EPA-600/2-77-215
November 1977
Environmental Protection Technology Series
COST ASSESSMENT FOR THE
EMPLACEMENT OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
IN A SALT MINE
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8. "Special" Reports
9. Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TECH-
NOLOGY series. This series describes research performed to develop and dem-
onstrate instrumentation, equipment, and methodology to repair or prevent en-
vironmental degradation from point and non-point sources of pollution. This work
provides the new or improved technology required for the control and treatment
of pollution sources to meet environmental quality standards.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
EPA-600/2-77-215
November 1977
COST ASSESSMENT FOR THE
EMPLACEMENT OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS IN
A SALT MINE
by
B. T. Kown
R. A. Stenzel
J. A. Hepper
J. D. Ruby
R. T. Milligan
Bechtel Corporation
San Francisco, California 94119
Contract No. 68-03-2430
Project Officer
Robert E. Landreth
Solid and Hazardous Haste Research Division
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
MUNICIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publica-
tion. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the
views and policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does
mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or re-
commendation for use.
-------
FOREWORD
The Environmental Protection Agency was created because of increasing
public and government concern about the dangers of pollution to the health
and welfare of the American people. Noxious air, foul water, and spoiled
land are tragic testimony to the deterioration of our natural environment.
The complexity of that environment and the interplay between its components
require a concentrated and integrated attack on the problem.
Research and development is that necessary first step in problem solution
and it involves defining the problem, measuring its impact, and searching for
solutions. The Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory develops new and
improved technology and systems for the prevention, treatment, and management
of wastewater and solid and hazardous waste pollutant discharges from municipal
and community sources, for the preservation and treatment of public drinking
water supplies, and to minimize the adverse economic, social, health, and
aesthetic effects of pollution. This publication is one of the products of
that research; a most vital communications link between the researcher and the
user community.
The Solid and Hazardous Waste Research Division contributes to these
program objectives by conducting research to promote improved solid waste
management and the environmentally safe management and disposal of hazardous
wastes. This report presents results of an economic evaluation of the non-
radioactive hazardous wastes storage in underground mine openings.
Francis T. Mayo
Director
Municipal Environmental
Research Laboratory
11
-------
ABSTRACT
This report presents the results of an economic evaluation of the stor-
age of nonradioactive hazardous wastes in underground mine openings. This
study is a part of a continuous effort to find a new and better method of
disposing or storing hazardous wastes in an environmentally acceptable manner.
The technical assessment of the hazardous waste storage in underground mine
openings performed in an earlier study (EPA-600/2-75-040) indicated that long-
term storage of hazardous wastes in a room and pillar type salt mine was an
environmentally acceptable method provided that certain precautions are taken.
This study is performed to develop the cost data associated with the storage
of hazardous wastes in a typical room and pillar type salt mine, including
the capital and operating costs. The intent of the study is to reveal eco-
nomic sensitivity of various parameters involved in the underground storage
of hazardous wastes. In order to develop the cost data, this study also in-
volved characterization of the wastes and conceptual design of the waste re-
ceiving, treatment, containerization, and storage facilities.
The major work tasks are (1) development of the design criteria including
waste characteristics, storage concept, treatment requirements, and selection
of the study mine; (2) conceptual design of the surface and subsurface facil-
ities; and (3) estimation of the capital and operating costs. Design infor-
mation based on actual experience was not available for the storage of hazard-
ous wastes in a salt mine at this time. This study considered five possible
alternative concepts of storing hazardous wastes in a salt mine that involved
variations in the plant size, the waste composition, and the storage method.
It was concluded that the underground storage of hazardous wastes should
be in a systematic manner to allow controlled handling, segregated storage of
different wastes, maintenance of stored waste, inventorying of the stored
waste, and long-term protection of the environment. To meet these criteria,
it was decided to convert all hazardous wastes to solid form, remove free
water and oil, and containerize the waste before placing it in the mine. Ce-
mentizing the waste instead of the containerization was considered as an al-
ternative storage method.
The cost of storing hazardous wastes in a salt mine depended considerably
on the plant capacity,the waste characterization, and the storage method. In
the case of different plant capacities, the unit cost per ton (waste manage-
ment fee) increased from $173 to $424 (per ton stored) as the storage loading
reduced from 1,030 tons per day to 103 tons per day.
The unit cost of storing the waste containerized in steel drums (420
TPD stored waste) was $187 (per ton stored); whereas the cost of storing ce-
mentized waste was $102. The waste characteristics also had significant
iv
-------
effects on the storage cost. The unit cost for storing all residue type
hazardous waste (420 TPD stored waste) was $187. The cost increased to $298
when approximately 30 percent of the waste is in liquid form requiring chemi-
cal treatment.
This report is submitted in fulfillment of Contract No. 68-03-2430 by
Bechtel Corporation under the sponsorship of the U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, Solid and Hazardous
Waste Research Division (EPA, MERL, SHWRD). Work for this report was con-
ducted during the period of July 1976 to May 1977.
-------
CONTENTS
Foreword i i i
Abstract ..................•••••••. iv
Figures viii
Tables • .x
Abbreviations and Unit Conversion • • • xii
Acknowledgment • • X1'ii
1. Introduction • • 1
Objectives of the study 1
Project methodology 2
2. Summary and Recommendations 6
Design and operating criteria 6
Facility design 9
Economic evaluation 10
Recommendations 15
3. Design Basis of the Study 20
Waste characteristics and quantity 20
Plant capacities 25
Waste storage concept 26
Alternative storage concepts • 28
Mine selection and description of selected 29
mine
4. Storage Facility Design and Operation 47
General design and operational criteria 47
Surface facilities 56
Subsurface facilities 80
Alternative storage concept 96
5. Capital and Operating Cost 102
Capital cost 103
Operating cost 108
Comparison of selected mines with other mines 116
6. Economic Analysis 119
References . 135
Appendices
A. Summary of U.S. hazardous waste quantities 133
B. Specific design criteria for the base case 144
surface facilities
C. Base case equipment and costs 147
D. Base case buildings, civil structures, mine. ... 154
rehabilitation, and costs
E. Base case labor requirement and costs 158
F. Hazardous waste storage at Herfa-Neurode, Germany 161
vii
-------
FIGURES
Number Page
1. Storage of hazardous wastes in an underground mine,
material flow chart. .................
2. General cross section of the Michigan Basin 36
3. Stratigraphic column of the shaft area 37
4. Photo of the main haulway in a salt mine (Courtesy of
International Salt Company) 40
5. General mine layout 41
6. Typical room and pillar arrangement 42
7. Cross section of production shaft 43
8. Material flow chart -- Type A wastes 48
9. Material flow chart --Type B wastes 50
10. Material flow chart -- Type C and D wastes 5T
11. Material flow chart -- Chemicals and containers 52
12. Material flow chart -- Plant effluent treatment 53
13. Schematic diagram of surface operation 57
14. Block flow diagram of surface operation 58
15. Plot plan of surface facilities 59
16. Process flow diagram -- Type A waste unloading and 60
surface storage
17. Process flow diagram -- Type A waste treatment 62
18. Process flow diagram -- Type A waste precipitation and 64
filtration
-------
Number Figures (continued) Page
19. Process flow diagram -- Type B waste unloading and
surface storage. ....................... 65
20. Process flow diagram -- Type B waste treatment and
filtration 66
21. Process flow diagram -- Type C and D waste unloading
and storage 68
22. Process flow diagram -- Chemical unloading and surface
storage 70
23. Process flow diagram -- Plant effluent treatment . 72
24. Process flow diagram -- Container unloading and
surface storage 74
25. Process flow diagram -- Containerization and staging 76
26. Schematic diagram of subsurface operation 82
27. Drums and pallet 84
28. Schematic diagram of long-term storage operation 86
29. Schematic diagram of retrievable storage (Type D)
operation 87
30. Schematic diagram of storage cell preparation cycle ....... 90
31. Subsurface ventilation plan 93
32. Plot plan of underground service facilities 94
33. Underground decontamination facility 95
34. Schematic diagram of stabilized waste storage operation 1QO
35. Sensitivity of the base case unit cost to changes in the
plant size 132
36. Sensitivity of the base case unit cost to changes in the
cost of capital 133
37. Sensitivity of the base case unit cost to changes in the
cost of the mine ; . . . . 134
-------
TABLES
Number age
1. Waste Management Fee (Unit Cost per Ton) of Alternative
Plant Sizes. ......... ....... ......... 11
2. Haste Management Fee (Unit Cost per Ton) of Alternative
Storage Methods ................ • ....... "12
3. Capital Cost Summary of Five Alternative Cases. ... ...... 13
4. Capital Cost Summary of Base Case and its Allocation
to Type A, B, C and D Wastes ........... . ..... 14
5. Operating Cost Summary of Five Alternative Cases ........ . 16
6. Operating Cost Summary of the Base Case and its
Allocation to Type A, B, C, and D Wastes ........... 17
7. Composition of Hazardous Liquid and Slurry Wastes ........ 24
8. Waste Composition of Alternative Cases ....... . ...... 27
9. Loading and Treatment Summary of Alternative Study ........ 30
10. Evaluation of Candidate Mines Based on General Criteria ..... 32
11. Evaluation of Candidate Mines Based on Specific Criteria ..... 33
12. General Stratigraphic Section of the Michigan Basin ....... 35
13. Capital Cost Estimate of Five Alternative Cases ......... 104
14. Operating Cost Estimate of Five Alternative Cases ........ Ill
15. Operating Cost Estimate of Base Case and its Allocation
to Type A, B, C, and D Wastes ................. 113
16. Summary of Unit Cost per Ton Waste Management Fee ........ 120
17. Pro Forma Discounted Cash Flow Statement for Case 1,
Privately Owned ........................ 121
-------
Number Tables (continued) Page^
18. Pro Forma Discounted Cash Flow Statement for Case 2,
Privately Owned 122
19. Pro Forma Discounted Cash Flow Statement for Case 3,
Privately Owned 123
20. Pro Forma Discounted Cash Flow Statement for Case 4,
Privately Owned 124
21. Pro Forma Discounted Cash Flow Statement for Case 5,
Privately Owned 125
22. Pro Forma Discounted Cash Flow Statement for Case 1,
Government Owned 126
23. Pro Forma Discounted Cash Flow Statement for Case 2,
Government Owned 127
24- Pro Forma Discounted Cash Flow Statement for Case 3,
Government Owned 128
25. Pro Forma Discounted Cash Flow Statement for- Case 4,
Government Owned 129
26. Pro Forma Discounted Cash Flow Statement for Case 5,
Government Owned 130
XI
-------
ABBREVIATIONS AND UNIT CONVERSION
Abbreviations
EPA -- Environmental Protection Agency
SHWRD -- Solid and Hazardous Waste Research Division
MERL -- Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
ISCO -- International Salt Company
BPT -- Best Practical Technology
TPD — Ton Per Day
W, H, L -- Width, Height, Length
cfm -- cubic foot per minute
Ib/hr -- pounds per hour
sq ft -- square foot
ft -- foot
hp — horsepower
gpm -- gallon per minute
Unit Conversion
British
1 acre -- 0.405 hectare
1 foot = 0.3048 m
1 inch = 2.54 cm ?
1 square foot = 0.0929 nr
1 cubic foot = 0.02832 nr
1 gallon = 3.785 liters
1 ton (short) = 0.9072 metric ton
$1.0/ton = $1.1023/metric ton
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The project team wishes to acknowledge the Project Officer, Mr. Robert
E. Landreth of the Solid and Hazardous Waste Research Division, Municipal
Environmental Research Laboratory (SHWRD, MERL), Cincinnati, for his contin-
ued support and guidance throughout the study. We wish also to acknowledge
Kali und Salz AG, Herfa-Neurode, West Germany, for allowing C. H. Jacoby of
ISCO to visit their hazardous waste storage plant and providing mine and
plant operational information.
BECHTEL AND ISCO PROJECT TEAM
Bechtel Corporation, San Francisco, CA
R. T. Milligan, Project Manager
B. T. Kown, Project Engineer
R. A. Stenzel, Pollution Control Specialist
J. A. Hepper, Economist
J. D. Ruby, Cost Engineer
International Salt Company (Subcontractor)
C. H. Jacoby, Mining Engineering Manager
A. Krug, Mining Engineer
J. H. Gardner (Consultant)
-------
Section 1
INTRODUCTION
This is the final report on the study "Cost Assessment for the Emplace-
ment of Hazardous Materials in A Salt Mine," conducted for the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency (EPA) under Contract No. 68-03-2430.
The promulgation of air and water pollution control regulations has re-
sulted in more effective removal of contaminants from waste streams, especial-
ly the hazardous constituents in many industrial effluent streams. These
cleanup activities have resulted in an increased quantity of concentrated
hazardous wastes that must be disposed of. Disposal of hazardous wastes in
a manner that isolates them from the environment is becoming a difficult
problem throughout the country.
In a continuing effort to find a new and improved method of disposing of
or storing hazardous wastes in a manner both economically reasonable and en-
vironmentally acceptable, EPA has been supporting a number of studies on the
subject of nonradioactive hazardous waste disposal, including offshore incin-
eration, secured landfill, chemical stabilization, encapsulation, and isola-
tion.
One of these studies was "Evaluation of Hazardous Wastes Emplacement in
Mined Openings" (EPA-600/2-75-040), supported by the Solid and Hazardous
Waste Research Division (SHWRD) of the Municipal Environmental Research La-
boratory, EPA (Ref. 1). The study, conducted by Fenix and Scisson, Inc.,
provided an assessment of the technical feasibility and environmental accept-
ability of emplacing hazardous industrial wastes in underground mines. The
study concluded that storing hazardous industrial wastes in a room and pillar
type salt mine would be an environmentally acceptable method of managing
hazardous waste, provided that the recommended procedures of site selection,
treatment, containerization, and waste handling are followed. In view of
this assessment EPA decided that an economic evaluation of the concept should
be conducted. This economic evaluation is the subject of this report.
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
This study is to provide EPA with necessary cost information to enable
the Agency to make sound decisions on future commitments of resources regard-
ing the emplacement of hazardous wastes in underground storage facilities.
Such commitments should include studies on geological assessment of available
mines, characterization of hazardous waste suited for the underground storage,
and various research and development efforts leading to a demonstration pro-
-------
ject.
This study provides EPA with the economic data for a review of the costs
that are associated with emplacement of hazardous wastes in a room and pillar
type salt mine. The study also discusses the economic sensitivity of various
parameters involved in the underground emplacement of hazardous wastes. In
order to develop the cost data, this study involved characterization of the
hazardous waste and conceptual design of the waste receiving, treatment, con-
tainerization, and storage facilities.
In this study, a "typical" salt mine located in a bedded salt deposit
suitable for storage of hazardous wastes has been used as a basis for design
of the required facilities and for cost estimation. The cost estimate in-
cludes:
• The probable cost of acquiring land and the con-
struction of surface facilities necessary for
waste receiving, unloading, treatment, contain-
erization, and staging.
t The probable cost of acquiring the mine and the
construction of underground facilities necessary
for waste hoisting, transportation, and storage.
• The direct operating costs, including chemicals,
containers, utility, and labor.
• The indirect operating costs, including taxes and
insurance and administration and general overhead.
This includes costs for public relations and educa-
tion and long-term liability insurance.
These costs were estimated from conceptual designs of the system. Cost
data were obtained from both published literature and Bechtel historical cost
data.
PROJECT METHODOLOGY
To fulfill the objectives of the economic evaluation, four major tasks
were performed for this study:
(1) Development of Design and Operating Criteria
-- Characteristics of received waste
-- Characteristics of stored material
-- Required treatment
-- Typical salt mine
(2) Conceptual Design
-- Surface facility
-- Subsurface facility
-------
(3) Cost Estimates
~ Capital costs
-- Operating costs
(4) Economic Analyses of Overall Operation
Characteristics of Received Wastes
The available literature was reviewed pertaining to the characteristics
of hazardous wastes. A visit was made to the hazardous waste storage plant
of Kali und Salz A.G. at Herfa-Neurode in West Germany, the only known under-
ground hazardous waste storage facility. The trip report to the Kali und
Salz plant is included in Appendix F.
It was apparent from the literature that at the present time the charac-
terization and inventory of hazardous wastes are incomplete. Although many
investigations for characterization and inventory have recently started, they
are as yet incomplete, and their results are not available for this study.
It is also expected that the characteristics of hazardous wastes (i.e., both
quantity and composition) will be changed rapidly as new laws and new manage-
ment programs are implemented.
From these findings, it was concluded that the hazardous waste charac-
teristics to be used for the study would be of a general nature, reflecting
a wide range of waste types, but specific enough to reveal the requirements
of different treatment and handling methods. The waste characteristics used
for this study are presented in Section 3.
Characteristics of Stored Materials and Required Treatment
The waste can be stored to be easily retrievable as in a warehouse oper-
ation or emplaced for long-term storage as in a secured landfill operation
with retrievability only in an emergency. Some of the design criteria for
easily retrievable storage are, however, not compatible with those for long-
term secured storage. For example, easily retrievable storage requires an
access to each and every container and open space for retrieval operation,
whereas long-term secured storage requires isolation of the stored waste by
construction of a barrier or backfilling of the void space with impermeable
material. Long-term secured storage of the waste may involve conversion of
the waste to more stable form before the storage, while retrievable storage
for future resource recovery may prefer storage of the waste as it is re-
ceived. It is apparent that waste storage with easy retrieval involves use
of more space and probably costs more for a unit weight of the stored waste
than long-term storage.
Early in the study, it was decided that for this study, the underground
waste emplacement should be based on long-term secured storage. Retrieving
the long-term stored waste would be considered only in an emergency and when
no other alternative is available. Such an emergency retrieval could be re-
quired if the long-term storage is later found to be unacceptable because of
a public safety reason and the stored waste had to be removed from the under-
. 3
-------
ground storage. However, in order to develop cost data associated with short-
term storage of the waste and its retrieval, the cases in which a portion of
the waste is stored temporarily and later retrieved were also considered.
Hazardous wastes for long-term storage are treated and containerized
before storage so that perpetual maintenance of the long-term stored material
will not be required. For the purpose of this study, treatment of hazardous
waste was assumed to be based on the best practical technology (BPT); that
is, waste handling and treatment is based on proven technology at reasonable
cost, using readily available equipment. The handling of plant effluents was
designed to have a minimum impact on the local community waste treatment
facility. Details of the storage concept, treatment requirements, and design
criteria are included in Sections 3 and 4.
Typical Salt Mine
The technical assessment report (EPA-600/2-75-040) indicated that a room
and pillar type salt mine is the most suitable mine for the long-term storage
of hazardous wastes. An actual mine representing a typical room and pillar
type salt mine in a bedded salt deposit was selected for this study to form a
base from which design, cost estimating, and operating information could be
obtained. The mine selection criteria identified in the EPA technical assess-
ment report were used for selecting the case mine. The selection process also
considered the availability of design information. The mine selection pro-
cedure and a description of the selected mine are included in Section 3.
Conceptual Design
Conceptual design of the surface and subsurface facilities and a des-
cription of their operating plans were necessary for the cost estimation.
The surface facilities include buildings, civil structures, and equipment
necessary for receiving and unloading the waste, for temporary storage and
treatment, and for containerization, staging, and service activities. The
subsurface facilities include buildings, civil structures, and equipment
necessary for hoisting, transportation, and storage of the waste. The sub-
surface facilities also include underground service buildings.
Design of the base case which represents the selected plant capacity and
operating mode was based on the best practical technology, namely the
demonstrated technology of a reasonable cost. This study also evaluated
three capacities of the same plant concept, an alternative waste type, and an
alternative storage concept. Criteria for these alternatives (Cases 1
through 5) are further discussed in Sections 3 and 4. The design of the
surface and subsurface facilities is described in Section 4.
Cost Estimates and Economic Analysis of Overall Operation
The cost estimation, based on the conceptual design, includes capital
and operating costs for all activities from receiving the waste at the plant
gate to its emplacement in the mine. The costs associated with decommission-
ing the facility and long-term liability insurance were also considered. An
estimating method consistent with the conceptual nature of the design and
-------
operating information was employed for this study. This included informal
vendor contacts and extrapolation from published data and Bechtel historical
cost data. All cost data assume first quarter 1977 price and wage levels
for the selected location.
The capital investment was obtained from the cost summaries of the
buildings, civil structures, equipment, piping, electrical and control facili'
ties, and mine rehabilitation. The operating cost was obtained from the
costs of labor and material, and the fixed cost. The unit cost per ton
(waste management fee) was estimated using discounted cash flow methodology.
Details of the cost estimates -- methodology, criteria, and results -- are
included in Section 5. Details of the economic analysis are included in
Section 6.
-------
Section 2
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The primary objectives of this study are to provide a conceptual design
of the facilities necessary for long-term storage of hazardous wastes in a
salt mine and to estimate the capital and operating costs of such a storage
plant. The major work tasks to accomplish these objectives are:
• The development of design and operating criteria
including waste character, storage concept, treat-
ment requirements, and selection of the study mine.
• A conceptual design of the surface and subsurface
facilities, preliminary specification of equipment,
building, and mine rehabilitations, and development
of a facility operating plan, including an estima-
tion of material and manpower requirements.
• An estimation of the capital and operating costs of
the facilities.
t An economic analysis of the storage facility
operation.
The results of this study are summarized in this section. Recommenda-
tions for future study efforts in the program of underground storage of
hazardous waste are also included.
DESIGN AND OPERATING CRITERIA
The characteristics of received wastes, the storage concept, and alter-
native study cases are summarized below.
Waste Characterization
The hazardous wastes considered for this study are classified into four
groups, each of which requires different treatment and handling. These waste
types are defined as follows:
• Type A. Aqueous liquids and slurries containing
dissolved hazardous elements, primarily toxic
heavy metals. Type A wastes require chemical
treatment before dewatering, containerization,
and storage. Type A wastes include four subtypes:
chromate waste (A-l), cyanide waste (A-2), acid/
caustic waste (A-3), and nonreactive waste (A-4).
-------
• Type B. Aqueous and organic sludges containing
solid hazardous elements. Type B wastes require
only pH adjustment and dewatering before contain-
erization and storage. Type B wastes include
acid/caustic sludges (B-l), inorganic sludges (B-2),
and organic sludges (B-3).
• Type C. Inorganic and organic solids containing
solid hazardous elements requiring only container-
ization before storage.
• Type D. Special wastes to be stored on a temporary
basis at customer request. These wastes will be re-
trieved and sent back to the waste generator. This
is included to develop cost data associated with
short-term storage of the waste and its retrieval.
Storage Concept and Alternatives
Five alternative cases of waste storage were evaluated for this study.
They include three plant capacities of the same hazardous waste composition
(Cases 1, 2, and 3), an alternative waste composition (Case 4), and an al-
ternative storage concept (Case 5).
The hazardous wastes brought to the plant will be treated to convert
hazardous constituents to solid form, filtered to remove free fluid (water
and oil), containerized (except Case 5), and finally stored in the under*-
ground storage cells for long-term storage (Figure 1). In Case 5, dewatered
and deoiled hazardous wastes will be mixed with a stabilizing additive (ce-
menting agent) and pumped into the underground storage cells without use of
containers, where the mixture would be cured to form a solid mass.
In summary, the five alternative cases are:
• Case 1 (Base Case). 1,250 tons* per day of Types A,
B, C, and D are received and reduced to 685 tons per
day for storage in drums. Type A is treated, Types
A and B are filtered, Types A, B, and C wastes are
containerized.
t Case 2 (High-Capacity Case). 1,875 tons per day of
Type A, B, C, and D wastes are received and reduced
to 1030 tons per day for storage in drums. The waste
composition, treatment, and containerization are the
same as those in Case 1.
* Throughout the report British units are used for clarity. Conversion
factors for these units to metric units are shown on page xi.
-------
RECEIVING
UNLOADING
D
STORAGE
D
TRANSFER TO STORAGE CELL
A, B, C, D
STORE
MONITORING
RAILROAD CARS (TANK, BOX AND DUMP CARS)
TRUCKS (TANK, CONTAINER AND DUMP TRUCKS)
A1, A2, A3, A4, B (ACID), B (ALKALINE),
B (INORGANIC), B (ORGANIC),
C, D STORED SEPARATELY
TYPE A CHEMICALLY TREATED
TYPE B NEUTRALIZED
TYPES A AND B DEWATERED
TYPES A, B AND C CONTAINERIZED
ALL WASTES STORED IN STAGING AREA
WASTES HOISTED INTO MINE
WASTES TRANSFERED TO STORAGE CELLS
WASTES STORED
Figure 1. Storage of hazardous wastes in an underground mine--
material flow chart.
-------
• Case 3 (Low-Capacity Case). 188 tons per day of
Type A, B, C, and D wastes are received and re-
duced to 103 tons for storage in drums. The waste
composition, treatment, and containerization are
the same as those in Case 1.
• Case 4 (Alternative Composition). 600 tons per day
of Type B and C wastes are received and reduced to
420 tons for storage in drums. The waste composition,
treatment, and containerization are the same as
those in Case 1 except the absence of Types A and D.
• Case 5 (Non-Container Case). .600 tons per day of
Type B and C wastes are received and reduced to 420
tons. The waste composition is the same as in Case 4.
Types B and C (370 tons per day) are mixed with a
stabilizing additive (11 percent cementizing agent
on dry weight base) and pumped into the underground
storage cells and cured to form a solid mass. 50 tons
per day of Type C waste delivered in specified drums
are stored directly as received and covered with ce-
mentized wastes.
FACILITY DESIGN
The surface facilities of the storage plant will consist primarily of
waste treatment and material handling facilities in which received wastes are
unloaded, temporarily stored, treated, containerized, and transferred to the
staging area. Design information based on actual experience is not availa-
ble at this time. To develop the conceptual design of the required surface
facilities, numerous assumptions and simplifications had to be made concern-
ing the waste characteristics, chemical and physical properties of the wastes
at various process stages, treatability of the wastes and their intermediate
products, and various reaction rates.
The conceptual design of the surface facilities presented in this report
allows an order-of-magnitude cost estimation. The subsurface activity is
primarily material handling and storage. Design of the subsurface facilities
is based on an actual mine and its operating information. In summary, the
surface facilities will include:
• Receiving and unloading facilities
• Surface facilities for temporary storage
• Treatment (chlorine oxidation, sulfur dioxide reduc-
tion, neutralization) and dewatering facilities
• Containerization and staging facilities
The subsurface facilities will include:
• Surface loading and lowering
• Underground unloading and staging
t Hauling to storage area
• Storage and monitoring
-------
ECONOMIC EVALUATION
The capital and operating costs were estimated based on the conceptual
design presented in Section 4 and on first quarter 1977 prices and wages. An
economic analysis of the plant operation, including estimation of the unit
cost (cost per ton) and sensitivity analysis, was performed. The capital
costs were estimated based on lists and specifications of equipment, build-
ings, civil structures, and mine rehabilitations. The operating costs were
estimated from conceptual operating plans, including a list of manpower re-
quirements and an estimation of material requirements.
Unit Cost Per Ton (Waste Management Fee)
The unit cost per ton (waste management fee) was estimated for all five
alternatives, based on the discounted cash flow net present value methodology.
The unit costs were computed for private and government ownerships. The
private ownership is based on a 10 percent return on investment, 100 percent
equity, and 48 percent income tax, while the government ownership is based
on a 100 percent financing at 6 percent cost of capital and no income tax.
Results of the unit cost computation (computer calculation) are shown in
Tables 16 through 26 and summarized in Tables 1 and 2.
Table 1 presents the unit costs for Cases 1, 2, and 3, which treat and
store the same four waste types but at different capacities. As can be seen,
plant size has significant effects on the unit cost. In the range considered,
larger capacities yield lower costs. Table 2 shows the unit costs of Cases
4 and 5 and compares them with the base case costs. Cases 4 and 5 process
the same two types of wastes (Types B and C), but Case 4 would containerize
the waste, while Case 5 would stabilize the waste to eliminate the containers.
To compare the unit costs of these different storage concepts based on the
same underground storage loading, the base case unit cost was adjusted to
reflect the cost at 126,000 tons per year (420 tons per day). In the case of
government ownership, the Case 4 unit cost ($187 per ton stored) is almost
twice of the Case 5 unit cost ($102 per ton stored). The Case 1 unit cost
($298 per ton stored) is almost three times the Case 5 unit cost. The
sensitivity of plant capacity, mine cost, and cost return on investment to
the unit cost were also analyzed and are presented in Section 6.
Capital Costs
The capital costs were estimated for all five cases. The capital costs
include the following items:
a Existing mine facilities
• Site development
t Buildings, civil structures, and mine rehabilitation
• Equipment, piping, electrical, and instrumentation
• Engineering service, allowance during construction,
and contingency
The summary of the capital costs is presented in Tables 3 and 4. Table
3 shows the capital costs for the five alternative cases. Table 4 shows the
10
-------
TABLE 1. WASTE MANAGEMENT FEE
(UNIT COST PER TON)
OF ALTERNATIVE PLANT SIZES
Item Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
Waste Quantity
Received, tons/yr
Stored, tons/yr
Total Capital ($1000)
Economic Life (Years)
375,000
205,000
90,135
30
562,500
309,000
104,075
20
56,250
30,900
61 ,494
40
Waste Management Fee
Private Ownership^)
$/ton of Received Waste 131 117 377
$/ton of Stored Waste 240 213 686
Government Ownership^)
$/ton of Received Waste 101 95 233
$/ton of Stored Waste 185 173 424
Note: (1) Private ownership assumed 10% return on investment.
(2) Government ownership assumed 6% cost of capital.
11
-------
TABLE 2. WASTE MANAGEMENT FEE
(UNIT COST PER TON)
OF ALTERNATIVE STORAGE METHODS
Item
Waste Quantity
Received, tons/yr
Stored, tons/yr
Total Capital ($1000)
Economic Life (Years)
Base Case
Case 1
375,000
205,500
90,135
30
Adjusted
Case 1
229,300
126,000
--
--
Case 4
180,000
126,000
68,853
40
Case 5
180,000
126,000
64,041
40
Waste Management Fee
Private Ownership
$/ton of Received Waste
$/ton of Stored Waste
Government Ownership
$/ton of Received Waste
$/ton of Stored Waste
131
240
101
185
210*
382*
164*
298*
179
257
131
187
118
168
71
102
* Adjusted to reflect the cost at 126,000 tons per year (Figure 35).
12
-------
TABLE 3. CAPITAL COST SUMMARY OF FIVE ALTERNATIVE CASES
Item
WASTE QUANTITY
Received Waste, Tons/Yr
Stored Waste, Tons/Yr
EXISTING MINE *
NEW SURFACE FACILITY
Site Development
Buildings
Plant Utilities
Process Mechanical Equipment
Process Piping, Electrical & Instrumentation
DIRECT FIELD COST, SURFACE FACILITY
NEW SUBSURFACE FACILITY
Mine Rehabilitation
New Ventilation System
Underground Buildings
Underground Eauipment
DIRECT FIELD COST, SUBSURFACE FACILITY
TOTAL DIRECT FIELD COST
TOTAL INDIRECT FIELD COST
S 6% of TDFC
TOTAL FIELD COST
ALLOWANCE DURING CONSTRUCTION
e is of TFC + $500,000
ENGINEERING SERVICE
9 15% Of TFC
CONTINGENCY
0 25% of TFC
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST
WORKING CAPITAL
S 102 of TCC
TOTAL INVESTMENT
$/Ton Received
$/Ton Stored
Base Case
Case 1
SIOOO's
375,000
205,500
30,000
360
5,966
560
12,428
8,699
28,013
1,749
4,437
231
J.812
8,229
36,242
2,175
38,417
884
5,763
9.604
54,668
5,467
90,135
240
439
Case 2
SIOOO's
562,500
309,000
30,000
406
7,869
714
15,435
11,083
35,905
1,794
4,437
231
2.354
8,816
44,721
2.684
47,405
974
7,111
11,851
67,341
6,734
104,075
185
337
Case 3
$1000's
56,250
30,900
30,000
130
2.322
370
6,064
4,245
13,131
1,614
2,758
111
1.208
5,691
18,822
1,129
19,951
699
2,993
4,988
28,631
2,863
61,494
1,093
1,990
Case 4
SIOOO's
180,000
125,000
30,000
234
3,809
370
6,287
4,401
15,101
1,717
4,437
231
1.312
8,197
23,298
1,398
24,696
747
3,704
6,174
35,321
3,532
68.853
383
551
Case 5
SIOOO's
180,000
126,000
30,000
234
2,976
370
5,136
3,595
12,311
1,614
4,437
231
1,778
8,060
20,371
1,222
21 ,593
716
3,239
5,398
30,946
3,095
64,041
356
508
NOTE: Number of significant figures may exceed those justified by accuracy of the estimate.
•See page 107
13
-------
TABLE 4. CAPITAL COST SUMMARY OF BASE CASE AND ITS ALLOCATION TO TYPES
A, B, C, AND D WASTES
Item
HASTE QUANTITY
Received Waste, Tons/Yr
Stored Waste, Tons/Yr
EXISTING MINE COST *
NEW SURfACE FACILITY COST
Site Development
Buildings
Plant Utilities
Process Mechanical Equipment
Process Piping, Electrical & Instrumentation
DIRECT FIELD COST, SURFACE FACILITY
NEW SUBSURFACE FACILITY COST
Mine Rehabilitation
New Ventilation System
Underground Buildings
Underground Equipment
DIRECT FIELD COST, SUBSURFACE FACILITY
TOTAL DIRECT FIELD COST
TOTAL INDIRECT FIELD COST 9 6% of TDFC
TOTAL FIELD COST
ALLOWANCE DURING CONSTRUCTION
@ 1% of TFC + $500,000
ENGINEERING SERVICE
e 151 of TFC
CONTINGENCY
@ 25Z of TFC
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST
WORKING CAPITAL
9 1 OS of TCC
TOTAL INVESTMENT
J/Ton Received
S/Ton Stored
BASE
Total
SlOOO's
375,000
205,500
30,000
360
5,966
560
12,428
8,699
28,013
1,749
4,437
231
1.812
8,229
36,242
2,175
38,417
884
5,763
9.601
54,668
5,467
90,135
240
439
CASE (CASE
Type A
SlOOO's
180,000
64,500
8,775
166
2,656
332
6,646
4,652
14,452
512
1,298
68
530
2,408
16,860
1,012
17,872
412
2.681
4,468
25,433
2,543
36,751
204
570
1)
Type B
SlOOO's
120,000
66,000
8,979
111
1,837
162
4,118
2,882
9,110
523
1,328
69
542
2,462
11,572
694
12,266
283
1,840
3.067
17,456
1,746
28,181
235
427
Type C
SlOOO's
60,000
60,000
8,163
55
1,052
53
1,522
1,065
3,747
476
1,207
53
493
2,239
5,986
359
6,345
145
952
1.586
9,028
903
18,094
302
302
Type_D
SlOOO's
15,000
15,000
4,083
28
421
13
142
100
704
238
604
31
247
1,120
1,824
110
1,934
44
290
483
2,751
275
7,109
474
474
NOTE: Number of significant figures shown In this table may exceed those justified by
accuracy of the estimate.
• See page 107
14
-------
base case capital cost and its allocation to the waste types (Types A, B, C,
and D) subjected to different treatments and handlings. Distribution of the
base case capital cost to the waste types reflects only relative cost for
each waste type and does not imply that each waste type alone will cost the
indicated figure.
Operating Costs
The operating costs were estimated for all five cases. The operating
costs include the costs of:
• Direct material and labor
• Maintenance material and labor
• Overhead material and labor
• Taxes and insurance, depreciation, and long-term
liability insurance
The summary of the operating costs is presented in Tables 5 and 6.
Table 5 shows the operating cost of the five alternative cases. Table 6
shows the operating cost of the base case and its allocation to the waste
types, which are being subjected to different treatments and handlings. As
in the capital cost allocation to the waste types, the allocation of the
operating cost reflects only the relative operating cost of each waste type
and does not imply that any one waste, alone, can be stored at the indicated
cost. The operating cost per ton shown at the bottom of Tables 5 and 6 does
not include the cost of capital and depreciation (and should not be confused
with the unit cost, cost per ton waste management fee computed by discounted
cash flow methodology).
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the findings of this study, the following studies are believed
essential for establishing an effective underground hazardous waste storage
program:
(1) Development of a better storage concept than
that used in the base case -- direct emplace-r
ment of stabilized (cementized) hazardous wastes.
(2) Development of inexpensive waste containers.
(3) Identification and characterization of hazardous
wastes suited for the subsurface storage.
Development of Better Storage Concepts
As indicated in the cost summary (Table 6), the direct storage of hazar-
dous waste (mixing the waste with a cementizing agent and pumping it into
the underground storage cell where it is cured and converted to a solid mass
filling the entire space) is economically most attractive. However, the
stabilization (cementizing) of hazardous waste is still in the development
stage and requires further research and development efforts.
