INEEL/EXT-97-00666 September 1997 Idaho National Engineering Laboratory Hot Spot Removal System: System Description LOCKHEED MART V I INEEL/EXT-97-00666 Hot Spot Removal System: System Description Published September 1997 Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory Lockheed Martin Idaho Technologies Company Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management Under DOE Idaho Operations Office Contract DE-AC07-941D13223 ABSTRACT Hazardous wastes contaminated with radionuclides, chemicals, and explosives exist across the Department of Energy complex and need to be remediated due to environmental concerns. Currently, an opportunity is being developed to dramatically reduce remediation costs and to assist in the acceleration of schedules associated with these wastes by deploying a Hot Spot Removal System. Removing the hot spot from the waste site will remove risk driver(s) and enable another, more cost effective process/option/remedial alternative (i.e., capping) to be applied to the remainder of the site. The Hot Spot Removal System consists of a suite of technologies that will be utilized to locate and remove source terms. Components of the system can also be used in a variety of other cleanup activities. This Hot Spot Removal System Description document presents technologies that were considered for possible inclusion in the Hot Spot Removal System, technologies made available to the Hot Spot Removal System, industrial interest in the Hot Spot Removal System's subsystems, the schedule required for the Hot Spot Removal System, the evaluation of the relevant technologies, and the recommendations for equipment and technologies as stated in the Plan section. iii iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background More than 3,000 inactive waste sites have been identified at U.S. Department of Energy(DOE) facilities, including ponds, basins, pits, piles, injection wells, spill areas, and landfills. Even though the waste sites have been identified, the extent and complexity of subsurface contamination is largely unknown. This is a result of several factors, such as incomplete records describing quantities and types of chemicals disposed of at individual waste sites. At some sites, a disparity exists between the chemicals reported to have been disposed of and those that were analytically determined to be in the underlying ground waters. The waste sites were created in the early days of DOE when environmental disposal was an acceptable practice. However, many of the individual chemical constituents in the wastes streams are now considered a health and/or environmental risk, and are either regulated under federal and state laws or are currently under evaluation for regulatory control. The Office of Environmental Management(EM) mission will bring DOE sites into compliance with all environmental regulations while minimizing risks to the environment, human health, and safety. The responsibility for managing the cleanup of DOE waste sites belongs to the DOE Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management(EM -40). Many of the waste sites have been classified in terms of the preferred remedial option, such as removal and treatment, in situ treatment, containment, institutional controls, or no action. Removal and treatment is further defined into two divisions: selective or full- retrieval sites. Selective retrieval is the removal by excavation of selected contaminants of concern from a waste stream. Full retrieval is the removal by excavation of the entire waste stream. The development of the Hot Spot Removal System (HSRS) under EM-50 (the Office of Science and Technology) for use by EM-40 is part of EM-40's waste site cleanup effort. The purpose of HSRS is to locate and remove hot spots at selective retrieval and small-scale (<l,000-yd3)full -retrieval locations. Approximately 25% of the sites across the DOE complex that have a preferred option for retrieval are planning to perform some type of selective retrieval. Selectively removing source term hot spots provides a number of cost saving benefits. Selective removal of hot spots reduces the risk associated with the area and allows less costly excavation methods to be used in remediating the remainder of the site. At some sites, selectively removing hot spots could preclude full retrieval as the remedial action. This would reduce the total volume of waste that is removed at a number of sites, subsequently reducing the overall cost of retrieval, assay, handling, treatment, storage, and disposal. Other sites could benefit from less stringent controls for retrieving the remainder of the site after the hot spot is selectively removed. This would reduce costs and accelerate remediation schedules. The potential for making an impact on EM-40's mortgage, by remediating landfills using selective retrieval rather than full retrieval, is considered significant. In order to understand the types of sites that HSRS must operate in, the Subsurface Contaminants Focus Area System's Engineering Project collected and summarized DOE landfill site information and then determined which of those sites would be applicable for hot spot removal. The data needed to accomplish this task were obtained from historical records, interviews with site managers, and from actual site visits. Fourteen sites were identified where selective retrieval was the preferred remedial action. Additional DOE sites have since been identified as good candidates for HSRS. Nine of these additional candidates include sites where the entire contaminated waste stream is less than 1,000 yd3. Other candidate sites include those that will require remote operations and/or stringent contamination control measures during retrieval activities. Selective retrieval might be used at these sites to realize substantial cost savings in a subsequent full-scale retrieval. In addition to the DOE sites, 31 potential sites were identified for hot spot removal using Internet key word searches, as well as a line-by-line search of the National Priority List established by the Environmental Protection Agency. As an example, HSRS could be used to selectively retrieve extremely hazardous wastes, such as unexploded ordnance or alpha radiological contamination. The remainder of the site could then be remediated using more conventional and less costly methods. An overall objective established by DOE is that HSRS must be capable of locating and removing hot spots from 90% of the identified DOE selective retrieval sites. The 14 sites were studied to develop the draft Hot Spot Removal System Requirements Document, which outlines the requirements that will be used in the design and selection of a Hot Spot Removal System. The next phase of the project involved conducting benchmarking studies to determine relevant technologies and equipment that are currently available or are emerging in industry as well as within DOE. The benchmarking effort involved (1) gathering information from vendors by placing advertisements in the Commerce Business Daily,(2) searching DOE databases, and (3) performing Internet searches. Due to the volatile environment in which HSRS would be used (unexploded ordnance, volatile organics, pyrophorics, and transuranic waste with high alpha concentrations), it is necessary to limit the exposure of personnel to the waste terms according to As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA)standards. Thus, the majority of the HSRS retrieval activities will be implemented using teleoperated (remotely controlled) equipment. Alternatives identified during benchmarking were evaluated based on the requirements defined in the draft Requirements Document and by means of a decision analysis methodology developed by the Air Force Institute of Technology based on the Environmental Protection Agency's Comprehensive Environmental Responsibility, Compensation, and Liability Act criteria. These criteria can be found in detail in Section 6 of this report. This decision analysis vi methodology was designed to evaluate completely different technologies for a given task; however, it was slightly modified to allow the evaluation of similar technologies to accomplish the same task. For example, the main categories found in the process, with modified subcategories, were used to evaluate the different excavators to determine which one would be best suited to HSRS. Through this process, some gaps were identified. An overall strategy was developed to meet these requirements, to obtain necessary equipment (purchase or partner), and to fill technology gaps. This strategy is discussed in detail in Section 7. This report provides a description of the technologies and equipment that were considered for use in HSRS, the evaluations that were performed on applicable equipment or technologies, the recommendations for equipment/technologies that should be included in HSRS, and the gaps in the corresponding technologies. As HSRS will be adaptable to many different sites and contaminants of concern, a suite of technologies were identified from existing and developing technologies, not all of which will be used at all sites. Specific equipment information is included in this report but is not necessarily recommended due to the fact that most of the equipment to be used in HSRS can be provided by a number of vendors or companies. As a result, Requests for Proposals must be used in order to determine the exact equipment to be used in the system. With the exception of a few subsystems, a competitive bid can be used to acquire the necessary