Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “WASTES”

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 703 records · Page 39
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2018

Identification of Waste Streams and Chemicals of Concern for CNL's Near Surface Disposal Facility - 18057

Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) has a 70-year history in nuclear Research and Development (R and D) and the original support to the Canada Deuterium Uranium (Candu) reactor fleet. The present laboratory and operations include multiple facilities including reactors, laboratories, and buildings at various locations in Canada. The onsite facilities produced and still produce numerous and complex waste streams which have historically been placed in waste storage areas at their sites. CNL has completed the design and is in the process of licensing a Near Surface Disposal Facility (NSDF) for CNL low level waste (LLW). The current plan, pending regulatory approvals would complete construction and commissioning in 2021. CNL has identified the waste streams that are proposed to be disposed of to determine which may or may not require treatment prior to disposal and the Chemicals of Concern (COCs) that require identification and control to protect the facility, workers, public and the environment. CNL gathered the information into a Waste Stream spreadsheet that identifies the waste. Each waste stream was then evaluated as to whether or not it should meet the NSDF Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC), and if not, which treatment technologies would be appropriate to make it ready for disposal. Understanding the hazards and associated COCs of the waste is required to safely dispose the waste. COCs present at Chalk River Laboratories (CRL) need to be identified and subsequently evaluated to determine if they pose any type of risk due to their hazardous properties or quantities. The COC data base was modified into a tool to assist waste generators. CNL has developed waste stream and COC data bases to support safe disposal of radioactive waste. Identification of waste streams and COCs for disposal is important for any disposal facility. The lessons learned by CNL as to what information is important and how to obtain the information would be useful to many facilities. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2015

Current status of solid waste management in small island developing states: A review

Highlights: • Waste management is a matter of great concern for small island developing states. • On average, waste generation rate in these islands amounts to 1.29 kg/capita/day. • Illegal dumping and landfilling prevail in most small island developing states. • Sustainable waste management practices, previously absent, are now emerging. • However, many challenges still hinder the implementation of these practices. - Abstract: This article reviews the current status of waste management in Small Island Developing States (SIDS) and the challenges that are faced in solid waste management. The waste generation rates of SIDS were compared within the three geographic regions namely Caribbean SIDS, Pacific SIDS and Atlantic, Indian Ocean, Mediterranean and South China (AIMS) SIDS and with countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD). Only Pacific SIDS had a waste generation rate less than 1 kg/capita/day. The waste generation rates for the three SIDS regions averaged 1.29 kg/capita/day while that for OECD countries was at a mean value of 1.35 kg/capita/day. The waste compositions in the different SIDS regions were almost similar owing to comparable consumption patterns while these differed to a large extent with wastes generated in OECD countries. In SIDS, the major fraction of MSW comprised of organics (44%) followed by recyclables namely paper, plastics, glass and metals (total: 43%). In contrast, MSW in OECD countries consisted mainly of recyclables (43%) followed by organics (37%). This article also reviewed the other functional elements of the waste management systems in SIDS. Several shortcomings were noted in the process of waste collection, transfer and transport namely the fact of having outdated collection vehicles and narrow roads which are inaccessible. Among the waste management practices in SIDS, waste disposal via landfilling, illegal dumping and backyard burning were favoured most of the time at the expense of sustainable waste treatment technologies such as composting, anaerobic digestion and recycling.

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 OSTI2017

EPRI Research Results: International Nuclear Power Plant Waste Classification - 17444

