Nuclear Site Remediation - ACS Publications - American Chemical

Chapter 1

The Environmental Management Science Program: One Facet of a Balanced Solution-Based Investment Strategy 1

2

3

Gerald Boyd , Mark Gilbertson , Roland Hirsch , and Arnold Gritzke

2

1

Downloaded by 80.82.77.83 on May 6, 2018 | https://pubs.acs.org Publication Date: November 29, 2000 | doi: 10.1021/bk-2001-0778.ch001

Office of Science and Technology, Office of Environmental Management, Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, Washington, DC 20585 Office of Basic and Applied Research, Office of Science and Technology, Office of Environmental Management, Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, Washington, DC 20585 Medical Sciences Division, Office of Biological and Environmental Research, Office of Science, Department of Energy, Germantown, MD 20585 2

3

DOE’s Office of Environmental Management (EM) is engaged in the cleanup of the facilities used in nuclear materials production. The science and technology to support many aspects of this mission do not exist. To address this, E M formed the Office of Science and Technology. In 1996, E M began reevaluating the notion that the cleanup would take over 30 years. Accelerating Cleanup: Paths to Closure which resulted, established E M ’ s strategy for cleanup most of the sites by 2006, expediting cleanup of the remaining sites, and implementing long-term stewardship. A t the same time, Congress mandated development of a basic science program.

2

© 2001 American Chemical Society Eller and Heineman; Nuclear Site Remediation ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2000.

3


Introduction The D O E ' s Office of Environmental Management (EM) is now engaged in the cleanup of the facilities used in over fifty years of nuclear materials production. E M was established with the mission of cleaning up the legacy of environmental pollution at D O E weapons complex facilities, preventing further environmental contamination, and instituting responsible environmental management. However, a coordinated effort in the conduct of scientific research and technology development to support many aspects of this mission did not exist. To address this need for effective and affordable solutions to the daunting environmental problems it faced, E M formed the Office of Science and Technology (OST) to conduct a national basic scientific and technology research, development and deployment program. OST's mission is to ensure the availability of cost-effective, technically better, and safer technologies to achieve the complex cleanup. The Environmental Management Science Program provides a key facet of the development of new cleanup methods and the improvement of existing methods by providing the scientific understanding of the environment and the chemical, biological and physical aspects of cleanup processes. In 1996, E M began to reevaluate the notion that the cleanup of the former weapons complex would take over 30 years to accomplish. The result of this réévaluation was Accelerating Cleanup: Paths to Closure, (1) which articulated E M ' s vision to cleanup and transition the majority of the operating sites by the year 2006, expedite the cleanup of the remaining sites, and implement a longterm stewardship program to address the complicated and intractable environmental management problems. This new planning document established a path forward, which allowed major cleanup activities to be completed in the near term, while leaving recalcitrant technical problems for the longer term. This staging of the cleanup effort allows the research efforts within OST to be focused on areas where there is a high technical need and allows adequate time for the required science and technology to be developed and tested. A t the same time, Congress mandated the establishment of an environmental science program within E M , (2) to be managed in collaboration with the D O E Office of Science and the Idaho Operations Office. The objective of this program is to focus the nation's scientific research infrastructure on E M ' s science needs in order to provide technical scientific underpinnings for the longterm cleanup effort. The first of the Environmental Management Science Program Projects (EMSP) have just completed their initial 3-year grants.

Eller and Heineman; Nuclear Site Remediation ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 2000.

4

EM's Environmental Management Problem


E M is engaged in the cleanup of the radioactive, hazardous, and mixed wastes left from over 50 years of U.S. nuclear weapons production. These materials are in a variety of forms (e.g., stored as waste in tanks and drums, disposed in landfills and trenches, released to the surface, contaminants in buildings and other structures, and as contaminants in soils and groundwater.) To assess the magnitude of the problem and to coordinate the cleanup effort D O E has organized the cleanup by problem areas. Total life-cycle costs for the cleanup are estimated to be approximately $147 billion from 1997 to 2070. This currently represents the largest cleanup effort in the world.

