That they generate a lot of radioactive waste in mining, and in oil and gas, particularly fracking, where you concentrate a lot of very large quantities of water together after it's been in the earth, and it comes in contact with radioactive minerals. We treat a lot of that waste, and our international presence is growing very rapidly too. There's very, very little waste treatment done anywhere outside of U.S. France does some, but outside of that, it's pretty much it. We get a lot of waste from Europe and Canada and Mexico shipped to our facilities. These are the four plants we have, and we'll spend a lot of time on them. One's in Richland, Washington, right outside the Hanford plant, about 10 miles from the center of the plant. That's our most strategic location.
It's our flagship facility with lots of square footage, of very, very robust permits. It allows us to do all different types of technology. We're very well-positioned, and the company's very focused on what Hanford has to offer for us in regards to their mission for closure. Second plant is in Kingston, Tennessee. That's right outside of Oak Ridge, Tennessee. It does a lot of different types of things, incinerators as well, and a lot of R&D there. Our Gainesville, Florida plant also has an R&D facility as well. It also does hazardous waste for a large portion of the Southeast, and also is growing through our R&D program. Our last one is what we call the EWOC facility in Oak Ridge.
That's right next to where all the new construction's going on for some of the power plants that you may have heard of, a really growing nuclear industry there in East Tennessee. Okay, four different areas of growth that we're focused on. I won't spend a lot of time on the first and third one, but I will on the second one. First one is growing our plants. We do a lot of improvement of technology and refinement of technology and implementation of new systems to broaden what we can accept in our plant. For example, number two there is, DSSI is the name of the plant there in Oak Ridge. We're expanding it to be able to take more classified waste of different types.
We have no competitors pretty much in the country that take classified waste, where we can treat them in areas that are suitable to take things from the weapons program directly. The EWOC facility is, we're also making some adjustments there for our new PFAS. I'll get into some more detail here with the big ones. Hanford really is right now the biggest focus in the company. Hanford's been cleaning up for about 30 years. They've determined back in the 1995, 2000 timeframe, that they wanted to make a priority out of vitrifying the waste they have in their tanks out there. They have about 56 million gallons of waste out there that they're trying to remove and stabilize and dispose of.
They just determined at that point the best way to do that was to build a plant called the DFLAW plant, which is Direct-Feed Low-Activity Waste. It's a certain type of waste that comes out of those tanks, and they're going to make glass out of it by heating it up to 2,100 degrees, adding glass pellets, and it makes a very stable waste form. That's what they plan on doing for about 40% of the waste that's in those tanks. They signed a Record of Decision several years ago that all the waste that comes out of that plant, as they're treating that waste, the effluent that would come out of that tank, out of that plant, would specifically go to our Perma-Fix Northwest facility by name, for a minimum of 10 years. That plant is just in the process of starting up.
It's been in construction for 25 years. It's reached a cost of about $20 billion. They're going through hot commissioning right now. It's going a little slower than anticipated, but they are still very dedicated to that plant. Once it gets rolling, we'll see a revenue increase of about $70 million a year in revenue once that plant's fully operational over the next several years. We've already started talking to them about waste. We expect to start receiving waste from DFLAW in the May timeframe, the first waste stream, and then it should increase up from that, as they get through closer and closer to an operational level. I mentioned that plant covered 40% of the tanks at Hanford. The other 40%, or another 40%, is, they're going to take out the waste, and send it to commercial facilities like ours to do grouting.
What they're going to basically do is pump the waste out of the tanks, put it in some special totes, ship it to commercial facilities, and we're going to take that waste, mix it with a very specific recipe of concrete and additives, stabilizers, and then we'll be able to dispose of that waste in a commercial landfill, in either Texas or in Utah. That's the other 40% of the plant. That program is going to be getting rolling here as early as the second half of this year. It gets rolling in a really big way, in 2028. An RFP has just come out for us to bid on with the plans of DOE to implement that program. They're valuing that program at over $4 billion over a 12-year period, to start in 2028.
