skip to main content

Title: Lessons Learned for Construction and Waste Water Management at Radioactive Waste Closure Site

Environmental remediation of three different radioactive waste closure sites each required exhaustive characterization and evaluation of sampling and analytical information in resolving regulatory and technical issues that impact cleanup activities. One of the many regulatory and technical issues shared by all three and impacting the cleanup activities is the compliant management and discharge of waste waters generated and resulting from the remediation activities. Multiple options were available for each closure site in resolving waste water management challenges depending upon the base regulatory framework defined for the cleanup or closure of the site. These options are typically regulated by the federal Clean Water Act (CWA), with exemptions available under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between regulatory agencies. In general, all parties must demonstrate equivalent compliance when concerns related to the protection of the general public and the environment. As such, all options for management of waste water resulting from closure activities must demonstrate compliance to or equivalent actions under the CWA. The CWA provides for the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) that is typically maintained by individual states through permitting processmore » to generators, public utilities, and more recently, construction sites. Of the three sites, different compliance strategies were employed for each. The approach for the Columbus Closure Project (CCP) was to initiate full scale compliance to the Ohio EPA General Construction Permit No. OHC000002. The CCP provided Notice of Intent (NOI) to the Ohio EPA to discharge under the general permit according to the regulator approved Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. For the second site, the Li Tungsten Superfund Site in Glen Cove, New York, the option was to manage and discharge waste water under a due diligence process to New York State General Permit No. GP-02-01. For the third site, the Middlesex Sampling Plant in Middlesex, New Jersey, the options was to manage and discharge waste water to the Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW). Each option has resulted in a safe, cost-effective, and compliant approach to managing discharging waste waters from the site closure activities. (authors)« less
Authors:
 [1]
  1. CHP ECC, Lakewood, Colorado (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
21326120
Report Number(s):
INIS-US--10-WM-08322
TRN: US10V0538067485
Resource Type:
Conference
Resource Relation:
Conference: WM'08: Waste Management Symposium 2008 - HLW, TRU, LLW/ILW, Mixed, Hazardous Wastes and Environmental Management - Phoenix Rising: Moving Forward in Waste Management, Phoenix, AZ (United States), 24-28 Feb 2008; Other Information: Country of input: France; 19 refs
Research Org:
WM Symposia, 1628 E. Southern Avenue, Suite 9 - 332, Tempe, AZ 85282 (United States)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES; CLOSURES; CONSTRUCTION PERMITS; RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL; RADIOACTIVE WASTES; REMEDIAL ACTION; SAMPLING; US EPA; US SUPERFUND; WASTE WATER; WATER POLLUTION