ML20205C793

Transcript of 860805 Hearing in Sandusky,Oh.Pp 1-259. Supporting Documentation Encl

ML20205C793
Person / Time
Site:	Davis Besse
Issue date:	08/05/1986
From:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:
References
CON-#386-405 ML, NUDOCS 8608130274
Download: ML20205C793 (300)

Text

ORlGb\fL g UlN11ED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NO: 50-346-ML TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY, et al.

(Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station)

O LOCATION: -SANDUSKY, OHIO PAGES: 1 - 259 DATE: TUESDAY, AUGUST 5, 1986 s

i D

ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC.

OfficialReporters 444 North CapitolStreet Washington, D.C. 20001 m ,

c. _, (202)347-3700 m c, n , : p -

NATIONWIDE COVERAGE

i 1

i 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I l

3 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD i 1

4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

-X i

1 5 IN THE MATTER OF:  :

6 TOLEDO EDISON CO., ET AL.  : DOCKET N U t1B E R

50-346-ML 7 (DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION):

G - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

-X 9 SANDUSKY HIGH SCHOOL ROOM 300 10 2130 HAYES AVENUE SANDUSKY, OHIO 11 TUESDAY, AUGUST 5, 1966 em 12

()

13 ThE HEARING IN THE ABOVE-ENTITLED MATTER CONVENED AT 5:30 A.M.

14 BEFORE:

15 dUDGE HELEN F. H0YT, CHAIRMAN 16 dUDGE J. R. KLINE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD 17 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 16 19 20 21 22 23

/3) 24 (v

2S

s 2

I 1 APPEARANCES:

2 QN_REbaLE_RE_ LICENSEE 2_IDLEQ0-_EQlSRU_CR2 :

3 JAY E. SILDERG, ESQ.

DAVID R.A. LEWIS, ESQ.

4 SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE 1800 M STREET, N.W.

S WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036 6 PRESENT:

TED MYERS, DIRECTOR OF LICENSING, TOLEDO 7 EDISON CO.

KENNETH MAUER, LEGAL DEPARTMENT, TOLEDO O EDISON CO.

9 QM_SEbaLE_0E_IbE_EIAIE_QE_0b10, L E A D _ l R I E R V E ti O B :

10 ANTHONY J. CELEBREZZE, JR., ESC.

11 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF OHIO 12 6Y JACK A. VAN KLEY, ESQ.

f' i SHARON SIGLER, ESO.

13 ASSISTANT ATTORNEYS GENERAL STATE OFFICE TOWER 14 30 EAST BROAD STREET, 17TH FLOOR COLUMBUS, OHIO 43215 15 BY EDWARD LYNCH, ESO.

16 ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL O.D.N.R., DIVISION OF WILDLIFE 1/ FOUNTAIN SQUARE, BUILDING C COLUMBUS, OHIO 43224 18 O li _ b EU A L E_R E _ IU E __IO L E R R _C R 6 L IILR U _ED B.

l it S & E E ,_ E U E B. G _Y :

I z'0 TERRY LODGE, ESR.

TOLEDO, OHIO 21 RN _ E Eht L F _D E _S.,.Da S 2_ AU D _Ib E _C 0 t!S U M ER S 22 LEAGUE _DE_0010:

23 GENEVIEVE COOK g7 ARNOLD GLEISSER

[ 24 DOROTHY AUSTIN CLEVELAND, OHIO 25

3 1 c _. p _ U _. I_. E _. t1_ I_1 2 E11t1E E S RJ B E CI_IE S Il t19 til 3 JOSEPH J. SOMMER 17 4 VIRGINIA AVENI 22 l 5 ANTHONY J. CELEBREZZE, JR. /. 7 1

6 DWIGHT WISE 53 I 7 l E11 ughs PIBEc1 ci10EE capss

! 8 (VAN KLEY/SIGLER) (LODGE) i 9 (PANEL) 32/56 BRIDEN 120/137 155 10 LLAND 114/117/121 TILL 108/111/120 11 JACKSON 106/109/112 227/254

) ,, 12 HERDENDORF 61/96 172/206 232 1

f' 13 REUTTER 106/107/109 229/241 i

NETHERINGTON 141 14 BENNETT 136/136

! HENDRON 97 179/192

, 15 198/250 i SWIM 73/95 166/176/186 106/202 1 16 190/193/195 j 200/245/251 l 17 l WALLACE 147/151 154/196

10 l WASILK 79/150/151 170/173/169 1L9 1

19 245/251/258 LINNEMANN 130 20 t

J l 21 l LAY-IN -

" LICENSEE'S TESTIMONY ON THE BURIAL OF L

22 VERY LOW LEVEL WASTE AT DAVIS-BESSE", PAGE 31 l

23 l ,/7 i -

24 l

! 25 1

4 1 P R 0, C E E D I N G S 2 - - -

3 JUDGE H0YT: THE HEARING WILL 4 COME TO ORDER. THIS CASE DEALS WITH DOCKET 5 5 0 -3 46 -M L , MEANING MATERIAL LICENSE, FOR THE 6 TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY, DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER 7 STATION, UNIT ONE.

8 THE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGES PRESENT HERE 9 THIS MORNING ARE JUDGE HELEN F. H0YT --

THAT'S 10 ME --

AND JUDGE JERRY KLINE, WHO IS THE SCIENTIFIC 11 ADVISOR IN THIS PROCEEDING. JUDGE KLINE IS AN 12 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTIST.

13 THE LICENSEE, TOLEDO EDISON AND CLEVELAND 14 ILLUMINATING ELECTRIC COMPANY --

CORRECTION --

15 THAT'S ILLUMINATING COMPANY --

FILED A REQUEST FOR 16 APPROVAL OF A PROCEDURE FOR DISPOSAL OF LOW-LEVEL 17 RADIOACTIVE WASTE ON JULY 14, 1983 AND SUBMITTED 18 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION TO THE COMMISSION, 19 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, ON JULY 3 0 T H', 1984, 20 AND AGAIN ON JANUARY 29, 1985. REQUEST FOR 21 APPROVAL WAS SUBMITTED PURSUANT TO 10 CODE OF 22 FEDERAL REGULATIONS 20.302.

23 ON OCTOBER 9, 1985, THE U.S. NUCLEAR k 24 REGULATORY COMMISSION PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL 25 REGISTER A NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO

~

5

( ) 1 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE AND FINAL DETERMINATION v

2 0F NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION AND 3 OPPORTUNITY FOR HEARING. IN THIS NOTICE THE 4 COMMISSION REACHED DECISIONS ON AMENDMENTS TO 5 LICENSES OF SEVERAL NUCLEAR POWER REACTORS 6 INCLUDING THE DAVIS-BESSE POWER STATION LOCATED IN 7 OTTAWA COUNTY, OHIO, WHICH IS THE SUBJECT OF THESE 8 HEARINGS WHICH ARE ABOUT TO BEGIN. IN THE NOTICE, 9 THE COMMISSION MADE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS 10 CON S ID ERI NG THE IDENTIFICATION OF THE PROPOSED 11 ACTION AND THE NEED FOR THE ACTION. IN 12 IDENTIFYING THE PROPOSED ACTION, THE COMMISS' ION 13 DESCRIBED IT AS FOLLOWS, AND I QUOTE:

14 "THE LICENSEE PROPOSES TO DISPOSE OF 15 PERIODIC LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE DREDGINGS FROM THE 16 ON-SITE SETTLING BASINS ONTO LAND OWNED BY THE 17 TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY. UNDER THE PROPOSED METHOD, 18 TOLEDO EDISON WOULD CONTINUE THE CURRENT PRACTICE 19 0F TRANSFERRING EACH YEAR APPROXIMATELY 1,000 20 CUBIC FEET OF RADI0 ACTIVELY CONTAMINATED 21 SECONDARY-SIDE CLEAN-UP RESINS AND ABOUT 5,800 22 CUBIC FEET OF NONRADI0 ACTIVE WASTE FROM THE WATER 23 TREATMENT FACILITY TO ON-SITE SETTLING BASINS.

1 24 ABOUT SIX TIMES OVER THE REMAINING OPERATING LIFE 25 0F THE FACILITY, THAT IS ABOUT ONCE EVERY FIVE

6 jll 1 YEARS, THE SETTLING BASINS WOULD BE DREDGED AND 2 THE REMOVED MATERIAL WOULD BE DISPOSED OF ON LAND, 3 AT A MINIMUM THICKNESS OF TWO FEET, COVERED WITH 4 FOUR INCHES OF CLEAN SOIL, AND SEEDED." END OF 5 QUOTE.

6 ON THE NEED FOR THE ACTION, THE 7 COMMISSION FOUND THAT THE OFF-SITE DISPOSAL AT A 8 LICENSED RADIOACTIVE WASTE SITE WOULD REQUIRE THAT 9 THE DREDGED RESINS BE FURTHER PROCESSED, PACKAGED 10 AND TRANSPORTED TO THE DISPOSAL SITE. THESE 11 EFFORTS WOULD RESULT IN A CERTAIN LEVEL OF e'N. 12 PERSONNEL EXPOSURE TO RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS WHICH

(,]

13 WOULD BE UNAVOIDABLE. THE COMMISSION FOUND THAT 14 THE PROPOSAL COULD REDUCE TIME AND EFFORT OF PLANT IS PERSONNEL IN RADIATION AREAS AND BE LESS COSTLY 16 THAN OFF-SITE DISPOSAL AT BURIAL SITES.

17 IN REACHING ITS DECISION ON THE 18 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION, THE 19 COMMISSION CONSIDERED ITS STAFF'S REVIEW AND 20 REACHED TWO CONCLUSIONS, AND I QUOTE:

21 ONE: "THE DOSES TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC 22 AS A RESULT OF EXPOSURE TO RADIATION FROM THE 23 DISPOSED DREDGINGS WOULD BE WELL BELOW REGULATORY 24 LIMITS AND VERY SMALL IN COMPARISON TO DOSES 25 MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC RECEIVE EACH YEAR FROM

\

l

('

\s"'

1 EXPOSURE TO NATURAL BACKGROUND RADIATION. AT THE l i

2 TIME OF DECOMMISSIONING OF THE NUCLEAR POWER 3 PLANT, THE LAND ON WHICH THE SLUDGE IS DISPOSED IS i

4 CAPABLE OF BEING RELEASED FOR UNRESTRICTED USE."

i 5 SECOND: "THE LICENSEE HAS TAKEN l

. I 6 APPROPRIATE STEPS TO ENSURE THAT OCCUPATIONAL l

(

7 DOSES WILL BE MAINTAINED AS LOW AS IS REASONABLY 8 ACHIEVABLE AND WITHIN THE LIMITS OF 10 CODE OF t

9 FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 20." END OF QUOTE. i l

10 THE COMMISSION THEN MADE ITS FINDINGS OF ]

11 NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT CONCLUDING THAT THE PROPOSED 12 ACTION WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE 13 QUALITY OF HUMAN ENVIRONMENT.

I 14 AFTER RECEIVING PETITIONS TO INTERVENE IN 15 OPPOSITION TO THIS COMMISSION ACTION IN THE PERIOD i

16 FROM NOVEMBER 1985 TO FEBRUARY 1986, THE l l

17 COMMISSION ON FEBRUARY 20TH, 1986 ISSUED AN ORDER i

18 STATING THAT --

AND I QUOTE --

" INTERESTED PERSONS {

1 19 SHOULD BE AFFORDED A HEARING UNDER SECTION 18 9 A 0F 20 THE ATOMIC ENERGY ACT. IN MAKING AN INITIAL 21 DISPOSITION OF THE PENDING HEARING REQUESTS, WE 1 22 NOTE THAT IN OUR DECISION IN KERR-MCGEE CORP., A 23 WEST CHICAGO RARE EARTHS FACILITY CASE, THE '

24 COMMISSION INDICATED THAT THERE WAS NO ENTITLEMENT 25 TO A FORMAL TRIAL-TYPE HEARING UNDER EITHER THE

)

L - _ _ - - - - - .- ._ . -. . -. _ - _ - - - _ - _ _ _

f 8

?

f f

jlh 1 ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY I. 2 COMMISSION REGULATIONS WITH REGARD TO MATERIALS I

j 3 LICENSING ACTIONS. FURTHER, NEITHER THESE s 4 PARTICULAR HEARING REQUESTS, NOR ANY OTHER

, 5 INFORMATION NOW AVAILABLE TO US, GIVE US CAUSE TO 6 EXERCISE OUR DISCRETION AND GRANT A FORMAL HEARING 7 UNDER THE PUBLIC INTEREST STANDARDS OF 10 CFR 8 2.104(A) AND 2.10 S ( A ) ( 7 ) OR TO FIND DUE PROCESS 1 9 CONCERNS REQUIRE THAT A FORMAL HEARING MUST BE 3

10 CONVENED. THEREFORE, ONLY AN INFORMAL HEARING 11 WILL BE I N ST I T U TED . " END OF QUOTE.

4 i ,/ 12 ON FEBRUARY 25, 1986, BY A NOTICE IN THE k-]'

13 FEDERAL REGISTER, I WAS APPOINTED PRESIDING

]

l 14 0FFICER TO CONDUCT AN INFORMAL HEARING INTO THIS 15 MATTER. BY MY ORDER OF MARCH 10, 1986, THE NOTICE 16 0F THIS INFORMAL HEARING AND OPPORTUNITY TO BECOME I 17 A PARTY WAS ISSUED. ON MAY 29, 1986, MATTERS -

i 18 DESIGNATED TO BE ADDRESSED AT THE INFORMAL HEARING 19 WERE SET OUT IN AN ORDER WHEREIN THE PROCEDURE WAS '

20 ESTABLISHED FOR FOUR PETITIONERS WHO HAD, IN MY 21 OPINION, DEMONSTRATED STANDING TO INTERVENE AS

( 22 GOVERNED BY 10 CFR 2. 714 ( D ) AND EXISTING AGENCY i

1 23 PRECEDENTS. THESE INDIVIDUALS ARE: THE STATE OF 24 OHIO --

AND THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE ATTORNEY l

25 GENERAL --

TOLEDO COALITION FOR SAFE ENERGY AND l

t

9

( l SUSAN A. CARTER; WESTERN RESERVE ALLIANCE; AND v

2 SAVE OUR STATE FROM NUCLEAR WASTE, CONSUMERS 3 LEAGUE OF OHIO, ARNOLD GLEISSER AND GENEVIEVE S.

4 COOK. ALTHOUGH FOUR OTHER PETITIONS TO INTERVENE S WERE CONSIDERED, THEY WERE DENIED BUT WILL BE r 6 PROVIDED TIME FOR REPRESENTATION OF THEIR POSITION j

7 UNDER OATH, IF THEY DESIRE. THE STATE OF OHIO 8 WILL SERVE AS LEAD INTERVENOR IN THESE 9 PROCEEDINGS. -

r 10 THIS PROCEEDING, WHOSE HISTORY I HAVE 11 SUMMARIZED, WILL BE CONDUCTED THROUGH TESTIMONY OF 12 WITNESSES FROM THE LICENSEE AND INTERVENORS WHO 13 WILL BE UNDER OATH. BEFORE WE BEGIN THE l

14 TESTIMONY, HOWEVER, I HAVE BEEN ASKED TO PROVIDE 15 AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND TWO 16 MEMBERS OF THE STATE'S STAFF TO MAKE A 17 PRESENTATION. THERE HAS BEEN NO OBJECTION TO THIS 18 PROCEDURE, 50 THAT WE WILL BEGIN THIS MORNING WITH 19 THOSE OFFICIALS.

20 AT THE CONCLUSION OF THEIR PRESENTATION, l 21 THE LICENSEE, WHO MUST CARRY THE BURDEN OF PROOF, 22 WILL PRESENT 13 WITNESSES FOR DIRECT EXAMINATION.

l 23 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY THE ASSISTANT ATTORNEY I 24 GENERAL OF OHIO WILL FOLLOW. IF THE STATE, AS 25 LEAD INTERVENOR, HAS NOT COVERED AN AREA 0F i >

_ . _ . _ _ . . _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ ~ . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ - . . _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ _

4 10

() 1 INTEREST OF THE INTERVENORS, THEN.THEY MAY. CHANNEL 2 ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS TO THE ASSISTANT ATTORNEY l 3 GENERAL. BRIEF REBUTTAL QUESTIONS WILL BE l

4 PERMITTED LIMITED TO MATTERS DISCLOSED THROUGH 5 CROSS-EXAMINATION. AFTER THE LICENSEE'S WITNESSES f 6 HAVE COMPLETED THEIR TESTIMONY, THE INTERVENORS 7 WILL CALL THEIR WITNESSES AND THE LICENSEE WILL BE l 1

8 PERMITTED CROSS-EXAMINATION. IT IS MY INTENTION 9 TO COMPLETE THE TESTIMONY AND CROSS-EXAMINATION IN l 10 THE TWO DAYS OF AUGUST S AND 6 FOR BOTH THE -

11 LICENSEE AND THE INTERVENORS.

l 12 AFTER THE ENTIRE CASE OF ALL PARTIES HAS 13 BEEN PRESENTED, WE WILL HAVE LIMITED APPEARANCE i 14 STATEMENTS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC IN TWO 15 SESSIONS. FIRST, IN A NIGHT SESSION FROM 7:00 ['

l' 16 P.M. UNTIL 10:00 P.M. WEDNESDAY NIGHT, AUGUST 6, f i

17 1986, AND THE SECOND SESSION ON AUGUST THE 7TH ,

t 18 FROM 9:30 A.M. THROUGH 5:00 P.M.

l- 19 THE COMMISSION HAS PROVIDED IN ITS i 20 REGULATIONS THAT A PERSON WHO IS NOT A PARTY MAY, l l

21 IN THE DISCRETION OF THE PRESIDING OFFICERS, BE  ;

f  !

22 PERMITTED TO MAKE A LIMITED APPEARANCE BY MAKING l l

t i 1 23 ORAL OR WRITTEN STATEMENTS OF HIS POSITION OF THE '

24 LICENSEES --

CORRECTION --

ON THE ISSUES. IN- l l

25 ORDER TO REAP FROM THESE ALLOTTED TIMES THE i l

L

. . . _ _ _ _-. . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 1

i 11 l

4

()

qj 1 GREATEST BENEFIT IN REACHING A DECISION ON THE 2 MATTERS SET FOR HEARING, I HAVE SOME COMMENTS 3 APPROPRIATE, HOPEFULLY, TO ACCOMPLISH THAT END FOR 1 <

l 4 THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE INDICATED OR WILL {

5 INDICATE THAT THEY WISH TO SPEAK.

6 THE FOCUS OF THE LIMITED APPEARANCES IS l 7 TO RECEIVE PUBLIC INPUTS. IT IS NOT MY FUNCTION 8 NOR JUDGE KLINE'S TO RESPOND TO YOUR QUESTIONS 9 WHICH ARE BETTER ADDRESSED TO THE N.R.C. PUBLIC 10 LIAISON OFFICER, MR. RUSSELL MARABITO, OR PERHAPS 11 TO THE PARTIES.

g'] 12 MR. MARABITO, I BELIEVE YOU ARE IN THE LJ 13 BACK OF THE ROOM, ARE YOU NOT? YES, SIR. THAT'S t 14 THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE. .

! 15 MR. MARABITO WILL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY  !

i l 16 PROCEDURAL QUESTIONS.

17 I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT AS J UD G E S WE CAN  !

l 18 FAIRLY HEAR A CASE WHILE MAINTAINING A DIALOGUE ON l 19 MATTERS THAT ARE THE VERY ISSUES TO BE DECIDED, SO 20 THAT WE WILL NOT R E S P.O ND TO ANY QUESTIONS FROM l 21 INDIVIDUALS OR FROM THE PRESS.  !

22 IN ACCEPTING YOUR STATEMENTS THAT MAY j 23 ALERT US TO OTHER AND DIFFERENT DIMENSIONS THAN )

l h 24 THAT RECEIVED IN THE EVIDENTIARY PHASE OF THESE 1

25 HEARINGS, I MUST CAUTION YOU THAT THE LIMITED '

e m-mm-,n --w ,,,, . _ . - - - - - . - - -w,- -w , , - , , , ----n-.--...,.--,--w, - . - - - , - --,y- . - - - - - - ---.---.wm -a,

12 j

1

() 1 APPEARANCE STATEMENTS ARE NOT EVIDENCE. WHAT 1

2 THESE STATEMENTS ARE ARE REFLECTIONS OF THE PUBLIC l 3 CONCERN WHICH MAY GENERATE INQUIRY. IT IS MY l

4 INTENTION TO PROVIDE YOU WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO 5 BE HEARD. IT IS NOT MY INTENTION TO MISLEAD YOU t

6 INTO BELIEVING THAT EACH AND EVERY EXPRESSED ,

t 7 CONCERN WILL BE ACTED UPON. THE.0PPORTUNITY TO BE i l

l 8 HEARD CANNOT AND DOES NOT ENSURE THAT YOU WILL 9 RECEIVE SATISFACTION.

f i i

j 10 IN ANY LARGE GROUP, IT IS POSSIBLE TO  ;

\ ,

! 11 PROVIDE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD TO SOME OF THE ,

I 12 MANY WHO MAY WISH TO GIVE THEIR UNSWORN TESTIMONY.

I 13 FOR THOSE WHO MAY NOT HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY, YOU l

i 14 MAY SUBMIT A WRITTEN STATEMENT TO ME, JUDGE HELEN

! l l 15 F. H0YT, U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, 1717 ,

l -

16 H STREET, NORTHWEST, WASHINGTON D.C. 20555. THE >

{ 17 WRITTEN STATEMENTS WILL BE PLACED IN THE DOCKET 18 FOR THIS CASE AND WILL BECOME PART OF THE RECORD

} 19 THE SAME AS THE ORAL STATEMENTS THAT WILL BE l

} 20 RECORDED IN THESE HEARINGS.

21 YOUR ORAL STATEMENTS WILL BE LIMITED TO 4 ,

22 FIVE MINUTES. THESE ORAL-LIMITED APPEARANCE 23 STATEMENTS ARE AN INFORMAL PROCEDURE, ALTHOUGH

\Q l 24 GIVEN IN A SETTING REQUIRING THAT THE STATEMENT 25 DEAL WITH THE POSITION OF THE INDIVIDUAL ON THOSE .

W _ - - - - . _.---vv-mv.-,w- -.-.-ww.w.-v- - ew.

13

) 1 ISSUES SET FORTH AS THE SUBJECTS OF THIS 2 PROCEEDING. THERE WILL BE NO CROSS-EXAMINATION 3 AND THE RULES OF EVIDENCE ARE NOT. ENFORCED. YOUR-4 OWN COMMGN SENSE SHOULD DICTATE WHAT IS 5 APPROPRIATE IN A LIMITED APPEARANCE STATEMENT.

6- I HAD ONE OTHER COMMENT WHICH I'LL GIVE 7 YOU, ALTHOUGH LOOKING AT THIS GROUP, I DON'T THIN'K 8 IT IS NECESSARILY APPROPRIATE, ,AND THAT WAS THAT.

{

9 DISRUPTIVE COND UCT- WOULD NOT BE TOLERATED FOR IT 10 NEITHER BENEFITS THE PROGRESS OF THE HEARING NOR

(-

3 11 PERMITS ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL HIS OR HER CHANCE TO z 12 MAKE A COMMENT. I DON'T THINK THAT ONE, HOWEVER,.

! 13 IS NECESSARY IN THIS SETTING.

14 THIS MORNING, TO BEGIN, WE'RE GOING TO l

15 START WITH THE TWO STATEMENTS OF THE MEMBERS 0F 16 THE STATE OF OHIO PRESENTATION._ HOWEVER, I 17 BELIEVE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS GOING TO ARRIVE A 18 LITTLE LATER, 50 THAT WE WILL RESERVE THE RIGHT TO

\

19 CALL HIM WHEN HE ARRIVES.

! 20 IN ORDER TO-NOT L'OSE ANY OF THE TIME THAT i

21 WE SET ASIDE, AFTER YOUR TWO STATEMENTS HAVE BEEN 22 COMPLETED --

AND I'M ADDRESSING THESE REMARKS-TO.

l f 23 THE STATE OF OHIO ATTORNEY GENERAL --

THEN WE WILL 24 HAVE THE LICENSEE INTRODUCE A LARGE PANEL OF

, 25 INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE SEATED TO MY LEFT OVER HERE SO

) .

i

i 14 l

i l

(' ') 1 THAT THOSE WITNESSES' PRESENCE CAN BE PLACED IN

'~~'

t  ;

t 2 THE RECORD AND NO TIME WILL BE LOST. 1 3 LET ME FIRST OF ALL TAKE THE APPEARANCES 4 0F ALL THE COUNSEL WHO REPRESENT THE LICENSEE IN 5 THIS CASE.

6 MR. SILBERG: REPRESENTING THE 7 LICENSEE, TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY, MY NAME IS DAY

(

8 SILBERG. I'M AN ATTORNEY WITH THE WASHINGTON D.C. {

9 LAW FIRM OF SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE.

10 WITH ME HERE TODAY IS MR. DAVID LEWIS OF THE SAME 11 LAW FIRM, MR. KENNETH MAUER OF THE LEGAL

,r'3 12 DEPARTMENT OF TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY, AND SITTING

~J 13 TO MY LEFT, MR. TED MYERS, LICENSING MANAGER FOR 14 THE TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY.

15 JUDGE H0YT: VERY WELL. AND 16 REPRESENTING THE INTERVENORE, AND WE'LL START OFF

{ 17 WITH THE STATE OF OHIO AS THE LEAD INTERVENOR.

18 MR. VAN CLEY: STATE OF OHIO IS

19 REPRESENTED BY THE OHIO ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE.

20 MY NAME IS dACK VAN KLEY. TO MY RIGHT IS SHARON 21 SIGLER, AND TO HER RIGHT IS EDWARD LYNCH.

l 22 JUDGE H0YT: THE NEXT GENTLEMAN?

23 MR. LODGE: I'M TERRY LODGE.

24 l'M HERE REPRESENTING THE TOLEDO COALITION FOR 25 SAFE ENERGY. I'M AN ATTORNEY AT LAW. AND ALSO 8

3

- - - - - - , . . - - , , - - - ..-.-. -_,,,- -, - _. ._--__--._ - -_. . . . , . . - - - - - - - - - _ - . - ..~.,._--_,.,c__,,._,_..-.-_,n_.--_,--_,_

~

i.

s . >

l -15 i

1 SUSAN CARTER. IN ANY. EVENT, I AM REPRESENTING- l 3

2 SUSAN CARTER OF THE TOLEDO COALITION FOR SAFE l

! 3 ENERGY. I'M A PRACTITIONER IN TOLEDO, OHIO. f I  !

! 4 JUDGE H0YT: THANK YOU, MR.

S LODGE. SIR?

6 MR. BIMBER: I'M RUSSELL BIMBER, i 7 A CHEMIST, AND I AM HERE AS A WITNESS TO ASSIST

}

i .a j 8 THE INTERVENORS. 1 9 JUDGE H0YT: ALL RIGHT. WE'RE

i t 10 NOT TAKING THE WITNESSES' APPEARANCES. WE'RE JUST j 11 TAKING THE REPRESENTATIVES' APPEARANCE.

12 i MISS COOK?

!s 1 l 13 MS. COOr YES. WE ARE AN  !

< i 14 INTERVENING GROUP, TWO ORGANIZATIONS AND TWO 1  !

15 INDIVIDUALS. j i

16 dUDGE H0YT: AND YOUR NAME IS?

l 17 MS. COOK PARDON?

i l

18 JUDGE H0YT: YOUR NAME? GIVE US i

i 19 YOUR NAME.

l 1 1 20 MS. COOK: YES. MY NAME IS i l

, 21 GENEVIEVE COOK, AND TO MY RIGHT IS ARNOLD 22 GLEISSER, AND WE ALSO ARE REPRESENTING S.O.S., WHO l 4

{

l 23 IS THE SAVE OUR STATE FROM RADIOACTIVE WASTE, AND lV

~

24 ALSO THE CONSUMERS LEAGUE ~OF OHIO, AND THAT WILL l 1 l 4 2S BE REPRESENTED BY D OR OT HY AUSTIN, WHO IS PROBABLY

),

}

s

_ -- _ _ _ _ _ _ - ___ ______ -_w

16 1 HERE, AND'MR. BIMBER IS EUR WITN'ESS.

2 JUDGE H0YT: W O U L D ~ YOU',LIKE TO 3 TAKE YOUR PLACE AT THE TABLE HERE? WE H VE ONE l 4 CHAIR LEFT.

i l

t 5 DOES THAT COMPLETE THE APPEARANCES? ~ VERY 6 WELL.

7 NOW WE'RE READY Td BEGIN.WITH'THE TWO 8

STATEMENTS OF THE WITNESSES THAT YOU f. A V E . .

j 9 MR. VAN KLEY: ALL RIGHT.

{

10 MR. SOMMER: GOOD MORNING, YOUR 11 HONOR.

12 JUDGE H0YT: GOOD MORNING, SIR. 3 13 MR. SOMMER: WHERE WOULD YOU 14 LIKE US?

15 JUDGE H0YT: WE'RE GOING TO SIT 16 YOU RIGHT HERE AT THE WITNESS TABLE AND ASK THAT

{

17 THAT MICROPHONE BE BROUGHT OVER TO YOU.

18 MR. SOMMER: FINE.

j 19 JUDGE H0YT: I'M SORRY, SIR.

I -

I 20 MAY I FIRST SWEAR YOU IN?.

21 (WITNESS SWORN.)

22 JUDGE H0YT: THANK4 YOU. PLEASE H

23 BE SEATED.

lO

!v 24 I BELIEVE THAT'S YOUR WITNESS.

25 MR. VAN KLEY: YES, IT IS, YOUR t

i 17 I

4 1 HONOR.

2 dUDGE HOYT: ALL RIGHT. GO 3 AHEAD. WOULD YOU INTRODUCE THE GENTLEMAN FOR US?

4 MR. VAN KLEY: YES. THE FIRST 5 SPEAKER WILL BE THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF 6 NATURAL RESOURCES, JOE SOMMER.

7 JUDGE HOYT: MR. SOMMER, DO YOU 8 HAVE A STATEMENT YOU WANT TO READ?

9 THE WITNESS: YES, YOUR HONOR, I 10 DO.

11 JUDGE H0YT: PLEASE PROCEED.

/~) 12 THE WITNESS: THANK YOU.

13 WHEREUPON, 14 JOSEPH d. SOMMER 15 WAS CALLED AS A WITNESS AND, HAVING BEEN FIRST 16 DULY SWORN, TESTIFIED AS FOLLOWS:

17 DIRECT TESTIMONY 18 'HE WITNESS:

i IN JANUARY, OHIO'S 19 GOVERNOR RICHARD F. CELESTE ASKED THE NUCLEAR 20 REGULATORY COMMISSION TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING TO

, 21 SEEK INFORMATION ABOUT THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL l

l 22 IMPACTS OF TOLEDO EDISON'S PLANS TO STORE i

i 23 LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE ON-SITE AT

/ ) DAVIS-BESSC, AS YOUR HONOR HAS JUST INDICATED.

'N_/ 24 25 ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNOR AND THE OHIO l

18

. l

() 1 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, I WOULD LIKE TO 2 THANK YOU AND THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 CHAIRMAN NUNZIO PALLADINO FOR' CONVENING THIS 4 HEARING AND GIVING THE STATE OF OHIO AND OTHER 5 INTERESTED OHIOANS AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON 6 THIS PROPOSAL.,

7 VERY FRANKLY, THE SKETCHY INFORMATION 8 PROVIDED IN THE OCTOBER 9TH, 1985 FEDERAL REGISTER 9 PAINTED A RATHER FRIGHTENING PIC.TURE FOR OHIOANS.

/ \

10 S UD D E N LY' THE'PUBLIC BECAME' AWARE OF OPEN FIELD j 11 LAGOONS CONTAINING LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE AND 12 OTHER NONRADI0 ACTIVE SLUDGES FROM WATER TREATMENT O 13 PROCESSES. AND WE HAD NO ID E A WHAT CONTAMINANTS l

14 MIGHT BE IN THE PITS.

15 THE SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS AND NEWS MEDIA 5

16 ARE FILLED WITH EXAMPLES OF FAILURE AFTER FAILURE 17 0F LANDFILLS, LAGOONS AND IMPOUNRMENTS, THE s' '

18 RESULTS OF WHICH DEGRADE THE LOCAL GROUNDWATER 19 SUPPLY TO THE POINT OF CONCERN FOR THE PUBLIC'S l

20 HEALTH. EXPERTS SUCH AS DR. JAY LEhR HAVE ,

/ 21 APPEARED BEFORE, CONGRESS AND TESTIFIED THAT OVER 22 F'I V E PERCENT OF OUR GROUNDWATER IS ALREADY I

l 23 POLLUTED. THAT FIGURE MAY DOUBLE OR TRIPLE WITHIN O, 24 THE NEXT FIVE YEARS AS ~MORE OF OUR PAST MISTAKES I 25 ARE DISCOVERED.

A i

. _ . . , ,c . .- .

19

() 1 OHIO HAS SUFFERED ITS SHARE OF GROUNDWATER POLLUTION INCIDENTS, AND THE CELESTE 2

3 ADMINISTRATION WANTS TO SEE SITING DECISIONS THAT 4 AVOID OR MINIMIZE THE CHANCE OF ANY FURTHER ,

S ENVIRONMENTAL DISASTERS. IN THIS CASE, THE 6 LAGOONS AND PROPOSED WASTE BURIAL SITES OF' 7 DAVIS-BESSE ARE WITHIN A MILE OF LAKE ERIE, A HALF 8 MILE OF THE TOUSSAINT RIVER AND ADdACENT TO 9 NAVARRE MARSH IN AN AREA THAT SUFFERED .W I D E S P R E AD 10 FLOODING IN NOVEMBER 1972.

11 IT IS DISTURBING TO NOTE THAT THE MAXIMUM 12 LAKE LEVEL REACHED DURING THE 1972 STORM IS ONLY 13 TWO FEET ABOVE THE PRESENT LAKE LEVEL. THERE MAVE 14 BEEN AT LEAST 20 TIMES SINCE 1972 THAT WIND ACTION 15 HAS RAISED THE LAKE LEVEL TO THOSE LEVELS, 16 NORMALLY ONCE OR TWICE A YEAR.

17 IT IS SAFE TO SAY THAT OVER DAVIS-BESSE'S 18 LIFETIME THE LAGOONS AND BURIAL CELLS WILL BE 19 SITTING IN WATER AT ONE TIME OR ANOTHER, IF THEY 20 ARE BUILT ON THE PROPOSED SITE. WHILE THEY MAY, 4

21 OR MAY NOT, BE LEAKING-INTO THE GROUNDWATER NOW OR 22 IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE, WE FEAR THAT-EVENTUALLY 23 CONTAMINANTS WILL FIND THEIR WAY INTO THE

(/) 24 GROUNDWATER.

25 THAT IS WHY WE ARE HERE TODAY, YOUR

20 1  !

1 HONOR.

2 THE STATE OF OHIO IS VERY PROUD OF OUR 3 REVITALIZED LAKE ERIE. IT WAS NOT LONG AGO THAT ,

4 IT WAS PRONOUNCED A DEAD LAKE. BUT TODAY, ERIE'S  !

a 5 ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES ARE AN IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTOR i

6 TO OHIO'S ECONOMY AND RECREATION PLEASURE. MUCH 7 0F THE 11.8 MILLION POUNDS OF FISH TAKEN FROM ERIE 4

8 EACH YEAR SPAWN IN THE WESTERN BASIN OFF 9 DAVID-BESSE.

10 RECREATION AND TOURISM ARE MAJOR-4 11 INDUSTRIES. THE STATE ALONE HAS'FIVE STATE PARKS, 12 FOUR NATURE PRESERVES, TWO DISTRICT WATERCRAFT

, O 13 0FFICES, AND SEVERAL WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES 14 FACILITIES ON LAKE ERIE, AND THE FEDERAL i 15 GOVERNMENT OPERATES THE OTTAWA WILDLIFE REFUGE 16 LOCATED JUST DOWN THE ROAD FROM THE DAVIS-BESSE -

17 PROPERTY. ADD TO THIS THE EXTENSIVE INVESTMENTS 18 0F LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND BUSINESSMEN IN THIS AREA.

19 LAKE ERIE AND HER COASTAL WETLANDS ARE 20 OHIO'S TREASURE, PROBABLY OUR GREATEST NATURAL 21 RESOURCE. WE URGE THE N.R.C. AND TOLEDO EDISON TO 22 DEFINE THE DAVIS-BESSE WASTE PROPOSAL TO MINIMIZE 23 ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS, AND AS PART OF THIS PROCESS, s 24 TO CONSIDER LOCATING AT ANOTHER SITE FOR BOTH THE l 25 TEMPORARY STORAGE LAGOONS AND THE WASTE STORAGE

i 21

() 1 CELLS WHERE THE RISK OF POLLUTION IS SUBSTANTIALLY 2 REDUCED. I CAN ASSURE YOU THERE ARE AREAS WHERE 3 THE HYDROLOGY AND GEOLOGY ARE MORE APPROPRIATE FOR 4 A LANDFILL. THE CURRENT SITUATION, WE FEEL, IS 5 INTOLERABLE. WASTE LAGOONS ARE OPEN AND EXPOSED 6 TO THE NATURAL ELEMENTS ON THE SHORELINE OF A LAKE 7 WHICH REACHES RECORD-BREAKING LAKE LEVELS EVERY 8 MONTH.

9 TOMORROW THE STATE OF OHIO WILL ARGUE 10 THAT BOTH TOLEDO EDISON'S OCTOBER 9TH PROPOSAL AND 11 THE JULY 19TH REVISION POSE TOO GREAT AN 12 ENVIRONMENTAL RISK TO OUR ENVIRONMENTALLY 13 SENSITIVE COASTAL WETLANDS AND GROUNDWATER 14 SYSTEMS. ACCORDINGLY, YOUR HONOR, I AM CONFIDENT 15 THAT WE CAN WORK TOGETHER TO DEVELOP A REMEDY 16 WHICH MEETS BOTH OHIO'S AND TOLEDO EDISON'S NEEDS.

17 I THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO APPEAR 18 HERE THIS MORNING.

19 JUDGE H0YT: THANK YOU.

20 MR. VAN KLEY: YOUR HONOR, THE 21 NEXT WITNESS WILL BE VIRGINIA AVENI. SHE'S A j 22 DEPUTY DIRECTOR WITH THE OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL  !

l 23 PROTECTION AGENCY. 1 24 JUDGE H0YT: VERY WELL. I DID i

. I 25 SWEAR YOUR WITNESS IN, ALTHOUGH I DON'T THINK THAT I

, l

l 22 ,

l l

() 1 WAS NECESSARY. IF Y O'U FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE 2 MAKING A SWORN STATEMENT, I'M HAPPY TO DO S0.

t 3 GO AHEAD.

4 MS. AVENI: GOOD MORNING.

5 JUDGE H0Y T : IF YOU'LL INTRODUCE 6 YOURSELF, PLEASE.

7 THE WITNESS: THANK Y O U , .Y OU R d

8 HONOR.

9 WHEREUPON, 10 VIRGINIA AVENI 11 WAS CALLED AS A WITNESS AND TESTIFIED AS FOLLOWS:

i 12 DIRECT TESTIMONY 13 THE WITNESS: MY NAME IS VIRGINIA I

i 14 AVENI AND I AM DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF THE'0HIO 15 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY.

16 MY AGENCY HAS A RESPONSIBILITY FOR l

4 17 PERMITTING AND REGULATING THE DISPOSAL 0F SLUDGES 18 'A N D SOLID WASTE IN THE STATE OF OHIO. THE 19 PROFESSIONAL STAFF OF THAT DIVISION MAKE 20 RECOMMENDATIONS TO ME FOR THE ISSUANCE AND DENIAL 21 0F SOLID WASTE PERMITS TO -I N S T A L L . I WOULD ADD 22 THAT THE AGENCY ' S POLICY IS TO SET INCREASINGLY i 23 HIGHER STANDARDS FOR BOTH THE' GEOLOGY AND 24 HYDROLOGY FOR SITING NEW LANDFILLS IN THE STATE.

~

25 OHIO ADMINISTRATIVE CODE CHAPTER 3734.31 i

i

• I 23 l (j 1 FOR PERMITS TO INSTALL ESTABLISHES THE REQUIREMENT 2 THAT THE OWNER /0PERATOR OF ANY PROPOSED NEW SOLID  !

3 WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY OBTAIN A PERMIT TO INSTALL 4 FROM THE OHIO EPA DIRECTOR PRIOR TO COMMENCING S CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW LANDFILL.

6 THE OHIO EPA BELIEVES THAT THE MATERIALS 7 DREDGED FROM THE SETTLING BASINS AT THE TOLEDO 8 EDISON DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION ARE 9 A SOLID WASTE AS DEFINED UNDER THAT RULE 10 3 7 45. 2 7. 01 ( U) . THEREFORE, THE PROPOSED LAND 11 DISPOSAL OF THE DREDGED MATERIALS CONSTITUTES A y^3 12 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY, AND SUCH PERMIT TO 13 INSTALL WOULD BE REQUIRED UNDER OHIO'S SOLID WASTE 14 LAWS.

15 THE COMPLETE APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO 16 INSTALL WOULD NECESSITATE AD E QU AT E LY DEMONSTRATING 17 THE HYDROGE0 LOGIC SUITABILITY OF THE PROPOSED 18 LANDFILL LOCATION INCLUDING DETAILED ENGINEERING 19 PLANS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE LANDFILL AND 20 INCLUDING DETAILED PLANS FOR THE ROUTINE OPERATION 6

21 AND EVENTUAL CLOSURE OF THE LANDFILL FACILITY.

I 22 AS YET, TOLEDO EDISON HAS NOT SUBMITTED A 23 PERMIT TO INSTALL APPLICATION FOR THE PROPOSED 24 DISPOSAL OF THE DREDGED MATERIAL.

25 EACH PERMIT TO INSTALL APPLICATION WOULD

24 1 BE REVIEWED BY THE AGENCY FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE

/'w])

2 PROVISIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE AND UNDER 3 CHAPTER 3745.27, ALL SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL 4 REGULATIONS.

5 THE OHIO EPA RULES ALL'*W .i SIX-MONTH 6 PERIOD FOR THIS REVIEW FROM THE POINT IN TIME WHEN 7 A COMPLETE APPLICATION -- AND MANY APPLICATIONS, I 8 WOULD ADD, ARE NOT COMPLETE ON THE TIME OF THEIR 9 FILING.

10 SINCE TOLEDO EDISON HAS NOT YET FILED AN 11 APPLICATION FOR A SOLID WASTE LANDFILL P.T.I., IT

,f] 12 WOULD NOT BL LAWFUL FOR TOLEDO EDISON TO PROCEJO LJ 13 WITH THE DREDGING AND LANDFILLING OF THIS SOLID 14 WASTE AT THE DAVIS-BESSE SITE.

15 A FINAL OHIO EPA PERMIT TO INSTALL MUST 16 BE OBTAINED BEFORE ANY ENTITY CAN LAWFULLY PROCEED 17 WITH THE DISPOSAL OF DREDGED MATERIAL AT ANY 18 LOCATION WHICH HAS NOT PREVIOUSLY BEEN AUTHORIZED 19 TO RECEIVE SUCH MATERIAL.

20 SERIOUS CONCERNS THAT THE AGENCY HAS WITH 21 THIS PROPOSAL INCLUDE THE TECHNICAL DEFICIENCIES 22 IN THE SPECIFICATIONS APPROVED BY THE NUCLEAR 23 REGULATORY COMMISSION FOR THE PROPOSED LAND 24 APPLICATION OF THE DREDGED MATERIAL AND THE 25 INADEQUATE ASSESSMENT OF THE ADEQUACY OF THE

25 l l

() 1 DAVIS-BESSE SITE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 2 LANDFILL WHICH FORMS WITH MINIMUM HYDROGE0 LOGIC 3 REQUIREMENTS OF THE OHIO EPA. AN EXAMPLE OF THIS 4 IS THE FOUR INCHES OF COVER AND SEEDING 5 SPECIFICATIONS OF THE N.R.C. APPROVAL WHICH IS 6 CLEARLY INADEQUATE WHEN CONTRASTED TO THE 7 SPECIFIC --

TO THE BASIC SPECIFICATIONS ROUTINELY 8 INCLUDED IN PERMITS TO INSTALL ISSUED BY OHIO EPA  ;

9 REQUIRING TWO FEET OF WELL-COMPACTED COVER 10 MATERIAL WITH TOPSOIL AND SEEDING. l l

11 AT THIS POINT, OHIO EPA, AS I INDICATED, gm) 12 HAS NO PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THE SLUDGE DISPOSAL

(/

13 BEFORE THE AGENCY, AND ANY SUCH PERMIT APPROVAL 14 MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH OHIO'S BOTH SOLID WASTE 15 LAWS AND RULES.

l 16 IT IS OHIO EPA'S POSITION THAT WE AGREE 17 WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND 18 REPRESENT THE STATE OF OHIO, AND WE WOULD URGE THE 19 COMMISSION TO WITHDRAW ITS APPROVAL AND CONSIDER A 20 MORE ALTERNATIVE AND MORE -- AN ALTERNATIVELY MORE 21 APPROPRIATE SITE.

22 JUDGE HOYT: THANK YOU.

23 I DON'T BELIEVE THE NEXT WITNESS IS YET 24 PRESENT.

25 MR. VAN KLEY: NO, HE'S NOT, YOUR

26 4

1 HONOR.

2 JUDGE H0YT: MR. SILBERG, YOU 3 INDICATED THAT YOU WANTED TO GIVE AN OPENING 4 STATEMENT. YOU WANT TO W A I T- UNT I L AFTER THAT'S 5 COMPLETED WITH?

6 MR. SILBERG: WE CAN INTRODUCE 7 THE PANEL NOW.

8 JUDGE H0YT: VERY WELL. AND 9 RESERVE YOUR OPENING STATEMENT UNTIL LATER?

10 MR. SILBERG: YES. PRIOR TO 11 PROCEEDING WITH THE TESTIMONY,.IF, INDEED, WE HAVE 12 FINISHED THAT PROCESS AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IS 13 NOT YET HERE, THEN I WOULD PROCEED WITH MY OPENING 14 STATEMENT.

15 dUDGE H0YT: VERY WELL.

16 MR. SILBERG: AT THIS TIME, I 17 WOULD ASK THE WITNESSES TO RISE AND BE SWORN IN, 18 PLEASE.

19 (WITNESSES SWORN.)

20 MR. SILBERG: JUDGE H0YT, IN 21 ACCORDANCE WITH AN AGREEMENT REACHED BETWEEN 22 MYSELF AND COUNSEL FOR THE STATE AND 23 REPRESENTATIVES FOR THE OTHER PARTIES, WE HAVE 24 AGREED THAT THE WRITTEN TESTIMONY AND 25 QUALIFICATIONS OF THIS PANEL CAN BE INCORPORATED

,s , w , y r --. ,, y- .4 z -y = -- g-

27

() 1 IN THE TRANSCRIPT AS IF READ.AT THIS POINT WITHOUT 2 THE NECESSITY FOR THE FORMAL LEGAL PROCEEDINGS OF 3 AUTHENTICATION. THE WITNESSES' STATEMENTS WILL, 4 0F COURSE, BE SUBJECT TO CROSS-EXAMINATION AFTER i

I 5 THE DOCUMENT IS INTRODUCED.

6 THERE ARE FOUR CORRECTIONS TO THE WRITTEN 7 TESTIMONY PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED TO THE --

TO 8 YOURSELF AND TO ALL THE PARTIES.

4 9 JUDGE H0YT: HAS THIS CORRECTION 10 BEEN CIRCULATED TO THE PARTIES HERE THIS MORNING?

YES, THE PARTIES 11 MR. SILBERG:

12 ARE AWARE OF THOSE CORRECTIONS. THEY HAVE BEEN 13 WRITTEN ON THE COPIES WHICH ARE BEING PROVIDED TO

, 14 THE REPORTER. I WILL JUST BRIEFLY GO THROUGH

15 THOSE ON THE RECORD AT THIS TIME.

16 THE FIRST CORRECTION IS ON PAGE 48-AND 17 THE ANSWER TO QUESTION 6-7, THE LAST SENTENCE' IN 18 THAT ANSWER. THE SENTENCE SHOULD READ AS FOLLOWS:

19 "MORE0VER, EVEN IF THERE WERE COMMUNICATION, THE 20 ONLY TIME THERE COULD BE COMMUNICATION IS DURING 21 TIMES WHEN THE MARSH IS FLOODED _WHEN.THE DIRECTION 22 0F FLOW WOULD BE FROM THE MARSH INTO THE BEDROCK, 23 AND NOT FROM THE BEDROCK INTO THE MARSH." THE I

24 PHRASE WOULD BE ADDED IN THAT SENTENCE: "THE ONLY

( 25 TIME THERE COULD BE COMMUNICATION IS DURING TIMES l

28 WHEN THE MARSH IS FLOODED WHEN."

({ ) 1 2 J UD G E H0YT: DOES EVERY ONE HAVE 3 THAT CORRECTION?

4 I HAVE A SHAKING OF THE HEAD IN THE l

5 AFFIRMATIVE, SO I TAKE IT THAT'S BEEN DONE.

6 MR. SILBERG: THANK YOU. THE 7 SECOND CORRECTION IS ON PAGE 49, TABLE 6-1, IN THE 8 COLUMN ENTITLED " GLACIAL TILL DEPOSIT," THE SECOND 9 NUMERICAL VALUE, WHICH STATES --

WHICH NUMBER 24 10 IS THE TESTIMONY, SHOULD BE 14. IT'S THE NATURAL 11 WATER CONTENT PERCENT IN THE GLACIAL TILL DEPOSIT.

f 12 J UD G E H0YT: DOES EVERY ONE HAVE

\s] 13 THAT CHANGE?

14 AGAIN, I HAVE AN INDICATION THAT THE 15 PARTIES HAVE IT.

16 MR. SILBERG: ON PAGE 100, WHICH 17 IS THE ANSWER TO QUESTION 18/19-2, ON THE FOURTH 18 LINE OF THAT ANSWER THE WORD " INVERTED" SHOULD BE 19 " CONVERTED." FOURTH LINE FROM THE TOP OF PAGE 20 100. I'M TOLD BY THE CHEMISTS THAT THAT'S A 21 SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE.

22 J UD G E H0YT: DOES EVERY ONE HAVE 23 THAT CHANGE?

24 AGAIN, THE PARTIES INDICATE THEY HAVE 25 THAT. PROCEED.

29 I

1 MR. SILBERG: THANK YOU.

'()

2 THE FINAL CHANGES ARE ON PAGE 102, THE 7

3 ANSWER TO QUESTION 18/19-5, IN THE NEXT TO THE 4 LAST SENTENCE, THE VALUE 32 OUNCES SHOULD. BE 54 5 GRAMS, AND THE VALUE 36 OUNCES --

EXCUSE ME --

THE 6 VALUE 16 0UNCES SHOULD BE 36 GRAMS. 50 THE CHANGE 7 WOULD BE FROM 32 OUNCES TO 54 GRAMS A N D - F R,0 M 16 1

8 OUNCES TO 36 GRAMS.

9 JUDGE H0YT: DO THE PARTIES HAVE

10 THAT CHANGE? YES, THE PARTIES INDICATE THEY D0.

11 MR. SILBERG: I WOULD ALSO NOTICE

j. -

12 ONE OTHER MINOR SUBSTITUTION IN THE EXHIBITS WHICH '

l j 13 ARE THE RESUMES OF THE WITNESSES BY LICENSEE. WE' i 14 HAVE SUBSTITUTED A MORE COMPLETE ~ RESUME'FOR 15 WITNESS RICHARD HETHERINGTON FOR THE RESUME WHICH 16 WAS SUBMITTED IN THE TESTIMONY AS DISTRIBUTED ON 17 JULY 19.

1 18 JUDGE H0YT: DO THE PARTIES HAVE 19 THAT ADDITION?

20 MR. VAN KLEY: YES, YOUR HONOR.

l 21 JUDGE H0YT: VERY WELL.

l 22 WE HAVE A DIAGRAM OF THE WITNESSES THAT l 23 CONSTITUTE THE PANEL WITH THE'NAME OF EACH ONE~OF ,

24 THE INDIVIDUALS. IF SOMEONE WOULD LIKE'TO COPY 25 THIS FROM THE COPY THAT HAS BEEN MADE FOR THE 4

- - , - .,- -w----,.m,m- - - - - - , , - , , , , - - , . ,-v. - - - - -. , .

30

() 1 BENCH HERE, WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO HAVE YOU DO THAT, 2 AND RETURN IT INTACT.

3 MR. SILBERG: AT THIS TIME, I 4 WOULD ASK YOUR HONOR TO ORDER THAT THE TESTIMONY 5 ON EXHIBITS AS PROVIDED TO THE REPORTER BE 6 INCORPORATED IN THE TRANSCRIPT AT THIS POINT AS IF 7 READ AS THE WRITTEN TESTIMONY OF THE WITNESS 8 PANEL.

9 JUDGE H0YT: THAT'S THE 10 PREVIOUSLY DISTRIBUTED PORTIONS?

11 MR. SILBERG: YES.

f-'T 12 JUDGE H0YT: AND WITH THE

(,/

13 CORRECTIONS AS NOTED.

14 MR. SILBERG: YES, YOUR HONOR.

15 JUDGE H0YT: ANY OBJECTIONS?

16 MR. VAN KLEY: NO, YOUR HONOR.

17 duDGE H0YT: VERY WELL. THE 18 DOCUMENTS AS DESCRIBED BY COUNSEL WILL BE 19 INCORPORATED IN THE RECORD AND ATTACHED AT THIS 20 POINT.

21 NOW, WE HAVE NOT ASSIGNED ANY NUMBERS TO 22 THAT PRESENTATION, MR. SILBERG. DO YOU WANT TO 23 PERHAPS CHANGE THAT OR DO YOU JUST WANT TO 1

24 INCORPORATE THAT AS A PACKAGE? ,

i 25 MR. SILBERG: I WOULD PREFER IT j

31 g 1 JUST BE INCORPORATED IN THE TRANSCRIPT ITSELF AS A 2 PACKAGE, IF THAT'S ACCEPTABLE.

3 (THE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW:)

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 11 O

v 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 -

25

a July 19, 1986 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Administrative Judge In the Matter of )

)

TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY, et al. ) Docket No. 50-346-ML

)

(Davis-Besse Nuclear Power )

Station, Unit No. 1) )

LICENSEE'S TESTIMONY ON THE BURIAL OF VERY LOW LEVEL WASTE AT DAVIS-BESSE S I. Introduction Ql. Please state your names, occupations, and addresses.

A1. (Dr. Bennett) My name is Dr. Gary F. Bennett. I am a Professor of Biochemical Engineering at the University of Toledo. My business address is the University of Toledo, Toledo, Ohio 43606.

[Mr. Bland] My name is J. Stewart Bland. I am a con-sultant and President of J. Stewart Bland Associates, Inc. My business address is P. O. Box 4154, Annapolis, Maryland 21403.

l O

j

[Mr. Briden] My name is David Briden. I am the Chem-O 1

l 1stry and Health Physics Superintendent for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Station. My business address is Toledo Edison Company, 300 Madison Avenue, Toledo, Ohio 43652.

[Mr. Hendron) My name is David M. Hendron. I am a Vice President of Woodward Clyde Consultants, a firm that specializes in geotechnical engineering. My busi-ness address is 11 East Adams Street, Suite 1500, Chicago, Illinois 60603.

[Dr. Herdendorf) My name is Dr. Charles E. Herdendorf.

I am a Professor of Zoology, Geology and Natural Re-sources at the Ohio State University, and I am the Di-rector of the Center for Lake Erie Area Research. My business address is Center for Lake Erie Area Research, The Ohio State University, 484 W. 12th Avenue, Columbus, Ohio 43210.

[Mr. Hetherington] My name is Richard Hetherington. I am the Marketing Manager for Epicor, Incorporated. My business address is P. O. Box 598, Fort Washington, Pennsylvania 19034.

(Dr. Jackson] My name is Dr. William B. Jackson. I am a Professor Emeritus of Biological Sciences at Bowling

\-) H i

Green State University. My business address is Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, Ohio 43403.

(Dr. -Linnemann] My name is Dr. Roger E. Linnemann. I am Vice Chairman and Chief Medical Officer of Radiation Management Corporation and am also an Associate Clin-ical Professor of Radiology at the Univesity of Pennsylvania School of Medicine. My business address is Radiation Management Corporation, 3508 Market Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104.

[Dr. Reutter] My name is Dr. Jeffrey M. Reutter. I am Associate Director of the Franz Theodore Stone Labora-tory, Assistant Director of the Center for Lake Erie Area Research, and Adjunct Assistant Professor of Zool-ogy and Natural Resources at the Ohio State University.

My business address is the College of Biological Sci-ences, 484 West 12th Avenue, Columbus, Ohio 43210.

[Ms. Scott-Wasilk] My name is Jennifer Scott-Wasilk.

I am the Envircnmental and Emergency Preparedness Man-ager for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Station. My business address is the Toledo Edison Company, 300 Madison Ave-  ;

nue, Toledo, Ohio 43652.

(Mr. Swim] My name is Theo S. Swim. I am the Civil / Structural Engineering Manager for the O

, Davis-Besse Nuclear Station. My business address in I

the Toledo Edison Company, 300 Madison Avenue, Toledo, Ohio 43652.

[Dr. Till] My name is Dr. John E. Till. I am a health physicist and President of Radiological Assessments Corporation. My business address is Route 2, Box 122, Neeses, South Carolina 29107.

[Mr. Wallace) My name is David M. Wallace. I am Lead Nuclear Projects Manager for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Station. My business address is the Toledo Edison Com- j l

pany, 300 Madison Avenue, Toledo, Ohio 43652. J 2.

S

-t; Q2. Would each of you briefly describe your professional quali-9 fications and expertise, and the subject of your testimony.

A2. [Mr. Briden], I hold a bachelor of science degree in chemistry from Upper Iowa University, and a master of

. science degree in radiological health from Temple Uni-versity. I have 24 years experience in health physics, radiochemistry, and chemistry. My resume is attached as an exhibit to the written testimony. In this pro-ceeding, I will provide background information on the waste to be buried at Davis-Besse, and on plant systems that produce and handle the waste.

1 I

(8 4

\-)

)

[Mr. Swim) I am a civil engineer. I hold a bachelor l

of science degree in civil engineering from the Univer- j sity of Illinois. I am registered as a Professional I Engineer in the State of Illinois, and I have 10 years' engineering experience. A summary of my professional j qualifications is attached as an exhibit to the written testimony. My testimony will address the Presiding Of-ficer's questions 1 and 2, on the location and configu-I ration of the burial site. I will also discuss design features that protect the burial site against erosion, which is the subject of the Presiding Officer's ques-tion 5.

[Ms. Scott-Wasilk] I hold a B.S. degree in biology from Wayne State University, an M.S. degree in zoology from the University of Michigan, and an M.S. engineer-ing sciences degree in environmental engineering from the University of Toledo. A summary of my professional

- qualifications is attached as an exhibit to the written testimony. I have been responsible for environmental l l

monitoring at Davis-Besse since 1978 and will be re-sponsible for monitoring the burial site once it is constructed. My testimony will address the Presiding Officer's question 3, which concerns the Navarre Marsh, and question 20, concerning how the burial site will be operated.

l l

1

-5 l l

l 1

L

[Dr. Herdendorf) I am a limnologist. I hold bachelor O of science and master of science degrees in geology from Ohio University, and a doctorate degree in zoology (limnology) from Ohio State University. I have been involved in the study of the Lake Erie area for approx-imately twenty years. A summary of my professional qualifications is attached as an exhibit to the written testimony. My. testimony will address the Presiding Of-ficer's question 3, concerning the Navarre Marsh, and questions 4 and 5, which relate to flooding and ero-sion.

l 1

[Mr. Hendron] I hold a bachelor of science degree in civil engineering from the University of Kentucky, and a master of science degree in soil and rock mechanics

~

from the University of Illinois. I have twenty years' experience in the field of geotechnical engineering, and for the last seven years I have been involved in more than 25 moderate to large sized waste management l

projects throughout the United States. A summary of my '

i professional qualifications is attached as an exhibit I l

to the written testimony. In response to the Presiding Officer's questions 6 through 8, I will discuss the ge-ology and hydrology at the burial site.

l bv l 1

l l

~

[Dr. Jackson] I hold a bachelor of arts and a master of arts degree in zoology from the University of Wisconsin, and a doctorate of science from the Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health.

I have over thirty years' experience in environmental research and studies. A summary of my professional qualifications is attached as an exhibit to the written testimony. In this proceeding, I will discuss the ter-restrial plants and animals at Davis-Besse, in response to the Presiding Officer's quection 9 on endangered species.

(Dr. Reutter] I hold a bachelor of science and master i

of science degree in fisheries management, and a doc-torate degree in biological limnology and fisheries bi-ology from the Ohio State University. I have studied the aquatic ecology of Lake Erie for over a decade. A summary of my professional qualifications is attached

.to the written testimony. In response to the Presiding Officer's question 9 on endangered species, I will dis-cuss aquatic biota.

[Mr. Bland] I hold a bachelor of science degree in physics and a master of science degree in nuclear sci-1 ence, both from the Georgia Institute of Technology. I have worked as a health physicist for twelve years. A p)

\-

summary of my professional qualifications is attached O as an exhibit to the written testimony. I will respond to the Presiding Officer's questions 10 through 16, which relate to dose calculations.

(Dr. Till) I hold a bachelor of science degree in en-gineering from the U.S. Naval Academy, a master of sci-ence degree in health physics from Colorado State Uni-versity, and a doctorate degree in nuclear engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology. I am a mem-ber of the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements ,and a member of the Radiation Advisory Committee to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

A summary of my professional qualifications is attached as an exhibit to the written testimony. I conducted a peer review of Mr. Bland's analyses and will so testi-fy. I will also comment on whether the low levels of radioactivity in the waste would have an impact on biota.

[Dr. Linnemann) I hold a bachelor of arts degree, a bachelor of science degree, and a medical degree from the University of Minnesota. I performed my medical internship and residency at Walter Reed Army Hospital, where I specialized in radiology. I have been involved in the fields of radiology and health physics for over f'N O

twenty years. A summary of my professional qualifica-tions is attached to the written testimony. I will discuss whether the doses calculated by Mr. Bland would have any appreciable effect on human health. j 1

(Dr. Bennett} I earned a bachelor of science degree in chemical engineering from Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario, and master of science and doctor of philosophy degrees, also in chemical engineering, from the University of Michigan. I have taught chemical and biochemical engineering for approximately 20 years. I have been involved in numerous studies on water pollu-tion control and hazardous wastes. A summary.of my

, n

'Qi professional qualifications is attached as an exhibit to the written testimony. I will address the Presiding Officer's question 17, concerning the chemical content of the water, supply treatment sludge.

[Mr. Hetherington] I hold a bachelor of science degree in chemistry from Temple University. I have been ac-tive in ion-exchange and water treatment fields for over forty years. I have authored numerous papers on ion-exchange technology and hold a number of patents relating to the application of ion-exchange resins. I am currently employed by Epicor, which provides the ion-exchange resins used at Davis-Besse. A summary of

_9 O

A

my professional qualifications is attached. My testi-mony will address the Presiding Officer's questions 18 and 19. I will discuss whether the resins are chemi-cally or biologically degradable.

l (Mr. Wallace] I hold a bachelor of science degree in construction engineering from the Lawrence Institute of Technology, a masters in business administration from Eastern Michigan University, and am presently pursuing a Ph.D in education at the University of Toledo. I am a Professional Engineer registered in Ohio and six other states. A summary of my professional qualifica-tions is~ attached as an exhibit to the written testi-mony. Along with Ms. Scott-Wasilk, I will address the Presiding Officer's question 20, concerning how the burial site will be operated.

Q3. Mr. Briden, would you please describe the waste to be buried at Davis-Besse?

l A3. (Mr. Briden) The waste consists principally of water supply treatment sludge. This waste is discharged to a lined basin on the Davis-Besse site, where the waste settles to the bottom. Ion-exchange resins contami-nated with very low levels of radioactivity are also discharged to the basin.

l l

'( .

_ -- _ _ _ - - _, _ _,, ._m -- n

Q4. What is the water supply treatment sludge?

O_

A4. (Mr. Briden] The Davis-Besse station has its own water supply treatment facility. The water supply treatment facility purifies lake water both for use in plant sys-tems and for personal use. The sludge consists of silt, minerals, and other suspended solids removed from the lake water plus water treatment chemicals. It is not a toxic substance.  !

l i

QS. For what purpose are the resins in question used at the Davis-Besse plant? ,

AS. (Mr. Briden] They are used to demineralize the water 9

in the secondary system.

Q6. What is the secondary system?

A6. (Mr. Briden] A Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR), like Davis-Besse, has two principal systems: the primary system and the secondary system. In the primary sys-tem, heat produced in the reactor is carried away by the circulating primary coolant (water). The coolant passes through steam generators, where the heat is transferred across tubes to water in the secondary sys-tem. The water in the secondary system turns to steam

which drives turbines. The turbines drive a generator N which produces electricity. The physical separation between the primary system and the secondary system provides a barrier for the control of the radioactive material. The secondary system remains essentially non-radioactive.

Q7. Why is the secondary side water demineralized?

A7. [Mr. Briden] Strict water quality requirements must be 1

maintained to ensure the continued efficient and reli- ,

1 able operation of the secondary system, particularly )

the steam generator tubes. Without the demineralization, mineral deposits could eventually build up in and corrode both the steam generators and the turbine. ,

I Q8. Please describe the demineralization process.

A8. [Mr. Briden] Demineralization occurs in the Condensate Demineralizer System. The Condensate Demineralizer System consists of four vessels. Inside each vessel l are perforated tubes which are coated with powdered ion-exchange resin. Water enters the vessel on the outside of the tubes, flows through the powciered resins to the inside of the tubes, and exits the vessel. The .

l q g ,

l l

l

coating of powdered resins is held in place by the O- pressure of the water flowing through the tubes.

The powdered ion-exchange resin consists of a mix-ture of anion and cation resins. The cation resin re-moves impurities with a positive valence. The anion resin removes impurities with a negative valence.

Q9. How do these resins become radioactively contaminated? ,

i l

A9. (Mr. Briden] While the secondary system is separated j from the radioactive primary system, primary to second-ary system leakage can occur through the steam genera-tor tubes. In March, 1981, Davis-Besse experienced its first (and to date only) steam generator tube leak.

Prior to this event, there had been no primary-to-secondary leakage; the secondary side of the plant was not contaminated. After the leak, the plant was shut down and the leak repaired. During the leak clean-up period, the secondary-side clean-up resins contained levels of radioactive material that required offsite disposal as a radwaste. Since then, very low levels of radioactive contaminants have continued to accumulate on the Condensate Demineralizer resins.

Much of this radioactive material is residual ra-dioactivity introduced into the secondary system during

() .

~

l the tube leak. With time, the activity has continued b'/ to leach out of the system from initial tube leak de-posits. An additional source of the activity is from

• s very minor leaks or weeps in the steam generator expe-rienced during system thermal expansions and contrac-tions. These same thermal expansions and contractions could also contribute to the dissolation of the depos-ited radioactive material in the secondary system.

Q10. How often are the resins replaced?

A10. [Mr. Briden] The volume of resins injected into each Condensate Demineralizer vessel is small -- about 20

~{I cubic feet. Because the volume is small, the resins are replaced weekly.

Q11. When resins are removed, where are they transferred?

All. [Mr. Briden] The resins are transferred from the Condensate Demineralizer vessel to the Condensate Demineralizer Backwash Receiving Tank. If the resins satisfy predetermined criteria, they then are trans-ferred from the Condensate Demineralizer Backwash Receiving Tank to the settling basin. The transfer is conducted as a water-resin slurry in approximately 10,000 gallons of water.

l

"\ l J

i Q12. Describe the testing that is done before a batch of contami- 1 nated resins may be discharged to the settling basin.

A12. (Mr.-Briden] Each batch of secondary-side resin is sampled and analyzed by gamma spectroscopy for radioac- l tive material prior to being discharged to the settling basin. The level of activity of each radionuclide de- I tected is quantified. If the radionuclide concentra-l tions are higher than acceptable, the resins are not l l

sent to the settling basin, but are treated as radwaste.1/

l Q13. How radioactive is the waste in the settling basin? I l

A13. [Mr. Briden] The level of radioactivity in the waste 8

in the settling basin'is extremely low. Concentrations of radionuclides in the waste are lower than those lev-els permitted by the NRC in water discharged to the Lake. Granite is more radioactive.

l 1/ The limiting concentrations are discussed further below in ,

response to the Presiding Officer's question 12. 1

\

l

. 1 l

II. Responses to the Presiding Officer's Questions l

1. What Final Location on the Davis-Besse Site Has Been Selected For Waste Burial?

Q1-1. Please describe the location that Toledo Edison has se-lected for waste burial.

Al-1. [Mr. Swim] The burial ground will be located in l

the south central portion of the Davis-Besse l site, approximately 2000 feet south of the switchyard and approximately 1200 feet east of State Route 2. The location is shown in Figure 1-1, which is attached to the written testimony.

Ql-2. Is this location final?

S Al-2. [Mr. Swim] The location shown in Figure 1-1 is the one that Toledo Edison has selected and intends to use. The location, however, is con-tingent on its approval in this proceeding and on obtaining a Permit to Install (PTI) from the State of Ohio.

Ql-3. What is the justification for the location selected?

Al-3. [Mr. Swim] The location of the burial ground was chosen as an area that is unlikely to be o

disturbed by any future construction on the O Davis-Besse site. The burial site will be a min-imum of 100 yards from any frequently occupied area. In accordance with Ohio requirements, the site will be over 1000 feet from any water well (not counting Toledo Edison's observation and monitoring wells), and will be located at least 200 feet from any stream or lak.e (including the drainage ditch to the east of the burial site).

The burial ground will not be within a floodway.2/ In addition, the burial ground is situated in an area with favorable geologic con-ditions.

9 2/ A floodway is the channel of the water-course and those por-tions of the adjoining flood plains which are required to convey l the regional 100 year flood. Ohio Admin. Code $ 3745-27-Ol(F).

l 1

l

Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station Oak Hartsor, ONo

~

July,1986 O ".

~K' ' \ l N '

,f 0$ /)

\

ff I("~' - . - - - - -

'-G}

• 3

( hcoonne  ? y FY(

M

-3 $/

-QR(g- U llc j ,.

(

swnchye,e "f

oeAs L

w l llw

$\

1

('d'

" ii

'/ 9 D i

... .n

_. _ O I ff' f* "

c==*c-- :2 Uk O' '.

l p"J,',l,'y

~

d ,- * * " ~

%7 . E--T TL.I

-- 4 5;;::::=.3r-

=

ar e

,a 9_

i:

T  ;

__..' 2 5 =. ,, f*"~3 S ]

, ____ @ Q') ,. i NL) L. -- A i /  ! x f -

I lh ol n _

/ /~ f C -

NlI N

,-~\

) 1 (bh' 1

l' I

) i[lgi # I,, )  ; ,-

l i N

j <- t ( /LJ y b

' , ' , 3\.} ;hS

[. ..

l i

d (j y/4, 1 jl; [ +~

-, l

,[ ' ~ -I-l wn ls I

l

,d "

m

' ~

%__2-1l f v

, . ,j 1 Cell l

I hI

( i .

acome _ p, p.ty un.

; .l. - _

• o v s \, _=w -~.

E.___.=..--_====== -

Figure 1-1

_..__._,.._...-_i -

I 1

2.

() What Will Be the Dimensions of the Waste Burial Site in its Final Configuration (After 30 Years)?

Q2-1. How will the waste be buried?

A2-1. (Mr. Swim] Toledo Edison intends to empty the settling basin six times over the life of the plant. There will therefore be six lots of waste buried at the burial site. Each lot will be bur-ied in a separately constructed square cell so as not to disturb previously buried lots.

To provide flood protecti,on and to maintain

_ a suitable distance between the waste and ground-

o

? water in the underlying aquifer, Toledo Edison intends to partially' elevate the cells. The walls of the cells will be constructed to serve as dikes and will be rip-rapped. Toledo Edison also plans to equip each cell with a four-foot thick liner. From bottom to top, the liner will be composed of a 2-1/2 foot thick layer of com-pacted clay, a synthetic impervious membrane, a one foot layer of graded gravel for leachate col-lection, and a six inch layer of compacted clay.

Each cell will be capped with a two to four foot thick cover consisting of a lower, compacted-clay l

1 l

i

layer, a sand or gravel filter layer, and an

, upper layer of top soil.

Some cells will adjoin others. Where a new cell is constructed adjoining a pre-existing cell, the adjoining cells will share the dike be-tween them.

The first three cells will be adjoining, and will be constructed in the center of the burial site. The next two cells will adjoin each other and will be constructed to the west of the first three cells. These two cells will not be con-nected to the first three because transmission lines pass between the two- and three-cell units.

The last cell will be constructed next to the northeast corner of the first three cells. The layout is shown in Figure 2-1.

Q2-2. How was the layout determined?

A2-2. (Mr. Swim] The layout was effectively dictated by the siting criteria that I previously de-scribed and by the necessity of keeping unencumbered a maintenance corridor for the l

transmission lines passing overhdad.

1

, 1

Q2-3. What are the dimensions of a typical cell?

s A2-3. TMr. Swim] The dimensions of a typical single square cell are illustrated in Figure 2-2. The inner base of the cell is approximately 45 feet x 45 feet, and is about 3 feet below land surface.

From the base, the inner sides of the cells slope upward and outward at a 3:1 grade to the top of I

the surrounding dikes. The top of the cell (not including the cover) is approximately 98 feet x 98 feet, and is about 5-3/4 feet above land sur-face. From the top of the cell, the dikes slope downward and outward at a 3:1 grade to land sur- -

face. From toe of dike to toe of dike, each cell 9 is 162 feet x 162 feet.

Q2-4. Please explain how you determined the dimensions of each cell.

A2-4. [Mr. Swim] The interior volume of the cell must  !

encompass the volume of the lot of waste to be  :

I buried. This is the principal constraint. With j this constraint, we designed the cells to mini-mize their area and the amount of earthwork needed to construct the cells. There were sever-al additional constraints. First, the excavation

([2) l

~

for the cell could not go below elevation 567 In-O ternational Great Lakes Datum (IGLD). If the ex-cavation were deeper, groundwater in the underlying aquifer, which is under pressure, might disturb the overlying sediments. With the cells having a four-foot thick liner, this con-straint put the base of the cell at elevation 571 IGLD (over three feet below land surface). Sec-ond, slopes had to remain 3:1 or less to prevent erosion. Third, the top of the cell had to be above flood level, and we chose elevation 579 to 580 IGLD as a conservative height.

Finally, we determined that making the cells square resulted in the minimal amount of earthwork. These con-straints and considerations produced the dimen-sions shown on Figure 2-2.

Q2-5. What are the dimensions of the multicell units?

A2-5. (Mr. Swim] As I stated, when cells are adjoining, they are constructed to share the dike between them. Therefore, the dimensions of the multicell units are not simple multiples of the dimensions of a singla cell. Taking this into considera-tion, the dimensions of the 3-cell unit will be approximately 395 feet by 162 feet, and the b

x_J

dimensions of the 2-cell unit will be approxi-mately 278 feet by 162 feet.

i l

I I

l 1

1 l

l

x

• Y

/ Y I R F A C D N

Oa

/

U O

a- B

. E T

I

.T S

.ng }>

gu _

.g IX -

n. _

,' L r c

, [ m. \

\

\

4 _ _

2 N

W M O

4 O T D

E Y ,

S A U LAE O _

H LR _

E EA .

R A

W V

A R

G

\

\\ 1 2

e r

u s g _

3 a e

i F _

R%

E c

r r%

o

~

w 3

)

R l3

\. , ,

O

\\ i

<a

,.t

.o ii ,i j  ! i

l 17' _

IS' _ 26.25' _

45' -_

26.25' -

15' _ _

17' -

- 2' _4' g._

EL 579.75 # COVER MAT'L ,

TOP OF DISPOSED MATERIALd i

l EL.574.0 t ll EL 571.0 7 4' LINER BN SECT /0N l4-A' l

6" CLAY

,- l*-0"LEACHATE i

LA k'"

4' E **#*

= g 2'-6" COMPACTED

== <

=

E CLAY l SECTION 'B-B' i

5'igure 2-2 1

~

3.

() Is the Waste Burial Site Located Within the Bounds of the Navarre Marsh? Provide a Description of the Burial Site Relative to the Marsh.

Q3-1. What is the "Navarre Marsh"?

A3-1. (Ms. Scott-Wasilk] Originally, the Navarre Marsh referred to the marshland within the Navarre tract. The Navarre tract was 524 acres that was at one time a private hunt club and was subse-quently acquired by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The bounds of the Navarre tract are shown in Figure 3-1.

In 1968, Toledo Edison acquired the Navarre tract from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in exchange for the Darby Marsh (a marsh about eight miles to the southeast). As part of this trans-action, Toledo Edison leased back to the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service 447 acres of the Navarre tract, and also leased to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 135 acres north of the site.

Toledo Edison further agreed to allow the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service to operate and control an additional 33 acres of the Navarre tract.

Under these leases and agreements, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service now manages all the

)

marshland in the Navarre tract. This marshland, plus the 135 acres north of the site, are now called the Navarre Marsh unit of the Ottawa Na-tional Wildlife Refuge.

Q3-2. Is the burial site located within the bounds of the Navarre Marsh unit of the Ottawa National Wildlife Ref-uge?

A3-2. (Ms. Scott-Wasilk] No. The closest approach of the dike around the cell nearest to the Navarre

' Marsh unit will be approximately 400 feet west of l the Navarre Marsh unit.

Q3-3. What is the biological definition of a marsh?

