Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Waste Disposal”

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 577 records · Page 32

PFAS Waste Management for Industrial, Water, and Wastewater Treatment Facilities

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), including perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), are widely used in industrial and consumer products due to their unique water and oil repelling properties. These slow-degrading and bio-accumulating compounds, often called "forever chemicals," are not typically removed by conventional industrial and municipal water/wastewater (W/WW) treatment. This tip of the month provides comprehensive strategies for managing PFAS-contaminated waste streams. Understanding the various types of PFAS waste streams is the first step in managing them. Primary PFAS waste includes contaminated process W/WW and solid materials directly from the production and processing of PFAS-containing materials. These might come from manufacturing facilities, firefighting training areas, or other industrial operations where PFAS compounds are used or were historically present. Secondary PFAS waste results from treatment and disposal mechanisms of primary PFAS waste streams, including spent activated carbon, used ion exchange resins, membrane reject streams, PFAS-laden backwash water, landfill leachate, incineration residuals, etc. TABLE 1 lists examples of the most common PFAS waste streams in different industrial facilities.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

MH-1A Sturgis Decommissioning and Dismantlement - 20281

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) with its prime contractor, Aptim Federal Services, LLC (APTIM), recycled 5,260 metric tons (11.6 million pounds) of material from Sturgis Barge (Sturgis) during the Decommissioning and Dismantlement of the MH-1A nuclear power reactor. The overall objective of the project was to reduce residual radioactivity associated with MH-1A to levels that permitted release of Sturgis for dismantlement and termination of the Army Reactor Office permit. By effectively applying waste hierarchy's three Rs - reduce, reuse and recycle - the Sturgis project not only minimized the amount of waste that required disposal at landfills, but also reduced the potential for long-term environmental liability emanating from these landfills. The project team completed the physical decommissioning efforts in June 2018 in Galveston, TX. In September 2018, radiological surveys were completed to demonstrate the vessel could be released for shipbreaking. Sturgis was towed from Galveston, TX to Brownsville, TX in late September 2018. Shipbreaking, dismantlement and recycling efforts began in early October 2018 and were completed on 15 March 2019. As part of the decommissioning effort in Galveston, the team shipped 69 shipments (860 metric tons) of low-level radioactive waste and radioactive components to the Waste Control Specialist (WCS) facility in Andrews TX for disposal. Certain radioactive components had to be transferred to the Department of Energy prior to placing the materials into the Federal Waste Facility located within WCS. However, most of the radioactive waste was characterized, profiled, approved and managed under the WCS permitted radioactive waste exemption process authorized and implemented by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and the Radioactive Materials Division. This allows LLRW and LLMW to be shipped as regulated waste and then upon receipt at WCS through satisfying the relevant waste acceptance criteria the waste is exempted and placed into the WCS RCRA permitted cell. An additional 35 shipments (544 metric ton) of contaminated hazardous waste water were transported to U.S. Ecology in Robstown, TX for treatment/disposal. An additional 36 shipments (500 metric tons) of non-hazardous wastewater was sent to Republic Waste Services' facility in Fresno, TX. The disposal of these materials required close coordination with State of Texas regulators. During decommissioning, the project team recycled approximately 270 metric tons (600,000 pounds) of lead and steel. As part of the dismantlement in Brownsville, TX the team recycled approximately 5,000 metric tons (11 million pounds) of ferrous and non-ferrous material, limiting our disposal requirements to about 180 metric tons (400,000 pounds) of material (<4% from entire shipbreaking activity). Although the primary hazard being mitigated by this project was radiological, recycling was always a priority for the project. The team strived to achieve sustainability goals as we implemented this one of a kind project. Scrap metal recycling has a large positive impact on the environment and can also favorably impact project disposal costs. Steel is among the most recycled material in the world. Nearly 40% of the world's steel production is made from scrap. Recycling steel also requires 75% less energy than producing it from raw materials. By using recycled steel rather than virgin materials, 2.33 kg of carbon emissions are eliminated per kg of steel [1]. The project recycled more than 4,500 metric tons (10 million pounds) of steel, which eliminated about 10,400 metric tons (23 million pounds) of CO{sub 2}. By implementing a recycling initiative for the Sturgis project, the team was able to realize cost avoidance for disposal of scrap, cost savings from the metals recycled, plus the project provided benefits to the environment through our recycling efforts. Once the dismantlement was complete, the team prepared a detailed decommissioning closure report, which allowed for the termination of the Army Reactor Decommissioning Permit. While it not only reduced any potential long-term environmental liability, this project to decommission and dismantle a floating nuclear power plant is truly unprecedented - it is a prime example of the USACE mission which is: 'Engineering solutions for the Nation's toughest challenges'. This unique, one of a kind, historical power plant was never designed to be taken apart, and the available information about its construction was lacking in many details. The hazards that required mitigation dictated a painstaking and deliberate process in order to avoid any release to the environment and the community, and to protect the health and safety of the workers involved while keeping the waste hierarchy's three R's - reduce, reuse and recycle at the forefront. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

