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts. Unavoidable adverse e n v i - -

ronmental impacts associated w i t h t h e p r o p o s a l s ' f o r managing r a d i o -

a c t i v e waste vary i n . k i n d a n d ' i n t e n s i t y w i t h the a l t e r n a t i v e studied.

Those a l t e r n a t i v e s t h a t would r e s u l t i n t he g rea tes t impact are those

t h a t would r e q u i r e the l a r g e s t amount o f c o n s t r u c t i o n and those t h a t

would be most l abo r and energy i n tens i ve .

Unavoidable cons t ruc t i on impacts i nc lude the l oss o f up t o

410 acres, depending on t h e a l t e r n a t i v e , f o r cons t ruc t i on o f f a c i l i -

t i e s . Th is r e s u l t s i n l o s s o f h a b i t a t and commitment o f t h i s land

u n t i l D&D. A d d i t i o n a l h a b i t a t would be l o s t f o r a sho r t t ime by such

cons t ruc t i on - re la ted a c t i v i t i e s as m a t e r i a l min ing and cons t ruc t i on

staging.

Operat ion o f some of the f a c i l i t i e s would be moderately l abo r and

energy i n t e n s i v e and would r e s u l t i n t h e commitment of valuable, non-

renewable resources, i n c l u d i n g labor hours, energy, and p u b l i c funds

(see Table 12-33). Employment leading to population increases in the

area could have adverse effects on public services. The potential for adverse air quality impacts would exist: but is not considered significant (see Subsections 12.2.1 and 12.3.1). There is also a slight

possibility of contamination by hazardous wastes during operations.

Waste from D&D of a retri&al f aci 1 i ty has been accounted for as

input to waste processing. D&D of a processing facility, however, would generate additional waste, some of which would go into sanitary 1 andf i 1 1 s. The contaminated waste would require speci a1 hand1 ing to be designed at the time the facility design itself was finalized.

Except for the long-term commitment of disposal areas, the i

above effects would all be nonradiological. In general, these are typical of any construction activity, and operation that consumes resources. The design, construction, and modes of operation, however, do not represent typical practices or costs; they are characterized by extreme precautions to overcome all conceivable radiological hazards. Incremental radiological effects still can be calculated, and have been in Subsection 12.4, but they are all so .small that measurement

would be impossible. The result is that normal operations and long- . term effects would impose no adverse impacts on the public nor on biota on or off the INEL. Normal operations and long-term effects

would impose no adverse radiological impacts on the public nor on biota on or off the INEL.

13. RADIOLOGICAL RISKS TO THE PUBLIC

13.1 ORGANIZATION OF SECTION

Th is sec t i on addresses the e f f e c t s on the p u b l i c o f acc identa l

o r u n c o n t r o l l e d re leases o f rad ionuc l i des i n t h e waste. . Discussed

i n Subsection 13.2 are the purpose and scope; d e f i n i t i o n s o f terms;.

assumptions and methodology f o r t h e ana lys is ; and long- term hazard

c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t he waste. Subsect ion 13.3 presents, i n summary

form, t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e dose commitment and r i s k c a l c u l a t i o n s f o r t h e

a l t e r n a t i v e s , concepts, and modules descr ibed i n Sect ions 8 through

10. For t h e s h o r t term (up t o 100 y r ) , t h e r e s u l t s presented i nc lude

maximum i n d i v i d u a l and popu la t i on dose commitment, as w e l l as maxim~rrn

i n d i v i d u a l and popu la t i on r i s k . For t h e l ong term (beyond 100 y r ) ,

maximum i n d i v i d u a l and popu la t i on dose commitments are given.

, Most of. t h e remainder o f t h e s e c t i o n (Subsect ions 13.4 through

13.10) discusses the re lease scenarios s tud ied and the d e t a i l s o f t h e

eva lua t ions . (The r e s u l t s o f t h e eva lua t ions are n o t repeated;' t h e

reader should r e f e r back t o Subsection 13.3.) Subsection 13.4 p re-

sents most o f t h e event scenar ios as p a r t o f t h e ana l ys i s o f A l t e rna -

t i v e 1 (Leave As I s ) . Shor t - term r i ,sks and doses(a) are ca l cu la ted '

' f o r a i rbo rne and f o r waterborne re leases. Long-term e f f e c t s (dose

commitments) are then discussed f o r a i rbo rne and f o r waterborne

re leases. Discussions o f subsequent~alternatives, concepts, and ,

modules r e f e r t o t h i s i n i t i a l d iscussion, and m o d i f i c a t i o n s o f t h e .

re lease scenar ios are inc luded where appropr ia te . The same order of

p resen ta t i on i s fo l lowed.

( a ) Hereaf te r , t h e term "dose" i s o f ten used f o r b r e v i t y . However, i t should be understood t h a t dose commitment i s meant, c a l c u l a t e d as descr ibed i n Appendix E.

Health effects estimated to result from the calculated exposures

are discussed in Subsection 13.11, The environmental effects of radio-

nuclide releases due to accidents and natural events are djscussed in Subsection 13.12.

13.2 BACKGROUND

13.2.1 purpose1 and Scope.. The purpose of the risk analysis i s

to evaluate and compare the doses and risks to,the public for the

various alternatives, concepts, and modules studied. Accidental or

uncontrolled~releases of radioactive materials are evaluated in this

section. Normal operational releases are addressed . . in Section 12.

Radiological hazards .to workers are addressed briefly in Section 14. .

The scope of the analysis presented in this section is indicated

by the guidelines of Subsection 7.4.1. The alternatives, concepts, and modules studied are identified in Figure 7-1.

The doses and risks to the public were estimated for the time

period to 100 yr after implementing each waste management alternative or concept. These are referred to as short-term doses and risks.

Depending on the concept or module being. evaluated, the operational .

period could range from 10 to 30 yr (including a postulated 20-yr

delay in retrieving the waste). For some concepts, a 30-yr retriev-

ability phase of disposal was studied.

Long-term effects (dose commitments) - involving times more .than 100 yr after implementation - were estimated for concepts in which the waste would be left, in place or disposed on the INEL. Probabilities

of events generating long-term effects are qualitatively discussed.

However, long-term risks were not calculated because of the difficulty

of reliably predicting probabilities and geologic characteristics into

the far-distant future. Long-term effects at the Federal Repository are not included because they aie being evaluated in other DOE projects.

13.2.2 D e f i n i t i o n o f Risk. The concept o f r i s k i n v o l v e s

n o t o n l y t h e l i k e l i h o o d t h a t a hazardous event w i l l occur, b u t a l s o

t h e consequences, o r e x t e n t o f damage, i f t h e event were t o occur

(NRC 1975). One way t o d e f i n e t h e r i s k t o an i n d i v i d u a l f rom a poten-

t i a l acc iden t i s t o c a l c u l a t e t h e absorbed r a d i a t i o n dose, i n roentgen

e q u i v a l e n t man (rem), and t o m u l t i p l y t h a t dose by t h e es t imated f r e -

quency o r p r o b a b i l i t y o f t h e event i n a g i ven year. ( a ) The p roduc t

o f these two terms i s t h e r i s k , measured i n rem/yr. The p o p u l a t i o n

r i s k , de f i ned as t h e sum o f t h e r i s k s i n c u r r e d by a l l i n d i v i d u a l s i n a

g i ven geographic area, can be expressed i n man-rem/yr.

The f o l l o w i n g example i l l u s t r a t e s how r i s k t o an i n d i v i d u a l can

be ca l cu la ted . An event r e s u l t i n g i n a r e l e a s e y i e l d i n g a ' c a l c u l a t e d <

dose o f 1 rem t o an i n d i v i d u a l , w i t h an expected f requency o f f o u r

t imes p e r year, would have t h e f o l l o w i n g assoc ia ted r i s k :

Dose Frequency R isk

Ana l ys i s o f another event m igh t show a l a r g e r p o t e n t i a l dose and a

lower f requency. I f t h e c a l c u l a t e d dose were 4 rem, and t h e expected

f requency were once i n 100 yr, o r lo- ' e v e n t s l y r , t h e r i s k would

be:

Dose Frequency R isk

4 reh /even t x l oe2 e v e n t s l y r = 0.04 rem/yr

The r i s k assoc ia ted w i t h t h e f i r s t event ( 4 rem/y r ) i s 100 t imes

t h a t o f t h e second e v e n t (0.04 r e m l y r ) . The c a l c u l a t e d r i s k s i n t h i s

a n a l y s i s a re especi a1 l y u s e f u l f o r such comparisons.

( a ) The d i scuss ion i n Subsect ion 13.11 enables t h e i n t e r e s t e d reader t o t r a n s l a t e t h e s t a t e d d e f i n i t i o n of r i s k i n t o one based on. h e a l t h e f f e c t s .

Calculated radiological effects onthe. public, for a given hypo-

thetical or actual release event or collection of events, are often

reported using the terms "maximum individual dose," "maximum indi-

vidual, risk," "population dose," "population risk," and "time-

integrated population risk." These terms are defined in this report as follows:

I .

(1 ) Maximum indivi.dua1 dose -(rem) is that dose commitment

incu,rred by an individual located in an unrestricted area

who .receives the maximum possible dose commitment as a

. res.ul t of the release of radioactive mater i a1 .

(2) Maximum individual risk (remlyr) is calculated for a given

release by multiplying the maximum individual dose commit-

ment (remlevent) by the expected frequency of the re1 ease

(eventslyr) .

( 3 ) Population dose (man-rem) is that dose commitment incurred

by the surrounding population as a result of the release of

radioactive material.

( 4 ) Population risk (man-remlyr) is obtained by mu1 tiplying

the population dose commitment for a given release by the

expected frequency of the re1 ease (eventslyr) .

( 5 ) Time-integrated population risk involves the summation,

or integration, of annual population risks over the duration of'-the operation presenting the risk. Factors repre-

sent in* population growth and decay of radionucl i de; in the

waste' are included in the calculations. The unit of time-

integrated population risk is man-rem, becau4se the risk is

equal to the annual population risk, in man-rem/yr, summed

over a specified number of years.

In this study, the first four measures of dose and risk were

evaluated. Means are provided for evaluating the last measure listed,

as discussed i n t he f o l l ow ing para.graphs. The s p e c i f i c assumptions

l and methods used t o c a l c u l a t e these q u a n t i t i e s a r e descr ibed i n

1 Appendix E.

T ime- in tegra ted v a l Oes o f p o p u l a t i o n i i s k can be es t imated b y

I m u l t i p l y i n g t h e annual r i s k by t h e f a c t o r s i n d i c a t e d i n Tab le " l3 -1 .

I (These p a r t i c u l a r f a c t o r s which a re de r i ved i n Appendix E, app ly o n l y

t o dose commitment. t o t h e .bone. A l though f a c t o r s were n o t d e r i v e d ' f o r

dose commitment t o ' o t h e r organs, t h e c a l c u l a t i o n procedure would be

I s i m i l a r t o t h a t d iscussed here and i n Appendi'x E;) Because severa l

I f a c t o r s are i n v o l v e d i n t h e t i m e - i n t e g r a t i o n process, t h e f a c t o r s i n

Table 13-1 a re o n l y approximate.

1 C a l c u l a t i o n s o f sho r t - t e rm dose commitments and r ' i s k s A

I assumed t h a t r e l eases w ' i l l occur i n 1985. Except as no ted i n ... ,

11 Subsect ions 13.5.3.3, 13.8.4.3.3, and 13.8.4.3.4, calculation,^ o f

11 l ong- term dose commitments assumed t h a t r e l eases w i 11 occur i n 2085.

11 For t h e most s i g n i f i c a n t r e l e a s e scenar ios, t h e long- te rm dose com-:

11 mi tments were a l s o c a l c u l a t e d f o r t imes as much as 25,000 yr' i ' n t o t h e

I f u t u r e . Table 13-1 and Subsect ion 13.2.5 p r o v i d e guidance f o r p r o j e c t -

I i n g re l ease e f f e c t s as much as 1,000,000 y r i n t o t h e f u t u r e .

I TABLE .13-1. . .

I MULTIPLIERS FOR TIME-INTEGRATED RISK TO THE BONE

Time- I n d i v i d u a l I n t e g r a t i o n Popu la t i on

I n t e r v a l - R isk R isk Dominant, ( y r ) M ~ I t ipl i e r M u l t i p l i e r I so topes

, .

13.2.3 Assumptions. A number ~ f ~ a p p r o x i m a t i o n s and s i m p l i f y i n g .

assumptions was used as bases i n per fo rming t h e r i s k analyses (see ,, . Subsect ions 7.4.1.3, 13.2.4, and 13.4 through 13.9). Therefore, t h e

doses and r i s k s presented i n t h i s r e p o r t a re b e s t ~ u s e d f o r broad com-

pa r i sons between concepts. Us ing ,the doses .and r i s k s as abso lu te

numbers (as f o r comparisons w i t h concepts f rom o t h e r waste management

s i t e s ) should be done o n l y w i t h cons ide rab le .cau t ion . . . . .

. .

I n t h e acc iden t s tud ies , i t was assumed t h a t t h e . r e l e a s e .fu.ac.tion

would be t he same f o r a l l n u c l i d e s present . I n r e a l i t y , s e l e c t i v e

processes and m a t e r i a l p r o p e r t i e s , such as v o l a t i l i t y , s o l u b i l i t y , and

chemical form, would promote t h e r e l e a s e o f some n u c l i d e s and t h e

r e t e n t i o n o f o thers .

Several assumptions .are a l s o i m p l i c i t i n t h e use o f t h e

man-rem concept f o r e s t i m a t i n g t h e e f f e c t s o f p o p u l a t i o n dose.

A l i n e a r , non th resho ld r e l a t i o n s h i p between dose and e f f e c t i s

assumed over t h e e n t i r e range o f p o t e n t i a l doses and dose r a t e s

( T a y l o r and Wyckoff 1976; I C R P 1965; NCRPM 1971, 1975; Casare t t 1968;

and NAS-NRC 19/2) . -For a g i ven organ (e.g., bone o r lung) , a l l pe r - . .

sons a re assumed e q u a l l y r a d i o s e n s i t i v e . Somatic e f f .ec ts , such as . .

cancer, a re assumed prop ,o r t iona l t o t h e dose t o t h e r e l e v a n t organ.

The assumptions used f o r HEPA f i l t e r e f f e c t i v e n e s s were developed

by examining severa l sources o f HEPA performance data. .Recommends- t i o n s f o r f i 1 t e r decontaminat ion f a c t o r (DF) i n removing Pu02 aero-

s o l s f r om an a i r stream v a r i e d w ide ly , even though t h e same range o f . . Pu02 p a r t i c l e s i z e s was considered. The h i g h e s t va lues o f DF sug- . :.

gested n e a r l y t h e u l t i m a t e i n f i l t e r performance, w h i l e t h e l owes t .

va lues r e f 1 ec ted p e s s i m i s t i c and p robab l y degraded performance. The

HEPA f i l t e r s r e f e r r e d t o i n t h e p resen t s tudy would be t e s t e d i n p l a c e , '

a t l e a s t t w i c e annua l l y and changed a t f requent i n t e r v a l s as needed..

The DF va lues adopted f o r t h i s , s t u d y l i e near t h e m idd le o f t h e range

i d e n t i f i e d : f o r a s i n g l e - s t a g e HEPA f i l t e r , lo3 ; f o r d double ,

6 stage, 10 .

13.2.4 Risk Ana lys is Methodology. Ca lcu la t i on o f r i s k as I

de f ined i n Subsect.ion 13.2.2 requ i res eva lua t i ng the r a d i o l o g i c a l

dose f rom pos tu l ated re1 eases and es t imat i ng the f requencies o f

occurrence. . I n d i v i d u a l 'opera t iona l steps i n t he a1 t e r n a t ives, con-

cepts, and modules were examined t o i d e n t i f y p o t e n t i a l events lead ing

t o releases. Hazards t y p i c a l l y evaluated were opera t iona l hazards ',

(equipment f a i l u r e s , opera t ing e r ro rs , and u t i 1 i t y outages); n a t u r a l

events (such as earthquakes, tornadoes, volc.anic action', and f l o o d s ) ; '

. and a i r c r a f t crashes. Analyses were a lso performed f o r several h i g h l y

unusual events, such as mete'or i te impact. I n a l l instances,' t he r i s k

f rom these unusual events was found t o be much less than t h a t from the ' "

dominant events l i s t e d i n t h e r e s u l t s .

Where possib le, t he event f requencies o r p r o b a b i l i t i e s used were

based on experience a t t h e RWMC. P r o b a b i l i t i e s f o r o ther events were

based on documented data sources f o r sim' i l 'ar o r r e l a t e d events. I n

some ins,tances, no.adequate data base e x i s t s f o r event p r o b a b i q i t i e s . !

I n such cases, engineer ing judgment was used.

The q u a n t i t i e s o f rad ionuc l i des released. i n t he hypo the t i ca l

acc idents were.est imated based on the i nven to ry present and the f r a c -

t i o n expected t o become mobi le under the assumed accident cond i t ions .

The prev ious d iscussion concerning data sources f o r p r o b a b i l i t i e s a l so

app l i es t o re lease f r a c t i o n s .

The pathways by which'the re1 eased rad ionuc l ides cou ld reach

man are discussed i.n Append.ix E. he movement o f rad ionuc l ides i n

t he environment was cons ide red ' t o occur v i a atmospheric d ispers ion

and t ranspor t o r 'by a' leach ing process i n t o the aqu i fe r w i t h sub-

sequent t ranspor t through the groundwater. The more s i g n i f i c a n t pro-

cesses governing these'pathways are i d e n t i f i e d i n F igu re 12-1. - F o r

most re lease scenarios, i n h a l a t i o n o f a i rborne r a d i o a c t i v e m a t e r i a l

( incqud ing resuspended m a t e r i a l ) was found t o be the dominant pathway

t o man i n the dose c a l c u l a t i o n s . Because the waste cons i s t s main ly o f

alpha-emi t t i n g rad ionuc l ides, t he ex te rna l dose would be expected t o

be much smal ler than the i n h a l a t i o n dose. Other pathways would a l so

be expected to have s imi la r ly small e f f ec t s (Denham e t a l . 1973).

However, uptake of deposited radionucl ides through the food chain t o

man was a lso evaluated.

For scenarios involving t ranspor t via the Snake River Plain

Aquifer, the dominant pathway was assumed t o be drinking water. The

known points of potential exposure are discussed in Section 5. The

r i sk analysis supplements these actual we1 1 . locat ions with two hypo-

t h e t i c a l * wells, one 3 miles andJone 80 miles from the RWMC, which

could yie ld higher doses t h a n f o r the actual lucations.

The population d j s t r ibu t ion used in the evaluations includes

those people residing within a 50-mile radius of the Central Fac i l i -

t i e s Area of the INEL (see Subsection 3.9). This population repre-

sen t s the genera1,public. I t was assumed tha t the current population

wi l l increase uniformly a t a geometric r a t e of l%/yr through the

year 2085. After 2085, the population was assumed to remain constant

(See Guideline (11) in Subsection 7.4.1.3).

The dose and r i sk t o INEL workers not associated with waste

management, represented by the current number of personnel during

normal day-.shift operations, ,were a1 so evaluated. The dose and r i sk

were found to be about 70% of those t o t h k general pub1 ic . These

r e su l t s were not included in the summary tab les , which represent dose

and r i sk t o the general public only. Hazards to waste management

workers are addressed b r i e f l y i n ' s ec t i on 14.

Maximum individual short-term dose and r i sk and short-term pop-

ula t ion dose and r i sk were estimated fo r each a l t e rna t ive and concept

f o r 1985, the year generally assumed for implementation. In ca lcu la t -

ing the doses ' for Alternative 6. (20-yr delay in r e t r i e v a l ) , considera-

t ion was given to the decay of the radionuclides and t o the estimated

increase in population. No s ign i f ican t differences were observed .

between the values calculated f o r 1985 and the l a t e r year of implemen-

t a t i on .

Est imat ion o f long-term r i s k s ( g r e a t e r than 100 y r ) i s much l e s s

c e r t a i n than es t ima t i on o f shor t - te rm r i s k s . P r o b a b i l i t i e s and t imes

o f occurrence f o r r a r e geo log ic events and f o r processes i n t he

d i s t a n t f u t u r e cannot be accu ra te l y p red ic ted . For t he long- term

e v a l u a t i o n s ' o f t h i s study, 'scenarios l ead ing t o waste d i spe rs ion

were pos tu la ted and t h e i r consequences evaluated, genera1l.y based

on a pos tu la ted re lease i n t h e year 2085. I f , under t he worst c i r -

cumstances, t h e r e would be no severe consequence, t he g iven scenar io

was no t considered f u r t h e r . However, i f the re would be severe con-

sequences, a judgment about t h e r e l a t i v e 1 i k e l i h o o d o f t he event was

sometimes found t o be o f value,' i n s p i t e o f the l ack of ' r e l i a b l e data

f o r t h e p r o b a b i l i t y o f t h e scenario. (For example, based on geo log ic

data, i t i s q u i t e l i k e l y t h a t l a v a w i l l f l o w over t he TSA w i t h i n t he ,

nex t 50,000 y r . However, impact o f a g i a n t me teo r i t e on t h e TSA pads

would be h i g h l y u n l i k e l y even i n a p e r i o d o f 1,000,000 y r . ) The con-

sequences were a l so est imated based on a pos tu la ted re lease occu r r i ng I

as much as 25,000 yr' i n t o ' t h e f u t u r e .

13.2.5 Long-Term Hazard C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e INEL TRU Waste.

The INEL TRU waste i s descr ibed i n Subsection 4.3. Thk long- term

hazard c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e s to red TRU waste, i n c l u d i n g decay

daughter products, are descr ibed i n t he f o l low ing paragraphs.

T o t a l a c t i - v i t y i s no t a v a l i d measure o f t h e r e l a t i v e hazard o f

t he rad ionuc l i des i n t he s to red waste. ~adionuc1;des \;ary w ide ly i n

r a d i o t o x i c i t y , w i t h Pu-239 having a h igh s p e c i f i c t o x i c i t y . Pu-239 i s

present i n t he waste i n s u f f i c i e n t q u a n t i t y and has a h a l f - l i f e long

enough t o be considered the p r i n c i p a l i so tope o f concern over t he ti,me 5

pe r i od f rom somewhat l ess than 100 y r up t o about 2 . 5 ~ 1 0 y r .

Table 13-2 g ives the expected rad ionuc l i d e composi t ion o f t h e

s to red I N E ~ TRU waste i n 1985. The t o t a l a c t i v i t y i n the waste i n

1985 w i l l be approx imate ly 12 t imes t h e Pu-239 a c t i v i t y .

The hazards o f t he o ther isotopes i n t he s to red waste can be

r e l a t e d t o t h e hazard o f Pu-239, as f o l l o w s :

. . I

R e l a t i v e Hazard - Concentrat ion o f Nuc l ide X - [ ( M P c ) ~ I Pu-239 ( 13-1 o f Nuc l i de X Concentrat ion o f Pu-239

The q u a n t i t y ~ M P C ) ~ ] ,X r e f e r s t o t he maximum pe rm iss ib le concentra-

t i o n f o r n u c l i d e X i n a i r . Whi le t he r e l a t i v e hazard i s no t a

r e l i a b l e measure o f r i s k , i t prov ides a pe rspec t i ve on the t ime-

dependence o f t he long- term hazards o f t he waste. For example, t he

t o t a l r e l a t i v e hazard f o r t h e waste i n 1985, ' cd lcu la ted us ing Equa-

t i o n 1'3-1 and the a c t i v i t y c o n c e n t r a t i o n s o f Table 13-2, w i 1'1 be o n l y

about f o u r t imes t h e Pu-239 hazard. (See Table 13-3 f o r r e s u l t s and

c a l c u l a t i o n a l d e t a i l s . ) I

TABLE 13-2

\ AVERAGE RADIONUCLIDE COMPOSITION OF INEL TRU WASTE I N 1985

Radionucl ide

PU-238

PU-239

PU-240

PU-241

PU-242

U-233

Am-241

Cm-244

Tota l A c t i v i t y ( C i )

.. -

TOTAL

A c t i v i t y Concentrat ion (bCi /g o f Waste)

13.2 ~ C i / g o f waste

( a ) values are taken f rom ~ h ' a r t of Nucl ides, 12 th ed, General E l e c t r i c (1977).

TABLE 13-3

RELATIVE HAZARD OF WASTE RADIONUCLIDES RELATIVE TO PLUTONIUM-239 I N 1985

Most R e s t r i c - Concentrat ion o f

t i ve Ocsu,pa- a Radionucl i d e X (MPC), Pu-239 .Re la t i ve , ,

Radio- t i o n a l , ( M P C ) ( ~ ) Concentrat ion o f (MPC ) . . Haz,ard, -

n u c l i d e (pci /cm3) - Pu-239 ,Radionucl i d e X 1 9 8 5 ( ~ ) , ,.

TOTAL 3.76, 4

. . ,

( a ) (MPC), - Maximum pe rm iss ib le a i r concent ra t ion .

( b ) Pu-239 hazard s e t a t 1 .O. . . . ' , . ..

. . . For t ime pe r i ods beyond 1985, t h e r e l a t i v e . hazard o f each n u c l i d e

changes due t o r a d i o a c t i v e decay. Many o f t he nuc l i des i n Table 13-2

produce r a d i o a c t i v e daughter products o r chains o f daughter products

t h a t must be cons idered i n e v a l u a t i n g t h e long- term hazard o f t h e

p a r e n t nuc l i des . For some n u c l i d e s and f o r some l i m i t e d t ime per iods ,

t h e ingrowth o f h igh-hazard daughter nuc l i d e s r e s u l t s i n an inc rease

, w i t h t i m e o f t h e r e l a t i v e hazard. Table 13-4 i l l u s t r a t e s t h e . t i m e

dependence o f t he r e l a t i v e hazard o f t he pa ren t and daughter n u c l i d e s

i n she s to red .waste. . ., . .

The r e l a t i v e hazard o f s t o r e d waste nuc l i des , i n c l u d i n g daughter

products , as a f u n c t i o n o f t ime, i s g iven i n Table 13-5. The predomi-

nan t hazards a t 0 and 100 yr a f t e r 1985 r e s u l t f rom Pu-238, Pu-239, 3 4 5 an-d Am-241 and t h e i r daughter products . A t 10 , 10 , and 10 y r ,

6 . . t h e predominant hazard i s f rom Pu-239. A t 10 yr, Am-241 predomi-

nates. ' The t o t a l r e l a t i v e hazard i s reduced by about a f a c t o r o f 3 . ? 3 4 * 5 a f t e r 10 yr, 5 . a f t e r 10 yr, 50 a f t e r 10 yr, and 400 a f t e r

I

6 . . 10 yr. ., , : . , , .

. . TABLE 13-4

CHANGE I N RELATIVE HAZARD OF RADIONUCLIDES AS A FUNCTION OF TIME

--- .-+ ~ime,~-i-985, ( y r ) - .- p

~ u c l i d e ( ~ ) 0 (bi - loL 1 o3 1 0- 10" l o U

( a ) Inc ludes decay daughter , p roduc t s o f nuc1,ide ind ica ted . . I ,

( b ) ~ e l a t i v e hazard f o r a l l nuc l ' ides s e t a t 1.0 f o r 0 yr. a ' f t e r 1985.

TABLE 13-5 < . . . \ . .

: . ,: , ,: , . , ; ' .

Relative ~azard'~' of Nuclide Parent and Daughters at

Specified Time After 1985 (yr) Nucl i de 0 1 o2 1 o3 1 o4 1 o5 1 o6

TOTAL 3.8~10' 2.8x1oo 1 .4x10° . 8.3~10-I 8.0x10-~ 9.1~10'~~

(a) , Pu-239 hazard set at 1 .0x1o0 in 1985:(Oyr after 1985). 1, . . ,

It is also o'f interest to examine the activity of the waste as a .. . . > ,

function of time. As shown in Table 13-2, the total concentration of . . '

transuranic nucl'ides in 1985 will be about 13.2 ~Ci/g (,13,200 nCi/g). ' . '

This assumes that the activity of the most important 'transuranic . ,

daughter product (Am-241) would be at its peak value at that time.

Table 13-6 shows the time dependence of the total concentration' of. . .

transuranic nuclides in the stored waste. The predominant nuclides ,.

(including daughter products) are given in order of their concentra- 5 6 tion at each time. Between 10 and 10 yr after 1985, the con- . , ,

c e n t r a t i o n of t r ansu ran i cs w i l l drop below 10 nCi/g, t h e c u r r e n t

lower concen t ra t i on l i m i t f o r waste t o be c l a s s i f i e d as t ransu ran i c -

contaminated.

TABLE 13-6 "

TOTAL CONCENTRATIONS OF TRANSURANIC NUCLIDES I N THE TRANSURANIC STORAGE AREA

- TSA

Time A f t e r Concentrat ion 1985 ( y r ) Predominant Nucl ides (nCi./g)

13.3 SUMMARY OF RESULTS

For t he waste management a l t e r n a t i v e s , concepts, and modules

s tudied, summary Tables 13-7 through 13-18 present t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e

dose and r i s k analyses.(a) For a l t e r n a t i v e s and concepts t h a t con-

s i s t o f more than one module, t h e r e s u l t s are g iven f o r each module

( i f t he r e s u l t s have no t been g iven p r e v i o u s l y ) .

Inc luded i n t h e t a b l e s are re lease f r a c t i o n s (RF), event f r e -

quencies, and decontaminat ion f a c t o r s (DF). The RF i s t he f r a c t i o n o f

t h e t o t a l i nven to ry o f t h e waste t h a t would be re leased t o t h e env i -

ronment, i.e., t he f r a c t i o n o f a l l waste p r o j e c t e d t o be i n s torage

( 4 . 2 ~ 1 0 ~ C i i n 1985). The DF i s discussed i n Subsection 13.2.3.

( a ) Some o f t he r e s u l t s presented i n these summary tab les may d i f f e r somewhat f rom t h e corresponding r e s u l t s presented i n t h e D r a f t Environmental Impact Statement, Waste I s o l a t i o n P i l o t P lan t , Carlsbad, New Mexico. The present r e s u l t s represent a more recent , improved c a l c u l a t i o n .

TABLE 13-7

SUPHARV OF ACCIDENT EFFECTS FMI ALTERNATIVE 1: LEAVE AS IS

Event Maximum Ind iv idua l Populat ion Release Freq ore rem s rem ore man-rem s man-re IT

Releases - Fract. 2 Body one L ung ~ody" one^^^ ~ u n g & ' ~ o n e ~ u n a BOG' k' ~ o n a

AIRBORNE

Shor t -Ten

Explosive Volcano 2xK)-3 4x10-9 3x10-2 1x101 2x101 1x10-10 4x10-8 8x10-8 4x101 2 x 1 0 ~ 4x104 2x10'~ .8x10-5 2x10'~

Earthquake 5x10-10 ' 2x10-6 5x10-9 3x104 5x10-6 1x10-14 5x10-12 1x10-11 1x10-5 5x10-3 1x10-f 2x10-)1 1x10-8 2x10-8 Mackay 0am(a) ' 6110-6 2x10-3 4x10-8 8x10-5 2x10-4 .8x10-11 2x10-? . 4x10-7 6x10-~ 1 x 1 ~ ~ 2 x I U l x 1 0 - ~ 2x10-~ - '4x10-~

Lava la(^) lx10-2 6x10-5 1x10-1 7x101 1x102 6x10-6 4x10-3 6x10-3 2x102 1x105 2x10~ 1 x 1 0 - ~ 6 x 1 0 ~ 1x10~

~ o n g - ~ e n n ( c )

~ a v a FI (b) 1x l '0 -~ N C ( ~ ) 3 x 1 0 - ~ 5 x 1 0 ~ 104 v 3 b ) 1x10-2 nc 5x10-3 2x101

Erosion Ulnd P i c k u ~ NC 1 x 1 0 - ~ 4x10-~ In t rus ion

(Excavation f o l - l o u i n Erosion: - . 7x10-9 c inhnled)/e) n / n ( f ) rc 2x10-5 2110-~

In t rus ion (Farming) Ingest( n (5x10-g t i / y r ) . N/A NC 8x10-5 2x100

lnha la t on ( 1 ~ 1 0 - 1 ~ l / ~ r ) ( ~ ) N/A NC 3 x 1 0 ~ ~ 6x10~

Tornado 3x10-3 NC 9x10-: 1x101 Mactay am(^) l x 1 0 ' ~ NC 3x10- 8 x 1 0 - ~ Earthquake 5x10-9 NC 2110-8 2110-5

Shor t -Ten

Mackay am(^) 1 x 1 0 - ~ 2 x l 0 - ~ 3x10-9 1 x 1 0 - ~ N/A 6x10-12 ~ x l 0 - ~ NIA 1x10-9 , 3x10-5 N/A 2 ~ 1 6 ' ~ 6110-8 N/A

~ o n d ~ e n n ( c )

Mack ay Dam 1 x 1 0 - ~ NC 3x10-9 l x 1 0 - ~ N/A NC NC Nc 3 x l 0 - ~ 7x10-5 N/A NC NC NC

. . River Channe A l t e r a t i o n l b ) 1.~10-i ' NC 3x10-7 1x10-2 N/A ' NC ' NC -NC 3x10-7 7 x 1 ~ 3 N/A NC NC ' NC

Groundwater Var ia t ion

Glac ia t ion C1 Change. ;tc.lkfte ' l x 1 0 - ~ NC 3x10-~ l x 1 0 - ~ N/A NC NC NC 3 x l 0 - ~ 7 x 1 ~ ~ NIA NC NC NC

(a) Resuspension by wind pickup.

(b) Dominant event.

( c ) Includes 1% populat ion growth t o 2085 and assumes 100 y r decay of radionucl ides unless otherwise specified.

(d) NC = Not calculated because o f the d i f f i c u l t y o f r e l i a b l y pred ic t ing p r o b a b i l i t i e s and geologic charac ter is t ics I n t o the d is tant future. . .

(e) Intake l i s t e d i s tha t for maximum ind iv idua l . .

( f ) NIA = Not applicable.

(9) Maximum ind iv idua l doses and r i s k s are based on use of 3-mile well; populat ion doses and r i s k s on use o f 80-mile wel l . Because. i n the analysis ,f waterborne releases, the maximum ind iv idua l i s not included i n the populatfo?. dose and r f s k t o maxlmum .fndlvidual may be la rger than those t o populat ion. '. .

TABLE 13-8

SUMMAAV OF ACCIOENT EFFECTS FOR CONCEPT 2-a: IMPROVE CONfINfMENT - ABOVE AND AROUND

Maximum Ind iv idua l N .- Event Dose, rem Risk, remlyr Dose, man-rem Risk, m a n - r e m l y r

Release Freq Releases Fract. Body - Bone Lung Body Bone Lung Body Bone Lung Body Bone Lung

AIRBORNE

Shor t -Ten -- Explo i lve

Vol :an0 2x10-3 4x10-9 '3x10-2 l x l 0 l 2x10~ 1x10-10 4x10-~" 8x10-8 4x10~ 2 x 1 0 ~ 4 x 1 0 ~ 2x10 '~ 8x10-5 t x 1 0 - ~ Earthquake 1x10-10 2 x 1 ~ - 6 1x10-9 8x1~-? IXIU'G ZXIU-15 IXIU'IL ~ x I u - ' ~ ~ X I U - ~ I X I U - ~ Z X I U - ~ 4x10-l2 2x10-9 4x10-9 Mackzy 0am(a) 1~10-7 2x10-3 8x10-10 2x10-6 4x10-6 2x10-12 4x10-9 8x10-9 1 x 1 0 ' ~ 2x10'~ 4x10*~ 2x10-9 4110-6 8x10-6

~ a v a F I ~ ( ~ ) 1 x 1 0 - 4 ' 6x104 1x10-3 7x10-1 lxl0O 6x10-8 4x10-5 6x10-! 2x100 1x103 2x103 IXIO-~ 6~10.2 1x10-1

~on~-Tenn(c !

~ a v a FI (b) 1x10-2 N C ( ~ ) 3x10-2 5x101 9rlD1 NC wc NC 1x102 2x105 4x105 NC nc NC 104 v?b) IXIO-~ NC 5x10-3 2x101 . lx10~ NC NC NC 2x101 1x105 6x1D4 NC NC NC

Erosion Mind Pickup NC 1 x 1 0 - ~ 4x10-1 8x10-I NC NC NC 5x10" 2x103 4x103 NC NC NC In t rus ton

(Excavation f o l - I m i n Erorion: 7x10-9 C inha led) le ) N / A ( ~ ) NC 2x10-5 2x10-2 4 x 1 0 - ~ NC Nc nc 7 x l 0 - ~ '1x102 2x102 NC NC NC

In t rus ion (Farming) l n g e s t i n (5x10-8 c i l y r ) MIA NC 8x10-5 2 x 1 0 ~ I I A NC NC NC 8 x 1 0 - ~ 2x101 MIA NC NC NC

Inha la t 'on (1x10-j ~ ? l y ~ ) ( ~ ) MIA -NC 3x10-3 6x101 6x101 NC ' NC NC 3x10-~ 5,102 5x102 NC NC NC

Tornado 3x10-3 n t 9x10-3 l x l O l 3 x 1 0 ~ NC NC NC 4x101 6 x 1 0 ~ 1 x 1 0 ~ NC NC NC Mrckay 0am(a) IX IO-~ NC 3x10-7 8 x 1 0 - ~ Z X I O - ~ NC ' NC NC lxlO-: 3x100 7 x 1 0 ~ NC NC NC Earthquake 5x10-9 NC 2x10'8 2 x 1 0 - ~ 4 x 1 0 - ~ NC NC NC 7x10- 1x10-~ 2x10-~ NC NC NC

MATERBMINE(P)

Short-Term

~ a c k a y 0am(b) 2110-5 2x10-3 6x10-10 2x10-5 NIA 1x10'~2 4x10-8 NlA 6x10.~ NIA 4x10-l3 1x10-8 NIA

Long ~ e n ( c )

Mackay Dam l x l ~ - ~ NC 3x10-9 1x10'~ NlA HC NC NC 3 x l 0 - ~ 7x10-~ NIA NC NC NC

River Channe A l t e r a t i o n l b )

Groundwater Var ia t ion 1 x 1 0 - ~ NC 3 x 1 0 - ~ 1x10'~ N/A NC fit NC 3x10-~ 7x10'~ N/A NC NC NC

Glac ia t ion Cl Change, ;tc.ls!te 1110-2

- (a) Resuspension by wind pickup.

(b) Ilominant event.

( c ) Includes 1% population growth t o 2085 and assumes 100 y r decay o f radionucl ides unless otherwise specified.

( d l hC Not calculated because of the d i f f i c u l t y of r e l i a b l y pred ic t ing p r o b a b i l i t i e s and geologic charac ter is t ics i n t o the d i s t a n t future. .

(e) Intake l i s t e d i s t h a t for maximum ind iv idua l .

( f ) N/A = Not wp l icab le .

(g) Maximum ind iv idua l doses and r i s k s are based on use Of 3-mile wel l ; populat ion doses and r i s k s on use of 80-mile wel l . Because, i n the analysis 0:' waterborne releases. the maximum ind iv idua l i s m t included i n the population, dose and risk. t o maximum Indtv idua l may be l a r g e r than those t o populat ion.

Uaximrm Individual Populatton -.

Event Dose, rm ~ t s k , r m l y r uose, man-rem Rtsk, man-rant: Release Freq.

Releases Fract. Body - Bone Lung Bone Lung Body Bone Lvng Body Bone ,Lung.

AIRBORNE

Short-Term

Explosive Yolcano 2x10-3 4x10-9 3x10-2 1x101 2x101 1x10-10 4x10-B 8x10-8 0x101 zr104 0x104~ Z X ~ O ~ { ~ B~IO-5 2 ~ 1 0 - ~

Earthouake )xlO-10 ~ ~ 1 0 - 6 1~10-9 axlo-7 1110-6 2~10-15 1x10‘12 2 x 1 0 - ~ ~ 2x10 -~ l x l ~ - ~ 2x10 4x10 2x10-9 4x10-9 Mackay 0am(a) 1x10-7 2x10-3 6x10-10 2~10 -6 4x10-6 2110-12 4x10-9 8x10-9 1 x 1 0 - ~ 2x10 -~ dx10 -~ 2~10 -9 4x10-6 8x10-6

~on~ -Tenn (c ) i

~ a v a FI (b) 1x10-2 nc(d) 1x10-2 5x101 9x101 NC NC nc 1x102 2x105 4x10~ NC WC WC 104 y 7 b l 1x10-2 uc 5x10-3 2~101 1x101 NC NC NC 2x101 la105 6x10~ Nt KC NC

Erosion Mind Pickup NC 1x10-~ 4x10-1 8x10-I NC* WC IC 5x10-~ 2x103 4x10~ hK KC K intrusion

(Excavation f o l - l w i n Erosion: 7110-9 C inhaled)le) N / A ( ~ ) NC 2x10-5 2x10-2 4x10-2 NC NC wc 7 x 1 0 - ~ 1x102 2al0Z KC NC nc

In t rus ion (Farminal lngest i n (5x10-g c i l v r ) MIA NC 8x10-5 2xl& NIA NC K NC 8 1 1 0 - ~ 2x101 NIA KC lr NC

lnhalat on (1x10-1 t i l y r ) ( e l H/A Nt 3x10-3 6x101 6x10~ nc wc Nc ~ X I O - ~ 5x102 5x10~ Nc nc Nc

Tornado 3x10-3 NC 9x10-3 1x10) 3x101 NC NC NC 4x10~ 6x10~ 1x10~ NC NC NC Mackay Dam(a) I ~ I O - ~ NC 3x10-~ Bx10-~ 2x10-3 NC NC WC 1x10:: 3x100~ 7x10~ NC MC MC Earthquake 5x10-9 NC 2x10 -~ 2110-5 4x10 -~ NC NC NC 7x10 1x10 2x10 -~ NC NC NC

Short-Term

n a c k u o d b ) 5x10-6 ~ ~ 1 0 - 3 1x10-10 6x104 NIA 2x10-13 1x10-0 ,NIA 6 x 1 0 - ~ ~ 1 ~ 1 0 - ~ NIA l x 1 0 - ~ ] 2x10'~ NIA

Long ~ e n n ( c )

Mackay Dam l x l ~ - ~ NC 3x10-9 1x10-4 NIA NC ' WC NC 3x10-9 7x10-5 NlA NC NC K

River Channe ~ l t e r a t i o n l b ) 1x10-2 WC 3x10-7 1x10-2 NIA NC WC nc 3x10 -7 7x10-] NIA NC It IC

Groundwater Variat ion

Glaciat ion C1 Change, kc. 1x10-2 NC 3x10-7 1x10-~ NIA NC NC NC 3x10 -7 7x10 -I #/A wc & NC

( a ) Resuspension by wind.plckup.

(b) Ominant event.

(c) Includes 1% Population growth t o 2085 and assumes 100 y r decay of radionucl ides unless otherwise specified.

(d) NC = Not calculated because of the d i f f i c u l t y of , re l iab ly pred ic t ing probabi l i t ies and geolog!c character is t ics i n t o the d is tant future.

(e) Intake l i s t e d i s that f o r m a x i m Indivldual.

( f ) N/A . Not applicable.

(9) Maximum ind iv idua l doses and r i s ks are based on use of I -mi le well ; population doses and r i s ks on use of 80-mile wel l . Because. i n the analysis o waterborne releases. the maximum ind iv idua l i s not irsluded i n the population, dose and r i s k t o mdximwn individual may be larger than those t o population.

TABLE 13-10

S W Y OF ACCIDENT EFFECTS FOR COWCEPT 2-c: IMPROVE COWIUEIIEWT - IWOBILIZATIOW

LV.23,. n a r l m m I ~ U I V I O Y ~ I ropularron Release Freq ose rm s rm se man-rm s man-rp r;---'

Releases Fract. Body B one ' L ung ~ o d y " k'~onelyr lung BOG 'none ~ u n g BO;' " none y3- AIRBORNE

Short-Tenn

E x ~ l o s i v e Volcano 2x10-5 4x10-9 3 x 1 0 ~ ~ 1x10-1 2x10-1 1x10-12 4x10-10 8 x 1 0 - ~ 0 4x10-I 2110~ 4.102 2.10-9 ~ X I O - ~ .IO-:,

Earthquake 5~10-12 2110-6 5x10-11 3x10-8 5x10-8 1x10-16 5x10-l4 1 x 1 0 - ~ ~ l x l ~ - ~ 5110-~ 1 ~ 1 0 ' ~ 2x10-l3 1 ~ 1 0 ' ~ ~ ' ~ 1 3 - Mackay am( a) 6x10-9 2x10-3 4x10-11 8x10-8 2x10-7 8110-14 2x10-10 4x10-10 6x10-6 I X I O - ~ ~ 1 1 0 ' ~ 1x10-10 Z X I O - ~ I.IO-'

Lava ~ l m ( b ) 1x10-4 6x10-5 1x10-3 7x10-1 1x100 6x10-8 4110-5 6x10'~ 2 x 1 0 ~ 1x103 2 x 1 0 ~ I ~ I O - ~ 6 ~ 1 0 - ~ ' X I O - '

~ a v a F1 (b) I X I O - ~ Ut(d) 3 x 1 0 - ~ 5x10-~ 9x10-I W t NC UC 1x100 2x103 4x103 WC UC NC 104 Y Y ~ ) 1x10-2 wc 5x10-3 2x101 1x101 nc nc ~c 2x101 1x105 6x104 u t uc n~

Erosion mind Pickup WC 1x10-6 4x10-3 8110-3 NC n t UC 5 x l 0 - ~ 2 x 1 0 1 4x101 UC NC NC ln t rus ion

(Excavation Fol- l w i n Erosion: 7x10-1 C i rha led) te) . M / A ( ~ ) NC 2x10-7 2x10-4 4x10-~ NC wc uc 7 x l 0 - ~ lx10O 2x100 wc UC NC

In t rus ion (Farming) Ingest1 n' (8x10-g C i l y r ) NIL NC 8x10-7 2x10-2 RIA MC MC UC B x 1 0 - ~ 2110-1 WIA NC C NC

lnha la t on 2 1 0 c l Y r e NIA WC 3x10-5 6x10-1 6x10-1 WC uc wc 3x10-1 5 ~ 1 0 0 5x100 nc K uc

Tornado 3 x 1 0 - ~ WC 9x10-5 ' 1x10-1 3x10-1 UC MC uc 1 0 6 x 1 0 1 1 0 uc uc IC Mackay Dada) 1x10‘~ WC 3x10-10 8x10-7 ~ x l O - ~ UC WC UC 1x10-6 3.10-3 7110-3 WC K UC . Earthquake 5x10-~1 NC 2x10-10 Z X ~ O - ~ 4x10-~ NC ~t Nt 7.10-7 1110-3 2x10-3 UC MC UC

Short-Term

Mackdy 0am(b) l x 1 0 - ~ Z X I O - ~ 3x10-" 1x10'6 NlA 6x10-l4 2x10-9 NlA l x 1 0 - ~ ~ 3 x 1 0 - ~ UIA 2x10-14 6x10'10 N/A

Long ~ e n n ( c )

Mackw Dam F a l l u r e 1x10-6 NC 3x10-11 . 1x10-6 MIA WC C nC 3x10-~' 7 r 1 0 - ~ MIA C UC UC

River Channe A l t e r a t i o n l b ) l x 1 0 - ~ NC 3x10-9 l x l ~ - ~ RIA WC NC UC 3x10-9 ~ ~ I o - ~ ~ W I A UC UC NC

Groundwater Var ia t ion 1 x 1 0 - ~ NC 3x10-l1 1x10-6 UIA WC UC, fC 3 x l 0 - ~ ~ 7 x 1 0 ~ ~ NIA C WC Nt

Glac ia t lon C l Change. ;tc.tgjtic 1110-4 WC 3x10-9 1x10-4 UIA UC C UC ' 3 x 1 0 - ~ 7x10'5 RIA UC MC NC

(a) Resuspensicm by wlnd pickup.

(b) Dominant event.

( c ) Imludes IS populat ion growth to 2085 and assumes 100 yy decay of radionucl ides unless otherwise specified.

( d l Nt Not calculated because of the difficulty of r e l i a b l y pred ic t ing p r o b a b i l i t i e s and geologic charac ter is t ics In to the d is tant future.

( e l Intake l i s t e d i s tha t for maximum indivtdual.

( f ) NIA = Not appl icable.

(9) Naxlmum ind iv idua l doses and r i s k s are based M use of 3-mile well; populat ion doses and r i s k s on use o f 80-mlle wel l . Because. i n the analysis of waterborne releases, the maximum indiv(dua1 I s not included i n the population, dose and r i s k t o m a x i m ind iv idua l may be la rger than those t o populat lon.

TABLE 13-11

SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT EFFECTS: RETRIEVAL

Event Maximum I n d i v i d u a l Popul a t i o n A i rborne Release Oecon. Freq. Dose, rem Risk, remly r Dose, man-rem Risk, man-remlyr Re1 eases Frac t . Fac to r y r Body B Lung B od . v 8 one Lung O ~ Y Bone Lung Body B one L ung -- - - one

Short-Term

Exp los ive ~ o l c a n o ( a ) 2 x 1 0 - ~ 1.0 4 x 1 0 - ~ 3 x 1 0 - ~ 1 x 1 0 ~ 2x101 1x10-10 4 x 1 0 - ~ 8210-8 4x101 2 x 1 0 ~ 4 x 1 0 ~ 2.<10-~ 8:<10-~ 2 x 1 0 - ~

~ a v a ~ l o w ( a 9 ~ ) 1 x 1 0 - ~ 1.0 6 x 1 0 - ~ 1 x 1 0 - ~ 7 x 1 0 ~ 1x102 6 x 1 0 - ~ 4 x 1 0 - ~ 6x10-3 2x102 1x105 2 x 1 0 ~ 1 x 1 0 - ~ 6x10° 1 x 1 0 ~

Tornado 1 x 1 0 - ~ 1.0 . 5 ~ 1 0 - 7 lX1o-6 7x10-4 1x10-3 5x10-13 4 ~ 1 0 - ' ~ 5x10-~O 2x10-3 l x l o O . 2 x 1 0 ° l x l ~ - ~ 5 x 1 0 - ~ 1 x 1 0 - ~ D

Oropped Conta iner 7 ~ 1 0 - 1 0 103 lX1o-2 7x10-12 5x10-9 7x10-9 7x10-14 5x10-~ ' 7x10-l1 1 x 1 0 - ~ 7 x 1 6 ~ I X I O - ~ l x 1 0 - ~ O 7 x 1 0 - ~ l x l ~ - ~

A

w ~ i r e ( c ) I

4 x 1 0 - ~ 101 I X I O - ~ 6 x 1 0 - ~ ~ X I O - ~ ~ X I O - ~ 6x10-10 3 x 1 0 - ~ 4 t 1 0 - ~ 8x10-4 4 x 1 6 ' 8 x 1 6 ' 8x10-7 4x10-4 8x10-4 A

a A i r c r a f t Impact U i t h F i r e 9 x 1 0 - ~ 1.0 " 9 x l 0 - ~ O 1 x 1 0 - ~ 6 x 1 0 - ~ 9 x 1 0 - ~ 9x10- l4 5x10- ' l . 8 < 1 t J l 1 2x10-I 9x101 ?x102 2 x 1 ~ ~ ~ 8 x 1 0 - ~ ~ X I O - ~

T r a n s f e r Accident 6x:V9 1.0 1 x 1 0 - ~ . 9 x 1 0 - ~ ~ X I O - ~ 6 x 1 0 - ~ 9x10- l4 3 x l r 1 ! ' 6 x 1 ~ " l x l ~ - ~ 6x1tJ2 l x l t J 1 1 x 1 ~ ~ ~ 6 x 1 0 - ~ l x l ~ - ~

T rans fe r Accident W i t h F i r e 6x i o - ~ 1.0 - 3 x 1 0 - ~ 9 x 1 0 - ~ 3x10-3 6x10-3 3x10- l2 9 x l r 1 0 2 x 1 ~ ~ 1 x 1 0 - ~ 6x10° 1 x 1 0 ~ 3x10-9 2 x 1 0 4 2x10-6

( a ) These scenar ios app ly p r i n c i p a l l y t o waste remain ing on the pads dur ing t h e campaign and do nu t apply t o r e t r i e v a l operat ions, pe r se.

I ( b ) Dominant event .

( c ) Dominant event r e l a t e d t o r e t r i e v a l operat ions.

TABLE 13-12

.'SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT EFFECTS: SLAGGING PYROLYSIS AND PACKAGING

Event . . Maximum I n d i v i d u a l Popul'at i o n A i rborne Release Oecon. Freq. Dose, rem Risk, r e m l y r Dose, man-rem Risk, man-rem/yr

F r a c t . F a c t o r . y r - 1 - # Body Releases . . Bone Lung Body Bone Lung Body Bone Lung Body B one L ung

SHORT-TERM

Waste P r e p a r a t i o n Area

Dropped Conta iner 7x10-lo 106 1x10-2 7x10-15' 5 x 1 0 - ~ ~ 7 x l 0 - ~ ~ 7x10- l7 5x10- l4 7 x 1 0 - l ~ 1 x 1 0 - ~ ~ 7x10:; 1 1 0 l x 1 0 - ' ~ 7 x 1 0 - ~ ~ 1 x 1 0 - ~ ~

F i r e 1x10-6 103 1 x 1 0 - ~ 1 x 1 0 - ~ 7x1W6 l x l W 5 l x 1 0 - ~ O 7x10-8 1x10-7 2 x 1 0 - ~ 1x10 2x10 2x10-7 1x10-4 2x10-4 Exp los ion . 2 x 1 0 4 lo3 1 x 1 0 - ~ 2 x 1 0 - ~ 1 x 1 0 - ~ 2x10-5 2x10-11 1x10-8 2x10-8 4x10-5 2 x 1 0 - ~ 4x10-' 4x10-8 2x10-5 4x10-5

P y r o l y s i s Area A

W I F i r e 1 x 1 0 - ~ : 103 1 x 1 0 - ~ 1 x 1 0 - ~ 0 7 x 1 0 - ~ I X I O - ~ 1 ~ 1 0 - l 2 7x10- lo 1 ~ 1 0 - 9 Z X I O - ~ 1 ~ 1 0 - ~ 2 x l ~ - 4 2 ~ 1 0 - 9 1 ~ 1 0 - 6 2 ~ 1 0 ~ 6

Tornado/Fai led Off-Gas Duct 3x10-8 1.0 5 x 1 0 - ~ ~ X I O - ~ 2!10-~ 3 x 1 0 - ~ 2x10-l3 l x 1 0 - ~ O 2 x 1 0 - ~ O 5 x 1 0 - ~ 3x10- I 4x101 2 x 1 0 - ~ O 1x10-7 .2x10-7

. ,

Sh ipp ing Area . -

F i r e 1x10-9 lo3 1 x 1 0 - ~ 1 x 1 0 - ~ ~ 7 x 1 0 - ~ 1 x 1 0 - ~ I X I O - ~ ~ 7 x 1 0 ' ~ ~ l x 1 0 - ~ O 2 x 1 0 - ~ 1 x 1 0 - ~ . 2 x l 0 - ~ 2 x 1 0 - ~ O 1x10'7 2x10-7

1 Tornado 1x10-8 1.0 5x10-7 1 x 1 0 - ~ 7 x 1 0 - ~ I X I O - ~ 5x10- l4 3x10- l1 5x10- l1 2x10-4 I X I O - ~ 2x10- I IXIO-~O 5x10-8 lX1o-7

(a ) Dominant Event.

TABLE 13-13

SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT EFFECTS: SHIPMENT OF PROCESSED WASTE TO FEDERAL REPOSITORY . .

. ~

Event Maximum I n d i v i d u a l Popu la t ion

Ai rborne Release Freq. Dose, rem Risk, remly r Dose, man-rem - Risk, man-remlyr

Releases Frac t . -- ~ r - 1 Body Bone ~ o d y Bone Lung Body Bone Lung Body Bone Lung Lung - -

-

[ a) ' Dominant event.

!b) Assumes a popu la t ion dens i t y approximately the same as the INEL s i t e . . . . .

( c ) . . Assumes a populat ion d e n s i t y o f about 8 t imes"the INEL' s i t e .

(d) Sig 'n i f i c a n t re leases i n urban accidents would not be expected. because speeds invo lved would n& be s u f f i c i e n t . to. r e s u l t i n breach o f ATMX r a i l c a r .

TABLE 13-14

SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT EFFECTS: COMPACTION AND IMMOBILIZATION

Event Maximum I n d i v i d u a l P o p u l a t i o n

A i r b o r n e Release Decon- Freq. , . Dose, rem - .R i sk , r e m l y r Dose, man-rem . R isk , man-rernlyr

F r a c t . F a c t o r y r -1 Releases Body Bone Lung Body Bone Lung Body 3one Lung. Body Bone Lung

SHORT-TERM

Waste P r e p a r a t i o n Area

E x p l o s i o n 2 x 1 0 - ~ l o3 l x l ~ - ~ 2 x 1 0 - ~ 1 x 1 0 - ~ 2 x 1 0 - ~ 2x10 - l 1 1x1Cf8 2x1U8 4 ~ 1 0 - ~ 2 x 1 1 ~ ~ d x l U 2 4x1U8 2x10-5 4x10-5

Compact ion A r e a , -

~ r o p p e d

Container: . l x l ~ - ~ l o 6 ' 8 x l 0 - ~ 1 x 1 0 - ~ ~ 7x10 - l 2 1x10-" 8x10 '~ ' 6 x 1 ~ ' ~ 8 x 1 ~ " 2 x 1 ~ " 1 x 1 5 ~ 2x1U8 2x1U13 8 x 1 ~ " 2 x 1 ~ ~ ~

ire(^) ~ X I O - ~ l o 3 1 ~ 1 0 - ~ 6 x 1 0 - ~ 3 ~ 1 0 - ~ 4 ~ 1 0 - ~ 6x10 - l 1 3 ~ 1 0 - ~ 4 x 1 0 - ~ 8 ~ 1 0 - ~ 4 x 1 6 ~ 8x1Cf3 8 x 1 0 - ~ ~ X I O - ~ 8 x 1 0 - ~ . . .

E x p l o s i o n 2 x 1 0 - ~ l o 3 1 x 1 0 - ~ 2 x 1 0 - ~ 1x10-' 2 x 1 0 - ~ . 2x10 - l 1 1 x 1 0 - ~ 2x10-* 4 x 1 0 - ~ 2x1Cf2 4x1U2 4 x 1 0 - ~ 2 x 1 0 - ~ 4 ~ 1 0 - ~

-

( a ) Dominant Event.

--

TABLE 13-15

SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT EFFECTS: PACKAGING ONLY

Event Maximum I n d i v i d u a l Popu la t ion A i rborne Release Oecon. Freq. Dose rem Risk, rem/yr Dose, man-rem Risk, man-rem/yr

F rac t . Fac to r yr-l Body , Releases Bone Lung Body Bone Lung Body Bone Lung Body Bone Lung

SHORT-TERM

Waste Prepara t ion Area

Dropped Conta iner 7x10-10 106 lX1o-2 7x10-15 5x10-12 7x10-12 7x10-17 5x10-14 7 x 1 ~ 1 4 1 x l W l l 7 x 1 ~ 9 1 x 1 ~ 8 1x10-13 7 x 1 ~ 1 1 1 x 1 ~ ~ ~

F i r e 1 ~ 1 0 - 7 103 1 ~ 1 0 - 2 1 ~ 1 0 - 9 7x10-7 1 ~ 1 0 - 6 1x10-l1 7x10-9 1x10-8 2x10-6 1 x 1 0 - ~ 2 x 1 0 - ~ 2 x 1 0 - ~ 1x10-5 2 x l 0 - ~

Explos ion 2 x 1 0 - ~ l o3 l x l ~ - ~ 2 x 1 0 - ~ 1x10-5 2x10-5 2x10-l1 1 x 1 0 - ~ 2 x 1 0 - ~ 4 x 1 0 - ~ 2 x 1 0 - ~ 4 x 1 ~ ' 4 x 1 0 - ~ 2x10-5 4x10-5

-4

Cr' Packaging Area

tb w Dropped

Co t i n e r 4x10-10 106 4x10-2 4x16-15 3x10-12 4x10-12 2x10-16 l j t 1 0 - ' ~ ~x1I0-l~ 6x10-12' 4x10-' 6x10-' Z X I O - ~ ~ 2 x l 0 - ~ O 3x10-~O F i rela! 4x10-7 103 1x10-2 6 x 1 0 ~ ~ 3x10-6 4x10-6 6x10-l1 3x10-8 4x10-8 8 x 1 0 - ~ ~ X I O - ~ 8 x 1 0 - ~ 8 x 1 0 - ~ 4 x 1 0 - ~ 8 x 1 0 - ~

Explos ion 2x10-6 103 1x10-3 2x10-8 1x10-5 2x10-5 2x10-11 1x10-8 2x10-8 4x10-5 2x10-' 4 x 1 0 - ~ 4 x 1 0 - ~ ZXIO-~ 4x10-5

Shipping Area

Dropped Co t i n e r 4x10-10 106 4x10-2 4x10-l5 3x10-12 4x10-l2 2x10-l6 1 x 1 0 - ~ ~ 2x10-l3 6x10- l2 4x10-' 6x10-' 2x10-l3 2x10-~O 3x10-lo

F i re?a! 4x10-7 103 1x10-2 6 x 1 0 - ~ 3x10-6 . 4x10-6 6 0 3 x 1 0 - ~ 4 x 1 0 ~ ~ 8 x 1 0 - ~ . .4x10-~ 8 x 1 0 - ~ 8 x 1 0 - ~ 4 x 1 0 - ~ 8 x 1 0 - ~

Explos ion - 2 x 1 0 - ~ l o3 I X ~ O - ~ ' 2 x 1 0 - ~ 1 ~ 1 0 - 5 2 ~ 1 0 - 5 2x10-l1 1x10-8 2x10-8 4 x 1 0 - ~ 2 x 1 0 - ~ 4x10-' 4 x 1 0 - ~ 2 ~ 1 0 - 5 4 ~ 1 0 - ~

(a) Dominant Event. .

TABLE 13-16

SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT EFFECTS: ONSITE SHIPMENT FOR ALL PROCESSING MODULES

- .-..- - Ai rborne Release Freq. Dose, rem R isk rem/ r Dose. man-rem Risk man-rern/ r Releases F r a c t . yr -1 Body Bone Lung Body 'Bone Lung- w x n e Lung ,Body ' Bone 'Lung -

SHORT-TERM

S lagg ing P y r o l y s i s and Packaging

L emh i 3x10-10 4x10-6 3x10-9 2 x 1 0 - ~ 4x10-6 1x10- l4 8x10-l2 2x10-l1 6x10-6 3 x 1 ~ 3 6 x 1 ~ 3 ' 2x10-11 1x10-8 2x10-8 S i t e 14 3x10-10 3x10-6 3 x 1 0 - ~ 2 x 1 0 - ~ 4x10-6 9x10- l5 6x10-l2 1x10-' I 6x10-6 3 x 1 0 - ~ 6xlG-3 2x1V11 9x10-9 2x10-8 RWMC 3x10-10 4 ~ 1 0 - 8 3x10-9 2x10-6 4x10-6 1 x 1 0 - ~ 6 8 x 1 0 " ~ 2x10-l3 6 x 1 0 4 3 x 1 ~ 3 6 ~ 1 0 . 3 2x10-13 1x10-10 2x lW10

Compaction, Immob i l i za t ion , and Packaging

- Lemhi 1x10-8 4x10-6 1x10-7 7x10-5 1x10-4 4x10-]3 3x10-~O 4 x 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ 2x10-4 1x10-1 2x10-1 8x10-10 4x10-7 - 8 ~ 1 0 - 7 w S i t e 14 1 ~ 1 0 - 8 2x10-6 1x10-7 7x10-5- 1x10-4- 2x10-13 1x10-~" 2x10-10 2x10-4 1x10-1 2x10-1 4x10-10 2x10-7 4x10-7 I N

R WMC 1x10-8 3x10-8 1x10-7 7x10-5 1x10-4 3x10-l5 Z X ~ O - ~ ~ 3x1(r12 2x10-4 1 x 1 ~ 1 2x10-1 6x10-12 3x10-9 6 x 1 0 4

Packaging Only

Lemhi 4x10-8 - 4 x 1 0 - ~ 4 x 1 0 - ~ 2 x 1 0 - ~ 4 x 1 0 - ~ 2x10- l2 8x1U10 2 x 1 0 - ~ 8 x 1 0 - ~ 4 x 1 ~ 1 8x10-1 3x10-9 2x10-6 3 x 1 0 4 S i t e 14 4x10-8 3 x 1 0 ~ ~ 4 x 1 0 - ~ Z X I O - ~ - 4 x 1 0 - ~ 1x10- l2 6x1U10 1 x 1 0 - ~ 8 x 1 0 - ~ 4 x 1 ~ 1 8x10-1 2x10-9 1x10-6. 2x10-6 RWMC 4x 10-8 3 ~ 1 0 - ~ 4 x 1 0 - ~ 2x10:~ 4 ~ 1 0 - ~ l x l ~ - ~ ~ 6 x 1 ~ ~ ~ 1 x 1 ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ 1 0 - ~ 4xlG-1 8x10-1 2x10-11 1x10-8 2x10-8

TABLE 13-17 '

SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT EFFECTS: ONSITE DISPOSAL - OPERATIONAL PHASE

Event Maximum I n d i v i d u a l P o p u l a t i o n A i r b o r n e Release Oecon.' Freq. Dose, rem R isk , r e m l y r Dose, man-rem R isk , man-remlyr Re1 eases F r a c t . F a c t o r y r - 1 Body B one 0 Y one Lung one -ung Body Bone Lung Body B Lung Bd B

DEEP ROCK DISPOSAL - L E f N I T I T E - S-SS

-

S lag 4x10-10 103 9x10-5 4x10-12 3x10-9 5x10-9 4x10-16 3 ~ 1 0 - l ~ 5 x 1 0 - l 3 8x10-9 4 ~ 1 0 - ~ 8 x 1 0 - ~ 7x10 - l 3 4 x 1 0 - ~ O 7x10-lo Compacted IXIO-9 103 a x l o - 5 I X I O - ~ ~ 7 ~ 1 0 - 9 1 ~ 1 0 - 8 8 ~ 1 0 - 1 5 6 x 1 ~ - 1 3 ax to -13 2 ~ 1 0 - 8 I ~ I O - ~ Z ~ I O - ~ 2x10-12 8 x l 0 - ~ O 2x10-9 Pack aged 4x10-8 103 1x10-4 4x10-10 3x10-7 5x10-7 4x10-14 3x10 - l 1 5x10 - l 1 8x10-7 4 x 1 0 - ~ 8 x 1 0 - ~ 8x10 - l 1 4 x 1 0 - ~ 8 x 1 0 - ~

DEEP ROCK 1)ISPOSAL .- LEMHI SITE - TUNNEL A C C E S S ( ~ )

S lag 7x10-13 103 1x10-2 7x10-15 5x10-12 9x10-12 7x10-17 5 x 1 0 - l ~ 9 x - 0 - l 4 l x l o - " 7x10-' 1 x 1 0 - ~ 1 x 1 0 - ~ ~ 7x10- l1 l x l l l - l o Packaged 3 x 1 0 - ~ 0 103 4x10-2 3x10-12 2x10-9 4x10-9 1x10-13 8x10- l1 ~ x . o - ~ O 6 x 1 0 - ~ 3 x 1 0 - ~ 6 x 1 0 - ~ 2 x 1 0 - ~ O 1x10-? Z X I O - ~

ENGINEERED SHAL.LOW AND -'E*u) - ~p - -

Slag 7x10- l3 l o 3 1 x 1 0 - ~ 7 x l o - l 5 5 ~ 1 0 - ~ ~ 9x10- l2 7x10- l7 5x10- l4 9 ~ 1 0 - ~ ~ 1x10 - l 1 7x10-' 1 x 1 0 - ~ 1 ~ 1 0 - ~ ~ 7x10- l1 l x 1 0 - ~ O Packaged 3x10- lo lo3 4x10-2 3x10-12 2x10-9 4x10-9 1x10-13 8x10- l1 2x10 -~O 6x10-9 3 ~ 1 0 - ~ 6 ~ 1 0 - ~ 2 ~ 1 0 - ~ O 1x10-7 2x10-7

ENGINEERED SURFACE DISPOSAL NEAR - c ( ~ )

S lag 7x10-13 103 lX1o -2 7x10-15 5x10-12 9x10-12 7x10-17 5x10-l4 9x;-l4 1x10- ' l 7x10-' 1 x 1 0 - ~ 1 x 1 0 - ~ ~ 7x10 - l 1 l x 1 0 - ~ O Packaged -jxlo-10 103 4~.10-2 3x10-12 2x10-9 4x10-9 1x10-13 8x10- l1 2x13- lo 6x10-9 3 x 1 0 - ~ 6 x 1 0 - ~ 2 x 1 0 - ~ ~ 1 x 1 0 - ~ 2x1W7

( a ) No r e l e a s e i n t he i n s t a n c e o f compacted and immob i l i zed waste.

( b ) E n t r i e s app l y a l s o t o l e s s massive v a r i a t i o n o f d i s p o s a l f a c i l i t y .

. . . .

TABLE 13-18 . . . % I S U W Y OF ACCIDENT EFFECTS: OWSITE OISPOSU - POSTCLOSLlRE PHASE

..=,,. . """.s..r."

Airborne Release Freq. Dose. ~m Rlsk. rm l r Oosc. Man-rm - - . . . . .

Releases Fract. yr-l Body one L ung Body Bone Lunq Body Bone L u n g Body Bone , . ..,q - , Risk. Man-r-g2.. . .

.. . DEEP ROCK OISPOSAl AT LEYHI LOCATIONS - . . . ,

:ECFE:s$.,TUNNEL Explosive

volcano(b)

ENGINEERED SWLOY- :;:," ;:g?SAL AT

WC ' Nc I I C WC WC IIC

Lava ~ l o w ( b ) 1x10-2 Erosion Wind Pickup In t rus ion

(Excavation f o l - lowin Erosion:

. I ~ I O - ~ c inha led) te) HI :(f)

in t rus ion (Farming) Ingest i n (2x10-8 t i / y r ) .

inha la t ion (2x10-8 C i l y r ) (e) NIA

Tornado 3x10-3 Earthquake 5110-9

2x10-5 ix10O NIA WC IC

~nv (9 .h ) - ~ a v a ~ \ow(b ) . IX~O-2 Erosion f Yind Pickup In t rus ion

(Excavation f o l - lowin Erosion: 3x10-8 C inha led) le) NIA

In t rus ion (Farmino) Ingest! ( ~ x ~ o - ~ ~ i ~ y r ) I/A

Inhalat on (5x10-Q c i / y r ) ( e l N/A

Tornado 3x10-3 Earthquake 5x10'9

5x10-5 2x100 NIA NC NC

ENGINEERED SURFACE

Lava ~ l a ( b ) 1x10-2 Erosion Yind Pickup In t rus ion

(Excavation f o l - '

I w i n Erosion: l x , " - ~ r , i ih;~edj(e)

In t rus ion (Farming) I nges t im (2x10-6 c i l y r )

Inha la t ion (2x10-8 c i l y r ) ( e )

Tornado Mackay oam(e) Earthouake

(a) A l l releases evaluated for the p a r 2085.

(b) Oaninant event.

( c ) NC = NO^ calculated because of the d i f f i c u l t y of r e l i a b l y pred ic t ing pmbab4l i t ies and geologic character is t ics i n t o the far d is tant future.

( d ) A l l releases evaluated for a t lm? 25.000 yr i n t o the future. .. .

(e) Intake l i s t e d is that f w maximwl i n d i v l b a l .

( f ) NIA = Not applicable.

(g) LWV identifies the use of the less massive var ia t ion o f the engineered sha l l a - l and d iSp0~a l f u i l ! t y a t S i t s 14.

( h ) A l l releases evaluated f o r a time 2000 yr i n t o the future.

( I ) Resuspension by wind pickup. . .

, ,

Ent r i es i n t he tab les have genera l l y been rounded t o one s i g n i -

f i c a n t f i g u r e . The u n c e r t a i n t i e s o f t he c a l c u l a t e d doses and r i s k s

are est imated genera l l y t o be f a c t o r s o f one t o two orders o f magni-

tude, bo th upward and downward. Such u n c e r t a i n t i e s do no t have a

major - impact on the s i g n i f i c a n c e o f doses and r i s k s t h a t are a l ready

extremely smal l .

! A summary o f p ro jec ted e f f e c t s from shor t - te rm (up t o 100-yr)

re lease scenarios f o r a l l a l t e r n a t i v e s and concepts i s g iven i n

Table 13-19. For a l t e r n a t i v e s and concepts c o n s i s t i n g o f more than

one module, t h e . r i s k s f rom t h e var ious modules were summed, t o g i ve

to t .a l values. The maximum ca lcu la ted doses are a l so 1 i s ted . For t h i s

t ab le , on ly c a l c u l a t i o n s i n v o l v i n g lung dose are presented. Whole-

body doses are no t as meaningful- as lung ' doses f o r rad ionuc l ides t h a t

c o n s i s t almost : e n t i r e l y o f t ransuran ics .

i .;The shor t - te rm re lease scenar io o f g rea tes t r i s k fo r A l te rna-

t i v e s 1 and.2 i s l ava f l o w over t h e waste. For the remaining a l t e r -

natives', the greates t shor t - te rm r i s k would be the same scenario, bu t

i n v o l v i n g t h e waste s t i l ' l remaining on t h e TSA du r ing the r e t r i e v a l ;

campaign. Such a r i s k , w o u l d e x i s t even w i thou t was te . re t r i eva1 opera-

t i ons . For c l a r i t y , t h i s type o f r i s k . w a s omi t ted f rom the e n t r i e s

f o r A l t e r n a t i v e s ,3 through 6 i n Table 13-19. The scenar io o f g rea tes t

r i s k f o r those a l t e r n a t i v e s , thus becomes a f i r e du r ing r e t r i e v a l

operat ions o r an exp los ion ( w i t h * f a i l e d confinement) dur ing s lagg ing

p y r o l y s i s operat ions.

The maximum t o t a l o f shor t - te rm r. isk appe.aring i n Table 13-19 i s

6 x 1 0 ~ ~ remlyr t o the maximum i n d i v i d u a l and 10 man-remlyr t o the , '

popu la t ion r e s i d i n g w i t h i n 50 mi les . These r i s k s are based on dose , .

commitment t o the lung. By coniparis"on, t he annual lung dose rece ived

I by t he same people f rom na tu ra l background r a d i a t i o n would be an e s t i - 3 mated 180x1 oe3 remlyr ( i n d i v i d u a l ) and 24x10 man-remlyr (popul a-

t i o n ) (NCRPM 1975).

TABLE 13-19

SUMYARY OF EFFECTS FROM SH3RT-TERM RELEASE SCENARIOS(,~,~.C.~)

Max~mum D O S ~ To ta l R isk Maximum t o Maximum t o Maximum Populat ion To ta l R isk I nd i v i dua l I nd i v i dua l Dose t o Popu 1 a t i on '

Alternat ive/Concept (rem) (rem/yr) (man-rem) (man-remlyr)

6 1x10-1 2 x 1 0 ~ ~ 2x102 3x10-3

Natura l Backgrougd Radiat ion 180x10-~ 24x10~

(a ) E f f e c t s repor ted here are f o r lung dose only.

(b) Short- term accidents inc lude re1 ease scenarios occur r ing no more than 100 y r i n t o the fu tu re f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 1 and 2. For A l t e rna t i ves 3 through 6, e n t r i e s inc lude on ly campaign-re1 ated events.,. En t r i e s do no t inc lude poss ib le releases due t o na tu ra l events or a i r c r a f t impacts t h a t would d i s r u p t waste s t i l l un re t r ieved dur ing . r e t r i e va l campaign (10-yr per iod) . I n c l us i on o f s ~ ~ c h events would cause e n t r i e s t o be s i m i l a r t o those f o r A1 t e r n a t i v e 1 f o r t h a t t ime period. .For A l t e r - na t i ve 4, e n t r i e s l i s t e d do not inc lude re lease scenarios f o r natura l . events occur r ing wh i l e processed waste i s i n storage dur ing 1985-2005. I nc l us i on of such events would have l i t t l e ef fect. For A l t e r n a t i v e 6, en t r i e s l i s t e d p e r t a i n t o t ime a f t e r campaigri s t a r t s i n 2005. From 1985 through 2005, en t r i e s f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 1 would-apply. F o r . A l t e r n a t i v e 5, on ly re1 eases occur r ing p r i o r t o or dur ing emplacement (10-yr per iod ) are i nc 1 uded .

( c ) Effects of possib.le releases occur r ing a t the Federal Reposi tory are not inc luded f o r A1 t e rna t i ves 3, 4, and 6, because these e f f ec t s are be ing . evaluated i n o ther DOE pro jec ts .

( d ) See Subsections 7.4.1 and 13.2 f o r add i t i ona l explanat ions o f scope and assumptions. . . I , . . .

(e ) Maximum dose i s associated w i t h e f fects of exp los ive volcano, Whereas t o t a l r i s k i s dominated by r i s k associated w i t h l a va f low. ,F,or th . i s . . reason, the e n t r i e s are not s imple m u l t i p l e s of the e n t r i e s ' f o r A l t e r -

. na t i ve 1 and, f o r Concept 2-12.. . , .. . ,

( f ) E n t r i e s apply..to ei , ther more massive or less massive v a r i a t i o n o f the . . . .' engineered shal low-land disposal f a c i l i t y a t S i t e 14.

A summary of projected effects from long-term release scenarios for each alternative or concept is given in Table 13-20. All entries

are calculated values of population dose to the lung for the dominant release scenario. Double entries indicate the effects before and

after hypothesizbd times of complete deterioration of confinement. For simplicity, such deterioration was assumed to occur instan-

taneously rather than gradually.

The supplement following Table 13-20 presents the same data

points.in graphic form, with connecting curves faired through the points. The increase in dose between zero and one hundred years is due to the assumed population growth during the first hundred years. Also indicated is the level of natural ha,ckground radiation, which is the population dose that is certain to accrue each year. (No esti-

mates were made of long-term decay of the sources of natural background radiation. However, such decay is believed to be relatively

small over the 25,000-yr period studied.) By contrast, the curves for the waste management a1 ternatives represent doses from highly unl i kely

volcanic action events.

Subsections 13.4 through 13.10 describe the scenarios evaluated and the assumptions. used to produce the entries in summary Tables 13-7

through 13-18. The dose and risk results are not repeated in the individual subsections. From the release fraition given in the text

for each scenario, the release quantities can be determined by multiplying by the inventory at the time of the scenario. The inventory

5 will be about 4 . 2 ~ 1 0 ~ Ci in 1985 (Table 13-2) and 1.8~10 Ci in

2085 (Tables 13-2 and 13-6). Inventories at other times can be estimated by referring to Table 13-6.

13.4 LEAVE AS IS (ALTERNATIVE 1)

This subsection describes the most significant event scenarios

considered in the risk analysis. Discussions of subsequent alterna-

tives, concepts, and modules refer to these scenarios and are modified and amplified as appropriate.

TABLE 13-20

YEARS AFTER 1985 A1 t e r n a t i ve/ . , 100 400 2000 25000

Concept 0 BCF L O ) ACFICI BCF . ACF BCF . ACF BCF ACF ,-

No l ong - te rm management o f s t o r e d TRU waste a t t h e IN EL(^)

No l ong - te rm management o f s t o r e d TRU waste a t t h e IN EL(^)

5-a t h rough 5 - f (Lemhi Range) 4 x 1 0 ~ 8 x 1 0 ~ ( d ) 6x101 ( d ) 2x101 ( d l . 8x100 ( d )

5-9 t h rough 5 - i ( S i t e 1 4 ) ( f ) 4x102 ( d )

5-9 t h r ugh , 5 - i ( u v ) ? g Y h ) 1x103 ( d l

A 5 - j t h r o h 5-1 W I ( R M C ) Y b

4x102 ( d ) 8 x 1 0 ~ 6 x 1 0 ~ 2 x 1 0 ~ ( d l 8x10~ . 4x l o4 W o 6 No l ong - te rm management o f s t o r e d TRU waste a t t h e INEL ( e

( a ) A l l e n t r i e s a re t h e c a l c u l a t e d va lues o f p o p u l a t i o n dose t o t h e lung, i n man-rem, f o r t h e dominant r e l e a s e scenar io .

