View Document Here - Hanford Site

R 2.1 199^ ^.EN GINEERING DATA TRANSMITTAL 

1.EDT 

.. ., t-' :'l 

. To: (Receiving Organization) 3. From: ( Originating Organization) 4. Related EDT No.: 

Distribution WRAP Technolo gy 132766 

5. Proj./Prog./Dept-/Div.: 6. Cog. Engr.: 7. Purchase Order No.: 

WRAO-24910 CJ Benar N / A 

i. ` c 1 

Page 1 of 1 

3. Originator Remarkse 9. Equip./COnponent No.: 

WHC-SD-W100-TI-003, rev. 0, "WRAP Module 2A Waste Form N / A 

Qualification Status Report". TO. System/Bldg•/Facility: 

WRAP 2A / W-100 

11. Receiver Remarks: r0 ?4 

g = Fi 

12. Major Assm. Dwg. No.: 

ti ^ 

N / A 

^lE^^ 

cs 

13. Permit/Permit Application No.: 

N/A 

14 . R equ i red Response 

N/A 

Date: 

. 15. DATA TTgD ^- (F) G) (H) (I) 

' ( A ) 

Item 

- 

(BI Document/Drawing No. 

- iCi - 

Sheet 

- - 

Rev. 

- - - 

(E) Title or Descdptbn of Data 

- -- 

Impact I Reason 

- 

^ ,.. No. 

No. No. Transmitted Level 

for 

Trans- 

Ortginator 

Dispo- 

Receivor 

Dispo- 

mittal eition sition 

I WHC-SD-W100-TI-003 0 WRAP Module 2A Waste 4 2 

Form Qualification 

Status Re ort 

16. KEY 

Impact Level ( F) Reason for Transmittal (G) Disposition ( H) &(I) 

1. 2, 3, or 4 Isee 1. Approval 4. Review 1. Approved 4. Reviewed no/comment 

MRP 5.43) 2. Release 5. Post-Review 2. Approved w/comment 5. Reviewed w/comment 

3. Information 6. Dist. (Receipt Acknow. Required) 3. Disapprovad w/comment S. Receipt acknowledged 

iGi (H) 

Reaeun 

17. SIGNATURE/DISTAIBUTION 

( See Impact Level for required signatures) 

Disp. ( JI Name (K) Signature ( U Data ( M) MSIN (J) Name (K) Signature IL) Date (M) MSIN 

2 ( Cog.Eng.CJ Bener Lf X60 

2 ^ Cog. Mgf•.CA Peter n H1-60 

OA 

Safety 

Env. 

I 1B• 19. 20. 21. DOE APPROVAL (if required) 

Ltr. No. 

q Approved 

q Approved u/comments 

Signature of EDT Date Authorized Representative Date Cognizant/Project t [) Disapproved w/comments 

l7riginator for Raceiving Organization EngineeYs Manager 

BD-7400-172-2 ( 07/91) GEF097 

(Gl iH) 

Reason 

Disp. 

BD-7400-1721 102/89) 

' ..

u. 

= THIS PAGE INTENT9ONALLY 

...._- LEFT BLANK 

^::_^;

Date Received% 

• I INFORMATION RELEASE REQUEST 

I Reference: 

4 /,h/ d3 i WHC-CM-3-4 

q 

_. 

SpeechorPresentation 

.PUr se- __--- -_-_-q 

Reference 

- 1 ID- N:abar (inelude revision, volume, 

WHC-SD-W100-TI-003 Rev. 0 

etc.) 

[I 

[] 

F ull Paper 

Summary 

(Check 

only one 

suffix) 

[x] 

q 

[] 

Technical Report 

Thesis or Dissertation 

Manual 

L i st attachments. 

[] Abstract [] Brochure/Flier appendices A through G 

[] Visual Aid [] Software/Database 

[] Speakers Bureau [] Controlled Document 

Date Release Required 

[] Poster Session Q Other 4/6/93 

t] Videotape 

Title WRAP Module 2A Waste Form Qualification Status Unclassified Category Impact 

Level 4 

Rep ort UC-NA 

New or novel (patentable) subject matter) [ X] No [ l yes 

f 'Ves', has disclosure been submitted by WHC or other company7 

Information received from others in confidence, such as proprietary data, 

trade secrets, and/or inventions) 

[l No [l Yes Discbsure Nolsl. 

[X] No [ l Yes (Identify) 

Copyrights? [X] No [l Ves 

Trademarksi 

If'Ves-,haswrittenpermisaionbeenprantedT [l No [Xl Veslldentify) Sorbond, Envirostone, 

[1 No [1 Yes IAttach Permissionl Cel1 te, Hobart 

tle of Journal 

or Meeting I Group or Society Sponsoring 

Conference or Meeting I City/State I Willproceedinpsbepublished7 [l Yes 

Re view Required per WHC-CM-3-4 

tesification/UnclesaifiedControlled 

clear Information 

Patent - General Counsel 

eneral Counsel - 

Applied Technology/Export Controlled 

Information or International Program 

WHC Program/Project 

Communications 

RL Proaram/Project 

Publication Services 

Other Program/Project 

References Available to Intended Audience 

Transmit to DOE-HQ/Office of Scientific 

and Technical Information 

Will material be handed out? [] Yes 

Yes No Reviewer - Signature Indicates Approval 

Name (printed) Signature 

[l [ X'- l+ , 

r" 

WC1p; 

W 

[l 1XI 

[l 1XI , 

[l 1XI 

[l 1XI 

1XI [l 

[l 1XI 

e reauirements. 

Yes No 

1XI [l 

[l 1XI 

Author/Requestor rinted/Signeture) Date 

CJ Benar 

Intended Audi ce 

VW 

[l internal all sponsor ^ External 

-sponsible Manager ( Print gp/ Stgnature) Date 

r.Â Petersen 4/2/93 

BD-7600-062 ( 08/91) WEF074 

4/2/93 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALU 

LEFT BLANK 

^^^

. 

SUPPORTING DOCUMENT 1. Total Pages 360 

2. Title 3. Number 4. Rev No. 

WRAP 2A Module 2A Waste Form Qualification Status WHC-SD-W100-TI-003 0 

Re p ort 

5. Key Vords 6. Author 

Solidification, Stabilization, Cementitious, Name: CJ Benar, DA Burbank, KM 

Polymer, Thermosetting, Grout, Waste Forms, Weingardt 

Immobilization, Matrix, Parametric Studies ^ 

• ^ ^: _^ 

^ C ^: 

7. Abstract 

'^ • S ^ .-( 

- v :. . 

E L n 4 

C` ! 

. 

ig ture 

Organization/Charge Code 24910/A55E2 

This report summarizes the results of the testing program conducted by WHC to 

confirm the baseline waste form selection for use in WRAP (Waste Receiving and 

Processing) Module 2A. WRAP 2A will provide treatment required to properly dispose 

of Contact Handled (CH) Mixed Low Level Waste (MLLW) accumulating at the DOE Hanford 

Site in Richland, WA. Screening tests were performed using the major chemical 

constituent of each waste type to measure the gross compatibility with the 

immobilization media. Positive results were obtained resulting in the production of 

a solid monolith from each major chemical constituent with the selected 

immobilization medium. This indicated that more advanced testing should be 

performed to confirm that a detailed surrogate waste in the immobilization matrix 

could pass all applicable test criteria imposed the final waste form. 

8. PURPOS AND USE OF DOCUMENT - This documen as prepar use 10. RELEASE STAMP 

within U.S. Department of Ene nd its c ractors is to 

be use nly to perform, or i n ate k under 

U.S. Depar nt of Energy c s. This doc i t approved 

for public ease untit ed. 

PATENT STATUS Thi^ûment copy, since it smitted in 

=dv ,.. .,, 

fore ° ^ us 

,,,.te# 

• ^' .... 

in `manceof 

,.,ad .otabte 

uork°,under 

cnfi 

tracts 

ce soleLy 

'th the 

U.S. Depart rgy. This document is to be pubt ed nor 

its conten erwi disseminated or use r purposes o[h than 

specifi e befor tent approval f ch release or u has 

been d, upon requ from the Pate ounsel, U.S. Department 

of E Field Office, R Land , WA. 

DISCLAIMER - This report was prepared as an account of work 

sponsored by an agency of the United States Goverment. Neither the 

United States Government nor any agency thereof , nor any of their t I^ 

emp l oyees, nor any o f t h e i r contractors, subcontractors or their !J C 3 

employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any 

f 

legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or 

any third party's use or the results of such use of any information, 

apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use 

would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any 

specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, 

trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily 

constitute or imply its endorsement, recommndation, or favoring by 

the United States Government or any agency thereof or its 

contractors or subcontractors. The views and opinions of authors 

expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the 

United States Government or any a g enc y thereof. 

1 9. Impact Level 4 

A-6400-073 (11/91) ( EF) WEF124 

YI

THIS PAGE lNTENTlONALLY 

LEFT BLANK 

_.^ 

r 

^.,.


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

A testing program has been conducted by the Westinghouse Hanford Company 

(WHC) to confirm the baseline waste form selection for use in WRAP (Waste 

Receiving and Processing) Module 2A. The WRAP Module 2A will provide 

treatment required to properly dispose of contact handled mixed low-level 

waste accumulating at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford Site in 

Richland, Washington. Solidification/stabilization has been selected as the 

appropriate treatment for this waste to reduce its toxicity and mobility in 

the disposal site. This work is intended to test various solidification media 

and confirm the baseline technologies selected for WRAP 2A. 

The testing used a phased approach, consisting of first screening the 

compatibility of surrogate wastes with the immobilization media, then 

performing detailed physical and chemical tests on laboratory-prepared 

=`} surrogate waste forms. This will be followed by performance testing of 

surrogate waste form specimens prepared by full-scale mixing equipment. 

Further testing will be performed during startup of the plant and introduction 

-cf-new--waste--streams:--it-fis-conceived that-similar-testing as described above 

will be required throughout the life of the plant as new wastes and variations 

to the process are encountered. This report details the efforts and results 

obtained from the initial phase of testing (waste form compatibility screening 

and surrogate performance testing). 

The current focus of this test work is to verify the ability of the 

immobilization media identified in the conceptual design report to adequately 

solidify certain waste types (UE&C 1992). As such, the first efforts of this 

testing focus on using two matrices for waste solidification; cement-based 

materials and thermosetting polymer resins. Project background, feedstream 

overview, and the conceptual design baseline approach are discussed in this 

rep^rt to further clarify the focus of the test work. 

ii


Eight different waste types, representing about 80% of the projected feed 

to WRAP 2A were used for these initial phases of testing. The remaining 20% 

consists of small quantities of various waste types that require better 

characterization data before testing. This 20% will be tested as better 

information becomes available. Four of the waste types were tested with 

cementitious waste forms, and four different waste types were tested with the 

thermosetting polymer. The split as to which waste was to be treated with 

which immobilization medium was based on the conceptual design baseline. 

Screening tests were performed using the major chemical constituent of 

each waste type to measure the gross compatibility with the immobilization 

media. Positive results were obtained here in that a solid monolith was 

successfully prepared from each major chemical constituent with the selected 

immobilization medium. This indicated that more advanced testing should be 

performed to confirm that a detailed surrogate waste in the immobilization 

matrix could pass all applicable test criteria imposed on the final waste 

form. 

Test criteria for solidified mixed waste were assembled from applicable 

-- - -----r_egulaiiory=documeQtation (DDEArder 5820-2A--[D4E -1-988], Washingtpn 

Administrative Code 173-303 [WAC 1990], and 10 CFR 261 [NRC 1992]), including 

guidance documents from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC Technical 

--- - ---Posi#iop-on-Waste-Faxm.[NRC-184T])-and the U.S. Er^vironmental Protection 

Agency Handbook for Stabilization_and Solidification of Hazardous Wastes 

(EPA 1984). 

Waste surrogates were then prepared by WHC to represent each of the eight 

waste types for testing. Surrogates for polymer testing were sent to the 

vendor commissioned for that portion of the test work. Surrogates for the 

cementitious testing were used in the WHC laboratory responsible for the grout 

performance testing. 

Test specimens were prepared with the surrogate wastes, and tests were 

performed. Detailed discussion of the laboratory work and results are 

contained in this report. All cementitious specimens performed as expected 

and confirmed baseline process selection. Successful test results have also 

iii


been achieved with some of the polymer specimens. All surrogates have been 

successfully solidified and have formed free-standing monoliths that exceed 

strength criteria. Some additional formulation work is necessary with the 

polymer-wastetypss to ensure adequate encapsulation of some key constituents. 

If the remaining tests show positive results, then the baseline process 

selection will be confirmed and the next stage of testing will proceed. The 

-follow-on tests will consist of laboratory parametric studies, mixing 

-----€qu#-pmer,t tests, and confirmatory testing using actual waste. These tests 

-- will_qenera_teprocess €ontxol data, detailed design data, and data required 

for pe%mit approval. 

iv

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY 

LEFT BLANK

__ _ _ MHC-SIL-yJ3,00-TI-D03 Rev. 0 

CONTENTS 

1.0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1 

1.1 WRAP 2A BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1 

1.2 WRAP 2A FEEDSTREAM OVERVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . 1-2 

1.2.1 Feedstream 1: 183H Solar Basin Waste ........ 1-3 

1.2.2 Feedstream 2: Liquid Effluent Treatment 

Facilities Secondary Solids . . . . . . . . . . . 1-4 

1.2.3 Feedstream 3: Compactible Solids . . . . . . . . . . 1-4 

1,2,4 _ Feedstream 4; Noncompactible Solids_._. . . . . . . . 1-5 

1.2.5 Feedstream 5: Metals . . . . . . . . . . 1-5 

1.2.6 Feedstream 6: Absorbed Chemicals/ 

Solidified Liquids . . . . . . 1-6 

1.2.7 Feedstream 7: Ash From Thermal Treatment ...... 1-6 

1.2.8 Feedstream 8: Contaminated Soils . . . . . . . . . . 1-6 

1.3 WRAP 2A CONCEPTUAL DESIGN BASELINE APPROACH . . . . . . . . . 1-6 

2.0 WAST E FORM PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 

2.1 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 

2.1.1 Federal Regulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 

2.2.2 State of Washington ..... 2-1 

2.2.3 Hanford Site Solid Waste Acceptance Criteria ..... 2-1 

2.2 PROGRAMMATIC AND FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 

2.3 TEST SELECTION AND ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA . . . . . . . . . . . 2-2 

2.3.1 Compressive Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-2 

2.3.2 Leachability Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-3 

2.3.3 Biodegradation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-4 

2.3.4 Thermal Cycling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-4 

2.3.5 Radiation Stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-4 

2.3.6 Water Immersion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-4 

2.3.7 Free Liquids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-5 

2.3.8 Hazardous Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-5 

3.0 TESTING SCOPE AND DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1 

3.1 SELECTION OF WASTE TYPES FOR TESTING . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1 

3.2 SELECTION OF WASTE FORMS FOR TESTING . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-2 

3.3 TESTING APPROACH . . 3-5 

3.3.1 Confirm Process Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-5 

3.3.2 Process Optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-8 

3.3.3 Hot Verification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-8 

3.3.4 Additional Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-8 

4.0 TEST RESULTS . . . . . . 4-1 

4.1 SCREENING TEST RESULTS ... . 4-1 

4.1.1 Cement-Based Waste Form Screening Test Results ... . 4-1 

4.1.2 Thermosetting Polymer Screening Test Results ..... 4-2 

4.1.3 Thermosetting Polymer Results Summary . . . . . . . . 4-5 

4.2 SURROGATE PERFORMANCE TESTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-5 

4.2.1 Cement-Based Waste Form Results ..... 4-5 

4.2.2 Thermosetting Polymer Waste Form Test Results .... 4-9 

4.3 FOLLOW-ON TESTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-11 

5.0 REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1 

v


LIST OF FIGURES 

3-1 Waste Form Qualification Strategy . . . . . . . . . 

3-2 WRAP 2A Process Development Waste Form Qualification 

Project Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

LIST OF TABLES 

1-1 Hanford Site Solid Waste Treatment Facilities . . . . . . . . . . 

1-2 WRAP 2A Design Basis Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

2-1 WRAP 2A Waste Form Performance Specifications . . . . . . . . . . 

3-1 Initial Testing Phase of Large Volume Feedstreams ........ 

3-2 Solidification Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

3-3 Formulations for Cement Solidification Testing . . . . . . . . . . 

4-1 WRAP 2A Waste Form Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

4-2 WRAP 2A Cement Waste Form Tests Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

4-3 TCLP Results for WRAP 2A Cement Waste Forms . . . . . . . . . . . 

4-4 Formulation Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

4 5 Rcpl IVatG JpGVImGnS TGJ40Y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

4-6 Summary of Polymer Waste Form Testing Results . . . . . . . . . . 

4-7 Follow-On Testing Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

vi 

3-6 

3-7 

1-2 

1-8 

2-3 

3-1 

3-2 

3-4 

4-6 

4-7 

4-9 

4-10 

4-10 

4-12 

4-13

F`= 


DESCRIPTION OF APPENDICES 

A. Statement of Work - Thermosetting Polymer 

Statement of Work prepared by Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) as part 

of the bid package soliciting qualified vendors to perform waste form 

performance testing using a thermosetting polymer with WHC-prepared 

surrogate waste. 

B. Technical Task Plan - Grout 

Technical Task Plan prepared by WHC for an "in-house" (WHC) testing 

program for waste form performance testing using cement-based waste forms 

and surrogate waste. Similar to the statement of work for thermosetting 

polymer. 

= C. Thermosetting Polymer Test Plan 

Detailed Test Plan prepared by the vendor awarded the contract for 

° thermosetting polymer testing described in Appendix A. Outlines test 

procedures, quality control, and testing deliverables. 

0. Characterization Data 

1. Two memos prepared by WHC Chemical Process Engineering Group. The 

first summarizes the "to date" characterization data on the 

183H basin wastes ( the largest volume of the currently stored 

low-level mixed waste types. The second memo describes the 

recommended waste forms for the various basin wastes and some to the 

future generated waste streams (Liquid Effluent Treatment Facility 

[L ETF,--?nd--Iacanerator Ash). 

2. 

Memo 1: JBW-183-001 

Memo 2: CPE-WOG-002 

Four WHC-generated Internal Letter Reports reviewing the records of 

the contents of all currently stored low-level mixed waste at the 

Hanford Site. The characterization data and the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency waste codes were used to group the containers into 

lots of similar waste types for processing. A technical evaluation 

was-then performed (by a solidification technology expert) as to the 

best treatment approach for each lot. The rationale for the 

treatment selection is included. 

Memo No.s: 87330-92-MLS-023, - 025, -026 -028. 

vii

Literature Search Results 


DESCRIPTION OF APPENDICES (cont.) 

1. This WHC Letter Report (CEP-WOG-001) contains a thorough literature 

search and review of solidification technologies. This review was 

done in support of the Waste Receiving and Processing (WRAP) 

Facility, Module 2A, Waste Form Qualification efforts. It included 

a review of all known solidification technologies. 

This report (generated by solidification expert Earl McDanial, 

Oak Ridge National Laboratory) is a review specifically of grouting 

technology (cement-based solidification) used throughout the world. 

This report was done to support the selection of a grout technology 

in WRAP 2A. 

F. Thermosetting Polymer Test Results 

Contained under four reports: 

Test Status Report (1) - WHC Trip 

Thermosetting Polymer Test Report 



G. Overview of Solidification Technologies 

Report to Stock Equipment Company 

(2) - Stock Equipment Company 



This is an internal WHC memo report that was prepared as a review of all 

avaiiable solidification technologies, important processing 

considerations,_and general advantages and disadvantages of various 

technologies. The report is not specific to WRAP 2A and is intended to 

provide--general--trackground needed to begin evaluating the various waste 

forms. 

viii


LIST OF TERMS 

ANS American Nuclear Society 

ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials 

BDAT Best Demonstrated Achievable Technology 

CDR Conceptual Design Report 

CH contact handled 

CH-MLLW contact handled mixed low-level waste 

DOE U.S. Department of Energy 

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

LETF Liquid Effluent Treatment Facilities 

LLW low-level waste 

MLLW mixed low-level waste 

NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 

RCRA ---_tespur^&_C=ser-vaLior. -and-Ttecevery Act 

RH remote handled 

RMW radioactive mixed waste 

TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure 

UE&C United Engineers and Constructors, Inc. 

WFQ Waste Form Qualification 

WHC Westinghouse Hanford Company 

WRAP Waste Receiving and Processing 

ix


This page intentionally left blank. 

x


WASTE RECEIVING AND PROCESSING MODULE 2A 

WASTE FORM QUALIFICATION 

STATUS REPORT 

1.0 INTRODUCTION 

_This-repart-provides a status of the waste form testing work being 

performed in support of Waste Receiving and Processing ( WRAP) Facility, 

Module 2A. The WRAP 2A will provide treatment-required to properly dispose of 

inorganic contact-handled ( CH) mixed low-level waste ( MLLW) ( CH-MLLW). It has 

been determined that solidification/stabilization is the appropriate treatment 

for this waste to reduce its toxicity and mobility in the disposal site. This 

work is intended to test various solidification media to confirm the baseline 

technologies selected for the WRAP 2A. 

The testing used a phased approach, consisting of first screening the 

compatibility of surrogate wastes with the immobilization media, then 

performing detailed physical and chemical tests on laboratory-prepared 

surrogate waste forms. This will be followed by testing of surrogate waste 

form specimens prepared by full-scale mixing equipment. Details of the test 

program can be found in the WRAP Module 2A Waste Form Qualification Plan 

(WHC 1993). This report details the testing efforts performed during calendar 

year 1992. 

The current focus of this test work is to verify the ability of the 

immobilization media identified in the WRAP Module 2A Conceptual Design Report 

(UE&C 1992) to adequately treat certain waste types. As such, the first 

efforts of this testing focus on using two matrices for waste solidification: 

cement-based materials and thermosetting polymer resins. Project background, 

feedstream overview, and the conceptual design baseline approach are discussed 

in the following sections to further clarify the focus of the test work. 

1.1 WRAP 2A BACKGROUND 

The WRAP Module 2A, provided by Project W-100, is the proposed second 

module of the WRAP Facility. This facility will provide treatment for CH-MLLW 

to allow its permanent disposal. The treatment process will reduce the 

toxicity and mobility of the waste by using nonthermal solidification and 

stabilization technologies. The facility will only treat those wastes that 

are amenable to this approach. Wastes with regulated levels of organic 

contamination that require thermal treatment will be treated at another 

facility. The WRAP 2A will be designed to provide the capacity to treat both 

the stored waste and the future generated Hanford Site MLLW. The WRAP 2A is 

part of-Mil-estone-M-19-00-in the-Tri-Party Agreement (Ecology, EPA, and 

DOE 1992) to begin operation of the second module of WRAP in 1999. 

Several 

capabilities 

Site. Table 

handle-trans 

different facilities will be needed to 

required to handle the different solid 

1-1 lists the facilities. The WRAP 1 

iranic-waste. The waste with the least 

1-1 

provide all of the 

wastes at the Hanford 

is a facility that will 

amount of uncertainties,


best characterization data, and most immediate need 'was determined to be 

CH-MLLW. The hazards and technical uncertainties associated with performing 

the required thermal treatment for organic wastes would impede the progress of 

dealing with inorganic wastes. Hence, organic wastes were deferred to a 

ttrermrall facility project scope; and WRAP 2A was initiated as a treatment 

-facil-ity--for--inorganic -CH-MLLW- conta-ined -in -drums-or -wast-e boxes. 

The WRAP 2B is proposed as a follow-on project to WRAP 2A, which will 

provide treatment for remote handled (RH), large, or otherwise noncompliant 

waste. The need for WRAP 2B as a separate project is based on the uncertainty 

in the characteristics of these waste types, the uncertainty in dispositioning 

these waste types, and the inherent design differences between a facility that 

handles CH waste and one that handles RH waste. 

Table 1-1. Hanford Site Solid Waste Treatment Facilities. 

Project Facility Waste type Line item 

W-026 WRAP Module 1 CH-TRU and CH-LLW FY 1991 

W-100 WRAP Module 2A Inorganic CH-MLLW FY 1994 

W-255 WRAP Module 2B RH and irregular FY 1995 

W-242 Thermal treatment Organic LL-MW FY 1996 

NOTE: WRAP 2A is scheduled to be operational by 1999. 

CH - contact handled. 

FY - fiscal year. 

LL - low level. 

MLLW = mixed low-level waste. 

MW - mixed waste. 

RH = remote hand l elJl. 

TRU - transuranic. 

WRAP - Waste Receiving 

1.2 WRAP 2A FEEDSTREAM OVERVIEW 

and Processing. 

The feedstreams for WRAP 2A have been identified by a review of the 

records of the_waste that is currently in storage and a survey of the 

-- ---^ T tI1rP Y- -r-4 T1. 

------ generatQrap.-tu__. -a+as-P-at theîar+€o.^ S^^^2. The wastes have been broken 

into several feedstream categories based on similarity in waste type and 

source and the perceived treatability of the wastes by various technologies. 

For the purposes of conceptual design for the facility, the wastes have been 

grouped into eight major categories and several subcategories. The total 

throughput to WRAP 2A is estimated to be on the order of 850 m3 (30,000 ft3) 

each year. The feedstreams are described in the following sections. 

1-2 

,,. 

G


1.2.1 Feedstream 1: 183H Solar Basin Waste 

The 183H Solar Evaporation Basins were used to reduce waste by means of 

natural evaporation of liquid chemical wastes generated as part of N Reactor 

fuel fabrication activities. The liquid waste discharged to the four concrete 

basins consisted primarily of spent acid etch solutions (sulfuric, nitric, and 

hydrofluoric acids). This waste was neutralized with sodium hydroxide before 

--discharge to the basins.--The wastes contained various metallic contaminants. 

Several types of nonroutine wastes were also discharged to the basins. The 

basins eventually ceased accepting waste and subsequently were found to be 

leaking. A timely cleanup and closure of th? basins was then pursued. This 

cleanup activity resulted in roughly 2,605 m (92,000 ft) of waste divided 

into the four types discussed in the following sections. 

1.2.1.1 183H Solidified Liquid. The liquid portion of the waste remaining in 

--the-basins--consi-s*.ed-of-slightly radioactively contaminated (uranium and 

9::V technetium) saturated sodium nitrate solution. The liquid was removed from 

k..;.° in a 

the ..,,^ Uo.,1114 1 ^^ „rums and solidified ( in the drums) with,a product called 

ê^..„cnd s^ ^_ LPC-iI: An-absorbant was adaed^ -on-top o# t^ne soiidified waste. 

Several problems with the-sofiidification, including swelling and cracking of 

c:v; the waste form and incomplete solidification, has lead to the decision that 

--th4_waste must tte-retr-eated-in_WRAP-2A.-Tha th oughput of this waste to 

WRAP 2A is estimated to be around 23 ms (800 ft^) each year. 

^4y 

1.2.1.2 183H Crystalline Solid. The evaporation of the liquid waste also 

produced a crystalline solid consisting mostly of salts of nitrate, sulfate, 

fluoride, and sodium. These wastes were removed from the basins and packaged 

in 2j8-L ( 55-ga31) drums without further treatment. They account for about 

37 m (1,300 ft ) each year throughput to WRAP 2A. 

1.2.1.3 183H Sludge. The remaining fraction of waste in the 183H basins was 

a sludge like material consisting of a mixture of mostly sodium sulfate and 

sodium nitrate. This fraction was also relatively high in copper content and 

had more apparent water content than the other wastes (thus its sludge-like 

consistency). The sludge was packageg in drums yith an absorbent material but 

had no further treatment. About 40 m (1,400 ft ) each year of this waste is 

planned to be treated at WRAP 2A. 

1.2.1.4 183H Miscellaneous Cleanup. After removal of the waste from the 

basins, contamination remained on the concrete floors and walls. These areas 

were sandblasted to remove this contamination, resulting in another waste 

form. Also, tumbleweeds and various tools and structures used in the cleanup 

operation were packaged as additional waste. The sandplast grit and other 

cleanup debris account for an additional 11 m3 (400 ft ) each year throughput 

to WRAP 2A. 

'Sorbond is a trademark of the American Colloid Company. 

1-3


1.2.2 Feedstream 2: Liquid Effluent Treatment 

Facilities Secondary Solids 

Two Liquid Effluent Treatment Facilities (LETF) are planned for 

construction at the Hanford Site in the near future. The C-018 Facility in 

the 200 East Area will treat evaporator condensate from selected double-shell 

tanks and-wi11_begin operation in 1995, The L-045 Facility will be 

constructed at the Hanford Site's 300 Area and will treat the combined sewer 

effluents from various laboratory buildings. It will also begin operation in 

1995. Both facilities will produce several secondary waste streams that may 

be both radiologically and chemically hazardous. It is assumed that these 

streams will require treatment to meet federal and state land disposal 

regulations. 

1.2.2.1 Ammonium Sulfate. The major secondary waste from the C-018 process 

-vil} -i€ an ammonium sulfate salt produced in an evaporative crystallization 

process. The high ammonia content of many of the double-shell tanks and the 

addition of sulfuric acid in the C-018 process leads to the formation of 

ammonium sulfate. This waste stream will be generally

^s. 


contaminated with hazardous chemicals and are radioactive. Such debris could 

result from cleanup or construction work performed'ìn contaminated areas. It 

is assumed that these wastes will have low levels of contamination and would 

be easily size reduced for compatibility with immobilization. Much of this 

waste will need to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis as it is generated in 

rela ively small quantities from various sources. This waste will add about 

59 m^ (2,100 ft3) each year of throughput to the WRAP 2A Facility. 

1.2.4 Feedstream 4: Noncompactible Solids 

Noncompactible solids will come from similar sources as compactible 

solids but will consist of hard debris, such als metal piping, ng, brick, concrete 

or glass. It will account for as much as 34 m (1,200 ft ) each year of 

throughput to WRAP 2A. 

1.2.5 Feedstream 5: Metals 

:-, This feedstream has been subgrouped into three categories. It consists 

of both currently stored and future generated wastes that contain metals that 

are--knnwn to -rPqyire P 1 ^ 

- C_p..î-a>--handT:ng--o M or treatment bgF .are o„^r a s par t „ wC 

, . 

^ the 

immobilization process. These are generally small volume waste streams that 

will not be treated in the main process line at WRAP 2A. The subcategories 

are discussed in the following sections. 

1.2.5.1 Mercury/Mercury Contaminated Solids. This waste consists of 

elemental mercury and bulk contaminated solid wastes, such as fluorescent 

light bulbs, laboratory thermometers, manometers, and mercury absorbents. 

Elemental mercury will be treated in accordance with Best Demonstrated 

Achievable Technology (BDAT), which requires amalgamation. Bulk contaminated 

solids will be shredded and residual mercury metal removed as required by 

BDAT. 

1.2.5.2 Reactive Metals. This stream contains zirconium and beryllium, which 

are easily ignited or oxidized in air if the particle size is fine enough and 

an ignition source is available. It is assumed that 50 wt% of the total 

incoming feedstream must be deactivated by pretreatment before encapsulation; 

the rest will require no pretreatment before encapsulation. No distinction is 

made between zirconium or beryllium metals for treatment requirements. It is 

assumed that no other reactive metals, such as sodium, potassium, or calcium, 

are present in this feedstream. These react_ive metals would require entirely 

different treatment techniques because of their reactive properties. 

___L 2.5_3__Lead/Lead_Contaminated-Sol!ds.Th-ts-feedstream consists of le'ad 

and lead contaminated bulk solids. Elemental lead will be treated in 

accordance with BDAT, which requires macroencapsulation. Bulk contaminated 

solids will_beshredded befnre encansulatinn 

1-5


1.2.6 Feedstream 6: Absorbed Chemicals/ 

Solidified Liquids 

This waste consists of both currently stored and future generated waste. 

It includes things, such as regulated chemicals absorbed on rags or liquid waste 

absorbed on other absorbents, such as vermiculite. This waste stream will 

consist -o€-very -small-lots-of simfilar-wastes.-- This is-due to the fact that this 

stream will be generated, as with the compactible and noncompactible solids, 

as part of isolated operations at various generatin sites. Tê throughput of 

this waste to WRAP 2A is estimated to be about 48 m^ ( 1,700 ft ) each year. 

1.2.7 Feedstream 7: Ash From Thermal Treatment 

This waste will be produced by the proposed thermal treatment facility 

for organic mixed waste. The ash residue from this process may need to be 

treated to account for residual contamination in the waste or to meet BDAT 

treatment standards for mixtures of waste types ( i.e., a waste may contain a 

mixture of waste types in which one type requires thermal treatment and the 

other requires immobilizajtion). The generation of this waste is estimated to 

add about 65 m3 (2,300 ft ) each year to the throughput of WRAP 2A. 

1.2.8 Feedstream 8: Contaminated Soils 

= This waste consists of both currently stored and future generated contaminated 

soils. Similar to some of the other wastes, it will mostly be generated 

from isolated operations, such as the excavation of soils in contaminated zones 

for construction or remediation. As such, most of this waste will bein small 

lots and handled on a case-by-case baîs. The throughput of this waste to 

1WRAP-2A is estimated to be about 20 m' (700 ft') each year. 

1.3 WRAP 2A CONCEPTUAL DESIGN BASELINE APPROACH 

The aforementioned feedstreams represent a broad variety of wastes both 

in-physical f.3riTi and i.iieiTiiL'i ^Tâkeup. All of the wastes, however, require 

some form of immobilization treatment before disposal. The selection of a 

dual technologyprocess approach is documentedin-theKRAP-?preconceptua7 

Design Additional Follow-On Activities Report ( UE&C 1992b). In this approach 

a standardcement-based--soli-di -ic ation--syst-em-wou-ld-be emrl-oyed-to process the 

bulk of the waste, and a more sophisticated system would be employed to handle 

those wastes that were not amenable to cementation. This approach is expected 

to eliminate the various pretreatment operations that would be required to 

make all wastes amenable to a single technology approach. 

The cement-based system uses relatively inexpensive materials and simple 

processing systems. This would be the method of choice for the bulk of the 

----- ---wast€-.----The secondary--systger was thostirr to use a-thermosetting polymer system. 

This technology was chosen because of the high degree of confidence in this 

waste form to immobilize wastes that were identified to cause problems with 

cement. This technology also represents a conservative approach for 

conceptual design cost estimation in that it represents a level of equipment 

complexitythat is unlikely to be surpassed by alternative technologies. 

1-6

__-'°'2 


Both process lines will use "in-drum" mixing techniques consisting of 

both agitated drum and vibrating drum systems. Agitated mixing will be used 

for sludges, powders, and particulate wastes. These wastes will be processed 

through a pug mill and measured into 208-L (55-gal) drums with installed 

agitators before movement to the solidification systems. The drums will then 

be coupled to an agitator drive and fill station. The stabilization agents 

are then added and mixing begins. When mixing is complete the drum is removed 

from the fill station with the agitator remaining in the drum. The drum is 

then inspected and capped for movement to the curing storage area. The 

vibrating drum system will be used for debris wastes that have been size 

reduced by shredders. The operation is similar to the agitated system except 

the drum is vibrated to achieve the required mixing, and no agitator is 

involved. 

The baseline approach for the cement-based system offers the capability 

to blend portland cements with various pozzolonic additives, including blast 

^ furnace slag, pulverized fly ash, and other dry mixtures, as well as small 

y; quantities of specialized additives. The system will allow tailoring the 

--_fQrmul-a ona Tot-by-let or-a -drum-by-dr;.1m basis. The agitated grout line will 

add the necessary water to the drum, followed by preblended dry materials. 

- _; The initial addition of water is to ensure that the waste is easily before the 

powders are added. The vibrated grout line will preblend the water and dry 

= materials before charging the drum. 

Y:S1 

The thermosetting polymer system uses several components to achieve 

solidification: a vinyl ester-based liquid resin, a promoter, a catalyst, and 

an extender. The resin, promoter, and extender are premixed in a day storage 

---tank. In the agitated polymer system, this mix is charged to the waste loaded 

drum and mixing begins. The catalyst is then added to the mix and the 

polymerization reaction begins. Mixing is then stopped and the drum allowed 

to cure. As with the cement side, the mixer is left in the drum and the drum 

is capped and removed from the station. On the vibrated polymer system, the 

promoter, catalyst, and extender are premixed, as on the agitated side. The 

catalyst is then mixed in line with this mixture as it is charged to the drum. 

The drum is then agitated to achieve proper distribution of the polymer into 

the void spaces. 

Drum curing storage, inspection, and monitoring, are also required as 

part of these systems; however, the details are still under development. 

The overall process philosophy for WRAP 2A is that drums of waste will be 

------- --&aracter-i-zed-and-group°cd into lots of similar waste before 

facility. The WRAP 2A will perform verification testing to 

receipt at the 

confirm the 

--identi-ty-af +_he--incaring-waste lots.-- The-waste-will-then be- ;rze --reduced-in 

shredder or homogenized in a pug mill to make the waste suitable for 

solidification. The waste will then be premeasured into drums for 

solidification. After the drums have cured and been inspected they will be 

transferred out of the WRAP 2A Facility for final disposal. 

a 

Table 1-2 illustrates the proposed conceptual design split as to which 

technology will be used for the various feedstreams. This split is reflected 

in the approach used in the test work described in this report. 

1-7

Waste source Waste type 

Sorbomd' liquids Sodium nitrate 

Table 1-2. WRAP 2A Design Ba sis Summary. 

ilajor chemical species 

Projected 

total 

o f concern i nven or 

(ft) 

®® 

Anhual 

Annual 

feed 

Treatment 

th 

production 

`f 1put 

l, 

process outpu t 

(drums) 

183-H Solar 

Evaporation 

Crysta!lline solibds Sodium sulfate 87,912 3,525 Polymer 999 

Basins 

(in storage) 

Sludge 

---- 

^---_...---- 

Miscel---l-ane--ous 

cleanup 

Copper sulfate! 

----------------- ------------ 

Contaminated debris 

------------ 

9,471 

---°-------- 

385 

------- - 

Grout 

---------- 

53 

C-018 evaporator 

salt cake 

Ammonium sulfate 

Liquid Effluent 

Treatment Ion exchange resins Nitrates and 

277,000 12,600 Pol;ymer 3,288 

Facilities 

(forecast) 

------- ----------------- 

L-045 metal sludge 

radionuclides 

------------------------------ 

Heavy metal hydroxides 

RO filter elements Contaminated debris 

Dry active waste 

Operations 

fins orectorage 

Construction debris 

and 

ast) 

---- -- --------- --- -- 

Metal wastês - 

---------- -••--- ----- 

Absorbed chemicals 

Thermal 

Treatment 

Facility 

Incinerator ash 

(forecast) 

----------------- 

Retrieval 

(forecast) 

--------------------- 

Contaminated soils 

------------ -------------- ------ ---- --------- 

75,000 3,400 Grout 873 

Contaminated debris 65,100 3,255 Grout 443 

_ - 

^----` 

------------------- ---- ---- 

2 

------------ 

Lead, mercury, reactives 21,500 Warie;z ol rmer Varies 

----------------------------- - ------------ --------- --_ ------------ - 

Inorganics and heavy 

34,000 

1,701) 

metals 

Polymer 

- ------- '-_-_- 

495 

Heavy metals 59,600 2,980 Grout 809 

'Sorbond is a trademark of American Colloid Company. 

zMetal waste is campaigned. Throughput varies with campaign length and waste volume. 

r.. 

;? 

x 

y 

E 

0 

_i 

5• 00w 

m 

< 

0

2.1 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK 


2."0 WASTE FORM PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS 

The purpose of WRAP 2A is to manage CH-MLLW by treating it in such a way 

as to produce a final waste form that meets all applicable, relevant, and 

appropriate regulations and ensures its suitability for land disposal in the 

mixed waste disposal trench at the Hanford Site. The regulations that apply 

to radioactive mixed waste (RMW) come from three main sources. 

2.1.1 Federal Regulations 

The federal regulations regarding disposal of RMW can be divided into two 

categories. The first set of regulations is concerned with the radioactive 

c^ portion of the waste and is embodied in 10 CFR 61 (NRC 1992). These 

regulations establish technical requirements for the land disposal of 

tommrrcial l-ow-levei waste, including site selection, site design, facility 

operation, and closure. Although not legally required, these regulations have 

y== been used for guiaance. The second set of regulations was promulgated after 

passage of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) and is 

>y, concerned with the chemical hazards of the waste, embodied in 40 CFR 261-268 

(EPA 1992). These regulations establish minimum standards for packaging, 

labeling, record keeping, and reporting for all generators, transporters, 

owners, and operators of hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal 

facilities. They also impose restrictions on land disposal of hazardous waste 

and identify acceptable treatment technologies that can be used to meet the 

land disposal restrictions. 

2.2.2 State of Washington 

The State of Washington has established regulations that are applicable 

to RMW through the Washington Administrative Code, WAC-173-303. These 

regulations overlap the federal RCRA regulations but include some additional 

requirements for management of dangerous and hazardous wastes. 

2.2.3 Hanford Site Solid Waste Acceptance Criteria 

The Hanford Site Solid Waste Acceptance Criteria, WHC-EP-0063-3 

(WHC 1991), includes additional reporting requirements and limitations on 

radionuclide content of low-level waste ( LLW) and RMW to be disposed of at the 

Hanford Site. These requirements are based on U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) 

Orders 5820.2A ( DOE 1988) and 5400.3 ( DOE 1989) and will include requirements 

-------- -- imposed-by--performance-assessments of the disposai grounds. 

2.2 PROGRAMMATIC AND FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS 

The WRAP 2A Facility will serve to treat all inorganic CH-MLLW received 

by the Hanford Central Waste Complex. Major waste streams that have been 

identified for treatment in WRAP 2A contain oxidizers, corrosives, toxic heavy 

2-1


metals, soluble salts, and reactive metals. TheAphysical characteristics 

range from semiliquid sludges and salt cake to dry powders, ash, soils, and 

contaminated debris. 

The wide variety of chemical and physical characteristics expected in 

WRAP 2A feedstreams precludes the use of a single immobilization technology 

for all waste types. The desire to minimize operating costs suggests the use 

of cement-based binders whenever possible. However, several feedstreams are 

known to be incompatible with cement-based materials, so a second technology 

is required. The objective of this approach is to provide two immobilization 

technologies that together can successfully treat all known and anticipated 

WRAP 2A feedstreams. 

The conceptual design of WRAP Module 2A thus includes two immobilization 

process trains: a cement-based grouting train and a vinyl ester styrene 

,-; polymer train. Both systems provide the capability to mix binder and waste 

either-in the waste drum or use a vibratory mixing technique. Additionally, 

the design of the grout system includes the flexibility to allow use of 

multiple formulations of inorganic binders, ( i.e., portland cement, slag 

cement, or gypsum cement). The available combination of technologies is 

--; expected to be able to successfully treat all WRAP 2A feeds. 

2.3 TEST SELECTION AND ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA 

The WRAP 2A waste forms are subject to rules and regulations promulgated 

by several entities. Primary performance requirements are described in 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations, Washington 

Administrative Code, and DOE orders. Other applicable guidance comes from the 

Hanford Site So1id Waste Acceptance Criteria (WHC 1991) and U.S. Nuclear 

Aegul-atoryû^t,sîc^t (NRC) re-yulations. Since there is no single regulation 

or guidance document that contains all applicable performance requirements and 

some discrepancies exist between similar requirements in different 

regulations, the WRAP 2A WFQ program has developed project-specific waste form 

performance specifications that ensure that waste forms that meet the 

specifications will also be compliant with all applicable regulatory 

requirements and guidance documents. The WRAP 2A waste form performance 

soer;fications- are-summartzed in-?abl-s--2-I: The following sections describe 

aV- 

-- -- -- -- the t..^$ a_lf^r"lan re£}S.S _&pe^. } . fl . ^ f3r WD11D "n ....`t ° r.,"__ : 

a^.,,r Gn wa^6e r^ruu in uL d. all 

2.3.1 Compressive Strength 

T!}e-neaszrement of the compressive strength is the key method of 

determining the stability and structural integrity of the waste form. The 

need for adequate compressive strength is a result of the desire to control 

subsidence in the disposal grounds, thus requiring the waste form to be able 

to withstand the full pressure of the overburden after it is buried. 

The most stringent compressive strength requirements are based on NRC 

requirements in 10 CFR 61 (NRC 1992) for shallow land disposal of Class B and 

Class C LLW. There are presently two NRC standards, depending on the nature 

of the matrix. For cementitious matrices, the minimum acceptable compressive 

2-2

^..." 

;_:.. 

:.^ 

.^.y^ 


Table 2-1. WRAP 2A Waste Form Performance Specifications. 

Waste form characteristic Test method Acceptance criteria 

Compressive strength orTASTMM 5 

Strength >500 lbf/in2 

Leachability index ANS 16.1 Leach Index >6 

Biodegradation 

ASTM G21 and 

ASTM D695 

or ASTM C39 

G22, 

Thermal cycling 

Radiation stability 

Immersion 

No growth, 

Strength >500 lbf/in 2 

ASTM 

ASTM D695, Strength >500 lbf/inZ after 

30 thermal cycles 

or ASTM C39 

ASTM D695 Strength >500 lbfjinz after 

or ASTM C39 irradiation to 10 rad 

ASTM 0695 Strength >500 lbf/in 2 after 

or ASTM C39 90-day water immersion 

Free liquids ANS 55.1 Free liquid


to support 10 CFR 61 (NRC 1992) radioactive waste disposal regulations. The 

WRAP 2A performance specification of a minimum leach index of 6.0 for all 

waste forms is the same as the NRC requirements. 

Leachate characteristics will also be analyzed and compared with the 

design basis for performance modeling-of the mixed waste disposal facility to 

ensure that the performance of the liner leachate collection system will not 

be compromised. Leachate aggressiveness shall be less than that used for 

EPA 9090 performance testing of the W-025 disposal trench liner system. 

2.3.3 Biodegradation 

The long-term durability of waste forms can be adversely affected if they 

are susceptible to microbial degradation. Therefore, the waste form specimens 

are tested for resistance to fungal growth ( ASTM G21)-and bacterial growth 

(ASTM G22). -The-'tests provide ideal conditions for microbial growth, such as 

proper moisture, temperature, and nutrients. After 21 days of incubation, the 

specimen is inspected for growth and tested for compressive strength. The 

.., WRAP 2A performance specification is for ng observable microbial growth and a 

minimum-compressive strength of 5J00 ibf/in following the test. 

