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

Pareizs, J. M.

doi:10.2172/1568794

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A significant amount of sulfur was found to be in the insoluble solids portion of a 2019 Tank 26 sample; ~60% of the sulfur was determined to be soluble. 38 Because Tank 26 was added to Tank 51, a calculation was performed to determine if a significant amount of insoluble sulfur was present in Tank 51. Results of that calculation are shown in Table 3-7.…”

Section: Soluble Sodium Sulfur and Oxalatementioning

confidence: 99%

Radioactive Waste Sludge Washing and Demonstration of the Nitric-Glycolic Acid Flowsheet for Sludge Batch 10 Qualification

MARTINO¹,

Siegfried²,

Pareizs³

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For each sludge batch that is processed in the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF), the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) performs qualification testing to demonstrate that the sludge batch (SB) is processible. During processing of SB9, DWPF will be transitioning from the Nitric-Formic Acid (NFA) flowsheet to the Nitric-Glycolic Acid (NGA) flowsheet. Thus, the qualification of SB10 was requested to only be performed using the NGA flowsheet.In order to qualify the batch for the NGA flowsheet, Sludge Receipt and Adjustment Tank (SRAT) and Slurry Mix Evaporator (SME) cycles, designated SC-19, were performed using SB10 Tank 51 sample material. SRNL received Tank 51 material in the midst of Tank Farm washing. SRNL continued the washing in the SRNL Shielded Cells. The SRNL process included the addition of Sodium Reactor Experiment (SRE) material from H Canyon, simulating the transfer of SRE from H Canyon to Tank 51 during Tank Farm washing. The washed SB10 Tank 51 material, with SRE, was characterized prior to flowsheet qualification testing.The Chemical Process Cell demonstration with the NGA flowsheet utilized an acid stoichiometry of 107% Koopman Minimum Acid basis (102% Hsu basis). The qualification was performed on the "batch", which is representative of the Tank 51 material that will be transferred to Tank 40, rather than the "blend", which is representative of the Tank 40 material that will be fed to DWPF. Thus, specifics for the DWPF processing of the Tank 40 blend may differ in varying degrees from this qualification test. Additionally, the qualification did not include Salt Waste Processing Facility (SWPF) feeds (Monosodium Titanate (MST)/Sludge Solids and Strip Effluent), which would contribute soluble salts and the MST solids, which could influence the acid addition and the product rheology, respectively. For these reasons, the results of this qualification testing demonstration are used in conjunction with simulant testing to inform the processing of the Tank 40 blend with inclusion of SWPF feeds.Highlights of the testing results are summarized in the paragraphs below.Prior to the addition of antifoam, foaming was encountered in the SRAT cycle during the addition of nitric acid to the extent that sludge foamed over into the off-gas system. Based on observations from simulant testing, during which foaming was not noted during nitric acid addition, the plan involved addition of Momentive TM Y-17112 antifoam after the completion of nitric acid addition and prior to glycolic acid addition. The foaming during nitric acid addition was likely due to the release of carbon dioxide from the acid reacting with carbonate. After a time out (3 weeks), the SRAT cycle was resumed with an antifoam addition prior to resumption of nitric acid addition. Foaming was successfully mitigated during the remainder of the SRAT and SME cycles.Total dried solids measurements of the SRAT and SME Products were 20.1 and 48.1 weight percent (wt%), respectively. Calcined solids measured 11.3 wt% in the SRAT Receipt and SRAT Pr...

show abstract

Section: Soluble Sodium Sulfur and Oxalatementioning

confidence: 99%