What they're basically asking is for proposals for commercial entities to be able to take that waste, and meet all those goals to treat it and dispose of it in a landfill. We're the only one near the site that has a plant. We have competition in Utah and Texas. They also even offered the opportunity to build a plant on their site. It takes 5 years-10 years typically to get a permit for something like this, or longer. It took us 16 years just to get our permit renewed, not even a new permit, just to get it renewed. It takes forever. We have an operating facility right there next to Hanford, about a mile outside the gate to do this, and we're actually doing this on a work form now. We feel like we're very well-suited to take over this project.
Again, this is a very sustainable waste stream that would come in about 3 million gallons a year. Just to give you a sense of what that means from a revenue perspective, a traditional grouting cost would be about $50 a gallon. In volume, it could go down, but just trying to give you a ballpark of the revenue we're talking about. Decision on that RFP is currently slated for July of this year. We also have a lot going on internationally, and we'll spend a lot of time on this, but we do have a $50 million contract that we've won with the Joint Research Centre, which is an arm of the EU, for remediation of waste in Ispra, Italy, which is just about 2 hours north of Milan.
That project has been going on for a couple of years now, and they've been going through a lot of paperwork, a lot of permitting, a lot of unexciting things. We'll start remediation of the waste out of the ground here next week. Once that starts, then the revenue starts picking up for us. We'll be shipping that waste that we remediate in Italy to our plant up in Washington State. The first shipment won't be until 2027, but it'll be a pretty sizable annual shipment rate. We have grown, as you see at the bottom there. I mentioned in our earnings call, we've grown about 160% on our international programs just in the past year. PFAS is our other big growing initiative right now, growth initiative for us. We've invented a new process for PFAS destruction.
It's a very unique approach to it that we have not seen anyone with a similar type of application where we can reach what we call six nines of destruction. We can do that with very low heat compared to most of our competitors, about 150 degrees Celsius, and minimal pressure, and we're in a position to be able to do that at a very economic approach. Right now there's a number of competitors out there that all have very interesting and exciting technologies. Ours is much cheaper than most. We view ourselves as competitors specifically with the incineration industry. I'll just give you a sense of what that looks like. Our estimates are that there's about $150 million or so each year going towards specifically incineration of PFAS. We can beat incineration prices, and we can do it without any emissions whatsoever.
In other words, we don't even have a stack. It basically is a closed-loop system, and we get clean water out the one end, and we can recycle the chemicals we're using at the other end to lower our cost. Where we are right now on this plant is we built our first one, our prototype in Gainesville. It's operating very well. It does about 1,000 gallons a day. Excuse me. This pollen's really getting to me out here. That 1,000 gallons includes about 650 gallons of the actual PFAS liquid of high concentrations that we take. If you're familiar with PFAS, we take AFFF, which is the firefighting foam that most companies have in their warehouses. We can take it straight into it, so very high concentrations. In about eight hours, we can have it treated.
That facility's been working for a year and a half now. I think October 24 is when we got rolling. We've been perfecting it every day, did some upgrades to it. We've taken everything we've learned from that system and built a new one. It can do 2,000 gallons a day. We're building it right as we speak in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. That should be up and running here later this quarter, and that will triple our capacity for PFAS destruction. Historically, revenue-wise, we'll spend a lot of time on this, but we have had a couple of down years. Our services group has had a tough time with some slowdown in the field operations. That's picking up, along with the waste coming in from Hanford here expected to, for DFLAW and a couple other new waste streams here in Q2.
We recently announced a $24 million win for our services group out at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California. That started last week. We have a couple more waiting to hear about that we're excited about. We feel like our services group is going to pick up the pace. They've dropped here in the last two years, along with our waste group seeing an influx from Hanford. We're very confident that Q2 will be an inflection point for us to move forward. Just a quick note on where we are in regards to margins. You can see we have a much higher margin associated with our treatment segment due to the fact that it's a higher fixed cost. On the services segment, it can move up and down with revenue.
