Engineering Papers⌕ Search

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.

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

At least 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2019

Prediction of Gibbsite Precipitation for LAWPS and TSCR Processes at Hanford (U)

Determining the risk of precipitation of feed streams that could potentially lead to plugging ion exchange columns resulting in potential safety concerns and inefficient operation. Characterizing the feed to the filter at the Hanford site and compare it to the feed stream at SRS in ARP-MCU. Different precipitation distribution was observed for Hanford and SRS sites. Gibbsite precipitation is strongly affected by hydroxide concentration and temperature. High degrees of uncertainty of prediction of the exact amount of precipitate due to the extreme sensitivity of the waste solution to hydroxide fluctuations. Overall TSCR system consists of transferring supernate into an existing tank farm tank. Upon sampling and feed qualification, the supernate is sent into a dead-end filter to remove entrained solids, then is passed through an ion exchange column. The treated supernate will then be sent into another tank farm tank which will be used as the feed to the LAW vitrification facility. 250 + projected feed batches provided by Hanford: Reduced down to 65 batches; Projecting the feed vector from 2021-2054. Differences in Hanford and Savannah River waste feed stream compositions leading to dissimilar ionic interactions thus different precipitation distributions. Gibbsite: Dominating precipitate in Hanford waste (89 %). Sodium Oxalate: Predominant precipitate in SRS Waste (84 %). Based on the results, gibbsite precipitation is inversely affected by hydroxide concentration and temperature. Risk of precipitation is highly sensitive to hydroxide concentration and can vary significantly with slight fluctuations. All 65 batches showed distinct results with the range of [0.14, 1.25] Vol % and [0.28, 1.92] Mass % PPT.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Mercury Dispersion Modeling and Purge Ventilation Stack Height Determination for Tank 35H Bulk Sludge Removal

The SRNL Atmospheric Technologies Group performed an analysis of mercury emissions from the H-Tank Farm Tank 35-H to assess worst case 15-minute, 1-hour and 8-hour average concentrations and evaluate whether the ACIGH Short-Term Exposure Limit (STEL), PAC (Protection Action Criteria), or Threshold Limit Value (TLV) levels for mercury are exceeded. This analysis was also used to establish a minimum stack height at which ambient mercury concentration would not exceed the regulatory limits. The American Meteorological Society/Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Model (AERMOD) was used as the dispersion modeling tool for this analysis. The PAC standard is not exceeded for any of the stack heights, or release scenario. A 100 ft stack for the 50 mg/m 3 modeling scenario and 110 ft for the 100 mg/m3 are necessary to prevent all exceedances at all receptors. If the highest receptor on the Evaporator West Stack Platform is excluded from the domain, then the maximum heights are 65 ft and 105 ft for the 50 mg/m 3 and the 100 mg/m 3 modeling scenarios, respectively.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Mercury Dispersion Modeling and Purge Ventilation Stack Height Determination for Tank 42H

The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) Atmospheric Technologies Group performed atmospheric dispersion modeling and analysis of mercury emissions from the H-Tank Farm - Tank 42 ventilation system exhaust to evaluate potential worker exposures to mercury vapor. This analysis was used to establish a minimum stack height at which ambient mercury concentration would not exceed any worker exposure limit. The American Meteorological Society/Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Model (AERMOD) was used as the dispersion modeling tool for this analysis. Results indicate that the default 10-foot stack results in ground level concentrations that significantly exceed exposure standards for the mercury discharge scenarios evaluated. For a discharge of 25 mg/m 3 , a 50-foot stack was necessary to raise the exhaust plume centerline from Tank 42H to a height that prevents mercury exposure problems for elevated receptors on buildings near the tank. If the discharge concentration is decreased to 10 mg/m 3 , the minimum stack height required to comply with exposure limits is of 40 feet.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Mercury Dispersion Modeling and Purge Ventilation Stack Height Determination for Tank 37H

