SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Tank Farm”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 253 records · Page 14

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2013

Analysis Of 2h-Evaporator Scale Wall [HTF-13-82] And Pot Bottom [HTF-13-77] Samples

Savannah River Remediation (SRR) is planning to remove a buildup of sodium aluminosilicate scale from the 2H-evaporator pot by loading and soaking the pot with heated 1.5 M nitric acid solution. Sampling and analysis of the scale material has been performed so that uranium and plutonium isotopic analysis can be input into a Nuclear Criticality Safety Assessment (NCSA) for scale removal by chemical cleaning. Historically, since the operation of the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF), silicon in the DWPF recycle stream combines with aluminum in the typical tank farm supernate to form sodium aluminosilicate scale mineral deposits in the 2Hevaporator pot and gravity drain line. The 2H-evaporator scale samples analyzed by Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) came from the bottom cone sections of the 2H-evaporator pot [Sample HTF-13-77] and the wall 2H-evaporator [sample HTF-13-82]. X-ray diffraction analysis (XRD) confirmed that both the 2H-evaporator pot scale and the wall samples consist of nitrated cancrinite (a crystalline sodium aluminosilicate solid) and clarkeite (a uranium oxy-hydroxide mineral). On “as received” basis, the bottom pot section scale sample contained an average of 2.59E+00 ± 1.40E-01 wt % total uranium with a U-235 enrichment of 6.12E-01 ± 1.48E-02 %, while the wall sample contained an average of 4.03E+00 ± 9.79E-01 wt % total uranium with a U-235 enrichment of 6.03E-01% ± 1.66E-02 wt %. The bottom pot section scale sample analyses results for Pu-238, Pu-239, and Pu-241 are 3.16E- 05 ± 5.40E-06 wt %, 3.28E-04 ± 1.45E-05 wt %, and <8.80E-07 wt %, respectively. The evaporator wall scale samples analysis values for Pu-238, Pu-239, and Pu-241 averages 3.74E-05 ± 6.01E-06 wt %, 4.38E-04 ± 5.08E-05 wt %, and <1.38E-06 wt %, respectively. The Pu-241 analyses results, as presented, are upper limit values. These results are provided so that SRR can calculate the equivalent uranium-235 concentrations for the NCSA. Results confirm that the uranium contained in the scale remains depleted with respect to natural uranium. SRNL did not calculate an equivalent U-235 enrichment, which takes into account other fissionable isotopes U-233, Pu-239 and Pu-241. The applicable method for calculation of equivalent U-235 will be determined in the NCSA.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2017

Comparison of Exhibited Wear in Tefzel?, Kynar?, and UHMWPE Valve Seats Exposed to Cyclic Operations with Abrasive Slurry - 17519

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) conducted abrasive-wear testing of ball valves used for double valve isolation in nuclear waste process lines. The valve seat materials consisted of Kynar{sup R}, Tefzel{sup R}, and ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (UHMWPE). Cycle testing was conducted for 1500 operating cycles for the Kynar{sup R} and Tefzel{sup R} valve seats and 5500 cycles for the UHMWPE valve seats. A valve operational cycle consisted of slurry flow, slurry gravity drain, flush water flow, and flush water gravity drain. Both two-way and three-way valves were evaluated, and valves were configured in simulated manifolds so the impact of serving various operational functions (e.g., slurry, flush, or drain control) could be evaluated as some valves are flushed prior to being cycled and others are not. Testing was conducted in PNNL's Multi-Phase Transport Evaluation Loop Facility using a performance-based simulant developed by PNNL specifically for this test program to emulate abrasive slurries for Hanford Tank Farms Waste Transfer System during single-shell tank retrieval and waste feed delivery to the Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant. Pre- and post-test valve tear-down evaluations were conducted to observe changes in the condition of internal components for the various seat materials. The various forms of physical wear observed for the different seat materials are presented. The wear results can be used to assess seat materials and valve configurations for application to waste transfer operations, and the observed wear mechanisms can provide insight into assessing valve service life. This information will be used to identify and select additional valve designs that should be evaluated for certification for future use. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2018

Application of an AREVA Mobile Evaporator Design Used Successfully at NRC Licensed U.S. Commercial Nuclear Sites to Support Hanford Site Operations - 18134

