Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “RICHLAND”

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.

At least 55 records · Page 3

Evaluating Movement Patterns of the Rattlesnake Hills Elk Herd on Hanford for Calendar Years 2019-2024

Biologists first documented elk on the Hanford Site in 1972; since then, the elk herd known as the Rattlesnake Hills Elk Herd (RHEH) has grown substantially (PNNL-13331, Population Characteristics and Seasonal Movement Patterns of the Rattlesnake Hills Elk Herd: Status Report 2000). Through the 1990s, the core range of the RHEH was focused on the portion of the Hanford Reach National Monument known as the Fitzner-Eberhardt Arid Lands Ecology (ALE) Reserve. More recently, larger numbers of elk have been occupying the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Hanford Field Office (HFO), formerly the DOE, Richland Operations Office managed portion- of the Hanford Site, known as central Hanford (Figure 1-1). This began with bachelor groups of bulls occupying the site intermittently, and the herd has grown to resident herds, including bulls, cows, and calves. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) established a target herd size for the RHEH of less than 350 animals to minimize damages on adjacent private agricultural lands (Washington State Elk Herd Plan–Yakima Elk Herd [WDFW 2002]). Attempts to control the RHEH population through hunting on private lands and a relocation effort during 2000 have failed to limit growth of the population toward the WDFW target, and the herd exceeds 1,600 according to recent counts (PNNL-13331; DOE/RL- 2023-20, Hanford Annual Site Environmental Report for Calendar Year 2022). Although elk are present on central Hanford year-round, they continue to move between areas offsite, the ALE Reserve, and central Hanford throughout the year, and it is these movements that result in many of the elk-vehicle collisions (EVC) that occur along Hanford Site roads and on the Washington State highways bordering the site. In addition, changes in management strategies on the ALE Reserve, including recent and potential future tribal elk hunts, may alter herd behavior and result in additional animals transiting onto and off central Hanford.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

ToF-SIMS spectral data analysis of Paenibacillus sp. 300A biofilms and planktonic cells

Analysis of bacterial biofilms is particularly challenging and important with diverse applications from systems biology to biotechnology. Among the variety of techniques that have been applied, time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry (ToF-SIMS) has many promising features in studying the surface characteristics of biofilms. ToF-SIMS offers high spatial resolution and high mass accuracy, which permit surface sensitive analysis of biofilm components. Thus, ToF-SIMS provides a powerful solution to addressing the challenge of bacterial biofilm analysis. This dataset covers ToF-SIMS analysis of Paenibacillus sp. 300A (300A) isolated from the Hanford site in Richland, WA. The strain is known to have metal and sulfur reducing properties and can be used for bioremediation, wastewater treatment, bioengineering and technology development. There is a current need to identify small molecules and fragments produced from bacterial biofilms. Static ToF-SIMS spectra of 300A were obtained using an IONTOF TOF-SIMS V instrument equipped with a 25 keV Bi 3 + metal ion gun. Identified molecules and molecular fragments are compared against known biological databases and the reported peaks have at least 65 ppm mass accuracy. These molecules range from lipids and fatty acids to flavonoids, quinolones, and other naturally occurring organic compounds. It is anticipated that the spectral identification of key peaks will assist detection of metabolites, extracellular polymeric substance molecules like polysaccharides, and biologically relevant small molecules using ToF-SIMS in future surface and interface research of bacterial biofilms.

