Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “performance assessment, 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 163 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Vadose Zone Model for B-3A/B Pond for Composite Analysis

The objectives of the vadose modeling for the updated Hanford Site composite analysis (CA) are to simulate the flow and transport of water and radionuclide releases from the surface to the water table and to provide radionuclide transfer rates for the plateau to river (P2R) model, version 8.3 (CP-57037, Model Package Report: Plateau to River Groundwater Model, Version 8.3). Water additions include natural recharge and water discharged to the ground as a result of industrial processes associated with Hanford Site operations. Contaminant sources include radionuclides in water discharged to the ground during operations and radionuclides disposed “dry” in solid waste burial grounds or other means. The following 16 radionuclides were selected for this modeling effort; carbon-14 (C-14), chlorine-36 (Cl-36), tritium (H-3), iodine-129 (I-129), neptunium-237 (Np-237), rhenium-187 (Re-187), strontium-90 (Sr-90), technetium-99 (Tc-99), uranium-232 (U-232), uranium-233 (U-233), uranium-234 (U-234), uranium-235 (U-235), uranium-236 (U-236), uranium-238 (U-238), radium-226 (Ra-226), and thorium-230 (Th-230). The simulation time starts in 1943 and ends at 12070, which is 10,000 years after assumed Hanford Site closure in 2070. The parallel version of the Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (STOMP) simulator officially named the exascale Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (eSTOMP), is used to simulate flow and transport for the vadose models. The documentation for the STOMP code is comprehensive. The theoretical and numerical approaches applied in the STOMP code are documented in a published theory guide (PNNL-12030, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 2.0 Theory Guide). The code has undergone a rigorous verification procedure against analytical solutions, laboratory-scale experiments, and field-scale demonstrations. The application guide (PNNL-11216, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Application Guide) provides instructive examples in the application of the code to classical groundwater problems. The user’s guide (PNNL-15782, STOMP: Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 4.0: User’s Guide) describes the general use, input file formatting, compilation, and execution of the code. The primary output of the vadose zone modeling is radionuclide transfer rates to the groundwater for input into the P2R model. The rates will be summed over the 100 by 100 m P2R grid cells that fall within the vadose zone model source domain. The Hanford Site Central Plateau was subdivided into 26 individual vadose zone models, with 13 in the 200 East Area and 13 in the 200 West Area. Waste sites that have a completed performance assessment (PA) or past-leak analysis were not included as sources of radionuclides. Instead the vadose zone to groundwater transfer rates of the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, Integrated Disposal Facility, US Ecology, and Waste Management Area C (WMA C) PAs and the past-leak analysis for WMA C were used as direct input to the P2R model. Each of the vadose zone models is documented in separate environmental calculation files (ECFs). This ECF describes the B-3A/B Ponds model. The scope of this ECF is to document the development and results of the B-3 A/B Ponds vadose zone model. CP-63515, Model Package Report: Central Plateau Vadose Zone Models, describes the approach, assumptions, process of determining the number of models required and domain of each model, input data, and processing common to all the models.

