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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 757 records · Page 42

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

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 OSTI2014

Determination of biogas generation potential as a renewable energy source from supermarket wastes

Highlights: • Disposal of supermarket wastes in landfills may contribute to environmental pollution. • High methane yields can be obtained from supermarket wastes by anaerobic co-digestion. • Fruit and vegetable wastes or dairy products wastes could individually be handled by a two-stage anaerobic process. • Buffering capacity, trace metal and C/N ratio are essential for digestion of supermarket wastes. - Abstract: Fruit, vegetable, flower waste (FVFW), dairy products waste (DPW), meat waste (MW) and sugar waste (SW) obtained from a supermarket chain were anaerobically digested, in order to recover methane as a source of renewable energy. Batch mesophilic anaerobic reactors were run at total solids (TS) ratios of 5%, 8% and 10%. The highest methane yield of 0.44 L CH{sub 4}/g VS{sub added} was obtained from anaerobic digestion of wastes (FVFW + DPW + MW + SW) at 10% TS, with 66.4% of methane (CH{sub 4}) composition in biogas. Anaerobic digestion of mixed wastes at 5% and 8% TS provided slightly lower methane yields of 0.41 and 0.40 L CH{sub 4}/g VS{sub added}, respectively. When the wastes were digested alone without co-substrate addition, the highest methane yield of 0.40 L CH{sub 4}/g VS{sub added} was obtained from FVFW at 5% TS. Generally, although the volatile solids (VS) conversion percentages seemed low during the experiments, higher methane yields could be obtained from anaerobic digestion of supermarket wastes. A suitable carbon/nitrogen (C/N) ratio, proper adjustment of the buffering capacity and the addition of essential trace nutrients (such as Ni) could improve VS conversion and biogas production yields significantly.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

DOE OSTI2017

Roadmap for disposal of Electrorefiner Salt as Transuranic Waste.

The experimental breeder reactor (EBR-II) used fuel with a layer of sodium surrounding the uranium-zirconium fuel to improve heat transfer. Disposing of EBR-II fuel in a geologic repository without treatment is not prudent because of the potentially energetic reaction of the sodium with water. In 2000, the US Department of Energy (DOE) decided to treat the sodium-bonded fuel with an electrorefiner (ER), which produces metallic uranium product, a metallic waste, mostly from the cladding, and the salt waste in the ER, which contains most of the actinides and fission products. Two waste forms were proposed for disposal in a mined repository; the metallic waste, which was to be cast into ingots, and the ER salt waste, which was to be further treated to produce a ceramic waste form. However, alternative disposal pathways for metallic and salt waste streams may reduce the complexity. For example, performance assessments show that geologic repositories can easily accommodate the ER salt waste without treating it to form a ceramic waste form. Because EBR-II was used for atomic energy defense activities, the treated waste likely meets the definition of transuranic waste. Hence, disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in southern New Mexico, may be feasible. This report reviews the direct disposal pathway for ER salt waste and describes eleven tasks necessary for implementing disposal at WIPP, provided space is available, DOE decides to use this alternative disposal pathway in an updated environmental impact statement, and the State of New Mexico grants permission.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2017

Environmental Assessment for the Above Ground Storage Capability at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Draft

The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) is the nation’s only approved repository for the disposal of defense related/defense generated transuranic (TRU) and mixed hazardous TRU waste (henceforth called TRU waste). The mission of the WIPP Project is to realize the safe disposal of TRU waste from TRU waste generator sites in the Department of Energy waste complex. The WIPP Project was authorized by Title II, Section 213(a) of Public Law 96-164 (U. S. Congress 1979). Congress designated the WIPP facility “for the express purpose of providing a research and development facility to demonstrate the safe disposal of radioactive wastes resulting from the defense activities and programs of the United States exempted from regulation by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).” The WIPP facility is operated by the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE). Transuranic waste that is disposed in the WIPP facility is defined by Section 2(18) the WIPP Land Withdrawal Act of 1992 (LWA) (U. S. Congress, 1992) as: “waste containing more than 100 nanocuries of alpha-emitting transuranic isotopes per gram of waste, with half-lives greater than 20 years, except for: (A) high-level radioactive waste; (B) waste that the Secretary has determined, with the concurrence of the Administrator, does not need the degree of isolation required by the disposal regulations; or (C) waste that the NRC has approved for disposal on a case-by-case basis in accordance with part 61 of title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2019

