Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Nuclear Facility”

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 937 records · Page 52
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

Characterization of the Soluble and Insoluble Portions of Solids from the Salt Waste Processing Facility Tank 201 and Tank 202 Samples

The Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF) Tank 201 and Tank 202 samples have been characterized using X-ray diffraction (XRD), scanning electron microscope/energy dispersive x-ray (SEM/EDX), particle size analysis (PSA-Microtrac), Fourier transform-infrared (FT-IR) and nuclear magnetic resonance ( 1 H NMR) spectroscopic techniques to characterize and identify organic and inorganic components in Tanks 201 and 202 as part of efforts to understand the problems occurring at SWPF due to the presence of solids in the recovered solvent.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2023

Characterization of the Soluble and Insoluble Portions of Solids from the Salt Waste Processing Facility Tank 201 and Tank 202 Samples

The Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF) Tank 201 and Tank 202 samples have been characterized using X-ray diffraction (XRD), scanning electron microscope/energy dispersive x-ray (SEM/EDX), particle size analysis (PSA-Microtrac), Fourier transform-infrared (FT-IR) and nuclear magnetic resonance ( 1 H NMR) spectroscopic techniques to characterize and identify organic and inorganic components in Tanks 201 and 202 as part of efforts to understand the problems occurring at SWPF due to the presence of solids in the recovered solvent.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS2015

Subscale Validation of the Subsurface Active Filtration of Exhaust (SAFE) Approach to NTP Ground Testing

Brief History of NTP: Project Rover Began in 1950s by Los Alamos Scientific Labs (now Los Alamos National Labs) and ran until 1970s Tested a series of nuclear reactor engines of varying size at Nevada Test Site (now Nevada National Security Site) Ranged in scale from 111 kN (25 klbf) to 1.1 MN (250 klbf) Included Nuclear Furnace-1 tests Demonstrated the viability and capability of a nuclear rocket engine test program One of Kennedys 4 goals during famous moon speech to Congress Nuclear Engines for Rocket Vehicle Applications (NERVA) Atomic Energy Commission and NASA joint venture started in 1964 Parallel effort to Project Rover was focused on technology demonstration Tested XE engine, a 245-kN (55-klbf) engine to demonstrate startup shutdown sequencing. Hot-hydrogen stream is passed directly through fuel elements potential for radioactive material to be eroded into gaseous fuel flow as identified in previous programs NERVA and Project Rover (1950s-70s) were able to test in open atmosphere similar to conventional rocket engine test stands today Nuclear Furance-1 tests employed a full scrubber system Increased government and environmental regulations prohibit the modern testing in open atmosphere. Since the 1960s, there has been an increasing cessation on open air testing of nuclear material Political and national security concerns further compound the regulatory environment

Test Facilities↗
DOE OSTI2021

Spent Crystalline Silicotitanate Storage Study—Post AP-105DF Processing

A Tank-Side Cesium Removal (TSCR) system is under development by Washington River Protection Solutions to support initial production of immobilized low-activity waste (LAW) by feeding Hanford tank supernate from tank farms to the Hanford Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) LAW Facility. Tank waste supernate is filtered to remove suspended solids and then Cs is removed by processing it through crystalline silicotitanate (CST) ion exchange media manufactured by Honeywell UOP, LLC. The Cs-loaded CST columns will be stored indefinitely, with a goal of eventual CST removal and treatment. Thus, the spent CST needs to be recoverable after undetermined storage time. Previous testing with AP-105 simulant showed that rinsing the CST bed with 3 bed volumes (1.4 apparatus volumes [AVs]) of 0.1 M NaOH resulted in a dried bed that maintained flow characteristics indicative of ease of recovery. This study explored the intermediate conditions (between feed dried in place and the 1.4 AVs of 0.1 M NaOH rinse) to evaluate CST bed properties.

