-
CASE STUDY AND PRESENTATION OF THE DOE TREATABILITY GROUP
CONCEPT FOR LOW-LEVEL AND MIXED WASTE STREAMS
Timothy D. Kirkpatrick INEL
Lockheed Idaho Technologies Trevion I, Room 434
12850 Middl ebrook Road Germantown,. MD 20874
(301) 903-1299
Beth A. Heath INEL
Lockheed Idaho Techno1 ogi es 1955 Fremont Ave.
P.O. Box 1625, MS 2420 Idaho Falls, ID 83415
(208) 526-8052
Keith D. Davis Roy F. Weston, Inc.
1920 E. 17th St., Suite 103 Idaho Falls, ID 83404
(208) 528-9326
ABSTRACT
The Federal Facility Compliance Act of 1992 requires the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) to prepare an inventory report o f its
mixed waste and treatment capacities and technologies.
technological requirements is the logical means of matching waste
streams to treatment technologies, and streamlines the effort of
identifying technology development needs. To provide consistency,
DOE has developed a standard method01 ogy for categorizing waste
into treatabil i ty groups based on three characteristic
parameters: radiological, bulk physical/chemical form, and regul
ated contami nant . Based on category and component definitions in
the methodology, descriptive codes or strings of codes are assigned
under each parameter , resulting in a waste characterization
amenable to a computerized format for query and sort functions.
this methodology can be applied to all waste types generated within
the DOE complex: radioactive, hazardous, mixed, and
sanitary/municipal. Implementation of this methodology will assist
the individual sites and DOE Headquarters i n analyzing waste
management technol ogy and faci 1 i ty needs.
Grouping waste streams according to
By using only the applicable parameters,
BACKGROUND
The need for a consistently applied, technically based approach
for categorizing waste information has been demonstrated by past
national strategic planning efforts involving mixed waste. rul
emaki ng , several U . S . Department of Energy (DOE) compl ex-wi
de reports and studies have been required to address mixed waste
characteristics and inventories , and associated treatment technol
ogy and capacity needs.
Since the 1987 byproduct
Some key examples of these are:
1 1
-
I
DISCLAIMER
Portions of this document may be illegible in electronic image
products. images are produced from the best available original
document.
-
0
National Reoort on Prohibited Wastes and Treatment Ootions,
submitted t o the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in January
1990 as required by the Rocky Fl a t s P1 ant Federal Facil i t y
Compl i ance Agreement
DOE complex-wide Land Disposal Restrictions Case-bv-Case
Extension ADolication f o r Thirds Radioactive Mixed Wastes,
submitted t o the EPA in November 1991
Interim Mixed Waste Inventory Reoort, submitted t o the EPA and
the States in April 1993 as required by the Federal Faci l i ty
Compliance Act (FFCA)
Department of Enerqy Proqrammatic Soen t Nuclear Fuel Manaaement
and Idaho National Enqineerinq Laboratorv Environmental Restoration
and Waste Manaqement Proqrams Draft Environmental Imoact Statement,
DOE/EIS- 0203-D, June 1994.
Throughout these e f fo r t s , character is t ic and inventory
data on mixed waste streams were collected from the s i t e s ,
resul t ing in the development of a national data set . Problems
tha t became apparent during these data collection e f fo r t s
were: (a) mixed waste streams are n o t always defined on a
technical basis t h a t support assessment o f treatment techno1
ogy and capacity needs, and (b) information and data available on
mixed waste streams have improved through time, resul t ing in
apparent inconsistencies between reports. Contributing fac tors t o
these problems have been the lack of both a technically based
approach t o defining waste streams and a standardized method t o
define t r e a t a b i l i t y groups.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
A technical ly based methodology has been developed fo r
categorizing DOE waste information in a consistent and technically
val id manner t o be used for the development o f waste management
needs and options, including those for treatment. The methodology
provides a formal approach for categorizing waste based on waste
charac te r i s t ics . methodol ogy i ncl udes :
The guidance document describing the
2
-
A methodology with standard definitions for aligning
site-specific waste into treatability groups that share similar
treatment needs
A standard structure that will allow comparing waste
treatability groups among sites, and combining all site-specific
data into one data set for the national summary
A technically based approach to identify treatment technology,
capacity, and development needs, along with storage and disposal
requirements for DOE mi xed waste.
