ML20211D103

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Summary of Meeting with Dow Chemical Re Disposal of Stag Piles Currently Located on Dow Property in Midland & Bay City,Mi.Licensee Perferred Transferring Slag Piles from Current Location to Salzburg Landfill for Disposal
ML20211D103
Person / Time
Issue date: 07/17/1987
From: Lasuk S
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
NRC
Shared Package
ML20211C526 List:
References
FOIA-99-270 NUDOCS 9908260174
Download: ML20211D103 (40)
v • d • e


Text

t

~

  • A C 8 4

/ yYg +/ "'

UNITED STATES

) =

f  %,

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[  ; + S j nEciou m l  ;

d vienooseveLv noao '

cLEN ELLYN. ILLINOIS 60137

....+

1 JUL 1i 1E l

MEMORANDUM F#

O 1

THRU: h /

on 2 FROM:

SUBJECT:

nL s g contractor, and disposal v. ment we . .. nv 3.

3 piies cur i enus i vu o i.eu un ov. vi vpe 6y in Midland and Bay City, Michigan. The meeting was chaired by George Bruchmann, Chief, Division of Radiological Health, MDPH. NRC attendees included Germain (Gerry) LaRoche, Division of Fuel Cycle, Medical, Academic, and Commercial Use Safety-HQ, Derek A. Widmayer, Division of Low-Level Waste Management and Decommissioning-HQ, plus R. Lickus and S. Lasuk of the Region III office. I The licensee's representative, Ric Olson, Manager, Environmental Regulatory Activities-Special Projects, initiated the licensee's presentation with a handout on Dow's Thorium Storage Sites as of November 13, 1986 (see i

' Enclosure 1). He then reviewed some background information regarding the slag piles and Dow's Salzburg landfill (see Enclosure 2); the landfill is in Midland, Michigan (see Enclosure 3). Mr. Robert Berlin, an engineer with Dames and Moore, discussed the various disposition alternatives, showing advantages and disadvantages of each (see Enclosure 4).

The licensee's preferred alternative is to transfer the slag piles from their current location to the Salzburg landfill for disposal. However, this means of disposal would require authorization from NRC, the State of Michigan, and probably other governmental agencies.

The slag pile at Midland is adjacent to a water diversion tesin which must be closed by November 1988; however, due to requirements of the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the slag pile would have to be removed before closure of the basin can be completed.

9908260174 990024 Y I PDR FOIA ERMISCH99-270 PDR QC i D j M0 )'j y

e

' Region III Files 2 JUL 17 1sg7 No decision was made, or expected, at this meeting regarding which disposition alternative should be. pursued by the licensee. The NRC-HQ representatives indicated the information presented at this meeting would be reviewed with their management and hopefully they would be able to get back to the licensee soon with some guidance.

During the previous day, July 7,1987, Mr. Olson escorted the NRC representatives and Mr. Dennis Hahn, MDPH, on a tour of the slag pile sites and the Salzburg landfill facility.

b ([

Stanley R. Lasuk -

Radiation Specialist

Enclosures:

As stated cc: D. G. Wiedeman

t .

bec: T. Parsons, 474

- G. Engdahl,1803 L. Rampy, 1803 J. Ulrich, 47 l

  • - DOW CHEMICAL U.S.A. J. Howell, 47 W. Delaney .

M. Rio November 13, 1986 'RA0 Corres. File MIDLAND. MICHtGAN 48667 Mr. Dennis Hahn .

MI Department of Radiological Health 3500 N. Logan Lansing, MI 48909

Dear Mr. Hahn:

SUBJECT:

DOW'S THORIUM STORAGE SITES This is in response to your request for updates on the current status, Dow's positions on the alternatives and a summary of the environmental monitoring data of the Midltnd and Bay City Thorium Storage Sites licensed under the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (STS-527).

Included with this letter are three attachments. Attachment A contains a summary of the Bay City Thorium Storage Site. Attachment B sumarizes the Midland Thorium Storage Site and Attachment C lists the disposal alternatives and our current position on them.

The Thorium Storage Area at the l'ay City Site was recovered with an asphalt sealant in 1984. The storage area in Midland was covered with 1-2 foot clay cap in 1983. The sites are fenced and posted with caution radioactive material signs. Both sites have been regularly monitored with summaries of the data included in the attachments.

Our preferred approach at this time would be for the material to be disposed at a Dow facility. However, significant legislative and regulatory hurdles exist. We are working toward this end.

Sincerely, k . A. 0 ban R. A. 01 son Environmental Services Trailer 1564 (517)636-3916 bt

! Attachments

! 4 l

ENCLOSURE $

maQualitus l

' PiiHermance Maru Mwv 4 Dow AN OPERATING UNIT OF THE DOW CHEMICAL COMPAHY L

I l-l l

\* .

I t

i ATTACHMENT A i

SUMMARY

OF l

BAY CITY THORIUM STORAGE SITE l

l l

Figure 1. Map of Michigan and Bay City Figure 2. Location of Storage Site ,

f Figure 3. Location of Sample Borings Figure 4 Groundwater Flow l

t Soil Data Summary l

l Water Data Summary

, Air Data Summary l I External Radiation Data Summary I

l

! i

4-e 4

> b

M cW

- CF s-hO s' n t.