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

Selection of Vadose Zone Flow and Transport Properties with Gravel Fraction Corrections for the Hanford Site Composite Analysis and Cumulative Impact Evaluation

This environmental calculation file (ECF) is a compilation of hydrologic and radiological/chemical properties to be used for the updated Hanford Site Composite Analysis (CA) and Cumulative Impact Evaluation (CIE) vadose zone (VZ) modeling. The CA will provide an all-pathways dose projection to a hypothetical future member of the public from all planned low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities and potential contributions from all other projected end-state sources of radioactive material left at the Hanford Site following site closure. Its primary purpose is to support the decision-making process of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under DOE O 435.1 Chg 1, Radioactive Waste Management, related to managing low-level waste disposal facilities at the Hanford Site. The CIE evaluates the effects of cleanup decisions regarding groundwater quality in the Hanford Site Central Plateau (DOE/RL-2018-69, Cumulative Impact Evaluation Technical Approach Document). Due to the complexity and large number of waste sites in source operable units (OUs), the computational tools used for the CIE must be capable of representing a range of site conditions and source terms in the VZ while also efficiently computing the impact that cleanup decisions have on the underlying aquifer. Waste-site proximity between and within source OUs has resulted in contaminants commingling in the vadose and saturated zones in complex ways. Plume commingling requires cleanup decisions to be evaluated considering the surrounding waste sites and existing groundwater contamination, therefore demonstrating the need to evaluate cumulative impacts from the VZ to groundwater.

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

Evaluation of PBR Spent Fuel Criticality and Dose Rate Compliance for Storage and Transportation

Spent tri-structural isotropic (TRISO)–based fuels have a strong track record in storage and transportation without documented incidents. This work seeks to reduce uncertainty to aid in more informed spent fuel management of TRISO-based fuels by modeling both fresh and spent pebble bed reactor (PBR) fuel and comparing the results to the regulatory standards from 10 CFR 71. SCALE was used for all modeling due to it having fast and accurate methods for handling PBR fuel modeling, as well as having an efficient method for shielding calculations in monaco with automated variance reduction using importance calculations (MAVRIC), which utilizes the consistent adjoint-driven importance sampling (CADIS) and the forward-weighted consistent adjoint-driven importance sampling (FW-CADIS) methods. KENO-VI was used for all criticality calculations, TSUNAMI was used for uncertainty quantification on k-effective, TRITON and the Oak Ridge isotope generation code (ORIGEN) were both used for depletion of the fuel, and MAVRIC was used for shielding calculations. For criticality assessments, this study focused on the requirement that the value of the neutron multiplication factor, k-effective (k-eff), would not exceed a peak value of 0.95, including uncertainty, with 95% confidence. Criticality was initially examined by modeling fresh fuel from three different designs—HTR-10 fuel, PBMR-400 fuel, and demonstration fuel representative of a TRISO-fueled modern high-temperature gas reactor (HTGR) design, henceforth referred to as Demo HTGR—and placing them into various sized containers with conditions described in 10 CFR 71 to quantify the peak k-eff state. When the peak value of 0.95 k-eff was exceeded, mitigation methods were examined in those scenarios. Burnup credit, pebble displacement in areas of strong neutron multiplication, and random pebble replacement using pebbles of various compositions and replacement fractions were examined. In summary, the criticality of PBR fuels can be well accounted for by restricting container size, taking credit for burnup, or by displacing/replacing pebbles. Uncertainty of the k-eff due to nuclear data uncertainties was recorded at ~0.6644%Δk/k, or roughly 664% mil (pcm). The nuclear data–induced uncertainty was relatively small and should not require significant modification in the design to be accounted for. Revisions to the evaluated nuclear data file values have been shown to have a larger impact than nuclear data–induced uncertainty. For dose rate aspects, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations require a maximum dose rate of 10 millirem per hour (mrem/h) at 2 meters. In examining the dose rate behavior of spent PBR fuel, the representative Demo HTGR fuel was modeled exclusively due to it possessing the highest target burnup of the examined fuels. Equilibrium cycle modeling methods were used to produce a higher-fidelity discharge isotopic composition than simple assumptions, such as reflected pebbles. The discharge composition was used as a source term in the fixed-source transport shielding calculations, and dose rates were calculated at 2 m for the shortest possible cooling time. The low concentration of fuel material led to dose rates that were in line with regulatory limits, despite the high burnup when compared to traditional light water reactor fuels. In conclusion, the methods employed in this study would require more work to further verify and validate and are limited to the criticality and dose rate analyses performed.

