DRAFT
PRELIMINARY DRAFT
(Not Yet Subjected to Peer Review)
SITES CONTAMINATED AND
POTENTIALLY CONTAMINATED WITH
RADIOACTIVITY IN THE UNITED STATES
Prepared by
L. T. Skoblar
Roy F. Weston, Inc.
Edison, New Jersey
and
J. J. Mauro
S. Cohen & Associates, Inc.
1311 Dolley Madison Boulevard
McLean, Virginia 22101
Contract No. 68D90107
Work Assignment 1-42
Prepared for:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Radiation Programs
401 M Street, S.W.
Washington, DC 20460
Jack Russell
Work Assignment Manager
February 1991
-------
DRAFT
A CAUTIONARY NOTE TO HEADERS OF THIS DOCUMENT
Users of this report should be aware of a number of factors require that the data it
contains be used with caution.
The purpose of this scoping study, began in June 1990 and completed in February 1991,
was to identify all sites in the United States contaminated or po|entiallyT containiiiated
with radioactivity. This initial scoping data was needed to support work related to
development of residual radioactivity guidelines and criteria. The approach for the study
was to identify and list all sites in the U.S. that may, either currently or at some time in
the future, require the removal of radioactive contamination to a level that would allow
unrestricted release. Therefore, the study sought to identify all sites where a problem
might exist irrespective of whether or not a given site requires remediation at the present
time. Most of the sites identified are potential rather than current problems.
For several reasons, the data on 'number of sites" should be used with caution. Data
available at the time of the study were used to determine if a given entity, e.g., Hanford
Reservation, was counted as a single site or as a collection of many sites. Where
detailed data were available, the entity was counted as the total number of sites within
the entity. Where data were not available, the entity was counted as a single site. This
approach avoids over-estimation of the total number of sites, but may under-estimate the
number of sites (but not the total number of facilities). In addition to this issue, the data
used in the study are almost two years old. New data on contaminated sites have been
generated by federal agencies during the year since the draft report was written. This
may affect the total number of sites (and facilities) that are currently or potentially
contaminated.
A large number of sites were identified and Hsted based solely on the fact that they
contain sealed sources. T_hgintegrity of sealed §ojLrcgs_..i$ generally very high and it is
unlikely that gites listed on the basis of these jources will ever require remediation.
Finally, this report is a preliminary draft and has not received peer review.
- February 1992
-------
DRAFT
Table of Contents
Page
1. Summary and Introduction , 1-1
1.1 Purpose and Scope 1-1
1.2 Background . 1-1
1.3 Key Definitions 1-4
1.4 Description of Study 1-5
1.5 Summary 1-6
13.1 Identification of Sites 1-6
1.5.2 Types, Locations, and Numbers of Sites .................. 1-7
1.5.3 Extent and Nature of Residual Radioactivity 1-7
2. Identification of Sites . 2-1
2.1 Federal Agency Sites 2-1
2.1.1 Army Corps of Engineers (CoE) ..... 2-2
2.1.2 Department of Agriculture (DoA) .. 2-2
2.13 Department of Commerce (DoC) 2-9
2.1.4 Department of Defense (DoD) 2-9
2.1.5 of Energy (DoE) 2-19
2.1.6 Department of Health and Human Services (DoH&HS) . 2-26
2.1.7 Department of Interior (Dol) 2-27
2.1.8 Department of Justice (DoJ) 2-27
2.1.9 Department of Labor (DoL) 2-28
2.1.10 Department of Transportation (DoT) 2-28
2.1.11 Department of Treasury 2-28
2.1.12 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 2-29
2.1.13 Government Services Administration (OSA) 2-30
2.1.14 National Air and Space Administration (NASA) 2-30
2.1.15 Postal Service (PS) . 2-31
2.1.16 Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) 2-31
2.1.17 Veterans Administration (VA) 2-31
2.1.18 Other Federal Agencies 2-32
2.2 NRC/Agreement State Sites 2-32
2.2.1 Medical Sites 2-33
2.2.2 Manufacturing Plants ............. 2-37
2.2.3 Non-Defense Research Laboratories . 2-38
2.2.4 Nuclear Power Reactors 2-39
2.25 Nuclear Research and Test Reactors .................... 2-39
2.2.6 Uranium Fuel Cycle Sites 2-39
2.2.7 Waste Management 2-41
ii
-------
DRAFT
Table of Contents (Continued)
2.3 State Sites 2-43
2,3.1 Manufacturing Plants 2-43
2.3.2 ............ 2-47
2.3.3 Oil and Gas Production 248
2.3.4 Power Plants 2-49
2.3.5 Research 2-49
2.3.6 Water Treatment 2-50
2.3.7 2-50
2.4 Future Projections 2-51
3. Nature and Extent of Residual Radioactivity and Information Gaps 3-1
References and Human Resources R-l
Appendix - Definitions A-l
111
-------
DRAFT
List of Exhibits
No. Page
1-1 Partial list of Decontamination and Decommissioning Guidance
Documents , 1-3
1-2 Number of Sites with Potential Residual Radioactivity, by Cognizant
Entity 1-6
1-3 Number of Sites with Potential Residual Radioactivity by Site Type,
Location and Cognizant Entity 1-8
1-4 Sites with Potential Residual Radioactivity, by Site Type and Contaminating
Waste Type 1-14
2-1 Number of Federal Sites with Potential Residual Radioactivity, by Site Type,
Location and Cognizant Entity 2-3
2-2 Department of Defense Sites 2-11
2-3 Department of Defense Reactors for Remote Locations 2-14
2-4 Department of Defense Test and Research Reactors 2-16
2-5 Nuclear Weapons Carrier Accidents 2-18
2-6 Department of Energy Sites 2-20
2-7 Number of NRC/Agreement State Licensed Sites with Potential Residual
Radioactivity, by Site Type and Location 2-34
2-8 Number of State-Administered Sites with Potential Residual Radioactivity,
by Site Type and Location 2-44
3-1 Sites with Potential Residual Radioactivity, by Site Type and Contaminating
Waste Type 3-2
IV
-------
DRAFT
1. Summary and Introduction
1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purposes of this study are (1) to identify sites in the United States contaminated and
potentially contaminated with radioactive material and (2) to characterize the nature and
extent of residual radioactivity, i.e., that which remains once readily removable sources of
contamination have been removed.
It is the intent of the study to estimate the number of contaminated sites and to briefly
characterize the magnitude and nature of the residual radioactivity. The sites include
those under the control of Federal agencies, those licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission and/or Agreement States, and those for which States are the cognizant
regulatory authorities (State and private sites). Active and inactive sites are included, as
are sites previously remediated when identifiable.
Detailed site characterizations are not included since it is beyond the intended purpose
and scope of this report. In addition, for many categories of sites, detailed site
characterization information is not yet available.
1.2 BACKGROUND
Thousands of sites throughout the United States are currently being used, or were
formerly used, in the production of radioactive materials, or in the manufacturing of
products that use or produce radioactive materials. Included are privately owned sites
regulated by the States and/or Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and sites currently or
formerly used in a variety of Federal programs. Eventually these sites will be
decontaminated and released for unrestricted use.
1-1
-------
DRAFT
Though Federal and State authorities have established interim decontamination guidance
(refer to Exhibit 1-1), there is a need to establish uniform, comprehensive clean-up
criteria. The USEPA Office of Radiation Programs is developing residual radioactivity
criteria for the decontamination of these sites. To support this overall initiative,
identification of sites, as well as information on easting and potential
radioactivity, is required. This information is necessary to define the and extent
of the problem, and to evaluate the costs and benefits of a broad range of alternative
clean-iip criteria. Key questions this information will help answer include:
» How many sites exist which may require decontamination and what is the
nature and extent of the residual radioactivity?
« Is the contamination on-site or off-site? Is it moving? At what rate? In
what direction?
» How should clean-up criteria be defined, i.e., should it be performance-
or prescriptive?
» Should clean-up criteria be specific for different sites because of
differences in nature and extent of residual radioactivity? Future land use?
Forms of institutional controls to be imposed on the site?
• Will or should prior decontamination efforts be required to meet standards
yet to be adopted?
Over the last decade, of reports have addressed aspects of this overall issue.
More recently, major environmental restoration initiatives have been undertaken by
Federal authorities. This study is limited to a review and compilation of the material
available from these reports and programs.
1-2
-------
DRAFT
1-1
Partial list of Decontamination and Decommissioning Guidance Documents
1. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Regulatory Guide 1.86, 'Termination of
Operating Licenses for Nuclear Reactors" (6/74)
2. American National Standards Institute, Draft American National Standard ANSI
13.12 (Draft), "Control of Radioactive Surface Contamination on Materials,
Equipment, and Facilities to be Released for Uncontrolled Use" (8/78)
3. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, E. F. Conti, Draft Report NUREG-0613,
"Residual Radioactivity Limits for Decommissioning" (1979)
4. Shilling, A. S,, H. E. Lippek, P. D, Tegler, J. D. Easterling, NUREG/CR-0671,
"Decommissioning Commercial Nuclear Facilities: A Review and Analysis of
Current Regulations" (1979)
5. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, "Standards for Protection Against
Radiation", 10 CFR 20 (1981)
6. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety,
"Guidelines for Decontamination of Facilities and Equipment Prior to Release for
Unrestricted Use or Termination of License for Byproduct, Source, or Special
Nuclear Material" (7/82)
7. U.S. Department of Energy, "Guidelines for Residual Radioactive Material at
Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program and Remote Surplus Facilities
Management Program Sites", Revision 2 (3/87)
1-3
-------
DRAFT
1.3 KEY DEFINITIONS
It is important to understand the distinction between the following key words in order to
properly portray the results and limitations of the study. An augmented list of key terms
is in the Appendix,
* Facility - An or landholding encompassing all contiguous land
owned by a department of the Federal government, NRC/Agreement State
licensee or private entity. Facilities may be complex, containing many
buildings and covering a wide area.
• Site - A contaminated site is a discrete, parcel of
containing or potentially containing radioactive in concentrations
greater than those naturally occurring. A site is a portion of a
facility.
For purposes of identifying sites, the significance of these definitions is best illustrated by
considering the Hanford Reservation, a Department of Energy complex in the State of
Washington. The Hanford Reservation is a single facility per the definition above.
However, Hanford has 78 major components (i.e., building complexes called
"operable units") within its borders. At Hanford, each operable unit has an average of
approximately 20 potentially contaminated sites for a total of approximately 1560 sites.33
Each site is expected to be the object of a site characterization decontamination
effort. When information on discrete, physically separate of within a facility
was available, the facility was decomposed into as many as the supported.
When information was not available, the facility was counted as a single site. This
approach was taken to avoid over estimating the number of sites.
1-4
-------
DRAFT
15 SUMMARY
1-5-1 Identification of Sites
Currently, a of over 45,300 handle radioactive material or contain
potential radioactive contamination as shown in Summary Exhibit 1-2, Of these,
approximately half are in operation today. In some cases, a complex have as
many as 1500 contaminated sites, in other cases there may be one site per complex.
The residual radioactivity ranges from levels approximating natural background to highly
radioactive liquids and solids. As a category, the most radioactive are owned by the
Federal government, primarily the Departments of Defense and Energy.
Not included in the total are approximately 1,5 million sites (oil/gas wells and coal-fired
boilers) potentially contaminated with naturally occurring radioactive (NORM).
Exhibit 1-2
Number of Sites with Potential Residual
Radioactivity, by Cognizant Entity
Entity Number
Federal Agencies 19,945
NRC/Agreement Licensees 18,902
States 6.514
Total 45,361
1-6
-------
DRAFT
15 SUMMARY
1-5-1 Identification of Sites
Currently, a of over 45,300 handle radioactive material or contain
potential radioactive contamination as shown in Summary Exhibit 1-2, Of these,
approximately half are in operation today. In some cases, a complex have as
many as 1500 contaminated sites, in other cases there may be one site per complex.
The residual radioactivity ranges from levels approximating natural background to highly
radioactive liquids and solids. As a category, the most radioactive are owned by the
Federal government, primarily the Departments of Defense and Energy.
Not included in the total are approximately 1,5 million sites (oil/gas wells and coal-fired
boilers) potentially contaminated with naturally occurring radioactive (NORM).
Exhibit 1-2
Number of Sites with Potential Residual
Radioactivity, by Cognizant Entity
Entity Number
Federal Agencies 19,945
NRC/Agreement Licensees 18,902
States 6.514
Total 45,361
1-6
-------
DRAFT
1-5-2 Typqs, Locations, and Numbers of Sites
Sites contaminated and potentially contaminated with radioactive materials are located
in all 50 States, the District of Columbia and in most, if not all. United States
Territories. Summary Exhibit 1-3 organizes the total number of sites according to
cognizant authority, State, and EPA Regioa
Exhibit 1-3, which presents the number of sites and their distribution, is incomplete
because it is based on incomplete information. However, the numbers presented are
believed to be minimums since information on discrete land parcels (sites) was not
always available from complex facilities, and such facilities are believed to contain
scores of sites. The main of report describes some of the challenges
encountered and assumptions used to construct the summary tables provided throughout
the report
1.5.3 Extent and Nature of Residual Radioactivity
Summary Exhibit 1-4 the waste type(s) that are sources of residual radioactivity
at the sites identified. The sources noted range from highly radioactive spent reactor
fuel to relatively high concentrations of naturally occurring material.HR*27
Refer to the Appendix for information describing each waste type.
1-7
-------
oo
Exhibit 1-3
Number of Sites with Potential Residual Radioactivity, by Site Type, Location and Cognizant Entity (1,2)'
SITE TYPE (3)
FEDERAL SITES
Army Corps of Engineers (9)
Dept of Commerce (5,9)
Oept of Defense (6)
Dept of Energy (7,8)
Dept of Health/Human Services
Dept of Interior (9)
Dept of Transportst-toa (9)
EPA (9,10)
UACA
mM3»\
Veterans Administration
SUSTQTALSi STATE
REGION
* Agreement State
** Numbers In parentheses ref
EPA EPA
REGION 1 REGION 2
TOTAL CT ME MA NH* RI* VT NJ NY* PR VI
14 - _ 1 _ _ _ _ i _ _
2__ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ „
23 1 - 1 - - 111-
7463 563 22 584 22 - - 87 87 -
11984 41 - ' 124 - - - 330 455 2 -
46-- 1-.-- 23-
88-- 1---. IT_
4.. ... _ - - 1 -
15 2- 2--- 21--
3_ - _ _ « _ - __
73-- 1-1- 74--
111 __ ___ _ _ __
0__ ___ - _ -_ _
121 2 1 - 11 1 2 91-
19945 609 23 714 23 2 1 423 558 9 0
19071 1372 990
er to notes on page 10.
