Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “waste compliance”

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 37 records · Page 2

Summary Report for the Analysis of the Sludge Batch 7b (Macrobatch 9) DWPF Pour Stream Glass Sample for Canister S04023

In order to comply with the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) Waste Form Compliance Plan for Sludge Batch 7b, Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) personnel characterized the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) pour stream (PS) glass sample collected while filling canister S04023. This report summarizes the results of the compositional analysis for reportable oxides and radionuclides and the normalized Product Consistency Test (PCT) results. The PCT responses indicate that the DWPF produced glass that is significantly more durable than the Environmental Assessment glass. Results and further details are documented in SRNL-STI-2013-00462, Revision 1 “Analysis of the DWPF Sludge Batch 7b (Macrobatch 9) Pour Stream Glass Sample.”

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Analysis Of The Sludge Batch 7b (Macrobatch 9) DWPF Pour Stream Glass Sample (Rev. 1)

The Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) began processing Sludge Batch 7b (SB7b), also referred to as Macrobatch 9 (MB9), in January 2012. SB7b is a blend of the heel of Tank 40 from Sludge Batch 7a (SB7a) and the SB7b material that was transferred to Tank 40 from Tank 51. SB7b was processed using Frit 418. During processing of each sludge batch, the DWPF is required to take at least one glass sample to meet the objectives of the Glass Product Control Program (GPCP), which is governed by the DWPF Waste Form Compliance Plan, and to complete the necessary Production Records so that the final glass product may be disposed of at a Federal Repository. Two pour stream glass samples were collected while processing SB7b. The samples were transferred to the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) where one was analyzed and the other was archived. The following conclusions were drawn from the analytical results provided in this report: The sum of oxides for the official SB7b pour stream glass is within the Product Composition Control System (PCCS) limits (95-105 wt%); The average calculated Waste Dilution Factor (WDF) for SB7b is 2.3. In general, the measured radionuclide content of the official SB7b pour stream glass is in good agreement with the calculated values from the Tank 40 dried sludge results from the SB7b Waste Acceptance Program Specification (WAPS) sample; As in previous pour stream samples, ruthenium and rhodium inclusions were detected by Scanning Electron Microscopy-Electron Dispersive Spectroscopy (SEM-EDS) in the SB7b pour stream sample; The Product Consistency Test (PCT) results indicate that the official SB7b pour stream glass meets the waste acceptance criteria for durability with a normalized boron release of 0.8 g/L, which is an order of magnitude less than the Environmental Assessment (EA) glass; The measured density of the SB7b pour stream glass was 2.70 g/cm 3 ; The Fe 2+ /ΣFe ratio of the SB7b pour stream samples was 0.07.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Knowledge-Based Hazardous Waste Determinations for Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Modules: A Foundational Study

This report explores using "generator knowledge" to determine whether a solar photovoltaic (PV) module must be managed as hazardous waste prior to recycling or landfilling. Generator knowledge is a legal term and existing regulatory pathway for making a hazardous waste determination that has been used by other industries but is a relatively unknown option to the PV industry. In the United States, a hazardous waste determination often acts as a pre-requisite to recycle or landfill a PV module. The results of the hazardous waste determination dictate whether the PV module must be managed as hazardous waste or nonhazardous solid waste. Managing a PV module as hazardous waste requires compliance with stringent U.S. federal and state hazardous waste law. In addition to increased management costs, which can be ten times higher, legal liability for PV modules regulated as hazardous waste is also heightened with both civil and criminal penalties for noncompliance which includes making an inaccurate or faulty hazardous waste determination. The most common reason a PV module would be regulated as hazardous is if it contains a regulated metal in an amount that equals or exceeds the toxicity characteristic limits. To determine whether a PV module exhibits a hazardous characteristic, the regulated person/entity must "apply knowledge...in light of the materials and processes used." In the absence of adequate knowledge to determine whether the PV module is hazardous, it must be tested using Test Method 1311 Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) or an equivalent EPA-approved method. Although TCLP is the predominant method used to today to make a hazardous waste determination for PV modules, evidence from this study concludes it is not practical to TCLP test every PV module even in a single utility-scale installation, and a scalable solution is needed. This study finds that knowledge-based hazardous waste determinations may allow a regulated person/entity to make a hazardous waste determination for more than one PV module at one time - making this regulatory pathway a potential scalable solution. Through legal analysis and interviews with 44 experts, the authors explore what it means to make an accurate knowledge-based hazardous determination for PV modules considering sources and forms of information as well as potential limitations. The work aims to provide a foundation for building consensus on whether knowledge-based hazardous determinations are a viable, scalable industry approach for solar.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Analysis of Exposure during Transportation of Waste to the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) - 20445

