DOCSLIB.ORG

Pond Linings for Desalting Plant Effluents

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Pond Linings for Desalting Plant Effluents Code z532 (Do~e) REC-OCE-70-30 i POND LININGS FOR DESALTING PLANT EFFLUENTS Field and laboratory evaluation of four types of lining materials for seepage control in brine disposal ponds W. R. Morrison R. A. Dodge J. Merriman L. M. EIIsperman Division of Research Office of Chief Engineer Bureau of Reclamation September 1970 Prepared for OFFICE OF SALINE WATER Washington, D.C. 20240 BM-230 (6-70) Bureau of Reclamation, ' TECHHIQALREPORTR STANDARD TITLE PAGE 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NO. REC-0CE- 70- 30 i!iS~!!i~@lii~.~ '~~,~ ~4~ ~ ~,~ ~~~,~ 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. REPORT DATE POND LININGS FOR DESALTING PLANT EFFLUENTS September 1970 Field and laboratory evaluation of four 6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE types of lining materials for seepage control in brine disposal ponds 7. AUTHOR(S) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO. W. R. Morrlson, R. A. Dodge, J. Merriman, L. M. Ellsperman 9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. WORK UNIT NO. Division of Research Office of Chief Engineer 11. CONTRACT ~I~KK~N0. Bureau of Reclamation 14-Ol-O001-1306 Denver, Colorado 80225 1S. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED 12, SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS Office of Saline Water Washington , D.C. 202~0 14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 16, ABSTRACT A field and laboratory evaluation of lining materials proposed for use in brine disposal ponds was conducted. Flexible membrane linings were the most effective for seepage control, followed by hard-surface lin- ings, compected earth, and soil sealants. The investigation and other studies show that soll sealants only reduce seepage and do not affect a complete seal, and that the service llfe of soll sealants is question- able. Recommendations on a monitoring system for measuring seepage losses from brine disposal ponds are included. t7. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS a DESCR,PTORS--/ *research and development/ *linings/ seepage/ soil tests *ponds/ earth linings / flexible linings/ *soll treatment/ polyethylenes/ laboratory tests/ *field tests/ soll cement/ asphaltic concrete/ seepage losses/ asphalt/ disposal/ *plastics/ *instrumentation/ *brine disposal/ 'water stage recorders/ temperature sensors/ *soll sealants b ;DENTIFIERS-~ Office of Saline Water/ polyvlnyl chloride/ permeability tests c. COSATI Field~group 18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT I119. (THISSECURITY REPORT) CLASS I121, NO. OF PAGE: Available from the Clearinghouse for Federal Scientific and Technical j UNCLASSIFIED I 112 Information. National Bureau of Standards, U,S. Department of Commerce, 120. SECURITY CLASS |22. PRICE Springfield, Virginia 22t51. I (TH~S PA~¢) I UNCLASSIFIED I $3,00 REC-OCE-70-30 POND LININGS FOR DESALTING PLANT EFFLUENTS Field and laboratory evaluation of four types of lining materials for seepage control in brine disposal ponds by W. R. Morrison R. A. Dodge J. Merriman L. M. EIIsperman September 1970 Division of Research Office of Chief Engineer Denver, Colorado UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF RECLAMATION Walter J. Hickel Ellis L. Armstron~j Secretary Commissioner ACKNOWLEDGMENT This study was conducted under the supervision of L. M. EIIsperman, Program Coordinator. C. W. Jones assisted in the supervision of the laboratory and field soil and soil-cement testing. Field investigation was conducted by W. R. Morrison, R. A. Dodge, K. B. Goral, and J. Merriman. C. K. Beebe, L. J. Cox, C. T. Coffey, R. C. Hatcher, and M. E. Hickey assisted in field construction. Laboratory tests were conducted by L. J. Cox, F. B. Larcom, Ko B. Goral, and Wo R. Morrison. Photographs by W. M. Batts and N. L. Russell. Reprint or republication of any of this material should give appropriate credit to the Bureau of Reclamation, Department of the Interior. b The information contained in this report regarding commercial products or firms may not be used for advertising or promotional purposes and is not to be construed as an endorsement of any product or firm by the Bureau of Reclamation. CONTENTS Page I ntrod uction ............................ 