-^f.-$,l 'j,:, i,,!'frW'»
-------
-------
Introduction
Any activity that produces or uses radioac-
tive materials generates radioactive
waste. Mining, nuclear power generation,
and various processes in industry, defense,
medicine, and scientific research produce ;
byproducts that include radioactive waste.
Radioactive waste can be in gas, liquid, or solid ,
form, and its level of radioactivity can vary.
The waste can remain radioactive for a few
hours or several months or even hundreds of
thousands of years. Because it can be so
hazardous and can remain radioactive for so
long, finding suitable disposal facilities for
radioactive waste is difficult. Depending on the
type of waste disposed, the disposal facility may
need to contain radiation for a very long time.
Proper disposal is essential to ensure protection
of the health and safety of the public and
quality of the environment including air, soil, ;
and water supplies.
Radioactive waste disposal practices have •
changed substantially over the last twenty ••
years. Evolving environmental protection
considerations have provided the impetus to
improve disposal technologies, and, in some :
cases, clean up facilities that are no longer in ,
use. Designs for new disposal facilities and •
disposal methods must meet environmental
protection and pollution prevention standards
that are more strict than were foreseen at the
beginning of the atomic age.
Disposal of radioactive waste is a complex
issue, not only because of the nature of the
waste, but also because of the complicated
regulatory structure for dealing with radioactive
waste. There are a variety of stakeholders
affected, and there are a number of regulatory
entities involved. Federal government agencies
involved in radioactive waste management '
include: the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRG), the Department of Energy (DOE), and •
the Department of Transportation. In addition,
the states and affected Indian Tribes play a
prominent role in protecting the public against
the hazards of radioactive waste.
Types Of
Radioactive Waste
There are five general categories of radioactive
waste: (1) spent nuclear fuel from nuclear
reactors and high-level waste from the reprocess-
ing of spent nuclear fuel, (2) transuranic waste
mainly from defense programs, (3) uranium mill
tailings from the mining and mining of uranium
ore, (4) low-level waste, and (5) naturally
occurring- and accelerator-produced radioactive
materials. Radioactive waste is categorized
according to its origin and not necessarily
according to its level of radioactivity. For
example, some low-level waste has the same
level of radioactivity as some high-level waste.
This booklet describes the different categories
of waste, discusses disposal practices for each
type, and describes the way they are regulated.
-------
Spent Nuclear Fuel
and High-level Radioactive Waste
Sources
and Volume
In addition to being used to generate commercial
electricity, nuclear reactors are used in govern-
ment-sponsored research and development
programs, universities and industry; in science
and engineering experimental programs; at
nuclear weapons production facilities; and by the
U.S. Navy and military services. The operation
of nuclear reactors results in spent reactor fuel.
The reprocessing of that spent fuel produces
high-level radioactive waste (HLW).
The fuel for most nuclear reactors consists of
pellets of ceramic uranium dioxide that are
sealed in hundreds of metal rods. These rods
are bundled together to form what is known as
a "fuel assembly." Depending upon the type and
size of the reactor, a fuel assembly can weigh up
to 1,500 pounds. As the nuclear reactor oper-
ates, uranium atoms fission (split apart) and
release energy. When most of the usable
uranium has fissioned, the "spent" fuel assembly
is removed from the reactor.
Until a disposal or long-term storage facility
is operational, most spent fuel is stored in water
pools at the reactor site where it was produced.
The water removes leftover heat generated by
the spent fuel and serves as a radiation shield
to protect workers at the site.
The operation of nuclear reactors over the
last twenty years has substantially added to the
amount of radioactive waste in this country. As
shown in the following graph, by the year 2020,
the total amount of spent fuel is expected to
increase significantly.
HLW is the liquid waste that results when
spent fuel is reprocessed to recover unfissioned
uranium and plutonium. During this process,
the fuel is dissolved by strong chemicals, and
this results in liquid HLW. Plans are to solidify
these liquids into a form that is suitable for
disposal. Sn1ifHfip.at.irm is still in the planning
stages. While currently there are no commercial
facilities in this country that reprocess spent
fuel, spent fuel from defense program reactors
has been routinely reprocessed for use in
producing nuclear weapons or for reuse in new
fuel.
