SEARCH · Search NASA
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Report prepared for NDEP
Two Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF) Tank 201 samples were collected from the replacement of the decontaminated salt solution (DSS) coalescer at different times; one in December of 2021 and the other in August 2022. The December 2021 sample was collected after nitric and water flushing of the DSS Coalescer. The Aug 2022 sample was collected after water flushing only. The December 2021 Tank 201 solids were previously characterized and documented. SWPF requested the characterization of the August 2022 Tank 201 sample, and the comparison of the characterization results for these two Tank 201 solids collected at different dates.
The Savannah River Nuclear Solutions (SRNS) Fast Critical Assembly (FCA) mission is reestablishing the electrolytic dissolver for processing of Pu and Pu-U materials clad in stainless steel (SS). H-Canyon is planning to dissolve and neutralize FCA fuel without recovering the special nuclear material (i.e., Pu) prior to discarding to the Concentration, Storage, and Transfer Facilities (CSTF) operated by the Savannah River Mission Completion (SRMC) Liquid Waste (LW) Organization. The FCA discards will be combined with sludge in the CSTF after Low Temperature Aluminum Dissolution (LTAD) if needed. The combined waste will be washed, concentrated, and vitrified at the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF). The high level waste canisters produced will be temporarily stored in the Glass Waste Storage Buildings prior to transfer to a future federal repository. Decants from LTAD and sludge washing will be combined with DWPF recycle and dissolved salt cake to prepare salt batches for processing in the Salt Waste Processing Facility. The resulting decontaminated salt solution will be processed in the Saltstone Production Facility.
The Savannah River Site's Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) operations are being upgraded with the introduction of the Nitric-Glycolic Flowsheet. Glycolic acid has been shown superior to formic acid as the reducing acid used during chemical processing. The new flowsheet improves or maintains necessary parameters such as 1) reduction of mercury, 2) adjustment of feed rheology and 3) adjustment of melter oxidation/reduction potential. Further, the potential for catalytic hydrogen generation in DWPF processing is virtually eliminated. DWPF process condensates are collected and returned to the SRS Concentration, Storage and Transfer Facilities (CSTF). The Recycle Collection Tank (RCT) collects off-gas condensate during chemical processing, vitrification, and other unit operations performed in DWPF and is the singular return vessel delivering recycle effluent back to CSTF. Each batch of recycle may contain a small amount of glycolate from chemical processing and melter off-gas condensates. To avoid potential flammability issues due to thermolysis of glycolate in the CSTF, chemical oxidation within the RCT has been investigated as an option for mitigating the transfer of glycolate. Sodium permanganate has been down-selected as the best option for oxidation of glycolate. Testing was performed using both 2-L and 22-L reactors (16,800:1 and 1,530:1 scale by volume) with non-radioactive waste simulants to approximate the expected RCT compositions. RCT simulants were evaluated at various process pH and temperature conditions. Also, RCT operations, namely the sequence of addition of corrosion inhibitors (NaOH and NaNO{sub 2}) versus a permanganate strike, were evaluated. Glycolate was introduced via a sludge simulant to mimic both expected entrainment and abnormal process foam-over conditions - the range being between 68 and 5100 mg/kg glycolate. Glycolate destruction was monitored by ion chromatography (IC). The corresponding manganese behavior was monitored in real-time using in situ ultraviolet-visible (UV-Vis) spectroscopy. RCT glycolate content can be reduced to below the IC detection limit within 90 minutes for all concentrations investigated. Ion Chromatography analysis revealed that under alkaline conditions, glycolate is primarily oxidized to oxalate with no significant formation of CO{sub 2} or carbonate, and nitrite is not oxidized to nitrate. Initially, complete oxidation of organics species and nitrite was assumed. Determination of the mechanistic chemical reaction has allowed the required amount of permanganate to be more accurately predicted and the total addition to be significantly reduced. UV-Vis measurements reveal that permanganate (Mn{sup 7+}) is reduced to manganate (Mn{sup 6+}) in the RCT. The oxidant stoichiometry is defined by using the initial permanganate to glycolate (P/G) molar ratio. At low initial glycolate concentration (68 and 140 mg/kg), the minimum required initial permanganate to glycolate (P/G) molar ratio was found to be 5-6. With high initial glycolate concentrations (5100 mg/kg) a lower (P/G) molar ratio of ∼2.5 was needed. The final portion of this effort supporting the nitric/glycolic flowsheet will be to test actual (fully radioactive) RCT samples as per the above simulant tests. (authors)
The Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF) Tank 201 and Tank 202 samples have been characterized using X-ray diffraction (XRD), scanning electron microscope/energy dispersive x-ray (SEM/EDX), particle size analysis (PSA-Microtrac), Fourier transform-infrared (FT-IR) and nuclear magnetic resonance ( 1 H NMR) spectroscopic techniques to characterize and identify organic and inorganic components in Tanks 201 and 202 as part of efforts to understand the problems occurring at SWPF due to the presence of solids in the recovered solvent.
The Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF) Tank 201 and Tank 202 samples have been characterized using X-ray diffraction (XRD), scanning electron microscope/energy dispersive x-ray (SEM/EDX), particle size analysis (PSA-Microtrac), Fourier transform-infrared (FT-IR) and nuclear magnetic resonance ( 1 H NMR) spectroscopic techniques to characterize and identify organic and inorganic components in Tanks 201 and 202 as part of efforts to understand the problems occurring at SWPF due to the presence of solids in the recovered solvent.
Near the beginning of calendar year 2021, Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF) processed nearly a million gallons of initially diluted, and subsequently undiluted, supernatant. Higher than usual levels of Isopar L were detected in the Decontaminated Salt Solution (DSS). After shutting down the process and inspecting the DSS coalescers, personnel discovered the coalescers media appeared deformed and at least one had extruded out of the sealing surfaces. The gasket material was removed and sent to the Savannah River National Laboratory to possibly determine the cause of gasket degradation. A memorandum was issued documenting the results that could not rule out assembly error of the coalescer. For example, over torquing the gaskets beyond their recommended degree of compression, may have been a potential failure mode. SRNL recommended performing a quick compatibility test between the different process solutions used at SWPF and four different polymeric materials (the fifth one-Kalrez ® -arrived at the end of this test).
The “as-received” Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF) Tank 101 and two Tank 104 samples (pre-wash and washed solids) have been characterized using x-ray diffraction (XRD) and scanning electron microscope/energy dispersive x-ray (SEM/EDX) techniques to address the concerns for the existence of solids, which may interfere with the operational performance of the SWPF crossflow filtration process.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) analyzed boric acid samples from the Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF). This document reports the results of these analyses. Analysis of these samples indicates that the material does not display any unusual characteristics or observations, such as visually apparent solids. The characteristics of both samples was as expected.
The aqueous waste from the Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF) is sampled semiannually for transfers to the Saltstone Production Facility (SPF). Salt solution is treated at SPF and disposed of in the Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF). Per request of customer, X-TTR-Z-00027, Revision 0, one SDF waste form (saltstone) sample was prepared in the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) from the SWPF Decontaminated Salt Solution (DSS) Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) sample and Z-area premix material for the April 2024 semiannual Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) sample. The sample contained 60:40 (by weight) of slag and fly ash (referred to as the “Cement-Free grout sample”). Results from the technical report support Task 2: ‘Grout Leaching Analyses’ of the Task Technical Request (TTR) prepared by Savannah River Mission Completion (SRMC). After at least 28 days cured, a sample of the SDF waste form was collected and shipped to a certified laboratory for analysis using the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP). The April 2024 semiannual Cement-Free grout sample met the South Carolina (SC) Code of Regulations for Hazardous Waste Management Regulations (HWMR) 61-79.261.24 and 61-79.268.48 requirements for a non-hazardous waste form with respect to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) metals and Underlying Hazardous Constituents (UHCs), and met the SPF WAC that was in effect at the time of the tank sampling.
