Los Alamos NATIONAL LABORATORY. Los Alamos National Laboratory Transuranic Database Analysis

Transcription

1 Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. Los Alamos National Laboratory Transuranic Database Analysis Title: Davis V. Christensen, CST-1 Pamela S. Z. Rogers, CST-7 Stanley T. Kosiewicz, CST-7 Donald B. LeBrun, DOE/LAAO Waste Management '97 Conference Tucson, Arizona March 2-7, 1997 Submitted to: DSCLAMER - This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. Los Alamos NATONAL LABORATORY e ~, Los Alamos National Laboratory, an affirmative actiodequal opportunity employer, is operated by the University of California for the U.S. Department of Energy under contract W-75ENG-36. By acceptance of this article, the publisher recognizes that the U S. Government retains a nonexclusive, royalty-free license to publish or reproduce the published form of this contribution, or to allow others to do so, for U.S. Government purposes. Los Alamos National Laboratory requests that the publisher identify this article as work performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy. The Los Alamos National Laboratory strongly supports academic freedom and a researcher's right to publish; as an institution, however, the Laboratory does not endorse the viewpoint of a publication or guarantee its technical correctness. Form 836 (O/%)

2 DSCLAMER Portions of this document may be illegible in electronic image products. mages are produced from the best available origid document.

3 Full Paper LosAlamos National Laboratory Transuranic Database Analysis by Davis V. Christensen,Pamela S. Z. Rogers,and Stanley T. Kosiewicz Chemical Sciences and Technology Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory and Donald B. LeBrun, Department of Energy/Los Alamos Area Office Los Alamos, New Mexico, 875 Abstract This paper represents an overview of analyses conducted on the TRU database maintained by the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). This evaluation was conducted to support the TRU Waste Workoff Strategies document and provides an estimation of the waste volume that potentially could be certified and ready for shipment to (WPP) in April of Criteria defined in the WPP WAC, including container type, weight limits, plutonium fissile gram equivalents and decay heat, were used to evaluated the waste for compliance. LANL evaluated the containers by facility and by waste stream to determining the most efficient plan for characterization and certification of the waste. Evaluation of the waste presently in storage suggested that 6% potentially meets the WPP WAC Rev. 5 criteria. DSCUSSON Transuranic (TRU) Waste generated at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) is stored at Technical Area 5 (TA 5), Area G prior to shipment to the Waste solation Pilot Plant (WPP) for permanent disposal. The activities involved with storage include among other things, maintenance of the LANL TRU database. The TRU database is a compilation of TRU storage records completed by the generators. These records span from 197 to the present. As of December 3 1, 1995, the total volume o TRU waste recorded in the database was 11,167. Based on an evaluation of the database, a portion, 2,596 m potentially could be reclassified as buried TRU an removed from the inventory of waste to be sent to Waste solation Pilot Project (WPP). The remaining m is considered retrievably stored as defined by DOE. J Table 1. Current inventory of Contact Handled (CH) and Remote Handled (RH) TRU waste retrievably stored at LANL (12/31/95)as defined by DOE. This volume includes combustible, noncombustible and cemented wastes, metallic scrape, special case and remote handled wastes and soil. The percentage of these waste are listed below in Table 2. WPP CRTERA EVALUATON This volume was evaluated against a subset of the WPP Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) Rev. 5 criteria, Table 3, to determine noncompliant volumes. The entire set of WPP WAC Criteria could not be evaluated from the information presently in the database. A complete evaluation of the WPP WAC criteria will be conducted by LANL as part of the Characterization and Certiocation Programs to be conducted in FY 97and beyond. LA-UR /1/96

4 n evaluating the entire volume of TRU waste in the database, some of the documentation associated with legacy waste streams lacked critical information required for WPP WAC, Rev. 5. Conservative assumptions, based on historical practices, were used to extrapolate these legacy waste streams so that over 23, waste containers could be analyzed. Table 2. major waste categories as detailed in the TRU Database. This is equivalent to more than 1, 55-gallon drum volume equivalents (DVE). Table 3. Requirements set compiled from Table 3.2 of DOE/WPP-69, Rev. 5 (DOE 1996) LA-UR gallon drum Standard Waste Box (SWB) Weight 1, lb&-gal. Drum 5, lbs/swb Filter Vents Payload containers vented 3.3 NUCLEAR PROPERTES Nuclear Criticality (Pu-239 Fissile Gram Equivalents, (FGE)) 5 2 g/55-gal. Drum 5325g/SWB TRU Alpha Activity must be >lo nci/gram of waste matrix 3. CHEMCAL PROPERTES Mixed Waste Limited to EPA Waste Codes listed in Table GAS GENERATON DecayHeat Wattage's listed in CH TRUCON Tables Flammable VOC's 5 ppm in container headspace 2

