United States
Environmental Protection
Office of
Radiation Programs
Washington, DC 20460
EPA 520/1-88-009
July 1988
Waste Package Performance
Criteria for Deepsea Disposal
of Low-Level Radioactive Waste

(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1, REPORT NO. ' 2,
EPA-52Q/ 1-88-009
Waste Package Performance Criteria for Deep Sea Di
of Low-Level Radionactive Waste
P. Colombo and M. Fuhrmann
Dept. of Nuclear Energy
Brookhaven National Laboratory
Upton, Long Island, New Yrok 11973
Office of Radiation Programs
401 M Street, SW
Washington, T)C. PlUfifi
YBFCITfl^1? w*
-Do-al July» 1988
This report presents technical information relevant to the packaging of Low-Level
Radioactive Wastes for ocean disposal. Sction 2.2 of the report contains 11
recommended waste package performance criteria. Specifications and rational statement
for each criterion are also included.
Radionuclides Radioactive
Disposal Package
Deep Sea Radiation
Waste Ocean
Release unlimited 20 SECURI

TY CLASS (ThisReport) 21. NO. OF PAGES
sified 43
TY CLASS (This page) 22. PRICE
A93 *>3.&>
EPA Form 2220-1 (Rev, 4-77)
                              PREVIOUS EDITION IS OBSOLETE

                      P, Colombo and M. Fuhrmann
                               July 1988
               UPTON, LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK 11973
         This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by
          The United States Environmental  Protection Agency under
                Interagency Agreement No. AD-89-F-1-558-0
                             Project Officer
                             Robert S. Dyer
                      Analysis and Support Division
                       Office  of Radiation  Programs
                   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                         Washington, DC  20460

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was given a Congressional mandate to
develop criteria, standards, and regulations governing the  ocean disposal of all forms of
wastes pursuant to Public Law 92-532,  the Marine  Protection, Research and Sanctuaries
Act of  1972, as amended.  In  response to this mandate, EPA has initiated a program to
develop regulations and criteria to control the ocean disposal of radioactive wastes.

    The EPA ocean dumping  regulations and criteria were issued in the Federal Register
on January  11, 1977. These  regulations require that high-level radioactive  wastes  be
prohibited from ocean dumping; and all other radioactive materials be contained to prevent
their  direct  dispersion  or  dilution in  ocean  waters.  Furthermore,  these  containerized
radioactive wastes must decay to environmentally innocuous levels within  the life expec-
tancy of the container(s) and/or the inert  matrix.

    The United States Congress has had a continuing interest in the question of ocean
disposal of low-level wastes (LLW) and, in consequence, has recently approved Public Law
(PL) 97-424. This Act amended PL 92-532 to include provisions to specifically consider
the structural aspects of each container when evaluating any permit for the  ocean disposal
of radioactive  waste.

    For the past few  years  the  EPA has been considering  the  question of suitable
packaging of radioactive wastes for sea disposal, both by evaluating the fate of radioactive
waste packages dumped at  formerly used United States ocean dumpsites, and considering
how past packaging designs might be improved. Although  the  EPA has  not  received a
request for a permit to  dispose of LLW in the ocean,  it is incumbent on  vhe Agency to
develop the criteria necessary to evaluate permit requests.

    For determining whether any particular containment system or waste packaging system
is adequate, it  is necessary to  establish a set of performance criteria or guidelines  against
which a particular packaging system can be evaluated.  The following report, prepared by
the Nuclear  Waste Research  Group  of the  Brookhaven  National  Laboratory, contains
recommendations  to  the Environmental Protection Agency  on packaging performance
guidelines and  criteria. The performance criteria present requirements for the behavior of
the waste in combination with its  immobilization agent and outer container in  a deepsea
environment. It is expected that some of the criteria given in this report may be modified or
amended, or new criteria  added as more technical information becomes  available.

    The Environmental Protection  Agency requests agencies and individuals to provide the
Agency with any comments and suggestions pertinent to improving the document and the
recommendations contained therein. Such comments or suggestions should be submitted to
Mr. David E. Janes, Director, Analysis and Support Division, Office of Radiation Programs
(ANR-461), Washington, DC  20460.
                                                      Richard J./yGuimond, Director
                                                      Office of 'Radiation Programs

      This  report  presents  technical  information  relevant  to  the
 packaging  of  low-level  radioactive wastes  (LLW)  for  ocean
 disposal.   Section  2.2  of  the  report contains  11  recommended
 waste package performance  criteria.  Specifications  and
 rationale  statements  for each  criterion  are  also  included.

      The recommended  criteria  were developed in  response  to
 Environmental Protection Agency  responsibilities  under PL 92-532
 and PL 97-424 (see  Foreword  and  Section  1.1).  The Agency's
 existing  (1977) Ocean Dumping  Regulations  contain no waste
 package performance criteria for LLW.  Accordingly,  the Agency
 is now evaluating these recommended  criteria.
Preceding page blank

                                1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background

    Sea disposal of low-level radioactive waste began in the United States in 1946, and
was placed under the licensing authority of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). In
1962, the first commercial shallow-land disposal site was licensed in Beatty,  Nevada. As
land disposal  operations expanded,  ocean disposal  was sharply reduced. The practice
stopped completely  in 1970  upon the recommendations of the Council on Environmental
Quality in  a  Report to  the  President [1].

    Most of the waste disposed of at sea was packaged in second-hand or reconditioned
55-gallon drums filled with  cement so  that the average package density was sufficiently
greater than that of sea water to ensure sinking. It was assumed that all the contents would
eventually be released since the packages were not designed or required to remain intact for
sustained periods of time after descent to the ocean bottom [2].

    In  1965,  the Nuclear  Energy  Agency (NEA)  of the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD), in collaboration  with a  number of  interested
countries, undertook a series of studies of the practicability of joint sea disposal operations
for low-level radioactive wastes. These studies led  to  the  formulation of a number of
conditions relating to the selection of suitable disposal areas, the design of waste containers
and the selection of  ships suitable for disposal operations. Procedures were also adopted for
conducting and supervising these operations to prevent unacceptable radioactive contami-

    On the basis of these  studies,  NEA sponsored the first international sea disposal
operation for radioactive waste in 1967. Five OECD/NEA  Member countries (Belgium,
France, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Netherlands  and  the United Kingdom)
participated in this first  sea disposal operation under  international supervision. During the
next internationally  supervised sea disposal operation in 1969, Italy, Sweden and Switzer-
land also participated while the Federal Republic of Germany abstained. Between 1971 and
1983, only Belgium, the Netherlands, Switzerland and the United Kingdom have used the
sea disposal option. Recently, there has been renewed interest in ocean disposal, both in
this country and abroad, as  a waste management alternative to land burial. It is currently
under review in several European countries and in Japan as a viable method for the disposal
of other than  high-level wastes.

    Although the United States is not presently engaged in ocean disposal of radioactive
waste, it has ratified and,is  a Contracting Party to the London Dumping Convention (an
international agreement to control sources of marine pollution, including  the disposal of
radioactive materials, in international waters) [3]. Also, the United States is a Member
Nation of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)  and a Participating Country to
the OECD Council Decision establishing  a Multilateral  Consultation and  Surveillance
Mechanism for Sea Dumping of Radioactive Wastes [4]. Thus, the United States shares

responsibility with  other nations for the consequences of ocean disposal of radioactive

    The Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (PL. 92-532) gives EPA
the regulatory responsibility for ocean dumping of all materials, including radioactive
waste. This act prohibits the ocean disposal of high-level radioactive waste  and requires
EPA to  control the ocean disposal of all other radioactive waste through the issuance of
permits. In implementing its permit authorities, EPA issued an initial set of regulations and
criteria in 1973 to control the disposal of material into the ocean waters [5]. It was in these
regulations that EPA initially introduced the general  requirement of isolation  and contain-
ment  of radioactive waste as the basic operating philosophy.

1.2 Present Packaging Requirements  for Ocean Disposal

    In 1977, EPA issued final revised regulations and criteria concerning the disposal of
radioactive wastes  in the ocean [6].

    In supporting the containment philosophy, the regulations requke that "the radioactive
materials must be contained to prevent their direct dispersion or dilution  in ocean waters"
and  that  "the materials to be disposed  of must  decay, decompose or radiodecay to
environmentally innocuous materials within the life expectancy of the containers and/or
their  inert matrix."

    The IAEA  recommendations to  the  London Dumping  Convention emphasize  that
isolation and containment  of radioactive  waste be  pursued  through  the use of suitable
packaging to keep radioactive releases "as low as  reasonably  achievable"  [7].

    Both EPA and IAEA have identified the waste package as the primary barrier for the
containment of radioactive waste. However, there appears to be a significant  difference in
package performance requirements between the two organizations. The terms "innocuous"
and  "as low as reasonably  achievable" are not  defined  as  used in the domestic  and
international guidance, respectively. In the  context of the EPA criteria, "innocuous" might
be interpreted as being low concentrations of radionuclides which do not represent a hazard
to man  if released into the marine environment. On the other hand, "as low as reasonably
achievable" refers to limiting radioactive releases, taking into account the state of packag-
ing technology,  economics of package improvements, public health and  sa*ety, and other
societal and socioeconomic considerations.

    The concept proposed in this report envisions the waste disposal system as a series of
barriers necessary to ensure that radionuclides are retained or their movement is retarded to
prevent a hazard to man. A multibarrier concept is assumed which consists of a "contain-
ment system" and  an "isolation system."

