Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “disposal”

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

Special Analyses for the Hanford Integrated Disposal Facility Performance Assessment - 20102

In 2014, the Department of Energy (DOE) Office of River Protection and its contractors began to develop a performance assessment for the near-surface disposal of low-level and mixed low-level waste at the Hanford Site's Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF). The IDF is a doubly-lined landfill that was constructed between 2004 and 2006 to be the disposal facility for the vitrified low-activity waste that will be produced at the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP). IDF is also expected to receive solid secondary waste produced at the WTP and other solid wastes from site activities. The IDF has been in a preoperational state awaiting authorization from DOE and a RCRA permit modification from the State of Washington Department of Ecology to receive waste. Both the Disposal Authorization Statement and permit modification require a performance assessment demonstrating that the system of engineered and natural features will limit releases of radionuclides and hazardous chemicals from the IDF and be protective of human health and the environment. The simulated duration is 10,000 years. Based on the analyses presented in the 2017 Integrated Disposal Facility Performance Assessment, DOE issued a conditional Operating Disposal Authorization Statement for the IDF in June 2018. The long-term performance of the IDF to be protective of human health and the environment was evaluated under the requirements of DOE Order 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management. Computer simulations were performed to evaluate whether or not the IDF would comply with DOE requirements. In the time that has passed since the performance assessment was approved by DOE, new information has been discovered that had not been considered in the performance assessment. Since this new information has not been evaluated, the potential impact of the changes have not been taken into consideration in DoE's disposal authorization. DOE and its contractors follow a change control process to screen and, when necessary, evaluate new information that could potentially impact the conclusions of the completed performance assessment. This paper will describe the change control process and provide two examples of evaluations performed following the change control process. The first example evaluates a new waste form for liquid secondary waste that was not evaluated in the performance assessment. In the performance assessment, liquid secondary waste was assumed to be solidified with grout. A new recommendation to dispose of the liquid secondary waste after drying it to a powder was evaluated. The second example evaluates inventory implications from changes to the flow sheet that estimates the feed composition to the low-activity waste vitrification facility. The changes result in higher strontium concentrations in the vitrified waste stream. (authors)

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

Borehole Disposal of Radioactive Waste in Israel - 20388

Israel is assessing borehole disposal of radioactive waste. With limited geological options for disposal, intermediate-depth borehole disposal is being considered in the arid Yamin Plain region of the northeastern Negev desert at depths of several hundred meters below ground surface in the vadose zone. Unlike deep borehole disposal of several kilometers, which relies on emplacement below the depth of recirculating groundwater, the safety case for intermediate-depth borehole disposal relies more on the aridity of the vadose zone, the robustness of the waste package, and the other engineered barriers (e.g., seals, backfill materials) in the disposal borehole. As a tradeoff, the shallower depth may allow the use of a larger diameter borehole than would be possible for a deeper borehole. To study the suitability of the Yamin Plain region for borehole disposal, a small-diameter characterization borehole is being planned to retrieve core samples and to better understand the vadose zone geomechanical and hydrogeochemical properties and percolation flux. The information from the characterization borehole will inform the safety case, and together with performance assessment analyses will help to identify key areas of uncertainty and guide future research and development activities aimed at demonstrating the feasibility of the intermediate-depth borehole disposal concept in Israel. (authors)

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

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

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

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

The corrosion of UK vitrified waste during disposal

The UK's vitrified high-level-waste (HLW) is destined to be disposed of in a deep geological disposal facility (GDF). Contact with groundwater will be the process by which radionuclides are released during 100,000+ years of disposal. Understanding the mechanisms and kinetics of glass dissolution allow models and predictions to be made on the long-term fate of the disposed HLW. Current standard laboratory scale experimental methodologies may be unrepresentative of the geological disposal environment. Aim: Provide insight into the dissolution behaviour of alkali-alumino-borosilicate UK vitrified waste in geological disposal environments. A 'cyclic vapor-static' dissolution methodology is proposed, capturing expected temporal behaviour. This will elucidate dissolution kinetics and mechanisms, optimize the base glass composition, waste loading content and generate significant, pragmatic disposal performance assessment data. Variants of three glasses to be investigated: waste-loaded MW25 and ZnCa MW28, and the ZnCa MW base. Preliminary Results: Suggests drying process decreases the chemical durability of the glass. Addition of ZnCa to UK HLW improves chemical durability. Increased waste-loading improves chemical durability. Banded structure in altered glass possibly attributed to dissolution/reprecipitation of secondary phases). Conclusion - Further Work: Cyclic vapor-static dissolution methodology may elucidate dissolution behaviour expected within a UK GDF. Potential to provide beneficial, pragmatic data for the performance assessment to implement geological disposal. Fundamental mechanisms to be understood.

