No abstract

This document addresses the conceptual design parameters associated with a proposed onsite remote-handled low-level waste disposal facility. A new onsite facility has been identified as an alternative for providing continued remote-handled low-level waste disposal capability in support of ongoing Department of Energy missions at the Idaho site. However, a decision has not been made by the Department of Energy to develop a new onsite disposal facility. The decision, following all required analyses and evaluation of the impacts of all viable alternatives, will be made in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. Use of words indicating requirements or specifying intention, such as "shall" or "will," are used for the convenience of discussion or to indicate requirements or activities that are conditioned on a decision to develop a new onsite disposal facility. Such usage should not be construed to mean that a final selection of an alternative has been made.

NOTE:This document addresses the conceptual design parameters associated with a proposed onsite remote-handled low-level waste disposal facility. A new onsite facility has been identified as an alternative for providing continued remote-handled low-level waste disposal capability in support of ongoing Department of Energy missions at the Idaho site. However, a decision has not been made by the Department of Energy to develop a new onsite disposal facility. The decision, following all required analyses and evaluation of the impacts of all viable alternatives, will be made in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. Use of words indicating requirements or specifying intention, such as "shall" or "will," are used for the convenience of discussion or to indicate requirements or activities that are conditioned on a decision to develop a new onsite disposal facility. Such usage should not be construed to mean that a final selection of an alternative has been made. iii ABSTRACTThis conceptual design report addresses development of replacement remote-handled low-level waste disposal capability for the Idaho National Laboratory. Current disposal capability at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex is planned until the facility is full or until it must be closed in preparation for final remediation (approximately at the end of Fiscal Year 2017). This conceptual design report includes key project assumptions; design options considered in development of the proposed onsite disposal facility (the highest ranked alternative for providing continued uninterrupted remote-handled low-level waste disposal capability); process and facility descriptions; safety and environmental requirements that would apply to the proposed facility; and the proposed cost and schedule for funding, design, construction, and operation of the proposed onsite disposal facility.iv v EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThis conceptual design report provides documentation of plans to design, construct, and operate a proposed facility for disposal of remote-handled low-level waste (LLW) at the Idaho National Laboratory. The conceptual design report was prepared in accordance with Department of Energy Order 413.3B, "Program and Project Management for Acquisition of Capital Assets." This report, coupled with other Critical Decision (CD)-1 documentation, provides information needed by the Department of Energy to make a determination to proceed with the project execution phase and establish a preliminary baseline for the proposed project. The following sections are included in the conceptual design report:Provides an introduction and overview of the project. It includes a description of the mission need for the Remote-Handled LLW Disposal Project; alternatives considered in developing the mission need; and identification of the highest ranked alternative to establish uninterrupted remote-handled LLW disposal capability for the Idaho National Laboratory.Section 2 Provides background information on the project. It includes a description of project assumption...

This report was prepared as a n account of work spomored by a n agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, make any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or mpomibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disdosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation,'or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.

Total life cycle costs (TLCCs), including disposal costs, of thermal, nonthermal and enhanced nonthermal systems were evaluated to guide future research and development programs for the treatment of mixed low-level waste (MLLW) consisting of RCRA hazardous and low-level radioactive wastes. In these studies, nonthermal systems are defined as those systems that process waste at temperatures less than 350°C. Preconceptual designs and costs were developed for thirty systems with a capacity (2927 I b s h ) to treat the DOE MLLW stored inventory (approximately 236 million pounds) in 20 years in a single, centralized facility. The same waste throughput and profile were used for all systems to allow a comparison of the results of the system studies. A limited comparison of the studies' results is presented in this paper. Sensitivity of treatment costs with respect to treatment capacity, number of treatment facilities, and system availability were also determined.The major cost element is operations and maintenance (O&M), which is 50 to 60% of the TLCC for both thermal and nonthermal systems. Energy costs constitute a small fiaction (4%) of the TLCCs. Equipment cost is only 3 to 5% of the treatment cost (i.e., TLCCs vithout disposal) indicating that process selection and R&D hnding should promote improved performance, reliability, and technical risk to minimize operations and maintenance labor rather than be based on the capital cost of the technology.Evaluation of subsystem costs demonstrate that receiving and preparation is the highest cost subsystem at about 25 to 30% of the TLCC for both thermal and nonthermal systems.These studies found no cost incentives to use nonthennal or hybrid (combined nonthermal treatment with stabilization by vitrification) systems in place of thermal systems. However, there may be other incentives including fewer air emissions and less local objection to a treatment facility. Building multiple treatment facilities to treat the same total mass of waste as a single facility would increase the total treatment cost significantly, and improved system availability decreases unit treatment costs by 17% to 30%. INTRODUCTIONFrom 1993 to 1996, the Department of Energy, Environmental Management, Office of Science and Technology (OST), has sponsored a series of systems analyses to guide its fkture research and development (R&D) programs for the treatment of mixed low-level waste (MLLW) consisting of RCRA hazardous and low-level radioactive waste. The technologies were evaluated as part of a total treatment system capable of processing MLLW to meet the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Land Disposal Restrictions (LDRs). The first study, Integrated Thermal Treatment Systems (ITTS) -Phase 1, evaluated relatively mature thermal treatment technologies (Reference 1). This study was extended to Phase 2 in which more innovative thermal treatment technologies were evaluated (Reference 2). As a result of a technical review (Reference 3) of the ITTS studies, a similar study of nonthermal systems, known a...