15
-------
TABLE 5. OPERATING COST SUMMARY OF FIVE ALTERNATIVE CASES
Item
WASTE QUANTITY
Received Waste, Tons/Yr
Stored Waste, Tons/Yr
TOTAL CAPITAL COST
DIRECT OPERATING COST
RAW MATERIALS & UTILITIES
Chemicals
Drums 4 Pallets
Utilities
DIRECT LABOR
Operating Labor '2)
MAINTENANCE
Labor
Materials
INDIRECT OPERATING COST
ADMINISTRATION & GENERAL OVERHEAD
Labor
Materials
FIXED COST(3)
TAXES AND INSURANCE'3'
? 2% of Plant Cost and $1.10 per ton for
Long Term Liability Insurance
OPERATING COST ^
$/Ton Received ^ '
S/Ton Stored ^
Base Case
Case 1
SlOOO's
375,000
205,500
90,135
1,526
13,395
1,907
16,828
3,695
1,565
3.643
5,208
1,486
337
1.823
2,215
29.769
' 79
145
Case 2
SlOOO's
562,500
309,000
104,075
2,297
20,093
2,724
25,114
4.860
1.908
4,616
6,524
1.889
433
2,322
2.700
41,520
74
134
Case 3
SlOOO's
56,250
30,900
61 .494
230
2,009
352
2,591
1,323
478
1,843
2,321
534
117
651
1,292
8,178
145
265
Case 4
SlOOO's
180.000
126,000
68,853
55
8,225
923
9,203
2,533
1,379
2,021
3,400
1,026
247
1,273
1.575
17.984
100
143
Case 5
SlOOO's
180,000
126,000
64,041
275
0
773
1,048
1,658
914
1,721
2,635
735
165
900
1,479
7.720
43
61
NOTE: (1) Number of significant figures shown in this table may exceed those justified
by accuracy of the estimate.
(2) Labor costs include 30* payroll additive and 8S overtime compensation.
(3) Insurance includes SI.10 per ton (0.54/gallon) of received waste for Long Tern
Liability and other insurances.
(4) Cost of Capital and depreciation Is not Included.
16
-------
TABLE 6. OPERATING COST SUMMARY OF THE BASE CASE AND ITS ALLOCATION TO
TYPES A, B, C, AND D WASTES 0)
Item
WASTE QUANTITY
Received Waste, Tons/Yr
Stored Waste, Tons/Yr
TOTAL CAPITAL COST
DIRECT OPERATING COST
RAW MATERIALS & UTILITIES
Chemicals
Drums & Pallets
Utilities
DIRECT LABOR
Operating Labor * '
MAINTENANCE
Labor
Materials
INDIRECT OPERATING COST
ADMINISTRATION & GENERAL OVERHEAD
Labor
Materials
FIXED COST
TAXES & INSURANCE '3^
{92% of plant cost and $1.10 per ton for
Long Terra Liability Insurance)
OPERATING COST ^
(4
$/Ton Received v
$/Ton Stored
BASE CASE (CASE
Total
JlOOO's
375,000
205,500
90,135
1,526
13,395
1.907
16,828
3,695
1,565
3.643
5,208
1,486
337
1,823
2,215
29.769
' 79
145
Type A
$1000's
180,000
64,500
36,751
1,471
4,934
1.146
7,551
1,498
574
1 ,859
2,433
652
137
789
933
13,204
73
205
Type 8
$1000's
120,000
66,000
28,181
55
5,030
527
5,612
1,218
474
1,191
1,665
456
103
559
696
9,750
81
148
1)
Type C
SlOOO's
60,000
60,000
18,094
0
3,431
160
3,591
715
345
502
847
252
65
317
428
5,898
98
98
Type D
$1000'S
15,000
15,000
7,109
0
0
74
74
264
172
91
263
126
32
158
158
917
61
61
NOTE: (1) Number of significant figures shown in this table may exceed those justified by
accuracy of the estimate.
(2) Labor rate includes 302 payroll additive (fringe benefits) and 8% overtime compensation.
(3) Insurance includes $1.10 per ton (0.5
-------
There have been several studies (Ref. 2, 3 and 4) on stabilization of
hazardous wastes to convert the waste into an insoluble or very low soluble
form. However, past studies have generally emphasized the development of a
solid with a minimal leachate problem. Most of the available data, therefore,
are the results of various leaching tests. Interests in the waste stabili-
zation associated with underground waste storage are somewhat different from
those associated with the surface land disposal. That is, for underground
storage, handling and engineering properties are more important, while for
surface land disposal, the primary concern is leaching of hazardous constit-
uents.
Although its economic attractiveness has been demonstrated, further
technical evaluations are required to confirm the feasibility of storing
hazardous waste in mines without containers. Major objectives of such a
study should include:
t Finding proper stabilization additive
• Finding optimum additive dosage
• Development of various process design criteria
• Development of engineering data of the mixture
at the various process stages
Some of the specific questions needed to be answered to confirm the
technical feasibility of the concept are:
• Can the cured mass be used to form a dike of
a few feet to retain the wet mixture during the
curing process?
• Can the cured mass support heavy equipment?
t Can the mixture be pumped?
Development of Inexpensive Waste Containers
The 55-gallon, 16 gauge steel drum container was selected for this study
because its use is proven technology; however, at $22 each, the drum cost is
over $70 per ton of the stored waste. Less expensive containers may be
feasible, such as a heavy duty wood box with plastic lining. Use of a wood
box, however, will require testing for applicability. If the containeri-
zation of the waste were to be practiced, use of a container other than a
steel drum should be explored. Testing for applicability of a container may
include tests for structural integrity (drop test, puncture test, compression
test, etc.) handleability, and resistance to corrosion, fire, and shear.
Identification and Characterization of Waste to Be Stored
Not all hazardous wastes are suited for underground storage. Some of
the wastes considered hazardous may be better incinerated, while some of the
others may be disposable in a secured surface landfill.
In many parts of the country, finding a secured on-land disposal site
18
-------
for hazardous wastes is a very difficult problem and underground mine space
can be very attractive for hazardous waste management. Underground mine
space is a valuable resource and should not be misused by storing wastes
that could be readily disposed of by other means.
Presently, the characteristics of hazardous wastes are poorly defined,
and their quantities are not well inventoried. However, investigations are
in progress in several states to develop pertinent data, which should be
available within a year. This information should be reviewed to define:
t A list of hazardous wastes suited for under-
ground storage. This may depend on the specific
mine in the given region.
• The characteristics of the wastes to be stored as
they are generated at the source and as they are
received at the plant.
19
-------
Section 3
DESIGN BASIS OF THE STUDY
This section presents the design basis of this study, including descrip-
tions of the quantity and characteristics of the wastes to be stored, the
methodologies of waste treatment, handling, and storage, and the physical
requirements of the storage site. A brief description of the methodology
used in selecting the actual subject mine is presented, along with a detailed
description of the mine itself. The selected mine is a typical room and
pillar salt mine in a bedded salt deposit, but specific information that
would reveal its name and location has been avoided.
The only known practice of underground storage of hazardous wastes is
at Herfa-Neurode in West Germany. At the present time, that operation is a
simple storage facility without treatment or recontainerization of received
wastes. No attempt is made to convert the wastes to a more stable form. The
operation is gradually improving through trial and error. It was decided
that although the German experience is valuable for this study, a fresh
approach based on the trend of U.S. waste management practices would be
developed.
The characteristics of hazardous wastes to be received at the storage
plant were formulated based on the current U.S. hazardous waste management
practice and its potential changes. The characteristics of stored wastes
were developed based on the concept of long-term environmental protection and
the use of the best practical technology in the treatment and handling of
the received wastes.
WASTE CHARACTERISTICS AND QUANTITY
In the report to Congress on hazardous waste disposal by the U.S. EPA
(Ref. 5) June 30, 1973, the hazardous waste is defined as:
"Any waste or combination of wastes which pose a
substantial present or potential hazard to human
health or living organisms because such wastes are
lethal, undegradable, persistent in nature, biologi-
cally magnified, or otherwise cause or tend to cause
detrimental cumulative effects. General categories
of nonradioactive hazardous waste are toxic chemicals;
flammable, explosive and biological. These wastes
can take the form of solids, sludges, liquids, or
gases."
20
-------
In an attempt to determine the characteristics and quantities of hazard-
ous wastes to be handled at the storage plant, a series of reports (Ref. 6
through 11) issued on the studies of the National Disposal Site concept,
and the reports (Refs. 12 through 24) on the Assessment of Industrial Hazard-
ous Waste Practices have been reviewed. In addition, the reports (Refs. 25
through 28) on hazardous waste management practice in the State of California
were also reviewed.
It is apparent from these reports that the characteristics of hazardous
wastes are not well identified, and their quantity and source distribution
have not yet been inventoried. It is recognized that the characteristics
and quantities of hazardous wastes will change considerably in the near
future, governed by many complex and uncertain factors, including:
• Local and state hazardous waste management programs
• Federal regulations on hazardous waste management to
be promulgated under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act of 1976
• Changes in manufacturing and waste treatment processes
• Location of storage (or disposal) site
• Criteria of design and operation of disposal (or
storage) facility
The majority of hazardous wastes in the United States is generated by
industry. Due to the differences in the manufacturing processes, local law,
and availability of disposal sites, the characteristics and quantities of
hazardous wastes differ from plant to plant in a given industry. Even for a
given plant, waste characteristics and quantities are expected to change as
new regulations and standards are enforced.
At present, hazardous waste management practices (generation, trans-
portation, treatment, and disposal) are controlled at the state level. How-
ever, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-580)
makes hazardous waste management a federal responsibility. Many new regu-
lations and standards controlling hazardous waste management are to be
promulgated before April 21, 1978. The Act also requires the U.S. EPA to
develop and promulgate criteria for identifying the characteristics of
hazardous wastes and for listing hazardous wastes before April 21, 1978.
As in the case of the wastewater management practice under the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, each state is expected to develop a
hazardous waste management program in lieu of the federal program and will
be authorized to issue and enforce permits for storage, treatment, and dis-
posal of hazardous wastes. Because of the strong dependence of hazardous
waste disposal on local climatic and geological conditions, different states
may have different approaches to the disposal of hazardous wastes. Accord-
ingly, industrial plants of the same type in different states may be re-
quired to handle their hazardous waste differently and produce chemically
and physically different wastes.
The reports on the Assessment of Industrial Hazardous Waste Practices
(Refs. 12 through 24) showed an approximate estimate of various hazardous
21
-------
waste quantities. This is summarized in Appendix A.
As shown in Appendix A, the quantities and characteristics of hazardous
wastes vary considerably from state to state and region to region, depending
on their industrial distribution. An extensive survey will be required to
inventory the sources and to determine accurately the quantity presently
generated in any given region. The State of California has just started such
an inventory of the statewide hazardous waste sources and their character-
istics.
The cost of storing these hazardous wastes will also affect the quan-
tities and characteristics of the waste received at the storage plant. Dis-
posal or reprocessing at the industrial source eliminates transportation
cost, and some industries may find this advantageous. This would eliminate
or reduce the need for storing the hazardous wastes at the storage plant.
The storage of hazardous wastes in underground mines generally requires
chemical and physical treatment of these hazardous wastes to reduce the
volume or to convert to more stable form, The majority of known hazardous
wastes are a mixture of many compounds, and the hazardous constituents are
usually a very minor portion of the total waste. Thus, both treatment and
storage techniques are dictated as much or more by the nonhazardous components
as by the hazardous constituents.
From these considerations, it was decided that the waste characteristics
to be used for this study should be of a general nature reflecting a wide
range of waste types and their possible change with time, but also specific
enough to reveal different handling requirements.
For this study, hazardous wastes were classified into groups that would
be subjected to similar treatment and handling during their receiving and
unloading, chemical treatment, dewatering, containerization, stabilization,
and storage.
Haste Characteristics Selected for the Study
Hazardous wastes to be handled at the storage site are classified into
four types. In formulating the waste classification, the following general
criteria were considered:
• All known hazardous wastes should be included except
those which cannot be stored because of their volatility
and explosiveness.
• Waste should be classified into groups that will be
representative of the current hazardous wastes and
future changes as new regulations are enforced.
• Wastes should be classified according to the needs
of common treatment and handling so that appropriate
costs will be charged to the customers storing
different wastes.
• Possible alternative modes of waste storage operation
should be considered in the waste classification.
22
-------
The classification of hazardous wastes into four types and further
grouping of each type into subgroups was not intended to represent the true
and accurate classification of what might be handled at a centralized
hazardous waste storage plant, but only to represent a reasonable classifi-
cation to allow development of realistic cost information for handling
different types of hazardous wastes.
The classification of hazardous wastes into different types, each
being subject to specific treatment and handling, also provides the EPA
with comparative cost information that will be useful in their future pursuits
and planning of the underground storage concept.
Hazardous wastes to be stored in the underground storage facility are
classified into the following four types.
• Type A, aqueous liquids and slurries
• Type B, aqueous and organic sludges
• Type C, inorganic and organic solids
• Type D, special liquid and solid wastes
requiring retrieval
Type A, Aqueous Liquids and Slurries. Type A includes liquid and slurry
hazardous wastes requiring chemical treatment followed by precipitation,
dewatering, and containerization. This type of hazardous waste contains
toxic inorganic constituents, primarily heavy metals such as cadmium, copper,
zinc, lead, mercury, nickel, manganese, arsenic, antimony, selenium, and be-
ryllium.
Concentrated liquid waste such as spent plating solution from an elec-
troplating industry is a typical example of this type waste. Currently, many
industries producing this type of hazardous waste use the services of small
private hazardous waste management firms that haul these wastes to collective
treatment or disposal sites.
Type A wastes are further divided into four subgroups requiring
different treatments:
• Type A-l. Chromate Waste. Wastes containing hexavalent
chromium, which requires sulfur dioxide (S02) reduction
before precipitation of heavy metals and subsequent
dewatering.
• Type A-2. Cyanide Waste. Wastes containing cyanides,
which require chlorine (C^) oxidation before pre-
cipitation of heavy metals and subsequent dewatering.
• Type A-3, Acidic and Caustic Liquids and Slurries.
Liquid and slurry wastes requiring neutralization
before precipitation of heavy metals and dewatering.
• Type A-4, Nonreactive Mixed Waste. Liquid and slurry
wastes containing heavy metals, requiring only pre-
cipitation and dewatering.
A likely composition of Type A wastes, shown in Table 7, was approxi-
23
-------
TABLE 7. COMPOSITION OF HAZARDOUS LIQUID AND SLURRY WASTES
Type A-1 Type A-2
Chroma te Wastes Cyanide Wastes
(Ibs/Day) (Ibs/Day)
Cr03 5,000 NaCN 5,000
H2S04
HC1
M(S04)x**
Organics
H20
5,000 NaOH 10,000
1,000 Na2C03 3,000
4,500 M(Cl)x 7,700
500 H20 174,300
184,000
200,000 200,000
Type A- 3
Acid/Caustic Wastes
(Ibs/Day)
HC1 5,000 NaOH 8,000
H2S04 5,000
HN03 1,000
H3P04 1,000
M(S04)x 22,800
Organics 500
H20 164,700
200,000
Na2C03 2,000
M(OH)x 8,000
Si02 1,000
Organics 3,000
H20 178,000
200,000
Type A-4
Non-Reactive Wastes
(Ibs/Day)
NaCl 10,000
CaC12 13,000
M(S04)x 17,000
H20 360,000
400,000
*This is an approximate waste composition used to compute the chemical requirement 1n Type A waste treatment of
Base Case.
**M refers to metal ions including hazardous constituents.
-------
mated from the characteristics of hazardous liquid wastes presently being
received by established hazardous waste management firms (Ref. 9). The
composition is not intended to represent a true average of what might be re-
ceived at the storage plant, but only reflects a realistic approximation
used for carrying out this study.
Sources of Type A wastes may include small electroplating industries,
textile industries, tanneries, electronic component manufacturers, and others
who find it advantageous to send their liquid and slurry wastes (concentra-
ted wastewaters) to underground storage sites.
Type B, Aqueous and Organic Sludges. Type B wastes include hazardous
sludge wastes, requiring only dewatering and pH adjustment (B-l) before con-
tainerization and storage. Toxic sludges from industrial wastewater treat-
ment plants are typical of this type hazardous waste. Type B wastes are sub-
divided into acid/caustic sludge (B-l), inorganic sludge (B-2), and organic
sludge (B-3) for the purpose of separate handling and separate storage.
The sources of inorganic sludges include battery industries, inorganic
chemical industries, metal smelting and refining industries, electroplating
industries, and machine manufacturing industries. The source of sludges con-
taining toxic organic residue and organic solvents includes organic chemical
industries, paint and allied product industries, pharmaceutical industries,
and rubber and plastic industries. Some of these sludges (B-l) will be either
acidic or caustic when received at the storage plant and will require neu-
tralization.
Type C, Inorganic and Organic Solids. Type C wastes include those
hazardous solid wastes requiring no treatment and no dewatering prior to
containerization. Type C wastes may be the same wastes as Type B, except
they are dewatered. Toxic solid wastes such as rejected battery products
and pesticide containers are also included in this type of hazardous waste.
Some of Type C wastes will be delivered to the storage plant already con-
tainerized. Type C wastes delivered in bulk quantity will be containerized
before the underground storage.
Type D, Special Waste for Retrieval. Type D includes hazardous wastes
brought to the plant for temporary storage. These wastes will be stored
for a given period and retrieved to be returned to the owner. These wastes
will be delivered to the site containerized in specified containers, which
will maintain their integrity during storage. Type D waste was included in
this study only to obtain cost information on the retrieval operation. In-
clusion of Type D waste does not imply that this operation is recommended,
nor likely to occur at an actual storage plant,
PLANT CAPACITIES
Determination of the plant capacity based on actual market conditions
of the storage service was impossible at this time.
Hazardous waste of 1,250 ton per day (TPD) capacity (as received) was
selected as the base case (Case 1) for this study. This represents approxi-
25
-------
mately 685 TPD of hazardous waste stored in the underground mine after de-
watering. The 685 TPD capacity selected for the base case represents the
capacity of the existing hoisting system during normal two-shift operation
of the selected salt mine facility.
To evaluate the sensitivity of plant capacities on the design of the
storage facility and the capital and operating costs, two additional plant
capacities -- one higher and one lower than the base case -- were also in-
cluded in the study. The high-capacity case (Case 2) receives 1,875 TPD
of hazardous wastes and stores 1,030 TPD, while the lower capacity case
(Case 3) receives 188 TPD and stores 103 TPD. The proportions of the Type A,
B, C, and D wastes in Case 2 and Case 3 are the same as that of the base
case.
The 1,030 TPD storage (Case 2) represents an upper limit based on three-
shift operation of the existing hoisting system operated at 75 percent of the
design capacity. The 103 TPD storage (Case 3) represents a low capacity of
one-shift operation of all underground facilities.
The quantities of Type A, B, C, and D wastes received and stored for
Cases 1, 2, and 3 are shown in Table 8. The proportions of Type A, B, C, and
D wastes shown in Table 8 were selected to study the sensitivity of the waste
types on design of the plant facility and the capital and operating costs.
For the base case, approximately equal storage loadings (215 TPD, 220 TPD,
and 200 TPD) were selected for the Type A, B, and C wastes, respectively.
This includes 65 TPD and 20 TPD of solids resulting from evaporation of Type
A waste filtrates and Type B waste filtrates. The 50 TPD loading of Type D
waste was selected to develop cost data for a small but reasonable retrieval
operation in conjunction with the long-term storage of Type A, B, and C
wastes. Cases 4 and 5, shown in Table 8, are for different modes of opera-
tion than Cases 1, 2, and 3, as discussed in the following section.
WASTE STORAGE CONCEPT
General criteria considered in formulating the concept of storing
hazardous wastes in salt mine openings are as follows:
• Waste storage will be long-term storage without
planned retrieval of stored waste, except certain
types of waste that may be stored temporarily.
• Retrieval of the long-term stored waste will be con-
sidered only when an extreme emergency occurs and
no other alternative is available.
• To assure the long-term environmental protection
and to prevent the need of retrieving the long-
term stored waste, all wastes brought to the plant
will be converted to the most stable chemical and
physical forms using the best practical technology.
• The stored waste will not contain any substance
that could generate toxic fumes, fire, hazardous
vapor, or explosive material.
t The storage operation will include all activities
26
-------
TABLE 8. WASTE COMPOSITION OF ALTERNATIVE CASES
ro
Type A, TPD Received
TPD Stored
Type B, TPD Received
TPD Stored
Type C, TPD Received
TPD Stored
Type D, TPD Received
TPD Stored
Solids From Wastewater
Evaporation, TPD Stored
Total Received
Total Stored
Case 1
600
150
400
200
200
200
50
50
85*
1250
685
Case 2
900
225
600
300
300
300
75
75
130
1875
1030
Case 3
90
22
60
30
30
30
8
8
13
188
103
Case 4
0
0
400
200
200
200
0
0
20
600
420
Case 5
0
0
400
200
200
200
20
600
420
*85 TPD wastewater solids include 65 TPD from Type A and 20 TPD from Type B wastes.
-------
from waste receiving at the gate to waste emplace-
ment in underground storage cells. Transport to the
plant site is not included in this study, except
formulating reasonable modes of transport methods.
• All wastes brought to the plant will be stored,
except the clean condensate from the filtrate
evaporation.
• There will be no effluent from the plant, except
sanitary wastewater and clean runoffs.
• The selected storage method will provide long-term
environmental protection without perpetual mainte-
nance of the stored materials.
• The selected storage method will use the available
space effectively.
• The stored material will be inventoried to identify
the waste type, quantity, and storage location, in
case retrieval becomes necessary.
These criteria dictate that hazardous wastes brought to the plant have
to be treated to precipitate any dissolved hazardous constituents and then
dewatered. In addition, if the waste contains a component that may generate
toxic fumes, the waste must be treated to remove or destroy the component.
Cyanide, for example, must undergo chloride oxidation followed by lime pre-
cipitation and filtration.
The criteria also dictate that the waste cannot be disposed of indis-
criminately into mine openings, but it has to be stored in a systematic
manner to allow controlled handling, segregated storage of different wastes,
short-term maintenance of stored waste, inventorying of the stored waste,
and long-term protection of the environment. To meet these criteria, it was
decided to containerize the wastes in all study cases, except Case 5, in
which the waste is cementized instead of containerized.
The container should be a type that can be readily obtained and suited
for the required handling. The container should also be a type that can be
stacked to an average of 21 feet. It was concluded that for this study,
open-top, 16 gauge, epoxy-lined 55-gallon steel drums will be used for con-
tainerization of all wastes.
In summary, the waste received at the storage plant will be treated to
convert hazardous elements into relatively insoluble forms, then filtered to
remove free water, and finally containerized in 55-gallon steel drums. The
waste in steel drums will then be hoisted into the mine on pallets, each con-
taining four drums. The pallets will be transferred to the storage cell
where they will be stacked to an average height of 21 feet. Details of the
design and operation are included in Section 4.
ALTERNATIVE STORAGE CONCEPTS
During the course of this study, it became apparent that Type A waste
requires a complicated and extensive chemical treatment facility. In fact,
proper handling of Type A waste would make the facility resemble a waste
28
-------
treatment operation more than a storage operation.
To evaluate the concept of receiving only non-liquid (residue) types
of hazardous wastes, a special case (Case 4) where only Type B and C wastes
are handled is included in this study. Operation of Case 4 will be the same
as that of the base case, except that it would require no chemical treatment
and thereby would reduce the surface activity considerably.
It also became apparent that the container cost will be a major item of
the overall operating cost, and any storage method that eliminates the need
of containerization would be very attractive.
To explore the possibility of eliminating containerization, several
presently available waste stabilization methods (solidification) were reviewed
and one of these stabilization methods (Case 5) is included in this study. In
Case 5, the non-liquid wastes (Types B and C) will be dewatered, mixed with a
stabilizing additive, and then pumped into the storage cell area in the mine.
Details of these alternative cases (Cases 4 and 5) are included in Section
4. The types of waste received and stored, and concepts of the five different
cases are summarized in Table 9.
MINE SELECTION AND DESCRIPTION OF SELECTED MINE
Mine Selection
One of the study tasks was to examine and evaluate existing salt mines
to select one specific typical salt mine suitable for the storage of hazard-
ous waste. The selected mine was used as a base from which design and cost
information was obtained. To prevent potential adverse public reaction, the
study mine has not been identified. Due to the limited time and budget, the
selection procedure was to be based on readily available information without
actual site surveys of the mines being considered. A summary of the mine
selection procedures and a description of the selected mine are presented
be1ow.
In the EPA technical assessment report, 17 salt mines were identified.
In this study, all 17 were evaluated to select a typical salt mine suitable
for waste storage. The selection of the study mine involved a two-step
evaluation: (1) screening of the mines based on general non-geologic selec-
tion criteria and (2) final selection based on specific geologic criteria.
These two criteria groups are as follows;
• General Criteria (physical, social, and economic factors);
1. Suitability of mine (availability of suitable space)
2. Availability of information (maps and design information)
3. Availability of surface land
4. Distance to waste source
5. Accessibility to mine
6. Compatability with other resource development (oil, gas,
coal, etc.)
29
-------
TABLE 9. LOADING AND TREATMENT SUMMARY OF ALTERNATIVE STUDY CASES
CO
o
Case 1
Case 2
Case 3
Case 4
Case 5
Waste Received
TPD
1250
1875
188
600
600
Waste Stored
TPD
685
1030
103
420
420
Storage Concept
Type A treated, Types A&3 filtered,
Types A, B &C containerized,
Types A, B, C &D stored.
Same as Case 1, except total
plant capacity.
Same as Cases 1 and 2, except
plant capacity.
Same as Case 1 except, Types A
are not included.
Same as Case 4 except waste is
total
& D
stabilized
(cementized) and stored directly into mine
space.
-------
t Specific Criteria:
1. Dryness of mine
2. Imperviousness of associated seams
3. Isolation from aquifers
4. Structural stability of mine
5. Reactivity of mineral
6. Homogeneity of mineral
7. Seismicity of area
8. Faulting of area
9. Competence and strength of mine
10. Alteration and dissolution of mineral
11. Depth of mine
12. Inclination of seam
13. Erosion potential
14. Thickness of seam
15. Distribution of seam
16. Relief
17. Access to mine
18. Glaciation
19. Inundation
The above criteria are those suggested in the technical assessment re-
port. The mine evaluation was based on Bechtel information and staff experi-
ence of the subcontractor, a large salt producing company, together with in-
formal contacts with salt industry personnel. It should be recognized that
the mine selection procedure used in this study is of a preliminary nature.
Much more information based on actual survey data will be required if actual
selection of storage sites were to be carried out. The results of the evalu-
ation are summarized based on general criteria in Table 10 and based on
specific criteria in Table 11.
In the mine screening process, rating scales of favorable (F), marginal
(M), unacceptable (U), and not determined (X) were used for both general and
specific criteria evaluation. In the general criteria evaluation, a mine
receiving an unfavorable rating in any category was eliminated from further
consideration. All mines with more than one marginal classification were
provisionally eliminated from consideration, to be considered only if all
other mines were later eliminated. Table 10 summarizes the results of this
initial evaluation.
The eight mines remaining after the general criteria evaluation were
further considered in the second evaluation step based on the specific geo-
logic criteria. As in the initial screening, all mines with an unfavorable
rating were eliminated from further consideration, and those with more than
two marginal ratings were provisionally eliminated. Table 11 summarizes the
results of the evaluation of the eight mines based on the specific criteria.
The three mines (Mines No. 2, 7 and 14) not eliminated at this point
were considered acceptable for storing hazardous waste. All three remaining
mines are of room and pillar type. Mines No. 2 and 7 are of bedded salt,
while Mine No. 14 is of dome salt. Any one of the three mines could have
31
-------
TABLE 10. EVALUATION OF CANDIDATE MINES BASED ON GENERAL CRITERIA
CO
rv>
General Criteria
Suitability of Mine
Availability of Information
Availability of Surface Land
Distance to Haste Sources
Accessability
Compatability with Other
Resource Development
Summary
Mine Number
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1 5 16 17
M
M
X
F
X
X
M
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
M
F
F
F
F
F
X
M
X
M
X
X
M
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
X
U
X
F
X
X-
u
X
U
X
F
X
X
U
X
U
X
F
X
X
U
X
U
X
F
X
X
U
F
M
F
F
F
F
F
F
M
F
F
F
F
F
X
U
X
U
X
X
U
X
M
X
M
X
X
M
X
M
X
M
X
X
M
F - Favorable
M = Marginal
U = Unacceptable
X = Not Determined
-------
TABLE 11. EVALUATION OF CANDIDATE MINES BASED ON SPECIFIC CRITERIA
Mine Number
Specific Criteria 2356 7 8 13 14
1 . Dry ness of Mine
2. Imperviousness
3. Isolation
4. Structural Stability
5. Reactivity of Mineral
6. Homogeneityof Mineral
7. Seismicityof Area
8. Faulting of Area
9. Competence &
Strength
10. Alteration &
Dissolution
11. Depth of Sestn
12. Inclination of 'Seam
13. Erosion Potential
14. Thickness of' Spam,
15. Distribution Of Seam
16. Relief
17. Access tnMinp
18. Glaciation
19. Inundation
F
M
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
M
F
F
M
M
F
F
F
M
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
M
F
F
F
F
F
F
M
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
M
M
M
M
F
F
F
F
M
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
M
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
M
F
M
F
F
M
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
M
M
F
M
M
F
F
F
M
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
M
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
Summary F M M M F M M F
F = Favorable M = Marginal U = Unfavorable
33
-------
been selected as a typical salt mine acceptable for the storage of hazardous
waste; however, Mine No. 7 had the most available information, and with the
approval of the EPA Project Officer, Mine No. 7 was selected for the study.
General Description of Selected Mine
All mine design and economic information used in this study is based on
an actual mine selected for this study. To prevent potential adverse public
reaction, the study mine is not identified and an effort was made to modify
the mine description so that the identity of the mine would not be revealed.
However, the modification of the mine description is so handled that impor-
tant characteristics of the selected mine are accurately described.
Geology --
The geology of bedded salt deposits is adequately discussed elsewhere
(Ref. 1). To provide a reference for understanding the geology of the waste
storage site, a brief description of the geology of the Michigan Basin and of
a salt mine operating in the basin is presented. This should be treated as
background data and is not site specific to the study.
The general character of the geologic province is that of a basin typi-
cally covered with a thick blanket of glacial drift. Rock units from each
division of the Paleozoic era, Cambrian through Pennsylvanian, are represen-
ted as shown in Table 12. These layers, representing the various Paleozoic
divisions, are situated in the basin similar to a stack of spoons of decreas-
ing size (see Figure 2).
Mining occurs in the Salina group of the Silurian Period. This sequence
of carbonate, shale* and evaporite rock is divided into a series of forma-
tions (Table 12). Although numerous salt units are included in these forma-
tions, only one is presently mined. A stratigraphic column of the shaft
area of an operating mine located in the Michigan Basin is shown in Figure 3.
In the basin itself, there are extensive oil and gas bearing rocks both
above and below the Salina. The bulk of the oil has come from carbonate
rocks of the Devonian period, with less amounts from Ordovician and Silurian
carbonates. Most gas production as been from Mississippian sandstones and
to some extent from Ordovician and Silurian carbonates.
Hydrological --
The unconsolidated overburden of glacial drift ranges from 80 to 120
feet thick in the vicinity of the mine. The drift is primarily clay with
thin and limited sand and gravel horizons. Water yields are small, quite
hard, sulfurous, and often gassy (hydrogen sulfide). The rock units immedi-
ately below the glacial drift are heavy water producers. A water bearing
sandstone at the 550 to 650 foot level would require special attention in
terms of shaft grouting. Shaft sinking through these zones has experienced
water problems, which, while not insurmountable, have slowed progress and
escalated costs.
34
-------
TABLE 12. GENERAL STRATIGRAPHIC SECTION OF THE MICHIGAN BASIN
SYSTEMS, SERIES
TLEISTOCENE
PERMO-CARBONIFEROU3
FENNSYLVANIAN
KISSISSIPPIAN
DEVONIAN
SILURIAN
OBDOVICIAN
02ARKIAN
OR
CANADIAN
CAMBRIAN
FORMATION, CROUP
Glacial Drift
Red-Beds
Grand River
Saginav
Bay Port
Michigan
Michigan Stray
Marshall
Colduater
Sunbury
Berea-Bedford
Ellsworth- An trim
Traverse
Bell
Roger City-Dunde'e
Detroit River
Sylvania
Bois Blanc
Bass Island
Salina
Niagaran
Cataract
Cincinnatlan
Trenton-Black River
St. Peter
Tralrie Du Chien
Heraansville
Lake Superior
LITHOLOCY
Sand .Gravel , Clay .boulder .ttarl
Shale ,Clay, Sandy Shale, gypsum
Sandstone , sandy, shale
Shale , Sand stone, line stone ,coal
Limestone, Sandv or Cherty
Liaestone , Sandstone
Shale, gypsun, anhydrite, sands tone
Sandstone
Sandstone, sandy shale
Shale, sand stone, limes tone
Shale
Sandstone, Shale
Shale, limestone
Limes tone , Shale
Shale, limes tone
Limestone
1 Dolocite, limes tone, salt, anhydrite
Sandstone, Sandy Dolomite
Dolomite, Cherty Dolomite
Dolomite
Salt , Dolomite, shale , anhydrite
Dolomite, lines tone, shale
Shale, Dolomite
Shale .Limestone
Limestone , Dolomite
Sandstone
Dolomite .shale
Dolomite, Sandy Dolomite,
s.indstone
Sandstone
THICK-
NESS
0-1000
80-95
20-535
2-100
0-500
0-80
100-400
500-1100
0-140
0-325
100-950
100-800
0-SO
0-475
150-1400
0-550
0-1000
50-570
50-4000
75-600
50-200
250-800
200-1000
0-150
0-410
15-500
200-2000
35
-------
CO
01
\\'/^u
-•-*' / X \ f
Figure 2. General cross section of the Michigan basin.
-------
0-22.3m (0-73 FT)
22.3-25.3m (73-83 FT)
25.3-44.5m (83-146 FT)
44.5-96.3m (146-316 FT)
96.3-102.1m (316-335 FT)
102.1-113.7m (335-373 FT)
113.7-128.Om (373-420 FT)
128.0-162.5m (420-533 FT)
162.5-200.3m (533-657 FT)
200.3-267.3m (657-877 FT)
267.3-292.6m (877-960 FT)
292. 6-295.7m (960-970 FT)
295.7-310.9ra (970-1,020 FT)
310.9-317.Om (1,020-1,040 FT)
317.0-338.3m (1,040-1,110 FT)
338.3-347.5m (1,110-1,140 FT)
347.5-408.Om (1,140-1,339 FT)
408.1-415.7m (1,339-1,364 FT)
415.7-438.Om (1,364-1,437 FT)
438.0-550.5m (1,437-1,806 FT)
-it
\
UNCONSOLIDATED ALLUVIUM - CLAY
-UNCONSOLIDATED ALLUVIUM - CLAY
& SAND WITH WATER
DUNDEE LIMESTONE WATER-BEARING
LUCAS DOLOMITE WATER-BEARING
DOLOMITE CONGLOMERATE
» — AMHKRSTBKRG DOLOMITE
• — ANDERSON LIMESTONE
— FLAT ROCK DQLOH £TE
— SYLVANIA SANDSTONE
WATER-BEARING
RIVER DOLOMITE SILURIAN
SALINA GROUP
BASS ISLAND SERIES (DOLOMITE)
VMLXED SALT AND LIMESTONE
^ROCK SALT
-MIXED SALT AND LIMESTONE
-ROCK SALT
MIXED SALT AND LIMESTONE
-ROCK SALT - MINED INTERVAL
MIXED SALT AND LIMESTONE
-ROCK SALT
- LIMESTONE
SALT
Figure 3. Stratigraphic column of the shaft area.
37
-------
Below 650 feet, water is generally not encountered and presents no
problems. Some water had been encountered during mining, coming from the
contact between the salt bed and the overlying unit. The occurrences, how-
ever, appeared to be local concentrations and dissipated with time.
Although permeable water-bearing strata exist above and below the mine
level, impermeable shale and salt beds form effective hydraulic barriers.
Migration of water is not a problem in the mine area.
Sociological --
The selected mine is conveniently located near a major metropolitan area
with a heavy industrial output. Above and adjacent to the mine is a mixture
of a blue collar residential area and light and heavy industry. Direct
access to the mine is provided by several railroads and interstate highways.
In addition, the site is a short distance from a large airport.
Specific Description of Selected Mine
Mine History --
Mining of the selected mine began over 50 years ago in a bed of salt
at a depth of approximately 1,400 feet. The seam thickness ranges from 25
to 30 feet. A layer of salt is left on both the floor and the roof of the
seam to seal it. The thickness actually mined varied from 18 to 27 feet
over the life of the mine. During this mining activity, an extensive set of
monitoring devices has been installed in the mine. These include convergence
gauges and dilation pins. The ongoing monitoring program has established
that the mine is stable, and there have been no significant changes in the
mine environment since the initiation of mining. Two shafts provide access
to the mine. The production shaft is a 16 foot diameter, concrete-lined
shaft divided into four compartments, two hoisting compartments and two ser-
vice compartments. The second shaft, a man and service shaft, is a 4- by
8-foot rectangular, concrete-lined shaft, divided into two compartments.
Mine Layout and Current Activity --
The mining method is conventional room and pillar. Rooms of 60 feet wide
with a ceiling height of from 18 to 27 feet are mined at the end of a long
gallery, up to several thousand feet long. At regular intervals along the
gallery are huge pillars of rock salt 60 by 80 feet, which are the sole
means of supporting the roof. Using this system, about 65 percent of the
salt is extracted. Several feet of salt are left to preserve the roof and
several inches to preserve the floor.
The first step in mining is undercutting. A self-propelled universal
undercutter carves a slot six inches high and ten feet deep at the base of
the deposit and across the entire room. This kerf provides an expansion
area for blasting, thus reducing the amount of explosives required and the
amount of salt pulverization. It also makes a smooth mine floor.