Safety is a priority for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Environmental Management (EM) Nevada Program. This commitment to safety is integrated into requirements and work procedures at DOE sites across the U.S. that generate low-level radioactive waste, mixed low-level radioactive waste, and classified waste that is transported to the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) for permanent disposal. Generators of this waste are responsible for ensuring it is packaged and transported in a safe and compliant manner. These generators and their contracted commercial carriers must comply with U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations; the Nevada National Security Site Waste Acceptance Criteria (NNSSWAC); and other applicable federal, state, and local regulations and requirements. This includes packaging and shipping the waste to meet DOT regulatory radiation dose limits to ensure public safety during transportation. NNSS waste generators have a solid safety record for complying with these stringent regulations as demonstrated by the fact that no shipments exceeding DOT dose rate limits were received at the NNSS Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Complex (RWMC) during FY 2014 through FY 2018. A 2005 study conducted by the Desert Research Institute validated shipments to the NNSS comply with DOT radiation dose limits. In response to recent Nevada stakeholder requests for an updated study, an analysis was conducted to verify and provide evidence that the public continues to be safe from exposure to radioactive waste shipment to the NNSS. Radiation exposure from radioactive waste shipments in transit to the NNSS was evaluated. Three studies were performed: 1. Confirm compliance of waste shipments to the DOT radiation limits using dose rate surveys taken at the generator site and at the disposal site. 2. Estimate the dose to the public from waste shipments using the dosimetry results for disposal site personnel by comparing time of exposure for various individuals/scenarios. 3. Estimate the truck driver dose using the receipt dose rate surveys and time of exposure, and from dosimetry results. Study 1 confirmed compliance with the DOT dose rate limits for a sample of waste shipments (123 of 1,038) received during fiscal year (FY) 2017. Study 2 showed that the average annual radiation equivalent dose for disposal site personnel during FY 2017 was approximately 6.7% [0.415 mSv (41.5 millirem)] of the annual average dose that a person living in the U.S. receives from all sources [6.2 mSv (620 mrem)]. Maximum dose to a member of the public, a person resting/sleeping in an adjacent truck at a rest area to a waste shipment, was 0.0166 mSv (1.66 mrem), which is less than the dose received from a person taking a round trip from the east coast to the west coast of the continental U.S. on an airplane [0.07 mSv (7 mrem) per round trip]. Study 3 showed that the truck driver who made the most shipments of radioactive waste to the NNSS, who drove the most hours (estimated time of exposure 2,520 hours), during FY 2017 had a total dose of 0.15 mSv (15 mrem), which was obtained from their personal dosimeter. The annual dose recorded for disposal site personnel, the dose estimates for the public, and the truck driver dose were all a small percentage of the average radiation dose a person receives from all sources (e.g., background and medical radiation). At these levels, risk should only be described qualitatively. Radiation exposure from radioactive waste shipments to the NNSS were shown to be compliant with the DOT dose rate limits, safe, and very low (i.e., within background levels). (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Analysis in Support of Disposition of Tank 48 Legacy Material

This report contains the characterization of six 200-mL Tank 48H samples: HTF-48-21-74, HTF-48-21-75, HTF-48-21-76, HTF-48-21-81, HTF-48-21-82, and HTF-48-21-83. The effort supports a Systems Engineering Evaluation (SEE) recommendation involving a Tank 48H decantation strategy that would remove liquid volume and grout the solids. The first three Tank 48H samples were surface samples taken after a quiescent period in the tank. The quiescent period allowed settling of the solids, these being mostly potassium tetraphenylborate. These three surface samples had no measurable solids, though a settling haze could be seen. The latter three samples were taken at 48, 25, and 10 inches from the bottom of Tank 48H immediately after tank mixing pumps had been run. Those samples contained measurable insoluble solids that were readily visible. All six samples were analyzed to provide chemical and radionuclide concentrations as defined as the "Limit" and "Target" in the Saltstone Production Facility (SPF) Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) and per the compliance strategy in the Tank Farm Waste Compliance Plan (WCP). Samples were analyzed by many methods to determine pH, density/specific gravity, radioactive isotopes, soluble and insoluble elements, total solids, total insoluble solids, organic and inorganic mercury, volatile and semi-volatile chemicals, and anions. Photographs of the settling of small samples were taken over time and are displayed in this report. The extent of settling was very significant, showing that surface sample liquids are similar to filtrates. However, Cs-137 measurements exceeded WAC limits in all surface samples (1.1E+07 vs. 1.3E+06). The solids were found to contain very high cesium activity, measured as high as 1.1E+10 dpm/gram. Sodium was in the range of 4.24 to 4.74 M for all samples, so the solids would tend to settle with time and would not be at risk of floating without air entrainment. No organic mercury was detected in this work.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Analysis in Support of Disposition of Tank 48 Legacy Material