The treatability group assignments will facilitate
identification of potenti a1 matches between waste streams and avai
1 ab1 e or planned treatment capacity. Assigning these category
designations to each of the site waste streams represents the
"common denominator," or core set of data, for lending consistency
to DOE-wide planning and analysis efforts. Individual sites are
encouraged to collect and maintain whatever additional information
they feel necessary t o properly manage their waste. supplement,
not preclude, other data needs. Also, the assignment of a
treatability group to a waste stream is not intended to provide the
detailed level of knowledge necessary to certify waste streams to
treatment or disposal facility waste acceptance criteria, or to
provide detailed characterization information required to proceed
beyond conceptual design of specific facilities. In addition to the
treatability grouping, characterization information will ultimately
be required to meet these specific needs.
This effort is intended to
METHODOLOGY
The DOE guidance document provides a method for assigning waste
to treatability groups based on characteristic parameters that
influence waste management, technology, and facility needs. The
parameters that, combined, are used to define the treatability
groups are: (a) radiological; (b) physical/chemical matrix; and (c)
regulated contaminant. The guidance document attempts to present a
hierarchy of detail and definition for each of the three parameters
that ranges, top-to-bottom, from the general to the specific. In
every case, discussion and definitions are accompanied by
3
-
organization-type charts tha t depict each t i e r or level of
de ta i l . Association l i n e s are used as necessary t o
indicate whenever a category a t one level i s broken o u t or
subdivided into multiple subcategories. This hierarchy o f de ta i
l should aid the user in applying the methodology t o each waste
stream and select ing the appropriate designation fo r each
parameter. The hierarchy a l s o supports the computerized
aggregation (or roll u p ) o f waste streams into higher levels
(more general) t h a t may be of value i n support o f DOE complex-
wide planning or reporting requirements. i s discussed in more
detai l i n the following sections.
Each t r e a t a b i l i t y grouping parameter
Radioloqical Parameter
The radiological character is t ic of a waste stream influences
management requirements, and must be considered in the design of
treatment and other handling f a c i l i t i e s t o control
radioactive releases and t o prevent worker exposures. categorized
the waste stream as t o i t s secondary waste type. Considering
"radioactive waste" t o be the primary waste type, the secondary
waste types addressed by the methodology are mi 11 t a i 1 i ngs, 1
ow-1 eve1 waste, transuranic (TRU) waste, and high-level waste.
Order 5820.2A, "Waste Management. 'I Except for high-level waste,
the parameter is then fur ther defined by one or more descriptive
components representing various radiological character is t ics
that may af fec t the manner in which the waste i s t reated or
otherwise managed. Individual code elements are associated with
each secondary radioactive waste type and, a s applicable, each
descriptive component; when p u t together, they create the
radiological parameter category code.
The f i r s t step in determining the radiological parameter i s
t o
These waste types are defined per DOE
Mill t a i l i n g s are designated with a code element "MT"
followed by a descriptive component o f "M10" or "M20" ( i . e . ,
MT/MlO or MT/M20) indicating whether the waste i s managed as
low-level waste or as mill t a i l i ngs , respectively. DOE orders
allow mill t a i l ings meeting certain small quantity requirements
t o be managed as low-level waste, ra ther than meeting a l l appl
i cab1 e mi 11 t a i 1 i ngs requirements .
4
-
A low-level waste would be designated with an "LL" followed by
four additional code elements to address each o f the following
descriptive components:
Dose rate component. present by identifying whether the waste
package is considered contact- or remote-handled (CH or RH)
Provides an indication o f beta-gamma activity
TRU alpha component. producing TRU radionuclides are present
and, if present, in what general concentration range
Provides an indication of whether or not alpha-
Non-TRU alpha component. alpha-producing radionuclides other
than TRU radionuclides are present and, if present, in what
concentration range
Provides an indication of whether or not
Problem radionuclide component. whether a problem radionuclide
is present in the waste. currently the only radionuclide singled
out in the guidance document for this designation.