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

Vadose Zone Model for SALDS for Composite Analysis

The objectives of the vadose modeling for the updated Hanford Site composite analysis (CA) are to simulate the flow and transport of water and radionuclide releases from the surface to the water table and to provide radionuclide transfer rates for the plateau to river (P2R) model, version 8.3 (CP-57037, Model Package Report: Plateau to River Groundwater Model, Version 8.3). Water additions include natural recharge and water discharged to the ground as a result of industrial processes associated with Hanford Site operations. Contaminant sources include radionuclides in water discharged to the ground during operations and radionuclides disposed “dry” in solid waste burial grounds or other means. The following 16 radionuclides were selected for this modeling effort: carbon-14 (C-14), chlorine-36 (Cl-36), tritium (H-3), iodine-129 (I-129), neptunium-237 (Np-237), rhenium-187 (Re-187), strontium-90 (Sr-90), technetium-99 (Tc-99), uranium-232 (U-232), uranium-233 (U-233), uranium-234 (U-234), uranium-235 (U-235), uranium-236 (U-236), uranium-238 (U-238), radium-226 (Ra-226), and thorium-230 (Th-230). The simulation time starts in 1943 and ends at 12070, which is 10,000 years after assumed Hanford Site closure in 2070. The parallel version of the Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (STOMP1) simulator, officially named the exascale Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (eSTOMP) is used to simulate flow and transport for the vadose models. The documentation for the STOMP code is comprehensive. The theoretical and numerical approaches applied in the STOMP code are documented in a published theory guide (PNNL-12030, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 2.0 Theory Guide). The code has undergone a rigorous verification procedure against analytical solutions, laboratory-scale experiments, and field-scale demonstrations. The application guide (PNNL-11216, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Application Guide) provides instructive examples in the application of the code to classical groundwater problems. The user’s guide (PNNL-15782, STOMP: Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 4.0: User’s Guide) describes the general use, input file formatting, compilation, and execution of the code. The primary output of the vadose zone modeling is radionuclide transfer rates to the groundwater for input into the P2R model. The rates will be summed over the 100 by 100 m P2R grid cells that fall within the vadose zone model source domain. The Hanford Site Central Plateau was subdivided into 26 individual vadose zone models, with 13 in the 200 East Area and 13 in the 200 West Area. Waste sites that have a completed performance assessment (PA) or past-leak analysis were not included as sources of radionuclides. Instead the vadose zone to groundwater transfer rates of the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, Integrated Disposal Facility, US Ecology, and Waste Management Area C (WMA C) PAs and the past-leak analysis for WMA C were used as direct input to the P2R model. Each of the vadose zone models is documented in separate environmental calculation files (ECFs). This ECF describes the State-Approved Land Disposal Site (SALDS) model. The scope of this ECF is to document the development and results of the SALDS vadose zone model. CP-63515, Model Package Report: Central Plateau Vadose Zone Models, describes the approach, assumptions, process of determining the number of models required and domain of each model, input data, and processing common to all the models.

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

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

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

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI1989

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 30, No. 3, July-September 1989]

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: 325 Safety of Framatome Advanced Nuclear Steam Supply Systems Designs by J. A. Charles and D. Lange, 333 Book Review of Nuclear Accidents: Intervention Levels for the Protection of the Public by H. B. Piper; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 335 Living PRA Computer Systems by S. C. Dinsmore and H.-P. Balfanz, 343 Summary of ICAP Assessments of RELAP5/MOD2 by W. E. Driskell and R. G. Hanson; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 352 Thermal Performance Monitoring System at Maanshan Nuclear Power Plant by H.-J. Chao, Y.-P. Lin, G.-H. Jou, L.-Y. Liao, and Y.-B. Chen; DESIGN FEATURES: 358 Warning Systems for Nuclear Power Plant Emergencies by J. H. Sorensen and D. S. Mileti; WASTE AND SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT: 371 Activities Related to Waste Management Compiled by E G. Silver; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 382 Steam Generator Tube Performance: Experience with Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactors During 1985 by O. S. Tatone and R. L. Tapping, 400 Systems Interaction Analyses: Concepts and Techniques (Part II) by M. D. Muhlheim and G. A. Murphy, 413 Reactor Shutdown Experience Compiled by J. W. Cletcher, 416 Operating U.S. Power Reactors Compiled by E G. Silver; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 440 General Administrative Activities Compiled by E G. Silver, 460 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides by D. S. Queener, 466 Status of Power-Reactor Licensing Activities Compiled by E G. Silver, 470 Proposed Rule Changes as of Mar. 31, 1989; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 334 Proceedings Published, 351 CEC Seminar on Methods and Codes for Assessing the Off-Site Consequences of Nuclear Accidents, 357 Short Course on Multiphase Flow and Heat Transfer: Bases and Applications in A: The Nuclear Power Industry B: The Process Industries, 357 International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management, 478 International Topical Meeting on the Safety, Status, and Future of Non-Commercial Reactors and Irradiation Facilities, 475 The Authors.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI1989

