Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT”

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 127 records · Page 7
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Drying Spent Magnox Fuel for Interim Dry Storage

Spent Magnox fuel is usually stored under water for shielding and cooling following use in-reactor, but the storage water can react with Magnox clad fuel and cause corrosion and forms a sludge which generates a secondary waste product. One option to prevent unwanted corrosion and avoid expensive waste management is to dry the wet fuel. This project aims to test a drying process which will convert wet and corroded Magnox fuel to a stable form to demonstrate viability for conversion from wet to dry storage. Samples of corroded Magnox supplied by National Nuclear Laboratory. Corrosion product retrieved by various methods including dry scraping, ultrasonic treatment to form sludge and sludge drying to isolate suspension. TGA undertaken on Sample 1 and Sample 2, with brucite and hydromagnesite for comparison. Both samples showed ∼10% mass loss up to 250 deg. C attributable to water held in sample. Mass loss from dehydroxylation which liberates further water in both samples. TGA data plotted alongside chemically pure brucite and hydromagnesite shows expected similarities/differences between Sample 1(mostly brucite) and Sample 2 (brucite/hydromagnesite mixture). Following treatment, dried samples observed to slowly gain mass in ambient conditions. Presumed to be hygroscopic absorption of air water vapour as effect is reversible, with similar effect observed for hydromagnesite and brucite. Etched Magnox vacuum dried for 3.5 h at 90 deg. C to test for reaction with residual water - some discoloration but no noticeable corrosion observed. Drying etched Magnox metal to observe surface effects/corrosion during drying process.

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

Acquisition and Implementation of a Comprehensive Environmental Permits Linking Tool at Savannah River Site - 20234

Historically, Savannah River Nuclear Solutions LLC (SRNS) tracked environmental regulatory commitments and the requirements from hundreds of permits at the Savannah River Site (SRS) using several separate methods, making integrated compliance assurance cumbersome and labor-intensive. When SRNS experienced an increase in environmental issues in 2017, SRNS management and U.S. Department of Energy - Savannah River (DOE-SR) management decided a single, proactive approach was needed to capture environmental permit information (including regulations, Consent Orders, DOE Orders, and any other state or federally issued statement of requirements), track the tasks necessary to ensure compliance with these requirements, and thereby mitigate the risk of noncompliance. SRNS developed a list of mandatory objectives that the tool must meet to function as a Comprehensive Environmental Permits Linking Tool (CEPLT). A key requirement was the ability to map Site permits to their governed locations and display the associated requirements at the compliance point (e.g., outfall, stack, waste unit, etc.). Several options included modifying existing onsite resources, building a custom onsite solution, purchasing an off-the-shelf solution, and contracting an offsite developer to build a custom solution. SRNS concluded an off-the-shelf solution with configuration and customization options would provide the flexibility to fit the unique needs of Savannah River Site (SRS) while taking advantage of industry-tested software and providing a reduced deployment timeline. SRNS chose Gensuite{sup R} a, a cloud-based solution that offers numerous a la carte applications in the environmental, health, and safety arenas, as the best candidate. SRNS selected three (3) integrated applications (Compliance Calendar, Permit Manager, and Mapper) to function as the CEPLT. The Compliance Calendar module allows for creation and tracking of regulatory commitment tasks assigned to responsible environmental professionals. Permit Manager organizes permits and other requirement documents, linking the commitments in each to Compliance Calendar tasks and/or implementing procedures. Mapper provides GIS capability for mapping the data from the other two modules to their physical onsite locations. The CEPLT was configured to allow for other SRS Site Tenants to eventually utilize the applications. Additionally, DOE-SR uses the CEPLT to provide an overview of contractor environmental compliance activities and to organize DOE-specific documents and tasks. The CEPLT fulfilled the requirement of meeting current compliance needs as well as providing the ability to grow as new organizations are incorporated and functionality is expanded. SRNS now uses the CEPLT to more effectively manage permit requirements, improve knowledge transfer, and increase the Site's overall protection of the environment, the Site worker, and the public. Possible future uses of the system include integration of mobile applications for timely communication of potential non-compliant conditions and DOE complex-wide deployment allowing for enhanced DOE site and Head Quarters oversight. Implementation of CEPLT will result in cost savings, both in terms of dollars and man-hours. (authors)

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

Removing the Cloak of Secrecy from Legacy Cleanup at Los Alamos national Laboratory - 20395

