SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE 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 163 records · Page 9

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2022

Hanford Site Composite Analysis Special Analysis: Inventory and Solid Waste Release Modeling for the LLBG Sensitivity Case - UCAQ-22-01 Inventory Discrepancies for 218-E-12B, 218-W-3A, and 218-W-3AE in the Hanford Site Composite Analysis

This environmental calculation file (ECF) documents the methodologies, assumptions, and results of four sensitivity analyses that reevaluate the representativeness of solid-waste radionuclide inventory and release rate from three solid waste sites included in the recently completed Hanford Site Composite Analysis (CA) (DOE-RL-2019-52, Composite Analysis for Low-Level Waste Disposal in the Hanford Site Central Plateau (FY 2020), Rev. 1) (hereinafter called the CA Update). Specifically, this ECF reevaluates the representativeness of the base case inventory and radionuclide waste release rates from three solid waste sites (i.e., 218-E-12B, 218-W-3A, and 218-W-3AE) and two radionuclides (i.e., carbon-14 [C-14] and technetium-99 [Tc-99]). These three waste sites and two radionuclides were identified as being the most significant contributors to groundwater contamination and dose in the CA Update for the Inner Area boundary at times periods after the compliance period. This ECF first evaluates the representativeness of the C-14 and Tc-99 inventory and second, radionuclide release rates for the three waste sites1. If the inventory and release rates assumed in the CA Update are determined to be not representative, as hypothesized in the CA Update, then this ECF evaluates the impact of more representative inventories and release rates on the transfer of radionuclides to the vadose zone. The four analyses described in this ECF are as follows: 1) 218-E-12B C-14 Inventory and Release Rate Sensitivity Case – Determine the representativeness of the C-14 inventory and associated waste release rate from the 218-E-12B waste site assumed in the CA Update. If the inventory and associated waste release are more appropriately characterized as being different from the assumptions in the CA Update, then update the predicted C-14 release rate and compare the results to the results presented in the CA Update (DOE/RL-2019-52); 2) 218-W-3A C-14 Inventory and Release Rate Sensitivity Case – Determine the representativeness of the C-14 inventory and associated waste release rate from the 218-W-3A waste site assumed in the CA Update. If the inventory and associated waste release are more appropriately characterized as being different from the assumptions in the CA Update, then update the predicted C-14 release rate and compare the results to the results presented in the CA Update (DOE/RL-2019-52); 3) 218-W-3AE Tc-99 Release Rate Sensitivity Case – Determine the representativeness of the Tc-99 inventory and associated waste release rate from the 218-W-3AE waste site assumed in the CA Update. If the inventory and associated waste release are more appropriately characterized as being different from the assumptions in the CA Update, then update the predicted Tc-99 release rate and compare the results to the results presented in the CA Update (DOE/RL-2019-52); 4) 218-W-3AE Tc-99 Release Footprint Sensitivity Case – Determine the representativeness of the Tc-99 waste area footprint for the 218-W-3AE waste site assumed in the CA Update. If the footprint of the waste is more appropriately characterized as being different from the assumptions in the CA Update, then update the predicted Tc-99 release rate and compare the results to the result presented in the CA Update (DOE/RL-2019-52).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

Whose Gas is it anyway? Differentiating the Source of a Large Soil Vapor Plume beneath Two Adjacent Waste Sites - 20487