1 Water Pollution Regulations ....................... 1 Lining Materials Investigated ....................... 2 Compacted Earth Linings ........................ 2 Flexible Membrane Linings ...................... 2 Hard-Surface Linings ........................ 3 Soil Sealants ............................ 3 Conclusions ......... .................... 4 Field Investigation ......................... 4 Laboratory Investigation ....................... 5 Initial Investigations .......................... 6 Roswell, New Mexico ........................ 6 Webster, South Dakota ........................ 6 Dalpra Farm ........................... 6 Field Installation ........................... 6 General ............................. 6 Monitoring System for Seepage and Evaporation Measurements ......... 10 Field Test Results ........................... 12 General ............................. 12 Effectiveness of Lining Materials ..................... 12 Evaluation of Seepage Measurements .............. , ..... 15 Laboratory Investigations ........................ 21 Laboratory Test Results ...................... 21 Soil Testing ...... ~ ..................... 2i Soil Sealants ........................... 21 Flexible Membrane Linings ..................... 22 Asphaltic Concrete ......................... 22 Soil~:ement ............................ 23 Spray-applied Liquid Asphalt .................... 23 Recommendations .......................... 23 General ............................. 23 Lining Materials .......................... 23 Seepage Monitoring for Brine Disposal Ponds ................ 25 Future Field Tests .......................... 29 References ............................. 3O Materials Listing ........................... 31 CONTENTS-Continued Page Appendix I-Summary of Field Seepage Measurements ........... 33 Appendix I I-Laboratory Test Results 45 Appendix II I-Construction of Test Ponds ................ 95 Appendix IV-Laboratory Test Methods ................. 101 TABLES Title Number Page Comparison of Seepage Losses ................. 1 12 Thermocouple Readings ................... 2 16 Evaporation Data 3 17 Evaporation Data (Metric Units) ................ 3A 18 Temperature Effects, on Evaporation Rate • ........... 4 20 Estimated Errors i'n Water Level Measurements ........... 5 20 Soil Use Chart ...................... 6 26 Seepage Losses Nylon-reinforced Butyl Rubber ............... 7 35 Polyethylene Plastic Lining .................. 8 36 Asphaltic-concrete Lining ................. 9 37 Soil-cement Lining .................... 10 38 Compacted-earth Lining .................. 11 39 CMC plus ALUM 12 40 Attapullogite Clay Formulation ............... 13 41 Liquid Asphalt ..................... 14 42 Natural Soil ...................... 15 43 Soil Test Data-Roswell Soil ................. 16 49 Soil Test Data-Dalpra Soil .................. 17 51 Chemical Analysis of Soil and Water from Roswell ......... 18 53 Chemical Analysis of Dalpra Brine Effluent ............ 19 54 Permeability Data-Roswell .................. 20 57 Permeability Data-Dalpra 21 61 Physical Properties of PVC Lining 22 67 Physical Properties of Polyethylene Lining ............ 23 68 Puncture Resistance of Plastic Films ............... 24 69 Physical Properties of Nylon Butyl Rubber ............ 25 70 Asphaltic Concrete Lining Asphalt-cement Properties ................. 26 73 Aggregate Gradation ................... 27 74 Immersion-compression Test Data 28 75 Sustained Load Test Data ................. 29 76 Permeability Test Data .................. 30 77 Soil-cement-Unconfined Compression and Permeability Test Data .... 31 81 Liquid Asphalt Physical Properties ...................." 32 89 Penetration Test Data ................... 33 90 . ii CONTENTS-Continued Title Number Page Unconfined Compressive Strength Data 23 ° C and 50 percent RH ................ 34 91 60 ° C and oven cured .................. 35 92 In-place Density Test Data .................. 36 98 FIGURES Title Number Page Location Map ....................... 1 7 Dalpra Farm Test Site ...... .............. 2 8 Seepage from Test Ponds ................... 3 13 Evaporation Rates vs Temperature Change ............ 4 19 Corrections for Evaporation Rate ................ 