~

=

e

,5 3 C

- x _. . C_

.E ;;

8 r .

sc e .

gj A E t'

.. w as b I I

. Eb' E< -

, . .. =

L E C C

h J \

h E D( %\

k t,'

N

. g p h

\

\\ .

\'\ \\

E V

C c-

g. c: ,. / ,3 s __/, t \.. t .

~

f C I

\

)j .

E .

-.h k e i

g........ ,

l ,f i .

s f .

4 -

, h w

  • m
  • n

'.g 4 y/ *

    • s ed f...

- eI .,,2

  • i i Cl -

%w

. =r*,

s u (

E- '

. Na E

6 j g . , . . . . . . . . ... 3. . .j,;, j 1

. .: e /

- st q 1 ,

) N D s .

w ts 11 k

l k

\

  • C

'I f 2

- I e,

NC/1715 Cyyng jgyCD CJ 07M I

l

E i en f

. h,, e o E G i,

2 o m E ]S.# -

St ,

~2

  • e 3 .

. a,

w. - t-

<~ o ,

&i %ra..

p W?,*

>F5 52 S 4@l

' V. g5 12 4

g 5 $3 d $Sh We=

0 (Y

  • 2
  • y ~r

. *y El e C '

J 4 20 k WSb r NO*

Bd!

h tl

> c <  ;

@ 'h x Zo2 D2u ,

h. t @<-

w h i

' e o

G e l h

w, I e . -

/Wc M l st, .

. . .c

-e 14hir- . t

%% ~.i-y --s *

%? .R e O .

I

  • s' s-t '

\ l s .-  ; ,

r. 1

%o l

.s -2 .'

I o' o l

'. A 9 1 .

b e. o l .

Y4 J D') So hO V a. tg i 6.- q'N ti ' P I

  • din. D .

,g

, \ t

< c.

e-

. s, o

e y &* B-cw F" C

g# -__ E v WD g I i -

<c 3 ,

e e

.M >& -

ti ,

5 *

[-\:' -. Gf a

k k 5

i

  1. A

?

-='**---Z i

l I

I

! B-11 l

t

. i

  • e EAY CITY THORIUM sIORAC-E SITE TECHNICAL DATA WATE oat 3 Di i DEsc4T: TOM REsotTs 1/70 WATER SAMPLE FROM POND NEAR P!LE. <0.1 PCI/G

. 9/71 WATER SAMPCE FOR TH FROM INLET <0.6 PCI/G CANAL DOW/ STATE 4/71 ICE SAMPLE FROM POND NEAR FILE <0.4 PCI/G S177 8 WATERISEDIMENT SAMPLES SY DOW

<! PCI/G 12/77 10 TEST WELLS DRILLED TO DETERMINE FLOW TOWARD INLET WATER FLOW kND' ELEVATION. CANAL AND BAY

',2/73 WATER LE ACHI.'!G OF IHORIUM FROM (0.5 G TH SLUDGE AT PH 2. 7. 10 BY DOW 2173 COW LEAC.HING STUDY OF THORIUM' 10 DAYS AND DAUGHTERS FROM SLUDGE AT INITi2l STELOY STATE t

PH 2 36 PCl!G 10 PCI/G PH 7 13 FCI/G E PCI/G FM 10 '

13 PCI/G 3 FCI!G 9/73 URC SAMPLES OF WELL, CANAL AND

<2 PCI/L - 4.0 PCI/L l

POMD WASTE - 6 SAMPLES

p i

?

i L EAY CITY THORIUM STCRAGE SITE TECHNICAL DATA e

! SOIL DATA l

}

l-Elli DE?C9I:TTON RESULTs 7/55 3 SOIL BORINGS TO DETERMINE CLAY 6-16 FT j 1

i COMPOSITION OF SOIL  ;

1 l 1/'57 3 SOIL BORINGS TO DETERMINE CLAY 6-16 FT l COMFO!! TION OF SOIL i

l 4/59 3 SOIL E0 RINGS TO DETERMINE CLAY 6-16 FT L . COMFOSITION OF SOIL

! . 1/70 4 SOIL SAMFLES PERIPHERY OF PILE 0.1 - 0.6 FCI/G l

4/71 25 SOIL SAMPLES TAKEN l' SELOW <0.7 PCI/G SURFACE AT 5', 50' AND 100' NE.

]

l TN. N. W FOND 6 SAMPLES WERE SLIGFTLY A50VE 0.9 - 2.0 PCIIG l i

EACKSROUND l

l 4!71 5 SOIL SAMPLES (DCW AND ST ATE) 1.E - 5.5 FCI/G s J.. :.

. I c, ,.i .. .-..- : s .a.. :. r--. :. :.

l 1 SOIL SAMPLE (DCW AND STATE) 34 PCI/G i

I1SIOE PILE ARE A \

! MUCK SAMPLE FROM FON 2.5 PCI/G.

l

EAY. CITY THORIUM STORAGE SITE TECHillCAL DATA E'<TERMAL RADIATION El 1 DEic:': 10N REFULTS 1/63 MEAsUREnENT OF EXTERNAL RADI- 2 - 2 5 MR/Ha ATION LEVELS IN CENTER OF PILE CN SURFACE' 1/53 waist LEVEL 0 5 - 1 5 eR/sa 1/E3 RoA:wAY Atac!Nins PILE <0 5 MR/sa 1/E3 RcA:wAY scuTx cF FILE HEstisIELE 4/71 R. D. OLSON - VICTOKEEN 440 0 5 - E.4 MR/sa 57 nEA !Nas 2' AEevE PILE Ave = 3 1 MR/sn 4/71 Outs!DE FENCE <0 5 nR/sa PosTro nAcrATION AaEA RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL E/77 R.A.OtsonVICTonn$N470A SAME As 4/71 EXTERNAL ON AND AROUND FILE 1975- ExTraNAL sUavEys CcN:u TE: 0 35 - 3.7 MR/sp.

