Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T07:47:25.879Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of Reactor Decontamination Complexing Agents On Soil Adsorption-Column Studies (JJ5.4)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2011

R. J. Serne ,
K. J. Cantrell ,
I. V. Kutnyakov  and
C. W. Lindenmeier
R. J. Serne
Affiliation:
Applied Geology and Geochemistry Section, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, WA 99352, [email protected]
K. J. Cantrell
Affiliation:
Applied Geology and Geochemistry Section, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, WA 99352, [email protected]
I. V. Kutnyakov
Affiliation:
Applied Geology and Geochemistry Section, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, WA 99352, [email protected]
C. W. Lindenmeier
Affiliation:
Applied Geology and Geochemistry Section, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, WA 99352, [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Previous studies show that some radionuclides present in reactor decontamination wastes form strong complexes with the organic complexing agents used to decontaminate reactor cores and piping. Further, the metal-ligand complexes exhibit reduced adsorption to soils. Flow through column tests were used to study the adsorption of metal-organic ligand complexes to two soils. The breakthrough curves for metals and organic ligands for four tests are shown. In all the column tests, the adsorption of the organic ligand-metal complex, or the free organic ligand and free metal (disassociated species) was reversible. That is, close to the total mass injected was recovered in the flushing stage with untraced background solution.

Two tests that used the iron oxide coated sand show complicated behavior that was interpreted as being caused by ligand (both EDTA and picolinate) interacting with the ferric oxides. The Ni-organic ligand complex in both cases appears to exchange Ni for Fe to some extent such that free Ni+2 is produced and Fe (III)-organic complexes are formed that adsorb with different strengths. Further, we suspect that the organic ligand is dissolving some of the ferric oxide coatings and destroying sorption sites. The combination of all these reactions leads to rather complicated breakthrough curves. In tests with picolinate there is partial disassociation of the metal and ligand such that the breakthrough curves for the metal and ligand are different

A recommendation is made to not bury EDTA-laden decontamination wastes with cement. Another observation is that predictions that use simple constant Kd and constant source release constructs may not be exclusively conservative in predicting concentrations of contaminants in water down-gradient from disposal sites.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 713: Symposium JJ – Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XXV , 2002 , JJ5.4
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Means, J. L., Crerar, D. A., and Duguid, J. O., Science 200, 1477–1482 (1978).Google Scholar
2. Means, J. L. and Alexander, C. A., Nuclear and Chem. Waste Management 2, 183–196 (1981).Google Scholar
3. O'Donnell, E., “Insights Gained from NRC Research Investigations at the Maxey Flats LLW SLB Facility.” In Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Participants' Information Meeting DOE LLW Management Program, CONF-8308106 (NTIS, Springfield, VA, 1983) pp. 254–268.Google Scholar
4. Polzer, W.L., Fowler, E. B., and Essington, E. H.. “Radioecology Studies at Maxey Flats, Kentucky: Radionuclides in Vegetal Samples.” In Radionuclide Distributions and Migration Mechanisms at Shallow Land Burial Sites, NUREG/CR-2383 (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., 1982) pp. V-1–24.Google Scholar
5. Dayal, R., Pietrzak, R. F., and Clinton, J.H., Nucl. Tech. 72, 184–193 (1986).Google Scholar
6. McIsaac, E.V., Waste Management 13, 41–54 (1993).Google Scholar
7. McIsaac, E.V., and Mandler, J. W., The Leachability of Decontamination Ion-Exchange Resins Solidified in Cement at Operating Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG/CR-5224 (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., 1989.Google Scholar
8. McIsaac, E.V., Akers, D. W., and McConnell, J. W., Effect of pH on the Release of Radionuclides and Chelating Agents from Cement-Solidified Decontamination Ion-Exchange Resins Collected from Operating Nuclear Power Stations, NUREG/CR-5601 (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., 1991.Google Scholar
9. Akers, D.W., Kraft, N. C. and Mandler, J. W., Release of Radionuclides and Chelating Agents From Cement-Solidified Decontamination Low-Level Radioactive Waste Collected From the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Unit 3, NUREG/CR-6164 (Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., 1994a.Google Scholar
10. Akers, D.W., Kraft, N. C. and Mandler, J. W., Compression and Immersion Tests and Leaching of Radionuclides, Stable Metals, and Chelating Agents From Cement-Solidified Decontamination Waste Collected From Nuclear Power Stations, NUREG/CR-6201 (Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., 1994b.Google Scholar
11. Shaw, R.A., and Wood, C. J., “Chemical Decontamination: An Overview.” Nuclear News 6, 107–111(1985).Google Scholar
12. Smee, J.L., Bradbury, D., and LeSurf, J. E., “Recent Experience with Dilute Chemical Decontamination,” In Proceedings of the Symposium on Advanced Nuclear Services, (Toronto Nuclear Association, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 1986) pp. 1–18.Google Scholar
13. Swan, T., Segal, M. G., Williams, W. J., and Pick, M. E., LOMI Decontamination Reagents and Related Preoxidation Processes, EPRI NP-5522M (Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA., 1987).Google Scholar
14. Speranzini, B.A., Voit, R., and Helms, M., “CAN-DECON Makes a Strong Comeback as CandEREM,” Nuclear Engineering International 9, 52–55 (1990).Google Scholar
15. Bradbury, D., Segal, M.G., Swan, T., Comley, G. C. W., and Ferrett, D. J., “Decontamination of Winfrith SGHWR Coolant Circuits Using LOMI Reagents,” Nucl. Energy 20(5),403–408 (1981).Google Scholar
16. Serne, R.J., Felmy, A. R., Cantrell, K. J., Krupka, K. M., Campbell, J. A., Bolton, H. Jr, and Fredrickson, J. K., Characterization of Radionuclide-Chelating Agent Complexes Found in Low-Level Radioactive Decontamination Waste, NUREG/CR-6124 (U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D. C., 1996).Google Scholar
17. Serne, R.J., Lindenmeier, C. W., Cantrell, K. J., and Owen, A. T., in Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XXII, edited by Wronkiewicz, D.J. and Lee, J.H. (Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc., 556, Warrendale, PA, 1999) pp 1043–1049.Google Scholar
18. Szecsody, J.E., Zachara, J. M., and Bruckhart, P. L., Environ. Sci. Technol. 28, 1706–1716, (1994).Google Scholar
19. Stumm, W., and Wieland, E., “Dissolution of Oxide and Silicate Minerals: Rate Depend on Surface Speciation,” In Aquatic Chemical Kinetics, ed. Stumm, W., (Wiley-Interscience, New York, 1990) pp. 367–400.Google Scholar
20. Serne, R.J., Cantrell, K.J., Lindenmeier, C.W., Owen, A.T., Kutnyakov, I.V., Orr, R.D., and Felmy, A.R., Stability, Adsorption, and Transport Potential of Chelated Radionuclide Complexes in Low-Level Decontamination Waste, NUREG/CR-6758 (U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D. C., 2002).Google Scholar
21. Davis, J.A., , J. A, Kent, D. B., Coston, J. A., Hess, K. M., and Joye, J. L., Water Resources Research 36, 119–134 (2000).Google Scholar