Jones, Daniel H. | Search NASA

DOE OSTI2021

Solvent Hold Tank Sample Results for MCU-20-32-33-34 (Quarterly Report, September 2020)

In late FY13, MCU implemented the Next Generation Solvent (NGS) flow sheet. Facility personnel added a non-radioactive, NGS “cocktail” containing the new Extractant (MaxCalix) and a new Suppressor (TiDG) to the SHT heel to implement the NGS flow sheet. The resulting “blend” solvent (“NGS blend solvent”) is essentially NGS with residual amounts of calix[4]arene-bis(tert-octylbenzo-crown-6) (BOBCalixC6) and trioctylamine (TOA). For process monitoring, SHT samples are sent to Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) to examine solvent composition changes over time. With the exception of Isopar™ L which is regularly added to the SHT due to its high vapor pressure, this report shows the cumulative chemical composition data, including impurities like mercury, of the September 2020 (MCU-20-32-33-34) solvent SHT sample. A summary report of the September SHT solvent sample was issued earlier. This report examines the cumulative results from these and several past monthly reports. These samples are intended to verify that the solvent is within the specified composition range. A baseline “scratch” solvent - a scratch solvent is a preparation of all 6 solvent components (this includes the old extractant BoBCalix and the old suppressor TrioctylAmine that remained when solvent was converted to Next Generation Solvent [NGS]) of the composition that approximates the blend of cocktail and heel solvent - was prepared in the lab (September 2018) and used for comparison and evaluation. The results from the analyses are presented in this document. This report is the last characterization analysis of the SHT solvent. MCU entered a lay-up state and about 128 gallons of the SHT solvent were pumped into 55 gallons drums for future disposal.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2021

Analysis and Testing of Parsons NGS Solvent Formulation

Three drums containing solvent used during the Next Generation Solvent Test (NGST) conducted by Parsons in 2014-2015 were received at SRNL. After homogenization, samples from each drum were removed, and a composite sample prepared. This composite was analyzed to determine current SRNL characterization method efficacy, and to determine if the 1,3-dicyclohexyl-2- (isotridecyl) guanidine (DCiTG) suppressor could be selectively removed. The results of this work indicate that the titration analytical method currently employed at SRNL is effective at quantitating the DCiTG. The nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) method at SRNL can detect the DCiTG, as well its amine and urea decomposition products. However, further development work will be required to allow the 1 H NMR method to quantitate these species. A series of three washing tests were performed on composite samples of the solvent. The results show that up to 67% of the DCiTG was removed from the solvent by simple washing, at multiple ratios of solvent: aqueous phase. This may indicate that a simple pathway exists to wash out the DCiTG and reclaim the solvent (~150 gallons) for future use at the Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

Solvent Hold Tank Sample Results for MCU-19-569-571 (December 2019), MCU-20-1-28 (January 2020), and MCU-20-29-30-31 (June 2020) (Quarterly Report)

A trend summary of three Solvent Hold Tank (SHT) monthly samples MCU-19-569-570-571 (December 2019), MCU-20-1-28 (January 2020), and MCU-20-29-30-31 (June 2020) are reported. Most of the conclusions are based on the June 2020 SHT sample (MCU-20-29-30-31). Analyses of the June 2020 SHT sample indicated that the Modifier (Cs-7SB) and the Extractant (MaxCalix) concentrations were above their nominal recommended concentrations (169,000 mg/L and 46,900 mg/L respectively) by 6% and 7% respectively. The Suppressor (N,N’,N”–tris(3,7-dimethyloctyl)guanidine or TiDG) concentration has remained at 833 ± 16 mg/L, but it is above the minimum recommended concentration (479 mg/L). The Semi-Volatile Organic Analysis (SVOA) and FT-HNMR did not detect any organic impurities. Another impurity observed in the samples was mercury. Based on the June 2020 SHT sample, up to 23 ± 5 micrograms of mercury per gram of solvent (or 19 ± 4 mg/L) was detected. The mercury concentration steadily decreased from 34.8 ug/g solvent (or 21.9 mg/L) in the December 2019 SHT sample to 34.8 ug/g solvent (or 19 mg/L) in the June 2020 SHT sample. The gamma concentration (~3.33E4 dpm/mL) measured in the June 2020 SHT samples was consistent with previous values observed when MCU was idle (for example, between February 2017 and August 2017). If additional SHT samples become available, the laboratory will continue to monitor the quality of the solvent for any new impurities or degradation of the solvent components.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