FIU Project 2: Environmental Remediation Science & Technology [Slides]

FIU’s research under this project involves conducting basic and applied science to fill knowledge gaps and validate potential remediation technologies for contaminated soil and groundwater and the assessment of the fate and transport of contaminants in the environment. The aim of FIU’s research is to reduce the potential for contaminant mobility or toxicity in the surface and subsurface through the development and application of state-of-the-art scientific and environmental remediation technologies at the Hanford Site, Savannah River Site (SRS), and the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), which is the Nation’s only mined geologic repository for permanent disposal of transuranic waste. FIU collaborates with scientists from Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL), Savannah River Ecology Laboratory (SREL), Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) and the DOE Carlsbad Field Office (CBFO) in order to plan and execute research that is synergistic with the work being conducted at the sites, and that supports the resolution of critical science and engineering needs which leads to a better understanding of the long-term behavior of subsurface contaminants. The knowledge gained through this research will be used to transform experimental and modeling innovations into practical applications deployed at the sites to support EM’s primary goal of expediting the closure of major contaminated soil and groundwater sites and waste units. Collaborative relationships between FIU and the national laboratories have provided large benefits over the years to FIU, the national laboratories, the DOE complex, and the DOE EM mission. By working closely with the national laboratories, FIU’s research is not only closely aligned with the cleanup mission priorities at the DOE sites, but complements and supports ongoing work at the national laboratories for screening of new remedial technologies. This coordination and leveraging of research efforts results in time- and cost-savings, and will accelerate progress of the DOE EM environmental restoration mission.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗

Applying laboratory methods for durability assessment of vitrified material to archaeological samples

Abstract Laboratory testing used to assess the long-term chemical durability of nuclear waste forms may not be applicable to disposal because the accelerated conditions may not represent disposal conditions. To address this, we examine the corrosion of vitrified archeological materials excavated from the near surface of a ~1500-year old Iron Age Swedish hillfort, Broborg, as an analog for the disposal of vitrified nuclear waste. We compare characterized site samples with corrosion characteristics generated by standard laboratory durability test methods including the product consistency test (PCT), the vapor hydration test (VHT), and the EPA Method 1313 test. Results show that the surficial layer of the Broborg samples resulting from VHT displays some similarities to the morphology of the surficial layer formed over longer timescales in the environment. This work provides improved understanding of long-term glass corrosion behavior in terms of the thickness, morphology, and chemistry of the surficial features that are formed.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

Critical Design Elements for an On-Site Mercury Concentration and Holding Facility - 20175

Administrative changes and funding issues have delayed the Department of Energy (DOE) from establishing and commissioning a National Repository for mercury as required under the Mercury Export Ban Act (MEBA) of 2008. In the interim, a few hazardous waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities (TSDFs) have been authorized to accept mercury classified as a hazardous waste as under Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Waste generators are charged (either by weight or by volume) for the waste they manifest to these TSDFs. In many cases, mercury and mercury compounds have chemically sorbed to (or physically lodged into) the interstitial spaces of a substrate material. This almost always causes the amount of waste generated to be unnecessarily large, due to the extra volume (or weight) of the accompanying, non-mercury materials. Depending on a multitude of factors, it could be financially beneficial for waste generators to take greater control of their mercury affairs by separating these substrate materials from the mercury and mercury compounds that have become associated with them. Building and operating an on-site mercury Concentration and Holding Facility (CHF) could help relieve a waste generator's overall cost burden. The purpose of such CHFs is not to treat or dispose of mercury, but to recover and concentrate mercury from bulky mercury-laden materials to the extent that the host substrate to which the mercury may have previously been sorbed could pass a Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) test and either be disposed of at a conventional landfill, or be disposed of at a hazardous waste landfill, but absent additional restrictions specifically for mercury. A CHF represents a way for waste generators to save money by separating mercury from common host materials, concentrating it, and then safely storing it until transportation to an authorized TSDF takes place This paper focuses on the critical design elements waste generators should consider when designing and operating a mercury CHF. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Organic Evaporation, Oxidation, and Hydrolysis Testing in Support of Hanford Sample-and-Send