High Level Waste One of the largest problems D O E faces both in terms of cost and scientific challenge is the cleanup of the waste contained in storage tanks. Within the D O E complex, over 335 underground storage tanks have been used to process and store radioactive and chemical mixed waste generated from weapon materials production and manufacturing. Collectively these tanks hold over 340 million liters of high-level (HLW) and low-level radioactive liquid waste in sludge, saltcake, and as supernate and vapor (3). Very little of this material has been treated and/or disposed of in final form. Most of the waste is alkaline and contains a diverse portfolio of constituents including nitrate and nitrite salts, hydrated metal oxides, phosphate precipitates, and ferrocyanides along with a variety of radionuclides. The tanks are located at five D O E sites and many of these tanks have known or suspected leaks. Major challenges exist in the areas of characterization and separations or pretreatment.

Mixed Waste A n estimate of the inventory of mixed waste inventory shows approximately 167,000 cubic meters of over 1,400 different types of mixed waste located at 38 sites in 19 states (3). This inventory, however, is increasing with newly generated waste resulting from ongoing processes and environmental restoration, facility decontamination, and facility transition activities. After appropriate treatment, much of this waste is expected to be placed in the Waste Isolation Pilot Project facility (WIPP). The first shipments of T R U have already been sent to WIPP. However, challenges in


5

characterization, separations and stabilization still exist before all of the mixed waste can be disposed.


Deactivation and Decontamination DOE is addressing the problem of deactivation transformation of over 7,000 buildings and decommissioning over 900 buildings and their contents. This represents more than 6 million square meters of buildings containing contaminated concrete, equipment, machinery, and pipes (3). Therefore, substantial quantities of metal and concrete must be decontaminated and nearly 200,000 tons of scrap metal must be disposed. Deactivation and Decommissioning activities across the complex will likely require decades to complete. Research is needed to develop or improve methods for the characterization, deactivation, decontamination, monitoring, and certification of facilities, as well as removal, control, treatment, and stabilization of Deactivation and Decommissioning derived waste. Scientific breakthroughs in these areas could reduce the schedule and associated long-term costs.

Subsurface Contaminants Soil and ground water contaminated with radionuclides, heavy metals, and dense, non-aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL) contaminants are found at most DOE sites. This consists of more than 50 million cubic meters of contarninated soil and 5,700 ground water plumes, which have contaminated over 2 trillion liters of water. In addition, there are numerous landfills that contain nearly 4 million cubic meters of radioactive and hazardous buried waste, some of which has contarninated surrounding soils and ground water (3). Currently available cleanup technologies are often unacceptable due to excessive costs, increased risks, long remediation schedules, or production of secondary wastes. Research is needed to improve characterizing and delineating contamination, removal and remediation of contaminants, separation of radionuclides from hazardous compounds, and prediction of contaminant migration.

Nuclear Materials Certain nuclear materials, such as plutonium, can be dangerous even in extremely small quantities, particularly if ingested or inhaled. In addition, finely divided plutonium dust may spontaneously ignite when exposed to air above certain temperatures. Extreme precautions are required in storing, handling, and transporting such materials. DOE's plutonium and other nuclear materials exist in a variety of forms — from acid solutions, to rough pieces of metal, to nearly finished weapons parts (3). In addition, unknown amounts of plutonium have collected on the surfaces of ventilation ducts, air filters, and gloveboxes at some DOE facilities. Metal and chemical wastes containing nuclear materials typically are stored in drums and monitored, pending ultimate disposition.


6

Methods are needed to package and stabilize the hundreds of metric tons of metals and oxides, residues, and other processing intermediates that resulted from weapons manufacturing, laboratory samples, and research reactors both domestic and international.


Accelerating Cleanup: Paths to Closure Objectives The vision of the Accelerating Cleanup: Paths to Closure strategy document is to set forth a path for the completion of the cleanup of the D O E complex. With this vision, a sequencing of projects has been established that calls for the cleanup of most of the 53 remaining sites by 2006 (Figure 1, below). A t the 10 remaining sites, including the five largest sites, treatment will continue beyond 2006 for the "legacy" waste streams. This vision will drive budget decisions, subsequent sequencing of projects, and the actions needed to meet program objectives. Meeting this vision will require a sustained national commitment and sufficient funding. It will also require the use of world class technologies, improved efficiency, national integration, and university and industry partnerships.