With the establishment in 2018 of the Los Alamos Legacy Cleanup Contract, the Department of Energy's (DOE) Environmental Management Los Alamos Field Office (EM-LA) and its contractor Newport News Nuclear BWXT Los Alamos (N3B) embarked on an expansive program to engage a broad range of local and regional stakeholders in the decision-making process for cleanup of legacy wastes (pre-1999) at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). From the inception of LANL during the Manhattan Project until the issuance of the new cleanup contract, the site was managed by a single management and operations (M and O) contactor whose main focus was national security. Segmenting from laboratory operations a separate cleanup contract managed by DoE's Office of Environmental Management (EM) brought new opportunities for the cleanup of legacy waste. That change likewise has opened new opportunities for engaging the community on legacy cleanup decisions. The new legacy cleanup contract - an unclassified contract - emphasizes public outreach, marking a cultural shift in how stakeholders in Los Alamos and throughout northern New Mexico are engaged. Without the constraints of classified work, EM-LA and N3B have increased the level of transparency with the public regarding cleanup activities. EM-LA and N3B have crafted an approach that best meets the values, priorities and needs of the neighboring communities by adapting the model successfully employed at Rocky Flats. Through enhanced stakeholder involvement, EM-LA will implement decisions that have considered broad input and deliver a safe and efficient cleanup of the site. EM-LA and N3B began the expanded stakeholder outreach program in January 2019, leading up to four Environmental Management Cleanup Forums held in the summer of 2019. EM-LA and N3B are now in the process of initiating a series of meetings with various stakeholder groups to determine their 'values' as they relate to cleanup using a novel approach that elicits and records values. The entire process is documented, ensuring that should questions arise about how, when and why decisions were made, they can be easily addressed. In addition to other public meetings to present cleanup scenarios and solicit active public involvement in cleanup decisions, the EM-LA and N3B approach involves discussions with stakeholders who want to explore specific technical issues and cleanup discussions in depth. EM-LA and N3B are also evaluating and implementing a variety of communications tools to help ensure the engagement plan sets the gold standard for transparency in legacy cleanup and stakeholder involvement. (authors)

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

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↗
DOE OSTI2021

FOURTH QUARTER / ANNUAL TRANSPORTATION REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2021

Waste Shipments to and from the Nevada National Security Site, Radioactive Waste Management Complex. This report satisfies the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) commitment to prepare a quarterly summary of waste shipments to the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) Radioactive Waste Management Complex (RWMC) in Area 5.

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

A Systematic Evidence Based Performance Approach to Regulation of Nuclear Sites in England and Wales - 20058

The Environment Agency for England has developed a systematic evidence-based approach to pursue our strategic environmental objectives for the regulation of nuclear sites. We use an annual evidence review process to ensure effective and efficient targeting of limited resources to achieve those objectives. Over the last 8 years, we have been developing and refining this approach to ensure risk-based and value driven regulation. The approach comprises nuclear site and nuclear sector review processes known as Site Environment Review (SER) and Nuclear Environment Review (NER). This approach complements our regulation of nuclear site permit holders under the Environmental Permitting Regulations (EPR). We deliver our regulation of nuclear sites in England and Wales alongside the Office for Nuclear Regulation. The SER process involves the lead regulator for each nuclear site assessing the permit holder's environmental performance across 14 themes, set within the context of the site's main activities and associated waste disposals. Our themes include environmental leadership, resources and climate change, radioactive waste management, facility management and decommissioning, groundwater, and environmental radiological protection. We use evidence from site inspections and working within our subject matter groups to grade current and predicted future environmental performance. We are particularly interested in sustainability and the application of Best Available Techniques (BAT) to prevent the creation, and minimise the disposal, of radioactive wastes. We use risk analysis (strengths, weaknesses, threats and opportunities) to examine performance against our strategic environmental objectives, which are set out, in our 5-year Nuclear Delivery Plan (NDP). The output supports the targeting of our resources at each nuclear site. We consult the relevant permit holders on the SER priorities and use their feedback to refine our plans. We expect all permit holders to take account of our priorities when considering their own programmes of work, objectives and plans. The NER process brings together what we learn and achieve through regulation across the sector. It provides input to planning priorities, supported by qualitative and semi-quantitative evidence. It covers the 28 nuclear sites in England and Wales and spans the same 14 environmental themes. During the process we collate, compile and summarise evidence from the SERs and other sources such as inspection reports and evidence from our other nuclear work programmes. The output is the NER annual report. This provides a snapshot of the status of the nuclear sector and gives insights to enable us to regulate more efficiently and effectively. It also takes account of cross-cutting issues and risks such as changes in international standards, domestic policy, regulatory framework, domestic standards and guidance, learning from experience such as incidents, events and good practice, and innovation, research and development. It provides graphics that illustrate the grading of environmental performance for the nuclear sector across the fourteen environmental themes. This analysis allows benchmarking of nuclear site's environmental performance and the visualisation provides a convenient comparison of performance across themes, sites, and over time. We use this intelligence to inform our investment in training and development of our staff, and our cross-cutting engagement on strategic issues with government, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) and other corporate organisations. Adopting this approach can provide benefits with organisational reputation, stakeholder participation and ensuring value from the public investment. This paper describes the history of the SER/NER process, a selection of outputs from the process and ideas for improvement. The paper will be of interest to other regulators and organisations across the world that are interested in supporting continuous improvement. (authors)

