National Academies Press: OpenBook

The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land (1957)

Chapter: Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference

« Previous: Appendix A: History of the Committee
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 12
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 13
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 14
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 15
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 16
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 17
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 18
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 19
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 20
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 21
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 22
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 23
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 24
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 25
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 26
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 27
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 28
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 29
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 30
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 31
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 32
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 33
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 34
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 35
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 36
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 37
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 38
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 39
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 40
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 41
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 42
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 43
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 44
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 45
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 46
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 47
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 48
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 49
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 50
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 51
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 52
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 53
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 54
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 55
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 56
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 57
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 58
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 59
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 60
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 61
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 62
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 63
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 64
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 65
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 66
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 67
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 68
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 69
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 70
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 71
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 72
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 73
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 74
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 75
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 76
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 77
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 78
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 79
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 80
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B: Proceedings of the Princeton Conference." National Research Council. 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10294.
×
Page 81

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

12. Appcudix B NATIONAL AC ADEMY OF SCIENCE - NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL DIVISION OF EARTH SCIENCES PROCEEDINGS of Me PRINCETON CONFERENCE on DISPOSAL OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE PRODUCTS ) ~ . . - 6 Edited condensation from the record of the stenotype reporter. September 10- IZ, 1955 Graduate College, Princeton University Princeton, New Jersey

Appendix B September 10, 1955 Afternoon Se s sion R. J. Russell H. H. Hess A. E. Gorman Charies Renn J. T. Christ~r F. L. Cu~er, Jr. - E'ren~ng Se8sion CONTENTS - O~en~ng remarks~eeeee..e. Remarks ~ e ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ Addre ~ s and discus sion . . . e Acldre s ~ and dis cus sion e ~ ~ ~ Address ~d ctiscussion ee.e Address and cliscus sion .... H. H. Hess - Remarks e e e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e e ~ ~ e ~ ~ e e ~ e e ~ e e ;r. Ae tieberm~ - Address and discussion e e ~ ~ e ~ e ~ e A e M . Piper - AcI - ess a=d discus sion e ~ ~ ~ ~ Re;Fe Morton - Acidress and discussion E. G. Stru~mess - Ac3dress and discussion September 11, 1955 ~, Sunday Morning Session Ee Ge Stru~mess - C;ontinuation of address and discussion oeeeeeee.eeee General Discussion eeeeeeeeeeeeeee.-~---~-eee-ee-.ee Appo~tment of Commi~ees eeeeeeeeeeaeeeeeeeeeeeeeee -- September 12, 1955 Monday Morning Session 13. Page , .. _eeeeeee 14 14 eeeeee. 15 .~. 18 ----e-~. 22 e.~e 32 ~4 34 40 50 55 58 64 75 Reports of Committees: M . K. Hubbert eeeeee.~eeee.~ee~e~ee.~e 7 6 78 81 J. C. Frye eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaeeeeeee H. H. Hess - Clos~ng remarks

14. PROCEEDINGS OF THE PRINCETON CONFERENCE ON THE DISPOSAL OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE PRODUCTS SATURDAY AFTERNOON SESSION September 10, 1955 The Conference on Disposal of Radioactive Waste Products convened ~ the Commons Room of the Graduate College, Princeton University, at 2 o'clock. DR. RICHARD J. RUSSELL: On behalf of the Division of Earth Sciences of the National Academy of Sciences - National Research Council, ~ am happy to welcome you to this Conference and to see this meeting so weU attended. We have been working with people at Johns Hopkins and with people from the A.E.C. since last November to prepare for this conference and plan for another one. We have called together a heterogeneous group of people from many different fields and cliscipl~es with a cumulative total of a tremendous amount . . O. experience . The main objective In this Conference, as far as the Division of Earn Sciences is concerned, is to generate and list ideas for the ~idergrou~c] disposal of high level wastes. That is our mission. - The ground rules have chimed from time to time on the problem, d it has been very difficult for those associated with it to keep up . with developments in the chemical processing which determine the nature of the materials we have to deal with. We have had the feeling several times that the problem has shifted completely from one area over to another; we believe that set this conference you win get a hint of the varier] nature of the problems before us. The preparation of this conference and the organization of the report which we win submit under the contract with the A.E.C., is under the direction of Harry Hess, who has served as Chairman of the Steering Committee, and who win presicle at these meetings. . .. Dr. H. H. Hess assumed the Chair .. . CHAIRMAN HESS: ~ would lilce to welcome you here on behalf of Princeton University. ~ am very happy, as Chairman of the Steering

15. Committee, to see how many of you responded to our request to participate in this conference. ~ know it is a serious matter to leave your normal activities and Rewrote several clays to our problem, en c] am delighted to see that so many of you have come. The problem we have to deal with is a very complex one. This first day ~nllbe spent determining what the components are: they change rather rapidly; the whole problem has changed Mace our first meeting of last spring. We will have to get the necessary background to know what sort of a problem we are dealing with, and ~ hope before the meeting is over there will be some specific suggestions that can be looked into and that win lead at least ~ the direction of the solu- tion or several solutions, however it may develop. Hi: .~ Mr. Corms, of the A.E.C., has agreed to make the introduc- tory remarks describing the Reactor Di~nsion's concept of the problem. Mr . Gorman! Mr. A. E. Gorman, Reactor Development Diwsion U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, Bu;~;"g T5, ~ 9 0 ~ Constitution Avenue, Washington 25, D. C. MR. GORMAN: On behalf of the Reactor Division of the want to take this occasion to theory you Al for giving us your time and valuable assistance to discuss one of our acute problems, and also to thank the Un~versit~r for its courtesy ~ providing such excel- lent accommodations for us. A.E.C ., The Reactor Division is sponsoring the contracts wit e National Academy of Sciences add Johns Hopkins Unz~rersity to evalu- ate problems connected with the disposal of high and low level radio- active wastes. At this conference we are confining our attention to disposal of the high level wastes, which in A.E.C. we feel is a real serious problem. Because atomic energy work was begun during the war period, our plants were established in more or less distant ~d iso- lated places, and as problems of waste disposal arose they were not too difficult to take care of because of this isolation. Now, however ... ... ..

16. under the rapid growth of opportunities under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 for privately-owned competitive industries to enter the Held of atomic energy, some real problems are being posed. It seems inevitable that the industry win move toward more populated areas. Our cliscussions with representatives of industry make it evi- dent that they env~;ic,= building reactors as`d fuel processing plats near their markets. When a new ~nclustry moves into a community which is aireacly well ~tegratecI and weH organized, it finds that its pre de c e ~ so rs have ce ran e stabli shed right s . The new industry wants to be a good neighbor. ~ the field of atomic energy we have to face the problem that the establisheci regulatory agencies (which could take almost any industry and its waste problems in its stride), are not familiar with radiation as a contaminant, nor with the mate- rials and the technology of the industry. Obviously, if the industry is to grow in a healthy way, it must be a "good neighbor,'' ancl that means having harmonious relations with the rest of the community and the regulatory agencie s . The group at Johns Hopkins U:uveraity and the A.E.C. staff have been struggling With this waste problem for a number calf years. To some extent, because of our geographically isolated locations;, it has been possible ''to sweep the problem under the rug," so to speak. But those of us who are close to it are convinced that we must face up to the fact that we are confronted by a real problem. ~ am sure that when you hear the details of the situation from those who follow me on today's program you Mao will be convince d. When we tries] to evaluate the problem ~ Me early phases of the atomic energy program, we caned upon the U. S. Geological Survey, the Weather Bureau, and many other governmental agencies, and many Universities for assistance, but the problem of the disposal of high level waste is a long way from berg resolved. It is one which causes deep concern because of the ranger of contaminating local water supply, or having an unfavorable affect on nature resources. The volumes of waste are large but they are not excessive, compared with other industries. The main concern is Me fact that some of the constituents of the wastes have long half-li~res which require that the waste be kept under control for many, many years . L- ~ addition to the consideration of safety there is aide the ques- tion of cost. The handling of waste ~ our Nations is costing tens of nonillions of dollars a year. The magnitude of this item is such that 5

17. it cold be a serious deterrent to the development of a competitive ~nclustry, therefore, it merits a good deal of attention. ~ effect, in A.E.C. we feel it is our responsibility to find economical solutions before we can elect an industry to be developed, and to do so, we know we need a lot of help. The problem has really two major categories: t) where and how can we put wastes into the ground economically and Ever con- clitions which win not jeopardize the rights of Others, especially in populated areas) and 2} what can we do with the large volume of wastes that have been and are yet to be produced at our production plants, particularly those which are being accumulated ~ urlder- ground tactics at the Hanford Works ~ the State of Washington. Al- n~ost every year appropriations must be made to build more and larger tanks, but this cannot go on forever. At least, we hope it w~11 not go on forever. We are looking to this group for more rational schemes directed toward disposal to the ground. Some of our difficulties have been described to the ocea~og- raphers and Marie biologists ~ meetings which Dr. Rena win re- ~new. They have given us good avarice: much of that Vivace indicates that we ought to consider further means of underground disposal. (Laughter) It seems to us, purely on the basis of economics, that ground disposal should be much cheaper than ocean disposal. After the representatives of our contractor once our operations and field officers have briefed you on the character of the wastes and the current arch foreseeable problems, we hope you win be able to make recommendations to us as to what methods have hope of berg reasonably elective, and what type of research and development should be carried out In order to evaluate these potentialities. . . j . The problem is extremely complex. It takes team work over a wide spectrum ~ order to put the problem before you In the proper light so that you may evaluate all aspects. If you can indicate to us the directions ~ which we should encourage research and develop- mez~t, we would be in a sound position to go to our budget people and ask for appropriations to study those approaches that have some probability of yielding positive solutions. It is no ordinary responsibility to take part In Me early phases of the growth of a new industry. :Looking backward] we know of the mistakes that may industries made ~ assuming that disposal of

~ - q 18. wastes was simply a backdoor problem that anybody could handle. But in this new atomic energy industry hazards are magnified greatly by the unique potentialities of the wastes. We have great hopes that as a result of your deliberations we can start an evaluation of the problem that w:H lead to final and eco- nomic disposal of high level radioactive wastes. Byf~nal, ~ mean returning those wastes to nature in some place where they can be held for very, very lon.g periods of time without jeopardy to our en- vironment or property. We know that we can extract from some of these waltzes certain long half-life raclioisotopes, but if this is done, you still have to keep a reasonable control over the use and storage of these materials. So the problem cannot be evaded by simply milk- ing the wastes of their highly objectionable constituents. I think, Dr. Hess, that is about all ~ want to say by way of ~n- troduction, because ~ know all of you are anxious to get down to the meat of the problem which those who follow me ~H be able to pre- sent to you. CHAIRMAN HESS Dr. Rem, of Joel Hopkins ~~l continue the introduction. Dr . Charie s Renn, Department of Sanitary Engineering & Water Resources, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore IS, Mci. DR. CHARLES REND: Five points were made at the most re- cent conference on ocean disposal of radioactive wastes which ~ think wall interest you. This meeting was held on June 22-24, at Woods Hole, MaS sachusetts. First, it is important to define the problem In terms of the volumes en c} characteristics of the different wastes so that the ocea- . . nographer can consider the variety of ways of disposing of materials In the seas. For example, the coastal waters above the midcile Atlantic continental shelf exchange, roughly, in a year and a half. This pro- v~des a relatively long growth interval for any crop to be ~ contact with wastes; there is a substantial hazard] to commercial fisheries if the waste material is released even In dilute form over the continental shelf .

19. That bungs up the question of dilution. A popular idea is that dilution is easy to obtain if you have large masses of water. How- if you have large masses of water. ever, the larger the masses of water. the more unpredictable the me charism of dilution b e come ~ . . ~ . · . . .—— According to some evidence, saline wasted; ctumpect ~ me ocean wad move as thin horizontal layers thou- sands of times as rapidly as on the vertical pane, so that concentra- tion of high order win be maintained over this horizontal band. There is a great hazard of isotopic movement and concentration along these bands. Those who are familiar with the dilution of industrial waste in larger rivers and harbors know the tendency of these wastes to move In narrow and uncontrolled streams, particularly along the edges. It takes a special circumstance to malce available for dilution the I ill volume of a large mass of water. A' ' O a, our knowledge of the mum mechanisms ~ oceanic masses. a -lnere are fame cars In The question of sequestering waste ~ the ocean came up. Where it is important to note the value of detailed knowledge of the ocean Door and of the water column. · ~ . e ~ ~ . ~ . ~ We have in the last ten years acqu~rect a very extensive Descry ot one vertical stratification of , , ~ water, but there are very few areas where the stations have been 8Ut- ficiently close together, and the measurements made with sufficient precision to accurately bound the water mass and determine the rate . , - . Of water exchange. The measurements are close together In the study ~ . ~ _ .~ ~ ~ · t ~ . — ot tone ~arrlnean ceeps, and Include recent, very precise measure- men1~s. These deeps have some ideal characteristics. The deep is bounded by a natural escarpment, and has a single entrance and exit. It allows the oceanographer to assay the rate at which water enters and leaves the area. There is possibility of complement, Ad it shouic3 be possible to predict the rate of eventual exchange ~ n this confined mass . . . A special hazard hack to be consiclered: when the heat content of pos sible waste. loads was exarn~ecI, the thermal stability of this area was form to be -- as far as we know -- very close to the limit required for containment. It win require a more careful analysis of the situation to be certain whether we can ~trocluce the heat at the bottom of the stratified water or not. - A very important point was brought up in Me discussion of the tendency of pl~ktoD!c organisms and their predators to concentrate .. .. . . ~ ~ ~ .. ~ . . the more active and troublesome sections at waste . For example, the long-life elements are taken up quite appreciably by filter-fee~ing plankton. We simply don't lmow what the rate of concentration beyond . . . ;:

20. the plankton forms would be. Presumably, at each stage of pro- cluction we would gab concentrations of acting r where initial con- centra;tions are high, and lose where initial concentrations are low. This represents a very considerable gap ~ our knowledge of the course of events following Dilution and dispersion of dissolved and suspended wastes ~ the ocean. But this is not ast insoluble problem. The oceanographer and the marine ecologist can make appro~ma- tions to determine theoretical standards for the allowable concentra- tion of isotopes. This would force the ecologist to examine aU the important variables Mat enter into the Marie en~riromnent. Me geologists presented an ~teresffng discussion of ground water: it was suggested that it might be possible to enter some ar- tesian aquifer that discharged at sea on the edge of the continental shelf. This would make it possible to introduce waste off the shelf into deep water without large disturbances. It woMd be much more convenient than transport by ocean vessel. The question of packaged waste was considered. A common concept that many specialists ~ the field of atomic waste disposal hare, and which has been considered at one time or another, is that packaged waste can be camped ~ the deep, and mat it Ant sink in ,% ~ . . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . . ~ ~ ~ the bottom oozes. A careful survey of 8UCh dung ground would be required. T'ne ideal condition a naturally enclosed area ~ which Acre is a deep bed of mud. Oceanographic ~d marsue geological research~dicates that suitable pockets of mud exact not far from shore on the Atlantic shelf, these would not involve deep sea opera- nons, but might affect commercial tifIneries. for example. those in . . . . · ~ ~— , . _ the Gulf of Mae. ~ , The ace ~ographere are not ~~ agreement on rates of exchange between surface and deep ~ tere. One group represents The clew That the deep waters are roughly 2000 years old. The supposing data depend largely on carbon 14 measurements which are not wholly con- sistent. Another group contends that the rate of tourer of the deep is much more rapid, that the data from the oxygen distribution pattern d thermal stratification Silicates relatively rapid movement. This is a summary of the thinking in tile field. We were very happy Bleed to find that Me oceanographers had seriously worked over the material that was presented as raw data, and that a large amount of Diligent work had been done. They discussed the problems Rigorously, anti gene ratetl well developed philosophic s on the waste disposal problem.