( b ) BCF = &fore Conf inement F a i l u r e .

( c ) ACF = A f t e r Conf inement F a i l u r e .

( d ) E x p l o s i v e v o l c a n i c e r u p t i o n i s dominant r e l e a s e scenar io . For a l1 :o the r e n t r i e s , l a v a f l o w i s dominant r e l e a s e scena r i o .

( e ) Long-term e f f e c t s of d i s p o s a l o f TRU waste a t t he Fedecal R e p o s i t o r y a re be ing eva lua ted i n o t h e r DOE-sponsored s t u d i e s .

( f ) Res i s tance t o e x p l o s i v e v o l c a n i c e r u p t i o n assumed t o be a f a c t o r o f 100 b e t t e r t han t h a t f o r Concepts ?-a and 2-b, as l o n g as f a c i l i t y has n o t d i s i n t e g r a t e d . .

( g ) Res i s tance t o e x p l o s i v e v o l c a n i c e r u p t i o n assumed t o be a f a c t o r o f 40 b e t t e r than t h a t f o r cdncepts 2-a and 2-b, as l o n g as f a c i l i t y has n o t d i s i n t e g r a t e d .

( h ) LMV i d e n t i f i e s t h e use o f t h e l e s s massive v a r i a t i o n o f t h e eng ineered sha l l ow- l znd d i sposa l f a c i l i t y a t S i t e 14.

Time o f r e l e a s e scena r i o ( y r a f t e r 1985)

I Supplement t o Table 13-20

(Summary of Consequences f rom Long-Term Re1 ease Fcenarios )

13.4.1 Summary. For A l t e r n a t i v e 1, t h e c a l c u l a t e d dose and

r i s k f o r events l e a d i n g t o acc iden ta l r e l eases a re summarized i n

Tab le 13-7. The l a r g e s t sHor t - te rm p o p u l a t i o n r i s k and long- te rm

p o p u l a t i o n dose are assoc ia ted w i t h a i r b o r n e r e l e a s e caused by l a v a

f l o w over the waste. Th i s scenar io was eva lua ted us ing conse rva t i ve

va lues f o r t h e q u a n t i t y o f r a d i o n u c l i d e s re leased. F u r t h e r a n a l y s i s

may show t h i s r e l ease q u a n t i t y t o be u n r e a l i s t i c a l l y l a rge .

The dominant sho r t - t e rm even t f o r waterborne re l eases was

found t o . b e f a i l u r e o f t h e Mackay Dam, f o l l o w e d by f l o o d i n g o f t h e

TSA. The scenar io has a sho r t - t e rm p o p u l a t i o n r i s k , based on bone

dose, t h a t i s approx imate ly e i g h t o rde rs o f magnitude l e s s than t h a t

f o r t h e scenar io w i t h l a v a f low. The p o p u l a t i o n dose f rom long- te rm

waterborne re l eases would be about seven o rde rs o f .magn i tude sma l l e r

t han t h a t f o r t h e l a v a f l o w scenar io . The dominant long- te rm water-

borne re leases are assoc ia ted w i t h g l a c i a t i o n , c l imate change, and

a1 t e r a t i on o f r i v e r channel s.

13.4.2 Short-Term Risks.

13.4.2.1 A i rbo rne Acc iden ta l Releases. No ope ra t i ona l

acc iden t s were i d e n t i f i e d as caus ing s i g n i f i c a n t re leases. Only

v i o l e n t o r unusual n a t u r a l o r e x t e r n a l l y caused events, capable

of d i s r u p t i n g t h e waste, a re s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t o r s t o dose and

- r i s k . Three major acc iden t scenar ios capable o f caus ing s i g n i f i -

c a n t r e 1 eases o f r a d i o n u c l i des were s tud ied : ( 1 ) e x p l o s i v e vol:

c a n i c a c t i o n up th rough t h e waste, ( 2 ) l a v a f l o w over t h e waste, and

. ( 3 ) earthquakes. Tornadoes and m e t e o r i t e impact were a1 so examined

b u t no r e l e a s e scenar ios were i d e n t i f i e d .

13.4.2.1.1 Exp los i ve 'Vo l can i c Ac t ion . The analyses o f

e x p l o s i v e v o l c a n i c a c t i o n up th rough t h e waste and o f l a v a f l o w over

t h e waste (Subsec t ion 13.4.2.1.2) were based p r i m a r i l y on t h e r e s u l t s

of c o n t i n u i n g s t u d i e s (Kuntz 1978) conducted f o r DOE by t h e USGS. 'The

g e o l o g i c h i s t o r y and i n f e r r e d p a s t v o l c a n i c events i n t h e area were

used t o assess t h e hazard f r om v o l c a n i c ac t i on . I nc l uded i n t h e

s tud ies were geologic f i e l d mapping, a l i m i t e d number o f rad iome t r i c

age dates o f l a v a f lows, and a s t a t i s t i c a l assessment o f vo l can i c

recurrence i n t e r v a l s. Geologic and seismic aspects o f the INEL

environment are discussed i n Subsection 3.4.

The 660-square m i l e Arco-Big Southern Bu t te area, i n which the

RWMC i s located, inc ludes t h e Arco Volcanic R i f t Zone. The RWMC l i e s

a t t he edge of t h i s r i f t zone, which i s approx imate ly 6 m i l e s wide and

3U m i l e s long. The occurrence o f volcanoes i n t h i s area would be

concentrated i n , bu t no t l i m i t e d to, t h e r i f t zone.

The general conclus ions o f t h e Kuntz s tudy (1978) were: ( 1 ) t h e

Arco R i f t Zone and adjacent areas have been a c t i v e vo l can i c reg ions

f o r t h e l a s t 400,000 y r , ( 2 ) t h i s req ion has been t h e locus o f much a f

t he g e o l o g i c a l l y recent volcanism i n t he eas tern p o r t i o n o f t he Snake

R ive r P la in , and ( 3 ) t h e reg ion i s l i k e l y t o be the s i t e o f f u t u r e

vo l can i c ac t ion .

Erup t ion of a new volcano up through the s to red waste cou ld

cause r a d i o a c t i v e m a t e r i a l t o become ai rborne, t he amount o f which

would depend on the type o f e rup t ion . Some e rup t i ons are no t accom-

panied by 1 arge volumes o f e x p l o s i v e l y e jec ted m a t e r i a l ( p y r o c l a s t i c s )

(Franc is 1976), whi 1 e o the r e rup t i ons are.

One type o f e rup t i on i s a r h y o l i t e e rup t ion . Such erup t ions ,

which have no t occurred i n t he area f o r severa l hundred thousand

years, are be l i eved t o 'have been nonexplosive i n those instances

(Kuntz 1978).

Hydromagmatic e r u p t i o s are moderately v i o l e n t e rup t ions t h a t r occur when t h e mol ten lava 'encounters groundwater a t ' r e l a t i , v e l y

shal low depths beneath t h e sur face o f t he ear th . A smal l bu t s i g -

n i f i c a n t number o f e rup t ions i n t h e eastern Snake R ive r P l a i n have

been of t h i s type (Kuntz 1978). The .presence o f zones o f perched

water .and t h e a q u i f e r unde r l y i ng t h e area cou ld conce ivab ly lead t o

f u t u r e hydromagmatic e rup t ions . Cra ters formed by such e rup t i ons

cou ld be as l a r g e as one m i l e i n diameter ( O l l i e r 1974).

Fissure eruptions are r e l a t i v e l y explosive a t the vent areas

and are characterized hy the eruption of both large and small volumes

of lava from the vents. Par t i cu la te matter in steam clouds emitted

from a f i s su r e could r i s e t o 300 f t and be ca r r i ed several miles 'down-

wind. Such events have occurred in the Arco-Big Southern Butte area

(Kuntz 1978). If a f i s s u r e eruption were t o occur within the RWMC,

la rge volumes of pyroclas t ics containing TRU waste could be ejected ( W i 1 coxson 1966).

An explosive eruption scenario was assumed f o r t h i s analysis .

All eruptions not involving the e f f ec t s of lava flow over the waste

were assumed t o match t h i s scenario, although most eruptions would

be l e s s severe and 'a few could be more severe. The'vent area was

assumed t o be 1 acre, o r about 20% of the estimated 5-acre area of

t he two TSA pads in which t he TRU waste would be stored. I t was cor-

respondingly assumed t ha t 20% of the inventory of 4 . 2 ~ 1 0 ~ Ci ( see 4 Table 4-Z), or about 8 . 4 ~ 1 0 Ci, would be ejected. Further, 1% of

the e jec ted waste (840 Ci) was assumed t o remain airborne and t o be

ca r r i ed o f f s i t e . This airborne f r a c t i o n ' i s a f a c to r of 10 higher

than t h a t assumed f o r most accidents (Mishima 1974; Mishima and

Schwendiman 1970, 1973a, 1973b; Selby e t a l . 1973; Sehmel 1977;

ORNL 1970b). The increase i s a t t r i bu t ed t o the sever i ty of the

scenario f o r volcanic act ion. The overall re lease f rac t ion assumed

was, theref ore, 2x1 o - ~ .

The probabi l i ty of the eruption scenario described, within the

s tored TRU waste area, was estimated t o be 4 ~ 1 0 - ~ / y r . This value

i s subject to' la rge uncertainty. The value was based on an average recurrence frequency of 1 in 3,000 y r ( 3 ~ 1 0 - ~ / y r ) f o r a1 1 volcanic

a c t i v i t y (explosive or nonexplosive) in the Arco-Big Southern Butte ..-

area (Kuntz 1978). The recurrence frequency was mult ipl ied by the

r a t i o of the area containing the stored waste t o t h a t of the Arco-Big

Southern Butte area.

The maximum individual dose and r i sk from t h i s scenario were

calcula ted, along with the dose and r i s k t o the public. However,

there would generally be su f f i c i en t warning f o r individuals l iv ing

nearby to evacuate the area before a major eruption. E'arthquakes,

ground cracking and t i l t i n g , and possible fau l t ing and steam a c t i v i t y .

generally precede eruptions by a few days or a few hours. In some,

instances, warning signs occur weeks before an eruption.

13.4.2.1.2 Lava Flow Over the Waste. I t has not ye t

been projected whether the 16-f t stack of waste, covered with 3 f t of

so i l and standing on an asphalt pad, i s adequately protected against

lava flow. The potential e f f ec t s of the lava on the waste are a lso

d i f f i c u l t to project . The following preliminary s e t of conservative assumptions was used: (1 ) the e n t i r e RWMC would be covered by hot

lava f o r several days; ( 2 ) the stored waste would become mixed with t.he lava; a n d ( 3 ) a11 t.he cnmh~rstihle material in the wa5t.e wn~rld

bu rn . Additional analysis may confirm or negate the va l i d i t y of these

assumptions.

Studies of prolonged f i r e s ( E R D A 1975) have assumed re1 ease f rac - . , .

t ions of U.l t o 0.5. Because about 25% of the stored waste i s com- ,

bust ible (Subsection 7.4.1.2), a re lease f rac t ion of 0.025 t o 0.125

might be appropriate. However, because re leases would f i l t e r through

a thick layer of lava, a re lease f rac t ion of 0.01 was assumed.

. . '

The probabi l i ty of a volcanic eruption within the Arco-Big . ,

Southern Butte area would be 3 ~ 1 0 - ~ / ~ r , as described e a r l i e r . A

20% conditional probabi l i ty was estimated t ha t a given lava flow

within the area would cover the RWMC (Kuntz 1978). Therefore, the

probabi l i ty of radionuclide re lease under these conditions would be

6x1 ~ - ~ / ~ r .

As in the previous scenario, the maximum i.ndividua1 dose and r i sk

were calculated. Again, there would be su f f i c i en t advance warning, in

most instances, f o r individuals l iv ing nearby t o evacuate the area.

13.4.2.1.3 Earthquakes. Another postulated event lead-

ing to airborne re lease was an earthquake strong. enough t o d i s -

rupt the waste stack, causing impact and breach of one or more

waste conta iners. The INEL i s c l a s s i f i e d as Seismic Zone 3

(UBC, rev i sed 1973). Sixty-seven earthquakes equ iva len t t o Modi - f i e d Merca l l i I n t e n s i t y (MMI)' V o r g reater were recorded i n Idaho

between 1884 and 1976. O f these, 29 had ep icenters i n Idaho, many

l y i n g i n or near t h e mountains surrounding the eas tern Snake R iver

P l a i n (see F igu re 13-1). Earthquake i n t e n s i t y a t t h e INEL has reached

M M I V o r Y I . No earthquake considered d e s t r u c t i v e (MMI I X o r h ighe r )

has been recorded i n the eastern p a r t o f t h e Snake R iver P la in . The

most recent 1 arge earthquake t h a t was accompanied by sur face f a u l t i n g

occurred i n August 1959,. about 100 m i l e s nor theas t o f t h e INEL. No

damage r e s u l t e d t o INEL. f a c i l i t i e s .

. .

Recent s tud ies have shown t h a t t h e p l a i n i t s e l f i s r a t h e r

aseismic. However., l o c a l shaking cou ld r e s u l t f rom in tense ear th -

quakes w i t h ep icenters , i n t h e surrounding area (ERDA 1 9 7 7 ~ ) . As a

r e s u l t , ground .cracking,and severe b u i l d i n g damage a t the RWMC cou ld

be caused by an earthquake o f MMI I X o r h igher i n t he surrounding

area.

It was assumed tha t , i n such an earthquake, 10% o f t he contents

o f ' on'e box O f waste o r o f 15 drums would be exposed'. The f r a c t i o n

o f the re leased r a d i o a c t i v i t y t h a t would become a i rbo rne was e s t i -

mated t o " b e I X I O - ~ ishi hi ma 19M, ish hi mi and Schwendiman 1973b,

and Sehmel 1977)'. Thus, t h e f r a c t i o n o f t h e t o t a l waste inven.tory 3 3 t h a t would become a i rbo rne i s about (0.21 C i l f t x 112 f t x 10-I x

1 0 - ~ ) / ( 4 . 2 ~ 1 0 ~ ) = 5x10-~O.

The ground. acce le ra t i on necessary t o cause the damage and a i r -

borne re lease j u s t descr ibed was est imated t o be a t l e a s t 0.5 g.

Seismic res i s tance of t h e . stacked waste conta iners i s con t r i bu ted

by t h e 3 - f t cover o f s o i 1, t he plywood. sheets between 1 ayers o f . con-

t a i n e r s , and the c lose packing. Based on the l i m i t e d data i n Hsieh,

Okrent, and Apostol ak i's ( 1975) ; Otway ( 1969) ; and .Agbabi an Associ - ates (1977), t he frequency o f such an earthquake a t t he RWMC was

conse rva t i ve l y est' imated t o be 2x10-~/~;.

A MM Intensity VIII - ' X

0 MM Intensity . V I - VII . .

o MM Intensity - I - , .

. .

Fig. 13-1 Seismic characteristics of the Intermountain Region (ERDA 1977~).

13.4.2.1.4 Tornadoes. On the average, the S t a t e of Idaho

experiences two tornadoes each year (EG&G 1977). Ten funnel clouds

(vortex clouds t h a t do not reach the ground) and two tornadoes have

been observed a t the INEL.

An extensive survey of tornadoes in Washington, Oregon, and Idaho . - was performed by Fu j i t a (1971 ), who found t h a t tornadoes in t h i s a r e a , .'

' .

ocdur' p r i m a r i l y in l ta l leys ." Locations of these a l l eys a re i i l u s -

t r a t e d . in. Figure 13-2,, which inc1,udes t h c , reported tornadoes during > . , . .

the 1950' through 1969. . '

. , . .. I . > , .

Tornadoes occurr.ing in the Twin Fa1 1 s a1 l ey cou1.d damage the ,

. I 6 . . . .

., . INEL area. Hobever, only. 21 s i gn i f i c an t tornadoes were recorded in:.

the Twin Fa l l s a l i e y during the 20-yr.report ing period. The warm, . = .

moist a i r and s teep density gradients required f o r a severe tornado

were absent from the region during the 20 -~ ; .s't;dy ( ~ u j i t ' a 1971).

ossuming an addit ional f a c to r of 25% f o r unrecorded tornadoes, t h e ,

frequency of occurrence was estimated t o be about 1.3 tornadoesyyr in

t he Twin Fa l l s a l l ey . . .

Tornadoes i n - t h e area have.been small. All b u t one tornado

resu l ted in a,damage area of l e s s than 0.1 square mile. Most have . .

affected an a rep of l e ss than 0.01 square mile. T h e area of the. Twin ..

Fa l l s a l l ey i s app~oximate ly 25,000 square miles. ~ a s e d . o n the Pu j i t a , '

data , i t was estimated t ha t the average tornado would r e s u l t i n a

damage zone of 0.01 square mile and a veloci ty of 100 mph. Assuming a

random process, the probabi l i ty of the TSA (an area of 0.01 square

mile) being the damage zone i s about 5 ~ 1 0 ' ~ / ~ r .

The protect ive cover over the waste on the TSA pads was assumed

t o r e s i s t tornado winds during the shor t term. No radioact ive re-

leases would be expected.

8 "

. 13.4.2.1.5 Meteor,ite Impact. The p robab i l i ty of a . ' . - , '

meteori te 1 arge enough t o i n f l i c t significant- 'damage' on t h e ' TSA i s

several orders of magnitude smaller than the p robab i l i ty of other

Fig. 13-2 D i s t r i b u t i o n o f charac ter ized ,tornadoes i n 20-yr per iod, 1950 through , 1969 . . . ( F u g i t a ' l 9 7 1 ) . .

events s tud ied . Because o f t h e ex t reme ly low p r o b a b i l i t y , t h i s

scena r i o i s n o t i nc l uded i n t h e summary t a b l e s f o r any o f t h e

a l t e r n a t i v e s , concepts, o r modules.

13.4.2.2 Waterborne Acc iden ta l Releases. Events t h a t cou ld

l e a d t o waterborne re l eases o f r a d i o n u c l i des i n c l u d e ( 1 ) f l o o d i n g f r om

p r e c i p i t a t i o n o r snowmelt ( e i t h e r f rom l o c a l r u n o f f o r f rom B i g Los t

R i v e r f l o o d i n g ) ; and 12) f a i l u r e o f t h e Mackay Dam upstream on t h e B i g

L o s t R i ve r . These scenar ios a re discussed i n t h i s subsect ion.

Another event t h a t c o u l d l e a d t o waterborne re l eases i s p e r t u r -

b a t i o n o f t he groundwijter system. Because s u f v e i l l a n c e would be con-

ducted f o r t h e s h o r t term, l e v e l s o f t h e water t a b l e would be moni-

t o r e d around t h e RWMC. S i g n i f i c a n t changes i n i r r i g a t i o n , r e s e r v o i r ,

a r t i f i c i a l recharge, and w e l l d i scharge p a t t e r n s would be eva lua ted

b e f o r e implementat ion. Therefore, s i g n i f i c a n t water t a b l e changes i n

t h e s h o r t term would be h i g h l y u n l i k e l y .

13.4.2.2.1 F lood ing f rom P r e c i p i t a t i o n o r Snow-

me l t . F l ood ing o f t h e RWMC f r om p r e c i p i t a t i o n o r snowmelt c o u l d occur - from ( 1 ) r u n o f f f rom t h e l o c a l dra inage bas in o r ( 2 ) B i g Los t R i v e r

f l o o d i n g , r e s u l t i n g i n f a i l u r e o r ove r topp ing o f t h e d i v e r s i o n dam

and Dikes No. 1 and 2 (see F i g u r e 13-3). Thes.e two scenar ios a re

d iscussed i n t h i s subsect ion, a f t e r d i scuss ion o f t h e l o c a l topography

and hydro logy. However, because o f s u r v e i l l a n c e , i t i s u n l i k e l y t h a t

unconta ined r a d i o n u c l i d e s f r om t h e s t o r e d waste would be p resen t t o

become mobi 1 i z e d by f 1 ood waters d u r i n g t h e sho r t - t e rm ( 100-yr )

pe r i od .

F l ood ing would n o t r e l ease r a d i o n u c l i d e s i n t o t he Snake R i v e r v i a

s u r f a c e waters. Water e n t e r i n g t h e RWMC would e i t h e r p e r c o l a t e as

groundwater t o t he Snake R i v e r P l a i n A q u i f e r o r t r a v e l as su r f ace

wate r i n a nor thwes te rn d i r e c t i o n and e v e n t u a l l y s i n k i n t o t h e B i g

L o s t R i v e r p layas (see F i g u r e 3-8).

Channel

Dike No.

- - - -

Southern Boundary of INEL , ,

. . . . . .

. r

Fig. 13-3 Map q f f l bod-cont ro l ' d i v e r s i o n system.

The RWMC l i e s in the bottom of a valley between basalt ridges. The area generally slopes from the southwest to the northeast (see Figure 5-3). The highest normal perimeter elevation i s 501 1 f t above

mean sea level (MSL), and the lowest elevations are about 5000 f t

above MSL. Water runs off surface irregul a r i t ies (mounds covering trenches, natural high spots, e tc . ) and follows the normal drainage pattern eastward, concentrating surface water in the central and

eastern portions of the RWMC.

The RWMC tends to be vulnerable to precipitation in f i l t r a t ion . The area tends to hold precipitation and to co l lec t runoff water from

I .

surrounding slopes. Vegetation i s sparse or absent over much of the area. Most of th'e precipitation and snowrnelt comes in l a t e winter or ear ly spring when potential ra tes of evaporation and transpiration are

re la t ive ly small.

As mentioned a t the beginni.ng of th i s subsection, mobilization of radionuclides in the stored TRU waste as a resu l t of floodwaters is highly unlikely. However, radionuclides in the buried TRU waste have been affected by floodwaters. A discussion of these effects on the

buried waste i s useful here for projecting effects on the stored waste.

Subsurface migration toward the Snake River Plain Aquifer of

radionuclides from b&ied TRU waste in the p i t s and trenches is d i s -

cussed in Subsection 5.5. To reach the aquifer, the l iquid would have

to percolate ver t ica l ly through about 580 f t of basalt and sedimentary layers (see Figure 3-6 ) . I t was assumed that f lu id would, a f t e r entering the aquifer, travel northeast a few miles because of the head of water and recharge i n the spreading areas to the southwest,.as shown in Figure 13-4. Finally, the f lu id would migrate southwest

9 . (Figure 13-5) about 80 miles to springs near Hagerman andITwin Fal ls , , ;' .. ' 1 . ' . .

: ( F i g u r e 3-9) .and enter the Snake River. , ,"3' ' . ...

... . ' . . . : . . . . . . . . . ,

. . . . < . . . . . .. 8

. * . . . , L .

. . . . . . . i I

. . . . , . . , . i . . " ' I . ' :

' . . . . . .. % . . . .

. . . , b '

EXPLANATION ' . .

4445.8 ' '

4435 -4435 Contour Line Showing The' Top.Of the . water Surface, in Feet Above Mean Sea Level. For March I972.Cyto'Jr . , , Interval. 5 Feet Eicepl as Noted: '

-- -- - - .- .. --* Generalized Direction Of Ground-Mter Movement

INEL-' ~ o u n d r y - . . . . . . . . . . . . . I N E L Diversion ~ r e o

. . . . . . ., . , .

. < b . . I ' . . .

. . . . . I . . . :. ; . . . f . :

, ! ' ' . : , . . . . . . .

. . , . . . . . . . . .. ' - . * 3 . ' . : . i . I .. . i . , . I . '

. , . . . * I . <

i . . . ':.. . % . I i . . . . . . ., . . . . . . " " . . . . I . : , : . , . . . . .. , ,. . . . . . .

. . ' I i . . . I . .' - 1 : . . . .

I , . ' .. Fig. 13-4 . ~ a p - ' o f " the'southhikstekn p o r i i 6 t i ' o f the ' INEL showing contours on the

water tab1 e o f t h e Snake R iver Plai 'n. A q u i f e r and i n f e r r e d d i r e c t i o n s . of groundwater movement, March 1972.

Fig. 13-5 IN.EL subsur face wate r f l ows .

Excavations at the RWMC have shown the presence of sand and

gravel lenses (thin horizont a1 1 ayers of water-saturated. porous .

material ). The distribution of these lenses has not, been .mapped in

detail, becduse of the amount of dri l l~ng that would be required.

here has been no evidence to indicate that significant quantities of water have migrated laterally into the RWMC through lenses.

Schmalz (1972) indicated, however, that in the 1969 flood (see

Subsection 3.5.2), some of the water. that accumulated in the RWMC

migrated a few feet horizontally through a sand lens. Subsurface

horizontal flow would not significantly affect radionuclide migration

because it would be unsaturated, i.e., less than the flow capacity o f

the porous media. Current data indicate that this potential outside

source would contribute an insignif ic$nt quantity df 'water .to the RWMC , , :

subsurf ace. I

The first flooding scenario involves precipitation and surface

run-off from the local drainage basin. Subsection 3.3.3 describes .

precipitation statistics at the INEL for the 22 yr of record. Inter-

mittent periods of high precipitation provide an opportunity for water infiltration. . .

The 1 ocal drainage basin f 1 ood . in 1969 demonstrated the inad@-,

quacy of the dike and drainage system at that time. Since then a more

extensive system has been constructed arou.nd the RWMC perimeter, as

described in Subsection 3.5.2. The local drainage basin: has, thus been

reduced from 1700 to 643 acres. For short-term considerations, ero-

sion and radionuclide transport in the RWMC from this source of flooding would be unlikely. Thus, as long as the RWMC is maintained, local

flooding should not adversely affect the RWMC or .the dikes and diver-

sion system.

; The second flooding scenario involves ' ~ i ~ Lost River flooding.

The river channel, two miles north of the RWMC, has an elevation 30 to :40 ft higher than that of the RWMC. A large flood could conceivably

overtop Dike No. 2 or cause it to fail. Water could overflow onto the

RWMC (see Figures 13-3 and 5-3). This event has not occurred during

13-45

t3e I N E L h i s t o r y . How?ver, a r t i f a c t s and f o s s i l s found dur.ing excava-

t i o n s i n d i c a t n t h a t f l oods -Fr.om t h e B i g L o s t R i v e r b a s i n have en te red .

t h e 4WMC s ince t h ~ P le i s t ocene Age.

The consequences o f i n f i 1 t r a t i n g f l oodwa te r c a r r y i n g r a d i o -

n u c l i d e s i n t o t h e ' s o i l a re d iscussed i n t h e f o l l o w i n g subsec t ion

r e l a t e d t o h y p o t h e t i c a l f a i l u r e o f t h e Mackay Dam. The Mackay Dam

f a i l u r e scena r i o , . i s more severe than t h a t f o r f l o o d i n g o f t h e B i g L o s t

I I The r e c e n t l y c o ~ l s t r u c t e d d i k e and d i v e r s i o n system l o c a t e d

Dne m i l e west o f tne RWMC p r o v i d e a terminus and spreading areas

R i ve r , so t h e consequences would be g rea te r . As shown below, such

consequences would s t i l l be expected t o be ex t reme ly sma l l . The

i

p r o b a b i l i t i e s f o r t h e two scena r i os a re s i m i l a r .

f o r B i g Cost R i v e r f l o o d s . Capac i t y o f t h e sp read ing areas i s about

38,000 ac re - f t . . The system was dess gned t o p r o v i d e p r o t e c t i o n aga ins t . .

a f l o o d w i t h a r e t u r n p e r i o d as g r e a t as 55 y r ' ( C a r r i g a n 1972). Pa r - ,

t i a l h lockage o f c u l v e r t s f rom d e b r i s d u r i n g a severe f l o o d would

s i g n i f i c a n t l y reduce t h e c a p a c i t y o f t h e d i ve - s i on system.

One p o t e n t i a l e f f e c t o f RWMC i n u n d a t i o n f rom t h e B i g L o s t R i v e r

would be t o i n i t i a t e m i g r a t i o n toward t h e a q u i f e r o f any unconta ined

r a d i o n u c l i d e s from t h e s t o r e d waste. I n any g i ven year , t h e prob-

a b i l i t y o f a f l o o d ove r t opp ing t h e d i v e r s i o n d i kes w h i l e t h e f a c i l i -

t i e s a re be ing ma in ta i ned would be 2 x 1 0 - ~ (an average o f once every

55 y r ) . Doub l ing t h e c a p a c i t y o f t h e d i v e r s i o n channel and o f t h e

connec t ing channels t o t h e sp read ing areas would reduce t h e prob-

a b i l i t y t o 3 x 1 0 - ~ (Ca r r i gan 1972).

not her p o t e n t i a l e f f e c t o f RWMC i n u n d a t i o n would be water e ro -

s i o n o f t h e s o i l cove r i ng t h e s t o r e d waste, and subsequent atmospher ic

d i s p e r s i o n f o l l o w i n g p o s s i b l e b reach ing o f t h e con ta i ne rs . ( T h i s a i r -

borne pathway i s ment ioned here and d iscussed i n t h e f o l l o w i n g sub- , , . . sec t i on , because h y d r o l o g i c events would be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r i n i t i a t i n g

t h e t r a n s p o r t o f r a d i o n u c l i d e s . ) Th i s scena r i o would be expected t o

involve a smaller airborne ' re lease than the airborne re lease fo r the

Mackay Dam f a i l u r e , which, in turn, i s shown t o lead t o very small

doses.

13.4.2.2.2 Mackay Dam Failure. The probabi l i ty of

f a i l u r e of the Mackay Dam, about 42 miles upstream from the RWMC on the Big Lost River (see Figure 13-6), was estimated t o be 2 x l 0 - ~ in

any given year. Possible f a i l u r e due t o seismic action i s included in

t h i s value.

The capacity of the Mackay Reservoir i s 45,900 acre-f t . A dam

f a i l u r e would lead to rapid draining of the reservoir . Immediately

downstream from the Mackay Dam, the c res t would be high, and the flood

duration would be shor t . Below the reservoir the water would spread

across the flood plain, which i s 1 to 3 miles wide. The maximum depth

would decrease, b u t the duration of flooding would be longer.

Based on preliminary s tudies , expected t o be publjshed in 1979,

the USGS has estimated t ha t f a i l u r e of the Mackay Dam a t f u l l capacity

would i n i t i a t e a flood wave with the following propert ies ' :

( 1 ) The f i r s t flood wave would reach the .RWMC in about

6 hr. .. ' . .

( 2 ) The peak flodd wave s tage would be about 12 f t high.

( 3 ) A 6 - f t high stage would continue fo r about 40 hr.'

(4 ) The peak discharge would be about 30,000 t o 35,000 c f s , . .

. including i n f i l t r a t i o n .

Further analyt ic ver i f ica t ion i s required fo r these preliminary

r e su l t s .

Big Southern Butte

A Streamf low Station

0 ! 0 20 Miles -

Fig. 13-6 Map o f B i g Los t R ive r Basin downstream from Mackay Reservoi r showing l o c a t i o n o f streamflow s t a t i o n s .

The hypothesized event could cause a radiological hazard to the

public by means of two alternative pathways for radionuclides released as a result of the flood. Ingestion of contaminated drinking water

and inhalation of airborne radionuclides released via resuspension are

the two pathways.

The ingestion pathway would entail: (1) infiltration of flood

waters into the TSA, ( 2 ) leaching of stored waste that may have been exposed via container deterioration, (3) percolation of the exposed

radionucl ides into the aquifer, (4) radionucl ide migration through the aquifer to wells, and (5) drinking of contaminated water from wells.

An estimate of the source term for this pathway is discussed below.

At the TSA, flood waters would percolate in a saturated flow

(i.e., at full capacity in porous media) toward the aquifer. Radio-

nuclides migrating with percolating water would be in a dissolved,

chelated, or colloidal suspension form. Radionuclides not in a convenient form for migration, or that are sorbed or filtered, would no

longer have a saturated-flow pathway to reach the aquifer. Thus,

further migration would be significantly retarded.

It was assumed that less than 10% of the radionucl ide inventory

would be in an appropriate dissolved, chelated, or colloidal suspen-

sion form. At low solute concentrations, ion-exchange and filtering

mechanisms would be extremely effective. It was therefore assumed

that less than U.1% of the migrating waste would travel the 580 ft

down to the Snake River Plain Aquifer. Based on the above assump-

tions, the overall release fraction for migration to the aquifer would 4 be about 1x10- . The expected radionuclide migration to the aquifer

was conservatively assumed to occur rapidly relative to subsequent travel time within the aquifer. In reality, migration to the aquifer

As . t i e r ad ionuc l ides ~m ig ra te th rough .t$e a q u i f e r , t h e i I- concen-

t r a t i o n would be d . i l u ted by d i spe rs i on , r e t d r d a t i o n , and r a d i o a c t i v e

decay. T ranspor t o f the rad ionuc . l i des i n t h e a q u i f e r was est.im.ated by

the groundwater t r anspo r t 'mode l descr ibed i n Appendix E. T h i s ' a n a l y -

t i c a l model was used t o es t ima te t he peak concen t ra t i on o f rad ionu-

c l i d e s a t we1 I s f o r d r i n k i n g water .

The d i r e c t i o n o f groundwater t r a v e l i s i l l u s t r a t e d i n F i g -

u res 3-9, 13-4, and 13-5. The w e l l c l o s e s t t o t h e RWMC i s 2 m i l e s

t o t he NE and i s w i t h i n t h e INEL boundaries. However, t h i s w e l l i s

n o t i n t h e a q u i f e r f l owpa th frorn t h e RWMC (Subsect ion 5 . 5 ) . The water

i n t h i s w e l l c o u l d be a f f e c t e d i f l o c a l f l o w p a t t e r n s were t o change

s i g n i f i c a n t l y . Because o f t h i s p o s s i b l ~ t y , a w e l l c l o s e r than t h e

neares t downgradient water supp ly 18 m i l e s away, was hypothesized f o r

purposes of c a l c u l a t i n g maximum i n d i v i d u a l doses. It was conserva-

t i v e l y assumed t h a t a h y p o t h e t i c a l w e l l was l o c a t e d 3 m i l e s down-

g r a d i e n t ( sou th ) o f t h e RWMC, a t t h e c l o s e s t INEL boundary.

For c a l c u l a t i n g p o p u l a t i o n doses, a second w e l l was hypothesized,

l o c a t e d about 8u m i l e s away i n t h e r e g i o n around Hagerman. Th i s i s

t h e neares t p o p u l a t i o n cen te r t h a t cou ld conce ivab ly use. contaminated

water f r om t h e a q u i f e r . ( Idaho ~ a l l s and P o c a t e l l o a re n o t locat,ed

downgradient i n t h e Snake R i v e r ' P l a i n A q u i f e r stream1 i n e f l o w s shown

i n F i g u r e 3-9.) 1n r e a l ~ t y , t h e popu la t i on i n t h e Hagerman area may 1

n o t t a k e t h e i r water supp ly f r om the a q u i f e r . h ow ever, t o conserva- '

t i v e l y es t ima te a p o p u l a t i o n dose, i t was assumed t h a t an upper, 1 i m i t

of 10,000 people would i n g e s t t h e water f o r 50 yr a t peak concentra- . '

t i o n s o f t h e rad ionuc l i des .

The c a l c u l a t e d va lues o f peak concen t ra t i on and t ime t o peak . . c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f t h e most s i g n i f i c a n t r a d i o n u c l ides, m i g r a t i n $ t o t h e

two we1 1 s appear i n Table 13 .21 . . . L .

TABLE 13-21

CONCENTRATION OF PRINCIPAL(^) RADIONUCLIDES IN WELL WATER DUE TO GROUNDWATER TRANSPORT FOLLOWING MACKAY DAM FAILURE SCENAR1,O

3-Mi le Well 80-Mi le Well Stored Waste Peak Time t o Peak Time t o

Radio- Inventory , Concentrat ion Peak Concentrat ion Peak nuc l i de 1985 (C i ) (pCi /ml) ( y r (PC i /m1) (yr)

(a ) Other rad ionuc l i des which were s tudied, such as Pu-238, Pu-241, Am-241, and Cm-244, were found t o g i v e much lower 'values o f peak concen t ra t i on than those l i s t e d ;

( b ) << = Much l e s s than.

Maximum i n d i v i d u a l doses and popu la t i on doses were summed f o r

each o f t he . . c o n t r i b u t i n g . . r ad ionuc l i des regard less o f a r r i v a l t ime.

The r e s u l t s are repo r ted under " s h o r t - ~ e r m Waterborne Re1 eases" i n '

summary Table 13-7. Th i s method prov ides an upper bound es t ima te o f

maximum conden t ra t i on f o r a1 1 a r r i v a l ' t imes. he' maximum i nd' iv i dual

dose was est imated by assuming t h a t a hypo the t i ca l i n d i v i d u a l would . . . , .

d r i n k 2 1 i t e r s o f &ter /day f rom t h e 3-mi 16 we1 1 f o r 50 y r a t t h e peak

r a d i o n u c l i d e concent ra t ion . Popu la t ion dose was est imated by assuming

t h a t 10,000 people would each d r i n k 1 l i t e r o f water/day from t h e

80-mi le w e l l f o r 50 yr a t the peak r a d i o n u c l i d e concent ra t ion .

The o ther important pathway f o r t h e Mackay Dam f a i l u r e scenar io

i s i n h a l a t i o n o f a i rbo rne rad ionuc l i des resuspended f o l l o w i n g re lease

as a r e s u l t o f f l ood ing . The eva lua t ions f o r t h i s pathway are d i s -

cussed i n t he f o l l o w i n g paragraphs. The r e s u l t s are presented under

"A i rborne Releases" i n Table 13-7, because t h e f i n a l phase o f r a d i o -

n u c l i d e t r a n s p o r t t o man i s a i rborne t r a n s p o r t . I t was assumed t h a t

2% of the waste would be scoured via movement of soi l from i t s or iginal s i t e to a new area of 10 square miles (see Figure 13-7). The c r i t i c a l shear s t ress , i .e. , the force required to move the s o i l , would be exceeded, so s ignif icant scouring would be expected (Vanoni 1975). The so i l covering the stored waste would be completely removed in approximately 2 hr. The waste containers would

be d i rec t ly exposed to the remaining flood waters. An equivalent of 2% of the waste containers would be breached (drum l ids removed and boxes punctured), releasing the i r contents.

The water level in the contaminated area would l a t e r subside by

in f i l t r a t ion and evaporation. I t was assumed that 10% of the transported waste would remain in the top one inch of sediment.

The agglomerated soi l par t ic les would form a thick mud.

Until the mud dried, radionuclides trapped in the mud.could not be resuspended for inhalation. After several weeks, the dried mud

would break up. Par t ic les less than about 10 microns in diameter

would be avail able for resuspension over an extended period of time. I t was assumed tha t , a f te r the mud dried, the fraction of the top

par t ic les less than 10 microns would be ~ x I o - ~ . The overall release fraction would be: (0.02 fraction of transported waste x 0.1 fraction of waste near soil surface x 3 x 1 0 ~ ~ fraction of waste par t ic les available for lo f t ing ) = 6x10'~. I

13.4.3 Long-Term Effects. As described i n Subsection 13.2.1,

long-term r isks were not calculated in th i s study. ~ o n ~ - d e r m doses, however, were calculated fo r the long-term release scenarios (e.g.,

erosion, glaciat ion) . The waste character is t ics and the pdpul a- '

t ion character is t ics assumed fo r such scenarios were those for the year 2085. If the effects of releases (doses) were s ignif icant for

4 2085, additional calculations were performed for a time 10 yr into the future. (Lava :flow over the waste was the only such case fo r 2085. )

!

J'

. To Salmon . \

I I - : . .

I. '' I

. .

MILES

Fig. 13-7 Area contaminated by h!ypothetical F.lackay Dam f a i l u r e .

'13-53

13.4.3.1 Airborne Accidental Releases.

13.4.3.1.1 Lava ,Flow Over the Waste. Sec- --- t ion 13.4.2.1.2 describes a volcan3c even t . tha t could r e su l t ' .

in covering the e n t i r e RWMC with lava. For analysis of long-term . , . .. i

e f f e c t s , the 3 - f t so i l cover over the waste was assumed t o have been completely removed by erosion by .the year 2085. (This conservative

assumption was used because the hi'gher elevation of the . so i1 co,ver would probably , resu l t in f a s t e r erbs ion .than the surrounding area. )

Additionally, ea r th or rock divers.ion bar r ie r s t ha t might be con- s t ruc ted t o prevent lava from en te r ing the RWMC were assumed t o be ', :

compromised by weathering or other phenomena by 2085.

I t was assumed tha t the stored !waste would be mixed .with the

lava, and tha t a l l combustible material would.burn. ' The airborne . . . . . .. .

re lease f rac t ion was assumed t o be 1x:10-~, leading to an airborne .

re lease of approximately:1800 Ci. Thais projected re lease quant i ty f o r

2085 i s l ess than the 4200 Ci f o r the:shor t - term analysis in Subsec- t ion 13.4.2.1.2, because radioactive clecay wi l l have reduced the in- :

ventory from about 420,000 Ci t o about: 180,000 Ci . . " . . . .. . .

Because the calcula ted dose was s , ignif icant f o r t h i s scenario . . .

occurring in 2085, the dose was- a lso calcula ted fo r the scenario. " ' '

4 occurring 10 y r in the future . . c l _ L , . *.

. . - . I . '.

The probabi l i ty of t h i s scenario ocrcurring in the shor t t e rm- .

was discussed in Subsection 13.4.2.1.2. , In t he long term, i t i s .' . . . s .*: .-

l i k e l y t ha t the RWMC wil l e x p e r i e k e onli or more lava flows within ' . .

the next 30,000 t o 50,000 y r . The i n i t i a l flow would probably give . . . . .

the most s ign i f ican t e f f ec t . Subsequent flows would probably have . .

lower consequences .because . (1 ) addi t ional radionucl ide decay- would 1 . : I.

have occurred, ( 2 ) the combustible' matevial would have - been consumed . . , ' . $ .

in t he f i r s t event, and ( 3 ) a t h i c k - l a y e r of lava would have protected . .

the waste against subsequent flows. I . . .

13.4.3.1.2 Intrusion. It was assumed that there

would be no maintenance and surveillance of the RWMC after 100 yr. See Guideline (9) in Subsection .7.4.1.1. With no institutional

control on the RWMC, the public would have unlimited access to the site, possibly without knowledge of its contents. .Furthermore, after

100 yr, the hazard of the waste would have deweased by only about 25%:. due to radioactive .decay (see Tab1.e 13-5).

, .

Two intrusion scenarios that could result in exposure to indi-

vidual s and to small population groups were considered. : These were

(1) an individual digging into the waste, and (2) a small group of

people living on- and.farming the 5-acre area:of soil covering the

TSA pads. For both scenarios the following assumptions were used:

(1) the intrusion would begin in 2085; (2) the.waste .contai.ners would have deteriorated and compressed, causing the waste cover to form a

slumped mound approximately 10 ft high over the area; ( 3 ) approxi- : mately 0.5% of the 208b radionuclide inventory, or 900.Ci, would have

migrated into,' and been homogeneously distributed in, the top 3-ft layer of the mound. The remaining inventory would be homogeneously

distributed in thk lower two-thirds of the mound. With a soil density 3 of 85 lb/ft ,, the total concentration of .radionuclides fin the upper

portion of the mound would be about 1.6~10-~ Ci/lb.

In the excavation scenario, it was assumed that an individual

would spend 100 hr-digging into the waste in search of.artifacts or

useful materials. The digging could develop a dust. cloud having a 3 concentration of 1 mg/m . It was assumed that, because the excava-

tion could penetrate into.tlie waste, 10% of the airborne dust would .be

waste material (Leddicotte et -a1 . 1973). The concentrat.ion of. radiio-

nuclides in the waste in 2085 would be 5.7x10-~ Ci/g (Table 13-6). ,

Because the individual would be active, his breathing rats was, '

3 assumed to bei1.25 m /hr. The amount of, radioactivity inhaled .

by the individual can be calculated. by the: following: (100 hr x . . 3 3 3 1.25 m /hr xB.1-mg waste dustim x 5 . 7 ' ~ Ci/g x lg/10' rng) =

7x10-~ ~ i . The-dustcloud wouldalso lead to inhalation of

radionuclides by people living away from the area of ,excavation.

The r e s u l t s o f t h i s scenar io are n o t l i s t e d i n Table 13-7,

because i t was found t h a t a r e l a t e d scenar io , excava t ion a f t e r tom-

p l e t e e ros ion o f t h e s o i l ' cover over t he waste, would g i v e l a r g e r '

doses. The l a t t e r scenar io , d iscussed i n Subsect ion 13..4.3.1.4, i s

t h e one f o r which t h e c a l c u l a t e d doses appear i n Table 13-7.

- I n t h e fa rming scenar io , bo th i r l ges t i on and i n h a l a t i o n pathways

were considered.

I n e v a l u a t i n g i n g e ~ t i o n , i t was assumed t h a t t h e p e o p l e ' l i v i n g on

t h e 5-acre p l o t would o b t a i n t h e i r e n t i r e f ood supp ly f rom fa rming t h e

p l o t . I t was a l s o assumed t h a t o n l y t he t o p 3 - f t o f s o i l would con-

t r i b u t e r a d i o n u c l i d e s t o t h e food supply.

The t r a n s f e r f a c t o r s used t o es t ima te t h e r a d i o a c t i v i t y i nges ted

annua l l y were based on da ta f o r f a l l o u t p l u ton ium i n t h e New York d i e t

(Bennet t 1974). Through mu1 t i p 1 i c a t i o n o f t h e concen t ra t i on f a c t o r s

by t h e f ood i n ta l t e q u a n t i t i e s , t h e t r a n s f e r f a c t o r f o r p l u ton ium was

c a l c u l a t e d t o be 0.49 1b/yr. Th is f a c t o r i nc l udes t he e f f e c t s o f bo th

p l a n t - d e r i v e d and animal -der ived p o r t i o n s o f t h e d i e t . The same

va lue was used f o r uranium and curium. Data (White, Dunaway, and , ,

Wireman 1977) i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e t r a n s f e r f a c t o r f o r americium would

be a f a c t o r o f 10 lower. ~ u l t i p l i c a t i b n o f t h e t r a n s f e r f a c t o r s by

t h e i n d i v i d u a l r a d i o n u c l i d e concentratTons i n t h e s o i l gave t h e

a c t i v i t y o f each r a d i o n u c l i d e inges ted per year. The t o t a l a c t i v i t y

i nges ted would be about 5 x 1 0 - ~ Ci/yr. The c a l c u l a t e d doses a re

g i ven i n Table 13-7.

For c a l c u l a t i o n s o f p o p u l a t i o n dose by t h e i n g e s t i o n pathways,,

i t was assumed. t h a t a maximum o f 10 people would be i n v o l v e d o n s i t e .

I t i s u n l i k e l y t h a t more than 10 people would l i v e on a 5-acre farm,

d e r i v i n g t h e i r e n t i r e d i e t , i o c l ud ing animal products , f rom food b ro -

duced o n ' t h e 5 acres.

I n e v a l u a t i n g i n h a l a t i o n from fa rm ing acti;i t i e s , i t was assumed

t h a t t h e fa rm would be plowed and c u l t i v a t e d i n 8 h r / y r , deve lop ing 3 an a i r b o r n e dust l o a d i n g o f 100 mg/m . The c o n c e n t r a t i o n i s a f a c -

t o r o f 100 h i g h e r than t h a t used i n t h e excava t i on scenar io . Other

f a rm ing a c t i v i t i e s , conducted f o r 8 hr/day, would . develop a dust load- ,

3 i n g of 1 mg/m ( L e d d i c o t t e .et a l . 1978). - The dust l o a d i n g due t o 3 normal a i r movement would be 0.1 mg/m f o r t h e rema in ing 16 h r l d a y . ,

3 B rea th i ng r a t e s would be 1.25 m / h r d u r i n g t h e 8 h r l d a y o f a c t i v i t y

3 and 1 m / h r f o r t h e remai r i ing 16 hr/day. The t o t a l c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f

r a d i o n u c l i d e s i n t h e su r f ace s o i l was taken t o be t h e same as f o r t h e

i n g e s t i o n pathway, 1 . 6 x 1 0 - ~ C i / l b . The t o t a l a c t i v i t y i n h a l e d was

c a l c u l a t e d t o be 1 . IX IO -~ Ci lyr. The c a l c u l a t e d doses ap iea r i n

Table 13-7.

. .

Approx imate ly 80% o f t h e dus t i n h a l e d a n n u a l l y would be d u r i n g * ,. . '4' . .'

a c t i v i t i e s o t h e r than p l ow ing and c u l t i v a t i n g . Thus, t h e p o p u l a t i o n . , .

dose would be ( 9 peop le x 0.8 maximum i n d i v i d u a l dose) + ( 1 person x * a

maximum i n d i v i d u a l dose) = 8.2 x maximum i n d i v i d u a l dose. .14*

, . : i a

13.4.3.1.3 Eros ion. I t was assumed t h a t t h e cover ',

over t h e waste would have eroded a f t e r 100 yr, expos ing t h e waste.

Wind b l ow ing across t h e exposed waste would p i c k up and t r a n s p o r t

r a d i o n u c l i d e s t o popu la ted areas. A r e p r e s e n t a t i v e wind speed o f

7 mph was assumed.

13.4.3.1.4 I n t r u s i o n F o l l o w i n g Eros ion. It was con-

s e r v a t i v e l y assumed t h a t l t h e . s u r f a c e cover o v e r ' t h e waste would have %

eroded comple te ly a f t e r 100 y r . I n t h e excava t i on scenar io , t h e a i r -

borne dus t would c o n s i s t e n t i r e l y o f waste m a t e r i a l , r a t h e r . than con-

s i s t i n g o f 10% waste m a t e r i a l . The dose would be h igher , by a f a c t o r

o f ten, than t h a t i n t h e excava t ion scena r i o o f t h e p rev i ous subsec-

t i o n . The r e s u l t s f o r t h i s scena r i o appear i n Table 13-7.

It was conc luded t h a t r a i s i n g crops d i r e c t l y i n t h e exposed wa5te

m a t e r i a l , a f t e r t h e s o i l cover had eroded 'away, would be un rea l i s t i c .

13.4.3.1.5 Erosion w i t h .Tornado. A tornado w i t h winds

o f IOU mph was assumed t o s t r i k e the waste a f t e r e ros ion had rembved .

t h e p r o t e c t i v e cover: A re lease f r a c t i o n o f 3x10-4 was assumed. ,

13.4.3.1.6 Other Events. Other events t h a t cou ld

l ead t o an a i rborne re lease i nc lude earthquak,es and a i rp lane crashes. ' , . Ne i the r poses a hazard as s e r i o u s as t h a t o f a vo lcan ic e rup t i on w i ' th ' . .

l a v a f low. The l a v a f l o w event cou ld i nvo l ve a l l the s to red 'waste. . ', , ' ,

An a i r p l a n e crash.would a f f e c t o n l y p a r t o f t he waste, and t h e l i k e - '.

l i h o o d o f occurrence would be 'less than f o r t he l a v a f l o w scenario.

For t h e s t rong earthquake scenar io i n t he long term, a d d i t i o n a l

d e t e r i o r a t i o n o f the waste conta iners was assumed, w i t h t e n times' as

much waste becoming a i rborne as i n t h e shor t - te rm scenario. Even so,

t he consequences would be much less than f o r t he l ava f l o w scenario.

The l i k e l i h o o d o f occurrence i s somewhat l e s s than t h a t f o r l ava f low

over t he waste. .

13.4.3.2 Waterborne Accidenta l Releases.

13.4.3.2.1 'Flooding f rom P r e c i p i t a t i o n or . Snowmelt..

The e x i s t i n g d ikes and ' d i ve rs ion channels must be' mainta ined t o m i t i -

ga te B i g Lost R ive r f lood ing . otherwise, they would probably b'e,'in- ., . '

e f f e c t i v e w i t h i n 50 yr. The p r o b a b i l i t y o f a l a r g e l o c a l sur face

r u n o f f o r a B ig Los t R ive r f l o o d would be about once every 10 y r ,

based on INEL h i s t o r i c a l data. However, t he consequences o f these

events f o r re lease o f waterborne rad ionuc l i des were est imated t o be

1/100 o f the consequences f o l l o w i n g th'e Mackay Dam f a i l u r e , discussed

be1 ow.

13.4.3.2.2 Mackay Dam F a i l u r e . I n t he long term;the

l a r g e s t waterborne re leases cou ld r e s u l t f rom f a i l u r e o f t h e Mackay . . .

Dam o r a sucessor dam a t t h a t l oca t i on . These consequences are evalu- . ' .

a ted f o r t he s h o r t term i n Subsection 13.4.2.2.2.

The hypothesized Mackay Dam f a i l u r e cou ld l e a d t o bo th i n g e s t i o n

and i n h a l a t i o n o f . r ad ionuc l ides. . For t h e , long- tern i .scenar io , evalua-

t i o n o f t he i n g e s t i o n pathway would be the same a s . f o r t h e s h o r t I .

term. Only t h e p r o j e c t e d popu la t i on growth would n o t i c e a b l y change

t h e results.:

For t h e long- term !ana lys is , t h e i n h a l a t i o n scena r io again con-

s idered scou.ring , o f t h e TSA, pads, and water depos' i t ion o f rad jonu-

c l i d e s , w i t h subsequent .resuspension. It was assumed t h a t con f ine-

ment would be. s u f f j c i e n t l y d e t e r i o r a t e d such t h a t 50% o f t h e waste .

would be scoured by the f l ood , o f which 10% would remain i n t h e top

one inch o f sediment. P a r t i c l e s l e s s than 10 mic rons i n diameter

would be ava i l . ab le . f o r resuspension over an extended p e r i o d o f t ime.

The f r a c t i o n . o f t h e top p a r t i c l e s l e s s than 10 m.icrons . . was again

assumed t o b e 3 x 1 0 - ~ . he o v e r a l l r e l ease f r a c t j o n would thus be . 4 about 1x10- . . . , .

, , , . . . . . .

13.4.3.2.3 G l a c i a t i o n . I n t h e l o n g term, c l i m a t i c

changes s i m i l a r t o those associated w i t h pas t g l a c i a t i o n s ( i c e ages)

must be considered. The l a s t . major . g l a c i a l . advaince . i n Nor th America

a t t a i n e d i t s maximum about 18,000 y r ago. Subsequent c l i m a t i c f l u c t u -

a t i o n s du r i ng i t s r e t r e a t occur red about 10,000iyr ago. I n t he INEL

area, t h i s event i s r e f l e c t e d by severa l g l a c i a l moraines i n t h e Lemhi

Range (Dor t 1962). . ,A more d e t a i l e d r e c o r d o f c'l i m a t i c , f l u c t u a t i o n s

(a1 t e r e d p r e c i p i t a t i o n / e v a p o r a t i o n r a t i o s ) i n t!he regi ,on i s found . i n

t h e sediments from ancient ' Lake Bonnevi. l le i n nlorthwestern Utah and

Lake Lahontan i n wes tern Nevada (Mor r ison 1961 ,: 1964, and 1965). The

s t r a t i g r a p h y 0f.Lak.e Lahontan shows f i v e c1imat:ic f l u c t u a t i o n s w i t h i n .

t h e l a s t 5000 yr. The l a r g e s t c l i m a t i c change i n t h a t area occurred

about 3000 y r ago (Schulman 1956).

There : is no e.v:idence o f pas t g l a c i a l i c e w i t h i n t h e INEL area.

However, a f u tu re ,occu r rence cannot be r u l e d &out. Over the. next

250,000 yr,,, and. p o s s i b l y t h e q e x t 1000 y r , c1:imatic f l u c t u a t i o n s

r e s u l t i n g i n a prolonged p e r i o d o f h igh p r e c i p i t a t i o n cou ld occur.,

The main e f f e c t o f a coo le r and we t te r c l i m a t e would be an increased

p r o b a b i l i t y o f f l ood ing .

, . The INEL i s loca ted in1 a shal low topographic bas in t h a t rece ives

f l o w f rom th ree drainages ( B i g Los t R iver , L i t t l e Los t River , and

B i r c h Creek). This bas in i,s connected t o a l a r g e r bas in t o the east

( ~ u d Lake), which i s s l i gh ' c l y lower i n e leva t i on . A t r a c e o f t h e

4900-f t contour suggests t h a t t h e sur face o u t f l o w o f bo th basins

would be from Mud Lake sou'tll t o t h e Snake R iver .

I n the event o f pro longed per iods o f h igh p r e c i p i t a t i o n , ground-

water aqu i fe rs might become ,saturated, l ead ing t o the emergence o f a

l a r g e shal low p l u v i a l lake. Because t h e depth o f the l ake would be

governed by t h e e l e v a t i o n o f ' t he o u t l e t ( l e s s than 4900 f t ) , t h e maxi-

mum depth would probably no t exceed 100 ft. The RWMC i s l oca ted a t an

e l e v a t i o n s l i g h t l y above 5000 f t and would l i e above the hypo the t i ca l

p l u v i a l lake. However, i f su r face f low f rom the B i g Los t R iver were

t o become blocked w i t h i c e o r 9 r u n o f f debr is , f l o o d waters cou ld e n t e r

t he RWMC and cover the area t o a depth of a few f e e t . If t h e f l o o d

waters ponded f o r an extended per iod , o r i f a stream f l o w were pre-

sent, e ros ion of the s o i l cover cou ld lead t o the re lease o f waste.

The waste would be deposited w i t h i n t h e bas in and would be sub jec t t o

1 a t e r a i rborne resuspensi on o r t r a n s p o r t i n t o the Snake R iver .

A1 t e r n a t i v e l y , depos i t i on r a t h e r ' t h a n eros ion cou ld occur. I n

t h i s instance, t he waste confinement cou ld be e n t i r e l y covered w i t h

d e t r i t a l ma te r i a l . To determine which e f f e c t (e ros ion vs. depos i t i on )

would most l i k e l y occur i n the event o f ex tens ive f l ood ing , d e t a i l e d

examinat ion o f t he surrounding 'topography and' modeling o f sur face f l o w

would be necessary.

The frequency o f g l a c i a l a c : t i v i t y can be i n f e r r e d f rom o ther

areas i n the western Un i ted States. Three major advances occurred i n

t h e l a s t 70,000 y r i n the Rocky F~oun ta in region.. The e a r l y and l a t e

stages o f the B u l l Lake G l a c i a t i o n and t h e p ineda le p la cia ti on took

p lace a t about 20,000-yr i n t e r v a l s. These' events i a s t e d about 5,000

t o 10,000 y r and, i n terms o f e ros ion potent ' ia l , would represent t he

worst case f o r t he RWMC.

A shorter return period of glaciation would be represented by the

Temple Lake st,age of neoglaciation which occurred about 3,000 yr ago. This event was recorded in the sediments of ancient Lake Lahontan and

lasted 500 to 1000 yr. The shortest time frame for glacial advances

was derived from tree ring analyses that indicated periodic glacial

advances in Alaska, the Canadian Rockies, and the Cascades during the last 500 yr. The most extensive of these glacial pulses occur-

red around 1850 (Matthews 1951, Hausser 1956, 1957; Sigafoos and

Hendricks 1961).

A return frequency of 3,000 to 20,000 yr would represent a more

realistic estimate of prolonged periods of wet climate that could

result in severe flooding or erosion at the RWMC.

A cross-sectional view of the RWMC (see Figure 3-6) indicates

that the next glacia1,advance might deposit sedimentary soil rather

than scour material. Based on the thickness of sedimentary deposits

and glacial periods: (1) the 240-ft sedimentary layer may represent deposits from the Bull Lake Glaciation period, (2) the 110-ft sedimen-

tary 1 aye+ may represent deposits from the Pinedal e Gl aci at ion period, and (3) the surf icial sedimentary layer may represent deposits during

the last 10,000 yr. However, this speculation should be, verified by radiocarbon dating of soils and an analysis of sorting pattern, angu-

larity, and size distribution.

Since the event frequency for climatic change was based on past events, it could be altered by large quantities of C02 released into

the atmosphere by fossil fuel burning during the past few centuries.

The overall effect of C02 on climatic cycles is a matter of speculation.

Based on the historical evidence, a conservative estimate of the

glaciation return period would be about 30,000 yr. The quantity of

radionuclides ledched would be greater than that discussed for the

Mackay Dam f a i l u r e because there would be a longer duration of water

i n f i l t r a t i o n . I t was assumed t h a t peak concentrations a t the hypo-

t he t i c a l wells would be 100 times t ha t f o r the short-term scenario fo r , .

Mackay Dam f a i l u r e , before adjusting fo r radioactive decay t o r e f l e c t

the time of the scenario.

13.4.3.2.4 Lake or Swamp. The RWMC could be covered

by a lake or swamp in the long term. Core d r i l l i n g s of the s i t e and

associated radiocarbon dat ing could provide a basis f o r .assessing the return period of t h i s event, which could be on the order of 1000 yr . . .

The quanti ty of radionuclides leached would be greater than t ha t d is-

cussed f o r the Mackay Dam f a i l u r e because there would be a longer

duration of water i n f i l t r a t i o n . I t was assumed tha t peak concentra- t ions a t the hypothetical wells would be the same as fo r g lacia t ion.

13.4.3.2.5 River Channel Alterat ions and Erosion.

Based on the current topography of the Idaho Fa l l s area, the Snake River would have t o t ravel over h i l ' l s 300 f t higher than i t s present

channel to reach the RWMC. The likelihood of t h i s event would be much

smaller than fo r a g lacia l advance or f o r a lake forming over the . . , . ,

s i t e . . , ~:

The estimated return period of an a l t e r a t i on of the Big Lost

River channel such t h a t i t would reach the RWMC would be 1000 yr . The ,

quant i ty of radi onucl ides 1 eached would be great,er than t ha t discussed

f o r t he Mackay Dam f a i l u r e because there would be a longer duration of

water i nf i 1 t r a t ion. Peak concentrat ions a t the hypothetical we1 1 s were assumed to be the same as fo r g lacia t ion.

13.4.3.2.6 Perturbation of the Groundwater System. A

s ign i f ican t ly 'h ibher . r a t e of aquifer f lux or a s i gn i f i c an t water t ab l e r i s e might occur with a return period on the order of 10,000'yr. This

event was es t imated t o have t h e same long- term e f f e c t s as t h e Mackay

Dam f a i l u r e , b e f o r e a d j u s t i n g f o r r a d i o a c t i v e decay t o r e f l e c t t h e

t i m e o f t h e scenar io .

C l i m a t i c F luc tua t i ons . Ext remely severe

c l i m a t i c f l u c t u a t i o n s cou ld a f f e c t processes l i k e g l a c i a t i o n o r l a k e

o r swamp fo rma t i on over t h e RWMC. Less severe c l i m a t i c f l u c t u a t i o n s

c o u l d r e s u l t i n s i g n i f i c a n t l y inc reased p r e c i p i t a t i o n o r h i ghe r wind

e ros ion o f t he s i t e . A r e t u r n p e r i o d o f 100 yr cou ld be assumed f o r

t h e l a t t e r t ype o f event. The q u a n t i t y o f r a d i o n u c l i d e s leached would

be s i m i l a r t o t h a t d iscussed f o r g l a c i a t i o n .

13.5 IMPROVE CONFINEMENT. (ALTERNATIVE 2 )

13.5.1 Add Top/Side B a r r i e r (Concept 2-a).

13.5.1.1 Summary. Fo r Concept 2-a, t h e c a l c u l a t e d dose

and r i s k f o r events l e a d i n g t o acc iden ta l re leases a re summarized i n

Table 13-8. Subsect ion 13.4, which addresses A l t e r n a t i v e 1, d iscusses

t h e bas i c scenar ios developed and t he assumptions used. f o r t h e evalua-

t i o n s . Only d i f f e r e n c e s f r om these a re d iscussed i n t h e p resen t sub-

sec t ion .

I The l a r g e s t sho r t - t e rm p o p u l a t i o n r i s k and long- te rm p o p u l a t i o n

~ dose a re assoc ia ted k i t h a i r b o r n e ' r e l ease caused by l a v a f l o w over

t h e waste. The dominant sho r t - t e rm event f o r waterborne acc iden ta l ~ r e leases i s f a i l u r e of t h e ~ a c k a ~ Dam. For t h i s scenar io , t h e s h o r t - I te rm p o p u l a t i o n r i s k , based on dose commitment t o t he bone, i s a f a c -

6 t o r o f more than 10 sma l l e r than t h a t f o r a i r b o r n e re l ease due t o

l a v a f l o w over t h e waste. The dominant long- term waterborne re l eases

a re assoc ia ted w i t h g l a c i a t i o n , c l i m a t e changes, and a l t e r a t i o n o f

r i v e r channel s .

13.5.1.2 Short-Term Risks.

13.5.1.2.1 Airborne Accidental Releases. Emplacing

an additional bar r ie r over the top and s ides of the waste would not be expected to change s ign i f ican t ly the e f f ec t s of volcanic eruption

d i r e c t l y under the waste. (See Subsection 13.4.2.1.1.) The e f f ec t of lava flow over the waste would be s imilar to t ha t described in Subsec-

t ion 13.4.2.1.2, b u t with a lower re lease f rac t ion . The 10-ft clay

and 3-f t r iprap cover was assumed to reduce the re lease f rac t ion t o I X I O - ~ , or a f ac to r of 100 less than fo r the "leave as is" a l t e r -

native.

In a strong earthquake ( see Subsection 13.4.2.1.3) or in a

tornado ( see Subsection 13.4.2.1.4), the clay cover would tend t o

minimize exposure of the waste. The.earthquake scenario was assumed

to lead t o dose and r i sk values 25% of those f o r Alternative 1 . As with Alternative 1, a tornado would, not be expected t o r e s u l t in

radionuclide releases.

The doses and r i sk s associated with accidental breach of waste

containers while emplacing the bar r ie r over the waste were found t o be

small compared with doses and ri'sks fo r disruptions caused by the ...

forces of nature. . .

13.5.1.2.2 Waterborne Accidental Releases. Flooding . , * t

of t he RWMC could occur as described f o r Alternative 1 in Subsec-

t ion 13.4.2.2. The cover over the waste would reduce the e f f ec t s of

floodwater on the waste and would fu r ther mitigate the already low

r i sk . I t was assumed t h a t , compared with Alternative 1, the scouring

e f f ec t would be reduced by a fac tor of 50, as would the resu l t ing dose

and r i sk values fo r the pathway involving resuspension and airborne

t r a n s p o r t . I t was assumed t h a t i n f i l t r a t i o n would be reduced by a

f a c t o r o f 5, as wquld t h e r e s u l t i n g dose and r i s k values f o r t h e

waterborne pathway v i a t he Snake R i v e r P l a i n Aqu i f e r .

13.5.1.3 Long-Term E f f e c t s .

13t5.1.3.1 A i rbo rne Acc iden ta l Releases. It was

assumed t h a t , a f t e r 2085, t h e 1 0 - f t c l a y cover would have been r e -

moved by p r e c i p i t a t i o n , and t h e r i p r a p cover would have eroded s i g -

n i f i c a n t l y . Therefore, t h e long- term a i r b o r n e re l eases would be about

t h e same as f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 1 (see Subsect ion 13.4.3.1).

13.5.1.3.2 Waterborne Acc iden ta l Releases. Beca~rse

t h e engineered improvements were assumed t o have n e g l i g i b l e b e n e f i t

a f t e r 2085, t h e waterborne re leases would be t h e same as descr ibed f o r

A l t e r n a t i v e 1 i n Subsect ion 13.4.3.2.

13.5.2 Add Top, Side, and Bottom B a r r i e r s (Concept 2-b).

13.5.2.1 Summary. For Concept 2-b, t h e c a l c u l a t e d dose

and r i s k f o r events l e a d i n g t o acc iden ta l r e l eases a re presented i n

Table 13-9. Only d i f f e r e n c e s f rom t h e e v a l u a t i o n o f A l t e r n a t i v e 1

(see Subsect ion 13.4) a re discussed here.

The l a r g e s t sho r t - t e rm p o p u l a t i o n r i s k and long- te rm p o p u l a t i o n

dose a re assoc ia ted w i t h a i r bo rne re l ease caused by l a v a f l o w over t h e

waste.

The dominant sho r t - t e rm event f o r waterborne acc iden ta l re leases

i s f a i l u r e o f t h e Mackay Dam. For t h i s scenar io , t h e sho r t - t e rm popu-

l a t i o n r i s k , 'based on dose commitment t o t he bone, i s sma l le r than

t h a t f o r . a i r b o r n e re l ease due t o l a v a f l o w over t he waste by a f a c t o r

7 of more than 10 . The dominant long- term waterborne re leases a re

assoc ia ted w i t h g l a c i a t i o n , c l i m a t e change, and a l t e r a t i o n o f r i v e r

channels.

13.5.2.2 Short-Term Risks.

13.5.2.2.1 A i rbo rne Acc iden ta l Releases. I t was

assumed t h a t t he e f f e c t s o f v o l c a n i c e r u p t i o n d i r e c t l y under t h e

waste would be t h e same as descr ibed f o r A l t e r n a t i v e . 1 i n Subsec-

t i o n 13.4.7.1.1. The e f f e c t o f l a v a f l o w over the waste would be

s i m i l a r t o t h a t descr ibed i n Subsect ion 13.4.2.1.2, b u t w i t h a lower

r e l e a s e f r a c t i o n . The improved conf inement ( 1 0 - f t c l a y and 3 - f t

r i p r a p cover and g r o u t - i n j e c t e d bot tom b a r r i e r ) was assumed t o reduce

t h e r e l e a s e f r a c t i o n t o IXIO-~, o r a f a c t o r o f 100 l e s s than f o r t h e

" l eave as i s " a l t e r n a t i v e .

I n a s t r o n g earthquake (see Subsect ion 13.4.2.1.3) o r i n a

to rnado (see Subsect ion 13.4.2.1.4), t h e c l a y cover would t end t o

m in im ize exposure o f t h e waste. The earthquake scenar io was assumed

t o l e a d t o dose and r i s k va lues 25% o f those f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 1. As

w i t h A l t e r n a t i v e 1, a tornado would n o t be expected t o r e s u l t i n

r a d i o n u c l i d e re leases .

Again, t he dose and. r i s k f o r acc iden ta l breach. o f waste con-

t a i n e r s du r i ng c o n s t r u c t i o n were found t o be smal l compared w i t h doses

and r i s k s , f o r d i s r u p t i o n s caused by t h e f o r c e s o f nature.

13.5.2.2.2 Waterborne Acc iden ta l Releases. The cover

over t h e waste would reduce t h e e f f e c t s o f f l o o d i n g . The g rou t -sea led

s t r a t a would f o rm an a d d i t i o n a l b a r r i e r t o p reven t water m i g r a t i o n t o

t h e a q u i f e r . It was assumed t h a t , compared w i t h A l t e r n a t i v e 1, t h e

scou r i ng e f f e c t f r om Mackay Dam f l oodwa te rs would be reduced by a

f a c t o r o f 50, as would t h e r e s u l t i n g dose and r i s k va lues f o r t h e

pathway involving resuspension and airborne transport. I t was a l so , . '

assumed that i n f i l t r a t ion would be reduced by a factor of 20, as woul'd

the resulting dose and risk values for the waterborne pathway via the

Snake River Plain Aquifer.

13.5.2.3 Long-Term Effects.

.13.5.2.3.1 Airborne Accidental. Releases. The long- . .,

term airborne releases would be' about the same as described for Con- cept 2-a in Subsection .13.5.1.3.1. The,grout sealing of the s t r a t a

beneath the TSA pads would have l i t t l e i f . any effect on airborne , . . .

re1 eases a f te r 2085. , ,

- , . .

13.5.2.3.2 Waterborne Accidental Releases. . I t . was i

assumed tha t , in the long-term, the engineered improvements would have -

negligible benefit in reducing waterborne releases. Therefore, the

waterborne releases would be the same as for Alternative.1 (see Sub-

section 13.4.3.2).

13.5.3 Immobilize in Place (Concept 2-c).

13.5.3.1 Summary. For Concept 2-c, the calculated dose . : .

and risk for events leading to accidental releases are presented in

Table 13-10. The largest short-term population risk and long-term ' : - popul a t ion dose are associ ated with airborne re1 ease caused by 7 ava

flow over the waste.

The dominant short-term event for waterborne. accidental releases

i s f a i lu re of the Mackay Dam. For t h i s scenario, the short-term popu- : . .

lation r i sk , based on dose cornmi.tment to the bone i s smaller than t h a t ' - ' . '

for airborne re1 ease due .to 1 ava f 1 ow over the waste by a. factor of . .. i

lo8. The dominant long-term waterborne .releases a r e associated with . . glaciation, climate change, and al terat ion of r iver channels;

13.5.3.2 . shor t -~erm Risks.

Airborne Accidental Re1 eases ., -- --- I t was

assumed t ha t , as a r e s u l t o f immobilization, the source re lease and resul tsng dose and r i sk values would be reduced by a fac to r o f 100

{Leddicotte e t a l . 1975), cpmpared with the "leave as i s " a l t e rna t i ve , f o r any scenario.

Again, the dose and r i sk associated with breach of waste con-

t a i n e r s during cons,truc+;ion were found to be small compared with t5e doses and r i sks fo r d isrupt ions caused by the forces of nature.

'I

13.5.3.2.2 Waterborne Accidental Releases. Compared

with Alternative 1, the immobilization would reduce the source re lease in flooding. I t was assumed t h a t , compared with Alternative 1 , the

scouring e f f ec t from Mackay Dam floodwaters would be reduced by a

f a c to r of 1000, as would the resu l t ing dose and r i sk values f o r the

pathway involving resuspension and airborne t ranspor t . I t was assumed t h a t i n f i l t r a t i o n would be reduced by a fac to r of 100, as would the

r e su l t i ng dose-and r i sk values f o r the waterborne pathway via the Snake River Plain Aquifer.

Long-Term Effects

13.5.3.3.1 Airborne Accidental Releases. I t was

assumed t h a t immobilization would reduce the source re lease by a f a c t o r of 100 for. any pathway f o r the f i r s t 400 y r (Leddicotte

e t a l . 1973). After t h a t time the grout-immobilized waste would have reverted t o a powder.form, so no c r e d i t was taken f o r the

improved conf i nement .

The r e s u l t s f o r long-term airborne re leases in Table 13-10

r e f l e c t the f a c to r of 100 reduction in source re lease assumed f o r

scenar ios~occur r ing in 2085. For lava flow, r e s u l t s a re a l so given

f o r t he scenar io occu r r i ng 10,000 y r i n t h e f u t u r e . Because the con-

f inement would have d e t e r i o r a t e d by t h a t t ime, no c r e d i t was taken f o r

reduc t i on i n sourcc re lease.

13.5.3.3.2 Waterborne Acc identa l Releases. 'It was

es t imated t h a t f o r t h e f i r s t 400 y r , cornparid w i t h A l t e r n a t i v e 1 , t h e

scour ing e f f e c t and t h e r e s u l t i n g doses would be reduced by a f a c t o r

o f 1000 f o r t h e pathway i n v o l v i n g resuspension and a i rbo rne t rans -

p o r t . ~ n f i l t r a t i o n e f f e c t s would be reduced b y ' a f a c t o r o f 100, as

would t h e r e s u l t i n g doses f o r t he waterborne pa thway 'v ia t h e Snake

R ive r P l a i n Aqu i fe r . The r e s u l t s f o r long- term wateYborne r e 1 eases i n

Table 13-10 r e f l e c t scenar ios o c c u r r i n g i n 2085. A f t e r 400 y r , no !

beneF.S.t would be expected f rom t h e engineered 'improvement. he .con-

sequences would be s i m i l a r t o t h e A l t e r h a t i v e 1 r e s u l t s f o r scenari 'os . .

. . o c c u r r i n g a t t he same p o i n t i n t ime. . .

TIVE 3)

:. Th is subsect ion discusses t h e dose and r i s k c a l c u l a t e d fo r t h e '

var ious modules w i t h i n A l t e r n a t i v e 3. These dose and r i s k r e s u l t s a re ' '

added i n Table 13-19 t o g i v e t h e t o t a l dose and t o t a l r i s k f o r t he

a1 t e r n a t i ve . . .

Except f o r t h e t o p i c discussed i n t h e f o l l o w i n g i n t r o d u c t o r y

paragraph, o n l y shor t - te rm doses and r i s k s . are ' r e l e v a n t f o r t h i s ..

a1 t e r n a t i v e . W i t h i n 10 yr, t h e waste would be loca ted ' a t t h e Federal

Reposi tory , o u t s i d e t h e INEL boundaries. (The r i s k ' presented b y ' t h e

waste a t t h e Federal Repos i to ry i s be ing addressed i n o t h k r DOE-funded

s tud ies . ) The same d iscuss ion ho lds f o r A1 t e r n a t i v e s 4 and 6 , except ' . t h a t t h e waste would n o t a l l be a t t h e Federal Repos i to ry u n t i l 30 y r

. . had passed.

. . . i

The p o s s i b i l i t y o f v o l c a n i c action, d iscussed under A l t e r n a -

t i v e 1, would e x i s t a l s o d u r i n g a campaign t o r e t r i e v e and process

t he waste. The ' r e t r i e v a l and p rocess ing fac i .1 i t i e s would p r o v i d e some

p r o t e c t i o n aga ins t t h e e f f e c t s o f l a v a f l ow , b u t l i t t l e o r no p r o t e c -

- t i o n aga ins t 'an e x p l o s i v ~ e r u p t i o n . Further!nore, d u r i n g t h e campaign, : '

much o f t h e waste would s t i 11 be on t h e TSA pads, exposed as i n A l t e r -

n a t i v e 1. On t h e o t h e r hand, t h d amount o f waste rema in ing on t he

pads would decrease d u r i n g t h e campaign, r each ing zero a t t h e campaign 1

comp le t ion . i '

Fo r convenience, t h e v o l c a n i c a c t i o n scenar. ios were addresscd i n

connec t ion w i t h r e t r i e v a l and a re h iscussed i n S i b s e c t i o n 13.6.1. I n

t h e i n t e r e s t of conservat ism, t h e ,same r e l e a s e f r a c t i o n s were assumed

as f o r t h e co r respond ing scena r i os i n A1 t e r n a t i v e 1.

The above r a t i o n a l e a p p l i e s a lso ' t o o t h e r n a t u r a l phenomena d i s - .

cussed i n t h e s h o r t j t e r m r i s k a n a l y s i s f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 1. One example

i s f l o o d i n g o f t h e RWMC. Because t h e v o l c a n i c scenar ios a re t h e domi-

nant sho r t - t e rm n a t u r a l events, t h e y .are t h e o n l y even ts o f t h i s t y p e r-

d iscussed i n connec t ion w i t h ~1 t z r n a t i v e 3.

13.6.1 D i r e c t - C o n t r o l R e t r i e v a l

13.6.1 . I Summary. Fo r d i r e c t - c o n t r o l r e t r i e v a l , t h e c a l c u -

l a t e d dose and r i s k f o r events l e a d i n g t o a i r b o r n e acc iden ta l ' r e l e a s e s

a re p resen ted i n Tab le 13-11. Waterborne a c c i d e n t a l r e l eases would be

n e g l i g i b l e . The dominant event was determined t o be r e l e a s e caused b y

l a v a f l o w over t h e waste, as i n A l t e r n a t i v e 1. The o p e r a t i o n s - r e l a t e d

even t l e a d i n g t o t h e l a r g e s t s h o r t - t e r m p o p u l a t i o n r i s k was determined

t o be a major f i r e i n t h e r e t r i e v a l f a c i l i t y .

13.6.1.2 A i r b o r n e Acc iden ta l Releases. . .

". ,

13.6.1.2.1 Vo lcan ic A c t i v i t y . The e f f e c t s , o f ' v o l - . .

c a n i c a c t i o n ' d u r i n g d i r e c t - c o n t r o l r e t r i e v a l would be s i m i l a r ' t o those '

'

e va l ua ted i n Subsect ions 13.4.2.1.1 and 13.4.2.1.2.

13.6.1.2.2 ~ o r n a d o . A torpado cou ld s t r i k e t he TSA

d u r i n g t h e 10-yr r e t r i e v a l campaign. The tornado h i s t o r y of t h e area

i s discussed i n Subsect ion 13.4.2.1.4. The p r o j e c t e d area o f t he TSA

r e t r i e v a l f a c i 1 i ty would be approximate1 y 150x1 50' f t = 8 x l 0 - ~ square

m i l e . The est, imated p robab i . .

