Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Supernate”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Characterization and CST Batch Contact Equilibrium Testing of Modified Tank 9H Process Supernate Samples in Support of TCCR

The Tank Closure Cesium Removal (TCCR) system uses ion exchange columns filled with crystalline silicotitanate (CST) media to process radioactive waste solutions for the removal of ¹³⁷Cs. TCCR currently focuses on dissolving Savannah River Site (SRS) radioactive tank waste (primarily sodium saltcake solids) within Tank 10H followed by at-tank ion exchange column treatment. Two supernate batches from Tank 10H have been processed through the TCCR unit and processing of a third batch is expected soon. After processing of this supernate batch, plans are to replace the CST columns and process dissolved salt solution from Tank 9H through Tank 10H and then through the new CST columns installed in the TCCR unit. The new columns are expected to contain either a media similar to an archived CST batch (IE-911) or the R9120-B CST media used in the current TCCR columns (the two materials are fundamentally the same; just different specifications, product names, and preconditioning steps). Samples of Tank 9H dissolved saltcake were received at the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) and characterized. The Tank 9H supernate contained a high sodium concentration (~9.6 M Na⁺) and will require dilution to near 6 M [Na⁺] prior to processing through the TCCR unit. The cesium concentration in Tank 9H is currently significantly higher than was observed with Tank 10H. Three dilutions of the Tank 9H supernate were conducted to mimic possible dilutions that could be conducted in the tank farm prior to TCCR processing using inhibited water, sodium hydroxide, and sodium nitrate solutions. Dilution #1 was prepared by diluting the Tank 9H supernate by a factor of 1.6 with inhibited water, Dilution #2 was prepared by diluting the Tank 9H supernate by a factor of 3.7 with a mixed sodium hydroxide/sodium nitrate diluent, and Dilution #3 was prepared by also diluting by a factor of 3.7 but with sodium hydroxide only. All three dilutions have similar Na⁺ concentrations (~6 M), but Dilutions #2 and #3 contain significantly less cesium. Major and key minor components of the diluted Tank 9H supernate samples are provided in Table ES-1. Batch contact equilibrium tests were conducted with the Tank 9H dilutions and the two different CST media batches being considered for use in the new TCCR columns. Results are summarized in Table ES-2 and compared to ZAM model predictions. The highest cesium distribution coefficient and percent removal were observed with Dilution #3. IE-911 CST (an archived CST media batch) was more effective at removing cesium than the more recently prepared R9120-B CST media, though both media samples removed >88% of the cesium and the differences may not be statistically different considering the overall uncertainty. Based on the results, maximum cesium loadings were calculated for each CST media type and Tank 9H dilution. In general, maximum cesium loadings from dilutions of this supernate batch are quite high (approaching 0.1 mmol total Cs⁺/g CST for Dilution #1). The highest calculated maximum ¹³⁷Cs loading for the Tank 9H dilutions using the ZAM model with input of the tank compositions and batch contact results was 207 Ci/kg CST (Dilution #1 with IE-911 CST). In all cases, higher maximum cesium loading values were predicted for IE-911 CST versus R9120-B, although the differences varied considerably between the dilutions. The maximum loading value for IE-911 CST with Tank 9H Dilution #1 was only 7% higher than the maximum loading for R9120-B. The maximum loading value for IE-911 CST with Dilution #3 was 24% higher than the maximum loading for R9120-B. Dilution #2 was intermediate between these values. Note that these maximum loading values are the theoretical calculated values, and actual operating conditions will cause differences. A CST binder dilution (correction) factor near 0.7 (relative to pure powder CST) was required for each batch contact test with IE-911 engineered CST using the three Tank 9H dilutions. Correction factors calculated for R9120-B CST ranged from 0.56 to 0.66 for the three dilutions. Following the batch contact tests, the CST samples were isolated from the Tank 9H solution, washed, dried, and digested in acid following established procedures. The analysis results are provided in Table ES-3. Total cesium loading values determined by CST digestion were similar to the calculated loading values based on solution analysis (Table ES-2) for all samples. In addition, the CST was observed to load calcium (R9120-B sample only), iron, strontium, lead, uranium, and plutonium after contact with the waste supernate, as has been observed previously.

