ML20205C086
| ML20205C086 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Sequoyah  |
| Issue date: | 03/25/1985 |
| From: | Giuffre M, Michele Kaplan, Nalbandian J ANALYTIC SCIENCES CORP. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20205B991 | List: |
| References | |
| TR-5122-1, NUDOCS 8608120242 | |
| Download: ML20205C086 (50) | |
Text
.
', w, >.
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CORPOAATION Y
TR-5122-1 1,
IMPACTS OF THE DISPOSAL OF EXEMPT TRASH IN A SANITARY LANDFILL 25 March 1985 i
Prepared for:
NATIONAL NUCLEAR CORPORATION 1904 Colony Street Mountain View, California 94043 i
Prepared by:
Michael S. Giuffre l
l James Y. Nalbandian Maureen F. Kaplan Approved by:
)
Thomas J. Kabele E. Wayne Vinje THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CORPORATION One Jacob Way Reading, Missachusetts 01867 l_
8608120242 860805 DR
{
ADOCK 05000327 i
PDR l
m
+
t THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES COAPOAATION
(-
I
~
.g l
f l
ACKNOWLEDGMENT The author would like to thank several peo-ple for their contribution to the development of this i
study.
First are Mr. Lenon Riales and Ms. Pam Jenkins I
of TVA who were instrumental in acquiring the data describing the Summit Landfill and the Chattanooga Ms. Joyce Davis of General Physics was a great area.
help in shaping and reviewing the document to make it more effective as part of the license exemption appli-cation.
Mr. Lester Kornblith of National Nuclear Corp. and Mr. Michael Naughton of EPRI directed the work and provided many useful insights.
i 6
f
==.
he e 6
l ii
3 THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATICN TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF FIGURES iv P
LIST OF TABLES iv 1.
INTRODUCTION 1-1
~
2.
DATA FOR THE IMPACTS ANALYSIS 2-1 2.1 The Radioactive Waste 2-1 2.2 Of f-Site Population 2-8 L
2.3 Transportation 2-9 2.4 The Summit Landfill 2-11 2.4.1 Landfill Operations 2-11 2.4.2 Site-Specific Airborne Release Data 2-14 2.4.3 Site-Specific Environmental Factors 2-15
{
3.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 3-1 3.1 Variability of the Disposal Volume 3-1 3.2 Environmental Impacts 3-2 3.3 Exceptions to the Transportation Impact Calculations 3-4 3.3.1 IMPACTS Analysis 3-4 3.3.2 TVA's Transportation Scenario 3-6 4.
COST ANALYSIS 4-1 i,
4.1 Costs for Disposal at Summit 4-1 4.2 Cost of Disposal at Richland 4-1 4.3 Cost of Disposal at Barnwell 4-2 4.4 Comparison of Disposal Costs 4-3 5.
SU1 MARY AND CONCLUSIONS 5-1 APPENDICES:
A THE WATER BALANCE FOR THE CHATTANOOGA AREA A-1 B
IMPACTS RESULTS B-1 m
REFERENCES R-1 M
iii
7 1
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES COAPORATION f-r LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 4
1 2.3-1 The Sequoyah Plant Disposal Site 2-10 2.4-1 Exposed Waste Faces 2-13 4.4-1 Comparison of Disposal Costs 4-4 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 2-1 Inputs to Impacts Analysis 2-2 2.1-1 Isotopic Distribution of Trash 2-6 2.1-2 1sotopic Activities in Ci/m 2-7 2.2-1 Population Within Ring of Radius:
2-8 p
2.4-1 Wind Conditions at Summit 2-15 2,4-2 Water Balance For Chattanooga 2-17 3.1-1 variation of Volume With Concentration 3-2 3.2-1 Summary of Maximum Doses From Impacts Calculations 3-3 W
r THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATION r
n 1
l i
1.
INTRODUCTION This report describes the environmental and cost im-pacts of the disposal of certain types of trash from TVA's t
Sequoyah Nuclear Plant in the Summit Landfill in Ooltewah, Tennessee.
The study supports a TVA request for NRC approval of the conventional disposal, at Summit, of certain trash that would otherwise be categorized as " Class A" pursuant to 10 CFR 1
l Part 61
(" Exempt Trash").
I The environmental impact analysis was performed using the IMPACTS computer program (Ref. 1).
That program was devel-E oped for NRC to assist the agency in evaluating requests for i
exemption of Very-Low-Level Wastes from the disposal require-ments applicable to Class A Wastes (10 CFR 61).
The 1MPACTS program includes generic information describing a variety of disposal facilities located in various regions of the U.S.
The data used in the environmental analysis presented in this study include both generic and site-specific items.
Generic data were used whenever site-specific data were judged too dif-ficult to obtain.
Some of the assumptions embodied in IMPACTS i
incompatible with actual practice at Sequoyah and Summit.
are In these situations, the report compares both the results from IMPACTS and calculations performed by The Analytic Sciences Corporation (TASC).
This comparison includes a complete de-scription of the dif ferences in assumptions between the two calculations.
The economic impact calculations are based on current prices for disposal and transportation.
l._
t 1-1 L-
7.,
o o
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPORATION I
I There are five chapters in this report; this Intro- ~
duction is the first.
Chapter 2 describes. the data used in the analysis.
The environmental and cost analysis are in Chapters 3 and 4, respectively.
The final chapter provides a condise review of the results of the analysis.
r i
P s
L I
i e
W 4
M l-2 lL
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATION l
m 2.
DATA FOR THE IMPACTS ANALYSIS The IMPACTS analysis employs data from two basic sources:
e The description of a generic Southeast-ern sanitary landfill, given in Ref. 1 Site-specific data describing the Summit e
i Landfill, the Chattanooga Area and the l
Sequoyah Nuclear plant.
e Table 2-1 contains a concise review of the input data for IMPACTS.
For each entry, the table lists the IMPACTS code symbol, a brief dese,ription and denotes whether the value is generic or site-specific.
The following sections describe the data and their source.
2.1 THE RADIOACTIVE WASTE If NRC approval is granted, the Summit Landfill will receive and bury exempt trash from TVA's Sequoyah Nuclear Plant.
The Sequoyah personnel and procedures will ensure that no more than the approved 200 mci of radioactivity is sent to Summit in exempt trash in any one year, and that every individual truck-load of waste sent to the landfill from the Sequoyah facility has a specific activity, averaged over the contained waste, no greater than 2 nCi/g.
This limit coincides with the NRC and DOT definition of " radioactive material. "
Sequoyah personnel will measure the activi r.y of each
]
bag of uncompacted trash using the National Nuclear Corporation l
2-1
. - - -, = - - - - -.,
..-,n.
g-r g
i r- --
m e
9 9
9 6-e TABI.E 2-1 INPUTS TO IMPACTS ANAI.YSIS Y
m SfMBOI.
Iff{bI DESCRIPTION CENEHIC VAI.UE IF USED l t Z
IR Regional Index 2 - llumid/Hoderately Permeable Soil r-IDAT Additional (Site-Specific Date Index) 3 - Use Si te-Speci fic d
O IQ Disposal Facility Index 2 - Sanitary I.andfill g)
IPOP Population Density Index 2 - Urban O
gj II.FE Facility Operational Life (yr) 10 yr gZ m
IINS Institutional Control Period (yr) 15 yr U)
IOFL Calculate Trench Overflow Impacts?
0 (1 if yes) 0 B
a NSTR Number of DeMinimis Waste Streams 1
B O
b)
ID Dispersability Index 1 - Trash B"
>d IA Accessibility Index 1 - Ordinary Waste
[j i
IK First Packaging Index 0 - Not Packaged IK2 Percent Metal Packages Recycled 0
i IP Processing Index 1 - Disposal Only IXl Number of Shipping Vehicles 1
IX2 Fraction of Vehicle Load that is 100 DeMinimis (%)
IX3 Number of Processing Facilities 0
IX4 Number of Disposal Facilities 1
i ICl-IC4 Composition Indices (only applicable ICl=0, IC2:0, IC3:0, IC4=100 i f waste is sorted / incinerated)
(All Trash)
BAS (1,1)
Annual Hass of Waste (HT) 100 MT 3
BAS (1,2)
Density of Vaste (HT/m ) = (8/cc) 0.129 HT/m BAS (1,3)
Annual Volume (m )
775.2 m3
g--
g-r"-"
P P
~
~
~
~
9 9
9 O
TABl.E 2-1 d
1 INPUTS TO IMPACTS ANA!.YSIS (Continued)
A b
- p. I i
', b S
01.