21. DR. M. KING HUBBERT: Mr. Chairman, ~ wonts! like to refer to the "graybook" of March al, 1955. In New of the oceanographic discussions, ~ would like to comment on one statement that struck my attention: it was states] that if wastes were put in the deep water that they would have to be monitored by periodic observations, but that no major cable company would guarantee a cable two miles long for more than one or two tripe. . .. . - That statement struck me as berg odd, and ~ checked with the Schiumberger Company, who regularly lower things on cable s down of] weds as much as four miles deep, and ~ asked them what Me life of a cable is, and they s=d they are good for about 200 rou=~-trips. DR. RENT: ~ am glad you brought that up, Dr. Hubbert, be- cause one of the points made by a small group of r``en was this: that the situation as far as mo~tor~g is concerned has improved greatly. Fir at of aH, plastics have been developed which have low adsorption characteristics for fission products. Decode of signaling that per- mit a high degree of leakage have been developed, so that deep water systems would not become vulnerable to smaHIeake of seawater. Instrumentation is improving rapidly and the present emphasis is on Increasing the sensitivity of tile equipment. The conditions for hand- li~g sampling gear at sea differ from Close of of} well logging. The weights are greater, and there are sudden strams due to ship ;~6 boom heaving, with the newer signal systems, longer effective life of cables is possible, however. ~ .. CLAN HESS: Are Mere any other questions you would like to brag up while Dr . Rem is stiU here ~ DR. TRUMAN P. KOHMAN: ~ would like to ask a little more about getting material into We ocean from coasts Satiations. Were you referring to underwater? DR. RENT: This powt was discussed more ~ detail by Dr. Ewing. He offered it purely as a possibility. The question under dis- cussion at that time was how to get the waste across the continental shelf and out into deep ocean. His suggestion was simply that there must emit a number of strata which incline sea - "rd. below the sur- face of the continental shelf, and intercepting He continental slope. The density of the introduced waste being higher than salt water, it would force the stream mead and would eventually seep out below the edge of the shelf.

1 22. DR. KOHMAN: ~ other words, Were are no such erg rivers that flow underground ~ Me sea against the more dense salt water, but the idea is they would create one? DR. PENN: No, the implication was Mat these structures do exist. For example, ~ the Chesapeake Bay we have artesian sprigs, and the picture ~ get is that such inclined strata probably east and break through the siop~g faces of the shelf. CHAIRMAN HESS: Are there any other questions? If not, Dr. Christy, of Hanford, wiO teU us some of the prob- ~ems they have out there ~ waste disposal. ~ have to apologize to Dr. Christy. He did not loom he was conning to discuse Mere problems until a few days ago, and he didn't Ludlow he was going to be a speaker until lunchtime. Dr. Joseph T. Christy, Hanford. DR. JOSEPH T. CHRISTY: Hanford is Me name of an Atomic Energy Commission site ~ the nor~we~ern part of his country, on the..Columbia River . ~ southeastern Washington . A schematic break- . . . .. down of the operations wit! permit the presentation of a generalized New of She plants, withy the limitations of security classifications. . The Columbia hider forme one boundary of our site, and the reactors are along Me river. The major radioactive waste problem at Hanford does not involve We waters of the Columbia River which is sapped for nOwff`rough the reactors, and is returned to the river to dissipate heat generated ~ the reactor. The radic~~cti~ y is negli- gible because the water is not recirculated and there is no concentra- time of acti' r; fuzthermora, there is no significant contaniination by fuel elements from rupture. The major waste problems are ~ the chemical separations plants. Early Hanford consisted of reactors and three major chemical processing plants, of which only No were operated initially. A foyers plant was not completed except for waste tangle, and the third plant became a stand-by. At eac:h one of Mere plats, separate stor- age facilities were provided for many thousands of gallons of waste. Essentially Al of the waste from the initial plants -was stored, because ... .......

23, noo~ereafe ~i~poBai memos was known. ~time, ~deranaccel- erated program, storage space was exhausted so mother set of tics was mataUed. Included ~ initial wastes was a considerable amount of material for Rich there eras use and which required recovery. The s~tand-by plant was re-equtpped and placed into operation ~d the mate from most of the tanks was processeci. ~ Me chemical proc- ess~g for recovery We waste fed to Me recovery plant was added to, resulting ~ more waste to more. The hamming of radioactive wanted at Hanford involved stored quantities measured ~ many millions of gallons, ~ undergrour,6 tic farms separated from two to six ~es, and este~ive transfer pipe shielding. ~ i-~ti~ plant operation, Mere were several types of waste to he: a) a high Ic~el waste from which a valuable con- stituent was recovered by reprocese~g; b) an intermediate waste, victim enough to necessitate storing; and c} a low level waste which, after berg passed Trough a series of taz~ke arranged In a "cascade" system, could be fed into a cribbed excavation aa.d allowed to seep into the ground; by his arrangement, most of the radioactivity of tibe . ~ . . · . . . . . . . 10W level Waste IB concentrates ~ sediments that fan am ~ me tanks . Tine ra.3ioac~ve misterm appears to adhere to cereal types of solids. If the initial solution is of relatively low activity it came disposed of through crow In the ground. A pivot producing Shis type of waste is still operating and the waste is berg handled essentially in this fash- ion. The higlz-level mate is being reprocessed after storage ~ tal~k8 for a period of a year and a half to two years. After recovery, nickel ferro cyanide is used as a aca~r~g'~g age" OzI the resultant wastes to remove two major fission products, cceium 137 and strontium 90. The suchel fcrrocyaz~ide is atided to Me waste before it leaves Me plant. The nickel ferrocyanidc forms a precipitate, and Me presence of Me phosphate ices aids ~ soil retention for cribbing Me supernatant. The low petrel super~tan$ is aDowed to amp into me ground but tanks are required to hold Me sludges. The ~tesmediate-type waste has been concentrated in the past by ev~poraticm but Me ferrocyani~le treatment has program effecti~re ~d is now berg Bed ~ lieu of evapo- ration. . DR. DAVID T. GRIGGS: Was the reason for Be evaporation because Be alu~ige settled and put Be water on top? DR. CHRISTY: The evaporator was achy a concentrator. All the evaporator would do is evaporate, Be "o~crheade" were crib- bed and Be '~ottoms't were transferred to storage tanks. The same . . ..

24. results can be gotten by the simple acidition of some small quantities of a cheap chemical, elim~at~g the costs of steam and manpower in evaporation. DR. T. P. KOHMAN: Does the ferrocyar~ide combine? DR. CHRISTY: The mc:3cel ferrocyanide forges 'ifloc'' and pro- motes sedimentation. DR. KOHMAN: Is the Locke} salt adcled separately? DR. CHRISTY: The Locke] ~d the salt are added separately. DR. H. C. THOMAS: Are you at liberty to say what the rela- ti~re values of these wastes are? DR. CRUSTY: This is the sort of thing ~ would rawer not com- ment out DR. KOHMAN: Was his precipitation method the result of a hatred Referent tests? DR. CHIUSTY: No. The or~g~al compounci cleveloped ~ the laboratory was copper ferrocy~ide. Hanford optimized the tec}mique, and beamed that nickel was a lot better than copper. More is being learIleil. It has been found Hat calcium nitrate added to the mixture gives more efficient clean-up of Unquote. MR. Why lAM LINDSEY: ~ think, while Hanford had a very low water table, the smote was permitted to overflow and the soil held Al other fission products. This precipitation only reams some fission-producta. Some fission products flow over He tops of the tanks and into the soil. This Bulk be a serious matter except for He soil conditions at Hanford which permitted it. As time went by, this process proved to have quite a few limitations, one being the fact that we couldn't re- cover the desired element. So another plant was built and is being operated today, which we will call the S plant. This plant had a tank farm and quite recently avower large farm had to be added. (Mr. Gorman mentioned tens of minions of tioUars ~ tanice . ~ DR. CHRISTY: The thermal heat generates] by the radioactive decay of fission products is used to some degree successfully to

25. self-concentrate currently the Hanford wastes. Heat, however, builds up in the accumulated sludges of these huge tanks and there is periodic burping . This burping creates pres surized conditions which must be taken into account ~ future tank construction. Burping is being controlled by agitation. There is an agitation system in the de- velopment stage, which, combines] with stronger vessels, shows prom- ise of berg able to control the burping. ~ might point out that waste storage tanks are aH underground, and that they are concrete tanks, mild steel lined and capped. Another new process has been ciexrelopec] and a new plant built which permits recovery of the desired elements without secondary processing; thi'; greatly reduces; the City of wastes produced. This improvement makes it possible to be optimistic about develop- ing a self-coucentration program. ~ wart to emphasize this pout: the new process gives better recovery and lessens the quantity of waste but it does not eliminate the disposal problem; the difficulties and expenses of storage are still great. DR. J. W. WATKINS: Was it your state.i~eut that this waste shouldn't be processed for around three years without the aciclition of ckel ferrocyanide? DR. CHRISTY: We were discussing a process which is In use today but is becoming obsolete. The waste from one particular proc- ess has to be aged, m=;nly so that the recovery process will work. This process was developed for an aged waste, and then it was found that the Locke! ferrocyan~de could be used on this particular waste after recovery. With these other {bonged) wastes it appears that self- concentration win be the an swer . MR. WILLIAM B. HE:ROY: Your diagra~n shows a waste line from one plant feedinginto another plant; as one plans becomes obso- lete does the other automatically become obsolete? DR. CHRISTY: After recovery is complete the subject plant will be obsolete ? MR. HI:ROY: In the series of tanlcs where the overflow from one cascades into the next' what happens to the sludge of precipitated

26. ferroyc~de? Does that just accumulate in the bosom of the tank? DR. CHRISTY: That is correct. DR. R. H. WILHE:LM: On self-evaporation what type of waste do you get ~ the clistiOate, the "overhead?" DR. CHRISTY: It is essentially water. DR. T. P. KOHMAN: Does the uranium get into one of those three wastes;? DR. CHRISTY: An is~signific~t amount. DR. KOHMAN: But not the bulk of the ura~niurn? DR. CHRISTY: Ice, not the bulk. DR. KOH]MAN: In the amount of nickel ferrocyanide sufficient to carry out aD of He strontium ? DR. CHRISTY: ~ would say, essentz~y An. Nickel ferrocya- nide is a highly efficient acaveng~g agent. DR. KORAN: There is always aluminum. DR. CHRISTY: This is some~g ~ didn't mention. Coating wastes in the early days used to be added to He intermediate wastes. When~this process was developed, the coating wastes were diverted into separate tanks so that it wouldn't interfere with the chemistry which makes this process possible. Today there is no alternative but to store the coating wastes. DR. KORAN: Fission products too? DR. CHRISTY: Fission products too. So we have to store all our jackets or coating wastes. DR. H. C. THOMAS: iBUtt it like He Irishman b - Hug a hole to put the dirt ~to. Now what are you going to do with Al the nickel ferrocyanide ? DR. CHRISTY: That is a part of the problem berg considered by this group, ~ ~der';t~d.

27 . DR. DAVID T. GRIGGS: ~ Louis lilce to ask a question about costs. We are given In the Johns Hopkins report a cost of 35 cents to $Z a gad on for waste of this general type . Of course, you named a great variety of waste, ~d ~ wonder if we could have a cost on the last two that you talked about. DR. CHRISTY: Nickel ferrocyanide? DR. GRIGGS: new plant. Nickel ferrocynnide, and then you spoke of a DR. CHRISTY: On the cost of tanic taxation, the more tanics that are built the lower are the unit cost. There are also ways to ~n- crease the capacity of the tanks. n - d in doing this. the cost is reduced .. . . . . . . ~ _ ~ O as the tank design and the number of tank`; are constructed are opti- m~.zed. DR. GRIGGS: Then ~ ask about concentration. a new process that results ~ greater concentra~cion. You talked about DO . C:HRISTY: ~ don't have with me the cost of Me essential naterial which would be needed for the nickel ferrocyanide. But on storage, emit Curve waste storage costs are dc~wn in the range of 20 cents a gaHon. However, when you set/-concentrate as is the cur- rent development, condenser equipment and cribs are added costs. So ~ would say there is some increase ~ that 20 cents a gaDon which would be possibly five to ten cents. DR. GRIGGS: On the other hand, you have less gallons to store because you have concentrateci it. DR. CHRISTY: That is right. DR. GRIGGS: Coul~you say what final waste storage costs wilt be per gallon using seli-concentration and nickel ferrocyanide. DR. CHIUSTY: ~ would like to repeat that both of these develon- . . . . . . . meets are in their infancy, and Anything said win be very preliminary. But ~ would guess that something on the order of 25 to 35 cents per waste space gallon win be Me cost by utilizing. self-concentration. There is yet to be developed ~ ideal way of agitating the sludges in these huge tanks, so we can't <:alculate what the final cost win be. -

28. DR. GRIGGS: This seems to be a Oman cost compared to the one given in the Johns Hopkins report. DR. CHRISTY: This looks like a most promising development. DR. GRIGGS: Suppose aH the radioactive proclucts ~ the stored material had completed their disintegration, what would be the recoverable value per gallon for the ~urninum nitrate and other salts if you could simply mine these deposits as though they were natural deposits? Is it desirable to dispose of the waste so they ~ , . could be recovered at a later date? DR. TRUMAN P. KOHMAN: First of Al, you couldn't possibly wait for Al the radioactive material`; to decay. Sometimes it is snil- lions of years. But ~ think there are some elements for which it might be worthwhile to none these cieposits. There are two other elements besides plutonium -- technetium and neptunium. DR. CHRD;TY: The ~siin~ng operation Overtaken recently to recover an element from the sludge proved to be difficult and hazard- Ous. These ~dergro~md tasks had to be entered with remote equ~p- ment such as pumps to sluice out that mete rim to transfer it to another tank, and it is a difficult operation. OD1Y Me extremely high value of the element involved made it economically possible to support the op- eration. The Finn of ~~ne ~ these tactics became more difficult . — O ~ cat — _ ~ as tome passe'; because it cievelops into fairly solid material. Our hope is to make use of the nackelferrocyarucie treatment Ad make self-cc,ncentration fully effective so that eventuaDy we won't have to be too concerned about how long Were tanks win last. It is felt that a slurry wiObe produced, then a semi-solid mass SD each vessel, ~d then, if tank space is again required, th - -E'upe~atant above the sludge may be treated with something which should not be difficult for the chemists to come up why, something which would give a result similar to nickel ferrocyanide. ., I. DR. ;r. W WATKINS: Can You tell us rmore- about the char- acteristice of cribs and muts Mat prevent contamination of the river? DR. CHRISTY: The cribs are rawer simple. They started out to be just a hole ~ the ground below surface. Our ground water table is quite deep -- on the viler of 350 feet -- and these cribs were con- structed close to the surface. The top was just a timbered structure, 6

29. so that the waste was pumper! into the crib and seeped into the soil. Considerable safety factors have been addec} to limit activity seep- age. Over a hatred well`; were drilled for monitoring plants, soil, and the underground] regions. The cribs under construction are final with rock, and gravel of varying sizes, and then a waterproof paper covered And a topping of soil. The waste ~ discharged into the central zone. The rock and gravel fill is simply a cheap way to maintain a cavern; timbering z~ costlier. CHAIRMAN HESS: Are Mere two long-life elements going into the cribs in any appreciable amount? DR. CHRISTY: No, not in any appreciable amount. MR. ~NDSE:Y: ~ would like to elucidate this a little mosque. Those fission products that do go overboard have this columm of soil, 250 or 300 feet high, to filter Trough before they get to the water table, and Me tests that we hare run indicate that his soil has very good Absorption properties for picking out all the elements rem~g. The crib is used until Me mortaring picks up Me first trace of the first salt coming through ~ Me water table; Me use of that crib is then discontinued. ~ some cases a concrete cap is put on top of the crib area so no surface water can percolate down through this column of soil to absorb fission products. At Hanford we have a deep column of soil with excellent absorp- tion qualities add we can dispose therefore of large quantities of low level waste as a rout~e procedure. What we need now is a process which win dispose of Me high -level wastes, and that win remove the elements that have long life, add remove those that are not absorbed readily by the soil. DR. HENRY C. THOMAS: Have any studies been made of the distribution of the absorbed elements Aver the crib? To do this, would you have to sample every sex feet and determine the change the composition of the material ? MR. LINDSEY: ~ wand like Mr. Lieberman to answer that. MR. JOSEPH A. LUMBERMAN: There has been a little of that done. We are dewing only way He low Ieve] waste from which the