Biofilms↗

Managing Hanford's Direct Feed Low Activity Waste Program - 20002

The Office of River Protection (ORP) is responsible for the management and completion of the River Protection Project (RPP) mission, which comprises both the Hanford Site tank farms operations and the completion and operation of the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Project. The RPP mission is to safely retrieve, treat, and immobilize Hanford's high-level and low-activity tank waste and close the tank farms to protect the Columbia River. The Direct-Feed Low-Activity Waste (DFLAW) Program is a major subset of the overall RPP mission, providing disposition of low-activity waste. The scope is to retrieve, treat, and immobilize the low-activity waste at the Low-Activity Waste Facility. DFLAW will begin operations no later than December 2023. The DFLAW Program overarches a suite of individual projects, activities, and infrastructure upgrades. The major projects and activities include multiple contractors under both ORP and the Richland Operations Office, underscoring the need for effective integration, coordination, and collaboration. The objectives of the DFLAW Program leadership team are to: - Effectively coordinate and integrate the projects that comprise the DFLAW Program - Manage the interfaces between the projects so that the integrated DFLAW Program is completed successfully - Ensure the DFLAW portfolio of projects operate as required without gaps or conflicts at the interfaces. DOE is accomplishing these objectives through a newly established leadership model that integrates the DOE and contractor work streams and promotes a teamwork model to enable collaborative success. Long considered one of the most formidable cleanup challenges at Hanford, the Department of Energy and its contractors are on the verge of achieving a cleanup commitment that has been decades in the making. DOE is preparing to vitrify (turn to glass) Hanford's chemical and radioactive tank waste using the DFLAW process. The Modified Consent Decree milestone for completing hot commissioning of the Hanford Site's Low- Activity Waste Facility is Dec. 31, 2023. While this milestone may seem distant under normal project management circumstances, it is a relatively short period of time for the operational and cultural transformation necessary to successfully begin treating tank waste at Hanford. Direct feed means separating the waste at a tank farm to remove the more radioactive portion (i.e., solids and cesium) so that the resulting low-activity (less radioactive) waste can be fed directly to the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant's Low-Activity Waste Facility. Starting DFLAW will require a singular, intensive leadership focus, along with a sustained, collective commitment to excellence and teamwork by the Department and its contractors. Major upgrades to Hanford's infrastructure will occur prior to startup. Supporting DFLAW operations requires significant integration between the DFLAW facilities - the Waste Treatment Plant, Hanford's tank farms, effluent treatment facilities, disposal facilities - and between all of the site contractors to achieve success. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Hanford Immobilized Low-Activity Waste Transportation System Testing Results - 20043

The immobilized low-activity waste (ILAW) transportation system is a first-of-a-kind system that is being designed and tested to transport ILAW glass-filled containers from Hanford's Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) Low-Activity Waste (LAW) Facility to the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF) burial trench for permanent disposal. A prototype design and fabrication of one transport trailer and four engineered ILAW pallets was completed in mid-2018. Prototype qualification testing to verify adequacy of the design was completed in 2019 by Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) and affiliate ATKINS SNC-Lavalin Group. Prototype testing was completed to advance design maturation across all operational and facility interfaces, and under adverse environmental and operating conditions, including thermal assessment of the system at peak projected temperatures. Test design, observation, and feedback was well represented and supported by all ILAW Transportation System interfacing organizations: WTP constructor Bechtel National, Inc.; IDF operator CH2M (CHPRC); transportation contractor Mission Support Alliance (MSA); the U. S. Department of Energy Richland Operations Office (DOE/RL) and Office of River Protection (DOE/ORP); and Washington State Department of Ecology. This paper presents the results of prototype qualification testing and opportunities for design improvements based on testing. Changes to the final design as a result of prototype testing include improvements in safety, ergonomics, operational flexibility, and As-Low-As-Reasonably-Achievable (ALARA) applications. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Infrastructure and DFLAW Support at Hanford - 20443