DESCRIPTION GENERIC VAI.tlE IF llSED g g j r"
IIAS(1.8)/
Concent rat ion of Nuclides in Waste Table 2.1-2 IS AS ( 1.92 )
Stream (Ci/MT)
O SOL Nuclide Solubility Class Table 8-10 (Ref.1)
,g FMF I.cachate Partition Ratios Table 6-5 (Ref. 1)
Og RET Retardation coefficients Table 6-7 Set 2 (Southeast) (Ref. 1)
N!!X Denotes Nuclide is Present Table 2.1-2 l'DCF Pathway Dose Conversion Factors Appendix D (Ref.1)
OO I' DIS Transportation Distance to Facility (mi) 30 mi I]
I}
N TVEL Transportation Velocity to Facility (mi/hr) 30 mi/hr O
])
VINC Annual Volume Incinerated (m /yr) 0 h
VANN Annual Volume Disposed (m /yr) 342,000 m /yr O
3 Z
XOQO X/Q for Facility Ops Calculated by Program 2
TPOP Population Density Along the Trans-610 people /mi portation Route (People /mi) 2 TDOZ Dose Factor Dependent on Distance 7.06 x 10-5,g-2/ft from the Transport Vehicle (mi /ft2) 2 POP Airborne Population-Weighted Factor 1.75 x 10-10 3
3 for Operations (Person /yr/m )
person /yr/m l
WVEL Average Wind Speed at the Facility (m/sec) 2.54 m/sec AXOQ Accident (X/Q) Factor for llazardous 1.4 x 10-10 y,j,3 2
Vaste Disposal Facility (yr/m )
EFAC Dust Mobilizat ion Factor for 11azardous 1.54 x 10-8 g/m
,,,c
}
2 2
Vaste Disposal Facility (g/m -sec)
FSC Const ruct ion Soil-to-Air Transfer Factor 2.01 x 10~II (Dimensionless) i 4
g--
g-g i
i P
P m
.~,
r====
=
m 9
9 9
TABLE 2-1 INPUTS TO IMPACTS ANALYSIS (Continued)
CODE SYMBOL DESCRIPTION CENERIC VALUE IF USED S
8 I
j y
g m
FSA Agriculture Soil-to-Air Transfer Factor 3.18 x 10'Il (Dimensionless)
Z QFC Dilution Factor (m /yr) 7700 m /yr (intruder well) 3 i
lof((popwell) k 2.05 x 4.5 x 10 surface water)
-j i
TTM Water Travel Time (yr) 23.6 yr (intruder well) 0 400 yr (pop well)
W 800 yr (surface water)
Om DTrn incremental Water Travel Time (yr) 27.2 yr 2
O TPC Peclet Number (Dimensionless) 340 (intruder well) 4 10000 (pop well) 20000 (surface water)
O DTPC Incremental Peclet Number O
680 (Dimensionless)
B]
a PRC infiltrating Percolation (m/yr) 0.446 m/yr I)
TSC Contact Time Fraction (Dimensionless) 0.160
-1 POPE Population for Airborne Exposed 0
Calculated by Program 7
3 Waste Scenario (person-yr/m )
POPW Site-Selection Factor for Water-borne Calculated by Program Exposed Waste Scenarios (yr/m )
j EERO Dust Hobilization Rate for Erosion 1.54 x 10-8 yr/m -sec 2
Initiated Exposure (yr/m -sec)
EREC Dust Mobilization Rate for Intruder 2.50 x 10-6 yr/m -sec 2
Initiated Exposure (yr/m -sec)
EDFO Exposure Durat ion Factor for Operations 0.333 (Dimensionless)
DENI Density of Waste During Shipment 3
0.129 HT/m DEN 2 Density of Waste During Disposal 0.129 HT/m Eq. Operator 6.78 x 10~
TWO Waste-to-Air Transfer Factor for Foreman 3.39 x 10~
Disposal Operations (Dimensionless)
- 1. abo re rs 3.39 x 10~
Cate Keeper 1.70 x 10~
g--
m y
,m m
~
.m e
m
- 9 9
-TABl.E 2-1
-i I
INPIITS TO IMPACTS ANAL.YSIS (Continued) m y
Z S
OL DESCRIPTION GENERIC VALUE IF USED Ij 3
2
-4 699 m for of f-site 5
ADAY Daily Exposed Area of Soil / Waste 2
2 Mixture (m )
648 m for equipment ops U) 2 51 m for other workers Og RMIX Cover Mixing Efficiency (Dimensionless) 0.59 Z
O EMP Waste Emplacement Efficiency m
(Dimensionless) 0*8 W
dDFOD Exposure Duration Factor for Maximum O
Exposed Off-Site Individual from 1/3 Operations y
O 1
EFF 3 2 Volumetric Disposal Efficiency (m /m )
7.31 m 3
SEFF Surface Utilization Efficiency 1.00
-1
-O GERO Delay Time for Erosion (yr) 1000 yr
\\
OSDL On-Site Dust Loading (g/m )
0.4 ag/m 3
i DSP Distance to Center of Population Ring (m)
Table 2.2-1 i
PDS Population Within Each Ring (People) f Table 2.2-1 USP Average Wind Speed for Each Stability f
Class (m/sec)
Table 2.4-1 STB Fraction of Year that a Given Stability Class Occurs Table 2.4-1 ilYTO Operations Release Height (m)
Om i
l DFSTO Distance to Maximum Exposed Off-Site 100 m Individual from Operations (m) ls l
o.
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCE 3 CCAPCAATION f
(NNC) WCM-10 Was,,te, Curie Monitor.
NNC. performed a test program at Sequoyah in April and May of 1983.
Reference e describes the monitor, its operation and the test program.
As part of the monitor calibration procedure described f
in Re f. 2, TVA and NNC prepared samples of Sequoyah trash.
The isotopic distribution of the trash (so called dry active f
waste, or DAW) stream at Sequoyah is very similar to that of water entering the primary coolant clean-up system.
Conse-quently, reactor primary system water that has decayed a few weeks has a spectrum very like that of the DAW.
TVA prepared laboratory measurements of the spectrum of several samples of this water at various activity levels.
Table 2.1-1 shows the results of three isotopic distributions measured in the labora-tory, and their average.
The average values are used in this study to characterize the isotopic distribution typical of I
Sequoyah Plant trash.
TABLE 2.1-1 ISOTOPIC DISTRIBUTION OF TRASH
- u PERCENT IN SMiPLE ISOTOPE SM1PLE ft3 SAMPLE f/4 SM1PLE ft5 AVERAGE f
Mn-54 11.9 12.3 11.0 11.7 Co-57 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Co-58 43.6 42.6 44.1 43.4 Co-60 34.0 33.4 35.7 34.4 1-131 2.6 3.5 2.8 3.0 Cs-134 2.8 2.7 2.1 2.5 Cs-137 4.9 5.3 4.1 4.8
- These data are taken from Table 4-4 of Ref. 2.
(t 2-6 9
i
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATION f
[
3 A typical bag of trash has a-volume of 2 ft and a weight of 7.28 kg, or approximately 16 lb.
The density of the bags of trash is about 0.129 MT/m3 (Ref. 2).
The trash consists of items such as plastic sheets, wood, protective clothing, metal pipe, pieces of concrete, rubber gloves, surgical masks
~
and scrap wire.
The radiation from this material is so low that it is only detectable using sensitive instruments such as the WCM-10 Curie Monitor, f
Two nCi/g corresponds to a specific activity of:
6 2 nCi 0.129 MT Ci 10 g
2.58 x 10-4 Ci/ m 3
x x
x
=
8 3
9 MT m
10 nCi (2-1)
Table 2.1-2 shows the isotopic activities corresponding to 2 nCi/g, 1 nCi/g and 0.5 nCi/g trash.
The activities are based on the isotopic distributions in Table 2.1-1.
TABLE 2.1-2 ISOTOPIC ACTIVITIES IN Ci/m TRASH SPECIFIC ACTIVITY NUCLIDE 2 nCi/g i n/Ci/g 0.5 nCi/g Mn-54 3.02x10-5 1.51x10-5 7.55x10-6 Co-57 5.16x10-7 2.58x10-7 1.29x10-7 Co-58 1.12x10-4 5.60x10-5 2.80x10-5 Co-60 8.88x10-5 4.44x10-5 2.22x10-5 1-131 7.74x10-6 3.87x10-6 1.94x10-6 Cs-134
- 6. 45x 10 - 6 3.23x10 1.61x10-6
-6 l
Cs-137 1.24x10-5 6.19x10-6 3.10x10-6 TOTAL 2.58x10-4 1.29x10-4 6.45x10-5 2-7 1.
e THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATICN f
{
2.2 OFF-SITE POPULATION Table 2.2-1 shows the approximate population within 5, 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50 miles of the Summit Landfill.
The population estimates were made using 1980 Census Data and
(
Department of Interior maps (Refs. 3 and 4).
f TABLE 2.2-1 POPULATION WITHIN RING OF RADIUS:
1 50 mi 40 mi 30 mi 20 mi 10 mi 5 mi COUNTY STATE (80 km)
(64 km)
(48 km)
(32 km)
(16 km)
(8 km) l BLEDSOE TENNESSEE 9478 9478 1752 0
0 0
BRADLEY TENNESSEE 67547 67547 67547 67547 26399 6083 GRUNDY TENNESSEE 13787 4326 0
0 0
0 HAMILTON TENNESSEE 287740 287740 287740 287740 107059 25161 MARION TENNESSEE 24416 24416 9451 0
0 0
t MEIGS TENNESSEE 7431 7431 0
0 0
0 MONR0E TENNESSEE 28700 0
0 0
0 0
McMINN TENNESSEE 41878 41878 14915 0
0 0
POLK TENNESSEE 13602 13602 8454 0
0 0
RHEA TENNESSEE 24235 16199 16199 0
0 0
SEQUATCHIE TENNESSEE 8605 8605 2214 0
0 0
i VANBUREN TENNESSEE 4728 0
0 0
0 0
DeKALB ALABAMA 11116 0
0 0
0 0
JACKSON ALABAMA 31'390 9812 0
0 0
0 j
CaTOOSA GEORGIA 36991 36991 36991 36991 7398 0
l CHAT 00GA GEORGIA 21856 7497 0
0 0
0 DADE GEORGIA 12318 12318 12318 0
0 0
FANNIN GEORGIA 14748 10891 0
0 0
0 FLOYD GEORGIA 5871 0
0 0
0 0
GILER GEORGIA 11110 1731 0
0 0
0 GORDON GEORGIA 30070 26814 0
0 0
0 MURRAY GEORGIA 19685 19685 2284 2284 0
0 PICKENS GEORGIA 3320 3320 0
0 0
0 WALKER GEORGIA 56470 56470 56470 12710 0
0 WHITFIELD GEORGIA 65789 65789 65789 3219 0
0 l
CHEROKEE NO. CAR.
18933 0
0 0
0 0
l TOTAL 871814 732540 582124 412491 140856 31244
'emum 2-8
[.
1 THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATION 2.3 TRANSPORTATION The transportation distance from the Sequoyah Plant to the Summit Landfill is approximately 30 mi.
The entire route 4
is within Hamilton County, Tennessee. Assuming an average
[I truck speed of 30 mi/hr, the trip takes one hour.
The route taken by the truck from the power plant to the disposal site is shown in Fig. 2.3-1.
It follows the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Access Road from the plant to U. S.
Route 27.
It then turns south on U.S. 27 to Tennessee Poute 153.
This section of the route passes through low rolling hills and is a sparsely-populated rural area.
The route then follows Tennessee 153 south-east through suburban areas and over the Chickamauga Dam on the Tennessee River to the intersection of 153 and Interstate Route 1-75.
1-75 is followed to its inter-section with U.S. Route 64.
This section is lightly populated.
The short section of U.S.
64 is fairly well built up.
The final portion of the route is a few miles of secondary roads through a rural area to the disposal site.
The total distance is thirty miles.
About half is through areas of very low popu-lation density.
According to Mr. David Meyer of BF1 of Tennessee, Inc., the waste disposal contractor, the truck has one driver 3
and contains about 40 yd of trash which is not compacted in the truck.