Different countries around the globe use varying schemes for the classification of radioactive waste. Many countries develop country specific waste classification schemes based on the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) waste classification framework. The United States of America use the Class A, B, and C waste classification. Additionally, some countries use concentration limits to classify wastes while others use dose rate limits or a combination of concentration and dose rate limits. General comparisons have been made between the IAEA and the United States classification schemes, but a clear and well researched comparison of the international schemes was not evident in the available research data sets. In 2013 Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) initiated the Comparison of Global Low and Intermediate Level Waste Management Methods project. The objective of the project was to understand how six countries managed their low and intermediate level wastes from generation to disposal. A major task of this project was to conduct a comparison of the international waste classification schemes. EPRI developed a set of reference waste volumes that are representative of nuclear power plant low-level radioactive waste in form and radioactivity concentrations (e.g. dry active waste, high activity resin, low activity resin, high activity filters and low activity filters). These waste volumes were then classified using the waste classification systems in place in several countries around the world. In 2016, EPRI presented a paper providing a status update on this research. This 2017 paper provides the final results of that research, show where comparisons and correlations can be made, and provide a discussion on how this information might inform international radioactive research and development and benchmarking of radioactive waste management strategies, operational experiences, best practices, and technology implementation. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2015

Technetium incorporation in glass for the Hanford Tank Waste treatment and immobilization plant - 15066

A priority of the United States Department of Energy (U.S. DOE) is to dispose of nuclear wastes accumulated in 177 underground tanks at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in eastern Washington State. These nuclear wastes date from the Manhattan Project of World War II and from plutonium production during the Cold War. The DOE plans to separate high-level radioactive wastes from low activity wastes and to treat each of the waste streams by vitrification (immobilization of the nuclides in glass) for disposal. The immobilized low-activity waste will be disposed of here at Hanford and the immobilized high-level waste at the national geologic repository. Included in the inventory of highly radioactive wastes is large volumes of {sup 99}Tc (∼9 x 10 E2 TBq or ∼2.5 x 10{sup 4} Ci or ∼1500 kg). A problem facing safe disposal of Tc-bearing wastes is the processing of waste feed into in a chemically durable waste form. Technetium incorporates poorly into silicate glass in traditional glass melting. It readily evaporates during melting of glass feeds and out of the molten glass, leading to a spectrum of high-to-low retention (ca. 20 to 80%) in the cooled glass product. DOE-ORP currently has a program at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering at Rutgers University and in the School of Mechanical and Materials Engineering at Washington State University that seeks to understand aspects of Tc retention by means of studying Tc partitioning, molten salt formation, volatilization pathways, and cold cap chemistry. Another problem involves the stability of Tc in glass in both the national geologic repository and on-site disposal after it has been immobilized. The major environmental concern with {sup 99}Tc is its high mobility in addition to a long half-life (2.1 x 10{sup 5} yrs). The pertechnetate ion (TcO{sup 4-}) is highly soluble in water and does not adsorb well onto the surface of minerals and so migrates nearly at the same velocity as groundwater. Long-term corrosion of glass waste forms is an area of current interest to the DOE, but attention to the release of Tc from glass has been little explored. It is expected that the release of Tc from glass should be highly dependent on the local glass structure as well as the chemistry of the surrounding environment, including groundwater pH. Though the speciation of Tc in glass has been previously studied, and the Tc species present in waste glass have been previously reported, environmental Tc release mechanisms are poorly understood. The recent advances in Tc chemistry that have given rise to an understanding of incorporation in the glass giving rise to significantly higher single-pass retention during vitrification are presented. Additionally, possible changes to the baseline flowsheet that allow for relatively minor volumes of Tc reporting to secondary waste treatment will be discussed. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2018

Cementitious Waste Form Development for Treatment of EMF Evaporator Bottoms - 18611