Office of Science and Technology Mission OST was formed in 1989 to provide a full range of science and technology resources and capabilities to meet E M ' s cleanup and long-term stewardship problems. This includes not only the development of technologies but also includes overseeing the targeted basic research needed to successfully develop new technologies and the support activities the sites may need to assure that these technologies are deployed. When OST was formed, there was a realization that the cleanup of many of the sites in the D O E complex could not be accomplished without major advances in science and technology. A t that time, either no technical solutions existed or currently available solutions were exorbitantly expensive or may have posed high risk to workers, the public, or the environment. OST's role is to provide scientific or technical alternatives, which will overcome these obstacles, on a schedule that will meet D O E schedules and goals. In recent years, the OST program has focused on deploying technologies to reduce the near-term cost and promote faster and more efficient cleanup. A t the same time, OST, through the Environmental Management Science Program, is investing in long-term basic targeted research to improve and reduce the cost and risk of post 2006 cleanup and environmental management activities.



Figure L 2006 cleanup goal of the Accelerating Cleanup: Paths to Closure


8

OST Objectives


OST has recently completed a Strategic Plan (4), an E M R & D Program (5) Plan, and a Management Plan (6). These documents establish the following four major goals for OST activities and define indicators of success in meeting these goals: meeting high priority needs, reducing the cost of E M ' s major cost centers, reducing E M ' s technological risk, and accelerating the deployment of innovative technologies. These OST goals support the 7 objectives delineated for E M in the E M Research and Development Portfolio.

Meet High Priority Needs E M ' s science and technology investments are end-user driven; they address the highest priority needs identified by the sites (Figure 2, below). This includes those needs on the critical path to site closure and those that represent major science and technology gaps that threaten project completion. Needs are rank ordered to ensure that E M focuses first on the problems with the biggest impact. Over 500 science and technology needs have been identified. Forty-six percent address highest risk problems, such as, stabilizing/securing plutonium, H L W tanks, etc. E M intends to bring more than 100 technologies to bear on these needs in the next 3 to 5 years.

Figure 2. Distribution of Needs as Related to Site Critical Paths


9

Reduce the Cost of EM's Major Cost Centers


Current life-cycle cost estimates for the cleanup of the former weapons complex total nearly $150 billion in constant 1998 dollars for all projects through 2070 (Figure 3, below, shows the distribution of costs by Problem Area). E M ' s five Focus Areas target 80% of these cleanup costs, with almost half of it devoted to high-level waste. Over 300 opportunities to help meet E M ' s cost reduction goals have been identified. The potential cost saving associated with these opportunities is in excess of $12 billion with me largest opportunities in the area of H L W tanks.

Figure 3. Life-Cycle Cleanup Cost by Problem Area

Reduce EM's Technological Risk Many of the cleanup plans at the sites rely on enabling or breakthrough science and technology assumptions that have not been fully validated. Science and technology investments are targeted at these areas to help reduce the risk that the critical science and technology will not be available when needed or will not perform as expected. E M has identified 50 Project Baseline Summaries that present medium to high technological risk and that are on the critical path to closure (Figure 4, below). Most of these projects are managed by the Savannah River, Oak Ridge, Albuquerque, Idaho, and Richland Field Offices. OST specifically targets the technologies associated with these projects to ensure that site closure goals are met.



10

Figure 4. Number of Project Baseline Summaries with Technical Risk Greater than 3 by Field Office

Accelerated Technology Deployment Throughout the investment in science and technology projects, the Focus Areas work with the sites to facilitate and support accelerated deployment and acceptance of the new technologies. In close coordination with the end-user community, Focus Areas provide technical advice and assist in development of site-specific deployment plans. Additionally, the Focus Areas assist in gaining regulatory acceptance of the new technologies, ensure that the national technology development program addresses site-specific requirements, and evaluate the progress and readiness of technologies under development (Figure 5, below). In fiscal year 1998, the target for deployment of new technologies was 49. The actual level achieved was 113 new deployments.