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

DECOVALEX-2019 (Task E Final Report)

The DECOVALEX Project is an on-going international research collaboration, established in 1992, to advance the understanding and modeling of coupled Thermal (T), Hydrological (H), Mechanical (M) and Chemical (C) processes in geological in geological systems. DECOVALEX was initially motivated by the recognition that prediction of these coupled effects is an essential part of the performance and safety assessment of geologic disposal systems for radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel. Later it was realized that these processes also play a critical role in other subsurface engineering activities, such as subsurface CO 2 storage, enhanced geothermal systems, and unconventional oil and gas production through hydraulic fracturing. Research teams from many countries (e.g., Canada, China, Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Japan, Republic of Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, United Kingdom, and the United States) various institutions have participated in the DECOVALEX Project over the years, providing a wide range of perspectives and solutions to these complex problems. These institutions represent radioactive waste management organizations, national research institutes, regulatory agencies, universities, as well as industry and consulting groups. This document is the final report of Task E which was proposed and coordinated by Andra, the National Radioactive Waste Management Agency in France, presenting the technical definitions of the problems studied, approaches applied, achievements made and outstanding issues for future research. The purpose of Task E of the DECOVALEX-2019 project is to investigate upscaling THM modelling from small-scale experiments (some cubic meters) to full-scale experiments (some ten cubic meters) and finally to the scale of the waste repository (cubic kilometers). To achieve this aim, the data of two in-situ heating experiments performed by Andra (the French National Radioactive Waste Management Agency) in the Meuse/Haute-Marne Underground Research Laboratory (MHM URL) have formed the basis for the understanding of the THM behavior of the COx at different scales. The first experiment provided the reference values of the THM parameters by means of a calibration exercise and they were used for a blind prediction and an interpretative analysis of the second one.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Vadose and Saturated Zone Flow and Transport Calculations for the Active Trenches of the Low-Level Burial Grounds, Hanford Site, Washington

The purpose of the fate and transport modeling described in this environmental calculation file (ECF) is to evaluate the impacts to groundwater associated with waste disposal operations at Mixed Waste Low-Level Burial Ground (LLBG) Trenches 31 and 34 to satisfy requirements in DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management. The model integrates the flow and transport in the vadose zone beneath the active trenches with the saturated zone downgradient of the trenches to predict the radionuclide concentration at the point of assessment (POA). DOE M 435.1-1, Radioactive Waste Management Manual, defines the POA as the point of highest projected dose or concentration beyond a 100 m (328 ft) buffer zone surrounding the disposed waste. The modeling is conducted in accordance with the DOE G 435.1, Implementation Guide for Use with DOE M 435.1-1, performance assessment (PA) guidelines. The modeling involves evaluation of the groundwater concentrations and radionuclide arrival times during the 1,000-year compliance and 10,000-year sensitivity-uncertainty periods per DOE O 435.1 and DOE M 435.1. This analysis does not consider radionuclide release during facility operations, only the post-closure impacts of the radionuclides to the environment. The evaluation of potential radiological dose to groundwater receptors caused by releases from a closed facility containing radioactive waste typically includes the following: (1) Release of radionuclides from that facility (2) Transport of those radionuclides through the environment, and (3) Exposure to humans to environmental concentration levels of those radionuclides The fate and transport three-dimensional (3D) model analysis involves the post-closure impacts to the environment of the technetium-99, iodone-129, and uranium (all isotopes in the waste). The residual inventory estimates include several radionuclides, but technetium-99 is typically responsible for almost all of the beta-gamma dose equivalent associated with groundwater (water resources) protection per 40 CFR 141, “National Primary Drinking Water Regulations” (e.g., see the results in WCH-520, Performance Assessment of Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, Hanford Site, Washington; hereinafter referred to as the ERDF PA), and iodone-129 can also be a significant dose contributor for some waste (e.g., RPP-RPT-59958, Performance Assessment for the Integrated Disposal Facility, Hanford Site, Washington; hereinafter referred to as the IDF PA). Uranium does not typically factor significantly into the impacts to groundwater, even during the 10,000-year sensitivity-uncertainty period, but always remains of interest as a contaminant. This ECF does not address vadose and saturated zone modeling for Trench 94 of the 200 East Area LLBG. Current information confirms the validity of the low corrosion rate of the naval reactor plant carbon steel (HY-80), and the even lower corrosion rate of the nickel-iron-chromium alloy reactor vessel (Inconel Alloy 600) presented in DOE/EIS-0259, Final Environmental Impact Statement on the Disposal of Decommissioned, Defueled Cruiser, Ohio Class, and Los Angeles Class Naval Reactor Plants. Based on these low corrosion rates, the time to breach the reactor vessel to allow release of radionuclides from the activated metal of the reactor vessel internal structure is at least 10,000 years. This time to breach precludes the need to evaluate the vadose and saturated zone transport of contaminants released from the reactor compartment disposal packages in the 200 East Area LLBGs PA (CP-63826, Waste Release Model Package Report for the Active Trenches of the Low-Level Burial Grounds, Hanford Site, Washington).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2026

