Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Waste”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 235 records · Page 13
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

A Study on Establishment of Scenario Considering to Location and Treatment for Waste Tracking System

Radioactive waste of domestic generated KAERI, KHNP and KNFC etc. Agency of radioactive waste generation have each waste tracking system and waste streaming. We need to establish integrated waste classification for waste tracking and management efficiency. This study main point is the integration of radioactive waste classification and the cording of domestic generators, waste disposal site, etc. We also created a scenario through this coding. First, This study was able to identify the status of domestic radioactive Waste Tracking System. Second, through this study, WTS scenarios were prepared by analyzing each waste management agency and transportation report. If WTS scenario establish from integration of waste streaming, it will be possible tracking, back tracking and management of radioactive waste more efficiency. Third, This study coded all the sources of radioactive waste generators, acceptor agency, waste classification and treatment. Using this code, we tracking the scenario from generator to acceptor and display it as bar-code. Also, if we later convert this bar-code to a Qr-code, it thought that it will be easier tracking radioactive waste.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Transporting Non-Compliant TRU Wastes in the OPTIMUS{sup TM} Packages - 20493

The OPTIMUS{sup TM} product line of packages was developed with the purpose of providing a versatile and modular packaging option for shipping problematic wastes and fissile material contents. The product line includes a high-activity design in the OPTIMUS-H and a low activity design in the OPTIMUS-L. The two variants utilize a singular containment vessel design, that is enclosed in different protective components that offer different levels of shielding along with thermal and impact protection. The thick shielding provided by the OPTIMUS-H packaging allows for higher activity contents than the OPTIMUS-L to be transported. But the lightweight design of the OPTIMUS-L packaging allows for more packages to be transported in a single shipment. The containment vessel design shared between the two packages provides leak-tight containment of all radioactive contents along with the capabilities to easily leak test and the option to inert and backfill the contents, as necessary, prior to each shipment of the package. Together the OPTIMUS package designs offer significant flexibility and are capable of handling a wide variety of waste materials and other radioactive contents. One of the primary contents covered in the initial design effort for these packages is TRU waste contents beyond the standard waste materials that are compliant with the WIPP Waste Acceptance Criteria. More specifically, the initial content of interest is TRU Waste drums containing sealed containers with potentially flammable gases. While there are multiple other packaging options available for transporting standard WIPP compliant TRU wastes, the goal of the OPTIMUS packages is to offer a superior option for transporting both standard TRU wastes as well as the more problematic non-compliant wastes, among other contents. The non-compliant TRU waste contents explicitly included for the OPTIMUS packages are standard aerosol cans and DOT 3E lecture bottles. However, the methods applied for the package containment can be easily adjusted to cover other sealed container types with potentially flammable gases. The primary challenges with including these items are both the obvious issue of potential for flammable gases (e.g. aerosol propellants) in the package, but also the uncertainty in the exact state of the contents. Because these desired contents are waste materials, the characterization of the materials present in the waste may include some uncertainties. For example, though it may be known that there are one or more aerosol cans in a TRU waste drum, it may not be known if this can is full, spent, or anywhere in between. Also there may be equal uncertainty in the contents of the aerosol can, specifically in the potentially flammable propellant remaining in the can. To include these types of non-compliant items as acceptable contents for the package, the methods utilized in the safety analyses of the OPTIMUS packages must consider all of the uncertainties in the characterization of the waste. The methods utilized cover a range of concerns with transporting contents of this nature including pressure buildup, gas generation, and gaseous combustion for demonstrating the containment of the package. The ability to transport these problematic contents in the OPTIMUS packages gives TRU waste generating sites the option to relocate these drums to an offsite location where the non-compliant items can be properly managed through removal or destruction. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Los Alamos National Laboratory Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Community Relations Plan

The requirements of the Hazardous Waste Facility Permit are fulfilled through execution of LANL's fourth strategic goal: “Enabling mission delivery through next-generation facility, infrastructure, and operational excellence.” With input from our stakeholders, we will continue to fulfill those requirements and to improve our waste operations. In 2015, the Laboratory purpose statement focused waste management efforts by directing delivery of mission success through operational effectiveness and scientific excellence. This Plan advances that purpose through community involvement. In the process of achieving our national security mission, Los Alamos National Laboratory generates some hazardous and mixed waste. Hazardous waste is solid waste that is dangerous or potentially harmful to human health or the environment. Hazardous wastes can be liquids, solids, gases, or sludges. They can be discarded as commercial products, such as cleaning fluids or pesticides, or as the byproducts of operations. Specific substances are listed in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 261: 40 CFR Part 261. Hazardous waste management activities are regulated by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency and the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) pursuant to New Mexico Hazardous Waste Act (HWA; Chapter 74, Article 4 NMSA 1978) and regulations under the Act. In 1989, NMED issued the Hazardous Waste Facility Permit (EPA ID Number NM0890010515-1) that established standards for the Laboratory to manage, store, and treat hazardous wastes on-site and to undertake the closure, post closure care, and cleanup as necessary, of permitted waste management units. On November 30, 2010, NMED renewed the Hazardous Waste Facility Permit (the Permit). In June 2020 the Permittees submitted a permit renewal application to the NMED for their review and approval. The Hazardous Waste Facility Permit Community Relations Plan (CRP) describes the scope of public involvement in the activities of the Permit. The CRP is specifically designed to facilitate the community outreach, engagement, and relations activities concerning the Laboratory’s Hazardous Waste Facility Permit and coordinates with but does not include public involvement for other Laboratory programs, initiatives, or environmental activities.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