The aqueous waste from the Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF) is sampled semiannually for transfers to the Saltstone Production Facility (SPF). Salt solution is treated at SPF and disposed of in the Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF). Per request of customer, X-TTR-Z-00027, Revision 0, one SDF waste form (saltstone) sample was prepared in the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) from the SWPF Decontaminated Salt Solution (DSS) Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) sample and Z-area premix material for the October 2024 semiannual Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) sample. The sample contained 60:40 (by weight) of slag and fly ash (referred to as the “Cement-Free grout sample”). Results from the technical report support Task 2: ‘Grout Leaching Analyses’ of the Task Technical Request (TTR) prepared by Savannah River Mission Completion (SRMC). At 64 days cured, a sample of the SDF waste form was collected and shipped to a certified laboratory for analysis using the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP). The October 2024 semiannual Cement-Free grout sample met the South Carolina (SC) Code of Regulations for Hazardous Waste Management Regulations (HWMR) 61-79.261.24 and 61-79.268.48 requirements for a non-hazardous waste form with respect to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) metals and Underlying Hazardous Constituents (UHCs), and met the SPF WAC that was in effect at the time of the sample collection at SWPF.
Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) has been requested by Savannah River Mission Completion (SRMC)/ Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF) personnel to investigate the potential routes for titanium and mercury accumulations within the SWPF Flowsheet. The first part of this work examined how various forms of mercury can migrate through the solvent extraction system. This entailed single stage distribution tests, a multi-stage Extraction-Scrub-Strip (ESS) test, and a detailed speciation analysis of several salt batch feed samples.
The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) was requested to develop a new antifoam control method for the Defense Waste Processing Facility’s (DWPF) Chemical Process Cell (CPC). SRNL completed testing of both chemical and nonchemical foam controls. The nonchemical foam controls were either ineffective (or worse, created more foam) or impractical (i.e., a water spray can control foam, but excessive water is needed). As a result, the focus of this study was on finding a superwetter or commercial antifoam for controlling foam.
The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) was requested to develop a new antifoam control method for the Defense Waste Processing Facility’s (DWPF) Chemical Process Cell (CPC). SRNL completed testing of both chemical and nonchemical foam controls. The nonchemical foam controls were either ineffective (or worse, created more foam) or impractical (i.e., a water spray can control foam, but excessive water is needed). As a result, the focus of this study was on finding a superwetter or commercial antifoam for controlling foam.
The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) was requested to develop a new antifoam control method for the Defense Waste Processing Facility’s (DWPF) Chemical Process Cell (CPC). SRNL completed testing of both chemical and nonchemical foam controls. The nonchemical foam controls were either ineffective (or worse, created more foam) or impractical (i.e., a water spray can control foam, but excessive water is needed). As a result, the focus of this study was on finding a superwetter or commercial antifoam for controlling foam.