195E- ONFILE E78- AT FEIE .63 .90 6/HR E35 OtrrsIDE OF PILE .02 .18 W/HR l

i 1

l 1

I I

p

, BAY CITY THORIUM STORAGE SITE TECHNICAL DATA l

SLUDG DATA l

Difi dei 64tETi6s Ris0Cis

, 3/63 ANALYSIS OF % IH IN SLUDGE - 23 - 3 6 TH

8 SAMPLES 10/70 ESTIMATION OF SIZE OF SLUDGE 4 64 b POUNDS PILE - 390 PILES

~

12/70 LETTER TO VAN FARROWE ESTIMATE 4 64 b POUNDS SLUDGE ACTIVITY 4/71 ESTIMATION OF SLUDGE ACTIVITY 4 64 b POUNDS OR 2320 YD R. D. OLSON REPORT 1 7 x 10-3 p CI/a 19,850 #/Ci 3 4 CURIES 67,000 #5 TH 4/71 R. D. OLSON REPORT - SAMPLES 1 x 10 -6 p Ct/sRAM TO DETERMINE SLUDGE ACTIVITY 7 x 10 -3 p C1/enAM 42 SAMPLES AVG = 1.7 x 10 -3 U C1/sRAM 4/71 SLUDGE SAMPLES FROM PILE 2 3 x 10-3 p CI/o DOW/ STATE S/77 SLUDGE ACTIVITY 3 04 x 10 -3 p C1/s 1986 SUM".ARY ADDED SOIL 3

OR!stNAL Sott -

1570 YD AT 60 PC1/G

_ 2320 YD 3 AT 1700 PC1/e l AVE ACTIVITY 3390 YD = APPR0x. 1000 PC1/G l TOTAL ACTIVITY APPROX. 3 5 CURRIES APPR0x. 69000 POUNDS IH ,

L .._

_v l:

l' i .

j

. ATTACHMENT B l

SUMMARY

OF MIDLAND l

THORIUM STORAGE SITE j . .

Figure 1. Map of Location

~

~ Figure 2. Map of Concer.trattens l .

Soil Data Summary

! Water Data Summary l

i . External Radiation Data Summary l

l l

i l

i I

i i

i I

l a.

(

I l FIGURE 2 i

r li!DLL'iD THORIUM STORAGE SITE I  !

I ..

90

)

ID y o e 40' 110 lce A.O' I -

C

~l 5 '

B 13E/

l t <

16 5 /

1 t

i i

5 00j l

l l

l l

[ Th-232 1 Av:- Activi v Ci Area A 120' x 155' x l'=19.300fd= -

722 ycs 3 23.5 pCi/g 0.03 Area E 100' x 135' x 2' = 27,000 ft = 1,000 yds" 45.0 pCi/g 0.05 Area C 70' x 75' x 3' = 15,750 ft # = 553 yds' 150.2 pCi/g 0.12 Area D 40' x 40' x 12' = 19,200 ft" = 711 yds" 455.7 pCi/g 0.47 3,027 yds 3 0.59 Ci I

r i

MIDLAND SITE THORIUM TECHNICAL DATA l

191L l Hi i Dete='= ten Rerutvs l

5/80 18 EAMPLES TAKEN FROM FORMER RANGE 0 2 - 1 8 l IHCR!uM STORAGE $1TE AREA pct /s TH 40' x 200'- Ave. 0 5 pC1/sM

\ \

5/82 NRC SAMPLE OF SOIL AT 800 UR/HR 430 PC1/e TH LOCATION l

l 5/E2 NR: SAMPLE CF SC!L AT 1,000 UR/HR 530 pct /s TH l

LOCATION 5/E2 DCw SIMPLE OF s0!L AT 700 uR/HR 325 PCI/G IH l LOCATION l

5/E2 DCW SAMPLE OF SAND AT EDGE OF 62 PC1/G IH Divers:0N BASIN l

! 11/E3 150 E0!L S AMPLES TA.<EN TO 43 PCI/G IH

! LETERMINE AVERAGE AMCUNT OF i

IHCR!cM t

1 i  :

i i

i I

i

y. -

1 L - -

rp N

-- Ap.n

.w eT.1. l.u.u p..n. .

i. I .,...n.

r.. c.n,s u

un, i n, i

.v..---

.DiTi? Di??: I:T T 0 *J R;;gtTs 12/E7. 25 GRAB SAMPLES FRoti TITIABAWASSE ltDL# D fw;sE AE0VE P.M.'T ABOVE AND BELOh PLANT 2.6 - 16.3 PCI/L GROSS EETA 1/63. (.MIDL AND) (FREELAND) FREELAND BELOW PLANT

- 00*

d' 2.6 - 11.6 PCI/L GROSS EE ;

y//:.

NO STATISTICAL SIGNIFICAN E 14/76.

l BETWEEN 2, SETS OF DATA 6/77. I i

1., / / / .