Compared to the total inventory of HLW, the
volume of commercial HLW from the reprocess-
ing of commercial spent fuel is almost insignifi-
cant, less than one percent. Defense-related
HLW comprises greater than ninety-nine percent
of the volume of HLW. The following graph
shows the historical and projected volume of
defense-related HLW through the year 2020.
The effect of the end of the "Cold War" on these
projections is uncertain.
Note: Reference for figure is the
Integrated Data Base for 1991:
U.S. Spent Fuel and Radioactive
.Waste Inventory Projections and
Characteristics, DOE, Oak Ridge
National Laboratory, Oct. 1991.
(DOE/RW-0006. Rev. 7)
Figure 1
Projected Accumulated Radioactivity of Commercial Spent
Fuel Discharges for the DOE/EIA No-New-Orders and Lower
Reference Cases
1970
Lower Reference Case
1980
1990
2000
2010 2020
-------
HLW is now stored in underground tanks or
stainless steel silos on federal reservations in
South Carolina, Idaho, and Washington and at
the Nuclear Fuel Services Plant in West Valley,
NY. These facilities have begun programs to
solidify and structurally stabilize the waste in
preparation for disposal at a national repository.
Regulation of
Disposal
Some elements, such as plutonium, in HLW and
spent fuel are highly radioactive and remain so
for thousands of years. Therefore, the safe
disposal of this waste is one of the most contro-
versial environmental subjects facing the federal
government and affected states.
The federal government (the EPA, the DOE,
and the NEC) has overall responsibility for the
safe disposal of HLW and spent fuel. The EPA
is responsible for developing environmental
standards that apply to both DOE-operated and
NEC-licensed facilities. Currently, the NRG is
responsible for licensing such facilities and
ensuring their compliance with the EPA stan-
dards. DOE is responsible for developing the
deep geologic repository which has been autho-
rized by Congress for disposing of spent fuel and
high level waste. Both the NRG and the
Figure 2
Historical and Projected Inventories of Defense High-Level
Radioactive Waste
Department of Transportation are responsible
for regulating the transportation of these wastes
to storage and disposal sites.
Site Selection for
Storage and Disposal
In the early 1980's, the DOE formally adopted a
national strategy to develop mined geologic
repositories as disposal facilities for spent fuel
and high-level radioactive waste. In 1983, the
DOE identified nine potentially acceptable sites
and, in 1984, selected three sites as candidates
for further characterization. In 1987, Congress
directed the DOE to pursue the investigation of
only the Yucca Mountain, NV site in order to
determine whether the site is suitable for
development as a repository. The DOE has
designed a comprehensive "site characterization"
program to evaluate the suitability of the Yucca
Mountain site. The objectives of this program
are to: (1) determine the geologic, hydrologic,
and geochemical conditions at Yucca Mountain;
(2) provide information needed to design a
package for the disposal of radioactive waste;
(3) provide information for the desigfn of the
repository facility; and (4) evaluate whether
Yucca Mountain can meet NRG and EPA
protection and safety requirements. Figure 3 is
400
J5? Reported
•add" Data
Estimated Future Projection
200S
o
-100;
-8
I
1980
1990
2000
2010 2020
DOE/RW-0006. Rev. 7
-------
Figure 3
Artist's Rendition of the Proposed Yucca Mountain Repository
Exhaust Shaft
Rock Storage Pile
Exploratory Shaft I \A
Worker and Materials Shaft
nveyor
- —-
Mined Rock Handling.Ramp
SUBSURFACE FACILITY
Waste Ramp Waste Handling Building #1
Handling Building #2
Underground Personnel Bui
Administration Buildin
SURFACE FACILITIES COMPLEX
an artist's rendition of the proposed Yucca
Mountain repository.
The DOE is also developing plans for the
siting and development of a potential Monitored
Retrievable Storage (MRS) facility. The MRS
facility could be used to receive and store spent
fuel from commercial power reactors for subse-
quent shipment to a repository when such a
facility becomes operational.