30. cesium and strontium has not been removed completely. The ferro- cynide method} is excellent, it is relatively new, and is more effec- tive with cesiurn and ,;trontiun~ than other methods. The process and procedure used ~ disposing of the t;upernatant'; containing the rest of the Cation products is based on laboratory experiments: soil col- uruns are maple up to simulate the soil profile and then the actual waste is passed through; from this is determined how much waste can be passed through the column before a contaminant wall "break through" at the specific ~epoBit8 dyer consideration. Strontium is usually the critical element. :Let's say five column volumes of this waste are in the laboratory column out ~ the field. We wall put in the equ~`r~ent say, of two columns of waste. (These are not necessarily the figures or proportions actually used . ~ ~ unders~tanc3 there is some strontium put in the ground in Hanford, however, no strontium has bed detected In the ground water. If, by chance, some contaminant passed through the exchange columns and clown to ground wafer, its half-life must have been short and by the the it traveled to the Columbia River its effectiveness must hay-e disappeared. To answer your question specifically, there is laboratory infor- malion on the point you make, but ~ the field, it is very difficult to get comparable data. It is more a case of detecting activity at differ- ent levels rather than getting the spectrum. Ruthen~urn is expected to be at Me bottom, strontium close to the top, and the others appear between; this; di';tribution has been established as a result of laboratory work. . . . DR. DAVID T. GRIGGS: There has been mention of longer life element';: doe ~ that refer to the fis `;ion product that we re mentioned ? DR. CHRISTY: Consider plutonium. . DR . GRIGGS: Are there any longer life fission products ? DR. CHRISTY: Pluto~iiurn i'; of most concern. DR. GRIGGS: Will that information be available? long. DR. CUL`l F.R: Sure. There are a lot of them. The list is quite DR. CHRISTY: Other chemicals present ~ these wastes, in ad- dition to the fission products, are the foHow~ng: 5

31. Na2U2O7 Na2CO2 NaNO3 Fe(OH)3 Na2SO4 Na2CrO4 NaAlO2 NaOH NaNO2 NaSiO3 DR. A. RODGER DENISON: You mentioned solids ~ some of these wastes. Do aH the wastes have solids as they go into the tanks? DR. CHRISTY: Yes, they do. DR. MURRAY HAWKINS: Are these Type ~ wastes you are talking about? DR. CHRISTY: Certain of these win be found su each of the wastes that we have. For example, some win ~ the coating wastes, some in the first cycle, second cycle, and third cycle and some ~ the waste ~ from the new plants . CHAIRMAN HESS: Are there any further questions? DR. or. W. WATKINS: ~ would like to ask if you are Tot con- cerned ~th~cechr~etiurn because of the low energy. - MR. J. A. BERMAN: ~ don't know that ~ Gad answer Hat question specifically; maybe some of the over men can give a hand. As a biological hazard it is of much lower magnitude than strontium or cesium. Whether it has ~ntr~siC Prague as an element ~ don't know; ~ think there has been some mention of recovering it for its value. - But from the biological standpoint, to my lmowledge it has never been given as a neuclid to be concerned about. DR. H. C. THOMAS: ~ was just looking in the book to see if can find it. ~ don't believe that there is any biological hazard given with it. DR. T. P. KORAN: Because of its long half-life, its activity is quite low. It forms a minor fraction of the total fission product activity. CHAIRMAN HESS: Are there any other questions ? DR. L. B. RILEY: What is the rate of heat production from the zincked sludge, the high level sludge ? Is it ~ to 3 Btu/hr /g~1 on given

- 32. ~ the handbook? And how does heat output vary win the half-life or with the life of radioactivity? Is it maximum at the start and does it fan off with time ? DR. CHRISTY: The heat follows the same trend as the radia- tion. It declines along the same curve, essentially. MR. W. LINDSEY: Regarding the heat figures: the high level wastes that we allow to boil, win continue to boil for a period, of roughly ten years before the heat generation falls to a pout where heat losses to the ground win stop the boiling -- and the boiling is fairly brisk. CHAIRMAN HESS: Are there any further questions? We have one more speaker this Recook, but we have gone for an hour and a half. Let's take a ten-m~nute breather and come back. ·e- Recess ·ee t:ElA~N HESS: ~ wouic! like to can on Dre Cuber of Oak Ridge, as our next speaker e Dr e Floyd ~ . CuDer, Jr e ~ Director Chemical Technology Diction Oak Ridge National Laboratory P. O. Box P Oak Ridge, Tesm. . .. . 5 (Dr. Caller presented an info renal renew of principles and processes moored ~ reactors and che~siical proces- a~g . The the ~ of re actor ~ and fuel purific ation pro c e ~ ~ e are numerous and yield a varied apartment of waste solu- tione, each with somewhat clifferent disposal characteristics. Lee relationship between the predicted optimum sizes of power reactors ~d fuel processing plants Suggests that the most economical arrangement would be for one chemical plant to process Me material from 5 - 15 reactors; this word localize ~e principal production of waste but require weD- shielded transportation of fuel elements . ~ (The info rrnation given by Dr. Caller has been covered in the refe-reTlces given below, and In the works referred to bibliographies contained ~ Mere references. ~

33. Cuber, F. L., Jr., The nature and magnitude of radio- active wastes as ir~uenc.ed by types of reactors and fue1 processing - present Ad prospective, ORAL Central Files Number fi6-5-2, May 4, 1956, Oak Ridge, Tenn. Report of the Committee on the Disposal and Dispersal of Atomic Wastes to be published by the NAS-NRC as one of its series of scientific ar'd technical mono- graphs . Culler, F. L., Jr., andBruce, F. R., The processing of uranium-alum~um fuel elements, International Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy, A/CONF .81P/541 USA Z0 July 1955. Fitly, H. R., Arnold, E. D., and Ull~nann, J. W., Processing requirements, buildup of fission product activity, and liquid radiochemical waste volumes in a predicted nuclear power economy, ORND Central Files Number 56-~-162, January 30, 1956, Oak Ridge, T em. ~ r . ~ . ._.., .,, . ,.;

34. SATURDAY EV-EHING SESSION September 10, 1955 The meeting reconvened at eight o'clock, Dr. Hess presicling. CHAIRMAN HESS: We start Me evening session tenth a goof} many people, judging from what ~ have heard since the last session, who are doubtful whether we have very much of a problem or any problem at an. Many of the things that seemed to be problems have disappeared as the chemical processing of wastes has improved. Dr. Liebertnan of the ARC is the next speaker and he win point out what problems we really have to Bold here and how serious they are. Dr . Joseph A. L~eber~nan Sanitary Engineer Atomic Energy Commission Washington IS, D. C. DR. LIEBERMAN: ~ certainly hope that ~ can disabuse you of the idea that we have any solution that wall solve immediately the prob- Ipms of waste ~i~pOBaie We feel hopeful that improvements in tech- - nology will, as the nuclear Poultry develops, reduce the complexity of the problem, perhaps Trough following some of the approaches al- ready described or perhaps along lines on which research is just start- ing. The whole problem is divisible into two major categories, one of immediate concern, lasting at least five, ten, or maybe more years, and the other, a longer range problem subject to much estimating of future power requirements and production, much speculation about the proportion of power we win be getting from nuclear fission, arch much debate about what king! of reactors win be the best. ~- The amount of fission products produced i8 a rather simple arithmetical calculation. When a gram of uranium fissions, 24,0~)0- kilowatt hours, or one megawatt day, of heat energy are produced and about one gram of fission product result. The total quantity of fission products accumulated at any time depends on the output of energy being produced by nuclear fission, how long the nuclear reactors have been operate-, and other factors related to chemical processing of nuclear fuels. Mr. Davis, Director of the Reactor Division, has estimated

35. that by 1980 there would be 175 ~ 000 megawatts of electrical energy produced by nuclear fis sign. There are other estimates based on other assumptions. The basic data for calculation given ~ the "graybook", prepared by the Hopkins group, are probably as good as we con get. Obviously, the quantities change as processes change, but from what we now know, it looks as though we have to consider the fission product wastes of the immediate future with activity con- centrations ranging in the hmtclreds of curies per gallon. The heat content is of Abe order of ~ to 3 BTU's per go-hour. ~ Idaho there are waste tanks where, roughly, 100,000 gallons of high level wastes are stored, and a cooling system must be prowded capable of removing something like 300,000 BTU's per hour. That is just for the Or at tanlc. If we can't do anything else ~th the ';e wastes, we have to plan for Me time when we may have to build additional tanks to con- t~ir. wastes that win continue to be produced. We are s~l building ~cs, and as far as anyone can see, more wall have to be built. These tanks are physical structures and have a finite life. A task manufacturer may guarantee the integrity of the tank for ten years, maybe twenty, maybe fifty years but there is a limit and thugs can go wrong. If we put Mete fission products ~ a tank and Mace Hey have an effective half-life reckoned ~ terms of hunkers of years, we or the people that come after us have to be con- cerned about that tic anci its environment for a long time. In other words, as presently practiced, tanic ato rage of Mgh-leve} wastes is not actuary disposing of Were material 8. As sanitary engineers familiar with experiences in other indus- tries, we low Mat things don't always go the way the flow sheets sn- dicate they should. Day-to-daY operations of a plant are sometimes ~ ; . . 6 - _ , ~ ~ . - .. . , . . · . · ~ . - _ .. ~ ~ attectecl By practices that no not enter Into cons~cteratlon ot me 1anora- tory procedures. It is not a case of anything being over-looked; it is merely that many steps and stages do not exist in the laboratory that are essential parts of ~dustri~ operation. One thing Mat should be emphasizer] has to do with Me utiliza- tion of the fission products. ~ think it is worth pointing out, that, to my l~owledge, there has been no practical fabrication of fission prod- uct sources. Much has been and is berg done ~ the laboratories by many people on tile effect of radiations on foods, in chemical reactions, cold sterilization of antibiotics, and aU sorts of possible uses; ~l this work is extremely important. If we fad ways of extracting ancI urging radioactive cesiurn and strontium, we merely postpone the date of disposal of these two fission products. After being used they . . ... ..

36. return, somewhat decayed, have to put those some place them for art extended period of time. for eventual disposal. We are going to and have somebody concerned about This focuses attention on the processes described earlier which may be characterized as "pulling the teeth" of these wastes . This refers to the select re ~d essentially quantitative removal of the Cesiurn 137 and the Strontium 90 isotopes. If and when the ''teeth" can be removed, practically ant] economically, from the mixtures of fission products, two different problems are created. The first has been mentioned. The effective half-life of the mixed products obtained from fissioned uranium has been estimated to be of the order of hun- drecis of years. If strontimn and cesium are removed, the effective ~ , . . , ~ . ~ haLf-nfe of the remaining mixture Is reduced oy perhaps a factor of ten; thus the remnin~g material might have an effective h~f-life fig - urec only in tens of years but indiscriminate return to the environment of material with such radioactivity is, nevertheless, unthinkable. The possibility of fixing Were radioactive material on an earth carrier is berg studieci. At -BrooRhaven the radioactive ions have been fixed on montmorillon~te clay primarily by ion exchange; then, by heating the clay, tl~e exchange reaction is made ir3re~rersible. This "hot') clay could be stored in special locations that Wand prevent the radioactive material re-enter~g the human environment. . A.E.C. employees who labor daily with this problem are faced with the coU8tant question, "when can we stop bulldog tacks? or, When can we do something with these wastes other than putting them In tanks?" The chemical technologists, the physical chemists, the biologists, and many other discip~ es have a part to plan in fining the solutions. What are the facts In the earn sciences fielci that bears On the possibility of putting- these wastes in the ground-? Then, just how do we go about deciding whether it is possible to put this surf ~ the ground and at which locations ? Then, just how do we go about put- t~g these wastes in the ground? Specifically, the questions to be an- swered are as follows: .. 1 i l a. What are the problems, en~nronrnes~tal and geological, asso- ciated with putting his material In the ground? b. Assuming Mat underground disposal is feasible, where can we do this, and under what conditions? .... . ~ ...

- - - ~ an academic problem. CHAIRMAN HE: SS: Thank you. 37. And then perhaps c: If there are questions that are still unan- swered, what do we have to do to get answers to them? Because of the restrictions of classification and because of certain detailed technological data that have not yet been pined down, there may be at the moment a lack of clear definition. This floes not, however. make the problem any less real or less serious. It is not less real or less serious. Does anybody have a question he would like to ask? DR. M. HAWKINS: ~ wonder if it would be possible to have a description of the cooling system In the tanlcs in Idaho which Dr. Lieberman refers to. DR. LIEBERMAN: It is simply a cooling coil which is put into the tank. Mr. Culler can give a more detailed answer. DR. F. L. CULT OR: There are two systems. When the tanks were first built it was not known that alurn~um arbitrate would attack the weld in type 347 stainless steel, and it was supposed that the heat . . . . . . . ., . . _ . .. . would he remorse ctursug Young oy re~umug one water. The tank was ~ - ~ standard AP] tank with a lower course going up to ~ umbrella the , _ . .. . ~ . . . ~ , ,~ _ root. moue it was an octagonal concrete structure. After about a year ant} a half of exhaustive solution tests ~ the laboratory, it was tentatively concluded that a Wife line word form along the center of the type 347 stainless steel, unless the temperature of the solution in We tank was kept below 150 degrees F~re~eit. This meant that boil- ~g cannot be tolerated and cooling must be accomplished with reflux- ers. Manholes aroma We periphery of the tank prowde---access for dropping type 347 Much coils into the tank. Water was circulated through the coils, pumped through an external cool g structure, down the umbrella, and then avowed to trickle cow" We outside of the Ink. This kept the walls cool even if the center of the tank was hot. There was a recirculating water system to pump extra water into the cooling system if a leak occurred. There was no connection with the water supply. So, it is a ply secondary heating circuit, somewhat unfortu- nately designed, but effective and operating. QUESTION: How thick are the concrete waHs ? , . ... . . .

