Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “EPA”

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 181 records · Page 10

Cost Impacts of Risk-Based Methods for Defining AoR and PISC Duration of a CO 2 Storage Project Using NRAP Tools and FE/NETL CO 2 Saline Storage Cost Model

The purpose of this analysis is to assess the fiscal impact of using risk-based methods to define the area of review (AoR) and post-injection site care (PISC) duration for a geologic carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) storage project. The Office of Fossil Energy (FE)/National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) CO 2 Saline Storage Cost Model (“cost model”) was utilized to evaluate CO 2 storage economics in this study. The cost model is a widely used tool for evaluating CO 2 storage costs in geologic settings. It estimates costs for storage operations conducted under compliance to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Underground Injection Control (UIC) Class VI regulations. This analysis evaluates and compares the costs of storage (on a first-year break-even dollar per tonne [2018$] basis) at the proposed FutureGen 2.0 site as a case study storage location by implementing different approaches to determine AoR and PISC given the prevailing geologic conditions and injection volume and duration considerations. The approaches include the use of 1) risk-based methods to define AoR and PISC duration, 2) an EPA-approved AoR and PISC documented in the FutureGen 2.0 UIC Class VI permit applications, and 3) cost model default settings that utilize uncertainty multipliers to estimate CO 2 plume and pressure front extent as part of AoR determination, as well as a 50-year PISC default. From all three sources, the AoR and PISC specified in the Class VI permit applications for FutureGen 2.0 were the largest and longest relative to the other two sources.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Hanford Site Composite Analysis: Dose Sensitivity Analyses

This environmental calculation file (ECF) documents the methodologies, assumptions, and results of five analyses that evaluate parameter changes to the revised Hanford Site Composite Analysis (CA) (DOE-RL-2019-52, Composite Analysis for Low-Level Waste Disposal in the Hanford Site Central Plateau). Specifically, this ECF describes the impact on total dose and analyte-specific doses for five sensitivity cases where changes to the following exposure-related parameters were implemented – (1) inventory, (2) recharge rate, (3) external dose conversion factors (DCFs) based on Federal Guidance Report (FGR) No. 15 in (EPA-402-R-19-002, Federal Guidance Report No. 15, External Exposure to Radionuclides in Air, Water, and Soil) instead of FGR No. 12 (EPA 402-R-93-081, Federal Guidance Report No. 12, External Exposure to Radionuclides in Air, Water, and Soil) for groundwater pathway scenario; (4) use of mean instead of 95th percentile intake assumptions for groundwater pathway scenario; and (5) consideration of limited sources based on U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) owned waste sites regulated under DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management. It should be noted that dose assessments for both base and sensitivity cases are based on the all-pathways representative person groundwater exposure scenario presented in DOE/RL-2022-52, Composite Analysis for Low-Level Waste Disposal in the Hanford Site Central Plateau.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Rules and Tools Crosswalk: A Compendium of Computational Tools to Support Geologic Carbon Storage Environmentally Protective UIC Class VI Permitting

This report identifies computational tools useful for addressing aspects of the dedicated carbon storage (Class VI) well permit application under the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program. The survey was conducted by researchers of the National Energy Technology Laboratory’s (NETL) Research and Innovation Center in collaboration with representatives of the U.S. EPA, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), and the four Regional Initiatives to Accelerate Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage: Carbon Utilization and Storage Partnership of the Western United States (CUSP), Plains CO 2 Reduction Partnership Initiative to Accelerate Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage Deployment (PCOR Partnership), Midwest Regional Carbon Initiative (MRCI), and the Southeast Regional Carbon Utilization and Storage Partnership (SECARB-USA). A total of 59 tools were identified through the elicitation for this report. It is intended to serve as a reference that can be used by geologic carbon storage stakeholders to identify computational tools that may be used to develop Class VI permit applications.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Ames National Laboratory Annual Site Environmental Report for CY2021