A large self-propelled four-boom drill produces 11 to 13 foot deep holes
38
-------
into the salt face in preparation for blasting. Each hole is primed with
one-half stick of dynamite, and then the holes are filled with prilled
ammonium nitrate. Blasting of the rooms occurs after the shift is over.
Each blast brings down 800 to 900 tons of salt.
Before loading out of the salt, a scaling operation removes potentially
dangerous pieces of rock salt from the roof and sidewalls. Front end loaders
and shovels load the salt on to large bottom-dumping tractor-trailers for
haulage to the primary crusher. The haulway and pillars in a similar mine
are shown in Figure 4.
From the primary crusher, the salt travels over several thousand feet of
conveyor belt to the underground preparation plant. At the preparation plant,
the salt is crushed to yield the required product line. Some salt is placed
in temporary storage underground (up to 200,000 tons) until needed. Waste
salt is stored underground in mined out areas.
The general mine layout is shown in Figure 5, with mining currently
taking place in one area. Figure 6 illustrates the typical room and pillar
arrangement. Conditions are a comfortable 58°F year round with a relative
humidity of 55-56 percent.
Mine Reserve and Future Activity --
Specific information as to reserves is confidential and was not obtained.
The entire area surrounding the mine contains mineable salt and could be
mined under the proper economic conditions. Exploration has also indicated
the existence of mineable seams below the current level. Future plans would
involve mining all reserves at the present level before developing lower
levels.
Mine Facilities --
Surface -- The mine plant site contains all those facilities essential
for the operation of the mine. This includes the offices, warehouses, shops,
and salt processing plant. In addition, there are complete truck and rail
loading and unloading facilities.
Underground -- The mine itself contains very little in the way of per-
manent facilities. The area adjacent to the man shaft has been developed to
serve as a shelter in case of a mine fire- This was accomplished by erecting
fire doors that can be closed in an emergency, sealing this area off from
the rest of the mine. The other stoppings in the area are made of salt and
should last the life of the mine. Other facilities in the mine include an
office, a machine shop, water tanks, and the pump facilities. All other
mine facilities are of a temporary nature and are frequently relocated as
the production areas change.
Shafts and Hoisting -- The existing production shaft is concrete-lined
with an interior diameter of 16 feet. As shown in Figure 7, this shaft is
divided into four compartments, two for hoisting and two service compart-
ments. Balanced hoisting is achieved using one electric hoist.
39
-------
Figure 4.
Photo of the main haulway in a salt mine (courtesy of International
Salt Company).
-------
VENTILATION
SHAFT
Figure 5. General mine layout.
-------
PILLAR
R 001*1
Figure 6. Typical room and pillar arrangement.
-------
PRODUCTION SHAFT
t I I I ( I '
01 23456
APPROX. SCALE
Figure 7. Cross section of production shaft,
43
-------
Production hoisting takes place in two skips, each with a 10-ton capa-
city. Additionally, this shaft can be used for hoisting men, utilizing com-
partments above the skips.
The concrete-lined man shaft is 4 by 8 feet in cross section. This
two-compartment shaft utilizes a balanced electric hoisting system. Each
compartment contains a double deck man-cage, capable of holding three men
per deck.
Drainage -- The small quantity of water in the mine comes from one of
three sources: (1) the formations penetrated by the shafts, (2) condensation
from the ventilation air, and (3) connate water. Connate water may occasion-
ally be found at the contact between the top of the salt and the overlying
bed. Such occurrences are, however, unusual, yielding only small flows that
cease shortly after mining. No special drainage facilities are used, and
the water produced is absorbed by waste salt in the area.
Drainage facilities are located in the shaft area. Water rings, em-
placed around the shaft, pipe formation water to the mine level for removal
to the surface. Additional water is condensed from the ventilating air as
it reaches the mine and collected in storage tanks for removal to the surface.
Water is collected underground in several small sumps and pumped to one
of two underground holding tanks. Combined storage capacity is approximately
50,000 gallons. Pumps take the water to the surface in a single lift.
Ventilation -- In the present ventilation system, intake air (160,000
cfm) is drawn down through the two service compartments of the production
shaft by a fan located in the mine.
Fresh air passes to the working areas through an intake airway that is
isolated from the rest of the mine by a brattice line. In the working area,
the brattice consists of temporarily hung brattice cloth. The remainder of
the brattice line is of a permanent nature consisting of either salt block
construction or fine salt piles capped with a brattice cloth-foam seal.
Older brattice lines were made of salt blocks cemented together by fine salt.
Typically, these are six feet wide at the base, tapering to several feet at
the roof. Newer brattice lines have been formed by piling waste salt in
the cross-cuts to within several feet of the roof. At the roof line, brat-
tice cloth is hung and sealed by spraying with a polyurethane foam.
The return air leaves the working area and follows the abandoned work-
ings to the shaft area. Air reaches the surface via the hoisting compart-
ments of the production shaft and through the man shaft. In addition to the
main fan, auxiliary fans are used in the mine, as needed, to provide circu-
lation in the working areas.
Electrical System -- Power (4,800 volts) is supplied to the mine by two
separate underground lines. Only one is used at any given time, with auto-
matic switching in case of line failure. Should both lines fail, emergency
mobile generators can be brought to operate the fan and hoist systems.
44
-------
The underground electrical distribution is.by necessity a flexible one,
adapting to the needs of production. All cables, up to the production area,
are roof mounted. A 250-volt DC, 75 kilowatt motor-generator set is avail-
able underground.
Miscellaneous Underground Facilities —
Non-potable Water -- Non-potable water is piped underground, under
natural head. The water line extends down the production shaft service com-
partments and out approximately 3,000 feet away from the shaft.
Diesel Fuel -- Diesel fuel is piped underground, under natural head.
The fuel line extends down the production shaft service compartment and
approximately 3,000 feet away from the shaft. A 500-gallon storage tank is
available.
Structural Condition --
The structural integrity of the mine has been preserved after more than
a half century of operation. Areas mined 50 years ago appear to have under-
gone no degradation or failure and are as competent as the areas currently
mined. Stability has been confirmed by monitoring with convergence gauges
and dilation pins. No faults, fractures, or other anomalies are known to
exist.
Available Storage Space --
An upper limit on the storage space in the mine has been estimated from
production figures and mine maps. This, however, reflects the void left
by mining and must be reduced to reflect actual conditions in the mine.
Some areas may not be usable as storage sites because of:
• Structural weakness in the roof and pillars may
prohibit use of some areas as storage space.
• A certain amount of space will be unavailable because
of the needs of the storage operation itself. This
will include space for items such as ventilation,
haulage and escape ways, offices, and unloading areas.
t If the storage operation is to be contemporaneous
with salt mining operations, some space will be
required for ventilation, haulage, underground
preparation, and salt storage. Ultimately, this
space could become available for waste storage.
0 Waste salt produced in the course of mining and
processing is often returned to the mine for storage
in mined out areas.
The total open space in the mine designated for the waste storage is
estimated to be 500,000,000 cubic feet. This is located in the following
45
-------
areas as designated in Figure 5.
Area Cubic Feet
XT 210,000,000
X2 70,000,000
X3 40,000,000
Y 70,000,000
Z 10,000,000
Haulways and
service areas 100,000,000
Total 500,000,000
Additional space is available in the area of current mining and is being
created at the approximate rate of 15,000,000 cubic feet per year. Although
this space is not designated for waste storage, the potential exists for its
long-term utilization.
46
-------
Section 4
STORAGE FACILITY DESIGN AND OPERATION
A detailed description of the hazardous waste storage facility is pre-
sented in this section. The description is based on Case 1, the base case,
which has received the most detailed design effort. The facilities of other
cases (Cases 2 through 5) will be discussed in the latter part of this sec-
tion. Material flow charts, process flow diagrams, and plant layout presen-
ted in this section are all for the base case. General design and opera-
tional criteria of the overall plant facility are presented, followed by des-
cription of surface facilities, subsurface facilities, and alternative cases.
GENERAL DESIGN AND OPERATIONAL CRITERIA
The plant facilities are designed to receive, store, treat, container-
ize, transfer to staging area, transfer to hoisting area, lower into mine,
transfer to storage cell area, and store the four types of hazardous wastes.
The plant operational logic is shown in Figures 8 through 12. Figures 8, 9,
and 10 show the flow of Type A, B, C, and D wastes through sequential steps
from receiving at the plant gate to placement in the storage cells. Figure 11
shows the flow of chemicals and containers used in the plant. Figure 12 shows
the material flow in the effluent treatment process.
As pointed out previously, no operating underground hazardous waste stor-
age plant presently exists at which the waste is treated and recontainerized
before the underground emplacement. Design criteria based on actual operating
experiences are not available. The scope of this study allows only the form-
ulation of a reasonable design criteria, which will allow the conceptual de-
sign of the storage facilities.
A number of general criteria were formulated to arrive at a reasonable
concept of the surface and subsurface facilities and a reasonable assessment
of their costs. The parameters involved are:
Plant operating hours
Modes of waste transport
Types of waste shipping containers
Waste surface storage
Waste treatment methods and capacities
Waste containerization methods and types of containers
Effluent wastewater treatment and disposal method
Modes of containerized waste transport into mine
and storage areas
Storage methods
47
-------
Wastes Delivered
D
Inspection
Weighed and Inspected
Trucks Weighed
Railroad Cars
T-IR) Routed to Unloading
Stations
D
to Unloading Stations
Haste B Haste C Waste D
, ,,, Container Truck Tank Truck Content
'~2H Contents Inspected <-!M Inspected
(0-2A3 ]Container Trucks (0_ZM ) Tank Trucks
1 /(Drums) Unloaded V / Unloaded
Waste A Transferred
| Drums Opened
ind Emptied
>, Waste A Transferred
' to Proper Storage
Tanks
r "y to Proper Sto
T^ Tanks
1 '•fjilUe L""'id ^
T^ Tanks
Liquid „ so I
Ty-lp-ulp (• 1 1
J
Acidic Liquid
Waste Stort
Waste Transferred
to Reactor
i-lAi^ uaste Stor<
Chronate Waste
Oxidized Cyanide i—>-\
'Waste Transferred FT-4A3) Reduced Chromate
to Storage I—.,/ Waste Transferred
r to Storage
I-3A4 "on-Reactive
Haste Inspected
-jflA Non-Reactive Waste
"Jfl7 Transferred to
~~ Storage
continued
Figure 8. Material flow chart — Type A wastes.
48
-------
Figure 8 (continued)
Palletized Drums
D ,\ Remain in Staging
' Area Until Ready
to Transfer
to Mine
/^"N. X Area Main-
0-14X tained and
V J
49
-------
Waste Delivered by
Railroad Cars
Waste Delivered
by Trucks
Haste fl & C
-2BT7lnorganic Tc i»5/ Empty Drums
Cake Stored \ / Stored
Empty Drums
-3X5> Moved to Containerize
\-lxVLids / 0-6B \Waste B ft C Filter
\ / Stored^ I-4B } Cake Containerised
Pallets Woved to
Staging Area
Figure 9. Material flow chart -- Type B wastes,
50
-------
. Railroad Cars
)Weighed and
y Inspected
-. Railroad Cars
T-lft/ Routed to Un-
, .««.",
|r-2ci
Waste
-V loading Stations
C
Dump Car Con-
tents (Waste C)
Inspected
Waste 0
1-2C2 tents {Wastes
Inspected
CSD)
, \ Dump Car
0-2C1 (Baste C)
' Unloaded
. .Bulk Haste C
fr-2Cl) Transferred
to Storage
f
1
r
^\ Bastes CSC in
-Id/ Inorganic, Bulk ^S-lC?7n ^ n ,
v 7 Wastl C Stored \ /Organic, Bulk
\y \/ Haste C Stored
Inorganic, Bulk
' ferred to
Container^
/ferred to
Container! zer
Wastes CfiD In
Drums Transferred
to Temporary
Staging ftrea
Figure 10. Material flow chart -- Types C and D wastes.
51
-------
Chemicals and Drums
Delivered b> Railroad C
Chemicals and Pallets
Delivered by Trucks
Sulfuric Acid n ,,
Transferred Pallets Moved
to Chromate *° Container-
ization Station
e Used
in Neutralization
of Haste A
Lime Used
to Precipitate
Haste A
Lime |)sed
in Neutralization
of Waste B
Figure 11. Material flow chart -- chemicals and containers.
52
-------
Process Hastes, Haste a
Spills. [Filtrates
Hashdown |
Hfsc. HastelOils
Scrubber Water . „
Recirculated F'2"3/
0-3WJ \ Crystaiiier- Slurry
Centrifuged
Solids, Transfer
T 5H\ to Containerizatic
' Station
~r"
'Empty Drums t_. . ,
'torage V'^V Solids Stored
Until Containerized
Hastewater Solids
I-2H H Containerized
Drums LlddetJ
and Labeled
0-6H 1 Drums Palletized
Pallets Moved to
Figure 12. Material flow chart -- plant effluent treatment.
53
-------
Plant Operating Hours
Both surface and subsurface facilities will be operated primarily on the
basis of two production shifts and one maintenance shift per day, six days
per week. Some activities that deviate from this basis are discussed in
appropriate places.
Modes of Waste Transport to Storage Plant
All wastes will be transported from the waste generators to the site by
rail and truck. The plant will receive at least 24 hours advance notice of
each proposed shipment, including all particulars on the waste characteris-
tics. The plant may place a "hold" on the shipment. Railcar loads will be a
nominal 50 tons net; truck loads will be a nominal 20 tons net.
Types of Shipping Containers
Rail shipments will be by tank car (bulk liquids and slurries), by sealed
bottom-dump hopper cars (bulk solids), and by box cars (drummed liquid, slur-
ries, solids). Truck shipments will be by tank truck (bulk liquids and slur-
ries), by sealed end-dump truck (solids), and by container truck (drummed
liquids, slurries, solids). Type A and B drummed wastes to be opened may be
in any suitable 55-gallon steel drum. Type C and D drummed wastes must be in
the same type of 55-gallon drum that will be used to containerize the treated
waste.
Waste Surface Storage
All bulk wastes will be stored in closed tanks or bins. Drums will be
stored in a warehouse-type storage building. No open storage will be per-
mitted. Unloading and storage areas will be paved and diked to impound
spilled materials. Surface runoff from potential contaminants will be collec-
ted and treated. Liquid and slurry waste surface storage capacity will be a
nominal four days at 100 percent operating capacity. Solid waste storage
will be a nominal six days at 100 percent operating capacity. Enough tankage
and bins will be provided so that filling, analyzing, and emptying operations
can be accommodated without difficulty. Eight days of surface storage capa-
city will be provided for drummed waste; stored drummed waste can be worked
off when production in waste treatment and containerization is below capacity.
Waste Treatment Methods
Waste treatment operations will be designed to convert wastes to a form
suitable for safe, convenient handling and emplacement in the mine. Soluble
or reactive hazardous materials will be converted to stable forms. Free
water and free organics or oily material will be separated from the wastes.
Each waste type (and subtype) will be processed at design throughput each day:
• Type A Wastes: Hexavalent chromium will be reduced
to trivalent chromium then precipitated as Cr(OH)3-
Cyanide will be oxidized to nitrogen and C02- Acid
and alkaline wastes will be neutralized. Heavy metals
54
-------
will be precipitated as hydroxides. Precipitates
will be dewatered to a minimum 40 percent solids
cake for containerization.
• Type B Hastes: Acid and alkaline wastes will be
neutralized. Inorganic and organic wastes will be
handled separately. All wastes will be dewatered
or deoiled to a minimum 40 percent solids cake for
containerization.
• Type C Hastes: Solid wastes will receive no treatment.
• Type D Hastes: Hastes designated for retrieval will
receive no treatment.
Haste Containers and Containerization Methods
In this study only one type of container was considered, a 16 gauge,
55-gallon open top steel drum with a lever-ring closure. Containerization
will be automated as far as is practicable with multiple drum filling lines.
Organic and inorganic wastes will be containerized separately. Exposure of
workers to the wastes will be minimized.
Effluent Haste Treatment Methods
Aqueous filtrates, process wastewater, and contaminated surface runoff
will be evaporated to recover water as a condensate and solids, including
hazardous components, as a filter cake. Recovered condensate water will be
reused as much as possible. Recovered solids will be containerized and
placed in the mine. Organic filtrate will be incinerated.
It is obvious that there are alternatives to these general criteria
adopted for the surface facilities. And it is recognized that alternative
methods of operation could significantly affect the cost of waste emplace-
ment. However, these criteria allow the design and specification of reason-
able surface facilities at a level of detail needed for cost estimation.
Modes of Waste Transport into Mine and to Storage Area
The transport of waste into the mine includes removing the drummed waste
(four drums on each pallet) from the surface staging area to the hoist load-
ing area, lowering four pallets (16 drums) on each hoisting cycle into the
mine, and then transporting these pallets to the storage area using flat-bed
haul trucks. Underground staging will be used if the transport to the under-
ground storage area has to be stopped.
Storage Method
Three storage areas will be used: Zone X (Figure 5) for inorganic
wastes, Zone Y for organic wastes, and Zone Z for the wastes to be stored
temporarily (Type D wastes)- Within each storage zone, waste may be stored
in several storage cells simultaneously as needed. Unloading of the pallets
55
-------
from the haul trucks, short distance movement, and final emplacement of these
pallets into the storage cell will be done using forklifts. The pallets will
be stacked as high as possible in all the storage cells except those in Area
Z. The Type D wastes to be stored temporarily in Area Z will be stacked in
two-drum layers, so that they can be retrieved readily.
SURFACE FACILITIES
The above ground waste handling process is summarized in Figures 13 and
14. Figure 15 is a plot plan showing the conceptual layout of the surface
facilities, which, as designed, will cover about 17 acres of fenced area.
The surface facilities will be described with the aid of process flow dia-
grams, Figures 16 through 25. Description of the surface facilities is di-
vided into the different waste types and their treatment pathways. Unit pro-
cess design criteria and their specifications used for cost estimation are
summarized in Appendices B and C.
Type A Haste Processing
Six hundred tons of Type A wastes will be received daily. Type A wastes
include 100 TPD of chromate waste (A-l), 100 TPD of cyanide waste (A-2), 100
TPD each of acid and alkaline wastes (A-3), and 200 TPD of nonreactive waste.
Waste Receiving and Storage --
Type A wastes will be transported to the plant either in bulk form by
tank trucks and tank cars or in 55-gallon drums by container truck and box
car (Figure 16).
After weigh-in and inspection, tank trucks will be routed to the "A"
truck unloading station and connected by a flexible hose to the unloading
pump appropriate for Type A wastes. The tank truck contents will be trans-
ferred to the appropriate waste storage tank. The pumps and tanks for each
waste subtype will be piped separately.
The same procedure will be used in unloading rail tank cars after weigh-
in, spotting and inspection.
Drummed waste in trucks will be spotted at the receiving dock and un-
loaded by forklift trucks. The drums will be moved to the drum open and
dump station. Drumheads will be automatically cut off, and the drum contents
will be dumped into a tank. The tank will be connected to the appropriate
waste subtype transfer pumps and storage tank. Emptied drums (and heads) will
be transported to the drum cleaning facility. The transfer tank will be
flushed and drained before changing to another waste subtype. Box cars of
drums will be spotted at a separate unloading dock, used also for Type B, C,
and D drummed waste. The cars will be unloaded by forklift trucks and trans-
ported by tractor-trailer cars to the Type A waste drum open and dump station
for transfer to the appropriate storage tanks. Storage tank capacities will
be 25,000 gallons and 50,000 gallons. Each waste storage tank will be equip-
ped with a side-entering agitator to mix the tank contents. The tank walls
and bottom will be lined with a suitable corrosion resistant material. Where
56
-------
©a
CHEMICAL
TREATMENT
PRECIPITATION
DEWATERING
TO MINE
STAGING
f
RECEIVING AND UNLOADING
"1—T
PALLETIZING
CONTAINERIZATION
Figure 13. Schematic diagram of surface operation.
-------
WKSTE TRANSPORT
KHO RECEIVING
VJMTE-
SIOR A.GE.
14-D*1S>
WASTE THE frTjj E M T frNP CO KjTftIN E.Rl£ft.T 10 N
cn
00
Figure 14. Block flow diagram of surface operation.
-------
en
5C ALE.: | = 50
EQUIP. REPAIR
U CAR UNLOADING
STORMWATER
HOLDING
BASIN
^
PROCESS
UJAT CR
f
WAST
STORAC
HEAD-
FRAME
™
SHAFT
STORMi
e
E
O
tJ
O
c~\
I ;
O
o
v_y
O
r^> r-
0
o
o
r~\
V 1
o
n
v^
o
3_C3_
„
Q
O
o
c\
v >
o
o
w
O
n n
D
O
O
c\
\ 1
o
o
\^
O
=» 0^
(' C. £t> WASTE.-
LOVWE.R LEVEL)
CONTAINtRIZED
WASTE. STftGING L-_
BLDG. r__
| PRODUCTION
SHftFT
V Y1 V
fclUE R I Z AT ION
BLQG.
(E.WPTV DRUM STORAGE.-
UPPER LtVEL )
ADMIN-
IS T RAT I ON
BLD6.
~| P ^R Kl MG
TRUCK ACC ESS
Figure 15. Plot plan of surface facilities.
-------
en
o
WASTE UNLQAOIMC
STAT|ON S
•UNK TRUCK
it TON LOAD
' " jdj
NQN- REACT. WASTE STORAGE
4- SQ,QQQ G*L TANKS
RAIL TKNK CAR
50 TON LOAD
DRlJW QPtN *ND DUMP STATION i eg (jj"9*
CONTAINER TRUCK
(DRUMS)
10 TON LOAO
DRUM OPEN AND DUMP STAT ION ,
NSFER PUMP5
g?"
-sV M
Sg"
feTJ
^3"
S"
S"
*
_
*
i _^ — __ t __ — ^ t ^, — ^ »
L ^ u U L
~l ~i ~]
i * i
„
rj/v M
C^i
C ^zsoooaHL-TMIKS
^ _^_ ^ ^^^ J __^_^ j
I. ^~~^^\ U L
OH __ CIH ^ OH _^
f f T
1 M
a
1 1
i ^ i 1
u"~"^"g u L • L
OH OH OH C
f f f
ACID WASTE.
1 >-\
ALKALINE WASTE.
STOR AGE.
^- 50,000 d^L.TKS
TO NE.UTRAL.
Figure 16. Process flow diagram -- Type A waste unloading and surface storage,
-------
four tanks are provided for a waste subtype, normally one tank will be empty,
one tank will be filling, one tank will be full and being analyzed, and the
last will be in the appropriate waste treatment system as described below.
Chromate Waste Treatment (Figure 17) --
Chromate waste will be pumped from the storage tank on flow control to
a pH adjustment vessel where sulfuric acid (78%) will be added, if necessary,
to bring the pH down to 2 to 3. The waste will enter the top of the stirred,
baffled reactor (1,000 gallons), where it will be contacted with sulfur di-
oxide (S02) sparged in from the bottom. An oxidation-reduction potential
(ORP) controller on the reactor effluent stream will ensure sufficient S02
flow to reduce all the hexavalent chromium to the trivalent form. Treated
waste will be pumped to a blend/surge storage tank. Vent gas water vapor,
containing traces of S02, will be piped to the vent collection system. One
hundred tons of chromate waste can be processed during two shifts of opera-
tion.
Cyanide Waste Treatment (Figure 17) --
Cyanide waste will be pumped from the storage tank and split into two
streams on separate flow controls. Each stream will enter the top of a
stirred, baffled reactor (3,600 gallons), where it will be contacted with
chlorine sparged in from the bottom. An ORP controller will ensure suffi-
cient chlorine flow to oxidize all the cyanide to nitrogen and carbon dioxide
(C02). Sodium hydroxide (50%) solution will be added to the vessel to main-
tain alkaline conditions. A pH monitor will be used as an indicator for ad-
justing the NaOH addition rate. Treated waste will be pumped on level control
to a blend/surge tank. Vent gas nitrogen, containing water vapor and traces
of Cl2> will be piped to the vent collection system. Fifty tons of cyanide
waste can be processed in each reactor during two shifts of operation. Re-
action conditions for the run will be based on prior analysis of the waste in
the storage tank.
Acid and Alkaline Waste Treatment (Figure 17) --
Acid and alkaline wastes will be pumped from the storage tanks on flow
control to the stirred, baffled neutralization vessel (1,200 gallons). Cal-
cium hydroxide (25% slurry) will be added to the vessel on pH control to
neutralize excess acidity. Cooling water will be circulated on temperature
control through the vessel jacket to remove heat of neutralization. The
neutralized waste will be piped to the vent gas collection system. One hun-
dred tons each of acid and alkaline waste can be processed during two shifts
of operation, and conditions for the run will be based on prior analyses of
the wastes.
Nonreactive Waste Handling (Figure 17) --
Nonreactive waste will be pumped on flow control to the appropriate
blend/surge tank, where it will be mixed with other treated wastes. It can
be processed in the downstream waste precipitation section directly, by-
passing the blending step.
61
-------
pH ADJUSTMENT
VESSEL
400 GAL.
en
ro
BLEND/SURGE
STORAGE.
2- 50,000 &M TA.NKS
BLEND/SURGE
STO RAGE
2- 50,000 GAL. TANKS
TO PR6CIP I TM lf)N
TO PRE.CIP ITA.TION
Figure 17. Process flow diagram -- Type A waste treatment.
-------
Blend/Surge Storage (Figure 17) --
The four 50,000-gallon stirred tanks will provide the capacity for
blending treated wastes to produce a uniform feed for the downstream pre-
cipitation step. With nonreactive waste bypassed, the surge capacity will
provide for independent filling and emptying of the tanks during the two-
shift operation.
Waste Precipitation and Filtration (Figure 18) --
Precipitation of metal hydroxides will be carried out in two parallel
trains. Blended waste from the surge tank will be pumped into the 3,000-
gallon stirred precipitation vessel. Calcium hydroxide (25% slurry) will
be added to the vessel on pH control, while maintaining the pH at 8 to
coprecipitate heavy metals. Precipitated slurry waste will be pumped on
makeup level control to a rotary vacuum belt filter system. Ferric chloride
(35%) solution will be metered into the flocculation trough as a coagulant
aid. The 12-foot-diameter by 24-foot-long vacuum filter will continuously
dewater the precipitated waste, producing a 40 percent weight solids filter
cake. The cake will be discharged into a bin from where it is transferred by
screw conveyors to a 150-ton-capacity cake surge bin. The filtrate collected
will be pumped from the vacuum receiver tanks to filtrate storage tanks for
subsequent processing. Each precipitation-filtration train can process
about 325 tons of blended waste during two shifts, producing 75 tons of
filter cake for containerization. Waste treatment will be carried out in the
waste treatment building as indicated in Figure 15. Processes will-be moni-
tored locally and in the main control room.
Type B Waste Processing
Four hundred tons of Type B wastes will be received daily. Type B waste
subtypes will include 50 TPD each of acid and alkaline wastes (B-l), 200 TPD
of inorganic wastes (B-2), and 100 TPD of organic wastes (B-3).
Waste Receiving and Storage (Figure 19) --
Any of the subtype wastes can be transported to the plant in bulk form
and in 55-gallon drums. Type B waste unloading and storage procedures will
be similar to those for Type A wastes. Unloading stations for rail and
truck shipments will be located near Type A waste unloading stations so that
unloading crews can handle both wastes. Positive displacement slurry pumps
will be used for transferring wastes to the storage tanks. Storage tanks
will have 25,000- and 50,000-gallon capacities and side-entering agitators
for mixing. The organic waste tanks will have steam heating coils to prevent
waste solidification during cold weather.
Type B Waste Treatment (Figure 20) --
Type B wastes will be dewatered to recover the insoluble solids as
filter cakes. Acid and alkaline wastes (B-l) pumped from the storage tanks
will first be neutralized in a 900-gallon stirred tank. Calcium hydroxide
(25% slurry) will be added on pH control to neutralize excess acidity.
63
-------
PRECIPITATION VESSELS
ROTftRY VACUUM
BELT FILTERS
C71
FILTRATE.
TO STORAGE.
TA.NK5
SOOTPQ
Figure 18. Process flow diagram — Type A waste precipitation and filtration.
-------
WASTE UNLQK&INC
STATIONS
CONTAINER TRUCK
(DRUMS]
2.0 TOW LOAD
UWLOAOING PUMPS
100 &PM LAP.
DRUW OPEM AND DUMP STATION
DRUM OPEN AMD DUNlP STATION
BOX CAK
(DRUMS)
50 TOH LOAO
FER PUMPS
0 &PM CAP.
S"
1 ^ \
L g I
0-, (
1
J>.C 0 WA.STE.
STO *&
t--— t
I 9L
OH Q
^
t -— - 1
L^:s™t
OH 5-- C
~1
J
ALKALINE WASTE.
STORK&E
Z- 25,000 GM.. TKS
Figure 19. Process flow diagram — Type B waste unloading and surface storage.
-------
CTi
WASTE.
(I 00 TPD)
FILTRfcTt TO
STORAGE TANKS
TO STORAGE ,
TAWKS
T
-L
It
— <^
« —
7SsB~~-
yft^y~-
^SvW^M^
,-. I 1 rui
M Ij W
5fl6PM_
f
a4
r
1
j
—\
n «
I
I 7
*n
\ rv-i, .
^T
U
i r
I 50TPD
^
tJTntn
SURGE
6 IMS
ISO TON CAP
CAKE TO
CQNTMNERttATiOM
ORGANIC FILTRATE.
TO 5TOR A&E TANKS
Figure 20. Process flow diagram — Type B waste treatment and filtration.
-------
Neutralized waste will be pumped to the filter feed tank. Ferric chloride
flocculant will be added in an on-line static mixer. Filtration will be
carried out cyclically in an automatic plate and frame pressure filter. At
the start of the filtration cycle, slurry waste will be pumped into the
filter chambers by the fast-fill pump. As the cake forms, the hydraulic ram
pump will be used to consolidate the cake during the high pressure (to 150
psi) dewatering phase. At the end of the preset filtration time (up to 90
minutes), the feed pump will shut off, and the plate opening mechanism will
separate the plates, allowing the cake slabs to drop into the filter cake
bin. The cake will be transferred by screw conveyors to a 150-ton cake surge
bin. The plate closure mechanism will move the plates back together so that
plate pressure against the filter cloths seals the chambers and the next
cycle can be initiated. The filtrate collected during the filtration cycle
will be pumped from a receiving tank on level control to a filtrate storage
tank.
Inorganic and organic wastes will be dewatered in similar filtration
systems. Inorganic waste will be pumped from the storage tank on filter
feed tank makeup level control. Ferric chloride flocculant will be added to
the waste stream ahead of an in-line static mixer. The waste will be de-
watered in two automatic pressure filters operated with staggered filtration
cycles. Organic waste will be dewatered in a separate automatic filter
system. Organic filter cake will be transferred by screw conveyors to a
separate 150-ton cake surge bin. Organic filtrate will be pumped to the
oily waste storage tanks. Each of the four 4 by 4 feet by 80-chamber pres-
sure filters can process about 100 tons of waste during two shifts, producing
50 tons of filter cake (40 percent solids) for containerization. A spare
filter system can be piped to operate on either organic or inorganic waste.
One hundred and fifty tons per day of inorganic filtrate and 50 tons per day
of organic filtrate can be produced. Filtration conditions will be based on
analysis of the wastes in the storage tanks and lab filtration tests.
Type C and D Waste Processing (Figure 21)
Two hundred and fifty tons of Type C wastes and 50 tons of Type D wastes
will be received daily. Type C wastes will be transported in bulk by covered
hopper rail car and by covered dump truck. Type C and D wastes in drums will
be transported by box cars and by container truck. After weigh-in and in-
spection, a dump truck of Type C waste will be routed to the dump station.
Waste discharged into the shrouded dump pocket will be transferred by screw
conveyors to one of six bulk storage bins (150-ton capacity each). A
hopper car of Type C waste will be spotted at the rail dump station. The
waste will be transferred from the dump pocket to the storage bins by a
screw conveyor system. Organic and inorganic wastes will be stored in
separate bins. The self-cleaning screw conveyors will prevent gross mixing
of the two waste types. Each storage bin will be equipped with a filter
fabric dust collector, bin level indicators, and a vibrating hopper. Waste
will be transferred by screw conveyor from a full bin to the desired surge
bins for subsequent containerization. The six-day storage capacity will
allow for independent filling and emptying of individual bins. Two bins
will be provided for organic wastes.
67
-------
UNLOADING
COVERED
DUMP TRUCK
ZO TON LQftD
r
CO
COVERED
HOPPER CAR
50 TON UQkD
TRANSFER COMVEYOR
50 TpH CAP.
TO WASTE
SUR&E BINS
*C f D" WA5TE
DRUMMED
WASTi STORAGE-
BUI LDIN&
1800 TONS)
CONTAINER TRUCK
(DRUMS)
EOTON LOAD
TO STAGING
AREA
Figure 21. Process flow diagram -- Types C and D waste unloading and storage.
-------
Type C and D drummed waste in box cars will be unloaded by forklift
trucks and transported across to the lower level of the drummed waste
storage building. Container trucks with Type C and D wastes will be un-
loaded by forklift trucks at the waste storage building receiving dock
(Figure 15). The drums will be stored in designated pallet banks. Type C
wastes will be segregated from Type D wastes, and each then further sub-
divided into organic and inorganic storage banks, Drums in storage will be
relabeled before transfer to the staging area for lowering into the mine.
The eight-day storage capacity will allow some flexibility in rescheduling
waste lots for emplacement when difficulties occur in waste treatment or
containerization operations. Type C and D waste unloading will normally be
a one-shift per day operation.
Chemical Feed Systems (Figure 22)
A number of chemicals will be used in Type A and B waste treatment
systems. The chemical unloading and storage area is indicated in Figure 22.
Chlorine --
Chlorine will be received and stored onsite in a 90-ton tank car.
During operation of the cyanide oxidation process, liquid Cl£ will be with-
drawn and vaporized in four parallel evaporation units. Gaseous chlorine
will be fed to each of the two cyanide oxidation reactors. The tank car
will provide a 10-day supply of chlorine at normal usage. As necessary,
tank cars will be switched during the third shift.
Sulfur Dioxide —
Sulfur dioxide will be received and sorted onsite in a 30-ton tank car.
During operation of the chromate reduction process, liquid S02 will be with-
drawn from the tank car and evaporated in an electrically heated evaporation
unit. Gaseous S02 will be fed on ORP control to the chromate reduction
reactor. The tank car will provide a 12-day supply of S0£ at normal usage.
Empty and full tank cars will be switched during the nonoperating (third)
shift.
Sodium Hydroxide --
Fifty percent sodium hydroxide will be received in 60-ton tank cars and
pumped into one of two 10,000-gallon storage tanks. Caustic will be pumped
from storage to the cyanide oxidation reactors during the operating shifts.
The storage tanks will provide eight days of storage capacity at the normal
rate of caustic usage.
Lime --
Calcium hydroxide will be used for neutralization of Type A and B acidic
wastes and for precipitation of Type A wastes. Lime will be slaked onsite
and diluted to a 25% Ca(OH)2 slurry. Pebble lime (90% CaO) will be received
in a 70-ton rail hopper car and dumped in the car dump pocket. The lime will
be transferred by the enclosed conveyor system to one of two 100-ton lime
storage bins. Lime will be charged to the slaker by a weigh-belt feeder.
69
-------
RtDUCTlOM
*,flOO LB/OAV
TO CYANIDE
CHLORINATION
18,000 LB/DAV
^__
H
H
^^
CAUSTIC
STORAGE TfcNKS
10,000 GAL. EA.
1
;i,M , — .
CO IONS NaOH (50%)
TO CYANIDE.
CHLORINATION
TRANSFER CONVEYORS
TAMK TRUCK
3000 GAL- FeCk (15%)
LIME SLURRV (£5%)
STORAGE AND FEED TANKS
10,000 &A>-. tA.
AMD PRECl P IT A.TION
190,000 LB/DhY
TO FILTE RS
8&00 LB/DAY
TANK TRUCK
1000 GAL. H?S04 (7S ?
I S04 STORAGE TAKW
6000 GAL.
TO pH
kDIUST.
N.N.F.
Figure 22. Process flow diagram — chemical unloading and surface storage.
-------
Slaked lime slurry will be discharged to a transfer tank from which it is
pumped to the lime slurry storage and feed tanks. Slurry will be pumped
through the distribution system to the various processes. The 10,000-gallon
storage and feed tanks will provide a one-day supply of Ca(OH)2 slurry. The
lime storage bins will provide a 10-day supply of lime at normal usage.
Ferric Chloride --
Ferric chloride will be used as a filter aid in Type A and B waste
filtration systems. Sewage-grade (35%) ferric chloride solution will be re-
ceived in 3,000-gallon tank trucks and transferred to a 6,000-gallon storage
tank. During the operating shifts, Fed3 will be pumped from storage through
the distribution system to the various filters. The storage tank capacity
will provide a two-week supply at normal usage.
Sulfuric Acid --
Sulfuric acid will be used for pH adjustment of Type A-l waste prior to
chromate reduction. Sulfuric acid (78%) will be received in 3,000-gallon
tank trucks and pumped to a 6,000-gallon storage tank. As needed, sulfuric
acid will be pumped from storage to the pH adjustment vessel. The storage
tank capacity will provide a one-month supply.