The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) Atmospheric Technologies Group performed atmospheric dispersion modeling and analysis of mercury emissions from the H-Tank Farm - Tank 37 ventilation system exhaust to evaluate whether the Short-Term Exposure Limit (STEL) for mercury is exceeded during salt dissolution activities. This analysis was also used to establish a minimum stack height at which ambient mercury concentration would not exceed this regulatory limit. The American Meteorological Society/Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Model (AERMOD) was used as the dispersion modeling tool for this analysis. Results indicate that the default 10-foot stack results in ground level concentrations that significantly exceed the standards for the mercury discharge scenarios evaluated. A 35-foot stack was necessary to raise the exhaust plume centerline from Tank 37H to a height that prevents mercury exposure problems for the three discharge concentrations modeled.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2026

Volume Change from Solidification Correlation for Hanford Tank Waste.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Hanford Field Office’s primary mission is to safely and effectively treat Hanford’s tank waste and deliver environmental remediation. Mixed radioactive waste is stored in the underground tanks at the Hanford Site. It was recently estimated that retrieval of the waste in the 200 West Area underground tanks in the SY, S, SX, and U Tank Farms will result in about 41 million gallons of mixed low-level waste (MLLW) (RPP-RPT-65147, Rev. 1). The current plan is to retrieve at least 22 S, SX, and U Farm tanks and pretreat1 to produce pretreated tank waste (PTW) which will be further treated (including solidification /immobilization) for Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Land Disposal Restriction (LDR) organics and inorganics before being transferred to an offsite out-of-state facility for disposal (RPP-PLAN-66135, Rev. 2). In addition, solidified PTW from the 200 East Area may also be transferred to an offsite out-of-state facility for disposal to ensure availability of critical Double-Shell Tank space, meet retrieval obligations, and optimize 200 East Area operations.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Deployment of a 3D Sonar System at Savannah River: Results, Implications and Next Steps - 19718

Waste solids mapping is required at SRS to support the closure of high level radioactive waste tanks. The current mapping methodologies utilize a combination of video inspections and still camera photos to record the solids location and height in the tank with interpretation by site Engineering personnel. Tank liquid level is recorded during capture of the images to determine the height of solids. If no liquid is present, the images are compared to known waste tank features (e.g., cooling coils, support columns) to determine the height of the solids. In December of 2017, NuVision Engineering and Fortis Engineering conducted a demonstration of Sonar technology in SRS F-Tank Farm (FTF) Tank 7 using three risers (Risers 1, 5, and Center) for the purposes of mapping waste solids in the tank. Tank 7 was not the ideal choice for a 'first-of-a-kind' deployment given its congested internals but was selected based on the priority of tank farm operations. Savannah River Remediation (SRR) evaluated the results of this demonstration against the current solids mapping methodologies to determine potential future application of Sonar technology to support upcoming sludge or salt waste removal, decisions to cease waste removal and perform sampling and analysis, final residuals volume determinations, and applicability for use in H-Tank Farm (HTF) Type IV tanks. The efficiency of the Sonar mapping technology against the current mapping techniques and the relative costs of each were also evaluated. The Sonar demonstration performed in the three risers of Tank 7 resulted in a tank floor coverage of approximately 26%. This limited coverage was primarily due to shadow effects and image distortions created by vertical cooling coils and support columns within the waste tank. A comparison of the images produced during the Sonar demonstration and the historical Tank 7 mapping, performed in 2011 upon completion of Bulk Waste Removal Efforts (BWRE), showed physical similarities between the mounds located near the Sonar deployment risers. The technology performed well in accurately mapping solids in those areas accessible to coverage. The Sonar mapping technology may achieve more benefits if configured to work around internal obstructions, or in a Type IV tank, where the lack of vertical cooling coils may allow for a larger coverage area. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Hanford Tank Vapors in Worker Breathing Zones - Source, Dispersion, and Receptor Data - 20373