The primary purpose of this report is to summarize the performance of Ames National Laboratory’s environmental programs, present highlights of significant environmental activities, and confirm compliance with environmental regulations and requirements for calendar year 2021. This report is a working requirement of Department of Energy Order 231.1B, Environment, Safety and Health Reporting. It includes descriptions of the Laboratory’s site, mission, the status of its compliance with applicable environmental regulations, its planning and activities to maintain compliance, and a comprehensive review of its environmental protection, surveillance and monitoring activities. Ames National Laboratory is located on the campus of Iowa State University (ISU) and occupies 13 buildings owned by the Department of Energy (DOE). See the Laboratory’s Web page for location and Laboratory overview. The Laboratory also leases space in ISU owned buildings. In 2021, the Laboratory accumulated and disposed of hazardous waste under a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued generator number. All waste was handled according to applicable EPA, State, and local regulations and DOE Orders. The Laboratory operates as a Small Quantity Generator (SQG) of hazardous waste. There were no radiological air emissions or exposures to the general public due to Laboratory activities in 2021 (See U.S. Department of Energy Air Emissions Annual Report in Appendix A.) The Laboratory has an established Environmental Radiological Protection Program (Plan 10200.041) per DOE Order 458.1 requirements. Plans, policies, and procedures are in place to protect the public and the environment against undue risk from radiation associated with DOE radiological activities. As indicated in prior Site Environmental Reports, formal pollution prevention awareness, waste minimization and recycling programs have been in practice since 1990, with improvements implemented most recently in 2017 with Iowa State University’s shift toward single-stream recycling. Included in recycling efforts are items such as batteries, monitors, corrugated cardboard, lamps, miscellaneous electronic office equipment, mixed paper, newsprint, food/beverage containers, and laboratory glassware. Ames National Laboratory also recycles/reuses salvageable metal, used oil, and foamed polystyrene peanuts, and encourages chemical redistribution and sharing among research groups. Ames National Laboratory reported its contractual performance to DOE-Ames Site Office (AMSO) through the Laboratory’s Performance Evaluation Measurement Plan (PEMP), and a performance level of “B+” was achieved in 2021 for Sustain Excellence and Enhance Effectiveness of Integrated Safety, Health, and Environmental Protection As reported in Site Environmental Reports for prior years, the Laboratory’s Environmental Management System (EMS) has been integrated into the Laboratory’s Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) since 2005. The integration of EMS into Laboratory business practices allows the Laboratory to systematically review, address and respond to environmental impacts. In addition to DOE-identified objectives and targets, the EMS Steering Committee recommends annual environmental goals for the Laboratory. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and limited onsite work staff, goals of reducing water usage and travel/commuting to promote the reduction of scope 3 greenhouse gases were achieved. All contract deliverables and environmental compliance activities were still met during this time.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Effects of Borate and Organics on U(VI) Solubility in WIPP Brine

The solubility of uranium (VI) in Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP)-relevant brine was determined to support ongoing WIPP recertification activities. This research was performed by the Los Alamos National Laboratory Carlsbad Operations (LANL-CO) Actinide Chemistry and Repository Science Program (ACRSP). The WIPP Actinide Source Term Program (ASTP) did not develop a model for the solubility of actinides in the VI oxidation state. The solubility of UO 2 2+ , in the absence of WIPP specific data, is presently set to be equal to a conservatively high 1 mM within the WIPP Performance Assessment (PA) for all expected WIPP conditions (SOTERM, 2019) as selected at the recommendation of the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) (EPA, 2005). According to the current WIPP chemistry model assumptions and conditions, the expected pC H+ is about 9.5 and controlled by MgO buffering CO 3 2- . The goal of this study is to perform screening experiments that account for the contributions of organics and borate on uranium solubility. In this report, the solubility of U(VI) was determined at pC H+ 9 WIPP brine in the absence or presence of borate and organics at under-saturation approach. Experiments were equilibrated for about 135 days. Organic compounds present in WIPP waste can form strong complexes with actinides and can affect the oxidation states of actinides. The organic compounds addressed in WIPP performance assessment include EDTA (Ethylenediaminetetraacetic Acid), oxalate, citrate, and acetate (SOTERM, 2019). These data quantify the effects of WIPP-relevant concentrations of borate and organics effects on the solubility of U(VI) to challenge the predictions of the WIPP actinide model and inform decisions and recommendations made in the upcoming recertification of the WIPP (CRA-2024). The experiments performed were done according to the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) approved Test Plan entitled “Experimental Strategy to Challenge Actinide Solubility Predictions” and designated LCO-ACP-26. All data reported were obtained under the LANL-CO Quality Assurance Program, which is compliant with the DOE Carlsbad Field Office, Quality Assurance Program Document (CBFO/QAPD) (QAPD, 2017).