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 30, No. 3, July-September 1989]

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: 325 Safety of Framatome Advanced Nuclear Steam Supply Systems Designs by J. A. Charles and D. Lange, 333 Book Review of Nuclear Accidents: Intervention Levels for the Protection of the Public by H. B. Piper; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 335 Living PRA Computer Systems by S. C. Dinsmore and H.-P. Balfanz, 343 Summary of ICAP Assessments of RELAP5/MOD2 by W. E. Driskell and R. G. Hanson; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 352 Thermal Performance Monitoring System at Maanshan Nuclear Power Plant by H.-J. Chao, Y.-P. Lin, G.-H. Jou, L.-Y. Liao, and Y.-B. Chen; DESIGN FEATURES: 358 Warning Systems for Nuclear Power Plant Emergencies by J. H. Sorensen and D. S. Mileti; WASTE AND SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT: 371 Activities Related to Waste Management Compiled by E G. Silver; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 382 Steam Generator Tube Performance: Experience with Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactors During 1985 by O. S. Tatone and R. L. Tapping, 400 Systems Interaction Analyses: Concepts and Techniques (Part II) by M. D. Muhlheim and G. A. Murphy, 413 Reactor Shutdown Experience Compiled by J. W. Cletcher, 416 Operating U.S. Power Reactors Compiled by E G. Silver; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 440 General Administrative Activities Compiled by E G. Silver, 460 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides by D. S. Queener, 466 Status of Power-Reactor Licensing Activities Compiled by E G. Silver, 470 Proposed Rule Changes as of Mar. 31, 1989; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 334 Proceedings Published, 351 CEC Seminar on Methods and Codes for Assessing the Off-Site Consequences of Nuclear Accidents, 357 Short Course on Multiphase Flow and Heat Transfer: Bases and Applications in A: The Nuclear Power Industry B: The Process Industries, 357 International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management, 478 International Topical Meeting on the Safety, Status, and Future of Non-Commercial Reactors and Irradiation Facilities, 475 The Authors.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
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 OSTI2025

Guiding Principles for Geochemical/Thermodynamic Model Development and Validation in Nuclear Waste Disposal: A Close Examination of Recent Thermodynamic Models for H + —Nd 3+ —NO 3 - (—Oxalate) Systems

Development of a defensible source-term model (STM), usually a thermodynamical model for radionuclide solubility calculations, is critical to a performance assessment (PA) of a geologic repository for nuclear waste disposal. Such a model is generally subjected to rigorous regulatory scrutiny. In this article, we highlight key guiding principles for STM model development and validation in nuclear waste management. We illustrate these principles by closely examining three recently developed thermodynamic models with the Pitzer formulism for aqueous H + —Nd 3+ —NO 3 - (—oxalate) systems in a reverse alphabetical order of the authors: the XW model developed by Xiong and Wang, the OWC model developed by Oakes et al., and the GLC model developed by Guignot et al., among which the XW model deals with trace activity coefficients for Nd(III), while the OWC and GLC models are for concentrated Nd(NO 3 ) 3 electrolyte solutions. The principles highlighted include the following: (1) Principle 1. Validation against independent experimental data: A model should be validated against experimental data or field observations that have not been used in the original model parameterization. We tested the XW model against multiple independent experimental data sets including electromotive force (EMF), solubility, water vapor, and water activity measurements. The results show that the XW model is accurate and valid for its intended use for predicting trace activity coefficients and therefore Nd solubility in repository environments. (2) Principle 2. Testing for relevant and sensitive variables: Solution pH is such a variable for an STM and easily acquirable. All three models are checked for their ability to predict pH conditions in Nd(NO 3 ) 3 electrolyte solutions. The OWC model fails to provide a reasonable estimate for solution pH conditions, thus casting serious doubt on its validity for a source-term calculation. In contrast, both the XW and GLC models predict close-to-neutral pH values, in agreement with experimental measurements. (3) Principle 3. Honoring physical constraints: Upon close examination, it is found that the Nd(III)-NO 3 association schema in the OWC model suffers from two shortcomings. Firstly, its second stepwise stability constant for Nd(NO 3 ) 2+ (log K 2 ) is much higher than the first stepwise stability constant for NdNO 3 2+ (log K 1 ), thus violating the general rule of (log K 2 –log K 1 ) < 0, or $\frac{K1}{K2}$>1. Secondly, the OWC model predicts abnormally high activity coefficients for Nd(NO 3 ) 2 + (up to ~900) as the concentration increases. (4) Principle 4. Minimizing degrees of freedom for model fitting: The OWC model with nine fitted parameters is compared with the GLC model with five fitted parameters, as both models apply to the concentrated region for Nd(NO 3 ) 3 electrolyte solutions. The latter appears superior to the former because the latter can fit osmotic coefficient data equally well with fewer model parameters. The work presented here thus illustrates the salient points of geochemical model development, selection, and validation in nuclear waste management.

