Unreviewed Disposal Question
DOWNLOAD
Download Unreviewed Disposal Question PDF/ePub or read online books in Mobi eBooks. Click Download or Read Online button to get Unreviewed Disposal Question book now. This website allows unlimited access to, at the time of writing, more than 1.5 million titles, including hundreds of thousands of titles in various foreign languages. If the content not found or just blank you must refresh this page
Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation
DOWNLOAD
Author :
language : en
Publisher:
Release Date : 2014
Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation written by and has been published by this book supported file pdf, txt, epub, kindle and other format this book has been release on 2014 with categories.
Solid low-level waste disposal operations are controlled in part by an E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility (ELLWF) Performance Assessment (PA) that was completed by the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) in 2008 (WSRC 2008). Since this baseline analysis, new information pertinent to disposal operations has been identified as a natural outcome of ongoing PA maintenance activities and continuous improvement in model simulation techniques (Flach 2013). An Unreviewed Disposal Question (UDQ) Screening (Attachment 1) has been initiated regarding the continued ability of the ELLWF to meet Department of Energy (DOE) Order 435.1 performance objectives in light of new PA items and data identified since completion of the original UDQ Evaluation (UDQE). The present UDQE assesses the ability of Solid Waste (SW) to meet performance objectives by estimating the influence of new information items on a recent sum-of-fractions (SOF) snapshot for each currently active E-Area low-level waste disposal unit. A final SOF, as impacted by this new information, is projected based on the assumptions that the current disposal limits, Waste Information Tracking System (WITS) administrative controls, and waste stream composition remain unchanged through disposal unit operational closure (Year 2025). Revision 1 of this UDQE addresses the following new PA items and data identified since completion of the original UDQE report in 2013: New Kd values for iodine, radium and uranium; Elimination of cellulose degradation product (CDP) factors; Updated radionuclide data; Changes in transport behavior of mobile radionuclides; Potential delay in interim closure beyond 2025; and Component-in-grout (CIG) plume interaction correction. Consideration of new information relative to the 2008 PA baseline generally indicates greater confidence that PA performance objectives will be met than indicated by current SOF metrics. For SLIT9, the previous prohibition of non-crushable containers in revision 0 of this UDQE has rendered the projected final SOF for SLIT9 less than the WITS Admin Limit. With respect to future disposal unit operations in the East Slit Trench Group, consideration of new information for Slit Trench#14 (SLIT14) reduced the current SOF for the limiting All-Pathways 200-1000 year period (AP2) by an order of magnitude and by one quarter for the Beta-Gamma 12-100 year period (BG2) pathway. On the balance, updates to K{sub d} values and dose factors and elimination of CDP factors (generally favorable) more than compensated for the detrimental impact of a more rigorous treatment of plume dispersion. These observations suggest that future operations in the East Slit Trench Group can be conducted with higher confidence using current inventory limits, and that limits could be increased if desired for future low-level waste disposal units. The same general conclusion applies to future ST's in the West Slit Trench Group based on the Impacted Final SOFs for existing ST's in that area.
Unreviewed Disposal Question
DOWNLOAD
Author :
language : en
Publisher:
Release Date : 2000
Unreviewed Disposal Question written by and has been published by this book supported file pdf, txt, epub, kindle and other format this book has been release on 2000 with categories.