    The containment system includes the waste form and the container. In this system each
component augments the other. The container protects the waste  form from erosion and

detrimental affects of prolonged exposures to water, while the waste form provides internal
support of the container against  the  great hydrostatic  pressure  at disposal depths.

    The isolation system consists of the containment system as well as the natural barriers
against radionuclide transport from the disposal site to man. The sediment and suspended
particulates will scavenge  most  of the remaining  activity  released  after the  200-year
lifetime of the container. The small fraction of activity which remains in the water column
will be isolated  by the residence time of water  at the disposal depth  and  the vertical
diffusivity to surface waters.

    The basic criteria and specifications recommended in this section were recommended
in a previous report [8], and are directed specifically toward conditions that influence the
performance of the waste package in a marine disposal environment.  Therefore, it pre-
cludes criteria associated with  other  aspects of ocean disposal such as site selection,
operations, and monitoring.

    Specific  performance criteria are recommended for the waste package and  for the
individual waste package components which include  the waste, the waste form and the
container. Where possible, numerical values are listed to  quantify  criteria.

    While many  of the requirements for the packaging of low-level radioactive wastes
(LLW) for land disposal may be  applicable  to ocean disposal, special conditions of the
deep-sea environment require specific considerations regarding packaging and  package
performance requirements. These special conditions include  exposure of the waste package
to high hydrostatic pressures and the corrosive sea water environment.

2.1 Assumptions

    It was necessary  to make assumptions to enable the development of waste package
performance  criteria.  These assumptions are:

    *  Existing Federal regulations govern the interim storage, transportation and disposal
of radioactive wastes. Waste packages intended for ocean disposal should meet all mini-
mum  Federal requirements, including  relevant United States international treaty  commit-

    •  Only LLW, as defined in the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act (PL 96-573),
is considered for ocean  disposal.

    •  The disposal site is located in ocean waters at an average depth greater than 4,000

    •  The waste package  is not  intended to be routinely retrievable.

    «  Package performance criteria are based upon a multiple barrier concept which
considers the contributions of engineered barriers (waste form, container) and natural
barriers (water column, physical  and geochemical properties of the sediment).

2.2 Waste  Package Performance Criteria
    2.2.1    Criterion:


     2.2.2    Criterion:
The  package should have adequate density to  ensure
sinking to  the  seabed.

The specific gravity of the waste package should not be
less  than  1.2 to ensure sinking to the seabed.

A waste package should  be sufficiently dense to sink
immediately. Although the specific gravity of surface
sea water does  not exceed 1.03, the package should be
sufficiently dense to ensure that its movements during
descent and on  the seabed are not readily influenced by

The  waste package should be designed to remain intact
upon impact with the sea surface  and the seabed.

The  waste  package should be designed to maintain its
integrity upon impact with the sea surface and the ocean
floor at a minimum calculated and/or measured velocity
of 10  meters per second.

There  should be no loss or dispersion of radionuclides
in the event of  damage to  the waste package upon
impact of  the  waste  package with the surface of the
ocean  or with the seabed. The  IAEA,  in its transporta-
tion regulations [9], requires a drop test with a free fall
of 1.2 meters onto an  unyielding plate for waste pack-
ages weighing  less than 5,000  kg.  Tests  conducted on
waste  packages that meet IAEA transport regulations
have shown that the impact of a  package free-falling
from a ship height of 9-15 meters to the ocean  surface
has  not resulted  in package failure [10, 11].

A waste form  falling  from the deck  of  a ship  would
impact the water at about 10 meters per second. In  free
fall tests from  the water's surface to the  ocean  bottom
(5,000 m), 55-gallon  drums,  filled  with cement  and
waste, have  terminal  velocities between  1.7  and 3.1
meters per second  [12,  13].

The impact of the package hitting the  surface  of the
water  is greater than its impact at  the seafloor. There-
fore, the package is expected  to  remain  intact upon
impact with the ocean floor if it meets the impact test

2.2.3     Criterion:
requirements for the  free  fall from  the  ship to the
surface of the ocean. However, sea floor characteristics
should be considered.

The container should be  capable of maintaining its  con-
tents until the radionuclides have decayed to acceptable
limits, as determined by appropriate regulatory authorities.

The waste container should have an expected lifetime in
the deepsea environment of 200 years or 10 half-lives of
the longest  lived radionuclide, whichever  is less.

A reasonable design objective for  the average life ex-
pectancy of  a  LLW  container is 200 years. The two
radionuclides that are found in large quantities in LLW
and have relatively long half-lives (approximately 30
years)  are cesium-137 (Cs-137)  and strontium-90 (Sr-
90). Decay of these isotopes during a 200-year interval
would  reduce the activity to  1 percent of  the original
levels. For example Cs-137 activity from typical  solidi-
fied power reactor waste forms  has been  estimated to
range from 30 to 300 mCi [14]. This activity will  have
decayed  to  between  0.3 and 3.0  mCi  in 200  years.
Depending on the types of activity contained and  their
quantity, some containers may not  requke  a lifetime as
long as 200 years.

Container failure is defined as the first breach  of the
container, when sea water first makes contact with the
waste  form  [15].  This  is consistent with  the  EPA
philosophy  that  "radioactive materials  must  be  con-
tained to prevent their direct dispersion or dilution in
ocean  water." Furthermore, "they must decay, decom-
pose or radiodecay to environmentally innocuous mate-
rial within the  life  expectancy of the containers  and/or
their inert matrix"  [6]. At container failure (after 200
years), only  a small portion of the  waste form is likely
to be exposed  to sea  water. This failure mode,  in the
form of small perforations, has been observed for mild
steel containers retrieved from previously used ocean
disposal sites [16,  17, 18, 19]. Upon failure of the pri-
mary or engineered barrier(s), the secondary or natural
barrier(s) become important. At this point the ability of
sediment and  suspended  particulates to adsorb these
radionuclides and the  residence time of seawater in the

2.2.4    Criterion:
deep ocean would tend to minimize any potential haz-
ards resulting from transport  of released radiormclides
from the site. A recent study of the adsorption capacity
of sediment collected  from  the  Atlantic 3,800-meter
radioactive waste disposal site indicates that 90 percent
of the Cs-137 is adsorbed by sediment under well mixed
conditions at 5 °C [20, 21].  Modeling studies of dis-
solved tracers released  at the seafloor indicate  that the
residence time for deepwater (5,000 meters) in the west-
ern basin of the North Atlantic is about 110 years. The
vertical extent of dispersion after 100 years is estimated
to be 2,200 meters [22].  Container life times can  be
affected by such factors as the choice of materials, the
thickness of the material, and  the fabrication technique
(e.g., welds, crimps, etc.) [16].

Liquid radioactive waste should be immobilized by suit-
able solidification  agents.

Liquid  wastes  should be solidified to form  a homoge-
neous,  monolithic,  free-standing solid containing  no
more than 0.5 percent  of free  or unbound liquid  by
volume  of the waste form.

Many radioactive wastes are  generated in the  form of
sludges, wet particulate filter media  or wet  ion ex-
change  resins [23]. These materials are not only  dispers-
ible but the liquid, which may be 80 percent of the
volume, is often corrosive. This waste should be solidi-
fied to  eliminate the concern  of dispersibility, to pro-
vide material that  is not corrosive, to  give  the  waste
form the strength to support  the container  against the
hydrostatic pressure of  the deep sea and to provide a
density  greater than  1.2 g/cm3.

A variety  of materials  have been used to solidify wet
wastes  successfully; among them are  portland  cement,
polymers  and  bitumen. These materials  and the pro-
cesses used  to solidify  low-level waste have been  re-
viewed  [24, 25].  Potential  solidification  agents  for
ocean disposal have also been evaluated [26].

The limit of 0.5 percent by  volume of free standing
liquid is given primarily to ensure proper solidification

2.2.5     Criterion:
2.2.6    Criterion:
of die waste.  With  good production  techniques and
formulations, a waste form can be produced in which
free  liquid is  below  0.5  percent  [27].

Buoyant material should be excluded or treated to pre-
clude its movement or separation from the waste form
during and  after disposal.

Buoyant materials should be treated to form a homoge-
neous free-standing monolithic  solid having  a specific
gravity  of not  less than  1.2.

A significant percentage of low-level radioactive  waste
consists  of trash such as contaminated items  composed
of wood, cloth, paper or plastic [23]. Unless properly
treated this  material could separate from a waste  form,
in the event of  container failure, and float to the surface.
Typical  treatment  processes  include  incineration and

In addition  to  the possibility of waste returning to the
surface,  consideration should be given to the ability of
this  type of waste  to  resist the hydrostatic pressure of
the deep ocean. Waste forms containing trash have been
observed to implode during descent [12]  either because
of large voids or compressive strengths that were unable
 o resist pressures even at depths of 1,800  meters.

The  waste package should be able to withstand the hy-
drostatic pressure  encountered during and after descent
to the seabed.

The  triaxial compressive strength of  a  waste package
should be 25 percent greater  than the  pressure encoun-
tered  at  the   disposal  depth.  Uniaxial compressive
strength of the package  may be measured (the triaxial
strength is taken to be 4 times the uniaxial compressive
strength [13]).  Pressure equalization devices  that  allow
only ingress of water can  be used.