DOE contractor CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Company is currently responsible for conducting groundwater contamination monitoring at several RCRA treatment, storage, and disposal units located on the Hanford Site in Richland, Washington State. The Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill treatment, storage, and disposal unit presents a distinct groundwater monitoring problem because of a large multi-contaminant soil vapor plume beneath it that is a likely source of low-level volatile organic compound groundwater contamination. Adjacent to Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill is the Solid Waste Landfill. Volatile organic compounds are inventory components of both the Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and the Solid Waste Landfill. Therefore, it is possible that both sites could be contributing to the soil vapor plume. For regulatory purposes, it is important to differentiate which site is the primary contributor of volatile organic compounds to the plume. An approach was developed to identify the primary volatile organic compound source of the soil vapor plume beneath Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste Landfill. The site conceptual model hypothesis of vapor-phase volatile organic compound transport to the dissolved phase in groundwater was tested by a simple mathematical model of vapor/liquid equilibrium concentrations at the groundwater/air interface. Once it was shown that vapor-phase volatile organic compound transport to groundwater was a valid conceptual model for Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste Landfill, spatial and statistical methods were used to determine the primary site contributing to the majority of volatile organic compounds to the soil vapor plume. Average groundwater chloroform, tetrachloroethene, and trichloroethene concentrations from Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste Landfill monitoring network wells were plotted on maps of the facilities and immediate vicinities and compared to soil vapor sampling probe locations. Principal component analysis and mixing ratios were used to identify source contributions of each treatment, storage, and disposal unit to the plume. Results of the vapor/liquid equilibrium concentrations mathematical model showed that transport phenomena outweigh steady-state equilibria. Estimated vapor/liquid equilibrium concentrations were considerably lower than soil vapor measurements. The results indicate that dynamic vadose zone and groundwater factors such as decreased vapor concentrations with depth, vapor dilution from dispersion in the vadose zone, and advective and diffusional volatile organic compound dilution in groundwater result in groundwater volatile organic compound concentrations much less than would be measured under steady-state equilibrium conditions. Site source contribution differentiation by principal component analysis and mixing ratios was inconclusive using actual soil gas data because of the similarity in concentration values in both datasets for Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste Landfill. Similar data populations suggest mixing of the vapor contributions from both sites by dispersion through the soil matrix pore spaces. However, when groundwater volatile organic compound data were compared between the Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste Landfill monitoring networks, Solid Waste Landfill mean concentrations were higher, suggesting more vapor-phase volatile organic compound transport to groundwater at those locations. Simulated volatile organic compound soil vapor and groundwater datasets created to test the methods developed for this study show that the method can be successful in source differentiation when significantly different datasets are compared. This paper will describe a method of testing a conceptual model for vapor-phase contaminant transport to groundwater and for differentiating site sources of contaminants comprising a mixed-constituent soil vapor plume. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

Predicting Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity over Time for Degrading Saltstone Vault Concrete - 20376

At the Savannah River Site (SRS), low-level liquid tank waste is mixed with cementitious materials to produce a solid, monolithic waste form referred to as saltstone. The liquid saltstone mixture is pumped into massive concrete structures referred to as saltstone disposal units (SDUs) for curing and long-term storage. SDUs are vaults made of high performance concrete forming a barrier between saltstone and the surrounding environment. Predicting the long-term performance of SDU vault concrete, as well as the saltstone material itself, is critical to understanding the potential releases of radionuclides to the surrounding environment as described in the Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF) performance assessment (PA). The hydraulic conductivity profile for SDU vault concrete was conservatively assumed to degrade linearly from the initial saturated hydraulic conductivity of the intact concrete over a long period of time. The initial hydraulic properties of saturated SDU vault concrete have been measured, and the final hydraulic properties of degraded vault concrete are assumed to be the same as the porous backfill material that will surround the vault after closure. The assumed final condition of the vault concrete is also conservative in that it provides a greater estimate of water penetration through the vault than would generally be expected. Therefore, insights that provide more realistic but conservative estimates as to how degradation processes may change the hydraulic properties of the SDU vault concrete, the time dependent relationship of the vault concrete hydraulic properties to degradation (and thus time), and the final hydraulic properties of the vault concrete provides useful additions to the SDF PA. This paper focuses on the assumption that the saltstone vault concrete saturated hydraulic conductivity would decrease linearly as a function of degradation time; this assumption resulted from a worst-case, weighted (by relative layer thickness), arithmetic average of intact and backfill material hydraulic conductivities representing flow parallel to a layered system. This research indicates that the effective saturated hydraulic conductivity of the degraded SDU vault concrete should be based on the relative thickness-weighted geometric mean of the intact and degraded layers hydraulic conductivities. This alternative, which is supported extensively in the relevant literature and evaluated in this paper, leads to a more realistic and defensible estimate of the effective saturated hydraulic conductivity in degraded vault concrete while remaining conservative. The impact of using the more realistic estimate of the effective saturated hydraulic conductivity for the degraded concrete decreases the effective saturated hydraulic conductivity by up to several orders of magnitude for early times (i.e., when the SDU vault concrete is assumed degraded via sulfate attack and carbonation). This revised estimate of the effective saturated hydraulic conductivity has been implemented in the recently revised SDF PA. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2025