GeoMelt{sup R} In-Container Vitrification (ICV){sup TM} for Fukushima Daiichi Water Treatment Secondary Wastes - 20212

The Japanese government is supporting development work implemented jointly by Veolia subsidiaries Kurion Japan, K.K., Veolia Nuclear Solutions (VNS), Inc., and Veolia Nuclear Solutions Federal Services, LLC for treating radioactive waste generated from Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station (NPS) water treatment using the GeoMelt{sup TM} In-Container Vitrification (ICV){sup TM} technology. The initial work consisted of glass formulation and engineering-scale testing which was completed in 2018, in the frame of an IRID (International Research Institute for Nuclear Decommissioning) program as part of a project subsidized by Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI). The Fukushima Daiichi NPS Mid- and Long-Term Road-map requires investigation of methods to stabilize solid wastes (and to immobilize radioisotopes in the wastes) generated as a result of emergency response and decommissioning activities. Cooling water treatment has resulted in a significant amount of solid and slurry secondary wastes (mostly adsorbents and ion-exchange materials) which will require processing at some point. GeoMelt{sup R} ICV{sup TM} is a joule-heated melter technology which uses a refractory-lined single-use container combining the melter and disposal container. There is no pouring required nor concerns with refractory corrosion which allows the process to accommodate a wide range of waste chemistries and high waste loadings. The testing described here consisted of three engineering-scale melts, each processing between 212 kg and 240 kg of waste simulants, glass formers, and non-radioactive cesium (Cs) and strontium (Sr) tracers. Continuous isokinetic stack sampling of off-gas emissions was performed for each test in order to calculate Cs and Sr retention in the glass wasteform. Single-pass retention of Cs in the final glass wasteform ranged from 91.46 to 99.30%, and single-pass retention of Sr ranged from 99.76 to 100%. Planned particulate recycle will increase these retention levels. Melt 1 processed a mixture of KUR-EH (a zeolite-based ion-exchange material), simulated Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS) Carbonate and Iron Slurries, and glass additives. Melt 2 processed a mixture of KUR-EH, KUR-TSG (a titanate-based adsorbent), and glass additives. Melt 3 processed a mixture of KUR-EH, simulated barium sulfate/iron ferrocyanide sludge (AREVA sludge), and glass additives. Waste loadings for these melts ranged from 70 weight percent (wt%) to 82 wt%. Vitrification produces a waste form much denser than the stored water treatment secondary waste wastes, resulting in significant volume reduction. Volume reductions for the three tests ranged from 74 to 79 vol%. Vitrification produces a chemically durable wasteform. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) tested three glass samples from each engineering-scale melt) by the Materials Characterization Center 1 (MCC-1) test, an international standard leach test of the chemical durability of nuclear waste glasses. PNNL also obtained one U.S. reference glass (EA Glass) and two Japan reference glasses P0798) and tested these under the same MCC-1 conditions (90 deg. C, 10 m-1, DIW, and 7, 14, 28-day) as the GeoMelt{sup R} ICV{sup TM} glasses. The GeoMelt{sup R} ICV{sup TM} glasses exhibited lower total normalized releases and 14- to 28-day normalized release rates than the three reference glasses. These results suggest that the GeoMelt{sup R} ICV{sup TM} glasses have durabilities on par with high-level waste glasses under standard test conditions. Post-melt process sampling and analysis indicated no Cs migration into the melter refractory materials and very little deposition of Cs or Sr onto the melter hood or off-gas piping internals. The results of the testing indicated good Cs retention in the glass, high volume reduction and waste loadings, and excellent chemical durability. These factors are important to minimize treatment costs and to protect workers and the environment. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Managing Hanford's Direct Feed Low Activity Waste Program - 20002

