Skip to main content

Review of the Analysis of Supplemental Treatment Approaches of Low-Activity Waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation Review #1 (2018) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

3 Committee's Review of the FFRDC's Draft Assessment of Waste Conditioning and Supplemental Treatment Approaches
Pages 17-22

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 17...
... . For either the current or next-generation melters, it could be possible to increase throughput using improved glass formulation as has occurred in the Savannah River Site's HLW melter during its operating life (e.g., Kruger et al., 2013)
Read the entire page →
From page 18...
... For details on the cementitious grouts that can be used, see Document 5. The FFRDC notes also that there are several advantages to using grout technology to treat and condition radioactive waste, including relatively inexpensive cementitious materials, low-cost processing at ambient temperatures, multiple demonstrated remote processing options, capability of incorporating slag cement to reduce the mobility of toxic heavy metals, suitability for a wide-range of aqueous compositions, alkaline chemistry to reduce the solubility of many radionuclides, flexible formulations to accommodate various waste feeds, and limited secondary waste volume (Document 5, p.
Read the entire page →
From page 19...
... . This option would use a 500,000 gallon waste holding tank upstream of the SLAW treatment system, but a ≈1,000,000 gallon additional delay tank plus two 250,000 gallon waste feed/mix tank capacity would be needed for the first approximately three years of SLAW treatment to accommodate the high initial feed rates calculated by the One System Integrated Flowsheet and then the throughput would decrease afterwards.
Read the entire page →
From page 20...
... ." Presentation 8 discusses that the team will assess "subsequent development or evaluation of the technology option (since its previous evaluation) ." Moreover, the FFRDC will "evaluate the current relevance of the option to:  Scope of the study,  Potential benefits to the supplemental treatment mission, and  Likelihood that benefits could be realized if pursued." 20
Read the entire page →
From page 21...
... COMMON ISSUES FOR THE SUPPLEMENTAL TREATMENT APPROACHES Committee's Observations The committee notes that DOE may find that the development of two treatment approaches, instead of just one, would be useful as a hedge against technological or programmatic risks. For example, if vitrification is chosen as the main approach, it might be useful to develop grouting or another approach on a smaller scale in order to mitigate and diversify risk, because then there would be a backup approach.
Read the entire page →
From page 22...
... This consideration would benefit from laying out clearly the reasons for such pre-treatment, for example, to remove certain radionuclides and other hazardous chemicals to meet waste acceptance criteria at certain disposal sites.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • waste treatment
  • slaw treatment
  • waste forms
  • supplemental treatment
  • treatment approaches

  • primary technologies
  • fluidized bed
  • bed steam
  • committee suggests
  • radioactive waste

  • waste form
  • glass forming
  • law vitrification
  • steam reforming
  • savannah river

  • generation melters
  • fly ash
  • waste acceptance
  • mineralized waste
  • gallon waste

  • tank waste
  • meet waste
  • primary treatment
  • primary supplemental
  • radioactive wastes

  • ffrdc clarify
  • processing facility
  • draft report
  • river site
  • disposal sites


    • 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.