Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “cleanup”

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 OSTI2020

Life-Cycle Baseline Customization for the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program - 20304

One of the responsibilities of the federal government is to estimate sound and defensible life-cycle baseline costs for use in federal budget estimates and to meet federal financial reporting requirements. To accomplish this, the US Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Legacy Management (LM) and the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) have partnered together to ensure that the liabilities documented in each Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) site's life-cycle baseline are specifically tailored. FUSRAP was created in the mid-1970's to clean up radiological contamination resulting from the early development of nuclear weapons. DOE was responsible for FUSRAP until October 1997, when Congress transferred the administration and execution of FUSRAP site cleanups to USACE. By 1997, DOE had completed the cleanup of 25 of the 46 sites that were active within the program and had begun cleanup at 13 additional sites. USACE was assigned responsibility for the cleanup of the 21 remaining FUSRAP sites, and at 8 additional sites that had since been referred for cleanup. The LM mission for the FUSRAP sites is to perform long-term surveillance and maintenance (LTS and M). Currently, LM provides long-term stewardship for 34 completed FUSRAP sites. Another 20 sites are under active remediation by USACE. Within the last 5 years, USACE has completed the cleanup at five FUSRAP sites and the LTS and M responsibility has been transferred to LM. By 2029, USACE will compete remediation at eight additional sites and LTS and M for those sites will transfer to LM. Because responsibilities for the FUSRAP sites transfer between USACE and LM upon completion of remedial actions, both agencies maintain life-cycle baselines for different stages of the project and both must have a strong understanding of the needs and requirements for each site. This understanding ensures that the life-cycle baselines form a complete and accurate picture of what is required for the site and for the FUSRAP program. LM focuses on several things when customizing the life-cycle baseline estimates for the FUSRAP sites, including (1) Understanding the unique requirements for each site. By reviewing site-specific documents prepared by USACE, such as Feasibility Studies and Records of Decision, and partnering with USACE to gain additional insight about site conditions and requirements for stewardship, as well as potential risks, LM can better develop the life-cycle baselines. (2) Developing site-specific labor breakdowns. This ensures the required labor mix is baselined for specific activities by comparing the labor mix required to perform activities at (a) other LM-managed FUSRAP sites and (b) non-FUSRAP LM sites and (c) by USACE at active FUSRAP sites. (3) Taking a tiered approach to life-cycle baseline planning. Estimates for sites transferring to LM in the near term (5 years) are more definitive than for sites transferring in the out-year period. Remedial actions at the near-term sites are at or near completion, providing LM a strong understanding of the LTS and M requirements and remaining liabilities. This in turn allows for site-specific customization of the baseline. (4) Using a robust risk management approach to ensure that liabilities specific to each site are identified, evaluated by probability and severity, and documented in relation to the impact to cost or schedule. To ensure the most accuracy within all the baselines, the FUSRAP life-cycle baselines are updated as needed to support program, project, and contract management needs. (authors)

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

Risk to ecological resources following remediation can be due mainly to increased resource value of successful restoration: A case study from the Department of Energy's Hanford Site

Several nations are faced with the need to remediate large contaminated sites following World War II, the Cold War, and abandoned industrial sites, and to return them to productive land uses. In the United States, the Department of Energy (DOE) has the largest cleanup challenge, and its Hanford Site in the state of Washington has the most extensive and most expensive cleanup task. Ideally, the risk to ecological resources on remediation sites is evaluated before, during, and after remediation, and the risk from, or damage to, ecological resources from contaminants should be lower following remediation. In this paper, we report the risk to ecological resources before, during, and as a consequence of remediation on contaminated units requiring cleanup, and then examine the causes for changes in risk by evaluating 56 cleanup evaluation units (EUs) at the Hanford Site. In this case, remediation includes a restoration phase. In general, the risk to ecological and eco-cultural resources is currently not discernible or low at most contaminated units, increases during remediation, and decreases thereafter. Remediation often causes physical disruption to ecosystems as it reduces the risk from exposure to contaminants. Most new remediation projects at the Hanford Site include ecological restoration. Ecological restoration results in the potential for the presence of higher quality resources after remediation than currently exists on these contaminated lands and facilities. Although counter-intuitive, our evaluation of the risk to ecological resources following remediation indicated that a significant percentage of units (61%) will be at increased risk in the post-remediation period. This increased risk is due to DOE's successful remediation and restoration that results in a higher percent of native vegetation and higher ecological value on the sites in the post-remediation period than before. These newly-created resources can then be at risk from post-remediation activities. Risks to these new higher quality resources include the potential for spread of invasive species and of noxious grasses used in previous cleanup actions, disruption of ecosystems (including those with state or federally listed species and unique ecosystems), compaction of soil, use of pesticides to control invasive species, and the eventual need for continued monitoring activities. Thus, by greatly improving the existing habitat and health of eco-receptors, and maintaining habitat corridors between high quality habitats, the ecological resources in the post-remediated units are at risk unless care is taken to protect them. Many of the negative effects of both remediation and future monitoring (or other future land uses) can be avoided by planning and management early in the remediation process. We suggest DOE and other agencies convene a panel of managers, remediation scientists, regulators, environmental and ecological scientists, Native Americans, economists, and the public to develop a generic list of performance metrics for the restoration phase of remediation, including evaluation of success, which could be applied across the DOE complex.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Hybrid Sorbents for 129 I Capture from Contaminated Groundwater