Figure 5. Number of Technologies Deployed 1993 through 1998


11


OST Investments As noted above, OST addresses problems through a "Focus Area Centered Approach." The OST Focus Areas are aligned with D O E ' s problem areas (Figure 6, below, shows the OST investment by Problem Area) and are led by Field Offices, i.e., Richland is the lead for H L W tanks; Idaho is the lead for M L L W and shares the leadership of Nuclear Materials with Albuquerque; Savannah River is the lead for Subsurface Contaminants; and Oak Ridge is the lead for Deactivation and Decommissioning. Not all problem areas are represented by a Focus Area. However, many needs and solutions applicable to one problem area can also be used to address other problem areas e.g., H L W and Mixed Waste solutions are applicable to Spent Fuel and Plutonium problems. Aspects of the transportation and health/ecology/risk problem areas are encompassed by all of the focus areas.

Figure 6. To-Date OST investment by Problem Area

EMSP Role The EMSP was established in response to a mandate from Congress in the fiscal year 1996 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act. Congress directed the Department to "provide sufficient attention and resources to longer-


12


term basic science research which needs to be done to ultimately reduce cleanup costs, ...develop a program that takes advantage of laboratory and university expertise, and ...seek new and innovative cleanup methods to replace current conventional approaches which are often costly and ineffective". This mandate followed similar recommendations from the Garvin Commission to the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board. The E M S P also has received valuable input from the National Academy of Sciences, regulators, citizen advisory groups, and other stakeholders. The goal of the E M S P is to develop and fund a targeted, long-term basic research program that will result in transformational or breakthrough approaches for solving the Department's environmental problems. The purpose is to provide the basic scientific knowledge that will lead to reduced remediation costs, schedule, or risk, or that will help alleviate otherwise intractable problems. E M S P research is focused on Department's cleanup problems and is linked to problem holders, including technical staff, managers, and stakeholder advisory groups at the sites. The program supports research that could: • •

•

Lead to significantly lower cleanup costs and reduced risks to workers, the public, and the environment over the long-term. Bridge the gap between broad fundamental research that has wide-ranging applicability, such as that performed in the Office of Science, and needsdriven applied technology development conducted by the E M Office of Science and Technology Focus Areas. Serve as a stimulus for focusing the nation's science infrastructure on critical national environmental management problems.

Research projects are solicited and awarded according to program needs of the D O E sites and the degree to which those needs can be influenced by scientific findings. Awardees interface with OST Focus Area representatives during the projects. Research results are integrated into technology development activities of the Focus Areas and site end-users through a number of facilitated interactions, such as topical and site-specific workshops, national workshops, other E M program meetings and other national meetings such as the American Chemical Society Symposium that is the focus of this proceedings volume.

EMSP Organization EMSP's relationship to other programs is shown in Figure 7, below. The EM/OST Office of Basic and Applied Research (OBAR) is the lead organization for the EMSP. It provides policy and programmatic guidance, solicits research needs, ensures research is applicable to D O E cleanup problems, and


13


communicates research results. DOE-Office of Science (SC) provides input into program policy development, manages the solicitation of research applications, oversees the scientific review process, and manages the scientific aspects of the Program. DOE-ID is the lead Field Office for program execution, which includes assisting O B A R in analyzing science needs, providing procurement services, integrating research results, and managing grant funding. DOE-ID also serves as the interface between the E M Focus Areas, Crosscutting Programs and D O E Field Offices.

Figure 7. EMSP Organization and Interactions

The E M S P has a number of technical advisory groups providing valuable input on both technical and programmatic matters. In the technical area, E M ' s Site Technology Coordinating Groups (STCGs) identify science and technology needs and opportunities associated with all field sites and cleanup projects. The Focus Areas work with E M S P and the STCGs to evaluate site needs and set basic research directions. The E M Integration team identifies ways to improve efficiencies and cost savings throughout E M and identifies additional science priorities associated with critical waste streams. Several programmatic advisory groups assist the E M S P with strategic and policy recommendations. The E M Federal Review Board and the E M Advisory


14


Board ( E M A B ) advise and evaluate overall Program execution. The E M A B Science Committee reviews the processes used to select projects, provides recommendations on Program direction, and advises on E M science policy. Similarly, the Biological and Environmental Research Advisory Committee of the Office of Science has provided input on the EMSP. DOE's Strategic Laboratory Council also advises the E M S P on planning and execution processes in order to ensure programmatic relevance and successful utilization of research results. The National Research Council/National Academy of Sciences provides periodic external policy recommendations.