Tests in  Japan indicate  that the triaxial compressive
strength (which is equivalent to the hydrostatic pressure
at any given ocean depth [28]) is 4 times  that of the
uniaxial co'mpressive strength.  For example, at  4,000
meters  depth,  the triaxial compressive strength of the

2,2.7     Criterion:
waste package  is 400 kg/cm .  This is  equivalent to a
uniaxial loading of 100 kg/cm". With the addition of a
25  percent safety  factor  the  uniaxial compressive
strength of the waste package at 4,000 meters should be
125 kg/cm2 [13].

The waste form and the container should withstand the
hydrostatic pressure encountered at the disposal depth.
The rigidity of  the waste form supports the container
against deformation. Therefore,  there should be as few
voids as possible in the waste form, since larger voids
have been observed to cause implosion  of the container
during descent to the ocean floor [12].

It  is conceded  that pressure equalization devices are
practical in tha» they compensate for deficiencies such
as voids in the waste package. Where voids are present
there is the possibility of failure resulting in the implo-
sion or breaching of the container under normal hydro-
static pressures encountered during descent to the ocean
floor. The  NBA [29]  allows pressure equalization de-
vices for waste packages disposed at Northeast Atlantic
disposal sites. Pressure equalization devices should iso-
late seawater, that has entered the container, from the
marine environment.

The leach rate of the waste form should be as low as
reasonably achievable (ALARA).

The  leach  rate  for cesium-137  (Cs-137), strontium-90
(Sr-90 ) and cobalt-60 (Co-60), as well as other radionu-
clides of concern in the waste, should be no greater than
regulatory  guidelines as  measured  by  the ANS 16.1
Leach  Test for leaching in seawater [30].

Adequate  isolation of radionuclides  at a LLW  ocean
disposal  site depends on the  performance  of  multiple
barriers to retard radionuclide  migration. One of the
barriers is the waste form, which reduces the release of
the waste to seawater in the event of container failure.
The ability of the waste form to retain  radionuclides is
often described in terms of a leach test where  the rates
of release of  elements  from  the waste form to the
environment are measured.

                            The  ANS 16.1 Leach Test [30]  is a standardized test
                            that is required for licensing of waste forms for disposal
                            at commercial shallow-land burial sites. Results of this
                            test can  be  expressed as a leach index. The Nuclear
                            Regulatory Commission (NRC) Branch Technical  Posi-
                            tion on Waste Form [31] has established a leach index
                            value of 6 for  shallow land burial. The three radionu-
                            clides, Cs-137, Sr-90 and Co-60, are used because they
                            are the most common radioisotopes in LLW and the Cs
                            and Sr are relatively long-lived.

                            Actual conditions at a deepsea disposal site will proba-
                            bly give a leaching index greater than 6 (lower leaching
                            rates), as required for shallow-land burial, for the fol-
                            lowing reasons:
2.2.8     Criterion:

• Temperatures typical of deep seawater (1  to 4 °C)
  will reduce leaching by about 30 percent, relative to
  tests  at  20 °C  [32], because most  solubilities and
  diffusion rates are reduced with lower temperature.
• At the tune of container failure only a limited surface
  area will be exposed to leaching, the remainder will
  be occluded by the container.
• Higher concentrations of certain elements in seawater
  will reduce the rate of release  of similar ions from the
  waste form and, in general, reduce leachability [33].

Paniculate wastes should be  rendered nondispersible.

Paniculate wastes, such as ashes, powders and  other
dispersible materials should be  immobilized by a suit-
able solidification agent to form a homogeneous, mono-
lithic,  free  standing solid.

Paniculate  wastes  are  readily  dispersible in air and
water and  are especially hazardous when present  as an
airborne material of respirable  size.  To eliminate this
hazard, in  the event of a container failure during trans-
portation,  handling  and disposal,  wastes  of  this  type
should be  immobilized. Also, a monolithic waste form
provides support for the container under the high hydro-
static pressures of the disposal environment. Solidifica-
tion agents and techniques suitable for wet wastes are

2.2.9    Criterion:
2.2.10   Criterion:
generally suitable for paniculate wastes as long as spe-
cial consideration is given to handling the waste prior to
solidification [21-24].

Free radioactive gaseous wastes should  be  prohibited
from ocean disposal.

No radioactive gaseous wastes should be accepted  for
ocean disposal unless they have been immobilized into
stable waste forms such that the pressure in the waste
package does  not exceed  atmospheric pressure.

Compressed gases, by their nature, present a hazard to
operating personnel during shipboard handling and dis-
posal operations. In addition, the possibility of failure
resulting from hydrostatic pressures encountered during
descent could  result in an instantaneous  release of gas-
eous radioactivity. The disposal of gaseous wastes such
as Kr-85 and H-3, will require immobilization by meth-
ods such as ion implantation on metal surfaces, sorption
on various substrates, or reaction with transition metals
to form metal hydrides.

Mixed wastes, which contain hazardous constituents,
should not be disposed of at a LLW ocean disposal site.

Wastes that contain constituents prohibited,  as other
than contaminants in 40 CFR, Subchapter H,  Subpart B,
part 227.6 should not be disposed of at  a LLW ocean
disposal site.

The design life time of a container for ocean disposal of
LLW is recommended as 200 years in these criteria to
ensure segregation of radionuclides from the  environ-
ment at reasonable cost. This is  possible only because
radioactive decay significantly reduces the quantity and
hazard of these materials during  the container lifetime.
Many  nonradioactive chemically  hazardous  wastes do
not degrade with time or do so very slowly, therefore,
any reasonable design objective for container lifetime is
inadequate for these materials.

2.2.11    Criterion:


The waste should be physically and chemically compat-
ible with the  solidification agent.

Waste forms should retain their structural stability after
immersion in  seawater for  180 days.

Waste form degradation (swelling, cracking and disinte-
gration)  has been  observed when certain  chemically
incompatible  waste/solidification agent  combinations
have  been immersed in water for prolonged times  [35,
36, 37].  Swelling and exfoliation of waste forms  is a
common mode of failure when water is  absorbed and
waste components  expand  as  they hydrate. Extensive
container failure resulting from pressure exerted by the
expanding waste  could result from a  minor leak allow-
ing seawater to contact the waste form. After  the 200-
year container life  time, the waste form is expected to
maintain its structural stability to minimize radionuclide

Materials that are pyrophoric or explosive should be ex-
cluded from the  waste form because they are intrinsi-
cally  incompatible with solidification  agents or the tech-
niques used to process the waste. Moreover, the hazard
posed by these materials during processing, transporta-
tion and disposal is unacceptable and, in  many circum-
stances,  is prohibited  by transportation regulations.

 1. Council on Environmental Quality. October 1970. Ocean Dumping a National PoHcy,
   A Report to the President  prepared  by the Council on  Environmental Quality,
   Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office,

 2. National Academy of Sciences. 1962. Disposal of Low-Level Radioactive Waste into
   Pacific Coastal Waters, National Research Council Publication No. 985. Washington,
   DC: National Academy of Sciences

 3. Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other
   Matter,"  drawn up at the Intergovernmental  Conference on the  Dumping of Wastes at
   Sea, held in London, 30 October-10 November 1972.

 4. Organization for Economic Cooperation and  Development. 1977.  Decision of the
   Council Establishing a Multilateral Consultation and Surveillance Mechanism for Sea
   Dumping of Radioactive Wastes, Paris:  OECD, C(77)115  (Final).

 5. Environmental Protection  Agency. "Transportation for Dumping of Material  Into
   Ocean Waters," Chapter I, Subchapter  H. Federal Register 38, No.  198,  15 October
   1973, 28610-28621.

 6. Environmental Protection  Agency,  "Final  Revision of Regulations  and Criteria,"
   Chapter  I, Subchapter H. Federal Register, 42, No.  7, 11 January 1977,  2462-2490.

 7. International Atomic  Energy Agency. "Convention on the  Prevention of Marine
   Pollution by Dumping of  Wastes and Other Matter - The Definition Required by
   Annex I, paragraph 6  to the Convention,  and the Recommendations Required by
   Annex II, Section D, INFCIRC/205/Add.I/Rev. 1,  IAEA, Vienna, Austria, August

 8. Colombo, P., Fuhrmann, M., Neilson, R.M., Jr. and Sailor, V. 1982. "Development of
   a Working Set of Waste Package Performance Criteria for Deepsea Disposal of Low-
   Level Radioactive Waste", EPA 520/1-82-007, BNL-51525. Washington, DC:  U.S.
   Environmental Protection  Agency.

 9. International Atomic Energy Agency. February 1985. Regulations for the  Safe Trans-
   port of Radioactive Material. Austria.

10. Mitchell, N.T. 1979.  "The Principles  and Practice of Design and Manufacture of
   Packages for Sea Disposal of Radioactive  Waste from U.K."  A paper distributed to
   the Committee Meeting, Ministry of Agriculture and Food, Directorate of Fisheries
   Research, Fisheries Radiobiological Laboratory, Lowestoft, Suffolk.

11. Olivier,  J.P. 1979.  "Sea Disposal  Practices  for Packaged Radioactive Wastes." In
   Proceedings of the International Symposium on the  Management of Wastes from the
   LWR Fuel Cycle, p.  667.  Springfield, VA: U.S.  Dept. of Commerce.


12.  Pananmj. E^oamaks Corporation. 1961. "Sea Disposal Container Test and Evaluation."
    ABC flksffiumhi and  Development Report, TID- 13226.
13.  SdtiL $.„ ffiiv. A. and Amano, H. 1980. "Integrity  Test  of Full-Size  Packages  of
    Cenrenc-SbilcBified  Radioactive Wastes  Under  Deepsea  Condition," Nuclear and
    Chemical Waste Management. 1:129-138.