Radioiodine ( 129 I) poses a risk to the environment due to its long half-life, toxicity, and mobility. It is found at the U.S. Department of Energy Hanford Site due to legacy releases of nuclear wastes to the subsurface where 129 I is predominantly present as iodate (IO 3 – ). To date, a cost-effective and scalable cleanup technology for 129 I has not been identified, with hydraulic containment implemented as the remedial approach. Here, novel high-performing sorbents for 129 I remediation with the capacity to reduce 129 I concentrations to or below the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) drinking water standard and procedures to deploy them in an ex-situ pump and treat (P&T) system are introduced. Furthermore, this includes implementation of hybridized polyacrylonitrile (PAN) beads for ex-situ remediation of IO 3 – -contaminated groundwater for the first time. Iron (Fe) oxyhydroxide and bismuth (Bi) oxyhydroxide sorbents were deployed on silica substrates or encapsulated in porous PAN beads. In addition, Fe–, cerium (Ce)–, and Bi–oxyhydroxides were encapsulated with anion-exchange resins. The PAN–bismuth oxyhydroxide and PAN–ferrihydrite composites along with Fe- and Ce-based hybrid anion-exchange resins performed well in batch sorption experiments with distribution coefficients for IO 3 – of >1000 mL/g and rapid removal kinetics. Of the tested materials, the Ce-based hybrid anion-exchange resin was the most efficient for removal of IO 3 – from Hanford groundwater in a column system, with 50% breakthrough occurring at 324 pore volumes. The functional amine groups on the parent resin and amount of active sorbent in the resin can be customized to improve the iodine loading capacity. These results highlight the potential for IO 3 – remediation by hybrid sorbents and represent a benchmark for the implementation of commercially available materials to meet EPA standards for cleanup of 129 I in a large-scale P&T system.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2020

Spatiotemporal Analyses of Groundwater and Shoreline Cr(VI) Concentrations in the 100 Areas at Hanford

Cleanup efforts have been ongoing since the late 1990s to remediate contaminated waste sites and groundwater in the 100 Areas at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford Site. One of the primary contaminants of concern is hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)), which was used as a corrosion inhibitor in cooling water for nuclear reactors that formerly operated along the shoreline of the Columbia River. Cleanup efforts have included 1) removal, treatment (as needed), and disposal of contaminated sediments; 2) in situ redox manipulation as a permeable reactive barrier; 3) pump-and-treat; 4) soil flushing; and 5) monitored natural attenuation. DOE’s annual groundwater monitoring reports document the significant reductions in Cr(VI) plume areas that have occurred over the past 10 years or more as a result of these cleanup efforts. The Record of Decision for the 100-HR-3 operable unit specified a cleanup level (CUL) for Cr(VI) in groundwater of 48 µg/L to protect human receptors, and a surface water CUL of 10 µg/L to protect aquatic organisms in the Columbia River. The Record of Decision did not specify point-of-compliance locations for the surface water CUL. Data for 2019 from the six groundwater operable units (OUs) in the 100 Areas indicate that the 48 μg/L groundwater CUL has been achieved in 100% of the wells in the 100-BC and 100-NR OUs, and in 89- 97% of the wells in the other OUs (100-KR, 100-HR-D, 100-HR-H, 100-FR). Data for 2019 indicate that 100% of the aquifer tubes monitored for Cr(VI) in the 100 Areas have concentrations below the 48 μg/L groundwater CUL. However, the 10 μg/L standard has not yet been consistently achieved for both inland groundwater monitoring wells and shoreline aquifer tubes. This report describes a series of data analyses performed to identify consistent relationships, if any, between inland well and shoreline Cr(VI) concentrations within the 100 Areas. To this end, select monitoring data for Cr(VI) measured in groundwater and aquifer tubes at the 100 Areas were analyzed for a 10-year period—2010 to 2019. Relationships between inland groundwater plumes and surface-water points of discharge in and along the Columbia River were examined through several analyses that included inland well and aquifer tube concentrations as a function of distance from the shoreline, evaluation of cumulative probability plots, trend analysis, correlation analysis, cluster analysis, and identification of plume trajectories for each of the 100 Areas. The analyses did not identify consistent relationships between inland groundwater Cr(VI) concentrations and shoreline concentrations within the 100 Areas due to several confounding factors influencing groundwater flow directions and Cr(VI) concentrations. The proximity of groundwater Cr(VI) plumes to the river, and the highly dynamic nature of the river, influence the transport behavior of the plumes and create challenges for quantifying attenuation of Cr(VI) between the inland monitoring wells and shoreline concentrations. Other factors contributing to temporal and spatial Cr(VI) concentrations, as supported by some of the data analyses, include the presence of vadose zone sources, variable sorption behavior, and complexities associated with Cr(VI) mass transfer between the upper and lower aquifers and their interactions with the river. Hence, monitoring to assess compliance with target CULs will need to be determined for each area individually since several factors influence Cr(VI) concentrations in the 100 Areas.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2022