The Department of Energy's waste management Order, DOE O 435.1, requires that low--level waste disposal facilities develop and maintain a radiological performance assessment to ensure that disposal operations are within a performance envelope defined by performance objectives for long-term protection of the public and the environment. The Order also requires that a radiological composite analysis be developed and maintained to ensure that the disposal facility, in combination with other sources of radioactive material that may remain when all DOE activities have ceased, will not compromise future radiological protection of the public and the environment. The Order further requires that a Disposal Authorization Statement (DAS) be obtained from DOE Headquarters and that the disposal facility be operated within the performance assessment, composite analysis, and DAS. Maintenance of the performance assessment and composite analysis includes conducting test, research, and monitoring activit ies to increase confidence in the results of the analyses. It also includes updating the analyses as changes are proposed in the disposal operations, or other information requiring an update, becomes available. Personnel at the Savannah River Site have developed and implemented an innovative process for reviewing proposed or discovered changes in low-level radioactive waste disposal operations. The process is a graded approach to determine, in a disciplined manner, whether changes are within the existing performance envelope, as defined by the performance assessment, composite analysis, and DAS, or whether additional analysis is required to authorize the change. This process is called the Unreviewed Disposal Question (UDQ) process. It has been developed to be analogous to the Unreviewed Safety Question (UDQ) process that has been in use within DOE for many years. This is the first formalized system implemented in the DOE complex to examine low-level waste disposal changes the way the U nreviewed Safety Question process examines changes in nuclear facility operations. The process, which ensures that proposed or discovered changes receive the appropriate level of review, is now being used whenever changes such as new waste streams or changes in the design of a waste disposal unit are proposed at SRS. The process involves going through a series of questions to ensure that the change is within the existing performance envelope. Two series of questions are used. The first is a simple screening process. If the change is obviously within the performance envelope, it will be screened from further evaluation. If it cannot be screened, technical personnel involved in the performance assessment, composite analysis, and DAS processes, perform a more detailed evaluation using the second set of questions. If the evaluation shows that the change is within the performance envelope, it can be approved within the contractor's organization. If the evaluation does not clearly conclude t hat the change is within the performance envelope, then a Special Analysis or other more extensive study is triggered. This is a disciplined way to be sure that one knows which changes are significant and which are not, so that the proper attention can be given to the changes that are significant.
Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation
DOWNLOAD
Author :
language : en
Publisher:
Release Date : 2005
Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation written by and has been published by this book supported file pdf, txt, epub, kindle and other format this book has been release on 2005 with categories.
The Closure Plan for the E-Area low-level waste facility assumes that dynamic compaction performed at the end of the 100-year institutional control period will adequately stabilize all waste in Slit Trenches. However, some non-crushable waste containers with significant void space will not be stabilized by dynamic compaction. These non-crushable containers will gradually corrode, eventually collapse and cause the final closure cap to subside resulting in an increase of the infiltration rates. After subsidence occurs, the waste zone will be significantly reduced to concentrate waste in the lower portion of the slit trench, therefore increasing waste concentration. The trench subsidence may have an adverse impact on the 1000-year compliance specified in DOE Order 435.1. This study addresses the issue of trench subsidence, evaluates the resulting concentrations at the hypothetical 100-m well against those obtained based on the PA approach, and provides the maximum number of trenches that can subside without causing the well concentrations to be out of compliance.
Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation
DOWNLOAD
Author : Margaret R. Millings
language : en
Publisher:
Release Date : 2005
Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation written by Margaret R. Millings and has been published by this book supported file pdf, txt, epub, kindle and other format this book has been release on 2005 with categories.
The Saltstone Facility 0.2 Curie/gallon MAVRC (Mixer At Vault Roof Concept) Project will utilize various pieces of process equipment that have not been analyzed from a Performance Assessment perspective for future disposal. The proposed activity will involve the disposal of Saltstone process equipment in an empty Vault 1 cell and encasing the equipment in clean (nonradioactive) grout. An examination of this activity indicates that the disposal of up to 20 pieces of each specified component should not affect the assumptions, results, and conclusions of the approved Performance Assessment (PA) and Special Analyses (SA) for Saltstone, and that the activity is within the bounds of the Disposal Authorization Statement (DAS).
Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation
DOWNLOAD
Author : M. A. Phifer
language : en
Publisher:
Release Date : 2003
Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation written by M. A. Phifer and has been published by this book supported file pdf, txt, epub, kindle and other format this book has been release on 2003 with categories.