38. DR. CULLER: About two feet; they are uniformly IS inches in some places. DR. W. B. HEROY: What is going to be the life of that tank? DR. CULLER: It is at least five years, and probably longer. DR. HI:ROY: What is the rate of corrosion of the tank by the nitrate solution? DR. CULLER: The loss is all in the welcis. If you average out the coils, or if you interpret inches per year to total area, it is a negligible loss. DR. HE:ROY: ~ other words, if it were a seasniess tank and cooling coils were provided, the tank might last inclef~nitely? DR. CUT T FIR: If you could get a tan}c with no welds you would have no serious trouble that we know of. Some new material we have receiver} may have adequate resistance but it has not been tested yet. The press notices say it is pretty good. CHAIRMAN HESS: Are there any further questions ? ~ . DR. H. C. THOMAS: AN ~ under~;ta~c} it, one- of the nicest suc- ceaeful ways of dealing why Ate moderately high level waste is by pumping to He grown. The reason it is successful at Hanford, is that you have a homogeneous soil way no peculiar structures, no ch- rect or rapid discharge to the river, and favorable ion exchange prop- erties. It would be puce to do this ~ other places. How difficult is it to survey the reg~onimrnediately arounclthe perac,lation crib ant] determine the nature and extent of the changes ~ the-~soil? If you pumped 100,000 gallons of active material would you get unifor',` and predictable -expansion of waste in the hole? It is possible to decide Ant such would take place ? MR. T TE:BERMAN: The wastes being put to the ground at Hanford are not moderately high leered; ~ would say they are-relatively low level wastes and Me steps used in their disposal are berg taken very slowly and cautiously. Diagrammatically, the procedure is as follows: the wastes to to a 30 by 30-foot crib. The crib and associated piping is 300 to 400 6

39. feet above the Trounce water table. The volume of waste that goes into this crib is determined by laboratory tests, and the tests are extrapolated, with adequate safety factors, to an actual field instal- lation. There is an elaborate system of wells around the crib to detect the presence of radioactivity away from the crib installation. DR. JAMES GILLULY: What about under its DR. L.lEBER~IAN: Well, they con tell what is getting in the ground water. DR. GIL`L`UI~Y: ~ wouldn't expect anything to move laterally 300 feet above the water table. ~ would expect the changes to take place under the crib. DR. L'1EBERMAN: The mo~tor weds might be on the orcier of 30 or 50 feet away from the crib, find activity has been-detected these wells. When field ~ns~ation is made, only the volume of soil ~ the 30 by 30-foot column under the crib down to the water table is considered; the operators feel they are gig the benefit of a big- ger volume as far as exchange capacity is concerned. It is known that an element like ruthenium will go right through the column, but it is also known that ruthenium has ahalf-life of one year end that the travel time of the water from the bottom of the crib to the Columbia River is of the order of magnitude of tens of years or hundrecis of years. The rate of flow is the subject of debate among the ground water geol- ogists, but in any case, they are sure that before this water which might be contaminated with ruthen~urn gets to a place where somebody can use it, it will have de c eye cl to the pout where it is no) longer harm- ful. ~ am sure that the people who are Evolved in this; work at Hanford would be the first ones to say that we can't take the results that we are getting here and apply them to any other place. Obviously, it is a question of environment, every location~~on its own merits . DR. H. C. THOMAS: It is true, then, that no spot other than Hanford has actually been investigates! from this point of view? DR. L`IEBERMAN: That isn't quite true. This afternoon Dr. Stru~ess and Mr. Morton will summarize the investigative work being done at Oak Ridge ~ connection with surface pits that Floyd Culler mentioner] earlier. But on a rout~e production basis, shall ~ say, at

l 40. no place within the Commission jurisdiction are high level wastes being discharged to the ground. ~ ' ' ' going to cribs at Hanford. c' Relatively lOW level wastes are DR. KORAN: ~ wonder if someone would please define a ·. crib . DR. BERMAN: We call them cribs or caverns. They are simply excavations that might be 30-foot squares ~ plan, and as much as 30 or 40 feet deep. They are filled tenth coarse broken rock. DR. KORAN: Is it Aced? DR. I"=BERMAN: No. Prexriously there was a crib-like structure of timbers to hold the excavation. The purpose of tlie rock is to distribute the waste so as to take advantage of the full cro';~-~;ectian calf the column when the waste is pumped in. The ton of the pit is covered with some imperious membrane which is in turn covered with the natural soil; the piping into the pit may be cov- ered so it is cafe to walk over, and the membrane sheds what little precipitation there is ~ the area. It is a very rough structure, but it is surprising how expensive It. ^~a {Gus ~ t~n1.h nit :. ~ - n1: tm it is to build a lot of these cribs . _ ___ _ _~ one centper gallon to discharge the relaffvelylowleve~wastes into the groom at Hanford. DR. GIL$~ULY: The statement has been made severe times that this is soil. It is difficult to persuade me Mat there are 350 or 400 feet of soil at Hanford: there i'; an abundance of Columbia River lava, there are gravels, and there are jotted rocks, all of which provide chapels to carry the solution through or diffuse it.. ~ word like to have Dr. Piper explain the hydrology. ~- ' Mr. A. M. Piper, Staff Scientist, Pacific Northwest U. S. Geological Surrey Box 3418 Portland I3, Ore. CHAIRMAN HESS: ~ was going to con on you later, Mr. Piper. Would you like to present your Sinews now? MR. PIPER: A crib is merely a shaHow excavation supported . . ^. . -

41. by rough timbers into which selected end products are discharged /products with only a low level of radioactivity/. The water table is 250 or more feet below land surface, and over most of the Hanford] area the unsaturates! interval is c~ccupieci mainly by glacial outwash -- silt, sand, anc} some gravel. A few areas adjacent to old cribs (where discharge of wastes has been terminated) have been tested by sinking holes at ·nter~rals around them, sampling the earth material, and analyzing it. This has delineated, beneath the cribs, roughly pear - shaped zone ~ ~ which fis sion products have been adsorbed by the earth materials. ~ know of no case where the total quantity of fission products fixed in the pear-shaped zone can be shown to be a major part of the products that were ~ the total volume of nut di~- charged into the overlying crib. ~ . MR . M . HAWKINS: Where did the rest of it go ? DR. D. GR]GOS: Is that statement teased on the water removed in the survey? You ~~'t fad fission products in solution-- is that what you meant? MR. PIPER: The earth material was not saturated when test- dri~ed. It was not dry ~ the sense Mat it continent no water. Ex- cept for a thin zone near the land 'surface, probably aH this material naturally contend that amount of water which it can retain against the force of gravity, ~d essentially aH the nut allied to the cribs must go on clown and ultimately reach the water table. We can conclude that all the fission products put into a crib either are trapped in the underlying area or have gone clown somewhere. Before some of the later cribs were put into use, observation weUs were Brined adjacent to them and some holes were angled be- neatly the axis of the crib. . DR. J. GI=.ULY: What sort of a drib did you use? MR. PIPER: Cable tool. The mast was canted, a guide casing was set, and the hole was drilled carefully and with fair success In getting under the axis. DR. T. P. KOHMAN: What kind of material? MR. PIPER: Glacial outwash largely. no basalt highs were cut above the water table. Over most of the area

42 . DR. KOHMAN: How was the water table related to the Columbia River? DR. L. F. CURTISS: Is it different from the leered of the river ? MR. PIPER: ~ you wish to defer that for a moment, ~ would like to come to it later. ~ would like to caution against any ~nterpre- tation that we can show conclusively ~ weHs of this sort what happens to the nuia it passes down largely in an unsaturated state and a *est hole may penetrate the zone of.percolation ant} not collect a single drop of Ouzd. Similarly with weH sampling of the water at the grour,8 water table: contacted water may be caught or it may go by un- detected. ~ doubt that the present practice of discharging low-le~rel wastes could be continued over the centuries;, and wouldn't for a moment consider adopting this practice in a populous area. ~ fee! the problem of waste-product disposal is far from solveci. There is another aspect to disposal in cribs at Hanford. Most of the waste cribs are roughly ~ me center of the area bounded by a large bend of the Columbia River. The <diagonal across this area measures about 40 miles. The water :table does not slope uniformly across the area. A couple of intermittent streams Recharge into the area from the hills to the west, and have formed a natural ground ~ ~ ~ _ - . ~ . . ~ ~ - ,~ . ~ ~ ~ water ridges The ridge merges with a rather gentle ground-water slope ~d induces a general radial movement of ground water in the central area, toward the river. This natural pattern has been com- pli<:ated by disposal of cooing water in the plant area, which has built a couple of rude ~round-water mounds. nossibl~r severaltens of {~t a; ~~ - chat +~^ ~1 ~~_ .~1 ^ __, ~ _ _ __ _~ ~ ^~^E5~^ ~~ "~ ^~ ~^ -~. These two mounds act es- sentiaDyas dams to the movement of wafer and, for the moment, they hold back the water that is beneath the cribbed area. We can't say definitely what the condition may be 25 years; from now. DR. CURTISS: What is the nature of the ground? Can you give us a cros ~ - ~ action or rough sketch . MR. PIPER: On the west side of Me area there is a ridge of basalt, 1500 or 2000 feet high. From its base, a rudely terraced plaits clescends to the river. The water table is relatively steep at the west side, then flattens beneath the central play.

43 . DR. M. HAWKINS: Do materials forming the terraced plan rest on basalt ? MR. PIPER: The basalt passes underneath, and there are some irregularities; In its upper surface. We haven't the data to plot the rock profile. The overburden is outwash and some material that may be non-glacial. DR. HAWKINS: What would be the normal rate of water move- ment toward the river if the mounds were not present? MR. PIPER: That is the sort of question a grounc3-water man `~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~~ ~ ~ t . ~ never answers. {I~au.~hter) Regardless of the average rate of mo~re- ~ ~ ~ v ~ meet, we Know that In other areas couta~ninat~ng (but non-radio- active) sued moves largely by displacement, as Rough floating. The great uncertainty is that there is no indication of impending trouble until the contaminant suc3deMy appears. The average rate calf move- ment is no measure of the movement in the most permeable thread';. DR. GILLULY: ~ a laboratory test of the soil column, solu- tions can be passed through samples in a beaker or disunion cold without auplicat~g the conditions in nature; in nature there are going to be high permeable chapels through which the Mow wiO be concen- trated. The natural conditions are far from homogeneous and very ~ - di£ferent from the conditions Ecu results one is apt to get ~ a test in a laboratory. MR . PIPER: That is very true . Any test ~ a cylinder of re- stricted size is difficult to extrapolate to natural conditions. For one reason there is a boundary effect In any cylincler of laboratory size _ , . . . that may greatly distort the results. The lack of homogeneity is shown by the tests made aroma some of the cribs: ~ sketched--a smoothly bounded zone /of fission-product adsorption/ but they are not aH that way by any means. In the ideal base the solutions mnved down through uniformly permeable material; where the permeability is discontinuous there is considerable irregular lateral spreading. You can get Al sorts of queer details rejected local inhomogeneity. Yet, on Abe whole, the material is permeable throughout. MR. S. G. LASKY: Why do you say that the test holes at the ground water table may not pick up any raclioactive material? MR. PIPER: A wed is Brined to the water table for the purpose of detecting the passage of a contaminated non. There is water In ... .. . .

44. He bottom of the well. Elow much purnp~g is necessary to be sure that you exhaust the nuia in the bore hole of the well aIld that you do get a sa~nple of what is going by? It is not nearly as simple as it seems to be. DR. HUBBERT. How are you going to get a sample in the wed ~ around the cribs ? MR. PIPER: There may or may not be some seepage from the percolating waste. But you can have nor go right by the end c)f a weH and not collect a drop. It is the hardest thing In the world to sample flub] moving ~ unsaturated material. DR. GILLULY: You said this pear-shaped area of poisoned soil doesn't contain anywhere near a major fraction of the material that was fed into it. What happened] to the rest of it? Where did it go? MR. PIPER: Some of the missing material may be tied up in sludge in Me bottom of the crib, an-c] it is physically impossible to drill and sample the crib bottom to get a good quantitative measure- ment of that sludge. But even making allowance for that, we haven't demonstrated at Hadford that there is anything like complete inter- ception by adsorption. DR. E. W. ROEDDER: ColllcI you have relatively uncontarni- nated material underwear the pear-shaped mass? MR. PIPER: Yes. The bottom of the mass is s~stantiaMy above the water table. DR. ROEDDER: Completely uncontaTn~nateci? MR. PIPER: Yes.-- DR. GRIGGS: ~ asked a question as to whether contamination occurs in the groom water. MR. PIPER: Not directly Aver the areas of absorption that have been tested by drilling. Contamination has been found in a few gro~-water samples. DR. HAWKINS: Where were they located?

no 45. MR. PIPER: Those that ~ am familiar with go back to war-t~me operation that was not well docusnented. Just where it came from hesitate to say. QUESTION: Is there a pattern in the amount of radioactive ma- terial you found in the hole ? MR. PIPER: You mean areas of absorption. They are quite unlike. ~ sketched a pear-shaped mass, but actually each one is rather irregular. DR. A. B. JOSEPH: Is the sampling adequate? MR. PIPER: Not entirely, no. These masses aren't too large. A 200-foot cylinder would probably enclose one. Near its margins you get into material of so low concentration that analytical methods are not sufficiently delicate to be sure of the tom quantity of acisorbed fission products. DR. R. H. WILHELM: Can one get activity by putting an ab- sorber over the hole ? wc~ulr1 re-enter same of the MR. PIPER: An effort was made to assemble apparatus that driU holes, and take s ample s through the casings. ~ am not familiar with the results. DR. GRIGGS: ~ don't know if anybody mentioned it, but some- body may have gotten the impression that song /waste products/ may have gotten down to the ground water. How Lo you reconcile the fact that there is no contamination beneath this pear-shaped area? MR. PIPER: ~ am not sure that any reached the ground-water level immediately beneath my of the absorption zones that were drilled out. ~ don't think we could prove so from /the e~st~g/ sampling. DR. GILLULY: What happened to the stuff then? MR. PIPER: Some could have gone down to the water table. We cap It procure that it didn't. QUESTION: Were any samples taken below the surface of the ground-water table ? MR. PIPER: ~ don't recaH. Can you answer, C.V. ?

·1 :~! .!1 .f : .~ . ., . :f ., ., ., 46. Hi_ ·_: .~ MB . RALPH IIUNT]SR: I wonder if tile acid mete Dial going dowel | into the crib might be precipitating ~ the aLkali"~..soil same strontium carbonate or some of the other carbonates c)r phosphates which are holding fission products . Has that been aswered? . ; ;? .a DR. C. V. THEIS: There were samples taken in well down below the water table in this area and they haven't 8~o~g°~g radioactive contamination. I believe I am right. alar QUESTION: How far below the water table ? DR. THEIS: Not deep enough, as far as I am co. These waste materials at Hanford are not shown to be of al,ybi s p e cific g ravity than wate r . S o you have mo r e oppo stun it's ne a gher water table. And I might add to what Mre Piper said tb.at He the taken soil samples below these cribs, and one of my diffiCUltiye~a~e been that they have gotten too much activity in a small zone has DR. S. LASKY: I would like to know, once strontium, Ad slum have been removed, how long it takes for the re.ma~Dg surf to get within tolerable limits. DR. J. A. LIEBERMAN: Tens of years, ~ think, would be Ids order of magnitude. DR. HAWKINS: 16 there any concern of possibly wanting to get at these materials once they are put ~ the ground? If; a Goody con corned over that? DR. LUMBERMAN: ~ think the only basis on which one cord answer at this time is that strontium and cesium can be extracted readily. They are sources of radio energy which may have value ~~ the future. But the problem is not whether we cap get the stuff back but what can we do with it now that we have it. MR. PIPER: ~ don't know that it has been answered. DR. HUBBERT: Mr. Chairman, the question just asked is one that several of us have been discussing between sessions. Mr. Culler this afternoon mentioned that all of these wastes could be put into a liquid form by the various methods of extraction. When the possibility is considereci of taking the liquid waste and putting it undergrown, tic question arises of whether or not a reaction between the material m- jected and the minerals in the groom might immediately block all He 6