5 28 Standard Soil Properties-Roswell ............... 6 50 Standard Soil Properties-Dalpra ................ 7 52 Soil-cement Compaction Test Data ............... 8 82 Soil-cement Durability Data, 6 Percent Cement ........... 9 83 Soil-cement Durability Data, 8 Percent Cement ........... 10 84 Soil-cement Durability Data, 10 Percent Cement .......... 11 85 Mechanical Analysis Sand Pad ................. 12 99 Radial Flow Permeability Test ................. 13 112 PHOTOGRAPHS Title Number Page Dalpra Farm Test Site .................... 1 9 Asphaltic Concrete ................... 2 24 Penetration of Liquid Asphalt ................. 3 24 Lining Construction Sequence ................. 4 96 Tank Installation ..................... 5 97 Laboratory Soil Permeability Tests ............... 6 105 Environmental Control Chamber ................ 7 106 Tensile Strength and Elongation Tests .............. 8 106 Soil Burial Test ...................... 9 107 Puncture Resistance Test ................... 10 108 Sustained Load Test .................... 11 110 iii INTRODUCTION This report summarizes thb laboratory and field evaluation of various pond lining materials and soil In the production of potable water at inland desalting sealants. Field studies were conducted at Dalpra Farm; plants, a large quantity of concentrated
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Policy Issue Information
    POLICY ISSUE INFORMATION September 15, 2003 SECY-03-0161 FOR: The Commissioners FROM: William D. Travers Executive Director for Operations SUBJECT: 2003 ANNUAL UPDATE - STATUS OF DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAM PURPOSE: To provide the Commission with an annual comprehensive overview of decommissioning activities, including the decommissioning of Site Decommissioning Management Plan (SDMP) sites and other complex decommissioning sites, commercial reactors, research and test reactors, uranium mill tailings facilities, and fuel cycle facilities. This report provides a status update on the decommissioning activities presented in last year’s report (SECY-02-0169), as well as current key decommissioning program issues. SUMMARY: Consistent with Commission direction, this paper provides a combined overview of all decommissioning activities within the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS); Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES); and the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR). Using SECY-02-0169 as a baseline, progress made in each of the program areas, through at least August 1, 2003, is described in this paper. CONTACT: John T. Buckley, NMSS/DWM (301) 415-6607 The Commissioners -2- BACKGROUND: In a Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) dated June 23, 1999, the Commission directed the staff to provide a single coordinated annual report on all decommissioning activities, instead of annual reports from separate offices. In addition, an SRM dated August 26, 1999, requested that the staff provide: (1) the status of the remaining active SDMP sites, including plans and schedules for each site; and (2) a summary report on all sites currently in the SDMP. In response to these SRMs, the staff provided comprehensive overviews of decommissioning activities in annual reports, SECY-00-0094 and SECY-01-0156, dated April 20, 2000, and August 17, 2001, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Remediation and Waste Management at the Sillamae Site, Estonia Cheryl K. Rofer, E-ET Tonis Ka
    Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. Title: Turning a Problem into a Resource: Remediation and Waste Management at the Sillamae Site, Estonia Author(s) Cheryl K. Rofer, E-ET Tonis Kaasik, OkoSil Ltd., Tallinn, Estonia Submitted to Conference Proceedings From a NATO Advanced Research Womhop, ,-e in Tallinn, Estonia, October 5 - 9, 1998 To be submitted to Kluwer Publishers, Belgium .- - _I CONTENTS Introduction and Recommendations Cheryl K. Rofer and Tirnis Kaasik ......................................................................... .V INTRODUCTORY MATERLAC: THE'SITUA'ITON AT SILLAM& Industrial Complex in Northeast Estonia: Technical, Economic and Environmental Aspects Mihkel Veiderma,.................................................................................................. .2 Uranium processing at SilWe and Decommissioning of the Tailings E. Lippmaa and E. Maremde .................................................................................. 