11 - NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
NASA NTRS2019

Update on Radiation Testing for Space Fission Power Systems

Radiation effects on materials and electronics is a major topic that needs to be addressed for a nuclear reactor flight demonstration of the Kilopower reactor. The Kilopower project team has taken steps towards developing a standardized radiation environment qualification program for components and materials. Candidate nuclear reactor facilities for both low fluence electronics and high fluence materials irradiations have been identified and approached. Collaborations are being pursued with both NASA and external experts to ensure that the results of the qualification testing are appropriate and relevant to nuclear fission power flight systems.

Chaiken, Max F.↗
DOE OSTI2024

Independent Review of Non-Destructive Assay for the K-25/K-27 D&D Project: November 30-December 3, 2004, Oak Ridge, TN

The DOE with concurrence from the D&D contractor has chartered an assessment of the methods and procedures used to obtain the original NDA results of holdup deposits at the K-25 and K-27 uranium gaseous diffusion facilities in Oak Ridge. The assessment has been performed by an external review team with the participation of the D&D contractor, DOE, and DOE/OR. This document is the final report for the assessment. The DOE provided the charter for this review. The review team spent a week in Oak Ridge attending meetings and participating in discussions with expert contractor staff. Substantial additional input for the review came from numerous written materials, unpublished and published. This final report of observations, findings, and recommendations in areas defined by the charter is based on information from the meetings, discussions, and documents. The assessment of the Review Team is that the DOE/OR and BJC approach in using historical NDA data for the D&D of K-25 and K-27 is appropriate and generally acceptable. Resolving issues, addressing findings, and implementing the recommendations documented in this report will reconcile specific technical concerns.

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

Key Technical Issues for Greater-Than-Class-C (GTCC) Waste Disposal - 20164

Greater-than-Class C (GTCC) waste is low-level waste (LLW) that exceeds the Class C concentrations tabulated in Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 61. Disposal of GTCC waste in the near surface (i.e. upper 30 m of the earth's surface) is prohibited in the United States. Though GTCC waste disposal is generally prohibited, the Commission can approve disposal according to 10 CFR 61.55(a)(2)(iv) on a case-by-case basis. The waste classification tables, developed in the early 1980's, were based on model projections of dose to an inadvertent intruder in agricultural, construction, and discovery exposure scenarios. The assumptions and parameters used were documented in a series of public reports. Though different disposal facility designs and site conditions were considered, the waste classification tables were based on a disposal facility design located in a specific environment. The tables were based on shallow (i.e., top few meters) trench facility designs and did not consider deeper facilities. To determine the suitability of GTCC waste disposal in the near-surface, site-specific analyses must account for differences between GTCC waste and Class A, B, and C LLW (hereafter, traditional LLW). GTCC waste can have concentrations of radionuclides that are much higher than traditional LLW. Because of these higher concentrations, processes that are typically not significant for traditional LLW may be significant with respect to disposal of GTCC waste. These processes include, but are not limited to, heat generation, criticality, and radiolysis. The form of the waste as well as the barriers to release of the waste (e.g. waste package) could be substantially different than they are for traditional LLW. These barriers need to be considered when assessing the impacts of accidents during receipt and placement and in evaluating long-term performance. Some GTCC radioactivity is either embedded in stainless steel or contained in stainless steel barriers. Stainless steel can have very low corrosion rates under a variety of environmental conditions. Finally, and possibly most importantly, GTCC waste would likely need to be disposed deeper than traditional LLW to reduce the probability of disturbance. The waste classification table values of traditional LLW are based on an inadvertent intruder excavating into the waste and bringing some of the material to the land surface. If waste is deeper than approximately 5 m, the excavation scenario becomes very unlikely. Therefore, other intruder scenarios, such as drilling exposure scenarios, need to be evaluated. This paper summarizes key technical issues for the disposal of GTCC waste. Our previous study shows that certain GTCC waste may be suitable for near surface disposal whereas others may not. This study may support ongoing technical analyses assessing potential disposal of GTCC in a near surface disposal facility. (authors)

