Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “DISPOSAL”

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

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

At least 1,135 records · Page 63
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2015

Field-scale Thermal Testing in a Generic Salt Disposal Environment Underground Research Laboratory (URL): Delineation of Principal Purpose Objectives and Hypotheses

The amount of brine present in domal salt formation is far less than in bedded salts (e.g., 0.01 to 0.1% compared with 1 to 3%). In salt domes, shear deformation associated with diapirism has caused existing brine to coalesce, leading to flow and expulsion. Brine migration behavior was investigated in bedded salt at WIPP (Nowak and McTigue 1987, SAND87-0880), and in domal salt at Asse (Coyle et al. 1987, BMI/ONWI-624). Test methods were not standardized, and the tests involved large diameter boreholes (17 to 36 in. diameter) and large apparatus. The tested intervals were proximal to mined openings (within approximately 1 diameter) where in situ stresses are redistributed due to excavation. The tests showed that (1) brine inflow rates can range over at least 2 orders of magnitude for domal vs. bedded salt, (2) that brine inflow is strongly associated with clay and interbedded permeable layers in bedded salt, and (3) that measurement systems can readily collect very small quantities of moisture over time frames of 2 years or longer. Brine inflow rates declined slightly with time in both test series, but neither series approached a state of apparent depletion. This range of flow magnitude could be significant to repository design and performance assessment, especially if inflow rates can be predicted using stratigraphic and geomechanical inputs, and can be shown to approach zero in a predictable manner.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

Summary of Calcine Disposal Development Using Hot Isostatic Pressing

Battelle Energy Alliance, LLC, has demonstrated the effectiveness of the hot isostatic press (HIP) process for treatment of hazardous high-level waste known as calcine that is stored at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center (INTEC) at Idaho National Laboratory. HIP trials performed with simulated calcines at Idaho National Laboratory’s Materials and Fuels Complex and an Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organization facility from 2007 to 2010 produced a dense, monolithic waste form with increased chemical durability and effective (storage) volume reductions of ~10 to ~70% compared to granular calcine forms. In December 2009, the U.S. Department of Energy signed an amended Record of Decision selecting HIP technology as the treatment method for the 4,400 m3 of granular zirconia and alumina calcine stored at INTEC. Testing showed that HIP treatment reduces the risks associated with radioactive and hazardous constituent release, post-production handling, and long-term (repository) storage of calcines and would result in estimated storage cost savings in the billions of dollars. Battelle Energy Alliance has the ability to complete pilot-scale HIP processing of INTEC calcine, which is the next necessary step in implementing HIP processing as a calcine treatment method.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2016

Final Report (BMWi Project No.: 02 E 10971): Joint project: Retention of radionuclides relevant for final disposal in natural clay rock and saline systems - Subproject 2: Geochemical behavior and transport of radionuclides in saline systems in the prese

The objective of this project was to study the influence of increased salinities on interaction processes in the system radionuclide – organics – clay – aquifer. For this, complexation, redox, sorption, and diffusion studies were performed under variation of the ionic strength (up to 4 mol kg -1 ) and the background electrolyte (NaCl, CaCl 2 , MgCl 2 ).

38 RADIATION CHEMISTRY, RADIOCHEMISTRY, AND NUCLEA↗
DOE OSTI2016

Waste Form Release Data Package for the 2005 Integrated Disposal Facility Performance Assessment. Erratum

Please insert erratum page in report PNNL-14805. This erratum serves to correct the K g (Glass apparent equilibrium constant based on the SiO 2 (aq) activity) values affected by a calculation error for glasses LAWA44, LAWB45 and LAWC22. The error was first identified by Papathanassiu et al. (2011). The K g values were corrected by Freedman et al. (2015) by multiplying the erroneous K g values by approx. 3.4. As indicated in Freedman et al. (2015), this 3.4 factor originates from the erroneous use of the molecular weight of H 4 SiO 4 (96.114 g·mol –1 ) instead of the molecular weight for Si (28.086 g·mol –1 ).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2016

Integrated Disposal Facility FY 2016: ILAW Verification and Validation of the eSTOMP Simulator

This document describes two sets of simulations carried out to further verify and validate the eSTOMP simulator. In this report, a distinction is made between verification and validation, and the focus is on verifying eSTOMP through a series of published benchmarks on cementitious wastes, and validating eSTOMP based on a lysimeter experiment for the glassified waste. These activities are carried out within the context of a scientific view of validation that asserts that models can only be invalidated, and that model validation (and verification) is a subjective assessment.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2017

Groundwater Pathway Model for the Los Alamos National Laboratory Technical Area 21, Material Disposal Area T

This report consists of four major sections, including this introductory section. Section 2 provides an overview of previous investigations related to the development of the current sitescale model. The methods and data used to develop the 3-D groundwater model and the techniques used to distill that model into a form suitable for use in the GoldSim models are discussed in Section 3. Section 4 presents the results of the model development effort and discusses some of the uncertainties involved. Three attachments that provide details about the components and data used in this groundwater pathway model are also included with this report.