14.  Ornraalli. ©.L and Roles, G.W. 1986. Update of Part 61 Impacts Analysis Methodol-
    agyB BKJ3UBG/Clt-4370,  Vol.  1.

15.  Dteter,. S.C". I9&3. "Materials for the Containment of Low-Level Nuclear Waste in the
    Deep OceanC EPA 520/1-82-005. Washington,  DC: U.S. Environmental Protection

16.  CoTambav P*.T Nc3son, R.M. Jr., and Kendig, M.W. 1979. "Analysis and Evaluation of
    a Radioactive Waste Package Retrieved from the Atlantic 2800 Meter Disposal Site,"
    BBHL-5J.10Z.  Upton, NY: Brookhaven National Laboratory.

17.  Colombo, P., Neflson, R.M. Jr., and Kendig, M.W. 1983. "Analysis and Evaluation of
    a Radioactive Waste  Package Retrieved from the Atlantic Ocean,"  pp. 237-268. In
    Pastes in the Ocean, Volume 3, Radioactive Wastes  in the Ocean, edited by P.K.
    Park,. D. Kester, I.W. Duedall and B.H. Ketchum.  NY:  John Wiley and Sons.

18.  Colombo, P., and Kendig, M.W. 1983.  "Analysis and Evaluation of a Radioactive
    Waste Package Retrieved From the Pacific 900 Meter Disposal," Draft Report. Upton,
    NY: Brookhaven National Laboratory.

19.  Colombo, P.  and Kendig,  M.W.  "Analysis and Evaluation of a Radioactive  Waste
    Package Retrieved From the Atlantic 4000 Meter Disposal Site," Draft Report, Upton,
    NY: Brookhaven National Laboratory.

20.  Fuhrmann,  M. and Colombo, P. 1984. "Analysis of Sediment from the Atlantic 3800
    Meter Low-Level Radioactive Waste  Disposal Site,"  BNL-34787. Presented  at the
    International Ocean Disposal Symposium, 10-14 September 1984 at Corvalis, Oregon.

21.  Fuhrmanrr,  M. and Colombo, P.  1983. "Sedimentology and Geochemistry of Cores
    from  the 3800 Meter  Atlantic  Radioactive Waste Disposal Site." Report submitted to
    U.S.  EPA,. Dec. 1983.

22.  Kupfennanv S.L. and Moore, D.E. 1983. "Dispersion of Dissolved Tracers Released at
    the Seaffloor," pp.  153-182, In Wastes in the Ocean, Volume 3. Radioactive Wastes
    and the OceanTJP.K. Park, D.R. Kester, I.W. Duedall and B.H. Ketchum (editors), NY:
    John: Wiley and Sons.

23.  Kibbey, AvH. and Godbee, H.W. 1980. "A State-of-the-Art Report on Low-Level
    Radioactive Waste Treatment," ORNL/TM-7427. Oak Ridge, TN:  Oak Ridge Na-
    tional Laboratory.

24.  Fuhrmann, M., Neilson, R.M. Jr., and Colombo, P. 1981.  "A Survey of Agents and
    Techniques Applicable to the Solidification of Low-Level Radioactive Wastes," BNL-
    51521. Upton, NY:  Brookhaven National Laboratory.

25.  Holcomb,  W.F. 1978. "A  Survey of the Available Methods of Solidification  for
    Radioactive Wastes," ORP/TAD-78-2. Washington, DC: U.S.  Environmental Protec-
    tion Agency.

26.  Fuhrmann, M. and Colombo, P.  1985. "Evaluation of Solidification Agents for Ocean
    Disposal of Low-Level  Radioactive Waste," draft  submitted to U.S.  Environmental
    Protection Agency. Upton, NY: Brookhaven  National Laboratory.

27.  U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 1982. Final Environmental Impact Statement
    on 10  CFR Part 61, "Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive
    Wastes,"  NUREG-0945. Washington, DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

28.  Japan Atomic  Energy Commission. 1978. Technical Criteria for Storage and Disposal
    of Radioactive Waste. Tokyo,  Japan.

29.  Nuclear Energy Agency. 1979. Guidelines for Sea Dumping Packages of Radioactive
    Waste. Paris,  France: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.

30.  American  Nuclear Society. "Measurement of  the Leachability of Solidified Low-
    Level  Radioactive  Wastes," Final Draft of a  Standard.  ANS Working  Group ANS
    16.1. Feb. 1984.

31.  Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 1983. Branch Technical Position on Waste Form.
    Washington, DC: Nuclear  Regulatory Commission.

32.  Laske, D., Mueller A. and Kuenzle, M. 1985. "Leaching of Cemented Medium-Active
    Radwaste by Sea Water," Swiss  Federal Institute for Reactor Research, Abstract only,
    In Waste Manegement Research, Abstract No. 16, IAEA/WMRA/16. Vienna: Interna-
    tional  Atomic  Energy Agency.

33.  Colombo, P. 1983. "Leaching Properties of Solidified TRU Contaminated Incinerator
    Ash,"  BNL-33671. Upton, NY: Brookhaven National Laboratory.

34.  National Archives and Records Administration. 1984. Code of Federal  Regulations,
    40 CFR 261.2, Subparts C and D. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

35.  Colombo,  P.  and  Neilson, R.M. Jr. 1979.  "Properties  of Radioactive Wastes and
    Waste Containers," First  Topical Report,  BNL-NUREG-50957.  Upton, NY:
    Brookhaven National Laboratory.

36.  Zhou, H. and Colombo,  P. "Solidification of Radioactive Waste in Masonry Cement,"
    BNL-34788. Paper  presented at the Fall Convention  of the  American  Concrete
    Institute,  October  28-November 2, 1984, New York, NY.

37.  Colombo, P., Kalb P.D, and Fuhrmann, M. 1983. "Waste Form Development Program
    Annual  Report," October  1982-Septernber  1983, BNL-51756.  Upton, NY:
    Brookhaven National Laboratory.


    To understand the concerns associated with the ocean disposal of low-level radioactive
waste and to develop waste package performance criteria and specifications, you will find
it useful  to consider the types of wastes that comprise low-level radioactive wastes. This
appendix will provide information concerning the sources  and types of low-level wastes,
their physical  and chemical properties,  and current and projected generation rates. The
isotopes normally present in LLW are discussed in terms of their longevity, toxicity, and
relative abundance.

A-l Definitions

    Low-level  radioactive waste (LLW) is defined fby the  Low-Level  Radioactive Waste
Policy Act (PL 96-573 as  amended by PL 99-240) as: radioactive waste not classified as
high-level radioactive waste, transuranic  waste, spent nuclear fuel or byproduct material as
defined in Section lle.(2)  of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954; and  the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, consistent with existing law. The Act defines by-piroduct maierial as "the
tailings or wastes produced by the extraction or concentration of uranium or thorium from
any ore processed primarily for its source material content." High-level radioactive waste
(HLW) is defined in the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (Public
Law 92-532) and EPA Ocean Dumping Regulations (40 CFR 227) as "the  aqueous waste
resulting from the operation of the first cycle solvent extraction system, or equivalent, and
the concentrated waste from subsequent extraction cycles,  or equivalent, in a facility for
reprocessing irradiated reactor fuels or irradiated fuel from nuclear power  reactors." This
law and its implementing regulations  also prohibit the ocean disposal of high-level wastes.

     Spent nuclear fuel is  defined by 40  CFR Part 191.02 (g) (Sept.  19,  1985) entitled,
"Environmental Standards for the Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-
Level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes; Final Rule." In this rule, spent  nuclear fuel  is
defined as "fuel that has been withdrawn from a nuclear reactor following  irradiation, die
constituent elements of which have not  been separated  by  reprocessing." The Atomic
Energy Commission defined transuranic  waste  as material excluding high-level  waste
which  contains more than  10 nanocuries per gram  of  transuranic  nuclides,  with the
exception of Pu-238 and Pu-241, but including  U-233 and its daughter products  (AEC
Manual, Chapter 0511, 1973). The AEC  Manual also mentioned that the value of 10 nCi/g
is  subject to modification  based on long-term studies of nuclide migration in soil. On
September 14,  1974, the AEC proposed the 10 nCi/g value in the Federal Register. The
definition for transuranic (TRU) contaminated material was redefined on  September 30,
1982, through DOE ORDER 5820.1, to read; "without regard to source or form, materials
that  at the  end of institutional control  periods are  contaminated with  alpha-emitting
radionuclides of atomic number greater than 92  and half-lives greater than 20 years  in
concentrations  greater than  100  nCi/g."  This definition   does not  explicitly  apply   to
commercially generated (NRC licensed)  wastes. The NRC  limits for land disposal of low-
level  radioactive wastes (10  CFR  61)  include  a  100 nCi/g  limit for  alpha emitting

transuianic nuclides with half-life greater than five years, with the exception of Pu-241 and
Cm-242, in which case  the limits are 3,500 nCi/g and 20,000 nCi/g, respectively.

A-2  Sources and Types  of Low-Level Wastes

     LLW are produced  as a  consequence  of both federal  government  and commercial

     The majority of federal LLW are from defense related activities, including fuel fabri-
cation, reactor operation, spent fuel  storage, fuel reprocessing and associated chemical
processing operations. (Although fuel reprocessing is primarily associated with the genera-
tion  of high-level  waste, significant quantities of low-level  waste  are  also produced.) In
addition, the federal government also generates LLW during facility decontamination and
decommissioning activities and from  research  and development activities.