Setting Environmental
Protection Standards
In 1985, the EPA published final regulations
that established generally applicable environ-
mental standards for the management and
disposal of spent nuclear fuel, HLW, and
transuranic (TRU) wastes. (TRU wastes are
discussed in the next section.) The disposal
portion of these standards was successfully
challenged in the courts and returned to the
Agency for revision. The court was primarily
concerned that the regulations might not adr
equately protect ground water and individuals
from radioactive contamination. Following the
court's ruling in 1987, the EPA worked to
repromulgate the disposal portion of these
standards.
In October 1992, two laws were enacted, the
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) Land With-
drawal Act and the Energy Policy Act, that
affected EPA's development of standards for the
management and disposal of spent nuclear fuel,
HLW and TRU wastes. As explained more fully
in the next section on TRU waste, EPA's
Administrator issued the revised disposal
standards as mandated by the WIPP Land
Withdrawal Act in December 1993. These
standards apply to all HLW, spent fuel, and
TRU waste disposal except for disposal at the
Yucca Mountain site. The Energy Policy Act
directs the EPA to issue environmental stan-
dards, which protect public health and safely
and are specific to the Yucca Mountain site.
The Act also requires that the National Acad-
emy of Sciences (NAS) conduct a study to
provide findings and recommendations related to
the form and content of environmental radiation
protection standards for Yucca Mountain,
Nevada. The EPA's standards for Yucca
Mountain must be developed based upon the
findings and recommendations of the NAS and
must be issued within one year from the time '
the EPA receives the NAS recommendations.
NRG, as the licensing authority for this site,
must incorporate the EPA's environmental
standards in their overall licensing regulations
for HLW disposal (10 CFR 60).
-------
Transuranic
Radioactive Waste
Sources
and Volume
Transuranic (TRU) waste materials have been :
generated in the U.S. since the 1940's. Most of
this waste originates from nuclear weapons
production facilities for defense programs.
"Transuranic" refers to atoms of man-made
elements that are heavier (higher in atomic
number) than uranium. The most prominent |
element in most TRU waste is plutonium. Some
TRU waste consists of items such as rags, tools, i
and laboratory equipment contaminated with
radioactive materials. Other forms of TRU j
waste include organic and inorganic residues or
even entire enclosed contaminated cases in
which radioactive materials were handled.
Some TRU waste emits high levels of pen-
etrating radiation; this type requires protective
shielding. However, most TRU waste does not ;
emit high levels of penetrating radiation but
poses a danger when small particles of it are
inhaled or ingested. The radiation from the
particles is damaging to lung tissue and internal:
organs. As long as this type of TRU waste :
remains enclosed and contained, it can be
handled safely.
Another problem with TRU waste is that
most of its radioactive elements are long-lived. '
That is, they stay radioactive for a long time.
For example, half of the original amount of
plutonium-239 in the waste will remain harmful .
after 24,000 years. Disposal must be carefully
planned so that the waste poses no undue threat j
to public health or the environment for years to
come. :
The total volume of TRU waste and TRU-
contaminated soil is estimated at around one
million cubic meters. The following figure
provides the historical and projected amounts of i
TRU wastes to the year 2015.
Site Selection for
Storage and Disposal
In the past, much of the TRU waste was
disposed of similarly to low-level radioactive
waste, i.e., in pits and trenches covered with
soil. In 1970, the Atomic Energy Commission
(predecessor to the DOE) decided that TRU
waste should be stored for easy retrieval to
await disposal at a repository. Federal facilities
in Washington, Idaho, California, Colorado, New
Mexico, Nevada, Tennessee, South Carolina,
Ohio, and Illinois are currently storing TRU !
waste. ;
The DOE has evaluated several alternatives
for managing buried waste and contaminated
soil including: (1) leaving it in place and moni-
toring it; (2) leaving it in place and improving
the containment; and (3) removing, processing,
and disposing of the waste in a repository.
As a first step in developing a permanent
disposal site for TRU waste, the DOE is develop-
ing an underground, geologic repository called
the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), near
Carlsbad, NM. This site has been excavated in
a salt bed about 2,100 feet underground. The
WIPP will have to meet environmental stan-
dards established by the EPA before it can be
used as a permanent disposal site.
