A new Energy Department assessment of waste disposal practices at the Savannah River Site concluded that radiation doses are being maintained within appropriate limits and should not pose threats to the public or facility personnel. The Energy Department’s Office of Enterprise Assessments (EA) conducted the evaluation in February and March and released its findings this month.
The Savannah River Site is located near Aiken, S.C. Two of the site’s waste facilities were evaluated: the Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF), which disposes of radioactive waste that was treated and immobilized using SRS waste processing facilities; and the E Area Low-Level Waste Facility, which stores the low-level material that comes from waste processing. The assessment was part of a DOE-wide effort to evaluate radioactive waste management practices, including disposal operations and waste generator and processor work. The assessments are intended to evaluate the practical implementation of a DOE order and manual that both focus on radioactive waste management.
The assessment states that SRS has a strong environmental monitoring program at the SDF. At the E Area facility, SRS maximizes its disposal capabilities by using a computer waste information and tracking system to increase the available space availability for storage, according to the EA report. The agency reported that waste management documents for both facilities appropriately outlined the plans, procedures, and requirements under which the facilities must be operated.
The Energy Department also identified some opportunities for improvements, including possibly implementing more radiological contamination survey requirements for trench work areas, equipment, and workers at the facilities. The requirements are intended to identify and locate areas of contamination. The department also found a few deficiencies, including one on dose rates not being properly calculated at the E Area facility. DOE concluded that the SRS manual for radioactive waste requirements does not “adequately address dose rate measurements taken… and whether re-calculation of activity is necessary when subsequent dose rate measurements taken for any reason are significantly higher than those used for the original characterization, which may result in non-conservative estimation of the curie content.”