The Office of River Protection (ORP) is responsible for the management and completion of the River Protection Project (RPP) mission, which comprises both the Hanford Site tank farms operations and the completion and operation of the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Project. The RPP mission is to safely retrieve, treat, and immobilize Hanford's high-level and low-activity tank waste and close the tank farms to protect the Columbia River. The Direct-Feed Low-Activity Waste (DFLAW) Program is a major subset of the overall RPP mission, providing disposition of low-activity waste. The scope is to retrieve, treat, and immobilize the low-activity waste at the Low-Activity Waste Facility. DFLAW will begin operations no later than December 2023. The DFLAW Program overarches a suite of individual projects, activities, and infrastructure upgrades. The major projects and activities include multiple contractors under both ORP and the Richland Operations Office, underscoring the need for effective integration, coordination, and collaboration. The objectives of the DFLAW Program leadership team are to: - Effectively coordinate and integrate the projects that comprise the DFLAW Program - Manage the interfaces between the projects so that the integrated DFLAW Program is completed successfully - Ensure the DFLAW portfolio of projects operate as required without gaps or conflicts at the interfaces. DOE is accomplishing these objectives through a newly established leadership model that integrates the DOE and contractor work streams and promotes a teamwork model to enable collaborative success. Long considered one of the most formidable cleanup challenges at Hanford, the Department of Energy and its contractors are on the verge of achieving a cleanup commitment that has been decades in the making. DOE is preparing to vitrify (turn to glass) Hanford's chemical and radioactive tank waste using the DFLAW process. The Modified Consent Decree milestone for completing hot commissioning of the Hanford Site's Low- Activity Waste Facility is Dec. 31, 2023. While this milestone may seem distant under normal project management circumstances, it is a relatively short period of time for the operational and cultural transformation necessary to successfully begin treating tank waste at Hanford. Direct feed means separating the waste at a tank farm to remove the more radioactive portion (i.e., solids and cesium) so that the resulting low-activity (less radioactive) waste can be fed directly to the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant's Low-Activity Waste Facility. Starting DFLAW will require a singular, intensive leadership focus, along with a sustained, collective commitment to excellence and teamwork by the Department and its contractors. Major upgrades to Hanford's infrastructure will occur prior to startup. Supporting DFLAW operations requires significant integration between the DFLAW facilities - the Waste Treatment Plant, Hanford's tank farms, effluent treatment facilities, disposal facilities - and between all of the site contractors to achieve success. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Removal of High Specific Activity Fission Products from Uranyl Sulfate Waste Solutions

The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) is currently providing support to SHINE Medical Technologies (SHINE) which plans to deploy a low energy, accelerator-based neutron source to fission low enriched U in a uranyl sulfate target solution for 99 Mo production. The 99 Mo is initially separated from the fission products and target solution by an extraction column. Subsequent washing of the column will generate waste solutions containing residual U and fission product activity. A small number of high specific activity fission products (e.g., 90 Sr, 137 Cs, and 144 Ce) in these streams will likely control the classification of the low level waste (LLW). If a sufficient amount of the high specific activity isotopes are separated from the SHINE waste streams and concentrated into a waste form, it would be possible to treat a majority of the wash solutions from the column operations as a lower class of LLW (Class A versus Class B or C or Class B versus Class C). The high specific activity fission product elements could then be dispositioned as a much smaller volume of waste rather than requiring the disposal of the entire waste stream at the higher waste classification. The Savannah River Site (SRS) has experience with using monosodium titanate (MST) and crystalline silicotitanate (CST) to remove Cs and Sr from high salt content waste solutions generated during the reprocessing of nuclear fuels and targets. Both of these materials have worked very well for their intended purposes at the SRS where the fission product elements are removed from highly alkaline waste. On the other hand, SHINE waste streams from the extraction column contain H 2 SO 4 which makes the solution acidic. Additionally, the SRS waste streams do not contain other fission product elements such as transition metals or lanthanides because they precipitate upon neutralization of the SRS waste and are not present in the supernate which is dispositioned as LLW following treatment. As such, there are inherent differences between SHINE and SRS waste treatment strategies. Savannah River National Laboratory was tasked with performing scoping studies to see if MST and CST would remove Sr, Cs, and Ce from an acidic mixed metal simulant solution. Batch contact experiments were performed using MST and two CST type materials. The MST material is a 15 wt % powder in 0.15 M NaOH slurry. The MST showed low adsorption for elements of interest from acidic solution. Furthermore, the powder size makes MST non-ideal for column operations. A CST IE-911 ion exchange material had high Cs adsorption, moderate Sr, and marginal Ce adsorption. Based on adsorption of all species, the ion exchange capacity was found to be 0.032 meq/mL. A bench-top column experiment to measure elemental breakthrough curves was performed using CST IE-911 where chromatographic separations of the mixed simulant were expected to occur. While most elements behaved as expected, the lanthanide series, containing Ce, broke though the column earlier than expected. The second CST material, CST R9120, displayed high adsorption for all elements in the acidic mixed simulant solutions in a batch contact study, and had a calculated loading capacity of 0.091 meq/mL. Future studies to develop a waste treatment flowsheet should focus on CST R9120 to treat SHINE waste solutions.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
NASA NTRS1971