Provides a ''yes" o r "no" indication of Tritium is
Considering the detailed descriptions in the guidance document,
the radi ol ogical parameter category code for a 1 ow-1 eve1 waste
would 1 ook somethi ng 1 i ke "LL/CH/TZO/N20/PZO. "
A TRU waste stream would be designated with a "TR" followed by a
dose rate component designation of "CH" or ''RH" to indicate
contact- or remote- handled. This is the only descriptive component
associated with TRU waste. High-level waste would be identified
with a radiological parameter code of "HL" only. There are no
descriptive components for this type of waste.
Matrix Parameter
The physical/chemical matrix parameter influences not only the
treatment technology selection, but the waste handling mechanisms
and the need for pretreatment conditioning. This portion of the
treatability grouping is
5
-
designated by a single alpha-numeric code associated with a
specific description tha t best f i t s the waste stream. several
sequential decisions as t o the matrix character is t ics of the
waste stream. table . Each decision takes the characterization from
a summary level category t o a more detai led, or waste form
specific category. The complete organization chart for the matrix
parameter shows approximately 120 waste form spec i f ic categori
es and about 35 summary 1 eve1 categories. assignment begins with
determining whether the waste i s a l iquid, sol id , spec i f ic
waste forms, or form acceptable fo r disposal.
The user i s asked t o make
That i s , what the waste would l o o k l i k e i f i t were
dumped o u t on to a
Matrix category
Waste qualifying as a liquid will have a matrix code that begins
with the l e t t e r "L" followed by a number i n the 1000 or 2000
ser ies , depending on whether i t belongs t o the "Aqueous
Liquids/Slurries" category or the "Organic Liquids" category,
respectively. The lowest level designations, those actually
assigned t o waste streams, include such codes as L l l l O (Acid
Waste Water), L1240 (Cyanide Aqueous Slurr ies) , and L2210
(Halogenated Pure Organic Liquids).
Waste f i t t i n g the definit ion of a s o l i d will have a
matrix code beginning with the l e t t e r "S." groupings o f S3000
(Homogeneous Solids), S4000 (Soil/Gravel), and S5000 (Debris
Waste). u n t i l detai led codes actually assigned t o waste
streams are reached. Inorganic and organic sludges and particulates
are included in the S3000 group; the lowest level designations
include such matrix types as S3111 (Ash), S3121 (Pond Sludges), and
S3221 (Biological Sludges). Several categories of s o i l , rock,
and gravel are included in the S4000 group, with S4100 (Soi l ) ,
and S4300 (Rock/Gravel) as examples. The S5000 group i s based on
EPA's definit ion of debris and includes a broad range of sol id
waste t h a t f i t s into one of the second t i e r categories of
S5100 (Inorganic Debris), S5300 (Organic Debris), o r S5400
(Heterogeneous Debris). The lowest level designations within t h i
s group include such matrix types as S5111 (Metal Debris without
Lead or Cadmium), S5122 (Wood Debris), and S5410 (Composite F i l t
e r s ) .
The f i r s t t i e r of detai l s p l i t s the waste into
Each o f these groupings i s fur ther broken down and so on,
6
-
Matrix descriptions f i t t i n g those defined under "Specific
Waste Forms" will have matrix codes beginning with the l e t t e r
" X , " and will f i t under the X6000 (Lab Packs) or X7000
(Special Waste) groups. The X6000 group i s s e l f - explanatory,
b u t i s s t i l l divided into several categories. The X7000
group i s divided into seven different categories tha t include
elemental hazardous materials (mercury, lead, cadmium, e t c . ) ,
ba t te r ies , reactive metals, explosives and propel 1 ants, and
compressed gases and aerosols.