2.3.4 Thermal Cycling 

Thermal cycle testing is used to determine the durability of the waste 

form when exposed to extremes of temperature that may be experienced during 

storage, transportation, or disposal. The standard method for thermal cycling 

is ASTM B-553, which involves exposing the test specimen to temperature 

extremes of -40 °C to +60 °C (-40 OF to 140 °F) for a total of 30 five-hour 

periods. After cyiling, the compressive strength must continue to meet the 

minimum 500 lbf/in performance specification requirement. 

2.3.5 Radiation Stability 

Exposure of waste matrices to radiation can cause chemical changes in the 

molecuiar structure, such as-radiolysis or crosslinking, which can in turn 

affect the physical properties of the material. Therefore, 10 CFR 61 

(NRC 1992) regulations-require that the waste form be tested to determine the 

effects that long-term exposure to radiation may have on the Vaste form. The 

t!RAP 2A-perfor„âner syeciîcati-n cr is for 

strength after exposure to a total gamma 

NRC regulations. 

a minimum *06 ibfjin` compressive 

dose of 10 radiation, as required by 

2.3.6 Water Immersion 

Waste forms in the shallow land disposal environment will inevitably be 

exposed to moisture. Depending on the type of waste and the immobilization 

matrix, exposure to moisture can cause swelling, cracking, and other adverse 

__--_---changes in__tha -waste formr- To e.n.sure adequ ate performance under these 

conditions, the waste form specimens are immersed in water for 90 days, after 

2-4 

x 

^


which the compressive strength is measured to determine the effects of the 

exposure. The WRAP 2A performance specification is fo r a minimum compressive 

strength of 500 lbf/inZ following the 90-day immersion period. 

2.3.7 Free Liquids 

The regulations in 10 CFR 61 (NRC 1992) and DOE Order 5820.2A (DOE 1988) 

prohibit the disposal of liquid ?ow-level waste and require that all 

solidified liquids contain no more than 0.5% by volume of free liquids. The 

ANS 55.1 Standard is the accepted method for determination of the amount of 

free liquids in a waste form. The WRAP 2A waste form performance 

specifications also require that the waste form have no more than 0.5% free 

liquids. 

2.3.8 Hazardous Characteristics 

The RCRA land disposal restriction regulations ( 40 CFR 268 [EPA 1992]) 

prohibit land disposal of any waste that exhibits a hazardous characteristic. 

The four hazardous waste characteristics are ignitibility, corrosivity, 

reactivity, and toxicity. The tests used for determination of these 

characteristics depend on the physical properties of the waste but generally 

involve measurement of the flash point or autoignition point, the pH of the 

waste or waste extract, and comparisons against reference oxidizing materials. 

The toxicity characteristic is determined by using EPA Method 1311, 

,_. Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP), to obtain an extract from 

the waste form and by analyzing the extract for toxic constituents. The 

WRAP 2A performance specification requires that the maximum allowable 

concentrationsfor wasteform_TCLPextracts-be-below the limits stated in 

40 CFR 268.41, Table CCWE. 

2-5

WHC-SD-WIOO-TI-003 Rev. 0 


2-6 

^ 

^

kIHC-Sû-Wi"v"u-Ti-u03 Rev. V 

,--,, 3.0 TESTING SCOPE AND DESCRIPTION 

The current focus of this test work is to verify the ability of various 

immobilization media to adequately solidify the waste feedstreams identified 

€or-WRAP--2A----The-base}}ne-destgn--as provid'd in the conceptual design for 

this facility was used as guidance in selecting which technologies should be 

applied for testing ( i.e., thermosetting polymer and cement based immobilization 

matrices). The following sections describe the logic in selecting the 

waste types and waste forms for testing, as well as a description of the 

testing approach. Detailed test plans are provided in the Appendixes A, B, 

and C. 

1 i erIrrrrnu ... • vc&co 1av^^ OF vr WASTE TYPES FOR TESTING 

Because of the lack of definition for some of the feedstreams identified 

for WRAP 2A, not all streams have been addressed in this initial testing 

phase. Instead, the approach taken was to address the large volume 

feedstreams that would have the greatest impact on facility design. These 

include 183H Basin Waste, LETF Secondary Solids (C-018 and L-045), and ash 

from thermal treatment. Together these represent the majority of the total 

feed to WRAP 2A. Certain other feedstreams, such as ion exchange resins and 

elemental lead, were not chosen for this testing phase because successful 

treatment of these streams has been sufficiently demonstrated commercially. 

The other smaller feedstreams for WRAP 2A will be tested at a later date. 

The specific waste types selected for this phase of testing are shown in 

Table 3-1. 

Feedstream 

number 

(test ID) 

Table 3-1. Initial Testing Phase of Large Volume Feedstreams. 

2A (Type 1) C-018 Ammonium sulfate 

1C (Type 2) 183H Sludge ( Basins 1 and 2) 

1C (Type 3) 183H Sludge ( Basins 3 and 4) 

lA (Type 4) 183H Crystalline solid 

1D (Type 5) 

183H Miscellaneous cleanup 

copper]) 

Feedstream title 

(contaminated sandblast grit [high 

1D (Type 6) 183H Miscellaneous cleanup (sandblast grit [high nitrate]) 

2C (Type 7) L-045 Metal sludge 

7 (Type 8) Ash from thermal treatment 

3-1

z.- 

^:- 

0 

- -- WHC-SU-riiVV I1-VVJ RCV. 

Surrogates were based on anticipated waste feedstreams: Characterization data 

for these wastes have been compiled (Appendix Q. Based on this data, 

surrogate recipes were prepared and are documented in Appendix F. 

-3-.-2 -3ELECTION OF WASTE FORMS FOR TESTING 

Vendor contacts, literature reviews ( Appendix G), and discussions with 

specialists in the field of nuclear waste solidification have led to the 

selection of the various waste forms chosen for testing in this phase of the 

WFQ Program. An overall discussion of the various waste forms, their 

-advantages and disadvantages, a description of the equipment needed for the 

various processes, and other pertinent terminology are provided in Appendix J. 

The waste forms chosen, as mentioned earlier, consist of cement-based waste 

forms and a thermosetting polymer waste form. The overall analysis of the 

-informat-ion _gathered-has led to the selection of which waste types should be 

tested in which of the above two waste forms. This selection is similar to 

the selection provided in the CDR for the project and is provided in 

Table 3-2. 

Table 3-2. Solidification Technologies. 

Feedstream Cement- Thermosetting 

number Title based polymer 

(test ID) testing testing 

2A (Type 1) C-018 Ammonium sulfate Yes* Yes 

IC (Type 2) 183H Sludge (Basins 1 and 2) -- Yes 

1C (Type 3) 183H Sludge (Basins 3 and 4) -- Yes 

1A (Type 4) 183H Crystalline solid -- Yes 

1D (Type 5) 

1D (Type 6) 


(high copper) 


(high nitrate) 

Yes -- 

Yes -- 

2C (Type 7) L-045 Metal sludge Yes -- 

7 (Type 8) Ash from thermal treatment Yes -- 

*Envirostone is a trademark of the United States Gypsum Company. 

The first four waste types were chosen for testing with the thermosetting 

polymer because of their high soluble salt content (including high nitrate 

content), which are known to cause problems with cement solidification. The 

last four waste types (5-8) were chosen for testing with cement waste forms 

because they did not contain high concentrations of any constituents that 

interfere with cement solidification. 

3-2


Type 1 waste demonstrates a special problem with cement in that the 

' acidic nature of the ammonium sulfate would react with the pH solytions in 

ordinary portland cement, thus evolving ammonia gas. Envirostone was 

selected as an alternative to ordinary portland cement for this waste stream. 

This is a gypsum-based cement, which exhibits a neutral pH. Using Envirostone 

would be similar to using an ordinary cement and would not require additional 

equipment ( i.e., this process could use the same equipment as the cement 

solidification system). Also, if successful, its use may provide a 

substantial cost savings over polymer for this large volume waste stream. 

The actual formulations, chemicals, and waste loadings to be used in the 

thermosetting polymer test work were developed by the vendor ( Stock Equipment 

Company of Chagrin Falls, Ohio) and are included in the test reports on this 

phase of work contained in the Appendix F and Section 4.22. 

The formulations for the cement solidification testing have been 

developed by Westinghouse Hanford Company (WHC) personnel and the test work 

was performed onsite at the Hanford Site by WHC. The selection of cement 

^ type, the general composition used, and the target waste loadings for the five 

wastes are given in Table 3-3. 

3,^ 1 

- - r... - 

Portland cement type III was selected for Grit 1 because the grit 

contained_cQpper, wh_ich retards the setting of ordinary portland cement. The 

,type III sets fast and achieves a high strength comparatively early. Thus, it 

was selected in lieu of the type I or II cement. Also, a quick screening 

experiment using slag and type III cement indicated type III cement was 

achieving the better set. 

The blast furnace slag cement was selected for Grit 2 because the grit 

contained a large quantity of nitrate. Based on a literature review, the slag 

cement contains the nitrate better than the portland cements. The slag cement 

produced a good product in a laboratory screening experiment and, thus, was 

selected for testing. 

Portland cement type III was selected for the ferric oxide mix because 

the iron acts similar to copper and interferes with the cement set. The fast 

Set4f_Lhetype_III-minimizes the aat-ratarriinn offects. 

Slag cement was selected for incinerator ash because of its good 

retention properties. It is expected to retain the chemical and radionuclide 

wL.. . 

better th an 

a^ ^ 

------ ^ YCItCr ^nportiiana cement. 

As mentioned earlier, Envirostone is a gypsum cement, which was selected 

for solidifying the stabilized evaporator residues because of the large 

quantity of ammonium sulfate. Portland cement slurry matrices are strongly 

basic exhibiting pHs characteristically around 12 and 13. 

ZEnvirostone is a trademark of the United States Gypsum Company. 

3-3


Table 3-3. Formulations for Cement Sol,.idification Testing. 

Type General composition 

Portland Cement Type III Solidifier 

-4,2%- -Basan-l-skudge--powder 

5 37.5% Grit (garnet) 

41.6% Portland cement type III 

16.7% Water 

Blast Furnace Slag Cement Solidifier 

4.2% Basin 4 crystal powder 

37.5% Grit (garnet) 

6 37.5% Slag cement 


16.7% Water 

Portiand Cement Type III Solidifier 

15.4% Ferric oxide mix 

7 46.2% Portland cement type III 

3V.5% Wal+.er 

Blast Furnace Slag Cement Solidifier 

30.0% Ash mix 

8 40.5% Slag cement 


25.0% Water 

Envirostone* Solidifier 

11.5% Ai:îonlum sulfat°c mix 

1.1% Citric acid 

1.1% Sodium bicarbonate 

28.7% Water 

57.5% Envirostone 

NOTE: T he ammonium sulfate mix that was used in the 

experiment was dry. The C-018 ammonium sulfate feedstream 

would normally be an aqueous liquid, and the waste loading of 

60% to 70% would be expected. 

*Envirostone is a trademark of the United Sta'tes_G.vosum 

Company. 

This strongly basic liquid will cause the ammonium sulfate salt to hydrolyze 

to ammonium hydroxide leading to the generation of ammonia gas. The gypsum 

(plaster of paris) slurry matrix is neutral, exhibiting a pH of 6 to 7. The 

ammonium sulfate is stable in the neutral matrix, no appreciable ammonium 

hydroxide is generated and, therefore, no ammonia gas is released. 

3-4

3.3 TESTING APPROACH 


The WFQ test work is directed toward three goals. First, suitable 

formulations that can produce waste forms meeting all performance 

specifications and regulatory requirements must be developed. Second, the 

in-drum mixing process must be developed to determine the effect the mixing 

process has on waste form performance and to evaluate the ability of the 

mixing process to achieve the required process objectives. Third, hot testing 

------- ---- +xill--deronstrate-the-tmmo'silizatioA-;,rocesses on actual WRAP 2A feedstreams 

for verification of results obtained with waste surrogates. Figure 3-1 

depicts the strategy for the WFQ program. 

The objectives of the WFQ programare to_c9nfi-m irhe technical basis for 

the process design by demonstrating successful MLLW immobilization 

ròrmulations and mixing processes. A further objective is to gather the data 

needed for support of detailed facility design and regulatory permitting 

^>rt efforts and to develop baseline process control parameters for use in 

. ' preparing operating procedures for the WRAP 2A immobilization systems. 

The test results reported in this status report have been focused on 

formulation development efforts. Screening tests and performance testing have 

=`= been performed on surrogate waste forms representing 80% of the design basis 

feed volume. Future testing, described in detail in Section 5.3 of this 

0°'1 report, will be directed toward mixing process demonstration and optimization 

of the formulations and immobilization processes. 

^:^... 

A brief description of the major objectives of the WFQ program and the 

interfaces between WFQ and other key project activities is presented in the 

following text. Figure 3-2 presents a logic diagram outlining the test 

-program and the flow-3f iPf"rmation between the various project activities 

relating to the WFQ program. 

3.3.1 Confirm Process Design 

Confirmation of the immobilization systems process design is the primary 

objective of the WFQ program. The process design basis will be confirmed when 

a successful immobilization formulation has been developed for each feedstream 

and when the in-drum mixing process has been demonstrated. 

Development of a successful formulation is achieved when a surrogate that 

is chemically similar to the waste stream in question is successfully 

immobilized. Successful immobilization is defined as production of final 

waste form specimens that meet or exceed the WRAP 2A waste form performance 

specifications, as measured through laboratory tests of waste form 

performance. 

The in-drum mixing process will be demonstrated when surrogates that are 

physically similar to the WRAP feedstreams have been successfully mixed with 

âmoaillzAti-on ana'trices using the in-drum mixing equipment. Successful mixing 

- is defined as production of a mixture that meets or exceeds the mixing process 

objectives, as measured through tests on full size pilot plant mixing 

equipment. 

3-5

n 

DEVELOP FORMULATIONS 

o Screeninp tests 

- Chemical compatibility 

- Free Water generation 

- Solid monolith 

o Surropate Performance Testing 

- Chemical surrogates ^ 

- TCLP, ANS16.1, Compressive 

strength, etc. 

o Laboratory Parametric studies 

- Formulation ranges and limits 

o Laboratory Parametric tests 

- Physical surrogates 

- Measure mixing process parameters 

- Determine effect on performance 

o Mixing Equipment tests 

- Full scale ( 55-gal) mixing equipment 

- Scale-up of mixing process 

o Full Scale Parametric studies 

- Equipment operating ranges and limits 

- Process Control Parameteirs 

- Operability / studies 

i i 

HOT DEMONS S$Q^ TION 

o Laboratory IHot uerification 

- Verify formulations 

o Pilot hot deinom:iration 

- Verify imixin+o oroce 

o Cold testing 

- Verify process 

o Hot testing 

- nualified Wast 

^ 

^ c 

A 

w 

.r 

_w 

IA 

PF 

^ 

^ 

0 

A= 

ca^ 

-n 

CI 

w er 

0 z 

CA 

^ 

a 

m 

^ 

^ 

(/^1 

QI 

î 

0 

w 

^< 

0

^.: 

fi 

WNC-SD-W100-TI-003 Rev. 0 

Figure 3-2. WRAP 2A Process Development Waste Form 

Qualification Project Logic. 

3-7

3.3.2 Process Optimization 


Confirmation of the baseline process design basis will be subject to 

independent review by an outside panel of experts. A report summarizing the 

findings of the review panel will provide the basis fo r approval of 

commencement of Title I preliminary design activities. 

The second major objective of the WFQ program is to optimize the 

immobilization formulations and mixing processes. These studies will serve to 

expand and define the limits of the "windows" of formulations and mixing 

process operating conditions within which waste forms exhibiting acceptable 

performance can be produced. Process optimization will consist of methodical 

variation of formulations and mixing parameters in factorial experiments 

covering the full range of achievable conditions. 

Results from process optimization studies will provide the majority of 

data required to prepare the Process Control Plan for the immobilization 

systems. The Process Control Plan will provide the interface with the RCRA 

facility permit, describing the formulation and mixing parameters that must be 

maintained to ensure production of fully compliant waste forms. It also will 

provide the foundation for development of operating procedures to be used with 

the immobilization systems equipment. 

3.3.3 Hot Verification 

The ±hi;-d major objective is verification testing of the formulations and 

mixing process performance on actual WRAP 2A feedstreams. Hot verification 

testswi11==le perfarmed on the-fieedstreams as they became availabie. 

Formulationtestingwill be perfnrmed in the laboratory, and, if any 

discrepancies in waste form performance are encountered, drum-scale hot 

testing will also be performed. Hot testing results that create modifications 

or additional requirements in the formulation or mixing conditions will be 

------ --- documented in the Process Control Plan. 

3.3.4 Additional Objectives 

Additional WFQ activities will include participation in the Polymer 

Solidification National Program at Brookhaven National Laboratory for 

development of a thermoplastic polymer encapsulation process using a heated 

extruder. Demonstration of BDAT technologies for special processes, such as 

mercury amalgamation ' r-reactive metais treatment,, will also be included in 

the WFQ testing program. The scope of these additional activities has not yet 

been fully defined. 

3-8 

i

4.1 SCREENING TEST RESULTS 


4.0 TEST RESULTS 

4.1.1 Cement-Based Waste Form Screening Test Results 

Waste surrogates for each waste type were immobilized with various 

cementitious binders to determine which would be selected for the grout 

formulations. Three things were considered when selecting the cementitious 

----- ----linders: (1) as h,ard Set muJt be aChieved within 48 hours, ( 2) a hard set must 

not occur within 6hours1_and ( 3) a reasonable waste loading must be achieved. 

4.1.1.1 Type 5- 183H Sandblast Grit 1 (High Copper Content). The binders 

that were evaluated were portland cement type III, a combination of portland 

cemeni:-types i and ii, and slag cement. Portland cement type III is a rapid 

setting cement and was selected to balance the effect of the copper in the 

waste, which is known as a set retarder. A hard set was achieved in 48 hours. 

The combination of portland cement types I and II gave a set time of 72 hours. 

The siag cement required more time to achieve a hard set and was not 

considered for further evaluation. Portland cement type III was selected as 

the cementitious binder. 

Mix formulation for sand grit/sludge ratio of 90:10: 

Waste loading - 41.7 wt% 

Water/cement ratio - 0.4 

Binder - 100 % portland cement type III. 

4.1.1.2 Type 6 - 183H Sandblast Grit 2 ( High Nitrate). The same cementitious 

binders as above were evaluated for this waste type. Because the nitrate 

content apparently did not interfere with the set time, a mixture of slag 

cement and portland cement type III was selected as the binder. A hard set 

was achieved in 24 to 48 hours using slag cement with portland cement type III 

as the initiator. 

Mix formulation for sand grit/sludge ratio of 90:10: 



Binder - 0.11 ratio of portland type III/slag cement. 

4.1.1.3 Type 7 - L-045 Metal Sludge (Iron). The transition metal ions, 

including iron, tend to interfere with the setting properties of the cement 

matrix. Several cementitious binders were considered to immobilize the iron 

sludge surrogate, including portland cement type III, lime or a lime-portland 

cement mixture, a combination of portland cement types I and II, and slag 

cement. The lime (natural cement) produced a soft set and the lime/portland 

cement mixtures had to be added in excess to achieve a reasonable set. The 

4-1


combination of portland cement types I and II and the slag cement performed 

adequately but not as well as the type III. The cementitious binder that 

produced the best results was the portland cement type III. 

Mix formulation: 



Binder - 100% portland cement type III. 

4.1.1.4 Type 8 - ASH from Thermal Treatment. Slag cement was chosen for 

testing because of the similarity of the ash to slag cement. Slag cement was 

also selected based on its high chemical retention capability. A hard set was 

achieved within 24 hours. 


• Waste loading - 30 wt% 

• Water/cement ratio - 0.55 

{8inder-- O:ii ratio of partiand cement type III to slag cement. 

4.1.1.5 Type 1(Alternate Waste Form) - C-018 Ammonium Sulfate. Envirostone 

(gypsum cement) was selected to immobilized this waste stream because of its 

ability to solidify acidic waste. Envirostone remains neutral when mixed with 

water as opposed to most cementitious binders, which are strongly basic when 

mixed with water. A strongly basic media would readily react with ammonium 

sulfate or other ammonium salts to form ammonium hydroxide, which decomposes 

to ammonia gas. The one problem with Envirostone is that when it mixes with 

-ammon4uir-sulfate, the set occurs too rapidly to be of use in a typical 

mechanical mixer. Additional testing was performed and results indicated that 

the addition of citric acid or sodium citrate would retard the set time. 


Waste loading - 20 wt% 


Binder - 0.02 ratio of retardant to Envirostone. 

4.1.2---Thermosetting--Fol „ er-Screening Test Results 

Screening 

performed at a 

tests for the thermosetting polymer immobilization 

private vendor's ( Diversified Technologies) rented 

process were 

laboratory 

.__space 

at Saginaw vaitey State University. Fifteen screening tests were 

performed using the Diversified Technologies vinyl ester polymer immobilization 

process. The technique was observed by the attenders and videotaped by 

WHC. The materials that were solidified were meant to represent the major 

chemical characteristics of the wastes selected for thermosetting polymer 

-test3ng ( see Section 3.2) as well as some waste samples that the vendor had 

prepared for demonstration purposes. The materials that were solidified and 

the_testresul+s are described .vcv in .^^ *h; ^ l.on i- sel.° L1 °- . 

4-2

,^. 

----- -- 


The process used in all cases involved adding a measured amount of 

_binder; either 100-g--t3>5-oz) or-5Q-g--(-1.8-oz), depending on the amount of 

final product desired, to a paper cup. Extender was added to the binder for 

the first 11 samples, then the process was tried without extender for the 

remaining samples. Surrogate waste was then added, at waste:binder ratios of 

either 1.5:1 or 1:1 ( weight basis). Following mixing of the waste and binder, 

a catalyst was added and allowed to mix for 1 minute. The promoter was then 

added, mixed for 1 minute, and the agitator withdrawn. The gel time was 

measured and the samples allowed to cure. 

Sample 1: Wet ammoniated powdex resin. The material was supplied by 

Diversified and consisted of a thick sludge of resin that had been 

drained of free water. 150 g (5.3 oz) of resin was added to 100 g 

(3.5 oz) of binder, for a waste loading of 60 wt%. The formulation was 

successful. 

Sample 2: Ammoniated powdex resin, 30 wt% slurry in water. Processed as 

described for Sample 1. The formulation was successful. 

Sample 3: Ammonium sulfate crystals (Type 1 Waste). 75 g (2.6 oz) of 

crystals were added to 50 g (1.8 oz) of binder. Processing was as 

described for Sample 1. The formulation was successful. 

Sample 4A/48: Ammonium sulfate crystals (Type 1 Waste). Processed as 

for Sample 3 but double the quantities. This material was transferred to 

specimen vials before curing. The vials were retained by WHC. 

Sample 5: Surrogate basin sludge (Type 2 or 3 Waste). The sludge was 

formulated to represent the average composition of the basin 183-H 

sludge. This material was prepared to the UE&C recipe, where 100 g 

(3.5 oz) of sodium nitrate, 42 g (1.5 oz) of sodium sulfate decahydrate, 

and 79 g (2.8 oz) of water were mixed well. The water was not sufficient 

to fully dissolve he crystals. The crystal slurry was added to 79 g 

-(2.8 oz) of Celitel 545 diatomaceous earth filter aid. This resulted in 

a moist cakey powder consistency. 75 g (2.6 oz) of this material was 

added to 50 g (1.8 oz) of binder and processed. The mixture formed a 

stable emulsion, but free water was exuded as the polymerization exotherm 

progressed. Following solidification, the free water was apparently 

reabsorbed into the matrix. 

Sample 6: Wet basin sludge slurry (Type 2, 3 or 4 Waste). The WHC and 

UE&C observers agreed that the original recipe appeared to contain less 

moisture than the actual basin sludge, so this material was prepared by 

adding water to the above recipe until the desired consistency was 

obtained. This resulted in a recipe that contained 35% water. 85 g 

(3.0 oz) of the slurry was added to 50 g (1.8 oz) of binder and processed 

as above. The matrix exuded water during the exothermal reaction, and 

the water was not reabsorbed. Approximately 2 wt% free liquid was 

produced. 

°=y zCelite is a trademark of Celite Corporation. 

4-3

:..,^ 


Sample 7: Sodium nitrate•crystals (Type 4.Waste). 75 g(2.6 oz) was 

added to 50 g (1.8 oz) binder and processed. The material was 

successfully solidified. 

Sample 8A/8B: Wet basin sludge slurry (Type 2, 3, or 4 Waste). 150 g 

(5.3 oz) of Sample 6 material was added to 100 g (3.5 oz) of binder and 

processed. The material was transferred into specimen vials and allowed 

to cure. Free water was exuded during the exothermal reaction. The 

vials were retained by WHC. 

Sample 9A/9B: Sodium nitrate crystals (Type 2, 3, or 4 Waste). 150 g 

(5.3 oz) of crystals was added to 100 g(3.5 oz) of binder and processed. 

The material was transferred into two specimen vials and allowed to cure. 

The cured vials were retained by WHC. 

Sample 10: Sodium sulfate decahydrate (Type 4 Waste). 50 g(1.8 oz) of 

crystals were added to 50 g of binder and processed. Water was exuded 

during the exotherm. The water evaporated, leaving behind salt crystals. 

Sample 11: Wet basin sludgeslurry (Type 2, 3, or 4 Waste). This sample 

was processed at 50:50 waste:binder ratio in an attempt to prevent 

formation of free water. During the exothermal reaction, about 2.3 wt% 

free water was produced. 

Sample 12: Sodium sulfate decahydrate (Type 4 Waste). 75 g(2.6 oz) of 

crystais were added to 50 g(1.8 oz) of binder. For this test, the 

polymer extender was not added to the binder. This caused less heat to 

be produced during the exothermal reaction and a significant reduction in 

the amount of free water produced. The free liquid evaporated, leaving 

dry crystalline powder on the surface of the sample. The observers 

estimated that less than 0.5 wt% free liquid had been produced. 

Sample 13: Wet basin sludge slurry (Type 2, 3, or 4 Waste). This sample 

was processed at 75 g (2.6 oz) waste to 50 g (1.8 oz) binder. No 

extender was added to the binder. The material produced 2.1 wt% free 

liquid. 

Sample 14: Wet ammonium sulfate (Type 1 Waste). Water was added to the 

ammonium sulfate crystals to produce 10 wt% moisture to simulate LETF 

filter cake. The material was successfully solidified at 60 wt% loading 

(75 g[2.6 oz] wet salt:50 g [1.8 oz] binder) with no extender added to 

the binder. 

Sample 15A/158: Sodium sulfate decahydrate (Type 4 Waste). 150 g 

(5.3 oz) of the crystals was added to 100 g (3.5 oz) of binder without 

extender. The material was transferred into two specimen vials retained 

by WHC. Traces of water were exuded, leaving small spots of dry crystals 

on the surface of the specimens. 

4-4


4.1.3 Thermosetting Polymer Results Summary 

The technology shows promise as an alternative to conventional cementbased 

grout for immobilization of the materials tested. Further development 

of the formulation will be required to eliminate the free liquids that were 

formed when processing the materials, which contained hydrated sodium sulfate 

crystals. The process was able to successfully immobilize sodium nitrate and 

ammonium sulfate, at 60 wt% loading, with no apparent side reactions. The 

immobilized material appears to be homogeneous and possesses considerable 

structural strength and durability. 

Based on the results of these initial screening tests, it was recommended 

that the technology be considered for further WFQ testing to support possible 

use in WRAP 2A for the immobilization of mixed wastes containing nitrates and 

amnonium salts. Additional development will be required to determine if the 

polymer formulation can be adjusted to prevent the formation of free liquids 

when processing material containing hydrated sodium sulfate salts. 

4.2 SURROGATE PERFORMANCE TESTS 

4.2.1 Cement-Based Waste Form Results 

Sample Preparation 

The cementitious waste forms were prepared by combining the waste 

_ ^------$!:r!3gat@°, i 

and tile £e^Tientitioua binderS according to the formulations 

^^^ developed during the screening tests, as shown in Section 4.1.1. The 

surrogate material and the cementitiPus binder were measured into a 19-L- 

(5-gal-) capacity, heavy duty Hobart variable mixer, where they were mixed 

-until a homogeneous mixture was obtained. A minimum of 9.5 L(2.5 gal) of 

cement-waste slurry was required for each set of experiments. For each waste 

type tested, a cement-waste slurry was prepared in three batches and poured 

out separately into the appropriate sized molds. Sample molds included 5 cm 

by 5 cm by 5 cm (2 in. by 2 in. by 2 in.) cubes, small cylinders 7.6 cm in 

diameter by 15 cm high ( 3 in. in diameter by 6 in. high), and large cylinders 

15 cm in diameter by 30.5 cm high ( 6 in. in diameter by 12 in. high). The wet 

specimens were covered with plastic or placed in plastic bags to simulate 

placement in a 208-L (55-gal) drum or another sealed container. The cube 

samples were removed from their metal molds after about 3 days. The samples 

were labeled and placed in plastic bags at room temperature until the 

appropriate cure time was ac-hieved. After curing, the samples were weighed 

and then-i

RESULTS 

Compressive Strengths 

Wi1C-SD-W100-TI-003 Rev. 0 

The first set of waste forms tested were 5 cm by 5 cm by 5 cm (2 in. by 

2 in. by 2 in.) cubes. The compressive strength tests were performed on two 

cube samples for each waste type. The first cube for each waste type was 

tested after 14 days of curing, the second cube for each waste type was tested 

after 28 days of curing. The results are shown on Table 4-1. 

3he second-set of waste forms were small cyiinders, 15 cm ( 6 in.) high 

with a 7.6-cm ( 3-in.) diameter. The cylinders were allowed to cure for 

28 days before the compressive strength tests were performed. The small 

cylinder results are shown in Table 4-2. 

Sample Solidifier 

Typ e 5 

Type 5 

Portland 

^ype Iii 

Table 4-1. WRAP 2A Waste Form Characteristics. 

Compressive strength 

Dens ity F ree li qu id 

(g/cc) (vol.%) 14 day 28 day 

(lbf/inZ) (lbf/in 2) 

Portland 

Type I and II 2.5 0 

2.5 - ------ 0------ 6,800 5,000 

4,600 5,600 

( 28d) (42d) 

Slag 

Type 6 Cement/portland 2.4 0 3,800 3,000 

Type III 

Type , Portland 

Type III 

1.7 0 1,000 1,300 

Siag . . 

Type 8- Cement/portland - 1.7 0 3,100 1,800 

Type III 

I 

Type 1 Environstone* 

I 

1.5 

2.6 at 1 day 

1.6 at 2 day 

0.0 at 3 day 

(Liquid oH_is 6) 

70 60 

- 

*Envirostone is a trademar o t e United States Gvosum Comoanv_ 

4-6

p 

Sam le 

Compressive Radiation 

strength stability 

Small Large Compressive 

cylinder 

(l bf / i n 

2 ) 

cylinder 

( lbf /in `^ ) 

strength 

( lbf/in 

2 ) 

^ _"' . 

^ws{ J 7' 

Table 4-2. WRAP 2A Cement Waste Form Tests Results. 


Compressive 

strength 

(sample/control) 

(lbf/in ) 

h 

Was e immersion 

Thermal 

cycling 

Compressive strength 

Leachability 

Index 

14d 

(lbf/in) 

42d 90d 

C ompress iv e 

strength 

/ Z) 

(lbf in 

Control 7,400 4,500 -- -- -- - - 

Type 5 7,100 5,400 8,500/9,100 

Type 6 3,500 4,200 3,800/4,800 

Type 7 2,800 2,100 2,500/2,000 

Type 8 3,400 2,400 4,100/3,900 

Type 1 50 

9.9 (Ce) 

No data (Sr) 

8900 3900 8400 5500/8000 

5300 2600 5500 4000/4400 

2400 1100 3000 2200/2400 

3900 2500 4380 2900/3100 

Failed


The third set of waste forms were the large cylinders, 30.5 cm (12 in.) 

high with a 15-cm (6-in.) diameter. The large cylinder waste forms were 

allowed to cure for 28 days before they were compressive strength tested. The 

large cylinder test results are shown in Table 4-2. 

Radiation Stability 

Two identical waste form cubes for each waste type were irradiated to a 

total dose of 108 radiation in a gamma irradiation faci_lity,_ Each_cube- was 

then compressive strength tested. Weights for each of the ten samples were 

recorded before and after irradiation. No weight change was observed and no 

visual change in color or appearance was observed. The compressive strength 

test results are shown in Table 4-2. 


Ten waste form cubes, two duplicate cubes for each waste type, were 

subject to ideal growth conditions for bacteria, for a period of 21 days. 

After this incubation period, the waste forms were tested for compressive 

strength. The results are shown in Table 4-2. 

T Leachability Index 

Cube samples for each waste type were subject to the leachability index 

test. The test results are shown in Table 4-2. 

Water Immersion 

Three cube samples for each waste type were stored in moist conditions 

over a period of time. After 14 days, one of the cubes for each of the waste 

types was compressive strength tested. After 42 days, the second cube sample 

was compressive-strength tested. _After 90 days, the third sample was tested. 

The results are shown in Table 4-2. 

Thermal Cycling 

Two cube samples for each waste stream were heated to +60 °C (140 °F), 

cooled, frozen to -40 °C (-40 °F), and then thawed. The cycle was repeated 

30 times and then a compressive strength test was performed on each cube 

sample. Results are shown in Table 4-2. 

Free Liquid 

The samples were prepared by pouring the slurry mix into 13 cmZ (2-in 2) 

plastic bottles to a 5-cm (2-in.) height, for each of the waste types. 

Duplicate samples for each waste type were prepared. At the end of a 24-hour 

period each sample was visually inspected for the presence of liquid. The 

amount of liquid, if any, was measured. The results are shown in Table 4-1. 

EPA (TCLP) Tests 

The test involves obtaining an extract from the waste form and analyzing 

the extract for toxic constituents. The test results for the TCLP tests are 

summarized in Table 4-3. 

4-8


Table 4-3. TCLP Results for WRAP 2A Cement Waste Forms. 

Sample Specie 

Type 5 

0riginal 

Cont. 

TCLP Cont. Limit Pass/fail 

Chromium 50 ppm 0.07 ppm 5 ppm Pass 

Copper 1.7% 0.09 ppm No limit N/A 

Type 6 Chromium 50 ppm

^- -'^ 


-----mai-erial,- TaYle 4-4 suarfzes the formulations that were used to prepare the 

waste form specimens. 

Table 4-4. Formulation Parameters. 

Formulation parameter Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Type 4 

Waste/binder ratio, ( kg/kg) 4/2 3/3 4/2 3/2 

Binder type 411-45 470-45 411-45 470-45 

Catalyst dose ( wt% of binder) 2.5_ 7.5 2.5 5.0 

Promoter dose ( wt% of binder) 0.1 2.0 0.1 1.0 

Total mixing time ( minutes) 25 8.5 8.5 10.5 

Peak-m}xing power (W) ---- 45 12.3 -9.9 13.9 

Peak exotherm (°C) 38.2 70 57.5 63 

Peak exotherm time ( minutes) 75 30 120 25 

SPECIMEN PREPARATION 

Test specimens were prepared from waste surrogates at the Stock Equipment 

Company laboratories. Batch size was approximately 4.7 L (1.25 gal). 

A variable speed laboratory mixer with propeller blade operating at 1,800 rpm 

was used. Each set of specimens was made from a single batch and poured into 

cylindrical molds. The tests described in Section 2.0 were performed on the 

specimens. Replicate tests were performed as described in Table 4-5. 

--- Table 4-5. Repiicate Specimens Tested. 

Performance test Number of replicates tested 

Compressive strength 10 @ 5-day cure, 10 @ 90-day cure 

Biodegradation 3 

Radiation stability 3 

Leachability/immersion 6 spiked, 6 unspiked 

7hermai cycling 3 

I Toxicity characteristic 2 + 1@ independent lab 

4-10 

i1 

-syr

..., TESTING RESULTS 

.^.CSSD-W-1OO-•TT-MQ 

Dnv n 

^ • v v.. nc ^ . v 

Results of the testing are summarized in Table 4-6. All specimens were 

successfully immobilized and exhibited strength and durability characteristics 

meeting or exceeding the waste form performance specifications. Type 3 

surrogate met all of the performance specifications. Leaching characteristics 

for all surrogates met the requirements for LLW, but some TCLP constituents of 

Types 1; 2, and 4 surrogates exceeded the allowable limits. Additional 

formulation development will be required for these waste types. 

CONCLUSIONS 

Surrogate waste form specimens were successfully immobilized at waste 

loadings ranging from 50 wt% to 67 wt%. Type I surrogate met all performance 

specifications with the exception of TCLP mercury. Type 2 surrogate met all 

performance specifications with the exception of TCLP mercury and chromium. 

Type 3 surrogate met all performance specifications. Type 4 surrogate met all 

performance specifications with the exception of TCLP chromium. 

The results show that the technology is capable of producing a waste form 

_that__meetsor_exceeds all appLi_cable performance requirements. Additional 

formulation development will be required to optimize the waste loading for 

,.; waste Types 1, 2, and 4 to enable the waste form to meet the TCLP limits for 

mercury and chromium. 

4.3 FOLLOW-ON TESTING 

The TCLP results prompted additional work to develop formulations that 

could meet the regulatory limits for chromium and mercury. Additional testing 

was performed using waste loading of 25 wt%. Three methods for preparing the 

TCLP extraction specimens were investigated. One method involved casting 

pellets from the mixture so no size reduction was required. The other two 

methods used larger specimens that were crushed to meet the size requirements 

for TCLP; all material was used in the extraction for one method and the other 

method discarded fines less than 1 mm screen size before extraction. 

The results of the follow-on TCLP testing are summarized in Table 4-7. 

The samples prepared as pellets passed for all TCLP constituents present. 

Neither of the crushing methods were able to meet TCLP limits for mercury. 

The results show that reduced waste loading is effective for controlling the 

chromium concentrations. The use of reduced waste loadings was successful in 

decreasing the concentrations of all TCLP metals observed in the waste 

extracts, but the sample preparation method apparently has a larger influence 

on the final results than waste loading. Further investigation is planned to 

address these concerns. 

4-11


Table 4-6. Summary of Polymer Waste Form Testing Results. 

Waste form Acceptance Test results 

characteristic criteria Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Type 4 

Compressive 

strength 

Leachability 

index 

Strength.. 

>500 psi 

2,472 psi 1,085 psi 1,411 psi 942 psi 

Leach 

index >6 

Cs 7.7/7.4 7.0/7.0 7.3/7.2 7.1/7.1 

Demin/sea 

water 

Co 

Sr 

8.2/7.9 

8.9/8.7 

9.2/9.3 

9.3/9.1 

10.1/10.3 

10.2/9.4 

7.5/7.7 

9.1/9.0 

No growth, No growth No growth No growth No growth 

Bi o d egra d a ti on s t reng th 

-' >506 psi 2,247 psi 3,710 psi 994 psi 1,114 psi 

Thermal cycling 

Radiation 

stability 

Immersion 

Free liquids 

Strength 

>500 psi after 

30 thermal 

cycles 

Strength 


irradiation to 

10 rad 

Strength 


90-day immersion 

Free liquid 

A I 

w 

^^',; ^^ ;J 

?1Fasf^.}: "q 

-? : ll .(„ F ^d^.ie J. .. 

Table 4-7. Follow-On Testing Results. 

Acceptance Test results 

Waste form 

criteria Wast.e type 1 Waste type 2 Waste type 4 

characteristic Sample 

preparation 

method* 

A B C A B C A B C 

Toxicity 

characteristics 

Ba 

0.022 0.320 

N/A N/A N/A 

0.268 

100 

N/A N/A N/A 

pass pass pass 

TCLP 

leachable 

Cd 

1 . 0 

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 

metals 

below EPA 

limits 

Cr 

5.0 

0.275 

P ass 

0.844 

P ass 

1.056 

p ass 

1.76 

P ass 

4.37 

P ass 

4.82 

P ass 

2.03 

pass 

2.19 

pass 

2.46 

pass 

(parts per 

million) 

Hg 

0.2 

0.182 

pass 

0.385 

fail 

0.350 

fail 

0.194 

pass 

0.270 

fail 

0.245 

fail 

N/A N/A N/A 

0.045 0.040 0.066 

A9 N/A N/A N/A 

5.0 pass pass pass 

*Method A= Pellets; Method B= Crushing; Method C= Crush, discard fines. 

N/A = not applicable. 

TCLP = Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure. 

N/A N/A N/A 

x 

^ ^^c 

E 

0 0 

-d 

M 

^ 

0 0w 

Am 

< 

0

CONCLUSIONS 


The immobilization/stabilization technologies selected for use in WRAP 2A 

have been tested on waste surrogates approximately reflecting the chemical 

characteristics of 80% of the baseline feed volume. The baseline process 

selection has been confirmed for the feed streams studied. Suitable 

formulations have been developed and waste form performance testing has shown 

that the technologies are capable of meeting all applicable regulatory 

acceptance criteria. 

ThQrmosetting -pn]ymer fermul.ationshavebeen-deveTuped-for four baseline 

WRAP 2A waste streams. Waste surrogates were successfully immobilized at 

waste loadings from 50 wt% to 66 wt%. Performance test results at these waste 

loadings met all specifications except TCLP for chromium and mercury. 

Specimens prepared as pellets with a 25 wt% waste loading met TCLP limits for 

all constituents. TCLP results for polymer waste forms were shown to be 

highly dependent on the method used for TCLP sample preparation and somewhat 

less strongly influenced by waste loading. 

4-14

;..;: 

.^:. 


5.0 REFERENCES 

DOE 1988, DOE Order 5820.2A, "Radioactive Waste Management," U.S. Department 

of Energy, Washington, D.C. 

DOE 1989, DOE Order 5400.3, "Hazardous and Radioactiv€ 1Mixed-Waste-Program," 

U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C. 

Ecology, EPA, and DOE, 1992, Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent 

Order, 2 Vols., Washington State Department of Ecology, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and U.S. Department of Energy. 

EPA 1984, Handbook for Stabilization and Solidification of Hazardous Wastes, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 

EPA 1992, Code of Federal Regulations, 1989, 40 CFR 260-268, Office of the 

Federal Register National Archives and Records Administration, 

Washington, D.C. 

NRC 1991, "Technical Position on Waste Form, Revision 1," Final Waste 

Classification and Waste Form Technical Position Papers, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 

NRC 1992, Code of Federal Regulations, 1992, 10 CFR 61, "Licensing 

Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste," Office of the 

Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, 

Washington, D.C. 

llEgC ^ gg2a, W,PAD Module 2A Conceptual Design Report, United Engineers and 

Constructors, Englewood, Colorado. 

UE&C 1992b, WRAP 2 Preconceptual Design Additional Fo11ow-On Activities 

Report,_Draft_Letter_Report, From M-.-J. W3lters-to-A:-W. Kello-yg, 

dated February 7, 1992, United_E_ng-ineers_andConstructors, Englewood, 

Colorado. - 

WAC 173-303, Department of Ecology, 1991, Washington Administrative Code 

"Dangerous Waste Regulations," WAC-173-303. 

WHC 1991, Hanford Site Solid Waste Acceptance Criteria, WHC-EP-0063-3, 

Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington. 

WHC 1993, WRAP Module 2A Waste Form Qualification Plan, WHC-SD-W100-TP-002, 

Rev. 0, Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington. 

5-1



5-2 

.^

--- 

....ti 

s..` 

WHC-SD-WI00-TI-003 Rev. 0 

APPENDIX A 

STATEMENT OF WORK - THERMOSETTING POLYMER 

Statement of Work (SOW) prepared by Westinghouse Hanford Company ( WHC) as 

part of the bid package soliciting qualified vendors to perform waste form 

_{aer#-ormance-tPsxing using a thermosetting polymer with WHC prepared surrogate 

waste. 

c-i



A-2

1.0 INTRODUCTION 


STATEMENT OF WORK - THERMOSETTING POLYMER 

Waste Form Qualification Testing 

Statemeni-of Work W-277587 

May 14, 1992 

The Westinghouse Hanford Company ( WHC), under contract to the United States 

r. Department of Energy ( DOE), is currently responsible for the design, 

'=e construc'tion,- startup, and operation of the Waste Receiving and Processing 

Facility ( WRAP) at the DOE's Hanford site. The second module of the facility 

(WRAP 2A) will handle and process contact-handled low level mixed (hazardous 

'-^=- anfi radioactive) wastes ( CH-LLMW). The WRAP 2A project is currently in the 

conceptual design stage, with architect/engineer services being provided by 

United Engineers and Constructors ( UE&C). 

As part of the conceptual design effort for this project, WHC is seeking 

contractors to provide services in support of the polymer immobilization 

technology waste form qualification program. The required services will 

involve the formulation, preparation and testing of vinyl ester styrene waste 

forms, - and doCilmenta-tion 3f-t!12 waste-f3r"F -content, fCrT!llatiCn, prOCess 

parameters, and analytical results. 

This document describes the work to be done by the contractor in support of 

the WRAP 2A waste form qualification program. The contractor shall comply 

with all provisions of this statement of work during the performance of the 

work. 

2.0 PURPOSE 

The first purpose of this phase of the WRAP 2A waste form qualification 

program is to develop polymer immobilization formulations for the four CH-LLMW 

waste types of concern, and to demonstrate the ability of the immobilization 

process to create a final waste form which is chemically and physically 

stable, and which meets all applicable regulatory requirements with respect to 

low-level radioactive and hazardous waste disposal. 

The second purpose of the program is to provide full and complete 

documentation of the qualification testing procedures, practices, and results. 

The documentation must be of sufficient quality to support ongoing efforts for 

regulatory compliance and detailed facility design. The test program will be 

performed in laboratories which are qualified to perform the work described. 

The results of this test program will be used to evaluate the suitability of 

-----ttie immobilization process for use in WRAP 2A. Successful demonstration of 

A-3



Statement of Work W-277587 

May 14, 1992 

suitable immobilization technologies is a critical element in the completion 

of the WRAP 2A conceptual design effort. 

3.0 SCOPE OF WORK 

The scope of work includes the following work elements: 

a.d-- Prepare- a- plan--tc perfarm-all elements of the work described for 

approval by WHC prior to the start of work. 

