ML20112E184
| ML20112E184 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Neely Research Reactor |
| Issue date: | 08/05/1969 |
| From: | Zimmerman R Neely Research Reactor, ATLANTA, GA |
| To: | Hendrix G US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20112E009 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9606050179 | |
| Download: ML20112E184 (34) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:_ _ - . _ - _ _ . _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ - _ - _ - - _ . - - - -
. /
. ~ /.. -
~
7 '
.)
_ 1818
;. / es m c '. r n c.v o r .r.,uru r:o w ome l ) <.. r : o s s o z.i l
(a%)/ t y,. Nuclear Research Center ,
- ,I Atlante. Georgia JM.8) nt;1c . .of R&: u .:l w I August 5, 1969
! i i
! l. .
l AIR MAIL i i
! I Division of Materials Licensing .
U. S. Atectic Energy Cocaission . Washington, D. C. 20545 Attention: Mr. Gene Hendrix Gentlemen: . n 9
'This letter supplies information to supplement my request of June 6, 1969, for amendrent of our broad license _10-01937-15 to permit tracer studies in the Chattahoochee River. Addirn>nal information was requested in the telephone conversation with Mr. Hendrix.
The additional details which have been requested concerning the flow and the use of the Chattahoochee River in the region under investigation is contained in the memo to me from J. R. Wall tec, a copy of which is attached. I hope that this will be sufficient for your continued review for this application.' -
; Very truly yours,
; . v/
l
/o f. c 's .~f m . I ,j C nt -s m.' 'i n.vs y/j ,}
! Robert L. Zi:=crmn l RL3:jh Radiologice.1 Cafety Officer l , Attachment h
j cc: Mr. R. H. Fets, Director
! Radiological Health Section
! Georgia Dept. of Health i ! Dr. H. M. Heumann
! Mr. H. L. Baker Dr. E. C. Tsivoglou 1
%;c ...
9606050179 960524 I ' Sw l PDR ADOCK 05000160 i H PDR _-- _____________\
i. gp;mmerw ------ y i.
. c .
1c1B
/'.
i i C2ORG;. . :NC liTUT2 OF TZCHNOLOGY - i e AT'sNTA. G eoRGIA 00332
! , sc x;. cr '
. V.IVib M G IN J s.. . $.C TELCPHONU ggg, g y g,, g g g I
j July 31, 19o9 - l
/ j j
i i
.4.0 . . ~ , , .....w n ..
-..c...... ..
l-i . - , . . . . , c.s.:..:.ac e cr a. C . ,,sivos..cu
- o. c. .
- m. ~ , ...... . .. . .. . .
a...< ..w..w s* l
}. Dic r.umo is in reply to ycur questions recc dinc the tracer l ctulie: which .te 7 ca to conduct in the Chctrahoochee 31ver. Se ::.ax.
.a.n : nu~.ber of to :a to ce cor.Scted is ten. The reach under inves.
I,.' ti;s; ion c cer.is for a distr.n:o c:" 30 miles from the bridge cf the Scc.bcs.rd Air Line 2 . .; c .' .;a.'re is no reported doc.cstic uce of t* ac "i.0tuch cchcc ..ivar sca ;cr :'or cypro.::ir.ctQr 70 rt.iics downstream.
....,s.
v.., . . , a , c.,. ..p . . ,. ,,.,. c , ..wa . c,. e s .
.u w ev i .. w ..s. u, c.., v.
v u o..ia. I. .
. .u. .e r ..,.
3.w,.c. r. . . ., m...
..v . ...w .,...
. .ab..e Ci. . . . ... ., . <.
, 3'; .
w u. ....
... /. . ..... .C. . . .., ..i . .u....
. . . ., .. e C .s.e ..,.,e.,, ;
,. . ... .. ., .. .. . . .we . .. ...
e d ov, . . . ......ve
..,.,._.....,.,....,v.....,C,.......r.,
vo... v.
.. , g , s e.w..
....,s.ig,,.,.*v...
o . .~ w . .
. .....w. . . ... ,.,. . , . , . . ..
.. w. v, vo s.,c
..,,..E,..e..,7 m.
,vc . .G .-
i
;1 . . . .w. ;
.. e..e ,vs .- .
..e vw v. ... ..e... .*,a w.i
./
;i v. v . L s, . . . . . . .
..s.. ..
t...<...:.:....w..
.. ., . ., . . . , ,. . e e .,., C n u.... .
j . , . . . .,. . . , ,-... . ....w. . . . . . ..v. . . . . , . . .w... .... ...
. . . , v... s. . .f . e.. .. .
mm,., ... gu. ..< .w- . a.g o..1y g .,, . , . . . :.... . w...l . . .
+.u,.
r.-r.w v-, ..,..>.....,i,....r-
. , , ..s ....v..% .. .# s.
w.., O Co o.,v -i.,. ru.
..e. .c. .. vc... y. g.>.. < c 1 w. .is.u . . . ou....c C.,.,c, . w . >v :. w
. .. . w 424e . .e..
. . , . .s, p ..j 4 .
u . c ww A,. C . coo.3..g. n y . u S:.: -.,cuer iar;:.11ations cro locc. tad near th; u?strec.~. end of the study j,
. res:h. he ime ctrici neo ci.ssificctica c.pplies for a dictance of !
.f 33 niles, tc.c ne::t 25 niles c.:'a :ated soci enouch.for fiching, cnd l
.[ not until pa: Sins this point is the water cuitabic for other recro-I- ctioral purposes. Knoviedse of the poor c.uality in the crea bein; I: :ied keepa the possibility of human contact with the water to a l
't .
. j: nininum.
!I
'I
he recorris of the U.S. Geologie:1 Survey for ga3e 2-3371.T, loca ,cd within the study reach, chov the minir.a:m dische.rge of record i
- ,- to be 1220 cis. It is e:cpected that the mini =um flow durin; cur
-f tecto vill be this 'high or hic;her.
t. 4 s
,g
.-.n. .._ .
l I i
*8 .
4
((. .; / p y'EI 7. .' ? '* f. w Ol 0. .)if d.
. ~
+q 1
\
o .t6+ f1v t. -u, st f ,IJ.\ 4
,...,.., .v ..7:, . , st .-j E i;'.': h a' U. TA L PROTCC TIC:2 C I V i ' '. * :
'- -k
; .:>e o. 7a. .a .
;. r. : :.:.m.G:'.n S :n1i s :,
v c e ,.,,,,, , , . w . , A7 u :.tA. c w nc A ae m A: t r.,.. uw t.c:c sTTc n u . s.s, o.. ..w. g i Jc..e 2 , 19H Yh@ WND Yhf. nuw. A . Q Q % (y N W%. National F,ureau of St talards lbute 270 gTr 6 \36 Qiinee Or:r.r.rd Read . Gai the rburg , .'.*c.r,, land 20760
,3.em 1.oftis ed i .s :
Radiation Physics Building
Dear Sir:
Per our previous telephone conversation, the State cf Georgia is re-
;;r questing 'GS certificution of our 10 .mg Pa-226 source, ne nource is a -
>1 'M platir.t a iriditta needic 150,20 x 1.75 x 3.5 ::a, purchased fre:a the Radii
't:a Chc.T.ical Coinpariy.
A certificate with the needle identified as 735599 kith 10.17 :dlligram Raditta in the fona of r;dium sulfate; the certi-h._9 fication did not accou:it for resothorita content; certificate date 5 h'o v . 7 3 . The needle has t .cn approxi:nately centered in a small plastic vial with a fea:a renterial, which will allow re. oval of the needle if r,c. esstr'. . The scurce has been leak tested and shipped in a reuscble lead container. A purchase crder will ha v en * " ' u.r..%. r s e!... rm- e cr- ec t . If you "c"~.1 u,q. tw_,.y a into:m d on, yea e,ay contact te at (4 94) sc4 .?a'7.5. h* ur -
- . .3.. . e r. gr. eat,y apprec2ated.
.t m
. .z Sincerely,
'*z~~~ a 'r ^ .f. ~ ./ f.a ll V.,Y.)dSM'Mf_ln,'{',.s I. RT?lnri.! Uhilli!S T c. n. -A. . s: . . i. ,.. r11
,c. d. i e e,,.
Cer IiT/ fpC
'N Y ;;$ %
.:. M.
5
% . 'S
- g. _ _ . . , _ . _ . - -"
-. i .c,, wa i s meur .w3 e 3
; 1 f '
t. I D E.: A Ti T M E !PT O F C C M M E : . C :. ' t u.T I C ru.L U'.14.i A t1 C ;* STA r 4 D A H L G W A:.H IN 07 0 r4 OC .% 2 3 *
\.
NATIONAL DUTdAU CF STANDARDS ' REPORT OF CALBR/- TION I iPi?CD.'.E!t s OF P. A0!0 ACTIVE M A Tc T.t AL 4 - f 4. ,. - Sabmitad t v s e i t i e i% Gaorgia Institute cf Tectndlocy Difice of Interdisciplinary Programs Atlanta Gcorgia 30334 I. t 1 i Deserh:::n: The inf,i:r..uica fa:cir.hed :his Futeau cencerning the :ldioac:ite mare:ials ;..3 d.e e r.c:q : ed a tion of th e :.p c e. - e n z, i .: ! ca!!!.:.uion res ul:s. given in c: e ta!!c(c) .t: ache:! :o this scport, tere:Let with d.e [ t
in P : !i e n. '/ .c c s u r e r e n t : The i
~
v: . he P :dit.: . .# t .:ndard c f .?:is radiuri speciraens have been comiu:r d, ei.her singly or in paape,
! ute au. The ran.:r n radianen f:c . thr : p,eci ne:a h::s bec.
C. W".~ t,f' fo.:n j tc he enui*. ~ ie nt :e t he .
- ' . c.c.:n.a 4.2 c R a a. .um '.'e .a s ur e ." e n t s , t..e.e : n 5. :n ru.l.. ien !:em the cuan :iet. given in the..n : ached i!e, af:ams c.: :..:.,:ur, in ra::o.:co ve c ca nm::u:n, and ec.r.-
tair.c d in tubes eill ':in:ian r:as:; 0.27 re a : hick, si:nilar to thn: el che Hadium 5:eni ar:. The 8 u .e : air:ie s ;n th,.r c - l .ie s ,:c giver: : thi; tab:c, Colun.n ? I: shculd be aceted that en :he
./. !
h is tt .c. is c.i :1 e .' i:
. ..ric,. ei . . :adium specimer.: 2:.d under the cendi:!cas of. me a sure m<:nt I.
.ra: . .
' ..a.:in e n:.:t er:a! vecte cc t sined :,n a r,.acs tuce or :ne.nn . , sp:en.. r, [
- f. t' e 3 : e n .! . : i f. . e e ..
; . :.. ii : : ,#.
a tali:. tion from *!:e .pe cinen vrou!J !.e . cater than :::e . ' ae ;;in e.. j n a te n. s 4:e c rec:c i !< r w a:1 al.? c p; ion 't et nc: for . c!f n!morption is .ver. . i n ti.e nd.'c , ' e. ! .r.n ( . Ec cb .n c:icnr. upn ,! ich this ter., t is bsed do not se .e to c. t g.