A3-3. (Dr. Herdendorf) A marsh is defined by the pres-ence of aquatic plants (hydrophytes), which indi-cate that at some point during the growing season the soil was saturated. The three types of aquatic vegetation that determine the existence of a marsh are emergent (for example, cattails and bulrushes), floating leaf type (for example, water lily), and submerged (for example, water milfoil, coontail, or pond weed). Professor Milton W. Weller of the Department of Entomology, Fisheries and Wildlife at the University of

Minnesota in his book entitled Freshwater Marshes: Ecology and Wildlife Management,3/ de-fines freshwater marshes as follows:

Any undisturbed low spot that will hold water of a few inches to a few feet over soil forms a suitable basin for the invasion of water-tolerant, rooted, pe-rennial, soft-stemmed plants such as sedges, cattail, and bulrush. This basin is now a marsh, and it in turn at-tracts other forms of life.

The term marsh is also applied to typical marsh veg-etation that may be distri-buted as patches or strips along the shallow edges of lakes, seashores, or rivers.

Q3-4. Do any governmental agencies have definitions for what constitutes a marsh?

A3-4. (Dr. Herdendorf) Yes. All marshes are wetlands.

The U. S. Army Corps of Engineers defines wet-lands as prescribed in Executive Order 11990, signed by President Carter in May 1977, to be "those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water with a frequency and 3/ M. W. Weller, Freshwater Marshes: Ecology and Wildlife Management 147 (University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 1981).

g b 1 - _ .

1

. 1 1

~

duration sufficient to support, and that under O , normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturat-ed soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas."4/ For i Lake Erie, the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers has ,

i established an elevation of 572.8 feet IGLD (which is the mean high water mark) as the demarkation between coastal marshes and terres-trial environments.

The U. S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service defines wetlands as " lands tran-sitional between terrestrial and aquatic systems where the water table is usually at or near the surface or the land is covered by shallow water.

. . . [W]etlands must have one or more of the following attributes: (1) at least periodically, the land supports predominantly hydrophytes

[ aquatic plants], (2) the substrate is predomi-nantly undrained hydric soil, and (3) the substrate is nonsoil (i.e. bedrock] and is l

l 4/ 33 C.F.R. $ 323.2(c). See also E. L. Horwitz, U. S. Council on Environmental Quality, Our Nation's Wetlands, an Interagency Task Force Report 70 (1978). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency uses the same definition. 40 C.F.R. $ 122.2(g).

J

~

saturated with water or covered by shallow water O at some time during the growing season of each year." The term wetlands includes a variety o#

1 areas with hydrophytes and hydric soils, such as those commonly known as marshes, swamps, and bogs.5/

Ohio State University, under contract to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, has developed an inventory of all wetlands on the Great Lakes.

Ohio State University also prepared an inventory

, of all wetlands along Lake Erie under contract to the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Admin-istration. This was published as Report No. 287 of the Center for Lake Erie Area Research, "Envi-ronmental Sensitivity Index (ESI) Maps for the Lake Erie System" by Fay and Herdendorf. As con-servative criteria for wetlands, both inventories used those areas designated as marsh on the Unit-ed States Geological Survey Lacarne topographic map and areas below elevation 575 (USGS) (equiva-lent to 573.5 IGLD).

5/ L. M. Cowardin, V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe, U.

S. Dept. Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Biologi-cal Service, Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States, FWS/OBS-79/31, p.3 (1979).

/~N 27-1 I

Q3-5. Under any of these definitions, does the burial site fall O within a marsh?

A3-5. [Dr. Herdendorf] No. On June 9, 1986, Dr.

Richard T. Fisher, Botanist and Pr'ofes-sor/ Chairman Emeritus of the Department of Bio-logical Sciences at Bowling Green State Universi-ty, and I examined the burial site in order to characterize the type of vegetation present. The vegetation consisted primarily of grasses, shrubs, and other terrestrial plant types. The site did not contain the prevalent growth of hydrophytes typical of a freshwater marsh. The nearest area containing aquatic vegetation is 25 feet away along the fence line east of the area where the 1-cell waste burial unit will be built.

Furthermore, the site is above elevation 574 IGLD, is therefore not a wetland or a marsh under the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' definition, and was not mapped as marsh on the USGS Lacarne topographic map. As shown in Figure 3-2, the NOAA study determined that the burial site was outside the marsh area. Therefore, the burial site is not a marsh under any of the definitions properly used for this geographic area.

O e O. . . .

L State Rt.

Borrow Pit or l

, g l h

l

)

i @l I

'p[xM j

S i- - -I-- """

! sii. wry -

l m

j ----- Navarr. Tract - s! l i g y,, MARSH g l

i

---

swion Area 'ouarry Q i

/ /

447kres g

9 v Borrow i Marsh Area 1 Pit

Leased to Bureau ,

i (582kres)

{

! .::::.:.::::.:.::::.: Marsh Area 188kres

! !ll Notleased but by Bureau l

/ p i

l TotalSite 954 Acres l Total Tract 524 Acres Station Area 56 Acres

Figure 3-2 m :Ea STATES ,

EPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR ,

CEO.00:0AL SJRVEY , , ,e .

O G -

.e ,,,

t, .

uf

.pn.. -\ f')

. J .

,' y u n, -w _M ,.< . r . .- . ..

3r-z,,w ~ -s.s .. -.. 3:

N&q:0.\ .. :-. c.. ..: . ,/ -

lw'/)(l

, _. b) e :.&. ,

/ +.s_-s

,- i .

$.,. o  :: .

-c%. ,s. ...,y ..

nn*,

l v w-y ,

s me ,.

r-'* ...n......_-w o

\@

~'

rr i. 2

.. g,. n . ,q ,/ . . . =

. p.- .

. . . - -... m_, c . ; .. . . . ...

6.% t.

i, A k.

~ .~w.-w Qy.x r

e , .

. .. -._r

~

s. -

. ;~ ...

a --,=,.. g g.: .

_.- 2 .

. \

1:. "N  :

(

~{, m c

w

. .. . ...._.m.. .

\. ,

s

-__-___ . Y..J .,. r. l1 M ,,Q '- < ...

- g%, \

,~ , . . ...

n 1 w ..e.d., r. ..~. d. .. ~.. .(.. . - a. . i\

pst .. ..' -- - -_c . C,,r,_9

.(-

• 1. s.

9,-.- v._.:c sn .- g.7.. - - -n . . I .-

4 .

~

s g I

m- v.A AfFEA

- s: .:-

- i . , .

• Y ' x N s*s lu.'  : s. L 3.. -W g ... *:-l:. . s.: ..

a/os s  ::- .

.. t..

r 1 :. ,, '.,$. -

, .* .* ' W f. .-

E.

&. 'g(. ' ,},f; .-,

P g '

~,-[ '~-l."*

.~

)'ESI L'10$. : X,g *

,\ > ( 'g. ,._

\

. -(oc&b. ". :,'.::' ~ F. .7. I .= $. .

. 3 . . .

. .:. c; W%g r j c:.- -

J < . ,# .

1o ,n -. - , . -: ... . . . e

__ -) -q, -

i , ./ 'l' y , l @a Y I

-r .ch. .... . .

) /

. yt.i-_.d. - ~ ' @@.. W,. .> ... .. ".. :. . - -

l c a. r i-"5% -t- - 11.Y. ::2.:y .

'n% ,

..s D . . . . . . i. . .. . . . t. ....

.a: ... . .: .

. . . ~ .

y

. v u....

. . e..-

...z:. n..

...: ..y.-. .. .

4

.2 ,.3 .

p

---.I ...l . , ,

C. i . a*.:.:_:.

.; ~:-?f:-d . . y -y. . ., ;... . .....

r.. ....a.-

. .. . : :.,-.. .F,- ..* M . . : .

.. /-

• / ,&- v- .*

  := *

.y, ::,e . O c. y 21. y~ .~..! . _. p. .

e . - ;,- .- u~ .m .

.-------s% 2 -

c ....a......w ; .;

"~ ~

?

.{' s .: .

..a m ,: 9 '.2 0 w.. -h=_ C f<.-f. --m. W % %c .:. . _ s ~ . . =~~~~ " 7. . -

. .( M.I:

1- .

{. .Y ?.- . 4. ....

. : . .-.... ..._l

,, . y~ . e, .-T- N. ....- 4.,,,------ k .

..; m. .

i

..,se_ wl_ ,._.

- :e .. . . .n.: - ...

s l/ . .~,mam, i.

u% .,M,., .

--- ..--.-----. ..... .......,,. .s ,

~ ..-- . . . . . . _

ESI MAP # 25 Locam e , OMo

4. What Is the Observed Flooding

() Frequency at the Waste Burial Site?

Q4-1. Please describe the evaluation of flooding at Davis-Besse and the burial site that has been conducted by Toledo Edison.

A4-1. (Dr. Herdendorf) The static water levels in the western basin of Lake Erie are affected by long term and annual cyclic variations in the mean monthly level from the mean low water level, and short period variations in the daily level from the monthly mean level due to wind tides and seiches. In conjunction with the NRC's licensing of the Davis-Besse plant, Toledo Edison investi-gated the subject of lake levels. The results of the investigation are presented in the Davis-Besse Final Safety Analysis Report.@/ For this proceeding, I re-examined data on lake lev-els and flooding, including the most recent data, to determine the likelihood of the burial site becoming flooded, l l

l s/ Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Final Safety Analysis Report, 5 2.4.2.

O I I

Q4-2. What record of Lake levels exists?

O A4-2. (Dr. Herdendorf] Water level records for Lake

- Erie have been gathered since 1860. Various planes of reference have been used during the period of record, and each of these reference planes has a correction factor which must be applied when converting to IGLD levels. Current lake levels are measured by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration at a number of gauges positioned around the lake. The data obtained by NOAA is analyzed and published month-ly by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

The Davis-Besse site is located approxi-mately midway between two lake level gauges --

one at Toledo and the other at Marblehead. Lake levels are not uniform across the Lake, but exhibit lengthwise and transverse variations due to wind tide and seiche. The maximum lake levels are observed at the west end of the Lake (that is, at Toledo Harbor), while the center of the Lake is a wind tide node (a point in the lake were no wind tide change in lake level occurs).

The Davis-Besse site is located about 80% of the way from the wind tide node to Toledo, and wind l

l

tide variations (storm surges) are therefore about 80% of those recorded at Toledo. Data from 1983 to 1986 (Table 4-2) shows this ratio to be 78.6%.

Q4-3. Has the burial site flooded in the past?

A4-3. [Dr. Herdendorf] The general area around the burial site has been observed flooded, but spe-cific hydrological records of such events have not been maintained.

Q4-4. Historically, how many times do you estimate the burial .

area has flooded?

A4-4. (Dr. Herdendorf} To determine the past history of flooding at the proposed burial site, I ana-lyzed water level records for Toledo Harbor fo'r the last 50 years. I was assisted by Mr. James P. Byrne, Engineering Technician, Toledo Project Office, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. I focused only on flooding events with a water level I greater than 6.0 feet above low water datum (LWD) at Toledo. A level of 6.0 feet above LWD is equivalent to an elevation of 574.6 IGLD. Lesser floods could not have affected the burial site.2/

2/ Table 4-2 illustrates that a storm surge elevation of 574.6 at Toledo would have a storm surge elevation of 573.8 to 574.3 at p

l 1

\- (Continued Next Page) l l

l

\

( To determine whether floods above 574.6 IGLD at Toledo would have coincided with a flooding

- event at the burial site, I examined the storm surge associated with each flood at Toledo, multiplied it by 0.786 to reflect the lesser surge that would occur at Davis-Besse, and added the corrected surge to the mean monthly still water elevation at the time of the flood. This provided me an estimate of the lake level at Lo-cust Point (where the Davis-Besse station is lo-cated) during each of the flooding events recorded at Toledo.

I also considered the avenue for flooding at the burial site. Because of existing protective dikes, flooding of the proposed burial site would occur indirectly, via the Toussaint River and drainage ditches. This causes flood waters at the site to lag considerably behind conditions on the open coast, by at least an estimatt four hours. This estimate is based on the observation (Continued)

Davis-Besse. For my analysis, I used 574.3 IGLD (5.7 feet above LWD) as the minimum base elevation of the burial site.

m

~

that storm surges which reached a projected O elevation of 574.52 (May 9, 1986) and 574.65 (June 17, 1986) at Locust Point and had durations of four hours (see Table 4-1) did not result in flooding of the burial site. I therefore deter-mined that flooding events that resulted in a Lake level of 574.3 at Locust Point for over four hours were the ones that might have flooded the burial site. The results of my analysis are shown on Table 4-1. Flooding events which were calculated to have potentially resulted in flooding of the burial site are marked with an asterisk. There are an estimated 25 such events over the 50 year period examined. The total duration of flooding was probably less than the equivalent of 12 days, or about 2.4 days every ten years.

Q4-5. Did the water level for any of the floods exceed the elevation of the dikes which Toledo Edison intends to build around the waste disposal cells?

A4-5. (Dr. Herdendorf) No. The highest water level at the site in estimated at 576.05 IGLD (7.45 feet I above LWD on April 8, 1974). Toledo Edison's de-sign calls for dikes to elevation 579.75 feet IGLD, or 11.15 feet above LWD.

O v

~

Q4-6. What is the likelihood that the burial site will be O flooded in the future?

A4-6. - (Dr. Herdendorf) The likelihood that the burial site will be flooded in the future depends upon the future level of Lake Erie and the probability and magnitude of storm surges raising the Lake above its still water surface. Any prediction of Lake level beyond the immediate future would be speculative. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, for example, only predicts Lake levels six months in advance.

However, the Lake mean water level for the month of June, 1986, was the highest level during the period since 1860, when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers began to maintain records. At Toledo, the monthly average for June reached 573.72.

Flooding occurs from the storm surge which would raise the Lake level above its still water mark. Northeast storms generated by low-pressure systems passing south of the Lake shore are largely responsible for the wind setup (or storm surge) which raises water levels at the west and l

1

\

of the Lake.g/ Severe storms can raise the still O water surface of the Lake approximately 4.2 feet in the vicinity of Locust Point (April 27, 1966).

Professor Charles H. Carter of the Depart-ment of Geology, University of Akron, analyzed )

water level records for western Lake Erie storm surges which occurred during the period from 1939 I

to 1980.9/ The study included all storm events i 1

which caused the daily mean water level to exceed the monthly mean water level by one foot. Based on the 179 storm surges during that period, Pro- l fessor Carter determined the following expected I frequency and magnitude per year for storm surges at the western end of Lake Erie.

g/ C. H. Carter and D. E. Guy, Ohio Dept. Nat. Res., Div. of Geol. Survey. Rept. Invest. 115, Lake Erie Shore Erosion and Flooding, Erie and Sandusky Counties, Ohio: Setting, Processes  !

and Recession Rates from 1877 to 1973 (1980).  !

9/ C. H. Carter, Frequency Magnitude, and Duration of Storm Surges at the West End of Lake Erie, Abst. 29th Conference on l

Great Lakes Research, International Assoc. Great Lakes Res., Uni-versity of Toronto (1986).

I

' o .

O a

s Surge Height Frequency J 1-2 feet 1.5/ year 2-3 2.0 3-4 0.6 Greater than 4 0.1 s

The number of storm surges per year racged from 1 to 7, and duration ranged from 1 to'3 days. 85%

of the storm surges lasted 1 day, 13% lasted 2 days, and 2% lasted 3 days. Based upon these data, occasional flooding of the burial site's base elevation'could occur.

Q4-7. Would you expect the burial structure itself to be flooded?

A4-7. (Dr. Herdendorf] The cells themselves would not be flooded. As described earlier, the waste  !

l burial cells will be surrounded by dikes. The elevation of the dike portion of the burial structure would be at least 579.75 feet (IGLD).  ;

1 This is 3.7 feet above the estimated flood level of the highest storm on record (April 8, 1974) and 1.84 feet above the Loko level which would l 1

occur if the maximum historical surge took place at today's record still water levels.10/ Flood 1

10/ The June 1986 still water level of 5.12-above LWD plus the maximum storm surge of 4.19 in April 1966 would yield on elevation of 577.91 IGLD.

O \ ..-:

1 waters would not penetrate the dikes. l

'N (G 1 The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers predicts

-- the following maximum water levels at Locust Point:ll/

Maximum Elev. (IGLD) Feet Above LWD 10 yr-flood 574.8 6.2 50 yr-flood 575.7 7.1 100 yr-flood 576.0 7.4 500-yr-flood 576.7 8.1 Q4-8. If the. base elevation of the burial site were to be flooded, wouldn't flood waters come in contact with the sides of the burial structure?

A4-8. [Dr. Herdendorf) Yes. However, I would not expect that such an event would cause any signif-icant erosion to the burial structure.

Q4-9. Why not?

A4-9. [Dr. Herdendorf) First of all, the burial struc-ture would not be exposed to any significant wave attack. In a storm which could create flooding of the burial site, waves would be coming towards the site from the northeast. However, the marsh 11/ U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Report on Great Lakes Open-Coast Flood Levels, Plate 4 (Feb. 1977).

O

. i ,

area and the outer marsh dikes, which are rip-rapped, would absorb the brunt of storm's waves. I would not expect any significant waves to reach the burial site. Wave heights near the burial site would also be limited by the physical properties of waves. The maximum wave height in shallow water is given by the equation H = 0.78(z) where H is the wave height r.nd z is the still water depth. Since the still water' depth near the burial site would be small, even in a flooding situation, the wave height would also be small.

s If flooding were to occur, I would expect that water levels would gradually rise around the base of the burial structure. This gradual rise would not be expected to cause significant ero-sion of the burial structure. It is worth noting that erosion along the Lake Erie shore generally

<does not occur in the absence of wave attack, even during severe storms. Erosion has typically occurred at bluff areas, which are undercut by wave action, not still water.

f' r

/

~ ~

w

O e O. ..

TADLE 4.1. LAKE ERIE FLOODING EVENTS FROM 1936 - 1986 WITH WATER LEVELS GREATER THAN 6.0 FT ABOVE LOW WATER DATlN AT TOLEDO, OHIO PROJECTIONS FOR LOCUST PT MAX ELEY TIME STILLWATER SURGE SURGE MAX ELEV PERIOD OF FLOODING ABOVE LWD OF MAX (MO MEAN ELEV) 111 11I ABOVE LWD DATE .TRE 1ES YEAR:1948 1 Jan 1700-2000 4 6.40 1800 1.05 4.55 3.57 5.42 13 Apr 2100-2200 2 6.10 2100 3.00 3.10 2.44 5.44 YEAR;1952 22 Mar

• 1600-2000 5 6.50 1700-1900 3.70 2.80 2.20 5.90 24 Apr 1000-1100 2 6.10 1100 4.13 1.97 1.55 5.68 30 Jun 2400 1 6.00 2400 4.18 1.82 1.43 6.00 YEAR:1954 i 29 Dec 1800-1900 2 6.30 1800 2.25 4.05 3.18 5.43 YEAR:1955 14 May 1100-1200 2 6.30 1100 3.57 2.73 2.14 5.71 YEAR:1961 14 Jun 1300 1 6.15 1300 2.07 3.28 2.58 5.45

O e O. . . .

TABLE 4.1 (CONTINUED)

PROJECTIONS FOR LOCUST PT PERIOD OF FLOODING MAX ELEY TIME STILLWATER SURGE SURGE MAX ELEV DAIE IllE 1ES ABOVE LWD OF MAX (MO MEAN ELEV) ljI 1]I ABOVE LWD YEARr1966 l 27 Apr* 0700-1300 7 7.07 1000 1.74 5.33 4.19 5.93 YEARr1969 6 Jul 0840 1 6.01 0840 4.05 1.96 1.54 5.59 YEARr1972 6 Apr 1200-1300 2 6.20 1200 3.45 2.75 2.16 5.61 13-14 Nov* 2200-1200 15 7.40 1000 3.53 3.87 3.04 6.57 YEARr1973 31 Jan 1300-1400 2 6.43 1300 3.31 3.12 2.45 5.76 5 Feb 1500 1 6.00 1500 3.95 2.05 1.61 5.56 17 Mar 0600-0900 4 6.20 0800 4.31 1.89 1.40 5.79 8-9 Apr* 0900-1300, 14 0.07 1600 4.76 3.31 2.60 7.36 1000-1800 27 May 1500-1700 3 6.13 1200 4.64 1.49 1.17 5.81 29 Oct 1300-1400 2 6.10 1300- 3.50 2.60 2.04 5.54 i

O e O. . . .

TABLE 4.1. (CONTINUED)

PROJECTIONS FOR LOCUST PT PERIOD OF FLOODING MAX ELEV TIME STILLWATER SURGE SURGE MAX ELEV pgE 11}4f. IES ABOVE LWD OF MAX DIO MEAN ELEV) 111 11I ABOVE LWD YEARr1974 l 12 Maru 0900-1400 6 7.10 1200 4.39 2.71 2.13 6.52 28-29 Mar 5 1400-0800 19 7.15 1900 4.39 2.76 2.17 6.56 8 Apra 0900-1600 8 8.27 1200 4.43 3.04 3.02 7.45 8 May 1300-1600 4 6.59 1500 4.75 1.84 1.45 6.20 19 May 1500 1 6.10 1500 4.75 1.35 1.06 5.81 23 Jun 1000-1100 2 6.10 1000 4.65 1.45 1.14 5.79 30'Nov 2000 1 6.00 2000 2.86 3.14 2.47 5.33 1 Deca 0700-2400 18 6.90 1930 3.23 3.67 2.88 6.90 YEAR:1975

~

I 14 Mar # 0400-1400 11 7.92 0900 3.98 3.94 3.10 7.08 2 Apr* 1600-2400 9 6.66 2200 3.95 2.71 2.13 6.08 24-25 Sep" 1900-0200 8 6.64 2330 3.88 2.76 2.17 6.05 7.00 3.58 3.42 2.69 6.27 17-18 Oct" 1700-0000 16 0300 YEARr1976 1-2 Hara 2200-0300 6 6.84 2330 4.06 2.78 2.19 6.25 4 Apr 0600-0800 3 6.20 0700 4.39 1.81 1.42 5.81 24-25 Apr* 1500-2300, 23 7.20 1400 4.39 2.81 2.21 6.60 0100-0500, 1000-1800 6 May 2300-2400 2 6.10 2400 4.31 1.79 1.41 5.72 e__-___________________________- _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

o e O. . . .

TABLE 4.1. (CONTINUED)

PROJECTIONS FOR LOCUST PT PERIOD OF FLOODING MAX ELEV TIME STILLWATER SURGE SURGE MAX ELEV DAIE .IIME 1ES ABOVE LWD OF MAX (MO I4EAN ELEV) 1H ljI ADOVE LWD YEAR:1977 j 29 May 0300-0400 2 6.40 0300 3.46 2.94 2.31 5.77 5 Doc 1200-1500 4 6.66 1345 2.22 4.44 3.49 5.71 YEARr1978 4 May* 1400-1800 5 6.40 1515 3.90 2.50 1.97 5.87 YEAR:1980 14 Apr# 0400-1300 10 8.08 0856 3.87 4.21 3.31 7.18 YEAR:1982 .

5-6 Apra 1700-0300 11 7.36 0130 3.65 3.71 2.92 6.57 YEAR;1983 21 Mar 0400-0700 4 6.75 0545 3.13 3.62 2.85 5.98 28 Jun* 1100-1600 6 6.63 1400 4.09 2.54 2.00 6.09 11 Aug 2300-2400 2 6.10 2300 3.97 2.13 1,67 5.64 i

o e O. .

TABLE 4.1. (CONTINUED)

PROJECTIONS FOR LOCUST PT TIME STILLWATER SURGE SURGE MAX ELEV PERIOD OF FLOODING MAX ELEV 11 I ABOVE LWD DATE Il!f IES ABOVE LWD OF MAX (MO MEAN FtEV) 111 l

YEAR 1984 6.40 0900 3.09 3.31 2.60 5.69 27-28 Feb 0700-1100 5 4.10 3.22 6.31 28 Feb' 1700-0200 10 7.19 2245 3.09 6.20 0300 3.56 2.64 2.08 5.64 29 Mar 0200-0400 3 6.28 28 May* 1300-1800 6 6.99 1630 3.66 3.33 2.62 YEAR 1985 20 7.90 0900 4.36 3.54 2.78 7.14 30-31 Mar

• 1800-1300 1.44 1.13 5.89 1 May 1500-1700 3 6.20 1700 4.76 8 6.20 0800 4.76 1.44 1.13 5.89 2 May# 0400-1100 6.02 7 6.40 1600 4.63 1.77 1.39 11 June 1300-1900 5.56 6.00 0100 4.43 1.57 1.23 22-23 Jul 2400-0200 3 1.57 1.23 5.66 31 Jul 2400 1 6.00 2400 4.43 13 6.83 0500 4.14 2.69 2.11 6.25 27-28 Nov" 2400-1200 YEAR 1986 20 7.64 0130 4.36 3.28 2.58 6.94 6-7 Feb" 1400-0900 1.34 5.86 1400-1500 2 6.23 1400 4.52 1.71 11 tiar 1.68 1.32 5.84 12 Mar 1600-1960 4 6.20 1900 4.52 2 6.16 1800 4.82 1.34 1.05 5.87 4 Apr 1700-1800 6.05 3 6.37 1900 4.87 1.50 1.18 14 Apr 1800-2000 5.92 0700-1000 4 6.19 0900 4.91 1.28 1.01 9 May 6.06 2100 5.15 0.91 0.72 5.87 5 June 2100 1 0.90 6.05 17 June 0300-0600 4 6.29 0500 5.15 1.1.4 6.08 0300 5.15 0.93 0.73 5.88 20 June 0300 1

" Storrns which likely resultod in fleoding of the proposorf tiurial sito (l abe Frf o olevat.f on of 574.3 or greater at Locust Point for a period greater than 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />).

O e O. . . .

TABLE 4.1 (CONCLUDED)

EXPLANATION All times given as Eastern Standard Time (EST). A level of 6.0 ft above Low Water Datum (LWD) is equivalent to an elevation of 574.6 (IGl.D) or 576.1 (MSL). The U.S. Army Corps of Enginee'rs (1977) ostimates that the water level during a flood-event will be approximately 0.3 to 0.4 foot lower at Locust' Point than the level in Maumee Bay. Earlier records indicate that flooding events at 6.0 f t above LWD may also have occurred in 1913,1917-1919,1929, and 1930. Data in this table were compiled with tho assistance of Mr. James P.

Dyrne, NOAA/USAC0E water level gauge observer, Toledo Project Of fice, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Dr.

Charles H. Carter, Professor of Geology, University of Akron.

O O O. . . .

TABLE 4.2. LAKE ERIE WATER LEVEL COWARISON DURING STORM EVENTS AT TOLEDO At() MARBLEHEAD DATI TOlFDO MARBLEHEAD DIFFERENCE AT MARBLEHEAD SurDe Surge Surge Percent Max Elev J_lEt Ht (ft) Max Elev IJER Ht (ft) Ht (ft) Time (hrs) Lower YEAR;1983 21 Mar 575.15 0545 N/A N/A - - -

28 Jun 575.23 1400 2.54 573.77 1300 1.08 1.46 1.0 42.5% i 11-12 Aug 574.70 2300 N/A N/A - -

, YEAR:1984 28 Feb 575.00 0900 N/A N/A - - -

28 Feb 575.79 2245 N/A N/A - - -

29 Mar 574.80 0300 N/A N/A - - -

j 28 May 575.59 1630 3.33 574.13 1500 1.87 1.46 1.5 '56.2%

YEAR:1985 31 Mar 576.50 0900 3.54 574.85 1100 1.89 1.65 2.0 53.4%

1 May 574.80 1700 1.44 574.17 1400 0.81 0.63 3.0 56.3%

2 May 574.80 0800 1.44 574.23 0700 0.87 0.57 1.0 60.4%

11 Jun 575.00 1600 1.77 574.33 1800 1.08 0.67 2.0 61.0%

22-23 Jul 574.60 0100 1.57 573.91 2400 0.88 0.69 1.0 56.0%

31 Jul 574.60 2400 1.57 573.85 2200 0.82 0.75 2.0 52.5%

28 Nov 575.43 0500 2.69 574.44 0500 1.77 0.99 0.0 65.8%

YEAR:1986 6-7 Feb 576.24 0130 3.28 574.80 2400 1.84 1.44 1.5 56.1%

4 11 Mar 574.83 1400 1.71 574.07 1300 0.95 .76 1.0 55.5%

12 Mar 574.80 1900 1.68 574.03 1700 0.91 0.77 2.0 54.2%

4 Apr 574.76 1800 1.34 574.02 1900 0.60 0.74 1.0 44 . 87, 14 Apr 574.97 1900 1.50 574.05 2100 0.58 0.92 2.0 38.7%

9 May 574.79 0900 -

N/A N/A - - -

I mean 0.96 ft. 1.5 hr 53.8%

O O O. . . .

TABLE 4.2 (CONCLUDED)

EXPLANATION This table shows the difference in Lake Erie water level, surge height, and time of maximum elevation at Marblehead and Toledo and the percent (%) of the total storm surge height recorded at Toledo which was expertenced at Marblehead. g longitudinal storm surge (resulting from wind set-up of the lake surface down the long axis, N 67 E) at Marblehead must travel an additional 14.5 miles to reach Locust Point or an additional 31.5 miles to reach Toledo. This additional distance accounts for the approximately 1 ft differenco in wind set-up between Marb1chead and Toledo, with Toledo always being higher usually an hour or more later. 'The difference in maximum elevations for 1983 to 1986 storms ranged from 0.57 to 1.65 ft with a mean storm surge height at Marblehead being equivalent to 53.8% of the mean storm surge height at Toledo. Because Locust Point is approximately mid-way between Marblehead and Toledo, the anticirtted dif ference in maximum elevations of storm surges would be 0.3 to 0.8 ft lower than Toledo or a mean surgo height of 78.6% of the surge height at Toledo. Therefore a storm surge elevation of 574.6 f t (6.0 f t above LWD) at Toledo would have an elevation of approximately 573.8 to 574.3 at Locust Point.

L I

4 o

4

,_f 5. What Soil Erosion From Storms

() Has Been Actually Observed At or Near the Disposal Site?

QS-1. To what extent would flooding of the burial site cause soil erosion?

AS-1. (Dr. Herdendorf] As I have just explained, I would not expect flooding to cause any signifi-cant erosion of the burial structure.

QS-2. What soil erosion has been caused at the burial site by past flooding?

~ AS-2. [Dr. Herdendorf) There are no records addressing soil erosion caused at the burial site by past flooding. On April 28 and June 9, I inspected the burial site to determine if past flooding events had caused any soil erosion. My examina-tion of water level records for Toledo had indi-cated that the site may have flooded on a number of occasions during the last five years. During my inspection of the burial site, I found the land surface well vegetated. I found no surficial evidence of erosion.

I I

i l

1

QS-3. What soil erosion has occurred in similar areas along Lake Erie?

AS-3 . -- ( Dr . Herdendorf] I know of no documented cases of soil erosion on well vegetated land due to flooding by Lake Erie of inland areas. Due to the slow rise of the water level, shallow depth, and minimal flow velocities in such areas, ero-sion of grassed surfaces would not be expected to occur.

QS-4. What steps will be taken to minimize the possibility of erosion of the burial structure?

AS-4. [Mr. Swim) Grasses will be planted on the burial structure. The U.S. Soil Conservation Service l

has recommended that Toledo Edison use a mixture of Kentucky blue grass and Lidino white clover, l

and the Soil Conservation Service is preparing a l

1 protective vegetation design plan which Toledo l Edison intends to follow.12/

In addition, the waste burial cells will be surrounded and protected by dikes. To prevent ,

l 12/ Toledo Edison will not use fertilizer on the burial struc- l ture, since fertilizer could adversely affect the marshes nearby.

O

-Q erosion of the dikes, the slopes of the dikes )

- l will be rip-rapped. Furthermore, there will be either a small graded stone layer or filter cloth under the rip-rap.

QS-5. How effective will these steps be in minimizing the pos-sibility of erosion?

AS-5. [Dr. herdendorf] Vegetative cover is a well-recognized and effective method for pre-vent'ing erosion. For example, the U.S. Depart-ment of Agriculture recommends seeding with local species of grass to handle run-off at speeds of 3 to 6 feet per second.13/ These velocities are greater than I would anticipate at the burial site. The rip-rapping of the dike slopes and the use of an inner graded stone layer or filter cloth are also a recognized and effective means to protect the dikes against erosion. I would expect these steps to be highly effective in pre-venting erosion.

l 13/ U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Farmers' Bulletin 2171 "How to Control a Gully" (1973).

O v

6. What Is the Direction of Groundwater Flow

() From the Burial Site Relating to Lake Erie, Navarre Marsh, and the Toussaint River?

Q6-1. Please-describe the geologic formations underlying the burial site?

A6-1. [Mr. Hendron] Complete descriptions of geologic formations underlying'the site are given in nu-merous documents prepared for the Davis-Besse site. In summary, the site is underlain from the ground surface by two primary glacial soil depos-( its. These glacial soil deposits are about fif-teen feet thick in the area of the burial site, and they overlie a relatively flat-lying dolomite 9 bedrock formation of Silurian geologic age.

l The upper glacial soil deposit is a glaciolacustrine clay. The deposit consists of a relatively homogeneous plastic silty clay that contains minor amounts of silts and fine sands within the clay matrix. The topmost foot contains organic material and is referred to as topsoil within the area being considered for the land disposal site. The glaciolacustrine deposit is only partially saturated (i.e. the voids be-tween the individual clay particles are only O

v

partially filled with water). A summary of typi-(

O cal physical properties of the glaciolacustrine deposit in the area being considered for the land disposal site is given in Table 6-1.

The lower glacial soil deposit is a glacial till deposit. The deposit consists of a rela-tively homogeneous mixture of moderately plastic clay, silt, sands, and gravels. The overall ma-trix of the deposit is controlled by the high ,

clay-silt content. Within the area being consid-ered for the land disposal site, the glacial till deposit is also only partially saturated. A sum-mary of average estimated physical properties of

() the glacial till deposit in the area being con-sidered for the land disposal site is given in Table 6-1.

The upper 15 to 20 feet of the dolomite bed- l rock formation is a relatively pure massive l I

dolomite. This upper layer is underlain to depths of several tens of feet by a laminated dolomite formation that contains subslant inverts of gypsum and anhydrite in addition to the dolomite. -

l l

l 1

Q6-2. In which of these formations does groundwater flow occur?

%J A6-2. [Mr. Hendron) Measurable groundwater flow in the

- area being considered for land disposal occurs only in the bedrock formation. The dolomite bed- ,

I rock formation contains several systems of

]

joints, fissures, and vugs. Weathering and solu-tion have opened some of these systems. The dolomite formation is fully saturated and is rel-atively permeable (i.e. the formation can convey fluids in response to application of either a natural or man-made gradient) because of the higher permeability of the system of joints, fis-sures, and vugs. The dolomite formation is the uppermost regional groundwater aquifer underlying the Davis-Besse site.

The glacial soil deposits are only partially saturated and are highly clay rich. Consequent-ly, these soils are highly impermeable (i.e. have a low hydraulic conductivity). The geologic studies conducted at Davis-Besse indicate that the glaciolacustrine deposit and the till deposit contain no systematic open joints, fissures, sand strata, or other non-uniformities that could serve as groundwater flowpaths. So far as can be l

l 1

b

determined, neither the glaciolacustrine or till deposit are considered or used as an aquifer in the area. To the contrary, these deposits are an aquitard, confining the underlying artesian aquifer in the bedrock.

Q6-3. How were these geologic and hydrologic characteristics determined?

A6-3. [Mr. Hendron] The geologic and hydrologic char-acteristics of the glacial deposits and bedrock were determined through extensive investigations

~

and studies of the Davis-Besse site for the siting and licensing of Units 1, 2, and 3. Dur-ing these studies, hundreds of borings, test pits, probes, pump tests, and other direct field tests were made throughout the site area (includ-ing the area being considered for the land dis-posal site), and tens of thousands of man hours were expended to evaluate the data obtained. The studies also included discussions with State ge-ologists and a thorough review of the already available information.

In addition, a study was recently undertaken within the boundaries of the site being O

considered for the land disposal site. The in-O vestigations included five borings through the soil deposits, physical property testing of drive samples taken from the boreholes, and laboratory permeability testing of tube samples taken from the boreholes. Typical results of these tests are summarized in Table 6-1.

Q6-4. What is the direction of groundwater flow from the burial site?

A6-4. [Mr. Hendron] Groundwater flow occurs only in the bedrock that is found approximately 15 feet beneath the existing ground surface. There is no present measurable groundwater flow that occurs horizontally or vertically through the soil de-posits that overlie the bedrock.

The gradient of groundwater in the bedrock i

is extremely small (1 to 2 ft/ mile). As a re-I sult, the rate of flow of groundwater is so small  !

that it is difficult to measure, and the precise 1 1

direction of groundwater flow beneath the burial 1

site cannot be determined reliably. However, groundwater flow can be determined on a larger scale. On a regional basis, groundwater most l

l

,_[ probably discharges very slowly into Lake Erie several miles offshore when the bedrock outcrops in the lake and to a smaller extent into the Toussaint River where bedrock is probably inter-mittently exposed by erosion of the overlying soil deposits by the river. One would expect the same flow to occur beneath the burial site.

Q6-5. How was the regional direction of groundwater flow deter-mined?

A6-5. [Mr. Hendron] Groundwater direction in the bed-rock was determined through installation of and measurements in numerous monitoring wells throughout the Davis-Besse site area since 1968.

9 The lack of groundwater flow through glacial soil deposits is established through physical measure-ments of soil properties, the analyses of bedrock groundwater contours in relation to physical site characteristics, and the results of long-term ob-servation of the lack of water movement through clay soil excavations during construction of Unit 1 facilities.

1 i

O j

( Q6-6. Does groundwater under the burial ground flow toward the Navarre Marsh?

A6-6. -- [Mr. Hendron] Groundwater probably flows through the bedrock beneath the burial site toward the Navarre Marsh, in response to a very low gradient directed towards Lake Erie.

Q6-7. Does groundwater in the bedrock communicate with the Navarre March?

A6-7. [Mr. Hendron] No, the glacial clay deposits sep-arate the marsh from the bedrock and prevent com-munication. Moreover, even if there were commu-nication, the direction of flow would be from the marsh into the bedrock, and not from the bedrock into the marsh.

I

Table 6-1 O

Summary of Typical Physica? Properties of  !

Glacial Soil Deposits in Land Disposal Area l Glaciolacustrine Glacial Till Property Deposit Deposit  :

Thickness Range, ft 5 to 8 9 to 12 1

l Natural Water Content, % 24 24 Liquid Limit 50 33 i Plastic Limit 23 17 sry Unit Weight, lbs/ft 3 97 to 99 112 to 118

~9 Permeability, cm/sec Less than 10 Less than 10-7

't Gradation

% Gravel O 3

% Sand 5 20

% Silt 30 33

% Clay 65 34

.l l

l 1

l J

O t

l 1

__-___.__. - _..- . -_-._,.-, _ . . . , - _ . _ _ . _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - - . - _ _ , , _ _ _ . e- . . - . . . _ - . . . , , , , , .

7. What Is the Depth to Bedrock of Unconsolidated Glacial Deposits

[f'] at the Burial Site?

Q7-1. What-is the thickness of the glaciolacustrine deposit?

A7-1. [Mr. Hendron] In the area of the burial site, the glaciolacustrine deposit is five to eight feet thick.

Q7-2. What is the thickness of the underlying glacial till?

A7-2. [Mr. Hendron] The thickness of the glacial till deposit in the area being considered for the buri-al site ranges from nine to twelve feet.

Q7-3. How were these thicknesses determined?

9 A7-3. [Mr. Hendron] The thicknesses were determined largely on the basis of the five most recent bor-ings in the burial site area. These ranges agree very well with results of numerous other borings conducted at the site during previous studies.

Q7-4. What will be the distance between the bottom of the waste disposal cells and the top of the bedrock?

l A7-4. [Mr. Hendron] The presently proposed bottom of  ;

1 the waste disposal cells (that is, the bottom of l l

the liner) is to be at elevation 567. The l I

() -' -

t i

=

l .. . .

elevation of the top'of bedrock is at elevation

G i

l 560. The distance between the bottom of the waste disposal cells and the top of the' bedrock will therefore be 7 feet.

I i

i I

i i

1 1

0  :

i l

}  !

l l l 3

1 4 .

1 .

l ~l

1 i

! l lg -sl -

]

l l

r--e-- -vr-- w wwwry--en-,*r, were w% enua-erw ww-s-e . _ .- - e- -

8. What Is the Average Depth and

() Upper and Lower Range of the Water Table at the Disposal Site?

Q8-1. Please define the term " water table."

A8-1. [Mr. Hendron] The simplest definition of water table is the point of contact between the saturated and unsaturated geologic zones in the subsurface.14/ This definition is consistent with that in Ohio's Solid Waste Disposal Regulations, Ohio Administrative Code 5 3745-27-01(AA).

Q8-2. Where in the formations under the burial site is the water table located?

A8-2. (Mr. Hendron] Calculations indicate that both the glaciolacustrine and glacial till deposits beneath the burial site are unsaturated. The bedrock de-posit is' saturated and water in the bedrock forma-tion is confined. Consequently, the water _ table within the area being considered for the disposal site is the contact point between the glacial soil deposits and the top of the weathered bedrock zone. This contact generally occurs at approxi,-

mately elevation 560.

14/ See R. Freeze and J. Cherry, Groundwater 39 (1979).

Q8-3. What will be the minimum distance between the bottom of the waste cells and the water table?

A8-3. --(Mr. Hendron] The present elevation of the bottom of the waste cells is elevation 567 and the elevation of the top of the water table is elevation 560. The distance between the bottom of the waste cells and the water table is 7 feet.

I O '

l i

l 1

. , . . .-..,.-.x , - - *- . , , . , . . _ . . _ , - . - . . _. -~-.-,-,-,---.-w- , r,--.

9. What Endangered Species of Plant or g-)J

( Animal Have Been Actually Observed )

on the Davis-Besse Site? What Critical Habitats for' Endangered Species Exist on the Davis-Besse Site?

Q9-1. Please describe the investigations that have been con-ducted at the Davis-Besse site to determine the plants and animals on or in the vicinity of the site.

A9-1. [Dr. Jackson] From 1972 through 1980, environ-mental monitoring studies were conducted at the Davis-Besse site. As part of these studies, my associates and I studied terres-trial animal and plant communities at the site. Plant, mammal, and herpetile popula-tions were examined. Bird populations were censused each season, and bird strikes at the cooling tower were monitored during spring and fall migration periods.

A9-1. (Dr. Reutter] Complementing Dr. Jackson's studies, Dr. Herdendorf and I conducted aquatic studies over the same nine-year period. The aquatic studies included a sam-pling program of fish and benthic organisms )

1 in Lake Erie near the site. A three-year  !

O l

sampling prcgram was conducted in the O Navarre Marsh.

Q9-2. During-these investigations, were any endangered species (plants or wildlife) found or observed on the Davis-Eesse site?

A9-2. [Dr. Jackson] The 1974 environmental monitoring program at the Davis-Besse site found evi-dence of Chenopodium leptophyllum (slender goosefoot) near the current location of the cooling tower. This plant is now on the en-dangered species list prepared by the Divi-sion of Natural Areas and Preserves of the Ohio Division of Natural Resources, but is not on the Federal endangered species list.

No plants or animals on the Federal endan-gered species list have been observed on the i

Davis-Besse site.

Q9-3. Has the slender goosefoot been found on the burial site?

A9-3. [Dr. Jackson] In June, 1986, a survey of the burial site was conducted by Dr. Richard T.

Fisher, Botanist and Professor / Chairman Emeritus of the Department of Biological Sciences at Bowling Green State University.

Dr. Fisher found..no evidence of the slender-O goosefoot, or of ar,y other species liste<i- on the State or Federal endangered species lists.

Q9-4. Have any endangered species been observed in Lake Erie in the immediate vicinity of the Davis-Besse plant?

A9-4. [Dr. Reutter) Four aquatic species on the State's endangered species list were found during the sampling program in' Lake Erie: silver chub, silver ~ lamprey, Great Lakes muskellunge, and lake sturgeon. Only one muskellunge and one sturgeon were found in eleven years of sampling.

Three benthic. organisms listed by.the State as " threatened" have been found in Lake Erie near the plant site. These are the deer too clam, the kneb shell clam, and the eastern sand shell clam. ,

i No aquatic species on the Federal endangered species list have been found in this part of Lake Erie. No aquatic 1 species on,the Federal or State lists were found in the Navarre Marsh.

1 I

^

() ~ ~

i l

s

. - - ~ - - , -

-w - . , - _ , , , . , . . - , , , , . - - ,

l

\

l

. I Q9-5. Would the construction or operation of the burial site j 1

have an adverse radiological effect on any of these spe- 1 cies?

A9-5. [Dr. Till] The levels of radioactivity in the waste would have no discernible impact on aquatic 1

species. Even if all the waste were deposited in I t'he Lake at once, the radionuclide concentrations would be well below the maximum permissible con- J l

centrations for water in Part 20 of the NRC's regulations.15/ At these levels, the impact on  ;

aquatic species would be negligible.

i Q9-6. Would the construction or operation of the burial site have any non-radiological impact on endangered or O threatened aquatic species?

A9-6. (Dr. R,eutter] There should be no such impact.  ;

1 Chemical analysis has shown the sludge to be l below EPA EP toxicity limits. The only possible effect would be if the burial structure were somehow to be washed into Lake Erie. I can think l

of no mechanism which could cause this to happen.

If the burial structure were somehow washed into 15/ 10 C.F.R. Part 20, App. B, Table II, Column 2.

l 1

O l

1 i

l

, _, _ . . . _ _ . ~ . _ _ -- _ m,- - -

r i

the Lake, there would be an increase in tur-O bidity; but this would be insignificant in com-parison to the turbidity resulting from the much greater amounts of soil which would be washed o

, into the Lake from all other areas affected by the same postulated mechanism which caused the burial structure to be washed into the Lake.

Q9-7. Have any birds on the endangered species list been ob-served near the site?

A9-7. [Dr. Jackson] A bald eagle, which is on the Fed-eral endangered species list, has been sighted over the Davis-Besse site on a few occasions.

/

The nearest bald eagle nect is located approxi-mately 1.5 miles south of the sit'e.

Two birds on the State's. endangered species list, the sharp-shinned hawk and the common tern, have been seen twice and several times, respec-tively.

The State of Ohio's petition for leave to intervene states that the American peregrine fal-con, Kirtland's warbler, the King rail, and the upland sandpiper " inhabit the vicinity of the proposed burial site." The first two species are l

() l

'A \

on the Federal endangered species list while the latter two are on the State's endangered species ,

I list. None of these species was observed by our I

__ i monitoring group at or near the Davis-Besse site. l The peregrine falcon and the Kirtland's warbler do not nest in this area of Ohio.

l Q9-8. Would the construction or operation of the burial site '

adversely affect the bald eagle, common tern or j i

sharp-shinned hawk?

l A9-8. [Dr. Jackson] The construction of the burial site would not remove or disturb any habitat for these specios. The burial site is not a wooded area in which the hawk would exist, and it has no tall trees used for nesting by the eagle. The ,

burial site will not be built on marsh, which could be used by the tern for feeding.

Operation of the burial site should simi-larly have no impact on these species. The dis-posal methods that Toledo Edison intends to use should prevent the waste from becoming biologi-cally available (that is, it will remain immobile and unable to enter the food chain). If the waste were somehow mobilized, I still would O

expect no effect. Birds are less sensitive to ]

radiation than man, and as Mr. Bland's and Dr.

Till's analyses have shown, the doses to man

__ 1 would be insignificant even if the waste were mo-bilized.

(Dr. Till) In fact, this is true for virtu-ally all species. Man is the species most sus-ceptible to adverse radiation effects. It is therefore generally assumed that if man is pro-tected, so are all other species. Here, the ra-dionuclide concentrations are too low to present any significant hazard to man, plant, or animal.

Even if this waste were completely mobilized, the

() very low levels of radioactivity would have no observable environmental impact.

Q9-9. Have any terrestrial species on the endangered species list been observed at the Davis-Besse site?

A9-9. [Dr. Jackson] No. The spotted turtle, which is on the Ohio endangered species list, has been ob-served by others in marshes in the general area, but it was not observed by our monitoring group at the Davis-Besse site (including the Navarre Marsh).

l O

l

Q9-10. Please define what is meant by the term " critical habi-tat."

A9-10.- [Dr. Jackson] The term " critical habitat" for an endangered species is defined by Section 2 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, 16 U.S.C.

$ 1532(5)(A), as:

(i) the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the spe-cies, at the time it is listed in accordance with the provisions of sec-tion 1533 of this title, on which are found those physical or biological fea-tures (I) essential to the conservation of the species and (II) which may re-quire special management considerations or' protection; and (ii) specific areas outside.the geographical area occupied by the spe-O cies at the time it is listed in accor-dance with the provisions of section 1533 of this title, upon a determina-tion by the Secretary that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species.

Areas are designated as critical habitat by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service in accordance with the procedures set out in 50 C.F.R. Part 424. Areas presently designated.as critical hab-itat are listed in 50 C.F.R. $ 17.95.

1

Q9-11. Is the Davis-Besse site or any part of it a " critical habitat?"

A9-11.- (Dr. Jackson] Neither the Davis-Besse site nor 1

the surrounding area has been designated as crit-ical habitat by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Ser-vice. The burial site itself and the upland por-tion of the Davis-Besse site are not important to any species. The Lake Erie coastal marshland, including the Navarre Marsh, is important habitat for a number of species, and such marshland should be protected. However, I do not believe that the burial of waste at Davis-Besse would damage or have any adverse effect on the marsh.

O

l i

l l

10. What Will Be the Total Radionuclide Inventory of the Burial Site After 30 Years of Operation Under Expected Levels of Resin. Contamination?

Q10-1. What is the present inventory of radionuclides in the settling basin?

A10-1. [Mr. Bland] Table 10-1 presents data for each batch of radioactively contaminated resins that has been discharged to the settling basin and in-cludes the present inventory of each batch cor-rected for decay. Table 10-2 presents the cumu-lative radioactive levels in the settling basin.

A's summarized in Table 10-2, a total of 0.0044 Curies has been sent to the settling basin. It is important to note that the radio-active material levels decrease with time due to the radioactive decay. As a result of decay, the total activity at present in the settling basin is 0.0031 Ci. Following decommissioning of the Davis-Besse site, Cs-137 will be essentially the only remaining radionuclide of the present inven-tory at about half of its current level.

i I

l r

Q10-2. What will be the total radionuclide inventory in the O burial site at the expiration of the Davis-Besse operat-ing license under expected levels of resin contamination?

A10-2. [Mr. Bland) Table 10-3 presents the expected ac-tivities in the burial site at termination of the Davis-Besse operating license (in 2011). The total expected activity is 0.013 Ci. This activ-ity is essentially all cesium-137.

Q10-3. Explain how you calculated the cotal burial site invento-ry under expected levels of resin contamination.

A10-3. [Mr. Bland] I conservatively assumed that levels of activity in future resin batches will continue at previously measured levels (which were the re-sult of a tube leak which is now repaired). I therefore took the present inventories in the settling basin as the inven' tories that would be produced .no buried every' f1ve years.

The ex-pected radionuclide activities for each buried lot were decayed from the respective estimated burial date of each lot to the year 2011. The decayed activities of the lots were then summed.

l

, () ' ~

r . . . - . -

. Table 10-1 O ' Calculated Settlirg Basin Resin Activity as of April 1, 1986 Initial Activity ------ ---

--- Final Activ ity ----------

CATE POL. VOLLPE Cs-137 Cs-134 Mn-54 Co-60 Co-58 01FF Cs-137 Cs-134 mn-54 Co-60 Co-5E (i) (ft3) (Wi) (uC1) (uC1) (ii) (uci) (4-1 -86) (uci) (uC1) (uti) (di) (uCi 1-1-85 2 18 7.SSE-2 - - - - 454 7.43E-2 - - - -

1-1-05 1 24 1.27E-1 - - - - 454 1.23E-1 - - - -

1-2-85 3 20 1.98E * - - - - 453 1.92E-1 - - - -

1-10-85 2 22 4.42E-1 9.78E-2 - - - 445 4.32 -1 6.49E-2 - - -

1-10-85 1 18 1.77E-1 - - - - 445 1.72E-1 - - - -

1-11-85 4 18 1.06E +0 1.68E-1 - - - 444 1.0X+0 1.12E-1 - - -

1-14-85 3 20 9.74E-1 1.56E-1 3.89E-2 - - 4 41 9.47E-1 1.04E-1 1.46E-2 - -

1 85 4 18 3.24E~1 4.36E-2 1.71 E-2 - -

438 3.15E-1 2.91 E-2 6.48E-3 - -

1-19-63 1 24 2. 56E-1 - - - -

43 2.49E-1 - - - -

1 85 3 18 8.46E-1 1.40E-1 3.93E-2 3.28E-2 - 432 8.23E-1 9.39E-2 1.51E-2 2.81 E-2 -

3-6-85 1 18 1.0E +1 2.4T +0 1.54E +0 2.2SE +0 -

3!E 1.06E+1 1.67E +0 6.50E-1 1.!EE +0 -

3-11 -c5 3 18 5.61 E+0 - - - -

385 5.47E+0 - - - -

3-15-85 c 18 4.15E+0 7.75E-1 - - - 381 4.05E+0 5.46E-1 - - -

3-17-85 1 18 4.15E+0 - 8.46E-1 - - 379 4.05E+0 -

3.EEE-1 - -

3-22-85 3,4 36 1.74E+1 2.74E+0 - - - 374 1.72+1 1.94E+0 - - -

3-22-85 1 18 2.04E+0 - - - -

374 1.99E+0 - - - -

d 4-2-85 4 22 1.46E+1 1.77E+0 1.0X+0 - - 363 1.4X+1 1.27E +0 4.59E-1 - -

4-2-85 3 22 2.25E+1 3.45E+0 1.20E+0 - - 363 2.20E+1 2.47E+0 5.37E-1 - -

4-8-85 1 22 3.94E+1 5.68E+0 1.72E+0 - -

357 3.86E +1 4.0E +0 7.78E-1 - -

4-10-85 3 22 1.73E+1 2.24E+0 - - -

355 1.EBE+1 1.61E+0 - - -

4-12-85 1 22 1.21E +1 - - - -

353 1.1 E +1 - - - -

4-14-85 3 22 1.75E+1 3.08E+0 - - -

351 1.71 E +1 2.2X+0 - - -

4-14-85 4 22 1.26E+1 2.3X+0 - - -

351 1.24E+1 1.6E +0 - - -

4-22-05 1 22 6.48E+0 - - - - 343 6.34E+0 - - - -

4-25-85 2 22 1.28E+1 2.98E+0 1.22+0 - -

340 1.25E+1 2.18E+0 5.65E-1 - -

4-25-85 3 22 1.45E+1 2.60E+0 - - -

340 1.41 E+1 1.90E+0 - - -

4-25-85 4 22 5.8E+0 - - -

1.85E+0 340 5.68E+0 - - - 6.63E 4-29-85 1 18 7.5KE +0 - - - -

336 7.73E+0 - - - -

5-13-85 2 18 6.22E+0 -

V.75E-1 - -

321 6.0E+0 - 3.80E-1 - -

5-16-85 4 18 5.40E+0 - - - -

31 8 5.30E+0 - - - -

5-27-85 3 18 2.54E+0 - 1.7BE+0 - -

307 2.49E+0 - 9.00E-1 - -

5-28-85 1 18 5.81 E+0 - - - -

306 5.70E+0 - - - -

6-2-85 2 18 4.98E+0 - - - -

302 4.89E+0 - - - -

6-3-85 4 18 7.14E+0 1.44E+0 - - - 301 7.00E +0 1.09E+0 - - -

6-3-85 3 20 3.84E+0 - - - -

301 3.77E+0 - - - -

6-4-85 1 18 1.91 E +1 - - - -

300 1.88E +1 - - - -

6-9-85 4 20 1.0E+1 - - - -

295 9.84E +0 - - - -

6-13-85 3 18 2.82E+0 - - - -

291 2.77E+0 - - - -

6-13-85 2 20 3.1X+0 - - - -

2 91 3.07E+0 - - - -

8-22-85 1,4 37 6.89E+0 - -

- - 221 6.8E+0 - - - -

9-10-85 4 18 8.26E-1 - - - -

202 8.15E-1 - - - -

0 r1 9 ') . asces es _

Table 10-1 Calculated Settling Basin Resin Activity as of April 1, 1986 l (continued)

---

--- Initial Activity ---- -- -- --- Final Activity -

CATE POL. VCLU'E Cs-137 Cs-134 Mn-54 Co-60 Cc-58 OIFF Cs-137 Cs-134 *n-54 Co-60 Co-58

(#) (ft3) (uci) (uci) (uCL) (tri) (uC1) (4-1-86) (uC1) (41) (uC1) (41) (uCL) 1-g-84 1.2 40 1.70E.0 - - - - 811 1.61E +0 - - - -

1 84 4 20 3.94E +' e .60E +0 2.10E +0 - - 809 3.74E+1 4.09E+0 3.49E-1 - -

1 84 1 20 5.38E+1 9.2T +0 3.9T+0 - - 803 5.11E +1 4.39E+0 6.56E-1 - -

1 84 3 20 3.32E+1 7.00E +0 4.2T +0 - 4.20E+0 799 3.16E+1 3.36E.0 7.13E-1 - 1.68E-1 84 1 20 2.34E +1 6.3N+0 2.2 T+0 -

5.53E +1 797 2.22E+1 3.03E+0 3.75E-1 - 2.25E-;

2-1-84 4 20 2.39E+1 8.02E+0 3.55E+0 - - 789 2.27E+1 3.88E+0 6.16E-1 - -

2-4-84 3 20 6.91 E+0 - 2.71E+0 - - 786 6.57E+0 -

4.74E-1 - -

2-9-84 1 20 2.93E+1 8.29E+0 4.50E+0 - - 781 2.79E+1 4.04E+0 7.96E-1 - -

2-22-84 2 20 6.05E+0 - - - - 768 5.75E+0 - - - -

2-28-84 1 20 1.53E+1 4.07E+0 2.13E+0 - - 752 1.45E+1 2.02E+0 3.92E-1 - -

3-3-84 5 20 6.6T +0 - - - 1.3N +0 758 6.2E+0 - - - 7.78E-:

3-8-84 3 20 2.57E+1 5.2T +0 3.1 T +0 - -

755 2.45E+1 2.6T +0 5.80E-1 - -

3-3-84 4 20 5.7T +0 3.61 +0 - - - 758 5.43E+0 1.7E+0 - - -

3-16-84 4 20 1.25E+1 - - - - 745 1.19E+1 - - - -

3-19-84 3 20 3.33E+1 7.0T+0 2.92+0 - - 742 3.1E+1 3.54E+0 5.58E - -

3-17-84 1 20 7.50E+0 - - - - 744 765Ed "- - - -

3-12-84 2 20 1.0E+1 2.0T+0 1.4T +0 - 3.2T +0 749 1.04E+1 1.0T+0 2.65E-1 - 2.09E-b 3-27-84 2 20 84T+0 - 1.4T +0 - 5.70E+0 734 7A4E+0 -

2.74E-1 - 4.32E-3-24-84 1 20 2.55E+1 5.0T +0 - - - 737 2.43E+1 2.54E+0 - - -

5-8-84 3 20 4.73E+1 9.30E +0 - - - IB2 4.53E+1 4.92E+0 - - -

5-16-84 4 20 1.04E+1 1.52 +0 1.2T+0 - - 684 9.96E+0 7.99E-1 2.63E-1 - -

5-15-84 2 20 - 5.1T +0 1.40E+0 - - 685 - 2.72E+0 3.06E-1 - -

5-11 -84 1 20 2.87E+1 - - - - 681 2.75E+1 - - - -

4 84 3 20 6.60E+0 2.00E+0 - - -

701 6.31 E+0 1.05E+0 - - -

4-23-84 4 20 7.1 T +0 - - - - 707 6.7E+0 - - - -

5 8 4 2 20 6.42E-1 1.17E-1 3.02E-2 - - 669 6.15E-1 6.33E-2 6.84E-3 - -

6-13-84 1 20 1.61 E-1 - - - 5.01E-2 656 1.55E-1 - - - 8.14E -

6 8 4 3 20 4.17E-2 2.67E-1 - - - 649 4.00E-2 1.47E-1 - - -

6-25-84 4 20 3.73E-1 - 4.95E-2 - - 645 3.58E-1 - 1.18E-2 - -

6-25-84

)

2 20 4.11E-2 - - - -

645 3.95E-2 - - - -

7-22-84 3 20 4.36E-2 - - - - 617 4.22-2 - - -

-)

8-8-84 1 20 1.36E-1 - 2.52 -1 - -

600 1.31 E-1 - 6.60E-2 - -

8-13-84 3 20 - - - - 7.20E-2 595 - - - - 2.13E 8-21 4 4 20 7.58E-2 - - - - 587 7.30E-2 - - - -

8-22-84 1 20 5.90E-2 - 2.47E-2 - - 586 5.68E-2 - 6.74E-3 - -

8-23 -84 2 20 4.23E-2 - - - -

585 4.C8E-2 - - - -

8 8 4 4 20 2.57E-2 - - - - 577 2.48E-2 - - - -

9-14-84 2 20 3.09E-2 - - - -

563 2.98E-2 - - - -

9-13-84 4 20 3.78E-1 1.06E-1 - - - 564 3.65E-1 6.28E-2 - - -

9-14-84 3 20 6.68E-2 - - - - 563 6.44E-2 - - - -

9-14-84 2 20 3.27E-1 7.9CE-2 - - - 563 3.16E-1 4.71 E-2 - - -

9-14-84 1 20 4.36E-1 1.05E-1 - - - 563 4.21 E-1 6.28E-2 - - -

1 l

, \

c l b 3 _ ass:: n _

1 i

Table 10-1 1 2 .

O Calculated Settling Basin Resin Activity

( as of April 1, 1986 (contirued)

Initial Activity - Final Activity -

0 ATE PCL. VOLLrE Cs-137 Cs-134 Mn-54 Co-60 Co-58 OIFF Cs-137 Cs-134 Mn-54 Co-60 -o-58 ,

(#) (ft3) (uCi) (uC1) (uC1) (uC1) (uC1) (4-1 -86) (uC1) (uC1) (uC1) (uC1) (uC1) 1-4-83 1 20 1.14E +1 -

6.40E+0 - - 1181 1.C6E+1 -

4.65E-1 - -

1-14-83 3 20 1.28E+1 - 1.16E+1 - - 1171 1.19E+1 -

8.62E-1 - -

1-15-83 2 20 2.C4E +1 - 1.00E+1 - -

1170 1.89E+1 -

7.45E-1 - -

1-17-83 5 20 2.22E+1 - - - - 1168 2.06E+1 - - - -

1 83 1 20 5.22E+1 1.3EE+1 - - -

1159 4.85E+1 4.68E+0 - - -

1-27-83 1 20 2.41 E+1 - - - - 1158 2.24E +1 - - - -

1-29-83 3 20 1.62E +1 - - - -

1156 1.51 E+1 - - - -

3-9-83 2 20 1.47E+1 3.4E+0 8.0E+0 - - 1117 1.37E+1 1.22E+0 6.70E-1 - -

3-11-83 1 20 2.06E+1 8.2E +0 7.80E+0 - - 1115 1.92E+1 2.94E+0 6.56E-1 - -

3-16-83 3 20 1.02E+2 2.7 0 1 1.65E+1 - - 1110 9.4 0 1 1.0E+1 1.4E+0 - -

3-25-83 4 20 1.04E+1 - - - - 1101 9.7 0 0 - - - -

3 83 3 20 1.7 0 1 -

5.6E+0 -

1.54E+1 1095 1.5 0 1 -

4.93E-1 -

3.4CE-4 4-4-83 1 20 1.96E+1 -

1.13E+1 -

1.92E+1 1091 1.83E+1 - 1.00E+0 -

4.41 E-4 4-9-83 3 20 7.5T +0 -

4.5T+0 - - 1086 7.0E+0 - 4.04E-1 - -

4-10-83 2 20 8.50E+0 -

7.80E+0 - - 1085 7.94E+0 -

7.01 E-1 - -

4-19-83 4 20 1.34E+1 -

9.8E+0 -

8.9 0 0 1076 1.25E+1 - 8.99E-1 -

2.37E-4 4-28-83 1 20 6.90E+0 -

4.22 +0 -

9.10E+0 1067 6.45E+0 -

3.33E-1 -

2.65E J-2-83 3 20 1.41E+1 -

6.1 T+0 -

7.100 1063 1.32E+1 -

5.76E-1 - 2.15E-4 5-9-83 4 20 1.5 0 1 -

4.5 0 0 -

6.4E+0 1056 1.4 0 1 -

4.32E-1 -

2.07E-4 5-12-83 2 20 1.78E+1 - 5.4E+0 -

5.4E+0 1053 1.601 - 5.21 E-1 - 1.80E-4 5-17-83 1 20 1.31 E+1 3.7 0 0 4.1 E +0 -

7.1 E +0 1048 1.23E+1 1.41 E+0 4.00E-1 -

2.49E-4 5-26-83 2 20 5.1 T+0 - - - - 1039 4.78E+0 - - - -

5 83 3 20 1.22E+1 - - - - 1034 1.14E+1 - - - -

6-9-83 4 20 4.5E+0 - 3.12+0 - - 1025 4.22E+0 - 3.19E-1 - - i 6-17-83 2 20 1.12E+1 4.70E+0 4.5 0 0 - - 1017 1.05E+1 1.84E+0 4.71 E-1 - -

6-22-83 3 20 5.8 0 1 1.56E+1 1.11E+1 - - 1012 5.51 E+1 6.15E+0 1.17E+0 - -

6-24-83 1 20 1.54E+1 4.5E +0 5.2 0 0 - -

1010 1.44E+1 1.78E+0 5.52E-1 - -

6-30-83 4 20 6.7T+0 2.8E +0 3.72+0 - -

1004 6.2 0 0 1.11E+0 3.98E-1 - -

7-1-83 2 20 9.80E+0 - 4.5E +0 - -

1003 9.2% +0 - 4.85E-1 - -

7-2-83 1 20 6.4E +0 - 3.1 0 0 - -

1002 6.0 0 0 - 3.35E-1 - - '

8-3-83 1 20 3.05E+1 5.8E+0 - - -

970 2.87E+1 2.38E+0 - - -

9 83 3 20 1.75E+1 5.6E +0 - -

5.3 0 0 9 21 1.65E+1 2.4E+0 - - 6.43E4l 9-23-83 1 20 6.36E+1 1.67E+1 4.80E+0 - -

919 6.00E +1 7.17E+0 6.24E-1 - -

l 9-29-83 5 20 3.5 0 1 1.1 0 1 3.5E+0 - 3.100 913 3.31E+1 5.14E+0 4.61 E-1 - 4.07Es' 10-19-83 1 20 2.16E+1 8.6 0 0 1.6E +0 - - 893 2.04E+1 3.78E+0 2.22 -1 - -

10-21-83 1 20 3.66E*1 1.1 0 1 4.42+0 - -

8 91 3.46E+1 4.93E+0 6.09E-1 - -

10-30-83 1 20 4.54E+1 1.4E +1 - - - 882 4.2 0 1 6.2 0 0 - - -

l 11-7-83 2 20 3.54E+1 1.3 0 1 6.5E+0 - - 874 3.35E+1 5.8 0 0 9.34E-1 - -

11-10-83 1,4 40 9.2 0 0 - - - - 871 8.71 E+0 - - - -

12-2-83 2 20 5.3 0 1 1.37E+1 6.72+0 - - 849 5.0 0 1 6.2 0 0 1.02E+0 - -

12-3-83 4 20 3.90E+1 1.06E+1 4.70E+0 - -

848 3.70E +1 4.86E+0 7.15E-1 - -

12-9-83 1 20 2.62E+1 1.3E +0 3.9 0 0 - 4.7E+0 842 2.48E+1 5.99E-1 6.02E-1 - 1.24E-: 1 2-G-83 3 20 1.60E +1 -

3.12 +0 - - 842 1.52E+1 - 4.78E-1 - -

u-13-83 2 20 1.6 0 1 4.5E +0 - - -

838 1.501 2.C8E+0 - - -

e I S 3 asseca es _

Table 10-1 Calculated Settling Basin Resin Activity as of April 1. 1986 O (continued)

. - - - Initial Activit'y -- - - - Final Activity ------

DATE POL. VCLTE Cs-137 Cs-134 Mn-54 Co-60 Co-58 OIFF Cs-137 Cs-134 Pn-54 Co-60 Co-58

(#) (ft3) (uti) (uC1) (uGi) (uC1) (uci) (4-1 -86) (uC1) (uC1) (uC1) (uCL) (uti) 2-17-83 3 20 3.47E+1 7.8E+0 3.1 E +0 - - 834 3.29E +1 3.62E+0 4.87E-1 - -

2-18-83 4 20 2.34E+1 4.90E+0 3.10E+0 - - 833 2.22E+1 2.28E+0 4.58E-1 - -

2-18-83 2 20 2.92E+1 6.6E+0 - - - 833 2.77E+1 3.07E+0 - - -

2-20-83 2 20 1.34E+1 3.30E+0 - - - 831 1.27E+1 1.54E+0 - - -

.2-22-83 3 20 5.1 E +1 7.3E +0 - - - 829 4.92E+1 3.4% +0 - - -

12-25-83 4 20 2.6E +1 5.2E +0 - - - 826 2.47E+1 2.43E+0 - - -

12-30-83 3 20 2.31E+1 6.12+0 - - 3.2E +0 821 2.1 E +1 2.87E+0 - - 1.03E-3 8-4-82 5 20 2.12E+1 - 3.75E+1 - - 1334 1.95E+1 -

1.94E+0 - -

8-5-82 5 20 2.91 E+1 - 5.87E+1 - - 1333 2.67E+1 - 3.04E +0 - -

8-10-82 5 20 4.62E+1 - - - - 1328 4.25E+1 - - - -

8-15-82 5 20 6.74E +1 - - - -

1323 6.2T+1 - - - -

8-16-82 5 20 9.84E+1 2.90E+1 3.65E+1 - - 1322 9.05E+1 0.59E+0 1.94E+0 - -

8-16-82 5 20 1.71 E+1 4.31E+0 3.69E+0 - - 1322 1.5K+1 1.28E+0 1.96E-1 - -

8-17-82 5 20 4.28E+0 - - - - 1321 3.94E+0 - - - -

8-20-82 5 20 2.46E+1 5.94E+0 1.01E+1 - - 1318 2.26E+1 1.77E+0 5.41 E-1 - -

9-3-82 5 20 3.82E+1 8.21E+0 3.42E+1 - - 1302 3.52E+1 2.48E+0 1.90E+0 - -

11-82 5 20 4.2T+1 1.34E+1 4.58E+1 - - 1296 3.8 X +1 4.0X+0 2.58E+0 - -

,113-82 5 20 4.84E+1 1.31 E+1 4.99E+1 - - 1294 4.46E+1 3.90E+0 2.82E+0 - -

9-22-82 5 20 1.14E+1 - 1.67E+1 - - 1285 1.05E +1 - 9.63E-1 - -

9-23 -82 5 20 5.87E+0 - 1.29E+1 - - 1284 5.41 E+0 - 7.46E-1 - -

9-24-82 5 20 9.46E+0 -

9.84E+0 - - 1283 8.72E+0 - 5.70E-1 - -

10-1-82 5 20 1.43E+1 - 1.62E+1 - - 1276 1.32E+1 -

9.53E-1 - -

10-5-82 5 20 2.62E+1 - 2.2T +1 - - 1272 2.42E+1 - 1.31E +0 - -

l 10-5-82 5 20 1.76E+1 -

1.6E+1 - - 1272 1.62E+1 - 9.52 -1 - -

10-6-82 5 20 1.32+1 - 1.1 E+1 - - 1271 1.20E+1 -

7.C8E-1 - -

10-8-82 5 20 1.C8E+1 - 1.34E+1 - - 1269 9.5r7E+0 - 8.01 E-1 - -

10-19-82 5 20 - - 6.9X+0 - - 1258 - - 4.24E-1 - -

10-23-82 5 20 7.22E+0 - 7.42E+0 - - 1254 6.67E+0 - 4.59E-1 - -

11-10-82 5 20 4.27E+1 1.31E+1 1.7X +1 - - 1236 3.95E+1 4.2T +0 1.14E+0 - -

11-10-82 5 20 3.40E+1 1.12'+1 1.28E+1 - - 1236 3.14E+1 3.59E+0 8.23E-1 - -

11-12-82 5 20 6.51E+1 1.78E+1 2.51E+1 - -

1234 6.02E+1 5.72E+0 1.62E+0 - -

12-2-82 5 20 3.44E+1 - 2.45E+1 - - 1214 3.19E+1 - 1.65E+0 - -

12-4-82 5 20 4.2X+1 1.15E+1 1.7X+1 - - 1212 3.95E+1 3.77E+0 1.17E+0 - -

12-4-82 5 20 5.49E+1 1.78E+1 - - - 1212 S.C8E+1 5.84E+0 - - -

l 12-8-82 5 20 2.71E+1 - 9.82+0 - - 1208 2.51 E +1 - 6.71E-1 - -

12-17-82 5 20 4.35E+1 - - - - 1199 4.03E+1 - - - -

12-17-62 5 20 4.16E+1 1.3X+1 1.61E+1 - - 1199 3.86E+1 4.55E+0 1.12E+0 - -

TOTALS 2.94E+3 5.27E+2 7.84E+2 2.29E+0 1.67E+2 2.77E+3 2.21 E +2 6.34E +1 1.99E+0 1.04E-1 NOTES: 1. Polisher notation #5 only indicates that the subject polisher was unidentified.

2. Resin voltess for 1982, 1983, and 1984 are estimated.

- 1S 3_ _

Table 10-2 Total Radioactive Material Content in Basin i

Total Activity (C1)* l Nuclide Half-Life Decayed Activity **  !

Undecayed At Present At Termination of l (4/1/86) OL (2011)

Mn-54 313 d 7.8E-04 6.3E-05 ---

Co-58 70.8 d 1.7E-04 1.0E-07 ---

Co-60 5.27 y 2.3E-06 2.0E-06 7.4E-08 Cs-134 2.06 y 5.3E-04 2.2E-04 5.0E-08 Cs-137 30.2 y 2.9E-03 2.8E-03 1.6E-03 Sr-90 28.6 y 1.4E-06 1.4E-06 7.4E-07 (correlated)

TOTAL 4.4E-03 3.1E k O3 1.6E-03 0

• Totals based on measpred radioactive material levels and volumes prior to discharge to basin. ,

• • Basin inventory considering radioactive ^ decay since input to basin.

i O .-_ _ -

i Table 10-3 Projected Cumulative Radioactive Material at Termination of Operating License Total Expected Radionuclide Activity (uCi)

Mn-54 6.4E+01 Co-58 0.1 Co-60 4.1 Cs-134 2.7E+02 Cs-137 1.3E+04 Sr-90 6.3 (correlated) .

Totals 1.3E+04 ,

(0.013 Ci)

O I

l 1

j

\

1

11. What Is the Estimated Dose to an O Individual Standing on Covered Basin Dredgings After 30 Years of Operation Under Expected Levels of Resin Contamination?

Q11-1. What dose would an individual receive if, after expira-tion of the Davis-Besse operating license, the individual stood directly atop the covered burial site?

All-1. (Mr. Bland] The estimated dose an individual i l

! would receive if he stood directly on top of the i last constructed burial cell at the expiration of the Davis-Besse operating license 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> per day for an entire year would be 0.007 mrem. If the individual stood on top of earlier con-structed cells, the dose received would be less,

{

since the inventory of those cells would have de-

cayed more.

! Qll-2. What methodology was used to calculate this dose?

l A11-2. [Mr. Bland] I used the radiation shielding and dose calculational methods of ISOSHLD. ISOSHLD was developed by Battelle Northwest Laboratories to provide a calculational method for accurately approximating radiation attenuation and build-up I for various shield materials. The methodology 1 1

t i

employed in the calculations is point kernel in-tegration. This technique consists of dividing the source volume into a sufficient number of

~

small discrete volumes that may then be approxi-mated as point sources for calculating radiation attenuation and build-up. Integration over the source to determine the total dose is obtained by summing the dose contribution from all of the differential source volumes. This technique is used throughout the industry and government for calculating radiation shielding attenuation and doses.

Qll-3. Please explain the assumptions that-were made in calcu-() lating this dose.

A11-3. [Mr. Bland] I assumed that the burial site will have a two-foot thick soil cover, which coincides with the minimum thickness specified in Toledo Edison's design of the burial ground. I used the soil density value measured in borings at the 3

burial site (2 gm/cm ). I used the ra-dionuclides concentrations listed in Table 11-1 as the concentrations in the last-constructed burial cell. The concentrations listed in Table O

l l

. l

. 1

. 11-1 are the average concentrations recently mea-4 i sured in the settling basin. As I just stated, I

! 1 I

assumed that the individual would stand directly l- \

! on top of the burial ground 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> per day, 365 l 4 I i days per year. l l

i l

l

=

a O

I l

l 1

i O

I l

l Table 11-1 Limiting Concentration in Resin Discharges and Current Basin Concentrations Limiting Sampling Data Concentration

• Current Measured Basin Nuclide (pCi/ml) Concentrations (uC1/ml)

Mn-54 6.2E-04 8.9E-08 Co-58 3.0E-03 2.1E-08 Co-60 5.4E-05 3.2E-07 Cs-134 1.1E-04 5.7E-07 Cs-137 1.0E-04 6.2E-06 Sr-90 3.1E-09 (correlated)

• The limiting concentration is the maximum allowable concen-c tration in resins discharged to the settling basin. The

( )s sum-of-fractions rule is applied to determine the limiting concentration for a mixture of radionuclides. Calculated values from Table 2 of report " Disposal of Low-Level Radio-actively Contaminated Secondary-side Clean-up Resins in the On-Site Settling Basins at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station," May 1983. ,.

Y A

O

0

12. What Criteria Will Be Used to Decide

( Whether Resins Will Be Buried On Site or Transported to a Licensed Burial Site in the Event That Resins Become i Contaminated at Higher Than Expected )

Levels (F-wom Steam Generator Tube l Leaks or Ruptures, For Example)?

l l

Q12-1. Please describe the criteria that govern whether a batch of resins may be discharged to the settling basin?