EPA
REGION 3
OE DC MO* PA VA W
- - 2 - -
_ 2 - 1 -
- 108 325 22 628 -
- - 41 288 -
2 7 1 - 1
- - 1231
1 - - ?
2_ i
- - _ _ 3 .
i 1 - - _
- - 1 1 - 1
_ 1 2 -
11353 4
1 113 386 320 642 8
1470
EPA EPA
REGION 4 REGION 5
AL* PL* GA* K¥» MS* NC* SC* TN» 1L* IN MI MN OH HI
1__ 112- -- 2-~
87 43 130 65 22 65 43 22 87 65 43 - 87 -
41 - 41 - - 83 251 291 41 41-332 -
1-2--1-- --112-
211-11-- 1111- 1
1-_1 _. ______
13111111 61113-
1 ^«.«, i-.- - -.«.,_ 5-
g____,,,^ 1g _.__,. _
4322424 5-5142
101 93 138 109 30 73 130 290 386 108 94 4 432 3
964 1027
o
73
-------
Exhibit 1-3 (Continued)
EPA
REGION 6
EPA
REGION 7
EPA
REGION 8
EPA
REGION 9
EPA
REGION 10
SITE TYPE (3)
TOTAL
AR* LA* NM* OK TX* IA* KS* MO NE* CO* MT MD* SO UT* WY AS A2* CA" GU HI NV* AK ID* OR* MA*
FEDERAL SITES
Army Corps of Engineers (9) 14
CIA (4) 0
Dept of Agriculture 2
Dept of Commerce (5,9) 23
Dept of Defense (6) 7463
Dept of Energy (7,8) 11984
Dept of Health/Human Services 46
Dept of Interior (9) 88
Dept of Justice (9) 4
Dept of Labor (9) 7
Dept of Transportation (9) 15
Dept of the Treasury (9) 3
EPA (9,10) 73
Government Services Adm 111
NASA 13
Postal Service (11) 1
Small Business Administration 0
TVA (12) 22
Veterans Administration 121
SUBTOTALS; STATE 19945
REGION 19071
1 -
87 87 173 22 303
_ - 354 _ 49
13111
1 - 931
. _ . _ 2 - - -
22 43 108 - 108 - 22 22 87 22
41-208 1 5100 - 10 138 211 42
- - 2 - 1 2 - 1 - -
1 1 - 91116 1
1 - i
1 _ ....
6 - - - 2 -
t _ _ 1 - - 2
43 952 537 88 44 43 - 43 1169
14 209 - - 810 - 129 50 1684
32--- 1 - - 2
93-- 21476
1
33
111
1
1
90 93 538 32 366 65 48 322 S 5226 4 34 166 306 65 0 69 1181 537 88 860 46 134 104 2869
1119 440 5801 2735 3153
D
73
•n
-------
Exhibit 1-3 (Continued)
EPA
REGION 1
EPA
2
EPA
REGION 3
EPA
REGION 4
EPA
REGION 5
SITE TYPE (3)
TOTAL CT ME HA NH* RI* VT NJ KV* Pi VI OE DC MO* PA ¥A W AL* FL* 6A* KY* MS* MC* SC* TN* IL« IN MI MN OH HI
HOSPITAL/MEDICAL CTRS (9,13) 5837 76 32 124 38 24 16 164 262 40 1
MANUFACTURINS PLANTS (9,14) 10207 25 3S 277 47 37 6 114 341 5 1
NON-DEFENSE
NUGLEA8 POWER REACTORS (1i)
NUCLEAR
URANIUM FUEL CYCLE (16)
WASTE MANAGEMENT
2613 3i 21 68 2S 10 12 46 137 20
110 4 1 Z 1 - 147-
71 _ - i _ _ _ 14-
4$ t _ . - 1 - _ ._
IB 1 1 1 - - 11-
16 26 120 312 114 46 11S 414 183 84 99 137 60 163 229 123 25S 58 236 85
8 - 370 176 S3 3 282 135 28f 229 201 30 141 266 172 90 19 S7 46 228
14 19 62 95 52 20 41 Si 58 34 24 87 75 56 12t 39 96 37 75 50
1-394- §§4- 157 4 13 -532 3
133651- -2-- 2 - 1 2--- 71
. - - 1 1 --.___ i i g 1--..-
- --1- ______ 111 2_i_,_
SUBTOTALS? STATE 18902 143 90 473 110 71 35 330 752 65 4 40 48 558 600 229 72 438 10S3 536 347 325 243 285 489 1048 252 376 155 366 367
REGION 18889 923 1151 1547 3716 2564
STATES
MANUFACTURING (17) 118
MINIM 3845
OIL • SAS PRODUCTION (IS) 1.5 Million -
POWER PLANTS (18) 52400 -
RESEARCH 1850 -
WATER TREATMENT £19) 700 3 -
OTHER (20) 1 - -
- - - - - - 12-- 2-21-- 1 43 Iff
4 1
4
t i
1 1 5
1 3 2
2 50 - 3 50 50
75 - 1 10 - 60
SUBTOTALS! STATE 6514 30 000 0 7 30 0 20342 0 23 45 51 26 60 51 7 851211560
REGION 4451
10
11
245
164
TOTALS: STATE
REGION
45361 751 113 1187 133 74 36 160 1313 74 4 43 161 947 924 873 80 562 1191 725 458 3S1 37i 466 7S6 1S19 361 472 170 803 430
42411 2298 2151 3028 4925 3755
D
73
-------
Exhibit 1-3 (Continued)
SITE TYPE (3)
HOSPtTAL/MfDICAL CTBS (9,13)
MANUFACTURING MJWTS (i,14)
NOM-OIFENSE UBS
NUCLEAR POWER REACTORS (15)
NUCLEAR RESEARCH REACTORS
URANIUM FUEL CYCLE (16)
WASTE
SUBTOTALS! STATE
REGION
STATES
MANUFACTURINS (17)
MINING
POWER PLANTS (18)
MATER TREATMENT (19)
flTHFl? (9n
SUBTOTALS! STATE
REGION
TOTALSs STATE
TOTAL
5837
10207
2613
110
71
46
18
18902
18889
118
3845
52400
1R<5ft
700
i
6514
4451
45361
EPA
RESIGN 6
fAR* LA» NM* OK TX»
103 139 33 70 815
137 288 223 299 1061
18 35 32 31 131
2 2 - - 4
1 - - 2 1
- - 6 1 3
.... -,
261 464 294 403 1716
3138
1 7 - - 7
2 1 243 4 57
- - 4 1 S
3 8 247 5 69
332
3S4 565 1079 440 2151
IP*
RESIGN 7
IA* KS* MO NE*
46 §7 120 39
132 165 40 98
53 39 51 22
1112
1 1 .
. . i
... i
232 293 i14 162
901
3 - 3 -
_ . i
120 6 SO 10
123 6 54 10
191
420 347 590 177
EPA
REGION 8
CO* MT NO* SO UT* W
68 24 30 13 29 18
361 3 78 2 168 251
67 16 16 10 30 7
1 ...
- - i
a - - i 4 9
- - - -
499 43 124 26 231 286
1209
1 - - 1 1
1331 21 13 148 1146 342
10 - - - 10 3
1341 22 13 148 1157 346
3027
7066 69 171 340 1694 697
EPA
REGION
AS AZ* CA* SU
- 81 544 1
- 220 1405 -
1 41 2i1 1
3 6 -
- - 22 -
- — 1 -
- - 1 -
1 345 2260 2
_
- 332 30 -
- 10 1 -
0 342 31 0
1 756 3472 539
9
HI W*
21 26
2 87
14 18
_ . .
1
_
g
37 134
2779
_
25
_
0 25
398
125 1019
EPA
REGION 10
AK IP" OR* HA*
8 22 54 100
21 96 218 256
11 84 37 107
- - i i
1
_ , - 3
" ' - '
40 142 311 468
961
8 -
S 21 7 27
- -
5 29 7 27
68
91 305 422 3364
RESIGN
D
-n
-------
DRAFT
Exhibit 1-3 (Continued)
NOTES:
(1) Dashes signify either that no State-specific data were available, that no rational
basis existed for placing sites within specific States, or that no site is located
within the State.
(2) In where information was not available on location, the sites were
included in the "Total" column. Consequently the two numbers shown at the
bottom of the "Total" column will not match until all State data can be obtained.
(3) Three basic categories of sites have been identified: Federal
NRC/Agreement State Sites, and State Sites. Federal Sites are those owned and
operated, or otherwise under the authority of the Federal government.
NRC/Agreement State are those civilian and non-DoE Federal sites that
require a regulatory program to assure they will be operated in a manner
protecting public health and safety. State Sites are all other whose operation
may result in residual radioactivity.
(4) The number of could not be determined from readily available sources of
information.
(5) Study underway currently to inventory potential sites with radioactivity.
Results are expected in late 1990.
(6) The distribution within States of all sites could not be determined from readily
available information. Information on the distribution of approximately 7100
formerly utilized defense sites is being sought from the Army Corps of Engineers.
For the present, the sites were distributed in proportion to the number of defense
complexes in each State.
(7) The distribution within States of approximately 3900 Environmental Restoration
remedial action sites could not be determined from readily available information.
For the present, the sites were distributed in proportion to the number of DoE
complexes in each State. Complexes for which sites have already been identified,
e.g., the Uranium Mill Tailings Program and the Hanford Reservation, were
excluded from the ratio process.
(8) Approximately 5600 sites of the total shown are related to uranium mill tailings.
1-12
-------
DRAFT
Exhibit 1-3 (Continued)
NOTES:
(9) The majority of sites utilize instruments and/or measuring devices with sealed
radioactive sources, thus residual radioactivity is not expected.
(10) The majority of sites shown are not EPA's direct responsibility, rather EPA
retains a management role through Superfund legislation. The 6
former DoD sites but exclude all UMTRA Program sites.
(11) Although is contaminated with mill tailings, it is an active site, therefore
not included in the UMTRA Program.
(12) Totals include 9 nuclear power plants not counted in the category "Nuclear Power
Plants" under NRC/Agreement States.
(13) Totals do not include about an equal number of nuclear medical vans, veterinary
sites, etc, licensed by or registered with the States. The number and location of
such sites could not be determined from readily available information.
(14) The total represents a combination of NRC/Agreement State and State licensees
because, for the most part, available information would not allow segregation,
(15) The total includes plants under active construction as of 12/88 minus the TVA
units which are listed under Federal Sites/TVA.
(16) Enrichment and Fuel Processing Sites are included under Federal Sites/DoE.
(17) These are included under NRC/Agreement States/Manufacturing Plants,
Available data would not allow segregation.
(18) Not included in totals to avoid obscuring results.
(19) Values shown represent the number of affected water treatment systems averaged
over the number of in that region,
(20) This category represents sites once licensed by the Atomic Commission
(AEC5 predecessor to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission) or Agreement States
that have since reverted back to the States. The site listed represents the low-
level radioactive waste portion of the West Valley site now under the
management of New York State,
1-13
-------
DRAFT
Exhibit 1-4
Sites with Potential Residual Radioactivity, by Site Type and Waste Type
WASTE TYPES
SITE TYPE
SPENT
FUEL
LOW LEVEL
GREATER
HIGH TRANS- THAN CLASS
LEVEL URANIC CLASS C A.B.C
HARM
URANIUM —•
MILL ACCELERATOR
MIXED TA!LINSS PRODUCED
NORM
FEDERAL SUES
Army Corps of Engineers
Dept ef Agriculture
Dept of Conwiere*
Dept of Defense
Dept of Energy
Dept of Health & Human Services
Dept of Interior
Dept of Jostle*
Dept of Libor
Oept of Transportation
ttept of the Treasury
EPA
General Services Mm
NASA
Postal Service
TVA
Veterans Mm
*
-
X
X
.
-
.
.
.
_
-
.
-
-
-
_
:
-
X
X
-
-
-
-
-
-
X
_
_
-
-
_
~
X
X
X
-
X
-
-
-
-
-
_
X
_
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
K
.
X
X
X
X
™*
-
X
X
-
X
_
-
-
-
X
-
„
,
X
-
*.
_
-
X
.
X
-
.
_
-
X
_
_
.
X
.
„
X
X
X
X
-
_
_
-
-
-
-
X
-
-
X
:
-
X
X
_
X
-
-
.
_
X
X
-
-
X
_
STATES
Medical Sites
Manufacturing Plants
Non-Defense Seswrch Lmb*
Nuclear Power Reactors
Nuclear Reseireh t Test iaseteri
Uranium fyel Cycle Facilities
Waste Management
:
.
X
X
X
X
I
-
_
_
X
X
X
-
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
I
-
X
X
X
X
X
X
STATES
Manufacturing
Mining
011 S Sas Production
Power Plants (Non-Nuel»*r)
Research
Mater Treatment
Other
1-14
-------
DRAFT
2, Identification of Sites
Sites are identified and organized primarily according to type, location
authority. This approach was selected to group sites in a way in which remedial
programs, budgets, etc., would be managed. Three basic categories of sites have been
identified: Federal sites, sites licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
and/or by NRC Agreement States, and individual in the 50 and U.S.
Territories not covered by NRC/Agreement State authority. Within each major
category, site types are further divided the various categories of licensees (e.g.,
nuclear power plant licensees) or Federal agencies and programs. All sites are tabulated
by EPA region.
In many cases, fall into more than one category. In an effort to avoid double
counting, sites are tabulated in one of the three basic categories. When faced with such
choices, the decision was always to include the site the with primary
responsibility for operating or managing the site, using footnotes to assure reader clarity.
For example, a nuclear power plant operated by the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)
is tabulated under the TVA segment of Federal Agency Sites (Section 2.1) even though
it would also fit logically in Section 2.2, NRC/Agreement State Sites.
Where it impractical to list entities with primary responsibility for operating or
managing a site, subcategories were created to group similar sites. Thus a subcategory
exists for nuclear power reactors rather than a of all reactor owners.
2.1
Sites within this category are owned and operated, or are otherwise under the authority
of agencies of the Federal government. Included are military bases, national research
laboratories, weapons complexes, radioactive materials production systems, and a host of
less prominent buildings and equipment. Such facilities include hospitals, schools, testing
2-1
-------
DRAFT
ranges, reactors, accelerators, enrichment equipment, storage depots, waste burial
grounds (i.e,, potential sites).
These sites are identified and described briefly below. Also summarized is the nature of
the residual radioactivity known to exist or anticipated. For the purposes ot this report,
the listing contains sites previously decontaminated. This is done to future
assessment of the acceptability of standards in use many years Exhibit 2-1 presents
a tabulation by site type, location, and cognizant agency of the 19,945 Federal sites
identified. Each site category identified in Exhibit 2-1 is described briefly below in the
order shown in the exhibit.