47 . pores. Of course, the injection of liquids in the ground is quite com- mon and one of the practices that is quite essential in of! work is to put up a plant so that the water is chemically treated in advance of ~- jection. However, in the disposal of breed from of} weds, the whole object is to get the stuff ~ the ground. One of the most recent devel- opments in underground mechanics is the deliberate fracturing of rocks by pressure and the Ejection of sand ~ the fractures to hold them open. Instead of hang just the wed bore, you have perhaps hatreds of square feet of exposed surface. Plugged pores can be dearth with by using enough pressure in a properly designed and executed maneuver to give controHecl fracturing. Wouldit be necessaryto reprocess the waste Ned as to remove the constituents that might subsequently precip- itate on contact with the rock material to form plugs ~ the pores ? I think we have to dilute the maternal enough to avoid forming 'Dot spots . 'I To obtain dilution and at the same time keep the density high, we can use natural brines. If the waste is placed ~ the bottom of the basin, diluted to disperse the hot stuff, and the clensity is kept higher than the surrounding water, we Hen have mechanical stability. CHAIRMAN HESS: Wouic3 you Eke to make a comment, Dr. Caner? DR. CULLER: It is going to be difficult to define a typical kind of waste. The kind of waste you get is high ~ aluminum nitrate, or ~ neutralized aluminum nitrate and Contras as much as 40 per cent by weight of dissolved Polices. Certain conditions ~ the rock might precipitate the aluminum nitrate as a heavy sludge and plug up the bore hole. If you dissolve stainers steel ~ nitric acid arc} inject it into an alkaline layer, the bed will plug tenth ferrous once, which would be hard to unplug. However, I suspect the chemical processing people could remove certain materials or the conditions of the..systems ad- justect so the waste could be injected. It is a matter of deciding where the material is to be Enacted, what the condition'; are, and what would be det rimental to the process, and then having the solutions prepared to fit the requirements. It is really difficult. Precipitation wii1 be .. problem. Heat will be a problem. It might be necessary to cool for periocis of three or four years, especially in the case of wastes from the processing Of stainless steel which otherwise would require very expensive neu- tralization. If there is concentration along restricted basis :n the rock or soil the heat concentration might be very serious; montmoril- lon~te clay may act as a trap and prevent di`;tribution. Removal of

48 . cesimn and strontium wiD help recluse the problem. DR. HUBBERT: In these remarks ~ am thinking about putting wastes down ~ a wed which may be lO,QOO feet deep. It will be structurally a basin in shape. The rocks at that depth are always fun of water. If we inject into a sa~cistone at this depth, all the in- jected quip will an is nOW out radially from the well. It is quite im- portent it does not block the pores of the sandstone. Now, ~ a dilute form an far as the hot constituents are concerned, may of them won't accumulate to form concentrations. DR. CUT.l ER: But if the soil through which it passes has the capacity for an ion exchange it will solidify. You will have solids. DR. HUBBERT: At a depth of ten thousand feet, we do scat have soil; we have rocks, and it is rocks ~ am thinking about. There may be rocks composed of montrnorillonite clay. We don't inject into those. But we may hare sandstones that have a percentage of clays which may have important ion exchange properties. We might pos- sibly be ~ject~g "to a limestone. The most desirable rock would be sandstone; the clays we would avoid. The rocks OCCUR in layers. The sandstone is probably bouncled above and below by clay stone, ~d the sancistone may be several hunclred feet Rick. If we inject into the thick, clean sanclstone, Were will be comparatively little ion exchange. So, a part of the chemistry would be to get the waste ready for that kind of an Ejection. DR. A. R. DENISON ~ should like to Squire if there has been any plugging in these cribs. Have any of these cribs at Hanforcl been abandoned ? MR. PIPER: One or two of the earlier ones have been discon- t~uedbecause of probable sludge In the base of the crib that may have been suspended Awe new when it entered the crib. Escape of now was considered hazardous and fee cribs -were abandoned for that reason. ~ am not familiar with the operation of some of the later cribs. DR. DAVISON: Is there a plugging effect ~ the cribs? MR. PIPER: There definitely was ~ one or two of the earlier ones . DR. DENISON: Of something not going into the present cribs?

49. MR. PIPER: Yes. DR. THE:IS: Tanks collect most of the sludge, so the experi- ence you may have with these cribs would not be a very good ~dica- tion of what might happen in the weds. The Hanford Ic~w regret wastes are not typical of the wastes we are talking about. DR. J. W. WATKINS: ~ the petroleum Poultry we have a half-million barrels of brine to dispose of this year. There are dis- posal wells in western states talcing thousands of barrels per day without treatment at an. So it depends on the location-- whether there is permeable rock or not. DR. DAVISON: ~ think ~ east Texas they put back one barrel of water for each barrel of oil they take out. It all goes by 'gravity. No fracturing is needed. DR. HUBBERT: This stiU depends on the fImd not blocking the holes~thesa=~. DR. DENISON: You have to be sure not to let the algae grow; Hey will block it up quickly. But keep file water clean and keep the air from it and it goes back in any quantity you want to put in. DR. HUBBERT: Another thing, Dr. CuDer mentioned colloidal solids suspended in this material. That is not tolerable if you are going to inject it ~ the ground. It has to go ~ as a pure liquid, no solids . CHAIRMAN HESS: Are there any other questions: ....' . . . . ·. · ... . We have two more speakers that we would like to get In in the next forty mutes. MR. F. A. HE:DMAN: ~ would like to get a comment from Dr. Liebern~an. From the distribution of Hanford wastes, is it likely to be practical to put up a plant that win generate high level wastes at some place where you would have to transport the waste? DR. ~ T=-BERMAN: ~ think it is very likely that problems wouic] cower out us, and the feasibility of putting the waste in the ground might weH determine Me type of process we would plan to use.

50. DR. HUBBERT: It may ultimately determine where you put the reactors. DR. LU:BERMAN: We have had experience ~ transporting soli~i fuel elements to a chemical processing plant, but the handing of the liquid d waste from the chemical proces sing plant, assusn~g we want to put the waste In the ground, might determine the location of the process. , ~ MR. $Di:DMAN: Minions of gallons of waste is something wouldn't want to halve. DR. BERMAN: Neither would I. CHAIRMAN HESS: If there are no other questions, ~ wouic! like to ask Mr. Morton, of Oak Ridge, to talk to us. Mr. ROY J. Morton Health Physics Dinsion Oak Ridge National Laboratory P. O. Box P Oak Ridge, Tennessee MR. MORTON: Dr. Lieberman asker] that Mr. Stru~ess and ~ discuss our experience ant} our study program at Oak Ridge. As background information for Mr. Str~ess 's discussion of high level waste~problems, ~ will give a brief resume of past activities and de- velopmeuts, and a summary of the present studies. . - At Oak Ridge National Laboratory the waste studies are carried OD. In the Health Physics Dimension and were organized ID 194~3. Until 1953 we were concerned principally with low level wastes j with water , ~ . ~ . ~ ~ . ^~ , ~ . ~ _ _ _ needy cri- neconlarn~a~zon problems, worn stream surveys;, and the teria, andtechniques of laboratory analysis. Those problems have not been solved completely but they have been given considerable at- tension and reported. The high level waste disposal problem became urgent, and In early 1954 the section was reorganized as the Sanitary Engineering Research Section. Since that time our efforts have been cle~roted almost entirely to this problem In anticipation of the peace- time uses of nuclear energy, particularly by He power industry. The early studies had to do with the wastes which could be dis- charged from the Laboratory into White Oak Creek and thence into ......... , ~

51. Couch River, and be disposed of by dilution. There are severed types of wastes. The principal types are: sanitary sewage which is treated separately; cooling water which has no opportnmty for being contaminate ~ with raclioactiv~ty and can b e dis char ge ~ dire ctly to White Oak Creek; the slightly-e ontam~nated process water from lab- oratory sinks, and the like, which, after brief retention, is discharged into White Oak Creek; cherriical wastes; ~d metal wastes. Chemical wastes, which we can ~ntermecliate, conta Chug ~ /3 00th to ~ / 30th of a curie per gaHon, have to be disposed of with care; and metal wastes have to be stored ~ tanks until reprocessed for recovery of the fuel materials . , a About 1951 the intermediate racliochemical wastes were filling up the available concrete storage tanics, despite the use of the waste evaporator, and the construction of new tank e had to be considered. Prior to that a survey by a geologist had indicated that a nearby bed of Conasauga shale had a thickness of at least 1500 feet. The shale is relatively impervious and laboratory tests showed that it might be suitable for containing wastes of his Icind. We first excavated ~ ex- perimental pit with a capacity of 200,000 gallons (Pit No. I). After introducing 130,000 gallons of evaporator concentrate a break-through to the ';urface occurred because it was on a steep hillside. Subsequent excavations have been Indicated more carefully. Two additional pits have been dug, and another is to be started ~ October 1955, each hav- ~g one million gallons capacity (Pit No, 2, No. 3, ~d No. 4~. The use of Pit ~ was discontinue] after a few months. Pit 2 and Pit 3 are still in operation. Pit 3 is nearly full, Pit 2 is two-thirds fun, once Pit 4 will be ~ operation In time to relieve these when they are fen. We are trying to evolve a safe but economical cie- 8igO to get the maximum possible efficiency from pits. Since June 1952, we have put two and a quarter minion gallons of intermediate level waste containing nearly 30,000 curies of activity into these pits. About 75 per cent of the activity is clue to ruthenium, and about 20 to 22 per cent is due to cesiurn. Three or four mon~tor~g weOs were ~n- stalled around each pit for making radiologs and talcing samples in an effort to detect the underground movement of the waste. Sampling at a distance of 80 to 85 feet showed, after about a month and a half, ruthe~urn ~d nitrates ~ the weD. ~ the highest concentration. the ~7 - ., .~ 6 acz:'n~r was about !u,u~u counts per minute per milliliter and the nits ate s about 3, 000 parts per mil ~ i on . The activity of the waste as originally put into the pit was about a minion counts per minute per milliliter, at lO per cent counting efficiency, or about 107 disintegra- tions per minute per milliliter.

52. After about a year and a half there was some breakthrough of ruthenium and nitrates to the surface and into a smaH stream at a distance of 500 feet. This was detected by the monitos~iTlg program which includes! an occasional scaring of Me ground surface and the vegetation. Only ruthenium activity was found in any of the weOs or seeps despite the fact that cesiurn arch small amounts of other radio- isotopes were present in the waste. During a very dry period when the stream was berg fed sorely by ground water seepage, 15,000 parts per million of nitrates were found In the creek. During that surruner of 1954 turtles were found clead or ~ distress ~ this creek apparently affected by the nitrates. It was known from the beginning that investigations of the problems of sanitation would have to include studies of both the radioactive constituents and the chemical constitu- ents because the wastes are Dated and the nitrates, ant! perhaps other chemicals, may be toxic. The construction costs was about $15,000 per minion gallons of pit capacity, ~ciuding the monitoring wells. This does not include the expense of the specie studies, the time of the health physicists, the mo~tor~g program, the collection of samples j and the analytical C08t. The monitoring C08t is a continuing expense not related to the cost of construction. It has been estimated conservatively Mat the discontinuance of the evaporator and the other economies, made pos- sible by the use of pits, have saved the laboratory apprc,~mateiv in, ~ $~5, UUU a yeas. -l-ne contrlouzzon oz waste =mas so tne nature dr~- age has not caused local hazards nor an-appreciable Increase In the content of radioactive material In the river. DR. KOHMAN: What is the size of the pit ? . MR. MORTON: Each pit is approximately 200 feet long, 100 feet wide, and 15 feet deep, with a slope from the outside edges to the bottom. QUESTION: They win be above the water level ? MR. MORTON: For Me most part they are above the water table which varies ~ depth with the location and may fluctuate 5 or 6 feet. ~ dry seasons the water level is below the pit but the bottom of tiLe pit may be in the water some of the time. The surcharge up to 15 feet of liquid In the pit has to be considered, of course, because of its effect upon the water level. . ... ;

53. DR. C. V. TEI15:IS: Do you keep putting liquids in the pits? MR. MORTON: Yes. They were transferred formerly by tank truck, but a pipeline has been built and about 75, 000 gaHons are pumped to the pits every two weeks. The chemistry of the wastes is different from those described by previous speakers. These wastes contain 25 to 35 per cent of dissolved solicis by weight. The principal bulk constituents are sodium ~c} ammonuum Curate. The principal radioisotopes are ruthenium and cesium. There is only a small per- centage of alurn~nurn. DR. GILLULY: What happens to the stuff? Is it diffused? MR. MORTON: It appears to diffuse grayly through the soil, the nitrates preceding everything else. The ruthenium diffuses, but none of the other isotopes have been found In we Us 50 to .75 feet from the pit. We have not detected strontium a'; yet, although strontium has been present In the waste going into Pit No. 3 Once January 1955. DR. KOHMAN: What fraction of what you put ~ has seeped out? MR. MORTON: The total input to the pits has been over two and a quarter minion gallons, and there are about one anti a half minion Talons ~ them now. There has been loss by seepage but the exact amount is not known. ~ connection untie these pits we have tried to collect data which win be of Prague in stuclies on high Petrel waste dis- posal and on further use of pits for intermediate level wastese One subject for investigation is the amount of seepage In this particular formation. Detailed explorations have been made by the Geological Survey of the character of the formation, the structure, and the hy- drology ~ this area to help determine the amount of seepage. A care- fully planned series of observations win be made during the next year to determine the evaporation from a pit of this configuration. If we know the waste input en c] the rainfall contribution, and can estimate the loss by evaporation, then we have a measure of the seepage. An approximate estimate is that the evaporation loss is about 30 to 35 inches a year and that rainfall contributes about 50 to 55 Aches a year. The liquid wastes added are about 3S,000 gallons per week into the two pits. DR. KOHMAN: The original intention was to have no seepage? MR. MORTON: No. These pits were intended primarily to pro- ~riae increased storage volume. It was assumed there would be some

a 54. seepage and the plan was to study it carefully to determine whether the seepage created a hazard. So far we think it has not. The Operations Division is considering the tlse of, say, a total of five pits, the idea berg that an operating seepage system would contribute fluids continuously to the soil over a large area and that Me seepage clef Quip would balance the production of waste. That is the general concept. If we fad that it creates a hazard, we can put liners z~ the new pits to minimize seepage, or aged start building storage taulcs. Some people ~ the more arid areas are quite interested In this concept be- cause they do not have the unfavorable balance between rainfall and evaporation which we have. We have more raz~faH than evaporation but In many places it is the reverse. DR. KORAN: Why not build shed roofs over the pits? it hot? MR. MORTON: That is a possibility that has heen discussed with the Weaker Bureau, but a roof win restrict evaporation as well as the entrance of rainwater and we might not Air much. The work of es~cimat~ng the e~raporation loss is berg done with the collaboration of the Weather Bureau, the U. S. Geological Survey, and others. It includes measuring liquid temperatures at the surface and below the surface, air temperatures and wind velocities, the chem- ical content of the waste Aqua, and other measurements that the Weather Bureau people ten us are necessary In order to calculate evaporation losses. DR. HUBBERT: What is the temperature of this n~aterial? Is MR. MORTON: No, it is not hot? I~ may be above ordinary tap water temperatures, but not much. Waste disposal research at ORNERY is a cooperative program ~n- volving several agencies: the Public Health Service, the U. S. Weather Bureau, the U. S. Geological Survey, the Tennessee Valley Authority, and the U. S. Engineers. The program talces into consid- eration the interests of many agencies; besides our own. For example, the U. S. Geological Surveys and our own workers are studying ~ cle- tail the geologic-structures and the hydrology at the sites which we propose to use for high ferret wastes ~iSpo8~ facilities. The objective is to see whether or not the behavior of wastes below grounc} can be correlated with the movement of underOro~c3 water. The evidence

- . - ~~ - ='athered to date indicates that it may be possible to correlate the data on waste with the data on water. If this proves valid, a reliable picture of the ground water movement may make it possible to pre- dict in a given situation whether or not a hazard would be created by the release or escape of wastes into the ground. DR. DENISON: Did you say your first two pits were built on knoll and you had a breakthrough at the base ? MR. MORTON: Yes. DR. DENISON: And you are now building one which won't have that hazard? MR. MORTON: No, that is also berg built on somewhat of a knoH In orcler to keep the pit above tile water table as much as pos- sible. We plan to put fresh water into this pit and make observations on seepage into the ~round. The water cantee pumped out and the waste put in later. We suspect that it will break out but we feel that in de:Hin~ with intermediate or low level waste we should take actv~- tage of the capacity of the soil so long as we don't get a breakout that is exces sire of hazardous . CHAWMAN HESS: We will now hear from Mr. Str~ess. Mr. E. G. Struxness, Director Waste Disposal Project He alth Thy ~ i c ~ Dive ~ i on Oak Ridge National lUaboratory P . O . Box P Oak Ridge, Tennessee At. MR. STRUXNESS: In late 1954, after extensive discussions, we set out to formulate a practical concept of the reactor waste dis- posal problem. Calculations based on the Putnam predictions of power development in the next forty years yielded figures that were invariably large. After a year of study, we ciecicled to let others worry about the U. S. problem and we would be content to develop a method of disposing of ORND wastes. Highly-raclioactive power- reactor waste may be disposed of in pits, prowled there is complete retention and imrnob~lization of radionuclides ~ the pits. For the disposal of low-level and ~ntermediate-level waste, some combination of retention plus seepage might be useful.