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

Tank 22 Supernate Sample Characterization for Select Radionuclides

The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) was requested by Savannah River Remediation (SRR), through a Technical Assistance Request (G-TAR-H-00007) to provide additional sample characterization on unfiltered Tank 22 supernate identified as sample HTF-22-18-117, which was delivered to SRNL Shielded Cells on December 14, 2018. A summary of the average analytical results for this unfiltered Tank 22 supernate liquid follows. The density of the unfiltered Tank 22 supernate is 1.008 g/mL, 0.2%RSD. The Tank 22 supernate sample was analyzed for a total of 45 radionuclide species, with 15 of these radionuclides showing activity levels above minimum detectable activity of at least one replicate. Cesium-137 showed the highest activity at 2.90E+07 dpm/mL, 2.35 %RSD (1.30E-02 Ci/ L) with U-235 showing the lowest measurable activity at an average of 1.66E-01 dpm/mL, 6.26 %RSD (7.49E-11 Ci/L). The primary beta emitting radionuclides in the unfiltered Tank 22 supernate sample include Sr-90, Y-90 and Cs-137 at average activity concentrations of 1.10E-05, 1.10E-05 and 1.30E-02 Ci/L, respectively. The primary gamma emitting radionuclide is Ba-137 m at an average activity concentration of 1.23E-02 Ci/L (note that the activity concentration for Ba-137 m was calculated as 94.7% the Cs-137 activity concentration).

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

Assessment of the Corrosion Risks to a Double Shell Tank During the Selective Removal of a Cesium-rich Supernate Layer - 20227

The Direct Feed Low Activity Waste (DF-LAW) activity will provide the initial feed to the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant at the Hanford Tank Farm facility. Feed preparation for DF-LAW will be carried out in multiple double shell waste tanks (DST) utilizing the Tank Side Cesium Removal (TSCR) process. Tank AP-106 will be an integral part of the TSCR process and hence key to the DFLAW activity. Prior to being utilized for this purpose, the Cs-137 concentration levels in the AP-106 supernate must be reduced significantly. The AP-106 re-purposing process manages normal waste tank addition procedures such that waste acceptance criteria objectives for Cs-137 removal are achieved. As this process was being developed, several concerns regarding tank integrity during and after repurposing of Tank AP-106, and the associated tanks (i.e., AP-102, AN-101, and AP-108), were addressed. The potential corrosion degradation mechanisms identified based on process knowledge included: general and pitting corrosion, caustic stress corrosion cracking, concentration cell corrosion, and microbiologically induced corrosion (MIC). A systematic approach was undertaken to assess the risk of corrosion during the AP-106 re-purposing process. The assessment considered the initial and present condition of the tank, the service history of the tank, the environmental conditions created in each tank during each stage of the process, process timing, and corrosion testing and modeling that approximated tank conditions. Based on this information, recommendations were provided to minimize the exposure of the tank to corrosive conditions. These recommendations included time limits for each stage of the process, staging of corrosion inhibitor solutions should process delays occur, and waste sampling with potential chemistry adjustments at defined steps in the process. Additionally, recommendations for post-process supernate chemistry adjustments and tank inspections were put forth. The greatest risk for this process occurs during the manipulation of large quantities of Columbia River water (i.e., greater than 450,000 gallons) within AP-106, the associated tanks and the supporting infrastructure (i.e., transfer line piping). This risk becomes more pronounced if there is a process upset and the tank walls remain exposed to a corrosive condition longer than intended. As long as the river water is blended into the supernate in a timely fashion, and the waste is adjusted appropriately with corrosion inhibitors, corrosion may be minimized and the final condition of the supernate in AP-106 and the associated tanks is expected to be in compliance with corrosion chemistry requirements. Contingency plans will be made to minimize the impact of a process upset. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2018

Crystalline Silicotitanate (CST) Ion Exchange Media Performance Evaluations in SRS Average Supernate Simulant and Tank 10H Waste Solution to Support TCCR