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

Approach to Quality Assurance for Complex Environmental Modeling - 20407

A strong Quality Assurance (QA) program for complex environmental modeling is essential for regulatory and public acceptance and trust, but it does not have to be onerous. Neptune and Company, Inc. (Neptune) has developed a strong QA program that improves transparency, traceability, reproducibility, and therefore, defensibility and trust. Neptune's QA program has evolved over the past 27 years, transitioning from an ad hoc QA program, to a program that is currently Nuclear Quality Assurance-1 (NQA-1) compliant, and will soon be NQA-1/DOE approved for DOE EM modeling work. In addition, Neptune is a qualified laboratory assessor and qualified auditor for reference materials, a proficiency testing provider, and fully complies with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) QA program. Neptune's President and CEO, Kelly Black, was recently named the Chairperson of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Technical Committee 69, Application of Statistical Methods. A strong QA program has been developed for Neptune's radiological performance assessment (PA) program. Although pieces of their QA program are currently in development, their current program includes document control using Subversion, issue tracking and work flow tracking using JIRA, and transparency and traceability via a system of 'calc sheets' for documentation of all data analysis and modeling combined with 'check print' documentation of QA checking, and rigorous model testing and configuration control. All work is reviewed by an independent subject matter expert who is not associated with the collection and assembly of information, for an internal peer review. The program is enforced with a handful of Standard Operation Procedures (SOPs), Work Instructions, QA Project Plans (QAPPs), and Quality Management Plans (QMPs) that are updated frequently, with required annual training and acknowledgment. In addition, effective communication of modeling approaches and results to clients and stakeholders are integral to their QA program. Many of their models are built using the GoldSim modeling platform, for which their models are well-known for their level of transparency, documentation, and QA traceability. This level of QA is also applied to their process-level models. Neptune has taken some lessons learned from the extremely rigorous QA program required for the Yucca Mountain Project (YMP), and imposed the YMP requirements of complete traceability, transparency, and reproducibility, but avoided the inflexibility of a QA program that likely contributed to the suspect e-mails in 2005 that resulted in loss of trust in the YMP, and in nuclear waste disposal (and nuclear power) in general. There are far too many examples of loss of public trust due to poor QA that could have been easily avoided with a simple and straight-forward QA program combined with stakeholder engagement. The purpose of this paper is to share features of Neptune's Radiological Performance Assessment program QA program, and some of their QA related lessons learned over the past 27 years of QA for complex environmental modeling. (authors)

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

Update to the Performance Assessment for the Savannah River Site Saltstone Disposal Facility - 20124

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 (DAS) 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. In addition, the potential consequences of an inadvertent human intrusion (IHI) were also evaluated. In accordance with the guidance and recommendations in US DoE's technical standard for DAS, deterministic and probabilistic analyses were performed to demonstrate the SDF system, which includes the engineered cover system, the SDUs, the waste form, and the natural features of the site, provides a reasonable expectation that saltstone disposal will meet performance objectives. Post-closure doses to future members of the public (MOP) were evaluated; dose estimates from the air pathway were well below the 1.0 E-04 Sv/yr (10 mrem/yr) performance objective within 1,000 years, and the calculated doses to the MOP from all exposure pathways, including the groundwater and air pathways, were well below the 2.5 E-04 Sv/yr (25 mrem/yr) performance objective within 1,000 years. Doses following an assumed intrusion event within the facility boundaries were well below the IHI performance objectives, where the acute IHI dose was below the acute IHI dose performance objective of 5.0 E-03 Sv (500 mrem) and the chronic IHI dose was below the chronic IHI dose performance objective of 1.0 E-03 Sv/yr (100 mrem/yr) within 1,000 years. (author)