Detection of Pollution Caused by Solid Wastes

To develop a means of detecting pollution, it s necessary to know something about the source and nature of the pollution. The type of pollution rising from solid wastes differs considerably from hat from liquid wastes or that from gaseous wastes ni its effect on the immediate environment. It may be "defined" by a series of negatives. When solid wastes are discarded on land, the resulting pollution is not land pollution in the sense of air and water pollution. For one thing, the solid wastes do not become a "part" of the land in that the wastes are neither intimately mixed nor homogenized into the land as are liquid and gaseous wastes into their respective media. The waste particles retain not only their chemical identity but also their visible (i.e., physical) characteristics. When buried, for example, the soil is under, above, and around the solids, because the wastes are there as discrete units. Secondly, solid wastes neither diffuse nor are they carried from the place at which they were deposited. In other words they remain stationary, providing of course the disposal site is land and not moving water. In a given area, solid wastes be not distributed uniformly over that area. Even the solid wastes falling into the specification of letter meets these specifications. In contrast liquid and gaseous wastes become intimately mixed, homogenized, and even dissolved in their media. Because solid wastes remain stationary, pollution constituted by their presence is highly localized and heavily concentrated, even to the extent that the pollution could be termed "micro" when compared to the macro-pollution arising from liquid and gasequs wastes.

Golueke, Clarence G.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Issues that Drive Waste Management Technology Development for Space Missions

Waste management technologies for space life support systems are currently at low development levels. Manual compaction of waste in plastic bags and overboard disposal to earth return vehicles are the primary current waste management methods. Particularly on future missions, continuance of current waste management methods would tend to expose the crew to waste hazards, forfeit recoverable resources such as water, consume valuable crew time, contaminate planetary surfaces, and risk return to Earth of extraterrestrial life. Improvement of waste management capabilities is needed for adequate management of wastes. Improvements include recovery of water and other resources, conversion of waste to states harmless to humans, long-term containment of wastes, and disposal of waste. Current NASA requirements documents on waste management are generally not highly detailed. More detailed requirements are needed to guide the development of waste management technologies that will adequately manage waste. In addition to satisfying requirements, waste management technologies must also recover resources. Recovery of resources such as water and habitat volume can reduce mission cost. This paper explores the drivers for waste management technology development including requirements and resource recovery.

Fisher, John W.↗
DOE OSTI2020

Advanced Retrieval and Disposition Techniques for Remote Handled Mixed Low-Level Waste - 20319

Legacy waste generated by the sodium-cooled fast reactor, EBR-II, program at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) (owned by the U.S. Department of Energy and managed and operated by Battelle Energy Alliance, LLC) is challenging to treat and disposition using conventional methods. As a result, Veolia Nuclear Solutions is under contract with the Idaho National Laboratory to demonstrate an integrated retrieval and disposition solution for Remote-Handled Mixed Low-Level Waste currently stored in underground liners at INL. Delivery of the integrated solution builds on the expertise and successes of Veolia Nuclear Solutions under its Problematic Waste Treatment Initiative with INL. This initiative focuses solely on the treatment of problematic (reactive metal containing) waste streams using the Veolia Nuclear Solutions GeoMelt{sup R} In-Container Vitrification (ICV{sup TM}) technology. Under the contract, Veolia Nuclear Solutions will provide a fully commissioned prototype remote retrieval system to semi-remotely retrieve and size-reduce problematic waste liners into a safe and consolidated package for transport. The consolidated package will be shipped to Richland, Washington for demonstration treatment using the robust GeoMelt Richland system at Perma-Fix Northwest. The treated waste will ultimately be disposed of as a vitrified Low-Level Waste glass monolith. Veolia Nuclear Solutions has delivered countless remotely operated systems globally to solve some of the industry's most challenging problems. To ensure risk is mitigated in the best possible manner, a methodical phased approach is being utilized to validate the integrated solution. This contract focuses on the delivery and deployment of the prototype retrieval system onsite and the treatment of a single liner. Following successful demonstration treatment using GeoMelt ICV, the project is planning to make prototype enhancements before retrieving and treating another liner. Establishing a new integrated approach for retrieval and disposition of waste offers many benefits to INL and the U.S. Department of Energy. It is anticipated that the integrated solution will provide significant cost and schedule savings by increasing the number of liners dispositioned per year. In addition, the complexity of the overall waste disposition process will be reduced. Remotely retrieving and size-reducing waste in the field will provide additional safety to operational personnel and allow critical resources, such as hot cells, to focus on the primary missions at hand. Vitrification (using the GeoMelt ICV technology) allows for the direct processing of metal clad waste thereby significantly reducing pretreatment steps while providing a robust waste form for long-term disposal. The results from this ongoing contract are presented in this paper. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2026