E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility Inadvertent Human Intruder Limits and Doses in Support of the PA2022

This report documents the inadvertent human intruder (IHI) analysis for the E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility (ELLWF) at the Savannah River Site (SRS), near Aiken, South Carolina. This analysis supports the revised ELLWF Performance Assessment (PA), complying with the Department of Energy standard for operation of low-level waste disposal facilities (USDOE, 2017). The ELLWF is an operating waste disposal facility and is scheduled to continue accepting waste to 2065. One task of the revised PA is to establish waste inventory limits for the various disposal units at ELLWF. This is done by modeling future contaminant release and transport through applicable pathways to human receptors, comparing predicted doses per disposed curie with applicable performance measures, to obtain inventory limits which will assure that doses to receptors do not exceed performance measures. This report documents results of modeling future doses to one class of receptor, the inadvertent human intruder. It is assumed that after site closure, public knowledge of the site is lost, and IHIs will engage in activities on the ELLWF that will disrupt the closure cap, causing dose to the IHI. Following USDOE (2017), six different stylized exposure scenarios are considered, simulating activities by an IHI which could result in a radiological dose. The six scenarios are: • Acute – Basement Construction: IHI constructs a basement and encounters waste during excavation which is inadvertently mixed with clean soil and diluted. • Acute – Well Drilling: IHI drills a water well through waste and is exposed to drill cuttings mixed with clean soil that are brought to the surface. • Acute – Discovery: IHI begins constructing a basement but stops when encountering the riprap in the final closure cap and is exposed to photon radiation from unexcavated material residing in the undisturbed waste zone. • Chronic – Agriculture: Resident IHI is exposed to waste that was excavated for basement construction and mixed with native soil in the intruder’s vegetable garden. • Chronic – Post-Drilling: Resident IHI is exposed to waste from drill cuttings mixed with native soil and scattered in the garden area. • Chronic – Residential: Resident IHI is exposed to external radiation while in home located above waste with shielding provided by the concrete basement floor and any soil or engineered material remaining between the basement and waste. Dose calculations are performed using the SRNL Dose Toolkit (Aleman, 2023), following the approach of Smith et al (2019). Calculations are performed separately for 27 of the 33 disposal units (DUs) at ELLWF and are radionuclide specific. The results of the IHI analysis include: • Dose Factors: mrem per disposed curie (acute) and mrem/yr per disposed curie (chronic) for each parent radionuclide, for each DU. • Inventory Limits: in curies, for each parent radionuclide, for each DU. • Estimated Dose to IHI: mrem (acute) and mrem/yr (chronic), for each DU, given its projected closure inventory without inventory biases applied. Most DU-specific IHI inventory limits are in the range of 10 3 to 10 7 curies per nuclide. The lowest inventory limits are associated with gamma-emitters such as Sn-126, Ra-226, Th-232, and Cm-248. Radionuclides with short half-lives such as Pu-241, and nuclides which are pure beta emitters or which decay by electron capture, such as Ni-59 and Ni-63, have the highest limits. For the 27 evaluated DUs, predicted IHI doses are shown in Table ES-1. The maximum acute dose is 1.18 mrem, at ST23, much less than the DOE performance measure of 500 mrem (USDOE, 2017). The highest chronic dose is 37.2 mrem/yr at ST02, below the DOE performance measure of 100 mrem/yr. Also shown are estimated inventory sums of fractions (SOFs) at closure in 2065, for groundwater (GW) and IHI pathways. For each DU, the inventory is constrained by the GW pathway. For most DUs, the IHI SOFs are approximately 1000 times lower than the GW SOF values, and the IHI pathway does not drive risk for any disposal unit.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2024

International perspectives on glass waste form development for low-level and intermediate-level radioactive waste