1 i t y o f tornado damage t o t h e f a c i 1 i ty,

based on t he tornado damage zone area, would be 5xl0- ' /yr .

I f a tornado were t o touch down a t t h e TSA w h i l e r e t r i e v a l was

under way, some o f t h e 55-gal drums cou ld be s c a t t e r e d and breached.

I t was assumed t h a t one row o f drums would be d isp laced . I f t h e

1 5 0 - f t w i d t h o f , the pad were comple te ly f i l l e d w i t h 55-gal . . drums,,

approx imate ly 300 cou ld f a l l onto. t h e pad. It was assumed t h a t 10%

o f those drums would b e breached and t h a t 16-3 o f t h e waste f r om t h e

breached drums would be re l eased f rom t h e pad and d ispersed. The e s t i -

mated volume o f waste re leased is.: (300 drums x 0.10 x 7.4 f t 3 /d rum x 3 l o m 3 ) = 0.22 f t . Th is represen ts an i n v e n t o r y r e l e a s e f r a c t i o n

7 o f about 1x10- . I

13.6.1.2.3 Earthquake. An earthquake d u r i n g r e t r i e v a l

ope ra t i ons was es t imated t o have a much sma l l e r e f f e c t than t h a t

assoc ia ted w i t h v o l c a n i c a c t i o n o r a tornado.

13.6.1.2.4 Dropping o f a Waste Conta iner . Dropping o f

a drum o r a box d u r i n g r e t r i e v a l ope ra t i ons was considered. On t h e

average, t h e . f o l low i .ng . n,umber o f con ta ine rs would be handled d a i l y i n

t h e r e t r i e v a l f a c i l i t y : I .

, . Boxes: 4/day @ 11 2 f t 3 / b o x Drums: 60/day @ 7.4 f t 5 /d rum

Bins: O.l/day @ 120 f t 3 / b i n '

. - . .

An acc iden ta l drop was es t imated t o occur a t a f requency o f 1x10- 5

per hand1 i n g opera t ion , b.ased ,on RWMC exper ience. The f requency o f

t he acc iden t would t h e r e f o r e b e a b o u t ~ x l 0 - ' / ~ r (64. contai ,ners/day x

??O d a y s l y r ) . A c o n d i t i o n a l p r o b a b i l i t y o f 1x10-' was assurned t h a t

thr? con ten ts would becomt? ?xpased ilpon impact, t i i t .rehy a d j u s t i n g t h ? 3

p r o b a b i l i t y o f a breached c o n t a i n e ~ t o 1x10- ' lyr .

3 There would be a t o t a l o f about 1000 f t o r 210 C i o f waste

r e t r i e v e d per day. The c a l c u l a t e d average c o n t a i n e r s i z e would be 3 about 15 f t ( 3 C i ) . A f r a c t i o n , I X I O - ~ , o f the con ten t s would

become a i r b o r n e when t h e a c c i d e n t a l drop occurred. The f r a c t i o n

o f t h e t o t a l waste i n v e n t o r y e n t e r i n g t h e f a c i l i t y f i l t e r system

would be ( 3 C i x lF4 a i r b o r n e f r a c t i o n ) / ( 4 . 2 x l o 5 C i ) 7 x 1 0 " ~ . 3 The f i l t e r system would reduce t h i s r e l ease by a f a c t o r , o f 1x10 .

The r e t r i e v a l f a c i l i t y f i l t e r c o u l d be i nope rab le a t t h e t i m e o f

t h e acc iden t . However, t h e l i k e l i h o o d o f t h i s combinat ion o f events

i s ex t reme ly smal l . F i l t e r performance would be checked by c o n t i n u -

o u s l y m o n i t o r i n g r a d i o a c t i v i t y i n t h e s tack e f f l u e n t . An annunc ia to r

would be used t o i n d i c a t e any o f f - s t a n d a r d f i l t e r performance. Auto-

m a t i c sw i tchover t o a backup f i l t e r system would be e f f e c t e d a t any

i n d i c a t i o n ' o f f i l t e r d e f i c i e n c y . Th is acc i den t scena r i o was n o t

i n c l u d e d i n t h e summary t a b l e because o f i t s ex t reme ly low prob-

a b i l i t y .

13.6.1.2.5 Waste Con ta iner Pene t ra t i on . A drum o r box

o f waste cou ld be pene t ra ted by a f o r k l i f t . The es t jmated p r o b a b i l i t y

o f t h i s event i s l x 1 0 - ~ per c o n t a i n e r handled, based on RWMC e x p e r i -

ence. The f requency o f t h i s acc i den t would be about t h e same as t h a t

f o r d ropp ing a con ta i ne r . However, s i n c e t h e c o n d i t i o n a l p robab i 1 i t y

o f a breach upon p e n e t r a t i o n wou'ld be one, t h e f requency o f a breach 1 would be 1x10- /yr. Because o f t h e sma l l e r expected s i z e o f t h e

breach, t h e f r a c t i o n of t h e waste i n v o l v e d t h a t would become a i r b o r n e

was es t imated t o be 1 x 1 0 - ~ , two o rde rs o f magnitude l e s s than t h a t

f o r r e l e a s e f rom a dropped and breached c o n t a i n e r .

13.6.1.2.6 A i r c r a f t Impact. The eva lua t ions inc luded

the p o s s i b i l i t y o f impact o f a l a r g e a i r c r a f t on t h e r e t r i e v a l f a c i l -

i t y , w i t h a r e s u l t i n g f i r e . It was assumed t h a t the c o l l i s i o n and

ensuing f i r e would breach waste conta iners, r e l e a s i n g waste t o t h e

atmosphere.

The est imated frequency o f an a i r c r a f t impact would be

4 . 6 ~ 1 0 - ~ / ~ r f o r an area o f 0.14 square m i l e (Wal l 1974). '

F i r e was assumed t o develop i n 113 o f such accidents (~csweeney 8

and H a l l 1975). Based on the p ro jec ted area o f , the TSA r e t r i e v a l 2 f a c i l i t y o f 22,500 f t , the frequency o f an a i r c r a f t impact accom-

panied by a f i r e was est imated t o be approximately 9x10-1°/yr.

Two rdws .of, 4 x 4 ~ 7 f t boxes, stacked f o u r h igh and twenty-one 5

across (18,800 f t ), were assumed t o be exposed dur ing normal r e -

t r i e v a l operat ions. It was assumed t h a t 10% o f t h e exposed waste con-

t a i n e r s would be breached and invo lved i n the ensu,ing f i r e , and t h a t

1 i 1 0 - ~ o f t h a t waste would become ai,rborne (Mishima 1974,'Mish,ima,

and Schwendiman .1973b!. The f r a c t i o n o f the t o t a l i nven to ry re leased would be about (18,800 ft3 x 10-I x 1 0 - ? ) / ( 2 x 1 0 ~ I f t 3 ) % 9 x 1 0 - ~ :

The f a c i l i t y was assumed not t o p rov ide any confinement.

13.6.1t.2.7 F i r e During R e t r i e v a l Operations. A

major f i r e a t t he r e t r i e v a l f a c i l . i t y cou ld cause a re leqse ? f r a d i o -

nuc l ides . I n i t i a t i o n o f a f i r e i n s i d e the f a c i l i t y would no t be .

l i k e l y because no f u e l would be s to red i n s i d e ( t h e r e t r i e v a l equipment

would be bat tery-operated) . There w,oul d a1 so be an i n s u f f i c i e n t per -

centage o f combust ible m a t e r i a l w i t h i n t h e s ing le -wa l led s t e e l s t r u c -

t u r e t o support combustion. However, an ex terna l f i r e , (e.g., a f u e l

s p i l l f rom a t ruck o r a' range f i r e ) cou ld burn through the two-'foot

i n f l a t a b l e seal around the base o f the f a c i l i t y . The p r o b a b i l i t y o f a

f i r e o f t h i s s e v e r i t y was assumed t o be l x l ~ - ~ / ~ r .

The wooden boxe i al'ong the s ides i f the TSA pads were as'surned

t o be a f f e c t e d hy t h e f i r e . These boxes woli ld be s tacked f o u r ' h i g h

about 2 t o 4 f t f rom the w a l l o f the r e t r i e v a l s t r u c t u r e , w i t h ' t he . .

overburden removed d u r i n g normal ope ra t i ons . It was assumed that, two ad jacen t columns ( 8 boxes) would burn as a r e s u l t ' o f the chimney

e f f e c t . It was assumed,that 10% o f t h e waste would burn be fo re t he

f i r e c o u l d be conta ined. Th is f r a c t i o n would represen't 40% o f the

combus t ib le waste w i t h i n t h e boxes o f i n t e r e s t . An a i r b o r n e ' f r a c t i o n

o f 1 x 1 0 - ~ ishi hi ha -1974) was assumed t o escape through t h e breached

sea l . Thus, t h e t o t a l i n v e n t o r y f r a c t i o n re l eased w i ' th in t h e f a c i l i t y

would be ( 8 x 112 f t3 x 10- I x 1 0 - ~ ) / ( 2 x 1 0 ~ f t 3 ) z 4x10-'. A 90% . .

c r e d i t was assumed f o r r e t r i e v a l f a c i l i t y conf inement c a p a b i l i t y , i n I

s p i t e o f t he breached seal .

13.6.1.2.8 Trans fe r Acc ident . A t r u c k acc iden t du r i ng

t r a n s f e r o f waste f rom t h e r e t r i e v a l f a c i l i t y t o t h e p rocess ing f a c i l -

i t y was considered. The Sandi a ' ~ a b o r a t o r i e s acc iden t c l a s s i f i c a t i o n

scheme ( C l arke e t a1 .' 1976) was used t o p r o v i d e c o n d i t i o n a l p robab i 1 -

i t i e s o f occurrence f o r t r u c k shipment acc iden ts r ang ing f r om minor 11

t o ex t reme ly severe. ' ~ n acc iden t o f s e v e r i t y - c l ass I I I woul'd' be r e -

q u i r e d t o cause a f r a c t i o n a l r e l e a s e f r om a t r u c k ( f o r Pu02) of

about l x 1 0 - ~ (C la r ke e t a l . 1976). C la rke e t a l . p rov ided a cond i -

t i o n a l p r o b a b i l i t y b f u.07 f o r s j c h an dcc ident . ruck' acc iden t f r e - . . I 6 quencies range f rom 1'.6 t o 2.5 acc iden t s f i d t ruck-mi ' les . ' he lower

va lue, reduced by a f a c t o r o f 10 because o f t h e committed roadways' and.

use o f a speed governor, was assumed f o r t h e RWMC t r a n s f e r system,

i .e., 1.6x10-' acc iden t / t ruck -mi 1;. Thus, t h e probabi 1 i t y of a r e -

l e a s e would be (1 .6x10 -~ acc iden t /m i l e x 0.25 m i l e / t r i p x 0.07 c o n -

d i t i o n a l p r d b a b i l i t y o f re lease /adc iden t x 540 t r i ' p s / y r ) : l x l ~ ' ~ / ~ r .

An airborne re lease f r ac t i on of I X I O - ~ from one breached . .

box was assumed. (This i s lower than, the value of l x 1 0 - ~ used

by Clarke e t a1 . , because a d i f f e r en t form of material would be ' ' " I .

involved.) The t o t a l inventory re lease f rac t ion would be (112 f t 3 x l 0 - ~ ) / ( 2 x l O ~ f t 3 ) - 6x10-'. '

A t rans fe r accident accompanied by a f i r e could . I increase the

airborne re lease f r ac t i on t o 1xl0-'. The condi t ignal probabil i ty of.

such a f i r e would be 1 . 6 ~ 1 0 - ~ (Clarke e t a l . 1976), yielding a f r e -

quency f o r a re lease in a f i r e accident of apbroximitely ~ X I O - ~ / ~ ~ . , . .

I t was assumed tha t o.ne box of waste would be breached in an accident . ,

w i t h a f i r e , and t h a t 1x10 -~ of the contents would become airborne. -7 ' .

The t o t a l inventory re lease f rac t ion would be 6x10 .

13.6.1.2.9 Loss of E lec t r i c Power. The TSA re -

t r i eva l building would no! depend on o f f s i t e power, but on power from a trailer-mount'ed diesel generator located outs ide the enclos-

(. ' 1 .

ure. All workers would be able t o evacuate the buil'ding safe ly . . , .

Because there would be no e.xposedA ( loose) waste in the building during

normal operations, a power f a i l u're would not be expected to r e s u l t in I ? ' I

re1 eases t o the environment. I

1'3.6.1.3 Waterborne ~ c c i d e n t a l Releases. Migrit ion of L ' : .

radi onucl i des . t o the a q u i f e r as a r e s u l t . o i , r e t r i eva l operation; would . , , . i . .: 1 .

not be expec'te,d.

13.6.2 Slagging Pyrolysis and Packaging. I

, . .. . . ' 13.6.2.1 summary. For ,sl agging pyrolysis , the calculated

dose and r i sk f o r events leading t o airborne accidental re leases are presented in able 13-1 2. Waterborne accidental re1 eases would be

negl igible . The event with the l a rges t population r i sk was determined t o be an explosion within the processing f a c i l i t y .

13.6.2.2 A i rborne Accidenta l Releases. . . 3 ' ,

13.6.2.2.1 Dropping o f a Waste Container. A waste

con ta ine r cou ld be breached due t o a hand l ing accident i n t he waste

p repa ra t i on area. The a i rborne r a d i o a c t i v i t y w i t h i n t h e f a c i l i t y

would be about the same as t h a t c a l c u l a t e d i n Subsection 13.6.1.2.4.

However, i f bo th HEPA f i l t e r s were opera t iona l , t h e amount re leased t o

t h e environment would be small 'er by a f a c t o r o f 1000 than t h a t i n t h e 1

case o f r e t r i e v a l . The est imated frequency o f t h i s 'event (see Sub- . > ' : a"'

sec t ion 13:6.'1.2.4~ i s i x l ~ - ~ / ~ r . ' . s

Dropping o f a conta iner o f waste a f t e r processing would n o t be . .

expected t o r e s u l t i n a release. 1mpact ' . t e s t i n g o f conta iners o f

v i t r i f i e d Aaste f rom drop h e i g h t i 'of 30 f t d i d no t r e s u l t i n conta in -

ment breach (Smith and Ross 1975). I n t h e sh ipp ing area, t he maximum

h e i g h t f rom i h i c h a s l a g conta iner cou ld be dropbed would be about

15 ft. ~ur thermore , ' i n t h e ' t e s t s referenced (Smith and Ross 19751, ' . '

t h e breakup f r a c t i o n 'o f the waste was extremely smal l . On the order . ., I

of l x 1 0 - ~ o f t h e o r i g i n a l contents was .broken i n t o p a r t i c l e s l e s s

than l U microns i n diameter. Thus, even i f a conta iner were t o f a i l , . . .

o n l y an extremely smal l f r a c t i o n o f the s l a g would become ai rborne.

. . . * . . .

. . '13.6.2.2.2 F i r e i n t h e Processing F a c i l i t y . A f i r e . . .I

i n any o f . the . .. t h ree . processing areas, w i t h s u f f i c i e n t i n t e n s i t y t o

des t roy HEP HE PA f i ibr i n a ser ies ' o f t w o , was considered a p o t e n t i a l

acc ident . he est imated frequency o f such an event i s l x l ~ ' ~ / y r .

3 About 2000 f t o f waste wo'uld be a v a i l ab le fir combustiori

i n t h e waste p repa ra t i on area, based on a surge capac i t y o f two

days supply.' Recent f i r e experiments i n d i c a t e d t h a t 5 t o 10% o f

t h e s imulated waste burned. It was t h e r e f o r e assumed t h a t 10% o f 3 3 .

t h e 2000 f t o f waste would burn i n t he waste p repa ra t i on area,

with an airborne fraction of ~ ~ l o - ~ . The total inventory frac- 3 tion released within the facility would be (2000 ft x loe1 x

3 . 10-~)/(2x10~ ft3) = 1x10'~. A OF of 10 was assumed for

the remaining HEPA filter. I ~ The surge capacity of the incinerator feed supply, in the pyroly-

3 sis area, would be about 20 ft . An airborne fraction of 1x10'~

was assumed for a fire involving the waste in this area. The release

quantity would be a factor of 100 less than that in the waste prepara- '

tion area, because of the smaller surge capacity.

If a fire were to occur in the shipping area (which would also r

have a two-day surge capacity), the resulting release to the environment from the slag product would be considerably less than from the

untreated waste. It was assumed that 10% of the containers would

be breached by the fire, with an airborne fraction of IXIO-~.

The total inventory fraction released within the facility would 3

be, based on waste volume before processing, (2000 ft x 10-I x 3 l0-~)/(2x10~ ft3) = I;IO-~. A OF of 10 was assumed with ,

I one HEPA f i 1 ter f unct i onal . . ' . . - ,.

No potential was identifi,ed for a fire severe enough't.0 burn

through the reinforced concrete yal I S of the facility. Nor , . was any ,, ,

fire potential. identified capable of destroying the second HEPA filter . , . .

in series in the ventilation system. Both HEPA filters would b e pro-

tected by fire dampers and sprinklers and would be remote from any

location where waste would be handled i n the facility.

13.6.2.2.3 ~xplosion. It is conceivab!e that an ex-

plosion could occur within the faciljty. The most likely area would . .

appear to be the slagging p.ir61ysis area. Explosions in other areas

of the facility would be expected to be much less 1 ikely or less I severe.

No re fe rence da ta were l o c a t e d f o r TRU waste r e l e a s e f r a c t i o n s

r e s u l t i n g f rom exp los ions . An a i r b o r n e f r a c t i o n o f 1 x 1 0 - ~ f o r an 3 exp los ion i n v o l v i n g 250 f t o f waste i n t h e s l a g g i n g p y r o l y s i s u n i t .

was assumed. The t o t a l i n v e n t o r y f r a c t i o n re l eased w i t h i n t h e f a c i l -

i t y would be (250 ft3 x 1 0 - ~ ) / ( 2 x 1 0 ~ f t 3 ) = I X I O - ~ . The assumed

f requency o f t h i s event was a t l e a s t l x l ~ - ~ / ~ r . I t was assumed

t h a t , i n most cases, a t l e a s t one o f t h e HEPA f i l t e r s would remain 3 f u n c t i o n a l , g i v i n g a OF o f a t l e a s t 10 . It was c o n s e r v a t i v e l y

es t ima ted t h a t t h e c o n d i t i o n a l p r o b a b i l i t y o f a g iven exp los ion

c r e a t i n g an open p a t h t o t h e atmas'phere . ( D f o f 1 .(3) would he

1 x 1 0 - ~ .

A l e s s severe exp los ion was p o s t u l a t e d i n t he ,was te p r e p a r a t i o n 3 area, i n v o l v i n g 50 f t o f waste. An a i r b o r n e f r a c t i o n o f 1x10-'

was assumed, f o r a t o t a l i n v e n t o r y r e l e a s e f r a c t i o n o f (50 ft' x 3 1 0 - ~ ) / ( 2 x 1 0 ~ f t 3 ) = 2x10'~. A f requency o f 1x10- /yr was again

assumed.

13.6.2.2.4 Tornado. The p r o b a b i l i t y o f a to rnado

h i t t i n g t h e f a c i l i t y would be s i m i l a r t o t h a t generated i n Subsec-

t i o n 13.4.2.1.4. The f a c i l i t y would be l o c a t e d on 1.4 acres, an

area much l e s s than t h e tornado damage area o f 0.01 square m i l e

(6.4 ac res) . Therefore, t h e p r o b a b i l i t y o f a tornado h i t t i n g t h i s

area was determined b y t h e to rnado damage zone t o be 5 ~ 1 0 ' ~ / ~ r .

The i n t e r n a l p o r t i o n s o f t h e f a c i l i t y would be t o r n a d o - r e s i s t a n t

because o f t he r e i n f o r c e d conc re te c o n s t r u c t i o n . I nc l uded a re t h e

waste p r e p a r a t i o n area and t h e s l agg ing p y r o l y s i s area. ( I t i s con-

c e i v a b l e t h a t a to rnado o f unusual s e v e r i t y c o u l d . . s t r i k e t h e f a c i l i t y

and cause f a i l u r e o f t h e t o r n a d o - r e s i s t a n t s t r u c t u r e s . ' However, . t h e

p r o b a b i l i t y o f such an occurrence would be o rders o f magnitude lower 7 than t h e va lue o f 5x10- /yr f o r more r e p r e s e n t a t i v e tornadoes.) ,

It was assumed t h a t t he i n c i n e r a t o r o f f - gas ductwork l ead ing t o

t h e HEPA f i l t e r system cou ld be severe ly damaged i n a tornado. Based

on an assumed shutdown t ime f o r t he i n c i n e r a t o r , t h e re lease q u a n t i t y

( p r i o r t o shutdown) i s est imated i n t h e f o l l o w i n g paragraph.

I f the o f f -gas ducts were damaged, t h e i n c i n e r a t o r a i r supply

would immediately sw i tch t o c o l d a i r . I n c i n e r a t o r shutdown was e s t l - .

mated t o take p lace i n about 30 min, l i m i t i n g the r a d i o a c t i v i t y r e -

leased w i t h t h e stack gases. The res idence t ime o f .was te i n t h e i n -

c i n e r a t o r would be about 6 h r . Based on a vo lumet r ic f l o w r a t e o f 3 about 42 ft o f waste/hr, t he i n c i n e r a t o r i nven to ry o f waste would

3 be about 250 f t . The i n c i n e r a t o r would r e q u i r e preheated a i r a t ,,

5 . 3 a r a t e of 24 tons/hr . A s tack gas f low r a t e o f 7x10 - f t /h r was 3

used. Mass l oad ing was conse rva t i ve l y .assumed t o be 100 mg/m , a

f a c t o r o f IOU h igher than t h a t assumed by Ledd ico t te e t a l . (1978). 5 3 The mass re lease through t h e stack would thus be about (7x10 f t /h r x

3 0.5 h r x 0.1 g/m ) 1000 g. From Table 13-6, t h e a c t i v i t y concentra-

t i o n i s 13.2x10-~ Ci/g. Thus, t he s tack re lease, would be 1000 g x

13 .2x10-~ C i /g ~ 1 . 3 x 1 0 - ~ C i .

Because o f the necess i ty t o p rov ide f o r loadout of pro-

cessed waste, no t a l l boundaries o f t h e sh ipp ing .a rea would be 3 to rnado- res is tan t . I t was assumed t h a t . 2000 f t o f waste (based

on volume be fo re processing) would be af fected. The p o t e n t i a l i m -

pac t v e l o c i t i e s o f t he waste conta iners i n a tornado are no t known.

I f t h e v e l o c i t i e s were as h igh as 100 f t / s e c , the.breakup f r a c t i o n

( l e s s than 10 microns) of the s l a g cou ld be as h igh as. l x l ~ - ~ (Smith

and Ross 1975). I t was assumed t h a t 10% o f t he broken s l a g would

escape the conta iners (Smith and Ross 1975). Thus, t h e t o t a l inven- 3 t o r y re lease f r a c t i o n cou ld be as h igh as (2000 f t x x

1 0 - ~ ) / ( 2 x 1 0 ~ f t 3 ) = 1 x 1 0 - ~ .

, 9' . ;;."

... h' . .A,: . . I , . ,

. . \.. ' , -: . .

. . . . . .. ,'.A

13.6.2.2.5 Other Events. Other acc iden ts eva lua ted

b u t found t o have l e s s r i s k t o t h e p u b l i c than those a l r eady d iscussed

i nc l ude : ( 1 ) a break i n a process l i n e , and ( 2 ) an a i r p l a n e impact on

t h e f a c i l i t y .

The p o s s i b i 1 i t . y of a c r i t i c a l i t y acc iden t d u r i n g p rocess ing o f

t r a n s u r a n i c m a t e r i a l s would be min imized b y m a i n t a i n i n g a r e c o r d o f

t h e f l o w o f t r a n s u r a n i c m a t e r i a l s , as d iscussed i n Subsect ion 9.1.2.

The second a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o n t r o l would cover m a t e r i a l r e t r i e v e d ,

processed, and shipped. Est imates o f t h e consequences t o t h e p u b l i c

o f a c r i t i c a l i t y acc iden t i n t h e i n c i n e r a t o r o r i n suppo r t i ng equip-

ment would be h i g h l y s p e c u l a t i v e a t present .

13.6.2.3 Waterborne Acc iden ta l Releases. The acc iden ts

p o s t u l a t e d f o r s l a g g i n g p y r o l y s i s would n o t l e a d t o any d i s c e r n i b l e

r e l e a s e t o water. I n t h e event o f an exp los ion s u f f i c i e n t l y severe t o

damage t h e f i l t e r system o r t h e f a c i l i t y s t r u c t u r e , some con tamina t ion

would be e j e c t e d t o t h e ground nex t t o t h e p rocess ing b u i l d i n g . Area

decontaminat ion procedures wou! d be undertaken, perhaps i n c l u d i n g

removal o f su r face s o i l , b e f o r e t h e r a d i o n u c l i d e s c o u l d be c a r r i e d

i n t o su r f ace o r subsur face waters.

13.6.3 Sh ipp ing o f S lag t o t h e Federa l Repos i to ry .

13.6.3.1 Summary. For shipment t o t he ~ e d e r a l Reposi tory ,

t h e c a l c u l a t e d dose and r i s k f o r events l e a d i n g t o a i r b o r n e re l eases

a re presented i n Table' 13-13. The dominant p o p u l a t i o n r i s k would

r e s u l t f r om a t r a i n acc iden t i n a r u r a l area. The r i s k o f waterborne

re l eases was es t imated t o be smal l compared t o t h a t f o r a i r b o r n e

r e 1 eases.

13.6.3.2 A i rbo rne Acc iden ta l Releases. The shipment

r o u t e assumed f o r t h e r i s k c a l c u l a t i o n s i s shown i n F i g u r e 9-10.

The a c t u a l r o u t e has n o t y e t been se lec ted . . A one-way, 1411-mi le

t r i p would r e q u i r e about 6 days. The es t imated sh ipp ing r a t e would

be 190 c a r s l y r .

The population densities along the postulated route have been

categorized as "urban" for the Denver-Boulder area, "suburban" for

the Colorado Springs and Pueblo areas, and "rural" for the remainder.

Distances through "urban," "suburban," and "rural" areas were esti-

mated to be 35, 50, and 1326 miles, respectively. The population

density of the rural areas was assumed to be the same as the average

density for the INEL population distribution. For the. suburban and

urban areas, density multiplying factors of 8 and 70, respectively,

were used to approximate the population densities used by McSweeney and Hall (1975).

The accident frequency for railroad freight cars was assumed

to be 1.2x10-* "serious" accidents (car damaged beyond repair)

per car-mil e (Adcock and McCarthy 1977). Through June 1976, a

total of 553 carloads of TRU waste had been shipped from Rocky

Flats to the RWMC (a distance of about 800 miles) with no "serious"

accidents (Adcock and McCarthy 1977). This data base covers about

44U,000 car-miles. Three unusual events, including one derailment,

have been recorded in rail shipments since 1970 (see Subsection 4.3.4,

Table 4-4). However, in none of these events was there any breach of , *

conf i nement .

An engineering evaluation has been conducted of the safety

features of the ATMX rail car (Adcock and McCarthy 1977). The

evaluation concluded that most of the rail car accidents normally

classified as "serious" would not result in significant damage to

cargo. Only under the most severe conditions would there be a sig-

nificant possibility of release of radionuclides to the environment.

The two following conditions were judged to be requisite for a release to the environment:

( 1 ) The t r a in carrying waste collides with a second t ra in a t a net impact speed of more than 70 mph. A 30- to60-min f i r e

. .

follows the crash. This accident was defined as "extra severe" ( A E C 19/21.

(2) As a consequence of the col l is ion just described, a strong, pointed object (e.g., a r a i l ripped from the roadbed in the coll ision) punctures the outer steel ' wall of the r a i l car., ,

Only t h i s type of railroad accident, a.ssociated with the "extra severe1I,accident above, was judged capable of breach-

ing the ATMX r a i l ' car (Adcock and McCarthy 1977).

The frequency of the "extra severell accident, based on interpre- ta t ion of data presented in AEC 1972, would be 1 . 6 ~ 1 0 - ~ ~ / c a r - m i l e . (This value i s considerably lower than the ra te of l . ~ x l ~ - ~ / c a r - m i l e for "serious" accidents. ) I t was conservatively assumed that a1 1 "extra severeN accidents would involve penetration of a r a i l car by a pointed object. The frequency of breach of containment would, therefore , be 1.6xl0-~*/car-mi le. . .

Railroad regulations prohibit high-speed operation in urban areas. However, a low-speed head-on col l is ion of two t r a ins could s t i l l occur in an urban area. An accident of th i s type could involve a net impact velocity great enough for a c lassif icat ion of "severeu

b u t probably not "extra severe" (AEC 1972). Such an accident was . , .

judged not capable of breaching the ATMX ra i lcar . Thus, no release of radioactive materi a1 would be expected.

Based on the assumed values of shipping rates and shipping distance, fractions of the route in urban, suburban, and r u r a l -

areas, and ra te of "extra severe" accidents; the annual f re - .

quencies of such 'accidents would be 0 (urban), 2x10-~ (suburban), . ' . .

and ~ X I Q - ~ ( r u r a l ) .

The f r a c t i o n o f waste t h a t would become a i rborne , a f t e r be ing

sub jec ted f o c o n t a i n e r r u p t u r e fo rces , would depend on t h e waste

form. d i r e c t l y usab le da ta f o r t h e a i r b o r n e f r a c t i o n s a re n o t

a v a i l a b l e f o r t he s lag . Therefore, t e s t da ta (Smi th and Ross 1975)

f o r s imu la ted h i g h - l e v e l waste immob i l i zed i n g lass were used as a

benchmark f o r e s t i m a t i n g re l ease f r a c t i o n s .

It was assumed t h a t shock dbso rp t i on b y t h e r a i l c a r s would reduce

t h e e f f e c t i v e impact v e l o c i t y o f t h e waste con ta ine rs t o h a l f o f t h e

i n i t i a l value. A t t h i s con ta ine r v e l o c i t y o f 35 mph (50 f t / s e c ) , t h e

bes t -es t ima te curve fo r ' v i t r i f i e d waste (Smi th and Ross ,1975) shows , .

t h a t I X I O - ~ would be t h e f r a c t i o n o f g l a s s t h i t would break ' i n t o

p a r t i c l e s o f l e s s than l U microns e q u i v a l e n t diameter. , .

Because o f t h e s i m i l a r i t i e s between t h e c a s t s l a g p roduc t and

v i t r i f i e d w i s te , t h e f r a c t i o n o f p a r t i c l e s l e s s than 10 microns i n

s i z e was taken t'o be t he same va lue o f I X I O - ~ . O f t h i s f r a c t i o n , i t '

was assumed 1'0% escaped f rom t h e breached c o n t a i n e r and t h e breached ' ,

. .

r a i l c a r ( s m i t h and Ross 1975). he o v e r a l l r e l e a s e f r a c t i o n would . .

t h e r e f o r e be 1 x 1 0 - ~ f o r any con ta ine r breached i n t h e p o s t u l a t e d

acc i dent.

The number o f drums l i k e l ' y t o be pene t ra ted has been eva lu -

a ted as t h r e e (DOE 1978a). ~ a c h drum wou'ld h o l d 7.4 f t3 of waste '

'

a t 0.41 c i / f t 3 . The t o t a l i n v e n t o r y r e l e a s e f r a c t i o n f o r t h e . .

p o s t u l a t e d acc iden t would t h e r e f o r e be ( 3 x 7.4 f t3 x 0.41 c i / f t 3 ' x

I O - ~ ) / ( ~ . ~ ~ I O ~ c i ) = Z X I O - ~ ~ ..

13.6.3.3 Waterborne Acc iden ta l release^. Waterborne

re l eases o f r a d i o n u c l i des r e s b l t i n g . f rom t h e sh ipp ing acc iden t de- . . , .

s c r i b e d i n Subsect ion 13.6.3.2 w o u l d ' r h s u l t i n a low l e v e l o f r i s k . '

The f requency o f such an event was es t imated as 2 t o 3 o rders o f mag-

n i t u d e l e s s than those i n Table 13-13. For r a d i o n u c l i d e s t o be re:

leased t o water, t h e acc iden t would have t o cause a t r a i n t o f a l l i n t o

a river.or lake, or to occur during a heavy rain with local flooding.

Water would have to penetrate the car through the punctured opening, dissolve the waste, and cause radionuclides to migrate out of the car.

The slag wou!d.be relatively insoluble in water. It would take some time for the water penetration and radionucl ide migration to

occur. During that time, mitigative measures would probably take ,

place, such as sealing,the breach or recovering the car.

Prolonged leaching was conservatively estimated to result

in a waterborne release fraction on the order of 1x10-~ for a breached container. h his estimate was based on a slag surface area

2 of 25 ft before the accident, an area increase of a factor of 5

due to the accident (Smith and Ross,1975), slag weight of 1300 lb, 2 solubility of 1x10-~ g/cm /day (based on preliminary tests), and

5 days leaching.] This fraction is about the same as that estimated

for an airborne release. The dose resulting from this release scenario would depend on the details of the.waterborne pathway to popu-

lations, but would generally be expected to be less than the dose resulting from an airborne release of the same quantity of material.

Thus, both the probabi 1 i ty and consequences of waterborne re:

leases in shipping accidents would be expected to be less than for airborne re1 eases.

13.7 RETRIEVE, PROCESS, AND DELAY SHIPMENT TO THE FEDERAL REPOSITORY

The risks associated with retrieval and processing by slagging

pyrolysis for Alternative 4 would be the same as those for correspond-

ing modules of Alternative 3 (see Subsections 13.6.1 and 13.6.2). The risks for shipping slag to the Federal ~epository would be similar

to those discussed in Subsection 13.6.3, except for adjustments of a few percent downward for radioactive decay and upward for population

growth. Such changes are not detectable within the accuracy of the . .

present analysis . In addit ion, there would be r i sk associated with

the 20-yr stbrage operation, as described be'l ow.

The surface f a c i l i t i e s f o r 20-yr storage of processed waste a re

described in Subsection 9.2. Events affect ing the waste placed in to I

storage a f t e r incineration would have lower r i sk than those f o r the

untreated waste. The s lag product would be f r e e from combustible

mater ia ls , r e l a t i ve ly immobile, and of low leachabi l i ty . The pre-

s t ressed concrete f a c i l i t i e s f o r 20-yr storage would be expected

t o provide confinement superior t o t h a t current ly provided on the TSA pads. Because of these fac tors , the r i s k s associated with t h i s

module would be considerably smaller than the short-term r i sk s f o r

Concept 2-b (see Subsection 13.5.2), a f t e r the mlnor corrections

required f o r radionuclide . . decay and population growth.

~ ropping ' . a container of s lag during emplacement in the storage . . ,

f a c i l i t y hould not be expected t o r e su l t in a ' s i g n i f i c a n t re lease , f o r

the reasons presented in Subsection 13.6.2.2.1. . ,

The same type of accident could occur during t rans fe r of the s lag \

from the process f a c i l i t y t o the storage f a c i l i t y as during t rans fe r

of untreated waste from the r e t r i eva l f a c i l i t y t o the

process f a c i l ' i t y (see Subsection 13.6.1.2.8). ~ o k e v e r , the r i sk s

would be several orders of magnitude l e s s than those discussed pre-

viously. The re lease f rac t ions from the s lag would be much smaller

than fo r untreated waste.

13.8 RETRIEVE, PROCESS, AND DISPOSE OF AT THE INEL (ALTERNATIVE 5)

The r i sk s associated with re t r i eva l and processing by slagging

pyrolysis fo r Alternative 5 would be the same as those fo r correspond-

ing modules f o r Alternative 3 ( s ee Subsections 13.6.1 and 13.6.2).

13.8.1 Compaction and Immobi l i za t ion .

13.8.1.1 Summary. For waste compaction and immobi l i za t ion ,

t h e c a l c u l a t e d dose and r i s k f o r events l ead ing t o a i rbo rne re leases

are presented i n Table 13-14. Waterborne acc identa l re leases would be

n e g l i g i b l e . The event l ead ing t o t he l a r g e s t r i s k was determined t o

be a f i r e i n t h e compaction area.

13.8.1.2 A i rborne Acc identa l Releases. Accidents t h a t

cou ld occur du r i ng compaction and immob i l i za t i on o f t h e s to red waste

would g e n e r a l l y be s i m i l a r t o those discussed f o r s l agg ing p y r o l y s i s

i n Subsection 13.6.2.2. One s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i s t h a t a surge

c a p a c i t y would no t be maintained. The est imated i nven to r i es , based on 3 waste processing r a t e and res idence t ime, were 200 f t f o r t h e waste

3 p repa ra t i on area, and 800 ft f o r t h e compaction area.

The eva lua t i on o f hand l ing 'accidents i n t h e waste p repa ra t i on

area was i d e n t i c a l t o t h a t i n Subsect ion 13.6.2.2. , ,

For hand l ing acc idents i n t h e compaction area, i t was

assumed t h a t t h e compacted waste would be processed a t a r a t e 3 o f 36 conta iners/day .w i th 16 f t o f compacted waste/conta iner .

The frequency o f dropping a con ta ine r o f waste.was est imated t o be

8 ~ 1 0 - ~ / ~ r , based on a drop probab i 1 i t y o f l x l ~ - ~ / c o n t a i ner handi ed

and an assumption of .7920 conta iners /y r . A c o n d i t i o n a l p r o b a b i l i t y

o f 1 x 1 0 - ~ was assumed f o r t h e breaching o f a dropped conta iner . A

s p i l l o f a l l t h e waste i n one con ta ine r would r e s u l t i n an a i rbo rne ' 3 3 re lease 05 (16 f t x 0.35 C i / f t x an a i rbo rne re lease f r a c t i o n o f

1 0 - ~ ) / ( 4 . 2 x lo5, C i ) = 1 x 1 0 ' ~ o f t he t o t a l waste inventory .

Aside f rom t h e d i f f e rences i n t h e i n v e n t o r i e s involved, t h e

assumptions made concerning a f i r e o r an exp los ion i n t h e f a c i l i t y

were t h e same as those i n Subsect ion 13.6.2.2. However, no p o t e n t i a l

source was i d e n t i f i e d f o r an explosi,on s t r o n g enough t o breach t h e

w a l l s o f t he f a c i l i t y o r t o f a i l b o t h HEPA f i l t e r s and t h e i r asso-

c i a t e d b l a s t dampers. The exp los ion scenar io f o r t h e compaction area

i s t he same as t h a t f o r t h e waste p r e p a r a t i o n area..

Du r i ng immobi 1 i z a t i on opera t ions , t h e i n v e n t o r y i n t h e

aging, packaging, ' and sh ipp ing area would be e q u i v a l e n t t o n e a r l y 3 20,000 f t o f preco~npacted waste. Concrete c u r i n g would r e q u i r e

approx imate ly 2U days. Because o f p r o t e c t i o n p rov ided by t h e conc re te

packaging, r a d i o n u c l i d e re leases ' d u r i n g t h i s phase would n o t be ex-

pec ted f r o p t h e types o f ' acc iden t s d iscussed f o r s l agg ing p y r o l y s i s .

13.8.'1.3 waterborne ~ c c i d ' e n t a l Releases. .As d iscusskd ' i n '

Subsect ion 13: 6.2.3, no pathways were i d e n t i f i e d l e a d i n g t o watprhnrne

r e i eases. , .

13.8.2 Packaging Only. For packaging o f t he waste, t h e ca l cu -

l a t e d dose and r i s k f o r 'events l e a d i n g t o a i r b o r n e re l eases a r e g i ven

i n Table 13-15. No pathways were i d e n t i f i e d lead ing . t o waterborne

re leases . The event l e a d i n g t o t h e g r e a t e s t r i s k was determined t o be . .

a f i r e i n t he packaging area o r sh ipp ing area.

Except f o r dropping a con ta ine r , acc iden ta l re leases d u r i n g .

packaging ope ra t i ons would be t h e same as those ' descr ibed ' i n Subsec- 3 . .

t i o n 13.8.1.' The waste would he p a c t a g e d ! i n 7 .4 - f t drums. A 3 s p i l l f rom a dropped con ta ine r would r e s u l t i n a r e l e a s e o f (7.4 f t x

3 5 0.21 C i l f t x an a i r b o r n e re l ease f r a c t i o n o f 1 0 - ~ ) / ( 4 . 2 ~ 1 0 ) =

4 x 1 0 - ' ~ o f the t o t a l waste i nven to ry . I t was assumed t h a t 170 con-,

t a i n e r s would be processed d a i l y \ n a 220-day work yr: Based on RWMC

exper ience i n hand1 i n 6 bpera t ions , t h e f requency o f such an event

would be 4 ~ 1 0 - ' / ~ r . A c o n d i t i o n a l p r o b a b i l i t y o f 1 x 1 0 - ~ was 0 :

assumed f o r t h e b reach ing o f a dropped con ta ine r .

The 'acc iden ts cons idered i n the sh ipp ing area i nc l uded a fir&, an

exp los ion , and a dropped c o n t a i n e r . The q u i n t i t y o f waste ' i n vo l veb

was assumed t o be the same as i n t h e packaging area. Therefore, t h e

dose and r - i s k ~ w o u l d .be~unchanged. U

13-87 -, ii. ;

:-'

13.8.3 Shipment of Processed Waste t o INEL Disposal Locat ions.

This subsection discusses possible accidental releases during truck

shipment of processed waste to the Lemhi Range, s i t e 14, or an Engi- .

neered Surface Disposal Faci l i ty near the RWMC. Shipment would' take

place in semitrailers limited to speeds of 35 mph on committed road- . .

ways. ~cc iden ' t s would resul t only in airborne releases; no waterborne '

releases were postulated. The calculated dose and risk are presented '

in Table 13-16.

No direct ly applicable data were located-for accidents dur-

ing shipment under such conditions. U.S. Department of Transporta-

t ion s t a t i s t i c s have been compiled for highway accidents occurring on

noncommi tted highways a t vehicle speeds of 30 to 50 mph (c lass i f ied as

"severe"). Accidents class i f ied as "severe" are assumed to involve

impact and puncture, followed by a 30 to 60 min f i r e , causing a re-

lease. The probability for a "severe" accident has been l i s ted as

about l x l ~ ' ~ ~ / v e h i c l e - m i l e (AEC 1972). Such an accident scenario i s

considerably more severe than 'might be expected during onsi t e shipment

of processed waste.

Another accident c lassif icat ion ~cheme (Clarke e t a1 . 1976) would

yield d prqbabi 1 i ty of 1.6x10-~ acci dent/vehicle-mi le . With a con-

dit ional probability of 1;6x10-* for f i r e , lowered by a factor of 10

as in Subsection 13.6.1.2.8, the resultant probability for an accident

inc1udi"g f i r e would be 2 .6~10 '~ /vehi~le-mi le . The probability used

for t h i s study was the geometric mean of these two estimates, or

5x10- '~ accident/vehicle-mi le .

For transport of waste in concrete blocks, i t was assumed that

only one block out of the eight blocks per truckload (see Table 10-1)

would be breached by the accident and tha t one drum in a block of four

would be opened. Waste processed by the other two methods would be

shipped in 55-gal drums. I t was assumed that 10% of these containers

would be opened as 'a resul t of the accident. This percent i s half of

the estimate of Clarke e t a1 . (1976). The reduction a1 lows fort the

use of committed roadways.

The airborne release fractions assumed for the waste in the

breached containers were I X I O - ~ for slag and l x l ~ - ~ for pack-

aged only and for compacted and immobilized waste. (By reference to

Table 10-1 for the shipping logistics, the total fractions of the

waste inventory released in a shipping accident were estimated to be

as follows:

3 x 0.41 Ci/ft x 7.4 ft3/container x 48 containers/load x

10-I breached)/(4.2x105 Ci) = 3 x 1 0 - ~ ~

Compact and 1rnmobi:l i ze

3 3 x 0.35 Ci/ft x 16 ft /container x 1 container bredch/load)/ . 5 . - (4.2~10 Ci) - 1x10-~ I

Package Only

3 3 x 0.21 Ci/ft x 0.8 x 7.4 ft /container x '144 containers/load x 10-I breached)/(4.2x105 Ci) = 4x10-~

13.8.4 Disposal. The analysis of dose and risk for onsite dis-

posal was divided into three phases: the operational phase; the re-'

trievability phase, following operations; and the postclosure phase.

13.8.4.1 Operational Phase.

13.8.4.1.1 Summary. Calculated doses and risks

for the operational phase of disposal at the Lemhi Range (shaft or

tunnel access), Site 14 (including'the less massive variation), and

the Engineered Surface Disposal Facility at the RWMC are presented

in Tables 13-1 7. Both operations-related accidental releases and

releases due to natural events were considered. For all disposal

modules, the event legding to the large4t population dose and risk

was determi ned ' to be breachi'ng of a dropped container .

13-39

13.8.4.1.2 O~erations-Re1 ated Accidental Releases.

(1) Lemhi Range - Shaft or Tunnel. The only significant operations-related accident identified for the Lemhi Range

disposal site was breaching of a dropped waste container. This event could be caused by a handling equipment malfunction or a personne:l

error. The resulting release would vary with the design of the access to the disposal facility.

In the shaft access design, a braking system malfuncti.on could cause

the elevator hoists to fail. The drop through the full shaft length would be approximately 800 ft. The fadling containers would impact onto the ,

underground receiving area with a velocity of about 200 ft/sec. This .

accident could result in breaching of the waste containers.

Hoist cage capacities would be 6 slag containers, one block of

concrete containing compacted waste, or 12 drums of the pac'kaged waste. For the compacted and immobilized waste form, it was assumed that the.

concrete block would provi.de additional protection such that only one drum out of the four involved would be breached. The fractions of the.tota1

waste activity released within the facility would be as follows:

3 3 (6 drums x 7.4 ft /drum x 0.41 Ci/ft x airborne

fraction)/(4.2x105 Ci) = 4x10-lo

Compacted and Immobi 1 i zed

3 3 (1 drum x 16 ft/drum x 0.35 Ci/ft x ~o-~airborne

fraction)/(4.2~10~ Ci) = 1x10'~

Packaged Only

(12 drums x 7.4 ft3/drum x 0.8 x 0.21 ci/ft3 x air-

borne fraction)/(4.2x105 Ci) = 4x10-~

3 A DF value o f 10 was assumed f o r one stage o f standby HEPA

f i l t e r s . On de tec t i on o f r a d i o a c t i v i t y i n t he e f f l u e n t s , t he vent i l -a -

t i o n system would au tomat i ca l l y sw i tch over t o the f i l t e r e d route. .

Operat ing experience w i t h Dover e leva to rs has i n d i c a t e d t h a t .

7 f a i l u r e occurs every 2 . 5 ~ 1 0 t r i p s . For t he contemplated waste

emplacement ra tes , t h e est imated p r o b a b i l i t y o f f a i l u r e w i t h i n a I

given year would range f rom 9 x 1 0 - ~ t o l x l ~ - ~ , depending on the

processing method used. . . f

I n t he tunnel access design, t he underground v a u l t would n.ot

r e q u i r e h o i s t s f o r emplacement operat ions. The tunne ls t o the v a u l t

area would slope upward from the l oad ing area on a 1/2% slope. A

waste conta iner cou ld be dropped f rom t h e hand l ing equipment, w i t h

an est imated maximum drop he igh t of 15 ft. It was assumed t h a t , f o r a

slagged o r repackaged waste, o n l y one drum would be breached i n a

g iven hand l ing accident . It was assumed t h a t a dropped conta iner o f

compacted and immobi l ized waste would no t be' breached, because t h e

concrete b lock would 'provide p ro tec t i on . , .

The a i rborne f r a c t i o n was assumed t o be I X I O - ~ f o r s l a g

(Smith and Ross 1975) and l x l ~ - ~ f o r packaged waste. The t o t a l

i nven to ry re lease f r a c t i o n s r e s u l t i n g f rom t h i s event would be

x 7.4 f t3 x 0.41 c i / f t3 ) / (4 .2x1O5 C i ) = ~ ' x I o - ' ~ f o r

s l a g and x 7.4 f t3 x 0.21 c i / f t 3 x 0 . 8 ) / ( 4 . 2 ~ 1 0 ~ C i ) = '

3 x 1 0 - ' ~ f o r waste which had been packaged only . Based on RWMC

experience w i t h hand l ing operat ions accidents and on the processing.

ou tpu t r a t e s i n F igures 10-1, 10-2, and 10-7, f requencies f o r t h i s

event would be l x l ~ - * / ~ r f o r s lag and 4 ~ 1 0 - ~ / ~ r f o r repackaged' ,'

waste.

(2 ) S i t e 14 and t h e RWMC. Doses and r i s k s due t o '

ope ra t i ons - re la ted accidents a t t he RWMC o r f o r e i t h e r the massive o r

l ess massive v a r i a t i o n s a t S i t e 14 and would be about the same as

those described f o r deep rock d isposal w i t h tunnel access.

13.8.4.1.3 Releases Due t o Natural Events.. Natural events were studied tha t could conceivably lead to radionuclide

re1 eases during waste emplacement operat ions. Included were severe

earthquakes, volcanic action, and flooding. The calculated r isks

from these events were.found to be much lower than those for accidents .

related to operations, which themselves would be extremely small: For- , .,

example, i t i s conceivable that a severe earthquake could cause f a i l - ure of the hoist used during waste emplacement a t the Lemhi Range (shaf t access). However, the r isk from th i s scenario was found to be three to four orders of magnitude smaller than tha t from hoist f a i lu re by human error or operational defect.

In other scenarios, the :risk. from natural events in, the opera- t ional phase would be much less , than from the same events in the

postclosure phase. In the l a t t e r phase, preventive and mitigat.ive actions could not be ensured because no societal control over the disposal s i t e s was assumed.

13.8.4.2 Retrievabili ty Phase. There would be no operations-re1 ated accidental re1 eases during the 30-yr retr iev- a b i l i t y phase (see Guideline (8) in Subsection 7.4.1.1), unless the emplaced waste were indeed retrieved. If re tr ieval were carried out,

the probabili t ies and the inventory release fract ions would be approxi- ,. . .

mately the same a t each location as those f o r the operational (emplace- ,

ment) phase of. disposal (Subsection 13.8.4.1).

Releases due to natural events during the re t r ievabi l i ty phase. . .

would be about the same as those described i,n Subsection 13.8.4.1.3,

with a small adjustment for radionuclide decay and population growth.

Postclosure Phase.

13.8.4.3.1 Summary. Bef.ore selecting . . a f inal dis-

posal location for the waste, extensive geological and hydrological, . surveys would be carried o u t . . Such surveys have not been made for . , .

a l l of the .locations considered here. Therefore, detailed analyses

of postclosure (long-term) effects for the INEL disposal locat ions (Lemhi Range, Site 14, and RWM'C) were not conducted for the present study. However, preliminary estimates were made of the effects on the waste from a number of types of natural events and

from intrusion. The calculated doses for these events are presented in Table 13-18. For the Lemhi Range disposal modules, only

an explosive volcanic eruption was identified as having the potential to cause a significant release. The domi'nant event for the Site 14 '

and RWMC disposal modules was determined to be lava flow over the waste.

13.8.4.3.2 Lemhi Range. Long-term effects from

postclosure releases at both of the Lemhi Range sites were assessed. Possible airborne releases were considered for an explosive volcanic

eruption, lava flow, erosion, intrusion, tornado, and earthquake. The waste disposal vaults would be located about 800 ft beneath the sur-

face of the ground. The entrance would be plugged with: 'large pieces of rock and with concrete. Therefore, no significant airborne releases were postulated to result from the effects of lava flow, a

tornado, a severe earthquake, erosion, or intrusion. However, a volcanic eruption up through the waste could result in a significant: airborne release of radionuclides. The likelihood of an eruption at

the Lemhi Range sites would be considerably lower than at the RWMC or Site 14'(see Subsections 3.4.4 and 13.4.2.1.1). The only recorded

instance of volcanic action close to a mountain along the Snake River Plain occurred in the northwest corner of Craters of the Moon National

Monument (about 5U miles away) .' The Lemhi Range sites would be between two volcanic rift zones and within the mountain;

The distance the waste would have to travel upward during the

eruption, in order to become airborne, would reduce the fraction released. The significance of this effect is difficult to estimate. For this analysis, the fraction of inventory released was assumed to be less than the corresponding (short-term) fraction for A1 ternative 1 by a factor of 1000. The assumed inventory release fraction

( 2 x 1 0 - ~ ) i s a l s o a f a c t o r o f 10 lower than t h a t f o r Concept 2-c.

These f ac to r s o f comparison a re f o r hypo the t i ca l ' r e l eases o c c u r r i n g a t

t h e same date, namely 2085.

Poss ib l e waterborne re l eases were s t u d i e d f o r f a i l u r e o f a dam

a t t h e Mackay Dam s i t e , r i v e r 'channel a l t e r a t i o n , and c l i m a t i c f l u c -

t u a t i o n s . The Lemhi Range l o c a t i o n s are h i g h enough t o be s a f e f rom '

f l o o d i n g o f t h e L i t t l e L o s t R i v e r o r o f B i r c h Creek and f r om t h e e f -

f e c t s o f changes i n r i v e r channel l o c a t i o n . Any f l o o d i n g f r om t h e B i g

L o s t R i v e r ( i n c l u d i n g f a i l u r e o f ti dam a t t h e Mackay Dam s i . t e ) would

s i n k i n t o the p layas b e f o r e reach ing t h e Lemhi Range area. L o c a l i z e d

sheet f l o o d i n g c o u l d occur. However, a d i k e on t h e ups lope s i d e o f

t h e s i t e would be s u f f i c i e n t - t o d i v e r t t h i s t ype o f r u n o f f around t h e

s i t e . Thus, no s i g n i f i c a n t r e l eases were es t imated t o occur i n these

events .

Thorough mapping o f subsur face hydrogeology i n t h e r e g i o n has n o t

been performed. Underground s p r i n g s cou ld conce i vab l y develop, poten-

t i a1 l y r e s u l t i n g i n l each ing and m i g r a t i o n o f r ad ionuc l ides . However,

t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e p r o j e c t i o n s o f subsur face m i g r a t i o n near t h e RWMC

(see Subsect ion 13.4.2.2.2) i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e doses expected f rom t h i s

scena r i o would be smal l .

13.8.4.3.3 S i t e 14. E f f e c t s f r om pos t c l osu re ( l o n g -

te rm) re leases due t o n a t u r a l events o r i n t r u s i o n a t ' S i t e 14 were

assessed. Two types o f engineered shal low- land d isposa l f a c i l i t i e s

were considered: a 'massive conc re te s t r u c t u r e w i t h 8 - f t t h i c k w a l l s,

and a l e s s massive v a r i a t i o n (LMV) w i t h 8 - in . t h i c k wa l l s .

U n t i l t h e w a l l s o f t h e d isposa l s t r u c t u r e s had d i s i n t e g r a t e d ,

no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on t h e waste would be expected f rom events . .

such as a tornado, l a v a f low, ' e r o s i o n ( w i t h o r w i t h o u t i n t r u s i o n ) ,

o r p e r t u r b a t i o n o f t h e groundwater system. A f t e r d i s i n t e g r a t i o n

o f t h e s t r u c t u r e s , t h e e f f e c t s o f : r e l eases r e s u l t i n g f r om these

events were assumed t o be t h e same as f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 1 (see Sub- ' '

s e c t i o n 13.4.3.11. However, t h e e f f e c t s f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 1 were

evaluated for the year 2085. These effects were adjusted for

radioactive decay to apply to the estimated dates of containment

disintegration at Site 14, as described below.

The per iod of ,t irrre for which t h e structures at Site 14 would remain intact is difficult to estimate. The cov.er over either type of

structure (massive or less massive) wou1.d consist of 21 ft of basalt

rip-rap, clay, and bentonite. It was assumed that weathering and

natural phenomena would displace all of the cover material within a

few hundred years, thereby exposing the concrete.

It was assumed that, after a total of about 2,000 yr, the

walls of the LMV facility would have completely disintegrated. (This

assumption seems .conservative in that some concrete structures from

the Roman era, nearly 2,000 years old, are still standing.) A uniform

mixture of waste and disintegrated concrete was assumed to remain. The walls of the massive facility were assumed to have completely

disintegrated after a total of 25,000 yr, resulting in a similar.

mixture of waste and concrete.

For all event scenarios evaluated, it was assumed that the event

occurred after 2,000 yr for the 'LMV and after 25,000 yr for the massive disposal facility.. The effects were calculated for these time

periods.

The expected frequency of lava flows, the event yielding maxi-

mum dose for either containment design, would be much less than

for the corresponding event at the RWMC. (The effects of the event

would be similar at either location.) Site 14 is located between the

Howe-East Butte.and Lava Ridge-Hell's Half Acre rift zones and would

be subject to flows from these rift zones. However, along the Howe-

East Butte rift zone, the two major buttes are older than 100,000 yr

(Kuntz 1978). The two major volca.nic events in the Lava Ridge-Hell's

Half Acre rift zqne are indicated by Kettle Butte and He1 1's Half

Acre. These are young vents,, about 4100 yr old (Kuntz 1978), but are

located about 20 miles SE of Site 14.

S i t e 14 i s t oo f a r f rom the f l o o d r o u t e t o be inundated w i t h

water f rom f a i l u r e o f a dam a t t h e Mackay Dam l o c a t i o n (see Subsec-

t i o n 13.4.2.2.2, p a r t i c u l a r l y F igu re 13-7, and F igures 3-1 and 3-2).

13.8.4.3.4 RWMC. Long-term e f f e c t s f rom hypothesized

acc idents were assessed f o r t he engineered sur face d isposal f a c i l i t y

a t t h e RWMC.

U n t i l t he 8 - f t t h i c k w a l l s o f t he d isposa l s t r u c t u r e s had

d i s i n teg ra ted , no s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t s on t h e waste would be expected

f rom events such as a tornado, l a v a f low, e ros ion ( w i t h o r w i t hou t

i n t r u s i o n ) , o r p e r t u r b a t i o n o f t h e groundwater system. There would

be l i t t l e e f f e c t f rom r i v e r channel a l t e r a t i o n o r f rom f a i l u r e o f a

dam a t t h e Mackay Dam S i te . A f t e r d i s i n t e g r a t i o n o f t h e s t ruc tu res ,

t h e e f f e c t s o f re leases o f rad ionuc l i des were assumed t o be t h e same

as descr ibed f o r A1 t e r n a t i v e 1 (Subsect ion 13.4.3.1 ) . However, t h e

e f f e c t s f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 1 were evaluated f o r t h e year 2085. These

e f f e c t s were ad jus ted f o r r a d i o a c t i v e decay t o apply t o t h e est imated

da te o f containment d i s i n t e g r a t i o n f o r t he engineered sur face f a c i l -

i ty , as descr ibed below.

The pe r i od o f t ime f o r which t h e s t r u c t u r e s would remain i n t a c t

i s d i f f i c u l t t o est imate. Eros ion was assumed t o remove t h e pro tec-

t i v e cover o f b a s a l t r i p - rap , c lay , and ben ton i t e f rom the engineered

su r face d isposa l f a c i l i t y w i t h i n a few hundr'ed years. D e t e r i o r a t i o n

o f t h e concrete was assumed then t o occur f rom freeze-thaw cyc les and

f rom chemical a c t i o n caused by s u l f a t e s present a t t h e s t r u c t u r e sur -

face. A f t e r a t o t a l o f 25,000 y r , t h e s t r u c t u r e was 'assumed t o have

comple te ly d i s i n teg ra ted . A un i f o rm m i x t u r e o f concrete p a r t i c u l a t e

ma t te r and r a d i o a c t i v e waste was assumed t o remain. For a l l event

scenar ios evaluated, i t was assumed t h a t t h e event occurred a f t e r

25,000 yr. The e f f e c t s were evaluated f o r t h a t t ime per iod.

DELAY RETRIEVAL 20 YEARS (ALTERNATIVE 6)

Accidental releases from delayed retrieval, slagging pyrolysis

and packaging, and shipment of slag to the Federal Repository would be

nearly identical to those for the same operations beginning in 1985

and described in Subsection 13.6.1. There would be a small reduction

in the radionuclide composition during the 20-yr delay, but an

increase of approximately 20% in the population distribution.

13.10 DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING (D&D)

It was assumed that D&D, as described in Subsections 9.1.5 and

10.5, would take place during a two-year period immediately following

the campaign. The D&n activities considered werat! those involving the facilities for retrieval, slagging pyrolysis, compact-immobilize- package, and package-on1.y. D&D for the waste-hand1 i ng systems of the

disposal facilities would occur later (about 2035) and would be minor

in magnitude and hazard, compared with the other D&D operations.

The volume of D&D waste would be about 45,000 ft3 (~uide- line (2) in Subsection 7.4.1.2 and Subsection 9.1.5), or about 2%

of the total volume of TRU waste handled during the 10-yr campaign.

Because the D&D campaign would last only two years, the waste volume

handled annually would be approximately 10% of that during the main campaign. The D&D waste would be decontaminated before processing.

If the concentration of radionuclides in the D&D waste were 10% of

that in the TRU waste, the number of curies managed annually in D&D

would be 1% of that for the retrieval, processing, and transfer/

shipment modules. As a fikst approximation, one might expect the dose

and the annual risk to the public from accidents during D&D activities

to be about a factor of 100 lower than those associated with the main

campaign.

The procedure for D&D of processing equipment would be similar

to that described for processing TRU waste. However, because of

the lower concentration of radionuclides, the severity of an acci-

dent involving t h i s equipment would be much lower. In addit ion,

only about 5% of the D&D waste would be combustible (see ' Guide1 ine ( 3 )

in Subsection 7.4.1.2).

13.11 HEALTH EFFECTS

Health e f f ec t s from accidental exposure t o radiat ion are dis-

cussed b r i e f l y here in order t o project the ultimate e f f ec t s of the

doses and r i sk s calculated in t h i s study. Health e f f ec t s from normal

operational re leases are discussed in Subsection 12.4.10. Health

e f f e c t s from the long-term environmental dose commitment resu l t ing

from normal operational re leases are a lso discussed there.

Health e f f ec t s can be discussed in terms of short-term e f f ec t s ,

occurring within. about one year of the accident, and long-term ,

e f f e c t s , occurring several years 1 a t e r (NCRPM 1971, NRC 1975).

13.11.1 Short-Term Effects. Short-term health e f f ec t s a re

usually not observed below a dose of about 25 rem, although changes in

blood c e l l s have been detected a t doses as low as 5 rern (NCRPM 1971).

The whole-body dose t ha t would be le thal t o 50% of the population with-

i n 60 days a f t e r exposure i s approximately 500 rem, assuming medical

f a c i l i t i e s are avai lable fo r prompt treatment of exposed individuals

( N R C 1975). In contras t t o the le thal dose of 500 rem, the l a rges t

expected whole-body dose t o an individual in an uncontrolled area has

been found in t h i s study t o be about 0.1 rem.

Another short-term health e f f ec t t ha t would require prompt medi-

cal a t t en t ion would be resp i ra to ry impairment. Pulmonary morbidity

would be expected t o occur among 5% of the subjects a f t e r a lung

exposure of 3000 rern ( N R C 1975). By cont ras t , the l a rges t expected

lung dose t o an individual in an uncontrolled area was calculated in

t h i s study t o be about 100 rem.

Thus , short-term public health e f f ec t s from the accidental or nature-caused re leases s tud ied 'here would probably so small as t o be

undetectable. The r e l a t i ve ly low values calculated fo r maximum indi-

v i d u a l dose a l s o suggest t h a t use o f t h e man-rem concept f o r popula- -

t i o n dose i s n o t u n r e a l i s t i c here. Any h e a l t h e f f e c t s would be ex-

pected t o be o f t h e long-term, s t a t i s t i c a l l y - r e l a t e d t ype descr ibed

below. I f t h e maximum i n d i v i d u a l doses were so l a r g e t h a t sho r t - t e rm

h e a l t h e f f e c t s c o u l d be expected, use o f t h e man-rem concept would be

ques t ionab le .

13.11.2 Long-Term E f f e c t s . Long-term h e a l t h e f f e c t s o f exposure

t o , r a d i a t i o n can be d iscussed i n terms o f l a t e n t somatic e f f e c t s and

gene t i c e f f e c t s . . . . . , ,

13.11.2.1 L a t e n t Somatic E f f e c t s . The l a t e n t somatic

e f f e c t o f g r e a t e s t importance would be t h e p o s s i b l e development o f

cancer, t y p i c a l l y 5 t o 30 yr a f t e r exposure. The Na t i ona l Academy o f

Sciences has s t a t i s t i c a l l y r e l a t e d t h e inc idence o f va r i ous types o f

cancer t o l e v e l s o f r a d i a t i o n exposure (NAS-NRC 1972). The r e s u l t s o f

these and o the r . s t ud ies have been c o r r e l a t e d (NRC 1975) t o g i v e f a c -

t o r s f o r p r o j e c t i n g t h e i nc i dence of cancer r e s u l t i n g f r om r a d i o l o g i -

c a l doses. ' a ) Those f a c t o r s , which were used i n t h e p resen t p r o j e c -

t i o n s , a re as f o l l o w s :

Expected L a t e n t Cance-r Deaths . %

Organ 6 Per 10 Man-Rem . : --

Lung

Bone

T o t a l ( a l l organs excep t t h y r o i d ) ,

( a ) I n t h e re fe renced r e p o r t , t he f a c t o r s o f i n t e r e s t ' were subse- q u e n t l y m u l t i p l i e d by dose-e f fec t i veness f a c t o r s , r e f l e c t i n g dose-rate e f f e c t s . (The dose-e f fec t i veness f a c t o r s were l e s s than o r equal t o . u n i t y . ) The p resen t ana l -ys is bypasses t h a t adjustment and i s , there fo re , ,more conserva t i ve .

A number of precautions have been given (NRC 1975) concern-

ing the accuracy of predictions of health effects based on such factors. Those precautions apply doubly in the present analysis because of (1 ) the re1 ati ve concentrat ions of radionucl ides present, (2) the time-dependence of the radionuclide releases, and (3) the relative effects on the various organs of interest, which differ from those in the referenced study.

The factors listed above were multiplied by the calculated values

of time-integrated population risk for the three organs of interest (who.le body, bone, and lung). The results are the predicted numbers

of cancer cases attributed to accidents or natural events affecting the TKU waste. (Note that a time-integrated risk can be considered as, and has the units of, ,a dose; see Subsection 13.2.2) The approximate multiplicative factors in Table 13-1 (see derivation in Appen- dix. E, Subsection E.8.6) were used to obtain the time-integrated risks for. exposure to the whole body and the lung, as well as to the bone.

The results for short-term accidental or nature-caused releases

(up to 100 yr), summarized in Table 13-22, indicate that the largest impact on the public would be expected to derive from Alternative 1

(leave as is). However, as shown in the table, the projected number of cancer cases due to the waste would be negligible, compared with

those normally occurring from all other causes. In fact, the most probable number of cancer cases attributed to the waste would be

zero.

The annual probability of an individual contracting cancer due to the waste was estimated using the results of Table 13-22. The pro-

jected number of waste-related cancer cases for the population was divided by the number of people and by 100 yr. The average of the

endpoints of the population during the 100-yr period was used. Based on the worst-case alternative, this probability of an individual con-

tracting cancer would be only about 2 ~ 1 0 - ~ / ~ r .

TABLE 13-22

PROJECTIONS OF CANCER CASES IN 50-MILE RADIUS POPULATION'DUE TO SHORT-TERM RELEASES . '

Time a t R isk (a ) Annual Populat ion Risk Pro jected Number of A l t e r n a t i v e 1 f o r I n t e r a t i o n ' man-rem Cancer Cases

Concept No! of Yr 'Mul t ip l ) ier (b) Phole Body ( Bone) Lung Whole Body(cJ Bone Lung =la) o t a

tiormal I n c i - cence of Cancer Cases

IO(~)

A l l o t h e r Orqans . Bone Lung ~ ( d )

. :. . . . . . 3 x 1 0 ~ 2x102 9x103 4 x 1 0 ~ 2x103 l x l 0 l 5x102 2x103

( a ) L im i ted to 100 y r f o r t h i s shor t - term analysis. ,See Table 13-23 f o r long-term analysis.,

(b) Values taken from Table 13-1. " . I '

( c ) Use o f the numbers i n t h i s column could iesul : . in some double-counting. The e f f e c t i s bb l ieved smali, because lung-re lated '

cancer cases vould predominate. . . . I .

. " ( d ) To ta l s hare been rounded.

( e ) Dominant e.rent ( l ava f l o w ) i s associated w i t h the p o r t i o n o f the 'uaste s t i1 . l .remaining on TSA d i r i n g campaign. -(To be conservat ive, t h ? values shown do not r e f l e c t reduct ion of t h i s inventory dur ing the campaign. For t h i s reason, calcu' lated values could be h igh by a fac to r of 2.) If on ly events r e l a t e d t o operations f o r r e t r i e v i n g , processing, and shipping the waste were, included, the annual populat ion r i s k and the pro jected number of cancer cases vould be reduced by a fdc to r on the order of about 10.0)O.

( f ) Analys is k i t h LMV module, where,applicable. y i e l d s i d e n t i c a l resu l t s .

( g ) Although t ime o f exposure i s 100 yr , the dominant event i s as described i n footnote (e) . The waste would be exposed t o t h i s , event. w i t 1 the present minimal confinement, f o r a maximum o f on l y 10 y r . . .

( h ) Mult ip1ica:ion includes e f fec ts of populat ion growth.

The p r o j e c t e d numbers o f cancer cases assoc i a ted w i t h 1 ong-term

( g r e a t e r than 100-y r ) r e l ease scenar ios a re g i ven i n Table 13-23. The

a l t e r n a t i v e o f g r e a t e s t r i s k , A l t e r n a t i v e 1, was t h e o n l y one so eva lu -

ated. P r o j e c t i o n s a re g iven based on t i m e - i n t e g r a t e d p o p u l a t i o n r i s k 6 o u t t o 10 y r .

( I n t he r i s k eva lua t i ons o f t h i s sec t ion , r i s k s were n o t e s t i -

mated beyond 100 y r , because i t was f e l t t h a t t h e p r o b a b i l i t i e s were

t o o u n c e r t a i n t o be r e l i a b l e . However, i t wa's des i r ed t o p rov ide some

i n d i c a t i o n o f p o s s i b l e h e a l t h e f f e c t s f r om long- term re leases . To

develop t he e n t r i e s f o r Table 13-23, i t was necessary t o make an as-

sumption concern ing t h e p r o b a b i l i t i e s o f f u t u r e re leases . The prob-

a b i l i t i e s f o r t h e f i r s t 100 yr were assumed t o remain cons tan t i n t o

t h e d i s t a n t f u t u r e . The , long- te rm r e s u l t s appear ing i n t h e t a b l e are,

t h e r e f o r e , s u b j e c t t o 1 arge u n c e r t a i n t i e s . )

For comparison, Table. 13-23 i nc l udes p r o j e c t e d numbers o f

cancer cases from normal inc idence i n t h e same 50-mi le r a d i u s popu-

l a t i o n . The c a l c u l a t i o n s were based on t h e assumption t h a t c u r r e n t .

i nc i dence r a t e s would con t i nue unchanged i n t o t h e d i s t a n t f u t u r e .

The number o f p r o j e c t e d cancer cases f r om r a d i o n u c l i d e re l eases f o r

A l t e r n a t i v e 1 i s neg l i g i b l e ' compared w i t h t h a t f r om normal inc idence.

Furthermore, t h e f r a c t i o n r e l a t i n g t h e two decreases f r om l o m 6 f o r 6 100 yr t o f o r 10 yr, r e f l e c t i n g t h e impact o f r a d i o a c t i v e

decay. The same t y p e o f e f f e c t , r e l a t e d t o normal o p e r a t i o n a l r e -

leases, i s p i c t u r e d i n F i g u r e 12-2 i n subsec t ion 12.4.8.

13.114.2.2 Genet ic E f f e c t s . I n a d d i t i o n t o somatic e f f e c t s ,

r a d i a t i o n can cause muta t ions , o r changes, i n t h e gene t i c m a t e r i a l o f

exposed persons. Such muta t ions a re i n excess o f those o c c u r r i n g

spontaneously. The e t fec ts o f gene t i c changes can be v i s i b l e o r i n -

v i s i b l e . The changes can occur i n t h e f i r s t gene ra t i on f o l l o w i n g

exposure o r i n l a t e r genera t ions .

TABLE 13-23 . .

. PROJECTIONS OF CANCER CASES IN 50-MILE-RADIUS POPULATION 3UE TO LONG-TERM RELEASES . * . .

Time a t Risk ( f o r I n t e g r a t i o n ) , . Pro jected Number o f Cancer Normal Incidence o f cancer cases( b, '

No. o f Y r , ~ u l t i p l i e r ( , . ~ ) ~ h o l e ' B o d y Bone Lung . A1 1 Other Organs Bone Lung Total'(d)

(a! Values presented are f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 1 (Leave As I s ) , the a l t e r n a t i v e o f maximum r i s k .

( b l Numbers inc lude e f f e c t s o f popu la t ion growth, assumed t o cont inue f o r on ly 100 y r .

( c ) From Table 13-1.

( d ) To ta ls have been rounded. . .

The i n d i v i d u a l dose t h a t would cause t he mu ta t i on r a t e t o become

t w i c e t h e spontaneous r a t e has been es t imated t o be f r om 20 t o 200 rem

(NAS-NRC 1972). A r e a l i s t i c va lue i n t h i s range has been es t imated t o

be 100 rem (NRC 1975). A va lue o f 100 rem would imp l y a f r a c t i o n a l

i nc rease i n t he spontaneous mu ta t i on r a t e o f 1 x l 0 - ~ f o r 1 rem ex'pos-

u r e (NAS-NRC 1972, NRC 1975).

For t he p resen t ana lys is , t.he whole-body .dose was used as an

approx imat ion t o t h e gonad dose. For acc iden ts , r e l a t e d t o t h e a l t e r -

n a t i v e s and concepts s tud ied, t h e l a r g e s t t i m e - i n t e g r a t e d whole-body

p o p u l a t i o n r i s k was es t ims tad t o be 1.5 man-rem i n t h e sho r t - t e rm

pe r i od . Th is value, i s assoc ia ted w i t h t h e l a v a f l o w scenar io f.or

A l t e r n a t i v e 1. From ,Table 13-7, 1 x 1 0 - ~ man-rem/yr x 150 yr (popu-

l a t i o n r i s k m u l t i p . l i e r f o r 100 yr f rom Table 13-1) = 1.5 man-rem.

In t h e 50-mi le r a d i u s popu la t ion , t h e expected number o f

s ing le-gene d i so rde rs , m u l t i f a c t o r i a l d iso rders , and e f f e c t s o f

chromosome aber ra t ions , assoc ia ted w i t h t h i s acc ident , would

be approx imate ly 6 x 1 0 - ~ , I X I O - ~ , and 9 x 1 0 - ~ , r e s p e c t i v e l y

( N ~ C 1975). That i s , t h e most p robab le number o f gene t i c e f f e c t s

would be zero. (Any e f f e c t s t h a t d i d occur c o u l d do so over severa l

genera t ions f o l l ow ing t h e t ime o f exposure. ) The n a t u r a l inc idence

r a t e s f o r t h e s e e f f e c t s , f r om a l l o t h & r causes,tamong t h e same popu-

l a t i o n o f 252,000 (average o f t h e end-point popu la t i ons over t h e 3 4 3 100-yr p e r i o d ) , would be 4x10 , 1x10 , and 2x10 , r e s p e c t i v e l y ,

over t h e same 100-yr pe r i od .

The maximum t i m e - i n t e g r a t e d whole-body r i s k t o an i n d i v i -

dual would be assoc ia ted w i t h t h e same scenar io . From Table 13-7,

6 x 1 0 - ~ rem/yr x 87 yr ( i n d i v i d u a l r i s k m u l t i p l i e r f o r 100 yr f rom

Tab le 13-1) = 5 x 1 0 - ~ rem. The expected f r a c t i o n a l inc rease i n

t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f muta t ions f o r t h i s i n ' d i v i d u a l would be about

5 x 1 0 - ~ (NRC 1975). Th is va lue compares w i t h a f r a c t i o n a l inc rease

on t h e o rde r of 1 x 1 0 - ~ , based on t h e p reced ing paragraph, f o r t h e

50-mi le r a d i u s p o p u l a t i o n as a whole.

13.12 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF ACCIDENTS AND NATURAL EVENTS

Th i s subsec t ion b r i e f l y addresses t h e env i ronmenta l con tamina t ion

expected t o r e s u l t f r om t h e p o s t u l a t e d acc iden ts and n a t u r a l events. 5

The acc iden ts and n a t u r a l events o f g r e a t e s t impact i n v o l v e a i r -

borne r e l e a s e o f r a d i onucl i des. The p r i n c i p a l ' env i r onm in ta l contamir-

n a t i o n r e s u l t i n g f r om such events would be con tamina t ion o f t h e su r -

f a c e s o i l . The f o l l o w i n g paragraphs p resen t a method f o r e s t i m a t i n g

s o i l con tamina t ion from acc idents , based on da ta a l r e a d y presented

i n Sect ions 12 and 13. The same method c o u l d be used f o r n a t u r a l

events. Contaminat ion o f surCace waters, as a r e s u l t o f h y p o t h e t i c a l

acc iden ts o r n a t u r a l cvcnts , was shown i n Subsect ions 13.4.2.2 and

13.4.3.2 t o be o f n e g l i g i b l e impact compared w i t h ' o t h e r env i ronmenta l

pathways. Contaminat ion o f groundwater was shown t o be o f minor

impact.

S o i l con tamina t ion f r om acc iden ta l r e 1 eases can be e s t imated by

comparing t h e magnitudes o f acc iden ta l r e l eases w i t h those o f normal

ope ra t i ona l re leases. S o i l con tamina t ion l e v e l s presented f o r normal

o p e r a t i o n a l r e l eases (Sec t i on 12) can then be m u l t i p l i e d by t h e r a t i o

o f acc iden ta l r e l ease t o normal ope ra t i ona l re lease . The procedure i s

l i k e l y t o overestimate'considerably t h e l e v e l s o f s o i l contaminat ion,

because t h e e f f e c t s o f c leanup opera t ior is f o i l ow ing acc iden ts aret n o t

inc luded. Such ope ra t i ons ' cou ld g r e a t l y r6duce t h e l e v e l ' o f env ikon-

mental contaminat ion.

The q u a n t i t y and d i s t r i ' b u t i o n 'o f r ad ionuc l i des avai 1 ab le f o r

acc iden ta l r e l ease would g e n e r a l l y be t h e same as f o r normal opera-

t i o n a l re leases. The i n v e n t o r y re l ease f r a k t i ons d u r i n g normal ope~ra-

t i o n s are p o s t u l a t e d t o be 1 x 1 0 - ~ ' f o i r e t r i e v a l and about 1 x 1 0 ' ~

f o r s l agg ing p 'y ro lys is . I n v e n t o r y re l ease f r a c t i o n s f o r acc iden ts

would range f r o m 1x10-' t o abdut l x l ~ ' ~ ~ , depending on t he pos tu r

l a t e d event and t h e a l t e r n a t i v e .

Table 12-16 presents maximum s o i l contaminat ion l e v e l s from

s lagg ing py ro l ys i s , . , These.leve1.s are based on a re lease f r a c t i o n .

of about 1x10 -~ . The contaminat ion l e v e l s f rom; the accidents . .

described i n Sect ion 13 can be est imated by d i v i d i n g the pos tu la ted

i n v e n t o r y re1 ease f r a c t i o n by - 1 x l 0 - ~ ,and mu1 t i p l y i n g by the values

i n Table 12-16. . .

The r a d i o l o g i c a l impact on b i o t a f rom accident cond i t i ons

would be s i m i l a r t o ' the e f f e c t s f rom normal operat ions . . . (see 'Sub- sec t i on 12.4.5), a f t e r adjustment by the est imated i nven to ry re lease

f r a c t i o n f o r t h e accident.

14. HAZARDS TO WORKERS I . .

T h i s s e c t i o n 'd i scusses .and, , to . t h e , ex ten t : f eas i b l e , . quan t i l f i e s : . . , '

t h e hazards t o workers f o r t h e a1 t e r n a t i ves s tud ied . Q u a n t i f i c a t i o n

o f t h e hazards i s comp l i ca ted by l a c k of a broad b a s i s o f . d i , r e c t l y ! a p p l i c a b l e exper ience. ,The a n a l y s i s t h e r e f o r e draws f r om t h e awa'i.1:- . . . ' "

a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n and exper ience and from da ta accumulated i n o t h e r

i n d u s t r i a l ope ra t i ons o f a s i m i l a r na tu re .

