bustibles containing 27,100 μc of activity were processed. 8 Rodgers and Hampson reported that the cost of incineration at ANL amounted to $2.68 per cubic foot for 8-hr and $1.60 per cubic foot for 24-hr operation schedules, as compared with solid storage costs of $9 per cubic foot. Combustibles could be shipped from ANL to ORNL for burial at a cost of $1.50 per cubic foot, and therefore incineration was abandoned. 14-6 SUMMARY Solid wastes are separated into combustible and noncombustible fractions. Volume reduction of the former is carried out before final disposal by burial on land or dumping into the ocean. Personal preference of a laboratory staff often determines which kind of the many different types of containers will be used for the initial collection. The kind of secondary container selected depends on whether on-site or off-site disposal is practiced. Because of the nonhomogeneity of the waste, few data are available on activity levels encountered. Monitoring is practiced so that exposure to personnel engaged in solid-waste handling operations can be avoided. Concentration of solid wastes is accomplished by means of baling; volume reductions of 1.7 to 1 to 10 to 1 have been reported. Volume reductions by incineration of 3 to 21 times those reported for baling have been attained. Land burial, used most extensively for on-site disposal, is the cheapest method of handling solid wastes. Ocean disposal of packaged materials is much more expensive. Contributing to high costs are such items as containers, transportation to the dock, and transportation to disposal point in the ocean. REFERENCES 1. J. M. MORGAN, J. C. GEYER, and D. C. COSTELLO, Land Burial of Solid Packaged Radioactive Wastes, Proc. Am. Soc. Civil Engrs., 88 (SA3): 139-161 (May 1962). 2. H. J. DUNSTER and L. F. U. Wix, The Practice of Waste Disposal in the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority, in Disposal of Radioactive Wastes, Proceedings Conference, Monaco, 1959, Vol. 1, p. 404, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria, 1960. 3. A. B. JOSEPH, Radioactive Waste Disposal Practices in the Atomic EnergyIndustry-A Survey of the Costs, USAEC Report NYO-7830, Johns Hopkins University, Dec. 31, 1955. 4. NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON RADIATION PROTECTION, Radioactive-Waste Disposal in the Ocean, National Bureau of Standards Handbook 58, Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., Aug. 25, 1954. 5. R. H. BURNS, Radioactive Waste Control at the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Research Establishment, Harwell, in Disposal of Radioactive Wastes, Proceedings Conference, Monaco, 1959, Vol. 1, p. 413, International 6. L. B. SILVERMAN and R. K. DICKEY, Reduction of Combustible, Low-Level Contaminated Wastes by Incineration, USAEC Report UCLA-368, University of California School of Medicine, May 15, 1956. 7. J. C. GEYER, L. C. MACMURRAY, A. P. TALBOYS, and H. W. BROWN, LowLevel Radioactive Waste Disposal, in Proceedings of the First International Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy, Geneva, 1955, Vol. 9, p. 19, United Nations, New York, 1956. 8. W. A. RODGERS and C. C. HAMPSON, Operating Characteristics and Economics of a 100 Ft/Day Incinerator for Radioactive Wastes, J. Air Pollution Control Assoc., 6: 41 (May 1956). 9. R. J. CHANDLER and R. C. THORBURN, An Incinerator for Uranium Contaminated Wastes, USAEC Report GEAP-3542, General Electric Company, Oct. 28, 1960. 10. W. B. HARRIS and M. S. WEINSTEIN, Open Field Burning of Low Level Radioactive Contaminated Combustible Wastes, in Sanitary Engineering Aspects of the Atomic Energy Industry, A Seminar Sponsored by the AEC and the Public Health Service, Held at the Robert A. Taft Engineering Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, December 6–9, 1955, USAEC Report TID-7517 (Pt. 1a), pp. 229–235, Division of Reactor Development and Public Health Service, October 1956. 11. H. H. ABEE, Problems in the Burial of Solid Wastes at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, in Sanitary Engineering Aspects of the Atomic Energy Industry, A Seminar Sponsored by the AEC and the Public Health Service, Held at the Robert A. Taft Engineering Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, December 6–9, 1955, USAEC Report TID-7517 (Pt. 1a), pp. 223-228, Division of Reactor Development and Public Health Service, October 1956. 12. J. W. ENDERS, Radioactive Trash Disposal at Los Alamos, USAEC Report AECU-4130, Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory, Sept. 15, 1958. 13. ANONYMOUS, Solid Radioactive Waste Disposal at the National Reactor Testing Station, in Sanitary Engineering Aspects of the Atomic Energy Industry, A Seminar Sponsored by the AEC and the Public Health Service, Held at the Robert A. Taft Engineering Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, December 6-9, 1955, USAEC Report TID-7517 (Pt. 1a), pp. 250-263, Division of Reactor Development and Public Health Service, October 1956. 14. United StATES ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION, AEC Amends Regulation on Land Burial of Low-Level Radioactive Waste, Federal Register, 26 (11): 352, Jan. 18, 1961. 15. UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION, Part 20-Standards for Protection Against Radiation, Federal Register, 25 (224): 10914-10924, Nov. 17, 1960; see also Appendix B of this book. 16. C. A. MAWSON and A. E. RUSSELL, Facilities for Waste Management at Chalk River, in Disposal of Radioactive Wastes, Proceedings Conference, Monaco, 1959, Vol. 1, p. 362, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria, 1960. 