~
The generic values for the population density along the transportation route, and the dose factor dependent on distance from the transport vehicle were adopted.
The generic 2
population density is 610 people /mi which is larger than the actual density of people in Hamilton County, Tennessee (Ref. 3).
2-9 l
i i..,.
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATION f
a / q pl2 g.
n.
- !( j t sgp -,-
re::
V
_., s'
- l
-' f y!L,n.
y Itla 3
.)i,' %l N, ' g.Q,3 ',h.
l l
ff
,..a i. 3 s'
l M-f Ig
~'
~
F N ' I.
W f
I' l} ' ji c W'
!! g3
'l
- j;!hy l
l!
i g
'si fj M.,'.
93
," s i.
1 f-
- ! I
. Ig I
8 3
r;g jg 1
l
- Et 2
~h,'
. (*
,J, h
. c-
~
- , rill c1l.
I!
-.s
-~
v3
.:o "s.
L,,.
N a(
g t
- s
/>
2, iY 2 \\.7
, Y',lj l N.
j
,',,, y,D%'
}
Q, II f
.j!
8 j
e
) ai l
- r. a ij
. io c.
..\\
y-J
.' s
, s % n. %, ', 6.. j::.g,]a g m
.y';-
3 r, !!,J3
~'
',/.
WN
, _\\
V, r
i~~
$1
\\
a 5
.I I#
?%.<./
1, s I k *$
/
,, MA..g'-
I g
Ja2 ll,. 4 c.
I Is.,
f.
8 J6 lJ a M*'4 '. "/QI,Jliji y('.). ' A'
.I 1
.,{ *.
y#I
.'\\
H :
C 1
l
~
<t
~
q.
41 N
fep",g.l,,
i
).
- .1 1 /
I 8
I i
jJ7
// y 9*. Mf N3 I
I n..-
~z.
g
.W s.a{s,vt
,i
- s.,
s c
/:
.i g is d3
.c 3
%.d.,7 '* f */ "
.4 V If.'i "1.
i t w
i Q.
i b i
\\, If/my e
s
-Z%
y,8 1
JI a G.av I
3i, - ;
t..,.
w! 1 9.,.. '
a'
. r...\\.z.y. )
n o.
s fl e
' ** j )
3
../3 q
I a
.s.t a li 5
u m
$.' p/ ' ** g' Il i s
!: o Y
. hd f ;', (
s 3
'3. /
ll T
4
,,p
!.h
=
p e
,2 6e2 [s n
7
=
s a'-
j g i f Q,-:.
,.. < g j\\.
... ' l 1;}f h 'u..
s jl q'{ 4,J 3
i
{
lJ'.\\
.. =.. -
m
, 7..w i.n fy
[V
.x 1H
,u..$\\i3;14he r p C.... ' N v.-
,]
/ Y' I(' ],
p' >\\
_.m w L >
k j ;; a
\\3;
.um 2-10 l
g.
THE ANALYTIC SC:ENCES CCAPORATION f
f The exempt trash from Sequoyah was assumed to be shipped only in full truck-load batches.
Sensitivity analyses with IMPACTS indicated that the calculated impacts were insensitive to this assumption until the ratio of exempt trash to total truck contents became so small that mdre than 750 truck loads of waste containing radioactivity were necessary.
Such a situa-tion is obviously unrealistic for the Sequoyah facility.
f 2.4 THE SUMMIT LANDFILL 2.4.1 Landfill Operations I
The location of the landfill and the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant are shown in Fig. 2.3-1.
The city of Chattanooga has operated the Summit Landfill since 1964.
The landfill is scheduled for use through 1994; a fifteen year institutional control period will follow.
The landfill is licensed by the f
state of Tennessee, and operated in compliance with Tennessee's Solid Waste Disposal Act and other state regulations.
The applicable regulations are included as an addendum to this report.
These regulations are consistent with the landfill operations described in Ref.
1.
Conversations with Mr.
P. Denardian of the City of Chattanooga indicate that the Summit landfill operations are very much like those described in Appendix C to Ref.
1.
The trench method of disposal is used.
The waste is placed in layers approximately seven feet deep, covered with six inches 3
of soil and compacted to 1000 lb/yd.
A two-foot overcover is placed on the filled trenches.
The trenches are approximately 25 feet deep, and are unlined so that no leachate accumulation problems can occur.
Because of the similarity between Summit and the NRC reference facility, this study uses the generic 2-11
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATION values from the NRC report (Ref. 1) for the cover mixing, waste
~
emplacement, volumetric disposal and surface utilization ef-ficiencies.
The major difference between Summit and the NRC refer-ence landfill is size.
Summit occupies about 200 acres and receives 800-1000 tons of waste per day for 280 days / year.
{
The NRC reference landfill covers only 25 acres and receives no more than 69 tons / day.
e This analysis considers only the trash buried in the last ten years of Summit's operation.
No credit is taken for the areal extent of the rest of the landfill in calculating environmental impacts.
Thus, off-site populations are assumed to be very close to the area of the landfill where Sequoyah trash will be buried.
Since this is not actually the case, the assumption made will tend to result in an over-estimate of the dose to persons off-site.
The total amount of waste buried from all sources at Summit annually is calculated as follows:
800 tons 280 days yd m
i
-x x
x 342,000 m /yr day yr 0.5 tons 3
1.31 yd (2-2)
The use of 800 tons / day in the calculation, which is at the lower end of the range of values above, is another conservative 3
assumption.
Thus, the 342,000 m /yr calculated is a minimum estimate, likely to be exceeded, to some degree, in practice.
The exposed waste face can be calculated assuming a seven-foot (2.13 m) cell height corresponding to the seven-foot layers described above.
The daily area of waste exposed is:
i 2-12
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATION f
3 3_42.000 m
~yr 1-2,
. 7",.. 4 a / da..
yr 700 days 7.T3 iii y
l (2-3)
~
which is equivalent to a square about 24 m on the side.
Figure 2.4-1 shows the exposed trench faces, assuming I
a 45 deg slope on the end face as in Ref. 1.
Off-site popula-tions are exposed to all three faces:
a total of 699 m.
2 Equipment operators are exposed to the top and slant faces:
a 2
total of 648 m.
Other workers are exposed to only the 51 m2 side face.
The faces not shown in the figure abut the trench walls; the re fore, they are not exposed.
i I
l' AREA = 576m2 p
24m 3.0m AREA = 51m2 2.13 m i
l Figure 2.4-1 Exposed Waste Faces 2-13 t
(.,.
L.
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES COAPCAhTION
(
2.4.2 Site-Soecific Airborne Rel' ease Data
~
~
{
The analysis uses the generic values of Ref.1 for:
3 On-site dust loading (0.4 mg/m )
e Operatior.s release height (0 m, i.e.,
e ground level)
Distance to the maximally exposed indi-e vidual (100 m) f l
Exposure duration factor (1/3).
~
e The populations within rings of given inner and outer radii are derived from the data presented in Table 2.2-1.
I Because the Chattanooga Weather Bureau does not maintain the needed data, the wind speeds and stability class distributions at Summit were assumed to be the same as at the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant.
Sequoyah reports 7 stability class (A-G) instead of the six classes (A-F) used in IMPACTS.
The re fo re, for the purposes of this study, the Sequoyah Classes F and G are combined into one IMPACTS Class F.
In Table 2.4-1, the fraction of time in Class F is the fractions of time in Class F or G, and the Class F Summit windspeed is the same as the Class F Sequoyah windspeed (which is greater than the Class G windspeed at Sequoyah).
L When originally run with these data, the version of IMPACTS used calculated extremely large airborne releases.
Investigation of the program showed that the AX0QF subroutine was in error.
In that subroutine, the windspeeds are not con-verted from m/see to in/y r.
Consequently, the value of X/Q was 3
3 computed in sec/m rather than yr/m the units used in the subsequent calculations.
M 2-14 1_.
~
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATION TABLE 2.4-1 ~
~
WIND CONDITIONS AT SUMMIT STABILITY WSP STB 7 LASS (WINDSPEED m/sec)
(FRACTION OF TIME)
I A
2.90 0.029 B
2.86 0.012 C
2.81 0.038 D
2.59 0.199 E
2.14 0.442 F
1.34 0.276
- Based on TVA's reported wind conditions at the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant.
When the correct units for windspeed were used, the re-sulting value of X/Q was 1.416 x 10-10 yr/m.
This is somewhat 3
larger than the generic value from Ref. 1:
9.1 x 10-11 yr/m,
3 2.4.3 Site-Soecific Environmental Factors The NRC description of a generic Southeastern sanitary landfill (Ref.1) is the primary source of data on disposal site environmental factors used in this study.
Parameters such as nuclide retardation factors and solubilities, leachate partition ratios, etc. were set at their generic values.
Generic values for groundwater migration parameters were also used, except for the percolation coefficient and contact time fraction which were calculated with a water balance using Chattanooga Weather Bureau data.
The use of generic groundwater migration variables contains some conservatism.
Summit is much larger than the 2-15
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATION
(
l generic landfill.
This suggests that"the travel time between.
sectors is probably greater than in the generic model.
Sec-ondly, Mr. P. Dendarin of the Chattanooga Engineering Depart-ment says that the water table is at least 100 ft deep.
This I
suggests that the 10 yr travel time assumed from the trench down to the aquifer may also be conservative.
Table 2.4-2 shows a water balance for the Summit Landfill.
The calculations are based on Chattanooga Weather Bureau data on rainfall and temperature.
Appendix A contains the details of the calculation.
The resulting percolation is 446 mm/yr.
This value is about 2.5 times larger than the NRC's generic value of a Southeastern site presented in Ref. 1 The value for the contact time fraction corresponding to the percolation rate calculated for this study is 0.16.
L I.
W O
ke 4
6 6
2-16
.~
_,.7,s
g --
g-
[
f-- --
y
- m
=
P i
i
-1 Im b
TABl.E 2.4-2 Z>
WATER BAI.ANCE FOR CilATTANOOGA Q
da JAN Fels flAH APH
?!AY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC ANNUAL.
g 0
Precipitation (P) 137 132 142 112 86 94 130 81 94 76 99 135 1318 fn 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.14 0.14 W
j o
Surface Hunoff (H) 19 18 20 16 12 11 16 10 11 9
14 19 175 13o ta D
Infiltration (P-H) 118 114 122 96 74 83 114 71 83 67 85 116 1143 Potential
-1 Evapotranspiration i
11 24 50 90 151 148 139 89 63 21 3
0 (PET)
Z I - PET 117 103 98 46
-16
-68
-34
-68
-6 4
64 113
+528 Cumulative Negativ Sum of I - PET (CNS)
-16
-84
-118
-186
-192 Soil floisture Storage 125 125 125 125 109 63 48 28 26 30 94 125 Clia n ge in Storage 0
0 0
0
-16
-46
-15
-20
-2
+4
+64
+31 Actual Evapotranspiration 1
11 24 50 90 129 129 91 85 63 21 3
(AET)
Percolation (nun) 117 103 98 46 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
82 446
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPOAATION
~
.~. -.