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

Annual Summary Report for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility—FY 2022

This Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 annual summary report (ASR) documents the continued adequacy of the performance assessment (PA), the composite analysis (CA) and associated operating disposal-authorization statement (ODAS) technical-basis documents for the Remote-Handled (RH) Low-Level Waste (LLW) Disposal Facility at Idaho National Laboratory. Annual review of the adequacy of the PA and CA for the RHLLW Disposal Facility ensures that conclusions of the analyses remain valid in accordance with requirements of Department of Energy (DOE) Order 435.1, “Radioactive Waste Management.” In FY 2022, no significant operational changes or other activities occurred that would cause deviation from the assumptions in the PA and CA pertaining to disposal geometry, verification of waste characteristics, tracking disposal inventories against total limits, facility-closure design, or institutional controls. Fifteen waste canister shipments were received at the RHLLW Disposal Facility, and 15 waste canisters were emplaced in disposal vaults.

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

Annual Summary Report for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility—FY 2023

This Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 annual summary report (ASR) documents the continued adequacy of the performance assessment (PA), the composite analysis (CA) and associated operating disposal-authorization statement (ODAS) technical-basis documents for the Remote-Handled (RH) Low-Level Waste (LLW) Disposal Facility at Idaho National Laboratory. Annual review of the adequacy of the PA and CA for the RHLLW Disposal Facility ensures that conclusions of the analyses remain valid in accordance with requirements of Department of Energy (DOE) Order 435.1, “Radioactive Waste Management.” In FY 2023, no significant operational changes or other activities occurred that would cause deviation from the assumptions in the PA and CA pertaining to disposal geometry, verification of waste characteristics, tracking disposal inventories against total limits, facility-closure design, or institutional controls. Eleven waste canister shipments were received at the RHLLW Disposal Facility, and ten waste canisters were emplaced in disposal vaults.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2025

Annual Summary Report for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility—FY 2024

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

12 - MGMT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE WASTE↗
DOE OSTI2019

Review Guidelines for Biosphere Safety Assessment of Low-Level Waste Disposal Repository in Taiwan - 19606

Conducting reviews of radiological dose assessments is a crucial step toward the approval of long-term radiological safety requirements for low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal facilities. However, the concentration of radionuclides released from the near field into the biosphere and the radiation exposure levels to an individual can influence the performance acceptability of the LLW disposal facility and safety of the disposal environment. Therefore, all LLW must be managed and disposed of such that it minimizes risk to individuals and the environment. A dose of 0.25 mSv/year is the limit for individuals expected to receive the highest level of exposure to residual radioactivity. In Taiwan, a review for license applications has been proposed for LLW disposal facilities. These review guidelines are based on the Standard Review Plan (NUREG-1200) and are amended according to the environmental conditions in Taiwan. These guidelines can help reviewers to perform safety assessment reviews of applications for the construction and operation of LLW disposal facilities. The review guidelines for biosphere safety assessment include radiological dose assessment, description of waste characteristics, radionuclide transport characteristics, radiation dose under normal and unusual conditions, radionuclide release into the biosphere, and interpretation of evaluation results in various transfer mechanisms. These guidelines can also serve as references for regulatory departments conducting safety assessments of radiological doses in LLW disposal facilities in Taiwan. (authors)

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

Can disposable masks be worn more than once?

Disposable facemasks are a primary tool to prevent the transmission of SARS-COV-2 during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, plastic waste generated from their disposal represents a significant environmental problem that can be reduced by maximizing the service life of disposable masks. We evaluated the effect of repeated wearing on the fitted filtration efficiency (FFE) of N95, KF94, KN95, and procedure/surgical masks. The FFEs of masks were compared following extended wearing with and without washing. Results reveal that most disposable facemasks can retain a high level of their baseline FFE after extended wearing, even after 40 h of wearing. Laundering disposable masks degraded FFE in some instances. We conclude that the durability of disposable facemask performance is considerably longer than their intended single use indication, suggesting that reusing disposable masks is a safe means of reducing plastic waste in the environment.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Geographic, sectoral, and constituent characteristics of US off‐site manufacturing wastewater disposal