.'a t.
~ . o.c en radh.,> ;.tq a _tiens :.nd chase ec n: air. int, cd.er a !!ur.ctive rnaterial.
' ! O :' - C c.,r,: . r : y !.'. .< c s c r e . e n t s cs :7 :ed sith y -ita: T:.nr. u!at e.! r _ rn .a. ay s ue:ces $therthan radiu:.) are F
a- : aces of he sa.ne ra&ae:ive . matt .r! hich have been ~essured in
~ .d e pa r.e t: in te::.s of mi::c.ie:. . e: s ; cr 1.sur at ene rmcr dis:a::ce. The Rhm :.!un
- . . ' i. e t < !: a:ed une c f Em ap s .: sty in t he mease:eincnt s .:re given in the a:r:ched table, Measu:ct.en:
. 3 Ga en "ay Ne:ces,9 hh a description oi the to :ces.
- y. ;
g.c . <, - qj . For the Directr,:
") .s.I.A. '.
g l Q. p)i[j}) 7 e.---__
-Q !)
ThG M ? L."[0 J u! D y S i C i d !' , ' 15 l ? .? ; ;"f S 42 C 010n E
.z., s t i r. n ,, h y r . c s wn.
i
- h. r. .y ive<:ca twc. 51l0/ ye
~
It st ? s ,'I, l / (,- de equS1 l. ,IJ//
- =
i1. w. t g I
.r . . . .
.t
- I R ADIUM M E A50".EMENTS g _ , _ _ _ , _ ,
i i I t 2 3 4 l 5 6 ; i.
- i. .
f .. _....,I__.__._ . _ . . . ........_.....__.i__....__ . - _ . . l ; i .
}a ..
i
/
I i l-
.,:, I .! e .-. I tl- .. kl, j j /, ; .
C . : a d e w ..' i < .. .i c s,w c r ( .s; : d e . '. :
" 'i " Y ' "" ' r r
,,;, ,, t e , ,,{ . , , w, ,.
i ic ar,a rli. ! s!is r a : Or .J t % '.. r. c . . m.. " i-f ,* % ~ t,. . ., : 3 c,,,,,.g., ! t n. ,i ri t. r . i. s . .i n , i i - a: .'si , - l I
.. .u ____ ___ ._1 _. ;
l . _ _ _ l i l . i ...; m:9 ! - Ft-le 1.75 'J 5 9./. D.2 9.8 ,' i . ; ! O
- j j
{ . l l 1
- i. t. f i -.- ,. l a 1 [ , i. ;.
i i ( l [ [ l ; L :.i i 4 l { 4 t l ' i
! I I l. f l . i. I g' .
i i i li . . t t i 6 i l i i i- ; I ' i i l I l . l i ; i I i a i i i i ! l i i : i t l 8 l 6 f i ,-1.1.. , %,t , e i,
- - I.
l h. I h 1 1 1 h:2 s
* )
%# 1 l
I 1 I e I.
- b. i l
! e
! ! [ i
~
i ! , l-e I i i . , l J .f.
- i. . .-
i, i 4 I i i
. i l 1
6 - I s..\' . } 4 -
<'.c.-0 / ~ f. i- 5q. c i
) . N 3. '\ e '
, .[, 'E *','. ;..,,2.
, .yT , b g'sC8 $
{ c- Gt D , (d , t
.- %C ,s V' .'
- i i -- S
.$u.. .. 39 c ",
s
' C.c..*htb v '. . as t c r". , i,, . e s' og 1
i
# "s'... o V',iP W. ,c-.- 6 ,
l y/:2c 6 " ,,,N 0D
~..
, 7,\@ ~, . ,'s0 ,~ 3cT ' ' g e @.
. l Cb < 51* .1 '.G' 7" '
1O?*.-
, . ,- ,>'wi . , i j i 1 1 i.' -l o , gC 5)C. ",, e -
- i .
t V'* l i
- c.c o d" li .
1 'iN l 1 4 l' . i 1 .
*' s j (t s.". lL l Nilf f I*
. . 6'. 4 ** I il I k Iie *'tI i
.i 4 .
+
n.,. ,,. , . ~ . . - - - , - l
a w ~ --
's-N, .:
v l is , l i .
, st ._.
t. s t. c.'i it li:c.*. *= 1 Gbd D i-~ n ~ l
* ~ : (m uA -- >
\ , c '.> 0 r / c)
' r** I '
-- I ( */ \ \ V H U q e.
POUR SEL DE ' :A '0 : ll .'/ liVrd di
- e.....
.s....- ., c p . . ., ..
l' ' . ? ., . O f .f
~: " " f,'d .OS i....,.,at.
, I .' .s .r .u.,.
$$.~h . .ni . f? tg + g-s., E!)+L!111011 bd, .< + ,t!11 Crc QttcSte par l8 pr SQnle que ltii,.;2310 e. 7 t .1 r . 7 MS , 'l 0 3 O *' 7 , '
*n! - ' ' O ?. ;
'd 8 3 9 9 g *
- _ .u.
( G T'e s e r m e ------- ,!.u , 1.,/ n
------ millig ra m m OS GG 4 r,ad,um i e,lCmGnl SOUS form 0 de SUl fate de Radium. (aaeiurn ceriti;e exem;; dei.6senc:,u:n).
s.
'::eue par ERUAELLES (5c!gique). 'e 5 c.c.v. - '. r.
\
..q
/
19 7 3
,-- % W. UNictJ r,'.iNi:t A E 5. A.
e
\ ...--
le lat:ra t:':e de f.:e sv:e r^
/ >v
\ l,5 \ l /
1 \ 6 4
!:10.
} 43
-n
. w~. ,m p ,g w%m>R.
.8 s.
g
.j
;nr
; an w a os q
&Mj [ N s .
g MS%; 8 $ $
}a a:h5 El ad
-g- ;F mE
~ 6' u
n .MM. Wg ..[} W= , p pm s- -s y 8 y nxn 88 g-a 8' a
- g-8N & aa E g
2 a . e " a g' g l 1--8
. m,I o $ ~.
~
h h.
= , .
3 : , , , , .. R . Amh - QuakeIqqf9 threat shakes tYrwme. m ecwwrewe buildingddes Sturdierstructures meant to reduce damagefom a temblor in the vulnerable South Cy Lucy Soto building code meant to reduce the "There. would be people at the. leased in 1997, and officials are work-STAFF WRITER hazards of earthquake damage. tops of skyscrapers who would really ing toward national standards by New building standards put a be able to tell stories about the ride. It 2000.
. On a sultry evening in August large swath of northern and eastern would be swinging terribly," said Better mapping, probability for-1886, the earth moved. In seconds of Georgia in a category prone to " mod. Tim long, a seismologist and geo. mulas and technology give scientists wrenching uncertainty, Mother Na- erate" earthquake damage, which physics professor at Georgia Tech. a better pt:ture of the nsks and po-Danger would come from flying . tential damage. Geophysicists have ture rocked, rumbled and nearly lev- means tall buildings, hospitals, eled Charleston, S.C. schools and office high-rises must be shards of glass, falling ceiling tiles, noted swarms of nucroquakes in Minuteslaterand 250 miles away, built with better bracing and support. and flying desks and chairs. MARTA eastern Tennessee in recent years.
'the undulating shock waves reached The additions can inflate the cost of a trains would sway and possiblyjump And seismologists who predict some Athnta, stopping clocks, shattering project by up to 5 percent, although a track. Atlanta's old warehouses earthquakes hit m 100-year cycles , windows, knocking down a house and some regulations can be sidestepped' could crumble. warn that the South is about 10 years crumbling chimneys atop the city's where soil and terrain conditions are The.new building codes bubbled past the anniversary of Charleston's largest building, a six-story structure favorable. up from the U3. Geological Survey #D, . housing The Atlanta Constitution. Federal seismologists have pre. and Federal Emergency Manage- sayin som ne is o ng to get i ed The damage in Atlanta was rela- dicted Georgia, South Camlina and ment Agency.Then in 1994,the maps out someday," said James IIarris, a tively minor, but the outcome might North Carolina could sustain billions and suggested rules were created by be radically different in today's bur- of dollars in property damage if a the Southern Building Code Congress consulting structural engineer in geoning metropolis of nearly 3 mil- Charleston-style quake hit today. Ex. International. Georgia adopted the Denver who has worked with the seismic codes. "We're trying to pro-tion people.That's one reason why 64 perts say there's a 25 percent proba. revamped building code late last vide some protection. It's a way to de ' Georgia counties, incl:2 ding most of bility one of that magnitude will hit year., termine where it's wisest to spend metro' Atlanta, are sufject to a new somewhere in the East in 25 years. More cuidelines are to be re- some money."
l i 1 1 1 l GEOLOGY OF THE GREATER ATLANTA REGION , Keith I. McConnell and Charlotte E. Abrams l l l } d
%h
.ffff. 1nW:
MtMU ff 4yy ft$: ~ R"iW
.M Nl}j
"<%u3[..Ng,.,"
c g& " s
\
I
) =- 9;. Mf y $ @f$ @? MJ p .n'Md gj: [E$g?
n l 'w 3 n[jf;h} d {fl ; i, yty}L i ,. l I l y he.: (.$hi $?.?$il? QE? w:$h!l ? ;h' N gg $ s9} w ?qgk N 5 $
."$$5:?q . hRyp7 J? %@'t5$Y?m,,$ ' ~$ \
g 5y 5:
- ?.,p.
Qh: k?:4 .Wy ; Y5h , ..LJy'Qpi; l g -V ?' ;
.Q
.,nt ,
, y'
~- m
- sx cyQ m = :.,e
.a= :
pl,16x%yy;5'ij$Qf gn . c: .- mey w;4 E'i..'- -- q i J n..n2:. : t
, p,a
! g dE . rk ,;,./ ~c 2 2
====
1 -
}.- - ... .. g ag.w. .. Uk "]E== I~:.?:ple,@ !!E:
E2d% 4 ,42
= . . ,_ , . _m :.= = E?. .-Q.lNigi.,_E iiii
== =..=. _= =_
- ,*e -
v.m, o< ,Pm- f :.. ==:==== m A: 5- ..: +m> i ir . , . .=: WE . 5.f.- w ; d_Wg-QR 5:
,g -
pt: i z y.- y., , s
-- a@.3
.:- . .. ...- 555'.
== =_ = = =_
y t < ;y/.,; ,,:s=+-
.... ;: : y. c --
151!N n . .
,n:
i.2.'::.'I
.~ .- .
= ==
, . _ u-i e . _. ed = g~ t c.= !.!!!--
== = _ == =
l -
. h v gir g- -
kF j' i. ~' !:"h - E 1 ! T ! k.ggg&I-i
;--r--U;I - 'ds"""d!!!!
l
)
$ l!!