A wide range of organic and inorganic chemicals from historical Hanford Site processes are now stored in 177 underground storage tanks at the Hanford tank farms. Workers at the Hanford tank farms have expressed concerns about chemical vapor exposures for many years. During the spring of 2014, worker reports of chemical odors and/or symptoms prompted the development of the Savannah River National Laboratory Hanford Tank Vapor Assessment Team (TVAT) and their resulting independent assessment and recommendations concerning tank farm worker reports of vapors. The Tank Vapor Assessment report included a hypothesis that 'vapors coming out of tanks in high concentration (bolus) plumes sporadically intersected with the breathing zones of workers, resulting in brief but intense exposures to some workers.' The focus of this effort is to present current knowledge to describe the mechanisms by which workers may experience short duration vapor concentrations above background in the tank farms environment. The TVAT hypothesis that workers have experienced concentrations approaching 80% of the tank headspace up to 3 meters (10 feet) from tank sources is not supported by sampling data or modeling results. Modeling indicates that concentrations are quickly reduced from the source, and that the upper end of predicted concentrations at worker breathing zones are a factor of 10 or more lower than source concentrations. Area measurements corroborate the fact that worker breathing zone concentrations are 10 to 100 times lower than source concentrations, and events with elevated concentrations are rare. These reduced vapor concentration levels may result in detectable odors or irritation, depending on a worker's specific odor threshold and sensitivity to the chemical species. Short-duration vapor events may be mitigated by evaluating daily atmospheric conditions in conjunction with planned tank farm activities. Monitoring changing conditions related to tank vapors concentrations at the source and within worker breathing zone is also an important step to protect workers from short duration elevated concentration events. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

Waste Retrieval Enhancements to Achieve Preliminary Cease Waste Removal in Savannah River Site Liquid Waste Tanks 9H and 10H – 25348

The Liquid Waste (LW) contractor at the Savannah River Site (SRS) is Savannah River Mission Completion (SRMC). The LW Mission is tasked with processing legacy nuclear waste stored in underground waste tanks for final disposition. The Concentration, Storage, and Transfer Facilities (CSTF) contain 43 active waste tanks and 8 closed waste tanks between the two tank farms, F-Area Tank Farm (FTF) and H-Area Tank Farm (HTF). The first steps in the Waste Retrieval and Tank Closure (WRTC) process are the waste removal campaigns, consisting of either salt dissolution or sludge mobilization. Two tanks that are rapidly approaching the final closure determination and have demonstrated considerable success with salt dissolution are Tanks 9 and 10. The closure of these tanks is a high priority for the LW Mission due to the greater environmental risk they pose since both tanks reside within the water table and contain active leak sites from the primary tank to the annulus space. Tanks 9 and 10 have each recently completed their respective salt dissolution campaigns and achieved the Preliminary Cease Waste Removal (PCWR) milestone.

Stetson, Jacqueline G.↗
DOE OSTI2019

Development of a Preliminary Performance Assessment to Support Single-Shell Tank Waste Retrieval - 19446

A preliminary Performance Assessment (PA) of Single-Shell Tank (SST) Waste Management Area A-AX (WMA A-AX) located at DoE's Hanford Site in southeastern Washington is being conducted to satisfy the requirements of the Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (HFFACO), as well as other Federal and State requirements of closure plans and permits. The WMA A-AX PA effort is assessing the fate, transport, and impacts of radionuclides and hazardous chemicals within residual wastes left in tanks, ancillary equipment, and facilities in their assumed closed configuration, and the subsequent risks to humans into the far future. WMA A-AX includes the 241-A Tank Farm (A Farm), the 241-AX Tank Farm (AX Farm), and the ancillary equipment associated with each Farm. There are six underground SSTs in A Farm, and four underground SSTs in AX Farm. Each of these SSTs have a storage capacity of 1,000,000 gallons. A complex waste transfer system of ancillary equipment supported the transfer and storage of waste within WMA A-AX SSTs. This ancillary equipment includes transfer lines, catch tanks, diversion boxes, vaults, valve pits, and other miscellaneous structures. This paper emphasizes the development of the PA effort focused on radiological impacts to meet the requirements for a closure authorization under DOE Order 435.1. Lessons learned from retrieval and development of a recently completed PA of the nearby Waste Management Area C (WMA C) led to the decision to develop a preliminary PA for WMA A-AX prior to initiation of retrieval efforts so that a site-specific risk management capability could be available to support anticipated retrieval decisions. The technical approach for the PA analysis includes developing both a process-level model using site-specific hydrogeological data, as well as a system-level model. The system model is being developed to facilitate uncertainty and sensitivity analyses being conducted in the PA effort. Preliminary results of the DOE Order 435.1 PA are evaluating potential impacts to the groundwater and air pathways to determine radiation exposure once radionuclides are released to the environment from residual waste after closure of the tank farm. To meet other analysis requirements in DOE Order 435.1, the PA effort must also evaluate potential radiological impacts from inadvertent intruder scenarios into the closed WMA A-AX facility. The results of the PA evaluation will be compared to performance objectives and measures in the DOE Order 435.1 to support retrieval and eventual closure decisions at WMA A-AX. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Progress in Addressing Workers' Concerns Related to Chemical Vapors at the Hanford Site - 19054