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of River Protection (ORP), manages the River Protection Project at the Hanford site in the South Eastern corner of Washington State in the Pacific Northwest of the United States. The mission of the River Protection Project is to retrieve and treat Hanford's tank waste and close the tank farms to protect the Columbia River. The Site Tank Operations Contractor (Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS)) via its site operations teams creates additional space in the Double Shell Tanks (DSTs) using the site's only remaining operational evaporator - 242-A. The current 242-A Evaporator has long been identified as a potential single point of failure that in the event of a major breakdown, could significantly impact retrieval operations at the Hanford Site. Areva has experience both on the Hanford site as an integrated subcontractor to the mission and in the design, procurement and construction of a mobile forced circulation evaporator unit designed to be used on Nuclear Regulatory Commission commercial nuclear utility sites. The mobile unit has been used at the following nuclear power plants: SONGS, Salem, Davis Besse, Waterford and Palo Verde. It was designed to take spent Water-EDTA based chemical cleaning solvent and evaporate water off to reduce the volume of waste required to go through downstream processes. It was further designed to fit inside ISO shipping containers. A multi-step approach will be used to: 1. review lessons learned from the previous DOE study for deploying a mobile evaporator on the Hanford sit, 2. evaluate the proposed waste streams and the required throughput and waste arising, sizing the evaporator appropriately, 3. develop a concept design requirements document for the use of a customized evaporator to meet the Hanford need 4. Design, and build a mobile evaporator and 5. Test, install and commission at a site to be agreed with WRPS/DOE. With an overall budget for the approach described of around $35 m, an operational evaporator could be delivered to site in 18-24 months from the approval of a detailed design package. Potential befits include the elimination of the 242-A evaporator as a single point failure, the creation of additional DST tank space and the elimination of the need to stage waste at the 242-A evaporator by moving the mobile unit to a location where is could be deployed at or close to the tank such as in 200W. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2018

Separation and Speciation of Mercury from Hanford 241-AP-107 Tank Waste Supernatant

Mercuric nitrate, Hg(NO 3 ) 2 , was introduced into the Hanford flowsheet when it was used to catalyze nitric acid dissolution of certain aluminum alloy fuels and to suppress radioiodine volatilization during nitric acid dissolution of short-cooled uranium metal fuel. Inventory estimates, based primarily on Hanford process-knowledge, suggest a total mercury inventory of 2,100 kg 1 in the Hanford Tank Farms. Aside from the obvious human exposure concerns via tank vapors, mercury species in the tank waste liquid and solid fraction pose risk to the implementation and execution of the River Protection Project mission due to mercury limits imposed under waste acceptance criteria, toxicity characteristic leaching procedure restrictions for secondary waste disposal, and air emission permits. Although there is currently no processing of tank waste at Hanford, waste processing is imminent and representative mercury inventory tracking will be important to anticipate and mitigate stack emissions and secondary liquid waste disposal issues like those experienced at the Savannah River Site.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2023

Low Activity Waste Tuning Feed Material Testing VSL-18R4350-1 (Final Report)

High level waste (HLW) from the Hanford tank farms will be retrieved and transferred to the Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP). The waste will be pretreated to separate the soluble chemical salts (mostly sodium nitrate/nitrite and sodium hydroxide) from the bulk of the radioactive materials. This decontaminated salt solution is the low activity waste (LAW) stream which constitutes most of the total waste volume. The remaining HLW contains most of the radioactive materials but a fraction of the volume. Each of these waste streams is directed to an independent processing facility where the waste is mixed with glass forming chemicals (mostly silica and borax or boric acid) and fed into the melters for stabilization by conversion into glass. The molten glass is poured into stainless steel containers to produce packages for disposal: local shallow burial for the LAW containers and a future geologic repository for the HLW containers. The LAW facility melters produce significant quantities of NOx-laden off-gas that require abatement in accordance with 10 CFR 830 and air emission requirements. The NOx emissions also pose a safety risk. The LAW facility commissioning sequence requires that the melters be operated and process control loops tuned prior to introducing waste or waste feed materials that produce NOx. Therefore, a temporary or permanent system architecture is needed that provides a feed supply to the melters for the purpose of melter testing and off-gas tuning that does not result in the production of significantly hazardous off-gas products.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2014

Technology Evaluation for Conditioning of Hanford Tank Waste Using Solids Segregation and Size Reduction