- l
~~:=,==< .;.,
[ u.=.:,u== m y ,..,;. . .. . . I !, v. j _ _ .. a
- su : - ,
1a . i i i kM f r Department of Natural Resources J. Leonard Ledbetter, Commissioner [ qgyp ' h b Environmental Protection Director Division /N '~ Harold F. Rehels, Assistant 3gg gD Georgia Geologic Survey William H. McLemore, State Geologist g gg i y \6 Sn v t\} Atlanta g ;QTM+CT5 1984 A I s 's\ T (4 N A - BULLETIN 96 MMM
,. st%TE (i50,1s0 C'3T gg gr(\\ d ds (AyN CMO_
t N FitE LM_-
.o ag Austell G neiss ( Abrams and McConnell,1981a: Abrams,1983): fine- to coarse-grained blastoporphyritic to nonporphyritic orthogneiss com-
.~
posed of muscovite, biotite, oligoclase, quartz and microcline. shg Sand Hill G neiss (this report): fine- to coarse-grained blastoporphyritic to nonporphyritic orthogneiss composed of muscovite, biotite, oligoclase,
,' quartz and microcline. Generally contains more muscovite, quartz and
, plagioclase and less microcline than Austell Gneiss.
mrg Mulberry Rock Gneiss (this report): medium-grained, equigranular l muscovite-quartz microcline-plagioclase orthogneiss.
- d Diabase dikes e
SOUTHERN PIEDMONT PROVINCE AND BREVARD FAULT ZONE e
. . Atlanta Group (late Precambrian to early Paleozoic)
, (stratigraphic order revised after Higgins and Atkins,1981):
, cc Camp Creek Formation (Higgins and Atkins,1981): massive
- , granite gneiss interlayered with thin, fine-grained, dark-green
, hornblende-plagioclase amphibolite.
icq Intrenchment Creek Quartzite (Higgins and Atkins,1981): spessartine quartzite and spessartine-mica schist interpreted in this g report to be banded iron formation. 4 bei Big Cotton Indian Formation (Higgins and Atkins,1981): inter-
! calated biotite-plagioclase gneiss (locally porphyritic), hornblende-
. ; plagioclase amphibolite, and biotite-muscovite schist. l
; .ca Clarkston Formation (Higgins and Atkins,1981): sillimanite-
- te garnet-quartz-plagioclase-biotite-m uscovite schist interlayered with I f hornblende-plagioclase amphibolite (ca). Includes a unit composed t only of schist termed the Fairburn Member (f); and a unit sirellar to 1.
Clarkston undifferentiated termed the Tar Creek Member (tc). . 6, i st Stonewall Formation (Higgins and Atkins,1981): intercalated i fine-grained blotite gneiss, hornblende-plagioclase amphibolite and j sillimanite biotite schist-
.5 Wahoo Creek Formation (Higgins and Atkins,1981): includes t
t ("ws[']s' slabby, medium grained muscovite-plagioclase-quartz gneiss, amphibolite, mica schist and epidote-calcite-diopside gneiss (cale. 6 silicate). i se Sencia Formation (Atkins and Higgins,1981): garnet-biotite-
.' , muscovite schist interlayered with fine-grained amphibolite, local
. y thin layers of spessartine quartzite (iron formation?), sillimanite schist and biotite gneiss.
', el Clairmont Formation (Higgins and Atkins,1981): interlayered-medium-grained biotite-plagioclase gneiss and fine- to medium-grained hornblende-plagioclase amphibolite.
1
! pl Promised Land Formation (Higgins and Atkins,1981): includes I h massive to thinly layered, medium-grained, gray, banded biotite grcnite gneiss interlayered with fine-grained, dark-green to greenish black, blocky amphibolite. A thin quartzite and muscovite quartz schist unit near top of the Promised Land Formation is termed the
; Hannah Member (h).
I we Wolf Creek Formation (Higgins and Atkins.1981): thinly lami-
, nated, fine-grained amphibolite interlayered with lustrous, silvery,
, gray, biotite-muscovite schist.
, I t 87 I ' l
._ , , .~ -
4 l
\
l ly Inm n Ycrd F:rm: tion (Higgins and Atkins 1981): porphyro-blastic biotite-plagioclase gneiss porphyroblastic granite gneiss and sillimanite-muscovite schist.
. ng Norcross Gneiss (Higgins and Atkins 1981): light gray epidote-biotite-m uscovite-plagioclase gneiss locally con taining am phibolite, n Snellville Formation (Higgins and Atkins,1981): includes two 1 members, a lower member of interlayered garnet biotite-muscovite schist, biotite-muscovite schist, thin amphibolites and minor biotite gneiss and quartzite termed the Norris Lake Schist (n) and an upper member composed of quartzite variably containing muscovite, garnet and sillimanite termed the Lanier Mountain Quartzite (1).
pfu Sandy Springs G roup (Higgins and McConnell,1978a: Kline,1980: cpq this report): Similar to sequence observed in northern Piedmont and is at least partially equivalent to Atlanta Group (see text). Includes a lower unit of intercalated biotite gneiss, mica schist and amphibolite (pfu): a middle unit composed of micaceous quartzite, mica schist and graphitic schist (epq): and an upper unit of graphite-garnet-mica schist with lesser amounts of biotite gneiss and amphibolite (fs). um Unnamed or unassigned units (after Grant, unpublished data: this amp report): includes meta-ultramafic rocks (um); amphibolite (amp) bgn mica schist and biotite gneiss (bgn): granitic gneiss (ggn); inter-ggn layered sillimanite-graphite schist and graphitic, feldspathic sg quartzite (sg); graphitic, micaceous, feldspathic quartzite (q): bgn/ amp /sch intercalated biotite gneiss, amphibolite and mica schist (bgn/ q amp /sch); garnet mica schist istaurolite and garnet biotite gneiss bms (bms); and marble (m). m Pzss Soapstone Ridge Complex (Higgins and Atkins,1981): includes an Pzum actinolite-chlorite-tale schist (Pzss); fine-grained amphibolite (Pzsa), Pzsa intermlxed amphibolite and actinolite-chlorite-tale schist (Pzsas); and Pzsas coarse-grained ultramafic rock (Pzum). Also present but not defined on Plate I is a mixed amphibolite-metagabbro-ultramafie unit and a sillimanite-quartz blastomylonite and epidosite near the base of the complex. lig Lithonia Gneiss (Herrmann,1954): includes evenly banded biotite-quartz-feldspar gneiss, quartz-rich garnetiferous layers and migmatitic muscovite-biotite-plagioclase-microcline-quartz gneiss termed the Mt. ' Arabia Migmatite (Grant and others,1980: not outline on Plate 1). Cp Palmetto Granite (Dooley, in Atkins and others,1980a): coarse-grained porphyritic granite composed of microcline, quartz and plagioclase with accessory biotite, muscovite, perthite, sphene, apatite, epidote, and zircon. Cb Ben Hill Granite (Higgins and Atkins,1981): coarse-grained, por-phyritic muscovite-biotite quartz-plagioclase-microcline granite. Cpa Panola Granite (Higgins and Atkins,1981): homogenous, medium-grained biotite-oligoclase-quartz-microcline granite. Cs Stone Mountain Granite (Herrmann,1954) fine-to medium-grained granite composed of biotite, muscovite, microcline, quartz and oligo-clase with characteristic rosettes of tourmaline. my Ductilely sheared rocks: includes undifferentiated ductilely sheared bz rocks in the Brevard zone including button schists (bz), mylonites in the bzm - Brevard zone (bzm), and mylonite in other areas (my). d .- Diabase dikes. 88
s Hatcher,R.D.,Jr.,andOdom, A.L.1980 Timingof thrusting Hull, J.P.D.,1920. Report on the barytes deposits of Georgia: in the southern Appalachians, U.S.A.: model for orogeny?: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 36,146 p. Journal Geological Society of Iondon, v.137, p. 321-327. Hull, J.P.D., LaForge, L., and Crane, W.R.,1919. Report on Hayes, C.W.,1891 Tho overthrust faults of the southern the manganese deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Su n ey Appalachians: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 2, Bulletin 35. 295 p. _
.g
~*
p.141 154. Hurst, V.J.,1952 Geology of the Kennesaw Mountain Sweat
.1895, Unpublished geology of the Cartersville Mountainarea.CobbCounty, Georgia (M.S.thesish Atlanta, topographic quadrangle: scale 1:125,000. Emory University,165 p.
1901, Geological relations of the iron-ores in the ,1955, Stratigraphy, structure and mineral re-Cartersville district. Georgia: American Institute of Mining sources of the Mineral Bluff Quadrangle, Georgia: Georgia Engineers Transactions, v. 30, p. 403-419. Geologic Survey Bulletin 63,137 p.
,1902, Rome folio, Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey ,1959, Geologic map of Kennesaw Mountain-Sweat Geologic Atlas of the United States, Folio 78,13 p. .
Mountain area, Cobb County, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Hayes,C.W..and Eckel E.C.1902,Ironoresof theCartersville Survey Map RM 2,1:24,000. district, Georgia, in Emmons. S.F., and Hgyes, C.W., eds., ,1970 The Piedmont in Georgia, in Fisher, G.W., Contributions to economic geology: U.S. Geological Survey Pettijohn, G.J., Reed, J.C., and Weaver, K.N., eds., Studles Bulletin 213, p. 233-242. of Appalachian geology: central and southern: New York. Hayes, C.W., and Phalen, W.C.,1907, Graphite deposits near Wiley Interscience, p. 383-396. Cartersville, Georgia, in Hayes, C.W., and Lindgren, W., ,1973 Geology of the southern Blue Ridge belt: eds., Contributions to economic geology: U.S. Geologic American Journal of Science, v. 273, p. 643-670. Survey Bulletin 340, p. 463 465. Hurst, V.J., and Crawford,T.J.,1964. Exploration for mineral Herrmann, LA.1954,Geologyof the Stone Mountain-Lithonia deposits in Habersham County, Georgia: U.S. Department District, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 61,139 of Commerce Area Redevelopment Administration,180 p.
- p. ,1970, Sulfide deposits in the Coosa Valley area.
Higgins, M.W.,1966 Geology of the Brevard lineament near Georgia: Coosa Valley Area Planning and Development Atlanta, Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 77,49 Commission,190 p.
- p. Hurst, V.J. and Jones, L.M.,1973,0rigin of amphibolites in
,1968, Geologic map of the Brevard fault zone near the Cartersville-Villa Rica area. Georgia: Geological Society Atlanta, Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey Map I 511, of American Bulletin, v. 84, p. 905-911.
