INL Calcine Disposition

1
INL Calcine Disposition

• Jim Beck
• Calcine Disposition
• Clean/Close INTEC

2
High-Level Waste Calcine

• Calcinated aqueous raffinate from the chemical
  dissolution and reprocessing of spent nuclear
  fuel (SNF)
• Classified as high-level waste by DOE Order 435.1
• Contains RCRA characteristic metals and listed
  constituents
• Currently stored in six concrete vaults (Bin Sets
  or CSSFs) containing between three to twelve
  stainless steels bins each
• Destined for disposal at the geologic
  repository,Yucca Mountain
• Dispose as is at Yucca Mountain in 15-foot by
  2-foot diameter SNF standards canisters

3
High-Level Waste Calcine (Continued)
RCRA hazardous, High Level Waste resulting from
dissolution of multiple reactor fuel types for
uranium recovery Abrasive, granular oxides
ranging from 0.2 to 0.6 mm, (15 fines)
4
Regulatory Background

• Calcine is RCRA regulated characteristically
  hazardous and listed
• Yucca Mountain will not accept RCRA hazardous
  waste
• Settlement Agreement requires acceleration of
  treatment alternative evaluations
• Record of Decision for calcine treatment by 2009
• Application for RCRA by 2012
• Calcine ready for shipment by about 2035
• Missed milestone suspension of DOE SNF
  shipments into Idaho
• Project Management Plan (PMP) accelerates
  schedule to complete shipping by 2035
• ICP Request for Proposal (RFP) further
  accelerates these dates

5
Regulatory Background (Continued)

• Site Treatment Plan
• Submit schedule of milestones for permitting,
  construction and operation by September 30, 2005
• High-Level Waste Facilities Disposition Final
  EIS
• DOE Proposed Action includes
• Making calcine suitable for disposal
• Safe storage of calcine
• Excluded alternatives
• Storage in CSSF for an indefinite period
• Shipment to Hanford for treatment
• State of Idaho preferred alternative - direct
  vitrification

6
Direct Disposal of Calcine
High Level Waste Calcine Shipped from Idaho

• ACCELERATED DISPOSITION
• PMP End State 2035
• ROD for calcine treatment path forward by
  12/31/09 (SA)
• RCRA Part B permit application by 12/1/12 (SA)
• RFP End State 2022
• RCRA Part B permit application by 9/30/09
• GFSI ROD for calcine treatment by 9/30/09
• GFSI - Removal of calcine from RCRA regulation

Direct Disposal - RFP
Direct Disposal - PMP
Vitrification
2000
2070
2035
Clean-up Activity Completion Date

• BENEFITS
• No interim storage/vitrification facility
• Waste volume reduction gt 50 compared to direct
  vitrification
• Cost Savings gt6B (treatment), 3-4B (disposal)
  compared to direct vitrification
• Safer than vitrification

7
Project Timeline - RFP
(calendar year)
2006
2007
2008
2011
2009
2010
2012
2005
2022
2015
EPA Pre-Petition Meeting (Fed Baseline)
Schedule EPA Pre-Petition Meeting (Fed Baseline)
Calcine Treatment ROD
DOE Decision EPA approval expected?
Calcine removed from RCRA regulation
RCRA Petition Direct Disposal
Submit RCRA Part B permit application
6 month lag to obtain EPA commitment
Send RCRA Petition to DOE/HQ (Fed Baseline)
Permit Application
RCRA
RCRA permit approved
CD-0
MNS
Incorporate prelim design in RCRA permit
application
Project Initiation
Conceptual Design
Incorporate final design into permit application
Preliminary Design
CD-1
Construction
Final Design
CD-3
EPA Pre-Petition Meeting
6 month lag to obtain EPA commitment
CD-2,3A
Ops
CD-4
RCRA Initiative Alt Treatment
Develop Test Alt Treatment
Calcine removed from RCRA regulation
Critical Decision
Critical Path RFP Milestone GFSI Milestone
Settlement Agreement Milestone
Regulatory Activity
Optimistic
Realistic
8
Treatment Options
9
Treatment Options (Continued)

• Vitrification
• Baseline previous to PMP
• RCRA LDR required best demonstrated available
  technology
• Direct vitrification
• 12,000 high-level waste canisters
• 7B EM life cycle cost
• Chemical separations with vitrification
• 650 high-level waste canisters
• 10B EM life cycle cost
• RCRA delisting required minimum 3 years (based
  on Hanford delisting of 200 area waste)

10
Treatment Options (Continued)

• Alternate Treatment
• PMP back-up
• Performance requirements unknown
• Technology development multiple possibilities
  costs not well defined
• Unknown waste volume
• Still requires removal from RCRA regulation

11
Treatment Options (Continued)

• Direct Disposal
• PMP direction
• Safe to ship and dispose without further
  treatment
• 1.3 B EM life cycle cost
• 4,400 high-level waste canisters
• EPA Rulemaking based on demonstration of
  no-migration of RCRA hazardous contaminants

12
Key Issues

• Highest project risk - dual RCRA-NRC regulation
• Highest technical risk - retrieval and
  characterization
• Integrating with YMP licensing and shipping
  schedules
• Stakeholder concerns

13
Retrieval

• Uncertainties
• Physical characteristics
• Angle of repose, flow properties, and propensity
  for rat-holing
• Caking, fusing, abnormal clumping
• Surface friction (adherence to bin walls and
  supports)
• Bin set access
• Number of access points
• Additional access points
• Access size
• 2007 demonstration
• AEA Technologies testing- Mooresville, North
  Carolina

14
AEAT Testing
15
Characterization

• Inventory development/maintenance
• D-cell calcine sampling and analysis
• CSSF II (1978 sampling event)
• Analysis completed during February 2004
• Historical Processing Model (HPM)
• Projects central repository for calcine
  inventory data
• Feed data from calcination campaigns
• Other modeling input
• ORIGEN
• HSC (thermodynamic)

16
Characterization (Continued)

• Waste Acceptance
• Total System Performance Assessment (TSPA)
  modeling
• FEIS Version
• Initial TSPA screening and sensitivity analysis
  of chemical and radionuclide constituents
  completed in 2003
• Deterministic modeling of radionuclide
  constituents completed concentrations well below
  levels of concern at point of compliance
• Stochastic modeling of RCRA metals completed
  chemical concentrations well below levels of
  concern at point of compliance

17
Canister Development

• Cost Comparison Completed
• Comparison of three canister designs
• 2 x 10, 2 x 15, and 5.5 x 17.5 Super
  Canister

• Cost savings associated with Super Canister
• Canisters/casks required
• Surface facility handling at Yucca Mountain
• Less (1/2 mile) tunnel space required

18
Summary

• Highest project risk - dual RCRA-NRC regulation
• Regulatory strategy/approach determined via
  DOE-HQ and U.S. EPA interface and input
• Alternative treatment options to vitrification
  should direct disposal be determined no go
• Highest technical risk - retrieval and
  characterization
• Retrieval studies and testing in progress
• Calcine inventory characterization evolving
• Further modeling (HSC, etc.)
• 2007 demonstration
• Development of Alternate Treatment Process
• Risk compounded with accelerated schedule
• Regulatory strategy and technical approach may
  change with new ICP contractor