The Hanford site has approximately 56 million gallons of radioactive mixed waste stored in 156 unretrieved underground storage tanks. The Hanford Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) is being built to treat and immobilize the tank waste. The baseline method for immobilization of Low Activity Waste (LAW) through the WTP is vitrification, but additional immobilization capacity is needed to supplement the initial LAW melters. An alternative cementitious waste form is being investigated for that future immobilization method. However, one impediment to a cementitious waste form is the presence of Land Disposal Restricted (LDR) organic chemicals in tank waste, which are regulated on a concentration-based standard in the final waste form. Hence, if the quantity of organics in LAW is high enough, they must be destroyed or removed to make a waste form compatible with disposal in a mixed low level waste landfill. This work evaluates potential avenues for treatment of LDR organics to eliminate the impediment and permit possible use of a cementitious waste form.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Organic Evaporation, Oxidation, and Hydrolysis Testing in Support of Hanford Sample-and-Send

The Hanford site has approximately 54 to 56 million gallons of radioactive mixed waste stored in 156 unretrieved underground storage tanks. The Hanford Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) is being built to treat and immobilize the tank waste. The baseline method for immobilization of Low Activity Waste (LAW) through the WTP is vitrification, but additional immobilization capacity is needed to supplement the initial LAW melters. An alternative cementitious waste form is being investigated for that future immobilization method. However, one impediment to a cementitious waste form is the presence of Land Disposal Restricted (LDR) organic chemicals in tank waste, which are regulated on a concentration based standard in the final waste form. Hence, if the quantity of organics in LAW is high enough, they must be destroyed or removed to make a waste form compatible with disposal in a mixed low level waste landfill. This work evaluates potential avenues for treatment of LDR organics to eliminate the impediment and permit possible use of a cementitious waste form. Vacuum evaporation testing to remove LDR organics consisted of preparing a non-radioactive LAW simulant, spiking that simulant with organic chemicals, and evaporating the mixture via differential distillation. The apparatus was a laboratory-scale vacuum evaporator operated at 60 ±5 torr absolute (vacuum evaporation). The LAW simulant represented the liquid expected to be retrieved from the Hanford tank farms at approximately 4.0 M [Na+] total sodium ion concentration. The concentration of the organic chemicals added was significantly higher than typically found in the tank waste samples since the higher levels were necessary to assist in analytical measurement and tracking of the spiked species.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

FY25 Organic Evaporation Testing in Support of Hanford Sample-and-Send

The Hanford Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) is being built to treat and immobilize the approximately 56 million gallons of radioactive mixed waste stored in 156 underground storage tanks. The baseline method for immobilization of Low-Activity Waste (LAW) is vitrification, but additional immobilization capacity is needed to supplement the initial LAW melters. Additionally, efforts are being undertaken to accelerate the disposition of Pre-Treated Waste (PTW) in Hanford’s West Area. An alternative cementitious waste form is being investigated as an alternative immobilization method. However, one impediment to a cementitious waste form is the presence of Land Disposal Restricted (LDR) organic chemicals in tank waste, which are regulated on a concentration-based standard in the final waste form. Hence, if the quantity of organics in PTW and LAW is high enough, treatment may be needed to destroy or remove said organics to make a waste form compatible with disposal in a mixed low level waste landfill. This work evaluates evaporation as a potential avenue for treatment of LDR organics to eliminate the impediment and permit possible use of a cementitious waste form.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