Direct Feed Low-Activity Waste operations at the Hanford Site (Washington State, USA) involve concentrating the Hanford low-activity waste (LAW) melter off-gas condensate waste stream by evaporation at the Effluent Management Facility (EMF) followed by recycle back to the melter feed. The EMF evaporator bottoms waste stream is expected to contain variable, high levels of halides and sulfate that could strain LAW melter performance and co-mingled radionuclides, technetium-99 ({sup 99}Tc) and iodine-129 ({sup 129}I), that readily volatilize in the LAW melter and are expected to accumulate during recycle. To this end, there is a need for alternative disposition paths for the EMF evaporator bottoms waste stream that bypass recycling to the LAW melter. One such alternative is solidification in low-temperature cementitious waste forms (CWFs) that meet disposal facility acceptance criteria. The work herein addresses recent waste form development and testing performed to identify CWF candidates that meet off-site disposal acceptance criteria and/or on-site Hanford Integrated Disposal Facility waste acceptance criteria. Phase one testing activities included the production and evaporation of simulated EMF evaporator feed from the Hanford Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant melter offgas effluent liquid secondary waste stream, which was then analyzed to demonstrate the behavior and fate of contaminants of concern (COCs). Based on analyses from these preliminary tests, a simulant for the EMF evaporator bottoms waste stream was formulated and used to evaluate several dry material compositions proposed for CWF development and testing. In particular, dry ingredient recipes used in early testing efforts contained a combination of ordinary Portland cement (OPC), Class F fly ash (FA), blast furnace slag (BFS), Aquaset{sup R} II-H, and/or Aquaset{sup R} II-GH to generate CWFs at various water-to-dry material ratios. CWFs were then tested according to the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) for COCs, such as Cr, Zn, As, and Se, to determine which specimens comply with land disposal restrictions (40 CFR 268). The results of TCLP testing showed that chromium leaching was a persistent challenge, except when using the original Cast Stone dry ingredient recipe (8% OPC, 47% BFS, 45% FA) to immobilize the EMF evaporator bottoms simulant. Improving Cr immobilization and evaluating leaching behavior for COC Hg were identified as objectives for the second phase of testing. During second phase testing efforts, a screening test was performed to determine whether the bulk EMF waste composition is a factor in producing an acceptable solidified waste form. A series of eight simulants with varying concentrations of major salts of boron, chloride, nitrite, and sulfate were prepared and immobilized using three dry ingredient recipes. Each dry ingredient recipe contained two to three of the following: BFS, OPC, FA, and Aquaset{sup R} II-GH. All eight simulants were spiked with Zn, Cr, As, Se, and Hg prior to production of the CWFs, similar to previous tests, and used to test for residual free liquids and TCLP analysis. The TCLP results indicate that all phase two formulated CWFs meet land disposal requirements when compared to Universal Treatment Standards (40 CFR 268) for hazardous wastes, regardless of simulant composition. Furthermore, re-absorption of residual free liquids is most quickly achieved for nearly all simulant compositions using the original Cast Stone recipe; however, replicas analysis is required to corroborate these findings. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Treatment of Foreign Radioactive Waste at the BELGOPROCESS Plant - 19345

Belgium has used a large number of nuclear technologies during the last 60 years. Power generation, reprocessing, fuel fabrication, isotope production and research activities have produced a large variety of radioactive waste streams. BELGOPROCESS is the operator of the centralised waste treatment facilities located in the Campine region in Flanders. Over the years BELGOPROCESS has developed the know-how and facilities to treat each one of these waste streams. BELGOPROCESS is a subsidiary of NIRAS, the governmental institution responsible for the safe management of radioactive waste and enriched fissile materials in Belgium. A number of these waste streams are only produced during a short period of time. After processing the existing stockpile the treatment facility is put into operational standby and eventually prepared for decommissioning. In order to treat the stockpile of some types of legacy waste within an acceptable time frame, the treatment facilities needed to be designed at a certain treatment capacity. Since the majority of the legacy waste is processed nowadays, a significant amount of treatment capacity becomes available. In June 2006 the Belgian government decided that this know-how and facilities should become available to foreign waste producers. This would allow BELGOPROCESS to fill up the available capacity of its facilities and consequently lower the cost for the Belgian waste producers. Nowadays two facilities are open to accept foreign radioactive waste. The CILVA-facility can be used for sorting, cutting, incineration, precompaction, supercompaction and cementation of low level solid waste. The PAMELA-facility - a former vitrification plant - can be used for the treatment of medium level and alpha-bearing waste. In this paper we will discuss the technical characteristics of the CILVA-incinerator and a showcase for the treatment of foreign waste at our facilities. In 2016 BELGOPROCESS started a cooperation with MATE-FIN for the incineration of low level burnable waste from the Cernavoda NPP in Romania. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Panel Session 51: Idaho Transuranic Waste Challenges, Solutions and Implications for the Future (3/5)