     LLW result from both fuel-cycle and nonfuel-cycle operations. Fuel-cycle operations
include uranium mining, uranium milling, uranium hexafluoride (UF6) production, uranium
enrichment, fuel fabrication, reactor operations, spent fuel storage and facility decontami-
nation and decommissioning,  (There is currently no fuel reprocessing conducted by the
commercial sector, although this may resume in the future.) Commercial fuel-cycle activi-
ties  are  similar in nature to federal government activities and produce analogous wastes.
Nonfuel-cycle wastes are produced from both institutional (including medical institutions
and universities) and industrial operations (pharmaceutical and other industries). The types
of LLW produced by the various sources are summarized in Table A-l. These wastes may
be classified as either dry wastes or wet wastes.

     Dry wastes are solids and include items such as paper, glass, metal, wood, plastic,
rubber and rags. Dry wastes may be further classified  as combustible  or noncombustible
and  compactible or noncompactible. Combustible dry wastes may be incinerated to reduce
volume. The resultant incinerator residue is  highly dispersible and requires solidification
prior to disposal.

     The majority  of wet wastes are produced from the cleanup of aqueous  processes or
waste streams prior to recycle  or discharge. The type of waste resulting  from these cleanup
operations depends upon the process used (filtration, ion exchange, evaporation, centrifu-
gation, reverse osmosis, ultrafiltration, flocculation, or sedimentation).  Filtration produces
filter cartridge and filter sludge wastes. Spent resin, powdered resin sludges and regenerant
solution wastes result from ion exchange operations. Evaporation, centrifugation, reverse
osmosis, ultrafiltration, flocculation and sedimentation  processes generate slurry, sludge
and  aqueous concentrate wastes.  Reverse osmosis and  ultrafiltration also  produce mem-
brane wastes.  In  addition, wastes  resulting  from these cleanup operations  are often
subjected to additional treatment to reduce their volume for disposal. For spent resins and
sludges this  may  include  a dewatering operation (settling, centrifugation, or filtration),
while volume reduction of  aqueous wastes is generally accomplished through some form of
evaporation.  Some wet  wastes are combustible  (resins, oils,  and organic  liquids) and

                                             Table A-l  Sources and Types of Low-Level Radioactive Wastes [1]

                                                                                                    TYPES OF HASTE GENERATED
04 Dc ••*• •
RO 4 Dd • • • • •
MILLING • * * •
POWER PLANTS * • • • • •
040 *»•* *
• t * • t •
• §•••• *
• *
• • t *
* *
• f
* f
a. Decontamination, pickling, etching, electropolishing,  etc.  solutions.
b. Membranes from processes such as ultrafiltration (UF)  and reverse  osmosis  (RO).
c. Decontamination and decommissioning (  D 4 D)  operations.
d. Research, development, and demonstration (RO  4 D)  programs.
e. Data on these wastes are Incomplete and difficult  to obtain.

incineration could be used to reduce waste volume. More detailed descriptions of these
wastes and  their origins can be  found in the  literature [1-4].

    Generally, wet  wastes are  solidified prior to disposal.  Exceptions include filter
cartridges, some spent ion exchange resins and  filter sludges and organic liquids. Solidifi-
cation agents commonly used in the United States include portland cements and modified
Portland cements. Urea-formaldehyde is no longer used. Thermosetting resins  and  asphalt
are beginning to be used for the  solidification of LLW in this country.  Sorbents, such as
vermiculite  and synthetic calcium silicates have  been used with wastes  to  immobilize
liquids.  While this practice has been greatly reduced at commercial fuel-cycle facilities due
to recent NRC regulations (10 CFR 61) [5], their use is still faiily widespread at some
government installations and at  commercial  nonfuel-cycle facilities.

A-3 Generation Rates of Low-Level Wastes

    Estimated volumes and activities of LLW generated  in the United States  during 1985
are shown in Table A-2. More  than half of the volume (61 percent)  and  activity  (58
percent) originated from DOE/Defense sources. These wastes are not broken down further
in  Table A-2  but  they have  been categorized  as: biological  (0.01  volume percent),
contaminated equipment (0.94 volume percent), decontamination debris (22  volume  per-
cent), dry solids (54.4 .volume percent), solidified sludges (0.02 volume percent) and  "not
classified" (23 volume  percent)  [6].

    Some 60 volume percent of commercial low-level waste is generated in the fuel cycle,
primarily by power reactor operations. Reactors  generate 67 percent of the activity, most of
which (99* percent)  is tritium [6].

    Considering the  mix of power  reactor types and their  respective  liquid  processing
systems  (deep-bed resins or precoat filters  for boiling water reactors (BWRs)  and conden-
sate polishing systems (CPS) or no CPS for pressurized water reactors (PWRs)  [2,7]), about
48 percent of power reactor wastes are dry solids. The remaining waste fraction consists
primarily of wet wastes which have been solidified prior to disposal. Dry solids constitute
approximately 42 percent of institutional  wastes  [3] and as much as 90  percent of the
volume of the LLW generated by some industrial producers [4].  Most of these dry wastes
contain relatively small quantities of radionuclides. A significant fraction of this waste  may
not be  contaminated and is referred to as "suspect" waste.

    Estimates of LLW volumetric generation  rates and activities through the year 2020 are
listed in Table A-3  [6]. Projections  of the volume of fuel-cycle LLW  are based  upon a
proposed reference growth scenario  projecting  148 gigawatts (GW)  of  nuclear generated
electricity by the year  2020.  The generation .rate of governmental  LLW  is expected to
increase significantly between 1990  and 2000 because of LLW  resulting from high-level
waste reprocessing as the Savannah River  Plant. The generation rate of commercial LLW
produced annually is projected to more than double by 2020. These projections  do not
consider governmental LLW resulting.from the decontamination and decommissioning of
formerly utilized or surplused sites  under the  Formerly Utilized Sites  Remedial  Action


Program (FUSRAP) or the Surplus Facilities Management Program (SFMP). They also do
not consider LLW resulting from a possible resumption of commercial spent fuel reprocess-
ing. Most of this  increase is due to increased quantities of fuel-cycle waste resulting from
the expansion of installed power reactor capacity. The generation rate of fuel-cycle LLW is
anticipated to increase by 380 percent between 1980 and 2200, while generation rates for
nonfuel-cycle wastes over this period are projected to increase by 180 percent; however,
reactor facilities in particular have significant incentive to reduce waste volume because of
high transportation and  disposal costs, especially following passage of PL  99-240.

                                     Table A-2

Estimates of Volumes  and  Activities of LLW  Generated in  the Untied States  in  1985  [6]



                                 Commercial LLW(a)

Reactor  Operations          43 x 103          51        398 x 103          67

Institutional^               25 x 103          33        398 x 103

Industrial                    5 x 103           7        164 x 103          28

Other(b)                      4 x 103           3          30 x 103         __5_

                            77 x 103         100        593 x 103         100

(a)Calculated from waste  sent to burial  site
(b)Primarily UF6
(c>This js an anomalously low value. Typical values for recent years  are -
  1200 x 103 Ci.
( Institutional sources include hospitals, medical schools  and universities.
120 x 103
77 x 103
197 x 103
814 x 103(c)
593 x 103
1407 x 103

                                     Table  A-3
     Projected Low-Level Waste Generation Rates and Activities,  1985-2020  [6]
104 M3/yr
106 Ci/yr
104 M3/yr
106 Ci/yr





*Based on a fuel cycle with no reprocessing

A-4  Radionuclides Commonly Present in LLW

     More than  2,000 radionuclides exist in nature  or have been  produced by nuclear
reactions. The vast majority of these are not of concern in waste disposal because their
half-lives are much shorter than the time required to collect and process the waste. After a
decay  time  of  7 half-lives,  less than  1 percent of  the original  activity  of a given
radionuclide remains; after 10 half-lives less than one  part in a thousand remains, and after
20 half-lives  less than  one part in a  million of the  original  activity  remains. Thus,
radionuclides having half-lives shorter than  0.1 years will have decayed toless than  0.1
percent of their original activity  after one year of aging and to less than 0.0001 percent
after two years.

     Most of the radionuclides appearing in LLW are products of nuclear fission or neutron
activation of  stable  elements contained in reactor  cores  (coolant,  fuel  hardware  and
cladding, reactor core structures,  control  rods,  etc.).  A few additional radionuclides
manufactured  by charged particle accelerators appear in industrial and institutional LLW;
e.g., Na-22, Cl-36,  Cd-109.

    The distribution and quantity of specific radionuclides appearing in various low-level
waste streams of reactors is quite diverse, depending on the reactor design, degree of fuel
bumup and the details of the waste processing equipment. In general, the wastes have been
poorly characterized  because  reliable  assays  have  been  limited. Consequently,  large
inconsistencies appear in  published data. Recently, R.E.  Wild et al. [8] completed a
comprehensive analysis of  radwaste data which appears to be particularly thorough. Some
additional data have been  taken from other sources, as  cited in the  references.

    Table A-4 lists the radionuclides commonly found in reactor waste streams.  Isotopes
with half-lives shorter than  0.5 years have been omitted from the table, since they will have
decayed to  negligible concentrations  within the first five years after packaging, and
therefore,  do not contribute  significantly to the long-term radioactive inventory  in the
disposal environment.  Radionuclides with half-lives in the  range  of 0,5 to 5 years have
been included because they must be considered when handling the wastes during  disposal

A-5  Quantities of Radionuclides in LLW

    Column 4 of Table A-4 lists the quantities of each isotope that are estimated to appear
in the LLW at commercial  nuclear power plants in the year 1984. Most of the inventory of
fission products remains trapped in the spent fuel and does not enter the LLW streams. (If
reprocessing of spent  fuel is resumed, the LLW streams from reprocessing plants will
substantially increase the quantities of fission products for LLW  disposal, even though
most  of the  inventory will go into  high-level waste streams.)