Knowledge-Based Hazardous Waste Determinations for Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Modules: A Foundational Study

This report explores using "generator knowledge" to determine whether a solar photovoltaic (PV) module must be managed as hazardous waste prior to recycling or landfilling. Generator knowledge is a legal term and existing regulatory pathway for making a hazardous waste determination that has been used by other industries but is a relatively unknown option to the PV industry. In the United States, a hazardous waste determination often acts as a pre-requisite to recycle or landfill a PV module. The results of the hazardous waste determination dictate whether the PV module must be managed as hazardous waste or nonhazardous solid waste. Managing a PV module as hazardous waste requires compliance with stringent U.S. federal and state hazardous waste law. In addition to increased management costs, which can be ten times higher, legal liability for PV modules regulated as hazardous waste is also heightened with both civil and criminal penalties for noncompliance which includes making an inaccurate or faulty hazardous waste determination. The most common reason a PV module would be regulated as hazardous is if it contains a regulated metal in an amount that equals or exceeds the toxicity characteristic limits. To determine whether a PV module exhibits a hazardous characteristic, the regulated person/entity must "apply knowledge...in light of the materials and processes used." In the absence of adequate knowledge to determine whether the PV module is hazardous, it must be tested using Test Method 1311 Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) or an equivalent EPA-approved method. Although TCLP is the predominant method used to today to make a hazardous waste determination for PV modules, evidence from this study concludes it is not practical to TCLP test every PV module even in a single utility-scale installation, and a scalable solution is needed. This study finds that knowledge-based hazardous waste determinations may allow a regulated person/entity to make a hazardous waste determination for more than one PV module at one time - making this regulatory pathway a potential scalable solution. Through legal analysis and interviews with 44 experts, the authors explore what it means to make an accurate knowledge-based hazardous determination for PV modules considering sources and forms of information as well as potential limitations. The work aims to provide a foundation for building consensus on whether knowledge-based hazardous determinations are a viable, scalable industry approach for solar.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2020

A Preliminary Radiological Risk Assessment Model for Disposition of Remote-Handled Transuranic Wastes at Los Alamos National Laboratory Area G - 20116

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) operates a low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal site at Material Disposal Area G, in Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA. Area G has been the primary LLW disposal site for Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) since the 1960's. In addition to LLW, Area G is host to a variety of other wastes, the disposition of which must be determined before closure of the site. A probabilistic Radiological Risk Assessment (RRA) for Area G is used in order to support decision making regarding some wastes that are not addressed in the extant Area G Performance Assessment (PA) and Composite Analysis (CA). Between 1979 and 1987, 33 special shafts were augered into the Bandelier Tuff at Area G. This volcanic tuff is present across Pajarito Plateau on the eastern slopes of the Jemez Mountains, and varies widely in its consistency, from weakly indurated non-welded layers to welded layers that uphold the mesa cliffs of the Plateau. These mesas are home to LANL, Area G, and the townsites of Los Alamos and White Rock, with residences about 1400 m from Area G. The 33 Shafts were lined with steel casing, and contain remote-handled (RH) transuranic wastes (TRU) resulting from experiments and analysis performed in special glove boxes at the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research (CMR) facility at LANL. Some of these wastes originated as used nuclear fuel. The purpose of the Area G RRA is to evaluate the potential future risk to humans and the environment from the RH TRU in the 33 Shafts in the context of the risk associated with the surrounding wastes at Area G. The analysis is responsive to expectations outlined in DOE Order 458.1, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment, and is informed by the Manual and Guidance accompanying DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management. Because the waste meets the definition of TRU, the regulatory context necessarily takes into consideration the regulation governing the disposal of TRU from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): 40 CFR 191, Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes. Given the broader regulatory context for the RRA, the analysis is subject to different assumptions from those made in the existing DOE O 435.1 PA and CA, such as allowing for future occupation of the site. The analysis begins with a comprehensive evaluation of features, events, processes, and exposure scenarios (FEPS) for Area G and the wastes it contains. These FEPSs are screened to eliminate from further consideration those of extremely low probability and/or consequence, and a conceptual site model (CSM) is subsequently developed. The scope and structure of the Area G RRA Model is informed by this CSM, and the Area G RRA Model is developed using the GoldSim systems analysis modeling platform. This paper presents the initial version of a defensible, transparent, and reasonably realistic model, which is based on the state of knowledge of the wastes, the site, and the FEPSs that govern contaminant transport from wastes into the environment and subsequent exposures to humans and other biota. Probabilistic model input distributions represent uncertainties inherent in the real and modeled systems. The results of the Area G RRA Model inform decisions regarding the disposition of the RH TRU in the 33 Shafts. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Co-Disposal Waste Package Loading Options for DOE SNF and HLW - 20331

