ML19084A065
| ML19084A065 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | PROJ0736 |
| Issue date: | 11/06/2018 |
| From: | Lloyd Desotell Division of Decommissioning, Uranium Recovery and Waste Programs |
| To: | |
| L DESOTELL DUWP | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19084A063 | List: |
| References | |
| Download: ML19084A065 (6) | |
Text
Hanford Waste Management Area C WIR Evaluation 11-06-2018 DOE-NRC Teleconference Summary Department of Energy (DOE) Attendees: Sherri Ross (DOE-HQ), Jan Bovier (DOE-ORP), Rod Lobos Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Attendees: Hans Arlt, Dave Esh, Lloyd Desotell DOE Contractor Attendees: Sunil Mehta (INTERA), Matt Kozak (INTERA), Paul Rutland (WRPS), Doug DeFord (WRPS), Mike Connelly (TecGeo), Jim Field (WRPS), Bill McMahon (CHPRC)
Member of the Public Attendees: No members of the public identified themselves The following topics regarding NRCs review of the Draft Waste Incidental to Reprocessing (WIR) Evaluation for Closure of Waste Management Area C (WMA C) at the Hanford Site were discussed during a November 06, 2018 teleconference. These items were not covered in a previous teleconference due to time constraints. The item numbers start with 32.
This teleconference was open to the public. The call in information for this teleconference was posted on the following DOE Hanford webpage:
https://www.hanford.gov/page.cfm/WasteManagementAreaC Topic: Radionuclide Inventory (Tanks) 32 NRC staff stated that Tables 3-10 and 3-12 from the PA do not seem to match. DOE stated that the tables provide different information. DOE stated that Table 3-10 presents the history of waste transfers into the tanks while Table 3-12 presents the best estimate of wastes types after retrieval.
33 NRC staff stated that Sec. 6.2.1.1 from the PA does not discuss tank C-301. DOE stated that a discussion on Tank C-301 is missing and that it should be added.
34 NRC staff asked if Tank C-205 represents Tank C-301 in PA Fig. 7-1. DOE stated that this is a typo and Tank C-205 does represent Tank C-301 and that it will be corrected.
35 DOE discussed how it would update the draft WIR evaluation and performance assessment if new inventory information became available. DOE stated that that the PA is a living document and that there is a control process for emerging issues. DOE stated that if the inventory changes significantly they will do a special analysis.
36 The representativeness of waste tank sampling was briefly discussed. DOE stated that the representativeness and uncertainties related to tank sampling and analysis are discussed in Section 5.2.1 of the PA. DOE stated that samples were obtained using a data quality objective process (RPP-23403) in addition to discussions with regulators.
DOE indicated that they cant always achieve what they desire because of riser locations DOE-NRC 11-06-18 WMA C 1lPage WIR Teleconference Summary
and other limitations but that they do try to sample different colors (phases) of waste.
They cant sample walls or stiffener rings.
37 NRC staff asked DOE to describe the tanks/isotopes that are based on the Hanford Defined Waste Model/Hanford Tank Waste Operations Simulator (HDW/HTWOS). As data has been collected some comparisons have been made between measured concentrations and previously estimated values using HDW/HTWOS. Please show the uncertainty ranges considered for the inventory compared to the differences between observed and predicted for the HDW/HTWOS. Table 3-22 shows HTWOS seem to have higher uncertainty than implemented in the uncertainty analyses. DOE indicated that inventory estimates with HTWOS makes assumptions about movement and mobility.
The report describing HDW is Rev 5 of RPP-19822. DOE relies on HDW when they have no sample results, which is the case for 18-20 radionuclides. HDW estimates have high uncertainty but DOE hasnt determined what the uncertainties are. DOE believes the HDW uncertainties are higher than the sampled uncertainties.
38 NRC staff stated that the overall tritium inventory in the system seems to be low compared to that observed in other DOE tank systems (e.g. SRS, INL, WVDP) relative to other isotopes. DOE stated that they have done a material balance and that tritium is likely in the groundwater due to historical crib discharges.
39 NRC staff stated that Tank C-106 inventory for uranium appears low. DOE stated that Tank C-106 was cleaned with oxalic acid which resulted in low uranium residual inventory. Table 5-1 shows uranium present in C-106.