This report contains the characterization of six 200-mL Tank 48H samples: HTF-48-21-74, HTF-48-21-75, HTF-48-21-76, HTF-48-21-81, HTF-48-21-82, and HTF-48-21-83. The effort supports a Systems Engineering Evaluation (SEE) recommendation involving a Tank 48H decantation strategy that would remove liquid volume and grout the solids. The first three Tank 48H samples were surface samples taken after a quiescent period in the tank. The quiescent period allowed settling of the solids, these being mostly potassium tetraphenylborate. These three surface samples had no measurable solids, though a settling haze could be seen. The latter three samples were taken at 48, 25, and 10 inches from the bottom of Tank 48H immediately after tank mixing pumps had been run. Those samples contained measurable insoluble solids that were readily visible. All six samples were analyzed to provide chemical and radionuclide concentrations as defined as the "Limit" and "Target" in the Saltstone Production Facility (SPF) Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) and per the compliance strategy in the Tank Farm Waste Compliance Plan (WCP). Samples were analyzed by many methods to determine pH, density/specific gravity, radioactive isotopes, soluble and insoluble elements, total solids, total insoluble solids, organic and inorganic mercury, volatile and semi-volatile chemicals, and anions. Photographs of the settling of small samples were taken over time and are displayed in this report. The extent of settling was very significant, showing that surface sample liquids are similar to filtrates. However, Cs-137 measurements exceeded WAC limits in all surface samples (1.1E+07 vs. 1.3E+06). The solids were found to contain very high cesium activity, measured as high as 1.1E+10 dpm/gram. Sodium was in the range of 4.24 to 4.74 M for all samples, so the solids would tend to settle with time and would not be at risk of floating without air entrainment. No organic mercury was detected in this work.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Annual Summary Report (FY 2025) Performance Assessment for the Integrated Disposal Facility

The purpose of this Annual Summary Report (ASR) for fiscal year (FY) 2025 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, Radioactive Waste Management. The ASR follows the guidance in DOE-STD-5002-2017, Disposal Authorization Statement and Tank Closure Documentation, which provides a framework for maintaining the validity of the DAS through periodic assessment of facility performance and compliance with waste disposal requirements.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