A Prediction Method for Catchment Efficiency Loss due to Coaxial Nozzle Wear in Powder Fed Directed Energy Deposition Systems

Abstract Powder fed laser directed energy deposition systems show significant promise and their widespread adoption could greatly advance manufacturing technology; however, a significant amount of gas atomized metal powder is wasted during material deposition. As contaminated powder must be collected and disposed of as hazardous waste, this process is often criticized for its low catchment efficiency. This presents potential implementation and scaling issues, as widespread use of this technology would directly increase the amount of contaminated powder in need of safe disposal. A direct contribution to this waste issue was identified in past work as wearing exterior and interior surfaces on a replaceable nozzle component within the additive head of such a system integrated into a hybrid manufacturing machine tool. A computational fluid dynamics simulation is developed specifically for use within the manufacturing process by predicting catchment efficiency losses before a deposition operation is performed. The model is robust enough to calculate a catchment efficiency estimate within a reasonable transition time before deposition and is designed to replace visual estimation of nozzle deterioration by the machine operator. Both of two previously identified wear modes are represented in the simulation. Their effects on powder stream geometry are discussed in detail and the results are compared with in-situ measurements of powder stream geometry and concentrations. The resulting work contributes to the growing understanding of using prediction and prevention methods on catchment efficiency related part defects within these systems.

DeWitte, Lisa↗

UNREVIEWED DISPOSAL QUESTION EVALUATION: Disposal of the Idaho National Laboratory Classified Mockup Low-Level Waste at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

This Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation (UDQE) assesses whether the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Classified Mockup Low-Level Waste (LLW) (INEL208599QR0, Revision 0 [INL 2020]) is suitable for shallow land burial (SLB) at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) on the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). Disposal of the INL Classified Mockup LLW meets all performance objectives of U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Manual DOE M 435.1-1, Radioactive Waste Management Manual, Chapter IV, Section P (DOE 1999). The INL Classified Mockup LLW stream is recommended for acceptance without conditions.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

UNREVIEWED DISPOSAL QUESTION EVALUATION: Disposal of the Idaho National Laboratory Classified Mockup Low-Level Waste, Revision 1, at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

This Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation (UDQE) assesses whether the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Classified Mockup Low-Level Waste (LLW) (INEL208599QR0, Revision 1 [INL 2021]) is suitable for shallow land burial (SLB) at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) on the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). Disposal of the INL Classified Mockup LLW meets all performance objectives of U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Manual DOE M 435.1-1, Radioactive Waste Management Manual, Chapter IV, Section P (DOE 1999). The INL Classified Mockup LLW stream is recommended for acceptance without conditions.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Analysis of Exposure during Transportation of Waste to the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) - 20445