.o / .: .

c/ / O. .

. c. .! / 6.

t/i..

.t / / :. . .

/ /c. 4 E/32  !!EC S A".FLE FR0". SHOT POND SLUDGE 2 FCI/G TH-2I2  !

1 i

h.

L __

1 1

i ATTACHMENT C ALTE.UlAilVES 1986 EVALUATION I

l l

1 t

e~c i

ALTERNATIVES LEE POSITION .

l.

CONTINUE LONG TERM TEMPORARY STORAGE ^AT PRESENT' SITE WITH APPROPRIATE MONITORING PROGRAM (STATUS QUO)

- CURRENTLY THIS IS BEING DONE 2

SHIP MATERIAL TO A NRC APPROVED NUCLEAR WASTE BURIAL SITE

- SITES WILL PROBAELY NOT ACCEPT, EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE 3

BURY MATERIAL AT' EXISTING OR OTHER DOW LOCATIONS WITH APPROPRIATE STATE AND NRC APPROVALS

- WE ARE EXPLORING THIS OPTION AND IT LOOKS PROMISING l' .

LEAVE MATERIAL IN PLACE UNTIL STATE OF MICHIGAN HAS DEVELOPED AN APPROVED BURIAL $1TE

- IT MAY BE 10 YEARS AWAY AND WOULD EE VERY COSTLY 5 TRANSPORT MATERIAL TO AN INTER'STED PARTY TO RECOVER THOR.,IUM VALUE

-NO ONE IS INTERESTED 1

6 SHIP MATERIAL TO ANOTHER DOW LOCATION OUTSIDE STATE OF MICHIGAN FOR PROPER DISPOSAL OR STORAGE

- DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE ACHIEVABLE 7 REDUCE v0LuME v!A SE?ARATION TECHN! CUE AND THEN DISPOSE

- STILL CONSIDERING THIS OPTION l

I r

L l

l-

r --

1

, ..' & ct '/ C~/ O f MICHIGAN DIVISION THORIUM l

]

AGENDA l BACKGROUND INFORMATION BAY CITY SITE

SUMMARY

i MIDLAND SITE

SUMMARY

1 DISPOSITION OPTIONS l

l SALZBURG LANDFILL OVERVIEW l

1 l

EucLos0RE 2 i

[

4

. j

l BACKGROUND INFORM ATION

  • SLAG MATERIAL FROM PRODUCTION OF MAGNESIUM-THORIUM ALLOY - USED FOR DEFENSE PURPOSES o

PRODUCTION IN BAY CITY (WELLMAN SITE) 1950'S-1970'S IN MIDLAND 1940'S-1950'S I

o SLAG STORED IN MIDLAND AND AT BAY CITY REFINERY l SITE ,

o SLAG CONSISTS OF MAGNESIUM WITH THORIUM UP TO  ;

TWO PERCENT; ALSO S' OIL / DISCARDED EQUIPMENT l i

l l

e i

REGULATORY BACKGROUND DOW GRANTED LICENSE IN 1973 FROM NRC TO STORE UP TO 200,000. POUNDS THORIUM AS PROCESS SLAG IN BAY CITY, MIDLAND, AND MADISON, ILLINOIS.

LICENSE EXPIRED IN 1978, BUT TIMELY RENEWAL ALLOWED LICENSE TO REMAIN IN EFFECT.

1981 - DOW REQUESTED MIDLAND AND MADISON, ILLINOIS FACILITIES BE DELETED FROM LICENSE. MADISON WAS DELETED.

1982 - NRC. CONDUCTED DECOMMISSIONING SURVEY ON MIDLAND AND WELLMAN SITES - FOUND CONTAMINATION ON BOTH SITES.

o 10/82 - DOW PROPOSED A CLEAN-UP PLAN TO THE NRC AND STATE FOR THE MIDLAND SITE - REMOVE TO BAY CITY. ,,

11/82 - NRC SAID "OKAY", BUT STATE SAID NO, REQUESTED SAMPLING PROTOCOL.

3/83 - DISCUSSED DISPOSAL OPTIONS AND SUBMITTED SAMPLING PROTOCOL FOR MIDLAND SITE TO STATE.

i l

  • 1983 - CONTRACTED WITH DAMES & MOORE FOR FEASIBILITY OF DISPOSAL OPTIONS FOR BAY CITY SITE.

l

)

REGULATORY BACKGROUND (CONTINUED) 11/83 - RECEIVED COMMENTS AND INITIATED SAMPLING FOR MIDLAND SITE.

1/84 - ANALYSIS OF MIDLAND SITE COMPLETE.

3/84 - DAMES & MOORE DISPOSAL OPTIONS REPORT COM PLETE.

3/84 - NRC REQUESTED DECOMMISSIONING SURVEY OF WELLMAN SITE.

8/84 - NRC CONTRACTOR CONDUCTED SURVEY - SOME ADDITIONAL CLEAN-UP NEEDED FOR WELLMAN SITE.

6/85 - NRC INDICATES MORE CLEAN-UP NEEDED. FOR WELLMAN SITE. DOCUMENTS ACCEPTABLE CRITERIA. l 8/85 - CLEAN-UP/SAMPl.ING COMPLETE.

11/86 - NRC REPORT INDICATES WELLMAN SITE MEETS j UNRESTRICTED USE CRITERIA.