Savannah River Remediation (SRR) is deploying an “at-tank” ion exchange process to remove radioactive cesium from waste supernate which is referred to as the Tank Closure Cesium Removal (TCCR) system utilizing Crystalline Silicotitanate (CST) media. After being loaded with cesium, but before flushed and dried and sent to Interim Safe Storage (ISS), it is anticipated that the TCCR ion exchange columns will be taken off-line (stagnant) with the CST media still immersed in supernate. The currently designed columns include no active cooling system during processing (although no rmal process fluid flow through the column during operations provides significant cooling) or during off-line conditions and temperature increases are expected in the stagnant, loaded, and liquid-filled columns due to decay heat from the radionuclides absorbed to the CST. As a result, modification of the Tank 10H supernate composition has been considered through the addition of either NaOH or KOH reagents to decrease cesium loading.

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

Characterization and CST Batch Contact Equilibrium Testing of Aged TCCR Tank 10H Batch 1A and 2 Process Supernate Samples

The Tank Closure Cesium Removal (TCCR) system uses ion exchange columns filled with Crystalline Silicotitanate (CST) media to process radioactive waste solutions for the removal of Cs-137. TCCR currently focuses on dissolving Savannah River Site (SRS) Tank 10H waste (primarily sodium saltcake solids) within the tank followed by at-tank ion exchange column treatment. Previous equilibrium batch contact tests conducted in the SRNL Shielded Cells laboratory and associated analyses indicated that CST cesium removal performance was lower than predicted by ZAM modeling for TCCR Tank 10H Production Supernate Batch 1A. An average cesium distribution coefficient of 1,948 mL/g which corresponds to 94.1% Cs + removal was observed for Batch 1A supernate at 38 °C in January of 2019 using laboratory pretreated IONSIV™ R9120-B a CST from Lot #209900034 (predominant TCCR CST batch) at a phase ratio of 122 mL/g. This cesium loading was approximately 32% lower than model predictions, presumably due to ion exchange competition or fouling associated with alkaline earth or transition metals present in the solutions at low levels. The current testing was designed to: 1) evaluate whether supernate compositional changes during storage would result in improved cesium removal performance with CST, and 2) assist in media selection and handling protocols for future TCCR columns by evaluating several CST manufacturer batches as well as samples of one CST batch which had been pretreated using two different methods (field and laboratory methods).

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

Uranium Solubility and Supernate Enrichment Testing for Accelerated Basin De-Inventory Discards to Concentration, Storage, and Transfer Facilities

After future Accelerated Basin De-inventory (ABD) enriched uranium discards into sludge batches (SB), portions of supernate decants during SB preparation will be blended into salt batches (StB) and the resulting feeds must meet the nuclear safety requirements for the Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF). During previous SB10 sampling and testing, which involved H-Canyon material containing enriched uranium being mixed with Tank 51 sludge shortly after the H-Canyon stream was neutralized, it was identified that the uranium isotopic enrichment in the supernate deviated from the uranium isotopic enrichment in the slurry. The higher uranium isotopic enrichment in the supernate introduced the risk of challenging the feed requirements of SWPF. The ABD material added to SB11 was isotopically diluted with depleted uranium, mitigating any downstream impacts. However, H-Canyon desires to eliminate or minimize future depleted uranium additions in order to meet the mission schedule.

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

CST Batch Contact Equilibrium Testing of TCCR Tank 10H Batch 1 and 1A Waste Supernate Samples

The Tank Closure Cesium Removal (TCCR) system uses ion exchange columns filled with crystalline silicotitanate media to process radioactive waste solutions for the removal of Cs-137. TCCR currently focuses on dissolving Savannah River Site (SRS) Tank 10H waste (primarily sodium saltcake solids) within the tank followed by at-tank ion exchange column treatment. Equilibrium batch contact tests conducted in the SRNL Shielded Cells laboratory and associated analyses indicated that both the Tank 10H Batch 1 (pre-production) and 1A (production) waste supernates are unique solutions for which CST cesium removal performance is lower than predicted by ZAM modeling. Cesium distribution coefficients (K d ), percent removal, and CST loading data for the TCCR production supernate batch are provided in Table ES-1. ZAM-based cesium loading predictions are compared to the observed loading for the production batch in Figure ES-1, where significantly lower performance was observed than predicted by the model. Even lower cesium loading results (versus ZAM) were observed previously for the in-tank “teabag” batch contact samples.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2025