1:48,000. Hurst, V.J., and long, S.W.,1971, Geochemical study of Higgins,M.W..and Atkins R.L,1981,Thestratigraphyof the alluvium in the Chattahoochee Flint area, Georgia: Piedmont southeast of the Brevard zone in the Atlanta, University of Georgia institute of Community and Area Georgia, area, in Wigley, P.B., ed., Latest thinking on the Development,52 p. stratigraphy of selected areas in Georgia: Georgia Geologic Jones, LM., Hurst, V.J., and Walker, R.L.1973, Strontium Survey Information Circular 54 A, p. 3-40. isotope composition of amphibolite of the Cartersville-Villa Higgins, M.W., and McConnell, K.I.,1978a, The Sandy Rica District. Georgia: Geological Society of America Springs Group and related rocks in the Georgia Piedmont- Bulletin, v. 84, p. 913-918. nomenclature and stratigraphy, in Sohl, N.F.. and Wright, Jones, S.P.,1909, Second report on the gold deposits of W.B., eds., Changes in stratigraphic nomenclature by the Georgia: Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 19,283 p. U.S. Geological Survey,1977: U.S. Geological Survey Keith, A.,1904, Asheville folio: U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Bulletin 1457-A, p. A98-A105. Atlas of the United States. Folio 116,10 p.
,1978b, The Sandy Springs Group and related ,1907, Nantahala folio: U.S. Geological Survey rocks of the Georgia Piedmont: nomenclature and strati. Geologic Atlas of the Unitad States, Folio 143,11 p.
graphy, in Short contributions to the geology of Georgia: Kesler T.L.1950 Geology and mineral deposits of the Georgia Geologic Survey Bulletin 93, p. 50-55. Cartersville District, Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey Higgins, M.W., and Zietz, I.,1975, Geologie interpretation of Professional Paper 224,97 p. seromagnetic and aeroradioactivity maps of northern King, F.P.,1894 A preliminary report on the corundum Georgia: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investi. deposits of Georgia: Georgia Geologic Suney Bulletin 2, gations Map I 783,1:500,000,16 p. 133 p. t Higgins, M.W., Atkins, R.L., and Dooley, R.E.,1980a, King, P.B.,1955, A geologic section across the southern Structure and stratigraphy of the Atlanta area, Georgia: Appalachians, in Russell, RJ., ed., Guides to southeastern _i i Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. geology: Geological Society of America, p. 332-373.
! 12,no.4,p.180. ,1964 Geology of the central Great Smoky Higgins, M.W., Pickering, S.M.,Jr., and Atkins, R.L,1980b, Mountains, Tennessee: U.S. Geological Survey Professional The Soapstone Ridge Complex, Atlanta, Georgia: a trans. Paper 349-C,148 p.
1 ported mafic ultramafic complex in the southeastern King, P.B., Hadley, J.B., Neuman, R.B., and Hamilton, W., Appalachian Piedmont: Geological Society of America 1958, Stratigraphy of 0coee series. Great Smoky Mountains Abstracts with Programs, v.12, no. 7, p. 446. Tennessee and North Carolina: Geological Society of
- Hopkins, 0.B.,1914 A report on the asbestos, tale and America Bulletin, v. 69, p. 947-966. . soapstone deposits of' Georgia: Georgia Geologic Suney ! Bulletin 29,319 p.
i 75
pM b.M ' ~ h [ g $%j? yw?l.c.3:LB ; Q V .g l
,x n, N zw
-- -n, .a sg .ww 4 w,t n. e t 9,
) V 6
Y f JE %
$w[,IS, 4 M./-
g N. y h()MM ' 1 %,c
\
d.I h# ,,~ # , IcOS
$ U - /. h '; [k o 6'1 coa _ 1*[( .d! /
coq
/ ~> &s .g INg 44,pi s .g me c
- n. hqige n 4 2
. 9. . ~
%'. M y-% ,ht,frW-
_s@%,s 6'_ rif 4,
\, ?
s w._ ' . ~ . y ' ;- 4 (,\
- r wm yqu
- v 41w4Ew%;an]p ,\
- a. amp p ,S.
, J W ' ' g' e 2.w:w. ,
m a'. 'm p e n ~-~, hgu 5',,9#4 s h 3 cttD nr - s g '/ : ('pa_ > m , m *- .,X, m :2
-p'e
} M< Cf/'kh #.+ %k d
\ 'h C .QW .j / 1 W ' ~
o 5
,% db ' \ , ., .,
aA= 4QMQpQ _s 4 . fw ye, fh f.rs m mmu nlp&eRf - g h?p'hr k' hh3fhhh
~
VV V' h %.
'~
khhMNhbbM
# -[#. w A-.,;
' w -
o d '/' 3 * 's ' t . j ' i-" kd "s, ) H< y ,.4 -
" P
- l ~ l 4' ^in y c+
~~
[; 2__ , u A
-e
^
~
,, c y.- " E f c &j,q h,m"itTi ' .
i jry ..'w,al[..%n,4,
, r, o ,c ggh j,j, .7 w 7 ,_ y _,,;
? ,. ,9 g[ga. nss'g lk h>
i f Fil I "[i 7 q q w [] m, m - Q Q ntp(s'h}d: 3~;f _. iWy 3 x =m g g @ypq y y' 9g 9&g7jE M R g8 g' 4
'he [ Mk. .p
~
= w A s @ m @. _~ nfMO
@ Ry; M m@%MMpIM%disNEI 'y r..I
..$, W N$g$ w'ctre e ..
l w (QQQ n
,, a v h y/O Y y&> . ~
kN TNd4 5
$$ed h [ = f= N d $ $ ?).N)h ~_hS,22L % _ u " -
Y~ f p' _,[$' e h - e .
- _,lkkh
% '~'
e ~ ees ci
\
(vs g' @W sm %'.%,w,$e g< . AY. y'. "% * ,ER(gn gMW # lhgfd
" ' , $@EE gQ \g V'*rf 2/g zwed % =v ygwb.
n , ' N,' E , _- m+aw f?f
'f _s- --
.k .
k 8
~
.,' . w....s.zsa mN, s ,
?w}N
- NR - Q 'a ) ]>
[ :, .w~n l .e. . C';' < - l
~
1 PY
- m. ... ~
_ m_.- . _ - - - .
1 l i i *b9 'F6 I4 Proposed Building i e B- 7 a l I l
- B- 8
- 6- 3 n
i i J
'N )
i I 5- B-a i i i I. i *
' B-1 !
4
/ i 1
4 B-10 - A B-2 I I - Proposed Reactor Building Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, Georgia
- j.
- Soil Test Boring l ggg g Scale 1"=30'-0" LAW ENGINREAIM TESTING CCMPANY Atlanta, Georgia
, Job 1832 p.12 - i t n ~
_ _ __ - . - - - - -- - ~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - ' ' ' - - ~ ' ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ ~ ~~ '~ 0[M ' r T. 912 O 10 20 30 40 60 80100 ) y 3 FILL LOOSE BROWN SILTY GRAVELLY SAND I
\. .
\
\ )
STIFF AND VER'l STIFF BROWN AND GRAY 902 FINE TO CCRRSE SANDY MICACEOUS CRAVELLY SILT , l 892 l I! HARD GRAY FINE TO COARSE SANDY MICA-d J, CEOUS SILT (FARTIALLY DECCMPOSED ROCK > I 29 ' 882 ' SOFT WEATHERED ROCK (GNEISS)
' +100+
BX SOFT TO MCI)ERATELY HARD GRAY GNEISS 29% 38 gg 872 I i I HARD CRAY GNEISS 82% 43 l l BORING TERMINATED ' 862 I
' ~
t
.J l i i
_ 8 e t A l l TEST \ PENETRAt Ogg3 yng gewygg gy ggggg or ,49 gy ,gaggygg l ,
L L tMG 30 IN '
. EQicIRE.*. "O DRIVE I. S IN. SAMPLEM ? F T.
BORING RECORD BORING NO B-1 i
~ UND'sT n e.y. s, p.:
I ' O l *4 R * . ;0n; y,,yygey ::= WATER TABLE JOB NO 1832 ' ' ' '
1 ELEV e PENET'R ATioN - BLotTS PER F T. fgpyg DESCRIPTION I FT. 913 o 1o to 30 4o so aoioo -
- e ,
__LL-STIFF TAN AND EZD-BROWN MICACID15 FINg SANDY GRAVILLY SILTY CIAY AND
- g'
.i 14 o
/l '
\
STIFF AND VERY STIFF TAN AND GRAY 903 ' MICACEOUS GRAVELLY FINE TO COMLSE I SANDY SILT I i -s, . 1 18 893 -
. N:
N
\
f HARD GRAY FINE TO COARSE SANDY MICA-CEOUS SILT (PARTIALLY DECCMPOSED ROCK 883 - ,1g ) ! 33 3 E j ! i SOFT AND MODERATELY HARD GRAY GNEISS 22% ; l k l
- 3a 873 I i g
HARD GRAY GNEISS B5% ! fI h 14 dORING TERMINATED l fg j k 863 j l 2 I :' i 1 i-
?
i I i. k ? i i I f --
* = CLAYEY SILT i
j NO GROUND WATER ENCOWrERED i TEST BORING RECORD ' l PENETRATION is THE Nut 4BER of Blows of I4o LB. HAMMER I F T. FALLING Jo IN. REoUIRED To oRIVE I.5 DN. S AMPLER BORING NO E-2
;W .... JOB NO 1832
-...r- pyo. I
gpfM DE 5calPTioN
" ELEV O PENET;t AiloN - ELOUS PER F T, Or 910 o to 20 so 40 60 80 too h FILL.ygtY SOFT TO FIRM SAMDY MICACIQB ; ,3 SILT, TOPSOIL, CDIDERS, AND GRASS I l
7.5- -
\ i !
' STIFF RID-BROWN AND TAN FINE TO C0ARS I. 900 \ _
i r/r SANDY SILTY CIAY AND CIAYIY SILT IL - c
' e \
i y VERY STIFF TO HARD GRAY FINE TO COARS Rf 3; < SANDY GRAVELLY MICAC30U3 SILT 8 00 T 4J f k
;.8
) 3 --
;N 4
SOFT WEATHERED ROCE (GMEISS) e120 33 rr ano , t
,y 100+
MCI)ERATELY HARD TO RARD GRAY GNIISS j BORING IIRMIMATED I ( s g t ' 870 i l I l i 1 ,
's
.' \
l 1
)
l '
- !,; l l' ,
i ii l I i l ,' l l ! l : I t ! I 1 ' l l l ' 1 1 '
, I
, i l'_l I l ii
' I
-{ .- i I Il, l' - t i ! , I lll F7 - FISHTAIL TEST
- eke TRATloM IS THE NUMBER Of BLOWS OFBORING
. HAMMER 140 L RECORD B
'ALLING Jo lN. MEQUIRED TO .
, SAMPLEMDRIVE I F T.I S IH W ukolsTuRsEO SAMPLE BORING NO - B-3 ISO l % Rocx Cont MEcovEnr :- WATEM TABLE JOB NO _ 1832_ _
- ,=
ogpys DESCRIPTION ELE O PENETR ATloN - 8LoDS PER F T. O 912 o to 20 30 40 so sotoo , h FILL-FIRM RED-BROWN CIAYEY SANDY SILT AND 5ILTY SAND ColffAINING SGIE GuYEL .l 6
\. :
VERY STIyy . ROWN A3G TAN \, FINE TO COMt Y M*,CACEOU 9 M2 / 7 STIFF TO VERY STIFF GRAY AND WHITE FINE TO COMtSE SANDY MICACIOUS SILT
\ '
o 17- -- 892 p' HARD CRAY FINE TO COARSE SANDY MICA-CE005 SILT (FARTIALLY DECCMTOSED ROC (' 29 *--* *100+ REFUSAL 882 i i 2 l' i 4 't
; i I!