Safety is a priority for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Environmental Management (EM) Nevada Program. This commitment to safety is integrated into requirements and work procedures at DOE sites across the U.S. that generate low-level radioactive waste, mixed low-level radioactive waste, and classified waste that is transported to the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) for permanent disposal. Generators of this waste are responsible for ensuring it is packaged and transported in a safe and compliant manner. These generators and their contracted commercial carriers must comply with U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations; the Nevada National Security Site Waste Acceptance Criteria (NNSSWAC); and other applicable federal, state, and local regulations and requirements. This includes packaging and shipping the waste to meet DOT regulatory radiation dose limits to ensure public safety during transportation. NNSS waste generators have a solid safety record for complying with these stringent regulations as demonstrated by the fact that no shipments exceeding DOT dose rate limits were received at the NNSS Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Complex (RWMC) during FY 2014 through FY 2018. A 2005 study conducted by the Desert Research Institute validated shipments to the NNSS comply with DOT radiation dose limits. In response to recent Nevada stakeholder requests for an updated study, an analysis was conducted to verify and provide evidence that the public continues to be safe from exposure to radioactive waste shipment to the NNSS. Radiation exposure from radioactive waste shipments in transit to the NNSS was evaluated. Three studies were performed: 1. Confirm compliance of waste shipments to the DOT radiation limits using dose rate surveys taken at the generator site and at the disposal site. 2. Estimate the dose to the public from waste shipments using the dosimetry results for disposal site personnel by comparing time of exposure for various individuals/scenarios. 3. Estimate the truck driver dose using the receipt dose rate surveys and time of exposure, and from dosimetry results. Study 1 confirmed compliance with the DOT dose rate limits for a sample of waste shipments (123 of 1,038) received during fiscal year (FY) 2017. Study 2 showed that the average annual radiation equivalent dose for disposal site personnel during FY 2017 was approximately 6.7% [0.415 mSv (41.5 millirem)] of the annual average dose that a person living in the U.S. receives from all sources [6.2 mSv (620 mrem)]. Maximum dose to a member of the public, a person resting/sleeping in an adjacent truck at a rest area to a waste shipment, was 0.0166 mSv (1.66 mrem), which is less than the dose received from a person taking a round trip from the east coast to the west coast of the continental U.S. on an airplane [0.07 mSv (7 mrem) per round trip]. Study 3 showed that the truck driver who made the most shipments of radioactive waste to the NNSS, who drove the most hours (estimated time of exposure 2,520 hours), during FY 2017 had a total dose of 0.15 mSv (15 mrem), which was obtained from their personal dosimeter. The annual dose recorded for disposal site personnel, the dose estimates for the public, and the truck driver dose were all a small percentage of the average radiation dose a person receives from all sources (e.g., background and medical radiation). At these levels, risk should only be described qualitatively. Radiation exposure from radioactive waste shipments to the NNSS were shown to be compliant with the DOT dose rate limits, safe, and very low (i.e., within background levels). (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Nevada National Security Site V3XA Spherical Explosive Confinement Vessel Awareness Package

This report summarizes the plans and activities that will facilitate shipment of the V3XA experimental spheres (a.k.a., Nevada Spheres) from the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) to the Idaho National Laboratory’s (INL) Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project (AMWTP). The spheres require shipment to INL to be segmented, characterized, and repackaged for ultimate disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). The NNSS does not currently have the facilities or safety basis to perform these activities. The INL has the facilities, the INL M&O contractor owns an 8-120B cask, and AMWTP has a WIPP Waste Acceptance Criteria approved characterization program. The NNSS has shipped other legacy transuranic waste to INL for WIPP certified characterization in the past.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Alloying of U-Al-SS as a Simulant for Pu-Al-SS Alloying

The Savannah River National Laboratory evaluated several options for disposition of stainless steel (SS)–clad plutonium metal, particularly Pu-10.6 at. % Al (Pu- 1.3 wt% Al) alloy fuel. One technology considered was alloying fuel with SS. The goal of the alloying would be to make a SS-Pu alloy that was a nonproliferable waste form with secondary Pu-rich microencapsulated regions distributed throughout the refractory SS. The microencapsulation of the Pu regions should therefore allow the waste form to meet the requirements for a low attractiveness waste as defined by the U.S. Department of Energy. Plutonium-bearing alloys at these levels could potentially be suitable for disposal at a waste isolation pilot plant. Four metal ingots were successfully fabricated using U and Al as a surrogate for Pu-Al. The U was distributed and microencapsulated by the alloy matrix, thereby setting the stage for subsequent tests using SS-clad fuel elements containing Pu-10.6Al.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

Special Analyses for the Hanford Integrated Disposal Facility Performance Assessment - 20102