KSC Headquarters Building Area SWMU 104 Soil Interim Measure Report for LOC 2D and LOC 2E Kennedy Space Center, Florida

This Interim Measure (IM) Report for Location of Concern (LOC) 2D and LOC 2E summarizes the activities associated with implementation of an IM to address soil and concrete contamination at the Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Headquarters Building Area (KHQA) located at KSC, Florida. KHQA has been designated Solid Waste Management Unit (SWMU) 104 under KSC’s Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Corrective Action Program. The IM consisted of excavating/removing residual polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) contamination in soil and concrete from two separate areas, LOC 2D and LOC 2E, which were associated with electrical transformer locations. IM activities were conducted in accordance with the Interim Measure Work Plan (IMWP), Revision 1, for KHQA dated June 2018, which was approved by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection in a correspondence letter dated April 2016 and the United States Environmental Protection Agency in a correspondence letter dated August 2018. The objective of the IM was to remove all remaining contaminated media with total PCB concentrations greater than the State of Florida Residential Soil Cleanup Target Level (RSCTL) (0.5 milligrams per kilogram [mg/kg]). This cleanup goal meets unrestrictive re-use conditions in Florida, and is below federal regulations for PCB Bulk Remediation Waste Cleanup of 1 mg/kg for high occupancy, unrestricted use areas, as outlined in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 761.61(a). The timeline of the IM was coordinated with demolition of the former KSC Headquarters Building (demolished in 2021) in order to safely remove contaminated media after electrical equipment was de-energized and removed from the site. Excavation activities were conducted between January 10, 2022, and February 8, 2022, and included two waste streams for off-site disposal: (1) PCB-remediation waste greater than or equal to 50 mg/kg, and (2) PCB-remediation waste less than 50 mg/kg. A total of approximately 347 cubic yards (478 tons) of PCB-contaminated soil and concrete was initially removed from the LOC 2D and LOC 2E areas, as defined in the IMWP. An additional 4.35 tons of soil and concrete were removed based on verification sampling, which was conducted until the cleanup goal was achieved. The total area of excavation from both LOC 2D and LOC 2E was approximately 5,186 square feet (0.12 acres), and excavation depths ranged from 0.5 to 4.0 feet below land surface Excavated soils and concrete were stockpiled based on waste stream and subsequently transported and disposed of at Waste Connections of Osceola County, LLC – JED Landfill in St. Cloud, Florida (PCBs less than 50 mg/kg) or the Chemical Waste Management Landfill in Emelle, Alabama (PCBs greater than or equal to 50 mg/kg). Following excavation, clean backfill was brought to the site and provided to the Demolition Contractor to complete backfill and grading in conjunction with their final site restoration activities from building demolition. Post-IM groundwater sampling was conducted in May 2022 at three monitoring wells installed in April 2022 to confirm that PCBs did not leach into groundwater. These wells were installed where the highest PCB concentrations were detected at LOC 2D, LOC 2E, and from the Building Perimeter IM (previously completed in 2020). All PCB results in groundwater were non-detect. Volatile organic compounds were also analyzed based on potential past use of solvents in transformers with PCB-dielectric fluids and the potential release of dielectric fluids containing volatile organic compounds, and all results were non-detect. Based on completion of a successful IM at LOC 2D and LOC 2E, as well as previous remedial actions that have addressed other contamination at KHQA (SWMU 104), No Further Action without controls will be recommended for SWMU 104. NASA will submit separate Site Rehabilitation Completion Order request documentation for SWMU 104 to support an NFA without controls recommendation.

PCB↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 133: Integrating Economic Redevelopment and Workforce Transition Into DOE Site Closure Planning (R1.18)

This panel focused on post-closure impacts to the long-term site workforce and communities in DoE's approach to accelerated site cleanup and expedited reduction of long-term financial liabilities. At sites where Cold-War workers shifted from weapons production to the cleanup effort, a more holistic approach to the workforce transition Post-EM cleanup is needed. This holistic approach would include incentives for expedited closure, trade re-training, and a vision for future site commercial activities. The panel discussed the importance of the right workforce incentives that includes appropriate training for displaced workers so that they can be integrated into a next job. A key aspect of this discussion was to re-assess the current and future land use opportunities related to land re-use concepts. By re-arranging cleanup sequencing is it possible to divest land sooner than originally projected for productive commercial use hence reducing the DOE long-term liability and consequently increasing an economic soft landing for those Cold-War workers. Panelists with presentations: Integrating Economic Redevelopment and Workforce Transition Into DOE Site Closure Planning (Sean Todd); Sustaining, Growing and Re-Developing DOD/DOD Facilities and Assets (Jonathan Taylor)