3.2 Prepare a quality assurance plan for approval by WHC prior to the 

start of work. 

3.3 Develop optimum formulations for the immobilization of the 

surrogate wastes supplied by WHC. 

3.4 Prepare waste form qualification specimens as necessary to 

complete all required laboratory tests. 

31 5 --Dprform laboratory qualif3caxien testing and analyses of ° 

immobilized waste forms. 

3.6 Support the conceptual design effort for the WRAP 2A polymer 

immobilization process facilities. 

3.7 Prepare progress reports and a final report to fully document all 

development and testing activities associated with this work. 

4.0 DESCRIPTION OF TESTING 

Thirty-j36j pounds each of the four surrogate waste simulants will be prepared 

and furnished by WHC for use in the testing. Table 1 summarizes the 

approximate chemical compositions of the surrogate wastes. The surrogates 

will be prepared by dissolving the required salts in water and evaporating to 

the desired moisture content. A complete description of the procedures used 

to prepare the surrogates, and full chemical analysis of each surrogate waste 

shal-l-be-supplied-by-WHC,--including-material-safety-data-sheets for all 

ingredients used to prepare the surrogates. The surrogate wastes will not 

contain any radionuclides. 

The contractor shall be responsible for developing the optimum formulation to 

be used for preparing the qualification specimens. Qualification testing 

specimens shall then be prepared using the optimum formulation for each 

surrogate waste type. 

A-minimum o-f-ei-ght quaT1firation specimens shall be prepared from each of the 

su{-rugat^ wastes suppiied 'ey WHC. All qualification specimens shall be 

prepared from a single batch of processed waste. The minimum batch size shall 

3 

A-4




May 14, 1992 

be one liter. The process shall be monitored for the parameters listed in 

Table 2 during the preparation of the qualification specimens. 

The specimens shall be tested to determine the final waste form properties as 

listed in Table 3. Documentation supporting laboratory qualification to 

perform the required testing shall be included with the work plan. The vendor 

shall propose additional process parameters or waste form properties to be 

monitored or tested, as may be necessary or desirable to fully define the 

pr-ocessor_demonstrate_superior waste-form qualities. 

5.0 ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA 

Waste form testing acceptance criteria are shown in Table 3. Polymer waste 

forms which do not meet all of the test acceptance criteria will not be 

considered for further evaluation or for use in the WRAP 2A facility. 

6.0 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN SUPPORT 

The contractor shall provide support to WHC during the development of the 

conceptual design report (CDR) for the WRAP 2A facility. The contractor's 

technical staff shall be available for occasional telephone consultation as 

required to answer questions regarding the conceptual design. Support shall 

include providing process design parameters, recommendations for process 

equipment selection, and review of the immobilization process conceptual 

design documents. This design review will include a 2-day meeting at UE&C's 

offices in Denver. The contractor shall prepare and submit a summary letter 

report describing the conclusions and recommendations resulting from this 

design review. 

7.0 TEST PROCEDURE 

The work plan shall include complete detailed descriptions of all proposed 

processing equipment and laboratory apparatus to be used for preparation and 

testing of the qualification specimens. Laboratory testing procedures to be 

used shall conform with the methods shown in Table 3. The tests shall be 

performed by laboratories which are qualified in the required test methods. 

Laboratory qualification shall be demonstrated by an established QA/QC program 

and- pr-ior- experi ence i-n- the- test- methods 3peci#ied. - An,- de.i ati on #rom the 

test procedures listed in Table 3 must be approved in writing by WHC prior. to 

performing the tests. 

8.0 SAFETY 

The contractor shall comply with all applicable safety regulations during the 

performance of the work. Any unusual safety hazards, such as flammability, 

chemical toxicity, or reactivity associated with the process technology shall 

be described in the work plan, along with the procedures and equipment which 

A-5




May 14, 1992 

will be used to mitigate safety hazards. Material safety data sheets for all 

process reagents shall be submitted with the work plan. 

9.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE 

The contractor shall prepare a quality assurance plan describing the QA/QC 

activities to be performed during the work. WHC shall review and approve the 

QA plan prior to the start of testing. The plan shall include, but not be 

limited to, descriptions of laboratory instrument and equipment calibration, 

analysis of duplicates and blanks, and statistical validity of analytical 

results. All reported results shall be fully traceable to the original data 

sources. The testing laboratory shall follow QA/QC procedures that conform to 

d•'-. the requirements of the testing methods in Table 3. 

10.0 SCHEDULE 

The schedule for performance of this work is shown in Figure 1. The 

--^_--- ----iAntraCtiSi"-s-ifiail--suf"im-it the-iv0rk plan and quality assurance plan within two 

weeks after award of contract. WHC review and approval of these documents 

will require one week. The contractor shall submit interim progress reports 

- on the work at four week intervals following approval of the work plan and 

release to proceed. The second progress report should contain the results of 

all laboratory testing with the exception of the long-term immersion, 

biodegradation, and leachability testing. Work shall be completed by 

October 16, with submittal of the final report no later than October 30, 1992. 

A-6

^-: 

-- ^ 

Component Waste Type 1 

LETF Salts 

WHC-SD-W100-TI-003 Reve 0 



May 14, 1992 

TABLE 1 

Surrogate Wastes Approximate Composition 

Waste Type 2 

Basins #1,#2 

Sludge 

Waste Type 3 

Basins #3,#4 

Sludge 

Silver (ppm) M 190 

Waste Type 4 

Basin Crystal 

Solids 

Barium (pp m ) 24 100 

Ber llium m 6 2.3 

Cadmium (ppm ) 6 

Chromium (pp m ) 187.5 900 390 500 

Co pp er (pp m ) 201.0 130,000 112,000 63,000 

Mercury (pp m ) 9.2 1.3 

Nickel (oom)_ 46.5 100 130 400 

SUBTOTAL Ippml 444.20 131,225.30 112,742.30 84,000.00 

Ammonium % 22.83 

Fluoride % 6.0 1.3 7.1 

Nitrate % 1.1 13.5 26 1.6 

Sodium ( % ) 20.0 24 22.9 

Sulfate_ %) 64.61 __20.2 _3,7 35.5 

Water ( % ) 10.0 21.58 25.03 24.5 

SUBTOTAL I%) 98.54 81.28 80.03 91.60 

Inerts % 1.42 5.6 8.7 2.0 

TOTAL 1%1 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 

A-1




May 14, 1992 

TABLE 2 

Key Process Parameters 

PARAMETER UNITS 

Mixer s p eed revolutions p er minute 

Mixer- p ower watts - 

Batch wei g ht g rams 

Batch volume cubic centimeters 

Curin g exotherm de g rees Centi g rade 

Waste loadin g wei ht p ercent 

Matrix chemistry wei ht percent 

7 

A-8

.^x. 

--1vHC-SD iii00- T i-003 Rev. 0 



May 14, 1992 

TABLE 3 

Immobilized Waste Testing Requirements 

Waste Form Characteristic Test Method Acce tance Criteria 

Com pressive Stren gth ASTM D695 Stren g th > 60 p si 

Leachability Index ANS 16.1 Leach Index > 6 

Biodegradation ASTM G21 & G22, No growth, 

ASTM D695 Stren th > 60 p si 

Thermal Cycling ASTM B553, Strength > 60 psi after 30 

ASTM 0695 thermal c y cles 

Radiation Stability ASTM D695 Strength > 60 psi after 

irradiation to 108 rad 

Immersion ASTM 0695 Strength > 60 psi after 90day 

water immersion 

Free Li q uids ANS 55.1 Free li uid < 0.5% 

Hazardous Characteristics 40 CFR 261 Not ignitible, not 

corrosive, not reactive 

Toxicity Characteristics EPA 1311 (TCLP), TCLP leachable constituents 

€FA 6010 bel ow EPA l imi tsc°' ce' 

-(")Basin-waste-texit-ctu!stituentzare_AgBa,-Be,-Cd,Cr,_-Cu, Hg, and Ni. 

LETr' toxic constituents are Cr, Cu, Hg, and Ni. 

cWEPA limits as described in 40 CFR 268.41, Table CCWE. 

8 

A-9

, 

TASK 

Bid period 

Award contract 

Prepare work plan 

Submit work plan 

Review & approve plan 

Release to proceed 

Develop formulations 

Prepare specimens 

Laboratory anaiyses 

Progress reports 

Final report 

Support CDR preparation 

WHC formulate surrogate 

WHC prepare surrogate = 

WHC ship surrogate = 

Vendor receive surrogate * 




May 14, 1992 

CIrIfPr I 

SCHEDULE 

May June July Aug Sept Oct 

* 

* 

9 

A-10

WHC-SD-W: JV-TI-VVJ ^cv. v 

APPENDIX B 

TECHNICAL TASK PLAN - GROUT 

Technical Task Plan (TTP) prepared by WHC for an "in-house" (WHC) testing 

_--program fQrwast_e fnrmpp-rfnrmanee testing-using-e^ment-based waste forms and 

surrogate waste. Similar to the SOW for thermosetting polymer. 

B-1



B-2

,..^ 

c:-- 

z 

,.E 

^=t 

^^ln^l 


TECHNICAL TASK PLAN - GROUT 

FY 1992 Technical Task Plan 

Support of the Waste Receivinq and Processing (WRAP) 

Module 2A 

TIP #A5202 

Princ pa1 Inv i a or Date 

naineer 

Date 

Date 

AP rogram Manager Da e 

B-3

Date: 05/04/92 


Tec hnical Task Plan 

Title: Waste Disposal Studies in Support of WRAP (Module 2A) 

Technical Manager: J. A. Hunter 

Technical Investigator: W. 0. Greenhalgh 

Program Coordinator: J. L. Westcott 

Fiscal Year: 1992 

B-4

Scope 


Support WRAP validation (August 15, 1992) by providing the following: 

Awast.e characterization summary for all WRAP 2A feed streams including 

C-01811, L-04511, 18311 basin, ash residue, etc. 

• Immobilization technology li,terature search for these feeds. 

• Cold laboratory testing of cement solidification systems on C-018H and 183H 

basin waste simulants. 

• Publish status report to support validation application. 

Budget 

FY 1992 - $60K expense. 

^`:,,,.`: 

^^.^r^^,v2 

To prepare, in report form, waste characterization data and summary, 

-immobilization candidates, and compatible immobilization options that can be 

- srwli-2d in-the Module 2A facility of WRAP to meet present and near future 

waste disposal criteria and regulations. 

Backaround 

The WRAP Module 2A Facility is scheduled to be constructed as a 1994 Line Item 

Project Number W-100. The conceptual design is currently underway and 

scheduled for completion in July of 1992. The facility is to start operation 

in September 1999 in accordance with the Tri-Party Agreement Milestone M-19. 

The Waste Receiving and Processing ( WRAP) Module 2A facility conceptual design 

is a contact handled ( CH) solid low-level radioactive mixed waste (LLMW) 

-- treatmer,t--€aci'i-t-y: -Tfie---facilaty will provide nnn-tharmal (

Task Descri ption 


Sampling and characterization daLa already available for waste scheduled for 

treatment in the WRAP 2A module will be collected, evaluated, analyzed, and 

summarized.- -Tlr,'s data-wi-ll form-the basis for--defining the -requirea -disposal 

criteria. Technical literature searches will be made to define waste 

immobilization and solidification options that can be applied to the different 

summarized waste streams. Lab screening tests will be made to verify 

appiication-of imnrooiiizatian- or solidification eptions to the C-018H and 183H 

WRAP waste streams. This information and the status of the disposal work will 

be made available in a brief report prior to the validation application 

(August 15, 1992). The balance of FY 1992 will be devoted to resolving any 

validation questions. 

Activitie s and Mile stones 

Waste activities and milestones are given in a chart on the following page. 

Costs and completion dates are given on a second chart. 

Deliverables 

The following deliverables are anticipated: 

D ate Deliv erable 

^` ," ,M' î^. ,,, 

u^/.) i/Vc ^^rin^îr^c search results 

06/01/92 Recommended solidification methods For lab screening 

06/30/92 Waste characterization summary 

07/15/92 Recomniended solidification methods for all WRAP 2A wastes 

08/01/92 BrieF laboratory report 

• Recommended solidification methods for C-018H and 183H wastes. 

• Waste form characteristics 

B-6

00 

V 

F-' 

Activity and Miltstone Chart (FY 199 2), 

Activit.y Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep FY 19 93 

1. Summarize Characterization Work 

• Collect Waste Data ^ 

• Evaluate & Analyze Data --- ---1% 

• Summarize Information ^ 

2. Literature Search 

• Perform literature search -----o 

• Review literat^re and --- ----o 

summarize results 

• Evaluate waste forms ---- -----^ 

3. Laboratory Screening 

• Recommend lab tests ---- a V 

• Initiate lab sc:reen ^ - 

• Complete lab screen - __^^ 

• Write brief status report °--o 

• Validation preparation/ --^ 

response 

August - Validation Approval 

E 

y 

E 

0 

1 

H 

0 

w 

T < 

0


Activity Completion Date Cost ($K) 

1. Summarize Characterization Work 

• Collect Waste Analysis Data 4/30 $ 5 

• EvaluaLe and Analyze Data 5/31 10 

• Summarize information - 6/30 - 10 

2. Literature Search 

-- • - perform literature searcii iôr 4/30 - 5 

alternate waste forms 

• Review literature and summarize 5/31 5 

results 

• Evaluate candidate waste forms for 6/30 5 

screen tests 

3. Laboratory Screening 

• Recommend waste forms to test 6/1 -- 

• Initiate lab screening 6/7 5 

•Gomplete lah-screeri,n,g . ?/15 10 

• Write brief status report 8/1 5 

• Resolve an y validation questions 8/15 -- 

I DOE PRESENTATION AUGUST 15 

TOTAL $60 

B-8


Laboratory Screenin g C riteria (will make "best effort" try to perform the 

appropriate listed tests) 

1. Must meet WIIC-EP-0063-3 criteria. 

• Jtable iJaSte fGrni 

• No free liquid 

• Not explosive, Flammable, reactive, nor corrosive 

2. Must pass TCLP test for any hazardous constituents. 

3. Should appear to meet NRC waste Form characteristics. 

• Compressive strength >500 psi for 28-day cure materials. 

• Leachability ANS 16.1 leach index >6, stop at 30 days (90-day is 

standard). 

• Immersion >60 psi after 30-day water inunersion ( 90-day is standard). 

• Radiation stability 

• Thermal cycling 

• Biodegradation 

• Free liquid measurement 

Exoected Result s 

. 

-The task plan is expected to provide the necessary support 

(Modu}e--2A) fa^^^;}},,^`y_.,,}ida+ =- ^tsn a^vp,;^,aFi^^. ^^^^, A^ summary of 

for 

the 

successful WRAP 

waste to be 

treated, general applicable treatment methods, and the basic equipment needed 

for the work is expected to be available for the validation application. 

Issues 

• It is assumed that sufficient waste sampling and characterization data is 

already available. 

• Lab screening tests will verify laboratory solidification and 

immobilization methods. 

• Certification of waste disposal compliance for specific waste streams will 

be eittmilted Irl f1 1992. 

B-9



B-10 

.e.,


APPENDIX C 

THERMOSETTING POLYMER TEST PLAN 

Detailed Test Plan prepared by the vendor awarded the contract for 

thermosetting polymer testing described in Appendix A. Outlines test 

procedures, quality control, and testing deliverables. 

C-I



C-2

16490 Chiaccothe Itoad 

Chagrin Falls, Ohio 440224398 

(316) J43-6000 

Telex 196071 

Telefax (216) 543-6678 


THERMOSETTING POLYMER TEST PLAN 

EXPRESS 92RACWH002 DOCUMENT TRANSMITTAL 

9 2 0 2 9 7 4 

Date July 23. 1992 Page 1 of i 

To: Westinghouse Hanford Company Subject STOCK Polymer Immobilization 

2355 Stevens Drive 

Richland, Washington 99352 Tech. Waste Form Oualification Testine 

Plant/Station 

ATTN: Mr. Dewey Burbank Contract # 

.,e H1-60 

Req'n # 

P.O. # MMW-SVV-277587 

Stock Re[. S.O. 6996 

The follc^Wg item(s) are enclosed for your revievc 

Drawing 0 Document it Procedure 0 Manuals q 

Print _ Mylar _ Copies _ Copies 

Sepia Vellum _ Other-Specify 

., _ Apt. Grd 

Reference No. Rev. Description ePurpose 

6996-0 0 Quality Plan 1 

90110 0 Test Procedure 1 

MSDS Documents 1 

90109 0 Leaching Procedures 1 

Comments: The above items are submitted for your approval in accordance with your order requirements. We respectfully 

request your approval on or before July 31, 1992. We confirm surrogate waste requirements of 25 to 30 pounds each. 

•e 

ar a.'^-- turwcr ^-0---•^-- uuututauun ^- u ---°^--' rcyuucu, -t---- ptcûc auvuc. -'.^-- 

c: - O.M. Wevihotf/G1-59 = W.H.C.%Transmittal only 

T. Litchney 

S.O. 6996 

•wrpore Code 

1. Ftst Issue, For Approval 

2. Final Isaue. For Records 

S. Other-Specify 

Stock Equipment Company 

A Unit of General Signal 

RECEIVED 

WRAP DMC) 

3. Itevision for 

2G rl 1^2 

4. Information Onty ^f[« „ 7 

C-3 

Russell A. CzellSth, Manager 

Contract Administration

WHC-SO-W100-TI-003 Rev. 0 

SPOCK EQUIPMENT COMPANY 

16490 Chllllcothe Road 

Chagrin Falls, Ohio 44022 

RADWASTE TEST PROCEDURE 

10 CFR 61 WASTE FORM 

VERIFICATION PROGRAM 

t n 

Prepared By: Date: ^ Z^ 49 Z 

Fria Podmore 

Nuclear ngineering 

Reviewed By j ^ Date: ZZ 

Thomas C. Litchney, Manager 

Nuclear Engineering 

Approved By. "' Date: ^ ZZ 

Michael J. Pavkov, ager 

Quality Assurance 

Test Performed By: 

Test Reviewed By: 

SECTION: 

SUBJECT: 

Technician 

Technician 

Quality Assurance Engineer 

pRl1rFn11RF - GFNFRAI 

Date: 

Date: 

Date: 

Revision Letter - 0 

Date issueo - JuIv 22, 199^ 

10 CFR 61 'dASTE FORM VERIFICATION PROGRAM Page at 37 

Stock Eouipment Comoany StanCarCs Number -:'01 : 0 

C-A

ca-. 

tY•^_E 

Q . 

- - StoGkE4uip+!nent Comoanv 


90.T 6+99•5O•91e6 


TA-BLI+;tSFCfìi.^c.^,'S 



1.0 Specimen Preparation . . . . . . . . . .. .. . ... .. .. . . . . . 3 

1.1 Lab Scale, One (1) Crellon Specimens . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 

2.0 Testing Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 

2.1 Compressive Strength Test Procedure . : . . . . . . . . . . 7 

2.2 Leachability Test Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 

2.3 Ninety (90) Day Immersion Test Procedure ...... 20 

2.4 Thermal Degradation Test Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . 20 

2.5 Bibdeqradatiofi-Test Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 

2.6 Radiation Test Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 

2.7 Presence of Free liquid Test Procedure ..... .... 28 

3.0 Assay for Metals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 

3.1 Instrumentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 

3.2 Methods Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 

4.0 Leachability Index Calculations . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 

4.1 Method of Calculating . . . . . . . . . . . ;. . . . . . . . . . 33 

4.2 Data Recording . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 

Appendix A - ASTM Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 

Appendix B - Solidificatioe Liossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : .36 

C-5 

Paee 

Pa,e i, of 37_

.^( SPECIMEN PREPARATION 


STOCK EQUIPMENT COMPANY 



1.1 LAB SCALE, ONE (1) GALLON SPECIMENS 

1.1.1 Specimen Preparation 

PROCEDURE 90110-0 

Lab scale, one (1) gallon size specimens, will be prepared for this testing program. 

The three (3) groups of specimens prepared for testing are listed in Table 13. 

Table 1.1 • Labels, One (1) Gallon Specimen 

Group I 

Polymer Control 

Group II 

Waste Stream 

Without Co, Sr, Cs 

Group III 

Waste Stream 

With Co. Sr, Cs 

Control Ll - - 

Waste Number 1 - L2 L3 

Waste Number 2 - LA IS 



The waste streams listed containing Co, Sr, Cs (Group III), will have between 0.20 

and 0.25 weight percent (of the total solidification) as metal, added to them, The 

three (3) metal salts that will be added to each of the waste streams listed in 

Group III are: 

Co (as CoCL2 • 6H20) ACS Reagent Grade, 

Sr (as SrCL2 • 61-120) ACS Rea,ent Grade, and 

Cs (as CsCL) ACS Reagent Grade. 

Mixing of the waste streams and polymer will be accomplished using a high shear 

energy mi;ting technique. 

Stock Eauipment Companv C-6 


^mm 9199-5n•9^96 

Pagc = of

^.. 


. , I PROCEDURE 90110-0 

i 

1.1.2 Sample Tube Insertion 

Tubes with the nominal dimensions of 1-7/16' I.D. and two inches (2') s 1/4' 

in length will be made. Maximum departure from perpendicularity to the as;s by 

either end: 1.0 degree. Maximum out of plane allowance for ends; 0.025 inch. 

After the specimens have been cast, the test specimens will be sealed and allowed 

to remain undisturbed for a seven (7) day period to permit the polymer/waste 

mixture to cure. At the end of the curing period, each specimen will be opened 

and the core tube removed. Labeling will be accomplished using the procedure 

with the exception that each specimen is not directly labeled, but placed in a 

prelabeled, sealed container. For example, the second specimen from the tube 

of specimen LZ will carry a label LZA2 on the container. Six (6) specimens 

obtained from each solidification, three (3) will be leached in distilled water and 

three (3) will be leached in synthetic sea water (per ANSI 16.1 and Section 2.2). 

All six ( 6) samples per specimen will be used for the ninety (90) day immersion 

test (Section 2.3). 

1.13 Mibng of the waste streams and polymer will be accomplished using a high shear 

energy mixing technique. 

In preparing for the solidification, the polymer will be mixed. This is done to 

minimiz e introduction of a random variable into any solidification. The 

surrogated waste will be mixed to minimize introduction of a random variable into 

any solidification. All components will be preweighed prior to the start of 

solidi5cation. 

1.1.4 Specimen Cast Preparation 

After mixdttg of all the components, the polymer/waste mixture will be poured 

into the tubes. All the specimens generated will be covered and allowed to cure 

for seven (7) days. The remainder of the polymer/waste mixnue will be used to 

obtain a esothertn profile and to determine Free L'quids ( Section 2.7). 

Table 1.1a 

Test Description Test Procedure Section Number Samples Required 

Compressive Strength 2.1 

Biodegradation 2.5 3 

Radiation 2.6 3 

Tnermai Cycie 

Degradation 

Stock cquipment Company 


ImT W!-SDAIN C-7 

zi 3 

Page 4 of 3?


1.15 Laboratory Standard Compression Specimens 


A gallon control specimen will prepared. It will yield at least twenty-four (24) 

specimens. The extended curing period will minimize differences in compressive 

strength. The standards will be used to minimize differences that may occur 

throughout the program due to uncontrollable variations in the experiment. At 

least three (3) standards will be selected at random and compression tested each 

day that compression testing is planned in the test program. 

Stock Equipment Company C-$ 


Form 6499•SD•9196 

Pa,c .; ot.;7 

;:.

Waste Type: 


SPECIMEN PREPARATION DATA SHEET 

Specimen Size: Gallon Specimen Label: 

Waste Stream Data: 

A. pH 

B. Temperature °C 

C. % Total Solids % 

D. % Free Standing Water 

E. Density g/cc 

Solidification Formula Used: 

F. Total Waste Volume 1 Gallons 

G. Polymer and Weight kg IN 

H. Weight of Waste (F'1000cdi'G) kg lbs 

1. Weight of Solidified Product (H+I+J) kg IN 

Weight of Metal Salts added to Waste Stream (.25% of K) 

Weight ratio of Co in CoCL2.6HZ0 = 4.0375 

Weight of CoCL2.6HZO required (.0025K4.0375) kg 

Weight ratio of Sr in SrC12.6H,0 = 3.0429 

Weight of Sr CL2.H20 required (.0025K3.0429) kg 

Weight ratio of Cs in CsCL = 1.2668 

Weight of CsCL required (.0025K.1.2663) kg 

Mixing Speed rpm 

Peak Exotherm °C 

Record additional solidification observations on reverse. 

Stock E G uipment Company C-9 


gWm 649e-50+91ee 

PROCEDURE 90110•0 

Technician Date 


Pa_c h of "7

,,.. 

ZA TESTING PROCEDURES 


2.1 COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH TEST PROCEDURE 


This test will be performed as per ASTM D695 (Appendix A) for those samples requiring 

compressive strength testing. 

2.1.1 Laboratory standard samples shall be chosen at random from the laboratory 

standard lot and compression tested. The compressive strength test data shall be 

recorded on the Compression Strength Data Sheet at the end of this section. The 

average compressive strength and density shall be calculated and recorded. One 

standard deviation value for the compressive strength and density will also be 

calculated and recorded on the Compressive Strength Data Sheets at the end of 

this section. 

2.1.2 Prior to beginning the day's compressive strength testing, at least three (3) 

random samples from the laboratory standard lot shall be compression tested and 

----reC3rded-orrthe-COmpresstve-.citr'cnoth Data Sheets at the end of this section. 

2.13 For each sample to be tested, the height, diameter, and mass will be determined 

and recorded on the Compressive Strength Data Sheet at the end of this section. 

2.1.4 The samples will be compressed individually using a Detroit testing machine 

-(Lfodel NTS•1,-number 836)-to-detarnrnethe-tttaximuiztoad.-irrpounds; applied 

to the specimen. As the compressive strength tests shall be performed throughout 

the program, the Detroit testing machine shall be calibrated by. -a- sertified 

calibration technician or by the Stock laboratory technician using a calibration 

ring. 

2.1.5 The compressive strength of each sample will be calculated by the formula. 

C.S. - load 

(D2)2>< 

where C.S. = Compressive Strength, PSI 

load - maximum load applied, in pounds 

D = diameter of sample in inches 

2.1.6 The density of each sample tested will be calculated by the equation. 

p = „J(d")Zha 

wh_e_re p = dcnsitv. Jcc 

m = mass. 

h = hei.-Iht. cm 

-^^--- ^ --- ^ - d = diameter, rm 

Stock EG lLpment Company 


=vi* 5a9e•50-9ie6 

of 7 

^ 

,Y

Stock E quipment Company 


Fa.n "98•50A1e6 



2.1.7 The following information will be entered onto the Compressive Strength Data 

Sheet at the end of this section. 

a. Specimen Label 

b. Diameter of Sample, inches/cm 

c. Height of Sample, cm 

d. Mass of Sample, g 

e. Maximum Load Applied, lbs 

f. Calculated Comoressive Strenath, psi 

g Densi.., g;w 

2.1.8 The average compressive strength and density will be calculated and recorded for 

each waste form solidification. One (1) standard deviation value will also be 

calculated and recorded for the compressive strength and density of each waste 

form solidification. 

4 

C_l I 

Page ? of^

T:5 

; i.., 


COMPRESSiVE STRENGTH DATA SHEET 

Waste Type: LAHORATORY STANDARD 

Date: 

Specimen Diameter Height Mass Load C.S. 

Label in h m CM ` lbs nsi 

Record Additional Observations on Reverse 

Technician Datc Technician 

Stock Equipment Comoany 


%o.. a+se-so-vêa 

C-12 


Date 

Density 

z1o; 

Pagc a of 37

G' ,.,. 

d,_ s 

WHC-0-W100-TI-003 Rev. 0 

COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH DATA SHEET 

Waste Type: LABORATORY STANDARD 

Date: 


Specimen Diameter Height Mass Load C.S. Density 

Label in hk Sm ° lbs 051 -1LSF^ 


Technician Date Technician Date 

Stock E Q uipment Company 


-o.m 6^9e-5n-9/66 

C-13 

Pa,,,e 9A of 37

^-.-^ 

Waste Type: 

Date: 




Speeimen Diameter Height Mass Load C.S. Density 

Label in h m cm g lbs nsi rLoc 

Rccord Additional Observations on Reverse 


Stock ECuipment Company 

A Unit of General Signal L-14 

°e- 5-99-50•916E 

Pa;e 10 of _7

Cx 

U: 

r°... 

.• , 

.ti 

Waste Type: 

Date: 





. 

Label in chicint cm l^ lbs ns!_ 1Sc 





=01m eA98-50-9166 C-15 

Pa:c If1A of 37

J 

Leachant Solution: 


LEACHABILITY TEST 

CnnqPRR.CSNA S'PRFNt:TH DATA SHEET 

Specimen Diameter Height Mass 

Label in ch/cm cm --L- 

Record Additional Observations on Reversc 


Load C.S. 

lbs osi 



A Unit ot General Signal 

Form 6^9e-50-9/!6 

C-16 

Pa_c II of _? 

^ v

-. 

LeachantSolution: 

Specimen Diameter 

T^bel inch/cm 



LEACHABILITY TEST 



Height Mass Load C.S. 

cm _L- lbs ps! 



A Unit of General Signal y_I7 

'arm 6A9a-5n-9/66 

Page 1 I A of 37


THERMAL CYCLING 

COMPR_ESSIVE ST_RENC:TH DATA SHEET 

PROCEDURE go111)•0 

Specimen Diameter Height Mass Load C.S. 

Label insh/cm cm ^ lbs psi 


Technician----- Date Tcchtiician Date 

Stock Eqwpment Company 


°arm 6+98-50-9i86 

C-18 

Pagc 12 of 3-1 

.r:^

c^1, 


THERMAL CYCLING 

COMPRESSiVE STRENCTH DATA SHEET 

Specimen Diameter Height Mass Load 

Label in ch/cm cm 1!_ Itis 


Technician Date Technician Datc 



%onn e49e•60-919e 

C-I9 


C.S. 

nsi 

Pa^c 12A of 17

-..-y 

- `-= 

4y., 

Stock Eouipment Company 


:orm 5498-50-9196 


21 LEACHAB[LITY'PEST PROCEDURE 


The following procedure will be performed for those specimens requiring 

Iparhahilirv r^crin..en 

.---..--..... .-..-.. - 

2.2.1 Leachant Solution Preparation 

Two (2) leachant solutions will be used for the leachability testing 

portion of this program. The following procedures will be used to 

oreoaro the leachant solutions. 

'--11.1 Distilled Water 

1. Distilled water will be prepared using a corning 

Meoa-Pure three (3) liter automatic distiller. 

2. The distilled water obtained in Step 1 will be passed 

through an ion exchange resin column, and collected 

in fifty (50) liter carboys. 

3. The carboys will be securely capped, labeled and 

stored until needed. 

2.2.1.2 Syn thetic Sea Water 

2.= Specimen Preparation 

1. The synthetic sea water Icachant solution will be 

prepared as per ANS 16.1, Appendix D, Page 40. 

2. The sea water leachant will be prepared in 20 liter 

batches and these batches will be combined and 

stored in fifty (50) liter carboys. 

3. The carboys will be tightly capped, labeled, and 

stored until needed. 

2.2.2.1 The following information will be recorded on the Core 

Specimen Data Sheet at the end of this section, for cach of 

the specimens obtained. 

a. Label number 

b. Hei^ht, cm 

c. Diameter, cm 

d. Calculated surface area, (cm2) 

C. Volume of leachant solution rcquired, (ml). 

f. Leachant time point 

C - 20 

Pa:•e I;of 17

..... 

lry" 

- 

Stock E a uipment Company 


Fe,m 6.96-50-9/B6 C-21 



2122 If the height or diameter of a given core specimen has 

changed due to swelling, decomposition or any other affect, 

the surface area will have changed and the volume of 

leachant solution must be adjusted appropriately. In all 

cases, the ratio of the volume of Ieachant solution to 

surface area of the core specimen will be 10.0. 

2.2Z3 Prior to immersion in the Ieachant solution, the specimen 

will be attached to the container lid by the following 

method. 

The specimen will have a plastic fishnet tied around its 

exterior surface. A length of dental floss will be used to 

suspend the specimen in the Ieachant solution. The dental 

floss will be attached to the container lid, and to the plastic 

----- ----fishnet aroun d-the spe{:Slfler4 See Figure la and lb. 

2.2 .2.4 The following procedure will be followed for the insertion 

of the specimen into the leachant solution, and the storage 

of each container for the appropriate time period. 

--i. For each specimen, the appropriate amount of 

Ieachant solution will be determined from the 

Specimen Data Sheet. 

2. The correct amount of leachant solution will be 

placed into the leachant container. 

3. The leachant container and cap will be labeled with 

the following information. 

a. Specimen label 

b. Leachant solution (distilled water, sea water) 

c. Volume of Ieachant solution (ml) 

4. At the start of any given leaching period, the 

specimen will be placed into the leachant solution. 

The top of the specimen will be covered by the 

leachant solution, whilc the bottom of the specimen 

will-be suspendcd above the botcom of the Icachant 

container, see Figure la and lb. 

5. The leachant container will be capped and allowed to 

remain undisturbed until the end of the leaching 

period. 

Page Il of 3?

- - - - 


2.23 Leachant Sample Preparation 

Stock c G uipment Company 


ê:m8a0o->p ::a: f:-ZZ 

PROCGllURL 90110-0 

22.3.1 All liquid samples for the leachability test will be obtaincd 

by the use of a volumetric pipet. Prior to the pipetting of 

the liquid sample, the leachant solution will be stirred 

thoroughly. If necessary, the solution can also be shaken. 

Regardless of the mixing procedure used, the leachant 

solution must be thoroughly mixed. 

3r^Z--- If _tha_Ieachattt_solution- ,ontains- a- p recir^.^t,••, . the 

preeipitate must also be assayed ( reference steps 2.23.7 

2Z33 An aliquot of the liquid will be extracted from the leachant 

solution (minimum of five (5) ml) and deposited into a 

volumetric flask. The size (volume, mis) of the aliquot will 

be recorded on the Leachant Sample Preparation Data 


213.4 The aliquot of sample taken in Step 4 will be diluted 

volumetrically using 1% by weight Nitric Acid (HNO3). 

The volume to which the aliquot of sample has been diluted 

will be recorded on the Leachant Sample Preparation Data 


2135 A four (4) ounce (125 ml) polyethylene bottie to be used 

for storing the sample will be rinsed with the diluted liquid 

sample solution. From five (5) to ten (10) mis of the 

diluted liquid sample solution will be poured into the bottle. 

The bottle will be capped and shaken. The rinse liquid will 

then be discarded.'Ihe remaining diluted liquid sample will 

be poured into the rinsed bottle. The bottle will be tightly 

capped and stored_ypriehc itt_a cool darkplace-(cupboard). 

2.23.6 Each sample bottle will be labclcd with the following 

information. 

a. Leach specimen label 

b. Lcachant solution (sea water or distilled water) 

L. Date and time sample obtained 

d. Dilution ratio 

\OTL: Proceed only after steps 1:J.1 through =?3.6 

have been completed. 

Pa_e IS of ?7

;=. 

.:^;. 

WHC-SD-W100-TI-003 Rev< 0 

PP.6CEDL']tk 90110-0 

Dental Lacl»nt 

-Fioss ^ - Solution 

Level 

Pl.stiC 

FisMet Llter 

Cor.;si^cr 

Figure la 

Dentsl ^ / Ltac.`..,t ! 

r'CSS 

Le+tl 

J / 

'lastic z euart 

^ 

Figure !D 

Stcck Equ,ar.ent Com;3ry 

A ums -?r 3entr2. Sl:,nei C-23 

s^:. y.ve.sav,u, 

i':.._ 16 ot=_

2.2.4 

Stock E q uipment Company 


Ge,n E499-50-91e6 



223.7 If the leachant solution contains a precipitate, the entire 

precipitate will be collected by filtration. The filter paper 

will be either a Whatman 2 or Whatman 5 qualitative filter 

paper. The precipitate will be gravity filtered and will not 

be washed. 

223.8 After the filtration step, the precipitate will be oven dried 

at 50-60'C for at lea.st three (3) hours. The precipitate will 

then be weighed, the mass of solids determined and 

recorded on the Leachant Sample Preparation Data Sheet 

at the end of this section. After weighing, the dried 

precipitate will be stored in a four (4) ounce polyethylene 

bottle. The bottle will be tightly capped and labeled with 

the following information: 

a. Leach specimen label 

b. Leachant solution (sea water or distilled water) 

c. Date and time sample obtained 

d. Mass of sample 

223.9 The filtered leachant solution will then be discarded. 

Leachability Specimen Compressive Strength Test 

Upon completion of ninety (90) day leachability testing the leachability 

- test spe citnens will be com^r•«i ,,. _.... ^.,.. ^ r._ ^sted per Section 2.1 Compressive 

Strength Test Procedure. Compression test results will be recorded on 

the Leachability Test Compressive Strength Data Sheet at the end of 

Section 2.1. 

C-24 

Pa,c I? of? 

^ y

(.7 

..^^ 

-„n 

f^. 

[Y^. 

Waste Type: 

Solidification Size: 

Specimen Label: 

LeaehancSoluuon: 

YIHC-SD-W100-TI-003 Rev. 0 

SPECIMEN DATA SHEET 

olon 


Leachant 

Heieht (em) Diameter (cm) Surface Area (cmZ) Volume(ml) Time Point 

Record Additional Observations on Reserve 




•a.. s.sa-eo-61ee 

-C-25 

Page 14 of 37

Waste Type: 

Solidification Size: 


Leachant Solution: 


SPECIMEN DATA SHEET 

gallon 


Leachant 

Heieht (cm) Diameter (cm) Surface Area (em2) Volume(ml) Time Point 

Record Additional Observations on Rcserve 




va.. 6.ve•so•siea C-26 

Pa_e ISA ofi 

,:,;

Date: _ 

Leachability Time Point 

Leachant Sample 

Label 


WHC-SO-W100-TI-003 Rev. 0 

LEACHANT SAMPLE PREPARATION DATA SHEET 

Diluted 

Aliouot (ml) Volume (mil 

TrrhR:_i2n 1-1 -- 

Date Technician 

3tock E9u_:m:^t comPany C-27 


Solid Mass 

Datc 

Page 

19 of^

LGIG] 

_._!-ueacF:ability, Time PoinC 


LEACHANT SAMPLE PREPARATfON DATA SHEET 


Leachant Sample Diluted 

Label Aliauot (ml) Volume fmll Solid Mass 



• eî ^..:. ^^ i:a....î c:^,:...y,i ^° 

_^ 

Page 19A of 37 

A

23 Ninety ( 90) Day Immersion Test Procedure 


90110-0 

23.1 The same specimens and data used in the Leachability Test will be used for the 

ninety (90) day immersion test. 

231 For each specimen the following information will be collected from the 

Leachability Test Compressive Strength Data Sheets at the end of Section 2.1. 


b. Diameter, in/cm 

c. Height, cm 

d. Mass, g 

e. Load, lbs. 

t Compressive Strength, PSI 

233 The average strength for each type of waste stream and leachant are also 

calcuiated and recorded on the Leachability Test Compressive Strength Data 

Sheet at the end of Section 2.1. 

2.4 Thermal Degradation Test Procedure 

2.4.1 Three (3) specimens will be obtained. These specimens will be 2 inches z 1/4' 

high, and 1- 7/16' in diameter. Each specimen has been labeled. 

2.4.2 All of the specimens to be tested will be placed on a metal (aluminum or steel) 

tray, and placed into an oven maintained at 60`C = i'C for one hour. The 

temperature of the oven at the start of the one (1) hour heating period, at thirty 

(30) minutes into the heating period and at the end of the one (1) hour heating 

period will be recorded on the Thermal Cycling Temperature Data Sheet at the 

end of this section. The samples will not be disturbed until the end of the one 

(1) hour heating period. 

2.43 Upon completion of the one (1) hour period, the specimens will be removed from 

the environmental chamber and allowed to stand at room temperature for one (1) 

hour. The temperature of the room at the start, at thirty (30) minutes and at the 

end of the one (1) hour room temperature period will be recorded on the 

Thermal Cycling Temperature Data Sheet at the end of this section. 

2.4.4 Upon completion of the room temperature period, the specimens will be placed 

into a cold chamber, maintained at -40' x I'C, for one (1) hour. The initial 

temperature, thirty ( 30) minute and final cold chamber temperatures will be 

recorded on the Thermal Cycli.^.g Temperature Data Sheet at the end of this 

section. 

2.4a At the end of the cold chamber cycle, Step 2.33 will be repeated. 

2.4.6 Steps 2.4.2 through 2.45 constitute a single thermal c,vcle. All of the specimens 

to be tested will be subjected to thirty (30) full thermal rycles. 

Stock = a uioment Company C-29 

A Unit n( ' -neralSianal 

Pa_e 1.0 of _;7

Stock °7uipment Company 

e ^ in^r !) .nosl Cinnal 



2.4.7 At the end of thirty (30) full thermal eycles, the Compressive Strength Test of 

each sample will be performed per Section 2.1. The following data will be 

recorded on the Thermal Cycling Compressive Strength Data Sheets at the end 

of Section 2.1. 


b. Diameter, in/cm 

c. Height, cm 

d. Mass, g 

e. Max load, lbs. 

f. Compressive Strength, psi 

The average compressive strength for each waste type will be calculated and 

recorded on the Thermal Cycling Compressive Strength Data Sheets at the end 


C-30 

pnce it ofi

ty ,.. 

='`F 

r...,, 

b 

Ly.. 

Specimen Labels 


THERMAL CYCLING'rF'MPEFtA1'IiRE DATA SHEET 


Initial Temp. Thirty Minute Temp. Final Temp. Average 

• Cvale 'C 'C 6C S 



•a - Heating chamber temperature 

h - Room temperatures 

C , `.^..^.tin 

b..-...___ 

n chamber temneratures 

d - Room temperatures 

Stock E9uipment Company 

A I Imt nRinnal 

C-31 


Page s;,. of -",

Specimen Labels 


THERMAL CYCLING TEMPERATURE DATA SHEET 


Initial Temp. Thirty Minute Temp. Final Temp. Average 

Cycl e 'C 'C oc- S'` 



•a - Hcatin,; chamber temperaturc 

b - Room temperatures 

c - Looiing chamber temperatures 

d - Room temperatures 


e i ^.... ..^ r ..-.^^ c.....,^ C-32 


` 

Pa^ê 22A of 3' 

I l

25 BIODEGRADATION TEST PROCEDURE 


A I IMt M GRnPIAl 1ienAi 

WNC-SD-W100-TI-003 Rev. 0 

ZS.1 new samples will be taken from each solidification prepared. 


25.2 All test work with the exception of compression strength tesring, will be 

subcontracted. United States Testing Company, 1415 Park Avenue, Hoboken, 

New Jersey will perform this work. 

153 The testing will be performed as per ASTM G22-76 and ASTM G21-70. 

25.4 The incubation time for the samples will be at least thirty (30) days. 

255 After the incubation period, the samples will be returned to Stock, where they will 

be compression tested, as per ASTM D695. Compression test results will be 

recorded on the Biodegradation Test Compressive Strength Data Sheet at the end 


C-33 

Page 23 of 3 7

Date: 


BIODECRADATION TEST 



Specimen Diameter Height Mass Load C-S. Density 

1.3bSlL inch1S= CM! E lbs pa1 Picc 


Technician Datc Technician Date 


A I lnit nf Qonoral Sinnal 

C-34 

_-_ P0°c a of 3", 

;is

Date: 


BIODEGRADATTON TEST 

POMPRESSIVE STRENGTH DATA SHEET 

PROCEDURE 90110-0 I 


Label sBShLsm sM t lbs osi _rlcc_ 


Technician Date Technician Datc 


] I Ini^ nl l:^nsrel Cinwa^ 

C-35 

Pa,e _.1A ' of= I

Date: 


BIODEGRADATION TEST 




Label inch/cm cm_ _'L_ lbs pi!_ 



c.__.. ^_..:-_e . r.......e.... 

Pagc ^ of ;;7 

=-.

^_... 

..^^ 

C:i1 

Date: 


RiODEGRADAT[ON TEST 

CQMPRFSSiVE DATA SHEEP 


Specimen Diameter Height Mass Load GS. Density 

Label iOchL®_ cm i. lbs psi _s62L- 

Reeord Additional Observation.s on Reverse 


Stock Eauipment Company 

C-37 

Page 25A of J'^

`v.. 

2.6 RADIATION TEST PROCEDURE 

Stnetr Fnuinmant Cmmnan. 


2.6.1 Three (3) samples from each soGdification will be tested. 


2.6.2 The samples will be sent to the Phoenix Memorial Laboratory, The Universiry of 

Michigan. 

2.6.3 The test procedure used by the Phoenix Memorial Laboratory will be returned 

with the samples upon completion of irradiation. 

2.6.4 Each sample will be irradiated until all accumulated dose of one (1) x 103 rads of 

gamma radiation had been achieved. 

=.6.s The samples will be returned to Stock where they will be compression tested per 

Section 2.1 Compressive Strength Test Procedure. Compression test results will 

be recorded on the Radiation Test Compressive Strength Data Sheet at the end 

of Scction 2.1. 

Page -;6 of ?7

Date: 


-- --- - -^-ncDwii^vF1 "cE 



Specimen Diameter Height Mass Load CS. Density 

Label inch/cm cm 1! lbs 031___ Y1cc 



Stock Eqtîpment Company C-39 

Page _7 of 37

Date: 


RADIATION TEST 



Soecimen_ Diameter Heieht Mass Load C.S. Density 

1aheL sahLSL cm i lbs 8i sLoc 




C-40 

Page 27A of _L7_ 

^:^'

f-^ 

-- 


2.7 PRESENCE OF FREE LIQUID TEST PROCEDURE 


2.7.1 The surface of the polymer matrix will be inspected for free liquid. If liquid is present 

it will be collected and the pH determined. The volume of liquid and pH will be 

recorded on the Presence of Free Liquid Data Sheet. 

2.7.2 The ullage for that particular container will be measured and recorded on the Presence 

of Free Liquid Data .cih'cet. - 

2.73 A.125' hole will be drilled into the side of the container one inch (1') below the top of 

the polymer matrix Any liquid that leaked from the hole will be collected, and the pH 

determined. The volume of liquid and pH will be recorded on the Presence of Free 

Ijquid Data Sheet 

2.7A At increments of one inch (I'), a.125' hole will be drilled and any liquid present will be 

collected and the pH determined. 'I7te volume of liquid and pH will be recorded on the 

Presence of Free Liquid Data Sheet. 