As we're between projects, we can lay off some of our staff and bring them back when we get new work. Certainly advantages to both. Both are important to the company. Includes a kind of just a conceptual approach to where we think we want to be when we get to $200 million in revenue, which we view in the next couple of years with Hanford beginning to start grouting and the DFLAW program highly underway, along with a couple of our bigger targets we have on the services side that we can make very strong margins. I think this is a very conservative chart in regards to what our EBIT could look like. We are seeing that our treatment segment is carrying more weight than our services segment, which would increase that EBITDA number significantly at the bottom there. Okay.
I don't think we'll spend too much time with a review of all that, but I think we could probably just go right into Q&A if you guys would like to.
Perfect. Yeah. Just wanted to check in. Any questions from the audience before we start the Q&A? Okay, perfect. Well, maybe we could just start with anticipated Q2 receipts for DFLAW, and I guess what that means going forward. Clearly it's a game-changing opportunity in Hanford.
Sure. DFLAW has been very difficult to nail down in regards to what specific waste streams we're going to get when, because they're going through hot commissioning, it's kind of intermittent. For example, two weeks ago, they started up on a Friday, and they shut it down on Tuesday. The important thing to understand about this facility is it's a giant facility, and you have two melters, very, very large melters that they melt this glass in. Once you turn these melters on, you can never turn them off. Like literally, never turn them off. You have to keep them at 2,100 degrees, or they'll crack. They have to keep steam on them, steam rolling over those melters. When you put waste in there, or you put water in there, you keep the thing processing.
That steam is already because they've already put waste through that as the steam comes off as radioactive liquid, that's going to start coming our way here in May. There's also some of the other wastes they've gotten from their initial hot commissioning startup. We also expect to start getting some smaller quantities in April. May is really kind of the start of that whole process. It's going to start slow, but we expect to be getting into the range of $1 million a month of additional revenue by the end of the quarter. That'll increase as they get through the operational phases, and get to 40% capacity and then 80% capacity in the next 1 year-2 years respectively. That's anticipated to be about 50,000 gallons a month, which will be several $1 million a month in revenue.
In addition to that, we are getting other waste from the Hanford Site that is new, that is liquid waste for processing. We're also doubling up on some of the older waste streams we've been getting as well for a long period of time. To answer your question, we see the Hanford waste going from about $3 million a quarter at our site near Hanford to closer to $7 million-$8 million a quarter beginning in Q2. Again, that's forward forecasting. Things can change. That's what we're anticipating, and that's what we're planning on working with our DOE friends is what we should be certain to receive in Q2.
Maybe just another question on growth, as it relates to the RFP tied to Hanford tank retrievals, a potential of up to 200 million gallons of waste. I guess, what positions Perma-Fix for that opportunity?
Again, our plant. Literally, we can see the fence of Hanford from our facility. The important thing to understand is doing work in Washington State, having our facility there for 25 years or so, we've become part of the community. One of the smarter things we've done in a long time was to unionize that plant last year. We unionized in October. By unionizing, we were able to really draw the community in. The union president is very, very supportive of our plant. The threats that we have as competition is shipping radioactive liquid from those tanks to Utah and to Texas. To do that, to ship 700,000 gallons, which is one task order, you'd have to have 30-40 tanker trucks of radioactive waste going up and down the roads in about a seven-week period.
It would be, excuse me, almost 200 trucks going down the roads in 30 different tankers. It's a very, very rapid rate of transporting liquid radioactive waste to out-of-state competitors. Obviously, the tagline our union president is pushing hard on DOE with is, why would you ship non-union jobs out of our state with liquid waste when Perma-Fix can do it right next door? When they treat it, they put it into large concrete blocks that go on a rail car, and there's no liquids going. What would you rather do? Send these tanker trucks of liquid or concrete blocks on rail cars? We have a lot of advantages. You never know what the government's going to do.