14.1 CHARACTERIZATION OF HAZARDS AF.FECTI.,NG WASTE MANAGEMENT 'WORKERS. : . . 1 . I 1 . . . , . $ 9

Occupat iona l hazards t o waste management workers ' a r i s e f r om normal a ,

ope ra t i ons and f r om p o t e n t i a1 acc iden ts . Hazards f r om normal opera-

t i o n s i n v o l v e unavoidable exposures t o smal l quantities o f harmfu l

m a t e r i a l s d u r i n g r o u t i n e performance o f work. Fo r example, harmful

m a t e r i a l s i n t he waste m igh t become a i r b o r n e d u r i n g hand l ing . Because

waste conf inment systems a re n o t 100% e f f e c t i v e , t h e workers m igh t

i n h a l e a smal l p o r t i o n o f t he a i r b o r n e m a t e r i a l s . F a c i l i t i e s and

o p e r a t i n g procedures a re designed t o m in im ize these r e s i d u a l hazards.

Acc iden ts pose t h r e a t s t o t h e workers ' h e a l t h and s a f e t y by i n -

c r e a s i n g . t h e exposure t o hazardous m a t e r i a1 s, by caus ing b o d i l y i n j u r y ,

o r both. Measures t o p reven t acc iden ts and t o m i t i g a t e t h e conse-

quences o f those t h a t do occur a re impor tan t f a c t o r s i n ana l yz i ng t h e

hazards t o which workers are exposed. The s e v e r i t y o f p o t e n t i a l a c c i -

dents, as judged by t h e i r consequences, i s another impor tan t f a c t o r .

A d i s t i n c t i o n can a l s o be made between r a d i o l o g i c a l and nonrad io-

l o g i c a l hazards. R a d i o l o g i c a l hazards a re those t h a t a r i s e because o f

t h e r a d i o a c t i v i t y i n t h e waste. N o n r a d i o l o g i c a l hazards a re those

t h a t c o u l d l e a d to-acc idents even i f . t h e ope ra t i ons d i d n o t i n v o l v e

r a d i o a c t i v e m a t e r i a l s . Examples o f n o n r a d i o l o g i c a l acc iden ts i n c l u d e

crane acc iden ts , f a l l s , exposures t o t o x i c substances, f i r e s , burns,

and exp los ions . These hazards a re n o t fundamenta l l y d i f f e r e n t f r om

those t h a t occur i n s i m i l a r i n d u s t r i a l a c t i v i t i e s n o t i n v o l v i n g r a d i o -

a c t i v e m a t e r i a l s .

Categories of hazards t o the workers a re l i s t e d i n Table 14-1. In the following subsections, each category shown in the t ab l e is

addressed, as appropriate, f o r the a1 t e rna t i ves studied. Nonradiolo- g i c a l , hazards are discussed i n Subsection 14.2; radiological hazards, i n Subsection 14.3.

. . All waste management operations would be designed t o minimize

hazards t o the w'orkers. F a c i l i t i e s would incorporate provisions t o I

a l l ow safe and e f f ec t i ve hand1 i ng of a1 1 hazardous materi a1 s expected I

t o be encountered. Health and s a f e ty imp1 ica t ions of any a l t e rna t i ve I I would be reviewed thoroughly before implementation. Appropriate pre- I I ! ventive and mitigating measures would be incorporated.

I . .

I

i 14.2 NONRADIOLOGI CAL HAZARDS

14.2.1 Nonradiological Hazards 'from Normal Oper'ations. Certain mater ia ls i n the waste 'can be harmful i f contacted d i r ec t l y . These hazardous mater i i l ' s may include carcinogens and other toxic substances, explosive or hi g h i y react ive .chemicals, and pyrophoric mater ia ls , such as unreacted plutonium, uranium, and zirconium. The reac t ive or toxic substances may have been o r ig ina l ly stored as waste, or they may have been formed by react ions w i t h other substances during storage. The hazards of a l l these mater ia ls can be discussed only i n a general way, because t h e i r quan t i t i e s and t h e i r physical and chemical forms i n the waste, a re not precise ly known.

j . . .

A,l t e rna t ives 1 and 2 would not involve any normal operational h a i z k d s fiom unavoidable contact w i t h hazardous materi a1 s , because waste would not be handled.

Alternatives 3 through 6 involve handling the waste. Therefore, contact w i t h hazardous mater ia ls could occur. Small quan t i t i e s of 'waste materi a1 s on outside surf aces of containers might be disturbed,

E

or waste mater ia ls might be dispersed through the a i r as they are processed. For instance, the- waste i n some of the drums contains

beryllium. - If a container f a i l e d during storage, beryllium could be

TABLE 14-1 . .

CATEGORIES UF HAZARDS TO THE WORKERS . : .

Possib le. Consequences ;

Type o f Accident

Normal Operat ions

Small unavoidabl e

exposures t o

hazardous mater i a l s

. and d i r e c t r a d i a t i o n . .

f i e l d s .

P o t e n t i a l Accidents

Common i n d u s t r i a1

accidents such as

f a l l s , shocks,

crushing, poisoning,

and burns.

Nonrad io log ica l . . Rad io log i ca l

Exposure t o poss ib le

c a r c i nogens and other.

t o x i c substances.

Res,ul t a n t sickness . , .

r e l a t e d t o degree of

exposure. The expected

low l e v e l s o f exposure

would probably have

n e g l i g i b l e .effect$.

Exposure t o low

l e v e l s o f r a d i a t i o n . . 1 .

The extremely low

exposures i nvo l ved . , . t

would probably have . .

n e g l i g i b l e ef fects.

phys ica l damage Moderate . . exposures

(broken bones, cuts, t o r a d i a t i o n . I n -

wounds, s ickness) o r , . . consequent i a1 heal t h

death. . . . . effect?, expected.

I . .

More ser ious Extreme i n j u r i e s or Acute r,ad i a t i on

accidents such as. , f a t a l i t i e s . exposures w i t h

explosions and f i r e s . , , . . , h e a l t h e f f e c t s .

presen t on t h e ou t s i de o f t he con ta ine r . The m a t e r i a l cou ld become

a i r b o r n e and a v a i l a b l e f o r i n h a l a t i o n . Small quant' i t ies o f dust would

a l so become a i r bo rne w i t h i n t he o p e r a t i n g c e l l s d u r i n g p rocess ing

ope ra t i ons when t h e con tp ine rs are opened and t h e con ten ts t r e a t e d .

Exposure o f workers t o ex t reme ly smal l amounts o f such a i r b o r n e con-.

taminants would be probable. However, because t h e q u a n t i t i e s would be

ex t reme ly smal l , t h e exposure would be inconsequent i a1 .

The waste r e t r i e v a l and p rocess ing f a c i 1 i t i e s and ope ra t i ons

would be designed t o p r o t e c t en~ployees f rom i n h a l i n g , i n g e s t i n g , and

c o n t a c t i n g hazardous substances. D u s t - t i g h t enc losures and v e n t i l a -

t i o n systems would i s o l a t e personnel f rom t o x i c dusts and o t h e r haz-

ardous agents. C o n t r o l 1 ed environment cabs would be p rov ided f o r

workers o p e r a t i ng r e t r i e v a l equipment. Process ing ope ra t i ons would be

conducted remote ly . Maintenance would be conducted by personnel wear-

i n g p r o t e c t i v e bubble s u i t s supp l i ed w i t h b r e a t h i n g a i r from a c e n t r a l

source. These p r e v e n t i v e measures would assure t h a t d i r e c t exposures

t o hazardous m a t e r i a l s would be ex t reme ly smal l . Q u a l i t a t i v e l y , t h i s

t ype o f hazard would be g r e a t e r f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 6 than f o r A l t e r n a -

t i v e s 3, 4, and 5. The 20-yr de lay would a l l o w more t i m e f o r con-

t a i n e r d e t e r i o r a t i o n and f o r decomposit ion o f t h e waste i n t o f i n e r ,

more r e a d i l y d ispersed forms.

14.2.2 Non rad io l og i ca l Hazards f r om P o t e n t i a l Acc idents . The

ope ra t i ons i n v o l v e d i n waste management a re s im i 1 a r t o 'o ther indus-

t r i a l p r a c t i c e s , w i t h t he added comp l i ca t i on t h a t r a d i o a c t i v e mater-

i a l s are p resen t . Because o f ' t h i s s i m i l a r i t y , occupat iona l i n j u r y and

f a t a l i t y r a t e s f rom comparable i n d u s t r i e s (Tab le 14-2) were used t o

q u a n t i f y t h e expected impact o f n o n r a d i o l o g i c a l acc iden ts d u r i n g waste

management opera t ions . P ro jec ted i n j u r y and f a t a l i t y r a t e s are a1 so

i n c l u d e d f o r c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e f a c i l i t i e s i n which these ope ra t i ons

would t ake p lace .

. .

The da ta f rom r e l a t e d i n d u s t r i e s p rov ide pe rspec t i ve on t h e

expected magnitude o f t h e hazards. However, t h e d i f f e r e n c e s i n i n j u r y

and f a t a l i t y r a t e s between waste management ope ra t i ons and s im i 1 ar

i n d u s t r i e s may be s u b s t a n t i a l . For instance, severa l waste management

opera t ions would be performed remote ly . Th is would g r e a t l y reduce t h e

hazards t o workers, compared w i t h t h e hazards i n a s i m i l a r i ndus t r y .

Therefore, cau t i on should be exerc ised i n us ing t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e

i n j u r y and f a t a l i t y p ro jec t i ons .

TABLE 14-2

( a ) INJURY AND FATALITY RATES FOR COMPARABLE INDUSTRIES

F a t a l i t y Rate (Deaths . I n j u r y Rate and Permanen T o t a l D is -

Category I n d u s t r y ( 1 n j u r i e s / l o 6 man-hr) a b i l i t i e s / l O & man-hr)

(1 ) Aerospace 2.07 0.00 I

(2 ) Rubber and P l a s t i c s

( 3 ) Surface . .

M i n j ng

( 4 Wholesale and R e t a i l Trade 10.15 0.00

( 5 ) Cement 11'. 83 0.06

( 6 Construct ion. 14.66 ,0.17

( 7 ) Foundry 18.21 0.10

(8) Underground Min ing ( n o t

- coal.)

( a ) Data f rom Accident Facts 1977 (Nat iona l Safe ty Counci l 1977).

The following paragraphs l i s t the various waste management opera- t ions and the industries whose injury and f a t a l i t i e s rates were judged most comparable for ' purposes of these calculations.

Surveillance and maintenance ac t iv i t i e s are relat ively nonhaz- ardous. Because the aerospace industry has the lowest injury and f a t a l i t y rates tabulated, these rates were used to estimate the impacts associated with these ac t iv i t i e s . Surveil 1 ance and maintenance would

continue fo r 100 yr following implementation of Alternatives 1 , 2 , and 5. For Alternatives 3, 4, and 6 , such ac t iv i t i e s would, for the stored TRU waste, cease when the waste has been removed from the RWMC.

Except for ac t iv i t i e s involving grouting and underground mining, the injury and f a t a l i t y rates for construction ac t iv i t i e s were taken t o be comparable to those for the construction industry. For grouting ac t iv i t i e s , data from the rubber and plast ics industry were used. Underground mining ac t iv i t i e s were taken to be comparable in hazard level t o the noncoal underground mining industry.

Retrieval operations were taken to be comparable in hazard level to surf ace mining ac t iv i t i e s . Processing operations were assumed to be comparable in hazard level to the -foundry industry for slagging pyrolysis, to the cement industry fo r compaction and immobilization, and to warehousing operations of the wholesale and r e t a i l trade indus- t r y fo r packaging.

Disposal operations at the Lemhi Range locations were taken to be analogous in hazard level to the noncoal underground mining industry.

A t S i te 14, the operations would be comparable to the surface .mining industry. ,Disposal and 20-yr storage in engineered f aci 1 i t i e s near

the RWMC would involve warehousing ac t iv i t i e s similar to those in the who1 esale and r e t a i l trade i ndustry. Hazards to workers from disposal operations at the Federal Repositor,y were not included in the calcula- t i ons.

S t a t i s t i c a l ' d a t a f o r t r u c k and r a i l sh i pp ing acc iden t f requenc ies ,

i n j u r i e s , and f a t a l i t i e s are summarized i n Tab le 14-3. Ons i t e t r a n s -

f e r o f waste i n A l t e r n a t i v e s 3, 4, 5, and 6, and o n s i t e shipment i n

A l t e r n a t i v e 5 would be performed by t r u c k s ope ra t i ng on committed

roadways. The t r u c k acc iden t da ta i n Table 14-3 a re f o r shipments on

p u b l i c roadways and are h i ghe r than t h e expected r a t e s f o r s h i p p i n g

acc iden ts i n A1 t e r n a t i v e s 3 t h r n ~ r g h 6.

. . TABLE 14-3

Mode o f I n j u r i e s F a t a l i t i es Transpor t Acc iden ts /Veh ic le -Mi le pe r Acc iden t Per Acc iden t

Truck 1 .7~10-6 0.51 R a i l 1 . 4 ~ 1 0 ' ~ ( b ) 2.7

( a ) Data taken f rom WASH-1238 (AEC 1972).

( b ) Acc i d e n t s l r a i l ca r -m i le .

Tab le 14-4 p resen ts t h e es t imated numbers o f non rad io l og i c a l

i n j u r i e s and f a t a l i t i e s t o workers i nvo l ved i n each o f t he waste man-

agement a1 t e r n a t i v e s and concepts. The r e s u l t s were ob ta ined by mul-

t i p l y i n g t h e man-hours o f c o n s t r u c t i o n o r opera t ions f o r each module

o f t h e a1 t e r n a t i v e o r concept by t h e i n j u r y r a t e o r f a t a l i t y r a t e f o r

t h e i n d u s t r y judged comparable i n hazard l e v e l .

For t h e a1 t e r n a t i v e s and concepts , s tud ied , t h e expected number of

worker i n j u r i e s ranges f rom 4 t o 127. The expected number o f f a t a l i-

t i e s ranges f r om 0 t o 1. A l t e r n a t i v e s 1 and 2 have t h e lowest number

of expected i n j u r i e s and f a t a l i t i e s . For the o the r a l t e r n a t i v e s , t he

module o f g r e a t e s t hazard, i n terms o f e'xpected non rad io l og i ca l i n j u -

r i e s and f a t a l i t i e s , i s s l agg ing p y r o l y s i s . Even f o r t h i s module, t h e

expected number o f i n j u r i e s and f a t a l i t i e s would be l e s s than f o r an

ope ra t i on o f s i m i l a r magnitude i n a comparable i n d u s t r y .

TLBLE 14-4

PROJECTED I(O*IMIOL061W IMJLRIES UD FATllTlES TO wlf IWlUjDEIll laarms

Manpaor CQnni t i n Various Act iv i t les t 'J 3 man-hours) Estimated l l d e r of ~ n f u r i e s ( ~ ) Es t im ted lder of ~ a t a l i t i * s ( b ) Alterna- Con- P r o - ' 0 7 s - Sur- Con- Con- RO- 01s- k t - PW- 01s- sur- t i v e c f struc- Re- cess- posa l l v e i l - s t r w - Re- cess- posa l l v e i l - struc- Re- cess- pos81l v e f l - Concept t i on t r i eva l inq Storaqe lance t i o n t r i e v a l i n p Storage t i o n t r i e v a l - (np Storm* IW*

1 N / A ( ~ ) MIA NIA MIA 2.1(1) MIA MIA V A MIA

A MIA MIA MIA MIA 111

75 11

75 1*1

75 18 12 18 8 18

n. 13 13

l2 8 13

MIA

111 111 MIA

0.4

0.4

0.4 go. 1

0

2-0 0 03 6) MIA MIA 2 0 2 MIA WA 2-c 0.04 21 MIA RIA

0.4 MIA 0.9 MIA 0.2 MIA

n i (e) MIA

0.1(4)HII 0.2(1)

Alterna- t i v e OT ConceDt 1

2-a 2-b 2-c

3

4

5-a 5-b 5-c

5-d 5-e 5- f

Hazards o f Twck Plirnnent Truck-Miles(9) Accidents - -

MIA MIA MIA

Halards o f Rai l S t p e n t k c j d e n t r I n l u r i e r

MIA ly A

MIA MIA MIA

MIA RIA

0.7 2

0.7 2

MIA MIA 111 MIA 111 MIA

MIA 111 ::: :::

Totals [For A11 k t i v I t i * s ; F a t a l l t l r s

MIA s MIA MIA ~ I A MIA MIA

MIA 111 MIA

0.1

RIA MIA MIA

0.2 0.1 *0.1 . #/A 0.2 0.1

I I A 111 RIA . 4 . 1 MIA

0.2 '0.1 4 . 1 111 MIA

MIA MIA

0.2 -0.1 rO.l MIA 111

0.2 NIA

-0.1 -0.1 RIA

MIA MIA 0.2 SO. 1 -0.1 MIA MIA 111 MIA

A MIA

4.2~103 e0. 1 '0.1 4 . 1 . M I A 3 . ~ 1 0 ) 4 . 1 -0.1 -0.1

1111 11/11 MIA

MIA

4.01103 4 . 1 (0.1 MIA MIA

4 . 1 MIA 111 I(I A 114 MIA

(a) M e r s i n Parentheses refer t o c w a r a b l e Industr ies for which accident rates a r e used (see T e l e 11-21.

(b) Actual calculated values are reported. Fract ional values have meaning only f o r cmparison purposes. Nonzero resu l t s less than 0.1 are shon t o Indicate small hazard.

( c ) MIA . llot Agplicable.

(d) * . Less than.

(e) MI - Not Included ( re la tes to operations at the Federal Repository).

( f ) UN Use of the less massive variation of engineered sha l l a - l and disposal a t S i te 14.

(9) Includes mileage fro. re t r i eva l t o processing f a c i l i t y and fro. processing t o m s i t e dlspasal o r storage f a c i l i t y .

14.3 RADIOLOGICAL HAZARDS

, . R a d i o l o g i c a l hazards t o workers a r i s e f rom the presence o f r a d i o -

a c t i v e m a t e r i a l i n t h e waste. Such hazards can be c l a s s i f i e d i n t o

those assoc ia ted w i t h normal ope ra t i ons and those f rom p o t e n t i a1 acc i -

dents. The f i r s t ca tegory i n v o l v e s t h e hazards assoc ia ted w i t h expo-

sures o f the workers t o low l e v e l s o f r a d i a t i o n and con tamina t ion

d u r i i g t h e normal course o f t h e i r d u t i e s . The hazards assoc ia ted w i t h

acc iden ts , involve unpl anned exposures t o r a d i o a c t i v i t y o r r e 1 eases of

r a d i onucl i des du r i ng waste management opera t ions .

14.3.1 Procedures and Design Features Used t o L i m i t R a d i a t i o n

Exposures t o Workers. A14 INEL workers are t ho rough l y t r a i n e d i n

rad . io log ica1 s a f e t y as r e l a t e d t o t h e i r jobs. A l l opo ra t i ons and

. . f a c i l i t y designs undergo thorough rev iew t o assure t h a t r a d i o l o g i c a l

hazards have been i d e n t i f i e d and t h a t app rop r i a te p r e v e n t i v e and m i t i - : g a t i n g measures are incorpora ted . Health. .phys ics s u r v e i 11 ance i s

. p rov ided dur.i ng opera t ions . M a i n t a i n i n g r a d i o l o g i c a l exposures a t

l e v e l s as low as p rac t i , cab le i s a major o b j e c t i v e o f a l l INEL opera-

t i o n s .

Workers can be exposed t o r a d i a t i o n by be ing near a source o f

, i o n i z i n g r a d i a t i o n o r by, i n g e s t i n g o r i n h a l i n g contami-n'ated m a t e r i a l s .

, Opera t ing procedures and f a c i l i t y designs are p l anned so as t o m in im ize

and' p r o t e c t ' aga ins t a l l o f these exposure modes.

Exposure t o d i r e c t r a d i a t i o n i s min imized ,by p l a c i n g s h i e l d i n g

between workers and t h e r a d i a t i o n source, by keeping workers as f a r .

away f rom sources as p r a c t i c a b l e , and/or by l i m i t i n g the t ime workers

are exposed t o t h e r a d i a t i o n . Waste mbnagement ope ra t i ons would use

these methods t o p r o t e c t t he workers.

I n h a l a t i o n and i n g e s t i o n o f contaminated m a t e r i a1 s are avoided by

( 1 ) i s o l a t i n g the waste f r om the workers whenever poss ib l e ; ( 2 ) p ro -

v i d i n g a i r f l o w and f i l t r a t i o n systems t o c o n t r o l t h e movement o f any

a i rborne contamination; and ( 3 ) f o l lowing es tab l ished procedures f o r

c o n t r o l o f contaminat ion spread. Fresh a i r would be p r o v i d e d , t o areas

where workers were present; t he a i r would be' rou ted .toward areas where

contaminat ion might be present. F i l t r a t i o n o f f lows f rom p o t e n t i a l l y

contaminated areas would be provided. P ro tec t i ve bubble s u i t s supp l ied

w i t h breath ing a i r would be worn by workers who would be requ i red t o

enter contami nated areas.

Rad ia t ion moni tors and alarms are provided i n a l l p o t e n t i a l l y

contaminated areas f o r a d d i t i o n a l assurance t h a t personnel exposures

are maintained a t l e v e l s as low as p r a c t i c a b l e (ERDA 1977a). Special procedures are es tab l ished f o r 'evacuating personnel, c o n t r o l l i n g con-

taminat ion, and c o r r e c t i n g accident condi t ions. Personal r a d i a t i o n

exposure dosimeters are used t o prov ide a record o f t h e exposures

rece ived by i n d i v i d u a l workers. Whole-body counters and t h e l a t e s t

medical technology are a lso a v a i l a b l e t o determine and m i t i g a t e t h e .

consequences o f any inadver ten t exposures..

14.3,.2 Rad ia t ion Exposures During Normal Operations. Table 14-5

presents the est imated doses t o the workers du r ing normal operat ions.

The r e s u l t s are not based on d e t a i l e d time-and-motion s tud ies and

' d e t a i l e d dose ca lcu la t i ons . Instead, f o r these p r e l i m i n a r y evalua-

t i ons , s i m p l i f y i n g assumptions were made, lead ing t o average exposure

l e v e l s f o r each module, as described i n the f o l l o w i n g paragraphs.

Unless otherwise indicated, the workers were assumed t o be exposed

t o r a d i a t i o n f o r 1500 h r l y r . The remaining 500 h r i n a t y p i c a l working

year were assumed t o be occupied i n changing i n t o o r ou t o f p r o t e c t i v e

c lo th ing , a t tend ing t r a i n i n g sessions, etc.

The number o f workers f o r each opera t ion was taken f rom

Table 12-9. One f o u r t h o f t he personnel were genera l l y assumed t o

be i n superv isory o r support capac i t ies . The opera t iona l doses r e -

ceived' by these personnel were est imated t o be n e g l i g i b l e , compared

TABLE 14-5

:: ESTIMATED WORKER DOSES FROM NORMAL OPERATIONS (man-rem)(a) --

Transfer and R e t r i e v a l Processing Onsi te Truck Shipment Disposal/Stcrage Maintenance/Surveillance Tota l

Number To ta l v s t a l Number To ta l Number - . . To ta l Number To ta l . ' Dose A l t e r n a t i v e 1 of. Dose o f Dose o f Dose of Dose o f Oose . f o r

Workers (man-rem) Workers (man-rem) Workers (man-rem) Workers Concept (ran-rein) ~ o r k e r s ' ( b ) (man-rem) .Concept

5-9 39 L M V ( ~ ) 39

5-h 39 LMV "' 39

5 - i 39 LMV 39 , .

5 - j 39 88 195 205 2 < C 1 2 1 5-k 39 88. 50 52 2 <<I 19 5-1 39 88 40 42 2 <<I . 30

6 39 44 195 102 - 2 . . < c 1 NI

( a ) To ta l est imated operat ions-re lated exposure t o whole body f o r du ra t ion o f operations.

(b) Surve i l l ance personnel f o r 10 y r f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 4, 20 y r f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 6, and 100 y r f o r A l t ,ernat ives 1, 2, and.5.

( c ) N/A = Not appl icable.

( d ) Covering, g rou t ing and i lmnobi l lzat ion personnel working f o r 2 y r .

(e ) c = Less than.

( f ) < < = Much less than.

(g ) NI = Not. included i n t h i s est imate (app l ies t o Federal Reposi tory workers).

( h ) LMV = Use o f less massive v a r i a t i o n o f engineered shal low-land d isposal a t S i t e 14. -

with doses received by other personnel. For a given operation, the

total exposure to the group of workers was estimated. This exposure was then reduced by 25% to obtain the total dose shown in Table 14-5.

For A1 ternative 1, radi ati on exposures during normal mai ntenance

and survei 1 1 ance operat ions would be expected to 'be' very small. . The waste is covered with about 3 ft of soil, which reduces doses from

direct radiation to an average of about 0.02 mrernlhr (~edahl ,and Janke 1978). Furthermore, perhaps only half of the personnel involved

would work near the waste. Even those personnel would be near the waste during only part (perhaps one-third) of the,1500 hr/yr mentioned

earlier.

For Alternative 2, radiation exposures would similarly . . be very small. This is true both during construction of the improved con-

finement0(about half of the personnel were assumed to work near the waste for 1000 hrlyr) and during maintenance and surveillance (same

1 assumptions as for A1 ternative 1).

The waste management activities for Alternatives 3 through 6 were categorized into retrieval, transfer, processing, onsite truck ship-

ment, and disposal /storage. Estimated exposures during these operations are discussed ' in the foll owing paragraphs. Exposures to workers

at the Federal ~epository are not included in this analysis. Exposures ' to train crews ar!e discussed in Subsection 12.4.9. The members of the

train crews would not be trained radiation workers; they would be members of the pub1 ic.

During retrieval operations, workers would be in relatively close

proximity to the waste containers. Preliminary calculations indicate that the maximum exposure to workers responsible for waste handling'

' I

would be about 300 mrem/yr. This value was conservatively used as the average exposure for nonsupervisory, nonsupport personnel. The calcu-

lations were based ,on known radiation levels at the surfaces of the various types of waste containers on the TSA pads. For delayed retrieval, the dose would be reduced by about a factor of two because of

rad i onuc'l'i de decay duri kg the 20-yr del ay period.

For nbrmal o p e r a t i o n s i n t h e waste 'process ing f a c i 1 i t i e s , t h e

f o l l o w i n g assumptions were made: ( 1 ) 10% o f t he workers a re mainte-

nance work'ers and r e c e i v e exposures of 400 mremlyr; ( 2 ) 65% o f t h e '

workers are ope ra t i ng personnel and r e c e i v e 100 mremlyr; and ( 3 ) t h e

remain ing 25% o f t h e workers are superv isoky and suppor t and

recei;e doses t h a t i r e smal l compared w i t h background. For delayed

processing, t h e dose would be reduced by about a f a c t o r o f two because

o f r a d i o a c t i v e decay. .. .

Exposures d u r i n g emplacement ope ra t i ons f o r d i sposa l o r s to rage

were assumed t o be i d e n t i c a l t o those f o r r e t r i e v a l opera t ions . There

a re two comp l i ca t i ng f a c t o r s , however. F i r s t , i nc rementa l cons t ruc -

t i o n du r i ng t h e campaign was p r o j e c t e d (see Sec t ion 10) f o r t h e d ispo-

s a l f a c i l i t i e s ' f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 5. Workers assoc ia ted w i t h i n c r e m ~ n t a l

c o n s t r u c t i on o p e r a t i ons were assumed t o r e c e i v e doses t h a t a re smal l

compared w i t h background l i v e l s . ~ m ~ l a c e m e n t workers o the r than t he

25% superv i sory and suppor t personnel were assumed t o r e c e i ve I

The second comp l i ca t i on i s t h a t , i n some cases, . . t he number o f

emplacement workers depends on t h e volume o f t h e waste emplaced. The

waste volume, i n turn, , depends on the p rocess ing method. However, t he

t o t d l r a d i o a c t i v i t y . o f t h e waste does no t depend on t h e p rocess ing . . method. I t was assumed, t he re fo re , t h a t the t o t a l . . d o i e t o a 'g roup o f

emplacement workers would be independent o f t h e waste p rocess ing meth-

od. The numbers o f empi ;cement workers r e q h i r e d f o r ' t Le compaction

and immob i l i za t i on d isposa l method were used throughout t h e d i sposa l

modules o f A l t e r n a t i v e 5.

Est imated exposures t o personnel o p e r i t i n g t r a n s f e r v k h i c l e s and . . 1

o n s i t e ' s h i p p i n g v e h i c l e s were based on t h e waste t r a n s f e r r a t e s i n

~ i ~ i r e s 1011, 10-2, q and .. 10-7 and on the sh ipp ing r a t e s i n Table 10-1.

~ o r ' s h i p m e n t t o t h e Lemhi ~ a n i e d isposa l s i t e s , a t o t a l of 1 . 6 ~ 1 0 5

t r uck -m i l es would t y p i c a l l y be r e q u i r e d (see Tab le 14-4). An average

speed o f 30 :mph was assumed. Two men would be i n each o f the two . .

t r u c k s requ i red . C a l c u l a t i o n s i n d i c a t e d a do.se r a t e o f 0.7 mremlhr a t

6 f t f rom the t r a i l e r sur face. The dose r a t e t o t h e workers w i t h i n

t h e cab was assumed t o be h a l f o f t h i s value. The r e s u l t i n g dose

would be about 100 mremlyr f o r each worker, o r a group t o t a l of

4 man-rem f o r t h e f o u r workers over t h e 10-yr campaign.

The es t imated sh ipp ing d i s tance t o S i t e 14 i s t w o - t h i r d s o f t h a t

t o t h e Lemhi' Range l o c a t i o n s so t h e t o t a l worker dose would be about

3 man-rem i n t h i s case. The d i s tance f o r shipment o f processed waste

t o t h e engineered su r f ace d isposa l f a c i 1 i t y o r t h e 20-yr s to rage fa-

c i l i t y would be l e s s than 1% o f t h a t f o r shipment t o t he Lemhi Range '

s i t e s . Thus, t h e t o t a l worker ' dose i n these cases would be mudh l e s s

than 1 man-rem. The same conc lus ion ho lds f o r waste t r a n s f e r f rom the

r e t r i e v a l f a c i l i t y t o t h e p r o c i s s i n g f a c i 1 i t y , because ' t he d i s tance

i n v o l v e d i s t he same.

Normal ope ra t i ons d u r i n g D&D o f the r e t r i e v a l and p rocess ing

f a c i l i t i e s would be expected t o g i v e exposures lower than those d u r i n g

r e t r i e v a l . The p o t e n t i a l f o r con tamina t ion o f the D&D workers would

be h i ghe r because of t h e necess i t y o f work ing i n s i d e contaminated

areas. The f a c i l i t i e s would be designed f o r ease o f decontaminat ion,

and t h e workers would be c l o s e l y mon i to red t o p rec lude unacceptable

exposures. Standard r a d i o l o g i c a l s a f e t y procedures would be fo l l 'owed

t o assure t h a t hazards are adequate ly i d e n t i f i e d and app rop r i a te p re -

v e n t i v e measures taken.

14.3.3 R a d i o l o g i c a l Hazards f r om P o t e n t i a l Acc idents . The TRU

waste has r e 1 at ive1.y 1 ow r a d i a t i o n l e v e l s . ~ c c i den ta l exposure t o t h e

l e v e l s of d i r e c t r a d i a t i o n expected t o be p resen t i s not' p r o j e c t e d t o

be a major hazard. The t ype o f acc iden t pos ing t h e r a d i o l o g -

i c a l hbzard t o 'workers i s t h a t i n v o l v i n g re1,ease o f a i r bo rne contami - na t i on , l e a d i n g t o p o s s i b l e i n h a l a t i o n or ' i n g e s t i o n o f r ad ionuc l i des .

.

The r a d i o n u c l i d e s i n t h e waste cou ld become a i r bo rne as a r e . s u l t o f

mechani c a i impacts, f i r e s , o r s p i 11 s. The acc iden ts cons idered here

i n c l u d e t h e dominant o p e r a t i o n a l acc iden ts analyzed i n Sec t ion 13 and

o the r hypo the t i c a l acc i dents.

It i s conce ivab le t h a t , due t o f a i l u r e o f t he waste conf inement . systems, t h e a i r b o r n e r a d i o n u c l i d e s cou ld be re l eased d i r e c t l y i n t o

occupied areas o f t h e f a c i l i t y and n o t r o u t e d t o t he s tack; I n t h i s

case, t h e e f f e c t s on a l l workers w i t h i n t h e f a c i l i t y c o u l d be l a r g e r

than those t o t h e member o f t he pub1 i c r e c e i v i n g maximum a c c i d e n t a l

exposure, which was eva lua ted i n Sec t i on 13. Consequences o f these

types o f acc iden ts a.re o f t e n expressed i n terms o f t h e l e n g t h o f t ime

r e q u i r e d f o r a worker t o r e c e i v e a maximum p e r m i s s i b l e body burden

(MPBB) (ICRP 1959) o f nuc l i des , under t he s p e c i f i e d acc iden t cond i -

t i o n s .

I n t h e more usual case, t h e acc i den t would r e s u l t i n an abnormal

r e l e a s e o f r a d i o n u c l i d e s r o u t e d t o a f a c i l i t y s tack. on ly t h e workers

d i r e c t l y i n v o l v e d would be exposed. The o the r workers, who would

remain w i t h i n t h e f a c i l i t y , would r e c e i v e i n s i g n i f i c a n t doses. Warn- , '

i n g s o f t h e acc iden t would be p rov i ded by mon i t o r s and r a d i a t i o n

a1 arms.

The f o l l o w i n g paragraphs d iscuss t he p robab le e f f e c t s on t he

workers f r om t h e hypo the t i c a l acc i dents t h a t were cohs i dered.

For A l t e r n a t i v e 1, no c r e d i b l e acc iden ts were i d e n t i f i e d t h a t

would r e s u l t i n exposures t o t h e maintenance and s u r v e i 11 ance workers.

For A1 t e r n a t i v e 2, t h e r e i s a smal l chance o f a c c ' i d e n t a l l y breach-

i n g a waste c o n t a i n e r d u r i n g cover emplacement o r i d u r i n g g r o u t i n j e c -

t i o n f r om above. On ly one o r two con ta i ne rs would be expected t o be

i nvo l ved . For a wind speed o f 10 mph, t h e a i r b o r n e c o n c e n t r a t i o n 6 f t

above t he ground sur face , 16 f t downwind f rom a breached con ta i ne r ,

was es t im ted t o be 2 x l 0 - ~ nCi/ml. An unpro tec ted worker downwind

would r e c e i v e an MPBB i n about 33 h r . I t i s expected t h a t , w i t h i n one

houi-, t h e con.tents o f t he breached c o n t a i n e r would be repackaged.

Thus, workers would no t be expected t o r e c e i v e s u b s t a n t i a l doses from

t h i s t ype of acc iden t .

The opera t ions i nvo l ved i n A l t e r n a t i v e s 3 through 6 can ,be ca te -

g o r i z e d i n t o r e t r i e v a l , t r a n s f e r , process ing, shipment, and d i sposa l .

o r s torage. These ope ra t i ons are discussed i n t he f o l l o w i n g para-

graphs.

R a d i o l o g i c a l hazards d u r i n g r e t r i e v a l and d u r i n g d isposa l o r

s to rage ope ra t i ons would be s i m i l a r t o one another. I n a l l of these

opera t ions , con ta ine rs o f waste handled by the workers cou ld be acc i -

d e n t a l l y punctured o r dropped. The consequences o f such an acc iden t

were evaluated, based on t he amount o f a c t i v i t y i n a con ta ine r and a

c o n s e r v a t i v e l y assumed a i r bo rne f r a c t i o n o f l x 1 0 - ~ o f the con ta ine r

con ten ts . I f t h e cpn ta ine r i n v o l v e d were a box, approximately 40 min

would be r e q u i r e d f o r an unpro tec ted worker t o r e c e i v e an MPBB. The

a i r b o r n e concen t ra t i on would be 1 x 1 0 ' ~ nCi/rnl. About 10 h r would be

r e q u i r e d i f a drum were invo lved . The a i r b o r n e concen t ra t i on would be

7 x 1 0 - ~ nCi/ml . The r e t r i e v a l workers are n o t unprotected, however.

F a i l u r e o f t h e environmental cab on t h e waste r e t r i e v a l equipment

s imu l taneous ly w i t h the con ta ine r breach i s u n l i k e l y . The con ten ts o f

t h e breached con ta ine r cou ld p robab l y be repackaged w i t h i n minutes.

A f j r e i n t he r e t r i e v a l f a c i l i t y would be t he acc iden t of g r e a t e s t

r i s k t o :the p u b l i c from ' r e t r i e v a l ope ra t i ons (see Sec t i on 13). Such. a .

f i r e would most l i k e l y o r i g i n a t e ou t s i de t h e r e t r i e v a l f a c i l i t y . It

i s expected t h a t r e t r i e v a l workers would have s u f f i c i e n t warn ing t o

vacate the f a c , i l i t y be fo re t he f i r e caused re l ease o f r ad ionuc l i des . , .

The workers would prob,ably r e t r e a t t o t h e sa fe t y of t h e process:ing

f a c i l i t y .

The p rocess i ng f a c i l i t y would be designed f o r remote opera t ions .

F a i l u r e s o f waste c o n f i nement systems du r i ng normal ope ra t i ons would

r e s u l t i n a i r b o r n e r a d i o n u c l i d e concen t ra t i ons i n t he f a c i l i t y t h a t

are s i m i li ar . t o those expected d u r i n g r e t r i e v a l .

From t i m e t o t ime, maintenance personnel would be r e q u i r e d t o

e n t e r contaminated areas i n t h e p rocess ing f a c i l i t y . I f t h e i r p r o t e c -

t i v e c l o t h i n g (bubb le s u i t s ) were damaged, some exposure cou ld occur.

( I f t h e damage were caused by a p o i n t e d o r jagged o b j e c t , punc tu re o f

t h e s k i n o f t he worker cn1.11d occur. 'Con tamina t ion cou ld thereby bc

deposi ted beneath t h e sk in . Any such punc tu re i n j u r y would r e c e i v e

s p e c i a l medica l a t t e n t i on. ) Maximum a i rbo rne con tamina t ion l e v e l s

would p robab l y n o t exceed l x l ~ - ~ nCi/ml . The workers would have

about 40 min t o 1 eave t h e contaminated area be fo re r e c e i v i n g an MPBB.

I f a worker l o s t h i s b r e a t h i n g a i r supp ly w h i l e i n a contaminated

area, t h e r e s u l t cou ld be i n h a l a t i o n o f contaminated a i r . He would

have an es t imated 40 min t o leave t h e area be fo re r e c e i v i n g ~ ~ ' M P B B .

P r o v i s i o n s f o r emergency evacua t ion o f con,taminated areas would 'a1 1 ow

e x i t w i t h i n one minute. .

I f an exp los ion were t o occur w i t h i n t h e p rocess ing f a c i l i t y , 3 h i g h l e v e l s o f con tamina t ion c o u l d r e s u l t . I f 5 f t o f waste were

d ispersed by t h e exp los ion and i f 10% o f t h e waste remained a i rborne,

concen t ra t i ons i n s i d e t he f a c i l i t y m igh t reach about ~ X I D - ~ nCi/ml . Unprotected workers would have about 13 min t o evacuate b e f o r e r e c e i v - '

i n g an MPBB. ' The assumptions on which t he f o r e g o i n g scenar io i s based

are very conserva t i ve .

F i r e s c o u l d a l so l ead t o s i g n i f i c a n t q u a n t i t i e s o f a i r b o r n e r a d i o -

nuc l i des . However, a c t i v i t i e s w i t h i n t h e c e l l s i n which f i r e s a re

most l i k e l y t o occur would be performed remote ly . I n a d d i t i o n , s p e c i a l

f i r e suppress ion systems would be i n s t a l l e d , c e l l s would be designed

t o c o n t a i n f i + e s , and t h e p rocess ing f a c i l i t y would be l o c a t e d o n l y

minutes away f rom t h e DOE f i r e department. For these reasons, o n l y

smal l volumes o f waste would l i k e l y be i n v o l v e d i n a f i r e . The con-

sequences would p robab l y no t be g r e a t e r than those c a l c u l a t e d f o r an '

exp los ion .

Under acc iden t cond i t i ons , workers ope ra t i ng t r a n s f e r v e h i c l e s

and o n s i t e sh ipp ing veh i c l es cou ld be exposed t o smal l amounts o f

con tamina t ion escaping f r om the v e h i c l e . ~ h e s e exposures would be

expected t o be smal ler than t h e exposures d iscussed elsewhere i n t h i s

subsect ion.

~ 14.4 SUMMARY

The foregoing analyses and discussion indicate t ha t implementa- t i on of any of the waste management a1 t e rna t ives would not r e su l t in unacceptably high levels of occupational hazard. The most prominent hazards would be those t ha t could lead t o nonradiological accidents, s imilar to accidents t ha t occur in common industr ia l operations. The

probabi 1 i t i e s of occurrence of some of the radiologi cal acci dents are l i s t e d in Section 13. For other radiological accidents, such as tear- ing of protect ive clothing, p robab i l i t i e s were not estimated. In seven years of TRU waste storage experience a t the RWMC, no incidents of abnormal exposure or high contamination levels have occurred. This record lends confidence t o the expectation t ha t such events would be very infrequent.. Radiological doses expected during normal operations

would be f a r below the present occupational 1 imi t of 5 remlyr ( E R D A

1977a). Proper f aci 1 i t y design and operation, worker t ra in ing , and health and sa fe ty monitoring would a l l contribute t o performance of waste management functions with 1 ow levels of occupational hazard.

I 15. COSTS

15.1 BASES

The cost estimates prepared for this study include capital costs, operations and maintenance (O&M) costs, and costs for D&D of facilities. Where app'licable, the costs of shipping the waste to the Fed- eral ~epository and of managing the waste at the Repository were fn-

cluded. All costs were based on mid-July 1978 dollar values. (See the cost guidelines in Subsection 7.4.1.4.)

I The. cost estimates are not consi dered budgetary cost estimates,

because they are based on the limited amount of preconceptual design performed during the study. The cost estimates have large associated

I unceitai nties.

11 s Estimates 'for tapital costs of materials and equipment were based

on telephone quotes from suppliers, where possible.' If telephone quotes were 'unavailable, the estimates were based on costs for 'similar equipment.

I Capital costs of facilities included only construction materials, '

1 abor, and contingency. (Capital costs of the process f aci 1 it ies were based on remote operations in areas where uncontained waste might be

I encountered. Costs associated with completely remote operations and

I maintenance were not included.) Among items in the total construction

I cost that were not included in these preliminary estimates are the

I following: engineering and design, research and development, quality assurance and quality control, construction management, project management, environmental permits or license applications, extra utili- ties outside the "5 ft line," site characterization (e.g., subsurface exploration), and escalation to the projected date of construction. Inclusion of these items could cause the estimated capital costs for the facilities to increase by a factor of 2 to 4 from the preliminary estimates given here.

The slagging pyrolysis f a c i l i t y cons t i tu tes an example of t he magnitude of the cost of items not included in the present preliminary est imates. For t h i s f a c i l i t y , additional design and cost evaluations, beyond the scope of the present study, were completed in January 1979. Remote operations and maintenance were assumed f o r the

f a c i l i t y . As a consequence of t h i s assumption and of the additional design de ta i l t ha t was developed (e.g., support bui 1 dings and ra i l road spur ) , the estimated construction cost increased from the $128 mi 11 ion given in t h i s section t o $175 mill ion. In addition, estimated costs

f o r design and project management were $59 mil 1 ion and $19 mi 11 ion, respect ively , giving a t o t a l of $253 million (1978 do l l a r s ) . Escala- t i on , t o r e f l e c t completion of construction in 1986, and 40% contingency increased the t o t a l estimated cost t o $500 mil 1 ion. (The e s t i - mates given in t h i s section include a contingency of only 251.)

To conduct such additional design and cost s tudies fo r a l l of t he f a c i l i t i e s evaluated in t h i s document i s beyond the scope of the study. The costs presented here, although incomplete in the sense described above, do f a c i l i t a t e comparisons among a l t e rna t ives . How- ever, the reader should bear in mind the increase of a fac to r of 2 t o

4, which could occur when more deta i led and more complete estimates are made of t o t a l capi ta l costs .

The O&M costs f o r Alternatives 1 and 2 include the cos t s of performing maintenance and survei l lance f o r the assumed 100-year period

described in Subsection 7.4.1.1 ( 9 ) . The estimated cost of $600,00O/yr i s based on the s t a f f presently employed in these a c t i v i t i e s a t or

near the RWMC.

The O&M cos t s fo r .Al te rna t ive 3 include s a l a r i e s of operators and maintenance personnel, costs f o r energy consumption, and cos t s f o r replacement equipment, pa r t s , and materials associated with r e t r i e v a l , t r ans fe r , and processing of the waste. The O&M costs f o r Alterna- t i v e 4 include the same categories as fo r Alternative 3. Also included are t he cos t s f o r maintenance and survei l lance of the storage

f a c i l i t y f o r 10 y r f o l l o w i n g t h e 10-yr r e t r i e v a l and processing cam--

paign. The O&M cos ts f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 5 inc lude: (1 ) t h e same ca te-

. go r i es as f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 3; ( 2 ) t h e cos t of the . incrementa l construc-

t i o n descr ibed i n Subsections 10.4.1.4, 10.4;'2.4, 10.4.3.5, 10.4.3.6,

and 10.4.4.2; and , ( 3 ) t h e cos ts f o r maintenance'and s u r v e i l l a n c e o f

t h e d isposal f a c i l i t i e s f o r t h e assumed 100-yr per iod . The O&M cos ts

f o r A l t e r n a t i v e - 6 i nc lude the same ca tegor ies as f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 3.

A lso inc luded are t h e cos ts for .maintenance and s u r v e i l l a n c e o f t h e

waste du r i ng the 20-yr de lay per iod .

. .

Cost data f o r . D&D operat ions are scarce. The d i f f i c u . 1 ty o f pro-

j e c t i n g D&D cos t est imates f o r t he 1996-1997 t ime pe r i od i s compounded

by t h e u n c e r t a i n t y i n t h e D&D c r i t e r i a t h a t w i l l be i n e f f e c t a t t h a t

t ime. D&D cos ts f o r var ious p o r t i o n s of. a f a c i l i t y are a l so r e l a t e d

t o t h e contaminat ion l e v e l s present and t h e f u n c t i o n a l complex i ty o f

t h e operat ion. T h e ' l i m i t e d ' h i s t o r i c a l da ta t h a t were reviewed f o r D&D

cos ts t y p i c a l 1 y : r a n g e f rom 4% t o 12% of i n i t i a l c a p i t a l cost , w i t h o u t

esca la t ion . D&D c o s t s f o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e areas ' tend toward t h e lower

l i m i t . For h i g h l y contaminated areas housing complex processes, t h e

h igher percentage i s ' m o r e appropr ia te . The o v e r a l l D&D cos t f o r each'

f a c i l i t y s tud ied here was est imated t o be 10% of t h e o r i g i n a l c a p i t a l ' 2 '

cost, w i t hou t esca la t ion . D&D cos ts f o r t he d isposal f a c i l i t i e s i n - .

c lude o n l y those cos ts associated w i t h D&D o f se rv i ce f a c i l i t i e s , such

as maintenance b u i l d i n g s . No D&D would take p lace f o r t he d isposa l

f a c i l i t i e s themselves.

For shipment t o t he Federal Repository, t h e est imated volume

and weight of t h e waste were used t o determine t h e number of r a i l .

cars t o be shipped. It was assumed t h a t t he present r a t e s t r u c t u r e

f o r waste shipment f rom t h e Rocky F l a t s P l a n t t o t h e INEL would app ly

t o shipments from the INEL t o t he Federal Reposi tory . The r a t e s were

adjusted t o r e f l e c t t h e d i f f e r e n c e s . i n sh ipp ing d is tances. The c o s t

was evaluated f o r standard t r a i n s , as opposed t o s p e c i a l l y committed

t ra i .ns . The cos t o f t h e r a i l cars, assumed t o be government-owned,

was no t included.

For shipment to ' d isposa l s i t e s w i t h i n t he INEL boundaries, t he

number o f veh i c les requ i red and t h e number o f t r i p s per day f o r each

v e h i c l e were determined. The i n i t i a l cos t o f veh ic les , t h e cos t o f

replacements, and t h e cos t o f f u e l and maintenance are inc luded i n t h e

shipment costs .

The cos t f o r long-term TRU waste management a t t he Federal 3 Repos i t o ry was taken t o be $60/ f t (Cunningham 1977). Th is pro-

j e c t e d cos t i s h i g h l y unce r ta in and would depend on t h e q u a n t i t y of

waste shipped t o the Federal Repos i to ry f rom the INEL and f rom o the r

DOE s i t e s . The cos t was i,ncluded t o p rov ige t h e most complete i n f o r -

mat ion poss ib le on which t o base cos t comparisons among a l t e r n a t i v e s .

15.2 - COST ESTIMATES

The cos t est imates f o r a1 1 the a1 t e r n a t i v e s and concepts t h a t

were s tud ied are g iven i n Table 15-1. (Table 7-3 l i s t s t h e a l t e rna -

t i v e s and concepts. ) Also 1 i s t e d , where appropr ia te, are shipment

costs , costs associated w i t h t h e Federal Reposi tory , and D&D costs .

The cos ts o f t he r e t r i e v a l , processing, and d isposa l modules are

l i s t e d separa te ly i n Table 15-2. I n bo th t ab les , rounding o f numbers

has caused some cos ts t o appear t o be equal, whereas t h e o r i g i n a l

values were no t p r e c i s e l y equal.

TABLE 15-1

SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED C O S T S ( ~ )

A1 t e r - Cost a t . - - .

T o t a l Shipment Costs F e d e r a l n a t i v e o r C a ~ i t a l O&M Repos i - D&D T o t a l

Concept Cost Cost O n s i t e O f f s i t e t o r y Cost Cost

5-a 161 5-b 106 5 -c 95 5 -d 161 5-e 106 5 -f 9 6 5-g 295

L M V ( ~ ) 155 5-h 21 1

LMV 102 5 - i 420

LMV 107 5 - j 227 5-k 176 5-1 32 9

( a ) A l l c o s t s a r e i n m i l l i o n s o f m i d - J u l y 1978 d o l l a r s .

( b ) N/A = ' N o t A p p l i c a b l e .

( c ) LMV i d e n t i f i e s t h e use o ' f ' t h e l e s s mass ive v a r i a t i o n o f t h e engineered s h a l l o w - l a n d d i s p o s a l f a c i l i t y a t S i t e 14.

, TABLE 15-2

ESTIMATED COSTS OF RETRIEVAL, PROCESSING AND DISPOSAL MODULES - STORED TRU WASTE(^.^.)

Tota l Cap i ta l O&M D&D

Modu 1 e Cost Cost Cost - - Total Cost

R ETRI EVAL 8 16 1

DELAYED RETRIEVAL

PROCESS FAC ILITY SP CPT PKG

DISPOSAL Deep Rock Disposal - Lemhi S i t e - Shaft Access

SP CPT PKG

Deep Rock Disposal - Lemhi S i t e - Tunnel Access

SP 25 66 0.3 CPT 25 65 0.3 PKG ' 32 68 0.3

Engineered Shal low-Land Disposal a t S i t e 14

SP .

CPT 1 30 67 0 I 4 LMV 2 1 63 0.4

PKG 356 7 2 0.5 LMV . . 43 68 . . 0.5

Engineered Surface F a c i l i t y near RWMC

CPT PKG

20-YR RETRIEVABLE STORAGE 4 14(e) 0.4

(a) A l l ' costs a r e ' i n m i l l i o n s o f mid-July 1978 do l l a rs .

(b ) SP: s lagg ing Py ro l ys i s and Packaging CPT: Compact, Imnobil ize, and Package PKG: Package Only

( c ) Includes 20 y r maintenance and surve i l lance p r i o r t o s t a r t o f r e t r i e v a l .

(d ) LMV i d e n t i f i e s the use of t he less massive v a r i a t i o n o f t he engineered shallow-land disposal f a c i l i t y a t Site.14.

(e) Includes 10 y r maintenance and s u r v e i l 1 ance a f te r waste emplacement. . ., .

16. REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPLEMENTATION

16.1 LAND ACQUISITION AND USE

Approx imate ly 850 square m i l e s (95%) o f t he IN'EL has been w i th - '

drawn f rom t h e p u b l i c domain, based on a s e r i e s o f P u b l i c Land o rde rs

(PLOs) d a t i n g back t o 1946. The PLOs, as i n t e r p r e t e d , p rov ide f o r

nuc lear energy research and development and r e l a t e d a c t i v i t i e s . he a l t e r n a t i v e s and concepts s tud ied f o r r e t r i e v a l , processing, storage,

and d isposa l o f t h e t r a n s u r a n i c waste a re r e l a t e d a c t i v i t i e s and, , .

t he re fo re , are cons idered c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t he i n t e n t and purpose o f '

t h e PLOs.

A l l o f t he INEL d i sposa l s i t e s cons idered f a l l w i t h i n - t h e areas

withdrawn f rom t h e p u b l i c domain. Thus, t h e r e would be no requi rement

t o purchase land, prepare o r adopt spec ia l l e g i s l a t i o n , o r modify t h e

PLOs themselves f o r e i t h e r s h o r t - o r long- term use.

The s t a t u s o f the PLOs i s p o t e n t i a l l y a f f e c t e d by t he o rgan i c

Act, PL94-579.' Under t h e Act, t h e Secre ta ry o f t h e I n t e r i o r i s r e -

q u i r e d t o determine whether and f o r how l ong withdrawn lands a re 'con-

s i s t e n t w i t h t h e i r ded ica ted uses and s t a t u t o r y o b j e c t i v e s . . Acti:on t o

v o i d the PLOs i s u n l i k e l y i n the near ' te rm. I f the PLOs were voided,

decontaminat ing and decommissioning f a c i 1 i t i e s would be r e q u i r e d be-

f o r e r e t u r n i n g t he f a c i l i t y s i t e s t o the p u b l i c domain. ' D isposal

s i t e s would r e q u i r e a spec ia l exc lus iona ry c lause i n any a c t i o n t o

r e t u r n the l and t o the p u b l i c domain. For a l l i n t e n t s and purposes,

t h e d isposa l s i t e s would have t o be excluded f . rom.pub1. i~ domain f0.r

a l l t ime. . .

F u r t h e r d e t a i l s r ega rd ing , t h e in tended uses under the P u b l i c . - '.

Land Orders and t h e e f f e c t s o f the ' Organic Act a re d iscussed i n

Subsect ion 12.2.6. . .

16.2 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS , .

Several federa l , s ta te , and l o c a l agencies have cognizance over

po r t i ons . of t k e waste management a c t i v i t i e s . The d e t a i l e d in te r fa .c ing

o f these agencies i n the r e g u l a t i o n o f r e t r i e v a l , processing, t rans -

p o r t a t i o n , storage, and d isposal i s , i n some instances, unclear a t

t h i s t ime.' However, . i t i s expected t h a t the agencies i s s u i n g regu la-

t i o n s appl i c a b l e t o waste management a1 t e r n a t i v e s would i nc lude t h e

f o l l o w i n g :

Uniteds States Department o f Energy (DOE)

Un i ted States Environmental P ro tec t i on Agency (EPA)

United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

Uni ted States Department o f Transpor ta t ion (DOT)

Uni ted States Department o f Labor, Occupational Safe ty

and Heal th ~ d m i n i s t r a t i o n (OSHA)

Sta te o f Idaho

It ' i s intei ided t h a t the p lans f o r s i t i n g , design, cons t ruc t ion ,

operat ions, and decommissioning o f f a c i l i t i e s descr ibed i n t h i s docu-

ment be accompl is l led i n accordance w i t h a1 1 appl i c a h l e regu la t ions .

An adequate l e v e l o f qua1 i t y assurance would be mainta ined t o ensure

t h a t the pub1 i c , the environment, and the workers would he pro tec ted

f rom t h e hazards associated w i t h t ransuran ic waste.

16.3 TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENT STUDIES.

Concepts develop.ed du r ing t h e present s tudy were r e s t r i c t e d t o .

those based on s ta te -o f - t he -a r t techniques and equipment. However,

development work would be needed t o adapt c u r r e n t technology t o t h e

e n v i s i o n e d a p p l i c a t i o n . ' u n t i l an a l t e r n a t i v e i s se lec ted f o r long-

term management o f t h e INEL s to red TRU waste, no major program commit-

ments w i l l be made f o r developing any o f the a l ternat ives, . However,

. t , . , . .. . , i . ' c . . ; . , a : . ' ) , . . .

existing studies will be continued and expanded to provide the neces-

sary data ,on which to base the selection of an alternative. Some. of . these studies (either 'in progress .or under consideration) are. 1 isted

below.

. .

For Alternatives 1 and .2, studies of, the clay overburden would be , .

helpful in,projecting its long-term integrity. .Examples . . are,tests,of . !

permeability, erosion rates, and the effectiveness of soil binders. , .

Another useful study would be of techniques for crushing basalt for

the riprap. For Concept 2-c, a plot would.,be used to test various . , .

grout formulations and to determine the optimum spacing of pressure ,

grout holes.

Several disposal concepts rely on a physical barrier provided. by

cast concrete, cement grout, clay, or basalt. While these.materials , .

are widely used, their behavior over very long periods of time (hun-

dreds of years) is not well known. The integrity and moisture exclu-

sion properties of these materia.1.s should be evaluated., Approaches . . to, this problem include: (1) review of historical data, (2) accelera-

ted testing, and (3) theoretical analysis to %extrapolate ,the effects . . ...

of known.mechanisms to longer time periods. .Knowledge of the effects..,. : .

of composition and treatment upon desired properties would be useful

information. . . . . . :

Techniques currently do not exist to..permi$, on, a production.

scale, an accurate assay of transuranics in the presence of'beta-'

gama emittersand in large packages of inert material., A develop-

ment program is needed to determine the .level of detection. thatcan

be achieved in reasonably short times, and the inaccuracies due to ..

shielding. Active neutron interrogation is.one of the,more useful. .

tools that might be adapted for waste monitoring. I c , . . :

A number o f areas assoc ia ted w i t h t h e s l agg ing p y r o l y s i s system

r e q u i r e addi t i 'onal development. . , There i s c u r r e n t l y no o p e r a t i n g ex-

pe r i ence w i t h t h i s equipment1 on contami'nated w a i t e s i m i l a r t d t h a t

s t u d i e d i n t h i s docum.ent. Areas r e q u i r i n g a d d i t i o n a l development

i nc l ude : I

( 1 ) M i x t u r e r a t i o s o f waste, s o i l , coa l , and 'bark must be

s tud ied t o determine t h e , e f f e c t s on emissions, o p e r a t i n g . . e f f i c i e n c y , and s l a g c h a r a c t e r i s t i ' c s o f t he s l agg ing

p y r o l y s i s system.

( 2 ) A p r o t o t y p e o f f -gas system must be b u i l t and operated.

Stud ies a re underway i n t h i s area.

( 3 ) A s tudy would be needed t o determine p o s s i b l e methods o f

con tamina t ion c o n t r o l i n t h e f eed - processor - s l a g

systemi I , . c

( 4 ) Maintenance and ope ra t i on o f a contaminated u n i t must be

evaluated. Design dec i s i ons p e r m i t t i n g r e p a i r and/or

rep1 acemen t would be a f f ec ted .

( 5 ) The c ~ m p o s i t i o n and i ' n t e g r i t y o f t h e s l a g c a s t i n g depends on

many f a c t o r s . , . Stud ies a re underway i n t h i s impor tan t area.

Whi le t h e exact concen t ra t i ons o f f i s s i o n a b l e m a t e r i a l s i n t h e

waste a re n o t known, t h e des ign and ope ra t i ng parameters f o r t he waste ! ,

t rea tment process must be determined so as t o p rec lude ' acc iden ta l

c r i t i c a l i t y . A s e r i e s o f c a l c u l a t i o n s would be performed t o determine

what i so tope concen t ra t i ons cou ld r e s u l t i n c r i t i c a l i t y . These ' c a l -

c u l a t i o n s wou'ld p rov ide i n f o r m a t i o n on the r e q u i r e d l e v e l o f incoming . .

waste i n s p e c t i o n and t h e marg in of sa fe t y assoc ia ted w i t h ' t h e planned 8 . -

q u a n t i t i e s and geometr ies o f waste. .,.. .

I ' 8

For concepts. t h a t i nvo l ve d isposal a t S i t e 14 and the Lemhi Range,

a cons iderab le amount o f a d d i t i o n a l geo log ic and hydrolo'gic data would

have t o be gathered t o determine s i t e s u i t a b i l i t y . A d r i l l i n g and

sampling program would be conducted f o l l o w i n g rev iew o f a l l a v a i l a b l e

data.

16.4 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SAFETY INVESTIGATIONS

Several environmental and s a f e t y i n v e s t i g a t i o n s are underway

o r planned i n support o f the EIS (Subsect ion . q 7.3.2) f o r long-term

management o f INEL TRU waste. This s e c t i o n focuses on a few such I ,

i nves t i ga t i ons , t h e need f o r which has heen ' h i g h l i g h t e d dur ing t h i s

and prev ious studjes.

(1 ) Waste cha rac te r i za t i on : varying' est imates have been g iven

f o r t h e q u a n t i t i e s and chemical forms o f t h e TRU waste.' A

d e t a i l e d search and ana1,ysis o f records i s underway t o

b e t t e r e s t a b l i s h t h e waste q u a n t i t i e s and forms, add t h e

p o t e n t i a l r a d i a t i o n l eve l s .

Container I n t e g r i t y : Sampling s tud ies are underway t o ,

assess' t h e i n t e g r i t y o f the s t o r e d waste conta iners p laced

on t h e pad pads as long as 8 y r ago. These s tud ies are

summarized i n Subsection 4.4.3,

~ a d ' i o n u c l i d e ~ i b r a t i o n uptake: The m i g r a t i o n o f t h e r a d i o - . .

nuc l i des i n the s o i l beneath the RWMC i s t he subject. o f '

con t i nu ing s t d i e ' s . Data are being :developed t o support

long-term pro j 'ect ions o f m i g r a t Ton. A mathematical model . .

o f p o t e n t i a 1 m i g r a t i o n ' t o t h e aq' l l i fer, f l o w through t h e

aqu i fe r , and ' i n g i s t i o n by popu la t ions i s i n a' s t a t e o f con-

t i n u i n g development t o he lp e s t a b l i s h t h e r i s k t o " t h e p t ~ b l i c

f rom waterborne t ranspo r t .

( 4 ) A d d i t i o n a l Risk Ana l vs i s Stud ies: Several s t u d i e s

a re underway t o b e t t e r d e f i n e long- term and sho r t - t e rm

r i s k s . Long-term p r e d i c t i o n s o f geo log ic , h y d r o l o g i c and

c l i m a t o l o g i c c o n d i t i o n s are be ing developed. The poss i -

b i l i t y o f f a i l u r e o f t h e Macka.~ Dam and t h e p o t e n t i a l f o r

assoc ia ted f l o o d i n g o f the INEL are be ing s tud ied . The

, p o t e n t i a l e f f e c t s o f sabotage and i n t r u s . i o n upon t h e RWMC

a re a l so be iqg s tud ied .

( 5 ) Eco log i ca l Stud ies: The Rad io l og i ca l and Environmental

Sciences Labora to ry (RESL) o f t h e DOE has conducted l i m i t e d

base l i ne s tud ies ' o f s o i l s , p l an t s , and smal l mammals i n t he

v i c i n i t y o f t h e RWMC (Subsect ion 5.7). An a d d i t i o n a l stud.y

o f f l o r a and fauna w i t h i n t he RWMC i s underway t o eva lua te

p o p u l a t i o n dens i ty , range, o f movement, r ad ionuc l i d e uptake,

and food-cha in pathways.

17. COMPARISONS AMONG ALTERNATIVES, CONCEPTS, AND MODULES

17.1 INTRODUCTION

This section presents comparisons among the a l t e rna t ives and

concepts f o r long-term management of the stored TRU waste. Competing modules (e.g., slagging pyrolysis versus compaction and immobiliza- t i on ) are a lso compared. The order of presenting the comparisons i s

as f o l l ows: (1 ) comparisons among a1 ternat ives and concepts' fo r leaving the waste in place; ( 2 ) among processing modules; ( 3 ) among

modules fo r onsi t e disposal ; (4 ) among a1 te rna t ives for r e t r i eva l , processing, and shipment t o the Federal Repository; ( 5 ) among concepts f o r r e t r i eva l , processing, and disposal on the INEL; and ( 6 ) among a1 ternat ives and concepts covered i n (1 ), ( 4 ) , and ( 5 ) above. Thus,

the approach i s t o s t a r t the comparisons on the modular level and t o make successively broader comparisons. The comparisons presented in item ( 6 ) are the broadest in scope.

Some of the fac tors fo r comparison, such as radiological r i sk t o

the public, radiological e f f ec t s on the environment, and cost ; are bas ical ly quant i ta t ive . These compa+isons are the most s t ra igh t - forward. The summary tab les f o r such factors, 'which appear in t he evaluation sections of t h i s document, are )referenced in Table 17-1.

Other f ac to r s , such as development r i s k , are not amenable t o

quan t i t a t ive comparisons. The, d i f f i c u l t y of making such' comparisons does not lessen the importance of these f ac to r s , however.

The remaining f ac to r s , such as hazards to the workers and non-

radiological e f f ec t s on the environment,. are par t ly quant i ta t ive . Comparisons based on these , fac tors are intermediate between'the two preceding c lasses of c.omparisons. Useful summary tab les fo r these f ac to r s are a lso referenced in Table 17-1.

TABLE 17-1

FOR LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT OF STORED TRU WASTE

Factor f o r Comparison Table(s)

Environmental E f f e c t s

. ' I 1

Nonrad io log ica l

Rad io log i ca l

Rad io log i ca l R isks t o . t h e P u b l i c . ! I

I

Hazards t o the Workers

Nonradi o l o g i c a l .14-4

~ a d i o l o g i c a l , ,

I .

14-5

Costs 1 :

I I t

Wi th in each subsection,, environmental ef fects are genera l l y corn- . . I

pared f i r s t . Risks t o the pub l i c , hazards t o t h e workers, and cos ts

a re then compared. F i n a l l y , f a c t o r s such as techn ica l development

r i s k and major u n c e r t a i n t i e s are discussed.

. ,

As i nd i ca ted i n subsect ion 1.2, t h e comparisons presented i n t h i s

s e c t i o n do ,not c o n s t i t u t e a complete bas is f o r s e l e c t i n g an a l t e rna -

t i v e f o r implementation. T h e eva lua t ions performed fo r t h i s document , ,

were p re l im ina ry , and not a l l t h e re levan t f a c t o r s f o r dec i s ion making

were addressed. More complete and d e t a i l e d w i l l be p ie - < .

sented in the draf t EIS for management of'INEL TRU waste, discussed in

Subsection 7 . 3 . 2 . However, the present comparisons provide prelimi-

nary information concerning re1 at ive impacts of the ' a1 t e rna t ives that

have been studied.

17.2 ALTERNATIVES A N D CONCEPTS FOR L E A V I N G THE W A S T E ' I N PLACE (ALT-ER~ , - .

NATIVE 1 , CONCEPTS ?-a, 2--by -- AND 2-c)

For the f i r s t few years a f te r implementation, the environmental

e f fec ts associated with these alternatives and concepts would be pro-

portional to the level of construction e f fo r t . (These effects would

be nonradiological.) The ef fec ts would be greatest for Concept 2-b . . . . .

and l e a i t for Alternative 1 , with Concepts 2-a and 2-c 'b6i'ng i d e r - , .

mediate in e f fec t (Table 12-32). Even for Concept ?-by however, the overall e f fec t on the environment would be minimal. ,

Hundreds of years a f t e r implementation, the ordering of concepts,

based on environmental e f fec ts , would be expected to be almost the '

reverse of that just discussed. (These ef fec ts would be radiologi-

ca l . ) The improved waste confinement provided in Concepts 2-b and

2-c might reduce the spread of radionuclides by erosi.on processes and .i .

by groundwater leaching. The least protection would be provided by

Alternative 1 . Thousands of years a f te r implementation, however, none

of these concepts would be expected to resu l t in smaller environmental

e f fec ts t h a n would any other, because a1 1 cbnf inement &ul b have' de- I

.:< ,

teriorated completely. The environrnenlal effects ' of r e l e a ~ e s , even ' '

without improved confinement, would be expected to be small. I ' . . .

Conclusions based on comparing r i sks to the public are similar to those for environmental effects . For a l l of the subject concepts, the

dominant release scenario i s that of volcanic action disrupting the 8

waste, e i ther explosively or by means of lava flow over the waste.

The improved confinement in Alternative 2 would reduce t h i s risk in \ '

the short 'term (Table 13-19). In the long term (Table 13-20), the

benefit would diminish as the confinement deteriorated, i n perhaps

. . . ' , , , .. . . . . : . . , .

100 y r f o r co&ept i 2-a. and 2-b and 400 yr f o r Cbncept 2-c. The . . ., . " -

I , . . ,' . improved confinement' would s i m i 1 erly reduce t h e r i bk o f waterborne

t r a n s p o r t for the f i r s t few hundred years. . -.

Nonrad io log ica l hazards t o t h e workers (Table 14-4) f o r t h e

sub jec t a l t e r n a t i v e s and concepts would be v i r t u a l l y i d e n t i c a l i n

magnitude. Rad io log i ca l doses t o the workers would be expected t o

be small compared w i t h background l e v e l s (Table 14-5). Rad io log i ca l

consequences o f p o t e n t i a l acc idents a f f e c t i n g the workers would be

very small f o r A1 t e r n a t i ve 2. No c r e d i b l e operat ions-re1 ated acc i -

dents were i d e n t i f i e d f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 1.

The t o t a l cos t over t t ie 100-yr pe r iod s tud ied would be $60 m i l -

l i o n , $61 m i l l i o n , $63 m i l l i o n , and $71 m i l l i o n , f o r A l t e r n a t i v e l and

Concepts 2-a, 2-b, and 2-c, r e s p e c t i v e l y (Table 15-1). Inc luded i n

each case i s $60 m i l l i o n f o r maintenance and su rve i l l ance . Thus, t h e

cos t of improving the confinement would be a smal l p a r t o f the t o t a l

waste management cos t over t he 100-yr per iod.

Although g r o u t i n g i s a proven technology, R&D would be necessary

f o r Concepts 2-b and 2-c t o determide t h e optimum g rou t m i x and i n j e c - i

t i o n spacing and t o attempt t o p r o j e c t the long-term e f fec t iveness . r 3

. . . 17.3 RETRIEVAL ' MODULES (FOR ALTERNATIVES 3 , 4, 5, AND 6 )

. : , . i !

i

D i r e c t - c o n t r o l r e t r i e v a l was the o n l y method f o r which envi ron-

mental e f f e c t s , r i s k , hazards t o workers, and cos ts were evaluated.

17.4 PROCESSING MODULES (FOR ALTERNATIVES 3, 4, 5, AND 6)

Three processing modules were studied: ( 1 ) s lagg ing p y r o l y s i s and

packaging; (2 ) compaction, immobi l i za t ion , and packaging; and (3) ' pack-

aging only. A l l t h r e e modules were s tud ied i n connect ion w i t h o n s i t e . . . . . . . . . ... .

* .,

disposal (Alternative 5). Only the wastc form produced by slayging ,., : . ? .

_ . , ( I !

pyrolysis was assumed to be acceptable at the ~ederal' Reposi tory . _ . . . ' . .

(Alternatives 3, 4, and 6).

Radiological effects of normal operational releases from

the slagging pyrolysis facility would be slightly larger than , 6

those for the other processing modules studied (Tables 12-21, 12-22,

12-24, 12-25, 12-34, and 12-35). Most nonradiological effect; would

also be larger for slagglng pyrolysis. (See Tables 12-32 and 12-33.

Recall that Concepts 5-a through 5-c, for example, differ from one

another only in the nature of the processing module.) During the

operational campaign, the risks to the public from operations-related

accidental releases would be slightly larger for slagging pyrolysis

(Tables 13-12, 13-14, and 13-15) than for the other processes. The

hazards to the workers would be somewhat higher for slagging pyrolysis

than for the other processes (Tables 14-4 and 14-5). However, none of

the differences mentioned is so significant as to be a controlling

factor in selection of a processing module.

The principal incentive for slagging pyrolysis is the reduced

long-term risk and environmental contamination due to immobilization

of the waste. The slag is of low solubility and ha? good resistance

to impact. It would be expected to maintain its integrity over long

periods of time. However, depending on enyironmental conditions, even

the slag might not maintain its integrity over geologic time periods.

(By comparison, reliable containment would be provided by the steel containers for the packaging-only module for perhaps a few decades,

and by the concrete b1ocks.of the compaction and immobilization module

for perhaps a few hundred years., Both time periods would depend V

strongly on environmental conditions.).

. .

The effectiveness of slagging pyrolysis in reducing long-term risk dependsSon atleast thpee factors. he first factor is the dis-

'

posal module considered (i .e., aboveground, shallow 1 and, or deep rock).

The second f a c t o r i s t h e dominant r e l e a s e scenar io c o n t r i b u t i n g ~,

t o r i s k . For scenar ios i n v o l v i n g d i s s o l u t i o n o f t h e waste, t h e low

m o b i l i t y of t h e s l a g would be - impo r tan t ; f o r scenar ios i n v o l v i n g vo l - ,

can i c ac t ion , t h e s l a g p roduc t m igh t l ead t o r a d i o l o g i c a l doses no

lower than those f o r concre te o r , even f o r a waste fo rm w i t h o u t immobi-

l i z a t i o n . The r i s k eva lua t i ons o f Sec t i on 13 i n d i c a t e t h a t r e l e a s e

scenar ios f o r v o l c a n i c a c t i o n a re dominant f o r a l l d i sposa l modules a t

t h e INEL (Tables 13-18, 13-19 and 13-20).

The t h i - r d f a c t o r i s t he t i m e a t which t h e r e l e a s e .even t m igh t

occur, i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e degrada t ion of t h e waste form. F u r t h e r

s tudy of these f a c t o r s , i n t he c o n t e x t o f r i s k ana lys is , would p rov ide

u s e f u l da ta f o r s e l e c t i n g a waste form based on these cons ide ra t i ons .

The c a p i t a l c o s t f o r t h e s l agg ing faci .1 i t y would be about t w i c e

those f o r t h e o the r p rocess ing modules (Tab le 15-2). .Ope ra t i ng and

maintenance (O&M) c o s t s would be two t o t h r e e t imes those f o r t he

o the r modules. Fo r b o t h c a p i t a l and O&M cos ts , t h e o the r two modules

would be s i m i l a r t o one another.

Cost e f f e c t s o f a p rocess ing module extend beyond t h e module

i t s e l f , however. The e f f e c t on s h i p p i n g . c o s t s and d i sposa l cos t s , due

t o changes i n . m a t e r i a 1 volume and weight , must a l s o be considered.

Fo r example, t h e packaging-only module was s tud ied f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 5 ,

because of i t s expected low cos t . For , t h i s module, t h e sav ing i n . . ".

t o t a l p rocess ing cos t , over compact ion and immob i l i za t i on , would be

$5 m i l 1 i o n (Tab le 15-2). However, compared w i t h compaction and im- . .

m o b i l i z a t i o n , o n s i t e d i sposa l c o s t s would be h i ghe r by from $9 m i l l i o n

t o $232 m i l l i o n , depending on t h e d isposa l method. (D i f f e rences i n

o n s i t e sh ipp jng c o s t s would be n e g l i g i b l e by comparison.)

Considerable R&D would be necessary be fo re imp lemen ta t i on .o f t h e . , ,

s l a g g i n g p y r o l y s i s module. Some of t h e p r e l i m i n a r y R&D i s desc r i bed .

i n Subsect ion 4.4.2. R e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e R&D would be a n t t c i p a t e d f o r . , .

t h e o the r two p rocess ing modules.

17.5 MODULES I-UK DISPOSAL AT THE INEL .(FOR ALTERNATIVE 5')

Four modules were studied f o r waste disposal a t the INEL: engi-

neered aboveground disposal near the RWMC, engineered shal l ow-1 and. disposal a t S i t e 14, and two modules involving deep rock disposal ( sha f t access and tunnel access) i n the Lemhi Range. Two designs were

studied fo r the S i t e 14 disposal module: a more massive ,var ia t ion (8 - f t thick wal ls ) and a l e s s massive var ia t ion (8-in. thick wal ls ) .

The modules i n t h e Lemhi Range and a t S i t e 14 would involve con- s t ruc t ion on a par t of the INEL not previously used f o r nuclear opera- t ions . There would be some loss of grazing land.

The modules f o r disposal a t S i t e 14 and a t the RWMC would require s izeable quan t i t i e s of c lay and bentonite (Table 12-6). Except f o r .

the l e s s massive .variat ion a t S i t e 14, very large quan t i t i e s of con- c r e t e would be required.

Long-term e f f ec t s on the public from uncontrolled re leases of radionuclides would be l e a s t f o r the Lemhi Range modules (Tables 13-18 and 13-20), because t h e i r location i s away from areas of recurrent volcanism ( t h e dominant re lease scenario) and off the Snake River Plain Aquifer. (However, this par t of the 'INEL i s be1 ieved t o be

'

hydrologically coupled t o the aquifer . ) The great depth below the ,

ground surf ace would afford protection from events such a s g lacia t ion and a i rp l ane crashes. Earthquakes 'could have some e f f ec t ; f u r t he r .

study of this scenario .would be advisable.

The-aboveground disposal module a t the RWMC would lead t o larger long-term waterborne re leases because of the rela t ively th in layer of sediment avai lable f o r adsorbing radionucl i des. The aboveground

disposal module would also be most prone t o long-term erosion and t o g lacia t ion. However; the dominant re lease scenario a t S i t e 14 and

the RWMC i s lava flow. T h u s , the important parameter i s the time fo r

which t h e waste conf inement cou ld r e s i s t t he e f f e c t s o f l a v a f low.

T h i s t i m e was taken t o be 25,000 yr f o r aboveground d i sposa l and f o r . , ,

sha l low- land d i sposa l , except f o r t he l e s s massive v a r i a t i o n a t

S i t e 14, which was assumed t o p r o v i d e p r o t e c t i o n f o r 2,000 yr.

Non rad io l og i ca l hazards t o t he workers would be s l i g h t l y h i ghe r

f o r deep rock d isposa l than f o r t h e o the r modules f o r o n s i t e d i sposa l

(Tab le 14-4). The d i f f e r e n c e i s a t t r i b u t e d t o t he need f o r subsur face

m i n i n g opera t ions . However, t h e d i f f e r e n c e i s n o t cons idered s i g n i -

f i c a n t . Deep rock d i sposa l would a l so i n v o l v e s l i g h t l y l a r g e r r a d i o -

l o g i c a l doses t o t h e workers f r om normal ope ra t i ons (Tab le 14-5) than

would t he o the r d isposa l modules.

C a p i t a l cos t s es t imated f o r t he f a c i l i t i e s f o r engineered sur face

d i sposa l and engineered sha l low- land d i sposa l a re about 3 t o 10 t imes

t hose f o r deep rock d i sposa l , depending on t h e waste volume a f t e r

p rocess ing (Tab le 15-2). However, t h e c o s t of t h e l e s s massive v a r i a -

t i o n a t S i t e 14 would be about t he same as t h a t f o r deep rock d i s -

posa l .

Extens ive s t u d i e s would be needed of t he geology and hydro logy

i n t h e Lemhi Range be fo re a c t i v e l y pursu ing p l ans f o r d i sposa l there .

There a re a number o f key u n c e r t a i n t i e s (e.g., t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f

underground sp r i ngs develop ing) concern ing t h e s a f e t y o f deep rock

d i sposa l i n t h a t l o c a t i o n . S i m i l a r s t ud ies would a l so be needed o f

t h e area o f S i t e 14.