E l i i TEST BORING RECORD PENETRATioM ts THE NUMBER of Blows OF I40 L B. HAMMER FALLING 30 lN. REoulMED To DMIVE I.S IN. SAMPLEM t F T. BORING NO E-4
& UNDISTURBE0 SAMPLE JC3 NO 19 M lSol % Rock cone nEC0VEMY WA EM BLE
~
..r.
~
f a
DEpty D E SCRIPTtoN ELEY F T. O FENETR Af ton - BLOUS PEA F T.
- 910 0 10 20 i
30 40 so aotoo >
-m ,
I I! FILL-FIRM AND STIFF RED-BROWN FDit .
/ l j AND MEDIUM SANDY CIAYEY SILT AND TOP - 3 SOIL ,
,! )
10 900 \'_ 11.5 LOOSE TAN AND GRAY CIAYEY SILTY Flasi r j - l
. 1 HARD GRAY FINE TO COARSE SANDY MICA-CEOUS SILT (PARTIALLY DECOMPOSED ROC 4 \ !
890 *\*
./.
l ,
. s 27 i CR -= " " " i' 30 ${ STIFF GRAY FINE SANDY MICACEOUS 880
! i I I 6i g ,., _ l l l I '
s0TT WEATHERED ROCK (GNEISS) i l I. l I 1 l 37 i .100+i ,.l
>> \
l 1i RfJUSAL 'JITH FISHTAIL BIT i l 870~! I i - f* l i
~l _l i : l1 4 l 3 .- 4i 1 I f I h i
l 'I '
- ' ll I
l 1 l i l T I
. i i I !i -_.
( , l i l , 4,. l i l' iI
. . . .. p i
l .y [ lI! e i b\ p\ l s
- . . . . . . - I 8 i
l ,, Im! dj
* = TO M2IUM SAND AND FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY SILT I!.I,,i W.
W TEST BORING RECORD ptNETMartois's Ts: nuustR or es.ows of ido LB. HAMht! i E.I - FALLIMG 30lV. RCQUIRED To DRIVE I.5 Iw. SAMPI.ER I F r. lp ' BORING NO - B-5 l& 50l %VNDISTURSED eacx core 9Ecovtat CAMPLE
* * ' "
- L ' 309 NO 1832 N f.'. i
r r. . . . . . . . . .. a w a a e r. n r s. 0- 900 o 10 _20 30 40 so so100 { FILL-FIRM AND STIFF BROWN AND GRAY FINI SANDY MICACIOUS SILT CONTAINING e
/
TOPSOIL, BRICK AND OTHER RUBBLE i
,10, . . . . ~ . . , . . . . . _ . . _ _ 8 90 D
f Q SOFT WEATHER 1D ROCK (GNEISS, REFUSAL 880 ' N MATERIALS) ;10o4 I i I
*100+
+ 30 -. 870 I BORING TERMINATED .too,, I . y i l 4 I ) i i i I 5 d I
-t 4 ?
I i1 4 t a
* = SILT (TOPS 0IL) t TEST BORING RECORD 9tNETMATIoM is THE NUMBEM of BLOWS of 140 LB. HAMMER FALLINc 30 IN. Mt0VIMto To oMIVE I.S IN. SAMPLEM i F T.
l BORING NO B-6
& UNolsTunato sAurLt -
1s0l% Mocx coME MtcovtMT = wArtM Tar.Lt JOB NO- 1831
- 2013 F-18 L AW ENGIN'EERING TESTING CO.
__ . _ _ _ _ _ . - - - _ - - - _ . _ _ , _ . . _ . _ . _ _ _ - - - - - - - ~ ' ' - ' ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ggptm * *" lP 8 6 V N . [ LEY O O FENETQATioN . 8 LOT.13 F T. PER j! 8 le 20 30 40 go go goo ! , AL.;GTT BROWN FINE SANDY MICASOUS
- #SILT AND LOSSE BROWN SILTY FINE TO
\ ,
!f',
'I I
7 i $ l l ( , , {~ ~ 884 ,, . i -e100+ l
- s i SOFT WEATHERED ROCE (GNEISS, REFUSAL *100+
2 MATERIALS) _ g74 l
, j I .
-e100+
4
, !l
- i. e I t e100+
j( 30 8 64 , 'h
- BORING TERMINATED i
*100+ ,
k > l[ 854 i .; ' I i i k 1 i i I I i ; l I ) 3
. .i h l
{ l i t i t i ! s 4 *
- I i-I
', ' t i I{ l =
.- l l[
TEST )' PENE}MATION is THE NUMBEM of OLOWS OF 140 LB BORING RECORD FALLING 30 IN. MEoulMED TO DMlVE I.S IN. SAMPLER I FT
.HAMMEM ii
\
- ' & yNoisTuneE0 SAMPLE BORING NO - B-7 '
~~
\sol% Mocx coME MEcovEMY wATEM TABLE 499 yn- gg3g
" l
,__ - - - .-- ---- - -_ [ 19_ _ - '-
F T. . . . n.r i n v m 0 ELEV 0 PENETA ATION - Blott$P L!t F T. 910 0 10 I 20 g 30 40 60 80#00 e :
)r
\ l TO COARSE TAINING GRAVEL SANDY MICACEOUS SILT CO
- i i t
900 l l i t t l 18 - 22 FILL-FIRM RED-BRCWN FINE 890 SILT - SANDY CIAYIY . Lt i t
,9 P.ARD GRAY FINE TO COARSE SANDY MICA -
t I !l <.
}
CEOUS SILT (FARTIALLY DECCMPOSED ROCK; 32 - 880 ' i i'I y j ibIIi SOFT VEATHERED ROCK (GNEISS, REFUSAL MATERIALS) i jr EX ' 40 - I 100+g 23% { ;( ' BORING TERMINATED 80 ' l 1 '
=-,
*100+
( l
.! l i
' l!l ,' ' i l ,
I i : { '> i ' i i {' 2, 1,!l
! l
, i I
i i ( , , lI e . ___ a > - ( t '
' l i i I
l l i
=- 1 NO CROUND WATER ENCOUNTERED l i 1
~
PENETRATION Is THE NUMBER OF BLO TEST FALLING 30 tN. REQulRED , TO CRIVE I 5 IWs 0F 640 BORING LB. NAMMER RECORD N. SAMPLER I F T.
& UNDisTUR8E0 SAMPLE .,_ ,_ BORING NO B-8
\s0l % ROCK 00RE RECOVERY ~'
*^ 'E" I* *U
'"1 JOB NC- 1832 b r-2.
L AW ENGINEERING TESTING CC --
OgPTH DE SCRIPTION . r T. ELEV O PENETil ATION - SLOOS PEft F T. 894 0 10 GRAY F 20 30 40 60 to600 0 r -- str.lN @0SSIBLY WLL 3 cEo0S SILT FDY MICA-
~
s - STITF TO VERY STIFF CRAY AND BROWN 1 e i P#, 9 FINE TO MEDIUM SANDY MICACEOUS SILT
-- ~
\,' .
* )
.884 -
i b .
\
et SOFT WEATHERED ROCK (GNEISS, REFUSAL { MATERIALS) \ 874 g
,100+
If
.100+
30 1 864 BORING TERMINATED I L 9 I i } e 1 3 I i i
- t
'l e I 4 4 i i l l TEST BORING RECORD :\ PENETRATION is THE NUMBER Of blows. HAMMER OF 140 LB 84
- FALLING 30lN. REQUIRED TO DRIVE I.S IN. F T.SAMPLER I Y
N
& UNDISTURBCO 5 AMPLE BORING NO B-9
_ W
\ Sol %, Rocx core RECOVERY v WATER TABLE 409 NO _ 1832 hk
* *m g
r.L t y F T. 0 PENETR ATION - SLocS PER F1 0 910 o to 20 30 40 so 80 too F!LL-SOFT AND FIRM BROWN AND GRAY ,
, i FINI SANDY MICACEOUS SILT CONTAINING GRAVEL / '
6 * ;
, N FILL-FIRM RED-BROWN FINE SANDY CLAYE Y
- SILT CONTAINING ClNDERS, BURNT 'J0OD
\
l 900 4 82 PIECES AND OLD BRICK Li - ) l Os STITF P.ES-P.ROWN AND TAN FINE TO COARM SANDY SI}.TY t.MY_ AND CIAYEY SILT
?
j VERY STIFF TO HARD GRAY FINE TO COAEE 890 ll ' i ! SANDY MICACEOUS SILT CONTAINING SCHE i WEATHERED ROCK PIECES ! i i 25 -- BORING TERMINATED .' j - I 880 l 'j
- i
- - l
; i I lI',
i i 4
! i i !
3 ' }t i ie 1 i ; ii i , ' l
, i i
l ii 3, , .
! I l l - l ! !
l I i i i i e i !I li i TEST BORING RECORD i PENETRATION Is THE NVMBER Of BLOWS OF I40 LB. HAMME9 jp FALLING 30 IN REQUIRED YO ORIVE I.S IN. SAMPLER I TT.
? BORING NO B-10
& UNDISTURBE0 SAMfLE
[r ls0l % Rock core ret OVERY WATER TABLE jog no_ 1832 .* I , < If F-22 . . ' AW ENGINEERING TESTING CO.
d . ,4 i
~SECTION 0/1 DEMOLITION AND EARTHWORK
). i 1
0/1.01 _ GENERAL: i ! -l , The GENERAL CONDITIONS, SUPPLEMENTARY GENERAL CONDITIONS
- and SPECIAL CONDITIONS govern all work under this section. ,
G/1.02 SCOPE: This section covers demolition, construction of cuts and fills, excavation and backfilling, for buildings, and for underground piping, and. finish grading. l G/1.03 . DEMOLITION: . demolished unless noted otherwise. Items noted on drawings to All-materials They Contractor. from demolition shall become property of and all. debris resulting from demo 11-tion, shall be rem,oved from site promptly. . ! G/1.04 TOPSOIL: Topsoil, suitable for support of plant life, and any top-soil containing organic material shall be stripped from ,i all on areas site aswithin working: limits and stock piled separately directed. 3 G/1.05 EXCAVATION: i
}
for bottom faces of grade beams-shall be cut to exactIf size of concrete. Otherwise, forms shall be used. Ex-for the bottom 1/4 of the circumference of the pipe, and 4
- ! ~4 shall be scoopedworkingout for aforshort distance, joints. at joints only, to provide space making 4
4 All other excavations shall be made with sufficient clear-ance to permit placing, inspection, and completion of work. ' i ll. 5816 0/1.1 i 1' i } .- '
l l l QUALIFICATIONS OF RECOMMENDATIONS l The results provided in this report are based on project information related specifically to the , GlT Campus and apply only to the project and site discussed. The results of the hazard study at the bedrock level apply throughout the campus, however, ground level response spectra are based on specific subsurface models. The effect on site response of varying subsurface conditions is a complex matter which does not lend itself to empirical estimates or
! extrapolation. For critical structures, tall structures, or buildings in which high costs are anticipated due to seismic design, a site-specific study including downhole or crosshole shear I wave techniques is recommended. I Our professional services have been performed, our findings derived, and our recommendations prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices. This warranty is in lieu of all other warranties either expressed or implied. Law is not responsible for the conclusions, opinions, or recommendations of others based on these data.