Topic: Waste Release 40 NRC stated that, in some cases, 30% or more of the waste inventory is on the walls or in the peripheral region of the tanks and asked why lateral diffusion from source/walls is not considered in the PA. DOE stated that most of the waste is near the base. DOE also stated that some detailed tank calculations were performed that did not end up in the PA and that they could perform a sensitivity analyses if needed.
41 NRC stated that due to the limited number of samples with respect to uranium solubility analyses, the true solubility range may not be captured. DOE stated they believe the solubility values are already conservative and consistent with those presented in the literature. DOE stated that the basis is provided in Section 6.3.1.2 of the PA document and 1E-04 mol/L solubility limit is based on assumption of amorphous uranium phases and was applied for 1,000 years. While the concentration value of 1E-4 mol/L was the maximum observed in the flow-through column experiments, this value was based on calcium carbonate leachant; the concentrations dropped off rapidly in the experiment.
42 NRC staff indicated that empirical measurements are encouraged because they provide the most direct information on the performance of the system. However, the empirical DOE-NRC 11-06-18 WMA C 2lPage WIR Teleconference Summary
approach to waste release has limitations because of the limited about of waste compositions and conditions tested. The phases and release mechanisms remain indeterminate. These results are very uncertain given waste heterogeneity. Please discuss why the range of uncertainty in the source term release is bound by the results of limited measurements. (Please see the response to question 41 for uranium). DOE indicated that the release of Tc-99 is fairly rapid in the PA model. While the experimental data may be limited, it is sufficient to justify the release rates used in the model.
43 NRC staff asked if the analysis for diffusive releases to air considered discrete pathways to release. DOE stated they did not consider discrete pathways and do not consider it to be a credible scenario because of the tank grouting procedure.
44 NRC staff stated that the liner failure timing is very uncertain and asked if alternate advective and diffusive conceptual models of flow/release with the liner present and not present (bathtub) have been considered. DOE stated that they have not considered that approach but have conducted some bounding sensitivity cases such as the GRT4 and DIF3 cases presented in Section 8 of the PA.
Additional clarification topics:
A. During the discussions pertaining to comment 41, NRC staff asked about the meaning of matrix degradation as used in Sec. 2.4.1. DOE made clear that matrix degradation should not be confused with grout degradation as described for grout sensitivity cases grt1, 2, 3, and 4 in Tab. 8-15. Matrix degradation process is not an actual degradation process but the process associated with the release of contaminants (i.e., Tc-99) into the pore waters of the material in the tank and ancillary equipment and their migration from the residual waste matrix.
Action Items Item Date Action Status Number 9-6.3a 9-6-18 NRC to provide GoldSim run log to DOE Completed 9-25-18 9-6.3b 9-6-18 DOE to provide NRC with GoldSim model for 400,000 Completed year simulation 9-27-18 9-6.5 9-6-18 DOE to provide additional details regarding the scaling pending for other uranium isotopes 9-6.6 9-6-18 DOE to provide the aqueous relative permeability pending parameters assigned in STOMP model 9-6.8 9-6-18 DOE to provide map showing the location of node 69 in Completed relation to the tank footprint 10-25-18 9-6.9 9-6-18 DOE to provide a water budget table with inflow at the pending surface and inflow/outflow at the four aquifer boundaries 9-6.12 9-6-18 DOE to provide the simulated hydraulic heads from the pending DOE-NRC 11-06-18 WMA C 3lPage WIR Teleconference Summary
STOMP model for the monitoring wells as seen in Fig. C-11, page C-22 9-6.14 9-6-18 Future presentation on Leapfrog geological model pending 9-6.15 9-6-18 DOE to check the discrepancy between 580 m3/d on PA pending
- p. C-8 and 730 m3/d on p. C-12.
10-2.10 10-2-18 DOE to send information on tank specific retrieval pending technology selection information 10-2.12 10-2-18 NRC to check information in NUREG 1854 on waste Completed classification criterion guidelines 11-13-18 10-2.a 10-2-18 DOE to check posting on website Completed 10-02-18 10-11.5 10-11-18 Item #5 from the 10-11-18 clarification call list will be Completed revisited next call when Bill McMahon is available. 10-25-18 10-11.6 10-11-18 DOE will generate a figure that represents the pipeline Completed source area used in the STOMP model. 10-25-18 10-11.7 10-11-18 DOE will review the discussion of Figure 7-16 on page 7- pending 24 of the PA document and make corrections as needed.