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗

Site 300 Small Firearms Training Facility Project Soil Sampling and Analysis Plan

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory's (LLNL) Project Management Office (PMO) is planning to execute a construction project at the Small Firearms Training Facility within LLNL's Experimental Test Site, Site 300 (S300). The proposed project will include extensive dirt work from a removal of a berm, the installation of a cinder block wall, and the replacement of a canopy and a fence with an access gate. This Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) outlines the procedures to collect environmental samples for the management and/or disposition of excess soil generated from the project site and geotechnical samples for building pad and pavement designs. This SAP has been prepared and is organized to be consistent with LLNL's Soil Screening and Management Plan (SSMP) (LLNL, 2021), as well as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Data Quality Objectives (DQO) programs (EPA, 2006).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

U328 Electrical Reliability Project Soil Sampling and Analysis Plan

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory's (LLNL’s) Project Management Office (PMO) is planning to install an underground electrical duct bank at the 3200 block of the Livermore Site (project). The proposed project will include a new electrical substation and feeders, demolition and replacement of the U328C utility building with a new structure to the west, re-routing of utilities, and update of the parking lot. This Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) outlines the procedures to collect and evaluate environmental samples for disposition of the excavated soil during the project and geotechnical samples for pavement design. This SAP has been prepared and is organized to be consistent with LLNL's Soils Screening and Management Plan (SSMP) (LLNL, 2022), as well as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Data Quality Objectives (DQO) process (EPA, 2006). In addition to the environmental samples, geotechnical samples will be collected by Consolidated Engineering Laboratories (CEL) on behalf of PMO. Geotechnical samples will be collected from a dedicated geotechnical boring location or co-located with environmental samples. Collection and evaluation of the geotechnical samples is determined by CEL and is therefore not discussed in this SAP.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Building 151 NNMA Clean Laboratory Project Soil Sampling and Analysis Plan

This Soil Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) was prepared by the Environmental Function Area (EFA)/Technical Services Department (TSD) of the Environment, Safety & Health (ES&H) Directorate for the Project Management Office (PMO) for the proposed Building 151 NNMA Clean Laboratory Project (project) located immediately south of Building 154. The purpose of the SAP was to describe the procedures for collection and analysis of environmental samples and evaluation of analytical data (chemical and radiological) to determine management options of excavated soil during project construction in accordance with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s (LLNL) Soils Screening and Management Plan (SSMP) (LLNL, 2022), which is consistent with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidance for developing Data Quality Objectives for environmental data (EPA, 2006). The SAP was developed in accordance with the SSMP and based on preliminary design information provided to EFA by PMO. In addition to environmental samples, geotechnical samples will be collected by Consolidated Engineering Laboratories (CEL) on behalf of PMO. Geotechnical samples will be collected from a dedicated geotechnical boring location or co-located with environmental samples. Collection of geotechnical samples is determined by CEL and is therefore not discussed in this SAP.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Aquifer Injection Modeling (AIM) Toolbox User Guide

The Aquifer Injection Modeling Toolbox (“AIM Toolbox”) software was developed by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) to provide a collection of analytical solutions suitable for evaluating the potential extent of the area impacted by subsurface injection operations. Subsurface injection operations are regulated under the EPA’s Underground Injection Control (UIC) program and are typically related to oil/gas development, waste disposal, or subsurface mining or storage. The analytical algorithms provided in the AIM Toolbox each have different approaches/assumptions/focus with respect to the nature and processes in subsurface and the nature of the injection operations. Collectively the set of analysis algorithms provides a broader evaluation of the area that can potentially be impacted by an injection operation. By providing estimates for the injectate plume extent, the software supports technical aspects of planning, evaluation, and overseeing injection activities. That is, the results help assess when further regulatory controls (e.g., monitoring, reporting) may be required and, in the case of disposal into an underground source of drinking water, the extent of the impacted area would require exemption from protection under the Safe Drinking Water Act. The AIM Toolbox software is available as a single-page web application, providing an interface to provide the necessary inputs, and both chart and map panes for visualizing the results. This User Guide describes the AIM Toolbox software, information required, user interactions, and the underlying basis of the calculations.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

PNNL Sequim Campus Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for Calendar Year 2020

