81a,(DMDR

To: D, L Cravener, Jr„ D/064

From: B, L, Tuffly, D/99l°359N . V, Sutton, D/991~35 9

Subject: The Fluoride Water Pollution Question

INTRODUCTION

RM ll83

18 August 1965

Since the Nomad Program in 19599 Rocketdyne has conducted a strict surveillance

program on the fluoride contamination in the catch ponds and reservoirs at Santa

Susan , Working cooperatively with the State authorities , maximum values for

propellant exhaust products in property surface drainage were establishe& In

addition9 standard methods of chemical analysis for these pollutants in water

were agreed upon When the chemical analysis results exceeded given limits, the

catch (or skim) ponds were chemically treated to reduce the contamination to an

acceptable value

The demise of the Nomad program relieved Rocketdyne of the fluorideacontaminationo

The interest in operational high energy systems , however, has reintroduced the

fluoride contamination questiono As of this writing, three areas handle fluorine,,

vino, the activity at PRA is Area I; the PLOX program at Alfa in Area II, and the

Compound A facility in Area IIIo While the quantities of fluoride discharged from

these systems do not pose a problem at this time , because there exists satisfactory

and economic methods for handling the water pollution , the question has arisen that

the increased usage of fluorine may introduce new problems in discharging the

polluted water

This report discusses in detail certain problems relating to the fluoride pollution

and attempts to recommend procedures for water handling to cope with the antici-

pated increase in fluorine usage

II0I muim i iimnmum i iim uii iuBNA0255145 3

HDMSE00637997

To; Do L Cravener, Jro, 1)1064 Page 2

From: B0 L0 Tuffly, L Vo Sutton B1 l183

Subject: The Fluoride Water Pollution Question 18 Auguat 196 5

THE SANTA SITSANA POND SYSTEM

Area I

The Area I pond system is shown in Figure 1o Propellant product discharge from

the PRA goes into PRA 1 , which has a capacity of 25 ,000 gallonse Another ponds

PRA 2, capacity 70,000 gallons, is used when PRA1 is too contaminated to intro

duce into the Area I pond system ; the total water capacity in Area I is abou t

5 million gallonso Discharge off the property is from the Perimeter pond and

surface drainage is into the San Fernando Valley via Bell Canyon , The PRA .l and

2, CTLml , CHTL, C3$!2 panda have cement bottoms, while all the other ponds

have dirt bottomso Killing the fluoride takes place in the discharge pond

(PRA 1) and, when required, PRA 2 0

Area II

The Area II pond system is shown in Figure 20 The total water capacity of Area II

is about 8 million gallons Propellant product discharge from the Alfa 5 stand is

into the 400, 000 gallon Alfa Skim pond , The physical aspects of this pond are

noteworthy , and demonstrate how well the geological features of the area have been

utilizedo The test stands fire against a natural stone walla The water runs down

a natural rock trough into this downhill , Y shaped ponds When a kill is required,

lime is dumped into the trough and as water runs down the trough, the lime is

easily "watered " in this runways The mixture then travels on down to the pond

(about 50 feet) and mixes in very readily Discharge of the water off the property

is from the 2,2 million gallon R-2®A ponds Surface drainage from this pond is also

into Bell Canyon leading into the San Fernando Valley

II0I m u imi i imnmumi i ini i iiu m iBNA02551454

HDMSE00637998

D, L. Cravener , Jr . , D/064To : Page 3

BL, Tuffly N0 V. SuttonFrom, RM 1183

The Fluoride Water Pollution QuestionSubject : 18 August 1965

SSFL WATER SUPPLY

There are two sources of water supply at 55'L: the well water which xontains

about 008 ppm fluorides and fresh water which is fed in through pipeline from

the Metropolitan Water District ( Simi Valley) , This latter water contains from

O,3 to Oo6 pa of fluoride0 The cost of he water averages about 51,000 for 3

million 'gallons

MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE CONTAMINATION

San Fernando Valley

The surface drainage from Area I is into the San Fernando Valley where State

authorities have established the maximum permissible contamination , as listed in