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

Air Pathway Dose Modeling for the E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility

The US Department of Energy (DOE) Order 435.1 performance assessment (PA) process (USDOE 1999) prescribes a performance objective (10 mrem y -1 ) for evaluating atmospheric releases of radionuclides from DOE low-level waste (LLW) disposal facilities. The potential dose to an individual from exposure to radionuclides released into the atmosphere from LLW disposals can be estimated by application of radionuclide -specific dose-release factors (DRFs) (mrem Ci -1 ) to estimated flux rates (Ci y -1 ) at a particular time and location. In Revision 0 of this report, Lee (2006) calculated DRFs for potential atmospheric releases of 15 volatile radionuclides from seven ELLWF disposal units in support of the 2008 ELLWF PA (WSRC 2008). The mainframe version of the US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) dose model CAP88 was used in the Revision 0 assessment. In Revision 1 of this report (Dixon and Minter 2017), the site-specific Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) atmospheric dose models MAXDOSE-SR version 2013 (Stone and Jannik 2013a) and MAXINE version 2017 (Bell 2017) were used to calculate DRFs for ten radionuclides. This work (Revision 2) supersedes Revision 0 (Lee 2006) and Revision 1 (Dixon and Minter 2017) of this report. The Revision 2 method for estimating new DRFs for the ELLWF disposal units is described in this report.

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

Calculation of Moisture-Dependent, Anisotropic Parameters Supporting the Hanford Site's Composite Analysis, Cumulative Impact Evaluation, and Performance Assessments

Variable, moisture (tension) dependent anisotropy (MDA) in unsaturated soils is an effective, large-scale (macroscopic) flow property that results from media heterogeneities at a smaller scale. The purpose of this environmental calculation file (ECF) is to document the variable MDA calculations using a script routine. The accuracy of the script calculations are cross-checked against results using other software. Appendices for this ECF are Appendix A, which documents supporting script use; Appendix B, which provides supporting spreadsheet calculations; and Appendix C, which provides supporting utility calculations. The work is in support of vadose zone flow and transport models used in performance assessment (PA), composite analysis (CA), and cumulative impact evaluation (CIE) at the Hanford Site.

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

Application of Particle Accelerators to Mitigate Energy and Climate Change Problems Facing America

Reliable CO 2 -free baseload power is needed to address ever-increasing demands for electricity while minimizing adverse climate change. Diversified power supply provided by solar, wind, geothermal, and nuclear reactors can displace the use of fossil fuels. The United States (U.S.) is taking a new look at nuclear power as a source of electrical energy and the nuclear industry is proposing new approaches which may minimize capital costs. However, nuclear power comes with a variety of technical problems. Chief among those is managing the used fuel from nuclear reactors. No long-term, practicable solution to this problem is available. The lack of progress on a comprehensive waste management strategy restricts growth in the nuclear power industry and minimizes the role that nuclear energy may serve as part of a zero-carbon future (Bahr, 2021). According to the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended, the U.S. Government has possession of the used reactor fuel and incurs large annual storage fees paid to utilities to store and safeguard the accumulated used fuel. In effect, short term on-site storage of nuclear waste is the current waste management plan. The amount of used reactor fuel in the U.S. is approximately 80,000 metric tons. While no geologic repository exists within the U.S., the potential site at Yucca Mountain, NV would accommodate 70,000 metric tons, which fails to meet current and future needs. Given the technical and political challenges associated with establishing a single geological storage site, it is necessary for the U.S. to implement technologies that improve the suitability of geological storage by reducing the volume and radiotoxicity of stored material. No extant technology meets this need. Accelerator driven waste burners have been proposed as a scalable method to process used nuclear fuel, however considerable technical challenges remain which impede commercialization. Innovations in design require investigation of novel materials, development of accurate models and simulations, and a comprehensive assessment of safety and performance. This proposal elaborates how LANL is uniquely positioned to make key contributions to this area of research.