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

Panel Session 4 and 15: Japan Fukushima Daiichi D and D Update and Technological Challenges at Japan Fukushima Daiichi D and D and Update on Nuclear Overview and Development in Japan - Nuclear Fuel Cycle

Sessions 4 and 15 represent a two-part panel series that discusses progress and challenges associated with cleanup at Fukushima. Severe limitations on availability of original panelists from Japan due to strict restrictions put in place to alleviate the spread of coronavirus necessitated changes to both panels. The result was a significantly modified panel for Session 04 (shown above) and the elimination of all panelists for Session 15. The 4 and 15 Panel Sessions provide an overview of activities related to both the progress and challenges of cleanup and decommissioning of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station (NPS) in Japan. Five panelists discussed perspectives of the cleanup following a Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) video showing the progress on site since the devastating Great East Earthquake and tsunami that caused the explosions at three of the six reactors on the site. Three of the five panelists discussed on-going work being performed for the effort, while the other two provided expert perspectives of on strategic efforts at the site. The panel was attended by over 80 technologists and policy makers spanning the globe and was opened by Dr. Monica Regalbuto of Idaho National Laboratory and a short video provided by TEPCO. The video described changes at the site that spanned the cleanup efforts from stabilizing water intrusion into the contaminated reactor buildings to construction of new administrative facilities. The video explained the processes underway to retrieve spent fuel rods and challenges in retrieval of the compromised fuel debris. The video highlighted working condition improvements that included establishment of rest housing and a small convenience store on the site, and the rollback of protective equipment around the site due to decreases contamination. Panelists with presentations: Revision of 'the Mid-and-Long-Term Road-map towards the Decommissioning of TEPCO's Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station' (Paul Dickman); Sharing UK experience at Fukushima Daiichi (Adrian Simper); SRNL Japan (Andrew Fellinger); ABLE's Initiative to Dismantle the Exhaust Stack (Daniel Walter); JAEA R and D in Fukushima (Tokio Fukahori); TEPCO - Overview and Update of the Fukushima Decommissioning Process (Monica Regalbuto); Toshiba's Involvement in the Decommissioning of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant (Yasuhiro Yuguchi); Remote Dismantling of the Exhaust Stack At Fukushima Dai-ichi NPS (Takashi Okutsu)

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

Panel Session 2: Hot Topics in US DOE Environmental Management

The well-attended Panel Session was chaired by Martin Schneider. The four panelists did not provide presentations. Rather the session was a discussion focusing on pressing issues facing US DOE Environmental Management (EM) sites and how the program is moving forward. The session began by momentarily reflecting on a success: the three Tank Waste Treatment Facilities will soon be coming online. These three facilities will treat as much waste in two years as was treated in the past 30 years. That is a significant milestone in progress. Also, safety enhancements at WIPP are a big success. The panelists noted that there will be challenges with the victories of the startup of the Waste Treatment Facilities. Treating tank waste is the last EM mission and will help with the relationships with the stakeholders, regulators and Congress. One of the biggest challenges will be moving back to full operation mode. Although the operation will increase productivity of reducing/managing the tank waste, it will decrease life cycle cost and lessen years of cleanup. The challenge will be having people understand that EM will be operating 24/7 and that maintenance will be key in keeping the operations. EM will be working together with the regulators to show tangible progress that will be effective and efficient. By working together, they can find opportunities/technologies for streamlining and accelerating cleanup. Recent changes to the regulatory framework between DOE-EM Los Alamos Field Office and New Mexico Environmental Department have helped cleanup in Los Alamos. Every year EM and the agencies review progress and come to agreements on the next work priorities. At Savannah River Site, the Federal Facility Agreement among EM, South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has developed a small core team that work are shared by together in resolving issues that come up. The discussion moved on to how progress can be made by sharing lessons learned among the contractors. An example of how these learned lessons can be shared is that key representatives from projects across the EM sites participate in various forums to review/contribute to the work planned. Other opportunities can be by temporary assignments of DOE staff to gain experience and by monthly EM Headquarters report that provide the lessons learned across the EM sites. The panelists discussed how skyline changes are the best examples of tangible progress. Decontamination and Demolition (D and D) of structures are the easiest tangible progress that can be seen. Whereas tank waste cleanup is the hardest to see. Disposal of waste onsite versus offsite is another challenge, and timely discussions are necessary to get to the best value to the government.