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is responsible for managing spent nuclear fuel (SNF) that is currently in, or will in the future come into, its possession. DOE must continue to safely store that SNF, transport it to an interim storage site or a repository, and dispose of it. These fuels come from a wide range of reactor types with various cladding materials and enrichments. Many of these reactors, now decommissioned, had unique design features, such as core configuration, fuel element and assembly geometry, moderator and coolant materials, operational characteristics, and neutron spatial and spectral properties, resulting in a large diversity of reactor and fuel designs. Because of the wide variety and conditions of SNF, a robust DOE Standard Canister was proposed that would confine radionuclides and preclude moderator. The DOE Standard Canister had four variations: 3.05-meter (10-foot) or 4.57-meter (15-foot) length, and 45.7-cm (18-inch) or 61.0-cm (24-inch) diameter. For ultimate disposal in the Yucca Mountain Repository, these canisters were to be grouped with 61.0-cm (24-inch) diameter high level waste (HLW) canisters in a 2.13-meter (84-inch) diameter co-disposal waste package. The smaller 45.7-cm (18-inch) diameter DOE Standard Canister could be placed in the middle of five HLW canisters. The larger 61.0-cm (24-inch) diameter DOE Standard Canister would take the place of one of the five HLW canisters on the outer ring in the co-disposal waste package. No DOE Standard Canisters have been loaded. A preliminary evaluation has estimated the number of elements of a fuel type that can fit into the different sizes of the DOE Standard Canister, but no definitive loading configuration has been selected. Changing the loading configuration could impact the number of loadable DOE Standard Canisters and the number of co-disposal waste packages needed for eventual disposition. This paper conveys the ranges of DOE Standard Canisters and HLW canisters that may be produced under certain conditions. It also examines the differences in the estimated number of co-disposal waste packages produced for eventual disposal when using different loading strategies in the DOE Standard Canister for Advanced Test Reactor (ATR), Peach Bottom, and High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) SNF. Changing the loading configurations of ATR, Peach Bottom, and HFIR SNF slightly impacted the number of co-disposal waste packages that may be needed for ultimate disposal. The change in loading configuration was more impactful when a different canister was used, as opposed to varying the number of elements that could fit inside the same size canister. In one case, a reduction of co-disposal waste packages could be achieved by allowing mixing of short HLW canisters with long DOE Standard Canisters. The main conclusion from this analysis is that the ratio between HLW canisters and DOE Standard Canisters will drive the total number of co-disposal waste packages. If too many HLW canisters (i.e., more than five times the number of 18-inch DOE standard canisters) or DOE Standard Canisters are produced, some co-disposal waste packages may not have all positions filled. A co-disposal waste package may be filled with all HLW with no DOE Standard Canister, or a co-disposal waste package could be filled with a single DOE Standard Canister. A ratio that does not closely align to optimum could allow for the design of waste packages that hold just HLW canisters or just DOE SNF canisters. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

Life Cycle Analysis of Renewable Natural Gas and Lactic Acid Production from Waste Feedstocks

Producing fuels and chemicals from waste is considered economically favorable, due to low feedstock cost, and environmentally favorable, due to avoided emissions from conventional waste management practices. In this study, we evaluate the life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction benefits of renewable natural gas (RNG) and lactic acid (LA) production from four types of wet waste feedstocks (wastewater sludge, food waste, swine manure, and fats, oil, and grease [FOG]) via anaerobic digestion (AD) and LA fermentation, respectively. RNG can be used as an alternative to fossil natural gas, while LA from waste feedstocks can displace conventional LA production pathways (mainly from corn via fermentation). Providing comprehensive life cycle GHG emissions of the combinations of waste feedstocks and products through different routes helps identify the GHG hotspots and show where emissions savings come from. The results show that the carbon intensities (CIs) of waste-derived RNG and LA are much lower than those of their counterparts. We estimated the life cycle GHG emissions for RNG to be between -146 and 27 g carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e)/MJ, much lower than the CI of fossil fuels. Waste-derived LA pathways also show substantially lower CIs, ranging from -4.2 to -1.4 kgCO2e/kg LA, compared to the CIs of LA from corn and corn stover (1.2 and 0.3 kgCO2e/kg LA, respectively). We will also discuss that the low CIs of waste-derived products can come from low yields leading to high emission credits. Thus, life cycle analysis results presented per weight of treated waste can be used to support decisions about which waste feedstocks and products are to be used for sustainable waste valorization. In addition, we found that monetary emission reduction credits can play an important role in driving waste valorization.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2021

