Failure in Nuclear Waste Disposal

["Mario Iannaccone" <miannacc@dhhs.state.nh.us>]

05:45 PM ET 06/02/99
 Failure in Nuclear Waste Disposal
 By H. JOSEF HEBERT=
 Associated Press Writer=
        WASHINGTON (AP) _ After spending nearly $500 million, the Energy
 Department acknowledged Wednesday that a crucial stage in the
 disposal of millions of gallons of highly radioactive waste is a
 failure and should have been abandoned years ago.
        The failed process involves attempts by scientist to find a way
 to separate the most highly radioactive material from less
 radioactive liquids in 35 million gallons of waste now being stored
 in drums at the Savannah nuclear weapons facility in South
 Carolina.
        Scientists found that the separation process, when handing such
 large amounts of waste, produces large amounts of explosive benzene
 gas, making it too dangerous.
        Last week, Energy Secretary Bill Richardson directed that the
 contractor for the project, a subsidiary of Westinghouse Corp., be
 replaced and that outside scientists be enlisted to help select an
 alternative separation technology.
        Over the objections of the contractor, Westinghouse Government
 Services, the Energy Department quietly pulled the plug on the
 waste separation project more than a year ago. Since then, a number
 of alternative technologies have been proposed and will be pursued
 under a new contractor, officials said.
        Nevertheless, the problems could add years to a $20 billion,
 30-year program to dispose of more than 35 million gallons of
 highly radioactive liquid wastes at Savannah River. The idea is to
 convert the sludge and the most radioactive materials floating in
 the liquid into as many as 6,000 glass logs for eventual storage or
 burial.
        About 650 such glass logs, using sludge waste, already have been
 produced at the $2 billion vitrification plant at Savannah River.
 But separating cesium and other highly radioactive materials in the
 liquid is crucial if the overall vitrification process is to work,
 officials said.
        In 1983, scientists began pursuing so-called in-tank
 precipitation to separate the material. While it became apparent as
 early as 1992 that the process produced large amounts of explosive
 benzene gas, the technology continued to be pursued. In 1995, a
 separation plant was constructed.
        Ernest Moniz, undersecretary of energy and Richardson's top
 science adviser, said Wednesday there were ``clear warnings'' from
 a review panel in late 1992 or early 1993 that the technology would
 not work with such large amounts of waste.
        ``It was quite frankly mischaracterized. ... They kept looking
 for solutions,'' said Moniz in a telephone interview. ``They
 continued to try to find engineering solutions'' instead of
 shifting to alternatives.
        A study released Wednesday by the General Accounting Office, the
 investigative arm of Congress, said the search for a substitute
 method for separating the liquid could take eight to 10 years and
 cost from $1 billion to as much as $3.5 billion.
        ``Mismanagement (of the program) ... led to an extraordinary and
 pathetic waste of taxpayer money,'' said Rep. John Dingell,
 D-Mich., who had ordered the GAO report. ``All we have to show for
 $500 million is a 20-year delay and the opportunity to risk another
 $1 billion to make a problematic process work.''
        Moniz said that since the department directed a halt in the
 program in January 1998, it has spent $25 million on developing a
 number of alternative technologies. Among them involves using the
 failed technology but in much smaller batches of waste to reduce
 the buildup of benzene gas.
        A decision on what technology to pursue will be made by this
 fall.
        Moniz said the waste separation problems could delay the overall
 vitrification program. ``We will have some delay depending on how
 fast we can get this new technology,'' he said. ``But it will allow
 us to go forward in the most expeditious way.''

Submitted by,
M. Iannaccone,
Health Physicist NHBRH
miannacc@dhhs.state.nh.us


************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html