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

Panel Session 88: Waste Management from Remediation of Legacy Sites or Unplanned Releases

This panel focused on the progression of cleanup on the Hanford Site, Washington, USA, from establishing the regulatory framework necessary for cleanup, to understanding the risks and addressing near-term hazards, to moving to 24/7 operations as cleanup focuses on tank waste treatment and co-located risk reduction efforts as the active cleanup footprint shrinks. Panelists with presentations: Hanford: Past, Present, Future (Brian Vance); Protecting the River (L. Ty Blackford); Hanford Tank Farms (John Eschenberg Jr.); The Hanford Site (Robert Wilkinson); The Hanford Site (Valerie McCain)

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

Selection of Vadose Zone Flow and Transport Properties with Gravel Fraction Corrections for the Hanford Site Composite Analysis and Cumulative Impact Evaluation

This environmental calculation file (ECF) is a compilation of hydrologic and radiological/chemical properties to be used for the updated Hanford Site Composite Analysis (CA) and Cumulative Impact Evaluation (CIE) vadose zone (VZ) modeling. The CA will provide an all-pathways dose projection to a hypothetical future member of the public from all planned low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities and potential contributions from all other projected end-state sources of radioactive material left at the Hanford Site following site closure. Its primary purpose is to support the decision-making process of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under DOE O 435.1 Chg 1, Radioactive Waste Management, related to managing low-level waste disposal facilities at the Hanford Site. The CIE evaluates the effects of cleanup decisions regarding groundwater quality in the Hanford Site Central Plateau (DOE/RL-2018-69, Cumulative Impact Evaluation Technical Approach Document). Due to the complexity and large number of waste sites in source operable units (OUs), the computational tools used for the CIE must be capable of representing a range of site conditions and source terms in the VZ while also efficiently computing the impact that cleanup decisions have on the underlying aquifer. Waste-site proximity between and within source OUs has resulted in contaminants commingling in the vadose and saturated zones in complex ways. Plume commingling requires cleanup decisions to be evaluated considering the surrounding waste sites and existing groundwater contamination, therefore demonstrating the need to evaluate cumulative impacts from the VZ to groundwater.

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

Remining and Restoring Abandoned US Mining Sites: The Case for Materials Needed for Zero-Carbon Transition

The electricity generation sector is responsible for 25% of the world’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and thus has been the focus of efforts to transition to clean energy and sustainable development in many nations. In the past 20 years, renewable energy sources have been the fastest-growing energy source in the world, comprising almost 29% of the world’s electricity generation in 2020. Renewable energy sources are expected to comprise nearly 95% of the world’s power capacity growth through 2026, with a share of planned capacity expansion of up to 46% in 2026. The rapid development of renewable energy sources and technologies will require an enormous amount of raw materials to replace coal and gas plants and increase in the capacity to handle growing electricity demand because renewable energy sources have a low-power density and intermittent behavior. Accounting for the expected scale of rapidly deploying renewable energy sources that require rare earth elements (REEs), cement, and steel, the mining industry may face a supply problem for the materials critical for clean energy. And, as the exploration and development of new mining sites can be expensive and risky, the mining industry may require economic stimuli to grow supply. The increasing demand for renewable energy resources makes mining a threat to the environment unless proper regulations are established and calls for remining, cleanup, and circular economic development are made. Mining also contributes to environmental injustices related to the exploitation and pollution of lands near communities that are dependent on biodiversity in the area, while not always benefiting from technological advancements provided by the use of renewable energy and technologies. This study explored the opportunity of remining abandoned mining waste to extract metals and minerals essential for the production of renewable energy sources. The authors analyzed materials used in the production of these technologies, materials readily available in the United States, and which materials can be extracted locally in the United States from abandoned mine waste. The authors also studied environmental injustices that populations near mining sites experience and ways to mitigate these injustices, such as providing more control over extraction and cleanup activities, providing more job opportunities in those areas, and offsetting costs associated with cleanup and land restoration projects.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2025

Web-Based Tools for Data-Informed Remedy Optimization: Software Theory and User Guide

This report documents the development and application of two web-based decision-support tools for pump-and-treat (P&T) groundwater remediation systems: PTOLEMY (Pump-and-Treat Optimized Location Evaluation to Maximize Yields) and OPTIMA (Optimization for Pump-and-Treat Implementation, Management, & Assessment). These tools enhance remedy design and management by leveraging advanced computational methods – specifically deep learning and multi-objective optimization – within a user-friendly platform. By integrating data-driven models with established hydrogeological knowledge, PTOLEMY and OPTIMA enable more efficient evaluation of well placement and operational strategies, helping site managers balance multiple remediation objectives under complex conditions. Both tools are implemented as modules within the SOCRATES (Suite Of Comprehensive Rapid Analysis Tools for Environmental Sites) web platform, which provides data access, visualization, and analytics to support remedy optimization across sites in the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management complex. PTOLEMY is a rapid screening module designed to identify promising locations for new extraction wells. It employs a multi-channel three-dimensional convolutional neural network (MC3D-CNN) trained on high-fidelity simulation data to predict the relative performance (in terms of contaminant mass recovery) of potential well sites. Through an interactive web interface, PTOLEMY visualizes the probability of high performance across a site, highlighting areas where an extraction well is likely to yield above-threshold contaminant removal over a multi-year period. PTOLEMY’s map-based displays and exportable results support transparent communication of screening analyses. By focusing attention on the most favorable candidate locations, the tool augments traditional engineering judgment and physics-based modeling, providing a data informed basis for subsequent detailed evaluations. OPTIMA is a multi objective optimization module designed to find wellfield layouts and operating schedules that meet various cleanup goals. It quickly evaluates thousands of candidate setups – combinations of well locations, timing, and rates – and returns a small set of best trade-off options for comparison. At its core, OPTIMA uses a U-Net-based surrogate model – a deep-learning emulator of a groundwater flow and transport simulator – to dramatically accelerate scenario evaluations. Coupling this fast surrogate with the NSGA-II (Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm II) evolutionary algorithm, OPTIMA explores a wide decision space of well locations and schedules to identify Pareto-optimal solutions that trade off key objectives (e.g., minimizing cleanup time, maximizing contaminant mass removal, and minimizing plume extent). The tool outputs a family of optimal configurations and visualizes their trade-offs (Pareto frontiers of cleanup metrics and maps of optimized well placements). Site managers can use these results to understand the range of viable strategies and to select candidate designs for more detailed verification. OPTIMA is currently under active development and not yet fully released; this guide provides early documentation to support planning and gather user feedback.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2007