One intent of DOE Order 435.1 (USDOE 1999a), as expressed in the performance assessment/composite analysis guidance (USDOE 1999c), is to ensure that proposed changes in wasteforms, containers, radionuclide inventories, facility design, and operations are reviewed to ensure that the assumptions, results, and conclusions of the DOE approved performance assessment (PA) (WSRC 2000), and composite analysis (CA) (WSRC 1997), as well as any Special analyses (SA) that might have been performed, remain valid (i.e., that the proposed change is bounded by the PA and CA) and the changes are within the bounds of the Disposal Authorization Statement (USDOE 1999b). The goal is to provide flexibility in day-to-day operation and to require those issues with a significant impact on the PA's conclusions, and therefore the projected compliance with performance objectives/measures, to be identified and brought to the proper level of attention. It should be noted that the term performance measure is used t o describe site specific adaptations of the DOE Order 435.1 Performance Objectives and requirements (e.g., performance measures such as applying drinking water standards to the groundwater impacts assessment). The intent of this document is to provide an evaluation of the issues identified within Problem Identification Report (PIR) number 2002-PIR-26-0050 (Kukraja 2002).
Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation
DOWNLOAD
Author :
language : en
Publisher:
Release Date : 2011
Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation written by and has been published by this book supported file pdf, txt, epub, kindle and other format this book has been release on 2011 with categories.
Operational inventory limits for the disposal of solid low-level waste in Slit Trenches 1-7 were established by the Special Analysis (SA) performed by Collard and Hamm (2008). To determine disposal limits for the Slit Trenches, the SA followed the methodology used in the 2008 PA (WSRC, 2008) which assumed that the inventories in each trench were instantaneously placed in 12/1995, which is the date when SLIT1 began operation. The 2008 SA analyzed the impact from placing storm-water runoff covers simultaneously over Slit Trenches 1-7 at 5, 10 and 15 years after the inventory was introduced. To include a measure of conservatism in the limits, the lowest of the limits calculated for any storm-water runoff cover placement time or that calculated in the original 2008 PA was chosen as the operational limit for each radionuclide. Through the availability of funding provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), storm-water runoff covers were placed over Slit Trenches 1-5 in December 2010. SRNL was requested to perform a UDQE for this accelerated action. Table 1 below lists the operational dates for Slit Trenches 1-5 and the time elapsed between when the first waste package was disposed in each Slit Trench and when the storm-water runoff covers were placed. As shown in Table 1, SLIT1 was covered 15.0 years after the date of the first waste package disposal. SLIT2 was covered 9.2 years after the date of the first waste package disposal in SLIT2 which falls within the window of ± 1.0 year within which the 2008 SA cover time analysis was assumed to be valid (Crowley and Butcher, 2008). Therefore, the analysis of SLIT1 and SLIT2 in the 2008 SA is considered adequate. However, the cover timings for SLIT3, SLIT4 and SLIT5 are from 2.2 to 1.6 years beyond the nearest cover time of 5 years assumed in the 2008 SA analysis and fall outside of the acceptable one-year margin. Therefore, an additional study was conducted by Collard et al. (2011) that assessed the impact on Slit Trench performance from a covering date that is between 12/2010 and 9/2011. Accelerated placement of storm-water runoff covers over Slit Trenches 1-5 put the cover timing outside of the range considered in the 2008 SA (Collard and Hamm, 2008) which establishes Slit Trench disposal limits. Results from a recent study (Collard et al., 2011) demonstrate that the actual cover installation in December 2010 produces acceptable Slit Trench performance. Additionally, covering Slit Trench 5 separately from Slit Trenches 6 and 7, which will be operationally closed at a later date, does not adversely affect performance of the operationally closed trenches.
Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation
DOWNLOAD
Author :
language : en
Publisher:
Release Date : 2013
Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation written by and has been published by this book supported file pdf, txt, epub, kindle and other format this book has been release on 2013 with categories.