A12-1. (Mr. Bland) As previously discussed, each batch of spent resin is analyzed before it can be dis- i charged to the settling basin. If radionuclide l

concentrations exceed established limits, the spent resins are not discharged to the basin but are instead treated as radwaste and processed for offsite disposal. The maximum concentrations al-lowed in resin batches discharged to the settling basin are listed on Table 11-1. These concentra-tions apply to the resin batches before they are mixed with the water treatment sludge. If more than one radionuclide is identified, the sum of the fractions rule is used to ensure that the cu-mulative concentration also meets the established limit.

O

\

Q12-2. How were these criteria derived?

J A12-2. [Mr. Bland) An evaluation of feasible release scenarios and environmental transport and expo-sure pathways was performed to assess the ra-diological limits of resin burial. The concen-tration limits were chosen so that, under the feasible release scenarios and environmental transport and exposure pathways evaluated, the dose to any member of the public would be negli-gible (less than 1 mrem).

Q12-3. What is done with resins that do not natisfy the criteria for discharge to the settling basin?

( '

A12-3. (Mr. Briden] The resins are pumped to either of two Condensate Polishing Domineralizer Hold-up Tanks. From these tanks, the resins are pumped to radwaste disposable steel liners. The resins within the liner are processed by dewatering to ensure a waste form acceptable for disposal. The liner is appropriately packaged to meet Federal radwaste transportation and disposal require-ments. The liner is then shipped as radwaste for burial at a licensed low-level radwaste burial site, normally to Barnweil, South Carolina.

O

13. What Is the Estimated Upper Limit

() of Radionuclide Inventory That Could Exist After 30 Years, Under the Above Criteria?

Q13-1. What is the maximum radionuclide inventory that could exist in the burial ground when the Davis-Besse operating license expires?

A13-1. [Mr. Bland] The maximum activity of each ra-dionuclide in the burial ground at the termina-tion of the Davis-Besse operating license is set forth in Table 13-1. The total maximum activity

, is 0.036 C1. and again is almost entirely attrib-

, utAble to cesium-137.

Q13-2.

O Please explain how this maximum inventory was calculated.

A13-2. [Mr. Bland) I determined that the average con-centration of past resin discharges to the set-tling basin (which were used to estimate total expected activity) is 0.37 of the limiting con-centration. I therefore multiplied the total ex-pected activities in the burial ground in the year 2011 (listed on Table 10-3) by the recipro-cal of 0.37, which is 2.7. This calculation pro-l duced the maximum activities that would result if j all resin discharges contained the limiting (i.e.

maximum allowable) radionuclide concentrations.

i

1

~

i Table 13-1 Projected Maximum Cumulative Radioactive Material i

at Termination of Operating License t

Radionuclide Maximum Total Activity (uCi)

Mn-54 1.7E+2 Co-58 0.27 Co-60 1.1E+1 Cs-134 7.3E+2

)

Cs-137 3.5E+4 i

! Sr-90 1.7E+1

] (correlated)

Totals 3.6E+4 l

l0 j

1 i

.i i

l 1

)

!O I

1 i

4

. - . .-,.e- , e.,.,---,__ ..-_, . . . . , ,._.y- . . . , _ . , . . . _ . , , _ , . . , , _ , . ,,,,..,_,,,%._,.,.,_. , _ . , , _ , , , , - - . . . , _ _ _ . , , _ . _ . , . , . . ,.,.c..,-..cm-., ,.

I 1

\

14. What Is the Estimated Upper Limit '

O of Dose to the Whole Body for an Individual Standing on the Burial Site that Could Exist After 30 Years l Under the Above Criteria?

i Q14-1. What is the maximum whole body dose due to direct expo-sure that an individual would receive if, after expira-  !

! tion of the Davis-Besse operating license, he stood di- l rectly atop the burial site?

A14-1. (Mr. Bland] The maximum whole body dose due to  ;

direct exposure that an individual would receive  ;

if, after expiration of the Davis-Besse operating license, he stood directly on top of the burial )

1 site 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> per day, 365 days per year, would be 0.02 mrem.

Q14-2. What methodology was used to calculate this maximum dose?

l A14-2. [Mr. Bland] I used the ISOSHLD methodology, 1

which I have previously disbribed.

i e <

Q14-3. Please describe the assumptions you made in calculating this maximum dose due to exposure.

A14-3. (Mr. Bland) I assumed that the individual stood over the last constructed burial cell 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> per day for a year. I used the maximum l

1

radionuclide concentrations, which I calculated by multiplying the expected concentrations in the last cell by 2.7.16/ To evaluate the shielding effect of the soil cover, I assumed that the cover would be 2 feet thick, which is the minimum thickness under Toledo Edison's design, and I used the soil density measurement obtained in borings at the burial site.

O 16/ The basis for the factor of 2.7 is explained in my response to question 13-2.

O

15. Why Has Sr-90 Not Been Included O in Licensee's Assessments?

Q15-1. Has Sr-90 been included in the inventory calculations in your testimony?

A15-1. [Mr. Bland] Yes.

Q15-2. Has Sr-90 been included in the dose calculations in your testimony?

A15-2. [Mr. Bland] Yos. The radioactive decay of Sr-90

is not accompanied by any gamma radiation or x-rays. Therefore, it does not contribute to the direct exposure doses. However, Sr-90 does con-tribute an internal dose if ingested or inhaled and has been considered in evaluating the inges-J tion pathwty doses presented later in this testi-mony.

I i

Q15-3. Why was Sr-90 not included in Toledo Edison's previous assessments?

I 1

A15-3. (Mr. Bland] Sr-90 was not included because of its negligible contribution to both the total ac-tivity and the doses. We have examined the Sr-90 levels in this particular wasto stream, and Sr-90 comprises only 0.04 percent (0.0004) of the total

()

f

activity. Its abundance and dose contribution 0 are negligible compared with that of Cs-137.

r

==

0 i

4

16. What Would Be the Total Estimated Whole

> Body Dose Equivalent for an Individual

Through the Food Ingestion Pathway That l Could Result From the Final 30-Year

- Inventory of Radionuclides Including i Sr-90? Peovide Estimates for Expected

Levels and Upper Limits of Radionuclide l Inventory After 30 Years.

Q16-1. Assuming that resin discharges to the settling basin con-tain expected levels of radionuclides, what would be the total estimated whole body dose equivalent for an indi-vidual for the food ingestion pathway after termination of the Davis-Besse operating license?

j A16-1. (Mr. Bland] Assuming expected levels of resin i .

contamination, the total estimated whole body 1

dose rate for the food ingestion pathway would be

() 0.31 mrem / year.

Q16-2. What methodology was used to calculate this ingestion pathway dose?

A16-2. [Mr. Bland] I used the environmental transport modeling of U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.109 coupled with effective i total body dose conversion factors derived from i Publication 30 of the International Commission on i Radiological Protection.

! 1

.,,-,,--.w -,-,n. , _ _ - - -

, , , , - - - -, . _ , , _ . _ , , _ _ , - , , , _ _ , _ _ . , _ - , _ _ . . . , , , - . , , , .- ._.,,,-, , , , - - . . . , - , . , . , . - - ~

u )

.  ; l 1

~ ' ^*"" ^"" """ "" " " """" *" """"*"'

Cj this food ingestion pathway' dose?

1 l

)

A16-3.- (Mr. Bl~and] -I assumed that an individual grew 1

all his fresh vegetables in soil contaminated with~ waste from the-last burial cell. I assumed  !

that.the. vegetables are grown in a mixture of j contaminated waste and coil in equal proportions.

This assumption follows the guidance in i l

NUREG/CR-3585, "De Miniciis Waste Impacts Method- )

ology" (Feb. 1984). I then used the soil-to-plant transfer fa-thes specified in NRC j Regulatory' Guide 1.109.

Q16-4. Did you evaluate any other food ingestion pathways?

A16-4. [ M:: . Bland) Yes,, I evaluated dosea'sttributable to the, ingestion of geese that'might graze on the burial site. I assumed that the geese graze on grass grown directly on Wa te from the last cell.

For simplicity and conservatism, I assumed that the flesh of the geese would accumulate ra-dionuclide concentrations equal to the concentra-tion in the_ vegetation. I then postulated that 1

an individual would consume 14 kilograms (30 l pounds) of.,such goose flesh per year. The total i

J O .

4

__ _ _ 'o . _ - _ _ - .- -

whole body dose equivalent from this scenario is O 0.025 mrem.

I also evaluated the whole body dose to an individual who drank contaminated lake water and consumed fish from the Lake. For this analysis, I postulated that some catastrophic mechanism transferred the entire burial site inventory to the Lake at one time and that all the sludge dis-solved. I then calculated the total' body dose to an individual using the Davis-Besse Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) which the NRC has re-viewed and approved. The ODCM is based on the NRC's Regulatory Guide 1.109 methods adapted to

() the specific features of the Davis-Besse site.

In accordance with this methodology, I applied a 10:1 near field dilution factor to address the immediate dispersion in the lake environment. An additional dilution of 5.7:1 was applied to de-termine the resultant radionuclide material con- i 1

centration at an assumed beach well, conserva- l tively postulated to be located at the southeast boundary of the Davis-Besse site. I used indi-vidual consumption rates of 21 kg/ year of fish and 730 liters / year of water. The resultant l

O l

l

total body dose (assuming expected levels of D resin contamination) would be 0.1 mrem. Due to dissipation of the release, thi- dose would be received only in the first year after the postu-lat'ed release. Doses in subsequent years would be orders of magnitude smaller.

I Q16-5. Can one add up the ingestion pathway doses for vegeta-bles, fowl, fish, and water to arrive at a total dose?

A16-5. [Mr. Bland) No. One could add the food inges-tion pathway doses for vegetable and fowl con-sumption. One could not, however, receive the total body dose equivalent for vegetable and fowl consumption and the total body dose due to inges-i tion of fish and drinking water. Both scenarios postulated to determine these doses could not occur simultaneously. Either the waste remains 1

in the burial ground, in which case the dose due to vegetable ingestion applies, or the waste is released to the Lake, in which case the dose due to ingestion of fish and water applies.

O

,, Q16-6. What would be the whole body dose equivalent for an indi-(

vidual through the food ingestion pathway if one assumes that the radioactivity in the waste is at the maximum possible level?

A16-6. [Mr. Bland] The maximum total body dose equiva-lent for food ingestion (vegetables) would be 0.85 mrem per year. The maximum total body dose equivalent due to ingestion of goose flesh would be 0.07 mrem per year. The alternative maximum total body dose due to ingestion of fish and drinking water would be 0.3 mrem. The 0.3 mrem total body dose due to ingestion of fish and drinking water would be received only in the

() first year and due to dissipation would not recur.

Q16-7. How were these maximum ingestion pathway doses calculat-ed?

A16-7. (Mr. Bland] These maximum doses were calculated using the same methods and assumptions I just de-scribed, except the radionuclide activities and i concentrations in the burial site were assumed to be at those maximum levels calculated by multi- )

i plying expected levels by 2.7.

i O

Q16-8. Dr. Till, have you reviewed Mr. Bland's analyses /

O A16-8. [Dr.-Till] Yes, I have.

Q16-9. Would you please describe your review?

A16-9. [Dr. Till] I read Mr. Bland's reports and his l testimony, and I identified the methodologies and assumptions he used. I was familiar with all of f

the methodologies he chose. I double checked his external dose conversion factors and inhalation dose conversion factors, and I verified the bicaccumulation factors for radionuclide uptake by plants and aquatic biota. I verified Mr.

Bland's estimate for Sr-90, compar'ing the esti-(j mate with a number of reported values. I then performed my own independent calculations and confirmed that radionuclides other than the six

~

listed on Table 10-2 do not contribute to dose.

l Q16-10. Do you agree with the results of Mr. Bland's analysis?

A16-10. [Dr. Till] I do. The agreement between our cal-culations is good.

l l

I

i

~.

nc cu a g d ses l

A16-ll? [Dr. Till] Yes. Mr. Bland used well-accepted methodologies. The assumptions he used were gen-erally conservative, which would tend to overestimate actual doses.

i Q16-12. Dr. Linnemann, would the doses calculated by Mr. Bland l cause any appreciable health effect in an individual receiving such dose?

A16-12. [Dr. Linnemann] No. I would not expect any ad- i i

verse health effects. Statistically, the proba-bility of an adverse health effect from these

() doses is vanishingly small, about one in ten mil-lion.

Q16-13. Could you please explain the basis for your response?

A16-13. [Dr. Linnemann] The health effects induced by s_ <

radiation have been studied for over 80 years.

^

In 1929, the International Commission on Ra-diological Protection (ICRP) and the U.S. Nation-al Council on Radiation Protection and Measure-ments (NCRP), as these groups are now called, were formed. Since then, these two groups have 1

1 l

had data on the biological effects of radiation under almost continuous review. In addition, over the years, the issue has been examined by many scientists and has been addressed by a num-ber of prestigious groups, including the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) and the National Acad-emy of Sciences' Committee on the Biological Ef-fects of Ionizing Radiation (the BEIR Committee).

Health effects induced by high levels of ra-diation are acute and well known. Doses of 200 rem or more delivered over a short period induce what is known as radiation sickness and depending

() on dose can be fatal.

Lesser exposures (from 10 rem to 100 rem) do not produce the symptoms of radiation sickness, but can increase the risk of cancer and of genetic abnormalities. Below 10 rem, it is dif-ficult to find animal or human study populations that show effects of radiation. If effects occur, they are too small to be detected.

The study of these effects at any dose level is complicated by several factors. First, the i 1

l 0

l l 1

1 l .

,_ ~ _. .. _ _ _ . - - - , _ _ -

- incidence of cancer or of a genetic abnormality is random; an individual exposed to radiation will usually not develop a cancer, nor are his offspring likely to suffer genetic abnormalities.

Second, cancers and genetic effects are delayed effects when they do occur. Third, one cannot distinguish cancers or genetic abnormalities caused by radiation from those that occur sponta-neously or as the result of some other agent.

Nevertheless, for radiation protection purposes and for evaluation of potential health hazards, we assume that effects can occur at low doses and have developed statistical models of dose effect relationships. From statistical studies, the N

risk of an additional cancer or genetic damage per rem of exposure can be estimated. The most current risk estimates are those contained in the BEIR Reports.17/ The evaluations and results in the BEIR reports are consistent with the 17/ Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation, Division of Medical Sciences, National Academy of Sciences, "The Effects on Populations of Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Ra-diation" (1980) ("BEIR III"); Committee on Biological Effects of Ioniz.'ng Radiation, Division of Medical 3ciences, National Acade-my of Sciences, "The Effects on Populations of Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation" (1972) ("BEIR I").

O

conclusi2as of the other leading scientific groups, particularly the ICRP (Report No. 26, 1977),1g/ the NCRP (Report No. 43, 1975; Report No. 60, 1980),19/ and UNSCEAR (Report, 1977; Report, 1982).20/ The BEIR III risk estimates are presented in Table 16-1.

At very low levels of exposure (below 5-10 rem), health effects have not been observed or detected statistically, and may not occur. How-ever, for the purpose of establishing standards, advisory and decisional organizations conserva-tively assume a linear relationship betweea dose and response, with no threshold. The "line. ,

() no-threshold hypothesis" implies that there is some risk at any level of exposure. While this 13/ International Commission of Radiological Protection, "ICRP Publication 26: Recommendation of the International Commission on Radiological Protection" (1977).

g19 National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement, NCRP Report No. 43: Review of Current State of Radiation Protec-tion Philosophy" (1975); National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement, "NCRP No. 64: Influence of Dose and Its Distri-bution in Time on Dose-Response Relationships for Low-LET Radia-tion" (1980).

20/ United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, " Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation" (1977);

United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Ra-diation, " Sources and Biological Effects" (1982).

O

hypothesis is appropriate when setting standards for radiation protection, it almost certainly overestimates risk. It is known to be incorrect as to a number of radiation-induced health ef- 1 fects (such as cataracts, impaired fertility, and abnormal fetal development) for which experimen-tal evidence has demonstrated that there is in-l deed a threshold dose below which the effect will l

not occur.21/ Furthermore, the hypothesis as-l sumes that a dose delivered over a long period of time is as damaging as the same dose given over a short time and takes no account of the human I

body's ability to recover or repair radiation damage.

O Notwithstanding the conservatism of the lin-ear, no-threshold hypothesis, I have applied the BEIR III risk estimators to the doses that Mr.

Bland calculated to place a statistical upper bound on resulting health effects. For simplici-ty, I rounded off to one mrem / year the dose rate a maximally exposed individual might receive from the burial ground. The risk to an individual of 21/ BEIR III.

O V

l I

4 a fatal cancer from a continuous one mrem dose would be 1.58 in ten million per year (158 per million per rem x 0.001 rem). In contrast, the risk of a spontaneous cancer death would be about 10,000 times greater. The risk of a genetic ab-norma _ity would be about one-half of the cancer risk or about one chance in ten million that a parent so exposed would experience a live birth 1

with a genetic abnormality. The normal genetic abnormality risk is about one in ten. Even if the entire population residing within 10 miles of the Davis-Besse plant 22/ were to receive this dose (one mrem / year), I would not expect a single i

fatal cancer.or genetic abnormality to occur. J A further illustration of a one mrem dose is obtained by comparing it with doses an individual l i

would receive from other sources. This compari-son is presented in Table.16-2. As one can see, themaximumdoseattribbtab5etotheburial

~

ground would be only one percent of the dose an individual would receive from natural background i

22/ The Davis-Besse USAR estimates the population within 10 miles of the plant to be approximately 15,000. Davis-Besse USAR, 5 2.1.3.1.

O c . - _ _ . .

radiation, is less than the additional dose a person would receive from living in a brick building, and is about the same as the annual dose a person receives from watching television.

Q16-14. In discussing the health effects attributable to radia-tion, the State of Ohio cited in its Petition to Inter-vene a report published by the U.S. Environmental Protec-tion Agency and entitled " Radionuclides: Background Information Document for Final Rules."23/ How does the EPA's assessment of tne risk of radiation-induced health effects compare with your own?

A16-14. [Dr. Linnemann] The EPA's estimates of cancer and genetic risks in the Background Information O Document are based on the BEIR-III Report.24/

The risk estimators I used are also from the BEIR-III report, and are therefore consistent with the EPA's assessment.

I l

l i

23/ State of Ohio, Petition for Leave to Intervene (April 14, 1986) at 8.

24/ U.S. EPA, " Radionuclides: Background Information Document for Final Rules," Vol. I at 8-1, 8-2 (Oct. 1984).

( - l l

l

J Table 16-1 Risk Coefficients

-- Radiation Life-Time Risk Spontaneous Risk, of Death per Million Deaths per Million Type of Risk per Rem

• per year **

All Cancers 158 1,800 i Effect per Million Current Incidence, Genetic Liveborn Offspring, per Million Liveborn Abno rmalities*** Rem per Generation Offspring Geometric Mean Range First Generation 19 (5-75) 107,100 All Future Generations 257 (60-1100) ---

O

• BEIR III at 212.

• • American Cancer Society, Cancer Facts and Figures (1984).

• • • BEIR III at 85 (based on average population exposure of 1 rem per 30 year generation). See U.S. EPA " Radionuclides," Vol. I at 8-49 (1984).

i I

1

l Table 16-2 jh

(_s! Whole Body Exposures From Natural and Man-Made Sources National Average Background in U.S. 102 mrem /yr*

1 Average Background Radiation in Ohio 100 mrem /yr** I l

Additional whole body dose from living in a brick house instead 4

of a wooden house 20 mrem /yr***

Round trip flight from New York City to Los Angeles 1.9 mrem ***

Diagnostic chest x-rays (series of 2-3 x-rays) 40 mrem ***

Dental x-ray (per exposure) 2.9 mram***

Exposure to color television set 1 mrem /yr***

Exposure to tritium dial watch 0.5 mres/yr***

O

• BEIR I, at 12.

• • 50 Fed. Reg. 41'265, 41266 (1985).

• • • UNSCEAR 1977, at 13, 51, 83, 99, 310, 319.

I l

i I (

17. What are the Principal Chemical

() Components of the Nonradioactive Sludge That are Mixed With Radioactively Contaminated Resins?

Q17-1. Please describe the sludge that is discharged to the set- i tling basin.

A17-1. (Dr. Bennett) The sludge that is discharged to the settling basin consists of impurities removed from the raw lake water together with chemicals used in and produced by the water treatment cro-cess (calcium hydroxide, sodium aluminate, and calcium carbonate). The sludge is mainly a sus-pension of inorganic solids in water.

Q17-2. What is the purpose. of the water treatment process which results in the sludge?

A17-2. (Dr. Bennett) The purpose of the water treatment is to remove suspended solids and other dissolved impurities in the Lake water and prepare it for general site use -- both for use in plant systems and for personal use. The treatment removes ma-terials which could deposit in the steam genera-tors and on the condenser tubes and thereby re-  !

i duce heat transfer efficiencies. The treatment )

also purifies th'e water to drinking water standards.

Q17-3. Please describe the water treatment system.

A17-3. [Mr..Briden] In the water treatment facility,

- Lake Erie water is first chlorinated. The chlo-rinated water is then delivered to two clarifiers. Chemical feeders are located in the vicinity of the clarifiers and provide lime for softening and sodium aluminate for clarification.

Suspended solids, hardness, and other impurities precipitate out. Clarified water flows by gravi-ty through two anthracite filters to a clearwell.

The precipitate is removed from the clarifiers by blowdown, producing the sludge in question. From the clearwell, the clarified and filtered water

() is either pumped to the domestic water system, or is pumped through two activated carbon filters to 1

demineralizers where it is further purified for use as primary and secondary makeup water.

Q17-4. How does the sludge compare with that produced by a typi-cal, municipal water treatment facility?

A17-4. (Dr. Bennett) The Davis-Besse sludge is fairly typical. Its principal solid constituent is cal-cium carbonate. The concentrations of heavy met-als in the Davis-Besse sludge are in fact smaller O

_ , -, _C _. .

. i

~

1 than that in sludge produced by Toledo's water treatment facility or the town of Oregon's water treatment facility.

Q17-5. What chemical analysis of the sludge has been performed?

A17-5. (Dr. Bennett] Samples were taken of the contents of the aettling basin bottoms. Standard analyti-cal procedures were used to determine the chemi-cal and physical characteristics of the sample.

These included atomic absorption (to determine presence and levels of heavy metals), gas chromatography / mass spectroscopy (for organic ma-terials), chemical titration (alkalinity), evapo-ration / burning (solids).

Q17-6. Please describe the results of the analysis.

A17-6. (Dr. Bennett) Other than containing the water treatment chemicals themselves, the sludge con-sists of the impurities found in Lake Erie water in a concentrated form. Metals are present in a concentration that mirror the concentration in the Lake water. The settling basin bottom sample has a pH of 9, which is less than a pH of 10.0 reported on one occasion in Maumee Bay and only O

I 1

slightly higher than the 8.8 reported in the

( Maumee River. The average pH in western Lake Erie is reported at 8.42. Rather than being det-rimental, the pH of the settling basin bottoms is beneficial. At this pH level, the metals would exhibit close to their minimum solubility and maximum resistence to dissolution and leaching.

The detailed results of.the chemical analysis are set forth in Table 17-1.

Q17-7. Would the settling basin bottoms be characterized as haz-ardous under U.S. EPA regulations? i 1

A17-7. (Dr. Bennett] The bottoms were' tested in accor-dance with the extraction procedure (EP) toxicity O tests called for in the U.S. Environmental Pro-tection Agency's regulations implementing the Re-source Conservation and Recovery Act, 40 C.F.R.

Part 261, App. II. Comparing the results of the tests with the RCRA standards (40 CFR $ 261.24) shows that the settling basin bottoms were well below the EP toxicity limits. See Table 17-1.

Given the characteristics of the sludge and res-ins, the bottoms do not exhibit the characteris-tics of reactivity, corrosivity or ignitibility

I as defined in the U.S. EPA regulations (40 CFR S$ 261.21, .22 and .23). Furthermore, water treatment sludge is not a listed hazardous waste listed in 40 C.F.R. Part 261, Subpart D. There-4 fore, the bottoms would not be considered as haz-ardous under U.S. EPA regulations.

i O I

l l

l 1

t O

l l

Table 17-1 l Analysis of Settling Basin Sludge and of Raw Lake Water Settling Basin Sludge As Received (wet)

TEST PARAMETER UNITS TEST RESULT SPECIFIC GRAVITY -- 1.14 pH e 25 0C S td 8.80 DRY SOLIDS e 1040C 4 20.6 VOLATILE SOLIDS 4 of D.S. 6.21 ALKALINITY mg/kg as CACO 3 167000 PHOSPHORUS mg/kg as PO4 136 SULFATE mg/kg -

2970 l ALUMINUM mg/kg 3090 ARSENIC mg/kg 2.5 BARIUM mg/kg 400 CAD 4IUM mg/kg LT 0.05 CALCIUM mg/kg 4360 CHROMIUM mg/kg 4.57 COPPER mg/kg 6.0 IRCN mg/kg 1930

LEAD mg/kg 2.23 MAGNESIUM ag/kg 466 MERCURY mg/kg LT 0.01 NICKEL mg/kg 3.2 SELENIUM mg/kg LT 0.3 continued 1 _ - - -. - .

Table 17-1 (cont.)

I D 1 1

i TEST PARAMETER UNITS TEST RESULT SILVER mg/kg 1.3 ZINC mg/kg 17.6 EP ARSENIC mg/L LT 0.004 i EP BARIUM mg/L LT 10 EP CAmItm ag/L LT 0.1 EP CHROMIUM mg/L LT 0.2 EP LEAD mg/L LT 0.2 EP MERCURY mg/L LT 0.004 EP SELENIUM mg/L LT 0.04 EP SILVER mg/L LT 0.2 O EP LINDANE mg/L LT 0.001 EP ENDRIN mg/L LT 0.004 EP METHOXYCHLOR mg/L LT 0.01 EP TOXAPIE2iE ag/L LT 0.004 EP 2,4-D ag/L LT 0.01 I

EP 2,4,5-TP SILVEX mg/L LT 0.002 l

continued I

1 O

~

Table 17-1 (cont.)

l l

O Settling Basin Sludge )

.. Organic Priority Pollutants TEST PARAMETER UNITS TEST RESULT ACROLEIN mg/kg LT 0.004 )

ACRYLNITRILE mg/kg LT 0.001 BENZENE mg/kg LT 0.0003 BROMOFORM mg/kg LT 0.001 CARBN TETRACEORIDE mg/kg LT 0.0004 ]

CEOROBENZENE mg/kg LT 0.0004 CHLORODIBROMOMETHANE ag/kg LT 0.0007 l

CHLOROETHANE mg/kg LT 0.0004 l 2-CEORDETHYLVINYL ETHER mg/kg LT 0.0006 CEOROFORM mg/kg 298 DICHLOROBROMONETRANE ag/kg LT 0.0004 1,1 DICHLORCETHANE mg/kg . LT 0.0005 1,2 DICHLORDETHANE mg/kg LT 0.0002 1,1 DICHLORCETHYLENE ag/kg LT 0.0006 1,2 DICEOROPROPANE ag/kg LT 0.0006 cis-1,3-DICEOROPROPENE ag/kg LT 0.0006 trans-1,3-DICHLOROPROPENE mg/kg LT 0.0006 ETHYL SENZENE mg/kg LT 0.0008 METHYLENE BROMIDE mg/kg LT 0.0004 METHYL CHLORIDE mg/kg LT 0.0004 l

METHYLENE CHLORIDE mg/kg LT 0.0005 l continued l 3

Table 17-1 (cont)

O TEST PARAMETER UNITS TEST RESULT 1,1,2,2-TETRAC E OROETHANE ag/kg LT 0.0007 TETRACHLORCETHYLENE ag/kg LT 0.001 TOLUENE mg/kg LT 0.0006 1,2-t-DICEORCETHYLENE mg/kg LT 0.0004 1,1,1-TRICEOROETHANE ag/kg LT 0.0003 1,1,2-TRICEORCETHANE 5g/kg LT 0.0009 TRICHLORDETHYLENE ag/kg LT 0.0008 TRICEOROFLUC,ROMETHANE mg/kg LT 0.0003 VINYL CEORIDE ag/kg LT 0.0004 2-CHLOROPHENOL mg/kg LT 0.08 2,4-DICHLOROPHENOL mg/kg LT 0.09 2,4 DIMETHYLPHENOL mg/kg LT 0.07 4,6 DINITRO-O-CRESOL mg/kg LT 0.3 2,4-DINITROPHENOL mg/kg LT 0.3 2-NITROPHENOL mg/kg LT 0.1 4-NITROPHENOL mg/kg LT 0.1 P-CEORO-M-CRESOL mg/kg LT 0.1 PENTACHLOROPHENOL mg/kg LT 0.3 PHENOL mg/kg LT 0.05 2,4,6-TRICHLOROPHENOL mg/kg LT 0.1 ACENAPHTHENE ag/kg LT 0.04 ACENAPHTHYLENE ag/kg LT 0.04 ANTHRACENE mg/kg LT 0.04 BENZIDINE mg/kg LT 0.9 BENZO (a) ANTHRACENE mg/kg LT 0.04 4 conu nu.o

Table 17-1 (cont.)

O l __

l TEST PARAMETER UNITS TEST RESULT BENZO (a) PYRENE mg/kg LT 0.08 BENZO (b) FLUORANTHENE mg/kg LT 0.08 BENZO (ghi) PERYLENE mg/kg LT 0.1 BENZO (k) FLUORANTHENE ag/kg LT 0.08 bis (2-CHLORDETHOXYMETHANE ag/kg LT 0.04 bis (2-CEORCETHYL) ETHER mg/kg LT 0.05 bis (2-CEOROISOPROPYL) ETHER mg/kg LT 0.1 bis , (2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE mg/kg 0.43 4-BROMOPHENYL PHENYL ETHER ag/kg LT 0.1 BUTYL BENZYL PETMALATE ag/kg LT 0.08 2-CHLOR 0 NAPHTHALENE ag/kg LT 0.04 4-CEOROPEDIYL-PHENYL ETHER mg/kg LT 0.06 CHRYSENE ag/kg LT 0.04 DIBENZO (ah) ANTHRACENE sg/kg LT 0.1 1,2-DICHLORCBENZENE ag/kg LT 0.04 1,3-DICHLOROSENZENE ag/kg LT 0.04 1,4-DICHLOR0 BENZENE ag/kg LT 0.06 3,3 '-DICBLOROBENZIDINE mg/kg LT 0.09 DIETHYL PHTHALATE ag/kg LT 0.1 DIMETHYL PHTHALATE ag/kg LT 0.04 DI-n-BUTYL PHTHALATE ag/kg 0.19 2,4-DINITR0 TOLUENE ag/kg LT 0.2 0 2,6-DINITHDf0LUENE ag/kg LT 0.2 DI-n-OCTYL PHTHALATE mg/kg LT 0.04 continued 5

Table 17-1 (cont.) l TEST PARAMETER UNITS TEST RESULT 1,2-DIPHENYLEYDRAZINE mg/kg LT 0.04 FLUOPANTHENE mg/kg LT 0.04 TLUORENE mg/kg LT 0.04 HEXACHLOROBENZENE mg/kg LT 0.07 HEXACHLOROBUTADIENE mg/kg LT 0.1 HEXACHLOROCYCLOPENTADIENE ag/kg LT 0.3 HEXACHLORDETHANE mg/kg LT 0.1 INDENO (1,2,3-cil) P'YRENE mg/kg LT 0.09 ISOPHORONE ag/kg LT 0.08 NAPN:'HALENE ag/kg LT 0.04 NITROCENZENE ag/kg LT 0.05 N-NITROSO-DIMETHYLAMINE mg/kg LT 0.09 N-NITROSO-DI-n-PROPYIAMINE mg/kg LT 0.4 N-NITROSO-DIPEDIYIAMINE mg/kg LT 0.09 PHENANTERENE mg/kg LT 0.04 PYRENE mg/kg LT 0.04 1,2,4-TRICHLOROBENZENE mg/kg LT 0.07 ALDRIN mg/kg LT 0.3 ALPHA-BHC ag/kg LT 0.08 BETA-BBC ag/kg LT 0.1 casetA-BBC mg/kg LT 0.3 DELTA-BHC m3/kg LT 0.2 CHLORDANE mg/kg LT 0.5 continued 6

Table 17-1 (cont.)

D UNITS TEST RESULT

~iST T PARAMETER 4,4'-0D0 mg/kg LT 0.08 4,4'-DDE mg/kg LT 0.1 4,4'-DDT mg/kg LT 0.2 DIELDRIN mg/kg LT 0.1 ENDOSULFAN I ag/kg LT 0.4 ENDOSULFAN II mg/kg LT 0.9 ENDOSULFAN SULFATE mg/kg LT 0.5 ENDRIN mg/kg LT 2 HDTACHLOR mg/kg LT 0.5 O HEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE mg/kg LT 0.5 TOXAPHENE mg/kg LT 0.6 ENDRIN ALDEHYDE mg/kg LT 0.6 LT -

Less than. EP = U.S. EPA EP Toxicity procedure SW 846 Test Method 1310. Results expressed as ag/L in the EP Leachate.

'4 , es

+

9 7

Table 17-1 (cont.)

l 1

Raw Water j l

l l

TEST PARAMETER UNITS TEST RESULT pH 9 25 0C Std 7.39 TOML SOLIDS 9 1040C mg/L 294 VOIATILE SOLIDS 9 5500C mg/L 81 mg/L 35 l

SUSPENDED SOLIDS 9 10 i

DISSOLVED SOLIDS 9 1800C mg/L 190 ALRALINITY mg/L as CACO 3 97.2 l CHLORIDE ag/L 20.8 j PBOSPHORUS ag/L as PO4 1.07 SULFATE ag/L 53.9 ALUMINUM mg/L 1.67 ARSENIC mg/L- ,- LT 0.002 BARIUM mg/L  ; - ,, LT 0.5 CAMIUM mg/L 0.007 CALCIUM mg/L 39.5 CHROMIUM mg/L 0.010 COPPER mg/L 0.017 IRQt ag/L 2.38 LEAD mg/L 0.006 MAGNESIUM mg/L 9.00 l MERCURY mg/L LT 0.0002 i l

NICREL mg/L 0.009 PonSSIUM mg/L 4.02 continued l

Table 17-1 (cont.)

D l

TEST PARAMETER UNITS TEST RESULT _

SELENIUM mg/L LT 0.04 SILVER mg/L LT 0.02  ;

Sooran og/L 10.3 ,

ZINC mg/L 0.094 continued O

l l

l 9

L Table 17-1 (cont.)

O '

Raw Water

- Organic Priority Pollutants TEST PARAMETER UNITS TEST RESULT ACROLEIN mg/L m ' LT 0.004 ACRYLONITRILE mg/L LT 0.001 BENZENE mg/L LT 0.0002 BROMOFORM ,

' ag/L LT 0.0008 CARBCN TETRACEORIDE ag/L LT 0.0004 CHLOROBENZENE ag/L ,'- LT 0.0002 CHLORODIBROMONETHANE mg/L LT 0.0004 -

CECROETHANE s ag/L LT 0.0005 2-CHLOROETHYININYL ETHER mg/L LT 0.006 CHLOROFORM mg/L LT 0.0002 DICEOROBROMOMETHANE my/L LT 0.0003 1,1 DICHLORCETHANE ag/. LT 0.0006 1,2 DICEOROETRANE ag/L LT 0.0003 1,1 DICEORCETHYLENE mg/L LT 0.0006 1,2 DICHLOROPROPANE ag/L LT 0.0004 cis-1,3-DICHLOROPROPENE ag/L LT 0.0003 trans-1,3-DICHLOROPROPENE ag/L LT 0.0004 i l

ETHYL BENZENE ag/L LT 0.0005 METHYLENE BRCMIDE ag/L LT 0.0004 METHYL CEORIDE ag/L LT 0.0005 METHYLENE CHLORIDE ag/L LT 0.0005 continued 10

Table 17-1 (cont.)

O TEST PARAMETER UNITS TEST RESULT 1,1,2,2-TETRACEORDETRANE ag/L 0.0018 TETRACEORCETHYLENE mg/L LT 0.0006 TOLUENE mg/L LT 0.0004 1,2-t-DICHLORCETHYLENE mg/L 0.0005 1,1,1-TRICHLORDETHANE ag/L 0.0003 1,1,2-TRICHLORCETHANE mg/L LT 0.0005 l

TRICHLORDETHYLENE mg/L LT 0.0005 j TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHANE ag/L LT 0.0003 VINYL CHLORIDE ag/L LT 0.0004 ,

O 2-CHLOROPHENOL mg/L LT 0.002 2,4-DICEOROPHENOL mg/L LT 0.002 2,4 DIMETHYLPHENOL mg/L LT 0.002 4,6 DINITRO-CH: RESOL mg/L LT 0.006 l 2,4-DINITROPHENOL mg/L LT 0.007 2-NITROPHENOL mg/L LT 0.003 4-NITROPHENOL mg/L LT 0.003 l

P-CHLORO-M-CRESOL mg/L LT 0.002 PENTACHLOROPPNOL mg/L LT 0.006 PHENOL mg/L LT 0.001 2,4,6-TRICHLOROPH20L mg/L LT 0.003 ACENAPETHENE ag/L LT 0.001 ACENAPHTHYLENE mg/L LT 0.001 ANTHRACENE ag/L LT 0.001 BENZIDINE ag/L LT 0.0020 SENZO (a) ANTERACENE ag/L LT 0.001

.- e- - -__, -. , , , ~ . . . . . , , , . - . , _ - . . - _ , , , . . .u .- - - - , , -m,c. .-,..

Table 17-1 (cont.)

O TEST PARAMETER UNITS TEST RESULT BENZO (a) PYRENE mg/L LT 0.002 BENZO (b) FLUORANTEDIE mg/L LT 0.002 BENZO (ghi) PERYLENE ag/L LT 0.003 BENZO (k) FLUORANTHENE mg/L LT 0.002 bis (2-CHLOICETHOXYMETHANE mg/L LT 0.001 bis (2-CHLORCETHYL) ETHER mg/L LT 0.001 l bis (2-CHLOROISOPROPYL) ETHER ag/L LT 0.003 bis (2-ETHYLHEXYL) PHTHALATE mg/L LT 0.001 4-BROMOPHENYL PHENYL ETHER ag/L LT 0.002 O BUTYL BENZYL PIfrHALATE ag/L LT 0.002 l 2-CHLORONAPHTHAIra ag/L LT 0.001 i 4-CHLOROPHENYL-PHENYL ETHER ag/L LT 0.001 CHRYSENE ag/L LT 0.001 DIBENZO (ah) ANTHRACENE ag/L LT C.003 1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE ag/L LT 0.001 1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE ag/L LT 0.001 1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE ag/L LT 0.001 3,3 '-DICHLOROBEN ZIDINE ag/L LT 0.003 l DIZTHYL PHTHALATE ag/L LT 0.002 j DIMETHYL PHTHALATE ag/L LT 0.001 DI-n-BUTYL PHTHALATE ag/L LT 0.001 2,4-DINITROTOLUENE mg/L LT 0.005 2,6-DINITICf0LUENE ag/L LT 0.005 DI-n-OCTYL PIFTHALATE ag/L LT 0.001 12 continued

Table 17-1 (cont.)

O l

l TEST PARAMETER UNITS TEST RESULT 1,2-DIPHENYLHYD'tAZINE mg/L LT 0.001 l 1

FLUORANTHENE mg/L LT 0.001 FI.UORENE mg/L LT 0.001 HEXACEOROBENZENE ag/L LT 0.002 HEXACEOROBUTADIENE ag/L LT 0.002 HEXACHLOROCYCLOPENTADIENE ag/L LT 0.005 HEXACHLOMETHANE ag/L LT 0.003 f INDENO (1,2,3-cd) PYRENE mg/L LT 0.003 I

ISOPHORONE ag/L LT 0.002 1

NAPHTHALENE ag/L LT 0.001 NITR0 BENZENE mg/L LT 0.001 N-NITROSO-DIMETHYIAMINE mg/L LT 0.002 )

N-NITICSO-DI-n-PROPYLAMINE ag/L  ; , LT 0.008

~

N-NITICSO-DIPHENYIAMINE ag/L LT 0.002 PHENANTERENE mg/L LT 0.001 PYRDIE mg/L LT 0.001 1,2,4-TRICHLOR0 BENZENE ag/L LT 0.001 ALDRIN mg/L LT 0.006 ALPHA-BHC mg/L LT 0.002 BETA-BHC mg/L LT 0.003-GAN(A-BHC mg/L LT 0.007 l 1

DELTA-BHC mg/L LT 0.005 l O(_,/ CHLORDANE mg/L LT 0.0010 continued 13 I

Table 17-1 (cont.)

i l

l l

TEST PARAMETER UNITS TEST RESULT l 4,4'-Dtc mg/L LT 0.002 l 4,4'-DDE mg/L LT 0.003 4,4'-cur og/L LT 0.003 DIELDRIN mg/L LT 0.003 ENDOSULFAN I ag/L LT 0.0010 l ENDOSULFAN II ag/L LT 0.0020 l 1

ENDOSULFAN SULFATE mg/L LT 0.0010 i l

ENDRIN mg/L LT 0.0030 HEPTACHLOR mg/L LT 0.0010 0 HEPTACHLOR EPOXIDE ag/L LT 0.0010 l

TOXAPHENE mg/L LT 0.0010 l

ENDRIN ALDEHYDE ag/L LT 0.0010 continued l

O l 1

14  ;

l

18. What Is the Rate of Biological or Chemical Degradation of Resins?

19. What Biological Hazards Are There from Resin Degradation That Have Been Published in the Scientific Literature or Are Known from Manufacturers' Tests?

Q18/19-1. Please describe the resins that are used in the secondary-side cleanup process at Davis-Besse?

A18-19-1. (Mr. Hetherington] The Davis-Besse secondary-side cleanup process uses three types of powdered ion-exchange resins supplied by Epicor, Inc. These are desig-nated PD-1, PD-2 and PD-3. The Epicor resins used at Davis-Besse are essentially the same as those used for this purpose throughout the nuclear industry.

Q18/19-2. What is the chemical composition of the resins?

A18/19-2. [Mr. Hetherington] All three types are copolymers of styrene and divinylbenzene

("DVB"). PD-1 is aminated (treated with an amine) to form a quaternary ammonium group that is tightly held on to the copolymer.

PD-1 is in the hydroxide form. PD-2 and PD-3

(

1 l

l

are sulphonated (treated with a sulphur com-pound such as sulphuric acid) to form a sulphonic acid group that is also tightly held on the copolymer. PD-2 is inverted to the ammonium form; PD-3 is in the hydrogen form. In all three forms, the DVB functions as a crosslinking agent, tying the linear chains of polystyrene together.

Q18/19-3. Would you expect these resins to be subject to biologi-cal degradation?

A18/19-3. [Mr. Hetherington) No. In my substantial experienIce with ion exchange resins, I have never seen any instance where biological deg-O radation of resins has occurred. There have been numerous instances where bacterial growth has occurred in a resin bed. However, when that growth was removed, the resins have shown no signs of degradation. On a personal note, some 20 years ago I added similar ion exchange resins to a tomato patch in my back yard in view of a number of technical papers which recommended their use as synthetic soil. This spring, in turning over the soil,

-100-

O

I found the resins were still there, with no signs of any degradation.

Q18/19-4. Would you expect these resins to be subject to chemical degradation?

A18/19-4. [Mr. Hetherington] No. The resins are designed to be highly insoluble. They are extremely insoluble in water. Even in sol-vents and solutions used in the laboratory, DVB cross-linked resins are essentially in-soluble. Decomposition can occur, but re- i quires extremely powerful oxidizing solu-tions, such as boiling nitric acid or chromic-nitric acid.25/ One example of the insolubility of these resins is their use in municipal water treatment systems to treat drinking water. Specifications typically re-quire that each cubic foot of resin treat at least one million gallons of water. Unless the resin were essentially insoluble, it would not be possible to meet this specifica-tion. The same volume of resin is present when the resins are replaced.

25/ Khym, Analytical Ion-Exchange Procedures in Cheuistry and Biology (1974).

-101-

{

Q18/19-5. What ot er examples are there of the inert nature of A18/10-5. [Mr. Hetherington] Several drugs listed in the United States Pharmacopeia and the Physi-cians Desk Reference are based on the same type of resins used in PD-1, PD-2, and PD-3.

For example, sodium polystyrene sulfonate (manufactured by Sterling Drug Company's Breon Division under the name Kayexalate) and cholestryamine resin (manufactured by Mead Johnson under the name Questran) are both to be -taken orally. The typical dose of Questran (a drug to prevent the formation of l () cholesterol) is 32 ounces per day, of which approximately 16 ounces are resins. The resin is therefore not'only inert, but also non-toxic. ~ '[

Q18/19-6. Would you expect that there would be any chemical reac- l

. i tions between the resins and the environment which I might cause the release of radioactive materials from the resins?

A18/19-6. [Mr. Hetherington] No. Impurities which have been exchanged onto a resin may be

-102-O

deliberately eluted (i.e. removed) from the resin by a regeneration process. This pro-cess requires the use of relatively strong acids or bases at concentrations in excess of one percent. For example, PD-2 and PD-3 are usually regenerated by using a 4% solution of sulphuric acid for periods of approximately

. 30 to 40 minutes. PD-1, on the other hand, is typically regenerated by using a 4% sodium hydroxide solution for periods of approxi-mately 90 minutes. These concentrations and contact times are required to achieve signif--

icant elution.

() It is highly unlikely that these concen-trations would exist in the natural environ-ment. I would not expect to find any signif-icant levels of sulfuric or nitric acid in I

the environment. There are some moderately I

strong humic acids produced in soil by the l dec,y of vegetation. However, there will not l

be decaying vegetation in the burial cells, nor is it likely that the vegetation covering the cell would produce signi"icant amounts of humic acid. Moreover, the manner in which

-103-(} ,

1

l . l the burial cells are constructed, as well as the packing characteristics of the resins, would prevent water containing ionizable salts and humic acid from percolating through the resins. Finally, one must remember that the resins are mixed with a very large volume of lime sludge. Even if water were able to percolate through the resin / sludge mixture, the alkalinity of this material would neu-tralize any strong acid.

The residual ion exchange capacity that i remains on the resins even after they are discharged, provides further protection i

( against elution of the radioactive ions.

l l

Typically, spent resins when they are dis-

charged still retain about 40% of their ion I exchange capabilities. Thus, the presence in the environment of ions with a greater affin-i ity for the resins than the ions presently held on them would not be expected to cause leakage of ions from the resins.

i I

I 1

l 1

)

-104 '

()

i i

l l

Q18/19-7. Are the resins flammable?

A18/19-7. [Mr. Hetherington] PD-1, PD-2, and PD-3 are l

I not combustible until moisture is removed.

When moisture is removed, the resins will i burn in flame at 230*C. It is estimated that auto ignition of pure resins will occur at 427*C (800*F).

At Davis-Besse, however, the resins will not be buried in pure form. It is my under-standing that the resins are mixed with tens l

of thousands of cubic feet of water treatment sludge (which is predominantly calcium car-bonate) and that the waste will be subso-quently solidified by cement kiln dust. I cannot envision such a solidified mixture burning.  !

1 l

-105-l

20. Describe the Licensee's Plans for

() Site Management During Operation, for Marking the Burial Site, and for Record Keeping at the Burial Site.

Q20-1. How will the waste burial be managed?

A20-1. [Mr. Wallace] Each time it becomes necessary to remove and bury settling basin bottoms, a project manager will be appointed. The project manager will be responsible for construction of the buri-al cell to be used, for removal of the bottoms from the settling basin and transportation of the bottoms to the constructed cell, and for the sub-sequent closure of the cell. The project manager i

will be assigned from the Nuclear Projects Divi-

) sion, Project Management Department, unless cir-cumstances make it beneficial to choose a project manager from another division (for example, if a manager from another division has special exper-tise). After the cell is sealed and the burial project completed, the Environmental Monitoring Section will assume responsibility for monitoring the burial site and maintaining the cell.

l

-106-O i

l

Q20-2. Please describe how the burial project will be conducted?

A20-2. [Mr..Wallace] The burial project will be con-

-- ducted in accordance with Davis-Besse procedure NMP-NP-401 RO, " Project Management." The project team will be composed of members of the various divisions with responsibility over aspects of the project. NMP-NP-401 brings all these divisions together unde- one project management and ensures

=n integrated, interdisciplinary approach to the project.

One of the first responsibilities of the project manager will be to develop a detailed project plan. The project plan will define the I scope of the work to be done, project goals and 1

objectives, the project team organization, method  !

i of implementation, schedule, and functional as-

• , . - +

signments. The project team will then commence implementing the plan. The actual construction of the cells and transportation of the waste will most likely be perfor.ned by contractors. In this case, the project team would prepare purchase order requests governing cell construction and waste transportation. The contractual documents

-107-O

will provide the specifications for the work to

.f be performed and will include quality controls.

1 The project team will oversee the work to ensure it meets the specifications.

l Q20-3. How will the burial cells be constructed? i A20-3. (Mr. Wallace] The specifications for the burial cells should be essentially the same as those de-scribed earlier by Mr. Swim. The project team i

will perform any uurther engineering that might be necessary (for example, to satisfy any addi-i tional design features that might be required by the Ohio Permit to Install).

() Q20-4. How will the settling basin bottoms be handled?

A20-4. (Mr. Wallace} The project will be conducted in accordance with standard practice for waste buri-al. The precise procedures will be established by the project management team. Toledo Edison's present concept of operations is as follows:

The settling basin will first be dewatered, but not to an extent where the bottoms would dry out. A number of representative samples of the bottoms will be taken to define the content of  ;

l

-108-O i

l l

l l

I

the bottoms. Then, vacuum trucks will be used to draw the bottoms out of the settling basin.

These vacuum trucks are equipped with a suction l l pump which draws material into closed tanks on l the trucks. This operation will be performed by l i

a contractor licensed by the State of Ohio to haul waste. The vacuum trucks will transport the i

j waste to the burial site. There, the waste will l l

l be mixed with a solidifying agent (cement kiln

dust). The solidifying agent will cause the i 1

j waste to set up. After the waste has solidified, the cell will be capped and the cover seeded.

Q20-5. Please describe the monitoring and maintenance that will

( be performed after burial.

a l A20-5. (Ms. Scott-Wasilk] The Toledo Edison Environ-

! mental Monitoring Section intends to monitor i

! groundwater and to conduct. periodic inspections ,

I

) of the cells. This program will be governed by l i

i written procedures.

The Environmental Monitoring Section's cur-rent plan is to monitor groundwater in four l

wells. One of the wells will provide background data, and the other three will be located in

]

I i

4 4

-109-1 i

s directions of possible groundwater flow. Water in these wells will be sampled semi-annually for priority pollutants, pH, and radioactivity.

The Environmental Monitoring Section intends to inspect the cells and dikes semi-annually to ensure that cracking of the cover or erosion does not occur. If any significant deterioration of the cell is detected, it will be repaired. The cells and dikes will also be inspected after any signific$ntfloodingevent.

Q20-6. What records will be kept pertaining to burial?

A20-6. [Mr. Wallace] Project records pertaining to the design and construction of the cells will be re-l tained as NRC permanent records under the Davis-Besse Nuclear Records Program.

(Ms. Scott-Wasilk] The Environmental Moni-toring Section will maintain a description of the waste in each cell, identified by type, volume, content, and date of burial. The location of each cell will be surveyed and recorded on a plat. In addition, all settling basin sampling daca, all groundwater monitoring data and

-110-

x l

l l

reports, all burial site inspection reports, and  !

all maintenance reports will be retained. These documents will be kept available for inspection and will be treated as NRC permanent records.

Q20-7. How will the cells be marked?

I A20-7. (Ms. Scott-Wasilk] Signs will be posted to alert any persons in the area and to prohibit unauthorized access..

O

-111-

32 l MR. SILBERG: AT THIS POINT, I

(}

2 WOULD ASK EACH OF THE WITNESSES TO INTRODUCE I 3 THEMSELVES.

4 WHEREUPON, 5 DR. GARY F. BENNETT, J. STEWART SLAND, 6 DAVID BRIDEN, DAVID M. HENDRON, 4

7 DR. CHARLE5 E. HERDENDORF, RICHARD 8 HETHERINGTON, DR. WILLIAM B. 'dACKSON, i

9 DR. ROGER E. LINNEMANN, DR. JEFFREY M.

10 REUTTER, JENNIFER SCOTT-WASILK, 11 THE0 S. SWIM, DR. JOHN E. TILL, AND

-l 12 DAVID M. WALLACE 13 WERE CALLED AS WITNESSES AND, HAVING BEEN FIRST 14 D ULY SWORN, WERE EXAMINED AND TESTIFIED AS 15 FOLLOWS:

l 16 DIRECT EXAMINATION 17 BY MR. SILBERG:

18 Q. WOULD YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAMES, 19 OCCUPATIONS AND ADDRESSES?

20 A. (D R . BENNETT) MY NAME IS DR. GARY-F.

21 BENNETT. I AM A PROFESSOR OF BIOCHEMICAL 22 ENGINEERING AT THE UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO. MY 23 BUSINESS ADDRESS IS THE UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO, O

L- 24 TOLEDO, OHIO 43606.

25 A. (MR. BLAND) MY NAME IS d. STEWART BLAND.

l

33 l I AM A CONSULTANT AND PRESIDENT OF J. STEWART-(}

2 BLAND, INCORPORATED. MY BUSINESS ADDRESS IS P.O.

3 BOX 4154, ANNAPOLIS, MARYLAND 21403.

4 A. (MR. BRIDEN) MY NAME IS DAVID BRIDEN. I 5 AM THE CHEMISTRY AND HEALTH PHYSICS SUPERINTENDENT 6 FOR THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR STATION. MY BUSINESS 7 ADDRESS IS TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY, 300 MADISON '

8 AVENUE, TOLEDO, OHIO 43652. '

i 9 A. (MR. HENDRON) MY NAME IS DAVID M.

i 10 HENDRON. I AM A VICE-PRESIDENT OF WOODWARD CLYDE i 11 CONSULTANTS, A FIRM TelAT SPECIALIZES IN 1 12 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING. MY BUSINESS ADDRESS IS

!(

, 13 11 EAST ADAMS STREET, SUITE 1500, CHICAGO, i

14 ILLINOIS 60603.

15 A. (D R . HERDENDORF) MY NAME IS DR. CHARLES 16 E. HERDENDORF. I AM A PROFESSOR OF ZOOLOGY, l

17 GEOLOGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES A T. THE OHIO STATE I

18 UNIVERSITY, AND I'M_THE DIRECTOR OF THE CENTER FOR 19 LAKE ERIE AREA RESEARCH. MY BUSINESS ADDRESS IS 20 CENTER FOR LAKE ERIE AREA RESEARCH,-THE OHIO STATE 1

', 21 UNIVERSITY, 484 WEST 12TH AVENUE, COLUMBUS, OHIO 22 43210.

1 I 23 A. (MR. HETHERINGTON) MY NAME IS' RICHARD

() 24 HETHERINGTON. I'M THE MARKETING-MANAGER FOR i

25 EPICOR, INCORPORATED. MY BUSINESS ADDRESS _IS POST '

I

l 34 l

l 0FFICE BOX 598, FORT WASHINGTON, PENNSYLVANIA

(}

2 19034.

3 A. (DR. JACKSON) MY NAME IS DR. WILLIAM B.

4 JACKSON. I AM A PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF BIOLOGICAL 5 SCIENCES AT BOWLING GREEN STATE UNIVERSITY.. MY 6 BUSINESS ADDRESS IS BOWLING GREEN STATE 7 UNIVERSITY, BOWLING GREEN, OHIO 43 403.

8 A. (DR. LINNEMANN) MY NAME IS DR. DOCTOR R t

9 ROGER E. LINNEMANN. I'M A PHYSICIAN AND 10 VICE-CHAIRMAN AND CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER OF 11 RADIATION MANAGEMENT CORPORATION. I'M ALSO AN 12 ASSOCIATE CLINICAL PROFESSOR OF RADIOLOGY AT'THE 13 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE. MY 4

! 14 BUSINESS ADDRESS IS RADIATION MANAGEMENT s

i 15 CORPORATION, 3508 MARKET STREET, PHILADELPHIA, 16 PENNSYLVANIA.

17 A. (DR. REUTTER) MY NAME IS DR. JEFFREY M.

18 REUTTER. I'M ASSOCIATE DIRECTORRDF THE FRANZ i

19 THEODORE STONE LABORATORY, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF 20 THE CENTER FOR LAKE ERIE AREA RESEARCH, AND 4

21 ADdUNCT PROFESSOR OF ZOOLOGY AND-NATURAL RESOURCES 22 AT THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY. MY BUSINESS ADDRESS I 23 IS THE COLLEGE OF BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES, 484 WEST 24 12TH AVENUE, COLUMBUS, OHIO 43210.

25 A. (MS. SCOTT-WASILK) MY NAME IS dENNIFER 4

1

35 '

l SCOTT-WASILK. I'M THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND EMERGENCY

(~}

, 1 PREPAREDNESS MANAGER FOR THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR 3 STATION. MY BUSINESS ADDRESS IS THE TOLEDO EDISON 4 COMPANY, 300 MADISON AVENUE, TOLEDO, OHIO 43652.

5 A. (MR. SWIM) MY NAME IS THE0 S. SWIM. I'M 6 THE CIVIL / STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING MANAGER FOR THE 7 DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR STATION. MY BUSINESS ADDRESS l 8 IS THE TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY, 300 MADISON AVENUE, 9 TOLEDO, OHIO 43652.

10 A. (D R . TILL) MY NAME IS DR. JOHN E. TILL.

11 I AM A HEALTH PHYSICIST AND PRESIDENT OF 12 RADIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENTS CORPORATION. MY BUSINESS a

13 ADDRESS IS ROUTE 2, BOX 122, NEESES, SOUTH 14 CAROLINA 29107.

15 A. (MR. WALLACE)- MY NAME IS DAVID M.

16 WALLACE. I'M LEAD NUCLEAR PROJECTS MANAGER FOR 17 THE DAVIS-SESSE NUCLEAR STATION. MY BUSINESS 18 ADDRESS IS TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY, 300 MADISON i

19 AVENUE, TOLEDO, OHIO 43652.

20 MR. SILBERG: BEFORE WE PROCEED 8

21 WITH THE TESTIMONY, IF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL HAS 22 STILL NOT ARRIVED, I WOULD --

i 23 JUDGE HOYT: HE DOESN'T APPEAR 4

24 TO BE ON STATION YET.

25 MR. SILBERG: I WOULD PROPOSE, IF

36 i

('T

%J 1 IT'S ACCEPTABLE, TO MAKE OUR BRIEF OPENING 2 STATEMENT.

3 JUDGE H0YT: VERY WELL. I HAVE i 4 NO OBJECTION TO THAT, IF THAT DOES NOT INTERFERE' 4

S WITH THE PRESENTATION.

6 MR. VAN KLEY: THAT'S FINE WITH 7 US, YOUR HONOR.

8 MR. SILBERG: ALL RIGHT.

! 9 JUDGE H0YT, AS YOU'VE INDICATED, -T H E 10 PURPOSE OF THIS HEARING IS TO REVIEW THE APPROVAL f 11 GRANTED BY THE N.R.C. STAFF OF THE PROPOSAL BY TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY TO BURY WATER TREATMENT 12 13 SLUDGE AND RESINS WHICH ARE CONTAMINATED WITH VERY i

14 MINUTE QUANTITIES OF RADIOACTIVITY AT-THE

! 15 DAVIS-BESSE SITE.

16 TOLEDO EDISON ASKED THE N.R.C. TO APPROVE 17 ON-SITE BURIAL IN JULY OF 1983. THAT REQUEST WAS -

18 BASED UPON THE N.R.C.'S SUGGESTION THAT'VERY LOW J 19 LEVELS OF RADIOACTIVITY SHOULD NOT BE SENT TO 20 0FF-SITE BURIAL GROUNDS.

21 THERE WERE A NUMBER OF REASONS FOR THAT 22 SUGGESTION BY THE COMMISSION. THERE WAS A BELIEF d

23 THEN, AND IS NOW, THAT THOSE'0FF-SITE BURIAL SITES 24 SHOULD BE RESERVED FOR MATERIALS WITH 25 SUBSTANTIALLY HIGHER LEVELS OF RADIOACTIVITY THAN

37 T

l THE VERY, VERY LOW LEVELS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT

(}

2 HERE TODAY. ALSO, THERE WAS A' BELIEF THAT THE.

l

[ 3 LIMITED ALLOCATIONS OF DISPOSAL SPACE AT THOSE .

4 0FF-SITE FACILITIES SHOULD NOT BE SPENT FOR l 5 MATERIALS WHICH COULD OTHERWISE BE SAFELY'AND --

6 SAFELY DISPOSED OF AND DISPOSED OF IN.AN

, 7 ENVIRONMENTALLY APPROPRIATE MANNER. AND THE FINAL 8 REASON FOR THAT N.R.C. SUGGESTION WAS A 9 CONGRESSIONAL POLICY, UNITED STATES CONGRESS, THAT 10 THE LOW-LEVEL BURIAL SITES WERE A NATIONAL ASSET-i 11 AND THAT THE CAPACITY THEY HAD TO RECEIVE 12 LOW-LEVEL WASTES SHOULD BE USED WISELY IN RESERVE 13 FOR MATERIALS WHICH REQUIRED THAT NATURE OF 14 TREATMENT.

15 IN OCTOBER O F '19 85, .T H E N.R.C. APPROVED

) 16 TOLEDO EDISON'S REQUEST. AS -THE SPEAKERS FOR THE 17 STATE INDICATED, TOLEDO EDISON STILL REQUIRES A 18 STATE PERMIT, REGARDLESS OF THE OUTCOME OF THIS 19 PROCEEDING, BEFORE WE CAN PROCEED WITH ANY ON-SITE 20 BURIAL, AND WE INTEND TO APPLY FOR THAT PERMIT AT 2

21 AN APPROPRIATE TIME FOLLOWING THE RESULTS OF THIS 22 HEARING.

23 THE QUANTITIES OF RADIATION THAT ARE 24 INVOLVED ARE VERY, VERY SMALL. INDEED, THEY ARE 25 50 SMALL THAT IF THE RADIATION WERE IN LIQUID i

38 l FORM, IT COULD BE DISCHARGED TO THE LAKE IN

(}

2 ACCORDANCE WITH N.R.C. REGULATIONS AND TOLEDO 3 EDISON'S LICENSE FROM THE N.R.C.

4 THE WATER TREATMENT S L UD G E , ON THE OTHER S HAND, IS ESSENTIALLY IDENTICAL TO MUNICIPAL WATER 6 TREATMENT -- TO SLUDGE WHICH IS GENERATED BY 7 MUNICIPAL WATER TREATMENT PLANTS FOR TOWNS AND

8 CITIES ALL ALONG LAKE ERIE.

9 LET ME TALK A MINUTE ABOUT THE TWO TYPES 10 0F MATERIALS THAT WE WISH TO DISPOSE OF ON-SITE.

11 THE FIRST IS THE WATER TREATMENT SLUDGE.

)

gg 12 LIKE MANY FACILITIES, DAVIS-BESSE HAS A WATER 1 LJ 13 TREATMENT PLANT. THE PURPOSE OF THAT SYSTEM IS TO

14 PURIFY LAKE ERIE WATER SO THAT IT CAN BE USED 15 WITHIN THE FACILITY FOR PERSONAL USE AS WELL AS 16 FOR USE IN THE NUCLEAR PLANT. THE WATER TREATMENT 17 SYSTEM REMOVES IMPURITIES WHICH ARE IN LAKE WATER.

18 IT DOES THIS BY ADDING STANDARD CHEMICALS SUCH AS

)

19 CALCIUM CARBONATE, AND THE RESULT OF THE PROCESS 20 IS PURE WATER WHICH CAN BE USED FOR DOMESTIC 21 PURPOSES. AND SLUDGE; SLUDGE CONTAINS THE WATER 22 TREATMENT CHEMICALS PLUS THE IMPURITIES REMOVED 23 FROM LAKE ERIE WATER. AND AS I MENTIONED, THAT 24 SLUDGE IS ESSENTIALLY IDENTICAL TO THAT PRODUCED i

25 BY MUNICIPAL WATER TREATMENT PLANTS IN MANY. CITIES

I '\

l 39 i

1 IN THIS AREA.

2 THE OTHER COMPONENT OF THE MATERIAL TO BE 3 DISPOSED OF ARE THE RESINS WHICH ARE USED TO 4 REMOVE IMPURITIES IN THE SECONDARY WATER --

5 SECONDARY WATER SYSTEM OF THE DAVIS-BESSE PLANT.

6 THE PRIMARY SYSTEM, THE PRIMARY WATER 7 SYSTEM, IS THE WATER THAT CIRCULATES THROUGH THE 8 NUCLEAR REACTOR ITSELF. THAT WATER SYSTEM IS PHYSICALLY SEPARATED FROM THE SECONDARY SYSTEM BY 9

10 THE STEAM GENERATORS. STEAM GENERATORS SERVE TO 11 TRANSFER THE HEAT FROM THE PRIMARY SYSTEM INTO THE 12 SECONDARY SYSTEM.

13 THE RESINS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ARE 14 USED TO REMOVE IMPURITIES WHICH ACCUMULATE IN THE 15 SECONDARY SYSTEM, NOT IN THE PRIMARY SYSTEM, AND 16 WE NEED TO REMOVE THOSE IMPURITIES BECAUSE I F- THEY 17 BUILT UP IN THE SECONDARY SYSTEM THEY C O U L'D 18 INTERFERE WITH THE EFFICIENCY OF THE PLANT 19 OPERATION BY PLATING OUT, BY FORMING SCALE ON-THE 20 STEAM GENERATORS'AND REDUCING THE EFFICIENCYROF 21 HEAT TRANSFER FROM THE PRIMARY SYSTEM TO THE 22 SECONDARY SYSTEM.

23 THE RESINS THAT ARE USED ARE VERY SIMILAR

(^d) s 24 TO THOSE WHICH ARE USED. IN HOUSEHOLD WATER 25 SOFTENERS. THE RESINS THEMSELVES ARE INERT. THEY l

40 l ARE NONT0XIC. INDEED, THEY ARE A COMPONENT OF

(}

2 MEDICINES WHICH PEOPLE TAKE, INGEST IN SUBSTANTIAL 3 QUANTITIES.

4 WHEN THE RESINS HAVE BEEN USED FOR SOME 5 PERIOD OF TIME, THEIR EFFICIENCY DECREASES AS THE 6 IMPURITIES BUILD UP ON THEM, AND THEY NEED TO BE.

7 REPLACED SO THAT THE EFFICIENCY OF THE IMPURITY 8 REMOVAL SY STEM CAN BE MAINTAINED.

9 AMONG THE IMPURITIES WHICH THE RESINS 10 REMOVE FROM THE WATER A R E- VERY, VERY LOW LEVELS OF 11 RADIOACTIVITY. AT HIGHER LEVELS, IF THERE WERE TO 12 BE HIGHER LEVELS, OF RADIOACTIVITY' IN THE 13 SECONDARY WATER, THE RESINS, AS REQUIRED BY PLANT 14 PROCEDURES, WOULD BE DISPOSED OF AT OFF-SITE 15 BURIAL FACILITIES AND WOULD NOT BE KEPT AT THE 16 DAVIS-BESSE SITE.

17 EVERY RESIN BATCH, BEFORE IT'S DISCHARGED 18 FROM THE WATER TREATMENT FROM THE DEMINERALIZER 4

19 SYSTEM, IS ANALYZED T0-DETERMINE JUST HOW MUCH 20 RADIOACTIVITY IT CONTAINS AND WHAT~ TYPES OF I

21 ISOTOPES ARE CONTAINED IN IT. THOSE RESINS WHICH 22 ARE DISCHARGED TO THE SETTLING BASINS AND WHICH WE I

23 WISH TO BURY ON-SITE HAVE VERY, VERY LOW LEVELS OF l 24 RADIATION.

25 AS I INDICATED, THE RESINS AND THE S L UD G E i I

41 l

I

() 1- ARE-DISCHARGED TO ON-SITE SETTLING BASINS. THESE l 2 BASINS WILL EVENTUALLY FILL UP OVER TIME AND THEY i

3 NEED TO BE EMPTIED. THE. ALTERNATIVES ARE TO BURY L 4 THEM ON-SITE OR TO SEND THEM OFF-SITE FOR DISPOSAL 5 AT LOW-LEVEL WASTE FACILITIES. l

! 6 AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, T IE CONGRESSIONAL 1 i

7 AND N.R.C. POLICY INDICATES THAT OFF-SITE BURIAL 8 SHOULD BE RESERVED FOR MATERIALS WHICH ARE 9 CON S ID ER A B LY MORE RADIOACTIVE THAN WHAT WE'RE 4 10 DEALING WITH HERE TODAY. THERE IS ALSO A 11 SUBSTANTIAL COST PENALTY, ADDITIONAL COSTS IF THIS 12 MATERIAL WERE TO BE SHIPPED OFF-SITE.

s.

13 F I N A L LY , BASED ON OUR ANALYSES, WE HAVE 14 FOUND NO ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTIFICATION WHICH WOULD 15 INDICATE THAT THEY SHOULD NOT BE BURIED ON-SITE.

16 THE ON-SITE BURIAL PROCESS HAS BEEN THE SUBJECT OF 17 EXTENSIVE ANALY SE S OF THE RADIOLOGICAL 18 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES, AND THE PRECAUTIONS 4

19 WHICH TOLEDO EDISON PLANS TO TAKE, AND WHICH ARE 20 DISCUSSED IN OUR TESTIMONY, ARE FAR GREATER THAN 21 THE PRECAUTIONS TAKEN FOR SIMILAR WASTES HANDLED =

22 IN SIMILAR FACILITIES IN THIS VERY AREA. THE-

.1 23 WASTES WILL BE STORED, WILL BE DISPOSED OF IN 24 DIKED BURIAL CELLS. THESE CELLS WILL HAVE OUTER 25 WALLS WHICH ARE COVERED WITH LARGE S T.O N E RIP-RAP l

l I

\

l l

42

(~

%)

. 1 TO PROVIDE PROTECTION AGAINST STORMS AND EROSION.

2 THE BURIAL CELLS WILL BE LINED TO PREVENT 3 ANY WASTE FROM GETTING OUT AND ANY WATER FROM 4 GETTING IN. THE LINER WILL BE TWO-AND-A-HALF FOOT 5 COMPACTED CLAY LINER TOPPED BY AN IMPERVIOUS 6 SYNTHETIC MEMBRANE TOPPED BY A ONE-FOOT GRAVEL 7 DRAINAGE BLANKET TOPPED BY AN ADDITIONAL ONE-HALF 8 FOOT OF COMPACTED CLAY. ON TOP OF THE BURIAL 9 CELLS WILL BE A CAP COMPOSED OF TWO TO FOUR FEET 10 0F COMPACTED CLAY TOPPED BY A SAND OR GRAVEL 11 FILTER LEVEL TOPPED BY TOPSOIL WHICH IS THEN

s. 12 SEEDED AND VEGETATED TO PREVENT EROSION. THE TOPS w.s 13 0F THE CELLS WILL BE HIGH ENOUGH SO THAT THEY WILL 14 BE ABOVE ANY CONCEIVABLE FLOOD LEVELS, AND THEY 15 WILL BE GRADED TO PROVIDE FOR DRAINAGE SO THAT NO 16 WATER CAN ACCUMULATE ON TOP OF THE CELLS.

17 AND ' FINALLY, THE SLUDGE IN THE RESINS 18 THEMSELVES WILL BE SOLIDIFIED. THEY WILL NOT BE 19 IN A LOOSE FORM, BUT THEY WILL BE SOLIDIFIED INTO 20 A CONCRETE-LIKE MASS WHICH WILL FURTHER PROTECT 21 AGAINST THE WASTE MIGRATING INTO THE ENVIRONMENT,  !

22 AWAY FROM THE CELLS AND INTO THE ENVIRONMENT.

23 OUR ANALYSIS HAS SHOWN THAT THE SITE IS A (O

kJ 24 VERY FAVORABLE LOCATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF 25 THESE BURIAL CELLS. UNDERNEATH THE BURIAL CELLS l 1

4 41: l l ARE DISCHARGED TO ON-SITE SETTLING BASINS. THESE

(}

2 BASINS WILL EVENTUALLY FILL UP OVER TIME AND THEY 3 NEED TO BE EMPTIED. THE ALTERNATIVES ARE TO BURY 4 THEM ON-SITE OR TO SEND THEM OFF-SITE FOR DISPOSAL ,

5 AT LOW-LEVEL WASTE FACILITIES.

6 AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, THE CONGRESSIONAL 7 AND N.R.C. POLICY INDICATES THAT OFF-SITE BURIAL 8 SHOULD BE RESERVED FOR MATERIALS WHICH ARE 9 CON S ID ER A B LY MORE RADIOACTIVE THAN WHAT- WE'RE 10 DEALING WITH HERE TODAY. THERE IS ALSO A '

! 11 SUBSTANTIAL COST PENALTY, ADDITIONAL COSTS IF THIS MATERIAL WERE TO BE SHIPPED OFF-SITE.

12 13 FINALLY, BASED ON OUR ANALYSES, WE HAVE 14 FOUND NO ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTIFICATION WHICH WOULD a

15 INDICATE THAT THEY SHOULD NOT BE BURIED ON-SITE. 1 i 16 THE ON-SITE BURIAL PROCESS HAS BEEN THE SUBJECT OF i

17 EXTENSIVE ANALYSES OF THE RADIOLOGICAL

18 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES, AND THE PRECAUTIONS 19 WHICH TOLEDO EDISON PLANS TO TAKE, AND WHICH ARE 20 DISCUSSED IN OUR TESTIMONY, ARE-FAR GREATER THAN 21 THE PRECAUTIONS TAKEN FOR SIMILAR WASTES HANDLED 22 IN SIMILAR FACILITIES IN T=HIS VERY AREA. THE

.I 23 WASTES WILL BE STORED, WILL.BE DISPOSED OF IN  ;

( 24 DIKED BURIAL CELLS. THESE CELLS WILL HAVE OUTER s

25 WALLS WHICH ARE COVERED WITH LARGE STONE RIP-RAP  ;

! l l l l l

42

( ) 1 TO PROVIDE PROTECTION AGAINST STORMS AND EROSION.

2 THE BURIAL CELLS WILL BE LINED TO PREVENT 3 ANY WASTE FROM GETTING OUT AND ANY WATER FROM 4 GETTING IN. THE LINER WILL BE TWO-AND-A-HALF FOOT 5 COMPACTED CLAY LINER TOPPED BY AN IMPERVIOUS 6 SYNTHETIC MEMBRANE TOPPED BY A ONE-FOOT GRAVEL 7 DRAINAGE BLANKET TOPPED BY AN ADDITIONAL ONE-HALF 8 FOOT OF COMPACTED CLAY. ON TOP OF THE BURIAL 9 CELLS WILL BE A CAP COMPOSED OF TWO TO FOUR FEET 10 0F COMPACTED CLAY TOPPED BY A SAND OR GRAVEL 11 FILTER LEVEL TOPPED BY TOPSOIL WHICH IS THEN fs 12 SEEDED AND VEGETATED TO PREVENT EROSION. THE TOPS b 13 0F THE CELLS WILL BE HIGH ENOUGH SO THAT THEY WILL 14 BE ABOVE ANY CONCEIVABLE FLOOD LEVELS, AND THEY 15 WILL BE GRADED TO PROVIDE FOR DRAINAGE SO THAT NO 16 WATER CAN ACCUMULATE ON TOP OF THE CELLS.

17 AND ' FINALLY, THE SLUDGE IN THE RESINS 18 THEMSELVES WILL BE SOLIDIFIED. THEY WILL NOT BE 19 IN A LOOSE FORM, BUT THEY WILL BE SOLIDIFIED INTO 20 A CONCRETE-LIKE MASS WHICH WILL FURTHER PROTECT 1

21 AGAINST THE WASTE MIGRATING INTO THE ENVIRONMENT, l 22 AWAY FROM THE CELLS AND INTO THE ENVIRONMENT.

23 OUR ANALYSIS HAS SHOWN THAT THE SITE IS A 1

(

(%/ l 24 VERY FAVORABLE LOCATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF ,

l 25 THESE BURIAL CELLS. UNDERNEATH THE BURIAL CELLS l l

l

3 43 I'T 1 ARE UNIFORM CLAY DEPOSITS, A HIGHLY IMPERMEABLE

'd 2 SOIL WHICH WOULD PREVENT WATER FROM PERC0LATING 3 DOWN INTO THE GROUNDWATER EVEN IF IT COULD ESCAPE 4 FROM THE CELLS. THERE ARE NO PATHS BY WHICH WATER 5 CAN REACH THE WASTES OR WASTES CAN REACH THE 6 WATER.

7 OUR AN A LY S I S OF THE SITE IS BASED ON MANY 8 YEARS OF GEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION AT THE 9 DAVIS-BESSE SITE PLUS SOIL BORINGS AT THE BURIAL 10 LOCATION ITSELF. WE BELIEVE THAT THERE IS NO WAY 11 FOR THE WASTES TO REACH THE ENVIRONMENT, THE g- 12 ENVIRONMENT I NC L UD I NG LAKE ERIE AND THE NAVARRE G)'

13 MARSH.

14 WE, OF COURSE, RECOGNIZE THE PRESENCE OF

• 15 THE NAVARRE MARSH. INDEED, TOLEDO EDISON HAS A 16 MAJOR RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT MARSH THROUGH THE 17 LEASES WHICH IT HAS GIVEN TO THE U.S. FISH AND 18 W I LD L I F E SERVICE. U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE I 19 MANAGES THE NAVARRE MARSH, BUT THE MARSH, INDEED, 20 IS OWNED BY TOLEDO EDISON COMPANY AND WE ARE 21 REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN PROTECTION OF THAT MARSH.