Solutions Network Formulation Report. Landsat Data Continuity Mission Simulated Data Products for Bureau of Land Management and Environmental Protection Agency Abandoned Mine Lands Decision Support

Presently, the BLM (Bureau of Land Management) has identified a multitude of abandoned mine sites in primarily Western states for cleanup. These sites are prioritized and appropriate cleanup has been called in to reclaim the sites. The task is great in needing considerable amounts of agency resources. For instance, in Colorado alone there exists an estimated 23,000 abandoned mines. The problem is not limited to Colorado or to the United States. Cooperation for reclamation is sought at local, state, and federal agency level to aid in identification, inventory, and cleanup efforts. Dangers posed by abandoned mines are recognized widely and will tend to increase with time because some of these areas are increasingly used for recreation and, in some cases, have been or are in the process of development. In some cases, mines are often vandalized once they are closed. The perpetrators leave them open, so others can then access the mines without realizing the danger posed. Abandoned mine workings often fill with water or oxygen-deficient air and dangerous gases following mining. If the workings are accidentally entered into, water or bad air can prove fatal to those underground. Moreover, mine residue drainage negatively impacts the local watershed ecology. Some of the major hazards that might be monitored by higher-resolution satellites include acid mine drainage, clogged streams, impoundments, slides, piles, embankments, hazardous equipment or facilities, surface burning, smoke from underground fires, and mine openings.

Estep, Leland↗
NASA NTRS2022

Phase II and III Solid Waste Management Unit Assessment and Confirmatory Sampling Report for Per- and Polyfluorinated Alkyl Substances, Potential Release Location 237, Kennedy Space Center, Florida

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) Phase II and III Solid Waste Management Unit (SWMU) Assessment (SA) and Confirmatory Sampling (CS) were conducted at the John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC), Potential Release Location (PRL) 237, located in Merritt Island, Brevard County, Florida for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) under Contract 80KSC019D0010/80KSC019F0289. A Phase I SA and CS Report was previously submitted that identified 33 locations of concern (LOCs) at KSC associated with the storage, use, or release of materials containing PFAS. The objectives of the Phase II and III SA and CS were to: - Complete site and source characterization of identified LOCs; - Identify areas of potential concern (AOPCs) where past or present activities may have resulted in a release of PFAS to the environment; - Qualitatively characterize migration potential of released PFAS to environmental media (primarily soil, groundwater, surface water, and sediment); and - Identify potential receptors for exposure to PFAS-impacted environmental media. Surface water samples were collected from LOCs/AOPCs and locations on the KSC periphery during PFAS CS Phases I, II and III. Including duplicate samples, 143 environmental samples were analyzed for 14 PFAS compounds and 104 environmental samples were analyzed for 18 PFAS compounds. Ten of the analytes on the 14 compound list were detected at least once in surface water at KSC, with a wide range in magnitude of detections. The State of Florida has surface water screening levels (SWSLs) for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) in surface water, both for human and ecological receptors. The human health screening levels are lower than the ecological ones and are used in this report. PFOA was not detected in surface water at concentrations exceeding the SWSL at any LOC or Area of Potential Concern (AOPC). PFOS was detected in surface water at concentrations exceeding the SWSL at 28 LOCs/AOPCs, plus 42 locations on the KSC periphery. The data suggest a wide distribution of PFAS, particularly PFOS, in surface water but the sources of surface water contamination are not yet adequately understood. Sediment samples were collected during Phases II and III but not Phase I. Including duplicate samples, 104 environmental samples were analyzed for 14 PFAS compounds and 10 environmental samples were analyzed for 18 PFAS compounds. Twelve compounds were detected in sediment at KSC, with a wide range in magnitude of detections. There are currently no screening levels or cleanup target levels (CTLs) for sediment. The need to delineate and further characterize PFAS in sediment will be evaluated for those sites that move forward into Site Assessment. Groundwater samples were collected via DPT from LOCs/AOPCs and locations on the KSC periphery during PFAS CS Phases I, II and III. Including duplicate samples, 812 environmental DPT groundwater samples were analyzed for 14 PFAS compounds and 247 environmental samples were analyzed for 18 PFAS compounds. Twelve of the 14 compounds were detected in groundwater at KSC, with a wide range in magnitude of detections. The State of Florida has provisional groundwater cleanup target levels (GCTLs) for PFOA, PFOS and the additive concentration of PFOA+PFOS. PFOA was detected in groundwater at concentrations exceeding its provisional GCTL at 16 LOCs/AOPCs, with no exceedances on the KSC periphery. PFOS was detected in groundwater at concentrations exceeding its provisional GCTL at 30 LOCs/AOPCs, plus two locations on the KSC periphery. PFOA+PFOS was detected in groundwater at concentrations exceeding the provisional GCTL at 31 LOCs/AOPCs, plus two locations on the KSC periphery. Soil samples were collected during Phases II and III but not Phase I. Including duplicate samples, 292 environmental samples were analyzed for 14 PFAS compounds and 80 environmental samples were analyzed for 18 PFAS compounds. Fourteen compounds were detected in soil at KSC, with a wide range in magnitude of detections. The State of Florida has provisional soil cleanup target levels (SCTLs) for PFOA and PFOS. There were no PFOA results above its provisional SCTL. There was one LOC with a result above the provisional SCTL for residential settings. Recommendations are presented for each LOC and AOPC.