This panel focused on the retrieval, characterization, treatment, certification, and shipping of transuranic (TRU) waste at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Site, Idaho, USA. The INL began receiving TRU waste from offsite generators (primarily the Rocky Flats Plant in Colorado, USA) beginning in 1954. Until 1970, the INL Site disposed of barrels, boxes, and other debris in a shallow, unlined landfill. Beginning in 1970, the INL Site began storing TRU waste on an asphalt pad, which was then covered with several feet of soil. This practice continued until the late 1980's at which time a large air support building was erected over the waste. In the mid-to-late 1990's, the air support building was removed and a massive building was constructed over the entire dirt mound. Contractors retrieved the waste from the early 2000's through February 2017 to support an Idaho Settlement Agreement milestone that required the retrieval of 65,000 cubic meters of TRU waste and removal from Idaho. This panel focused on the Idaho Transuranic Waste Challenges, Solutions and Implications for the Future. The Idaho Transuranic Waste Program includes buried and stored waste retrieval and processing of contact- and remote-handled transuranic waste. Over the duration of the program, the Idaho site has conducted targeted retrieval of buried waste from the 1950's and 1960's; designed, permitted, built, operated, and completed the mission of a facility to process 65,000 cubic meters of waste; and shipped more than 57,000 cubic meters of waste to WIPP. Presentation proposed: Transuranic Waste Challenges and Solutions (Hoss Brown, Fluor Idaho, LLC (USA), John McCoy, Fluor Idaho, LLC (USA), James Malmo, US DOE (USA), Doug Pruitt, Department of Energy Idaho Field Office (USA), Kenneth Princen, US DOE (USA))

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Simulation of Spent Nuclear Fuel loading into a Final Waste Repository

Previous work towards studying repository loading have used: - spent nuclear fuel (SNF) with an average burnup composition; - a lumped capacitance thermal model for calculating temperature in a Cyclus repository model. The goal of this work is to improve on the repository models and use U.S. historical SNF inventory data in simulations to more accurately study the loading of a waste repository. These goals will be achieved by: - using UNF-ST-and-DARDS Unified Database (UDB) that has historic assembly-specific data (e.g, isotopic composition, heat) in Cyclus simulations; - implementing a more accurate thermal model within a Cyclus repository model. Objectives: - Create a Cyclus spent fuel conditioning model that packages spent fuel bundles into packages which have user-defined properties. - Create a Cyclus medium-fidelity repository model that gives accurate time and spatial dependent temperature values and loads the repository based on a user-selected loading strategy. Cyclus is an agent-based extensible framework for modeling flow of material through user-defined nuclear fuel cycles. In Cyclus, each facility in the fuel cycle is modeled individually and the facilities interact with one another as independent agents. The spent fuel conditioning model accepts spent fuel bundles and puts them into a cylindrical waste package. In the spent fuel conditioning model, the user can define variables: For each layer, radius, thermal conductivity, thermal diffusivity; For each package, Number of spent fuel bundles, Radius and height. The waste repository model accepts waste packages and emplaces them into available positions within the waste repository based on a thermal criteria. The thermal criteria is a temperature limit at the interface between the waste package surface and the host geology, that is set based on the repository's host geology. In the waste repository model, the user can define the variables: Capacity, Distance between waste packages, Distance between drifts, Repository host geology, Loading Strategy. After the addition of new waste packages at each time step, the waste repository model recalculates the temperature at each location in the repository. If the addition of this new package causes its temperature to exceed the thermal limit, it will be placed back into the buffer. A thermal model that relies on a transient 'outside' model and quasi-steady-state 'inside' model is used to accurately determine the temperature in the repository. The 'outside' model assumes a homogenous medium with the Engineered Barrier System (EBS) replaced by the geologic medium. Temperature solutions for the central waste package, adjacent point and line sources are superimposed to calculate the temperature at specific points in the repository. The central drift consists of one finite line source which represents the central waste package. The central drift also consists of point sources that represent neighboring waste packages in the central drift. The neighboring drifts are represented by infinite line sources. The 'inside' model is considered to be at a quasi-steady-state condition because EBS has a relatively low thermal mass compared to the infinite geologic medium. The steady state calculation is performed at each time step with the heat source and interface temperature as boundary conditions. Future Work: Run Cyclus simulations with U.S. historical SNF inventory data, the spent fuel conditioning and repository models to study how waste package acceptance strategies impact repository loading.