3.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS f
3.1 VARIABILITY OF THE DISPOSAL VOLUME f
This section describes the environmental effects of the disposal of up to 200 mci /yr contained in exempt trash in the
~
Summit Land fill.
Each waste shipment will have an average specific activity of no more than 2 nCi/g.
The maximum volume
{
of exempt trash that the Sequoyah Plant could be permitted to l
ship in any given year will vary as a function of the actual specific activity.
For example, i f the average concentration shipped in a year is 1 nCi/g, then Summit could receive up to 200 MT of exempt trash from Sequoyah that year.
Based on the average density of 0.129 MT/m3, a volume of 1,550 m3 (54,715 ft3) of such trash could be disposed of in this manner.
Of course, the actual amount shipped will also depend on the amount of trash actually generated in the Sequoyah Plant that meets the specific activity criterion for exemption.
I..
The impact analyses in this chapter are based on the assumption that the entire 200 mci is disposed of at Summit yearly.
To determine whether the impacts change as the volume of waste varies, IMPACTS was run three times with average con-centrations of radioactivity of 2 nCi/g, 1 nCi/g and 0.5 nCi/g, respectively.
Table 3.1-1 summarizes the variation in volumes in the three cases.
The impacts calculated in each of the three cases were exactly the same.
(Appendix B contains the Tape 5 (input) data for these runs and the calculated impacts. )
Consequently, we conclude that the environmental impacts depend on the total activity of the trash, and are independent of the volume shipped.
i 3-1 n
.. ~.
T...
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAAQAATION l
TABLE 3.1 ~
VARIATION OF VOLUME WITH CONCENTRATION 7
i TOTAL AVERAGE TRASH TRASH TRASH ACTIVITY CONCENTRATION WEIGHT VOLUME VOLUME mci (nCi/g)
(MT) '
(m )
(ft3) 3 i
F 200 2
100 775 27,364 l
200 1
200 1550 54,729 200 0.5 400 3101 109,457 3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Table 3.2-1 summarizes the results of the IMPACTS calculations.
Pathways with a zero dose result are not listed in the table.
Appendix B contains the complete IMPACTS output for the analysis.
~
Transportation impacts are the largest.
The transporta-tion dose model in IMPACTS contains several assumptions which are inappropriate for the shipment of waste from Sequoyah to Summit.
The following section describes these assumptions and their ef fects on the dose to transportation workers.
The next highest doses are to the workers at the dis-posal facility.
Of these workers, the largest calculated dose is less than one millirem per year.
Doses to the of f-site population, around the disposal facility, total less than 10-4 millirem per year and the maximum individual dose is much o
less than one microrem per year.
The calculated cumulative dose to the population along the transportation route is 101 person-millirems per year.
l_
3-2
- k
r-l THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATION TABLE 3.2-1 ~
~
SUMMARY
OF MAXIMUM DOSES FROM IMPACTS CALCULATIONS (l.
IMPACT SCENARIO UNITS" TOTAL WORST AFFECTED HIGHEST ORGAN BODY DOSE ORGAN DOSE Transportation g
Maximum Worker a
38.7 Total Body 38.7f All Workers b
77.3 Total Body 77.3 Population Along Route b
101.0 Total Body 101.0 Intruder Impacts Intruder Water a
2.46E-7 Lungs 4.74E-7 Intruder Airborne b
1.45E-4 Lungs 4.62E-4 Exposed Waste Erosion Water a
1.96E-14 Lungs 3.44E-14 Erosion Airborne b
1.52E-13 Lungs 3.00E-13 Disposal Facility Operation Population b
6.62E-4 Thyroid 2.59E-2 Off-Site Individual a
1.60E-6 Thyroid 6.28E-5 All Workers b
6.49E-1 Total Body 6.49E-1 Maximum Worker a
6.49E-1 Total Body 6.49E-1 Groundwater Impacts Intruder Well a
9.34E-27 Lungs 1.84E-26 s
I
- Units: a - mrem /yr b
person - mrem /yr tThese values are further discussed in Section 3.3.
The NRC code does not include provision for calculating the dose to a maximum individual along the route, but it is ap-parent that with the generic average population density of 2
610/m'i used in the calculation, this must be distributed over many thousands of people and the maximum per individual would be extremely small.
M j
3-3 2.
r-l 1
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAAQAATION 7
l 3.3 EXCEPTIONS TO THE TRANSPORTATION IMPACT CALCULATIONS '
I This section describes the appropriate calculation of f
dose to a driver who transports exempt trash from Sequoyah to
_therSummit Landfill.
In particular, domparisons are made be-f tween the assumptions in the IMPACTS program and the actual situation at the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant.
3.3.1 IMPACTS Analysis The dose calculation in the IMPACTS program includes four assumptions that are not appropriate for the sequoyah situation:
}'
Number of drivers in the cab during a e
trip (2) e Weight of waste carried per trip (4.5 MT)
Duration of trip (3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br />) e Geometry of the disposal vehicle (see l
Ref. 1).
(
The following discussion reviews the IMPACTS transpor-tation model and describes the effects of these assumptions on the calculated impacts.
Equation 3.3-1 expresses the total dose to a driver who is transporting exempt trash.
D=
C (pd /Pw) f DCF (3.3-1) 9 c
nuclides where:
l D
is the total dose (mrem /yr)
E 3-4 L
[
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAACAATION
[
C, is the concentration of a given nuclide (Ci/m ) ~
~
3 3
pd is the density of dirt (MT/m )
3 p
is the dencity of waste (MT/m )
f is the geometry / trip factor c
DCF is the external dose conversion factor 3
I (mrem /yr/Ci/m )
e The nuclide concentrations are given in Table 2.1-2 and the corresponding DCF's are found in Ref. 1.
The density of dirt 3
is 1.6 MT/m and the density of exempt trash is 0.129 MT/m3 (Re f. 2).
The geometry / trip factor f is composed of four parts c
which are given in Eq. 3.3-2.
f
=
PK x CF x DF x EDF (3.3-2) c where:
PK is the packaging factor CF is the geometry correction factor DF is the distance factor EDF is the exposure duration factor The packaging factor PK is assumed to be unity because the trash is not specially packaged.
The distance factor DF is also set to unity, which corresponds to a distance of one meter.
The geometry correction factor CF is computed assuming the drivers sit in the cab of the disposal truck for two hours,
.f_
are at its side for one-half hour, and are away from it for i
+
l_
j 3-5 e
,--g-y-,,<-
e-
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES COAPCAATION e
I another half hour.
While in the cab, 'the waste. form is approx-imated by a disc of infinite thickness with a radius of two meters.
Similarly, when at the side of the truck, the waste I
appears as a disc of four meters in radius.
The net correction factor for this geometry assumes a oni meter distance from the center of the surface of the disc of waste; its value is 0.187.
I J
The exposure duration factor EDF is a function of how many trips per year are required for disposal, and the duration of each trip.
The number of trips per year is com-i puted by taking the annual mass of exempt trash and dividing e
it by a five ton limit (4.534 MT) per shipment.
The IMPACTS model will automatically reduce the impact to driver if more
(
than 750 trips / year are needed to ship the waste.
Such a i
situation could not occur at Sequoyah.
The trip duration term is expressed in hr/ trip per hr/yr.
IMPACTS computes a dose of 38.7 mrem / year to each of the drivers.
(
3.3.2 TVA's Transportation Scenario The scenario for TVA's disposal of exempt trash does not match the scenario used as a basis for the IMPACTS program.
Specifically, the following assumptions are different:
I.
One driver in the cab during a pickup e
Four and one-third tons (3.9 MT) of e
waste per trip l
t Two hours per trip e
e Different dimensions for the disposal vehicle.
Because of the first assumption, only one driver is ex-posed to the radiation so the dose to all workers equals the dose to the maximum transportation worker.
The second assumption 3-6
=
-r, w
r
e, THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATION
~
i 3
is based on a 40 yd volume in the disposal truck for waste.
The value of four and one-third tons per load is determined first by computing a volume limit.
3 3
3 3
3 3
~
(40 yd )
(27 ft /yd )
(0.02852mfft)
Limit =
30.6 m
=
(3.3-3) i Next, the volume limit from Eq. 3.3-3 is converted to a mass by multiplying this limit by the density of the uncompressed waste.
F I
Mass
=
3 (Limit)
(0.129 MT/m )
(3.3-4) 3.946 MT = 4.348 ton
=
The two-hour trip includes a one-hour drive to the landfill (30 miles), one-half hour at the side of the truck, and another half hour away from it.
The disposal vehicle is a flat bed truck with a width of 8 feet, a disposal compartment of 30 feet in length, and a minimum distance of 8 feet separat-ing the driver from the trash.
With these dimensions, the p
geometry correction factor becomes:
CF = ( 0.3416 (0.5 hr) + 0.0064 (1 hr) + 0.0 (0.5 hr) ) / (2 hr)
= 0.089 L
(3.3-5)
The value of 0.3416 was directly computed from the IMPACTS using the function routine COFF with arguments of R =4.572 m (15 ft) and X = 1.219 m (4 ft).
The parameter R corresponds to the approximate radius of waste while the driver stands at the side of the truck and the parameter X corresponds j
3-7 2
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATION l
]~
to the distance from the center of the waste in the truck to
~
the driver at its side.
similarly, the value of 0.0064 was
~
4' computed using a R value of 1.219 m (4 ft) and a X value of A-7.010 m (23 ft).
In this case, the parameter R corresponds to the approximate radius of waste while the driver is in the cab and the parameter X corresponds to the distance from the cen-ter of the waste to the driver in the cab.