5 Sillawe-A Common Baltic Concern Jan OlofSnihs...................................................................................................... .5 Master Plan for Remediation of the Sillami4e Tailings Pond and Technical Design Project T&is Kaasik ........................................................................................................ .21 Site Monitoring VladimirNosov ..................................................................................................... 27 Stability of the Dam at the SiUamiie Tailings Pond M. Mets and H. Torn,........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • INL Research Library Digital Repository
    INL/EXT-17-40907 2016 Annual Reuse Report for the Idaho National Laboratory Site’s Advanced Test Reactor Complex Cold Waste Ponds February 2017 The INL is a U.S. Department of Energy National Laboratory Idaho National operated by Battelle Energy Alliance Laboratory INL/EXT-17-40907 2016 Annual Reuse Report for the Idaho National Laboratory Site’s Advanced Test Reactor Complex Cold Waste Ponds February 2017 Idaho National Laboratory Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 http://www.inl.gov Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy, Science, and Technology Under DOE Idaho Operations Office Contract DE-AC07-05ID14517 ABSTRACT This report describes conditions and information, as required by the state of Idaho, Department of Environmental Quality Reuse Permit I-161-02, for the Advanced Test Reactor Complex Cold Waste Ponds located at Idaho National Laboratory from November 1, 2015–October 31, 2016. The effective date of Reuse Permit I-161-02 is November 20, 2014 with an expiration date of November 19, 2019. This report contains the following information: • Facility and system description • Permit required effluent monitoring data and loading rates • Permit required groundwater monitoring data • Status of compliance activities • Issues • Discussion of the facility’s environmental impacts. During the 2016 permit year, 180.99 million gallons of wastewater were discharged to the Cold Waste Ponds. This is well below the maximum annual permit limit of 375 million gallons. As shown by the groundwater sampling data, sulfate and total dissolved solids concentrations are highest in well USGS-065, which is the closest downgradient well to the Cold Waste Ponds.
    [Show full text]
  • Helpful Study Guide (PDF)
    WASTEWATER STABILIZATION POND (WWSP) STUDY GUIDE ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION DIVISION OF WATER OPERATOR TRAINING AND CERTIFICATION PROGRAM http://dec.alaska.gov/water/opcert/index.htm Phone: (907) 465-1139 Email: [email protected] January 2011 Edition Introduction This study guide is made available to examinees to prepare for the Wastewater Stabilization Pond (WWSP) certification exam. This study guide covers only topics concerning non-aerated WWSPs. The WWSP certification exam is comprised of 50 multiple choice questions in various topics. These topics will be addressed in this study guide. The procedure to apply for the WWSP certification exam is available on our website at: http://www.dec.state.ak.us/water/opcert/LargeSystem_Operator.htm. It is highly recommended that an examinee complete one of the following courses to prepare for the WWSP certification exam. 1. Montana Water Center Operator Basics 2005 Training Series, Wastewater Lagoon module; 2. ATTAC Lagoons online course; or 3. CSUS Operation of Wastewater Treatment Plants, Volume I, Wastewater Stabilization Pond chapter. If you have any questions, please contact the Operator Training and Certification Program staff at (907) 465-1139 or [email protected]. Definitions 1. Aerobic: A condition in which “free” or dissolved oxygen is present in an aquatic environment. 2. Algae: Simple microscopic plants that contain chlorophyll and require sunlight; they live suspended or floating in water, or attached to a surface such as a rock. 3. Anaerobic: A condition in which “free” or dissolved oxygen is not present in an aquatic environment. 4. Bacteria: Microscopic organisms consisting of a single living cell.