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 OSTI2013

A material flow analysis on current electrical and electronic waste disposal from Hong Kong households

Highlights: ► Most household TWARC waste is sold directly to private e-waste collectors in HK. ► The current e-waste recycling network is popular with HK households. ► About 80% of household generated TWARC is exported overseas each year. ► Over 7000 tonnes/yr of household generated TWARC reach landfills. ► It is necessary to upgrade safety and awareness in HK’s e-waste recycling industry. - Abstract: A material flow study on five types of household electrical and electronic equipment, namely television, washing machine, air conditioner, refrigerator and personal computer (TWARC) was conducted to assist the Government of Hong Kong to establish an e-waste take-back system. This study is the first systematic attempt on identifying key TWARC waste disposal outlets and trade practices of key parties involved in Hong Kong. Results from two questionnaire surveys, on local households and private e-waste traders, were used to establish the material flow of household TWARC waste. The study revealed that the majority of obsolete TWARC were sold by households to private e-waste collectors and that the current e-waste collection network is efficient and popular with local households. However, about 65,000 tonnes/yr or 80% of household generated TWARC waste are being exported overseas by private e-waste traders, with some believed to be imported into developing countries where crude recycling methods are practiced. Should Hong Kong establish a formal recycling network with tight regulatory control on imports and exports, the potential risks of current e-waste recycling practices on e-waste recycling workers, local residents and the environment can be greatly reduced.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2014

Determining heavy metals in spent compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) and their waste management challenges: Some strategies for improving current conditions

Highlights: • Heavy metals in spent compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) determined. • Current waste management condition of CFLs in Iran assessed. • Currently, waste of CFLs is disposed by municipal waste stream in waste landfills. • We propose extended producer responsibility (EPR) for CFLs waste management. - Abstract: From environmental viewpoint, the most important advantage of compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) is reduction of green house gas emissions. But their significant disadvantage is disposal of spent lamps because of containing a few milligrams of toxic metals, especially mercury and lead. For a successful implementation of any waste management plan, availability of sufficient and accurate information on quantities and compositions of the generated waste and current management conditions is a fundamental prerequisite. In this study, CFLs were selected among 20 different brands in Iran. Content of heavy metals including mercury, lead, nickel, arsenic and chromium was determined by inductive coupled plasma (ICP). Two cities, Tehran and Tabriz, were selected for assessing the current waste management condition of CFLs. The study found that waste generation amount of CFLs in the country was about 159.80, 183.82 and 153.75 million per year in 2010, 2011 and 2012, respectively. Waste generation rate of CFLs in Iran was determined to be 2.05 per person in 2012. The average amount of mercury, lead, nickel, arsenic and chromium was 0.417, 2.33, 0.064, 0.056 and 0.012 mg per lamp, respectively. Currently, waste of CFLs is disposed by municipal waste stream in waste landfills. For improving the current conditions, we propose by considering the successful experience of extended producer responsibility (EPR) in other electronic waste management. The EPR program with advanced recycling fee (ARF) is implemented for collecting and then recycling CFLs. For encouraging consumers to take the spent CFLs back at the end of the products’ useful life, a proportion of ARF (for example, 50%) can be refunded. On the other hand, the government and Environmental Protection Agency should support and encourage recycling companies of CFLs both technically and financially in the first place.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2013