The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science (DOE-SC) Pacific Northwest Site Office has oversight and stewardship duties associated with the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Sequim Campus. Some research projects have the potential to emit low levels of radioactive materials. This report is prepared to document compliance with the Code of Federal Regulation, Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, Subpart H, “National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities” and Washington Administrative Code Chapter 246-247, "Radiation Protection–Air Emissions." Compliance is indicated by comparing the estimated effective dose equivalent (EDE) to the maximally exposed individual (MEI) member of the public with the 10 millirem per year (mrem/yr) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standard. The PNNL Sequim Campus has only fugitive emissions sources. Despite the fact that the regulations are intended for application to point source emissions, fugitive emissions are included with regard to complying with the EPA standard. The EDE to the Campus MEI due to routine operations in 2020 was 3.5E-05 mrem (3.5E-07 mSv). No non-routine emissions occurred in 2020. The Sequim Campus is in compliance with the federal and state 10 mrem/yr standard.

40 CFR 61 Subpart H↗

PNNL Sequim Campus Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for Calendar Year 2021

The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science (DOE-SC) Pacific Northwest Site Office has oversight and stewardship duties associated with the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Sequim Campus. Some research projects have the potential to emit low levels of radioactive materials. This report is prepared to document compliance with the Code of Federal Regulation, Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, Subpart H, “National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities” and Washington Administrative Code Chapter 246-247, "Radiation Protection–Air Emissions." Compliance is indicated by comparing the estimated effective dose equivalent (EDE) to the maximally exposed individual (MEI) member of the public with the 10 millirem per year (mrem/yr) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standard. The PNNL Sequim Campus has only fugitive emissions sources. Despite the fact that the regulations are intended for application to point source emissions, fugitive emissions are included with regard to complying with the EPA standard. The EDE to the Campus MEI due to routine operations in 2021 was 5.4E-05 mrem (5.4E-07 mSv). No non-routine emissions occurred in 2021. The Sequim Campus is in compliance with the federal and state 10 mrem/yr standard.

40 CFR 61 Subpart H↗

PNNL-Sequim Campus Radionuclide Air Emissions Report for Calendar Year 2022

The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science (DOE-SC) Pacific Northwest Site Office has oversight and stewardship duties associated with the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Sequim Campus. Some research projects have the potential to emit low levels of radioactive materials. This report is prepared to document compliance with the Code of Federal Regulation, Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, Subpart H, “National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities” and Washington Administrative Code Chapter 246-247, "Radiation Protection–Air Emissions." Compliance is indicated by comparing the estimated effective dose equivalent (EDE) to the maximally exposed individual (MEI) member of the public with the 10 millirem per year (mrem/yr) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standard. The PNNL-Sequim Campus has only fugitive emissions sources. Despite the fact that the regulations are intended for application to point source emissions, fugitive emissions are included with regard to complying with the EPA standard. The EDE to the Campus MEI due to routine operations in 2022 was 7.5E-07 mrem (7.5E-09 mSv). No non-routine emissions occurred in 2022. The PNNL-Sequim Campus is in compliance with the federal and state 10 mrem/yr standard.

40 CFR 61 Subpart H↗

Building 438 Drainage Channel Soil Sampling and Analysis Plan (February 2023)

This Soil Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) was prepared by the Environmental Function Area (EFA)/Technical Services Department (TSD) of the Environment, Safety & Health (ES&H) Directorate for the Project Management Office (PMO) for the proposed Building 438 Drainage Channel Project (project) located near Building 438 (B438) in the southern portion, Building 433 (B433) in the middle portion, and Building 543 (B543) in the northern portion (project area as shown on Figure 1). The purpose of the SAP was to describe the procedures for collection and analysis of environmental samples and evaluation of analytical data (chemical and radiological) to determine management options of excavated soil during project construction in accordance with Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s (LLNL) Soils Screening and Management Plan (SSMP) (LLNL 2022), which is consistent with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) guidance for developing Data Quality Objectives for environmental data (EPA 2006). The SAP was developed in accordance with the SSMP and based on preliminary design information provided to EFA by PMO.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Quantifying the Impact of Excluding the Submersion Exposure Route for Existing Superfund Radionuclide Screening Level Calculator Soil and Tap Water Models