PFAS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Session 097A - Panel: Accomplishments and Update of the East Tennessee Technology Park in Oak Ridge, TN (1/4) (R1.16a)

This panel was deferred until 2021. The session was designed to highlight and celebrate the accomplishment of Vision 2020 at US DoE's East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP) in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Vision 2020 is the overarching strategy and guidance that have formed the foundation of success in closing one of the largest cleanup site in the DOE Complex. The session was supposed to feature representatives from the DOE Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management (OREM) and its contractor, UCOR, in exploring the partnerships and performance excellence that have made the difference in achieving success. OREM's Vision 2020 is a collaboration with entities that have made a difference in its success: economic developers, workforce developers, the University of Tennessee, and community partners. The vigorous Oak Ridge small business contracting community has also been instrumental in helping achieve success. This session plans to celebrate the entire process, its numerous players, and the spirit of accomplishment as the Oak Ridge community comes to realize the promise of 30 years of continuous cleanup excellence. This session integrated with panel sessions 97B, 97C and 97D. Panelists with presentations: Beyond Cleanup: Achieving Risk Reduction through Partnerships and Performance Excellence (Kenneth Rueter); Strategic Approach to Achieve End States at the East Tennessee Technology Park (Jay Mullis)

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Efficient Mesofluidic Separation of Large Particles in nuclear slurries - 20408

Efficient and effective particle separation is essential to cleanup of many nuclear wastes. For example, particle separation may be used to accelerate settle-decant bottlenecks that limit the throughput necessary to achieve the U.S. Department of Energy waste cleanup mission in a timely manner. Particle separation may be used to protect downstream processing equipment from pulses of solids that may be encountered near (within a few feet of) liquid-solid interfaces during waste transfer operations, thereby preventing work stoppages. Effective particle separation may permit efficient sludge washing. These are only a few of the ways in which particle separation is important. Yet, efficient and effective particle separation in nuclear processing environments remains challenging. For example, settle-decant operations permit larger and heavier particles to settle, leaving smaller, lighter particles suspended. However, settle-decant operations are slow, convection currents may resuspend solids, hindered settling of multicomponent slurries remains incompletely understood, and predictive models for settling in graduated cylinders fail to match limited observations of settling in large waste tanks. Additionally, pumping operations can cause turbulent resuspension of particles when the pump intake is close to the settled solids layer. Filtration techniques that use membranes or partially permeable barriers retain larger particles, permitting smaller particles to permeate. However, filters, including dead-end filtration, are prone to clogging and caking, operate at elevated pressures due to minimal void volume, and increase in pressure during operations, which require more control systems. Therefore, the need for high throughput particle separation techniques that operate with modest pressure drops persists. A novel mesofluidic separator presents the opportunity to effectively and efficiently accelerate the waste cleanup mission. The separator separates large particles from process streams across a broad range of particle sizes and has no moving parts or media to replace, regenerate, or clean. This separator design has an unusually large void volume, permitting operation at much higher flow rates (and lower pressures) than traditional filtration (e.g., dead-end filtration). Industrial-scale flow rates have been demonstrated. In performance testing, mesofluidic separators operate at might flow rates (>90 gpm (0.0006 m{sup 3}/s) in piping 3 inches (0.08 m) in diameter; Re>10{sup 5}), with modest pressure drop (∼25 psi (170 KPa) in testing). In complex, aggregating waste simulants, the separator loses <25% of flow projected over months without back pulsing or chemical cleaning. Mesofluidic separation presents infrastructure advantages, reduces risk, and provides mission impact. Infrastructure advantages include implementation within existing transfer systems, plug and play without facility modifications to safety systems, and operation at low pressures. The separator is flexible in location, may be positioned within or outside of waste tanks, and may replace or augment dead-end and cross-flow filters. Mesofluidic separation reduces risk by minimizing waste (no media to replace or regenerate and no cleaning chemicals to handle and dispose) and by minimizing filter change-out consistent with as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) exposure to workers. The potential mission impact of these separators is substantial. The separator has potential to support, simplify, and accelerate in-farm transfers and waste feed delivery. Furthermore, the separator can free up settling and holding tanks in the Direct Feed Low-Activity Waste (DFLAW) mission by reducing or eliminating post-transfer settling and wait times with the potential to free up 1 Mgal (4000 m{sup 3}) of double-shell tank space. This paper quantitatively compares mesofluidic separation to dead-end filtration, discusses scale-up results, and considers the separator's potential to efficiently and effectively reduce the long-term environmental ability of particulate-rich nuclear wastes. (authors)