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

Panel Session 46: Final Closure of Unlined LLW Disposal Facilities Worldwide (R3.5)

This panel discussed the on-going and emerging issues with the design and construction of final cover system of unlined disposal facilities (e.g., material disposal areas (MDAs), subsurface disposal areas (SDAs), burial grounds, and similar historical waste trenches, pits and vaults). The discussion focused on key technical and regulatory issues as well as lessons learned from years of engineering and construction in US and non-US locations. Panelists with presentations: Closure of Unlined LLW Disposal Sites (Craig Benson); Closure of LLW Facilities (Paul Pointon); Final Closure of Unlined LLW Disposal Facilities - Lessons Learned (Kevin Foye)

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

Panel Session 55: US DOE Savannah River Operations Office: Liquid Waste Progress

This panel provided an overview of the SRS HLW Liquid Waste Program (history, challenges, opportunities, and future) including discussions of the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF), Tank Closures, Actinide Removal Process/Modular Caustic Side Solvent Extraction Unit, Tank Closure Cesium Removal, and the Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF). Panelists with presentations: SRS Liquid Waste Program (James Folk); SRS Liquid Waste Progress (Mark Schmitz); Salt Waste Processing Facility (Frank Sheppard)

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

Measurement Acceptance Region (MAR) Assessment Results Based on the October 2019 Sludge Batch 10 Projections

Recent analysis of a Tank 26 sample indicated a higher than anticipated sulfur concentration in the supernatant and a significant amount of insoluble sulfur. The final concentration in the glass product would be well above the sulfate limits of 0.6-0.65 weight percent (wt.%) determined for previous sludge batches. In preparation for Sludge Batch 10 (SB10) processing, washing of Tank 51 will be performed to reduce the sulfate concentration in the glass product to less than 0.65 wt.% at waste loadings (WLs) of interest. To evaluate the feasibility of two Tank 51 Na wash endpoints (0.8 and 1.2M), Savannah River Remediation requested that the Savannah River National Laboratory perform assessments using the Defense Waste Processing Facility Product Composition Control System (PCCS) models and their associated Measurement Acceptance Region (MAR) constraints.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2022

SB14 Source Reduction Evaluation Review and Plan for the DOE California Sites

The Department of Energy (DOE) is the owner of multiple facilities in Northern California. The facilities include Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), Sandia National Laboratories/California (SNL/CA) and SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory (SLAC) among other sites. Through their operations, the facilities generate hazardous waste and, thereby, are subject to the requirements of Chapter 31 of the Title 22 California Code of Regulations, Waste Minimization. The Northern California sites are primarily research and development facilities in the areas relating to national security, high-energy physics, bioscience and the environment.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2022

Removable, Sequestration Coatings for Mitigating Hazardous Contaminants Related to Deactivation and Decommissioning Activities