  • 1987 - PROPOSAL FOR DECOMMISSIONING BAY CITY AND MIDLAND SITES.

I I*

f e

B'A Y CIT SITE

SUMMARY

- LOCATIONS i

- SITE DATA 4

i

b o e

D e

/ -

I

- C~

~ . A.,

D,

' a*

3 2

1 I

, / ~ f

~

., , iaus u e c

wi > >H '

-j -  ; <c e -

g e.

t g.

I [

I

=

~

l g. E e

Ah  !

c w

  • l t

( b=

a <

C E

Y C

E.

~~

l a

1

\

i S' n l

3 -

I q) J-J. L

p l

8 l

am tu k

6 eecLU C l-i

.f @* m

  1. 5: *D

-=

II ~

m s.:.!,.u e

. Cy S =.

g .h !

t. s.

%5

. 25

  • - w e: 2*

E L.* e.

G

=

c a? 2 g g C a:

8 E

e C

L 8 s>

~

0 5 =

/  % c 4: . /

'. \.l $ 'p Qh __-

/ .

i,

\

' e

=

g C

c c$ - Q [. f:

f ',',# *- '

y u

, [" - . -

-. c,.,, -

/ . .

j -

j . -

I .- .

/ -

p y.......*.

g

  • ., g l

.~. * * '

q f *.

"% e.

g

%L se *?

w d c

'{S $$, 9 e . .

o y * -

. f'P R

=

N*

I g

uj

' %w = / '

E *. u(

/

o Q'  %

. . f't I

h.

x;

~

., r 5 e '/

~

e w.

Q' K

i k

)

s'  ; 5 k;

t 5 e 4 s 1,..

f-t 3 Ei t:

[' l y8s, .e t

Ry .

( E lt el

-A 'kIl t-k l M

p t .

BAY CITY SITE DATA l

0 l 9,000-15,000 CUBIC YARDS CONTAMINATED SOIL / SLAG / y's- 2' ,

Q -%)

! 4,000 CUBIC YARDS FENCED l

l 5,000-11,000 CUBIC YARDS ADJACENT l

AVERAGE CONCENTRATION ESTIMATED TO BE ABOUT 260 l pCi/g THORIUM-232 -

CONCENTRATION RANGE 2-7,000 pCi/g THORIUM-232 l

TOTAL ACTIVITY ESTIMATED ABOUT 3.6 Ci THORIUM-232 l SITE MARKED BY FENC.E/ PARTIALLY COVERED GROUNDWATER MONITORED CONSOLIDATION NEEDED l

1 l

l i

L .

E 1 l

e i

MIDLAND SITE

SUMMARY

- LOCATIONS

- SITE DATA

4 FIGURE 1 I i

MIDLAND THORIUM STORAGE LOCATION EMB.GENCY A' =.- i ZONE.5 .. .

....- +.

. p .v% w.,

. ,, s ,

h .

- .e' bs: J- A si.s

. es,ms: it I n

.I*

m

\

~

l&l!l.12

l. . \

J he ..: e _.

u \ - .,

I g

!l '," )  ; 2 Q%y OL - -

.. .. , ,w _w

i. , .

W H _i ~

l tj .- .

< i T' lt:3 9 iL.C __. i e npr

!. v t! u l

.: X 11 jj y' W = El li, k.t, iI i

2l

==__

& .1

-- . .- - 3 1 .h. _;L.' llt e

iyml l

f. c . . i.

. . . L..c =:..o ei.41_ \s.t =!i Ile

~h

[.,

j!_" lj- [ M J_ v ll It

~' - t 6

E I si v .l' .l[i. ., .;'7 l, i",! - c.

-.^ ~n.(

j sf

,! fl h ll l

g g g ,. .

7-1 N 'NJ s N' 4 .

\.

r.O.f ' g, s..

s i :-

1:.\ _.:

1

'n .

t n^v N.I .

[

j g-E * .}

\w g \

'w\[:s i.

8 9 A E.b m

.re - .

\. !. 41' li.

6, . t. , 7  %- - - - . . - l ,3 g-l

%= x k m

~

=* -

g , -N
'4--

q .

.s.e

=-

[:..

" ::-: a e . ...
=  :.

_. , 7 .x-~D ,-

\I N

'\-

~ !. f \, N

'N, l .-

  • \ ~~~~ O 'g. C '.".' C. ' : .-

.'"*v. " * *y - .0.,

j u l

I b.

f 1

l FIGURE 2 MIDLAND THORIUM STORAGE SITE P

i l\

D.C W hs b t o' q9=

l 110 ICt' (

(60 te. ,

5 .

!!!/

k 16 i #

t

~~1 00' n-

., s v l ~ /'

s .'. . : a e v ki: A: 'v Cf Arne A 120' x 155' x l'

  • 17.202 f- " III JC! 22 I 30I/5 0 ~2 Area 5 100' x 13!' x 2' = 2 ,000 ft = 1.000 yts's 45.0 p':i/; 0. 0f l Arts C 70' x 7E' x 2' = 15,750 f: =

!!! yds; 16;.2 pCi/; 0.13 Arne D 40' x 40' x 12' = 19,200 f:# = 711 yds' 4E5.7 pCi/; 0.27

.3,027 yds 3 0.59 Ci

I. .

MIDLAND THORIUM SITE DATA 3,000-5,000 CUBIC YARDS CONTAMINATED SOIL / SLAG AVERAGE CONCENTRATION ESTIMATED TO BE ABOUT 150 pCi/g THORIUM-232 I CONCENTRATION RANGE 2-2,000 pCi/g THORIUM-232 i

SITE MARKED BY FENCE AND COVERED  !

