23.04.2013 Views

Management of Commercially Generated Radioactive Waste - U.S. ...

Management of Commercially Generated Radioactive Waste - U.S. ...

Management of Commercially Generated Radioactive Waste - U.S. ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

6.73<br />

TABLE 6.1.11. Radiological Impacts Of The Normal Operation<br />

At A Subseabed Repository<br />

Whole Body Dose,<br />

man-rem/yr<br />

Spent Fuel High-Level <strong>Waste</strong><br />

Occupational<br />

Seaport Facility<br />

Seagoing Vessels<br />

340<br />

340<br />

200<br />

200<br />

Nonoccupational<br />

Seaport Facility 40 10<br />

Seagoing Vessels Negligible Negligible<br />

Bechtel (1979a) gives the consequences <strong>of</strong> abnormal events at subseabed facilities. These<br />

consequences are equated with accidents postulated for the AFR (i.e., design basis tornado)<br />

facility for the most exposed public individual. No probability analysis was included. For<br />

spent fuel disposal, the radiological impacts <strong>of</strong> an abnormal event would be 0.02 mrem/event<br />

for the seaport facility and 0.003 mrem/event for the seagoing vessels. For HLW, these im-<br />

pacts would be 0.001 mrem/event and 0.002 mrem/event, respectively.<br />

The maximum risk would be posed by the sinking <strong>of</strong> the seagoing vessel or by loss <strong>of</strong> waste<br />

canisters overboard. Except for accidents in coastal waters where mitigation actions could<br />

be taken, the radioactive materials released into the sea following such an event would dis-<br />

perse into a large volume <strong>of</strong> the ocean. Some radionuclides might be reconcentrated through<br />

the food chain to fish and invertebrates, which could be eaten by man. Bechtel (1979a) as-<br />

sumes that the waste could be retrieved if either event were to occur and does not provide an<br />

impact estimate. The doses provided in Table 6.1.12 for such an event are taken from EPA<br />

(1979).<br />

Nonradiological Impacts. The numbers <strong>of</strong> injuries, illnesses, and deaths related to the<br />

construction and operation <strong>of</strong> the subseabed disposal option prior to the waste arriving at<br />

the seaport facility/repository are expected to be similar to those for the mined geologic<br />

options. At the seaport facility, it is estimated that the impacts would be no greater than<br />

those associated with surface storage and transfer facilities to be used with a reprocessing<br />

plant or spent fuel overpacking facility. These impacts are discussed in Chapter 4.<br />

Additional areas specific to subseabed disposal that would have nonradiological health<br />

impacts are the construction <strong>of</strong> seagoing vessels and the conduct <strong>of</strong> operations at a seaport<br />

and on the ocean. Although there are no quantitative estimates <strong>of</strong> these impacts, it is anti-<br />

cipated that they would be similar to those incurred during the construction and operation <strong>of</strong><br />

conventional seagoing vessels and operation <strong>of</strong> conventional dock facilities.<br />

Natural System Impacts<br />

Impacts to the natural environment for this disposal option would be related primarily to<br />

transportation and emplacement activities. Radiological concerns would be most significant

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!