This study employs recent US Environmental Protection Agency off-site manufacturing wastewater disposal data and a socioenvironmental assessment tool for the United States to understand the characteristics of such disposal in terms of geography, major contributing sectors and pollutants, and environmental impacts. Environmental impact analyses of manufacturing are insufficient without encompassing the extended physical boundary of waste management. Our analysis reveals that off-site manufacturing wastewater disposal occurs disproportionately in populations residing in census tracts already negatively impacted by environmental hazards (impacted populations, or IPs) with 44% of transfers and 55% of Risk Screening Environmental Indicators (RSEI) Hazard going to these areas, compared to their national share of 37%. Disposal hazard is concentrated in a small number of populations, with a Gini coefficient of 0.99 for RSEI Hazard. Four manufacturing sub-sectors are significant generators: Chemicals, Fabricated Metals, Primary Metals, and Transportation Equipment, with Chemicals off-site wastewater disposal largely occurring in IPs. For individual contaminants, chromium compounds and chromium represent more than 85% of the hazard but less than 10% of transfers. We explore transfer distances and waste generation and disposal hotspots, finding that the Midwest hosts a disproportionate share of off-site wastewater disposal. Further, RSEI Hazard steeply rises at shorter distances and plateaus over distances >500 miles, revealing opportunities to reduce hazard by reducing 20–500-mile transfers. Our findings strongly support targeted mitigation strategies like process substitutions, control technologies, on-site recycling and treatment, and minimizing transfer distances. This article met the requirements for a gold-gold JIE data openness badge described at http://jie.click/badges.

Fuchs, Heidi [Lawrence Berkeley National Laborator↗
DOE OSTI2020

Workshop to Plan R&D Support of Fuel/Basket Modification for Direct Disposal of Future DPCs

By 2030 about half of all spent nuclear fuel (SNF) arising from the current fleet of commercial power plants will be in dual-purpose canisters (DPCs), which are designed for storage and transportation but not for disposal. As an alternative to complete repackaging of the fuel for disposal, considerable cost savings and lower worker dose could be realized by directly disposing of this SNF in DPCs. The principal technical consideration is criticality control in a geologic repository, because the DPCs are large and depend on neutron absorbing basket components for criticality control. Neutron absorbing materials are generally aluminum-based, and under disposal conditions can degrade after a few hundred years contact with ground water. Simple modifications to the SNF assemblies or the DPC baskets could help to achieve direct disposal, and this is one of the approaches being studied to address the possibility of disposal criticality (SNL 2020a). Five fuel/basket modification concepts have been proposed (SNL 2020b) and a virtual workshop was conducted to solicit review and feedback on these concepts. The proposed solutions are: 1) zone loading of DPCs to limit reactivity, 2) replacing absorber plates with advanced neutron absorbing (ANA) material, 3) adding disposal control rods to pressurized water reactor (PWR) assemblies, 4) rechanneling boiling water reactor (BWR) assemblies with ANA material, and 5) basket insert plates (chevron inserts) made from ANA material. The presentations from the workshop are provided in this report, and the workshop discussions are summarized. This information includes prioritization of the proposed fuel/basket modification solutions, and prioritization of the associated model development, validation testing, and quality assurance activities. Information documented in this report will help to steer research and development efforts at Sandia National Laboratories, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and Idaho National Laboratory that support the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy, Spent Fuel and Waste Science and Technology program

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

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

Beginning in 1996, the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) started accepting low-level radioactive, hazardous, and mixed wastes that were generated during cleanup activities at the Hanford Site. ERDF is composed of a series of cells or disposal areas and can accommodate future design expansions as needed. Currently, there are eight cells and two supercells in ERDF. Each supercell is the equivalent of two cells. During this reporting period, fiscal year (FY) 2025, extending from October 1, 2024, through September 30, 2025, approximately 50,653 metric tons (55,835 U.S. tons) of waste was disposed at ERDF. From ERDF inception through September 30, 2025, approximately 17.3 million metric tons (19.1 million U.S. tons) of waste has been disposed at ERDF, which equates to consumption of approximately 91.0% of the currently constructed disposal volume. According to the design of ERDF, the facility has the ability to be expanded as needed. In 2023, the Department of Energy approved the construction of supercell 11 to provide additional disposal capacity to meet the cleanup mission at the Hanford Site. The construction of supercell 11 began in FY 2025, and it is expected to take up to two years. Construction of the new cell will not affect ongoing waste disposal activities at ERDF.