The geometry / trip factor is:
P*
4 w
f
= (1.0) (0.089) (1.0) (100 MT/yr/3.946 MT/ trip) (2 hr/ trip /8760 hr/yr) f c
= 5.149 x 10 (3.3-6)
Now, evaluating Eq. 3.3-1 with this revised value of f gives c
a total dose to a driver of 14.1 mrem / year.
i~
This calculation assumes 100 MT of 2 nci/g waste is shipped per year.
If instead, 200 MT of 1 nCi/g waste were L-shipped, the value of f w uld double, but the waste concen-c trations would be cut in half.
Consequently, the calculated dose of 14.1 mrem /yr would be unchanged.
P The TVA calculations are approximately a factor of three smaller for the individual driver and a factor of six smaller for all transportation workers than the results from the IMPACTS program.
The reasons for the smaller total dose are:
l' e
Shorter exposure times per shipment Larger separation distance from the waste e
to the driver.
).
3-8 t
T 2
r'..
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCACCA ATION e
i l
These two factors result in an overestimate of the dose in the TVA scenario when the unmodified IMPACTS code is used.
e Historically, the radiation dose rate in the cab of low-level waste shipments to Richland, Washington has averaged 1
0.3 millirem per hour which results in a radiation dose of 13.2 millirem tc i
the common carrier driver during one average shipment.
If the same driver drove all shipments to Richland in an average yean, he would receive a cumulative dose of 422 millirem.
The calculated maximum dose of 14.1 millirem per year to a driver to the Summit Landfill compares favorably i
with the Richland exposure.
4 p
The average dose ra t.e in the cab of the truck going to the Summit landfill is less than 0.05 millirem per hour.
The Department of Transportation limit is 2 millirems per hour.
i.
c b
P I
o b
o l
1 l
u
(
3-9 I
~_-
n..
l-THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES COAPOAATION r
I 4.
COST ANALYSIS i
r This chapter compares the costs of transporting and burying trash at Summit with similar costs for the shallow land burial facilities at Richland, Washington and Barnwell, South Carolina.
Trash shipped to Richland or Barnwell will be compacted and drummed before shipment.
Trash shipped to Sum-mitt will neither be compacted nor drummed.
Throughout this I
chapter, costs are expressed as dollars per uncompacted cubic foot of trash.
4.1 COSTS FOR DISPOSAL AT SUMMIT 1.
BFI charges TVA $ 6 per ton of trash picked up at I.
Sequoyah for transportation and burial.
The uncompacted trash has an average density of about 8 lb/ft Therefore, there 3
3 are about 250 ft of uncompacted trash per ton.
Consequently, the cost of transportation to and burial at Summit is S0.024 per cubic foot of uncompacted trash.
P 4.2 COST OF DISPOSAL AT RICHLAND TVA's Sequoyah Nuclear Plant presently ships its DAW f
to Richland, Washington.
Transportation of the waste costs
$3900 for a 150-drum shipment.
The drums contain compacted l
trash.
Reference 2 states that during the curie monitor test-L ing, 135 bags of trash were compacted and filled 13 55-gallon I.-
4-1
~-
[.. =
O THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCRATION I
3 drums.
Based on these figures, 3,115 'ft o f uncompac~ted trash could be sent in a shipment.
Consequently, transportation 3
F costs are Sl.252/ft for uncompacted trash.
I, Standard 55-gallon drums are~used as shipping packages r
i for the waste.
At a cost of $25 each, their use results in a cost of $1.204/f t-of uncompacted trash.
3 Burial costs at Richland are $21.76/ft for very I
lightly contaminated waste based on a 7.5-ft volume for a 3
drum.
The resulting burial cost for a shipment is $24,480.
3 I
This cost corresponds to $7.859/ft of uncompacted trash.
The total cost for transportation to and burial at 3
Richland is S10.31/ft of uncompacted trash.
2 4.3 COST OF DISPOSAL AT BARNWELL TVA currently does not have a disposal allocation large enough to allow the shipment of Sequoyah's radwaste to Barnwell.
However, these cost calculations are included in anticipation of TVA using Barnwell as part of the Southeast L
Compact.
(
L The average cost of a shipment of 150 drums is $779.
3 The resulting cost is S0.25 per ft for uncompacted trash.
Burial costs at Barnwell for very lightly contaminated 3
wastes are $24.89/ft plus a 2.4 percent tax.
The total burial price for a 150 drum shipment is $28,673.
This cost corresponds 3
j to $9.205/ft for uncompacted trash.
J I
l 4-2
- b
3 7
a THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATION l
'~
1 3
Including the drum cost of Sl.204/ft the r.o t:1 transportation and burial costs for disposal at Barnwell are 3
S10.66/ft for uncompacted trash.
r 4.4 COMPARISON OF DISPOSAL COSTS 1
As the previous three sections show, disposal in a commercial radioactive waste burial ground costs approximately S10.29 to S10.64 per cubic foot more than disposal at Summit.
i 3
If 27,000 ft were shipped to Summit, TVA would save over a quarter of a million dollars per year.
These costs do not include the savings for labor to compact the waste into drums,
[
prepare the drums for shipment, and prepare shipping papers for the waste.
Figure 4.4-1 graphically displays the differences in disposal costs between Summit and a commercial radwaste site.
Additional savings would also occur due to the reduc-tion in 3
truck miles driven.
The waste is driven 1.41 mi/ft 3
3 to reach Richland; 0.25 mi/ft to reach Barnwell; and 0.05 mi/ft to reach Summit.
It is difficult to quantify the savings in cost, risk and environmental impact derived from these travel reductions; however, they are qualitatively of some significance.
t L
t_
4-3 i
w.
a 4
O THE ANALYT!C SCIENCES CCAPCAATION
~
s sas e s
l f
I.
r-I 500 Y
400 I,
2?
.3 sOY 300 COMMERCIAL LLW g4 SHALLOW LAND SURIAL C%
ua N2 1
j'
$b 200 24 100
=
DISPOSAL AT LANOFILL t
to 20 30 40 50 ANNUAL VOLUME OF UNCOMPACTED EXEMPT TRASH 3
(Thousands of ft )
i i
I Figure 4.4-1 Comparison of Disposal Costs i
S P
o 6
f 4-4 f
- - -, -. ~,, -.,,,,, - - -
.+ --
-,e
C, s
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATION
(
I
,r.
5.
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSIONS s.
\\'
i I
The disposal in the Summit Landfill of up to 200 m'Ci of exempt trash f rom TVA 's Sequoyah Plant is feasible, cost-beneficial, and presents no undue risk to the public.
Except for the driver of the trash hauler, no one outside the Sequoyah f
site would receive a dose which even approaches one percent of that which they receive annually from natural background radi-ation.
If one driver is assigned to haul all the exempt trash from Sequoyah, the maximum dose he could receive is less than
(
15 mrem / year, a value that is within the variability of back-ground and is generally undetectable against that background.
This value is also less than three percent of the maximum al-lowed to persons off-site under NRC's regulations (10 CFR 20).
Vacations, absences or changes in route assignments would reduce the annual dose to any individual driver even further.
Workers
+
at the landfill would receive less than 0.5 mrem / year during
{
disposal operations, less than 0.1 percent of the allowable dose.
The annual whole body dose to the maximum hypothetical person off-site would be less than 0.000002 mrem / year.
The calculations upon which the above doses are based g
assume that the exempt trash disposed of every year, year-af ter-year, would contain activity at the 200 mci limit.
- However, it is not certain that this limit would be reached every year, a fact which introduces additional conservatism into the cal-I culations.
Because TVA will limit the specific activity of waste shipped to Summit to less than 2 nCi/g, more than the nominal 3
27,000 ft of exempt trash could be shipped before the 200 mci u
}-
5-1
b i
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATION 7
1 limit is reached.
However, for the purposes of this analysis, '
the minimum volume has been used to calculate disposal costs, introducing another element of conservatism.
At present, trash that could qualify as exempt is shipped with other low-level waste to Richland, Washington.
The cost of packaging, trans-3 porting and burying 27,000 f t of waste at Richland is $278,000.
The comparable cost for disposal at Summit is $650.
This savings increases further if a greater volume of less active waste is shipped.
While the potential cost savings associated with this analysis are sizeable, cost is not the only consideration.
The predicted lack of low-level waste disposal space makes it jr essential that only waste defined as " radioactive material" be disposed of in licensed low-level waste disposal facilities.
Other materials, such as the exempt trash described in this report, should be disposed of in other suitable facilities.
P L
L L
o 6
4 m
1 5-2
}
m
~,
~
1 THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATION l
e APPENDIX A THE WATER BALANCE FOR THE CHATTANOOGA AREA-This appendix describes the water balance calculations used to determine the percolation at the Summit Landfill.
Table A.1-1 contains the average monthly temperatures and rainfalls for the Chattanooga area, as reported by the r
Chattanooga Weather Bureau.
7 l
TABLE A.1-1 AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPERATURES AND RAINFALL r
MONTH AVERAGE TEMPERATURE l AVERAGE RAINFALL F
C l
In.
l mm Jan 35.5 1.94 5.4 137 Feb 43.2 6.22 5.2 132 Mar 48.2 9.00 5.6 142 Apr 56.8 13.78 4.4 112 May 64.4 18.00 3.4 86 June 77.4 25.22 3.7 94 July 76.2 24.56 5.1 130 Aug 76.6 24.78 3.2 81 Sept 68.0 20.00 3.7 94
{
Oct 60.8 16.00 3.0 76 Nov 48.5 9.17 3.9 99 Dec 37.0 2.78 5.3 135 h
\\_
A-1
~
w,
=
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCRPCAATION l
Table A.1-2 shows the potential evapotransportation (PET) calculation for the Chattanooga area.
The calculation follows the method of Ref. 5; the heat index, unadjusted PET and correction factor for day length are taken from that l-reference.
Table A.1-3 shows the water balance for the Chatta-nooga area.
These calculations are based on Ref. 6 which con-tains tables corresponding to a soil moisture storage capacity of 125 mm.
The actual evapotranspiration was taken from Ref.
7.
All other data used matched the generic assumptions for a Southeastern site as presented in Ref. 1.