2.7.5 A final .125' hole will be drilled into the center of the bottom of the container. Any free 

liquid present will be collected and the pH determined. The volume of liquid and pH will 

be recorded on the Presence of Free l.iquid Data Sheet. 

2.7.6 The total volume of free liquid will be calculated and recorded on the Presence of Free 

liquid Data Sheet 

Stook Equipment CompanY 

C-41 

Page 2$ of 37,


Date: 

Ullage: inehes 

Height of Polymer Matrix: inches 

ist Hole 

2nd Hole 

3rd Hole 

4th Hole 

5th Hole 

6th Hole 

Bottom Hole 

Total Free Liquid Collected 

Record additional observations on reserve 


PRESENCE OF FREE LIQUID 

DATA SHEET 

Liauid Volume (mis) 

Technician 

Technician 

Engineering 

Stock Eauioment Comoam, C-42 

PROCEDURr 90ll0-0 

Date 

Date 

Date 

Pace -2L of 37 

;

^-..., 

3•0 

ASSAY FOR MEI'ALS 

3.1 INSTRUMENTATION 



The method chosen for the quantitive determination of cobalt, cesium, and strontium is 

atomic absorption spearophotometry. An Inmumentation Laboratories Video 11 

-pItoMlleter^ Model Number 07570. Serial Number 1207, will be used for all assay 

work. 7-e approprim itotlow--eathode lamps to be used a.... - 

Cobalt Cat. No. 62928-02 

Cesium Cat. No. 62823 

Strontium Cat. No. 62835 

3.2 MLTHODS DESCRIPTION 

The methods used to atomize the samples will be either flame or flameless. The 

flameless method involves aspirating the sample into a graphite furnace buvette, which is 

electrically heated to the temperature required for atomization. 

Due to the nature of the samples to be tested, it is not possible to provide a step-by-step 

procedure for the assay of these samples. However, the following procedure will be 

adhered to for all assays. 

- ^â- ----- --- - ---- - _ + + + The ,K. a.^.a ...., ,..,,. ^rtê.r_ ..._ .L,.1enraHon iahnratnries 

--- --- Methods Manual for flame and flameless 

operations will be used whenever possible. 

3A calibration curve of each metal of interest, in each matrix (D.L water or sea 

.vACer), will be prepared. Thesc calibration curves will be replicated as often as 

netestary 

-- --- -- gw^ Any chemical ,estnx modifiers (ie+ ammonium ttitnte) used in the assay will be 

identified and recorded on the Atomic Absorption Data Sheet. 

3.2.4 The element, matrix, wavelength, bandwidth, deposition time and background 

correction will be recorded on the Atomic Absorption Data Sheet. 

3.25 Any dilution required to bring the absorbance of a metal specie into the detection 

range of the instrument will be recorded. All dilutions will be volumetric 

dilutions. 

3.16 The method of atomization, flame or tlameless, will be recorded. 

3.2.7 Any modifications to the Instrumentation Laboratories methods used will be 

recorded. - 

3: .8 The Atomic Absorption Data Sheet will be kept in the separate binder. Each 

^ data sheet will be photocopies and stored in the Ouality Assurance vault. 

a"{ - 

Stock Eouioment Company C-43 

Page 30 of .47

...4..._^^ ^ 

---StOOk Cquipm@nt i.ompanr 



3Z9 For all assays, the original tape record of the values measure by the 

spectrophotometer will be labeled and stored with the Atomic Absorption Data 

•.^ . ^_ 

..._a-__e 

^. 

60t in [ . hc .,... 

. .. 

Jn 

VuYUty t^ u^w n.uL.^. - 

C-44 

Page .3J_ of 37

t..f 

f....,.. 

P....^ 

.-- ^ 

: .^ 

^-. 


ATOMIC ABSORPTION DATA SHEET 

Dats_ Operators(s) : 

Element: Matrbc 


Wavelength: nM Bandwidth: nM 

Disposition Timr. sec. Background Correction: 

Other. 

Average 

Specimen Concentration 

S.N. Label Time Point nb D ilution S.D. R.S.D. 


C-45 

Page }L of 'M

:4^ 

4.0 LEACHABILITY INDEX CALCULATIONS 



4.1 The method of calculating the leaehab0ity index will be the method used in ANS 16.1, 

June 20, 1984 Revision, Pages 20 to 33. 

If the cumulative fraction released of a given element exceed 20% of the original amount 

.-_ __bf-mef$1,Yite-pYdYfer-shape fSt4or-will-be-SlSed in calculating the eu'cct'iVe diffusivity. 

4.2 DATA RECORDINC 


AN leachabiity index calculations will be performed on the Leaehability Index Calculations 

Forms (see example at the end of this section). When all leachability calculations for a 

specimen are complete, the form will be photocopied and stored in the Quality Assurance 

vault 

C-46 

Page IL of 37

^c. 

v 

3 

0 w.3 

cn 

a 

v 

t[ACeRUtIIY IOPtxcnu%AYloNrlloN 

---- 

O 

w 

lo - 

M 

m -_^ 

.- _ 

d 

M 

I.rech 

1-lerv3l 

[lewent _ _ . 3 0, RInse Cont, (PPf) Oete 

Mstrle _ 

An 

(Ôs) 

- 

9 

!. 

OPentorft 

Senyile 1.0. - S.A. - cwt 11-_ ce 

6..c• 

M/r./Y 

ilwe 

In out 

,- 

IAI) 

f 

1-[(AtIn 

f 

Cone. 

Pr0 en ^ 

-- - - - 

en/A°' bn)'b 01 L 

- - --•• M 

- 

M 

SIC 

2 

^1 

lA v1 

xc 

0 

1 

-4 

., 

1 

0 

w 

7tf 

CD 

< 

0


APPENDIX A 

ASTM STANDARDS 

ASTM B553-79 Standard Test Method for Thermal Cycling of Electroplated Plastics 

ASTM D695 Standard Test Method for Compressive Properties of Rigid Plastics. 


ASTM 021-70 Standard Practice for Determining Resistance of Synthetic Polymeric Materials 

to Fungi. • 

ASTM 022-76 Standard Practice for Determining Resistance of Plastic to Bacteria 

These modifications are made for the following reason: 

1. Since the compression test stand used is accurate to twenty (20) pounds load 

(approximately ten (10) psi compressive strength), the maAmurn aocurary in compressrve 

strength is = ten (10) psi. The above modifications do not cause the compressive 

strength to vary by more than ten (10) psi at one thousand (1,000) psi (0.1%). Reference 

Stock Equipment Company Calculation Number 058-0. 

Stock Eq uipment Company 

A I Inil nf fiwnwrwl Rinnwl C-48 

Page-35 of _37


APPENDIX B 

SOLiDff7CATION GLOSSARY 


CATALYSf Atry substance of which a fractional percentage notably affects the 

rateAfz chemical rea_^*on without itself consumed or undergoing 

-- - a chemical change. 

COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH Th e maximum load per unit area that an object can withstand prior 

to breaking. 

SPECIMENS Cylindera of the solidified produce with the nominal dimensions: 1- 

7/16' Dia, Z' Height These cylinders are used for the testing of 

compressive strength. 

DISSOLVED SOLIDS In an aqueous system, the relative percentage of the total solids that 

exist in solution. 

EXOTHERM A plot of the temperature versus time. 

FINES Particles with a diameter less than 74 mierons, as determined by a 

Tyler sleeve. 

FREE STANDING LIQUID Liquid that is either. 

1. Visible on the surface of a solidifieation sample. 

2. Pours or leaks from a container upon the coetainen being 

breached or punctured. 

LAB SCALE Approximately one (1) gallon in volume. 

ONSET The start of a reaction. When used in conjunction with the term 

"exotherm', the start of the rise in temperature as a function of 

time. 

PARTS PER BILLION ppb 1 microgram per liter or one (1) mg per Itiloliter. 

PARTS PER MILLION ppm 1 milligram per gram, one (1) g per liter. 

PEAK The highest value attained. When used in conjunction with the 

tertn 'exotherm'.the highest temperature achieved. 

PLATEAU A region in the curve where 9X = 0. 

dx 


A I rft;f of C,w%.Hm Sinnal 

C-49 

Page J6 of ?^7



PROMOTER A substance which, when added in relatively small quantities to a 

catalyst, increases the catalyst's activity. 

SUSPENDED SOLIDS In an aqueous system, the relative percentage of the total solids 

more or less uniformly dispersed in the water. 

TOTAL SOLIDS In an aqueous system, the residue left after the evaporation of all 

the water. 


A Unit nf Gwnwrnl Sional 

C-50 

Page -27 of 37 

V.;



16490 Chillicothe Road 

Chagrin Falls, Ohio 4402Z 

___ PROMT)RIrNUMBER: 90109-0 

Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure 

(TCLP) 

Prepared Br. ^^1• _ """ 

Fria Podmore 

Nudear eering 

Reviewed By: ItC. I.itchney, Manager 

Nuclear Engineering 

A11proved Bx - r-, ti^^wC 1 4 4^ 

Michael J. Pavkov, ager 

Qual.., °.J^nw - 

SECTION: PROCEDURE - GENERAL 

SUBJECT: TOXICITY CHARACTERISTIC LEACHING PROCEDURE 

Date: t /94L 

Date: 

? Z Z 9 z 

Date: 22 2 

Revi s i o n L e tte r - 0 

Date Issued - Ju ly 22 . 1 

Page 1 of 22 

I Stock Eouipment Company Standa rds I Number - 90109 ^ 

sam No. 639-3-Daiee C-51

.Ê 

Stock Ea uipment Company 


fermlN¢SDA/a! 


TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure 

(TCLP) 

Pace 

1.0 Scope and Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 

2.0 Summary of Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 

3.0 Interferences .................................. 3 

4.0 Apparatus and Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 

4.1 Agitation Apparatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 

4.2 Extraction Vessel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . 4 

43 Filtration Devices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 

4.4 Filters ..................................... 5 

45 pI'I Metcrs . .. .. . . . . . . . .. . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . S 

4.6 Laboratory Balance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 

5.0 Reagents ..................................... 5 

6.0 Sample Collection, Preservation, and Handling . . . . . . . . . 6 

7.0 Preliminary TCLP Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 

7.1 Preliminary Determination of Percent Solids ........ 7 

7.2 Determination of Whether Waste is liquid 

or Has Insignificant Amounts of Solid Material ... 8 

7.3 Determinapon of `wnethEr the Wastes Require 

Particle-Size Reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 

7.4 Determination of Appropriate Extraction Fluid ..... 9 

8.0 Procedure when Volatiles are not Involved . . . . . . . . . . . 10 

9.0 Quality Assurance Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 

.b ..... ........... ........... . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 

F9gure Number 2 - Rotary Agitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 

Table Number I - Volatile Contaminates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 

Table Number 2 - Suitable Rotary Agitation Apparatusl ...... 18 

Table Number 3 - Suitable Zero-Headspaa Extractor Vessels . 19 

Table Number 4 - Suitable Filter Holdersl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 

Table Number 5 - Suitable Filter Media . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 

Appendix A ....................................... 22 

C-52 

Procedure 90109-0 

Page 2„ of 22 

. :a

19 SCOPE AND APPLICATION 



Toxicity Characteristic I.each Procedure 

F:'C•..P) 


1.1 The TC4P is designed to determine the mobility of both organic and inorganic 

contaminates present in liquid, solid, and multiphasic wastes. 

1.2 If a total analysis of the waste demonstrates that individual contaminates are not present 

in the waste, or that they are present but at such low concentrations that the appropriate 

regulatory thresholds could not possibly be exceeded, the TCLP need not be run. 

Us SUMMARY OF METHOD 

3.0 

21 For liquid wastes ( i.e, those containing insignificant solid material), the waste, after 

filtration through a 0.6-0.8 an glass fiber filter, is defined as the TCLP extract. 

2.2 For wastes comprised of solids or for wastes containing significant amounts of solid 

material, the particle-size of the waste is reduced (if necessary); the liquid phase, if any, 

is separated from the solid phase and stored for later analysis. The solid phase is 

extraeted with an amount of extraction fluid equal to twenty (20) times the weight of the 

solid phase. The extraction fluid employed is a function of alkalinity of the solid phase of 

the waste. A special extractor vessel is used when testing for volatiles (Reference Table 

1, Page 17). Following extraction, the liquid extract is separated from the solid phase by 

0.6 to 0.8 µtn glass fiber filter filtration. 

2.3 If compatible (i.e., multiple phases will not form on combination), the initial liquid phase 

of the waste is added to the liquid extract, and these liquids are analyzed together. If 

incompatible, the liquids are analyzed separately and the results are mathematically 

combined to yield a volume-weighted average connection. 

J 2- P-otcaaal--inte rznces _-strtriy__ - eacoynterea_dunnn ' anA ^ are discuSSed in 

-- - ^ -"-'^ 

the 

individual analytical methods. 

4.0 APPARATUS AND MATERIALS 

4.1 AGITATION APPARATUS 

Stock E p uipment Company 


Fp,n 41408-11tM/a6 

An aeceptable agitation apparatus is one which is capable of routing the extraction vessel 

in an end-over-end fashion (Reference Table 2, Page 18) at thirty (30) s two (2) rpm. 

Suitable devices known to EPA are identified in Table 2. 

C-53 

Page _I of 22

4.2i cna'""ianCiivN va:jSEL 



4.2.1 When the waste is being evaluated for other than volatile contaminates, an 

extraction vessel that does not preclude headspace (e.g. a two (2)-liter bottle) 

is used. Suitable extraction vessels include bottles made from various materials, 

depending on the contaminants to be analyzed, and the nature of the waste. 

It is recommended that borosilicate glass bottles be used over other types of 

glass, especially when inorganics are of concern. Plastic bottles may be used 

only if inorganics are to be investigated. Bottles are available from a number 

of laboratory suppliers. When this type of extraction vessel is used, the 

filtration device discussed in Step 43.1 is used for initial liquid/solid separation 

and final exuaet filtration. 

43 FILTRATION DLVICES 

Stock Eyuipment Company 


r^ ene.so-vss 

It is recommended that all filtrations be performed in a hood. 

43.1 Filter Holder 

When the waste is being evaluated for other than volatile compounds, a filter 

folder capable of supporting a glass fiber filter and able to withstand the 

pressure needed to accomplish separation is used. Suitable filter holders range 

from simple vacuum units to relatively complex systems capable of exerting 

pressures of up to fifty (50) psi or more. The type of filter holder used 

depends on the properties of the material to be filtered (Reference Step 432). 

These devices shall have a minimum internal volume of three hundred (300) 

mL and be equipped to accommodate a minimum filter size of forty-seven (47) 

mm. (Filter holders having an integral capacity of 1.5 liters or greater and 

equipped to accommodate a one hundred and forty two (142) mm diameter 

filter are recommended.) Vacuum filtration is only recommended for wastes 

with low solids content (less than ten percent (10%)) and for highly granular 

(liquid-containing) wastes. All other types of wastes should be filtered using 

positive pressure filtration. Filter holders known to EPA to be suitable for use 

are shown in Table 4 on Page 20. 

4.3.2 Materials of Construction 

Extraction vessels and filtration devices shall be made of inert materials which 

will not leaeh or absorb waste components. Glass, polytetrafluoroethylene 

(PTF'E), or type 316 stainless steel equipment may be used when evaluating the 

mobility of both organic and inorganic components. Devices made of highdensity 

polyethylene (HPDE), polypropylene, or polyvinyl chloride may be used 

only when evaluating the mobility of metals. Borosilicate glass bottles are 

recommended for use over other types of glass bottles, especially when 

inorganics are constituents of concern. 

C-54 

Page î of 22

L:^3 

ll 

Q. 

4 AA :'ILTEP.S 

WHC-0-W100-TI-003 Rev. 0 


Filters shall be made or borosilicate glass fiber, shall contain no binder materials, and shall 

have an effective pore size of 0.6-0.8 v.m or equivalent. Filters known to EPA to meet 

these specificaaons are identified in Table 5 on Page 21. Prefilters must not be used. 

When evaluating the mobility of metals, filtets shall be acid-washed prior to use by rinsing 

--with }.ONritrie-ac6d-folhnyed bythree{3}eonsecutivt rinses with doionized dist'led oter 

(a minimum of one (1) liter per rinse is recommended). Glass fiber filters are fragile and 

_U_..â U_ L__.u_a .... 

5.1GiiilY uc Itauaucu w1u, MrG. - 

4S pH METERS 

Any of the commonly available pH meters are acceptable. 

4.6 LABORATORY BALANCE 

^.0 REAGENTS 

Any-laboratory-ba}an'te-awr^,trate--Ylthin =0.01 g7a^T; may be used ( all weight 

measurements are to be within ± 0.1 gtam). 

5.1 REAGENT WATER 

Reagent water is defined as water in which an interferant is not observed at or above the 

method detection limit of the analyte(s) of interest. For nonvolatile extractions, ASTM 

Type II water, or equivalent meets the definition of reagent water. For volatile 

extractions, it is recommended that reagent water be generated by any of the following 

methods. Reagent water should be monitored periodically for impurities. 

5.2 1.ON hydrochloric add (HCl) made from ACS reagent grade. 

53 1.0N nitric acid (HNO3) made from ACS reagent grade. 

5.4 1.ON sodium hydro)dde (NaOH) made from ACS reagent grade. 

55 Glacial acetic acid (HOAJ ACS reagent grade water. 

5.6 EXTRACTION FLUID 



s^ sna•ao.ane 

5.6.1 Eztraction Fluid Number 1 

This fluid is made by adding 5.7 mL glacial HOAe to five hundred (500) mL 

of the appropriate water (Reference Step 5.1), adding 643 mL of 1.ON NaOH, 

and diluting to a volume of one ( 1) liter. When correctly prepared, the pH of 

this fluid will be 4.93 =0.05. 

C-55 

Page _L of 22

5.6.2 Extr9ction Fluid Number 2 



This fluid is made by diluting 5.7 mL glacial HOA, with ASTM Type II water 

(Reference Step 5.1) to a volume of one (1) liter. When correctly prepared, 

the pH of this fluid will be 2.88 x0.05. 

NOTE. It is suggested that these extrection fluids be monitored frequently 

for impurities. The pH should be checked prior to use to ensure that 

these fluids are made up accurately. 

5-7 Analytical-standardsshall br- preparcd atxording totheappxogria e-analyti^l -method. 

6_0 SAMPLE COLLECTION. PRESERVATION. AND HANDLINC 

6.1 All samples shall be collected using an appropriate sampling plan. 

62 At least three (3) separate representative samples of a waste should be collected. The 

first sample is used in several preliminary TCLP evaluations (e.g., to determine the 

percent solids of the waste; to determine if the waste contains insignificant solids (i.e., the 

waste is its own extract after filtration); to determine if a solid portion of the waste 

requires particle-size reduction; and to determine which of the two (2) extraction fluids 

are to-bc-used-for-the-nenvolatite T.^.._P e..;actior. of waste). The preliminary evaluations 

are identified in Seetlon 7.0. 

63 Preservatives shall not be added to samples. 

6.4 Samples can be refrigerated unless refrigeration results in irreversible physical change to 

the waste (e.g., precipitation). 

6.5 TCLP estracts should be prepared for analysis and analyzed as soon as possible following 

ratraction. -If-theyneed-to-bestored,-evea!s,+ras.hor*.-period of-tittte, storage^ sh ll be at 

4°C, and samples for volatile analysis shall not be allowed to come into contact with the 

atmosphere ( i.e. no headspace). Reference Section 9.0, Quality Assurance Requirements, 

for acceptable sample and excaet holding times. 

7_0 PRELIMINARY TCLP EVALUATION 

The-prelaninary-'d'CLP-evaluaeons are perfo.^ned on a minimum of one hundred ( 100) grams 

representative sample of waste that will not actually undergo TCLP extraction ( designated as 

the first sample in Step 6.2). These evaluations include preliminary determination of the 

percent solids of the waste; determination of whether the waste contains insignificant solids, and 

is therefore, its own extract after filtration; determination of whether the solid potion of the 

waste required particle-size reduction; and determination of which of the two (2) extraction 

fluids are to be used for the nonvolatile TCLP extraction of the waste. 

Stock E uipment Company 

A Unit o^ General Signal C-56 

F^ YOe-SOA/y 

Page A. of 22

4_T 

tJrD 

o,...Ys 

j 

^,.,. 


7.1 PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION OF PERCENT SOLIDS 

Stock EQ uipment Company 


Fp,n Me.3D•o/M 


Percent solids is defined as that fraction of a waste sample ( as a percentage of the total 

_Sample)--fr9tn-wl!lG3nn-llquld- nà''--bl-ft:._ 

below. 

^1ttt by an wi nppl.FU -applied --nrE -CS--.îT.. 

AF ^ 

- • - 

described 

r 

7.1.1 If the sample is liquid or multiphasic, liquid/solid separation to make a 

preliminary determination of percent solids is required. This involves the 

filtration device described in Step 43.1 and is outlined in Steps 7.13 through 

7.13. 

7.1.2 Preweigh the filter and the container that will receive the filtrate. 

7.13 Assemble the filter holder and fill following the manufacturer's instructions. 

Place the filter on the supportsereen and secure. 

7.1.4 Weigh out a representative subsample of the waste (one hundred (100) grams 

minimum) and record the wei;ht. 

7.1-5 Alow slu*ries to stand to permit the solid phase to settle. Wastes that settle 

slowly may be centrifuged prior to filtration. Centrifugation is to be used only 

as an aid to filtration. If used, the liquid should be decanted and filtered 

followed by filtration of the.solid portion of the waste through the same 

filtration system. 

7.1.6 Quantitatively transfer the waste sample to the filter holder ( liquid and solid 

phases). If filtration of the waste at 4•C reduces the amount of expressed 

liquid over what would be expressed at room temperature then allow the 

sample to warm up to room temperature in the device before filtering. 

NOTE If waste material (greater than one percent (1%) of original sample 

weight) has obviously adhered to the container used to transfer the 

sample to the filtntion apparatus, determine the weight of this 

residue and subtract it from the sample weight determined in Step 

7.15 to determine the weight of the waste sample that will be filtered. 

Graduallyapp4vaeuum or VxsleTrcv.re of one+-'# totgtl(10}-psi,-u^.r^l air 

--orpressurizingr"overthrough the filter.-if-this point is not reached under 

ten (10) psi, and if no additional liquid has passed through the filter in any two 

(2) minute interval, slowly increase the pressure in ten (10) psi increments to 

a maximum of fifty (50) psi. After each incremental increase of ten (10) psi, 

if the pressurizing gas has not moved through the filter, and if no additional 

liquid has passed through the filter in any two (2) minute interval, proceed to 

- the next ten (10) psi inerement. When the pressurizing gas begins to move 

through the filter, or when liquid flow has ceased at fifty (50) psi (i.e., filtration 

does not result in any additional filtrate within any two (2) minute period), 

filtration is stopped. 

C-57 

Page 7 of

WyC--c0141W- T_I-003 Rev. 0 


NOTL Instantaneous application of high pressure can degrade the glass 

_fiher filter and may cause premature plugging. 

7.1.7 The material in the filter holder is defined as the solid phase of the waste, and 

the filtrate is defined as the liquid phase. 

7.1.8 Determine the weight of the liquid phase by subtracting the weight of the 

filtrate container (Reference Step 7.1.2) from the total weight of the filtratefilled 

container. The weight of the solid phase of the waste sample is 

determined by subtracting the weight of the liquid phase from the weight of the 

total waste sample, as determined in Step 7.1.4 or 7.1.6. Record the weight of 

the liquid and solid phases. Calculate the percent solids using the following. 

Percent Solids = Weieht of Solid (Step 7.1.9) 

Total Weight of Waste x 100 

(Step 7.13 x 7.1.7) 

7.2 Determination of Whether Waste is Liquid or Has Insignificant Amounts of Solid 

Material 



Fem,M116-3041116 

If the sample obviously has a significant amount of solid material, the solid phase must be 

subjected to extract5on; proceed to Step 7.3 to determine if the waste requires particle-size 

reduction (and to reduce particle-size, if necessary). Determine whether the waste is 

liquid or has insignificant amounts of solid material (which need not undergo extraetion) 

as follows. 

7 21 Remove the solid phase and filter from the filtration apparatus. 

72.2 Dry the filter solid phase at one hundred (100) ^20'C until two (2) successive 

Weighings yieldzitesame_value within _1°Ja. Record final weight. 

NOTE Caution should be taken to ensure that the subject solid will not 

flash upon heating. It is recommended that the drying oven be 

vented to a hood or appropriate device. 

723 Calculate the percent dry solids as follows: 

Weight of Dry Waste and Filter - 

Percent Dry Solids = Tared Weiaht of Filter x 100 

Initial Weight of Waste 

(Step 7.1.4) 

C-58 

Page fi of 22


-, Procedure 90109-0 

f:^q 

--i^•.- 

s 

72.4 If the percent dry solids is less than 0S%u, consult Step 6.2 and proceed to 

Section 8.0 if nonvolatiles in the waste are of concern. In this case, the waste, 

after filtration is defined as the TCLP extract. If the percent dry solids is 

greater than or equal to 0.5%, and if the nonvolatile TCLP is to be performed, 

return to the beginning of this Section 7.0 with a new representative waste 

sample, so that it can be determined if particle-size reduction is necessary (Step 

7.3), and so that the appropriate extraction fluid may be determined ( Step 7.4) 

on a fresh portion of the solid phase of the waste. If only the volatile TCLP 

is to be performed, reference the NOTE in Step 7.4. 

7.3 Determination of Whether the Wastes Require Particle-Size Reduction (Particle-Size 

Reduced During this Step) 

is 

Using the solid portion of the waste, evaluate the solid for particle-size. If the solid has 

a surface area per gram of material equal to or greater than 3.1 em2, or is smaller than 

one (1) an in its narrowest dimension ( e.g, is capable of passing through a 95 mm (0375 

inch) standard sieve), particle-size reduction is not required (Proceed to Step 7.4). If the 

-surfaee area is smaller or-the particle=size irrger than described above, the solid portion 

-of thewaste is prepared for eatraation by er,ts.:ing, .:uarlr,g, or grinding the waste to a 

surface area or particle-size as described above. 

NOTE: Surface area requirements are meant for filamentous (e.g., paper, cloth) and 

similar waste materials. Actual measurement of surface area is not required; 

nor is it recommended. 

7 4 Deiermiaatien OfA'rv naie Facvaciinn rjiiiA 

PP P 



r,,,,, Moa•so.ans 

If the solid content is greater than or equal to 05% of the waste and if TCLP extraction 

for nonvolatile constituents will take place (Section 8.0), determination of the appropriate 

fluid (Step 5.6) to use for the nonvolatiles extraction is performed as follows. 

7.4.1 Weigh out a small subsample of the solid phase of the waste, reduce the solid, 

if necessary, to a particle-size of approximately one (1) mm in diameter or less, 

and transfer 5.0 grams of the solid phase of the waste to a five hundred 500 

mL beaker of Erienmeyer flask. 

7.4.2 Add 96S mL of reagent waster (ASTM Type II) to the beaker, cover with a 

watchglass and stir vigorously for five (5) minutes using a magnetic stirrer. 

Measure and record the pH. If the pH is less than 5.0, extraction fluid number 

one (1) is used. Proceed to Section 8.0. 

7.4.3 If the pH from Step 7.4.2 is greater than 5.0, add 3S mL 1.ON HCI, slurry 

briefly, cover with a watchglass, heat to 50'G and hold at 50°C for ten (10) 

minutes. 

C-59 

Page 9 of_71



7.4.4 Let the solution cool to room temperature and record the pH. If the pH is 

less than 5.0, use extraction fluid number one (1). If the pH is greater than 

5.0, use extraction fluid number 2. Proceed to Section 8.0. 

75 The sample of waste used for performance of the section shall not be used any further. 

Other samples of the waste (Reference Step 6.2) should be employed for the Section 8.0. 

L& PROCEDURE WHEN VOLATILES ARE NOT INVOLVED 

Although a minimum sample size of one hundred (100) grams (solid and liquid phases) is 

required, a larger sample size may be more appropriate, depending on the solids content of the 

waste sample (pereent solids, Reference Step 7.1) whether the initial liquid phase of the waste 

will be miscible with the aqueous exvact of the solid, and whether inorganies, semivolan'le 

organira, pesticides, and herbicides are all analytes of concern. Enough solids should be 

generated for extraction such that the volume of TCLP extraet will be sufficient to support all 

of the analyses required. If the amount of the extract generated$y the-performaiice of a'single 

TCLP extraction will not be sufficient to perform all of the analyses to be conducted, it is 

recommended that more than one (1) extraction be performed and that the extracts from each 

ern-action be combined and then aliquoted for analysis. 

8.1 If the waste will obviously yield no liquid when subjected to pressure filtration (Le. is one 

hundred percent (100%) solid Reference Step 7.1), weigh out a representative subsample 

of the waste (one hundred (100) grams minimum) and proceed to Step 8.9. 

8.2 If the sample is liquid or multiphasic, liquid/solid separation is required. This involves the 

filtration device described in Step 43.2 and is outlined in Steps 83 to B.S. 

83 Preweigh the container that will receive the filtrate. 

---- -----8.4-Aater.^.ble4lacfilter itolder and flater followint: the manufaeturer's instruetions. Place the 

filter on the support screen and seeure. Acid wash the filter if evaluating the mobility of 

metals (Reference Step 4.4). 

NOTE Acid washed filters may be used for all nonvolatile extractions even when 

metals are not of concern. 

85 Weigh out a representative subsample of the waste ( 110 grams minimum) and record the 

weight. If the waste was shown to contain less than 0.5% dry solids ( Step 7.3), the waste, 

after filtration is defined as the'f'Q,P extract. Therefore, enough of the sample should 

be filtered so that the amount of filtered liquid will support all of the analyses required 

of the TCLP eztract. For wastes containing greater than 05% dry solids ( Step 7.1 or 7.2), 

use the percent solids information obtained in Step 7.1 to determine the optimum sample 

size ( one hundred (100) grams minimum) for filtration. Enough solids should be 

generated after filtration to support the analyses to be performed on the TCLP extract. 


A Unit ot General Signal 

Fpm 6NdSDA/w 

C-60 

Page „]Q of 2^^ 



8.6 Allow slurries to stand to permit the solid phase to settle. Wastes that settle slowly may 

be eenfused prior to filtration. Centrifugation is to be used only as an aid to filtration. 

If used, the liquid should be decanted and filtered followed by filtration of the solid 

portion of the waste through the same filtration system. 

8.7 Quandtatively transfer the waste sample (liquid and solid phases) to the filter holder 

(Reference Step 43.2). If filtration of the waste at 4•C reduces the amount of expressed 

liquid over what would be expressed at room temperature, then allow the sample to warm 

up to room temperature in the device before filtering. 

NOTE If waste material (greater than one percent ( 1%) of the original sample weight) 

has obviously adhered to the container used to transfer the sample to the 

filtration apparatus, determine the weight of this residue and subtract it from 

the sample weight determined In Step 85, to determine the weight of the waste 

sample that will be filtered. 

Gradually apply vacuum or gentle pressure of one ( 1) to ten (10) psi, until air or 

pressurizing gas moves through the filter. If this point is not reached under ten (10) psi, 

and if no additional liquid has passed through the filter in any two (2) minute interval, 

slowly increase the pressure in ten ( 10), two ( 2) minute intervals, slowly increase the 

pressure irrten{18}* inaetnettts-tsriasdmum-offuty{i0)psi.- After-each incremental 

-ir.crcax of-rsn ( lm p^, if the pressurizing gas has not moved through the filter, and if no 

additional liquid has passed through the filter in any two (2) minute interval, proceed to 

the next ten ( 10) psi inaement. When the pressurizing gas begins to move through the 

_fiiter,Dr wherLtheJiquidflow-has-=asedacfifty(S0)psi ( 's,e« filtration does not result in 

any additional filtration within a two (2) minute period), filtration is stopped. 

NOTE Instantaneous application of high pressure can degrade the glass fiber filter 

and may cause premature plugging. 

8.8 The material in the filter holder is defined as the solid phase of the waste, and the filtrate 

is defined as the liquid phase. Weigh the filtrate. The liquid phase may now be either 

analyzed (Reference Step 8.13) or stored at 4•C until time of analysis. 

NOTE: Some wastes, such as oily wastes and some paint wastes, will obviously contain 

some material that appears to be a liquid. But even after applying vacuum or 

pressure filtration, as outlined in Step 8.7, this material may not filter. If this 

is the case, the material within the filtration device Is defined as a solid and 

is carried through the extragtiQn-a3-a solid. The-original filter is not to be 

replaced with a fresh filter under any circumstances. Only one (1) filter is 

used. 

stook Eq uipment Company 


F.,o, ena.w.ve, C-61 

Page I I of -M



8.9 If the waste contains less than 0.5% dry solids (Reference Step 7.2), proceed to Step 8.13. 

If the waste contains greater than U3% dry soiids (Reference Step 7:1-or 7.2), and if 

particle-size reduction of the solid was needed in Step 73, proceed to Step 8.10. If 

particle-size reduction was not required in Step 73, quantitatively transfer the solid 

material into the extractor vessel, including the filter used to separate the initial liquid 

from the solid phase. Proceed to Step 8.11. 

8.10 The solid portion of the waste is prepared for extraction by crushing, cutting, or grinding 

the waste to a surface area of particle size as described in Step 73. When the surface 

area of particle-size has been appropriately aitered, quantitauvely transfer the solid 

material into the extractor vessel, including the filter used to separate the initial liquid 

from the solid phase. 

NOTE: Sieving of the waste through a sieve that is not Teflon coated should not be 

done due to avoiding possible contamination of the sample. Surface area 

requirements are meant for filamentous (e.g. paper, cloth) and similar waste 

materials. Actual measurement of surface area is not recommended. 

8.41-Determine-GRe-Amout:t-af-F.xtraetion-F;uid-to-Add to t,he-Exterior-Vessel 

20 x Percent Solids (Step 7.1) x Weight of Waste Filtered 

Weight of Extraction Fluid = Steo 8.5 or 8.7 

100 

Slowly add this amount of appropriate extraction fluid (Reference Step 7.4) to the 

extractor vessel. Close the extractor bottle tightly (it is recommended that Teflon tape be 

used to ensure a tight seal), secure in rotary extractor device, and rotate at 30 =2 rpm for 

18 _2 hours. Ambient temperature (f.e., temperature of room in which extraction is to 

take place) shall be maintained at 2Y _3'C during extraction period. 

NOTE As agitation continues, pressure may build up within the extractor bottle for 

some type of wastes (e.g, limed or calcium carbonate waste may evolve gases 

such as carbon dioxide). To relieve excess pressure, the extractor bottle may 

be periodically opened (e.g, after fifteen (15) minutes, thirty (30) minutes, and 

one (1) hour) and vented into a hood. 

8.12 Following the 18 s2 hour extraction, the material in the extractor vessel is separated into 

its component liquid and solid phases by filtering through a new glass fiber filter, as 

outlined in Step 8.7. For final filtration of the TCl-P extract, the glass fiber filter may be 

chanaed, i_f_necessary^tofacilitate filtration. Filter(s) shall be acid washed (Reference Step 

4.4) if evaluating the mobility of metals. 

8.13 The TCLP Extract is Now Prepared 

8.13.1 If the waste contained no initial liquid phase, the filtered liquid material 

obtained from Step 8.12 is defined as the TCLP extract. Proceed to Step 8.14. 


A Unit of General Signal C-62 

fen„ 449a-SDA1e6 

Page JL of ^7

(FM 



8.132 If compatible ( e.g. multiple phases will not result on combination), the filtered 

liquid resulting from Step 8.12 is combined with the initial liquid phase of the 

waste as obtained in Step 8.7. This combined liquid is defined as the TCLP 

extract. Proceed to Step 8.14. 

8.13.3 If the initial liquid phase of the waste, as obtained from Step 8.7, is not or may 

not be compatible with the filtered liquid resulting from Step 8.12, these liquids 

are not combined. The liquids collectively defined as the TCLP eztract, are 

analyzed separately, and the results are combined mathematically. Proceed to 

Step 8.14. 

&14 Following collection of the TCLP extract, it is recommended that the pH of the extract 

be recorded. The extract should be immediately aliquoted for analysis and properly 

preserved (metal aliquots must be acidified with nitric acid to pH ±2; all other aliquots 

must be stored under refrigei•ation (40C) until anaiyzed)-.fhe-TCLP eztiract shaii be 

prepared and analyzed to appropriate analytical methods. TCLP extraess.to be analyzed 

for metals, other than mercury shall be acid digested. If the individual phases are to be 

analyzed separately, determine the volume of the individual phase (to ±0S%), conduct 

the appropriate analyses, and combine the results mathematically by using a simple volume 

wnivhMrl ..^. -- avernvf. 

-D_ - 

Final Analyte Concentration = L.V1=ILE21X21 

V1+V2 

Where: 

Vt - The volume of the first phase (liters). 

C1 - The concentration of the contaminant of concern in the first phase (mg/liters). 

V2 - The volume of the second phase (liters). 

C2 - The concentration of the contaminant of concern in the second phase 

(mg/liters). 

8.15 The contaminant concentrations in the TCLP extract are compared with the thresholds 

identified in the appropriate regulations. Refer to Section 9.0, Quality Assurance 

Requi l Cments. 

4,Q QiJAI.ITY ASSURANCE REOUIREMENTS 

9.1 AII data, including quality assuranee data, should be maintained and available for reference 

or inspection. - 

9.2 A minimum of one (1) blank (extraction fluid number 1) for every ten (10) extractions 

that have been conducted in an extraction vessel shall be employed as a check to 

determine if any memory effects from the extraction equipment arc occurring. 



Fmm 41,011-SD-0/06 

C-63 

Page _I;Z of 22,

^^T^•= 



93 For each analytieal batch (up to twenty (20) samples), it is recommended that a matrix 

----spike=oe--performed. Addition of matrix spikes should occur once the TCLP extract has 

been generated (i.e., should not occur prior to performance of the TCLP procedure). The 

purpose of the matrix spike is to monitor the adequacy of the analytical methods used on 

the TCLP extraet and for determining if matrix interferences exist in analyte detection. 

9A All quality control measures described in the appropriate analytical methods shall be 

followed. 

- - ---9§-"Ahe-method-of standard addition shall be employed for each anaiyte if. 

1. recovery of the compound from the TCLP extract is not between 50% and 

150%; or 

2. if the concentration of the constituent measured in the extract is within 20% 

of the appropriate regulatory threshold. If more than one (1) extraction is 

being-r-unon samples of the same waste (up to twenty (20) samples), the 

method of standard addition need be applied only once and the percent 

recoveries applied to the remainder of the extractions. 

9.6 Samples must undergo TQ.P extraction within the following time period after sample 

receipt. 

Stock EDuiomentCompany 


Fpm 64053DA/86 

Volatiles - Fourteen (14) Days 

Semivolatiles - Forty (40) Days 

Mercury - Twenty-Eight (28) Days 

Other Metals - One Hundred and Eighty (180) Days 

Extraction of the solid portion of the waste should be initiated as soon as possible 

following initial solidAiquid separation. TCLP exeracts shall be analyzed after generation 

and preservation within the following periods. 

Volatiles - Fourteen (14) Days 

Semivolatiles - Forty (40) Days 

Mercury - Twenty-Eight (28) Days 

Other Metals - One Hundred and Eighty (180) Days 

C-b4 

Page ]4 of 22

C... 6 

Wet Waste Sample 

Contains no or 

Insignifitxnt Nonfilterable 

Solids 

Liquid/SoGd 

Separation: 

0.6-0$ µm 

Glass Fiber 

Filtiation 

Liquid 

NIiC-Sfa-'d100-T1-003 Rev. 0 

FICURE NUMBER I 

TCLP FLOWCHART 

Representative 

Waste Sample 

Discard Dry Waste 

Solid Sample 

Reduce Partiek-Size if 

> I an in narrowest 

dimension or surface 

area

Stock EcûiD.^.tent Cam08ny 

A iJnM c Ganaral Sipnat C-66 

fp^w 

WHC-SD-W100-TI-003 Rev. 0

^..., 

. ,.y^ 

h:.r 

WHC-SD-WI00-Ti-003 Rev. 0 

TABLE 1 

VOLATILE CONTAMINANTS 

COMPO CAS NUMBER 

ACETONE 67-64-1 

N-BUTYL ALCOHOL 71-36-6 

CARBON DISULFIDE 75-15-0 

CARBON TETRA RIDE 56-23-5 

CHLOROBENZENE 108-90-7 

METHYLENE CHLORIDE 75-09-2 

METHYL ETHYL KETONE 78-93-3 

MÎ.IJOBUIIL I^L1ONE--.-.-_ ivv-iv-i - - - 

TETRACHLOROETHYLENE 127-18-4 

TOLUENE 108-88-3 

1.1.1 - TRICHLOROETHANE 71-55-6 

TRIClII.OROETHYL.ENE 79-01-6 

TRICHLOROFLUOROMETHANE 75-694 

XYLENE 1330-20-7 


Includes eompoundidentified in the Land Disposal Restrictions Rule. If any or all of these 

compounds are of eoneern, the zero-headspace extractor vessel shall be used. If other 

( nonvolatile) compounds are of ooneern, the conventional bottle extractor shall be used. 



iynn NfaMind/M 

Page _7 of ,22

?A.` 

f ?' 


TABLE 2 

SUITABLE ROTARY AGiTATION APPARATUSI 

COMPANY LOCATION MODEL 

Procedure 90109.0 

Associated Design and Manufacturing Alexandria, Virginia 4-Vessel Device 

Com pany (703) 549-5999 6-Vessel Device 

Lars Lande Manufacturing Ulhivnore Lake, Michigan 10-Vessel Device 

(313) 449-4116 5-Vessel Device 

IRA Machine Shop and Laboratory Santurce, Puerto Rico 16-Vessel Device 

(809) 752-4004 

EPRI Extractor 6-Vessel Device2 

Rexnord Milwaukee, Wisconsin 6-Vessel Device 

(414) 643-2850 

Analytical Testing and Consulting Warrington, Pennsylvania 4-Vessel Device 

Services, Inc. (215) 343-4490 

Any device that rotates the extraction vessel in an end-over-end fashion at 30 _2 rpm 

is acceptable. 

2 Although this device is suitable, it is not commercially made. It may also require 

retrofitting to accommodate ZHE devices. 



Fam 64911-0A/86 

Page ]8 of 22

:. 


TA3i.E 3 

SUITABLE ZERO-HEADSPACE HXTRACTOR VESSELS 


COMPANY LOCATION MODEL 

Associated Design and Manufacturing Alexandria, Virginia 3740-ZHB, Gas 

Company (703) 549-5999 Pressure Device 

MHlipore Corporation Bedford Massachusetts SD1 P581 C5. Gas 

(800) 225-3384 Pressure Devices 

Analytical Testing and Consulting Warrington, Pennsylvania C102, Mechanical 

Services, Inc. (215) 343-4490 Pressure Device 


A Unit o( General Signal C-69 

- - - -- Fane vmsdiiaiY 

Page _19 of 22


TABLE 4 

SUITABLE FII-TER HOLDERS' 


COMPANY LOCATION MODEL SIZE 

Nuclepore Corporation Pleasanton, California 425910 142 mm 

(800)182-7711 - 410400 47 mm 

Micro F-iltration Systems Dublin, California 302400 142 mm 

(415) 828-6010 

Millipore Corporation Bedford, Massachusetts YT30142HW 142 mm 

(800) 225-3384 )0C1004700 47 mm 

Any device capable of separating the liquid from the solid phase of the waste is suitable, 

providing that it is chemically compatible with the waste and the constituents to be 

analyzed. Plastic devices (not listed above) may be used when only inorganic 

eontaminants are of concern. The 142 mm size filters are recommended. 

Stock EGuipment Company 


Fenn 6495-SD-9199 

Page 20 of 22

^' . 

WHC-SD-W100-T1-003 Rev. 0 

TABLE 5 

SUITABLE FQ.TER MEDIA 

Whatman Laboratory Products, Uifton, New Jersey OFF 0.7 

Incorpo rated (201) 773-5800 


A Unit of Caeneral Signal C-71 

Psnn MhSD-^^w 


- ^^^? :^ LOCATION MODEL PORE SIZE1 

1 Nominal Pore Size 

Page ] of 22


APPENDIX A 


Hazardous characteristics of the solidified specimens will be performed per 40 CFR 261. The 

following characteristics will be determined: 

Flammab7ity, 

Corrosiveness, and 

Reaetivity. 

Stook Eouipment Company 

A Unit o( General Signal C-72 

F^ 6Y09-SD-9/16 

Page _;2 of _22

^- 

^-> 

^ 

C^Jl 

I I^t 

^.: 

l 

WHC-St]-W100-TI-003 Rev. 0


LEF'i° BLANK

c. 

03 

00 

r=3 

^t 

C^' 

II 6.0 II Calibration of Laboratory II PhysicaUMechanical Equipment List II 

I11 

All I W-277587 II Vendor Certificate f 

Instruments and Test Equipment Chemical as applicable Table 

I 

3 Test All ACS of Cemnlianne I 

$1 Lcachability Index and Inamersion Leachability and Leach Index is S^ (6) samples ANS 16.1 and Test Report 

Tests . Immersion greater than six (6) per waste fortr.t ASTM D695 

and strength is, (^4) 

greater than 60 psi, ^ 

after ninety (90) day 

immersio n. 

$3 Btodcgradanon Tests No growth. 

Strength is greates 

;: 

than 

P:rsisiance to 

btologica! 

':- Titrec (3) ,' 

samples per;. 

ASTM 021 and 022 

fASTM D695 

I ab Repoa' 

Test Renort 

60 ps mlestanon and wîste form - 

, wtirificanon of (12) 

a^ mP ressrve 

strength , 

WHC-SD-4i100-TI-003 Rev. 0


LEF7 BLANK

LY; 

^ 

C=l . 

^.^ 

.^,..,, 

€:^. 

MHC-SD-N100-TI-003 Rev. 0


LEF'i°BLANK

R: 

C=1 

rIj 

s^ ^ 

^.. 