If the WIPP site is eventually determined to
be suitable for the disposal of TRU waste, the
underground disposal area is planned to cover
100 acres. It will have a design capacity of over
2 million cubic meters, or about 850,000 barrels,
of TRU waste. The following is a schematic
drawing of the WIPP.
Setting Environmental
Protection Standards
As stated earlier, the EPA established environ-
mental standards applicable to spent fuel, HLW
and TRU waste, but they were returned to the
Agency by the courts for revision. 1iA7hile the
Energy Policy Act specifies, procedures for
developing standards for a repository at Yucca
Mountain, NV, the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant
(WIPP) Land Withdrawal Act requires the EPA
to promulgate final standards applicable to
WIPP and all other spent nuclear fuel, HLW,
and TRU waste disposal faculties other than
those developed under the Nuclear Waste Policy
Act of 1982.
Figure 4
DOE Accumulated TRU Waste
1985 1990
DOE/RW-0006, Rev. 5
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
-------
The WIPP Land Withdrawal Act reinstated
all of the EPA's 1985 radioactive waste disposal
standards except for the sections that the court
found problematic, i.e., the Individual and
Ground-Water Protection Requirements of the
disposal standards. The reinstated sections
consist primarily of containment requirements
and assurance requirements. These require-
ments are designed to help ensure that the
wastes will be disposed of in a manner that
limits the release of radioactive materials.
In 1993, EPA finalized amendments to the
standards to address the court's concerns.
Individual radiation protection standards will
limit a person's total annual radiation exposure,
considering the sum of all possible exposures.
Ground-water protection standards protect
present and future sources of drinking water.
Figure 5
Schematic of the WIPP Repository
New Regulatory
Responsibilities for EPA
Under the WIPP Land Withdrawal Act, Con-
gress gave EPA the responsibility for implement-
ing its radioactive waste disposal standards at
the WIPP. The Act also requires the EPA to
review and approve of the DOE's plans for
testing and retrieving waste at the WIPP. EPA
must also ensure compliance with all federal
environmental laws and regulations. In order
for the WIPP to become a permanent disposal
facility, the EPA must certify that the facility
complies with its disposal standards. If the
EPA does not certify the WIPP, the DOE must
decommission the facility. Even if the EPA
certifies the WIPP, the Agency will have to
determine, on an ongoing basis, whether it
continues to comply with the disposal standards
as well as all other federal environmental laws,
regulations, and permit requirements that apply.
In particular, DOE must demonstrate that the
WIPP complies with the Clean Air Act; the
Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act; the Solid
Waste Disposal Act; the Safe Drinking Water
Act; and the Resource Conservation and Recov-
ery Act.
Electrical and Mechanical Shop
Experimental Area
Waste Disposal Ares
-------
Uranium
Mill Tailings
Sources
and Volume
i
Uranium mill tailings are the radioactive sand- '.
like materials that remain after uranium is
extracted by milling ore mined from the earth. :
Tailings are placed in huge mounds called
tailings piles which are located close to the millis
where the ore is processed.
The most important radioactive component of
uranium mill tailings is radium, which decays to
produce radon. Other potentially hazardous ;
substances in the tailings are selenium,, molyb- :
denum, uranium, and thorium.
Uranium mill tailings can adversely affect
public health. There are four principal ways
(or exposure pathways) that the public can be
exposed to the hazards from this waste. The •
first is the diffusion of radon gas directly into
indoor air if tailings are misused as a construc-
tion material or for backfill around buildings.
When people breathe air containing radon, it ;
increases their risk of developing lung cancer.
Second, radon gas can diffuse from the piles into
the atmosphere where it can be inhaled and
small particles can be blown from the piles
where they can be inhaled or ingested. Third,
many of the radioactive decay products in <
tailings produce gamma radiation, which poses a
health hazard to people in the immediate
vicinity of tailings. Finally, the dispersal of
tailings by wind or water, or by leaching, can
carry radioactive and other toxic materials to
surface or ground water that may be used for
drinking water.