The future of waste management and reduction shows promise with technological advances that have sparked newer and more efficient methods

The safe, clean, and efficient reduction and management of both radioactive and nonradioactive wastes are essential processes, however, these processes can be time consuming, complicated, and costly. The goal of this poster is to research possible waste solutions that will encourage the use of more environmentally and monetarily efficient methods of waste disposal, and decrease the amount of hazardous waste bound for energy recovery, treatment, and disposal facilities. Technological advances such as smart trash bins provide a more efficient means of disposing solid wastes and encouraging recycling. Using artificial intelligence, these bins are able to categorize and separate different forms of waste and recyclable material. The smart bins also provide a method for ensuring the most efficient pick up times for waste facilities. This is done with the use of trash bin sensors, thus, overtime saving money and reducing CO2 emissions. Some countries are also finding ways on a larger scale to reduce waste and encourage environmentally friendly practices. Facilities are reducing waste output through waste recycling, and they are using the waste-to-energy techniques to supply cities with the majority of needed energy. The adoption and encouragement of technological advances in waste reduction and energy restoration can lead to a diminished need for hazardous waste treatment plants, and have a significant impact on preserving our resources, protecting the environment, and simultaneously reducing costs over time.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

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 OSTI2014

Scientific Solutions to Nuclear Waste Environmental Challenges

The Hidden Cost of Nuclear Weapons The Cold War arms race drove an intense plutonium production program in the U.S. This campaign produced approximately 100 tons of plutonium over 40 years. The epicenter of plutonium production in the United States was the Hanford site, a 586 square mile reservation owned by the Department of Energy and located on the Colombia River in Southeastern Washington. Plutonium synthesis relied on nuclear reactors to convert uranium to plutonium within the reactor fuel rods. After a sufficient amount of conversion occurred, the rods were removed from the reactor and allowed to cool. They were then dissolved in an acid bath and chemically processed to separate and purify plutonium from the rest of the constituents in the used reactor fuel. The acidic waste was then neutralized using sodium hydroxide and the resulting mixture of liquids and precipitates (small insoluble particles) was stored in huge underground waste tanks. The byproducts of the U.S. plutonium production campaign include over 53 million gallons of high-level radioactive waste stored in 177 large underground tanks at Hanford and another 34 million gallons stored at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina. This legacy nuclear waste represents one of the largest environmental clean-up challenges facing the world today. The nuclear waste in the Hanford tanks is a mixture of liquids and precipitates that have settled into sludge. Some of these tanks are now over 60 years old and a small number of them are leaking radioactive waste into the ground and contaminating the environment. The solution to this nuclear waste challenge is to convert the mixture of solids and liquids into a durable material that won't disperse into the environment and create hazards to the biosphere. What makes this difficult is the fact that the radioactive half-lives of some of the radionuclides in the waste are thousands to millions of years long. (The half-life of a radioactive substance is the amount of time it takes for one-half of the material to undergo radioactive decay.) In general, the ideal material would need to be durable for approximately 10 half-lives to allow the activity to decay to negligible levels. However, the potential health effects of each radionuclide vary depending on what type of radiation is emitted, the energy of that emission, and the susceptibility for the human body to accumulate and concentrate that particular element. Consequently, actual standards tend to be based on limiting the dose (energy deposited per unit mass) that is introduced into the environment. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has the responsibility to establish standards for nuclear waste disposal to protect the health and safety of the public. For example, the Energy Policy Act of 1992 directed the EPA to establish radiation protection standards for the Yucca Mountain geologic repository for nuclear wastes. The standards for Yucca Mountain were promulgated in 2008, and limit the dose to 15 millirem per year for the first 10,000 years, and 100 milirem per year between 10,000 years and 1 million years (40 CFR Part 197; http://www.epa.gov/radiation/yucca/2008factsheet.html). So, the challenge is two-fold: (1) develop a material (a waste form) that is capable of immobilizing the waste over geologic time scales, and (2) develop a process to convert the radioactive sludge in the tanks into this durable waste form material. Glass: Hard, durable, inert, and with infinite chemical versatility Molten glass is a powerful solvent liquid, which can be designed to dissolve almost anything. When solidified, it can be one of the most chemically inert substances known to man. Nature's most famous analogue to glass is obsidian, a vitreous product of volcanic activity; formations over 17 million years old have been found. Archaeologists have found man-made glass specimens that are five thousand years old.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2019