Not Available

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2022

Integrated Disposal Facility FY2011 Glass Testing Summary Report [Erratum]

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was contracted by Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC to provide the technical basis for estimating radionuclide release from the engineered portion of the disposal facility (e.g., source term). Vitrifying the low-activity waste at Hanford is expected to generate over 1.6 x 10 5 m 3 of glass (Certa and Wells 2010). The volume of immobilized low-activity waste (ILAW) at Hanford is the largest in the DOE complex and is one of the largest inventories (approximately 8.9 x 10 14 Bq total activity) of long-lived radionuclides, principally 99 Tc (t 1/2 = 2.1 x 10 5 ), planned for disposal in a low-level waste (LLW) facility. Before the ILAW can be disposed, DOE must conduct a performance assessment (PA) for the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF) that describes the long-term impacts of the disposal facility on public health and environmental resources. As part of the ILAW glass testing program PNNL is implementing a strategy, consisting of experimentation and modeling, in order to provide the technical basis for estimating radionuclide release from the glass waste form in support of future IDF PAs. The purpose of this report is to summarize the progress made in fiscal year (FY) 2011 toward implementing the strategy with the goal of developing an understanding of the long-term corrosion behavior of low-activity waste glasses.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

Groundwater and Intruder Radionuclide Screening

Solid Waste Management (SWM) operates the E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility (ELLWF) where low level on-site and off-site solid waste streams are buried. The facility has been in operation since late 1994 and is currently projected to remain in operation until 2065. This facility can accommodate a broad range of waste forms resulting from the six different types of disposal unit options (i.e., varying degrees of engineered barriers → trenches to concrete vaults). This facility is currently operating under a Performance Assessment (PA) issued back in 2008, along with several subsequent supporting Special Analyses (SA). The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) developed the prior PAs and SAs and has been tasked to update the facility’s PA. For operating the E-Area facility, a Waste Inventory Tracking System (e.g., WITS) is actively employed by waste generators where every radionuclide entering the facility (to be buried in one of its many disposal units1) must be either directly or indirectly accounted for. Since there is a large number of radionuclides in existence (>3,000), the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP-107) has provided guidance on the subset of radionuclides requiring further assessment in landfills such as the E-Area LLWF. The ICRP-107 publication provides critical radiological information on 1,252 radionuclides of 97 elements. This database is the critical starting point for developing a consistent inventory limit system. The explicit measurement and tracking of all 1,252 ICRP-107 radionuclides can be reduced when process knowledge, burial history, and radiological aspects are factored into conservative groundwater and intruder screening processes. Across the DOE complex these screening processes have been historically performed using the methodology suggested by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) as presented in their original report (NCRP 1984) and then refined in a later report (NCRP 1996). In the recommended screening models employed within this report the traditional NCRP models are updated to better handle progeny and better reflect the known characteristics of E-Area. This improved screening process is referred to as the “NCRP-like” method. Various upgrades to the traditional NCRP methodology have been used by others (e.g., NRC funded effort by Kennedy and Strenge 1992). The more detailed models by Kennedy and Strenge (1992) were considered in this effort and are compared to the results from the more traditional NCRP-like models. The groundwater and inadvertent intruder screening analyses presented in this report start with this 1,252 radionuclide list and reduces it down to more manageable lists that are applicable to the various disposal unit types contained within E-Area. In order to reduce this starting list, some level of exposure risk must be considered acceptable. Historically, a dose (or concentration level) has been compared with a screening criterion set to 1% of a performance measure (e.g., a betagamma dose not to exceed the 4 mrem/yr beta-gamma performance measure x 0.01 = 0.04 mrem/yr). Thus, if a radionuclide produced a bounding or screening-level dose (or concentrations) less than the screening criterion, it could be safely removed from further consideration. Several tiers of screening and bounding level analyses have been considered in this report.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

Nevada National Security Site 2019 Waste Management Monitoring Report Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Sites