17.6 ALTERNATIVES AND CONCEPTS FOR RETRIEVAL, PROCESSING, AND SHIP-

MENT TO THE FEDERAL REPOSITORY (ALTERNATIVES 3, 4, and 6 )

Th i s subsec t ion p resen ts comparisons made a t t he l e v e l o f a l t e r -

na t i ves , r a t h e r than a t t h e l e v e l o f modules. The a l t e r n a t i v e s com-

pared d i f f e r i n t he dates a t which t h e waste would s t a r t t o be ( 1 ) r e -

t r i e v e d and processed, and ( 2 ) shipped t o t h e Federa l Repos i to ry . I n

A l t e r n a t i v e 3, a l l t h e above ope ra t i ons would beg in i n 1985. I n A l -

t e r n a t i v e 4, t h e r e t r i e v a l and p rocess ing would beg in i n 1985; t h e

processed waste would be stored until 2005, when shipping to the Fed-

eral Repository would begin. In Alternative 6, none of these opera-. tions would start until 2005,.

17.6.1 Effects of Delaying Retrieval. The environmental

effects, hazards to the workers, and risks to the public would be

expected to be nearly identical for Alternatives 3 and 6. There would

be a small effect from retrieving waste containers that had deterio-

rated to some extent. The inventory of radionuclides would have de-

creased slightly by virtue of radioactive decay. However, the assumed

growth in the popula'tion during the intervening 20 yr would counteract the effect of radioactive decay. In ~lternative 3, the waste would be

disposed of in the Federal Repository starting in 1985, rather than remaining until 2005 in its present confinement at the RWMC. During

the 20-yr delay period, the risk from processed waste at the Federal

Repository would be expected to be less than that of unprocessed waste at the RWMC. However, compared with the time-integrated values of

long-term effects from uncontrolled releases, the t ime-integrated

values of the risks from this 20-yr delay would be negligible

(Tables 13-15, 13-19, and 13-20).

Except for escalation, the cost of Alternative 6 would be ex-

pected to be essentially the same as that for Alternative 3. One

small difference (about $12 mil 1 ion, or 3%) would be the added cost

of monitoring the waste for an extra 20 yr, awaiting retrieval

(Tables 15-1 and 15-2).

An additional effect of the 20-yr delay concerns the waste that

might be received at the RWMC between 1985 and 2005 (see Appendix C).

This additional volume of waste would constitute a backlog increment

of 36% above the waste in storage by 1985 (Table C-2). Thus, in Al-

ternative 6, either the processing rate of the facility designed for

Alternative 3 would have to be increased by 36%, or the operational

campaign would have to be lengthened by 36% beyond the nominal 10 yr.

If the campaign were lengthened, the economic effect would be found

in O&M costs. If the processing rate of the facility were increased,

both capital and O&M costs would be increased.

17.6.2 E f f e c t s o f Delay ing Shipment. A l t e r n a t i v e 4 (delayed

shipment) d i f f e r s f rom A l t e r n a t i v e 3 i n t h e need f o r 20-yr storage'.and

i n t he date o f shipment t o t h e Federal Repository. The r e l a t i v e con - .

t r i b u t i o n s o f t h e 20-yr s torage module t o t h e p u b l i c r i s k , worker

hazards, and environmental e f f e c t s o f the complete a1 t e r n a t i v e s would

be small. The same i s t r u e f o r t h e e f f e c t s of de lay ing shipment t o

t h e Federal Reposi tory by 20 yr.

Except f o r esca la t ion , the major cos t d i f f e r e n c e r e s u l t i n g f rom

delayed shipment i s t h e cos t o f 20-yr s torage (Tables 15-1 and 15-2).

T o t a l c a p i t a l and O&M costs f o r t h i s opera t ion would be about $12 m i l - '

l i o n . I n add i t i on , an e x t r a 10 y r o f mon i to r i ng the waste would be

requ i red a f t e r emplacement i n 20-yr storage. The cos t o f t h i s i tem

would be about $6 m i l l i o n . The net impact o f $18 m i l l i o n i s about 5%

o f the t o t a l cos t f o r t he a1 te rna t i ve .

17.7 CONCEPTS FOR RETRIEVAL, PROCESSING, AND DISPOSAL OF THE WASTE AT

THE INEL (ALTERNATIVE 5)

The observat ions made i n subsect ions 17.3, 17.4, and :17.5, con-

cern ing the modules f o r r e t r i e v a l , processing, and d isposal , respec-

t i v e l y , are no t repeated here. Rather, those observat ions are i n t e -

g ra ted here;to a s s i s t i n comparisons a t t he level ' o f concepts. '. '

The p r i n c i p a l t r a d e o f f i n s e l e c t i n g a processing module appears

t o be the h igher cos t o f processing by s lagg ing ' p y r o l y s i s (Tables 15-1

and 15-2) versus the improved immob i l i za t i on achieved f o r sa fe d i s -

posal .

Compared w i t h packaging only, s lagg ing p y r o l y s i s would l ead t o

a saving i n d isposal cos t because o f t h e greater volume reduc t i on

achieved. Slagging p y r o l y s i s and compaction and immob i l i za t i on would

l ead t o s i m i l a r d isposal costs. Any d i f f e rences would be due p r i n -

c i p a l l y t o o p t i m i z a t i o n cons idera t ions (conta iner s i z e and shape,

s torage room dimensions, etc.) . Because o f t h e r e l a t i v e l y sho r t d i s -

tances involved, cos t d i f fe rences i n o n s i t e shipment would be smal l i n

111 instances.

. . , . . , . . .

Among theLonsite disposal modules, the engineered aboveground an,d,

shallow-land dispo.sa1 modules are at a large disadvantage i,n cost

(Tables 15-1 and 15-2). This di,sadvantage can be overcome by use ,of

the less massive variation for engineered shallow-land d.isposa1, al-

though at some penalty. in- long-term safety (Table 13-20). .

Site 14 would be less subject to flooding and volcanism than

would the RWMC. The greater depth of sediments at Site 14 would re- strict the subsurface migration of radionuclides more than would the -

sediments at the RWMC. The disposal modules at the Lemhi Range loca-

tion are the only ones studied that would furnish positive protection

against lava flow, glaciation, and routine weathering. Furthermore,

the area is not situated above the Snake River Plain Aquifer, although

it is believed to be hydrologically coupled to thc aquifer. The prin-

cipal drawbacks of the Lemhi Range location are (1) the relatively

unknown geology and hydrology of the site, and (2) the nearness (less

than 1 mile) to the present boundary of the INEL (Figure 3-4).

17.8 ALL ALTERNATIVES STUD.IED FOR LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT OF THE INEL -

TRU WASTE . ,

, , . . . . . i

The intent of this subsection is. not,. to. advocate one particular.

alternative or concept over another. Rather, the intent is to inte-

grate the:preceding comparisons, highlighting the relative advan-

tages and,disadvantages of,the alternatives. . . , ' . . .

, I . ' .

To quantify some of these comparisons, six general areas were

selected for comparison: (1 ) radiological environmental effects,

(2) short-term radiological risk, (3.) long-term radiological consequences, (4.) nonradiologi cal hazards to workers, , ( 5 ) radiological

hazards to workers, and (6) cost.. To limit the compl,,exity o f .the

exercise,.onJy one specific parameter was chosen to represent each

general area of comparison.

The s i x s p e c i f i c parameters are, respect ive ly , t h e fo l l ow ing :

(1) popul a t i on (bone) dose commitment from normal opera t iona l r e -

leases, (2) t o t a l popu la t ion r i s k (based on lung dose commitment) from

short - term acc identa l re1 eases, (3 ) maximum popu la t ion lung dose f rom .

1 ong-term acc identa l releases, (4 ) t o t a l nonradi o l o g i c a l occupational

i n j u r i e s t o workers dur ing implementation, (5 ) t o t a l worker dose dur-

i n g normal operat ions, and (6) t o t a l est imated cost. Comparisons o f

t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s and concepts f o r these s i x parameters are presented

i n Table 17-2.

Considerable s i m p l i f i c a t i o n was requ i red t o produce Table 17-2.

Lack o f space precludes l i s t i n g a l l o f t h e bases f o r t h e e n t r i e s ,

Furthermore, one number was selected t o represent the r e s u l t s o f an

e n t i r e area o f study. Thus, m i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e data i s pos-

s i b l e . To minimize t h i s p o s s i b i l i t y , t he reader should consu l t the

source tab les l i s t e d a t t h e bottom o f Table 17-2.

The most s t ra igh t fo rward comparison o f t he a l t e r n a t i v e s

concerns t h e est imated costs. I n round numbers, A l t e r n a t i v e 1 would cost $60 m i l l i o n ; A l t e r n a t i v e 2, about $65 m i l l i o n ; Al terna-

t i v e s 3, 4, and 6, about $375 m i l l ion; and A l t e r n a t i v e 5, f rom about $225 m i l 1 i o n t o $575 m i l 1 ion. For the a1 t e r n a t i v e s i n v o l v i n g shipment

t o t h e Federal Repository, an apport ioned cos t o f d isposal a t t h e

Reposi tory i s included, as discussed i n Sect ion 15. The apport ioned

cos t i s h i g h l y uncerta in. It depends on t h e volume o f waste t h a t '

might be shipped t o the Repository, i n c l u d i n g waste from other DOE

s i t e s . Another compl ica t ion i s t h a t t h e est imated cos t o f t h e Federal.

Reposi tory (DOE 1979) inc ludes a number o f cost f a c t o r s not inc luded

i n t h e d isposal cos t est imates f o r ~ l t e r n a t i v e 5. Therefore, t h e

cos ts fo r A l t e r n a t i v e s 3, 4, and 6 are no t s t r i c t l y 'comparable w i t h

those f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 5. Also, see Subsection 15.1 f o r an important

caveat concerning a l l est imates given f o r f a c i l i t i e s . costs.

Hazards t o t h e waste management workers would be lowest f o r

A l t e r n a t i v e 1, s l i g h t l y h igher f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 2, and considerably

h igher f o r A l t e r n a t i v e s 3 through 6.

TABLE 17-2

SELECTED QUANTITATIVE COMPARISONS OF ALTERNATIVES AND CONCEPTS

Popul a t i on Dose Tota l Populat ion Maximum Populat ion Tota l Comni tment from Risk from Short- Dose from Long- Nonradiological Tota l Worker Tota l Estimated

Normal Operational Term Accid n a1 Term Accid n a1 Occupational Doses dur ing Cost ( m i l l ion-s A1 te rna t i ve / Releases Releaseslaj Releasesfbj I n j r r l e s dur ing Normal Operations of mid-Jul y

Concept Jman-rem/yr t o bone) Jman-remlyr t o lung) jman-rem t o lung) Implementation . (man-rem) 1978 d o l l a r s ) , . .,

No stored waste a t INEL

No seored waste a t INEL

5-h .LMV

5 - i LMV

5 - j 5-k 5-1

6 . 3.8x10-~ 3x10-3 No stored waste -Ol+NI 147+NI 383. a t INEL

Source Table 12-35 13-19

(a) The r i s k f o r A l t e rna t i ves 3 thr~ough 6 includes on ly operat ions-related events. no t included are poss ib le releases due t o natural . events d i s rup t i ng unre t r ieved waste dur ing the campaign. I nc lus ion o f such events would cause the r i s k s f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 3 through 6 t o be s i m i l a r t o t h a t f o r A l t e rna t i ve 1 dur ing the campaign period.

(b ) For vo lcan ic ac t ion scenar io occur r ing a t a t ime 25,000 y r i n t o the future: Concepts 2-a through 2-c and 5-9 through 5-1 would provide p ro tec t i on against t h i s scenario f o r var ious times, up t o a maximum of 25,000 y r . Concepts 5-a through 5- f would prov ide p ro tec t i on f o r longer, as-yet-undeternined times.

( c ) NI = Not Included ( r e l a t e s t o operations a t the Federal Repository).

(d ) LMV i d e n t i f i e s the use o f the l ess massive v a r i a t i o n o f the engineered shallow-land disposal f a c i l i t y a t S i t e 14. . - . .

Comparisons of the alternatives on the bases of environmental effects and of risk to the public are particularly difficult. The

time periods for which these parameters were studied were 10 yr for Alternative 3, 30 yr for Alternatives 4 and 6, and many thousands of

years for Alternatives 1, 2, and 5. The reason for this difference is that the long-term environmental effects and risks associated with the

Federal Rep~sit~ry were not evaluated in this study. These topics are .being addressed in other DOE-sponsored studies (DOE 1979).

Of course, the long-term radiological effects at the INEL would

be l'ess for Alternatives 3, 4, and 6 than for Alternatives 1, 2, and 5. However, these effects for Alternatives 3, 4, and 6 would not

cease to exist. The effects would simply be transferred to the location of the Federal Repository, probably at a reduced level.

I

Because Alternatives 3, 4, and 6 would involve handling of

the waste, their environmental effects and risk would be somewhat' greater, in,the near term, than those for leaving the waste in place,

Alternatives 1 and 2. .(Footnote (a) in Table 17-2 clarifies the short- term risk comparisons. ) However, if the comparisons of environmental

effects and of risks were to cover the long periods of time associated with disposal at the Federal Repository, this conclusion could be re-

versed. The environmental effects and risk associated with long-term management at the 'Federal. ~eposi tory would probably be smal ler than

those for leav'ing the waste in' place at the RWMC for the same time period. Several factors could contribute to this possible reduction

in risk: (1) deeper disposal, (2) lower expected frequency of volcanic and seismic action, (3) greater isolation from 'an aquifer, and (4) probable lower population density. A lower risk associated with long-term management at the Federal Repository might eventually out-

weigh the higher near-term risk associated with operations during the . *

campaign.

Until the analyses of long-term environmental effects at the

Federal Repository are final i zed and compared in detai 1 with the results of the present study, only partial comparisons can be made

of Alternative 5 with Alternatives 3, 4, and 6.

. .

REFERENCES I

Adcock, F. E., and. J. D. ~cdarth~. 1977. Rockwell International Corporation, Atomics International Division, Rocky Flats Plant, ,. ATMX-600 Rail Car Safety Analysis Report for Packaging, RFP-2244

(Rev 1). . .

AEC (U.S. Atomic Energy Commission). . 1972. Environmental Survey of

Transportation of .Radioactive Materials to and from Nuclear.Power

Plants, WASH-1238, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing

Office.

AEC (U.S. Atomic Energy Commission). 1974. Proposed Final Environ-

mental Statement,.Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor Program, .

Vol. IV, WASH-1535. t

. - . . I

Agbabian Associates. 1977. El Segundo, California, Evaluation of . .

Seismic Criteria Used In Design of INEL Facilities, R-7741-4509.

I I

Barraclough, J..T., et al. 1976. U.S. Department of Interior,

Geol.ogica1 Survey, Water Resources Division, Idaho. Falls, Idaho,

Hydrology of the Solid Waste Burial Ground, as Related to the

Potenti a1 . Migration of Radionucl ides,. Idaho, National .Engineering

Laboratory, IDO-22056. . .

Beck, H. L., et al. 1972.. In Situ Ge(Li) and NaI(T1.) Gamma Ray

Spectrometry,. USAEC Report HASL-258: . I .

t '

Bennett.,,.B. G. 1974. Health and Safety Laboratory, New York, N.Y.,,

Fallout Pu-239, Pu-240 in Diet, USAEC.Report HASL-286.

Bishoff, Jim R. 1978. EG&G Idaho, Inc., TSA-1 Cell Penetration and

Bonneville Council of Governments. 1974. Population and Economic

Trends and Projections, April 1974, Chart B, p 5.

Buchholz, J. R., et al. 1971. Los Alamos Scientific labor at or.^,

Los Alamos, New Me.xico, Summary of a Study of the Uptake of

Pu-239 b.y Alfalfa'from Soils, USAEC Report LADC-12897.

Bureau of ~adiolo~ical Health. 1970. U. S. Department of

Health, Education, and Welfare, Radiological Health Hand-

book, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Pri.nting Office.

Burgus, W. H., and S. E. Maestas. 1976. . U.S. Energy Research and

Development Administration, Idaho Operations Office, The 1975

RWMC Core Drilling Program, IDO-10065.

Burkholder, H. 1976. "Nuclear Waste Partitioning Incentives,"

p 456 in Proceedings of the NRC Workshop on the Management

of Radioactive Waste: Waste Partitioning as an Alternative,

NF -CONF-001.

Caldwell, H. H:, ed. 1970. Department of Geology, University of

Idaho, id ah^ Economic Atlas, Moscow, Idaho: Idaho Bureau of

Mines and Geology.

Carrigan, P. 1972. U.S. Department of Interior Geological Surve.y,

Arlington, Virginia, Probability of Exceeding Capacity of

Flood-Control System at the National Reactor Testing Station,

Idaho, IDO-22052.

Casarett', A. P. 1968. Radiation Biology. Englewood Cliffs, New

Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. .

C h r i s t i a n , J. D., B. E. K i r s t e i n , and D. .T. Pence. 1978. Science

App l i ca t i ons , Inc, .- Development ~f an --- Off-Gas Treatment System

Conceptual Design f o r EG&G Radsoact ive I n c i n e r a t o r - F i ~ a l Repor t

f o r Phase I, SAI78-74.7-LJ, (Ava i 1 ab le from: Marv Cohn, ~ 6 i e n c . e

A p p l i c a t i o n s Inc., 5 Pa lo A l t o Square, S u i t e 200, Palo A l t o ,

Cal i f o r n i a 94304).

C l arke, R. T., . e t a1 . 1976. Sandi a Labora to r ies , A lh !~que rq~~e ,

New Mexico, S e v e r i t i e s of Transporta, t ion Accidents, 4 voils.,

USAEC Report SLA-74-0001.

C l i ne , J. F. 1968. B a t t e l l e P a c i f i c Northwest Labora to r ies ,

Rich land, Washington, Uptake of ,Am-241 and Pu-239 by Plants ,

4 vulurr~es, USAEC Repur.1 BNWL-7140.

Code o f Federa l Regulat ions, U. S. (10 CFR 20.105). 1977.

T i t l e 10 - Energy, Pa r t 20.1.05, "Pe rm iss ib l e Leve ls o f

R a d i a t i o n i n Un res t r i c t ed ,A reas , " Was'lington D.C.: U. S.

Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e .

Code o f Federa l Regulat ions, U. S. (10 CFR 20 Ap,p B). 1977.

T i t l e 10 - Energy, P a r t 20, Appeodix B, "Concentrat ions i n .

A i r and Water Ahove Na tu ra l Background," Washington, D.C.:

U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e .

Code o f Federa l Regulat ions, U.S. ( 40 CFR 50). 1977. T i t l e 40 - P r o t e c t i o n o f the Environment, Part.. 50, "Na t iona l P r i m a r . ~ and

Secondary Ambient A i r Q u a l i t y Standards," Washington, D.C.:

U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e .

Code o f Federal Regulat ions, U.S. (49 CFR 173.393). 1977. T i t l e 49 - Transpor ta t ion , P a r t 173.393, "General Packaging and Shi,pment

Requirements," Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government P r i n t i n g

O f f i c e .

Codel l , R. B., and D. . L. Schre iber . 1977. "NRC Models f o r Eva lua t i ng

t h e Transpor t o f .Rad ionuc l i des i n Groundwater," presented a t t h e

Symposium on Management o f Low Level Rad ioac t i ve Waste, A t l an ta ,

Georgia, May 1977, ( i n press, Oxford: Pergarnon Press) .

Cowan, G. A., e t a1 . , 1976. "Heavy Methanes as Atmospheric tracer;^,"

Science, - 191, p 1048.

Craig, T. H. 1977. Raptors o f t h e Idaho Na t i ona l Engineer ing

Labora to ry S i t e , Masters Thesis, Idaho S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , , :

P o c a t e l l o.

Craig, T. H., and C. H. T ros t . 1976. A Study o f t h e R a p t o r i a l

Species on t h e INEL S i t e , IDO-12080.

Cunningham, G. W. 1977. U.S. Energy Research and Development

Adm in i s t r a t i on , -"Management o f Rad ioac t i ve Wastes," Statement , :

be fo re Subcommittee on Energy and.Environment; Committee 6n

I n t e r i o r and I n s u l a r A f f a i r s , 94 th Congress, 1 s t session,

16 May 1977.

Dawson, G. W. 1974. B a t t e l l e P a c i f i c Northwest Labora to r ies ;

The Chemical T o x i c i t y o f t h e Elements,. BNWL-1815. . .

Denham, D. H., e t ' a l . 1973. B a t t e l l e P a c i f i c Northwest Labora to r ies , ,-

R a d i o l o g i c a l ' Eva lua t i ons . f o r Advanced Waste Management Studies,

BNWL-1764. . . . . .

Dodson, W. J., J. E. Hopper, and M. D. McCormack. 1978. . "An

I n c i n e r a o r f o r T ransuran ic Contaminated Waste," I n T ransac t ions

o f t h e American Nuclear Soc ie ty , - 28.

DOE (U.S. Department o f Energy), 1978a. A l t e r n a t i v e s f o r Long-Term . Management o f Defense Transuranic Waste a t t h e Idaho Na t i ona l

Engineer ing Laboratory , Idaho F a l l s , Idaho, ID0 10075.

DOE (U.S. .Department of Energy). 1978b. Summary of INEL Personnel -- . '

'

Data, March 1978 Personnel Questionnaire. Idaho National

Engineering Laboratory, Idaho Falls, Idaho.

DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 1979. Environmental Impact

Statement. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. Carlsbad. New Mexico.

in draft.

Dolonc, M. R., and:D. H. Janke. 1977. EG&G Idaho, Inc., Environ-

mental Surveillance Report for the INEL Radioactive Waste .

Management Complex, Annual Report - 1976, TREE-1078.

Dort, W. Jr. 1962. "Multiple Glaciation of the Southern Lemhi Mountains, Idaho; Preliminary Reconnaissance Report;" Idaho

State College Museum Journal, -- - 4 pp 2-17.

Duprey, R. L. 1968. U. S. Department of HEW Public Health

Service, .- Compilation of Air Pollutant - Emission Factors, PHs-Pub-999-AD-42.

EG&G Idaho, Inc. 1977. Safety Review Document for the Radio-

active Waste --- Management Complex at -- the 'Idaho Natiooal

Enaineerina Laboratorv. TREE-1064.

EPA (U.S.. Environmental Protection Agency). 1977. .-- Proposed Guidance on Dose Limits for Persons Ex~osed to Transuranium

Elements in the General Environment. EPA 520/4-77-016.

EPA (U.S. Environmental' Protection Agency). 1978. Background Report,

Considerations of'Environmenta1 -- Protection Criteria for Radio- -

active Waste (Available from: Waste Envi.ronmenta1 Standards - - Program (AM-460), Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M ST SW,

Washington, D.C. 20460).

Epstein, H. H., and M. J; Barvenik. 1975. Grouting Applications , .,. ,> - , in Civi 1 Engineering,, 2 volumes, ORNL/Sub-3960/1.

ERDA (U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration). 1973a.

ERDA Manual, Chapter 0511, "Radioactive Waste Management," Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

ERDA (U.S. Energy Research and Development Admini stration). 1973b. ERDA Manual - 6301, "General Design Criteria," Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

ERDA (U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration). 1973c. ERDA Manual Appendix 6301, Part.11, "General Design Criteria, Plutonium Facilities, 8uildings, and Facilities Design,"

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. , ..

ERDA (U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration). 1975. Final Environmental Impact Statement: Waste Management Operations, Hanford Reservation, Richland, Washington, ERDA-1538, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

ERDA (U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration). 1976. ERDA Manual Chapter 0552 "Industrial Fire Protec- tion," Washington, D.C.: UcS. Government Printing Office.

ERDA (U.S. Energy Research and Development Adminstration) . 1977a. ERDA Manual Chapter 0524, "Standards for Radiation Protection," Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. .

ERDA (U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration). 1977b. Final Environmental Impact Statement: Management of Inter- - mediate Level Radioactive Waste, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, - ...

ERDA-1553, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

ERDA (U.S. Energy 'Research and Development Admin i s t ra t i on ) . 1977c.

F i n a l Environmental Impact Statement: Waste - Management Opera-

t i ons , INEL, ERDA-1536, Washington, D.C. : U.S. Government

P r i n t i n g O f f i c e .

Essington, E. H., and E. B. Fowler. 1977'. " D i s t r i b u t i o n o f

Transuranic Nucl ides i n So i l s : A Review," i n Transuranics

i n Natura l Environments, e d i t e d by M. G. White and P. B.

Dunnaway, U .S. Energy Research and Development Admini s t r a -

t i o n , Las Vegas, Nevada, ERDA Report NVO-178.

Estcour t , -V. F., e t a l . 1978. "Tests o f a Two-Stage Combined

Dry Scrubber/S02 Absorber Using Sodium o r Calcium," I n

Proceedings o f 40th Annual Meeting o f t h e American Power Con-

ference, I l l i n o i s . I n s t i t u t e o f Technology, Chicago, I l l i n o i s .

FMC Corporat ion. 1977. Engineered Systems D iv i s ion , .Se lec t i on

o f Waste Treatment'Process f o r Ret r ieved TRU Waste a t Idaho

Nat iona l ~ n g i n e e r i ng Laboratory, R-3689.

FMC Corporat ion 1978. Design o f an Equipment - System f o r R e t r i e v a l

and Handl ing o f Bu r ied Rad ioac t ive Waste, R-3679R.

Francis , P. 1976. Volcanoes, Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England:

Penguin Books, L td .

F r i e d J., '.et a l . 1976.: "Migra t ion o f Ac t i n ides i n Geologic

Formations," I n --- Proceedings o f t h e - I n t e r n a t i o n a l Symposium

on t h e Management - o f Wastes f rom t h e LWR Fuel Cycle, - Paper

CONF-76-0701.

Fugi ta, T. T. 1971. "Est imates o f Maximum Wind Speeds o f Tornadoes

i n Three Northwestern States," Appendix 2 t o Review of Tornado -- Considerat ions -. f o r FFTF, by D. F. Simpson, Hanford Engineering

Development Laboratory, Richland, Washington, HEDL-TME-71-35.

. . . ' ., ,,:*,,!.. , .

Harness, J . L., and R.: W. Passmore. 1976a. EG&G Idaho, Inc,. , . onsite Environmental Surveillance Report for the INEL Radioactive -- Waste Management Complex: Annual Report - 1974, TREE-1014.

Harness, J. L., and R. W. Passmore. 1976b. EG&G Idaho, Inc., Onsite

Environmental Surveillance Report for the INEL Radioactive Waste

Management Complex: Annual Report - 1975, TREE-1013.

Harniss, R. 0.; and N. E. West. 1973. "Vegetation Patterns of the

National Reactor Testing Stat ion, Southeastem Idaho," Northwest

Science, - 47 pp 30-43.

Hausser, C. J. 1956. "Post Glacial Environments in the Canadian

Rocky Mountains, " - Ecology Monographs, - - 26 pp 263-302.

Hausser, C. J. 1957. "Variations pf the Blue, Roh,,,and White Glaciers

during Recent Centuries," Arctic, - 10 pp 139-150.

Healy, J. W. 1974. Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory, Los Alamos,

New Mexico. -- A Proposed Interim Standard for Plutonium in Soils,

USAEC Report LA-5483-MS.

Hedahl, T. G., and Janke, D. H. 1978. EG&G Idaho, Inc., Environmental

Surveillance Report for the INEL Radioactive Waste Management -- Com- plex, Annual Report - 1977, TREE-1251. -

Houston, J. R., D. L. Strenge, and E. C. Watson. 1974. Battnlle

Pacific Northwest Laboratories, Rich1 and Washington, DACRIN - , A

Computer Program for Calculating Organ Dose from Acute or Chronic

Radionuclide Inhalation, USAEC Report BNWL-B-389. . .

Hsieh, T., D. Okrent, and G. Apostolakis. 1975.. UCLA, School of

Engineering and Applied Science, Los Angeles, California On the

Average Probability - Distribution of Peak -- Ground Acceleration in -- the U.S. Continent due to Strong Earthquakes. UCLA-ENG-7516.

Humphrey, T. G., and F. H. Tingey. 1978. EG&G Idaho, Inc., - The

Subsurface Migration of Radionuclides at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex, 1976-1977. TREE-1 171.

ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection). 1959. Recommendations of the ~nternational Commission on Radiological, Pr.otection. ICRP Publ ication 2, Oxford: Pergamon Press. . .

ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection). 1964. I

Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection, ICRP Publ ication 6, Oxford: Pergamon Press.

! ICRP (International Commissi on on Radiological Protection). 1965.

The Evaluation of Risks from Radiation, ICRP publication 8, - New York: Pergamon Press.

~ ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection). 1966. ~ Task Group on Lung Dynamics, "Deposi t'i on and Retention Model s for Internal Dosimetry of the Human Respiratory Tract," Health Physics, - 12 p 173.

ICRP (International Commission on Radio1 ogical 'Protection). 1969. Radiosensitivitv and S~atial Distribution of Dose. ICRP Publication 14, Oxford: Pergamon Press.

ICRP (International Commission on ~adiolo~ical Protection). ,1972.

Task Group of ICRP Committee 2, The Metabolism of Compounds of Plutonium and other Actinides, ICRP Publication 19, Oxford: . ,

- Pergamon Press.

ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection). ,1975.

W . S. Snyder, ed., Report of the ---- Task Group on Reference Man, ICRP Publication 23, Oxfor'd: 'Pergamon Press.

Idaho Falls Chamber of Commerce, 1978. -- Idaho East, Summer 1978,

p 28.

. -

Jakubick, A. T. 1976. "Migration of Plutonium Natural Soil,"

Transuranic Nuclides in the Environment. Vienna: Interna-

ti onal Atomic Energy Agency.

Kaiser Engineers. 1977. A Comparison of Slagging Pyrolysis and

Molten Salt Incinerators for Treating TRU Waste at the INEL.

77-92 RE.

Karol, R. H. 1968. "Chemical Grouting Technology," Journal of the

Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division. Proceedings of the

American Society of Civil Engineers, - 94 pp 175-204.

Killough, C. G., and L. R. McKay. 1976. A Methodology for Calculat-

ing Radiation Doses from Radioactivity Released to the Environ-

ment, ORNL-4992. -

Kuntz, M. A. 1978. U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological

Survey, Geology of the Arco-Big Southern Butte Area, Snake River

Plain. and Po.tentia1 Volcanic Hazards to the Radioactive Waste

Management Complex, and Other Waste Storage and Reactor Facil-

ities at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Idaho, U.S.

Geological Survey Open-File Report 78-691.

LATA (Los A1 amos Technical ~ssociates, Inc.). 1977. ANL-W R?.dio-

active Liquid Waste Treatment Facility - Labor Escalation Study,

...

~eddiootte, G. W. et al. 1978. "Suggested Concentration Limits for

Shallow Land Burial of Radionuclides," In Waste Management and

Fuel Cycles 1978 (Proceedings of Symposium on Radioactive Waste

Management, March 6-8, 1978, Tuscon, Arizona) edited by Roy G. Post, Chicago: American Nuclear Society.

Magno, P. J., P. E. Kauffman, and B. Shleien, 1967. "Plutonium in

Environments and Biological Media," Health Physics, - 13 p 1325.

Malde, H. E., A. M. Pitt, and J. P. Eaton 1971. --- Geological

Investigation of Faulting Near the National Reactor -- Testing

Station, Idaho, USGS Open-File Report.

Markham, 0. D., K. W . Puphal, and T. D. Filer. 1978. "Plutonium and Americium Contamination near a Transuranic Storage Area

in Southeastern Idaho," Journal of Environmental Quality, - 7(3)

p 422.

Matthews, W. H. 1951. "Historic and Prehistoric Fluctuations of

Alpine Glaciers in the Mount Garibaldi Map Area, Southwestern

British Columbia," Journal of Geology, - 59 p 357.

McBride, R., et al. 1978. U.S. Department of Energy, Idaho Falls,

Idaho, Vegetation Types and Surface Soils of the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory Site, IDO-12084. -----

McSweeney, T. I., and R. J. Hall. 1975. Battelle Pacific North-

west Laboratories, An Assessment.of - the Risk of Transporting - Liquid Plutonium - Oxide and Liquid Plutonium Nitrate by Truck, -

BNWL-1846.

Mishima, J. 1974. "Fractional Airborne Release of Plutonium Under

Shipping Accident Conditions," In Proceedings .-- of the Fourth --

International Symposium on Packaging and Transportation of Radio- --- - active Materi a1 s, Miami Beach, Florida, Paper CONF-740901.

Mishima, J., and L.. Schwendiman. 1970. Battel le Pacific Northwest

Laboratories, The Amount and Characteristics of Plutonium Made .- ------- -- - --- Airborne Under Thermal Stress, RNWL-SA-3379. --------.---

. . . . . :

3 .

. a . - n . . . . L . . ' . , . .-.,-%$

Mishima, J., and L. Schwendiman. 1973a. B a t t e l l e P.acif i c .North- !,

west ~ a b o r a t o r i e s , .- F r a c t i o n a l Ai rborne Release o f Urani um ..

(Representing Plutonium) Dur ing t h e Burning o f Contaminated -- .%,

Mishima, J., and L. Schwendiman. 1973b. B a t t e l l e P a c i f i c Northwest

Laborator ies, Some Experimental Measurements o f A i rborne Uranium. --- (Representing Plutonium) i n Transpor ta t ion Accidents., BNWL-1732.

Morr ison, R. B. 1961. Lake Lahontan S t ra t i g raphy and H i s t o r y i n t h e

Carson Desert ( F a l l o n ) Area, Nevada, U. S. Geological Survey

Professional Paper 424, pp 111-,114.

Morr ison, R. B. 1964. Geology o f t he Southern Carson Desert, Nevada,

U.S. Geological Survey Pro fess iona l Paper 401 pp 156.

Morr ison, R. B. 1965. .New Evidence o f Lake Bonnev i l l e S t ra t i g raphy . and H i s t o r y f rom Southern Promontory Point , Utah, U.S..Geological

Survey Pro fess iona l Paper 525.

Mundorff, M. J., E. G. Crosthwaite, and C. K i l b u r n . 1964. Ground

Water f o r I r r i g a t i o n i n t h e Snake R ive r Basin i n Idaho, U.S.

Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 1954.

. .

NAS-NRC (Nat ional Academy of sciences, Nat iona l Research counc i l ) . 1972. The Effects on Popu la t ion o f Exposure - t o Low Leve ls o f

I o n i z i n g Rad.iation, The BEIR Report, Washington, D.C: Nat ional . ., Academy o f . Sciences . .

. . .

NAS-NRC (Nat iona l Research Counc i l ) . 1976. Committee on Rad ioac t ive

Waste. Management, The Shal low Land B u r i a1 o f Low-Level Radio-

a c t i v e Contaminated Waste, Washington, D.C.: Nat iona l Academy,

o f Sciences. . C

NAS-NRC (Nat iona l Research Counci l ) . 1978. Committee on Radio- * . a c t i v e ~ a s t e ' ~ a n a ~ e m e n t , ~ a d i o a c t i v e was tes a t t h e an ford

Reservat ion, A Technica l ~ e v i e w , Waihington, D.c.: ' Na t iona l ' '

'

Academy of Sciences.

Nat iona l Sa fe t y Counci l . 1977. "Accident Facts," Chicago, I 1 1 i n o i s . . ,,

NBS (Nat iona l Bureau o f s tandards) . 1964. The i n t e r n a t i o n a l Com-

miss ion on ~ a d i a t i o n U n i t s and ~easurernents, - Physica l Aspects of "

I r r a d i a t i o n , NBS Handbook 85, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government -- P r i n t i n g O f f i c e .

, c

NCRPM (Nat iona l Counci l on Rad ia t i on p r o t e c t i o n and ~ e d s i r e m e n t s ) . '

1971. ,- Bas ic Rad ia t i on -- .--- P r o t e c t i o n -- -- . . -. . . -. . C r i t e r i a , NCRP-39, Washing- . .

ton, 0 .'C . : NCRP pub1 i c a t i ons Of f i ce .

NCRPM (Nat iona l Counci l on Rad ia t i on P r o t e c t i o n and Measurements).

1975. - Review o f t h e Cur ren t S t a t e o f Rad ia t i on - P r o t e c t i o n

Phi losophy, NCRP-43, Washington, D.C.: NCRP P u b l i c a t i o n s -- O f f i c e .

NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regu la to ry Commission). 1974. C a l c u l a t i o n of

Annual Doses t o . Man from' Rout ine' Releases o f Reactor E f f l u e n t s ' - f o r - t h e Purpose o f Eva lua t i ng --- Compliance w i t h 10 CFR, P a r t 50,

Appendix I, Regula to ry Guide 1.109, Washington D.C.: U.S. ---- Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e .

. .

NRC (U .S. Nuclear Regul a t o r y Commission) . 1975: Reactor Safety - .

Study, WASH-1400 and NUREG-75/014, Washington, D.C. : U .S; . --- Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e .

. .

NSC 1977. Nuclear Serv ices Corporat ion, Campbell, C a l i f o r n i a , R isk

Ana lys is Methodology and Data Study o f A l t e r n a t i v e s -- f o r ~ o n g -

Term Management - o f Hanford - Defense High-Level Rad ioac t ive -- Waste,

NSC-PS-ARH 77001.

01 1 i e r , c:"D:' 1974.' - " " ~ h r e h t i c ' ~ r u p t i o n i and Maars," ~ e v e l o ~ m e n t s : + : , . .-! I, ,.

i n S o l i d Eart t i Geoph,jsics, Vol 6, ~ e h York: Amer.ican Elsevier::

pub* l ish ing company, Inc:

ORNL 1970a. Oak Ridge Nat ional Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee,

Highway Veh ic le Impacts o f Vehicle, Package, and T i e Down Systems

Capable o f Car ry ing Radioact ive Ma te r ia l , ORNL-NSIC-61.

ORNL 1970b. Oak Ridge Nat iona l Laboratory; Oak Ridge, Tennessee,

S i t i n g o f Fuel Reprocessing P lan ts and Waste Management

F a c i l i t i e s , ORNL-4451.

Otway, H. J. 1969. u n i v e r s i t y of . C a l i f o r n i a , Los Alamos S c i e n t i f i c

Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico, The App l i ca t i on o f Risk

A l l o c a t i o n . t o Reactor S i t i n g and Design, LA-4316. - 1

Overton, C. K., D. A. Grove, and D. W. .Johnson. 1976. ' "B ig Los t

R ive r F isher ies," I n Summaries o f t h e Idaho Nat ional Engineering

Laboratory S i t e Eco log ica l I n fo rma t ion Meeting, J u l y 10-11, 1975,

pp 42-43, ed i ted by 0. D. Markham, Idaho Operations O f f i ce , U.S.

Energy Research Research and Development Admin is t ra t ion .

P e l l e t i e r , C. A., and P: G. Voi l leque. 1971. "The Behavior of

Cesium-137 and Other F a l l o u t Radionucl ides on a Michigan

D a i r y Farm," Heal th Physics, - 21 p 777.

Polzer, W. L., 0.-R. Perciva1;and J. T. Barraclough. 1976. U.S.

Research and ~eve lopment Admin is t ra t ion , Idaho Operat ions O f f ice,

Special Analyses f o r Plutonium and Americium i n Water f rom t h e

Snake R ive r P l a i n Aqui fer , IDO-12081.

Pr ice , K. R. 1972. ~ a t t e l l e P a c i f i c Northwest Laborator ies, Richland,

Washington, Uptake of Np-237, Pu-239, Am-241, and Cm-244 f rom

so i 1 by Tumbl eweed and Cheatgrass, USAEC Report BNWL- 1.688. I .

-

Robertson, J. B. .1974. D i g i t a l c Model ingt o f Rad ioac t ive andp Chemical

Waste Transpor t i n t h e Snake R i v e r P l a i n Aqu i fe r a t t h e - Nationa l

Reactor Tes t i ng S ta t i on , U.S. Geologica l Survey Open-File,.Report,

IDO-22054. ;,

' .. , . . Robertson, J. B., R. Schoen, and J. T., B a r ~ a c l o u g h . 1974. , U . S o . - . . . . . ,

Department o f I n t e r i o r Geologica l Survey, Water Resources

~ i v i s i o n , Idaho F a l l s , Idaho, The I n f l u e n c e o'f ~ i ~ u i d Waste

Disposal on t h e Geochemistry of Water a t t h e Nat4onal Reactor , .

T e s t i n g S ta t i on , Idaho, 1952-1970, IDO-22053. . . . -

. ,>. ' ' . , . ! ,

Sansom, B. F. 1964. "The Trans fer o f Pu-239 f rom t h e D i e t o f a Cow.

t o i t s Mi lk , " B r i t i s h Ve te r i na ry Journal , - 120 p 158,

Schmalz, B. L. 1972. -- Radionucl ide D i s t r i b u t i o n i n S o i l Mant le - of t h e ; Lithosphere as a Consequence o f Waste Disposal a t ' the Nat iona l -- - Reactor Tes t i ng Sta t ion , -.- IDO-10049. , . . . .

Schulman, , . 1956. - Dendrocl imate Changes i n Semiar id - America,.

Tucson: Uni v e r s i . t y o f .Ar izona Press ..

Sehmel, G. A. 1977. B a t t e l l e P a c i f i c Northwest Labora tor ies ,

Transuranic and.Tracer Simulant Resuspension, BNWL-SA-6236. - -- - ~' .

Sehmel, G. A., and W. H. Hodgson. 1976. "Pred ic ted . . . Dry Deposi-

t i o n Ve loc i t i es , " I n Atmospheric Surface Exchange .- of P a r t i c - -- u l a t e and Gaseous Po l l u tan ts , ERDA Symposium Ser ies No. 38,

CONF-740921, U.S. E,nergy Research and Development Adminis t ra- ... :

t i 'on, Washington D,C.

. .

Selby, J., e t a l . 1973. B a t t e l l e P a c i f i c Northwest ~ a b o r a t o r i s s ,

Richland, Washington, --- Considerat ions i n ---- t h e Assessment o f t h e - Consequences o f E f f l u e n t s f r om a Mixed Oxide Fuel F a b r i c a t i o n ----- Plant , BNWL-1697. , - ,

Shea, G. J. 1978. Andco-Torrax Group, Andco Inc., TRU Waste Ana lys i s - . .

and P r e l i m i n a r y Operat ion Parameters f o r a Rad ioac t ive Waste ---- Slagging P y r o l y s i s I n c i n e r a t o r .

Sigafoos, R. S., and E. L. Hendricks. 1961. Bo tan i ca l Evidence of t h e

Modern H i s t o r y o f N i s q u a l l y G lac ie r , Washington, U.S. Geologica l

Survey Profess ional Paper 387-A.

Smith, T,; .H., and W. A.iRoss. 1975. B . a t t e l l e P a c i f i c Northwest

Labora tor ies , Impact Tes t i ng of V i t r eous Simulated High-Level

Waste i n Canis ters, BNWL-1903. - -

Staley , G. B., e t a l . 1977. "Radionucl ide M i g r a t i o n f rom Low Level

Waste: A Generic Overview," presented a t t h e Symposium.on

Management o f Low Level Rad ioac t ive Waste, A t l an ta , Georgia,

May 1977, ( i n press, Oxford: Pergamon Press) .

S t a r t , G. E., and L. L. Wendell. 1974. Regional E f f l u e n t D ispers ion

Ca lcu la t i ons Consider ing S p a t i a l and Temporal Meteoro log ica l

Var ia t ions , NOAA Technical Memorandum ERL ARL-44.

Strong, A.- B . , J. M. Smith, and R. H. Johnson, Jr. 1977. O f f i c e

o f Rad ia t i on Programs, U.S. Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency,

Washington, D.C. EPA Assessment of F a l l o u t i n t h e Un i ted Sta tes - from Atmospheric T e s t i n g on September 26 and November 17, 1976 '

by t h e Peoples Republ ic of China, EPA Report EPA-520/5-77-002.,

Tay lo r , L . S., and H. O.,Wyckoff. 1976. " I m p l i c a t i o n s of t he

Man-Rem Concept," I n 'Proceedings o f t h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l Sympo- . . - sium on t h e Management of Wastes f r o m t h e LWR Fuel Cycle,

Paper CONF-760701.

UBC. 1961. I n t e r n a t i o n a l Conference of B u i l d i n g O f f i c . i a l s , .

Uni form B u i l d i n g Code, 1961, 11th ed, Revised, Vol 1,

Los Angeles, Cal i f o r n i a .

UBC. 197.3; . . .International Conference of..B~iilding Officials,'Uniform,. !

Building.,Code;. 1973,ed, .. Whittier,. . . California.

United Nations. 1972. Report of the United Nations Scientific Corn-

mittee on the .Effects .of At0mi.c Radiation, Ionizing Radi ati.on: . Levels and Effects, united' Nations,'. 'New York. . .

. .

U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1973. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Census of Popul~ation: 1970, Detailed Characteristics, United States ..

Summary,. Fi,nal ~ e ~ o r t ! PCt.1 )-Dl, Washington, D.C. : U. S. Govern- ment Printing Office. . . I . .

Vanoni, 'V. A. 1975.. .,Sediment Engineering,. AXE, Task Committee for . . .

the prep.arat ion of the Manual' on. Sedimentation,. Sedimentat i.on

Comrni.ttee, %Hydraul ics Division. . ,, . . . ' ,

. I . . ? 4

Voilleque, P. G. and C. A. Pelletier, 1974. "Comparison of External 1rr:adi . . at i on and Consump.t.i on. of Cows ' Mi 1 k as Critical Pathways for Cs-.137,.Mn-54, and . C.e-,Pr-144 . .. , Released . . to the Atmosphere," Health Physics, 2'7 p 189. ,

, . -

Wall, I. B. 1974. "Probabilistic Assessment of Ai'rcraft Risk for

Nuclear Power Plants," Nuclear Safety, - 15 p 3. I I

Wilcoxson, K. H. 1966. Chains of Fire: the Story of Volcanoes, Philadelphia: Chi1 ton Book Company.

White, M. G., P. B. Dunaway, and D. L.. Wireman.. 1977. Nevada Appl.ied Ecology .Group, ".In,corpor'ation of .Transuranics into .Vegetable and, Field Crops GrGwn at :the Nevada Test Site,," .In Transuranics in Desert Ecosystems NVO-181. ~.

Yanskey, G. R., E. H. Marker, .Jr., and A. P. Richter. 1966. Climatology of .the National Reactor Testing Station, IDO-12048.

APPENDIX A

TEXT OF COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO CONCERNING

LONG-TERM MANAGEMENT OF INEL TRU WASTE

Over the l a s t several years, t h e DOE (and i t s predecessor o rgan i -

za t i ons, ERDA and AEC) has corresponded w i t h government o f f i c i a1 s o f

Idaho about t he long-term s ta tus o f TRU waste a t t he INEL, f o rmer l y

the Nat ional Reactor Tes t ing S ta t i on (NRTS). Although TRU waste had

been r o u t i n e l y shipped from Rocky F l a t s t o the INEI>- s ince 1954, i t was

n o t u n t i l 1969 t h a t i n t e r e s t fncused on t h i s issue. A t t h a t time,

l a r g e q u a n t i t i e s o f TRU-contaminated s o l i d waste were being shipped t o

the NRTS as a r e s u l t of cleanup operat ions from a f i r e b t the Rocky

F l a t s P lan t . P u b l i c i t y stemming from the f i r e caused Idaho o f f i c i a l s

t o r a i s e quest ions regard ing the s a f e t y o f bury ing the Rocky F l a t s

waste i n Idaho.

A t the request o f U.S. Senator Frank Church, f o u r Federal agen-

c i e s made a j o i n t study o f r a d i o a c t i v e waste storage a t t h e RWMC. The

agencies we& the U. S. ~ e d l o ~ i c a l Suriey, the Bureab o f Rad io log ica l

Heal th o f t he U. S. pub1 i c Heal th Service, t h e ,Federal Water ~ o l l u t i o n

Contro l Adminis t rat ion, and the Bureau of Sport ~ i s h e r i e ; And Wild-

l i f e . Subsequent s tud ies o f t h e RWMC a l so were made by t h e Bureau of

Rad io log ica l ~ e a l t h (BRH) and the Federal. Water Q u a l i t y Admin is t ra t ion

(FWQA) . The f i n d i n g s o f t h e BRH were summarized as f o l l o w s i n a

l e t t e r t ransmi t ted i n February 1970 t o Senator Church f rom the ,Assis-

t a n t Surgeon General :

It i s our judgment t h a t the land b u r i a l techniques c u r r e n t l y i n use meet t h e r a d i a t i o n sa fe ty c r i t e r i a o f t he Federal Rad ia t ion Counci 1 fo r p r o t e c t i o n of the pub1 i c . Extensive environmental r a d i o a c t i v i t y data are a v a i l a b l e f o r t h e s i t e which show t h a t no h e a l t h and safety problems have occurred as a r e s u l t of t he b u r i a l of s o l i d r a d i o a c t i v e wastes., This

. exper ience a l s o i n d i c a t e s t h a t i t i s no t l i , k e l y . t h e rad'ia-: a c t i v i t y w i l l m i g r a t e f r om t h e b u r i a l grounds i n t h e f u t u r e ; i f c u r r e n t procedures a re cont inued. Because o f t h e poten-

' t i a l , long-term e f f e c t s , addit. iona! s a f e t y ' measures, cons i s - t e n t w i t h a conse rva t i ve approach rega rd i ng r a d i o a c t i v i t y , . , are recommended i n t h e s t a f f s tudy.

The recommendations i d e n t i f i e d i n t he qu,ted' r e p o r t were

implemented a t t h e RWMC. :

-. 5 : . ..

The FWQA r e p o r t was completed i n A p r i l o f 1970. The AEC, i n a

subsequent meet ing w i t h ~ e n ' a t o r Church and i n a l e t t e r addressed t o L

him i n June 1970, took except i o n t o a number o f t he FWQA r e p o r t f i nd-

ings . However, i n a June 1970 l e t t e r t o sena to r Church,. AEC Chairman

Seaborg in 'd i ca ted t h a t : .

I n FY [ F i s c a l Year1 1972 AEC w i l l s e e k bu tho r . i t y t o es tab- l i s h a demonstrat ion. r a d i o a c t i v e , waste. r e p o s i t o r y i n s a l t which w i l l s t o r e b o t h h i g h l e v e l wastes f r om f u e l . r e p r o c e s - s i n g p l a n t s and low l e v e l a lpha p a r t i c l e e m i t t i n g wastes ( a l pha wastes! such as t he Pu-contaminated wastes f rom t h e Rocky F l ' a t s P lan t . When t h e s a l t mine r e p o s i t o r y i s f u l l y opera t i ve , AEC p lans t o s t o r e no t o n l y c u r r e n t l y generated a lpha wastes b u t a l s o t o excavate, process and s h i p such wastes which a re be ing t e m p o r a r i l y s t o r e d a t NRTS. A number of years w i l l be, r e q u i r e d t o complete t h e t r a n s f e r o f such . wastes f rom NRTS' which we hope t.0 s t a r t w i t h i n t h e decade. ,

The au tho r i za t i on . reques t r e f e r r e d t o by Dr. Seaborg was f o r a

r e p o s i t o r y i n sa l t . : The r e p o s i t o r y . was te.ntat ive1.y t o be l o c a t e d a t 1

Lyons, Kansas, s u b j e c t t o s a t i s f a c t o r y comp le t ion o f c e r t a i n add i -

t i o n a l t e s t s and studies. . The p r o j e c t e d a v a i l a b i l i t y of t he Lyons

r e p o s i t o r y was 1976. Thus, the . commenc,ement o f waste t r a n s f e r f rom , .

Idaho b e f o r e the end o f t he decade seemed a reasonable hope. However,

s i t e - s p e c i f i c s a f e t y ques t i ons arose a t t he Lyons s i t e . When i t ap-

peared t h a t the ques t i ons m igh t no t be s a t i s f a c t o r i l y answered i n a

reasonable t ime, t h e p r o j e c t was abandoned in ' mid-197'?. 'A search f o r

an a1 t e r n a t i v e l o c a t i o n began.

A se r ies o f communications f o l l ~ w e d between the Governnr.of .Idaho

and DOE o f f i c i a l s r e l a t i v e t o t h e issue. I n October 1973, ~ o v e i n o r

Cec i l Andrus wrote a l e t t e r t o D r . D i x i e Lee. Rav, then Chair'man o f the

U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, which requested, i n p a r t , t h a t :

(1 ) The AEC assure us and the $people o f Idaho t h a t the .

Nat ional Reactor Tes t ing S t a t i o n i s i n no way being considered as a s i t e f o r the permanent or the extend.edu., . " i n t e r i m " storage o f long l i v e d nuclear wastes i n any f orm

( 2 ) A l l e f f o r t s are being exer ted by the Atomic Energ.y Com- miss ion t o 'assure t h e procurement and development o f a sa fe and acceptable Nat ional Atomic W a s t ~ Repository, no t l oca ted over a v i t a l water resource such as the Snake P l a i n Aqui fer , so t h a t long l i v e d r a d i o a c t i v e wastes c u r r e n t l y i n i n t e r i m storage a t t h e Nat ional , '

Reactor Tes t ing S t a t i o n can be removed f o r permanent storaqe a t t h e e a r l i e s t pnss ih le da te i n l i n e w i t h promises made by the AEC t o begin preparat ions f o r the removal of . such wastes f rom . the NRTS bu r ia l , ground by the end o f t h i s decade. . -

I

Chairman Ray o f the AEC responded i n November o f 1973 w i t h the

f o l l o w i n g : , , . I

(1 ) I can assure you t h a t thk :NRTS i s not being cogsidered . . i n any w'ay as the s i t e f o r 'permanent d isposal o f any l ong - l i ved nuclear waste. No dec is ion has been made concerning. t h e l o c a t i o n f o r the, Retr i ,evable Surface

8

Storage F a c i l i t y which we pl'an t o 'br.rild f o r the s o l i d i - f i e d commercial h igh - leve l r a d i o a c t i v e waste.! , !

. :

Wherever the f a c ' i l i t y i s located, i t w i l l 6e design'ed, ' ' cons t ruc ted and operated i n a manner which w i l l assure t h a t the r a d i q a c t i v e i nven to ry w i l l no t be. released by , equipment f a i l u r e , human e r ro r , o v e r t o r cove r t ac t ions '

by man, o r na tu ra l phenomena. , i

Further , be fore any de'cis ian is 'made i n t h i s matter, ' the p u b l i c w i l l be given f u l l oppor tun i ty , through an . .

,Environmental Impact Statement, Congressional Author i - za t i on and Appropr ia t ion 'hear'ing, etc., t o thoroughly rev iew t h e s a f e t y cons idera t ions and t o r a i s e any 'and . a l l quest ions i t may have concerning the a b i l i t y o f the f a c i l i t y t o g i ve f u l l p r o t e c t i o n t o t h e h e a l t h and s a f e t y o f the p u b l i c and t o the environment.

( Z ) . . . the Commission has a pas-itive program t o develop and implement the techniques needed t o t r e a t , package and permanent ly d ispose of t h e p l u ton ium contaminated waste , now s t o r e d a t NRTS, i n c l u d i n g t h a t p r e v i o u s l y b u r i e d i n t h e t renches a t t h a t s i t e . The schedule of t h i s Program i recogn izes our c o m i t m e n t t o be ready t o s t a r t moving t h i s waste from t h a t s i t e by t h e end o f t h e decade.

I n p u r s u i t of t h j s cornmi tment, t h e ERDA b,udget submi t ted t o Con- . .

g ress e a r l y i n 1975 requested increased f und ing f o r c o r e d r i l l i n g t o

eva lua te a bedded s a l t area i n southeastern New Mexico as a p o t e n t i a l

r e p o s i t o r y f o r d isposa l of ERDA-generated wastes. Th i s r e p o s i t o r y

would he a d i sposa l s i t e f o r t h e back log 'o f Rocky F l a t s w a s t ~ p resen t -

l y l o c a t e d a t t h e INEL.. .

. . . . Wi th t h i s budget s u b m i t t a l and the p o s s i b i l i t y o f a f e d e r a l r e -

p o s i t o r y , t h e f o l l o w i n g a c t i o n p l a n f o r t h e r e t r i e v a l , process ing, and

packaging o f TRU wastes was developed and g iven t o t f i e Governor o f

Idaho i n 1975 by l o c a l DOE f f o r m e r l y ERDA) o f f i c i a l s .

ACTIVITY

1973-78 Retrieval , processing and packaging R&D ..

bemonst+ate r e t r i eva l ' a t INEL ' . *. .

. . ' 1 , 1 * . , . ' , I '

Conceptual design of r e t r i eva l , processing, , ,

packaging fac i 1 i t y . . ( R P P F ) . . . " . / % , , . . . . .

Budget request f o r RPPF . . . . . .-

I 1977-78 Advanced conceptual design and planning : . :

1978 Project funds become avai lable . . ! . , '

9 978-81 Detailed f a c l l l t y desiyrt . .

I1 1980-83 184 Fac i l i t y con.struction . ' . . . . .

~ {; ', , . . . . : .:r

1984 Fac i 1 i t y checkout . .

I 1985 I n i t i a l operat ions

Y 1 986 Full sca le operations

I 199111 198521 Shipments to repository begin

1991 1985 Incoming shipments t o INEL cease

1995 1994 All wastes a t INEC processed (and shipped t o repository)

11 The dates through the remainder of this column. assume 1991 is the - e a r l i e s t date t h a t a federal reposi tory can accept t ransuranic waste.

21 The dates through the remainder of this column assume 1985 is the - e a r l i e s t date t h a t a federal repository can accept t ransuranic waste.

The Governor i n d i c a t e d suppor t o f t h i s p l a n i n r e t u r n correspon-

dence to. DOE o f f i c i a l s i n A p r i l 1975.

Several l e t t e r s f o l l o w e d concern ing emphasis and c l a r i f i c a t i o n o f

statements i n p rev ious correspondence. I n October 1976, as a r ,esu l t

o f t h e Governors s t a f f r ev i ew o f WASH-1536, " E I S Waste Management

Operat ions - Idaho Na t i ona l , Engineer ing Labora to ry " f ERDA 1 9 7 7 ~ 1 , t h e

Governor aga in corresponded w i t h DOE o f f i c i a l s . I n t h i s l e t t e r ,

Governor Andrus asked the f o l l o w i n g ques t ions concern ing t h e p r a c t i c e s

a t t h e RWMC:

( 1 ) W i l l b u r i a l o f non- t ransuran ic r a d i o a c t i v e waste con- t i n u e beyond t h e end o f t h i s . decade?

( 2 W i l l t he l o n g - l i v e d non- t ransuran ic wastes which a re . p r e s e n t l y be ing b u r i e d ever be r e t r i e v e d as promised f o r t r a n s f e r t o a f e d e r a l r e p o s i t o r y o r are t5e.y r e a l l y disposed of a t t h e i r p resen t s i t e ?

(3 ) , I s t he p r e s e n t ' l e v e l o f a c t i v i t y a t INEL expected t o change?

( 4 ) I s the r a t e o f genera t ion o f waste a t o the r areas such as Rocky F l a t expected t o change?

DOE responded t o t h i s l e t t e r i n September 1977 w i t h t he f o l -

lowing:

( 1 ) We expect t h a t b u r i a l o f INEL-generated non t ransuran ic waste w i l l con t i nue a t r ough l y t h e p resen t r a t e as l ong as c u r r e n t f a c i l i t i e s are operated.

( 2 ) The non t ransuran ic wastes t h a t a re b u r i e d a t INEL are cons idered permanent ly disposed o f , and we know o f no env i ronmenta l h e a l t h o r sa fe t y problem t h a t would d i c t a t e t h e i r removal.

( 3 ) We do no t expect t h ~ p resen t l e v e l o f programs a t INEL t o change s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n t h e fo reseeab le f u t u r e .

( 4 ) The r 3 . t ~ of genera t ion o f waste a t Rocky F l a t s and o the r s i t e s i s n o t expected t o change s ign i f i can t1 .y .

I n December 1977, -. -- Senator church again corresponded w i t h t h e '

Department o f Energy, expressing concern t h a t e a r l i e r commitments made

by the' AEC i n 1970 had no t been met; e.g., t h a t the AEC .would beg ih ,- .

removing t ransu ran i c wastes' f rom Idaho w i t h i n t h e decade. . i

DOE .responded w i t h t he f o l l o w i n g i n Mdrch o f 1978:

I n p a r t i c u ' l a r , i t i s un fo r tuna te t h a t removal o f . the s to red wastes cannot begin as ear1.y as the Atomic Energy Commissi.on .

(AEC) hoped i n 1970. A t t h a t t ime, i t was expected t h a t t h e Lyons, Kansas, s a l t r e p o s i t o r y would be i n r o u t i n e opera t ion by now. As you know, t h a t p r o j e c t had t o be abandoned.. I can assure you t h a t we are proceeding w i t h t he p r i o r i t y development o f a s u i t a b l e r e p o s i t o r y as r a p i d l y as i s compatible w i t h safet.y and w i t h the i n t e r e s t s of the people i n i t s ' area. . The 'schedule i s con t ingent on t h e cornpletlon o f the eriv i r - u n ~ r ~ e r ~ t d l impact assessment process and successful awangements w i t h s ta tes and l o c a l i t i e s i n t h e area. We expect t h a t t h e W a s t e ~ I s o l a t i o n P i l o t P lan t (WIPP) r e p o s i t o r y w i l l beg in t o accept wastes i n t he 1985-1986 t ime per iod . I n any event, Idaho, wastes w i 11 r e c e i v e p r i o r i t y a t t en t i on .

The complete t e x t o f a1 1 t he p e r t Snent correspondence on t h i s

subject , between o f f i c i a l s o f t h e Sta te o f Idaho and o f * the DOE and

i t s predecessor agencies, i s attached.

LIST OF CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN STATE OF IDAHO OI-FICIALS AND FED~RALUFFICIALS

E x h i b i t A - L e t t e r o f October 15, 1969, f r om Glen T. Seaborg, Chairman o f AEC t o Senator Frank Church ( r e g a r d i n g response on j o i n t s t udy b y Federa l agencies)

E x h i b i t B - L e t t e r o f A p r i l 30, 1970, f r om Senator Frank Church t o Chairman Seaborg ( r e g a r d i n g u l t i m a t e removal o f t h e b u r i a l s i t e t o a more s u i t a b l e l o c a t i o n )

E x h i b i t C - L e t t e r of May 26, 1970, f r om John E r l ew ine t o Senator Len. B. Jordan ( r e g a r d i n g p lans f o r a waste r e p o s i t o r y i n s a l t )

E x h i b i t D - L e t t e r o f June 9, 1970, f r om Chairman Seaborg t o Senator Church ( r e g a r d i n g commitment t o remove tr ansuran i cs f r om NRTS)

E x h i b i t E - ~ e t t e r o f October 5, ' 1973, from Governor C e c i l D. Andrus t o R. Glenn B rad ley ( r e g a r d i n g NETS as rep rocess ing f a c i 1 i t y )

E x h i b i t F - Telegram o f October 9, 1973, f r om Governor Andrus and Senator Church t o Chairman D i x y Lee Ray (NRTS as reprocess i ng f ac i 1 i t y )

E x h i b i t G - L e t t e r o f November 5, 1973, f rom Chairman Ray t o Governor Andrus ( cornmi tment t o remove p l u ton ium waste and o t h e r v e r y l o n g - l i v e d waste)

E x h i b i t H - L e t t e r o f November 14, 1973, f r om R. Glenn Brad ley t o Governor Andrus ( r e g a r d i n g month ly r e p o r t )

E x h i b i t I - L e t t e r o f March 13, 1974, f r om R. Glenn B rad ley t o Governor Andrus !sample month ly r e p o r t )

E x h i b i t J - L e t t e r o f March 20, 1974, f r om Governor Andrus t o R . Glenn Brad ley ( r e g a r d i n g concern over NRTS be ing n a t i o n ' s major de f a c t o b u r i a l ground) --

E x h i b i t K - L e t t e r o f A p r i l 22, 1974, from R. Glenn B rad ley t o Governor Andrus ( r e g a r d i n g Governor ' s concern on i n t e r i m s to rage )

E x h i b i t L - L e t t e r of December 18, 1974, from Governor Andrus t o R. Glenn Brad ley ( q u e s t i o n i n g when wastes w i l l be removed f r om NRTS)

E x h i b i t M - INEL Ac t i on P lan . f hand d e l i v e r e d b.y R. Glenn Brad ley, Manager ERDA-Idaho Operat ions O f f i c e t o Governor Andrus 3-21 -75)

E x h i b i t N -

I E x h i b i t 0 -

E x h i b i t P ' -

E x h i b i t Q -

E x h i b i t R ' -

E x h i b i t S -

L e t t e r o f A p r i l 29, 1975, f rom Governor Andrus t o R. Glenn Bradley ( regard ing Blue Ribbon Committee)

L e t t e r o f June 19, 1975, f rom R. Glenn Bradley t o Governor Andrus (answer t o A p r i l 29, 1975 l e t t e r ) . ,

L e t t e r f rom Governor Andrus 30 James L. Liverman, October 8, 1976 (comments on INEL Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement) . .

L e t t e r o f Sept. 30, 1977 f rom ~ames L. Liverman t o Governor John Evans (answer t o the October 8, 1976, l e t t e r f rom Governor Andrus t o John Liverman)

L e t t e r f rom Senator Church t o James Schl e s i nger, December 6, 1977, ( regard ing commitment on removal o f TRU waste)

L e t t e r o f March 2; 1978 from Dale D. Myers t o Senator Church ( r e p l y t o Deceinber 6, 1977, l e t t e r f rom Church t o Sch 1 e s i nger)

E x h i b i t A

U n i t e d S ta tes ATOMIC ENERGY COYMISSION Washi ngt,on, 0. C. 20545

October 15, 1969

Honorable Frank Church U n i t e d S ta tes Senate

Dear Senator Church:

Th i s i s i n response t o your l e t t e r o f SeptemSer 13, .1969, r e q u e s t i n g ' comments on your proposal t h a t four o t h e r Federal agencies make a j o i n t s tudy of r a d i o a c t i v e waste s to rage a t t h e AEC's Na t i ona l -Reactor T e s t i n g S ta t i on , (NRTS) i n Idaho.

A t t he t ime o f s t a r t up , t he bes t geo log i ca l and h y d r o l o g i c a l i n f o r m a t i o n was used t o s e l e c t a s i t e w i t h i n t h e NRTS s u i t a b l e f o r b u r i a l o f i t s s o l i d r a d i o a c t i v e wastes. The s i t e has a l so heen u s e d f o r b u r i a l o f ' s o l i d r a d i o a c t i v e wastes f rom t h e AEC's Rocky F la t s , Colorado, p l a n t and was used f o r wastes f rom AEC l i censees u n t i ! commerc ia l ly operated b u r i a l s i t e s became ava i 1 able.

T+e NRTS has alwavs operated an environmental m o n i t o r i n g program t o d e t e c t r a d i o a c t i v i t y which cou ld escape . i n t o t h e a i r o r water f rom i t s operat ions. The r a d i a t i o n exposure standards o f comparison are b a s i c a l l y those o f o rgan i za t i ons independent o f t h e AEC--the Federa l R a d i a t i o n Counci l , t h e Na t i ona l Counci l on Rad ia t i on P r o t e c t i o n and Measurement, and t he I n t e r n a - t i o n a l Commission on R a d i o l o g i c a l P ro tec t i on . The env i ronmenta l m o n i t o r i n g , r e s u l t s , which are summarized i n semi annual p u b l i c r epo r t s , show r a d i o - a c t i v i t y concen t ra t i ons i n o f f s i t e waters and i n o n s i t e underground waters have always been we1 1 below these appl i c a h l e ; 1 i m i t s . . .

The average annual p r e c i p i t a t i o n a t t h e NRTS d u r i n g t h e p a s t 15 years has been 8.5 inches. S tud ies a t t he b u r i a l ground i n d i c a t e t h a t 96 percen t o f a l l p r e c i p i t a t i o n i s l o s t by evapora t ion f rom t h e s o i l o r t r a n s p i r a t i o n by vege ta t ion . The remain ing 4 p'ercent i s no t s u f f i c i e n t t o cause sa tu ra - t i o n . Therefore, once t h e wastes a re b u r i e d and covered by about 3 f e e t o f s o i l i t seems reasonable t o be1 i e v e t h e y are no t leached by water b u t remain v i r t u a l l y dry .

From the fo rego ing , t h e r e i s no reason t o b e l i e v e t h a t the a q u i f e r has been contaminated, o r w i l l become conta.minated, f rom r a i n f a l l . We p l a n t o i n t e n s i f y our e f f o r t s t o d p t e c t any changes due t o s p r i n g snowmelt, and t o t ake c o r r e c t i v e a c t i o n accord ing ly . I n a d d i t i o n , because o f t h e presence o f l o n g - l i v e d p lu ton ium i n t he b u r i a l ground, we are e v a l u a t i n g t h e hazard p o t e n t i a l o f some f u t u r e major f l o o d which migh t exceed any f l o o d i n t h e known h i s t o r y o f the s i t e .

Honorxable Frank Church - 2 -

The four agencies named i n your l e t t e r a1read.v have some fami 1 i a r i t y w i t h NRTS opera t ions . The AEC has always sought t h e expe r t adv ice o f t he U. S. Geo log ica l Survey (USGS), and the USGS has always ma in ta ined a smal l s t a f f o f s c i e n t i s t s a t t h e NRTS f o r t h a t reason. A d d i t i o n a l USGS c o n s u l t a t i o n has Seen p rov ided a t t he headquar ters l e v e l . The Bureau o f R a d i o l o g i c a l Health, U. S. P u b l i c Hea l t h Serv ice, r o u t i n e l v i n t e g r a t e s t he NRTS environmental m o n i t o r i n g r e s u l t s w i t h those f r om t h e m o n i t o r i n g networks operated by i t s e l f and by S ta te h e a l t h agencies. Technica l s t a f f f rom the Denver Regional O f f i c e o f the P u b l i c Hea l th Serv ice r e c e n t l y v i s i t e d NRTS f o r o r i e n t a t i o n on r a d i o a c t i v e waste d i s - posal . The Regional D i r ~ c t o r o f t be Federa l Water P o l l u t i o n Con t ro l A d m i n i s t r a t i o n has v i s i t e d NRTS t o rev iew bo th r a d i o a c t i v e and nonradio- a c t i v e waste d isposa l p r a c t i c e s . The Bureau o f Spor t F i s h e r i e s and W i l d l i f e has d i r e c t knowledge o f f i s h and game c o n d i t i o n s on t h e NRTS through s t a f f v i s i t s i n connect ion w i t h p reda to r c o n t r o l programs. The AEC w i l l con t i nue t o cooperate w i t h these agencies on ma t te r s o f common i n t e r e s t . The AEC, o f course, i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t he dec i s i ons which have been made and t h e p rpcpd jng references are n o t in tended t o imp l y f u l l endorsement o f such dec i s i ons by these o the r agencies.

As a f i inal comment, ' a proposed p o l i c y on s i t i n g o f p r i v a t e nuc lea r f u e l ,

reprocess ing p l an t s , pub l i shed i n the Federa l Reg i s te r on Juno 3, 1969, p rov ides i n p a r t t h a t t h e h i g h - l e v e l l i q u i d wastes f rom such p l a n t s

-would be s o l i d i f i e d and t r a n s f e r r e d t o a l i m i t e d number o f Federa l r e p o s i t o r i e s wh.ich would p r o v i d e permanent + s o l a t i o n o f t h e was tes , f rom man's environment.. By l e t t e r o f J u l y 22, Mr., Donald J. McKay, Chairman o f t h e . I d a h o Nuclear .Energy Commission, agreed w i t h t h e proposed p o l i c y a,nd requested t h a t the NRTS be des ignated as one o f the Federa l r epos f - t o r i e s . .

. ..

.We..hop'e t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n i s , s u f f i c i e n t l y respons ive t o .your i n q u i r y . I f you have any f u r t h e r quest ions, o r i f you would l i k e a b r i e f i n g . b y AEC t e c h n i c a l s t a f f , p lease l e t us k'now.

. ,

. . .Co rd ia l ly,

/s/ Glenn .T. Seaborg

E x h i b i t B

U. S. SENATE, Washington, D.C., A p r i l 30, 1970.

Mr . Glen Seaborg, Cha i rman , Atomi c Energy Commi ss ion, Washington, D.C.

Dear Mr . Chairman: The Federal water Qua1 i t y Admin i s t ra t i on ( f o r m e r l y t h e Fed- e r a l Water P o l l u t i o n Contro l Adminis t ra- t i on) has r e c e n t l y completed a r e p o r t concern ing waste d isposal p r a c t i c e s a t t he Na- t i o n a l Reactor Tes t ing S t a t i o n i n Idaho F a l l s , Idaho.

The comnents and recommendations con- t a ined i n t h i s r e p o r t are o f v i t a l importance t o the people o f my s ta te . I request the - .

immediate implementat ion o f t h e repo r t s . i n beha l f o f the people o f the s t a t e o f Idaho.

Three separate r e p o r t s have now openly c r i t i c i z e d , t h e a c t i v i t i e s o f the AEC a t Idaho F.al ls, Idaho. Two o f those r e p o r t s have c a l l e d , f o r the u l t i m a t e removal o f the b u r i a l s i t e t o a more s u i t a b l e l oca t i on . I n l i g h t o f these fac ts , I f e e l t h a t the AEC should proceed w i t h a l l due speed t o implement these rec - omnendat i ons.

Please ,keep me f u l l y and c u r r e n t l y informed o f t h e ac t ions o f t h e agency i n t q i s regard.

With bes t wishes, S i ncere 1 y,

1 I '

/s/ FRANK CHURCH

E x h i b i t C

U n i t e d s t a t e s ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION Washington, D. C. 20545

. . May 26, 1970

Honorable Len B. Jordan Un i t ed S ta tes Senate . ,

Dear Senator Jordan: . . ' ' t

We v e r y much apprec ia ted t,he o p p o r f u n i t y t o . d i s c u s s w i t h you and your s t a f f t h e waste management a c t i v i t i e s a t t h e Na t i ona l Reactor T e s t i n g S ta t i on . The AEC b e l i e v e s t h a t these a c t i v i t i e s are b e i n g ca r r i ' ed ou t s a f e l y and i n . ,. . accordance w i t h app! i c a b l e . standards.

We descr ibed a t some l e n g t h t he b u r i a l o f . l ow - l eve l s o l i d r a d i o a c t i v e wastes a t NRTS and I would ' l i k e t o summarize AEC's p lans rega rd ing such wastes.

AEC regards b u r i a l o f s o l i d r a d i o a c t i v e was$es a t NRTS as c o n s t i t u t i n g s torage, n o t d i spos.alJ. 'This i s rio't because 'o f any near- term hazard t o t h e aqu i f e r , t h e p u b l i c o r , e m p l o y e e s T u t i n o rder t o o b t a i n t h e v e r y long- te rm i s o l a t i o n f rom t h e bi,osphere r e q u i r e d f o r s'ome o f these wastes, t r a n s f e r r a l t o an underground r e b o s i t o r y seems t o . b e advisab1,e; AEC has conducted an ex tens i ve R&D program and' has concluded t h a t a s a l t 'mine would p r o v i d e t h e most e f f e c t i v e i s o l a t i o n .of sucb wastes f rom f r e s h water a q u i f e r and f r om 1.

t h e biosphere. AEC w i l l seek i n FY-1972 a u t h o r i t y t o e s t a b l i s h a radioactivm6 waste r e p o s i t o r y i n s a l t which w i l l s t o r e n o t o n l y h i g h - l e v e l wastes f rom f u e l reprocess ing p l a n t s ' h u t a1 so l ow- l eve l a lpha contaminated wastes such as t he Pu-contaminated wastes f rom Rocky F l a t s .

When t h e r e p o s i t o r y i s opera t i ve , AEC g lans t o s t o r e c u r r e n t l y generated a lpha wastes t h e r e and a l s o t o excavate, process and s h i p such wastes p r e s e n t l y s t o r e d a t NRTS. A number o f years would be r e q u i r e d t o complete t he t r a n s f e r o f such wastes f rom NRTS.

Should you d e s i r e a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n rega rd ing our waste management a c t i v i t i e s , we w i l l be p leased t o p rov ide it.

S ince re l y ,

/ s / John A. E r lew ine A s s i s t a n t General Manager

f o r Operat ions

E x h i b i t D

U n i t e d S ta tes ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION Wasclington, D. C, 20545

June 9, 1970

Honorable Frank Church U n i t e d S ta tes Senate

Dear Frank:

S ince r e c e i v i n g you r l e t t e r o f May 1, 1970, Commissioner Thompson and members of t h e AEC s t a f f have had t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o meet w i t h you and y o u r a s s i s t a n t s t o d iscuss waste management a c t i v i t i e s a t t he Na t i ona l Reactor T e s t i n g S t a t i o n .

Among ma t t e r s d iscussed were some o f t h e recommendations o f t h e r e c e n t l y i s sued r e p o r t o f t h e Federa l Water Q u a l i t y Adm in i s t r a t i on . As you were informed, AEC i s n o t i n accord w i t h a number o f t he FWQA r e p o r t f i n d i n g s and recommendations. We have r e c e n t l y completed d e t a i l e d comments on t h a t r e p o r t and have f u rn i shed you a copy.

As you know, t h e AEC has l o n g suppor ted an a c t i v e research and development program on methods f o r managing and d i spos ing o f r a d i o a c t i v e wastes. Th i s program has r e s u l t e d i n t h e development o f seve ra l e f f e c t i v e processes f o r r educ ing t h e volume o f h i g h l e v e l l i q l ~ i d wastes and c o n v e r t i n g them i n t o s o l i d forms s u i t a b l e f o r shipment and l ong t ~ r m s to rage . Jus t about a year ago t h e commission announced a proposed po1ic.v t h a t would r e q u i r e h i g h l e v e l wastes f r om commercial f u e l r ep rocess ing p l a n t s t o be s o l i d i f i e d on s i t e and t o be sf i ipped t o a Federa l re posit or,^ f o r s torage. Such a p o l i c y i s p o s s i b l e because o f t h e success fu l t e c h n o l o g i c a l deve lop- ments r e s u l t i n g f r o m t h e AEC's R&D program. That program has a l s o i n c l u d e d e x t e n s i v e R&D on t h e b e s t methods f o r l ong te rm s to rage o f s o l i d wastes. A f t e r years o f s t udy and exper iment t h e Commission has concluded t h a t a s a l t mine would p r o v i d e e f f e c t i v e l ong te rm i s o l a t i o n o f s o l i d r a d i o a c t i v e wastes f rom f r e s h , w a t e r a q u i f e r s and f r om t h e biosphere. I n FY 1972 AEC w i l l seek a u t h o r i t y t o e s t a b l i s h a demonst ra t ion r a d i o a c t i v e waste r e p o s i - t o r y i n s a l t which w i l l s t o r e b o t h h i g h l e v e l s o l i d wastes f rom f u e l r e - p rocess ing p l a n t s and low l e v e l a lpha p a r t i c l e e m i t t i n g wastes ( a l p h a wastes) such as t he Pu-contaminated wastes f r om t h e Rocky F l a t s P lan t .

When t h e s a l t mine r e p o s i t o r y i s f u l l y ope ra t i ve , AEC p lans t o s t o r e n o t o n l y c u r r e n t l y generated a lpha wastes b u t a l s o t o excavate, process

.and s h i p such wastes which a re be ing t e m p o r a r i l y s t o r e d a t NRTS. A number o f years w i l l he r e q u i r e d t o complete t he t r a n s f e r o f such wastes f r o m NRTS which we hope t o s t a r t w i t .h in t h e decade. The proposed t r a n s f e r o f such wastes i s no t hecause o f any near term hazard t o the a q u i f e r which

u n d e r l i e s NRTS, t he p u b 1 . i ~ or ' NRTS employees. T r a n s f e r r a l t o an underground r e p o s i t o r y a p p e a r s ' t o be t h p b e s t method f o r a t t a i n i n g t h e v e r y 1 ong-term i s 0 1 a t i o n o f these wastes f rom the biosphere.

We w i l l keep you f u l l y in formed as our waste management p l ans con t i nue t o develop and w i l l be happy t o d iscuss them w i t h you.