Because Engineered Trench #3 (ET#3) will be placed in the location previously designated for Slit Trench #12 (ST#12), Solid Waste Management (SWM) requested that the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) determine if the ST#12 limits could be employed as surrogate disposal limits for ET#3 operations. SRNL documented in this Unreviewed Disposal Question Evaluation (UDQE) that the use of ST#12 limits as surrogates for the new ET#3 disposal unit will provide reasonable assurance that Department of Energy (DOE) 435.1 performance objectives and measures (USDOE, 1999) will be protected. Therefore new ET#3 inventory limits as determined by a Special Analysis (SA) are not required.
Hanford Site Tank Waste Remediation Systems Twrs Management And Disposal Of Radioactive Hazardous And Mixed Wastes City Of Richland Grant County
DOWNLOAD
Author :
language : en
Publisher:
Release Date : 1996
Hanford Site Tank Waste Remediation Systems Twrs Management And Disposal Of Radioactive Hazardous And Mixed Wastes City Of Richland Grant County written by and has been published by this book supported file pdf, txt, epub, kindle and other format this book has been release on 1996 with categories.
Special Analysis
DOWNLOAD
Author :
language : en
Publisher:
Release Date : 2003
Special Analysis written by and has been published by this book supported file pdf, txt, epub, kindle and other format this book has been release on 2003 with categories.
This Special Analysis (SA) addresses two contaminants of concern, H-3 and I-129, in three Effluent Treatment Facility (ETF) Activated Carbon Vessels awaiting disposal as solid waste. The Unreviewed Disposal Question (UDQ) evaluation listed two options for disposal of this waste, disposal as Components-in-Grout (CIG) or disposal in Slit Trenches with sealed openings to restrict release of H-3 form the vessels. Consumption of the CIG inventory limit and consumption of CIG facility volume are shown for the ETF vessels to allow easy comparison with the consumption of Slit Trench inventory limit and consumption of the Slit Trench facility volume . The inventory projections are based on doubling the inventory of the three ETF vessels in the E-Area to account for the unknown inventory of three ETF vessels in the ETF. When the grout ultimately is assumed to degrade hydraulically, the water movement is not impeded as much as the release is accelerated by the presence of the grout. Under these conditions for the CIG trenches relative to the Slit Trenches, the well concentrations are higher, the inventory limit is lower and for a given inventory the inventory limit consumption is higher.
Chemical Pretreatment Of Nuclear Waste For Disposal
DOWNLOAD
Author : E.P. Horwitz
language : en
Publisher: Springer Science & Business Media
Release Date : 2012-12-06
Chemical Pretreatment Of Nuclear Waste For Disposal written by E.P. Horwitz and has been published by Springer Science & Business Media this book supported file pdf, txt, epub, kindle and other format this book has been release on 2012-12-06 with Science categories.
Chemical pretreatment of nuclear wastes refers to the sequence of separations processes used to partition such wastes into a small volume of high-level waste for deep geologic disposal and a larger volume of low-level waste for disposal in a near-surface facility. Pretreatment of nuclear wastes now stored at several U. S. Department of Energy sites ranges from simple solid-liquid separations to more complex chemical steps, such as dissolution of sludges and removal of selected radionuclides, e. g. , 90Sr, 99Tc, 137CS, and TRU (transuranium) elements. The driving force for development of chemical pretreatment processes for nuclear wastes is the economic advantage of waste minimization as reflected in lower costs for near-surface disposal compared to the high cost of disposing of wastes in a deep geologic repository. This latter theme is expertly and authoritatively discussed in the introductory paper by J. and L. Bell. Seven papers in this volume describe several separations processes developed or being developed to pretreat the large volume of nuclear wastes stored at the US DOE Hanford and Savannah River sites. These papers include descriptions of the type and amount of important nuclear wastes stored at the Hanford and Savannah River sites as well as presently envisioned strategies for their treatment and final disposal. A paper by Strachan et al. discusses chemical and radiolytic mechanisms for the formation and release of potentially explosive hydrogen gas in Tank 241-SY-101 at the Hanford site.