Environmental monitoring data are collected at and around the Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Sites (RWMSs) within the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). This report summarizes the 2019 environmental data to provide an overall evaluation of RWMS performance and to support environmental compliance and performance assessment (PA) activities. Some of these data (e.g., radiation exposure, air, and groundwater) are presented in other reports (Mission Support and Test Services, LLC 2019, 2020a, 2020b). Direct radiation monitoring data indicate exposure levels at the Area 3 and Area 5 RWMSs are within the range of background levels measured at the NNSS. Slightly elevated exposure levels outside the Area 3 RWMS are attributed to nearby historical aboveground nuclear weapons tests. Air monitoring data at the Area 3 and Area 5 RWMSs show that tritium concentrations in water vapor and americium and plutonium concentrations in air particles are below Derived Concentration Standards for these radionuclides. Groundwater monitoring data indicate the groundwater in the uppermost aquifer beneath the Area 5 RWMS is not impacted by RWMS operations. Results of groundwater analysis from wells around the Area 5 RWMS are below established investigation levels. Leachate samples collected from the leachate collection systems at the Area 5 mixed low-level waste disposal unit are below established contaminant regulatory limits. During 2019, precipitation at the Area 3 RWMS was 77 percent above average, and precipitation at the Area 5 RWMS was 69 percent above average. Water balance measurements indicate that evapotranspiration from the vegetated weighing lysimeter at the Area 5 RWMS dries the soil and prevents downward percolation of precipitation more effectively than evaporation as measured from the bare-soil weighing lysimeter. Vadose zone monitoring in the Area 3 and Area 5 RWMS soil covers shows no evidence of precipitation percolating through the covers to the waste. Moisture from precipitation did not percolate below 120 centimeters (3.9 feet [ft]) in the vegetated final cover on the U-3ax/bl disposal unit at the Area 3 RWMS during 2019. There was no drainage through 2.4 meters (8 ft) of soil as indicated from the Area 3 drainage lysimeters that received only natural precipitation. At the Area 3 RWMS, which received three times the natural precipitation, 57 percent of the applied precipitation and irrigation drained from the bare-soil drainage lysimeter. All 2019 monitoring data indicate that the Area 3 and Area 5 RWMSs are performing within expectations of the model and parameter assumptions for the facilities’ PAs.

2019↗

DOE OSTI2021

E- Area Low-Level Waste Facility Multitiered Groundwater and Intruder Radionuclide Screening

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2021

Uranium Immobility in Tims Branch Wetland

The objective of this study was to address an item identified by the Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group (LFRG) panel during their review of the Savannah River Site’s Composite Analysis. Their concern was that the Tims Branch wetland, which has elevated levels of uranium (U) originating from site operations between 1952 to 1985, may be a secondary source term, posing a human health risk. This report briefly describes three studies dealing with: 1) quantifying the mass of U remaining in the wetland, 2) quantifying the tendency of U to release from Tims Branch sediment, and 3) describing the distribution of U in aqueous and suspended solids in Tims Branch water during episodic storm events. The Tims Branch wetland has been extremely effective for the last 50 years at immobilizing U released to the system. A detailed map including 270,000 gamma spectra of the U distribution in the wetland indicated that 84% of the initial 43,500 kg U introduced in the system remain there after 50 years (Kaplan et al., 2020). The effectiveness of immobilizing U is supported by stream water measurements collected over the last several decades indicating that U concentrations have been consistently below drinking water regulatory limits (i.e., the EPA Maximum Contaminant Level, 30 pg/L (SRNS, 2019)). Furthermore, using contaminated Tims Branch sediments, in situ desorption Kd values (ratio of U sediment/U Water) were extremely high, ranging from 104to 106 L/kg, suggesting the U is strongly bound to these wetland sediments. Finally, a detailed study of Tims Branch stream water properties during episodic rain events indicated that essentially all the U transported in this stream was associated with suspended solids (Batson et al., 1996). Together these findings indicate that the Tims Branch wetland is extremely effective in its present state at immobilizing U and that the small masses of U released downstream will be predominantly in association with suspended solids.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2021

Updated Estimate of Tritium Permeation from TPBAR Disposal Containers in ILV (U)