Washington River Protections Solutions, LLC (WRPS) is the prime contractor for the Department of Energy (DOE) Tank Farm Operations at the Hanford Site, and is responsible for the management and retrieval of millions of gallons of radioactive and chemical wastes, stored in 177 underground tanks; a legacy of decades of production activities at the Site. The potential for workforce exposure to the chemical vapors from the tanks has long been a concern for the workforce and for DOE and its tank contractors; concerns about tank vapors is an issue that pre-dates WRPS's incumbency as the Tank Operations Contractor. In response to an increase in the number of tank vapor events reported by workers at the Hanford Site in 2014, WRPS commissioned the Savannah River National Laboratory with establishing and overseeing a panel of external, independent experts (Tank Vapor Assessment Team (TVAT)) to examine chemical vapor management and related worker-protection measures at the Hanford Tank Farms. The TVAT released the Hanford Tank Vapor Assessment Report (SRNL-RP-2014-00791) in late 2014, which included several recommendations to reduce the potential for chemical vapor exposures. From 2015- 2018, governmental and external groups conducted additional assessments to review the progress made in implementing the TVAT recommendations, and the overall Industrial Hygiene (IH) program. All of these assessments specifically recommended WRPS take action to improve communications with the workforce around the subject of tank vapors. Some further recommended assessing the effectiveness of vapors-related communications. In fiscal year 2016, WRPS and DOE Office of River Protection (DOE-ORP) formed an Integrated Project Team (IPT) to: (1) develop the strategy for addressing chemical vapors and (2) define the future chemical vapor protection actions at the Tank Farms. The actions are designed to address the recommendations from the external assessments as part of the overall effort to mitigate vapors-related exposure incidences, and to ensure workers are safe and feel safe while working in and around the Hanford Tank Farms. A comprehensive vapor management communication plan, engagement processes, and effectiveness measurements were established as essential components of the IPT effort. The Chemical Protection Program Office (CPPO) was formed, in part, to deliver on these IPT initiatives, monitor performance, and drive improvements to WRPS's vapors-related communications and engagement efforts at the Hanford Tank Farms. The CPPO was created as a temporary program office tailored to address these unique challenges by augmenting traditional company performance monitoring and communications (i.e. all employee e-mails, posters, and formal briefings). Modeled in broad concept after the successful program office WRPS created to support the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, CPPO has also proven successful in its mission. Because concerns about chemical vapors in the workplace were expressed by the workforce, they are a key stakeholder. As such, the CPPO has concentrated its information sharing efforts toward the WRPS workforce. With a focus on empathetic engagement, continuous improvement, and transparent information sharing, the CPPO has developed and implemented a strategy for improving worker trust in vapors-related communications and increasing the workforce knowledge of responses taken to address chemical vapors. Effective implementation of this strategy is demonstrated by the results of workforce surveys, which indicate measured and important improvement in the effectiveness of vapors-communications and the knowledge level workers report about vapor issues compared to the previous year. This paper discusses the utilization of a temporary program office and the unique approach that the CPPO implemented to achieve success, including: strategic application of the technical and communications staff skill mix of the organization (including talent development opportunities such as stretch assignments for WRPS's Strategic Talent Development program members and support from WRPS college interns), teaming with other WRPS' organizations such as IH, Engineering and Communications and Public Relations (C and PR), the development of new types of information sharing to support the effort, and the methods by which the effectiveness of the communications efforts are measured to drive continuous improvement. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

