Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Low Level Waste Facility”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Presentation on the INL Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility FY-2024 Annual Summary Report

The abstract below is from the report INL/RPT-24-82600. The powerpoint presentation contains information taken from the report. This Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 annual summary report (ASR) documents the continued adequacy of the performance assessment (PA), the composite analysis (CA), and associated operating disposal authorization statement (ODAS) technical basis documents for the Remote Handled Low Level Waste (RHLLW) Disposal Facility at Idaho National Laboratory (INL). Annual review of the adequacy of the PA and CA for RHLLW Disposal Facility ensures that conclusions of the analyses remain valid in accordance with requirements of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 435.1, “Radioactive Waste Management.” In FY 2024, no significant operational changes or other activities occurred that would cause deviation from the assumptions in the PA and CA pertaining to disposal geometry, verification of waste characteristics, tracking disposal inventories against total limits, facility closure design, or institutional controls. Nineteen waste canister shipments were received at the RHLLW Disposal Facility, and all nineteen waste canisters were emplaced in disposal vaults.

12 - MGMT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE WASTE↗
DOE OSTI2021

Annual Summary Report for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility—FY 2020

This Fiscal Year (FY) 2020 annual summary report documents the continued adequacy of the performance assessment (PA), the composite analysis (CA) and associated operating disposal-authorization statement (ODAS) technical basis documents for the Remote Handled (RH) Low-Level Waste (LLW) Disposal Facility at Idaho National Laboratory. Annual review of the adequacy of the PA and CA for the RHLLW Disposal Facility ensures that conclusions of the analyses remain valid in accordance with requirements of Department of Energy (DOE) Order 435.1 Change 1, “Radioactive Waste Management.” In FY 2020, no significant operational changes or other activities occurred that would cause deviation from the assumptions in the PA and CA pertaining to disposal geometry, verification of waste characteristics, tracking disposal inventories against total limits, facility closure design, or institutional controls. Fifteen total waste-canister shipments were received at the RHLLW Disposal Facility, and 15 total waste canisters were emplaced.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2023

Performance Assessment for the E-Area Low Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility at the Savannah River Site: Chapter 1

This report documents the revised Performance Assessment (PA) analysis for the E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility (ELLWF) at the United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) Savannah River Site (SRS). A PA analysis is required for DOE-operated facilities that dispose of low-level radioactive waste. PA analyses simulate (1) the release of radionuclides from the disposal site after facility closure, (2) transport of those contaminants through the environment, and (3) exposure/impacts to potential receptors. The purpose of the PA analysis is to demonstrate that the facility is operated in a manner that ensures long-term environmental protection after facility closure, thereby providing for the protection of public health and safety in limiting doses to a hypothetical member of the public (MOP) or an inadvertent human intruder (IHI). DOE Manual (M) 435.1-1, Chg. 3, Radioactive Waste Management (U.S. DOE, 2021b) establishes quantitative post-closure environmental impact limits and requires a facility-specific PA analysis to demonstrate compliance with these limits for DOE low-level waste (LLW) disposed of after September 26, 1988. These limits are defined in terms of human health (e.g., dose limits) with respect to radioactive constituents in the waste.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2022