A step-by-step development of radioactive waste management strategy

Fennovoima is Finland's third nuclear power company founded in 2007. Fennovoima will build a new nuclear power plant, Hanhikivi 1, in Pyhajoki municipality located in Northern Finland. Currently Fennovoima is evaluating bids from reactor suppliers. Originally two suppliers, AREVA and Toshiba Heavy Industries were invited to bid for the plant but later also a bid from Rosatom were invited. The plant supplier will be selected in 2013. Platom is a Finnish company with extensive experience in radioactive waste management. In the beginning of 2008, Platom was assigned by Fennovoima as radioactive waste management consultant and to develop radioactive waste management strategy and to support Fennovoima in negotiations with plant suppliers in waste management aspects. Since Fennovoima has started, there have been some changes to the regulatory requirements which had to be taken into account while developing the strategy. One important change is due to the Government Degree 27.11.2008/736 which establishes a new waste category of very low-level waste following international development and the 'new' IAEA waste classification. Other important change was introduced by the change 342/2008 to the Nuclear Energy Act allowing some nuclear waste to be delivered to another country for treatment. These and many more requirements had to be considered when developing the strategy. Early work by Platom was mostly done to support development of application for Decision-in-Principle. This was the first important licensing step for Fennovoima. Work started with studies and plans which were used by Fennovoima to gather the know-how required to draw up the application. Descriptions of waste streams and waste management technologies were developed as well as preliminary waste inventories and studies for final disposal, including preliminary dimensioning of the repository facilities. Based on these plans nuclear regulator's preliminary safety assessment was performed. The work was successfully completed as in 2010 the Government of Finland granted Fennovoima a permit to build a new nuclear power plant. The work continued in 2012 when bids were received for EPR and ABWR type reactors. Plans developed earlier were elaborated into a detailed strategy and the proposed waste management solutions were evaluated. This allowed feedback from the bids into the strategy and to the bid specification and they both were developed. Also waste inventories were elaborated which allowed development of reactor design specific disposal strategies. The main objective of work has been to establish basis for safe and efficient radioactive waste management which meets all the relevant national and international recommendations, requirements and regulations, takes advantage of best available and state-of-art technologies and offers fit-for-purpose solutions. All the work was performed to accommodate requirement based management system. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Metallic Low-Level Waste (LLW) Handling Options: An Optimal Life cycle-Based Approach for North American Operations - 19413

Daily activities associated with nuclear power plant operations produce large volumes of low-level contaminated waste. During operation, a small percentage of this low-level waste is metallic (< 1% by volume). However, this figure increases materially when a facility is finally decommissioned, with approximately 1000 m{sup 3} of contaminated metal waste generated for every 1 GW decommissioned (13% by volume). With global nuclear decommissioning efforts expected to increase until 2050, the amount of low-level metallic waste generated is expected to increase the global inventory by over an order of magnitude. The high cost of conventional surface storage and burial of radioactive metal, coupled with the projected increase in low-level metallic waste volumes provides strong incentive to identify cost-effective waste management solutions. Surface decontamination and thermal methods are proven options for decontaminating low-level metallic waste. Surface decontamination processes include chemical, electrochemical, or mechanical methods, which are used to remove contamination from exposed layers of metal. Surface decontamination is most effective when metal has low levels of activity localized on the outer layers. When the activity is more uniformly distributed in the metal (or the geometry is complex), alternative methods such as thermal decontamination are required. In the thermal decontamination process, contaminated scrap metal is melted in a furnace and held in a molten state for a period of time while the radioactive material is separated out through gravity. Radioactive material reports to slag which is handled separately, or to the exhaust which is handled using conventional gas handling technologies. Thermal methods of decontamination involving metal melting present an opportunity to reduce long-term storage cost with a reduction in waste volume, along with the opportunity to reuse the decontaminated metal. Methods for dealing with metallic low-level waste from nuclear facilities vary extensively across the globe. The approach employed at any given site may be set by a host of factors ranging from regulatory influence, public perception, local economics, available geology for underground storage and often, precedent established long ago by early operations. This paper examines several low-level metallic waste handling options including techniques for surface decontamination and metal melting, as well as a combination of both. The various methods are categorized according to their suitability for waste characterization and local/global installations. The effectiveness of each option is benchmarked against a range of criteria, including capital and operating costs, environmental impact, overall sustainability and risk management issues. The overall objective of this paper is to develop a methodology for determining the most beneficial low-level metallic waste management strategy for a facility once the quantity, type and nature of the waste is established on a long-term basis. It is the authors' hope that the methodology can be used as a tool to test a facility's current plans (which are primarily focused on long-term storage) and identify areas for optimization with an emphasis on overall cost and environmental footprint reduction. The trend towards long term planning to handle large amounts of contaminated metal, along with obtaining a social license to implement a sustainable waste management solution, are key decision-making variables that will be discussed in relation to the LLW handling options presented in this paper. (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 OSTI2015