2.1.1 Army Corps of Engineers (CoE)40
The Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for various sites that utilize radioactive
materials. Fourteen located in 12 states are under the CoE jurisdiction. Little, if
any, residual radioactivity is expected at these sites due to the use of measuring
instruments with sealed radioactive sources.
2.12 Department of Agriculture (DoA)7-40
The DoA's Agriculture Research Center in Beltsville, Maryland is reported to have used
radioactive materials in simulating the effects of atomic weapons fallout on crops.
Similar tests were also carried out at military bases wherein short-lived radionuclides
were dispersed on land, buildings, vehicles, crops and roads to removal
methods. Since the radionuclides used are relatively short lived, no residual radioactivity
is expected at these sites. Aside from a research site in Hyattsville, Maryland, the
Beltsville site appears to be the only potentially contaminated DoA site.
2>2
-------
Exhibit 2-1
Number of Federal Sites with Potential Residual Radioactivity, by Site Type, Location and Cognizant Entity (1,2)
FEDERAL ASENC¥ (3)
Artny Corps of Engineers
B*pt of
Oept of Connierc* (5)
Oept of 0*f«ns»
OERP (Active)
Bases (6)
Power Production
Propu1»1on (7)
Late
T«st1ng
Weapons Accident* (8) 29
D€RP/FUOS (I
Oept of Energy
WHO (Actlvn)
D1v««Mf1ed Ubs (10) 1573
Material* ProdyctKm
Research
N1_c*11anaous
ER
FUSRAP
WRAP (12)
SF«P (11)
UMTRAP (13)
* Agreement State
** Ni«jibers in par»nth«se» r«f»r to notes on page 18.
EPA EPA
REGION 1 REGION 2
TOTAL CT Mi HA NM* RI* VT NJ NY* PR VI
14 __ i _ _ - - i _
2___ ,___--
n i ~ i - ~ . i i i -
103 1 1 - 1 - 2 4 - -
6 *.«,._-, - _ • •
1 74 5** - 91. * « «. «.«.«. *
19 __ 2 - - - ---
29------ a _ _ _
7118 537 21 55? 21 - - 83 83 -
1573 -_.__ - - 2 -
5 _____ - ___
77« «___— _ _ - _ —
4 __ 1__ _ ___ _
7 — — 11
! 392Q 40 - 121 - - - 323 445 -
31 1-2--- 66--
Kfl'l ____- _ ___
36 _____ . _ 12-
5039 ----- . -._
EPA EPA
REGION 3 REGION 4
DC DC MO* PA VA WV AL* FL* SA* KV» «S« NO* SO* Ttf«
- _ 2--- 1-111__-
- -. g.« - . . * w v « -
- _ 2- 1- - 1 - - 112-
3 10 12- 4132121 1
*. - 25 — - — *****.
24- 1- -- 2----
-_ i • - - - - ill- 11-
- 103 310 21 599 - 83 41 124 62 21 62 41 21
_._ i- _ ..-__. 1 i
»-._.-,• •, «..»„*. 1 _* «. 1
1
- - 40 121 - - - 40 - 40 - - SI 242
- - 11- -- \
... 1- - -_,._. i 5
_-_164- - _______
EPA
REGION 5
IL* IN MI HN OH HI
- - - - -
- _ 2 - -
3 2 1 - 1 -
1 - 1 - 1 -
1 - - 2 -
83 62 41 - 83 -
1 1
_ * - _ t
283 40 40-323 -
3 - 1 - -
2 - - - 4 -
-------
2-1 (Continued)
fEDCRAL AGENCY (3)
Artny Corps of Engineers
CIA (4)
Dept of AgHeultuf*
Dept of CorrmercB (5)
Dept of Oefsnse
(Active)
Bases (6)
Powwr Production
Prepulstert (7)
Research Labs
Weapons Testing
Weapons Accidents (8)
0ERP/FUOS (Inactive) (f)
Dept of Energy
UMO (Active)
0
-------
Exhibit 2-1 (Continued)
EPA EPA EPA EPA EPA
REGION 1 REGION 2 REGION 3 REGION 4 REGION 5
FEDERAL AGENCY (3) TOTAL CT ME MA NH* RI* VT NJ NY* PR VI DE DC MD* PA VA W AL» FL* GA* KY* MS* NC* SC* TN* IL* IN MI MN OH WI
*>
Ui
Oept of Health K Human Service
Dept of Interior
Dept of Justice
Dept of Labor
Dept of Transportation
Dept of the Treasury
EPA
ACTIVE FACILITIES
SUPERFUND (Inactive) (14)
Government Services Adn
Postal Service (15)
Small Business Administration
TVA (16)
Veterans Administration
46--1----23--271- 1 1 - 2 - - 1 - - --112-
88 --!____ 11- _- 123 1211- 11-- 1111- 1
7 _____ _ ___ _ ___ 9 _ !_______ _ ~ 1__ t
28 ---- i- 11- - - - i - - i 111- 11- - 2- 111-
45 - - 1 - - - 63- - --- 1- - - 2- 1~- 1 1 41-. 2 -
13 --..-..-.---- 1-2- i i - - 1 - - - __.--5_
0 -_-._.« _. . . . - _-_._.__ _ ..,.,-....
121 21-111291- 113534-4322424 5-5142
TOTALS! STATE 19945 609 23 714 23 2 1 423 558 9 0
REGION 19071 1372 990
1 113 386 320 642
8 101 93 138 109 30 73 130 290 386 108 94 4 432 3
1470 964 1027
-------
Exhibit 2-1 (Continued)
s
FEDERAL AGENCY (3)
Dept of Health & Human Service
Dept of Interior
Dept of Labor
EPA
ACTIVE FACILITIES
SUPERFUND (Inactive) (14)
TWA f\R\
Veterans Administration
TOTALSs STATE
REGION
TOTAL
46
38
28
45
yy
121
19945
19071
EPA EPA EPA IPA ' EPA
REGION 6 REGION 7 REGION B REGION 9 REGION 10
AR* LA* MM* OK TX* IA* KS* MO NE* CO* KT ND* SO UT* WY AS A2* CA* SU HI NV* AK ID* OR* MA*
1311 1 - - 2- 12- 1- - - 3 2-- - 1-'- 2
1-931-11- 911161-93-- 21476
- - - 12-1-- 2------- 1 - - 2-- 2 2
- - 21---*- 4--- 2 - - - 3-- --11 4
31262333 11131--- 10-- 2-123
90 93 538 32 366 65 48 322 5 5226 4 34 166 306 65 0 69 1181 537 88 860 46 134 104 2B69
1119 440 5801 2735 3153
o
73
•m
-------
DP* A ff
It" A ET
i\/--tl I
Exhibit 2-1 (Continued)
NOTES:
(1) Dashes signify either that no State-specific data were available, that no rational
for specific States, or that no site is located
within the State.
(2) In instances where information was not available on location, the sites were
included in the 'Total" column. Consequently the two numbers shown at the
bottom of the "Total" column will not match until all State data can be obtained.
(3) Acronyms: CIA - Central Intelligence Agency
DEEP - Defense Environmental Restoration Program
DERP/FUDS - Formerly Utilized Defense Sites
EPA - Environmental Protection Agency
ER - Environmental Restoration
FUSRAP - Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program
GJRAP - Grand Junction Remedial Action Program
NASA - National Aeronautics and Space Administration
SFMP - Surplus Facilities Program
TVA - Tennessee Valley Authority
UMTRAP - Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program
WMO - Waste Management Operations
(4) The number of sites could not be determined from readily available information.
(5) Study underway currently to inventory potentially contaminated sites. Results are
expected by late 1990.
(6) The total does not include 34 sites used for stockpiling strategic materials under
the management of the Government Services Administration.
(7) D&D assumed to be equally distributed amongst the 7 identified
in Exhibit 2-2.
(8) Two of the are in coastal waters and not in the States themselves.
Twenty-nine of the 50 suspected cases have been documented,
2-7
-------
DRAFT
Exhibit 2-1 (Continued)
NOTES:
(9) Not all are expected to contain radioactive contamination; however, until
more is known, all sites are included.
(10) The total of 1573 consists of 13 facilities plus 1 facility within which approximately
1560 discrete, physically separated parcels of land have been identified. Each of
the other 13 facilities is expected to contain from 10 to 1500 physically separated
land parcels within its boundaries. To avoid over counting and speculation,
however, each of the 13 facilities was counted as a single site since details on the
number of land parcels were not available.
(11) The ER program includes 220 sites of the former Defense Decontamination and
Decommissioning Program plus 30 sites of the former Surplus Facilities
Management Program (SFMP). The latter is not included in the total of 3920
but is separately under SFMP.
(12) Includes 593 sites. Approximately 4450 Grand Junction "vicinity properties" are
managed under the UMTRA Program.
(13) Includes 24 sites and approximately 5014 "vicinity properties."
(14) Includes 6 former DoD sites but excludes all UMTRA Program sites.
(15) Although this site is contaminated with mill tailings, it is an active site and
therefore not included in the UMTRA Program.
(16) Includes 9 nuclear power plants not counted in the totals of Exhibit 2-7.
2-8
-------
DRAFT
2.1.3 Department of Commerce (DoC)7-40
The DoC, through the U.S. Maritime Administration, controls the Nuclear Ship
Savannah which has undergone D&D and is now stationed at Charleston, South
Carolina. The DoC controls, through the National Bureau of Standards (NBS), the
Center for Radiation Research at the Bureau. This Gaithersburg, Maryland site includes
a reactor and several accelerators. The total number of potentially contaminated sites
controlled by DoC, including various laboratories and food inspection is 23.
Currently, the DoC is undertaking a study to more accurately inventory sites that may be
radioactively contaminated. The results of this effort are expected in the October -
November frame.27
Residual radioactivity is expected to consist primarily of and products at
the reactor and accelerator sites.
2.1.4 of (DoD)7
The U.S. Department of Defense through its Departments of Army (including the Army
National Guard), Navy (including the Marine Corps), and Air Force (including the Air
National Guard) controls a large number of sites both in and outside the conterminous
United States. Additional military sites are controlled by the Department of
Transportation through the U.S. Coast Guard.
Military facilities range in size from single buildings to large forts and bases which may
cover areas as large as a few million acres. These complexes cover a of
functions including schools, hospitals, training academies, research and development
laboratories, proving grounds, bombing and gunnery practice ranges, storage depots,
arsenals, air naval launch sites, forts, and manufacturing sites for
2-9
-------
DRAFT
weapons and ammunition. Some sites are also used for storage of strategic materials for
national stockpiles.
Most of the residual radioactivity at military sites is a result of research and development
testing of military munitions, testing and operation of military reactors, or accidents.
Sites may be contaminated with plutonium and fission products over large areas, or may
have used or stored small quantities of radioactive materials in the form of luminous dial
watches, compasses, electron tubes, and lights in electric equipment. Still others have
been contaminated with depleted uranium munitions but vary widely in character.
The DoD's Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP) has been ongoing
since 1983 to restore active (DERP) and formerly utilized defense sites (DERP/FUDS).
The Defense Environmental Restoration Program has been codified into law as part of
Superfund.
There may be very few sites where radioactive wastes have been buried on site but little
information is available regarding deliberate on-site burials.
Refer to Exhibit 2-2 for a list of potentially contaminated DoD sites.
2.1.4.1 Defense Environmental Restoration Program (Active Sites). The Defense
Environmental Restoration Program (DERP) is an outgrowth of the overall Installation
Restoration Program (IRP). Active sites may have segments that are inactive or which
may have been decontaminated. In such cases the overall site is still considered an
active site.
* Bases - Bases can be large, sprawling complexes where many varied activities
have been carried out. Some of the military sites such as hospitals, research and
development laboratories, and schools will continue in for the indefinite
future. Others have already been taken out of service and decontaminated and
decommissioned but are still part of the active base.
2-10
-------
DE":>\ &, mmmm
RAFT
Alaskj
Ft. Greeley
Alabama
Redstone Arsenal
California
Exhibit 2-2
Department of Defense Sites
Source of Residual Radioactivity
Activation/fission products
Accelerator
Army Ionizing Radiation
Camp Parks
Camp Roberts
China Lake Naval Weapons Center
Long Beach Naval Shipyard/Base
Mare Island Naval Shipyard
Naval Electronics Lab
Naval Post Graduate School
Port Hueneme
San Diego Naval Base
Connecticut
New London Submarine Base
District of Columbia
Naval Research Lab
Naval Research Lab, Reactor
Walter Reed Research Reactor
Florida
EgUn Air Force Base
Hawaii
Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard
and Submarine Base
Accelerator
Sr-90 in hot cell
Depleted uranium
Depleted uranium
Activation/fission products
Activation/fission products
Accelerator
2 Accelerators
Activation/fission products
Activation/fission products
Activation/fission products
13 Accelerators
Activation/fission products
Activation/fission products
Depleted uranium
Activation/fission products
2-11
-------
AFT
Exhibit 2-2 (Continued)
iite
Indiana
Crane Naval Weapons Support Ctr
Jeffersonville Depot
Iowa
Army Ammunitions Plant
Maine
Portsmouth Naval Shipyard
Maryland
Aberdeen Proving Ground
Aberdeen Pulsed Reactor
Armed Forces Radiobiology
Research Institute
Army Chemical Center
Diamond Ordnance Radiation
Edgewood
Naval Medical Center
Naval Ordnance Lab
.Massachusetts
Army Quartermaster Depot
Michigan
Detroit Arsenal
Nevada
Nellis Air Force Base
Fallen Naval Air Station
Source of Residual Radioactivity
Thorium
Zircon sands
Depleted uranium
Activation/fission products
Depleted uranium
Activation/fission products
Activation/fission products, transuranics
Accelerator
Activation/fission products
Accelerator
Accelerator
Accelerator
2 Accelerators
Accelerator
Depleted uranium, plutonium,
fission products
Shoal underground nuclear weapons test
2-12
-------
2-2 (Continued)
New Jersey
Kcatinny Arsenal
New Mexico
Korkland Air Force Base
White Sands
(Trinity Site, Fast Burst Reactor)
New York
Watervliet Arsenal
Ohio
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base
Texgg
Source of Residual Radioactivity
Accelerator
Unknown
Activation/fission products
Accelerator
Activation/fission products, accelerator,
Am-241
Fort Worth (Aerospace Systems Activation/fission products
Test Reactor, Ground Test Reactor)
Medina Base Depleted uranium
3 Accelerators
Activation/fission products
Activation/fission products
Activation/fission products
Ra-226
Hill Air Force Base
Virginia
Ft. Belvoir
Newport News Naval Shipyard
Washington
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard
Sandpoint
2-13
-------
DRAFT
There are 113 military bases/camps/arsenals with expected residual radioactivity,
In addition, 34 military reservations have been used to stockpile strategic
materials under the management of the Government Services Administration
(refer to Section 2.1.13).