E-Area Low Level Waste Generator Inventory Uncertainty Estimation

This report describes the method used to estimate the uncertainty and bias in the low-level waste inventory, as reported by Waste Generators, for waste disposed in the E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility at SRS. The waste cut uncertainty and bias is summed to calculate the current total uncertainty and bias in each disposal unit in the E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility. This information is used to estimate the future uncertainty and bias when all disposal units are closed. For most waste cuts, there are two areas of inventory uncertainty and bias: in the isotopic characterization of the waste stream and in the measurement of total waste cut activity. Waste stream characterization is accomplished through a combination of process knowledge and analytical measurements. This characterization is documented by a technical baseline that describes the relative quantity of each isotope present in the waste stream. The total activity of each individual waste cut is usually measured directly or is calculated through a ratio of activity per weight or activity per volume. The waste cut total activity is multiplied by the waste stream isotopic fraction to calculate the total isotopic activity present in the waste cut. The waste cut uncertainty and bias is calculated by analyzing the uncertainties and biases in the waste stream characterization and waste cut measurements and adding the uncertainties in quadrature and multiplying the reported isotopic activities by the bias factors. The current isotopic inventory, uncertainty, and bias of a disposal unit is the sum of the currently disposed individual waste cut isotopic activities, uncertainties, and biases. The future uncertainty and bias is estimated based on the average “worst-case” (largest) uncertainties and biases of currently closed and operational disposal units. This report details the method, data sources, and calculation techniques used to calculate these values. It also presents some of the difficulties in working with the reported data and gives examples of the calculations and analysis. The software used to carryout the analysis is included and the location of the complete individual analyses is given. After discussion with waste generators, examination of multiple waste characterization documents, and a review of SRS Manual 1S, the reported ELLWF radionuclide activities are clearly conservative and likely represent reasonable upper bounds for the true activities. However, quantifying the bias and uncertainty in each waste cut requires detailed analysis of the documentation for each waste cut measurement and waste stream characterization.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Dose Calculation Methodology and Data for Solid Waste Performance Assessment and Composite Analysis at the Savannah River Site

This report provides a detailed description of the methodology developed to perform dose calculations for E-Area Low Level Waste Facility Performance Assessments and Savannah River Site Composite Analyses. Chapters 2 – 8 give a complete set of equations to be used to calculate dose for individual exposure pathways. The first set of dose scenarios assume that a member of the public establishes residence near the waste site and uses contaminated groundwater or contaminated surface water for personal consumption and to irrigate a garden and pasture where produce and farm animals are raised. Products from the garden and farm animals are used for personal consumption. This scenario applies to both E-Area Performance Assessments and Savannah River Site Composite Analyses. General dose exposure pathways for the resident farmer scenario are: 1. Ingestion pathways described in Chapter 2, 2. Inhalation pathways described in Chapter 3, 3. External exposure pathways described in Chapter 4, and 4. Recreational pathways described in Chapter 5 (Composite Analysis only). Doses from all of the above pathways are directly related to the contaminant concentration in the water. Additional dose scenarios considered for E-Area Performance Assessment assume that an inadvertent intruder encroaches on the waste disposal site after loss of institutional control. General dose exposure pathways considered for the inadvertent intruder are: 1. Ingestion pathways described in Chapter 6, 2. Inhalation pathways described in Chapter 7, and 3. External exposure pathways described in Chapter 8. Doses from all of the intruder pathways are directly related to the contaminant concentration in the buried waste. Special dose considerations related to human consumption of meat and dairy, and treatment of tritium in dose calculations are discussed in Chapter 9. Chapter 10 describes an Excel database named “Radionuclide, Element and Dose Parameter Data Package” that has been created to provide a system for maintaining the data required to perform radionuclide transport and dose calculations. This data includes: Isotope physical parameters and radioactive decay data needed for both transport and dose calculations, Isotope-specific dose coefficients and soil shielding factors associated with exposure pathways, Radionuclide drinking water concentration limits either published by the Environmental Protection Agency or derived from internal dose coefficients to meet the groundwater protection requirements in Department of Energy Order 435.1, Element-specific bio-transfer factors used in dose calculations, Dose equations and values of physical parameters and human factors used in dose calculations, and Key physical constants used in dose calculations. Revision 1 incorporates updated information developed since this report was issued for use in the next revision of the E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility Performance Assessment.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Cliff Retreat Rates Associated with a Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility in Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA

We present an analysis and interpretation of potential cliff stability at a low-level waste disposal facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico, using cliff morphologic and fracture characteristics coupled with carbon-14 surface exposure dating. Our study is important as it directly bears on the licensing criteria for low-level radioactive waste sites. We find that future characteristic cliff failures will likely not breach disposal pits and shafts over the 1000-year minimum regulatory period. Further, we find, using a multivariate regression model, that slope angle and cliff face aspect are sub-equal in importance to predict regions of high risk of failure when combined with surface exposure ages and assuming that old exposure ages are most indicative of stability (instability) and therefore can aid decision making in final design implementation.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