Developing a Process for Collaboration-Based Siting of a Federal Consolidated Interim Storage Facility in the United States: Learning from Communities Living with Legacy Waste

In June of 2023, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) announced the selection of its Collaboration-Based Siting (CBS) Consortia, a group of 12 awardees, including the Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP) (led by Vanderbilt University) to assist DOE-NE with the development of its process for siting a federal consolidated interim storage facility (FCISF) for spent nuclear fuel (SNF) storage. At this time, DOE NE is not soliciting interested host communities, rather the CBS Consortia are tasked with in-depth engagement, mutual learning, and capacity building to provide DOE NE with feedback on the CBS process. CRESP’s objective is to engage communities in two regions (the Pacific Northwest and the Southeast) with sites currently storing defense- and research-related SNF to foster learning concerning the best and worst practices in community participation in risk-informed decision making. This includes learning from existing structures for public input in radioactive waste management decision making [e.g. citizen advisory boards (CABs)] and other local parties about how to build and sustain trust among the parties. CRESP has been working to engage stakeholders and Tribes surrounding two DOE sites historically differing in receptiveness to engaging with DOE and trusting in DOE to accomplish its missions. CRESP’s approach to date has consisted of (1) engaging voluntarily members and former members of the DOE Office of Environmental Management’s CABs to develop a mutual understanding of their perspectives, values, and experiences related to risk and participatory decision making; (2) engaging members of those communities that would likely be part of any radioactive waste management discussions and who may provide valuable feedback for the development of the CBS process; and in the longer term, (3) engaging communities to foster knowledge sharing on understanding and definitions of risk and how risk is factored into community decision making. Our emphasis is to identify opportunities for improving risk communication frameworks, strategies, and decision making. The selection of a future FCISF site is likely to result in the creation of a structure similar to a CAB composed of members of the local community. We anticipate that these insights can help DOE NE learn from existing participatory risk communication structures in place at sites storing defenseor research-related SNF to understand best practices for fostering enduring and participatory relationships with future CABs. Within this paper, we (1) describe CRESP’s overall approach to assisting DOE NE with maturing the CBS process; (2) present a summary of preliminary phase 1 project results, including the development of a body of knowledge (describing available resources to support community engagement, risk communica tion, and participatory decision making) and community ecosystem information (leveraging demographic, social, economic, and environmental attribute mapping and advanced sentiment analysis of social media data); and (3) based on these results, provide observations for future research opportunities to support the development of CBS processes for radioactive waste management facilities, generally.

collaboration-based siting↗
DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 36: Hot Topics in US Commercial Low-Level Waste Management