    [Show full text]
  • Surface Water Management Plan Water Resources | City of St
    Surface Water Management Plan Water Resources | City of St. Louis Park Proposals are due 4:00 p.m. April 24, 2017 Executive Summary City of St. Louis Park Surface Water Management Plan Executive Summary Located in Hennepin County just west of Minneapolis, the 10.7-square-mile City of St. Louis Park is a fully developed suburban community. The population of St. Louis Park is approximately 48,000 residents, making it the 20th largest city in Minnesota. St. Louis Park contains a variety of physical and water resources including several wetlands and small lakes, wooded areas, parks, and recreational lands, as well as the Minnehaha Creek corridor. Two watershed management organizations (WMOs) cover St. Louis Park, each with its own governing body: the Bassett Creek Watershed Management Commission (BCWMC) and the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD). This local Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) was prepared in accordance with Minnesota Statute 103B.235 and Minnesota Rules 8410 and is intended to replace the 2009 plan. The purpose of this SWMP includes objectives outlined in Minnesota Statute 103B.201 for metropolitan water management programs. According to the statute, the purposes of these water management programs are to: • protect, preserve, and properly use natural surface and groundwater storage and retention systems; • minimize public capital expenditures needed to correct flooding and water quality problems; • identify and plan for means to effectively protect and improve surface and groundwater quality; • establish more uniform local policies and official controls for surface and groundwater management; • prevent the erosion of soil into surface water systems; • promote effective groundwater recharge; • protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitats and water recreational facilities; and • secure the other benefits associated with the proper management of surface and groundwater.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Ponds, Lagoons, and Natural Systems Study Guide December 2013 Edition
    Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Wastewater Operator Certification Introduction to Ponds, Lagoons, and Natural Systems Study Guide December 2013 Edition Subclass D Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Bureau of Science Services, Operator Certification Program PO Box 7921, Madison, WI 53707 http://dnr.wi.gov/ The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources provides equal opportunity in its employment, programs, services, and functions under an Affirmative Action Plan. If you have any questions, please write to Equal Opportunity Office, Department of Interior, Washington, D.C. 20240. This publication is available in alternative format (large print, Braille, audio tape. etc.) upon request. Please call (608) 266-0531 for more information. Printed on 12/06/13 Introduction to Ponds, Lagoons, and Natural Systems Study Guide - December 2013 Edition Preface This operator's study guide represents the results of an ambitious program. Operators of wastewater facilities, regulators, educators and local officials, jointly prepared the objectives and exam questions for this subclass. How to use this study guide with references In preparation for the exams you should: 1. Read all of the key knowledges for each objective. 2. Use the resources listed at the end of the study guide for additional information. 3. Review all key knowledges until you fully understand them and know them by memory. It is advisable that the operator take classroom or online training in this process before attempting the certification exam. Choosing a Test Date: Before you choose a test date, consider the training opportunities available in your area. A listing of training opportunities and exam dates is available on the internet at http://dnr.wi.gov, keyword search "operator certification".
    [Show full text]
  • Evaporation Pond Seepage Soil Solution
    from the soil surface. The subcores were fitted and sealed with plexiglass ends and set up to measure Permeability. Drainage water having an electrical conductivity (EC) of 10 dS/m (6100 ppm total dissolved salts) was applied to the cores for three days to ensure saturation and uniform electrolyte concentration. Biological activity was minimized in some of the cores by the addition of chlo- roform to the percolating drain water. Percolating drainage water having pro- gressively larger EC values was applied over periods of one to five days in an effort to exaggerate variations in evaporation pond salinity resulting from evaporation lnfiltrometers (left)were installed in Kings County and fresh drain water additions. The sa- evaporation pond to estimate seepage. Rainfall, evaporation, drainage flows, and changes in pond linity of inflow and outflow water was water levels (herebeing checked by co-author Blake measured periodically along with the per- McCullough-Sanden)were also measured. meability of each subcore. The sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) is an index of the relative concentration of sodium, calcium, and magnesium in the Evaporation pond seepage soil solution. When soil salinity is low, permeability has been shown to increase Mark E. Grismer o Blake L. McCullough-Sanden as the SAR value of the inflow solution in- creases. Past studies, however, have typi- cally considered SAR values of 30 or less. Rates of seepage from operating evaporation In this study, SAR values of the inflow so- ponds decline substantially as they age and as lution increased in the same stepwise fashion as EC, with values ranging from salinity increases 210 to 660.