FY2020 Savannah River Site Composite Analysis Annual Summary Review

This document provides the Department of Energy (DOE) Order 435.1 and its manual, Radioactive Waste Management (DOE 2021a, 2021b) required Annual Review for the Savannah River Site (SRS) Composite Analysis (CA). Progress made to-date toward addressing the secondary issue from the LFRG review of the 2010 SRS CA has focused primarily upon inventory estimate improvements. Inventory impacts dose in a linear fashion and reduces the uncertainty with the CA conclusions. Maintenance items are addressed, as funding allows, based on the relative risk associated with meeting the performance objectives. Currently, there is minimal risk in exceeding the DOE 100 mrem/yr CA primary dose limit or the DOE 30 mrem/yr dose constraint (administrative limit). Proposed activities, discoveries, new information and changes potentially affecting the 2010 SRS CA are documented in this and earlier Annual Summary reports, and a consolidated list of changes since the 2010 CA is documented in this report. The impact to the CA of changes arising from updated performance assessment (PA) baselines [i.e., Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF), E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility (ELLWF), and F & H Tank Farm (FTF & HTF) closures] is expected to be minor for the following reasons: The primary contributors to the SRS CA dose impact at the Upper Three Runs (UTR) point of assessment (POA) are the H-Canyon and Mixed Waste Management Facility (MWMF), contributing 68% and 9%, respectively, to the dose impact at that POA. The combined contribution to the UTR dose impact from all PA’s (SDF, ELLWF, FTF and HTF) is ~2% of this total. The 2010 SRS CA model validation performed indicates that the CA projected dose, while generally conservative, provides a reasonable representation of the maximum annual doses. Doses evaluated are well below the SRS established 15 mrem/yr administrative limit (Crapse et al. 2011). Based on the assessment presented within this annual review and collective engineering judgement, the conclusions of the 2010 SRS CA remain valid and there is reasonable assurance that SRS will meet the performance objectives delineated in DOE Manual 435.1-1. The 2010 SRS CA should be updated to incorporate PA changes, proposed changes to inventories and sources and model improvements accumulated since the 2010 CA. The timing will be dependent on the completion of the ongoing E-Area PA revision.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Panel Session 104: US DOE LLW On-Site Disposal: LLW Disposal Facility Federal Review Group Review Process

The US DOE Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group (LFRG) as the regulatory authority for onsite low-level waste disposal facilities for the complex per DOE Order 435.1. This panel focused on the review process for technical basis documents including the Performance Assessments that are used to issue the disposal authorization statement Presentations proposed include: 1 - Low-Level Waste Disposal Overview (Jhon Carilli, US DOE EM Nevada (USA)); 2 - Factors Influencing Allowable Waste Concentrations and Inventories at Disposal Facilities (Roger Seitz, IEI (USA)); 3 - Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group - LFRG (Jaffet Ferrer-Torres, US DOE (USA))

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Impact of Permanganate Oxidation of Glycolate on Corrosion of the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) Recycle Collection Tank (RCT), Transfer-line and Waste Tank Materials of Construction (MoC)

Savannah River Remediation (SRR) is evaluating the use of glycolic acid to replace formic acid as an alternate reductant for the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) at Savannah River Site (SRS). The replacement is aimed at reducing facility hazards, improving pH stability and rheological control, and lowering off gas production. Glycolate, which is the product that may remain, can also be carried downstream to High-Level Waste and Low-Level Waste facilities. Complete oxidation of glycolate and other organic species from the Sludge Receipt and Adjustment Tank (SRAT) may be necessary to minimize thermolytic hydrogen generation that can cause flammability issues. The glycolate oxidation may be performed in the Recycle Collection Tank (RCT). The RCT heel would be adjusted with sodium hydroxide to maintain the solution caustic and sodium nitrite as corrosion inhibitor prior to the addition of condensate that can be from the contents of the Slurry Mix Evaporator Condensate Tank (SMECT) or Offgas Condensate Tank (OGCT). The RCT tank collects the waste to be transferred via the Low Point Pump Pit – Recycle Pump Tank (LPPP-RPT) through a jacketed transfer-line to the Tank Farm facility. Scoping studies were performed to evaluate an oxidizing agent and sodium permanganate was selected as the best option for glycolate destruction. Testing was recommended to determine the impact on the Materials of Construction (MoC) due to the addition of sodium permanganate. The targeted concentration of sodium permanganate used equated to a 7:1 molar permanganate to glycolate ratio (nominally 0.002 M permanganate). However, to conservatively maximize the permanganate corrosivity, in some cases no glycolate was added.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