22 INDEED, IT HAS BEEN PROTECTED FROM THE 23 ENVIRONMENT, FROM THE STORMS, FROM THE WATER i

( j kD/ 24 LEVELS, BECAUSE TOLEDO EDISON PURCHASED IT AND l

25 ASSURED THAT IT WOULD BE PROTECTED. WE HAVE j l

44 l STUDIED THE MARSH FOR MORE THAN A' DECADE AND WE ,

(}

2 HAVE DETAILED KN OW L ED G E OF THE ENVIRONMENT OF THE 3 MARSH, ITS ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS, THE BIRDS, FISH, 4

4 WILDLIFE'THAT INHABIT IT.

5 THE WASTES WILL BE ISOLATED FROM THE 6 MARSH, AND NOT EVEN THE MOST DAMAGING STORMS WOULD 7 BE ABLE TO RELEASE THEM; ALTHOUGH I WOULD NOTE'IF

}

8 SUCH A STORM OCCURRED, IT WOULD UNDOUBTEDLY CREATE' l 1 9 GREAT DAMAGE ITSEL.F TO MARSHES ALL ALONG THE LAKE.

10 THE WASTES WHICH WILL BE STORED, WHICH' 1

j 11 WILL BE DISPOSED OF IN THESE BURIAL CELLS HAVE

, 12 BEEN TESTED TO THE UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL 3

13 PROTECTION AGENCY REQUIREMENTS AND THEY ARE NOT ,

I l 14 HAZARDOUS WASTES, AND, INDEED, WE BELIEVE THAT 15 ANYTHING WHICH WOULD COME OUT OF THOSE CELLS, EVEN

{

i j 16 THOUGH WE CAN'T CONCEIVE THAT IT WOULD, WOULD -MEET 17 DRINKING WATER STANDARDS.

l 18 WE BELIEVE, BASED ON EXTENSIVE ANALYSIS, t  ;

j 19 THAT NO HARM WOULD COME Tor THE MARSH, NO HARM i 20 WOULD COME TO THE. GROUNDWATER OR TO THE.  !

21 ENVIRONMENT. WE BELIEVE WE WILL DEMONSTRATE'THAT

! 10 -

I 22 HERE, AND WE WILL DEMONSTRATE IT AGAIN WHEN'WE l

i l 23 FILE OUR APPLICATION WITH THE STATE FOR A PERMIT ,

24 TO CONSTRUCT THE-BURIAL FACILITY.

! 2s TOLEDO EDISON 1S CHARGeo BY THe ~.R.C. .10 L a

, ,.....---,n-.-,- ,,c,, , . . - . ~ - . . - - - - - . - , . . - - - , , - , - . , , _ . - , . . . . , . , - - - . , . . ~ . . _ , ,,...,,,.,,nw, .n.-- , - , - ,

y ,

45 llg 1 PROTECT THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC IN ALL 2 0F ITS NUCLEAR-RELATED OPERATIONS. AT THE SAME 3 TIME, WE ARE REQUIRED BY THE PUBLIC UTILITIES 4 COMMISSION OF OHIO TO MINIMIZE THE COST OF 5 OPERATING THE DAVIS-BESSE PLANT CONSISTENT WITH 6 THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC.

7 WE SELIEVE THAT OUR PROPOSED PLAN FOR 8 DISPOSING OF THE RADI0 ACTIVE SLUDGE FROM THE 9 DAVIS-BESSE SETTLING POND FULLY SATISFIES BOTH 10 REQUIREMENTS WHILE PROTECTING THE AREA'S NATURAL 11 RESOURCES.

7- 12 SENDING THESE WASTES TO AN OFF-SITE V) 13 BURIAL GROUND WOULD RESTRICT OUR CHOICES FOR 14 COMMERCIAL DISPOSAL OF LOW-LEVEL WASTES IN THE 15 FUTURE. AS THE N.R.C. BALANCES THESE 16 CONSIDERATIONS IN THE HEARING, WE'RE CONFIDENT 17 THAT THE EARLIER DECISION TO PERMIT ON-SITE BURIAL 18 WILL BE REAFFIRMED AND THAT THE N.R.C. WILL 19 CONTINUE TO ALLOW US TO PROCEED WITH OUR PLANS TO 20 TREAT THESE WASTES IN APPROPRIATE MANNER, TO BURY 21 THEM ON-SITE IN A WAY THAT PROTECTS THE 22 ENVIRONMENT, THE LAKE AND THE MARSH.

23 TODAY WE WILL PRESENT A PANEL OF TOLEDO

(>

N- 24 EDISON EXPERTS AND DISTINGUISHED CONSULTANTS WHO 25 HAVE STUDIED THE GEOLOGY, HY D R OL OGY AND I

,~

46

() 1 ENVIRONMENT OF THE SITE FOR MORE THAN A DECADE.

f 2 WE BELIEVE THAT TESTIMONY WILL DEMONSTRATE THAT i 3 THE ON-SITE BURIAL PROPOSED IS THE BEST SOLUTION 4 TO THE DISPOSAL OF THE SLUDGE AND THE RESINS.

5 THANK YOU, JUDGE HOYT.

6 dUDGE H0YT: STILL NO --

I 7 MR. VAN KLEY: YOUR HONOR, 8 ATTORNEY GENERAL CELEBREZZE HAS ARRIVED.

i 9 JUDGE H0Y T : VERY WELL. I'M i

10 GOING TO SUGGEST, MR. SILBERG, THAT WE GIVE FROM

{

11 THE CRAMPED QUARTERS OVER HERE SOME TEMPORARY j 12 RELIEF TO YOUR WITNESSES, GET THE TESTIMONY OF THE 13 ATTORNEY GENERAL, AND IMMED I ATELY FOLLOWING WE'LL i

i 14 BRING THEM BACK.

15 MR. SILBERG: FINE. GENTLEMEN?

16 dUDGE H0YT: WE WILL HAVE A

~

! 17 BRIEF RECESS.

l 18 (RECESS TAKEN.)

19 JUDGE H0YT: THE HEARING WILL

} 20 COME TO ORDER.

21 ALL THE PARTIES TO THE HEARING WHO WERE 22 PRESENT WHEN THE HEARING RECESSED ARE AGAIN l

23 PRESENT.

24 AT THIS TIME, THE HEARING WILL TAKE A i 25 STATEMENT OF THE DISTINGUISHED ATTORNEY GENERAL OF k .

47 '

() 1 THE STATE OF OHIO.

WHEREUPON, SIR?

l 2 3 ANTHONY J. CELEBREZZE, JR. ,

l 4 WAS CALLED AS A WITNESS AND TESTIFIED AS FOLLOWS l

l 5 DIRECT TESTIMONY j 6 THE WITNESS: THANK YOU, YOUR l 7 HONOR.

{ 8 I APOLOGIZE FOR DISRUPTING THE 9 PROCEEDINGS. I'VE FOUND THAT ONE OF THE BASIC 10 LAWS OF PHYSICS IS YOU CAN'T BE IN TWO PLACES AT 11 ONE TIME. AND I JUST BURNED THE ROAD UP GETTING i

12 UP HERE. THERE WERE A COUPLE.0F SURPRISED HIGHWAY 13 PATROLMEN BACK DOWN AROUND ROUTE 13 SOMEWHERE KIND 14 0F WONDERING WHAT WENT BY THEM.

15 YOUR HONOR, 1 AM ANTHONY J. CELEBREZZE, l

16 JR., THE ATTURNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF OHIO.

17 I'M HERE BECAUSE I SHARE WITH MANY i

, 18 NORTHERN OHIO RESIDENTS A GRAVE CONCERN OVER THE '

l 19 PLAN TO BURY LOW-LEVEL NUCLEAR RADIOACTIVE WASTE i 20 AT THE DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION.

21 I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE STATE OF OHIO

22 TO OBJECT TO THE BURIAL OF THE WASTES IN GENERAL, i

23 AND IN PARTICULAR TO THEIR BURIAL IN THIS AREA 24 BECAUSE THE SITE IS ONLY 25 FEET FROM THE LAKE

{

25 ERIE WETLANDS, WHICH ARE ONE OF THE MOST PRECIOUS i _ . _ _ _ - _ . _ _ _ _ . __ .. .

48 1

NATURAL RESOURCES'0F THE STATE OF OHIO.

( l 2 THERE ARE VARIOUS IMPORTANT FACTORS THAT 3 HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED WHEN DISCUSSING THIS ISSUE.

4 I THINK WE MUST TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION 5 THE NATURAL PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE 6 LOCATION. BEING ADdACENT TO THE LAKE ERIE 7 SHORELINE CREATES ITS OWN SPECIFIC PROBLEMS.

8 INVESTIGATION INDICATES THAT THE DAVIS-BESSE SITE 9 HAS LOW-RELIEF, ERODIBLE SHORE MATERIALS AND A 10 HISTORY OF FLOODING. DIKES WOULD BE CAPABLE OF 11 HOLDING THE NORMAL FLOODING AND EROSION, BUT IN 12 THE EVENT OF A STORM SIMILAR TO THE 1972 STORM, 13 THOSE DIKES COULD BE BREACHED.

14 THE PROBLEM IS OF SERIOUS CONCERN TO US 15 BECAUSE OF THE WATER LEVEL PROBLEMS THAT ARE NOW 16 OCCURRING ALONG THE SHORE REGION. THE MEAN ANNUAL 17 LAKE LEVEL HAS RISEN SOME FOUR-AND-A-HALF FEET 18 SINCE 1934. LONG-TERM AND ANNUAL CHANGES.IN THE 19 LAKE LEVEL ARE PRESENTLY PRODUCING FLOOD 20 CONDITIONS ALONG LOW-LYING AREAS IN THE WESTERN 21 PART OF THE LAKE. WASTE MATERIAL COULD EASILY BE 22 DISPERSED OVER A WIDE AREA. THIS BY ITSELF IS A 23 GOOD REASON TO AVOID ANY WASTE BURIAL AT THE SITE 24 THAT'S BEING CONSIDERED.

25 THE COMPANY HAS MADE AN OVERSIMPLIFIED

• /

1 .

e o

1 9

9 4

6 O

O

49 4.

() 1 2

PRESENTATION OF THE BURIAL SITE'S GEOLOGICAL STRUCTURE. CURSORY SITE STUDIES HAVE-BEEN DONE j 3 WHICH WE BELIEVE ARE FLAWED AND SUPERFICIAL IN i ,

4 REGARD TO THE COMPANY'S GROUNDWATER PATH 5 ASSESSMENT. THERE COULD BE AS MANY AS SIX i  ;

j 6 DIFFERENT TILL DEPOSITS PLUS LAKE SEDIMENTS AT THE 4

7 LOCATION BEING C ON S I D ERED . THE SEDIMENTS CAN' VARY -

- FROM IMPERMEABLE PURE CLAY TO COBBLE DEPOSITS SO ,

9 POROUS THAT YOU COULD THREAD A GARDEN HOSE THROUGH l 10 THEM.

I

{ 11 THE GEOLOGY OF THE SITE, I THINK, MUST BE

\

i 12 WELL-KNOWN BEFORE WE CAN DETERMINE GROUNDWATER l

{ 13 FLOWS AND WATER TABLE. I BELIEVE THAT THIS STUDY i

j 14 HAS NOT BEEN SATISFACTORILY COMPLETED AT THE 15 PROPOSED SITE, AND THAT WITHOUT IT, WE'RE GAMBLING l 16 ON THE SAFETY OF THIS PARTICULAR PROPOSAL. ,

i 17 WE ALSO HAVE VERY GRAVE CONCERNS OVER THE 18 PRESERVATION OF THE REGION AS ONE OF THE S T AT E S

(

f 19 WETLAND RESERVES. THE DAVIS-BESSE POWER STATION 20 IS LOCATED IN THE MIDST OF EXTENSIVE, INVALUABLE

. 21 STATE FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES. BESIDES ITS l

I 22 PROXIMITY TO LAKE ERIE, IT'S ALSO NEAR AN ARRAY OF l 1

l 23 RIVERS, WETLANDS, WILDLIFE REFUGES, PARKS, 24 WOODLANDS AND FARM AND RECREATIONAL AREAS.

{

l 25 IN PARTICULAR, THE SITE IS ADdACENT TO f

50

() 1 THE NAVARRE MARSH, A NATURAL HABITAT FOR ,

2 ENDANGERED FISH AND WILDLIFE SPECIES.

3 CHEMICAL AND/OR RADIOACTIVE CONTAMINATION 11 4 COULD MIGRATE FROM THE DISPOSAL AREA INTO THE 5 MARSH THROUGH FLOODING, THROUGH SURFACE WATER 6 RUNOFF, OR THROUGH GROUNDWATER MOVEMENTS.

7 THE COMPANY DID NOT SPECIFICALLY 8 INVESTIGATE THE POTENTIAL HARM TO THE FISH AND 9 WILDLIFE RESOURCES OF THE GENERAL AREA OR TO THE 10 SITE ITSELF AS A PREREQUISITE FOR THE LICENSING.

11 A THOROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY IS 12 IMPERATIVE TO PROPERLY EVALUATE POTENTIAL 13 ECOLOGICAL DAMAGE THAT WOULD RESULT FROM A WASTE  ;

14 BURIAL SITE AT THIS PARTICULAR PLACE.

15 WE HAVE LEARNED THE HARD WAY TOO MANY 16 TIMES FROM HISTORY; AND HISTORY, ON THE OTHER 17 HAND, IS A GREAT TEACHER. WE'VE FOUND OVER THE

> 18 PAST SEVERAL DECADES THAT BURYING WASTES IN THE i

19 GROUND CAN NO LONGER BE TAKEN LIGHTLY. AT ONE

20 TIME, THAT MAY HAVE BEEN THE ACCEPTABLE PROCEDURE

! 21 FOR BURYING THOSE WASTES, BUT TOO OFTEN BURIAL OF I

i 22 WASTE HAS LATER PROVEN TO BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE 4

4 23 HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE CITIZENS OF THE STATE OF 24 OHIO, AND IN MANY AREAS OF THIS STATE, WE'RE 25 PAYING THE PRICE OF POLLUTION OF THE GROUNDWATER, 1 i

51

() 1 WHICH IS A VALUABLE RESOURCE OF THIS STATE.

2 OVER HALF OF THE CITIZENS OF THE STATE OF 3 OHIO RELY ON GROUNDWATER AS THEIR SOURCE OF FRESH, 4 POTABLE DRINKING WATER. A NATIONAL STUDY S INDICATES THAT OVER FIVE PERCENT OF THE NATION'S 6 GROUNDWATER IS ALREADY POLLUTED. WE MUST REALIZE 7 THE SERIOUSNESS OF THIS ISSUE EACH AND EVERY TIME 8 WE CONSIDER BURIAL OF ANY WASTE PRODUCTS, IN 9 PARTICULAR, WHEN WE'RE DISCUSSING BURIAL OF 10 NUCLEAR WASTE MATERIALS.

11 AT THE DAVIS-BESSE SITE, WATER LEVELS ARE 12 IN A CONSTANT FLUX WITH NATURE. WE DON'T FEEL

-)

\,_

13 THAT THE STORAGE PROPOSAL IS FAIL-SAFE. WE 14 BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A LIKELIHOOD POLLUTION WILL 15 OCCUR TO THE GROUNDWATER AS RAINFALL OR OTHER 16 SURFACE WATER PASSES THROUGH THE LANDFILL AND 17 CARRIES CONTAMINANTS WITH IT AS IT PERCOLATES INTO 18 THE GROUNDWATER. DURING CFRTAIN SEASONS, THERE'S 19 A POTENTIAL THAT THE LANDFILL COULD ACTUALLY BE 20 SITTING IN THE GROUNDWATER.

21 THE COMPANY, I DON'T THINK, REALIZES 22 FULLY NOR DO THEY FULLY UNDERSTAND THE GROUNDWATER 23 PROBLEMS AT THE FACILITY. IT HAS DEMONSTRATED t'

(-)/ 24 VERY LIMITED KNOWLEDGE OF THE GEOLOGY AND 25 HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE PROPOSED DISPOSAL SITE. THE

52

() 1 COM P ANY ' S 'KNOWLED GE IS BASED ON A FEW CURSORY SOIL 2 BORINGS.

3 AS TO HAVING A BURIAL SITE AT THE 4 FACILITY AT ALL, I REFER BACK TO THE ORIGINAL 1970 5 LICENSING HEARINGS, WHEN THE COMPANY PROMISED --

t i 6 AND I'M QUOTING NOW --

"THERE WILL BE NO DISPOSAL 7 0F SOLID WASTE AT THIS PARTICULAR FACILITY, NOR 8 WILL THERE BE ANY DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTE-9 PERFORMED UNDER THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION PERMIT -

10 OR OPERATING LICENSE FOR WHICH WE HAVE A P P L I ED . "

11 CLOSE QUOTE.

12 AS ATTORNEY. GENERAL OF THE STATE OF OHIO, i O 13 I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST A DECISION THAT FORCES THE l

14 COMPANY TO KEEP ITS PROMISE. WE PROTEST THE IS BURIAL OF ANY WASTES AND IN PARTICULAR THE NUCLEAR 16 WASTE AT THE DAVIS-BESSE FACILITY.

17 WE URGENTLY ASK THAT THE HEALTH AND

, 18 WELL-BEING OF OHIO'S CITIZENS, AS WELL AS THE 19 WELL-BEING OF AN ENVIRONMENTALLY IMPORTANT REGION 20 TO THE STATE OF OHIO, BE PARAMOUNT IN ANY l '

21 CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED BURIAL OF THIS TYPE OF i

22 WASTE.

1 23 YOUR HONOR, I AGAIN THANK YOU FOR GIVING

("

h i

24 ME THE PRIVILEGE OF APPEARING. I APOLOGIZE FOR f 25 BEING LATE. AND WE'LL FOLLOW WITH INTEREST THE i i i

53 k

() 1 PROCEEDINGS IN THIS HEARING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH i 2 FOR ALLOWING ME TO APPEAR. w 3 JUDGE H0YT: THANK YOU.

4 WE HAD ONE ADDITIONAL REQUEST FROM S REPRESENTATIVE WISE FROM --

I BELIEVE IT'S THE 6 19TH DISTRICT OF OHIO. IS THAf CORRECT, SIR? g 7 MR. WISE: 85TH.

8 JUDGE H0YT: I'M SORRY. I 9 SLIPPED.

10 WOULD YOU JUST GO AHEAD AND MAKE YOUR 11 STATEMENT, THEN WE'LL GET ON WITH THE REST. I 12 MR. WISE: THANK YOU. I 13 APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THIS BRIEF 14 STATEMENT.

15 WHEREUPON, 16 DWIGHT WISE 17 TESTIFIED AS FOLLOWS:

18 DIRECT TESTIMONY 19 MR. WISE: 1 AM REPRESENTATIVE 20 0F THE 85TH DISTRICT, WHICH INCLUDES ALL OF 21 SANDUSKY COUNTY AND THE NORTHERN PART OF SENECA ,

22 COUNTY, INCLUDING TIFFIN. i 23 AS STATE REPRESENT FOR THE 85TH OHIO 24 HOUSE DISTRICT REPRESENTING OVER 110,000 CITIZENS 25 IN SANDUSKY AND PART OF SENECA COUNTY, I VERY MUCH

54 4

() 1 APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO GIVE INPUT HERE 2 TODAY ON TOLEDO EDISON'S APPLICATION TO BURY 3 LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE AT THE DAVIS-BESSE 4 PLANT. I WRITE IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED l S APPLICATION, NOT ONLY AS A STATE REPRESENTATIVE, I

6 BUT ALSO AS A CONCERNED RESIDENT OF NORTHWESTERN 7 OHIO.

8 I BELIEVE I ECHO WHAT THE --

THE 9 SENTIMENTS OF MOST OF THE RESIDENTS OF THIS AREA 10 WHEN I SAY WE SIMPLY DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH 11 INFORMATION ON THE FULL HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL

12 IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED BURIAL, NOR HAS SUFFICIENT J \

l 13 TESTING BEEN DONE AT THE SITE TO DETERMINE WHETHER 14 SUCH BURIAL IS AT ALL FEASIBLE AND SAFE FOR THE 15 COMMUNITY. UNTIL MORE INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE, I 16 URGE THAT THE N.R.C. POSTPONE ANY FURTHER 1

17 CONSIDERATION OF THE APPLICATION.

) 18 THE INFORMATION THAT IS AVAILABLE TO 19 DATE, HOWEVER, SUGGESTS THAT THE PROPOSED SITE IS 20 NOT SUITABLE TO ENSURE WITH A REASONABLE DEGREE OF l

21 CERTAINTY THAT THE HEALTH OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE 22 AREA, AS WELL AS THE ENVIRONMENT, WILL BE ,

23 PROTECTED. 1 i

24 THE SHALLOW BEDROCK LOCATION, SUSCEPTIBLE 25 TO FLOODING, PRESENTS A SERIOUS RISK TO

SS

() 1 GROUNDWATER IN THE AREA AS WELL AS JEOPARDIZING 2 OUR LAKE ERIE WATER SUPPLY. AT A TIME WHEN WE IN 3 OHIO ARE MAKING GREAT STRIDES TOWARDS PROTECTING 4 OUR WATER SUPPLY, UNDERTAKING MANY NEW INITIATIVES S IN THIS AREA AND DEVELOPING COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING 6 0F OUR MANY RICH WATER RESOURCES, IT IS VERY 7 DISTURBING TO REALIZE THAT THESE EFFORTS CAN BE 8 RETARDED AND THE PROGRESS THAT WE HAVE MADE CAN BE 9 ELIMINATED BECAUSE OF THE PROPOSAL PRESENTLY BEING 1

10 CONSIDERED. NOT ONLY IS THE HEALTH OF OUR 12 11 CITIZENS ENDANGERED BY THIS PROPOSAL, BUT So ARE 12 THE RICH ENVIRONMENTAL TREASURES IN THE AREA. THE 13 WETLANDS THAT WE ARE TRYING TO PROTECT AND 14 PRESERVE IN NORTHWEST OHIO AND THE WILDLIFE 15 HABITATS THEY PROVIDE WILL BE JEOPARDIZED BY THE '

16 BURIAL OF THIS RADIOACTIVE WASTE.

17 IN ADDITION, WE IN OHIO NO LONGER WISH TO 18 BE A DUMPING GROUND FOR OTHER STATES' WASTE. IF 19 THIS APPLICATION WERE TO BE APPROVED, I BELIEVE A 20 POTENTIALLY DAMAGING PRECEDENT WOULD BE SET IN 21 SENDING A MESSAGE THAT IT'S ACCEPTABLE IN OHIO TO 22 BURY RADIOACTIVE WASTES. I BELIEVE THIS IS 23 ESPECIALLY INAPPROPRIATE, GIVEN THE FACT THAT THE 24 MIDWESTERN COMPACT ON LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE 2S IS PRESENTLY SEARCHING FOR AN APPROPRIATE SITE FOR

56 4

i

() 1 THE BURIAL OF WASTES GENERATED IN THE MIDWEST. I 2 SHARE THE FEAR OF OTHERS IN THIS AREA THAT IF THIS

, 3 APPLICATION WERE TO BE APPROVED, THAT-IT WOULD i

4 ONLY BE A MATTER OF TIME BEFORE OTHER COMPANIES IN 5 OTHER STATES STARTED SHIPPING THEIR WASTE HERE TO 4

6 THE TOLEDO EDISON SITE.

1

! 7 FINALLY, THE RESIDENTS OF NORTHWESTERN I

8 OHIO, WHILE WE APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOICE 9 OUR OPINIONS, FEEL DISTRESSED THAT ALL OUR' EFFORTS

! 10 AT PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT IN OUR AREA FOR THE ,

11 SAFETY OF OUR FAMILIES, FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS CAN 12 BE PUT IN DANGER THROUGH A PROCESS IN WHICH OUR 3

l 13 INPUT IS LIMITED. WE ASK FOR GREATER INPUT IN 14 THIS DECISION-MAKING PROCESS SINCE WE ARE THE ONES 1

15 WHO WILL BE AFFECTED. '

8 s

16 IN CLOSING, I STRONGLY URGE THAT TOLEDO 1

) 17 EDISON'S APPLICATION TO DISPOSE OF RADI0 ACTIVE 18 WASTE AT THE DAVIS-BESSE PLANT BE DENIED IN ORDER i 19 TO ADEQUATELY PROTECT THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF OUR 3

20 CITIZENS.

i l 21 THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS 22 THIS VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE, AND I DO APPRECIATE

) 23 THIS VERY MUCH.

24 I 'D JUST LIKE TO MAKE ONE ADDITIONAL

} 25 COMMENT. ,

}

i i

57 ,

l I DO REPRESENT SANDUSKY COUNTY AND ' SENECA

(}

2 COUNTY WHERE WE HAVE AT VICKERY, OHIO THE ONLY 3 0FF-SITE HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL DEEP-WELL 4 INJECTION SITE IN THE STATE OF OHIO. NOW, MANY S COMPANIES HAVE DEEP-WELL INJECTIONS ON THEIR OWN 6 SITE, BUT WE HAVE ONE AT VICKERY, AND IF ANYONE' 7 HAS FOLLOWED THAT SPECIFIC FACILITY AT ALL, YOU'RE

! 8 MORE THAN AWARE OF SOME OF THE PROBLEMS WE HAVE

9 HAD UP THERE, AND THAT'S MY CONCERN. AND I DO -

APPRECIATE THE CHANCE TO BE HERE AND EXPRESS OUR 10 11 CONCERN, AND I THINK THAT WE ALL NEED TO BE 12 INVOLVED WHEN A DECISION OF THIS MAGNITUDE IS 13 MADE.

14 SO I WOULD LIKE TO LEAVE THIS LETTER WITH 15 YOU, AND I REALLY DO APPRECIATE THE BREAK ON THE 16 AGENDA AND THE CHANCE TO --

17 JUDGE H0YT: THANK YOU VERY -

18 MUCH.

19 PERHAPS THE PERSON IN THE REAR OF THE 20 ROOM DIDN'T HEAR THE LAST PARAGRAPH OF MY OPENING 21 STATEMENT, BUT I'LL READ IT AGAIN.

l 22 DISRUPTIVE CONDUCT WILL NOT BE TOLERATED I

23 FOR IT NEITHER BENEFITS THE PROGRESS OF THE l 24 HEARING NOR PERMITS ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL AN 25 OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THEIR COMMENT. THIS IS NOT A

58 l 1 CHEERING SESSION. THANK YOU.

2 IF YOU WANT TO TAKE YOUR WITNESSES BACK 3 TO THEIR PLACES, AND WE'LL JUST REMOVE THAT BOARD.

4 MR. SILBERG: WILL THE WITNESSES 5 KINDLY RETURN TO THE PODIUM?

6 IF WE MAY PROCEED.

7 dUDGE H0YT: YES. THE RECORD 8 WILL REFLECT THAT THE WITNESSES AS PREVIOUSLY 9 INTRODUCED BY MR. SILBERG HAVE AGAIN TAKEN THEIR 10 PLACES ON THE ELECTIVE WITNESS STANDS, AND WE WILL 11 PROCEED AT THIS TIME, SIR.

gs 12 WHEREUPON,

(,E 13 DR. GARY F. BENNETT, J. STEWART BLAND, 14 DAVID BRIDEN, DAVID M. HENDRON, 15 DR. CHARLES E. HERDENDORF, RICHARD 16 HETHERINGTON, DR. WILLIAM B. JACKSON, 17 DR. ROGER E. LINNEMANN, DR. JEFFREY M.

18 REUTTER, dENNIFER SCOTT-WASILK, THE0 S.

19 SWIM, DR. JOHN E. TILL, AND 20 DAVID M. WALLACE 21 HAVING BEEN PREVIOUSLY DULY SWORN, RESUMED THE 22 STAND AND TESTIFIED FURTHER AS FOLLOWS:

23 DIRECT EXAMINATION (CONTINUED)

O[h 24 BY MR. SILBERG:

25 Q. WOULD EACH OF YOU BRIEFLY DESCRIBE YOUR

59 i

PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERTISE, AND THE

({} 1 2 SUBJECT OF YOUR TESTIMONY. MR. BRIDEN?

3 A. (MR. B R ID EN) I HOLD A BACHELOR OF l 4 SCIENCE DEGREE IN CHEMISTRY FROM UPPER IOWA l

5 UNIVERSITY, AND A MASTER OF SCIENCE DEGREE IN 6 RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH FROM TEMPLE UNIVERSITY. I 7 HAVE 24 YEARS EXPERIENCE IN HEALTH PHYSICS, 8 RADIOCHEMISTRY, AND CHEMISTRY.

9 MY RESUME IS ATTACHED AS AN EXHIBIT TO 10 THE WRITTEN TESTIMONY.

11 IN THIS PROCEEDING, I WILL PROVIDE 12 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE WASTE TO BE BURIED

(

13 AT DAVIS-BESSE AND ON PLANT STEPS THAT PRODUCE AND 14 HANDLE THE WASTE.

15 Q. MR. SWIM?

16 A. (MR. SWIM) I'M A CIVIL ENGINEER. I HOLD 17 A BACHELOR OF SCIENCE DEGREE IN CIVIL ENGINEERING l

18 FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS. I'M AN --

I AM 19 REGISTERED AS A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER IN THE STATE 20 0F ILLINOIS, AND I HAVE TEN YEARS ENGINEERING 21 EXPERIENCE.

22 A

SUMMARY

OF MY PROFESSIONAL 23 QUALIFICATIONS IS ATTACHED AS AN EXHIBIT TO THE

24 WRITTEN TESTIMONY.

25 MY TESTIMONY WILL ADDRESS THE PRESIDING

60 l

j 1 0FFICER'S QUESTIONS ONE AND TWO ON THE LOCATION 2 AND CONFIGURATION OF THE BURIAL SITE. I WILL ALSO )

3 DISCUSS DESIGN FEATURES THAT PROTECT THE BURIAL i

4 SITE AGAINST EROSION, WHICH IS THE SUBJECT OF THE  ;

5 PRESIDING OFFICER'S QUESTION FIVE.

6 Q. MISS WASILK?

7 A. (MS. SCOTT-WASILK) I HOLD A BACHELOR OF l

8 SCIENCE DEGREE IN BIOLOGY FROM WAYNE STATE 9 UNIVERSITY, A MASTER OF SCIENCE DEGREE IN ZOOLOGY 10 FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, AND A MASTER OF 11 SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING SCIENCES DEGREE IN 7-3 12 ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING FDOM THE UNIVERSITY OF

(-) 13 TOLEDO.

14 A

SUMMARY

OF MY PROFESSIONAL 15 QUALIFICATIONS IS ATTACHED AS AN EXHIBIT TO THE 16 WRITTEN TESTIMONY.

17 I HAVE BEEN RESPONSIBLE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL 18 MONITORING AT DAVIS-BESSE SINCE 1978 AND WILL BE 19 RESPONSISLE FOR MONITORING THE BURIAL SITE ONCE IT 20 IS CONSTRUCTED.

21 MY. TESTIMONY WILL ADDRESS THE PRESIDING 22 0FFICER'S QUESTION THREE, WHICH CONCERNS THE 23 NAVARRE MARSH, AND QUESTION 20, CONCERNING HOW THE

,p

\_J 24 BURIAL SITE WILL BE OPERATED.

25 Q. DR. HERDENDORF?

61 llg 1 A. (DR. HERDENDORF) I'M A LIMNOLOGIST. I 2 HOLD A BACHELOR OF SCIENCE. AND MASTER OF SCIENCE 3 DEGREES IN GEOLOGY FROM OHIO UNIVERSITY AND A 13 4 DOCTORATE DEGREE IN ZOOLOGY (LIMNOLOGY) FROM OHIO 5 STATE UNIVERSITY. I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN THE STUDY 6 0F THE LAKE ERIE AREA FOR APPROXIMATELY 20 YEARS.

7 A

SUMMARY

OF MY PROFESSIONAL 8 QUALIFICATIONS IS ATTACHED AS AN EXHIBIT TO THE 9 WRITTEN TESTIMONY.

10 MY TESTIMONY WILL ADDRESS THE PRESIDING ll 0FFICER'S QUESTION THREE, CONCERNING THE NAVARRE r ey 12 MARSH, AND QUESTIONS FOUR AND FIVE, WHICH RELATE h 13 TO FLOODING AND EROSION.

14 Q. MR. HENDRON?

15 A. (MR. HENDRON) I HOLD A BACHELOR OF 16 SCIENCE DEGREE IN CIVIL ENGINEERING FROM THE 17 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY AND A MASTER OF SCIENCE 18 DEGREE IN Soll AND ROCK MECHANICS, GEOTECHNICAL 19 ENGINEERING, FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS.

20 I HAVE 20 YEARS EXPERIENCE IN THE FIELD 21 0F GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING, AND FOR THE LAST 22 SEVEN YEARS I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN MORE THAN 25 23 MODERATE TO LARGE SIZED WASTE MANAGEMENT PROJECTS q

(/ 24 THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES.

25 A

SUMMARY

OF MY PROFESSIONAL

62 l

l 1 QUALIFICATIONS IS ATTACHED AS AN EXHIBIT TO THE 1

2 WRITTEN TESTIMONY.

3 IN RESPONSE TO THE PRESIDING OFFICER'S 4 QUESTION SIX THROUGH EIGHT, I WILL DISCUSS THE 5 GEOLOGY AND HYDROLOGY AT THE BURIAL SITE.

6 Q. DR. JACKSON?

7 A. (DR. JACKSON) I HOLD A BACHELOR OF ARTS 8 AND A MASTER OF ARTS DEGREE IN ZOOLOGY FROM THE 9 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN, AND A DOCTORATE OF 10 SCIENCE FROM THE JOHN'S HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL 11 0F HYGIENE AND PUBLIC HEALTH. I HAVE OVER 30 7

e 12 YEARS EXPERIENCE IN ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND 13 STUDIES.

14 A

SUMMARY

OF MY PROFESSIONAL IS QUALIFICATIONS IS ATTACHED AS AN EXHIBIT TO THE 16 WRITTEN TESTIMONY.

17 IN THIS PROCEEDING, I WILL DISCUSS THE 18 TERRESTRIAL PLANTS AND ANIMALS AT DAVIS-BESSE IN 19 RESPONSE TO THE PRESIDING OFFICER'S QUESTION NINE 20 ON ENDANGERED SPECIES. .

21 Q. DR. REUTTER?

22 A. (DR. REUTTER) I HOLD A BACHELOR OF 23 SCIENCE AND MASTER OF SCIENCE DEGREE IN FISHERIES

\ !

(- 24 MANAGEMENT, AND A DOCTORATE DEGREE IN BIOLOGICAL l 2S LIMNOLOGY AND FISHERIES BIOLOGY FROM THE OHIO l

l

[ 63 i

l

() 1 STATE UNIVERSITY. I'VE STUDIED THE AQUATIC 2 ECOLOGY OF LAKE ERIE FOR OVER A DECADE.

3 A

SUMMARY

OF MY PROFESSIONAL l 4 QUALIFICATIONS IS ATTACHED TO THE WRITTEN 5 TESTIMONY.

6 IN RESPONSE TO THE PRESIDING OFFICER'S 1 7 QUESTION NINE ON ENDANGERED SPECIES, I WILL 8 DISCUSS THE AQUATIC BIOTA.

2 9 Q. MR. BLAND?

10 A. (MR. BLAND) I HOLD A BACHELOR OF SCIENCE 11 DEGREE IN PHYSICS AND A MASTER OF SCIENCE DEGREE 12 IN NUCLEAR SCIENCE, BOTH FROM THE GEORGIA 4

O. 13 INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. I HAVE WORKED AS A 14 HEALTH PHYSICIST FOR 12 YEARS.

15 A

SUMMARY

OF MY PROFESSIONAL 16 QUALIFICATIONS IS ATTACHED AS AN EXHIBIT TO THE 17 WRITTEN TESTIMONY.

18 I WILL RESPOND TO THE PRESIDING OFFICER'S 19 QUESTIONS 10 THROUGH 16 , WHICH RELATE TO DOSE 20 CALCULATIONS.

21 Q. DR. TILL?

22 A. (DR. TILL) I HOLD A BACHELOR OF SCIENCE 23 DEGREE IN ENGINEERING FROM THE UNITED STATES NAVAL 24 ACADEMY, A MASTER OF SCIENCE DEGREE IN HEALTH 25 PHYSICS FROM COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY, AND A 2

64 ggg 1 DOCTORATE DEGREE IN NUCLEAR ENGINEERING FROM THE 2 GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. I AM A MEMBER OF 3 THE NATIONAL COUNCIL ON RADIATION PROTECTION AND 4 MEASUREMENTS'AND A MEMBER OF THE RADIATION 5 ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO THE UNITED STATES 6 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY.

7 A

SUMMARY

OF MY PROFESSIONAL 8 QUALIFICATIONS IS ATTACHED AS AN EXHIBIT TO THE 9 WRITTEN TESTIMONY.

10 I CONDUCTED A PEER REVIEW OF MR. BLAND'S 11 ANALYSES AND WILL SO TESTIFY. I WILL ALSO COMMENT ex 12 ON WHETHER THE LOW LEVELS OF RADIOACTIVITY IN THE s Y 13 WASTE WOULD HAVE AN IMPACT ON BIOTA.

14 Q. DR. LINNEMANN? ,

15 A. (DR. LINNEMANN) I HOLD A BACHELOR OF 16 ARTS DEGREE AND BACHELOR OF SCIENCE DEGREE AND 17 MEDICAL DEGREE FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA.

18 I PERFORMED MY MEDICAL INTERNSHIP AND RESIDENCY AT 19 WALTER REED ARMY HOSPITAL, WHERE I SPECIALIZED IN 20 RADIOLOGY. I HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN THE FIELDS OF 21 RADIOLOGY AND HEALTH PHYSICS FOR OVER 20 YEARS.

22 A

SUMMARY

OF MY PRdFESSIONAL 23 QUALIFICATIONS IS ATTACHED TO THE WRITTEN C/ 24 TESTIMONY.

25 I WILL DISCUSS WHETHER THE DOSES

... - - - _~. . _ _ . . ._

65

() 1 CALCULATED BY MR. BLAND WOULD HAVE ANY APPRECIABLE l 2 EFFECT ON HUMAN HEALTH.

3 Q. DR. BENNETT?

I 4' A. (DR. BENNETT) I HAVE A BACHELOR OF ,

5 SCIENCE DEGREE- IN CHEMICAL ENGINEERING FROM l

6 QUEEN'S-UNIVERSITY IN KINGSTON, ONTARIO,.A MASTER l 7- 0F SCIENCE AND DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DEGREES, ALSO 8 IN CHEMICAL ENGINEERING, FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF 4

9 MICHIGAN. I'VE TAUGHT CHEMICAL AND BIOCHEMICAL 10 ENGINEERING FOR APPROXIMATELY 20 YEARS. I'VE BEEN .

1 i

11 INVOLVED IN NUMEROUS STUDIES ON WATER POLLUTION i l

12 CONTROL AND HAZARDOUS WASTES.

13 A

SUMMARY

. OF MY PROFESSIONAL j

14 QUALIFICATIONS IS ATTACHED AS AN EXHIBIT- TO THE 15 WRITTEN TESTIMONY.

l l

16 I WILL ADDRESS THE PRESIDING OFFICER'S 17 QUESTION 17, CONCERNING THE CHEMICAL CONTENT OF 18 THE WATER SUPPLY TREATMENT SLUDGE.

19 Q. MR. HETHERINGTON?

[ 20 A. (MR. HETHERINGTON) I HOLD A BACHELOR OF 21 SCIENCE DEGREE IN CHEMISTRY FROM TEMPLE 22- UNIVERSITY. I HAVE BEEN ACTIVE IN ION-EXCHANGE 23 AND WATER . TREATMENT FIELDS FOR.0VER 40 YEARS. I-24 HAVE AUTHORED NUMEROUS PAPERS ON ION-EXCHANGE 25 TECHNOLOGY AND HOLD A NUMBER'0F PATENTS RELATING

66 g 1 TO THE APPLICATION OF ION-EXCHANGE RESINS. I AM 2 CURRENTLY EMPLOYED BY EPICOR, WHICH PROVIDES THE 3 ION-EXCHANGE RESINS USED AT DAVIS-BESSE.

4 A

SUMMARY

OF MY PROFESSIONAL 5 QUALIFICATIONS IS ATTACHED.

6 MY TESTIMONY WILL ADDRESS THE PRESIDING 7 0FFICER'S QUESTIONS 18 AND 19. I WILL DISCUSS 8 WHETHER THE RESINS ARE C H EM I C A L LY OR BIOLOGICALLY 9 DEGRADABLE.

10 Q. FINALLY, MR. WALLACE.

11 A. (MR. WALLACE) I HOLD A BACHELOR OF

.q 12 SCIENCE DEGREE IN CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING FROM s l 13 THE LAWRENCE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND A MASTERS 14 IN BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION FROM EASTERN MICHIGAN 14 15 UNIVERSITY, AND AM PRESENTLY PURSUING A PH.D. IN 16 THAT AT THE UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO. I'M A 17 PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER REGISTERED IN OHIO AND SIX 18 OTHER STATES. ,

19 A

SUMMARY

OF M '. PROFESSIONAL 20 QUALIFICATIONS IS ATTACHED AS AN EXHIBIT TO THE 21 WRITTEN TESTIMONY.

22 ALONG WITH MISS SCOTT-WASILK, I WILL 23 ADDRESS THE PRESIDING OFFICER'S QUESTION 20,

/

N/ 24 CONCERNING HOW THE BURIAL SITE WILL BE OPERATED.

25 Q. MR. BRIDEN, WOULD YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE THE

67 lll 1 WASTE WHICH IS TO BE BURIED AT DAVIS-BESSE?

2 A. (MR. BRIDEN) THE WASTE CONSISTS 3 P R I N C I P,.L LY OF THE WATER SUPPLY TREATMENT SLUDGE.

4 THIS WASTE IS DISCHARGED INTO A LINED BASIN ON THE S DAVIS-BESSE SITE, WHERE THE WASTE SETTLES TO THE 6 BOTTOM. ION-EXCHANGE RESINS CONTAMINATED WITH 7 VERY LOW LEVELS OF RADIOACTIVITY ARE ALSO 8 DISCHARGED TO THE BASIN.

9 Q. WHAT IS THE WATER SUPPLY TREATMENT 10 S L UD G E ?

11 A. THE DAVIS-BESSE STATION HAS ITS OWN WATER x 12 SUPPLY TREATMENT FACILITY. THE WATER SUPPLY

[y,~/]

13 TREATMENT FACILITY PURIFIES LAKE ERIE WATER BOTH 14 FOR USE IN PLANT SYSTEMS AND FOR PERSONAL USE.

1S THE SLUDGE CONSISTS OF SILT, MINERALS, AND OTHER 16 SUSPENDED SOLIDS REMOVED FROM THE LAKE PLUS WATER 17 TREATMENT CHEMICALS. IT IS NOT A T0XIC SUBSTANCE.

18 Q. FOR WHAT PURPOSES ARE THE RESINS IN 19 QUESTION USED AT THE DAVIS-BESSE PLANT?

20 A. THEY ARE USED TO DEMINERALIZE THE WATER 21 IN THE SECONDARY SYSTEM.

22 Q. AND WHAT IS THE SECONDARY SYSTEM?

23 A. A PRESSURIZED WATER REACTOR, LIKE

!\' 24 DAVIS-BESSE, HAS TWO PRINCIPAL SYSTEMS, THE I

2S PRIMARY SYSTEM AND A SECONDARY SYSTEM. IN THE

68 l

lg 1 PRIMARY SY STEM , HEAT PRODUCED IN THE REACTOR IS 2 CARRIED AWAY BY THE CIRCULATING PRIMARY COOLANT, 3 WATER. THE COOLANT PASSES THROUGH STEAM 4 GENERATORS, WHERE THE HEAT IS TRANSFERRED ACROSS 5 TUBES TO WATER IN THE SECONDARY SYSTEM. THE WATER 6 IN A SECONDARY SY STEM TURNS TO STEAM WHICH DRIVES 7 THE TURBINES. THE TURBINES DRIVE A GENERATOR 8 WHICH PRODUCES ELECTRICITY. THE PHYSICAL 9 SEPARATION BETWEEN A PRIMARY SYSTEM AND A 10 SECONDARY SYSTEM PROVIDES A BARRIER FOR THE 11 CONTROL OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL. THE SECONDARY 12 SYSTEM REMAINS ESSENTIALLY NONRADI0 ACTIVE.

13 Q. WHY IS THE SECONDARY SIDE WATER 14 DEMINERALIZED?

15 A. STRICT WATER QUALITY REQUIREMENTS MUST BE 16 MAINTAINED TO ENSURE THE CONTINUED EFFICIENT AND 17 RELIABLE OPERATION OF THE SECONDARY SYSTEM, 18 PARTICULARLY THE STEAM GENERATOR TUBES. WITHOUT 1,9 THE DEMINERALIZATION, MINERAL DEPOSITS COULD 20 EVENTUALLY BUILD UP IN AND CORRODE BOTH THE STEAM 21 GENERATORS AND THE TURBINE.

22 Q. WOULD YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE THE 23 DEMINERALIZATION PROCESS?

24 A. DEMINERALIZATION OCCURS IN A CONDENSATE 25 DEMINERALIZER SYSTEM. THE CONDENSATE

69

() 1 DEMINERALIZER SY STEM CONSISTS OF FOUR VESSELS.

2 INSIDE EACH VESSEL ARE PERFORATED TUBES WHICH ARE 3 COATED WITH POWDERED ION-EXCHANGE RESIN. WATER t

4 ENTERS THE VESSEL ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE TUBES, 5 FLOWS THROUGH THE PDWDERED RESINS TO THE INSIDE OF 6 THE TUBES, AND EXITS THE VESSEL. THE COATING OF I

7 POWD ERED RESINS IS HELD IN PLACE BY THE PRESSURE 8 0F THE WATER FLOWING THROUGH THE TUBES.

9 THE P OWD ER ION-EXCHANGE RESIN CONSISTS OF 10 A MIXTURE OF ANION AND CATION RESINS. THE CATION 11 RESIN REMOVES IMPURITIES WITH A POSITIVE VALENCE.

12 THE ANION RESIN REMOVES IMPURITIES'WITH A NEGATIVE 13 VALENCE.

14 Q. AND HOW DO THESE RESINS BECOME f

i 15 RADI0 ACTIVELY CONTAMINATED?

16 A. WHILE THE SECONDARY SYSTEM IS SEPARATED' 17 FROM THE RADIOACTIVE PRIMARY SY S TEM ,. PRIMARY TO i 18 SECONDARY LEAKAGE CAN 0CCUR THROUGH THE STEAM 19 GENERATOR TUBES.

l 20 IN MARCH 1981, DAVIS-BESSE EXPERIENCED' 21 ITS FIRST AND, TO DATE ONLY, STEAM GENERATOR TUBE 22 LEAK. PRIOR TO THIS EVENT, THERE HAD BEEN N0 f 23 PRIMARY-TO-SECONDARY LEAKAGE; THE SECONDARY SI6E l

([) 24 0F THE PLANT WAS NOT CONTAMINATED. 'AFTER T H F -_

~

25 LEAK, THE PLANT WAS SHUT DOWN AND THE LEAK e

70

() 1 REPAIRED. DURING THE LEAK CLEAN-UP PERIOD, THE 2 SECONDARY SIDE CLEAN-UP RESINS CONTAINED LEVELS OF 3 RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL THAT REQUIRED OFF-SITE 4 DISPOSAL AS A RADWASTE. SINCE THEN, VERY LOW 5 LEVELS OF RADIOACTIVE CONTAMINANTS HAVE CONTINUED 6 TO ACCUMULATE ON THE CONDENSATE DEMINERALIZER 7 RESINS. MUCH OF.THIS RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL IS A 8 RESIDUAL RAD'I0 ACTIVITY MATERIAL INTRODUCED INTO 9 THE SECONDARY SYSTEM DURING THE TUBE LEAK.

10 WITH TIME, THE ACTIVITY HAS CONTINUED TO 11 LEACH OUT OF THE SYSTEM FROM THE INITIAL TUBE LEAK 12 DEPOSITS.

13 AN ADDITIONAL SOURCE Of THE ACTIVITY IS 14 FROM VERY MINOR LEAKS OR WEEPS IN THE STEAM 15 GENERATOR EXPERIENCED DURING SYSTEM THERMAL 16 EXPANSIONS AND CONTRACTIONS. THESE SAME THERMAL 17 EXPANSIONS AND CONTRACTIONS COULD ALSO CONTRIBUTE 18 TO THE DISSOLUTION OF THE DEPOSITED RADIOACTIVE 19 MATERIAL IN A SECONDARY SYSTEM.

20 Q. HOW OFTEN ARE THE RESINS REPLACED?

21 A. THE VOLUME OF RESINS INJECTED INTO EACH 22 CONDENSATE DEMINERALIZATION VESSEL IS SMALL, ABOUT 23 20 CUBIC FEET. BECAUSE THE VOLUME IS SMALL, THE 24 RESINS ARE REPLACED WEEKLY.

25 Q. WHEN THE RESINS ARE REMOVED, TO WHERE-ARE e

71

() 1 THEY TRANSFERRED?

2 A. THE RESINS ARE TRANSFERRED FROM THE 3 CONDENSATE DEMINERALIZER VESSEL TO THE CONDENSATE 4 DEMINERALIZER BACKWASH RECEIVING TANK. IF THE 5 RESINS SATISFY PREDETERMINED CRITERIA, THEY THEN 6 ARE TRANSFERRED FROM THE CONDENSATE DEMINERALIZER 7 BACKWASH RECEIVING TANK TO THE SETTLING BASIN.

8 THE TRANSFER IS C O N D U C.T E D AS A WATER-RESIN SLURRY 9 IN APPROXIMATELY 10,000 GALLONS OF WATER.

-10 Q. WOULD YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE THE TESTING 11 THAT IS DONE BEFORE A BATCH OF CONTAMINATED RESINS 12 MAY BE DISCHARGED TO THE SETTLING BASIN?

13 A. EACH BATCH OF SECONDARY SIDE RESIN IS 14 SAMPLED AND ANALYZED BY GAMMA SPECTROSCOPY FOR 15 15 RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL PRIOR TO BEING DISCHARGED TO 16 THE SETTLING BASIN. THE LEVEL OF ACTIVITY OF.EACH 17 RADIONUCLIDE DETECTED IS QUANTIFIED. IF THE 18 RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS ARE HIGHER THAN 19 ACCEPTABLE, THE RESINS ARE NOT SENT TO THE 20 SETTLING BASIN, BUT ARE TREATED AS RADWASTE.

21 Q. HOW RADIOACTIVE IS THE WASTE IN THE 22 SETTLING BASIN?

23 A. THE LEVEL OF RADIOACTIVITY IN THE WASTE

\~

24 IN THE SETTLING BASIN IS EXTREMELY LOW.

25 CONCENTRATIONS OF RADIONUCLIDES IN THE WASTE ARE w---- - - - - ,

y-, ,

72

) 1 LOWER THAN THOSE LEVELS PERMITTED BY THE N.R.C. IN 2 WATER DISCHARGED TO THE LAKE. GRANITE IS MORE 3 RADIOACTIVE, AND A WATCH WITH A RADIUM LUMINESCE 4 DIAL IS SIGNIFICANTLY MORE RADIOACTIVE. THIS CAN 5 BE OBSERVED IN THE FOLLOWING D E M O N S.T R A T I O N .

6 THIS RADIATION DETECTION INSTRUMENT IS 7 CURRENTLY READING BACKGROUND WHICH IS 8 APPROXIMAT2LY 30 COUNTS PER MINUTE. THE TICKS 9 THAT YOU WILL HEAR FROM THIS IS WHAT'S COMING FROM 10 OUTER SPACE AND GENERALLY NATURALLY OCCURRING 11 RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS WHICH MAKE UP THE 12 CONSTRUCTION OF THIS ROOM.

gJ)

L 13 I HAVE A SAMPLE OF SLUDGE THAT I 14 COLLECTED FROM THE BASIN LAST THURSDAY AFTERNOON, 15 AND IF WE PUT THE DETECTOR DIRECTLY OVER THE 16 RESIN, YOU CAN SEE THAT IT CANNOT EVEN BE 17 DETECTED. THIS DETECTOR WILL NOT SEE IT. IT'S 18 EXACTLY THE SAME LEVEL AS NATURALLY OCCURRING 19 BACKGROUND THAT'S OBSERVED WITH THIS DETECTOR. NO l

20 INCREASE AT ALL. l 21 I MENTIONED THAT GRANITE WAS MORE 22 RADIOACTIVE. THIS IS A PIECE OF GRANITE, AND IF l

l 23 WE PUT THE DETECTOR ON IT, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE

\

t 24 COUNT RATE WILL RAISE TO A P P R O X I M A T E LY 100 COUNTS 25 'A MINUTE. THIS INCREASE IS APPROXIMATELY TWO TO

73

() 1 THREE TIMES GENERAL BACKGROUND.

2 I MENTIONED IF YOU HAVE A RADIUM DIOL 3 LUMINESCE WATCH SUCH AS THIS ONE, IT WILL BE 4 SIGNIFICANTLY MORE RADIOACTIVE. AS I BRING IT 5 CLOSE, YOU CAN SEE THE COUNT GO UP AND HEAR IT.

6 MR. SILBERG: AT THIS TIME, WE 'D 7 LIKE TO --

WE HAVE A SERIES OF QUESTIONS AND 8 ANSWERS THAT ARE ADDRESSED TO THE PRESIDING 9 0FFICER'S FIRST QUESTION. THE FIRST QUESTION IS:

10 "WHAT FINAL LOCATION ON THE DAVIS-BESSE SITE HAS 11 BEEN SELECTED FOR THE WASTE BURIAL 7" 12 DIRECT EXAMINATION (CONTINUED) 13 BY MR. SILBERG:

14 Q. MR. SWIM, WOULD YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE THE 15 LOCATION THAT TOLEDO EDISON HAS SELECTED FOR WASTE 16 BURIAL? l 17 A. (MR. SWIM)- THE BURIAL GROUNDS WILL BE 18 LOCATED IN THE SOUTH CENTRAL PORTION OF THE 19 DAVIS-BESSE SITE, APPROXIMATELY 2,000 FEET SOUTH 20 0F THE SWITCHYARD AND APPROXIMATELY 1,200 FEET )

1 21 EAST OF STATE ROUTE 2. THE LOCATION IS SHOWN IN  !

l I

22 FIGURE l-1, WHICH IS ATTACHED TO THE WRITTEN I

23 TESTIMONY. l 24 Q. IS THIS LOCATION FINAL?

l 25 A. THE LOCATION AS SHOWN IN FIGURE l-1 IS  :

I

'I

74 Iw/'i 1 THE ONE THAT TOLEDO EDISON HAS SELECTED AND 2 INTENDS TO USE. THE LOCATION, HOWEVER, IS 3 CONTINGENT ON ITS APPROVAL IN THIS PROCEEDING AND 4 UPON OBTAINING A PERMIT TO INSTALL FROM THE STATE 5 0F OHIO.

6 Q. WHAT IS THE JUSTIFICATION FOR THE 7 LOCATION WHICH WAS SELECTED?

8 A. THE LOCATION OF THE BURIAL GROUND WAS 9 CHOSEN AS AN AREA THAT IS UNLIKELY TO BE DISTURBED 10 BY ANY FUTURE CONSTRUCTION ON THE DAVIS-BESSE 11 SITE. THE BURIAL SITE WILL BE A MINIMUM OF 100 12 YARDS FROM ANY FREQUENTLY OCCUPIED AREAS. IN 13 ACCORDANCE WITH OHIO REQUIREMENTS, THE SITE WILL 14 BE OVER 1,000 FEET FROM ANY WATER WELL, NOT 15 COUNTING TOLEDO EDISON'S OBSERVATION MONITORING 16 WELLS AND WILL BE LOCATED AT LEAST 200 FEET FROM 17 ANY STREAM OR LAKE, INCLUDING THE DRAINAGE DITCH 18 TO THE EAST OF THE BURIAL SITE. THE BURIAL GROUND 19 WILL NOT BE WITHIN A FLOODWAY. IN ADDITION, THE 20 BURIAL GROUND IS SITUATED IN AN AREA WITH 21 FAVORABLE GEOLOGICAL CONDITIONS.

22 Q. THE BOARD'S SECOND QUESTION WAS AS 23 FOLLOWS: WHAT WILL BE THE DIMENSIONS OF THE WASTE 24 BURIAL SITE IN ITS FINAL CONFIGURATION AFTER 30 l 25 YEARS?

75

(]) 1 MR. SWIM, HOW WILL THE WASTE BE BURIED?

2 A. TOLEDO EDISON INTENDS TO EMPTY THE 3 SETTLING BASIN SIX TIMES OVER THE LIFE OF THE <

4 PLANT. THERE WILL THEREFORE BE SIX LOTS OF WASTE 5 BURIED AT THE BURIAL SITE. EACH LOT WILL BE 6 BURIED IN A SEPARATELY CONSTRUCTED SQUARE CELL SO 7 AS NOT TO DISTURB PREVIOUSLY BURIED LOTS.

8 TO PROVIDE FLOOD PR.0TECTION AND TO 9 MAINTAIN A SUITABLE DISTANCE FROM THE WASTE AND 10 GROUNDWATER IN THE UNDERLYING AQUIFER, TOLEDO 11 EDISON INTENDS TO PARTIALLY ELEVATE THE CELLS.

12 THE WALLS OF THE CELLS WILL BE CONSTRUCTED TO

> O.~

13 SERVE AS DIKES AND WILL BE RIP-RAPPED. TOLEDO 14 EDISON ALSO PLANS TO EQUIP EACH CELL WITH A

15 FOUR-FOOT THICK LINER. FROM BOTTOM TO TOP, THE 16 LINER WILL BE COMPOSED OF A TWO-AND-A-HALF FOOT 17 THICK LAYER OF COMPACTED CLAY, A SYNTHETIC 18 IMPERVIOUS MEMBRANE, A ONE-FOOT LAYER OF GRADED 19 GRAVEL FOR LEACHATE COLLECTION, AND A SIX-INCH 1

20 LAYER OF COMPACTED CLAY. EACH CELL WILL BE CAPPED 21 WITH A TWO-TO-FOUR-FOOT THICK COVER CONSISTING --

i .

-22 EXCUSE ME --

WILL . BE CAPPED WITH A i 23 TWO-TO-FOUR-FOOT THICK COVER CONSISTING OF A 24 LOWER, COMPACTED-CLAY LAYER, A SAND OR GRAVEL 25 FILTER LAYER, AND AN UPPER LAYER OF TOPSOIL.

- -, , -- m y - ,

76

( ) 1 SOME CELLS WILL ADdOIN OTHERS. WHERE A 2 NEW CELL IS CONSTRUCTED ADdOINING A PREEXISTING 3 CELL, THE ADdOINING CELLS WILL SHARE THE DIKE 4 BETWEEN THEM.

5 THE FIRST THREE CELLS WILL BE ADdOINING 6 AND WILL BE CONSTRUCTED IN THE CENTER OF THE 7 BURIAL SITE. THE NEXT TWO CELLS WILL ADdOIN EACH 8 OTHER AND WILL BE CONSTRUCTED TO THE WEST OF THE 16 9 FIRST THREE CELLS. THESE TWO CELLS WILL NOT BE 10 CONNECTED TO THE FIRST THREE BECAUSE TRANSMISSION 11 LINES PASS BETWEEN THE TWO AND THREE CELL UNITS.

rs 12 THE LAST CELL WILL BE CONSTRUCTED NEXT TO THE U

13 NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE FIRST THREE CELLS. THE 14 LAYOUT IS SHOWN IN FIGURE 2-1.

T 15 Q. HOW WAS THIS LAYOUT DETERMINED?

16 A.

() THE LAYOUT WAS E F F E C T I V E LY DICTATED BY 17 THE SITING CRITERIA THAT I HAVE PREVIOUSLY 18 DISCUSSED AND BY THE NECESSITY OF KEEPING 19 UNENCUMBERED A MAINTENANCE CORRIDOR FOR THE 20 TRANSMISSION LINES PASSING OVERHEAD.

21 Q. PLEASE GIVE US THE DIMENSIONS OF A 22 TYPICAL CELL. l I

23 A. THE DIMENSIONS OF A TYPICAL SINGLE SQUARE 24 CELL ARE ILLUSTRATED IN FIGURE 2-2. THE INNER 25 BASE OF THE CELL IS APPROXIMATELY 45 FEET BY 45 l

77

1 FEET AND IS ABOUT THREE FEET BELOW LAND SURFACE.

2 FROM THE BASE, THE INNER SIDES OF THE CELLS SLOPE 3 UPWARD AND OUTWARD AT A THREE-TO-ONE GRADE TO THE 4 TOP OF THE SURROUNDING DIKES. THE TOP OF THE 5 CELL, NOT INCLUDING THE COVER, IS A P P R O X I M A T E LY 98 6 FEET BY 98 FEET AND IS ABOUT FIVE AND 7 ThREE-QUARTER FEET ABOVE LAND SURFACE. FROM THE 8 TOP OF THE CELL, THE DIKES SLOPE DOWNWARD AND l 9 UPWARD AT A THREE-TO-ONE GRADE TO LAND SURFACE.

10 FROM TOE OF DIKE TO TOE OF DIKE, EACH CELL IS 16 2 f 11 FEET BY 16 2 FEET.

(~S 12 Q. I'M SORRY. YOU SAID THAT THE DIKES SLOPE

%~)

13 DOWNWARD AND U P W A R D,. DID YOU MEAN --

14 A. EXCUSE ME. I HAVE A CORRECTION. THE 15 DIKES SLOPE D OWNW ARD AND OUTWARD AT A THREE-TO-ONE 16 GRADE-TO-LAND SURFACE.

17 Q. THANK YOU.

\ '

18 WILL YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW YOU 19 DETERMINED THE DIMENSIONS FOR EACH CELL?

20 A. THE INTERIOR VOLUME OF THE CELL MUST I 21 ENCOMPASS THE VOLUME OF THE LOT OF WASTE TO DE f 22 BURIED. THIS IS THE PRINCIPAL CONSTRAINT. WITH 23 THIS CONSTRAINT, WE DESIGNED THE CELLS TO MINIMIZE Ig 24 THEIR AREA AND THE AMOUNT OF EARTHWORK NEEDED TO

{

25 CONSTRUCT THE CELLS.

78 llg 1 THERE WERE SEVERAL ADDITIONAL 2 CONSTRAINTS. FIRST, THE EXCAVATION FOR THE CELL l

3 COULD NOT GO BELOW ELEVATION 567 INTERNATIONAL 4 GREAT LAKES DATUM. IF THE EXCAVATION WERE DEEPER, 5 GROUNDWATER IN THE UND ER LY I NG AQUIFER, WHICH IS 6 UNDER PRESSURE, MIGHT DISTURB THE UNDERLYING 7 SEDIMENTS. OH, EXCUSE ME. OVERLYING SEDIMENTS.

8 WITH THE CELLS HAVING A FOUR-FOOT THICK 9 LINER, THIS CONSTRAINT PUT THE BASE OF THE CELL AT 10 ELEVATION 571 I.G.L.D. SECOND, THE SLOPES HAD TO 11 REMAIN THREE-TO-ONE OR LESS TO PREVENT EROSION.

73 12 THIRD, THE TOP OF THE CELL HAD TO BE ABOVE FLOOD V

13 LEVEL, AND WE CHOSE ELEVATION 579 TO 5 80 I.G.L.D.

14 AS A CONSERVATIVE HEIGHT. FINALLY, WE DETERMINED 15 THAT MAKING THE CELLS SQUARE RESULTED IN THE 16 MINIMAL AMOUNT OF EARTHWORK. THESE CONSTRAINTS 17 AND CONSIDERATIONS PRODUCED THE DIMENSIONS SHOWN 18 IN FIGURE 2-2.

19 Q. WHAT ARE THE DIMENSIONS FOR THE MULTICELL 20 UNITS?

21 A. AS I STATED, WHEN CELLS ARE ADdOINING, 22 THEY ARE CONSTRUCTED TO SHARE A DIKE BETWEEN THEM.

23 THEREFORE, THE DIMENSIONS IN A MULTICELL UNITS ARE 24 NOT SIMPLE MULTIPLES OF THE DIMENSIONS OF A SINGLE  !

25 CELL. TAKING THIS INTO CONSIDERATION, THE 1 i

7;9

7. -

1 DIMENSIONS OF A THREE-CELL UNIT WILL BE l

\

l 2 APPROXIMATELY 3;95 FEET BY 16 2 FEET, AND THE 3 DIMENSIONS OF A TWO-CELL UNIT WILL BE l

( 4 APPROXIMATELY 27 8 FEET BY 16 2 FEET.

5 Q. THANK YOU. WE WILL NOW PROCEED --

l l 6 dUDGE H0YT: MR. SILBERG, LET ME 7 DETERMINE IF THE REPORTER WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A 8 CHANGE AT THIS POINT.

9 (RECESS TAKEN.)

2 10 JUDGE H0YT: MR. SILBERG.

11 BY MR. SILBERG: l l

12 Q. WE'LL NOW PROCEED TO THE THIRD QUESTION

,m s 13 ASKED BY THE PRESIDING OFFICER, AND THAT QUESTION:

14 IS THE WASTE BURIAL SITE LOCATED WITHIN THE BOUNDS 15 0F THE NAVARRE MARSH? PLEASE PROVIDE A 16 DESCRIPTION RELATIVE TO THE MARSH.

17 FIRST OF ALL, MRS. WASILK, COULD YOU TELL 18 US WHAT IS THE NAVARRE MARSH?

1;9 A. (MS. SCOTT-WASILK) ORIGINALLY THE NAVARRE 20 MARSH REFERRED TO THE MARSHLAND WITHIN THE NAVARRE 21 TRACT. THE NAVARRE TRACT WAS 524 ACRES THAT WAS 22 AT ONE TIME A PRIVATE HUNT CLUB AND WAS 23 S UB S E QU E NT LY ACQUIRED BY THE U.S. FISH AND T'l 28 4 W I LD L I F E SERVICE. THE BOUNDS- 0F THE NAVARRE TRACT U

25 ARE SHOWN IN FIGURE 3-1.

80 ps 1 IN 1196 8, TOLEDO EDISON AC QU I RED THE t

2 NAVARRE TRACT FROM THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE  ;

3 SERVICE IN EXCHANGE FOR THE DARBY MARSH (A MARSH i 4 ABOUT EIGHT MILES TO THE SOUTHEAST). AS PART OF 5 THIS TRANSACTION, TOLEDO EDISON LEASED BACK TO THE 6 U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 447 ACRES OF THE 7 NAVARRE TRACT, AND ALSO LEASED TO THE U.S. FISH 8 AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 13 5 ACRES NORTH OF THE SITE.

,9 TOLEDO EDISON FURTHER AGREED TO ALLOW THE U.S.

10 FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE TO OPERATE AND CONTROL 11 AN ADDITIONAL 33 ACRES OF THE NAVARRE TRACT.

12 UNDER THESE LEASES AND AGREEMENTS, THE U.S. FISH k- 13 AND WILDLIFE SERVICE NOW MANAGES ALL THE MARSHLAND l>4 IN THE NAVARRE TRACT. THIS MARSHLAND, PLUS THE 15 13 5 ACRES NORTH OF THE SITE ARE NOW CALLED THE 16 NAVARRE MARSH UNIT OF THE OTTAWA NATIONAL WILDLIFE 17 REFUGE.

18 Q. IS THE BURIAL SITE WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF 1;9 THE NAVARRE MARSH UNIT OF THE OTTAWA NATIONAL 20 WILDLIFE REFUGE?

21 A. NO. THE CLOSEST APPROACH OF THE DIKE 22 AROUND THE CELL NEAREST TO THE NAVARRE MARSH UNIT 23 WILL BE APPROXIMATELY 400 FEET WEST OF THE NAVARRE g 24 MARSH UNIT.

25 Q. DR. HERDENDORF, COULD YOU PLEASE GIVE US

81 cm 1 THE BIOLOGICAL DEFINITION OF A MARSH?

2 A. (DR. HERDENDORF) A MARSH IS DEFINED BY THE 3 PRESENCE OF A QU AT I C PLANTS, HY D ROP HY T E S , WHICH 4 INDICATES THAT AT SOME POINT DURING THE GROWING S SEASON THE SOIL WAS SATURATED. THE THREE TYPES OF 6 A QU AT I C VEGETATION THAT DETERMINE THE EXISTENCE OF 7 A MARSH ARE EMERGENT (FOR EXAMPLE, CATTAILS AND 8 BULRUSHES), FLOATING LEAF TYPE (FOR EXAMPLE),

9 WATER LILY), AND SUBMERGED TYPE (FOR EXAMPLE, 10 WATER MILFOIL, COONTAIL OR POND WEED. PROFESSOR 11 MILTON W. WELLER OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENTOMOLOGY 12 FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE AT UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA k_/ 13 IN HIS BOOK ENTITLED ERESBHAIER_ MARSHES 1_ECQLQGL_

14 ANE_HikaLIEE_MANAGEMEN, DEFINES FRESHWATER 15 MARSHES AS FOLLOWS:

16 I QUOTE. "ANY UNDISTRUBED LOW SPOT THAT 17 WILL HOLD WATER OF A FEW INCHES TO A FEW FEET OVER 18 SOIL THAT FORMS A SUITABLE BASIN FOR THE INVASION 1;9 0F WATER-TOLERANT ROOTED, PERENNIAL. SOFT-STEMMED 20 PLANTS SUCH AS SEDGES, CATTAIL AND BULRUSH. THIS 21 BASIN IS NOW A MARSH, AND IT IN TURN ATTRACTS 22 OTHER FORMS OF LIFE. THE TERM MARSH IS ALSO 23 APPLIED TO TYPICAL MARSH VEGETATION THAT MAY BE ggg 2,4 DISTRIBUTED AS PATCHES OR STRIPS ALONG THE SHALLOW 25 EDGES OF LAKES SEASHORES, OR RIVERS." END QUOTE.

82 1 Q. DO ANY GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES HAVE 9 2 DEFINITIONS FOR WHAT CONSTITUTES A MARSH?

3 A. YES. ALL MARSHES ARE WETLANDS THE U.S.

4 ARMY CORP OF ENGINEERS DEFINES WETLANDS AS S PRESCRIBED BY EXECUTIVE ORDER 11990.. SIGNED BY 6 PRESIDENT CARTER IN MAY OF 1977 TO BE, AND I 7 QUOTE. "THOSE AREAS THAT ARE INUNDATED OR 8 SATURATED BY SURFACE OR GROUNDWATER WITH A

9 FREQUENCY AND DURATION SUFFICIENT TO SUPPORT, AND 10 THAT UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES DO SUPPORT, A 11 PREVALENCE OF VEGETATION TYPICALLY ADAPTED FOR 12 LIFE IN SATURATED SOIL CONDITIONS. WETLANDS 13 GENERALLY INCLUDE SWAMPS, MARSHES, BOGS, AND 184 SIMILAR AREAS." END QUOTE. FOR LAKE ERIE, THE 15 U.S. CORP OF ENGINEERS HAS ESTABLISHED AM 16 ELEVATION OF 572.8 FEET IGLD, WHICH THEY DETERMINE 17 THE MEAN HIGH WATER MARK AS THE DEMARKATION 18 BETWEEN COASTAL MARSHES AND TERRESTRIAL 19 ENVIORNMENTS.

20 THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR DEFINES 21 WETLANDS AS QUOTE, " LANDS TRANSITIONAL BETWEEN 22 TERRESTRIAL AND AQUATIC SYSTEMS WHERE THE WATER 23 TABLE IS USUALLY AT OR NEAR THE SURFACE OF THE (v ')

~

214 LAND OR THE LAND IS COVERED BY SHALLOW WATER.

2S WETLANDS MUST HAVE ONE OR MORE OF THE

83 )

,, 1 FOLLOWING ATTRIBUTES. ONE, AT LEAST P E R I OD I C A L LY ,

I l

'~'

2 THE LAND SUPPORTS PREDOMINATELY HYDROPHYTES OR 3 A QU A T I C PLANTj, TWO, THE SUBSTRATE IS 4 PREDOMINATELY UNDRAINED HYDRIC SOILS. AND, THREE, 5 SUBSTRATE IS NONSOIL SUCH AS BEDROCK, AND IS 6 SATURATED WITH WATER OR COVERED BY SHALLOW WATER 7 AT SOME TIME DURING THE GROWING SEASON OF EACH 8 YEAR _" END QUOTE. THE TERM WETLANDS INCLUDES A 9 VARIETY OF AREAS WITH HY D ROP HY T ES AND HYDRIC 10 SOILS, SUCH AS THOSE COMMONLY KNOWN AS MARSHES, 11 SWAMPS AND BOGS. l 12 OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY, UNDER CONTRACT TO 13 THE U S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE _ HAS DEVELOPED 184 AN INVENTORY OF ALL WETLANDS ON THE GREAT LAKES.

15 OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY ALSO PREPARED AN INVENTORY 16 0F ALL WETLANDS ALONG LAKE ERIE UNDER CONTRACT TO 17 THE NATIONAL OCEANOGRAPHIC AND ATMOSPHERIC 18 ADMINISTRATION. THIS WAS PUBLISHED AS REPORT 19 NUMBER 2 87 0F THE CENTER FOR LAKE ERIE AREA 20 RESEARCH, ENTITLED ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY 21 INDEX, ESI MAPS FOR THE LAKE ERIE SYSTEM" BY FAY I 3 1 22 AND HERDENDORF. AS CONSERVATIVE CRITERIA FOR 23 WETLANDS, BOTH INVENTORIES USED THOSE AREAS gg 2'4 DESIGNATED AS MARSH ON THE UNITED STATES 25 GEOLOGICAL SURVEY LACARNE TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE I

J

84 1 MAPS AND AREAS BELOW ELEVATION 575, BASED ON USGS 2 ELEVATIONS, WHICH IS EQUIVALENT TO 573 .5 IGLD.

3 Q UNDER ANY OF THESE DEFINITIONS. DOES THE 4 BURIAL SITE FALL WITHIN THE MARSH?

5 A. NO. ON JUNE 9TH. 1986 DR RICHARD T.

I 6 FISHER, BOTANIST AND PROFESSOR / CHAIRMAN EMERITUS l

i 7 0F THE DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCES AT BOWLING GREEN 8 STATE UNIVERSITY, AND I EXAMINED THE BURIAL SITE 9 IN ORDER TO CHARACTERIZE THE TYPE OF VEGETATION 10 PRESENT THE VEGETATION CONSISTED PRIMARY OF 11 GRASSES SHRUBS AND OTHER TERRESTRIAL PLANT 12 TYPES. THE SITE DID NOT CONTAIN THE PREVALENT g

kJ 13 GROWTH OF HY D ROP HY T E S TYPICAL OF FRESHWATER 14 MARSHES. THE NEAREST AREA CONTAINING AQUATIC 15 VEGETATION IS 25 FEET AWAY ALONG THE FENCE LINE 16 EAST OF THE AREA WHERE THE l-CELL WASTE BURIAL 17 UNIT WILL BE BUILT.

18 FURTHERMORE, THE SITE IS ABOVE ELEVATION 19 574, IGLD IS THEREFORE NOT A WETLAND OR A MARSH  ;

1 20 UNDER THE U.S. ARMY CORP OF ENGINEERS' DEFINITION, 21 AND WAS NOT MAPPED AS A MARSH ON THE USGS LACARNE 22 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP AS SHOWN IN FIGURE 3-2, THE NOAA 23 STUDY DETERMINED THAT THE BURIAL SITE WAS OUTSIDE 1

/') 2'4 THE MARSH AREA. THEREFORE, THE BURIAL SITE IS NOT v

25 A MARSH UNDER ANY OF THE DEFINITIONS PROPERLY USED l

l

l FOR THIS GEOGRAPHIC AREA.

2 Q. THANK YOU, DR. HERDENDORF.

. 3 NOW, MOVE ON THE TO THE PRESIDING 4 0FFICER'S FOURTH QUESTION WHICH IS WHAT IS THE 5 OBSERVED FLOODING FREQUENCY AT THE WASTE BURIAL 6 SITE.

7 DR. HERDENDORF, WOULD YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE 8 THE FLOODING IN THE BURIAL SITE THAT HAS BEEN 9 CONDUCTED BY TOLEDO EDISON?

10 A. THE STATIC WATER LEVELS IN THE WESTERN 11 BASIN ARE EFFECTED BY LONG TERM AND ANNUAL CYCLIC 12 VARIATIONS IN THE MEAN MONTHLY LEVEL FROM THE MEAN i )

s' 13 LOW W /. T E R LEVEL, AND SHORT PERIOD VARIATIONS IN 14 THE DAILY LEVEL FROM THE MONTHLY MEAN LEVEL DUE TO 15 WIND TIDES AND SEICHES.

16 IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE NRC'S LICENSING 17 0F THE LAVIS-BESSE PLANT, TOLEDO EDISON 16 INVESTIGATED THE SUBJECT OF LAKE LEVELS. THE 19 RESULTS OF THE INVESTIGATIONS ARE PRESENTED IN THE 20 DAVIS-BESSE FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT.

21 FOR THIS PROCEEDING, I RE-EXAMINED DATA 22, ON LAKE LEVELS AND FLOODING, INCLUDING IN THE MOST 23 RECENT DATA, TO DETERMINE THE LIKELIHOOD OF THE 7-( ,' 24 BURIAL SITE BECOMING FLOODED.

25 Q. WHAT RECORD OF LAKE LEVELS EXIST?

86 1 A. WATER LEVEL RECORDS FOR LAKE ERIE HAVE 2 BEEN GATHERED SINCE 1860. VARIOUS PLANES OF 3 REFERENCE HAVE BEEN USED DURING THE PERIOD OF 4 RECORD, AND EACH OF THESE REFERENCE PLANES HAS A 5 CORRECTION FACTOR WHICH MUST BE APPLIED WHEN 6 CONVERTING TO IGLD LEVELS.

