Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Aleman, Sebastian E.

Publications and source records attributed to Aleman, Sebastian E..

30 records · Page 2

Performance Assessment for the E-Area Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility at the Savannah River Site: Appendix E

Supplemental transport model results for the LAWV from Chapter 5, Section 5.2.2 are provided in Section E.1.1 to compare concentrations at the 100-meter POA for the nominal PA case, best estimate case, and various sensitivity cases (Figure E-1 through Figure E-12). Second, Figure E-13 through Figure E-30 in Section E.1.2 display concentrations at the 100-meter POA for decay-chain daughter and parent radionuclides. Third, Figure E-31 through Figure E-34 in Section E.1.3 show maximum concentration contours for I-129. Only contour plots for I-129 from the remaining sensitivity runs are shown because I-129 is identified as the only radionuclide that impacts disposal limits for the LAWV. All concentration units, whether noted or not in the y-axis labels, are pCi L-1 per Ci parent buried.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Performance Assessment for the E-Area Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility at the Savannah River Site: Appendix F

As a supplement to Chapter 6, Section 6.1.1.3, Table F-1 through Table F-24 provide tabular results of the sensitivity analysis calculations for waste disposal timing (Sensitivity Case S6) in NR07E (Cases 3 and 4) and NR26E (Cases 1 through 4). The title of each table identifies the DU, sensitivity case, and performance measure. Section F.1.1 (Table F-1 through Table F-8) presents results for NR07E and Section F.1.2 (Table F-9 through Table F-24) presents results for NR26E. In each table, radionuclides are sorted from highest to lowest nominal concentration or dose factor. Nominal values are when waste disposal occurs at the start of operations; timeline values are when waste disposal occurs at the end of operations. The differences (Δ values) in the last column of each table equal the timeline concentration or dose factor minus the nominal concentration or dose factor, where DF and CF are shorthand designations for dose factor and concentration factor, respectively.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Performance Assessment for the E-Area Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility at the Savannah River Site: Appendix G

This appendix contains supporting information and key data used during the IHI analysis, including the following: • A list of parent radionuclides requiring IHI inventory limits (Section G.1) • Tables of IHI acute and chronic dose factors, inventory limits, and concentration limits for all DUs (Section G.2) • IHI acute and chronic dose history time profiles for all DUs (Section G.3)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Performance Assessment for the E-Area Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility at the Savannah River Site: Appendix H

This section provides supporting material for the development of DU-specific final inventory limits for the GW pathways for every generic waste form and SWF parent radionuclide requiring an inventory limit. The final inventory limits are based on nominal PA transport simulations using PORFLOW as reported in Chapter 5. The nominal PA settings represent the compliance case where some modeling parameter settings are defined based on conservative (pessimistically leaning) arguments. In the overall computational approach employed in this PA, a multitiered radionuclide screening process is adopted as discussed in Chapter 2, Section 2.3.7. In the multitiered process, the initial list of 1,252 parent radionuclides is shortened substantially using conservative, but simple, transport models, along with a reasonably low cutoff criterion of 0.1% SOF value. Multidimensional PORFLOW flow and transport modeling is employed for every parent radionuclide that failed the GW screening. The generic waste form limits represent Tier-3 analyses, while Tier-4 analyses are employed for SWF limits, where warranted.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Performance Assessment for the E-Area Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility at the Savannah River Site: Appendix I

As stated in Section 9.1.2.2, a final inventory of parent radionuclides is projected for every DU at the time of facility operational closure in 2065. These final closure inventories are upper-bound estimates wherein each DU is assumed to reach its activity capacity. Composition vectors based on existing DU inventories are employed to estimate the final compositions of all existing and future DUs. Specifically, (1) the existing DU compositions are assumed to remain constant; (2) future DUs are assigned averaged existing compositions based on appropriately averaged DUs. This information is detailed in Appendix H, Section H.7. In addition, the variability in composition among existing DUs is used to generate log-normal distributions for uncertainty quantification, which is detailed in Section I.1.1.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

E- Area Low-Level Waste Facility Multitiered 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 (DU) 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).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

CST R9120-B 30x60 Media Pretreatment and Digestion Standard Development to Support Tank Closure Cesium Removal 1A (TCCR-1A) Operations