In 2014, the Department of Energy (DOE) Office of River Protection and its contractors began to develop a performance assessment for the near-surface disposal of low-level and mixed low-level waste at the Hanford Site's Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF). The IDF is a doubly-lined landfill that was constructed between 2004 and 2006 to be the disposal facility for the vitrified low-activity waste that will be produced at the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP). IDF is also expected to receive solid secondary waste produced at the WTP and other solid wastes from site activities. The IDF has been in a preoperational state awaiting authorization from DOE and a RCRA permit modification from the State of Washington Department of Ecology to receive waste. Both the Disposal Authorization Statement and permit modification require a performance assessment demonstrating that the system of engineered and natural features will limit releases of radionuclides and hazardous chemicals from the IDF and be protective of human health and the environment. The simulated duration is 10,000 years. Based on the analyses presented in the 2017 Integrated Disposal Facility Performance Assessment, DOE issued a conditional Operating Disposal Authorization Statement for the IDF in June 2018. The long-term performance of the IDF to be protective of human health and the environment was evaluated under the requirements of DOE Order 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management. Computer simulations were performed to evaluate whether or not the IDF would comply with DOE requirements. In the time that has passed since the performance assessment was approved by DOE, new information has been discovered that had not been considered in the performance assessment. Since this new information has not been evaluated, the potential impact of the changes have not been taken into consideration in DoE's disposal authorization. DOE and its contractors follow a change control process to screen and, when necessary, evaluate new information that could potentially impact the conclusions of the completed performance assessment. This paper will describe the change control process and provide two examples of evaluations performed following the change control process. The first example evaluates a new waste form for liquid secondary waste that was not evaluated in the performance assessment. In the performance assessment, liquid secondary waste was assumed to be solidified with grout. A new recommendation to dispose of the liquid secondary waste after drying it to a powder was evaluated. The second example evaluates inventory implications from changes to the flow sheet that estimates the feed composition to the low-activity waste vitrification facility. The changes result in higher strontium concentrations in the vitrified waste stream. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Sulfate Conversion of Reillex HPQ Anion Exchange Resin for Disposal (Interim Report)

This report describes preliminary data to validate the Savannah River Plutonium Processing Facility’s (SRPPF) flowsheet for conversion of used Reillex HPQ anion exchange resin from the nitrate form to the sulfate form. The nitrate form is an oxidizer and therefore does not meet acceptance criteria for disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). The purpose of this study is to develop data to support acceptance for this disposition pathway. Due to the challenges characterizing the nitrate concentration on solid resin, the data developed to date are based upon indirect analysis of the ion exchange column effluent by ion chromatography. These challenges are discussed and two methods for quantification of nitrate directly on the resin are recommended for further development: TGA-MS and permanganate digestion followed by IC. The resin used for this work was provided in the chloride form; this is the form in which resin is supplied by the manufacturer. However, it had to be converted to the nitrate form, which is the form that will be used in SRPPF’s ion exchange process, prior to use in the sulfate conversion experiments. The chloride-form resin was characterized. A lab-scale procedure for the conversion of Reillex HPQ resin from the chloride to nitrate form was validated. The nitrate-form resin was assessed for particle size and chloride concentration to ensure it met SRPPF’s facility specifications. The baseline sulfate conversion flowsheet was tested. However, nitrate was still detectable in the effluent after approximately 10 bed volumes of 1 M sodium sulfate had been passed through the resin bed. Additional experiments were performed to assess the effect of increasing the feed volume, reducing the flowrate, the use of 2 M sulfuric acid instead of sodium sulfate, and the use of irradiated resin. The sulfuric acid test was the only one which provided a nondetectable nitrate concentration (<0.002 M) in the effluent. Detectable nitrate in the column effluent suggests that nitrate is still present on the resin itself.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Stakeholder-Engaged Structured Decision Making for the Los Alamos Legacy Cleanup Mission - 20501

