Radionuclide Retention Mechanisms in Secondary Waste-Form Testing: Phase II

This report describes the results from laboratory tests performed at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) for Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) to evaluate candidate stabilization technologies that have the potential to successfully treat liquid secondary waste stream effluents produced by the Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP). WRPS is considering the design and construction of a Solidification Treatment Unit (STU) for the Effluent Treatment Facility (ETF) at Hanford. The ETF, a multi-waste, treatment-and-storage unit that has been permitted under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), can accept dangerous, low-level, and mixed wastewaters for treatment. The STU needs to be operational by 2018 to receive secondary liquid waste generated during operation of the WTP. The STU will provide the additional capacity needed for ETF to process the increased volume of secondary waste expected to be produced by WTP. This report on radionuclide retention mechanisms describes the testing and characterization results that improve understanding of radionuclide retention mechanisms, especially for pertechnetate, {sup 99}TcO{sub 4}{sup -} in four different waste forms: Cast Stone, DuraLith alkali aluminosilicate geopolymer, encapsulated fluidized bed steam reforming (FBSR) product, and Ceramicrete phosphate bonded ceramic. These data and results will be used to fill existing datamore » gaps on the candidate technologies to support a decision-making process that will identify a subset of the candidate waste forms that are most promising and should undergo further performance testing.« less

[1]  R. Garrels,et al.  Solutions, Minerals and Equilibria , 1965 .

[2]  Bill Batchelor,et al.  Reductive capacity of natural reductants. , 2003, Environmental science & technology.

[3]  S. J. Gregg,et al.  Adsorption Surface Area and Porosity , 1967 .

[4]  D. Langmuir.  Aqueous Environmental Geochemistry , 1997 .

[5]  D. Kaplan,et al.  REDUCTION CAPACITY OF SALTSTONE AND SALTSTONE COMPONENTS , 2009 .

[6]  Marcia L. Kimura,et al.  Secondary Waste Form Development and Optimization—Cast Stone , 2011 .

[7]  W. Brent Lindquist,et al.  Tomographic Analysis of Reactive Flow Induced Pore Structure Changes in Column Experiments , 2009 .

[8]  W. Lukens,et al.  Evolution of technetium speciation in reducing grout. , 2005, Environmental science & technology.

[9]  E. Barrett,et al.  The Determination of Pore Volume and Area Distributions in Porous Substances. II. Comparison between Nitrogen Isotherm and Mercury Porosimeter Methods , 1951 .

[10]  Arlin L. Olson,et al.  Fluidized Bed Steam Reforming of Hanford LAW Using THORsm Mineralizing Technology , 2004 .

[11]  Silvia S. Jurisson,et al.  Potential interferences on the pertechnetate-sulfide immobilization reaction , 2009 .

[12]  P. Gröning,et al.  Cleavage mechanism and surface chemical characterization of phengitic Muscovite and Muscovite as constrained by X-Ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy , 1998 .

[13]  R. Smith,et al.  The Role of Oxygen Diffusion in the Release of Technetium from Reducing Cementitious Waste Forms , 1992 .

[14]  E. Barrett,et al.  (CONTRIBUTION FROM THE MULTIPLE FELLOWSHIP OF BAUGH AND SONS COMPANY, MELLOX INSTITUTE) The Determination of Pore Volume and Area Distributions in Porous Substances. I. Computations from Nitrogen Isotherms , 1951 .

[15]  L. L. Lockrem,et al.  CAST STONE TECHNOLOGY FOR TREATMENT & DISPOSAL OF IODINE RICH CAUSTIC WASTE DEMONSTRATION FINAL REPORT , 2005 .

[16]  W. D. Bostick,et al.  Solidification/stabilization of technetium in cement-based grouts , 1990 .

[17]  Michael F. Hochella,et al.  Auger electron and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopies , 1988 .

[18]  Eric R. Vance,et al.  Immobilization of Pb in a Geopolymer Matrix , 2005 .

[19]  Kirk J. Cantrell,et al.  Secondary Waste Form Screening Test Results—Cast Stone and Alkali Alumino-Silicate Geopolymer , 2010 .

[20]  Elizabeth C. Golovich,et al.  Secondary Waste Form Screening Test Results—THOR® Fluidized Bed Steam Reforming Product in a Geopolymer Matrix , 2011 .

[21]  M Newville,et al.  ATHENA, ARTEMIS, HEPHAESTUS: data analysis for X-ray absorption spectroscopy using IFEFFIT. , 2005, Journal of synchrotron radiation.

[22]  Pavel R. Hrma,et al.  Low Temperature Waste Immobilization Testing Vol. I , 2006 .

[23]  C. M. Jantzen,et al.  Characterization and Performance of Fluidized Bed Steam Reforming (FBSR) Product as a Final Waste Form , 2003 .

[24]  W. Lukens,et al.  Products of pertechnetate radiolysis in highly alkaline solution: structure of TcO2 x xH2O. , 2001, Environmental science & technology.

[25]  L L Lockrem,et al.  HANFORD CONTAINERIZED CAST STONE FACILITY TASK 1 PROCESS TESTING & DEVELOPMENT FINAL TEST REPORT , 2005 .

[26]  John J. Rehr,et al.  Theoretical X-ray Absorption Fine Structure Standards , 1991 .

[27]  Boon K. Teo,et al.  EXAFS: Basic Principles and Data Analysis , 1986 .

[28]  Arun S. Wagh,et al.  Chemically bonded phosphate ceramics for low-level mixed waste stabilization , 1997 .

[29]  Arun S. Wagh,et al.  Chemically Bonded Phosphate Ceramics: Twenty-First Century Materials with Diverse Applications , 2004 .

[30]  Fredrik P. Glasser,et al.  The Chemical Environment in Cement Matrices , 1985 .

[31]  John Crank,et al.  The Mathematics Of Diffusion , 1956 .