Plant Effluent Treatment (Figure 23)
Contaminated effluents from waste processing operations will include
650 TPD of inorganic filtrate, 150 TPD of process and utility wastewater,
and 50 TPD of organic filtrate. Contaminated runoff from process areas
will be an intermittent effluent. Effluent waste treatment systems will
operate three shifts per day.
Inorganic Effluent Treatment —
Inorganic (aqueous) filtrates will be collected in two 175,000-gallon
storage tanks. Process and utility wastewaters will be collected by gravity
in a 50,000-gallon lined basin. Process wastewater will include water from
drum cleaning, equipment cleanout and decontamination, floor and unloading
area washdowns, lab wastes, and any water pumped from the mine. Utility
wastewater will include cooling tower blowdown, utility boiler blowdown, flue
gas scrubber blowdown, pump seal water blowdown, and minor amounts of steam
condensate.
The aqueous effluents will be treated in an evaporation-crystallization
system. Process and utility wastewaters will normally be worked off with
the inorganic filtrate,
Wastewater will be pumped from the storage tank on flow control to the
vapor-recompression evaporator unit (150 gpm capacity). The purpose of the
unit is to produce a concentrated brine stream (about 33% solids) by evapo-
rating part of the water and collecting it as condensate.
The vapor-recompression evaporator unit is a package system in which
71
-------
ro
FROM
FILTERS
COM7MN6RIZATION
Figure 23. Process flow diagram -- plant effluent treatment.
-------
the feed will be combined with the brine in the sump of the evaporator and
then the mixture fed to the top of the evaporator for evaporation-concen-
tration process. Heat for the evaporation will be obtained from condensa-
tion of recompressed vapor. Part of the concentrate will be discharged as
brine product and pumped to the crystal!izer. The total energy requirement
for evaporation will be 70-100 kilowatt-hours per 1,000 gallons of water
evaporated.
About 70 percent of the feed will be recovered as condensate. The con-
densate will be stored in a 140,000-gallon tank for possible reuse in the
plant, such as cooling water makeup and boiler feedwater makeup. Excess
condensate will be discharged into the plant sanitary wastewater sewer.
Hot brine product will be pumped on level control to a stirred surge
tank ahead of a forced circulation evaporator-crystal!izer unit. This
unit will be used to crystallize dissolved solids by evaporating water.
Salts come out of solution as their solubility limits are exceeded. The
crystallizer is also a package system (100 TPD capacity), in which water will
be evaporated from a circulating feed-slurry mixture producing slurry and
condensate.
Crystallizer slurry product will be pumped to the feed tank ahead of the
centrifuge filter. The slurry will be filtered in a 5 ton per hour recip-
rocating centrifuge filter. Salt cake will be discharged into a cake bin
continuously and transferred by screw conveyors to a 150-ton surge bin for
subsequent containerization. Eighty-five tons per day of salt cake will be
produced. Saturated filtrate will be pumped back to the evaporator-crystal -
lizer feed tank for reprocessing.
A 75 gpm vapor-recompression evaporator unit will be used intermittently
to evaporate contaminated storm runoff. The small quantity of brine produced
can be sent to the 150 gpm vapor-recompression evaporator or to the evapora-
tor-crystal! izer. This 75 gpm unit will also serve as a 50 percent capacity
spare for working off inorganic filtrates and process wastewater when the
larger unit is down for maintenance. Prolonged shutdown of any of the units
would require shutdown of waste processing units. The large stormwater basin
will provide emergency storage capacity.
Organic Effluent Treatment (Figure 23) --
Organic filtrate will be collected in two 25,000 gallon storage tanks.
The tanks will be equipped with steam coils to maintain the contents
pumpable. The filtrate and. small amounts of waste lubricating oils will be
burned in a 600-gallon-per-hour package-type liquid waste incinerator. Oil
will be used as fuel for startup. Hot flue gas will be cooled and scrubbed
with water in a venturi scrubber,
The organic effluent incinerator is a package system (600 gallons per
hour capacity) consisting of feed pump, incinerator, and scrubber system.
Slowdown from the scrubber system will be pumped to the inorganic effluent
treatment system.
73
-------
B OX CA.R UNLOADING
•SOO DRUMS PLATFORM
PER CAR
C 2000 DRUMS PER DAV)
DRUM CUAIM CONVEYOR
DRUMMED WASTE.
STORAGE. 3LDG.
(4000 DRUM STORAGE
CAP- OM TOP LEVEL )
CQNTMNE.R TRUCK
ifto PA.H.E.TS
PE R LDKO
(GQOO ORWM STORAGE
CAP. OM TOP LEVEL)
Figure 24. Process flow diagram - container unloading and surface storage.
-------
Waste Containerization and Staging
Five hundred and eighty-five tons of waste will be put in 55 gallon
drums during two shifts of operation. About 2,000 drums and 500 wood pallets
will be used in containerization each day. Palletized drums of waste will
be transferred to the staging area prior to emplacement in the mine.
Drum and Pallet Receiving and Storage (Figure 24) --
Fifty-five gallon, open-top steel drums will be brought to the plant in
box cars. After a car is spotted at the receiving platform (Figure 15), the
drums will be unloaded and placed horizontally on a feed conveyor, which will
transfer them to an inclined conveyor and to an elevated drum chain conveyor,
all enclosed. The chain conveyor system will run through the upper level of
the drummed waste storage building and on to the upper level of the contain-
erization building. Drums will be stored in the upper level of both build--
ings.
As needed, the drums will be transferred to the lowering conveyors in
the containerization building after removal of the drum covers. Up to 10,000
drums can be stored (5-day supply).
Heavy duty wood pallets will be shipped in by container truck. At the
unloading platform outside the containerization building, a forklift truck
will be used for unloading the pallets and stacking them in the containeri-
zation building (lower level). The pallets will subsequently be taken from
storage and loaded in the automatic pallet loaders. Damaged pallets from
waste unloading and storage operations will be hauled away as scrap wood.
Waste Containerization (Figure 25) --
Type A and B waste filter cake, Type C bulk solid waste, and salt cake
from effluent treatment will be containerized in drums. Six drum filling
lines will normally be used, each fed waste from a surge bin located outside
the containerization building. Type C bulk wastes will be distributed to the
various surge bins as necessary to maintain feed supply to drum filling lines.
A typical drum filling operation is indicated in Figure 25. Empty drums
on the upper level will be fed into a conveyor that automatically loads the
arm lowering conveyor. Drums are lowered to the first floor of the contain-
erization building and transferred to the drum-fill station, An indexing
conveyor will move each drum sequentially into and out of the drum^-fill
station. At the drum-fill station, waste from a small surge bin will be fed
into the drum until a preselected total weight is reached (normally 625 Ib
net). The scale will electronically shut off the vibrating feeder and will
signal the indexing conveyor to move the drum out and another into position.
Filled drums will be sequentially indexed into and out of the drum close
and label station. At the drum close station, the drum cover will drop on to
the drum, and the lever-snap ring is manually closed and locked. A drum
labeling machine will stencil the waste type, date, and drum number on the
side of the drum. The closed, labeled drums will be indexed onto an accumu-
75
-------
WAST E.
CDNTfUNERl2A,TlQH
(SIX CONTA.INERL1AT |OW LINES)
FORK LIFT
Figure 25. Process flow diagram -- containerization and staging.
-------
lation conveyor, which will transfer the drums to the automatic pallet
loader. When the four drums have been positioned on a pallet, the pallet
will be lowered onto a transfer conveyor. Loaded pallets from each of the
six containerization lines will be collected on an accumulation conveyor
from which forklift trucks will pick them up for transport to the waste
staging building. Although waste containerization will be largely automated
and worker contact with the waste will be small, it will be necessary that
the operating personnel wear protective clothing and filter masks where
contact with the wastes is possible.
Surface Staging --
The waste staging building will be located at the production shaft
(Figure 15). Waste staging and scheduling will be coordinated with sub-
surface personnel responsible for scheduling waste storage. Loaded pallets
from the containerization building will be stacked four-high in designated
areas of the staging building. The drums will be segregated in pallet banks
according to the emplacement designation of waste types, i.e., organic, in-
organic, and retrievable.
Only one of the four types of waste will normally be lowered into the
mine during a shift. This will allow shipments to be made to only one area
at a time. For example, organic wastes will be allowed to accumulate in the
staging area until a shift's worth of production is available. Retrievable
wastes (Type D) will normally be lowered into the mine during one shift a
week. They will not usually be stored in the staging area, but will be
transferred from the waste storage building directly to the production shaft
area. Drummed Type C wastes will normally be worked off in a similar manner.
Surface Site Development and Buildings
The layout of the surface civil structures and buildings are shown in
Figure 15. Except for the production shaft and some portion of the railroad
tracks, all surface civil structures and buildings will be new. Of the
total 17 acres of the fenced surface area, 15 acres are within the present
mine boundary and 2 acres have to be purchased from the local residents.
Approximately 13 acres of land will have to be cleared, including all of
the existing buildings except the production shaft. New civil structures
and buildings will be;
Truck scale office and pad
Rail scale office and pad
Tank truck unloading platform
Container truck unloading platform
Dump truck unloading building
Tank and hopper car unloading building
Box car unloading platform
Drum unloading platform
Chemical unloading platform
Chlorine unloading platform
Storage tank area
77
-------
Drum waste storage building
Waste treatment building
Filtration building
Containerization building
Staging building
Administration building
Safety/medical building
Laboratory
Equipment storage building
Warehouse
Shops
Drum cleaning building
Wastewater collection ponds
Wastewater treatment and filtration building
Boiler house
Description of these facilities and their costs are summarized in
Appendix D.
Surface Utilities
A boiler, cooling tower, electric system, compressed air system, drain-
age system, and yard safety such as fire protection systems and washdown
stations will be included in the surface utility. Their general specifica-
tions and costs are shown in Appendix C. The boiler and cooling tower will be
primarily for the wastewater treatment process.
Surface Treatment Problems
To develop the conceptual design of surface facilities, numerous assump-
tions and simplifications had to be made on the waste characteristics, waste
treatability, reaction rates, and properties of wastes at various process
stages. Considerably more would need to be known about the handling proper-
ties of received wastes, their chemical characteristics, and their reaction
rates before a reliable plant could be constructed. Some of the potential
problem areas are discussed here.
Waste Receiving and Unloading --
Compatibility of the wastes is an important factor that will affect the
number of unloading stations, the number of transfer pumps, piping, and
conveyors, and the number of storage tanks and bins. The more varied the
wastes (chemical and physical characteristics), the more extensive the re-
ceiving and storage facilities will have to be. The trucks and railcars
would need to be decontaminated within the plant, accepting and treating
all of the contaminated water. The cost, both in manpower and equipment,
could be very high.
It may be difficult to mix adequately sludge and slurry wastes in large
storage tanks. Mixing is needed to prevent solids from settling to the
bottom of the tank where they cannot be easily resuspended. When the liquid
level falls below the agitator impeller, settling out will occur. Prolonged
78
-------
failure of an agitator (power outage) could result in mud cakes that cannot
be resuspended. The tanks might be equipped with jet-nozzle systems to re-
slurry and pump out mud cakes. Plugging of pump suction lines may be mini-
mized by routinely back-flushing the lines prior to pump startup.
The liquefaction of bulk solids in storage bins will depend on the
properties of the various solid wastes, their moisture contents, and even
the ambient temperature. The bins should have vibrating hoppers and other
devices to reduce solids bridging and assist material flow out of the bin.
In winter, freezing of material on bin walls could hinder or prevent flow
of material out of a bin. Use of steam guns to assist thawing may be needed,
or the bins could be equipped with external strip heaters and insulation.
In unloading drummed wastes, drums may be punctured or dropped causing
leaks of waste onto floors or yard areas. Cleanup and decontamination
efforts will result in unloading delays. Cleanup operations will have to be
well planned and carefully supervised for worker safety.
Waste Treatment --
Again, the wide variety of wastes may dictate more types of treatment
than were included here, and consequently more equipment and a more complex
operation. It would seem prudent that any single facility should not attempt
to handle every kind of hazardous waste, since it could not do so economical-
ly.
With these basic treatment methods, problems are most likely to be the
results of malfunctions - either mechanical or instrumentation. In the
reaction steps, overtreatment could result in vent gases containing SC^ or
chlorine that would have to be scrubbed out. If volatile materials were
present in the wastes, they may be stripped and appear in the vent gases.
Undertreatment could result in potentially reactive material being handled
in downstream steps and being placed in the mine. Reactor products will
have to be carefully analyzed and reprocessed if incomplete reactions
occurred.
Filtration will likely be a problem area in design and operation. Fil-
tration rates and cake solids contents are highly dependent on the physical
and chemical properties of the wastes. The average 40 percent solids content
used here may in practice represent the long-term average where the day-to-
day variation is, say, 10 percent to 80 percent. Such variations would
create difficult problems in downstream operations. Variations in the
handling properties of the filter cakes could make the transfer conveyors,
storage bins, and feeders difficult to design and operate.
Wastewater Effluent Treatment --
The inorganic filtrate evaporation and mixed salt crystallization pro-
cesses should have the capability of handling a wide range of feed solids
concentrations. Processing problems may include scale formation on heat
transfer surfaces, foaming caused by surface active chemicals, and perhaps
low-temperature polymerization of organic materials present in the filtrates.
79
-------
Again a knowledge of the feed material and its variability in the design
stage, can help to minimize processing problems. The 24-hour a day system
has the vulnerability that a prolonged major equipment failure will shut down
the upstream treatment processes. If high reliability cannot be assured,
then extensive spare capacity should be provided.
Disposal of excess condensate could be a problem if volatile hazardous
materials are present in the feed. Some additional treatment, e.g.,
activated carbon adsorption or ion exchange, may need to be considered for
polishing the condensate.
The incinerator system is not intended to burn hazardous organic mater-
ials. For organic filtrates containing chlorinated hydrocarbons, there is
a potential for formation of phosgene (COC12)> if combustion conditions are
not well controlled. There is also the possibility of polymerizing organic
material in the combustion or post combustion zones. Again, with well_de-
fined feed characteristics in the design, processing problems can be mini-
mized.
Waste Containerization --
Containerization is essentially a large packaging operation. Empty drum
handling is labor intensive in order to reduce the damaging of drums ahead of
Containerization. Bent drums may buckle when filled and stacked, and drum
covers may not fit on out-of-round drums. Drum handling and storage re-
quirements could be reduced by onsite fabrication.
The drum-filling operation is susceptible to over- and underfilling
of drums, if bulk densities of the wastes are highly variable. Fill weights
should be easy to adjust. Alternatives are automatic volumetric filling and
manual filling by observation. The automatic conveyor system should be very
reliable, but a malfunction will shut down an entire line.
Before drums are taken to the staging area, they will have to be care-
fully inspected for structural integrity. Mechanical handling and the move-
ment by forklift trucks can be expected to result in damaged drums. These
will have to be taken off the line and recontainerized -- probably a manual
operation.
It may be advisable to strap the drums together on the pallets to mini-
mize drum movement and shifting on the pallets during subsequent handling
operations.
SUBSURFACE FACILITIES
Existing mine facilities are described in detail in Section 3. Descrip-
tion of new underground facilities and rehabilitation of existing facilities
are discussed in this section. An overview of the subsurface operation is
shown in Figure 26. The subsurface facilities and their operation will be
described with the aid of Figures 27 through 33. Lists of underground
equipment, service buildings, and operating personnel are shown in Appendices
C, D, and E.
80
-------
Although a wide variety of wastes (four types and seven subtypes) will
be processed at the surface facilities, when the wastes are ready to be
transported into the mine they will all be in drums of the same specifica-
tion. These drums are divided into three groups designated for separate
storage (Figure 5). This includes:
• Storage Zone X for 535 TPD of inorganic wastes
(Type A - 150 TPD; Type B - 150 TPD; Type C -
150 TPD; WW solids - 85 TPD).
« Storage Zone Y for 100 TPD of organic wastes
(Type B - 50 TPD; Type C - 50 TPD).
* Storage Zone Z for 50 TPD of wastes to be retrieved
(Type D - 50 TPD).
The daily loading rates shown above are a long-term average figure. In
actual operation, the storage operation will be scheduled so that the same
group of wastes will be lowered and stored during any one shift.
This will include approximately nine shifts per week for inorganic
wastes, two shifts per week for organic wastes, and one shift per week for
wastes to be retrieved. All subsurface facilities are operated two shifts
per day and six days per week. The maintenance work is done during the
third shift.
The subsurface operation will start with the transfer of drummed wastes
from the surface staging area to the production skip in the same building.
The subsurface operation will include:
Surface loading and lowering into mine
Underground unloading and staging
Haul to storage zones
Storage
Storage cell preparation
Monitoring
Record keeping
Surface Loading and Lowering into Mine
The surface loading operation will consist of transferring four pallets
(16 drums) from the surface staging area to the production skip in the same
building and placing them on the skip. Forklift trucks will be used to
handle the pallets (Figure 27). A utilityman (laborer) stationed at the
shaft will secure the load and signal that the load is ready for lowering.
On the average, 70 lowering cycles will be performed in each shift.
Each cycle will take 5 to 7 minutes, which includes 1.5 minutes of actual
lowering time and the remaining for loading and unloading. The surface
loading will involve three forklifts and four operating personnel in each
shift. Detailed lists of equipment and personnel are shown in Appendices C
and E.
81
-------
oo
ro
SURFACE LOADING
-rii
n
UNDERGROUND
STAGING
R
RECORD KEEPING
UNLOADING
HAULING
MONITORING
R
STORAGE
Figure 26. Schematic diagram of subsurface operation.
-------
OD
CO
II
VENTILATION
SHAFT
Figure 5. General mine layout.
-------
23/8 DIAr
I-
47'
48"
o
T
APPROX.SCALE
Figure 27. Drums and pallet.
84
-------
The lowering operation will use a two-compartment balanced electric
hoist system housed in the 16-foot-diameter production shaft. It will
take 1.5 minutes to descend the 1,400 feet. As the loaded skip is being
lowered in one compartment, the empty skip will be raised in the other
compartment. The production shaft and hoisting system are existing facili-
ties and will require minor rehabilitation.
Underground Unloading and Staging
The underground unloading operation (Figure 26) at the base of the
shaft is essentially the reverse of the surface loading operation. A whole
skip load (4 pallets) will be taken out of the skip using a forklift and
set aside for another forklift to pick up two pallets at a time and load them
onto a waiting flatbed haul truck.
Normally, underground staging will not be used; however, if there is
any reason to stop the waste hauling to the storage area, those wastes will
be temporarily stored in the underground staging area until they can be
transferred to the storage area. The staging area will consist of seven
rooms of approximately 40 by 40 by 22 feet in height. The wastes will be
stored in two pallet stacks, and the staging area will have the capacity to
hold one day's waste. The wastes in the staging area can be sent directly
to the storage area or to the shaft area to load on the haul truck.
Open space for the underground staging area is already available. Minor
rehabilitation work of scaling roof, roof bolting, and floor grading is
required. This is discussed further in the latter part of this section and
also in Appendix D.
Haulage to Storage Zone
Flat bed trailers powered by diesel tractors will be used to transfer
the wastes (drums on pallets) from the shaft area to the storage zones. A
normal load will consist of 20 pallets (80 drums) or 25 tons. There will
be 28 shipments to storage each day or 14 shipments per shift. Round trip
distances to the storage zones will vary from an average of 3,000 feet (to
Zone Z) to an average of 18,000 feet (to sections of Zone X). During one
shift, the wastes will be hauled to the same storage zone.
Eight flatbed trailers and three tractors will be used for hauling.
One tractor and one trailer will normally be stationed at the shaft area
loading the pallets. Two tractors will normally be on the road either taking
loaded trailers to the storage area or bringing back the empty trailers to
the shaft area. Equipment and personnel involved in this operation are
listed in Appendices C and E.
Storage
The storage operation can take place in any of five storage zones
(Figures 5, 28, and 29). Each storage zone is formed by many existing inter-
connected rooms of approximately 60 by 60 by 22 feet high. Each of these
storage zones will be isolated from the others by unmined salt barriers or
85
-------
oo
en
Figure 28. Schematic diagram of long-term storage operation.
-------
CO
Figure 29. Schematic diagram of retrievable storage (Type D) operation.
-------
by ventilation stopping constructed of waste salt. Storage rooms will have
been prepared by scaling of ribs and roofs, roof bolting, and grading and
brushing of the floor. As needed, sub-divisions will be formed within each
zone by constructing waste salt barriers.
Normally, the underground operation will be scheduled in advance so that
only one storage crew is necessary, and the crew will be working in the same
zone during one working shift. A waste trailer will be brought into a room
of the designated storage zone and parked for unloading (Figures 28 and 29).
A fork lift will unload two pallets at a time from the trailer and place
them in storage.
Long-Term Storage --
In long-term storage zones (X and Y), pallets will be stacked six
pallets high (Figure 28) and locked together for additional stability.
In an average long-term storage cell (60 by 60 by 22 feet), there will
be room to hold 1,350 pallets. Some of this capacity cannot be utilized
because of space provided for side clearance and monitoring access (Figure
28). Allowing a 10 percent loss would permit storage of 1,218 pallets
(4,872 drums or 1,523 tons) per room. This would require an average stacking
of 14 pallets by 14% pallets by six pallets per room. On this basis, a room
would be filled every 2.25 days. During one year's operation, 125 rooms
would be utilized for long-term storage, 105 rooms allocated for Zone X and
20 for Zone Y. The average storage density under these conditions would be
38.5 pounds per cubic foot, 43 percent of the room space, Actual usage of
the total available space will be considerably less than this, because of
haulageway,storage of waste salts, airways, and underground facilities.
The long-term storage operation is not designed to allow selective
retrieval of the stored waste. Although waste that has been recently em-
placed may be easily retrieved, this will not be possible for most stored
waste. Retrieval from Zones X and Y would involve massive rehandling of
material and in most cases would disrupt the normal storage operations. It
is anticipated that total retrieval of the stored waste would require at
least the same amount of time required for emplacement, if not more.
Temporary Storage --
In the temporary, short-term storage area, Zone Z, it is assumed that
an average,of 300 tons or 240 pallets per week are stored for a period of
two years. After an initial buildup of material (24,000 pallets), the amount
of waste material sent to storage will be offset by a similar amount of
material removed from storage. Waste pallets may be stored in 1, 2, 3, or
4 pallet stacks. To facilitate retrieval, rooms will not be filled to
capacity (Figure 29).
Retrieval of Type D waste in Zone Z would be scheduled on a one-shift-
per-week basis and would be conducted concurrently with shipments to Zone Z.
The retrieval process will be the reverse of the emplacement procedure. At
the shaft unloading area and the surface loading area, the backup forklift
88
-------
trucks would be utilized to assist in the retrieval. After a skip load of
waste has been unloaded at the shaft bottom, a load of retrieved waste will
be placed on the skip for hoisting. In normal operations, retrieval will be
conducted by the regular storage crew and no additional personnel would be
required. If necessary, the room preparation crew could assist in the re-
trieval operation. Retrieved wastes will be sent to the drum storage building
and then loaded to either a truck or box car to ship to the owner.
Storage Cell Preparation
Preparation of the storage cell will be one of the major underground
activities. A typical room used for storage will be approximately 60 by 60
by 22 feet in height. Prior to use for storage, these rooms will be cleaned
of waste salt and debris, will have the roof and ribs scaled and be roof
bolted, and will have the floor graded and brushed (Figure 30). Preparation
will be done on a continuous basis, maintaining a one-month supply (12
rooms) of prepared rooms in Zones X and Y.
Waste salt produced during salt mining and stored in the rooms must be
removed. For this study, it was assumed that 5 percent of the storage vol-
ume was filled with waste salt. This is taken to be 150 tons of waste salt
per room. Most waste salt will be hauled to an unused portion of the mine
space. Some of it will be used to build ventilation stoppings within the
storage facility. After the room is emptied, the roof and ribs will be
scaled of loose rock and the roof is roof bolted. This will be done on
four-foot centers using 10-foot bolts, requiring 225 bolts per room. The
final step in room preparation will be to prepare a level floor for the
stacking of waste pallets. In most cases this will be accomplished by
spreading waste salt on the floor, spraying with water and rolling. Where
this is not satisfactory, grading or brushing may be used.
Monitoring
With the exception of Type D wastes (50 TPD), all wastes will be con-
verted to solid form and should not generate toxic, flammable, or hazardous
spills. However, there is a remote possibility that a broken drum may re-
lease some waste that becomes airborne and enters circulating air systems.
The minimum requirement of a detection, monitoring, and control system
will include:
• Continuous monitoring of circulating air for
particulates
• Continuous monitoring of storage Zone Z for free
fluid
• A system for any employee to report any spill, odor,
or any unusual sight at the instance of finding and to
get immediate attention of a proper inspector
• The capability for analyzing all possible contaminants
in air and water
• Decontamination .capability on surface and subsurface
area
89
-------
WASTE SALT REMOVAL ROOF A R!B SCALING
CD COQ
ROOF BOLTING
FLOOR GRADING *. BRUSHING
O 0 0
£>>"::?
Figure 30. Schematic diagram of storage cell preparation cycle.
-------
A standard laboratory will be provided on the surface area. In addition
to usual laboratory equipment, the laboratory will be provided with a gas
chromatograph, atomic absorption spectrophotometer, and organic carbon
analyzer.
In addition to monitoring for possible contaminants, structural integrity
of the mine space has to be monitored. This will be conducted by semi-
annual reading of convergence gauges and dilation pins. A series of conver-
gence gauges and dilation pins had been installed during the mining opera-
tions as part of a monitoring program. These instruments will continue to
be monitored as part of the storage operation. Access to these monitors is
provided by omitting some waste pallets to provide manways as shown in
Figure 28. Additional instruments will be added as needed.
Record Keeping
The record keeping operation requires that records be maintained of all
stored drums, including type of waste, date of receiving, and storage loca-
tion. Each drum will be coded for its waste type and date of receiving and
storage. The storage crew supervisor will be responsible for recording the
location of these drums and maintaining the record file in both surface and
subsurface offices.
Underground Facilities
Major underground facilities will include shafts, ventilation systems,
underground staging area, haulways, storage cells, and service buildings.
These facilities are discussed below. Rehabilitation work specification and
their costs are summarized in Appendix D.
Shafts —
Three shafts will be used in the storage plant. Two shafts, the pro-
duction and the man shaft, exist, located in the vicinity of the surface
facilities. The third shaft will be a new ventilation shaft located in the
mining area. Fresh air will be taken in through the ventilation shaft and
exhausted through the production shaft.
The production shaft will be a circular shaft, concrete lined, and 16
feet in diameter. The shaft will be divided into two 5 by 6-foot hoisting
compartments and two service compartments. A two-skip balanced electric
hoist will be used for production. The 4 by 8 foot man shaft contains two
3% by 3% foot compartments. A two-cage balanced electric hoist will be used.
The third shaft will be an 8 foot diameter concrete lined ventilation shaft.
It will be equipped with an emergency personnel hoist but is otherwise
without fittings.
The ventilation shaft will be a new shaft 8 feet in diameter and 1,400
feet deep. Minor rehabilitation will be required for the production shaft
and the man shaft. This includes grouting some sections of both shafts and
rehabilitating shaft walls and shaft timbers. These works and their costs
are summarized in Appendix D.
91
-------
Ventilation System --
The ventilation system will operate in conjunction with that of the
active salt mining facility. Fresh air will be drawn into the mine by a
5-foot-diameter fan located at the base of the new ventilation shaft and
exhausted at the production and main shafts (Figures 5 and 31). In this
system, the main entries will provide fresh air for the haulage ways, the
underground service area, the underground staging area, and the various
storage zones. All activity will take place in air that has not passed
through the storage zones. To prevent mixing of storage air with fresh air,
a series of ventilation drifts have been established in a salt bed 100 feet
above the storage cells. These drifts connect with the production shaft.
Ventilation raises (36 in. diameter) located in each of the storage areas
connect the two levels. Booster fans located at the top of each raise ex-
haust the air from the storage zones. A main backup fan is located in the
underground service.
Underground Staging Area --
The underground staging area is intended to provide temporary storage for
one day's production. The staging area, which will be located adjacent to
the production shaft (Figure 32), will consist of seven storage cells. Each
cell will be approximately 40 by 40 by 22 feet in height. All cells will be
roof bolted with 10-foot bolts on 4-foot centers.
Haulways --
Waste hauling will, as much as possible, be confined to designated
haulways (Figure 4), approximately 60 feet wide and 22 feet high. The
primary haulway is presently existing. The haul way will be separated from
the rest of the operation by ventilation stoppings. These stoppings will
consist of rooms filled with waste salt sealed at the top with brattice-foam
caps. Doors will be provided at periodic intervals to provide access to the
storage zones. Secondary haulways will be established as needed within the
storage zones. These will provide access to the active storage cells and in
turn become storage cells as they are no longer needed for haulage.
Underground Service Facilities --
The underground service area located at the base of the shafts (Figure
32) will contain various support activities, including office, record room,
lunch room, restrooms, first aid station, stock rooms, vehicle service sta-
tion, repair shop, and decontamination facilities (Figure 33). Sizes of
these facilities and their costs are summarized in Appendix D.
Underground Utilities --
Underground utilities will
and fire fighting equipment.
include electric power, water, diesel fuel,
Electric Power—Electric power will be taken into the mine via a pipe
adjacent to the man shaft. Electric lighting will be possible at all areas
92
-------
LEGEND
0000000000000000000000000000
jaaaDaaoonaDaaaooDoaQoooaoo
oaaoaoooaooooaaoaaoaaooaa an® a
pa DO a DQDO.a.DDD nooaDO DDDD'anapfo a
aDDaaaaQDOaooDO an a n a a a a a a if o a D
3DDoaaoDDDDnaooaQDDaDQDD an a a a
DaDDDaaaaDDoaaDODODaaaa a/a a D a a
DDDDonnoaocDoaooaao 0000060002 a
DaaoaaaDDDDDDaaooooaDa yaa a n o a
jaaaaaaaooaaaaoaaDaQao era a a D a a
DnaaDaooaDDDDDaGQDana a ao a o a o a
DCDODDanODDDDDnODQO D ADDDQDnan
JuaaaDDaaDODDODoano apoaQoacina
aaoDDDDaaDDaaaonDa a\haaaaaauoa
rmDOQoaoaaoaooaaaa rva Qaaaoaaaa
oaaaQDODoaQaoaooa g/o a Q o^jsa a a D o a
DnaaDoanQQaoaaaaa a a a D cro q a o a en a
oaaaaaaoaauaaaa a
-------
il Hi
ID
-p.
0 30' 60' 90' 120'
APPPOX,SCALE
KEY
1. Production Shaft 9.
2. Man Shaft 10.
3. Underground Staging Area 11.
4. Decontamination Facility 12.
5. Fire Fighting Equipment Storage 13.
6. Ventilation Access 14.
7. Vehicle Service Area 15.
8. Office
Record Room
Rest Rooms
Maintenance & Repair Shop
Stock Room
Lunch Room
First Aid Station
Water Storage
Figure 32. Plot plan of underground service facilities.
-------
FRESH
WATER
r
LAVATORIES
3_
WASTE PUMP ROOM
DO
XI
X
X
ECO N TAW I NATION
ROOM
HOSE CONNECTIONS
WASTE DRAIN
0
L
5
J_
10' 15' 20'
I l I
LOADING DOCK
APPPOX. SCALE
Figure 33. Underground decontamination facility.
-------
of the storage operation, including the service area, the haulways, and the
storage zones. Two separate power lines are available to the plant, and
should both lines fail, emergency mobile generator will be supplied by the
local power company.
Wate_r--Decontamination water will be piped underground under natural
head. The water line will extend down the production shaft service compart-
ment and be piped to the decontamination facility, where it will supply a
20,000 gallon holding tank. Mine water will be collected in a separate
20,000 gallon holding tank, where it can be pumped to the surface by a 75 gpm
single-lift pump. Contaminated water will not be handled by these facilities.
All water used in decontamination operations will be placed in 55-gallon
drums at the decontamination facility and hoisted to the surface for process-
ing.
Diesel Fuel—Diesel fuel will be piped underground under natural head.
The fuel line will extend down a drill hole to the mine level and then to a
500-gallon storage tank.
Fire Fighting Equipment—Fire fighting equipment will be housed adjacent
to the underground service area. There is limited potential for fires in
the underground operations, due primarily to the lack of combustibles under-
ground. Fire will be controlled by standard non-water techniques such as
C02 and fire suppressing foam.
ALTERNATIVE STORAGE CONCEPTS
Five alternative cases are included in this study. These include three
different plant capacities of the same waste composition, an alternative
waste composition, and a non-container storage concept. In summary, these
alternative cases are:
• Case 1 (Base Case): 1,250 TPD of Type A, B, C, and D
waste are received, treated, dewatered, and container-
ized. Six hundred and eighty-five TPD of containerized
waste is stored in underground storage cells,
• Case 2 (High-Capacjty Case): The same waste composition
as that in the base case. The plant capacity is one and
a half times that of the capacity of the base case.
Handling of the waste is the same as in the base case.
• Case 3 (Low-Capacity Case): The same waste composition
and handling as those in the base case. The plant ca-
pacity is 188 TPD waste received and 103 TPD stored.
• Case 4: Only Type B and C wastes (600 TPD) are received.
The quantities and handling of Type B and C wastes are
the same as those in the base case. Because of the
absence of Type A waste, many of the surface facilities
in the base case will be eliminated,
• Case 5: As in Case 4, only Type B and C wastes (600
TPD) are received. These wastes are treated, dewatered,
and mixed with a cementizing additive to form a solid
mass when it is placed and cured in the underground
storage area.
96
-------
Facilities for these alternative cases and their general design criteria
are discussed below.
Case 2, High-Capacity Case
In Case 2, 1,875 TPD of Type A, B, C, and D wastes would be received
and processed to store 1,030 TPD of containerized wastes. The surface and
subsurface facilities would be primarily the same as those of the base case,
except sizes (and numbers) of equipment and facilities would be increased to
handle the increased waste loadings. Assumptions and changes in design
criteria from those of the base case are:
• Two-shift operation of surface facilities and
three-shift operation of subsurface facilities
are assumed.
• Receiving and unloading facilities would be the
same as those of the base case, except more
forklifts would be needed.
• Sizes of surface buildings would be increased by
27 percent, except that the drum storage building
would be increased by 50 percent.
• Mine rehabilitation and underground service
buildings would be the same as those of the base case.
• Capacities of all storage tanks and bins would be
increased by 50 percent, by enlargement and
additional tankages.
• Capacities of all process equipment (reactor vessels
and filters) would be increased by 50 percent.
« Effluent treatment capacity would bfe increased by
50 percent.
• The containerization system would be the same
as that of the base case.
• Chemical storage capacities would be increased
by 50 percent.
• All underground facilities would be the same as the
base case, except for more drum handling equipment.
Case 3, Low-Capacity Case
In Case 3, 188 TPD of Type A, B, C, and D wastes would be received and
processed to store 103 TPD of containerized wastes. Waste treatment, con-
tainerization, and storage methods would be the same as those of the base
case. Because of the low capacity, some of the buildings and civil struc-
tures would be combined to include more than one activity, allowing changes
in the plant layout and in the method of handling the wastes at various pro-
cess stages. Assumptions and changes in the design cirteria from those of
the base case are:
• All facilities would be operated one shift,
• Surface process building sizes would be 33 percent
of the base case, except that the containerization
building would be 50 percent of that in the base case.
• Shops, warehouse, and drum cleaning buildings would
be combined into one and sized for 50 percent of
97
-------
those in the base case.
• Administration, safety/medical, and laboratory
buildings would be combined into one and sized
for 50 percent of those in the base case.
t Wastes, chemicals, and empty drums would be brought
to the plant by trucks.
• Approximately 50 percent of the base case plot
areas would be used.
• Capacities of all tanks and bins would be 15 percent
of those in the base case.
• Capacities of transport systems (pumps and conveyors)
would be 33 percent of those in the base case.
• Capacities of process equipment (reactor vessels and
filters) would be 33 percent of those in the base case.
• Mine rehabilitation would be the same as that of the
base case, except haulways and ventilation systems
are reduced.
• Effluent treatment capacity would be 33 percent of
that in the base case. Only one evaporation-crystal-
lization system would be needed.
• Containerization capacity would be 33 percent of
that in the base case.
• Underground drum handling equipments would be
33 percent of those in the base case.
Case 4
Only Type B and C wastes (residue-type wastes) would be received for
underground storage. Treatment and containerization of Type B and C wastes
would be the same as those in the base case. Civil structures, buildings,
and equipment associated with Type A and D wastes in the base case would
be eliminated. Assumptions and changes in the design criteria from those of
the base case are:
• All facilities would be operated two shifts, except
waste receiving and unloading facilities, which
would be operated for one shift.
• Wastes would be brought to the plant by trucks and
raiTears.
• Waste receiving and unloading facilities would be the
same as those of the base case, except that drum un-
loading capacity would be reduced to half of that
in the base case.
t Equipment and facilities involved with Type B and C
wastes would be the same as those in the base case.
Equipment and facilities involved with Type A and D
wastes would be eliminated.
• Containerization and staging capacities would be
67 percent of those in the base case,
• Effluent treatment capacity would be 33 percent of
that in the base case.
0 Surface service facilities would be reduced to
50 percent of those in the base case.
98
-------
• Mine rehabilitation, underground service facilities,
and underground equipment would be the same as those
in the base case, except that the number of the initial
storage cells required are reduced proportionately.