A tritium source term analysis was performed for TPBAR disposal in the E-Area Intermediate Level Vaults for the E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility Performance Assessment (PA). This analysis is based on an earlier source term analysis which treated the bulk oft he tritium residual as tightly bound by the TPBAR getter material, with only a small fraction existing as tritiated moisture in the lithium aluminate ceramic pellets. Together with atmospheric moisture trapped in the free volume, the tritiated water vapor is assumed to corrode steel surfaces inside the disposal container, covering them with a magnetite film while generating hydrogen. The carbon steel walls of the disposal container are permeable to hydrogen, providing a path way for tritium to escape containment. The rate of hydrogen generation is assumed to be limited by the rate of corrosion, which is assumed to be governed by parabolic reaction kinetics obtained from the literature. This relies on the further assumption that the water vapor consumed by the corrosion reaction is continually replaced by moisture from the lithium aluminate pellets until all of that moisture is gone. In addition to tritium permeation, the analysis also includes a slow leak through the disposal container walls at the maximum allowable leak rate, 1 x 1CH standard cm3/s. Results were obtained for four different combinations of internal and container wall temperatures, established in an earlier thermal analysis that considered two different vault loadings and two different TPBAR activity levels. Instantaneous release rates for these four cases are plotted in Figure ES-1 below

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2022

An Assessment of Potential Dose Impacts from External Contamination on Naval Reactors Facility Waste Canisters (Special Analysis)

This Special Analysis (SA) was performed to address a request by Naval Reactors Facility (NRF) Waste Programs for a permanent exception to limits of removable surface contamination on the exterior of waste canisters shipped to the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste (RHLLW) Disposal Facility as specified in the waste acceptance criteria (WAC) (PLN-5446). The purpose of this SA is to determine if the NRF-requested levels for removable surface contamination on the exterior of all NRF waste canisters is within the bounds of the current performance assessment (PA). This was done by calculating the groundwater all-pathways dose contribution from surface contamination on the exterior of NRF canisters for the following cases: (1) the exteriors of all NRF waste canisters are contaminated to the 10 CFR 835 Appendix D allowable limits in the current WAC, and (2) the exteriors of all NRF waste canisters are contaminated to the limits requested by NRF Waste Programs. Dose impacts for each case were compared to each other and to the all pathways dose for the PA base case. Dose impacts were also compared to the all pathways dose limit specified in DOE O 435.1. A simple assessment of the potential impacts of the increase in surface contamination using the NRF-requested limits on the biotic, air, and inadvertent intruder pathways was also performed. Based on the results of this SA, the increase in canister exterior contamination limits requested by NRF are well within the bounds of the current PA and will not result in a violation of performance objectives. The results also show the increased limits do not reflect or necessitate a fundamental change to the PA conceptual model, nor a change to the way exterior contamination is not included in PA dose calculations. Therefore, it is recommended the NRF request for an exception to the current limits for external surface contamination be accepted and the revised limits for NRF-generated waste canisters be added to the WAC. The monitoring plan will also be revised to identify external canister contamination as a potential mobile source term that may be detected by monitoring earlier than potential releases from waste. The PA, composite analysis (CA), closure plan, and PA/CA maintenance plan do not require revision. Recommendations are also included for inclusion of NRF procedures used to limit water pool radionuclide variability (and thus canister surface contamination variability) to the waste generator certification process.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2023

Composite Analysis for Low-Level Waste Disposal in the Hanford Site Central Plateau (FY 2020) (Rev. 2)