\

2f: chg l MATERIAL NEEDS T6 BE RELOCATED FOR DIVERSION  !

BASIN CLOSURE i

F:

?

1.

l i

SALZBURG LANDFILL OVERVIEW .-

- SITE DESCRIPTION l

- CELL DESIGN i

i l

l I

l-l Li. .

1 SALZBURG LANDFILL SITE DESCRIPTION o 152' ACRES o

C,0NTIGUOUS TO MICHIGAN DIVISION FULLY PERMITTED HAZARDOUS /NON-HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY STRATIGRAPHY:

BELOW l THICK GRADE I (FEET) (FEET)

SAND 0-10 0 LAKEBED CLAY "

10-30 10 GLACIAL CLAY 90-200 30 REGIONAL AQUlFER 0-50 120 BEDROCK >200 120 j 1.5 MILES FROM MIDLAND SITE.

l 20 MILES FROM BAY CITY SITE.

4

6 CELL DESIGN EXCAVATE TO TILL 3 FOOT RECOMPACTED CLAY UNDERLINER 1 FOOT SAND DRAINAGE 5 FOOT RECOMPACTED CLAY LINER j

)

100 MIL HDPE SYNTHETIC LINER 1 FOOT SAND LEACHATE DRAINAGE 24 FOOT WASTE 100 MIL HDPE LINER 6 INCHES SAND DRAINAGE l l

3 FOOT CLAY 18 INCHES TOP SOIL .

$ 4 'i hs I!- .;

a r - m 1 i s '

l t . ,,4ao ,

V. ^

f

- lIl  :.

3 s. -

c e ..

gj . /

. ,..~ 6 4

i

0 N.

..;4  !

  • s:

r.,.

.=p .

. , ur .

l f N~ ~

g Q J e is} 3 f,y< , -

pE$$$

, J g

<M Il ts ,i . , _ . _ 2 +1. i A

.g  ; e us e, - - ..

gg 3: I n i li ! _

,g '

~

~ '

7 bh__

~

~

l

- ~ y% ., . e' '

  • eb m

~'

x .

3  !; j ,\

\ N:. gl:g! (O .

n g i s-

y. _

x -

g

?;y t'

i

\

'q!

ll '^' k*Q vc& '

1 E

L i;

~~

shg 3

%-M' l ;[ F .g,

!- - is g ,r s g t.{I,t gy; a .. %r

- -s

[gl,gi Ir

  • g["Ill

[iii l 8 11

s. I '

A

.g \:\as i fj r M a

= *g .. El w

!lll;gh O

5 k,//h ~'ll" d-1 ,t 'E U fj g a'hA

., O

,f . (Q _

s -s .

f

,\

e

~

.n p.

i. =,
;/ \ .

1 /

t b y y a E

q{. .- L-M s, o .

B

,-/- k' L,

4

.- 8 - <'

had 7/r/e7

.- ' ?.

f. , .. .

4.1-MG-TH MATERIAL DISPOSITION ALTERN TIVES (1) NO ACTION

)

(2) ON SITE PERMANENT DISPOSAL a .

(3) OFF-SITE PERMANENT DISPOSAL f.(A) AT COMMERCIAL BURIAL SITE (B) AT SALZBURG HAZARDOUS iWASTE LANDFILL.

~

l (4) ON-SITE TEMPORARY STORAGE FOLLOWED

[BY OFF-SITE PERMANENT DISPOSAL..

(5) TREATMENT OF SLAG AND Soll

, 4

. s.

ENcLodVRE 4 e

/

, ,,,  :?. r# ji q.'.jf,' ;1% ' ::"9 ; i, '

.3 1'; N NdhdN 3_ . - --. ' .b. -

, ;f_ -

~

MAINTAIN CURRENT CONTINUED. LONG TERM . STATUS OF MG TH SLAG Pl[ES . AS STORAGE WITN APPROPRIATE MONITORING l AND MAINTENANCEi -

ADVANTAGES:' -

(1) L.OW COST -

4 (2)

TERMLEAVING

POTENTIAL MATERIAL .lN PLACE .MINIMlZES SHORT POR INCREASED . DOSES"
DURING REMEDIATION AND REMOVAL. ,

DISADVANTAGES: '.'.

(1) NEITHER DOW, PUBLIC, OR' REGULATORS C NSIDERS "NO ACTION" TO BE ACCEPTABLE LONG . : TERM ALTERN ATIVE, . i

- I (2) NOT' FEASIBLE ' AS LONG TERM SOLUTION UNDER ~

SECY 81-576 FOR EITNER BAY CITY 'OR MIDLAND ' PILES.

MAJORITY OF MAT.ERIAL WOULO REQUIRE EXCAVATION AND . REBURIAL AT -41TES 2AND. IMPOSITION OF INSTITUTIONAL CONSTRAINTS ON FUTURE USE OF. SITES; SOME MATERIAL WOULD REQUIRE DISPOSAL AS L(.,W.