EMSP Participation Since its inception in Fiscal Year 1996, E M S P has invested over $220 million in support of 274 research projects. This investment has provided funding for researchers at 90 universities, 13 national laboratories, and 22 other governmental and private laboratories. Research is being conducted in 38 states and the District of Columbia, two Canadian provinces, Australia, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the Czech Republic. Forty percent of funding to date has gone to universities and other non-Federal labs. There are 202 projects started prior to 1998, which included over $160 million distributed across all 13 science categories. From 1998 onward, the grants have become focused on particularly intractable problems. In Fiscal Year 1998, 33 projects were funded to respond to needs in the areas of high level radioactive waste and deactivation and decommissioning. Drawing on expertise available from abroad, particularly in high level waste, the 1998 awards also included grants to researchers in the Czech Republic and Russia.

Projects by Problem Areas The 1999 awards for 39 projects focused on subsurface contamination and low dose radiation effects. This latter area is likely to have an impact on the cleanup activities in most of the problem areas. The number projects anticipated, depending on available funding, is 31 projects in Subsurface Contaminants/Vadose Zone (Subsurface Contamination Problem Area) and 8 projects in Low Dose Radiation Effects (Health/Ecology/Risk Problem Area)(Table 1, Below, shows the annual distribution of projects by problem area). SC has funded and additional seven projects in the Low Dose Radiation Effects area. Five additional projects may be funded by E M S P in FY2000, depending on funding levels and SC may fund up to nine more projects in FY2000, again depending on funding levels.



15

FY96

FY97

FY98

FY99

High Level Waste

26

22

20

-

Spent Nuclear Fuel

-

5

-

-

Mixed Waste

22

9

-

-

Nuclear Materials

2

6

-

-

Subsurface Contamination

72

11

-

31

Health/Ecology/Risk

10

8

-

8

Decontamination and Deactivation TOTAL

4

5

13

-

136

66

33

39

Table 1. EMSP Projects by Year by E M Problem Area

EMSP Successes While most E M S P projects are funded on a three year basis, useful results have emerged from many projects before their completion. These research results may be instrumental in developing not only new tools for environmental cleanup, but also in improving the understanding of scientific principles that underlie conventional cleanup methods. The following are examples of some early E M S P results that could provide significant benefits to EM's cleanup effort. Many others are highlighted in the remaining chapters of this volume. One research project in the high level waste problem area, led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, focuses on a key problem in processing radioactive wastes where insoluble sludges clog transfer lines or interfere with solid-liquid separations. In order to control the problem, better understanding of the characteristics and mechanisms for controlling the physical properties of sludge suspensions, which consist of submicron colloidal particles, is needed. The project focuses on the factors controlling colloidal agglomeration, detemiining how agglomeration influences slurry rheology, and developing


16

strategies to control agglomeration. Early results are pointing the way to optimization of waste processing conditions for retrieval, transport, and separation of the waste currently in tank storage.


A research project in the mixed waste problem area, being conducted at Los Alamos National Laboratory, is developing a high-flux neutron source for nondestructive assay of containerized T R U waste at D O E sites. This research could lead to a more stable and powerful neutron source, which would improve assay results. Some potential applications are the characterization of T R U wastes for mixed waste residues prior to stabilization and disposal, cemented or vitrified wastes, spent nuclear fuel, and high level wastes. Basic research at the University of Georgia, addressing the remedial action problem area, deals with mercury contamination in soils. This work uses genetic engineering to transfer properties from soil bacteria to plants which would allow them to degrade mercury into a less toxic form. These plants can then be grown in contaminated areas where they could withdraw mercury from the soil and reduce its toxicity. This work is expected to lead to the development of a passive method for remediation of mercury and possibly other contaminants. Another project in the area of subsurface contamination deals with the problem of water flow processes in mixed soil or fractured rock environments in the vadose zone (that is, above the ground water table). Researchers at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory have developed equations that describe the pattern of fractures in basalt and the trajectory of flow paths in the basalt. The results of this research may change the approach used to predict flow and transport of groundwater and contaminants in fractured media. With this information in hand, the environmental restoration program stands the best chance of stopping contaminants before they seep into the water table. In the problem area of mixed waste, the mixture of toxic chemicals, heavy metals, halogenated solvents and radionuclides in many D O E waste materials presents the challenging problem of separating the different species and disposing of individual contaminants. A microbiological treatment system is an attractive possibility for separation and treatment. A project is being conducted at the University of Washington to develop organisms capable of detoxifying metals, such as mercury, and halogenated organics in mixed waste. This research involves cloning these beneficial properties from other bacteria into a bacteria strain that is highly resistant to radioactivity.