7 CURRENT LAKE LEVELS ARE MEASURED BY THE 8 NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION AT

,9 A NUMBER OF GAUGES POSITIONED ALONG THE LAKE. THE 10 DATA OBTAINED BY NOAA IS ANALYZED AND PUBLISHED 11 MONTHLY BY THE U.S. CORP OF ENGINEERS.

12 DAVIS-BESSE SITE IS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY

- 13 MIDWAY BETWEEN TWO LAKE LEVEL GAUGES -- ONE AT 14 TOLEDO AND THE OTHER AT MARBLEHEAD. LAKE LEVELS 15 ARE NOT UNIFORM ACROSS THE LAKE, BUT EXHIBIT 16 LENGTHWISE AND TRANSVERSE VARIATIONS DUE TO WIND 17 TIDE AND SEICHE. THE MAXIMUM LAKE LEVELS ARE 18 OBSERVED AT THE WEST END OF THE LAKE,. THAT IS, AT 19 TOLEDO HARBOR, WHILE THE CENTER OF THE LAKE IS A l 20 WIND TIDE NODE OR A POINT IN WHICH THE LAKE, IN 21 THE LAKE WHERE NO WIND TIDE CHANGE OCCURS.

22 THE DAVIS-BESSE SITE IS LOCATED .

l 23 APPROXIMATELY 80 PERCENT OF THE WAY FROM THE WIND l 1

(v ') 284 TIDE NODE TO TOLEDO, AND WIND TIDE VARIATION OR 25 STORM SURGES ARE THEREFORE ABOUT 80 PERCENT OF

87 1 THOSE RECORDED AT TOLEDO. DATA F R OM 19 83 TO 1986

.Cs 2 SHOWN IN TABLE 4-2 SHOWS THIS RATIO TO BE 78.6 3 PERCENT.

4 Q. HAS THE BURIAL SITE BEEN FLOODED IN THE 5 PAST?

6 A. THE GENERAL AREA AROUND THE BURIAL SITE  !

l 7 HAS BEEN OBSERVED FLOODED, BUT NO SPECIFIC "

8 HYDROLOGICAL RECORDS OF SUCH EVENTS HAVE BEEN 9 MAINTAINED.

10 Q. HISTORICALLY, HOW MANY TIMES WOULD.YOU 11 ESTIMATE THAT THE BURIAL SITE HAS BEEN FLOODED?

4 12 A. TO DETERMINE THE PAST HISTORY OF FLOODING

( 13 AT THE PROPOSED BURIAL SITE, I ANALYZED WATER:

J 184 LEVEL RECORDS FOR TOLEDO HARBOR FOR THE LAST 50 i

i 15 YEARS. I WAS ASSISTED BY MR. JAMES P. BYRNE, i 16 ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN,-TOLEDO PROJECT.0FFICE, 17 U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. I FOCUSED ONLY ON k 18 FLOODING EVENTS WITH A WATER LEVEL GREATER THAN 6 I

19 FEET ABOVE LOW WATER-DATUM, OR LWD, AT TOLEDO. A 1 20 LEVEL AT 6 FEET ABOVE LWD IS EQUIVALENT TO AN 21 ELEVATION OF 574.6 IGLD. LESSER FLOODS COULD NOT j 22 HAVE AFFECTED THE BURIAL SITE.

! l

, 23 TO DETERMINE WHETHER FLOODS ABOVE 574.6 l l

IGLD AT TOLEDO WOULD HAVE COINCIDED WITH A

~

34

}

25 FLOODING EVENT AT THE BURIAL' SITE, I EXAMINED THE l

88-1 STORM SURGE THAT WOULD OCCUR AT DAVIS-BESSE, AND 2 ADDED THE CORRECTED SURGE TO THE MEAN MONTHLY 4

3 STILL WATER ELEVATION AT THE TIME OF THE FLOOD.

4 THIS PROVIDED ME WITH AN ESTIMATE AT THE LAKE 5 LEVEL AT LOCUST POINT WHERE THE DAVIS-BESSE 6 STATION IS LOCATED DURING THE EACH OF THE FLOODING 7 EVENTS RECORDED AT TOLEDO.

8 I ALSO CONSIDERED THE AVENUE FOR FLOODING 9 AT THE BURIAL SITE. BECAUSE OF EXISTING 10 PROTECTING DIKES, FLOODING AT THE PROPOSED BURIAL 11 SITE WOULD OCCUR INDIRECTLY, VIA THE TOUSSAINT 12 RIVER AND DRAINAGE DITCHES. THIS CAUSES FLOOD g

(m) 13 WATERS AT THE SITE TO LAG CONSIDERABLY BEHIND 14 CONDITIONS ON THE OPEN COAST BY AT LEAST AN 15 ESTIMATED FOUR HOURS.

16 THIS ESTIMATE IS BASED ON THE OBSERVATION 17 THAT STORM SURGES WHICH REACH A PROJECTED 18 ELEVATION OF 574.52 ON MAY 9, 1986, AND 574.65 ON 1;9 JUNE 17TH, 1986, AT LOCUST POINT, AND HAD 20 DURATIONS OF FOUR HOURS, AND THESE ARE LISTED IN 21 TABLE 4-1, DID NOT RESULT IN F L O O D I-NG AT THE 22 BURIAL SITE. I THEREFORE DETERMINED THAT FLOODING 23 EVENTS THAT RESULTED IN A LAKE LEVEL OF 574.3 AT LOCUST POINT FOR OVER FOUR HOURS WERE THE ONES

. (/')

x-2>4 25 THAT MIGHT HAVE FLOODED THE BURIAL SITE. THE

I 89 1 RESULTS OF MY ANALYSES ARE SHOWN ON TABLE 4-1.

\

l 2 FLOODING EVENTS WHICH WERE CALCULATED TO HAVE l

3 POTENTIALLY RESULTED IN FLOODING OF THE BURIAL l 4 SITE ARE MARKED WITH AN ASTERISK. THERE ARE AN 5 ESTIMATED 25 SUCH EVENTS OVER THE PAST 50 YEAR I

6 PERIOD, OVER THE 50 YEAR PERIOD EXAMINED. THE l

7 TOTAL DURATION OF FLOODING WAS PROBABLY LESS THAN 8 E QU I VA L ENT OF 12 DAYS OR ABOUT 2.4 DAYS EVERY TEN 9 YEARS.

l 10 Q. DID THE WATER LEVEL FOR ANY OF THE FLOODS y 11 EXCEED THE ELEVATION OF THE DIKES WHICH TOLEDO l

12 EDISON INTENDS TO BUILD AROUND THE WASTE DISPOSAL 13 CELLS?

l 114 A. NO. THE HIGHEST WATER LEVEL AT THE SITE 15 IS ESTIMATED AT 576.05 IGLD, WHICH IS EQUIVALENT 16 TO 7.4 FIVE FEET ABOVE LOW WATER DATUM THAT I j

17 OCCURRED ON APRIL 8TH, li97 4. TOLEDO EDISON 'S I

! 18 DESIGN CALLS FOR DIKES TO AN ELEVATION OF 579.75

> 1;9 FEET IGLD OR 11.15 FEET ABOVE LOW WATER DATUM. I t

20 Q. DR. HERDENDORF, WHAT IS THE LIKELIHOOD

) 21 THAT THE BURIAL SITE WILL BE FLOODED IN THE 22 FUTURE?

23 A. THE LIKELIHOOD eHAT THE BURIAL SITE WILL )

gg 24 BE FLOODED IN THE FUTURE DEPENDS ON FUTURE LAKE 25 LEVELS OF LAKE ERIE AND THE PROBABILITY AND

90 i

l i

! 1 MAGNITUDE OF STORM SURGES ABOVE THE STILL WATER 1 ibT' l

2 SURFACE. ANY PREDICTION OF LAKE LEVEL BEYOND THE

! 3 IMMEDIATE FUTURE WOULD BE SPECULATIVE. THE U_S. l 4 ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, FOR EXAMPLE, ONLY S PREDICTS LAKE LEVELS SIX MONTHS IN ADVANCE 6 HOWEVER, THE LAKE MEAN WATER LEVEL FOR 7 THE MONTH OF JUNE, 198 WAS THE HIGHEST LEVEL 8 DURING THE PERIOD SINCE 1860, WHEN THE U.S. ARMY

9 CORPS OF ENGINEERS BEGAN TO MAINTAIN THE RECORDS.

10 AT TOLEDO THE MONTHLY AVERAGE FOR JUNE REACHED 11 573.72.

12 FLOODING OCCURS FROM THE STORM SURGES 13 WHICH WOULD RAISE THE LAKE LEVEL ABOVE ITS STILL 14 WATER MARK. NORTHEAST STORMS GENERATED BY 15 LOW-PRESSURE SYSTEMS PASSING SOUTH OF THE LAKE 16 SHORE ARE LARGELY RESPONSIBLE FOR WIND SETUP OR 17 STORM SURGES WHICH RAISE WATER LEVELS AT THE WEST 18 END OF THE LAKE SEVERE STORMS CAN RISE THE STILL 19 WATER LEVEL --

STILL WATER SURFACE OF THE LAKE 20 APPROXIMATELY 4.2 FEET IN THE VICINITY OF LOCUST i

21 POINT. AND THIS OCCURRED ON APRIL 27 1;96 22 PROFESSOR CHARLES H CARTER OF THE 23 DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF AKRON.

g 2>4 ANALYZED WATER LEVEL RECORDS FOR WESTERN LAKE ERIE 25 STURM SURGES WHICH OCCURRED DURING THE PERIOD 1939

91 1 THROUGH 1980. THE STUDY INCLUDED ALL STORM EVENTS 2 WHICH CAUSED THE DAILY MEAN WATER LEVEL TO EXCEED i

3 THE MONTHLY MEAN WATER LEVEL BY ONE FOOT. BASED '

4 ON THE 179 STORM SURGES DURING THAT PERIOD, 5 PROFESSOR CARTER DETERMINED THAT THE FOLLOWING 6 EXPECTED FREQUENCY AND MAGNITUDE PER YEAR FOR 7 STORM SURGES AT THE WESTERN END OF LAKE ERIE. TO 8 REVIEW HIS FINDINGS, A STORM OF ONE TO TWO FEET 19 WOULD HAVE A FRE QUENCY OF 1.5 YEARS. A STORM --

10 Q. EXCUSE ME 1.5 PER YEAR?

11 A. PER YEAR, CORRECT. A STORM SURGE HEIGHT 12 0F TWO To THREE FEET WOULD HAVE A FREQUENCY OF TWO h 13 PER YEAR. A STORM SURGE HEIGHT OF THREE TO FOUR 114 FEET WOULD OCCUR .6 PER YEAR. STORM SURGES 15 GR' EATER THAN14 FEET WOULD ONLY OCCUR .1 PER YEAR.

16 THE NUMBER OF STORM SURGES PER YEAR RANGE e

17 FROM 1 TO 7, AND THE DURATION RANGE FROM 1 TO 3 18 DAYS. 85 P E R C'E N T OF THE STORM SURGES LAST 1 DAY, 1:9 13 PERCENT LASTED 2 DAYS AND 2 PERCENT LASTED 3 20 DAYS. BASED UPON THESE DATA, OCCASIONAL FLOODING 21 0F THE BURIAL SITE'S BASE ELEVATION COULD BE

/

22 EXCEPTED. , . ,

23 Q. WOULD YOU EXPECT THAT THE BURIAL lh 24 STRUC,TURE ITSELF 10 'B E FLOODED?

P 25 A. THE CELLS THEMSELVES WOULD NOT BE Y '?

• 7 92 r ^3

^

1 FLOODED. AS DESCRIBED EARLIER, THE WASTE BURIAL

'\ j 2 CELLS WOULD BE SURROUNDED BY DIKES. THE ELEVATION 5

3 0F THE DIKE PORTION OF THE BURIAL STRUCTURE WOULD

>4 BE AT LEAST 579.75 FEET AT IGLD. THIS IS 3.7 FEET 5 ABOVE THE ESTIMATED FLOOD LEVEL FOR THE HIGHEST 6 STORM ON RECORD WHICH OCCURRED APRIL- 8T H , 1197 4, 7 AND 1. 84 FEET ABOVE THE LAKE LEVEL WHICH WOULD 6 OCCUR IF THE MAXIMUM HISTORICAL SURGE TOOK PLACE

9 AT TODAY S RECORD HIGH LEVELS. FLOOD WATERS WOULD 10 NOT PENETRATE THE DIKE.

11 THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS PREDICTS 12 THE FOLLOWING MAXIMUM WATER LEVELS AT LOCUST O 13 POINT: THIS IS BASED ON A FREQUENCY OF FLOOD FOR ,

l>4 A PERIOD OF 10 -- A 10 YEAR FLOOD WITH AN 15 ELEVATION OF 574.8, WHICH CONVERTS TO IGLD OF 6.2 16 FEET. A 50 YEAR FLOOD WOULD HAVE AN ELEVATION OF 17 575.7, WHICH 7.1 FEET ABOVE THE WATER DATUM. A 18 HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD HAVE AN ELEVATION OF 576 .0, 119 WHICH IS 78.4 FEET ABOVE LWD, AND A 500 YEAR FLOOD 20 WOULD REACH AN ELEVATION OF 576.7, WHICH IS 8.1 21 FEET ABOVE LWD.

l l

22 Q. IF THE BASE ELEVATION OF THE BURIAL SITE 23 WERE TO BE FLOODED, WOULD N 'T THE FLOOD WATERS COME' llh 14 INTO CONTACT WITH THE SIDES OF THE BURIAL 25 STRUCTURE?

93 1 .A. YES. HOWEVER, I WOULD NOT EXPECT THAT g

2 SUCH AN EVENT WOULD CAUSE ANY SIGNIFICANT EROSION

• 3 TO THE BURIAL STRUCTURE.

4 Q. WHY NOT?

5 A. FIRST OF ALL, THE BURIAL STRUCTURE WOULD 6 NOT BE EXPOSED TO ANY SIGNIFICANT WAVE ATTACK. IN 7 A STORM WHICH WITH WOULD CREATE FLOODING IN THE 8 BURIAL SITE, WAVES WOULD BE COMING TOWARD THE SITE

9 FROM THE NORTHEAST. HOWEVER, THE MARSH AREA AND 10 THE OUTER MARSH DIKES, WHICH IS RIP-RAPPED, WOULD l

11 ABSORB THE BRUNT OF THE STORM WAVES. I WOULD NOT

,, 12 EXPECT ANY SIGNIFICANT WAVES TO REACH THE BURIAL 13 SITE. WAVE HEIGHTS NEAR THE BURIAL SITE WOULD BE 144 LIMITED BY THE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF WAVES. THE 15 MAXIMUM WAVE HEIGHT IN SHALLOW WATER IS GIVEN BY 16 THE E QU AT I ON H E-QU A L S POINT 78 TIMES Z, WHERE H IS 17 THE'VAVE HEIGHT AND Z IS THE STILL WATER DEPTH.

18 SINCE THE STILL WATER DEPTH NEAR THE BURIAL SITE 1;9 WOULD BE SMALL, EVEN IN A FLOODING SITUATION, THE 20 WAVE HEIGHT WOULD ALSO BE SMALL.

21 IF FLOODING WERE TO OCCUR, I WOULD EXPECT 22 THE WATER LEVEL --

WATER LEVELS WOULD GRADUALLY 23 RISE AROUND --

I WILL START THAT PARAGRAPH, AGAIN,

()

rN.

24 P L E /s S E .

25 IF FLOODING WERE TO OCCUR, I WOULD EXPECT

94 1 THAT WATER LEVELS WOULD ' GRAD UALLY RISE AROUND THE 2 BASE OF THE BURIAL STRUCTURE. THIS GRADUAL RISE 3 WOULD NOT BE EXPECTED TO CAUSE SIGNIFICANT EROSION 4 0F THE BURIAL STRUCTURE. IT IS WORTH NOTING THAT 5 EROSION ALONG THE LAKE ERIE SHORE GENERALLY DOES 6 NOT OCCUR IN THE ABSENCE OF WAVE ATTACK, EVEN 7 DURING SEVERE STORMS. EROSION HAS TYPICALLY ,

8 OCCURRED AT BLUFF AREAS, WHICH ARE UNDERCUT BY t 4

19 WAVE ACTION, NOT STILL WATER.

4 10 Q. WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO OUR RESPONSES TO THE 11 PRESIDING OFFICERS FIFTH QUESTION, WHICH IS: WHAT SOIL EROSION FROM STORMS HAS BEEN ACTUALLY 12

, 13 OBSERVED AT OR NEAR THE DISPOSAL SITE?-

114 DR. HERDENDORF, TO WHAT EXTENT WOULD

15 FLOODING OF THE BURIAL SITE CAUSE SOIL EROSION?

16 A. AS I HAVE JUST EXPLAINED, I WOULD NOT 17 EXPECT FLOODING TO CAUSE ANY SIGNIFICANT EROSION 4

18 0F THE BURIAL STRUCTURE.

19 Q. WHAT SOIL EROSION HAS BEEN CAUSED-AT THE I 20 BURIAL SITE BY PAST FLOODING.

21 A. THERE ARE NO RECORDS ADDRESSING SOIL 22 EROSION CAUSED AT THE BURIAL SITE BY PAST 23 FLOODING; BUT ON APRIL 28TH AND JUNE 19TH, I

() 21 4 INSPECTED THE BURIAL SITE TO DETERMINE IF PAST 25 FLOODING EVENTS HAD CAUSED ANY Soll EROSION. MY i

95 1 EXAMINATION OF WATER LEVEL RECORDS FOR TOLEDO HAS 2 INDICATED THAT THE SITE MAY HAVE FLOODED A NUMBER 3 0F TIMES, ENOUGH OCCASIONS DURING THE PAST FIVE

4 YEARS. DURING MY INSPECTION OF THE BURIAL SITE, I 5 FOUND THE LAND SURFACE WELL VEGETATED. I FOUND NO 6 SURFICIAL EVIDENCE OF EROSION.

7 Q. WHAT SOIL EROSION HAS OCCURRED IN SIMILAR 8 AREAS ALONG LAKE ERIE?

9 A. I KNOW OF NO DOCUMENTED CASES OF SOIL 10 EROSION ON WELL VEGETATED LAND DUE TO FLOODING OF 11 LAKE ERIE OF INLAND AREAS. DUE TO THE SLOW RISE 12 0F THE WATER LEVEL, SHALLOW DEPTH, AND MINIMAL

(,,')

'~' 13 FLOW VELOCITIES IN SUCH AREAS, EROSION OF GRASSED 114 SURFACES WOULD NOT BE EXPECTED TO OCCUR.

15 Q. MR. SWIM, WHAT STEPS WOULD BE TAKEN TO 16 MINIMIZE THE POSSIBILITY OF EROSION OF THE BURIAL 17 STRUCTURE?

18 A. (MR. SWIM) GRASSES WILL BE PLANTED ON THE 1:9 BURIAL STRUCTURE. THE U.S. SOIL CONSERVATION 20 SERVICE RECOMMENDED THAT THE TOLEDO EDISON USE A 21 MIXTURE OF KENTUCKY BLUE GRASS AND LIDINO WHITE 22 CLOVER, AND THE SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE IS 23 PREPARING A PROTECTIVE VEGETATION DESIGN PLAN

,o

( ) 2,4 WHICH TOLEDO EDISON INTENDS TO FOLLOW.

25 IN ADDITION, THE WASTE BURIAL CELLS WILL

96 1 BE SURROUNDED AND PROTECTED BY DIKES. TO PREVENT 2 EROSION OF THE DIKES, THE SLOPES OF THE DIKES WILL 3 BE RIP-RAPPED. FURTHERMORE, THERE WILL BE EITHER 4 A SMALL GRADED STONE LAYER OR FILTER CLOTH UNDER S THE RIP-RAP.

6 Q. DR. HERDENDORF, HOW EFFECTIVE WILL THESE 7 STEPS BE, WHICH MR. SWIM HAS JUST DESCRIBED, BE IN 8 MINIMIZING THE POSSIBILITY OF EROSION?

9 A. (DR. HERD END OR F) VEGETATIVE COVER IS A 10 WELL-RECOGNIZED AND EFFECTIVE METHOD FOR 11 PREVENTING EROSION. FOR EXAMPLE, THE U.S.

12 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE RECOMMENDS SEEDING WITH l'\

'- 13 LOCAL SPECIES OF GRASS TO HANDLE RUN-OFF AT SPEEDS 14 0F 3 TO 6 FEET PER SECOND. THESE VELOCITIES ARE 15 GREATER THAN I WOULD ANTICIPATE AT THE BURIAL 16 SITE. THE RIP-RAPPING OF THE DIKE SLOPES AND THE 17 USE OF AN INNER GRADED STONE LAYER OR FILTER CLOTH 18 ARE ALSO A RECOGNIZED AND EFFECTIVE MEANS TO 119 PROTECT THE DIKES AGAINST EROSION. I WOULD 20 ANTICIPATE THESE STEPS TO BE~ HIGHLY EFFECTIVE IN 21 PREVENTING EROSION.

22 G. I'LL NOW MOVE ON TO OUR RESPONSES TO THE 23 PRESIDING OFFICER'S SIXTH QUESTION. THAT QUESTION

() 2) 4 STATES: WHAT IS THE DIRECTION OF GROUNDWATER FLOW 25 FROM THE BURIAL SITE RELATING TO LAKE ERIE,

- f

19 7 1 NAVARRE MARSH, AND THE TOUSSAINT RIVER, MR.

2 HENDRON, WOULD YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE THE GEOLOGIC 3 FORMATIONS UNDERLYING THE BURIAL SITE?

4 A. (MR. HENDRON) COMPLETE DESCRIPTIONS OF 5 GEOLOGIC FORMATIONS UNDERLYING THE SITE ARE GIVEN 6 IN NUMEROUS DOCUMENTS PREPARED FOR THE DAVIS-BESSE 7 SITE. IN SUMM ARY , THE SITE IS UNDERLAIN FROM THE 8 GROUND SURFACE BY TWO PRIMARY GLACIAL SOIL

9 DEPOSITS. THESE GLACIAL SOIL DEPOSITS ARE ABOUT 10 15 FEET THICK IN THE AREA OF THE BURIAL SITE, AND 11 THEY OVERLIE A R E L AT I V E LY FLAT-LYING DOLOMITE 12 BEDROCK FORMATION OF SILURIAN GEOLOGIC AGE.

/ )

13 THE UPPER GLACIAL SOIL DEPOSIT IS A 114 GLACI0 LACUSTRINE CLAY. THE DEPOSIT CONSISTED OF A 15 RELATIVELY HOMOGENEOUS PLASTIC SILTY CLAY THAT 16 CONTAINS MINOR AMOUNTS OF SILTS AND FINE SANDS 17 WITHIN THE CLAY MATRIX. THE TOPMOST FOOT CONTAINS 18 ORGANIC MATERIAL AND IS REFERRED TO AS TOPSOIL i

119 WITHIN THE AREA BEING CONSIDERED FOR THE LAND 20 DISPOSAL SITE. THE GLACI0 LACUSTRINE DEPOSIT IS l 21 ONLY PARTIALLY SATURATED; THAT IS, THE VOIDS 22 BETWEEN THE INDIVIDUAL CLAY PARTICLES ARE ONLY 23 PARTIALLY FILLED WITH WATER. A,

SUMMARY

OF TYPICAL

[s) 24 PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF THE GLACI0 LACUSTRINE l 1

25 DEPOSIT IN THE AREA BEING CONSIDERED FOR THE LAND 1

l l

19 8 l

( s 1 DISPOSAL SITE IS GIVEN IN TABLE 6 -1.

l l 2 THE LOWER GLACIAL SOIL DEPOSIT IS A I

l 3 GLACIAL TILL DEPOSIT. THE DEPOSIT CONSISTS OF A j 4 RELATIVELY HOMOGENEOUS MIXTURE OF MODERATELY l 5 PLASTIC CLAY, SILT, SANDS, AND GRAVELS. THE l

6 OVERALL MATRIX OF THE DEPOSIT IS CONTROLLED BY THE 7 HIGH CLAY-SILT CONTENT. WITHIN THE AREA BEING 8 CONSIDERED FOR T H F. LAND DISPOSAL SITE, THE GLACIAL 19 TILL DEPOSIT IS ALSO ONLY PARTIALLY SATURATED. A 10

SUMMARY

OF AVERAGE ESTIMATED PHYSICAL PROPERTIES 11 OF THE GLACIAL TILL DEPOSIT IN THE AREA BEING 12 CONSIDERED FOR THE LAND DISPOSAL SITE IS GIVEN IN

13 TABLE 6-1.

114 THE UPPER 15 TO 20 FEET OF THE DOLOMITE 15 BEDROCK FORMATION IS A RELATIVELY PURE MASSIVE 16 DOLOMITE. THIS UPPER LAYER IS UNDERLAIN TO DEPTHS 17 0F SEVERAL TENS OF FEET BY A LAMINATED. DOLOMITE

^

18 FORMATION THAT CONTAINS SUBSLANT INVERTS OF GYPSUM 119 AND ANHYDRITE IN ADDITION TO THE DOLOMITE.

20 Q. WHICH OF THESE FORMATIONS DOES 21 GROUNDWATER FLOW OCCUR?

22 A. MEASURABLE GROUNDWATER FLOW IN THE AREA 23 BEING CONSIDERED FOR LAND DISPOSAL OCCURS ONLY IN

() 2) 4 THE BEDROCK FORMATION. THE DOLOMITE BEDROCK 1

25 FORMATION CONTAINS SEVERAL SYSTEMS OF JOINTS,

)

J

I 19 9 1 FISSURES, AND VUGS. WEATHERING AND SOLUTION HAVE 2 OPENED SOME OF THESE SYSTEMS. THE DOLOMITE 3 FORMATION IS FULLY SATURATED AND IS RELATIVELY 4 PERMEABLE; THAT IS THE FORMATION CAN CONVEY FLUIDS 5 IN RESPONSE TO APPLICATION OF EITHER A NATURAL-OR 6 A MAN-MADE GRADIENT, BECAUSE OF THE HIGHER 7 PERMEABILITY OF THE SY STEM OF JOINTS, FISSURES AND

~

8 VUGS. THE DOLOMITE FORMATION IS THE UPPERMOST 19 REGIONAL GROUNDWATER A QUI F ER UNDERLYING THE 10 DAVIS-BESSE SITE.

11 THE G L AC I A L. SOI L. D E P O S IT S ARE ONLY 12 PARTIALLY SATURATED AND ARE HIGHLY CLAY RICH.

O 13 CONSEQUENTLY, THESE SOILS ARE HIGHLY IMPERMEABLE; 14 THAT IS THEY HAVE A LOW HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY.

15 THE GEOLOGIC STUDIES CONDUCTED AT DAVIS-BESSE 16 INDICATE THAT THE GLACI0 LACUSTRINE DEPOSIT AND THE 17 TILL DEPOSIT CONTAIN NO SYSTEMATIC OPEN JOINTS, 18 FISSURES, SAND STRATA, OR OTHER NON-UNIFORMITIES 119 THAT COULD SERVE AS GROUNDWATER FLOWPATHS. 50 FAR 1

20 AS CAN BE DETERMINED, NEITHER THE GLACI0 LACUSTRINE l l

21 OR TILL DEPOSIT ARE CONSIDERED OR USED AS AN I l

22 A QU I F ER IN THE AREA. TO THE CONTRARY, THESE 23 DEPOSITS ARE AN AQUITARD, CONFINING THE UNDERLYING

() 24 ARTESIAN AC QUI F ER IN THE BEDROCK.

l I

25 Q. MR. HENDRON, HOW ARE THESE GEOLOGIC AND l

l I

'k. j

'w i ,

"I-i < i a: ,

1 e 3

1 7

~

s l

i e J

4 l

6

,{

a pl 4

I r '

(N'

" i

.J g E

5 p

.T  !

.. i

, ) F.

?

sNDS a

'E .E DA' ISCUS lUGH R 1

, A STU IE BOUND

. LAND DIS LUDED FIV

,, /SICAL PRO lM THE BORE TING OF TUB 5S, TYPICAL RES

.'A B L E 6-1.

- IS THE DIRECT

100 1 HYDROLOGIC CHARACTERISTICS DETERMINED?

)

%n-2 A. THE GEOLOGIC AND HYDROLOGIC 3 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE GLACIAL DEPOSITS AND 4 BEDROCK WERE DETERMINED THROUGH EXTENSIVE S INVESTIGATIONS AND STUDIES OF THE DAVIS-BESSE-SITE 6 FOR THE SITING AND LICENSING OF UNITS 1, 2 AND 3.

7 DURING THESE STUDIES, H U N D F; E D S OF BORINGS, TEST 8 PITS, PROBES, PUMP TESTS AND OTHER DIRECT FIELD 19 TESTS WERE MADE THROUGHOUT THE SITE AREA INCLUDING 10 THE AREA BEING CONSIDERED FOR THE LAND DISPOSAL 11 SITE, AND TENS OF THOUSANDS OF MAN-HOURS WERE 12 EXPENDED TO EVALUATE THE DATA OBTAINED. THE 13 STUDIES ALSO I N C L UD E DISCUSSIONS WITH STATE

! 1)4 GEOLOGISTS AND A THOROUGH REVIEW OF THE ALREADY 15 AVAILABLE INFORMATION.

l 16 IN ADDITION, A STUDY WAS RECENTLY 17 UNDERTAKEN WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE SITE BEING-18 CONSIDERED FOR THE LAND DISPOSAL SITE. THE li9 INVESTIGATIONS INCLUDED FIVE BORINGS THROUGH THE.

20 SOIL DEPOSITS, PHYSICAL PROPERTY TESTING OF DRIVE 21 SAMPLES TAKEN FROM THE BOREHOLES, AND LABORATORY 22 PERMEABILITY TESTING OF T U B E. 'S AMP L E S TAKEN FROM 23 THE BOREHOLES. TYPICAL RESULTS OF THESE TESTS ARE

,() 2)4 SUMMARIZED ON TABLE 6-1, 25 Q. WHAT IS THE DIRECTION OF GROUNDWATER FLOW

)

101

(~i v

1 FROM THE BURIAL SITE, MR. HENDRON?

2 A. GROUNDWATER FLOW OCCURS ONLY IN THE 3 BEDROCK THAT IS FOUND APPROXIMATELY 15 FEET 4

4 4 BENEATH THE EXISTING GROUND SURFACE. THERE IS NO 5 PRESENT MEASURABLE GROUNDWATER FLOW THAT OCCURS 7

6 HORIZONTALLY OR VERTICALLY THROUGH THE S0ll 7 DEPOSITS THAT OVERLIE THE BEDROCK.

8 THE GRADIENT OF GROUNDWATER IN THE

! ;9 BEDROCK IS EXTREMELY SMALL, ONE TO TWO FEET-PER 10 MILE. AS A RESULT, THE RATE OF GROUNDWATER --

THE 11 RATE OF FLOW OF GROUNDWATER IS SO SMALL THAT IT IS

, 12 DIFFICULT TO MEASURE, AND THE PRECISE DIRECTION OF

, 13 GROUNDWATER FLOW BENEATH THE SURIAL SITE CANNOT BE ,

4 11 4 DETERMINED RE L I A B LY . HOWEVER, THE GROUNDWATER 15 FLOW CAN BE DETERMINED ON A LARGER SCALE. ON A 16 REGIONAL BASIS, GROUNDWATER MOST PROBABLY 17 DISCHARGES VERY SLOWLY INTO LAKE ERIE SEVERAL 18 MILES OFFSHORE WHEN THE BEDROCK OUTCROPS IN THE 119 LAKE AND TO A SMALLER EXTENT. INTO THE TOUSSAINT 20 RIVER WHERE BEDROCK IS PROBABLY INTERMITTENTLY t

21 EXPOSED BY EROSION OF THE OVERLYING SOIL DEPOSITS I

22 BY THE RIVER. ONE WOULD EXPECT THE SAME FLOW TO 4

23 OCCUR BENEATH THE BURIAL SITE.

( 214 Q. HOW WAS THE REGIONAL DIRECTION OF i

25 GROUNDWATER FLOW DETERMINED? j

102 1

l l r- 1 A GROUNDWATER DIRECTION IN THE BEDROCK WAS 1 NS) 1 2 DE TERM I NE D THROUGH INSTALLATION OF AND 3 MEASURdMdNTS IN NUMEROUS MONITORING WELLS 4 THROUGHOUT THE DAVIS-BESSE SITE SINCE 1968. .THE l

5 LACK OF GROUNDWATER FLOW THROUGH THE GLACIAL SOIL i

6 DEPOSITS IS ESTABLISHED THROUGH PHYSICAL f 7 MEASUREMENTS OF SOIL PROPERTIES, THE ANALYSES OF 8 BEDROCK GROUNDWATER CONTOURS IN RELATION TO 9 PHYSICAL SITE CHARACTERISTICS, AND THE RESULTS OF 10 LONG-TERM OBSERVATION OF THE LACK OF WATER 11 MOVEMENT THROUGH CLAY SOIL EXCAVATIONS DURING 12 CONSTRUCTION OF UNIT 1 FACILITIES.

O 13 Q. DOES THE GROUNDWATER UNDER THE SURIAL 14 GROUND FLOW TOWARDS THE NAVARRE MARSH?

15 A. GROUNDWATER PROBABLY FLOWS THROUGH THE 16 SEDROCK BENEATH THE BURIAL SITE TOWARD THE NAVARRE 17 MARSH, IN RESPONSE TO VERY LOW GRADIENT DIRECTED 18 TOWARDS LAKE ERIE.

19 Q. DOES THE GROUNDWATER IN THE BEDROCK 20 COMMUNICATE WITH THE NAVARRE MARSH?

21 A. NO, THE GLACIAL CLAY DEPOSITS SEPARATE 22 THE MARSH FROM THE BEDROCK AND PREVENT 23 COMMUNICATION. MORE0VER, EVEN IF THERE WERE j

() 24 COMMUNICATION, THE ONLY TIME THERE COULD BE 25 COMMUNICATION IS DURING TIMES WHEN THE MARSH IS

. - ~ . .. . ... - _.

103 r' 1 FLOODED, WHEN THE DIRECTION OF FLOW WOULD BE FROM

\

2 THE MARSH INTO THE BEDROCK, AND NOT FROM THE 3 BEDROCK INTO THE MARSH.

4 Q. NOW, MOVING ON TO OUR RESPONSES TO-THE 5 PRESIDING OFFICER'S QUESTION 7. THAT QUESTION

, 6 STATES: WHAT IS THE DEPTH TO BEDROCK OF

7 UNCONSOLIDATED GLACIAL DEPOSITS AT THE BURIAL 8 SITE?

9 MR. HENDRON, WHAT IS THE THICKNESS OF THE 10 GLACI0 LACUSTRINE DEPOSIT? ,

i

11 A. IN THE AREA 0F THE BURIAL SITE, f 12 GLACI0 LACUSTRINE DEPOSIT IS FIVE FEET TO EIGHT .

4 13 FEET THICK.

4 14 Q. WHAT IS THE THICKNESS OF THE UNDERLYING 15 GLACIAL TILL?

16 A. THE THICKNESS OF THE GLACIAL TILL DEPOSIT i 17 IN THE AREA BEING CONSIDERED FOR THE BURIAL SITE 18 RANGES FROM 9 TO 12 FEET. i l

1 1 19 Q. AND HOW WERE THESE THICKNESSES

20 DETERMINED? o 21 A. THE THICKNESSES WERE DETERMINED LARGELY

! 22 ON THE BASIS OF THE FIVE MOST RESENT BORINGS IN 1 1 l

23 THE BURIAL SITE AREA.- THESE RANGES AGREE VERY  ;

()

24 WELL WITH RESULTS OF NUMEROUS OTHER BORINGS i 25 CONDUCTED AT THE SITE DURING PREVIOUS STUDIES.

w_~Jv

104 ,

1 Q. WHAT WILL BE THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE 2 BOTTOM OF THE WASTE DISPOSAL CELLS AND THE TOP OF 3 THE BEDROCK?

4 A. THE PRESENTLY PROPOSED BOTTOM OF THE 5 WASTE DISPOSAL CELLS, THAT IS, THE BOTTOM OF 'THE j 6 LINER, 15 TO BE AT ELEVATION 567. AND THAT'S 7 IGLD. THE ELEVATION OF THE TOP OF BEDROCK IS AT 8 ELEVATION 560. THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE BOTTOM OF *

} 9 THE WASTE DISPOSAL CELLS AND THE TOP OF THE I 10 BEDROCK WILL THEREFORE BE SEVEN FEET.

l 11 Q. PRESIDING OFFICER'S QUESTION 8 STATES AS 12 FOLLOWS WHAT IS THE AVERAGE DEPTH AND UPPER AND I

i 13 LOWER RANGE OF THE WATER TABLE AT THE DISPOSAL

14 SITE? '

15 FIRST, DR. HENDRON, WOULD YOU PLEASE j 16 DEFINE THE TERM WATER TABLE?

I l 17 A. THE SIMPLEST DEFINITION OF WATER TABLE IS

! 18 THE POINT OF CONTACT BETWEEN THE SATURATED AND'THE l 19 UNSATURATED GEOLOGIC ZONES IN THE SUBSURFACE.

iI 20 THIS DEFINITION, IN FACT, 15 VERY CONSISTENT-WITH 21 'THAT IN OHIO'S SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL REGULATIONS, 22 OHIO ADMINISTRATION CODE PARAGRAPH 3745-27-01 23 (AA).

()

24 Q ., ,A WHERE IN THE FORMATIONS UNDER THE BURIAL 3

25 SITE IS THE WATER TABLE LOCATED?

l i

105 1 A. CALCULATIONS INDICATE THAT BOTH THE 2 GLACI0 LACUSTRINE AND GLACIAL TILL DEPOSITS BENEATH 3 THE BURIAL SITE ARE UNSATURATED. THE BEDROCK 4 DEPOSIT IS SATURATED AND WATER IN THE BEDROCK 5 FORMATION IS CONFINED. CONSEQUENTLY, THE WATER

, 6 TABLE WITHIN THE AREA BEING CONSIDERED FOR THE j 7 DISPOSAL SITE IS THE CONTACT POINT BETWEEN THE 8 GLACIAL SOIL DEPOSITS AND THE TOP OF THE WEATHERED 9 BEDROCK ZONE. THIS CONTACT GENERALLY OCCURS AT 10 ABOUT ELEVATION 560.

11 Q. WHAT WILL BE THE MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN 12 THE BOTTOM OF THE WASTE CELLS AND THE WATER TABLE?

13 A. THE PRESENT ELEVATION OF THE BOTTOM OF 14 THE WASTE CELLS IS ELEVATION 567 AND THE ELEVATION 15 0F THE TOP OF THE WATER TABLE IS ELEVATION 560.

16 THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE BOTTOM OF THE WASTE CELLS 17 AND THE WATER TABLE IS SEVEN FEET.

18 Q. THANK YOU. THE NEXT QUESTION POSED BY 19 THE PRESIDING OFFICER, QUESTION 9, STATES AS 20 FOLLOWS: WHAT ENDANGERED SPECIES OF PLANT OR 21 ANIMAL HAVE BEEN ACTUALLY OBSERVED ON THE 22 DAVIS-BESSE? WHAT CRITICAL HABITATS FOR 23 ENDANGERED SPECIES EXIST ON THE, DAVIS-DESSE SITE?

() 24 DR. JACKSON, WOULD YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE 25 THE INVESTIGATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED AT THE

106 1 DAVIS-BESSE SITE TO DETERMINE THE PLANTS AND 2 ANIMALS ON OR IN THE VICINITY OF THE SITE?

3 A. (DR. JACKSON) FROM 1972 THROUGH 1980, 4 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING STUDIES WERE CONDUCTED AT 5 THE DAVIS-BESSE SITE. AS PART OF THESE STUDIES, 6 MY ASSOCIATES AND I STUDIED TERRESTRIAL ANIMAL AND 7 PLANT COMMUNITIES AT THE SITE. PLANT, MAMMAL, AND 8 HERPETILE POPULATIONS WERE EXAMINED. BIRD 9 POPULATIONS WERE CENSUSED EACH SEASON, AND BIRD 10 STRIKES AT THE COOLING TOWER WERE MONITORED DURING 11 SPRING AND FALL MIGRATION PERIODS.

12 Q. DR. REUTTER?

\"

13 A. (DR. REUTTER) COMPLEMENTING DR. JACKSON'S 14 STUDIES, DR. HERDENDORF AND 1 CONDUCTED AQUATIC 15 STUDIES OVER THE SAME NINE-YEAR PERIOD. THE 16 AQUATIC STUDIES INCLUDED A SAMPLING PROGRAM OF 17 FISH AND BENTHIC ORGANISMS IN LAKE ERIE NEAR THE 18 SITE. THE THREE-YEAR SAMPLING PROGRAM WAS 19 CONDUCTED IN THE NAVARRE MARSH.,

20 Q. DURING THESE INVESTIGATIONS, WERE ANY 21 ENDANGERED SPECIES, PLANTS OR WILDLIFE, FOUND OR 22 OBSERVED ON THE DAVIS-BESSE SITE?

23 A. (DR. JACKSON) BACK TO THE 1974 r^T

( ,) 24 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM AT THE I 25 DAVIS-BESSE SITE FOUND EVIDENCE OF CHENOPODIUM

4 107 1 LEPTOPHYLLUM, SLENDER GOOSEFOOT, NEAR THE CURRENT 2 LOCATION OF THE COOLING TOWER. THIS PLANT IS NOW 3 ON THE ENDANGERED SPECIES LIST PREPARED BY THE 4 DIVISION OF NATURAL AREAS AND PRESERVES OF THE 5 OHIO DIVISION OF NATURAL RESOURCES, BUT IS NOT ON 6 THE FEDERAL ENDANGERED SPECIES LIST. NO PLANTS OR 7 ANIMALS ON THE FEDERAL ENDANGE".ED SPECIES LIST 8 HAVE BEEN OBSERVED.

9 Q. DR. JACKSON, HAS THE SLENDER GOOSEFOOT l

10 BEEN FOND ON THE BURIAL SITE?

11 A. IN JUNE, 1986, A SURVEY OF THE BURIAL

, 12 SITE WAS CONDUCTED BY DR. T. RICHARD FISHER,

("'

13 BOTANIST AND PROFESSOR / CHAIRMAN EMERITUS OF THE 14 DEPARTMENT OF BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES AT BOWLING GREEN 15 STATE UNIVERSITY. DR. FISHER FOUND NO EVIDENCE OF 16 THE SLENDER GOOSEFOOT OR ANY OTHER SPECIES LISTED 17 ON THE FEDERAL OR STATE ENDANGERED SPECIES LISTS.

18 Q. DR. REUTTER, HAVE ANY ENDANGERED SPECIES 19 BEEN OBSERVED IN LAKE ERIE IN THE IMMEDIATE 20 VICINITY OF THE DAVIS-BESSE PLANT?

21 A. (DR. REUTTER) FOUR AQUATIC SPECIES ON THE 22 STATE 5 ENDANGERED SPECIES LIST WERE FOUND DURING 23 THE SAMPLING PROGRAM IN LAKE ERIE: SILVER CHUB,

( 24 SILVER LAMPREY, GREAT LAKES MUSKELLUNGE, AND LAKE 25 STURGEON. ONLY ONE MUSKELLUNGE AND ONE STURGEON

108 l

l l

1 WERE FOUND IN ELEVEN YEARS OF. SAMPLING.

( 2 THREE BENTHIC ORGANISMS LISTED BY THE l

3 STATE AS THREATENED HAVE BEEN FOUND IN LAKE ERIE l

4 NEAR THE PLANT SITE. THESE ARE THE DEER TOE CLAM, 5 THE KNOB SHELL CLAM, AND THE EASTERN SAND SHELL 6 CLAM. ,

7 NO AQUATIC SPECIES ON THE FEDERAL 8 ENDANGERED SPECIES LIST HAVE BEEN FOUND IN THIS 4

9 PART OF LAKE ERIE. NG AQUATIC SPECIES ON THE 10 FEDERAL OR STATE LISTS WERE FOUND IN THE NAVARRE 11 MARSH.

12 Q. DR. TILL, WOULD THE CONSTRUCTION OR 13 OPERATION OF THE BURIAL SITE HAVE ANY ADVERSE 14 RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT ON ANY OF THESE SPECIES?

! 15 A. (DR. TILL) THE LEVELS OF RADIOACTIVITY IN 16 THE WASTE WOULD HAVE NO DISCERNIBLE IMPACT ON a

17 AQUATIC SPECIES. EVEN IF ALL THE WASTE WERE l 18 DEPOSITED IN THE LAKE AT ONCE, THE RADIONUCLIDE 19 CONCENTRATIONS WOULD BE WELL BELOW THE MAXIMUM 20 PERMISSIBLE CONCENTRATION FOR WATER IN PART 20 0F

! 21 THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION'S REGULATIONS.

22 AT THESE LEVELS, THE IMPACT ON AQUATIC SPECIES 23 WOULD BE NEGLIGIBLE.

() 24 Q. DR. REUTTER, WOULD THE CONSTRUCTION OR 25 OPERATION OF THE BURIAL SITE HAVE ANY

1 NON-RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT ON THREATENED OR

< i 2 ENDANGERED AQUATIC SPECIES?

3 A. (DR. REUTTER) THERE SHOULD BE NO SUCH 4 IMPACT. CHEMICAL ANALYSIS HAS SHOWN TME SLUDGE TO 5 BE BELOW E.P.A. E.P. T0XICITY LIMITS. THE ONLY 6 POSSIBLE EFFECT WOULD BE IF THE BURIAL STRUCTURE 7 WERE SOMEHOW TO BE WASHED INTO LAKE ERIE. I CAN 8 THINK OF NO MECHANISM WHICH COULD CAUSE THIS TO 9 OCCUR. IF THE BURIAL STRUCTURE WERE SOMEHOW 10 WASHED INTO THE LAKE, THERE WOULD BE AN INCREASE 11 IN TURBIDITY; BUT THIS WOULD BE INSIGNIFICANT IN 12 COMPARISON TO THE TURBIDITY RESULTING FROM THE 13 M U C '1 GREATER AMOUNTS OF Soll WHICH WOULD BE WASHED 14 INTO THE LAKE FROM ALL OTHER AREAS AFFECTED BY THE 15 SAME POSTULATED MECHANISM WHICH CAUSED THE BURIAL 16 STRUCTURE TO BE WASHED INTO THE LAKE.

17 Q. DR. JACKSON, HAVE ANY BIRDS ON THE 18 ENDANGERED SPECIES LIST BEEN OBSERVED NEAR THE 19 SITE?

20 A. (DR. JACKSON) A BALD EAGLE, WHICH IS ON 21 THE FEDERAL ENDANGERED SPECIES LIST, HAS BEEN 22 SIGHTED OVER THE DAVIS-BESSE SITE ON A FEW 23 OCCASIONS. THE NEAREST BALD EAGLE NEST IS LOCATED f) 24 APPROXIMATELY ONE-AND-A-HALF MILES SOUTH OF THE 25 SITE.

110 f~3 1 TWO BIRDS ON THE STATE'S ENDANGERED D 2 SPECIES LIST, THE SHARP-SHINNED HAWK AND THE 3 COMMON TERN, HAVE BEEN SEEN TWICE AND SEVERAL l'

4 TIMES, RESPECTIVELY.

5 THE STATE OF OHIO'S PETITION FOR LEAVE TO 6 INTERVENE STATES THAT THE AMERICA PEREGRINE 7 FALCON, KIRTLAND'S WARBLER, THE KING RAIL, AND 8 UPLAND SANDPIPER QUOTE " INHABIT THE VICINITY OF 9 THE PROPOSED BURIAL SITE." UNQUOTE.

10 THE FIRST TWO SPECIES ARE ON THE FEDERAL 11 ENDANGERED SPECIES LIST WHILE THE LATTER TWO ARE 12 ON THE STATE'S ENDANGERED SPECIES LIST. NONE OF 13 THESE WERE OBSERVED BY OUR MONITORING GROUP AT OR t 14 NEAR THE DAVIS-BESSE SITE. THE PEREGRINE FALCON 15 AND THE KIRTLAND'S WARBLER DO NOT NEST IN THIb 16 AREA 0F OHIO.

17 Q. WOULD THE CONSTRUCTION OR OPERATION OF i 18 THE BURIAL SITE ADVERSELY AFFECT THE BALD EAGLE, 19 COMMON TERN OR SHARP-SHINNED HAWK, DR. JACKSON?

20 A. THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BURIAL SITE WOULD 21 NOT REMOVE OR DISTURB ANY HABITAT FOR THESE i

9 l 22 SPECIES. THE BURIAL SITE IS NOT A WOODED AREA IN l

l 23 WHICH THE HAWK WOULD EXIST, AND HAS NO TALL TREES

() 24 USED FOR NESTING BY THE EAGLE. THE BURIAL SITE ,

l 25 WILL NOT BE BUILT ON MARSH, WHICH COULD BE USED BY l

l

111 1 THE TERN FOR FEEDING.

2 OPERATION OF THE BURIAL SITE SHOULD 3 SIMILARLY HAVE NO IMPACT ON THESE SPECIES. THE 4 DISPOSAL METHODS THAT TOLEDO EDISON INTENDS TO USE 5 SHOULD PREVENT THE WASTE FROM BECOMING 6 BIOLOGICALLY AVAILABLE; THAT IS, IT WILL REMAIN 7 IMMOBILE AND UNABLE TO ENTER THE FOOD CHAIN. IF 8 THE WASTE WERE SOMEHOW MOBILIZED, I WOULD STILL i

9 EXPECT NO EFFECT. BIRDS ARE LESS SENSITIVE TO 10 RADIATION THAN MAN, AND AS MR. BLAND'S AND DR.

11 TILL'S ANALYSES HAVE SHOWN, THE DOSES TO MAN WOULD 12 BE INSIGNIFICANT EVEN IF THE WASTE WERE MOBILIZED.

i 13 Q. DR. TILL? -

l 14 A. (DR. TILL) IN FACT, THIS IS TRUE FOR 15 VIRTUALLY ALL SPECIES. MAN IS THE SPECIES MOST 16 SUSCEPTIBLE TO ADVERSE RADIATION EFFECTS. IT IS 17 THEREFORE GENERALLY ASSUMED THAT IF MAN IS 18 PROTECTED, 50 ARE ALL OTHER SPECIES. HERE, THE 19 RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS ARE TOO LOW TO PRESENT 20 ANY SIGNIFICANT HAZARD TO MAN, PLANT, OR ANIMAL.

21 EVEN IF THIS WASTE WERE COMPLETELY MOBILIZED, THE 1

22 VERY LOW LEVELS OF RADIOACTIVITY WOULD HAVE NO l 23 OBSERVABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT.

() 24 Q. DR. JACKSON, HAVE ANY TERRESTRIAL SPECIES 25 bEEN OBSERVED?

112 1 A. (DR. JACKSON) NO. THE SPOTTED TURTLE, 2 WHICH IS ON THE OHIO ENDANGERED SPECIES LIST, HAS 3 BEEN OBSERVED BY OTHERS IN MARSHES IN THE GENERAL 4 AREA, BUT IT WAS NOT OBSERVED BY OUR MONITORING 5 GROUP AT THE DAVIS-BESSE SITE, INCLUDING THE 6 NAVARRE MARSH.

7 Q. DR. JACKSON, PLEASE DEFINE WHAT IS MEANT 8 BY THE TERM QUOTE " CRITICAL HABITAT" UNQUOTE?

9 A. THE TERM CRITICAL HABITAT FOR AN 10 ENDANGERED SPECIES IS DEFINED BY SECTION 2 0F THE 11 ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT OF 1973, 16 U.S.C.,

12 PARAGRAPH 1532(5)(A).

-w

- 13 (1), THE SP ECI FIC AREAS WITHIN THE 14 GEOGRAPHICAL AREA OCCUPIED BY THE SPECIES AT THE 15 TIME THAT IT IS LISTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 16 PROVISIONS OF SECTION 1533 0F THIS TITLE, ON WHICH 17 ARE FOUND THOSE PHYSICAL OR BIOLOGICAL FEATURES 18 (I) ESSENTIAL TO TH5 CONSERVATION OF THE SPECIES 19 AND (II) WHICH MAY REQUIRE SPECIAL MANAGEMENT 20 CONSIDERATIONS OR PROTECTION.

21 (II) SPECIFIC AREAS OUTSIDE THE 22 GEOGRAPHICAL AREA OCCUPIED BY THE SPECIES AT THE 23 TIME IT IS LISTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE

() 24 PROVISIONS OF SECTION 1533 0F THIS TITLE, UPON A 25 DETERMINATION BY THE SECRETARY THAT SUCH AREAS ARE

'113 i

gw 1 ESSENTIAL FOR THE CONSERVATION OF THE SPECIES..

. b 2 AREAS ARE DESIGNATED AS CRITICAL HABITAT 3 BY THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE IN 4 ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROCEDURES SET OUT IN 50 CFR 5 PART 424. AREAS PRESENTLY DESIGNATED AS CRITICAL 6 HABITAT ARE LISTED IN 50 CFR PARAGRAPH 17.95.

7 Q. IS THE DAVIS-BESSE SITE OR ANY PART OF IT 8 QUOTE " CRITICAL HABITAT" UNQUOTE?

9 A. NEITHER THE DAVIS-BESSE SITE NOR THE 10 SURROUNDING AREA HAS BEEN DESIGNATED AS CRITICAL ,

l j 11 HABITAT BY THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE.

12 THE BURIAL SITE ITSELF AND THE UPLAND PORTION OF l l') l

(/ 13 THE DAVIS-BESSE SITE ARE NOT IMPORTANT TO ANY

\

14 SPECIES. THE LAKE ERIE COASTAL MARSHLAND, 15 INCLUDING THE NAVARRE MARSH, IS IMPORTANT HABITAT i

16 FOR A NUMBER OF SPECIES, AND SUCH MARSHLAND SHOULD 17 BE PROTECTED. HOWEVER, I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE i

18 BURIAL OF WASTE AT DAVIS-BESSE WOULD DAMAGE OR 1

19 HAVE ANY ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE MARSH, i 20 Q. PRESIDING OFFICER'S NEXT QUESTION, 21 QUESTION 10, READS AS FOLLOWS WHAT WILL BE THE 22 TOTAL RADIONUCLIDE INVENTORY OF THE BURIAL SITE 23 AFTER 30 YEARS OF OPERATION UNDER EXPECTED LEVELS 24 0F RESIN CONTAMINATION?

(f 25 MR. BLAND, WHAT IS THE PRESENT INVENTORY?

I

, v- .- --

-,,, , , , , --------m. -g ,-

114 g3 1 A. (MR. BLAND) TABLE 10-1 PRESENTS DATE FOR g.

2 EACH BATCH OF R ADI 0 AC TI VE LY CONTAMINATED RESINS 3 THAT HAS BEEN DISCHARGED TO THE SETTLING BASIN AND 4 INCLUDES PRESENT INVENTORY OF EACH B ATC H CORRECTED 5 FOR DECAY. TABLE 10-2 PRESENTS THE CUMULATIVE 6 R ADI O AC TI VE LEVELS IN THE SETTLING BASIN.

7 AS SUMMARIZED IN TABLE 10-2, A TOTAL OF 8 0.0044 CURIES HAS BEEN SENT TO THE SETTLING BASIN.

9 IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE R ADI O AC TI VE 10 MATERIAL LEVELS DECREASE WITH TIME DUE TO THE 11 RADIOACTIVE DECAY.

12 AS A RESULT OF DECAY, THE TOTAL ACTIVITY 13 AT PRESENT IN THE SETTLING BASIN IS 0.0031 C1.

14 FOLLOWING DECOMMISSIONING OF THE DAVIS-BESSE SITE, 15 CS-137 WILL BE ESSENTIALLY THE ONLY REMAINING 16 RADIONUCLIDE OF THE PRESENT INVENTORY AT ABOUT 17 HALF OF ITS CURRENT LEVEL.

18 Q. MR. BLAND, WHAT WILL BE THE TOTAL 19 RADIONUCLIDE INVENTORY IN THE BURIAL SITE AT THE 20 EXPIRATION OF THE DAVIS-BESSE OPERATING LICENSE 21 UNDER EXPECTED LEVELS OF RESIN CONTAMINATION?

22 A. TABLE 10-3 PRESENTS THE EXPECTED 23 ACTIVITIES IN THE BURIAL SITE AT TERMINATION OF

() 24 THE DAVIS-BESSE OPERATING LICENSE IN YEAR 2011.

25 THE TOTAL EXPECTED ACTIVITY IS 0.013 CURIES. THIS 1 ._ - - .-  : -

115 gy 1 ACTIVITY IS ESSENTIALLY ALL CC-137.

k~

2 Q. WOULD YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW YOU 3 CALCULATED THE TOTAL BURIAL SITE INVENTORY UNDER 4 EXPECTED LEVELS OF RESIN CONTAMINATION?

S A. I CONSERVATIVELY ASSUMED THAT THE LEVELS 6 0F ACTIVITY IN FUTURE RESIN BATCHES WILL CONTINUE 7 AT PREVIOUSLY MEASURED LEVELS, WHICH WERE THE 8 RESULT OF n TUBE LEAK WHICH IS NOW REPAIRED. I 9 'HEREFORE TOOK THE PRESENT INVENTORIES IN THE f

10 SETTLING BASIN AS THE INVENTORIES THAT WOULD BE 11 PRODUCED AND BURIED EVERY FIVE YEARS. THF i  !

l 12 EXPECTED RADIONUCLIDE ACTIVITIES FOR EACH BURIED I 13 LOT WERE DECAYED FROM THE RESPECTIVE ESTIMATED 10 l l 14 BURIAL DATE OF EACH LOT TO THE YEAR 2011. THE

! l l 15 DECAYED ACTIVITIES OF THE LOT WERE THEN SUMMED. l i

16 Q. WE'LL NOW MOVE ON. I 17 JUDGE H0YT: I WONDER IF THIS IS l I

18 NOT AN APPROPRIATE TIME FOR A NOON BREAK.

4 19 MR. SILBERG: THAT.WOULD BE 20 ACCEPTABLE.

i 21 JUDGE H0YT: YOU ARE AT THE i

22 HALFWAY POINT IN YOUR TESTIMONY. WE CAN GO OFF i

23 THE RECORD FOR A MOMENT. I 24 - - -

l 25 (OFF RECORD) l

, - - -.~ . ._..._ _ - ._.~ - .~. -. __.-..- - . _

116 1

1 2 JUDGE H0YT: VERY WELL. WE HAD 3 A BRIEF DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD CONCERNING THE f 4 TIMES FOR THE LUNCH. NOON BREAK. THE CONSENSUS IS i ,

j 5 THAT WE WILL CONVENE AGAIN AT 11:30. THE HEARING 6 IS IN RECESS. ,

, t i 7

{

8 j 9 A F T E R N O O N S E S S I O N 10 - - -

11 JUDGE H0YT: VERY WELL. THE l 12 HEARING WILL COME TO ORDER. LET THE RECORD i r"  :

I ( ')

i 13 REFLECT THAT ALL THE PARTIES TO THE HEARING WHO l 14 WERE PRESENT WHEN THE HEARING RECESSED ARE AGAIN

)

{ 15 PRESENT IN THE HEARING ROOM. i i

i 16 MR. SILBERG, IF YOU WILL PICK UP WHERE i

i 17 YOU LEFT OFF, WHICH I BELIEVE IS WITH THE QUESTION I l 18 NUMBER 11 FROM THE LIST OF THOSE CONCERNS THAT j 19 WERE EXPRESSED IN THE ORDER.

) 20 MR. SILBERG: THANK YOU, JUDGE.

} 21 BY MR. SILBERG:

i 22 Q. QUESTION 11-STATES AS FOLLOWS WHAT 1S f-23 THE ESTIMATED DOSE TO AN' INDIVIDUAL STANDING ON 24 COVERED BASIN DREDGING AFTER 30 YEARS OF OPERATION

( f.

i 25 UNDER EXPECTED LEVELS OF RESIN CONTAMINATION?

4 i

i

}

}

L _-_ _ _ ~

117

, 1 MR. BLAND, WHAT DOSE WOULD AN INDIVIDUAL 4 2 RECEIVE IF, AFTER EXPIRATION OF THE DAVIS-BESSE 3 OPERATING LICENSE, THE INDIVIDUAL STOOD DIRECTLY 4 ATOP THE COVERED BURIAL SITE?

S A. (MR. BLAND) THE ESTIMATED DOSE AN 6 INDIVIDUAL WOULD RECEIVE IF HE STOOD DIRECTLY ON 7 TOP OF THE LAST CONSTRUCTED BURIAL CELL AT THE 8 EXPIRATION OF THE DAVIS-BESSE OPERATING LICENSE 24 9 HOURS PER DAY FOR AN ENTIRE YEAR WOULD BE 00. 07 10 MREM.

11 LET ME CL ARI FY THAT. 0.007 MREM. IF THE 12 INDIVIDUAL STOOD ON TOP OF EARLIER CONSTRUCTED 13 CELLS, THE DOSE RECEIVED WOULD BE LESS, SINCE THE 14 INVENTORY OF THOSE CELLS WOULD HAVE DECAYED MORE.

15 Q. WHAT METHODOLOGY DID YOU USE TO CALCULATE 16 THIS DOSE?

17 A. I USED THE RADIATION SHIELDING AND DOSE 18 CALCULATIONAL METHODS OF ISOSHLD. ISOSHLD WAS .

19 DEVELOPED BY BATTELLE NORTHWEST LABORATORIES To i

20 PROVIDE A CALCULATIONAL METHOD FOR ACCURATELY 21 APPROXIMATING RADIATION ATTENUATION AND BUILD-UP e

22 FOR VARIOUS SHIELD MATERIALS.

THE METHODOLOGY EMPLOYED IN THE 23 24 CALCULATIONS IS POINT KERNEL INTEGRATION. THIS

( f.

• 25 TECHNIQUE CONSISTS OF DIVIDING THE SOURCE VOLUME

e

~ f 118

.r ,- .

~ l INTO A SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF SMALL DISCREET VOLUMES u

2 THAT MAY THEN BE APPROXIMATED AS POINT SOURCES FOR -

.. i 3 CALCULATING'THE RADIATIUN ATTENUATION AND

~

1

<4 UUILD-UP. INTEGRATION QVER THE. SOURCE TO S DETERM'1;NE THE TOTAL DOSE IS OBTAINED BY SUMMING 6 THE DOSE CONTIRIBUTION FROM ALL OF THE DIFFERENTIAL 7 SOURCE VO UMES.

8 THIS TECHNIQUE IS USED THROUGHOUT THE 9 INDUSTRY AND GOVERNMENT FOR CALCULATING RADIATION '

10 SHIELDING ATTENUATION AND DOSES.

11 Q. WOULD YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN THE ASSUMPTIONS

~

12 THhT YOU HADE IN CALCULATING THIS DOSE?

(/) 13 A. 1 ASSUMED THAT THE BURIAL SITE WILL HAVE 14 A TWO-FOOT THICK SOIL COVER, WHICH COINCIDES WITH IS THE MINIMUM THICKNESS SPECIFIED IN TOLEDO EDISON'S 16 DESIGN OF THE BURIAL GROUND.

17 1 USED THE SOIL DENSITY VALUE MEASURED IN 18 BORINGS AT THE BURIAL SITE, TWO GRAMS PER CUBIC l l

19 CENTIMETER. I USED THE RADIONUCLIDES 20 CONCENTRATIONS LISTED IN TABLE 11-1 AS THE 21 CONCENTRATIONS IN THE LAST-CONSTRUCTED BURIAL l 22 CELL. THE CONCENTRATIONS LISTED IN TABLE 11-1 ARE l l

23 THE AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS RECENTLY MEASURED IN l 24 THE SETTLING BASIN. AS I JUST STATED, I ASSUMED (f

2S THAT THE INDIVIDUAL WOULD STAND DIRECTLY ON TOP OF s

L_._--_____ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . .

+ 119 1 THE BURIAL GROUND 24 HOURS PER DAY, 365 DAYS PER 2 YEAR. ,

3 Q. PRESIDING OFFICER'S QUESTION NUMBER 12 4 STATES AS FOLLOWS: WHAT CRITERIA WILL BE USED TO 5 DECIDE WHETHER RESINS WILL BE BURIED ON SITE OR 6 TRANSPORTED TO A LICENSED BURIAL SITE IN THE EVENT 7 THAT RESINS BECOME CONTAMINATED AT HIGHER THAN 8 EXPECTED LEVELS FROM STEAM GENERATOR TUBE LEAKS- OR 9 RUPTURES, FOR EXAMPLE.

10 MR. BLAND, WOULD YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE THE 11 CRITERIA THAT GOVERN WHETHER A BATCH OF RESINS MAY e

12 BE DISCHARGED TO THE SETTLING BASIN?

f' , ,

(s.) 13 A. AS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED, EACH BATCH OF 14 SPENT RESIN IS ANALYZED BEFORE IT CAN BE 15 DISCHARGED TO THE SETTLING BASIN. IF RADIONUCLIDE 16 CONCENTRATIONS EXCEED ESTABLISHED LIMITS, THE 17 SPENT RESINS ARE NOT DISCHARGED TO THE BASIN BUT 18 ARE INSTEAD TREATED AS RADWASTE AND' PROCESSED FOR 19 0FFSITE DISPOSAL.

20 THE MAXIMUM CONCENTRATIONS ALLOWED IN THE 21 RESIN BATCHES DISCHARGED TO THE SETTLING BASIN ARE' 22 LISTED ON TABLE 11-1. THESE CONCENTRATIONS APPLY 23 TO THE RESIN BATCHES BEFORE THEY ARE MIXED WITH i j

/ \ 24 THE WATER TREATMENT SLUDGE. IF MORE THAN ONE

\~J l 25 RADIONUCLIDE IS I DENTI FI ED , THE SUM OF THE l

12 0 1 FRACTIONS RULE IS USED TO ENSURE THAT THE 2 CUMULATIVE CONCENTRATION ALSO MEET THE ESTABLISHED l 3 LIMIT.

4 Q. HOW WERE THESE CRITERIA DERIVED?

5 A. IN AN EVALUATION OF FEASIBLE RELEASE 6 SCENARIOS AND ENVIRONMENT TRANSPORT AND EXPOSURE 7 PATHWAYS WAS PERFORMED TO ASSESS THE RADIOLOGICAL 8 LIMITS OF RESIN BURIAL. THE CONCENTRATION LIMITS 9 WERE CHOSEN SO THAT, UNDER THE FEASIBLE RELEASE 10 SCENARIOS AND ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPORT AND EXPOSURE 11 PATHWAYS EVALUATED, THE DOSE TO ANY MEMBER OF THE 12 PUBLIC WOULD BE NEGLIGIBLE, LESS THAN ONE MREM.

13 Q.- WHAT IS DONE WITH RESINS THAT DO NOT 14 SATISFY THE CRITERIA FOR DISCHARGE TO THE SETTLING 15 BASINS?

16 A. (MR. BRIDEN) THE RESINS ARE PUMFED TO 17 EITHER OF TWO CONDENSATE P LISHING DEMINERALIZER 18 HOLD-UP TANKS. FROM THESE TANKS, THE RESINS ARE 19 PUMPED TO RADWASTE DISPOSABLE STEEL LINERS. THE 20 RESINS WITHIN THE LINER ARE PROCESSED BY 21 DEWATERING TO INSURE A WASTE FORM ACCEPTABLE FOR 22 DISPOSAL. THE LINER IS APPROPRIATELY PACKAGED TO l

23 MEET FEDERAL RADWASTE TRANSPORTATION AND DISPOSAL 1 11 l 24 REQUIREMENTS.. THE LINER IS THEN SHIPPED TO A --

25 AS RADWASTE FOR BURIAL AT A LICENSED LOW-LEVEL l

s

121 1 RADWASTE BURIAL SITE, NORMALLY TO BARNWELL, SOUTH 2 CAROLINA.

3 Q. PRESIDING OFFICER'S QUESTION 13 STATES AS 4 FOLLOWS: WHAT IS THE ESTIMATED UPPER LIMIT OF 5 RADIONUCLIDE INVENTORY THAT COULD EXIST AFTER 30 6 YEARS, UNDER THE ABOVE CRITERIA?

7 MR. BLAND, WHAT IS THE MAXIMUM 8 RADIONUCLIDE INVENTORY THAT COULD EXIST IN THE 9 BURIAL GROUND WHEN THE DAVIS-BESSE OPERATING 10 LICENSE EXPIRES?

11 A. (MR. BLAND) THE MAXIMUM ACTIVITY OF EACH j 12 RADIONUCLIDE IN THE BURIAL GROUND AT THE h 13 TERMINATION OF THE DAVIS-BESSE OPERATING LICENSE 14 IS SET FORTH IN TABLE 13-1.

15 THE TOTAL MAXIMUM ACTIVITY IS 0.036 CURIE 16 AND AGAIN IS ALMOST ENTIRELY ATTRIBUTABLE TO l

17 CESIUM-137.  !

18 Q. WOULD YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW THIS MAXIMUM 19 INVENTORY WAS CALCULATED?

20 A. I DETERMINED THAT THE AVERAGE 21 CONCENTRATION OF PAST RESIN DISCHARGES TO THE I

22 SETTLING BASIN, WHICH WERE USED TO ESTIMATE TOTAL  ;

1 23 EXPECTED ACTIVITY, 15 0.37 0F THE LIMITING l

()

(~)

24 CONCENTRATION.

j 25 I THEREFORE MULTIPLIED THE TOTAL EXPECTED 1 l

i

%. n I

122 1 ACTIVITIES IN THE BURIAL GROUND IN THE YEAR 2011, 2 LISTED ON TABLE 10-3, BY THE RECIPROCAL OF 0.37, 3 WHICH IS 2.7. THIS CALCULATION PRODUCED THE 4 MAXIMUM ACTIVITIES THAT WOULD RESULT IF ALL RESIN 5 DISCHARGES CONTAINED THE LIMITING, THAT IS MAXIMUM 6 ALLOWABLE, RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS.

7 Q. THE BOARD'S QUESTION 14 STATES AS 8 FOLLOWS: WHAT IS THE ESTIMATED UPPER LIMIT OF 9 DOSE TO THE WHOLE BODY FOR AN INDIVIDUAL STANDING 10 ON THE BURIAL SITE THAT COULD EXIST AFTER 30 YEARS 11 UNDER THE ABOVE CRITERIA?

12 MR. BLAND, WHAT IS THE MAXIMUM WHOLE BODY

(N

(__) 13 DOSE DUE TO DIRECT EXPOSURE THAT AN INDIVIDUAL 14 WOULD RECEIVE IF, AFTER EXPIRATION OF THE 15 DAVIS-BESSE OPERATING LICENSE, HE STOOD DIRECTLY 16 ATOP THE BURIAL SITE?

17 A. THE MAXIMUM WHOLE BODY DOSE DUE TO DIRECT 18 EXPOSURE THAT AN INDIVIDUAL WOULD RECEIVE IF, 19 AFTER EXPIRATION OF THE DAVIS-BESSE OPERATING 20 LICENSE, HE STOOD DIRECTLY ON TOP OF THE BURIAL 21 SITE 24 HOURS PER DAY, 365 DAYS A YEAR, WOULD BE 22 0. 02 MREM..

23 Q. WHAT METHODOLOGY DID YOU USE TO CALCULATE 24 THIS MAXIMUM DOSE?

[)

m 25 A. I USED THE ISOSHLD METHODOLOGY, WHICH I

4 123 1 HAVE PREVIOUSLY DESCRIBED.

2 Q. WOULD YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE Th ASSUMPTIONS 3 YOU MADE IN CALCULATING THIS MAXIMUM DOSE DUE TO 4 EXPOSURE?

5 A. I ASSUMED THAT THE INDIVIDUAL STOOD OVER 6 THE LAST CONSTRUCTED BURIAL CELL 24 HOURS PER DAY 7 FOR A YEAR. I USED THE MAXIMUM RADIONUCLIDE 8 CONCENTRATIONS, WHICH I CALCULATED BY MULTIPLYING 9 THE EXPECTED CONCENTRATIONS IN THE LAST CELL BY 10 2.7. I EVALUATED THE SHIELDING EFFECT OF THE SOIL 11 COVER, I ASSUMED THAT THE COVER WOULD BE TWO FEET l 12 THICK, WHICH IS THE MINIMUM THICKNESS IJNDER TOLEDO 13 EDISON'S DESIGN, AND I USED THE SOIL DENSITY 14 MEASUREMENT CONTAINED IN BORINGS AT THE BURIAL 15 SITE.

16 Q. PRESIDING OFFICER'S QUESTION NUMBER 15 17 STATES AS FOLLOWS: WHY HAS STRONTIUM-90 NOT BEEN 18 INCLUDED IN LICENSEE'S ASSESSMENTS?

19 MR BLAND HAS S TRONTI UM-9 0 BEEN INCLUDED 20 IN THE INVENTORY CALCULATIONS IN YOUR TESTIMONY?

21 A YES. I l

22 Q AND HAS STRONTIUM-90 BEEN INCLUDED IN THE I 23 DOES C A L C il L A T I O N S IN YOUR TESTIMONY?

()

'w J 24 A. YES. THE RADIOACTIVE DECAY OF 26 STRONTIUM-90 IS NOT ACCOMPANIED BY ANY GAMMA )

1

l 124 ;

1 l

1 RADIATION OR X-RAYS THEREFORE IT DvES NOT 2 CONTRIBUTE TO THE DIRECT EXPOSURE DOSES _ HOWEVER, 3 STRONTIUM-90 DOES CONTRIBUTE AN INTERNAL DOSE IF  ;

4 INdECTED OR INHALED AND HAS BEEN CONSIDERED IN 6 EVALUATING THE INGEbTION PATHWAY DOSES PRESENTED 6 LATER IN THIS TESTIMONY.

7 Q. WHY WAS S TKONTI UM-9 0 NOT INCLUDED IN 8 TOLEDO E D I S O RJb P R E V I O U S ASSESSMENTS?

9 A. S TRONTI UM-9 0 WAS NOT INCLUDED BECAUSE OF 10 ITS NEGLIGIBLE CONTRIBUTION TO BOTH THE TOTAL 11 ACTIVITY AND THE DOSES. WE HAVE EXAMINED THE 12 STRONTIUM-90 LEVELS IN THIS PARTICULAR WASTE 13 STREAM, AND STRONTIUM-90 COMPRISES ONLY 0.04 14 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL ACTIVITY. ITS ABUNDANCE AND 15 DOSE CONTRIBUTION ARE NEGLIGIBLE COMPARED WITH 16 THAT OF CS-137, 17 Q. THE 16 T H QUESTION POSED BY THE PRESIDING 18 0FFICER STATES AS FOLLOWS: WHAT WOULD BE THE l

19 TOTAL ESTIMATED WHOLE BODY DOSE EQUIVALENT FOR AN l 20 INDIVIDUAL THROUGH THE FOOD INGESTION PATHWAY THAT 21 COULD RESULT FROM THE FINAL 3 0-Y E AR INVENTORY OF l l

22 RADIONUCLIDES INCLUDING STRONTIUM-90?

l 23 PROVIDE ESTIMATES FOR EXPECTED LEVELS AND l 24 UPPER LIMITS OF RADIONUCLIDES INVENTORY AFTER 30 f'w )\

25 YEARS.

l l

125 1 MR. BLAND, ASSUMING THAT RESIN DISCHARGES 2 TO THE SETTLING BASIN CONTAIN EXPECTED LEVELS OF 3 RADIONUCLIDES, WHAT WOULD BE THE TOTAL ESTIMATED 4 WHOLE BODY DOSE EQUIVALENT FOR AN INDIVIDUAL FOR S THE FOOD INGESTION PATHWAY AFTER TERMINATION OF 6 THE DAVIS-BESSE OPERATING LICENSE?

7 A. ASSUMING EXPECTED LEVELS OF RESIN 8 CONTAMINATION, THE TOTAL ESTIMATED WHOLE BODY DOSE I

9 RATE FOR THE FOOD INGESTION PATHWAY WOULD BE 0.31 10 MREM PER YEAR.

11 Q. WHAT METHODOLOGY DID YOU USE TO CALCULATE 12 THIS INGESTION PATHWAY DOSE?

13 A. I USED THE ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPORT 14 MODELING OF U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 15 REGULATORY GUIDE 1.109 COUPLED WITH EFFECTIVE 16 TOTAL BODY DOSE CONVERSION FACTORS DERIVED FROM 17 PUBLICATION 30 0F THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON

~

18 RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION.

19 Q. PLEASE EXPLAIN ANY ASSUMPTIONS YOU MADE 20 IN CALCULATING THIS FOOD INGESTION PATHWAY DOSE?

21 A. I ASSUMED THAT AN INDIVIDUAL GREW ALL HIS 22 FRESH VEGETABLES IN SOIL CONTAMINATED WITH WASTE 23 FROM THE LAST BURIAL CELL.

12

( , 24 I ASSUMED THAT THE VEGETABLES ARE GROWN

%.)

25 IN A MIXTURE OF CONTAMINATED WASTE AND SOIL IN

126 1 EQUAL PROPORi10NS. THIS ASSUMPTIONS FOLLOWS THE 2 GUIDANCE IN NUREG/CR-3585, "DE MINIMIS WASTE 3 IMPACTS METHODOLOGY" FEBRUARY 1984.

4 I THEN USED THE SOIL-TO-PLANT TRANSFER 5 ACTORS SPECIFIED IN NRC REGULATORY GUIDE 1.109.

6 Q. DID YOU EVALUATE ANY OTHER FOOD INGESTION 7 PATHWAYS?

8 A. YES, I EVALUATED DOSES ATTRIBUTABLE TO 9 THE INGESTION OF GEESE THAT MIGHT GRAZE ON THE 10 BURIAL SITE. I ASSUMED THAT THE GEESE GRAZE ON 11 GRASSES GROWN DIRECTLY ON WASTE FROM THE LAST 12 CELL.

p

\ s_) 13 FOR SIMPLICITY AND CONSERVATISM, I 14 ASSUMED THAT THE FLESH OF THE GEESE WOULD 15 ACCUMULATE RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS EQUAL TO 16 THE CONCENTRATION IN THE VEGETATION. I THEN 17 POSTULATED THAT AN INDIVIDUAL WOULD CONSUME 14 18 KILOGRAMS, 30 POUNDS, OF SUCH GOOSE FLESH PER 19 YEAR.