Plutonium Solubility and Supernate Concentration for Neutralized Fast Critical Assembly Discards to Savannah River Site Tank Waste

The Savannah River Site (SRS) plans to dissolve non-irradiated stainless steel (SS)-clad bundles of Fast Critical Assembly (FCA) materials in eighteen batches.1 FCA dissolution is currently underway in the 6.3D dissolver by simultaneous chemical and electrolytic dissolution, which is required to generate the harsh conditions necessary for dissolution of metal-oxide (MOX) and non-aluminum spent nuclear fuels (NASNFs).2 Nitric acid and potassium fluoride are used to promote chemical dissolution.2 Gadolinium will be added during processing as a thermal neutron poison for criticality control. There are no plans for recovering plutonium from this waste stream. After FCA dissolution, the acidic (HNO3/KF) “discards” containing the dissolved metals will be neutralized by addition of 50 wt% sodium hydroxide to a final free hydroxide concentration of 1.2 M.1 Neutralization will precipitate a slurry of insoluble solids, predominantly metal oxides/hydroxides of plutonium, uranium, and SS components. Small fractions of the SS components, Pu, U, and Gd will remain dissolved in the supernate. The neutralized slurry will be composited to existing radioactive waste storage tanks within the SRS Concentration, Storage, and Transfer Facilities (CSTF) containing other similar sludge batch (SB) materials.1 The fate of soluble plutonium and freshly-precipitated, colloidal plutonium from this process are of concern since the total Pu can challenge the waste acceptance criteria (WAC) at the downstream SRS Liquid Waste (LW) facility. Supernate decants including the neutralized FCA discards (nFCAd) within the CSTF will be composited with salt batch (StB) materials and transferred to the SRS Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF), where total plutonium is also of concern.

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

Progress Report on the Investigation of Separable Floating Layers in Hanford Double-Shell Tank Supernates

A review of studies performed the last four years at 222-S Laboratory on separable floating solids including demonstration of the formation of a floating layer in the organic-bound simulated solids and investigation of floating solids found in AN-101 and AW-104 as well as carbonate precipitation floating on the surface of AN-107 grab samples. Demonstrated that semivolatile organic analysis can detect separable organics including tributyl phosphate, degradation products of Quintolubric hydraulic fluid, and hydrocarbon as tentatively identified compounds. In addition, an evaluation of the relationship of small organic acids to the total organic carbon is discussed in selected double-shell tank supernate. A systematic approach is presented to monitor separable organics and insoluble particulates in the double-shell tank waste.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2017

Test Report for Cesium and Solids Removal from an 11.5L Composite of Archived Hanford Double Shell Tank Supernate for Off-Site Disposal

The 222-S Laboratory blended supernate waste from Hanford Tanks 241-AN-101, 241-AN- 106, 241-AP-105, 241-AP-106, 241-AP-107, and 241-AY-101 from the hot cell archive to create a bulk composite. The composite was blended with 600 mL 19.4 M NaOH, which brought the total volume to approximately 11.5 L (3 gal). The composite was filtered to remove solids and passed through spherical resorcinol-formaldehyde ion-exchange resin columns to remove cesium. The composite masses were tracked as a treatability study. Samples collected before, during, and after the ion-exchange process were characterized for a full suite of analytes (inorganic, organic, and radionuclides) to aid in the classification of the waste for shipping, receiving, treatment, and disposal determinations.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2017

Test Report for Cesium and Solids Removal from an 11.5L Composite of Archived Hanford Double Shell Tank Supernate for Off-Site Disposal.

The 222-S Laboratory blended supernate waste from Hanford Tanks 241-AN-101, 241-AN- 106, 241-AP-105, 241-AP-106, 241-AP-107, and 241-AY-101 from the hot cell archive to create a bulk composite. The composite was blended with 600 mL 19.4 M NaOH, which brought the total volume to approximately 11.5 L (3 gal). The composite was filtered to remove solids and passed through spherical resorcinol-formaldehyde ion-exchange resin columns to remove cesium. The composite masses were tracked as a treatability study. Samples collected before, during, and after the ion exchange process were characterized for a full suite of analytes (inorganic, organic, and radionuclides) to aid in the classification of the waste for shipping, receiving, treatment, and disposal determinations.