E-Area LLWF Final Closure Cap Design – Constructability Evaluation Criteria for the Plot 8 and NR07E Disposal Areas

SRNS Design Engineering has been asked to complete a constructability evaluation of the proposed final closure cap designs for the Plot 8 (Engineered Trenches ET07, ET08, and ET09) and 643-7E NRCDA (NR07E) disposal areas located outside the original E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility (ELLWF) footprint. This memorandum presents the guidelines and criteria for the constructability evaluation. A new conceptual design for the ELLWF closure cap is not requested at this time.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

GSA Aquifer Cutouts for E-Area PA Revision Transport Simulations

The 2018 General Separations Area (GSA) aquifer model is dissected into four refined cutouts for aquifer transport in preparation for the next E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility (LLWF) Performance Assessment (PA) revision. The recommended refined horizontal and vertical grid sizes are 20 ft and 3 ft, respectively. The horizontal resolution appropriately represents longitudinal dispersion with dispersivity of 15.4 ft. Four cutouts (i.e., West, Center, East 1, and East 2) are selected to adequately contain tracer plumes emanating from disposal units expected in the E-Area LLWF. For feasible computation, each cutout is refined to mesh sizes much less than the PORFLOW limit of 1,024,000 nodes.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Safety Functions and Features, Events and Processes for the E-Area Performance Assessment

The DOE Technical Standard, “Disposal Authorization Statement and Tank Closure Documentation,” (DOE 2017) recommends the use of safety functions and features, events and processes (FEPs) to support development of conceptual models and identification of scenarios to be considered in a performance assessment (PA). The FEP process provides a means to describe how a PA considers and addresses the factors that could influence the performance of key barriers. Understanding the roles of barriers in terms of limiting migration helps to focus on how changes in the system could lead to a situation where those roles cannot be fulfilled and there is the potential for compromised performance. The FEPs screening and review process was used to identify FEPs that are relevant for the EArea Low-Level Waste Facility (LLWF) and specifically those FEPs that could have a detrimental impact on the effectiveness of a given safety function. For this PA, a default list of FEPs developed at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA 2004) and an approach implemented for PAs at the Hanford and Idaho sites (Mehta et al. 2016, DOE-ID 2019) are used to identify processes and events that could influence the effectiveness of a given safety function for the E-Area LLWF (e.g., subsidence can impact the safety function of the cover system and lead to increased infiltration). The Hanford and Idaho PAs represent two of the most recent applications of this approach. The PA evaluates the potential impacts of changes in performance of different features of the system and demonstrates that the safety functions represent multiple and redundant barriers. Barrier analyses, assuming a safety function is not present, also test the robustness of the system in the event of the loss of one or more safety functions. Such evaluations also support a qualitative illustration of the concept of defense in depth. The safety concept for closure of the E-Area LLWF (generically referred to as “E-Area”) encompasses a variety of different features (i.e., administrative controls, natural site features, and engineered barriers) that reduce the potential impacts on human health and the environment from the residual waste that will remain after closure. These features can be represented as a collection of safety functions acting independently and as a system to provide for overall safety. In some applications, there have been attempts to assign numerical expectations to specific safety functions, but that is not the intent in this case. The concept of safety functions is used more qualitatively in two ways for this PA: 1. To illustrate the robustness of the E-Area design, operational practices and closure approach by documenting features that are and are not credited in different modeling cases. 2. To identify the roles of the different features and potential processes and events that could compromise the performance of safety features and need to be considered when developing the modeling approach. This report addresses both safety functions and FEPs for the E-Area PA.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Comoparison of Slit Trench and Engineered Trench 3D Vadose Zone Conceptual Models