This panel focused on emerging issues in commercial LLW management in the US from the perspective of active members of the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Forum, Inc. State, compact, federal and industry officials shared their views on a variety of timely and significant topics related to low-level radioactive waste management, disposal and related issues. Session no. 36 Co-Chairs, Patricia Holahan and Daniel Shrum, introduced the panelists and provided a summary of the purpose of the session. This Panel Session focused on several current and emerging issues impacting the commercial Low-Level Radioactive Waste (LLRW) management in the US from the perspective of active members of the Low-Level Waste Forum, Inc., States, Compact, as well as Federal and nuclear industries. The panelists provided different perspectives on number of key issues such as: LLW disposal facility status and updates (e.g.; in terms of disposal capacity, plans, and waste acceptance conditions). The panelists also addressed waste disposal rates and potential impacts of ongoing regulatory developments by the NRC and the concerned States. Other timely topics pertaining to the revision of 10CFR Part 61, the Greater-than-Class C (GTCC) and Transuranic (TRU) waste, and Very Low-Level Waste (VLLW) disposal issues were also addressed at this Session. Panelists with presentations: Hot Topics in US Commercial LLW Management (Joe Weismann); Texas LLRW Compact (David Carlson); Texas Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Compact Commission (John Salsman); Barnwell LLRW Disposal Facility (Benjamin Smith, Bill Carver)

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

Thermal Process Technology for Nuclear Applications - 20379

ANSTO's Synroc technology has been developed to provide a safe, secure matrix for the immobilization and final disposal of radioactive waste. Synroc technology will be used to manage radioactive wastes from the production of the radioisotope Molybdenum-99 (Mo-99). This paper shall outline various stages of the process development with specific reference to the thermal treatment technology of calcination. Calcination is a key step in the Synroc process [1-2].The rotary thermal processing system includes: an advanced heating element design for increased robustness and ease of remote operation and maintenance, an enhanced modular design of components for ease of remote maintenance in a hot cell and in compliance with hot cell radioactive environment requirements for safety, reliability and maintainability. In addition to thermal treatment of waste from nuclear medicine production, this technology provides solutions for a variety of nuclear materials processing applications including sintering UO{sub 2} pellets for reactor fuel rods, oxidation of UO{sub 2} pellets, swarf, and powder to U{sub 3}O{sub 8}, de-nitration of Uranyl nitrate and hydrofluorination of UO{sub 2} pellets. The paper will also discuss thermal processing solutions for a range of nuclear applications. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

Special Considerations for the Removal and Disposal of Micro-Reactor Experiments

Idaho National Laboratory (INL) is preparing to host several microreactor experiments through 2030 and beyond. Two new test beds currently under development will operate as microreactor or nuclear system experiment user facilities. Test bed experiments will be performed in series, with each nuclear experiment installed, operated, and removed before installation of the subsequent experiment. The necessarily brief transition period between experiments introduces unique equipment removal and radioactive waste disposal challenges. This paper evaluates equipment removal and radioactive waste management topics associated with tight sequencing of nuclear experiments and presents some of the solutions and approaches currently planned to meet these special considerations for one such experiment, the Molten Chloride Reactor Experiment (MCRE), slated for operation at INL’s Laboratory for Operation and Testing in the United States (LOTUS). The MCRE project is a collaboration between Southern Company Services, TerraPower, and INL, among others, to provide integral nuclear data that will advance molten salt fast reactor technology. MCRE will be the first critical fast-spectrum circulating fuel system ever operated and the first experiment operated in the LOTUS test bed. The experiment will nominally operate at zero power with planned low power excursions as part of operational planning for MCRE has been to minimize at-power operations to limit fission product formation while still achieving experimental objectives. After the experiment is complete, MCRE will be allowed to radioactively decay for a short period (nominally 90 days) prior to system defueling, flushing, removal, and disposal of all MCRE equipment, readying the test bed for the next nuclear experiment. Equipment removal and radioactive waste disposal have been integral to MCRE project planning since the Cooperative Research and Development Agreement was formalized in 2021. Due to requirements for future use of the test bed, the MCRE system, of necessity, must be removed in a much shorter time frame than typical for historic reactor decommissioning projects at INL. This results in minimal time for radioactive decay, resulting in not only elevated radiation dose rates but also the presence of short-to-medium-lived isotopes not typically encountered in the reactor decommissioning and radioactive waste management space. Additional unique constraints placed on the project include lack of intrinsic remote-operations capabilities in the test bed, space constraints in the test bed once MCRE has been installed, and contamination minimization requirements to return the test bed to as-found conditions to enable future use. This paper discusses planned solutions to these challenges. Approaches for implementing remote or semi-remote technologies in a non-hot cell environment with limited space availability are discussed. The paper also summarizes the systems engineering approach for concept development and design of equipment removal systems, which are being implemented concurrent with the MCRE design phase, providing feedback to system designers to incorporate features enabling efficient and safe equipment removal approaches. The timing of this paper at a relatively early phase of the project is meant to highlight the importance of early planning for nuclear system decommissioning while reactor design is ongoing to allow design feedback on componentry driven from decommissioning system needs. As new, innovative nuclear reactor technologies enter the nuclear market sector, reactor experiments are crucial for providing new integral nuclear data that establish safe operational margins for technology advancement. Microreactor experiments at INL will require safe, effective, and timely decommissioning approaches, which in turn require nuclear systems designed to expedite decommissioning. In addition to the advancement of nuclear reactor technologies, these nuclear experiments provide an opportunity to demonstrate, deploy, and test new removal and disposal capabilities to support the next generation of nuclear reactor technology.