Characterization techniques for TRU waste from the Analytical Laboratory Hot Cells at Idaho National Laboratory

Characterization techniques for TRU waste from the Analytical Laboratory Hot Cells at Idaho National Laboratory Since the first reactor went hot in 1942, there has been a never ending desire to improve the nuclear reactor and the fuel that it burns. The Idaho National Laboratory has been a key player in reactor and fuel development. As more research projects begin, the spectrum of waste parameters grows. Over the years, the Analytical Laboratory (AL) at the Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) has supported a large range of various research projects. Each project brings its own challenge and analytical technique that, in turn, yields its own unique waste parameters. The AL Hot Cells at INL consist of 6 small cells that can support around 12 different fuel research projects at a time along with infrastructure and environmental samples. Each different project yields different levels of transuranic (TRU) material, RCRA constituents, dose, and contamination levels. The waste parameters from each project dictate a path forward for the waste Low-Level Waste (LLW), Contact Handled TRU (CH-TRU), Mixed Contact Handled TRU (M-CH-TRU), Remote Handled TRU (RH-TRU), or Mixed Remote Handled TRU (M-RH-TRU). With visual examination techniques and process knowledge as an aid, there have been waste handling methods developed that allow debris and sample material to be segregated. Unique characterization mechanisms have been applied for each debris and sample material that are generally more accurate than smear and surface contamination data. For debris found in the Hot Cells, analytical data is gathered and conservatively summarized for each fuel type and research method. This consists of data from Quadrupole Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (Q-ICP-MS), Gamma Spectroscopy, and some data verification through Thermal Ionization Mass Spectrometry (TIMS) and Multi-Collector Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (MC-ICP-MS). This data gives a range of TRU isotope concentrations. Fuel age is taken into account to determine the dominant TRU activity isotopes. Cesium concentrations are also gathered. Each parameter/fuel type then ties a measured Cesium number to TRU content based on historical analytical data. Debris in the hot cells is segregated by project and packaged in individual 2 gallon metal paint cans. Each can is counted by gamma spectroscopy in a calculated and measured geometry. Using process knowledge to determine the fuel or project type, newly counted cesium numbers can be applied to the historic analytical data and TRU content can be estimated. The TRU content allows waste debris to be segregated between CH-TRU and RH-TRU. Packaging techniques can allow for the minimization if RH-TRU waste. Sample material received into the AL must be dissolved into a liquid matrix in order to be analyzed in most cases. When analysis is complete, these liquids go through a consolidation, complexation, neutralization, and solidification process where real time analytical data can be used to calculate TRU content and RCRA constitutes. These calculations allow for no further analytical data to be gathered. The waste matrix is considered stable and acceptable by all AK [define AK] documents. The unique techniques used in characterizing and handling the Analytical Laboratories Hot Cell waste can be applied to various situations and various laboratories. They allow for more accurate data for waste constituents and also for the minimization of RH-TRU waste.