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

Process Knowledge Concerning Organic Chemicals in Hanford Tank Waste Supernate

This report addresses the specific need to characterize double-shell tank supernates to meet the regulatory requirements and data quality objectives associated with Direct Feed Low Activity Waste, Tank-Side Cesium Removal, Low Activity Waste Pretreatment System, and Test Bed Initiative requirements. The use of process knowledge can greatly reduce the need for chemical analysis to meet regulatory requirements. This will decrease the cost of characterization and improve sample data turnaround times.

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

Media comparison of filtration with Hanford tank AP-107 supernate

The present experimental work was performed in order to investigate media performance in both cross-flow and dead-end filtration on 9 L of Hanford tank AP-107 supernatant. Media grades 0.1 and 5 were tested for each the cross-flow filter (CFF) and dead-end filter (DEF). The CFFs were tested in the cells unit filter (CUF) system in recycle mode and the DEFs (in-line and disc) were used to dewater the feed. Visual inspection of the feed material indicated essentially no settled insoluble solids in the feed material. The 5 micron grade cross flow filter produced stable filter fluxes while the flux for the 0.1 micron grade material steadily decayed. The 5 media grade BDEF (backpulsed dead-end filter) was effective at removing solids from the AP-107 feed and when backpulsed, fully restored the filter flux, indicating that the solids did not irreversibly foul the filter. The 0.1 media grade DEF was used to filter the final 2 liters of AP-107 feed drained from the CUF and collect solids on the filter media. Additional DEF filtering was performed on 4 L of BDEF permeate in order to assess whether small particles that cause fouling in the 0.1 media grade filter passed through the 5 media grade filter. There was no indication of fouling and limited solids were observed on the filter. In conclusion, a direct comparison of filtration rates between the 0.1 and 5 media grade filters for both the CFF and DEF showed the 5 media grade filter flux was, on average, 200 times higher than the 0.1 media grade filter while still effectively filtering the solids.

38 RADIATION CHEMISTRY, RADIOCHEMISTRY, AND NUCLEA↗
DOE OSTI2021

Cesium Exchange onto Crystalline Silicotitanate from Blended Hanford Tank Wastes

The Tank Side Cesium Removal (TSCR) system was developed to filter and remove cesium (Cs and 137 Cs) from Hanford tank waste supernate in preparation for vitrification. The Cs removal will be conducted with crystalline silicotitanate (CST) ion exchange media. Under the planned waste-processing strategy, the tank waste supernate will be queued for TSCR processing in tank 241-AP-107 (AP-107). Once AP-107 tank waste volume is sufficiently depleted, the waste supernate from tank 241-AP-105 (AP-105, the holding tank before transfer to AP-107) will be transferred to tank AP-107. Supernate from another tank will be transferred to the holding tank, AP-105, for eventual transfer to tank AP-107. These supernate streams will undergo blending in tanks AP-107 and AP-105; the volume blend ratios will be driven by how much the tank waste supernate volumes are depleted before the next tank waste is added. The consequence of tank waste blending on Cs uptake by CST was of interest and was tested via batch contacts; results are reported herein.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2025