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

Optimization of Backfill Material Transport for the Future Belgian Geological Disposal Facility - 19071

In Belgium, long-lived, low- and intermediate level waste (B waste) will be conditioned in concrete monoliths B and high-level waste (C waste) in so-called Supercontainers (SC). It is planned to dispose of the waste packages in a Geological Disposal Facility (GDF). The B and C waste shall be disposed of each in one emplacement field at a depth between 200 m and 600 m below the surface. Two access galleries run through each field and connect the disposal galleries with a central shaft and support zone. After the emplacement of a specified number of waste packages, a stepwise backfilling of the voids is planned in order to stabilize the galleries, to limit the amount of voids, and to ensure a favourable chemical environment. Taking into account the objectives of backfilling and the specific material properties of the waste packages two mortars were developed to backfill the disposal galleries. In particular, for reasons of safety at work, the mortars should be hydraulically pumped through pipelines. Accordingly, in any case, it is necessary to operate storage facilities of the raw materials, a mix plant and a pump. The raw materials are foreseen to be supplied by trucks from external producers. Due to this fact, the better accessibility of the plants and with the aim of minimizing noise and dust emissions and the space for technical systems in the GDF, it is advisable to install the technical equipment above ground outside the GDF control area. However, the feasibility of this basic concept depends on the processing time of the backfill materials and the capacity of the transport system. Thus, although short transport times can theoretically be realized if pipelines with a small cross sections are chosen, in this case the required power of the pump increases significantly. If no suitable configuration can be found, the distance of the mixing and pumping system to the backfill segment has to be shortened. In this case a pneumatic conveyor system would have to be installed to transport the solids to a mix plant and pumping unit located in the underground galleries to be able to meet the desired backfill rates. In order to identify the optimum solution, the decision criteria and the advantages and disadvantages of existing and planned transport systems were evaluated. The investigations showed that it is technically feasible to pump the backfill material from above ground into the disposal galleries. As failures of the backfill system would result in interruptions of the general disposal operation, a redundant pump and pipeline system was developed. The two lines can be operated separately or simultaneously in order to realize high flow rates needed for the backfilling of segments far from the shaft. (authors)

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

Panel Session 56: Nuclear Power Plant Waste Management - US LLW Disposal Issues

This panel focused on specific disposal site issues with the disposal site operators. Representatives from each of the operating commercial disposal sites presented an update of their facility, license, and waste acceptance criteria (WAC) followed by a panel discussion in response to audience questions. WM attendees that ship their radioactive waste to one or more of these commercial disposal sites attended this panel session. Presentations proposed include: 1 - US Nuclear Power Plant Waste Management - US LLW Disposal Issues (Joe Weismann, US Ecology (USA)); 2 - Waste Control Specialists Update 2019 (Dan Burns, Waste Control Specialists LLC (USA)); 3 - Barnwell LLRW Disposal Facility (Mark Lewis, EnergySolutions (USA), Benjamin Smith, Chem Nuclear Systems (USA)); 4 - EnergySolutions Clive Treatment and Disposal Facility Update (Bret Rogers, EnergySolutions (USA))

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

Saltstone Facility Operating Experience with Mega-Vault Disposal Units - 19497

The Saltstone Production Facility (SPF) has been treating low-level waste aqueous salt solution at the Savannah River Site (SRS) since 1990. Salt solutions are transferred from a large-volume, underground storage tank via underground waste transfer line into the SPF. The waste is received into one of two receipt tanks and then transferred to a twin-shaft mixer where dry feeds are introduced to create a fresh grout slurry. The grout exits the mixer into a hold tank, which has a residence time of approximately two minutes. The slurry is then pumped via peristaltic pump through a grout transfer line to one of several disposal units in the Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF). The transfer line length varies from 0.4 km to 0.8 km depending on disposal location. With the salt disposal mission at SRS accelerating via the operation of the Modular Caustic Side Solvent Extraction (MCU) facility and the anticipated startup of the Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF), it is important that the SPF and SDF operate with minimal outage time and maximum facility availability. To this end, the design of the newest disposal units has incorporated the benefits of commercially available cylindrical concrete tank design on a very large scale to maximize economies of scale. This new design has been placed into radioactive service and the initial operational data will be compared with previous disposal operations along with an overview of how disposal unit design has significantly evolved since the initial construction in the early 1990's. Additionally, several processing facility modifications have either been implemented or developed in recent years to improve operating reliability and ensure facility availability once the SWPF becomes the primary waste generator providing feed for the SPF. These modifications, the issues driving their development, and an assessment of their effectiveness will also be discussed. (author)