(3) CANNOT BE ' ACCOMPLISHED AT MIDLAND. BECAUSE RCRA. i. REQUIREMENT FOR CLOSURE OF ADJACENT DIVERSION BASIN MAKE MOVING SLAG ylLE A NECESSITY. <

(4). CAPABILITY OF CONTAINING MATERIAL IN PRESENT LOCATIONS OVER LONG TERM IS UNCERTAIN.

CONCLUSION? : 5, -

. .U. .

NOT A VIABLE REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVE. ONLY SERVES AS

" BASE CASE" . FOR COMPARISON O.F IMPACTS OF .OTHER ALTERNATIVES.

,. . . w-4 I d

'?.

. .e . q ~. -

.i

2:
2. 'ON-SITE PERMANENT DIRPOSAL -, -

(a. .

REMOVE SCONTAMINATED MATERI AL ' FROM ~.IEXiSTING LOCATIONS'AND DISPOSE IN A 10 'CFR 61 - QUA(1FIED LLW BURIAL FACILITY DEVELOPED. AT BAY CITY. (OR~ MIDLAND) '

SITE.  : ;

ADVkNTAGES:

3:. ~.

s: .

(1) : VOLUME OF MATERIAL SHIPPED OFFSITE'WOULD BE MINIMlZED. J (2) ' DISPOSAL 'ON DOW FACILITY ELIMINATES :-NEED TO ACQUIRE ADDITIONAL LANDS. ..

(3) ? POTENTIAL LONG TERM ENVIRONMENTAL AND HE ALTH - JIMPACTS WOULD BE. REDUCED TO ALARA '

STAN.D.ARD S. ,

l (4) fFACILITY COULD BE $4TED TO MAXIMlZE" DISTANCE TO NEAREST RESIDENCES. 1.

DISADVANTAGER:

. (1') l SITE . SELECTION, - CH AR ACTERIZ ATibNAND LICENSING PROCESS, AND FACILITY DE84GN AND DEVELOPMENT COULD TAKE 68 YEARSJ:SEFORE MATERIAL COULD BE MOVED TO NEW FAC4LITY. ; MIDLAND ..

MATERIAL WOULD HAVE TO BE REMOVED TO TEMPORARY STORAGE IN INTERIM, -lNCREASING CO.STS AND OCCUPATIONAL DOSES. PERMANENT DISPOSAL WOULD NOT"BE ACHIEVED AT EITHER. LOCATION. ;FOR THIS ..

PERIOD.

CONCLUSION: .

VIABLE ALTERNATIVE. -NOT AS ' ATTRACTIVE AS DIS.'POSAL IN SALZBURG , FACILITY. , j.

S- . :. .

/

?ly

. SA' OFF-SITE PERMANENT' DIRPdt AL , d.[

T;. .

'i~

~

. REMOVE TH'E CONTAMINATED SLAG ' AND ' SOIL FROh4 'THs EXISTING . LOCATIONS -AND TRANSPORT FOR DFFSITE DISPOSAL AT. A LICENSED COMMERCIAL LLW BURIAL. SITE.

ADVANTAGES: ~

q. .

.b:. _ i (1) COMPLIES WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF 10 'CFR 61.

(2) REQUIRES ' MINIMAL. REGULATORY REVIEW AND ACTION. .

u.

(3) PERMITS EARLY PERMANENT DISPOSAL OF MATERIAL; 'NO INTERIM ' STORAGE REQUIRED FOR MIDLAND MATERIAL.

l

~. -

(4) PU'BLIC AND , REQULATORY CONCERN: OVER DISPOSITION OF MATERIAL MAY BE ALLEVIATED.

~ '

DISADVANTAGES:

(1) COSTS WOULD EXCEED '$20M' BASED ON CURRENT ESTIMATES OF MATERIAL VOLUME ,'

(2)' EXISTING' DISPOSAL -SITE OR HOST STATES MAY NOT ACCEPT HIGH VOLUME OF MATERIAL FROM THE DOW SITES. '

]

VIABLE ALTERNATIVE BUT NOT ATTRACTIVE BECAUSE OF UNCERTAINTY ~ AS TO AVAILABILITY OF DISPOSAL FACILITY AND HIGH COSTS.

F e

t 4

g

' q',. <

.* ].

1 7',S. .,.  : ':  :;[l:' :

.~ ;

~

. . 0FF-SITE PERMANENT DISPOSAL . ..l:

ll:: .

. l*

REMOVE dONTAMINATED' MATERIAL FROM EXISTING LOCATIONS )[AND DISPOSE .IN THE' SALZBURG HAZARDOUS WASTE LANDFILL MIXED WITH ' -lNCINER ATOR A.SH AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT SOLIDS. .

~ <:

ADVANYAGES: l$ .'

p. $.{ .

(1) BECAUSE. OF-LOW RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATION IN " AS-IS" M AT ERI AL' AND. 180L ATIO N CHARA.CTERISTICS~ OF WASTE . CELLS, LONGu TERM PROTECTION OF ENVIRONMENT AND ~ PUBLIC:tHbALTH WOULD. BE ACHIEVED. . DISPERSION . ALONG P4THWAVS MINIMlZED BY LINERS AND CAPS .TO" ALARA, LEVELS, RED'UCING DOSES TO .lNNOCUOUS LEVELS. MIXING WITH ASH AND SOLIDS 'WOULD REDUCE CONCENTRATIONS FURTHER, POSSIBLY ACHLEVING DE-MINIMUS LEVELS.