FY2020 performance assessment annual review for the E-area low-level waste facility

The Savannah River Site (SRS) E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility (ELLWF) consists of six types of disposal units described in the Performance Assessment (PA) (WSRC, 2008): Low Activity Waste Vault (LAWV), Intermediate Level Vault (ILV), Trenches [Slit Trenches (STs), Engineered Trenches (ETs), and Component-in-Grout (CIG) Trenches], and Naval Reactor Component Disposal Areas (NRCDAs). The ELLWF is a part of the Solid Waste Management Facility (SWMF). SWMF is managed and operated by the SRS Management and Operations prime contractor, Savannah River Nuclear Solutions (SRNS). Within SRNS, the Solid Waste Management (SWM) organization is responsible for operating the SWMF, and the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) is the technical agency responsible for preparing and maintaining the PA. SWMF operations have been performed at SRS since 1952. The mission of the SWMF is to provide storage, processing, disposal, and shipment of radioactive, hazardous, and mixed waste. The SWMF is committed to treat, store, and dispose of these waste products in a manner that protects the environment and the health and safety of the facility worker, the co-located worker, and the offsite general public. Wastes handled in the SWMF include low level waste, transuranic waste, hazardous waste, Toxic Substances Control Act waste, and mixed waste (containing both hazardous and radioactive constituents). The FY2020 PA Annual Review for the ELLWF affirms that the disposal facility continued to operate within the bounds of the current PA and Composite Analysis (CA) baseline and the subsequent SA’s and satisfied all the requirements, conditions, and limitations identified in the 2008 DAS (DOE 2008a), RWMB SRNL_STI-2020-00588 Revision 0 vi (McGill, 2020), and ELLWF Low-Level Waste Acceptance Criteria (SRS-1S, 2014). This annual review affirms that the supporting studies performed in FY2020 do not alter the conclusions of the ELLWF PA (WSRC, 2008) and that there is a reasonable expectation that the ELLWF will meet the performance objectives delineated in DOE Manual 435.1-1 (DOE 2011)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

Waste Compliance and Tracking System (WCATS) Version 3 Requirements Document

This document describes the end-user requirements for the Waste Compliance and Tracking System (WCATS) project in accordance with the WCATS Software Quality Management Plan, EPC-WMP-WCATSPLAN-001. The WCATS application shall support the generation, characterization, processing, and shipment of LANL radioactive, hazardous, and industrial waste. Regulatory drivers include RCRA hazardous waste, DOT shipping, NNSA nuclear material control and accountability, DOE nuclear safety, TSDF permit, and transuranic waste certification requirements. The system will utilize a task-based architecture that supports the spectrum of treatment, storage, disposal, administrative, and characterization based unit operations necessary to manage waste from cradle to grave. The application design shall readily accommodate new facilities, processes, workflow, signature requirements, and so forth, via end-user established metadata. WCATS will provide support for representing waste storage and disposal facilities, buildings, rooms, and grid layouts (x, y, z) to support waste and radioactive material inventory management. Nuclear material at risk (MAR), DOE hazard rating (e.g., Category II facility) compliance per DOE-STD-1027, and permit inventory requirements will be configurable for any storage or disposal facility, or waste operation, and the system will automatically evaluate and enforce those requirements. In addition, the application will support the characterization and management of the entire range of hazardous and radioactive wastes (TRU, MTRU, LLW, MLLW, hazardous waste, etc.) that might be colocated or processed at a permitted facility. Some capabilities not found in traditional systems include user-defined tank systems for liquid waste, user-defined work paths (i.e., sequence of operations), and an equipment subsystem for tracking the calibration, maintenance, and inspection of tools used to process waste, such as torque wrenches, scales, pH probes, etc. The application incorporates a desktop and mobile user interface as shown in Figure 1. The mobile interface supports field operations, such as waste item characterization, intra-facility transfers, internal and external audits, and shipment preparation and receipt.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2025

Coal-Waste-Enhanced Filaments for Additive Manufacturing of High-Temperature Plastics and Ceramic Composites

In the United States, coal waste from over a century of mining and burning coal for heat and electricity has accumulated as mountains of coal fly ash and bottom ash and acre-size ponds, coal fines and gob. These materials can be a problem for local communities and water systems. A cost-effective process to utilize high volumes of these coal wastes in a high-value product would be beneficial to those communities by reducing the amount of waste and providing jobs, manufacturing components, and materials from the waste. Many coal-to-products technologies (e.g., carbon fibers, graphene, carbon foam) rely on carefully choosing the starting material and then altering it chemically or thermally to make the products work. Due to the wide variability of composition and coal content in typical coal waste streams, many high-volume coal waste streams are likely to be unsuitable for use in those technologies. Semplastics’ technology has been shown to utilize most types of coal waste successfully without any pre-selection or pre-processing requirements other than a nominal particle-size reduction for wastes like bottom ash. This characteristic of Semplastics’ solution may enable the use of much larger volumes of a wider range of coal wastes than other coal-to-products technologies. In this project, Semplastics leveraged its unique experience with both coal waste (fly ash or coal combustion residuals), resin materials, and 3D printing to develop 3D printer filaments using common coal wastes – bituminous coal fines and fly ash – and researched the feasibility of using other forms of coal waste as fillers. Simple 3D-printed parts were successfully produced from the coal waste enhanced filaments, which were found to have improved strength and stiffness.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2020