The l a s t category in the upper t i e r o f matrix types i s
"Final Waste Forms." and f i t s in to e i the r the ZlOOO
(Immobilized Forms) or 22000 (Decontaminated Solids) group. a l l
known or expected disposal c r i t e r i a , including those
established for the regulated contaminants under EPA's land
disposal res t r ic t ions (LDRs). The lowest level designations
within the "Z" ser ies include such matrix types as ZlllO (Cement
Forms), 21120 (Vitrif ied Forms), 21200 (Macro-Encapsul ated
Forms), and 22100 (Decontaminated Metal).
Waste f i t t i n g this definit ion has a matrix code t h a t
begins w i t h "Z"
The "Z " matrix ser ies are reserved for waste streams t h a t
meet
As a user follows the methodology t o assign a matrix code t o a
waste, the "Unknown/Other" o p t i o n i s provided a t each
decision level or t i e r . t h i s manner, each waste stream can
be assigned a matrix code t h a t i s as specif ic as the available
characterization information will allow. A t the very t o p leve l
, i f the waste cannot be placed in the S , L, X , or Z ser ies ( i
. e . , essent ia l ly n o t h i n g i s known o f the waste
matrix), i t will be assigned a code o f U9999 (Unknown/Other
Matrix). Correspondingly, i f the waste i s known t o be a l i q u
i d , b u t i t i s unknown whether i t i s aqueous or organic, i t
will be given a matrix code o f L9000 (Unknown/Other Liquid). This
logic car r ies t h r o u g h t o each lower t i e r o f increased
detai l for each matrix type. As additional characterization detail
i s obtained on a waste stream, i t s matrix code should be revised
t o a lower t ie red , more detailed code description.
In
Reaul ated Contaminant Parameter
The regulated contaminant parameter i s intended t o designate
those hazardous consti tuents or character is t ics of the waste
tha t cause i t t o be
-
regulated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) (as hazardous waste), and/or the Toxic Substance Control Act
(TSCA) (as containing PCBs), or under more stringent State
regulations. In most cases, t h i s parameter d i c t a t e s the
general treatment requirements from both a regulatory (what must be
achieved) and technical (how i t must be achieved) perspective. The
regulated contaminant parameter a1 so influences the management of
treatment residues and eff luents . The methodology for determining
the appropriate regulated contaminant category code for a waste i s
very similar t o the methodology described for the radiological
parameter. t o make an i n i t i a l decision between s ix
different t o p level categories and then, depending on t h i s i n
i t i a l selection, the contaminant parameter code will consist of
s ingle o r multiple descriptive elements. The t o p level
categories and t h e i r codes are: (a) RCRA State Regulated, ST; (
b ) TSCA Regulated, TS; (c) RCRA/TSCA EPA Regulated, RT; (d) RCRA
EPA Regulated, R C ; (e) RCRA Regulated Meets LDR Standards, LD;
and (f) Unknown I f Regulated, UN.
The user i s asked
Of the t o p level categories, only the RCRA/TSCA EPA Regulated
(RT) and
The three descriptive components t o be addressed in the RCRA
EPA Regulated ( R C ) categories are associated with additional
descriptive components. the contaminant parameter code for e i ther
an RT or an RC waste are as follows:
Organics Component. contains RCRA organic components above LDR
standards
Provides an indication o f whether or n o t the waste
Metals Component. contains RCRA metals above LDR standards
Provides an indication of whether o r n o t the waste
Ignitable, Corrosive, Reactive (ICR) Component. Provides an
indication o f whether or n o t the waste qual i f ies as one o r
more of the RCRA ICR charac te r i s t ics , o r i f i t contains
specif ic l i s t e d constituents defined ( for purposes of t h i
s methodology) as corrosive o r reactive.