This document provides an updated Hanford Site composite analysis (CA). A Hanford Site CA was prepared and issued in 1998 (PNNL-11800) with an addendum provided in 2002 (PNNL-11800 Addendum 1). The CA was approved in 2002 (Frei, 2002) and has been maintained (DOE/RL-2000-29 and subsequent revisions) to support low-level waste disposal performance assessments (PAs) and disposal authorizations for facilities at the Hanford Site, including the following: Continued operation of the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) and the 200 East and 200 West Low-Level Burial Grounds; Construction of the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF); Forthcoming closure of tank residual waste systems such as Waste Management Area (WMA) C. The CA maintenance program resulted in a determination in 2015 (DOE/RL-2015-66) that the Hanford Site CA needed an update for the following reasons: While the initial Hanford Site CA has been maintained since 2001, the accumulation of basis changes reported in the annual summary reports over the succeeding 14 years merit evaluation in an updated analysis; The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Headquarters requested in a memorandum in 2015 (Gilbertson and Marcinowski, 2015) that “as soon as the relevant PAs are complete, the CA will be revised to account for all of the new information.” This updated Hanford Site CA accounts for the following new information: 1. Inclusion of a detailed Hanford Site baseline disposition that projects remedial activities through site closure. There have been significant changes through decision making in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) process that were not available when the original CA was produced; 2. Inclusion of an updated inventory basis, new modeling capabilities, and new decisions reached in the associated record of decision (ROD) that was provided by issuance of DOE/EIS-0391 in fiscal year (FY) 2013. Development of a Hanford Site groundwater model from the baseline provided in a technical transfer of models for the Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0391) commenced in FY 2014 and resulted in the plateau-to-river (P2R) groundwater flow model that is used in this updated Hanford Site CA; 3. Accounting for pump and treat systems, which were not evaluated in the initial CA. Pump and treat systems have had significant impact on groundwater flow system behavior, contaminant transport, and contaminant removal from Hanford Site groundwater. This process is accounted for in the use of the P2R model for this updated Hanford Site CA; 4. Inclusion of water-level data collected since the initial CA was completed. Data collected as the unconfined aquifer water levels continue to recede since the cessation of large liquid discharges in the late 1990s have led to marked improvement in understanding of the flow system for future conditions, particularly regarding northward flow potential in the critical Gable Gap area. The calibration in the latest version of the P2R model accounts for this information; 5. Inclusion of results from the revised ERDF PA completed in 2013 (WCH-5209) that account for updated inventory and expansion of the ERDF facility to about twice the size that was evaluated in the original CA; 6. Use of updated geoframeworks to provide the structural basis for numerical fate and transport models in the groundwater pathway of this updated CA. The geologic basis for groundwater models has continued to improve with additional data collection and interpretation with the creation and maintenance of the Hanford South Geoframework and the Central Plateau Vadose Zone Geoframework tools; 7. Incorporation of updated tank residual inventory estimates. Tank residual inventory estimates have improved with the incorporation of tank retrieval inventory data for those tanks that have completed retrieval. The CA inventory data package includes this updated information; 8. Incorporation of WMA C PA results. Two additional PAs for tank farm closure decisions are in preparation during the period required to prepare an updated Hanford Site CA: WMA C (FY 2016) and WMA A-AX (in preparation). The WMA C PA results are incorporated into the updated Hanford Site CA, and its grouted residuals model is used as the basis for a release model to account for the other tank farm systems modeling in this updated CA; 9. An update to the IDF PA was submitted in FY 2017 and has been reviewed and approved. The results of the IDF PA are incorporated into this updated CA; 10. Updated risk assessment scenarios. The risk assessment scenarios currently in use for Hanford Site CERCLA and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) analyses differ from those evaluated in the initial Hanford Site CA. The representative person exposure scenario evaluated in this updated Hanford Site CA is consistent with recent PAs and CERCLA and RCRA analyses as the Hanford Site. This updated Hanford Site CA provides the following: A comparison of the updated Hanford Site CA all-pathway dose results with the performance measures during the compliance period, which is assumed to begin with site closure in calendar 2070 with the last scheduled disposal action and continue for 1,000 years postclosure (to calendar year 3069); A comparison of Hanford Site CA all-pathway dose results with the performance measures during the postcompliance period to address potential peaks beyond the compliance period. This is accomplished by evaluating dose in the period for 9,000 years following the compliance period (i.e., from calendar year 3070 to 12070).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2023