Integration of performance assessments and 3116 basis documents within the Savannah River Site liquid waste facilities - 15375

The end of the Cold War has left a legacy of over 136 million liters (36 million gallons) of radioactive waste in the aging waste tanks at the Department of Energy's Savannah River Site (SRS). A robust program is in place to remove waste from these tanks, treat the waste to separate it into a relatively small volume of high-level waste and a large volume of low-level waste, and to actively dispose of the low-level waste on-site. This process allows the US Department of Energy (DOE) to move forward with closure of the cleaned waste tanks and associated ancillary structures. To support performance-based, risk decision making for closure and disposal activities, three individual performance assessments (PAs) have been developed - salt-stone Disposal Facility, F-Tank Farm and H-Tank Farm. In addition, three Waste Determinations (WDs) have been made by the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), under the authority of Section 3116 of the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 (NDAA Section 3116). To support these waste determination decisions, individual '3116 Basis Documents' were developed that describe the assumptions and conditions under which the criteria outlined in NDAA Section 3116 are met. The development of each of the PAs represented a long and arduous effort that involved the development of both deterministic and probabilistic conceptual models of the facilities, the development of assumptions and associated ranges, uncertainty and sensitivity analyses, model data collection and analyses, writing of the actual performance assessment, internal and external peer reviews, and ultimately approval by DOE. Similarly, the development of the 3116 Basis Documents represents similar time and financial commitments. At the end of these efforts, after years of preparation and millions of dollars in investment, we have thousands of pages of highly technical text, tables of data and hundreds of graphs and charts all contained in a series of thick binders that fit neatly on the shelf of a bookcase. We were done - right? Actually, we were just getting started. Performance Assessments and 3116 Basis Documents are living documents that shape day-to-day and long-term decision making in the operation of a low-level waste disposal facility (e.g., salt-stone Disposal Facility) or in area closure activities (e.g., F-Tank Farm or H-Tank Farm). Although these documents do not contain specifically described requirements per se, they do utilize specific assumptions that, if changed significantly, could result in no longer being able to demonstrate that there is reasonable assurance that the required performance objectives or the criteria from NDAA Section 3116 can be met. Savannah River Remediation LLC (SRR), the contractor responsible for Liquid Waste operations at SRS, has not only developed the PAs and 3116 Basis Documents to support this work and shepherded these documents through the DOE approval process, but has also developed the processes and procedures to ensure the successful implementation and integration of these documents into day-to-day decision making within the associated facilities. This paper describes these processes, including the Un-reviewed Waste Management Question process and the PA Maintenance process, and provides specific examples of their successful implementation. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Development of a Trace Detection Method for Mercury Speciation in Hanford Tank Waste - 19014