SRS Strategy for Tank 3 Salt Dissolution - Performance and Lessons Learned - 20441

The Savannah River Site (SRS) Tank Farms have 51 underground waste tanks used to store and process liquid nuclear waste materials. There are 4 different tank types, ranging in capacity from 2,840,000 to 4,920,000 L (750,000 to 1,300,000 Gal). Twenty-four of the tanks are older style and do not meet full secondary containment standards. The older style tanks are the initial focus of waste removal efforts for tank closure at SRS. Eight of these twenty-four tanks have completed waste removal and are filled with grout. Prior to salt dissolution, Tank 3 was a dry salt tank that contained 5.06 m (199.3 in) of salt and sludge waste. Additional salt waste was present on cooling coils above the salt layer up to approximately 5.59 m (220 in). Three mixing eductors were installed in Tank 3 to aid in dissolving salt waste in three tank riser access ports. A transfer pump was installed, and the transfer pump suction was located 25.4 cm (10 in) from the tank bottom. Well water was added to the tank through a downcomer until the dry bulk salt was covered with liquid. During the initial fill of Tank 3, approximately 242,000 L (64,000 Gal) of rain water were added from periodic F-Tank Farm (FTF) Catch Tank additions and approximately 17,000 L (4,500 Gal) of well water were added. Following liquid additions to cover the dry bulk salt, well water was added through the three mixing eductors in batches during each stage. Additionally, during the salt dissolution campaigns, the FTF Catch Tank was utilized to add rain water through a downcomer in the center tank riser access port as needed for volume relief in the FTF Catch Tank. Following liquid additions, the water was recirculated (internal to the tank) using the transfer pump, and a sample was pulled to confirm the target specific gravity (SpG) of the dissolved salt solution was achieved. The dissolved salt solution was then transferred to the receipt tank (Tank 7), and the mixing eductors were lowered as close to the new bulk salt layer as possible, to support subsequent dissolution campaigns. While the mixing jets were able to dissolve salt successfully in Tank 3, they did not do so in a completely uniform manner. Throughout dissolution, mounds were discovered under Riser 1, Riser 2, and the Center Riser. The mixing jets dissolved the salt around the edges of the tank well but were not as effective toward the center of the tank. FTF Catch Tank additions through the center tank riser access port downcomer were required to impact the mound under the center tank riser. FTF Catch Tank additions were sporadic as they were dependent on rainfall in the area. Additionally, all mixing jets were rarely able to be lowered to the same elevation, indicating some mounding in the bulk salt layer. Indexing of the mixing jets was also utilized to impact the salt mounds. Overall, Tank 3 salt dissolution was successful as approximately 1,476,000 L (390,000 Gal) of dissolved salt solution was transferred to Tank 7 over six stages. Slightly less than 852,000 L (225,000 Gal) of water were added to Tank 3. The original material balance prediction estimated that the bulk salt level in Tank 3 would be 3.88 m (152.8 in) after six salt dissolution stages. After six stages the actual bulk salt level was 3.38 m (133 in). This paper will discuss the salt removal strategy, each salt dissolution stage, and lessons learned for future salt dissolution. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Impact of GSA2018 Flow Update, Alternative Dispersion Model, and Increased Grid Resolution on Tank Closure Performance Assessments

The F-Area Tank Farm (FTF) and H-Area Tank Farm (HTF) Performance Assessments (PAs) involve simulations of radionuclide and chemical waste migration through groundwater to exposure points. These solute transport simulations are based on a circa 2004 “GSA/PORFLOW” flow model [WSRC-TR-2004-00106]. The GSA/PORFLOW model was significantly updated in 2016-2017 [SRNL-STI-2017-00008 Rev. 1]. Impacts of the “GSA2016” flow model on the F- and H-Tank Farm PAs were assessed in SRNL-STI-2017-00445, Impacts of Updated GSA Groundwater Flow Models on the FTF, HTF and SDF PAs. Since then (2018-2019) further revisions resulted in a “GSA2018” flow model [SRNL-STI-2018-00643], which has been adopted for the 2019 Saltstone PA revision [SRR-CWDA-2019-00001 Revision A]. This study assesses the impacts of the GSA2018 flow model on the FTF and HTF PAs. Also assessed are the impacts of an alternative plume dispersion model and increased grid resolution that have been incorporated in the 2019 Saltstone PA.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Proposed Plutonium-Nickel Critical Experiment