Solvent Hold Tank Sample Results for MCU-19-557- 558-559 (July 2019), MCU-19-560-561-562 (August 2019), MCU-19-566-567-568 (September 2019) (Quarterly Report)

In late FY13, MCU implemented the Next Generation Solvent (NGS) flow sheet. Facility personnel added a non-radioactive, NGS “cocktail” containing the new Extractant (MaxCalix) and a new Suppressor (TiDG) to the SHT heel to implement the NGS flow sheet. The resulting “blend” solvent (“NGS blend solvent”) is essentially NGS with residual amounts of calix[4]arene-bis(tert-octylbenzo-crown-6) (BOBCalixC6) and trioctylamine (TOA). For process monitoring, SHT samples are sent to Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) to examine solvent composition changes over time. With the exception of Isopar™ L which is regularly added to the SHT due to its high vapor pressure, this report shows the cumulative chemical composition data, including impurities like mercury, of three SHT samples: MCU-19-557-558-559, MCU- 19-560-561-562, and MCU-19-566-567-568. A summary report for each of the SHT monthly samples was issued previously. This report examines the cumulative results from these and several past monthly reports.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

Solvent Hold Tank Sample Results for MCU-19-366- 367-368 (April 2019), MCU-19-469-470-471 (May 2019), MCU-19-524-525-526 (June 2019): Quarterly Report

A trend summary of three sets of Solvent Hold Tank (SHT) monthly samples MCU-19-366-367-368 (April), MCU-19-469-470-471 (May), and MCU-19-524-525-526 (June) are reported. Most of the conclusions are based on the June SHT sample (MCU-19-524-525-526). Analyses of the June SHT sample (MCU-19-524- 525-526) indicated that the Modifier (Cs-7SB) and the Extractant (MaxCalix) concentrations were below their nominal recommended concentrations (169,000 mg/L and 46,900 mg/L respectively) by 4% and 2% respectively but consistent with previously observed levels during normal runs. The Suppressor (N,N’,N”– tris(3,7-dimethyloctyl)guanidine or TiDG) concentration has decreased since the March 2019 measurement to 793 mg/L, which is above the minimum recommended concentration (479 mg/L). The Semi-Volatile Organic Analysis (SVOA) did not detect any impurities. However, the Fourier Transform Hydrogen Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (FT-HNMR) analysis detected presence of phthalates at a few ppm. The impurity concentration was highest in the April sample and consistently detected in the May and June samples (but always registered as a few ppm or less). Another impurity observed in the samples was mercury. Based on the June SHT sample, up to 25 ± 5 micrograms of mercury per mL of solvent was detected (as the average of the Direct Mercury Analysis (DMA) and X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) methods). The higher mercury concentration in the solvent (as determined in the last three-monthly samples) is possibly due to the higher mercury concentration in Salt Batches 9 and 10. The gamma concentration (~2.90E4 dpm/mL) measured in the June 2019 SHT samples was consistent with previous values observed when the Modular Caustic-Side Solvent Extraction Unit (MCU) was operating continuously (for example, between December 2016 and January 2017). Statistical analysis of the different analytical methods detected a bias between the FT-HNMR and the High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) methods when measuring the MaxCalix and Modifier concentrations; the FT-HNMR gave a higher concentration possibly due to peak overlapping in the measured data. A bias was detected when measuring total mercury by the DMA method versus the XRF method with the XRF method reported higher mercury concentrations. The laboratory will continue to monitor the quality of the solvent for any new impurities or degradation of the solvent components.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