Manhattan Project era infrastructure systems are degrading at an accelerated pace across the Department of Energy's (DOE) Environmental Management complex. Revitalizing, rejuvenating and right-sizing these systems to ensure reliability for ongoing cleanup missions is a major focus at the 580-square- mile Hanford Site in southeast Washington State. The push to complete construction, commissioning, startup, and operation of facilities and systems in the Direct-Feed Low-Activity Waste (DFLAW) program at Hanford by 2023 requires considerable coordination among site contractors and a significant investment in infrastructure. The passage of time also poses a challenge. It has been about 75 years since facilities were first operated at the site, and approximately 40 years of plutonium production created a legacy of unidentified active and abandoned underground obstacles and waste sites that must be avoided when building and upgrading the infrastructure. Converting infrastructure systems originally built to support plutonium production from the 1940's to the 1980's and upgrading those systems to optimize technology is an ever-changing balance of funding profiles, available resources and execution strategies. The DOE Richland Operations Office (RL) has long recognized the need for increased investment in Hanford Site infrastructure to support the future processing of approximately 56 million gallons of waste currently stored in large underground tanks. When DFLAW is fully operational, safe and reliable infrastructure systems will be needed to ensure continuity of operations around the clock, 365 days a year. These include roadways, water, power, sewer, information technology systems and facilities. To ensure the readiness of Hanford's infrastructure to support treating tank waste in the next three years, 15 projects were identified with a combined value of $133.8 million. Through calendar year 2019, 7 infrastructure projects have been substantially completed and the remaining 8 projects, with a remaining value of $103.8 million, are scheduled to be completed by December 2023. RL and its site services/infrastructure contractor, Mission Support Alliance (MSA), regularly evaluate the needs of the DFLAW program and other Hanford Site missions to ensure the highest priority systems are addressed. In addition to a fast-approaching deadline for round-the-clock treatment operations, RL and MSA face another significant infrastructure challenge. As cleanup is being completed in a 220-square-mile area called the River Corridor, most of the cleanup operations going forward will occur in a 20-square-mile area in the center of the Hanford Site, known as the Central Plateau. Infrastructure systems are becoming more congested in an already overcrowded area. This paper/presentation will outline some of the challenges Hanford faces while executing infrastructure reliability projects. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Erratum: Production and validation of scintillating structural components from low-background Poly(ethylene naphthalate)

Regretfully, the author list of the original paper did not contain the members of the groups being responsible for the HPGe screening, Radon emanation measurement and ICPMS surface characterization works. As the work performed is to be considered more than “just service work”, the authors together with the members of these groups have decided to amend the authors list. At publication the following authors were not included in the author list: • From Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA, U.S.A.: E.W. Hoppe, I.J. Arnquist, K.P. Hobbs, A.D. French, M.L. diVacri • From INFN, Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso, 67100 Assergi, Italy: M. Laubenstein • From M. Smoluchowski Institute of Physics, Jagiellonian University, 30-348 Krakow, Poland: G. Zuzel The metadata of the present erratum are already correct.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Optimized Machine Learning Model for Predicting Groundwater Contamination

The use of physical models to predict groundwater contaminant movement remains technically challenging due to the complexity of the phenomena, the heterogeneity of key parameters in nature, and the presence of poorly defined interactive and feedback processes. New approaches to address these challenges are needed. In this study, we evaluate various Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based approaches to understand a hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)) plumes located on the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Hanford Site in Richland, WA. The groundwater monitoring dataset used in this study included data from the 100 Area along the Columbia River and included data collected between 2010 to 2019. This study investigates the most prominent contaminant, Cr(VI), with the Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) machine learning model. The XGBoost models were compared with optimized versions using an Empirical Bayes Search Cross-Validation technique for better prediction. The optimized XGBoost model yielded an R^2 value of 0.99 on the training set and 0.85 on the testing set, whereas XGBoost without optimization yielded a value of 0.83 on the training set and 0.85 on the testing set. This paper provides an overview of a computational method for groundwater contamination modeling that shows promise for improving current remediation efforts.