If I had to guess what they'll do with these large quantities, probably make a couple awards, but I would see us still as the premier first choice for the most volume of this moving forward.
I just want to shift gears to PFAS, because that sounds like it could be an interesting opportunity going forward. Maybe you could just give us some more context there and how you see that evolving.
Yeah, PFAS is a tough market. The reason it's tough is because it's not regulated. No one admits they've got it. In other words, if you had a regulated waste out there, the EPA requires you to maintain inventories, do a lot of reporting, so that you can understand who has what permits and who has what kind of waste. It's very public. It's very easy to understand who your clients could be. PFAS, it's not regulated. No one wants anyone to know what's going on because they don't want any lawsuits from a liability perspective, because it's rising in that realm with the legal community and a lot of complaints. You have to dig a lot harder. One thing is for certain, the government and the large corporations are seeing the value of getting rid of it.
We just completed one of the Department of Energy sites and cleaned up all their PFAS off the site. We just had a press release last week about it. We're doing that same kind of approach, excuse me, for airports. We just won a job for the Tucson Airport. We've finished Norfolk and Des Moines, where we've come in with some partners that sell and install the new firefighting foam. We come in with another company, pump out their systems from the airports. We get all the waste, we send it to our place to be treated, and then the other guys put the new stuff in. That team has done very well. We got four or five other airports we're bidding on. Those are kind of low-hanging fruit to get rolling. This AFFF stuff is everywhere.
It's heavily involved in the carpet industry and a lot of other types of industries that have waterproofing types of objectives. We think once the EPA recognizes this as a hazardous waste, this entire market will completely transform overnight. The companies that have viable economical destruction technologies will soar. There's a lot of speculation on that regulation coming to the front. Right now our goal is to be about the $400,000 a month range in revenue by Q4, and demonstrating the new system works very well. At that point in time, we'll decide whether we're going to build smaller units for modular applications or build additional units for higher productivity.
Definitely an interesting opportunity. Just want to take a question here from the audience.
Thank you for the presentation. Regarding PFAS, you say that you are destroying it at 160 degrees. There is another company, well, called 340Water they destroy it at 340 degrees. What is the difference? Does it take longer for you to do it, and therefore the cost is higher than what they propose to do? They also have mobile units going to different sites. Could you talk a little bit about that?
Sure. We're very familiar with 374, and there's a couple other companies that do the same technology. Reviv is another one. They do what they call supercritical water oxidation. Ours is much more reliant on the chemistry. We have an additive that we add to it, and it can actually do it at ambient temperatures. As you just mentioned, very astutely, it will take longer. You can do it at ambient temperature, which allows us to design this for field applications. In other words, to be able to do things in the field for leachate from landfills without a lot of heat, a lot of energy. Yes, 150 degrees is our sweet spot. It can be less and take a little bit longer. If we went up to 210 degrees, which we've been testing, it goes much faster. It also matters on the concentration.
The lower concentration stuff you can go much faster on and much lower heat overall. That's a great question, though.
I did mean 374Water. I am always confusing those numbers.
That's okay.
You said that at the end you have a clean water stream. What is the other component of whatever is left, and does that need to be incinerated or encapsulated somehow?
Yeah. We have what we call clean water. It optimally could go to a POTW or a water treatment plant. In some cases, we've had some small quantities after large batches that we've sent to a deep well injection. Right now the optimal goal is to get it to a water treatment plant and not have to go to the injection with it.
Thank you.
Mm-hmm.
Any further questions? Yep.
Great presentation.
Thank you.
We have a question from our virtual attendees. It's a bit long, so I'm going to do my best. Management has done an impressive job expanding the Perma-Fix Northwest permits, PFNW, I guess that's it here, specifically for liquid mixed waste and microencapsulation. Given that the primary bottleneck in domestic rare earth refining is the handling of radioactive thorium and uranium byproducts, and considering Perma-Fix already possesses the unique permits, specialized staff, and radiological infrastructure required to manage these hazardous streams, has the company evaluated a strategic entry into the critical materials processing market to leverage this existing regulatory moat?
