PROGRAM AREA OVERVIEW --
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

http://www.em.doe.gov

With the end of the Cold War, the Department of Energy (DOE) is focusing on understanding and eliminating the enormous environmental problems created by the Department's historical mission of nuclear weapons production.  The DOE's Office of Environmental Management (EM) seeks to eliminate these threats to human health and the environment, as well as to prevent pollution from on-going activities.  The goals for waste management and environmental remediation include meeting regulatory compliance agreements, reducing the cost and risk associated with waste treatment and disposal, and expediently deploying technologies to accomplish these activities.  While radioactive contaminants are the prime concern, hazardous metals and organics, as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), are also important.

EM responsibilities include the remediation of radioactive and toxic wastes to their original background levels and the deactivation and decommissioning (D&D) of thousands of contaminated facilities.  With regard to site remediation, DOE is responsible to locate and remediate plumes to prevent contamination of groundwater as well as the potential off-site migration of the contaminated plume.  New or improved technologies are sought to address issues related to materials for reactive barriers and for in situ monitoring systems to facilitate the use of reactive barriers.  DOE is also responsible for reducing the volume of contaminated concrete and associated waste streams; therefore, new or improved technologies are needed to separate contaminates from concrete.  DOE also sponsors research to reduce risks to workers from potential exposures associated with decontamination and decommissioning activities, therefore, new or improved technologies are sought for remote cutting or sizing technologies and for multi-purpose remote platforms.

The following two topics solicit grant applications for reactive barriers and monitoring systems for groundwater remediation and decontamination and decommissioning of facilities.  Background information on the research needs associated with these topics can be found on the World Wide Web (http://www.em.doe.gov), by clicking on a State and under the Office of Science and Technology (http://apps.em.doe.gov/ost).

10. REACTIVE BARRIERS AND MONITORING SYSTEMS FOR SUBSURFACE REMEDIATION

Several DOE sites have plumes in the subsurface that are contaminated with metals, organics, and/or radionuclides.  The plumes identified at DOE sites include a trichloroethylene-technetium plume at Paducah, a carbon tetrachloride plume at Hanford, a mercury plume at Oak Ridge, a polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) plume at Oak Ridge, a uranium plume at Fernald, and a chromium plume at Lawrence Livermore.  Details on these and other plumes can be found on the web at www.em.doe.gov.  The current approach to remediating these plumes, once they are located, involves pump-and-treat operations, a process that manages, but may not eliminate, the risks associated with the plumes.  A further concern is that the life-cycle costs for pump-and-treat operations may be significant and may impede final site closure.  Another approach, which could be used along with pump-and-treat operations, involves the construction of barriers that react with the contaminant to prevent plume spread.  The reactions are intended to convert the plume into a non-mobile form or to convert the contaminants into non-toxic materials.  Both strategies may be required in order to eliminate both the risks associated with the contaminants as well as the potential for off-site contamination.  In addition, reactive barriers may offer better life-cycle costs, better protection for the environment, and the elimination of some of the risks associated with contaminated plumes.  However, before any approach can be attempted, the nature of the contamination must be characterized, often in difficult-to-access locations.  Additional information on these needs can be found at the following websites: http://apps.em.doe.gov/ost/progstcg.html and http://www.cmst.org.  Grant applications are sought only in the following subtopics:

a.   Materials for Reactive Barriers—Reactive barriers usually consist of deep beds of reactive material (e. g., zero-valent iron, ion-exchange materials) placed in the path of the plume.  A barrier could also be formed by incorporating reactive compounds in the soil in the path of the plume, including the soil surrounding the source of contamination.  Because long-term plume control is desired, the barrier must contain sufficient material for treating all the contaminant in the plume or else the barrier material must be economically replaceable.  Grant applications are sought to develop new barrier materials with either reactive or absorptive capabilities.   Contaminants of interest include halogenated hydrocarbons such as trichloroethylene, carbon tetrachloride, and PCBs; inorganic contaminants such as lead, chromium, mercury, and other RCRA metals; and radioactive isotopes such as those of uranium, technetium, strontium, and cesium.  Grant applications should clearly identify the contaminants to be addressed and the soil and subsurface conditions for the reactive barrier.  Of particular interest are barrier materials capable of removing or stabilizing more than one contaminant.  Barrier materials (1) must be capable of effective operation for long periods of time; (2) must be sufficiently selective so as not to be quickly consumed (if reactive materials) or loaded (if absorptive) by non-contaminant plume materials (target contaminants usually represent only a tiny fraction of plume material, and bulk ions, such as calcium and magnesium, which are almost always present in groundwater, must not load any reactive material or displace absorbed contaminant); and (3) must not degrade in use by, for example, biodegradation of organic barrier materials or poisoning of reactive materials. Finally, it is desirable that any spent barrier be easily disposed of in place or elsewhere.  This requires that the spent barrier material be sufficiently stable to last indefinitely, be able to convert the pollutant into a stable form (as by mineralization), or be able to be regenerated.