38 RADIATION CHEMISTRY, RADIOCHEMISTRY, AND NUCLEA↗

DOE OSTI2017

The Future of EPA's Waste Estimation Support Tool - 17227

The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Waste Estimation Support Tool (WEST) is a GIS-based decision support tool for estimating the characteristics, amount, and residual radioactivity of waste generated from remediation and cleanup activities after a radiological incident, including those involving radiological dispersal devices, improvised nuclear devices, and nuclear power plants. WEST has been released to the public and has been used in numerous national level exercises and planning scenarios; however, it continues to be improved and refined to add additional functionality and performance. Since its inception, WEST has undergone a myriad of updates, routinely ensuring compatibility with ESRI's ArcGIS and FEMA's Hazus, a tool for estimating potential losses from earthquakes, wind, and flood events. Furthermore, recent enhancements have added reporting and mapping features and multi-state support. Over time, this progress has strained WEST's Microsoft{sup C} Excel based platform. The inherent limitations of Excel have limited the capacity of WEST and narrowed the scope of potential enhancements. Recent collaborative efforts between the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS's) Science and Technology Directorate (S and T) and EPA will see the introduction of a new software platform for easing memory limitations and new and innovative features for improving the accuracy of waste estimates. The planned enhancements include: 1) Systems approach: measure or predict the outcome of decisions associated with disaster response (e.g., decontamination efficacy vs. waste) and to a greater extent, the overall resource demand (e.g., cost, time, etc.); 2) Custom infrastructure data and international support: accommodate non-US building information where available and also add new data and information on recently used decontamination technologies as applied in a real-world incident; 3) Additional waste factors: addition of waste factors that are unique to wide area scenarios such as vehicles and trees as they will likely contribute in a significant manner to the overall waste stream;4) Site analysis and logistics: apply spatial information and analysis technologies to locate and prioritize potential waste staging or storage sites; and use GIS-based logistics planning to better organize, route, and estimate the cost, time, and logistical requirements (i.e., resource demand) associated with transporting large volumes of waste from a disaster-stricken area to waste staging or storage sites; 5) Decontamination technologies: introduce new decontamination technologies, better understand the feasibility and efficacy of new and preexisting decontamination technologies when applied to a wide area incident, and use historical incidents to ground truth waste results; and 6) Resource demand: ability to estimate resource demand information associated with decontamination technologies, waste staging and storage, and logistical information for transporting waste. This paper will describe the next version of WEST (WEST 4.0), and how the aforementioned enhancements will contribute to improving the planning and response capabilities of the tool. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2019

Assessment of Rare Earth Element Fingerprints for Distinguishing Between Site-Related Wastes and Background - 19441

Actinides such as uranium, thorium and radium are known to be present in sites associated with various phases of the cold war weapons research, development and production. Remediation of these sites as well as others associated with chemical plants that may have generated radioactive actinide-containing wastes have been the focus of the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) for the past 20 years. The goal is to remediate a site to established cleanup standards as efficiently and cost-effectively as possible. For radiologically-contaminated sites, one potential challenge is the presence of non-FUSRAP media such as naturally-occurring radioactive material (NORM) or technologically-enhanced naturally-occurring radioactive material (TENORM), from non-FUSRAP sources, at concentrations exceeding site cleanup standards. Such NORM and TENORM, and even byproduct radionuclides from other unrelated activities on or near the site, can be mistaken for project waste and thus incur significant additional excavation and waste transport and disposal costs. Past studies have provided examples of NORM and non-FUSRAP waste and described strategies to distinguish them from FUSRAP waste. This paper describes various sources of NORM, summarizes the types of project-related waste at some active FUSRAP sites, and identifies TENORM sites from which radionuclides could possibly migrate via various environmental pathways to nearby FUSRAP sites. The authors also examine two Case Studies that calculate distinctive elemental ratios and are examples of tools which may be used for distinguishing FUSRAP waste from other radionuclides present in natural or other man-made contributors to background. Case Study I examines two bodies of data and calculates distinctive elemental ratios between pairs of rare earth elements (REE) to see if significant differences may exist between such ratios in unregulated coal ash residue, common in fill in well-established towns and cities, and FUSRAP waste. The first group of data, consisting of eighteen sample results, was obtained from the FUSRAP Maywood Superfund Site's historical data while the second was obtained from a paper which provided extensive data (more than 100 samples) on the REE content in fly ash residues from three major coal-producing areas in the United States. This example illustrates statistically significant differences in five of six REE ratios and thus provides a potential tool for distinguishing FUSRAP waste from coal ash-based NORM. Case Study II examines differences in the mean REE:Actinide and REE:REE ratios in Welsbach-impacted sample results to distinguish project waste from background. While the purpose of this study was to distinguish project waste from background levels of the radionuclides of concern (ROC), it provides a good example of how one or more ratios could potentially be used to distinguish FUSRAP waste from NORM. Lastly, the authors recommend that future projects ensure robust characterization, that considers all potential radionuclide contributors from both FUSRAP activities as well as from other contributors to background for the region during the Planning Phase of the Data Life Cycle described within the Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM). It is expected that the incremental characterization sampling and analysis costs will be dwarfed by potential savings from efforts to better delineate and limit remediation to FUSRAP wastes rather than other potentially unregulated contributors to regional background. Other agencies or commercial entities with radiological environmental liabilities similar to FUSRAP would benefit from similar considerations of REEs and other radionuclides that could contribute to regional background. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2018