    [Show full text]
  • Reclamation of Tailings Ponds
    Journal American Society of Mining and Reclamation, 2012 Volume 1, Issue 1, COMPARISON OF HYDROLOGIC CHARACTERISTICS FROM TWO DIFFERENTLY RECLAIMED TAILINGS PONDS; GRAVES MOUNTAIN, LINCOLNTON, GA1 Gwendelyn Geidel2 Abstract: This study compares and evaluates the hydrologic characteristics between two kyanite ore process tailings ponds that were reclaimed with different reclamation strategies; one reclaimed with an impermeable membrane and the other with an open, surface reconfiguration (OSR) methodology. During the extraction and processing of kyanite ore from the Graves Mountain mine, Lincoln County, Georgia, fine grained tailings were produced. The tailings were transported by slurry pipeline to various tailings ponds which were created by the construction of dams using on-site materials. The first study site, referred to as the Pyrite Pond (PP), was constructed and filled during the 1960’s and early 1970’s. In early 1992, the PP was capped with an impermeable membrane, covered with a thin soil veneer and vegetated and in 1998 the upslope reclamation was completed. The second tailings pond, referred to as the East Tailings Pond (ETP), was constructed and filled in the 1970’s and early 1980’s and was reclaimed in 1995-96 by surface reconfiguration and the addition of soil amendments. Piezometers and wells were installed into the two tailings ponds and also in close proximity to the tailings ponds. While the initial study was aimed at comparing the two reclamation strategies, it became apparent that the ground water was a dominant factor. Results of the evaluation of the potentiometric surface data for varying depths within each tailings pond indicate that while both tailings ponds exhibit delayed response to precipitation events suggesting infiltration effects, the delay in the ETP deep wells and PP wells could not be adequately described by a surface infiltration model.
    [Show full text]
  • Kennecott Groundwater Permit Pipelines
    GROUND WATER QUALITY DISCHARGE PERMIT UGW450012 STATEMENT OF BASIS US Magnesium LLC Rowley, Utah April, 2020 Introduction The Director of the Division of Water Quality (Director) under the authority of the Utah Ground Water Quality Protection Rules1 (Ground Water Rules) issues ground water discharge permits to facilities which have a potential to discharge contaminants to ground water2. As defined by the Ground Water Rules, such facilities include milling and metallurgical operations and ponds and lagoons whether lined or not. As defined in Utah Admin. Code R317-6-1, US Magnesium is considered an existing facility because it was under operation before February 10, 1990. The Ground Water Rules are based on an anti- degradation strategy for ground water protection as opposed to non-degradation; therefore, discharge of contaminants to ground water may be allowed provided that current and future beneficial uses of the ground water are not impaired and the other requirements of Rule 317-6-6.4.C are met4. Following this strategy, ground water is divided into classes based on its quality5; and higher-quality ground water is given greater protection6 due to the greater potential for beneficial uses. The Director has developed permit conditions consistent with Rule 317-6 and appropriate to the nature of the wastewater, facility operations, maintenance, discharge minimization technology7 and the hydrogeologic and climatic conditions of the site, to ensure that the operation not contaminate ground water. Basis for Permit Issuance Under Rule 317-6-6.4A, the Director may issue a ground water discharge permit for an existing facility if: 1) The applicant demonstrates that the applicable class TDS limits, ground water quality standards and protection levels will be met; 2) The monitoring plan, sampling and reporting requirements are adequate to determine compliance with applicable requirements; 3) The applicant utilizes treatment and discharge minimization technology commensurate with plant process design capability and similar or 1 Utah Admin.
    [Show full text]
  • CERCLA Cleanup, 1
    Environmental Defense Institute Troy, Idaho 83871-0220 http://envirinmental-defense-institute.org Assessment of Agency Five-Year Review Advanced Test Reactor Complex formerly called Test Reactor Area CERCLA Cleanup Plan Submitter by Chuck Broscious December 12, 2015 Rev-11 1 Preface This Environmental Defense Institute Review of the Idaho National Laboratory Advanced Test Reactor Complex (ATRC) - formerly called Test Reactor Area (TRA) - CERCLA Cleanup is an updated iteration of our previous Comments (March 1997) on the three agency 1992 collective Record of Decision and subsequent Five-Year Reviews. EDI’s review of the co-located Engineering Test Reactor (ETR) and Materials Test Reactor (MTR) Decommission – Decontamination is covered in separate EDI Comment on ETR – MTR CERCLA Cleanup 12/24/15. References are imbedded in the text in [brackets] with an acronym/agency document ascension number and page [“@”] number that can be identified in the Reference section with the complete citation at the end of this report. Tragically, the collective federal and state agency aversion for environmental remediation has not changed since the 1949 Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) designated National Reactor Test Station – now called the Idaho National Laboratory - in south-eastern Idaho desert as another nuclear sacrifice zone. The underlying Snake River Aquifer was perfect for providing the massive water needs for what the AEC and its successor Department of Energy required for the 52 reactors that were built/tested at the site. In the early years, the aquifer was both the source for reactor cooling water but also the place to inject the highly radioactive hot waste water that could not be dumped in percolation ponds for fear of worker exposure.