F 6.
p 6
P
=
0 W
e I-L A-2 r
,-e g- - -,
-n
, ~..
p y
m g
m m
e
=
m 9,
9 7
4 Im b
TABI.E A.1-2 Z>
P E T C A I.C lJI.A T I O N S FOlt CIIATTANOOGA AREA Q
sO JAN Fell PIAH APR t!AY JilN
Precipitation (uun) 137 132 142 112 86 94 130 81 94 76 99 135 1318 f
O 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.14 0.14 h1 O
T*(C) 1.9 6.2 9.0 13.8 18.0 25.2 24.6 24.8 20.0 16.0 9.2 2.8 h
i llea t Index 0.23 1.39 2.44 4.65 6.95 11.57 11.16 11.30 8.16 5.82 2.52 0.42 66.61 11 i
Unadjusted PET 1
13 23 46 74 125 120 120 86 65 24 4
-1 0
Correction Factor 0.87 0.85 1.03 1.09 1.21 1.21 1.23 1.16 1.03 0.97 0.86 0.85 Z
(Daylight)
Adjusted PET 0.87 11 24 50 90 151 148 139 89 63 21 3
Precipitation (P) 137 132 142 112 86 94 130 81 94 76 99 135 P - PET 136 121 118 62
-4
-57
-18
-58 5
13 78 132 tS28 Accumulated Potential 0
0 0
0
-4
-16
-79
-137 0
0 0
0 Water Loss S t o ra ge 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125 125
g ---
g--
y p
m r-----
m e,
m m
9 m.
9
-1 Im b
TAllI.E A.1 -3 Zb WATER BAIANCE FOR CllATTANOOGA Q
d JAN FEB flAR APR
?!AY JUN JUL AllG SEPT OCT NOV DEC l ANNilAl.-
o gg Precipitation (P) 137 132 142 112 86 94 130 81 94 76 99 135 1318 o
{,
O.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.14 0.14 US j
3 O
O Surface Runoff (R) 19 18 20 16 12 11 16 10 11 9
14 19 175 3)Il I
Infiltration (P-R) 118 114 122 96 74 83 114 71 83 67 85 116 1143
[
O p
B Potential
-i Evapotranspiration 1
11 24 50 90 151 148 139 89 63 21 3
0 (PET) 2 1 - PET 117 103 98 46
-16
-68
-34
-68
-6 4
64 113
+528 Cumulative Negative
-16
-84
-118
-186
Soil floisture Storage 125 125 125 125 109 63 48 28 26 30 94 125 Change in Storage 0
0 0
0
-16
-46
-15
-20
-2
+4
+64
+31 Actual Evapotranspiration 1
11 24 50 90 129 129 91 85 63 21 3
(AET)
Percolation (mm) 117 103 98 46 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
82 446
f.3
~.-
. THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES COAPOAATION e
I
~
4, r
APPENDIX B IMPACTS RESULTS r
d This appendix contains the TAPE 5 inputs and the outputs of the IMPACTS runs for this analysis.
{
Table B-1 is the data for 100 MT of 2 nCi/g waste.
Table B-2 is the data for 200 MT of 1 nCi/g waste.
q' Table B-3 is the data for 400 MT of 0.5 nci/g waste.
P L
w
[.
P een
(
j B-1 3
~
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATION r
i F-TABLE B-1 INPUT AND OUTPUT FOR 2 nCi/g WASTE 2 3 2 1 2 to 15 0
.NNC-03 100.
0.129 775.2 r
2 1
0 0
l
-1
-t t
100 0
1 -100 0
0 0
MN-54 w
2.34E-04 CO-57 Y
4.00E-06 CO*58 v
8.68E-04 CO-60 V 6.88E-04 I-131 0
6.00E-05 C$-134 0 5.00E-05 CS-137 0 9.6tE-05 g
$ANITARY LANOPILL LIFEs to OvFL.
O NSTR=
1 REGN*
2 OATA*
3 IPOP*
2 INST = 15 OPTIONAL A00 PARAMS 4.023E*03 3.t2dE*04 2.900E*00 2.900E-02 1.207E*04 s.09eE*05 2.86CE*00 1.200E-02 2.484t*04 2.7thf*05 2.8 TOE *00 3.800E-02 4.023E*04 1.6stE*05 2.590E*00 1.990E-01 5.633E*04 1.504E*us 2.140E*C0 4.420E-01 7.242E*04 1.393E*05 t.340E*00 2.760E-01 r
O.000E*00 0.QQ0E*00 3.000E*02 1.000E*02 3.333E-Ot 3.333E-On OPTIONAL ENvla0NMtNTAL PARAMETERS PRC = 4.46E-01 TLC
- 1.60E-Ol CFC
- 7.70E+03 2.05E*05 4.50E*06 FSC s 2.0IE-fl CTTMs 2.72E*01 TTM = 2.36E*01 4.00E*02 8.00E*02 FSA = 3,i8E-st OTPCs 6.80E*02 TPC a 3.40E*02 1.00E*04 2.00E*04 evEL* 3.61E*00 AA00* l.40E-to EFAC= 1.54E-08
.ASTE: NNC-03
.EtGMT 1.00E+02 MT DENSITY: I.29E-Of MT/M3.
los 2 IAs Ints 0 Im2=
0 PROCES5* 1 IAS*
1 100 0
t IC5s t00 0
0 0
i.
4
- NuM8ER OF PROCES$1NG FACILITIES = 1 ****
a L
- NuM8ER OF PROCESSING FACILITIES a i ****
j TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS TR-Man a 3.67E*01 MREM /VR TR-0CC = 7.73E*01 MREM /vEAR TR-POP
- t.01E*02 PERSON-MREM /VR INTRuoER IMPACTS:
P SCM LhMGS
- 5. WALL LLI =ALL T. 800v mIONEYS LIVER REO MAR BONE invROIO ICRP INT-C0 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 INT-AG 6.36E-02 6.36E-02 6.36E-02 6.36E-02 6.36E-02 6.36E-02 6.36E-02 6.36E-02 6.36E-02 6.36E-02 L
EAPOSEO =ASTE IwpACTS.
SCN LUNGS
- 5. 'aALL LLI WALL T. 800v mIONEv$
L!vER REO MAR SONE TnvROID ICRP IN-AIR 4.62E-04 9.94E-05 1.64E-04 8.45E-04 t 96E-04 2.10E-04 1.9tE-04 t.99E-04 t.75E-04 2.50E-04 L.
ER-AIR 3.00E-93 7.39E-14 g.60E-te 1.52E-13 2.42E-13 2.46E-13 2.32E-13 2.52E-13 2.14E-13 2.56E-13 IN wAT 4.74E-07 1.26E-07 2.04E-07 2.46E-0 7 3.69E-0 7 3.76E-07 3.54E-07 3.80E-07 3.22E-07 4.01E-07 ER*"AT 3.94E-14 8 d3E-15 1.04E-te 1.96E-14 3.05E-14 3.ltE-te 2.92E-14 3.16E-te 2.67E*l4 3.24E-14 INCINERATION AND OPEkAftONAL tupACTS:
SCN (bhG$
g, MALL LLt.ALL T. 800v alONEv5 LIVER REO MAR SCNE THvRoto ICRP IC-POP 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*C0 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 IC-INO 0.00t*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 IC =0R 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 BC-M.R 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 OP-POP 2.2tE-03 5.77E-04 1 13E-03 6.62E-04 7.12E-04 7.9tE*04 7.14E-04 7.10E-04 2.59E-02 1.82E-03 CP-tho 5. 36E-06 1.40E*06 2.75E-06 1.60E-06 1.73E-06 4.92E-06 1.73E-06 1.72E-06 6.28E-05 4.4tE-06 CP-m0R 6.49E-Qt o.49E-01 6.49E*05 6.49E-Ol 6.49E-09 6.49E*01 6.49E-01 b.49E-On 6.49E-01 6.49E-01 w
a.
.e i
i B-2 i
y----,g,-
,m, m-..
.--m.,--.m ye,-
se e
a.
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCW:CA ATION TABLE B-1 INPUT AND OUTPUT FOR 2 nCi/g WASTE (Continued)
I Co-wee 6.49E*01 6.49E-Os 6.49E-0t 6.49E-Of 6.49E-Os 6.49E-01 6.49E-On 6.49E-Of 6.49E-01 6.49E-Of P
LEACHafE ACCLwuLaTICN IMeaCTS:
l
$CN LLhGS
- s. mall LLI wall T. 800v utDNEY$
LIVEe
- EO Mae 80NE TMye0IO ice #
La-005 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 La-Ove 0.00E*00 0.QCE*00 0.COE*00 0.CCE*C0 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 La-ate 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0 00E*00 1
l
(
Oecuno watte tusaCT5e INteucEn.wELL ftwf LuhG5 5.
=aLL LLI wall T. 800v ut0NEv$
Lives REO Was BONE THv20!O ice #
20ve 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*C0 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 40's 0.00E*00
- 0. 00E *00 0.00E*C0 0. 00E*00 0.00E *00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E *00 0.00E*00 0.00E *00 t
60ve 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.CCE*C0 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 80ve 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 100ve 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E+00 0 00E*00 420's 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*CO 0 wCE*00 160ve 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 0 00E*00 0 00E*00 0 00E 00 200ve 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 40nve 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 0 00E*00 0 00E*00 600ve 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00
{
800ve 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*C0 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 in we 0.00E*00 0 OCE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 2n ve 84E-26 4.37E-27 5,10E-27 9.34E-27 1.43E-26 1.46E-26 1.37E-26 1.49E-26 1.27E-26 8.52E-26 ga ve 0.00E*C0 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 10m we 0 0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 0 00E*00 0 00E*00 20m we 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 P00VLatt0N = ELL t
TtwE LuhGS
$. wall LLt wall T.
800v E!ONEv$
Lives eEO was Sche TMwe010 ICeP 40ve O.CCE*00 0.0CE*C0 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.0 60ve O.CCE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.COE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0,00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 00'e 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*C0 0 00E*
100'e 0 00E*00 0 0CE 00 0 i
s 0 CCE*00 0.CCE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 L
120v I60ve 0.00E*C0 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 0 00E*00 0 200ve 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0,00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+03 0.00E*00 0 00E*C0
.00E*00 400,8 0.00E*00 0.COE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 600ve 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 000ve 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 In vs 0.00E*00 C.CCE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E *00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E *00 0.GCE *0 2n Sn we O COE*00 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 0 00E tom we O.COE*00 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00 20a ve O CCE*00 0.COE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 QOE*00 0 P00VLatt0N-suefact.atge T!*E LuhGS S
- att LLI wall T. 800v u!ONEv$
LIVEe RED wam SONE THYeoto Icee dove 0.00E*00 0.00t*00 0.0ut*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 0 0CE 60ve 0. 0CE *C0 0. 00E *00 0.CCE*00 0.00E *00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E *00 E*00 41ve 0 00E*00 0 Out*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.CDE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 0 00E*00 L.