    Industrial and institutional LLW originate from many sources, including reactors and
charged particle accelerators and do not show typical fission product distribution. The most
common radionuclides in industrial and institutional LLW, with half-lives greater than 0.5
years are  C-14, H-3  and,  to  a lesser extent, Cs-137 [6].

    This inventory omits  several important  sources of waste; e.g., DOE production and
research reactors and the nuclear navy, since  such information is not in the public domain.
However,  as a rough estimate it can be assumed that the inventories will have a distribution
similar  to that shown  in Table A-2 and that the listed inventories would about double.

    Table A-5 compares the  estimated 1985  United States LLW inventory with the IAEA
release rate limits. If the United States is to use ocean disposal for LLW at an annual rate
equal to the 1985 inventory, only a small fraction of the IAEA release rate limits would be
approached. Therefore, it can be concluded that the IAEA release rate limits will not be a
major restrictive factor if  the United States should decide to resume  ocean disposal of

                              Table  A-4

 Radioactive  Isotopes in Wastes  from Commercial Nuclear Power Plants
Only  those important isotopes with half-lives  greater than 0.5  years
have  been  included. The  "relative  hazard  index"  (RHI) is defined as the
quantity of water  (in liters) required to dilute 1  micro-Ci of the radio-
nuclide to  Maximum Permissable Concentration  (MPC) listed in 10 CFR
20, Appendix B, Table II, Column 2,

        Radionuclide(a>  Half-Life(b)  (1984)
 Relative Hazard  Index (RHI)(C)
 After Various Periods  of Radio-
active Decay  During Confinement



7.5 x 104
2.14 x 105
1.56 x 107
7.04 x 10s
4.47 x 109

1.9 x 105
2.5 x 105
1.8 x 104
5 x 103
8.4 x 103
(liters/initial micro-Ci)
0 yrs
110 yrs
200 yrs
300 yrs
  Significant radionuclides were identified  and quantities estimated  from data given
  in Ref. 8 and 7  and based on 42.3 gigawatts electric-year  (GWe-yr)  for 1984  [10].

(b)Ref. 9.

(c>The RHI entries  for  1  Ci  at  0  years. Values shown for subsequent years take  the
  radioactive decay into account.

(d>Neg. negligible,  less than  10"3.

                                    Table A-5
Comparison of the Estimated 1985 United States LLW Inventory With the IAEA Criteria

    If the United States used  ocean disposal at the estimated rate of 1985 gen-
    eration of wastes, the IAEA guidelines would  not be exceeded.
Alpha emitters
Beta/gamma emitters
with half-lives  of  at
least 1.0 years
(excluding  tritium)

Tritium and beta/gamma
emitters with half-
lives less than  1.0
                            Release  Rate Limit
  5.4  x 108

(2 x  107TBq)

  8.1  x 109

(3 x
                     Estimated 1985  U.S.
(Ci/yr) [11]
IAEA Single-Site
1.35 x 106
(5 x lO^Bq)
LLW Inventory^ [6]
4.1 x 103
3 x 10°
   2.8 x 10
(1.04 x
   2.4 x
(8.93  x 103TBq)
5.2 x 10"
3.0 x 10
  Allowance  for defense LLW would approximately double the numbers in  this col-

A-6 Toxicity of Radionuciides

    The radioactivity of a sample, measured in units of curies, is not an accurate reflection
of its toxicity. (Of coarse, for a given isotope,  2 curies is twice as toxic as 1 curie.) The
toxicity of a radionuclide depends also on the type and energy of the radiation it emits
(alpha particles, beta particles, gamma rays, x-rays) and on the biochemical behavior of the
chemical compounds of the radionuclide. The  latter determines  the routes by  which a
radionuclide can enter a living organism, which organs will be affected and the average
residence time  in each of the organs.

    The toxicity of individual radionuclides has been the continuing subject of investiga-
tion  by the International Commission on Radiological  Protection (ICRP), the  National
Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement (NCRP) and various other national and
international bodies. The recommendations of these organizations have been adopted with a
slight modification by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).  The maximum
permissible concentration (MPC) for each radionuclides in air and water is listed in 10 CFR
20, Appendix B [12]. The inverse of the MPC values can be regarded as a measure of the
toxicity of each radionuclide and is referred to as the "relative hazard index," were RHI I/
(MPC x 10"3).  Columns 5-8 of Table A-4 list the decreasing value of RHI selected for 0,
10, 200 and 300 years of containment. RHI is selected to  illustrate the relative reduction in
toxicity for radionuclides of importance  in  LLW.

A-7  Identification of Most  Important Radionuclides

    The data in Table A-4  make it possible  to identify the most important isotopes from
the viewpoint of disposal. These are the isotopes that have long half-lives, higher toxicities
and  are  produced in large  quantities. The  three  radionuclides that  dominate  disposal
considerations  for typical waste streams  are: Sr-90, Cs-137 and Co-60.

    The radionuclides in LLW can be divided into two major groups: (1) those with half-
lives of 30 years or less, and (2) those with half-lives greater than 30 years. The  rationale
for this division is that practical engineered barriers can be designed to  immobilize the
radionuclides with half-lives less than 30 years for the duration of their significant toxicity.
For  radionuclides  with  half-lives greater than 30 years  factors  other than  engineered
barriers, i.e., natural barriers, must be relied  upon for  long-term radiation protection.

     Except in unusual circumstances; e.g., cases in which radiochemical separations have
been  performed on wastes prior to disposal, relatively few radionuclides (Sr-90, Cs-137,
Co-60) will dominate the waste stream and will determine the performance specifications
of the waste package. Packages that can immobilize these radionuclides  can  adequately
retain radionuclides  with shorter half-lives.

     It is prudent to  assume that after several hundred years economically practical waste
packages on the ocean floor will have gradually deteriorated and the residual radioactivity
will  have been discharged  into  the surrounding environment.  The consequences  of the
ultimate releases must  be examined in  geochemical terms. These include:


•      concentrations of identical or similar i^dionuclides already present in ocean waters
       from natural sources;
•      abundance of stable isotopes of the element relative to the inventory of radioisotope
•      chemical and geochemical behavior of the  radionuclides in the disposal environ-

A-8 Conclusions

     The radionuclide content and quantities of radioactivity in low-level waste at current
annual generation rates  in the United States could be accommodated by ocean  disposal
without exceeding  the limits  recommended  by the IAEA.  Engineered barriers combined
with natural barriers would enhance the margin of safety by retaining most of the shorter
lived radionuclides for the duration of their toxicity. The desirable time span  of 200 years
for the integrity of the outer container barriers is dictated primarily by the radionuclides,
Sr-90 and Cs-137, because of their relative quantities and their half-lives of approximately
30  years.

                         APPENDIX A. REFERENCES

 1. Kibbey,  A.H. and Godbee,  H.W.  1980.  A State-of-the-Art-Report on  Low-Level
   Radioactive Waste Treatment, ORNL/TM-7427. Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National
 2. Phillips,  J., et al. 1979. Waste  Inventory Report for  Reactor and Fuel Fabrication
   Facility Wastes. ONWI-20/NUS-3314. Rockville, MD: NUS Corporation.
 3. Beck,  T.J., Cooley L.R.  and McCampbell,  M.R.  1979.  Institutional  Radioactive
   Wastes-1977, NUREG/CF-1137. Baltimore, MD: University of Maryland.
 4. General  Research Corporation.  1980. Study of Chemical Toxicity of  Low-Level
   Wastes. NUREG/CR-1973. Santa Barbara, CA: General  Research  Corporation.
 5. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.  May 1983. Branch  Technical Position on Waste
   Form.  Washington,  DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
 6. U.S. Department of Energy. 1986. Integrated  Data Base  for 1986: Spent Fuel and
   Radioactive Waste Inventories, Projections and Characteristics, DOE/RW-0006, Rev.
   2. Washington, DC: U.S.  Department of Energy.
 7. Mullarkey, T.B. et al. 1976. A Survey and Evaluation  of Handling and Disposing of
   Solid Low-Level Nuclear Fuel Cycle Wastes, AIF/NESP-008. Rockville, MD: NUS
 8. Wild, R.E. et al. 1981. Data Base for Radioactive Waste Management. Waste Source
   Options  Report, NUREG/CR-1759,  Volume 2. Dames and  Moore,  Inc.
 9. Lederer,  C.M. and Shirely, V.S. editors.  1978.  Table of Isotopes, 7 Edition. New
   York:  John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
10. Office of Resource Management. 1985. Licensed Operating Reactors Status Summary
   Report, Data as of  12-31-84. NUREG-0020,  Vol. 9, No.  1. Washington, DC:  U.S.
   Nuclear  Regulatory Commission.
11. International Atomic Energy Agency, Report of Intersessional Activities Relating to
   the Disposal of Radioactive Wastes at Sea, including the Final Draft of the Scientific
   Review:  Revision of the  Definition Required  by  Annex I (paragraph  6) to  the
   Convention  and of  the Recommendation  Required by  Annex n  (Section D), LDC
   9/INF.14, GOV/2218/Add.l, IAEA, Vienna,  Austria,  September 1985.
12. National Archives and Records Administration. Jan. 9,  1986. Code of Federal Regula-
   tions,  10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table II, Column 2. Washington, DC: U.S. Govern-
   ment Printing Office.