    [Show full text]
  • 00414:J Uc-11
    //8' PNL-2253 00414:J UC-11 ECOLOGY OF THE 200 AREA PLATEAU WASTE MANAGEMENT ENVIRONS: A STATUS REPORT ~J • " Edited by: L. E. Rogers ~I. H. Rickard PLEASE RETURN TO: October 1977 ENVIRO NM ENTAL DlVISI ON RESOURCE CEl~TE. R BATTELLE Pacific Northwest Laboratories , • .. .. \. •· .. ·. Richland, Washington 99352 This work was performed as part of the Rockwell Hanford Operation's Program under Contract No. EY-77-C-06-2130 i;•-- ,., ••. ~ --- - ' ,,.[ ,,r~ ,, ·1 ' THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ~er !!il. •. I "}J ·, ,., : ~- ;1;,.; ,--1• .... .,. ,. ~ . • • ,. -t · ·~ t ...r·"'"' 1. ... _1 , a ~:_-~ ~ - • f I) .. ,: .:, }' l_~ : •1 :t J ~{ : • . :·_ :, .... -· ' : -, '· .' L • I , .. _ •• --~ \ !, l . ~. ; •. ; \ ,,:' ·.:_ •• • ·_ ·, ..: ::~;_: ·. : A,~- , _· • • •• - - ... ... , :~-.:.: · .·, .... \ I : ,~ .;-~\;:... .· ... /·.,\ , 1'1 THIS PAGE INTE TIONALLY LEFT BLANK ., • ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This document was prepared for the Rockwell Hanford Operation's (RHO) Biotic Transport program under Intercontractor Support Program. A number of the ideas and concepts contained herein have developed over the past few years as a result of close cooperation between Rockwell Hanford . ,-. Operations (RHO) and Battelle, Pacific Northwest Laboratory personnel . In ~eveloping our concepts, we have drawn extensively on the data base, design paradigms and professional experience of staff associated with the ROWMA program and its predecessor programs funded by the Division of Biomedical and Environmental Sciences of the Department of Energy. Numerous meetings have been held also with RHO staff, RHO's outside consultants and PNL's ecology staff in order to develop a comprehensive ecological capability to deal with biotic transport problems. We wish also to thank the following individuals (RHO) for their interest and participation which contributed to the success of thls effort: R.
    [Show full text]
  • Mining and Environment in the Western Balkans
    Mining and environment in the Western Balkans www.envsec.org This study was initiated by the Environment and Security Initiative (ENV- SEC), a partnership between UNDP, UNEP, OSCE, NATO, UNECE and REC. Disclaimer: The views expressed in this study are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect views of neither UNEP nor ENVSEC partner organizations or their member-countries. The designations employed and the presentation of material in this study do not imply the expression of any opinion on the part of the organizations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area of its authority, or delineation of its frontiers and boundaries. “Mining and Environment in the Western Balkans” is also available as in- teractive map and information film for further insight in this subject. Both are available at www.envsec.org UNEP promotes environmentally sound practices globally and in its own activities. This report is printed on 100% recycled paper, using vegetable-based inks and other eco- friendly practices. Our distribution policy aims to reduce UNEP’s carbon footprint. Mining and environment in the Western Balkans Editor This study was prepared by Zoi Environment Christina Stuhlberger Network on behalf of UNEP Vienna in the framework of the Environment and Security Ini- Cartography tiative - South Eastern Europe with support of the Matthias Beilstein Austrian Development Agency (ADA) and the www.zoinet.org Produced by Zoï Environment Network Christina Stuhlberger Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Finland. Photography A special “thank you” to the many members of UNDP Montenegro the ENVSEC - South Eastern Europe family and Philip Peck friends of the Balkan who contributed through- Christina Stuhlberger out the years with passion and dedication to the topic.
    [Show full text]