In the next revision of the E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility (ELLWF) Performance Assessment (PA), radionuclide groundwater transport from slit (ST) and engineered trenches (ET) will be simulated using 3-dimensional PORFLOW models representing the vadose zone. In total, the conceptual framework will aim to model 29 total trenches with a degree of conservatism that provides a high level of confidence in meeting performance objectives. The implementation of generic conceptual models allows for a reasonable number of simulation scenarios, thereby reducing the chances of errors and enabling a better one-to-one comparison between the results, while still capturing the most important features of each trench. The current investigation seeks to understand if a generic trench model based on the general ET footprint can justifiably be used for representing both STs and ETs while maintaining a reasonable degree of conservatism. In this process, the groundwater transport of several key radionuclides was simulated for both ET and ST geometries and the flux-to-the-water-table profiles were compared. For all radionuclides simulated, the ET geometry is shown to be conservative (i.e., produces the highest peak flux to the water table).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Hydraulic Properties Data Package for the E-Area Soils, Cementitious Materials, and Waste Zones–Update

Hydraulic property estimates for the soils, cementitious materials, and waste zones associated with the E-Area low-level radioactive waste disposal units have been provided to support the Performance Assessments (PA) for the E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility (LLWF). Nominal or “best estimate” hydraulic property values for use in the deterministic modeling are provided along with representations of the hydraulic property value uncertainty for use in sensitivity and uncertainty modeling. The hydraulic properties provided for each of the E-Area materials include: porosity ( η ), dry bulk density ( ρ b ), particle density (ρ p ), saturated hydraulic conductivity ( K sat ), characteristic curves (suction head, saturation, and relative permeability), and effective diffusion coefficient ( D e ). A representation of the uncertainty associated with each property, except for the characteristic curves, is provided for each material, except for the E-Area waste zones. These nominal parameter values for each of the E-Area soils, cementitious materials, and waste zones, and, where indicated, parameter uncertainty representations, are based upon the following in order of priority: Site-specific field data, Site-specific laboratory data, Similarity to material with site-specific field or laboratory data, and Literature data. Additionally, a methodology to represent long-term concrete degradation is provided. Finally, because much of the nominal hydraulic property values and uncertainty representations for the E-Area soils, cementitious materials, and waste zones are based on similarity to other materials or literature data, a methodology to prioritize additional work to better define these values and representations is outlined. Prioritization should be based on the importance of the material and/or property to the results of deterministic, sensitivity, and uncertainty modeling. This prioritization should be established through a process of sensitivity modeling. This report supersedes the previous hydraulic properties data package. Revision 1 contains clarifications, updates and corrections to text, figures and tables in a number of places in the report along with some minor editing.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

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↗
DOE OSTI2021

Installation of Lysimeters Near Engineered Trench 3

Three new lysimeter stations were installed on the north rim of Engineered Trench 3 (Figure ES-1)at the E-Area Low Level Waste Facility (ELLWF). These stations were designated as ET3-VL-3, ET3-VL-4, and ET3-VL-5. The stations were installed in a line with the two existing stations (ET3-VL-1 and ET3-VL-2) and spaced approximately 100 ft apart. Two lysimeters were installed at each station at the depths shown in Table ES-1. Lysimeter placement was based on borehole lithology and was comparable to the existing lysimeter stations. The deepest lysimeter at each of the three new lysimeter stations was designated as the action-level lysimeter.Following installation, the lysimeters were purged and placed under vacuum for sampling. Sampling occurred in December 2020 with each lysimeter producing 1000 ml of water for tritium analysis. All lysimeters were below the administrative limit for ET3 (43.7 pCi/ml) with all but ET3-VL-5 (222) at background levels. ET3-VL-5 (222) had a tritium concentration of 27.5 pCi/ml.With the addition of the new lysimeters at ET3, the vadose zone monitoring system is now comprised of 309 active lysimeters at 102 lysimeter stations. There are 93 action-level lysimeters at 102 stations

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 OSTI2021

Installation of Lysimeters and Monitoring Wells in Support of the Revised Approach to E-Area Performance Monitoring

Savannah River Site (SRS) has developed a revised approach to performance monitoring of the E Area Low Level Waste Facility (ELLWF) that adds a saturated zone component to the existing vadose zone monitoring program (Kubilius, 2019). The revised approach specifies modifications to the vadose zone monitoring program, the addition of new lysimeters at Engineered Trench 3 (ET3), and the installation of water table monitoring wells to complement the existing well network surrounding the ELLWF. This project summary report is intended to provide the final construction details and layout for the new vadose zone lysimeters at ET3 and the water table monitoring wells installed as part of the new saturated zone component of the revised performance monitoring program.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