Testing Results from the Low Activity Waste Pretreatment System (LAWPS) Full-Scale Ion Exchange Column Test and Engineering Scale Integrated System Test - 18634

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of River Protection's (ORP) primary mission is to retrieve and treat Hanford's tank waste and close the Tank Farms to protect the Columbia River. Mixed radioactive waste is stored in 177 underground tanks at the Hanford Site as reported in DOE/ORP 2003- 02, Environmental Impact Statement for Retrieval, Treatment, and Disposal of Tank Waste and Closure of the Single Shell Tanks at the Hanford Site, Richland WA, Inventory and Source Term Data Package. The 177 underground tanks are estimated to contain about 56 million gallons of waste. The Low Activity Waste Pretreatment System (LAWPS) Project provides for the early production of immobilized low activity waste (ILAW) by feeding LAW directly from Tank Farms to the Hanford Waste Treatment Plant's (WTP's) LAW Facility, bypassing the Pretreatment Facility. Prior to the transfer of feed to the WTP LAW Vitrification Facility, tank supernatant waste will be pretreated in the LAWPS to meet the WTP LAW waste acceptance criteria. The LAWPS will also facilitate the return of secondary liquid wastes from the WTP LAW Vitrification Facility to the Tank Farms. In November of 2015 DOE's Tank Operations Contractor, Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS), awarded a contract to the AECOM team to design, fabricate and operate two test platforms to generate performance data at two different scales and demonstrate technology maturation. The first platform models the ion exchange (IX) columns at full scale, and the second platform models the integrated flowsheet (cross flow filter (CFF) and IX) at 1/9. scale. Overarching technical objectives of performing the full-scale ion exchange test and the engineering-scale integrated test are to: 1. Test interactions between unit process operations; 2. Test removal of non-radioactive cesium from process stream; 3. Test removal of undissolved solids from process stream; 4. Confirm operational flow rate range and stability; 5. Confirm volumetric throughput of waste stream over flow operating range; 6. Confirm range of process temperatures over planned operating range; 7. Establish system hydraulics and process criteria; 8. Coordinate key control and monitoring components; 9. Establish treated product chemistry meets requirements (cesium, solids, and pH); and 10. Test the hazard control strategy for a no flow condition through the IX column. Data collected during testing will be used by WRPS to validate the preliminary design, inform the final design of the permanent plant equipment, and demonstrate that the critical technology elements have advanced to a technology readiness level of 6 (prototypical system validation in a relevant environment). Testing on both platforms started in fall of 2016 generating NQA-1 data. This paper covers test results from the first five phases of testing on the 1/9. scale integrated test platform. A further three phases of testing are currently being executed, these including a 5.6 M sodium simulant containing foulant, a high viscosity simulant and finally a run performed with a lower Cs concentration (all earlier tests were spiked to 4 x Cs to reduce volume and cost). Results from these tests were not available at the time of writing available. Results are also presented from the full scale IX testing. Eight test were performed covering column loading, elution and regeneration; column loading, elution and regeneration with upflow displacement; IX column loading and gas migration; resin removal; solids accumulation; and IX column emergency recirculation and vent. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2019