Great question. Yeah. Wow. Yes, we have. We're very excited about that. I should shut my phone off. Excuse me. The mining industry. One of the technology I didn't talk about today that it's really taking off very well for us is the soil sorting technology. We have a soil sorting technology because we have so many health physicists that work for us. We've designed some equipment. The basic is a large conveyor belt, and you put your dirt in the conveyor belt, and as it goes up the conveyor belt, there's some detectors it goes through, and what we've developed is this software, so it detects thorium and radium or uranium, and many other different radiological components.
As it's going up the belt, it has a gate at the end of it, and if it's radioactive, it goes this way, and if it's not radioactive, it goes that way. It sorts your soil. It characterizes it instantly, so you have a great record of characterization, and it also keeps you from having to send soil that may not be contaminated off and pay prices for waste, which no one wants to do because it's so expensive. What we've been doing is working with several different organizations to implement that. We've done work with the Navy in dredging in San Diego, several different clients all over the country. We're sort of realizing that for the uranium industry particularly. We can characterize what's there to make sure they don't leave anything behind.
We just won a job in New Mexico at a uranium mine, do that very thing, and for the rare earth industry with a very large company, Fortune 100 company. It's kind of our test case. It's actually mobilizing here in June. We're very confident we could take that application, if it works the way we think it's going to work, that it'll really do well, specifically finding rare earth, and getting it concentrated quantities, very, very effective and inexpensive to run this thing. We're starting to see, we built two of them. They both are getting booked for the summer. We see that taking off. We hope to. Just very beginning, though.
Get a mic here.
I'm just curious, you talked about the classified waste piece, and maybe you could review that. Specifically, when you talk about classified waste, what are you actually talking about?
Classified waste, again, one of our bigger clients is NNSA, the weapons group. There's half a dozen labs around the country, Y-12 in Oak Ridge, for example, Los Alamos, Livermore, Berkeley, Savannah River. They all have labs or some portion of the weapons production cycle. Some of the waste that comes off of those production cycles are classified. For example, they do a lot of foundry work, and they'll have crucibles that they'll pour something into. Well, the shape of that crucible is classified.
Of course, yeah.
There's some very reactive wastes that come off of that process as well. Reactive wastes are ones that ignite with air or moisture, that are very, very difficult to deal with. We get some of those as well. We are able to handle reactive and pyrophoric materials, so we get that waste from them as well. It's a byproduct of making weapons.
One last one. Obviously, there's a new program, the Sentinel ICBM. Is there any opportunities there? Would that play into your business? Secondly, just on the demand for power, nuclear power, that cycle on both sides, on the commercial side and on the defense side, maybe you could just briefly talk about that before.
Yeah. Once the weapon gets out of DOE's hands, it does not generate any waste. Really that wouldn't have any impact on anything like that, for the most part. On the power side, SMRs, which is really, they're being highly developed in Oak Ridge, right down the street from us. They're all coming into town, stealing our employees. We're having to fight to keep everybody from getting stolen. It's really good for the town overall. We've gotten some initial work doing the siting and evaluation of properties that were previously contaminated, and helping with some of the permitting that they're going through. There's really surprisingly little real understanding of what kind of waste SMR is going to generate, other than spent fuel. It's really a big question mark.
Is it going to be an ancillary, secondary waste stream from those things besides the fuel or not? My opinion, and I'm no expert at all on this at all, is it's not going to be a lot. That's one of the beauties of SMRs. SMRs really are, if you think about it, the country's made hundreds of SMRs in subs and ships.
Right.
They have very little waste.
Very little waste.
I think it's going to be limited impact.
Great job. Thanks.
Thanks.
We're just about out of time, but great presentation and overview and discussion, and we're excited about Perma-Fix. We look forward to having you guys back.
Good. All right. Thank you.
Now I'd like to invite Tony back up to introduce our next company.