20 THE TOTAL WHOLE BODY DOSE EQUIVALENT FROM 21 THIS SCENARIO IS 0.025 MREM.

22 I ALSO EVALUATED THE WHOLE BODY DOSE TO 23 AN INDIVIDUAL WHO DRANK CONTAMINATED LAKE WATER f\

W.J 24 AND CONSUMED FISH FROM THE LAKE. FOR THIS 25 ANALYSIS, I~ POSTULATED THAT SOME CATASTROPHIC

127 l

1 MECHANISM TRANSFERRED THE ENTIRE BURIAL SITE 2 INVENTORY TO THE LAKE AT ONE TIME AND THAT ALL THE 3 SLUDGE DISSOLVED.

4 I THEN CALCULATED THE TOTAL BODY DOSE TO 5 AN INDIVIDUAL USING THE DAVIS-BESSE OFF-SITE DOSE 6 CALCULATION MANUAL ODCM, WHICH THE NRC HAS 7 REVIEWED AND APPROVED. THE ODCM IS BASED ON THE 8 NRC'S REGULATORY GUIDE 1.109 METHODS ADAPTED TO 9 THE SPECI FIC FEATURES OF THE DAVIS-BESSE SITE.

10 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS METHODOLOGY, I 11 APPLIED A 10 TO 1 NEAR FIELD DILUTION FACTOR TO '

12 ADDRESS IMMEDIATE DISPERSION IN THE LAKE

,m (s i x) 13 ENVIRONMENT. AN ADDITIONAL DILUTION OF 5.7 TO 1 14 WAS APPLIED TO DETERMINE THE RESULTANT 15 RADIONUCLIDE MATERIAL CONCENTRATION AT AN ASSUMED 16 BEACH WELL, CONSERVATIVELY POSTULATED TO BE 17 LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST BOUNDRY OF THE 18 DAVIS-BESSE SITE.

i 19 I USED INDIVIDUAL CONSUMPTION RATES OF 21 ,

20 KILOGRAMS PER YEAR OF FISH AND 730 LITERS PER YEAR 21 0F WATER. THE RESULTANT TOTAL BODY DOSE, ASSUMING 22 EXPECTED LEVELS OF RESIN CONTAMINATION, WOULD BE 23 1.1 MREM.

f^'}

~~j 24 DUE TO DISSIPATION OF THE OF THE RELEASE, i

25 THIS DOSE WOULD BE RECEIVED ONLY IN THE FIRST YEAR l l

l

128 c3 1 AFTER THE POSTULATED RELEASE. DOSES IN SUBSEQUENT h (j 2 YEARS WOULD BE ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE SMALLER.

3 Q. CAN ONE ADD UP THE INGESTION PATHWAY )

4 DOSES FOR VEGETABLES, F0WL, FISH AND WATER TO 5 ARRIVE AT A TOTAL DOSE?

6 A. NO. ONE COULD ADD THE FOOD INGESTION 7 PATHWAY DOSES FOR VEGETABLE AND F0WL CONSUMPTION.

8 ONE COULD NOT, HOWEVER, RECEIVE THE TOTAL BODY 9 DOSE EQUIVALENT FOR VEGETABLE AND F0WL CONSUMPTION 10 AND THE TOTAL BODY DOSE DUE TO INGESTION OF FISH 11 AND DRINKING WATER.

12 BOTH SCENARIOS POSTULATED TO DETERMINE kN h 13 THESE DOSES COULD NOT OCCUR SIMULTANEOUSLY.

14 EITHER THE WASTE REMAINS IN THE BURIAL GROUND, IN 15 WHICH CASE THE DOSE DUE TO VEGETABLE INGESTION 16 APPLIES, OR THE WASTE IS RELEASED TO THE LAKE, IN 17 WHICH CASE THE DOSE DUE TO INGESTION OF FISH AND 18 WATER APPLIES.

19 Q. MR. BLAND, WHAT WOULD BE THE WHOLE BODY 20 DOSE EQUIVALENT FOR AN INDIVIDUAL THROUGH THE FOOD 21 INGESTION PATHWAY IF ONE WERE TO ASSUME THAT THE 22 RADIOACTIVITY IN THE WASTE IS AT THE MAXIMUM 23 POSSIBLE LEVEL?

/ ) 24 A. THE MAXIMUM TOTAL BODY DOSE EQUIVALENT

\ ,J 25 FOR FOOD INGESTION, VEGETABLES, WOULD BE 0.85 MREM

129

.c- s 1 PER YEAR.

lT 2 THE MAXIMUM TOTAL BODY DOSE EQUIVALENT 3 DUE TO INGESTION OF GOOSE FLESH WOULD BE 0. 07 MREM 4 PER YEAR. THE ALTERNATIVE MAXIMUM TOTAL BODY DOSE 5 DUE TO INGESTION OF FISH AND DRINKING WATER WOULD 6 BE 0.3 MREM. THE 0.3 MREM TOTAL BODY DOSE DUE TO 7 INGESTION OF FISH AND DRINKING WATER WOULD BE 1

8 RECEIVED ONLY IN THE FIRST YEAR AND DUE TO 9 DISSIPATION WOULD NOT RECUR.

10 Q. HOW ARE THESE MAXIMUM INGESTION PATHWAY 11 DOSES CALCULATED?

12 A. THESE MAXIMUM DOSES WERE CALCULATED USING tm k

( ,/ M 13 THE SAME METHODS AND ASSUMPTIONS I JUST DESCRIBED, 14 EXCEPT THE RADIONUCLIDE ACTIVITIES AND 15 CONCENTRATIONS IN THE BURIAL SITE WERE ASSUMED TO 16 BE AT THOSE MAXIMUM LEVELS CALCULATED BY 17 MULTIPLYING EXPECTED LEVELS BY 2.7.

18 Q. DR. TILL, HAVE YOU REVIEWED MR. BLAND'S 19 ANALYSES?

20 A. (DR. TILL) YES, I HAVE.

21 Q. WOULD YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE YOUR REVIEW?

22 A. I READ MR. BLAND'S REPORTS AND HIS 23 TESTIMONY, AND I DENTI FIED THE METHODOLOGIES AND

1. '\ 24 ASSUMPTIONS HE USED. I WAS FAMILIAR WITH ALL THE (Q

25 METHODOLOGIES HE CHOSE. I DOUBLE-CHECKED HIS i

130

,m i  ;

1 EXTERNAL DOSE CONVERSION FACTORS AND INHALATION 2 DOSE CONVERSION FACTORS, AND I VARIED THE 3 BI0 ACCUMULATION FACTORS FOR RADIONUCLIDE UPTAKE BY 4 PLANTS AND AQUATIC BIOTA.

5 I VERIFIED MR. BLAND'S ESTIMATES FOR 6 STRONTIUM-90, COMPARING THE ESTIMATE WITH A NUMBER 7 0F REPORTED VALUES. I THEN PERFORMED MY OWN 8 INDEPENDENT CALCULATIONS AND CONFIRMED THAT 9 RADIONUCLIDES OTHER THAN THE SIX LISTED ON TABLE 10 10-2 DO NOT CONTRIBUTE TO DOSE.

11 Q. DO YOU AGREE WITH THE RESULTS OF MR.

12 BLAND'S ANALYSIS?

(^r -

( [s ) 13 A. I D0. THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN OUR 14 CALCULATIONS IS GOOD.

1S Q. DID MR. BLAND USE ACCEPTABLE METHODOLOGY 16 AND ASSUMPTIONS IN CALCULATING THE DOSES?

17 A. YES. MR. BLAND USED WELL-ACCEPTED 18 METHODOLOGIES. THE ASSUMPTIONS HE USED WERE 19 GENERALLY CONSERVATIVE, WHICH WOULD TEND TO OVER 20 ESTIMATE ACTUAL DOSES.

21 Q. DR. LINNEMANN, WOULD THE DOSES CALCULATED 22 BY MR. BLAND CAUSE ANY APPRECIABLE HEALTH EFFECT 23 IN AN INDIVIDUAL RECEIVING THAT DOSE?

l l

/ N, 24 A. (DR. LINNEMANN) NO. I WOULD NOT EXPECT l 'u,'

25 ANY ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECTS. STATISTICALLY, THE 1

n. I p

131

! c_ 1 PROBABILITY OF AN ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECT FROM THESE g1(_) 2 DOSES IS VANISHINGLY SMALL, ABOUT ONE IN 10 3 MILLION.

4 Q. WOULD YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN THE BASIS FOR S YOUR RESPONSE?

6 A. WELL, THE HEALTH EFFECTS INDUCED BY 7 RADIATION HAVE BEEN STUDIED FOR OVER 80 YEARS. IN 8 1929, THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON RADIOLOGICAL 9 PROTECTION, THE ICRP, AND THE U.S. NATIONAL 10 COUNCIL ON RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION AND 11 MEASUREMENTS NCRP, AS THESE GROUPS ARE NOW CALLED, 12 WERE FORMED.

x_ 13 SINCE THEN, THESE TWO GROUPS HAVE HAD 14 DATA ON THE BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF RADIATION UNDER 15 ALMOST UNDER CONTINUOUS REVIEW. ,

16 IN ADDITION, OVER THE YEARS, THE ISSUE 17 HAS BEEN EXAMINED BY MANY SCIENTISTS AND HAS BEEN 18 ADDRESSED BY A NUMBER OF PRESTIGIOUS GROUPS, 19 INCLUDING THE UNITED NATIONS SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE 20 ON THE EFFECTS OF ATOMIC RADIATION AND THE 21 NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES' COMMITTEE ON THE 22 BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF IONIZING RADIATION, THE BEIR 23 COMMITTEE.

( 24 HEALTH EFFECTS INDUCED BY HIGH LEVELS OF GJ 25 RADIATION ARE ACUTE AND WELL-KNOWN. DOSES OF 200

132

,s

- 1 REM OR MORE DELIVERED OVER A SHORT PERIOD INDUCE Y_

2 WHAT IS KNOWN AS RADIATION SICKNESS AND, DEPENDING 3 ON THE DOSE, CAN BE FATAL.

4 LESSER EXPOSURES, FROM 10 REM TO A S HUNDRED REM, DO NOT PRODUCE THESE SYMPTOMS OF 6 RADIATION SYMPTOMS, BUT CAN INCREASE THE RISK OF 7 CANCER AND OF GENETIC ABNORMALITIES. BELOW 10 8 REM, THAT IS 10,000 MILLIGRAM, IT IS DIFFICULT TO 9 FIND ANIMAL OR HUMAN STUDY POPULATIONS THAT SHOW 10 EFFECTS OF RADIATION. IF EFFECTS OCCUR, THEY ARE 11 TOO SMALL TO BE DETECTED.

12 THE STUDY OF THESE EFFECTS AT ANY DOSE

,f

. ( j u.) 13 LEVEL IS COMPLICATED BY SEVERAL FACTORS. FIRST, 14 THE INCIDENCE OF CANCER OR OF GENETIC 15 ABNORMALITYIS RANDOM; AN INDIVIDUAL EXPOSED TO 16 RADIATION WILL USUALLY NOT DEVELOP A CANCER, NOR 17 ARE HIS OFFSPRING LIKELY TO SUFFER ABNORMALITIES.

18 SECOND, CANCER IN GENETIC EFFECTS ARE 19 DELAYED EFFECTS WHEN THEY DO OCCUR.

20 THIRD, ONE CANNOT DISTINGUISH CANCERS OR 21 GENETIC ABNORMALITIES CAUSED BY RADIATION FROM 22 THOSE THAT OCCUR SPONTANEOUSLY OR AS A RESULT OF 23 SOME OTHER AGENT. NEVERTHELESS, FOR RADIATION

/ ') 24 PROTECTION PURPOSES AND FOR EVALUATION OF

(_/

25 POTENTIAL HEALTH HAZARDS, WE ASSUME THAT EFFECTS

133 l

l 1 CAN OCCUR AT LOW DOSES AND HAVE DEVELOPED l I

2 STATISTICAL MODELS OF DOSE EFFECT RELATIONSHIPS. l 3 FROM STATISTICAL STUDIES, THE RISK OF AN 4 ADDITIONAL CANCER OR GENETIC DAMAGE PER REM OF 5 EXPOSURE CAN BE ESTIMATED. THE MOST CURRENT RISK 6 ESTIMATES ARE THOSE CONTAINED IN THE BEIR REPORT.

7 THE EVALUATIONS AND RESULTS IN THE BEIR REPORTS 8 ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE OTHER 1

9 LEADING S C I ENTI FI C GROUPS, PARTICULARLY THE ICRP, 10 REPORT NUMBER 26, AND NCRP, REPORT NUMBER 43, AND 11 REPORT NUMBER 60 AND UNSCEAR, REPORT, 1977. l 12 THE BEIR III RISK ESTIMATES ARE PRESENTED 13 IN TABLE 16-1.

14 AT VERY LOW LEVELS OF EXPOSURE, BELOW 15 S-10 REM, OR 5,000 TO 10,000 MILLIGRAM, HEALTH 16 EFFECTS HAVE NOT BEEN OBSERVED OR DETECTED 17 STATISTICALLY AND MAY NOT OCCUR. HOWEVER, FOR THE 18 PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING STANDARDS, ADVISORY AND 19 DECISIONAL ORGANIZATIONS CONSERVATIVELY ASSUME A 20 LINEAR RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DOSE AND RESPONSE, 21 WITH NO THKESHOLD 22 THE LINEAR, NO-THRESHOLD HYPOTHESIS 23 IMPLIES THAT THERE IS SOME RISK AT ANY LEVEL OF 24 EXPOSURE. WHILE THIS HYPOTHESIS IS APPROPRIATE v

')

25 WHEN SETTING STANDARDS FOR RADIATION PROTECTION

134 1 IT IS ALMOST CERTAINLY OVER ESTIMATES RISK IT IS

-)

l N_J 2 KNOWN TO BE INCORRECT AS TO A NUMBER OF 3 RADIATION-INDUCED HEALTH EFFECTS SUCH AS 4 CATARACTS, IMPAIRED FERTILITY. ABNORMAL FETAL 5 DEVELOPMENT, FOR WHICH EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE HAS 6 DEMONSTRATED THAT THERE IS INDEED A THRESHOLD DOSE 7 BELOW WHICH THE EFFECT WILL NOT OCCUR.

8 FURTHERMORE, THE HYPOTHESIS ASSUMES THAT 9 A DOSE DELIVERED OVER A LONG PERIOD OF TIME IS AS 10 DAMAGING AS THE SAME DOSE GIVEN OVER A SHORT TIME 11 AND TAKES NO ACCOUNT OF THE HUMAN BODY'S ABILITY 12 TO RECOVER OR REPAIR RADIATION DAMAGE.

13 NOTWITHSTANDING THE CONSERVATISM OF THE 14 LINEAR, NO-THRESHOLD HYPOTHESIS, I HAVE APPLIED 15 THE BEIR III RISK ESTIMATORS TO THE DOSES THAT MR.

16 BLAND CALCULATED TO PLACE A STATISTICAL UPPER 17 BOUND ON RESULTING HEALTH EFFECTS.

18 FOR SIMPLICITY, I ROUNDED OFF TO ONE MREM 19 PER YEAR THE DOSE RATE A MAXIMALLY EXPOSED 20 INDIVIDUAL MIGHT RECEIVE FROM THE BURIAL GROUND.

21 THE RISK TO AN INDIVIDUAL OF A FATAL CANCER FROM A 22 CONTINUOUS ONE MREM DOSE WOULD BE 1.58 IN 10 23 MILLION PER YEAR.

, / 24 IN CONTRAST, THE RISK OF A SPONTANEOUS L/

l 25 CANCER DEATH WOULD BE ABOUT 10,000 TIMES GREATER.

1

(

135 1 THE RISK OF A GENETIC ABNORMALITY WOULD BE ABOUT '

l 2 ONE-HALF OF THE CANCER RISK OR ABOUT ONE CHANCE IN 3 10 MILLION THAT A PARENT SO EXPOSED WOULD 4 EXPERIENCE A LIVE BIRTH WITH A GENETIC 5 ABNORMALITY. THE NORMAL GENETIC ABNORMALITY RISK l l

6 IS ABOUT ONE IN TEN. EVEN IF THE ENTIRE 7 POPULATION RESIDING WITHIN TEN MILES OF THE 8 DAVIS-BESSE PLANT WERE TO RECEIVE THIS DOSE, ONE 9, MREM PER YEAR, I WOULD NOT EXPECT A SINGLE FATAL i 10 CANCER OR GENETIC ABNORMALITY TO OCCUR.

14 11 A FURTHER ILLUSTRATION OF ONE MREM DOSE 12 IS OBTAINED BY COMPARING IT WITH DOSES AN 13 INDIVIDUAL WOULD RECEIVE FROM OTHER SOURCES. THIS 14 COMPARISON IS PRESENTED IN TABLE 16-2.

15 AS ONE CAN SEE, THE MAXIMUM DOSE 16 ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE BURIAL GROUND WOULD BE ONLY l 17 PERCENT OF THE DOSE AN INDIVIDUAL WOULD RECEIVE 18 FROM NATURAL BACKGROUND RADIATION, IS LESS THAN 19 THE ADDITIONAL DOSE A PERSON WOULD RECEIVE FROM I

20 LIVING IN A BRICK BUILDING, AND IS ABOUT THE SAME i

21 AS THE ANNUAL DOSE A PERSON RECEIVES FROM WATCHING

{ 22 TELEVISION.

23 Q. DR. LINNEMANN, IN DISCUSSING THE HEALTH 1 24 EFFECTS ATTRIBUTABLE TO RADIATION, THE STATE OF

/L ,.)\, 1 25 OHIO CITED IN ITS PETITION TO INTERVENE, CITED A I

I

136 1 REPORT PUBLISHED BY THE U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL 2 PROTECTION AGENCY AND ENTITLED " RADIONUCLIDES:

3 BACKGROUND INFORMATION DOCUMENT FOR FINAL RULES."

4 HOW DOES THE E.P.A.'S ASSESSMENT OF THE 5 RISK OF R A DI ATI ON-I N DUC E D HEALTH EFFECTS COMPARE 6 WITH YOUR OWN?

7 A. THE E.P.A.'S ESTIMATE OF CANCER AND 8 GENETIC RISKS IN THE BACKGROUND INFORMATION 9 DOCUMENT ARE BASED ON THE E. E I R III REPORT. THE 10 RISK ESTIMATORS I USED ARE ALSO FROM THE BEIR III 11 AND ARE THERE FORE CONSISTENT WITH E.P.A.'S k 12 ASSESSMENTS.

13 Q. THANK YOU, DR. LINNEMANN.

14 QUESTION 17 POSED BY THE PRESIDING 15 0FFICER STATES AS FOLLOWS: WHAT ARE THE PRINCIPAL 16 CHEMICAL COMPONENTS OF THE NON R A DI 0 AC TI VE SLUDGE 17 THAT ARE MIXED WITH R ADI 0 AC TI VE LY CONTAMINATED 18 RESINS?

19 PLEASE DESCRIBE THE SLUDGE THAT IS 20 DISCHARGED TO THE SETTLING BASIN, DR. BENNETT?

2;l A. (DR. BENNETT) THE SLUDGE THAT IS 22 DISCHARGED TO THE SETTLING BASIN CONSISTS OF 1 i

fv 23 IMPURITIES REMOVED FROM THE RAW LAKE WATER 24 TOGETHER WITH CHEMICALS USED IN AND PRODUCED BY 25 THE WATER TREATMENT PROCESS, CALCIUM HYDROXIDE, l

- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -  % ~

137

+

1 SODIUM ALUMINATE, AND CALCIUM CARBONATE. THE 2 SLUDGE IS MAINLY A SUSPENSION OF THE INORGANIC 3 SOLIDS IN WATER.

4 Q. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE WATER S TREATMENT PROCESS WHICH RESULTS IN THIS SLUDGE?

6 A. THE PURPOSE OF THE WATER TREATMENT IS TO 7 REMOVE SUSPENDED SOLIDS AND OTHER DISSOLVED 8 IMPURITIES IN THE LAKE WATER AND PREPARE IT FOR 9 GENERAL SITE USE, BOTH FOR USE IN PLANT SYSTEMS 10 AND FOR PERSONAL USE.

11 THE TREATMENT REMOVES MATERIALS WHICH g

\ w) 12 COULD DEPOSIT IN THE STEAM GENERATORS AND ON THE 13 CONDENSER TUBES AND THEREBY REDUCE HEAT TRANSFER 14 EFFICIENCIES.

15 THE TREATMENT ALSO P URI FI E S THE WATER TO 16 DRINKING WATER STANDARDS.

17 Q. MR. BRIDEN, WOULD YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE THE 18 WATER TREATMENT SYSTEM?

'9 A. (MR. BRIDEN) IN THE WATER TREATMENT 20 FACILITY, LAKE ERIE WATER IS FIRST CHLORINATED.

21 THE CHLORINATED WATER IS DELIVERED TO TWO 22 CLARIFIERS. CHEMICAL FEEDERS ARE LOCATED IN THE

( 23 VICINITY OF THE CL ARI FI ERS AND PROVIDE LIME FOR q) 24 SOFTENING AND FOR SODIUM ALUMINATE AND FOR 25 C L ARI FI C ATI ON. SUSPENDED SOLIDS, HARDNESS, AND

138 1 OTHER IMPURITIESPERCIPITATE OUT.

2 C L ARI FI E D WATER FLOWS BY GRAVITY THROUGH 3 TWO ANTHRACITE FILTERS TO A CLEARWELL. THE 4 PRECIPITATE IS REMOVED FROM THE C L ARI FI E R S BY 5 BLOWDOWN, PRODUCING SLUDGE IN QUESTION. FROM THE 6 CLEARWELL, THE CL ARI FI E D AND FILTERED WATER IS 7 EITHER PUMPED TO THE DOMESTIC WATER SYSTEM, OR IS 8 PUMPED THROUGH TWO AC TI V ATE D CARBON FILTERS TO 9 DEMINERALIZERS WHERE IT IS FURTHER P URI FI E D FOR 10 USE AS PRIMARY AND SECONDARY MAKEUP WATER.

n 11 Q. DR. BENNETT, HOW DOES THE SLUDGE COMPARE km) 12 WITH THAT PRODUCED BY A TYPICAL MUNICIPAL WATER 13 TREATMENT FACILITY?

14 A. (DR. BENNETT) THE DAVIS-BESSE SLUDGE IS 15 FAIRLY TYPICAL. ITS PRINCIPAL SOLID CONSTITUENT 16 IS CALCIUM CARBONATE. THE CONCENTRATIONS OF HEAVY 17 METALS IN THE DAVIS-BESSE SLUDGE ARE IN FACT 18 SMALLER THAN THAT IN THE SLUDGE PRODUCED BY 19 TOLED0'S WATER TREATMENT FACILITY OR THE TOWN OF 1

20 OREGON'S WATER TREATMENT FACILITY.

21 Q. WHAT CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF THE SLUDGE HAS 22 BEEN PERFORMED, DR. BENNETT?

23 A. SAMPLES WERE TAKEN OF THE CONTENTS OF THE (J')

~

24 SETTLING BASIN BOTTOMS. STANDARD ANALYTICAL 25 PROCEDURES WERE USED TO DETERMINE THE CHEMICAL AND

139 1 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SAMPLE.

2 THESE INCLUDED ATOMIC ABSORPTION TO 3 DETERMINE THE PRESENCE AND LEVELS OF HEAVY METALS, 4 GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY / MASS SPECTROSCOPY, FOR ORGANIC S MATERIALS, CHEMICAL TITRATION, ALKALINITY,

• 6 EVAPORATION / BURNING FOR SOLIDS.

7 Q. DR. BENNETT, WOULD YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE 8 THE RESULTS OF THE ANALYSIS?

9 A. OTHER THAN CONTAINING THE WATER TREATMENT 10 CHEMICALS THEMSELVES, THE SLUDGE CONSISTS OF THE 11 IMPURITIES IN LAKE ERIE WATER IN A CONCENTRATED A

k) 12 FORM. METALS ARE PRESENT IN A CONCENTRATION THAT 13 MIRROR THE CONCENTRATION IN THE LAKE WATER.

14 THE SETTLING BASIN BOTTOM SAMPLE HAS A PH 15 0F 9, WHICH IS LESS THAN A PH OF 10 REPORTED ON 16 ONE OCCASION IN MAUMEE BAY AND ONLY SLIGHTLY 17 HIGHER THAN THE 8.8 REPORTED IN THE MAUMEE RIVER.

18 THE AVERAGE PH IN WESTERN LAKE ERIE IS 19 REPORTED AT 8.42. RATHER THAN BEING DETRIMENTAL, 20 THE PH OF THE SETTLING BASIN BOTTOMS IS 21 BENE FI CI AL. AT THIS PH LEVEL, THE METALS WOULD 22 EXHIBIT CLOSE TO THEIR MINIMUM SOLUBILITY AND

[ ') 23 MAXIMUM RESISTENCE TO DISSOLUTION AND LEACHING.

% m ,/

24 THE DETAILED RESULTS OF THE CHEMICAL ANALYSES ARE 25 FOUND IN TABLE 17-1.

L- __ ,

140 1 Q. DR. BENNETT, WOULD THE SETTLING BASIN 2 BOTTOMS BE CHARACTERIZED AS HAZARDOUS UNDER U. S.

3 E.P.A. REGULATIONS?

4 A. THE BOTTOMS WERE TESTED IN ACCORDANCE 5 WITH THE EXTRACTION PROCEDURE THAT THE E. P.

6 TOXICITY TESTS CALLED FOR IN THE U.S.

7 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'S REGULATIONS 8 IMPLEMENTING THE RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND 9 RECOVERY ACT, 40 CFR PART 261.

10 COMPARING THE RESULTS OF THE TESTS WITH 11 THE RCRA STANDARDS, 40 C FR , PARAGRAPH 261.24, 12 SHOWS THAT THE SETTLING BASIN BOTTOMS WERE WELL 15 13 BELOW THE E. P. T0XICITY LIMITS. SEE TABLE 17-1 14 AGAIN. GIVEN THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SLUDGE 15 AND RESINS, THE BOTTOMS DO NOT EXHIBIT THE 16 CHARACTERISTICS OF RE AC TI VITY OR CORROSIVITY OR 17 IGNITIBILITY AS DEFINED IN THE U.S. E.P.A.

18 REGULATIONS, 40 C FR PARAGRAPHS 261.21, .22 AND 19 . 2 3.

20 FURTHERMORE, WATER TREATMENT SLUDGE IS 21 NOT A LISTED HAZARDOUS WASTE LISTED IN 40 CFR, 22 261, SUBPART D. THE R E FO RE , THE BOTTOMS WOULD NOT

[\ 23 BE CONSIDERED AS HAZARDOUS UNDER U.S. E.P.A.

L~)

24 REGULATIONS.

25 Q. QUESTIONS 18 AND 19 WILL BE ANSWERED

141 1 TOGETHER. QUESTION 18 STATES: WHAT IS THE RATE ,

1 2 0F BIOLOGICAL OR CHEMICAL DEGRADATION OF RESINS?

3 AND QUESTION 19 STATES: WHAT BIOLOGICAL 4 HAZARDS ARE THERE FROM RESIN DEGRADATION THAT HAVE  !

l 5 BEEN PUBLISHED IN THE SCI ENTI FIC LITERATURE OR ARE 6 KNOWN FROM MANUFACTURERS' TESTS?

l 7 MR. HETHERINGTON, WOULD YOU PLEASE 8 DESCRIBE THE RESINS THAT ARE USED IN THE l 9 SECONDARY-SIDE CLEANUP PROCESS AT DAVIS-BESSE?

10 A. (MR. HETHERINGTON) THE D A VI S-B E S S E

)

11 SECONDARY-SIDE CLEANUP PROCESS USES THREE TYPES OF

(

km~\) 12 POWDERED ION-EXCHANGE RESINS SUPPLIED BY EPICOR, i 13 INC. THESE ARE DESIGNATED PD-1, PD-2, AND PD-3.

14 THE EPICOR RESINS USED AT DAVIS-BESSE ARE 15 ESSENTIALLY THE SAME AS THOSE USED FOR THIS 16 PURPOSE THROUGHOUT THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY.

17 Q. WHAT IS THE CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF THE 18 RESINS, MR. HETHERINGTON?

19 A. ALL THREE TYPES ARE C0 POLYMERS OF STYRENE 20 AND DI VI N YL B ENZENE . PD-1 IS AMINATED. BY 21 AMINATED I MEAN TREATED WITH AMINE TO FORM 22 QUATERNARY AMMONIUM GROUP THAT IS TIGHTLY HELD ON f\

y 23 TO THE COPOLYMER. PD-1 IS IN THE HYDROXIDE FORM.

24 PD-2 AND PD-3 ARE SULPHONATED AND TREATED WITH A 25 $ULPHUR COMPOUND TO FORM A SULPHONIC ACID GROUP.

142 1 PD-2 IS INVERTED TO THE AMMONIUM FORM; 2 PD-3 IS HYDROGEN FORM. IN ALL THREE FORMS, THE 3 DVB FUNCTIONS AS CROSSLINKING AGENT, TYING THE 4 LINEAR CHAINS OF POLYSTYRENE TOGETHER.

5 Q. MR. HETHERINGTON, WOULD YOU EXPECT THESE 6 RESINS TO BE SUBJECT TO BIOLOGICAL DEGRADATION?

7 A. NO. IN MY SUBSTANTIAL EXPERIENCE WITH 8 ION EXCHANGE RESINS, I HAVE NEVER SEEN ANY 9 INSTANCE WHERE BIOLOGICAL DEGRADATION OF RESINS 10 HAS OCCURRED.

11 THERE HAVE BEEN NUMEROUS INSTANCES WHERE n

(- 12 BACTERIAL GROWTH HAS OCCURRED IN A RESIN BED.

13 HOWEVER, WHEN THE GROWTH WAS R EMO VE D, THE RESINS 14 HAVE SHOWN NO SIGNS OF DEGRADATION.

15 ON A PERSONAL NOTE, SOME 20 YEARS AGO I 16 ADDED A SIMILAR ION EXCHANGE RESINS TO A TOMATO 17 PATCH IN MY BACKYARD IN VIEW OF THE NUMBER OF 18 TECHNICAL PAPERS WHICH RECOMMENDED THEIR USE AS 19 SYNTHETIC SOIL.

20 THIS SPRING, IN TURNING OVER THE SOIL, I 21 FOUND THE RESINS WERE STILL THERE. YOU SEE THE 22 LITTLE BEADS WITHOUT ANY DI FFI C U L TY , AND THERE WAS (n',

\

23 NO SIGNS OF DEGRADATION.

,i 24 Q. WOULD YOU EXPECT THESE RESINS TO BE 25 SUBJECT TO CHEMICAL DEGRADATION, THE RESINS THAT

143 1 ARE USED AT THE DAVIS-BESSE?

2 A. NO. THE RESINS ARE DESIGNED TO BE HIGHLY 3 INSOLUBLE. THEY ARE EXTREMELY INSOLUBLE IN WATER.

4 EVEN IN SOLVENTS AND SOLUTION USED IN THE 5 LABORATORY. DVB CROSS-LINKED RESINS ARE 6 ESSENTIALLY INSOLUBLE. DECOMPOSITION CAN OCCUR, 7 BUT REQUIRES EXTREMELY POWERFUL OXIDIZING 8 SOLUTIONS, SUCH AS BOILING NITRIC ACID OR 9 CHROMIC-NITRIC ACID.

10 ONE EXAMPLE OF THE INSOLUBILITY OF THESE 11 RESINS IS THEIR USE IN THE MUNICIPAL WATER

(

'w_) 12 TREATMENT SYSTEMS TO TREAT DRINKING WATER.

13 SPECIFICATIONS TYPICALLY REQUIRE THAT EACH CUBIC 14 FOOT OF RESIN TREAT AT LEAST ONE MILLION GALLONS 15 0F WATER. UNLESS THE RESIN WAS ESSENTIALLY 16 INSOLUBLE, IT WOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE TO MEET THIS 17 SP EC I FI C ATI ON. THE SAME VOLUME OF RESIN IS 18 PRESENT WHEN THE RESINS ARE FINALLY REP L AC E D.

19 Q. ARE THERE OTHER EXAMPLES OF THE INERT 20 NATURE OF THE RESINS?

21 A. SEVERAL DRUGS LISTED IN THE UNITED STATES 22 PHARMACOPEIA AND THE PHYSICIANS' DESK REFERENCE 23 ARE BASED ON THE SAME TYPE OF RESIN USED IN PD-1,

( m ')

24 PD-2, AND PD-3.

25 FOR EXAMPLE, SODIUM POLYSTYRENE SULFONATE

l 144 1 MANUFACTURED BY STERLING DRUG COMPANY'S BREON 2 DI VI S ION UNDER THE SAME OF KAYEXALATE, AND 3 C HOL E S TR Y AM I NE RESIN MANUFACTURED BY MEAD JOHNSON 4 UNDER THE NAME OF QUESTRAN ARE BOTH TO BE TAKEN 5 ORALLY. THE TYPICAL DOSE OF QUESTRAN, A DRUG TO 6 PREVENT THE FORMATION OF CHOLESTEROL, IS 54 GRAMS 7 PER DAY, OF WHICH 36 GRAMS ARE RESIN. THE RESIN 8 IS THEREFORE NOT ONLY INERT, BUT ALSO NON-TOXIC.

9 Q. MR. HETHERINGTON, WOULD YOU EXPECT THAT 10 THERE WOULD BE ANY CHEMICAL REACTIONS BETWEEN THE 11 RESINS AND THE ENVIRONMENT WHICH MIGHT CAUSE THE n

t  ;

N) ~ 12 RELEASE OF R ADI O AC TI VE MATERIALS?

13 A. THE IMPURITIES WHICH HAVE BEEN EXCHANGED 14 ONTO A RESIN MAY BE DELIBERATELY ELUTED; THAT IS 15 R EMO VE D FROM THE RESIN BY A REGENERATION PROCESS.

16 THIS PROCESS REQUIRES THE USE OF A 17 RELATIVELY STRONG ACIDS OR BASES OF CONCENTRATIONS 18 IN EXCESS OF ONE PERCENT. FOR EXAMPLE, PD-1 AND 19 PD-2 ARE USUALLY REGENERATED BY USING A 4 PERCENT 20 SOLUTION OF SULPHURIC ACID FOR PERIODS OF 21 APPROXIMATELY 30 00 40 MINUTES. PD-1, ON THE 22 OTHER HAND, IS TYPICALLY REGENERATED BY USING A 4 (mv S 23 PERCENT SODIUM HYDROXIDE SOLUTION FOR PERIOOS OF 24 APPROXIMATELY 90 MINUTES. THESE CONCENTRATIONS 25 AND CONTACT TIMES ARE REQUIRED TO ACHIEVE

145 l

1 SIGNI FIC ANT ELUTION.

16 2 IT IS HIGHLY UNLIKELY THAT THESE 3 CONCENTRATIONS WOULD EXIST IN A NATURAL 4 EN VI RONMEN T. I WOULD NOT EXPECT TO FIND ANY 5 S IGNI FIC ANT LEVELS OF SULFURIC OR NITRIC ACID.

6 THERE ARE SOME MODERATELY STRONG HLMIC ACIDS 7 PRODUCED BY THE SOIL BY THE DECAY OF VEGETATION.

8 HOWEVER, THERE WILL NOT BE DECAYING VE,GETATION IN 9 THE BURIAL CELLS, NOR IS IT LIKELY THAT THE 10 VEGETATION COVERING THE CELL WOULD PRODUCE 11 SIGNI FIC ANT AMOUNT OF HUMIC ACID.

(

kg) 12 MORE0VER, THE MANNER IN WHICH THE BURIAL 13 CELLS ARE CONSTRUCTED, AS WELL AS THE PACKING 14 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE RESINS, WOULD PREVENT WATER 15 CONTAINING IONIZABLE SALTS AND HUMIC ACID FROM 16 PERC0LATING THROUGH THE RESINS.

17 FINALLY, ONE MUST REMEMBER THAT THE 18 RESINS ARE MIXED WITH A VERY LARGE VOLUME OF LIME 19 SLUDGE. EVEN IF THE WATER WERE ABLE TO PERCOLATE 20 THROUGH THE RESIN AND SLUDGE MIXTURE, THE 21 ALKALINITY OF THIS MATERIAL WOULD NEUTRALIZE ANY 22 STRONG ACID.

I  ; 23 THE RESIDUAL ION EXCHANGE CAPACITY THAT x) 24 REMAINS ON THE RESINS EVEN AFTER THEY ARE 25 DISCHARGED, PROVIDES FURTHER PROTECTION AGAINST

' ' ^

i >

, , 1

. ;f 146 i

t*

1 ELUTION OF R ADI O AC TI VE IONS.

2 TYPICALLY, SPENT RESINS WHEN THEY ARE

~

l3 DISCHARGED STILL R E T A l l4 ABOUT 40 PERCENT OF THEIR 4 ION EXCHANGE, CAPABILITIES. THUS, THE PRESENCE IN 5 THE ENVIRONMENT OF IONS WITH A GREATER AFFINITY 6 FOR THE RESINS,THAN THE IONS PRESENTLY HELD ON 7 THEM WOULD NOT BE EXPECTED TO CAUSE LEAKAGE OF 8' IONS-FROM THE RESINS.

9 Q. ,MR. HETHERINGTON, ARE THE RESINS 10 FLAMMABLE?

11 A. PD-1 AN D - P D-2 AND PD-3 ARE NOT p -

%) 12 COMBUSTIBLE UNTIL, MOISTURE IS REMOVED. WHEN 13 M0ISTURE IS REMOVED, THE RESINS WILL BURN IN A 14 FLAME OF 230 DEGREES CENTIGRADE. IT IS ESTIMATED 15 THAT THE suTO IGNITION OF PURE RESINS WILL OCCUR 16 AT 427 DEGREES CENTIGR DE.

17 AT DAVIS-BESSE, HOWEVER, THE RESINS WILL 18 NOT BE BURNED IN A PURE F'ORM . IT IS MY

^

19 ~UN DER S h AN DI NG THAT THE RESINS ARE MIXED WITH TENS 20 0F THOUSANDS OF C'b 81 C FEET.0F WATER TREATMENT 21 SLUDGE, WHICH IS PREDOMINANTLY CALCIUM CARBONATE, 22 AND THAT THE 4ASTE WILL BE SUBSEQUENTLY SOLI DI FIE D

( \ 23 BY CEMENT KILN DUST.

%)

24 I CANNOT ENVISION SUCH A SOLI DI FI E D I

25 MISTURE BURNING.

f L n $

s r

147 1 Q. FINAL QUESTION POSED BY THE PRESIDING 2 0FFICER. QUESTION 20 STATES AS FOLLOWS: DESCRIBE' 3 THE LICENSEE'S PLANS FOR SITE MANAGEMENT DURING j 4 OPERATION, FOR MARKING THE BURIAL SITE AND FOR 5 RECORD KEEPING AT THE BURIAL SITE?

6 MR. WALLACE, HOW WILL THE BURIAL BE 7 MANAGED?

8 A. (MR. WALLACE) EACH TIME IT BECOMES 9 NECESSARY TO REMOVE AND BURY SETTLING BASIN 10 BOTTOMS, THE PROJECT MANAGER WILL BE APPOINTED.

11 THE PROJECT MANAGER WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE

(^\,

Vm/ 12 CONSTRUCTION OF THE BURIAL CELL TO BE USED, FOR f 13 THE REMOVAL OF THE BOTTOMS FROM THE SETTLING B'AS I N 14 AND TRANSPORTATION OF THE BOTTOMS TO THE 15 CONSTRUCTED CELL, AND FOR THE SUBSEQUENT CLOSURE .

16 OF THE CELL.

17 THE PROJECT MANAGER WILL BE ASSIGNED FROM 18 THE NUCLEAR PROJECTS DI VI S I ON , AND PROJECT 19 MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, UNLESS CIRCUMSTANCES MAKE 20 IT BENEFICIAL TO CHOOSE, FOR EXAMPLE, IF A PROJECT 21 MANAGER FROM ANOTHER DI VI SION HAS SPECIAL 22 EXPERTISE. AFTER THE CELL IS SEALED AND THE (J

N

) 23 24 BURIAL PROJECT IS COMPLETED, THE EN VI RONME N T AL MONITORING SECTION WILL ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY FOR 25 MONITORING THE BURIAL SITE AND MAINTAINING THE sq

148 l

1 CELL.

2 Q. MR. WALLACE, WOULD YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE 3 HOW THE BURIAL PROJECT WILL BE CONDUCTED?

4 A. THE BURIAL PROJECT WILL BE CONDUCTED IN 5 ACCORDANCE WITH DAVIS-BESSE PROCEDURE NMP -N P - 4 01 6 RO, "PR0dECT MANAGEMENT."

7 THE PROJECT TEAM WILL BE COMPOSED OF 8 MEMBERS OF THE VARIOUS DI VI S I ON S WITH 9 RESPONSIBILITY OVER ASPECTS OF THE PROJECT THAN.

1 10 N M P - N P - 4 01 BRINGS ALL OF THE DIVISIONS TOGETHER 11 UNDER ONE PR0dECT MANAGEMENT AND ENSURES AN

^

/\

im ,) 12 INTEGRATED I N T E R D I S C I P. L I N A R Y APPROACH TO THE 13 PROJECT.

J4 ONE OF THE FIRST RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE 15 Pk0dECT MANAGER WILL BE TO DEVELOP A DETAILED t

16 PROJECT PLAN. THE PR0dECT PLAN WILL DEFINE THE 17 SCOPE OF THE WORK TO BE DONE, THE PROJECT GOALS 18 AND OBJECTIVES, THE PROJECT TEAM ORGANIZATION, THE 19 METHOD OF IMPLEMENTATION, SCHEDULE, AND THE 20 FUNCTIONAL ASSIGNMENTS.

I-21 THE PROJECT TEAM WILL COMMENCE 22 IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN. THE ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION OF

[- 23 THE CELLS AND THE TRANSPORTATION OF THE WASTE WILL 24 MOST LIKELY BE PERFORMED MY CONTRACTORS. IN THIS l 25 CASE, THE PROJECT TEAM WOULD PREPARE PURCHASE

(

149 1 ORDER REQUESTS GOVERNING CELL CONSTRUCTION AND 2 WASTE TRANSPORTATION.

3 THE CONTRACTUAL DOCUMENTS WILL P R O VI DE 4 THE SP ECI FI C ATI ONS FOR THE WORK TO BE PERFORMED 5 AND WILL INCLUDE QUALITY CONTROLS. THE PROJECT 6 TEAM WILL OVERSEE THE WORK TO ENSURE IT MEETS THE 7 SPECI FIC ATIONS.

8 Q. HOW WILL THE BURIAL SITES ACTUALLY BE 9 CONSTRUCTED?

10 A. THE SPECI FIC ATIONS FOR THE BURIAL CELLS 11 SHOULD BE ESSENTIALLY THE SAME AS THOSE AS f'N

(_ )

12 DESCRIBED EARLIER BY MR. SWIM. THE PROJECT TEAM 13 WILL PERFORM ANY FURTHER ENGINEERING THAT MIGHT BE 14 NECESSARY; FOR EXAMPLE, TO SATISFY ANY ADDITIONAL 15 DESIGN FEATURES THAT MIGHT BE REQUIRED BY THE OHIO 16 PERMIT TO INSTALL.

17 Q. MR. WALLACE, HOW WILL THE SETTLING BASIN 18 BOTTOMS BE HANDLED?

19 A. THE PROJECT WILL BE CONDUCTED IN 20 ACCORDANCE WITH STANDARD PRACTICE FOR WASTE 21 BURIAL. THE PRECISE PROCEDURES WILL BE io 22 ESTABLISHED BY THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT TEAM.

i l

[

v. )S 23 TOLEDO E DI S ON ' S PRESENT CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS IS 24 AS FOLLOWS:

17 25 THE SETTLING BASIN WILL FIRST BE

150 1 DEWATERED, BUT NOT TO THE EXTENT WHERE THE BOTTOMS 2 WOULD DRY OUT. A NUMBER OF REP RES ENTATI VE SAMPLES 3 OF THE BOTTOMS WILL BE TAKEN TO DEFINE THE CONTENT 4 0F THE BOTTOMS. THEN, THE VACUUM TRUCKS WILL BE 5 USED TO DRAW THE BOTTOMS OUT OF THE SETTLING 6 BASIN.

7 THESE VACUUM TRUCKS ARE EQUIPPED WITH 8 SUCTION PUMP WHICH DRAWS M A T-E R I A L INTO CLOSED 9 TANKS ON THE TRUCKS. THIS OPERATION WILL BE 10 PERFORMED BY A CONTRACTOR LICENSED BY THE STATE OF ll OHIO TO HAUL WASTE. THE VACUUM TRUCKS WILL

/T

-- 12 TRANSPORT THE WASTE TO THE BURIAL SITE. THERE THE 13 WASTE WILL BE MIXED WITH A SOLI DI FY I NG AGENT. THE 14 SOLI DI FY I NG AGENT WILL CAUSE THE WASTE TO SET UP.

15 AFTER THE WASTE HAS SOLI DI FI E D, THE CELL WILL BE 16 CAPPED AND THE COVER SEEDED.

17 Q. MS. WASILK, WILL YOU PLEASE DESCRIBE THE 18 MONITORING AND MAINTENANCE THAT WILL BE PERFORMED 19 AFTER BURIAL.

20 A. (MS. WASILK) THE TOLEDO EDISON 21 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING SECTION INTENDS TO 22 MONITOR GROUNDWATER AND CONDUCT P ER I O DI C INSPECTIONS OF THE CELLS. THIS PROGRAM WILL BE l [J]

w 23 24 GOVERNED BY WRITTEN PROCEDURES.

25 THE ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING SECTION'S

151 O 1 CURRENT PLAN IS TO MONITOR GROUNDWATER IN FOUR 2 WELLS. ONE OF THE WELLS WILL PROVIDE B AC KGROUN D 3 DATA, AND THE OTHER THREE WELLS WILL BE LOCATED IN 4 DIRECTIONS OF POSSIBLE GROUNDWATER FLOW. WATER IN 5 THESE WELLS WILL BE SAMPLED SEMI-ANNUALLY FOR 6 PRIORITY POLLUTANTS PH, AND R ADI O ACTI VI TY.

7 THE ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING SECTION 8 INTENDS TO INSPECT THE CELLS AND DIKES 9 SEMI-ANNUALLY TO ENSURE THAT CRACKING OF THE COVER 10 OR EROSION DOES NOT OCCUR. IF ANY SIGNI FIC ANT 11 DETERIORATION OF THE CELL IS DETECTED, IT WILL BE

/%

\s) 12 REPAIRED. THE CELLS AND DIKES WILL ALSO BE 13 INSPECTED AFTER ANY S I GNI FI C ANT FLOODING EVENT.

14 Q. WHAT RECORDS WILL BE KEPT PERTAINING TO 15 THE BURIAL?

16 A. (MR. WALLACE) PROJECT RECORDS PERTAINING 17 TO THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE CELLS WILL 18 BE RETAINED AS NRC PERMANENT RECORDS UNDER THE 19 DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR RECORDS PROGRAM.

20 Q. MISS WASILK?

21 A. (MS. WASILK) THE ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 22 SECTION WILL MAINTAIN A DESCRIPTION OF THE WASTE (h

w._j 23 IN EACH CELL, I DENTI FI E D BY TYPE, VOLUME, CONTENT 24 AND DATE OF BURIAL. THE LOCATION OF EACH CELL 25 WILL BE SURVEYED AND RECORDED ON A PLAT.

152

1. 1 IN ADDITION, ALL SETTLING BASIN SAMPLING 2 DATA, ALL G R O U N D W ,i T E R MONITORING DATA AND REPORTS, 3 ALL BURIAL SITE INSPECTION REPORTS, AND ALL 4 MAINTENANCE REPORTS WILL BE RETAINED. THESE 5 DOCUMENTS WILL BE_KEPT AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION 6 AND WILL BE TREATED AS NRC PERMANENT RECORDS.

7 Q. AND FINALLY, MISS WASILK, HOW WILL THE 8 CELLS BE MARKED?

9 A. SIGNS WILL BE POSTED TO ALERT ANY PERSONS 10 IN THE AREA AND TO PROHIBIT UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS.

11 MR. SILBERG: JUDGE HOYT, THIS

,-'~T

(__) 12 COMPLETES THE PRESENTATION OF OUR DIRECT J3 TESTIMONY, AND THE PANEL ARE AVAILABLE FOR 14 QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.

15 JUDGE H0YT: WE WILL RECESS FOR 16 FI VE MINUTES.

17 - - -

18 (RECESS TAKEN) 19 - - -

20 -

JUDGE H0YT: ALL RIGHT. IF WE 21 LOULD HAVE ORDER, PLEASE. THE HEARING WILL COME 22 TO ORDER. AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE PREVIOUS

('

'm,'

') 23 SESSION, I BELIEVE WE HAD AN IN DI C ATI ON FROM 24 MR. --

MR. SILBERG THAT THE WITNESSES WERE NOW 25 READY FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION.

153 1 MR. SILBERG: YES, JUDGE.

2 JUDGE H0YT: AND I WILL REPORT, 3 FOR THE RECORD, THAT ALL THE PARTIES ARE AGAIN 4 PRESENT IN THE HEARING ROOM AND THAT THE WITNESSES 5 HAVE TAKEN THEIR PLACE ON THE WITNESS STAND, 6 AGAIN.

7 I BELIEVE WE HAVE STRUCTURED THIS HEARING 8 FOR THE STATE OF OHIO TO BECOME THE LEAD 9 INTERVENOR IN THIS CASE; AND, AS SUCH, WE WILL 10 CALL UPON THE ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL, MR. JACK 11 VAN KLEY TO START OFF THIS AFTERNOON, AND THEN ANY f3 (s_) 12 QUESTIONS THAT ARE NOT POSED BY MR., THE STATE OF 13 OHIO AS THE LEAD INTERVENOR AND ARE NOT 14 REPETITIOUS OF THOSE MATTERS COVERED BY THIS 15 CROSS-EXAMINATION MAY BE ASKED BY ANY OF THE OTHER 16 INTERVENORS IN THIS MATTER.

17 ALL RIGHT, SIR, ARE YOU READY TO BEGIN?

18 MR. VAN KLEY: THANK YOU, YOUR 19 HONOR. THE WAY WE WOULD LIKE TO STRUCTURE THIS IS 20 WE WOULD LIKE TO GO QUESTION BY QUESTION. WE WILL 21 I N DI C ATE FOR YOUR HONOR WHICH QUESTION WE ARE 22 PROCEEDING WITH SO THAT IT WILL BE EASIER FOR YOU llg 23 TO FOLLOW THE CROSS-EXAMINATION.

24 JUDGE H0YT: LET ME JUST ASK 25 YOU, QUESTION BY QUESTION, YOU MEAN THOSE QUESTION

154

l NUMBERS THAT THE --

AS THEY ARE ON THE P R E- FI LE 2 TESTIMONY OF THE LICENSEE OR ON THE 19 OR 20 3 QUESTIONS THAT WERE ASKED BY THIS PANEL?

4 MR. VAN KLEY: YES, 5 JUDGE H0YT: YES TO WHICH?

6 MR. VAN KLEY: WE WILL BE

) 7 FOLLOWING THE ORDER IN TOLEDO EDISON'S TESTIMONY AS THEY PRESENTED IT TODAY. 50 WE WILL START WITH

~

8 9 THE INTRODUCTION AS PUT INTO THE DIRECT TESTIMONY.

10 JUDGE H0YT: ARE YOU CHALLENGING 11 ANY OF THESE WITNESSES IN A VOIR DIRE FASHION OR 12 JUST WANT TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THEIR I N

d 13 GENERAL BACKGROUND?

14 MR. VAN KLEY: IN SOME LITUATIONS, 15 I WILL BE ASKING A FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT GENERAL 16 BACKGROUND: BUT I WILL BE DOING THAT WHEN I 17 QUESTION THEM ABOUT SPECI FIC TESTIMONY THEY HAVE 18 GIVEN TODAY.

19 - - -

20 CROSS-EXAMINATION 21 BY MR. VAN KLEY:

22 Q. I WOULD LIKE TO FIRST START WITH THE 23 INTRODUCTION, WHICH IS LABELED IN THE TESTIMONY AS A)

(, 24 Q, IT STARTS WITH Q-1, A-1 AND SO FORTH.

25 THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE I WOULD LIKE TO

155 g

1 DIRECT TO MR. BRIDEN SINCE HE PRESENTED THE 2 TESTIMONY THAT I WANT TO QUESTION TOLEDO EDISON 3 ABOUT.

4 FIRST OF ALL AS KIND OF A GENERAL 5 QUESTION, MR. BRIDEN, EITHER YOU OR SOMEBODY ELSE 6 MENTIONED LEAKS AND WEEPS IN THE SYSTEM. DO YOU 7 REMEMBER, DO YOU RECALL THAT TESTIMONY --

WAS THAT 8 YOU THAT GAVE THAT TESTIMONY?

9 A. YES.

18 10 Q. WOULD YOU EXPLAIN TO THE HEARING EXAMINER 11 AND TO THE OTHER FOLKS LISTENING HERE WHAT THOSE 12 WEEPS AND LEAKS ARE?

(O i

'~/

13 A. THERE ARE 430,000 TUBES IN A STEAM 14 GENERATGR, AND TUBES ARE SOMETIMES SUSCEPTIBLE TO 15 SMALL LEAKS. A SMALL LEAK IS REFERRED TO AS A 16 WEEP.

17 Q. S0 THE WEEPS AND THE LEAKS THAT YOU ARE 18 REFERRING TO ARE LEAKS OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL?

19 A. POTENTIALLY, YES.

20 Q. ALL RIGHT. NOW, I ASSUME THAT YOU DO NOT 21 RULE OUT THE POSSIBILITIES THAT THESE WEEPS AND 22 LEAKS WILL CONTINUE TO OCCUR, IS THAT CORRECT?

23 A. THAT'S A POSSIBILITY.

/N

() 24 Q. IN FACT, IT'S A PROBABILITY, ISN'T IT?

25 A. YES.

156 gg 1 Q. LET ME ASK YOU A FEW QUESTIONS ABOUT THE 2 MECHANISM BY WHICH THE RESINS REACH THE SETTLING 3 BASIN.

4 .COULD YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THE MECHANISM IS 5 BY WHICH THE RESINS LEAVE THE CONDENSATE 6 DEMINERALIZER BACKWASH REC E I VI NG TANK AND GO TO 7 THE SETTLING BASIN?

8 A. THERE IS A LINE WHERE WE PUMP THE RESINS 9 OUT TO THE SETTLING BASIN. INSIDE THE TANK WE 10 FLUFF UP THE RESINS WITH NITROGEN BATCH SYSTEM, 11 MIX IT UP INTO A SLURRY, AND IT'S PUMPED OUT WITH 12 A CONVENTIONAL PUMP TO THE SETTLING BASIN.

[,,

'^ 13 Q. THIS MATERIAL GOES THROUGH A PIPED IN 14 SETTLING BASIN, DOES IT?

15 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

16 Q. NOW, THE RESIN THAT IS CONTAINED IN EACH 17 BATCH IS 20,000 CUBIC FEET, AS I RECALL; IS THAT 18 RIGHT?

19 A. NO. 20 CUBIC FEET.

20 Q. OH, 20 CUBIC FEET. ALL RIGHT. IS THAT 1

21 HOW M U C il Tile TANK HOLDS? I 22 A. THE TANK CAN HOLD UP TO TWO BATCHES, 1

23 WHICH WOULD BE 40 CUBIC FEET. WE TYPICALLY PUT IT I

,n

t. ) 24 OUT BATCH AT A TIME, 20 CUBIC FEET.

25 Q. ALL RIGHT. SO WHEN YOU PUT IT OUT A

157 1 BATCH AT A TIME, YOU MIX THAT WITH WATER?

2 A. YES.

3 Q. HOW MUCH WATER DO YOU MIX IT WITH BEFORE 4 YOU SEND IT TO THE BASIN?

5 A. 10,000 GALLONS. j 6 Q. WHEN IT GOES TO THE PIPE, IT RUNS INTO 7 THE SETTLING BASIN, IS THAT CORRECT?

8 A. THAT'S ONE PATH IT CAN GO, THAT IS 9 CORRECT.

10 Q. WHERE DOES THE PIPE ENTER THE BASIN? l 11 A. THE PIPE ENTERS THE BASIN ON THE WEST END y 12 0F THE SOUTH SETTLING BASIN.

[ )

'^s' 13 Q. WHAT HAPPENS TO THE LIQUID WHEN IT 14 EMPTIES INTO THE POND ON THIS END OF THE BASIN?

15 A. THE LIQUID THAT GOES INTO THE POND ENTERS 16 INTO A WEIR ON THE EAST END OF THE BASIN, WHICH 17 FLOWS TO THE NORTH BASIN, AND WHEN A LEVEL REACHES 18 A DESIGNATED LEVEL, IT IS PUMPED OUT AUTOMATIC 19 PUMPS TO THE NORMAL STATION DISCHARGE.

20 Q. I ASSUME THAT THERE'S A PROCESS OF 2.1 SETTLING THAT OCCURS IN THIS BASIN, IS THAT )

22 CORRECT?

23 A. IT SETTLES OUT IMMEDIATELY. WHERE THE l l

(,)

,~

24 PIPE GOES INTO THE BASIN YOU CAN SEE THE RESIN, l 25 AND IT FALLS OUT IMMEDIATELY AND IT MAKES A CLUMP l 1

l l

l l

158 g 1 IN THE EAST END. THAT'S WHY IT HAS TO BE MOVED AT 2 THIS TIME.

3 Q. IT FALLS IN THE EAST END OR THE WEST END?

4 A. RIGHT WHERE THE PUMP COMES IN AT THE EAST 5 END -- I'M SORRY, WEST END, CORRECT THAT.

6 Q. WHERE DO THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT 7 SLUDGES ENTER THE BASIN?

8 A. THEY ENTER --

THERE'S A T IN THE PIPE, 9 AND THEY ENTER AT THE SAME POINT.

10 Q. HOW OFTEN ARE THE RESINS SENT TO THE 11 SETTLING BASIN?

, 12 A. APPROXIMATELY ONCE A WEEK.

I.p )

d 13 Q. AND HOW OFTEN ARE THE WATER TREATMENT 14 SLUDGES SENT TO THE BASIN?

15 A. THAT CAN OCCUR THROUGHOUT THE DAY AS IT 16 DEPENDS, AS THE SLUDGE BUILDS UP IN OUR WATER 17 PLANT PRECIPITATORS.

18 Q. IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT ON THE AVERAGE IT 19 OCCURS EVERYDAY?

20 A. FROM THE WATER PLANT?

21 Q. YES.

I 22 A. YES.

l 23 Q. WHAT HAPPENS To THE SLUDGE FROM THE WATER

['N 24 PLANT AS IT COMES INTO THE BASIN?

I

( , j 25 A. THE SAME THING HAPPENS. IT PRECIPITATES

159 1

1 OUT IN THE WEST END OF THE BASIN.

2 Q. NOW, IS THE SLUDGE --

AS THE MATERIAL 3 FROM THE RESINS GOES INTO THE BASIN, IT SETTLES TO 4 THE BOTTOM; IS THAT CORRECT?

5 A. YES.

6 Q. ALL RIGHT. AND LIQUID WATER DISCHARGES 7 TO LAKE ERIE, IS THAT CORRECT?

8 A. THAT'S RIGHT.

9 Q. AND THE INTENDED PURPOSE OF USING THE 10 SETTLING MECHANISM IS SO THAT MOST OF THE 11 CONTAMINATION CAN SETTLE INTO THE BOTTOM WITH THE p.

12 CLEANER WATER GOING INTO THE LAKE; IS THAT I i R/ 13 CORRECT?

14 A. THE SLUDGE AND THE RESINS SETTLE OUT.

15 THE WATER WHICH GOES OUT TO THE LAKE IS CLEAR 16 WATER, THAT IS RIGHT.

17 Q. 50 THE MATERIAL THAT'S IN THE BOTTOM OF 18 YOUR BASINS IS GOING TO HAVE A GREATER 19 CONCENTRATION OF CONTAMINANTS IN IT THAN THE 20 SLURRY IN THE TANK, IS THAT CORRECT?

21 A. THAT'S RIGHT.

22 Q. WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME THAT THE RESINS 23 WERE SENT INTO THE SETTLING BASIN?

,a, i

) 24 A. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ABOUT JUNE 1985.

25 Q. JUNE 1985 IS THE LAST TIME THAT THE

16 0 1 RESINS WERE SENT FROM THE DEMINERALIZER TANK INTO 2 THE SETTLING BASIN?

3 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

4 Q. DID YOU TAKE THE SAMPLE OF THE MATERIAL 5 YOU RAN THE GEIGER COUNTER TEST TODAY?

6 A. DID I COLLECT THAT SAMPLE?

7 Q. YES.

8 A. YES, 1 DID.

9 Q. DID YOU PERSONALLY COLLECT IT?

10 A. YES.

11 Q. WHERE?

12 A. IT WAS OUT OF WHERE THE RESIN PILES UP IN

( 13 THE WEST END OF THE BASIN.

)

14 Q. WOULD YOU BE MORE SPECIFIC AS TO HOW YOU 15 TOOK THE SAMPLE?

16 A. THAT WAS COLLECTED ON A LONG POLE WITH A 17 DIPPER ON THE END OF IT.

18 Q. ALL RIGHT. YOU DIPPED IT INTO THE 19 SLUDGE; IS THAT RIGHT?

20 A. THAT'S RIGHT.

19 21 Q. DID YOU DIP INTO THE SLUDGE OR DID YOU 22 TAKE WATER WITH IT?

23 A. WHEN WATER COMES UP WITH IT --

OBVIOUSLY js 24 YOU ARE BRINGING IT THROUGH WATER, 50 SOME OF IT

( '

)

25 WILL HAVE WATER IN IT. THE WATER IS DECANTED OFF

c 161 1 AND POURED OUT THE SLUDGE.

O 2 Q. MY QUESTION IS AIMED AT THE BOTTLE 3 MATERIAL THAT YOU TOOK WITH YOU TODAY. DOES THAT 4 CONTAIN JUST SLUDGE OR A MIXTURE OF SLUDGE AND 5 WATER?

6 A. IT HAS SOME WATER IN IT. IT'S MOSTLY 7 SLUDGE.

8 Q. DO YOU KNOW WHETHER THAT SLUDGE IS SLUDGE 9 FROM THE RESINS AS OPPOSED TO SLUDGE FROM THE 10 WATER TREATMENT PUMP?

11 A. IT'S A MIXTURE.

12 Q. WHEN THE MATERIAL FALLS INTO THE POND, IT

,o (L. ') 13 LAYERS, IS THAT CORRECT?

/

14 A. TO SOME EXTENT, YES.

15 Q. HOW DEEP DID YOU GO INTO THE SLUDGE IN 16 THE BOTTOM OF THE BASIN WHEN YOU TOOK YOUR SAMPLE?

17 A. ON THAT PARTICULAR ONE, IT WAS DOWN 18 AROUND FOUR TO FIVE FEET.

19 Q. ALL RIGHT. AND HOW MUCH OF A CROSS 20 SECTION, HOW DEEP OF A CROSS SECTION DID YOU GET 21 IN YOUR SAMPLE?

22 A. ABOUT THE SAME. IT CAME THROUGH ABOUT A 23 FOUR TO FI VE FEET AREA.

g"3 24 Q. WOULD YOU CONSIDER THAT TO BE A

\ J 25 REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE OF THE SLUDGE THAT'S IN THAT

7 162 k

1 POND?

2 A. IT'S TYPICAL. THE SAMPLES THAT WE HAVE 3 COLLECTED WHERE WE DID ENSURE THAT WE HAD A CORE 4 BORE ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE PILE REGISTERED THE 5 SAME THING ON THAT TYPE OF A DETECTOR.

6 Q. YOU DIDN'T TAKE A CORE BORE, DID YOU?

7 A. WE HAVE TAKEN A LOT OF CORE BORES, YES.

8 Q. BUT THIS PARTICULAR JAR IS NOT A CORE 9 BORE?

f 10 A. NO.

11 Q. THIS IS JUST A DIP SAMPLE?

12 A. CORRECT.

/

(%,').

13 Q. AND THAT'S NOT A SCI ENTI FIC SAMPLING 14 METHOD, IS IT?

15 A. IT'S A METHOD.

16 Q. 50 YOU CAN'T TELL ME WHETHER OR NOT THE 17 MATERIAL YOU HAVE IN THAT JAR CONTAINS RESINS OR 18 WHETHER IT MIGHT JUST CONTAIN WATER TREATMENT 19 PLANT SLUDGE?

20 A. IT CONTAINS BOTH SLUDGE AND RESINS.

21 Q. ARE YOU AWARE THAT GRANITE CAN CONTAIN 22 VERY HIGH LEVELS OF RADON?

23 A. YES, I AM.

f e^q' 24 Q. AND YOU ARE AWARE THAT RADON, OF COURSE, j

2S IS RADIOACTIVE?

163 1 A. CERTAINLY.

O 2 Q. ARE YOU AWARE THAT IN SOME PARTS OF THE 3 COUNTRY THE RADON EMISSIONS FROM GRANITE HAS 4 PRESENTED A VERY GRAVE HEALTH PROBLEM?

5 A. YES.

6 Q. 50 JUST BECAUSE YOU HAVE STATED THAT 7 GRANITE MIGHT HAVE MORE RADIATION THAN THE RESINS 8 IS NO INDICATION IN ITSELF THAT THE RESINS ARE 9 HARMLESS, IS IT?

10 A. THE SAMPLE OUT OF THERE IS TYPICAL OF 11 SAMPLES THAT WE WOULD SEE IN THE ENVIRONMENT; 12 GRANITE BEING ONE OF THEM.

j 3 13 THERE ARE OTHER SOURCES --

SHALE. THERE 14 ARE MANY SOURCES OF RADIOACTIVITY OTHER THAN 15 GRANITE. THAT WAS THE ONE SELECTED.

16 Q. I 'M NOT ASKING ABOUT YOUR PARTICULAR 17 SAMPLE OF GRANITE. I'M ASKING YOU ABOUT GRANITE 18 IN GENERAL.

19 YOU MADE A STATEMENT IN YOUR TESTIMONY 20 THAT THIS WASTE WAS LESS RADIOACTIVE THAN GRANITE.

21 IT'S ON PAGE 15 0F YOUR TESTIMONY?

22 A. THAT'S CORRECT, WHICH IS NOT CONSIDERED 23 TO BE A HARMFUL MATERIAL BECAUSE OF ITS HEAVY USE g^ 24 0F CONSTRUCTION IN MANY DIFFERENT PLACES.

L~3) ISN'T IT TRUE, THOUGH, 25 Q. IN SOME PARTS OF l J

164 1 THE COUNTRY IT IS CONSIDERED TO BE A VERY HARMFUL 2 MATERIAL BECAUSE OF ITS VERY HIGH RATE ON 3 EMISSIONS?

4 A. IN SOM 5P L AC E S , THAT'S TRUE.

5 Q. LET ME ASK YOU ABOUT THAT WATCH THAT YOU 6 ARE WEARING.

7 HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN WEARING THAT l

8 WATCH?

9 A. I'VE HAD THIS WATCH FOR YEARS.

10 Q. Do YOU WEAR IT EVER DAY?

11 A. I CANNOT WEAR IT IN THE NUCLEAR POWER 12 PLANT, THAT SHOULD BE OBVIOUS BY YOUR KNOWLEDGE,

~

(s}

~/

13 BECAUSE IT WOULD NOT GET PAST THE FRISKERS THAT 14 WE'RE USING.

15 Q. THAT WATCH CONTAINS LEVELS OF RADIUM, IS 16 THAT CORRECT?

17 A. CORRECT.

18 Q. THAT KIND OF WATCH IS NOT MADE ANYMORE, 19 IS THAT CORRECT?

20 A. THAT S CORRECT.

21 Q. AND THE REASON THAT --

WHEN I TALK ABOUT 22 THAT KIND OF WATCH, I'M REFERRING TO WATCHES WHICH 23 HAVE HAD THEIR DIALS ILLUMINATED WITH RADIUM. IS l l

rw 24 THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING?

25 A. YES.

165 1 Q. THEY ARE NOT MAKING THOSE TYPES OF 2 WATCHES?

3 A. YES.

4 Q. BECAUSE IT HAS POSED A HEALTH PROBLEM, IS S THAT CORRECT?

6 A. TO THE MAKERS OF THEM, YES.

7 Q. ISN'T IT ALSO CORRECT THAT IT HAS 8 PRESENTED A HEALTH PROBLEM FOR THOSE WEARING THE 9 WATCH?

10 A. NOT A HEALTH PROBLEM, NO.

11 Q. ARE YOU AWARE THAT IN THE PAST PEOPLE WHO 12 HAVE BEEN WEARING THESE WATCHES WITH THE RADIUM f1

% ,1 13 ILLUMINATED DIALS HAVE DEVELOPED SKIN CANCER AS A 14 RESULT?

15 A. I'M AWARE OF THAT.

16 MR. VAN KLEY: YOUR HONOR, I HAVE 17 NO FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THE INTRODUCTORY PART OF 18 THE ITEMS.

19 JUDGE H0YT: WE'LL PROCEED.

20 DOES ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT?

21 MR. LODGE: I HAVE A COUPLE ON 22 THE INTRODUCTORY MATERIAL ONLY.

23 - - -

(~3 24 CROSS-EXAMINATION 25 BY MR. LODGE:

166 1 Q. WAS THE DIP SAMPLE THAT YOU TOOK THE ONLY S 2 SAMPLE 1. . A T YOU TOOK WHEN YOU WERE PREPARING FOR 3 YOUR PRESENTATION TODAY?

4 A. NO, SIR.

5 Q. HOW MANY OTHERS DID YOU TAKE?

6 A. APPROXIMATELY 30 CORE BORE TYPE SAMPLES.

7 MR. SILBERG: COULD.1 GET A 8 CLARIFICATION. ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE SAMPLE

( 9 THAT HE PUT IN THAT JAR?

10 MR. LODGE: THE SAMPLE IN THE 11 JAR.

12 JUDGE H0YT: LET'S PUT IT IN (a) 13 THE --

THE SAMPLE THAT WAS USED HERE TO m-s 14 DEMONSTRATE THE TESTIMONY EARLIER IN THIS HEARING.

15 MR. LODGE: YES. J 16 BY MR. LODGE:

17 Q. D10 YOU TAKE ANY OTHER SAMPLES ON THE 18 SAME DAY THAT YOU TOOK THAT ONE?

19 A. NO, 1 DIDN'T.

20 Q. DID YOU TEST THAT ONE FOR ITS RADIATION 21 LEVEL IMMEDIATELY AFTER REMOVING IT FROM THE 22 BASIN?

23 A. ONLY WITH OUR SURVEY METERS.

20

^

,- s 24 Q. HAVE YOU PROCESSED IT IN ANY FASHION?

('~'!

25 A. NO.

167 1 Q. WOULD YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE RADIATION 2 OR THE RADIONUCLIDE CONTENT OF SAMPLES SUCH AS 3 THAT MIGHT VARY CONSIDERABLY FROM LOCATION TO 4 LOCATION IN A BASIN?

5 A. WHAT DOES CONSIDERABLY MEAN?

6 Q. BY A FACTOR OF TEN OR MORE?

7 A. NOT WITHIN A FACTOR OF TEN, NO.

8 Q. BY WHAT VARIATION?

9 A. TWO TO FIVE.

10 Q. WOULD YOU PUT THAT ON THE --

THAT SAMPLE 11 THAT YOU BROUGHT WITH YOU TODAY, IS THAT ON 1ME 12 LOW OR HIGH END OF SIMILAR SAMPLES YOU HAVE TAKEN?

g 13 A. OF THE NUMBER OF SAMPLES WE HAVE TAKEN WE 14 FIND, REGARDLESS OF WHERE YOU GET IT, IT'S A 15 TYPICAL SAMPLE NO MATTER WHERE YOU SEEM TO GET IT.

16 WE HAVE HAD HAD A RANGE OF NUMBERS, AS I HAVE 17 QUOTED OVER A PROXIMATE RANGE OF TWO DO FIVE.

18 Q. IS THAT CLOSER TO TWO OR CLOSER TO FI VE ?

19 A. I CANNOT TELL YOU THAT. I DID NOT COUNT 20 THAT ONE ON A GERMANE AND SYSTEM.

21 MR. LODGE: I HAVE NOTHING l

22 FURTHER.

23 JUDGE H0YT: ANYTHING ELSE?  !

l 24 ALL RIGHT. LET'S GO INTO THE NEXT AREA,

/~N

\ )

25 MR. VAN KLEY.

[ 168 1 MR. VAN KLEY: NEXT I WOULD LIKE t> 2 TO MOVE ON TO QUESTION NUMBER 1, WHICH STARTS ON 3 PAGE 16 OF THE DIRECT TESTIMONY. I WILL BE 4 ADDRESSING MY QUESTIONS TO MR. SWIM SINCE HE WAS 5 THE PERSON THAT PROVIDED THIS TESTIMONY.

6 dUDGE H0YT: MR. SWIM.

7 CROSS-EXAMINATION 8 BY MR. VAN KLEY:

9 Q. MR. SWIM, I'M GOING TO HAND YOU A COUPLE 10 0F EXHIBITS. I'M GOING TO LET YOUR ATTORNEY LOOK 11 AT THEM FIRST. .

l 12 l'M GOING TO HAND YOU WHAT HAS BEEN g 13 MARKED AS STATE OF OHIO EXHIBIT A, WHICH IS A l 14 TOPOGRAPHICAL MAP OF THE AREA. WHAT I WOULD LIKE 15 YOU TO D0, FIRST OF ALL, IS TO LOOK AT THAT 16 EXHIBIT IN CONNECTION WITH STATE EXHIBIT B, WHICH I

17 IS FIGURE l-1 FROM THE DIRECT TESTIMONY OF THE

(

18 APPLICANT. 1 l

19 NOW, MY FI R S T QUESTION 1 WOULD ASK YOU:

1 20 WHAT IS THE AREA JUST RIGHT, ON FIGURE l-1, TO THE 21 CELL WHICH IS THE FURTHEST TO THE RIGHT ON THE 22 DOCUMENT WHERE IT SAYS 1 CELL?

23 A. (MR. SWIM) YES, I 00.

/^x 24 Q. WHAT IS THE PROPERTY JUST TO THE RIGHT OF

! ~~'

)

25 THAT CELL WHICH IS THE FURTHEST TO THE RIGHT ON

(

l

169 1 1-1?

OS 2 A. CAN YOU C L ARI FY YOUR QUESTION AS TO WHAT, 3 WHAT IS THE PROPERTY TO MORE OF A DEFINITION.

4 Q. l'LL POINT IT OUT TO YOU. l 'M LOOKING AT S THE PROPERTY, WHAT APPEARS TO BE A TRIANGULAR 6 SPACE OF PROPERTY JUST TO THE RIGHT OF THAT ONE 7 CELL, AND I'M POINTING TO IT AT THIS POINT IN 8 TIME?

9 A. I SEE THE AREA YOU ARE POINTING TO. MY 10 QUESTION: WHEN YOU ASK'ME TO DESCRIBE IT, WHAT

\

11 TYPE OF DESCRIPTION?

12 Q. FOR EXAMPLE, IS IT A WETLAND?

( 13 A. I AM NOT A GEOLOGIST AND WOULDN'T BE ABLE 14 TO GIVE YOU A PROPER CLASSIFICATION OF THE LAND AS 15 FAR AS THAT DESCRIPTION GOES.

16 MR. SILBERG: MR. VAN CLAY, 17 PERHAPS IF YOU WOULD ASK DR. HERDENDORF OR MISS 18 WASILK, THEY WOULD THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO GIVE YOU 19 AN ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION?

20 MR. VAN KLEY: LET'S RESERVE THAT 21 QUESTION TO SOMEBODY ELSE.

22 BY MR. VAN KLEY:

23 Q. LET ME POINT YOU TO WHAT APPEARS TO BE A f^s 24 BODY OF WATER TO THE RIGHT OF THE LAND THAT I JUST

('"~' )

25 POINTED TO WHICH IS JUST TO THE RIGHT ON FIGURE

17 0 1 1-1 0F THE DESIGNATION PROPERTY LINE. DO YOU SEE 2 THAT FIGURE OF WATER?

3 A. YES, I D0.

4 Q. WHAT IS THAT FIGURE OF WATER, PLEASE?

S A. IT'S A DRAINAGE DITCH.

6 Q. IS THERE A NAME FOR THAT DRAINAGE DITCH?

7 A. NOT THAT I AM AWARE OF.

8 Q. WHERE DOES THAT DRAINAGE DITCH GO?

9 A. I PERSONALLY AM NOT AWARE OF EXACTLY 10 WHERE THIS DRAINAGE DITCH ENDS UP. PERHAPS 11 SOMEONE ON THE PANEL, THOUGH, IS FAMILIAR WITH 12 THAT LOCATION.

l 13 Q. ALL RIGHT. LET ME ASK MISS WASILK.

14 I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU, FIRST OF ALL, 15 FIGURE 1.1 WHICH HAS BEEN LABELED AS STAT OF OHIO 16 EXHIBIT B, AND ASK YOU WHAT THE PROPERTY JUST TO 17 THE RIGHT OF THE 1 CELL CONSTITUTES? IS THAT 18 MARSHLAND?

19 A. (MS. WASILK) YES, IT IS.

20 Q. IT IS MARSHLAND?

21 A. IT'S WETLAND.

22 Q. HOW FAR IS THE NEAREST BOUNDARY OF THAT 23 PIECE OF, THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY JUST TO THE RIGHT

/^x 24 0F THE l-CELL LOCATED IN FIGURE l-1?

( 1 R v' 25 JUDGE H0YT YOU ARE GOING TO

171 1 HAVE TO TURN YOUR HEAD. I DON'T THINK THE 2 REPORTER CAN HEAR YOU.

