Rapid TRU Monitoring Unit Technology Profile

Technology Information Profile (rev. 2) for ProTech

Information Last Revised: March 25, 1993

TTP Reference Number: ID-121210

1. Technical Name of Technology: Rapid Transuranic Monitoring Unit

2. Common Name of Technology: RTM

3. PI and Telephone No: C. V. McIssac (208) 526-0581, C. W. Sill (208) 526-0605, G. R. Gehrke (208) 526-4155

4. Affiliation: Idaho National Engineering Laboratory

5. Technology Category: Buried Waste Characterization Technology

6. Developers: Buried Waste Integrated Demonstration

7. Application:

7.1. Where (in-situ/ex-situ): ex-situ

7.2. Media: soils, smears, fallout coupons, filters, air, liquids.

7.3. Targeted Contaminants: plutonium, americium, any alpha emitter and entire gamma spectrum from X-rays to CO-60 and Cs-137.

8. Scope of project (feasibility study, treatability, bench, pilot, field):

Field demonstration

9. Integrated Demonstration (ID) Need/Requirements:

At the INEL there are 2M cu ft. of transuranic waste commingled with 8 to 10 M cu. ft. of soil. Retrieval and treatment of this material is one of the options being considered for final disposition of this material. The transuranic contaminants such as oxides of plutonium and americium can become attached to small soil particles during the excavation process or during internment due to deterioration of the original waste containers, subsidence, and backfill. Since retrieval at the INEL and other arid sites is considered to generate considerable dust, control of the potentially contaminated dust spread is mandatory. This is primarily due to the extremely low levels of uptake allowed (tenths of micrograms). A contamination control strategy involves ventilation, dust control, naturally occurring moisture control in the soil/waste mixture, and rapid monitoring to access the success of the scheme.

10. Objective

10.1. Objective of technology (i.e., This technology will destroy VOCs in groundwater.):

The Contamination Control Project will demonstrate in the field a Rapid Transuranic Monitoring Unit. This unit is field deployable and will be ready for hand-off to ER/WM.

10.2. Baseline (baseline technology to which it is compared):

Hand Held Instruments (Hand Held Inst.)

11. Process Description:

Hundreds of samples per day of soil, filter, smear and air samples will be analyzed in an on-line manner for plutonium, americium, and the entire spectrum of gamma emitters. The system utilizes state-of-the art alpha continuous air monitors, U-L-Shell X-ray measurement system, and a specially designed large area ionization chamber. The Unit has the capability for sample preparation and a separate counting area. The data is assimilated using a VAX 4000 computer. Analyzed samples, characterized to tens of pCi/g for soils, smears, and filters and 1-DAC HR for air monitoring continuously. The data will be continuously displayed and printed out by the computer.

11.1. Input:

11.2. Output:

12. Summary of Technology Advantages (relative to the baseline: faster, better, cheaper, safer):

The alternatives to rapid monitoring are to employ conventional non-rapid monitoring techniques. Radiochemistry of soil, filter, and smear samples takes on the order of 1 day for 4 samples per radiochemist. Standard Health Physics techniques for measuring the presence of transuranics is not of sufficient accuracy to track the trend of levels such that safety and operating limits are breached. The Health Physics techniques are more applicable to emergency response to a spill where the levels are in the tens of nCi/g.

13. Limitations of Technology (relative to the baseline: faster, better, cheaper, safer):

The technology cannot provide the lower levels of detection achievable from radiochemistry. Radiochemistry can measure isotopic plutonium at the 200 fCi/g for 1000 minute counts. The Rapid Transuranic Monitoring Unit can measure at 20 pCi/g for 15 minute counts. This rapid in-field measurement allows up to 100 samples of soils/filters/smears to be analyzed per day per trailer. For an environmental restoration project such as a pit retrieval, 100 samples per day should be adequate to track contamination levels, thereby supplying an essentially on-line tracking capability. A true "on-line" tracking of Pu-239 content is presently not possible.

14. Major Technical Challenges:

The U-L-Shell X-ray system should add a bar code reader to facilitate counting. An additional large area ionization chamber should be added and the existing systems modified to incorporate all recent improvements in resolution. The actual field performance of the Rapid Transuranic Monitoring Unit at the nominal 100 samples per day has not been demonstrated. Geometry differences between Model 1 and Model 2 of the Large Area Spectrometer has not been resolved and a third spectrometer cannot be specified until this is resolved. Resolution of the algorithm for the alpha continuous air monitors is required. Also, geometry changes in the present system may facilitate operations. These and other issues will be identified during Fiscal Year 1993 testing in the field.

15. Technical Effectiveness:

15.1. Performance

15.1.1. Remaining Contamination: (contamination mobility reduction, volume reduction, toxicity reduction)

Summary (20 words or less): None

Further Description (unlimited length):

15.1.2. Process Waste

15.1.2.1. Status of waste (mobility, volume, hazard, recyclability)

Summary (20 words or less): There are no hazardous or radioactive materials in the Rapid Monitoring Unit during FY-93 field testing activities.