Mazumdar, Hirak↗

Characterization of a Uranium Groundwater Plume along the Columbia River

The 300 Area is adjacent to the Columbia River on the southeastern end of Hanford, approximately one mile north of the city of Richland. Uranium fuel fabrication took place in the 300 Area from 1943 to 1988. In this chapter, the historical waste releases that occurred within the 300 Area of the Hanford Site, and specifically the resulting uranium plume, will be used as a case study. There are 3 different operable units (OU) that were established in the 300 Area for cleanup purposes: The 300-FF-1 OU, 300-FF-2 OU and the 300-FF-5 groundwater OU. To determine the location of contaminant plumes within the Hanford Site’s 300 Area, several puzzle pieces must be put together using multiple resources. The first piece of the puzzle is determining the location and chemistry of waste disposed of in the area. Records beginning in the 1940’s can help piece this information together, and the known waste sites and waste disposed of are an example of that process knowledge. Characterization of the subsurface and groundwater is important to determine where the contaminants are now, and what form they are in. This information can be used to design a remediation strategy, as well as to inform modeling efforts to predict where the contaminants will move to next.

300-FF-5, uranium, 300 area, hanford book project↗

Boat-Dragged Riverbed and Mid-Column Water Quality along the Hanford Reach in the Columbia River Shorelines

This dataset contains water quality measurements used to identify sites of hydrologic exchange (i.e.hydrologic exchange flows; HEFs) in the Columbia River near Richland, WA by looking for anomalies in temperature and electrical conductivity (EC) along the bed of the river in February, June, July, August, and November 2017. These are ultimately the ‘ends’ of HEFs as they are locations of subsurface inflow to the river. This dataset contains dissolved oxygen (DO) measurements at 1-min intervals; temperature, EC, depth, and GPS coordinates at 1-second intervals; and N-NO3 at 2-min intervals along the river bed and mid-column water. DO measurements are included in this dataset for completeness but were not used in the analysis of HEFs due to the relatively long time interval of collection.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Time-series dissolved oxygen, other bigeochemically-relevant analytes, and pressure gradients associated with the manuscript “Dissolved oxygen sensor in an automated hyporheic sampling system reveals biogeochemical dynamics”

This dataset contains time-series data from a vertical profile within the bed and banks of the Columbia river near Richland, WA. Water was sampled through 3 small tubes embedded in the sediment at 50,100, and 200 cm below the sediment-water interface. The goal of this study was to observe the correlations between hydraulic drivers and biogeochemical responses. The results of this study are published in the manuscript “Dissolved oxygen sensor in an automated hyporheic sampling system reveals biogeochemical dynamics”. The file types included in the data package are all time-series spreadsheet data, including hydraulic head gradients, physical parameters (temperature, pressure, SpC (specific conductivity)), and biogeochemical parameters (dissolved oxygen, pH, NO3 (nitrate) and ORP (oxidation-reduction potential)).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Riverbed and Near-Surface Water Quality Data, Hanford Reach, Columbia River, February 2021 - April 2022

This dataset contains longitudinal profiles of natural groundwater tracers (temperature, electrical conductivity (EC), and Radon-222 (Rn)) collected to identify locations of hydrologic exchange flows along a 75-km reach of the Columbia River near Richland, Washington.A jetboat was used to tow a 30 foot long, weighted tether that had one set of temperature and EC sensors just below the water surface and one set of temperature and EC sensors on the end (just above the river bed). The dataset contains profiles of temperature/EC data (resolution: 1 second) collected along the left and right banks during three different sampling events. During the final sampling event, we revisited some "deep holes" where the river was more than 30 feet deep with a weighted tether that was 75 feet long. The dataset has been processed to remove data collected when the sensors were not in the water, or when the water was too deep to keep the tether on the riverbed. We collected grab samples of water for analysis of dissolved Rn in places where the temperature/EC was different from the background river water. The Rn data was joined to the temperature/EC profiles based on the sample times.This dataset is comprised of one main data folder containing (1) file-level metadata; (2) data dictionary; (3) installation methods; (4) February 2021 data; (5) July 2021 data; (6) April 2022 data; and (7) April 2022 deep hole data. All files are .csv format and can be opened with a spreadsheet program (such as Microsoft Excel or OpenOffice).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Lab Homes