• Power Production - Most of the military nuclear reactors were designed to
produce electricity and heat and, with the exception of nuclear reactors, have
been shutdown or dismantled. These power plants were typically used to service
remote installations. There were 6 such sites as shown in Exhibit 2-3.
Residual radioactivity at the non-operating reactors is primarily activation
products. Except for the PM-3A site in Antarctica, the waste from which has
been sent to the Naval Center at Port Hueneme, California, waste volumes and
inventories are not available.
2-3
Department of Defense Power Reactors for Remote Locations
Name Location
Stationary Medium Power Plant No. 1A Alaska
Portable Medium Power Plant No. 3A Antarctica
STURGIS Floating Nuclear Power Plant Canal Zone
Portable Medium Power Plant No. 2A Greenland
Stationary Medium Power Plant No. 1 Virginia
Portable Medium Power Plant No. 1 Wyoming
2-14
-------
DRAFT
Propulsion - The U.S. Navy has constructed approximately 150 nuclear submarines
and about a surface ships. To support its nuclear powered ships, the Navy
has 11 shipyards, 13 tenders, and 2 submarine bases for a total of approximately
174.
Residual Radioactivity consists primarily of activation and products. In
addition, low levels of radioactivity (principally Co-60) are also usually present in
harbor where are serviced. This is true not only for the shipyards
listed in Exhibit 2-2, but also for other nuclear ship as at Guam,
Scotland, and possibly others.
Research Labs - The DoD has operated several test and reactors
for simulating the effects of nuclear weapons and for other physical and medical
research. Most of have been shut down or dismantled. There are 19 such
sites as indicated in Exhibit 2-4.
Residual at non-operating reactors consists primarily of fission and
activation products. Remediation efforts at recently will
contend with spent fuel and fresh fission products.
Weapons Testing - There are several nuclear test sites where missile,
gunnery and bomb testing is performed. Tests can be both surface and
underground, on-site and off-site. There are at least two sites where nuclear
bombs were detonated, and approximately 11 where uranium shells
have been fired. In addition, there is one site where nuclear weapons have been
assembled and stored, for a total of 14.
Residual radioactivity from bomb testing is expected to range widely and include
fission products as well as plutonium. The Nellis Air Force Base and Nellis
Bombing and Gunnery Range encompass about three acres, portions of
2-15
-------
DRAFT
Exhibit 2-4
Department of Defense Test and Research Reactors
U.S. Navy Postgraduate School
Naval Research Center
Walter Reed Research Reactor
Radiation Effects Reactor
Pool Type Reactor
Army Materials Research Center
Aberdeen Pulsed Reactor
Armed Forces Radiobiology Research
Institute
Diamond Ordnance Facility
U.S. Naval Hospital
Fast Burst Reactor
Nuclear Engineering Test Reactor
Aerospace Systems Test Reactor
Ground Test Reactor
Reactivity Test Assembly
Location
California
District of Columbia
District of Columbia
Georgia
Georgia
Massachusetts
Maryland
Maryland
Maryland
Maryland
New Mexico
Ohio
Texas
Texas
Texas
2-16
-------
D^AFT
which are contaminated by fallout from atmospheric nuclear weapons and
weapons safety tests.
Residual radioactivity can also be present in the form of shell fragments (from
projectiles incorporated depleted uranium), storage and waste areas, and
contaminated soils.
• Accidents of Weapons Carriers - Very little information has been released by the
DoE or the DoD on residual radioactivity associated with accidents involving
weapons carriers in the United States. A few accidents are known to have had
residual radioactivity associated with them, some on already contaminated
with radioactivity, but essentially no unclassified information has been reported.
Some have involved other radioactive but non-fissionable
radionuclides (e.g., tritium). Estimates of the total number of weapons accidents
range up to more than 50. Exhibit 2-5 summarizes the available for
29 documented cases.
The extent of residual radioactivity at nuclear weapons accident sites is unknown.
Possible contaminants would be plutonium, enriched uranium tritium.
2.1.4.2 Defense Environmental Restoration Program/Formerly Utilized Defense Sites
(Inactive Sites). The DERP Formerly Utilized Defense Sites (FUDS) activity is
managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Included are related to
hazardous and toxic/radioiogic wastes, ordnance and explosive waste and building
demolition on formerly owned or used by any DoD component for which DoD is
responsible.
2-17
-------
DKAFT
Exhibit 2-5
Nuclear Weapons Carrier Accidents
Date Location
2/13/50 Pacific Ocean, off Puget Sound, WA
4/11/50 Manzano Base, New Mexico
7/13/50 Lebanon, Ohio
8/05/50 Travis AFB, California
1/09/56 Kirkland AFB, New Mexico
5/22/57 Kirkland AFB, New Mexico
10/11/57 Homestead AFB, Florida
12/12/57 Fairchild AFB, Washington
2/05/58 Savannah, Georgia, 5 miles off coast
3/11/58 Florence, South Carolina
5/22/58 Leonardo, New Jersey
11/04/58 AFB5
11/26/58 Chennault AFB,
7/06/59 AFB, Louisiana
10/15/59 Glen Bean, Kentucky
6/07/60 McGuire AFB, New Jersey
1/19/61 Monticello, Utah
1/24/61 Goldsboro, North Carolina
3/14/61 Yuba City, California
11/13/63 Medina Base, Texas
1/13/64 Cumberland, Maryland
12/05/64 Ellsworth AFB, South Dakota
12/08/64 Grissom AFB, Indiana
8/09/65 Searcy, Arkansas
10/12/65 Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio
8/24/78 Rock, Kansas
4/80 Wichita, Kansas
9/16/80 Grand Forks AFB, North Dakota
9/19/80 Damascus,
Weapons System
B-36
B-29
B-50
B-29
B-36
B-36
B-52
B-47
B-47
Nike Missile
B-47
B-47
C-124
B-52 & KC-135
BOMARC Missile
B-52
B-52
B-52
Storage Site
B-52
Minuteman
B-58
Titan
C-124
Titan Missile
Titan Missile
B-52
Titan O ICBM
2-18
-------
DRAFT
A total of 7118 formerly used properties with potential for inclusion In the program have
been identified. Preliminary at 1934 sites have been completed. Not all are
expected to have radioactive contamination; however, until more complete information is
available, all 7118 are in Exhibit 2-l.HR'2S
2,1.5 Department of Energy (DoE)
The U.S. DoE has responsibility for most of the government controlled contaminated
sites and materials in this country. There are DoE sites present in every state.
Sites range from small, contaminated laboratory type rooms to large, complex,
highly contaminated processing plants, as well as surrounding contaminated lands.
Besides that are government owned, DoE has responsibility for some sites that were
formerly used in government operations or for the benefit of the government.
These DoE sites include the national laboratories, those undergoing remedial action, and
sites associated with specific research and development programs. These are further
classified as Waste Management Operations (active sites) or Environmental Restoration
(inactive and surplus sites) in accordance with the terminology used in DoE's Five-Year
Plan.20 Refer to Exhibit 2-6 for the names and locations of DoE sites.
2.1.5.1 Waste Management Operations (Active Sites).7-20*33 The Waste Management
Operations (WMO) portion of DoE's Five-Year Plan is dedicated to waste management
at all active sites. As the Five-Year Plan gets further into implementation, it is expected
that details will emerge on identification of sites. For now, the following sites have been
identified.
• Diversified Laboratories - These are major complexes that have diversified
programs. There are nine major national laboratories and 5 more focused labs
for a total of 14 complexes in this category. Among these 14 is the National
Laboratory at Hanford, Washington. Hanford is reported to have approximately
1560 potentially contaminated sites within its borders.33
2-19
-------
Exhibit 2-6
Department of Energy Sites
DRAFT
ACIWE Sites
Diversified Laboratories
» Major National Laboratories
Argonne National Lab
Brookhaven National Lab
The National Lab at Hanford/PNL
Idaho National Engineering Lab
Lawrence livermore National Lab
Los Alamos National Lab
Oak Ridge National Lab
Sandia National Lab
Savannah River Lab
» Other Diversified Laboratories
Ames
Bettis Atomic Power Lab
Knolls Atomic Power Lab
Lawrence Berkeley Lab
Mound
Nuclear Production Sites
Ashtabula - Materials
Femald - Materials
Oak Ridge (K-25) - Enrichment
Paducah - Enrichment
Portsmouth - Enrichment
Weapons. Production and Testing
Alamogordo - Nuclear Testing
Kansas City - Non-nuclear material
Nevada Test Site - Nuclear testing
Oak Ridge (Y-12) - Plutonium materials
Other Test - Nuclear Testing
Pantex - Weapons Assembly
Pinellas - Neutron generators
Rocky Flats • Plutonium materials
Chicago, Illinois
Upton, New York
Richland, Washington
Idaho Falls, Idaho
Livermore, California
Los Alamos, New Mexico
Oak Ridge, Tennessee
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Aiken, South Carolina
Ames, Iowa
West Mlfflin, Pennsylvania
Nishayuna, New York
Berkeley, California
Miamisburg, Ohio
Ohio
Ohio
Tennessee
Kentucky
Ohio
New Mexico
Missouri
Nevada
Tennessee
Mississippi, New Mexico
Texas
Florida
Colorado
2-20
-------
Rocky Flats - Plutonium materials
Exhibit 2-6 (Continued)
DRAFT
Colorado
ACTIVE Sites (Continued)
Physical Research
Bates Linear Accelerator - Physics
Fermi National Accelerator - Physics
Notre Dame - Physical chemistry
Stanford Linear Accelerator - Physics
Miscellaneous Sites
New Brunswick - Safeguards
Princeton Plasma Physics - Fusion
Waste Isolation Pilot Project
Massachusetts
Illinois
Indiana
California
Illinois
New Jersey
New Mexico
INACTIVE Sites
ER (Remedial Action & Defense
Grand Junction Site
Idaho National Engineering Lab (Portion)
New Brunswick Lab
Knolls Atomic Power Lab (Portion)
Mound (Portion)
Oak Ridge National Lab (Portion)
FUSRAP
Oilman Hall, U of Cal, Berkeley
Seymor Specialty Wire
Palos Park Forest Preserve
Labs at U of Chicago
National Guard Armory
W. R. Grace, Curtis Bay
Shpack Landfill
Ventron, Beverly
St. Louis Airport & vicinity
Latty Avenue Properties
St. Louis Downtown Site
General Motors, Adrian
Exhibit 2-6 (Continued)
Colorado
Idaho
New Jersey
New York
Ohio
Tennessee
California
Connecticut
Illinois
Illinois
Illinois
Maryland
Massachusetts
Massachusetts
Missouri
Missouri
Missouri
Michigan
2-21
-------
Exhibit 2-6 (Continued)
DttAFT
INACTIVE Sites (Continued)
E. I. du Pont, Deepwater
Kellex Research, Jersey City
Middlesex Muncipal Landfill
Middlesex Sampling Plant
W, R, Grace, Sheffield Brook
Stepan Chemical
Acid/Pueblo/Los Alamos Canyons
Bayo Canyon, Los Alamos
Chupadera Mesa, White Sands Missile
Linde Air Products
Colonie Interim Storage Site
Niagara Falls Storage Site
Ashland Oil No. 1
Oil No. 2
Seaway Industrial Park
Albany Metallurgical Research Center
Aliquippa Forge
Elza Gate
GJRAP
593 Properties, Grand Junction
SFMP
Santa Field Lab
Idaho National Engineering Lab
Argonne National Lab
Weldon Springs Site
Los Alamos National Lab
Lewiston (Niagara Falls Storage Site)
Mound Plant Advanced Systems
Battelle Columbus Lab
Shippingport Station
Savannah River Site
Oak Ridge National Lab
Monticello Site
Hanford Site
New Jersey
New Jersey
New Jersey
New Jersey
New Jersey
New Jersey
New Mexico
New Mexico
New Mexico
New York
New York
New York
New York
New York
New York
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Tennessee
Colorado
California
Idaho
Illinois
Missouri
New Mexico
New York
Ohio
Ohio
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
Tennessee
Utah
Washington
2-22
-------
2-6 (Continued)
DRAFT
INACTIVE Sites (Continued)
UMTRAP
Monument Valley
Tuba City
Durango
Grand Junction
Gunnison
Maybell
Naturita
Hew Rifle
Old Rifle
Slick Rock - NC Site
Slick Rock - UC Site
Lawman
Ambrosia Lake
SMprock
Belfield
Bowman
Lakeview
Canonsburg
Falls City
Green River
Mexican Hat
Salt Lake City
Converse County
Riverton
Arizona
Arizona
Colorado
Colorado
Colorado
Colorado
Colorado
Colorado
Colorado
Colorado
Colorado
Idaho
New Mexico
New
North Dakota
North Dakota
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Texas
Utah
Utah
Utah
Wyoming
Wyoming
2-23
-------
DRAFT
» Nuclear Materials Production - These sites are devoted to manufacturing nuclear
fuels and targets. There are 5 sites in this category.
• Weagons; jftroduction and Testing Sites - These sites are concerned with nuclear
weapons from the design and testing phases to the Ml production phase. Seven
complexes are included in this category. One of these, the Nevada Test Site,
reports approximately 770 individual test sites.
• Physical Research - Four devoted to basic research at universities have been
identified.
» Miscellaneous Sites - This category includes small laboratories for fusion and
nuclear safeguards work, the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) intended for the
permanent geologic disposal of defense transuranic waste, the West Valley
Project, a DoE Area Office, Seven sites have been identified for this
category.
2.1.5.2 Environmental Restoration (Inactive Sites),20*30'33 DoE has
environmental restoration (ER) programs that directly involve the remediation and/or
decontamination and decommissioning of DoE-eontrolled sites contaminated by activities
of DoE and its predecessors, some of which have recently been combined. One example
is the Surplus Facilities Management Program (SFMP), now included under the
Decontamination and Decommissioning Division of ER. These programs are described
briefly below.
* - The Remedial Action portion of the ER segment of the
DoE Five-Year is dedicated to the management of inactive DoE sites,
including those that have the potential for releases to the environment (called
Remedial Actions) and certain surplus facilities (called Defense Decontamination
and Decommissioning). There are approximately 220 of the at 7 locations
2-24
-------
DRAFT
throughout the United States, and about 3700 of the former for a total of 3920.
Of the 3700 remedial action sites, not all may be radioactively contaminated but
are included in Exhibit 2-1 until more information becomes available.
Additionally, approximately 30 Surplus Facility Management Program sites have
been the ER but are discussed and tabulated separately as
discussed below.