Further Description (unlimited length): Ultimately, during environmental restoration activities, there will be a compactable Low Level Waste stream less than 10 nCi/g (TRU) which can be disposed of in the INEL Low Level Waste disposal area.

15.1.2.2. Treatment (needed, available)

Summary (20 words or less): None

Further Description (unlimited length):

15.1.2.3. Decontamination / Decommissioning

Summary (20 words or less): The systems utilize smooth surfaces and in the event of a contamination spread, the surfaces are easily decontaminated.

Further Description (unlimited length):

15.1.2.4. Disposal (needed, available)

Summary (20 words or less): None needed during FY-93 field testing.

15.1.3. Practicality

15.1.3.1. Foreclose Future Options

Summary (20 words or less): Unit will be transferred to Environmental Restoration and Waste Management for use on Remediation and Operations Projects.

Further Description (unlimited length):

15.1.3.2. Reliability

Summary (20 words or less): 90% availability; technician operated with advisory from scientists.

Further Description (unlimited length):

15.1.3.3. Failure Control

Summary (20 words or less): Standard Radiation Control procedures are followed.

Further Description (unlimited length):

15.1.3.4. Ease of Use

Summary (20 words or less): The system is designed to be operated by technicians with some scientist support for calibration etc.

Further Description (unlimited length):

15.1.3.5. Infrastructure

Summary (20 words or less): none required.

Further Description (unlimited length):

15.1.3.6. Versatility

Summary (20 words or less): Can be employed at any DOE facility since the unit is completely mobile and self contained.

Further Description (unlimited length):

15.1.3.7. System Compatibility

Summary (20 words or less): Should be compatible with any plutonium handling operation.

Further Description (unlimited length):

15.1.3.8. Off-the-Shelf (procurement ease)

Summary (20 words or less): The rapid monitoring unit uses commercially available electronics with specially fabricated counting equipment.

Further Description (unlimited length):

15.1.3.9. Maintainability

Summary (20 words or less): Continuous calibration of the counting equipment is mandatory on the unit. There is a continuous evaluation of backgrounds during counting by all instrumentation.

Further Description (unlimited length):

15.1.3.10. Safety Measures

Summary (20 words or less): All electrical systems are wired to code, and all personnel protective equipment is Health Physics approved.

Further Description (unlimited length):

15.1.4. "Works" (functions as intended):

Summary (20 words or less): Lower levels of detection for counting equipment has been published.

Further Description (unlimited length):

15.2. Cost

15.2.1. Start-Up Cost

Summary (20 words or less): Rapid Monitoring Units can be procured for $500K. Approximately $2 million has been expended during development of the final prototype unit.

Further Description (unlimited length):

15.2.2. Operations and Maintenance Cost

Summary (20 words or less): Four technicians plus 10% time for scientific help.

Further Description (unlimited length):

15.2.3. Life-cycle cost

Summary (20 words or less): Unknown

Further Description (unlimited length):

15.3. Time

15.3.1. Years Until Available

Summary (20 words or less): The unit should be field deployable in October 1993. Additional units could be deployable within 6-months of order.

Further Description (unlimited length):

15.3.2. Speed/Rate

Summary (20 words or less): The Monitoring Unit can analyze 100 samples per day.

Further Description (unlimited length):

15.3.3. Years to Finish

Summary (20 words or less): One-half year.

Further Description (unlimited length):

16. Environmental Safety and Health

16.1. Worker Safety

16.1.1. Exposure to Hazardous Materials/Hazards

Summary (20 words or less): Samples for the monitoring unit will be standard Health Physics wrapped and will be prepared under a Class A hood.

Further Description (unlimited length):

16.1.2. Physical Requirements

Summary (20 words or less): None

Further Description (unlimited length):

16.1.3. Number of People Required

Summary (20 words or less): Four

Further Description (unlimited length):

16.2. Public Health and Safety

16.2.1. Accidents

Summary (20 words or less): Unit could be utilized in accident mitigation.

Further Description (unlimited length):

16.2.2. Routine Releases

Summary (20 words or less): None

Further Description (unlimited length):

16.2.3. Transportation

Summary (20 words or less): Rapid Monitoring Unit trailer is pulled by tractor.

Further Description (unlimited length):

16.3. Environmental Impacts

16.3.1. Ecological Impacts

Summary (20 words or less): None

Further Description (unlimited length):

16.3.2. Aesthetics

Summary (20 words or less): Not applicable

Further Description (unlimited length):

16.3.3. Natural Resources

Summary (20 words or less): N/A

Further Description (unlimited length):

16.3.4. Energy Demands

Summary (20 words or less): 25KW portable power source

Further Description (unlimited length):

17. Socio-Political Interests

17.1. Public Perception

17.1.1. Proponent Reputation

Summary (20 words or less): Unit is a part of DOE complex cleanup process; therefore unlikely interference.