FY24 Task 5: Leachate Disposition

Directly feeding sludge solids to the high-level waste (HLW) Waste Treatment Plant represents an alternative flowsheet seeking to initiate sludge processing as soon as possible. Key processing functions previously captured during baseline pretreatment operations include leaching and washing prior to solids concentration. These operations should be considered in the potential direct feed flowsheets to maximize waste feed loading, minimize HLW volume, and mitigate corrosion challenges associated with vitrification of high phosphate and fluoride concentrations. Additionally, single-shell tank (SST) retrievals and waste transfers to double-shell tanks (DSTs) in a direct feed flowsheet would likely also benefit from some level of leaching, washing, and solids concentration in order to reduce DST space and mission duration. These operations could occur in a new facility or potentially in available DSTs. If washing and leaching are utilized, an effective disposition pathway for the wash water and leachate solutions are needed. Three target species that benefit significantly from leaching and washing are phosphate, fluoride and aluminum. Phosphate (PO 4 3- ) and fluoride (F - ) can contribute substantially to the amount of carrier fluid needed for dissolution, and the resulting volume of liquid generated. Disposition of this retrieval solution should be evaluated in order to prevent crystallization of these anions throughout system processing. Since there is a high probability that any retrieval solutions will be at or near their PO 4 3- and F - solubility limits, evaporation or blending with a high Na supernate (>3.5 M) is not recommended for the wash water streams without a method to remove precipitants prior to solution disposal. Additionally, aluminum present in the southeast quadrant of the Hanford site represents roughly 60% of the waste solids in the initial processing tanks. These aluminum solids are in the form of gibbsite (Al(OH) 3 ) and can pose significant challenges for processing due to the fast-settling times and high solids loading associated with these materials. Easily remediated by caustic addition to the solids, these wash solutions could be processed through crystalline silicotitanate (CST) ion exchange columns to prepare the supernate solutions for disposition. The current target for feed conditions to the Low Activity Waste (LAW) melter are waste streams that contain nominally 5-6 M Na. Fractions within the tanks contain upwards of 0.2 M phosphate and fluoride in solution at 3.5 M Na. Concentrating these solutions above 5 M Na would result in an exceedance of the solubility limits, and potential for uncontrolled precipitation of the phosphate and fluoride crystal material. The resulting crystalline salt material is typically sodium fluoride phosphate, also referred to as natrophosphate (Na 7 FPO 4 ·19H 2 O). Salt phases are of importance in tank waste due to their chemical reactivity, which can result in precipitation, dissolution, or transformation, impacting any downstream processes (Bolling et al. 2020, Russell, Snow, and Peterson 2010). Salt generation and precipitation could pose challenges by causing system plugging and melter corrosion if left in the supernate stream, or limit sodium molarity of the supernate that would be accepted without incident in waste operations. To understand the impact of this salt generation, the crystallization of natrophosphate in multiple simulant feed matrices was studied to understand the implications of various tank waste supernate chemistries. Three matrices were examined: high PO 4 3- /low F - , low PO 4 3- /high F - , and an average matrix. Subsequent testing was performed with the average matrix with the inclusion of CsNO 3 , and a final run with the average matrix including CsNO 3 and a 137 Cs spike for tracer purposes.

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

Qualification of Processing Batches for Tank Closure Cesium Removal Through In-Tank Batch Contact Testing - 20470

The Tank Closure Cesium Removal (TCCR) process at the Savannah River Site (SRS) is currently processing waste from Tank 10H, generating decontaminated salt solution that is sent to Tank 11H. Transfers out of Tank 11H are then disposed of on site as a grout wasteform in the SRS Saltstone Processing Facility. This is a full-scale demonstration of the use of Crystalline Silicotitanate (CST) for the decontamination of aqueous nuclear waste supernate. CST primarily removes cesium from the high sodium alkaline feed, but also adsorbs strontium, actinides, and some other trace metals. The TCCR unit is an at-tank set of four ion exchange columns, with two typically being operated in series during waste processing. Tank 10H is serving a dual function as both the salt dissolution tank as well as the feed tank for the TCCR system. Prior to operation of TCCR, Tank 10H must undergo dissolution campaigns, dissolving the salt cake to form an aqueous salt solution (supernate). After each dissolution campaign, the supernate created must be qualified prior to processing through the TCCR system. Qualification includes detailed characterization of the supernate as well as in-tank batch contact tests to determine the equilibrium loading of Cs-137 on the CST ion exchange media (IONSIV{sup TM} R9120-Ba). In support of the in-tank batch contact testing, Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) developed a CST sample holder, also referred to as a 'tea-bag', to hold a measured amount (∼0.1 grams) of pretreated CST between stainless steel screens. The tea-bag fits within a standard stainless steel sample vial that has been modified to allow the flow of supernate to the CST. This sample holder is then immersed in the waste tank allowing free contact between the CST beads and the surrounding liquid, at an effectively infinite liquid-to-solid phase ratio. A pair of tea-bags are deployed in the tank for a period of 10 days for each batch, after which the CST is recovered, digested, and analyzed to determine the loading of cesium isotopes on the CST. This result then supports the TCCR column thermal loading limits for processing as part of the TCCR safety basis. This paper will discuss the design and testing of the CST sample holder, as well as results from the first few batches of waste qualified and subsequently processed through the TCCR system. In addition, results from analyses of Tank 11H samples, showing decontamination of the product will be included. (authors)