Formerly Utilized Remedial Action Program (FUSRAF) - FUSRAP is
primarily concerned with waste clean-up of sites that were formerly to
support the nuclear activities of DoE's predecessor agencies: the Manhattan
Engineering District established for the Manhattan Project, and the Atomic
Energy Commission. There are 31 sites in this category.
Residual radioactivity at FUSRAP sites can include floor tiles, soils, building
rabble, road materials, piping and tanks. The primary at these sites
are uranium, thorium and radium. These are usually present at low activity levels,
though they vary from site to site.
Grand Junction Remedial Action Project (GJRAP> - Underway since 1973, the
GJRAP was a precursor to the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program
and was designed to oversee the rehabilitation of structures utilized uranium
mill tailings in some phase of their construction. There are 593 decontaminated
sites in this category.
In addition to the 593 sites, there are approximately 4450 vicinity properties at
Grand Junction that are managed under the UMTRA Program discussed below.
Most of the residual radioactivity at the GJRAP sites of tailings
and tailings mixed with soil. The uranium and thorium in the soil compose the
primary radionuclldes.
2-25
-------
• Surplus Management Program (SFMP>HR'16 - Until recently, SFMP had
been a separate distinct program. Currently it is part of the Environmental
Restoration Program's Decontamination and Decommissioning Division. It is
included here under its former title because it would have been conspicuous by its
absence.
•
Underway since 1978, SFMP was decontaminating about 30 radioactively
contaminated sites that have been declared surplus to government needs. To
avoid double counting, have not been included in the ER (Remedial
Action) segment discussed above. SFMP sites included such installations as
power and research reactors, fuel reprocessing plants, laboratories, tanks,
stacks, pipelines, waste treatment systems, solid waste disposal sites, ponds,
ditches, areas contaminated by uranium and thorium mill tailings.
Residual radioactivity at such a diversity of can everything from
spent fuel, contaminated storage tanks and uranium mill tailings to general
laboratory (hoods, glove boxes) and waste burial grounds. The
nuclides present depend upon the specific type of site being discussed.
• The Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program (UMTRAP) - The program
includes on 24 inactive uranium mill tailings sites and vicinity
properties. As of July 1990, over 12,000 vicinity properties have been evaluated,
5014 of which will undergo some form of remediation. Of 4455 are
associated with Grand Junction, Colorado. Currently, 5039 sites and vicinity
properties are remediated under UMTRAP.™"20
2.1.6 Department of Health and Human Services (DoH&HS)7'40
The DoH&HS the Institutes of Health (NIH) in Bethesda, Maryland.
The research sites at NIH include several accelerators, however, the combination is
2-26
-------
considered as one site at this time pending receipt of additional information. The
primary consist of or material struck by the accelerator beam, beam
stops, pipes, shielding materials, vaults, and soil surrounding the underground storage
vaults.
In addition to the NIH, the DoH&HS is responsible for 45 other sites located in M
states, Puerto Rico and Washington, B.C. These sites consist mainly of research centers
managed by the Food and Drag Administration and the Center for Disease Control, and
branches of the Public Health Service.
2.1.7 Department of f DoD7'40
Three inactive uranium mill sites have been identified on Dol land and are under the
cognizance of the Bureau of Land Management. These sites are not included in the
DoE UMTRA Program. The Dol, through the U.S. Geological Survey, a
Triga reactor at its site in the Federal Center in Denver, Colorado. In addition, the Dol
is responsible for 84 other including those managed by the Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Land Management and Reclamation, the National Park Service, the Fish and
Wildlife Service, most of which use sealed source radioactive devices. All told, the Dol
has responsibility for 88 located in 35 states and Puerto Rico.
There is also residual radioactivity at the Dol Albany site, managed by Dol's Bureau of
Mines, which is listed as a FUSRAP site. Several other Bureau of Mines sites are also
FUSRAP sites due to early involvement in the Manhattan Project.7
2.1.8 Department of Justice fDoJY"
The Department of Justice operates 4 sites, 2 in Virginia and one each in Puerto Rico
and Washington, D.C. These include offices of the Drag Enforcement Agency, the
2-27
-------
Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Institute of Forensic Sciences. Such
include research areas and utilize measuring devices containing radioactive materials.
Residual radioactivity is expected to consist of typical lab wastes (vents, gloves, coats,
etc).
,40
2.1.9 Department of Labor f DoLV
The Department of Labor is licensed to possess nuclear materials and thus is likely to
own or manage potentially contaminated sites. Through the Mine Safety and Health
Administration and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the DoL has a
total of 7 sites in 6 states under its jurisdiction. These utilize various
devices with sealed sources and typical lab equipment. Minimal residual radioactivity is
expected.
2.1.10 Department of Transportation f DoTi40
The Department of Transportation is responsible for 15 sites located in 10 states.
Included are of the Administration, the Federal Highway Administration,
and various U.S. Coast Guard Cutters. Such sites utilize various research labs and
measuring devices with sealed sources. Minimal residual radioactivity is expected due to
the nature of the materials used.
2.1.11 Department of the Treasury40
The Department of the Treasury is responsible for 3 sites in 2 states and Washington,
D.C, These sites include an office and laboratory of the U.S. Customs Service and a
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearm's site. Minimal residual radioactivity is
expected since the materials in use, typical lab supplies and measuring devices, have a
low likelihood of releases from their sources.
2-28
-------
DRAF
2,1.12 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)7'28'40
2.1,12.1 Active Sites. The EPA manages a laboratory in Montgomery, where
surplus Ra-226 sources were stored at one time. The EPA also has a laboratory in Las
Vegas, Nevada a of uranium mill tailings was stored.
Residual radioactivity at these EPA sites is in the form of uranium as well as
soil, equipment, piping or clothing contaminated from the leaking Ra-226 sources.
The EPA also operates 26 other sites located throughout 20 states. These sites
encompass various regional offices, the National Enforcement Office,
research labs, and the Toxicant Analysis Center in Mississippi. Contaminants would
depend upon the specific type of site in question, with typical lab waste (e.g., gloves,
hoods, coats, etc) most likely present.
2.1.12.2 Superfund (Inactive Sites). Under the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation Liability Act (CERCLA), EPA has the authority to require
cleanup of most radiological releases from private and Federal sites. Not included are
UMTRA Program sites and, as a matter of policy, current NRC license holders.
As of January 1991, 45 have been proposed for the National Priority List (NPL).
By definition some of these sites may be duplicates of others listed in Exhibits 2-1, 2-7
and 2-8 (e.g., Rocky Flats - Weapons Production/Testing, Weldon Springs - Surplus
Facilities Management Program, Hanford - DoE Waste Management Office/ Active
Sites/Diversified Labs). To avoid double counting, these 45 Superfund sites were not
included in the totals.
2-29
-------
2,1.13 Government Services Administration (GSA)7>9>4°
Prior to 1979, the GSA responsible for managing the National Stockpile Storage
Sites of strategic materials. With the formation of the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) in 1979, responsibility for the stockpiles was given to FEMA, but GSA
still retains responsibility for management of the stockpiles. The include ores
of thorium, chromium, copper, cobalt, magnesium, zirconium, and other minerals. These
ores are often associated with elevated concentrations of thorium and uranium. The
number of in this number 111. It is not known how many sites contain
ores with elevated concentrations of radioactivity. The materials are contained at 29
GSA depots, 34 military depots, 14 other government depots, and 35 plants and other
sites, including one office located in Washington, D.C.
Residual radioactivity at the stockpiles of strategic materials are similar to that at a
uranium mill. The primary concern is contamination of soil and equipment Primary
nuclides of concern are radium, uranium and thorium.
2.1.14 National Air and Space Administration (NASA)7-40
NASA previously operated three reactors at its Cleveland and Sandusky, Ohio sites and
an accelerator at its Cleveland site. Residual radioactivity at NASA sites is likely to be
similar to that at a typical test reactor site. Waste storage rooms, hot cells, core
structural and shielding components and piping, among others, are all sources of
residual radioactivity. The primary nuclides present would be Co-60, Zn-65 and Nb-94.
In addition to the above, NASA operates 9 other complexes in 8 states.
These include various and flight centers, research centers and offices.
Contaminants would vary depending upon the site.
2-30
-------
DRAFT
2.1.15 Service (PSI™'28
The Postal Service owns a site in Boulder, Colorado which It believes is contaminated
with mill tailings. Since this is an active site, it is not included under the UMTRA
Program.
2,1,16 Tennessee Vallev Authority (TVA)7-40
TVA operates several power reactors, owns an inactive uranium mill and is involved in
the phosphate industry. A total of 22 sites have been identified in 3 states, the majority
of which (13) are located in Tennessee. To avoid double counting, the reactors are not
included in the Section 2.2.4 totals (Nuclear Power Reactors), and the phosphate sites
are not included in the Production Plant totals in Section 23.1
(Manufacturing). Since the uranium mill is not part of UMTRAP, it is included in
TVA's total.
Residual radioactivity at TVA is varied depending upon the type of operation. Mill
tailings, phosphogypsum piles and typical reactor contamination (e.g., shields, structural
supports, labs, etc.) are included, as well as the radionuclides with type
of sites (e.g., uranium, thorium, Co-60).
2.1.17 Veterans Administration
The VA is responsible for approximately 121 sites that may require D&D, including a
Triga reactor at the Omaha, Nebraska VA Hospital and an accelerator at the VA
Hospital in Minneapolis, Minnesota. It is assumed that the VA operates other
accelerators and radiation therapy sites although how many could not be determined
from the readily available reference material. For example, the Bureau of Radiological
Health is responsible for long-term storage of radium needles.™"8
2-31
-------
DRAFT
VA sites would likely have residual contamination typical of reactors and accelerators.
Structural supports, beam targets, shielding, and lab waste are all possible sources at
these sites, Nuclides of concern include Co-60 and Fe-55.
2.1.18 Other Agencies7-40
A search of readily available reference material indicates that the Small Business
Administration does not have any known sites contaminated with radioactivity.
Information on the Central Intelligence Agency was not available.
It is likely that most, if not all, sites owned or managed by all Federal agencies use
sealed radioactive sources in smoke detectors, level gauges, and so on. However, unless
the sources are cared for improperly, they are not expected to be a source of residual
radioactivity.
For more information, refer to the material entitled "Manufacturing Plants" in Sections
2.2.2-and 2.3.1.
2.2 NRG/AGREEMENT
Sites within this category consist of a portion of what is commonly referred to as the
"nuclear industry", i.e., those civilian nuclear energy activities that require a
comprehensive regulatory program to assure that they will be conducted in a manner
that will protect public health and safety. Non-DoE Federal sites also require NRC or
Agreement State licenses for possession of radionuelides. All below are, or
have been, in of a NRC or Agreement State license in the conduct of their
activities.
Except in a regulatory sense, the sites listed are not the direct responsibility of the
NRC/Agreement States; actual responsibility resides with the individual licensees.
2-32
-------
DRAFT
Accordingly, and to avoid double counting, Federal sites issued an NEC license are listed
in Section 2,1 only and not repeated in this section.
The number of sites identified as NRC/Agreement State licensees totals almost 19,000
from the references reviewed. Since identifying and listing each individual licensee
would serve no useful purpose with respect to the study, the are grouped for
convenience as shown in Exhibit 2-7.
2.2.1 Medical sites16-36*37'39
Two categories of medical were identified and are described below: Hospitals and
Medical Centers, and Nuclear Pharmacies.
• Hospitals and Medical Centers - Typical sites may contain accelerators and use
radionuclides and radionuclide devices in the diagnostics and of
patients. Of these, as many as 100 institutions may operate incinerators used to
reduce the volume of low-level waste,
There are over 5600 sites in this category. Additionally there is at least an equal
number of medical support sites and functions (e.g., nuclear medical vans,
veterinary sites, etc.) that are licensed by, or registered with, the States.
Insufficient information exists on these activities at this time to include them in
this report.
Residual radioactivity at hospitals and medical centers is expected to take the
form of lab bench tops, cabinets, vaults, piping, vents, etc., as well as shielding and
other materials associated with the use of accelerators. These are not listed
individually due to the very large number and relatively minor residual
radioactivity expected.
2-33
-------
Exhibit 2-7
Number of NEC/Agreement State Licensed Sites with Potential Residual Radioactivity, by Site Type and Location (1,2)*
SITE TYPE
MEDICAL SITES
Hospitals/tted1e»1 Csnturs (3) 5721
Nuclear Pharmacies
MANUFACTURING PUNTS
R»(J Devices/ Products (4)
Radio-Pharmaceutical/Mat.
Radioactive Sealed Source
NON-DEFENSE RESEARCH UBS
NUCLEAR POWER REACTORS (5)
NUCLEAR RESEARCH £ TEST REACTORS
URANIUM FUEL CYCLE SITES
Mining
Conversion
Enrichment (i)
Fuel Fabrication
Fuel Reprocessing (7)
WASTE MANAGEHENT
Proossl rig/Treatment
Spent Fuel Storage
Disposal
TOTAL
5721
116
9511
679
17
2613
110
71
M
2
11
(1
1
16
EPA EPA EPA EPA
REGION 1 2 REGION 3 REGION 4
CT ME MA NH» RI* VT NJ NY» PR VI DC OC MD* PA VA HV AL* FL* GA* KY* MS* NC* SO* TN*
73 31 123 36 24 16 161 262 39 t 16 26 116 305 112 48 112 405 181 83 S8 135 60 160
311--- 3-1- --472- 392112- 3
- 31 230 46 35 3 62 316 - - 5 - 355 130 40 - 2SO 500 282 223 197 20 139 254
25 4 47 1 2 3 52 25 5 1 3 - 15 45 13 3 2 35 7 6 4 10 2 11
1 1
36 21 68 26 10 12 46 137 20 2 14 19 62 95 52 20 41 99 58 34 24 67 75 56
4121- 1 47- - 1- 3f4- - 54- 157-
- -i--_ 1 4 _ _ 133651- -2-- 2- 1
1 . - , 1- ... - ... 11- - .--, 11 2
11 1 - - - 1 1 ----- 1 - ^ It-
EPA
REGION 5
1L» IN MI
121 121 2S1
424
610 77 -
62 13 19
129 39 96
13 - 5
2 - -
1 «, «,
...
1 _ _
1 - 1
MN OH HI
56 229 83
272
44 - 217
13 45 11
1
37 75 50
323
7 1
- -
-
...