This project is a collaborative effort between InnoSense LLC (ISL) and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) aimed at mitigating the mercury (Hg) contamination problem at the Y-12 National Security Complex (NSC). The report summarizes the research and technology development work of the Phase IIB Project, led by Dr. Uma Sampathkumaran at ISL for the period of July 31, 2017–October 31, 2021. The Y-12 site cleanup includes technologies for safe and cost-effective facility demolition, soil remediation, and on-site treatment and disposal of mercury bearing wastes. One of the technology demonstration goals was a reactive strippable coating for targeted pre-demolition and de-contamination to limit Hg mobilization and the volume of debris requiring treatment for disposal. Toward this, ISL has developed a water-based reactive strippable coating (Trap & See-Hg™) to sequester elemental Hg(0) and mercuric Hg(II) species in the coating. The coating provides multiple benefits including (1) Hg vapor suppression, (2) sealing in the hazardous contaminants, (3) visually locating the contaminant through color changes, and (4) remediating the contaminated surfaces upon coating removal. Through collaboration between ORNL and ISL in Phase II work, the team successfully demonstrated the Trap & See-Hg technology to (1) visually locate the presence of Hg on concrete, soil and drywall surfaces, (2) effectively sequester all mercury species (elemental, soluble and insoluble Hg) from lab-generated and ex-situ soil and brick/rubble samples collected from the Y 12 site with 80 to 95% efficiency to capture/reduce Hg vapor concentration, (3) be applied by manual and robotic spray applicators and cure at room ambient, (4) remain a cohesive and peelable coating upon drying, and (5) sequester Hg0 from walls in the alpha-2 building basement at Y-12 during a small scale in-situ field trial. In Phase IIB, ISL’s effort was focused on refining the coating formulations with additives containing passive and reactive sorbents, colorimetric indicator, and thixotropic agents to achieve the desired performance. The paints were then evaluated at ORNL for applicability to metal and concrete surfaces of different sizes and shapes, and soil rubble, Hg-sorption capacity and achieving sag-free coating on surfaces when applied by a manual spray applicator. Ambient cure of the coating resulted in a dry thickness of 16–20 mil. The coatings were removed from smooth or rough surfaces with low to moderate force. Both lab-generated Hg-contaminated samples and soil and brick/rubble samples containing a range of Hg concentrations (collected from the Y-12 site by UCOR) were used in this project. Optimized formulations were applied to these samples and evaluated for ability to suppress Hg vapors, sequester Hg 0 and Hg(II) species and color mapping of mercury species on the test surface. The ORNL team initially identified three to four potential sites at Y-12 and ORNL for potential demonstration. However, the pandemic closed any possible avenues for on-site demonstration of the robotic spray applicator. The metal and concrete samples with low to high Hg content provided by UCOR from an ongoing demolition were subsequently used for ex-situ sample characterization and analysis at ORNL over a period of 25 days. The coatings suppressed Hg vapors with an efficiency of 95–99% from heavily contaminated metal and 60% from concrete substrate. Analysis of total Hg in the peeled paints indicates sorption capacities ranging from 12 µg Hg/g of paint from concrete to 1.2 mg Hg/g of paint from the metal substrates while peeled paints from soil samples could capture a total Hg from 2.3 mg Hg/g to 66 mg/g paint. Toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) tests recovered total mercury leached at 0.15±0.0008 µg/L for concrete to 126.81±0.67 µg/L and 377.25±5.67 µg/L for the two metal substrates, to allow for informed decisions on downstream disposal considerations. Together, this Phase IIB demonstrated the potential value of the Trap & See-Hg for Hg uptake, vapor suppression, and color mapping, and may thus be used to enhance worker safety during site cleanup, facility demolition, and downstream waste disposal at Y-12 NSC.

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

Panel Session 133: Integrating Economic Redevelopment and Workforce Transition Into DOE Site Closure Planning (R1.18)

This panel focused on post-closure impacts to the long-term site workforce and communities in DoE's approach to accelerated site cleanup and expedited reduction of long-term financial liabilities. At sites where Cold-War workers shifted from weapons production to the cleanup effort, a more holistic approach to the workforce transition Post-EM cleanup is needed. This holistic approach would include incentives for expedited closure, trade re-training, and a vision for future site commercial activities. The panel discussed the importance of the right workforce incentives that includes appropriate training for displaced workers so that they can be integrated into a next job. A key aspect of this discussion was to re-assess the current and future land use opportunities related to land re-use concepts. By re-arranging cleanup sequencing is it possible to divest land sooner than originally projected for productive commercial use hence reducing the DOE long-term liability and consequently increasing an economic soft landing for those Cold-War workers. Panelists with presentations: Integrating Economic Redevelopment and Workforce Transition Into DOE Site Closure Planning (Sean Todd); Sustaining, Growing and Re-Developing DOD/DOD Facilities and Assets (Jonathan Taylor)

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

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

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

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