Re: Mixed Waste

[dryeamans@lanl.gov (David Yeamans, CST-7, 5-8832, dryeamans@lanl.gov)]

If the waste in question contained only Uranium, the exemption in 40   CFR
261.4 (4) would apply, but since lead is present, according to the _listed_
test,  40   CFR  262.11 (b), it is RCRA Hazardous waste.  The New Mexico
Environment Department has led Los Alamos National Laboratory to this
conclusion over years of interpretation.

Your friend may have a significant characterization problem with this
discovered material.  Since it is radioactive, Department of Transportation
(DOT) requires that he provide a list of the isotopes present, the total
curies of radioactivity present, the wattage for the package, the amount of
fissile material present, and a Transport Index (from 10CFR 71, pertaining
to criticality safety).  He also needs to determine if there are forbidden
substances, reportable quantities of materials, and the hazardous waste
constituent codes (e.g. D008 for lead) for the materials present.  Other,
more easily obtainable data are also required.

I hope there are no transuranic elements present, because he will be utterly
blocked from shipment because a). he will need a TRUPACT-II shipping
container, b). there is no place to ship it, c). he will have to apply for a
TRUCON content code for the material, and that takes time and yet more
characterization.


>     Oh knowledgeable ones,
>
>     A  colleague of mine employed by the Department of the  Navy
>has a problem, and perhaps this group can be of help.
>
>     This  person  has discovered and removed (from  the  ground)
>some  old "slag" which contains radioactive material  (radium-225
>and  "perhaps" U-238 and thorium isotopes) AND some heavy  metals
>(lead, tin, copper, magnesium, beryllium etc).
>
>     This material is, of course, mixed waste.
>
>
>The Problem:
>
>     The  Navy is telling this command that they have 90 days  to
>ship this material to a disposal/treatment site or they will  be
>in violation of various and sundry California and Federal
>regulations.
>
>BUT:
>
>     IS THIS MATERIAL HAZARDOUS WASTE?
>
>     DOES THIS MATERIAL HAVE TO BE DISPOSED OF/SHIPPED OFF WITHIN
>     90 DAYS?, and
>
>     WHAT SITES CAN ACCEPT THIS WASTE (FROM CALIFORNIA)
>
>
>To digress:
>
>     What  is a solid waste?  40 CFR 261.2 defines a solid  waste
>as any discarded material that is not excluded by 261.4(a)...
>
>     40   CFR  261.4 (Exclusions):  Excludes (a) Materials  which
>are
>not  solid  wastes.   Subsection (4) exempts a  "source,  special
>nuclear  or  byproduct  material" (California  Title  22  66261.4
>(a)(2) gives the same exemption).
>
>
>So:
>
>     As  this  material  does not meet the definition of  a  RCRA
>SOLID  WASTE,  nor  of  a  RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE,  -  and  -  it's
>RADIOACTIVE,  that  component  should take  precedence  over  the
>metals that it contains.
>
>     Therefore,  the 40 CFR 262.34 "Accumulation Time" specifying
>that  a  generator may accumulate hazardous waste on-site for  90
>days  or  less  without  a  permit  or  without  having   interim
>status..... should not and does not apply.
>
>     What do you think, inquiring minds want to know...
>
>
>     Thank you all (a head of time) for your input,
>
>     Joel Baumbaugh   (baumbaug@nosc.mil)
>     NRaD
>     San Diego, CA
>
>Std.  Disclaimer.   The thoughts and opinions above are mine  and
>mine  alone and do not (necessarily) reflect the opinions of  the
>Federal Govt.,  the Navy or my supervisors.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



.,:;-!+=*^&%#$@(^)?->;:,.
David Yeamans
CST-7, MS E516, (505) 665-8832
Los Alamos National Laboratory
Los Alamos, New Mexico 87544

dryeamans@lanl.gov