The results presented in this report were developed for the exclusive use of the Georgia Institute of Technology (GIT) using proprietary information , including an Earthquake Catalog and Seismic Hazard Analysis software developed by LAW. No part of this report may be reproduced or used in any form by any means without the permission of LAW or GlT. t 50 h% S MA=L p9 h mL 3 huA Mw;p oucy $10 gv o A m% D b Wo Wwng s'bh mq-_ ~ Auwak , ., g clANd \AML A h a ;t (MMd w q"L. M Mae, c i f" PV <
~
'l MAP OF SEISMIC ZONES AND EFFECTIVE PEAK VELOCITY-RELATED ACCELERATION Av SBC 199 i GEORGIA TECH CAMPUS CIRCLED INTERPOLATED VALUE Av = 0.09 R
e P. o Vo g g , o s
;3 . s/ 2
<o '5 x / o 'o
;b.
. i:. ,
m D hs$yA 0 40 0 10 ! ', 0.10 ' - .F s s r- o
, 010 .
om aos 4
..'.1/,g,',c.
i @, .j !.......; j ' I3 9$ o ,o o 20.__ @p^-$1.i g3 a T?
- - ', ,. . . ' # ($ ,$As .
p 02: 9j gg
.c %>, .l 0 20 ., ; . . . . . .,, , 7
- Qti . ' :; .og;j Qnj
*** *io x
- 1, ' '.~. _. . ,
... *o
., o 20 3
,,._; g g55,,; - . g..,.P.. -. ..
-.1.
g :..... .f
.g. ,, f i.
t 0 05 mzC
** sn b fb ' - .
\ s 'r.Y' D CS
.',, _. i. . .
(") > w
} y' -a,. 3,_.. <015 ;
Y ~ $'.[.,,k - '.f.{g' * '3, ."Oh N, ' -0 hh,8
.8 ,' o' .- }
. .ik .0- ';g',
h ,.j j' .!.7
'. , 1 y) mQ 3m "J.-?i? Q 010,, <015 3
g,o g[ .-....; 0 f c.qv.ey; ; ;,;,p,.,. ,., ,. ,
- t. -- . ' * * * - - -
g3 gq o eoo am EEE /z LEGEND: '" $ g . , _ _ = = - . . . 7 1 Selsmic Zone e .as . = - 4 0.40 Effective Peak Velocity-Related Acceleration (A,) Unear Interpolation Between M A.;> 0.40 Contours is Acceptatne. i i I i l l GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY l SEISMIC STUDY l_aW FIGURE 719: MAP OF SEISMIC ZONES AND EFFECTIVE PEAK VELOCITY.RELATED ACCELERATION Atlanta, Georgia Av SBC,1991 Project No. Scale Date Engineering and Environmental Services 57704495.01 N.T.S. MARCH 1993 l 1 t- - . - 1
l t l- . GlT Seismic-Hazard Study ' March 16,1993
- Page 11 of.4G 6.0 SITE GEOLOGY AND SOIL PROFILES'-
6.1: SITE GEOLOGY The Georgia Tech campus is located in the Appalachian Piedmont seismotectonic region, about 7 km (4%' miles) southeast of the Brevard Zone. The underlying bedrock is late , Precambrian to early Paleozoic age metamorphic rock of Stonewall, Wahoo Creek, and Clairmont formations, in general, these formations are comprised of gneiss, schist and { amphibolite. The Stonewall formation includes intercalated, fine-grained, biotite gneiss, horneblende-plagioclase amphibolite and sillimanite-biotite schist. TheWahoo Creek formation includes slabby, medium-grained muscovite plagioclase-quartz gneiss, amphibolite mica schist l and epidote calcite diopside gneiss. The Clairmont formation consists ofinterlayered medium-grained biotite-plagioclase gneiss and fine to medium-grained horneblende plagioclase amphibolite.(McConnell, at.3].,1984) t The natural soils on the campus are typically residual soils form $d by the in-place weathering of the underlying metamorphic rocks. The typical residual soil profile consists of clayey soil near the surf ace, where soil weathering is.more advanced, underlain by sandy silts and silty. sands, that generally become firmer with depth to the top of bedrock. During the urbanization of Atlanta, low areas were often filled. Areas of fill exist over the GlT Campus. The fill is commonly reworked residual soil and can include organic debris. The boundary between soil and rock is not sharply defined. A transitional zone termed
" partially weathered rock" (PWR) is normally found overlying the parent bedrock. Partially weathered rock is defined, for engineering purposes, as residual material with standard
-penetration test (SPT) resistance (N values) exceeding 100 blows per foot. Weathering is 'I f acilitated by fractures, joints and by the presence of less resistant rock types. . Consequently, the profile of the partially weathered rock and hard rock is quite irregular and erratic, even over -short horizontal distances. Lenses and zones of hard rock and zones of partially weathered rock often exist within the soil mantle, well above the general bedrock level.
i' '?-' N w+ 3"W H -9
GIT Seismic Hazard Study March 16,1993 - Dage 10 of 46 annual earthquake activity and the relative proportion of earthquakes at differing magnitudes within the region, are considered in the analysis. The seismotectonic regions used to calculate probabilistic hazard include:
- Eastern Basement (Region 17)
- Appalachian Piedmont (Region 107) ,
- Brunswick Terrane (Region 108) , 7
- Charleston Seismic Zone (Region 35)
- Northern Coastal Plain (Region 105)
- New Madrid Rift Complex New Madrid Fault Zone (Region 18)
Reelfoot Rift (Region 4) St. Louis Arm (Region 6) Wabash Valley Arm (Region 5)
- East Continent Gravity High (Region 1)
- Indiana - Ohio Gravity High (Region 3)
- Mississippi Embayment (Region 117)
- Indiana Block (Region 115) 4
*- Ohio Pennsylvania Block (Region 112) '
- Southern Coastal Plain (Region 1268)'
- Ozark Uplift (Region 15)
These regions are described in Appendix Section 5.3. Other seismotectonic regions in the central U.S. were considered for use in the probabilistic hazard analysis, but were not used because of their great distar.ce and low impact on the site. 5.2 MAXIMUM MAGNITUDES Each seismotectonic region is assumed to have a maximum likely earthquake associated with it. This maximum earthquake represents the largest magnitude category used for probabilistic , seismic hazard in a particular seismotectonic region. The maximum magnitude was based primarily on regional tectonics and was not based on increments above historic maximum events or on activity rates.
WN, MAR-04-96 3:34PM U$NRC 4043317023 7.02R P.2 0001gl$2Cll l } /Le a b4 a m ,es Home of dsis95 olympic witage Cctr.munies:io.1s GeorgiaInstimte of Technology i OfSee of Communica: lor.s AQama. Georgia 30332 0181 ( 404aS94'2452 FAX 404 894 7214 NEWSADVISORY
\
Contact:
Bob Harty i Director of Communications (404)S94 0870 FOR IMMFnIATF REf 5ASE . March 1,1996 GEORGIA TECH SUCCESSFULLY SHIPS REA SAVANNAl$ RIVER SITE I i:, W t ATLANTA.-The GeorgiaInstitute of Technol *
}uccessfully transferred the research reactor fuel frorn the Neeley Research Facili etES. "artment of Energy's Savannah River site in Aiken, South Caroli
.. 18.
NuclearRegulatory Commission guidelines require safe h bIe _i ) "'g r 10 days after the shipment date). The transfer removes a m= he high:F'c h[dr6Fifi
;u c.,v. , e Georgia Tech campus, The yas transfer prhg to i q
planned and executed witint!N eq
~
Niember 17,1995 and was closely
'ry Commission, the U.S. Dephrtment of Energy and State of Georg a I, a l'6f itnessed and monitored the fuel transfer.
The fuelloading and shipment to Savannah Rt . ~~as carried out b International, one of the leading spent fuel tr ks in the world. TOTAL P.02
WJN, tER-0446 Si34PH- USNRC 404 331 7023 P. 01 [ February 29,1996 PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION OF EVENT OR UNUSUAL OCCURRENCE PNO-il-96-013 A This preliminary notification constitutes EARLY notice of events of POSSIBLE
- safety or public interest significance. The information is as initially received without verification or evaluation, and is basically all that is
- known by Region 11 staff in Atlanta, Georgia on this date.
i j Facility Licensee Emeraency Classification Georgia institute Of Technology Notification of Unusual Event Georgia Institute Of Technology Alert Atlanta, Georgia Site Area Emergency,, Dockets: 05000276 License No: R 111 General Emergency X Not Applicable
Subject:
SPENT FUEL SHIPMENT FROM GEORGIA TECH l ! On June 16,1995, the NRC issued an Order modifying Georgia Tech Research
. Reactor (GTRR) operating licerue to authorize the conversion from high enriched uranlun (HEU) to low enriched uranium (LEU) fuel. The licensee i shut down the GTRR on November 17,1995, to begin the conversion process. ,
- The I!censee subsequently transferred the irradiated HEU fuel elements '
to the storage pool, cut off the non-fuel bottom and top ends of the fuel elements in the Hot Cell, and placed the spent fuel in shipping " baskets" in the pool. In addition the unirradiated fuel was shipped out. The i " baskets" of irradiated fuel elements were loaded into a shipping cask on February 16 and 17. i On February 18, the cask containing the irradiated fuel was shipped from
- the site to the Savannah River Site by truck. This completed the removal
] of the GTRR fuel. State of Georgia personnel escorted the shipment from 1 the campus to the Georgia State line. An NRC Inspector escorted the shipment to the Savannah River Site, where it arrived at 11:30 p.m. No j problems were encountered during the shipment. L The licensee plans to replace the HEU fuel with LEU, but the LEU fuel
- Will not be received at the facility until after the Atlanta Olympic l Games, scheduled to end on August 4.