00ve O.CCE*00 0.CCE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 9 20ve O.C0f *00 9 00E*C0 0.0aE*00.0.00E*00 0.0LEac1 OCE*a0 0 00E*00 0 OGE*00 0.000*00 0.GOE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00
- 60ve 0.0CE*00 0 i
400ve 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 1.03E*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0 CCE*00 0
..00E*00 600=e O.CCE*00 0 00 taco 0.CCE*00 0.QCE*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 0 00E*00 w
800ve 0 00E*00 0.C0f*00 0.00E*00 0 00f*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 0 00E*00 0 00E*
su va 0.0CE*00 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 0 00E*00 0 00E*0 2n we 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 0 00E*00 0 00E*0 5m we 0.00E*uo 0.00E*00 we O. COE *00 a COE
- C0 0.00E *00 0.00E*00 0.00E *00 0.00E *00 0.00 10m 20m we 0.00E *UD 0. 00E *00 0 00E *00 0. 00E *00 0,00E *00 0.00E*00 0.OCE *00 0.00E *00 0.00E *00 0.00E *00 l.
u.
B-3 8
mm y
a.
4 7
---e-
i.
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPOAATICN r
[.
TABLE B-2 INPUT AND OUTPUT FOR 1 nCi/g WASTE I
2 3 2 e 2 to 15 0 NNC-04 200.
0.129 1550.4 2
1 0
0 1
-1
-1 1 100 0
1 100 0
0 0
uN-54 w
t.17E-04 CO-57 v 2.00E-06 CO-58 V 4.34E-04 CO-60 y 3.44E-04 3-t31 0
3.00E-05 C5-t34 0 2.50E-05 CS-137 0 4.80E-05 samtfaev LANOFILL LIFE
- 90 OvFLs 0 N$TR*
1 REGNa 2 Carne 3 i
spope 2 IN$7e 15
'OPTIomat n00 panaw$
4.023E*03 3.124E*04 2.900E*00 2.900E-02 1.20?E*04 s.096E*05 2.860E*00 1.200E-02 2.414E*04 2.716E*05 2.810E*00 3.800E-02 4.023E*04 1.696t*C5 2.590E*00 1.990E-Of
[
5.633E*04 1.504E*05 2.140E*00 4.420E-Ot 7.242E*04 f.393E*05 f.340E*00 2.760E-01 0.000E*00 0.000E*00 3.000E*02 1.000E+02 3.333E-01 3.333E-01 Op?t0Nat ENVIRONMENfaL PARAMETERS PRC
- 4.46E-Os TSC s t.60E-Of OFC = 7.70E*03 2.05E*05 4.50E*06 FSC a 2.01E-It OTTus 2.72E*01 TTM e 2.36E*01 4.00E*02 8.00E*02 F5a
- 3.t8E-te OTPCs 6.80E*02 7pC = 3.40E*02 1.00E*04 2.00E*04 avtLa 3.6tE*00 an00s t ace-10 EFaCs 4.54E-08 wa5ft ANC-04 WEIGHT: 2.00E*02 MT DEN $ TTY: 1.29E-Of MT/M3, TOs 2 tas I tut
- O Iu2= 0 PROCES$* 1 185s a 100 0
1 ICS* 100 0
0 0
- NuwSER OF PROCES$tNG FACILITIES = I ****
L NuwSER OF PROCESSING FACILITIES s I ****
TRaN5p0RTaf!ON IMPACTS TR-Max
- 3.87E*01 MREw/ve TR-0CC = 7.73E*01 MREM /vEaR 7R-900
- 1.01E+02 PER50N-w2EM/v4 INTRuoER Impact 5i
$CN LUNG 5
- 5. wall LLI wall T. 800v ut0NEv5 liver RED mar SONE THveotD ICRp INT-C0 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 INI-aG 6. 36[-02 6.36E-02 6.36E-02 6.36E-02 6.36E-02 6.36E-02 g 36E-02 6.36E-02 6 36E-02 6 36E 022.f7E-02 Exp0 SED waste tupacTSs SCN LUNG $
$, wall LLI wall T.
000v
'ONEys LI4ER RED uaR BONE THv2010
[CRO
~
IN-a:R 4.62E-04 9.94E-05 1.64E-04 1.45E-04
.96E-04 2. tC E -04 1.90E-04 f.98E-04 t.75E-04 2.50E-04 ER*alR 3.00E-t3 7.39E-14 8.59E-14 f.S t E-t:
. 42E*13 2.46E-13 2.32E-13 2.51E-13 2.14E-13 2.55E-13 IN**4T 4.74E-07 8.26E-07 2.04E-07 2.46E-C-3.69E-07 3.76E-07 3.54E-07 3.79E-07 3.22E-07 4.
i ER-waT 3.94E-14 8.82E-15 8.04E-84 1.95E
,4 3.05E-te 3.10E-14 2.92E-te 3.16E-14 2.67E-te 3.23E-14 e
INCINER4710N AND OPERaf!0NAL !MeaCTS:
SCN LUNGS
$. WALL LL1 wall T. 800v ut0NEv$
L!vER RED 484 BONE THv2010 ICRP
!C-DOp 0.CCE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 0 00E*00 IC-INO 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 0 IC-woe 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 IC-w=R 0.00E*00 0,00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.CCE+00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 00-000 2.21E-03 5.77E-04 1.13E-03 6.6tt-04 7.12E-04 7.90E-04 7.14E-04 7.10E-04 2.59E-02 f 82E-03 Op-IND 5.36E-06 t.40E-06 2.75E-06 f.60E-06 f 73E-06 1.92E-06 f.73E-06 f.72E-06 6.28E-05 4.4tE-06 Op-won 6.49E-01 6.49E*0t 6.49E-Of 6.49E-05 6.49E-01 6.49E-01 6.49E-Ot 6.49E-Ot 6.49E-01 6.49E*0t t
4 THE ANALYTLC SCIENCES CCAPOAATICN f
TABLE B-2 INPUT AND OUTPUT FOR 1 nCi/g WASTE (Continued)
V
-OP-uwe 6.49E-On 6.49E*0s 6.49E-01 6.49E-On 6.498-01 6.49E-Of 6.49E-01 6.49E-01 6.49E-01 6.49E-01 LEACMATE ACCumuLATICN tuPACT$t SCN LUNOS MALL LLI WALL T. 800v E10%Ev$
liver RED uAa SONE TMvR0!O ICRP LA-OPS 0.00E *00 0.00 E.00 0. 0CE *00 0. 00E*00 0.00E +00 0.CCE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E *00 0.CC E*00 0 LA-OvP 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.0CE*00 0,CCE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*C0 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 LA* AIR 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.COE*00 0.00E*00 0.QQE*00 0.00E*00 0.COE+
ORouMO WATER tupACTS P
(NTRUCER-= ELL T!ut lungs
=ALL LLt MALL T. 800v ntDNEv$
liver RED MAR SONE TMvmoto ICAD 20vR 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E *00 0.00F *00 0.00E*00 0.00E*CG o 00E*00 0.00E+00 40VR 0.00E*00 0.00e*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 9.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.00E+00 60ra 0.00E*C0 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.COE*00 0.00E*C0 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.COE*00 30th 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.CCE*00 0.0CE*00 0.COE*00 0.QQE*00 0.00E*00 ICQve O.CCE*00 0,COE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.COE*00 0.00E*00 s2 ova 0.QOE*C0 0.COE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 160tR 0.COE*C0 0.00E*00 0.COE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+C0 0.00E*00 0.COE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 200ve 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.QQE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*CQ 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE+00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 400VR 0.00E*QO 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 li 600*R 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 800vR 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+30 0.0CE*00 0.0CE*00 0.OGE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 In va 0.00E*C0 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*C0 0.00E*00 0.CCE*00 0 00E*00 2n VR 1.84E-26 4.37E-27 5.09E-27 9.33E-27 1.43E-26 l.46E-28 1.37E-26 1.49E-26 1.27E-26 1.52E-26
$n vR 0.QQE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.0CE+00 0.00E*00 10m vR 0.COE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 e
20m va 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.OQE*00 0.COE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 popuLAff0N*wfLL
.t
?!wE LUNG $
WALL LLI WALL T. 800v ntDNEv$
liver REO uaR 60NE TMvR010 ICRP 20VR 0.COE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.COE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*C0 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 40VR 60ve 0.00E *00 0.COE *C0 0,0CE *00 0.00E*00 0.COE*C0 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 Bove 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 3.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.COE*00 0.COE*00 0.00E+C i
t00rR 120va 0.CCE+00 0.CCE*10 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.0
(
160ve O.CCE*00 0.0CE*00 0 QCE*00 0 OQE*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E 200VR O.0CE*C0 0.00E*00 0.OCE*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.00E*0 400ve 0.0CE*00 0.CCE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*C0 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 0 QCE*00 0 00E 600VR 0.GCE+00 0.00E *00 0.CCE+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E 600VR in va 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.CCE*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0 COE+00 0 0 2n va 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 C.00E+00 0.00E+C0 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.CCE*00
+
Sn VR 0.COE+00 0.OCE*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.0CE*00 0.0CE*00 0.CCE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E 10m vR O.00E+00 0.0CE *00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.QCE *00 0.00E 20m vR 0.60E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*03 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*C0 0.00E*0 POPULATION-$URFACE WATER Trut lungs
$. wall LLI wall T. 800v n!0NEv$
liver RED use SONE THv2010 ICRD 20VR 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.COE+00 0.00E*00 0.CCE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.CCE*00 0.00E dove 0.0CE*CQ 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.QQE+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E *00 0.00E *00 0 0CE *00 0 0 60VR 0.00E *00 0.CCE *00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E *00 0.COE*00 0.CCE*00 0.00E *00 0.0CE*00 0 00E 80VR 0.00E*CQ O.GCE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 OCE 100VR 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.GOE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 120vR 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.OQE*00 0.UCE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 160ve 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.QCE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 0 00E*0 200rR 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.0CE*00 0.0CE*00 0.00E+00 0.GCE*CO 0 00E*0 g
400VR
- 0. 00E *00 0.CCE*C0 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.COE*00 0.00E*00 0.QCE*00 0 CCE f
600ve 0. 00E *00 0 COE *00 0 00E *00 0. 0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E *00 0. CCE*C0 0.GOE*00 0.CCE *00 0 80Cve 0.00E *00 0.CCE*00 0. 0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.0CE *00 0.00E*00 0.00E *00 0.CCE*00 0.00 0.G0E eud 0.00E *00 0.COE+00 0.00E *00 0.00E*C0 0.CCE *C0 0.00E*00 0.00E *00 0.0CE*00 0.QC)
In VR 2n vR 0.COE*00 0.CCE*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.CCE*CO 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.CCE*00 0.CO f
va 0. 0CE *00 0. CGE*00 0.OCE*00 0.00E*00 0. 00E.00 0. CCE *00 0.00E*00 0.00E*uo 0.OCE *00 0.CO Sa 1
- 0. COE *0u 0.0GE *00 0.CCE*00 0.00E+00 0.COE*00 0.COE *00 0.00E *00 0. 00k *00 0.00E *00 0.00E 10m vR f
20n vR 0.00E *00 0.0CE *uo 0.00E *00 0.00E+00 0.00E *00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.COE*00 0.00E+00j i
I 4
B-5 6
I
]
- s THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAACAATiCN e
(
- 1..