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

Infrastructure and DFLAW Support at Hanford - 20443

Manhattan Project era infrastructure systems are degrading at an accelerated pace across the Department of Energy's (DOE) Environmental Management complex. Revitalizing, rejuvenating and right-sizing these systems to ensure reliability for ongoing cleanup missions is a major focus at the 580-square- mile Hanford Site in southeast Washington State. The push to complete construction, commissioning, startup, and operation of facilities and systems in the Direct-Feed Low-Activity Waste (DFLAW) program at Hanford by 2023 requires considerable coordination among site contractors and a significant investment in infrastructure. The passage of time also poses a challenge. It has been about 75 years since facilities were first operated at the site, and approximately 40 years of plutonium production created a legacy of unidentified active and abandoned underground obstacles and waste sites that must be avoided when building and upgrading the infrastructure. Converting infrastructure systems originally built to support plutonium production from the 1940's to the 1980's and upgrading those systems to optimize technology is an ever-changing balance of funding profiles, available resources and execution strategies. The DOE Richland Operations Office (RL) has long recognized the need for increased investment in Hanford Site infrastructure to support the future processing of approximately 56 million gallons of waste currently stored in large underground tanks. When DFLAW is fully operational, safe and reliable infrastructure systems will be needed to ensure continuity of operations around the clock, 365 days a year. These include roadways, water, power, sewer, information technology systems and facilities. To ensure the readiness of Hanford's infrastructure to support treating tank waste in the next three years, 15 projects were identified with a combined value of $133.8 million. Through calendar year 2019, 7 infrastructure projects have been substantially completed and the remaining 8 projects, with a remaining value of $103.8 million, are scheduled to be completed by December 2023. RL and its site services/infrastructure contractor, Mission Support Alliance (MSA), regularly evaluate the needs of the DFLAW program and other Hanford Site missions to ensure the highest priority systems are addressed. In addition to a fast-approaching deadline for round-the-clock treatment operations, RL and MSA face another significant infrastructure challenge. As cleanup is being completed in a 220-square-mile area called the River Corridor, most of the cleanup operations going forward will occur in a 20-square-mile area in the center of the Hanford Site, known as the Central Plateau. Infrastructure systems are becoming more congested in an already overcrowded area. This paper/presentation will outline some of the challenges Hanford faces while executing infrastructure reliability projects. (authors)

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

Results of a Soil Flushing Treatability Test for Hanford Site Hexavalent Chromium Removal - 20446

U.S. Department of Energy contractor CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Company has made significant progress remediating hexavalent chromium in groundwater near the Columbia River through the operation of pump and treat facilities and source removal activities. To mitigate risks associated with hexavalent chromium contamination, which was identified in a CERCLA interim action record of decision as the primary groundwater contaminant of concern for the 100-KR-4 Operable Unit from discharging to the Columbia River, three ion-exchange pump and treat systems were installed between 1997 and 2009. Between 2010 and 2016, operation of the K West pump and treat system, located near the former 105K West plutonium production reactor, reduced concentrations below the groundwater remediation target for hexavalent chromium. In 2016, a rebound study was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of the pump and treat remedy and assess the potential for any residual hexavalent chromium sources continuing to contribute to groundwater contamination. As a result of the rebound study, a source of continued groundwater contamination was identified. To address this condition, a soil flushing treatability test was written and approved by the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The test included saturating about a 1-acre area of soil with treated water with the goal of forcing the residual hexavalent chromium to groundwater where existing extraction wells could remove it for treatment, accelerating the cleanup process. In spring and summer 2019, CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Company installed and began operating a shallow underground leach system to support the treatability test. Preliminary sampling data show the test was effective in removing the residual contamination. Following further evaluation and analysis from the initial test, the process will be considered for implementation elsewhere on the Hanford Site, particularly at locations where there is a known or suspected continuing contamination source in the soil column. The paper will cover the goals of the study, as well as more details about the following: - Overview of pump and treat exit strategy (using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency guidance); - The design and installation of the soil flushing technology in the 100-K Area; - The testing process and results of sampling data; - Post-study evaluation and potential for implementation in other locations at the Hanford Site. Innovative solutions for cleanup, such as the soil flushing technology, have resulted in substantial progress in the removal of groundwater contaminants at the Hanford Site, potentially shortening the time frame required to meet cleanup goals and resulting in significant cost savings. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