I

Cord i a1 ly ,

IS/ Glenn T. Seaborg

Chai rman

E x h i b i t E

STATE OF IDAHO O f f i c e o f t h e Governor

BOISE

October 5, 1973

C e c i l D. Andrus Governor

R. Glenn Brad ley, Manager Atomic Energy Commissions Idaho Operat ions Idaho F a l l s , Idaho 83401

Dear Mr . Brad1e.y:

I would l . i ke t o t a k e t h i s o p p o r t u n i t y t o welcome .yot~ back t o Idaho. I understand you were he re some yea rs ago w i t h P h i l l i p s Petroleum Co., and so 1 am c o n f i d e n t t h a t I do no t have t o e y t o l l the v i , r t ues o f 1 i v i n g i n Idaho t o ,you.

W i t h each pass5ng day I am sure t h a t you a re keen l y 'aware how con- t r o v e r s i a l a tomic energy i s becoming i n t h e eyes o f t h e pub1 i c . I have always had a h i g h .degree o f conf ider ice i n t h e competence o f t h e AEC's p r o f e s s i o n a l personnel and t h e i r management o f ou r f a c i 1 i t . y . I a l s o keen l y recogn ize t he importance o f t h e AEC's presence i n Idaho and t h e f u n c t i o n o f t h e reprocess ing f a c i 1 i t . y a t t h e s i t e .

However, due t o such t h i n g s as A t l a n t i c R i c h f i e l d ' s inexcusab le l ack o f m o n i t o r i n g a l e a k i n g waste tank a t t h e Hanford s i t e , and t h e suh- sequent p u b l i c i t y , " t h e s u b j e c t o f waste management i s be ing s c r u t i n i z e d by b o t h t 5 e p u b l i c and t h e p ress as never before. Because o f my r e - s p o n s i b i l i t y t o r ep rosen t and t o p r o t e c t the bes t i n t e r e s t s and t he s a f e t y o f a l l Idahoans, I f e e l I must c l e a r l y impress upon yo11 my concern about what U. S. News and World Repor t has termed "The R i s i n g Danger o f Atomic Waste.

Wi th your predecessor, W i l l i a m L. Ginke l , I had an unders tanding which ' I want t o e s t a b l i s h w i t h you also'. B a s i c a l l y , tGie unders tand ing e n t a i l s you r s t a f f keep ing i n d i r e c t c o n t a c t w i t h m,y s t a f f concern ing any unusual i nc reases i n t h e amount o f atomic waste be ing t r q n s p o r t e d Or . t r a n s f e r r e d t o Idaho f o r purpose's o f " i n t e r i m s torage." 'To be q u i t e cand id w i t h you, many Idahoans have a j u s t i f i a b l e f e a r t h a t on an i n t e r i m bast is t he AEC may make Idaho t h e n a t i o n ' s de f a c t o r e p o s i t o r y f o r atomic wastes o f a l l v a r i e f i e ~ . Th is p o s s i 5 i l i t . y concerns bo th myse l f and Senator Frank Church f o r w h i l e your predecessor assured us t h i s would n o t happen, i n q u i r i e s by Senator Church's s t a f f i n Washing- t o n r e s u l t e d i n an ac!(nowledgment o f the p o s s i b i 1 i t y .

R . Glenn Bradley

As Governor of t h i s s t a t e , I cannot and wil l not permit Idaho t o become a de f a c t o r epos i to ry f o r a considerable port ion of t h e n a t i o n ' s was te- -par t icu lar ly waste which in no way f i g u r e s in short- term reprocessing. To t h a t end I am enclosing a copy'of a telegram which Senator Church and I w i l l j o i n t l y r e l e a s e on Tuesday, October 9, . in which we c a l l upon Dixy Lee Ray t o assure us through both her o f f i c e and your o f f i c e t h a t except f o r the 1imit.ed purposes nf fue l reprocessing and ca lc in ing waste, t h e s to rage f a c i l i t i e s a t t h e NRTS wi l l not in any way be expanded or used f o r the s to rage of atomic wastes from sources which have not previously u t i l i z e d t h e NRTS s i t e p r i o r to January 1, 1973.

I note f o r example t h a t Mr. Ginkel ' s s t a f f , in conformance w i t h our agreement, did inform me t h a t t h e f i r s t shipment of 85 b a r r e l s of waste from a p lant in Pennsylvania was enroute t o Idaho as of Sep- tember 27. ' I t i s my understanding t h a t t h i s shipment i s t he f i r s t of a t o t a l of 3,000 some b a r r e l s t o be added' t o the a1read.y e x i s t i n g 250,000 b a r r e l s s to red a t t h e NRTS s i t e . What we a r e asking, then, i s t h a t although t h i s shipment may be completed, under the assurances we seek the re wi l l be no f u r t h e r shipments from t h a t p l an t in Penn- '

sylvania s ince i t was not shipping p r i o r t o January 1. Also, the assurances we seek mean t h a t waste from non- t radi t ional sources should not be shipped to Idaho even on a one-shot bas i s . 'The r e s t of. the telegram i s se l f -explanatory .

I a l so would l i k e a monthly r epor t from your off i c e in which you i d e n t i f y t h e amount of on - s i t e generated waste as opposed t o o f f - s i t e generated waste. Enclosed i s a copy of the s o l i d waste cumulation r epor t as of December, 1972. I am s p e c i f i c a l l y requesti 'ng t h e same repor t as of October, 1973, and then as of the f i r s t of each month a f t e r t h a t . Should t h e r e be any s i g n i f i c a n t increases , I want my s t a f f to rece ive a de ta i l ed explanat ion.

I am confident you can comply with my reques ts , f o r I have always en joyed a cooperat ive re1 a t ionship with your predecessor. I know we are both looking forward t o a candid r e l a t i o n s h i p based upon a mutual understanding and appreciat ion with r e spec t t o the r o l e s in which we serve.

Again, welcome t o Idaho, and I wi l l look forward t o hearing from you soon and t o meeting you soon.

Sincerely,

/s/ Cecil D . Andrus

CECIL D. ANDRUS GOVERNOR

E x h i b i t F

October 9, 1973

TELEGRAM

Dr. D i xy Lee Ray, Chairman U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C. 20545

A recen t a r t i c l e , which appeared i n t h e August 28 i ssue o f t he Washington Post, i s o f g r e a t concern t o us. We were bo th assured by personnel a t t h e Na t i ona l Reactor T e s t i n g S t a t i o n t h a t t he Atomic Energy Commission d i d n o t contemplate t h e use o f t h e NRTS as a Na t i ona l Repos i t o r y f o r Atomic wastes. Indeed, pas t r epo r t s , par - t i c u l a r l y t h e A p r i l 1970 r e p o r t o f t h e Federa l Water Cont ro l Admin- i s t r a t i o n , have imd ica ted t h a t the l ong te rm s to rage o f r a d i o a c t i v e wastes above t h e Snake P l a i n Aqu i f e r i s undes i rab le .

I n 1 i g h t o f r e c e ~ t dec i s i ons t o sh ip atomic wastes t o t he NRTS f rom Pennsylvania, and t h e c l e a r # i m p l i c a t i o n o f t h e newspaper acco i~n t t h a t t h e AEC i s indeed s tudy ing t h e NRTS as a p o s s i b l e permanent waste d isposa l s i t e , we s p e c i a l l y request , i n w r i t i n g , t h e f o l l o w i n g assurances:

1. That except f o r t h e l i m i t e d purposes o f f u e l reprocess ing and c a l c i n i n g o f wastes t h e s to rage f a c i l i t i e s o f t h e NRTS w i l l no t i n any way be expanded o r used f o r t he s to rage o f atomic. wastes f r om sources which have n o t previous1.y u t i l i z e d the NRTS s i t e .

2. That the AEC assure us and the people o f Idaho t h a t t he Nat ional : ,Reactor Tes t i ng S t a t i o n i s i n no way be ing cons idered as a s i t e f o r t h e permanent o r t he extended " i n t e r i m " s to rage o f l ong l i v e d nuc lea r wastes f n any f orm.

That a l l e f f o r t s a re be ing exer ted by t he Atomic Energ,y Commission t o assure t h e procurement and development o f .a safe and acceptable Na t i ona l Atomic Waste Reposi tory , n o t l o c a t e d over a v i t a l water resource- such' as t h e Snake P l a i n Aqu i f e r , so, t h a t l o n g l i v e d r a d i o a c t i v e wastes c u r r e n t l y i n i n t e r i m s to rage a t t h e Na t i ona l Reactor T e s t i n g S t a t i o n can be removed f o r permanent s to rage a t t h e e a r l i e s t p o s s i b l e da te i n l i n e w i t 1 1 promises made by t he AEC t o beg in p repa ra t i ons f o r t he removal o f such wastes f r om t h e NRTS b u r i a l ground by the end o f t h i s decade.

S incere ly , .

/s / FRANK CHURCH U. S. SENATOR, IDAHO

/s / CECIL D. ANDRUS GOVERNOR OF IDAHO

E x h i b i t G

U n i t e d S ta tes ATOMIC ENERGY C O M M I S S I O N Washington, D.C. 20545

November 5 , 1973

Honorable C e c i l D. Andrus Governor o f Idaho Boise, Idaho 83702

I

Dear Governor Andrus:

Thank you f o r t h e October 5, 1973, te l 'egram f rom you and Senator Chuvch concern ing t h e Commission's p resen t and f u t u r e use o f t h e Na't ional Reactor T e s t i n g S t a t i o n as a s i t e f o r t he s to rage o f r a d i o a c t i v e waste.

I assure you and t h e people o f Idaho t h a t no a c t i o n w i l l be taken b y t h e Commission rega rd ing t he s to rage o f ra .d ioac t i ve waste w5ich can p o s s i b l y r e s u l t i n a p u b l i c hazard o r i n s u l t t o t h e environment, and t h a t s teps w i l l be taken on a t i m e l y bas i s t o e l i m i n a t e any p o s s i b l e source o f hazard o r env i ronmenta l i n s u l t which m igh t r e s u l t f rom p a s t Commission p r a c t i c e s . Th is i s a fundamental o b j e c t i v e which we f o l low i n a l l o f our a c t i v i t i e s , r ega rd less o f l o c a t i o n .

I n r ega rd t o your reques t f o r w r i t t e n response t o t h r e e s p e c i f i c po in t s ; namely:

"1. That except f o r t h e l i m i t e d purposes .o f f u e l reprocess ing and c a l c i n i n g o f waste t h e s to rage f a c i l i t y o f t h e NRTS w i l l ' n o t i n any way be expanded o r used f o r t he s to rage o f atomic wastss f r om sources which have n o t p r e v i o u s l y u t i l i z e d t h e NRTS s i t e . "

The NRTS s i t e i s un ique l y s u i t e d f rom the s tandpo in t o f s i t e charac- t e r i s t i c s , a v a i l a b l e f a c i l i t i e s and equipment, and a v a i l a b l e t r a i n e d personnel f o r s a f e su r f ace o r -near-sur face r e t r i e v a b l e s to rage o f c e r t a i n types o f waste which have been r o u t i n e l y generated i n t h e p a s t a t c e r t a i n AEC f a c i l i t i e s and which w i l l be generated ? n t he f u t u r e a t o t h e r AEC f a c i l i t i e s . I am sure you app rec ia te t h a t we must make maximum e f f i c i e n t use o f a l l o f our s i t e s , f a c i l i t i e s and manpower so l o n g as such u t i l i z a t i o n does n o t i n any way endanger t h e h e a l t h and s a f e t y o f the pub1 i c o r produce an unacceptable impact. on t he environment.

A l l waste a t t h e NRTS has been, and w i l l con t i nue t o be, managed i n a manner t o assure t h a t t he h e a l t h and s a f e t y o f t he p u b l i c w i l l no t be endangered. S ince 1970, a l l p l u ton ium contaminated waste a t t h e NRTS has been r e t r i e v a b l y s t o r e d i n d i s c r e t e packages designed t o r e t a i n t h e i r i n t e g r i t y f o r a t l e a s t twenty years under t h e NRTS weather c o n d i t i o n s . P r i o r t o 1970, p l u ton ium contaminated waste was b u r i e d a t

Honorable C e c i l D. Andrus .- :2 .- : , , , . ' . . ..' , . , , ,' . ,, - t ,

t h e NRTS i n packages which d i d no t always.. meet t h i ' s i n t e g r i t y c r . i te r ion , . . b u t ou r m o n i t o r i n g program has shown t h a t t h e rad ioac t . i . v i t y i n t h i s . . -

e a r l y waste has no t m ig ra ted f r om i t s p l a c e o f buri.al.. . Ev.en so, i n accord w i t h a commitment made b y Dr. Seaborg seve ra l years ago, :we now. . have a program i ~ n d e r way t o en,g.ineer t he equipment and t o s t a r t exhuma- t i o n and. repackaging o f t h i s m a t e r i a l w i t h i n t h e .next seve ra l years. . . :

. . , .. . . . ' . .. . . ,

"2. That the AEC assure us and the peo&e o f Idaho t h a t t he Na t i ona l ' ' . . Reactor Tes t i ng S t a t i o n i s i n ,no way b e i n g cons idered as a s , i t e . . .

f o r the permanent o r the extended " in te r . im8 ' s to rage o f long- l i v e d nuc lea r wastes i n any form."

.. .

I can assure y,ou t h a t t he NRTS : i s n o t be ing cons idered i n any ka.y. as . t h e s i t e f o r permanent d isposa l o f any l o n g - l i v e d nuc lea r waste. No d e c i s i o n has been made concerni.ng t he l o c a t i o n f o r t he R e t r i e v a b l e Surface Storage Fac i 1 i t y which we p l a n t o b u i l d f o r t h e s o l i d i f i e d c o m e r c i a l h i g h - l e v e l r a d i o a c t i v e waste.

Wherever t h e f a c i l i t y i s loca ted , i t w i l l be designed., cons t ruc ted and operated i n a manner which w i l l assure t h a t t he r a d i o a c t i v e i n v e n t o r y w i l l n o t be re l eased by equipment f a i l u r e , human e r r o r , o v e r t o r c o v e r t a c t i o n s by man, o r n a t u r a l phenomena'.

. . : , I

Fur the r , b e f o r e any d e c i s i o n i s made i n t h i s mat te r , t h e pub1 i c w i l l be g iven f u l l oppo r tun i t y , through an Environmental Impact S ta te - ment, Congressional A u t h o r i z a t i o n and A p p r o p r i a t i o n hear ing , etc., t o t ho rough l y rev iew the s a f e t y cons ide ra t i ons and t o r a i s e any and a l l ques t ions i t may have concern ing t h e a b i l i t y o f t h e f a c i l i t y t o g i v e f u l l p r o t e c t i o n t o t h e h e a l t h and sa fe t y o f t he p u b l i c and t o t he env i ronment . "3. That a l l e f f o r t s are be ing exe r ted by t he Atomic Energy Commission

t o assure t h e procurement and development of a safe and acceptable n a t i o n a l a tomic waste r e p o s i t o r y , n o t l o c a t e d over a v i t a l water r esou rce such as t h e Snake P l a i n Aqu i f e r , so t h a t l o n g - l i v e d r a d i o a c t i v e wastes c u r r e n t l y i n i n t e r i m s to rage a t t he Na t i ona l Reactor T e s t i n g S t a t i o n can be removed f o r permanent s to rage a t t h e e a r l i e s t p o s s i b l e date i n l i n e w i t h promises made by t h e AEC t o beg in p r e p a r a t i o n s f o r t h e removal of such wastes f r om t h e NRTS b u r i a l ground by the end o f t h i s decade."

As I noted i n my response t o you r f i r s t p o i n t , t h e Commission has a p o s i t i v e program t o develop and implement the techniques needed t o t r e a t , package and permanent ly d ispose o f t f i e p l u ton ium contaminated wasto now s to red a t NRTS, i n c l u d i n g t h a t p r e v i o u s l y b u r i e d i n t h e t renches a t t h a t s i t e . The schedule o f t h i s program recogn izes our conuni tment t o be ready t o s t a r t moving t h i s waste f rom t h a t s i t e by t h e end o f t h e decade.

Honorable Cec i l D. Andrus - . 3 -

I n c los ing, I r e i t e r a t e t h a t we have no plans t o use t h e NRTS as a permanent dispos.al s i t e f o r the plutonium contaminated and other very l ong - l i ved nuclear wastes ,w i th which you are concerned. A11 our i n t e r i m storage a c t i v i t i e s a t the NRTS w i l l ' be guided by the p r i n c i p l e

1 t h a t t h e Snake P l a i n Aqu i fe r must be f u l l y p ro tec ted against a l l ~ possi b i l i ty o f r a d i o a c t i v e contami nat ion. I f u r t h e r assure you t h a t you and t h e people o f Idaho w i l l be kept completely informed on a l l of our p lans . f o r waste management a t the NRTS, and we w i 11 c e r t a i n l y do noth ing t h a t would i n any way be det r imenta l t o t h e o v e r a l l bes t i n t e r e s t s o f t h e 4 t a t e o f Idaho.

I am seriding t h i s same l e t t e r ' t o Senator Church, and i f I can be o f f u r t h e r assis tance t o you i n t h i s matter, please ' l e t me know.

Sincerely,

/s/ Dixy Lee Ray, Chairman

cc: Senator James A. McCluce Representat ive Or'val Hansen Representat ive Steve D. Symms

Exhibit H

November 14, 1973

Honorable Cecil D. Andrus Governor of Idaho Statehouse Boise, Idaho

Dear Governor Andrus :

I enjoyed my v i s i t with you r e c e n t l y . i n Boise and the opportunity ' i t provided fo r continuing the close, cooperative re la t ionsh ip which has existed between our o f f i ces . I share your i n t e r e s t i n es tabl ishing a cand'id re la t ionship , based upon a mutual understanding and appreciation with respect t o the roles i n which we serve.

You no doubt have received by now Chairman Ray's response t o the October 5 telegram which you and Senator Church sen t t o Dr. Ray, posing spec i f i c questions about the radioact ive waste management plans and pract ices a t the NRTS. While the Chairman's l e t t e r responded t o the policy questions ra ised i n your pa ra l l e l comunication t o me on t h i s subject , there i s one addit ional point in your October 5 l e t t e r t o me about which I would l i k e t o comment;

You requested a monthly repor t of the type which we provided your off ice i n December 1973, report ing both onsi t e and off s i te-generated radioact ive sol i d wastes accumulated a t the NRTS. We will be glad t o comply w i t h this request, and in t h i s connection we have attached a summary of the quan t i t i e s of on- s i t e and o f f s i t e so l i d radioact ive waste disposed and stored a t the NRTS'for t h e period January through August 1973 and fo r the month of September. I plan to provide you w i t h a monthly report s imi lar t o t + e attachment Sy ' the 25th of each month following the month being reported. This s h o r t delay ''.

each month i n report ing will he due t o the time required to perform the measurements, t abu la te the data and process i t through our data processing, center .

. .

If I can be of fu r the r ass is tance to you in t h i s matter, p lease l e t me . know.

Sincerely yours,

Original Signed b y R . Glenn Bradley

R . Glenn Bradlev Manager

Enclosure: Summary of quan t i t i e s of ons i t e and o f f s i t e radioactive so l id waste.

E x h i b i t I

1

March 13, 1974

The Honorable Cec i l D. Andrus Governor o f Idaho Statehouse Boise, I D 83707


Consis tant w i i h my promise t o keep you advised o f mat ters r e l a t e d t o tho r e c e i p t o f s o l i d r a d i o a c t i v e wastes a t t h e NRTS f rom o the r AEC f a c i l i t i e s , I have had my s t a f f update t h i s i n fo rma t i on and prov ide est imates f o r 1974. I n order t o min imize any poss ib le misunderstanding due t o pas t discussions, I have tabu la ted the da ta and inc luded the ac tua l amounts rece ived i n 1973 f o r comparative purposes. ,

Actual Forecast* CY-1973 CY-1974

Vol ume R a d i o a c t i v i t y Vol ume AEC F a c i l i t y Cubic Feet Cur ies Cubic Feet

.Rocky F la t s , Colo. 258,000 23,500 200,000 B e t t i s Laboratory, Penna. 1,190 2 5,300 Mound Laboratory, Ohio - - - - 20,000 ANL - East, I l l i n o i s - - - - 6,600

Tot a1 259,190 23,502 231,900

*It i s d i f f i c u l t t o f o recas t the amount o f r a d i o a c t i v i t y .

We s t i l l expect t o beg in r e c e i v i n g t h e wastes from Mound Labora tory i n Ju ly . It i s about t h i s same t ime t h a t modest q u a n t i t i e s o f wastes from the AEC f a c i l i t y l oca ted i n I l l i n o i s w i l l s t a r t t o be shipped t o t h e NRTS. This development, which has no t been p r e v i o u s l y i d e n t i f i e d t o you, i s a . r e l a t i v e l y new one w i t h d e f i n i t i o n o f fo recas ted q u a n t i t i e s having been rece i ved on1.y i n recent days. This waste, as w i t h a l l such wastes s to red a t t he NRTS, w i l l be i n con ta iners designed t o ma in ta in t h e i r i n t e g r i t y f o r 20 years. The conta iners w i l l be s to red i n the Idaho Transuranic Storage Area and dest ined f o r f u t u r e shipment t o an AEC f a c i l i t y designed f o r long-term storage.

I t r u s t t h a t if you o r your s t a f f have any quest ions regard ing any o f t h i s in format ion, you w i l l con tac t us. .

Very tru1.y yours,,

O r i g i n a l s igned by Car l R. Malmstrom f o r

R. Glen Bradley Manager

Exhibit J

STATE OF IDAHO Office of t he Governor

BOISE March 20, 1974

Cecil D. Andrus Governor

Mr. R. Glenn Bradley, Manager Idaho Operations Office U . S. Atomic Energy Commission P. 0. Box 2108 Idaho Fall s , Idaho 8340.1

Dear Glenn:

Jus t a short note in which I want t o acknowledge receipt of a recent l e t t e r from you advising me of t he rece ip t of some so l i d radioact ive wastes a t the NRTS from some other AEC f a c i l i t i e s . I appreciate your keeping me updated in t h i s manner, as I also appreciate rece ip t of the monthly reports of on-s i te and off - s i t e waste a t t he NRTS burial grounds.

I do have one point of inquiry with regard t o your recent l e t t e r . When my Administrative Assistant , William J. Murphy, and my Press Secretary, Chris Carlson, returned from t h e i r personal tour of t he NRTS s i t e , they reported t o me t h a t you had indicated t h a t the l a s t shipment of waste from a nontradit ional source would be t h a t from the Mound Laboratory in Ohio. I now note t h a t in c la - endar year 1974 you are expecting t o receive 6,600 cubic f e e t of waste from an AEC f a c i l i t y located in I l l i n o i s , and t ha t t h i s shipment was not previously iden t i f i ed t o us.

As I pointed out t o you previously, Glenn, my main concern has always been t ha t the AEC might permit Idaho's NRTS s i t e t o slowly evolve in to one of the na t ion ' s major de f ac to burial grounds. T h u s , when Chris and Bil l reported t h a t . v f i d no knowledge of any shipments a f t e r t h a t from the Mound Laboratory, and t ha t you were aware of no other plans fo r any shipment, I was most. pleased because your answer rendered moot t he question of an evolutionary de fac to burial ground. -- This previously u n i d ~ n t i f ied shipment r a i s e s a new possibil i t , y t h a t pa r t i cu l a r l y in the eyes of the press, t h i s shipment from I l l i n o i s could he construed as another s tep on the way towards t he NRTS indeed becoming the reposi tory of a g rea t number of wastes from nontradit3onal sources. .I would appreciate more de- t a i l e d c l a r i f i c a t i o n of t h i s shipment, and also your own personal assessment of the 1 i kel i hood of the AEC almost su r rep t i t ious ly permitting Idaho's NRTS bur ia l ground t o evolve in to one of the na t i on ' s large de f ac to burial grounds on an interim basis over -- t h e next 30 years.

. R: Glenn Bradley

As always, I have apprec iated our candid and f i n e working r e l a t i o n - ship, and I w i l l look fo rward t o your candid response, f o r I know we b o t h have an apprec ia t ion o f the somewhat d i f f e r e n t r o l e s c u r r e n t circumstances have us f u l f i l l i n g . .

S incere ly ,

I s / Cec i l D. Andrus

CECIL D. ANDRUS GOVERNOR

cc: Lee Stokes Mike C h r i s t i e Gary Catron

E x h i b i t K

A p r i l 22, 1974

Honorable C e c i l D. Andrus: Governor o f Idaho Statehouse . .

Boise, Idaho 83707


Your l e t t e r o f March 20 r e i t e r a t e d e a r l i e r expressed concern about r e c e i p t a t t h e NRTS o f o f f - s i t e generated l ow- l eve l t r a n s u r a n i c wastes f rom new sources and what t he long- term i m p l i c a t i o n s a re - f o r t he s t a t u s o f t h e NRTS as a waste s to rage s i t e . Moreover, you no ted t h a t my , recen t communi- c a t i o n about t he r e c e i p t a t t h e NRTS t h i s ca lendar year o f r e l a t i v e l y smal l volumes of such wastes from t h e Commission's Argonne Na t i ona l Labora to ry i n I l l i n o i s i s no t c o n s i s t e n t w i t h impress ions conveyed by me t o Messrs. Murphy and Car lson du r i ng an e a r l i e r v i s i t t o Idaho F a l l s . ' .

A t t he t ime I met w i t h your r ep resen ta t i ves , I reviewed a l l known contemplated t r a n s a c t i o n s i n v o l v i n g ' o f f - s i t e generated r a d i o a c t i v e wastes t h a t cou ld come t o the NRTS f o r s torage. It was recognized a t t he t ime t h a t , w h i l e I had no knowledge o f new shipments f rom new sources beyond those planned f rom Mound Laho ra to r ,~ , a d d i t i o n a l e x p l o r a t i o n s o r i n i t i a t i v e s cou ld a r i s e a t any t ime i n t h e f u t u r e . Th is r e c o g n i t i o n o f p o s s i b l e f u t u r e developments, I f e l t , was c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t he passage i n Chairman Ra,yls November 5, 1973 l e t t e r t o you s t a t i n g t h a t i t would be necessary f o r t h e AEC t o "make maximum e f f i c i e n t use o f a l l ou r s i t e s , . ~ f a c i l i t i e s and manpower so l ong as such u t i 1 i z a t i o n does n o t i n any way endanger t h e ' hea l t h and s a f e t y : o f t h e pub1 i c o r produce an unacceptable impact .on the environment."

As soon as I became aware o f a se r i ous i n t e r e s t on t h e p a r t o f t h e AEC .

f a c i l i t y ' i n Ill i n o i s . t o s t o r e ' i t s l ow - l eve l t r ansu ran i c waste a t t h e 'NRTS, I advised you by l e t t e r . ,I r e g r e t any misunderstandings t h a t may have r e s u l t e d between me o r m.y s t a f f w i t h Messrs. M11rph.y and Carlson. Should , the AEC be f avo rab l y disposed toward s t o r i n g a d d i t i o n a l o f f - s i t e generated low l e v e l wastes a t t h e NRTS, i t would be undertaken, as i n t he case o f t he ANL wastes, o n l y a f t e r a decisi.on, based on c a r e f u l d e l i b e r a t i o n s , t h a t . such a course o f a c t i o n c o n s t i t u t e s optimum h e n e f i t t o the AEC and t h e . n a t i o n as a whole and t h a t i t w i l l n o t endanger t h e h e a l t h and s a f e t y o f t h e people o f t he 'S ta te now o r ' u n t i l . such . t ime as t he waste i s shipped, t o '

.,a permanent d i sposa l fac i1 . i t y . . .

W i th r espec t t o your more general ' concern about t3e NRTS waste s to rage s t a t u s over a p e r i o d ,o f t ime, - you requested my assessment o f t h e 1 i k e l ihood t h a t the AEC would pe rm i t the NRTS " b u r i a l ground" t o evo lve i n t o one o f t he n a t i o n ' s l a r g e de f a c t o b u r i a l grounds on an i n t e r i m b a s i s over t h e nex t 30 years. I had- in terpreted your e a r l i e r statements on t h i s sub jec t as

Honorable C e c i l D. Andrus - 2 - A p r i l 22, 1974

r e f l e c t i n g concern t h a t t he NRTS would become a -- de f a c t o f e d e r a l r e p o s i t o r y f o r t h e b u l k o f t h e n a t i o n ' s l o n g - l i v e d r a d i o a c t i v e wastes. To t + e e x t e n t t h a t t h a t was the i n t e n t o f the general concern expressed i n your March 20 l e t t e r , I can o n l y r e f e r you t o Chal-iman Ray 's November 5 l e t t e r f o r r e - assurance on t h i s p o i n t . You w i l l r e c a l l t h a t Dr. Ray sa id : " I can assure you t h a t t h e NRTS i s n o t be ing cons idered i n any way as t h e s i t e f o r permanent d i sposa l o f any long-1 i v e d nuc lear waste."

On t h e o the r hand, t h e r e w i l l undoubtedly be a c o n t i n u i n g need f o r t h e Commission t o assess and determine on a case-by-case bas i s the d i s p o s i t i o n o f l ow - l eve l t r a n s u r a n i c wastes generated a t va r i ous non-NRTS sources, perhaps even f r om commercial sources. D i s p o s i t i o n i n t h i s ins tance means i n t e r i m s to rage o f .such wastes packaged i n con ta ine rs meet ing AEC c r i t e r i a designed t o p rov ide an i n t e g r i t y f o r a t l e a s t a 20-year per iod . Th is m a t e r i a l , a f t e r an i n t e r i m s to rage pursuant t o AEC p r a c t i c e s which you rev iew- ed i n a December 1973 v i s i t , would be re-examined and c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t he s t a t e o f t h e a r t and economic va lue a t t h a t t ime eva lua ted f o r p rocess ing :

t o ( 1 ) recover some o f the t r a n s u r a n i c m a t e r i a l s ; ( 2 ) reduce the volume; a'nd ( 3 ) repackage s u i t a b l y f o r u l t i m a t e d isposa l a t a f e d e r a l r e p o s i t o r y . (As. mentioned above, t he NRTS i s no t a cand ida te f o r t he r e p o s i t o r y s i t e . ) In . t h e event a f e d e r a l r e p o s i t o r y had n o t y e t been i d e n t i f i e d , a backup program i s be ing cons idered t o develop longer range engineered s to rage f o r t h e low l e v e l t r a n s u r a n i c wastes j u s t as has been done f o r h i g h l e v e l commercial wastes.

One of the f a c t o r s which t he Commission w i l l t ake i n t o account i n i t s d e l i b e r a t i o n s about optimum i n t e r i m s to rage o f t h e low l e v e l t r a m u r a n i c wastes i s the p r o x i m i t y o f t h a t s to rage s i t e t o t he pr ime candidates s i t e s f o r a + $ waste p rocess ing and repackaging f a c i l i t y and t h e ex i s tence o f a des i r ed l e v e l o f e x p e r t i s e i n wasto management. Since we have t he e x p e r t i s e and .

expect t o have a reprocess ing . and repackaging f a c i l i t y because o f t h e t r a n s - u r a n i c waste a l r eady s t o r e d a t t he NRTS, we obv ious l y qua ! i f y f o r s t r o n g cons i - d e r a t i o n f o r i n t e r i m storage. The p rocess ing p l a n t and con t inued development o f s to rage and repackaging t e c h i q u e s we a n t i c i p a t e w i l l con t i nue t o . b r i n g RRD and des ign f und ing t o Idaho. The p r e l i m i n a r y f und ing f o r t h e R&D t ype o f a c t i v i t y i n t he FY 1975 budget i s about $1,100,000. .- -

I n summary, t h e recen t i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of a d d i t i o n a l l ow - l eve l t r a n s u r a n i c waste f r om non-NRTS sources ( i .e . , AEC's Labora to ry i n I l l i n o i s ~ which t h e Commission p l ans t o s h i p t o t h e NRTS f o r s a f e r e t r i e v a b l e s to rage on an i n t e r i m bas i s i s cons i s ten t , we f e e l , w i t h t he views s e t f o r t h ~ i n Dr. Ray 's l e t t e r t o you o f November 5, 1973. I had f e l t t h a t these views were r e i t e r a t e d i n t h e course o f m.y December d iscuss ions w i t h Messrs. Murphy and Car lson du r i ng ou r d i scuss ion i n v o l v i n g o f f - s i t e generated t r a n s u r a n i c wastes des t i ned f o r NRTS storage. There w i l l undoubtedly be a d d i t i o n a l ins tances i n t he f u t u r e where we w i l l be asked t o r e c e i v e and s t o r e such wastes on an i n t e r i m b a s i s , a t t h e NRTS.

Honorable Cec i l D. Andrus , i . ' - 3 - A p r i l 22, 1974

Should these arrangements be unacceptable t o t h e State, i n s p i t e o f t h e poss ib le at tsndant economic b e n e f i t s t o the reg ion and AEC assurances about adequate p rov i s ions f o r t he h e a l t h and s a f e t y o f t h e p u b l i c and t h e environment, I b e l i e v e t h i s in fo rmat ion would be h e l p f u l t o the Commission i n i t s f u t u r e planning. Once again, cons i s ten t w i t h t h e S ta te ' s wishes, the NRTS i s not being considered b,v the AEC as a s i t e f o r permanent d isposal o f any l ong - l i ved nuclear waste.

We have t r i e d t o p rov ide a complete and candid response t o your l e t t e r , perhaps t o t h e p o i n t o f being unduly verbose. On t h e o ther hand, I f e e l i t i s important t o have a c l e a r understanding o f views i n order t o f u l f i l l our respect ive o b l i g a t i o n s which encompass a number o f s i m i l a r i t i e s , e.g., t o assure a sa fe environment f o r the p u b l i c f rom a c t i v i t i e s undertaken a t the NRTS and t o p rov ide as favorab le an economic c l ima te as poss ib le through sound management o f AEC programs i n Idaho.

S ince re l y yours,

I s / R. Glenn Bradley Manager

Exhibit L ,* i! . .

STATE OF IDAHO Office of the Governor. i.

BOISE . . . ,

, . I . Cecil D'. Andi-us. , . Govern~r , , . .

December , l 8 , 19.74 - I ; .

1 ' .

R . ,Glenn . Brad1 ey, Manager . . , % . . . - . . . ' I

Idaho Operations Off ice ,. .,. . . . , . i . . - ! U..S. Atomic Energy Commission . . . ..: .F, . . 550 Second S t ree t . . . . . .

Idaho Fa l l s , Idaho 83401 . . . I . . .

. . . Dear Gl enn : . . . ' . > .

. , ,

As you know, my testimony with regard to Wash-1539 was recent ly subml t t ed t o t he Atomic tnergy Commission's hearing examiner i n S a l t Lake City. I am enclosing a copy of t h a t testimony which you might w i s h t o peruse.

While I think the testimony speaks cl 'early f o r i t s e l f , there a re several other points I woulcl l i k e t o make. F i r s t of a l l , please note t ha t I in no way precluded receipt f o r interim storage of t ransuranic waste from the AEC's t r ad i t i ona l source-- namely, Rocky F la t s , Colorado. Secondly, the testimony i s consis tent with t he l e t t e r I wrote t o you soon a f t e r you assumed your new posit ion and in which I asked the AEC not t o accept transuranic waste from non-tradit ional , non-AEC sources, i .e., commercial t ransuranic waste.

Final ly , I in no way was c r i t i c a l of the current AEC waste management pract ices developed and used s ince 1970. I hope you wi l l understand, however, t h a t the main thrust of my testimony centered around the potential t h r ea t t o the aquifer .I bel ieve most Idahoans view the interim s torage of t r ans - uranic waste t o be. T h u s , I would hope t ha t you and your superiors in Washington would recognize the e f f i cacy and the wisdom in f u l f i l l i n g the commitment t o remove waste s t a r t i n g a t the end of t h i s decade, and t h a t those wastes be removed as expedit iously as possible.

R . Glenn Bradley

You can see ' then why I mi gh t view Mr. Bi 1 1 Is comments as made on the Viewpoint news conference program of December 15, with ' regard t o the length of interim storage above the aquifer to ind~icate a waffling of the AEC with regard t o ' i t s ea r l i e r commitments. I t rus t that you, Mr. Bi l ls , and your superiors recognize the value of continuing on unqbated your resolve . .

to sa t i s fy the request that represents the' vast maj0r'it.y view of most Idahoans. .. .

, . If the AEC does not intend to begin removing the' transuranic waste from above the aquifer by the end of th i s decade, a's i t has comnittcd itse,lf to do, I would appreciate being notified in writing of your intention notlto 'accept commercial transuranic wa.ste from the nati,onls commercial nuclear plants unti 1 such time as such wastes 'could be processed without any ' interim storage for any appreciable length of time above the aquifer. If you cannot provide these assurances, please inform me, and I will have to consider another course of action.

In the meantime, permit me to close by wishing you the very best for the holidays, and I will look forward to hearing from you soon.

Sincerely,

/s / CECIL D. ANDRUS GOVERNOR

. . Cpl '

enclosure

E x h i b i t M . .

Note: This i s an a c t i o n plan, hand-carr ied on 3-21-75 by R. G. Bradley ( o f the Idaho 0perati.on.s. O f f jce. p f ; ERDA) t o Governor. Cec i l D. Andrus o f ;,.

Idaho. ) . . . . . . .

. . . . ' ! .

Have two sets o f c o n d i t i o n s and rorrespondi.ng t imetab les as a resu! t o f . .

t h e u n c e r t a i n t y abdut wh&' th ,e f ede ra l repqs,i to ry : t o u l d s t a r t accept i,ng

TRU wastes. The t ime tab le associated w i t h the estahl isf iment o f 'a waste " . . .

p rocessing a t INEL i i t h e same under: e i , ther s e t .of cond i t i ons ; however',

t h e establ ishment o f such a proces~i.bg c a l j i b i l i t i a t INEL i . . , volume '.

r educ t i on p o r t i o n ) , i s prbdi,cateb on. INEL 'be ing t h e s i t e ,se lec ted f d 6 i n t e r i m . . . i

sur face stqrage .:of :iomnck'cial TRU . . . ' ; [ . . . . . .. .

. . . . INEL ACTION PLAN .: . . . .

ERDA and commercial Transuranic 'waste

. .- . . . ACTIVITY

Re t r i eva l , processing and packaging R&D

~ e m o n s t r d f e r e t r i e v a l a t INEL

Conceptual design o f r e t r i e v a l , processing, packaging f a c i l i t y (RPPF)

Budget request f o r RPPF

Advanced conceptual design and p lann ing

P r o j e c t funds become a v a i l a b l e

De ta i l ed f a c i l i t y design

F a c i l i t y c o n s t r u c t i o n

Faci 1 i t y checkout

I n i t i a l opera t ions

F u l l sca le operat ions

199111 198521 Shipments t o r e ~ o s i t o r y beg i n

1991 1985 Incoming shipments t o INEC cease

A l l wastes a t I.NEL processed (and shipped t o r e p o s i t o r y )

1 / The dates through the remaindera o f t h i s column assume 199.1 i s . - t h e e a r l i e s t date t h a t a f ede ra l r e p o s i t o r y can accept t r ansu ran i c waste.

2/ The dates' through the remainder o f ; t h i s column assume 1985 - i s t h e e a r ' l i e s t date t h a t a f ede ra l r e p o s i t o r y can accept t r ansu ran i c waste.

Exhibit N

STATE OF IDAHO Office of the Governor

BOISE Cecil D. Andrus

Governor April 29, 1975

Mr. R . Glenn Bradley, Manager Idaho Operations Off i ce U . S. Energy Research and Development Administration 550 Second S t ree t Idaho Fa l l s , Idaho 83401

Dear Glenn:

I r egre t t h a t i t hac taken s ~ c h a long, time fo r ma t o come up with conclusions pertaining t o E R D A ' S proposal f o r interim storage a t INEL, b u t time i s now on our s ide in t ha t I understand there b i l l be a new impact statement and the decis.ion-making process has been put off for one year. I am plhased to see, from the newspaper repor ts , t h a t the new statement wil l speak t o many of the points t h a t Idaho's Blue Ribbon Committee posed when they studied WASH 1539.

Since our meeting in Idaho Fa l l s and in Boise, I have not met with the en t i r e Blue Ribbon Committee, b u t I have met with i t s chairman, Bud Davis, President of Idaho S t a t e Unjversity. I f e l t t h a t because of the yea r ' s delay there was , rea l ly no advantage in meeting with the . - -

e n t i r e Committee a t th is time.

The basic points r e a l l y boil down to ones of spec i f i cs , or in the pas t , lack of spec i f i cs ; and I r espec t fu l ly suggest the ERDA speak t o these points so t ha t we, in Idaho, can make an i n t e l l i gen t decision about our fu tu re based on f ac t .

( 1 ) Recognizing t ha t WASH 1539 l i s t s as one of i t s c r i t e r i a . f o r the s i t i n g of the interim storage f a c i l i t i e s high

p r i o r i t y o f public acceptance, I f ee l t ha t the people of Idaho should be made aware of the pos i t ive values should, we expand the storage capab i l i t i e s , of INEL.

( 2 ) I keep hearing of t he economic benef i ts t h a t i t would accrue t o Idaho i f the interim storage disposal s i t e were located here, b u t the f igures and concepts seem vague and hazy. Exactly what would these economic benef i t s be?

Mr. R. Glenn Bradley, Manager ,

Page 2 April 29, 1975

( 3 ) With the exception of. the Idaho Falls area, most t e s t i - mony received by the Blue Ribbon Committee was,-in opposition to the location of a commercial interim storage s i t e above the aquifer. Leading agricultural clubs, such as the Idaho Growers Shippers Commission, Idaho Wheat Commission, Idaho Potato Growers Associa- t ion, Trout Farm and many other organizations were opposed. What has been done by ERDA or INEL in terms

I of meeti$ng. with these groups .and getting the.ir support and. approval ?

( 4 ) What i s the current s ta tus of s i t e selection for permanent disposal ?

. .

(5) One recurring question keeps haunti;ng me. With so many, of t h e technical problems. and decisions in .a s ta te . of fl,ux, there does, appear to b,e a high-risk factor invol-

.ved for the s ta tes se!ect~d as the int.erim disposal s i t e ; namely, what happens . i f no s t a t e a t a l a t e r date

i consents to be the permanent;. s i t e? .

In the INEL action plan, which shows shipments to repositories begin between 1985 and 19191;I. believe th i s is . an improvement over ear ly information ,and would probably .find support in Idaha if the .other questions were answered and we could place the commercial nontreatable wastes away from the aquifer.

As th is issue continuos to be illuminated by ERDA reports, ~ l e & I<eep me advised. ,

I

I . 1 Sincerel!y, . .

'! ' ', , . - . / s / Cecil D. Andrus

1 CECIL 0. ANDRUS .

GOVERNOR : .

Exhibit 0

June 19, ' 1975

The Honorable Cecil D. Andrus Governor of Idaho I

S t atehouse : ' i

Boise, Idaho 83720 I

Dear Governor Andrus f . . I ' .

I apologize for taking so long in responding to your April 29, ..1975, l e t t e r . Considerable travel and a rash of v i s i t s by members of the management teams from the new agencies, ERDA and NRC, have occupied my time. The following i s provided in response to your April 29th l e t t e r .

I

1. Your question related to the posit ive values that would occur from an expanded temporary storage program fo r waste a t INEL. If we assume.. that Idaho benefits from ,having the old transuranic waste that is stored a t INEL retrieved safely and prepared for shipment to a permanent repository at some future date, 'we believe the surest way of contro1,ling the pl.anning and' thus the funding and scheduling of that operation would be to have the total ERDA responsibi1,ity for the transuranic waste storage, both ERDA-generated which INEL gets anyway and the 1 esser volume of commercial waste sthat will be involved. To 'become involved with .another western s i t e on a competi,tive basis for funding for operations, research and development, and most importantly for technical ta lent would notlbe in .INEL or Idaho's best in te res t for 2.. infl uencing the schedule for the future disposi'tion of .the transuranic wastes.

* - Another merit we be1 ieve would be to enhance the probabi 1 i ty that 1.daho would be considered for future nuclear programs and ac t iv i t i e s , such as nuclear energy parks, with a1 1 the attendant economic advantages. INEL has relat ively unique advantages for certain types of programs and projects; i t would be unfortunate should these advantages to the nation, State, and INEL be of fse t by Idaho gaining the reputation of being an anti-nuclear s t a t e because of i t s position on nuclear waste management. I t i s , we believe, in the nafional interest t o locate such a waste management s i t e where these ac t iv i t i e s can be conducted in the most economical and effect ive manner so long as the ,health and safety of the public and the environment are not jeopardized. In ERDA's view, INEL ranks as a prime candidate for sat isfying these c r i t e r i a under present circumstances.

Governor, Cec i 1 D. Andrus - 2 - June .19, ..I975

Waste Management i s a major technology and added 5usiness for INEL insures that the ta lent that has been developed here over the past 20 years will stay here and not be drained away i f a new s ta f f has to be developed a t another site.. We have already found that the waste management technology has given spin-off to other .important phases of energy technology, namely, conservation where the f l uidized-bed technology i s being seriously looked a t as an ef f ic ien t way of burning waste or for heat exchangers. Another

, , posi tiv,e value i s obviously .related to your second ,quest ion on economic benefits.

. . . v

2. The. economic :benefits f o r '1,daho re1 ated t o the expanded storage for commercial. transuranic waste we believe have been somewhat misunderstood as , they were extrapolated.from the WASH-1539 concept and subsequent discussions. There were references to accrued benefits in the order of $500 million ranging over the next 20 years. More r e a l i s t i c a l l y we would envision interim storage expenditures in the $75-$300 mil 1 ion range during that same period.., The higher values quoted included the cost of reprocessing the millions of cubic fee t of transuranic wastes now in storage a t

. INEL. Cost estimates a t th i s time are somewhat .dependent upon, the timing and mix of processing between the commercial s i t e s of TRU waste generation and the ERDA processing capabi l i t ies . . The lower estimate would be incremental t o , the , costs. associated,with the ERDA-generated wastes. The lower

: costs are also in par,t due to the benefits of integrating the commercial operat.ion wi th , the ERDA/INEL operation, thus avoiding duplication of r a i l roads, technical s taff and associated services already a t INEL. I t

,should .not be overlooked that t h i s savings i s a benefit t o not only the people of Idaho b u t the nation since i t i s public funds.

3. We are not in f u l l agreement with your conclusion that much of the t e s t i - mony outside of Idaho Fal ls was in opposition to storage on INEL. We monitored most.of the.meetings and found much testimony irrelevant or confused due to the inadequate nature of WASH-1539. The nature of WASH-1539 wastnot to ex,amine the specifics of the INEL.site, thus the pros and cons were never full," developed for public comment as they would be in a more detailed environmental statement which would be s i te -spec i f ic i f Idaho were to he a s i t e contender. We found the arguments to be large- ly emotional and we were less than successful in gett ing representatives from most of the. groups .you mentioned to view the INEL operati 0n.s and look a t the f ac t s regarding public health and.safety and potential impact on the environment. Indeed your own Blue Ribbon Committee did.not.mention the aquifer problem specif ical ly or allude to any health and safety problems in the i r report. - .

We recognize that a part of t+e problem stems from the public not being aware of .our current waste management operations. We are continuing 1 our e f for t s with many tours of interest groups such as the League of

1 . I

Governor Cecil D. Andrus June 19,,. :I975

Women Voters, news media, Chambers of Commerce, clergy and a. successfu! pub1 ic open house when over 600 (some from Twin Fa l l s County) v i s i t ed the f a c i l i t y , including the research program of re t r i eva l and. repackaging

: . of wastes buried 5-6 years ,ago. The attached open l e t t e r from the League of Women Voters i s ind:icative of the comnents we have been 'receiving.

I .'

4. The work done on bedded s a l t t o date indicates t h a t i t i s not only acceptable, b u t as f a r as we can t e l l , the best method of ultimate d i s - posal of both high level and other radioactive wastes. The work we have done with the U. S. Geological Survey in identifying an area with favorable geological formations in New. Mexico has reached the. point where ERDA f e e l s i t i s timely t o reac t iva te the bedded s a l t program ~ 7 t h t h e objec- t i v e of constructing a p i l o t plant there as soon as the r e su l t s of the research and development, pub1 i c a.cceptance, and funding perm'i t-. . ,

This p i l o t p lant ' program has been assigned t o Sandia Laborator'ies. . The FY-76 budget provides $1 mill ion fo r , fu r ther work and i t i s hop'ed ttht

. . some of t he $5 mill ion t h a t was dropped from the RSSF f o r FY-76 would be added to speed up the repository project . ERDA plans to request '

construction funds in FY-78 and expects t o s t a r t placing si :gnificant quan t i t i e s of waste in to the bedded s a l t around 1983, when -ERDA expects t o be able t o get t he f i r s t commercial can i s te r s of waste. Since i t i s a p i l o t plant , i t will be operated as a re t r i evab le f a c i l i t y fo r several years before we say t ha t i t can 'be used f o r permanent disposal.

Agai'n we can only s t r e s s tha t the economics and advantages of INEL cannot be real ized i f t he temporary storage i s not in near proximity.to cuprent waste treatment operations which would s t i l l in a l l likelihood necess i ta te

.. storage over t he aquifer. , .>

..5. ' We believe t ha t the program mentioned ?above tb es tab l i sh a Federal repository and t he exis t ing programs aggressively pursuing objectives t o re t r i eve INEL buried ,wastes should se rve , as reinforcement ':to' our

. ' p rev ious ly writ ten commitments t h a t INEL will not become a - de .- f ac to permanent s i t e .

I t r u s t that the foregoing m a t ~ r i a l i s responsive to your questions. If fu r ther c l a r i f i c a t i on i s required,: please l e t me know. Should there be new developments w i t h WASH-1539 tha t r e l a t e to Idaho, I will be in contact with you.

Very t r u l y yours, . . \ .

Original signed by , R . Glenn Bradley (by C. W. ..B. )

R. Glenn Bradley Manager

Enclosure

E x h i b i t P

STATE OF IDAHO O f f i c e o f t h e Governor

BOISE

C e c i l D. Andrus Governor

October 8, 1976

James L. Liverman ,

A s s i s t a n t Adm in i s t r a to r f o r Environment and Sa fe t y

U. S. Energy Research and Development A d m i n i s t r a t i o n ,

Washington, D. C. 20545

Dear M r . Liverman:

At tached are some corrunents f r om Idaho agencies on ERDA-1536. I n r ev i ew ing my agency comments and t h e document i t s e l f , ' I would s p e c i f i c a l l y l i k e t o p o i n t o u t one g l a r i n g omiss ion t o you.

For severa l years, Senator Church and I have had an under- s t and ing w i t h , f i r s t t h e o l d Atomic Energy Commission, and now ERDA, t h a t a commitment e x i s t e d on beha l f o f ERDA t o t h e S t a t e o f Idaho t o beg in t o remove a l l r a d i o a c t i v e wastes, bo th those b u r i e d underground and t h ~ s e s to red aboveground, f rom above t + e Snake R i v e r Aqu i fe r , s t a r t i n g a t . t h e end o f t h i s decade. Nowhere i n ERDA-1536 i s t h i s commitment mentioned.

Cons ider ing t h a t ERDA-1536 i s t o be t he D r a f t Environmental Statement on t h e waste management ope ra t i ons a t t h e Idaho Engineer ing Laboratory , I cons ider t h i s omission t o be inexcusable and b e f o r e t h e statement can be cons idered adequate, I f e e l i t incumbent upon me as Governor o f t he S t a t e o f Idaho t o i n s i s t t h a t t h i s commitment i s p u t i n w r i t i n g i n t he environmental impact statement, ERDA-1536.

James L. Liverman October 8, 1976

Along with the comments from my various s t a t e agencies, I am also attaching a copy of the testimony I delivered on WASH-1539 l a s t year in Sal t Lake City. I would specif ical ly point out tha t there, too,* I reminded ERDA of th is commitment. Personnel a t the INEL are very aware of t h i s commitment and I t r u s t they, too, have pointed out th i s oversight t o you with intarnal memorandums.

If I have one general complaint of ERDA-1536 as opposed t o the above specific complaint, i t i s that very l i t t l e attention i s given to the expected environmental impact of waste management programs a t the .INEL. This general complaint i s naturally an outgrowth' of the specific complaint I have mentioned, b u t from reading through the statement, i t i s clear t o me there i s pract ical ly no information provided re1 ative as to how much waste the INEL can expect to receive between now and the end , ,

of the decade when ERDA i s supposed t o begin removing tha t waste from above the aquifer. .Nor, i s there any description of what form waste from traditional 'sources can be expected to take in the future.

Neither i s there any, cl ear di v j s i on . in ERDA-1536 between, the concepts of storage, and disposal. I t appears, tha t a l l material which is being bu,ried.is considered to be "disposed of" and tha t i t will be. l e f t buried forever. This imp1 ication runs counter to ERDA's pledge. . .

On the other hand, material which i s ~ to red .above '~ round . . '

will eventually be removed to a permanent disposal s i t e , supposedly. The probl.ems in using these terms appears throughout the document. . .

As I stated, there i s no clear statement of future ,

ac t iv i t ies which w.il.1 change the impacts described in ERDA-1536. Some questions which should be clear ly answered, for me, are: .

James L. Liverman October 8, 1976

1. Is there any plan to transfer the calcined high level waste to a federal repository when one is selected?

2. Will burial of non-transuranic radioactive waste continue beyond the end of th i s decade?

3. Will the long-lived non-transuranic wastes which are presently being buried ever be retrieved as promised for transfer to a federal repository or are they rea l ly disposed of a t t he i r present s i t e ?

4. I s t h e p r e s e n t l e v e l o f a c t i v i t y a t I N E L expected to change?

5. Is the ra te of generation of waste a t other areas such as Rocky Flat expected to change?

Granted, i t i s important to discuss the past, b u t an EIS should address the future impact with the goal of improving the operation. ERDA-1536 f a l l s fa r short in th i s respect.

Sincerely,

/s/ CECIL D. ANDRUS GOVERNOR

enclosures

cc: Dr. Charles Wood Charles E. Williams W. H. Pennington

Exhibit Q

UNITED STATES ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20545 September 30, 1977

Honorable John V. Evans Governor of Idaho Boise, Idaho 83720

Dear Governor Evans :

This is in response to Governor Andrus' letter of October 8, 1976, commenting on the Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA) draft environmental impact statement on the waste management operations at the Idaho National Engineering 1 ahoratory ( INEL). The Governor's comments, as well as those of your Division of Environment, have been considered by the ERDA staff in the preparation of the final environmental impact statement, a copy of which is enclosed for your information. Because of the importance of the issues raised by Governor Andrus, I would like to address them in this letter.

With regard to the ultimate removal of radioactive wastes from INEL, we recognize the omission in the draft statement of the correspondence between Governor Andrus and officials of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). This omission has been corrected and discussed in the final statement.

The AEC had indicated that it hoped to start removal of transuranic '

waste by the end of the decade; however, this intent was predicated on the establishment of a fully operational Federal repository. At that time, start of repository construction in Lyons, Kansas, was planned for the early 19701s, which made the beginning of transuranic waste transfer from Idaho by 1980 a reasonable hope. As you are aware, the Lyons project was cancelled, resulting in a delay in the Federal repository program. Governor Andrus was advised of this delay a couple of years ago, and a revised schedule for having a repository in place by about 1985 was given to him. At present, this schedule still seems val id.

In addition, we plan to remove the transuranic waste from INEL on a schedule consistent with the availability of funding. An operation of this magnitude will probably require specific appropriations from the Congress. This will be especially true for any proposal to remove the significant portion of the transuranic waste which was buried in pits and trenches before adoption of the present more readily retrievable storage system in 1970. In connection with this, the National Academy of Sciences has recently issued a report which pointed out risks

Honorable John V. Evans - 2 - . . . . . . . , ' . . . .

i n vo l ved w i t h t h e exhumation process and recommended a c lose ana l ys i s o f . t h e . benefi t s o f any such exhumation and i t s a1 te rna t i ves . Such ana1.ysi.s i s of course cons i s ten t w i t h and r e q u i r e d by t h e Nat iona l Environmental . . ,

P o l i c y Act.

ERDA i s p repar ing r e p o r t s on the techn i ca l a1 t e r n a t i v e s f o r long-term management o f bo th t h e t ransu ran i c and h igh - l eve l wastes a t INEL. These r e p o r t s w i l l be re leased f o r p u b l i c rev iew and comment, and w i l l be used i n t h e p repa ra t i on o f environmental . impact statements on these long- term management a1,tevnatives. ;. D r a f t s o f these statements w i 11 a1 so be made a v a i l a b l e f o r pub l i c . - rev iew, and i n f i n a l form w i l l p rov ide t h e environmental i n p u t i n t o f u tu re decis ions on the long- term management o f t h e wastes.

We do wish t o emphasize t h a t we share your concernathat the prob!.em o f long- term management o f t h e wastes be reso lved and t o assure you t h a t t h i s r e s o l u t i o n has h igh p r i 0 r i t . y .

. . Governor Andrus asked severa l r e 1 ated quest ions which care addressed : as. .: f o l l o w s : I . , . . . .,

( 1 ) The op t ions fo r long-term management o f the ca l c i ned h igh - l eve l waste w i l l be analyzed i n t h e techn i ca l a1 t e r n a t i v e s and environmental impact statement documents mentioned above.

( 2 ) We expect t h a t b u r i a l o f INEL-generated nontransuranic waste w i l l con t inue a t rough l y t h e present r a t e as long as c u r r e n t f a c i l i t i e s are operated.

( 3 ) The nontransuranic wastes t h a t are b u r i e d a t INEL are considered permanently disposed of, and we know o f no env i ronmental h e a l t h o r s a f e t y problem t h a t would d i c t a t e t h e i r removal.

(4 ) We do no t expect the present !eve1 o f programs a t INEL t o change s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n t h e foreseeable f u t u r e .

(5) The r a t e o f generat ion o f waste a t Rocty F l a t s and o ther s i t e s i s no t expected t o change s i g n i f i c a n t l y .

I hope t h i s l e t t e r and the d iscussion i n t he accompanying environmental impact statement are respons iv,e t o t h e concerns expressed hy Governor Andrus, the s t a t e agencies, and your rep resen ta t i ve a t t he Boise p u b l i c hear ing on t h e d r a f t statement. A copy o f t h e Pub l i c Hearing Record i s a l so enclosed f o r your in fo rmat ion . We apprec iate your i n t e r e s t i n INEL,

Honorable John V. Evans - 3 - . , . ' I.: .:

and your constructive input into the NEPA process. If youhave f u r t h e r ' questions, please feel f r e e t o ca l l on me or Charles E. Williams, Manager of our Idaho Operations Office.

Sincerely, , .

. .

/s/ James L. Liverman A ~ s i s t ~ a n t Administrator

f o r Environment and Safety

Enclosures : (1 ) Final Environmental Impact

Statement, ERDA-1536 ( 2 ) Public Hearing Record

cc w/enclosures: , . . .

Honorable Cecil Andrus, USDI ' . . .

Idaho S ta te Clearinghouse

E x h i b i t R

UNITED STATES SENATE COMMITTEE ON

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOUCES WASHINGTON D.C. 20513'

December 6, 1977

The Honorable James Schl es inger Secretary o f Energy Department o f Energy Washington, D.C. 20314

Dear Mr . Secretary:

The most ser ious unresolved problem r e l a t e d t o the use o f nuclear energy i s nuclear waste d isposal . This problem has been evaded and sidestepped f o r years. The waste d isposal p ro - blem a t t he Idaho Nat iona l Engineering Laboratory i s a case i n p o i n t .

I have r e c e n t l y reviewed correspondence between Secretary o f I n t e r i o r C e c i l Andrus and you, as w e l l as e a r l i e r l e t t e r s w i t h former ERDA Admin is t ra to r Robert F r i , on the mat te r o f removing nuclear waste now s tored above t h e Snake R ive r a q u i f e r i n Eastern Idaho.

I f u l l y support Secretary Andrus' p o s i t i o n i n t h i s mat ter .

On June 1, 1970, a meeting was h e l d i n my o f f i c e w i t h AEC Commissioner Theos J. Thompson, Ass i s tan t AEC General Manager John B. Erlewine, and Idaho AEC D i r e c t o r W i l l i a m L. Ginkel. That meeting was the cu lminat ion o f several months o f correspondence and d ia logue between me and t h e AEC about nuc lear waste storage a t what was then known as the Nat iona l Reactor Tes t i ng Sta t ion . I was g iven assurances a t t h a t meeting t h a t t h e AEC would beg in removing t ransu ran i c wastes f rom Idaho w i t h i n a decade.

A t t h e meeting. I pressed f o r much speedier a c t i o n on waste removal, c i t i n g c r i t i c a l s tud ies done by the Nat iona l Academy o f Sciences and o ther organizat ions. I accepted t h e 10-yeqr commitment i n good f a i t h . I n d i c a t i o n s t h a t ERDA, and now the Department o f Energy i s hedging on t h i s commitment t r o u b l e me g r e a t l y .

I j o i n Cec i l Andrus i n asking t h a t the Department r e a f f i r m t h e 1970 promises. At t h e minimum, t h e Department should commit i t s e l f t o expanding the fund ing f o r cu r ren t e f f o r t s t o p e r f e c t techniques t o r e t r i e v e and p r o p e r l y s t o r e wastes which were e a r l i e r bu r ied i n he1 t e r - s k e l t e r fashion. An' e a r l y announcement o f your

The Honorable Ja111es Schlesinger . December 6, 1977 Page Two

intent to begin this retrieval effort, coup1)ed with a firm timetable for final removal will go a long way in restoring faith in the Department's intent to keep long-standing promises.

Sincerely,

Is/ Frank Church

cc: The Honorable Cecil Andrus The Honorable John Evans

I . .

E x h i b i t S

Department o f Energy Washington D.C. 20585' March 2, 1978

. . . .

Honorable Frank Church U n i t e d S ta tes Senate Washington, D.C. 20510

, .

Dear Senator Church:

I n respon'se t o your q e t t e r o f December 6, 1977, M r . Sch. lesinger and .I have g.iven our persona l a t ten t . ion t o t h e programs f o r removal o f : r a d i o a c t i v e wastes f rom above t he Snake P l a i n a q u i f e r . I share. your concern, and those o f Sec re ta r y Andrus and t h e Governor.and people. . o f Idaho, about t 9 e p r o t e c t i o n o f p u b l i c hea l th , sa fe t y , and t he environment i n c l u d i n g t h e Snak& P l a i n aqu i f e r . I have a number o f c o m e n t s on the work a t Idaho which I w i l l a l s o be p r o v i d i n g Secre ta ry Andrus.

I n p a r t i c u l a r , i t i s u n f o r t u n a t e t h a t removal o f the s to red wastes cannot beg in as e a r l y as t h e Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) hoped i n 1970. A t t h a t t ime, ? t was expected t h a t t he Lyons, Kansas, s a l t r e p o s i t o r y would be i n r o u t i n e o p e r a t i o n b y now. As you know, t h a t p r o j e c t had t o be abandoned. I can assure you t h a t we a re proceeding w i t h t h e p r i o r i t y development o f a s u i t a b l e r e p o s i t o r y as r a p i d l y as i s compat ib le w i t h s a f e t y and w i t h t he i n t e r e s t s o f t h e people i n i t s area. The schedule i s con t i ngen t on t h e comple t ion o f t h e env i ronmenta l impact assessment process and success fu l arrangements w i t h s t a t e s and l o c a l i t i e s i n t h e area. We expect t h a t t h e Waste I s o l a t i o n P i l o t P l a n t (WIPP) r e p o s i t o r y w i l l b e g i n t o accept wastes i n t he 1985-1986 t i m e pe r i od . I n any event, Idaho wastes w i l l r e c e i v e p r i o r i t y a t t e n t i o n .

S ince 1970, we have s t o r e d t ransuranium (TRU) contaminated wastes f o r e a r l y r e t r i e v a l when t h e r e p o s i t o r y would be a v a i l a b l e . We are p l a n n i n g t o move these wastes f i r s t and are proceeding w i t h t h e development o f equipment f o r p rocess ing t h a t may be r e q u i r e d b e f o r e some o f them can meet t he r e p o s i t o r y acceptance c r i t e r i a .

Wastes t ha t . were b u r i e d b e f o r e 1970 a re n o t e a s i l y r e t r i e v a b l e . We have recovered about f i v e percen t o f those wastes t o show t h a t i t can be done. Fo l l ow ing recommendat'ions by t h e Na t i ona l Academy o f Sciences (NAS), we are e v a l u a t i n g t he a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r t he d i s p o s i t i o n o f these wastes.

I n response t o you r expressed concerns, we are p r o v i d i n g an a d d i t i o n a l $3M t o acce le ra te t h e TRU waste programs a t Idaho and t o assure t h a t we can proceed w i t h o u t de lay when the arrangements w i t h t h e Western S ta tes p e r m i t t h e process ing, shipment, and emplacement i n a s u i t a b l e r e p o s i t o r y .

Honorable Frank Church

As par t of the National Energy Plan, the President has requested a review of the e n t i r e nuclear waste management issue. As a f i r s t s t ep -

in t h i s review process, the Department of Energy ( D O E ) i s preparing a report t h a t includes the issues of i n t e r e s t t o you. This paper wil l

- be forwarded to you when i t i s completed. I hope t ha t you will f ind t h i s s t a r t on a comprehensive National waste management policy t o be constructive. We will welcome your comments on the paper and' your act ive par t ic ipat ion in the fu r ther development of the policy. ' I assure you t ha t your views will weigh heavily in t ha t process.

As c i t i z ens of t h i s defense a c t i v i t i e s your support in the management programs

country, we c o n t i n u ~ . t o benef i t from the National tha t have resulted in these wastes. We appreciate National commitment t o ,ef fect ive nuclear waste that are now .required to deal with them. ,

I . . Sincerely, , . . .

/ s / Dale D,. Mye!rs . Under Secretary 11 . . 8

' I . '

I ' '

APPENDIX B

B.l INTRODUCTION

The waste management a1 t e r n a t i v e s and concepts eva lua ted i n t h i s

s tudy a re shown i n F i g u r e B-1, which i s a d u p l i c a t e o f F i g u r e 7-1.

The a l t e r n a t i v e s and concepts dep ic ted were developed i n some d e t a i l .

(See Sect ions 8, 9, and 10) . Environmental , r i s k , worker hazard, and

cos t eva lua t i ons were conducted; these r e s u l t s aPpear i n Sect ions 12,

13, 14, and 15, r e s p e c t i v e l y .

The purpose o f t h i s appendix i s t o descr ibe b r i e f l y some o f t h e

a l t e r n a t i v e s , concepts, and ideas t h a t were i d e n t i f i e d d u r i n g t h e

s tudy b u t were no t s t ud ied f u r t h e r . Th is m a t e r i a l i s i nc l uded i n t h e

document as a sample o f t h e broader base f rom which t h e s tudy evolved.

Because F igu re B-1 i s a convenient r e fe rence p o i n t f o r c o n s i d e r i n g

concepts no t s tud ied, t he o rgan i za t i on o f t h i s 'appendix p a r a l l e l s t he

p r e s e n t a t i o n o f ideas i n t h e f i g u r e . Concepts n o t s twd ipd f o r t + e

I

F i g u r e B-1 shows t he logica.1 p rogress ion fo l lowed i n i d e n t i f y i n g

waste management concepts. Wi th t h e a i d o f t h e f i g u r e , supplementary

approaches can be i d e n t i f i e d i n two ways. F i r s t , a t man.y o f t he

branch p o i n t s , o r d e c i s i o n p o i n t s , shown i n t h e f i g u r e , concepts and

ideas can be added t o the l i s t o f those shown. For example, f o u r

d isposa l methods and t h r e e INEL d isposa l l o c a t i o n s a re shown f o r

A1 t e r n a t i v e 5. A d d i t i o n a l d isposa l methods and d isposa l l o c a t i ons

were i d e n t i f i e d b u t n o t s tud ied . Second, f o r each ope ra t i on shown i n

t h e f i g u r e , severa l ways t o per fo rm t h e ope ra t i on can g e n e r a l l y be

i d e n t i f i e d . For example, "Add t op and s i d e b a r r i e r s " f o r Concept 2-a

cou ld be e f f ec ted us ing concrete, c l ay , asphal t , o r o t h e r m a t e r i a l s .

I f a l l t h e concepts and ideas generated d u r i n g t h e s tudy were dep i c ted

on t he f i g u r e , a l a r g e r , more complex diagram would r e s u l t .

Leave as is Alternative 1

i Add top 8 side barriers

I . Improve confinement Add top 8 side 8 bottom barriers Alternative 2

I Delay

Stored TR U J

waste

f Engineered surface facility (near RWMC!

I retrieval - 1 + . Shin R

-

Immobilize in place Concept 2-c

Incinerate - and package Federal Repository

20-year storage lncinerate

at the INEL and

package

Retrieve as Deep rock disposal: shaft access scheduled - (1 985)

r

- .

Fig. B-1 A1 t e r n a t i v e s and concepts s tud ied f o r long-term management of s to red IMEL TRU waste.

Direct Ship 8 dispose (in Lemhi Range) Compact.

Process on INEL control r immobilize, L

P retrieval 8 package Alternative 5 Deep rock disposal: tunnel access

Direct , .

control retrieval

7

(in Lemhi Range)

Package Engineered shallow land disposal - (atsite 14) ,

Process Fncinerate

anc package .

-...r -.

dispose . . Federal

Repository Alternative 6

- l eave - i n -p l ace a l t e r n a t i v e s a re discussed, f o l l o w e d by modules f o r

r e t r i e v a l , p.rocessing, ons i t e storage, shipment, and d isposa l . F i n a l - ly, i d e a s ' are discussed t h a t m igh t p e r t a i n t o severa l a1 t o r n a t i v e s .

Genera l ly , waste management methods t h a t were n o t s t t rd ipd f u r t h e r

were abandoned because more a t t r a c t i v e methods were i dent i f i ed. How-

ever, t h e sc reen ing process was a p p l i e d i n a c u r s o r y manner, so t h o

r e s u l t s o f t he sc reen ing 'should n o t be cons idered as f i n a l eva lua-

t i o n s . I n a f e w ins tancks , i n s u f f i c i e n t d a t a were a v a i l a b l e t o

j u s t i f y a s e l e c t i o n on t h i s 'bas is . I n such instances, one i dea was

se lec ted f o r - d e v e l o p m e n t , ~ f r o m among a group o f s i m i 1 . a ~ ideas, s imp l y

t o a l l ow eva. luat ion o f a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e member o f t h e gro,up.

8.2 CONCEPTS AND APPROACHES NOT STUDIED FOR ALTERNATIVES 1 AND 2:

LEAVE I N PLACE

The ideas i n t h i s subsec t ion r e l a t e t o ways i n ' w h i c h i n -p l ace

. conf inement c o u l d be improved (A1 t e r n a t i v e 2 ) . The o n l y v a r i a t i o n s , ,

i d e n t i f i e d i n A l t e r n a t i v e 1 i n v o l v e d i f f e r e n t approaches t o ma in te -

nance, s u r v e i 1 lance, and s e c u r i t y . These v a r i a t i o n s a re addressad i n

subsect ion B.8.6.

Table B-1 l i s t s a l l comhinat ions o f h a r r i e r t.ypes ( t op , s ides,

and bot tom) t h a t c o u l d be used t o i s o l a t e t h e waste, along w i t h t h e

p o s s i b i l i t y o f f i x i n g t h e waste i n p l ace hy i m m o b i l i ~ a t ~ i o n . ~ a c h . '

. e n t r y represen ts e i t h e r an a l t e r n a t i v e o r concept t h a t was.devc?l,opsd

o r an. idea t h a t i s d i scussedh r i e f1 . v i n t h e f o l l o w i n g subsections. I n

genera l , comhinat ions o f b a r r i e r s , w i t h o r w i t h o u t immobi 1 - i za t ion , can

be r e a l i z e d s imp l y by combining t h e methods f o r e r e c t i n g each, h a r r i e r .

Even f o r concepts studied,, , d i f f e r e n t t e c h n i q l ~ e s o r matepi a1 s

than those se lec ted cou ld be used. Only. a few r e p r e s e n t a t i v e

approaches a re l i s t e d ; a complete l i s t o f a l l p o s s i b l e approaches

i s no t attempted.

TABLE B-1 . . . . . , , .; ;. . . . L . , : 4 : ,-. # .: ...:. .< . . -. . . '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

'WASTE BARRI ER/IMMOBILIZAT:IDN~ COMBINATIONS FOR'. WASTE. LEFT 4N PLCICE. ' . ' . ''1

Bar r i e r1 , A1 te rna t i ves O r A l te rna t i ves O r Concepts . - ;, :C

Immobi 1 i z a t i o n Concepts Studtied I d e n t i f i e d But Not !, .,

~ o m b i n a t i o n s ( ~ ) (See Figure B-1) (Subsection o f Appendix B)

None T(b)

srb)

( d.) B.2.3, . .

(a) T = Top Cover or Ba r r i e r S = Side Ba r r i e r . .

B = Bottom Ba r r i e r I = In-Place Immobi l izat ion O f Waste

(b) T, S, a n d T + S a r e i d e n t i c a l becauseof t h e c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f the a '

stored waste.

. . . ( c ) Barrier/immobil' ization combinations wi thout a re ference, t o the spec i f i c subsection can be der ived by combining the appropr iate. . . . .

. ideas found i n the referenced subsections. However, there i s no ,

guarantee t h a t a reasonable combination w i l l r e su l t .

(d) The method ind icated here f o r emplacing the ba r r i e r ( s1 i s d i f f e r e n t from t h a t s tud ied i n t he concepts which were developed.

B.2.1 Top Cover: Concrete Cover. A layer of concrete or asphalt would be placed over the waste storage areas. Tho impermeable

surface would be subject .to cracking as the ground surface subsides due to the waste se t t l ing . The degree of additional protection pro-

vided .by this : approach did not warrant further exploration.

B.2.2 Top Cover: Lapped Surface Cover. Overlapping slabs of concrete or basalt would be 'placed over the existing compacted clay on top of the waste storage areas. As the waste subsided, these slabs

would s e t t l e and would tend to separate from one another. weather protection would no longer be provided. Therefore, t h i s concept, was not explored further.

8.2.3 .- Top, ~ i d e ( " , and Bottom Barriers: Vaults Constructed Under Present Stored Waste. Without disturbing the waste, large caverns would be excavated beneath the stored waste. The caverns

would be lined with clay of low permeability. By standard mining techniques, concrete f loors and walls would then be formed inside the

clay, resulting in a concrete vault. The waste would then be caved into the vault. Permanent covers of concrete would be constructed over the ent i re area.

Because of the excavation and construction costs for the vault and vault l inings, and also because of the possible escape of contamination d ~ ~ r i n g the caving-in operation, t h i s .approach was not developed further.

6.3 RETRJEVAL METHODS NOT STUDIED

Various methods .of retrieving the stored waste have been studied (DOE 1978a, FMC 1978!: . Retrieval . . ,'a1 t e rna t ives ident,if ied in' those

. . .

( a ) The stored waste i s in a dome-like configuration. Side and top covers are considered synon.ymous. .

reports, but not studied in this document, are briefly described below.

More complete ,descriptions are given in the original reports.

Off-the-shelf equipment could be used for the retrieval of the stored waste from the TSA pads. The waste has heen placed on the TSA

pads with retrieval in mind. Front end loaders were ,judged inferior when compared with forklifts for retrieval.

The practice of direct retrieval of the stored waste, with

workers lifting the containers by hand or by means of hand trucks, was rejected. Many of the containers are too large or heavy to be'readily handled in this manner. The radiation dose to the retrieval workers would he increased, as would the possibility of workers becoming contami nated.

Remote control of retrieval equipment for retrieving the stored waste was judged un.necessarily costly and complex.

Retrieval with no enclosure or within an air-supported building was excluded by the study guide1 ines (Subsection 7.4.1) because o f

poor control of contamination.

B.4 PROCESSING METHODS NOT STUDIED

B.4.1. Combinations of Processes. Four types of waste processing operations were identified for the purposes of this study:

Incineration - a high-temperature treatment of waste to achieve oxidation. The primary reason for incineration, as applied to TRU waste management, is to achieve chemical stabilization of the waste, in the sense of resistance to later combustion. Depending on the waste form and the inci neration process, a measure of volume reduct ion is also

> 1

achieved. A sl agg i ng pyrolvsi s incinerator is the reference unit considered, for reasons given in Subsection 4.4.2 and at the beginning of Section 9.

: . - . . , . . .

( 2 ) ~rnrnobil i z d t i o n - a f i x a t i o n procass t h a t r e s u l t s i n a waste

f o rm more r e s i s t a n t t o , l e a c h i n g and/or d i spe rs i on . Cas t ing

i n conc,rete and v i t r i f i c a t i o n a re two examples o f immob i l i -

za t i on . . . , ' . .

" . , . .

( 3 ) Compaction - a mechanical c o m p ~ e s s i o ~ o f 'the waste t o rebuce

the. volume and t o e l i m i n a t e t rapped a i r 'o r o t h e r gases.

. .

( 4 ) Packaging - t h e ' p l a c i n g o f waste i n a c o n t a i n e r t h a t r e s u l t s

i n a sealed, con tamina t ion- f ree o b j e c t . . f o r f u r t h e r hand1 i n g 4 .

and d isposa l a c t i v i t i e s . The package remains i n p l a c e and ' . , .

i s d isposed o f w i t h t h e waste.

The f o u r processes cover a wide r a n g e , o f cost , w i t h i n c i n e r a t i o n . .

be i ng t h e most expensive. The processes a l s o ' d i f f e r g r e a t l y i n t h k . .

degree o f long- te rm i s o l a t i o n t h a t i s p rov ided f o r t he waste.

. ,

These f o u r processes a re n o t a l l m u t u a l l y exclusive;. i n fact , '

some combinat ions o f processes are a t t r a c t i v e . Table B-2 1 i s t s a1 1 , ,

16 p o s s i b l e combinat ions o f t h e f o u r processes. O f t h e '16 cbmhi'na-

t i o n s , some were n o t cons idered f u r t h e r because o f redundancy ... . i n the , . .

p rocess ing. For example, s i n c e s l agging p .v ro lys is r e s u l t s ' in a dense

s o l i d waste fo rm o f low l e a c h a b i l i t y , n e i t h e r - a d d i t i o n a l compaction

nor i m m o b i l i z a t i o n i s u s e f u l . On t h i s b a s i s , op t i ons 6. 7 , 1 3 , 14,

15, and 16 i n Table 8-2 were no t st 'udied. ' w i t h o u t su i ' t ab le packaging

o r i m n o b i l i z a t i o n , t h e o u t p u t p roduc t f rom most processes i s u n s u i t - . . , . a b l e f o r hand l i ng . , r and sh ipp ing operat ions' . On t h i s . bas is , . combina-.

t i o n s 1, 2, 3, . . 4, and . 9 weSe n o t s tud ied . .

t

Combinations 5, 8, and 12 were se lec ted f o r f u r t h e r cons ider * - . . , . t i o n . (combinat ion 12 has s tud ied, r a t h e r t han combinat ion 10 o r 11,

because, i t encompasses tho~se comb'i . . nation's'. ) ' They rep resen t f e a s i h l e

(a1 though . , n o t necessar i 1 t h e most des i r ab le ) combinat i ons of proces- . . . . .

ses. Among them, t h e y c o n t a i n a l l t he f o u r processes considered.

Combination 5 represen ts minimal process ing. Combination 8 i s t h e

TABLE 8-2

WASTE PROCESSING COMBINATIONS( a)

Opt ion No. I n c i n e r a t e

(1 ) - - -

( 2 ) X

Compact Immobi l ize

- - - ---

Pack age

(a ) Inc ludes s i z e reduc t i o n as necessary.

o n l y combinat ion o f t h e r e t h r e e . t h a t , w i l l s a t i s f y t h e c u r r e n t accep-

tance c r i t e r i a f o r t h e Federa l Repos i t o r y (see Appendix D). Combina-

t i o n 12 represen ts an i n te rmed ia te case, i n terms o f t h e cos t and t h e

long- term i s o l a t i o n prov ided.

I n summary, t h e t h r e e p rocess ing combinat ions s tud ied are:

( 1 ) i n c i n e r a t e waste and package res idue;

( 2 ) compact,. immobi l ize, and p'ackage waste; and

f 3 ) package waste.