5 KEY ASSUMPTONS Since all of this waste was generated before the WPP WAC Rev 5 criteria was published several key assumptions were used in analyzing the data. These assumptions are listed below for each criterion ~ CONTANER AND HYSCAL PROPERTES All 55 gallon drums are assumed to meet the DOT Type A DOT requirements or can be proven to be equivalent. SWB are approved Type A containers Any 55 gallon drum or SWB which is over Weight weight is assumed to require significant treatment, andlor repackaging efforts. Waste drums under earthen cover will require Filter Vents that a filter vent be installed. NUCLEAR 1 ROPERTES Nuclear Criticality (Pu-239 FGE) TRU Alpha Activity CHEMCAL PROPERTES Since RCRA regulations were not in place during Mixed Waste the generation of a significant portions of this waste EPA codes were assigned based on process knowledge. EPA codes assigned that are not found in the WPP WAC were identified as requiring significant treatment, andlor repackaging efforts. GAS GENERATON For legacy waste streams the packages were Decay Heat assumed to contain four layers of confinement and were assigned the appropriate limit based on the matrix. Waste containing EPA codes F3 and F5 Flammable VOC s were assumed to have flammable VOC s in concentrations 2 5 PPM in their headspace RESULTS CONTANER AND PHYSCAL PROPERTES The first criterion evaluated in the database was container type. The three categories identified included: 55 gallon drum (which are assumed to meet DOT Type A requirements or equivalent) Standard Waste Boxes, and containers (this includes 3 and 83 gallon drums, large plywood boxes, metal pipes, etc.). These volumes were then used to determine the percent volume which requires major treatment or repackaging effort s to meet the criteria, and implies the percent volume that will meet the criteria will minimal or no treatment and repackaging. LA-UR-96-3

6 3.2.1 Type %-gal drum Type %-gal drum SWB in Database Weight (> limit) Filter Vents Not Present 3,97 7, NUCLEAR PROPERTES Nuclear properties associated with the waste were evaluated to determine compliance. Established limits for 55gallon drums and SWB were compare to the values reported by the generators in the database. Only a small fraction of the drum and SWB inventor was reported to be above the limit. Completion of the double data entry process and the Non-destructive characterization activities plan for this waste will confirm these values before the waste is shipped to WPP. A slightly larger fraction of the waste, 7%, was identified in the database as being below 1 nci1g. The majority of this waste can be attributed to the 1 nci/g limit established in the early 7 s Nuclear Criticality (> limit) TRU Alpha Activity (c limit).1.1 YO CHEMCAL PROPERTES The only EPA identified with a drum of waste, which was not listed in Table of the WPP WAC was U8 Methylene chloride. dentification of this compound and the disposition of this drum with respects to sending it to WPP will be evaluated at a later data. No PCB s have been identified by the generators for TRU waste at LANL. Type 55-gal drum SWB LA-UR Mixed Waste Not listed in WPP WAC PCB s Cont. (< 5 PPm)

7 ,. d c GAS GENERATON Wattage limits for individual payload containers in the LANL database were calculated and compared to the limits presented in the TRUPACT-11 Content Codes. The S A R P limits were specific for waste matrix and assumed four () layer of packaging. n support of the WPP WAC matrix depletion studies are being conducted to determine legacy gas generation values for these waste matrixes. nitial results from these studies have shown a decrease in hydrogen generation over time, which will eventually lead to increasing the wattage limits for payload containers when the study is concluded. Based on preliminary results, the decay heat limit for this evaluation were increase by a factor of three. Flammable VOC s were assumed to be a subset of the EPA Codes F3 and F5. All waste packages with these codes listed were assumed to have concentrations greater than 5 ppm. Type 55-gal drum SWB Decay Heat (>3x limit) 1,1 2, Flammable VOC s (< 5 ppm) CONCLUSON This evaluation suggested that % (of the waste presently in storage) potentially meets the WPP WAC Rev. 5 criteria. This evaluation may include some overlap of data, but serves as a reasonable estimate. Noncompliant waste will require additional repackaging and size reduction. This activity will require upgrading of existing facilities. REFERENCES 1. U.S. Department of Energy. WasteAcceptance Criteriafor the Waste solation Pilot Plant, DOENPP U S. Department of Energy. TRUPACT-11Content Codes (TRUCON),DOENPP 89- LA-UR-9 6-5