Further Description (unlimited length):

17.1.2. Familiarity / Understandability

Summary (20 words or less): Counting equipment is fairly standard concept.

Further Description (unlimited length):

17.2. Tribal Rights / Future Land Use

17.2.1. Capacity for Unrestricted Use (terrestrial, aquatic)

Summary (20 words or less): Not applicable

Further Description (unlimited length):

17.3. Socio-Economic Interests

17.3.1. Economic Impacts

Summary (20 words or less): None.

Further Description (unlimited length):

17.3.2. Labor Force Demands

Summary (20 words or less): Minimal

Further Description (unlimited length):

18. Regulatory Objectives

18.1. Compatibility with Cleanup Milestones

Summary (20 words or less): This unit will be integral parts of an overall buried waste retrieval strategy.

Further Description (unlimited length):

18.2. Regulatory Infrastructure / Track Record

Summary (20 words or less): The Rapid Monitoring Unit can eliminate the number of expensive samples sent to certified laboratories.

Further Description (unlimited length):

18.3. Regulatory Compliance

Summary (20 words or less): The rapid monitoring unit could verify that workers are exposed to less than 100mr per year.

Further Description (unlimited length):

19. Industrial Partnerships

19.1. Company Names:

Large Area Spectrometer built by Ordella of Oak Ridge to INEL specification.

19.2. Rationale:

Not applicable

19.3. Contract Mechanism:

Technical literature search gave the idea.

19.4. Other Potential Companies:

None

19.5. International:

20. Intellectual Property

20.1. Patent Ownership:

EG&G Idaho Inc. A System to Control Contamination During Retrieval of Buried TRU Waste-

20.2. Other Owners:

20.3. Patent Number:

S-71,122

21. Cost Sharing: The work was sponsored by DOE/OTD

22. Background on this technology (Where did the idea come from? Who else is doing similar work? What have the results been to date? What is the most significant competitor to this technology?):

The idea for the rapid transuranic monitoring unit came out of a system design for an overall system to retrieve buried transuranic waste at the INEL. This program was called the Buried Waste Program Pit-9 Retrieval project and was started in the late 1980's. The INEL Subsurface Disposal Area (where the pits and trenches are) was listed on the National Priorities List and CERCLA was invoked. The project was stopped however background research (especially on contamination control) for the CERCLA process continued under the newly formed Environmental Restoration Program. Finally the work was transferred to the Office of Technology Development where final development occurred culminating in the present field deployable units. Contamination Control research has been centered at the INEL since the late 1980's. The results to date include developed field deployable isotopic transuranic counting equipment with the lowest levels of detection obtainable (for plutonium, americium, and a wide range of gamma emitters). There is no competitor for this technology. The closest alternative, Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectroscopy, is non technician based, requires extensive sample preparation, and is not oriented to field application.

23. Reference Documents:

K. B. McKinley, "Initial Drum Retrieval Final Report," TREE-1286, August, 1978.

J. B. Bishoff, "Early Waste Retrieval Final Report," TREE-1321, August, 1979.

P. Shaw and G. Loomis, "Plutonium Contamination Control Studies During a Glove Box Scale Simulated Excavation of TRU Buried Waste," EGG-WM-8289, October, 1988.

S. W. Duce, et. al., "Contamination Control Techniques for Retrieval of Buried TRU Waste," EGG-PHY-8209, August, 1988.

D. W. Scott and M. R. Winberg, "Background Ventilation Studies for TRU-Waste Retrieval," EGG-WM-8802, October, 1989.

P. G. Shaw, "Rapid Determination of Pu Content on Filters and Smears Using Alpha Liquid Scintillation," EGG-WM-8775, October, 1989.

S. W. Duce, et.al., "Basic Radiological Studies Contamination Control Experiments," EGG-WM-8724, September, 1989.

C. V. McIsaac and C. R. Amaro, "Real-Time Transuranic Monitoring with a Victoreen Model 758 Alpha Continuous Air Monitor," EGG-WM-8774, September, 1989.

C. V. McIsaac, et.al., "Rapid Monitoring for Transuranic Contaminants During Buried Waste Retrieval," EGG-WTD-9412, March, 1991.

TECHNICAL PAPERS

G. G. Loomis, "Contamination Control During TRU-Waste Retrieval at the INEL," Waste Management-89, Tucson, AZ, February 26 - March 2, 1989.

G. G. Loomis et al., "A System to Control Contamination During Retrieval of Buried TRU Waste," Waste Management-90, Tucson, AZ, February 25 - March 1, 1990.

G. G. Loomis and C. V. McIsaac, "Rapid Monitoring of Transuranic Contaminants During Buried TRU Waste Retrieval," Waste Management-91, Tucson, AZ, February 24-28, 1991.

PATENTS:

A patent has been granted entitled: "A system to control contamination during buried TRU waste retrieval". This patent discusses rapid monitoring as a part of contamination control.