This PN is being issued at this time because the shipment detalis are Safeguards information until ten days after completion of the shipment. This information is correct as of February 29,1995. i j
Contact:
C. H. Bassett (404)331-5570 f l 4 t d
p ww p#pnacast's HAZARDOUS WASTE NEWS #185 Providing news and resources to the Movement for Environmental Justice -- June 13,1990 Radiation-Part 3 The most compelling evidence comes from studies of 91,231 people who survived the atomic bombings of HUMAN HARM FROM LOW LEVEL EXPOSURE Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan in 1945. Contrary The federal govemment is proposing to allow large to popular belief, most of these survivors received only quantities of " low level" radioactive wastes to be de- very low exposures to ionizing radiation. Their health has been continuously monitored by intemational sci-clared non-radioactive ("below regulatory concem,' or entific organizations, so they represent the best avail-BRC, is their phrase for it; see RHWN #fB3). These radioactive wastes would then be handled like ordinary able information on the effects of low levels of ionizing household trash; they would be transported, landfilled, radiation on humans. The bomb survivor data now shoyvs without doubt that there is no safe dose of incinerated, reused (for example, radioactive tools) or radiation and, furthermore, that the lowest doses have recycled (for example, radioactive metals) along with caused the greatest cancer increases per unit of radia-everything else we discard each day. Such a change lion. (in other words, the shape of the dose-response would expose Americans randomly to more ionizin9 curve is supralinear; see RHWN #164.) This means radiation than they are exposed to today. Govemment and industry both argue that this is acceptable. In- that both the industry assumption (threshold theory) dustry uses one justification, govemment uses another, and the EPA's assumption (linear theory) seriously underestimate the dangers from exposure to low levels Many peop'e in the nuclear industry argue that small of ionizing radiation. Furthermore, the Japanese data increases in ionizing radiation aren't dangerous at all. reveal another important fact about low level radiation: They argue that there is a threshold dose of radiation, young humans (children and infants) are more sen-below which no effects occur, and above which people may be harmed (see RHWN #184). They say the sitive to the effects of low levels of ionizing radiation BRC program will not expose anyonc to a dose of than are older humans. We will discuss the Japanese radiation greater than the threshold dose, and there- data in detail.at another time. fore the BRC program will cause no harm. Here we will discuss more recent human data provided by accidents that released large amounts of Govemment approaches the matter differently. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ionizing radiation at Chemobyl (Soviet Union,1986), that any amount of radiation causes som(EPA) e damage to argues Island (Pennsylvania, U.S.A.,1979), and Three-Mile Savannah River (Georgia, U.SA,1970). These acci-a large population of exposed individuals; they sub-scribe to the ' linear theory' of radiation damage (see dents are the subject of a shocking new book: Jay, RHWN #fB4). They have set limits for radiation ex- Gould and Ben Goldman, Deadly Deceit, cited in our last paragraph. Page numbers inside parentheses in posure based on the moral premise that it is accep-table to kill one citizen out of every 100,000 citizens our text refer to this bo$. Uke the Japanese bomb survivor data, these three accidents indicate that the by exposing them to radiation. Sine the BRC pro-gram will not cause exp0sures that would kill more lowest doses of ionizing radiation cause the greatest human damage per unit of radiation. This provides ' than one in every 100,000 citizens (and the linear confirmation that the govemment's estimate of the haz-theory tells them that, in teamy, the program will kill many fewer people than one in every 100,000), the ards of low level radiation is low; that is to say, today's allowable limits for human exposure to ionizing radia-govemment argues that the ERC program is accep-l tion will allow more deaths than our govemment offi-table because it will save billions of dollars for the nuclear power industry (which must soon dismantle its cially admits. How many more is the question. Bomb survivor data indicate 30 times more, but even this aging nuclear reactors and put them 'away" some-may be low, according to Gould and Goldman. where) and for the govemment itself (which must eventuallv clean up millions of pounds of radioactive The three accidental releases of large quantities of contamination lying around near weapons factories). radiation a!so confirm what the bomb survivor data are showing: that infants and children are the most sensi-Unfortunately, there is now very substantial evi-l dence, from studies of huma , beings exposed to radi- tive to damage from low levels of ionizing radiation. Consider these facts: ation, that both industry and the govemment have ; misunderstood (intentionaN or not) the dangers of low "The Chemobyl nuclear power plant blew up on levels of ionizing radiation. (Ey 10w leve!s" we mean April 26,1986; nine days later, radioactivity monitoring within the range O to 5 rem bentiS;even].) stations in Washington state (9,000 miles from Cher-ce%
r
' detected radioactivity in rainfall. By May 16th, A monitoring stations detected radioactive iodine- the entire U.S. and over the southeastem states taken as a whole. During the following summer (May
[ cow's milk all across the U.S. Our govemment through September) Infant mortality in South Carotina oroblem.' Now govemment data, analyzed by was 15% higher than it had been the previous year. 1 id Goldman, show that in May,1986, there Again, we are omitting a wealth of detail.
- was a 5.3% increase in the U.S. death rate, compared to the previous year; the chances are less than one in
" March 28,1979, a meltdown at the Three Mile D ,
Island (TMI) nuclear power plant spewed more than 10 a thousand that this increase occurred by chance. ! million Curies of radioactivity into the environment, During June,1986, the infant mortality rate in the U.S. was 12.3% higher than it had been in June,1985, and most of it into the air. Because the radiation dis-persed quickly, most people received only low levels in some parts of the country it was much higher; for example, in the south Atlantic states, the infant mor- p of exposure. Govemment and industry spokespeople have repeatedly assured the public than no one was talay rate in June,1986, was 28% higher than it had harmed. However, the govemment's own health data been the previous year. Based on this, and on much tell quite a different story. Comparing the period three additional evidence that we haven't space to review, m'onths prior to the accident against the period four Gould and Goldman suggest that current EPA limits on months after the accident, Pennsylvania's infant mor-exposures to low level radiation may need to be tight- tality rate increased 16% and the state of Maryland's ened by as much as a factor of 1000 (pg. 21). < t increased '41%. All together, Gould and Goldman "In November and again in December,1970, two calculate that perhaps as many as 50,000 deaths nuclear rod meltdowns occurred at the Savannah River occurred during 1980-1982 as a result of the TMi nuclear weapons plant in Georgia. The plant was accident (pg. 63). operated for the government by DuPont, who never This is an important book. Any individual fact in told the public anything about these accidents until the book may be disputed, but the cumulative weight Senator John Glenn grilled Dupont officials in public of the evidence is persuasive. And though we gen-hearings in late 1988. To this day, DuPont claims that erally do not give much credence to conspiracy theo-no radiation escaped outside the plant, but official
' ries, if you read this book from cover to cover, you will govemment measurements of radioactivity in rain have difficulty believing that your govemment is telling throughout the southeastem U.S. reveal highly suspi.
clous increases immediately after the accidents. in the full truth about the effects of lowlevel radiation. We suggest that you act prudently to protect yourself South Carolina in December,1970, rain carried six i and your family: do whatever it takes to keep BRC times as much radioactivity as it had carried in De- wastes out of your community. .v cember,1969. Radioactivity was also measurable in local fish; fish in the Savannah river contained radi-63 i Get: Jay M. Gould and Benjamin A. Goldman, Deadly l stion levels 100,000 times higher than fish sold in New Decelt; Lowlevel Radiation, High Level Cover Up (New York City in 1971. A child who ate 1/4 pound of cat. York: Four Wa!!s Eight Windows Press (P.O. Box 548, fish from the Savannah Rber in 1971 would have Village Station, New York, NY 10014],1990). $19.95 received a radiation dose equivalent to 20 chest x- And: Keep in touch with Nuclear Information Resource rays. Infant mortality .in South Carolinain. January' Service (NIRS),1616 P Street, NW, Washington, DC 1971, was 24% higher than it had been a year earlier; 20036; (202) 328 0002, and the Radioactive Waste Cam-in contrast, infant mortality declined that month over paign, 625 Broadway, 2nd floor, New York, NY 10012; (212) 473 7390. Rechel's Hazardous Waste News is pubCshed weekly by Environmental Research RM&c.EL30: 354L P%, W C033 - O Editor: Peter Montacut Ph.Da Associate Editor: Maria B; Pellerano; Assistant Editor: Annette Eubank; subscriptions / Otfee Manager. Suosenption rates: $40 per year for individuals and cibzen groups, $80 for govemment agencies, $15 G.for yd seniors, $400 for businesses and professionals. In Canada and Mexico, add $4.00; in all other countries, add $11.00. All payments in U.S. funds. Printed on f 00% Recycled Paper @ s SUBSCRIPTION ORDER FORM Environ sa
./
ch Foundation FIRsT-CLASS MAIL hbMt%
- f. 8. F .
ri NJ 08543 3541 Name: Add:ess: @W
-4 [ g @y r
g. ADDRESS CORRECTION REQUESTED Permit No. 434 j g gg g g# Qpr T: Mubmtro Criy: gp. " " State and Zo:
. m m .4e,.sma. h [qr .
/M i DOE Suppresses information on Radiation Exposure Scientists Reveal 600,000 worker's healt1 may have been jeoaardized ~
tors and to highlight reassuring findings curate exposure rm m of the more than by 11JOSEFIIERERT WASIIINGTON - The Energy Depart- . while downplaying or denying risks " said 600,000 people who worked in its nuclear ment (DOE) failed to keep accurate radia- hck Geiger, a founding member of the weapons program over fourdecades. tion n cmts of the more than NX),(XX) peo- physicians
- group and a pmfcssor at City ele wlm have weted over rour decaacs on universityornew vmk. The group,s report criticized the Energy its nuclear weapons program, said a report ..
by a parri ofindependent scientists. The physicians, Energy n nt I iu s task force said an ex- Department for failing press Iralth data needed to determine how amination of 124 avail- to keep accurate expo-seriously workers at atomic weapons fac-twics may have been aficctal by radiatim. able government re- sure records of the "We have found evi- ports on worker expo- more than 600,000 dence extending over sure to radiation are so . people who worked in many decades of gov- flawed and incomplete its nuclear weapons ernmental attempts to that possible health ef- Pmgram. suppress evidence sug- fects cannot be deter. He Enugy Depanmmt declined to
. . comment directly on the report, b gesting health risks, to mined our number one priority is to
. . guarantee that all of our studies meet the Int.lMidate some inves- ne physicians task rorce said an highesi standanis or scientinc credibiiity
" "i" " r i24 avanaue govamnent and integrity, said raui ziemer, the doe 4
tibalors and to hib hlibht reports on worker exposure to radiation assistant secretary for envimnment, safety reassuring findings are so nawed and inwmpie mat rossime health effects cannot be determined. and heaim. But the physicians group said it had while downplaying or "What there is (available) is not no confidence that the Energy Department
., comprehensible," said David Rush, a pro- could conduct unbiased health studies in-denying risks...,, ressor or epidemiology at Turts volving its workers.
University, and a member of the group of The government studies tiiat have "We have found evidence extending 12 scientists who studied the available been made available "have very large over many decades of governmental at- govemment documents. omissions that make the epidemiologic tempts to suppress evidence suggesting The group's report criticized the record radically incompletc," said the health risks, to intimklate some investiga- Energy Department for failing to keep ac- --
l
)
l l group. Geiger also disputed government claims that the Energy Department is now j making available to researchers the entire base of raw health data from the weapons plants.
"The DOE has de-nied open and unfet-tered scientific investi ,
gations necessary to determine the extent of the occupational and public health threats posed by its nuclear ; weapons complex..." ;
"'Ihe DOE has denied open and un-fettered scientific investigations necessary ;
to detennine the extent of the occupational I gs and public health threats posed by its nu-
~~
' .) clear weapons complex," he said.