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↗

Preliminary IHLW Formulation Algorithm Description

This report documents the initial algorithm that could be used by the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) in batching high-level waste (HLW) and glass-forming chemicals (GFCs) in the HLW melter feed preparation vessel (MFPV) (HFP-VSL-00001 and -00005). Not all Hanford tank waste can be accommodated by the models developed for this report and significant expansion of the model boundaries could be achievable to reduce the WTP mission life and total canister production count. The immobilized HLW (IHLW) must meet a series of constraints to be acceptable for disposal in the Monitored Geologic Repository, which are contained in the Specification 1 of the Contract (DOE 2000), the Waste Acceptance Product Specifications (WAPS, DOE 1996), and the Waste Acceptance System Requirements Document (WASRD, DOE 2007). The IHLW Waste Form Compliance Plan (WCP, 24590-HLW-PL-RT-07-0001, Rev 3) specifies that the formulation algorithm will be developed and used to comply with the constraints associated with glass composition and properties. This report is not an engineering calculation, does not provide design input, and is not an engineering study. Algorithm inputs include the chemical analyses of the blended HLW in the HLW blend vessel (HBV) (HLP-VSL-00028, the volume and composition of the MFPV heel, the volume and composition of the MFPV after waste addition, the volume and composition of MFPV batch after GFC addition, the compositions of individual GFCs, and the mass of glass in each canister. In addition to these inputs, uncertainties in the HLW composition and processing parameters are included in the algorithm. Using the above inputs, the algorithm calculates the following outputs: 1) the volume of HLW to be transferred from the HBV to the MFPV, 2) the mass of each GFC for addition to the MFPV, 3) the composition of the glass that will be produced along with uncertainties, and 4) the predicted properties, with associated uncertainties, of the resulting IHLW. The algorithm uses the property-composition models to calculate properties with associated uncertainties and compares them with various constraints to ensure that a processable feed is formulated and a compliant IHLW is produced. The GFC additions are determined using an optimization approach to provide high confidence that the HLW glass will meet all product quality requirements and key processing constraints. For most HLW batches there are many possible glass compositions that meet all constraints. In these cases, the glass composition is optimized for a series of target component concentrations and target property values. The algorithm also incorporates process measurement and product quality uncertainties, based on the work of Piepel et al. (2005). Estimates of the various process and measurement uncertainties that affect glass compositions and predicted glass properties have been previously reported (Piepel et al. 2005, 2006) and the impacts of these estimated uncertainties on the IHLW composition envelope that meets product quality and processing-related properties with sufficient confidence were evaluated. The details of work performed to date to develop this initial GFC addition and batching algorithm are summarized in Sections 4 and 5. An example data set is used to illustrate the calculations of the algorithm summarized in Section 6. Finally, in Section 7, there is a statement of the required work to achieve a final operational IHLW formulation control algorithm. This report is not an engineering calculation, does not provide design input, and is not an engineering study.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Analysis of the Sludge Batch 7b (Macrobatch 9) DWPF Pour Stream Glass Sample

The Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) began processing Sludge Batch 7b (SB7b), also referred to as Macrobatch 9 (MB9), in January 2012. SB7b is a blend of the heel of Tank 40 from Sludge Batch 7a (SB7a) and the SB7b material that was transferred to Tank 40 from Tank 51. SB7b was processed using Frit 418.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

Testing of the Defense Waste Processing Facility Cold Chemical Dissolution Method in Sludge Batch 10 Qualification

For each sludge batch that is processed in the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF), the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) tests the applicability of the digestion methods used by the DWPF Laboratory for elemental analysis of Sludge Receipt and Adjustment Tank (SRAT) Receipt samples and SRAT Product process control samples. DWPF SRAT samples are typically dissolved using a method referred to as the DWPF Cold Chemical or Cold Chem Method (CC), (see DWPF Procedure SW4-15.201- 2.1).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Compliance of NNSS Activities with P322-4 Issues Management and NNSSWAC Requirements

The Institutional Quality and Performance Assurance Division's Quality Support Services Group conducted a surveillance of the compliance of Waste Management Program activities to Issues Management/Corrective Action requirements communicated in P322-4 and the Nevada National Security Site Waste Acceptance criteria (NNSSWAC). All corrective actions reviewed and records examined were found to be compliant with appropriate and relevant procedures. There were no Findings or Opportunities for Improvement noted.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Panel Session 79: Challenges and Lessons Learned in Radwaste Packaging, Transportation, Compliance, and Receipt

This panel focused on challenges and lessons learned in radioactive waste packaging, transportation, compliance, and receipt for fabricators of radioactive waste packaging. World-wide companies are urged to participate. Participants provided their perspectives and suggestions on how to increase efficiencies through eliminating inconsistencies between specifications and other requirements to provide products at a reasonable cost and enhance communication to enable better service. Panelists with presentations: PACTEC (Bill Smart); Waste Packaging Strategy and Challenges at Whiteshell (Miles Smith); Challenges and Lessons Learned in Radwaste Packaging, Transportation, Compliance and Receipt (Dan Payne)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Origins and Contents of the Waste Specifications: the Example of the French LLW-SL Disposal Facility - 20016

The waste specifications published by Andra for its surface disposal facilities for Low and Intermediate, Short-Lived waste (CSA) are primarily defined to ensure the safe disposal of waste, both in the short and long term, spanning from disposal operations to hundreds of years after closure, when the man-made safety barriers have long disappeared into dust. The paper presents the methodology used at Andra to derive the CSA waste specifications, also known as Waste Acceptance Criteria, their contents, and the process in place to verify compliance of the waste with the specifications. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Annual Status Report (FY 2020): Performance Assessment for the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility

DOE O 435.1 and DOE M 435.1-1 require that a determination of continued adequacy of the performance assessment (PA) (CP-60089), composite analysis, and disposal authorization statement (DAS) be made annually, and these guidelines must be used to consider the results of data collection and analysis from research, field studies, and monitoring as well as provide the need to update any radioactive waste management basis documents. Beginning in 1996, the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) started accepting low-level radioactive, hazardous, and mixed wastes generated during cleanup activities at the Hanford Site. ERDF is composed of a series of cells or disposal areas and can accommodate future design expansions as needed. Currently, there are 10 cells. During this reporting period (fiscal year 2020, which extended from October 1, 2019, through September 30, 2020), approximately 3.39E+04 U.S. tons (3.07E+04 metric tons) of waste was disposed at ERDF. From ERDF inception through September 30, 2020, approximately 18.5 million U.S. tons of waste has been disposed at ERDF, which equates to the consumption of approximately 88% of the disposal volume. As a condition of the DAS, disposal operations within ERDF must be in accordance with the waste acceptance criteria (ERDF-00011) that provide specific radionuclide disposal limits, waste form restrictions, and descriptions of acceptable waste packages in compliance with DOE M 435.1-1 requirements. The ERDF waste acceptance criteria stipulate that waste destined for disposal at ERDF be controlled based on source, physical form, and contaminant concentration and activity levels. There have been no changes to the physical configuration of ERDF or to the waste forms (source, physical form, etc.). No new Unreviewed Disposal Question Screenings or Evaluations have been generated during this reporting period. Therefore, there are no noted impacts to the PA, composite analysis, DAS, or radioactive waste management basis documents resulting from the evaluations and screenings. Sum of fraction analysis shows that the disposed inventory meets both the concentration and inventory threshold requirements. A sum of fractions value is computed for ERDF sensitive radionuclides contributing to the all pathways and air pathway inventory limits. Computed values were 8.85E-02 and 1.78E-01, respectively. The disposed waste inventory remained well under the PA imposed limits. Required monitoring was satisfactorily completed during the fiscal year reporting period (fiscal year 2020). Compliance with performance objectives were met as each of the reported values were well below the established limit. Overall, there are no substantive changes to primary PA assumptions nor changes to the PA analysis conclusion; therefore, compliance with DOE O 435.1 and the DAS is maintained.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Performance Assessment for the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (Annual Status Report FY 2022)

DOE O 435.1 and DOE M 435.1-1 require that a determination of continued adequacy of the performance assessment (PA) (CP-60089), composite analysis (CA), and disposal authorization statement (DAS) be made on an annual basis, and that the determination must consider the results of data collection and analysis from research, field studies, and monitoring as well as the need to update any Radioactive Waste Management Basis (RWMB) documents. Beginning in 1996, the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) started accepting low-level radioactive, hazardous, and mixed wastes that were generated during cleanup activities at the Hanford Site. ERDF is composed of a series of cells or disposal areas and can accommodate future design expansions as needed. Currently, there are eight cells and two supercells in ERDF. Each supercell is the equivalent of two cells. During this reporting period (fiscal year 2022, extending from October 1, 2021, through September 30, 2022), approximately 8.52E+04 metric tons (9.39E+04 U.S. tons) of waste was disposed at ERDF. From ERDF inception through September 30, 2022, approximately 17.0 million metric tons (18.7 million U.S. tons) of waste has been disposed at ERDF, which equates to consumption of approximately 89.1% of the currently constructed disposal volume. According to the design of ERDF, the facility has the ability to be expanded as needed. As a condition of the DAS, disposal operations within ERDF must be in accordance with the waste acceptance criteria (ERDF-00011) that provide specific radionuclide disposal limits, waste form restrictions, and descriptions of acceptable waste packages in compliance with the requirements of DOE M 435-1.1. The ERDF waste acceptance criteria stipulate that waste destined for disposal at ERDF be controlled based on source, physical form, and contaminant concentration and activity levels. There have been no changes to the physical configuration of ERDF or to the waste forms (source, physical form, etc.). No new unreviewed disposal question screenings or evaluations have been generated in this reporting period. Therefore, there are no noted impacts to the PA, CA, DAS, or RWMB resulting from the evaluations and screenings. Sum-of-fractions analysis shows that the disposed inventory meets both the concentration and inventory threshold requirements. A sum-of-fractions value is computed for ERDF sensitive radionuclides contributing to the groundwater pathways and the air pathway inventory limits. Computed values were 5.50E-04 and 3.30E-03, respectively. The disposed waste inventory remained well under the PA imposed limits, as shown in Table 4 and Table 5 in the main text of this report. Required monitoring was satisfactorily completed during the fiscal year reporting period. Compliance with performance objectives were met as each of the reported values were well below the established limit. Overall, there are no substantive changes to primary PA assumptions or changes to the PA analysis conclusion; therefore, compliance with DOE O 435.1 and the DAS is maintained.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Performance Assessment for the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (Annual Status Report FY 2021)