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

Past Approaches for Spent Nuclear Fuel, Transuranic, and High-Level Waste Disposal in the United States—Part 2: Siting Process, Staged Development, and Public Preferences

This report presents pertinent aspects of the ~50-year United States experience in siting a mined geologic disposal repository for spent nuclear fuel (SNF), transuranic (TRU) waste, and high-level radioactive waste (HLW) as related to site selection and the staged process for site investigations as specified in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and generic and site-specific regulations of the US Department of Energy (DOE), US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The roles of the Environmental Impact Statement and guidance in international consensus standards by the International Atomic Energy Agency are also mentioned. The focus is on siting and developing the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, an operating repository for TRU waste from atomic energy defense activities, and the proposed Yucca Mountain repository for commercial SNF and HLW. In the social dimension, the role of institutional stakeholders is described. Past national surveys related to waste management options for storage and disposal provide insight on public preferences of other stakeholders. The descriptions are intended to help other countries more fully understand the stages adopted for siting and developing repositories in the United States.

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

Composite Analysis for Low-Level Waste Disposal in the Hanford Site Central Plateau (FY 2020) (Rev. 2)

This document provides an updated Hanford Site composite analysis (CA). A Hanford Site CA was prepared and issued in 1998 (PNNL-11800) with an addendum provided in 2002 (PNNL-11800 Addendum 1). The CA was approved in 2002 (Frei, 2002) and has been maintained (DOE/RL-2000-29 and subsequent revisions) to support low-level waste disposal performance assessments (PAs) and disposal authorizations for facilities at the Hanford Site, including the following: Continued operation of the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) and the 200 East and 200 West Low-Level Burial Grounds; Construction of the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF); Forthcoming closure of tank residual waste systems such as Waste Management Area (WMA) C. The CA maintenance program resulted in a determination in 2015 (DOE/RL-2015-66) that the Hanford Site CA needed an update for the following reasons: While the initial Hanford Site CA has been maintained since 2001, the accumulation of basis changes reported in the annual summary reports over the succeeding 14 years merit evaluation in an updated analysis; The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Headquarters requested in a memorandum in 2015 (Gilbertson and Marcinowski, 2015) that “as soon as the relevant PAs are complete, the CA will be revised to account for all of the new information.” This updated Hanford Site CA accounts for the following new information: 1. Inclusion of a detailed Hanford Site baseline disposition that projects remedial activities through site closure. There have been significant changes through decision making in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) process that were not available when the original CA was produced; 2. Inclusion of an updated inventory basis, new modeling capabilities, and new decisions reached in the associated record of decision (ROD) that was provided by issuance of DOE/EIS-0391 in fiscal year (FY) 2013. Development of a Hanford Site groundwater model from the baseline provided in a technical transfer of models for the Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0391) commenced in FY 2014 and resulted in the plateau-to-river (P2R) groundwater flow model that is used in this updated Hanford Site CA; 3. Accounting for pump and treat systems, which were not evaluated in the initial CA. Pump and treat systems have had significant impact on groundwater flow system behavior, contaminant transport, and contaminant removal from Hanford Site groundwater. This process is accounted for in the use of the P2R model for this updated Hanford Site CA; 4. Inclusion of water-level data collected since the initial CA was completed. Data collected as the unconfined aquifer water levels continue to recede since the cessation of large liquid discharges in the late 1990s have led to marked improvement in understanding of the flow system for future conditions, particularly regarding northward flow potential in the critical Gable Gap area. The calibration in the latest version of the P2R model accounts for this information; 5. Inclusion of results from the revised ERDF PA completed in 2013 (WCH-5209) that account for updated inventory and expansion of the ERDF facility to about twice the size that was evaluated in the original CA; 6. Use of updated geoframeworks to provide the structural basis for numerical fate and transport models in the groundwater pathway of this updated CA. The geologic basis for groundwater models has continued to improve with additional data collection and interpretation with the creation and maintenance of the Hanford South Geoframework and the Central Plateau Vadose Zone Geoframework tools; 7. Incorporation of updated tank residual inventory estimates. Tank residual inventory estimates have improved with the incorporation of tank retrieval inventory data for those tanks that have completed retrieval. The CA inventory data package includes this updated information; 8. Incorporation of WMA C PA results. Two additional PAs for tank farm closure decisions are in preparation during the period required to prepare an updated Hanford Site CA: WMA C (FY 2016) and WMA A-AX (in preparation). The WMA C PA results are incorporated into the updated Hanford Site CA, and its grouted residuals model is used as the basis for a release model to account for the other tank farm systems modeling in this updated CA; 9. An update to the IDF PA was submitted in FY 2017 and has been reviewed and approved. The results of the IDF PA are incorporated into this updated CA; 10. Updated risk assessment scenarios. The risk assessment scenarios currently in use for Hanford Site CERCLA and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) analyses differ from those evaluated in the initial Hanford Site CA. The representative person exposure scenario evaluated in this updated Hanford Site CA is consistent with recent PAs and CERCLA and RCRA analyses as the Hanford Site. This updated Hanford Site CA provides the following: A comparison of the updated Hanford Site CA all-pathway dose results with the performance measures during the compliance period, which is assumed to begin with site closure in calendar 2070 with the last scheduled disposal action and continue for 1,000 years postclosure (to calendar year 3069); A comparison of Hanford Site CA all-pathway dose results with the performance measures during the postcompliance period to address potential peaks beyond the compliance period. This is accomplished by evaluating dose in the period for 9,000 years following the compliance period (i.e., from calendar year 3070 to 12070).