WHC-SD-YlI00-TI-003 Rev. 0 

C-79/C-•80

THIS PAGE iNTENTIQNALLY 

LEFT BLANK

.,,_..1 

---^ - - 

i-•_E 

?*^^ 

Material Safety Data Sheet 

Product Code: 19631 


Product Name: DERAKANE 011 411-50 VINYL ESTER RESIN 

Effective Date: 06/18/91 Data Printed: 07/14/92 

1. INGREDIENTS: (% w/w, unless otherwise noted) 

Dow U.S.A. 

T^^''^0n^'^^mn~ 

Mq4tq, MKnqan 48574 

Em.wnry S17 • p6-Ya0 

Page: 1 

MSDS:000660 

Styrene monomer CAS/ 000100-42-5 35-505* 

Vinyl astiet-tesin "cASi 036425-16-8 BAL. 

*for specific percentage of styrene monomer found in this product, 

see section 9. 

This document is prepared pursuant to the OSHA Hazard 

Communication Standard (29 CFR 1910.1200). In addition, other 

substances not 'Hazardous' per this OSHA Standard may be listed. 

Where proprietary ingredient shows, the identity may be made 

available as provided in this standard. 

2. PHYSICAL DATA: 

BOILING POINT: 294F. 146C* 

VAP. PRESS: 7 essNg e20C* 

VAP. DENSITY: 3.6* 

SOL. IN WATER: Insoluble. 

SP. GRAVITY: 1.025-1.075 

APPEARANCE L ODOR: Straw yellow, viscous 

ODOR: Pungent styrene odor. 

*Based on styrene 

3. FIRE AND EXPLOSION HAZARD DATA. 

FLASH POINT: 74-84F 

METHOD USED: PMCC, ASTM 0-93 

FLAMMARL; IIMtT! 

LFL: 1.15 

UFL: 6.12 

(Continued on page 2) 

(R) Indicates a Trademark of The Dow Chemical Company 

C-81 

Iiquid - pungent


Dow Chemical U.S.A• Midland. MI 48674 Emergency Phone•. 517-636-4400 

Product Code: 19631 Page: 2 

Product Namc DERAKANE Otl 411-50 VINYL ESTER RESIN 

Effective Date: 06/18/91 Date Printed: 07/14/92 MSDS:000660 

3. FIRE AND EXPLOSION HAZARD DATA: (CONTINUED) 

EXTINGUISHING MEDIA: Water fog, foam, alcohol foam, CD2, dry 

chemical. 

FIRE & EXPLOSION HAZARDS: Upon exposure to heat or flame, an 

^_>.. exothermic reaction can develop, followed by decomposition of 

product. Keep vapors away from possible ignition sources. 

- - - - - - --FiRf`fiGHTiNG EQU1PMEkT: WEar-gLyy!es -..- and ,^r-^•*•"_^ ^-!..• r _SSUre, 

nr• 

- self-contained breathing apparatus. 

4. REACTIVITY DATA:. 

STABILITY: (CONDITIONS TO AVOID) Avoid storage in direct 

sunlight and at temperatures above 120F, 49C. 

INCOMPATIBILITY: (SPECIFIC MATERIALS TO AVOID) Oxidizing 

material 

HAZARDOUS DECOMPOSITION PRODUCTS: Pyrolysis products such as CO. 

HAZARDOUS POLYMERIZATION: May occur. Avoid contact with metal 

salts such as ferric and aluminum chlorides, unintended contact 

with peroxides, and depletion of inhibitor levels. Avoid 

exposure to direct sunlight or temperatures above 120F (49C). 

5. ENVIRONMENTAL AND DISPOSAL INFORMATION: 

----------- ACTION T0 TAKE FOR SPILLS/LEAKS: Treat as flammable liquid; keep 

heat, flame. or spark producing equipment away. Protect 

yE'S01nal-f-.•Exo- s;YLene-yapors.---Soak-up s{!iJ-1s iArabserbent 

material such as sand and collect in suitable containers. 

Residual resin may be removed using steam or hot soapy water. 

Solvents are not recommended for cleanup unless the recommended 



e An Operating Unit of The Dow Chemical Company 

C-82 

.:J


Dow Chemical U.S.IIa Midland. MI 48674 Emergency Phone 517-636-4400 


Product Name: DERAKANE (R) 411-50 VINYL ESTER RESIN 

Effective Date: 06/18/91 Date Printed: 07/14/92 MSOS:000660 

5. ENVIRONMENTAL AND DISPOSAL INFORMATION: (CONTINUED) 

exposure guidelines and safe handling practices for the specific 

solvent are followed. Consult appropriate solvent MSOS for 

handling inforwation and exposure guidelines. For large 

spills, evacuate upwind of spills and contain with dike. 

DISPOSAL METHOD: Resin can be disposed of through burning in an 

adequate incinerator or burying in an approved landfill in 

accordance with federal, state and local regulations. 

6. HEALTH HAZARD DATA. 

`'. EYE: May cause moderate irritation with corneal injury. Vapors 

may irritate eyes. May cause lachrymation (tears). 

SKIN CONTACT: Prolonged or repeated exposure may cause skin 

irritation. Material may stick to skin causing irritation 

upon removal. 

SKIN ABSORPTION: A single prolonged exposure is not likely to 

result in the material being absorbed through skin in harmful 

amounts. The LD50 for skin absorption in rabbits is expected to 

be >2000 mg/kg. 

INGESTION: Single dose oral toxicity is low. The oral LD50 

for rats is >4000 mg/kg. If aspirated (liquid enters the 

lung), may be rapidly absorbid through the lunys and result 

in injury to other body systems. _ 

INHALATION: Excessive vapor concentrations are attainable and 

could be hazardous on single exposure. Signs and symptoms of 

excessive exposure may be anesthetic or narcotic effects. 

Excessive exposure may cause irritation to upper respiratory 

tract. 



n An Operatiny Unit of The Dow Chemical Company 

C-is3


Dow Chemical U.SAa Midland MI 48674 Emergency Phone 517-636-4400 


Product Name DERAKANE Oil 411-50 VINYL ESTER RESIN 

Effective Date: 06/18/91 Oate Printed: 07/14/92 MSDS:000660 

6. HEALTH HAZARD DATA: (CONTINUED) 

SYSTEMIC (OTHER TARGET ORGAN) EFFECTS: 

Repeated excessive exposures to high amounts may cause central 

nervous system, liver, kidney effects and respiratory or eye 

irritation. Repeated excessive exposures to smaller amounts 

may cause central nervous system effects and respiratory or 

,.. 

;.., 

..--------- -- ---------- e,vg iltaz!-EiaQ-.._.$tyrene is reeorred to have caused hearing 

loss in laboratory animals upon exposure to high concentrations 

(sixteen times the TLV and higher); however, the relevance of 

this to humans is unknown. 

CANCER INFORMATION: 

This mixture contains a component which is listed as a 

potential carcinogen for hazard communication purposes _ 

under OSHA Standard 29 CFR 1910.1200. Components listed 

by IARC: styrene. Neither the data from various Iong-term 

animal studies nor from epidemiology of workers exposed to 

styrene provide an adequate basis to conclude that styrene 

is carcinogenic. 

TERATOLOGY ( BIRTH DEFECTS): 

------ 4e--l4boratory animals, styrene did not produce any effects 

on the fetus even at exposure concentrations having an 

adverse effect on the mother. 

REPRODUCTIVE EFFECTS: 

In animal studies, styrene has been shown not to interfere 

with reproduction. 

MUTAGENICITY (EFFECTS ON GENETIC MATERIAL): 

Results of in vitro ('test tube') and animal mutagenicity 

tests on styrene have been inconclusive. 



A An Operating Unit of The Dow Chemical Company 

C-84

^ 

±.£:a 

[7.p 

-;^ 

--- --------- 


Dow U.S.A. 

Material Safety Data Sheet '""^ro"^"'^;.,,`°";^;; 

Esuqsesy m ^ 176-N00 

Product Code: 19631 

Product Name DERAKANE Otl 411-50 V(NYL ESTER RESIN 

Effective Date: 06/18/91 Date Printed: 07/14/92 

1. INGHEOOiNiS: (% w/w, wkss atMrw(se aond) 

Styrene monomer 

Vinyl ester resin 

Page: I 

MSOS:000660 

CASI 000100-42-5 35-50f* 

CAS/ 036425-16-8 SAL. 

-A7orfpee,tie pzrttentaya of styrar.e mon-c-er found in this prOduet, 

see section 9. 

_ This docueent is prepared pursuant to the OSHA Hazard 

Coenwnication Standard (29 CFR 1910.1200). In addition, other 

substances not 'Hazardous' per this OSHA Standard may be listed. 

Where proprietary ingredient shovs, the identity may be made 

available as provided in this standard. 

Z PHYSICAL DATA. 

BOILING POINT: 294F, 146C* 

VAP. PRESS: 7 essNG e20C* 

VAP. DENSITY: 3.6* 

SOL. IN WATER: Insoluble. 

SP. GRAVITY: 1.025-1.075 

APPEARANCE & ODOR: Straw yellow. viscous 18quid - punqent 

ODOR: Pungent styrene odor. 

*Based on styrene 

1 F1RE AND EXPLOSION HAZARD DATk 

FLASH 74-84F 

METHOD USED: PMCC. ASTM 0-93 

FLAMMABLE LIMITS 

LFL: 1.15 

UFL: 6.15 



C-85


Dow Chemical U.S.Ae Midland. MI 48674 Emergency Phone: 517-636-4400 


Product Name: DERAKANE (RI 411-50 VINYL ESTER RESIN 


3. FIRE AND EXPLOSION HAZARD DATA: (CDNTINUED) 

EXTINGUISHING MEDIA: Water fog, foam, alcohol foam. C02. dry 

Chela i ca l . 

X-) FIRE 6 EXPLOSION HAZARDS: Upon exposure to heat or flame, an 

`^-^^'----- -- --- -------- ---e:

WHC-S®-hi1.00-T'.-00?, Rev. 

Dow Chemical Midlan4 MI 48674 Emergency Phont 517-636-4400 

Code: 19631 Page: 3 

Product Name DERAKANE (R) 411-50 VINYL ESTER RESIN 


- S--MlRDNMEBRAI.-AA10 DISPOSAL INFORMATION: (CONTINOED) 

exposure guidelines and safe handling practices for the specific 

solvent are followed. Consult appropriate solvent MSDS for 

handling information and exposure guidelines. For large 

spills. evacuate upwind of spills and contain with dike. 

DISPOSAL METNOD: Resin can be disposed of through burning in an 

adequate incinerator or burying in an approved landfill in 

accordance with federal. state and local regulations. 

6. HEALTII NAZARO OATII• 

EYE: May cause moderate irritation with corneal injury. Vapors 

may irritate eyes. May cause lachrpsation (tears). 

SKIN CONTACT: Prolonged or repeated exposure may cause skin 

irritation. Material may stick to skin causing irritation 

upon removal. 

SKIN ABSORPTION: A single prolonged exposure is not likely to 

result in the material being absorbed through skin in harmful 

--------- amounts. The L050 for skin absorption in rabbits is expected to 

be >2000 mg/kg. 

INGESTION: Single dose oral toxicity is low. The oral LD50 

for rats is>i000 mqf>-Cq: -if aspirated (li0uid eRters the 

lung). may be rapidly absorbed through the lungs and result 

in injury to other body systems. 

INHALATION: Excessive vapor concentrations are attainable and 

could be hazardous on single exposure. Signs and syeptoms of 

eIIc!lsiVe i7lposiire may be a.e'thetic or narcotic effects. 

Excessive exposure may cause irritation to upper respiratory 

tract. 



* An Operating Unit of The Dow Chemical Company 

C-87


Dow Chemicai USAe niidiand, nni 48674 Emergency Phonr. 517-636-4400 


Product Name: DERAKANE Otl 411-50 VINYL ESTER RESIN 


6. HEALTH NAZARD DATII• (CONTINUED) 

SYSTEMIC ( OTHER TARGET ORGAN) EFFECTS: 

Repeated excessive exposures to high amounts may cause central 

-------- nervous systes, liver, kidney effects and respiratory or eye 

irritation. Repeated excessive exposures to smaller aswunts 

-^-! may cause central nervous system effects and respiratory or 

eye irritation. Styrene is reported to have caused hearing 

^l`- -_...:. ---- - --------lost--ifi-PabBrttLry--ania.}!S -upori exposure to high concentrations 

(sixteen times the TLV and higher); however, the relevance of 

----- -- tlti-s--to husans is unknown. 

CANCER INFORMATION: 

This mixture contains a component which is listed as a 

--------- ----------- --- 

-- - 

- w--•. -..•:..^ ., '._.rrt,.enen- for haiard commrnication purposes 

'-'- - - 

under•05MA Standard 29 CFR 1910.1200. Components listed 

_ by i1RCo styr.rw. °_+ ,^, ...r, t.e data _._ from rvarious lo nq-term 

animal studies nor from epidemiology of workers exposed to 

styrene provide an adequate basis to conclude that styrene 

is carcinogenic. 

TERATOLOGY ( BIRTH DEFECTS): 

--- In laboratory animals. styrene did not produce any effects 

on the fetus even at exposure concentrations having an 

adverse effect an the sother. 

REPRODUCTIVE EFFECTS: 

In animal studies, styrene has been shown not to interfere 

with reproduction. 

MUTAGENICITY ( EFFECTS ON GENETIC iMATERiAL)e 

Results of in vitre ( 'test tube') and anioal outagenicity 

---- ---- ------ -- tests--a.^. styrene have been inconclusive. 

(Continued on oaae 5) 



C-88

t;7_7 

,...:: ----------- 


Dow Chemical U.SA• Midland. NO 48674 Emergency Phone: 517-636-4400 


Product Namt: DERAKANE DO 411-50 VINYL ESTER RESIN 

Effective Date: 06/18/91 Date Printed: 07/14/92 MSOS:000660 

7. FIRST AID: 

EYES: Irriqate with flowing water immediately and continuously 

for 15 minutes. Consult medical personnel. 

SKIN: Wash off in flowing water or shower. 

INGESTION: Do not induce"vomiting. Call a physician and/or 

transport to emergency facility immediately. 

INHALATION: Remove to fresh air. If not breathing, give 

mouth-to-mouth resuscitation. If breathing is difficult, give 

oxygen. Call a physician. 

NOTE TO PHYSICIAN: The decision of whether to induce vomiting 

or not should be made by the attending physician. If lavage is 

... performed, suggest endotracheal and/or esophaqeal control. 

Danger from lung aspiration must be weighed against toxicity 

when considering emptying the stomach. No specific antidote. 

Supportive -^-•-, Treatment based on judgment of the physician 

in response to reactions of the patient. 

8. HANDLING PRECAUTIONS: 

ERPOSURE GUIDELINE(S): Styrene, monomer: ACGIN TLV and OSHA PEL 

are 50 Pont TWA. 100 ppm STEL. 

VENTILATION: Provide general and/or local exhaust ventilation 

to control airborne concentrationsbelow the exposure 

guideline. 

RESPIRATORY PROTECTION: Atmospheric levels should be maintained 

below the exposure guideline. When respiratory protection 

is reouired for certain operations, use an approved airpurifying 

respirator. 




C-89

'NJ^.' _11-'M.,:' ;,'- .,-.v. 

Dow Chemital U.S.A.* -(Nidiand, n"1 49674 Emergency 

Phone: 517-636-4400 

Product Code: 19631 ---- -Page: 6 

Product Name: DERAK/WE OD 411-50 VIN1'L ESTER RESIN 

Effective Date: 06/18/9l Date Printed: 07/14/92 RSDS:000660 

& HANDLING PRECAUTIDNS.` ICONi1NUED1 

...._e SKIN PROTECTION: For brief contact, no preeautions other than 

clean body-covering clothing should be needed. When prolonged 

or freQuently repeated contact could occur. use protective 

clothing impervious to this material. Selection of specific 

itps such as gloves, boots, apron or full-body suit will 

t 

depend on operation. 

.-;.., --- ----- 

_____ ----EYE PROTECTfON: Use chemical goggles. If veDOr exposure causes 

eye discomfort. use a full-face respirator. 

9. IIDD(TIONAL INFORNIATION: 

SPECIAL PRECAUTIONS TO BE TAKEN IN HANDLING AND STORAGE: 

Practice good care and caution to avoid skin and eye contact 

and to avoid breath:ng vapors. For additional precautions, see 

Oow Bulietin. OERAKANE (R) Vinyl Ester Resins - Fabricating 

Tips. 

RSDS STATUS: Revised section 9. 

The following products are represented by master 1660. The specific 

composition of styrene monomer found within each product is 

indicated as follows: 

Derakane 111-35 VER ( 19691) ......................................35`. 

Derakane 411-35 Low Inhibitor VER (19774)........................ 35`+ 

Derakane 411-45 VER ( 19633) ......................................45: 

Ozrikane :)1-49 Low Inhibitor VER (19678) ........................ 45 

Intermediate Vinyl Ester Res7n 145 ( 08e08) ........... :::........ 45$ 

Oerakane #Ti-50 ( :a63))...: .....................................505 

Intermediate Vinyl Ester Resin 150 (08809) .......................§0S 

For information regarding state/provincial and federal regulations see 



C-90


Daw M.. uê Mldland, MI 48674 Emergency Phone 517-636-4400 

Product Code: 19631 Page: R-1 

Product Name: DERAKANE gri 411-50 VINYL ESTER RESIN 


REGULATORY INFORMATION: (Not meanl to be all-inclusive--seleead 

regutmfeas represemedJ 

NOTICE: The information herein is presented in good faith and believed 

to be accurate as the effective date shown above. Mowever, no 

warranty, express or ioplied, is given. Regulatory requirements are 

subject to change and may differ from one location to another; it is 

the buyer's responsibility to ensure that its activities comply with 

federal, state or provincial. and local laws. The following specific 

- ---- - °-information ' ^ 8 for the -rpo±e of eomplyiny with numberous federal, 

state or provincial, and local laws and regulations. See MSb Sheet for 

health and safety information. 

U.S. REGUUITIONS 

.............r 

SARA 313 INFORMATION: This product contains the following substances 

subject to the reporting requirements of Section 313 of Title III of 

the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 and 40 CFR 

Part 372: 

CHEMICAL NAME CAS NUMBER CONCENTRATION 

---------------------------------------------------------------------- 

STYRENE 000100-42-5 35 -50 = 

SARA HAZARD CATEGORY: This product has been reviewed according to the 

------€PA"1a3ard-Categories" promulgated under Sections 311 and 312 of the 

Superfund Amendment and Reauthorization Act of 1906 (SARA Title III) and 

is considered• under appiiEahl- _efinitiens, to meet the following 

categories: 

An inaediate heaith hazard 

A delayed health hazard 

A fire haxard 

A reactive hazard 

(Continued on page R-2) 



C-91

Dow Chemical U.SAa Mid!and, MI 48674 Emergency Phone: 517-636-4400 

Product Code: 19631 Page: R-2 

Product Blame: UERAKANE uu 411-50 .^:'4: E.,( ,o,ES!N 


REGULATORY INFORMATION (CONTINUED) 

CANADIAN REGULATOINS 

-- --------- Ti.. Werkelace Mazardous Materials Information System (W.M.M.!.S.) 

C!assificat!on for this product is: 

82 

02A 

^ 026 

----------------------------- 

The Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act (T.D.G.A.) classification for 

this product is: 

Resin Solution/Class 3.3/UN1866/111 


The Information Herein Is Given In Good Faith. But No Warranty. 

Express Or Implied, is Made. Consult The Dow Chemical Company 

For further Information. 

* An Operatinq Unit of The Dow Chemical Company 

C-92 

a:

^ ^..rYfl VF •UIYb 

1 1 

AGA GllS. NC. Cr6) 642Ee0o 

s225 oAKTRE£ eotaFVario 

P.O. 6oX 94737 

CLEVBJWD, OH 441011TS7 

Rev. 0 

PnOO . NN+ CA4 • 

Carbon Dioxide 124-38-9 

TaAOE wW[ A.,o sYNaWw 

OOT u^. ra: 

.'..Ok YL 

MATERIAL 

SAFETY 

DATA SHEET 

NO. 15 

Carbon Dioxide ; Carbonic Anhyd rid e ^„^^ 

UN 1013 

014EMIrxwwE•w3Ynonr Oivision 2.2 

Carbon Dioxide 

fSSUE oAT[ An011EN40N9 Ch@yy FavYr 

Revised February 1991 CaT.bonate 

HEaLTH wsfeQn nere 

TI AYEfiA EY Rfe UMI --- 

5,000 Mo1ar PPM• ST0. = 30,000 Molar PPM (AC6IH I990-1991). ' OSHA 1989 TWA = 10,000 Nola 

PPM; SiEL a 30,600 Motar PPM 

J.wi.IV.IJVa'LV'VJYaar . . - . 

Inhalation : Low concentrations (3-5 molar %) cause increased respiration and headache. 

Eight to 15 molar S concentrations cause headache, nausea and vomiting which may lead to 

unconsciousness if not moved to open air or given oxygen. 

High concentrations cause rapid circulatory insufficiency leading to cooB and death. 

TOXICq60pIC/1L PROPEfiT1ES 

Carbon dioxide is the most powerful cerebral vasodilator known. Inhaling large concentTations 

causes r=apid circuiaPrry insufficiency leading to colrm and death. Chronic, 

harmful effects are not known frxn repeated inhalation of low (3-5 molar Z) 

' _^..--..-.-..-..-. 

Carbon dioxide is not listed in the IARC, NTP or by OSHA as a carcinogen or potential 

carcinogen. 

Persons in ill health where such illness would be aggravated by exposure to carbon 

dioxide should not be allowed to work with or handle this product. 

MGOMrEMDED qRaf AIO TREAif/elYf • 

PROMPT MEDICAL ATTENTION IS MANDATORY IN ALL CASES OF OvEREXPOSURE TO CARBON DIOXIDE. 

RESCUE PERSONNEL SHOULD BE EpUIPPED NITH SELF-CONTAINED BREATHING APPARATUS. 

Inhalation : Conscious persons should be assisted to an uncontaminated area and inhale 

fresh air. Quick removal from the contaminated area is most important. Unconscious 

persons should be moved to an uncontaminated area, given assisted respiration and 

supplemental oxygen. Assure that vomited material does not obstruct the airway by use 

of positional drainage. Further tr'eatment should be symptomatic and supportive. 

C-93 

C02



C-94


APPENDIX D 

CHARACTERIZATION DATA 

A. An overview of characterization data used in this stage of Waste Form 

Qua7ification testing. 

B. Two memos prepared by WHC Chemical Process Engineering Group. The first 

summarizes the "to date" characterization data on the 183H Basin wastes - 

the largest volume of the currently stored low level mixed waste types. 

The second memo describes the recommended waste forms for the various 

basin wastes and some to the future generated waste streams (LETF and 

Incinerator Ash). 

memo i: JBW-183-I701 

Memo 2: CPE-WOG-002 

C. Four WHC generated Internal Letter Reports reviewing the records of the 

contents of all currently stored low-level mixed waste at the Hanford 

Site. The characterization data and the EPA waste codes were used to 

group the containers into lots of similar waste types for processing. 

A technical evaluation was then performed (by a solidification technology 

expert) as to the best treatment approach for each lot. The rationale 

for the treatment selection is included. 

Memo numbers: 87330-92-MLS-023, -025, -026, and -028. 

D-1



R_. 9 

- u-G 

r"T

CHARACTERIZATION DATA 

Part A: Overview of Characterization Data 

The purpose of the WRAP 2A facility is to receive and process for disposal 

mixed radioactive-hazardous wastes received at the Hanford Site. These wastes 

C iiz%"wid%^'%#'tEt}^$f 

r rr ^ 

Tr^'at£Y'i%i^ fruiii a iûiiiGEr Or d1TTerellt faC11it1eS. 

A any of these wastes are already in storage, but some are anticipated from 

near-term future facilities. The largest volume generators include the 

following: 183-H Basin, the C-018 Liquid Effluent Treatment Facility (LETF) 

to treat the 300 Area Process Sewer, the Low Level Mixed Waste ( LLMW) thermal 

treatment facility, and the L-045 LETF ( treat or stabilize evaporator 

overheads). This represents roughly 80% of the waste expected at WRAP 2A. A 

detailed search of the waste generating and receiving records have been made 

to collect and summarize the available waste characterization data. 

183-H Basin Wastes 

A summary of the basin wastes (in dry form) is given below. It includes the 

ae:^ basin sand blasting grit from cleaning up the basins after removal of basin 

solid and liquid wastes. 

„"._F 

f_n_p.r_ _ 

in î.nn rl..'n_ra 

Sodium 29%Zirconium4% 

Sulfate 29%Silical% 

Copper 17%Uraniumtrace 

Nitrate 11%Technetium-99 trace 

Fluoride 9% 

Basin 1 - Outer Sludge 

Sodium 29%Silicon3% 

Sulfate 46%Nitrate2% 

Fluoride 9%Uraniumtrace 

Copper 8%Technetium-99 trace 

Zirconium 3% 

Basin 1 - Sorbed Liauid 

The 1iq;rid, wet-sludge-,- asrd eryst-aili-ne rrteriai was removed and sorbed onto 

probably a diatomaceous earth absorbent. The liquid fraction was probably 

mostly sodium nitrate, possibly some sodium sulfate, with a slight trace of 

- uranium and possibly technetium. 

Basin 2 - Sludge 

Copper 28%Zirconium6% 

Nitrate 30%Silicon4% 

Sodium 21%Fluoride2% 

Sulfate 9%Uraniumtrace 

D-3

Y:,Cse 

Basin 3 - Sludqe 

Sodium 31%Sulfate5% 

Nitrate 35%Fluoride2% 

Copper 15%Uraniumtrace 

Zirconium 12% 

Basin 3 - Crystals 

Sodium 62%Nitrate2% 

Sulfate 30%Uraniumslight trace 

Fluoride 6% 

Ba5 i n 4 - 

Sodium 

IJ;+^.^+.. 

1.1 1 GLO 

Sulfate 

Sludae 

38%Fiuoride2% 

47%iiraPi i uiTitrace 

13% 

Basin 4 - Crystals 

;N`^ 

v>, 

Sodium 

Nitrate 

Copper 

Zirconium 

38%Sulfate3% 

35%Fluoride2% 

16%Uraniumslight 

6% 

trace 

Basin 2 - Sorbed Liauid 


The liquid and entrained solids was thought to be sorbed on to Sorbond LPC-II, 

a calcium type absorbent. The chemical content of the liquid is given below: 

Sodium 27%Uraniumtrace 

Nitrate 73%Technetiumslight trace possible 

Sand Blast Grit 

The grit is at least 90% grit, the balance being a mixture of basin salt, 

sludge, dirt and sand, and liner material. 

Wastes designated Grit 1 and Grit 2 constitute a large volume of drummed basin 

wastes at the present time. The grit wastes were generated from cleaning 

basins I and 4. Gr_it_1 wasamixturQ of_sand blast grit plus the residual 

basin sludge. Grit 2 was a mixture of sand blast grit plus basin 4 sludge. 

These wastes are top priority for WRAP 2A processing. The waste compositions 

and representative surrogate wastes composition procedure for cement based 

testing is given below: 

D-4

Grit 

Specie or MaterialOverall Content 

Sand Blast Grit 90% 


Basin I Sludgel0% 

• Sodium = 29% 

• Sulfate - 29% 

• Copper - 17% 

• Nitrate - 11% 

• Fluoride - 9% 

• Zirconium - 4% 

• Silica - 1% 

• Molybdenum - 0.05% (uranium stand-in) 

• Ruthenium - 0.05% (technetium stand-in) 

• Chromium VI - 0.05% 

Grit 2 : 

Soecie or Material0vera1l Content 

Sand Blast Grit90% 

Basin 4 Crysta110% 

• Sodium - 38% 

• Nitrate - 47% 

• Sulfate - 13% 

• Fluoride - 2% 

• Molybdenum - 0.05% (uranium stand-in) 

• Chromiur VI - 0.05% 

• Cobalt i: - 0.01% 

• Strontium II - 0.01% 

The basin sludge portion of the Grit 1 surrogate was produced by weighing the 

appropriate amount of copper metal powder and dissolving it in dilute nitric 

acid which provided the nitrate. Zirconium powder, sulfuric acid, and 

hydrofluoric was added and mixed with the liquid in the preceding sequence. 

Sodium carbonate was used to neutralize the liquid, and then the chemical 

tracer compounds were added. The final pH was adjusted to a neutral value 

with nitric acid and sodium carbonate as appropriate. The liquid was dried, 

-- mil_fied, cieved to =20 mesh,--and- blended p^rior to use. 

The basin crystal portion of Grit 2 surrogate waste was made by weighing and 

dissolving the appropriate proportions of sodium nitrate, sodium sulfate, 

sodium fluoride, and sodium carbonate in water. The trace compounds were also 

added and stirred into the mixture. The liquid was then dried, milled, sieved 

to -20 mesh, and blended prior to use. Some carbonate was added as a source 

of sodium. 

L-045 LETF (300 Area Process Sewer Treatment Sludge) 

i.y -The 300 Area, in the past, has typically generated in excess of a million 

gallons per day of process water. The process sewer stream is monitored 

D-5


for radioactivity at-keylocations_and di-versioncapability is available to 

prevent all but very low level contamination in the stream. There has been 

and continues to be some light chemical contamination of the system at times, 

making the waste stream hazardous. A waste minimization effort is presently 

in place to reduce the overall volume by a factor of 5 to 10 by eliminating 

cooling water and other large volume flows. However, this is expected to 

increase chemical concentrations in the stream increasing the risk of it being 

hazardous more of-the time. A LETF is planned that will use a ferrichydroxide-sulfide 

flocculation water treatment method to remove the bulk of 

--the chemical contaminants and any residual radionuclides that might be 

present. This proposed facility has yet to define-exactl. whatvalume or 

composition of mixed waste might be generated. However, ferric hydroxide is 

unstable in air to decomposition to ferric oxide hydrate (rust). A surrogate 

waste composition of ferric ( iron) oxide, sodium sulfide, polymer flock, and 

trace chemicals was weighed, milled, and blended. The chemicals were all dry 

(water free) so no drying was performed. There was a batch of ferrichydroxide-sulfide 

flock produced, washed, dried, and milled. A sample of the 

flock was submitted for analysis and two test cubes were made to verify the 

ferric oxi-de surrogate mixture. 

The actual ferric oxide mixture used is given below: 

r'erric Oxide Sludge Mix 

98.7% - 

1.3% - 

0.07%- 

0.01%- 

0.01%- 

0.01%- 

ferric oxide reagent 

sodium sulfide 

Polymer flock 

mercury chloride 

trichlorethylene 

chromium oxide 

ow-Level Mixed Waste Incinerator 

---- -- - i'+=Lt^,^J -i-ncj nerator--or -siatfl ar--equipmert i s- pi afiReu' for future i nstal l ati on at 

the WRAP facility. The primary waste generated by the incinerator is ash. 

Tfie composition of the ash is very dependent upon the materials to be 

processed. - Rubber products such as gloves have a high solids residue (>5%). 

Plastic materials and resins have a very low residue content (


The incinerator ash mix used is given below: 

Incinerator Ash Mix 

Specie or MaterialOverall Content 

Fly ash 90% 

Clay 8% 

Sand 

Chromium VI 

Cooeer iT 

2% 

0.01% 

O . A1% 

-rr-• 

Cesium 

0.01% 

Cerium 0.01% (transuranic stand-in) 

Ruthenium 0.01% (technetium stand-in) 

Mercury II 0.01% 

^.. Barium 0.01% 

Lead 0.01% 

Silver 0.01% 

Selenium 0.01% 

Cadmium 0.01% 

=.` 

C-018 LETF 

The C-018 LETF is planned to treat the evaporator overhead liquids. The 

primary waste in the overheads is ammonia plus residues of_organics. The LETF 

facility will be designed to stabilize the ammonia as ammonium sulfate using 

sulfuric acid to neutralize it and destroy the organics chemically (ozone, 

ultraviolet). The ammonium sulfate will likely contain a slight trace of 

radioactivity (tritium and volatile radionuclides) plus some trace chemicals 

making it a ca ndidate mixed waste material. A representative surrogate waste 

mixture is giv en below: 

C-018 LETF: 

Soecie or MaterialOverall Content 

Ammonium Ion 26% 

Sulfate72% 

Nitratel.2% 

Silicon0.6% 

Chromium VI 0.07% 

Fluoride 0.05% 

Copper II 0.02% 

Cerium 0.02% ( transuranic stand-in) 

Nickel II 0.005% 

Mercury II 0.001% 

Cesium 0.001% 

Strontium 0.001% 

The materials were weighed in the dry form milled to -20 mesh, and blended. 

---------f,ummerc;al- grade fertilizer was used for the basic ammonium sulfate material. 

D-7


From: Chemical Process Engineering JWB-183H-001 

Phone: 6-1778 L5-31 

--- Date: .June 25, 1go2 

Subject: 183-H Solar Basin Waste Characterization 

To: J.L. Wescott H2-58 

cc: D.A. Burbank H1-60 

W.O. Greenhalgh L5-31 

J.A. Hunter L5-31 

C.A. Petersen H1-60 

J.G. Riddelle H2-58 

K.M. Weingardt H1-60 

E.A. McDaniel ORNL 

Attached is the "to date" characterization data for the 183-H Basin wastes. 

With the characterization data is a summary chronology, as best as can be 

determined, of events involved in the cleanup of the 183-H Basins. 

The information contained in the attachment was gathered from several sources. 

The primary source for the characterization data was the 183-H Solar 

Evaporization Basins Closure/Post-Closure Plan (Rev. 2). Other information 

was obtained from various letters and field notes generated during the cleanup 

operations. 

Since some of the information is 6 to 7 years old it is very difficult to 

verify any of the information. Therefore, all data should be viewed with some 

degree of uncertainty. 

As- more inforrttatien is fourd lt wrl te trammitted as an updaie to this 

letter. 

It 

Biglin 

D-8


183-H BASINS 

CLEANUP CHRONOLOGY 

Oct 1984 Basin 1 sampled 

Wet sludge ( inner basin) 

Dry crystalline ( outer basin) 

Liquid phase 

6-25-92 

BASIN 1 SOLID SAMPLES 

CONTSTITUENTS GREATER THAN 19'. 

(Table I .A-5 183-H Basin Closu re Plan) 

' Inner' Basin 'Outer' Basin 

Sludge content ( Y) Sludge co ntent (Y.) 

Constituent A v e ra ge Ranoe Samole 0-0 Samole 0-9 

= Sodium 20.0 17.7 - 23.5 20.5 22 . 9 

Co;,per -- 11.9* 10.0 - I1.-2 - 5.4 

Zirconium 3.2 1.9 - 3.9 1.6 1.8 

Flouride ion 6.0 5.4 - 6.4 7.1 6.7 

Nitrate ion 8.0 6.1 - 10.4 1.4 1.6 

Sulfate ion 20.2 17.7 - 23.5 35.5 32.7 

Water ( dried to 

105- C) 22.2 18.7 - 24.5 22.8 23.1 

Silicon


BASIN 1 SOLIDS SAMP LES 

EXTRACTION PROCEDURE TOXICITY RESULTS 

(Table I.A-21 183-H Basin Closure Plan) 

'Inner' Basin 'Outer' Basin 

Sludge content (mg/1) Sludge content (mg/1) 

Constituent Averane _ Range. Sample 0-0 Samole 0-9 

Arsenic


June - Sept 1985 Basin 1 liquids transfered to adjacent basins. 

Jan 1986 Basin 2 sampled 

Wet sludge 

Liquid phase 

Wet sludge and crystalline material removed from 

basin. Materials were not segregated. Absorbant used. 

Waste volume estimated at 7,646 cubic feet (1700 barrels). 

Barrel's contain 4.5 Cu ft of waste and 3 cu ft of 

absorbant (type of absorbant unknown - probably 

aa..+°'"„'-",.' ".'- 

Y_ 16LYq16l_GllY.l Cdf-LII; _ 

BASIN 2 SLUDGE SAMPLES 

CONSTITUENTS GREATER THAN 1% 

Constituent content ( %) Range (%) 

Copper 13.0 9.9 - 15.4 

Sodium 9.7 4.2 - 15.9 

Silicon 2.4 0.06 - 9.3 

Zirconium 3.2 2.8 - 3.5 

Flouride ion 1.1 0.57 - 1.81 

Nitrate ion 13.5 8.2 - 17.5 

Sulfate ion 3.8 0.65 - 15.2 

Moisture 52.7 45.7 - 57.7 

pH range 10.8 - 11.9 (liquid phase in contact 

- --- w-i-th -s1 udge) 

BASIN 2 SLUDGE SAMPLES 

TRACE CONSTITUENTS DETECTED 


Average 

Constituent content ( DDm) Ranae (oom) 

Aluminum 1950 540 - 4470 

Beryllium 6 4.4 - 7.8 

Calcium 334 158 - 634 

Chromium 450 292 - 727 

Mercury 1.3a


Average 

Uranium 1,250 ppm 28 - 2,500 

Technetium-99 1.170 pCi/1 

WASRE DESIGNATIONS: Basin 2 sludge; WT02 - Toxicity ( DW), D007 - EP TOX (Cr) 

U123,PO29, P030, P098, P120 

July_-Sept_1985>aiqu_id__from-Basin_2 transfered to Basins 3 & 4. 

Basin 2 sludge packaged. 

E-'t: 8,955 Cliî3ic PEet 11990 oarT°elr - 4.5 cu ft 

waste and 3 cu ft of absorbant). 

Basin 2 sludge PIN #'s: 

183H-86-0001S thru 183H-86-00265 48 drums/number 

183H-86-0027S thru 183H-86-0035S 72 drums/number 

183H-86-0036S 48 drums 

183H-86-0037S 46 drums 

36 mil Hypalon liner installed in Basin 2. 

Liquids from Basins 3 & 4 transfered to relined Basin 2. 

March 1987 Basins 3 & 4 sampled 

Wet sludge 

Crystalline 

BASINS 3 & 4 SAMPLES 

MAJOR INORGANIC CONSTITUENTS 


Basin 4 Sludge (9'e) 

Constituent A vera g e Rang e 

Copper 10.3 9.7 - 12.0 

Sodium 24.0 23.0 - 26.0 

Zirconium 4.4 0.34 - 13.0 

Flouride ion 1.1 0.98 - 1.2 

Nitrate ion 22.0 20.0 - 24.0 

Sulfate ion 1.9 1.3 - 3.9 

Moisture 46.0 43.0 - 51.0 

pH 9.7 - 9.9 

Basin 4 Crystalline (%) 

Constituent Average Rana e 

Sodium 38.0 30.0 - 50.0 

Sulfate ion 13.0 1.5 - 31.0 

Flouride ion 2.2 0.28 - 5.8 

Nitrate ion 46.6 7.1 - 71.0 

Moisture 6.6 1.1 - 25.0 

pH 9.2 - 9.9 

D-12 

asin_3 Sludoe (% 

Average Rang e 

11.2 8.8 - 14.0 

23.0 20.0 - 30.0 

8.7 2.2 - 22.0 

1.3 0.98 - 1.5 

26.0 17.0 - 29.0 

3.7 1.9 - 5.3 

42.0 35.0 - 51.0 

10.2 - 12.1 

Basin 3 Crvstallin e (%) 

Avera g e Rang e 

42.0 35.0 - 55.0 

20.0 16.0 - 26.0 

3.6 2.9 - 4.9 


BASINS 3 & 4 SLUDGE SAMPLES 

TRACE I NORGANIC CONSTITUENTS DETECTED 

(Table I .A-10 1 83-H Basin Cl osure Plan) 

Concentration in Basin 4 Concentration in Ba sin 3 

sludge content (oom) sludae content (o om) 

Constituent Average Ran ae Averaae Ranae 

Aluminum 430 390 - 490 8900 1100 - 17000 

Barium 24a


BASINS 3 & 4 CRYSTALLINE SAMPLES 

TRACE INORGANIC CONSTITUENTS DETECTED 


Concentration in Basin 4 Concentration in Basin 3 

crystalline content (oom) crystalline samole (oom) 

Constituent Av ra Ranoe Average Ranae 

Aluminum 440 200 - 610 810 780 - 

Barium 2.3 -- - 0.96 - 3-4 8b ?.5-- 

Beryllium 0.4a


BASINS 3 & 4 RADIONUCLIDE CONTENT 

URANIUM RESULTS 


Samole stratum Average content (oCi/a) * dry weight Rance (oCi/a) 

$asin 3 sludge 870 -- -- 320 - 1,500 

Basin 3 crystalline 25 8 - 62 

Basin 4 sludge 520 44 - 820 

Basin 4 crystalline 12 7 - 20 

NOTE: Technetium-99 believed to be present but was not analyzed for. 

WASTE DESIGNATION : Basins 3 & 4 sludge/crystalline; WT01 - Toxicity (EHW) 

U123, P029, P030, P098, P120 

March 1987 Basin 2 liquid sampled. 

Estimated volume of Basin 2 is 470,000 gallons. Estimate 

is by extrapolation backwards from later volume estimates 

and estimates of evaporation rates. 

BASIN 2 LIQUID SAMPLES 

MAJOR INORGANIC CONSTITUENTS 


Constituents - Average concentration (ma/1) Rang e (ma/1) 

Sodium 140,000 120,000 - 160,000 

Nitrate ion 380,000 310,000 - 430,000 

Moisture (57%) (57 - 58%) 

PH 10.5 - 10.7 

D-15


BASIN 2 LIQUID SAMPLES 

TRACE INORGANIC CONSTITUENTS 

(Table I.A-17 183-H Basin Clos ure Plan) 

Constituents Average contents ( mg/1) Range (ma/1) 

Aluminum 36 30 - 44 

Boron 63a

^- 


BASIN 2 LIQUID RADIONUCLIDE CONTENT 

Constituent Averaae oCi/1 Range oCi/l 

Uranium 82,400 74,000 - 94,000 ± 5,000 

Technetium - believed present but not analyzed for. 

WASTE DESIGNATIONS: Basin 2 liquid; WT01 - Toxicity (EHW) 

U123. P029, P030, P098, P120 

May - Sept 1987 Basin 3 sludge and crystalline material removed. 

Volume - 14,535 cubic feet (3230 barrels - 4.5/3 ratio). 

36 mil Hypalon liner installed in Basin 3. 

Jan 1988 Status - Basin I Empty except for rainwater 

Basin 2 Liquids - volume unknown 

Basin 3 Empty except for rainwater 

Basin 4 Sludge and crystalline material remain. 

May - Sept 1988 Basin 4 sludge and crystalline material removed. 

Volume - 6,259 cubic feet (1391 barrels - 4.5/3 ratio). 

Sept 1988 All original sludge/crystalline material removed and 

packaged. 

1988/1989 Basins 1& 4 sandblasted. 

- - -- -- Basin 1 approximately 1/8 to 1/4 inch of concrete was 

removed during sandblasting. 

Basin 4 original liner (Gray butyl material with white 

Hypalon sprayed cover remained after sandblasting). 

All sandblast materials were packaged. Sampling data of 

sandbiast grit unknown. Packaging requirements unknown. 

Volume of sandblast waste unknown. 

Evaporation of approximately 33,760 gallons of liquid with 

a resultant crystallized solid with a volume of 

approximately 21,900 cubic feet. 

Solidified -60,000gallons_of liquid frnm Basins 2 & 3. 

Liquid solidification - 40 gallons liquid mixed with 

-290:4 ibs-of Sorbond LPC-II absorbant. 

D-17


Sorbond LPC-II Formula 

Componds Range (%) 

Silicon dioxide 14.4 - 15.6 

Aluminum oxide 3.1 - 3.5 

Ferous oxide 1.6 - 1.9 

Calcium oxide 63.2 - 73.2 

Manganese oxide 5.1 - 6.0 

Sulfate ion 1.4 - 1.8 

Potassium 0.4 - 0.7 

Sodium oxide 0.8 - 1.2 

Calcium carbonate 0.3 - 0.5 

Fnn+ 

_Gulk--deflsity 'a -70 - 80 pnunde pnr 

- J VY.\YJ G. cubic VYVI\. .VVY• 

183-H Basin 2 

Absorbed Aoueous Waste 

Waste mixture: Waste per barrel - 40 gallons. 

Assumed bulk density of waste is 9.2 lbs. per gallon. 

Weight of 40 gallons waste - 368 lbs. 

Sorbond LPC-II used per barrel - 290.4 lbs. 

Total weight of absorbed waste per barrel - 658.4 lbs. 

Wt Y. of waste per barrel - 567. 

Wt y of Sorbond LPC-II per barrel - 44%. 

NOTE: 2 to 3 inches of absorbant was placed on top of 

cured waste to fill void space and absorb any 

condensate that formed. 

Note: Records show 1616 barrels ( @ 65,000 gallons of 

liquid) of material generated from 6/89 tO 12/89 

during solidification of liquid. However, records at 

the Central Waste Complex show that there are 2767 

barrels of solidified liquid. The extra 1151 barrels 

may be of material which solidified during 

evaporation stages of volume reduction that took 

place from 1987 to 1989. SWITS records indicate that 

all 2767 barrels are considered as solidified liquid. 

Estimates of material in Basins 2 & 3 in Sept. 1989 

were 111,142 gallons of liquid and crystalline 

evaporate. This .would correspond with the amount 

needed to fill about 2767 barrels with 40 gallons of 

material each. 

Basin 2 & 3 Liners removed and boxed up. Basins 2 & 3 were 

not sandblasted. 

D-18


-------------- WestBngho::ea Internal 

Hanford Company Memo 

From: Chemical Process Engineering CPE-WOG-002 

Phone: 6-9616 L5-31 

Date: June 1, 1992 

Subject: RECOMMENDED WASTE FORMS FOR WRAP 2A MODULE WASTES 

To: J. L. Westcott 

H2-58 

cc: J. W. Biglin L5-31 

D. A. Burbank H1-60 

J. A. Hunter L5-31 

C. A. Petersen H1-60 

--J G. -Riddel-le ---H2-58 

WOG/File-LB 

The purpose of this letter is to recommend some waste forms to use to 

solidify WRAP 2A Module mixed wastes. The waste forms recommended here will 

undergo laboratory testing in the very near future to verify or negate their 

planned use. A comprehensive literature search has been performed during 

the last month to help assist with--the_effort.In addition; E. W. McDaniel 

of ORNL, a solidification con sultant, will review this recommendation before 

the laboratory work gets very far. 