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

A Preliminary Radiological Risk Assessment Model for Disposition of Remote-Handled Transuranic Wastes at Los Alamos National Laboratory Area G - 20116

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) operates a low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal site at Material Disposal Area G, in Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA. Area G has been the primary LLW disposal site for Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) since the 1960's. In addition to LLW, Area G is host to a variety of other wastes, the disposition of which must be determined before closure of the site. A probabilistic Radiological Risk Assessment (RRA) for Area G is used in order to support decision making regarding some wastes that are not addressed in the extant Area G Performance Assessment (PA) and Composite Analysis (CA). Between 1979 and 1987, 33 special shafts were augered into the Bandelier Tuff at Area G. This volcanic tuff is present across Pajarito Plateau on the eastern slopes of the Jemez Mountains, and varies widely in its consistency, from weakly indurated non-welded layers to welded layers that uphold the mesa cliffs of the Plateau. These mesas are home to LANL, Area G, and the townsites of Los Alamos and White Rock, with residences about 1400 m from Area G. The 33 Shafts were lined with steel casing, and contain remote-handled (RH) transuranic wastes (TRU) resulting from experiments and analysis performed in special glove boxes at the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research (CMR) facility at LANL. Some of these wastes originated as used nuclear fuel. The purpose of the Area G RRA is to evaluate the potential future risk to humans and the environment from the RH TRU in the 33 Shafts in the context of the risk associated with the surrounding wastes at Area G. The analysis is responsive to expectations outlined in DOE Order 458.1, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment, and is informed by the Manual and Guidance accompanying DOE O 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management. Because the waste meets the definition of TRU, the regulatory context necessarily takes into consideration the regulation governing the disposal of TRU from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): 40 CFR 191, Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes. Given the broader regulatory context for the RRA, the analysis is subject to different assumptions from those made in the existing DOE O 435.1 PA and CA, such as allowing for future occupation of the site. The analysis begins with a comprehensive evaluation of features, events, processes, and exposure scenarios (FEPS) for Area G and the wastes it contains. These FEPSs are screened to eliminate from further consideration those of extremely low probability and/or consequence, and a conceptual site model (CSM) is subsequently developed. The scope and structure of the Area G RRA Model is informed by this CSM, and the Area G RRA Model is developed using the GoldSim systems analysis modeling platform. This paper presents the initial version of a defensible, transparent, and reasonably realistic model, which is based on the state of knowledge of the wastes, the site, and the FEPSs that govern contaminant transport from wastes into the environment and subsequent exposures to humans and other biota. Probabilistic model input distributions represent uncertainties inherent in the real and modeled systems. The results of the Area G RRA Model inform decisions regarding the disposition of the RH TRU in the 33 Shafts. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI1992

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 33, No. 1, January-March 1992]

Nuclear Safety is a review journal that covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. Its scope includes the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, the safety aspects of the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 1 Technical Note: A New Approach to Fission Reactor Safety, Yu. V. Petrov; 5 Erratum; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 6 Analysis and Modeling of Fission Product Release from Various Uranium-Aluminum Plate-Type Reactor Fuels, R. P. Taleyarkhan; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 23 Applications of a Surveillance and Diagnostics Methodology Using Neutron Noise From a Pressurized-Water Reactor, R. T. Wood, L. F. Miller, and R. B. Perez; DESIGN FEATURES: 36 Westinghouse Advanced Passive 600 Plant, B. A. McIntyre and R. K. Beck; 47 System 80+™ PWR Safety Design, C. W. Bagnal, R. A. Matzie, and R. S. Turk; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: 58 The MATS Experiments—Mesoscale Atmospheric Transport Studies at the Savannah River Site, A. H. Weber, S. Berman, R. J. Kurzeja, and R. P. Addis; 75 Book Review: Environmental Radioactivity in the European Community 1984-1985-1986, C. A. Little; WASTE AND SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT: 76 Activities Related to Waste and Spent Fuel Management, M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 87 Aging Assessment of BWR Control Rod Drive Systems, R. H. Greene; 100 Reactor Shutdown Experience, Compiled by J. W. Cletcher; 103 Selected Safety-Related Events, Compiled by G. A. Murphy; 110 Operating U.S. Power Reactors, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 129 General Administrative Activities, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; 139 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides, D. S. Queener; 143 Proposed Rule Changes as of Sept. 30 1991; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 128 Harvard School of Public Health Announces Short Courses; 128 16th Biennial ANS Topical Meeting on Reactor Operating Experience: Present and Future Technologies—Applying Lessons Learned (Call for Papers); 147 The Authors; 150 Indexes to Nuclear Safety, Volume 32; 154 Errata.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2020