The nuclear weapons complex in- % cludes plantsin Oak Ridge Tenn. Shirley Fry, an epidemiologist at Oak Ridge Associated Universities who has headed some DOE-sponsored epi-demiological studies, declined to comment on the report because she hadn't seen it. She said she supports calls forinde-1 g g ggy" @$, % %Q j I pendent study, but added that her xcess to ;
~
data has never been restricted by DOE. Sen. John Glenn. D-Ohio, and Rep. Bill Richardson, D-N.M., both of whom yggLEAR SAFETY: Eight boatloads of protesters sailed to the Savannah River Site nuclear complex and p' resented have major nuclear weapons facilities in petitions'asking' the Department'of Energy to close the their states, praised the independent physi- plant. Cited: a spill of several hundred gallons of tritium-cian's findings and said theY were pushing contaminated water into the river in December.The plant, near Aiken, S.C. is the USA's only producer of radioactive legislation to have m. dependent agencies tritium gas, which boosts the power of nuclear weapons. study worker exposure to radiation at ' Also, the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board is investi-atomic weapons plants, gating reports that pla'nt o!5cials falsided safety records of
,,The nation,s nuclear weapons an accident last summer in which five Savannah River Site employees reportedly inhaled pliatonium at the HB.Line complex has historically opemted under a plant, a nuclear materials processing facility separate from veil of secrecy This veil of secrecy has al- the nuclear reactor. A report Friday in USA TODAY mise so extended to ... environmental compli- l Identified the facility at which the accident occurred.
ance and worker exposure," Richardson said. p
, The study was sponsored by "
e Physicians for Social Responsibility, a na- , tional organization representing health . ' professionals who have been involved in j
" Ele r We pons connol. f @@ M N WdVE D D6&46AE g
, w swmtw gwR mc vgg(p g on - m s c y & % "t9 Ree m
3
? ENTA 5 UNITED STATES OF #tERICA A Ei % Tpp g )d NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS$10N f
In the Matter of )
)
GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ) Docket No. 50-160
- 900 Atlantic Drive, N.W. ) License No R-97 Atlanta, GA 30332 ) EA 88-32 %' $4 ORDER MOO!FYING LICENSE, EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY i
I The Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech) is the holder of Operating License No.'R-97 issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or . Commission) on December 29, 1964, and subsequently amended. The license, as amended, authorizes Georgia Tech to operate its modified research reactor located on its campus in Atlanta, Georgia, at power levels up to 5 megawa'tts
"* "h (thermal) for research and development activities in accordance with the conditions specified therein.
11 The Georgia Tech Research Reactor (GTRR) is utilized to conduct irradiation
- experiments including the irradiation of, topaz and other gem quality minerals.
{,. During the week of August 17, 1987, the imoroper ooening of an irr.adiated topaz c gtAina* resoited in contamination of the reactor building. An inspection of the licensee's operational and health physics activities, including actions pertaining to this contamination event, was conducted on December 16, 1987, and January 4-5, 1988 during which it was learned of the August contamination event. The inspection revealed that the experiment conditions and manipulation of the I Y[O M7 k d'
, - y
-t. !
. I i
i experiment materials rmulted in unexpected elevated radiation levels from the ; experiment container and also the unmonitored ' release of Cadmium-115 (Cd-115) ! in the reactor building. The exposure dose rate at one foot from the experiment material was approximately 3 rem per hour (R/hr) on August 18, 1987 and
- Y qualitative measurements of radioactive contamination indicated levels on masolin wipes of approximately 20 mR/hr on August 19, 1987. The NRC staff also determined during the inspection that thr itcensee had not orovided adeou_4,te "
egoosure assessments for personnel involved in the August 1987 incident, nor had the licensee conducted adequate verification q s to demonstrate that the contamination had not been spread by oersonnel to . ara =s entside of_ the
- I reactor building. Inspection findings indicated that the licensee had not
{ pau, conducted its activities in full compliance with NRC requirements. A written Notice of Violation has not been issued at this time; additional inspection activities are being conducted. Nonetheless, the rfollowing safety concerns, which could result in unnecessary personnel radiation exposures and the potential spread of contamination away from the reactor building as a result of experiment manipulations. -have a_1 ready been identified:
, A. On May 4, 1987. an enforcement conference was held with the Itcensee j:v.v..
in which the licensee outlined steps to be implemented to improve the management controls over operations and health physics at the GTRR to , i assure safe operation,. These actions included steps to assure appropriate interaction hatween health physics and operations l components of the orcanization. A recent inspection has shown these 1 j actions have not been fully successful and irtdicate that management - j i control oroblems a ntinue. p \
'I * .
j
/
t
- 6. The licensee's health physics and operating erocedures were inadequa.te in that they failed to address the precautions and ecutoment to prevent unnecessary exoosure and contamination during handling and manipulation of materials irradiated during experiments at the GTAR, C. The 1_icensee failed to follow operating procedures as required by Technical Specifications as follows:
- 1. The August 1987 experiment involved irradiation of topaz gemstones for a total of 41.8 mecawatt hours compared to
- _30 megawatt-hours authorized on the Request for Minor Experiment ki1C[j Approval regarding topaz irradiations dated April 3, 1987.*
- 2. Procedure 3102, Quality Assurance for Experiments. October 28;.
1982, requires that the approval form for Category _4 experiments, such as the topaz irradiation, address quantitative ~ controls of reactivity, activation, shielding, cooling and materials. Request for Minor Experiment Approval, dated 3,) . April 3,1987, regarding the topaz irradiation lists the estimated isotopic activities to be " nil." However, following an initial irradiation in April.1987, activation of the experiment materials, including the container, resulted in radiation levels of approximately 3 R/hr at a distance of one foot from the container. These elevated exoosure levels were not evaluated or included in experiment plans for the August 1987 topaz irradiation. 4
i /*
- , - - / 4
. r i D. A_ssessments of internal and external personnel eroosuret for i personnel involved in the August 1987 incident and_ decontamination event were not adeouate in that they did not determine andgnt intakes of radioactive material extremity _ dole or skin _dg. l l E. (urveysconductedwereinadequateasfollows: i i 4 1
- 1. Continuous air samples collected from within the reactor building
- during the August 1987 incident were not adequate to determine intakes in that they were not rectretentative cif_concentrationi t
of radioactive material in the work area. gg%y ,
/ 2. Subsequent to the August 1987 incident,_s_urveys war = inadanuate to define the extent and amount of radioactive contamination in the reactor building, on personnel, and in personal property-offsite which could have been potentially contaminated.
F. At the time of the inspection the licensee had failed to complet_e a y,, thorough review of_the August 1987 contamination avent r garding its . s / cause or causes, nor had any corrective measures baan imnlementnGs of January 5,1988 to prevent recurrence durina future experiments. G. Licensee management has indicated that there are n W e eveats-stM !*r to the August 1987 event that also have not yet been fully evaluated _by the licensee. These safety concerns were the subject of discussions 6' 4 1 L _,
8 % 5-between Region II and the licensee on January 7, 1988. U, i o_f these di_scussions. Regiaa It-vseban y m uested, and the licaa % V
/
that irradiation exoeriments would be suspended until further notice. N I 1 Af ter consideration of the apparent viola.tions and safety hazards posed by the I licensee's conduct of experiment activities, as exhibited during the August 1987 3 ' event, and the subsequent lack of aggressive review and corrective actions by ! , j 9.b/ t the licensee, I have determined that certain actions by the licensee are required, 1n l l 1
/\ and an Order modifying the Georgia Institute of Technology license is necessary, l
- % to protect the health and safety of the public and licensee's employees.
Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.204, I find that the public health, safety, and I ' ' i interest require that that this Order be effect1ve immediately, l j . IV I Accordingly, pursuant to sections 104,161b,161c,1611,161o,182 and 186 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, 42 U.$.C. 2011 g sea., and 10 CFR 2.204, IT IS HERE8Y ORDERED, EFFECTIVE IMME0!ATELY, THAT: ' a A. The licensee shall ca.ase utilization of the reactor facility for irradiation experiments until the following conditions are met and the NRC approves, in writing, the resumption of irradiation experiments. l l
. /
'y =6-
!'/ jf . L Management controls over factitty operation, including l irradiation experiments, are assessed to identify weaknesses.
- 2. A formal review is conducted, including record reviews and
, in-depth personnel interviews, to determine (a) if other occurrences similar to the August 1987 incident have occurred, and (b) the principal root causes of the August 1987 incident i
j and any other similar incidents. 1 h An assessment of internal exposure, external whole body,
- i extremity, and skin doses to personnel involved in the August P9'd/ 1987 incident (any other identified incidents) and/or 4 decontamination activities is conducted. I i , !
4 4 The GTRR health physics and operating procedures are reviewed to h identify inadequacies which contributed to the August 1987 contamination event (and any other identified events). 1 S. Corrective actions are identified and a schedule established for l implementing the corrective actions, including necessary changes in management controls, operations, and procedures. 6; A training program addressing all changes to management controls, operations, and procedures is developed and implemented. 1 1
'c -.
= - _ _ -
__.~ _ _ j
- i i
i I r. 7. The licensee's reviews and assessments of the above matters are
- I
) i documented and a summary of these reviews and assessments, ! including corrective actions and appropriate schedules, are ! L. submitted in writing to the NRC for review and approval. - f 4 B. . Results of the licensee's survey of the house of the individual. involycd in the August 1987 contamination event shall be provided I in writing to the NRC within 10 days of the issuance of this order. ) The Regional Administrator, Region II, may in writing relax or rescind any of' - .l the above conditions upon writ.en request and demonstration of good cause' by the licensee, i ' i i V i The licensee or any person other than the licensee adversely affected by this i Order may request a hearing on this Order within twenty days of its issuance. Any request for hearing shall be sent to the Director, Office of Enforcement, 1
- U.$. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555. Copies shall also be 4
sent to the Assistant General Counsel for Enforcement at the sue address and i the Regional Administrator, NRC Region II,101 Marietta St., NW, Suite 2900, I Atlanta, GA 30323. If a person other than the Itcensee requests a hearing, that person shall set forth with particularity the manner in which the petitioner's interest is adversely af fected by this Order and shall address the l criteria set forth in 10 CFR 2.714(d). A REQUEST FOR HEARING SHALL NOT STAY THE IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVENESS OF THIS ORDER. l ! l i
4 1 if a hearing is requested by the licensee or any person who has an interest adversely affected by the Order, the Commission will issue an Order designating ! the time and place of any such hearing. If the Licensee fails to request a i hearing within 20 days of the date of this Order, the provisions of this Order shall be final without further proceedings. If a hearing is held, the issue to be considered at such hearing shall be whether this Order should be l sustained. . 4 FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS$10N i James M. Taylor, Deputy Executive Director j for Regional Operations . Dated at Bethesda, Maryland l this day of January 1988 1 i e l i i
- i t
1 t i 1 l l l}}