The Savannah River National Laboratory and the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory team performed a literature search on current and proposed technologies for solids segregation and size reduction of particles in the slurry feed from the Hanford Tank Farm. The team also investigated technology research performed on waste tank slurries, both real and simulated, and reviewed academic theory applicable to solids segregation and size reduction. This review included text book applications and theory, commercial applications suitable for a nuclear environment, research of commercial technologies suitable for a nuclear environment, and those technologies installed in a nuclear environment, including technologies implemented at Department of Energy facilities. Information on each technology is provided in this report along with the advantages and disadvantages of the technologies for this application. Any technology selected would require testing to verify the ability to meet the High-Level Waste Feed Waste Acceptance Criteria to the Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Pretreatment Facility.

Hanford tank waste↗

DOE OSTI2020

Innovative mercury treatment technology options for the liquid waste system at the Savannah River Site: scoping studies

The Savannah River Site (SRS) Liquid Waste System (LWS) contains liquids, salts and sludges that are currently being processed into final wasteforms for disposition, specifically, waste glass for sludges, solids and liquids containing high levels of radioactivity, and saltstone grout for low activity decontaminated liquid solutions. The LWS also contains approximately 60,000 kg of mercury present in the following physical and chemical forms, specifically: a) ionic inorganic mercury, organomercury (e.g., methylmercury), and other minor components found in LWS fluids b) mercury solids such as oxides, hydroxides, amalgams sulfides and sorbed mercury, c) accumulations of dense liquid elemental mercury, and d) vapor phase elemental and organomercury mercury found in tank headspace gas and in evaporators. An effective and proactive management strategy of the mercury present in the LWS is needed to support processing of LWS wastes into glass and saltstone. Sustainable processing of the LAWS to completion requires mercury removal from the LWS at a rate of approximately 2,900 kg/yr. This removal can be accomplished through existing mercury treatment systems or newly implemented LWS “purge points”. The chemical speciation of mercury has emerged as the key factor that controls mercury behavior in the LWS. For example, past studies demonstrated that mercury speciation is adversely impacting the performance of existing removal systems so that significant levels of mercury are recycled from the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) back to the tank farm. Consequently, mercury concentrations have slowly increased in the LWS tank fluids over time. The presence of organo-mercury has also been identified as the cause of increased mercury leaching from saltstone. In response to these challenges, the Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM-TD) Technology Development Program has supported a series of scoping studies predicated on manipulating or controlling mercury speciation and mercury behaviors within the constraints of LWS waste chemistry and safety conditions. The intent of these studies was to rapidly triage potential technology options and develop a technically based go / no go recommendation for further work. This composite report presents the results of three scoping studies: 1) advanced photooxidation processes, 2) chemical reduction, and 3) mercury getters.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

Ion-Exchange Modeling of Crystalline Silicotitanate for Cesium Removal - 20283

The Tank Closure Cesium Removal (TCCR) system is a Savannah River Site (SRS) demonstration 'at-tank' process designed to remove {sup 137}Cs from the high-level aqueous tank waste so that the decontaminated solution can be disposed as low-level waste. Cesium is removed by ion exchange (IX) columns using engineered IONSIV{sup TM} R9120-B form of the Crystalline Silicotitanate (CST) media. The TCCR system is deployed at Tanks 10 and Tank 11 in the SRS H Tank Farm. Water is added to the salt-cake in Tank 10 H to dissolve it. The dissolved salt solution waste is pumped out of Tank 10H (feed tank), through filters and IX columns. The decontaminated salt solution is transferred to Tank 11 (receipt tank), and on to Tank 50H for final disposal in the Saltstone Production Facility. The current TCCR can accommodate lead-lag (two-column) or lead-lag-guard (three-column) configurations to optimize media utilization and achieve the target decontamination. To assist the TCCR operations, a parametric study was conducted to evaluate the impact of different parameters (e.g., column configurations (single column, two columns or three columns in series), waste characteristics, operating temperature, process flow rate, CST average particle size) on the IX column performance including CST bed utilization. The initial results indicate that the IX column performance is improved at slower process flow rate, at lower operating temperature, and with smaller CST average particle size. Multi-column configurations are recommended, because the single-column configuration does not utilize CST bed effectively. This paper demonstrates the versatility of the ion exchange modeling to evaluate the effects of CST characteristics and operational parameters on IX column performances. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2013