Table I, These values therefore represent ; the maximum pollutants that the 1,1

million gallon Perimeter Pond can have and still be cumped ,

The surface drainage from Area II is also into the San Fernando Valley These

values, therefore, represent the max imum pollutants that the 202 million gallon

R2~-A pond can have and still be dumped 0

Simi valley

From time to time, water may drain into the Simi Valley, ~ithough thin occurs only

from some of the Atomic International pondso For purposes cf this report, and for

future planning of the North American pond system, cognizan .A should be taken of

the requirements for draining into the Valley The maximum ,11.,wable concentration

for surface drainage water is shown in Table I1 0

CURRENT METHODS FOR POLLUTANT LULLS

A plurality of propellanta are fired or lumped at Santa Susana And definite

II0I muim i iimnmum i iim uim iBNA0255145 5

HDMSE00637999

To: Do H, Cravener9 JrD/064 Page 4

From: B, L, Tuffly , N, V, Sutton RM 1183

Subject : The Fluoride Water Pollution Question 18 August 1964

methods have been established for disposal of their waste , These methods have

been in use for over 10 years and have proven extremely effective , Many of the

methods9 where applicable , are also employed at NFL ,

By razines

The hydrazine fuels are killed with hydrogen peroxide at a pH of from 8 to 11 0

The chemical equations for hydrazine are : N2H4 + H2O ----~ N2H5OH

N21150H + H2a2-- 3 N2H5OOH + 1120

N2H500H - ---~ N2H2 +2$20

N2H2 + H2O2 -- --+ N2 + H2O

The nitrogen leaves the pond as a gas , This has proved to be an excellent route

to reducing the hydrazine concentration to acceptable values, notwithstanding the

fact that the effectiveness of the procedure is pH and temperature sensitive . The

treatment is satisfactory for hydrazine , monometbyl~hydrazine and unsym~dimethyl-

hydrazine ,

RP].

Because the RP~1 floats on water , its removal is performed by skimming the pond,

In addition , repeated use of contaminated water for cooling the flame bucket reduces

the RP 1, If necessary , the RP -1 can also be burned on the surface of the pond,

Nitrates

The maximum allowable concentration for nitrogen (as nitrate ) is 50 ppm , Because

of this high tolerance, nitrates are usually killed by dilution,

II0I muimiiimnmumiiin iimimiBNA02551456

HDMSE00638000

To : D, H,, yravener, Jr,, D/064 page 5

From: B0 L, Tuffly, N, V0 Sutton JL fl83

Subject : The Fluoride Water Pollution Question 18 August 196 5

Fluoride

The detailed procedure for killing fluoride is attached The present method

^omprises introducing lime r93 per hydrated calcium oxide ) to the catch pond ,

This causes the formation of the slightly soluble salt, calcium fluoride , Any excess

fluoride in the catch pond above the allowable 105 ppm is diluted as the water from

the catch pond is introduced into the SSFL =water system ,

REQUIREMENTS T~)R A FLUORIDE KILL AT SSF L

Any technique developed for reducing fluoride in the pond systems at SSFL must

meet the following criteria ;

i.) Reduce the F ' below 105 ppm when discharged off property ,

2) Must not reduce pH of the system below 8, so that the hydrazine kill can be

effected ,

3) Must not introduce a more serious problem such as toxic heavy metals , flocculence,

etc o

4) Must cost less than equivalent amount of fresh water , $1000 for 3 million gallons,

5) Must be simple enough to be carried out routinely by non-professional personnel,

6) Must be flexible enough to be operable for a large kill as well as a small ,

EVALUATION OF PRESENT TECHNIQUE

Because there is no chemical fix for F , as there is with the hydrazine,, the present

method takes advantage of the insolubility of the salt calcium fluoride, The upper

limit for calcium, as calcium carbonate, is 500 ppm, If the pH is above 7, the

soluble calcium salts will be below this value

The price of lime is $35 a ton ; use of lime to kill the fluoride is acceptable to

the state and to Rocketdyne , Notwiths xding the fact that lime cannot reduce the

fluoride to 1,5 ppm, fresh water is avaiiable f ;;r the complete kill, In addition ,

II0I muimiiimnmumiiin i iBNA0255145]

i u I IHDMSE00638001

To : D,. H0 Cravener9 Jr ., D/064 Page 6

From ; B, L< TufflyD H0 V Sutton R 1183

Subjects The fluoride Water Pollution question 18 August 1965

because of the large quantity of waste water in the Canoga Park water system,

it is permissible to dump water containing up to 25 ppm into the Canoga Park

sewer systemo The cost is approximately $600 to haul away 70,000 gallons of

water from Santa Susan to Canoga Park,

CHEMICAL ASPECTS

Fluorine is a cryogenic oxidizer , which is an important propellant for high energy

systems , When mixed p ith oxygenD the resulting oxidizer is called FLAX , which is

hypergolic with RP-J , In addition to the advantage of hypergolicityD 3C% FLOX

also will insreas~ the payload capability of the Atlas-Centaur by 30 percents and

the Atlas =Agena by 58 percent ,

to addition to its use as a neat propellant or as an additive to oxygen , fluorine

is an ip-rtant starting material in the manufacture of eartJ~storable high energy

oxidizes , such as chlorine trifluoride , Those materials incorporating chemically

the f ]uorine atom will undoubtedly be the oxidizers of choice in advanced pre

packaged propellant systems

T ose chemical reactions involving fluorine containing propellants all lead to at