l 56. The disposal of high-le~re} wastes includes pre-treat~nent to make them suitable for ground disposal. This may be considered chemicalprocess~g in the sense that Hssion products having ~ndus- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e · ~ Treat ann medical use may oe or su~c~ent entered to recover. The - - iti - ~1 i .~^C! =~^ :90 v90 c - 89 y91 ~ C! 137 __ ^~ Ace. ~^ - ~ ~ ~ _^ ~ ~ ye ~ Bal37 ~ Cel44 Prl44 Zs9~, Nb95, Bal40, Lal40, and Pmi47. If these can be re- moved the problem of heat will largely disappear. Chemical precip- itation and solvent extraction methods for removing some of these isoto pea are berg developed and the value of one or two isotopes · ~ , ~ . ~ ~ ~ .— might pay for the removal of the rest of them. To Acreage the effective use of pits, the geologic and hydro- logic conditions that seem to be most favorable for the location of the pits are being studied. ~ addition, the possibility of cle~relop~ng impervious liners is berg explored: this includes mineral Hoers and asphalt liners, and also possible self-sealing as the result of ~ter- action between the wastes and the soil. ~ searching for a suitable liner, wohavestudied concrete, Hmestoneandasphalt~theconta~n- ment of acid waste; high temperatures and radiation have a deleterious effect on asphalt, but the concrete seems as though it might hold up lone enough once we have developed a method of permanently fixing O O - ~ — ~ ~ — ————~———-—~—, —— —0 . .. . . . ., ~ . . . . ... . . ~ . . and tus~g the waste. Asphalt has been tester moth hungry aDcanne waste Whit has been in the pit for over a year without showing any leakage e Even though an impervious liner is developed. it will be necessary to imsnobilize the waste in the pit. The ceram~sts have ideas which may prove helpful in permanently fig and fusing the ma- teri~ ~ the pit after the water has evaporated and Me nitrogen odder have been driven off. Even if we have an impervious liner. ~d the material is per- .. . - manently fixed and fused in the pit, it is imports for purposes of monitoring to understand the exchange properties of. the soil ~ which you Iocate the T,zt. The surface disposal of wastes is as much a urob- , ~ _ ~ _ , ~ . . . .. . ~ . ~ ~ ~ . lem at `3eocuemI=ry as It 18 geology. w e are concerned ~ so about the techniques of mow toning ~ weds and ~ the soil to determine the underground movement. The acid alumin~n nitrate wastes have been studied sit the past year to deprive means of fixing the isotopes permanently. This is acicI-deficient waste which might forest a gel or slurry when muted with cheap and readily available materials such as clay silicates, phoshate tailings, and soda ash. The volumes aide d should be kept as low as possible and should aid In fusion. To avoid c:rea~g a hazard from

57 ~ airborne radioactivity during the evaporation and fusion processes, it may be feasible to use river sand-as an entrapment bed and shield. It may be possible to sinter the dried mass into a ceramic body, from which, we hope, the radioisotopes win not escape. There may be enough heat generated In the residue to bring about self-fusior~ or self- s~ntering but ceramists and others fee! that the amount of heat energy available is on its borderline. It might be necessary to use a calcin- ing or sintering machine. It is important to keep the sintering temper- ature low In orcier to minimize the volatilization of the radio isotopes. Something like twelve or fifteen clay flux mixtures containing synthetic waste and tracers were prepared by Dr. McVay. One mixture con- sisted of the following: 250 milliliters of acid waste solution, 30 grams of soda ash, 30 gra~nsof about ZOO-meshlimestone, ~d 100 grams of 6-mesh calcareous shale from the Volunteer Cement Co . The mixture Maters at 1,050 degrees Fahrenheit; after 50 days, leach tests In tap and salt water showed that only Cesium 137 is leached. This was unusual In our experience, because the wastes In the present pits conSam cesium, ruthenium, and 'strontium, but only ru1ibe~urn has moved through the shale. DR. GRIGGS: You listed a group of critical nUclides that you are going to get rid of but you include one of them in your tests of fusion fixation ? MR. STRU~ESS: The idealized concept supposes that cesium w~Ube removed from the waste, but Dr. McVay is ~ncludi"~, Cesium ~ Ms synthetic wastes because the cesimn separation process has not been worked out. CHAIRMAN HESS: We wiD have to limit the questions because i; the Steering Committee has to work after this meeting. .l propose that ; we have the questions the first thing in the morning. MR. STRUXNESS: Louis you like for me to continue? ~ arn afraid ~ have a half-hour more. CHAIRMAN HESS: We don't want to rush. ~ Wiry we Ant close his session now and start off at this point at nine o'clock tomorrow morning. . . . The meeting adjourned at ~ 0: ~ 5 0 ' clock . . .

58. SUNDAY MORNING SESSION September 11, 1955 The meetly reconvened at 9: 15 o'clock, Dr . He ss presiding . CHAIRMAN HESS: Mr. Str~ess will continue. MR. STRUXNESS: We have made four "hot pot" experiments that are ciesignecito tellus whether or not self-fusionis possible. The calculations of heat capacity ant! heat dissipation of various wastes anc] different containers were testect empirically. The pot is built as follows: the innermost container holds clay that had been calc~nea previously at 600 degrees, with a heater in the center; the heater is a pressed mica sheet wound with nichrome wire; surrounding the clay container i'; an insulating container of 4 inches of lamp black, and this, ~ turn, is surrounded by {3 inches of vermiculite. ~ the three experiments depicted In the table the dimensions of tile inner container were changed. We tried to maintain the Verne insulation surrounding, the inner container. To represents the temperature at the center of the inner container. To represents the temperature of the clay at the exterior of the inner coroner. . - - - ¢ - ~ , - T3 is the temperature at the exterior was of the lamp black container. The outside container is a galvanized con ~ the dimensions of which are 4 feet in height and 3 feet In diameter . In "hot pot" No. ~ the inner container was 4 inches high ~d 12 inches diameter. ~ experiment No. 2 the inner container was 6 Nones in diameter and 2 inches high. In exper~rnent 4 the Aver container was 24 inches In diameter and ~ inches creep. At 40 watts input the temper- ature rose to about 385 degrees In approximately 4 days. With ~- creased power-, the temperature rose rapidly and ~;tabliz~ed at about 560 de Frees Centigrade on approximately the 9th day . With further increase power, the temperature rose rapidly and stablized at approximately 730 degrees after the 14th clay. If we plot the input in watts as a func- tion of temperature, the curve suggests to the ceramists that a reason- able temperature to attempt to achieve for fusion is 900 degrees C. Experiments 2 arid 4 were performed to determine the effect of areas to volume ratio, on the energy required to heat the clay mass. ~ experiment ~ this ratio is .S, and the calculated power is midway between .01 ant] .02 watts per c.c. In experiment No. 2 this ratio is slightly over ~ . 5, and the power input calculated is midway between .06 ~d .07 watts per c.c. In experiment No. 4, where the dimensions 5

r ._ ~ _ Ad; ;' a, . :\ ., . , ', ,. 59. TAB1F I HEAT EXPE RIME Nip DATA Time Watts Tl(Center} T2tExterior) T3(Carbon Insulation oC oC oC Exterior) (days) . ... . EXPERIMENT 1 0 40 28 25 25 1 40 280 1 57 46 2 40 338 208 72 7 60 383 254 98 1 ~ 60 554 373 140 17 80 636 414 144 25 80 722 490 176 - . EXPERIMENT 2 0 10 25 25 25 2 10 226 176 54 7 20 414 324 86 9 49 764 616 143 10 60 - 884 - 152 (failed before eq'';librium) EXPERIMENT 4 0 400 25 25 25 2 400 800 428 157 3 400 876 (628) 212 (heater failed)

~ - ~ 1 mass . 60. were increased to 8 inches deep and 24 inches in diameter ~ his ratio is slightly above .4, and the calculated input is slightly above .01 watts per c.c. DR. KOHMAN: Is this the power necessary to get 900 degrees? MR. STRUXNESS: This is the power required to fuse this clay MR. MORTON: You will get 900 degrees if you have enough in sulation at the boundary. MR. STRUXNESS. However, Dr. Johnson, who did these ex- periments, feels that the se power requirements are cons;er~rative . He says that with reasonable insulation in the grouncl, and with a pit about 20 feet deep and 20 feet In diameter, one might be able to fuse this clay flux material. DR. HUBBERT: Wouldn't it be more important if you stated how much energy was required to reach that leered? DR. CULLED: It would have to be energy-time, wouldn't it, to reduce that temperature? . DR. HUBBERT: In order to produce fusion the temperature must be raised the required amount. This, In turn, ~n~rolves the ad- dition of an amount of heat equal to the heat capacity of the material at the melting temperature with respect to that of the initial tempera- sure, and then an aciclitional amount of heat to product fusion. The power required, it seems to-me, is fundamentally ambiguous because Me heat produced by any given power is proportional to the time. Since there are heat losses by conduction, these c--be kept small only by keeping the time as short as possible, which implies rapid heating at a high power level. The object, therefore ,_should be not to find the least power that would permit fusing temperature to be reached, but rather to produce fusion at the least energy cost. At low power levels the energy expenditure could be without limit because of heat leakage; at high power levels the energy required would approach that for fusion without leakage. MR. STRUXNESS: Further work is needed to extend the pouts on the curare, and ~ will certainly talk to him about it.

o 61. DR. LINDSEY: At Hanford most of the energy would be re- leasec3 ~ boilirlg anal ~ the ground. DR. HUBBERT: The primary concern is how much energy is needed} to make these brickettes. MR. STRUXNESS: Yes. DR. HUBBERT: Is this heating element shaped lilce a doue~,haut, hollow inside ? MR. STRUXNESS: Yes. In experiment No. 4, the set up is as follows: In the inner con- ta~er is acid aluminum nitrate waste plus the clay flux mixture, sur- rounded with foam glass, ~d with vermiculite ~ the outer container. The diameter of the Inner container is 12 inches, the foam glass con- ta~ner is 20 Aches, the trot pot outer cottager is 36 Aches, the height is 48 Aches, and the inner liquid is 24 inches. With ~ input of 40 watts Me temperature rose to almost 100 degrees Centigrade ~ 3 days. Then the power we'; Screamed to 100 watts and the temperature rose Ranier. Act at about Me few day it was somewhere between ~ 10 arch MU degrees. Berg at about the third day, ~O extending to tne tenth clay, it bubbled and ~;teamecI. Berg about the sixth clay the temperature began to increase slowly and NO2 funned began to appear. This continued until the nineteenth flay, the temperature gradually ~- creasing -- on the fifteenth day, the temperature had risen to about 250. By the twentieth day We temperature had risen to 300°C., at which port practically aD the nitrogen oxide had been released. Then the temperature began to rise more abruptly, so that by Me thirtieth day the temperature had risen to 460°C.; Me reason for this; was that after the liquid had been evaporated and Me mtrogen oriole fusnes had been evolved, an ~sulat~g material was added above the dry mass. Now a word about what happens ~ the inner container: the level of the liquid was 24 inches, the diameter 12 Aches. As the level dropped 10 inches noting clung to the wallet Then dropping from 10 to 17 inches the material die] cling to the wars. The reduction of the waste and clay flux mixture was from ;54 Aches to something on the order of ~ Aches. The heater failed, so temperatures could not be raises! further but the mass acemec! to be fairly weH fused. Dr. Johnson's de acription of the consolidation is as follows: 1

62. 1'No violent babbling, surging or Burping were ob`;er~red and as the mass shrank it did not adhere to the container walls during Ate first 2/3 of its consolidation. Only small amounts of the cake adhered after mat. The mass appeared to be fairly uniformly heated. Although the temperature finally attained was insufficient for good stn- ter~ng, the mass was haul witch relatively small bubbles trapped within. The plans are to continue the experiments using a pit perhaps 6 feetin diameter and 6 feet deep, end possibly progressing to a pit approximately 20 feet in diameter, 20 feet deep. ~ The final stage, presumably, would be to build another pit of this approximate size and add to our clay nux rnix~ure hot reactor wastes to see if self-fusion can be obtained. DR. HUBBERT: How large is the first pit going to be? MR. STRU~ESS: The first win be 6 feet deep and 6 feet in diameter. The second win be 20 feet deep and 20 feet in diameter with an Ternary ~nataDed heater. The Bird step is Me same size pit, approximately. adding our mixture deco the hot waste. DR. L.. R. ZUMWAI`T: ~ take it that tl''s alum Strafe waste Mat you used ~ this experiment did not have the fission proil- ucts in it. It was merely the chemical equivalent of the bulk. ~ . MR. STRUXNESS: Eight. DR. ZUMWALT: In other words, there has been no opportunity to take the solid mass and subject it to leaching tests. MR. STOUTNESS: Right. Furthermore, we have learned ~ some of the experiments that Me ruthenium comes off ~ the gases. Not Al of it, but quantities enough to worry us, and we are building equipment to collect it. ~ DR. TUNIS: Where are the heaters located? Are they actually the radioactive Liquid? MK. STRUXNESS: It is simulated waste. DR. TH31:IS: They are in Me reactors, and actuary to have overheating Me mixture must entirely overlie the heater surface.

63. MR. STRUXNESS: 'Nell, ~ don't know. Dr. Johnson says that the dry mass was uniformly heated. DR. BENSON: ~ suppose you suspected that you would be very closely simulating it when you have the heat released by radioisotope aecay . MR . STRUXNESS: Yes . ~ suppose if the heat were not evenly distributed we would have gotten burping, . DR. HUBBERT: Coming back to power versus energy: if to reach an equilibrium based on the curve would take a long time, it will take a very large amount of energy. If, on the other hancl, you put in larger power you produce that temperature in much shorter time alla I suspect you would brig about much lower energy cost. think the energy is important, not the power. MR.- STRUXNESS: ~ win have to get the information. DR. KORAN: When you do this by self-fus~g you won't get any power failure. Your heater won't bum out. You would be able to turn it off when you want to. But it za difficult to get it mollified if it is hot enough so it will liquefy, and this; brags up the general problem of the heat that win be produced by insoluble waste. . MR. STRUXNESS: There are other difficulties connected with this experiment. It requires wastes with an activity of the owlet of !;00 curies per lithe to produce enough heat. DR. HUBBERT: The problem involved is the energy problem. You can melt anything with that amount of heat coming off continually at the center. DR. P. H. ABELSON: What is the object of using self-heat~ng or self-fussDg as against using other sources of heat? MR. STRUXNESS: At the moment we clon't know whether self- fusion win work or not. The heat is there. DR. ABELSON: Obviously the self-fusion will work if you have enough heat per unit of volume ant} if you don't allow too much to es- cape. ~ mean, suppose that you can have self-fusion, why use it?