Case 5, Non-Container Storage Case
As in Case 4, only Type B and C wastes would be received. Treatment
of Type B waste, namely neutralization of acidic/caustic sludges and sludge
dewatering would be the same as that in the base case. However, instead of
containerizing these wastes in drums, the dewatered wastes would be mixed
with a stabilizing additive (cementizing reagent) and pumped into the mine
and to the storage area where the mixture would be cured to form a solid
mass.
Surface facilities for receiving and unloading Type B and C wastes and
their treatment and dewatering would be the same as those of Case 4. The
containerization and surface staging facilities would be eliminated. The
concept of non-container storage is shown in Figure 34.
Presently, three waste stabilization processes are commercially avail-
able in the country. These include Synearth process (calcilox process) of
Dravo Lime Company, Chemfix process of Carborundom Company, and IUCS process
of I U Conversion System, Inc. All of these stabilization methods have been
known to solidify certain waste sludges such as power plant flue gas scrubber
sludge and some industrial waste residues. Technical data on these processes
are scarce and generally limited to leachability tests of the solidified
products.
Additional work is required to confirm or disprove the technical feasi-
bility of stabilizing (cementizing) hazardous wastes, which would allow
storage of the waste without the containerization. However, available in-
formation strongly suggests that with proper preparation, this hazardous
waste residue could be solidified satisfactorily. Selection of the proper
additive, the mixture composition, and the emplacement method would have to
be based on many more studies with waste materials and different additives.
Considerably more data on solidification mechanisms of different sludges and
different additives, their solidification rates, and the properties of
cured mixtures are required before such a facility can be designed. For
this study, the Synearth process (calcilox process) was selected for the
conceptual design and approximate cost estimation. Selection of the Synearth
process was not intended to imply that the process has a technical or econo-
mical advantage over the other processes. The stabilization system shown in
this study is of a preliminary nature and involves assumptions on design
criteria that would have to be verified by extensive research and development
efforts before actual application. These assumptions include:
• Waste salts and cured materials could be used to
construct three-foot dikes to contain the mixture
during the curing period.
• The mixture would be pumpable-
t The mixture would not have free flowing water,
and it can be cured directly on the salt bed.
99
-------
o
o
Stab!izing Additive
Storage Bin
Dewatered Waste Cake
Storage Bin
i_ Waste & Additive Mixer
^
•^ x
/
(
^\
r
j^
—
sine nt Pumping System
-,
SjQ
\
•«=r
^
.-•''-'1 -VA-. '."•.. ••'..•.•• A <^
^-•,li -.- •';;• 'A '••; :- — i:.-A— , -
' v . ',"."•'. '-A1. • •• 1 '.-"•'• '/\ '.'.'• '.-.'t • • A
-' • ' - •, -/\' . • . •' • /\ '.• - • - -'/\^ • . . • '/\
>
<
-:->-.-.;<.;.-'A ^K A
P r1 Q c h MTV
>
^>
4
H
/ r
Figure 34. Schematic diagram of stabilized waste storage operation.
-------
• The mixture would not emit any toxic vapor or
gaseous product that could harm the operating
personnel and public.
• The cured mixture would support earth moving
equipment used in the mine.
Four hundred TPD of Type B waste would be processed to produce 220 TPD
of filter cake having minimum 40 percent solid contents. This would include
20 TPD solid residue resulting from evaporation of the plant wastewater. Two
hundred TPD of Type C waste would be received and stored. Fifty TPD of Type
C waste would be brought to the plant in drums and transferred directly into
the mine and to the storage area as is. The major steps of the stabilization
system include:
• Mixing of the additive and waste
• Pumping the mixture into the mine and to the
storage cells
• Curing the mixture
• Preparation of the containment structures
Major equipment of the stabilization system, in addition to waste re-
ceiving and unloading, treatment and dewatering, and mine hoisting system
would include:
• Additive Receiving and Storage: 32' x 10' x 8'
hopper, 100 foot conveyor system, six 100 ton bins.
• Additive and Haste Mixing: Two 6-ton/hour additive
feeders, two 30 ton/hour sludge feeders, two 800
cubic foot/hour ribbon mixers.
• Mixture Pumping System: 250 gpm cement pump system
(dual-pump package unit), two 8-in. by 5,000-foot
pipelines and fitting system, 1,000-gallon surge tank.
• Preparation of Containment Structure; A haul truck,
a front-end loader, a forklift, two floor graders.
101
-------
Section 5
CAPITAL AND OPERATING COST
Cost data associated with emplacement of hazardous wastes in an under-
ground salt mine are presented in this section. The cost data include both
capital and operating costs. The economic analysis, including the unit cost
(cost per ton), and sensitivity analysis are presented in Section 6. The
capital cost reflects the costs of:
Land and mine
Site development
Buildings and civil structures
Equipment, piping, electrical, and instrumentation
Engineering service, contingency, and allowances
during construction
The operating cost reflects the costs of:
• Direct labor and materials
• Maintenance labor and materials
• Overhead labor and materials
• Taxes and insurances, and long-term
liability insurance
These costs were estimated based on the conceptual design of the waste
storage plant. The method of cost estimation and summaries of the estimates
are presented in this section.
The cost data were developed for the five alternative plant concepts;
three plant capacities (Cases 1, 2, and 3), an alternative waste composition
(Case 4), and an alternative storage method (Case 5). The costs for these
alternative concepts were compared to evaluate the sensitivity of these
variables. The cost data of the base case (Case 1) was also broken down to
the waste types (Types A, B, C, and D), so that the cost for each waste type
subject to different processes could be compared.
The most detailed cost estimation effort was made for the base case.
The base case capital costs were estimated from the lists and specifications
of equipment, buildings, and mine rehabilitation requirements. The lists of
these items, their specifications and their costs are summarized in Appen-
dices C and D. The base case operating costs were estimated from a detailed
list of labor (Appendix E) and material requirements.
All costs presented in this report are based on first quarter 1977
102
-------
prices and wages. Three versions of the same cost data are presented in
this report. The most detailed cost estimates are presented in Appendices
C and D. The intermediate summaries of the capital cost and the operating
cost are included in this section (Tables 13, 14, and 15), and the final
summaries of the total plant costs (Tables 1, 2, 3, and 4) appear in Section
2.
CAPITAL COST
The capital cost (Table 13) includes the construction cost and the cost
of the mine (land, mine, and existing facilities). The construction cost
includes:
Direct field cost
Indirect field cost
Allowance during construction
Engineering service cost
Contingency
Only the direct field cost was estimated in detail based on the plant
design. The other construction costs were estimated by relating them to
the direct field cost based on statistical information of similar projects.
Direct Field Cost
The direct field cost was categorized into seven groups;
Equipment
Site development, buildings, and civil structures
Plant utilities
Piping, electrical, and instrumentation
Mine rehabilitation
New mine facility ventilation system
A detailed breakdown of each category is included in Appendices C and D.
For each item, the installed unit cost was estimated. The cost information
was obtained from informal vendor contacts as well as extrapolation of pub-
lished data and Bechtel historical information.
Some of these costs were obtained as installed unit costs, while others
were estimated from the costs of equipment, estimated bulk material, con-
struction labor, and subcontracts.
Equipment Cost --
All mechanical equipment involved in receiving and unloading of the
wastes, surface transfer, and, storage, treatment, containerization, trans-
port into the mine and storage cells, and final emplacement of the wastes
are included in this category.
in
The cost of equipment was estimated from the conceptual design presented
Section 4. Lists of equipment, specifications, and costs are summarized
103
-------
TABLE 13. CAPITAL COST ESTIMATE OF FIVE ALTERNATIVE CASES
Item
Base Case
Case 1 Case 2
Case 3 Case 4 Case 5
WASTE QUANTITY
Received Waste, Tons/Year
Stored Waste, Tons/Year
SlOOO's JlOOO's SlOOO's SlOOO's SlOOO's
375,000 562,500
205,500 309,000
56,250 180,000 180,000
30,900 126,000 126,000
EXISTING MINE:
'Land & Existing Facility*
30,000 30,000
30,000 30,000 30,000
NEW SURFACE FACILITY:
SITE DEVELOPMENT & BUILDINGS
Site Preparation & Grading
Receiving 4 Unloading Buildings
Waste Storage Buildings
Process Buildings
Plant Wastewater Treatment Buildings
Service Buildings
PLANT UTILITY
PROCESS MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT
Receiving & Unloading Equipment
Storage & Treatment Equipment
Containerization Equipment
Plant Wastewater Treatment Equipment
Laboratory & Monitoring Equipment
360
610
750
2,996
180
1.430
6,326
S60
1,225
4,808
1,945
4,250
200
406
717
1.085
4,014
229
1,824
8,275
714
1,270
6,852
2,092
5,021
200
130
203
150
1,140
119
710
2,452
370
454
2,592
973
1,845
200
234
494
375
1,877
119
944
4,043
370
972
1,786
1,484
1,845
200
234
382
375
1,156
119
944
3,210
370
972
2,023
96
1,845
200
12,428 15,435
6,064
6,287 5,136
PROCESS PIPING, ELECTRICAL & INSTRUMENTATION
Piping @ 30% of Mechanical Equipment
Electrical @ 25% of Mechanical Equipment
Instrumentation @ 15% of Mechanical Equipment
3,728
3,107
1,864
4,630
3,859
2,314
8,699 11,083
1,819
1,516
910
4.245
1,886
1,572
943
4,401
1,541
1,284
770
3,595
DIRECT FIELD COST. SURFACE FACILITY
NEW SUBSURFACE FACILITY:
H1NE REHABILITATION
Production Shaft Rehabilitation
Loading & Unloading Station
Man Shaft Rehabilitation
Underground Staging
Haulway Rehabilitation
Storage Cell Preparation
28,013 35,905
1.250
1,749
1,250
1,794
13,131 15,101 12,311
1.250
1,614
1,250 1,250
36
256
52
63
92
36
256
52
63
•137
36
256
32
17
23
36
256
52
63
60
36
256
32
17
23
1,717 1,614
continued
104
-------
TABLE 13. (Continued)
Base Case
Item Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4 Case 5
VENTILATION SYSTEM
New Ventilation Shaft
Ventilation System - Airways & Equipment
UNDERGROUND SERVICE BUILDINGS
UNDERGROUND EQUIPMENT
Loading, Hoisting & Unloading Equipment
Hauling Equipment
Storage Equipment
Ventilation Equipment
Miscellaneous Underground Equipment
DIRECT FIELD COST, SUBSURFACE FACILITY
TOTAL DIRECT FIELD COST
TOTAL INDIRECT FIELD COST
e SOX of Construction Labor (&% of Total
Direct Field Cost)
TOTAL FIELD COST
11000's
2,750
1.687
4,437
231
351
183
1,031
82
165
1,812
8.229
36,242
2,175
38,417
SlOOO's
2,750
1 .667
4.437
231
351
236
1,495
82
190
2.354
8,816
44,721
2,684
47,405
. $100TE
2,750
8
2.758
111
188
no
764
47
99
1.208
5,691
18,822
1,129
19,951
$1000's
2.750
1,687
4.437
231
351
183
1,031
82
165
1,812
8,197
23,298
1,398
24,696
SlOOO's
2,750
1,687
4.437
231
158
54
1,325
82
159
1,778
8,060
20,371
1,222
21,593
ALLOWANCE DURING CONSTRUCTION-
e IX of TFC + $500,000 884 974 699 747 716
ENGINEERING SERVICE
9 15X of TFC 5,763 7,111 2,993 3,704 3,239
CONTINGENCY
9 25X of TFC 9.604 11,851 4,988 6,174 5,398
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST 54,668 67,341 28,631 35,321 30,946
WORKING CAPITAL • . „ 3 ogs
9 lOX of TCC 5«*67 6'734 Z*80J JfSJ '
TOTAL INVESTMENT 90,135 104,075 61,494 68,853 64,041
NOTE: Number of significant figures shown in the table may
exceed those justified by accuracy of the estimate.
* See page 107
105
-------
in Appendix C. The cost information for these items was obtained from
reports of parametric studies, potential supplier's quotes, and Bechtel cost
information files. Some of the equipment costs were obtained as package
system costs. These include the liquid waste incineration system, the vapor-
recompression evaporation system, and the drum containerization system.
Site Preparation, Building, and Civil Structure Cost --
Site preparation includes site clearing, grading, and new railroad
tracks. Buildings and civil structures include 10 receiving and unloading
stations, seven service buildings, five process and waste storage buildings,
and nine underground service buildings. The construction costs for these
items were estimated from the required bulk material, labor, subcontract,
and permanent equipment. Specification for these work items and their costs
are shown in Appendix D. These costs are summarized in Table 13.
Plant Utility Cost --
The plant utilities include the steam generating boiler, cooling tower,
electric power supply and lighting system, storm and sewage drainage systems,
yard safety, and the compressed air system. The costs of these items, except
the boiler and cooling tower, were estimated from the required bulk material,
labor, subcontract, and permanent equipment. The costs of the boiler and
cooling tower were obtained as package unit costs.
Piping, Electrical, and Instrumentation Cost --
All pipings, electrical works, and the instrumentation necessary for the
operation of surface process equipment are included in this category. Based
on historical information of similar type and size projects, the costs of
piping, electrical, and instrumentation for surface facility were estimated
to be 30, 25, and 15 percent of the installed equipment cost, respectively.
For the subsurface facility, the costs of piping, electrical, and instru-
mentation were incorporated into the facility costs.
Mine Rehabilitation and New Mine Facilities Cost --
Most of the existing underground mine facilities will be reused with
minor rehabilitation. These include production shaft, underground staging
area, haulways, and waste storage cells. The only new mine facility required
for the waste storage is the ventation system consisting of new 8- by 1,400-
foot shaft, ventilation fans, and ventilation raises, drifts, and stoppings.
The specifications and costs of these work items are shown in Appendix D and
summarized in Table 13.
Mine Acquisition Cost --
The cost of acquiring an operating mine can be approached from several
points of view. One basis for evaluation is facility replacement value. The
cost of the mine could be determined by the replacement value of the existing
plant, equipment, facilities, and land at today's prices. The second approach
would be in terms of an opportunity cost. The value could be determined, not
106
-------
by the existing facilities, but by the value of alternative uses for the
facility. A third approach would establish value in terms of the cost of
creating a new mine to meet the needs of the storage operation.
The approach selected for use in this study was that of facility re-
placement value. This was considered the best approach for this study because
of the availability and reliability of needed information. Actual capital
costs and investment were determined and adapted to the modified mine in
order to establish a facility replacement value ($30,000,000).
The opportunity cost approach was not pursued because of the lack of
information relating to the purchase of mines for alternative uses. It was
felt that development of this type of data was outside of the scope of the
contract. The space created in salt mining has several alternative uses
which render the space potentially valuable. These include petroleum storage,
compressed air storage for peak shaving of electric power, and warehouse
space. Presently, the federal government is negotiating with several mining
companies to acquire existing mines for use for strategic oil storage. One
mine owner has stated the cost of its mine to be $160,000,000 (Wall Street
Journal, 4/20/77). Once these negotiations have been accomplished, a
suitable opportunity cost may be available and related to the current project.
The third alternative, developing new mine costs, was not pursued.
This approach could perhaps be utilized in determining the cost of a combined
new mine and storage facility.
In this study, $30,000,000 was set as the acquisition cost of the mine
and facilities. This represents the replacement value of a mine similar to
the one described in the study. Included in this evaluation are the surface
land, surface plant, the mine shafts, and the underground facilities.
In the particular mine selected, the assumption was made that the mine
facilities would be relocated at a distance from the hazardous waste storage
facility. This would allow continuous operation of both the mine and the
storage facility. In order to achieve this, however, all the mine facilities
would have to be replaced. The salvage value of the existing surface and
plant facilities would be minimal. The relocation of the mining activity
would necessitate the development of a new mining system utilizing new
equipment. The $30,000,000 acquisition value represents the cost of re-
placing the existing facilities and does not represent the cost of developing
new facilities at a new location.
Indirect Field Cost
The indirect field costs are those construction cost items that cannot
be ascribed directly to the individual construction work item. These in-
clude temporary construction facilities, miscellaneous construction services
such as general cleanup, construction equipment rental, field overhead, and
field insurance and taxes. Based on past projects of similar type and size,
the indirect field cost was estimated as 6 percent of the total direct field
cost.
107
-------
Engineering Service Cost
The engineering service cost includes those costs for plant design,
specification, vendor-drawing review, procurement service, estimating and
scheduling services, quality assurance, and construction management. Based
on Bechtel data, the engineering service cost for this type of plant was
estimated to be 15 percent of the total field cost.
Allowance During Construction
The cost for obtaining various permits, environmental impact reports,
and public relations and education are included in this category. Public
acceptance of the project is very important. Public education must be
planned in advance of the plant construction. Public relations and educa-
tion will involve both state and local communities. The activities would
include education on the needs of the project, the safety of the project,
and the potential benefits of the project to the community and the state.
Initially, the public relations and education program will be a joint
effort of the owner and a consultant in the field, but when the plant starts
operating, a permanent staff will be hired to handle the program on a con-
tinuous basis. The cost items for the public relations and education pro-
gram are public notification, community forums, survey by questionnaires,
brochures and articles, a spokesman, and a planning staff.
Various permits from local, state, and federal governments will be re-
quired for the construction of the plant and its operation. An environmental
impact report of the project will also be required. Based on Bechtel in-
formation and experience, $200,000 was estimated as the cost of the environ-
mental impact report, and 1 percent of the total field cost was allocated
for the public relations and education program and for acquiring the
necessary permits before and during construction.
Contingency
The capital cost estimate for this study was based on the conceptual
design of the facilities. This design contains uncertainties in the effec-
tiveness of some of the selected processes, in quantity and size of some of
the selected equipment, and in their pricing. Often in a conceptual design,
a process is simplified due to the lack of detailed information, and the
cost estimate based on the conceptual design may miss the cost items that
only detailed design can reveal. The contingency includes the allowance for
these uncertainties within the design and pricing. Based on past experience
with projects of a similar type and size, the contingency for this project
was estimated to be 20 percent of the total field cost.
OPERATING COST
The operating cost was estimated from the conceptual facilities design
and its operating plan described in Section 4. The operating costs were
divided into four categories:
108
-------
• Direct Labor and Materials
— Direct operating labor
-- Chemicals, containers, and utilities
• Maintenance Labor and Materials
-- Maintenance labor
-- Maintenance materials
t Plant Overhead
-- Administrative and staff personnel
-- General supplies
• Fixed Cost
-- Taxes and insurance
-- Depreciation
-- Long-term liability insurance
The operating costs for all five alternative cases are summarized in
Table 14. The base case operating cost was divided into the costs for the
four waste types according to their actual process requirements. The
allocation of the base case operating cost to the four waste types is shown
in Table 15. The cost allocation to the four waste types compares relative
operating costs of the different wastes received at the plant. The cost
allocation does not imply that a waste storage plant receiving only a part
of the base case waste can operate at the corresponding cost. The operating
cost per ton shown in Tables 14 and 15 does not include the cost of capital
(interest charge on the capital). The unit cost (cost per ton), which in-
cludes the cost of capital, is presented in Section 6.
All plant personnel, except administrative and staff personnel, were
assumed to be union members. Their annual salaries are based on hourly
wages and 2,400 working hours per year plus 8 percent for overtime compen-
sation and 30 percent for the payroll additive. The labor costs used in
this study were based on the actual union labor costs of the selected mine.
All materials and utility costs are the costs of those delivered to the
selected mine site.
Direct Labor and Materials
Direct Labor Cost --
For every step of the waste pathway shown in the material flow charts
(Figures 8 through 12), operating manpower requirements, including numbers
and types of personnel, were estimated. In general, operating personnel
are classified into labor (utilityman), operator (equipment operator), and
foreman (supervisor). The detailed labor requirement and costs are shown in
Appendix E. The summary of the labor cost for all five cases is shown in
Table 14.
Chemicals, Containers, and Utility Costs •?-
Chemical usage is based on the waste composition and the treatment
requirement shown in Tables 7 and 9, respectively. Stabilization additive
will be used only in Case 5 and its usage is discussed in Section 4. Unit
costs of these chemicals (cost per ton) delivered to the plant site and their
109
-------
annual costs are shown in Tables 14 and 15.
Container costs were based on $22 per drum (55-gallon, open top, epoxy-
lined, 16 gauge steel drum) delivered to the plant site. Drum usage is
based on 625 pounds of the waste per drum. Heavy duty pallets will be
delivered to the plant at $6 each. Their usage is based on one pallet for
four drums.
Based on the approximate horsepower (3,500 HP for the base case) of
involved equipment and their usage, the total electric power requirement
was estimated. Similarly, usages of diesel fuel (1,770,000 gallons per year)
and gasoline (20,000 gallons per year) were estimated. Potable water usage
(3,000,000 gallons per year) was estimated at 35 gallons per person per day.
All utility costs were based on current prices at the selected mine site.
Maintenance Labor and Material Cost
Maintenance labor for the five alternative cases was estimated in the
same manner as that for the direct operating personnel. Categories, numbers
in each category, and their annual costs are shown in Appendix E. Total
maintenance labor costs are shown in Tables 14 and 15.
Maintenance materials include equipment replacement and maintenance,
and repair supplies, including lubricating oils, replacement parts, and
other supplies used in conjunction with repair work. Maintenance material
costs were approximated by relating them to the total equipment costs. Due
to difficulty of determining service life of the equipment, higher than
normal equipment maintenance cost was used as an alternative to the main-
tenance material plus the investment in the replacement facility. The cost
of maintenance materials for the surface equipment including replacement
facility were approximated to be 15 percent of the total surface equipment
cost, while the maintenance material cost for the underground equipment was
approximated to be 20 percent of the total underground equipment cost,
Plant Overhead
The plant overhead includes the cost of administrative and staff per-
sonnel and the cost of general supplies. Numbers and types of administrative
and staff personnel required for the base case operation were estimated on
the assumption that the waste storage plant is a combination of a chemical
manufacturing plant and a salt mine. Composition of the administrative and
staff personnel and their costs are shown in Appendix E. Total administra-
tive and staff personnel costs are shown in Tables 14 and 15.
General supplies include office supplies, medical supplies, laboratory
supplies, and other supplies used in normal operation of the plant, excepting
the direct materials and maintenance materials. The cost of general supplies
was approximated to be 5 percent of the total labor cost.
Fixed Cost
The fixed cost includes property taxes and insurance, depreciation, and
110
-------
TA.BLE 14. OPERATING COST ESTIMATE OF FIVE ALTERNATIVE CASES
Item
WASTE QUANTITY
Received Waste, Tons/Yr
Stored Waste, Tons/Yr
DIRECT MATERIALS & LABOR
RAW MATERIALS 4 UTILITIES
SURFACE OPERATION:
CHEMICALS
Sulfur Dioxide (liquid, $185/Ton)
Chlorine (liquid, S210/Ton)
Lime (90%, $55/Ton)
Caustic Soda (50% sol., $105/Ton)
Ferric Chloride (352 sol., $52.5/Ton)
Sulfuric Acid (782 sol.. $54/Ton)
Stabilization Additive ($45/Ton)
DRUMS & PALLETS:
Drums (55 gallon epoxy lined, $22 ea.)
Pallets ($6 each)
UTILITIES:
Power (S0.04/KW-HR)
Fuel Oil ($0.37/gallon)
Gasoline ($0.60/gallon) ,
Water 4 Sewer Service ($1.0/10J gallon)
SUBSURFACE OPERATION
UTILITIES:
Power ($0.04/KW-HR)
Diesel Oil ($0.37/gallon)
Water & Sewer Service (Sl.0/103 gallon)
DIRECT LABOR
SURFACE OPERATION:
Waste Receiving 4 Unloading
Waste Treatment
Containerlzation 4 Staging
Plant Wastewater Treatment
SUBSURFACE OPERATION:
Loading, Hoisting & Unloading
Hauling
Storage
Storage Cell Preparation
Stabilization (Case 5 only)
TOTAL DIRECT LABOR
Base Case
Case 1
$1000's
375,000
205,500
133.2
571.2
330.0
456.8
23.6
10.8
0
1,525.6
12,540
855
13,395
760
655
12
3
V;430
272.4
203.4
a,
476.6
16,827.2
639.1
498.3
1,048.3
369.4
2,555.0
388.8
169.2
160.6
421.2
1,139.8
3.694.8
continued
Case 2
Case 3
SlOOO's $1000's
562,500 56,250
309,000 30,900
199.8 20.0
856.8 85.7
495.0 49.5
685.2 68.5
35.5 3.6
24.3 2.4
0 0
2,296.6
18,810
1,283
20,093
1,120-
951 .
16
4
2,091
328
304
1.2
633.2
25.113.0
913.4
593.3
1.260.7
369.4
3,136.8
533.2
253.8
240.8
645.1
1,722.9
4,859.7
229.7
1,881
128
2,009
152
100
3
.8
255.8
56
40
.3
96.3
2.590.3
260.9
148.3
311.0
175.0
895.2
144.0
46.1
93.6
144.0
427.7
1,322.9
Case 4
Case 5
SlOOO's SlOOO's
180,000 180,000
126.000 126,000
0 0
0 0
42.9 42.9
0 0
11.8 11.8
0 0
0 220.0
54.7
7,700
525
8,225
320
163
6
1.6
490.6
272
160
.7
432.7
9.203.0
382.6
221.0
766.1
175.0
1.544.7
288.0
169.2
160.6
370.8
988.6
2.533.3
274.7
0
0
0
360
163
6
1.6
530.6
192
50
.7
242.7
1,042.0
382.6
375.1
0
175.0
932.7
144.0
46.1
72.7
97.9
365.0
725.7
1,658.4
in
-------
TABLE 14. (continued)
Item «•*« "se
Case 1
MAINTENANCE
LABOR
SURFACE OPERATION:
SUBSURFACE OPERATION:
MATERIAL 1
SURFACE OPERATION (915% of Surface Equipment^
SUBSURFACE OPERATION (@ 20% of Underground
Equipment)
3
OVERHEAD
5,
ADMINISTRATIVE & STAFF PERSONNEL
SURFACE OPERATION: 1
SUBSURFACE OPERATION:
1
GENERAL SUPPLIES
SURFACE OPERATION: (0 5% of Labor)
SUBSURFACE OPERATION (0 5% of Labor)
SlOOO's
685.9
879.1
,565.0
,253
390
,643
208
,288.3
197.7
,486.0
226
111
337
Case 'i
SlOOO's
841.9
1,065.6
1,907.5
4.145
471
4,616
6,523.5
1,592.0
296.6
1,888.6
279
154
433
Case 3
$1000's
318.2
159.8
478.0
1,602
241
1,843
2,321
485.0
49.4
534.4
85
32
117
Case 4
SlOOO's
526.1
852.5
1,378.6
1.659
362
2,021
3,399.6
828.0
197.8
1,025.8
145
102
247
Case 5
SlOOO's
526.1
388.1
914.2
1,365
356
1 ,721
2,635.2
583.0
152.2
735.2
102
63
165
FIXED COST
,y, 1,823 2,321.6 651.4 1,272.8 900.2
TAXES AND INSURANCE^'
9 2% of Plant Cost and $1.10 per ton for
Long Term Liability Insurance 2,215 2,700 1,292 1,575 1,479
OPERATING COST '4*
(4)
Cost Per Ton Received ,S/Ton
Cost Per Ton Stored'4' .S/Ton
29,769
79.3
144.7
41 ,520
74
134
8,178
145
265
17,984
100
143
7,720
43
61
NOTE: (1) Number of significant figures shown in this table may exceed those justified
by accuracy of the estimate.
(2) Labor costs include 30% payroll additive and 8% overtime compensation.
(3) Insurance includes $1.10 per ton (0.5C/gallon) of received waste for Long
Term Liability and other insurances.
(4) Cost of Capital and depreciation is not included.
112
-------
TABLE 15. OPERATING COST ESTIMATE OF BASE CASE AND ITS
TYPES A. B. C, AND D HASTES
ALLOCATION TO
Item
WASTE QUANTITY:
Received Waste, Tons/Yr
Stored Waste, Tons/Yr
DIRECT MATERIALS & LABOR
RAW MATERIALS i UTILITIES
SURFACE OPERATION
CHEMICALS:
Sulfur Dioxide, (liquid, $1S5/ton)
Chlorine, (liquid, $21 O/ ton)
Lime, (90%, S55/ton
Caustic Soda, (50% sol., 5105/ton)
Ferric Chloride, (35% sol., $52.5/ton)
Sulfuric Acid, (78J sol.. S54/ton)
Stabilization Additive, ($45/ton)
DRUMS & PALLETS:
Drums, (55 gallon, epoxy lined, $22 each)
Pallets. ($6 each)
UTILITIES:
Power, (S0.04/KWH)
Fuel Oil, ($0.37/gallon)
Gasoline, ($0.60/gallon)
Water & Sewer Service ($1.0/103 gallon)
SUBSURFACE OPERATION:
UTILITIES:
Power, ($0.04/KUH)
Diesel Oil, ($0.37/gallon)
Hater & Sewer Service, ($1.0/103 gallon)
DIRECT LABOR (2)
SURFACE OPERATION:
Waste Receiving & Unloading
Waste Treatment
Containerization 4 Staging
Plant Wastewater Treatment
SUBSURFACE OPERATION:
Loading, Hoisting & Unloading
Hauling
Storage
Storage Cell Preparation
Stabilization (Case 5 Only)
TOTAL DIRECT LABOR
BASF CASE '(CASE n
Total
$1000's
375,000
205,500
133.2
571.2
330.0
456.8
23.6
10.8
0
l',525.6
12,540
855
13.395
760
655
12
3
1,430
272.4
203.4
.8
476.6
lfr.827.2
639.1
498.2
1.048.3
369.4
2.555.0
338.8
169.1
160.7
421.2
0
1.139.8
3,594.3
!*£e_A
$1000's
180.000
64,500
133.2
571.2
287.1
456.8
11.8
10.8
0
1,470.9
4,620
314
4,934
508
492 •
5.8
1.4
1,007.2
79.7
59.5
.2
139.4
7.551.5
261.6
303.8
359.4
240.1
1.1 64 ..9
113.7
49.5
47.0
123.2
0
333.4
1.498.3
Type B
$1000 's
120,000
66,000
0
0
42.9
0
11.8
0
0
54.7
4,708
322
5,032
216
163
3.8
1.0
383.8
81.5
60.9
.3
142.7
5,611.2
223.2
194.4
359.4
99.7
876.7
116.4
50.6
48.1
126.1
0
341.2
1.217.9
Type C
Type 0
SlOOO's $iOOO's
60,000 15,000
60,000 15,000
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0
3.212
219
3,431
28
0
1.9
.4
30.3
74.1
55.3
.2
129.6
3,590.9
91.6
0
291.0
22.2
404.8
105.8
46.0
43.7
114.6
0
310.1
714.9
0
0
0
0
8
0
.5
.2
8.7
37.1
27.7
.1
64.9
73.6
62.7
0
38.5
7.4
108.6
52.9
23.0
21.9
57.3
0
155.1
263.7
continued
113
-------
TABLE 15 (continued)
Item BASE CASE (CASE 1)
Total Type A Type B, Type C Type D
$1000's $1000's $1000's SlOOO's $1000's
MAINTENANCE
LABOR
SURFACE OPERATION: 686.0 316.6 211.0 105.6 52.8
SUBSURFACE OPERATION: 879.0 257.1 263.1 239.2 119-7
1,565.0 573.7 474.1 344.8 172.4
MATERIAL
SURFACE OPERATION:(15% of Surface Equipment)3.253 1,745 1,074 396 38
SUBSURFACE OPERATION: (202 of Und. Equip.) 390 114 117 106 53
3,643 1,859 1,191 - 502 91
°VERHEAD 5,208 2,432.7 1,665.1 846.8 263.4
ADMINISTRATIVE & STAFF PERSONNEL
1,288.3
197.7
1,486.0
226
m
337
594.6
57.8
652.4
104
33
137
396.4
59.2
455.6
70
33
103
198.3
53.8
252.1
35
30
65
99.0
26.9
125.9
17
15
32
SURFACE OPERATION:
SUBSURFACE OPERATION:
GENERAL SUPPLIES
SURFACE OPERATION:
SUBSURFACE OPERATION:
1,823 789.4 558.6 317.1 157.9
FIXED COST
TAXES i INSURANCE13^
(9 2X of plant cost and $1.10 per ton for
Long Term Liability Insurance) 2,215 933 696 428 158
OPERATING COST ^'
Cost Per Ton Received^ ',$/Ton
Cost Per Ton Stored^4', $/Ton
29,769
79.4
144.9
13,205
73.4
204.7
9,749
81.2
147.7
5,898
98.3
98.3
917
61.1
61.1
NOTE: (1) Number of significant figures shown in this table may exceed those justified
by accuracy of the estimate.
(2) Labor rate includes 30? payroll additive (fringe benefits) and 8? overtime compen-
sation.
(3) Insurance includes $1.10 per ton (0.54/gallon) of received waste for Long Term
Liability and other insurance.
(4) Cost of capital and depreciation is not Included.
114
-------
long-term liability insurance.
Property Taxes and Insurance —
Property taxes and plant insurance were approximated to be 2 percent of
the plant cost. This includes property taxes paid to city, school district,
and state, and property insurances against loss or disablement due to fire,
flood, and explosion. The long-term liability insurance is handled separately
and discussed below.
Depreciation --
The simple straight line depreciation method was used to compute the
cost of plant depreciation; that is, annual depreciation is equal to the
total depreciation value divided by the plant service life. The plant
service life is determined based on presently available mine space and waste
storage rates. The maximum plant service life was assumed to be 40 years.
The plant service lives for Cases 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 are 30, 20, 40, 40 and
40 years, respectively, In actual operation, all cases may have much longer
service life because concurrent salt mining activity can produce more new
mined space than that used by the waste storage.
The depreciable value is the total plant cost minus the salvageable
value at the end of the plant service life. The land and some portion of
the surface facilities and equipment will be salvageable at the end of the
plant service life. However, at the end of service, the facility will have
to be decommissioned. This may include removing some of the surface facili-
ties, construction of physical barriers in the mine to prevent potential
water intrusion, and plugging up all shaft holes. It is impossible to es-
timate the salvageable value or the decommissioning cost with any accuracy
at the present time. For simplicity, it was assumed that all salvageable
values will be used in decommissioning the plant at the end of its service
life. This will result in depreciating plant cost over the plant life.
Long-Term Liability Insurance --
The problems of perpetual or long-term care and liability of hazardous
waste management facilities are of vital concern to the public. Some of the
considerations related to implementing long-term care and liability pro-
visions are:
• Operation of plant by reliable owner
• Final closing and subsequent perpetual monitoring
and maintenance of the storage facility
• Financial capability of the owner in the
assessment of possible liability
With respect to the perpetual monitoring and maintenance after the mine
is filled to capacity, it was assumed that the underground facility will
be permanently decommissioned including construction of impermeable barriers
and sealing the shaft openings so that monitoring and maintenance will not
be required. The cost for the decommissioning will be paid out of the sal-
115
-------
vage value. Accordingly, it is not anticipated that a combined surety bond
and perpetual care fee will be required.
With respect to the liability insurance problem, it was assumed that the
owner will have liability insurance against a hazardous waste pollution in-
cident in addition to the standard public liability protection. Currently,
numerous unresolved questions concerning financial liability, insurability,
government indemnification, and standards must be resolved before a univer-
sally acceptable methodology can be developed to determine an appropriate
premium for such liability insurance. For this study, it was assumed that
long-term liability insurance for the hazardous waste storage operation will
be $1.10 per ton of received waste (0.5
-------
Grouting of the two existing shafts would be required because of the
condition of the overlying beds. Many other bedded salt deposits would
require similar grouting. There are, however, some operations in which this
would not be necessary. The dollar figures (production shaft grouting --
$1,000,000; and service shaft grouting — $225,000) are costs for the selec-
ted mine and would not necessarily be the same for other operations. They
would vary depending upon the depth to the grout zone and the specific prob-
lems associated with the water inflow.
Storage cell preparation will involve the removal of waste salt from
the proposed storage cells. Many salt mines store waste salt underground
in the abandoned mine workings. The amount of salt and the difficulty in
removing it will vary from mine to mine. This will be reflected in both the
capital costs in terms of initial cell preparation and in the annual operating
cost, since salt will be removed on a continual basis during the life of the
operation. The disposal of waste salt may add significantly to the under-
ground operating costs.
In the selected mine, roof bolting is proposed throughout the storage
area. This is an added safety precaution. The majority of the mine has a
stable roof and has not presented any problem during mining. The degree
of roof support required wil\ vary from mine to mine and will again be re-
flected in the capital cost and the operating cost. It is expected, however,
that most bedded salt deposit mines would utilize roof bolting as an added
precaution.
The ventilation system used in the selected mine will involve a two-
level system. Fresh air will be taken in a new ventilation shaft located in
the area of the current mining activity. This air will be split, one portion
going to the mining operation, and the other portion going to the hazardous
waste storage facility. Air that enters each of the storage zones at the mine
level will be removed through ventilation raises to a level 100 feet above
the storage operation. This air will then be removed to the production
shaft, where it will be exhausted to the surface. This system will require
the development of a substantial amount of ventilation drifts as well as
six ventilation raises. The cost of this system was approximately
$1,662,000 and was necessitated by the mine plan. It was not possible to
route air that was passed through the storage cells to the exhaust shaft
without passing through areas in which men would be working. The mine plan
of other mines will vary and this particular type of system may not be
necessary.
In comparison with other mines of bedded salt, the capital costs pre-
sented in this study can be taken as representative of the costs that would
be incurred to convert an existing mine of bedded salt to a storage facility.