".east one common reaction product, HF This weak acid is completely soluble in

water, and dissociates into the hydrogen ion, [HI , the fluoride ion [F'] , and the

und~ssociated molecule [BP] Although the boiling point of pure HF is lowD l94 C

66 9 P. when dissolved in water , it can not be removed except by boiling the watero

Thus, by using F containing water for cooling during an engine firing , some HF would

ce removed from the water, This has been attempted , but the efficiency was too low

o be practical ,

The amount of each of the three species Fresent when HF is dissolved in water can

be changed by changing the pH, Thus at low pH (high hydrogen ion), the fluoride

II0I muimiiimnmumiiinn i iBNA02551458

I IHDMSE00638002

To: D, H, Cravener, Jr. D/064 Page 7

From : B. L, Tuffly, N, V, Sutton RM~1183

Subject : The Fluoride Water Pollution Question 18 August 1965

concentration goes down, but the HF concentration goes up, Thus the F stays

constant but the chemical form changes, At high pH, (low hydrogen ion), the

fluoride concentration goes up but the HF concentration goes down, Again, the

total F stays the same,, The reason for having a pH of above 8 in the ponds for

the present kill is to reduce the amount of HF, which does not react with the

lime, and to increase the availability of the Fu which does react with the lime

A process for removing fluoride as a gas would be desirable , because this technique

would obviate residue build up and/or expensive capital installations, However,

the chemical reactions of HF to form volatile materials usually take place at

fairly high reaction densities , i,e,, at high concentrations of HF , Thus, to

remove small amounts of fluoride from water in the form of a noxious gas is not

possible ,

Alternate methods of fluoride removal therefore are, 1) passage of the water over

a fixed fluoride absorption bed, or 2) precipitation as an insoluble salt ,

The use of a fixed bed to remove anions (fluoride ion is an anion ) is a common

industrial practice, Beds comprising ion exohmnge resins could be installed for

passage of the water over them to remove fluoride ,, However, this requires a great

deal of facility modifications, capital equipment , and a staff to operate ; in other

words ,, a water treatment plant would be necessary , Although this is the ultimate

in water treatment , the potenti , .l problems of fluoride contamination are not

ouficiently great to warrant such an expensive undertaking . However, it shoul d

be borne in mind that if excess ive firings of fluorine do begin , involving the

release of several tons a day ,, on a daily basis , serious consideration should be

given to a recovery plant

The last alternative is precipitation ~ .f the fluoride as an insoluble salt, An

examination of the literature for insoluble fluoride materials shows the following :

II0I muimiiimnmumiiiniuuBNA02551459

UHDMSE00638003

To: D„ HL Cravener , Jr,, 1)1064 Page 8

From: B, Lo Tuffly , N, V, Sutton &Mm1183

Subject : The Fluoride Water Pollution Question 18 August 1965

Solubility, ppmCaP2 ( Calcium fluoride) 16

(Magnesium fluoride) 76

PbF2 (Lead fluoride) 640

Pb C1F (Lead chlorofluoride) 370

Al F3 (Aluminum fluoride )

(Aluminum oxyfluorides )

5600

5 (eat, )

There are, of course , other inorganic fluorides which are insoluble , but these

are the most important ones , The only material less soluble than calcium fluoride

is an aluminum oxyfluoride compound, The lead salt can be immediately discarded

as a candidate because of the increased toxicity problem lead would introduce d

The aluminum oxyfluoride should be considered , although it is anticipated that

close pH control would be required, and further ; the floc might introduce serious

flow problems in transferring water from one pond to the other,

The calcium fluoride has many advantages , and these are listed below :

1) Compact precipitate

2)

3)

4)

Calcium is a natural constituent in water and is non-toxic

Cheap method , 1 calcium atom for 2 fluoride atoms )