64. MEMBER: I think it would be a lot easier to handle this stuff. It Is going to be awfully hot from the gamma radiation st~dpo~t. DR. ABELSON: Once you have got this red hot brick, what are you going to do tenth it? DR. ZUMWAL'r: You can have a remote operation ancl let it heat itself. MEMBER: ~ assume you are going to keep it right there. . MR. STRUXNESS: Part of our answer is self-fusion anti low- fir~ng temperature, and 'there is a feeling that uses wiD be found for some of these fission products, and it wouici be nice if we comb im- mobilize them until then rather tha~pump them into art inaccessible place . DR. HU33BERT: isn't it probable Me pro d~uctiox1 of fission prod- ucts is likely to keep pace tenth the development of the needs ? Suppose we throw e~rery~ing away right now. There is more coming adong. The way this thing is promising to develop it looks to me like we are always going to have ample supplies of hot material for all current needs. If so, a little waste is not impor~ca~tO - ~ ~ A — ~—~ CHAIRMAN HESS: Are there any other questions? Thank you, Mr. Stru~ess. GENERAL DISCUSSION . - DR. LOOFBOUROW: Is it correct to say that reactors will generate moderate to low Eternity wastes, and those reactors must be located for reasons of operating ecc~nor.~y near where the power is required, but the problem of disposal at those sites is not a serious one because of the type of waste. ~ But the highly concentrated wastes generated at chemical plants, which can only be shipped with serious costs or hazards, can be shipped farther, so that the site of those plants can be chosen where dispose is most simple ? DR. ABELSON: No. It would be most economics to -process at the spot. The radiation hazard would be very great.

65. DR. BERMAN: ~ don't believe that que`;tion car be answered categorically. For example: if you have an aqueous type of reactor and process it at the spot you would have high level waste right at the reactor site. On the other hand, with the heterogenous reactors, fuel element`; can be shipped to the chemical procese~g plot. The answer differs with the type of reactor decided upon. DR. LOOFBOUROW: Are we limited ~ the consideration of Abe immediate problem to one or the other of these situations ? . CHAIRMAN HE:SS: No. The committee clebated whether to Emit discussion to the possibility of establishing two disposal areas ~ the United States, or whether the disposal should be around every reactor. So many variables had to be considered that it was decided each com- mittee should be aDowed to work out its own course. DR. CULL OR: The processing of the homogeneous waste does occur right at the site, ~ the sense that the fis siou products are the fuel. But the plant that separates thorium from uranium does not have to be there. ~ fact, the economics of the processing and of the con- struction of processing plants Chic ate s it would be desirable to operate at maximum capacity. It arrears at the moment most economical to . ~ nave ~ to ~o reactors served by one processing plant. DR. H. C. THOMAS: Is it possible to remove the aluminum . from waste solutions ? . DR. CULLED: Yes, depending on the type of fuel element. It is impossible to get rid of the aluminum ~ ~ alurIiinurn-uramum alloy. Aluminum may be dissolved ~ caustic, but the uranium is slot soluble, so a caustic separation process may be developed. The Bow for high temperature elements are ~ Cult to separate and are highly salted some cases. DR. KOHMAN: ~ would lace to ask a question about Me ratio of ten reactors to one processing plant. Isn't it possible that all these reactors might be ~ one area for a central power station? DR. CUL`l F-R: Yes . DO . KORAN: So you wouldn't necessarily neec! transportation. DR. CUL`1 F-R: There would be some transport, ~d Rat means building a carrier and getting equipment. If you transport two miles,

66. it is almost as economical, considering all the loacling ant] unloading, to transport it 200 miles. The transportation cost per mile is impor- tant, but it is not necessarily the major item. DR. HE: DM AN: It seems to me there is a great difference be- tween transportation between points In your own installation and points in different installations. Some citizens object to hang radioactive waste s hauled acres s their water supply. DR. LINDSEY: The slugs are moved generally ~ large casks that have 9 to I! inches of lead.. The cask weighs approximately ten tons, and the slugs weigh one to two 1hous end pounds. We have to transport a tremendous amount of lead to carry a limited amount of the fuel element. The cost is less for the fuel element then for the shielding, particularly under Abe present regulations, where we almost always have ~ escrot guarding a shipment of this sort. There is an incentive to recluce the transportation if there is a way to do it. DR. WATKINS: ~ want to ask whether it is feasible at all to transport ion-active liquid waste by common carrier, and if so, how much could you haul it for ? DR. R. J. RUSSELL: May ~ add z;ometh~a to that question. The transportation of radioactive material in this country by common carrier is controlled by the Interstate Commerce Commission, and they have very Refute rules, and anybody can read them. . ~ - ~ . - ; ..~ DR. HE:DMAN: I might add one thing to that. I have recently looked over the I.C.C. regulations, and they specifically state that you must transport according to the I.C.C. regulations unless it is done by or for Me A.E.C. uncler escort, ~ which case the I.C.C. doesn't seem to care. DR. HAWKINS: It seems to me the proper design of a pipline has some possibility, and there has been some experience on pipelines. wonder if somebody would say something about that. DR. LINDSEY: The pipe];nes at Hanford consist generally of a concrete encasement In which are laid two or three starriest steel lines, and covered by a concrete cap. The encasement and space around the pipe is carefully constructed] so it drains, and the drainage is monitored to be certain obese is no leakage from the pipes. The in- staHation is extremely expensive. 6

67 . We have given thought to making pipe of carbon steel, but the diHic~ties always seem to be resoldered by using stainless steel. The lines are built of about winch pipe, but there is no reason they cannot be made larger. DR. HUBBERT: How much does it cost per mile? DR. LINDSEY: ~ don't know the accurate figure, but it is some- th~ng on the order of one hundred] thousand cloHars. DR. ROEDDER: If you have disposal at just a few places you have to transport either the waste to those sites or you have to set up your processing plants at disposal sites. ~ would imagine that the cost of transporting slugs would be far less than the cost of transport- ~g waste . Is that not true ? DR. LINDSEY: We have not transported liquid wastes. We are afraid to. We have transported slugs on a large scale and for quite a while. There is no reason why we couldn't work out a way to trans- port liquids. It just doesn't seem as safe as tra=epor~dng the slugs. DR. RUSSEI,I`: May ~ remark that the A.E.C. can get away with a great may things ~ this country that a private <:orporatiou Operating a power plant wouicl not be permitted to clot DR. KORAN: With regard to transportation ~ think one would have to consider We relative cost of transport the materials and transporting the power. ITL other words, whether the power plant is to be near an area where the material is to be disposed of, or near the area where the power is to be useci, or not near either one. DR. HUBBERT: Mr. Chairman, ~ would lice to malce a furler comment on that. It is a truism of sorts that with any technology de- ~relopment, you begin to tie on where you are now, but as time goes on you sometimes abandon the initial premise. It seems to me this is a strong pos';ibi1;ty~n the case at hand. At the moment, we are talking about building atomic power plants for industrial power where we al- ready have coal power plants. The reason for Mat it; perfectly obvious: we use 60 cycle AC current and the economic transmission is about 400 miles. Many of you know that there have been theoretical discussions ~d a fair amount of experimental work that dates back thirty or forth years on high tension DC long distance transmission. It is physically possible but it has never been done. In principle, you generate AC to high voltage, rectify DC, and transmit it great distance';; 1 hen convert

68. to AC and step the voltage down to that of your power plaints. Initially we assume building atomic reactors ~ lieu of coal plants in consumer areas. But if this industry becomes as large as has been discussed there, ~ thinly we will have to re-exaniine the preens ise. It may be, because of transportation costs of the hot material, that we might eventually decide that it is better to put the power plants ~ habited area, and transmit the power to centers of consump_ tion by methods that are considered unorthodox at the moment. That is not something that this committee is caned upon to solve or to rec_ ommend. It is not with)" the premise of the contemplated power plant, but it is ~ the background. DR. MORTON: ~ don't have any specific data with regard to transportation of high level wastes, but our experiments with low or intermediate level lead us to thank that transportation in a container is going to be uneconomic and not feasible for more the" very short dis- ta~ces. Our wastes were ~ to 30 curies per gallon, transported in 500_ gallon tanics on specially constructed trucks, hoisted wad a lift some feet back of Me driver, and we lead shields behind tibe cab. The ex- posure time for the driver was very short but exposure time created a bottleneck in getting waste out to the pit despite its low leered. A pipe- line 7000 feet long now does the work of Me trucks. Multiply the hazard by several hundred to a thou sad curies per gallon, and it requires transportation in a container shielded with seven to Me mches of lead all around, weighing many tons, ~d carrying several gallons at a time. It is impractical. DR. ZUMWALT: Dr. Culler mentioned that economics require one chemical plant for several reactors. But ~ wondered how about the economics of field transportation. Is Mat considered- ~ 'there ? .. . - ~ 1 DR. CULL~F-R: There have been several studies of Me probable Cost of transportation of various kincis of carriers, but ~ don't think it has been worked out and integrated into the economics of power. ~ am saying that a central chemical plant is necessary from Me star.dpo~t of the chemical plant alone, and with;= a DC structure it is economic to ship fuel certain distances to a plant Mat already has the capacity rawer than building a new plant. An Lingual kind of analysis has to be made and it isn't very clear at the moment, because the specifica- tions have not been written on the reactor, the processing, the locations, the power, etc. 6 . ,, ,, , _.

- 69. DR. ~:DMAN: Could ~ get some idea of the volume that is transported between a power reactor and a punt? DO . C Ul-T OR: Let' s say the fuel elements are maple out of a metal like zirco~urn, and zirconium slag or staginess steel built ~ a similar m;~""er. It might be necessary to transport an element 15 feet long any 5 inches in diameter. In order to shield his after a rea- sonable cooling period it would require about ~ or 10 Aches of lead. DR. HI:DMAN: That is within the realsn of being practical. ~ thought maybe you would have to transport large volumes of liquid be- ~ides . DR. CULl TAR: No. If you shipped the fuel element within thirty days after it comes out the reactor you would have to provide cooling water to take out the fission products. You can put a number of such fuel elements ~ the cask, ~d ~ suspect the size of the cask is deter- m~ned by the limits of the carrier. If you have an 80, 000 pound flat car you make the cask 430,000 pounds. There is mower factor that enters into it. If the fuel elements are highly enriched you have to limit the number that go into the cask. But ~ suspect if you have more cylinders of shielded lead on a Oat car you could transport a reasonable number of fuel elements at one time. The transportation is going to become a business like the power bumpers, ~ suspect, ard it has never been looked at In this light. Re~,- ulations may have to be changed to take care of it. Right now it is a big hazard and we are Hong everything we can to make sure there is no Anger. DR. L. MacMURRAY: Dr. Morgan at Job=s Hopkins has some specifications on this question of transporting liquid wastes. Would you like to have him present it? CHAIRMAN HE:SS: Yes. DR. J. N. MORGAN: After the first Woods Hole meeting, at Johns Hopkins we made a few observations based on Dr. Culler's paper concerning the transportation of liquid wastes. These figures are based upon the information concerning shipment of slugs throughout the United States. The cost of the cask, Ate transportation cost, the carrier cost, the salaries, and amortization of the cask, total 9 cents per ton mile to 6

70 ~ ship the lead, i.e., the shield that cont~s the slugs. Calculations were made for a hollow sphere about 4 I/2 feet Sternal diameter with a capacitor of about 500 gallons as envisioned at Oak Ridge for transporting liquid waste. With a IZ-~nch wall, skids, base, and structural steel, the cask would probably weigh approximately 50 tons . Some of the weight was the waste itself. The liquid waste that presurn- ably would go into this contained the maximum activity mentioned by Dr. Culler in his first discussion, namely, 2000 curies per gallon. At 9 cents per ton mile, it would cost about $14 per gallon to ship 1000 miles . Remember that these calculations were on data obtained from the shipment of slug';, which are the only data available. There has been no shipment of liquid waste; possibly on a modified basis of 200 gallons In a container of 4 suches of lead sb~elding it would appear more eco- nomical. DR. LINDSEY: What about coo1;ng-for something as hot as that? DR. MORGAN: It was not considered. DR. HUBBERT: -is 2000 curies the maximum you can horde? DR. MORGAN: That is the ma~murn Dr. Cuber mentioned. DR. HUBBERT: WeH, those ca" be further concentrated. DR. MORGAN: Yes. We took these from his initial work, based on 2000 curies per gaHon. DR. HUBBERT: None the less, if you are shipping that much lead we can Fit the cask with more concentrated material if there are no reasons for not doing it. ~ other words, how many curies could you put in that container and stay short of critical? DR. CULl OR: There is no criticality on the waste. DR. HUBBERT: Good. Then we could concentrate this to drynes s . DR. CULLER: As this gets more concentrated you have to pro- ~ride cooling: ~000 curies per gallon is pretty hot and will boil itself without a little cooling.

71. DR. HUBBERT: What I meant is that we are paying $14 per gallon for hauling lead. Now, if we cat" hold 100 times as many curies tenth the same load of lead we can cut this $14 per gallon. Even if we have to add a refrigerating unit we cut that down to a fraction of a dol- lar . cost . . DR. CULLER: This particular waste is Ready saturated with aluminum, and the dry aluminum concentrate occupies the same volume as the wet solution. DR. HUBBERT: The aluminum is not radioactive. Can we get rid of it? DR. CUL.L`ER: Yes. That $14 per gallon made us get rid of it. (L'aughter) DR. MacMURRAY: ~ would like to come to the rescue-of Dr. Morgan: liquid reactor waste costs $14 a gallon to ship. The discus- sion has moved on to talk of concentration and refrigeration, and to the removal of Humbug. DR. MORGAN: To carry it further, this was based on a freight car 40 feet ~ length, and it would hold three of these units. So the freight car load was about ~ 50 tons . DR. ROEDDER: If you loaded Mat Maine freight car with BlUgB what Louis be the equipment? DR. MORGAN: ~ don't think you can make a comparison. DR. ROE DDER: As to curies and slugs, I wondered the relative DR. MO-ROAN: ~ casmot give you that. Perhaps the answer lies along the lines of developing a specially constructed railroad car in the shape of ~ oilta~cer, completely shielded, with atube through the center and shielded at either end. DR. RUSSELL: Have you ever considered what would happen to the car ~ a tram wreck? DR. MORGAN: ~ am sure Hat the possibility of an accident has been on Mr. Gorman's mind.

72. DR . HE:DMAN: What is the basis- for your 50 tons ? DR. MORGAN: Conformity Etch the existing I.C.C. regulations. DR.-WATKINS: It seems probable that with a homogeneous re- actor, the disposal facilities are to be at the site; with a heterogeneous reactor, the processing plant can be at some distance from the reactor. DR. CULLER: ~ don't think that is true. The homogeneous re- actor materials can be shipper} just as can the heterogeneous elements. The peaces sing on the heterogeneous system consists of drawing a small amount off the reactor, arid shipped it as the reactor fuel ele- ment, ~ suspect. It has a higher potential of spillage than does a metal container, but you are not shipping thousands of gallons. In the homo- geneous system you do not withdraw uranium; you withdraw fission products, and from the external core. The cycle or turnover time for the core is about 270 days, and the amount of material that we have to take out per day may be in the neighborhood of 100 to 200 1itres. The liquid might be transported ~ relatively small Volumes, or as a dry solid. It is necessary to bow off heavy water Ad rehire it to the homo- geneous system before the stuff drawn off the reactor leaves the plant. We probably would be transporting dry sodium oracle. DR. RUSSELL: That would be at high temperature ? . DR. CURVIER: At a high temperature in a coolly system. DR. HUBBERT: It seems to me we have been very premature indeed Awe come to any conclusion that the waste can~otbe trans- ported. The difficulties are great and the costs appear high but ad- niitte~ythe estimates are sub3ectto many modifications and are based on "adequate data. There are enmesh ounortanities for corrections . and improvements, therefore, the imposition of limiting suppositions may seriou';ly jeopardize the usefulness of the committee. DR. CLAUS: ~ our committee work should we consider prima- rily our immediate problem, and by immediate ~ mean the next ten to twenty years, or should we consider it in terms of the vast quantities that have been discussed in connection tenth possible production by the year 2000? Furthermore, should we think primarily ~ terms of prob- lems ~ the United States, or should we take a wider ~new? England, for example, expects to have a large number of reactors and some are us der construction. Their waste disposal plain; are unknown to most , · - . .. . ..