The operating costs for different mines would be similar. The specific
differences that might occur are the cost of the ventilation shaft, the cost
of grouting the existing shafts, and the cost of developing a new ventilation
level for the mine.
The primary difference between a hazardous waste storage facility loca-
ted in a bedded salt deposit and one located in a salt dome would be in the
117
-------
size of the underground openings. Room heights in dome salt may be as high
as 150 feet. This height would pose difficult problems for the storage of
waste utilizing methods proposed in this study. For this reason, a direct
comparison between the cost of waste disposal in a salt dome, as opposed to
a bedded salt deposit, would not be accurate. A different system would have
to be developed to utilize openings of such large scale.
The costs developed in this study would be similar for other room and
pillar mines, regardless of the type of the deposit. Assuming that the
deposit met the necessary requirements for isolation from water and stability,
the cost differences would be primarily a function of the specific site and
less dependent on the characteristics of the mined resource. If, for example,
a suitable limestone mine was located, the cost of the storage operation
would be similar to that of the study mine.
In general, then, the cost developed in this study can be taken as
representative of the costs of establishing a hazardous waste storage
facility in an existing mine. The costs would be valid for room and pillar
mines of dimensions and depth similar to the example study. A storage
facility located in a thinner seam would undoubtedly involve higher operating
costs. This would be due primarily to the increased haulage distances
necessary to handle the same volume of waste. The development of a storage
facility in a seam or an opening of larger dimensions would also probably
involve higher operating costs. This would be due primarily to the additional
costs associated with stacking and stabilizing containerized waste at greater
heights.
118
-------
Section 6
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
The purpose of this section is to present the results of an economic
analysis of five hazardous waste storage alternatives (Cases 1 through 5)
for which capital investment and operating cost are presented in Section 5.
The objective of the analysis is to estimate the unit cost, cost per ton
(as received) to receive, treat, containerize (all but Case 5), and store
the hazardous waste. The sensitivity of the unit cost to some of the plant
variables is also determined.
The unit costs were estimated using the discounted cash flow net present
value methodology. For each of the five cases, the unit costs were estimated
for two different plant ownership possibilities, namely private versus public:
1. The hazardous waste facility is privately owned, has
a 10 percent return on investment, 100% equity, and
pays 48 percent income tax.
2. The hazardous waste facility is government owned, has
6 percent cost of capital, and pays no income tax.
Also assumed for the economic analysis were the following:
• The plant will have a 300 stream-day operating year.
• The plant will process only 60 percent of its designed
capacity in the first year; accordingly, only 60 percent
of the chemicals, drums and pallets, utilities, and plant
maintenance budget will be utilized in the first year.
A summary of the economic analysis of the five cases is presented in
Table 16. As shown in the table, the unit cost for each case is presented
for both the privately owned facility and for the government owned facility.
All unit costs shown in Table 16 are the waste management fee based per ton
of received waste, not per ton of stored waste. Tables 17 through 26
present the pro forma discounted cash flow analysis for the privately owned
facility (Tables 17 through 21) and for the government owned facility (Tables
22 through 26).
To ascertain the relative importance of the size of the storage plant,
the return on investment, and the cost of the mine on the estimated unit
costs, sensitivity analyses were performed on the base case unit cost as a
function on these parameters. It is important to emphasize that the analysis
utilized order-of-magnitude cost estimates, and, therefore, the unit costs
119
-------
IND
o
TABLE 16. SUMMARY OF WASTE MANAGEMENT FEE
(UNIT COST PER TON, 1977 DOLLARS)
Capital Cost ($ 1,000's)
Tons Received per Year
Economic Life (years)
Waste Management Fee in Dollars
per Ton Received
• Privately Owned with 10%
Return on Inventment
• Government Owned with 6%
Case 1
90,135
375,000
30
130.65
101.40
Case 2
104,075
562,500
20
116.69
94.94
Case 3
61 ,494
56,100
40
376.71
232.77
Case 4
68,853
180,000
40
176.06
131.02
Case 5
64,041
180,000
40
118.15
71.16
Cost of Capital
-------
TABLE 17. PRO FORMA DISCOUNTED CASH FLOW STATEMENT FOR CASE 1, PRIVATELY OWNED
PO
F.ETUPN ON INVESTMENT 10.00%
CAPITAL INVESTMENT:
HII.'E
PROCESS PLANT
TOTAL INVESTMENT
WORKING CAPITAL
KET CAPITAL INVESTMENT
REVENUE:
V»ASTL MANAGEMENT FEE (S130.65
TOTAL REVENUE
OPERATING COSTS:
DIRECT LAPOP
C'lC.-'.ICALS S CATALYSTS
DP.L"-'S (. PALLETS
UTILITIES
AD".IN & GENERAL
PLAM' SMUT
TAX!S 4 INSURANCE
DEPI ECIATION
TOTAL OPERATING COSTS
SET OPERATING INCOME
INCOME TAX LIABILITY t 48.00%)
NET INCOME AFTER TAX
PLUS: DEPRECIATION
CASH FP.OK OPERATIONS
NET CASH FLOW
CUMULATIVE CASH FLOW
YEARl -1
30000.0
24668.0
54668.0
0.
54668.0
PER TON)0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-54668.0
-54668.0
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT STUDY CASE 1 (375000 TPV)
(THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS)
012345
0.
30000.0
30000.0
5467.0
35467.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-35467.0
-90135.0
0
0
0
0
0
16608
16608
3695
915
8037
1144
1823
3125
2215
2822
23776
-7167
0
-7167
2822
-4345
-4345
-94480
.
.
•
.7
.7
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.3
.3
.5
.5
.3
.3
.3
.3
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
48993.9
48993.9
3695.0
1525.6
13395.0
1906.6
1823. 0
5208.U
2215.0
2822.3
32590.5
16403.4
4433.2
1197U.2
2d22.3
14792.5
14792.5
-79687.8
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
48993.9
48993.9
3695.0
1525.6
13395.0
1906.6
1823.0
5208.0
2215.0
2822.3
3259U.5
16403.4
7873.7
8529.8
2822.3
11J52.1
11352.1
-G8335.7
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
48993.9
48993.9
3695.0
1525.6
13395.0
1906.6
1823.0
5208.0
2215.0
2822.3
3259U.5
164U3.4
7873.7
8529.8
2822.3
11352.1
11352.1
-56983.7
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
48993.9
48993.9
3695.0
1525.6
13395.0
1906.6
1823.0
52U8.0
2215.0
2822.3
32590.5
16403.4
7873.7-
8529.8
2822.3
11352.1
11352.1
-45631.6
20
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
43993.9
48993.9
3695.0
1525.6
13395.0
1906.6
1823.0
5203.0
2215.0
2822.3
32590.5
16403.4
7873.7
8529.8
2822.3
11352.1
11352.1
124649.3
30
0.
0:
0.
0.
0.
48993.9
48993.9
3695.0
1525.6
13395.0
1906.6
1823.0
5208.0
2215.0
2t!22.3
32590.5
16403.4
7873.7
8529.8
2822.3
11352.1
11352.1
233169.8
TOTAL
30000.0
54668.0
84668.0
5467.0
90135.0
1437432.2
1437432.2
1108SO.O
45157.4
396492.0
56435.4
5469U.O
154157.Q
66450.0
84668.0
968899 .8
468532.4
224895.6
243o36.8
84663.0
328304.8
238169.8
0.
-------
TABLE 18. PRO FORMA DISCOUNTED CASH FLOW STATEMENT FOR CASE 2, PRIVATELY OWNED
ro
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT
(THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS)
YEAR: -1012
RETURN ON INVESTMENT 10.00%
CAPITAL INVESTMENT:
MINE
PROCESS PLANT
TOTAL INVESTMENT
WORKING CAPITAL
NET CAPITAL INVESTMENT
REVENUE:
WASTE MANAGEMENT FEE ($116.69
TOTAL REVENUE
OPERATING COSTS:
DIRECT LABOR
CHEMICALS & CATALYSTS
DRUMS S. PALLETS
UTILITI ES
ADMIN Si GENERAL
PLANT MAINT
TAXtS S. INSURANCE
DEPRECIATION
TOTAL OPERATING COSTS
NET OPERATING INCOME
INCOME TAX LIABILITY ( 48.004)
NET INCOME AFTER TAX
PLUS: DEPRECIATION
CASH FROM OPERATIONS
NET CASH FLOW
CUMULATIVE CASH FLOW
30000.0
33341.0
63341.0
0.
63341.0
PER TON).
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-63341.0
-63341.0
0.
34000.0
34000.0
6734.0
40734.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-40734.0
-104075.0
0
0
0
0
0
19714
19714
4860
1378
12056
1634
2320
3914
2700
4867
33729
-14014
0
-14014
4867
-9147
-9147
-113222
.
.
.
.8
.8
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.2
.2
.0
.2
.2
.2
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
65639.5
65639.5
4860.0
2297.0
20093.0
2724 .0
2322.0
6524.0
2700.0
4867.0
46387.0
19252.4
2514.4
16738.1
4867.0
21605.1
21605.1
-91617.0
STUDY
3
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
65639.5
65639.5
4860.0
2297.0
20093.0
2724.0
2322.0
6524 .0
2700.0
4867.0
46387.0
19252.4
9241.2
10011.3
4867.0
1487B.3
14878.3
-76738.7
CASE 2 (562500 TPY)
4 5
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
65639.5
65639.5
4860.0
2297.0
20093.0
2724.0
2322.0
6524.0
2700.0
4867.0
46387.0
19252.4
9241.2
10011.3
4867.0
14878.3
14878.3
-61860.4
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
65639.5
65639.5
4860.0
2297.0
20093.0
2724.0
2322.0
6524.0
2700.0
4867.0
46387.0
19252.4
9241.2
10011.3
4867.0
14878.3
14B78.3
-46982.1
10
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
65639.5
65639.5
4860.0
2297.0
20093.0
2724 .0
2322.0
6524.0
2700 .0
4867.0
46387.0
19252.4
9241.2
10011.3
4867.0
1-4878.3
14878.3
27409.5
20
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
65639.5
65639.5
4360.0
2297.0
20093.0
2724.0
2322.0
6524.0
2700.0
4867.0
46367.0
19252.4
9241.2
1001] .3
4867.0
14878.3
14878.3
176192.7
TOTAL
30COO.O
67341 .0
97341.0
6734.0
104075.0
1266865.1
1266865.1
97200.0
45021.0
393823.0
53390.0
46438.0
127870.0
54000.0
97341.0
915033.0
351782.1
168855.4
182926.7
97341.0
280267.7
176192.7
0.
-------
TABLE 19. PRO FORMA DISCOUNTED CASH FLOW STATEMENT FOR CASE 3, PRIVATELY OWNED
ro
CO
RETURN ON INVESTMENT 10.00%
CAPITAL INVESTMENT:
MINE
PROCESS PLANT
TOTAL INVESTMENT
WORKING CAPITAL
NET CAPITAL INVESTMENT
REVENUE:
WASTE MANAGEMENT FEE ($376.71
TOTAL REVENUE
OPERATING COSTS:
DIRECT LABOR
CHEMIC7.LS & CATALYSTS
DRUMS & PALLETS
UTILITIES
ADMIN t, GENERAL
PLANT MAINT
TAXES & -INSURANCE
DEPRECIATION
TOTAL OPERATING COSTS
NET OPERATING INCOME
INCOME TAX LIABILITY ( 48.00%)
NET INCOME AFTER TAX
PLUS: DEPRECIATION
CASH FROM OPERATIONS
NET CASH FLOW
CUMULATIVE CASH FLOW
YEAR: -1
30000.0
8631.0
38631.0
0.
38631.0
PER TON) 0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-38631.0
-38631.0
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT
(THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS)
012
0.
20000.0
20000.0
2863.0
22863.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-22663.0
-61494.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
3805.8
3805.8
1323.0
138.0
1205.0
211.0
651.0
1392.0
1292.0
1465.8
7677.8
-3372.0
0.
-3872.0
1465.8
-2406.2
-2406.2
-63900.2
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
21133.4
21133.4
1323.0
230.0
2009.0
352.0
651.0
2321.0
1292.0
1465.8
9643.8
11489.7
3656.5
7833.2
1465.8
9298.9
9298.9
-54601.3
STUDY CASE 3 (56100 TPY)
345
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
21133.4
21133.4
1323.0
230.0
2009.0
352.0
651.0
2321.0
1292.0
1465.8
9643.8
11489.7
5515.0
5974.6
1165.8
7440.4
7440.4
-47160.9
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
21133.4
21133.4
1323.0
230.0
2009.0
352.0
651.0
2321.0
1292.0
1465.8
9643.8
11489.7
5515.0
5974.6
1465.8
7440.4
7440.4
-39720.5
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
21133.4
21133.4
1323.0
230.0
2009.0
352.0
651.0
2321.0
1292.0
1465.8
9643.8
11489.7
5515.0
5974.6
1465.8
7440.4
7440.4
-32280.1
20
0
0
0
0
0
21133
21133
1323
230
2009
352
651
2321
1292
1465
9643
11489
5515
5974
1465
7440
7440
79325
•
.
•
.4
.4
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.8
.8
.7
.0
.6
.8
.4
.4
.9
40
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
21133.4
21133.4
1323.0
230.0
2009.0
352.0
651.0
2321.0
1292.0
1465.8
9643.8
11489.7
5515.0
5974.6
1465.8
7440.4
7440.4
223133.8
TOTAL
30COO.O
28631.0
58631.0
2863.0
61494.0
828009.6
828009.6
52920.0
9108.0
79556.0
13939.0
26040.0
91911 .0
51680.0
'58631.0
383785.0
444224.5
213227.8
230996.8
58631.0
289627.8
228133.8
0.
-------
TABLE 20. PRO FORMA DISCOUNTED CASH FLOW STATEMENT FOR CASE 4, PRIVATELY OWNED
ro
RETURN ON INVESTMENT 10.001
CAPITAL INVESTMENT!
» INE
PROCESS PLANT
TOTAL INVESTMENT
WORKING CAPITAL
NET CAPITAL INVESTMENT
REVENUE:
WASTE MANAGEMENT FEE ($179.06
TOTAL REVENUE
OPERATING COSTS:
DIRECT LABOR
CHEMICALS 4 CATALYSTS
ORUI'.S & PALLETS
UTILITIES
ADM IS 4 GENERAL
PLANT MA1NT
TAXES 4 INSURANCE
DEPRECIATION
TOTAL OPERATING COSTS
NET OPERATING INCOME
INCOME TAX LIABILITY ( 48.001)
I;ET INCOME AFTER TAX
PLUS: DEPRECIATION
CASH FROM OPERATIONS
NET CASH FLOW
CUMULATIVE CASH FLOW
YEAR: _1
30000. 0
15321. 0
45321.0
0.
45321.0
PER TON)Q.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-45321 .0
-45321 .0
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT STUDY
(THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS)
0 1 2
0.
20000.0
20000.0
3532.0
23532.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-23532.0
-6S853.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1 3050.1
13050. 1
2533.0
33.0
4935.0
554.0
1273.0
2040.0
1575.0
1633.0
14576.0
-1526.0
0.
-1526.0
1633.0
107.1
107. 1
-68745.9
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
32230.
32230.
2533.
55.
8225.
923.
1273.
3400.
1575.
1633.
19617.
12f>l 3.
5321.
7291.
1633.
8924.
8924.
-59821.
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
8
3
0
3
3
6
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
32230.
32230.
2533.
55.
8225.
923.
1273.
3400.
1575.
1633.
19617.
12613.
6054.
6558.
1633.
8191.
8191.
-51629.
3
2
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
8
0
9
9
8
CASE 4 (180000 TPY)
4 5
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
32230.2
32230.2
2533.0
55.0
8225.0
923.0
1273.0
3400.0
1575.0
1633.0
1961 7.0
12613.1
6054.3
6558.8
1633.0
8191.9
8191.9
-43437. 9
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
32230.2
32230.2
2533.0
55.0
8225.0
923.0
1273.0
3400.0
1575.0
1633.0
1961 7.0
12613.1
6054.3
6558. 8
1633.0
8191.9
8191.9
-35246.1
20
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
32230.2
32230. 2
2533.0
55.0
8225.0
923.0
1273.0
3400.0
1575.0
1633.0
19617.0
12613. 1
6054. 3
6558. 8
1633.0
8191.9
8191.9
87631 .8
40
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
32230.2
32230. 2
2533.0
55.0
8225.0
923.0
1273.0
3400.0
1575.0
1633.0
19617.0
1261 3. 1
6054.3
6558.8
1633.0
8191.9
8191.9
251468.9
TOTAL
30000.0
35321 .0
55321 .0
3532.0
68853.0
1270026.2
1270026. 2
101320.0
2178.0
325710.0
36551 .0
50920.0
134640.0
63000.0
65321 .0
779640. 0
490336. 2
2353E5.4
255000.9
65321.0
32032 1.9
251468.9
0.
-------
ro
en
TABLE 21. PRO FORMA DISCOUNTED CASH FLOW STATEMENT FOR CASE 5, PRIVATELY OWNED
PETUPM ON INVESTMENT 10.00*
CAPITAL INVESTMENT!
MI'lE
FFOCKSS PLANT
TOTAL INVFSTPF.NT
WORKING CAPITAL
NET CAPITAL INVESTMENT
F.F.VENUE:
WASTE MANAGEMENT FEE (S118.15
TOTAL REVENUE
OPERATING COSTS!
DIPfc'CT LAPOR
CHEMICALS 6 CATALYSTS
DHUr.5 S PALLETS
UTILITIFS
AD.VIi: t GFNE.RAL
PLANT V.AINT
TAXLS 6 INSURANCE
DTP! ECIATION
TOTAL OPFI'ATIHG COSTS
MET OPERATING INCOME
INCOVE TAX LIABILITY ( 48.00S)
NET INCOME AFTER TAX
PLUS: DEPRECIATION
CAS!1 FPOM OPERATIONS
NET CASH FLOW
YEAR I -1
30000.0
15000.0
45000.0
0.
450UO.O
PER TON)0.
0.
oooooooo
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-45000.0
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT STUDY
(THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS)
0123
0.
15946.0
15946.0
3095.0
19041.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-19041.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
4221.8
4221.8
1658.0
165.0
0.
464 .0
9UO.O
1591 .0
1479.0
1523.6
7770.7
-3548. 8
0.
-3543.8
1523.6
-2025.2
-2025.2
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
21267.6
21267.6
1658.0
275.0
0.
773.0
900.0
2635.0
147y.O
1523.6
9243.7
12024 .0
4u68.1
7955.9
1523.6
9479,5
9479.5
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
21267.6
21267.6
1658.0 ,
275.0
0.
773.0
900.0
2635.0
1479.0
1523.6
9243.7
12024 .0
5771.5
6252.5
1523.6
7776.1
7776.1
CASE 5 (180000 TPY)
4 5
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
21267.6
21267.6
1658.0
275.0
0.
773.0
900.0
2635.0
1479.0
1523.6
9243.7
12024.0
5771.5
6252.5
1523.6
7776.1
7776.1
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
21267.6
21267.6
1658.0
275.0
0.
773.0
900.0
2635.0
1479.0
1523.6
9243.7
12024 .0
5771.5
6252.5
1523.6
7776.1
7776.1
20
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
21267.6
21267.6
1658.0
275.0
0.
773.0
900.0
2635.0
1479.0
1523.6
9243.7
12024 .0
5771 .5
6252.5
1523.6
7776.1
7776.1
40
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
21267.6
21267.6
1658.0
275.0
0.
773.0
900.0
2635.0
1479.0
1523.6
9243.7
12024 .0
5771 .5
5252.5
1523.6
7776.1
7776.1
TOTAL
30000.0
30946.0
60946.0
3095.0
64041.0
833658.9
833658.9
66320.0
10890.0
0.
30611 .0
36000.0
104346.0
59160.0
60946.0
36B273.0
465385.9
223385.2
242000.7
60946 .0
302946.7
238905.7
CUMULATIVE CASH FLOW
-45000.0 -64041.0 -66U66.2 -56586.6 -4b810.5 -41034.4 -33258.3
83383.4 238905.7
0.
-------
TABLE 22. PRO FORMA DISCOUNTED CASH FLOW STATEMENT FOR CASE 1, GOVERNMENT OWNED
I\3
CT>
COST OF CAPITAL 6.00%
CAPITAL INVESTMENT:
MINE
PROCESS PLANT
TOTAL INVESTMENT
WORKING CAPITAL
NET CAPITAL INVESTMENT
REVENUE:
WASTE MANAGEMENT FEE ($101.40
TOTAL REVENUE
OPERATING COSTS:
DIRECT LABOR
CHEMICALS & CATALYSTS
DRUMS & PALLETS
UTILITIES
ADI11N & GENERAL
PLANT MAI NT
TAXFS & INSURANCE
DEPRECIATION
TOTAL OPERATING COSTS
NET OPERATING INCOME
INCOME TAX LIABILITY ( 0.00%)
NET INCOME AFTER TAX
PLUS: DEPRECIATION
CASH FROM OPERATIONS
NET CASH FLOW
YEAR: -1
30000.0
24668.0
54668.0
0.
54668.0
PER TONJO.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-54668.0
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT STUDY CASE 1 (375000 TPY)
(THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS)
012345
0.
30000.0
30000.0
5467.0
35467.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-35467.0
0
0
0
0
0
7764
7764
3695
915
8037
1144
1823
3125
2215
2822
23776
-16011
0
-16011
2822
-13189
-13189
.
.
.
•
.6
.6
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.3
.3
.6
.6
.3
.4
.4
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
38025.1
38025.1
3595.0
1525.6
13395.0
1906.6
1823.0
5208.0
2215.0
2822.3
32590.5
5434.6
0.
5434.6
2822.3
8256.9
8256.9
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
38025.1
38025.1
3695.0
1525.6
13395.0
1906.6
1823.0
5203.0
2215.0
2822.3
32590.5
5434.6
0.
5434.6
2822.3
8256.9
8256.9
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
38025.1
38025.1
3695.0
1525.6
13395.0
1906.6
1823.0
5208.0
2215.0
2822.3
32590.5
5434.6
0.
5434.6
2822.3
8256.9
8256.9
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
38025.1
38025.1
3695.0
1525.6
13395.0
1906.6
1823.0
5208.0
2215.0
2822.3
32590.5
5434.6
0.
5434.6
2822.3
8256.9
8256.9
20
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
38025.1
38025.1
3695.0
1525.6
13395.0
1906.6
1823.0
5208.0
2215.0
2822.3
32590.5
5434.6
0.
5434.6
2822.3
6256.9
8256.9
30
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
38025.1
33025.1
3695.0
1525.6
13395.0
1906.6
1823.0
5208.0
2215.0
2822.3
32590.5
5434.6
0.
5434.6
2822.3
8256.9
8256.9
TOTAL
30000.0
54668.0
84658.0
5467.0
90135.0
1110492.4
111C492.4
110850.0
45157.4
396492.0
56435.4
54690.0
154157.0
66450.0
84668.0
968899.8
141592.6
0.
141592.6
84663.0
226260.6
136125.6
CUMULATIVE CASH FLOW
-54668.0 -90135.0 -103324.4 -95067.5 -86610.6 -78553.7 -70296.8
53556.6 136125.6
0.
-------
TABLE 23. PRO FORMA DISCOUNTED CASH FLOW STATEMENT FOR CASE 2, GOVERNMENT OWNED
ro
—i
COST OF CAPITAL 6.00%
CAPITAL INVESTMENT:
1INE
PPOCt'SS PLANT
TOTAL INVESTMENT
WORKING CAPITAL
NET CAPITAL INVESTMENT
REVENUE:
WASTE MANAGEMENT FEE ($ 94.94
TOTAL REVENUE
OPERATING COSTS:
DIRECT LABOR
CHEMICALS & CATALYSTS
DRUMS S PALLETS
UTILITIES
ADV.IM ' TE>"=T)\L
PLA'JT ,-IAlNT
TAXES S INSURANCE
DEPRECIATION
TOTAL OPERATING COSTS
NET OPERATING INCOME
INCOME TAX LIABILITY ( 0.00%)
NET INCOME AFTER TAX
PLUS: DEPRECIATION
CASH FROM OPERATIONS
NET CASH FLOW
CUMULATIVE CASH FLOW
YEARl
30000
33341
63341
0
63341
PER TON10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-63341
-63341
HAZARDOUS WASTE
(THOUSANDS
-1 0
.0 0
.0 34000
.0 34000
6734
.0 40734
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.0 -40734
.0 -104075
0.
.0 0.
.0 0.
.0 0.
.0 0.
10617.
10617.
4860.
1378.
12056.
1634.
2320.
3914.
2700.
4867.
33729.
-23111.
0.
-23111.
4867.
-18244.
.0 -18244.
.0 -122319.
MANAGEMENT STUDY CASE 2 (562500 TPY)
OF DOLLARS)
12345
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
8
0
7
7
7
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
53403.7
53403.7
46 60.0
2297.0
20093.0
2724 .0
2322.0
6524.0
2700.0
4867.0
46387.0
7016.7
0.
7016.7
4867.0
11883.7
11883.7
-110436.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
53403.7
53403.7
4860.0
2297.0
20093.0
2724.0
2322.0
6524.0
2700.0
4867.0
46387.0
7016.7
0.
7016.7
4867.0
11883.7
11883.7
-98552.3
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
53403.7
53403.7
4860.0
2297.0
20093.0
2724.0
2322.0
6524.0
2'!00.0
4867.0
46387.0
7016-7
0.
7016.7
4867.0
11883.7
11883.7
-86668.6
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
53403.7
53403.7
4860.0
2297.0
20093.0
2724.0
2322.0
6524.0
2700.0
4867.0
46387 .0
7016.7
0.
7016.7
4867.0
11883.7
11883.7
-74784.9
10
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
53403.7
53403.7
4860.0
2297.0
20093.0
2724.0
2322.0
6524.0
2700.0
4867.0
46387.0
7016.7
0.
7016.7
4867.0
11883.7
11883.7
-15366.3
20
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
53403.7
53403.7
4860.0
2297.0
20093.0
2724.0
2322.0
6524.0
2700.0
4867.0
46387.0
7016.7
0.
7016.7
4867.0
11883.7
11883.7
103470.8
TOTAL
30000.0
67341.0
97341.0
6734.0
104Q75.Q
1025287.8
1025287.8
97200.0
45021.0
393823.0
53390.0
46438.0
127870.0
54000.0
97341.0
915083.0
110204.8
0.
110204.8
97341 .0
207545.8
103470.8
0.
-------
TABLE 24. PRO FORMA DISCOUNTED CASH FLOW STATEMENT FOR CASE 3, GOVERNMENT OWNED
ro
CO
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT STUDY
CASE 3 (56100 TPY)
(THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS)
COST OP CAPITAL 6.00%
CAPITAL INVESTMENT:
MINT
PROCESS PLANT
TOTAL INVESTMENT
WORKING CAPITAL
NET CAPITAL INVESTMENT
REVENUE:
WASTE MANAGEMENT FEE (5232.77
TOTAL REVENUE
OPERATING COSTS!
DIRECT LABOR
CHEMICALS (• CATALYSTS
DRUMS (. PALLETS
UTILITIES
ADMIN I, GENERAL
PLANT MAI NT
TAXES S INSURANCE
DEPRECIATION
TOTAL OPERATING COSTS
NET OPERATING INCOME
INCOME TAX LIABILITY ( 0.00»)
NET INCOME AFTER TAX
PLUS: DEPRECIATION
CASH FROM OPERATIONS
NET CASH FLOW
CUMULATIVE CASH FLOW
YEARj -1
30000.0
8631.0
38631.0
0.
38631.0
PER TON) 0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-38631.0
-38631.0
0
0.
20000.0
20000.0
2863.0
22863.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-22863.0
-61494.0
1
0.
Q.
0.
0.
0.
897.9
897.9
1323.0
138.0
1205.0
211.0
651.0
1392.0
1292.0
1465.8
7677.8
-6779.9
0.
-6779.9
.1465.8
-5314.1
-5314.1
-66808.1
2
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
13058.6
13058.6
1323.0
230.0
2009.0
352.0
651.0
2321.0
1292.0
1465.8
9643.8
3414.8
0.
3414.8
1465.8
4880.6
4880.6
-61927.5
0
0
0
0
0
13058
13058
1323
230
2009
352
651
2321
1292
1465
9643
3414
0
3414
1465
4880
4030
-57046
3
•
.
.
•
.6
.6
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
.8
.8
.8
•
.8
.8
.6
.6
.9
4
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
13058.6
13058.6
1323.0
230.0
20U9.0
352.0
651.0
2321.0
1292.0
1465.8
9643.8
3414.8
0.
3414.8
1465.8
4880.6
4880.6
-52166.3
5
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
13058.6
13058.6
1323.0
230.0
2009.0
352.0
651.0
2321.0
1292.0
1465.8
9643.8
3414.8
0.
3414.8
1465.8
4880.6
4880.6
-47285.7
20
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
13058.6
13058.6
1323.0
230.0
2009.0
352.0
651.0
2321.0
1292.0
1465.8
9643.8
3414.8
0.
3414.8
1465.8
4880.6
4880.6
25923.5
40
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
13058.6
13058.6
1323.0
230.0
2009.0
352.0
651.0
2321.0
1292.0
1465.8
9643.8
3414.8
0.
3414.8
1465.8
4880.6
4880.6
123535.7
TOTAL
30000.0
28631.0
5B631.0
2863.0
61494.0
510183.7
510183.7
52920.0
9108.0
79556.0
13939.0
26040.0
91911.0
51680.0
58631.0
383785.0
126398.7
0.
126398.7
58631.0
185029.7
123535.7
0.
-------
TABLE 25. PRO FORMA DISCOUNTED CASH FLOW STATEMENT FOR CASE 4, GOVERNMENT OWNED
COST OF CAPITAL 6.00»
CAPITAL INVESTMENT!
MINE
PROCESS PLANT
TOTAL INVESTMENT
WORKING CAPITAL
NET CAPITAL INVESTMENT
REVENUE!
WASTE MANAGEMENT FEE ($131.02
TOTAL REVENUE
OPERATING COSTS!
DIRECT LABOR
CHEMICALS f, CATALYSTS
DRUMS 4 PALLETS
UTILITIES
AUI'.Itl 4 GENERAL
PLA'Jl MA I NT
TAXES 4 INSURANCE
DEPRECIATION
TOTAL OPERATING COSTS
NET OPERATING INCOME
INCOME TAX LIABILITY ( 0.00%)
NET INCOME AFTER TAX
PLUS: DEPRECIATION
CASH FROM OPERATIONS
NET CASH FLOW
CUMULATIVE CASH FLOW
YEAR! -1
30000.0
15321.0
45321.0
0.
45321.0
PER TON)0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-45321.0
-45321.0
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT STUDY CASE 4 (180000 TPY)
(THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS)
012345
0.
20000.0
20000.0
3532.0
23532.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-23532.0
-68853.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
5112.5
5112.5
2533.0
33.0
4935.0
554.0
1273.0
2040.0
1575.0
1633.0
14576.0
-9463.5
0.
-9463.5
1633.0
-7830.5
-7830.5
-766B3.5
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
23583.3
23583.3
2533.0
55.0
8225.0
923.0
1273.0
3400.0
1575.0
1633.0
19617.0
3956.2
0.
3966.2
1633.0
5599.3
5599.3
-71084.2
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
23583.3
23533.3
2533.0
55.0
B225.0
923.0
1273.0
3400.0
1575.0
1633.0
19617.0
3966.2
0.
3966.2
1633.0
5599.3
5599.3
-65484.9
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
23583.3
23583.3
2533.0
55.0
8225.0
923.0
1273.0
3400.0
1575.0
1633.0
19617.0
3966.2
0.
3966.2
1633.0
5599.3
5599.3
-59885.7
0.
0.
0,
0.
0.
23583.3
23583.3
2533.0
55.0
8225.0
923.0
1273.0
3400.0
1575.0
1633.0
19617.0
3966.2
0.
3966.2
1633.0
5599.3
5599.3
-54286.4
20
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
23583.3
23583.3
2533.0
55.0
8225.0
923.0
1273.0
3400.0
1575.0
1633.0
19617.0
3966.2
0.
3966.2
1633.0
5599.3
5599.3
29702.6
40
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
23583.3
23583.3
2533.0
55.0
8225.0
923.0
1273.0
3400.0
1575.0
1633.0
19617.0
3966.2
0.
3966.2
1633.0
5599.3
5599.3
141688.0
TOTAL
30000.0
35321.0
65321.0
3532.0
68853.0
924860.0
924860.0
101320.0
2178.0
325710.0
36551 .0
50920.0
134640.0
63000.0
65321.0
779640.0
145220.0
0.
145220.0
65321.0
210541.0
141688.0
0.
-------
TABLE 26. PRO FORMA DISCOUNTED CASH FLOW STATEMENT FOR CASE 5, GOVERNMENT OWNED
CO
o
COST OF CAPITAL 6.001
CAPITAL INVESTMENT:
MINE
PROCESS PLANT
TOTAL INVESTMENT
WORKING CAPITAL
NET CAPITAL INVESTMENT
REVENUE:
WASTE MANAGEMENT FEE ($ 71.16
TOTAL REVENUE
OPERATING COSTS:
DIRECT LABOR
CHEMICALS t, CATALYSTS
DRUMS t, PALLETS
UTILITIES
ADMIN & GENERAL
PLANT MA I NT
TAXES & INSURANCE
DEPRECIATION
TOTAL OPERATING COSTS
NET OPERATING INCOME
INCOME TAX LIABILITY ( 0.00%)
NET INCOME AFTER TAX
PLUS: DEPRECIATION
CASH FROM OPERATIONS
NET CASH FLOW
YEARt -1
30000.0
15000.0
45000.0
0.
45000.0
PER TON)0.
0.
OOOOO OOO
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-45000.0
HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT STUDY CASE 5 (180000 TPY)
(THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS)
012345
0.
15946.0
15946.0
3095.0
19041.0
0.
0.
oooooooo
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-19041.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
922.3
922.3
1658.0
165.0
0.
464.0
900.0
1581.0
1479.0
1523.6
7770.7
-6648.3
0.
-6848. J
1523.6
-5324.7
-5324.7
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
12809.0
12809.0
1658.0
275.0
0.
773.0
900.0
2635.0
1479.0
1523.6
9243.7
3565.4
0.
3565.4
1523.6
5089.0
5039.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
12809.0
12809.0
1658.0
275.0
0.
773.0
900.0
2635.0
1479.0
1523.6
9243.7
3565.4
0.
3565.4
1523.6
5089.0
5089.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
12809.0
12809.0
1658.0
275.0
0.
773.0
900.0
2635.0
1479.0
1523.6
9243.7
3565.4
0.
3565.4
1523.6
5089.0
5089.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
12809.0
12809.0
1658.0
275.0
0.
773.0
900.0
2635.0
1479.0
1523.6
9243.7
3565.4
0.
3565.4
1523.6
5089.0
5089.0
20
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
12309.
12809.
1658.
275.
0.
773.
900.
2635.
1479.
1523.
9243.
3565.
0.
3565.
1523.
5089.
5089.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
7
4
4
6
,0
.0
40
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
12809.0
12809.0
1658.0
275.0
0.
773.0
900.0
2635.0
1479.0
1523.6
9243.7
3565.4
0.
3565.4
1523.6
5039.0
5039.0
TOTAL
3000C.O
30946.0
60946 .0
3095.0
64041 .0
500474 .7
500474.7
66320.0
10890.0
0.
30611.0
36000.0
104346.0
59160.0
60946.0
368273.0
132201.7
0.
132201.7
60946.0
193147.7
129105.7
CUMULATIVE CASH FLOW -45000.0 -64041.0 -69365.7 -64276.6 -59187.6 -54098.6 -49009.5
27326.0 129106.7
0.
-------
shown should not be construed as precisely accurate estimates.
The sensitivity of the base case unit cost to the size of the storage
plant is presented in Figure 35. The sensitivity of the base case unit cost
to changes in the return on investment is presented in Figure 36. Figure 37
presents the sensitivity of the base case unit cost to the cost of the mine.
As shown in Figure 35, the unit cost per ton of received waste would be
reduced rapidly as the plant size is increased from 56,400 tons per year
(Case 3) to 375,000 tons per year (Case 1), but it gradually levels off as
the plant size is increased beyond 375,000 tons per year.
As shown in Figure 36, the unit cost per ton is sensitive to the return
on investment. If, for example, a return of 7.5 percent instead of 10 percent
was acceptable, the waste management fee could be reduced from approximately
$130 to $119, an 8 percent reduction.
The sensitivity of the unit cost to the cost of the mine is presented in
Figure 37. Changing the mine cost from $30 million to 50 million increased
the unit costs from approximately $131 to $171.
131
-------
700
0
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
PLANT SIZE, MM TONS
(TON PROCESSED PER YEAR)
Figure 35. Sensitivity of the base case unit cost to changes in plant size.
132
-------
170
160 -•
150 -•
140 - -
0 130 ••
2
D
120 ••
110 • •
100 •-
4-
0%
4%
8% 12% 16%
RETURN ON INVESTMENT
20%
Figure 36. Sensitivity of the base case unit cost to changes in the cost
of capital.
133
-------
180
160 --
o
o
I- 140 -f
120 -•
z
0
20
40
60
80
^^^^
100
COST OF MINE
(MILLION DOLLARS)
Figure 37. Sensitivity of the base case unit cost to changes in the cost
of the mine.