The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) environmental legacy cleanup program requires decisions to be made for environmental remediation, decommissioning and disposal or management of radioactive waste. This legacy cleanup program was established to address groundwater contamination, material disposal areas (MDAs) that have been used to dispose of radioactive and other waste material, and 'aggregate areas' that might produce radioactive or other chemical waste as a result of remediation activities. The LANL site is regulated for environmental concerns under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). However, some parts of LANL, such as material disposal area G (MDA G), have disposed of radioactive waste under DOE Order 435.1, and are subject to other regulations. For example, decommissioning the remote-handled TRU material stored in 33 shafts at MDA G falls under EPA's 40 CFR 191. Collectively, the regulations are all aimed in the same direction of finding the best solution, either through constructs such as 'as low as reasonably achievable' (ALARA), considering balancing factors as opposed to only cost and human health risk, and, under EPA regulations such as RCRA and NEPA, evaluating impact from all chemicals and both human health and ecological endpoints. Despite the basic goals and objectives of the regulations or their guidance, the main challenge is in their implementation. Arguably perhaps, but really in principle, all of these (and similar) regulations are asking for a decision analysis to be performed. Implementation challenges encountered have included lack of understanding of decision analysis in the industry, lack of effective stakeholder engagement in the decision analysis process, and lack of appreciation of the need to separate value judgments from science, the latter leading to developing conservative, or protective, science-based models. Conservative models lead to poor solutions, lack of effective stakeholder engagement leads to long drawn out protracted approaches to finding a solution (which also might never be found with this approach), and lack of understanding of decision analysis and Bayesian statistics causes poor models to be built, which creates unfortunate situations of 'garbage in, garbage out' becoming the basis for decision making. Stakeholder-engaged structured decision making (SDM) is an approach to solving problems that relies on the theory of decision science to involve stakeholders in the decision-making process. This approach incorporates stakeholder values using a scientifically rigorous methodology that separates value judgments from science in a way that helps avoid the pitfalls of biased, protective, or conservative modeling. This approach has its foundation in Keeney's 1992 treatise on value-focused thinking [1]. Keeney advocated a paradigm shift in decision making based on the idea that the standard way of thinking about decisions is backwards. The standard approach of focusing first on identifying alternatives rather than on articulating values results in a reactive approach with the emphasis on mechanics and fixed choices instead of the core values that have meaning to stakeholders. This paradigm shift effectively engages all stakeholders in the decision-making process while using a values focused thinking approach that can lead to the identification of decision opportunities and the creation of better alternatives. The intent is to be proactive and generate solutions that are related directly to values and objectives as identified by stakeholders. There are, perhaps, two overarching reasons why SDM can be used to benefit LANL's environmental legacy cleanup. Some of LANL's remaining waste management and environmental management problems are challenging and complex (for example, the Cr and RDX plumes, and MDAs) and while the traditional approach has, arguably, worked well for relatively simple risk-based problems, it cannot, or should not, be applied to more complex problems if the most effective and efficient solutions are desired. The second reason is cost. This has perhaps become more critical since publication of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports that DoE's environmental liability is considered a high-risk concern for the nation [2]. The focus of SDM is on structuring solutions to decision risk problems by first addressing stakeholder and decision maker values and subsequently developing decision objectives and ways to measure those objectives, preference weighting across objectives, identifying decision alternatives that best achieve those values, and characterizing uncertainty in predictions of the measures. Because a complete decision model is created using SDM, it can be evaluated to find the main elements of the model that drive, or predict, the best solution. This approach creates complete decision models that are transparent, traceable, reproducible and technically defensible. The science behind SDM, or decision analysis, is well founded, yet it is not unusual to see ad hoc approaches to decision making implemented under various environmental regulations that are pertinent to the LANL site, including NEPA, RCRA and DOE Order 435.1. Such ad hoc approaches are often not transparent or traceable, and lack reproducibility and technical defensibility. The LANL legacy cleanup program has embarked on using SDM to address the complex problems that remain. Stakeholder meetings have been held, and a prototype version of the stakeholder value system has been developed. Further meetings are expected in the future to address specific project needs. This is a long-term endeavor considering the complex environmental problems faced by DOE EM in Los Alamos (EM-LA), and careful planning, consideration of stakeholder value systems, and engagement with stakeholders throughout the SDM process is expected to lead to a successful endpoint. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

A Comprehensive Survey of Coal Ash Law and Commercialization: Its Environmental Risks, Disposal Regulation, and Beneficial Use Markets

This white paper was commissioned by the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) under a grant from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), in response to a major rule, Hazardous and Solid Waste Management System; Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals From Electric Utilities; Final Rule (Final Rule) issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on April 17, 2015, on coal ash disposal and remediation of disposal sites, which has significant implications to states. It subjects state environmental agencies and public utility commissions to regulatory responsibilities to implement federal regulations under the Final Rule and oversee the cost implications on electric customers. To better evaluate the regulatory issues underlying the choices facing utilities and independent power producers (IPPs) regarding coal ash management options under the Final Rule, an overview of coal ash production and disposal practices is helpful. This comprehensive survey provides background information on the following topics: (a) coal ash production by a coal combustion generation plant, (b) the historical practices of utility waste management practices, (c) coal ash toxicity and related constituents, (d) further understanding of potential impacts to groundwater, and (e) the aging structures and outdated designs of coal ash surface impoundments and landfills.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