TOTALS: STATE 18902 143 90 473 110 72 35 330 752 55 4 40 48 558 600 229 72 438 1053 536 347 325 243 285 489 1048 252 376 155 366 367
REGION 18889 923 1151 1547 3716 2564
* Agreement State
** Numbers 1n parentheses refer to notes on page 42.
•n
—f
-------
2-7 (Continued)
SITE TYPE
MEDICAL SITES
Hospitals/Medical Cmtars (3)
Nuclear" Pharmacies
MANUFACTURING PLANTS
tad Devices/ Prodyct* (4)
RadIo-Plwwcwjt1ca1 /Mat,
Radioactive Sealed Source
NON-DEFENSE RESEARCH LABS
NUCLEAR POWER REACTORS (5)
NUCLEAR RESEARCH I TEST REACTORS
URANIUM FUEL SITES
Milling
Conversion
Enrichment (6)
Fuel Fabrication
Fu*1 Reprocessing (7)
WASTE
Process1ng/Treatment
Spent Fuel Storage
Disposal
TQTALSs STATf 18902
REGION 18889
TOTAL
5721
116
9511
679
1*t
2613
no
71
33
11
16
EPA EPA EPA EPA
6 7 REGION 8 REGION 9
AR* LA* NM* OK TX* IA* KS* MO ME* CO* WT NO* SO UT* W AS AT* CA* 6U HI NV»
102 137 33 68 503 4S 85 117 38 61 24 30 13 27 18 - 78 529 1 20 25
12- 2 12 1231 1 - - - 2 - - 3 15 - 1 1
135 275 21i 290 1032 126 163 21 98 3SS - 77 - 163 250 - 205 1354 - - 85
2 12 49 29 62 19- 6312 5 1-15 51 - 2 2
m
18 35 32 31 131 S3 39 51 22 67 16 16 10 30 7 1 41 281 1 14 18
22-- 41112 1------36---
1 - - 2 1 - 1 1 - .---, i _ _ 22 - - 1
- - 6 - 3 - - _ . a-- 14 9------
.
. . _ _ _ . _ 1- _..--_.. i___
' 1 1 - - ^
EPA
REGION 10
Alt 10* OR* MA*
8 22 53 96
--14
21 Bi 213 24S
S 5 11
11 24 37 107
1 1
- - 1 -
- _ _ 2
. - - 1
. - . ,
261 464 294 403 1716 232 293 214 162 499 43 114 26 231 286 1 34S 2260 2 37 134 48 142 311 468
3138 901 1209 2779 961
D
>
Tl
-------
DRAFT
Exhibit 2-7 (Continued)
NOTES:
(1) Dashes signify either that no State-specific data were available, that no rational
for within specific States, or that no site is located
within the State,
(2) In instances where information was not available on location, the sites were
included in the "Total" column. Consequently the two numbers shown at the
bottom of the "Total" column will not match until all State can be obtained.
(3) Totals do not include about an equal number of nuclear medical vans, veterinary
sites, etc, licensed by or registered with the States. The number of sites could not
be determined from readily available information.
(4) The total represents a combination of NRC/Agreement State and State licensees
because, for the most part, available information would not allow segregation.
(5) Includes under active construction as of 12/88. Does not include the TVA
units which are listed in Exhibit 2-1.
(6) Included under DoE Materials Production, Exhibit 2-1.
(7) Included under DoE Waste Management Operations, 2-1.
2-36
-------
DRAFT
Nuclear Pharmacies - Typical sites act as distributors of products between radio-
pharmaceutical manufacturers and users, e.g., hospitals and medical centers.
These sites utilize predominantly isotopes with short half-lives, with long-lived
isotopes used to a lesser extent. Those nuclear pharmacies located within the
confines of hospitals and universities are not included in this category to preclude
double counting.
Typical residual radioactivity would take the physical form of fume hoods, filters,
ductwork, and miscellaneous supplies, trash, and cleaning solutions.
2.2.2 Manufacturin
Three categories of manufacturing sites were created to capture the diversity of ongoing
activity: Radiation Device and Consumer Products, Radio-Pharmaceutical/Materials,
and Radioactive Sealed Source. These categories are described below.
• Radiation Devices and Consumer PrpjJBfitS • Typical sites are involved in the
production of products that use sealed sources, such as self-luminous products
(e.g., emergency lighting signs). There are approximately 9500 sites in this
category. This figure is believed to be a slight over-estimate because it reflects
the total number of industrial licensees, including State licensees. Because there
was no convenient method to distinguish NRC/ Agreement State licensees from
State licensees, the total number is included in Exhibit 2-7 and omitted entirely
from Exhibit 2-8.
Residual contamination at these sites is associated with the release of the
radioactive materials, such as tritium or krypton 85, from the sealed sources.
• RadiQ-PharmaceMtical/Mat.erials - Typical sites label compounds in batches, with
each step in the process usually handled in a separate enclosure. The sites may
2-37
-------
DRAFT
contain numerous labs for the different isotopes used and products manufactured.
There are approximately 680 sites in this category.10
Residual contamination is expected to reside in the form of lab tops, hoods,
vents, filters, floors where spills have occurred, and other lab equipment.
• Radioactive Sealed Source - Typical sites manufacture sources to be used as
reference standards, therapy units, and gamma irradiation sources, among others.
These sites usually utilize long-lived isotopes and/or isotopes with high activities.
Eleven active sites have been identified, although at least seventeen are known to
have been operating at one time. It is not known if the six outstanding facilities
have been released for unrestricted use after decommissioning, are in the process
of being decommissioned, or were found not to be contaminated at all. The exact
number and distribution of these manufacturers could not be determined from the
available reference material.16129'31
Residual radioactivity takes the form of hot cells, remote devices, vents,
and as a of spills.
2.2.3 Non-Defense Research Laboratories11'16'36'37'39
These sites can be divided into three categories of laboratories: those that use primarily
sealed sources and/or low quantities of unsealed radioactive those that use
high-activity sealed sources; and those that use large curie quantities of radionuclides,
some of which are long-lived in unsealed form. There are over 2500 sites in this
category.
The residual radioactivity ranges from minimal, requiring disposal of small quantities of
radioactive materials, to that requiring major decontamination, including removal of
laboratory equipment, components, and structures.
2-38
-------
DkAFT
2.2.4 Nuclear Power Reactors15'16
This category of light-water reactors used in the production of commercial
electrical power, Typical complexes consist of reactor, containment, cooling and power
generation components. Not counting the 9 Tennessee Valley Authority units already
included in Section 2.1, there are 110 sites of this type in the United States either
shutdown, in operation, or under active construction. Less than a half dozen are planned
to undergo D&D in the near future.
Concerns include long-lived radionuclides from activation and fission products resulting
in residual radioactivity of relatively large quantities of piping, hardware and concrete.
2.2.5 Nuclear Research and Test Reactors12'16
This category consists of non-power reactors licensed by the NRC for medical therapy
and research and development. There are approximately 71 sites of this type, including
several owned by Federal agencies (e.g., NASA and VA). The sites vary in size, type,
and complexity.
Residual radioactivity occurs in structural components (e.g., beam tubes, reactor tank
walls), storage areas, and laboratories, among others.
2.2.6 Uranium Fuel Cycle Sites9'16-31
• Milling - Milling sites consist of those currently under license by NRC (active) and
inactive (UMTRAP) sites being remediated by the DoE. This section discusses
the active mills. Inactive mills are discussed in Section 2.1.5.2. Four types of
mills exist: conventional, heap-leach, by-product recovery, and solution mining.
Milling preconcentrates mined ores to minimize transport and chemical extraction
costs, typically by the ore, leaching the uranium from the ore, and
2-39
-------
recovering the ore from the leachate. The end product is called "yellow-cake". Of
the 33 sites of this type, four were in operation as of the end of 1988,
Mill wastes, called "tailings", are predominantly composed of uranium-238 and its
decay products and discharged to a mill waste pond or tailings pile. Additional
radioactivity includes soil and building materials, and 'Vicinity properties."
• Conversion - Conversion sites process yellow-cake to a level of purity necessary
for reactor fuel element manufacture. The end product is uranium hexafluoride
(UF6). Wastes include the fluoride waste lagoons and solid waste burial grounds.
Some contaminated waste is expected from process equipment, rubble, and
building materials. There are two operating sites in this category.
* Enrichment - Enrichment is the process of increasing the of the fissile
uranium isotope, uranium 235, from 0,7% up to about 3.5%, or higher to fulfill
military requirements. Enriched uranium is used for weapons production,
commercial Navy nuclear reactors, test and research reactors, and plutonium
production reactors. There is very little information on existing residual
radioactivity at these sites, although additional information is being compiled
under ongoing DoE programs. There are three enrichment included under
the DoE category of Waste Management Operations, Materials Production,
Section 2.1.5.1.
Radioactive are present at waste burial sites and waste lagoons. In
addition, residual radioactivity is associated with process equipment, concrete
rabble, and building materials. The primary contaminant is (as a
hydrolyzed UF6), possibly with low levels of transuranlcs.
• Fuel Fabrication - The fuel fabrication process converts uranium hexafluoride to a
ceramic oxide by reaction with steam and hydrogen in kilns. Nuclear reactor fuel
2-40
-------
DRAFT
can be a uranium metal, uranium oxide or a uramum-plutonium oxide (mixed
oxide). Uranium oxide is the predominant fuel form. Ceramic grade powder is
compacted into pellets, sintered, and filled into zireoloy or tubes,
that are then welded and assembled to make fuel elements. There are 11 sites in
this category, four of which manufacture fuel for research and Navy reactors (Le.,
non-light water reactors).
Wastes are expected to consist of burial sites, waste lagoons (calcium fluoride
uranium) and waste from process equipment, concrete rubble and
building materials. Mixed oxide sites contain plutonium and other transuranics.
• Fuel Reprocessing - Fuel reprocessing typically consists of a solvent extraction
process fuel, separates out useable material, and purifies and
stores resulting uranium and plutonium products. There are three sites in this
category, though only one has ever reprocessed fuel. The one West Valley, is
included under the DoE category of Waste Management Operations,
Miscellaneous, 2.1,5.1.
The residual radioactivity concerns are those associated with^the curie
content remaining after mechanical and chemical decontamination of the fuel
storage area, main process building, tank farm and low-level radioactive waste
treatment systems.
2.2.7 Waste Management9'13
* Waste Processing/Treatment - These sites are relatively new and consist typically
of waste compaction and/or incineration. There is one incineration site in this
category. The number of treatment sites could not be determined from the
reference material.
2-41
-------
Residual radioactivity is expected to include handling equipment, storage areas for
incoming material, and loading areas for material transported off-site. If
labs are present, the typical laboratory residual radioactivity (i.e.5 hoods, glove
boxes, bench tops) would also be present
Spent Fuel - This category is defined as all sites storing spent reactor fuel
not integrated within a reactor site, i.e., away-from-reactor storage. At-reactor
storage, whether wet or dry, is considered part of a power plant site and
not counted separately in Exhibit 2-7. There are two in this category,
although the location of the future DoE Office of Civilian High Level Radioactive
Waste Monitored Retrieval Storage facility is not known at this time.
A typical site contains shielding, cooling and clean-up components. Contaminated
materials are expected to include piping, equipment and concrete.
Additional radioactive wastes are expected to include wet and dry solid wastes
from the decontamination process. Residual radioactivity from at-reaetor spent
fuel storage is considered part of a nuclear power plant site.
Disposal - These sites consist of two basic types: commercial sites designed to
accept low-level wastes, and non-defense Federal The Federal sites
handle high, low and transuranic radioactive wastes, although most Federal
facilities ship their LLW to the commercial sites. In addition to currently
operating low-level waste disposal sites, the list includes 11 potential low-level
waste compact sites. There are 16 sites in this category.
Most burial sites are considered to be part of the waste solution and do
not need to be decontaminated themselves. However disposal site surface
structures will require decontamination at the time of site closure. Additionally,
various decontaminated were part of what is now called surplus
facilities and may require additional remediation since standards have changed.
2-42
-------
Dimfc f f*- ••"
RAFT
Currently, there are no plans for other than on-site remediation of older sites that
may not comply with today's standards.11*"1*
23 STATE SITES
Sites within this category consist primarily of consumer product and commodity
manufacturers, mines, oil and gas production sites, power plants, research sites and water
treatment plants not under the authority of the NRC/Agreement States. In some cases,
the States issue permits and licenses to operators. In other cases, licenses have not been
issued either because the residual radioactivity levels are sufficiently low to not be a
public or worker health problem, or the newness of the issues involved (e.g., NORM).
Refer to Exhibit 2-8 for a listing of the more than 6500 sites by type and
location. Note that 1.5 million oil and gas production sites and over 52,000 coal-fired
boiler plants are not counted in the overall totals. This was done to preclude obscuring
the results obtained for the rest of the category.
2.3.1 Manufacturing Plants
* Radiation Devices and Consumer Products - This category includes manufactured
products that incorporate byproduct materials produced by the NRC/Agreement
State licensees (refer to Section 2.2.2) into the finished goods, such as self-
luminous devices, gas and aerosol detectors, static eliminators, measuring and
controlling devices, etc. The manufacturers are licensed by the State to
manufacture the product, and granted a general license by the NRC to distribute
the product. The manufacturer itself issues a "general license" for possession and
to the consumer.1111"14 Because of the difficulty involved with
differentiating these licenses within the overall licensee data base, the total is
included with the NRC/Agreement State total in 2.Z2.3*
2-43
-------
Exhibit 2-8
Number of State-Administered Sites with Potential Residual Radioactivity, by Site Type and Location (1,2)**
EPA EPA EPA IPA fPA
RESIGN 1 REGION 2 REGION 3 REGION 4 REGION 5
SITE TYPE TOTAL CT ME MA NH» RI* VT NJ NV* Pi VI BE DC MO* PA VA W¥ «.* Ft* SA» Id* MS* NC* SC" TN* It* IN MI W OH MI
MANUFACTURING
Had Devices/ Product* (4) Q ------------------------ __--_-
Phosphat* Production Plants 118 ----- _ _ _ _ _ _-.._ _ 22 12-- 16- 3 8 - - - -
MINING
Mineral Pressing 108 ------ -2-- 2 - 21-- 1 17 12221 4 211-5-
Ur»n1u» (Actlva i In«et1v«) 3737 -__-. . •)._ - .__.. . -26--- 2- - --- 1-
OIL I SAS PRO£«T!ON (SJ 1.5 Million - -- -_,_„,_ . _____
POWER PUNTS
^ Coal (5) 52400 ----- _ .-_ . _
4*. Hydrothermal (3) 0------------------------ ._-__.