Hanford Tank Waste - Near Source Treatment of Low Activity Waste

Abstract only. Treatment and disposition of Hanford Site waste as currently planned consists of 100+ waste retrievals, waste delivery through up to 8+ miles of dedicated, in-ground piping, centralized mixing and blending operations- all leading to pre-treatment combination and separation processes followed by vitrification at the Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP). The sequential nature of Tank Farm and WTP operations requires nominally 15-20 years of continuous operations before all waste can be retrieved from many Single Shell Tanks (SSTs). Also, the infrastructure necessary to mobilize and deliver the waste requires significant investment beyond that required for the WTP. Treating waste as closely as possible to individual tanks or groups- as allowed by the waste characteristics- is being investigated to determine the potential to 1) defer, reduce, and/or eliminate infrastructure requirements, and 2) significantly mitigate project risk by reducing the potential and impact of single point failures. The inventory of Hanford waste slated for processing and disposition as LAW is currently managed as high-level waste (HLW), i.e., the separation of fission products and other radionuclides has not commenced. A significant inventory of this waste (over 20M gallons) is in the form of precipitated saltcake maintained in single shell tanks, many of which are identified as potential leaking tanks. Retrieval and transport (as a liquid) must be staged within the waste feed delivery capability established by site infrastructure and WTP. Near Source treatment, if employed, would provide for the separation and stabilization processing necessary for waste located in remote farms (wherein most of the leaking tanks reside) significantly earlier than currently projected. Near Source treatment is intended to address the currently accepted site risk and also provides means to mitigate future issues likely to be faced over the coming decades. This paper describes the potential near source treatment and waste disposition options as well as the impact these options could have on reducing infrastructure requirements, project cost and mission schedule.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2014

Technology Evaluation for Conditioning of Hanford Tank Waste using Solids Segregation and Size Reduction

The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) and the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) team performed a literature search on current and proposed technologies for solids segregation and size reduction of particles in the slurry feed from the Hanford Tank Farm (HTF). The team also investigated technology research performed on waste tank slurries, both real and simulated, and reviewed academic theory applicable to solids segregation and size reduction. This review included textbook applications and theory, commercial applications suitable for a nuclear environment, research of commercial technologies suitable for a nuclear environment, and those technologies installed in a nuclear environment, including technologies implemented at Department of Energy (DOE) facilities. Information on each technology is provided in this report along with the advantages and disadvantages of the technologies for this application.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2017

Characterization of the March 2017 tank 10 surface sample (combination of HTF-10-17-30 AND HTF-10-17-31) and variable depth sample (combination of HTF-10-17-32 and HTF-10-17-33)

Two surface samples (HTF-10-17-30 and HTF-10-17-31) and two variable depth samples (HTF-10-17-32 and HTF-10-17-33) were collected from SRS Tank 10 during March 2017 and submitted to SRNL for characterization. At SRNL, the two surface samples were combined in one container, the two variable depth samples (VDSs) were combined in another container, and then the two composite samples were each characterized by a series of physical, ionic, radiological, and elemental analysis methods. The surface sample composite was characterized primarily for Tank Farm corrosion control purposes, while the VDS composite was characterized primarily for Tank Closure Cesium Removal (TCCR) purposes.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2019

Drying of Crystalline Silicotitanate (CST) Beds by Air Flow

The Direct Feed Low-Activity Waste (DFLAW) process has been proposed to support early production of immobilized low-activity waste (LAW) at the Hanford Site. The tank farm contractor Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC (WRPS) is developing the Tank-Side Cesium Removal (TSCR) system to accomplish the treatment objectives. The TSCR system is being designed and built by AVANTech, Inc. for WRPS and will use a filter to remove any entrained solids in the LAW and will use columns of crystalline silicotitanate (CST) ion exchange media to remove 137 Cs. A key step in preparing used columns of CST for transportation and interim storage is draining and drying of the CST beds. The purpose of this study is to document testing activities that quantify the drying of full-height beds of CST material in a laboratory column that is scaled to represent the drying process of the planned full-scale CST columns to be used in the TSCR system. The purpose also includes demonstrating that CST material within the scaled column, when dried with air injection, will pass the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Paint Filter Liquids Test.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2021