3 MS. WASILK: AS WAS STATED IN 4 THE TESTIMONY, IT'S APPROXIMATELY 25 FEET.

5 BY MR. VAN KLEY:

6 Q. NOW, WOULD YOU LABEL ON FIGURE l-1 THE 7 PROPERTY WHICH YOU HAVE JUST IDENTIFIED AS 8 W E T L /.N D , JUST PUT THE WORDE WETLAND. YOU CAN USE 9 THIS MARKER Oil THAT EXHIBIT.

10 ALL RIGHT. NOW, ARE YOU AWARE OF WHAT 11 THE DITCH IS TO THE RIGHT OF THAT PIECE OF 12 WETLAND?

k' ) 13 A. (MS. WASILK) YES, I AM.

14 Q. WHAT IS T H /. T , PLEASE?

15 A. ThAT IS A DITCH THAT E V E f4 T U A L L Y 16 DISCHARGES I tJ T O THE TOUSSAINT RIVER.

17 0 THAT DITCH CARRIES DRAINAGE FROM THE 16 DAVIS-BESSE PROPERTY?

19 A. YES, IT CARRIES AREA RUN-OFF.

20 Q. DCES IT C /. R R Y AREA RUN-OFF FROM THE 21 BURIAL AREAi 22 A. I D 0 tJ ' T K t4 0 W . I DON'T KNOW UECAUSE I 23 HAVEN'T LOOKED SPECIFICALLY AT THE RUN-OFF

(-- ) 24 CHAR /,CTERISTICS OF THAT SITE IN RELATION TO THE 25 DITCH. THAT'S ALSO i10 T MY AREA 0F EXPERTISE.

I J

172 1 Q. WHO ELSE ON THIS PANEL WOULD KNOW THAT?

2 A. DR. HERDENDORF LOOKED AT THE RUN-OFF 3 CHARACTERISTICS IN MORE DETAIL.

4 Q. LET ME ASK DR. HERDENDORF THAT QUESTION 1

5 IF 1 CAN FI G UR E OUT WHICH ONE HE IS.

6 JUDGE H0YT: WE'LL GIVE YOU THE 7 PLAN AGAIN.

8 BY MR. VAN KLEY:

9 Q. MR. HERDENDORF, DO YOU KNOW WHETHER THE 10 DRAINAGE DITCH TO THE RIGHT OF THE PROPERTY, NOW 11 LABELED WETLAND, TAKES RUN-OFF FROM THE AREA WHICH 12 IS PROPOSED TO CONTAIN THE BURIAL CELLS?

g 13 A. (MR. HERDENDORF) I THINK THE PRIMARY 14 ROUTE OF DRAINAGE WOULD BE IN THE OPPOSITE 15 DIRECTION TOWARDS THE MICROWAVE TOWER. I BASE 16 THAT ON THE FACT THAT THAT'S WHERE THE FLOODING 17 COMES IN. WHEN THE AREA DOES FLOOD, WATER RUNS IN 18 TOWARD THE TOWER THEN BACK IN THIS DITCH.

19 MR. SILBERG: YOU SAID MICROWAVE 20 TOWER?

21 THE WITNESS: METEOROLOGICAL 22 TOWER. BASED ON THAT INFORMATION, 1 SUSPECT THAT 23 THE LAND DRAINAGE IS NORMALLY IN THAT DIRECTION.

f~N 24 MR. SILBERG: WHEN YOU SAY THAT

( ^

)

25 DIRECTION, ALSO COULD YOU CLARIFY THAT SO THE

173 1 RECORD IS CLEAR.

2 THE WITNESS: I SUSPECT THE 3 PRIMARY DRAINAGE BASED ON THE FLOODING EVIDENCE 4 WOULD bE IN A hESTERLY DIRECTION AND THEN IN A S SOUTHERLY DIRECTION, EVENTUALLY ENDING UP IN THE 6 TOUSSAINT RIVER. '

7 BY MR. VAN KLEY:

6 Q. 50 IT IS YOUR OPINION, THEN, THAT ANY 9 RUN-OFF FROM THE AREA 0F THE PROPOSED BURIAL CELLS 10 WOULD R U ti TO THE TOUSSAINT RIVER?

t 11 A. (MR. HERDENDORF) THAT'S CORRECT.

p_

12 Q. JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THE RECORD IS

( '

' ~ / 13 CLEAR AS TO THE DITCH WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, WOULD 14 YOU LADEL THE DITCH, PLEASE, JUST PUT THE WORD 15 DITCH ON IT.

16 A. ( 11 5 . WASILK) ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE 17 OITCH THAT DR. HERDENDORF IDENTIFIED AS NOT DEING 18 THE LIKELY PATH?

19 C. RIGhT, CORRECT. ALL RIGHT. NOW, LET ME 20 HAND YOU WHAT HAS BEEN MARKED AS EXHIBIT A, AND I 21 WILL ASK YOU IF YOU CAN TELL FROM THIS EXHIBIT j 22 WHAT THE LARGEST AREA IN RED IS?

23 A. ( fi S . WASILK) THE LARGEST AREA IN RED IS

,o I 3 24 WHAT WE HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSING AS A

~

j 25 WETL/ND.

17 4

~-

1 Q. IHAT S THE WETLAND WHICH IS --

THE EDGE 2 0F WHICH IS 25l FEET FROM THE NEAREST CELL, IS THAT 3 CORRECT?

4 A. YES, THAT IS.

S Q. BY THE WAY, ON THIS EXHIBIT THERE ARE 6 THREE SMALLER RED IDENTIFICATIONS WHICH ARE 7 LABELED CELLS.

8 WOULD YOU AGREE THAT THOSE THREE CELLS 9 ARE IN THE AREA WHICH TOLEDO EDISON HAS PROPOSED 10 THE BURIAL OF THE WASTE TO BE?

11 A. THE LOCATION OF THOSE THREE CELLS LOOKS 12 TO BE IN THE APPROXIMATE' AREA 0F THE CELLS 13 l IDENTIFIED ON OUR FIGURE l-1.

14 JUDGE H0YT: COUNSEL, YOU ARE 15 GOING TO GIVE US THREE COPIES OF EACH OF THESE 16 DOCUMENTS THAT YOU HAVE BEEN REFERRING TO, AND 17 PLEASE BE SURE THAT, FOR THE RECORD, THAT EACH OF 18 THE DOCUMENTS THAT YOU HAVE HAD THE WITNESS MAKE 19 NOTATIONS ON ARE RECORDED PRECISELY IN THE RED, AS 20 YOU HAVE ON THE ORIGINALS HERE, 50 THAT THE 21 PERSONS EXAMINING THE RECORD WILL HAVE A COMPLETE 22 AND UNDERSTANDABLE COPY AND THAT WILL G0 ALONG

23 WITH THE TdSTIMONY THAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED.

l o

,x 24 ARE YOU SUBH1TTING THESE INTO EVIDENCE AT

)

~

25 TH1S PolAT OR WHY D'O 'Y OU HAND THEM TO ME?

I o

~

17 5  ;

/

I 1 MR. VAN KLEY: I WAS HANDING THEM 2 TO YOU SO YOU COULD SEE WHAT SHE WAS TALKING {

I 3 ABOUT.

4 JUDGE H0YT: VERY WELL. I'LL l I 5 RETURN THEM TO YOU THROUGH JUDGE KLINE. l l

6 BY MR. VAN KLEY: '

1 7 Q. MISS WASILK, EARLIER IN YOUR TESTIMONY

\

8 YOU STATED THAT THE BURIAL SITE WAS 400 OR SO F F. E T l l

9 FROM THE MARSH, IS THAT CORRECT?

1 10 A. (MS. WASILK) THAT IS CORRECT. j

(

11 Q. JUST NOW YOU HAVE REFERRED TO SOME 12 WETLAND WHICH LIES IN BETWEEN NAVARRE MARSH AND l

l 13 THE BURIAL SITE; IS THAT CORRECT?

14 A. THAT IS CORRECT.

)

15 Q. DOES NAVARRE MARSH ADdOIN THE WETLAND

( 16 AREA WE HAVE JUST BEEN REFERRING TO? l I

l 17 A. THE NAVARRE MARSH IS ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE

) 18 0F A BARRIER DIKE. FROM THE WETLANDS WHICH WE ARE {

19 DISCUSSING, THEY ARE NOT CONTIGUOUS BECAUSE OF THE I

? 20 DIKE.

{

21 Q. BUT THEY ARE RIGHT TOGETHER, IS THAT l

l 22 CORRECT?

l l

23 A. YES, THEY ARE NEXT TO EACH OTHER.

/' 24 Q. IF YOU WOULD LOOK AT FIGURE l-1 IN YOUR bs 25 TESTIMONY, PLEASE --

I GUESS MR. SWIM PROBABLY l

l s

L _ _ _____________________

176 l

1 SHOULD ANSWER THIS QUESTION.

2 YOU'LL NOTICE A STRUCTURE WHICH IS 3' LOCATED TO THE LEFT OF THE AREA WHICH IS 4 DESIGNATED TWO CELLS. DO YOU SEE THAT STRUCTURE?

5 IT'S BETWEEN THE AREA WHICH SAYS TWO CELLS AND THE 6 AREA WHICH IS LABELED METEOROLOGICAL TOWER?

7 A. (MR. SWIM) I D0.

8 Q. COULD YOU TELL US WHAT THAT STRUCTURE IS?

9 A. IT'S A SMALL POND.

10 Q. ALL RIGHT. WHEN WAS THIS POND BUILT?

11 A. I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION WITH ME.

12 Q. DO YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS, gh 13 WHETHER IT CAME INTO EXISTENCE AS PART OF THE 14 CONSTRUCTION FOR UNIT ONE?

~15 A. NO, I DON'T.

16 Q. DOES ANYBODY ON THE PANEL KNOW THE ANSWER 17 TO THAT QUESTION? APPARENTLY NOBODY ON THE PANEL 18 KNOWS THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.

19 JUDGE H0YT: I BELIEVE THE 20 WITNESS TE S TI FI E D HE DOESN'T HAVE THE INFORMATION 21 WITH HIM.

22 COULD YOU OBTAIN THAT INFORMATION AND c

23 GIVE IT TO US TOMORROW MORNING?

/ms 24 MR. SWIM: YES, I COULD.

~

25 JUDGE H0YT: VERY WELL. WE WILL

177 1 RESERVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO EXAMINE THAT ISSUE.

2 BY MR. VAN KLEY:

3 Q. DOES ANYBODY ON THE PANEL KNOW HOW DEEP 4 THAT POND IS --

5 JUDGE H0YT: THERE DOESN'T SEEM 6 TO BE ANYBODY THAT'S RESPONDING. LET'S RESERVE 7 ALL THOSE QUESTIONS ON THAT PARTICULAR POND ISSUE.

8 MR. SILBERG: COULD WE JUST GET 9 AN IDENTI FIC ATION OF WHAT INFORMATION MR. VAN KLEY 10 WOULD LIKE ON THAT POND.

11 JUDGE H0YT: I THINK THAT'S A 12 FAIR QUESTION.

l h 13 MR. VAN KLEY: I WAS GOING TO ASK 14 ONE MORE QUESTION.

15 MR. SILBERG: WHAT WAb THE FIRST 16 QUESTION?

17 MR. VAN KLEY: THE FIRST QUESTION 18 WAS HOW IT CAME INTO EXISTENCE AND WHEN.

19 JUDGE H0YT: AND NOW THE OTHER 20 QUESTION?

21 MR. VAN KLEY: THE NEXT QUESTION 22 IS HOW DEEP IS IT. AND I WAS GOING TO FOLLOW UP 23 WITH A QUESTION AS TO WHETHER IT HAS BEEN COMMUNICATED TO THE BEDROCK AQUIFER.

24 25 dUDGE H0YT: THOSE QUESTIONS

, 17 8 <

1 I

1 WILL BE RESPONDED TO TOMORROW MORNING BY YOU, MR.

2 SWIM.

3 MR. SILBERG: WE WILL ATTEMPT TO 4 GET THAT INFORMATION. .

5 JUDGE H0YT: ARE ANY OF THE 1 f

j 6 OTHER WITNESSES THAT MAY HAVE ACCESS TO THAT?

7 WE'LL THROW IT OPEN TO WHOEVER BEST CAN RESPOND TO f

l i

8 THAT.

9 BY MR. VAN KLEY:

10 Q. THE NEXT QUESTIONS WILL BE AIMED AT MR.

j 11 SWIM. I

12 STAYING ON FIGURE l-1, IF YOU'LL LOCATE 13 THE ONE CELL ON THAT FIGURE, YOU'LL SEE THAT IT

!, 14 APPARENTLY IS TRANSPOSED UPON A FIGURE OF ANOTHER i

i 15 STRUCTURE?  !

l 16 A. (MR. SWIM) YES, I SEE THAT. j 17 Q. CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT THAT OTHER STRUCTURE 18 IS?

) 19 A. IT'S A POND. (

l l j 20 Q. WOULD YOU TELL ME WHAT THAT POND IS USED f 21 FOR?

I l j 22 A. AT PREfFNT, IT DOESN'T SERVE ANY FUNCTION )

I 1 23 I KNOW OF.

I f\ 24 Q. DO YOU KNOW HOW THAT POND CAME INTO l U 25 EXISTENCE?

I l

i l 179 i

I f 1 A. NO, SIR, I DON'T.

l

! 2 MR. VAN KLEY: ALL RIGHT. I 'M i

l l 3 GOING TO ASK THE SAME SERIES OF QUESTIONS ABOUT l

4 THIS, YOUR HONOR. MAYBE I SHOULD GENERALLY ASK j 5 THE PANEL WHETHER THEY KNOW THE INFORMATION. DOES l l

6 ANYBODY ON THE PANEL KNOW HOW T t.A T POND CAME INTO 7 EXISTENCE, WHAT IS IT USED FOR, HOW DEEP IS IT AND 8 WHETHER IT IS COMMUNICATED TO THE BEDROCK AQUIFER, j 9 OR NOT DOES ANYBODY KNOW ANY OF THOSE QUESTIONS?

(

10 MR. SILBERG: I THINK MR. HENDRON l 11 CAN ANSWER SOME OF THOSE QUESTIONS.

l 12 BY MR. VAN KLEY:

r 13 Q. SIR? I

{

14 A. (MR. HENDRON) MY NAME IS DAVE HENDRON. I 15 l' CONSTRUCTION, AND I  !

WAS ON-SITE DURING THE UNIT r

16 BELIEVE THAT THIS POND WAS USED PRIMARILY FOR 17 UNITS TWO AND THREE INITIAL CONSTRUCTION 18 AC TI VI TI E S TO CIRCULATE GROUNDWATER EXTRACTED AS 19 PART OF THE GROUNDWATER, THE BEDROCK DEWATERING 20 OPERATION FOR CONSTRUCTION. I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY

{

21 HOW DEEP IT IS, BUT THE POND WAS BUILT BY DIKING l

22 SOILS AROUND THE AREA, AND AS FAR AS I COULD i

l 23 DETERMINE, DOES NOT COMMUNICATE TO THE BEDROCK.  !

f y ,T ^ x 24 Q. AS FAR AS YOU CAN DETERMINE, IS IT NOW  !

(__)

l 25 CONNECTED TO THE BEDROCK? {

l l

l '

l 180 I

l l

1 A. I WOULDN'T BELIEVE SO, NO.

l 2 Q. DOES THIS POND CURRENTLY CONTAIN WATER?

I l l 3 A. YES, iT DOES.

4 Q. COULD YOU TELL US HOW MUCH WATER IS l

i 5 CONTAINED IN THE POND?

6 A. NO, NOT WITH THE INFORMATION I HAVE AT i 7 HAND.

I 8 Q. YOU WERE /s T THE SITE AND SAW THIS POND, 9 IS THAT CORRECT?

10 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

11 Q. CAN YOU JUST GENERALLY DESCRIBE HOW HIGH I i -

12 THE WATER WAS IN COMPARISON TO THE SURFACE OF THE l t

('  ;

I J 13 GROUND?

I

! 14 A. GENERALLY, I'D SAY THAT THE WATER IS l

15 WITHIN A FOO) OR SO OF THE GROUND SURFACE. THIS ,

i '

16 COULD BE CHECKED OUT.

17 Q. DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE ELEVATION OF THE 18 GROUND S U Ps F A C E IS AT THAT POND? i

-l 19 A. I WOULD ESTIMATE ROUGHLY ELEVATION 575 f i

I f 20 IGLD.

21 Q. MR. HENDRON, I IF YOU LOOK BACK AT FIGURE l

) 22 1-1 YOU WILL SEE THAT THERE IS A, I DON'T KNOW HOW {

t 23 TO DESCRIBE IT, IT LOOKS L I.K E SOMETHING IS COMING i

24 OUT OF THAT POND INTO THE WETLAND NEXT TO IT. DO 25 YOU SEE WHAT I'M REFERRING TO?

l l

[

l

(. . _ - _ - . - - .- - . -.- - - - - - - - - - - - -

} {

161 Q ,

1 A. YES.

2 Q. DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT REPRESENTS?

3 A. YES. l t  !

4 Q. WOULD YOU TELL US, PLEASE? l 1 I j 5 A. THE OPERATION OF THIS POND INVOLVED AN l

! 6 INPUT OF WATER FROM THE DEWATERING SYSTEM UP NEAR 7 THE NORTHEAST CORNER, AND THE WATER SIMPLY I J

8 CIRCULATED FROM THAT POINT AROUND THE POND AND 1 4 THROUGH A CHANNEL AND DISCHARGED INTO THE --

IT l

?

10 APPEARS DISCHARGED INTO THAT LOW AREA THAT'S BEEN i

11 IDENTIFY AS A WETLAND, AND THEN DOWN THE CHANNEL

, 12 AND INTO THE RIVER.  !

J ('

\

s' 13 Q. IS THIS DISCHARGE STILL OCCURRING? I 14 A. NO.  ;

15 Q. WHEN DID IT LAST OCCUR?  !

I f 16 A. I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT DATE; BUT OVERALL, 17 IT OCCURRED WHEN THE DEWATERING SYSTEM WAS SHUT 18 DOWN SEVERAL YEARS AGO.

i i 19 Q. DO YOU KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THE SURFACE OF l

20 THE WATER IN THIS POND FLUCTUATES ALONG WITH ANY l 21 MONITORING BELL WATERS THAT MIGHT BE AT THE SITE?

{

i; 22 A. NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF, NO.

, 2 23 Q. HR. HENDRON, WOULD YOU TELL US HOW THE 3 g

i. Io, '

24 DEWATERING SYSTEM WORKED WHILE UNITS TWO AND THREE l 25 WERE BEING STARTED?

l' l

C --

182 j l 1 A. WELL, I WILL QUALIFY THIS STATING THAT I 2 WAS NOT AT ThE SITE DURING UNITS TWO AND THREE BUT l l l

. 3 WAS AT THE SITE DURING UNIT ONE CONSTRUCTION WHEN 1

4 A SIMILAR DEWATERING OPERATION WAS UNDERTAKEN, AND i

5 MY DESCRIPTION WILL BE BASED ON MY OBSERVATIONS  !

l 6 DURING UNIT ONE CONSTRUCTION.

7 THE DEWATERING WELLS WERE DRILLED INTO 1

8 BEDROCK, FROM THE BEDROCK SURFACE TO A DEPTH OF J

r S ABOUT 40 OR 50 FEET, TYPICALLY, BELOW THE BEDROCK l 10 SURFACE. THESE WELLS WERE RELATIVELY LARGE 11 DIAMETER WELLS. THE W E L I. DIAMETERS WERE FROM SIX

12 TO TEN INCHES IN DIAMETER. AND THEY SIMPLY PUT A 13 VACUUM PUMPING SYSTEM ON TOP OF THESE WELLS THAT i 14 WOULD R El.C V E THE WATER, PUT IT IN A HEADER PIPE f

15 THAT WAS ROUTED TO THIS PARTICULAR POND. THE {

i 16 WATER WAS DISCHARGED INTO THE POND, AND THE t

17 COLLECTED HYDROGEN SULFIDE GAS, WHICH IS A --

j 18 hMICH IS A GAS THAT WE FIND IN THE GROUNDWATER AT I

19 THE SITE, CAME OFF; AFTER THE HYDROGEN SULFIDE GAS f 20 CAME OFF, THEN THE WATER WAS DISCHARGED.

{

i l 21 Q. IN YOUR OPINION, HOW DOES THE POND WHICH 22 WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, THE POND THAT --

A POND 23 WHICH THE ONE CELL IS SUPERIMPOSED, HOW DOES T.H A T

-m

{

'4 POND FILL WITH WATER?

25 A. I THINK THAT THIS POND --

PROBABLY THE {

-l

- .- (

_ _ - - - - - - . - - - .~ . . -_ _

{ 183 j I

f 1 LEVEL IN THIS POND REMAINS FAIRLY STABLE; IF, FOR

\ G 2 NO OTHER REASON, IT HAS A SET ELEVATION AT THE t

l 3 DISCHARGE END OF IT, AND THE WATER GETS IN THAT i

i 5

4 POND, I BELIEVE, PRINARILY FROM RAINFALL. ]

(

l 5 Q. DO YOU KNOW WHERE THE MONITORING WELLt ON j 6 THE SITE ARE LOCATED?

7 A. WELL, I COULDN'T PUT ALL OF THEM ON THIS 8 PARTICULAR MAP, BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, I KNOW THE 9 AREAS WHERE MONITOR WELLS OCCUR, YES.

1 10 Q. ALL RIGHT. WHY DON'T WE START WITH THE I l 11 MONITORING WELLS THAT ARE LOCATED CLOSEST TO THE 12 PROPOSED BURIAL SITE. WHY DON'T YOU TELL US WHICH l i ~~) 13 IS THE CLOSEST WELL AND WHERE IS IT LOCATED? f 14 A. I DON'T HAVE THAT -- THAT INFORMATION AT IS MY DISPOSAL RIGHT NOW.

16 Q. DO YOU KNOW APPROXIMATELY HOW CLOSE IT'S I 17 LOCATED?

18 A. I WOULD SAY THAT -- THE MONITOR WELLS 19 WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ARE BEDROCK MONITOR WELLS. I 20 WOULD SAY THAT THE CLOSEST MONITOR WELL MAY BE i

21 WITHIN A FEW HUNDRED FEET OF THE WELLS TO BE OR --

5 22 EXCUSE ME -- OF THE CELLS THAT ARE PROPOSED FOR 23 CONSTRUCTION.

24 Q. ALL RIGHT. YOU STATED THAT --

DO YOU 25 KNOW THE DEPTH OF THE WATER IN THAT DEWATERING r

?

- . _ - _ . ._ _ _ _ ~ _ _ . _ _ _ _ ____ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

184

(

g 1 POND?

5 2 A. I DO NOT.

3 Q. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYbODY ON THE PANEL j

i.  !

4 THAT KNOWS THAT QUESTION?

i ,

5 (NO RESPONSE.)

l 6 MR. VAN KLEY: COULD WE GET AN l

i 7 ANSWER TO THAT TOMORROW, TOO? -

8 MR. SILBERG: WE'LL TRY. I DON'T i

9 KNOW IF THAT INFORMATION IS READILY AVAILABLE. IF l

10 IT IS, WE'LL TRY TO GET IT.

I

! 11 JUDGE H0YT: YOU WANT THE DEPTH 12 0F THE POND AS IT EXISTS --

j ,7 m

'b 13 MR. VAN KLEY: YES.

l l 14 JUDGE H0YT: --

WHEN? .

15 MR. VAN KLEY: AT THE ~ PRESENT 16 TIME. ,

17 JUDGE H0YT: VERY WELL.

18 MR. VAN KLEY: AND ALSO WHETHER IT 19 IS COMMUNICATED WITH THE BEDROCK.

20 JUDGE H0YT: THAT'S AN 21 ADDITIONAL FEATURE, MR. SILBERG. HE WANTS TO KNOW i

22 WHETHER IT'S CONNECTED WITH THE BEDROCK.

23 MR. SIL6 ERG: I BELIEVE MR.

!, ) 24 H E N D Ps 0 N TESTIFIED THAT THAT WAS NOT HIS BELIEF.

25 dUDGE H0YT: MR. HENDRON, WAS 1

185 1 THAT YOUR TESTIMONY?

1. 2' THE WITNESS: (MR. HENDRON) THAT 1

I 3 WAS.

f 4 8Y MR. VAN KLEY:

l 1 I BELIEVE THAT WAS YOUR BELIEF, THOUGH.

5 Q.

f f 6 DO YOU Kh0W THAT AS A FACT OR DO YOU JUST THINK l

7 THAT?

8 A. NO. I STATED THAT THAT WAS MY BELIEF 9 SINCE I DON'T HAVE THE DATA IN HAND.

IU Q. SO YOU REALLY DON'T KNOW.

11 A. THAT'S WHAT I BELIEVE. I DON'T HAVE THE 12 DATA IN HAND, YES.

(

2

\- _'\ 13 JUDGE H0YT: WOULD YOU BE ABLE {

14 TO GET THE DATA IN HAND SOMETIME?

15 THE WITNESS: (MR. HENDROM) YES, i 16 I THINK -- I BELIEVE WE CAN.

i 17 JUDGE H0YT: OVERNIGHT? i 18 THE WITNESS: (MR. HENDRON) YEAH.

t 19 JUDGE H0YT: GIVE IT YOUR BEST 20 SHOT, MR. HENDRON.

t 21 ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO.

22 BY MR. VAN KLEY

23 Q. OKAY. LET ME GO BACK TO MR. SWIM FOR A i es

( " -

24 FEW QUESTIONS.

l ~.n) 25 MR. SWIM, I PROBABLY SHOULD GIVE YOU SOME

1 I

106 j l

' i

1 0F THESE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE MONITORING WELLS l 2 SINCE YOUR TESTIMONY INCLUDED A REFERENCE TO THOSE

3 MONITORING WELLS. j i

4 IF YOU LOOK AT PAGE 37 0F YOUR TESTIMONY, {

5 YOU STATED THAT THE SITE WILL BE OVER A THOUSAND 1

6 FEET FROM ANY WATER WELL, NOT COUNTING TOLEDO 7 EDISGN'S OBSERVATION AND MONITORING WELLS.

8 GIVEN THE FACT THAT YOU MADE THIS l t

S TESTIMONY, DO YOU KNOW THE LOCATION OF THE l

10 MONITORING WELLS? I 11 A. (MR. SWIM) I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION 12 WITH ME, NO.

) 13 Q. DO YOU KNOW HOW CLOSE THE CLOSEST j 14 MONITORING WELL IS TO THE BURIAL SITE?

15 A. NO, I DON'T.

16 Q. DO YOU KNOW HOW THE MONITOR WELLS WERE 17 CONSTRUCTED?

18 A. I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION WITH ME.

19 Q. OKAY. DO YOU KNOW WHETHER THE MONITORING 20 WELLS WERE CEMENTED OR GROUTED?

21 A. NO, I DON'T.

22 JUDGE H0YT: ALL RIGHT. I THINK 23 WE COULD GO THROUGH AN ENDLESS LIST. LET'S  !

ll g 24 RESERVE THAT QUESTION ON MONITORING WELLS ALONG f 25 WITH THE OTHER INFORMATION THAT YOU'VE REQUESTED, I

1 MR. VAN KLEY, UNTIL TOMORROW. THE PANEL -

AN l (BID ,

j 2 APPROPRIATE MEMBER MAY HAVE THAT INFORMATION IN

! i i 3 THE MATERIALS ELSEWHERE, CAN LOCATE IT OVERNIGHT, i 1 l 4 AND WE'LL TESTIFY ON THAT TOMORROW MORNING. }

i {

! S MR. SILBERG, WE'LL GIVE YOU SOME TIME ON

{

6 REDIRECT TO GO THROUGH THAT. l i (

i 7 NK. SILBERG: COULD WE JUST HAVE l 4  !

( 8 THOSE ITEMS OF INFORMATION PLAYED BACK?  ;

1 9 JUDGE H0YT: WELL, THE REPORTER f

10 OR YOU WANT --

f 11 MR. SILBERG: MR. VAN KLEY CAN 1

t 12 IDENTIFY THEM.

$(C_J e 13 l JUDGE H0YT: WILL YOU?

I

! 14 MR. VAN KLEY: SURE.

!' r 15 THE INFORMATION THAT IS NEEDED IS, FIRST  ;

i

) 16 0F ALL, THE LOCATIONS OF THE MONITORING WELLS, HOW  !

! i l 17 FAR THEY ARE FROM THE BURIAL SITE. THE l

16 CONSTRUCTION OF THE MONITOR WELLS. FOR EXAMPLE, i 19 WHETHER IT'S STEEL OR PLASTIC CASING, WHETHER IT'S j 20 CEMENTED OR GROUTED. IF THEY ARE CEMENTED OR 21 GROUTED, THE MECHANISM BY WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN t

22 CEMENTED OR GROUTED. ALSO, THE WATER LEVELS IN j 23 THESE MONITOR WELLS.

i

)

24 BU MR. VAN KLEY:

w~j l 25 O. ALL RIGHT. MR. SWIM, YOU'RE NOT A t

I l l - - _ - - - - - 1

186 ;

)

1 GEOLOGIST, ARE YOU?

2 A. (MR. SWIM) NO, SIR.

l 3 Q. 50 YOU'RE NOT REALLY COMPETENT TO GIVE I

1 4 GEOLOGIC TESTIMONY, ARE YOU?

l 5 A. NO, SIR.

I  !

6 MR. VAN KLEY: ALL RIGHT. THANK -

7 YOU. I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS, YOUR HONOR.

j 8 JUDGE H0YT: DO WE HAVE ANY I

9 OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE OTHER INTERVENORS NOT 1  ;

I 10 COVERED BY MR. VAN KLEY? i 11 MR. LODGE: YES, THERE IS.  !

12 JUDGE H0YT: ALL RIGHT, MR.

( 'T i

'^s# -

13 LODGE.

( 14 CROSS-EXAMINATION

{

f 15 BY MR. LODGE:

16 Q. I NOTE IN YOUR TESTIMONY, MR. SWIM, THAT I i

17 YOU INDICATE ON PAGE 17 THAT THE SITE WILL BE A 18 THOUSAND FEET FROM ANY WATER WELL. IT'S MY 19 UNDERSTANDING ThAT THERE IS A PROPERTY LINE j 20 APPROXIMATELY 400 FEET AWAY. IS THAT A GOOD f

21 APPROXIMATION?

\

22 A. APPROXIMATELY.

{

i j 23 Q. DO YOU HAVE ANY ASSURANCES THAT THERE {

i? ' \

l (

24 WILL NOT BE ANY WATER WELL DEVELOPMENTS ON THE.

3 25 PROPERTY THAT IS NOT CONTROLLED BY THE LICENSEE? {

)

i 4

r_-_____ . _ - --

189 i

t j 1 A. NO, I DON'T.

t l 2 Q. HAVE YOU SOUGHT ANY OR ARE ANY IN THE l

l 3 CONTEMPLATION OF TOLEDO EDISON?

4 A. EXCUSE NE. I DIDN'T CATCH THE FULL 5 QUESTION.

6 Q. HAS TOLEDO EDISON CONTEMPLATED SECURING  !

l 7 SOME KINDS OF EASEMENTS OR OTHER PROHIBITIONS ON i 8 ADdOINING PROPERTY TO ENSURE THAT THE 1,000 FOOT 1 l

l 9 FIGURE YOU CITE WILL REMAIN CONSISTENT?

10 A. I DO fl 0 T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT  !

l {

ll QUESTION. {

12 MS. SCOTT-WASILK: MR. LODGE?

13 MR. LODGE: YES.

I '

j 14 MS. SCOTT-WASILK: WE HAVE LOOKED AT ]

. 15 THAT, AND AS YOU SAID, THE ELECTRIC COMPANY DOES 1 '

I 16 HAVE THE OPTION OF EXERCISING CONDEMNATION RIGHTS.

l 17 BY MR. LODGE:

{

' l 18 Q. HAS THAT BEEN CONTEMPLATED BEFORE THIS j I

19 HEARING?

f

{

20 A. (MS. SCOTT-WASILK) YES.

f j 21 MR. SILBERG: I'M SORRY. DO YOU l I i

, 22 MEAN THE EXERCISE OR THE POSSIBILITY OF I

5 j 23 EXERCISING? ,

j es

( (-J '

) 24 MR. LODGE: THE POSSIBILITY OF

)

l 25 EXERCISING.  !

/ (

l I

k 190 t

?

1 MS. SCOTT-WASILK: WE HAVE LOOKED AT gg 2 THAT AS ONE OF THE OPTIONS IF WE ARE FACED WITH t 3 THAT PARTICULAR SITUATIONr AND UE DID LOOK AT THAT 4 PRIOR TO THIS HEARING.

! 5 MR. LODGE: I HAVE NO FURTHER I

l i 6 QUESTIONS.

i

! 7 JUDGE H0YT: VERY WELL. ALL O RIGHT. MR. VAN KLEY?

9 MR. VAN KLEY: YOUR HONOR, FOR i 10 QUESTION NUMBER 2, SHARON SIGLER WILL BE HANDLING 11 THE QUESTIONING ON BEHALF OF THE STATE.

I

, _ 12 JUDGE H0YT: VERY WELL. MISS

/ 's i

k '-) 13 5!GLER?

j 14 MS. SIGLER: YOUR HONOR, I'D j 15 LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS QUESTION TO MR. SWIM.

! 16 CROSS-EXAMINATION i

17 BY MS. SIGLER:

lb Q. YOU HAD DESCRIBED IN YOUR TESTIMONY THE i  ;

19 PROPOSED BURIAL CELLS, AND YOU MENTIONED THAT f 20 THERE'S GOING TO BE A SYNTHETIC IMPERVIOUS j g 21 MEMBRANE THAT'S GOING TO LINE THE BOTTOM OF THE j i j

! 22 CELL 7 I I

23 A. (MR. SWIM) THAT'S CORRECT.

^'

{

j 24 Q. AND CAN YOU DESCRIBE WHAT KIND OF j

-s 25 MATERIAL THIS MEMBRANE IS GOING TO BE MADE OUT OF? l l \

s t

191

) 1 A. UE HAVEN'T SELECTED AN EXACT MATERIAL AS 2 0F YET.

3 Q. UELL, THEN, YOU DON'T KNOW IF THE 4 PROPOSED GRAVEL TO COVER THE MEMBRANE COULD 5 PUNCTURE THIS MEMBRANE IN ANY WAY?

6 A. WELL, THE MATERIAL WE SELECT, WE'LL TAKE 7 THAT INTO ACCOUNT.

8 Q. AND WILL YOU TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHAT SORT 9 0F DEGRADATION IT COULD BE SUBJECT TO AS WELL?

10 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

11 Q. HOW ABOUT ANY RETRO-COMPATIBILITY TEST TO 12 DETERMINE IF THE WASTE IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE G4

~

13 LINING?

1 14 A. YES, THAT'S ALSO ONE OF THE FACTORS WE*LL l

15 CONSIDER BEFORE WE SELECT. {

l 16 Q. HAVE ANY --

ARE YOU GOING TO PERFORM ANY l l

17 LEACHATE TEST TO DETERMINE HOW IT WILL AFFECT THE {

18 LINER?

{

15 A. WE DON'T HAVE ANY PLANS TO AT PRESENT. l 20 Q. WHY IS IT THAT YOU'RE ONLY -- IN YOUR l 21 PROPOSAL, YOU HAVE ONLY ONE LAYER OF LEACHATE? IS

{

}

22 THERE A REASON WHY THERE'S ONLY ONE LEACHATE 23 LAYER?

l() 24 MR. SILBERG: I'M SORRY. YOU 25 MEAN A LEACHATE COLLECTION LAYER?

I )

(

l

192 1 MS. SIGLER: RIGHT.

2 A. (MR. SWIM) FROM THE EXPERIENCE OF OUR 3 CONSULTANTS WHO GAVE US THE PRELIMINARY DESIGN FOR 4 THIS PIT, THAT WAS ALL THAT WAS RECOMMENDED.

S Q. ARE THESE CONSULTANTS THAT DEAL PRIMARILY 6 WITH TRADITIONAL LANDFILL TYPE SITUATIONS?

7 A. MR. HENDRON CAN PROBABLY ADD SOMETHING TO 8 THAT SINCE HE WAS THE CONSULTANT.

9 A. (MR. HENDRON) I'LL TRY TO ANSWER YOUR 10 QUESTION.

11 THE REASON THAT WE HAVE RECOMMENDED ONLY 12 ONE LEACHATE COLLECTICN LAYER IS REALLY TWOFOLD.

( ,

m-) 13 ONE, IT'S NOT A HAZARDOUS WASTE. IT'S A 14 NON-HAZARDOUS WASTE BY ALL DEFINITIONS.

15 50 IF WHAT YOU'RE ASKING IS --

MOST 16 HAZARDOUS WASTE LANDFILLS NOW HAVE A DOUBLE LINER 17 AS A DOUBLE LEACHATE COLLECTION SYSTEM 16 REQUIREMENT.

19 THIS IS A b.ON-HAZARDOUS LANDFILL.

20 SECONDLY, THE OPERATION OF LEACHATE 21 COLLECTION SYSTEM IS REALLY INTENDED TO CEASE AND 22 DESIST AFTER SOME PERIOD OF TIME DURING THE 23 OPERATION. AND WE EXPECT THIS DRAIN TO BE ORY

(~-- , 24 SOMETIME AFTER THE OPERATION BEGINS, AND, 25 THEREFORE, WE NEED NOT HAVE A SECOND DRAIN.

153 1 Q. ALL RIGHT. IS THERE A LEACHATE REMOVAL 2 SYSTEM PLANNED OR PROPOSED?

3 A. (MR. SWIM) YES, THERE IS.

4 Q. AND HOW WILL THIS LEACHATE BE REMOVED?

5 A. WE HAVE NOT FINALIZED THE DESIGN ON THAT 6 YET. PRELIMINARILY, WE ARE LOOKING AT HAVING A 7 PIT FOR THE LEACHATE TO C O L L E C ', AND A PUMP TO 6 REMOVE IT AFTER IT'S BEEN TESTED.

9 Q. HOW WILL THE LEACHATE BE DISPOSED OF?

10 A. IT blLL FIRST BE TESTED, AND THE RESULTS 11 0F THOSE TESTS WILL DETERMINE HOW THE LEACHATE IS 12 TO SE DISPOSED OF.

's.-

13 Q. HAVE YOU MADE PLANS OF WHERE YOU'RE GOING 14 TO DISPOSE OF IT, WHERE THE LEACHATE WILL BE 15 DISPOSED OF7 4

16 A. UNDER WHAT CONDITIONS? WELL, DEPENDING 17 ON --

IT DEPENDS ON THE RESULTS OF OUR TESTS.

18 Q. OKAY.

15 WHEN YOU --

YOU'VE BUILT --

WHEN YOU 20 BUILD THE CELLSr WHEN YOU CONSTRUCT THE CELLS, HOW 21 ARE YOU GOING TO PROTECT THE INTEGRITY OF ONE CELL 22 WHEN YOU BUILD THE OTHER? WILL THE HEAVY 23 MACHINERY IMPACT ON IT? .

( 24 A. NO. THE CONSTRUCTION WILL TAKE PLACE 25 FROM THE SIDE. THERE WON'T BE ANY MACHINERY

194 g 1 TRANSVERSANT ACROSS THE TOP OF THE CELL THAT HAS 2 BEEN COMPLETED AS WE CONSTRUCT THE NEXT CELL.

3 Q. WON'T THERE BE VIBRATION FROM THE 4 MACHINERY?

5 A. THERE WILL BE A SMALL AMOUNT OF 6 VIBRATION.

7 Q. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO KEEP THE RIP-RAP ON 8 THE SIDES F R 0tt ROLLING AND GOING DOWN INTO THE NEW 9 PIT YOU'RE DIGGING, NEW CELL?

10 A. WELL, THE RIP-RAP ON THE WALL THAT THEY f

11 SHARE WILL BE REMOVED DURING THE CONSTRUCTION OF 12 THE -- ON THAT SIDE, IT WILL BE REMOVED DURING THE 1

13 CONSTRUCTION OF THE ADJOINING CELL.

14 Q. COULDN'T THIS DAMAGE THE COVER?

15 A. YOU MEAN ON THE --

WHERE WE'VE REMOVED 16 THE RIP-RAP?

17 Q. RIGHT.

lE A. THE REMOVAL OF THE RIP-RAP ITSELF 19 WOULDN'T PHYSICALLY DAMAGE ANYTHING.

20 Q. HOW LONG DO YOU EXPECT CONSTRUCTION OF 21 THE CELL TO TAKE?

22 A. MR. WALLACE COULD PROBABLY GIVE YOU A 23 MORE ACCURATE DETERMINATION AS TO THE EXACT r~x j 24 TIMEFRAME THAT WE*RE LOOKING AT.

25 A. (MR. WALLACE) I WOULDN'T ANTICIPATE IT

195 1.. WOULD'TAKE MORE THAN 90 DAYS.

2 Q. MORE THAN SO DAYS 7 ,

3 A. (MR. .WALLACE) NOT MORE'THAN 90 DAYS.

4 Q. NOT MORE THAN 90 DAYS,

~5 WHAT IF 'THERE WERE A' STORM OR SOME ~ 0THER.

'6 KIND OF INCIDENT DURING THIS PERIOD WHEN THE 7 OTHER --

THE R I P -R AP ' S REMOVED FROM THELONE CELL?

8 A. (MR. SWIM) WELL, WE INTEND TO HAVE THE 9 OTHER THREE SIDES OF THE NEW DIKE- IN PLACE BEFORE-10 WE REMOVE THE RIP-RAP FROM THE ADJOINING W A L L' THAT ll THEY WILL SHARE SO THAT THAT AREA WILL BE.

12 PROTECTED FROM A FLOOD.OR STORM BEFORE THAT 13 R I P -R AP ' S REMOVED.

14 Q. IN DETERMINING THE' LAYOUT.OF THE CELLS, 15 YOU --

THEY WERE ESSENTIALLY DETERMINED B Y ,' YOU 16 SAID, THE NECESSITY,OF KEEPING AN' UNENCUMBERED 17 MAINTENANCE CORRIDOR FOR THE OVERHEAD-TRANSMISSION i

18 LINES?

i

, 19 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

t 20 Q. WHAT KIND OF MAINTENANCE.ARE YOU l

i 21 DISCUSSING OR COMTEMPLATING? I 5 l

! 22 A. I SPECIFICALLY DON'T KNOW THE EXACT TYPE I

! 23 O F. ELECTRICAL MAINTENANCE THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED l

() 24 25 TO REPAIR A LINE BREAK OR ANYTHING .A L O N G THAT NATURE, OR TO STRING A NEW LINE, REPLACEMENT WIRE. )

l l

196 1 Q. IF IT SHOULD RAIN DURING THIS 90-DAY 2 CONSTRUCTION PERIOD, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO KEEP THE 3 RAIN WATER OUT OF THE CELLS?

4 A. WELL, THE RAIN WATER WON'T BE ABLE TO BE 5 KEPT OUT OF THE CELLS DURING THAT PERIOD OF 6 CONSTRUCTION.

7 Q. IT WILL GO IN THE CELLS DURING THIS 6 PERIOD?

9 A. THE OPEN PERIOD, YES, IT WILL.

10 Q. WHAT HAPPENS TO THIS RAIN WATER?

11 A. WELL, THE RAIN WATER WILL HAVE TO BE 12 REMOVED.

'NJ 13 Q. DO YOU --

HAVE YOU PROPOSED HOW YOU'RE 14 GOING TO REMOVE THAT?

15 A. (MR. WALLACE) THIS IS SURFACE WATER.

16 WE'LL PROBABLY USE SOMETHING LIKE A PUMP AND PUMP 17 IT OUT.

16 Q. WILL THIS MAKE THE MATERIALS IN THE CELL 19 WET?

20 A. (MR. WALLACE) WHAT WAS YOUR QUESTION?

21 Q. WILL THIS SATURATE THE MATERIALS INSIDE 22 THE CELL, THE RAIN WATER?

23 A. (MR. WALLACE) NOT IF THE CLAY IS (xj ') 24 PROPERLY PLACED AT THE TIME.

25 Q. AND IF IT'S NOT?

197 1 A. (MR. WALLACE) IT WILL BE PROPERLY 2 PLACED.

3 Q. HOW WILL YOU REMOVE RAIN WATER FROM THE 4 CELL THAT'S OPENED WHILE YOU'RE DOING S CONSTRUCTION, THE CELL THAT YOU'RE CONSTRUCTING?

6 A. (MR. WALLACE) THERE WON'T BE A CELL THAT 7 WOULD BE OPENED.

8 Q. THE ONE YOU'RE CONSTRUCTING, THE ONE 9 YOU'RE DIGGING WILL BE OPENED. RAIN WILL GO IN 10 THERE. HOW WILL YOU KEEP THE RAIN WATER OUT OF 11 THE CONSTRUCTION?

12 A. (MR. WALLACE) YOU WON'T KEEP THE RAIN

( ,

~s 13 WATER OUT. THE RAINS WILL FALL IN THE CELL.

14 Q. AND WHAT KIND OF IMPACT WILL THAT HAVE ON 15 THE CONSTRUCTION AND PUTTING MATERIALS IN?

16 A. (MR. WALLACE) VERY LITTLE. AS I SAID 17 BEFORE, WHAT WE'LL DO IS WE'LL PUMP IT OUT AND 18 CONTINUE TO WORK THE SOIL.

19 Q. CAN YOU GIVE ME SOME KIND OF DESCRIPTION 20 0F WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE CELL WILL AGE OVER TIME?

21 A. (MR. WALLACE) I'LL HAVE TO PASS THAT TO 22 ONE OF THE SOILS MEN.

23 MR. SILBERG: I'M SORRY. COULD

/ 24 YOU TELL US WHAT KIND OF EFFECTS YOU'RE TALKING

)

25 ABOUT?

196 1 MS. SIGLER: WELL, WHAT I'M 2 TALKING ABOUT --

WILL THE CELL SETTLE OVER TIME?

3 WILL IT DEVELOP CRACKS?

4 JUDGE H0YT: YOU FRAME ALL THESE 5 QUESTIONS IN REFERENCE TO THE OPEN CELL, ARE YOU 6 NOT?

7 MS. SIGLER: NO. NO. l'M G SORRY. I SHOULD HAVE MADE THAT CLEAR.

9 BY MS. SIGLER:

10 Q. ONCE THE CELL IS COMPLETED, ONCE YOU'RE 11 DONE, OVER A PERIOD OF TIME WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN 12 TO THAT CELL?

I

'; 13 A. (MR. HENDRON) I'LL TRY TO ANSWER THAT 14 QUESTION.

15 TWO THINGS ABOUT THIS DESIGN ARE INTENDED 16 TO MAKE SETTLEMENTS MINIMAL. THERE WILL BE 17 SETTLEMENT, BUT ONE THING ObVIOUSLY IS WE ARE 16 SOLIDIFYING THE WASTE TO A VERY STIFF CLAY, STIFF 15 TO HARD CLAY CONSISTENCY, 50 THE WASTE ITSELF WILL 20 HAVE VERY, VERY SMALL SETTLEMENTS, AND I'M GOING 21 TO ESTIMATE LESS THAN A QUARTER OF AN INCH OVER 22 THE lot!G PERIOD.

23 AND THE BASE OF THE WHOLE SYSTEM, NAMELY j 24 THE LINER SYSTEM AND THE WASTE ABOVE IT, IS 25 FOUNDED ON THE GLACIAL TILL DEPOSIT, AND THE

199 g 1 GLACIAL TILL DEPOSIT IS A VERY INCOMPRESSIBLE SOIL 2 DEPOSIT.

5 3 AND AGAIN, WE'RE TALKING SETTLEMENTS LESS 4 THAN A QUARTER OF AN INCH FOR --

FOR THE PURPOSES 5 0F THIS FORUM.

6 A TOTAL SETTLEMENT OF A HALF-AN-INCH OVER 7 THE LENGTH OF TIME MAY TRANSLATE TO A DIFFERENTIAL 8 SETTLEMENT ACROSS THE STRUCTURE OF A QUARTER OF AN 9 INCH, HALF OF THAT TOTAL SETTLEMENT. AND THERE IS 10 NO STRUCTURAL ELEMENT WITHIN THIS DESIGN THAT I 11 KNOW OF THAT WOULD BE IMPACT BY THAT TYPE OF 12 DIFFERENTIAL SETTLEMENT.

x 13 Q. WELL, DOESN'T CLAY CRACK OVER TIME?

14 A. ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE CLAY COVER?

15 Q. YES.

16 A. WHICH WOULD BE THE MOST SUSCEPTIBLE 17 ELEMENT TO THE CRACKING.

18 IT DOES. WE HAVE A TWO-FOOT THICK 19 MINIMUM THICKNESS COVER. THE MAXIMUM THICKNESSES 20 0F THAT WILL EE IN THE ORDER OF THREE OR F O U P.

21 FEET.

22 WE ARE PROVIDING A VEGETATIVE COVER ON 23 THAT, AND WE'RE ALSO PROVIDING A DRAINAGE LAYER ON L j 24 TOP OF THAT, 50 THAT WE WILL MINIMIZE THE PROBLEMS 25 WITH CRACKING OF THE COVER OVER A LONG PERIOD.

200 1 AND AS WAS TESTIFIED EARLIER, THERE WILL 2 DE A MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS PROGRAM IN THE 3 LONGER TERM TO REPAIR CRACKS AND ANY DEFICIENCIES 4 THAT ARE OBSERVED IN THIS COVER.

5 Q. THIS COVER, THE TOP COVER, IT'S TO BE HOW 6 THICK? CAN YOU GIVE ME A THICKNESS OF EACH OF THE 7 COMPONENTS OF THE COVER, THE TOPSOIL, THE CLAY, 8 THE CRAVEL?

9 A. OKAY. I THINK THAT'S PART OF MR. SWIM'S 10 TESTIMONY, AND AT THIS POINT I'D LIKE TO TURN IT 11 OVER TO HIM, IF I COULD.

12 Q. ALL RIGHT.

f I

)

a 13 A. (MR. SWIh) THE COVER WILL SE OF 14 COMPACTED CLAY WHICH WILL RANGE FROM A THICKNESS 15 OF TWO FEET TO A NAXIMUM OF APPROXIMATELY FOUR 16 FEET OVER THE CENTER. ON TOP OF THAT THERE WILL 17 BE SOME TOPSOIL WHICH WILL BE SEEDED.

18 Q. OKAY.

19 NR. SILBERG: EXCUSE ME, MR.

20 SWIM. DID YOU OMIT THE SAND OR GRAVEL FILTER 21 LAYER?

) 22 THE WITNESS: (MR. SWIM) YES, I 23 CID, INADVERTENTLY.

24 JUDGE HGYT: LET ME ASK YOU, CAN 25 I HAVE THAT DIAGRAM OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THAT

201 1 CELL? I BELIEVE YOU GAVE COPIES OF IT TO THOSE OF 1 2 US WHO WERE AT THE --

THAT'S THE ONE I'M LOOKING 3 FOR.

4 MR. SILBERG: IT'S FIGURE 2-2 5 WHICH FOLLOWS PAGE 24. I'M SORRY. IT IS PAGE 24, 6 ALTHOUGH IT'S NOT NUMGERED. NO. I'M SORRY. IT 7 FOLLOWS PAGE 22 IN THE TESTIMONY.

8 dUDGE H0YT: NO, THAT'S NOT THE 9 ONE. THAT'S N0i MY 22. I'VE GOT A DIFFERENT ONE.

10 NR. SILBERG: FIGURE 2-2.

11 JUDGE H0YT: YEAH. IT'S THE 12 SECOND PAGE. THANK YOU.

I

' i

' -/ 13 MR, SILBERG: THAT SHOWS A CROSS 14 SECTION OF THE BOTTOM COMPONENT OF THE LINER BUT 15 DOES NOT SHOW A CROSS SECTION OF THE TOP CAP.

16 dUDGE H0YT: RIGHT. THAT 17 MEMBRANE IS LISTED ON THE BOTTOM AS THE BOTTOM OF 10 IT, ISN'T IT?

15 MR. SILBERG: YES.

20 dUDGE HOYT: ALL RIGHT.

21 THE WITNESS: (MR. WALLACE) 22 THERE IS NO MEMBRANE ON THE TOP.

23 dUDGE H0YT: YEAH.

( ') 24 8Y MS. SIGLER:

v 25 C: . CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT THE THICKNESS WILL

i .

, 202 e

! /

E 1 .BE 0.% THE'END UHERE IT'S JUST'TWO FEET? CAN YOU 2 iELL NE WHAT THE THICKNEFS OF EACH LAYER WILL BE?

3 HOW THICK THE GR A /EL LAfER, b,3W THICK THE TOPSOIL 4 WILL BE ON THE 5. N D , HOW THICK THE COMPACTED CLAY S WILL BE, THE TWO FOOT?

6 A. (MR. ShlM) TiiO S E'i T H I C K N E S S E S HAVEN'T SEEN UE HAVEN'T DETERMINED EXACTLY.

~

7 1,'i s t G N E D Y E 1.

8 0 50 ESSENTIALLY, THIS IS A BARE BONES PROPOSAL. TEIS IS NOT.YET A COMPLETED PROPOSAL 10 T H f.T YOU'RE ADDRESSING H E F. E .

11 A. IT'S A P R E I I tll N A R Y PROPOSAL. IT'S NOT A 12 FINAL, COMPLETED PROPOSAL. I WOULDN'T CALL IT A I-, i'

%' 13 BARE CONES PROPOSAL, NO.

14 C. THERh ARE SEVERAL ISSUES YET TO BE 15 ADDRESSEp IllCLUDIPG -

16 A. 'hERE i ARE SEVERAL ASPECTS YET TO BE 17 DESIGNED, E S .

f .

18 MS. SIGLER: I HAVE NO FURTHER 19 QUESTIONS.

20 MR. LODGE: I HAVE A FEW.

21 ddDGE H0YT: ALL RIGHT.

22 CROSS-EXAMINATION 23 SY MR. LODGE:

y 24 Q. MR. SWIM, HAVE YOU CALCULATED THE 25 VOLUME --

I GUESS YOU'D CALL IT THE CUBIC FOOT

203 1 CAPACITY -- 0F EACH OF THESE CELLS?

/ 2 A. (MR. SWIM) YES, WE HAVE.

3 Q. AND WHAT IS THAT CAPACITY, ASSUMING 4 THEY'RE ALL GOING TO BE OF UNIFORM SIZE?

5 A. WELL, THE TOTAL VOLUME IS APPROXIMATELY 6 46,000 CUBIC FEET, AND THE VOLUME TO WHICH WE WILL 7 PLACE THE MATERIAL INTO IT WILL BE APPROXIMATELY 8 42,000 CUBIC FOOT.

9 Q. IN YOUR OCTOBER STH --

OR IN THE OCTOBER 10 9TH, 1985 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE, IT INDICATED 11 THERE WOULD BE ABOUT SIX DREDGINGS OVER THE LIFE 12 0F DAVID-BESSE; CORRECT?

./

13 A. YES, I BELIEVE THAT'S CORRECT. I DON'T 14 HAVE A COPY OF THAT IN FRONT OF ME.

15 Q. AND THAT THE VOLUME OF THE DREDGED 16 MATERIAL'S ESTIMATED TO EE ABOUT 30,000 CUBIC FEET 17 FOR A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD.

16 A. THAT'S --

IF YOU'RE READING THAT, I TAKE 19 THAT AS BEING CORRECT.

20 Q. YOU WOULD ACCEc7 THAT.

21 A. YES.

22 Q. IS THERE --

23 MR. LODGE: AND, YOUR HONOR, I

(

24 WILL STOP IF I'M GETTING BEYOND THE PARTICULAR 25 ISSUE WE'RE DISCUSSING. q

204 1 Q. BUT I BELIEVE I RECALL SEEING SOMETHING g

2: IN THE TESTIMONY CONCERNING MIXING LIMEKILN DUST.

3 MR. BIMBER: CEMENT KILN DUST.

4 Q. CEMENT KILN DUST. PARDON ME.

5 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

6 Q. IS THAT FACTORED INTO YOUR PROJECTIONS OF 7 THE CAPACITY YOU'RE GOING TO NEED?

8 A. YES, IT IS.

9 Q. DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA AS TO WHAT 10 APPROXIMATE PERCENTAGE THAT WOULD INCREASE THE 11 VOLUME OF MATERIAL TO BE DUMPED?

p 12 A. THE INCREASE WILL BE MINIMAL.

I  ;

> 13 Q. MORE THAN TEN PERCENT?

14 A. I WOULD SAY LESS.

15 Q. BETWEEN FIVE AND TEN PERCENT; WOULD THAT 16 BE FAIR?

17 A. I WOULD GUESS THAT WOULD BE INACCURATE.

16 PROBABLY LESS.

19 Q. HAVE YOU DONE ANY SMALL SCALE EXPERIMENTS 6

20 TO MIX CEMENT KILN CUST WITH A SAMPLE OF THE 21 SLUDGE MATERIAL?

22 A. WE'VE DONE SOME VERY SMALL SCALE TESTS, 23 YES.

/

') 24 Q. AND IS THAT PERC,ENTAGE OR THOSE 25 PERCENTAGES YOU'VE JUST QUOTED A RESULT OF THOSE

/

205 1 TESTS?

2 A. NO.

3 Q. SO YOU REALLY DON'T KNOW AT THIS POINT.

4 A. AT THIS POINT, I PERSONALLY DON'T HAVE 5 HARD CONCRETE EVIDENCE, NO.

6 MR. LODGE: I HAVE NOTHING 7 FURTHER.

8 JUDGE H0YT: VERY WELL. ALL 9 RIGHT. LET'S MOVE ON TO THE NEXT SERIES OF 10 QUESTIONS. THAT'S ON OUR QUESTION NUMBER THREE.

11 MR. VAN KLEY: YES, YOUR HONOR.- I 12 WILL BE HANDLING QUESTION NUMBER THREE.

, ry

' l

~\

13 JUDGE H0YT: ALL RIGHT.

14 MR. VAN KLEY: I'D LIKE TO DIRECT 15 MY QUESTIONS TOWARDS MR. HERDENDORF SINCE HE GAVE 16 l THE TESTIMONY ON PART NUMBER THREE. j 17 I CROSS-EXAt11 NATION 18 8Y MR. VAN KLEY:

19 Q. MR. HERDENDORF, IF YOU COULD TURN TO PAGE 20 28 0F YOUR TESTIMONY, YOU MADE A STATEMENT ON PAGE {

l 21 28 CONCERNING THE SITE BEING ABOVE ELEVATION 574 1

1 22 I.G.L.D. YOUR CONCLUSION WAS 1 HAT BECAUSE THE I 23 SITE IS ABOVE ELEVATION 574, IT'S NOT A WETLAND OR l

) (em 24 A MARSH UNDER TMc CORPS OF ENG If4 E E RS ' DEFINITION; I

25 IS THAT CORRECT? l 1

206 1 A. (DR. HERDENDORF) THAT IS CORRECT.

2 Q. OKAY. THE ELEVATION YOU'RE REFERRING TO 3 IS COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK; 4 ISN'T THAT RIGHT?

5 A. THAT IS CORRECT.

6 Q. ALL RIGHT. AND ORDINARY HIGH WATER MARK 7 IS THE TERM WHICH DESCRIBES THE LIMIT OF THE 8 CORPS

• JURISDICTION UNDER THE NAVIGABLE SERVITUDE 9 PORTIONS OF ITS JURISDICTION; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?

10 A. THAT'S TRUE, BUT ALSO IN CONVERSATIONS 11 WITH THE TOLEDO OFFICE OF THE CORPS, THAT'S THE 12 ELEVATION THAT THEY USE IN THE FIELD WHEN ADVISING 13 PROPERTY OWNERS AS TO THE DEMARCATION LINE BETWEEN 14 COASTAL WETLANDS AND THE TERRESTRIAL ENVIRONMENTS.

15 Q. BUT THE --

THERE CAN BE WETLAND WHICH IS 16 ALSO ABOVE 574 WHICH IS ALSO UNDER CORPS OF 17 ENGINEERS' JURISDICTION; ISN'T THAT CORRECT?

18 A. THAT IS CORRECT. THEIR JURISDICTION IS EXTENDS NO MATTER WHAT THE ELEVATION 15.

20 Q. ALL RIGHT. IT EXTENDS TO WETLANDS 21 REGARDLESS OF THE ELEVATION; IS THAT RIGHT?

22 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

23 Q. SO YOUR STATEMENT AS YOU'VE WRITTEN IT ON

( 24 PAGE 28 IS NOT QUITE ACCURATE THEN, IS IT?

}

25 A. I THINK I QUALIFIED THAT STATEMENT

f

~

207 m i

l

1. EARLIER: - IN TERMS OF REGARDING-IT AS COASTAL ~ o a

-2 WETLAND OF LAKE ERIE, AND I N' THAT VEIN, IT IS )

3 CORRECT.

4 -. Q . EVEN FOR COASTAL WETLANDS,-IT DOESN'T:

5 MATTER WHETHER OR NOT IT'S ABOVE ELEVATION 57'4; I 6 IT'S WHETHER OR NOT IT'S 'A WETLAND.- ISN'T THAT {

7 RIGHT? , .

I 8 A. THE CORPS IS STILL USING THAT:, ELEVATION .  ;

9 AS EARLY AS A MONTH AGO WHEN I CHECKED WITH THEM.

I '10 Q. THEY'RE USING THAT ELEVATION TO DETERMINE- -

i 11 WHETHER LAND'S A. WETLAND OR N O T ?. '

i

)

12 .A. THIS MAY SEEM STRANGE, BUT THAT'S WHAT --

i

,s 13 I WAS GIVEN THAT_INFORMATION.

14 Q. I'M GOING TO HAND YOU.dN EXHIBIT. THIS J

15 HAS BEEN MARKED AS STATE-0F OHIO EXHIBIT NO.'C. I i

16 WILL HAND YOU THIS EXHIBIT'AND ASK YOU WHETHER OR

17 NOT YOU CAN LOCATE THE-BURIAL CELLS ON THIS 1

18 EXHIBIT. THIS EXHIBIT HAS A DEMA.RCATION OF' 19 . WETLANDS ON IT.

20 JUDGE HOYT: YOU HAVE THREE.

21 COPIES OF THAT, MR. VAN KLEY?

22 MR. VAN KLEY: I'M GOING TO-HAvE i

23 HIM MARK IT WITH SOME MARKINGS, THEN_WE*LL.MAKE-A ,

i 24 FEW C O P.I E S OF IT..

25 BY MR. . VAN KLEY:

4 6

)

- ,-., . ~ , r, , , + , , , - . -,v . ,--..,,e-.-, , < , . ..,n..,,-~ .-,e .~,,e .~ s -,,w ~n-.~n,

208 1 Q. ALL RIGHT. I'M HANDING YOU WHAT'S BEEN 2 MARKED AS STATE OF OHIO EXHIBIT C. IF YOU CAN, 3 WOULD YOU DRAW IN THE WETLAND --

THE LANDFILL 4 CELLS ON THAT EXHIBIT. IF YOU CAN'T, LET ME KNOW.

5 A. I CAN ONLY DO IT VERY CRUDELY BY LOOKING 6 AT ANOTHER ILLUSTRATION THAT WAS IN THE TESTIMONY.

7 Q. ALL RIGHT. BEFORE YOU TRY THAT, LET ME 8 ASK ANOTHER MEMBER OF THE PANEL WHETHER HE OR SHE 9 MIGHT BE BETTER QUALIFIED TO LOCATE THE LANDFILL 10 CELLS. ANY VOLUNTEERS?

11 MR. SILEERG: THAT MAY NOT BE 12 SONETHING WHICH UE WOULD NECESSARILY WANT TO DO

(' '

13 WITHOUT TAKING SOME TITE TO DO IT MORE CAREFULLY.

14 MR. VAN KLEY: ALL RIGHT. WELL, 15 IF WE CAN HAVE THE STIPULATION THAT THEY WILL MARK 16 IT AND RETURN IT, FOR EXAMPLE, TOMORROM, I WOULD 17 BE HAPPY TO 00 THAT.

16 JUDGE H0YT: WILL YOU DO THAT, 19 MR. SIL6 ERG? l 20 MR. SILBERG: UH-HUH.

21 JUDGE H0YT: VERY WELL. WE'LL 22 DO IT THAT WAY THEN.

23 MR. VAN KLEY: I WILL ENTRUST. l

/^x

( l 24 EXHIBIT C TO YOUR CARE THEN. l l

25 JUDGE H0YT: C FOR

209 1 IDENTIFICATION, MR, VAN KLEY.

2 MR. VAN KLEY: CORRECT, YOUR 3 HONOR.

4 8Y MR. VAN KLEY:

5 Q. MR. hERDENDORF, DO YOU KNOW OF ANY 6 LANDFILL WHICH HAS CONTAINED RADIOACTIVE WASTE 7 BEING SITED 25 FEET AWAY FROM A WETLAND?

8 A. (DR. HERDENDORF) NO, I DO NOT.

9 NR. VAN KLEY: THANK YOU. NO 10 FURTHER QUESTIONS, YOUR HONOR.

11 JUDGE H0YT: VERY WELL. ANY 12 QUESTIONS FROM THE OTHER INTERVENORS NOT COVERED J 13 BY MR. VAN KLEY ON (UESTION NUMBER THREE?

14 MR. LODGE: ONE MOMENT, YOUR 15 h0NOR, IF I MAY.

16 dUDGE H0YT: AFTER MR. LODGE, IF 17 HE DOES HAVE A QUESTION --

18 MR. LODGE: YOUR HONOR, WE DO 19 NOT.

20 JUDGE HOYT: VERY WELL. THEM 1

21 WE'LL RECESS FOR APPROXIMATELY TEN MINUTES.

22 (RECESS TAKEN.)

23 JUDGE H0YT: WE WILL GO BACK ON

) 24 THE RECORD. THE HEARING WILL COME TO ORDER. LET 25 THE RECORD REFLECT THAT ALL THE PARTIES TO THE

~

210

, .- r

,N 1 HEARING WHO WERE.PRESENT WHEN THE.HE'ARING RECESSED'

. L ). '

2 ARE AGAIN 'PRESENT IN THE HEARING-ROOM. ,

3 I BELIEVE COUNSEL FOR THE STATE. OF OHIO 1

4 WAS IN THE-MIDST OF HIS EXAMINATION AND WILL BEGIN 5 WITH QUESTION NUMBER THREE.

-6 MR. VAN KLEY: 'I THINK WE'RE GOING

7. TO QUESTION NUMBER FOUR.

i 8 JUDGE HOYT: I'M SORRY. .WE 9 FINISHED _WITH QUESTION N U M B E R -.T H R E E . WE'RE GOING 10- TO QUESTION NUMBER FOUR. I STAND CORRECTED.

11 THANK YOU.

I 12 NR. VAN KLEY: ALL'RIGHT.-

IhK) 13 YOUR HONOR, WE'D LIKE TO GO -TO QUESTION

~

i j 14 NUMBER FOUR, WHICH DEALS WITH THE FLOODI'NG AT'THE i

~

15 SITE. THE QUESTIONS WILL!BE' DIRECTED TOWARDS MR.

16 HERDENDORF, WHO GAVE ,THE . TESTIMONY FOR-QUESTION j

17 NUMBER FOUR.

1 l

16 CROSS-EXAMINATION 19 BY MR. VAN KLEY:

20 Q. MR. HERDENDORF, I'D LIKE~TO STARTLWITH 21 PAGE 31 OF YOUR TESTIMONY, WHERE UNDER QUESTION j 7 j 22 AND ANSWER 4-3 YOU STATE THAT.'THE GENERAL AREA 1

23 AROUND THE BURIAL -SITE HAS BEEN OBSERVED-FLOODED. -

( 24 COULD YOU-PLEASE TELL US WHO MADE-THESE'

!- 25 OBSERVATIONS, W H'E N ' A N D WHERE?

i I

i L_-

211 1 A. (DR. HERDENDORF) YES. THIS IS 2 INFORMATION THAT --

WELL, I PERSONALLY HAVE SEEN 3 IT FLOODED MYSELF DURING THE EARLY '70 PERIOD, BUT 4 NOT FROM THE STANDPOINT OF CONDUCTING ANY 5 INVESTIGATION SPECIFICALLY AT THE SITE.

6 THE INFORNATION THAT I HAVE CONCERNING 7 THE FLOODING WAS SUPPLIED TO ME BY CHARLES MCBELL, 8 FORMERLY OF TOLEDO EDISON.

9 Q. ON HOW MANY OCCASIONS HAVE YOU PERSONALLY 10 SEEN THE SURIAL SITE FLOODED?

11 A. I'VE ONLY SEEN IT FLOODED ON ONE 12 OCCASION.

't '

13 Q. DO YOU REMEMBER WHEN THAT OCCASION WAS?

14 A. I BELIEVE IT WAS 1972, NOVEMBER.

15 (: . THIS WAS THE LARGEST FLOODING EPISODE 16 THAT HAS OCCURRED IN THAT AREA; IS THAT RIGHT?

17 A. 1972, NOVEMBER, AND APRIL 1974 ARE THE 18 TWO LARGEST EVENTS WE'VE HAD.

19 0. WHAT WAS THE NAME OF THE PERSON THAT YOU 20 CONFERRED -- WITH WHOM YOU CONFERRED ABOUT THE 21 OTHER FLOODING?

22 A. MR. CHARLES MCBELL. ,

23 Q. MCBELL.

, 24 A. CORRECT.

25 Q. ALL RIGHT. HE'S A TOLEDO EDISON

212 1 EMPLOYEE?

2 A. fES. I SELIEVE HE HAS --

HE HAD THE 3 POSITION 11 R . SWIM NOW OCCUPIES.

4 MR. SILBERG: HE FORMERLY WAS A 5 TOLEDO EDISON EMPLOYEE.

6 Q. ALL RIGHT. DID MR. MCSELL TELL YOU THE 7 N U tiB E R OF OCCASIONS ON WHICH HE SAW THE SITE 8 FLOODED?

9 A. NO. HE JUST INDICATED THAT IN THE EARLY 10 '70'S HE HAD SEEN IT FLOODED.

11 Q. IF YOU WILL GO TO PAGE 32 0F YOUR 12 TESTIMONY, IN THE FIRST' PARAGRAPH OF THAT PAGE, t  ;

'L' 13 YOU REFER TO A hEAN t'.O N T H L Y STILL WATER ELEVATION.

14 DO YOU SEE THAT?

15 A. WHAT LINE ARE YOU REFERRING TO?

16 Q. SIXTH --

SEVENTH LINE DOWN. SEVENTH AND 17 THE EIGHTH LINE.

16 A. OH, YES. ALL RIGHT.

19 Q. ALL RIGHT.

20 A. YES. OKAY.

21 Q. WOULD YOU SHOW US HOW YOU CALCULATE 22 THE --

OR CALCULATED THE MEAN MONTHLY S T I L I. WATER 23 ELEVATION?

1 24 A. THE NEAN MONTHLY STILL WATER ELEVATION 25 WAS PROVIDED TO ME BY THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF

213 1 ENGINEERS, TOLEDO OFFICE.

2 Q. DO YOU KNOW WHAT DAYS ARE BEING AVERAGED 3 TO GET THIS EQUATION?

4 A. I BELIEVE THEY PROBABLY AVERAGED AT LEAST S HOURLY LEVELS, MAYBE EVEN SHORTER TERM. IT'S ON A 6 COMPUTERIZED SYSTEM THAT AUTOMATICALLY UPGRADES 7 IN -- WELL, HOURLY, CONTINUALLY UPGRADING THAT 8 MONTHLY AVERAGE.

9 Q. WHAT'S THE TOTAL PERIOD OF TIME THAT IS 10 BEING USED FOR THIS CALCULATION? IS IT 30 DAYS OR 11 SEVEN DAYS OR WHAT?

12 A. I BELIEVE IT'S THE FULL CALENDAR MONTH.

13 Q. 30 DAYS.

14 A. NO. IT WOULD DE DEPENDING ON THE NUMBER 15 OF DAYS IN THE PARTICULAR MONTH.

16 Q. ALL FIGHT. 50 WHATEVER NUMBER OF DAYS 17 THAT PARTICULAR MONTH HAS, THAT'S THE NUMBER OF lb DAYS THAT ARE USED?

19 A. YES.

20 Q. ALL RIGHT. ARE THESE THE 30 DAYS DURING 21 THAT CALENDAR MONTH OR IS IT 30 DAYS BEFORE THE 22 SURGE OR 30 DAYS AFTER THE SURGE?

23 A. WHEN WE CALCULATED THIS, WE USED THE

^

l )

24 PARTICULAR MONTH THAT THE EVENT OCCURRED IN.

25 Q. 50 IF THE EVENT OCCURRED, LET'S SAY, JULY

214 1 31ST OR JULY 1ST OR JULY 15TH, YOU WOULD USE THE 2 30 DAYS OF JULY TO CALCULATE THE E(UATION?

3 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

4 Q. IN YOUR TESTIMONY YOU REFER TO FLOODING 5 OCCURRING ON THE BURIAL SITE; IS THAT CORRECT?

6 A. THAL'S CORRECT.

7 Q. AND I THINK EARLIER YOU INDICATED THAT 8 ThIS FLOODING CO ttE S FROM TOUSSAINT RIVER; IS THAT 9 RIGHT?

10 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

11 Q. IS THAT ALL OF THE --

IS THAT THE SOLE 12 SOURCE OF THE FLOODING, OR ARE THERE OTHER AREAS 13 0F FLOODING THAT OCCUR 7 14 A. THIS AGAIN IS INFORMATION THAT WAS 15 PROVIDED TO ME BY MR. MCBELL HAVING OBSERVED THAT 16 EVENT OCCUR.

17 C. HOW FAR IS THE TOUSSAINT RIVER F R 0 ft THE 18 DURIAL SITE?

19 A. I CAN'T GIVE YOU THAT WITHOUT SCALING IT 20 0FF. I DON'T HAVE THAT NUtiBER AVAILABLE.

21 Q. OKAY. I 'f4 GOING TO HAND YOU STATE OF 22 OHIO EXHIBIT ti A R K E D AS EXHIBIT A. SEE IF YOU CAN 23 USE THIS TO SCALE IT OFF.

, 24 JUDGE HOYT: YOU W Af4 T TO SEE 25 THIS, it R . SILDERG?

215 1 MR. SILBERG: MO. IT'S ALREADY 2 BEEN --

3 A. (DR. HERDENDORF) THE SCALE ON THE 4 PHOTOGRAPH IS ONE INCH EQUALS 945 FEET.

5 DO YOU WANT ME TO TRACE THE FLOOD PATH OR 6 THE STRAIGHT, SHORTEST DISTANCE?

7 Q. JUST TRACE THE SHORTEST DISTANCE BETWEEN 8 THE TOUSSAINT RIVER TO THE LANDFILL CELLS.

9 A. LOOKS TO BE ABOUT THREE-EIGHTHS OF AN 10 INCH.

11 GOT A CALCULATOR? WORKS BETTER IF YOU 12 TURN IT ON.

m) 13 I GET ABOUT 354.75 FEET.

14 MR. SILBERG: THAT'S THE SHORTEST 15 DISTANCE BETWEEN TWO POINTS?

16 THE WITNESS: (MR. HERDENDORF) 17 THAT WAS THE SHORTEST DISTANCE I COULD FIND, AND 10 THE MAP IS A LITTLE BIT HAZY, BUT --

IT LOOKS LIKE 19 IT MIGHT bE IN FLOOD WHEN THAT WAS TAKEN, 50 --

20 BY MR. VAN KLEY:

21 Q. SO THE CLOSEST DISTANCE BETWEEN THE 22 LANDFILL CELLS AND THE TOUSSAINT RIVER IS 23 APPROXIMATELY 354 FEET?

^ 24 A. APPROXIMATELY, YES.

25 MR. SILBERG: MR. VAN KLEY, COULD

216 1 YOU PERHAPS INDICATE WHETHER THAT PICTURE 2 INDICATES A FLOOD CONDITION, OR AT LEAST THE DATE 3 0F THAT?

4 MR. VAN KLEY: ONE OF OUR S WITNESSES WILL BE TALKING ABOUT THIS EXHIBIT AND 6 WE'LL ADDRESS IT AT THAT TIME.

7 8Y MR. \AN KLEY:

6 Q. MR. HERDENDORF, ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY 9 FLOODING IN THE INTERIOR WHERE THE TOUSSAINT RIVER 10 HAS ITS ORIGIN?

11 A. (CR. HERDENDORF) I'M AWARE OF FLOODING 12 THAT HAS OCCURRED ALONG THE TOUSSAINT RIVER AT

~ 13 SOME WILDLIFE FACILITIES UPSTREAM IN THE 14 TOUSSAINT. I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S NEAR THE ORIGIN, 15 0UT IT'S --

IT'S STILL AT LAKE LEVEL EFFECTIVELY 16 RATHER THAN NEAR THE ORIGIN.

17 Q. IT IS POSSIBLE, HOWEVER, FOR THERE TO SE 18 SUBSTANTIAL RAINFALL TOWARDS THE INTERIOR WHERE 8

19 THE TOUSSAINT RIVER IS COMING FROM AND THAT 20 PRODUCE FLOOD LEVELS IN THE TOUSSAINT; IS THAT 21 CORRECT?

22 A. YES, FLOODS CAN BE PRODUCED ON THE 23 TOUSSAINT BY EXTENSIVE RAINFALL.

l g 24 Q. ALL RIGHT. THE CALCULATIONS THAT YOU 25 'HAVE GIVEN US IN YOUR TESTIMONY CHLY ADDRESS THE

217 1 FLOODING FROM LAKE ERIE; IS THAT CORRECT?

2 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

3 MR. SILBERG: EXCUSE 11 E . WHAT 4 CALCULATIONS ARE WE REFERRING TO NOU?

5 MR. VAN KLEY: I'M REFERRING TO 6 ALL OF THE FLOOD TESTIMONY THAT HE HAS GIVEN US 7 UNDER QUESTION FOUR.

E MR. 5ILBERG: YOU MEAN THE 9 FREOUENCY OF FLOODING?