*" RESEARCH 1850 ---_- ..... - ----- _ _______ _ _.,._
HATER TREATMENT (6) 700 ------ 50-- ---------50--5Q50- 71 --71 -71
OTHER (7) 1.__..__1, _____-_____,._, ______
TOTALS! STATE (3) 6514 00000 0S130 0 20210 02355512360S1 7 81 1 1 72 5 71
REGION (3) 4472 0 54 5 252 231
* Agreement StatH
** Numbers In parentheses refer to notes on page 50.
>
•n
-------
Exhibit 2-8 (Continued)
SITE TYPE
MANUFACTURING
fad Devices/ Product! (4)
Phosphate Production Plants
MINING
Mineral Processing
Uranium (Active ft Inactive)
OIL t 6AS PRODUCTION (S)
POMES PUNTS
Coil (5)
Hydrothernwl (3)
RESEARCH
WATIK TttAWENT (8)
OTHER IT)
TOTALSi STATE (3)
EPA EPA EPA EPA
REGION 6 7 REGION 8 REGION 9
TOTAL AR* LA* MM* OK TX» IA* «* MO «" 00* MT NO* SO UT* W? AS AZ* CA« GU HI NV*
ft ____ _ ____ .___ _ . _____
ne 1?., ? 3 ~ 3 - - i - - ii._.-~-
1CB 2151 7 . - 1 - 42-- 22*55-- 1
3737 »^23B3s0~-~- 1337 19 13 i4@ 1154 340 - 327 25 - - 2*
0 . - • . - . . . .. . . . . . * .*,_*«, .
1850 ».»- . . - - . _,.». - - _ * - . .
7£X) —-..» 7^«7J!*.*, «, _. •«.
6514 3 8 243 4 64 74 0 75 0 1331 22 13 148 1147 343 0 332 30 0 0 25
4472 322 149 3004 387
EPA
REGION 10
AK ID* OR* MS»
* ft mt *
1 10 4 9
4 11 3 18
5 29 7 27
68
"Tl
-------
DRAFT
Exhibit 2-8 (Continued)
NOTES:
(1) Dashes signify either that no State-specific data were available, that no rational
existed for within specific States, or that no site is located
within the State,
(2) In instances where information was not available on location, the were
included in the "Total" column. Consequently the two numbers shown at the
bottom of the "Total" column will not match until all State data can be obtained.
(3) The number of could not be determined from readily available sources of
information.
(4) Sites included in Exhibit 1-7 under Manufacturing/Radiation Devices &
Consumer Products. Available data would not allow segregation,
(5) Not included in totals to avoid obscuring results.
(6) Values shown represent the number of effected water treatment averaged
over the number of states in that region.
(7) Sites once by the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC, predecessor to the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission) or Agreement States that have since reverted
back to the States. The site listed represents the low-level radioactive waste
disposal portion of West Valley now under the of New York State,
2-46
-------
DRAr
Residual radioactivity would be typical of that of sealed source manufacturers and
would exist as a result of leaky sources.
* Phosphate Production Plants*8'HR'10 - The phosphate cycle consists of mining,
processing and product formation. Mined phosphate rock (ore) is processed by
washing, flotation and drying. It is then transformed into elemental phosphorous
or into phosphoric acid for fertilizers, detergents, and so on. There are
approximately 24 mines and 31 processing and manufacturing in the United
States.
The process creates a slurry which subsequently is discharged onto waste piles
(phosphogypsum stacks). Since the ore contains naturally occurring radioactive
material (NORM), this process tends to concentrate this material and create
elevated levels of contaminants. There are approximately 63 phosphogypsum
stacks, making a total of 118 sites in this category.
In addition, one of the products of this process, phosphate fertilizer, contains
elevated levels of radionuclides. The fertilizers produced are spread over large
tracts of agricultural land to replenish natural nutrients depleted from soils due to
farming and erosion. This activity introduces slightly elevated of
Ra-226 into soils nationwide. However, the presence of radionuclides in soils at
individual farms is still low since the rate at which fertilizer is applied is governed
by the type of crop and pre-existing soil conditions. Prolonged use could unduly
expose people who live or work on the land at some point in the future. For now,
using phosphate fertilizers are not included in this category.
23.2 Mining
• Minerals Processing - As with uranium mining, the processing of ores rich in
aluminum, copper, nickel, zinc and other minerals results in the concentration of
2-47
-------
naturally occurring radioactive materials (NORM) as a result of the techniques
used.HM6
There are approximately 108 sites where concentrated NORM exists as a result of
the extraction process.
» Uranium - These facilities extract uranium ore from above and below ground
mines. Mining wastes are generally segregated into tailing waste piles (see
Sections 2.1.5.2 and 2.2.6) and subore piles, the latter being natural materials
extracted from the earth enroute to the ground depth of interest. Subore piles
typically contain uranium (and uranium daughter products) in lower
concentrations than is economically feasible to process. Most waste stays on-site
and the amount generated depends upon the mining method used, the richness of
the ore, and the economic conditions at the time.
Only 4 of the approximately 3737 uranium mines in the United States are active
currently.1111"24
2.3.3 Oil and Gas Production18*™-26
There are over 1.5 million oil and gas wells in the United States. Water associated with
the extraction of oil and gas from the earth contains elevated levels of naturally
occurring radioactive material (NORM). Over time, the of extraction pipes
become coated with a concrete-like substance called "scale." Pipe scale can be very high
in Ra-226 and Ra-228.
Residual radioactivity takes the form of discarded pipes either left on-site to rust, sent to
scrap yards where they may be reused, or recycled on-site where scale is removed and
dumped or stored on-site in 55 gallon drums.
2-48
-------
DRAFT
23.4 Power Plants18'"11-26
* Fossil Power - Coal-fifed units are used in the production of electrical power.
The use of coal fuel results in the accumulation of naturally occurring radioactive
material (NORM) in the fly ash and bottom ash which are collected and
impounded on or off site. There are approximately 1300 utility coal-fired boilers
and 51,100 industrial coal-fired boilers throughout the nation, for a of
approximately 52,400.
The concern with NORM is the presence of long-lived radionuclides in potentially
recyclable ash. This can be used by a variety of industries (e.g., concrete,
wallboard) which may result in elevated radiation levels in structures utilizing such
materials.
* Hydrothermal - The pipe scale issues discussed in Section 2.3,3, Oil and Gas
Production, apply to the category of hydrothermal power plants as well. The
number and distribution of these plants could not be determined from readily
available
2.3.5 Research9-18
It is estimated that there are perhaps 1200 - 2000 atomic particle operating
within the United States. Accelerators are found in every State with broad application in
physics, chemistry, radiobiology, medical radiation therapy, radiation processing and
sterilization, industrial radiography and ion implantation for integrated electron circuit
fabrication.
Of the large number of accelerators, approximately 150 have relatively high beam energy
levels (> 10 MeV) and are either licensed by the NRC/Agreement or belong to
the military. The larger machines create a category of waste called NARM (naturally
2-49
-------
occurring and .accelerator produced radioactive materials). Those that remain are the
relatively small accelerators generally exempt from NRC/Agreement State regulation.
There are about 1850 accelerators in this category.
At the lower energy levels, there is insufficient energy to create significant activation
products. It is expected that residual radioactivity can be readily managed by natural
decay.
2.3.6 Water Treatment"**'26
There are approximately 50 - 60,000 water supply companies in the United States.
Approximately 3300 such companies obtain their water from underground sources, about
700 of which have elevated levels of radionuclides. The process of treating these waters
creates various waste forms: a sludge, ion-exchange resins, granulated activated carbon
and reject water from filter backwash. If the groundwater originally had elevated levels
of radioactivity, the resulting wastes would also be radioactive.
Residual radioactivity takes the form of dissolved and suspended naturally occurring
radioactive materials (NORM) that concentrate in the sludge. The sludge is typically
dumped locally or sold to firms that produce fertilizer.
2.3.7 Other
There are certain facilities once licensed by the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC, the
predecessor to NRC) or Agreement States that have since been taken over by States.
An example is the West Valley complex in New York where the State is responsible for
the LLW disposal site located there. Only one such site has been identified from the
available literature.
2-50
-------
DRAFT
2,4 FUTURE PROJECTIONS11'"*-15
With respect to Federal sites, DoE and DoD represent over 98 percent of potentially
contaminated sites. The initial phases of DoE's Waste Management Program are
expected (1) to produce a complete assessment of the numbers of DoE sites potentially
contaminated with radioactive materials, and (2) to serve as a model for other Federal
to update their inventory of sites. It is unclear at this time whether all relevant
information will be the DoD.
With respect to NRC/Agreement State licensees, no significant increase in licensed sites
is expected for the foreseeable future; however, new sites are expected to be identified
as a result of proposed NRC regulations that would require its licensees to identify the
extent and nature of residual radioactivity at licensed
Additionally, there may be several emerging NORM issues within the purview of the
States. Since NORM is a relatively new concern, it is possible that past practices may
have allowed contaminated radioactive material to have been recycled. If so,
"contaminated scrap metal" end up contaminating facilities such as steel mills that
were used in the recycling process, as well as products produced from that steel.
2-51
-------
Df
3. Nature and Extent of Residual Radioactivity and Information Gaps
Exhibit 3-1 lists the site categories of interest and the material that has been the cause of
residual radioactivity. This exhibit provides a very general overview of the types of
residual radioactivity issues associated with each category of site. However, a much
more detailed characterization of the nature and extent of residual radioactivity is
required to support the development of residual radioactivity guidelines and criteria. For
example, information is required on physical quantities and characteristics, radioactive
and chemical characteristics, and waste disposal characteristics. A great deal of detailed
information is contained in the references cited in this report. In addition, DOE
contractor reports are compiling detailed information in support of the various remedial
programs.
Notwithstanding the large amount of information that is available, information gaps exist.
With the relatively recent increase in Federal environmental restoration activity, it is
expected that in the near term virtually complete information will be available on site
identification in the Federal sector. Since the DoD and the DoE manage the greatest
number of contaminated sites, the results of ongoing programs are expected to capture
the majority of missing information.
Access to the DoE data is primarily through the Integrated Data Base.30 It is not clear
at this point if access to the DoD data base will be possible. Between the two
departments, over 98% of the contaminated site data would be in hand when complete.
However, site characterization activity for most sites is still underway and probably 5-10
years from completion. Additionally, the EPA is completing a comprehensive data base
on contaminated sites that should be available in calendar year 1991.
Information available is fairly complete with respect to NRC/ Agreement State site
identification. However, there are gaps in identifying the number of sites administered
by each State. In addition, there is limited information characterizing the sites. For
3-1
-------
DRAFT
Exhibit 3-1
Sites with Potential Residual Radioactivity, by Site Type and Contaminating Waste Type
SITE TYPE
HASTE TYPES
LOW LEVEL
GREATER
SPEXT HIGH TRANS- THAN CUSS
FUEL LEVEL URANIC CLASS C *,B,C
HARM
URANIUM —-
HILL ACCELERATOR
MIXED TAILINSS PRODUCED
NORM
FEDERAL SITES
Army Corps of Engineers
Dept of Agriculture
Dept of Commerce
Dept of Drf*nsc
DERP (ACTIVE)
BASES
POWER
PROPULSION
RESEARCH LABS
WEAPONS TESTING
WEAPON CARRIER ACCIDENTS
DERP/FUD (INACTIVE)
Dept of Energy
W« (ACTIVE)
DIVERSIFIED LABS
MATERIALS PRODUCTION
WEAPONS PRODUCTION/TEST
PHYSICAL RESEARCH LABS
MISCELLANEOUS
ER (INACTIVE)
ER (REMEDIAL ACTION}
FUSRAP
6JRAP
SFMP
UKTRAP
Dept of Health t Human Services
Dept of Interior
Oept of Justice
Oept of Labor
Dept of Transportation
Dept of the Treasury
IPA
ACTIVE FACILITIES
SUPERFUND (INACTIVE)
Seneral Services Adm
NASA
Postal Service
TVA
Veterans Adm
X
X
X
X X
-
-
* —
X X
_
_
_
X X
_
-
-
X X
_
-
X
_
-
-
-
_ _
-
-
.
-
X
X
-
X
X
X
X
X
-
X
-
X
-
X
X
X
-
X
-
-
-
-
_
-
-
_
X
-
,
_
-
_
X
X
X
X
X
X
-
-
X
X
X
X
-
_
-
-
X
,
-
X
,
.
.
_
„
-
-
X
-
X
X
X
X — •* •"
X X
XX-
XX-
XX-
X X - X
X
x
XX-
X X X
XX-
X — - —
X X - X
XXX-
X
x ~ — -
X
XXX X
-X
X - - X
X - X -
X
X
X
x
X - X
XXX
.
X - - X
X
X - X
X X
—
_
-
X
-
_
-
.
-
-
-
X
„
X
X
X
X
-
X
-
-
-
-
_
X
X
-
_
X
_
3-2
-------
Exhibit 3-1 (Continued)
WASTE TYPES
LOW LEVEL
SHE TYPE
NRC/AGREEWENT STATES
MEDICAL SITES
Hospitals 8 Medical Canters
Nuclear Pharmacies
MANUFACTURING PUNTS
RAD DEVICES i CONSUMER PRODUCTS
RADIO-PHARMACEUTICAL/MAT
RADIOACTIVE SEALED
NON-DEFENSE RESEARCH LABS
NUCLEAR POWER REACTORS
NUCLEAR RESEARCH & TEST REACTORS
URANIUM FUEL CYCLE SITES
MILLING
CONVERSION
ENRICHMENT
fUEL FABRICATION
FUEL REPROCESSING
WASTE MANAGEMENT
PROCESSING/TREATMENT
SPENT FUEL STORAGE
DISPOSAL
SPENT HIGH TRANS-
FUEL LEVEL URANIC
-
— » ..
X
X
_
X - X
X - X
_ -
.
X
X
XXX
_
X - X
XXX
CBF4TFB
isn^M i £K
THAN
CLASS C
_
M
X
X
-
X
X
_
-
X
X
X
»
X
_
CLASS
A.i.C
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
»*mrt
HILL ACCELERATOR
MIXED TAILINGS PRODUCED NORM
X
-
_ -
_
-
- X X
X - -
x
X X
x
_
_
x
X - -
-
X - -
STATES
MANUFACTURING
RAD DEVICES S CONSUMER PRODUCTS
PHOSPHATE PRODUCTION' PLANTS
MINING
MINERAL PROCESSING
URANJUH (ACTIVE I INACTIVE)
OIL * SAS PRODUCTION
POWER PLANTS
COAL
HYDROTHERMAL
RESEARCH
HATER TREATMENT
OTHER
3-3
-------
i-sfJs^.F^i I
example, it would be helpful if the various could be further subdivided into
decontamination units, such as, labs, hoods, bench top areas, floor space,
linear feet of piping and ductwork, tons of contaminated and/or activated concrete and
metal, etc. Such is to varying degrees in the available literature
but will likely need to be supplemented with detailed of "reference"
sites. A proposed NEC rulemaking is intended to fill this information gap.