DOE O 435.1 and DOE M 435.1-1 require that a determination of continued adequacy of the performance assessment (PA) (CP-60089), composite analysis (CA), and disposal authorization statement (DAS) be made on an annual basis, and that the determination must consider the results of data collection and analysis from research, field studies, and monitoring as well as the need to update any Radioactive Waste Management Basis (RWMB) documents. Beginning in 1996, the Environmental Disposal Facility (ERDF) started accepting low-level radioactive, hazardous, and mixed wastes that were generated during cleanup activities at the Hanford Site. ERDF is composed of a series of cells or disposal areas and can accommodate future design expansions as needed. Currently, there are eight cells and two supercells in ERDF. Each supercell is the equivalent of two cells. During this reporting period (fiscal year 2021, extending from October 1, 2020, through September 30, 2021), approximately 9.14E+04 metric tons (1.01E+05 U.S. tons) of waste was disposed at ERDF. From ERDF inception through September 30, 2021, approximately 16.9 million metric tons (18.9 U.S. tons) of waste has been disposed of at ERDF, which equates to consumption of approximately 88.7% of the currently constructed disposal volume. According to the design of ERDF, the facility has the ability to be expanded as needed. As a condition of the DAS, disposal operation within ERDF must be in accordance with the waste acceptance criteria (ERDF-00011) that provide specific radionuclide disposal limits, waste form restrictions, and descriptions of acceptable waste packages in compliance with the requirements of DOE M 435-1.1. The ERDF waste acceptance criteria stipulate that waste destined for disposal at ERDF be controlled based on source, physical form, and contaminant concentration and activity levels. There have been no changes to the physical configuration of ERDF or to the waste forms (source, physical form, etc.). No new unreviewed disposal question screenings or evaluations have been generated in this reporting period. Therefore, there are no noted impacts to the PA, CA, DAS, or RWMB resulting from the evaluations and screenings. Sum-of-fractions analysis shows that the disposed inventory meets both the concentration and inventory threshold requirements. A sum-of-fractions value is computed for ERDF sensitive radionuclides contributing to the all pathways and the air pathway inventory limits. Computed values were 7.63E-03 and 1.49E-03, respectively. The disposed waste inventory remained well under the PA imposed limits, as shown in Table 4 and Table 5 in the main text of this report. Required monitoring was satisfactorily completed during the fiscal year reporting period. Compliance with performance objectives were met as each of the reported values were well below the established limit. Overall, there are no substantive changes to primary PA assumptions or changes to the PA analysis conclusion; therefore, compliance with DOE O 435.1 and the DAS is maintained.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Performance Assessment for the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (FY 2019 Annual Status Report)

DOE O 435.1 and DOE M 435.1-1 require that a determination of continued adequacy of the performance assessment (PA), composite analysis, and disposal authorization statement (DAS) be annually, and it must consider the results of data collection and analysis from research, field studies, and monitoring as well as update any Radioactive Waste Management Basis documents. Beginning in 1996, the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) has accepted low-level radioactive, hazardous, and mixed wastes that were generated during cleanup activities at the Hanford Site. ERDF is composed of a series of cells (currently 10) or disposal areas and can accommodate future design expansions as needed. During this reporting period (fiscal year 2019, October 1, 2018, to September 30, 2019). approximately 139,721 U.S. tons of waste was disposed at ERDF. From inception through September 30, 2019, ERDF has received approximately 18.5 million U.S. tons of waste, which equates to consumption of approximately 88% of the disposal volume. As a condition of the DAS, disposal operations within ERDF must be in accordance with the waste acceptance criteria (WAC) that provide specific radionuclide disposal limits, waste from restrictions, and descriptions of acceptable waste packages in compliance with DOE M 435-1.1 requirements. The ERDF WAC stipulates that waste destined for disposal at ERDF be controlled based on source, physical form, and containment concentration and activity levels

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