B.4.2 I n c i n e r a t i o n Processes. I n c i n e r a t i o n processes o t h e r than

s l agg ing p y r o l y s i s were n o t addressed i n t h e p resen t stud.v. A r e c e n t

s tudy (FMC 1977), conducted f o r E G G Idaqo, Inc . , i nvo l ved in -dep th

comparisons o f e i g h t cand ida te i n c i n e r a t i o n processes ( p l u s a c i d d i -

g e s t i o n ) f o r t he b u r i e d TRU waste a t t he INEL. The e i g h t i n c i n e r a t i o n

processes were a g i t a t e d hear th , c o n t r o l l e d a i r , cyc lone drum, f l u i d i -

zed bed, mol ten s a l t , p y r o l y s i s ; r o t a r y k i l n , and s lagging. The s tudy

recommended t h a t development o f s l agg ing p y r o l y s i s be s t u d i e d f o r

p rocess ing t he b u r i e d waste. Most o f t h e r e s u l t s o f t he FMC s tudy

app ly a l s o t o i n c i n e r a t i o n o f t h e s t o r e d TRU waste. See t h e i n t r o d u c -

t i o n t o Sect ion 9 f o r a d d i t i o n a l d e t a i l s .

Based on t h e FMC s tudy (1977) and on t h e p o s i t i v e r e s u l t s (Dodson, . .

Hopper, and McCormack 1978; Ka i se r Engineers 1977) o f f o r m u l a t i n g a

conceptual des ign f o r a s l agg ing p y r o l y s i s u n i t , t h i s process was

se lec ted by t he DOE f o r ' development f o r t r e a t i n g INEI- TRU waste. As

discussed i n Subsect ion 4.4.2 and a t t h e beg inn ing .o f Sec t ion 9, R&D

s tud ies are underway o f s l agg ing p y r o l y s i s , as app l i ed t o TRU waste a t

t h e INEL. An i n i t i a l R&D s tudy e n t a i l e d a rev iew and c r i t i q u e , b.y an

independent mu1ticompan.y task f o r ce , o f t he dec i s i on t o develop s l ag -

g i ng p y r o l y s i s . The task f o r c e concurred w i t h t h e genera l conc lus ions

f a v o r i n g s lagg ing . -py ro l . vs is f o r t h i s app1.i c a t i o n . The i n t e r e s t e d

reader should c o n s u l t t h e re fe renced s tud ies f o r f u r t h e r i n f o rma t i on

on i n c i n e r a t o r comparisons.

B.4.3 Immobi 1 ization Processes. The purpose of immobi 1 i zation is to produce a waste form of lower leachability, lower mobility,

and/or greater ease of hand1 i ng. Imrnobi 1 izat ion processes may be

viewed as being of two basic types. The first type involves formation

of a continuous matrix, with the waste distributed fairlv uniformly

throughout. The second type entails encasement of the waste ,in a

surrounding layer. The selection of a process entails choosing an

immobilization technique (both the general principles and the opera-

tional details) and an. immobilization material.

The immobilization technique selected for the study is to cast

the immobi 1 izi ng agent (concrete, in this instance) around cylindrical containers of compacted waste. This technique was selected for two

principal reasons. First, the mechanical properties of most immobi-

lizing agents are seriously affected by the inclusion of large metal

objects, such as the hand tools and pieces of process equipment found

in the waste. Second, definite hazards would be associated with shred-

ding the waste (FMC 1977) to produce a more homogeneous product. Some

of the waste is not readily shredded and would have to he presorted.

The presorting step, in turn, would add to the hazard and cost of the

process. Thus, the possibility of shredding the waste and mixing it

with a binder, such as concrete, was not studied.

Concrete was the immobilization material selected for use with

the chosen method of immobilization. Although glass is less soluble

than concrete, glass would probably be prohibitively expensive for

encapsulating waste quantities in the mill ions of cubic feet. Also,- a

number of technical questions exist for the vitrification process. Examples are the outgassing of the waste at the elevated temperatures .

required in the glassmaking process, and the long cooldown periods .

requ i red.

Rubber, fi berg1 ass, and concrete can a1 1 be cast at ambient tem-

peratures. Bitumen encapsulation requires elevated temperatures (ap-

proximately 400'~). A1 1 these mater i a1 s, except concrete. would result in a waste form that is combustible.

Thus,'concrete was selected because of i t s structural strength,

noncombustibil i ty , chemical inertness, low cost, and general ava-i l$--

ab i l i ty .

8.5 METHODS NOT STUDIED FOR MANAGING THE EFFECTS OF A 20-YR DELAY IN THE AVAILABILITY OF THE FEDERAL REPOSITORY

Three points in time were identified a t which the 20-yr delay

could be imposed on the alternatives for re t r ieva l , processing; and shipment of waste to the Federal Repository: (1 ) af te r processing b u t

before shipment, ( 2 ) a f te r retrieval b u t before processing, ,and .

( 3 ) before retr ieval . The ramifications of .these three approaches are

discussed in Subsections 8.5.1, 8.5.2, and B.5.3, respectively..

B.5.1 Delay Shipment to the Federal Repository. In th i s ap-

proach, waste retrieval and processing would proceed as scheduled, b u t ,

the processed waste would be stored for 20 yr before sfiipment to .the ,

Federal Repository. This approach i s embodied in Alternative 4.-

Only one method for the 20-yr storage module was addressed in the . ,

study: that involving an aboveground engineered structure (see Sub-

section 9.3) . Other approaches for 20-yr storage are discussed br ief ly .

below.

The storage methods identified are classif ied, for the purposes

of th i s subsection, into "outdoor" and "indoor" methods. "Outdoor" :

methods are those requiring no self-supporting structure for storing . 2 . .

containers. " Indoor" methods are 'those that take place inside build- .

ings. 'The ab i l i t y of the waste containers to withstand 20-yr storage.

a t a particular s i t e , with or without additional protection, would . .

affect the choice of the storage method. For both of these s torage.

c lassif icat ions, several methods were considered.

0.5.1.1 Outdoor Storage Methods : Ahoveground.

8.5.1.1.1 Totally Exposed Surface Storage. In t h i s 2 .

method, the waste containers would be stored in the open and exposed t o the elements similar t o the method commonly used i n salvage yards. A harrier would be provided to deny access to unauthorized personnel. The ground surface could be l e f t -as i s , or a hard surface (such as asphalt or concrete) could be provided. In general, a suitably prepared hard surf ace is advantageous fo r operation of hand1 i ng equipment and for promoting drainage. This method was eliminated for lack of confinement of the waste.

B.5.1.1.2 Surface Storage With Weather Cover. This method i s identical t o the previous one, except that the stored waste containers would be covered with a removable covering. The covering, made from plas t ic or other similar materials, would be weighted or otherwise secured to prevent i t from being blown away. Depending on the material selected and the method' for securing the edges, the covering might have to be rep1 aced one or more times during the 20-yr storage l i f e . This method was eliminated because of inadequate waste confinement.

. . , .

~ . 5 . l . 1.3 Mounded Earth Cover Over Storaae Containers. This type of storage has been used since November 1970 ' a t the TSA for retr ievable storage of l6w-level, solid transuranic waste. ' Containers

are stacked on a hard-surfaced pad. The array of containers i s then covered with a protective layer of earth. This method was evaluated in the. leave-in-place alternatives. I t was not considered for the ' '

processed waste because i t would not offer an im~rovement in risk and environmental effects compared t o the leave-in-place alternatives.

B.5.1.1.4 Shielded and Protected Outdoor storage. In these concepts, closed pipes, constructed from concrete, s t ee l , or

some other material, would be located above the ground surface, e i ther vertic'bl iy o r horizontal ly. waste containers would be loaded into

_ ; . , . . .. . . , L , !.: : . . . ., i I

these pipes fo r s torage. When t h e cap'aci t.y of a p i p e i s L reached, the

open end would be covered and sealed. . A . . large . number o f , p ipe s would be required because of t h e ineffi 'ciency . . of t h i s storage method, so the

. . n'

method was e l imi nated.

B15. 1.2 Outdoor Storage Methods: Underground.

B.5.1.2.1 Hole-in-Ground Storage. Holes would be . <

providpd i n . the .ground t o contain a number of stacked waste con- t a iners . Concrete or s t e e l pipes would be used as l i n e r s f o r the holes. The holes could be constructed ver t i ca l or placed horizontally in an ear th wall. As each hole i s f i l l e d with waste containers, t he opening would be closed with a l i d and covered with earth. The l i d . .

would serve primarily t o i nh ib i t entry of water resu l t ing from ra in or melting snow. Depending on the storage location, provisions might be required f o r draining the holes t o prevent accumulation of water.

This method was eliminated because of t$e largo number of pipes re- . .

qui red. 1 :

8.5.1.2.2 Trench stoCage. The trench or p i t conf iqur- '

ation i s a var ia t ion of the hole-in-ground concept, wkierein the waste containers would be stored in a long trench. .The s i z e and shape of

the trench would be selected t o accommodate waste handling equipment, as well as the waste containers. An inclined ramp could be provided fo r equipment access. As in the previous concept, the walls and bottoms of the trenches would be lined with concrete to prevent wall cave-ins and t o f a c i l i t a t e storage and re t r i eva l opei-ations. A,, var- ia t ion of t h i s method was studied fo r Alternative 5 a t S i t e 14..

B.5.1.2.3 Cave or Mine Storage. Storing transuranic waste in caves or abandoned mines i s . a t t r a c t i v e because t h i s type of storage s i t e , which of fe r s excel lent protection from the elements, ma.y already ex i s t . Suitably selected caves or mines would provide nearly

constant temperatures and humidity, zero p rec ip i ta t ion , and freedom . .

f rom wind and f l ood hazards. No s u i t a b l e caves or abandoned mines

were, i d e n t i f i e d on t h e INEL. However,, tunnel and s h a f t d isposal

methods were s tud ied f o r the Lemhi Range i n A l t e r n a t i v e 5.

B.5.1.3 Indoor Storage Methods: Aboveground. C h a r a c t y i s -

t i c s upon which an indoor s torage method might be se lec ted include.:

( 1 ) ease o f mon i to r i ng t h e ,stora.ge environment and d e t e c t i o n of . r a d i a t i o n leakage,

( 2 ) . s i t i n g f l e x i b i l i t y ,

8

(3 ) ease o f accommodating ,waste conta iners o f e s s e n t i a l l y a1 1

s izes and shapes,

( 4 ) ease o f accessi b i l i t y f o r i ,n-storage i n s p e c t i on,

( 5 ) c a p a b i l i t y f o r year-round operat ions, and

( 6 ) c o n t r o l o f stor.age environment f o r p r o t e c t i o n o f t he con-

t a i n e r s .

The.,basi c disadvantage o f indoor s torage methods, compared w i t h

p r o t e c t e d outdoor concep.ts i s h.igher cons t ruc t i on cost . However,

surp lus b u i l d i n g s may be i d e n t i f i e d t h a t would be su i tab , le f o r s to r i .ng . .

waste conta iners .

I I . .

,, B.5.1.3.1 Precast Concrete S t ruc tu re . The use o f .. .

precast , p res t ressed concrete panels i n c o n s t r u c t i n g low-cost perma- . .

nent b u i l d i n g s i s w e l l es tab l i shed. I n d i v i d u a l panels, approx imate ly

8 - f t wide and any reasonable length, con ta in ing prestressed, h igh- ten-

s i l e s t e e l wire, are cas t near t he cement m ix ing p l a n t . .After cur ing,

t h e panels are t ranspor ted t o t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n s i t e . S tee l pl.ates a re

imbedded i n the concrete on each side. The panels are , joined as they.

are erected i n t o p o s i t i o n by weld ing these s t e e l p l a t e s together . The

r o o f and w a l l s are formed f rom the same t ype o f panels.

storage o f waste wduld take' p lace ' BS i n r o u t i n e warehousing oper-

a t ions. The waste woul d be d i l i v e ~ e d ' td the wakehohse i n app rop r i a te

conta iners and stacked us ing convent ional equipment f o r m a t e r i a l s 3 .

hand1 ing. . ~ e p e n d i n ~ on t h e ' l oca l env i ronment and the s t r u c t u r a l i n -

t e g r i t y o f t h e waste cbnta iners , t h e atmosphere i n s i d e t h e bu i , ld ing I

would be c o n t r o l l e d t o w i t h i n temperature and humid i ty l i m i t s . This

i s t h e se lected 'methob o f shor t - te rm storage In ~ l t e r n a t i v e 4 (20-yr

de lay i n shipment o f processed waste t o the ~ e d e r a i Reposi tory) .

8.5.1.3.2 Cast- in-Pl ace Concrete S t ruc tu re . This t ype

o f cons t ruc t i on i s s i m i l a r t o the prev ious type, except t h a t t he w a l l s

are cas t i n place. The r o o f f o r t h i s type o f bu i l d iAng migh t be con-

s t r u c t e d o f corrugated s t e e l o r precast panels, 'as descr ibed i n t he

preceding subsect ion. This t ype o f s t r u c t u r e i s gene ra l l y used f o r

nuc lear reac to rs or processing b u i l d i n g s f o r which massive concrete

b i o l o g i c a l s h i e l d i n g i s needed. However, f o r low- leve l waste, such

s h i e l d i n g i s not needed.- This type o f ' c o n s t r u c t i o n dould be more

expensive than t h e o the r types o f concrete b u i l d i n g s considered.

Therefore, i t was e l im ina ted f rom f u r t h e r cons idera t ion .

B. 5.1.3.3 Concrete Block St ruc tu re . The t h i r d bas i c

t ype o f concrete s t r u c t u r e i s s i m i l a r t o the preceding two, except I t h a t t h e w a l l s are l a i d w i t h concrete blo'cks. The r o o f oh t h i s type

o f s t r u c t ~ r r e i s usual1 y supported by exposed s t e e l ' s t r u c t u r a l ' members,

which c o n s t i t u t e a weakness i n case o f f i r e w i t h i n t h e b u i l d i n g .

Although the b u i l d i n g i t s e l f i s f i r e - r e s i s t a n t , a f i r e w i t q i n t he

b u i l d i n g f r e q u e n t l y causes' t h e s t e e l t o overheat and co l lapse. Without

added f i r e p ro tec t i on , t h i s type o f b u i l d i n g wobld probably be unsat-

i s f actory. : I I

B.5.1.3..4 ~ e t i l ~ r a m e Bu i l d i ng . Several types 'of

metal frame b u i l d i n g s are commerciai l'y avai 1 able. ' B u i l d i n g s t y l es ,

p r ices , and q u a l i t y vary wide1.y. This c lass o f b u i l d i n g i s f i r e -

r e s i s t a n t and cah bc! ' b u i l t t o meet minimum c r i t e r i a f b r i i n d r e i i s - .

tance, snow loading, and earthquake res is tance. However, t h i s b u i 1 d-

i n g i s a lso sub jec t t o co l l apse du r i ng a f i r e .

B-15

B.5.1.3.5 Air Support Building. A plastic-coated

fabric structure supported by internal a i r pressure i s currently used

in experimental retrieval projects. However, the sun's ul t raviolet

rays degrade the fabric. A service l i f e of 5 yr i s generally expected, with 10 yr being the upper limit., Thus, for 20-yr storage, t h i s type of building would have, to be replaced periodically. This method i s also unsatisfactory because of the use of a positive (rather than the

desired negative) a i r ,pressure d i f fe rent ia l .

B.5.1.3.6 Structural Support Buildings, The structural support fabric building i s similar to the a i r support building.

The cover material i s the same type,of fabric, b u t i t i s supported

internally by steel arches rather than by a i r pressure. This s t ructure has the same limitations on fabric l i f e as the a i r support build-

ing. The i n i t i a l cost i s higher than tha t for an a i r support build-

ing, b u t less than that for the rigid structures discussed previously. This f a c i l i t y has the same basic disadvantages of the a i r support

building and was eliminated.

B.5.1.4 Indoor Storage Methods: Underground. The same

general selection c r i t e r i a , advantages, and disadvantages apply for

these methods as for aboveground methods for indoor storage. The structures discussed in Subsection 8.5.1.3 were considered for con-

struction aboveground. Most of the same structures could be consid-

ered for use underground or pa r t i a l ly buried. For example, under-

ground storage would provide greater resistance to storms, earth-

quakes, vandal ism, or sabotage. However, underground construction i s

more expensive than construc,tion of a similar structure a t ground level. Except for the .concrete structures, other building materials

are more susceptible to.degradation or corrosion if used underground. Since the same type of concrete building constructed aboveground would

meet minimum c r i t e r i a for earthquakes and other requirements for radio-

active waste storage, the only substantial advantages of underground storage would be additional protection against adverse events and

extra shielding against radiation.

M u l t i s t o r i e d s t r u c t u r e s are g e n e r a l l y a t t r a c t i v e economica l l y

o n l y i f t h e c o s t o f l and i s . r e l a t i v e l y high. Since l and i s r e a d i l y

a v a i l a h l e a t t h e INEL, m u l t i s t o r i e d s t r u c t t ~ r e s were n o t s tud ied .

B.5.2 Delay Processing. I n t h i s approach, r e t r i e v a l would p ro -

ceed on schedule, b u t p rocess ing would be delayed f o r 20 yr. The .

r e t r i e v e d waste would r e q u i r e s to rage f o r t h e .20-yr per iod . Th i s '

approach i s e s s e n t i a l l y t h e same as t h a t i n Subsect ion B.5.1, except

t h a t unprocessed, r a t h e r than processed, waste would be p l a c e d , i n t o

s torage. Because p rocess ing would p rov ide volume r e d u c t i o n and im-

proved chemical s t a b i l i t y and leach res i s tance , t h i s approach was

cons idered i n f e r i o r t o t he p rev ious . approach and was n o t s tud ied.

. .

B.5.3 Delay Ret r i ,eva l . I n t h i s approach, waste r e t r i e v a l would

he delayed f o r 20 yr. Th is s i t u a t i o n i nvo l ves a number o f p o s s i b l e

scenar ios and management op t ions . . .

The key t e c h n i c a l dec is ion , about which o the r dec i s i ons would

revo lve , i s whether t h e e x i s t i n g cont$inment/conf inement o f t he ,was te

would be s a t i s f a c t o r y u n t i l t he 'year 2005. (Because o f t h e assumed

10-yr l e n g t h o f t h e r e t r i e v a l campaign, some waste m.ight n o t be r e -

t r i e v e d u n t i l 2015.) Th is dec i s i on migh t be made hy t he ,nominal da te ,

o f implementat ion i n 1985. However, a d e c i s i o n t o con t i nue t o de lay

r e t r i e v a l m igh t have t o be r e v 6 s e d l a t e r , i f t he r e s u l t s o f c o n t i n l i n g '

s u r v e i 11 ance i ndi.cated a s i g n i f i c a n t hazard r e s u l t i n g f rom degrada t ion

o f t he containment/conf inement. . .

M o n i t o r i n g .s tud ies of t he TSA have heen underway f o r severa l ,

years and have i n d i c a t e d no s i g n i f i c a n t hazard f rom t h e s t a r e d TRU

waste. S tee l drums removed f rom TSR d u r i n g t h e r e e n t r y s tudy (see

Suhsedtion 4.4.3) showed some r u s t and c o r r o s i o n on t h e con ta ine rs .

However,. t h e data are i n s u f f i c i e n t t o s u b s t a n t i a t e a p r o j e c t i o n of

con ta ine r i n t e g r i t y t o t h e year 2005.

For t h i s b r i e f d iscussion, i t was assumed t h a t the dec is ion con-

cern ing whether t o cont inue present . contai,nment/conf i nement methods:

would be made i n 1985. A t t h a t t ime. the accumu.la-ted data cou ld i n d i -

1 ca te t h a t p r o j e c t i o n s of containment/confinement adequacy i n t he 2005 . '. \ t o 2015 t ime frame are (1 ) favorable, (2 ) unfavorable, o r ( 3 ) uncer- .

t a i n .

\

I f the p r o j e c t i o n s were favorable, then a 20-yr de lay i n re -

t r i e v a l could take p lace w i t h confidence t h a t environmental e f f e c t s

du r ing the i n t e r v e n i n g 20 yr- would be minimal,.. T,his scenar io forms

t h e background assump.tions f o r A1 te rna t . i ve 6: (See Subsection K 3 . )

I f the p r o j e c t i o n s were unfavorable, a number o f opt ions.would. .be . .

availab1,e. I f a near-term haza rd . to the,envi ronment e x i s t e d , . a c t i o n

would be taken as soon as feas ib le . However, i f , fo r example, the

s to red waste conta iners were found t o be br:eached, a nea,r-term t h r e a t

t o the environment would no t necessa r i l y e x i s t . The containers. for,

t h e buried.TRU waste have been breacheg f o r several years, w i thou t

such a near-term hazard ensuing. 1 t . m i g h t . b e . f e a s i b l e t o cont inue,

f o r 20 e x t r a years, t o manage t h e s to red waste as a t present, even

though a subs tan t i a l number o f conta iners might be breached.

1

If i t were judged t h a t a hazard , t o . t he environment would, ens~ue . from cont inu ing , present man,agement f o r 20 y r before r e t r i e v a l , a ,

.

number of app roaches .c~u ld be fol lowed. , Improved confinement., such.as

descr ibed i n A1 t e r n a t j v e 2, c o u l d , be. constructed. (However, t he re - , . . .

q u i r e d r e t r i e v a b i l i t y o f the. waste cou ld be a c o n s t r a i n t p laced .on any . .

work t o improve. confinement . ) Another approach would be t o overpack ....

those conta iners judged t o have f a i l e d . The magnitude o f t h i s e f f o r t , ,

would determine i t s f e a s i b i l i t y . If the overpack opera t ion cou ld be

conducted i n e x i s t i n g f ac i 1 i t i e s , ., i;n, an A i r Support Weather ,Sh ie ld . . . .

(ASWS), or (poss ib ly ) i n t he open a i r , such'an e f f o r t cou ld be f e a s i -

b le .

. . , .

I f the p r o j e c t i o n s o f containment:/conf i nement adequacy were un.- . . '

ce r ta in , t he r e t r i e v a l dec i s ion cou ld be .de layed o r t h e conserva t ive ' . :.

approach o f i n i t i a t i n g r e t r i e v a l w i thou t f u r t h e r delay could be f o l - .

lowed.

B.6 SHIPMENT AND TRANSFER METHODS NOT STUDIED 8

The bas ic means o f shipment considered i n t h i s document are.

(1 ) ATMX 600 r a i l c a r s f o r shipment t o the ,Federal Repository, ( 2 ) con- ' . .

ven t iona l s e m i t r a i l e r s f o r shipment between t h e RWMC and d isposal . ' '

s i t e s on the INEL, and ( 3 ) s p e c i a l l y designed t r a n s f e r veh ic les be-

tween t h e r e t r i e v a l f a c i l i t y and t h e process f a c i l i t y w i t h i n t h e RWMC.

The s e m i t r a i l e r s would t r a v e l over committed roadways w i t h i n the INEL'. I ' . . I ; :

The use o f t rucks f o r shipment t o t h e Federal Reposi tory was '

,

considered bu t not studied. The p r i n c i p a l reason was the expected 1

higher cos t o f sh ipp ing by t ruck . However, a po t len t ia l lack o f a v a i l - I

ab le r a i l c a r s s u i t a b l e f o r such shipments could f o r c e the use o f

t rucks. . .

The use o f a conveyor was a lso considered fo r t r a n s f e r w i t h i n the

RWMC. T h i s approath was r e j e c t e d f o r t h ree reasons. IF i rs t , th!e use

o f a conveyor up. t o 1 m i l e long t o move haz!ardous rad ' ioact ive mater-

i a l s i s an a p p l i c a t i o n f o r which the re i s 1 i t t l e ; o r nolex'perienc'e.

Second, the poss ib i 1 i t y o f conveyor bmreakdowns a f t e r contaminat ion by

rad ionuc l ides poses a ser ious maintenance problem. Third, enclosed ' .

conveyors (such as t h i s wo'uld have t o be) are sub jec t t o f i l r e wllen . '

hand1 i n g combustibles. I

. I.

6.7 LOCATIONS AND TECHNIQUES NOT STUDIED FOR WASTE D'ISPOSAL AT

THE- INEL I ' .

Disposal l oca t i ons off the INEL were excluded f rom t h i s study by

t he guide1 ines (Subsect ion 7.4.1).

. . 0nsi.te d isposal would i n v o l v e s e l e c t i o n o f a d isposal l o c a t i o n

and a waste emplacement technique. Three p o t e n t i a1 l o c a t i o n s f o r

o n s i t e disposal were studied: the RWMC, s i t e 14, and the emh hi Range

a t t he northwest corner o f t h e INEL. Two o ther loca t ions , t h a t were

considered b u t not studied, are discussed below. A broad range o f

emplacement ' techniques was se lec ted f o r stud.y: deep rock disposal,

engineered shal low- land disposal, and engineered aboveground d i s -

posal. Two o ther d isposal - techniques a i e discussed i n t h i s subsec-

t i o n .

. $ . '

B.7.1 INE~ bisposa l ~ o c a t i o n s Not Studied. . . I

. .. 8.7;1:1 Middle Butte. Middle Bu t te i s a s i l i c i c vo l can i c

format ion w i t h a b a s a l t i c cap, loca ted j u s t i n s i d e t h e southern INEL

boundary. F O ~ waste d isposal , v e r t i c a l min ing and deep excavat ion

(qua r ry ing ) f rom the top would , , be poss ib le . b u t . were no t considered

favorab le because of t h e i n a c c e s s i b i l i t y o f t he top o f t h e bu t te .

Hor izonta l min ing w i t h the excavat ion o f i n t e r n a l v a u l t s would be more

f e a s i b l e . I n e i t h e r case, spec ia l containment s t ruc tu res cou ld be

b u i l t i f needed. Once the waste i s i n place, the containment would be

sealed and t h e mine o r excavat ion b a c k f i l l e d t o prevent i n t r u s i o n .

~ a v o r a 6 l e aspe 'c t i '6 f Middle Bu t te inc lude i t s l o c a t i o n w i t h i n

INEL boundaries, prox.irnity t o t h e RWMC, e l e v a t i o n above the f lood- I '

p l a i n , and r e l a t i ~ e ' ~ e o 1 o ~ i c s t a b i l i t y ; Considerable in fo rmat ion

about t he b " t t e i s d v a i l a b l e f rom t 6 e Un i ted s ta tes ~ e o l o ~ i c a l Survey

(USGS) . A cornmi t t e d roadway f o r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n o f the waste cou ld be '

: - 4

const ruc ted complete ly w i t h i n INEL boundaries and would be r e l a t i v e l y .

s h o r t i n length. Long-term mon i to r i ng of t he waste would be performed . . . .

t o de tec t rad ionuc l ide' movement.

unfavorable aspects (and reasons f o r lack i f f u r t h e r s tudy) of

Midd le But te i nc lude i t s l o c a t i o n o v e r ' t h e SnakeRiver P l a i n ~ q u i f e r , , ,,

i n a c c e i s i b i l i t y o f the top o f t h e butte, ' and the p o s s i h i l i t y o f recu r - . . ' , I 5 .I

r i n g s i l i c i c volcanism.

B.7.1.2 Circular Butte and EBR-I1 Ridge. The INEL loca-

t ions of Circular Butte and the ridge eas t of EBR-I1 were considered as potenti a1 s i t e s f o r engineered shal low-land disposal .

Advantages of these s i t e s include c lose proximity t o t he RWMC,

location within the INEL boundaries, location off the current flood-

pla in , and lack of surface water. The ridge near EBR-I1 i s a t a

higher elevation than most of the INEL. Information about these s i t e s i s available from the USGS.

Disadvantages of these s i t e s include t h e i r location above the . .

Snake River Plain Aquifer, the p o s s i b i l i t y b f renewed volcanism in t he ' area, and possible c l imat ic changes causing flooding of these areas.

. , . . I' . . . ,.

These locations were not studied because they do not o f fe r as many advantages fo r deep rock disposal as the Lemhi ~ t n ~ e s i t e s and' because the geologic and hydrologic cha rac t e r i s t i c s are l e s s favorable ' than those of S i t e 14.

. . . :

B.7.2 Waste Disposal Techniques Not Studied.

8.7.2.1 Waste Disposal in Deep Dri l led Holes. - Waste would be placed in deep holes d r i l l e d in to a th ick, hydrologically t i g h t , s t ab le formation. I f holes were used t h a t were 3 f t in diameter and

3 2000 f t deep, each hole would hold, approximately 14,000 f t of waste.' . '

i

Depending on the method of waste treatment, hundreds of such holes , ,

could be required t o contain the TRU waste. After the waste i s

lowered, the hole would be plugged, f i l l e d , and sealed. . : I

While t h i s method would require a minimum of aboveground f a c i l i t i e s , the waste would not be re t r i evab le a f t e r the holes were sealed. More important, the presence of the Snake River Plain Aquifer below nearly a l l of the INEL would c rea te the pos s ib i l i t y of ground-

water t ranspor t of the radionucl ides t o d i s t an t populations. Disposal , c

of the waste beneath the aquifer would r i sk the same t ranspor t of

r a d i o n u c l i d e s . Also, . d r i l l i n g through the aqu i fe r (est imated t o be - +

1000 t o 5000 ft t h i c k ) f o r t he purpose o f emplacing waste, would be j

d i f f i c u l t . .

8.7.2.2 Deep Well I n j e c t i o n o f L i q u i f i e d Wastes. Th is

concept requ i res t h a t t he waste be f i n e l y d i v i d e d and mixed i n t o a

g rou t s l u r r y . The s l u r r y i s then i n j e c t e d . i n t o a geo1ogic. format ion

through a deep i n j e c t i o n w e l l . . Th is d isposal method i s . c u r r e n t l y

be ing used by another DOE l a b o r a t o r y (ERDA 1977b). However, t he l o s s -

o f r e t r i e v a b i l i t y , t he -was te processing requirements, an,d t h e poss i -

b i l i t y o f contaminat ing the Snake R iver P l a i n Aqu i fe r are major disad-

vantages. . ,

8.7.2.3 Shal low-Land D i s ~ o s a l a t the RWMC. Shal low-land

d isposa l a t t h e RWMC f o l l o w i n g r e t r i e v a l and processing was n o t

s tudied. Over long per iods o f t ime, the e f f e c t s o f such a method

would be s i m i l a r t o those f rom t h e cu r ren t d isposal methods f o r t h e

b u r i e d TRU waste. The p r i n c i p a l d i f ference might be a t t r i b u t e d t o

immobi l i za t ion o f t he waste i n concrete o r as slag. It was concluded

however, t h a t t o r e t r i e v e , process, and rebury the waste w i thou t con-

f inement would n o t be worth the cost .

8.8 OTHER ALTERNATIVES, CONCEPTS, AND IDEAS IDENTIFIED BUT NOT STUDIED

FURTHER

A number o f approaches r e l a t e d t o management o f the INEL TRU

waste were suggested du r ing the study. The approaches ranged f rom -

major changes i n waste management phi losophy t o minor v a r i a t i o n s i n

t h e technique by which a concept might be implemented. Time con-

s t r a i n t s prevented f u r t h e r s tudy of these ideas, b u t several o f the

ideas are mentioned i n t h i s subsect ion.

- . B.8.1 Postdecis ion Changes i n A l t e r n a t i v e s o r Concepts. For . : . . . .

most o f t he a l te rna t i ,ves and concepts s.tudied, t h e d isposal method : i s . . , .

r e v e r s i b l e , a t l e a s t f o r a pe r iod of up t o . 4 0 yr. S e l e c t i o n + o f an . . a l t e r n a t i v e t h a t invo lves r e v e r s i b l e d isposal would leave the way open . a

t o change t o a d i f rerent a1 t e r n a t i v c , shoi l ld the need ar ise. . For '.

example, t h e "Leave-As-Is" A l t e r n a t i v e cou ld l a t e r be abandoned i n

f a v o r o f almost any o ther a l t e r n a t i v e . However, Concept 2-c i s no t

r e a d i l y reve rs ib le , because o f t he d i f f i c u l t y o f r e t r i e v i n g the i m -

mob i l i zed waste from a huge body o f grout .

The p o t e n t i a l .number o f these pos tdec is ion changes i n a1 te rna-

t i v e s i s very large, and the i m p l i c a t i o n s vary g rea t l y . The poss ib le

range o f t i m i n g f o r such changes cou ld be a sub jec t i n i t s e l f . Th is

e n t i r e sub jec t i's no t considered f u r t h e r i n the present study.

B.8.2 Return t h e Waste t o Po in t s o f Or ig in . One a l t e r n a t i v e

mentioned du r ing the study was t o r e t u r n the waste t o i t s var ious

p o i n t s o f o r i g i n . Under t h i s approach, most o f t he waste would be

re tu rned t o Rocky F l a t s . Th is idea was not s tud ied because implemen-

t a t i o n o f t h e idea would c o n t r i b u t e l i t t l e , i f anything, t o r e s o l v i n g

t h e n a t i o n a l need f o r safe, permanent d isposal o f defense TRU waste.

Th is approach would no t even r e s u l t i n removal o f a l l TRU waste f rom

the INEL, because some of the waste has been generated a t the INEL.

B.8.3 Terminate the Receipt o f Waste f rom Off-INEL Locat ions.

The idea o f reducing the waste d isposal problem a t the INEL by pro-

h i b i t i n g t h e ' r e c e i p t . o f any new waste :from off- INEL s'ources 'was n o t ' .

s tudied. This would no t he lp t o e l i m i n a t e the n a t i o n a l waste d isposal

problem because the product ion o f defense TRU waste i s cont inu ing .

A d d i t i o n a l l y , the problem o f 'waste c u r r e n t l y s to red a t the RWMC would

no t be resolved.

B.8.4 Separat ion o f t h e Waste. It has been proposed t h a t t he

waste m a t e r i a l be separated i n t o two or t h ree por t ions , based'on the

l e v e l o f t ransuran ic contaminat ion. Contamination l e v e l s t h a t might

serve as l o g i c a l d i v i s i o n p o i n t s are (1 ) 10 nCi/g, and ( 2 ) t h e lowest

de tec tab le l e v e l o f t ransuran ic contaminat ion. The advantage o f t h i s

approach i s t h a t waste p o r t i o n s o f successively lower l e v e l s o f con-

taminat ion might be managed w i t h l ess processing o r w i t h l ess expen-

s i v e d isposal methods. An approach o f t h i s - t y p e was evaluated i n a

recent study, (DOE 1978a). As no ted t h e r e i n and i n o ther s tud ies .. .. (e.g., Kaiser Engineers 1977), the approach s u f f e r s from a number. o f

weaknesses. Separat ion o f m i l l i o n s o f cubic f e e t o f waste and/or s o i l

i n t o two or t h ree por t ions , based on contaminat ion l e v e l , would be . .

d i f f i c u l t w i t h i n a 10-yr opera t ing campaign. The separat ion process

would be hazardous, and i t would be c o s t l y , p o s s i b l y lead ing t o no n e t

overa ' l l cos t reduc t ion . For these reasons, t he approach was not con-

s idered f u r t h e r i n t he present study.

8.8.5 D i l u t e and Disperse. I n t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e , the waste

would be reduced t o p a r t i c u l a t e m a t e r i a l and dispersed, o r d i l u t e d

w i t h a d d i t i o n a l mater i a1 and' then dispersed. I n e i t h e r case, t h i s

process i s e s s e n t i a l l y i r r e v e r s i b l e , should 1 a t e r re t r i ' eva l be de-

s i r e d . Another major weakness o f t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e i s t he r e s u l t i n g

1 ow-level contaminat ion of the biosphere.

B.8.6 Se lec t i on o f a Per iod f o r Maintenance, Surve i l lance, and

Secur i ty . The gu ide l ines o f Subsection 7.4.1 s p e c i f y an assumed

100-yr per iod f o r s u r v e i l l a n c e of the d isposal area and f o r con-

duc t i ng maintenance and s e c u r i t y a c t i v i t i e s . The a l t e r n a t i v e was

proposed o f open-ended p u r s u i t of maintenance, surve i l lance, and

s e c u r i t y . That i s , these a c t i v i t i e s would cont inue f rom one human

generat ion t o another, u n t i l t he hazards associated w i t h the waste

were judged t o be acceptably smal l . Th i s phi losophy was n o t s tud ied

because of the inherent d i f f e rence i n t he h a l f - l i v e s o f the r a d i o -

nuc l i des i n t he waste and the demonstrated per iods o f s t a b i l i t y o f

human i n s t i t u t i o n s r e l a t e d t o managing hazards t o man. The opposi te

extreme approach, t h a t of abandonment i n l e s s than 100 yr, was a l so

n o t s tudied.

B.8.7 Nongeologic Disposal Methods. Nongeologic d isposal methods

have been considered i n e a r l i e r s tud ies and are summarized i n t h e €IS

(DOE 1979) t h a t t h i s document i s intended t o support. These methods

include disposal in. sea beds, ice sheets , and tectonic p la te bound- a r i e s ; rocketing in to the sun or in to deep' space; and a r t i f i c i a l transmutation of the radi onucl ides. Study of these disposal methods f a l l s outside the scope of the present study.

0.8.8 - Separating the Melt Product During the Slagging Process. If the waste material were separated while molten, perhaps by making use of density gradients, the heavy metal portion could be spec ia l ly handled t o enhance radiological . safeguards, c r i t i c a l i t y protection,

and economic recovery. Because t h i s process var ia t ion would viol a t e the guidelines of Subsection 7.,4.1 (no reclamation of f i s s i l e ma- t e r i a l ) , i t 'was not studied.

APPENDIX C

THE EFFECTS OF TRU WASTE.RECEIVED AFTER 1985 ON THE WASTE MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES STUDIED

C. 1 INTRODUCTION

Generation rates for defense TRU waste beyond 1985 are subject to

great uncertainty. Although projections can be formulated on a strict- ly technological basis, such projections become increasingly unreliable with the length of time projected into the future.

Most of the TRU waste projected to be shipped to the INEL is

related to nuclear weapons programs. Thus, significant changes in international relations or in disarmament efforts could'affect the quantity of waste to be received at the INEL. Such consequences of international politics are not amenable to quantitative prediction.

In addition, it is difficult to predict the national policies and programs for the management of defense nuclear waste in the time period beyond 1985. For example, the avai labi 1 i ty, number, locat ion,

type, and capacity of -Federal Repositories would need to be known to make projections for waste management at the INEL. Also needed would be knowledge of the type of waste processing, if any, that would take place at each facility that generates TRU waste.

These large uncertainties have led to the decision to address the

topic of post-1985 waste in this appendix, rather than in the body of the report. The reason was to separate the baseline studies (facility

layout, cost, risk, and environmental effects) from the uncertainties associated with the post-1985 waste. The impacts of the post-1985 waste on the alternatives are, therefore, addressed separately here. These impacts on the design of the processing, storage, and disposal facilities range from very small to very large, depending on the a1 ternat i ve studied .

C.2 WASTE PROJECTIONS TO 1985

TRU waste i s c u r r e n t l y being received' a t the RWMC f rom the f a c i l -

i t i e s l i s t e d i n Table C-1. The t a b l e l i s t s the ,es t ima ted volumes

shipped i n 1978, as we l l as the p ro jec ted volumes t o be shipped i n

1985. Pro jec t ions o f t h e waste generat ion ra tes are avai l a b l e through

1987. However, t he 1987 values are genera l l y s t r a i g h t - l i n e ex t rapo la-

t i o n s o f the est imates through 1985. Thus, l i t . t l e re1 i a b l e informa-

t i o n i s added by the 1985-1987 est imates.

Most o f t h e waste comes f rom Rocky F la ts . Changing t h e r a t e o f

waste generat ion by a f a c t o r o f two or th ree a t any o ther f a c i l i t y

l i s t e d , would no t have a l a r g e e f f e c t on t h e r a t e o f r e c e i v i n g TRU

waste a t the RWMC. But f l u c t u a t i o n s i n the amount of waste generated

a t Rocky F la ts , o r unforeseen changes i n t h e method o f waste treatment

there, could have s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t s upon the requ i red capac i ty o f

t h e f a c i l i t i e s i n t h e a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r TRU waste management a t t h e

INEL. Fur thermor~, f a c i l i t i e s not c u r r e n t l y shipping low- level TRU

waste t o t h e INEL could conceivably begin t o sh ip waste t o t h e INEL.

C. 3 ASSUMPTIONS

I n s p i t e o f the u n c e r t a i n t i e s involved, an e f f o r t was made t o

assess t h e e f f e c t s on t h e INEL waste management a1 te rna t i ves o f t h e

waste t h a t might be received a f t e r 1985. To f a c i l i t a t e t h i s assess- .

. . . ment, t h e fol1:owing assumptions were made:,

. ,. . .. ~

) The generat ion r a t e o f TRU waste a t Rocky F l a t s w i l l : con- . . ..:, 3

t i n u e a t approxSmate1.y 67,000 ft /yr a f t e r 1985.

( 2 ) The Rocky F l a t s waste generated a f t e r January 1, 1385, w i l l

be i nc ine ra ted and immobil ized a t Rocky F la ts .

NOTE : Any delay i n t h e s t a r t u p of t h i s f a c i l i t y would

cause a greater volume of waste t o be shipped t o

t h e INEL than t h a t p red ic ted here.

. . a .. _. . TABLE C-1 . . : a I. . . . : , . ,

Estimated Pro jec ted . , . .

. . ' Volume Shipped Volume Shipped

i n 1978 i'n 1985

Abbrev ia t ion I d e n t i f i c a t i o n Locat ion ( f t 3 ) ( f t 3 )

ANL-W Argbnne West INEL ' 530 ' 7,410 . . . . . . . . . .

CPP Idaho Chemi c a l IN EL 2,120 6,350 . . , ., : R r ~ c ~ s s i n g ' P lan t ':

. . ., , . . . BETTIS Westinghouse

, # , - ' . . . . PA'

, . . . . l', 230 0

. . , MOUND ,: Mound Labqratory OH 14,120 ., ,l 4,1:20

ANL-E Argonne Nat.. Lab. I L 4,940 4,940

APPROXIMATE TOTAL 150,000 100,000

(a) Before .inci,nerati.on, compaction;, o r immobi 1. izat ion o f the combustible. p o r t i o n o f t he waste. O f t he l i s t e d f a c i l i t i e s ; o n l y Rocky F l a t s i s known t o have f i r m p lans t o begin. process i rig waste - i n the next several! years. The p ro jec ted y e a r l y volume o f 67,070 f t 3 would be reduced t o about 51,000 ft3 a f t e r the combust ible p o r t i o n o f the waste i s

, . . . .

processed. . .

, :. . , .

( 3 ) Seventy - f i ve percen t ( by volume) o f t h e Rocky F l a t s waste

w i l l be noncombust ib le. The 25% t h a t i s combust ib le w i l l be

reduced i n volume by a r a t i o o f 40:1 i n t h e i n c i n e r a t i o n

process a t Rocky F l a t s . No volume r e d i c t i o n i s assumed f o r

t h e noncombust ib le waste. The ash f r om t h e i n c i n e r a t o r w i l l

be immob i l i zed by adding g lass - fo rming m a t e r i a l s . Thus, t h e 3 approximate y e a r l y volume o f 67,.000 f t would be reduced

3 t o about 51,000 f t /yr a f t e r t he combust ib le p o r t i o n o f

' t h e waste i s processed. I

NOTE : Th is conc lus ion i s r e l a t i v e l y i n s e n s i t i v e t o t h e

p r o p o r t i d n o f g lass - fo rming materi'a-1 s added, be-

cause a h i g h percentage o f ' t h e waste i s noncomhus-

t i b l e and i s assumed n o t t o be immobi l ized.

( 4 ) The processed Rocky F l a t s waste and i t s packaging w i l l be

acceptable, w i t h o u t f u r t h e r process ing, f o r shipment t o and

r e c e i p t a t a f e d e r a l r e p o s i t o r y ( i f such a r e p o s i t o r y

e x i s t s ) , o r f o r shipment t o and d isposa l i t t h e INEL.

NOTE : 1f t he c r i t e r i a f o r d isposa l change' a f t e r t h e

Rocky F l a t s waste process' ing f a c i 1 i t y has 'been

b u i l t , o r i f t h i s f a c i l i t y does no t operate as

planned, then t h e Rocky F l a t s waste c o u l d r e q u i r e

' f u r t h e r processing, o r packaging, o r 'both. ! I n . .

t h i s study, no p'lans have be'en made t o 'process, '

reprocess, o r package any post-1985 Rocky F l a t s

waste a t t h e INEL.) , .

('5) The v-olume o f TRU waste generated a t t he INEL i s assumed t o ! ' 3 remain a t a p p r o x i m a t ~ l , y 14,000 f t / v r a f t e r 1985. NO

o n s i t e p rocess ing o f t h i s waste i s assumed, 'o ther than t h a t

which m igh t he performed a t the RWMC.

NOTE: A majdr p,rograti change a t t h e INEL c o u l d have a

& j o r e f f e c t on t h i s q u a n t i t y .

. . , ,

( 6 ) T ~ ~ T R U . waste , by Mound Laboratory and a t ANL-E i s

assumed ti continue a t approximately 19,000 f t31yr a f t e r 1985. No waste treatment by these waste generators i s assumed. I t is, assumed t ha t Be t t i s ships no TRU waste t o the RWMC a f t e r 1985.

. . ' 0 2 ,

NOTE.: A major . program . change or t h e addition of an i n -

c inera t ion Program a t e i t he r lab cou'ld 'effect a major change i n this va.lue.

I ; , .

(7 ) The Federal Repository wil l include no waste processing

f a c i l i t i e s such as incinera tors . The waste acceptance c r i - ter ia . . w i 11 require a waste form acceptable f o r disposal upon a r r iva l a t the Repository.

C.4 EFFECTS

This section addresses the e f f ec t s of the TRU waste generated a f t e r 1985 on the INEL waste management a l t e rna t ives . The e f f ec t s a r e

ca lcula ted, based on the previous assumptions and the scenarios t h a t are described. Because burial of TRU waste a t the RWMC ceased in 1970, TRU waste t ha t migh t be r,eceived a f t e r 1985 is addressed as a potential addition t o the stored TRU waste. The e f f ec t s on the a l t e r -

natives fo r managing the stored waste are summarized in Table C-2 and discussed in t he following su5sections.

, 8 . .

The number of scenarios t h a t can bei en,visioned i s extremely

large , so t h i s br ief study should not be expected t o be all-encompas- s i n g . . Furthermore, the scenarios d i s c u ~ s e d here are studied only by, way of example and are not necessar i ly the most l i ke ly t o .occur. The

r e su l t s are: highly ,dependent on the spec i f i c assumptions made i n each

scenario.

C.4.1 Alternative 1 - Leave the Stored Waste As Is . In this

a l t e rna t ive , i t is assumed t ha t .the INEL waste is l e f t as i s and t h a t there is no Federal Repository. All TRU waste newly generated by the

TABLE C-2

EFFECTS OF TRU WASTE GENERATED AFTER 1985 ON ALTERNATIVES FOR WASTE MANAGEMENT AT TiE INEL '

Un i ts are f t 3 / y r , except for subtotal en t r ies i n parentheses, which are i n u n i t s o f ft3 o f waste accumulated dur ing the t ime per iod ind ica ted i n the heading. --

1985-T995 Operations lWZ?Ji% Operations 2005-2015 Operations Operations a f t e r 2015 " ' - -nat ive . . 0escr iPt ion(a) Processinp Storage . D isposal Processinq Storage Disposal Processing Storage Disposal Processing Storage Disposal

1 Leave As I s O(C)

2 Leave I n Place: O(C) Improve Conf i nernent

3 Retr ieve and Process. 14.000 S t a r t i n g i n 1985; ( 6% Ship t o Federal Reposi tory as dxd) Processed

Retr ieve and Process, 33.000 S t a r t i n g I n 1985. (-1 5% Store 20 yr. then incre- Ship t o Federal ment)(e) Repository

67.500 N/A (675,000)

(65%. increment)

33.000 67.500 fi/A (675,000) (add i t ion- a l 65% i n - crement)

o l d 84.000 o(c) N/A 8 4 . m N/A (840.000) ( t ime-

In tegra ted sun i s i n - determi nate)

o(c) . NIA 84.000 o(c! N/A 84.000 (84&000) ( t ime-

In tegra ted sun i s i n - determinate)

, - Retr ieve and Process, 33.000 N/A 67,500 33,000 N/A 67.500 33.000 67.500 67.500 33.000

N/A (675,000) ' S tar t ing i n 1985; (15% ' (675,000) (675.0001 N/A ( t lme- Dispose a t ' INEL incre-

ment)(e) (65%

incre- (add i t iona l 65% incre-

in tegra ted sum i c i n - .. ~ - -. .. . - . . .

men t ) m n t ) m n t ) determinate)

Retr ieve and Process, 0 84.000(fl N/A 0 84.000(f) H/A 1561 80;WO 0 N/A 14.000 0 (840.000) (840.000)

N/A S t a r t i n q i n 2005; . . Ship to - federa l Repository as Processed

. ... increment)(9)

- -- (a) See tex t for l iore de ta i led descr ip t ion of scenarios pursued, because many scenarios are possible f o r each al ternat ive.

!b) Slagging pyro lys is i s the assumed process for t h i s study.

f c ) It i s assumed here tha t no waste i s processed-at the RWMC a f t e r 1985 unless a f a c i l i t y were b u i l t a t the INEL f o r (1) process.ing bur ied waste o r (2) processing i n c m i n g waste, o r both.

( d ) The 14.000 f t 3 / y r would be from newly generated I N R TRU waste. (Waste from rock.^ Flats, Mound Laboratory. and ANLX would not be received a t the INEL a f t e r 1985.) The 14,000 f t /y r i s eauivalent to 6% o f the processing r a t e f o r the pre-1985 waste i n a 10-yr campaign dur ing 1985-1995.

( e l The 33,000 ft3/yr w u l d bee from newly generdted I N K , Mound, and ANL:E waste received a f te r 1985. Waste from Rocky F l a t s would be processed a t Rocky F la ts . ~h~ 33,000 f t lyr is equivalent to 15% of the processing r a t e f o r the pre-1985 waste i n a 10-yr campaign dur ing 1985-1995.

I f ) Sto*age.would be on TSA pads, ra ther than i n .an engineerea abovegroun~ f a c i + i t y , as f o r A l te rna t ive 4.

(9 ) The increased processing load o f 90.000 f t 3 / y r i s larger than tha t for A l te rna t ives 4 and 5. because a 20-Yr accumulation (1985-2005) of post-1985 waste would be worked o f f i n 10 y r (2005-2015),along w i t h 14.000 f t l y r o f new waste generdted i n 2005-2015 a t the INEL.

:d;.A Not App! icabl'e

f a c i l i t i e s l i s t e d in Table C-1 would continue t o be shipped to the 3

RWMC. Approximately 84,000 f t of waste (51,000 f t 3 f rom1~ockX

Fla t s a f t e r processing, 19,000 f t 5 r o m ANL-E and Mound Laboratory, 3 and 14,000 f t from INEL operations) would be placed on the TSA

pads in the year 1985 and every year the reaf te r . Thus, by ahout

the year 2009, the volume of stored TRU waste on t h e JSA would have 3 3 doubled, from about 2,000,000 f t in 1985, t o about 4,000,000 f t .

Of t h i s quanti ty, only the Rocky F la t s portion would have been pro-

cessed. When each TSA pad i s f i l l e d , i t would ,he covered in accor-

dance with present pract ices (see Subsection 4.2). Thus, tbe current

storage method would become a continuing de facto disposal method fo r

the defense TRU waste t o be received from the current waste generators.

C.4.2 Alternative 2 - Leave the Stored Waste in Place and

Improve Conf jnement. A1 te rna t ive 2 i s identical t o A1 te rna t ive 1

with respect t o the waste received a f t e r 1985, un t i l a TSA pad i s

f i l l e d . After the pl.ywood, polyvinyl, and clay are placed over t he

waste, additional confinement would be provided by one of the methods

described in Subsection 8.2.

C.4.3 Alternative 3 - Retrieve the Stored Waste, Process, and

Ship t o the Federal Repository. Because t h i s a1 t e rna t ive presupposes

the operation of a Federal Repository accepting waste in 1985, the Rocky Fla ts waste i s assumed t o go d i r ec t l y t o the Federal Repository

s t a r t i ng i n 1985. Waste newly generated a t Mound Laboratory or a t

ANL-E could be incinerated a t t he RWMC or a t Rocky ~ i a t s , or shipped

to the Repository without incineration. Although the guidelines

chosen fo r t h i s exercise preclude the pos s ib i l i t y of incineration a t

Mound and ANL-E, such a pos s ib i l i t y ex i s t s . In t h i s a l t e rna t ive ,

waste generated a f t e r 1985 a t Mound and ANL-E i s assumed not t o be

processed a t the RWMC.

During the re t r ieval . and processing of the stored waste, the

waste newly generated a t t he INEL would a lso be processed. This 3 increment would amount to approximately 14,000 f t /yr, or about 6%

3 of the 220,000 f t /yr r a t e associated'with processing the pre-1985

waste i n a 10-yr campaign.

c- 7

I .

The estimated 6% increment in processing demand would be such

a small addition as t o have minimal impact on the waste processing

f a c i l i t y a t the INEL during the 1985-1995 campaign. By 1995 the

I r e t r i eva l and processing of the waste stored a t t he TSA would be com-

I plete . I t i s assumed in this study t ha t the processing f a c i l i t y (and

1 any replacement f ac i 1 i t i e s ) would remain operational indef in i te ly , , .

although on a much smaller scale , t o process newly generated INEL TRU , '

waste before shipment t o the Federal Repository., , .

1 C.4.4 Alternative 4 - Retrieve and Process the Stored Waste

Between 1985 and 1995; ,Store Onsite; Ship t o the Federal Repository . <

i n 2005. In the scenario studied fo r this a l t e rna t ive , the on s waste from ANL-E, Mound, and the INEL would be processed a t the RWMC, along

with the TRU waste previously stored on the TSA. (Rocky. F la t s , waste

would be processed before receipt a t the INEL.) A 15% increase 3 in processing capacity (an additional 33,000 f t /yr) would be re-

quired over the processing r a t e f o r the TSA-stored waste alone. All

of t h i s TRU waste would then be placed in to storage, stored un t i l

2005, and then shipped t o the Federal Repository. The ex t ra waste put 3 in to storage would consis t of the 51,000 f t /yr of processed waste

3 from Rocky F la t s , plus 16,500 f t /yr from processing the CI '

33,000 f t J / y r of waste benerated a t the INEL, Mound, and^^^-E. An overal l volume reduction r a t i o of approximately 2:1 was used f o r the

. ,

waste processed a t the I N E L (see Figure 9-9, Subsection 9.1.2.2).

This r a t i o allows fo r the possible addition of clean so i l t o produce . . . .

an acceptable output from the s l agging pyrolysis incinerator. T h u s , .-

the t o t a l additional storage vblume would be 67,500 f t 3 j y r , br about ' 3 65% of the 103,000 f t /yr of processed waste resul t ing from proces-

sing the waste in a 10-yr campaign.

The post-1985 TRU waste would have a major e f f ec t (65% increase) - on the f a c i l i t y requirements fo r 20-yr storage i n the 1985-1995 time

period. In the 1995-2005 time period, another 65% increase in storage

volume would be required, f o r a t o t a l increase of 130% t o the required

capacity of the 20-yr storage f a c i l i t y .

C.4.5 A l t e r n a t i v e 5 - R e t r i e v e and Process t h e Stored Waste,

Dispose o f a t t h e INEL. I n t + i s a l t e r n a t i v e , i t i s presupposed t h a t I

t h e r e would bh no Federa l Repos i to ry . The waste s t o r e d a t t h e TSA'

would be r e t r i e v e d , processed, and disposed o f a t t he INEL by one' o f

t h e four methods descr ibed i n ~ u b s e c t i o n 1 0 . 4 . New waste from Rocky

F l a t s , ~ o u n d ; ANL-E, and t he INEL would con t i nue t o be shipped t o t h e

RWMC and disposed o f a t t h e INEL. The Rocky F l a t s waste would be

processed a t Rocky F l a t s , so no p rocess ing c a p a b i l i t y a t t h e INEL

would be r e q u l r e d f o r t h i s waste. waste f rom Mound, ANL-E, and t h e

INEL would he processed a t t he INEL.

The e f f e c t on waste p rocess ing requi rements d u r i n g t h e 10-yr

campaign o f r e t r i e v i n g and p rocess ing t h e TSA-stored waste would be

t h e same as i n A l t e r n a t i v e 4. However, t h e p r o j e c t e d amount of

waste t o be disposed o f a t the INEL between 1985 and 1995 would be 3 increased by approx imate ly 675,000 f t due t o t he post-1985 waste.

Th i s i s a 65% a d d i t i o n t o t h e volume requi rement f o r d isposa l of t h e

pre-1985 waste. Furthermore, t h e e f f e c t on d isposa l requi rements

would accumulate t o l a r g e r and l a r g e r ' v a l u e s (65% inc rease f o r eve ry

10 y r ) , as l o n g as TRU waste con t inued t o be.generated: : . ' i

C.4.6 A1 t e r n a t i v e 6 - Delay R e t r i e v a l , Processing, and Shipment I

o f t h e Stored Waste t o t h e Federa l Repos i t o r y u n t i l 2005. I n t h e

scena r i o s t u d i e d f o r t h i s a l t e r n a t i v e , new TRU waste f r om Rocky F l a t s ,

ANL-E, Mound, and the INEL would con t i nue t o be rece i ved and s t o r e d on

t h e TSA pads u n t i l t h e Federa l Repos i t o r y became a v a i l a b l e i n 2005. . . The Rocky F l a t s waste would be processed a t Rocky ~ l a t s . A l l t h e

o t h e r TRU waste would be processed a t t h e RWMC, beg inn ing w i t h t h e

campaign s t a r t u p i n 2005.

It m igh t be app rop r i a te t o s t o r e the new Rocky F l a t s waste a t

Rocky F l a t s , a f t e r processing, o r a t t h e s i t e o f t h e ~ e d e r a l Reposi- . .

t o r y . However, i t was assumed here t h a t t h e s to rage would he l oca ted ,

a t t h e RWMC.

The,,,.impact..on #pr.ocessi . . . ng . ,woul,d . . come .i;n t he 2005-2015 t ime : %

. . . ) . . , , . , :..,< . ,. < I ' .

per iod . . The, 20-yr accumu1,ation o f ?,ost-1,985 . . .w.aste,. p.1u.s t h e new waste , , j 7

f rom the INEL would have t o be worked o f f i n t h e . . . 10-,yr t ime ~ e r i o d ' , ' ' .:

. .

f rom 2005 t o 2015. The r e q u i r e d .. increment . . o f . .processing capac i ty i s . . . . . ,

computed as ,f 01 1 ows : .'

. . . . i

. .

Waste accumulated between 1985 and 1995: ' . ' 3 . . ' 33,000 f t / y r

Waste accumulated between ,1995 and 2005: . .

33,000 f t 3/yr 3

Waste generated a t the INEL between 2005 and 2015: 14,000 f t & , . TOTAL , . . 80,000 . . f t .. / y r

3 . "

The e f f e c t s on t h e storage requirements would be greater than

those f o r A l t e r n a t i v e 4 because the 1985-2005 waste p laced on t h e

TSA pads would no t have been processed, except f o r t h a t from Rocky

F l a t s . However, as mentioned above, t he waste i s assumed t o be s to red

on t h e TSA pads dur ing 1985 t o 2005, r a t h e r than i n an engineered

storage f a c i l i t y .

C.5 CONCLUSIONS

For the scenarios inves t iga ted , t he e f f e c t s o f t he post-1985 TRU

waste on t h e requ i red capac i t y o f processing f a c i l i t i e s contemplated

a t t he INEL would range f rom 6% t o 36%. A 10-yr campaign i s assumed

f o r waste processing. Another approach would be t o r e t a i n t h e same

capac i t y f o r the processing f a c i l i t y as t h a t requ i red f o r processing

t h e pre-1985 waste only, b u t t o lengthen t h e campaign by t h e percent-

age ind ica ted .

Themore important e f f e c t o f the post-1985 TRU waste would be t o

extend the ~ ~ e q u i r e d p e r i o d o f opera t ion f o r t h e processing f ac i 1 i-

t i e s . For .several scenarios, t he pe r iod o f extension would have no

foreseeable endpoint, because processing would be requ i red as long as

TRU waste cont inued t o be generated. Replacement o f a l l processing

equipment and f a c i l i t i e s would even tua l l y be requ i red .

The e f f ec t s on requiremints f o r ..20-.yretigi neefed storage' a t the

INEL would be s i gn i f i can t '('130% increase'\. F O ~ a1 1 d l t k r n i t i v e s ; no .. . .

requirements f o r i n t e r i m storage would e x i i t a f t e r 2005. (Note : To ''

simp1 i f y the presentat ion, instantaneous emptying o f storage f ac i 1 i - '' t i e s was assumed t o occur as soon as processing began. I n r e a l i t y ,

the emptying could take 10 yr, thus prolonging accordingly the length

o f t ime f o r which storage f a c i l i t i e s would be required.)

For A l ternat ives 1, 2, and 5, i n which no Federal Repository i s

projected, tqe e f f ec t s on disposal requirements a t the INEL would

extend i n t ime w i t h no foreseeable endpoint.

APPENDIX D

The f o l l o w i n g i s t he verbat im t e x t o f t h e "WIPP Acceptance C r i t e r i a

f o r Defense Low-Level TRU Waste, J u l y 1, 1977." These are the d r a f t

c r i t e r i a f o r waste acceptance a t t h e Waste I s o l a t i o n P i l o t P lant , a

proposed Federal Repository. Although the c r i t e r i a are sub jec t t o

change, they are presented here as background m a t e r i a l t o amp l i f y t h e

processing d iscussions i n the present repo r t .

WIPP ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA

FOR

DEFENSE LOW-LEVEL TRU WASTE

J u l y 1, 1977

This document de l ineates the acceptance c r i t e r i a proposed f o r defense

low- leve l TRU waste rece ived f o r storage a t t h e Waste I s o l a t i o n P i l o t

P lan t (WIPP). By in ten t - -and by ERDA d i rec t i ve - - these c r i t e r i a are

conservat ive; i t i s l i k e l y t h a t f u t u r e changes i n t h e c r i t e r i a w i l l be

i n the d i r e c t i o n o f l ess r e s t r i c t i v e s p e c i f i c a t i o n s . Changes w i l l be

made on l y when they can be j u s t i f i e d on the bas is of more complete

knowledge o f the behavior o f the s a l t s torage medium 'and o f t he waste

m a t e r i a l i t s e l f . "F ina l " pre-operat ional c r i t e r i a w i 11 probably n o t

be a v a i l a b l e be fore July , 1979.

I n t h i s document, "TRU waste" r e f e r s s p e c i f i c a l l y t o the s o l i d rad io -

a c t i v e waste described i n ERDA Manual Appendix 0511, P a r t I, para-

graphs B-18, 22, and 23 ( i n t e r p r e t e d here t o i nc lude Pu-238, b u t n o t

Pu-241, among t h e t ransuran ic isotopes) . "Low-level" r e f e r s t o waste

packages which e x h i b i t surface dose r a t e s no greater than

500 mremlhour, as defined i n Chapter 20 o f ERDA-76-43 (TAD).

The present c r i t e r i a have evolved from e a r l i e r d r a f t s through numerous

reviews by most o f t h e agencies invo lved i n the'management o f ERDA-

generated r a d i o a c t i v e wastes; the c o n t r i b u t i o n o f these agencies i s

g r a t e f u l l y acknowledged.

D- 1

I. DEFINITIONS

Low-Level TRU Waste: Any s o l i d waste ma te r ia l , o ther than h igh-

l e v e l waste, which i s contaminated w i t h l ong - l i ved alpha e m i t t e r s

t o the ex ten t t h a t , under the p rov i s ions o f ERDA Manual

Chapter 0511, i t i s no t s u i t a b l e f o r sur face b u r i a l , b u t which

e x h i b i t s s u f f i c i e n t l y low r a d i a t i o n l e v e l s (sur face dose r a t e

l e v e l s 5500 mremlhr) t h a t i t i s amenable t o hand l ing by

"contact" (as opposed t o "remote") methods.

Waste Container: The box o r drum, i n c l u d i n g any associated l i n e r

,and/or s h i e l d i n g ma te r ia l , which immediately surrounds (and i s

considered t o be an i n t e g r a l , disposable p a r t o f ) t h e waste ma-

t e r i a1 .

Waste Package: The f i n a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n o f the waste i n i t s con-

t a ine r , ready f o r emplacement i n a s u i t a b l y prepared storage

s i t e .

Overpack: A second l a y e r o f containment which may be requ i red

(and app l ied) by t h e WIPP operator because o f t h e mechanical

c o n d i t i o n or l e v e l o f sur face contaminat ion o f the waste con-

t a i ner.

Combustible Ma te r i a l s : M a t e r i a . 1 ~ which w i l l sus ta in combustion

when exposed t o a temperature of 1 3 0 0 ~ ~ ( 7 0 0 ' ~ ) f o r a p e r i o d o f

15 minutes o r less, i n atmosphere. air. (Examples o f combust ib le

m a t e r i a l s are paper, most p l a s t i c s , c l o t h , and wood.)

Gas-Producing Ma te r ia l s : Ma te r i a l s which produce gas du r ing

t h e i r decomposit ion by r a d i o l y s i s , py ro l ys i s , chemical reac t i on ,

o r b a c t e r i a1 decay. (Gas-produci ng mater i a1 s i nc lude v i r t u a l l y -

a l l combustibles and such non-c~ombustibles as concrete, steel;

and c e r t a i n process sludges. )

11. ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA

It i s ax iomat ic t h a t no acceptance c r i t e r i a document can ade-

qua te l y address a l l t h e spec ia l cases which may a r i s e i n t h e manage-

ment o f defense low- leve l TRU waste. The WIPP operator w i l l cooperate

w i t h waste generat ing agencies i n f o r m u l a t i n g waste t reatment and

packaging procedures which b r i n g speci a1 waste forms i n t o compl i ance

w i t h t h e s p i r i t , i f no t t h e l e t t e r , o f these c r i t e r i a .

A. WASTE FORM

1. Combustible Ma te r i a l s : The shipment o f ' l o w l e v e l TRU

waste t o t h e WIPP w i l l be coord ina ted on an ERDA-wide bas i s so

t h a t t h e t o t a l amount o f combust ib le m a t e r i a l i n a s i n g l e s torage

room does no t exceed 20 percent by volume ( b u t Sec t ion I I .A.2

a l so app l ies ) . I n t he conten t o f t h i s c r i t e r i o n , t he m a t e r i a l s

used i n t h e f a b r i c a t i o n o f DOT-7A and s i m i l a r non-metal con- .

t a i n e r s i s considered t o be combustible.

When necessary t o meet t h i s s p e c i f i c a t i o n , combust ible w a s t e ' w i l l '

be i n c i n e r a t e d or digested, us ing technology c u r r e n t a t the t i m e '

o f processing, t o conver t t h e combust ibles t o a chemica l l y s t a b l e

form .

I n o rder t o c o n t r o l the r a d i o l y t i c p roduc t ion o f flammable gases,

t h e TRU n u c l i d e conten t o f unprocessed combust ible waste i s l i m - 3 3

i t e d t o 2 C i l f t (70 C i / m ) o f alpha em i t t e rs .

2. Gas-Producing M a t e r i a l : The shipment of low- leve l TRU

waste t o the WIPP w i l l be coord inated on an ERDA-wide bas is so

t h a t t h e t o t a l amount o f combust ible and gas-producing m a t e r i a l s

i n a s i n g l e storage room does no t exceed 10 percent by weight.

I n t h e contex t o f t h i s c r i t e r i o n , t he m a t e r i a l s used i n t h e fab-

r i c a t i o n o f a l l present con ta iners and l i n e r s are considered t o

be gas-producing.

3. .Explosive and Pyrophorric Mater ia ls : 'Waste containi-ng ,

exp los ive or pyroph.oric .mater ia ls w i l l no t be.accepted f o r . ..

s torage a t t he WIPP. . . . , . . ,

4. Toxic Mater ia ls : Packages con ta in ing waste whose con-

s t i t u e n t s are known t o produce t o x i c fumes (e.g., by thermal

decomposition o r chemical r e a c t i o n w i t h o ther m a t e r i a l s i n the

same con ta ine r ) .when exposed t o f i r e temperatures up t o 1 3 0 0 ~ ~

( 7 0 0 ' ~ ) w i l l be prominent ly 1 abeled i n a manner p rescr ibed by t h e

WIPP operator . The term " t o x i c fumesu r e f e r s ' to gases and vapors

o f moderate and severe t o x i c i t y , as def ined i n Sect ion 9 o f "Dan-

gerous P roper t i es of I n d u s t r i a l Mater ia ls , " L i b r a r y o f Congress

Catalog Card Number 74-17275.

5. L i q u i d s : ' Waste con ta in ing f r e e l i q u i d s w i l l n o t be

accepted, f o r . storage a t t he WIPP. Process s ludges must e i t h e r be

d r i e d by heat ing o r mixed homogeneously w i t h an appropr ia te

d ry ing agent; i n e i t h e r case, the l i q u i d content o f the product '

should be c o n t r o l l e d t o minimize d i spe rsa l of t he waste i n a

hand1 i ng accident.

6. . S t a b i l i z a t i o n : F i n e l y divi .ded waste forms such as i n -

c i n e r a t o r res idues w i l l . . b e s t a b i l i z e d i n concrete o r g lass ( o r

such o ther mat r ices as may be approved by the WIPP operator) , , o r

p e l l e t i z e d , i n such a manner as t o m in im ize . the product ion o f

r e s p i r a b l e f i n e s i n a hand l ing accident. .. , L

7.. Thermal-Power Densi ty : I n d i v i d u a l low- leve l TRU waste . .

packages i n .which the average thermal power dens i t y exceeds . 3 3 0.1 . w a t t / f t .(3.5 watts/m ) . w i l l be prominent ly labe led i n a

manner p rescr ibed by t h e WIPP operator . . . . .

8. Nuclear C r i t i c a l i t y : The f i s s i l e i so tope content o f

low- leve l TRU waste i s l i m i t e d t o t h e values s p e c i f i e d i n DOT

Exemption No. 5948: 200 g of f i s s i l e i so tope per 55-gal lon

( 2 1 0 - l i t e r ) o r l a r g e r drum, 100 g per 30-gal lon ( 1 1 5 - l i t e r ) drum,

3 3 and Gt3g/ft (200 g/m ) in boxes. '(Note.cthat Scction II.k.7 1 imits the~concen t ra t ion of heat source plutonium t o about 1, g ' . . .

3 per 55-gallon drum, 0.5 g per 30-gallon drum, and 0.2 g / f t . - 3

( 6 g/m ) in boxes. )

B. WASTE CONTAINER

1.. Dimensions: The la rges t waste container .which 'can be + . .

accommodated ins ide the WIPP low-l.evel hois t cage i s '8 f e e t x: 12 f e e t x 9 f e e t high (2.4m x 3.7m x 2.7m high), including han-' ..

dli'ng appurtenances. The use, of waste containers .smaller than .

the DOT.17C 55-gallon (210- l i t e r ) drum i s discouraged but n o t , 2 . .

prohibited. . .'. . ,

2. Handling Appurtenances: All low-level TRU waste con-

t a ine r s must be provided with c l ea t s , o f f s e t s or .chines which

permit handling by means ofafork trucks. L i f t ing rings..and. sim-

i l a r handling devices are permissible provided they are recessed or hinged in a manner which permits stacking in a*c lo se away. , :

3. Materials of Construction: Metal containers are pre-

ferred; wooden and , p l a s t i c conta iners . are permitted. In . a l l

cases', the materials used in the fabr icat ion of waste containers

are subject t o the l imi ta t ions fo r combustible and gas-producing

materials defined in Sections' II.A.l and II.A.2.

4. St ructural Design: The s t ruc tura l design of a l l low-

1 eve1 TRU 'waste containers must meet the requirements f o r Type A

packages as outlined in 49CFR 173.398b,and, in .add i t ion , must. . . :

permit- the stacking of f u l l y loaded containers on an empty con-

t a iner of the same type, t o an overall height of 12 f t (3.7m):;

5. Liners: The use of drum or box l i ne r s i s permitted when

required because of the physical or chemical propert ies of the

contained waste mate r ia l . . When used, the l i ne r s should be made

o f materi-als which minimize the r a t e and t o t a l quan t i t y o f gas

prdduced as a r e s u l t o f r a d i o l y t i c , py ro l y t i c and b a c t e r i a l de-

composit ion;~Sections I I . A . l and II.A.2, l i m i t i n g the use o f .

combustible and gas-producing mater ia ls , apply t o l i n e r mate-

r i a l s . The use o f halogenated p l a s t i c s such as PVC i s d i s -

couraged but not proh ib i ted.

. .

1. Weight: The weight o f a s ing le low- level TRU waste

package i s l i m i t e d t o 25,000 pounds (11400 kg), the capaci ty of

the WIPP low-level ho is t .

2. Surface Contamination: The maximum permissib le l eve l s

o f loose p lus f i x e d su r f ace contamination (above which the waste

package w i l l be decontaminated o r overpacked a t the expense o f

the shipper) are as spec i f i ed i n 49CFR 173.397:

. .

Maximum Permissible Loose Plus Contaminant Fixed Contamination Level

u ~ i / c m ~ d i s/min-cm2

Natural or depleted uranium and natura l thorium:

B - Y

A l l other B-Y em i t t i ng radionucl ides

A l l ott ier a em i t t i ng radionucl ides

3. penet ra t ing Radiat ion: The dose r a t e from penet ra t ing

r a d i a t i o n a t the surface o f an i nd i v i dua l waste package may no t

exceed 500 mrem/hour. Averaged over the waste packages i n a

given t ranspor t vehicle, the surface dose r a t e may not exceed

200 mrem/hour.

2 I . . . - . ~ . . , ; ;;,:.:.. ' .;, < : -< . . , " '

An addi t'i o&l. '1 i m i t apbl i'es t o age&; e s w h ~ ch cj6neiat'g inore than ' I . ' :. . t * . 3 . . . 3 : : ... - <

5000 f t (140 m ) o f l d w - l e v e l TRU. has te ' per , : . yea?: av'eraijedi "

3. .~ .

over t he waste packages sh i i bed i h a g i v e n quar ter , t he s l r h c e " :, . , . , '. . . . . . . . . . . . . ,

dose r a t e may no t exceed 10 mremlhour. . . . . . . .

.. ' . . , . ' .

4. Label inq: Each waste package' riili' be u n i q u e l y iden-

t i f i e d by means o f a l a b e l which i s permanently attached t o the . . 8 .

con ta i ner i n a conspicuous l oca t i on . 1nf ormati dn obta inab le from, I t he l a b e l i t s e l f and f rom the records p e r t i n e n t t o the waste 1

, .

package w i l l i nc lude t h e fo l l ow ing : '

Label . .

- Package i d e n t i f i c a t i o n number ( t o be standardized) \

- Waste generat ing agency

- Date o f ' packaging .

- Rad ia t ion l eve l s : mrem/hour o f neutrons and gammas, a t the

s u r f ace and a t a p o i n t 1 'm tram the s u r f ace ...

- w e i g h t ( i n pounds i n d . k g )

111. APPENDIX: RATIONALE FOR ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA

A. WASTE FORM

1. Combustible Ma te r i a l s : The permiss ib le volume percent '

of combust ible i s der ived as fo l l ows : . " .

a. A 4 f t x 4 f t x 7 f t plywobd box conta ins 350 g . . . . . 3

(148 C i ) o f pl'utonium.' . I . . . . . . _ . . .

1 I I .

b. The f r a c t i o n a l a i rbo rne re lease due t o burn ing con-

tami nated waste i s ,.0.05% (PNWL-B-27L.). . . , , . . . . . . . . . . , .

3 c. The a i r f l o w through a r e p o s i t o r y room i s 17 m /sec.

..d. A f i r e i s i n i t i a t e d by t h e detonator' o f exp los i ve

gases, w i t h r u p t u r e o f the associated boxes.

e. The burn ing t ime o f a s i n g l e box i s 30 minutes. 'Th is

corresponds t o a f i r e propagat ion r a t e of 0.07 cm/sec,

a va lue which i s cons i s ten t w i t h expe r imen ta l l y de ter -

mined ra tes . . . - r

f. he maximum body burden f o r p lu ton ium i s

between 0.04 x and 0.1 x lom6 C i , dgpending on . .

t h e date o f p u b l i c a t i o n .

-4 3 g. The human b rea th ing r a t e i s 3.47 x 10 m /sec.

( a ) and ( b ) imp ly t h a t a box re leases 0.074 C i ( a t a r a t e o f 4 'x

Ci/sec i n a 30-minute f i r e ) .

3 From (c ) , the a i r a c t i v i t y i s 2.4 x lom6 ~ i l m .

From (g) , t he exposure r a t e i s 8.3 x 10 -9

r . -lo = 10 Ci/sec.

. . . . . .

From ( f ) , t he t ime t o reach maximum pe rm iss ib le body burden i s

f rom 40 t o 100 seconds (about 1 t o 2 minutes, a reasonable t ime

f o r an i n d i v i d u a l downstream from the f i r e t o i s o l a t e h imse l f

f rom the .hazardous environment).

I n order t o con ta in t he f i r e and reduce i t s impact on associated . .

boxes, t h e combust ib le boxes are stacked among non-combustible

boxes i n an a r r a y which i s o l a t e s the combust ibles (s to rage rooms

are designed f o r a 3-h igh s tack ing ) :

. . . . . * a , . = . . I " . . . . ,

Edge contact allowed, no combustibles i n t op lS.yerer

. .. . . * . . x denotes combustible boxes 1.; ' . '

- . -

Top Layer , . , I . , ) ' . : I . . . . .

. .

In t h i s array, 9/27 = 33% of

, . , the , boxes . can be combustible . .

... .

Middle Layer

Bottom Layer

. .

Corner contact allowed, no combustibles i n t op . l aye r

x .denotes combustible boxes.. .

I n t h i s ar ray, 5/27 = 19% of t h e hoxes can be combust ib le

M idd le Layer

~ o t t o m Layer . .

For conservat ism, t h e corner -con tac t a r r a y i s chosen; t h e permis-

s i b l e pe rcen t o f combust ib les i s %20%.

The a l l owab le f r a c t i o n o f ' c o m h u s t i h l e s i s expressed as a volume

percent , r a t h e r than as a weiqht percent , t o emphasize t h e impor-

tance o f t r a s h compaction; t h i s reduces t he f i r e hazard and a t

t h e same t ime saves s toraae volume.

LASL exper iments have shown t h a t d u r i n g the 20-50 years o f a c t i v e

WIPP operation,. hydrogen genera t ion f rom t h e r a d i o l y s i s o f com-

b u s t i b l e s can be h e l d t o a non-hazardous l e v e l by l i m i t i n g t he 3 alpha a c t i v i t y of comhust ih le TRU waste t o 2 C i / f t .

2. Gas-Producing M a t e r i a l s : Th is c r i t e r i o n i s p r e d i c a t e d

on t he d e s i r e t o c o n t r o l p r e s s u r i z a t i o n o f t he (decommissioned)

r e p o s i t o r y due t o long- term gas bu i ld -up . The underground op-

en ings are expected. t o c l o s e by sa . l t creep i n , a per iod, f rom

200-2000 years, a t ime which i s s h o r t compared w i t h t h e t ime

d u r i n g which gas w i l l he produced i n r a d i o l y t i c , ~ y r o l y t i c , chem-

i c a l , and b a c t e r i a l processes. The gas permeah iq i t y o f t h e s a l t

f o rma t i on i s p r e s e n t l y unknown, b u t i s es t imated t o be smal l

enough to allow significant accurr~uldtion of gas. Gas prcssure

may cause some re-inflation of the underground workings. The amount of re-inflation which can occur before gas fracture of the

geologic formation results is an open question. It is not clear

that this essentially hydrostatic environment would not allow

sufficient plastic f 1 ow to accommodate whatever gas is produced. Current thinking, however, is that less than 10 percent re-.

inflation may cause gas fracture of the waste storage, horizon.

If total gas generation can be shown experimentally to be low

enough and/or if the gas permeability of the salt medium is found

to be high enough, then the permissible amount of gas-generating materials can be revised upward from the present conservative, ,

va 1 1 . 1 ~ .

Estimation of gas leakage, using the calculations af Cheverton, Claiborne and Evans (ORNL-TM-4569.), suggest that the salt has a ,

permeability coefficient which is sufficiently low that. a sub-

stantial amount of gas will be retained. Laboratory and -- in situ

measurement of salt permeability i$ a first-priority requirement;

this has, been initiated at Sandi a ~ahoratories.