In support of continued operations of Savannah River Remediation’s (SRR) ion exchange process to remove radioactive cesium from Savannah River Site (SRS) dissolved saltcake, referred to as the Tank Closure Cesium Removal 1A process (TCCR-1A; containing the second set of at-tank ion exchange columns), SRNL was tasked with: 1) validating the field protocol planned for pretreating the crystalline silicotitanate (CST) ion exchange media to be used in the columns, 2) preparing CST media for use in in-tank batch contact testing, and 3) developing a digestion standard to verify complete CST dissolution prior to characterization following each in-tank batch contact test. A procedure (SRNL L29 Manual, ITS-0229) was developed previously in support of the TCCR Demonstration (which contained the first set of ion exchange columns) based on evaluations of a different CST production lot with a larger particle size range to document the protocol for pretreating CST utilizing conditions similar to what will be performed in the field.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

GoldSim E-Area Low-Level Waste Lacility Vadose Zone Model Benchmarking

This report documents the development and benchmarking of the E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility (ELLWF) GoldSim Engineered and Slit Trench (ET and ST) vadose zone models. Subsequent activities (beyond the scope of this effort) will couple the GoldSim-based vadose zone models to the GoldSim aquifer model, with the intent of performing stochastic analyses that couple all pertinent fate and transport processes from the ground surface up to the 100-m Point of Assessment (POA). The benchmarking presented within this report focuses on the Slit Trench 06 (ST06) bydrostratigraphic location that resides within the center set of slit trenches. These GoldSim-based vadose zone models are generic models capable of being benchmarked to any of the other trench locations within E-Area.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

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↗

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 units) 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 radionuclides are not necessary 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 beta-gamma 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↗

Cesium Removal Performance Comparisons of Crystalline Silicotitanate Media Batches with Savannah River Site Waste Simulant

The Tank Closure Cesium Removal (TCCR) system uses ion exchange columns filled with Crystalline Silicotitanate (CST) media to process radioactive waste solutions for the removal of Cs- 137. The TCCR project is currently focused on dissolving Savannah River Site (SRS) Tank 10H waste (primarily sodium salt cake solids) within the tank followed by at-tank ion exchange column treatment. Plans are underway to prepare and install a second TCCR unit at SRS. Capacity and particle size differences exist between archived (IE-911) and more recently prepared CST media batches (9120-B and 9140-B). Side-by-side comparison testing was performed to evaluate the cesium removal performance of each batch to aid in selecting the preferred CST batch and media characteristics to load into the second TCCR unit. Batch contact equilibrium and flow-through column tests have been conducted with three CST batches using an SRS Average Simulant.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Cesium Removal Performance Comparisons of Crystalline Silicotitanate Media Batches with Savannah River Site Waste Simulant

The Tank Closure Cesium Removal (TCCR) system uses ion exchange columns filled with Crystalline Silicotitanate (CST) media to process radioactive waste solutions for the removal of Cs137. TCCR currently focuses on dissolving Savannah River Site (SRS) Tank 10H waste (primarily sodium salt cake solids) within the tank followed by at-tank ion exchange column treatment. Plans are underway to prepare and install a second TCCR unit at SRS. Capacity and particle size differences exist between archived (IE-911) and more recently-prepared CST media batches (9120- B and 9140-B). Side-by-side comparison testing was performed to evaluate the cesium removal performance of each batch to aid in selecting the preferred CST batch and media characteristics to load into the second TCCR unit. Batch contact equilibrium and flow-through column tests have been conducted with three CST batches using an SRS Average Simulant. Simulant batch contact equilibrium cesium loading results for the three CST batches (including two lots of one batch) are provided in Table ES-1. The 35 °C data indicates that the archived IE-911 batch has a higher cesium capacity than recently-prepared CST media and that the minor TCCR CST 9120-B media lot (2099000035) has similar cesium removal performance to the major TCCR lot (2099000034). Tests conducted at 25 ºC for the archived IE-911 CST batch indicated lower cesium removal performance with this simulant batch than was observed recently with a different SRS Average Simulant batch. A dilution factor (DF) is typically utilized when modeling engineered CST media cesium loading performance to account for mass contributions from the binder material. In cases where CST performance is lower than expected, this factor includes corrections for the binder and for low performance. The ZAM (Zheng, Anthony, and Miller) Isotherm Model DF values are provided in Table ES-1 for each simulant batch contact result. DF values near 0.5 were determined for the 9120-B and 9140-B CST batch contact tests while DF values near 0.6 (20% higher) were determined for the tests with IE-911. These dilution factors are lower than recently observed with a different SRS Average Simulant batch (9140-B DF = 0.68; IE-911 DF = 1.0). Based on these results, it appears that some component in the simulant solution used for equilibrium testing may have resulted in reduced cesium loading on the CST media.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