Proven to be effective

The fact remains that no candidate methods can compete effectively with the lime

treatment, If this is true , it would ordinarily be necessary to determine if lime

would fulfill the requirement of a large kill, However, due to air pollution aspects

of he fluoride situation , limitations are in effect which restrict tankage of

fluorine at Santa Susana to 1000# (2400# for CTF and Campo i)0 Therefore , large kill

considerations are not required,

II0I muimiiimimmmiiumi iuBNA02551460

UHDMSE00638004

Toe Da H, Cravener, Jr,, D/064 Page

oQ.; B. Lo Tuffly, Ne V, Sutton RM 1183

Subject: The Fluoride Water Pollution Question 18 August 196

CONCLUSION S

10 SSFL has utilized 31,136 lbs . of fluorine (or fluorine containing

oxidizers ) at Area I during the period 1 July 1964 to 1 July 1965, Lime

treatment or hauling the contaminated water away bas solved the fluoride

contamination problem, About 20,200 ibs, of fluorine ( or fluorine con

taming oxidizers ) will be used in Area I from July 65 to July 66, Hence,

lime treatment should be effective ,

2r, SSFL has utilized 479250 lbs, of fluorine at Area II since cy

Lime . treatment of the skim pond has solved the fluoride question During

the nest six months , little or no fluorine activity is anticipated o

3, A facility at Area III which will have a maximum of 200 lbso of fluorine

(or fluorine containing materials) has an isolated pond which will not empty

into any complex SSFL water systeme Lime treatment will handle all potential

contamination problems e

4~ Past intrusion of fluoride into the ponds due to rain cannot be calculated

although it is anticipated that the majority of residual fluoride will be

washed back into the skim pond around the test stand , where the fluoride can

be killed ,

5, In the absence of a large fluorine program, the present lime treatment,

and, where deemed necessary, haulage will satisfy the present State and

Rocketdyne control of the fluoride pollution

II0I muim i iimimmm i i um iuBNA02551461

UHDMSE00638005

To: D, L Cravener, Jr -~ D/065 Pare 10

Pram : B, L- Tuffly9 N, V, Sutton RL-1183

Subject : The Fluoride Water Pollution Question 18 August 1965

RECOMMENDATIONS

It is recognized that some of the recommendations herewith made are currently

implemented ,

1. Cement al skim ponds which are recipients of the cooling water from

fluoride containing firings

2, Industrial Sngineering must be advised in advance of any fluorine

firing to provide for adequate kills .,

3 . All future fluorine programs must anticipate a pollution phase0 This

is to be coordinated with Industrial Engineering who would then coordinate

with SSFL.Chemical Analysis o

REFERENCES FOR PHYSICAL CONSTANTS

i LangeA HANDBOOK of CHEMISTRY9 9th Editions

2, Seidell9 SOLUBILITIES-Inorganic & Metal Organic Compounds , Vol, I .

5. U, S, Rubber CompanyB HANDBOOK of CfEMISTR7 and PRYSICS9 45th Edition o

II0I muimiiimimmmiiumimiiuBNA02551462

HDMSE00638006

To : D, H, Cravener9 Jr 0 9 D/065 Page 11

Fraa : B, L> Tuffly9 N . V, Sutton RM~1183

Subject : The Fluoride Water Pollution Question 18 August 196 5

CHART I

AREA I m FLUORINE CONTAINING OXIDIZERS

Period Period1 July 64 1 July 65 1 July 65 v 1 Jul 66

Pr=~llant Lbso Lbs estimated

CT? 14a300 69400

Comp ., A 19630

F2 986 19800

OF2 20 300

FLAX 149200 11,800

IIDI muimiiimimmmiiummim iBNA02551463

HDMSE00638007

Toy D Hp Cravener9 Jr,9 D/065 Page 12

Vim; Ba Lo Tuffly9 N, Va Sutton RM 1l83

Subject : The ?Fluoride Water Pollution Question 18 August 196 5

CART II

AREA II FLUORINE USAGE

079 19659Lb80

January 4, 600

Fehruazy 59260

March 89000

April 69190

May 1,000

June 49200

July 109000

August 7 8,000

47 250

Remainder of year none anticipated

A1tEA III Maximum 200 lba, weekly9

Beginning August9 1965

II0I muim i iimimmm i i umi im u iBNA02551464

HDMSE00638008

T, Y D0 H, Cravener, Jr, D/061~ Page 13

Fir Bm L. Tuf'P1y, Ya V, Sutton RM l183

Subject, THE FLUORIDE WATER POLLUTION QUESTION 18 August 1965

TABLE I

MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE CONTAMINATION

SURFACE DRAINAGE TO THE SAN FERNANDO VALLEY

maxe

Total dissolved solids 1000Total hardness (as CaCO) 500

3V( e~rsenate Method)ChlorideSultah plus chloride salinityNitrogen (as NO,)Hexa lent chroidiFluorideBoronpHTurbidityColor (p1atinumcoba1t scale)Floatable oil & greaseTotal oil and grease (including rats