The waste to be treated in WRAP 2A varies in chemical characteristics, 

physical characteristics, radionuclide contamination, and hazardous 

constituents. The bulk of the waste is expected to come from the 183-H 

8-asin-clean-up, the C-018 Liquid Effluent Treatment Facility (LETF), ash 

from thermal treatment of combustible low-level mixed waste ( LLMW), and 

possibly some from the L-045H LETF. This represents about 80% of the waste, 

the balance will be varied mixed waste residues including soil, spent resin, 

salts, chemicals, etc. from facilities throughout the Hanford Site. The 

major waste streams are given below with their approximate chemical content 

in dry form: 

1. Basin 1 -Inner-Sludge 

Sodium 29% Zirconium 4% 

Sulfate 29% Silica 1% 

Copper 17% Uranium trace 

Nitrate 11% Technetium49 trace 

Fluoride 9% 

2. Basin 1 - 

Sodium 

Sulfate 

Fluoride 

Copper 

Zirconium 

Outer Sludge 

29% Silicon 3% 

46% Nitrate 2% 

9% Uranium trace 

8% Technetium-99 trace 

3% 

0-19 

Hanford oper.tion..na enyhwrfirq emm.ccor for n» US o.oarmen, of en.ryr

J. L. Westcott 

Page 2 

June 1, 1992 

3. Basin 1- Sorbed Liquid 


CPE-WOG-002 

The liquid, wet sludge, and crystalline material was removed and sorbed 

---------- anzo--px-0bably--a-di-ato„aceous earth absorbent. The liquid fraction was 

probably mostly sodium nitrate, possibly some sodium sulfate, with a 

-s ight ^raEe 

:^, .__^-_.:.._ 

of i:raffTUnt an u"55y ue^nneum. 

4. Basin 2 - Sludge 

Copper ^coro now 

Nitrate 30% 

^:__-_:.._m 

circoniu 

Silicon 

^ 

6% 

4% 

Sodium 21% Fluoride 2% 

Sulfate 9% Uranium trace 

S. Basin 3 - Sludge 

Sodium 31% Sulfate 5% 

Nitrate 35% Fluoride 2% 

Copper 15% Uranium trace 

Zirconium 12% 

6. Basin 3 - Salt 

Sodium 62% 

Sulfate 30% 

Fluoride 6% 

7. Basin 4 - Sludge 

Nitrate 2% 

Uranium slight trace 

Sodium 38% Fluoride 2% 

Nitrate 47% Uranium trace 

Sulfate 13% 

8. Basin 4 - Salt 

Sodium 38% Sulfate 3% 

Nitrate 35% Fluoride 2% 

Copper 16% Uranium slight trace 

Zirconium 6% 

9. Basin 2 - Sorbed Liquid 

The liquid and entrained solids was thought to be sorbed on to Sorbond 

LPC-II, a calcium type absorbent. The chemical content of the liquid 

is given below: 

Sodium 27% Uranium trace 

Nitrate 73% Technetium slight trace possible 

D-20 

'i


Page 3 

June 1, 1992 

10. Sand Blast Grit 


CPE-WOG-002 

The grit is expected to be at least 90% grit, the balance being a 

mixture of basin salt, sludge, dirt and sand, and liner material. This 

is not expected to be designated hazardous from the contents, but if 

designated it would probably be by association. 

11. C-018 LETF Facility ( Stabilized Distillate Residue) 

Ammonium Sulfate (in dry form) > 95% 

Volatile Radionuclides - Trace levels 

12. C-018 LETF Facility 

Spent ion exchange resin 

13. C-045 LETF Facility (300 Area Process Sewer Treatment) 

Ferric Hydroxide Sludge ( on Occasion) 

14. C-045 LETF Facility 

Spent ion exchange resin (Duolite) - on Occasion 

15. LLMW Incineration or Destruction Facility 

Ash Residue 

RECDMMEnDATIUnS 

_The-foll3wing recommended methods will made and the appropriate waste forms 

tested in the laboratory: 

A. Cement is recommended and will be tested on the basin wastes numbered 1 

through 10. Slag cement appears from the literature search to provide 

the best waste product performance in regards to leachability and EPA 

toxicity testing. Therefore, it is the prime candidate; however, 

portland cement type I-II, or type III will be used as back-up if any 

of the basin mixes appear to yield a poor product with slag cement. In 

addition, a cement modifier suggested by E. W. McDaniel of ORNL will be 

obtained and tested for its ability to increase retention of salt 

materials such as nitrates. 

B. Gypsum cement is recommended for ammonium sulfate listed as waste 

no. 11. Slag and portland cements exhibit strongly basic slurries in 

the mixing stage, this would release ammonia gas. Gypsum cement 

however is neutral during mixing and stabilizes the ammonium sulfate in 

the ammonium ion form. Laboratory screening experiments will be used 

to determine whether plaster of paris or a modified gypsum cement is 

used. Gypsum cement can be handled in the same type equipment as slag 

cement if the set is retarded. Either a slow setting material or a 

retarder will be added to provide a reasonable set time. 

D-21

--;-.y 


Page 4 

June 1, 1992 


C. Spent ion exchange resins (nos. 12 and 14) will be processed with 

cement after a pretreatment process wherein the resin beads or granules 

are destroyed. A chop blending method will be used for slurries or wet 

resin, and milling will be used for dry resin. 

D. 

CPE-WOG-002 

A lime or lime-flyash treatment will be used for ferric (iron) 

-Sy4 J .^ •= nxide _f1_ock f'+&sti: ri} === ^; \ 

- = The ^_ C1 I. O d....^......w 

- , s^,^-^^^ cement setting 

properties and the flock is too basic for materials such as sulfur 

polymer cement. The use of trade mark Aquaset or Petroset from Fluid 

Tech, Inc. could be lab tested for this application. 

E' , The ash residue (no. 15) as well as the basin'grit (no. 10) would best 

be used as blending agents to stretch the cement and improve its 

strength and containment characteristics. It will be tested in this 

__manner._Ash_i.s_a good candidate for sulfur polymer cement, but this 

would require a different type of facility equipment. An effort will 

be made-to prouide-some- i-nformation-on the use of sulfur polymer cement 

for ash immobilization. There are other miscellaneous wastes that 

would probably be immobilized better in sulfur polymer cement than the 

other cements. 

Work on these waste immobilization methods will begin in the laboratory 

within the next week with the intent to show that they meet present and 

anticipated future waste disposal criteria. 

W. 0. Greenhalgh, Principal Scientist 

f'homiral Process Engineering 

dfm 

D-22

u...^^, 

WHC-SD-W100-TI-003 Rev. 0 Internal 

O WBsHngtrouse 

HaniDrd CDmpany Memo 

From: Restoration Projects 87330-92-MLS-023 

Phone: 372-1362, H2-58 

Date: August 7, 1992 

Subject: SOLID WASTE INFORMATION AND TRACKING SYSTEM LOW-LEVEL MIXED WASTE 

CHARACTERIZATION TO SUPPORT WASTE RECEIVING AND PROCESSING 2A 

To: J. L. Westcott H2-58 

cc: S. R. Briggs G6-47* J. G. Riddelle H2-5844 

D. A. Burbank H1-60 V. M. Weingardt H1-60: 

W. 0. Greenhulgh L5-31 RP Characterization File 

R. S. Kelley H2-58* MLS File/LB 

D. R. Lucas G6-46* *w/o attachment 

Per your request on June 9, 1992 a Solid Waste Information and Tracking System 

(SWITS) data run was pulled on all low-level mixed waste (LLMW) in storage 

except the 183H basin. This data summed up to some 2547 containers. The raw 

data was analyzed to determine that which was to be treated at WRAP 2A. To 

determine this the data with


Attachment 

87330-92-MLS-023 

Pages 1 through 16 

D-24

•N`^C-Sf1-"d100-71-003 Rev. 0 

,S'FIPcE`f19oX!_S 

LO'^VlFR-A.,P2A,i 7/27/92 

CONTAINER INFORMATION 

SIZE: 55 GAL GENERATOR:313 BLDG. 300 AREA 

AMOUNT:83 FUEL FABRICATION OPERATION 

DOSE:tmr 

WASTE CODE:WT02 GROSS WEIGHT: 281-345 KG 

HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS 

CHROMIUM 

------ -------- COPPER 

SODIUM FLUORIDE 

SODIUM HYDROXIDE 

SODIUM NITRATE 

(--§;ZIRCONIUM 

TOTAL HAZARDOUS WEIGHT 

PHYSICAL DESCRIPT(ON 

ABSORBENT(POZZOLAN/ OIA.EARTH) 

PLASTICIPOLY(90 MIL LINER) 

SLUDGES(ABOVE) 

RADIONUCLIDE DISTRIBUTION 

TOTAL BETA/GAMMA: .05 CURIES 

ENRICHED URANIUM RANGE:159.2 p through 839.8 p 

AVERAGE:382.12 

P IN # 

364 365 368 369 376 388 398 

366 367 370 371 391 395 402 

387 372 374 404 392 397 412 

--389 373 375 405 399 401 413 

390.B 378 377 406 403 408 414 

393 379 380 407 423 409 415 

394 382 381.8 420 424 410 416 

396 383 384 - 421 425 411 417 

400 386 385 422 426 419 418 

RECOMMENDED TREATMENT: 

1.TAILORED GROUT 

2.POLYrL1ER 

3.GYPSUM CEMENT 

WEIGH (Kal 

0.23 

31.3 

49.89 

36.29 

31.75 

O,R2 

150.28 

X 

25 

5 

70 

ACID NEUTRALIZATION CENTERFUGE SLUDGE 

ABSORBED IN POZZOLAN OR DIATAMACEOUS 

EARTH PER SOAR/ 3-1 B-7HM-2 

17CGALV.DRUM, 90 MIL LINER 

ABSORBED WASTE DIRECT TO 

LINER 

EPA LABEL: 

'WT02 TOXIC FOR NsF• 

COMPLETE RATIONALE FOR TREATMENT ATTACHED. 

D-25 

4eapa4 -

a^. 

:_f 


LOT WRAP 2A.1 - - 

SHEET 5.XLS 


1. TAILORED GROUT 

2. POLYMER 

3. GYPSUM CEMENT 

RATIONALE FOR TREATMENT RECOMMENDATION: 

Tailored grout is a convient waste form in that: ( I) thawaste-exists -a a sludge; (2)--sodium--saltsare 

absorbed on either_a-poxzntan or c:a, e:;r,h, i3) Total noiariiy of soittable salts are approx. 0. 1 M. 

Nitrate conccentration is 0.03 M. Chromium concrentation is approx. 100 ppm which just makes 

material a mixed waste. 

Polymer could also be used 

Gypsum cement is aso acceptable 

Major effort is t convert sludge to a solid form. 

D-26 

^

CONTAINER /NFORMATlO N: 

`d"-C-Sn-'w°'.00-TF-003 RBv. 0 

ikliÊ'1':3.XI_S 

(^Q1,_WRAP2A.3 07/27/92 

SIZE AMOUNT GENERATOR: WASTE CODE: 

5 GAL I tO0N.100N AREA D002,WTO2 

55 GAL 16 2ETF,200E AREA, TANK FARMS 

163PA,10oN AREA. WATER FILTER PLANT 

DOSE: AMOUNT 

0-iMr 11 

20Mr I 

25Mr I 

3SMr 2 

36Mr I 

42Mr 1 

AHYS/CAL DESCR/PTlON: 

CONWED PADS: 10 53%, 6@ 26%, 1@ 27%. it 28%, it 29%, 4@ 12%. 2@ 14% 

LIQUID: 1@ 12%, 6@ 7%, it 6%, 1@ 4%, it 3%, 3@ 20%, it 19%, it 17%, 1@ 14%, 1@ 40% 

PLA/POLY: 1@ 35%, 9@ 1%, 6@ 3% 

ABSMITY LTRNERM: 1 @ 60% 

ACID: 9@ 1%. 3@ 26%. 1@ 24%, 1@ 22%. 1@ 18% 

DIRT/SOIL/DIA.EARTH: 50 61%. 10 80%, 3@ 82%.3@39%,_1@32%; 1@A4%,-1@ 51% 

GLASS: 9@ 4% 

HAZARDOUS CONST/TUEMSlKoI: 

/OF H2SO4 H20 KOH HN03 H3P04 

1 0.0094 0.8904 

1 56.25 

9 0.12 

3 28.558 

1 25.2015 

1 21.2779 

1 18.4793 

RAD/ONVCL/DE D/STR/8UT/ONew4tl: 

0 OF TOTAL B/G Co 60 F. 59 Mn 54 

1 0.002 0.00015 0.00002 0.00003 

1 0.001 

9 0.00002 0.00002 

2 0.018 0.009 0.009 

3 0.012 0.006 0.006 

1 0.01 0.005 0.005 

N /• 

IOSN-90-220 10514-90-205 10514-90-219 

IOSN-90-201 1OSN-90-206 105N-90-220 

105N-90-201 10514-90-207 10514-90-221 

10514-90-202 10514-90-208 10514-90-222 

105N-90-203 105N-90-209 10514-90-223 

10514-90-204 10514-90-218 2EFT-87-02285 



3.POLYMER 



D-27

LOT WRAP 2A.3 

SHEET 3.XLS 

kE(:OMNIENDED TKEAT NIENT 


15 of the 17 drums are listed as containing significant amounts of H3P04. It is best to neutralize this 

acid with lime prior to solidification. 



3. POLYMER 


When the H3P04 is neutralized with lime it is no longer hazardous and can be solidified with either grout 

gypsum cement or polymer. 

There should be no difficulty in passing TCLP. 

D-28

ONTANVER BVFORMA 

SI7 E: AMOUN=i 

8 GAL 2 

85 GAL 17 

55 GAL 31 

WASTE CODE:WT02 

GENERATORS: , 

fl.4T WRAP2A.4 

329,300 AREA CHEMICAL SCIENCE LA8 

Sh,_ /.XLS 

325,300 AREA APPLIED r,HEMISTY LAB 

1234,300 AREA PNL 

202A,200E AREA PUREX 

2718,200E AREA BPLANT 

2345Z,200W AREA ZPLANT 

163PA,100N AREA 

NALAB, FERMI NATIONAL ACCELERATOR LABS 

GLASS: 1010% 

CONWED: 1022 % 

DIRT/SORJDIA.EARTH: 10 48%,1@ 57%, 1@33%, 10 16%, 

1@ 24%, 15@ 100% 

C7 LIOUID: 1@ 26%,1 @ 61 % 

N PLA/POLY:2541 1%, 1@ 8%, 1@ 47%, 20 12%. 1@ 20%, 1@ 5% 

^ CLOTHIRAGS/NYLON: 1@ 34%, 1@ 61 % 

RUBBER: 1@ 3%, 1414% 

METALARON/GALV./SHEET: 1@ 2%, 3419% 

CONCRETE: 3@ 60% 

STAINLESS STEEL:3@ 10% 

PAPER/CARDpOARD: 1@ 12%, 1@ 48% 

CLAY:22@ 1% 

RESINS: 24@ 2% 

ASHES: 1@ 12% 

RAD/ONUCLDE.• 

NAZAIROQ'J8 CONSTl7UENTS 

13@ 173.9u971K8, 3@ 172A013 M:B, 10 

155.9896 K8, 261 187.0152 K8, 140186.0173 1 

10 199.9878 KBi, 10 179.9845 Kq'i, 10175.9929 

K8, 10 172.999'y't K8, 2@ 182.978R K8, 10 

190.0089 K8, 1ti71P 178.9986 K8, 1(0 170.0055 Kp, 

1@180.9824120 184.0215 11@'193.0025 

Ka, 1@ S2 K8 

'NOT'E: FOR HAZ. TOTALS SEE ATT)ICHED 

105N-90-155 91031-01^0014 

211-089038 9103-01 -•0015 

0213-089002 910:1-01-0016 

1271B-91-0135 91031-01a0017 

°325-88-03 9103-01 -0018 

325W88001 9103-01 •0019 

325W88002 9103-01-0020 

329-90-022112Mr) 9103-01-0021 

9103-01-0012' 9103-01-0022 

9103-01-0013 9103-01-0023 


1.POLYMER 


LOT WRAP2A.4 

SHEt, /.XLS 

Ferrio Oxide: 15@ 5.62 K8 

Sodium Oxide: 15@48.26 K8 

HCI: 1@.1 K8 

HN03: 1 @ .9 1 

SODA ASH: 1@3 1 

Ni 1 @1.18 Kg 

FsOH: 1 @ .2 Kg 

i f 

0, i-' ^.. {.! ^',. . 

9103-01-0024 9103-01-0034 PNL88013 

9103-01-0025 9103-01-0035 PNL88014 

9103-01-0026 PNL88005 PNL88015 

9103-01-0027 PNL88006 PNL88016 

9103-01-0028 PNL88007 PNL88017 

9103-01-0029 PNL88008 PNL88018 

9103-01-0030 PNL88009 PNL88019 

9103-01-0031 PNL88010 RHZ-219-92--28 

9103-01-0032 PNL88011 WHC-A-91-822 

9103-01-0033 PNL88012 WHCA-91-000825 


r .2 

Vf 

0 i 

E 

0 0 

^ 

0 

w 

to 

< 

0

LOT WRAP 2A.4 

SHEET 7.XLS 

RECOMMENDED TREATMENT 

1. POLYMER 


RATIONALE FOR TREATMENT CHOICE: 


Polymer is treatment of choice because: ( l) 24 containers contain resins, resins are best stabilized by 

f_,mrt polymer in that resigns tend to swell in a cement-based matrix. (2) Oxalic acid crystals exist in at least 

one container, oxalate would cause a delay in set time of a cement matrix which could be excessive. 

--•-- 

(3) A number of containers contain ammonium salts. The high Ph of cement could liberate ammonia gas. 

(4) NaCl in a system such as cement containing pore fluids would react with encapsulated metals possibly 

causing expansion and cracking. 

Gypsum cement could well serve as an alternate treatment for many of the above reasons. Also each 

represents a single component system which facilitates ease of handling. 

D-31

_-- 

jYÊC'L4nLS 

_ 

i nr lninnn1 n 07/27192 

CONTAINER INPoRMATION: 

5_5_ GA_L_ 53 WASTE CODE: 

F003,F005 

DOSE: AMOUNT

LOT WRAP 2A.5 

SHEET 8.XLS 


1. POLYMER 2. TAILORED GROUT 



A tailored grout could be used if the aluminum were removed from one drum. The high caustic content 

of cement would react with aluminum metal to produce hydrogen gas. One drum contains II % resin 

which is incompatibte with cement. Waste form would likely swell. 

D-33

CONTAINER 1NFORM4 T/ON: 

55 GAL 22 

DOSE: I Mr 

pNYS/CAL DESCR/PT/ON: 

CLOTHRIAGS/NYLON: 

DIRT/SORJDIA.EARTH: 

HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENT: 

PAPER/CARDBOARD: 

PLAS.RWLY: 

WOOD: 

ASBESTOS: 


SHEET9eXLS 

LOT WRAP2A.6 

GENERATORS: 

202A.200W AREA 

PUREX 

10 40%,1@25%,1@5% 

WASTE CODES: 

D001.D002,WTO2 

07/27/92 

20 1%,8@ 3%,5@ 5%,5@ 8%,1@ 28%,1@ 33%,1@ 88%,1@ 93% 

1502% 

10 15%,1@ 10%,1@30% 

180 10%,30 35%,1 @ 80%,1 @ 90% 

1@ 10% 

20 80%,5@ 83%,8@ 85%,2@ 87% 

NITRIC ACID: 80 .05K8.3@ .04Kp,30 .08Kp,2@ .O1Kp,2@ .02Kp,2@ .07Kp,1@ .08Kp,30 .09Kg 

URANYL NITRATE HEXAHYD.: 10 1.3898K9 

ASBESTOS: 15@11-23Ka - - _l.vC: 15.93 

HNt: 

WHC•A-89-820 

WHC-A-89•821 

WHC-A-89-822 

WHC•A-89-823 

WHC-A-89-824 

WHC•A-89•825 

WHC-A-89-826 

WHC-A•89-828 

WHC•A-89-829 

WHC•A-89-830 

YYFi{;-A-89431 

WHC-A-89-832 

WHC•A-89•833 

WHC-A-89-834 

WHC•A-89-835 

WHC-A-89-837 

WHC•A-89•838 

WHC-A-89-839 

WHC•A-89•840 

WHC-A-89-841 

WHC-A-89-842 

WHC-A-89-843 

RECOMMENDED TREATMENT: COMPLETE RATIONALE FOR TREATMENT ATTACHED. 


2.POLYMER 


D-34 

-P+grt

.:•n-,,, 

LOT WRAP 2A.6 

SHEET 9.XLS 



Code required that acid be deactivated prior to solidification/stabilization. 


2. POLYMER 


RATIONALE FOR TREATMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 

Nitric acid which is most probably absorbed in the soil and/or dia. earth can be treated with either lime 

or caustic soda solution. the deactivated material then can be solidified in a cement-based matrix. Also 

Polymer or gypsum cement is suit:ihle. 

0-35

CONTA/NER /NFORMAT/ON: 


SHEETIO.XLS 

LOT WRAP2A.7 07/27/92 

55 GAL 15 WASTE CODES:D009,WT01 

20 GAI. I 

8-GAL------ 1 GENERATORS: 

2258,200E AREA BPLANT ENCASULATION 

DOSE: 0-1 Mr 2345Z,200W AREA ZPLANT 

202A,200E AREA PUREX 

2225,200W AREA LABORATORY 

340,300 AREA RETENTION & NUETRALIZATION 

325.300 AREA APPLIED CHEMISTRY LABS 

PNYS/CAL DESCR/PT/ON.• 

-------- -A$SORBENT:-- -- 1@25%,i@607r,,10 85%,10 30% 

CLOTH/RAGS/NYLON: 1@ 5%,1@ 10%,1@ 80% 

GLASS: 10 1%,4@ 7%,30 10%•3@ 90% 

METdifl.%f•ALV/STEEL: - 2@1 % +a '% "•r^' 

..r., +i'v%,iiy20%,1@2B%,4@84%,1@90% 

-" PLAS..?OLY: 9@ 3%,2@ 10%.1@ 12%,1@ 21%,1@ 40% 

'..^ p RUBBER: 6@ 6%,1@ 4% 

DIRT/SOIL/DIA.EARTH: 1@10 %,1@ 55%•1@ 80%,1@ 93% 

MFRCIIRY• . 

,^. FLOOR TILE: 1 @ 26% 

i n 

.r 

1 d ^..2i.,1ue3%,i@s%,i@i5% 

"

LOT WRAP 2A.7 

SHEET 10.XLS 


WHC-SD-W100-TI-003 Revo 0 

AMALGAMATION WITH SULFUR, ZINC OR NICKEL 


Waste code D009 requires that contained amount of mercury be amalgamated. It may be necessary to 

evaporate mercury from solid waste prior to amalgamation. Remainder of solid waste could be treated 

with a tailored grout. 

D-37

NTA/NfR lNPoRMAT/ 

DOSE: 0-1-Mr- - 

8 GAL 3 

30 GAL 2 

5 GAL. 3 

55 GAL 48 

%NIr 

100K-92-003900 

IOSN-89-1064 

fOSN-89-1075 

tOSN-89-741 

105N-89-742 

105N-89-743 

105N-89-950 

--- 105N-90-12 

^.. 211-089008 

211-A18584 

211-A18888 

L11-A19523 

_,. 211-A19624 

211-A19726 

212-089006 

221T-91-00065 

2225-89-587 

2225-89-1119 

222S2W-90-861 

22242W-90-662 

-- - - - 22252W-90-685 --- 

222S2W-90-687 

222S2W-90-689 

222S2W-90-690 

222S2W-90-892 

222S2W-90-695 

222S2W-90-969 

22252W-90-697 

222S2W-90-713 

222S2W-90-714 

222S2W-90-715 

222S2W-90-718 

222S2W-90-719 

224U-91-011 

225B-90-20 

2713-89-v72 

271U-91-90601 

271U-91-90802 

325-91-007 

340-91-00031 

ETF-241-901020 

ETF-91-068-02 

ETF-91-123-03 

KEHN-91-52-001 

KEHN-91-52-002 


SHEETI2.XLS 

LOT WRAP2A.8 07/29/92 

GEiveRATORS: 

340,300 AREA,RET.bNEUTRL. 

t00KE,100K AREA 

221T,200W AREA,EOUIP.DECON 

202A,200E AREA,PUREX 

2327,200W AREA,WST.INCINERAT. 

271U,200W AREA,U PLANT 

241AW,200E AREA, TANK FARM 

224U,200E,U PLANT 

241C,200E AREA,TANK FARM 

241BX,200E AREA,TANK FARM 

222S,200W AREA,LABS 

2218,200E AREA. 8 PLANT 

183PA,100N AREA 

2258,200E AREA, ENCAPSULATION 

t00N,1O0N AREA 

2345Z,200W AREA, Z PLANT 

325,300 AREA, APP.CHEM. 

KEHN-91-52-003 

KEHN-91-52-004 

WHC-A-90-800 

WHC-A-90-804 

WHC-A-91-801 

W14C-A-91-809 

WHC-A-91-821 

WHC-A89-805 

WHC-A89-807 

WHCA-91-000828 

WHCA-91-000827 

WASTE CODES: 

U151,D009 

D008,D009 

D005,0009,U151 

D009,D005,0006 

D009 

D006,D009,WC02 

DOOS,D007,D008,D009, 

D01 O,D011,WT02 

D002, D006, D009,WCO i, 

WT01 

D001,D006,D009,WT01 

D009,D002,WCO1,WT01 

D005,D006,D009,WC02 

WT01 

D006,D008,0009,Wi02 

D002,D009,WT02 

D002,D009 

D006,D009,WC02,WT01 

D009,WT01 

- DOOx0003.DCi09,--ro i 

0004,0005,0008,0007 

D009,D010.D011 


1.MERCURY TO BE AMALGAMATED AND ENCAPSULATED 

2.LEAD TO BE ENCAPSULATED 

3.TAILORED GROUT FOR REMAINDER OF SOUDS 

4.POLYMER IS ALSO ACCEPTABLE 

D-38

PHYSICAL DESCR/PTTON: 

V-r-S?-W100-TZ-003 Rev. 0 

LOT WRAP2A. 8 

SNEE71'i.XLS 

RNG. AVG. IOF RANGE AVG. IOF 

CONWED 5-97% AVG:14.7% 9 PAINTS NA 095% 1 

DIRT,ETC. 2-97% AVG:56.1% 10 ROCK NA @40% 1 

HAZ.CONST!T- - a^54% -A-Vfd:7.5%- 1â --- -- -SI'L-ICA GEL NA 020% 1 

METAL.ETC. 1-70% AVG:12.8% 19 SLUDGE NA @30% 15 

. PL,.45T!C,ETC.- -1-50% -AiSGt10.'a% - 42 BATTERIE NA @24% 1 

GLASS 1-97% AVG:56.8% 24 UQUIO 4•25% AVG:13.6% 3 

Hp 1-70% AVG:12.5% 6 CEMENT NA @10% 1 

H20 NA 015% 1 CLOTH 1•15% AVG:7% 4 

- RUBBER 2-76% AVG:32.6% 3 MISC.,ETC. 2-58% AVG.23% 12 

OXIDES 1-3% AVG:2.0% 2 ABSORB,ETC. 10-76% AVG.30.8% 12 

PAPER,ETC. 1-40% AVG:17% 3 Al NA @1% 1 

"'V ' HA7ARDOUS C0NS7rTf/ENTS: 

f OF RANGE AVG. 8 OF RANGE AVG. 

'°--' AMMAL. HQ 1 NA 0.028K9 NaOH 1 NA @.085K9 

•- H9 55 0-24.1Kp AVG:1.46Kg ZnC12 4 0-.22Kp AVG:.16Kp 

t :..a Pb 17 0-.113K8 AVG:025Kp Zn 2 NA 0.28Kp 

^-^ Ba OXIDE 1 NA @2Kp ANTIMONY 2 NA @.02K0 

-- - °ca 30 0-38Ky AVG:2.4Ka MQ 1 NA 9.02Kp 

Cd 19 0-13.2Kp AVG:1.7Kp CaCHL.FLU. 10 0-5.1Kp AVG:2.7Kg 

Cr 16 0-.014Kp AVG:.0115Kp Mg02 I NA 0.95Kp 

Ss 16 0-.0003K9 AVG:.00022K8 HpTHIO.CYA. 1 NA 0.0004K9 

Ag 16 O-.OO3Kg AVG:.002Kp FsN03 1 NA @.0105K0 

NH4C!2 4 0-r35Kp---- -AVG..21R0 N03 I NA 9.1974Ka 

CdOH 1 NA 0.205K9 HNO3 1 NA 0.0315Kp 

CoOH i NA 0.02Kp BoTRIFLUO. 1 NA 9.0045Kp 

H90H 1 NA @.2Kp Mn 1 NA @.06Kp 

MON 3 O-.38Kg AVG:.184Kp ARSENIC 1 NA 0.0002K9 

KOH 3 0-.37Kp AVG:.23Kg 

EADIONUCLIDE D/sTR(armn;v; 

/ OF RANGE AVG. / OF RANGE AVG. 

Cv137/3a137 34 0-.0085C1 5.7E-03 C-14 7 NA 00.00 

TOTAL B/G 49 0-.1614C1 5.5E03 S^151 7 0-00480 1.14E-03 

Sv90,'Y90 - 14- 0=.-0073CI 8./E-04 U ENRICHED 2 0-12.42 Gr 6.235Gr 

Ca60 26 0-.0002C! 2.67E-05 Eu-155 1 NA @O.OC! 

NI-60 1 NA 0 Eu-154 I NA 81E-05 

Ru1O6lRh106 9 O-.0102Ci 1.77E-03 ----- --- -An!24l It 0-.00002C1 I.SE-05 

Ca134 I NA 3E-05 Fa-59 2 NA 02E-05 

Cs144/Pr144 8 0-.0423C1 8.25E-03 Mn-54 2 NA 03E-05 

PM-147 7 0-.01890 4.44E-03 PU 3 0..00132Gr 1.14E-03 

H-3 7 0-.000040 5.71 E-06 

D-39

^ '.'. 

JLL-31-1992 09:37 FROM EDS/ORF$ihA1ES TO 815093721253 P.03/03 

e f'l 

LOT WRAPÂS 7^t l t?ÎHY [H 6 

SHhC1 1l.JC'LS 


wNC-SD-YI100-TI-003 Rev. 0 

1. MERCURY TO BE AMALGAMATED AND ENCAPSULATED. 

2 LEAD TO BE ENCAPSULATED 

3. TAILORED GROUT FOR REMAINDER OF SOLIDS 

4. POLYMER IS ALSO ACCEPTABLE 


Regulations reevire-thatmerculy and]eadhetncapsulated._Ihe-drums-containingthrce materials 

should be isolated and sorted to segregate as much of the mercury and lead bearing waste as possible. 

-The-tnerc;:ry ",2avaeuurtmkhelmaily-distiiled-andamalgarated peior to encapsulation. Assumption 

is that batteries in waste are lead storage batteries. These must also be sorted for encapsulation. 

After sorting and pretreatment to remove mercury, the residue can be stabilized In a tailored grout. 

Polymer encapsulation is also acccptable. 

AN AREA OF CONCERN IS DRUM CONTAINING MERCURY THIO CYANIDE. 

D-40 

) 

.^%

,.: 

Westinoause 

Harlford COMM 


Fmm: Restoration Projects 87330-92-MLS-026 

Phone: 372-1362, H2-58 


Subiect:_ -SOL I-DWAST-E INFOR.MATIONA.ND ?PACKING-SX-STEM LOW-LEVEL MIXED WASTE 



YI Q Gi1C-/1 D 

...,,. 19L^ f 1 1 ^ L 

cc: S. R. Briggs G6-47* 

D. A. Burbank, Jr. H1-60 

W. 0. Greenhulgh L5-31 

H2-58 

D. R. Lucas G6-46* 

J. G. Riddelle H2-58 

K. M. Weingardt H1-60 

RP Characterization File H2-58 

*w/o attach O 

ment 

Per your on June 9, 1992 a Solid Waste Information and Tracking System 

data run was-puUe-d on-atl 1Qw-leveimi-xed-was-te i-n-s_toraae except the 

183H basir. Five of the last seven lots have been reviewed by Earl 

McDaniel and are attached. Once again a summary sheet along with 

rationale for treatment recommendations have been assembled. The lots 

are WRAP2A.9 through WRAP2A.12. The last two lots will be evaluation and 

summarized in the coming week. 

If you have any questions or require additional information, please feel 

free to contact me on 372-1362. 

4ML gff ^ 

. . Sheri 

Engineering Technician 

pss 

Attachment 

D-41 

* 

Internal 

Memo

COIV/ABVER /VfORMAT/ON: 

il i MÔUNTi 

55 GAL 280 

2 GAL 1 

85 GAL 28 

10 GAL 1 

8 GAL 1 

4•4•8 1 

4•4•7 18 

UNKNOWN 1 IVOL.3.21 M3) 

SEE ATTACHED FOR PIN i 

G 1A 

N 

SHEETII.MLS 

1.OT WRAP2A ,? 

CODES: WT01,D008 

POSE Rz :AMQU!+I: 

0-10 301 

11-20 1 

21-30 3 

31-40 1 

41-50 0 

51-100 6 


1. ENCAPSULATION FOR LEAD. 

2. INCENERATION FOR SOLVENTS AND GREASE 

3.TAILORED GROUT OR POLYMER FOR SHREDDED SOUDS 

Page 

J Y ? 

GENERATORS: 

202A,200E AREA.PUREX 

SPAP,OFFSITE,SHIPPINGPORT 

07/23I82 

221B,200E AREA.PROCESS TREATMENT 

AMES,OFFSITE,IOWA ST.UNIV.LAB 

2345Z,200W AREA,ZPLANT 

2225, 200W AREA, ANAL.LAB 

324,300 AREA.WASTE TECH.ENG.LAB 

2ETF,200W AREA, TANK FARMS 

313.300 AREA,FUELS MANUF. 

2258,200E AREA,ENCAPSULATION 

209E,200E AREA,CRIT.MASS LAB 

325,300 AREA.APPUED CHEM. LAB 

242B,200E AREA.CASK BLDG.BPLANT 

2WB,200W AREA. BURIAL GROUNDS 

221TS,200 W AREA,EOUIP.DECON 

3720,300 AREA, CHEM. METALS LAB 

305,300 AREA,HOT CELL VERIF.FAC. 

NALAB,OFFSITE,FERMI NAT.ACCEL.LAB 

100N,100NAREA 

333,300 AREA,N FUELS MAN. 

2710.200E AREA,ELEC.MAINTENANCE 

224U,200W AREA,U03 

E 

S 

V1 

4 

E 

^ 

O 

O 1 

--1 

O 

W 

m < 

O 

A W H 

1° ^ n 

r ô 

M 3 

rr 

WfA 

N 

ON

O I 

tA 

SHEETII.XLS 

;, 

LOT WRAP2A.2 

WMA FEnRAPPOk 

LEAD 275 CONT. 1-100% AVG.84% RADIONUCLIDES., 

PAPER/ETC. 28 COINT. 1•309A AVG.B% A^241 1 CONT. 118Gr NA 

PLASTIC/ETC. 143 PONT. 1-83% AVG.7% C-14 1 CONT. NA AVG.1.71Ci 

RUBBER 16 C471NT. 1-17% AVG.4% G144/Pr14 35 CONT. 0-,148C1 AVG..027CI 

METALIETC. 64 CqNT. 1-100% AVG.39.5% Co-58 1 CONT. NA AVG.148G 

BTANNLESS/ETC. 13 CQNT. 2-1576 AVG.6% Co-60 17 CONT. .01•250000 AVG147OC1 

ABSORBENT/ETC. 39 CqNT. 1-63% AVG.16% Cr•51 1 CONT. NA AVG..34G 

DIRT/ETC. 17 CNNT. 6•90% AVG.30% Cs137/B03 72 CONT. O•.51C1 AVG..017CI 

CLOTHIETC. 42CQNT. 1-909i1 AVG.7% Fa55 1 CONT. NA AVG.18400Cf 

ASBESTOS 

WOOD 

I COIrIT. 

27 CONT. 

NA 

1-74%. 

AVG.1% 

AVG.36% 

Fs-59 

H-3 

1 CONT. 

6 CONT. 

NA 

0Y72.4 Cl 

AVG..39CI 

AVG.12.06C1 

GLASS 16 CONT. 1-98% AVG.22% Mo-54 3 CONT. 3•339q AVG.113G 

CONVVED PADS 34 CONT. 1-72%. AVG.11% Mo-93 1 CONT. NA .02CI 

FILTEIRS I COWT. 67X. NA Nb-94 I CONT. NA AVG..01CI 

SAND/ETC. 2 CONT. 18+35% NA Ni-59 1 CONT. NA AVG.127 Cl 

CU MiETAL 5 COINT. 1•20'1i 7% Ni-63 1 CONT. NA AVG.18800G 

GREASE 1 COINT. 5% NA Pm•147 35 CONT. O•.06901 AVG..014CI 

SOLVITHSY 1 COIVT. 5% NA Pu-239 1 CONT. .0002Gr NA 

LIQUID 5 CONT. ALL 1116, NA Ru106/Rh10 26 CONT. 0-.035C3 AVG..008Ci 

OR6 1 i 

8 CONT. 48-60% AVG.55% Sm-151 13 CONT. 0•A16G AVG...005G 

BATTIERIES 3 COI,ff. 40-66% AVG.52% Sr90/Y90 23 CONT. 0-.03Ci AVG..007C1 

AIR 2 CONT. 40+49% NA Th-232 2 CONT. ALL 5Gr NA 

TOTAL B/G 309 CONT. 0•62900G AVG.203G 

! ARDOUS CONSTITUfNfS: U DEPLETED 8 CONT. O•.255 Gr AVG...036Gr 

LEAD 274 C:ONT. .0003-17640.12K9 AVG.456K8 U ENRICHED 11 CONT. 0-1.23Gr AVG.231Gr 

LEAD SHEILDING 6 C011T 29.0^978•91000K8 AVG.47158.8169K8 U NATURAL 2 CONT. ALL 1OGr NA 

LEAD BRICK 32 CONT. 33.65-384.96K8 AVG.248.969K8 Zr95INb85 I CONT. NA AVG..01CI 

LEAD GLASS 3 CONT. 9.32-218.718K9 AVG.112.71K8 

ASBESTOS 2 CONT. 4.O8-122.47K9 AVG.63.27K8 

LEAD NO 1 CONT. 59.1 ^1 K8 NA 

LEAD SALTS 1 CONT. .04 M:e NA 

BUTOXYETHANOL I CONT. . 15Kip NA 

LEAD GLOVES 1 CONT. 4.451C8 NA 

Pap6 2 

A !F 

m 

VI 

Oo 

S 

O O 

--1 

O 

0 

w 

s 3 

w^ 

N I ^ 

^ 

M ^ 

r 

w I O

_OX--41--1oa2 ag: e7 FROM FnS/ruPNL/MMF-4 TO 815093721253 

ATTACHMENT 

P. 02/k!7 

WHC-SD-WI00-TI-003 Rev. 

87330-92-MLS-026 

Page 3 of 13 

0 

LUl' W1LU' 2A,12 

SF^F.F.T 11.aZS 

it1iCY)MMENDED TREATMLNT 

1. 13NCAPSUtAT1ON FOR LEAD. 

2 INCINSRA'IION tult 5ULVENTS AND ORIiASF. 

3. TAILOItED ORO[1T OR POLYMER FOR SHREDDED SOLIm 

RA7TONAI.E POR TRBA1 Mk:lv'P RECOh4sQNDA9T0N 

llrumt eoptainiaj lead he ar.Itarated. Aftet septuttion iead must be weapsulated per 

regulntions. It is assumed that battcries are lead stnra;e Ind ir.dta also. They must be scponted and 

encrpsutated. eonminert with solvents and ;reaao ato bcst Incinerated. Hi:wever if this matedai 

proves to be absorbed on an inuripuile sorbet It is aeceptabla to sotidlty/ttabilira with either a utL eir,t 

grout of polymer. Gypsutn ecment would he ,.rr.ptable. 

D-44 

r4 

,..,^

CONTAINER /NFORMAT/ON: 

DOSE: SIZE: 

1@ 20 Mr 8 GAL 

BAL.@ 1-6 Mr 30 GAL 

P/N1: 

t00K-91-0092 

105N-89-1117 

10SN-89-441 

1OSN-B9-442 

105N-89-873 

202L-92-000703 

21 4 -^.89W5 

211-090026.e 

21 1-A21187 

212-A18652 

212-A19972 

212-A200005 

212-A21228 

212-A21790 

212-A21853 

219-091247 

220-A19943 

2718-91-0026 

2718-91-0156 

PNL-89047 

PNL-89048 

RHZ-219-091321 

WHC-A-89-845 

WHC-A-89-846 

WHC-A-89-847 

WHC-A-90-805 

-- ---- WHC-A"a0-829 

WHC-A90-844 

WHC3-89-50 

WHC3-89-51 

WHC3-89-52 

WHC3-89-53 

WHC3-89-54 

55 GAL 

PHYSICAL DESCR/PT/ON: 

S9-IEEI'13.XLS 

LOT WRAP2A.9 

r,evo 0 

ATTACHMENT 

87330-92-MLS-026 

Page 4 of 13 

07/31 /92 

GENERATORS: CODES: 

3 NALAB,FERMI NATIONAL ECC. LA8 0002 

5 271 B,200E AREA.B PLANT D002, WT01 

30 202A,200E AREA. PUREX D001,WTO2 

2345Z,200W AREA, Z PLANT DOO1,WT01 

RTL,3000 AREA.PNL FACILITY D002,WCO2 

333,300 AREA.N FUELS MAN. D001 

10oN,100N AREA 

202AL.200E AREA,PUREX ANAL.LAB 

1706K,100K AREA 

f OF AVG. RANGE 

OT C!C 

- Inl, G^Y. 20 44.455% 7-`^.li% 

GLASS 5 4% 1-9% 

HAZ.CONS. 23 11.78% 1-75% 

ASBESTOS 11 9.818% 3-15% 

CLOTH,ETC 18 20.2% 1-75% 

PLAS. ETC. 22 23.63% 1-95% 

KOTEX,ETC 1 @10 % NA 

RUBBER 9 '21.2% 1-80% 

FILTERS 2 14.5% 5-24% 

ABSORB. 5 33% 15-69% 

SLUDGES 9 @90% NA 

LIQUID 4 7.25% 1-14% 

ACID 2 13% 9-17% 

METAL,fFC- 8 36.,`, A .. v0 % 

WOOD 1 @15% NA 

H20 2 62.5% 60-85% 

PAPER,ETC 2 8% 1-15% 

CONWED 2 6% 5-7% 

HAZ4RDOUS CONSTITUENTS: 

URANYL IOF AVG. 

NITRATE 4 .244Kq 

ASBESTOS 1 0.25K8 

NaOH 7 3.83K0 

HN03 5 1.54Kp 

KN03 1 @.47K8 

A1N03 1 @,4999 

NeC12 2 @10.99K0 

NaN03 11 11.845Kg 

WHC3-89-55 NaF 9 3.306K0 

WHC3-89-56 HCI 2 

--- --------.---- 

.819Kn 

WHC3-89-57 ACID 1 @1.0002Kp 

WHC3-89-58 H3PO4 3 .713Kg 

KOH . 4 3.6Kp 

RECOMMENDED TREATMENT: H3PO4HCI 1 019KQ 

COMPLETE RATIONALE FOR __- K2S207 1 ® a5K0 

TREATMENT ATTACHED. H2S04 1 @.2K8 

la,;y 1. POLYMER Na3PO4 1 @34.1Kp 

FaN03 1 @.1K8 

D-45 

RANGE 

.05-.89Kp 

NA 

.1-11Kp 

.46-4Kp 

NA 

NA 

NA 

.67•25.BKp 

1.09-7.26Kg 

-.499-1.13K.- 

NA 

.47-1 Kg 

1-10K8 

NA 

NA 

NA 

NA 

NA

RADIONUCLIDE AVG. 

lOF 6.47E-03 

TOTAL B/G 37 1905.8Gr 

U DEPL. 14 1.35E•03CI 

Sr/Y 90 8 1.55E•03CI 

Cs/Bra 137 8 2.48E-03 

Ru/Rh 108 6 1.03E-02CI 

CO(Î 144 V 7.YVLN3W 

Pm 147 8 2.5E-05C1 

H 3 2 1.23E-03CI 

Sm 151 

6 2.27E-02Gr 

Pu ^ 

4 1.11E-03Ci 

Co 60 4 2.25E•04C7 

Fe 59 2 3.65E-04Cf 

Mn 54 2 .7 Gr 

U ENRICH. 3 


ATTACHMENT 

87330-92-MLS-026 

SHEET13.XLS 

Page 5 of 13 

LOT WRAP2A.9 

RANGE 

0-.1504Ci 

0-10200Gr 

0-8.8E•03CI 

0•7.9E•03Cf 

0-9.5E-03CI 

0-3.9E•02C1 

0-1.9E-02C( 

0-4E-05Cf 

W4.SCG3C1 

0-5.1 E-02Gr 

0-3.3E-03Cf 

0-4.5E-04Ci 

0-8.7E-04Ci 

0-.9 Cr 

D-46 

Y^ 

Z..'

PU33-11-1992 09:48 FROM EDS/qRI$ir•P1ES TO 81S093721253 P.03i0°f 

LOT W1L1Y 2A.9 

SIIL•ET 13.XZS 

RFC'OMMENllbll TILEAT.IIENT 

1. POLl'1ìL•R 

RATIONALE FOR 'l'1LLATb1ENT R[COMMENDATlON 

ATTACHMENT 

87330-92-MLS-026 

WHC-SD-WI00-TI-003 Rev. 0 Page 6 of 13 

'!bo drum eontaintnp auJ must first be Irotated and ooid ncutralisd. 'ILes srllx and shredded solids 

are then enoapsuloted in polymer. This avlitUflcrtlnn r¢romroendatioa is consistent with plant dcwiYn. 