    A review of domestic and international regulations concerning the ocean disposal of
low-level radioactive wastes is presented. These regulations potentially impact the develop-
ment  of waste package performance criteria, and therefore,  must be considered.

B-l United  States

B-l.l Environmental Protection  Agency (EPA)

    The Environmental Protection Agency was created under Reorganization Plan Number
3 of 1970 to consolidate in one agency various Federal pollution abatement activities which
had been performed under separate organizations. EPA regulations are published as Title
40 of the Code of Federal Regulations.  The EPA has  the authority to control the ocean
disposal of all wastes, including  radioactive wastes as specified in the Marine Protection,
Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972.

    The Marine Protection,  Research and Sanctuaries  Act of 1972  (Public Law 92-532)
promotes a national policy to regulate the dumping into ocean waters of all materials which
would adversely affect human health and welfare or the marine environment, ecological
systems or economic potential. The Act prohibits the  dumping  or transportation for the
purpose of dumping any radiological, chemical  or biological warfare  agent  or any high-
level radioactive waste  into the territorial ocean waters of the  United States (defined as 12
nautical miles from U.S. territory). It also describes conditions whereby permit' "nay be
issued by EPA for ocean disposal of materials not otherwise prohibited. This Act was
amended in  1974 (Public Law 93-254) to implement the provisions of the Convention on
the Prevention of Marine Pollution by  Dumping of Wastes and Other  Matter (London
Dumping Convention), and  for  other purposes.

    In January 1977, EPA published regulations concerning the transportation aisi dump-
ing of wastes in the  ocean (40 CFR  220-229) [1]. These  regulations  contain general
requirements for all wastes. They also establish  a policy of isolation and containment for
radioactive waste through two  specific  criteria:

    (1) Radioactive materials must be contained  to prevent their direct  dispersion or
        dilution in ocean waters.

    (2) The materials to be disposed of must decay, decompose, or radiodecay to environ-
        mentally innocuous materials within the life expectancy of the containers and/or
        their inert matrix.

    In December, 1982, the Ocean Dumping Act was further amended  by  PL 97-424 to
provide for a Radioactive Material Disposal Impact Assessment which includes a specific

consideration of structural aspects of each radioactive waste container when evaluating any
permit for  disposal.

    EPA has also promulgated  regulations  for determining if wastes are  hazardous  for
purposes of implementing the Solid Waste Disposal Act as  amended by the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA). The requirements for "Identification and
Listing of  Hazardous Waste"  are contained in 40  CFR 261.

    The applicability of RCRA standards to mixed  wastes (hazardous and radioactive) as
they are generated at defense and commercially operated nuclear facilities and the potential
impact on  current waste disposal is of major concern to both the U.S.  Department  of
Energy (DOE)  and the U.S.  Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

B-1.2 Nuclear Regulatory  Commission (NRC)

    The development of commercial nuclear activities has been subject to regulation since
1954. At that time, the Atomic Energy Act  of 1954 created the authority to  regulate  the
development of a civilian nuclear power program. The regulatory functions were performed
by the Atomic  Energy Commission and are currently the responsibility of  the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, which was created by the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974.
The basic authorities derived from the Atomic Energy Act include licensing  and regulating
the production, use, ownership and distribution of special nuclear materials, source material
and by-product materials, as well as licensing and control over the manufacture, produc-
tion, possession,  use, importation or exportation of production and utilization facilities.

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations are issued under Title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations. Radioactive waste disposal regulations are primarily found in 10 CFF.
Part 20 -  Standards for Protection Against Radiation. In particular, it  requires NRC
authorization for ocean disposal of wastes from NRC-licensed facilities. Ocean disposal
also requires a permit from  the Environment?! Protection Agency  under  the  Marine
Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of  1972 for all nonprohibited radioactive wastes,
and for all potential disposers.

    Nuclear Regulatory Commission  regulations pertaining  to radioactive  waste form
stability for land disposal  is  addressed in 10 CFR  61.56(b) [2]. These requirements  are
"intended to ensure that the waste does not structurally degrade and affect overall stability
of the site through slumping, collapse, or other failure of the disposal unit and thereby, lead
to water infiltration." Elaboration of this requirement is  made  in the  Nuclear Regulatory
Commission Branch  Technical Position on the Waste Form (May 1983) [3] which provides
guidance on waste form test methods and results acceptable for demonstrating compliance
with 10 CFR 61 waste stability criteria.

B-1.3 Department of Transportation (DOT)

    The Department of Transportation was established by Congress (PL 89-670) in 1967 to
administer and coordinate Federal government transportation programs. The Department of
Transportation is authorized to regulate the transportation of explosives  and other danger-
ous, articles, including radioactive materials, in interstate and foreign commerce. Under the
terms of a memorandum of understanding between the DOT and the NRC, the Department
of Transportation has primary responsibility for regulations concerning  the transportation
of NRC-liceased materials, except  for shipments of intermediate and large quantities of
radioactive materials and shipments of fissile materials, which are primarily under NRC's
jurisdiction. The DOT's primary responsibility is  to  develop safety  standards for the
classification and labelling of all packages of radioactive material and regulation of carriers
and freight forwarding operations. The Department of Transportation regulations governing
transportation of radioactive materials are largely found in Title 49, Parts 170-179 of the
Code of Federal Regulations.

B-2  International

B-2.1 The  Nuclear Energy Agency of  the Organization for Economic Cooperation
      and  Development  (NEA/OECD)

     The OECD Nuclear Energy  Agency  (NEA)  was  established  in 1972,  replacing
OECD's European Nuclear Energy  Agency (ENEA). NEA now  includes all the European
Member Countries of OECD as well as Australia, Canada, Japan and the United States (23

     NEA's responsibilites regarding ocean disposal of low-level waste  lie with the Mem-
ber  Countries of OECD  and, recently, fall  under a Decision of  the  OECD  Council
establishing a Multilateral Consultation  and Surveillance Mechanism  for Sea Dumping of
Radioactive Waste (the  OECD Council Decision) [4]. Twenty-one of the  23  member
countries,  excluding  Austria  and  Australia,  are Participating  Countries  to  the OECD
Council Decision. This  mechanism is designed to  further the  objectives of the London
Dumping Convenr.on. It provides for the establishment and review of standards, guidelines
and  procedures  for the  safe  disposal  of radioactive wastes, taking  into  account the
provisions  of the London Dumping Convention  of 1972 and  the IAEA Definition and
Recommendations of  1978.

     In October 1978,  the NEA guidelines were revised to conform to the requirements of
the London Convention and the IAEA Recommendations. This  revision was published in
April 1979 [5].

B-2.2 The London Dumping Convention

     The Convention on  the Prevention  of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and
Other Matter, commonly referred to as the London Dumping Convention, was adopted by

an intergovernmental  conference in London in November  1972.  The London Dumping
Convention is an international convention to control marine pollution from the dumping of
waste, including the dumping  of radioactive material, in international waters. It applies
only  to those  countries,  including the  United  States,  who have  ratified, acceded or
succeeded to the  Convention (over 60 countries as of January 1986). The International
Maritime Consultative Organization (IMCO) was designated as the formal secretariat for
the Convention during a meeting  of  the parties in December 1975.

B-2.3 International Atomic Energy Agency  (IAEA)

    The London Dumping Convention provides for the IAEA (as the competent interna-
tional body) to define "high-level radioactive wastes or other high-level radioactive matter
as unsuitable for dumping at sea" [6]. The IAEA also is entrusted with the responsibility of
establishing recommendations that  the Contracting  Parties to the Convention should  con-
sider  in issuing permits for the dumping at sea of radioactive wastes or other radioactive
material not otherwise prohibited by the IAEA Definition.  Consequently, IAEA responsi-
bilities for recommendations and guidance on the dumping of radioactive waste at sea
comes from the London  Dumping Convention with  the recommendation." and guidance
being taken into account by the Contracting Parties to the Convention. Such recommenda-
tions and guidance were issued by IAEA in 1978 [7], and revised in 1985 [8]. For example,
high-level radioactive waste is  defined and limits placed on annual dumping rates of three
classes of radionuclides. Criteria are also given for low-level radioactive  waste forms and
for approval of the ship and  equipment used for  ocean disposal.

                          APPENDIX B. REFERENCE

1.   National Archives and Records Administration.  1982. Code of Federal Regulations,
    40 CFR 220-229. Washington, DC:  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office.
2.   National Archives and Records Administration.  1982. Code of Federal Regulations,
    10 CFR 61. Washington, DC:  U.S.  Government  Printing  Office.
3.   Nuclear Regulatory Commission.  1983. Branch  Technical Position on Waste Form.
    Washington DC: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
4.   Nuclear Energy  Agency. 1978. Decision  of the  OECD Counil of 22 July  1977
    Establishing a Multilateral Consultation and Surveillance Mechanism for Sea Dump-
    ing of Radioactive Waste," NEA Sixth Activity Report 1977. Paris, France: Organiza-
    tion for Economic Cooperation Development.
5.   Nuclear Energy Agency. 1979. Guidelines for Sea Dumping of Radioactive Waste,
    Revised Version. Paris, France: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Devel-
6.   "Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other
    Matter," drawn up at the Intergovernmental Conference on the Dumping of Wastes at
    Sea,  held in London, 30 October-10 November,  1972.
7.   International Atomic Energy Agency, "Convention  on the  Prevention of Marine
    Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter,  - The Definition Required by
    Annex I, paragraph 6 to the Convention, and  the Recommendations Required by
    Annex H, Section D," INFCIRC/205/Add.l/Rev. 1, IAEA, Vienna, Austria, August
8.   -International Atomic  Energy Agency, Report of Intersessional Activities Relating to
    the Disposal of Radioactive Wastes at Sea, including the Final Draft of the Scientific
    Review: Revision  of the Definition  Required  by Annex I (paragraph 6) to the
    Convention  and  of the Recommendation  Required by Annex n (Section D),  LDC
    9/INF.14, GOV/2218/Add.l,  IAEA,  Vienna, Austria, September 1985.

