Underground and Ventilation System - Waste Isolation Pilot Plant

Underground and Ventilation System - Waste Isolation Pilot Plant

WIPP CAPACITY National Academy of Sciences Todd Shrader Carlsbad Field Office June 26, 2018 www.energy.gov/EM 1 WIPP Statutory Capacity The WIPP Land Withdrawal Act (LWA), Public Law 102-579, authorizes WIPP for disposal of up to 175,565 cubic meters (6.2 million cubic feet) of transuranic (TRU) waste. Up to 7,079 cubic meters (250,000 cubic feet) of TRU waste can be remote handled DOE 1981 & 1998 ROD, and 1997 SEIS-II. Drums and boxes assumed to be full, based on inventory estimates from late 1970s & early 1980.

Although recognized as a possibility, overpack was not assumed. Volume was based on original 1980 assumptions of TRU waste in interim storage in Idaho, an enduring mission at Rocky Flats and continued plutonium missions at Hanford and Savannah River. There is no specific disposal configuration specified in the LWA other than the requirement to stay within the 16 square mile land withdrawal boundary. LWA Sec. 7(3) CAPACITY OF WIPP. The total capacity of WIPP by volume is 6.2 million cubic feet of transuranic waste. As of June, 2018 93,500 cubic meters of TRU waste emplaced in WIPP. www.energy.gov/EM 2 WIPP Statutory Capacity Less than one square mile at a single horizon has been used thus far. www.energy.gov/EM 3 Panel Regulatory Capacity

For operational efficiencies, WIPP handles all TRU waste as mixed TRU waste Each Hazardous Waste Disposal Unit (Panel 1-8) was permitted for 18,000-19,400 cubic meters of TRU mixed waste. Panel 9 not planned for disposal. Panel 10 may be used but must be permitted by the state for use. Per the WIPP Hazardous Waste Facility Permit, The maximum repository capacity of 6.2 million cubic feet of transuranic waste is specified in the WIPP Land Withdrawal Act (Pub. L. 102-579, as amended) It is estimated that after Panel 8 is filled, the emplaced WIPP repository volume will be 115,000 to 120,000 cubic meters. www.energy.gov/EM 4 WIPP Volume Capacity--Current and Projected Volumes TRU Waste Inventories TRU Waste Already Emplaced at WIPP "WIPP-Bound" Best Estimates ** SubTotal: Already Emplaced + WIPP-Bound UNSUBSCRIBED CAPACITY Current Permit

Calculates Volume of Outer Container Cubic meters (m3) 93,500 ~78K Permit Modification-Changes Volume of Record to Inner Container (m3) Notes ~-30% WDS data through mid-June ~-15% Data cutoff 12/31/16; Includes 6 metric tons (MT) of surplus Pu~5K m3; Source: DOE/TRU-17-3425 ~172K ~4K "Potential Inventory" Estimates** ~19K Total Emplaced, WIPP-Bound, and

Potential Waste** ~191K >40K Volume below WIPP LWA Limit of 175,565 m3 Data cutoff 12/31/16; Source: DOE/TRU-17-3425 ~150K 191K 40K = ~150K ** Estimates will vary as estimates are updated and waste is packaged. Definitions: WIPP-Bound this is waste already in storage or projected to be generated in the future and is expected to meet the WIPP waste acceptance criteria, currently totaling approximately 78,000 m 3; Potential Waste this is waste that may be intended for WIPP but requires resolution of a regulatory or other constraint before it may be considered, currently totaling approximately 19,000 m 3; and www.energy.gov/EM 5 WIPP Volume of Record

Volume of Record to track compliance with this limit has generally been determined by using the outer container volume for CH-TRU waste. Because many drums are overpacked in larger containers, using the outer container volume counts a significant amount of void space as waste. DOE/CBFO proposes to change the calculation method so the Volume of Record better reflects the volume of waste disposed. For tracking the TRU waste volume with WIPP LWA capacity limit the new methodology will count the volume of the inner container in cases where CH TRU waste is overpacked. The waste volume of direct loaded containers will continue to be the outer container. For compliance with the RCRA Hazardous Waste Facility Permit, the outer container is proposed. Under the new methodology, the calculated volume of waste already emplaced is reduced by about 30%, and future WIPP-bound waste by 15%. www.energy.gov/EM 6 VOR Permit Modification Request Process NMED determined the PMR will follow the Class 3 PMR procedures,

which consists of the following major steps; NMED will likely provide a Technical Incompleteness Determination (TID). WIPP responds to the TID. NMED prepares a draft Permit. Minimum 45-day public comment period on the draft Permit. May include Negotiation. May include an administrative Hearing. Findings of Facts and Conclusion of Law produced. Hearing Officer prepares a report NMED Secretary final decision on PMR. Submittal of a Planned Change Notice to EPA is performed in parallel. www.energy.gov/EM 7 Additional Disposal Panels at WIPP

Conceptual repository design for additional disposal panels being prepared. NEPA analysis of the potential environmental consequences from the proposed action associated with adding disposal panels to meet the LWA Capacity limit, increase in operational time frame, and a revised final WIPP facility closure date. Permit Modification Request to NMED for construction and use of additional disposal panels. Planned Change Request to EPA demonstrating WIPP continues to comply with long-term radioactive waste standards with the new repository design Excavate access drifts and additional disposal panels. www.energy.gov/EM 8

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • News from Canada - Carleton University

    News from Canada - Carleton University

    Energy transition and challenges for wind energy in Switzerland Maya Jegen, Université du Québec à Montréal Climate Change and Renewable Energy Policy in the EU and Canada Workshop, October 1-2, 2015
  • www.statslife.org.uk

    www.statslife.org.uk

    Hazard Perception Filter . Accounts for 10% of the Perception measure (i.e. only 1/40th of total GIIP score) Why 10%: small proportion, further research required to evaluate this figure . Three considered as influencing factors in perception:
  • Managers Network Meeting Developing a Learning Organisation 23rd

    Managers Network Meeting Developing a Learning Organisation 23rd

    What is a Learning Organisation? A learning organization facilitates the learning of its workforce and continuously transforms itself. A learning organisation model put forward 17 years ago was by someone called Peter Senge.
  • CHAPTER 1 GLOBALIS M GLOBALISM > LOCALISM =

    CHAPTER 1 GLOBALIS M GLOBALISM > LOCALISM =

    "More than a new capitalism, the world needs a new multilateralism." "Critics claim that the Washington consensus or deregulation and privatization, preached condescendingly by America and Britain to benighted governments around the world, has actually brought the world economy to...
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis Training: - OER University

    Cost-Benefit Analysis Training: - OER University

    Terminal Learning Objective. Task: Apply Army Cost Benefit Analysis to a Simple Scenario Condition: You are training to become an ACE with access to ICAM course handouts, readings, and spreadsheet tools and awareness of Operational Environment (OE)/Contemporary Operational Environment (COE)...
  • Introduction to Real Time Systems

    Introduction to Real Time Systems

    Restore saved CPU registers; Return from interrupt; When no Post() call is needed. No OSIntExit() call is needed. Should be the exception as the OS does not know about this at all… One Common Master ISR. The while loop above...
  • Transience Essay

    Transience Essay

    COUNTER-ARGUMENT THESIS: In the epic poem, The Odyssey by Homer, Odysseus is an unworthy hero because of his arrogant actions and motives. Say: "I clambered fore and aft my hulk until a comber/split her, keel from ribs, and the big...
  • Dermal and Musculoskeletal Infections

    Dermal and Musculoskeletal Infections

    dermal and muscular infections msc tid 1 28th april 2010 nyakundi bm