- ; :d ~ - 73 ~ of us at the conference, and it should be kept ~ mind that England's problems are world problems just as ours are, and any thoughts we might have on the disposal of waste from England will also be of bene- fit to us. :- & CHAIRMAN HESS: ~ think it would be difficult to consicler con- struction outside the Uniter} State`;. Construction of reactors and dis- posal of waste in most countries will probably follow the pattern set by the originators. There is nobody here who knows enough of the geol- ogy of out-of-the-way places to give intelligent data. A lot of people here are familiar with many parts of the United States, so we can come to rather specific conclusions about many places, whereas ~ don't know that we are competent to tackle the geology of England from our pro- fessiollal experience, and whatever we do here, except for Englantl, will probably be followed in over countries. We can find solutions for the condition'; ~ the United States and we can work out analogous solu- tions for over areas ~ Me future. ~ think we have sufficient diversity within the United States to meet any conditions any other country would face. ~ don't tank we should discuss Outside meat. DR. LACK Y: Such things as costs and amortization would be considerations ~ competitive Emus try or would be handled by fairly adbstanti~ go~rerament subsidy. ~ propose we omit these items ~d think of the technolog'zc~ feasibility of the solutions to the problems nearest to us. If solutions are found, Me costs win be clealt Off Me norms development of the industry. CHAIRMAN H11:SS: ~ think that is right, for we will not have cost figures for the mews of disposal that we suggest. DR. ABELSON: On the other hand, if the cost of disposal is more - --t}~an the Court of storage in tanks, it is not a good solution.. -I- DR. G. F. JEANS: ~ would like to add that the Union Carbide Companyis deeply~nterested On these consideration'; as a priorate firm. We are working Inch practically Apache power reactor groups =~ designs ofchen~calprocess~ng plants to purity reactor fuels. The variations are certainly complex: Lathe government reactor prograxn Here are -~about five kinds ofreactors, and He A.~.C.is encouraging He devel- opmentofnew types oireactors. There is no advantage In building -just one kind, so the physicists, the meta~ur~sts, and The mechanical engineers are being encouraged to develop new reactor designs, new reactor arrangements, and new metallurgical Buoys. For example,

74. the Detroit Allison Company is interested ~ t he fast breeder reactor using alloys containing only a small amount of fissionable material; _ ~ ~ . ~ . ~ ~~ . in. . ~ ~ ~ . , In order to run me system al one maximum ez~clency, Ryan 18, 10 breed, the fuel is to be purified at a high rate. The problem is not just to rid the fuel of the fission products, but also to process rapidDy so as to minimize the inventory costs of fissionable uranium. It takes a lot of reactors to retake it economical to run a chemical processing plant; but on the other hand, aU of the different reactor plants must have some on-the-site purification ~ order to cut clown the amount of ire uranium. Then the slags or the concentrated form of the fission products containing a minimum of uranium will be shipped to a central face ity where it is econorn~c lo recover one remaking uranium . The only reason we have the waste is because we are treating the fission products to recoverer the U 235 or Me U 233 or the Plutonium 239. If none of these material were ~ the fission products then there would be no interest In them at the present time. However, we are interested In Me radioisotopes because they are potentially valuable raw materiels. Throughout our corporation we are encouraging re- search in applications as a form of investigation distinct from research In separation and recovery. We want to encourage research In applica- tions to such fields as Ploys, gases, carbons, chemicals, plastics, and rest, ~d we are trying to build up withy our corporation an ap- preciation of the need for the utilization of Obese materials, so that Bateau of a waste disposal problem we are con~rert~g it into a raw ma- terial problem. We are, therefore, In favor of disposal ~ such a way that the material is not lost but is retained somewhere so that ~ the next Eve or ten years it can be recovered and put to use; that is what would like to suggest at the present time. We have given a lot of thought to the methods developed at Brookhaven and other laboratories where the materials are treated ~ nc~t-too-<]ilute form so that the val- uable components~caD be put to some future use. .. . - ;~ ,1 ..! DR. CLAUS: To what extent may we actually consider it feasible to remove strontium and cesiurn? ~ think~chis was discussed very en- thusiastically yesterday as something that might be done easily, and yet ~ understand that we have not yet reached the stage where it can be extracted from waste streams ~ a reasonable useable manner. It makes a difference what kind of disperse can be applied to the rem~- ~g material. If these elements are not present, the degree of hazard is so much less, that you have a different way of thinking about the re- m~g wastes than if the cesium and strontium are present. ~ Clinic this ought to be clarified before we Mink seriously about what to do with the remaining material.

75. CHAIRMAN HESS: It seems to me from the discussion that you have a reasonable chance of taking these two elements out at some future time, say five years hence, so it won't be much of a problem after that period. But it certainly is a problem at present. I think we should consider both alternatives and have multiple solutions. ~ think ~ would agree there certainly is a clisposal problem. The waste we have on hand is not being disposed of, in ally strict sense, and it is something to worry about. There also win be a waste prob- lem with us until the chemical processing and reactor treatments have been stabilized on a product that can be dealt with easily. But for the . ·. . Immediate tuture, extending lo many years, wastes wait constitute a serious problem. It is an encouraging possibility that ~ the future people can produce wastes that can be gotten rid of more easily than the present material. APPOINTMENT OF COMMITTEES The Steering Comsnittee wishes to study the Waste problem from two pouts of view and, therefore, this group should be separated into subcommittees to consider each one. One approach involves disposal at great depth us~gtech~iques like those used~ disposing of oil field brined;; the other approach iB relatively shaHow disposal such as is berg employed at Oak Ridge and Hanford. The goal is an evaluation of the efficiency, the hazards, and the practical methods of resolving, the mOi~ndual problems. Dr. Hubbert has agreed to be the Chairman of the Committee on deep disposal, am] the Committee on near-surface disposal wall be headed by Dr. Joh Frye. From the long List of Par- ticipants, each committee chairman has selected a few names to make up a nucleus; the remaining members on this fist wall be left to di~nde themselves a'; they see fit, In keeping with their individual Steve sts ~c] specializations. Those selected for the Surface Committee are as follows: Benson, Claus, Frye , Goldich, Hunt, Ingerson, Jenlcins, IJatta, Coofbourow, Theis, Thomas. Those selected for the Deep Committee are as follows: Culler, Den~son , Ferris, Garrels, GiOuly, Hubbert , Hunter, Thurston, acid Wakens . an.. ~ 6 The committee s will meet ~d proceed immediately . ... Whereupon, at 10:50 o'clock, the meeting adjourned

76. MONDAY MORNING SESSION September 12, 1955 The meeting convened at 9:15 o'clock, Dr. Hess presiding. CHAPMAN HESS: This will probably be our final session of this conference. We wall hear the reports of Me work done and cos~- clusions reached yesterday by the two committees. At the end of the reports we win have a general discussion, anci then acI.,ourn. The Grit report will be by DO. Hubbert. Dr. M. King Hubbert Chief Consultant, General Geology &elf Oil Company Box 2099 Houston I, Texas DR. HUBBERT: Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen: The committee to look into the possibility of deep waste disposal ~ permeable rocks met yesterday afternoon and reviewed He problem. We decided on two premises for our discussions: one, that the disposal should be safe; and, two, that we MUIR formulate basic principles governing disposal during what we hope win be orclerly ~d rational development of the Poultry ~ the future. ~ ogler to obtain a clearer idea of the magnitude of the waste- dispos=1 problem, the following calculation was made: Suppose that begiruiing ~ ~960, nuclear power-were produced at ~ rate eq~ to the present entire power output of the United States, and the waste products diluted to the extent of 50 gallons of water per gram of :Eission products, were injected] underground into a sandstone 100 feet thick, having 20 percent porosity, what would be the area of the Band that would be fined with waste products by the year 2000? At <~the meeting an approximate calculation was made, and the following are the slightly revised results: The present power output of the United States is about 4.~ x ~0~ kw-hr/yr (l 08 kw at a load factor of 0.54). The quantity of U-235 requ~recl would be 84 metric tons per year, and the diluted wastes would amount to 100 million (42-g~) barrels per year. By the year 2000 the area occupied by tibe wastes would be 40

77. square miles, or a square of 6,3 miles to the side -- the size of a large oil field. For comparison, ~ the East Texas oil field, 100 million barrels of water per year are currently being injected through 58 wells with 7-~nch casings. Eight wells take over 10,000 barrels per day each without pumping. Since structural basins this size, or much larger, are abunciant, it is concluded that the deep underground disposal of wastes for a long time to come would involve operations which are small as compares] with those of the petroleum industry. The various other phases of the deep disposal question were dis- cussed in considerable detail by the committee, and finally a subcom- mi~ee drew up a summary of the conclusions which were approved and read as follows: The committee has accepted as premises Me following: A. That the nuclear waste, if ';tored underground, should be isolated as permanently as possible from contact with sieving organisms; B. That the nuclear waste may be stored ocher conditions where it nedd not be recovered; C. ticular ~nsta~ation. That We disposal of waste is a specie problem for each par- However, it is concluded that certain general principles should guide the selection of methods of disposal: - I. Thistle liquids containing the nuclear waste shallhave a greater specific gravity when ~ntroclucec! into the reservoir the the liquids already present ~ the reservoir; 2. That me liquids shall be stored underground preferably where they will remain under essentially static conditions; 3 . That the introduction of the flus ds into Me bottom of structural basins is one means of satisfying effectively this condition 4. That adequate monitoring of *te distribution of nuclear waste within the reservoir be provided by appropriate observation wells,

78. which could also serve as sources of diluent; 5. That prior to the introduction of nuclear waste liquids into the reservoir, We problems of heat dissipation, clogging of reservoir space, and chemical reaction with the reservoir rock and fluids be evaluated. CHAIRMAN HESS: Does anyone wish to discuss this report or offer any amen~nents? If not, ~ will caJ1 on Dr. John Frye to present the report of the committee on surface disposal. Dr. John C. Frye Chief, State Geological Survey Urbana, I~inois DR. FRYE: The committee on the stucly of shallow disposal recommends: I. Disposal of waste materials ~ solic] form is preferable to any suggested methods of disposal of liquids. The most desirable form appears to be a stinter or brick ~ which the fission products are faced. In this form the material can be disposed of ~ shaHow covered trenches In many places. Seconc] choice would be waste materials evaporated to dryness, solids but soluble. Such materials could be packaged ~ metal containers and stored ~ shallow noises or under- grounc] vaults that are relatively dry. If feasible, different elements shouic! be packages} separately. It seems highly desirable that research along both of Mere lines be pursuecl as rapidly as possible. 2. Until concentration In solid foam becomes" feasible, disposal of Squid wastes at relatively shaHow depths may be possible under cer- ta~r. conditions. 'Shadow" proved to be a slight misnomer, because in considering mines, depths as great as 6,000-7,000 Ret were contemplated. How- ever, most of Me exca~raHone are relatively shallow ~ comparison to deep disposal methods considered by the over group. The work of the committee was conce~ratet1 on item 2, and a large range of geologic en~nromnents were studied. Many of these ge- ologic environments were discarded by the comzn~ttee as unsuited for Me hippo sal of liquids, but ~ order to record the Poe sibiliti;e 8 that were

79. discussed, it seems amusable to outline the various environments · . . conslaerea. I. Excavations a. ~ crystaD~ne rocks b. In permeable sedimentary rocks c. In argillaceous rocks, such as shale and clay pits. 2. Infiltration In permeable, near-surface beds a. Above the water table b. Below the water table. - 3. Uncierground openings a. Nature caverns b. Abandoned ore mines c. Specially prepared workings. —O— 4. Sat beds, salt domes, abandoned salt mines, and related geologic structures. The consensus of the corurnittee was that several of these env,- onrnents might be feasible but more information was needed. The order of feasibility ~ which the committee arranged these various en~nromnents was as follows: fin deterrnin~ng this order we did not get a unanimous Rote Ed the consensus of the committee was estimated) First: mat domes ~ salt beds ~ abandoned salt mines ~ and storage ~ cavities excavated ~ salt below the surface but not necessarily near the base of the local stratigraphic section. This would use an en~nron- ment that has relatively wale distribution ~ the United States, both In coastal areas and at many places In the interior. It was pointed out that the development of cavities In salt is very cheap. The figure ranges from Free to six dollars per barrel for cavities for the storage of hy- drocarbons . How these figures can be translated into ~;pecia~y prepared cavities for this type of waste disposal is another question. For this general type of disposal several lines of research are indicated: (a) laboratory stud' calf salt under conditions of heat and pressure in contact with these liquids; ace {b) heat-transfer considerations.

80 ~ The second priority was storage ~ especially prepared excava_ tions ~ shale at depth. The experience record comes from cavities that have been prepared at a number of places for storage of hydro- carbosts in very recent years. Some of the advantages are that rela- tively thick shale beds are scattered widely over the United States; there are sites that probably could be obtained for this use near sev- eral of the existing ~sSaHations as wed as potential future sites. _ .. .. . . ~ Furthermore, the cost z~ low. When we use as a basis of cost evalua- tion the operations now under way for the storage of hydrocarbons, figures ranging from $3 to $7 per barrel were cited as representative of the cost for the preparation of this type of underground cantor. The research needed here is study of the stability of shale ~ Me presence of these particular aqueous solutions. The third order of preference -- and on this particular item there was considerable diversity of opinion -- was infiltration into particular low-permeable beds with ~ mutable high clay content for the fixing of these materials in place. This infiltration above the grater table bears some similarity to the Hanforc! operation as it was cles- cribed, but with certain modifications. The needed research indicated here was (a) study of the hydrodynamic profile of the systems (b) clevel- opment of proper tracer for water; (c) study of behavior of a suitably simulate c] 'solution to determine exchange characteristics; and, of course, (~) highly detailed ~`re';tigations of water-table fluctuations in any area that might be considered for his type of disposal. It shouic! be pouter} out that only those areas with low water table, which would largely limit his matter to some of the western areas, wouic] be usable. . - The fourth order of preference was deep, abancloned flay relines. It was the consensus calf opinion that if a proper dry Mae couch be lo- cated it niightbe a very feasible method of disposal, but that such mines would be extremely difficult to come by and niight very weD not be In file vicinity of any site where they would be needed. If such a structure could be located, it was Chic ate d that some research would be needed on heat-dissipa~don problems under the particular conditions obtaining that Mae. The fish and last category that was judged to be worthy of consid- eratioD. was disposal in properly covered shale and clay pits on the sur- face. The consensus was that at the present state of knowledge, it is not a desirable means of di';pos~g of high petrel wasted;, but that it would be desirable to have continued research on base exchange and self-sealing characters :m the hope that tili8 method might become fea- sible for high-level waste ~ the future e Research on self-seal~ng 6 ., ., , #,, .

81. possibilities indicated In this area midget also have applicability in several other areas or methods of relatively shMIow disposal. CHAIRMAN HESS: Thank you, Dr . Frye . Does anyone wish to comment on this report^ You: win notice that the tasks as given out were changed some- what after the committees got to work. "Deep'' and "shallow" do not apply any more. Someone wanted to know what we meant by deep and shallow. The first committee did not comment on how deep they considered deep, but ~ would Wink it would mean 1000 to lO, 000 feet for the dis- pc~sal of materials underground. DR. HUBBERT: ~ think Me consensus was that deep means as- deep- as-pos sible . (L`aughter) CHAIRMAN EDi:SS: What is deep to a geologist may seem very deep to a non-geologist or not deep at all. DR. HUBBERT: We can say ten or fifteen thousand feet is thor- oughly practical, although in many cases depths of 5,000 to 10,000 feet ,- or even le ~ a, may be satisfactory . The conference was adjourned at 1 1 :30 ae m - .

Next: Appendix C: Committee on Deep Disposal »
The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!