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provides initial data screening guidelines for radionuclide-contaminated Superfund sites using preliminary remediation goals (PRGs) and dose compliance concentrations (DCCs). PRGs and DCCs are target concentration values based on acceptable excess lifetime cancer risk and annual dose limits, respectively. They are calculated for various environmental media that may be encountered by residential and worker land uses. PRGs and DCCs typically consist of multiple exposure routes. One of these routes is submersion, which is exposure to a gaseous or particulate radionuclide that is suspended in air. Currently, submersion is only included in air calculations. This study focused on determining whether factoring submersion into total PRG/DCC calculations for soil and tap water created a significant difference in the target concentrations. New equations for individual submersion PRGs/DCCs for each land use of interest for soil and tap water were developed. A wind-driven particulate emission factor and Andelman’s constant were used to model the amount of soil and vapor in the air from soil and household use of tap water, respectively. The submersion PRG/DCC was then included in the total PRG/DCC for each radionuclide, followed by a percent difference comparison of the old and new totals to quantify the impact of the change. For total soil PRGs/DCCs, with and without submersion, the difference was less than 1 percent; however, many of the tap water radionuclides analyzed – including multiple radon and polonium isotopes – showed as high as a 200 percent difference.This technical memorandum (TM) presents recommendations for updates to current EPA guidelines for initial data screens of radionuclide contaminated tap water.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Reference Gastrointestinal Absorption Fractions for Radionuclides Ingested in Soil

Oak Ridge National Laboratory is conducting a project for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation involving derivation of cancer risk coefficients for ingestion of radionuclides in soil. EPA provides guidance on quantifying gastrointestinal (GI) absorption of a chemical in a given medium for use in risk evaluations including assessments for Superfund sites. Essentially, a medium-specific GI absorption fraction may be applied if and only if there is sound information to support that value. Otherwise, the applied GI absorption fraction should be the best estimate of fractional absorption of the chemical when ingested in highly soluble form. Based on our review of the literature on GI absorption of elements in soil, we have concluded that for many elements there is convincing evidence of substantially reduced absorption in ingested soil compared with ingestion in readily dissolved form. This report summarizes the reviewed information and proposes a comprehensive set of GI absorption fractions for ingestion of elements in soil. For most elements, the proposed GI absorption fractions are lower than the default absorption fractions recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection for radionuclides ingested in highly soluble form, even though considerable conservatism has been incorporated into the proposed soil-specific GI absorption fractions.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗

Tank Waste LDR Organics Data Summary for Sample-and-Send (Rev.1A)