The Los Alamos Critical Experiments Facility (LACEF) and subsequently its descendant, the National Criticality Experiments Research Center (NCERC) located at the Nevada National Security Site, have been performing critical experiments for over 75 years. The work done continues to build upon lessons learned from the past. It also builds upon knowledge gained from past experiments. The LACEF and NCERC experiments “provide nuclear criticality benchmark data for a wide variety of fissile and non-fissile materials in all neutron energy spectra systems”. In 2014, a subcritical benchmark with plutonium surrounded by nickel was issued in the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP). Two years later, a new benchmark experiment was performed, commonly known as Subcritical Copper Reflected $\mathcal{a}$-Phase Plutonium SCR$\mathcal{a}$P. The uncertainties in the SCR$\mathcal{a}$P experiment were significantly reduced from the Pu-Ni experiment and the methods were refined. Additionally, a Pu-lead critical experiment was performed in 2017 which followed different methods and with different objectives. Now, an experiment is proposed that builds on both the subcritical nickel experiment and the critical lead experiment. The proposed experiment has interleaved nickel and plutonium, in a thermal arrangement. This particular experiment would support criticality safety at the Hanford Tank Farms, whose tanks contain a significant amount of nickel credited as a neutron absorber in the criticality safety evaluation.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Tank 48H Phase 1 Initial Testing Using Sodium Permanganate to Decompose Tetraphenylborate: Simulant Studies with Shaker Oven and 2-L Vessel

Tank 48H currently holds legacy material including organic tetraphenylborate (TPB) compounds from the operation of the In-Tank Precipitation process. The large quantity of TPB is not compatible with the waste treatment facilities at SRS and must be removed or undergo treatment to oxidize the organic compounds before the tank can be returned to routine Tank Farm service. Tank 48H currently holds approximately 270,000 gallons of legacy material comprised of decontaminated salt solution, approximately 20,000 kilograms of TPB solids, 3,400 kilograms of sludge solids, and 1,800 kilograms of monosodium titanate (MST).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Respirator Cartridge Performance on Mixed Vapors from Hanford Tank Headspaces and Exhausters - 20427

Between 2016 and 2018, the Hanford Tank Operations Contractor - Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) - conducted a series of tests of air-purifying respirator (APR) chemical cartridges commonly used at Hanford tank farms to determine the period of time for which the cartridges would provide adequate performance when used in APRs and powered-air-purifying respirators (PAPRs) to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of vapors exiting tank headspaces. Although cartridge manufacturers provide service life estimating tools for individual chemical compounds, the projected performance of these cartridges on complex vapor mixtures is not available, and the adequacy of APRs for tank farm applications represents an important workforce concern. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration identifies cartridge testing as a valid approach for establishing cartridge service life. The primary function of the WRPS Cartridge Test Program was to obtain objective data to determine service lives for the APR and PAPR cartridges used at Hanford tank farms. WRPS contracted with Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to analyze the test data and offer an independent analysis of and recommendations based on respirator cartridge performance. A total of 28 APR and 10 PAPR cartridge tests were conducted between 2016 and 2018 on 12 different tank headspaces and tank farm exhauster slipstreams. Two APR cartridges from SCOTT (now 3M) and two PAPR cartridges from MSA Safety, Inc. and 3M were evaluated using a cartridge testing system specifically designed to measure and monitor test conditions and sample cartridge inlet and outlet vapor streams for important chemical compounds. Testing focused on analysis of approximately 61 tank vapor chemicals of potential concern (COPCs) that have been previously detected in tank vapors at levels above 10% of their occupational exposure limits (OELs). Each test was conducted over 16 hours of run time. Evidence of chemical breakthrough was assessed by comparing inlet and outlet COPC concentrations over the duration of each test. The breakthrough threshold was normally defined as exceeding 10% of the compounds OEL at the cartridge outlet. Ammonia breakthrough was observed in a majority of the cartridge tests and occurred earlier than breakthrough of any other chemical compound. Several other COPCs did exhibit breakthrough behavior, including mercury, 1,3-butadiene, furan, 2,5 dihydrofuran, and N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), but only in a very limited number of cartridge tests and only after ammonia breakthrough had occurred. In addition, tests results suggest that breakthrough of some of these COPCs may have been affected by competition with and breakthrough of other non-COPC organics, such as ethanol and acetone, with substantially lower toxicological hazard. Comparison of cartridge manufacturers' service life estimates with the experimentally derived breakthrough times indicates that manufacturers' estimates are generally conservative, even in the presence of the complex mixed vapor streams experienced in these tests. With consideration of appropriate safety margins, these results provide valuable insights on cartridge performance to inform industrial hygiene professionals in establishing appropriate cartridge change-out schedules for APR and PAPR use in the Hanford tank farms. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