This dataset includes processed data from the Lab Homes (LH) Test Facility located on the PNNL campus in Richland, WA. This a set of 2 identical homes that allow for the side-by-side comparison/performance evaluation of different technologies under the same weather at any given time. The dataset spans December 6, 2021 to December 27, 2021 and represents a series of tests performed; calibration, set-point excitation, pre-heating, free-floating and warm up. The measurements correspond to whole building electrical power, HVAC energy use, water heating, appliances and lighting, as well as space temperatures, space humidity, window glass surface temperatures, through glass solar radiation, and meterological data from an onsite meteorological weather station. In addition to the measurements, a metadata .json file, a .ttl file to visualize the data as per BRICK schema, and a detailed .pdf description of the dataset are also provided.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Composite Analysis for Low Level Waste Disposal in the Central Plateau of the Hanford Site (FY2019 Annual Status Report)

In accordance with DOE M 435.1-1 requirements and as implemented by DOE/RL-2000-29, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Richland Operations Office has prepared this annual summary for fiscal year (FY) 2019. Originally reported in PNNL-11800 and PNNL-11800, Addendum 1, the Hanford Site Composite Analysis was approved through issuance of a 2002 memorandum. As required by DOE/RL-2000-29, an annual evaluation of new information and data developed by a number of onsite programs was completed. The reporting period for this annual evaluation is FY 2019 (October 1, 2018, through September 30, 2019). The information provided in this evaluation includes activities performed in FY 2019 that are considered pertinent to the Hanford Site Composite Analysis - information that could change source terms considered, and monitoring, research, and development results.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Sequim Campus Master Plan

Based in Richland, Washington, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) is one of ten U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science (SC) national laboratories. PNNL is DOE’s premier chemistry, earth sciences, and data analytics laboratory, delivering vital mission impacts in energy resiliency and national security. PNNL has 19 core capabilities, each a powerful combination of world-class staff, state-of-the- art equipment, and mission-ready facilities. These capabilities represent a collective set of skills and a body of world-leading scientific and engineering work that provides exceptional value and mission delivery to DOE, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and other federal agencies and industry through strategic partnership projects on a not-to-interfere basis. Currently operated by Battelle Memorial Institute, PNNL occupies more than 2.3 million gross square feet (GSF) of buildings and employs approximately 4,700 staff members. PNNL has implemented a rolling 10-year campus strategy, initiated in fiscal year 2013, designed to deliver the foundation for the multidisciplinary science and engineering expertise, equipment, instrumentation, facilities, and infrastructure required to continue providing exceptional value and mission delivery. This strategy is incorporated into PNNL’s annual Laboratory Plan, which serves as DOE-SC’s equivalent of the Five- Year Site Plan required by DOE Order 430.1C Chg. 1, Real Property Asset Management. The PNNL Sequim Campus is located in Clallam County, just outside of Sequim, Washington. PNNL Sequim builds upon a rich history of research related to marine and coastal resources, environmental chemistry, water resources modeling, ecotoxicology, biotechnology, and national security. Facilities at the PNNL Sequim Campus were designed to take advantage of two unique locational assets: the pristine coastal ocean water in Sequim Bay and the region’s exceptionally clean air. Research facilities on the waterfront are supplied with up to 200 gallons per minute (gpm) of seawater and/or groundwater that enables research on aquatic systems ranging from fully seawater to fresh water, with an onsite water treatment system that removes all biological and hazardous chemical residues prior to discharge. Multiple large seawater tanks outside the waterfront laboratories, along with a boat ramp, pier, and floating dock, enable lab-to-field research. The uplands facility takes advantage of the amazing air quality and is built and operated to enable ultratrace chemical/radiological analytical chemistry. This combination of capabilities is not available at any other marine laboratory in the nation.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗

Analysis of Air-Purifying Respirator (APR) and Powered Air-Purifying Respirator (PAPR) Cartridge Performance Testing on a Hanford AP Tank Farm Exhauster Slipstream (Volume 1)

Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) tested four types of chemical cartridges for use in air-purifying respirators (APR) and powered air-purifying respirators (PAPR). These tests were undertaken to determine the period of time that the cartridges would provide adequate performance1 for APRs and PAPRs used to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPC) from vapors exiting the Hanford AP tank farm exhauster slipstream. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) considers cartridge testing to be a valid approach for establishing cartridge change schedules. Testing commonly is applied in situations where mixtures of COPCs exist and where other approaches, such as manufacturer recommendations and modeling, are less reliable. The tests were designed and conducted to assure measurement and/or control of the key variables OSHA identified as important to estimate the cartridge service life, including temperature, humidity, COPC concentration, breathing rate, and cartridge adsorption capacity. Cartridge testing on a slipstream from the Hanford AP tank exhauster was conducted on March 23-24, 2018. This testing focused on both APR and PAPR cartridges. Previous testing of APR cartridges was conducted on the AP exhauster in June of 2016. However, an AP exhauster upgrade was completed in September 2016. In the most recent testing, slipstream vapors from the new AP exhauster were fed to two respirator cartridge test stands, one for the PAPR respirator cartridges and the other for the APR respirator cartridges. Both the APR and PAPR test stands were developed by WRPS in collaboration with HiLine Engineering (Richland, Washington). Multipurpose APR cartridges—SCOTT 7422-SD1 and SCOTT 7422-SC1 (SCOTT Safety, Monroe, North Carolina)—were assessed on separate days using the APR cartridge test stand. Multipurpose PAPR cartridges—MSA OptiFilter TL (MSA Safety Inc., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) and 3M FR-57 (3M Company, Maplewood, Minnesota)—were also tested consecutively over the same two days as the APR cartridge tests, using the PAPR cartridge test stand. Sample media (i.e., sorbent tubes) were used to collect samples of the vapor stream entering and exiting the respirator cartridges, and the samples then were analyzed for COPC concentrations. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was tasked with conducting an independent analysis of the analytical results and making recommendations based on the results for respiratory cartridge performance and service life. The key conclusions from the analysis are described below.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

Analysis of Respirator Cartridge Performance Testing on Hanford Tank A-101

Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) conducted tests on two types of chemical cartridges for use in air purifying respirators (APR) to determine the period of time that the cartridges would provide adequate performance1 to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPCs) from vapors emanating from the headspace of tank A-101 on the Hanford Site. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) identifies cartridge testing as a valid approach for establishing a cartridge change schedules.[3] Testing is commonly applied in situations where mixtures of COPCs exist, and where other approaches, such as manufacturer recommendations and modeling, are less reliable. The tests were designed and conducted to ensure measurement and/or control of the key variables OSHA identified as important to estimate cartridge service life, including temperature, humidity, COPC concentration, breathing rate, and cartridge adsorption capacity. Testing was conducted over a period from July 22-24, 2016, using headspace vapors from Hanford tank A-101 under static conditions2 fed to a respirator cartridge test stand developed by WRPS in collaboration with HiLine Engineering (Richland, Washington). Multipurpose respirator cartridges, SCOTT 7422-SD1 and 7422-SC1 (SCOTT Safety, Monroe, North Carolina) were assessed on separate days with A-101 headspace vapors. Sample media (sorbent tubes) were used to collect samples of the vapor stream entering and exiting the respirator cartridge, and were subsequently analyzed for COPC concentrations. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was tasked with conducting an independent analysis of the analytical results and making recommendations based on the results for respiratory cartridge performance and service life. Key conclusions from the assessment of the 59 COPCs in this study are described below: • Based on d measured cartridge inlet vapor concentrations from tank A-101 headspace, both ammonia and N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) exceeded their Occupational Exposure Limits (OEL).3 These measurements were generally consistent with maximum A-101 headspace measurements previously obtained for these two compounds. • Ammonia had respirator cartridge outlet concentrations that exceeded 10% of the OEL for both cartridges tested, indicating breakthrough for each. For the SCOTT 7422-SD1 cartridge, ammonia appeared to breakthrough above 10% of its OEL after 2 hours. For the SCOTT 7422-SC1 cartridge, ammonia breakthrough appeared to occur after 8 hours. 1 “Adequate performance” refers to the breakthrough criteria used in this analysis—that is, sustained cartridge outlet concentrations above 10% of the OEL. For some COPCs, an alternate threshold has been applied when necessary due to higher detection limit (DL)/reporting limit (RL) values for specific compounds. Ultimately, Industrial Hygiene professionals will use these results along with specific hazard assessments to determine service life and cartridge use that provides the necessary performance. 2 These tests were conducted under static conditions absent waste-disturbing activities in the subject tank or tank farm. 3 Occupational Exposure Limits accepted for Hanford Tank Farm use are based on OELs established by a U.S. governmental agency or national professional organization (e.g., OSHA, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists), or if no U.S. OEL exists, standard toxicological practices are applied to develop OELs using non-U.S. exposure limits, other established OELs for chemical surrogates when available, or other standard procedures. The OEL for NDMA was established in 2005 based on the MAK (Maximale Arbeitsplatzkonzentration) Commission standard adopted in Europe. iv • Despite respirator inlet measurements for NDMA that were in excess of its OEL, all corresponding outlet measurements, from both respirator cartridges, were below analytical DL 1 for the