Sample Preparation Method for Low-Level Total 129 I Measurements by ICP-MS

Trace-level measurements of iodine’s isotopic ( 129 I and 127 I) and chemical species distributions are needed for an accurate understanding of radioiodine migration in the Hanford subsurface. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) previously developed a novel analytical method for iodine characterization that uses ion chromatography (IC) coupled to inductively coupled mass spectrometry (ICP-MS). While the method can measure speciated forms of 129 I at levels below the drinking water standard, an interference from molybdenum (Mo) prevents the assay from quantifying the $\underline{total}$ 129 I concentration in many Hanford sample matrices. In this work, solvent extraction was evaluated as a sample preparation method for eliminating the Mo interference. A series of 10 experiments was conducted in which solutions containing known amounts of iodate or iodide were treated by solvent extraction, and the extracted solutions were analyzed for total iodine concentrations by ICP MS. Several extraction parameters such as reagent concentrations and chemical reaction times were systematically adjusted in attempts to optimize the extraction process. While solvent extraction was shown to be effective at removing Mo, there was a consistent inability to recover more than approximately 75% of the total iodine in most experiments. This would reduce the ability to detect 129 I at levels near the drinking water standard. Additionally, the extraction efficiencies in several experiments were highly variable, suggesting that solvent extraction could add significant uncertainty to radioiodine measurements. We recommend evaluating ion exchange as an alternative sample preparation approach in fiscal year (FY) 2024.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2023

E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility Multitiered Groundwater and Intruder Radionuclide Screening

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2025

Annual Status Report (FY 2024): Performance Assessment for the Integrated Disposal Facility

The purpose of this Annual Summary Report (ASR) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 is to evaluate the continued adequacy of the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF) Performance Assessment (PA) and Disposal Authorization Statement (DAS). This report consolidates relevant monitoring data, modeling analyses, and regulatory reviews to demonstrate a reasonable expectation that the PA objectives and performance measures will be met, as required under DOE O 435.1. The ASR follows the guidance in DOE-STD-5002-2017, which provides a framework for maintaining the validity of the DAS through periodic assessment of facility performance and compliance with waste disposal requirements. The IDF is a near-surface disposal facility designed to receive and permanently dispose of low-level waste (LLW) and mixed low-level waste (MLLW) generated from Hanford Site operations. The facility consists of two double-lined disposal cells equipped with leak detection and leachates recovery systems to ensure environmental protection. Waste planned for disposal includes vitrified low-activity waste (LAW) and solid secondary waste (SSW) from the Hanford Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP). At the end of FY 2024, the IDF had not yet received any waste, as it remains in a pre-operational state. Disposal activities will begin with the hot commissioning of the WTP LAW Vitrification Facility using the Direct-Feed Low-Activity Waste (DFLAW) approach in Calendar Year (CY) 2025. This ASR justifies the continued adequacy of the PA and DAS by reviewing key documents and data sources. these sources are listed in Table A-2 in Appendix A.4): The Operating Disposal Authorization Statement (ODAS) for the IDF (DOE-EM, 2021) remains in effect, with no outstanding conditions or key issues affecting its implementation. Based on the comprehensive review of PA analyses, monitoring data, and regulatory compliance activities, this ASR concludes that the IDF remains in compliance with DOE O 435.1, and there is reasonable assurance that the PA performance objectives will be met once disposal operations commence in CY 2025.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2026

Performance Assessment of the Inactive Trenches in the 200 West Low-Level Burial Grounds at the Hanford Site

The purpose of this document is to provide a performance assessment (PA) of the 200 West Area Low‑Level Burial Grounds (LLBGs), under the requirements of DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management1. The objective is to ensure that the radioactive waste is managed in a manner that is protective of human health and the environment. Figure ES-1 shows the location of the LLBGs in the 200 West and 200 East Areas of the Hanford Site.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2026

Annual Summary Report (FY 2025) Performance Assessment for the Disposal of Low-Level Waste in the 200 East Area Burial Grounds

This annual review provides the projected dose estimates of radionuclide inventories disposed in the 200 East Area Low Level Burial Grounds (LLBGs) since September 26, 1988. All trenches in these burial grounds except one have remained inactive since July 2004. Trench 94 located in 218-E-12B Burial Ground is the only active trench, which is dedicated for disposal of U.S. Navy reactor compartments. During this reporting period (fiscal year 2025, from October 1, 2024, through September 30, 2025), two reactor compartments were disposed in Trench 94.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