Applicability Evaluation of the In-can Vitrification to Fukushima Waste - 19016

The in-can vitrification process has been developed by the CEA for an internal application (alpha waste treatment) since 2005 and can be rated TRL 7. On these basis the DEM'n'MELT consortium which gathers Orano, CEA and ECM technologies is currently developing and qualifying a robust, simple and versatile in situ vitrification process dedicated to D and D waste. The DEM'n'MELT vitrification process is developed with a modular design, the main characteristics are presented hereafter: - Suitable for high or medium level waste. - Heated by a simple and robust resistance furnace. - Offering homogeneity to the melted mixture. - Suitable for solid or liquid wastes, including zeolites and sludge. - Flexible enough to accommodate uncertainties on waste composition. - Designed in order to produce a small amount of secondary waste. - Implementing proven technological solutions from French high level vitrification shops. - Requiring low investment and operation costs. Regarding this features, the in-can process has been deemed as an appropriate tool for the vitrification of the Fukushima water treatment secondary waste (mineral adsorbants, sludge). The evaluation of the In-can process for Fukushima waste is a project led by Orano, CEA and ANADEC. The main phases are: - Scenarios and glass formulation studies to optimize waste loading and matrix homogeneity. - Bench scale tests on several scenarios of blended waste. - Pilot scale test on one selected scenario (reference scenario). - Feasibility evaluation to Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station implementation. This paper presents the first results of this project with a highlighting on glass waste loading, glass properties, bench tests and pilot test results, process parameters, and material balance. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2013

Enhancing e-waste estimates: Improving data quality by multivariate Input–Output Analysis

Highlights: • A multivariate Input–Output Analysis method for e-waste estimates is proposed. • Applying multivariate analysis to consolidate data can enhance e-waste estimates. • We examine the influence of model selection and data quality on e-waste estimates. • Datasets of all e-waste related variables in a Dutch case study have been provided. • Accurate modeling of time-variant lifespan distributions is critical for estimate. - Abstract: Waste electrical and electronic equipment (or e-waste) is one of the fastest growing waste streams, which encompasses a wide and increasing spectrum of products. Accurate estimation of e-waste generation is difficult, mainly due to lack of high quality data referred to market and socio-economic dynamics. This paper addresses how to enhance e-waste estimates by providing techniques to increase data quality. An advanced, flexible and multivariate Input–Output Analysis (IOA) method is proposed. It links all three pillars in IOA (product sales, stock and lifespan profiles) to construct mathematical relationships between various data points. By applying this method, the data consolidation steps can generate more accurate time-series datasets from available data pool. This can consequently increase the reliability of e-waste estimates compared to the approach without data processing. A case study in the Netherlands is used to apply the advanced IOA model. As a result, for the first time ever, complete datasets of all three variables for estimating all types of e-waste have been obtained. The result of this study also demonstrates significant disparity between various estimation models, arising from the use of data under different conditions. It shows the importance of applying multivariate approach and multiple sources to improve data quality for modelling, specifically using appropriate time-varying lifespan parameters. Following the case study, a roadmap with a procedural guideline is provided to enhance e-waste estimation studies.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2015

Hazardous waste status of discarded electronic cigarettes

Highlights: • Electronic cigarettes were tested using TCLP and WET. • Several electronic cigarette products leached lead at hazardous waste levels. • Lead was the only element that exceeded hazardous waste concentration thresholds. • Nicotine solution may cause hazardous waste classification when discarded unused. - Abstract: The potential for disposable electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) to be classified as hazardous waste was investigated. The Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) was performed on 23 disposable e-cigarettes in a preliminary survey of metal leaching. Based on these results, four e-cigarette products were selected for replicate analysis by TCLP and the California Waste Extraction Test (WET). Lead was measured in leachate as high as 50 mg/L by WET and 40 mg/L by TCLP. Regulatory thresholds were exceeded by two of 15 products tested in total. Therefore, some e-cigarettes would be toxicity characteristic (TC) hazardous waste but a majority would not. When disposed in the unused form, e-cigarettes containing nicotine juice would be commercial chemical products (CCP) and would, in the United States (US), be considered a listed hazardous waste (P075). While household waste is exempt from hazardous waste regulation, there are many instances in which such waste would be subject to regulation. Manufactures and retailers with unused or expired e-cigarettes or nicotine juice solution would be required to manage these as hazardous waste upon disposal. Current regulations and policies regarding the availability of nicotine-containing e-cigarettes worldwide were reviewed. Despite their small size, disposable e-cigarettes are consumed and discarded much more quickly than typical electronics, which may become a growing concern for waste managers.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