b.   In Situ Monitoring Systems to Facilitate the Use of Reactive Barriers—Monitoring systems are needed to determine the performance and integrity of reactive barriers.  The development and deployment of such systems involves numerous challenges.  Technical challenges include determining appropriate indicator parameters for the plume of interest, ensuring the longevity and continued integrity of the monitoring system itself, identifying appropriate ways of communicating monitoring data and other information to and from the system, and determining reliable maintenance strategies and schedules for the systems.  Additional challenges involve replacing conventional monitoring practices, based on laboratory analysis of manually obtained samples, with strategies based on such remote monitoring systems, and achieving the acceptance of new systems and strategies by regulators and stakeholders.  Grant applications are sought to develop in situ remote monitoring systems for reactive barriers.  Proposed systems should include:  (1) autonomous reporting via secure wireless communications with a central information processing facility; (2) low power requirements, preferably using on-site solar panels; (3) no need, or at most minimal need, to recharge reagents; (4) zero, or at most minimal, production of secondary wastes; and (5) a capacity for self-testing and autocalibration.  Contaminants of interest include any of the halogenated organic constituents, inorganics such as RCRA metals, and radionuclides.  Grant applications should clearly identify the contaminants to be addressed and associated detection limits for the monitoring systems.  Systems that are capable of detecting and quantifying multiple contaminants within a class, either without modification or with minor adjustments that can be made during system deployment, would be particularly useful.  Communications support for such monitoring systems are available and, therefore, are not sought in this solicitation.

c.      Characterization Technologies for Difficult Subsurface SettingsSoil and groundwater at many DOE sites have been contaminated with organic solvents, heavy metals, and radionuclides as a result of past operational and disposal practices.  Often, this contamination occurs in subsurface settings that are difficult to efficiently and cost-effectively access for the purpose of characterizing the location and quantity of contamination.  Specific examples of these subsurface settings include contamination that is:  beneath buildings and other manmade structures such as underground tanks and buried pipelines; at depths that reach 45 meters or more; in difficult-to penetrate sediments such as beds of gravel or layers of caliche; and in highly heterogeneous geologic settings such as sediment facies containing complex interbeds and other structures for which fluid flow predictions are difficult.  Grant applications are sought to reduce the cost or expand the capabilities characterizing and monitoring contaminants in difficult-to-access subsurface settings.  Proposed approaches should include:  (1) capability of providing real-time data, (2) detection limits down to required remediation levels, (3) capability of downloading data into computer systems for analysis and retrieval; and (4) ruggedness.

References:

1.       CLU-IN:  Hazardous Waste Clean-Up Information, Environmental Protection Agency, Technology Innovation Office, http://www.clu-in.org

2.       DOE Hanford Site, http://www.hanford.gov/

3.       Environmental Technology, U.S. DOE Oak Ridge Operations Environmental Management Program
http://www.oakridge.doe.gov/em/td/default.htm)
 

4.       Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
http://www.frtr.gov

5.       Office of Science and Technology (EM-50)
U.S. DOE Office of Environmental Management, http://apps.em.doe.gov/ost/   

6.       Savannah River Site http://www.srs.gov/general/srs-home.html

7.       U.S. DOE Environmental Management Science Program, http://emsp.em.doe.gov

8.       U.S. DOE Idaho Operations Office http://www.id.doe.gov/doeid/index.html

9.      U.S. DOE Office of Environmental Management
http://www.em.doe.gov/

 

11. DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING OF FACILITIES

The DOE is responsible for the deactivation and decommissioning of numerous buildings and facilities that have handled toxic and radioactive materials since the 1940s.  These facilities were used for chemical separations, component and weapons fabrication, fuel/target fabrication, reactor operations, enrichment operations, and mining, milling, and refining.  Deactivation refers to ceasing facility operations and placing the facility in a safe and stable condition to prevent unacceptable exposure of people or the environment to radioactive and other hazardous materials until the facility can be decommissioned.  Decommissioning is the process of decontaminating or removing contaminated material and equipment to achieve the end state for the facility.  Desired end states include complete removal and remediation of the facility, facility entombment, and release of the facility for either unrestricted or restricted use.

This topic focuses on three issues of concern to D&D operations:  removing contaminants from concrete, using robotic technologies to reduce exposure to workers, and controlling airborne radiological contamination.  Among contaminated materials, concrete is pervasive within these buildings and facilities, and particular attention must be paid to recycling the concrete and disposing of concrete debris.  Improved robotic technologies would allow for remote operation, lower the risks to health and safety, and reduce life-cycle costs.  Better control of airborne contaminants would further reduce health and safety risks to D&D workers and the environment during dismantlement or disassembly operations.  Grant applications are sought only in the following subtopics:

a.   Separation Technologies for the Removal of Contaminants from Concrete—The concrete in buildings and structures of DOE facilities is found in floors, walls, concrete covered beams and posts, etc.  The concrete might be found cast in place or in concrete blocks, and its surfaces may contain paint or other coatings.  Since concrete is a porous material, contamination could have penetrated a short distance below the surface; if the concrete were cracked, the penetration might be much greater.  Grant applications are sought for new or improved methods for removing solvents, toxic metals, and/or radionuclides from concrete, including contaminants that may have penetrated short distances from the surface.  Approaches of interest include electrokinetic methods, supercritical fluid extractions, and advanced leaching technologies.  One or more of the following forms of contaminated concrete should be addressed:  (1) concrete in floors, walls, and other structures in existing buildings; (2) scabble particles (residue left after physical methods remove the outer inch or so of the concrete surface, where most contamination is concentrated); (3) concrete rubble remaining after building demolition.  Phase I should include tests on concrete with simulated contamination from stable isotopes of cesium and strontium, solvent, or toxic metals.  Grant applications should explain how the contaminated concrete will be prepared and indicate what outcome (or range of outcomes) will be used to determine whether the proposed concept is working.

b.   Robotic Technologies for Automated Deactivation and Decommissioning—D&D activities require workers to routinely enter areas contaminated with radioactive and other hazardous materials and work with powerful heavy equipment that is capable of breaching protective clothing.  To reduce the potential risk to workers, there is a need for new or improved robotics and intelligent machines to perform these D&D functions remotely.  Such improvements would be expected to reduce life-cycle costs and to lower health and safety risks to workers.  Grant applications are sought to develop (1) a more efficient and universal remote cutting device and/or (2) a multi-purpose remote platform.  Regarding (1) above, most cutting devices are material-specific, or function only on a limited number of materials.  A universal cutter would function on a multitude of materials, shapes, and sizes and be adaptable for use on multiple robotic arms.  The remote cutter must be capable of remote maintenance and produce a minimum amount of residual waste from the cutting process.  Regarding (2) above, the multi-purpose remote platform must be equipped with an interchangeable apparatus capable of performing a variety of tasks including size reduction, radiation characterization, decontamination, and materials handling.  The platform must be capable of operation in compact and congested areas, and tetherless operation is preferred.

c.   Control of Airborne Radiological Contamination—Many facilities throughout the DOE complex are radiologically contaminated.  This contamination has the potential to become airborne during dismantlement or disassembly operations as part of deactivation and decommissioning (D&D) activities.  Radiological contamination poses safety and health risks to D&D workers, peripheral workers, and to the environment.  Grant applications are sought to develop:  (1) techniques to permanently affix the contamination without risking worker health or the environment; (2) techniques to completely capture removable contaminants so that there is no possibility of airborne radionuclide particles; (3) low-cost systems or materials to control loose surface contamination in the form of low-level alpha emitters, which are difficult to detect but pose risks to worker health and safety; (4) a fixative to contain dispersible alpha contamination – the  fixative must be easily applied to a variety of surfaces, last at least 20 years, and be easy to remove during the eventual decontamination of the facility; and (5) a method to capture airborne alpha contamination from a work area, such as a materials processing facility.  Proposed approaches must not pose any additional hazard to workers, and must be at least as efficient as a glove bag.  Any fixatives developed must meet Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP).

References:

1.       Accelerating Cleanup: Paths to Closure, U.S. DOE Office of Environmental Management (EM), June 1998.  (Report No. DOE/EM-0362) (Available at: http://www.em.doe.gov/closure/)

2.        Characterization, Monitoring, and Sensor Technology Crosscutting Program, U.S. DOE, EM Office of Science and Technology, http://www.cmst.org 

3.       Deactivation and Decommissioning Focus Area
U.S. DOE National Energy Technology Laboratory, http://www.netl.doe.gov/dd)

4.       Deactivation and Decommissioning Information System (DDIS)

C   OH-MB-215:  Control of Loose Surface Contamination

C   RL-DD04:  TRU Waste Fixatives for PFP

C   RL-DD062:  A Method to Capture Airborne Alpha Contamination (e.g., plutonium) from a Work Area at 233-S

University of North Dakota Energy & Environmental Research Center
http://www1.undeerc.org/scripts/ddis/  (Under “Select a Site Need ID” choose “AL-00-01-04-DD.”  Scroll down to “Similar Needs” to view three needs listed above.)

5.       DOE Hanford Site, http://www.hanford.gov/  

6.       Environmental Technology, U.S. DOE Oak Ridge Operations Environmental Management Program http://www.oakridge.doe.gov/em/td/default.htm)

7.       Office of Science and Technology [EM-50]
U.S. DOE Office of Environmental Management, http://apps.em.doe.gov/ost/

8.       Research Opportunities for Deactivating and Decommissioning Department of Energy Facilities, National Academy of Sciences/ National Research Council, 2001.   (Full text available on the Web at: http://www.nap.edu/catalog/10184.html)

9.       Savannah River Site http://www.srs.gov/general/srs-home.html

10.   Site Technology Coordinating Groups [Links]
U.S. DOE, EM Office of Science and Technology
http://apps.em.doe.gov/ost/progstcg.html

11.   U.S. DOE Idaho Operations Office http://www.id.doe.gov/doeid/index.html

12.   U.S. DOE Office of Environmental Management http://www.em.doe.gov/