Each o f these component categories are broken into more
detailed, coded subcategories t ha t are actually assigned t o the
waste stream. subcategories are described in terms o f the EPA
codes tha t are associated with the waste. The "RT" o r "RC"
designation, along with code elements for each of
The detailed
8
-
t
the components, create a regul ated contaminant parameter code t
h a t 1 ooks something 1 i ke "RT/0ll/M12/C9O1' or
"RC/Oll/M12/C90." From a regulated contaminant perspective, the
difference between the two example codes i s t ha t PCBs, a t
regulated concentrations, are designated as being present in the f
i r s t , b u t n o t in the second.
A s indicated, waste fa l l ing into any of the t o p level
categories other than "RT" and "RC," i s given a single two-letter
code with no additional descriptive elements. i s used t o
designate waste t h a t contains no federal ly regulated
contaminants, b u t because of more stringent State standards, i s
considered hazardous within the State. No further descriptive de ta
i l i s being sought for t h i s category of waste since there are
re la t ively few DOE waste streams tha t f i t t h i s c r i t e r
i a and, because they are regulated only within the State , they do
n o t play key roles in national planning ef for t s . indicates
the waste contains PCBs regulated under TSCA, b u t has no RCRA
hazardous constituents. An "LD" tag indicates that the waste
requires no fur ther action to t r ea t RCRA regulated contaminants
( b u t could require additional treatment t o address radiological
o r matrix considerations). designation would be used fo r waste
that meets a l l LDR standards, b u t s t i l l c a r r i e s EPA
codes for l i s t e d waste under RCRA. t o describe a waste t h a
t i s suspected of containing regulated contaminants b u t fo r
which characterization has n o t been completed.
''ST"
"TS"
This
The ''UN" designation i s used
SUMMARY
The methodology described in th i s paper i s being implemented
i n the form of a formal DOE guidance document. of t r ea t ab i l
i t y groups through classifying or characterizing waste by three
separate parameters. the t r e a t a b i l i t y g roup i s broken
o u t into multiple categories and subcategories t ha t are defined
in the guidance document. associated w i t h a specif ic definit
ion and i s assigned a l e t t e r or alpha- numeric code and short
t i t l e . When the codes ( o r s t r ing o f codes) for a specif
ic waste a re grouped together by parameter in the format
"radiologicaJ - physical/chemical matrix - regulated contaminant,"
the result ing nomenclature represents a t r ea t ab i l i t y
group.
The method01 ogy specifies the devel opment
Each of the three character is t ic parameters tha t make up
Each breakout i s
Wastes a t any DOE s i t e , or across the
9
-
complex, with the same code string belong to the same
treatability grouping.
The focus of this methodology is to assign each waste package
(or group of packages with the same waste) to the lowest level
subcategory for each applicable parameter based on the data
available on that waste. The sites are asked to use this action to
define their waste streams for purposes of the national data base
(i.e., wastes with the same treatability grouping become a ''waste
stream"). selecting "unknown/other" at almost every level o f
detail, a waste package can be categorized to the greatest detail
possible without misrepresenting the contents, and without diluting
or tarnishing accurately categorized data with assumed information.
waste's treatability group assignment may change. In support o
national summaries, lower level subcategories may be rolled up to
higher level categories for various general cross-cut evaluations.
be lost during the roll up, but will be available for more spec fic
waste management analyses.
Since each characteristic parameter contains an option of
As more detailed characterization data are obtained, the
Detailed data will not
Implementation of this methodology will assist the individual
DOE sites in analyzing waste management technology and facility
needs; consistent implementation at all of the sites will
facilitate development of technically valid, comparable national
waste data sets needed to support the same analysis on a
complex-wide basis.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This work was performed for the U.S. Department of Energy under
Contract DE-AC07-94ID13223. Program Integration (EM-33) under the
direction o f Mr. Matt Zenkowich, Waste Information Program Manager
(EM-332).
The work was performed in support o f DOE'S EM Office o f
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an
agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States
Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees,
makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal
liability or responsi- bility for the accuracy, completeness, or
usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process
disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately
owned rights. Refer- ence herein to any specific commercial
product, process, or service by trade name, trademark,
manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply
its endorsement, r a m -
' mendation, 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.