D-47

CONTA/NER /NFORMATION 

WHC-SD-W100-TI-003 Rev. 0 ATTACHMENT 

87330-92-MLS-026 

SHEETI4.XLS Page 7 of 13 

LOT WRAP2A.10 08ro3/92 

SIZE: DOSE: GENERATORS: 

30 GAL. 1 0-10 Mr 17 221TS,200E AREA. EOUIP.DECON 

55 GAL 22 11-50 Mr 6 244AR,200E AREA,VAULT 

2225,200W AREA.ANALYTICAL LAB 

CODES: WT02,WC02,WP02,FO01,F002 ORGANICS

LOT WRAP 2A 10 

Slf-EET 14.)C,S 


1. ENCAPSULATION FOR LEAD 

2. INCINERATION 

WHC-SO-W100-TI-003 Rev 

RATIONALE FOR TREATMENT RECOMMENDAT[ONS 

ATTACBMF t iT09372 ]. 253 

87330-92.--M[.S-026 

Page 8 c:,r'. 13 

0 

M Regulations require that lead be encapsulated. Drums must first be sorted. Solvents are suited 

"X9 

for 

incineration. Any solidif'ication technology that produces heat will tend to volltize solvents. 

, + These 

m.. .., ..o;,,ûe b encapsnrated in po(vrrter or ¢Vnsum r^ ntne .^t but would tend to volatilize 

^ - -- -- - _. ... 

^ 

v.,.._., 

IT IS NOTED THAT T""r„cTED C.ODES F-001'-003 ADDRESS SPENT SOLVENTS 

D-49 

R. Q4iQl?

SIZE: DOSE: 

30 GAL. 2 1@5 Mr 

8 GAL. I BALANCE.1 Mr 

5 GAL. 1 

85 GAL. i 

55 GAL. 12 

CODES: 

D002,D005,WT01 

D002,D00e,WT02 

0001,0002,001 1 , WC02, WT02 

D002,D011 

0002,0007,D010,WT01 

D002,0010,WT02 

D002,D007,WT01 

0001,D007 

D002,D007,WT02 

0002.DOOB,WT01,WC01 

DOO1,0007,0011, WCO2, WTO2 

HAZARDOUS CONSTITUENTS: 

IF OF AVERAGE 

ASBESTOS 1 .54 K8 

BaOH 1 .45 Kg 

KF 1 1.35 K8 

KOH 1 7.41 Kg 

SRJCA 1 .04 Kg 

NaOH 1 5.22 Kg 

Cd 2 .07 Kp 

Co 1 .002 KB 

Ni 1 A5 KB 

K 1 .004 K8 

AIN03 1 .2 Kg 

H202 2 . 12875K8 

M8(CI04)2 1 .1 Kg 

KMn04 1 .8 Kg 

ABN03 2 .058 Kg 

HCI 2 .904 Kg 

HF 2 12.27 Kg 

HN03 2 12.43 Kg 

NaC03 1 .027 Kg 

Cr 9 .0068 Kg 

H3P04 8 14.29 Kg 

H2SO4 2 .049 Kg 

Na 1 2.56 Kg 

ZnCRO4 1 1.59 Kg 

NI/Cd BATT. 1 7.73 Kg 

Cr2(S04)3 1 .52 Kg 

CuSO4 1 .1 Kg 

- ----- RECOMMENDED TREATMENT: 

1.POLYMER 


WHC-SD-W100-TI-003 Rev. (bTTAC04EN2 

87330-92-MLS-026 

SHEET15.XLS Page 9 of 13 

LOT WRAP2A.11 8/8/92 

GENERATORS: 

202AL, 200E AREA, ANALYTICAL LAB 

202A, 200E AREA,PUREX 

221T, 200W AREA.EQIP.DECON 

329, 300 AREA,CHEM.SCIENCE LAB 

163PA, IOON AREA 

333,300 AREA. N FUELS MANUFACT 

241AY, 200E AREA. TANK FARM 

105KE,100K AREA 

lOON, 100N AREA 

1234. 3000 AREA. STORAGE 

PHYSICAC DESCR/PTION: 

/ OF AVERAGE RANGE 

ABSORB. 3 48% 20-74% 

CONWED 3 38% 7-90% 

GLASS 4 8% 1-18% 

HAZ.CONS. 10 16% 1-37% 

PLAST.ETC 18 15% 1-99% 

BATTERIES 1 9% NA 

DIRT,ETC 12 54% 1-93% 

RANGE LIQUID 3 6% 2-14% 

NA ACID 3 41% 4-95% 

NA CLOTH,ETC 1 10% NA 

NA METAL,ETC 2 11% 1-20% 

NA WOOD,ETC 1 20% NA 

NA 

NA 

EQUIPT. 3 57% 5459% 

.03-.1 1 Kg RADIONUCLID E O/STR/BUT/ON.• 

NA I OF AVERAGE RANGE 

NA TOTAL B/G 17 2.83E-02Ci 0-.43 Cl 

NA U DEP. 3 3.SE-02 Gr .001-.1 Gr 

NA Sr/Y 90 3 4.3-04 Ci 0-.0005Ci 

.1-.157 Kg Ru/Rh 106 2 1.4E-03 Ci .0008-.002C1 

NA Ca/Ba 137 6 2.7E-04 Ci 0-8E-09 Ci 

NA Ce/Pr 144 2 3.SE-03 Ci SEE ATT 

.01-.1 K8 Pm 147 2 1.75E-03 Ci SEE ATT 

.82-.88 Kg H 3 2 2.OSE-04 Cl 0-4E-04 Ci 

0-24K0 1 129 1 .0001 CI NA 

0-24 KB To 99 1 .0001 Cl NA 

NA Pd 107 1 .0001 CI NA 

SEE ATT Ce 135 1 .0001 Ci NA 

.05-50 Kg Sm 151 2 .00025 Cl SEE ATT 

.008-.09Kp Zr 90 1 .0001 Ci NA 

NA Co 60 9 2.0E-04 Ci 0-4.0E-04 Ci 

NA Ni 83 1 2.3E-04 Ci NA 

NA F. 55 1 .433 Cl NA 

NA Pu 1 .00004 Gr NA 

NA 


D-50 

;.. \

qN i: 

105N-89-1097 

105N-89-1098 

105N-89-1099 

10 5 N-69-1 1 v,v 

105N-89-1101 

tOSN-89-1102 

106N-89-1108 

lOSN-90-337 

202L-92-000702 

221-T-91-00066 

329-90-46 

329-91-010 

ETF241-900722 

PNL-88031 

WHC-3-89-64.B 

WHC-A-91-828 

4m^= 

w°•^ WHC-A89-802 

MIHC-SD-M100-T1-003 Rev. 0 ATTACHMENT 

87330--92-MLS-026 

SHEETI5.XLS Paqe 10 of 13 

D-51 

-pswe

LOT WRAP 2A.11 

SHEET 15.XLS 


1. POLYMER 

2. ENCAPSUTA7TON FOR LEAD 

RATIONALE FOR TREATMENT RECOMMENDATION 

_ N:. P.B5/ 

ATTACHMEIIT 

8733O-42-MLS-026 

Page 11 of 13 


Drums containing acid must be sorted, acid removed and neutralized. Drum containing hydrogen 

peroxide must be isolated and the peroxide which is a strong oxidizer should be treated as an acid 

and neutralized. Batteries are assumed to be lead storage batterlcs(D008 code is for lead). Plant 

design basis requires salt rich waste be encapsulated in polymer. 

D-52

SIZE: DOSE: 

5 GAL 1 1@15 Mr 

30 GAL 1 4@3 Mr 

10 GAL 2 BAL.@1Mr 

85 GAL I 

56 GAL 10 

PHYSICAL DESCR/PT/ON: 

TOTAL AVERAGE 

ABSOR.ETC 5 29 % 

CONWED 1 30 % 

GLASS 3 4.3% 

HAZ.CONS. 7 13.8 % 

PLAST.ETC 9 11.1 % 

METAL,ETC 2 25 % 

DIRT,ETC 8 84.5 % 

PAPER,ETC 1 15% 

RUBBER 3 21.6 % 

ACID 3 75 % 

NITRATE 3 25 % 

LIQUID 1 9 % 

HAZf1RO0US CONST?UENTS: 

TOTAL AVERAGE 

ARSENAZO 1 .21 K8 

BARIUM 2 .34 Kg 

CHROMIUM 5 . 1348 Kg 

SILVER 3 1.49 Kg 

Nrr2Cr207 1 .9 Kg 

BrrC03 1 .1 Kg 

_ CADMwM 1 .0014 Kg 

SELENIUM 1 1.0002 Kg 

COPPER 1 .1 K8 

NIOH 1 .3 Kg 

NrrCL2 1 . 6001 Kg 

ZINC 1 .25 Kg 

Cd OXIDE 1 .44 Kg 

Cr OXIDE 1 1.49 Kg 

Ag OXIDE 1 .39 Kg 

No OXIDE 1 .51 Kg 

CdN03 2 . 9001 Kg 

pN1: 

202L-92-000705 

325-91-008 

221-T-91-00072 

221-T-91-00073 

221-T-91-00074 

WHC-A81-814 

3314-90-001 

WHC-A-91-802 

WHC-A-91-803 

WHC-A-91-804 

211-089038 

211-089065.A 

PNL88003 

WHC-A88-800 


SHEET18.XLS 

LOT WRAP2A.12 

GENERATORS: 

202AL.200E AREA,ANALYTICAL LAB 

325,300 AREA,APPLIED.CHEM.LAB 

221T,200W AREA,EQUP.DECON 


2EBG,200E AREA,BURIEL GROUNDS 

2345Z,200W AREA,Z PLANT 

1234,3000 AREA.STORAGE 

RANGE 

5-45% 

NA 

2-8 % 

1-80 % 

1-50 % 

10-40% 

50-100 % 

NA 

10-30% 

@75 % 

@25 % 

NA 

RANGE 

NA 

.2-.49 Kg 

.008-.4 Kg 

.1-4.1 Kg 

NA 

NA 

NA 

NA 

NA 

NA 

NA 

NA 

NA 

NA 

NA 

NA 

.55-1.25 Kg 

A2TACHMENT 

87330-92-MLS-026 

Page 12 of 13 

8/10/92 

CODES: 

D007, WT01 

D006,WT02 

D008,0007,D011,WC02 

WT02 

0004,D005,DO10,WC01 

WT01 

D007 

D018, WC02 

D008 

DO11 

D007,WCO1,WT02 

D005,WT02 

D005.0007,D011, WC01 

0004 

TOTAL AVERAGE RANGE 

TOTAL B/G 15 8.48E-03Ci 0-.03 Ci 

U DEPL. 1 S.SE-04 Gr NA 

5rlY 90 4 2.6E-03 Cl . 0005-.008 

Co 60 1 3.BE-03 Cl NA 

Ru/Rh 108 3 1.0E-03 Cl .0008-.0015 

GR'r 144 3 4.2E-03 Cl .003-.0015 

Pm 147 3 .002 Cl .0003-.0015 

H 3 1 1.0E-05 Cl NA 

Sm 151 3 S.OE-04 Ci .0004.0007 

Th 232 3 5235 Gr @5235 Gr 

U 233 3 .007 Gr @.007 Gr 

Eu 155 3 6.0E-OS Cl @B.OE-05 

Pb 212 3 3.0E-04 Ci @3.0E-04 

Ac 228 3 4.OE-04 Cl @4.OE-04 

Rrr 224 3 3.OE-04 Cl @3.0E-04 

11 208 3 1.0E-04 Cl 01.0E-04 

81 212 3 5.0E-04 CI @S.OE-04 

Se 75 1 1.41 E-03 Cl NA 

B. 133 1 3.76E-03 Cl NA 

WHC-A89-804 


COMPLETE RATIONALE FOR TREATMENT ATT. 


2. POLYMER 


D-53

LOT 2A.12 

SHEET 16.XLS 

RECOMMENDEIlTREATMENT 


2 POLYMER 

3. GYPSUM CEIVLfiNT 


.. C.. - C..G. 

ATTACHMENT 

87330-92-MLS-026 

Page 13 of 13 

=-- RATIONALE FOR TREATMENT RECOMMENDATTONS 

e..i


Westtnghouse 

Internal 


From: Restoration Projects 87330-92-MLS-025 

Phone: 372-1362, H2-58 




To: J. L. Westcott 142-58 



W. 0. Greenhulgh LS-31 

R S Kelley H2-58* 

D. R. Lucas G6-46* 

J. G. Riddelle 142-58 



MLS File/LB 

*w/o attachment 

Per your on June 9, 1992 a Solid Waste Information and Tracking System 

data run was pulled on all low-level mixed waste in storage except the 

183H basin. The last two treatment lots have been reviewed by Earl 

McDaniel and are attached. Once again a summary sheet along with 

rationale for treatment recommendations have been assembled. The lots 

are WRAP2A.13 and WRAP2A.14. 

if you have any ciiestiofls or require additional information, please feel 


M. L. Sheriff 


pss 

eaa...L-....4 

MllQU1111C114 

D-55 

Hanbre Ope.sNent and EngMeeHnq CeMrsetor for the US Devsmnent of EneRy

WHC-SD-W100-TI-003 Rev. 0 ATTACHMEtaT 

87330-92-MLS-025 

Page 1 of 4 

SHEET18.XLS 

LDT_]NRAP2A.14 8111192 

CONTAINER INFORMATlON: 

- --- - - 7NR€E55 GAL. nnew r.cycanrnac- 

ONE 10 GAL. ALL AT I Mr 221T,200E AREA,EQUIP.DECON 

202A.200E AREA,PUREX 

CODES: 2345Z,200W AREA,Z PLANT 

D002,D003,D009,WT01 

D002,D003,D008,WT01 

D001,D003,WT01 HAZARDOUS CONST/TUENTS: 

D002,0003 TOTAL AVERAGE RANGE 

Cs OXIDE 1 .5 Kg NA 

PHYSICAL DESCRlPTION: ALN03 1 2.27 Kg NA 

TOTAL AVERAGE RANGE BoFL3 2 .05 Kg . 004-.1 Kg 

DIRT.ETC 2 70% 48-94% Pb 1 3.4 Kg NA 

HAZ.CON. 1 1% NA MERCURY 1 .4999 Kg NA 

PLAS.ETC 4 5.75% 5-7% 

CLOTH 1 95% NA 

BORON 1 1% NA RADIONUCLIDE DlSTR/BU T10N: 

LEAD 1 49% NA TOTAL AVERAGE RANGE 

^"- METAL,ETC 2 43% NA TOTAL B/G 4 3.25E-03 Ci SEE ATT 

CONWED 1 5% NA Sr/Y 90 1 S.OE-04 Ci NA 

Ru/Rh 106 1 B.OE-04 Ci NA 

Cs/Bs 137 1 6.0E-04 Ci NA 

P/N Iy Cs/Pr 144 1 3.1 E-03 Ci NA 

221-T-91-00069 Pm 147 1 1.SE-03 Cl NA 

WHC-A89-806 Sm 151 1 4.OE-04 Cl NA 

211-089-024 

212-089006 

fi'cCOMM'cNDE'u TREATMENT: COMPLETE RATIONALE FOR TREATMENT ATTACHED. 

1. ENCAPSULATION FOR LEAD AND MERCU RY 


3.POLYMER 

D-56 

^ 

„

LOT WRAP A2.14 

SHEET 18.XLS 


WHC-SD-W100-TI-003 Reve 0 

1. ENCAPSULATION FOR LEAD AND MERCURY 

Z. TAILORED GROUT 

3. POLYMER 


ATTACFIMENT 

87330-92-MLS-025 

Page 2 of 4 

Material containing lead and mercury must be sorted. ThC lead is then encapsulated. Mercury is 

distilled from material. Mercury is then encapsulated. Other material may be solidified In either it 

tailored ¢rc,nt or polymer. 

D-57 

TnT^,^ C n-

A:: ii(: 

WHC-SD-W100-TI-003 87330-92-Mrs-025 

Rev. 0 Page .3 of 4 

SHEETI7.XLS 

LOT WRAP2A.13 anlroz 

CONTAINER INFORMATION: 

SIX 55 GAL. GENERATORS: CODES: 

ALL AT 1 Mr 202AL.200E AREA,ANALYTICAL LAB D007,DOO8,WCOI,WP01 

23452,200W AREA,Z PLANT 

WTO1 

218W2A,200W AREA.BURIEL GROUNDS DO02,D008 

D007,000B,WC01 

DOOI,DOO6,WCOI,WTO2 

PNYSIC.4L DESCR/PTIONt 

TOTAL AVERAGE RANGE MAZARDOUS CONST/TUENTS: 

ABSOR._ETC 3 73% 80-80% TOTAL AVERAGE RANGE 

GLASS 1 7% NA CERIUM NO3 1 .11 KO NA 

HAZ.CON. 1 25% NA Pb02 1 . 45 Kg NA 

PLAS,ETC 6 13% 5-34% KBr2 1.45 Kg NA 

METAL,ETC 3 7% 5-9% KC12 1 .45 Kp NA 

DIRT.ETC 3 55% 44-70% KN02 1.45 Kg NA 

PAINTS * 3 11% 2-19% K PERIODAT 1 .22 Kg NA 

WOOD,ETC 1 9% NA KMN04 1 .9 Kp NA 

ACID 2 15% 10-20% ThN03 1.45 Kp NA 

CLOTH.ETC 1 7% NA PbCr2 3 .71 Kg . 0641.9 Kg 

RUBBER 1 1% NA Pb 2 50 Kp 18-84 Kg 

H2SO4 2 . 15 Kp .1-.2 KQ 

RADIONUCLIDE DISTRIBUTION: 

TOTAL AVERAGE RANGE 

TOTAL B/G 6 2.SE-04 Ci SEE ATT 

UUaPL. ---- 1 1.0ec-03 ur NA 

Sr/Y 90 2 1.0E-05 Ci NA 

P% 

202L-92-000704 

RHZ-219-091442 

RHZ-219-091443 

S172-91-001 

S 172-91-002 

219=A21581 




3. POLYMER 

D-58 

--aawx

---- - 

LOT WRAP ZA.13 

SHEET 17.XLS 




3. POLYMER 

WHC-Sq-W100-TI-003 

Rev. 0 

^ - -- - R,4117ON^,.-*-,E FOR-°REAcTNfE1V"r RECOMMENDATiONS 

'C g1„509372].253 

RZ3'AC#1MFi^^ 

87330-92--twl.s-0z5 

P.02[0.3 

Page 4 of, 4 

Requlations require that lead be encapsulated. Drums containing lead must be sorted and lead 

A,,a removed. Drum containing sulfuric acfd must be segregated and acid neutralized prior to 

solidificatioNstabilization. 

Cr' 

..°' 

'^. 

D-59

W Westinghouse WHC-SD-W100-TI-003 Rev . 0 Internal 

- Hanford Company Memo 

From: Restoration Pro,jects 87330-92-MLS-028 

Phone: 372-1362, 1-12-58 



-€HARACTfR1ZATI0N T{!-SUPP'JP.T V.'ASTE-RECEIVING AND PROCESSING 2A 




w. o. Greenhuigh L5-31 

R. S. Kelley H2-58* 

U. R. Lucas G6-46* 




MLS File/LB 

*w/o attachment 

Per your request on June 9, 1992 a Solid Waste Information and Tracking 

System data run was pulled on all low-level mixed waste in storage except 

the 183H basin. This lot represents those containers that have only 

Washington State codes. Once again a summary sheet along with rationale 

for treatment recommendations have been assembled. The lot is WRAP2A.15. 

If you have any questions or require additional information, please feel 


M. L. Sheritt 


pss 

Attachment 

D-60 

y^, HanbrA Opeyllm and EnlineerIng Conlracla for IM US Depsnrnenl of Energy 

a.

n .-.^..-n..^^- .. ... .dJ. ^ 

ShIEE1°1 9.XILS 

LOT WRAP2A.15 

CONTAINER /NfORMA T/ON.• 

SIZE: DOSE: GENERATORS: 

5 GAL 2 1@4 Mr 328,300 AREA 

8 GAL. 1 1@3 Mr 163PA.IOON AREA 

7.609.3615 1 BAL.@1 Mr 331.300 AREA 

55 GAL _._._-302AL,200v AREA.ANALLAB 

241S,200W AREA 

333.300 AREA 

100N,100MAREA 


TRWSG,OFFSITE,TRW INC. 

PHYSICAL DESCR/PTR)N: HAZAROOUS CONS T?VENTS: 

8/20/92 

WASTE CODES: 

WT01 

WT01,WC01 

WC02 

/ OF AVERAGE RANGE / OF AVERAGE RANGE 

HAZ.CONS. 11 8.8% 1-20% BERYLLIUM 2 3.5 KU .005-7 KU 

CLOTH 2 17.5% 10-25% NiOH 2 .088 Kg .002-.135 K8 

GLASS 8 5% 3-10% NaF 1 .9 Kp NA 

METAL 5 10% 1-30% NAOH 1 . 285 Kg NA 

-_W PAPER 3 17% 10-23% NrrNO2 1 .265 KU NA 

PLASTIC 10 13.7% 1-55% HF 1 52.3 Kg NA 

DIRT 7 73% 85-93% KCI 1 1.5 Kg NA 

CONWE}---- 5 33.8%- -- - 1-93-W- - - - 1iN03 3 2.11 KU 1.9-2.3 kp 

ABSORB. 5 55.8% 1-100% H31`04 2 24.5 Kg 20.29 Kg 

FIBERGLS. 1 20% NA ETHY.GLYCOL 1 36.29 Kp NA 

LIQUID 3 3% NA COPPER 1 8.35 Kg NA 

BRICK 1 99% NA 

RAD/ONUCL/DE D/STR/BUT/ON: PIN1 

! OF AVERAGE RANGE 328-90-031 WHA-88-303 

TOTAL B/G 15 9.8E-4 Cl 0-1.47E-3C1 105N-90-231 6803-1-1-34 

H-3 1 2.3E-4 Cl NA PNL-89019 

Mn-54 3 1.3E-4Ci 0-2.2E-4CI 328-88-00125 

Fs-55 1 3.OE-SCI NA 2021-92-000708 

Co-60 3 6.4E-4C1 0-1.1E-3C1 WTF-91-148-05 

C-14 I 1.OE-4Ci NA WHC-3-90-83 

U-OEPL. 2 t 2see Gr •n.Z Rea4G• 10eu-90-232 

U-ENR 1 .1 at NA 105N-90-157 

Sr/Y-90 4 3.SE-5Ci '0-4.OE-SCi 105N-90-158 

Fr59 2 1.3E-4CI 0-1.SE-4Ci IOSN-90-159 

U-NATR. 1 94300 Gr NA 105N-89-874 

105N-89-875 


1. POLYMER 


D-61 

pspsll

LOT WRAP 2A.15 

SHEET 19.XLS 

TREATMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 

1. POLYMER 



RATIONALE FOR TREATMENT RECOMENDATIONS 

Acids must be removed from containers and neutralized prior to treatment. Ethylene glycol should be 

removed and stored for incineration. Since material contains salt, polymer use is design basis. 

nW-uc 6, 

IJ5

--^ 


APPENDIX E 

LITERATURE SEARCH RESULTS 

A. This WHC Letter Report (CEP-W06-001) contains a thorough literature 

search and review of solidification technologies. This review was done 

in support of the WRAP 2A WFQ efforts. It included a review of all known 

solidification technologies. 

B. This report (generated by solidification expert Earl McDanial, ORNL) is a 

review specifically of grouting technology (cement based solidification) 

used throughout the world. This report was done to support the selection 

of a grout technology in WRAP 2A. 

E-1



E-2


Westinghouse 

Hanford Company LITERATURE SEARCH RESULTS 

From: Chemical Process Engineering 

Phone: 6-9616 L5-31 

Date: May 27, 1992 

Subject: WRAP 2A LITERATURE SEARCH 



D. A. Burbank H1-60 


J, G. Riddelle H2-58 

C. A. Petersen H1-60 

WOG/F ile-LB 

Internal 

Memo 

CPE-WOG-001 

A detailed literature search of waste solidification methods has been 

completed and several packets of information generated by the search are 

provided. The typically used materials such as portland cement and 

variations of it are still the primary referenced solidification material. 

However, a couple of new or newer materials are available. These include 

sulfur polymer cement, a thermosetting inorganic binder, Aquaset® and 

Petroset® inorganic binders used for aqueous and organic liquids 

respectively, and Syncrete® a synthetic concrete. These materials will be 

considered, evaluated, or tested along with the more familiar materials; 

information and test samples of all three have been requested. 

To minimize cost and make processing as simple as possible, thermal 

processing was limited to s500°F for WRAP 2A. This eliminates 

vitrification, synthetic rocks, metal matrices, calcines and ceramic waste 

forms from consideration. Also, absorbent materials were not considered 

viable candidates since they could be used as solidification matrices for 

low-level waste, but not mixed waste since they are not expected to retain 

hazardous components and would not normally pass the TCLP test. Some 

searches were done for all solidification methods including vitrification so 

as not to exclude any references that are potentially useful. A summary of 

waste solidification agents is given in Table 1. Table 2 lists the 

-sol-itiifirati-on methods ±hat--are--expected to-be--consi-dered-for application at 

the WRAP 2A Module. 

The use of portland cement and similar materials continues to be the most 

referenced of solidification materials. Slag cement references, however, 

seem to z^ inmr^ro ' nca J`--`- rna ::^t it might retain radionuclide and hazardous elements 

more completelyethan cement. Pozzolan and latex cement might offer 

additional advantages over portland cement for certain chemicals or 

matrfieere iiiêwise ^rwirosioRee and Rlaster-of paris are gypsum cements 

that set well with neutral and acidic wastes. Other cementitious materials 

to consider include grout mixes, polymer modified cement, and SyncreteA. In 

contrast, organic binders offer solidification agents that are expected to 

form waste products exhibiting lower leach characteristics and higher waste 

loadings than cement products. Thus, they will be considered, but they will 

E-3 

NrNOnI oNr°Hnns and EnpYwekV CpNnetor for the US Wo^nt at Emryy

[•.^^ 

h_:... 


Page 2 

May 27, 1992 


- - - - - * CPE-WOG-001 

also be examined for unacceotable flammability or combustibility 

characteristics. The other class of solidifiers is inorganic binders which 

offer some of the characteristics of both cementitious agents and organic 

binders. 

The most useful literature packet is one entitled "Literature Search for 

WRAP Solidifiers." It summarizes most of the important references. The 

literature pointed out a number of additives or modifiers that improve waste 

product performance particularly for cement. Materials such as lime, 

silica, or alumina can improve cement leachability. For gypsum cements, 

retardant modifiers are probably necessary for proper solidification of 

phscerxfoarisand Envirostane*was*.e products' A1so, materials or 

reagents to avoid are important in considering the use of organic binders or 

polymers. A number of these guidelines are included in the literature 

references and summaries. 

This completes the initial phase of the WRAP literature search. We will 

attempi to keep the iiterature search current with time and periodically 

update to support the design work. If you have any questions or comments, 

please call me on 6-9616. 


Chemical Process Engineering 

dfm 

Attachments 

'Envirostone0 is available in a slow set formulation. We have 

submitted a procurement request to obtain some for laboratory testing and 

evaluation. 

E-4 

.

Table 1 

Candidate Waste Forms 

Absorbents Cementitious Materials Or anic Binders 

•Vermiculite •Portland Cement Type I •Bitumen 

Kitty-L#tter - -•Partland Cement •Coid Working Polymers 

•Zeolites Type III -Dow Polymer® 

•Diatomaceous Earth •Pozzolan Cement -Water Extended 

•Calcium Sulfate •Envirostone® Polyester (WEP) 

Dissicants .Plaster of Paris -Epoxies, etc. 

•Silica Gel •Grout ( Hanford- •Heat Setting Polymers 

•Agricuiturai Products Nitrate Mix) -Polyethylene 

(cellulose, corn cobs, •Slag Cement -Polypropylene 

-etc.) •Polymer Modified -Polyurethane 

Cement -Polymethyl 

•Latex Cement Methacrylate, etc. 

•Syncrete® •Polymer Impregnated 

•FUETAP Concrete Concrete ( PIC) or 

•Concreted Pellets other waste form 

•Grout Mixes 

-Salt Resistant 

-Sulfate Resistant 

-Weather Resistant 

-High Density 

-E p oxy Grout 

Calcines Ceramics Inor g anic Binders 

•Salt Cake •Pellets •Sulfur Polymer Cement 

•Metal Oxides •Alkali-Clay Fixation •High Temp Sulfur 

•Granules/Pellets ( Cancrinite) -Water Glass ( Sodium 

•Formed Clay Silicate) 

•Fired Inorganic Resins •Acid Anhydride Melts 

•Aquaset® 

•Petroset® 

Metal Matrices Synthetic Rocks Vitrification 

•Alloy Melts •Titanates (Synroc) •Borosilicate Glass 

•Hardware Fusion -Hydrothermal Process •Phosphate Glass 

•Alumino Silicate Glass 

•Soda Glass 

•Other - Flint/ 

Borate/etc. 

•Fused Soils 

®Envirostone is a trademark of U.S. Gypsum Company. 

--®Dow- Polymet•-is--a trademark of Davr Chemica i Company. 

•Aquaset is a trademark of Fluid Tech, Inc. 

•Petroset is a trademark of Fluid Tech, Inc. 

®Syncrete is a trademark of STMI of France. 

E-5


Table 2 

Viable Candidate Waste Forms 

for WRAP 2A 

Cementitious Materials Organic Binders Inorganic Binders 

•Portland Cement Type 

•Portland Cement 

Type III 

-+Poaaol-an Cement 

•Envirostone® 

•Plaster of Paris 

•Slag Cement 

;Polymer Modified 

Cement 

•Latex Cement 

•Syncretem 

•Concreted Pellets 

•Grout Mixes 

-Salt Resistant 

-Sulfate Resistant 

-Weather Resistant 

I •Bitumen 

•Cold Working Polymers 

-Dow Polymer® 

=Water Extended 

Polyester (WEP) 

-Epoxies, etc. 

•Heat Setting Polymers 

-Polyethylene 

-Polypropylene 

-Polyurethane 

-Polymethyl 

Methacrylate, etc. 

•Polymer Impregnated 

Concrete 

•Sulfur Polymer Cement 

•High Temp Sulfur 

•Water Glass (Sodium 

Silicate) 

•Acid Anhydride Melts 

•Aquasetm 

•Petrosetm 

-Hiah Densitv 

_ 

-Epoxy Grout ' 

®Envirostone is a trademark of U.S. Gypsum Company. 

®Dow Polymer is a trademark of Dow Chemical Company. 

®Aquaset is a trademark of Fluid Tech, Inc. 

®Petroset is a trademark of Fluid Tech, Inc. 

®Syncrete is a trademark of STMI of France. 

E-6

--- -Aauaspt and Pe-liroset 


LITERATURE SEARCH FOR WRAP SOLIDIFIERS 

1. "Aquaset and Petroset," Technical Data Sheet, Fluid Tech, Inc., 

Las Vegas, NV. 

B itume n 

Aquaset is designed for aqueous waste and Petroset is designed for 

organic liquids. Up to 40 to 48 gallons of liquid can be solidified in 

a 55 gallon drum. - 

1. S. Simpson, H.-lidal, and M. Morris, "Mixed and Chelated Waste Test 

Programs with Bitumen Solidification," Spectrum '88, 

September 11-15, 1988, Pasco, WA, pp 323-325. 

;-, Bitumen solidification tests with mixed and chelated wastes were carried 

=- • out. Test results are still being evaluated for 10 CFR-61 type 

v.,* analyses. 

= 2. M. Snellman and M. Valkiainen, "Long Term Behavior of Bituminized 

Waste," Waste 

,... cni_Sn7 

rN . 

Management '86, Vol. 3, March 2-6, 1986, Tucson, AZ, 

^Y 

Water uptake by bitumen solidified ion exchange resin was studied. 

Water uptake corresponded to the resin content, but no unacceptable 

bitumen product long term effects were observed. 

3. A. J. Mattus, R. D. Doyle, and D. P. Swindlehurst, "Asphalt 

Solidification of Mixed Wastes," Waste Management '88, Vol. 1, 

February 28 - March 3, 1988, Tucson, AZ, pp 229-234. 

Solidification of some mixed waste with bitumen can be used to "delist" 

the waste so it can be disposed of as a radioactive waste. 

4. A. Bernard, A. C. Nomine, G. Cornec, A. Bonnet, and L. Farges, "Long 

Term Leaching Tests on Full-Scale Blocks of Radioactive Wastes," Nuclear 

and Chemical Waste Management , Vol. 3, pp 161-168, 1982. 

Cement 

Leaching tests on full size waste blocks showed bitumen exhibited leach 

advantages over cement based waste products. 

1. C. V. Mclsaac, D. W. Akers, J. W. McConnell, and N. Morcos, "Leach 

Studies on Cement-Solidified Ion Exchange Resins from Decontamination 

Processes at Operating Nuclear Power Stations," EGG-M-92090, Idaho 

National Engineering Laboratory, EG&G Idaho, Inc., Idaho Falls, ID. 

Tested Cemented resin samples against NRC requirements, the samples did 

not pass the tests. 

2. L. Weitzman and L. E. Hamel, "Evaluation of Solidification/Stabilization 

as a Best Demonstrated Available Technology for Contaminated Soils," 

PB89-169908, Acurex Corporation, Research Triangle Park, NC, March 1989. 

E-7


Literature Search WRAP 2A 

Page 2 of 9 

Soils with metals and organics was solidified with cement, lime, and 

flyash. 

The resul-ting rCLp tests sh,owed metal leach rates were lowered but 

little or no retention effects were shown with the organics. 

3. B. G. Place, "Treatment Technology for Transuranic Waste Streams-- 

Cementation, Vitrification, and Incineration Testing for the Treatment 

of Spent Ion Exchange Media," WHC-EP-0462, Technical Report, 

Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, WA, April 1992. 

Physical pretreatment of ion exchange resin prior to cement 

solidification enhances product characteristics and waste packing 

efficiencies. 

4._-_ C. G-.Howard, "Advanced-Cementatinn Concepts Final Report," AEEW-R2398, 

Winfrith Technology Centre, Winfrith, United Kingdom, October 1989. 

The addition of limestone flour or microsilica to cement solidifications 

reduces the cesium leachability. Microsilica acts as a pore blocker, 

and limestone flour acts as a cesium absorber. 

5. G. W. Veazey, "The Cement Solidification Systems at LANL," 

LA-UR-90-4161, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM. 

They used an "End Over End" mixer applying cement solidification to 

basic sludges, and Envirostonem solidification to acidic wastes and 

organic compounds. 

6._ S. Hoyle and M. W. Grutzeck, "Effects of Phase Composition on the Cesium 

Leachability of Cement-Based Waste Forms," Waste Management '86, Vol. 3, 

Tucson, AZ, pp 491-496. 

Cesium leachability performance is improved by increasing the silica or 

alumina content of the binding cement matrix. 

7. S. L. Unger and R. W. Telles, "Surface Encapsulation Process for 

Managing Low-Level Radioactive Wastes," Waste Management '86, Vol. 1, 

Tucson, AZ, pp. 555-558. 

They applied surface encapsulation polymers namely polyethylene and poly 

butadiene to seal the cement solidified waste material. 

8. D. F. Fischer and T. R. Johnson, "Immobilization of IFR Salt Wastes in 

Mortar," Spectrum '88, September 11-15, 1988, Pasco, WA, pp 102-104. 

The addition of flyash to the cement enhanced chloride leachability 

performance for calcium and potassium chloride salt wastes. Leach 

indices were above 7 for the 10% salt mixtures. 

9 L. Jaouen-and-B. îgreux, "Cement Soiidification of Spent ion Exchange 

Resins Produced by the Nuclear Industry," Spectrum '88, 

September 11-15, 1988, Pasco, WA, pp 105-108. .:° 

r n 

C-O

- 

'^ - 

qev. r' 


Page 3 of 9 

They chemically pretreated the resin wastes prior to solidification to 

enhance immobilization. They achieved a 40 to 75% encapsulation ratio. 

10. B. M. Rzyski and A. A. Suarez, "Setting Temperature Evolution of Nitrate 

Radwaste Immobilized in Ordinary Portland Cement," Spectrum '88, 


Nitrates change the"cement hydration reaction and lower the hydration 

temperature. 

ii. J. W. McConnell, Jr., R. M. Neilson, Jr., and R. D. Rogers, "Testing 

Waste Forms Containing High Radionuclide Loadings," Waste Management 

'86, Vol.1, Tucson, AZ, March 2-6, 1986, pp 259-266. 

. 

EPiCDR Il--resins from-T-,14I-2-were so3idi€ied with port,'and cement and Dow 

Polymer ( vinyl ester-styrene). The waste forms were tested against NRC 

(10-CFR-61) requirements, the Dow polymer was attacked by fungus; 

otherwise all tests were positive. 

- Il: T. F. Schuier and "u. L. Charlesworth, "Solidification of Radioactive 

Incinerator Ash," Waste Management '86, Vol. 1, Tucson, AZ, 

March 2-6, 1986, pp 489-493. 

ASHCRETE. The ashcrete process uses an automatic tumbler mixer from 

Stock Equipment Co. that adds ash waste to cement, sand and water to 

form an ash concrete. 

13. W. 0. Greenhalgh, "The Immobilization of Organic Liquid Wastes," Waste 

Management '86, Vo1.3, Tucsor, AZ, March 2-6, 1986, pp 255-260. 

Report described immobilization of organic liquids ( oil, NPN, etc.) 

using cement in combination with emulsifiers. 

-14.---ifi:-G-. towgil1,-"A Comparison of Solidification Media for the 

Stabilization of Low-Level Radioactive Wastes," BNL-52304, Brookhaven 

National Laboratory, Upton, NY, October 1991. 

The document compares the solidification characteristics of Cement, 

thermoplastic polymers, Thermosetting polymers, and Gypsum. The binding 

of cesium and certain other elements is difficult for cement and gypsum; 

flammability and incorporation of oxidizing agents are difficult with 

the polymer media. A comparisvn-tabie is included. 

15. R. L. Gay and L. F. Grantham, "High Strength Cementized Dried Resins," 

Waste Management '86, Vol. 3, March 2-6, 1986, Tucson, AZ, pp 479-483. 

Chemically spent resins pretreated in a high efficiency drier were found 

to be nearly impermeable to water and therefore formed satisfactory 

products when solidified with cement. Swelling is often a problem 

when -H and -OH type resins are solidified with cement. 

16. --8.- Siskind-,- :i.-kt. .4dams,- 1. H. C.l-i-aton,- and P:1. Pici„1o, "The Effect 

of Cure Cor,diti-0ns on the Stability-^f r ..O ... ^ânt ^.. Waste Forms after 

inonersion in Water," Waste Management '88, Vol. 1, February 28 - 

March 3, 1988, Tucson, AZ, pp 613-618. 

E-9



Page 4 of 9 

Some formulations exhibited typical cure patterns, others did not 

particularly those with high resin loadings. 

17. B. L. Ganser, "Cementation - A Solution for Final Disposal," Waste 

Management '90, Vol. 2, February 25 - March 1, 1990, Tucson, AZ, 

pp 527-533. 

Rlast furnaie s7ay^-Cement showed-Iower -radionuclide 

r leach results than 

portland cement. Cement products formed by direct cementation of liquid 

wastes showed excellent mechanical properties. Tong term stability of 

cement looked good except under unrealistic harsh conditions. 

18. K. Sauda, F. Todo, T. Nakashima, T. Kagawa, and H. Kuribayashi, 

"Advanced Cement-Solidification Process for Spent Ion-Exchange Resins," 

Waste Management '90, February 25 - March 1, 1990, Tucson, AZ, 

pp 299-303. 

-_ , 

Spent ion-exchange resins were pretreated and modification made to 

enhance cement solidification. They included ( 1) adsorption of Na, Ca, 

^- --- -- andotherionss ( 2) improvement of the cement binder, (3) coating the 

resin with polyester or other sealant, and (4) resin pretreatment to 

increase the water content. 

19. H. J. Funk and R. Pfeiffer, "Solidification by Cementation of Liquid 

Radioactive Primary Waste Mixes," Waste Management '90, February 25 - 

March 1, 1990, Tucson, AZ, pp 803-807. 

They used an in-drum cement mixing method to solidify evaporator and 

other process residues of primarily sodium nitrate. A water to cement 

ratio of O.a5 was used to yield a compressive strength product of 10 

N/sq mm. 

--- ZD.-__A,_M_ Boehmer_and-M. M.Larsen,_"So1.idi-firat9om o-f-tlazardous and M,;xed 

Radioactive Waste at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory," Waste 

Management '86, Vol. 1, March 2-6, 1986, Tucson, AZ, pp 635-642. 

Mixed wastes were successfully solidified using cement, cement-silicate, 

or Envirostone to produce non-toxic stable waste forms. In-drum mixers 

or rotary drum mixers were used to prepare the test drums. 

21. J. A. Stone and P. D. d'Entremont, "Measurement and Control of Cement 

Set Times in Waste Solidification," DP-1404, Technical Report, Savannah 

River Laboratory, Aiken, SC, September 1976. 

The report addresses the use of set retarders particularly Pozzolith 

122-R and showed that retarders could be used to control the cementwaste 

set times. 

22. "Atcor Radwaste Solidification Systems," Technical Data Sheet, Atcor 

Engineered Systems, Inc., Chem-Nuclear Company, Avon, CT. 

Atcor has cement and Dow polymer feed storage systems, in-line or incontainer 

(steel liners) mixer systems, and support systems to provide 

waste solidification services per customer needs. 

E-10

Dow Polymer 



Page 5 of 9 

1. H. E. Filter and K. Roberson, "The Dow System for Solidification of Low 

Level Radioactive Wastes from Nuclear Power Plants," Technical Report, 

Dow Chemical Company, Midland, MI, May 1977. 

Envirostone 

This is one of the initia7 Company reports describing Dow Polymer and it 

use as a solidification agent. 

1. T. L. Rosenstiel, S. P. Bodett, and R. G. Lange, "Envirostone Gypsum 

Cement," 1984 Topical Report, United States Gypsum, Libertyville, IL. 

This report details the qualification of Envirostone Gypsum Cement per 

e` .P 10 CFR-61 type tests. Test samples include boric acid, ion exchange 

resin, and oil wastes; all waste products tested were qualified. 

2. T. L. Rosenstiel and R. G. Lange, "The Solidification of Low Level 

Radioactive Organic Fluids with Envirostone Gypsum Cement," Waste 

Management '84, March 11-15, 1984, Tucson, AZ, pp 169-172. 

Grout 

The report covers the successful solidification of oils using 

emulsifiers in conjunction with Envirostone cement. 

I. E: L. Wiihite and R. L. Hooker, "Saltstone Processing Startup at the 

Savannah River Plant," Spectrum '88, September 11-15, 1988, Pasco, WA, 

pp 99-101. 

Predicted maximum ground-water concentration of all contaminants from 

saltstone disposal are below ground-water standards based on modeling 

studins_ 

2. T. M. Gilliam, R. D. Spence, B. S. Evans-Brown, I. L. Morgan, 

J. L. Shoemaker, and W. D. Bostick, "Performance Testing of Blast 

Furnace Slag for Immobilization of Technetium in Grout". Spectrum '88, 


The addition of slag cement improved the retention of technetium and to 

a lesser extent nitrate. 

3. C. A. Langton, "Metal Toxicity Evaluation of Savannah River Plant 

Saltstone Comparison of EP and TCLP Test Results," Waste Management '88, 

Vol. 1, February 28 - March 3, 1988, Tucson, AZ, pp 197-203. 

Based on EP and TCLP tests, chromium Is chemically stabilized in s7ag 

based-3&l-titone and physically entrapped in the cement based saltstone. 

The_chemica7 stabilization is preferred ( better)! 

4. T. L. Sams and E. W. McDaniel, "Development of a Cement-Based Grout for 

Immobilization of a Low Level Waste Stream containing Sodium Sulfate," 

Waste Management '88, Vol. 1, February 28 - March 3, 1988, Tucson, AZ, 

pp 703-708. 

- E-11



Page 6 of 9 

The grout contained cement type III, flyash, attapulgite clay, and 

indian red pottery clay. The formulations are on page 705. 

5. E. G. Collins and G. Magnin, "Final Design and Start-up of the 

Transportable Grout Equipment Facility at Hanford," Waste Management 

'88; VoT.--i, February 28 - March 3, 1988, Tucson, AZ, pp 751-759. 

The TGE facility is a remote operating grout mixing facility. 

f:. -- - J. E. Van Beek-a.n.d-D.-D. Wodrich,--"Gro!^± Disposal System for Hanford 

rfiized Waste;" Waste Management '90; Vol.--!, February 25 - March 1, 1990, 

Tucson, AZ, pp 797-802. 

The system has been designed to meet hazardous waste regulations and has 

^L.--- 

1lI)LIdLPO (l(IPI'.il//)/I5. 

7: C. A. Langton, M. D. Dukes, and R. V. Simmons, "Cement-Based Waste Forms 

for Disposal of Savannah River Plant Low-Level Radioactive Salt Waste," 

DP-MS-83-71, Technical Report, Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, SC, 

November 14-17, 1983. 

A cement based grout waste form has been designed to treat 100 million 

liters of soluble salt waste, the waste form is termed "salt stone". 

8. 0. K. Tallent, E. W. McDaniel, G. D. Del Cul, K. E. Dodson, and 

R6-$A^ 

- . . . -_""---- ---='v: R:`-rr-^ìtter ,-'"ifTlilR'i i iizatTii ui ia^h netlum-an -Ni$rate in Cement-Based 

Materials," Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc., Vol 112, 1988, pp 23-32. 

The Ieachabilities of technetium and nitrate wastes immobilized in 

cement-based grouts have been investigated using ANS 16.1 test 

prgcedures.- -factors found to affect the leachabilities include grout 

mix ratio, fluid density, blend composition, and waste composition. 

9.--------'r!: 0: Greenhaigh, R:-J:-Cash, and M.-A. Christif,- "T-Rti- Waste- im-mobiiized 

---- -- ---------- - inGr-out;^Waste Management '88, Vol. 2, Tucson, Arizona, February 28 - 

March 3, 1988, pp 309-316. 

Various portland cement based grout compositions mixed with shredded 

solid waste was tested for WIPP and NRC compliance criteria. Some 

compositions passed all tests. 

Hydrothermal Solidification Process 

1. Y. Nishihara, T. Kashiwai, and N. Yamazaki, "Development of the Waste 

Solidification Process Utilizing Hydrothermal Reaction," Waste 

Management '86, Vol. 3, March 2-6, 1986, Tucson, AZ, pp 485-490. 