... . . .  ::Y (2) SALZBURQ SITE 18 DOW-OWNED FACILITY, ESSENTIALLY CONTIQUOUS WITH MIDLAND SITE. DOW WOULD' CONTROL EACH PHASE OF REMEDIAL PROC.ESS (3) MATERIAL COULD' BE lMMEDIATELY REMOVED AND BURIED IN A-DESIGNATED CELL ACHIEVING A PERMANENT SOLUTION AND ELIMINATING CONCERN .OVER '

DISPOSITION OF MATERIAL. -

(4) NO INTERIM SOLUTIONS REQUIRED. ..

l (5) MINIMAL COST OPERATION .'

(6) DISPOSAL CELL SITED TO MAXIMlZE DISTANCE TO -

NEARES.T- RESIDENCES, DISADVANTAGES:

(1) NO/ PRECEDENT FOR DISPOSING OF THIS T,YPE OF MATERIAL IN STATE AND RCRA-DESIGNATED HAZARDOUS REQUIRES CONCURRENCES OF..ST' ATE, WASTE. LANDFILL.

EPA, AND NRC. *1 '.

(2) POTENTIAL PUBLIC. RELATIONS CONCERNS: -

^-

CONCLUSION:: . ,,

VIABLE ALTERNATIVE. ' PREFERRED. REMEDIAL ALTERUATIVE.

3 S ,; I

c';, ;

- ~

r ..

, I', ,

4. ON. SITE TEMPORARY STORAGE FOLLOWED BY
OFF-SITE PERMANENT DiltWOSAL' S.[ .

.( ,

9' MAINTAIN CURRENT STATUS OF PILES UNTIL' COMPdCT LLW FACILITY IS AVAILABLE AND THEN REMOVE MATERIAL -FOR DISPOSAL AT. THIS FACILITY. ,

ADVANTAGES:

(1) MdTERIAL WOULD ~ BE: DISPOSED IN ABCURE FACILITY, LICENSED UNDER 10 CFR 61 STANDAMDS, WITH POTENTIAL FOR LONG TERM ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTHLIMPACTS REDUCED TO ALARA. i."

(2) PUBLIC AND REGULATORY CONCERN. OVER DISPOSITION OF MATERIAL MAY BE ALLEVIATED. -

DISADVANTAGES:

UNCERTAIN ' PERIOD OF TEMPORARY STORAGE

~

(1)

REQUIRED (5-7 YEARS.. MINIMUM) .B ASED ..ON CURRENT STATUS 'OF COMPACT SELECTION PROCESS. MtDLAND MATERIAL WOULD HAVE TO BE REMOVED TO TEMPORARY BE ACHI ED AT El ER L T FOR THIS ER D. l (2) LIKELY TO BE HIGHEST COST ALTERNATIVE .SINCE FEES AT NEW COMPACT FACILITY WOULD ; EXCEED CURRENT. FEES AT COMMERCIAL BURIAL FACILITIES.

COSTS COULD EXCEED $30M.

CONCLUSIONS:

VIABLE ALTERNATIVE BUT NOT ATTRACTIVE BECAUSE OF UNCERTAIN WAITING PERIOD AND HIGH COSTS. .

~

t e.

3 6

r-

, }-},if.:

-[ ]

Y. * ,

-l'.;;.-

1.' ' 5.

TREATMENT OF SLAG AND toit - ,j.

6 TREAT SLAGAND SOIL BY PROCESSING (AT. EITHElbMIDLAND OR BAY CITY FACILITY TO RECOVER THORIUM AND THEN DISPOSE OF THE RESIDUAL. THE RECOVERED THORlUM WOULD BE. STORED, .OR DISPOSED OF AT A LICENSED FACILITY.

, ADVANTAGES: .

"-] .

~

(1) LOWERS THE AVERAGE THORIUM CONCE ATION IN THE ' MATERIAL AND PERMITS ONSITE DISPO. SAL OF RESIDUAL AS STIPULATED IN SECY 81576. , ,1 (2) l RECOVERS THORIUM FOR'OTHER POTENTIAL USE.

I (3) PERMITS PERMANENT DISPOSAL OF SLAG ISLES.

~

DISADVANTAGES: .

(1) 'A' SITE FOR REPROCES$1NGI WOULD HAVE TO BE SELECTED, AND THE REPROCESSING. FACILITY; LICENSED BY THE NRC AND STATE. 3; -

.l '.

(2) :THE RESIDUAL , MATERIAL ' WOULD STILL . REQUIRE DISPOS AL AND ' WOU LD CONTAIN RESIDU AL CONTAMINATION. ,.

1 (3) '.THE RECOVERED THORIUM WOULD - 'CONTAIN I CONCENTRATED ACT,lVITY, POTENTIALLY PREVENTING DISPOSAL AS CLASS A, B OR C WASTE. TH.E THORIUM '

HAS NO CURRENT ECONO!5C VALUE. .

    • .p .+

CONCLUSibN: '.

r.

~

  • Dl ._

ALTERNATIVE IS VIABLE. ..HOWEVER, THE ADDEi: COST OF REPROCESSING DOES NOT REDUCE THE VOLUME OF MATERIAL TO BE DISPOSED AND MAY YlELD 'A RESIDUAL' DIFFICU.LT TO DISPOSE OF. . , .;,

i

.y- .

f .

., j:q:-

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20211D103&oldid=3303489"