TABLE B-3 INPUT AND OUTPUT FOR 0.5 nCi/g WASTE P
l J
2 3 2 8
2 to 15 0 k=C-05
- 400, 0.129 3800.8 2
8 0
0 t
-8
-l 1
100 0
t 100 0
0 0
uN*54 w
5.BSE-05 CO-57 v
1.00E-06 C0-58 v 2.17E-04 CO-60 v 1.72E-04 t-131 0
1.50E-05 C5-834 0 e.25E-05 C5-137 0 2.40E-05 5
1 saNtfaev LANortLL Ltate to Ovate 0 hSve.
I MEG== 2 caTa.
3 sp0**
2 t=57* 15 Op?tDNAL =00 sasaus 4.023E*C3 3.124t*04 2.900E*00 2.900E-02 t.207E*04 1.0968 05 2.860E*00 1.200E-02 2.c14t*04 2.716E*05 2.810E*00 3.80CE-02 4.023E*04 f.696E*05 2.590E*00 9.990E-01 5.633E*04 f.504E*05 2.f40E*00 4.420E-On 7.242E*04 f.393E*05 8.340E*00 2.760E-01 0.0C0E*00 0.000E*00 3.000E*02 1.000E*02 3.333E-01 3.333E-01 OprtCNaL ENvlR0huENTaL PanauETER$
peC
- 4.46E-01 T5C
- 2.OtE-It 07748 2.72E*01 TTu a 2.36E*01 4.00E*02 8.00E*02 S$a
- 3.19 E - 11 OTpCs 6.80E*02 TPC e 3.40E*02 1.00E*04 2.00E*04 avEts 3.6tE-00 ax00* 1.40E-10 EFace 1.54E-08 wa$TE: NNC-05 WEIGHT: 4.00E*02 MT DENSITY: 1.29E-01 MT/u3 10* 2 tas e tute o tu2e o pn0 CESS. t 145*
I 100 0
1 ICS* 100 0
0 0
- suuSEs CF po0CES5tNG FACILITIES
- l ****
- NuuSEe CF po0CEsstNG FACILITIES e l'
reaNsponfaTION lupaCTS TR uas = 3.87E*01 mREu/vR in-0CC s 7.73E*01 uREurvEaR TR-pop
- 1.0tE*02 PERSON *uREu/VR ENieucte tupaCTS:
SCN LuhGS
$. wall LLI wall T. 800v 410NEv5 LIVEe REO WAR SONE TMv8080 tCRP TNT-CO 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 2.27E-02 INT-aG 6. 36E-02 6.36E-02 6. 36E-02 6.36E-02 6. 36E-02 6.36E-0 2 6. 36E-02 6. 36E-02 6. 36E-02 6.36E-02 Exp0 SED waste tupacTS:
SCM LUNG $
5, wall LLI wall T. 800v ut0NEv5 L!vER RED uan SONE THvp010 ICRp IN-ate 4.62E-04 9.94E-05 1.64E-04 f.45E-04 f.96E-04 2.10E-04 t.90E-04 t.99E-04 f.75E-04 2.50E-04 En-a t e 3.0CE-13 7.39E*se 8.53E-14 1.5tE-13 2.42E-13 2.46E-13 2.32E-13 2.5tE-13 2.14E-83 2.55E-13 (N-war 4.74E-07 t.26E-07 2. 04 E -0 7 2.46E-07 3.69E-07 3.76E-07 3.54E-07 3.79E-07 3.22E-07 4.0tE-07 gn-.ar 3.94E-14 8.82E-15 1.04E-14 1.95E-14 J.05E-14 3.10E-14 2.92E-te 3.16E-14 2.67E-14 3.23E-te INCthEnaf!ON aho OptoaTIONat tupaCTS:
SCN Lu=GS
$. mall LLt a&LL T. 800v KIONEYS LIVER REO uaR SONE THvRO10 1Chp IC-pop I
0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.QCE*00 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 IC-INO 0.CCE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.OJE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 l
IC =OR 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 IC-uwe 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.CCE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 s.
Op.90p 2.2tE-03 5.77E-04 I 13E-03 6.6tE-04 7.12E-04 7.90E-04 7.14E-04 7.10E-04 2.59E-02 1.82E-03 OP-tho 5.36E*06 5.40E-06 2.75E-06 f.60E-06 t.73E-06 1.92E-06 1. 73E-06 1. 72E-06 6. 28E-05 4.4 t E-06 OP-=0a 6.49E-Os 6.49E-On 6.49E-01 6.49E-Ot 6.49E-01 6.49E-Ot 6.49E-01 6.49E-01 6.49E-Of 6.49E-Ot i
B-6
b A
o..
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATION TABLE B-3
~
INPUT AND OUTPUT FOR 0*5 nCi/g WASTE (Continued)
OP-wee 6.49E-01 6.49E-Of 6.49E-01 6.49E-Ot 6.49E-01 6.49E-Ot 6.49E-Ot 6.49E-Ot 6.49E-01 6.49E-Ol LEACnaft ACChuubATION IMPACTS.
(
SCN LwNGs 5.
MALL LLI WALL T. 00DY ntDNEv5 Lt9ER RED MAR BONE TMv20to ICRP LA-Ops 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 LA-OvP 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 LA-AIR 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 GRouMO MATER tupACTS:
INTRuCER ELL l
flut LvhG5 5.
=ALL LLt WALL T. 800v mIDNEYS L!vER RED MAR SONE TMvROIO ICRP j
20ve 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.QQE*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 40=R O.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 eava 0.00E*00 u 00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 aQve 0 00E*00 0.00E*c0 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 1005R 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 120's 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 th0ve 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 200ve 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 400,R 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 600ve 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 000ve 0.00E*00 0.0CE+00 0.OOE+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 in va 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 2n va t.84E-26 4.37E-27 5.03E-27 9.33E-27 1.43E*26 l.46E-26 1.37E-26 l.49E-26 9.27E-26 1.52E-26 Sa vR 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.0CE*00 0.OCE+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 10m VR 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 20m vm 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 POPULATION wELL Tiui LUNGS
- 5. MALL LLI =ALL T. 800V E!ONEV$
LIVER RED MAR SONE THYR 0!O ICRP 20ve 0 00E*00 0.00E*c0 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 40ve 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.COE*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 60ve 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*c0 00ve 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 100ve 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 120vR 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 l6 ave 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 200ve O.COE*00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 400va 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 600vR 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.r2E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 000VR 0.00E*00 0.COE*00 0.00E+00 0,00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00s+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*C0 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 la va 0.CCE+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00k*00 0.00E*00 2K WR 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00Ee00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 Sa vR 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 10E TR 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 20n VR 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 u
POPULATION-SURFACE WATER flME LuMGS
$. nALL Lgg MALL T. 800Y MIONEv5 liver REO MAR BONE THvR010 ICRP 20VR 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 40vR 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 60VR 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 80ve 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 100VR Q.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 120VR 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*C0 9.00E+00 0.00E*00 160VR 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 200VR 0.COE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E.00 0.00E*00 400ve 0.00E*u0 0.0CE*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.COE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0 00E*00 600vR 0 30E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 600VR 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 1R VR 0.00E*GO 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 2K *R 0.0CE*GO 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 SA WR 0.00E*00 0 00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.CCE*00
(,
Ian va 0.00teu0 0.ucE*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00
?O* YR 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00E*00 0.00E+00 0.00Ee00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 0.00E*00 a.wCE*ud I.
6 i
B-7 e
-r w,-
.-y m,-m,---w--a-.9-.
- = + - - -.
e------.,y e- - -
w
,..-,ew....
6.+
THE ANALYTIC SCIENCES CCAPCAATION I
REFERENCES 1.
- Oztunali, O.I.,
- Roles, G.W.,
"De Minimis Waste Impacts Analysis Methodology," USNRC Report No. NUREG/CR-3585, February 1984.
2.
Kornblith, L., " Segregation of Uncontaminated Dry Active Waste," EPRI Report No. NP-3299, November 1983.
3.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, "Vol-ume 1 Characteristics of the Population Ch. A Numbers of Inhabitants, Part 2: Alabama, Part 12:
Georgia, Part 35:
North Carolina, Part 44:
Tennessee," USDOC Documents No. PC80-1-A2, PC80-1-Al2, PC80-1-A35, PC80-1-A44, l
January 1982.
i 4.
U.S. Department of the Interior, " Geological Survey Maps:
Alabama; Georgia; North Carolina; Tennessee," Edition of 1970.
'L 5.
Thornthwaite, C.W.,
and Mather, J.R.,
"The Water Balance,"
Drexel Institute of Technology Publications in Climatology, Vol. VIII, No.
1, 1955.
u 6.
Aikens, A.E.,
et al., " Generic Methodology for Assessment of Radiation Doses from Groundwater Migration of Radio-j nuelides in LWR Wastes in Shallow Land Burial Trenches,"
Atonde Industrial Forum Report No. AIF/NESP-013, Revi-sion 3, January 1979.
7.
Fenn, D.G..
"Use of the Water Balance Method for Pre-dicting Leachate Generation from Solid Waste Disposal Sites," USEPA Report No. EPA /530/SW-168, 1975.
l k.s.
emme h
w
>