The NRG and some individual states that
have regulatory agreements with the NRG have
licensed 26 sites for milling uranium ore.
However, most of the mills at these: sites are no
longer processing ore. Another 24 sites have
been abandoned and are currently the responsi-
bility of DOE.
All the tailings piles except for one aban-
doned site located in Canonsburg, PA, are
located in the West, predominantly in arid areas
(Figure 6). The licensed tailings pil.es contain a
combined total of approximately 200 million
metric tons (MT), with individual piiles ranging
from about 2 million MT to about 30 million
MT. (A metric ton is 2,200 pounds,) The 24
abandoned sites contain a total of about
26 million MT and range in size from about
50 thousand MT to about 3 million MT.
It is unlikely that there will be much addi-
tional accumulation of mill tailings in the U.S.,
because foreign countries now produce uranium
much more cheaply than can domestic produc-
ers.
Figure 6
Uranium Mill Tailings Piles
-------
Setting Environmental
Protection Standards
The EPA issued two sets of standards control-
ling hazards from uranium mill tailings in 1983,
under the authority of the Uranium. Mill Tail-
ings Radiation Control Act of 1978. These
standards provide for the cleanup and disposal
of mill tailings at abandoned sites and the
disposal of tailings at licensed sites after cessa-
tion of operations. They are implemented by
DOE, NRG, and some states through agree-
ments -with NRG, and require a combination of
active and passive controls to clean up contami-
nated ground water as well as tailings that have
been misused at off-site locations, and to dispose
of tailings in a manner that will prevent misuse,
limit radon emissions, and protect ground water.
Active controls include building fences,
putting up warning signs, and establishing land
use restrictions. Passive controls include
constructing thick earthen covers, protected by
rock and designed to prevent seepage into
ground water, over the waste. Earthen covers
also effectively limit radon emissions and
gamma radiation and, in conjunction with the
rock covers, serve to stabilize the piles to
prevent dispersion of the tailings through
erosion or intrusion. In some cases, piles may
be moved to safer locations.
The standards were amended in 1993 to
require that all licensed sites that have ceased
operation undergo remedial action as soon as
possible. The EPA is in the process of enacting
revised ground-water protection standards that
will require the same treatment of ground water
at the abandoned sites as is now required at the
licensed sites.
In addition, EPA enacted Clean Air Act
standards in 1989 limiting radon emissions and
restricting the length of time that abandoned
piles may remain uncovered with no controls on
radon, emissions. EPA also requires that any
piles that may be constructed in the future meet
requirements that limit radon emissions and
inhibit ground-water contamination during their
operational phase. Licensed mills also are
subject to the Uranium Fuel Cycle standard
which regulates radionuclide emissions other
than radon.
Note: Reference for figure is the
Integrated Data Base for 1991;
U.S. Spent Fuel and Radioactive
Waste Inventory Projections and
Characteristics, DOE Oak Ridge
National Laboratory, Oct. 1991.
Low-level
Radioactive Waste
Sources
and Volume
Low-level radioactive waste (LLW) is radioac-
tively contaminated industrial or research waste
such as paper, rags, plastic bags, protective
clothing, cardboard, packaging material, organic
fluids, and water-treatment residues. It is
waste that does not fall into any of the three
categories previously discussed. Its classification
does not directly depend on the level of radioac-
tivity it contains.
LLW is generated by government facilities,
utilities, industries, and institutional facilities.
In addition to 35 major DOE facilities, over
20,000 commercial users of radioactive materials
generate some amount of LLW. LLW generators
include approximately 100 operating nuclear
power reactors, associated fuel fabrication
facilities, and uranium fuel conversion plants,
which together are known as nuclear fuel-cycle
facilities. Hospitals, medical schools, universi-
ties, radiochemical and radiopharmaceutical
manufacturers and research laboratories are
other users of radioactive materials which
produce LLW. The clean-up of contaminated
buildings and sites will generate more LLW in
the future.