and waxes , wet extraction use thud)Hydraaines

250500

50 0005lay100

5 0 5 to 1110020

None visible

25None

TABLE II

MA%IIi4UM ALLOWABLE CONTAMINATION

SURFACE DRAINAGE TO SIMI VALLEY AND PERCOLATIO N

Total dissolved solidsChlorideSulfateBoronNitrogen (as N03)FluorideHexavalent ChroeiumpHTurbidityTotal oil and grease

(including fats and waxes zitextraction method)

Floatable oil and greaseHydrasines

2000175500

None visibleNana

II0I muimiiimimmmiiummim iBNA02551465

HDMSE00638009

Tog Do H, Cravener , Jr, m D/0614 Page 11 4From s B0 L, Tuffly9 N. V o Sutton RM 1183

Subjects THE FLUORIDE WATER POLLUTION QUESTION 18 August 1965

APPENDI=

PROCEDURES FOR DECONTAMINATING WATER CONTAINING FLUORIDE ,

The fluoride content of water should be rednced ' at the test stand retaining

ponds because it is easier to precipitate the fluoride in concentrated fog

rather than after it has been diluted by passing to reclamation reservoirs .

Although the allowable fluoride concentration is limited to 1 .5 ppa for water

passing frcas he facility , it usually will not be necessary to reduce the

fluoride content to this limit at the test stand treating ponds, Current

practice is to reclaim or recirculate the water used for test stand use and

under such circumstances , substantial Quantities of fluoride in the water

should provide no deleterious effects , Tuning the heavy rain season, which

lasts about four writhe of a year, it will be necessary to pass some of the

water off property, It is desirable in this case to maintain the fluoride

content of the reclamation reservoirs to relatively low limits to minimise

the quantity of dilution water requiredo The addition of lime to the water

in sufficient concentration to completely saturate the water will usually

reduce the concentration of the fluoride to a range of 540 o The actual

concentration will depend on mangy factors including water temperature, degree

of mining , reaction time , and concentrations of otter dissolved salts, Low

temperatures and high concentrations of magnesium favor fluoride precipitation 0

moderate mixing will speed up the precipitation of fluoride by increasin g

the rate at which lime goes into solution while excessive agitation is

undesirable since it has a tendency to break up the (loos and leave finely

divided calcium fluoride in suspension .

The addition of lime to contaminated xater should be done with discretion

because from the viewpoint of test stand operation , excessive lime may be more

objectionable than fluorideo High concentration of line have a tendency to

form calcium carbonate precipitates Which contribute to the formation of

familiar "boil scale" in water pipes, The concentration of calcium in the

reclamation ponds mapr be

fn ~~ ~8d2t99 T'€ k er L98 c °k:a n

DI IBNA02551466

I IHDMSE00638010

To: D0 H Cravener9 Jr,D/064 Page 15

From: B L0 Tuffly, L. V, Sutton RM~1183

Sub .ect: The Fluoride Water Pollution Question 18 August 1965

retained to eafe operating limits by the addition of sodium carbonate, which

precipitates the calcium as calcium carbonate ; however, this represents added

expanse and increases the dissolved solid content of the water which is limited

to 1,000 ppm for water passing off property, Thus, lame should be added to the

water only when sufficient fluoride will be precipitated to justify its use d

The addition of magnesium sulphate to water after it has been treated with

lie will cause a further reduction in the fluoride concentration , The magnesium*

required for fluoride precipitation may be estimated from the following equation :

t F F <3 2tag 200 A ? _

'

Where Mg = quantity of magnesium required ppm

Fl - original fluoride concentration„ ppm

F2 = final concentration of fluoride, ppm

The use of magnesium sulphate should be limited to those cases where it is essential

to reduce the fluoride concentration to a range of 1~4 ppm, since it results in

added sulphate contamination ,

Because of the varying nature of the water and the degree of contamination that may

be tolerated, it is not practical to specify a water treatment procedure which should

be applicable for each case of water pollutiono A few general rules and decontamznat--,

ing procedures will be specified which in general, will be applicable for the

Research and Delta areas where fluorine is currently being used for test operations o