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

Data Validation Package - June 2015 Groundwater and Surface Water Sampling at the Green River, Utah, Disposal Site

Groundwater samples were collected during the 2015 sampling event from point-of-compliance (POC) wells 0171, 0173, 0176, 0179, 0181, and 0813 to monitor the disposition of contaminants in the middle sandstone unit of the Cedar Mountain Formation. Groundwater samples also were collected from alluvium monitoring wells 0188, 0189, 0192, 0194, and 0707, and basal sandstone monitoring wells 0182, 0184, 0185, and 0588 as a best management practice. Surface locations 0846 and 0847 were sampled to monitor for degradation of water quality in the backwater area of Brown’s Wash and in the Green River immediately downstream of Brown’s Wash. The Green River location 0801 is upstream from the site and is sampled to determine background-threshold values (BTVs). Sampling and analyses were conducted as specified in Sampling and Analysis Plan for U.S. Department of Energy Office of Legacy Management Sites (LMS/PRO/S04351, continually updated, http://energy.gov/lm/downloads/sampling-and- analysis-plan-us-department-energy-office-legacy-management-sites). Water levels were measured at each sampled well. The analytical data and associated qualifiers can be viewed in environmental database reports and are also available for viewing with dynamic mapping via the GEMS (Geospatial Environmental Mapping System) website at http://gems.lm.doe.gov/#. All six POC wells are completed in the middle sandstone unit of the Cedar Mountain Formation and are monitored to measure contaminant concentrations for comparison to proposed alternate concentration limits (ACLs), as provided in Table 1. Contaminant concentrations in the POC wells remain below their respective ACLs.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

Data Validation Package May 2016 Groundwater Sampling at the Sherwood, Washington, Disposal Site August 2016

The 2001 Long-Term Surveillance Plan (LTSP) for the US. Department of Energy Sherwood Project (UMI'RCA Title II) Reclamation Cell, Wellpinit, Washington, does not require groundwater compliance monitoring at the Sherwood site. However, the LTSP stipulates limited groundwater monitoring for chloride and sulfate (designated indicator parameters) and total dissolved solids (TDS) as a best management practice. Samples were collected from the background well, MW-2B, and the two downgradient wells, MW-4 and MW-10, in accordance with the LTSP. Sampling and analyses were conducted as specified in the Sampling and Analysis Plan for US. Department of Energy Office of Legacy Management Sites (LMS/PRO/S04351, continually updated). Water levels were measured in all wells prior to sampling and in four piezometers completed in the tailings dam. Time-concentration graphs included in this report indicate that the chloride, sulfate, and TDS concentrations are consistent with historical measurements. The concentrations of chloride and sulfate are well below the State of Washington water quality criteria value of 250 milligrams per liter (mg/L) for both parameters.

2016 Groundwater Sampling Sherwood, Washington↗
DOE OSTI2012

Annual Status Report (Fiscal Year 2011) Composite Analysis of Low-Level Waste Disposal in the Central Plateau at the Hanford Site

In accordance with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) requirements in DOE O 435.1 Chg 11, and as implemented by DOE/RL-2000-29, Rev. 22, the DOE Richland Operations Office (DOE-RL) has prepared this annual summary of the composite analysis for fiscal year (FY) 2011 as originally reported in PNNL-118003 (henceforth referred to as the Composite Analysis). The main emphasis of DOE/RL-2000-29, Rev. 2 is to identify additional data and information to enhance the Composite Analysis and the subsequent PNNL-11800 Addendum 14 (hereinafter referred to as the Addendum), and to address secondary issues identified during the review of the Composite Analysis.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2012

Annual Status Report (Fiscal Year 2012) Composite Analysis of Low-Level Waste Disposal in the Central Plateau at the Hanford Site

In accordance with U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) requirements in DOE O 435.1, Chg. 1,1 and as implemented by DOE/RL-2000-29, Rev. 2,2 the DOE Richland Operations Office (DOE-RL) has prepared this annual summary of the Hanford Site Composite Analysis for fiscal year (FY) 2012, as originally reported in PNNL-118003 and PNNL-11800, Addendum 14 (hereafter these reports are referred to collectively as the Composite Analysis), and to address secondary issues identified during the review of the Composite Analysis.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2017

Thermal Analysis of Disposal of High-Level Nuclear Waste in a Generic Bedded Salt repository using the Semi-Analytical Method.

An example case is presented for testing analytical thermal models. The example case represents thermal analysis of a generic repository in bedded salt at 500 m depth. The analysis is part of the study reported in Matteo et al. (2016). Ambient average ground surface temperature of 15°C, and a natural geothermal gradient of 25°C/km, were assumed to calculate temperature at the near field. For generic salt repository concept crushed salt backfill is assumed. For the semi-analytical analysis crushed salt thermal conductivity of 0.57 W/m-K was used. With time the crushed salt is expected to consolidate into intact salt. In this study a backfill thermal conductivity of 3.2 W/m-K (same as intact) is used for sensitivity analysis. Decay heat data for SRS glass is given in Table 1. The rest of the parameter values are shown below. Results of peak temperatures at the waste package surface are given in Table 2.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