17. J. C. LANG and A. A. JARRETT, Radioactive Waste Disposal at North American Aviation, Inc., in Sanitary Engineering Aspects of the Atomic Energy Industry, A Seminar Sponsored by the AEC and the Public Health Service, Held at the Robert A. Taft Engineering Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, December 6–9, 1955, USAEC Report TID-7517 (Pt. 1a), pp. 132–152, Division of Reactor Development and Public Health Service, October 1956. Wastes, in Sanitary Engineering Aspects of the Atomic Energy Industry, A 19. A. B. JOSEPH, Technical Considerations of Sea Disposal, in Sanitary Engi- 20. J. M. MORGAN, JR., Technical and Economic Aspects of Disposal of Radioactive Waste at Sea-Cost Analysis, in Sanitary Engineering Conference, Baltimore, Maryland, April 15-16, 1954, USAEC Report WASH-275, pp. 300-312, Division of Reactor Development, August 1955. 1 PUBLIC-HEALTH IMPLICATIONS Acceptance of the fact that all radiation exposure is damaging to living cells to some degree and that a proper balance between risks and benefits cannot yet be made has led to the recommendation by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP),1 the National Committee on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), and others that it is highly desirable to keep the exposure of individuals and of large populations at as low a level as practicable. Since the disposal of wastes into the environment results in radiation exposure of populations, it is important that the public-health implications of such disposals be evaluated. 15-1 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS All radioactive wastes discharged into the environment should be evaluated in terms of their potential contribution to radiation exposure of the surrounding population so that the total radiation hazard from the waste and from existing radiation sources can be computed. This statement implies a need to know other radiation sources to which the population already is exposed, such as naturally occurring radionuclides, radiation sources used in medical and dental diagnoses and therapy and other beneficial applications, and fallout. With such information estimates of total radiation dose can be made and compared with permissible exposure levels. If the permissible dose exceeds the dose calculated from existing sources other than natural background or medical exposures, the difference or some suitable fractional multiple thereof may be used to calculate permissiblerelease levels for specific radionuclides. Formulas for estimating existing radiation levels have been indicated by Straub et al.2 for given environmental conditions. Of particular significance is the fact that all potential radiation sources must be considered in terms of their contribution to both internal dose (total intake) and external dose. The extent and complexity of the estimation for an existing or proposed nuclear facility is dependent upon a determination of the existent radiation exposure sources as well as on the size of the facility, the kinds of operations carried out, and the nature, amount, and distribution of radioactive materials being or to be released. For example, an evaluation of radiation effects from the release of a specific radionuclide from a hospital or experimental laboratory into the sewerage system is quite simple compared with an evaluation of the radiation effects from a national laboratory, e.g., Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) or Hanford Atomic Products Operation (HAPO). Moreover, the approach to the problem varies with the location of the source in relation to population characteristics and distribution and with the degree of utilization of the specific environment. Approaches differ for existing, new, or modified facilities. In the case of an existing facility, a change in operations or an enlargement of units involving new or additional waste sources may require costly modification of the waste collection, disposal, or monitoring systems. When new facilities are planned, design criteria can be utilized very effectively to reduce potential radiation exposure, not only to the occupational worker, but also to the population in the environs. 15-2 EXPOSURE PATHWAYS Exposure of populations takes place as a result of the release of radiocontaminants into the water, soil, and air environments (Chaps. 4, 5, and 6, respectively) through the various pathways referred to in Sec. 1.5. The following discussion of the importance of these routes in radiation exposure is based on the material of Parker.3 15-2.1 Release to the Water Environment Exposure of people may occur from (1) use of contaminated waters as sources of domestic water supply, (2) immersion in the water, (3) proximity to contaminated water and sediments, (4) use of crops irrigated with contaminated water, (5) contaminated freshwater and salt-water food sources, (6) industrial uses of contaminated water, and (7) sewage-treatment operations. (a) Drinking Water. The possible hazards from contaminated drinking water are (1) irradiation of the gastrointestinal tract of man or animals, (2) transfer of radioactive materials to the blood stream and subsequent irradiation of the blood, (3) transfer to and deposition in certain critical organs as determined by the specific radionuclide and its chemical and physical form, (4) irradiation of reproductive organs from materials passing through the body, deposited in specific organs, or, in rare cases, deposited in the reproductive organs, and (5) uptake by foods washed or cooked in domestic water. In addition, certain individuals may be irradiated externally by radioactive materials retained in water-purification systems, such as dissolved radionuclides in- ion-exchange systems (e.g., water softeners), flocculent deposits in municipal water systems, and scaly deposits of radioactive materials in evaporators and boilers. |