Waste Forms Technology and Performance Final Report (2011) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
8 Legal and Regulatory Factors for Waste Form Performance
8 Legal and Regulatory Factors for Waste Form Performance
Pages 197-218
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 197... ...
In the context of this report, the term waste form performance has a very specific meaning: It is the ability of a waste form to sequester and retain its radioactive and chemically hazardous constituents. As discussed in Chapters 6 and 7, the performance of a waste form depends crucially on the physical and chemical conditions in the near-field environment of the disposal facility into which it will be emplaced.
|
From page 198... ...
as well as for defense transuranic waste at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico. The DOE-Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management1 (OCRWM)
|
From page 199... ...
To provide additional clarity to this source-based and vague definition, DOE promulgated Order G 435.1 in 1999 that uses risk criteria to determine what defense wastes actually need to be disposed of in a geologic repository. Using Order G 435.1, DOE was able to reduce the number of Savannah River Site defense HLW canisters requiring geologic disposal to between 6,000 and 8,000.
|
From page 200... ...
repository.3 8.1.3 Energy Policy Act of 1992 The Energy Policy Act of 1992, Section 801, required EPA to develop a site-specific health and safety standard for a geologic repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Section 801 also required EPA to contract with the National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
|
From page 201... ...
DOE Order G 435.1 also provides guidance for the near-surface disposal of DOE-EM LLW at DOE sites. This guidance includes the following performance objectives, which are not stated as requirements: • For off-site members of the public, a limit of an annual effective dose equivalent from all releases and exposure pathways of 0.25 millisieverts per year (mSv/year)
|
From page 202... ...
Calculations of dose beyond 1,000 years should only be considered as qualitative for DOE sites, and only for comparison of disposal alternatives that are otherwise not distinguishable in their dose impacts. There are additional requirements in DOE Order G 435.1 regarding the conduct of performance assessments, but these are not explicitly stated as performance objectives.
|
From page 203... ...
Where appropriate, interim action alternatives are to be identified at specific sites to promote cooperation among parties prior to the implementation of final actions. DOE-EM has negotiated with the other parties to these agreements to establish specific characteristics for the waste forms that will be produced as a result of cleanup at its sites.
|
From page 204... ...
has maintained that any supplemental treatment technology [for LAW at Hanford] must be shown to Carolina have agreed that low-activity waste disposed of at the Savannah River Site will be in a grouted waste form (Saltstone)
|
From page 205... ...
that examines four alternative methods for disposing of this waste: (1) geologic disposal in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, and/or land disposal in (2)
|
From page 206... ...
Part 61.56 (Waste Characteristics) establishes requirements for the structural stability of waste forms.
|
From page 207... ...
All of these performance objectives apply to the disposal system as a whole and impose no performance requirements on waste forms. It should be noted that these three separate safety requirements (individual protection, cumulative release, and groundwater concentration limits)
|
From page 208... ...
As with 40 CFR 191, the Yucca Mountain-specific safety standard sets performance requirements on the total repository system but places no performance requirements on waste forms. 8.3.3 USNRC: 10 CFR Parts 60 and 63 for HLW Disposal The NWPA directed the USNRC to develop licensing procedures for geological repositories for SNF and HLW that are consistent with the environmental standards developed by EPA.
|
From page 209... ...
. Therefore, a conservative approach was taken to construe Part 60.113 as a benchmark for borosilicate glass waste forms; if it could be shown that the long-term fractional dissolution rate was equal to or less than 10–5 parts per year for the most soluble and long-lived radionuclides such as selenium-79, technetium-99, cesium-135, and iodine-129, then borosilicate glass should provide acceptable performance for any repository site or concept.
|
From page 210... ...
No other nation has safety regulations that impose such sub-system performance objectives; it is left to the institution implementing the repository to develop and qualify a set of multiple barriers that, in concert with specific waste forms and site characteristics, will comply with system-level safety requirements. In addition, the NAS specifically concluded that ‘‘because it is the performance of the total system in light of the risk-based standard that is crucial, imposing subsystem performance requirements might result in suboptimal design" (NRC, 1995)
|
From page 211... ...
require that hazardous wastes be treated to meet specific treatment standards prior to land disposal. The treatment standards are expressed in terms of specific contaminant levels, or specific treatment technologies that must be applied to reduce the toxicity or mobility of hazardous constituents.
|
From page 212... ...
to establish waste acceptance criteria imposed by the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management System (CRWMS) on SNF and defense HLW delivered into the CRWMS (DOE, 2008)
|
From page 213... ...
Product Consistency Test A (PCT-A) is specifically used to evaluate whether the chemical durability and elemental release characteristics of nuclear, hazardous, and mixed waste glass waste forms have been consis 11 About 2,300 tonnes of spent fuel in wet storage in the K-Basins at the Hanford Site have been retrieved, dried, and packaged in steel canisters.
|
From page 214... ...
There are no requirements in the WASRD on waste form performance with respect to meeting long-term, post-closure regulatory safety standards for radionuclide release rates. This purposeful absence of waste form performance requirements by the repository implementer reflects (1)
|
From page 215... ...
As noted in this chapter, some laws, regulations, orders, and Agreements establish requirements for the production and use of waste forms in the cleanup program. For example, RCRA waste intended for land disposal must be processed to meet specific treatment standards.
|
From page 216... ...
2008. Civilian Radioactive Waste Management System -- Waste Acceptance System Requirements Document (Rev.
|
From page 217... ...
2002. Characterization of Remote-Handled Transuranic Waste for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, National Academies Press, Washington, D.C.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.