A Decade of Innovative Approaches to Treating and Dispositioning Radioactive Waste at the Savannah River Site - 20620

This year marks the 70. anniversary of the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Savannah River Site (SRS), located near Aiken, South Carolina. SRS is a key industrial complex responsible for environmental stewardship, environmental cleanup, waste management, and disposition of nuclear materials. SRS also continues to have a role in critical defense-related activities and the reprocessing of used reactor fuel. The SRS encompasses 803 square kilometers (310 square miles) in parts of Aiken, Barnwell, and Allendale counties. The Liquid Waste Mission starts with the safe receipt and storage of radioactive liquid waste in the waste tanks, which principally includes Cold War legacy waste, but also waste from support of National Aeronautics Space Administration missions, medical isotope production, and research activities. This 133,000 cubic meters (m{sup 3}) (35 million gallons [Mgal]) of high-level radioactive waste (HLW) is currently held in 43 large underground waste tanks. The capacity of each of these tanks range from 2,800 m{sup 3} to 5,000 m{sup 3} (0.75 to 1.33 Mgal) and were placed in operation between 1954 and 1986. In July 2009, the DOE awarded a stand-alone contract to execute the Liquid Waste Mission at SRS. The Liquid Waste Contractor selected was Savannah River Remediation LLC1 (SRR), which is responsible for receipt, storage, retrieval and treatment of all HLW, disposal of the decontaminated low-activity waste fraction, as well as operationally closing cleaned HLW tanks. Since July 2009, SRR has successfully grouted and operationally closed six large underground tanks, poured 1,476 canisters of vitrified HLW (a stable glass waste form), treated approximately 34,200 m{sup 3} (9.0 Mgal) of HLW, and dispositioned over 41,200 m{sup 3} (10.9 Mgal) of decontaminated salt solution as low-level waste (LLW) into the Saltstone Disposal Units (SDUs) being constructed by SRR on site. The innovative work performed by SRR in the LLW portion of its mission has earned it the Richard S. Hodes Award. The work conducted by SRR is the same work championed by the late Richard S. Hodes, a respected physician, statesmen, and Chairman of the Southeast Compact Commission for Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management. (authors)

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

Issue Resolution During the Development of the Performance Assessment for the Savannah River Site Saltstone Disposal Facility - 20125

In 2019, Savannah River Remediation developed a revision to the performance assessment (PA) on behalf of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Savannah River Operations Office (SR) for the near-surface disposal of low-level waste at the Savannah River Site (SRS) Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF). Soluble waste from SRS Tank Farms undergoes salt processing to remove cesium and other high-activity constituents. The low-activity decontaminated salt solution (DSS) is then immobilized by mixing it into a cementitious waste form known as saltstone. After mixing, the saltstone is poured into leak-tight concrete vaults, known as saltstone disposal units (SDUs), where the waste form cures. By the time of facility closure, the SDF is expected to consist of 15 SDUs with a combined capacity of 1.06 E+09 L (280 Mgal) of cured saltstone. The facility operates under a Disposal Authorization Statement from DOE and a permit from the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC). Since the start of operations in 1990, the SDF has received almost 6.7 E+07 L (18 Mgal) of DSS, resulting in the safe disposal of 2.7 E+16 Bq (7.3 E+05 Ci) of activity. Due to the radioactive decay of short-lived contaminants, the total remaining activity in the disposed waste is estimated to be approximately 1.4 E+16 Bq (3.9 E+05 Ci), as of September 2018. The Disposal Authorization Statement requires a demonstration that the system of engineered and natural features of the disposal facility will limit releases from the facility and be protective of human health and the environment for at least the next 1,000 years. The long-term performance of the facility was evaluated under the requirements of the DoE's Radioactive Waste Management Manual (US DOE Manual 435.1-1). Simulations were performed to demonstrate that the disposal facility would meet performance objectives specified in the manual. The evaluation was based on numerical models that simulate the releases of contaminants from the saltstone waste form. Contaminants were transported through groundwater and air pathways to points of assessment to evaluate compliance (i.e., 100 m from the SDUs). In addition, the potential consequences of an inadvertent human intrusion (IHI) were also evaluated. A number of issues were overcome during the development of these simulations. These issues were identified as part of internal technical reviews. Simulations are developed by people and people make mistakes, so the internal technical review process is a vital step in PA development. Specific examples of resolved issues include a unit-conversion error, an inappropriate definition for a model boundary condition, a model time-stepping issue, and an error in the calculation for the buildup of contaminants in soil. Actions taken to address these issues resulted in an improved product with a better supported technical basis and more defensible results. The identification and correction of these issues are discussed. By understanding these issues, model developers and technical reviewers working on PAs in the future may avoid repeating these types of mistakes. Transparency with respect to these mistakes builds trust between waste management sites, regulators, and stakeholders. (authors)