The HRA/Solarium Project: Feedback Based on 20 Years of Experience in Treatment of Medium Level Waste - 20185

Since the 1980's the management of the historical site of Mol has been transferred to the National Agency for Radioactive Waste and Enriched Fissile Materials (ONDRAF/NIRAS). Belgoprocess is entrusted by ONDRAF/NIRAS with the operational waste management and site remediation. One of the major challenges has been the characterization, treatment and conditioning of approximately 200 m{sup 3} of medium level waste. These waste packages were stored in poor conditions in storage vaults ('HRA') or concrete containers ('Solarium'). They have been produced in various research programs and reactor operations at the Belgian nuclear energy research centre SCK.CEN, isotope production, decontamination and dismantling operations from the 1960's up to the 1980's. Despite the limited volume, this historical waste consists of a great variation of waste characteristics and waste configurations. To tackle these liabilities, a new processing facility was built in the 1990's to allow safe transfers, handling, characterization and treatment of these packages. Also some auxiliary facilities have been built to deal with the by-products, like emptied concrete containers. The engineering of the installation, safety procedures and (characterization) methodology that has been developed generically have been proved to be successful. Nevertheless, the specific nature of some items made it necessary to organize a step-by-step treatment in distinct campaigns in which some relevant extra (safety) measures had to be taken into account. This dynamic approach made it possible to process a great variety of waste types in order to to ensure that this legacy is no longer left for subsequent generations. After about 20 years of operations, there has been a great build-up of experience and feed-back concerning the waste management of these specific waste streams. Some cases will be highlighted to specify the approach followed for treatment of e.g.: - Na/NaK containing equipment; - spent radioactive sources; - fuel element residues; - medium level waste originating from activation experiments; - radium bearing medium level waste originating from Ac-227 production research. (authors)

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Tool for Developing Integrated Strategies for Decontamination and Waste Management - 20291

Management of waste from chemical, biological, and radiological incidents is complicated by the fact that decontamination decisions have a profound impact on the characteristics of resulting waste streams. Wide-area biological and radiological incidents could produce massive quantities of waste that may need to be treated on-site and sent for subsequent disposal as non-contaminated materials, or else be directly disposed of as contaminated materials. The EPA has developed the Waste Estimation Support Tool (WEST) for characterizing and quantifying biological and radiological waste that may be generated from decontamination efforts. This paper focuses on the WEST's uses for radiological incidents. WEST combines Geographic Information System (GIS)-based analysis of externally-supplied plume data, infrastructure databases derived from the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA's) Hazus tool [1], and satellite imagery surface recognition algorithms to combine the composition and square footage of the buildings in the plume with estimates of the materials between the buildings in the plume. The resulting GIS data files are then imported into a Microsoft Access database application, where they are combined with information about the nature and concentration of contaminants, and then subjected to decontamination strategies for different contaminated surfaces. The tool provides estimates of the type and quantities of potential wastes resulting from simulated decontamination and/or demolition activities and includes estimates of the remaining contamination levels including residual contamination contained within each waste stream. Estimates are presented at several levels of detail, allowing users to obtain needed data at the desired resolution. These include estimates for the total affected area, estimates by contamination zone, estimates by decontamination method(s), and estimates by building type (occupancy classification). EPA is currently developing the next version of WEST which will include several substantial enhancements. The most significant improvement for the next version of WEST will include the ability for users to develop contamination scenarios and waste estimates based on previously developed, readily available, and geographically specific infrastructure data. Instead of using WEST's default infrastructure data based on FEMA's Hazus tool, users will be able to import their own building data specific to the geographically affected area. This capability may substantially decrease uncertainties in the resulting waste estimates because the results will be based on actual building data (numbers of each type, square footage, building height, etc.). Two other significant enhancements will be the ability to generate waste estimates for vehicles and biomass. In addition to building debris and building decontamination waste, vehicles and biomass will likely constitute a significant percentage of the total waste which may result from wide area contamination events. This presentation will present the most recent version of WEST, which includes such considerations as affected biomass (e.g., trees), vehicles, and the ability to replace the default Hazus infrastructure databases with custom infrastructure databases. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