The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) was requested to develop a new antifoam control method for the Defense Waste Processing Facility’s (DWPF) Chemical Process Cell (CPC). SRNL completed testing of both chemical and nonchemical foam controls. The nonchemical foam controls were either ineffective (or worse, created more foam) or impractical (a water spray can control foam, but excessive water is needed). As a result, the focus of this study was on finding a superwetter or commercial antifoam for controlling foam. Thirty potential antifoams were tested as part of this study. A series of tests were developed to help screen out ineffective alternatives including: 1. Spreading testing of superspreaders, 2. Foam column testing with physical simulants, 3. Boiling testing with physical and chemical simulants, 4. Days-only Sludge Receipt and Adjustment Tank (SRAT) process simulations with sludge (containing noble metals and mercury), Precipitate Reactor Feed Tank (PRFT), and Slurry Mix Evaporator Feed Tank (SEFT) simulants in the RC1 Reaction Calorimeter (purchased for antifoam testing), and 5. Around-the-clock SRAT and Slurry Mix Evaporator (SME) process simulations with sludge(containing noble metals and mercury), PRFT, and SEFT simulants in the RC1 Reaction Calorimeter. Evonik Surfynol® MD20, a commercially available defoamer, was relatively effective in controlling foam, while remaining chemically stable in SRAT and SME processing across the pH range of 4 to 13. No degradation products were detected in the offgas, in the condensate or in the SRAT and SME products. In nitric-glycolic acid flowsheet testing, 250 mg/kg Evonik Surfynol® MD20 was needed for foam control compared to 1,625 mg/kg for Antifoam 747, DWPF’s current antifoam. In nitric-formic acid flowsheet testing, 1,125 mg/kg of Evonik Surfynol® MD20 was needed to control foam throughout the SRAT and SME cycles. The commercially available superspreader Momentive™ Y-17112 was even more effective than Evonik Surfynol® MD20 as both a defoamer and an antifoam. Not only was the foam destroyed upon addition but also was less persistent between additions. It was the most effective antifoam in testing using both the nitric-glycolic acid flowsheet and the nitric-formic acid flowsheet. In nitric-glycolic acid flowsheet testing, only 100 mg/kg Momentive™ Y-17112 was needed to control foam throughout the SRAT and SME cycles. In nitric-formic acid flowsheet testing, 300 mg/kg Momentive™ Y-17112 was needed to control foam throughout the SRAT and SME cycles. Momentive™ Y-17112 is also resistant to hydrolysis as demonstrated by its chemical stability in SRAT and SME processing across the pH range of 4 to 13 and lack of degradation products in offgas or condensate. Both candidates were effective as potential replacements for Antifoam 747, with Y-17112 demonstrating superior foam control. During nitric-glycolic flowsheet testing 50% less antifoam was needed when using Momentive™ Y-17112 compared to MD20. During nitric-formic flowsheet testing 75% less antifoam was needed when using Momentive™ Y-17112 compared to MD20. Foam remediated with Momentive™ Y-17112 was less persistent throughout testing. In addition, no degradation products were detected in the offgas, in the condensate or in the SRAT and SME products. Based on this testing, Momentive™ Y-17112 is clearly superior to Evonik Surfynol® MD20 and Antifoam 747, especially for the nitric-formic acid flowsheet processing; it is recommended that Momentive™ Y-17112 replace Antifoam 747 in DWPF. An antifoam addition strategy is recommended for both the nitric-glycolic acid flowsheet and the nitric-formic acid flowsheet. Implementation of Momentive™ Y-17112 is expected to decrease SRAT and SME boiling times by up to 50%, eliminate the issues resulting from Antifoam 747 degradation products, and minimize foamovers. To validate the effectiveness of these defoaming agents, SRNL recommends irradiation of a SRAT or SME product simulant containing fresh antifoam. The goal of this testing is to determine whether the irradiation causes decomposition of the antifoam that would make it less effective or produce new species in the offgas or slurry. This testing began in April 2020. An evaluation should be completed to determine the thermolytic hydrogen and methane generation rate in downstream equipment, including the High-Level Waste evaporators.
In this Technical Report, the chemical and radionuclide contaminant results from the October 2023 Semiannual sample of the Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF) Decontaminated Salt Solution (DSS) salt solution are presented in tabulated form. The information from this characterization will be used by Savannah River Mission Completion (SRMC) for the transfer of aqueous waste from SWPF to the Saltstone Production Facility (SPF) where the waste will be treated and disposed in the Saltstone Disposal Facility. This Technical Report compares results, where applicable, to SPF Waste Acceptance Criteria (WAC) LIMITS and TARGETS that were established at the time the SWPF DSS sample was obtained. The October 2023 Semiannual sample of the SWPF DSS is a composite from the six months of SWPF processing during the Third Quarter Fiscal Year 2023 (3QFY2023) and the Fourth Quarter Fiscal Year 2023 (4QFY2023).