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

GIS-Based Modeling of Contaminated Soil Volumes at Multiple Sites in the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program - 20149

The remediation of hazardous, toxic, and radioactive waste (HTRW) sites produces cost-related risks associated with the estimation of contaminated soil or debris volumes. Historical risk-management techniques include cost contingencies to cover volume uncertainties that affect project budgeting and decision-making. The Buffalo District teamed with project partners to lessen volume uncertainty and reduce project risks at multiple HTRW sites managed under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP). Historical remedial investigations under FUSRAP commonly identified the presence of radiological material in site media, the associated human health risk, and then areas of remediation. To manage remedial execution and reduce risk, pre-design or remediation-phase sampling essentially 'chased' contamination, which was not conducive to efficient predictive budgeting derived from Feasibility Study (FS) cost analyses. The Buffalo District first optimized their approach to better understand volume uncertainty by utilizing the Argonne National Laboratory's Bayesian Approaches for Adaptive Spatial Sampling (BAASS) software [1]. BAASS processed soft data (e.g., gamma walk-over data) and spatial sampling data to estimate the lateral extent of contaminated soil irrespective of depth (i.e., gross contamination extent) and define areas of contaminant uncertainty. The software performed a binary transformation of contaminant concentrations at all sampling points based upon remedial action goals or a sum of ratios approach (i.e., clean, impacted, or range of impacts in soil). The model produced two-dimensional (horizontal) contaminant probability contours and statistical uncertainty in the sampling coverage and resulting contaminant extents. This method was translated vertically by partitioning the sampling data into depth brackets that produced a stacked representation of contaminant extents and uncertainty in the subsurface (i.e., similar to construction lifts). The results commonly led to a better understanding of project uncertainty and the need for sampling strategies that produce high-confidence soil volumes, which control costs. The BAASS-based delineations were eventually replaced by Empirical Bayesian Kriging (EBK) methods available in ArcGIS Spatial or 3D Analysts [2]. The EBK method calculates contaminant probability zones derived from user-controlled semivariograms of the spatial datasets. The resulting probability zones (e.g., 50% or 80% of contaminant probability) represent the two-dimensional surface delineation of the overall horizontal remedial area, similarly to BAASS. However, unlike BAASS, the vertical sampling data within these probability zones became vertical control points to contour a subterranean surface that connects subsurface points to the land-surface delineations of contamination. The resulting representation of horizontal and vertical impacts within an enclosed envelop (volume) of soil included uncertainty distributions that are used to plan uncertainty-reduction sampling. These data-driven and math-based models of three-dimensional sampling results produced well-bounded remedial volumes for project planning and better uncertainty predictions during project budgeting. The EBK method was applied to several FUSRAP sites managed by the Buffalo District and compared to less rigorously modeled sites previously remediated by the District. The comparison of modeled to actual remediated volumes provide a basis for validating the volume-estimation method. This comparison is important to ensure modeled volumes match physical boundaries of site remediation. FUSRAP sites with denser investigative sampling and lesser volume uncertainty proved useful in remedial planning and contracting. The Buffalo District noted that historical sites with sparser sampling arrays had greater disparity between estimated volumes and final remedial volumes. The benefit achieved over the cost of detailed soil sampling appears positive for FUSRAP projects, especially where impacts vary widely and appear unbounded by investigation-phase sampling. The subsequent Empirical Bayesian Kriging of contamination coupled with vertical contouring for soil estimations reduces uncertainty in soil volumes or indicates where sampling is required to reduce uncertainty, which together optimize remedial planning and budgeting. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