10 NR. VAN KLEY: YES, THAT'S 11 CORRECT.

12 A. (DR. HERDENDORF) YES. THE ANSWER TO

,ry

'- 13 YOUR QUESTION IS THAT THE CALCULATIONS I MADE WERE 14 DEALING STRICTLY WITH LAKE ERIE FLOODING, NOT 15 CONSIDERING THE STREAM.

16 IF I MIGHT ADD, THOUGH, I HAVE NEVER 17 WITNESSED FLOODING OF THE STREAM OF THE MAGNITUDE 18 THAT WAS CAUSED EY THE LAKE ITSELF, 50 I BELIEVE 19 THE CALCULATIONS I MADE WOULD BE MORE EXTREME THAN 20 ANYTHING T H /s T COULD BE EXPERIENCED ON THE STREAM.

21 Q. NOW, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE --

WE'RE 22 TALKING ABOUT CALCULATIONS YOU MADE AS TO SETUP 23 AND THAT TYPE OF THING, IS THAT RIGHT, NOT THE m

, 24 ACTUAL NUMBER OF TIMES THE SITE WILL FLOOD.

25 A. I THINK IF ONE TAKES A LOOK AT THE MAP

216 1 THAT WAS IN THE STATE TESTIMONY THAT SHOWS THE 2 AREA 0F FLOODING DURING THE 1972 STORM, I FEEL 3 CONFIDENT IN SAYING THAT THAT KIND OF MAGNITUDE OF 4 FLOODING HAS NOT OCCURRED DUE TO THE STREAM FLOOD S SITUATION.

6 Q. LET ME DIRECT YOU TO TABLE 4.1, WHICH IS 7 IN YOUR TESTIMONY. NOW, TABLE 4.1 JUST INCLUDE --

8 ONLY INCLUDES THE NUMBER OF PROJECTED TIMES THAT 9 LAKE ERIE HAS FLOODED THE BURIAL SITE; IS THAT 10 CORRECT?

11 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

12 Q. OKAY. 50 TABLE 4.1 DOES NOT TAKE INTO

(' '

13 ACCOUNT ANY FLOODING FROM THE --

CAUSED BY 14 FLOODING ON THE INTERIOR OF THE TOUSSAINT RIVER, 15 A. YES. IT ONLY --

THE TABLE OHLY DEALS 16 WITH LAKE ERIE EVENTS.

17 Q. LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION ABOUT TABLE 18 4.2. TABLE 4.2 ONLY COVERS THE YEARS 1963 TO 19 1986. WOULD YOU TELL ME WHY YOU DIDN'T GO FURTHER 20 BACK FOR TABLE 4.2?

21 A. FOR A VERY PRACTICAL REASON. THAT'S 22 THE --

THE LARGEST DATA SET I HAD AT MY DISPOSAL 23 AT OUR FIELD LABORATORY, PUT-IN-BAY, BUT I FELT

(

})

24 THAT A THREE-YEAR PERIOD WAS SUFFICIENT TO 25 UNDERSTAND THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TWO

219 1 GAUGES.

2 Q. LET ME DIRECT YOU NOW BACK TO PAGE 37 0F 3 YOUR TESTIMONY, AND ON A COUPLE OF OCCASIONS I'VE 4 NOTED THAT YOU HAVE PHRASED YOUR TESTIMONY USING S THE TERM "SIGNIFICANT WAVE ATTACK." FOR EXAMPLE, 6 LOOK UNDER ANSWER A4-9.

7 A. CORRECT, YES.

8 Q. ALL RIGHT. I ASSUME THEN THAT THE BURIAL 9 SITE WILL BE SUBJECT TO SOME WAVE ATTACK; IS THAT 10 CORRECT?

11 A. IF THE AREA WERE TO BE FLOODED AND THERE 12 WAS STANDING WATER AROUND THE BASE OF THE

_ 13 STRUCTURES, IT IS CONCEIVABLE THAT THERE WOULD BE 14 SMALL AMOUNT OF WAVES GENERATED BY THE FETCH 15 AVAILABLE, AND WAVES COULD BE CREATED.

16 Q. NO DIKE IS INDESTRUCTI6LE, IS IT?

17 A. I SUPPOSE NOT.

lL Q. ARE YOU AWARE THAT TOLEDO EDISON, WHEN IT 19 WAS PROPOSING TO DUILD UNITS TWO AND THREE, ALSO 20 PROPOSED TO ERECT A DIKE STRUCTURE BETWEEN THE 21 MARSH AND UNITS TWO AND THREE TO PROTECT THE 22 UNITS?

23 A. NO. I CAN'T --

I WASN'T INVOLVED WITH l 24 THAT PHASE OF UNIT TWO AND THREE. I DON'T KNOW 25 THE SPECIFICS OF IT.

220 1 Q. ALL RIGHT. IS ANYBODY FROM THE PANEL g

2 AWARE OF THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTI0t! I'VE JUST 3 ASKED?

4 (NO RESPONSE.)

5 MR. VAN KLEY: APPARENTLY NO ONE 6 IS AWARE OF THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION I'VE ASKED, 7 YOUR HONOR.

8 SY MR. VAN KLEY:

S Q. G0 BACK TO PAGE --

I GUESS YOU'RE STILL 10 ON PAGE 37, AREN'T YOU?

11 A. (DR. HERDENDORF) CORRECT.

12 Q. OKAY. THE BURIAL SITE IS LOCATED IN THE

! 8

'x -

13 500-YEAR FLOODPLAIN; CORRECT?

14 A. NO. I BELIEVE IT'S WITHIN THE 100-YEAR 15 FLOODPLAIN.

16 Q. WELL, IT WOULD ALSO BE WITHIN THE 17 500-YEAR FLOODPLAIN; ISN'T THAT RIGHT? IF IT'S lb UITHIN THE 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN, IT'S ALSO IN THE 19 500-YEAR FLOODPLAIN BY ITS DEFINITION. 1 20 A. NO. 500-YEAR FLOODPLAIN WOULD BE AT A 21 MUCH HIGHER ELEVATION. THAT MEANS THAT ONCE EVERY 22 500 YEARS IT WILL FLOOD, 50 IT WOULD DE AT A 23 HIGHER ELEVATION.

,-, Q 1 24 C. OKAY. I GUESS YOU AND I ARE SORT OF 25 CRISSCROSSING, NOT MEETING ON OUR INTENTS OF MY

221 1 QUESTION AND YOUR ANSWER.

2 ANY 500-YEAR FLOOD WOULD FLOOD THE BURIAL 3 SITE; IS THAT CORRECT?

4 A. YES, THAT'S CORRECT.

5 Q. AND ANY 100-YEAR FLOOD WOULD ALSO FLOOD 6 THE BURIAL SITE?

7 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

6 Q. AND ANY 50-YEAR FLOOD WOULD ALSO FLOOD 9 THE BURIAL SITE?

10 A. ThAT'S CORRECT.

11 Q. AND ALSO ANY 10-YEAR FLOOD WOULD FLOOD 12 THE BURIAL SITE; IS THAT RIGHT?

13 A. PORTIONS OF THE SITE, NOT ALL OF IT.

14 Q. DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH OF THE LAKEFRONT AT 15 DAVID-BESSE HAS ARMORED DIKE?

16 A. I WOULD ESTIMATE 60 TO 70 PERCENT.

17 Q. 50 THAT LEAVES 30 TO 40 PERCENT OF THE 10 DIKES ARE NOT ARMORED.

19 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

20 Q. DO YOU KNOW TO WHAT DESIGN LEVELS, IN 21 OTHER WORDS, STORM SEVERITY DESIGN LEVELS, THE 22 DIKES ALOHG THE TOUSSAINT RIVER WERE CONSTRUCTED? ,

1 23 A. I BELIEVE I HAVE A NOTE OF THAT, TO THAT 24 EFFECT, IF I MAY LOOK AT IT HERE.

l 25 THE TOUSSAINT DIKES ARE BUILT TO 1.G.L.D.

222 1 ELEVATION 578.

2 Q. DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH OF A SETUP THOSE 3 DIKES WERE DESIGNED TO WITHSTAND?

4 A. THE TOUSSAINT DIKES ARE INTERIOR DIKES IN 5 TERMS OF THEY'RE NOT DESIGNED TO WITHSTAND THE 6 FULL BRUNT OF LAKE ERIE FORCES.

7 Q. 50 THEY'RE NOT DESIGNED TO WITHSTAND, FOR 9

8 EXAMPLE, WIND ATTACK FROM LAKE ERIE?

9 A. THAT IS CORRECT. THEY'RE NOT DESIGNED TO 10 TAKE THE OPEN --

OPEN WATER WAVE ATTACK THAT THE 11 OUTER DIKES FRONTING THE COAST ARE.

12 Q. ISN'T IT TRUE THAT A WIND SETUP ON LAKE

/ 1

'x-) 13 ERIE OF SIX TO EIGHT FEET IS NOT TOO UNLIKELY, IS 14 NOT TOO IMPROBABLE IN THE FUTURE?

15 A. THAT IS VERY UNLIKELY. THE HIGHEST ON 16 RECORD IS 4.2 FEET.

17 Q. THE LAKE IS AT HIGHER LEVELS NOW THAN IT 18 WAS FORMERLY; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?

19 A. THAT IS CORRECT.

20 Q. IN YOUR TESTIMONY --

I BELIEVE IT'S PAGE 21 33 --

YOU STATED THAT THE SITE FLOODED 25 TIMES IN 22 50 YEARS?

23 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

llg 24 Q. I WOULD LIKE TO DIRECT YOU BACK TO TABLE 25 4.1. AND I RECOGNIZE l'M KEEPING EVERYBODY VERY 1

f 223 1 BUSY JUST FOLLOWING FROM PAGE TO PAGE HERE.

2 IF YOU LOOK AT TABLE 4.1, ISN'T IT TRUE

> 3 THAT -- WELL, LET ME START OFF BY ASKING THIS: AT 4 THE RATE OF 25 TIMES IN 50 YEARS, THE SURIAL SITE Q

! 5 WILL FLOOD ON THE AVERAGE ONCE EVERY TWO YEARS; IS 6 THAT RIGHT?

f i

! 7 A. YES, THAT'S CORRECT.

\

j 6 Q. AND EACH TIME THAT THE SITE FLOODS, THE I

S LAND' FILL CELLS ARE SITTING IN WATER; IS THAT i

{

10 RIGHT? I i

! 11 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

l 12 Q. WHEN THE FLOODING WATERS LEAVE THE SITE, f t'm 13 THEY LEAVE DEHIND WET SOIL; IS THAT CORRECT?

14 A. YES.

i f 15 Q. NOW, IF YOU WOULD LOOK AT TABLE 4.1, f 16 TAELE 4.1 OLVIOUSLY ENCOMPASSES 50 YEARS, RIGHT?

I i 17 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

t 16 Q. NOW, LOOK AT THE LAST 15 YEARS IN YOUR i

! 19 CHART AND TELL ME HOW MANY TIMES THE BURIAL SITE

}

} 20 HAS BEEN PROJECTED TO HAVE FLOODED IN THE LAST 15 21 YEARS. I BELIEVE THAT WOULD START WITH 1972.

22 A. INCLUDING 1972, WE HAVE 23 TIMES.

23 Q. ALL RIGHT. 50 IN THE LAST 50 YEARS, THE (c' 24 SITE HAS FLOODED 25 TIMES, AND 23 OF THOSE TIMES j 25 HAVE OCCURRED IN THE LAST 15 YEARS; IS THAT RIGHT?

224 i

1 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

2 Q. ALL RIGHT. 50 IF YOU'RE TO AVERAGE OUT {

l 3 THE NUMBER OF TIMES THE SITE HAS FLOODED, WOULDN'T

{

4 IT B' E MORE ACCURATE TO LOOK AT THE LAST 15 YEARS 5 RATHER THAN 50 YEARS?

6 A. NO. IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE USING THIS AS 7 A PREDICTIVE TOOL FOR THE FUTURE, ONE WOULD

}

f 8 ATTEMPT TO GET THE LONGEST DATA BASE ONE CAN. AND {

l 9 SO I WOULDN'T SHORTEN IT TO 15 YEARS. IF WE LOOK g 10 AT THE LONG-TERM WATER LEVEL RECORDS, IT MAY BE 11 THAT AFTER -- BY STATISTICALLY LOOKING AT THEM, WE

(

12 WOULD BE EXPECTING THE LAKE TO BE DROPPING AND l 4

g 13 RETURNING TO A MORE NORMAL CONDITION.

l l

14 Q. THERE IS NO INDICATION, HOWEVER, THAT THE 15 LAKE IS RETURNING TO WHAT YOU REFERRED TO AS A I i 16 NORMAL CONDITION, IS THERE?

f i l '

17 A. THE LAKE IS STANDING RIGHT NOW  ;

i 16 APPROXIMATELY THREE FEET ABOVE MEAN, AND THE

{

[

19 CLIMATIC CONDITIONS THAT WE'RE NOW EXPERIENCING

{

20 ARE LIKELY TO CONTINUE AT THAT HIGH --

AT A HIGH

{

21 LEVEL AT LEAST FOR THE NEXT SIX MONTHS.

l f 22 Q. ISN'T IT TRUE THAT YOU REALLY CAN'T TELL {

23 WHETHER THE LAKE LEVEL IS GOING TO STAY AT ITS i

24 PRESENT LE\ELS OR WHETHER IT WILL GO UP OR DOWN?

25 A. THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS WILL PREDICT SIX 1

l

)

225 1 MONTHS IN ADVANCE. THAT'S THE FARTHEST THEY CARE 2 TO EXTEND THEIR PREDICTIONS, AND THAT'S PROBABLY A 3 REASONABLE LENGTH OF TIME. BEYOND THAT, WE JUST f 4 DON'T KNOW WHAT THE RAINFALL IS GOING TO BE, WHICH S IS THE PRIMARY INFLUENCING FACTOR.

6 Q. ISN'T IT TRUE THAT THE GOVERNMENT 7 AGENCIES INVOLVED WITH FLOODING --

FOR EXAMPLE, 8 THE GEOLOGIC SURVEY --

HAVE INDICATED THAT THEY

)

9 BELIEVE THE LAKE WILL CONTINUE TO RISE?

10 A. NC. I THINK THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS ARE 11 ACTUALLY P R E D I C T I t!G A LOWER LEVEL FOR THE NEXT SIX 12 MONTHS.

c~s

) 13 Q. FOR THE NEXT SIX MONTHS?

l' 1,4 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

}

15 Q. ARE YOU AWARE OF A LETTER WHICH TOLEDO 16 EDISON RECEIVED FROM REGION THREE OF THE N.R.C.

17 WHICh PREDICTED THAT THE LEVELS WOULD REACH THEIR 18 PEAK IN HOVEMBER OF 'L67 19 A. NO, I HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF THAT.

f 20 Q. ACCORDING TO YOUR TABLE 4.1, THE SITE 1

21 FLOODED TWO TIMES IN 1984; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?

22 A. CORRECT.

l 23 Q. IN 1985, IT FLOODED FOUR TIMES?

( ^

( ) 24 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

25 Q. AND NOW WE'RE HALFWAY THROUGH '86, AND

226 1 IT'S ALREADY FLOODED ONCE; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?

2 A. YES.

3 MR. SILBERG: EXCUSE ME. ARE WE I 4 TALKING ABOUT ACTUAL FLOODS OR CALCULATED FLOODS?

I l 5 A. YEAH. I'M GIVING MY CALCULATIONS AND 6 I'VE GIVEN YOU MY ASSUMPTIONS FOR MAKING THOSE 7 CALCULATIONL. WHETHER OR NOT IT ACTUALLY FLOODED 8 OR NOT, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OTHER THAN EVIDENCE 9 IN THE FIELD THAT INDICATES THERE WAS DEFINITELY 10 NO EROSION IF IT DID FLOOD.

l l 11 Q. YOU USE THE BEST INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO I

) ,_ '

12 YOU TO NAKE THESE CALCULATIONS, THOUGH; ISN'T THAT 13 RIGHT?

i

! 14 A. THAT'S CORRECT. THE ONLY WEAKNESS I CAN f

15 SEE IN THE CALCULATIONS IS THE FACT THAT I USED A 16 FOUR-HOUR LAG T I ti d BECAUSE THAT'S THE BEST DATA i

17 BASE I HAD. IT MAY GE THAT THERE IS A LONGER LAG l 18 TIME. IF THAT IS TRUE, THAT MEANS THERE'D BEEN A c 19 LESS INCIDENCE OF FLOODING, WHICH IS QUITE LIKELY.

20 Q. ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY RADIOACTIVE WASTE 21 LANDFILLS OR ANY SOLID WASTE LANDFILLS THAT ARE 22 LOCATED IN A TEN-YEAR FLOODPLAIN?

23 A. I'M SORRY. THAT'S NOT MY FIELD AT ALL.

1

) 24 I

• ti NOT FAMILIAR WITH THEM.

l t

25 j Q. ANYBODY FROM THE PANEL AWARE OF ANY

)

r 227 j 1 RADIOACTIVE OR SOLID WASTE LAtDFILLS THAT HAVE  ;

i l [

2 EVER BEEN SITED IN A TEN-YEAR FLOODPLAIN? ,

l 3 A. (DR. JACKSON) I CAN CITE ONE KIND OF l 4 SITUATION WHICH IS PERHAPS ANALOGOUS IN WHICH l

5 HIGH-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS WERE AGGLOMERATED ,

6 WITH SAND AND PUT INTO A CRATER ON THE OCEAN REEF l 7 IN DIRECT CONTACT WITH THE OCEAN WATER.

6 Q. WHAT KIND OF WASTE WAS THAT?

j S A. (DR. JACKSON) HIGH-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE l l (

10 WASTE. {

'l l Q. AND WHAT WAS THE HIGH-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE 12 WASTE PUT IN?

gs 4 m 13 A. (DR. JACKSON) IT WAS MIXED WITH CORAL, 14 SAND AND CEMENT.

15 0 HASN'T THAT METHOD OF DISPOSAL DEEN l 16 OUTLAWED?

17 A. No. THIS WAS THE METHOD WHICH WAS l 18 DESIGNED AND APPROVED BY N.R.C.

I

19 Q. WHEN WAS IT APPROVED?

20 A. THIS WAS DONE ROUGHLY TEN YEARS AGO, AND 21 IN RESPONSE TO THE FACT THAT THESE RADICACTIVE 22 WASTES COULD NOT DE DISPOSED OF AT SEA.

23 Q. ISN'T IT TRUE THAT THE N.R.C. NO LONGER I

24 ALLOWS ANY KIND OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL AT 25 SEA?

l

226 1

f 1 A. THESE WERE NOT DISPOSED OF AT SEA.

2 Q. WHAT WAS DONE WITH THEM THEN? {

3 A. THEY WERE PUT INTO A CRATER ON THE REEF.

{

4 Q. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT SOME KIND OF

{

5 TEMPORARY STORAGE?

6 A. SEVERAL THOUSAND YEARS.

7 Q. AND THAT'S NOT DISPOSAL?  !

f

. 6 A. IT'S LONG-TERM ENTOM6 MENT AND VERY MUCH {

)

9 THE SAME KIND OF TECHNIQUE THAT'S BEING PROPOSED

10 HERE.

{

11 JUDGE KLINE: LET ME CLARIFY, DID 12 YOU MEAN THAT THIS WAS APPROVED BY N.R.C. OR ITS p

t1 13 PREDECESSOR, A.E.C.?

i 14 THE WITNESS: (DR. JACKSON) I 15 THINK BY THE TIME IT WAS FINALLY PUT INTO PLACE, t f

i 16 IT WAS N.R.C.

17 JUDGE KLINE: OKAY.

f lE JUDGE H0YT: WHY DON'T WE ASK 1

19 YOU A COUPLE OF 00ESTIONS.

5 20 COUNSEL, ARE YOU GOING TO PLACE IN f l

21 EVIDENCE, GIVE US A REFERENCE ANY FURTHER TO THE l s

l

~

22 LETTER THAT YOU'VE REFERRED TO FROM THE REGI0h '

23 THREE OF N.k.C.?

/m \

( '

24 MR. VAh KLEY

I CAN DO THAT IF I 25 YOU SO DESIRE, YOUR HONOR. j 1

__ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ - ~ ~ _

i

229 -

1 JUDGE H0YT: YES, I WOULD LIKE 2 VERY MUCH TO SEE WHAT YOU HAVE REFERENCE TO.

3 MR. VAN KLEY: SURE. ALL RIGHT. i f

4 I D 0 f1 ' T THINK I UOULD HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS ON l 5 THIS PARTICULAR QUESTION FOR YOU.

6 DR. HERDENDORF: I'D LIKE TO GO i

7 BACK, IF I COULD, AND COMPLETE THE ANSWER TO THAT C QUESTION, IF I MIGHT.

9 I BELIEVE YOUR QUESTION DEALT WITH NOT

(

10 JUST RADI0 ACTIVE WASTE. IT DEALT WITH OTHER {

11 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS BEING DISPOSED OF7

(

12 bY MR. VAN KLEY:

, e'~x (

) 13 Q. I WAS REFERRING TO BOTH RADIOACTIVE WASTE

{

14 AND SOLID WASTE. (

l 15 A. (DR. HERDENDORF) I CAN THINK OF A NUMBER l j

16 0F OTHER CASES WHERE MATERIAL HAVE BEEN DEEMED 17 HEAVILY POLLUTED AS HAZARDOUS MATERIAL, HEAVY lb METAL, THAT ARE PLACED DEFINITELY WITHIN THE FLOOD 19 ZONE, AND THIS WOULD LE VIRTUALLY EVERY HARBOR 2U ALONG LAKE ERIE HAS A CONTAINED DIKE DREDGED

{

21 DISPOSAL SITE. THESE MATERIALS /RE TOO HAZARDOUS l

22 TO BE PLACED IN OPEN LAKE DISPOSAL IN THE LAKE AND 23 ARE PLACED EEHIND THESE STRUCTURES: TOLEDO, em i

( 24 L O R A l fi , ASHTABULA*S BEING CONTEMPLATED, HURON.

}

{

, 25 Q. WHAT IS THE ORIGIN OF THESE WASTES?

l i

1 w--_-_--,._._. -

. . . . . . . . . - _ - _ ----n--- ~~

230 t

l l

1 'A. THESE ARE MATERIALS THAT ARE DREDGED FROM 2 T!!E NA'VIGATION C H A th4 E L S . THEY COME FROM A VARIETY 3 0F 1NDUSTRIAL AND AGRICULTURAL SOURCES. {

t 4 Q. ALL RIGHT. SO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE l l

5 DREDGE AND FILL OPERATIONS, FOR EXAMPLE, THE ARMY 6 CORPS OF ENGINEERS?

)

7 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

! 8 Q. ALL RIGHT.

k 9 A .- (MR. HENDRON) IF I MAY CONTRIBUTE AN l 10 , ANSWER TO THE QUESTION THAT WAS RAISED, IF ANYONE I

11 OF THE PANEL HAS EXPERIENCE IN LOCATING LANDFILLS, j p_ 12 I THINK AS A GENERIC TERM, WITHIN THE TEN-YEAR 13 s PLO0tfLAIN --

EE'VE 00T SITES'DOWN IN THE COASTAL  !

14 REGIONS OF 1HE GOLF COAST REGION WHERE, IN FACT, i

15 THESE SITES ARE WE!L W I T'H I N 100-FEAR FLOODPLAIN. }

16 WHETHER THL Y 'R E WITHIN A TEN-YEAR FLOODPLAIN OR f e

17 NOT, I'D LIKE TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SOME 16 CALLS 1HIS E VEN I NC TO REFRESH MY MEMORY, IF THAT'S 19 OKAY WITH THE JUDGE l 20 TYPICALLY TFE DESIGN DEING PROPOSED AT 21 THIS LANDFILL AT OAVID-BESSE IS VERY SIMILAR TO j 22 ThE. DESIGN CONCEPT THAT WE ARE REOUIRED TO DO IN i

23 T h r.' 5 E LANDFILLS, AND THAT IS TO PROTECT THE WASTE t

/~

24 CELL 6 WITH RFINFORCED DIKES SUCH AS THAT BEING {

25 PROPOSED TO AbOVE THE 100-YEAR FLOOD LEVEL.

• t

231 1 JUDGE HOYT: YES, DOCTOR, IF YOU 2 WILL DO THOSE CALCULATIONS OVERNIGHT AND LET US 3 HAVE THE BENEFIT OF THAT, ALONG WITH SOME OF THE 4 OTHER ANSWERS THAT WILL COME IN TOMORROW, WE WILL 5 BE VERY GRATEFUL TO YOU.

6 MR. VAN KLEY: YOUR HONOR, CAN WE 7 HAVE THE NAMES OF THOSE LANDFILL SITES NOW?

8 8Y MR. VAN KLEY:

9 Q. DO YOU REMEMBER THE NAMES OF THEM?

10 A. (MR. HENDRON) WELL, THE ONE THAT I'M 11 THINKING OF IS A HAZARDOUS WASTE LANDFILL DOWN IN 12 CARLYSS, LOUISIANA THAT WAS PERMITTED --

I BELIEVE

'/ _

13 THE DATE OF PERMIT WAS 1960, BUT I COULD BE 14 CORRECTED ON THAT. AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE 15 FLOOD FREQUENCY WAS AT THAT SITE, BUT I BELIEVE IT 16 WAS LESS THAN 100 YEARS, AND I WOULD REQUEST THE 17 OPPORTUNITY TO GET A NUMBER ON T I ,4 T PARTICULAR 18 SITE.

19 JUDGE H0YT: IS THAT THE ONLY 20 ONE YOU HAD IN MIND?

21 THE WITNESS: (MR. HENDRON) 22 THAT'S THE ONLY ONE THAT I PREFER TO NAME NOW, AND 23 I MAY MAY BRING SOME ADDITIONAL LANDFILLS IN

( 24 TOMORROW, BUT THAT ONE IN PARTICULAR IS CNE THAT 25 I'D LIKE TO OFFER.

232 1 BY MR. VAN KLEY:

2 Q. HOW 00 YOU SPELL CARLYSS?

3 A. (MR. HENDRON) IT'S CARLYSS, 4 C-A-R-L-Y-5-S 5 Q. DO YOU KNOW THE NAME OF THE COMPANY 6 THAT'S PROPOSING THAT HAZARDOUS WASTE FILL?

7 A. WELL, THEY'RE OPERATING.

8 Q. ALL RIGHT. WHAT'S THE NAME OF THE 9 COMPANY?

10 A. THE NAME OF THE COMPANY IS WASTE' 11 MANAGEMENT, INCORPORATED.

12 hR. VAN KLEY: 1 HAVE NO FURTHER

(  ;

'NJ 13 ,

QUESTIONS, YOUR HONOR.

14 JUDGE H0YT: ALL RIGHT. ANY 15 QUESTIONS FROM THE OTHER INTERVENORS IN RELATION 16 TO FOUR?

17 MR. LODGE: YES, YOUR HONOR.

18 JUDGE H0YT: ALL RIGHT, MR.

19 LODGE.

20 CROSS-EXAMINATION 21 bY MR. LODGE:

11 22 Q. JUST TO CLARIFY, DOCTOR, YOUR DATA ON 23 TABLE 4.1 IS FROM THE TOLEDO READING STATION, I

( )

24 GUESS, AT TOLEDO HARBOR; IS THAT CORRECT?

25 A. THAT'S CORRECT. IT'S THE NOAA GAUGING

?

233 l

1 STATION.

, S 2 Q. DO YOU KNOW WHERE SAYVIEW IS, BAYVIEW, 3 OHIO?

4 A. I THINK I KNOW OF THREE BAYVIEW, OHIO'S, 5 BUT IF YOU CAN --

+

6 Q. Do YOU KNOW OF ONE IN ERIE COUNTY?

7 A. YES. NEAR THE BAY BRIDGE?

8 Q. OKAY. THAT'S --

9 A. THAT THE ONE?

10 Q. THAT WOULD DE SOMEWHERE BETWEEN SANDUSKY 11 AND DAVIS-BESSE; IS THAT CORRECT?

12 A. WELL, MUCH CLOSER TO SANDUSKY.

()

4 13 Q. OKAY. HOW FAR FROM SANDUSKY?

14 A. I BELIEVE IT'S IN THE SANDUSKY CITY 15 LIMITS. I'M NOT CERTAIN.

16 Q. HOW FAR WOULD YOU ESTIMATE BAYVIEW TO DE 17 FROM THE DAVIS-BESSE SITE?

lb A. I WOULD GIVE YOU A VERY CRUDE ESTIMATE, 19 MAYBE 20, 25 MILES.

20 Q. HOW FAR IS SANDUSKY FROM THE OAVIS-BESSE l

21 SITE. 1 22 A. 30 MILES. l 23 Q. I'LL HAVE TO CHECK MY ODOMETER ON THE WAY n

(

24 BACK.

'~ ,/

25 IN THE COURSE OF PUTTING TOGETHER YOUR

234 1 TESTIMONY, DID YOU REVIEW ANY DOCUMENTS, STUDIES 2 OR PUBLICATIONS SY THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY 3 MANAGEMENT AGENCY CONCERNING THE --

THEIR 4 DESIGNATIONS OF FLOODPLAIN AREAS?

5 A. YES, I HAVE SEEN THEIR DOCUMENTATION.

6 Q. DO YOU RECALL REVIEWING ANY DOCUMENTATION 7 THAT MAY HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED OR FINALIZED IN 1985 6 CONCERNING BAYVIEW?

9 A. NO, I'VE NOT SEEN THAT SPECIFIC REPORT ON 10 BAYVIEW.

11 Q. DO YOU RECALL REVIEWING ANY 1985 DATA ON 12 HIGH WATER MARKS OR HIGH WATER MARK MEASUREMENTS

'J

x.J 13 FROM FEMA THAT WAS PUBLISHED IN 1985?

14 A. NO. I BELIEVE FEMA, THOUGH, RELIES UPON 15 THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS AS THEIR TECHNICAL SOURCE 16 RATHER THAN HAVING THEIR OWN EXPERTISE IN THIS 17 AREA.

lE Q. DO YOU RECALL SEEING ANY REVISIONS OF ANY 19 OHIO MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS 100-YEAR FLOODPLAIN 20 LEVELS?

21 A. FOR WHAT YEAR?

22 Q. FOR 1965.

23 A. NO. I REVIEWED THE MOST RECENT

24 INFORMATION FOR OTTAWA COUNTY AND DIDN'T SEE ANY

% ,i 25 THERE.

235 m

1 Q. IN REVIEWING YOUR TABLE 4.1 --

I'D LIKE 2 TO SHARE WITH YOU SOME PROOFING THAT I'M PRIVY TO.

m 3 I SEE --

AND CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG --

THAT FOR 4 THE YEARS 1936 THROUGH 1947, YOU SHOW NO FLOODING S OF TOLEDO HARBOR MORE THAN SIX FEET ABOVE THE, I 6 GUESS, LOW WATER DATUM.

7 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

8 Q. OKAY. AND THEN FOR THE PERIOD 1948 E 9 THROUGH '71, WHICH WOULD BE 23 YEARS, I COUNT

=

10 EIGHT PLOOud UP I40Rt THAN SIX' FEET BUT LESS THAN 11 SEVEN FEET. IS THAT CORRECT?

12 A. I DIDN'T MAKE THE CALC, BUT I'LL TRUST 13 YOU.

14 Q. OKAY. YOU WOULD ACCEPT THAT FROM YOUR 15 DATA. AND I ALSO SEE 14 FLOODS FOR THE PERIOD OF, ,

16 LET'S SAY, 1972 THROUGH --

YOUR DATA ENDS IN THE 17 FIRST HALF OF 1986 --

14 FLOODS OF MORE THAN SEVEN lE FEET INCLUDING THREE OF MORE THAN EIGHT FEET.

. 19 A. YES.

20 Q. YOU WOULD ACCEPT THAT?

21 A. YES.

22 Q. DON'T YOU SEE ANY KIND OF TREND IN THAT 23 DATA?

24 A. VERY MUCH S0.

25 Q. AND WHAT IS THAT?

~

236 1 A. WE ARE EXPERIENCING A PERIOD OF 2 ABNORMALLY HIGH WATER LEVEL RIGHT NOW IN WHICH THE 3 AREA'S FLOODING MUCH MORE BECAUSE LAKE ERIE IS 4 MUCH HIGHER THAN IT HAS BEEN IN THE HISTORIC PAST.

5 Q. BUT I TAKE IT FROM YOUR EARLIER TESTIMONY 6 YOU DON'T KNOW HOW LONG A PERIOD THIS MAY BE; 7 CORRECT?

8 A. WELL, LOOK AT IT THIS WAY. WE HAVE WATER 9 LEVELS THAT GO BACK TO 1860. WE KNOW WHAT THE 10 MEAN LEVEL IS FOR THAT PERIOD. WE KNOW WE'RE 11 THREE FEET ABOVE THAT MEAN. THAT'S A FAIRLY LONG 12 PERIOD OF RECORD. IF ONE --

IF ONE DOESN'T KNOW i

'w's 13 WHETHER WE'VE HAD A CLIMATIC CHANGE --

AND WE MAY 14 HAVE HAD ONE --

CUT IF ONE --

IF WE'RE GOING 15 THROUGH THE NORMAL KIND OF CYCLIC EVENTS THAT 16 WEATHER DOES GO THROUGH, WE SHOULD EXPECT THAT WE 17 SHOULD RETURN THEN TO THE MEAN. THAT'S A LONG 10 PERIOD OF TIME ON WHICH THE MEAN WAS DETERMINED.

19 AND IF I HAD TO LAY MONEY ON WHETHER OR NOT IT'S 20 GOING TO STAY HIGH LOOKING AT 160 YEARS OF RECORD, 21 I THINK 1 WOULD VOTE FOR IT RETURNING TO A LOWER 22 PERIOD.

23 Q. 50 WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS IS YOUR LONG

( 24 VIEW WOULD BE --

YOU CAN'T INFER, FROM DATA GOING 25 BACK TO 1860, YOU CAN'T INFER, BUT YOU'RE SIMPLY

237 1 TAKING THE GAMBLE THAT THE LAKE LEVEL WILL DROP 2 BACK TO A LOWER LEVEL?

3 A. I'M USING C00D STATISTICAL PRACTICE IN 4 SAYING THAT THE LAKE LEVEL WILL RETURN TO ITS S MEAN.

6 Q. WAS THE MEASURING AS PRECISE OR 7 STANDARDIZED IN 1860 AS IT WAS IN 196L?

8 A. I BELIEVE THAT THE LEVELING WAS GOOD 9 ENOUGH TO PICK UP THESE MAJOR KINDS OF CHANGES.

10 WE PROSABLY HAVE INCREASED OUR TECHNOLOGY IN 11 COMPUTERIZATION, BUT I THINK THE LEVELS WERE

/

12 ACCURATE TO THE LEVEL OF THE --

0F OUR DISCUSSION I >

' x ,/ 13 HERE.

14 0. I TAKE IT THAT YOU'VE PROBABLY REVIEWED 15 DATA IN INTERVENING YEARS BETWEEN 1860 AND THE 16 tARLY '30's, 1930'S; IS THAT ALSO CORRECT?

17 A. YES. THE TOLEDO GAUGE WAS NOT IN lb OPERATION ALL THE WAY BACK TO 1860. WE HAD A LAKE 19 ERIE GAUGE AT CLEVELAND THAT GIVES US OUR MONTHLY 20 MEAN BASE BACK AT THAT TIME.

21 Q. H A VE YOU --

DO YOU HAVE ANY RECALL OF SO 22 LARGE AN INCREASE OVER, SAY, A 37 , 3 8-Y E A R PERIOD 23 ANYWHERE BETWEEN 16607

( 24 A. THIS IS THE MOST ABNCRMAL PERIOD THAT 25 WE'VE EVER EXPERIENCED. THE ONLY EXCEPTION IS THE

238 1 EXTREMELY LOW PERIOD THAT MIRRORS THIS THAT WE HAD 2 DURING THE DUST BOWL YEARS OF THE THIRTIES. THE 12 3 WATER LEVEL THEN WAS EXTREMELY LOW AT THAT TIME AS 4 IT IS HIGH NOW.

5 Q. IS THERE ANY MEANING YOU CAN SEE IN THE 6 LENGTH OF CYCLES? IS THERE A CYCLICAL AFFECT? IS 7 THAT YOUR ARGUMENT?

6 A. DEFINITELY THERE ARE CYCLES. THERE IS A 9 LOT OF DEBATE AS TO WHAT THE PERIOD OF THOSE -

10 CYCLES ARE. YOU SEE EVERYTHING FROM ONE-YEAR, f

11 EIGHT-YEAR, ll-YEAR, 22-YEAR, 36-YEAR, EVEN ONE

/

12 GENTLENAN SUGGESTED A 95-YEAR PERIOD OF TIME.

'x) 13 IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO VERIFY THAT.

14 THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF SPECULATION AND A 15 LOT OF MODELING DONE ON LEVELS. AND NO, I'M NOT 16 BASING MY ESTIMATES OR MY POSITION ON ANY l 17 PARTICULAR CYCLICAL MODEL. I DON'T KNOW WHEN IT'S l

18 GOING TO RETURN. I'M JUST SAYING STATISTICALLY IT {

19 SHOULD RETURN TO THE MEAN.

I 20 Q. HOW LONG WOULD IT TAKE TO RETURN TO THE 21 MEAN IF YOU ASSUME NORMAL PRECIPITATION FOR THE 22 REGION?

23 A. I WOULD SAY THAT IF WE RETURN TO NORMAL '

24 eRECIeiTATiON, WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT PROBABLY A

(} '.

25 YEAR OR MORE OF HIGHER LAKE LEVELS BECAUSE LAKE

239 1 SUPERIOR'S STANDING ABOUT ONE FOOT ABOVE AVERAGE 2 RIGHT NOW. THAT MEANS THAT WE HAVE TO RETURN THAT 3 LAKE SYSTEM TO ITS NORMAL CONDITIONS UNTIL WE CAN 4 GET THOSE --

THAT ALL THE WAY FLUSHED THROUGH OUR 5 SYSTEM. 50 WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT A SHORT PERIOD 6 0F TIME. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MANY MONTHS.

7 0. DOES YOUR DATA --

I TAKE IT YOUR DATA AND 6 YOUR TESTIMONY DOES NOT INCORPORATE ANY FACTORING S FOR LOCALIZED HIGH-VOLUME RAIN STORMS AND RUNOFF 10 THAT hlGHT CAUSE LOCALIZED FLOODING; IS THAT 11 CORRECT?

12 A. IT'S BEEN SHOWN THAT THE CONTRIBUTION OF

- x_,/ 13 RUNOFF WATER FROM LAKE ERIE --

TO LAKE ERIE FROM 14 ITS OWN CONTRIBUTARY STREAMS IS A MINOR COMPONENT 15 0F THE WATER LEVEL SITUATION IN LAKE ERIE. 95 16 PERCENT OF THE WATER ENTERING LAKE ERIE COMES IN 17 VIA THE DETROIT RIVER, SO THAT WHAT HAPPENS lb LOCALLY IS NORMALLY A FAIRLY SMALL ASPECT.

19 THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE 20 LAND FLOODING ADJACENT TO THE CONTRIBUTARIES 21 COMING IN. IT JUST MEANS THAT THE VOLUME OF WATER 22 COMING IN FROM THE OHIO CONTRIBUTARIES, LET'S SAY, ,

23 FORM % VERY SMALL COMPONENT OF THE LEVEL OF THE j 24 LAKE.

m 25 O. IN YOUR RESEARCH IN PREPARATION FOR YOUR

2 10 1 TESTIMONY, DID YOU NOTE ANY JUNE 2ND, 1966 g

2 FLOODING? I DON'T FIND IT IN TABLE 4.1.

3 A. I'M TRYING TO SEE WHAT THE CUT-OFF DATE 4 15.

5 Q. IT'S THE END OF JUNE.

6 A. THERE WAS NOT AN EVENT THAT DATE.

7 Q. ACCORDING TO YOUR DATA AT TOLEDO.

8 A. YES. CORRECT.

9 Q. TURNING TO TABLE 4.1, COULD YOU EXPLAIN 10 TECHNICALLY THE MANNER OF CALCULATING THE PERIOD 11 0F FLOODING CATEGORY, PLEASE?

12 A. THE DURATION --

r' '

! s

' s. ) 13 C. YES.

14 A. --

0F THE FLOOD TIME?

15 Q. YES.

16 A. QUITE SIMPLY, LOOKING AT THE RECORDS FROM 17 THE TOLEDO GAUGE, I NOTED THE TIME AT WHICH IT --

18 THE WATER LEVEL EXCEEDED SIX FEET ABOVE LOW WATER 19 DATUM AND THE TIME THAT IT DROPPED DOWN BELOW, AND 20 THAT SPAN OF TIME THEN IS INDICATED THERE AS THE 21 PERIOD OF TIME GIVEN IN MILITARY TIME, AND THAT 22 THEN IS THE DURATION OF THE FLOOD PERIOD. IT'S 23 EXPLAINED IN TABLE TWO, THAT MAY BE OUT OF h  ;

24 SE(UENCE WITH THE ACTUAL TIME OF OCCURRENCE AT

' ' ,-.J 1

l 25 LOCUST POINT, BUT THE DURATION SHOULD BE

241 1 APPROXIMATELY THE SAME LENGTH OF TIME.

2 MR. LODGE: NOTHING FURTHER.

3 JUDGE H0YT: VERY WELL. ARE YOU 4 PREPARED TO GO INTO QUESTION FIVE?

i 5 MS. SIGLER: I'M GOING TO 6 ADDRESS QUESTION NUMSER FIVE FOR THE STATE.

7 CROSS-EXAMINATION 8 6Y MS. SIGLER:

9 Q. MR. HERDENDORF, YOU THOUGHT YOU WERE OFF 10 THE HOOK, HUH?

11 A. (MR. HERDENDORF) I WAS HOPING.

12 Q. YOU STATED IN YOUR TESTIMONY THAT ON

\

m_) 13 APRIL STH AND JUNE STH, YOU INSPECTED THE BURIAL 14 SITE TO DETERMINE IF THERE HAD BEEN ANY SOIL 15 EROSION; CORRECT?

16 A. THAT'S CORRECT.

17 Q. AND ARE YOU ACQUAINTED AT ALL WITH THE 18 HISTORICAL USE OF THIS BURIAL SITE?

19 A. NO, I CAN'T SAY WITH ANY SPECIFICS THAT I 20 AM. IT'S BEEN UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE TOLEDO 21 EDISON COMPANY SINCE PROBABLY 19 --

LATE 1960's, 22 SUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SPECIFIC USE HAS BEEN.

23 Q. ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE AREA'S BEEN

( '/ _

24 FARMED, THERE HAVE BEEN CROPS GROWN ON THE AREA?

25 A. I ASSUME THAT SOMETIME IN ITS HISTORY IT

242 1 WAS PROBABLY WAS FARMLAND BECAUSE IT'S COMPLETELY 2 DEVOID OF ANY LARGE TREES.

3 Q. DO YOU KNOW WHEN THE LAST PERIOD OF TIME 4 THAT WAS USED FOR ANYTHING --

THE SITE WAS USED S FOR ANYTHING AT ALL?

6 A. NO, I CAN'T SAY THAT.

7 Q. FARMING ERASES ANY EVIDENCE OF EROSION, 8 DOESN'T IT?

9 A. WELL, NO, buT IT CAN MASK SMALL EROSION.

10 EUT IF YOU'RE THINKING OF SOME OF THE MAJOR 11 GULLIES, OF COURSE, THOSE WOULD TAKE MORE THAN 12 JUST NORMAL FARMING TO ERASE.

I, _

)

x.J 13 Q. ISN'T THE SITE VEGETATED RIGHT NOW?

14 A. IT IS, YES.

1S Q. 50 THIS VEGETATION, YOU'RE SAYING, THAT'S 16 ON IT RIGHT NOW WOULD MASK SOME SMALL EROSION THAT 17 YOU WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO TELL HAD OCCURRED?

18 A. WELL, THINGS I WAS LOOKING FOR WOULD BE 19 DISRUPTED VEGETATION. I WOULD HAVE SUSPECTED THAT 20 THAT KIND OF THING, EITHER DISRUPTED VEGETATION, 21 GULLYING, OR ACTUALLY DEPOSITION OF MATERIAL; 22 DURING A FLOODING EVENT, AS THE WATER SLACKENS, 23 THE MATERIAL THAT'S LEFT BEHIND IN THE WATER WOULD

( ) 24 SETTLE OUT, AND YOU MIGHT FIND A COATING OF 25 SEDIMENT ON THE PLANTS, LEAVES, AND I FOUND NO

243 l

1 EVIDENCE OF ANY OF THAT KIND OF THING.

2 Q. WELL, WHAT OTHER EVIDENCE WOULD YOU BE 3 LOOKING FOR TO FIND TO LOOK FOR SOIL EROSION?

4 A. WELL, THE EFFECTS OF FLOODING, YOU MIGHT 5 LOOK FOR TRASH LINES OR DEBRIS, THIS KIND OF 13 6 THING, LEFT BEHIND. BUT MAINLY I WAS LOOKING FOR 7 RIVULETS AND SMALL EXCAVATIONS IN THE SOIL AND 6 INTO THE SURROUNDING DIKES.

9 Q. WELL, DOESN'T EVIDENCE OF EROSION IN SOIL 10 REALLY LAST A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME?

11 A. REALLY DEPENDS ON THE CLIMATIC REGIME.

12 IN CERTAIN AREAS, EROSIONAL FEATURES CAN LAST

' _) 13 THOUSANDS OF YEARS.

14 Q. IN THIS AREA THAT WE'RE SPECIFICALLY --

15 A. IN THIS AREA, I WOULD EXPECT THAT I --

IF 16 THERE WAS SEVERE EROSION OR --

YOU KNOW, WHAT I 17 MEAN BY SEVERE EROSION, SEVERAL INCHES OF MATERIAL 18 REMOVED, THAT SHOULD PERSIST OVER A FEW SEASONS.

19 Q. A FEW SEASONS?

20 A. I WOULD THINK SO.

21 Q. WHAT ABOUT EROSION IN CLAY? DOESN'T THAT 22 GENERALLY LAST ABOUT FOUR OR FIVE YEARS, THE 23 EVIDENCE OF IT?

,o

24 A. NO. CLAY IS QUITE A RESISTANT MATERIAL.

25 IT HANGS TOGETHER QUITE WELL, AND IT DOESN'T

244 1 SLOUGH, AND SANDY --

SANDIER SOIL OR A SOIL WITH A 2 LOT OF ORGANIC MATERIAL WOULD TEND TO EVEN OUT 3 MUCH MORE EASILY THAN A HARD COMPACT CLAY WHICH 4 TENDS TO HOLD ANY FEATURE THAT'S GOUGED INTO IT.

5 Q. WELL, WOULDN'T ANY EVIDENCE OF, SAY, THE 6 1972 FLOODING BE ERASED BY NOW?

7 A. YES, I WOULD --

I WOULD THINK THAT IN 8 THAT SPAN OF TIME. I WASN'T EXPECTING TO FIND ANY 9 '72 EVIDENCE. I WAS LOOKING FOR MORE RECENT

10 EVENTS.

11 0 WHAT ABOUT FREEZE AND THAW 7 DOES THIS 12 ERASE EVIDENCE OF EROSION?

I w/ 13 A. IT CAN. I SUPPOSE IT CAN MOVE PARTICLES 14 TOGETHER.

15 Q. ISN'T IT TRUE THAT VEGETATION, WHILE IT 16 MIGHT PROVIDE SOME PROTECTION AGAINST EROSION FROM

) 17 RUNOFF, WOULDN'T PROTECT MUCH --

WOULDN'T PROTECT 18 THE AREA FROM EROSION FROM WAVE ACTION?

19 A. WELL, IT WOULD PROVIDE SOME PROTECTION, 20 SUT DEPENDING ON THE MAGNITUDE OF THE WAVE. FOR 21 EXAMPLE, THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE DOES 22 RECOMMEND PLANTING ON WATER COURSES THAT ARE 23 FAIRLY RAPIDLY MOVING STREAMS. THAT'S NOT A WAVE

!  ; 24 ACTION, BUT THAT'S FAIRLY RAPIDLY MOVING WATER.

25 WAVE ACTION HAS A LOT MORE FORCE DEHIND IT, AND A

245 i

1 BREAKING WAVE CAN BE QUITE DISRUPTIVE, AND A 2 BREAKING UAVE OF SEVERAL FEET HIGH PROBABLY CAN 3 UPLIFT VEGETATION.

4 Q. THE BURIAL CELLS, AS YOU'VE HEARD IN THE 5 PREVIOUS TESTIMONY, ARE GOING TO BE COVERED WITH A 6 GRASS.

7 A. YES. THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.

6 MR. SILBERG: I'M SORRY. THAT'S 9 THE TOP OF THE BURIAL CELLS.

10 MS. SIGLER: RIGHT, THE TOP.

11 BY MS. SIGLER:

12 Q. CAN YOU --

DO YOU KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO --

s J 13 I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS BEST ADDRESSED TO YOU OR 14 MAYBE MR. SWIM --

BUT WHAT'S GOING TO KEEP THIS 15 VEGETATION FROM D Y I ll G ? IT'S GOING TO BE ELEVATED 16 TO THE ELEMENTS, THE SUN, RAIN. WHAT'S GOING TO 17 KEEP IT FROM DYING?

18 A. THAT SOUNDS LIKE A MANAGEMENT QUESTION.

19 Q. PASS THE BUCK.

20 A. (MS. SCOTT-WASILK) IF YOU DON'T MIND, 21 I'LL ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

22 MY ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING SECTION IS 23 TASKED WITH INSPECTING THAT SITE THREE -- THREE I s 24 TIMES OR MORE PER WEEK, THEY DRIVE PAST THAT SITE

~J 25 ON INSPECTION TOURS OF THE PROPERTY, AND THINGS

246 1 THAT ARE SO O6VIOUS AS GRASS, VEGETATION, DYING 2 WOULD BE READILY DETECTED BY THEIR NORMAL ROUTINE 3 SITE INSPECTIONS THAT ARE CONDUCTED SEVERAL TIMES 4 A UEEK.

5 Q. ISN'T IT TRUE THAT YOU'RE ONLY GOING TO 6 DO AN INSPECTION OF THE SITE TWICE A YEAR?

7 A. (MS. SCOTT-WASILK) A FORMALLY DOCUMENTED 8 INSPECTION WILL BE CONDUCTED TWICE A YEAR, BUT 9 LIKE I SAID, IT'S STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE FOR 10 MY ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING SECTION TO INSPECT THE 11 SITE, DO AN ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEY, SEVERAL TIMES A 12 UEEK.

x) 13 Q. WHAT IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S DYING? ARE 14 YOU GOING TO WATER IT?

15 A. (MS. SCOTT-WASILK) CERTAINLY SOUNDS LIKE 16 A VERY PRACTICAL IDEA, IF IT LOOKS LIKE THE DYING 17 VEGETATION WILL COMPROMISE THE ABILITY OF THE DIKE 18 TO SHED WATER.

19 Q. DURING A DRY PERIOD, WILL THE DIKE BE 20 IRRIGATED TO MAINTAIN THE VEGETATION?

21 A. (MS. SCOTT-WASILK) I'D RATHER LEAVE T H A'T 22 TO THE PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL 23 PEOPLE WHEN THEY'RE --

WHEN THEY'RE CONDUCTING hm ; 24 THEIR ROUTINE SITE ENVIRONMENTAL INSPECTIONS.

25 Q. 50 YOU DON'T KNOW RIGHT NOW. IF IT WERE

247 1 TO DIE, WOULD YOU REPLANT IT?

2 A. WE*VE MADE A COMMITMENT IN THIS TESTIMONY 3 THAT WE'RE GOING TO MAINTAIN VEGETATIVE COVER, AND 4 THAT'S --

THE IMPLICATION IS WE WILL MAINTAIN IT 5 IN A LIVE STAGE, 50 IF THE VEGETATION DOES DIE, WE 6 WILL REPLANT IT TO KEEP CUR COMMITMENT.

7 Q. 50 YOU'D HAVE TO UPROOT THE SOIL TO 8 REPLANT DURING THIS PERIOD?

9 A. NOT NECESSARILY. PROBABLY THE MORE 10 KtASONAbLE PRACTICE WOULD BE TO CAST APPROPRIATE 11 SEED OUT AND THEN PUT SOME KIND OF STRAW OVER ON 12 TOP OF THAT AND NOT ACTUALLY DISRUPT THE SURFACE

~ 3 t.- 13 No MORE THAN MAYBE A QUARTER OF AN INCH.

14 Q. YOU WERE SAYING THAT YOU WOULD MOST 15 LIKELY WATER THIS IF IT WERE DRY. WOULD THIS 16 PENETRA1E THE COVER?

17 MR. SILBERG: EXCUSE ME. CAN WE 18 GET AN ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION?

19 JUDGE H0YT: YOU MEAN AS TO 20 WHETHER OR NOT IT WILL BE WATERED?

21 MR. SILBERG: YEAH.

22 MS, SIGLER: SHE HAD SAID IT l 23 WOULD BE WATERED. SHE SAID SHE DIDN'T KNOW IF IT 24 WOULD BE IRRIGATED, I BELIEVE.  !

25 dUDGE H0YT: WELL, LET'S NOT l

248 l

1 HAVE A CONFLICT. ARE YOU GOING TO WATER IT?

2 THE WITNESS: (MS. SCOTT-WASILK) 3 WE'RE GOING TO MAINTAIN THE VEGETATION IN A LIVE 4 STATE. IF THAT MEANS WE HAVE TO WATER IT TO 5 MAINTAIN THE COMMITMENT, YES.

6 JUDGE H0YT: THE ANSWER'S YES, 7 MA'AM. LET'S GO ON. WHAT WAS YOUR NEXT QUESTION 8 THEN? I THINK MR. SILBERG JUMPED IN ON THAT.

S BY MS. SIGLER:

10 Q. WOULD THIS WATER PENETRATE THE COVER?

11 A. I WOULDN'T EXPECT IT .T O HAVE ANY 14 12 DIFFERENT PENETRATING CHARACTERISTICS THAN THE l

('xj \

~-

13 RAIN WATER.

14 Q. WHEN THE VEGETATION DIES, DOESN'T IT l 15 LEAVE ROOTS? DOESN'T IT LEAVE CHANNELS GOING DOWN 16 IN, ROOT h0LES?

17 A. THE GRASS ITSELF IS GOING TO PENETRATE 18 INTO THE TOPSOIL. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE {

19 CLAY CAP RIGHT NOW.

20 Q. WELL, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO KEEP SAPLINGS 21 AND OTHER THINGS FROM GROWING IN THIS AREA THAT 22 WOULD PENETRATE THE CLAY? FOR INSTANCE, 23 DANDELIONS WHICH CAN GO DOWN 36 INCHES AND CAN

('x; 24 PENETRATE CLAY.

25 A. THAT'S --

THAT'S --

THAT PARTICULAR 4

249 1 SITUATION IS SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD ASSESS AT THE 2 TIME OF OUR 06SERVATIONS. IF WE FELT THAT 3 SAPLINGS OR DANDELIONS WERE COMPROMISING THE 4 INTEGRITY OF THE CLAY LINER, WE WOULD DEAL WITH IT 5 AT THAT TIME. THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY WE'RE 6 DOING THOSE SEMI-ANNUAL FORMAL INSPECTIONS.

7 Q. S0 YOU REALLY DON'T KNOW AT THIS POINT; 8 IS THAT RIGHT?

9 A. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF --

THERE ARE 10 SOME -- BY DEFINITION, THERE ARE SOME UNKNOWNS; 11 DANDELIONS SAMPLINGS. THAT'S WHY WE ARE COMMITTED 12 TO THE SEMI-ANNUAL FORMAL INSPECTIONS.

'wj 13 Q. NOW, EARLIER, I THINK MR. SWIM SAID THAT 14 ON THE AREA -- ON THE AREA ON THE EDGE OF THE 15 CELL 5 IT'S GOING TO BE QUITE THIN, THE TOPSOIL?

16 NO? WHERE IT'S ONLY GOING TO BE, WHAT?

17 A. TWO FEET.

16 , Q. TWO FEET. BUT THE TOPSOIL --

HOW THICK 19 DO YOU EXPECT THE TOPSOIL TO BE ON THE EDGES?

20 A. (MR. SWIM) WE HAVEN'T DETERMINED EXACTLY 21 HOW THICK THE TOPSOIL WILL BE OVER THE CLAY COVER 22 AS OF YET.

23 Q. WILL IT BE LESS THICK THAN IT IS IN THE 24 MIDDLE?

^

,)

25 A. I EXPECT A MORE UNIFORM DISTRIBUTION OF

250 1 THE TOPSOIL ACROSS THE ENTIRE COVER.

2 Q. BUT YOU'RE NOT CERTAIN AT THIS POINT?

3 A. UE DON'T HAVE A FINALIZED DESIGN SHOWING 4 THAT, NO. THE TOPSOIL WILL NOT BE TAPERED IN THE 5 SAME MANNER THAT THE CLAY LINER IS TAPERED. IT 6 WILL FOLLOW THE CONTOUR OF THE CLAY LINER IN A

, UNIFORM MANNER, 8 Q. 50 IF THE TOPSOIL'S GOING TO BE UNIFORM, 9 THERE'S GOING TO BE LESS CLAY LINER ON THE END OF 10 THE CELLS?

11 A. NO. THE THICKNESS OF THE CLAY TOP IS 12 ALREADY TREATED, IN OUR PRELIMINARY DESIGN IS

'x. 13 ALREADY SET AT TWO FEET. ANYTHING --

THE GRAVEL 14 AND THE TOPSOIL WILL BE ABOVE AND ON TOP OF THAT 15 CLAY LINER. IT WILL NOT BE A TOTAL.0F TWO FEET, 16 PART OF WhICH IS MADE UP OF TOPSOIL AND CLAY. IT 17 WILL BE A TWO-FOOT CLAY MINIMUM.

18 Q. KNOWING THE AREA, WHAT OTHER --

I'VE 19 NENTIONED SAMPLINGS AND DANDELIONS. IS THERE SOME 20 OTHER COVER THAT COULD GROW IN THIS AREA THAT 21 YOU'RE AWARE OF7 22 NR. SILBERG: I'M SORRY. ARE YOU 23 REFERRING TO --

m 24 MS. SIGLER: OTHER VEGETATION

- ~j 25 THAT COULD GROW IN THIS AREA.

251 1 MR. SILBERG: THE RECOMMENDED 2 COVER THAT'S --

3 MS. SIGLER: NO. NO. I MEAN 4 THAT COULD GROW WILD IN THIS AREA THAT COULD GROW 5 IN THE TOPSOIL OR ON TOP OF THE CELLS.

6 A. (MS. SCOTT-WASILK) MOST OF THE WILD --

7 UILD GRASSES THAT ARE FOUND IN THE AREA I WOULD G EXPECT TO SEED THEMSELVES TO SOME DEGREE ON THE 9 TOP OF THE DIKED AREA. IT'S NOT GOING TO T H E' --

10 THE TOPSOIL THERE WILL NOT HAVE THE 11 CHARACTERISTICS THAT ARE MUCH DIFFERENT THAN THE 12 TOPSOIL IN THE SURROUNDING AREA.

\-x_/ 13 Q. WHAT ABOUT THE --

WON'T THERE BE HOLES 14 LEFT IN THE TOPSOIL AND PERHAPS THE CLAY FROM 15 DECAYING ROOTS?

16 A. (MS. S CO TT-W AS I L K) IN MY EXPERIENCE --

17 AGAIN, I'M NOT A SOILS BIOLOGIST --

BUT NORMALLY 18 I --

IN NORMAL GARDENING, THAT'S NORMALLY NOT A 19 CONSIDERED A PROBLEM.

20 (. WELL, THIS ISN'T A NORMAL GARDEN.

21 MR. SILBERG: IS THAT A QUESTION?

22 MS. SIGLER: NO.

1 23 JUDGE H0YT: STATEMENT. '

[ , 24 BY MS. SIGLER:

._)

25 Q. MR. SWIM, ON PAGE 18 0F YOUR TESTIMONY

252 1 YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE CAPr AND YOU SAID THAT 2 THE CELL WOULD BE CAPFED WITH A TWO-TO-FOUR-FOOT 3 THICK COVER CONSISTING OF A LOWER COMPACTED C I. A Y 4 LAYER, A SAND AND GRAVEL FILTER, AND AN UPPER 5 LAYER OF TOPSOIL.

6 CONSIDERING WHAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT, 7 CAN YOU EXPLAIN THIS IN A LITTLE MORE DETAIL JUST 8 EXACTLY WHAT THIS CAP IS GOING TO BE?

9 A. (MR. SWIM) YOU MEAN THE -- BEFORE YOU 10 WERE TALKING ABOUT THE SIDES AND THE BOTTOM.

11 O. RIGHT.

12 A. NOW YOU'RE ASKING THE QUESTION AS TO WHAT

( <

' x ./ 13 THE CAP WILL BE?

14 Q. THE DIMENSIONS OF THE CAP, SIDE AND 15 BOTTOM, OR TOP.

16 A. THE CAP IN THE MIDDLE, THE PEAK OR THE 17 CROWN WILL BE APPROXIMATELY FOUR FEET THICK AND

\

16 WILL TAPER TO A POINT WHERE IT COVERS THE RESIN 19 MATERIAL OR SLUDGE TO A THICKNESS OF NO LESS THAN 20 TWO FEET.

21 MR. SILBERG: EXCUSE ME. JUST TO 22 CLARIFY --

MAYBE THIS IS THE POINT THAT'S 23 CONFUSING PEOPLE. THE FOUR FEET AND THE TWO FEET

[ 'x 24 IS ALL COMPACTED CLAY; IS THAT CORRECT?

% ,)

25 THE WITNESS: (MR. SWIM) THAT'S

252

, 1 YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE CAP, AND YOU SAID THAT 2 THE CELL WOULD BE CAPPED WITH A TWO-TC-FOUR-FOOT 3 THICK COVER CONSISTING OF A LOWER COMPACTED CLAY 4 LAYER, A SAND AND GRAVEL FILTER, AND AN UPPER 5 LAYER OF TOPSOIL.

6 CONSIDERING WHAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT, 7 CAN YOU EXPLAIN THIS IN A LITTLE MORE DETAIL JUST 8 EXACTLY WHAT THIS CAP IS GOING TO BE?

9 A. (MR. SWIM) YOU MEAN THE --

BEFORE YOU 10 WERE TALKING ABOUT THE SIDES AND THE BOTTOM.

11 O. RIGHT.

12 A. NOW YOU'RE ASKING THE QUESTION AS TO WHAT Q 13 THE CAP WILL BE? j 14 Q. THE DIMENSIONS OF THE CAP, SIDE AND 15 BOTTOM, OR TOP.

16 A. THE CAP IN THE MIDDLE, THE PEAK OR THE 17 CROWN WILL BE APPROXIMATELY FOUR FEET THICK AND 16 WILL TAPER TO A POINT WHERE IT COVERS THE RESIN i

19 MATERIAL OR SLUDGE TO A THICKNESS OF NO LESS THAN 20 TWO FEET. )

l 21 MR. SILBERG: EXCUSE ME. JUST TO I

22 CLARIFY --

MAYBE THIS IS THE POINT THAT'S i l

23 CONFUSING PEOPLE. ThE FOUR FEET AND THE TWO FEET

( ) 24 IS ALL COMPACTED CLAY; IS THAT CORRECT?

25 THE WITNESS: (MR. SWIM) THAT'S (

i

253 1 CORRECT. AS I SAID EARLIER, THAT'S THE LLAY 2 ITSELF. THAT LOES NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUhT THE 3 GRAVEL AND TOFSOIL WHICH UE WOULC PLACE ON TOP OF 4 THAT. THOSE ARE M I N I l'. U l . S FOR THE CLAY CAF.

5 BY hs. S I G L E fs :

6 0 ThlS SEENS SONEUHAT CONSISTENT --

4 7 INCONSISTENT hlTH UHAT'S ON THE SOTTOM OF PAGE 18.

4 b MR. SILbERG: I Th!NK THE WITNESS 9 HAS TESTIFIED. I THINK THAT EXPLAINS -

10 MS. 5IGLER: THE T E S T I I'.O N Y IS 11 S GM E Uii A T CIFFERENT FROi, bHAT S IN --

12 hh. SILGERG: UELL, THE TESTIMONY 13 UILL SPEAK FOR ITSELF. I THINK THE WITNESS HAS u

14 STATED UHAT IT WILL EE. I THINK IT IS CONSISTENT

, 15 UITH THE TESTIMONY.

16 dUDGE HOYT: ThAT'S IN THE F0FM 17 OF OBJECTION, MR. SILBERG?

i lb MR. SILbERC: ATTEMPT TO CLARIFY 15 UHAT I THINK IS A i'. I S U N D E R S T A N D I N G .

i 20 LY MS. SIGLER:

21 (: . WELL, I hA\E A (UESTIOf; CN INSECT 22 EURRGUS. CAN INSPECTS D U R R O ti THROUGH THE COVER 23 AND ALD PERhEAEILITY TO THE BURIAL CELLS?

24 A. (kn. SUIM) DO YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC INSECT 25 IN li I i4 D ?

1

}

254 i

1 G. NO.

2 A. I'M NCY A BIOLOGIST AND I'D HAVE TO DEFER 3 POSSIBLY TO A 11 E M E E F. ON THE PANEL.

4 Q. DOES ANYONE --

CAN ANYONE ELSE ON THE 5 PANEL ADDRESS IT?

I C MAYEE t. E CAG TALK ABOUT E A R T H W C R t4 5 .

l I

l 7 MS. SCOTT-UASILK: THEY'RE NOT 8 !NSECTS.

S hk. SWIN: YEAH, IT'S NOT AN 10 INSECT.

j 11 A. (DR. JACKSGN) WELL, IF WE COULL A5R thd 12 C U E S T I O t.: WOULD THERE LE PEF 1 HAPS AN ANT COLONY 13 ThAT LOULD ESTAELISh ITSELFi ThESE TEND TO BE i

l 14 KELATIVELY SHALLGU, PARTICULARLY IN RELATIVELY DRY J

15 /s R E A S l. E E R E ThE FOCL SUPPLY IS RESTRICTED, THEY 16 MIGHT HAVE A VERY E X P A l: D E D SERIES OF TUNNELS /Nb d

17 C H A l'.L E R S , EUT IT'S A VERY POROUS SCRT OF T h I t!G , 50 1

10 IT DOESN'T PROVIDE A ONE-UAY CHUTE FR0!i THE TOP TO IS THE BOTTOM, AND ONCE THAT COLONY DIED OUT O F. 1l /. S

! 20 NO L 0 t: C E r, ACTIVE, THOSE GALLERIES WOULD VERY

'4 1

21 QUICKLY CULL /PSE ANE UGULD NOT CONSTITUTE A 5

22 ERCSION CHANNEL. SC THAT I CON'T SEE THAT AN i

. 23 INSECT I N F E S T /s T I O N CR THAT E A R T H b O E l'. DURROWS WGULD 24 LE ThAT EXTENSIVE. IF l. E DON'T HAVE THE GIANT

.I i 25 AUSTRALIAN EARThbORMS THAT DIG AROUND HERE FOR US.

1 4

- - - n

e l 255-BUT I DON'T SEE_THE ANIMAL' ACTIVITY OCCURRING, THE

~

f 1 1

2 INSECT ACTIVITY, ThE INVERTE6 RATE ACTIVITY

! 3 OCCURRING IN THE TOP TWO' FEET.0F SOIL BEING ,

l 4 SOMETHING UNICH WOULD C O tiP R O M I S E THAT LAYER.

5 Q. COULD!4'T THEY ADD TO THE PERMEABILITY OF l l i 6 THAT LAYER, THEIR bUFROWINGS? i l

7 A. LELL, THE --

THE TOP TUO FEET IS A l i

l i

6 BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONf;ENT IN WHICH YOU HAVE PLANTS '

l 9 GROWING, IN WHICH YOU HAVE SOIL INVERTEBRATES. IT I I

f 10 ALREADY IS POROUS. THE U tlD E R L Y I liG CLAY LAYER IS i  ;

l j 11 THE IMPERVIOUS LAYER.  !

I f 12 Q. LELL, IT NAKES THE CLAY SO IT'S NC LONGER ]

13. AS COHPACTED; ISN'T THAT RIGHT?

14 A. WELL, YOU AREN'T --

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT l J r

15 THE INSECT ACTIVITY, THE INVERTEBRATE ACTIVITY l 1

l l 16 OCCURRING Ih THE AREA ADOVE THE CLAY. THIS IS IN l l t t

l 17- SOIL, UNICH IS MAYBE A RELATIVELY HEAVY SOIL, BUT j i

j 16 IT'S NOT A CLAY LAYER IN THE. SENSE OF THE l I

f 19 IMPERVIOUS CAP. I 20 Q. ARE YOU SUGGESTING THERE ARE NC INSECTS t

l 21 THAT ARE GOING TO ENTER THE CLAY LAYER?

22 A. I'M NOT SURE I CAN SAY THERE ARE 23 ALSOLUTELY NO INSECTS THAT ARE GOING TO ENTER THE l l

24 CLAY LAYER. IT'S A LAYER WHICH WOblD BE VERY 25 DIFFICULT FOR INSECTS TO ENTER, TO SURVIVF IN, TO 1

256  !

i 1  !

l .  ;

l TUNNEL IN. I T.' S N0T A LAYER THAT WOULD BE

( ,

2 TYPICALLY PENETRATED BY AN INVERTEBRATE .

i 3 POPULATION. THEY'RE GOING TO BE F E E D I t1 G AND i I

4 D E P E !4 D I N G ON NUTRIENTS CR FOOD ON THE SURFACE OR '

5 NEAR THE SURFACE, AND THE FURTHER THEY GET FROM  !

l 6 THE SURFACE, THE LESS OF .THOSE NUTRIENTS ARE G O I l1 G f 7 TO BE AVAILABLE. THERE'S NOTHING TO EAT IN A CLAY- )

l i f 8 LAYER. I

' t

{ 9 Q. LELL, WHAT ABOUT BURROWING ANIMALS SUCH l

l  !

l 10 A5 GROUNDHOGS? CAN THEY GET THROUGH THE RIP-RAP e i

l' l 11 AND CURROW INTO T ii E COVER? ,

12 A. GROUNDHOGS CERTAINLY WOULD BE A LARGER 13 KIND OF ANINAL THAT COULD, IF.THE RIP-RAP WERE NOT 14 SECURELY OR 140T FULLY IN PLACE, Kt10 C K A BOULDER I i

15 OUT OR SOME STONES OUT. THEY'D BE MORE LIKELY,  !

I 16 HOWEVER, I THINK IN THIS SITUAT10Nr. .TO GO IN AT 17 THE TOP WHERE DIGGING WAS A WHALE OF A LOT EASIER 1  !

18 THAN KNOCKING ONES TEETH AGAINST A BUNCH OF l l

t i 19 STONES. AND THIS, I THINK, WOULD BE PART OF THE r

20 NORMAL MONITORING THAT WOULD GO ON AS A PART OF L i 21 THE --

ThAT'S bEEN INDICATED IN THE TESTIMONY i

22 WE'VE ALREADY HEARD.

l 23 Q. BUT THESE ANIMALS WOULD Go INTO THE CLAY ,

24 LAYER; CORRECT?

( w 25 A. NOT IF THEY GOT SOMETHING EASIER TO DIG, 1

l t

, 257 i

l I

1 IN-. AND YOU H\VE GIVEN THEh TWO FEET OF SOIL, 2 LhlCH IS A LOT EASIER TO DIG I -4 THAN CLAY, SO THAT j 3 AS LONG AS THERE'S PLENTY.OF PLACES TO DIG, I 1

i 4 WOULD NOT EXPECT THEN TU GO INTO THE CLAY.

i 1 .

4 l

5 I: THINK FURTHER ,Y O U NEED TO LOOK_AT THE ,

4

! 6 SITUATION, ThERE IS A GRAVEL BARRIER, AND RODENTS >

l ,

l 7 hAVE A TERRIBLE TIME G0 LNG THROUGH GRAVEL  !

o  ;

6 UARRIERS. ThEY 'STAni DIGflNG, AND ALL OF A SUDDEN  !

! 9 THE STONES F A L'U Iff WhERE THEY'RE DIGGING, AND THEY i

j 4

10 GET DISCOURAGED VERY'CUICKLY. AND THIS KIND OF AN l

f a

E N V I R 0 i; N E N T , INSTEAD OF G'01111 G DOUN, IMEY'LL GC f - . ,

12 LATERALLY.

l 13 C. I LNLERSTAND THAT THEY ARE SORT OF THE i

i 14 SCOURGE OF THE D I .( E S ALONG LAKE ERIE, 'BUT HAVE YOU 15 EVER SEEN A; GROUNCHOG THAT DION'T DURROW DOWN l

16 FURTHER T tit h 'Y L O FEET?

{

17 A. W H El[ Y G li SAY "DOWN", YOU MEAN D0hN FROM 18 THE SURFACE OR T H *~ _BURROU IS SHORTER _THAN TUG I

l I 19 FEET? I l

2C Q. YHEy D0fi'T SThY THAT NEAR THE SURFACE.

l 21 A. YEAH, I'VE SEEN SOME THAT, STAY THAT CLOSE I

l I- 22 TO THE SURFACE. '

23 Q. IT'S LMUSUAL, T H O.U G H , ISN'T-IT FOR

• l f ,

)

l 24 GROUNDHOG TO STAY THAT CLOSE TO THE SURFACE 7 l l l 25 A.' IT.

, THE{ WILL DO I

j \

i I

i  ;

' ~ '

( , n j

t__.__,-.__- n

.. .. ,_. ,. =- __ ._

. '256' N p

J l Q. I S N .' T ' I T' U N U'S U A L ,. T H O U G H 7-- ,

2 .A~. DEPENDS ON T'HE;CIRCOMSTANCES..

A

~

T3 Q. ARE THERE GOING 'T O' - B E." A N Y ~ P R E C A U T'I O N S I

4 TAKEN'AT THE-SITE TO KEEP THESE ANIMALS OUT?

1 .

5, A.- (MS. SCOTT-WASILK) WE H A V EA STAN'DARD  !'

[

l t ~

! 6 POLICY WHEN W E ' --- - A N I M A L CONTROL' POL. ICY WE'VE I 1

~

l 7 WORKED-OUT FOR THE NAVARRE MARSH-PORTION.J0FiOUR t

~8 PROPERTY AND HAVE A METHOD THAT'S.'BEEN APPRO'EDIBY V

-l .

j 9 FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE ~TO S P.E C I F I C A L L Y ; C O N T R O L.

10 GROUNDHOGS ON DIKE STRUCTURES', SO WE'RE VERY.

l 11 PRACTICED.AT THAT.

~

i 12 Q. MR.'HERDENDORF>-'-

4 13 JUDGE H 0 Y T-: M I S S =S I G L E R ,'-I T 'I S' l .

14 5:00, AND I hAVE A.COMMI'TMENT ,T O END THESE -

15 HEARINGS IN THIS FACILITY A T --A R O U N D. 5 : 0 0.. WE-HAVE

!- 16 EXCEEDED OUR TIME. I WONDER'IF WE ARE'AT A ~- G O O D i

17 PLACE TO BREAK IN YOUR QUESTIONS.

! '18 MS. . S I G' L E P, : SURE.- I CAN START 19- TOMORROW.

20 JUDGE H0YT:s WE'VE'HAD.LALL'I 21 THINK WE-CAN TAKE OF GROUNDHOGS.- BUT.-WE'LL RESUME!.

22 TOMORROW AT 9:30, 'A N D YOU CAN CONTINUE -Y O U R: ,

23 QUESTIONING. t l

24 THE HEAPING IS RECESSED.

NJ  :

l 25 - - -

4

. _ . _ . . . _ _ - . _ .- - _ _ . _ . _ . . . , _ ~ _ . . . _ . . . _ . . _ . . . ~ . . ~.

v /.

\ '

, 259 i 4 ,

I i

16 / (THEREUPONr THE. HEARING WAS RECESSED AT

.I >I 2 5:07 P.M., TO BE RECONVENED AT 9': 3 0 A.M. ON

[

3 WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 6, 1986.)

l

}f o

bl6 r

4 - - -

j 5 i s I F

~

i 6

/

,. i r i ij/

(I

,e c

i i i 0 t r

$ t

! 9 10 m

11 >

i 12 13 l

! 14 ,

, 15 ,

J > / 1 4 / #

t 16 j ,,

t

.i l 17 , , ,

(

18 j i l'  :

)

i 19 .

t j'

/ -

4

? .. o 1*

, i 20 , ./ -

i I

i 21 I I

l t

') ,~

22 r f

1 ,'t

! 23 . l .- [

l h, .

4

!:; 25 t e.

}

4 /

( ', . - C

,,1' .! .

,l.L--- ----------- .-- .-- - -. . - _- - :_L ._-_ _ .__ _ .

l I

1 C E R T I F I C A T E 2 - - -

l 3 WE, KENDRA E. JOHNSTON AND CYNTHIA J.

4 fi E F F , REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL REPORTERS AND I

5 fl0TARIES PUBLIC IN AND FOR THE STATE OF OHIO, DO 6 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING IS A TRUE AND l l

7 CORRECT TRANSCRIPT OF THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE 8 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY 9 COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD, ON 10 TUESDAY, AUGUST 5, 1986, AS REPORTED BY US IN 11 STEN 0 TYPE AND TRANSCRIBED BY US OR UNDER OUR 12 SUPERVISION.

() 13 y . .. ,

14 /:

i 15 -

KENDRA E. JOHN TON,'R.P.R.

16 NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR  !

THE STATE OF OHIO j 17 1 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: JULY 13, 1967  ;

18  !

l 15 ,

4 1 l 3

20 -

/ )

- - . - - - - - - - - . - ---------- i 21 CYNTHIA J. NEFF, R.P.R.

NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND F O Ps l 22 THE STATE OF OHIO' I

\

23 MY COMMISSION E X P I Ps E S : NOVEMBER 8, 1966 T 24 - - -

25

.. . .- ..