134
-------
REFERENCES
1. R. B. Stone, P. L. Aamodt, M. R. Engler, and P. Madden, Evaluation of
Hazardous Waste Emplacement in Mixed Openings, EPA - 600/2-75-040, U.S.
EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1975, 553 pp.
2. J. L. Averett Mahloch and M. J. Bartos, Jr., Pollutant Potential of Raw
and Chemically Fixed Hazardous Industrial Wastes and Flue Gas Desulfur-
ization Sludges, EPA - 600/2-76-182, U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1976,
105 pp.
3. H. W. Fuller, Residual Management by Land Disposal, Proceedings of the
Hazardous Haste Research Symposium, EPA - 600/9-76-015, U.S. EPA,
Cincinnati, Ohio, 1976, 269 pp.
4. R. B. Fling, W. M. Graven, F. D. Hess, P. P. Loo, R. C. Rossi, and J.
Rossoff, Disposal of Flue Gas Cleaning Hastes: EPA Shawnee Field Evalu-
ation - Initial Report, EPA - 600/2-76-070, U.S. EPA, Washington, D. C.,
1976, 221 pp.
5. Report to Congress, "Disposal of Hazardous Wastes," Office of Solid
Waste Management, EPA, Publication No. SW-116, June 30, 1973.
6. Booz, Allen Applied Research, Inc., A Study of Hazardous Waste Materials,
Hazardous Effects, and Disposal Method, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Contract No. 68-03-0032, Bethesda, Md., June 30, 1972, three
volumes, 406 pp., 544 pp., 460 pp.
7. J. T. Funkhouser, Alternatives to the Management of Hazardous Wastes at
National Disposal Sites, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Contract
No. 68-01-0556, Cambridge, Mass., Arthur D. Little, Inc., May, 1973, two
volumes, 235 pp., 235 pp.
8. R. S. Ottinger, et al, Recommended Methods of Reduction, Neutralization,
Recovery, or Disposal of Hazardous Waste. Vol. 1-16, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Contract No. 68-03-0089, Redondo Beach, Calif., TRW
Systems Group, Inc., June 1973.
9. Battelle Memorial Institute, Program for the Management of Hazardous
Wastes, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Contract No. 68-01-0762,
Richland, Wash., 1974, two volumes, 397 pp., 781 pp.
135
-------
10. J. K. Hoi combe, et al, Solid Waste Management in the Industrial Chemi-
cal Industry, U.S. EPA Contract No. 68-03-0138, IR and T Corp., Ar-
lington, Va., June 1974, 155 pp.
11. R. E. Landreth, "Promising Technologies for Treatment of Hazardous
Wastes," EPA 670/2-74-088, U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, Ohio, November 1974,
45 pp.
12. L. C. McCandless, et al, Assessment of Industrial Hazardous Waste
Practices. Storage and Primary Batteries Industries, EPA Contract No.
68-01-2276, Versar, Inc., Springfield, Va., January 1975, 258 pp.
13. R. G. Shaver, et al, Assessment of Industrial Hazardous Haste Practices.
Inorganic Chemical Industry, EPA Contract No. 68-01-2246, Versar, Inc.,
Springfield, Va., March 1975, 502 pp.
14. Calspan Corp., Assessment of Industrial Hazardous Haste Practices in
the Metal Smelting and Refining Industry, EPA Contract No. 68-01-2604,
Buffalo, New York, April 1975, three volumes.
15. Jacobs Engineering Co., Assessment of Industrial Hazardous Waste
Practices in the Petroleum Refining Industry, EPA Contract No. 68-01-
2288, Pasadena, Ca., June 1976.
16. Foster D. Snell, Inc., Assessment of Industrial Hazardous Waste
Practices. Rubber and Plastic Industry. EPA Contract No. 68-01-3194,
Florham Park, N.J., February 1976, three volumes.
17. WAPORA, Inc., Assessment of Industrial Hazardous Waste Practices, Paint
and Allied Product Industry, Contract Solvent Reclaiming Operations
and Factory Application Coatings, EPA Contract No. 68-01-2656, Washing-
ton, D.C. , 1976, 295 pp.
18. WAPORA, Inc., Assessment of Industrial Hazardous Waste Practices.
Electronic Components Manufacturing Industry, EPA Contract No. - - ,
Washington, D.C., March 1976.
19. WAPORA, Inc., Assessment of Industrial Hazardous Waste Practices.
Special Machines Manufacturing Industries, EPA Contract No. - - ,
Washington, D.C., February 1976.
20. J. R. McMahan, N. J. Cunningham, L. R. Woodland, and D. Lambcon, Hazard-
ous Waste Generation, Treatment and Disposal in the Pharmaceutical In-
dustry. EPA ontract No. 68-01-2684, A. D. Little, Inc., Cambridge Ma.,
July 1975, 175 pp.
21. SCS Engineers, Inc., Assessment of Industrial Hazardous Waste Practices.
Leather Tanning and Finishing Industry, EPA Contract No. 68-01-3261,
Reston, Va., September 1976, 224 pp.
136
-------
22. Versar, Inc., Assessment of Industrial Waste Practices, Textile Indus-
try, EPA Contract No. 68-01-3178, Springfield, Va., June 1976.
23. Battle Columbus Lab., Assessment of Industrial Hazardous Waste Prac-
tices, Electroplating and Metal Finishing Industry, EPA Contract No.
68-01-2664, Columbus, Ohio, January 1976.
24. G. I. Gruber, et al, Assessment of Industrial Hazardous Haste Practices,
Organic Chemicals, Pesticides and Explosive Industries, EPA Contract No.
68-01-2919, TRW Systems, Redondo Beach, Ca, 1976.
25. Midwest Research Institute, A Study of Haste Generation, Treatment and
Disposal in the Metals Mining Industry, EPA Contract No. 68-01-2665,
Kansas City, Mo., July 1976, 403 pp.
26. California State Department of Public Health, Hazardous Waste Disposal
Survey, Sacramento, Ca., January 1972.
27. California State Department of Public Health, Guidelines for Hazardous
Haste Land Disposal Facilities, Sacramento, Ca., January 1973.
28. California State Department of Public Health, Hazardous Haste Manage-
ment — Law, Regulations and Guidelines for the Handling of Hazardous
Waste, Sacramento, Ca., February T9"7lT!
29. California State Solid Waste Management Board, Disposal of Environ-
mentally Dangerous Wastes in California, Sacramento, Ca., August 1976.
30. C. S. Dunn, D. Geary, 0. C. Gilliland, and J. E. Wyrick, Feasibility of
Permanent Storage of Solid Chemical Waste in Subsurface Salt Deposits,
Fenix & Scisson, Inc., Tulsa, OK., Department of the Army, Edgewood
Arsenal Contract No. DAA-15-71-C-0310, October 1971.
31. L. L. Lackey, T. 0. Jacobs, and S. R. Stewart, Public Attitudes Toward
Hazardous Waste Disposal Facilities, EPA 670/2-73-086, U.S. EPA Cin-
cinnati, Ohio, September 1973, 180 pp.
32. M. Shannon, Long-Term Cares and Liability Issues Related to Hazardous
Waste Treatment, Storage and Disposal Sites, Fifth National Congress
of National Solid Waste Management Association, December 9, 1976.
137
-------
APPENDIX A*
SUMMARY OF U.S. HAZARDOUS WASTE QUANTITIES
TABLE A-l. HAZARDOUS WASTE QUANTITIES (U.S.)
(million metric tons annually)
INDUSTRY
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
BATTERIES
INORGANIC CHEMICALS
ORGANIC CHEMICALS, PESTICIDES,
EXPLOSIVES
ELECTROPLATING
PAINTS
PETROLEUM REFINKG
PHARMACEUTICALS
PRIMARY METALS
LEATHER TAKING AND FINISHING
TEXTILES DYEING ACT FINISHING
RUBBER AND PLASTICS
SPECIAL MACHINERY
ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS
WASTE OIL RE-REFINING
TOTALS (TO DATE)
DRY BASIS
0.005
2.000
2.150
0.909
0.075
0.600
0.062
17.398
0.045
0.048
0.205
0.102
0.016
0.057
23.667
KET BASIS
0.010
3.400
6.860
5.276
0.096
1.300
0.065
20.355
0.146
1.770
0.785
0.162
0.023
J0.057
40.432
*Note: These tables are summary of the reports on the
assessment of industrial hazardous waste prac-
tices. These tables are obtained from the
project offices.
138
-------
TABLE A-2. HAZARDOUS WASTE GROWTH PROJECTIONS
Amount
(Mill. Metric Tons/Yr.)
1974
INDUSTRY
1.
•2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7;
O.VTTERIES
nWRCANIC
CHEMICALS
ORGANIC CHEt-lICALS, PESTICIDES
AND EXPLOSIVES
ELECTROPLATING
PAINT AND ALLIED PRODUCTS
PETfQLEUIl REFINING
FHAK-IACEUTICALS
DRY
0.005
2.000
2.150
0.909
0.075
0.610
O.OG2
h'li'P
0
3
6
5
0
1
0
.010
.400
.860
.27-6
.096
.300
.065
1977
DHY i
0
2
3
1
0
0
0
.002
.300.
.500
.316
.084
.647
.070
V.'ICT
0.164
3.900
11.666
4.053
0.110
1.400
0.074
1983 %
DHY
0.105
2.800 -
3.800
1.751
0.105
0.693
0.104
wrr 'T
0.
4.
12.
5.
0.
1.
0.
209
800
666
260
145
500
108
GROWTH
1 - '83
2000
40
77'
92
30
12
68
8. PRIMARY METALS SMELTING
AND REFINING 17.398*20.356* 18.211* 21.307*21.110*24.700* 21
9. TEXTILES DYEING AND FINISHING 0.0-48 1.770 0.500 1.870 0.179 0.716 373
10. LEATHER TANNING 0.045 0.146 0.050 0.143 0.06S 0.214 51
11. SPECIAL MACHINERY 0.102 0.163 0.094 0.153 0.157 0.209 54
12 ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS 0.016 0.023 0.023 0.051 0.032 0.070 200
13. RUBBER AND PLASTICS 0.205 0.705 0.242 0.944 0.299 1.204 4G
14. WASTE OIL KG-REFIMIHG 0.057 0.057 0.074 0.074 0.344 ...0.144 253-
TOTALS (TO DATE) 23.667 40.432 27.143 45.90931.347 51.245 32
63**
* This figure excludes primary metals Industry slaq arid Foundry s.ind
*l Fxcludtnrj primary metals
139
-------
TABLE A-3. EPA REGIONAL CENTER OF HAZARDOUS WASTES
INDC
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.'
15.
BATTERIES
INORGANIC CHEMICALS
ORGANIC CHEMICALS,
PESTICIDES, AND EXPLOSIVES'
PHARMACEUTICALS
METALS MINING
PRIMARY METALS
PAINTS
ELECTEOPLATING
PETHDLSC*! REFINING
TEXTILES
LEATHER TANNING
RUBBER AND PLASTICS
SPECIAL MACHINERY
ELECTFQNIC COMPONENTS
WASTE OIL RE-REFINING
EPA REGION
V
VI
VI
II
IX
V
V
V
VI
IV
I
IV
V
II
V
% TOTAL
36.2
45.5
54.6
51.5
51.6
38.6
31.6
44.4
43.1
58.8
38.3
24.5
25.0-
28.0
30.1
140
-------
TABLE A-4. HAZARDOUS WASTE PROFILE
(MM METRIC TON, WET)
INDUSTRY
PRIMARY METALS
ORGANIC CHEitlCALS
ELECTROPLATING
INDUSTRIAL INORGANIC
CHEMICALS
TEXTILE MILL PRODUCTS
PETROLEUM REFINING
7 OTHERS
1974
20
7
5
4
2
1
1
WASTELOAD
1977
21
12
4
4
2
1
2
1933
25
13
5
5
1
1
2
PERCENT
MANAGED
OFF-SITE
2
2C
70
15
5
60
75
TOTAL
40
46
52
18
141
-------
TABLE A-5. EPA REGION RANKINGS:HAZARDOUS WASTE GENERATION
I
II
1 in
IV
1 V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
!R5ICN (RANK)
(7)
(6)
(2)
6)
CD
0)
(10)
(8)
(4)
(8)
% OF TOTAL
' 3.0
'4,3
21,5
7,8
31,0
14,2
0,9
1,7
33,8
1.7
142
-------
TABLE A-6. STATE HIGHLIGHTS: HAZARDOUS WASTE GENERATION
(METRIC TONS - DRY WEIGHT)
STATE
(1) PENNSYLVANIA
(2) OHIO
(3) INDIANA
(4) TEXAS
v-
(5) ILLINOIS
(6) MICHIGAN
(7) WEST VIRGINIA
(8) NEW Y3PX
(9) LGUISLS^NA
(10) ALABAMA
(11) MARYLAND
(12) CALIFORNIA
QUANTITY
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(ID
(12)
3,278,328
2,899,797
2,268,171
2,124,047
1,378,351
1,224,139
778,288
739,850
739,850
689,600
637,507
659,189
% TOTAL
(1) 15.6%
(2) 13.8*
(3) 10.8%
(4) 10.1%
(5) 6.6%
(6) 5.8%
(7) 3.8%
{8) 3.7%
(9) 3.5%
(10) 3.28%
(11) 3.27%
(12) 3.14%
(37) VIRGINIA
(37) 32,872
(37) 0.16%
(50) NORTH DAKOTA
(50)
2,838
(50)
143
-------
APPENDIX B
SPECIFIC DESIGN CRITERIA FOR THE
BASE CASE SURFACE FACILITIES'
Criteria used for the design of the surface equipments are summarized
below.
Receiving and Unloading Stations
• Types A and B waste tank car unloading — 90 minutes
• T.ypes A and B waste tank truck unloading — 60 minutes
• Type C hopper car and dump truck unloading — 60 minutes
• Drummed waste box car unloading — 90 minutes
• Drummed waste container truck unloading — 60 minutes
Waste Storag'e
• The capacity of each tank is one day's volume of a
particular waste plus 10% free board, except two day's
capacity for tanks of acid and alkaline wastes
• Average liquid waste density is assumed to be 9 Ibs/gal.
• Mixing power is 1 HP per thousand gallon of Type
A waste and 2 HP per thousand gallons of Type B.waste.
• Transfer pumps have connected spares
• Storage bins for Type C waste have one day's capacity —
150 tons (90 Ibs per cu. ft). Transfer conveyor capa-
city is 25 tons per hour.
Waste Treatment
Type A-l, Chromate Waste
Waste composition is shown in Table 7.
+6 +3
Cr is reduced to Cr under acidic condition. The
reaction is carried out continuously- Thirty minutes
residence time is allowed at design capacity.
144
-------
Type A-2, Cyanide Waste
• Waste composition is shown in Table 7.
• Cyanide waste is reacted with chlorine and caustic
according to
2 NaCN + 5 C12 + 12 NaOH - 10 Nad + 2Na CO + N + 6H 0
• Four hours residence time is allowed for the reactions
Type A-3, Acid and Caustic Waste
• Waste composition is shown in Table 7.
• Waste are neutralized by blending them together
along with lime addition.
• Twenty minutes residence time is allowed for
neutralization.
Type A Precipitation
• Precipitation with lime follows blending of non-
reactive wastes and the above treated wastes
(one day's surge).
• Thirty minutes residence time is allowed for the
precipitation.
Type A Dewatering
• Rotary vacuum belt filter at a filtration rate
of 5 gal. per per hour per square feet.
• Filter cake is 40% solid, 90 Ibs per cubic feet.
Type B-l, Acid and Caustic Waste
• Acid and caustic sludge wastes are mixed together
along with lime to neutralize excess acidity.
• Thirty minute residence time is provided for
neutralization.
Type B Dewatering
• Dewatering of inorganic and organic wastes is
accomplished batchwise in automatic pressure filters.
• Filter cake is at minimum 40% solids. Five tons
per 90 minute filter cycle is processed.
145
-------
Effluent Treatment
• Effluent Treatment operates three shifts per day.
• Effluent storage capacities are:
— 2 days for all filtrates
— 1 day for all process wastewater
— Runoffs from 6-inch rains on 10 acres, 0.9 run-
off coefficient
• Vapor-recompression evaporation system capacity
is 150 gpm.
• 70% water is evaporated at 100 kwh/1000 gallons
evaporated.
• Evaporator - crystallizer capacity is 100 tons
per day and filter capacity is 5 tons per hour.
• 75 gpm vapor-recompression evaporator is provided
to work off contaminated storm runoff (15 days workoff^.
• Oily waste incinerator capacity is 600 gallons per hour.
Heat release is 77 million Btu per hour assuming
heating value of 15,000 Btu per pound.
Containerization
• 300 drums per box car is unloaded in 90 minutes
• 10,000 drums storage area (5 day supply) is provided.
• 180 pallets per truckload is unloaded in one hour.
• 2500 pallets storage area (5 day supply) is provided.
• Drum filling rate is 30 drums per hour per line.
• Each drum contains 625 Ibs of waste (52 gallons per
drum, 12 Ibs/gal).
• Total Containerization capacity is 60% above the
design rate of 585 tons per day based on two shift
operation.
Staging
• Drums are stored on pallets (4 drums on each pallet).
• 2 day storage is provided in staging area.
• 'Types C and D waste in drums (50 TPD each) are trans-
ferred from their storage area directly to the shaft
area for lowering into the mine.
146
-------
APPENDIX C
TABLE C. BASE CASE EQUIPMENTS AND COSTS
SERVICE
DESCRIPTION
INSTALLED
EQUIPMENT
COST. $
SURFACE OPERATION
RECEIVING & UNLOADING
Tank Car & Tank Truck Unloading
Drum Handling - Opening, Unload-
ing, Pumping
Dump Truck Unloading
Dump Car Unloading
Transfer Conveyor System
(To Storage Bins)
Transfer Conveyor System
(To Filter/Surge Bins)
Drum Unloading
18 Pumps (5-100 gpm, 4-100 gpm, 5-200 gpm,
4-200 gpm)
9-Pumps,
2-Drum Head Removers,
2-500 Gallon Tanks,
4-Electric Forklifts,
4-Tractor Trailers
2-10' xlO' x6' Hopper & Conveyors
12' x 26' x 12' Hopper S Conveyor
12"0 x 40'H Screw Elevator Conveyor,
12"0 x 75'L Screw Conveyor,
16"0 x 45'H Screw Elevator Conveyor
14"W x 220'L Belt Conveyor,
2 - 14"0 x 75'L Screw Conveyor
2 - 12"0 x 75'L Screw Conveyor,
12"0 x 30'H Screw Elevator Conveyor
12" 0 x 45'L Screw Conveyor,
12"0 x 100'L Screw Conveyor
6 - Electric Forklifts (4 - 3,000 Ibs,
2 - 10,000 Ibs capacity)
104,000
326,000
35,000
45,000
311,000
224,000
180,000
1,225,000
WASTE STORAGE & TREATMENT
TYPE A WASTE:
Chromate Waste, A-l
Storage (Chromate Waste)
pH Adjustment
Chromate Reduction
Sulfur Dioxide Feeding
Sulfuric Acid Feeding
4 - 25,000 Gallon Tanks,
4 - 25 HP Agitators,
4 - 1.5 HP Feed Pumps
400 Gallon Vessel
1000 gallon Vessel ,
2.5 HP Agitator
Package SO? Feed System
Tank Car Air Padding Unit
6000 Gallon Tank
1 HP Pump
Continued
206,000
42,000
52,000
60,000
20,000
380,000
147
-------
TABLE C (continued)
SERVICE
DESCRIPTION
INSTALLED
EQUIPMENT
COST, $
Cyanide Waste, A-2
Storage (Cyanide Waste)
Cyanide Oxidation
Chlorine Feeding
Caustic Feeding
Acid/Alkaline Waste. A-3
Storage (Acid & Alkaline Waste)
Neutralization
Non-Reactive Waste, A-4
Storage (Non-Reactive Waste)
Lime Slaking & Feed System
Lime Unloading & Storage
Lime Slaking
Slaked Lime Feeding
4 - 25,000 Gallon Tanks,
4 - 25 HP Agitators,
4 - 1.5 HP Feed Pumps
2 - 3600 Gallon Vessels,
2 - 7.5 HP Agitators,
3 - 1 HP Pumps
2 - Package Chlorine Feed Systems
with Air Padding Units
2 - 10,000 Gallon Tanks,
2 - 2 HP Pumps,
2 - 3/4 HP Feed Pumps
4 - 50,000 Gallon Tanks,
4 - 25 HP Agitators,
5 - 1.5 HP Feed Pumps
1200 Gallon Reactor
4 - 50,000 Gallon Tanks,
4-25 HP Agitation,
4 - 2.5 HP Feed Pumps
32' x 10' x 8' Hopper,
50'H Bucket Elevator,
16"W x 50'L Conveyor Belt,
2 - 100 Ton Storage Bins
Lime Feeder, Package Slaker,
750 Gallon Slaker Tank
10,000 Gallon Lime Slurry Tank,
15 HP Agitator,
2 - 1 HP Pumps,
10,000 Gallon Lime Feed Tank
181,000
169,000
100,000
42,000
492,000
260,000
90,000
350,000
270,000
270,000
113,000
30,000
57,000
200,000
Continued
148
-------
TABLE C (continued)
SERVICE
DESCRIPTION
INSTALLED
EQUIPMENT
COST, $
Type A Waste Precipitation
Blend/Surge
Precipation
Type A Waste Filtration
Filtration
Cake Storage
Ferric Chloride Feeding
4 - 50,000 Gallon Tanks,
8 - 25 HP Agitators,
4 - 2.5 HP Feed Pumps
2 - 3,000 Gallon Vessels,
2 - 6 HP Agitators,
3 - 6 HP Slurry Pumps,
3 - 3/4 HP Lime Slurry Pumps
2 - 2,700 sq ft Vacuum Filters,
2-3 HP Filtrate Pumps
2 - 3' x 26' x 6' Bins,
4 - 9"0 x 30'L Screw Conveyors,
2 - 10"0 x 30'H Elevator Conveyors,
2 - 9"0 x 15'L Transfer Conveyor
6,000 Gallon Tank,
2 - 1 HP Pumps,
2 - 1/3 HP Feed Pumps
300,000
180,000
480,000
753,000
177,000
20,000
950,000
TYPE B HASTED
Acid/Alkaline Slurry Waste. B-1
Acid/Alkaline Slurry Storage
Neutralization
4 - 25,000 Gallon Tanks,
4 - 25 HP Agitators,
4 - 1 HP Pumps
900 Gallon Yassel,
2.5 HP Agitstor
204,000
86,000
290,000
Acid/Alkaline Slurry, B-1 Filtration.
Filter Feed
Filtration
Filtrate Storage
Filter Cake Storage & Transfer
2,500 Gallon Surge Tank,
1.5 HP Agitator,
3 - 7.5 HP Pumps
2,560 sq. ft., 4' x 4' x 80 Chamber,
Plate and Frame Filter Press,
Static Mixer for FeCl3 Mixing
1 ,000 Gallon Tank
4 HP Pump
6' x 20' x 4' (480 cu ft) Bin,
9"0 x 30'L Screw Conveyor
continued
149
12,000
120,000
4,000
84,000
220,000
-------
TABLE C(continued)
SERVICE
DESCRIPTION
INSTALLED
EQUIPMENT
COST. $
Inorganic Slurry, B-2 Filtration
Storage {Inorganic Slurry Waste)
Feed Surge
Filtration
Filtrate Storage
Filter Cake Storage 8 Transfer
Cake Transfer
Organic Slurry, B-3 Filtration
Storage (Organic Slurry Waste)
Filter Feed Surge
Filtration
Filtrate Storage
Filter Cake Storage & Transfer
TYPE C WASTE:
Storage (Waste C - Bulk)
WASTE CONTAINERIZATIOH
Filter Cake Surge
4 - 50,000 Gallon Tanks,
8 - 25 HP Agitators,
4 - 4 HP Pumps
2,500 Gallon Surge Tank,
1.5 HP Agitator
2 - 2,500 sq ft (41 x 4' x 80 Chamber),
Plate and Frame Filter Press,
Static Mixer for Fed3 Mixing
2,000 Gallon Tanks,
2 - 4 HP Pumps
2 - 480 cu ft Bins,
2 - 9"0 x 30'L Conveyor
120' Conveyor System
4 - 25,000 Gallon Tanks,
4 - 25 HP Agitators,
4 - 2 HP Pumps
2,500 Gallon Tank,
1.5 HP Agitator,
1/4 HP Pump,
3 - 6 HP Pumps
FeCl3 Mixer (Static Mixer),
2,560 sq ft Plate & Frame Filter Press
1,000 Gallon Tank,
2 - 4 HP Filtrate Pumps
2 - 6' x 20' x 4' Bins,
150' Conveyor System
6 - 120 Ton (12' x 12' x 28') Bins,
6 - Screw Feeders
6 - 150 Ton Capacity Bins,
6 - 10"0 x 25'L Screw Feeders
280,000
15,000
119,000
8,000
72,000
97,000
591,000
198,000
17,000
108,000
7,000
140,000
470,000
115,000
144,000
continued
150
-------
TABLE C( continued)
SERVICE
DESCRIPTION
INSTALLED
EQUIPMENT
COST, $
Drum Feed System
Drum Handling & Containerization
(Subcontracted Package)
Drum Moving
6 - 1 Ton Capacity Hoppers,
6 - Vibrating Feeders
950' (30"-40"W) Empty Drum Conveyor System,
600' (30'W) Containerization Conveyor System,
350' (60"W) Pallets Conveyor System,
6 - Automatic Drum Filling Units,
6 - Automatic Lidding Units,
6 - Automatic Labeling Units,
6 - Automatic Drum Palletizing Units
1 - 3,000 Ibs Capacity Electric Forklift,
3 - 10,000 Ibs Capacity Electric Forklifts
21,000
1,650,000
130,000
1,945,000
PLANT WASTEVIATER TREATMENT:
Filtrate Concentration
Filtrate Storage
Evaporation (Filtrate)
Condensate Storage
Evaporation (Contaminated Storm
Water)
Brine Crystallization
Brine Surge
Crystalization (Evaporative)
Filter Cake Transfer S Storage
2 - 175,000 Gallon Tanks,
2 - 5 HP Feed Pumps
150 gpm Vapor Recompression Evaporator-
Package Unit
140,000 Gallon Tank
75 gpm Vapor Recompression Evaporator -
Package Unit
4,500 Gallon,
10 HP Agitator,
2 - 2 HP Feed Pumps
100 TPD Package Evaporator - Crystallizer,
2 - 5 TPH Centrifugal Filters,
2 - 3/4 HP Slurry Pumps,
1,000 Gallon Slurry Tanks.
650 Gallon Centrate Tanks
105' Cake Conveyor System,
48 cu ft Capacity Bin
170,000
1,750,000
80,000
1,120,000
3,120,000
5,000
585,000
60,000
650,000
Oily Haste Incineration
Waste Storage
2 - 25,000 Gallon Tanks,
2 - 2.5 HP Agitator,
2 - 1/2 HP Feed Pumps,
112,000
continued
151
-------
SERVICE
TABLE C (continued)
DESCRIPTION
INSTALLED
EQUIPMENT
COST, $
Incineration
MONITORING & ANALYTICAL INFORMATION
50 TPH (600 Gallons/Hour)Package Incinerator
with Scrubber
368,000
480,000
Sample Analysis & Mine Environment
Monitoring
Standard Lab Equipment,
Gas Chrornatograph,
Nephalometer (Particulate in air),
Atomic Absorption Spectrophotoineter,
Organic Carbon Analyzer
200,000
SUBSURFACE OPERATION
HOISTING
Loading on Hoist System
Unloading from Hoist & Staging
Automation of Existing Hoist System,
3 - New Skips,
3 - Forklifts (Electic)
3 - Forklifts (14,000 Ib capacity diesel
forklifts)
252,000
99,000
HAULING
Loading on Truck & Transfer to
Storage Area
8 - Flat Bed Trailers (25 ft.)
3 - Diesel Tractors
183,000
STORAGE
Storage Cell Preparation 4
Emplacement
3 - Forklifts,
3 - Haul Trucks,
2 - Front-end Loaders,
2 - Utility Vehicles,
2 - Floor Graders,
2 - Roof Bolters,
2 - Rollers,
2 - Water Trailers,
2 - Sealers,
2 - Brush
1,170,000
VENTILATION
Ventilation
1 - Main Fan
1 - Backup Fan
6 - Buster Fans
continued
82,000
152
-------
TABLE C (continued)
SERVICE
DESCRIPTION
INSTALLED
EQUIPMENT
COST. $
MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES
1 - First Aid Vehicle,
2 - Decontamination Vehicles,
2 - Fire Control Vechiles,
2 - Utility Repair Vehicles,
4 - Personnel Carriers
165,000
PLANT UTILITIES
Boiler
Cooling Tower
Electric System
Drainage System
Yard Safety
Compressed Air System
20,000 Ibs/hr, 150 psi Package Boiler
800 - 3,000 gpm Package Cooling Tower,
3-100 gpm pumps
Main Transformer, Motor Control Center
Yard Lighting
Storm Drainage, Sewage System
Fire .Protection System,
Washdown Stations
100 psi, 150 U SCFM Package Air Compression
Unit
60,000
170,000
70,000
130,000
60,000
70,000
560,000
153
-------
APPENDIX D
TABLE D. BASE CASE CIVIL STRUCTURES, BUILDINGS,
MINE REHABILITATION, AND COSTS
SERVICE
DESCRIPTION
INSTALLED
EQUIPMENT
COST. $
SITE DEVELOPMENT
Site Preparation
Grading
Railroad Track
RECEIVING *. UNLOADING
Truck Scale Office & Pad
Rail Scale Office & Pad
Tank Truck Unloading
Container Truck Unloading
Dump Truck Unloading
Tank & Hopper Car Unloading
Box Car Unloading
Drum Unloading
Chemical Unloading
Chlorine Unloading
R&F - Roof and Floor; L - Lighting; P - Plumbing;
HVAC - Heating, Ventillation, Air Conditioning;
SF - Steel Frame; MW - Masonry Wall; 2ST - Two
Stories
12.8 Acres Site Clearing,3,300' x 7'H Fencing,
30,000 cu yd cut/fill Earthwork
8,600 sq yd Concrete Paving,
5,700 sq yd Asphalt Paving,
3,200 sq yd Grassed Area,
24,000 sq yd Graveled Area,
41,500 sq yd Base Preparation
2,200 ft New Track,
2,200 ft Remove Old Track
300 sq ft Office, RAF, MW, L&P, HVAC
660 sq ft Pad, R&F, L
300 sq ft Office, R&F, MW, L&P, HVAC
720 sq ft Pad, R&F, L
1,000 sq ft Platform
1,200 sq ft Building - R&F, MW, SF, L
2,500 sq ft Platform
2,500 sq ft Building - R&F, MW, SF, L
700 sq ft Building - R&F, SF, L,
3 side MW
4,375 sq ft Building - R , L, Gravel Floor
720 sq ft Platform
1,800 sq ft Building - R, L
1,800 sq ft Platform
3,520 sq ft Building - R, L
6,000 sq ft - R, Gravel Floor, SF, L
1,200 sq ft - R, Gravel Floor, SF, L
Continued
90,000
166,000
104,000
360,000
50,000
51,000
66,000
112,000
31,000
54,000
46,000
112,000
73,000
15,000
610,000
154
-------
TABLE D (continued)
SERVICE
DESCRIPTION
INSTALLED
EQUIPMENT
COST, $
WASTE STORAGE
Storage Tank Area
Drummed Waste Storage
30,000 sq ft Graveled - Diked Area
2 X 27,600 sq ft, 2ST, R&F, MW, SF, L,
HVAC
17,000
733,000
750,000
SERVICE BUILDINGS
Adminstration Building
Safety - Medical Building
Laboratory
Equipment Storage Building
Warehouse
Shops
Drum Cleaning Building
PROCESS BUILDINGS
Waste Treatment Building
Filtration Building
Containerization Building
Staging Building
4,000 sq ft, R&F, SF, MW, L&P, HVAC,
Furniture
2,925 sq ft, R&F, SF, MW, L&P, HVAC,
Furniture, Standard Equipment
2,600 sq ft, R&F, SF, MW, L&P, HVAC,
Furniture
7,200 sq ft, R, Graveled Floor, Equipment
4,125 sq ft, R&F, SF, MW, L&P, Equipment
4,800 sq ft, R&F, SF, MW, HV, L&P,
Equipment
1,925 sq ft, R&F, SF, MW, HV, L&P,
Equipment
2 X 5,250 sq ft, 2ST, R&F, MW, SF, HV,
L&P
2 x 11,100 sq ft, 2ST, R&F, SF, MW, HV,
L&P
2 X 40,250 sq ft, 2ST, R&F, SF, MW, HV,
L&P
2 x 44,000 sq ft, 2ST, R&F, SF, MW, HV,
L&P
240,000
200,000
210,000
260,000
170,000
260,000
90,000
1,430,000
400,000
840,000
836,000
920,000
2,996,000
PLANT HASTEWATER TREATMENT BUILDINGS
Wastewater Collection Ponds
55,000 Gallon Lined Pond
1.6 MG Storm Water Pond
110,000
continued
155
-------
TABLE D (continued)
SERVICE
DESCRIPTION
INSTALLED
EQUIPMENT
COST, $
Wastewater Solid Filtration Building 500 sq ft, R&F, SF, MW, HV, L&P
Boiler House 750 sq ft, R&F, SF, MW, HV, L&P
30,000
40,000
180,000
MINE REHABILITATION
Production Shaft
Rehabilitate Existing 16 ft Concrete
Lined Shaft - Grout Wat.pr Bearing
Sandstone, Rehabilitate Shaft Walls
and Shaft Timbers
1,250,000
Loading & Unloading Station
Rehabilitation
Man Shaft
Underground Staging Area
Haulways
Storage Cells
VENTILATION SYSTEM (NEW)
Ventilation Shaft
Ventilation System
Convert Existing Bulkloading Station
to Pallet Loading, New Shaft Housing
at Surface and Underground
Minor Rehabilitation of Existing
Man Shaft - Grouting, Rehabilitate
Man Station
7 Rooms (40' x 40' x 22') - Waste
Salt Removal, Scaling of Roof, Roof
Bolting, Floor Grading, Provide
Lighting
Improve 8,000 ft of h^ulways and 8000
ft of Access Roads- Scale . Loose
Rocks , Roof Bolting as Needed, Floor
Grading, Construct 20 Stopping and
Haulway Doors, Provide Lighting
Prepare 24 Cells Initially- Remove Waste
Salts (300 tons per room), Scale Loose
Rocks, Install Roof Bolts, Grade Floor
Drill New 8' x 1,400' Ventilation
Case and Outfit
Shaft
Construct 50 New Stoppings and Remove
Existing 50 Stoppings, 6 New Ventilation
Raises (600 ft), 10,000 ft New Drifts
continued
36,000
256,000
52,000
63,000
92,000
1,749,000
2,750,000
1,687,000
4,437,000
156
-------
TABLE D (continued)
SERVICE
DESCRIPTION
INSTALLED
EQUIPMENT
COST, $
UNDERGROUND SERVICE BUILDINGS
Office
Record Room
Lunch Room
Rest Rooms
First Aid Station
Stock Rooms
Vehicle Service Station
Repair Shop
Decontamination Room
400 sq ft, R&F, MW, L&P, Furniture
600 sq ft, R&F, MW, L&P, Furniture
600 sq ft, R&F, MW, L&P, Furniture
Two 150 sq ft, R&F, MW, L&P, Furniture
300 sq ft, R&F, MW, L&P, Furniture
900 sq ft (400, 300, 200 sq ft), R&F,
MW, L&P, Furniture
1,000 sq ft Open Area with Workbench
900 sq ft Shop Area with Workbench and
Equipment
2,400 sq ft, roof and 3 side walls, L&P,
Equipment
16,000
24,000
24,000
12,000
12,000
37,000
8,000
20,000
78,000
231,000
157
-------
APPENDIX E
TABLE E. BASE CASE LABOR REQUIREMENT AND COSTS
DIRECT LABOR
Men/Shift
Men/Day
Rate
$/Hr
Annual Cost
$/Yr
SURFACE OPERATION:
Waste Receiving & Unloading
Wei ghmaster/Di spatcher
Operator, Tow Tractor
Operator, Tank Truck & Car Unloading
Operator, Hopper Car & Truck Unloading
Operator, Forklift
Labor, Drum Cleaning
Labor, General
Foreman
17
2
1
2
0
0
2
2
J_
10
4
3
4
1
5
4
4
J.