Assumptions . . ,

a. Volume of storage room plus associated tunnel = 2 ;

(356,400) ft3.

3 b. Volume of drums in storage room = 92,400 ft .

c. Volume of void space to be backfilled with crushed 3 salt = 264,000 ft .

d. Volume of tunnel to be backfilled with crushed salt =

356,400 ft3.

e. , To ta l i n i t i a l v o i d volume . . . - vo id space i n b a c k f i l l e d , , , . .

. . s a l t i n storage. room and . % tunnel + one-half volume o f

drums. - - - . .a

< - . . . , 5 f . ~ i t r o g e n . i ,n . mine con t r i bu tes 2 x 1 0 no1 es of, N2.

. . .

g. Gas product ion (o ther than Hz produced by corro-

. . : s ion of steel)--i.e.., t h e capac i t y .o f t h e , t r a s h . 3

t o produce gas--is 450 rn (ST')/~OOO kg (%2 x

l o 4 moles/1000 kg) .

' , . . - . . . . . . .

i. Gas temperature = 4 0 ' ~ .

. .

The number of m e t r i c tons o f gas-producing waste requ i red t o f i 11

t h e ava i l ab le vo id space w i t h ,gas a t hyd ros ta t i c pressure

(82 bars) and l i t h o s t a t i c pressure (152 bars) a r e tabu la ted below

f o r back f i l .1 dens i t i es o f 50%.and 80%. ,

, . . Gas Volume Required f o r P=82 Bars

, . '

~ e q u i r e d for ~ ~ 1 5 2 Bars (Percent o f Me t r i c Tons I Met r i c Tons

O r i g i n a l Void,. I . o f ,Gas-Pro- , o f Gas-Pro- Space Moles o f Gas ducing Waste

'

' I . , Moles of das ducing Waste

. . . . . . . '. c'

50% B a c k f i l l . ,

Dens i ty

80% B a c k f i l l ! ' ' . ' I % . .. Dens i ty . _ . . , _ . . . . . I

For re - in f la t ion of the mine t o 1 0 ' ' ~ e r c e n t .of . t he or iginal void volume, the amount '.of gasiproducing waste required t o produce a gas pressure of 152 bars (with a backf i 11, density of 50 -percent) i s 150 metric tons. This i s equivalent t o about 1000 55-gallon drums (@I50 kg per' drum)--or 8 ( = l o ) percent by wei.gh.t of the '

t o t a l room capaci ty . . ,

3 . Explosive and Pyrophoric Materials: A recent sbrvey by Mound Laboratory indicates t ha t no ERDA agency co'ntemp,l a tes shipping explosive or pyrophoric wastes fo r storage a t the' WIPP. Therefore, the categorical exclusion of such materials causes no imrnedi a t e inconvenience fo r the' waste generators,. and i t assures proper planning to avoid possible fu tu r e con f l i c t s with t h i s

. . cr i t e r ion . I

4. Toxic Materials: This c r i t e r i on does not bar material having a potenti a1 fo r 'producing vtij'xic fumes im a f i r e envi'ron-- ment; i t merely assures t ha t the WIPP' operator wil l 'be aware of' '

t h e , presence of such materials , so t ha t he can take ex t ra ' pre- . .

cautions against exposure of t ha t waste t o highf temperature.' . 5. . Liquids: The intention here , i s t o allow a waste gen-

I 1 .

e r a t o r t o exerc.ise his judgement a s t o iow much 1 iiquid t o leave. . .,, . '

i'n , t h e ' f i nal waste form. From the standpoint -of the 1.ong-term ' . ' [ . . . . . . ,

sa fe ty of the W I P P , i t i s c l ea r ly desi rable t o i l e a v 6 as l i t t l e . "

l iquid as possible in the waste: the l iquid can serve as b0 th .a leaching agent and a t ranspor t medium. On the other hand, a '

' *

completely dewatered and otherwise unstabil ized sludge would . . * . i

re lease an unacceptably and unneces.sarily large amount of f i ne s

in a handling accident. As a guideline, i t i s observed t h a t the new Waste Treatment Facil i t y a t Rocky F l a t s wil l reduce sludges

t o a pe l le t i zed form containing 5 to 10 percent sorbed water. 1

6. S t a b i l i z a t i o n : Th is s p e c i f i c a t i o n has both short-and

long-term safety imp l ica t ions . The short - term concern i s , again,

t h e re lease of f ines i n a hand1 i n g accident. The long-term con-

cern i s t h e l e a c h a b i l i t y o f t he waste form;:. this i s t a k i n g on a

greater: and g rea te r ' imdortance i n ,Sandi a ' s r i s k - assessment ac-

t i v i t i e s . Unfor tunate ly , present technology w i 11 'no t support a

meaningful ' s p e c i f i c a t i o n f o r leachab i . l i t y , bu t i t should not be

dismissed as an ob jec t ive . By way o f p rov id ing reassurance t o ,

waste generators, i t i s po in ted out tha t , f rom the standpoint o f

leachabi 1 i ty, o rd ina ry concrete i s probably -adequate.'as a , s tab i -

l i z i n g mat r ix ; g lass i s be t te r , and recent work a t Rocky F l a t s

i nd i ca tes t h a t "gl ass i f i c a t i o n " o f i n c i n e r a t o r res idues i s fea-

s i b l e b o t h ' t e ~ h n o l o ~ i c a l ly and economically.. . .

7. Thermal Power Density: Th is c r i t e r i o n ' i s based on t h e

power dens i t y corresponding t o 200 grams o f weapons2grade p l u t o -

nium (or 1 gram o f heat source p lutonium) i n a 55-gal drum 3 con ta in ing .6 ft o f waste. The i n t e r e s t i s i n i d e n t i f y i n g

e s p e c i a l l y "hot" waste packages so t h a t they can be s tored among

packages which conta in r e l a t i v e l y l i t t l e combustible and gas-

producing mate r ia l . Thermal considerat ions i n t h e WIPP do no t

impose a , r e a d i l y i d e n t i f i a b l e l i m i t - o n power density; i n a prac-

t i c a l sense, the. upper : l i m i t . l i s determined by shipping reg-

u l a t i ons and the economics o f lp l 'u toni um recovery. I , . . . . .

8. Nuclear C r i t i c a l i t y : Shipping regu la t i ons ( s p e c i f -

i c a l l y , DOT Exemption Noi.5948) alone are s u f f i c i e n t t o prevent

c r i t i c a l i t y i nc iden ts i n t h e WIPP--unle'ss the re i s d i s s o l u t i o n .

and reconcent ra t ion :of .the f i s s i l e species. T h i s . i s a h i g h l y

improbable scenario, bu t one whose importance cannot be evaluated

u n t i 1: more sophist i ,cated nucl i d e t ranspor t codes are a v a i l able. , .. . . ,

B. WASTE CONTAINER . . . . ._ .

. . .. . . ' .

.l. Dimensions: Except for a few very 1 arge i tems of decommissioning waste, container. sizes will never approach .the 8 ft .x .

12 ft x 9 ft limit imposed by the size of the WIPP low-leve1,TRU. .

waste hoist cage. As a rare perturbation of normal operating , .

procedures, it may be possible to rig very large items .below the . ~ .

hoist cage. . .

, ?,

2. Handling Appurtenances: The justification f.or this , . ... . \ . '

specification is self-evident. . , 0 . . . . ,

. . ., - '

3. Materials of Construction: All container materials,of .

practical interest are potential gas producers; metal is the least objectionable from this standpoint. Rocky Flats is not .

considering the use of an all-Fiberglass box; LASL suggests that the Fiberglass (actually, Fibergl ass-reinforced polyest,er.) should . . be treated with antimony oxide as a .fire retardant. Any con- .

tainer material is acceptable, .as long as the conditions of .

Sections II.A.l and II.A.2 are satisfied.

4. .Structural Design: At a.June 2, 1977, meeting at Mound Laboratory, representatives of Mound, LASL ARHCO (for OW I ) and Sandia concluded that there is no need for the struc,tuyal design . of TRU waste containers to exceed the requirements of 49CFR.

5. Liners: The position taken in these criteria is that, the decision to use or not to use a liner should rest w'ith the , . ::

waste generator. There is no requirement for container integrity beyond the time of empl acement in the storage rooms, but' survival .

of packages containing unneutralized acids or bases for even that long might well depend on the use of a liner. Alternatively, the

waste generator might choose to neutralize the acid or base before drying or sorbing it, and omit the liner.

1. ' weigh<: he capacity of the WIPP lbw-level TRU waste hoist is 25,000 pounds--a value determined on the basis of Sandials best engineering judgement. Surface and underground hand1 ing equipment is designed to handle' a single 25,000-pound

. - waste

2. Surface Contamination: The WIPP plan to inspect in- .

coming waste packages by automated direct alpha counting makes it

impossible to distinguish between fixed and removable surf ace contamination. Admittedly, if all waste packages arrived with maximum permissible contamination levels, and if all the surface contamination were removable, there could be a serious airborne contamination problem throughout the WIPP low-level TRU waste facility. Historically, this has not happened, and the fact that the WIPP is prepared to accommodate occasional (re1 at ively) highly contaminated waste packages will not provide an incentive for waste generators to alter their present practices.

3. Penetrating Radiation: The major producers of defense TRU waste have indicated that there is a very real advantage, in terms of processing and'packaging requirements, in treating packages with surface dose rates up to 500 mrem/hr as "low-level" waste. Records shows that there will be relatively few such packages, and that a great majority of the packages will exhibit surface dose rates less than the 10 mrem/hr value used as the basis for the WIPP design. Automated inspection equipment will divert "hot" packages for special handling, so that no serious perturbation of routing operation is anticipated.

4, Labeling: Labeling requirements will be more fully developed in consultation with the waste generators. There is no intention to place an unnecessary burden on shippers, but it is

considered important to be able to distinguish power reactor fuel

reprocessing waste, for example, from weapons program waste. It is likely . : that a coding system similar (or identical) to that in

use at INEL will be adoped. . .

5. Color Codinq: Again, further development work is necessary. AS noted in the criterion itself, the color-coding system .

. will be compatible with systems already in use, and should not pose a serious problem for, waste shippers.

APPENDIX E

METHODOLOGY FOR CALCULATING DOSE COMMITMENT

/I E. 1 INTRODUCTION

This appendix discusses the methodology used t o c a l c u l a t e t he

dose commitments ( n f t e n c a l l e d "doses", f o r b r e v i t y , i n Sect ions 12

and 13) expected f rom normal operat ions (Sec t ion 12) and f rom postu-

l a t e d acc idents (Sec t ion 13). The d iscuss ion inc ludes a i rborne t r a n s -

po r t , groundwater t ranspor t , i n d i v i d u a l dose commitment, popu la t i on

dose commitment, and t ime- in teg ra ted e f f e c t s .

Ca l cu la t i on o f t he consequences o f r a d i o n u c l i d e re leases r e -

qu,ir-es consl i ler.a. t ia i~ of transport f rom t h e p o i n t o f r e leasc t o t h e

var ious l o c a t i o n s a t which members o f the p u b l i c cou ld rece i ve a dose

commitment. Such t r a n s p o r t cou ld be e i t h e r through t h e a i r o r through

groundwater systems. (Except where i n d i c a t e d otherwise, pathways

i n v o l v i n g surface water t r a n s p o r t and animal and p l a n t t r a n s p o r t were

found t o be i n s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n s by comparison. )

Ex terna l doses t o t h e p u b l i c would r e s u l t f rom ex te rna l exposure

t o the a i rborne rad ionuc l i des and t o rad ionuc l i des deposi ted on t h e

ground. I n t e r n a l dose commitments would r e s u l t f rom i n h a l a t i o n o f

t he i n i t i a l a i rborne rad ionuc l ides, i n h a l a t i o n o f resuspended r a d i o -

nuc l ides , i n g e s t i o n o f p l a n t o r animal mat te r con ta in ing rad ionuc l i des

f o r m e r l y deposited on the ground, and/or i nges t i on o f water contami-

nated w i t h rad ionuc l ides .

E.2 ATMOSPHERIC TRANSPORT AND DISPERSION

The most important t r a n s p o r t mechani sm f o r r a d i onuc! ides would be

I the wind t h a t cou ld c a r r y rad ionuc l i des t o popu la t i on centers, a g r i -

I c u l t u r a l areas, o r g raz ing lands on or around t h e INEL. As noted i n

I Subsection 3.3, meteoro log ica l mon i to r i ng and research programs have

I been conducted a t t h e INEL f o r more than 20 y r . I n recen t years,

simultaneous measurements o f wind speed and d i r e c t i o n have been made

a t numerous l o c a t i o n s on t h e Upper Snake R ive r P la in . These data have

been used as i n p u t t o an improved model o f atmospheric d i spe rs ion f o r

t h e INEL and surrounding areas.

The model and associated computer code (MESODIF) ( S t a r t and

Wendell 1974) use a boundary l a y e r f i e l d o f wind vectors. Measured

temporal and s p a t i a l v a r i a t i o n s i n t h e w i n d . speed and d i r e c t i o n were

used t o c a l c u l a t e plume t ranspor t and d ispers ion . The in f luences o f

l o c a l topography are . i n d i r e c t l y . incorpora ted through simultaneous wind

measurements a t many 1 ~ o c a t i o n ~ ' ~ c r o s s the p l a i n . The present model

has achieved two major improvements over t he convent ional s ing le - : '

s t a t i o n wind rose technique. F i rs t , ' the greater concentrat ions r e -

s u l t i n g f rom.s tagna t i on o r r ' ec i r cu l ' a t i on o f a i rborne e f f l u e n t s are

inc luded i n t h e model, s ince the ' hour-by-hour ' t r anspor t o f t h e e f f 1 u-

en t was modeled us ing .w ind f i e l d data. second, disper.sion parameters

are adjusted h o u r l y t o r e f l e c t changes i n atmospheric s t a b i l i t y . . ..,

. . . .

The s i x-year average ( 1 972-1 977) r e 1 a t i ve t ime-i n tegra ted concen- 2 3

, . t r a t i o n ($/Q, h r /m ) was ca l cu la ted us ing MESODIF. Consistent

w i t h Sect ion 12, average metegro log ica l ' cond i t i ons .were used t o calcu-

1 a te the consequences o f acc identa l a i rborne r e 1 eases' i n Sect i o n 13.

F igu re E-1 shows t h e c a l c u l a t e d values o f +/Q f o r t h e INEL and sur-

rounding areas. The r e s u l t s are "for a stack re lease from an INEL

l o c a t i o n d ischarg ing gaseous e f f l u e n t s a t .a r i e f f e c t i v e he igh t o f 76 m

(250 f t ) . Though not shown i n F igure E-1, t he maximum +/Q was found 2 3 t o be 180x10-~ h r /m .

. .

3 The atmospheric d i l u t i o n fac to rs , x/Q (sec/m ), requ i red f o r

dose commitment c a l cu l a t ions were der ived f rom the re1 a t i v e t ime-

i n teg ra ted concentrat ions by t a k i n g the appropr ia te $/Q and d i v i d i n g

by t h e number o f hours (8760) i n a year. The r e s u l t i n g number i s t h e 3 annual average atmospheric d i l u t i o n f a c t o r i n hr/m . By conver t ing

hours t o seconds, t h e atmospheric d i l u t i on fac to r , x/ ,Q, becomes :

DUBOIS 7 4 7 ' .

Fig. E-1 Average annual time-integrated c ncentrations 1972-1977. ult'pl isopleth values by for correct magnitude !M 3 3 In hr /m . )

3 Annual average air concentrations, X (Cilm 1, for each radionucl ide released were calculated by mu1 tiplying X/() by the annual average release rate, Q (Cilhr). The values calculated were maximum values, since no credit was taken for removal processes such as dry and wet deposition and radioactive decay. The mean annual x/O values are given in Table E-1. The sectors are numbered in a clockwise direction with the first sector bordering on the north. The X/Qts were determined for the midpoint of each 10-mile radial interval.

E. 3 DEPOSITION AND SCAVENGING

Transport of airborne mater i a1 to ground surf aces was calculated using Equation (E-2) below. The equation was developed to describe the transport of particulate radioactive fallout from air to ground surfaces (Pelletier and Voilleque 1971). Both wet and dry transport processes are considered. The average daily deposition rate is related to the mean air concentration by

where

2 D = deposition rate fCi/m -sec) of particulates Vd = empirical constant for dry deposition of airborne

particulates (m/sec) g = . empirical constant for. precipitation scavenging of

airborne particulates '(mlcm of rain) r = average rainfall rate (cm of rainlsec)

3 X ' = average air concentration (Ci/m ) of particulate material.

. . Distance (miles)

.. 10-20 . . . Sector . 0- 10 , .. '30-40

('a) Sectors 'are numbered in a clockwi'se direction with the first sector bordering on the north. X/Q is determined for the midpoint of each 10-mi le radial interval.

The daily buildup of par t iculate ,radionucl ides on the surface was

computed using Equation (E-3) :

in which

2 S = surface concentration (Cilm ) of deposited material

. = - radiological decay ra te constant for the radionuclide

, ( sec- l ) . ' I

The values used for the parameters in Equations (E-2) and (E-3) are

l i s t ed below. To ref lec t differences in the assumed s ize of particu- !

l a tes i n . the effluent from normal and accidental releases, different

values for . V d were used for the calculations.

Vd = 0.01 mlsec (accident conditions: par t ic les 1.0 pm . AMAD) . . .

0.005, m/sec (normal operation: par t ic les 0.3 pm AMAD.)

g = 4530 mlcm of rain (Voilleque and Pel let ier 1974)

. s .

r . = 6.8 x cm rain/sec (based on 8.5 in. ra inlyr , as

g~ive.n in Subsection 3.3.3). ~

I . .

, . I E.4 DISTRIBUTION OF RAD,IONUCLIDES IN THE SOIL

3 . . ' . I !

The dis.tribut.ion of a radi'onuclide in the superficial soi l layer

has frequently been found to de,crease expon~ntial l y with increasing . .

depth. Tbe.distribution can be approximated b y Equation'(€-4)' I

in which

z = distance below the soil surface (cm, positive downward) 2 S(z) = areal concentration (Ci/m ) a t depth z

. . ' ~ ( 0 ) = a rea l concent ra t ion ( ~ i l m ? ) a t the 'surface -1 .

a = a parameter which charac ter izes the d i s t r i b u t i o n ' ( c m ).

The l / a (cm) i s termed t h e r e l a x a t i o n l e n g t h o f t h e d i s t r i -

bu t ion .

I n es t ima t i ng the long-term a c t i v i t y d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f t r ans -

u ran ics i n INEL s o i l s , i t was assumed t h a t f u t u r e downward m i g r a t i o n ' I

cou ld be adequately approximated by the l o c a l observat ions o f f a l l -

out . Measurements have been made o f t h e concent ra t ions o f p lu ton ium

f rom atmospheric f a l l o u t a t var ious depths below the sur face o f t he

INEL. The data f rom 1-cm la-yers o f s o i l i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e d i s t r i b u -

t i o n o f Pu-239 i s charac ter ized by' a r e l a x a t i o n l eng th o f about 2 cm.

The depos i t ion and downward m iq ra t i on have been underway f o r about

30 y r . The chemical and t r a n s p o r t t h a t , y i e ld the p r e s e n t l y '

observed d i s t r i b u t i o n s are no t w e l l understood. However, t h e d i s -

t r i b u t i o n s o f p lu tonium i n undis turbed s o i l a t oth'er l o c a t i o n s . . ,

(Essington and Fowler 1977) c & a1 so be descr ibed u s ' i n g ' ~ q u a -

Approximately 40% o f t he f a l l o u t p lu tonium i n the INEL s o i l

l i e s i n t he top cm. About 60% o f t he t b t a i depos i t i on occurred i n '

the 1962-64 per iod . Much o f the remainder was deposited" be fore t h a t

t ime. An approximate d e s c r i p t i o n o f . . . t h e r a t e o f movement downward 2' '

f rom the top 1-cm laye r i s : 20% o f the t o t a l p lu ton ium has mdvedfrom

t h e top l a y e r t o lower l aye rs i n about 15 yr. Thus, t h e decrease of

p lu tonium concent ra t ion has been somewhat more t h a n l%lyr. Thus, a 1 '

r a t e o f 1%/yr was used i n t h e present study. This r a t e i s substan- .

ti a l l y smal ler than t h e ' exponent ia l m i i t a t i o n r a t e c o n s t i n t ' o f d. l 3 / y r

f o r f a l l o u t plutonium, est imated by Jakubick (1976) f o r 5-cm t h i c k ,

p a r t i a l l y sa tu ra ted l aye rs o f n a t u r a l so'il: However, the s o i l mois-

t u r e conten t used was l a r g e r than t h a t f o r t h e r e l a t i v e l y a r i d INEL

environment.

E.5 RESUSPENSION OF DEPOSITED MATERIAL

Over l ong pe r i ods o f t ime, t h e resuspension o f depos i ted m a t e r i a l

becomes an impor tan t mechanism by which r a d i o n u c l i d e s a re a v a i l a b l e

f o r i n t a k e v i a i n h a l a t i o n . Two d i f f e r e n t approaches were used t o

determine resuspension, one f o r t h a t due t o normal re leases and one

f o r t h a t due t o acc iden ta l re leases . The method used by Healy (1974)

was used f o r normal re leases. WASH-1400 (NRC 1975) methodology was

used f o r acc iden ta l re leases. (The two approaches were used because

of f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h and a v a i l a h i l i t y o f the computat ional t o o l s by

d i f f e r e n t eva lua to r groups conduc t ing d i f f e r e n t p o r t i o n s o f t h e

s tudy. The use o f s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t approaches a p p l i e s a l s o t o o t h e r

aspects o f t h e dose commitment methodology. For t h i s r e p o r t , t h e two

approaches would be expected t o y i e l d s i m i l a r r e s u l t s f o r the same

p h y s i c a l s i t u a t i o n s . ) '

Healy (1974) has examined sev6ra l ways i n which i n h a b i t a n t s i n

and nea? areas contaminated w i t h p l u ton ium cou ld r e c e i v e r a d i a t i o n

doses as a consequence o f con tac t w i t h contaminated s o i l . Resuspen-

s i o n o f su r f ace m a t e r i a l was found t o be t h e most impor tan t exposure

pathway. Another d e t a i l e d ' r e v i e w o f the sur face contaminat ion problem

by t h e Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency (EPA 1977) con f i rmed resuspen-

s i o n as the c r i t i c a l pathway.

Two models were used t o es t ima te r a d i a t i o n doses t o persons as

t h e r e s u l t o f resuspension o f depos i ted m a t e r i a l . For t h e l o c a l area

( w i t h i n $0 m i l e s o f the r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s i t e ) , t he mod i f i ed mass load-

i n g approach (EPA 1977), w i t h a i r bo rne p a r t i c u l a t e concen t ra t i ons

measured i n t he INEL v i c i n i t y (ERDA 1977c), was used t o p r e d i c t l o c a l

concen t ra t i ons o f resuspended nuc l i des . The f o l l o w i n g equat ion was

used t o compute the a i r concen t ra t i on o f resuspended a c t i v i t y

where

X = concen t ra t i on o f resuspended r a d i o a c t i v i t y i n 3 a i r ( f C i / m )

3 = concen t ra t i on o f dus t i n a i r (ug/m )

1 = areal concentration of radioactivity in the

top 1 cm of soil ( )~~i /rn ' )

1.5 = enrichment factor ( E P A 1977)

6.67x10-' = ~ r o d u c t of several constants:

For INEL and boundary locations, the average airborne mass loading, 3 X d , averages 28 ug/m ( E R D A 1977c), sn the relationship (E-5).

becomes

The observed, average mass loading ref leCts local variations in snow

cover, soil moisture, drtd w i r d speed, even though such variations

cannot be considered expl ici t ly .

For populations a t greater distances, the resuspension ra te model

(Healy 1974) was used with the average areal concentration of ac t iv i ty

in the top cm 6f soil ( S , ) to obtain a resuspension source term for

long-distance diffusion c.alculations. The area was considered t o be

large enough that no correction for a f i n i t e source was necessary. .

Healy (1974) examined a variety of data and found that t b r e s u s -

pension ra te cdnstant K (sec- l) varied from 10" to for

freshly deposited ac t iv i ty and 10-12 to 10-I' for older deposits. In these calculations, an intermediate value of K ' = 10-lo sec-I

was used, which probably overestimates the long-term impact of resus-

pensi on.

The surface contamination S1 i s not constant with time.

Three processes reduce the amount available for resuspension a t

time t: (1) radioactive decay, ( 2 ) downward migration out of the

t o p 1-cm layer, and ( 3 ) resuspension i t s e l f . These effects are

described by ,Equation (E-7) for an existing surface deposit:

in which .

.. . ' . . . . . . . - . 0 . . . .)

S1 = average areal concentration in the top 1-cm layer

( ~ . i / m Z ) , :

. .

- . , . . . . , . . - radioactive decay ra te constant ( y r - I ) , , . . 'r A m = downward migration ra te constant (yr"'), and * , I. .

A R = resuspension ra te constant (yr"). . . . . . . .

. . Integration yields . , . . . .

. . I .

where . . . .

2 'lo = average in ' i t i a l areal concentrat,ion (Ci/m ).

Equation (E-7) was used-:to descri'be the time .dependence of the resus- '..

pension source term in calculations of the local and dis tant impacts . . of resuspended soil contami nation.

For accidental re1 eases, the resuspensi on of deposited par.-

t i c l e s was modeled based on WASH-1400 ( N R C 1975) methodology. The i

t ime-dependent resuspension factor , K ( t ) , was mu1,tipl ied by btle sur- , , . '

2 face concentration (Ci/m ) to determine' the local . a i r concentra- ' . 3 tion (Ci/m ). The- factor , K ( t 1 , i s : , . . " . . . . .

. . . .

K ( t 1 = K O exp f - h k t ) + K, (E -9 ) . , . , * . .

where . . . , . %

KO = resuspension factor i n i t i a l l y a f te r deposition , .

m-11

= .equilibrium resuspension factor (10 -9 m- l , Ke - . .

t : = , . t i m e af te r deposition f j r ) . ' '

X k 1 = resuspension equivalent ha l f - l i fe constant (0.677 ,yr- )

E.6 TRANSFER TO THE HUMAN FOOD CHAIN

Transuranic nuclides released in.gaseous effluents can be

directly transferred to food.c.rops by wet and dry deposition mech-

anisms previously discussed. Radioactive material deposited in the

soil can also be taken up into the plants via the roots. Root up-

take factors are small, ranging from approximately (uCi/g of plant)/(pCi/g of soil) for plutonium to 3 to 4 x (pCi/g of plant)/(pCi/g of soil) for americium and curium !Cline 1968,

Price 1972, Buchholz et a1. 1971). Transuranic nuclides in or on

plant materials generally pass through the animal gut with only minor

fractions transferred to the blood (ICRP 1972). This fact is also

reflected in the small measured transfer of plutonium from feed to

milk of per liter (Sansom 1964) and the measured low concen-

trations of plutonium in milk (Magno, Kauffman, and Shleien 1967;

Bennett 1974). Transfer of plutonium in foods to human internal

organs is similarly limited by the small transfer from the gastro-

intestinal (GI) tract to blood. .( ICRP 1959, ICRP 1964).

.

E.7 GROUNDWATER TRANSPORT MODEL . . .

An analytical model was developed by Codell and Schreiber (1977)

to estimate radionuclide transport in an aquifer. .The governing equa-

tion was based on solution of the three-dimensional partial differen- -

tial equation for conservation of mass in a uniform saturated medium.

The model included advection, dispersion, sorption (retardation), and

radioactive decay. For this analysis, the assumed geometry and ini-

ti a1 conditions were uniform aquifer thickness, infimite lateral ex-

tent, a vertical line source, instantaneous release, and homogeneous

properties.

For an instantaneous input of one curie; the applicable solution

would be:

x = (nea)-' XYZ (E-30)

. . where . ,

I ' . : . 3 .. ,

concentration of the nuclide at a point--(^,^) for a n ', .'.

3 instantaneous one curie release (Ci/cm ) at the .. .

origin .

effective porosity of the medium

retardation factor, 1 + K P /n 9 bulk density of medium (g/cm )

tot a1 porosity 3 distribution coefficient (cm /g) ' ,

(4rD t/a) -'I2 exp [-(x-ut/a) 2 /(4Dxt/a) -At]

(cm" ) - ,

2 DX = dispersion coefficient in the x direction (cm /sec) 2 D,, = dispersion coefficient in they direction (cm /sec)

. .. ,

t' = time'after release (sec)

u = x-component groundwater veloc3t.y (cm/sec).

A = radioactive decay constant (sec-'1

h = thickness of aquifer (cm)

The transverse distance, y, was consid~red to be zero for esti- . , . . . . : .

mating the maximum concentration at a location at 'time t. Equa- tion (E-10) simplifies to:

2 X =

1 /2 exp [ - (iD; - At]

4nneah (D D ) Y . ,

The retardation factor, a, or alternately the distribution coef-

f icient, Kd, has been estimated for each radionucl i de in several papers (Burkholder 1976, Staley et al. 1977, Leddicotte et al. 1978).

The work by Staley et al. inc1uded;a comparison of coefficients for

sand, silt, and clay. Retardation factors for sand were about 1/8

the values for silt- and clay and were the smallest values estimated

in the above papers. Since theretare many fissures in the basalt,

beneath the RWMC, t h i s study conservat ive ly used t9e sand r e t a r d a t i o n ,,

f a c t o r s f rom Sta ley e t al. (1977), e f f e c t i n g t h e qu ickes t m ig ra t i on and

l e a s t d i lu t ion . .

D i s p e r s i v i t i e s have been estimated and v e r i f i e d f o r the ICPP s i t e

6 m i les NE o f t h e RWMC (Robertson 1974). Using the equations

and u = 4.3 f t / d a y (Codel l and Schreiber 1977), t he d ispers ion 2 c o e f f i c i e n t s were ca l cu la ted t o be Dx = 1290 f t /day and

2 D~

= 1935 f t /day.

The thickness o f t he aqui fer , h, was assumed t o be 250 ft,

t h e same as below t h e ICPP s i t e (Robertson 1974). The e f f e c t i v e

poros i ty , ne, was est imated as 0.10, f rom the same reference.

E.8 DOSE CALCULATIONS

E.8.1 Dose Ca lcu la t ions - General. Both maximum i n d i v i d u a l and

popu la t ion doses were ca lcu la ted ' as def ined i n Sect ion 13. The i n d i -

v idua l r e c e i v i n g the maximum airborne dose was assumed t o res ide i n

Sector 7 (Table E-1) where t h e X/Q was a maximum. The popu la t ion

d i s t r i b u t i o n around the s i t e i s . i l l u s t r a t e d i n F igure 3-13.

The pathways considered f o r c a l c u l a t i n g doses were f o r bo th

ex terna l and i n t e r n a l exposure mechanisms. The f o l l o w i n g pathways

con t r i bu ted t o t h e o v e r a l l t o t a l doses:

(1) ex terna l exposure t o the i n i t i a l c loud o f r a d i o a c t i v i t y ;

( 2 ) ex terna l exposure t o the . deposited r a d i o a c t i v i t y ;

(3 ) i n h a l a t i o n ,of i n i t i a l c loud o f radionucl ides;

(4 ) s inha la t ion o f resuspended radtonucl ides; and

(5) ingest i on o f contaminated p lants, animals, and water.

The potential consequences calculated were dose commitments t o

the whole body, lung, and bone. The individual dose commitment was

expressed+in rem, and the population dose commitment was expressed in man -rem.

The calculations extended to a distance of 50 miles. No credi t was taken for evacuation of the population near the s i t e . A shielding factor of 113 ( N R C 1975) was used for a l l external doses. This factor accounts for protection provided by struc'tures such as bui 1 dings, cars , etc.

For normal operation, the effects of the released radionucl ides over a 70-yr period (70-yr dose commitment) were calculated. For

9 '

accident s i tuat ions, a period of 50 yr following the acc'ident was assumed. A population growth of l%lyr from 1985 to 2085 was assumed in computing the risk to the public. After 2085, the population was assumed to remain constant. The chronic pathways considered were external exposure to contaminated sur'faces and inhalation of resus-

. .

pended part ic les for both accidental and normal operational releases. For normal operations, external exposure to and inhalation of t h k

i n i t i a l cloud were also considered.

E.8.2 Models for Calculating Internal Radiation Doses. The . . basic expression used for calculating internal radiation doses re-

.' - . ceived as the resu l t of in+alation or ingestion of a radionuclide i s

where

Dk = the dose equivalenf frem) .delivered.to the k t h t i s sue

€ k = effect ive absorbed, energy deposited by nuclide in the . . k t h t i ssue (MeVldi?) (remlrad)

mk = mass of the k t h t i s sue ( g )

t h q ( t ) = a c t i v i t y ( P C ~ ) of the nuclide present in the k . ,

t j s s u e a.s a function o f . time . . . .

~ ~ s / s ~ c ) .Sx10-6 : =) (0-2 rad )( 1 . sec, 5 1 . 2 - c i MeV erg& 8 .64~10 *) . .

Values of t h e parameters c k and, m k were obtained from ICRP

pub1 (ca t ions (1959, 1964 and 1975). . The functions q ( t ) were deter-

mined- . . . . using models of human metabolism of each nuclide. considered.

Brief descript ions of these models and assoc;ated computer codes

follow.

All ca lcula t ions of the doses resu l t ing from inhalat ion used the

ICRP Task Group model of the human resp i ra to ry t r a c t (ICRP 1966), as

revised (ICRP 1972). The Task Group model was coupled t o metahol i c

models f o r other organs previously developed f o r in ternal dosimetry

(ICRP 1959, ICRP 1954). Acute and chronic inhalat ion exposure ca l -

cula t ions were made using t he DACRIN code (Houston, Strenge, and

Watson 1974). DACRIN was used t o obtain l i f e t ime dose commitments

t o the various organs as functions of exposure time and the quant i ty

of a c t i v i t y inhaled. For acute accidental exposure, 50-yr dose com-

mitments were calculated f o r each organ. For chronic exposure, 70-yr

dose commitments were calculated fo r each organ. The a c t i v i t y median

aerod.vnamic diameter was assumed t o be 1 micron f o r accidental r e -

leases and 0.3 micron fo r normal re leases . This d i s t inc t ion was i n -

tended t o r e f l e c t the f a c t t ha t normal operational re leases would be

f i l t e r e d , whereas some of the accidental re leases would not he. The

dose commitment f a c to r s (DCFs) (rem/pCi inhaled) were then used with

the t ranspor t and resuspension models t o obtain the dose commitment

f o r each nuclide and pathway.

For ingest ion pathways, the dose conversion f ac to r s were calcu-

la ted with the INREM (Killough and McKay 1976) code using dosimetry

described in Publication -2 of the ICRP (ICRP 1959). Again, f o r acci-

dental re leases , 50-yr dose commitment conversion fac to rs were used;

f o r normal operational re leases , 70-yr fac to rs .

E.8.3 External Radiation. The radioactive material released t o

the environment and subsequently deposited on the land surface provides a small source of gamma radia t ion fo r a long time a f t e r the

cloud passage. The i n i t i a l radia t ion exposure t o individuals by the cloud passage i s much smaller than the long-term e f f ec t s of the resu l t i ng surface contamination.

All external dose conversion fac tors were calculated from the EXREM I11 computer program developed a t Oak Ridge National Laboratory (Killough and McKay 1976).

Only photon doses resu l t ing from immersion in contaminated a i r and exposure t o a contaminated land surface were considered. The doses resu l t ing from standing on contaminated land present some long- term exposure t ha t must be addressed t o assess the level of external

I i r rad ia t ion .

E.8.4 Normal Release Dose Calculations. As s ta ted e a r l i e r , the local population was assumed t o grow exponentially a t the r a t e of l%/yr unt i l 2085, a f t e r which i t was assumed t o remain constant. See Guideline ( 7 ) in Subsection 7.4.1.5. Figure 3-13 i l l u s t r a t e s t he 80 sectors in to which the population i s divided. Maximum X / Q values were taken from Table E-1 fo r each sector . The average annual popu- 1 at ion dose commitment fo r inhalat ion of dispersed airborne a c t i v i t y in a given sector was computed using

where

1 = the annual population dose commitment (man-remlyr) Q = the re lease r a t e of the nuclide ( ~ C i l s e c )

3 x/Q = the dispersion fac tor (seclm )

3 BR = the breathing r a t e ( m / y r )

DCF = ,the organ o r t i s s u e dose commitment f a c t o r

(rem/cCi inha led) f o r t he nuc l i de

P = t h e popu la t i on o f t h e sec to r (persons).

The c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o t he t o t a l popu la t i on dose were then summed

over a l l nuc l i des and sec tors t o o b t a i n the t o t a l popu la t ion dose

commitment f o r each organ f o r one year o f operat ion.

Long-term environmental dose commitments were c a l c u l a t e d f o r t h e

l o c a l popu la t i on exposed t o d i r e c t r a d i a t i o n and resuspended sur face

contaminat ion. Dur ing t h e p e r i o d o f 1985-2085, i t was assumed t h a t

bo th the popu la t i on P and sur face concent ra t ion S1 would be chang-

ing, and t h i s was considered i n t he dose c a l c u l a t i o n s . For per iods

beyond 2085, o n l y S1 was assumed t o be time-dependent. For a t ime t

between t h e end o f operat ions i n 1995 and 2085, t h e annual popu la t i on

dose t o an organ f rom resuspension o f a p a r t i c u l a r i sn tope i s

I ( t ) = 2 .8x10-~ S1 [exp(-bet\] (BR) (DCF) (1 .3 )P( t ) (man-remlyr)

(E-15)

The f a c t o r o f lo-' conver ts f C i t o p C i , and the f a c t o r o f 1.3

accounts f o r t h e average changes i n body organ s i z e and b rea th ing

r a t e s p r i o r t o age 20. The o ther f a c t o r s and va r i ab les have a l ready

been discussed. The cumulat ive pop111 a t i o n dose commitment (man-rem)

f o r a s i n g l e n u c l i d e a t t ime t i s x ( t ) (man-rem):

where

Y = t h e popu la t i on growth r a t e constant

P(1995) = t h e p o p u l a t i o n i n 1 9 9 5 .

For periods beyond 2085, -the expression 'for : the :cumul at ive - p0p.u-

lation dose commitment to an organ is

3.64 x 10" S, (BR) (DCF) P(2085) .

. I (E-17) 4 . . . . .

C(2085) is the cumulative population dose commitment to an organ

up to 2085. In both time periods, the contributions of all the nu-

clides were.summ.ed to obtain the total population dose commitment % for

each organ ,or ,tissue.

. ,

~o~ulations of U.S. locations distant from the INEL were also assumed to grow expo,nential ly at t,he rate of 1Xlyr unti 1 2085. The

resuspension rate approach was us.ed to obtain the source term for

long-distance .diffusion calculations:

where

Qr = resuspension source term (~Cilsec) K = ' resuspension rate (sec-l)

2 - . A . = . ..the area o f the 50-mile circle'lm ) . .

7 S1 . = the initial concentration (~Ci/m-) . . .

0

= the effective source reduction,coristant (.yr-' ) A e

Between 1995 and 2085 the cumulative contribution of each nucl ide'to

the dose commitment for an organ or tissue is given by . . .

where (x /Q) ' and P' (1995) r e f e r t o d i spe rs ion f a c t o r s and popu la t ions

f o r t he d i s t a n t locat ions. For the pe r i od a f t e r 2085, -

' .

S, AK (X/Q)'(BR)(DCF)(1.3)P1(2085)

z ( t ) = x(2085) + o [I-exp ( - A t ) ]

Ae

I n .both cases, t h e cumulat ive popu la t i on dose commitment f o r a

p a r t i c u l a r organ i s the sum o f t he c o n t r i b u t i o n s o f t he i n d i v i d u a l

nuc l ides.

The d ispers ion f a c t o r s and the est imated 1985 popu la t ions f o r the '

areas presumed t o be a f f e c t e d by t h e t r a n s p o r t o f resuspended contami-

n a t i o n are g iven i n Table E-2. The d i spe rs ion f a c t o r s are based on a

s i n g l e s e t o f t r a c e r measurements (cowan e t al. 1976) and t h e ext rapd-

1 a t i ons f rom them. The referenced measurements were made w i t h a non- . . . . 2'

depos i t i ng t race r , so t h e d i spe rs ion f a c t o r s do no t i nc lude plume .

dep le t i on by wet o r d r y depos i t ion . Plume dep le t i on would r i d u c e t h k '

a i r concent ra t ions a t t h e d i s t a n t l oca t i ons . Therefore, t h e d i spe r -

s i on f a c t o r s are conservat ive. The popu la t i on da ta are based on

1970 census i n fo rma t i on (U.S. Bureau o f t h e Census 1973).

TABLE E-2

ESTIMATED POPULATIONS AND DISPERSION FACTORS FOR DISTANT LOCATIONS

t s t ima ted . kst imated Regions o f States Populat ion D ispers ion

Un i ted States Inc luded PI (1985) (x /Q) ' (sec/m3)

New England ME, NH,. VT, MA,RI,CT '

Middle A t , l an t i c NY, NJ, PA. 43,133,262 . 2.4 . x . 1 : 0 - ~ ~

East Nor th OH, IN,. IL , Centra l M I , W I 46,732,110 5.4 x 10- l2

West Nor th MN, I A , MO, "

Centra l , ND, SD, NB, KS 18,952,109 9.5 x 10- l2

Mountain M, MY, CO 3,754,671 5.7 x 10-11

E.8.5 '~~Aac i t len t Dose Calculat ions. . . Allu'.dosecomrni tments were : . .-

ca lcu la ted . . fo r 50 yr f o l ldw,ing the ' . re lease , o f a c t i v i t y f rom an .

acc ident . ' The assumed popu la t i on growth was t h e same as described

e a r l i e r . F o r . a l l a i rborne re lease accidents, t he most s i g n i f i c a n t

c o n t r i b u t o r t o the 50-yr t o t a l dose was the i n h a l a t i o n o f radionu-

c l i d e s . Ca lcu la t i on o f t h e chron ic pathways considered t h e i n h a l a t i o n

pathway due t o resuspension, as we l l as ex te rna l exposure due t o con-

taminated ground. The f o l lowing equat ion was used f o r t h e i n h a l a t i o n

pathway:

P k = J0 exp ( - i t ) so K ( t ) C Po e x p i y t i dt

. I .

where ., .

. I

C - - exp (Y t ) ... =

popu la t ion dose'.commitment w i t h i n the sec tor

i n t e r v a l (man-rem)

c o r r e c t i o n f o r decay

popu la t i on a t t ime zero

resuspension f u n c t i o n '

sur face contaminat ion a t t ime zero

b rea th ing r a t e

dose conversion f a c t o r

c o r r e c t i o n f o r popu la t i on growth

For externa1,exposure due t o contaminated ground, t he equat ion used .-

was :

where

W(t) = ' weathering f u n c t i o n

F = s h i e l d i n g f a c t o r (113)

and the o ther terms have Seen def ined above.

E-20

For the waterho.rne..acc,ident. releases,; . . + ,the&;maxjn)m; dose~~c,ommi t;-, ; ment to an individual : and the : popu.1 ation* dose:!comyi tment were;, ca:l.; t , , - ; , .

culated for: the:.pathway of drinkding water. . The..:indivi:duaJ receiving - : . ,!

a:? .. the maximum dose commitment. was a,ssumed to dr.ink..2 .l,iters per day .,. ,,

of contaminated, water, while the general popu,lation wasassumed to. .., drink. 1. 1 i ter per day. . The sources. of drinking. water are described ...

in Subsection 13.4.2.2.2. The. dose. conversion .factors were generated, . .,,

from the INREM code (Killough and McKay, 1976).;as,indicated in Sec- . . . :

tion E.8.2. . .

E.8.6 Time-Integrated Risk. Time-integrated risks depend on

population growth, radionuclide decay and buildup, and change in

resuspension factors. The major effects are due to the population

growth and radionuclide decay. Each release in 1985 would consist of

a m i x o f the radirrr~ucl ides yivers i n Table 13-2. The resulting doscs

on a nuclide-by-nuclide basis were determined to vary exponentially

with time. An increase in population would increase the doses, while

radioactive decay would decrease the doses. Because each radionuclide

has a different radioactive decay rate and different dose conversion

factors for each organ, it was necessary to derive the multiplicative

factors in Table 13-1, based on a mix of nuclides. The effective dose

due to each nuclide would be the quantity of the nuclide released

multiplied by its dose conversion factor. For these calculations,

only dose to the bone due to inhalation was considered. Separate

calculations for dose to the lung indicated that the multiplicative

factors would differ from the values shown in Table 13-1 by less than

a factor of two for all times given.

The multiplicative factors represent the integrati,on of the

time-varying effective 'doses of each released nucl ide. ' These doses

have been normalized such that the summation over all the nuclides is

equal to one at release time: . . .

where ". 1 . ' . ,

, ,. . . . . , . . . . .

i = r e l a t i v e ' e f f e c t i v e dose o f t he ith k c l i d e (re;)

R . .1 .

= r e l ease of ith n u c l i d e i n 1 9 8 5 ( C i )

DCFi = dose convers ion f a c t o r (50.-yr commitment t o bone)

due t o i n h a l a t i o n (rem/Ci)

The t ime-vary ing r e l a t i v e e f f e c t i v e doses are . . , . .

RDi(t) = Di exp ( Y - A ~ ) (E-25)

. .

where

t h RDi ( t ) = , r e l a t i v e t ime -va ry i ng e f f e c t i v e d o s e o f t he i

. . . . nuc?. i pe (rem) . ..

Y = p o p u l a t i o n .growth f a c t o r - f o r l%/yr . increase

.. . ( 9 . 95x10 -~ y r - ' ) . . . - .

: X i . . = . r ad !oac t i ve .decay f a c t o r f o r ith n u c l i d e (yr- l ) .

t = t ime f rom redeasel ( y r )

To c a l c u l a t e t h e des i r ed t i m e - i n t e g r a t i o n i n t e r v a l r i s k m u l t i -

p l i e r s , Equat ion (E-25) must be i n tegva ted f rom t ime 0 t o t i m e T ( y r ) ,

which r e s u l t s i n

DTi = ( D i I i i -1) ( 1 - exp ( A i ) T] (E-26)

and f o r T>100 yr:

1-exp (100f - A ~ ) ]

(100Y) [ e x p - exp hi^)] I ( E-27)

where

T = t i m e s i nce re l ease " ( y r )

DTi = i n t e g r a t e d r e l a t i v e e f f e c t i v e dose f rom t i m e 0 t o

T ( rem-yr)

- The m ~ ~ l t i p l i c a t i v e factors are then determined bay summing over a l l the "

nuclides and dividing by the effect ive dose a t release. . . " . . . , . : . . 5 " I . . . . . .

where . . I . . . - . \ . . . .

MT = multiplicative factor for time-integration from 0 to T (yr)

For the case of the maximum individual dose, the procedure i s the same except there i s no population effect (Y =O) .

The pieceding method i i riot &act, but i t does indicate t h e e f - f ec t of population growth and radionucl ide decay on. t ime-integrated r i sk . Table 13-1 indicates t h i s effect . During the f i r s t 100 yr, t hepopu la t iongrowthwouldbe thecon t ro l l ing fac to r . Atmuch l a t e r '

times, there would be a - d6credse. in r i i k ' due to 'decay. Therefore;the risk multiplicative factors approach .a'coristant. ,

APPENDIX F

SCIENTIFIC NOTATION

When dea l ing w i t h very l a r g e or very small numbers, the conven-

t i o n a l n o t a t i o n i s awkward and cumbersome. W r i t i n g 0.000000000000001,

f o r example, i s undesirable, as i s c a l l i n g t h i s number "a m i l l i o n t h o f

a b i l l i o n t h . " To overcome t h i s problem, a n o t a t i o n system i n general

use throughout the s c i e n t i f i c community has been employed i n t h i s 15 repo r t . This system would i n d i c a t e the above number as 1 x 10- .

This n o t a t i o n can then be converted back t o the o r i g i n a l number by

moving the decimal p o i n t according t o the power o f ten t h a t i s i n d i -

cated. If t h e power o f ten i s p o s i t i v e , f o r example, t h e decimal i s

moved t o the r i g h t the number o f places i nd i ca ted by the power. I f

the power o f t en i s negat ive, t he decimal i s moved t o the l e f t t h e

number of places i nd i ca ted by the power. Examples o f p o s i t i v e and

negat ive powers o f t en fo l low:

P re f i xes are o f t e n added t o u n i t s (such as c u r i e s o r grams) t o

i n d i c a t e the magnitude o f the value. ,Common p re f i xes , t h e i r values,

and t h e i r abbrev ia t ions are as fo l l ows :

P r e f i x

mega

k i l o

c e n t i

m i l l i

micro

nano

p i c 0

f emto

Power

Thus, 1 k i l og ram (kg) = 10' grams = 1,000 grams

and 1 m ic rocu r ie ( v C i ) = l om6 c u r i e = 0.000001 cu r ie .

AEC

ALAP

AM AD

AN L

ANL-E

ANL-W

ASWS

B e t t i s

B LM

BRH

C

CEQ CFA

CFR

x/Q (Chi/Q)

C i

c f s

CPT

CY

D& D

DCF

DF

DF S

DO D

DOE

DOT

DOT Spec

dpm EBR-1,-I1

APPENDIX G

ABBREVIATIONS

Atomic Energy Commission (now DOE)

As Low As P r a c t i c a b l e

A c t i v i t y Median Aerodynamic Diameter

Argonne Nat iona l Laboratory

Argonne Nat iona l Laboratory East

Argonne Nat iona l Laboratory West

A i r Support Weather Sh ie ld

B e t t i s Laboratory, (P i t tsburgh, Pa)

Bureau o f Land Management

Bureau o f Rad io log i ca l Heal th

c e n t i (see Appendix F)

President ' s Counci 1 on Environmental Qua1 i t y

Centra l F a c i l i t i e s Area

Code o f Federal Regu 1 a t i ons

atmospheric d i l u t i o n f a c t o r

Cur ie

cubic f e e t per second

Compaction, Immobi l izat ion, and Packaging

Calendar Year

Decontamination & Decomiss ion ing

Dose Commi tment Factor

Decontamination Factor

Decontamination F a c i l i t y South

Department o f Defense

Department o f Energy

~ e ~ a r t m e n t o f Transportat i o n

Department o f Transpor ta t ion S p e c i f i c a t i o n

d i s i n t e g r a t i o n s , p e r minute

Experimental Breeder Reactor I, I I

EC IPDA

E DR

EG&G

EIS

EPA

ERDA

ERDAM

e V

EWR

f

FAA

ft

FMC

FWQA

FY

9 G I

HEPA

h r

I CPP

ICRP

I D I

I DO

I D R

. i n .

INEL

k

K E

LASL

East-Central Idaho Planning and Development Associat ion . .

Experimental Data Report

EG&G Idaho, Inc. (Edgerton, Germeshausen & G r i e r )

Environmental Impact statement '

Environmental P ro tec t i on Agency

Energy Research & Development Admin is t ra t ion (Now DOE) : . <

ERDA Manual . .

e l e c t r o n v o l t I . . .

, .. Ea r l y Waste R e t r i e v a l

. .

femto (see: ~ ~ p e n d i i F) , . .

Federal ~ v i a f i o n ~ d m i n i - s t r a t i o h '

f o o t

Corporate i d e n t i f i c a t i o n - fo rmer l y Food Machinery I Corporat ion

Federal Water Qua1 i ty Admi n i s t r a t i on

F i s c a l Year

gram . .

Gas t ro - In tes t i na l '.

High E f f i c i e n c y ~ d r t i c u l a t e A i r ( f i l t e r )

hour

Idaho he mi c a l Process i ng P l ant

I n t e r n a t i o n a l Commission on Rad ia t ion P ro tec t i on . . . . . - . , . . . . . .

In'-Drum ' 1nci nei-at'i'bn . . : ,S '

~epaktment o f ~ n e r g ~ , 1'haho Operations o f f i c e :..$ :

I n i t i a l Drum R e t r i e v a l , .

i nch

Idaho Nat ional Engineering Laboratory . . *. .

k i 1 6 (see- ~ ~ ~ e n d i x ' F). . . . . , .. , . , . .

I: . I ,

Kaiser Engineers

Los A1 amos ~ c i e n . t if i t ~ a b o r a t o r y ( b s A1 amos, . . .

New Mexico) . .. . . : r . ,

.. . .! . . ; . 4 . ,

. , . . . .. . .. , I (

ABBREVIATIONS (Cont I d )

\ L ATA

1 b

LMV

m

M

lJ (mu)

mlIm MM I Mound

MPBB

MPC

mR

mrem

MS I

MSL

n

N AS

NBS

NDE

NEPA

NFPA

NO AA NCRP

NPS

NR C

NR C

NRTS

NSC

NSC

O&M

OR NL

OSHA

Los Alamos Technical Associates

pound

Less Massive , . Va r ia t i on

m i l l i (see Appendix F)

Mega (see Appendix F)

micro (see Appendix F)

manlmateri a1 s . . . : ~

Modi f ied Mercal l i intensity' Mound Laboratory (Miami sburg, Ohio)

Maximum Permi ss i b l e Body ~ u r d e n . . . .

Maximum Permiss ib le Concentrat ion

m i 11 i roentgen

m i 11 i roentgen equ iva lent man

Molten S a l t I n c i n e r a t i o n .I

Mean Sea Level

nano (see Appendix F)

Nat ional Academy o f Sciences

Nat ional ~ u r e a b o f Standards

Nondestruct ive Examination

Nat ional Environmental Pol i c y A c t ,

Nat ional F i r e P ro tec t i on Associat ion . i

Nat ional Oceanic & Atmospheric Admin is t ra t ion

Nat ional Council on Rad ia t ion P ro tec t i on

Nat ional Park Service

Nat ional Research Counci 1

Nuclear, Regu 1 a t o r y Commission

Nat ional Reactor Test ing S ta t i on (Now INEL)

Nat ional Safety Counci 1

Nuclear Services Corporat ion . .

Operating & Maintenance

Oak Ridge Nat ional Laborator ies (Oak Ridge, Tennessee)

Occupational Safety and Heal th Admin is t ra t ion

ABBREVIATIONS (Cont I d )

PKG

R&D : . R AL ,. -

rem

RFP

RPPF

RWMC

SCC'

SDA

TR A

TRU

TS A

UBC

USGS

W I PP

WVRF

Y d

Yr

p i c 0 (see Appendix F )

Packaging Only

P u b l i c Land Order

r e l a t i v e t i m e i n t e g r a t e d concen t ra t i on .

P o l y v i n y l c h l o r i d e . . .

Roentgen

Research and Development

Rad ia t i on Ana l ys i s ~ a b o r a t o r ~

roentgen e q u i v a l e n t man . .

R a d i o l o g i c a l and ~ n v i r o n m e n t a l Sciences Labora to ry

Release F r a c t i o n

Rocky F l a t s P l a n t (Golden, Colorado)

R e t r i e v a l , Process ing and Packaging F a c i l i t y

Rad ioac t i ve Waste Management Complex (INEL)

Secondary Combustion Chamber

Subsurface D isposa l Area ( p a r t o f RWMC)

Slagging P y r o l y s i s and Packaging ,

Transuranic Disposal Area ( p a r t o f RWMC)

Thermoluminescent Dos imeter , . .

Test Reactor Area

Transuranic

. . Transuranic Storage Area ( p a r t o f RWMC)

un i f o rm B u i l d i n g Code

Un i ted S ta tes Geo log ica l Survey

Waste I s o l a t i o n P i l o t Pl-ant . . Waste Volume Reduct ion F a c i l i t y

y a r d

year . . . .

~, .

I '

GLOSSARY

, >

ATMX ser ies 600 railroad cars: Railroad freig' l t cars , that have been, special ly designed fo r high, s t ruc tu ra l integrity.

. . .

a r t iv i ty : A measure of the ra te a t which a material i s emitting nuclear radiations; u s u a l l ~ g i v e n , in terms of t h e number of

, . nuclear disintegrations occurring in a given quintit." of mate- r i a l over a unit of time. The s t anda rdun i t of ac t iv i ty i s t1,e'

. #

curie (Ci).

, . adiabatic lapse rate: The ra te of decrease of 'temperatlrre with height

. . . ,

of dry a i r 1 i f ted with no external heat losies or gains through an atmosphere in hydrostatic &ul i br'ium.

- .

aeolian: Borne, deposited, eroded or produced by the wind.

alluvial fan: Rock deposit laid down by streams flowing from mountains to 1 ower regions.

. . ' .

alluvium: Clay, s i l t , gravel or similar material deposited hy running water.

alpha emitters: Radioactive elements that emi,t alpha part ic les , ( i . e .

transuranics) .

alpha part ic le: Used with respect to radiation; a posi t i v e l . ~ charged par t ic le consisting of two protons and two neutrons; a helium atom that has lost two electrons.

alpha radiat ion: An emmission of alpha pa r t i c l e s from a material undergoing nuclear transformation; the pa r t i c l e s have a nuclear mass number of four and a charge of plus two. I t i s the l e a s t penetrat ing of the three common types of radia t ion (alpha, beta, and gamma), being stopped by a sheet of paper. I t i s not dangerous to plants , animals or man unless the alpha-emitting substance has entered the body.

alpha waste: Waste material t ha t i s contaminated by radionuclides which emit alpha pa r t i c l e s , pa r t i cu la r ly transuranic elements.

a l t e rna t ive : As used in t h i s report , a general method of managing the TRU waste. For example, Alternative 5 i s "Retrieve as Scheduled, Process, and Dispose of on the INEL."

alumino-sil i ca te : A combined aluminate (aluminum oxide) and s i 1 i c a t e ( s i l i con oxide).

aquifer: A stratum or zone below the surface of the ear th t ha t i s capable of producing water, as from a well.

asphal t ic cement: A paving .material t ha t uses asphalt bitumen as a binder.

background radiation: The level of rad ioac t iv i ty in an area, which i s produced by sources other than the one of spec i f i c i n t e r e s t . Background radiation i s produced by natural ly occurring radioactive mater ia ls in the c rus t of the ear th , cosmic radia t ion,

and the f a l l o u t from nuclear weapons t e s t s . I t i s also called natural radia t ion.

basal t : A dark, f ine-grained, basic, igneous rock. Basalt i s the world's most abundant type of lava. The ferromagnesian minerals predominate i n basa l t , b u t feldspar i s abundant; quartz i s absent.

ben ton i t e : A c o l l o i d a l c1a.y formed by decomposit ion o f v o l c a n i c ash,

hav ing t h e a b i l i t y t o absorb l a r g e q u a n t i t i e s o f water and t o

expand t o severa l t imes i t s normal volume.

b e t a p a r t i c l e : An elementary p a r t i c l e e m i t t e d f r om a n u c l w s d u r i n g

r a d i o a c t i v e decay, w i t h a s i n g l e e l e c t r i c a l charge and a mass

equal t o 1/1837 t h a t o f a p ro ton . A n e g a t i v e l y charged b e t a

p a r t i c l e i s equ i va len t t o an e l e c t r o n and a p o s i t i v e l y charged

b e t a p a r t i c l e i s equ i va len t t o a p o s i t r o n . Beta r a d i a t i o n may

cause s k i n burns, and are harmfu l i f they en te r t h e body.

However, b e t a p a r t i c l e s are e a s i l y stopped by a t h i n sheet o f

metal .

b ioassay: A procedure t o determine t he a c t i v e power o r potency o f a

substance b y measuring a g i ven e f f e c t on p l a ~ t s o r exper imenta l '

animals as t e s t ~ b ~ j e c t s . Binassay i s a l s o used t o s tudy t h e

b i o l o g i c a l e f f e c t o f va r i ous r a d i o a c t i v e mat .e r ia ls on humans o r

t o measure t he i n t a k e o f r a d i o a c t i v e m a t e r i a l s i n t o t h e body.

For example, measurement o f r a d i o a c t i v e i so topes i n t h e u r i n e o f

i n d i v i d u a l s work ing w i t h r a d i o a c t i v e m a t e r i a l s i s a measure o f

i n g e s t i o n o r i n h a l a t i o n o f r a d i o a c t i v e m a t e r i a l .

b l ock f a u l t s : High angle normal o r r eve rse f a u l t s bo rde r i ng a mass o f

rock on a t l e a s t two oppos i t e s ides. The mass may be e leva ted o r

depressed r e l a t i v e t o t he a d j o i n i n g reg ion , o r it ma,y be e leva ted

r e l a t i v e t o t h e r e g i o n on one s i d e and d e p r e s s e d ' r e l a t i v e t o t h a t

on t h e o ther .

body burden: The amount o f a s p e c i f i e d r a d i o a c t i \ l e m a t e r i a l o r t he

summation o f t h e var ious r a d i o a c t i v e m a t e r i a l s p resen t i n an

animal o r human body a t t he t ime of i n t e r e s t .

b r a t t i c e : A p a r t i t i o n o r wa l l , o f t e n temporary, o f wood o r c l o t h used

i n a mine t o c o n t r o l v e n t i l l a t i o n .

breccia: ~Rock cons is t ing o f sharp fragments cemented together o r - L a

embedded i n .a f i ne-grai ned mat r ix .

but te: An i so la ted h i l l o r mountain, usua l l y having a f l a t top,

r i s i n g abrupt ly above the surrounding 1 and.

calcareous: Consist ing of o r contain ing calcium carbonate, CaCo3.

Carboniferous: See Table H-1, (Geological Time Periods) a t the end o f

the glossary.

carcinogen: A substance t h a t tends t o pr0duce.a cancer.

chelate: To form a r i n g s t ruc tu re contaning a metal i o n (such as pl 'utoni um) he1 d by coordinat ion bonds.

chert : A rock resembling f l i n t and. cons is t ing essen t i a l l y o f micro,-

c r ys ta l 1 ine quartz. , .

c o l l o i d a l suspension: A suspension of % p a r t i c l e s rang.ing i n s i ze from

1 t o ,500 m i l l im i c rons i n diameter. . ,

concept: As used i n t h i s repor t , a spec i f i c method f o r implementing

an .a1 t ,ernat ive (through the use o f a ser ies o f modules) .-. For

example i n A l t e rna t i ve 5,l Concept 5-8, would en ta i l . d i rect . -contro l

r e t r i e v a l , i n c i ne ra t i on .by . s l ag'ging pyro lys is , .packaging, and

deep rock disposal ( sha f t access) i n the Lemhi Range.; . , :

contamination (contaminated mate r ia l ): The deposi t ion , solvat ion, o r

i n f i l t r a t i o n o f radionucl ides on or i n t o an object, mater ia l , o r

area whereupon the area, mater ia l , or ob jec t i s considered

"con t ami nated . ". . -

c r i t i c a l : The c0ndi.t i on '.i,n whi'ch matkr i.al ' . is llndergoi ng nuclear - ? .- .

f i s s ion a t a se l f -susta ining r a t e . . The cri:tical mass o f l a materi a1 i s t ha t 'amo~~nt t ha t will se l f -sustain nuclear f i s s i on when placed 'in optimum arrangement i n : i t s present 'form: The min- - '

imum c r i t i c a l mass i s the amount of a fi'ss.iTe. isotope t ha t will se l f -susta in nuclear f i s s i on when placed in optimum conditions.

. . .. . . . . . .

c r i t i c a l i t y safe ty: Those procedures necessary t o the handling of f i s s i l e ' materiaqs in a manner. t ha t wi l l prevent them from ' '

reaching a c r i t i c a l condition. . .

cur ie (Ci) : A uni t of rad ioac t iv i t j ' defined as the ' amount 'of a radioactive material t ha t has an a c t i v i t y of 3 . 7 ~ 1 0 ' ~ disintegrations per .second (d / s ) . . .

. . . ,

daugfiter products : The nuc 1 ides formed by the radioactive di s - iritecjration of. a . f i r s t nucl i.de [paren t ) . : ..

. . .

decay product: A nuclide resu l t ing from the radioactive dis integration, of a radionucli.de, .formed ei'ther .di,rectl.y or as the res1il.t. ' .

of successive transformations,.. A decay. product may be e i t he r radioactive or s table .

. .

decomni s s i on-ing: ' The process' of removing. a f aci 1 i t y or area, ,from : ., operation 'and deco.ntaminating and/or disposing of i t or placing

i t in a condition of standby with appropriate controls land safeguards. , . ' ..

decontami nation: The 'selective 'removal 'of .radioactive material from a 'surface. or from w i thi.n .another material . '

d i r ec t control r e t r i eva l : Retrieval of buried or stored waste in which the re t r i eva l equipment i s d i r ec t l y controlled b.y operators r id ing on the equipment in environmental1.y controlled cabs.

disposal : Operations designed t o i s o l a t e waste permanently f rom man-

k i n d and h i s environs w i t h no expecta t ion o f r e t r i e v a l a f t e r

empl acement .

d iu rna l : Having a d a i l y cycle.

do1 omi te : Calcium magnesium carbonats, CaMg(C03) *, o r a rock com-

posed c h i e f l y o f t h i s minera l .

dome: A rough1.v s - m e t r i c a l upfolr l w i t h beds d ipp ing r a d i a l l y ou t -

ward w i t h rough ly equal amounts from a g iven p o i n t ; w i t h t h e

development o f an axis, a dome becomes an a n t i c l i n e .

dose: A general . term i n d i c a t i n g the amount o f energ.y absorbed f rom

i n c i d e n t rad, ia t ion per u n i t o f mass, by a body o r by any p o r t i o n

of a body.

dose c o m i tment: The i n teg ra ted dose t h a t r e s u l t s from an i n take o f

r a d i o a c t i v e m a t e r i a l when the dose i s evaluated from t 3 e begin-

n ing o f i n t a k e t o a l a t e r t ime !usua l ly 50 y r ) ; a l so ussd f o r t he

long-term in teg ra ted dose from r a d i o a c t i v e m a t e r i a l re leased t o

the environment.

dosimeter: A device c a r r i e d on the person f o r measuring t h e q u a n t i t y

o f rad i .a t i on t o which one has been exposed.

. .

dust p a l l i a t i v e : A substance used t o reduce o r lessen the s e v e r i t y o f

a i rborne dust.

ecology: That branch o f b i o l o g i c a l , science t h a t deals w i t h t h s r e l a -

. . t i o n s h i p s between organismsand t h e i r environment. - ...

ecosystem: An assemblage of b i o t a ! c o m u n i t y ) and t h e i r environment.

e f f l u e n t : Something t h a t f lows ou t such as waste m a t e r i a l discharged

t o the environment.

. . , . . .. 7 ' , , , .. e vapo t r& ip i r a t i on: he' combined 'ldss o f weter f r o m s b l l " bj'-&vapur-b', ,

. a . , t i o n from the s b i 1 anh ' f r o * p i a n t Grf aces.

exposure: The condi t ion o f being made subject t o the act ion o f radia-

t ion.

f a1 lou t : Pa r t i cu l a te mater i a1 , which may be radioact ive, deposited on

the ground from the a i r .

Federal Repository: A planned, federa l ly-owned f ac i 1 i t y f o r ' the long-,

term management o f nucl ear waste.

feldspar: Any o f a group o f c r y s t a l l i n e minerals t ha t cons is t o f

aluminum s i 1 i c a t ~ s w i t h e i t he r potassium, sodium, calcium, or

barium and t ha t are an essenti.al const i tuent of . near ly a ' l l '

c r y s t a l 1 i ne rocks.

. .

f i l m badge: A small pack o f s e n i i t i v e photographic f i l m worn as d

badg$ f o r i rid icat ing exposure t o r i d i a t i o n .

f ines: F ine ly crushed or mater ia l ; very small p a r t i c l e s i n a :

mixture o f various sizes. r .

f i s s i o n ( h c l e a r j : The d i v i s i o n o f a nukleus i n t o two nucl ides o f

lower mass, usua l l y aciompainiid by the expulsion o f ganimd rays

and neutrons.

f i s s i o n products: The nucl ides formed by the d i v i s i on o f a heav'ie7

nucleus; usua l l y i n a nuclear reactor. . .

. ..

f l a p valve: A valve w i t h a hinged c losure t h a t a1 lows f l ow i n o n l y one

d i rec t ion.

gamma rays: High-energy, short-wavelength, electromagnetic radia- ti'on deriving from nuclear transformations; simii ar t o , b u t

generally more penetrat ing than, X-rays. Gama radiaf ion f r e - quently accompanies alpha and beta emissions and always accompanies f i s s i on . Gamna rays are very penetrat ing and are best stopped or shielded against by dense mater ia ls , such as lead or depleted uranium.

graben: A geological s t ruc ture t ha t i s a generally l inear block bounded by f a u l t s on each s ide , along which the block has dropped, r e l a t i v e t o the sides.

. .

groundwater: water' f hat e x i s t s or f l ows below the surfac'e ( " i th in the zone of sa tu ra t ion) .

grout: A mortar or cement mixture t ha t does not contain gravel or other re inforcing aggregate.

ha l f - l i f e : The time during which one-half of the or iginal amount of 'a radioactive isotope decays or d i s in tegra tes in to another nuclear

. . form.

halogenate: To t r e a t or cause to'combine with a halogen ( f luor ine , chlorine, bromine, iodine, or a s t a t i ne ) .

I i high eff ic iency part icu ' late a i r f i l t e r ( H E P A ) : An a i r f i l t e r capable

of removing a t l e a s t 99.97% of the pa r t i cu l a t e material as small as 0.3 micron from an a i r stream. (0.3 micron is approximately the s ize of the pa r t i cu l a t e materi'al in tobacco smoke. )

' I . .

hydrostat ic: Of or r e l a t i ng t o l iquids a t r e s t or t o the pressures they exer t or transmit.

. - .

inversion: A' condi'tidn where 'temperature increases with hiight"in the atmosphere.

ion-exchange: , Process far selectively removing a constituent .from a . . . . . . .

waste strean by reversibly transferring ions between an insoluble , . . . . .

solid and the ,. waste . stream; < . the exchange medium. (usually a column of resin or soil) can then be washed to collect the , . waste or taken directly to disposal; for example, a hot water spftener.

. . I

isopleth: A line drawn on a map through all points having the same

numerical value such as population, geographic measurements, or concentration. . .

I

, . - isotope: Nuclides with the same atomic number, (i .e., the same chem-

ical element) but with different atomic masses; although chemical properties are the same, radioactive and nuclear properties may

t .

be quitc different for each isnt.npf? of an element.,

lacustrine:, O f or relating to lakes.

lava: Fluid rock such as that which issues'from a volcano; also this

rock solidified by cooling.

. . , - . . . " , . ... . . leach: The process of removal or separation of soluble components , '

from a solid by percolating water or other liquids through the solid. ,

. 4

, . ' . , I .

limestone: A rock composed mainly of calcium carbonate, usually formed

by ,accumulation of organic. material such as shells or coral,.

* . . . ,. ... . .

lithic: Of or relating to rock.. .

. . . . . loess: An unstratified loamy sediment, deposited chiefly by the

wind. . . ' . . . , . , . , . :

I . ' ..

man-rem: The radiation dose received by a typical individual, multi-

plied by the number of individuals in a given population group.

Maximum Permissible Body Burden (MPBB): The maximum permissible amount of a specific radioactive material or the summation of the amounts of various radioactive materials, present in an ' animal or human body at the time of interest.

Maximum Permissible Concentration (MPC): The,average concentration of a radionuclide in air or water to which a worker or member of the general population may be continuously exposed without exceeding an established standard.

Mesozoic: See Table H-1 (~eologic Time Periods) at the end of the

glossary.

Miocene: See Table H-1 (Geologic Time Periods) at the end of the glossary. j

3 ,

Modified Mercall i Intensity (MMI): A subjective scale, used to estimate the intensity of an earthquake. The scale varies from I to XII. A reading of I indicates an earthquake so slight it was not felt.; IV indicates that chandeliers shake; and XI1 indicates very exten- si ve damage.

module: As used in this veport, a specific operation, such.as direct- , , control retrieval, or slagging pyrolysis.

, moraine: An accumulation of earth and stones carried and finally

deposited by a glacier.

neutron: A particle existing in or emitted from the atomic nucleus. It is electrically neutral and has a mass approximately.equa1 to that of a stable hydrogen atom.

nucleus: The positively charged center of an atom.

nuclide: A species of atom having a specific mass, atomic number, and nuclear energy state.

,

off-gas: Gas produced by a reaction or by a process.,

overburden: Rock or so i l of l i t t l e value over lying 'a layer with A '

desi rable fea tures , and which must be removed before mining can proceed.

overpack: A container in to which a smaller container i s placed.

oxide: A compound of oxygen and another element or elements.

pahoehoe: A basa l t i c lava flow characterized by a smooth surface showing ropy folds .

Paleozoic: See Table H-1 (Geologic Time Periods) a t the end of the glossary.

par t icula te : Referring t o f3nely divided pa r t i c l e s suspended in a gaseous media.

perched water: Subsurface water located above the aquifer over an impermeable ' layer t ha t i s small r e l a t i v e t o the extent of the aquifer .

percolate: To pass through f i n e i n t e r s t i c e s ; t o f i l t e r , a s water per- col a tes through sand.

permissible dose: That dose of ionizing radia t ion which, in the l i g h t

of present knowledge, c a r r i e s negligible probabi l i ty of causing severe somatic injury or genetic e f f ec t .

physiographic: Pertaining to physical geography.

playa: A f l a t area t h a t ferns the bottom o f an undrained basin. Playas are usually found in ar id regions, and a t times become

shal l ow 1 akes.

, . . . .

Pleistocene: See able H-1 (~eo1ogic"~irn. ~ e r i o d s j a t t h e end of the glossary. , ,

Pliocene: See Table H-1 (Geologic Time Periods) a t the end of the

gl oss ary .

pluvial: Occurring through the action of rain.

poise: A unit of viscosity.

popu 1 a t ion dose (population exposure) : The summat ion of individual. . .

radiation doses received b v a l l those exposed t o the so,urce or event being considered.

pressure grout: The process of forcing a cementatious.grout.mixtnre into f issures or cracks in rock.

pyrocl as t ic : A general term applied to de t r i t a l volcanic materials

that have been explosively or aer ia l ly ejected from a volcanic

vent. Also a general term for the class of rocks made .up of

these materials.

pyrolysis: Chemical change bsoug+t about by heat. . .

pyrophoric: Igniting spontaneously. . .

Quarternary: See Table H - 1 (Geologic Time Periods) a t the end of the

glossary. . .

rad: Abbreviation for Radiation A>so,rSed Dose, tfie .basic unit of

absorbed dose of ionizing radiation. A dose o f 1 rad corresponds to the absorptinn of I00 ergs of radiation energy per gram of

t issue.

radiat ion ( ion iz ing) : Par t i c les and electromagnetic energy emitted by s

nuclear transformations which are capable of producing ions.'when

interact ing with matter; gamma rays and alpha and beta pa r t i c l e s

are primary examples. . . .

radioactive: Unstable in a manner indicated by nuclear d is integrat ion.

. ,

radiolys is : Chemical decomposition by the action of radia t ion.

radionuclide: A radioactive nuclide.

Recent: See Table H-1 (Geologic Time'Perio'ds) a t the end'o'f the

glossary. I

rem (abbreviation fo r Roentgen Equivalent Man.) : A uni t of measure . . , . , :

f o r the dose of ionizing radia t ion which 'give's the same bio-

logical e f f ec t as one roentgen of X-rays; 'one ;em approximately

equals one rad f o r X , gamma, or beta radia t ion.

rhyol i te : ' A l i gh t colored fine-grained, acidic, volcanic rock, in

which feldspar and quartz predominate.

r i f t zone: A narrow be1 t of s t ruc tures and volcanic Jand forms . in .

which most, i f not 1 1 of the eruptions of an area are lo'cal ized.

r iprap: A foundation or re ta ining wall of stones thrown together

without order; a lso , the stone used f o r r iprap.

roentgen: A uni t of exposure of ionizing radiat ion. I t i s ' that ' .

amount of gamma or X-rays required t o produce ions carrying

1 e l e c t r o s t a t i c uni t of ' e l e c t r i c a l charge' in 1. cuhic ;enti&ter '

of dry a i r under standard conditions.

roughing f i l t e r : A r e l a t i ve ly coarse f i l t e r ins ta l l ed in f ron t of

HEPA f i l t e r s t o avoid overloading the HEPA f i l t e r s .

H-13

seismicity: . ,:The-: ten.den.cy. for .the .occurrence of :an eaythquake, . . . . .l . , . .

a . , . . . . . . . . . . . . I . - .1 .

. ,

shale: A f inely s t r a t i f i ed rock formed by the conso-lidation,of clay, , . . . mud, 'or s'i 1 t . , . . . . . , , .

s i l i c i c : 'Of or relat ing to si.li.ca or s.i..l-icon. . . .

slag: The glass-like product of a slagging pyrolysis incinerator.

i ' . . ' I

slurry: A watery mixture of insoluble matter..

somatic effects: . Effects on .the body. . ,

sorb: To take up and hold by ei ther adsorption or .adsorption,.

steppe: Arid land (usually an extensive plain) with vegetation

requiring l i t t l e moisture, usually found in regions of extreme t~mperature range and loess so i l .

storage: Retention of waste in a-manner for which (a) surveillance and human control are provided, and (b) subsequent retri(eva1 i s possible.

' . . . . ., . , .

tectonic: Related to the deformation of the ear th ' s .crust and. the ,. forces involved i n producing such deformations.

. . . " , . . .. ,. . .'i ' '

thermal neutron : A neutron slowed,. down by coll i s ions w i tb , , 1 ight:. atoms (e.g., hydrogen) to the speed of gas mole~ules a t room tempera- . .

ture (about 0.025 eV a t 15 '~) .

thermal neutron flux: The number of thermal ner~trons passing through a unit area in unit time. I t i s a term expressing the intensi ty

2 of thermal neutron radiation, measured in neutrons/cm /sec.

thermoluminescent dbsimeter: . A ' so l id -s ta te dosimeter t y p i c a l 1.y made . , :

o f l i t h i u m f l u o r i d e or calcium f luo r ide . The energy (o r radia-

t i o n ) absorbed by the dosimeter i s d i r e c t l y proport ional t o the

l i g h t o f a pa r t i cu l a r co lor emitted when t h e c r y s t a l i s heated.

transuranic: Generally r e fe r s t o the elements beyond uranium i n the

per iod ic table, i .e., w i t h an atomic number greater than 92. A

more d e t g i l e d ' d e f i n i t i o n i s given i n ERDAM-0511 (ERDA 1973a),

i nd i ca t i ng which nucl ides are included and which are not.

transuranic (TRU) waste: Waste contaminated w i t h t ransuranic rad io-

nucl ide. I n t h i s document, the term i s appl ied wi thout regard

t o the l c v e l o f t ransuranic contamination. See Footnote (b) i n

Subsection 1.1 f o r f u r t h e r de ta i l .

t raver t ine : A type o f limestone formed by the deposi t ion o f calcium

carbonate'from spr ing waters, espec ia l ly from hot spr ing waters.

t u f f : A f ine-grained, py roc las t i c rock composed o f fragments less

than 4 i n diameter. The fragments are o f ten fused o r welded

together -.by heat. ,Tuff i s ,often q u i t e porous.

water table: The upper boundary o f the por t ion o f the ground t ha t i s

saturatedl w i th water.

wind rose: A diagram designed t o show the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f p reva i l i ng

wind d i rec t ions a t a given locat ion; some var ia t ions include wind

speed groupings by d i rec t ion.

TABLE H-1

GEOLOGIC TIME PERIODS(~)

I Eon

Approx. system-Period

Era 1 System-Period I Subdivisions I Series-Epoch (106 yr)

Precambrian

Cenozoic I Quarternary

Tertiary Neogene

Paleogene

Recent I (Holocene)

Pleistocene 1 - 0 ' 1 2 -

Pl i ocene

Miocene

22

01 i gocene - --

Eocene

Paleocene

62

(a) Source: Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (Woolf et al. 1977).

Mesozolc

Paleozoic

H-16 GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: I978 281 -704/1028 1-3

Proterozoic

2600 - Archean

3600 - No record

Cretaceous 130-

Jurassic 180-

Triassic

230 .- Permi an

280 - Carboniferous Pennsylvanian -

Mississlpian

340 - Devonian

400 - Silurian

450 - Ordovician

500 - Cambr i an

570-

Environmental and Other Evaluations of Alternatives for Long ...

Documents

Transcript of Environmental and Other Evaluations of Alternatives for Long ...