Epoxy Sealant Self-leveling and Adhesion Test Report

The Hanford tank farms have 149 single shell tanks which were built between 1943 - 1964, and 28 double-shell tanks (DSTs) which were built between 1968 – 1986 (Tank Farms, 2020) which contain radioactive and chemical mixed waste. Many of the tanks have leaked, including DST AY-102 (Waste Tank Summary Report, 2023). As a result, methods of repairing or reinforcing double-shell storage tanks are being evaluated.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Characterization Results of SRS Tank 26 Samples FTF-26-19-12 and -13

Savannah River Remediation (SRR) has requested that the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) characterize several samples from the Savannah River Site (SRS) Tank Farm in preparation for Sludge Batch (SB) 10. This report documents the characterization of Tank 26 material received by SRNL in May of 2019. SRR pulled 2 x 200 mL samples (FTF-26-19-12 and FTF-26-19-13) with Tank 26 slurry pumps at 60 inches. Two samples were taken to ensure SRNL has adequate material for the requested analyses. Because both samples were taken at the same time and at the same tank level, SRNL combined the two Tank Farm samples into one sample prior to analyses. Results presented in this report include: weight percent solids, density, elemental composition of supernate and slurry, Cs-137 in supernate and slurry, and slurry total alpha and beta. The sample contained higher than expected total sulfur with a significant insoluble fraction, prompting SRR-E to request a washing study to predict how sulfur will be removed during Tank Farm washing.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Alternative Treatment of Defense Waste Processing Facility Recycle via Reuse of Existing Liquid Waste Facilities - 20097

The Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) at Savannah River Site (SRS) has been immobilizing high level waste since 1996. The chemical process within DWPF generates a large volume of condensate, which is recycled to the SRS H-Area Tank Farm. The recycle stream includes a small quantity of sludge solids, as well as soluble cesium that is volatilized during melter operation. The recycle waste is currently received into a large, underground waste tank that separates insoluble solids via decanting. The supernate is treated by an evaporator with a concentrate stream that is stored for future processing. The evaporator overheads are collected and sent to the Effluent Treatment Project (ETP) for final polishing and testing prior to discharge to local surface water. Recycle storage and treatment as described above complicates the overall mission within the tank farms, which are primarily engaged in waste retrieval and preparation activities that support sludge and salt disposition, as well as tank characterization and closure. The need to devote a portion of available storage space to recycle treatment limits operational flexibility, and ultimately the DWPF recycle stream must be diverted to fully close all the SRS waste tanks. An alternative treatment process is being explored to decouple the recycle stream from the tank farm. The proposed treatment process will accomplish solids separation via crossflow filtration and will utilize a wiped film evaporator to volume-reduce the filtrate stream. Evaporator overheads will continue to be further processed in ETP while the solids stream and evaporator concentrate stream will be returned for reprocessing with the DWPF and Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF). This process will utilize existing facilities within DWPF and the tank farm that were previously dedicated to Interim Salt Disposition (ISD), but no longer have an identified mission with the startup of SWPF. The reuse of these facilities will remove several constraints from the current Liquid Waste (LW) System Plan without expanding the current footprint of Department of Energy Environmental Management (EM) infrastructure within LW. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