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

Path of Disposal for Hazardous and Non-hazardous Waste from Cradle to Grave

Hazardous waste is a threat to human health and the environment and must be managed and disposed of properly. A Solid Waste is defined as any material (solid, liquid, containerized gas) which has been discarded, abandoned (no longer needed), or recycled. The Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) is a law that creates the framework for the proper management of solid waste. Under RCRA, EPA has developed a program which ensures hazardous waste is managed safely from the moment it is generated to its final disposal (cradle-to-grave)2. To educate about how waste is handled at the Savannah River Research Campus (SRRC) under RCRA, the path it takes from point of generation (cradle) to disposal (grave), and the responsibilities of every person involved in the process. Researcher or other laboratory personnel that generates waste as a result of their work Responsibilities: - Fill out inventory log sheet and corresponding container sheet which includes the constituents of the waste; - Properly label waste container with SAA/WSA ID no., generator's name, what it is, the hazards, and date; - Place waste in designated waste storage area. Laboratory Custodian Responsibilities: - Ensures waste is handled and stored properly; - Ensures inventory is updated; - Ensures all container sheets are completed; - Ensures only authorized personal have access to waste storage areas. Environmental Compliance Authority Responsibilities: - Develops waste procedures; - Provide waste training; - Inspects for improperly handled waste; - Establishes or closes waste storage areas as needed; - Determines if waste can be recycled; - Determines if waste is RCRA hazardous: Is it U or P listed? - Unused commercial chemical products; Is it F listed - Spent solvents; Is it characteristic? - Flammable/Oxidizer, Corrosive, Reactive, Toxic; - Weighs waste to ensure laboratory has not exceeded its monthly or total storage limits; - Maintains waste records; - Determines how waste should be disposed: Trash - Nonhazardous solids; Drain - Nonhazardous Liquids; Labpack; - Prepares waste for shipment with Vendor and Department of Transportation (DOT) personnel. Packages, Transports, and Treats Hazardous Waste Responsibilities: - Must be EPA permitted and approved by the Department of Energy - Picks up hazardous waste for transport to a treatment, storage or disposal facility depending on waste disposal requirements - Must meet all Department of Transportation regulations for transporting hazardous waste - Dispose of waste according to RCRA regulations. Due to the potential risks to human health and the environment, waste must be handled safely through the chain of possession from cradle to grave. To ensure proper handling, there are many safety checks as required by RCRA and DOT regulations. This includes proper labeling, inventory, and characterization to ensure all hazards are known, inspections by the Custodian, ECA, and the state regulator (SCDHEC), and transportation verifications and manifesting. One of the best ways to reduce the risks that waste presents is to minimize or eliminate the creation of waste. This can be accomplished through source reduction which includes: Inventory control, material substitution, process modification, improved housekeeping, and preventative maintenance and recycling.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2025

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

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

12 - MGMT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE WASTE↗
DOE OSTI2019

DOC-WMF - A Generic Model for Assessment of Waste Disposal Facilities - 19278

Numerical models and computer codes play an important role in the safety assessment of nuclear waste disposal facilities, as well as in the regulatory review of proponents' safety assessments. An important part of a safety assessment is the radiation dose calculation. This paper presents a computer code called DOC-WMF for calculating radiation dose from nuclear waste disposal facilities. DOC-WMF is a generic code that could be used for dose calculations for deep geological or near surface disposal facilities of nuclear wastes. DOC-WMF is much faster than complicated 3-D numerical models in terms of computational speed since the model uses the commercial code GoldSim as the computation engine which is based on analytical solutions for contaminant transport. As a result, it enables a user to quickly assess the dose consequences of multiple options or scenarios for a nuclear waste disposal facility. DOC-WMF was adapted from, and an improvement to, the Scoping of Options and Analyzing Risk (SOAR) model developed by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (US NRC). A key improvement over the SOAR model is that DOC-WMF allows the calculation of dose contributions from other pathways such as food ingestion and air inhalation in addition to the drinking water pathway which is the sole dose contribution considered in the SOAR model. DOC-WMF also allows for: the consideration of 55 radionuclides with option to add more if required; the choice of source release method; various pathways to the biosphere; and dose calculations including an extended array of exposure pathways. In addition, DOC-WMF can simulate more complex hydrogeological settings and waste forms than SOAR does. DOC-WMF was compared against known analytical solutions for verification. It was then applied to two test cases and the results were compared. The first was a hypothetical deep geological disposal repository. The second test case was a near-surface nuclear waste disposal facility. DOC-WMF independently modeled these two test cases and achieved similar results as the more complicated numerical models did. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