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

Ion Exchange Processing of AP-105 Hanford Tank Waste through Crystalline Silicotitanate in a Staged 2- then 3-Column System

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is working to expedite processing of Hanford tank waste supernate at the Hanford Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP). To support this goal, Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC (WRPS, Richland, WA) is designing a system for suspended solids and cesium (Cs/ 137 Cs) removal from Hanford tank waste supernate. The effluent will then be sent to the WTP Low-Activity Waste (LAW) Facility for vitrification. The Cs removal is critical for eliminating the high dose rate associated with 137 Cs and facilitating a contact maintenance philosophy for the LAW Facility. The maximum 137 Cs concentration in the LAW sent to the WTP is targeted to be below the 3.18E-5 Ci 137 Cs/mole of Na waste acceptance criteria (WAC) limit. The filtration and ion exchange systems will be placed near the Hanford tanks and are collectively termed the Tank Side Cesium Removal (TSCR) system.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Analysis of Air-Purifying Respirator (APR) Cartridge Performance Testing on Hanford Tanks SX-101 and SX-104 (Vol.1)

Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) conducted tests on two types of chemical cartridges for use in air-purifying respirators to determine the period of time that the cartridges would provide adequate performance1 to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPC) from vapors exiting the headspaces of Hanford tanks SX-101 and SX-104. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) considers cartridge testing a valid approach for establishing cartridge change schedules.2 Testing is commonly applied in situations where mixtures of COPCs exist and where other approaches such as manufacturer recommendations and modeling are less reliable. The tests were designed and conducted to ensure measurement and/or control of the key variables OSHA identified as important to estimate the cartridge service life, including temperature, humidity, COPC concentration, breathing rate, and cartridge adsorption capacity. Testing was conducted from June 16-17, 2017, and June 23-24, 2017, using headspace vapors from Hanford tank SX-104 and Hanford tank SX-101, respectively. Headspace vapors under static conditions were fed to a respirator cartridge test stand developed by WRPS in collaboration with HiLine Engineering (Richland, Washington). Multipurpose respirator cartridges, SCOTT 7422-SD1 and SCOTT 7422-SC1 (SCOTT Safety, Monroe, North Carolina), were assessed on separate days. Sample media (sorbent tubes) were used to collect samples of the vapor stream entering and exiting the respirator cartridges, and subsequently were analyzed for COPC concentrations. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was tasked with conducting an independent analysis of the analytical results and making recommendations based on the results for respiratory cartridge performance and service life.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