Spent Crystalline Silicotitanate Storage Study—Post AP-105DF Processing

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2021

Spent Crystalline Silicotitanate Storage Study—Post AP-105DF Processing

A Tank-Side Cesium Removal (TSCR) system is under development by Washington River Protection Solutions to support initial production of immobilized low-activity waste (LAW) by feeding Hanford tank supernate from tank farms to the Hanford Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) LAW Facility. Tank waste supernate will be filtered to remove suspended solids and then Cs will be removed by processing it through crystalline silicotitanate (CST) ion exchange media manufactured by Honeywell UOP, LLC. The Cs-loaded CST columns will be stored indefinitely, with a goal of eventual CST removal and treatment. Thus, the spent CST needs to be recoverable after undetermined storage time. Previous testing with AP-105 simulant showed that rinsing the CST bed with 3 bed volumes (1.4 apparatus volumes [AVs]) of 0.1 M NaOH resulted in a dried bed that maintained flow characteristics indicative of ease of recovery. This study explored the intermediate conditions (between feed dried in place and the 1.4 AVs of 0.1 M NaOH rinse) to evaluate CST bed properties after: 1) stoppage with feed in place; 2) stoppage after draining feed; 3) stoppage after 0.7 AV of 0.1 M NaOH rinse through column; 4) stoppage after 1.5 AVs of 0.1 M NaOH rinse through column. Post processing, each column was heated at 50 °C for 19 days under pseudo-storage conditions to simulate the expected dried and stored CST bed conditions. Testing was conducted at the small scale (12-mL bed volume); actual, Cs-depleted, AP-105 tank waste was used as the feed. Post-dried CST bed physical properties (angle of repose and penetration depth) were measured to evaluate how CST moved and flowed. All process stop-conditions resulted in a solidified CST bed except for the final condition, 1.5 AVs of 0.1 M NaOH rinse. At this small scale, the three CST beds presented an issue for retrievability after the short storage period (19 days at 50 °C). The latter case confirmed the results from simulant testing. The testing was intended to provide a preliminary assessment of issues that may arise from desiccation of CST during storage with the indicated salt solutions in place. Since these were small-scale tests, the processing system did not scale to full scale conditions exactly; however, the tests did provide insight into the impact on the dried and stored CST bed after stopping processing at an earlier step (upset condition) than normal. These results indicate that if an upset condition occurs at TSCR, a dilute hydroxide rinse should be considered before the CST dries from internal heating.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2016

Extraction-Scrub-Strip test results from the interim Salt Disposition Program Macrobatch 9 Tank 21H qualification samples

Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) analyzed samples from Tank 21H in support of qualification of Macrobatch (Salt Batch) 9 for the Interim Salt Disposition Program (ISDP). The Salt Batch 9 characterization results were previously reported. An Extraction-Scrub-Strip (ESS) test was performed to determine cesium distribution ratios (D (Cs) ) and cesium concentration in the strip effluent and decontaminated salt solution (DSS) streams; this data will be used by Tank Farm Engineering to project a cesium decontamination factor (DF). This test used actual Tank 21H material, and a blend solvent prepared by SRNL that mimics the solvent composition currently being used at the Modular Caustic-Side Solvent Extraction Unit (MCU). The ESS test showed acceptable performance with an extraction D (Cs) value of 52.4. This value is consistent with results from previous salt batch ESS tests using similar solvent formulations. This compares well against the predicted value of 56.5 from a recently created D (Cs) model

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2017

Extraction, -scrub, -strip test results from the interim salt disposition program macrobatch 10 tank 21H qualification samples

Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) analyzed samples from Tank 21H in support of qualification of Macrobatch (Salt Batch) 10 for the Interim Salt Disposition Program (ISDP). The Salt Batch 10 characterization results were previously reported.ii,iii An Extraction, -Scrub, -Strip (ESS) test was performed to determine cesium distribution ratios (D(Cs)) and cesium concentration in the strip effluent (SE) and decontaminated salt solution (DSS) streams; this data will be used by Tank Farm Engineering to project a cesium decontamination factor (DF). This test used actual Tank 21H material, and a sample of the NGS Blend solvent currently being used at the Modular Caustic-Side Solvent Extraction Unit (MCU). The ESS test showed acceptable performance with an extraction D(Cs) value of 110. This value is consistent with results from previous salt batch ESS tests using similar solvent formulations. This is better than the predicted value of 39.8 from a recently created D(Cs) model.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2019