17

Incorporating Science Results into Technology Development


The results from many of the projects of the E M S P have been or will be incorporated directly into ongoing cleanup projects, baseline technologies, or innovative technologies under development by OST. Others will require further development before they can be utilized in cleanup. OST uses a "stage-gate" model for managing its investment portfolio. Research and development activities are categorized into 7 distinct "stages" with a review process at the "gates" for advancing a project to the next stage. This includes technical merit review and go/no-go decisions (e.g., American Society of Mechanical Engineering reviews at gate 4) and the programmatic relevance review each year by Focus Areas. Scientific merit reviews and relevance reviews are used before the initiation of basic research, i.e. gate 0. With the emphasis that has been placed on demonstrations and deployments to achieve short-term goals of the Accelerating Cleanup: Paths to Closure and the initiation of new basic research projects to meet the Accelerating Cleanup: Paths to Closure long-term goals, there has been a lack of emphasis on applied research and exploratory development. As the first of the 3-year grants in the E M S P reach the end of their primary funding period steps are being taken to move this basic research into the applied research stage. This is shown conceptually in Figure 8, below, where the valley associated with applied research funding is less pronounced in 2001. Due to the flat or decreasing overall funding for E M - O S T the increase in applied research funding will be accomplished at the expense of basic research and projects at more mature stages. In planning for the transitioning of E M S P sponsored basic research into later stages of the stage-gate approach used by OST, many of the same evaluation criteria are used that are used for evaluation and ranking of more mature technologies. These parameters include meeting needs, high probability of use, potential to treat currently unbeatable waste, and potential for cost savings. Pressures on the E M budget inevitably have not allowed E M to build the applied research program as quickly as desired, but progress is being made toward this goal.

Conclusions E M must invest in a balanced portfolio ranging from basic research to deployment assistance for the sites. Demonstrations and deployment assistance are needed to achieve the goal of closure of most sites by 2006. Basic and applied research is needed to meet long-term goals. E M ' s cleanup mission remains heavily dependent on achieving basic scientific breakthroughs that will allow the cleanup of intractable problems. E M S P therefore is integral to the success of the overall OST mission. The E M S P is how E M reaches out to the



18

basic research community and is an integral part of the balanced portfolio strategy. E M is now addressing the difficult task of transitioning the basic science projects that reached the end of their primary funding period in F Y 1999 into the applied research stage. Fortunately, the Department has many of the best scientists in their fields participating in the E M S P . These scientists have a strong interest in helping to solve the problems facing the Nation's cleanup effort. They also possess a firm commitment to close collaboration with each other and the technologists and managers at the sites seeking solutions to the many currently intractable problems. The staff of the Office of Environmental Management and Office of Science is grateful for the dedication of the scientists who participated in the symposium from which this volume is derived. The organizers and participants deserve congratulations for this impressive display of accomplishments and vision for the future.

References 1. Accelerating Cleanup: Paths To Closure; United States Department of Energy, 1998 2. H.R. Conference Report No.293, 105 Congress 1 Session, 1996. 3. D O E Research and Development Portfolio: Environmental Quality; Volume 3: United States Department of Energy. 4. Environmental Management Strategic Plan for Science and Technology, United States Department of Energy, 1998. 5. Environmental Management Research and Development Program Plan, United States Department of Energy, 1998. 6. Office of Science and Technology Management Plan, United States Department of Energy, 1999. th

st


Nuclear Site Remediation - ACS Publications - American Chemical

Recommend Documents