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

Cesium Ion Exchange Testing Using a Three-Column System with Crystalline Silicotitanate and Hanford Tank Waste 241-AP-107

Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) is working to support early production of immobilized low-activity waste by feeding Hanford tank supernate from tank farms to the Hanford Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) Low-Activity Waste (LAW) facility. This goal incorporates the design of a Tank-Side Cesium Removal (TSCR) system, which in effect filters tank waste supernate and processes it through a cesium ion exchange medium to remove 137Cs. The 137Cs-depleted product is sent to the WTP for vitrification. Rovira et al. (2018) reported the successful Cs removal from Hanford tank 241-AP-107 waste (hereafter called AP-107) using crystalline silicotitanate (CST) ion exchange media manufactured by Honeywell UOP, LLC (product IONSIVTM R9140-B, Batch 2081000057) in a lead-lag column system. Since that testing, WRPS has changed the column design to a three-column system. WRPS requested a repeated study with AP-107 tank waste using a different batch of IONSIVTM R9140-B, Lot 2002009604, in a three-column format. A small-scale test platform was constructed to demonstrate solids filtration, Cs removal, and LAW vitrification and installed at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. This report describes the small-scale ion exchange testing system component of the test platform and the processing of approximately 8.55 L of filtered AP-107 supernate using CST, Lot 8056262-999, that passed through a 25-mesh filter. This report also describes the Cs ion exchange batch contact testing to determine the Cs distribution coefficient and the maximum Cs loading capacity in the AP-107 tank waste matrix. Batch contact testing helps to evaluate CST performance on tank waste supernate and is often used prior to processing tank waste through ion exchange columns to assess some performance metrics (e.g., 50% Cs breakthrough). Batch contact tests were performed with the filtered AP-107 tank waste at four Cs concentrations at a phase ratio of 200 (liquid volume to exchanger mass). The distribution coefficient (K d ) at the equilibrium condition of 9.2 µg Cs/mL (AP-107 feed condition) was determined to be 806 mL AP 107/g CST. With a CST bed density of 1.01 g/mL (<25 mesh CST), this K d corresponded to a predicted 50% Cs breakthrough of 814 bed volumes (BVs). The Cs load capacity at the equilibrium feed condition was determined to be 8.3 mg Cs/g dry CST. The three-column format testing was prototypic to the intended TSCR operations, albeit on a small scale with 10-mL CST beds. Flowrate was adjusted to match the CST contact time expected for the full-scale operation, i.e., matched bed volumes per hour (BV/h) flow rate. The feed was processed downflow through the lead column, then through the middle column, and then through the polish column. Loading continued at an average of 1.88 BV/h (1.83 to 2.04 BV/h range) until the entire available AP-107 feed was processed. The Cs-decontaminated product will be provided for vitrification testing. The lead column only reached 45% Cs breakthrough after processing 855 BVs of feed. The 50% Cs breakthrough was extrapolated to occur at ~900 BVs. This extrapolated 50% Cs breakthrough value differed from the batch contact estimate (814 BVs) by 13%. The waste acceptance criteria (WAC) or contract limit for the WTP LAW vitrification facility is 3.18E-5 Ci 137 Cs per mole Na. For the AP-107 tank waste, only 0.127% of the influent 137 Cs concentration may be delivered to the WTP; this required a Cs decontamination factor of 787. The Cs effluent from the middle column reached the WAC after processing 590 BVs. Cs breakthrough from the polish column began at 590 BVs, reaching 6.3E-3 µCi/mL or 4.3E-3% Cs breakthrough after processing 844 BVs of feed.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