Extraction, Scrub, and Strip Test Results from The Interim Salt Disposition Program Macrobatch 11 Tank 21H Qualification Samples

Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) analyzed samples from Tank 21H in support of qualification of Macrobatch (Salt Batch) 11 for the Interim Salt Disposition Program (ISDP). The Salt Batch 11 characterization results were previously reported. An Extraction, Scrub, and Strip (ESS) test was performed to determine cesium distribution ratios (D(Cs)) and cesium concentration in the strip effluent (SE) and decontaminated salt solution (DSS) streams; this data will be used by Tank Farm Engineering to project a cesium decontamination factor (DF). This test used actual Tank 21H material, and a sample of the Next Generation Solvent (NGS) Blend solvent currently being used at the Modular Caustic-Side Solvent Extraction Unit (MCU). The ESS test showed acceptable performance with an extraction D(Cs) value of 117. This value is consistent with results from previous salt batch ESS tests using similar solvent formulations. This cesium removal efficiency is better than the predicted value of 50.8 from a recently created D (Cs) model.

Peters, T.↗

DOE OSTI2012

Single-Shell Tanks Leak Integrity Elements/ SX Farm Leak Causes and Locations - 12127

Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC (WRPS) developed an enhanced single-shell tank (SST) integrity project in 2009. An expert panel on SST integrity was created to provide recommendations supporting the development of the project. One primary recommendation was to expand the leak assessment reports (substitute report or LD-1) to include leak causes and locations. The recommendation has been included in the M-045-91F Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (Tri-Party Agreement) as one of four targets relating to SST leak integrity. The 241-SX Farm (SX Farm) tanks with leak losses were addressed on an individual tank basis as part of LD-1. Currently, 8 out of 23 SSTs that have been reported to having a liner leak are located in SX Farm. This percentage was the highest compared to other tank farms which is why SX Farm was analyzed first. The SX Farm is comprised of fifteen SSTs built 1953-1954. The tanks are arranged in rows of three tanks each, forming a cascade. Each of the SX Farm tanks has a nominal 1-million-gal storage capacity. Of the fifteen tanks in SX Farm, an assessment reported leak losses for the following tanks: 241-SX-107, 241-SX-108, 241-SX-109, 241-SX- 111, 241-SX-112, 241-SX-113, 241-SX-114 and 241-SX-115. The method used to identify leak location consisted of reviewing in-tank and ex-tank leak detection information. This provided the basic data identifying where and when the first leaks were detected. In-tank leak detection consisted of liquid level measurement that can be augmented with photographs which can provide an indication of the vertical leak location on the sidewall. Ex-tank leak detection for the leaking tanks consisted of soil radiation data from laterals and dry-wells near the tank. The in-tank and ex-tank leak detection can provide an indication of the possible leak location radially around and under the tank. Potential leak causes were determined using in-tank and ex-tank information that is not directly related to leak detection. In-tank parameters can include temperature of the supernatant and sludge, types of waste, and chemical determination by either transfer or sample analysis. Ex-tank information can be assembled from many sources including design media, construction conditions, technical specifications, and other sources. Five conditions may have contributed to SX Farm tank liner failure including: tank design, thermal shock, chemistry-corrosion, liner behavior (bulging), and construction temperature. Tank design did not apparently change from tank to tank for the SX Farm tanks; however, there could be many unknown variables present in the quality of materials and quality of construction. Several significant SX Farm tank design changes occurred from previous successful tank farm designs. Tank construction occurred in winter under cold conditions which could have affected the ductile to brittle transition temperature of the tanks. The SX Farm tanks received high temperature boiling waste from REDOX which challenged the tank design with rapid heat up and high temperatures. All eight of the leaking SX Farm tanks had relatively high rate of temperature rise. Supernatant removal with subsequent nitrate leaching was conducted in all but three of the eight leaking tanks prior to leaks being detected. It is possible that no one characteristic of the SX Farm tanks could in isolation from the others have resulted in failure. However, the application of so many stressors - heat up rate, high temperature, loss of corrosion protection, and tank design working jointly or serially resulted in their failure. Thermal shock coupled with the tank design, construction conditions, and nitrate leaching seem to be the overriding factors that can lead to tank liner failure. The distinction between leaking and sound SX Farm tanks seems to center on the waste types, thermal conditions, and nitrate leaching. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