10-11.8 10-11-18 DOE will produce a revised figure showing the early Completed times (0 to 2000 years) for figures 7-15 and 7-16. 10-25-18 10-11.9 10-11-18 Item #9 from the 10-11-18 clarification call list will be Completed revisited next call when Bill McMahon is available. 10-25-18 10-11.11 10-11-18 Item #11 from the 10-11-18 clarification call list will be Completed revisited next call when Bill McMahon is available. 10-25-18 10-11.13 10-11-18 DOE to provide access to WRPS document RPP-ENV- Completed 334418 and CH2M Hill Hanford Group Inc. document 10-11-18 RPP-32681 10-11.15 10-11-18 DOE to provide NRC document that discusses how the pending unsaturated zone is effective at filtering colloids.
10-11.16 10-11-18 DOE to provide access to PNNL document PNNL-15226 Completed 10-11-18 10-11.18 10-11-18 DOE to provide access to Washington Closure Hanford Completed document WCH-520 10-11-18 10-11.20 10-11-18 Item #20 from the 10-11-18 clarification call list will be Completed revisited next call when Bill McMahon is available. 10-25-18 10-11.21 10-11-18 NRC will locate the Sr-90 plume map it referenced in pending Item #21 from the 10-11-18 clarification call list.
10-11.31 10-11-18 DOE will address the typographic errors identified in pending Item #31 from the 10-11-18 clarification call list.
10-11.9a 10-25-18 DOE will correct the text on p. 8-80 related to the vertical pending extent of the modeled clastic dike 10-11.22 10-25-18 DOE to provide access to DOE/RL-2015-75 Completed 10-25-18 10-11.26 10-25-18 DOE to provide cross sections shown in Fig. 2.7 in pending PNNL-13024, and the cross-section G - G from Fig. B-1 in RPP-RPT-46088, Rev. 2 10-11.30 10-25-18 NRC staff to provide reference (PNNL-16407) to support Completed discussion of y unknown subsurface features 11-05-18 DOE-NRC 11-06-18 WMA C 4lPage WIR Teleconference Summary
10-11.a 10-25-18 DOE to provide the most appropriate reference pending supporting the use of a no-flow bottom boundary in the 3D STOMP model 10-30.6 10-30-18 DOE to provide access to DOE/RL-2016-37 Completed 10-30-18 10-30.10 10-30-18 DOE to provide access to CERCLA documents that Completed relate to closure of the pipelines outside WMA C 11-09-18 10-30.15 10-30-18 DOE to provide access to RPP-RPT-55804 Completed 11-01-18 10-30.16 10-30-18 DOE to provide access to GRT4 GoldSim file Completed 11-09-18 10-30.25 10-30-18 DOE to search for references related to equipment that pending will remain in the tanks at closure 10-30.27 10-30-18 DOE to provide access to PNNL-15503 Rev 1 Completed 11-09-18 10-30.29 10-30-18 DOE to search for additional references related grout pending degradation 11-01.1 11-01-18 DOE to provide reference that supports land use Completed assumptions and the procedure for determining which 11-09-18 exposure scenarios will be evaluated 11-01.2 11-01-18 DOE to provide reference that supports the farmer pending scenario assumptions 11-01.13 11-01-18 DOE stated they would look for a report that describes pending regional drilling practices 11-01.25 11-01-18 DOE stated they would provide a map showing the eight Completed assumed plugged cascade lines and the V122 pipeline 11-09-18 11-01.26 11-01-18 DOE stated that the would provide NRC access to RPT- Completed 24257 11-09-18 11-01.28 11-01-18 DOE stated that the would provide NRC access to SD- Completed RE-EV-001 11-09-18 11-01.39 11-06-18 NRC will search for the figure it referenced regarding low pending uranium content in Tank C-106 Acronyms and Abbreviations CPGW Central Plateau Groundwater CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 DOE U.S. Department of Energy DOE-ORP U.S. Department of Energy Office of River Protection DOE-HQ U.S. Department of Energy Headquarters EHM equivalent homogeneous media INL Idaho National Laboratory NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission PA performance assessment PNNL Pacific Northwest National Laboratory SST single-shell tank SRS Savannah River Site WVDP West Valley Demonstration Project DOE-NRC 11-06-18 WMA C 5lPage WIR Teleconference Summary
WIR waste incidental to reprocessing WMA waste management area WMA C Waste Management Area C WRPS Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC DOE-NRC 11-06-18 WMA C 6lPage WIR Teleconference Summary