Figure 7
Historical and Projected Accumulated Volume of LLW
1991-2020 DOE/EIA
No-new-orders Case
Total DOE and Commercial)
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
2020
-------
Figure 7 provides a historical look at the
overall volume of LLW produced through 1990.
It also projects that the volume will double by
2020. Figure 8 below shows .the volume of low-
level radioactive waste disposed of by major
sources in the United States.
Both commercial and defense-related LLW have
been disposed of using shallow land disposal
methods. There are currently 23 DOE and
commercial LLW disposal sites in the U.S. The
major sites are depicted in Figure 9. Although
some LLW facilities are closed, they are continu-
ously monitored to detect releases of radioactiv-
ity into the environment.
Disposal Management
The EPA has the authority to set generally
applicable environmental standards for LLW
disposal; such standards would be implemented
by the NRG and the DOE. DOE is planning the
clean-up of radioactively contaminated sites
which will result in considerable volumes of
LLW. Because of this, EPA is developing clean-
up regulations as well as general environmental
standards for LLW disposal. EPA plans to
propose the disposal standards at the end of
1994. The standards will facilitate planning and
reduce costs for clean-up and disposal.
The NRG and some individual states that
have regulatory agreements with NRC regulate
all disposal of commercial LLW. In 1982, the
NRG improved its regulatory requirements.
That year, the NRG established disposal site
performance objectives for land disposal of LLW;
technical requirements for the siting', design,
operation, and closure for near-surface disposal
faculties; technical requirements concerning
waste packaging for land disposal; classification
of waste; institutional requirements; and admin-
istrative and procedural requirements for
licensing a disposal facility. Though the 1982
NRG regulations exempted existing iNDRC dis-
Figure 8
Volume of LLW Disposed in 1990
Industrial/
Reactors 20.9% \ institutional
16.3%
Figure 9
Major LLW Disposal Sites
Total volume of LLW disposed in 1990: 86,900 cubic meters
OakRidge
Jlfe
'^Savannah River Plant
<^> Commercial LLW Disposal Site
fjn
*&? Department of Energy or Department of Defense Disposal Site
9
-------
posal site licensees, the NRG and the states are
working to incorporate such requirements into
those licenses.
In 1988, the DOE, which is self-regulating,
issued its own orders governing the DOB
disposal sites.
The general regulatory framework for the
disposal of LLW has changed to account for new
technology, what we have learned from past
disposal practices, and current wisdom about
environmental protection. As a result of increas-
ing costs of LLW disposal at existing sites,
predisposal waste processing (e.g., volume
reduction) is a more common practice. The
waste is processed by separating radioactive
from nonradioactive components and by compact-
ing bulk waste before packaging for disposal.
Consequently, while the volume of waste to be
disposed of is reduced, the concentration of
radioactivity is greater. This waste requires
more stringent safeguards for its disposal.
Site Selection
for Disposal
The first of six regional, commercial LLW
disposal sites was licensed in 1962. Since then,
four of the commercial sites have closed, mainly
because of problems with site instability. These
problems included the collapse of the earth
covering the waste and difficulties in managing
surface- and ground-water contamination. Since
then the technology and requirements governing
disposal sites have been upgraded. New dis-
posal facilities must be designed to avoid two
kinds of failures: those caused by long-term
processes such as subsidence and those caused
by more unpredictable events such as human
intrusion (either intentional or unintentional)
and natural disaster.
The Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act
of 1980 and subsequent amendments direct
states to take care of their own LLW either
individually or through regional groupings,
referred to as compacts. The states are now in
the process of selecting new LLW disposal sites
to take care of their own waste. The selection
process for these new sites is complex and varies
because of many factors including the regula-
tions for site selection. This selection process
will be affected by EPA's new LLW standard.
10
-------
Disposal of Naturally Occurring and
Accelerator-Produced Radioactive Materials (WARM)
Sources
and Volume
Accelerator-Produced Materials
Accelerator-produced radioactive waste is
produced during the operation of atomic particle
accelerators for medical, research, or industrial ,
purposes. The accelerators use magnetic fields '.
to move atomic particles at higher and higher j
speeds before crashing into a preselected target.