27
9.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
8.70
8.70
11.10
91,200
75,600
100,800
25,200
126,000
83,520
83,520
53.280
639,120
Waste Treatment
Operator, Type A Waste Treatment
Operatoi , Type A Waste Precipitation
Operator, Type A Waste Filtration
Operator, Chemical Feed
Operator, Type B Treat & Filtration
Labor, Type B Waste Filtration
Foreman
10 10
20
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
8.70
11.10
100,800
50,400
50,400
100,800
100,800
41,760
53,280
498.240
Containerization
Operator, Drum Unloading Forklift
Labor, Drum Unloading
Labor, Drum Storage
Foreman, Drum Unloading
Operator, Fill Station
Labor, Drum Handling
Operator, Forklift
Foreman
22 22
2
6
4
2
14
6
6
44
10.50
8.70
8.70
11.10
10.50
8.70
10.50
11.10
50,400
125,280
83,500
53,280
352,800
125,280
151,200
106.560
1,048,300
Plant Wastewater Treatment
Operator, Waste Concentration System
Operator, Boiler
Labor
Operator, Incinerator
Foreman
TOTAL SURFACE OPERATION
1.5 1.5
1 1
1 1
.5 .5
1
1
1.5
1
1
.5
1
555
54 47 5
continued
4.5
3
3
1.5
3
15
106
10.50
10.50
8.70
10.50
11.10
113,400
75,600
62,640
37,800
79.920
369,360
2.555.020
158
-------
TABLE E (continued)
SUBSURFACE OPERATION:
Loading, Hoisting & Unloading
Operator, Loading Forklift
Labor, Loading
Operator, Hoisting
Operator, Unloading Forklift
Labor, Unloading
Foreman
Men/Shift
Hen/Day
4
2
2
4
2
_2
16
Rate
$/Hr
10.50
8.70
10.50
10.50
8.70
11.10
Annual Cost
$/Yr
100,800
41,760
50,400
100,800
41,760
_ 53,280
388,800
Operator, Haul Truck
Labor, Hauling
Foreman
2
1
.5
3.5 3.5
10.50
8.70
11.10
100,800
41,760
26.640
169,200
Operator, Forklift
Labor
Foreman
1
2
.5
1
2
.5
3.5, 3.5
10.50
8.70
11.10
50,400
83,500
26,640
160,560
Storage Cell & Haulway Preparation
Operator, Frontend Loader
Operator, Haul Truck
Operator, Grader
Operator, Roof Bolter
Operator, Sealer
Labor
Foreman
TOTAL SUBSURFACE OPERATION
1
2
1
2
1
1
.5
8.5
23.5
1
2
1
2
1
1
.5
8.5
23.5
0
0
0
0
0
0
p_
0
0
17
47
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
10.50
8.70
11.10
50,400
100,800
50,400
100,800
50,400
41,760
26,640
421,200
1,139,760
MAINTENANCE LABOR,
SURFACE OPERATION:
Welder
Machinist
Electrician
Mechanic
Pipefitter
HVAC
11.10
11.10
11.10
11.10
11.10
11.10
26,640
79,920
79,920
79,920
53,280
79,920
continued
159
-------
TABLE E (continued)
SURFACE OPERATION (Continued)
Hen/Shift
Men/Day
Rate
$/Hr
Annual Cost
$/Yr
Operator, Equipment
Technician, Instrument
Foreman
Mechanic, Vehicle
Mechanic Helper, Vehicle
16
2
3
3
2
J_
26
10.50
11.10
11.10
11.10
9.50
50,400
79,920
79,920
53,280
22,880
685,920
SUBSURFACE OPERATION:
Hoist Serviceman
Shaft Repairman
Ventilation Serviceman
Mechanic
Electrician
Machinist
Utility Man
General Maintenance Crew
Foreman
12 12
3
1
3
3
2
3
6
8
_4
33
11.10
11.10
11.10
11.10
11.10
11.10
11.10
11.10
11.10
79,920
26,640
79,920
79,920
53,280
79,920
159,840
213,120
106.560
879,120
ADMINISTRATIVE & STAFF PERSONNEL
SURFACE OPERATION:
Manager
Assistant Manager
Engineer
Chemist, Lab & Quality Control
Inspector
RN & Safety Engineer
Guards & Custodian
Accountant, Clerical, Stenographer
Traffic Engineer
Warehouseman
25 14
1
2
2
6
4
6
9
11:
2
_4
44
25.50
18.80
16.50
13.50
13.50
11.10
10.50
io.so
11.10
10.50
61 ,200
90,240
79,200
162,000
129,600
133,200
201,600
277,200
53,280
100.800
1,288,320
SUBSURFACE OPERATION:
Inspector
Accountant, Clerical, Stenographer
Underground Supervision
53,280
91,2QO
53,280
197,760
NOTE: « Labor, ccst includes 30» payroll additive and 8» overtime compensation.
i Number of significant figures shown in this table may exceed those
justified by accuracy of the estimate.
160
-------
APPENDIX F
HAZARDOUS WASTE STORAGE AT HERFA-NEURODE, GERMANY
Inspection Visit
of the
Hazardous VJaste Storage
at
Herfa-Ncurode, Germany
of
Kali & Salz
by
Charles H. Jacoby
for
Bechtel Subcontract (E.P.A.)
161
-------
Kali und Salz Hazardous Waste Storage at Herfa-Neurode, Germany
Introduction
The storage of hazardous wastes in the Kali und
Salz A.G. at Herfa-Neurode in West Germany is the first com-
mercial attempt to store such wastes on a large scale. Mr.
Charles H. Jacoby (formerly of International Salt Co.) in
September of 1976, visited the operation and what follows is
a summary of his observations.
The term waste storage is used by the Germans
primarily because of the fact that for the first three years
of placement, the waste remains the property of the producer.
The material can be retrieved at Kali und Salz's option at
the producer's expense if the material does not meet the
specifications agreed upon by Kali und Salz and as shown in
the form A and the letter of acceptance furnished to the pro-
ducer after approval of the'mining authorities.
After three years the waste becomes the property of
Kali und Salz if no other terms are agreed upon in writing.
During the five years of operation, there has been no occasion
to retrieve material to return to a producer.
162
-------
Geology
The underground depository at Herfa-Neurode is
located in the southern part of the Permian Zechstein Basin.
This extensive area of sedimentation, encompassing northwest
Germany, the Netherlands and the larger part of Denmark, is
well known for its voluminous production of potassium salts.
The Zechstein evaporite sequence consists of four distinct
cycles, each beginning with the deposition of a clastic,
followed by one or more phases of sodiums, several levels of
potassium salts and terminating with the deposition of a re-
gressive halite or anhydrite. Figure 1 depicts the typical
stratigraphy and thickness in the area.
The depository is located at a depth of about 700m
in Zechstein 1 (Zl), a basin margin deposit. Figure 2 depict
a typical cross section of the "Thdringen" potash bed (KITh).
Above this level is a cover of rock salt approximately 170m
in thickness which, in turn, bears layers of clay and argil-
laceous earth, a cavernous dolomite and an impervious clay.
This forms an absolutely impervious seal to the variegated
sandstone lying above. In the dolomite, waste brine from the
potash refineries is disposed of. A 100m thick layer of rock
salt immediately below the depository forms a barrier, pro-
hibiting connections with the lower strata.
s
163
-------
Stratigraphy and Thicknesses
jf German Zechstein in the Werra - Fulda -Area
3 tratigrp ohy
Zechslcin
3 and 4
Zechslein 2
Zechstein 1
Z41
Ca3
Z3t
T2No
T2 A
T2
Na1y
K1H
Nalp
KITh
Nalcx
Al*
CaAl
Cal
Tl
21C
Upper Zechslcintetlen
Plaly Dolomite
Lower Zechsleinlcllen
Halile
Zwibclienbdliiidi
Anhydrite
Salt Clay
Upper Werra Halite
Potashbed .. HE5SEN "
Middle Werra Halite
Polashbed THURINGEN"
Lower Werra Halite
Lower Werra Anhydrite
Anhj/drilknolenschiefer
Zechstei/i Limestone
Copper Shale
Conglomerate
Thickncs
Werra
10
20
35
5
10
10
100
3
60
3
100
5
5
8
03
0-3
ses ( m }
Fulda
10
not typical
40
10
-
10
50
2,5
55
2,2
90
3
/,
7
03
5
FIGURE 1 - TYPICAi STRATIGPTvPHY OF !'HUM I AN ZTCIISTKIH SEQUENCE
164
-------
Normatprofif des l/nferen Lagers fKaliffoz Thurmgcn)
fur das cvcstl/che VV'crragcbicf
•urn l)r ri.Rjlh. KJS.C!
Htftifref k'iffa
; IN* Wl
—T-T" ' \ Obcre Ijfs^ciffcitJie
FIGURE 2 - CROSS SECTION OF "TI1URINCEN" POTASH BED
165
-------
Figure 3 shows the location of the Herfa-Neurode
facilities with respect to Bad Hersfeld, the nearest town
of any size. The area has extensive mining operations as
depicted in Figure 4. The storage facility is located
(Figure 5) in the far northwest corner of the mine, some
4 km from the shaft area. Figure 6 details a section of the
storage area.
166
-------
MAD STAB ci1: 200 000 I Urn
\
' FIGURE 3 - LOCATION MAP OF HERFA-NEURODE FACILITIES
167
-------
n 9
CO
ThQrlngrn
—iVVVWi
Schacfil li • 'i...
__ ri,nn,.n7;V^;0;^
Grubenfeld Haltorl
FIGURE 4 - MINIKG OPERATIONS IN THE HERFA-NEURODE AREA
5 km
Grubenfeldubersicht
Kaliwerk Wintershat
Grubtnlftd Wlnlfrshall 1. Sohlf
Herfo 2.
T»il ' Hallor/ 1.
-------
j L-J ^ r>—f \
ig-g'D 0*1
'o'Q'DgDcK
I a D:D b a a b'b.Lcu.Y
\P.P.P.P-P.P n'p ti T;ibp.a a-nb
•^ a D'G'LJ r'^ q cliTtj IJ'G a n.n:f
irsf ^1 "d a'o'ij u G'o.acr
VAJ n"^ D Q.P m"J G a
^D.aTj-d'
3.D.D-D d:p.n"q-p Ulj'y .
70 a o'b a g'p-q.a-g'b'm
"^J^JQ a [d.p'Q Qp'ao-c
nj.u a'd a g '"' ""
fVaci o D o"O DG
'•'Vjaci1-'-"-""-1—r-
:-_-_U-v, .^QD
nraSf] a oS oVu Ul
CD
Sj
..- - ^.-^.- -. a'i7iVa.'Dni];u[fLi
] a a B drp a a.pjDjQ.n^G.n p1Gp.n..dia
5.a,a" D.D D-JJ D a
"a n
rt D'd-p ap'gp^
M ff n.^nv,r;"i'D"C?1"D-
ffc.ij.j up D'O r
'"j Gp.a.p p'D r;
r'iA"/n'a'b
,k"i.u:Ua a a.acr:
a
FIGURE 5 - HAP OF THE liF.RFA-NEURODE STORAGE AFX
169
-------
U LT\_r ^
-" • ¥>'">*•.
n;D-D D LJ
^» - » f 0". •»*
DT
Ou
• « "^ >^. — •« 'r o(/-wV:
i.':n a G a a_n.[_j?J.Lj!
a "a d
„. „. ..
^f n' q r^J"D"n' ra^aa
-1-' <&s$y"~y.-> \" Houioj I
e^
ri>c.. v;.- J- 1A ^-'- 7 *" "^ • ••
-oTMi.g p-ti
' .'.S^X^ ^•"^>-
AUS.JC
a D.Q-D D
Q
L
n cTQ c
FIGURE 6 - DETAIL HAP OF STORAGE AREA
170
-------
Previous Mining Operations
The mining of potash was the primary reason for
the construction of Herfa-Neurode Mine. Reportedly, this
mine was started in 1901 for the exploitation of the low
grade potash ore which ran between 8 and 11% K20. A room
and pillar system was used since trackless LHD equipment
was introduced in 1969 where the room widths were 12-14
meters with basically square pillars of a dimension of
12-14 feet on each side, depending upon depth and rock
mechanical properties of the potash mined. There was no evi-
dence of undue pillar stressing. The height of the room
openings is 2 to 3 meters which is a governing factor in
the storage operations.
During recent years headings were driven as shown
in Figure 7. This shows 3 contiguous 4 meter wide headings
being driven in a V wedge. The three headings are four
meters wide by 7 meters long. These headings or panels were
drilled with auger drills and shot to form a wedge shaped pile
of broken oxe.
Generally speaking, the mine is somewhat similar
to the Retsof Mine of International Salt Company. The section
of potash bearing salt which is being mined is at a depth of
731 meters.
171
-------
or
FIGURE '7 - MINING HEADING
172
-------
Conversion
Reportedly, the principal cost of conversion lies
in the clean up of waste salt and debr-s,-scaling^and renewed
roof bolting to guarantee safe roof conditions. Prior to be-
ginning this clean up, the roof is inspected for loose salt
or slabs. These areas of possible roof problems are drilled
with low angle holes; light charges of dynamite inserted into
the holes, detonated and the possible dangerous material
blasted down. Holes are drilled into the roof and 1m 20cm
roof bolts installed. The 2cm bolts are shell type bolts
anchored in salt on a 2 meter pattern. Plates over the bolt
heads hold the roof in place.
Subsequent to the installation of the bolts, a
payloader scoops up the waste salt and debris and dumps it
into breaks or rooms which can not be used for storage. rhe
governing factor in the use of a room for storage is the mini-
mum permissible room height of 2 meters 30 centimeters. The
floor has to be thoroughly prepared by grading and adding fine
salt, which is in turn compacted by vibrators. The rooms are
now ready for storage.
173
-------
Method and Materials to be Stored
A master plan for the storage of materials has
been developed for the more than 700 compounds handled.
These compounds are separated into 19 different storage
categories. Categories of storage vary from single com-
pounds to multi-compound compartments.
There are three basic containers, normally 55 gal-
lon steel drums, but occasionally smaller steel drums and
plastic drums.
Brick walls are built at prescribed intervals in
keeping with the type of wastes to be stored. When a pre-
determined volume of a given waste has been stored, a brick
wall 12 meters long, 30 dm thick and 2*5 meters high is built
across the room. These brick walls are hand laid at a cost
of 3,500 Deutsche Marks or $1520 per wall. Most of the walls
have to be paid for by the producers, and this is agreed upon
in the letter of acceptance, if the material they deliver
makes this necessary to avoid bad odor or with respect to
safety rules and ventilation requirements set by the mine or
the mining authorities.
Special substances, such as outdated drugs, were put
in an isolated fenced room under lock and key.
174
-------
Ventilation
Two shafts service the storage area. One of these
carry the downcast fresh air for ventilation while the other
is up cast. The down cast air stream is split in the shaft
so that 2,500 m /min. goes to the storage operation while the
remainder of the flow is diverted to the active mining areas.
This section of down cast area shaft is the only mutual con-
tact between the material to be stored and the areas in which
mining is currently being conducted.
No water was observed either in the mine or in the
man shaft. Where the two shafts penetrated the aquifer over-
lying the Zechstein salt formations, steel tubbing was used.
This steel tubbing has been caulked by using lead in the
joints.
Air entering the mine from the down cast shaft
travels along the 4.5 kilometer haulageway leading to the
storage area. This same haulageway is used for vehicular
traffic carrying waste to storage. Exhaust air is carried
in an isolated return air system and discharged to the up
cast air shaft. Air from this shaft is discharged directly
to the atmosphere with no prior filtering or scrubbing.
175
-------
Storage Charges & Tonnages
Storage charges are based on metric tons with the
current cost being 122.80 DM (2.3 dm- $1.00). The density
of the material being stored is usually not taken into con-
sideration. The greatest weight of a drum filled with dry
bulk waste is 500 kg. Normally, a skip load consists of 8
tons. Thus, in order to meet their standard hoist of 200-300
tons per shift (1 shift per day) they must lower an average
of 40 tons per hour.
During the last four years of operation approximately
100,000 tons of waste have been stored. In 1975, about 40,000
tons of waste were disposed of at Herfa-Neurode. The projected
tonnage for this year is between 36 to 38,000. It is estimated
that the current storage rate requires 150,000 m of space/year.
Reportedly, the mining operations will create some 2 x lp
O
m /yr. from a tonnage of 25/000 tons daily.
176
-------
Summary & Conclusions
With the exception of lowering the waste into the
mine through the fresh air down cast air shaft and the materials
•transport to the storage area in the fresh air haulageway, we
were in basic agreement with the German operation.
The Germans were prepared for spillage clean up; for
example, if steel drums or other containers had been punctured
by the fork lift or dropped from the truck.
Of particular significance was their system of
scheduling and coding waste shipments. The waste producer
makes application for the storage of their waste by chemical
composition and volume. After permission is granted, the
tentative date of shipment is stipulated and a 24 hour shipping
notice is given by Kali und Salz. When the shipment is made,
copies of the "Waste-Waybill" (Abfallbegleitschein) are given
to the respective authorities so that transport control is
possible. Upon receipt of the shipment, a maximum of 24 hours
of surface "shed" storage is provided. The responsibility for
the waste is assumed by Kali und Salz at the time the material
is unloaded from the trucks after examination of the load and
waste-waybill.
Material to be lowered into the mine is taken directly
from the surface transport vehicle or from the shed storage and
placed in the mine cage ready for lowering into the mine. This
177
-------
skip has a stipulated load capacity of 8 tons '(metric) .
All drums are delivered on one-way pallet and
strapped with a steel band to avoid dislocation on the pallets
during the transport and handling with fork lifts. Two pallets
are stacked on top of each other. This standard configuration
varies with the density of the material being stored. Drums
are coded in keeping with a master map and ledger book. Upon
arrival underground, the code numbers are recorded in a separate
ledger and placed on another map in the exact spot where the
material is to be stored.
A full emergency medical facility to cover all even-
tualities has been set up near the bottom of the shaft. This
facility is equipped with showers, medicines and baskets. Ad-
jacent to this facility is a "double" change room, together
with a lunch room. Elaborate precautions have been taken with
respect to both lunch room sanitation and contamination.
178
-------
IC.Ii »~i S.1» *G,
.~.1l.<»g. ligl K.il.1. fotll.di 10JOJ*
7«l««:
30M (v.,mitiiu..fl)
•>nkr»t>i<«fu«g: K.N-B.-V AC *••••!
(GL2 S302OTOO) Konlo 147SJ01
IH»« Ztid
NadtricM t
Ttl.fon -Di>nt>»M
Hauptvcrwaltung
K..1.I, Frl.d,:* Ebtrl.Sl.^Bt ISO
Untertage-Deponie Eerfa-Neurode
Selu? geehrte Herren!
Vir iibersenden Ihnen die "Allgemeinen Geschaftsbedingungen" und
das "Formblatt A" unserer Untertage-Deponie Herfa-Neurode.
Die Untertage-Deponie Herfa-Neurode ist insbesondere fiir die
Ablagerung -von -Abfallstoff en geeignet, die -anderweitig nicbt.
tunweltunschadlich beseitigt werden konnen.
Ira Interesse der Sicherheit des Betriebes unter Tage unterliegt
sie jedoch folgenden Beschrankungen:
1. Die Abfallstoffe diirfen in den praktisch geschlossenen
Raumen unter Tage keine ziindfahigen, explosiven oder
toxischen Gas - Luft .- Gemische bilden.
2. Flussige Abfallstoffe konnen nicht abgelagert werden.
Solche Abfallstoffe mussen init geeigneten Mitteln in
absolut stichfeste Form uberfiiart verden, so dafi keine
freien Flxissigkeiten austreten konnen.
Bei Abfallstoffen, die zunachst infolge dieser Beschrankungen
nicb-t angenommen werden konnen und deren anderweitige umwelt-
unschadliche Beseitigung technisch und wirtschaftlich nicht ge-
geben ist, lassen sich in vielen 'Fallen durch gemeinsam zu erar-
beitende Verfahren (Konditionierung, besondere Verpackung,
AbmaueruDg untertage usw.) die Voraussetzungen fiir die sichere
Ablagerung in der Untertage-Deponie schaffen.
Hit der Ubersendung des "Formblatts A" (in zweifacher Ausfer-
tigung) an die Kali + Salz AG., Abt. B 3, 35 Kassel, Postfach 1O2O29
erkennt der Beseitigungspflichtige die "Allgemeinen Geschafts-
"bedingungen" an. Dariiber binaus gelten die in der schriftlichen
Annabjnebestatigung der Untertage-Deponie ggf. festgelegten verein-
barten besonderen Bedingungen.
179
-------
Gcnehmigungsverf shren
Per Beseitigungspflichtige erhalt nach Priifung des betreffenden
Abfallntoffes und der Genehmigung durch das Bergamt Bad Hersfeld
von der Untertage-Deponie Herfa-Neurode die r.chriftliche Annahae-
bestatigung, .der eine Kopie des mit dem Genehmigungsvernerk des
ISerganites versehenen "Formblatts A" beigefiigt 1st. AnnabinebeEta-
tigung, bergbehordliche Genehmigung und Codc-Bezeichnung geltea
fur die wiederholte Anlieferung des gleichen Abfallstoffes_ (s.§§ 13
UDd 11 der "Allgemeinen Geschaftsbedingungen" ) . "In "der" Annahmebe-
statigung und auf dem "Formblatt A" ist die Code-Bezeichnung ange-
geben, mit der die Behalter, in denen der betreffende Abfallstoff
angeliefert wird, deutlich lesbar und dauerhaft zu beschriften
sind.
Mit diesen Unterlagen kann der Beseitigungspflichtige dann gemaB
den Verordnungen der Bundesregierung vom 29- 7* 7^ zu den §§ 11,
12 und 13 des Abfallgesetzes bei seiner zustandigen Behorde die
Transportgenehxnigung beantragen. Nach. Erhalt der Transportgeneh.-
Bigung vereinbart der Beseitigungspflichtige mit dem Betrieb der
Untertage-Deponie Herfa-Neurode die verbindlichen AnlieferujDgs-
termine.
Auf den Begleitscheinen nach der Abfallnach'weisverordnung vom
29- 7- 7^» § 2 Abs. 1 miissen zusatglich Code-Nujimer und Zab.1 der
angelieferten Beha'lter angegeben werden.
Anlieferung
Die Anlieferung kann nur mit LKW erfolgen. Die Behalter, in der
Regel 200-Liter-Stahlblechfasser mit SpannringverschluB, miissen
mechanisch einwandfrei, dicht verschlossen und diirfen auBerlich
nicht verunreinigt sein.
Die Behalter sind auf Paletten (AbmaBe bis zu 1200 x 1200) anzu-
liefern und durch ein horizontales Stahlband so zu umschlingen,
daB ein Verrutschen beim Transport und beim Be- und Entla"den"
sicher verhindert wird. Einweg-Paletten konnen bei bestimmten
Stoffen vorgeschrieben werden. Auf einer Palette dxirfen nur Ab-
fallstoffe gleicher Art und Behalter gleicher GroBe angeliefert
werden.
Hit freundlichem GruB und Gliickauf!
\KALI UND SALZ AKTIENGESELLSCHAPT
(i.V. von der Ehe)
180
-------
Kail und Snlac AQ
3500 K_««ol1, F,i»d,icJi-Ebnrl-Str«Be 160
Poitf.eh 102029
Tol.fon: (0561)3011 (Dmcfcw.hl 301396)
F.,n.*,r.ibBr:992418
„ ..
"'I"'* H«rf«-N-"«>««»
6<32 H.rmgen (We,,.). Werk Wintar.h.ll
™efon: (06624)811
Farnichreiber: 493383
GeichlfUbecfingungen (i. J.
II
Dit Kill und S«li Am«r,0B..|lich,M - i™ fol
Firm. ».>.,nt>«rt mil K + S, Belrit bxll.ilung H.
Eini.lh.it.-, Ob.r d.r, Uml.ng und d,. ,,:,,,_£, F<
n. Oab.i w.rd i JOr di
Ullig.
in Mon*U.
jng w!rd 14
firfcilct di« R
-,.-,,._. . , ^ . .
(3) D«r in Absitz 1 oen.nnle Gr-indprsii •nihlll iu TO % *n P«'«on»IfcOiten
gibundtn* Au^endunjo... Bbi »in«r And«n,n0 dor P.-.on*li,oll»n Indnrl «ldi
• u* mil •oforiiQ.r W.»kung im Olfl,c^,n VB.h»llni. d.r an P.r.on»llio»len C»-
buftdent 7«p| dei Grundp'B»»i. M»9gabend *0r «in» X-d«ajng ill di* Andeojng
da* L^hnl«fifvartf_gtt iwndien der Ir-du«lri«fltw»fkichtf1 Bc'gbiu und Entrgi*,
Bod>um( und d»m Kativer*in •- V., H*onov«r, vorn I. 7. 1674
Der Gojndprelt «n!hlH xu 30% Ab>cff«ibupg und Verjiniung barf ilgestelllar
G»fltfl. Ande't «ich def Indei der Frreugerpre-.e d*' InvBihlionsgOler-lndustriii
(Gnindlig«: VerBff«nUicf*ung de« Sta*i»lischen Bundenm!»i, Wiesbaden. F»rh-
•*n< M, R»ihe 3. unlar .tndei der £r/«ug..p,e,si irdu>ln»l|*r prorfuk-e und
lnvetlMien«gOi«r*( A-tsgtnjirahl: Indei f(jf d*f J«^' l?^). d«m |nje<1 i,_*i dar
• i Abid^'e
K+S
fr«! d!»
(1) K + S tst Cber di*
Verlrsgsi ninaui von ihr
•) die Firmi n.cM fnil
lic^«n Besli^muncen Cb*r den Fill HP| $ 0 rfW...
liper^ngi ve plficrluro gd-nlfl $ 1 L«lr«it w*™
den njch §2 >«r«inb»'1fn MftJdepflidilen n*dv
nr.lcn Gnjnd« vot|i»g|,
pd«f dutch b»Kflrd!>d-p
,
b) einer d»r ir § 8 Abi 1 «-b
c) dif Ablige'ung dwch G«^
wind,
d) K 4 S tw'-tiit, dif die Ablig«njig au« betrieblichen, von K -f- S nicM
irenehuldetan GrOnden unm&glidi cd»r unumylb*/ iBL
p) Die Befreiung von der Ab'epfrungsverp(l!c^1i.ng gilt nur (Of die (••eiligen
Tei'mpngofl di-i ibiu!*gprnd«n Ab'tMiloHei, (Or di« einer d«r in Aba. 1 g»-
nennlen GrDnde aingelrejen lit.
P) Di* Firmi h*t die Abr_tll>toH« in einpr d*n jeweiTt gellenden geietrlichert
Beitimmungen und b»Ki5rdlidien Anordnungen entipredianden Vorpiciung knru-
liefarn. Diruba' hinju> gelten di» mil K + S ve'einbirten und in der ichrill-
lichen Annanmeheiflttgung (eilgslegton Anfo'derung*n &/i Art und Be*chaffen-
k>*i1 d*r Verpidtung.
(1) K + S muB vertengen, - Kofern dai Bergtml H*r»feld tit lusllndig* Auf-
• ieW^beKBrd* di* von den Laboralorien dm Bpsflittpurgspflirhtigert gamicfiUn
Anoaben oichl »n*rV*ftn( -, daft der Be»4»i[ig«nS»pflicn!ig* PrOf«M«ite er^e-k-nn-
|«r P/Qf|l*Han anlalien l«8l die au den A^yiban m Fsrmblatt A Slellung
(vehrr-en und Auiugen Dber die Eignung der Ab'alltlof'e hin^ichtlidi d»r Ablt-
D*rvno «ol*/ d»n Bedinnungen d*r Unlerlage Depon,« wie^«n.
*
I •
0) Di* Ab'agerung d*' Ab'alUloMa bedarf *il der Be-
hlMer und dai Bruttoy^-itiil der LaHung durdi eine ^legakirle belegt werdwi.
Vor der Abltdyng «LT( dam ZerrianpleU d*' Sc^idii-nltgi) H.r^t-Neo'od*, HeH«-
Srund, »rifd d'* Obweinilimmuog der W«renbogie it papier* mit der Ladu"%g
yrc*i Zlhluig und Wlpung der Lading CbcrpKlH Wird keine rri_npi*r». oder
SewicihiimlBige Dbe.r*ir>»limrnung feitgnilBlIt. *>ird K -f S die Fimn v.ratlA-
'gen. FOr oie Ai/ftlining der fehlend*n Obeitinitimmuna KeJ d>e F'frni ru
•orgen. Bi| Jut Aufkllrung *>rv*aig*r Unilimmiglieilen k*nn K-f- S di* AnnaKm*
**rwaigenv
(1) Di* Pflicht von K 4- S ZLT Ver^iJ^ng der ebgelagerlen Abl»lli!oH. b*-
eteht lolingtt, bit die AblallrloHe in dti ttgenlum von K -J- S ObergeKen.
I
(2) K + S Iftnn d''e R0cknihrr>» ebge'ip.Her AbfallitoH* nur d«nn v*flf*j_r«,
wenn die Abf*H&tof(e rvch! dem Formblelt A, odor don hmtid^tlidi der V«rj,ait-
kurg ytlroWmntn Virembanjnynn enliprechan, oder wenn ein ar.dere/ v*id\lig«f
Gnjnd vorliegt, der nic^l in die Ri»ikc»r!iSre von K -f S Ullt
Mil Eigentuni|0b*rgi_pg tfh»cM j&de ROdt^mhrr •v>rpnic^tijnfl.
(3) Obi K -f 5 einen RQe_-n«Vir«emipnjati gemtfi Abi. 3 eui ein.Ti G^-.d« iu«,
d*n die Firmi ru vertrelen hat. «o hat die Firmt all* ndi d«r«ui •nj»b*r<_j«n
Koiten zu 1'agen.
(4) Ein Anipruch *uf EnUHur^g der geriHllen V»rgDlungen Im Fell* d*r Aul-
Obung dec RJeinaKmetn»prucha gemle Abi. 2 beileht nic^L
§ 13
IK
D»J
•H A til »t*enti;c*>4»r GailAndleil de* Verti>ge».
I «
And*njng*n, Erglnjungen ur^ di* KQndiawna d*i V»r1f»Q«i b*dQH»n rf^r
SrfifWorm. v
I 18
Allgemeiner Geiid
Irl PCu»«l.
181
-------
Koll uncl Snlz AG
Foimbl.tl A
UNTERTAGE-DEPONIE HERFA-NEURODE
dor
Kail unrl Sofz AG
Belricb Merfa-Neurode T .-'.
.6432 Hennncn (Worra), Wcrk Winlershall
.Telc(on:~ .;. (06624) 811 ;
Fo'rnJchreibor: 493 3B3
3500 Kaiso! 1, rriedncfv-Ebt/1-SI/aBo ICO
Poslfach.102028
(0561)3011 (Duichwahl 301395)
Femjdiroibor:092419
Dieses Formblall A Isl v'om Bespitigungspllichlignn In doppcltei Auslertigung an Kali und Salz AG, T 8 3 -',
35 Kaisell, Posl'ach imcrM , zu ubcrsenden. Die schiifllicho Annahmebeslallgung erlolgt nach ObcrprOfung der Angaben.
J^BfirirHr-una_dfS 4bfslKM'cs,_Mengtt~flr^ct5rJ/fjp_»cl:uns (ggf. SloH^cnn; eichnung_n_«cll_ AD^R b:w. EVO):
2. Tf cduVlionsl'CfVunft :,
3. Codtbdokhnung (Mil K+S lu ve,oinl,»,en):'
t V1« v.urdo'der AblallsloH nach seinem Anfallen beim DcsoitigungspriicJiligen behandell und gelagert? (dazu ggf. Angabs'
--^ RtVslnlern"er Vorschrifler, benordlicher BeslimmunBcn usw.). .-^ '^ i. ' ^-r_i. :. ','~- -"^~--. .'.'^ »'s ' 'lr~ -'•' ';"'*-
5. Chomi^cJic Beieichnung der .
Liniolkomponenlcn
1.
•2.
S.
4.
5.
'6.
7.
6.
•9.
10.'
11.
0
Anleil
mm.
: in I -
maK. •
. ;
6. BescliBfTenheU (bet 3D °C):
^Jlussig .-• - Q fesl erstafrle ScJimelze1 ..Q schlBmmlg/slichFesi • Q
zShdussig/leigig Q fest-Vornig ~ . Q schlammig / f lussig -Q
"" '" fcst-pulverig Q "
7. Wnsser-bzw. FlussigVeilsgehaU ^Gewic/us-l) J
Aui v-elcJien Sioffcn bcslchen die FIGssigkeilen? ~
S.Schmohpunld (QC)l;_i - :" '• ;11. PH-Worl'j- '
S.SicdepunU (°C) . 1?. Gasdruck bci 20 °C (Tern) ^
10.FIammpunH" (°C) : ; '"•"•-•'.'.- bei50°C(Tcm)
, 13. \VelcJic Gaiv. nann dc; AbfalKtoFI durch evcnluelle NacJueaMIonen unlor den Ablagerungsbcdingungon entw!d«Bln?
») Wonn er im AnlieFefungsbehaller elngesdi'osscn blc">bt:
t) Wenn ci mil Lufl in Dcruhrung kommt:
c) Vr'enn ei mil dcn> ansleKenden San in De'Otr'ung kommt:
d) Del wcldien Temperaluien tielcn Zerjeliungcn. Ausgasuogen, sponlanfj Zcrxetiungen oder Eiploslonen aul ? :
WelrfiD Gasgomijdie kfinncn bei 3eri~bet»efTcnden Tcmperaturrn entslehen?"
182
-------
14. Anoibtn ubtr die toilkolonifchen Eiaenichiifi.n .>. *ii n , n
u n tigontcnan.n das AbfallttorTet (ggf. «usfohrlidie Angaben gesondorl beifQaen)
15. Bei Traniporlschaden, insbosondere Brimjen:
a) Geeignete Loschmillel, unzulSssigo Loschmitlel
b) Atemtdiutz
c) Angaben Ober Varichrifton (behfcrdliche und/oder werksinterne) zur Bnhandlung von Personen, die mil dom AbfaMsloff
direkt in BcrOhrung gekommen sind (Schleimhaule. Haul) oder die bel BcSnden den enlstohenden Gasen »usge»etzt
war«n (ggf. ausFuhrliche Angabcn gesondert beifOgan)
; Angaben zu den Bedingungen unter Tage der Deponie Herfa-Ncurode
Die AbfallsloFfe warden in loergefordErlcn Abbauen von elwa 2,5 - 3,5 m Hohe abgelagert. Tomperatur: 25 - 30<>C, reUtiva
Luftfeuditigkcil: max. 451. Gehalte der Grubenwetler an Abgasen: CO: ~ 0,001 (Vol.1), COi: ~ 0,1 (Vol. I), NO2; ~ 2,5 (rng/m5).
Das BO'lehendo Salz hat im Mittel folgende Zusammenselzung:
MgSOcHiO(Kieseril): 10 - 201 KG I • MgCli-6H!O (Catnallit): 5 - 10% Unlasliehes (Ton usw.): 1 - 1,5 %
KCI(S)lvin): 10-151 NaCI (Steinsalz): 60-651
Erlclarung
Wir versidhern, daB die im Formblatt A zum Vertrag mil der r^S gemachlon Angabon zutreffen.
Die zur Ablagerung in dio Unterfaga-Dcponio Herfa-Neurode anzulielcrndon Ablallstoffo cnlsprechen den aufgofuhrtan De-
klarationen. Das mil der Declaration und dem Transport beaultragte Personal isl von uns gegen Unterschriflsbeslatigung darauf
hingewiesen worden, daB
a) nur genau dofinierte Abfallstoffo bntsprechend den Angabon dieses Formblatles A zur Abfuhr bareitgestollt,
b) keine anderen als die im Formblatt A definierten Abfallstoffe lur Untoitage-Deponie Herfa-Neurode angoliefert
werden cljrfen.
Verantwortlich
•) FOr die analytischcn Angaben:
b) FOr gowiesorihaMa Doklaration:
c) FDrVerladung und Transport:
Name Telefon
Name des Slel!vertreter«
Anschrift der Firma :
Datum:
RocMsverbindlicrie Unterscbrift
der Firma
Raum (Or Bohordenvermetka:
183
-------
UNTERTAGE-DEPONIE H E R F A - N E U R O D E / -';
3500 Kid>-Eb
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(rlease read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
REPORT NO.
EPA-600/2-77-215
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSIOWNO.
TITLE AND SUBTITLE
COST ASSESSMENT FOR THE EMPLACEMENT OF
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS IN A SALT MINE
5. REPORT DATE
November 1977 (Issuing Date)
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
AUTHOR(S)
B.T. Kown,
J.D. Ruby,
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
R.A. Stenzel, J.A. Hepper,
R.T. Mllligan
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Bechtel Corporation
San Francisco, California 94119
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
1DB064 SOS2 Task 4
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-03-2430
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory--Cin. ,OH
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final July 76 thru May 77
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/14
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Robert E. Landreth, P.O. Phone No. 5l<3/684-7871
16. ABSTRACT
This report presents the results of an economic evaluation of the storage of
nonradioactive hazardous wastes in underground mine openings. This study is a
part of a continuous effort to find a new and better method of disposing or
storing hazardous wastes in an environmentally acceptable manner. The technical
assessment of the hazardous waste storage in underground mine openings performed
in an earlier study (EPA-600/2-75-040) indicated that long-term storage of
hazardous wastes in a room and pillar type salt mine was an environmentally
acceptable method provided that certain precautions are taken. This study is
performed to develop the cost data associated with the storage of hazardous
wastes in a typical room and pillar type salt mine, including the capital and
operating costs. The intent of the study is to reveal economic sensitivity of
various parameters involved in the underground storage of hazardous wastes. In
order to develop the cost data, this study also involved characterization of the
wastes and conceptual design of the waste receiving, treatment, containerization,
and storage facilities.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDEDTERMS
COSATI Field/Group
Waste disposal, sludge disposal,
stabilization, waste treatment,
encapsulating, hazardous materials,
economic analysis, operating costs,
capitalized costs
Solid waste management,
hazardous waste manage-
ment, fixation
13B
13. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
RELEASE TO PUBLIC
19. SECURITY CLASS {ThisReport)
UNCLASSIFIED
199
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
UNCLASSIFIED
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
185
4U.S. GOVERNMENTFHIHHHGOFFlCt 1978— 7 57-140/66Z3
------- |