The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Hanford Site in southeast Washington State stores 56 million gallons of chemical and radioactive waste stored in underground tanks. Mercury species in liquid and solid fractions of Hanford tank waste pose a risk to the implementation and execution of DoE's River Protection Project mission due to mercury concentration limits imposed under waste acceptance criteria, toxicity characteristic leaching procedure restrictions for secondary waste disposal, and air emission permits. Although there is currently no processing of tank waste at Hanford, waste processing is imminent, and representative mercury inventory tracking will be important to anticipate and mitigate stack emissions and secondary liquid waste disposal issues. A methodology to accurately determine total mercury and mercury speciation in Hanford tank waste, while maintaining low mercury detection limits, currently does not exist at Hanford. Moreover, the mercury species in the waste solids are unknown and may be waste type-specific. The development of an analytical method to separate and speciate mercury in tank waste was undertaken by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) while leveraging an existing non-radiological, ultra-trace mercury detection technique frequently performed at PNNL's Marine Sciences Laboratory in Sequim, Washington. The ultimate goal of this work is to develop an analytical method to obtain detailed mercury speciation information and update flowsheet modeling assumptions related to mercury partitioning at Hanford. The first phase of testing was completed in the development of an analytical methodology for the low-level determination of total mercury, elemental mercury, methylmercury, and dimethylmercury in Hanford tank waste. This paper presents Phase I testing which focused on determining whether mercury species can be preconcentrated from aqueous Hanford tank waste solution onto a solid substrate, while simultaneously eliminating or very significantly reducing the parent radionuclide activity. This was demonstrated by developing protocols for the separation and preconcentration of total mercury and methylmercury onto solid substrates, then measuring the substrates for radiological content at PNNL's Radiochemical Processing Laboratory on the Hanford Site. The mercury content was successfully separated onto stable substrates and the radionuclide activity reduction was significant enough that the preconcentrated samples could be subjected to quantification using far less restrictive handling and radiological controls than would be required for the parent sample (i.e., contamination area fume hood vs. hot cell). This mercury separation method required no sample dilution, which enables maximum mercury detectability, while still allowing mercury speciation. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Panel Session 126: US and International Waste Classifications; Differences and Issues

The panel focused and addressed the existing US waste classification scheme set forth in US 10 CFR Part 61 and DOE Order 435.1 focusing upon the commensurate risk associated with the disposal of radioactive Low-Level (LLW) and High-Level Waste (HLW). The panel provided insights on the ongoing efforts by the NRC in conducting its Very LLW Scoping Study, the waste classification scheme used by the IAEA with a comparison of that system to the waste classification regulatory process in the US and the increasing role of RCRA sites in disposal of LLW in the US. The process used for very low activity waste disposal known as Bulk Survey for Release in the State of Tennessee was discussed as well as various studies conducted by EPRI addressing the relative risks of very low activity waste will be addressed. The panel strived to compare the risks of radioactive LLW and HLW to the operational process used for its disposal in the US and Internationally and determine if changes are needed in the process. The audience heard the perspectives from six panelists that addressed issues ranging from the technical basis used to establish the waste classification system specified in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 61 developed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; the approaches and impacts for dispositioning materials with Very Low Levels of Radioactive Waste (VLLRW); approaches used by the Department of Energy (DOE) to disposition Low-Level Radioactive Waste (LLW) in accordance with Order 435.1; and methods adopted by the international community to classify and disposition LLW and Intermediate Level Waste (ILW). A summary of each of the presentations given by the panelists is provided herein. Presentations proposed include: 1 - U.S. Low-Level Radioactive Waste Classification System 10 CFR Part 61 - Basis, Updates, and Issues (Rateb (Boby) Abu Eid, US NRC (USA)); 2 - EPRI Research on the Technical Basis for VLLW Classification (Lisa Edwards, EPRI (USA)); 3 - Division of Radiological Health (Anthony Hogan, State of Tennessee (USA)); 4 - Perspectives on VLLW Based on EPA's Low Activity Waste Effort (Thomas Peake, US EPA (USA)); 5 - US Department of Energy Perspectives on Waste Classification (Justin Marble, US DOE (USA))

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