This reaction produces desired radioactive
materials in metallic targets or kills cancer cells
where a cancer tumor is the target. The !
radioactivity contained in the waste from
accelerators is generally short-lived, less than !
one year. The waste may be stored at laborato- '•
ries or production facilities until it is no longer ,
radioactive. An extremely small fraction of the
waste may retain some longer-lived radioactivity1
with half lives greater than one year. There are
no firm estimates of the amount of this type of ,
radioactive waste; however, it is generally ',
accepted that the volume is extremely small :
compared to the other wastes discussed. ;
Included for each category is an estimate of the
volume that would accumulate over a 20-year
period based on today's technology and produc-
tion levels. It should be noted, however, that
the level of radioactivity varies widely among
these wastes.
Metal Mining & Processing Waste—20 billion
metric tons*
Coal Ash—1.7 bilh'on metric tons
Phosphate Waste-800 million metric tons*
Uranium Mining Overburden—740 :million metric
tons
Oil and Gas Production Wastes-13 million
metric tons*
Water Treatment Residues-6 million metric
tons*
'(These categories may contain high-concentration
radioactive components.)
Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials
(NORM) :
Naturally occurring radioactive materials
(NORM) generally contain radionuclides found in
nature. Once NORM becomes concentrated
through human activity, such as mineral extrac-
tion, it can become a radioactive waste. There
are two types of naturally occurring radioactive
waste: discrete and diffuse. The first, discrete
NORM, has a relatively high radioactivity :
concentration in a very small volume, such as a .
radium source used in medical procedures.
Estimates of the volumes of discrete NORM
waste are imprecise, and the EPA is conducting
studies to provide a more accurate assessment of
how much of this waste requires attention.
Because of its relatively high concentration of ;
radioactivity, this type of waste poses a direct
radiation exposure hazard.
The second type, diffuse NORM, has a much
lower concentration of radioactivity, but a high
volume of waste. This type of waste poses a
different type of disposal problem because of its
high volume. The following are six sources of
such naturally occurring radioactive materials.
Diffuse NORM may pose a health hazard
because of its many uses. For example, though
most metal-mining waste is stored near where it
is generated, small amounts have been used as
construction backfill and road building materi-
als. It is also used in concrete and wallboard.
• Coal ash is primarily used as an additive in
concrete and as backfill.
• Phosphate waste (slag) from the processing of
elemental phosphorous has been used in con-
struction and in paving.
• Uranium mining waste is the soil and rock
that is removed during surface or underground
uranium mining. This waste is sometimes used
to backfill mined-out areas and to construct
roads around the mining site.
• Oil and gas production may produce radioactive
pipe scale (a residue left in pipes from drilling
oil wells) and sludge that leave sites; and
equipment contaminated. Some radiation-
contaminated piping has been used by schools
and other organizations for playground equip-
ment, welding material, and fencing.
11
-------
• Radiation-contaminated water treatment
residue accumulates when radioactive material
is filtered out of drinking water during the
purifying process. This waste may be disposed of
in landfills or lagoons. It may also be used in
agriculture as a soil conditioner.
There is increasing evidence that improper
use or disposal of such naturaUy-occurring
radioactive materials can result in significant
contamination of the environment and radiation
exposure. This can adversely affect the health
of those occupationally exposed, as well as the
public in general.
Disposal Issues
There are currently no federal regulations
covering disposal of NARM with high radioactiv-
ity concentrations. Few states have regulations,
and those regulations are inconsistent. The
EPA has initiated studies to more accurately
characterize the radiological hazards posed by
NARM.
For More
Information
The safe disposal of radioactive waste is a very
important issue today. Radioactive waste
disposal standards have changed substantially
with unproved technology and evolving environ-
mental protection considerations. Regulatory
programs and standards continue to change, so
if you would like more information on the
disposal of radioactive waste, write to:
Office of Radiation and Indoor Air
Criteria and Standards Division (6602J)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M St., SW
Washington, DC 20460
Recycled/Recyclable
Printed with Soy/Canola Ink on paper that
contains at least 50% recycled liber
12
-------
-------
Bi!
I
------- |