Lessons Learned In Technology Development for Supplemental Treatment of Low-Activity Waste at Hanford
- Washington State Department of Ecology, Richland, WA (United States)
Hanford needs supplemental technology treatment of low-activity waste (LAW) in addition to the Waste Treatment Plant (WTP). The Washington State Department of Ecology requires that supplemental technology provide the same protection to human health and the environment as WTP LAW glass. In 2002, the U.S. Department of Energy (US DOE) evaluated supplemental treatment technologies for LAW treatment and looked more closely at three: bulk vitrification (BV), steam reforming, and tailored cementitious stabilization. US DOE with Ecology's support chose to design and test BV because it believed BV would offer rapid deployment, low cost, and waste stream versatility. This paper will describe the path taken in choosing and developing technologies for additional LAW treatment capacity and, more importantly, the lessons learned along the way. In conclusion: Contractors' off-the-shelf vitrification technology that worked elsewhere may not apply easily to Hanford's waste challenges. The BV development process could have been improved by first identifying and then focusing on primary areas of concern. Continuing integrated tests at the Horn Rapids facility offers a convenient option to test both the dryer and the SMF. But the plan for development of the SMF must be short term with well defined success criteria. US DOE has the responsibility to carefully evaluate each proposal and make critical decisions that will make optimum use of limited funds. The ERP provided valuable technical guidance on improving BV's design. This must be complemented by a similar study of cost effectiveness of a process. We must have a better understanding of life cycle costs before a path for supplemental treatment is chosen. US DOE has now gained five years of experience in developing BV. It is time for US DOE to make defensible economic evaluations before further funding towards developing supplemental treatment. It must reevaluate if the projected advantages of rapid deployment, low cost, and waste stream versatility are still valid. The decision-making methodology US DOE uses to approve designs as part of its Critical Decision Process appears rigorous and useful. Looking ahead, Ecology expects US DOE will use lessons learned from BV and other testing in a concerted manner as part of their decision-making process. The success of Hanford's cleanup depends on it. (authors)
- Research Organization:
- WM Symposia, 1628 E. Southern Avenue, Suite 9 - 332, Tempe, AZ 85282 (United States)
- OSTI ID:
- 21323118
- Report Number(s):
- INIS-US-10-WM-08379; TRN: US10V0575064309
- Resource Relation:
- Conference: WM'08: Waste Management Symposium 2008 - HLW, TRU, LLW/ILW, Mixed, Hazardous Wastes and Environmental Management - Phoenix Rising: Moving Forward in Waste Management, Phoenix, AZ (United States), 24-28 Feb 2008; Other Information: Country of input: France; 12 refs
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
Similar Records
Progress Report on the Laboratory Testing of the Bulk Vitrification Cast Refractory
INITIAL SELECTION OF SUPPLEMENTAL TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES FOR HANFORDS LOW ACTIVITY TANK WASTE
Related Subjects
DECISION MAKING
DRYERS
GLASS
HANFORD RESERVATION
LIFE-CYCLE COST
LOW-LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTES
PUBLIC HEALTH
RADIOACTIVE WASTE FACILITIES
RADIOACTIVE WASTE PROCESSING
SAFETY
TESTING
US DOE
VITRIFICATION
WASTE PROCESSING PLANTS