                            APPENDIX C. GLOSSARY
    Some of the terminology used in this report is defined to provide the reader with a
quick reference  to uncommon terms, or  terms having unique meanings  in  the  field of
radioactive waste management.

    Although it is acknowledged that the definitions may not be universally accepted, it is
anticipated that the inclusion of this glossary will result in  a  better understanding of the
criteria  in Section 2.
Acceptable  Limit:


Alpha Particle:
As Low As  Reasonably
Achievable (ALARA)

Becquerel (Bq):

Beta Particle:

Buoyant  Material:
Radioactivity or radiation limit acceptable to a regulatory

A measure of the rate of radioactive decay occurring in a
given quantity  of material; i.e.,  the  number  of nuclear
disintegrations  per  unit  of time. Activity is  commonly
expressed in curies (Ci), or becquerel (Bq).

A positively charged nuclear particle consisting of two
protons and two neutrons. Alpha  particles  are ejected
during certain radioactive tranformations  usually involv-
ing  very heavy isotopes; i.e., those of Z >  82.

ALARA refers to limiting  release  and exposure  and is
used by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission  (NRC)  (10
CFR 50.34)  in the context of "	as low as  reasonably
achievable, taking into account the state of technology and
the  economics of improvements in relation to benefits to
the  public health  and safety and other societal and socio-
economic considerations."

Any medium, engineered or natural, which  prevents  or
retards the  movement  of radioactive  materials.

A unit of  radioactivity equivalent  to  1  disintegration/
second or  approximately 2.7  x 10~u Ci.

A positively or negatively charged subatomic particle hav-
ing an  atomic mass of 5.4 x 10"  (1 emitted from  an
atomic nucleus during certain radioactive transformations.

Material having the tendency or capacity to remain afloat
when Immersed in water.

Compressive Strength:


Container Lifetime:



Curie (Ci):



(also Ocean Dumping)

Fuel  Cycle:

Fuel  Reprocessing:
The load per unit of cross-sectional area under which a
solid block fails.

The receptacle  into which a  waste form  is placed  for

The time period during which the container effectively
serves as a barrier to radionuclide movement.

The retention of radioactive material by the use of suitable
packaging in such a way that it is effectively prevented
from being dispersed  into the environment.

A standard on  which a decision  or judgement may be
based. It may  be  qualitative  or quantitative.

A unit of activity  equal to 3.7 x 10  disintegrations per

In context of ocean disposal  of radioactive wastes, it is
that part  of  the ocean where  the average  water depth is
-greater than 4,000 meters.

The summed effect of those processes of transport, diffu-
sion and mixing which tend to distribute  materials from
wastes or effluents through an increasing volume of water.
The ultimate effect appears  as a dilution of material.

The disposition of waste  materials at a designated site
without  the  intention  of routine retrieval.

The deliberate  disposal of wastes into the ocean from
vessels, aircraft, platforms or other manmade structures, as
defined by the Marine Protection,  Research and Sanctu-
aries Act  of 1972, as amended.

The sum of all the conditions and influences that affect the
survival and development of an organism.

All the steps involved in supplying and using fuel materi-
als for nuclear reactors, including waste management op-

The dissolving of spent fuel elements for the removal of
waste materials and the recovery and segregation of reus-
able  materials.

Gamma Ray:
Gigawatt  (GW):

Gigawatts electric-year

High-Level Waste (HLW):
High-energy, short-wavelength, electromagnetic radiation
deriving from nuclear transformations; similar to, but gen-
erally  more  penetrating  than x-rays.  Gamma radiation
frequently  accompanies alpha and beta emissions and al-
ways accompanies fission.

A rate of doing work or expending energy. A  gigawatt is
equivalent  to 10  watts or 109 joules per second.

A unit of  energy or work used to  measure  large-scale
electricity  production. It is equivalent  to  approximately
3.2 x  1016 joules.

The characteristic time in which half  the atoms  of  a
particular radioactive substance disintegrate. Each radio-
nuclide has a  unique half-life.

A natural  or manmade  cause of a potential  deleterious
effect, as differentiated  from an expected or actual delete-
rious effect.

Irradiated reactor fuel; liquid wastes from the first solvent
extraction  cycle of chemical  reprocessing of irradiated
reactor fuel, or equivalent processes; and solidified forms
of such waste; and
and other waste or matter of activity concentration exceed-
(a)  5 x 10"5 TBq-kg"1  for  alpha emitters;
(b) 2 x 10"2 TBq-kg"1 for beta/gamma emitters with  half-
    lives of greater than one year (excluding tritium); and
(c)  3 TBq-kg"   for tritium and beta/gamma emitters with
    half-lives of one year or  less.

The above activity concentrations shall be averaged over a
gross mass not exceeding  1,000 tonnes.

Conversion of  a waste to a form that reduces the potential
for migration or dispersion of radionuclides during  stor-
age, transportation and  disposal.

The segregation of radionuclides from the human environ-
ment and the restriction of their release into the environ-
ment in unacceptable quantities or concentrations.

Atoms of the same atomic number but with different atomic
masses. For a  given element the chemical properties of its
various isotopes are almost  identical;  however,  the nuclear
properties  of each isotope are distinctly  different.

Leach Rate:
Low-Level Waste  (LLW):
Matrix Material:

Maximum Permissible
Concentration (MFC):
Migration (radionuclide):

Mixed Waste:





Pyrophoric Material:

Radioactive Decay:
The  rate of release  of  components from a solid  in  the
presence of an aqueous environment.

Radioactive waste not classified as either high-level radio-
active waste, transuranic waste, spent nuclear fuel or ura-
nium mill tailings, as defined in  the Low-level Radioac-
tive  Waste Policy Act  (PL 96-573).

See  Solidification  Agent.

Maximum levels of radioactivity  in drinking water or in
air for the occupational  worker, as defined in 10 CFR 20,
Appendix B.

The  movement of radionuclides  through various  media
due  to dissolution, fluid flow and/or by diffusion.

Radioactive  wastes  that  contain nonradioactive  co-
contaminants (defined as hazardous  in 40 CFR 261).

Exhibiting  rigid and  uniform properties.

A system using two  or  more independent barriers to iso-
late  the waste from the human environment. These  can
include  the waste  form, the container,  other engineered
barriers and  the disposal medium and its  environment.

A species of the nucleus of an atom characterized by its
mass number, atomic number and nuclear energy  state.

An  uncharged nuclear particle, with atomic  mass  of ap-
proximately 1, which is emitted from an atomic nucleus
during certain radioactive  transformations.

The  waste form and  any container(s) as  it is prepared for
handling, transport,  storage and disposal.

Any material (solid or liquid) that ignites spontaneously in
dry  or moist air  at  or  below 130°F.

A spontaneous nuclear transformation in which alpha par-
ticles, beta particles or neutrons  are emitted, sometimes
with associated gamma  rays, or x-ray radiation is emitted
following  orbital electron  capture,  or  the  nucleus
undergoes  spontaneous  fission.

Radioactive Waste:
Relative Hazard Index

Site (Disposal or


Solidification Agent:
Spent  Nuclear Fuel:
Transuranic Waste

Uranium  Mill  Tailings:

Waste Form:
Waste Management:
Any material  or  equipment  that contains or is contami-
nated with radionuclides at concentrations or radioactivity
levels  established by  the  regulatory authorities and, for
which there is no  anticipated use.

The quantity of water (in liters) required to dilute 1  j^Ci of
an  isotope to  MFC, listed in 10 CFR 20, Appendix  B.

The area  containing low-level nuclear waste that is  de-
fined by a boundary and which is under effective control
of the implementing organization.

Conversion  of liquid  radioactive waste  to a dry, stable
monolithic solid.

A material  used to  solidify or  immobilize radioactive
waste  by  forming a monolithic solid (e.g, cement, bitu-
men, polymer).

Nuclear fuel which has been discharged from a reactor
after having been subjected to nuclear reactions. (Fuel is
usually discharged  because it has been consumed to the
design limit or because of failure or for necessary reactor

Wastes containing  quantities of  alpha-emitting radionu-
clides of atomic number greater than 92 in concentrations
greater than 100 nCi/g.

Finely ground residues resulting from processing of ores
for recovery of uranium.

A monolithic  free standing solid resulting from the incor-
poration of waste into a matrix material (e.g., liquid in
concrete,  solids in bitumen).

The planning  and execution of essential functions relating
to radioactive wastes,  including treatment, packaging,  in-
terim  storage, transportation and disposal.

A penetrating form of electromagnetic radiation emitted
either when the inner orbital electrons of an excited atom
return to their normal state (characteristic x-rays), or when
a metal target is bombarded with high-speed electrons.
                                                        •f US. QQVEftBEi!£«T PfUHTENCl OFFICB:
                                                                         >SH ~ 617-003 - l