Some of the newest residual radioactivity concerns are administered by the States;
specifically NARM waste. Consequently, as these issues are recognized throughout
industry, new information is developed. Details on the extent and nature of
residual radioactivity of State-administered sites does not to exist, the
prospects for compiling such data appear remote.HR"M
-------
DRAFT
References
1. 6/78 Technology, Safety and Costs of Decommissioning a Reference
Pressurized Water Reactor Power (NUREG/CR-0130) -
Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Battelle Memorial Institute
2. 2/79 Technology, Safety and Costs of Decommissioning a Reference
Small Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication (NUREG/CR-0129) -
Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Battelle Memorial Institute
3. 6/80 Technology, Safety and Costs of Decommissioning a Reference
Boiling Water Reactor Power Station (NUREG/CR-0672) - Pacific
Northwest Laboratory, Battelle Memorial Institute
4. 6/80 Technology, Safety and Costs of Decommissioning a Reference Low-
Level Waste Burial Ground (NUREG/CR-0570) - Pacific Northwest
Laboratory, Battelle Memorial Institute
5, 2/82 Characterization of Contaminated Nuclear Sites, Facilities and
Materials (Accelerators) - Evaluation Research Corporation
6. 3/82 Technology, Safety and Costs of Decommissioning Reference
Nuclear Research and Test Reactors, Appendices (NUREG/CR-
1756) - Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Battelle Memorial Institute
7. 6/82 Radioactive Contamination at Federally Owned Facilities (RAE-23-
1) - Rogers & Associates Engineering Corp.
8. 11/82 Technology, Safety and Costs of Decommissioning Reference light
Water Reactors Following Postulated (NUREG/CR-
2601) - Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Battelle Memorial Institute
9. 12/82 Radioactive Contamination at Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facilities (RAE-
23-2) - Rogers & Associates Engineering Corp.
10, 2/83 Characterization of Contaminated Nuclear Sites, Facilities and
Materials (Radioisotope and Radiophannaceutieal Manufacturers
and Suppliers) - Evaluation Research Corporation
11. 2/83 Characterization of Contaminated Nuclear Sites, Facilities and
Materials (Research Development) - Evaluation Research
Corporation
R-l
-------
References (Continued)
12. 7/83 Technology, Safety and Costs of Eeference
Nuclear Research and Test Reactors, Addendum (NUREG/CR-
1756) - Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Battelle Memorial Institute
13, 1/84 Technology, Safety and Costs of Decommissioning Reference
Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installations (NUREG/CR-2210) -
Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Battelle Memorial Institute
14. 9/84 Technology, Safety and Costs of Decommissioning a Reference
Water Reactor Power Station, Addendum 2, Classification of
Decommissioning Wastes (NUREG/CR-0672) - Pacific Northwest
Laboratory, Battelle Memorial Institute
15, 1986 Residual Radionuclide Contamination Within and Around
Commercial Nuclear Power Plants (NUREG/CR-4289) - Pacific
Northwest Laboratory, Battelle Memorial Institute
16. 12/87 Sources of Residual Radioactivity in Decommissioning of Nuclear
Facilities (WA No. 1-24) - Roy F. Weston, Inc. and S. Cohen &
Associates, Inc.
17. 5/88 Remedial Investigation Plan for ORNL Waste Area Grouping 4,
Oak Ridge National Laboratory Remedial Investigation/Feasibility
Study (ORNL/RAP/Sub-87/99053/11) - Inc.
18. 9/89 DRAFT - Diffuse NORM Wastes: Waste Characterization, Risk
Assessment and Regulatory Control Options (WA No. 2-53) -
Sanford Cohen and Associates, Inc., Rogers & Associates
Engineering Corp., and Roy F. Weston, Inc.
19. 12/89 RCRA Facility Investigation Plan, Abandoned Nitric Acid Pipeline,
Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant (Y/TS-599) - Martin Marietta Energy
Systems, Inc.
20. 1989 Environmental Restoration and Waste Management, Five Year Plan
- U.S. Department of Energy
21. 5/90 Federal Liabilities Under Hazardous Waste Laws - U.S.
Congressional Budget Office
R-2
-------
DRAFT
References (Continued)
22. 1/89 Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 30 - Rules of General
Applicability to Domestic Licensing of Byproduct Material - U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
22. 1/89 Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 30 - Rules of General
Applicability to Domestic Licensing of Byproduct Material - U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
23. 1/89 Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 40 - Domestic Licensing
of Source Material - U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
24. 1/89 Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 70 - Domestic Licensing
of Special Nuclear Material - U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
25. 8/89 Sampling and Analysis of the Inactive Waste Storage Tank Contents
at ORNL (ORNL/RAP-53) - Oak Ridge National Laboratory
26. 8/89 Remedial Investigation Plan for ORNL Waste Area Grouping 1,
Oak Ridge National Laboratory Remedial Investigation/Feasibility
Study, Revision 1 (ORNL/RAP/Sub-87/99053/4&Rl) - Bechtel
National, Inc.
27. 8/88 Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement on
Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities (NUREG - 0586) - U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Regulatory Research
28. 1/90 Assessment of Technologies for the Remediation of Radioactively
Contaminated Superfund Sites (EPA/540/2-90/001) - U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and
Emergency Response
29. 3/90 Site Decontamination and Management Program, Policy Issues
(Information) (SECY-90-121) - U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission
30. 11/89 Integrated Data Base for 1989: Spent Fuel and Radioactive Waste
Inventories, Projections, and Characteristics (DOE/RW - 0006, Rev
5) - Department of Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory
R-3
-------
DRAFT
References (Continued)
31. 9/89 Risk Assessments, EIS, NESHAPs for Background
Information Document - Volume 2 (EPA/520/1-89-006-1) -
U.S,Environmental Protection Agency and Sanford Cohen and
Associates, Inc.
32. 9/89 Nuclear Facility Decommissioning and Site Remedial Actions -
Selected Bibliography (ORNL/EIS - 154/V10) - U.S. Department of
Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory
33. 12/89 Environmental Restoration and Waste Site-Specific
Plan for the Richland Operations Office: Detailed Information
(DOE/RL-89-10) - U.S. Department of Energy, Richland
Operations Office
34. 9/90 Draft Radiological Risk Assessment Requirements Definition
(Contract No. 68D90170, Work Assignment 1-6) - U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency and Sanford Cohen and
Associates, Inc.
35. 6/82 Report of the State and Local Radiological Health Programs Fiscal
Year 1980 (PB82-250028) - U.S. Bureau of Radiological Health
36, 2/90 of State and Local Radiation Control Programs in the
United States for Fiscal Year 1988 - Conference of Radiation
Control Program Directors
37. 7/90 Idaho Radioactive Materials Licenses and Phosphorous Operations -
Idaho Department of Health and Welfare, Division of
Environmental Quality, Radiation Control
38. 3/90 EPA Workshop on Radioactively Contaminated Sites (EPA 520/1-
90-009) - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation
(ANR 461)
39. 7/90 Radioactive Materials License Facilities of the 29 Agreement States
as provided by the Agreement States
40. 8/90 Radioactive Materials License Facilities as provided by the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
41. 9/89 of Research and Test Reactors as provided by the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
R-4
-------
DRAFT
References (Continued)
Human Resources
HR-1 Mr. J. W. Autrey, Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge, TO, 37831
HR-2 Mr. David Bernhardt, Rogers and Associates Engineering Corp.. P.O. Box
330, Salt Lake City UT, 84410
HR-3 Mr, Sid Garland, Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge, TO, 37831
HR-4 Ms. Linda Coins, Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge, TO, 37831
HR-5 Mr. Tom Hill, Georgia Dept. of Human Resources. Room 600, 78
Peachtree St., Atlanta Georgia, 30309
HR-6 Mr. Donald Hughes, Kentucky Dept of Services. 275 St.,
Frankfort, KY, 40621
HR-7 Mr. Jay O. Heinze, U.S. Depajrtjpent of Energy. Chicago Operations
fice. Argonne, IL, 60439
HR-8 Mr. Don Jacobs, Roy F. Weston.Inc.. Weston Way, West Chester, PA,
19380
HR-9 Mr. George J. Konzek Battelle Northwest Laboratory. Richland WA,
99352
HR-10 Mr. Michael Mays. Idaho Dept. of Health and Welfare. Boise, ID, 83720
HR-11 Mr. Richard Smith, Battelle Northwest Labs. Richland, WA, 99352
HR-12 Mr. Paul Thrash, U.S. Department of Energy. San Francisco Operations
Office, Oakland, CA, 94612
HR-13 Ms. Maureen Moriarty, JLJ.S. Muclear Regulatory Commission. White Flint,
Maryland
HR-14 Mr. Terry Strong, Washington Department of Social & Health
Services. Olympia, WA, 98504
HR-15 Ms. Ellen Livingston, U.S. Department of Energy. Waste Management
Bee. Washington, D.C.
R-5
-------
DRAFT
References (Continued)
HR-16 Mr. Ron Levis, Roy F Weston,gurjphis Facilities Project
Germantown, Maryland
HR-17 Mr. James Flore, U.S. Department of Energy. Environmental Restoration
Division, Germantown, Maryland
HR-18 Mr. Lowell Ralston, S. Cohen & Associates. McLean, Virginia
HR-19 Ms, Mollie Quasebarth, U.S. Congressional Budget Office. Washington,
D.C.
HR-20 Mr. Leehel, Roy F Weston UMPTRA Project Office. Albuquerque,
New Mexico
HR-21 Mr. Nick Morgan, U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency. Office of
Federal Facilities Enforcement. Washington, D.C.
HR-22 Ms. Pat Vacca, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. White Hint,
Maryland
HR-23 Ms, Julie Erickson, U.S. Department of Energy. Richland Operations
Office. Environmental Office, Richland, WA
BQRX24 Mr. Paul Pierce, S. Cohen & Associates. Albuquerque, New Mexico
HR-25 Dr. Bruce Heitke, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Washington, D.C.
HR-26 Mr. J-C Dehmel, S. Cohen & Associates. New York
HR-27 Mr. WilczynsM, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C.
HR-28 Mr. Edward Wandelt, U.S. Postal Service. Washington, D.C.
HR-29 Mr. Cecil Brown, North Carolina State Department of Environmentf
Health and Natural Resources. Raleigh, North Carolina
R-6
-------
DRAFT
Appendix
Definitions
* Accel.erajir - Any device that accelerates charged, sub-atomic particles
or nuclei to energies usefyl for research.
• Activation Products - A radioactive material produced by
with nuclear particles.
* AgreementState - Any state with which the Atomic Energy Commission or
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has entered into an effective
agreement under subsection 274b of the Atomic Energy Act. A "Non-
Agreement State" means any other state.22
* Byproduct Material - Any radioactive material (except special nuclear
material) yielded in or made radioactive by the radiation incident to
the process of producing or utilizing special nuclear material.22
Basically this means material made radioactive from interfacing with
Plutonium or certain isotopes of uranium defined as special nuclear
materials. Byproduct material includes mill tailings as defined in the
Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978.
• Decontaroination & DecoBnlssioninq - The process of removing radioactive
materials, removing the site safely from service, and disposing of the
radioactive materials. The level of any residual radioactivity on the
site must be low enough to permit unrestricted access to the general
public.
• Radiation - A-product into- which, is-placed, a -staled radioactive
source, e.g., a fire alarm.
• Facility - An installation or landholding encompassing all contiguous
land by a department or agency of the United States, an
State licensee, or a private entity.
* Fission Products - Radionuclides produced either directly by nuclear
fission (splitting of heavy atoms such as uranium) or the subsequent
decay of those radionuclides.
» Greater-Than-Class-C Low-Level Waste (6TCC) - Low level radioactive
waste containing radionuclide concentrations that exceed Nuclear
Regulatory Commission limits for Class C low-level waste as defined in
10 CFR Part 61.55, but not the threshold for high-level waste,
transuranic waste, spent nuclear fuel, or byproduct material specified
as uranium or thorium tailings and waste.
A-l
-------
DRAF
Appendix (Continued)
High-level Waste HIM) - As defined by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, (1)
the highly radioactive material resulting from the reprocessing of spent
nuclear fuel, including the liquid waste produced directly in
reprocessing and any solid material derived from such liquid waste that
contains fission products in sufficient concentrations; and (2) other
highly radioactive material that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
consistent with ©Misting law, determines by rule to require permanent
isolation.
Low-Level Waste (LLM) - Radioactive waste not classified as high-level
waste, transuranic waste, spent nuclear fuel, or byproduct material
specified as uranium or thorium tailings and waste. All low-level waste
exists in one of three classes, A, B or C as defined in 10CFR61. Most
low-level waste (classes A and B) is short-lived and has low
concentrations of radioactivity.
Mixed Waste(MW) - Waste that includes both radionuclides and hazardous
constituents.
Naturally Occurring Radioactiye Material (NORM) - Material that occurs
in nature. NORM is a subset of NARM.
Natural1y Occurring and Accelerator Produced Radioactive literial(HARM)
Radioactive waste consisting of two distinct types: Naturally occurring
radioactive material (NORM), plus activation products produced from the
use of accelerators.
Site - A contaminated or potentially contaminated site is a discrete,
physically separate parcel of land containing or potentially containing
radioactive materials in concentrations above those naturally occurring.
SourceMaterial - (1) Uranium or thorium, or any combination thereof, in
any physical or chemical form or (2) ores which contain by one-twentieth
of one percent (0.05%) or more of: (i) uranium, (ii) thorium, or (iii)
any combination thereof. Source material does not include special
nuclear material.24 Basically this means ores or material containing
uranium or thorium at a concentration of greater than 0.5%.
Special Nuclear Material - (1) Plutonium, uranium 233, uranium enriched
in the isotope 235, and any other material which the Commission
determines to be special nuclear material; or (2) any material
artificially enriched by any of the foregoing but does not include
source material." Basically this means plutonium, uranium 233, or
uranium enriched in uranium 233 or 235.
Spent Fuel - Nuclear fuel that has been permanently discharged from a
reactor after it has been irradiated.
A-2
-------
DRAFT
Appendix (Continued)
Transuranic Waste (TRU). - Radioactive waste that contains more than 100
Nci/g of alpha-emitting isotopes with atomic numbers greater than 92 and
half-lives greater than 20 years.
Uranium Mill Tailings - The material left over from the conversion of
uranium ore to yellowcake.
Yellowcake - A uranium-oxide concentrate that results from milling
(concentrating) uranium ore. It typically contains 80 to 90% U308.
Vicinity Properties - Properties off-site from uranium mill sites that
have been contaminated either through the direct use of yranium mill
tailings in their construction or by windblown particles.
A-3
------- |