The presence of organic chemicals regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) adds complexity to treating and disposing of the low activity fraction of Hanford tank waste if a low temperature treatment method such as grouting is used (SRNL-STI-2020-00228). The complexity arises from the fact that the baseline vitrification method is considered by the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology) as providing adequate thermal treatment for organics; a status not automatically extended to a lowtemperature process, such as solidifying the waste in a cementitious waste form. In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) LDR program is intended to ensure that wastes are properly treated prior to disposal. Proper treatment makes hazardous waste less harmful to groundwater by reducing the mobility and/or toxicity of the hazardous constituents in the waste. EPA guidance indicates that stabilization/solidification of waste for organics could be considered impermissible dilution under the LDR dilution prohibition. In addition, waste storage activities at Hanford have required transferring and blending waste within the tank system and these activities have potentially altered the concentrations of the hazardous constituents. The LDR dilution prohibition found in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 268.3 states that “… no generator, transporter, handler, or owner or operator of a treatment, storage, or disposal facility shall in any way dilute a restricted waste or the residual from treatment of a restricted waste as a substitute for adequate treatment …”. Hence, if LAW is to be treated using low temperature stabilization (such as cementation), then it is important to demonstrate both how past storage activities have contributed to the removal (by vacuum evaporation), or destruction (by in situ decomposition) of the LDR organics and how future retrieval and waste feed preparation will contribute to their removal (by filtration and ion exchange). Demonstrating these processes helps validate that cementation without additional organic treatment does not necessarily represent impermissible dilution. To aid in implementing cementitious solidification of Low Activity Waste (LAW), WRPS has been developing a regulatory and processing LDR treatment variance strategy termed “Sampleand-Send” that relies, in part, on demonstrating that in situ decomposition reactions along with historic evaporation of tank waste has destroyed or removed most of the LDR organics possibly associated with Hanford Tank Waste (SRNL-STI-2020-00582, SRNL-STI-2021-00453, SRNL-STI-2022-00391). Under the Sample-and-Send concept, Hanford tank waste would be retrieved, processed through a Tank-Side Cesium Removal-like system, and staged as a candidate feed that would then be sampled to confirm the waste acceptance criteria is met for solidification in an LAW cementitious treatment facility. If it can be shown that LDR organics are at concentrations below the waste acceptance criteria (WAC) for cementitious stabilization and have been sufficiently removed (by historic evaporation or by filtration and ion exchange during Cs removal), destroyed (by historic in situ decomposition), or are not soluble in LAW above the WAC then additional organic treatment is not needed prior to creating a cementitious final waste form and the concept of Sample-and-Send would be proposed to establish a non-rulemaking site-specific treatment variance using the specified method of treatment “STABL” to remove sampling requirements of the waste form after treatment. Waste not meeting the WAC could either be routed to the Hanford Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant for LAW vitrification, or further processed by evaporation or chemical oxidation before solidifying in a cementitious waste form. A key component in implementing the Sample-and-Send strategy is identifying which of the 207 LDR organic compounds associated with the RCRA Part A permit application waste codes for the Double Shell Tanks (DSTs) and Single Shell Tanks (SSTs) and any applicable Underlying Hazardous Constituents (UHCs) from 40 CFR 268.48 should be considered as potentially present and thus subject to regulation. In addition, it is also necessary to understand the solubility volatility, and reactivity of these compounds in LAW to identify which of the potentially present LDR organic compounds are not soluble above regulatory levels or are likely to have been removed by historic evaporation or destroyed by in situ decomposition reactions. If there are potentially present LDR organic compounds that have not been removed or destroyed and are soluble above regulatorily significant concentrations then a treatability variance may be needed for these species to eliminate any concerns pertaining to impermissible dilution. The spreadsheet accompanying this calculation report contains the data and logic computations needed to screen the list of 207 LDR organics associated with Hanford tank waste to identify those potentially present and to indicate which compounds may need to be included in a treatability variance.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

LLNL NESHAPs 2023 Annual Report

Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC operates facilities at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in which radionuclides are handled and stored. These facilities are subject to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) in Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 40, Part 61, Subpart H, which regulates radionuclide emissions to air from Department of Energy (DOE) facilities. Specifically, NESHAPs limits the emission of radionuclides to the ambient air to levels resulting in an annual effective dose equivalent of 10 mrem (100 µSv) to any member of the public. Using measured and calculated emissions, and building-specific and common parameters, LLNL personnel applied the EPA-approved computer code, CAP88-PC, Version 4.1.1.0, to calculate the dose to the maximally exposed individual member of the public for the Livermore Site and Site 300.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Carbon Storage Site Mapping Inquiry Tool (MapIT)

To date, 48 projects, consisting of 139 wells, are currently under review with the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program for Class VI – wells used for geologic sequestration of carbon dioxide. The number of applications submitted is expected to increase in coming years with the increase of the 45Q tax credit available to projects that initiate construction prior to 2033. The amount of data collected to submit a Class VI permit is vast, and often disparate, coming from state, federal, and commercial entities, as well as field-specific data collected within an area of interest. When preparing for site selection and permitting, the initial aggregation of relevant public data can be time intensive. The Carbon Storage Site Mapping Inquiry tool (MapIT) was created to support and accelerate the discovery and accessibility of open-source data and information available across the USA. Data was aggregated and organized based on data types described within the EPA UIC Class VI permit documentation. The online tool enables users to explore hundreds of geospatial data layers and connect to additional external resources, leveraging API and REST services where possible to ensure updates to data in real time. MapIT enables users to explore state and federal data related to geologic, geophysical, structural, hydrologic, and contextual information. In addition to displaying spatial data and linking to external resources, MapIT leverages custom widgets to ensure that internal data and external data are discoverable and accessible. The widgets connect users to resources such as the USGS publications and the USGS Earthquake Catalog based on a user-defined location. This talk will describe data aggregation workflows, data types, data preparation, and tool development for MapIT. The Carbon Storage Site Mapping Inquiry Tool and underlying database are valuable, intuitive resources that empower government, academic, commercial and industry stakeholders to explore, analyze, and acquire carbon storage related data.

Morkner, Paige↗