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

PFLOTRAN Development FY2022

The Spent Fuel & Waste Science and Technology (SFWST) Campaign of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Nuclear Energy (NE), Office of Spent Fuel & Waste Disposition (SFWD) is conducting research and development (R&D) on geologic disposal of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level nuclear waste (HLW). A high priority for SFWST disposal R&D is to develop a disposal system modeling and analysis capability for evaluating disposal system performance for nuclear waste in geologic media. This report describes fiscal year (FY) 2022 accomplishments by the PFLOTRAN Development group of the SFWST Campaign. The mission of this group is to develop a geologic disposal system modeling capability for nuclear waste that can be used to probabilistically assess the performance of generic disposal concepts. In FY 2022, the PFLOTRAN development team made several advancements to our software infrastructure, code performance, and process modeling capabilities.

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 OSTI2020

Estimation of stress and stress-induced permeability change in a geological nuclear waste repository in a thermo-hydrologically coupled simulation

Geologic disposal is a promising solution for a safe permanent isolation of accumulated high-level nuclear waste from nuclear powerplants. The behavior of host rock is highly coupled thermally, hydromechanically, and chemically. Numerical simulations of such coupled phenomena for the extremely long term (>100,000 years) and large length scale (>1 km) of geologic disposal remain to be computationally challenging. In this study, a methodology has been developed to approximate stress and stress-induced permeability change in host rock using only thermo-hydrological (TH) variables. A coupled thermo-hydromechanical (THM) simulation is carried out using TOUGH-FLAC simulator to model THM behaviors of a generic nuclear waste repository, in order to evaluate the performance of the developed methodology, which is implemented in a coupled TH simulation. Results show that stress and permeability change estimated by the developed methodology in the TH-coupled simulation match those calculated in the THM-coupled simulation over the simulated timeframe of over 10,000 years. Details about errors in stress and permeability estimates accrued by the developed methodology are discussed here. The developed methodology will help incorporate stress-induced permeability change into existing TH simulators for the long-term radionuclide transport in geologic disposal.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