DECONTAMINATION PROCEDURES FOR TEST STAND TETAINING PONDS :

Determine the fluoride concentration of the water before taking any decontamination

steps 0

*W A= Handenbergh; Water Supply and Pu.rifzcaf on, 1952

II0I muimiiimimmmiium iBNA0255146]

I I IHDMSE00638011

r Too Do L Cravener, JrD/064 Page 16

From: Bo L0 Tuffly , N, Y, Sutton RM_-1183

Subje'°t: The Fluoride Water Pollution Question 18 August 195 5

2n If the totav fluoride content is equal to or less than 15 pp, no

decontamination steps are necessary, Allow the water to pass to the

reclamation pond

If the fluoride concentration exceeds 15 ppm, add lime (Ca(OH)2) to the

water in a quantity equivalent to the theoretical quantity required to

precipitate the fluoride, The required quantities are given in Figures 1

and 2

5

In addition to the lime required for precipitation, additional lime should

be present in the ?ond to ensure a saturated solution of lime in the water

and ensure a reass~nable rate of equilibrium attainment, The required quantity

will vary greatij with degree of agitation ; particle size of the lime, and

water temperatu.•ea As an initial treatment, it is suggested that abou t

30 pounds of L.mef1000 gals, of water be added to the pond in addition to

the theoretical quantity of lime required to precipitate the fluoride,

Moat of the unreacted lime will remain in the

bottom of the pond and will serve to saturate the water after subsequent tests

with fluorine With repetitive additions of lime for fluoride precipitation, the

the solid lime content of the pond may be sufficient, to precipitate the fluoride with

without further additions of lime., In this case, mixing of the lime and water as

speci!ied in step (4) may be sufficient, This condition may be anticipated by

1towiag the quantity of lime that has been previously added to the pond and the

quantity of fluoride precipitated

40 The water should be stirred or agitated sufficiently to cause a fairly uniform

su:pen.ion of solid lime in the water, The required mixing time will probably

be in. the range of l 53O minutes but will vary with lime concentration and

the efficiency of the mixing apparatus

TYr"s specification may be dowered if the fluorine usage rate is increased .,

II0I muimiiimnmumiiuunuBNA02551468

UHDMSE00638012

To. D, H. Cravener, Jr,, iU/064 Page l

From : B . L. Tuffly, N, V . -Sutton FX--1183

Subje t: The Fluoride Water Pollution Ruesticn 18 August 196 5

Take a sample of the Na ::er and analyze it for fluoride . If the fluoride

-cntent is eater than 12 %~pms continue stirring and alternately analyzing

w4til the fluoride content is no greater than 12 ppm ,

6 Add 2J lbs, of magnesium sulphate ( SO4;ifor each 1000 gal- of water in

the pord< Stir the water for an additional l3 minutes, This step should

reduce the, fluoride °.oncentration to a range of 2-4 ppm ,

A.1ow the waier to settle without agitation f~)r at least 2 hours „

8, glow the water to pass to the reclanaticn reservoir . The drain from the pond

scoui'i be aoove the '.evel of the lime-~:alcium fluoride slime which will collect

a th;, ;bottom of the goad ,

3 After extensive usage , the quantity of the lime-calcium fluoride mixture will

: ;come sufficient to seriously affect the capacity of the pond , When this

occurs, the pond should be dredged and the solid lime and calcium fluoride

ai.xtura hai.Ced to a dump,

*Phis step may be eliminated if the fluoride content in the reclamation

reservoir Is lass than 1,5 ppm o

AJ I/N, V. Sut :ron B, Tuff

Principal C,: :.er. iet =soup Scientist

Chemical 1,ralyc3.s Analytical Chemistry

e search P e sear-,h

Aoprnved oya

J. 3LvesmanChiChemistryResearch

BNA02551469I I

HDMSE00638013

AREA I Pollution Pond System I UZ-1000 gsl,4ot-,

11 ponds : 4,782,9000 gallons

Industrial Engineering can pump water

back from Perimeter Pond to R-1 o

O P E3.OPERT"Y ----------------

0r

Arrows indicatedownhill direction

S

To Atomics International

flueu`-~~A X

ABA II Pollution Pond System13 ponds: 8,215,200 gallons

/

OO gallons

q2F

r

OFFPROP) RTY

gallons

P .

I

a II Operat, Bidgs, CT

__ ._ .~

fTo Area 1 ,~.,

r_

k~-io alta-Bravo

Arrows indicatedownhill direction

.gaffs