The hydrothermal reaction is characterized by reacting mixed powders 

---- ---------- surh-as-?nE-ineratnr ashes, solidification material, and aqueous alkali 

at relatively high temperatures and pressures to form a synthesized 

rock. 

E-12

L im e 


Page 7 of 9 

1. A. Dupont, "Lime Treatment of Liquid Waste Containing Heavy Metals, 

Radionuclides, and Organics", Technical Fact Sheet, National Lime 

Association, Arlington, Virginia, August 1, 1986. 

Polvethvlene 

1. _ _P. 0, _Kal b _and P. Colombo, _"PoLve-thyl ene -Sol Ui ficati on of Low-Level 

Wastes," BNL 51867, Topical Report, Brookhaven National Laboratory, 

Upton, NY, October 1984. 

Polyethylene was tested and evaluated as a radwaste immobilization 

media; recommendations are given on sodium sulfate, boric acid, 

incinerator ash, and ion exchange resin wastes. 

2. P. D. Kalb, J. H. Heiser, and P. Colombo, "Polyethylene Encapsulation of 

Nitrate Salt Wastes: Waste form Stability, Process Scale-Up, and 

Economics," BNL-52293, Topical Report, Brookhaven National Laboratory, 

Upton, NY, July 1991. 

A polyethylene encapsulation system for treatment of 1ow-Ieve1 

radioactive, hazardous, and mixed waste has been developed and appears 

to offer several advantages over more conventional methods such as 

cement. 

Polymer Imoreanated Concrete (PIC) 

1. Brookhaven National Laboratory Progress Reports for the Development of 

Durable Lono-Term Radioactive Waste Composite Materials , No. 1-10, 

_ __zluly 1972 - Apri1 1_975,_Bronkhavan Natinnal Laboratory, Upton, NY. 

2. Brookhaven National Laboratory Progress Reports for the SRL Lono-Term 

Waste Storaae Suooort Progress , No. 1-8, July 1973 - January 1975, 

Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY. 

Cemented waste is impregnated with a Iow viscosity polymer such as 

styrene after the cement has been cured. The catalyst (benzoyl 

peroxide) is then added at 0.5 wt% and the material polymerized within 3 

to 4 hours at 50 to 70'C. Product leaching performance is improved a 

factor of 100 and compression strengths are 3 to 10 fold higher. 

Sulfur Polymer Cement 

1. P. 0. Kalb and P. Colombo, "Modified Sulfur Cement Solidification of 

Low-Level Wastes,"BNL 51923, Topical Report, Brookhaven National 

---Lab4ratory,_U¢ton,_NYr-Qctober-1-985: 

Sulfur Polymer Cement was tested as a radwaste solidification agent. It 

appears to produce an acceptable waste form and recommendations for 

sodium sulfate, boric acid, and incinerator ash wastes are provided. 

E-13



Page 8 of 9 

2. P. D. Kalb, J. H. Heiser III, and P. Colombo, "Encapsulation of Mixed 

Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Contaminated Incinerator Ash in Modified 

Sulfur Cement," BNL-43691, Technical Report, Brookhaven National 

Laboratory, Upton, NY. 

The sulfur polymer cement will hold about three times more incinerator 

ash than regular cement waste products. 

3. P. D. Kalb, J. H. Heiser III, and P. Colombo, "Comparison of Modified 

Sulfur Cement and Hydraulic Cement for Encapsulation of Radioactive and 

Mixed Wastes," BNL-45163, Technical Report, Brookhaven National 

I 1. e+....., nn+nn klv 

LGVVr14V1^, V'/FVI1, 1.1. 

The report claims significantly greater waste loadings-for the sulfur 

polymer cement versus the regular hydraulic cement for radwastes. 

4. G. R. Darnell, W. C. Aldrich, and J. A Logan, "Full-Scale Tests of 

Sulfur Polymer Cement and Non-Radioactive Waste in Heated and Unheated 

Prototypical Containers," Informal Report, EGG-WM-10109, Idaho National 

Engineering Laboratory, Idaho Falls, Idaho, February 1992. 

Syncrete 

They found sulfur polymer cement to be superior to portland cement in 

so7idfying ash material. 

1. S. Cohen and P. Crouzet, "A High Efficient Polymer Cement Embedding 

Matrix for Waste Processing," Waste Management '86, Vol. 1, 

March 2-6, 1986, Tucson, AZ, pp 583-588. 

Other 

Syncrete (synthetic concrete) is a composite matrix of ordinary 

hydraulic cement and a thermosetting polymer mixture. The Syncrete 

exhibits a significantly reduced water uptake. 

1. K. D. Wiel^lers, J. E. Mendel, A. A. Kruger, L. R. Bunnell, and 

G. B. Mellinger, "Preliminary Assessment of Candidate Immobilization 

Technologies for Retrieved Single-Shell Tank Wastes," PNL-7918, 

Technical Report, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, WA, 

January 1992. 

It lists candidate waste forms for low-level, transuranic, and highlevel 

wastes. 

2. W. 0. Greenhalgh, "Disposal Concepts for Wastes in Underground Single- 

Shell Storage Tanks at the Hanford Site," WHC-SA-1344-FP, Technical 

Report, Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, WA, January 1992. 

----- ------ -------Jieport-lists-candidate-waste-f-orms-or-methods-being considered for 

Immobilization of radioactive tank waste. 

3. P. D. Kalb and P. Colombo, "Full Scale Leaching of Commercial Reactor 

"--`- easte F-^ rvrms, " BNL 35561, Technical Report, Brookhaven National 

Laboratory, Upton, NY, September 1984. 

E-14 -

The report compares the 7eachability of 

and masonry cement versus Dow polymer. 

rates for transition metal ions such as 

cesium. The Dow polymer showed similar 

radionuclides indicating an encapsulatii 


Page 9 of 9 

several cements, type I, III, 

The cements showed lower 7each 

cobalt and higher ones for 

leach rates for cesium and other 

ig mechanism. 

4. Alternatives for Manaqino Wastes from R eacto rs and Fissi onOoe rations i 

the LWR Fuel Cycle . EROA-76-43, Vol. 2, May 1976, Pacific Northwest 

Laboratories, Richiand, WA, Sections 12.0 to 12.41. 

The included Section provides a comprehensive summary of solidification 

methods used prior to 1976 for low-level wastes. 

r ' e 

C-18


Westinghouse Internal 


From: Chemical Process Engineering 

Phone: 6-9616 L5-42 

Date: May 29, 1992 

Subject: WRAP 2A LITERATURE SEARCH UPDATE - NOTE ON SULFUR POLYMER CEMENT 





WOG/File-LB 

The hotte^t sC?id1-fiCation-med-i-a ^rr the-market- in recent years is sulfur 

polymer cement, sold as CHEMENT 2000. It is elementary sulfur 

(approximately 95%) mixed with a thermosetting polymer (dicyclopentadiene) 

that melts at 119°C. The sulfur polymer cement (SPC) was developed by the 

,.; Sulfur institute of Washington D.C. to provide an additional market for 

suifur materiais. it was found to be very useful in coating, covering, or 

actually replacing concrete in applications where acidic or salt corrosion 

were severe. It has been shown in many of these applications to be superior 

to portland type concrete or cement products with the possible exception of 

polymer impregnated concrete. The reason for its enhanced performance in 

the above mentioned areas is probably the chemistry of the system. 

Portland cement mixes and concrete matrices are basic exhibiting an initial 

pH of about 13. Sulfur on the other hand is probably best considered as an 

Arhennius type acid. This means that sulfur would likely provide an 

excellent solidification media for acidic materials or provide protection 

from attack by acidic materials, but would likely react with or be attacked 

by basic materials. Cement or concrete on the other hand stabilizes base 

type materials well and the product matrix is stable to attacks by bases. 

It turns out both materials are fairly compatible with neutral materials and 

are generally stable in a neutral environment. It is recommended that SPC 

not be used to solidify any base as strong or stronger than sodium carbonate 

to avoid forming an unstable product, particularly if water is present. An 

example of an acid-base reaction is given below. 

Na2CO3 + H2O + S =- NaHCO3 + NaHS + 1/202 

In addition to sulfur exhibiting acidic properties, sulfur is also a 

reducing agent. That means that it should not be mixed with, nor used to 

immobilize, oxidizing materials or materials with significant quantities of 

axidantsY The amounts of nitrite or nitrate material that can be present in 

SPC treated waste materials needs to be defined. In addition, sulfur is a 

combustible material (flashpoint 188°C) which burns with a very light blue, 

E-16 

Hanford Operatione and EnpineeAnp Contractor for the US Department of Enarpy


Page 2 

May 29, 1992 


almost invisible, flame that emits sulfuric acid type fumes. Care should be 

taken to limit SPC mixing or handling temperatures well below the flashpoint 

region. 

^1 /• ^ ^ l^ ^, 


rhamiral Drnroee Fnninuurinn 

-..-....--. ..---^^ -.^...^^...7 

ldc 

E-17

,RTIN MARIETTA ENERGY SYSTEMS, INC. 

Mr. J. L. Westcott 

Westinghouse Hanford Company 

Post Office Box 1970, H2-58 

Richland, Washington 99352 

De,jr Jeff: 


Reports and Papers Discussing Alternate Solidification Technologies 

POST OFFICE BOX 2008 

OAK RIDGE. TENNESSEE 37831 

April 24, 1992 

Enclosed is a list of the vendor reports, technical data sheets and papers that I am mailing to you as 

I promised to do when I returned from my vacation. 

These are being mailed to you in two separate packages and will be labeled #1 and #2. 

EWM:jew 

Enclosures 

cc: C. H. Brown, Jr. 

^:. : Ta::e;^ 

E-18 

Best Regards, 

Earl W. McDaniel 

Chemical Technology Division

Package #1: 

Package #2: 


LIST OF REPORTS AND PAPERS 

DISCUSSING ALTERNATE SOLIDIFICATION TECHNOLOGIES 

(1) Nuclear Waste: Solidification Programs 

(2) __ Lime_Treatment of Liquid Waste Containing Heavy Metals, Radionuclides, and 

Organics - Part I - Processes for Treatment 

(3) Immobilization of Rocky Flats Wastes Using the Inert Carrier Process 

(4) Reaction of Formaldehyde and Nitric Acid in a Remotely Operated Thermosiphon 

Evaporator 

(5) Envirostone - Gypsum Cement 

(6) Waste Generation Reduction - Nitrates Comprehensive Report of Dcnitr': cation 

Technologies 

(7) Syncrete - A High Efficient Polymer Cement Embedding Matrix for Waste Processing 

(8) Solidi6cation/Stabilization - Mechanisms & Applications 

(9) Solidification of Nitrate Salt Wastes - RMN-15-86 

(10) VERI (Vinyl Ester Resin In Situ) Solidification Process for Low-Level Radioactive 

Waste 

(11) Service Summary - Diversified Technologies 

(12) A Waste Management System Utilizing WPS, HVV, and VERI Process Systems and 

Technology 

(13)-- Radioactive Waste Management and Disposal 

(14) Solid Solutions for Your Toxic Metal and Organic Wastes 

(15) Report of Note (LLRW) 

(16) Low-TemperatureCeramicRadioactiveWasteFormCharacterizationofSupercalcine- 

Based Monazite-Cement Composites 

(17) Operating Cost Estimate Low Level Radioactive Waste Volume Reduction and 

Packaging Options 

(18) Abbreviated Statement of Qualifications 

E-19

Internal Correspondence 

Mr. Jeff Wuestcott 


P. O. Box 1970, N3-12 


Dear Jeff: 

WHC-SD-W100-TI-003 Rev. F 

MARTIN MARIETTA ENERGY SYSTEMS, INC. 

August 21, 1991 

Milestone Letter Report: Cement Grout Technology Final Report Due August, 1991 

Enclosed is a copy of the above milestone titled, "Survey of Grouting Technology in Support of 

WRAP's Shred-Grout Module, Final Report." 

if there are any questions or comments,rtease call F1S 624-0439. 

EWMcD:jen 

Enclosure 

Best Regards, 

Earl W. McDaniel, Manager 

------- --$anfordfrrout Program 

Chemical Technology Division 

E-20


SURVEY OF_GROUTING TECHNOTO('TY 

IN SUPPORT OF 

WRAP'S SHRED GROUT MODULE 

FINAL REPORT 

A Letter Report Prepared 

for Westinghouse Hanford Company 

Richland, WA 

L^-^ ^:.a.. :::. .*.",cDaniel 


Oak Ridge National Iaboratory^ 

Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-6044 

'Managed by Martin Marietta Energy Systems. Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy 

under contract DE-AC05-34OR21400. 

E-21


SURVEY OF GROUTING TECHNOLOGY IN SUPPORT OF 

WRAP'S SHRED-GROUT MODULE 

•- L ------ 

MliJt^ XcPURT 

Introduction 

This ftnal letter report in support of WRAP's shred-grout module is more an extension of the 

April 1991 draft report than a final version. The April 1991 report discussed ;routint, facilities at a 

variety.of US DOE sites and provided informatior;ab9sttthe-use of--routsinrhe iru France, 

Germany, Korea, Japan, Finland, and Taiwan. Over fifty reports and papers were supplied as 

supporting documents. Very little information from the draft report will be repeated in this letter 

report, only the executive summary and the introduction. The draft report made no 

--recammendations, dr'w no conclusions or discussed lessons learned. This Threport will address these 

4epics.--Also included are -a number of-additionai reports and documents in support of WRAP's 

shred-grout module. 

LESSONS LEARNED 

.. . 

--- --- --- -Processand-.ormtlafion developmert in listed papers and reporis aescnoed success stories. IF vou 

do things in the prescribed manner the end result will be an acceptable product. The major lesson 

learned was from information provided by the Martin Marietta Energy Systems K-25 Site Sludge 

Fixation Facility. The problems at this facility have received wide press coverage. This facility can 

serve as an example as what not to do or what happens when processes are not properly developed 

prior to plant operations. 

Little process development was performed prior to plant design and construction. The feelings were 

t hat we were just making concrete, not doing brain surgery, and anyone can make good concrete. 

It is a well established art. 

- ^-«

f ..;' 


A summary of plant operations is as follows: the manner in which -the sludge tieation facility was 

operated was generally sloppy and not governed by any established operating procedures. Training 

for the operators was on-the-job with no written tests or performance testing. Little attention was 

given to quality assurance planning or execution. There was no apparent effort in quality control of 

the product. 

A minimal level of outside expertise and advice was sought throughout the project. No concrete 

batch experience was acquired or used in the development work and virtually none was sought for 

plant operations. 

Pressutes to keep cost of the sludge fixation facility operation down were immense. It should be 

noted that a development program costing between SO.75M and S1.5M up front could have avoided 

a 550-100M retrofit. The perception that the sludge fixation facility was not important affected both 

funding and operator attitude. 

The principal causes of the problem were: (1) the process equipment utilized was inadequate to 

solidify low solids containing sludge, (2) no final product inspections of solidified waste forms were 

conducted, (3) a "self-inflicted" schedule for solidification was imposed, (4) there were no personnel 

primarily dedicated to managing the project, (5) there was no involvement of middle and upper 

management, and (6) the quality assurance program was ineffective. 

$^.rther c:rr.tple offaihne is the RocRy ;,ats pondcrete problem, in which little or no development 

effort was done and no attention given to final product quality. The Rocky Flats issue appears to 

be headed for court, so little else will be said beyond there appears to be both a legal and technical 

problem there. 

One example of well-developed processes is the Savannah River Site Saltcrete process, which was 

well developed and has been operating for several months with no problems. Support documentation 

is supplied in the April 1941 dra€^repcrt. The Han^rd Grout Treatment facility has also completed 

one successful campaign and is in the process of developing formulae for additional waste streams. 

This effort is also documented in the earlier letter report. 

E-23


The above examples are listed only to serve as what can happen if proper attention is not devoted 

to up-front development and is not intended to be all-inclusive. 

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

The major conclusions to be drawn from the literature search are: (1) much development effort has 

been devoted to tixing a variety of waste in a cement-based matrix, and (2) each waste stream must 

be carefully characterized prior to any successful development effort. 

The following recommendation is germane: a well defined technology development effort that starts 

with lab scale, progresses through pilot scale, and ends in full scale testing and demonstration is 

necessary to assure successful plant design and operation. 

It is recommended that the Shred-grout development effort in support of WRAP start in FY-1992 

to assure that adequate information in process development and equipment selection be available 

when needed. 

It is recommended-that a team be-organized consisting of at least the following persons: (1) a R&D 

manager. ( 2) a R&D engineer. (3) a QA specialist, and (4) a compliance specialist. 

The manager should be the point of contact for information flow and should be dedicated full-time 

to the effort. The (project) engineei should be responsible for any design, construction, or 

--- -- - engir:eering-work-needed to support development work. l}te engineer should also be responsible for 

costs and budgets. The QA specialist will be necessary to insure quality is "built in" throughout the 

development effort. The compliance specialist will assure that the end product meets or exceeds 

regulatory requirements. The compliance specialist will be responsible for assuring that all activities 

are carried out in compliance with federal, state, and local regulations, laws, and standards for 

protection of the environment and the safety and health of involved employees and the public. 

----_A closing Statemen-twotSldbr tFtat-}t ts-Chealpe-Ftt3do it Co.i°ccth% the first time. 

E-24




E. W. McDaniel 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF APRIL 1991 DRAFT REPORT 

This letter report covers a wide variety of grouting and other information that may be 

applicable to WRAP's Shred-Grout Task. Very little information is available on past, or present, 

operations of fixing shredded solids in a cement-based matrix. 

Information is provided about ORNL's Hydrofracture Process, the K-25 Site Sludge 

Fixation Facility, SRS Saltstone, Hanford's Grout Treatment Facility, and PPEPP at INEL. 

Limited information is provided on grouting efforts at Rocky Flats, West Valley, and Mound 

Labs. 

Information is provided on cement-based fixation efforts in a number of European and 

Asian countries. 

A literature search is included that addressed low-level waste solidification technology. 

Also, included is a strategic planning document on low-level waste disposal and demonstration 

programs at Oak Ridge, Tennessee. This report also contains a three volume report about waste 

management processes in the nuclear industry. 

E-25


IN'I'RODUCTION FROM APRII.1991 DRAFT REPORT 

This letter report covers a variety of cement-based grouting technologies, both national 

and international, that may be applicable to Westinghouse Hanford Company's Waste Receiving 

and Processing (WRAP) Shred-Grout effort. WRAP's mission is to process past and currently 

guenerated solid low-level (SLLW), mixed (MLW), and transuranic (TRU) waste at the Hanford 

site. Richland, Washington. As this is an internal letter report, no background on WRAP is 

provided. 

The waste to be processed by WRAP has been generated in defense related efforts and 

are, in many cases, unique to this industry. However, the commercial sector of the nuclear 

industry has developed, both in the United States and abroad, grouting technology that, with 

modification, is applicable to WRAP ( i.e., the solidification/stabilization of spent ion-exchange 

resins). 

Infortnation_is provided on USDOE grouting efforts at Oak Ridge, Tennessee 

(Hydrofracture at ORINL and the Sludge Fixation Facility at the K-25 Site), PREPP at INEL, 

Saltstone at SRS, West Valley, NY, and Soilcrete at 1NEL. A brief description is given of the 

Rocky Flats plant inert carrier process. A manual laboratory process for making pellets of TRU 

waste is mentioned. It should be pointed out that little work has been reported on grouting 

shredded solids as is the mission of WRAP's shred-grout module. 

Most of the international information reported is from nuclear utilities. It is difficult to 

obtain information on defense reiated efforts in countries that have nuclear weapons programs, 

such as the United Kingdom (UK), France, and the USSR. West Germany (now just Germany) 

has a small shred-grout facility at NUKEM's Hanau plant. This operation was covered in 

R. Wotojack's 1986 trip report and will not be repeated here. 

It is noted that the majority of grouting information reported in the open literature 

addresses the use of cement-based materials ( i.e.. grouts) to solidify liquids and slurries. Most 

E-26


commercial processes are in drum or batch type mixing. Larger operations are: the ORNL, 

hydrofracture facility for liquid waste (which is no longer operational), the K-25 Sludge Fi.eation 

------- ---- ---Facility,-the SRS-Saltcreteplaat,the Hanford Grout TrEatmentFacility, PREPP at TNFT 

^,;• 

West Valley's grout facility. 

Information is also provided on the use of grouts in the UK, France. Germany, Korea, 

Japan, Finland, and Taiwan. 

E-27


Copies of all reports listed in the bibliography are included in this report. 

E-28


Bibliogranhy 

A. Bernard, J. C. Nomine, G. Cornec, A. Bonnet, and L. Farges, "Long-Term Leaching Tests on Full- 

Scale Blocks of Radioactive Wastes," Nuclear and Chemical Waste Management, v. 3, 161-5, 

1982. 

L. G. Butler, F. K. Cartledge, D. Chalasani, H. C. Eaton, F. Frey, M. E. Tittlebaum, and S.-L. Yang, 

"Immobilization Mechanisms in Solidification/Stabilization Using Cement/Silicate Fixing 

Agents," Proceedings, LSU HWRC Symposium, Oct. 1988. 

-- D. Chalasani, F. IC.-CardedgP,- H. C,- Eaton,--M. F'.T'.tttlebaum, and M. R. Walsh, "The Effects of 

Ethylene Glycol on a Cement-Based Solidification Process," Hazardous Waste & Hazardous 

Materials, v. 3, 2, 167-71, 1986. 

A- C. Chou, H. C. Eaton, F. W. Cartledge, and M. E. Tittlebaum, "A transmission Electron 

Microscopic Study of Solidified/Stabilized Organics," Hazardous Waste & Hazardous 

Materials, v. 5, 2, 145-53, 1988. 

A. I. Clark, C. S. Poon, and R. Perry, "The Rational Use of Cement-Based Stabilization Techniques 

for the Disposal of Hazardous Wastes," Proccedings: International Conf. on New Frontiers 

for Hazardous Waste Management, U.S. EPA/60019-85/025, Sept. 1985, 339-47. 

E. L: Davis, J. S: Falcone, S. D. Boyce: and P. H. i{rumrine; "Mechanisms for the Fixation of Heavv 

Metals in Solidified Wastes Using Soluble Silicates," The PQ Corp., Lafayette, PA. 

H. C. Eaton. M. E. Tittlebaum, and F. K Cartledge. "Innovative Techniques for the Evaluation of 

Solidified Hazardous Waste Systems," Louisiana State Univ., Baton Rouge, LA- 

H. C. Eaton, M. B. Walsh, M. E. Tittlebaum, F. K. Cartledge, and D. Chalasani, "Organic 

Interference_of-Solidified/Stabilized-Hazardous--Wastes," Er.viror.mental Monitoring and 

Assessment, 9 (1987), 133-42. 

IVI. Fuhrmann, R. M. Neilson, Jr., and P. Colombo, "A Survey of Agents and Techniques Applicable 

to the SolidiBcation o€-,'_ow-Lerel Radioactive Wastes," BNL-51521, Brookhaven National 

Laboratory Assoc. Univ., Inc., Upton, New York, Dec. 1981. 

P. D. Kalb and P. Colombo, "Full Scale Leaching of Commercial Reactor Waste Forms," BNL-33931, 

Brookhaven National Laboratory Associated Universities, Inc., Upton, New York. Nov. 1983. 

R. L A. viaiek; D. M. Roy, P. H.-Licastro, and C A. Langton, 'Slag Cement-Low Level Radioactive 

Waste Forms at Savannah River Plant," American Ceramic Soc. Bulletin, 65 (12). 1578-83, 

1986. 

H. Matsuzuru and A. Ito, "Effect of Dimension of Specimen an Amounts of Cesium-137, Strontium- 

90 and Cobalt-60 Leached from Matrix of Hardened Cement Grout," Journal of Nuclear 

Science and Technolow, v. 15, 1, 60-5. 

1. McGraw, "Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of Hazardous 

Waste," Federal Reaister. 50, 94, 20239-48. 

E-29


D. J. Naus, "Concrete Material Systems in Nuclear Safety Related Structures - A Review of Factors 

Relating to their Durability, Degradation Detection and Evaluation, and Remedial Measures 

for Areas of Distress," Internal Report, Gas-Cooled Reactor Programs, Oak Ridge National 

Laboratory, July 1954. 

T. Ohnuki, H. Ogawa, Y. Ohtsuka, T. Yamamoto, and Y. Wadachi, "Retardation Factor of 

Radioactive Strontium in a Japanese Sandy Soil Layer," Japan Atomic Enetgy-Reasearch 

Institute, Tokyo, Japan, 1989. 

I. Ple6aJ: J. Drl}aala, A. Peri6, and A.- KostadinoviF, "Immobilizatior, of Cs-137, Co-60, Mn-54, and 

Sr-85 in Cement-Waste Composition," "Boris KidriV Institute of Nuclear Sciences-VinCa, 

Belgrade, Yugoslavia. 

C. S. Poon, A. I. Clark, R. Perry, A. P. Barker, and P. Barnes, "Permeability Study on the Cement 

Based Solidification Process for the Disposal of Hazardous Wastes," Cement and Concrete 

Research. v. 16, 161-72, 1986. 

--c:F -----R:-H.-. .i ' L'I A..L-- 

A .eisny er, " r` ^ .. nsc4idaaor o f r,y tvucs and Are Furnace Dusts Usin; Sodium Silicates," 

Technical Report WTF#12, The PQ Corp., Lafayette, PA, June 1982. 

J 

R. Shuman, N. Chau, and E. A. Jennrich, "Long-Term Structural and Radiological Performance 

^•,^ 

Assessment For an Enhanced Abovegrade Earth-Mounded Concrete Vault," DOE/LLW-7ST, 

Defense Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Program, EG&G Idaho, Idaho Falls, 

Dec. 1989. 

D. G. Skipper, H. C. Eaton, F. K. Cartledge, and M. E. Tittlebaum, "Scanning Electron 

Microscopy/Energy Dispersive X-Ray Analysis of Type I Portland Cement Passtes Containing 

Parachlorophenol," Cement and Concrete Research, v. 17, 851-63, 1987. 

D. G. Skipper, H. C. Eaton, F. K. Cartledge, and M. E. Tittlebaum, "The Microscopic Fracture 

Morphology of Hardened Type I Portland Cement Paste Containing Parachlorophenol; 

Hazardous Waste & Hazardous Materials v. 4, 4, 389-402, 1987. 

A. Sheffield, S. Makena, M. Tittlebaum, H. Eaton, and F. Cartledge, "The Effects of Three Organics 

on Selected Physical Properties of Type I Portland Cement," v. 4, 3, 273-86, 1987. 

R. W. Spencer, R. H. Reifsnyder, and J. C. Falcone, "Applications of Soluble Silicates and Derivative 

--- --- - --:iateAaw iit the Management of Hazardous Wastes," The PQ Corp., Lafayette, PA. 

L. M. Thomas, "Hazardous Waste Management System; Identification and Listing of Hazardous 

Waste, " Federal Register, 49. 206, 4258Q 93. , 

M. E. Tittlebaum, F. K . Cartledge, D. Ch?lasani, H. Eaton, and M. Walsh, "A Procedure for 

-r't'--- ^cterizing ,aâ 

interactions of Organics with Cement: Effects of Organics on 

Solidification/Stabilization," Louisiana State Univ., Baton Rouge, LA. 

M. E. Tittlebaum, H. C. Eaton, F. K. Cartledge, M. B. Walsh, and A. Roy, "Procedures for 

Characterizing Effects of Organics on Solidification/Stabilization of Hazardous Wastes," 

Special Technical Publication 933 1987, American Soc. for Testing and Materials, 

Philadelphia, 1987. 

E-30 

ji-


A. P. Toste, L. J. Kirby, W. H. Rickard, and D. W. Robertson, "Radionuclide Characterization, 

>-' Migration and Monitoring at a Commercial Low-Level Waste Disposal Site," Radioactive 

Waste Management, v. 5, 213-26. 

r i= 

A. P. Toste and T. J. Lechner-Fish, "Organic Diagenesis in Commercial Nuclear Wastes ," Transactions 

of the American Nuclear Societv, v. 56, Proc. of the 1988 Meeting of the Am. Nuc. Soc.. June 

1988. 

A. P. Toste, T. J. Lechner-Fish. D. J. Hendren, R. D. Sheele, W. G. Richmond. "Analysis of Organics 

in Highly Radioactive Nuclear Wastes," Journal of Radioanalvtical and Nuclear Chemistrv , 

Articles, v. 123, 1(1988), 149-166. 

A. P. Toste and R. B. Myers, 'The Relative Contributions of Natural and Waste-Derived Organics 

to the Subsurface Transport of Radionuclides," The Effects of Natural Oraanic Comoounds 

and of Microoreanisms on Radionuclide Transoort. Proc. of NEA Workshop, Paris, June 

1985. 

A. P. Toste, T. R. Pahl, R. B. Lucke, and R. B. Myers, "Analysis of Complex Mixtures in Nuclear 

Wastes," Health & Environmental Research on Complex Organic Mixtures. Proc. of 24th 

Hanford Life Sci. Symposium, Oct. 1985. 

U. S. General Accounting Office, "Nuclear Waste: Information on DOE's Interim Transuranic Waste 

Storage Facilities," U.S. GAO/RCED-90-166, June 1990. 

_ (J. SGeneral_ACCOUAttPg Off Cer °NUClear W3S?e: Transl ran:G Was 8 Steragc' i.iiitations at ROCky 

Flats Plant," U.S. GAO/RCED-90-109, February 1990. 

L. D. Wakeley, "Dependence of Expansion of a Salt-Saturated Concrete on Temperature and 

Mixing and Handling Procedures," U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Eeperiment Station, 

Vicksburg, MS, July 1987. 

M. B. Walsh, H. C. Eaton, M. E. Ti ttlebaum, F. K. Cartledge, and D. 

- - - - - 

Chalasani, "The Effect of Two 

-------- -Orga£IC-COmp9Un4i4-Jn-aPCrtlandCement-Bascd Sta`viii2atiun ivtatrix," Hazardous Waste & 

Hazardous Materials, v. 3, 1, 111-23, 1986. 

M. Weber, Y. Dedegil, and H. H. Homann, "Transport of Waste into Caverns by Vertical Flow of 

Concrete Suspensions," Scientific Basis for Radioactive Management - V, Elsevier Science 

Publishing, 873-77. 

E-31

DON'T SAY IT 

TO: Distribution 

cc E. P. Mertens 

R. J. Roberts 

J. L. Scott 

J. A. Swenson 


Write It ^ DATE: May 6, 1991 

N3-13 

N3-13 

N3-12 

G6-45 

FROM: L. A. Fort 

SUBJECT: E. W. McDANIEL LETTER REPORT "SURVEY OF GROUTING TECHNOLOGY IN 

SUPPORT OF WRAP'S SHRED GROUT MODULE" 

Please find attached a copy of Mr. E. W. McDaniel's initial letter reoort 

HaCeQ[ar3i '-^-' A 29-r-19 9 i^ on ^^, "sub'ect ^.. J of 

Suooort of WRAP's Shred Grout Module." 

"Surve y of Grouting Technolo Qy in 

This activity is to assess the international and DOE Complex waste 

immobilization technology development and defense waste management grout 

techniques applicable to the Waste Receiving and Processing (WRAP) Facility 

Shred-Grout operation. During the April 9, 1991 Exchange Meeting, 

Mr. E. W. McDaniel provided a preliminary draft letter report in compliance 

with the 5/24/91 milestone. The edited version of the earlier preliminary 

draft report is attached. The preliminary draft report was distributed as 

Attachment 2 to the April 9, 1991 Exchange Meeting report. Again, copies of 

the approximately 60 references identified within the draft report (over 15 

inches of documents) are available in my office for referral. 

As stated in the April 9, 1991 Exchange Meeting report, the draft report 

essentially formulates a"road map" to all the referenced documents. The 

evaluation does provide the current information on grout formulations, lessons 

learned at other DOE Sites, and any pertinent information relative to 

imnobilization technology. The final Cementation/Grout Technology Evaluation 

report is due by 8/30/91. After the final report has been delivered, I will 

edit and format the formal report so it can be issued internally. 

v 

E-32 

RECEIVED 

MAY 0 6 1991 

E.P. MERSELa

OAK R1DGE NATIONAL LABORATORY 

OPERATED EY MARTIN MARIETTA ENERGY SYSTEMS, INC. 

FOR THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Mr. L. A. Fort 


P.O. Box 1970, R2-37 


Dear Les: 


POST OFFICE BOX 2008 

OAK RIDGE. TENNESSEE 37831 

April 29. 1991 

Milestone Letter Report: Cement Grout Technology Evaluation Report due May 1991 

Enclosed is a clean copy of the above milestone titled. "Survey of Grouting Technology in 

Support of WRAP'S Shred-Grout Module." I hope the fifty or so documents that I brou,ght out 

to you in support of the above milestone provide you with much useful information. 

EWM:jml 

cc: O. K Tallent 

E-33 

Best Regards. 

C.C1%-f r.c1.^^^^ 

Earl W. McDaniel, ivlanager 

Hanford Grout Program 

Chemical Technology Division


SURVEY OF GROUTING TECHNOLOGY 

IN SUPPORT OF 


A Letter Report Prepared 

for Westinghouse Hanford Company 

Richland, WA 

Earl W. NfcDaniel 


Oak Ridge National Laboratory' 

Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-6044 

Managed by Nfartin Marietta Energy Systems. Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy 

under contract DE-AC05-&3OR21400. 

E-34




E. W. iVlcDaniel 

ENBCUTNE SUMMARY 

This letter report covers a wide variety of grouting and other information that may be 

applicable to WRAP's Shred-Grout Task. Very little information is available on past, or present, 

operations of tiring shredded solids in a cement-based matrix. 

Information is provided about ORNL's Hydrofracture Process, the K-25 Site Sludge 

Fixation Facility, SRS Saltstone, Hanford's Grout Treatment Facility, and PPEPP at INEL. 

Limited information is provided on grouting efforts at Rocky Flats, West Valley, and Mound 

Labs. 

Information is provided on cement-based fixation efforts in a number of European and 

Asian countries. 

A literature search is included that addressed low-level waste solidification technology. 

Also. included is a strategic planning document on low-level waste disposal and demonstration 

programs at Oak Ridge, Tennessee. This report also contains a three volume report about waste 

management processes in the nuclear industry. 

E-35

WHC-$D-W100-TI-003 Rev. 0 

1. INTRODUCTION 

This letter report covers a variety of cement-based grouting technologies, both national 

and international, that may be applicable to Westinghouse Hanford Company's Waste Receiving 

and Processing-(WR-AP) Shred=GTout eaort. iivxAP's mission is to process past and currently 

generated solid low-level (SLLW), mixed (MLW), and transuranic (TRU) waste at the Hanford 

site, Richland. Washington. As this is an internal letter report, no background on WRAP is 

provided. 

The waste to be processed by WRAP has been generated in defense related efforts and 

are,-in zrtanycases,vnique-to this industry.- tiowever, the commercial sector of the nuclear 

industry has developed, both in the United States and abroad, grouting technology that, with 

- modification, is applicable to WRAP ( i.e., the solidification/stabilization of spent ion-exchange 

resins). 

Information is provided on USDOE grouting efforts at Oak Ridge, Tennessee 

/Hydrefracture at ORYL and the Sludge Fixation Faciliry at the K-25 Site), PREPP at INEL, 

Saltstone at SRS, West Valley, NY, and Soilcrete at INEL A brief description is given of the 

Rocky Flats plant inert carrier process. A manual laboratory process for making pellets of TRU 

waste is mentioned. It should be pointed out that little work has been reported on grouting 

shredded solids as is the mission of WRAP's shred-grout module. 

Most of the international information reported is from nuclear utilities. It is difficult to 

obtain information on defense related efforts in countries that have nuclear weapons programs. 

such as the United Kingdom (UK), France, and the USSR. West Germany (now just German,v) 

has a small shred-grout facility at NUKEM's Hanau plant. This operation was covered in 

R. ::'otojack> 1»^ trip report and will not be repeated here. 

It is noted that the majority of grouting information reported in the open literature 

addresses the use of cement-based materials (i.e.. grouts) to solidify liquids and slurries. Most 

E-36 

:A


commercial processes are in drum or batch type mixing. Larger operations are: the ORNL 

hydrofracture facility for liquid waste (which is no longer operational), the K-25 Sludge Fixation 

Facility, the SRS Saltcrete plant, the Hanford Grout Treatment Facility, PREPP at INEL, and 

West Valley's grout facility. 

Information is also provided on the use of grouts in the UK, France, Germany, Korea, 

Japan, Finland, and Taiwan. 

2. NATIONAL 

2.1 OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY HYDROFRACTURE FACILITY 

The concept of fluid waste disposal by hydraulic fracturing was borrowed from the 

=. - petroleum industry and developed at ORNL for the disposal of liquid low-level waste (LLLW). 

The original pilot plant was modified into an operational facility and was used from 1966 to 1979 

to routinely dispose of liquid waste. 

In the mid-1970s, a new facility was built that was capable of processing both liquids and 

sludges. This facility was completed in 1981 and operated until 1984. The facility is described in 

"Conceptual Design Report New Hydrofracture Facility." by H. 0. Weeren et al. 

(ORNLT(-4826, July 1975) and in "Design Criteria for New Hydrofracture Facility." Project 

No. 78-18-d X-OE-57. For mix design and other details please refer to reports listed in literature 

search. 

The facility is no longer used to dispose of waste at ORYL. 

2.2 SLUDGE FDCATION FACILITY AT THE K-25 SITE 

In the mid-1980s, a concrete batch plant surplused from the Clinch River Breeder Reactor 

(CRBR) Project was modified for solidifying a variety of pond sludges at the Oak Ridge K-25 

Site, previously known as the Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant (ORGDP). 

E-37


This plant experienced a variety of problems and presently is not operating. These 

problems are described in reports provided to Westinghouse Hanford Company in the first 

quarter of FY 1991 and will not be repeated here. 

Zi ORNL HLW CONCRETES FORMED UNDER ELEVATED TEiviPERATURE AND 

PRESSURE 

--ORZ'L-developeirtement=basedvraste hosts-thai were formed under eievated temperatures 

and pressures, (FUETAP). FUETAP concretes were shown to be effective hosts for hi;h-level 

radioactive defense waste and may even be considered for commercial HLW applications. The 

tailored formulas developed at ORNL were prepared from common portland cement, fly ashes, 

sand, and clays with wastes like calcines, frits, and sludges. These concretes are provided by an 

accelerated cure under mild autoclave conditions (85-200°C, 0.1-1.5 Mpa) for up to 24 h. The 

solids are subsequently dewatered at 250°C or 24 h to remove the unbound pore water. 

The resulting products were strong (unconfined compressive strengths of 40-60 MPa), 

leach resistant (plutonium leaches at a rate of 10 pg/cm= • d), and radiolytically stable, monolithic 

waste forms ( total gas G-values of 0.005 molecule/100 eV). This study concluded that these 

dewatered, autoclaved, cement-based waste hosts were suited for the disposal of HLW. 

Since 1981, no further development studies have been conducted at ORYL, and the DOE 

defense community has no plans to continue this work. However, a 1984 study by GA 

Technologies chose FUETAP as a-potential_process to stabilize Tiigh Temperature Gas Reactor 

(HTGR) fuel pellets. This study reaffirmed the cost-effectiveness of using cement-based waste 

forms and is the basis for a continuing development program. GA will use this ORNL process to 

perform a demonstration with unirradiated HTGR fuel pellets, and perhaps irradiated fuel from 

the Fort St. Vrain reactor. 

L_ZA


A report "Cement-Base Radioactive Hosts Formed Under Elevated Temperatures and 

Pressures (FUETAP Concretes) for Savannah River High-level Defense Waste," ORNL(I;M-8579, 

March 198.1, is included. 

2.4 IDAHO NATIONAL ENGINEERING LABORATORY PROCESS EXPERI,vfENTAL 

PILOT PLANT (PREPP) 

During the early 1980s, INEL embarked on an effort to develop a facility to treat past and 

future TRU solid waste at the INEL in order to certify it for disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot 

Plant (WIPP). 

The conceot was to shred, incinerate, and solidifynoncombustibles and ash residues in a 

cement matrix. 

A report prepared by Ralph M. Parsons Co., "Study Report for RWivfC Process 

Experimental Pilot Plant Cementing," is included. This report contains the results of a study on 

grout mixtures, mixing equipment, and methods to be used in the Process Experimental Pilot 

Plant (new building) conceptual design. Even though this report was prepared in the 1930-51 

timeframe, it is still a valid document. 

This report assumed a new building. INEL chose to build the facility in an existing 

building. The facility never became operational and is being closed out during FY 1991. 

^4lso,-ittcluded:s "Conce-ptual-Zesig:t Criteria for TA.^!:=5/w? Process Experimental Pilot 

Plant (PREPP) by EG&G Idaho, Inc. 

25 SOILCRETE AT INEL 

In the mid 1980s, INEL considered solidifying contaminated soil in a cement-based matrix. 

bfi.x design was performed at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. No funds were appropriated 

for plant design. 

E-39


A.report entitled "Grout Testing and Characterization for Shallow-Land Burial Trenches at 

the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory," ORNL/I',^f-9881, October 1936, is included. 

2.6 SAVANNAH RIVER SITE (SRS) 

SRS chose a cement-based matrie to solidify contaminated salt for disposal. This matrix is 

called saltstone and is described in the following handout provided by SRS. For additional 

information, see literature search and proceedings of Spectrum '88 folder which is included. 

27 ROCKY FLATS PLANT (RFP) 

The Rocky Flats Plant, together with Quadrex, Inc., took a novel approach with some of 

their TRU streams that are difficult to process with standard processing equipment. Quadrex 

developed a processing technique that fluidizes both waste and cement-based components with an 

inert volatile halocarbon carrier, i.e., the "Inert Carrier Concrete process." This process is 

described in Dole and Row's "Development Programs in the United States of America for the 

Application of Cement-Based Grouts in Radioactive Waste Management " A copy of the report 

is included. 

?R PnN1^C RFiF. 

RFP chose to fix some of their pond sludge in a cement-based matrix. The waste form 

failed to meet necessa'ry criteria. No report is available. 

2.9 MOUND LABORATORY (MI.) WASTE P?=11.F117e TION PROCESS 

DEMONSTRATION 

TMound Laboratory (ML) developed a TRU waste immobilization method for the 3,IL 

cyclone-incinerator ash, sludges, salt residues, and contaminated soil. The Materials Research 

Laboratory (MRL) at the Pennsylvania State University had shown that strong, dense, and 

E-40


impermeable cement-based waste forms could be formed with radioactive wastes at moderate 

temperatures and high pressures [150-250°C and 177-344 .1vIpa (25,000-50,000 psi)]. 

Subsequently, ML developed and demonstrated a process that pressed 1 in.-diam pellets of waste 

and Portland cement at 177 Mpa (25,000 psi). This process was demonstrated with "hot" materials 

in 1982 and the leaching and radiolysis characteristics were studied and documented. Since 1982, 

no further development has been done, and there are no current applications of this technology. 

2.10 HANFORD, WASHINGTON 

In Fy 1983, waste management officials at the Hanford site chose cement-based grout as 

the method for futation and disposal of low-level radioactive waste. This facility, first called the 

transportable grout facility (TGF) now the Grout Treatment Facility (GTF) has many features in 

common with the SRS Saltstone Process and ORNL's Hydrofracture Facility. It was developed in 

conjunction with PNL and ORNL. Both institutions continue to contribute to the GTF effort at 

Hanford. This facility is best described in a paper entitled "The Grout Treatment Facility 

Processing Facilities for Low-Level Waste Immobilization and Disposal" by R. H. Guyman et al. 

A copy of this paper is included (In the folder labeled Proceedings of Spectrum '38). Several 

other reports that discuss formulation development for a variety of waste streams are included. 

2.11 WEST VALLEY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT 

The West Valley Demonstration Project selected cement as the solidification medium for 

the disposal of liquid and wet solid low-level radioactive (LLW) as well as for transuranic (TRU) 

waste. The system is designed around a high-shear cement mixing system. The process is 

described in the paper by J. C. Cwynar et al., "Retrofit of Low-Level Radwaste Solidilication 

System," which is included. 

E-41

3.1 UMTED KINGDOM 


3. INTERNATIONAL 

British Nuclear Fuels. Ltd. (BNFL) is building encapsulation plants at Sellafield that will 

contain intermediate level waste (ILW) by encasing it first in cement then inside steel drums. 

The long-term solution adopted by BNFL is to store the encapsulated waste on site until the 

commissioning of permanent storage facilities. This facility was visited by Randy Roberts. WHC, 

in June 1989. 

A more complete description is given in "Report of Foreign Travel" by Earl McDaniel 

(ORNL/FIR-3114, November 1935) which is included). 

Also, included is "Flowsheet Finalization for Immobilization of SGHWR Wastes" by D. J 

Lee , tÊ W-R-109,i, Mach 1983. 

3.?. .°.I:CE 

France uses a cement matrix to solidify a variety of waste. To my knowledge all processes 

are in drum mixing. Several papers are included in Spectrum '86 and '83 folders. 

Also, included is a brochure describing ANDRA, the French government agency for 

managing radioactive waste. 

33 GERLfANY 

German law requires that all radioactive waste be disposed of in a geologic repository. 

German waste is classified as heat producing, which will be disposed of in a salt mine, and non- 

heat producing, which wiii be disposed of in an iron mine. All radioactive waste in Germany is 

the result of nuclear utilities and institutional use. Germany has abandoned its plans for a fuel 

E-42 

-..^


reprocessing facility. Randy Roberts visited the KFK Facility at Karlshrue in June 1959. Please 

see his Foreign Trip Report for details. 

A shred-grout facility for Alpha waste exists at NUKEM's Hanau plant. I am unable o 

find a paper describing this facility. 

Several papers from Germany are included in the Spectrum '86 and '98 folders. 

3.4 JAPAN 

Japan has a very active nuclear energy program and, therefore, a very aggressive waste 

management effort. This program is best described in two enclosed documents: 

folders. 

1. Low-Level Radwaste Disposal Concepts in Japan 

2. Outline of Radioactive Waste IManagement Center 

Several papers related to Japan's waste disposal program are included in the Spectrum 

3S SOUTH KOREA 

Even though South Korea has a very aggressive nuclear power program, little has been 

accomplished in efficient waste management. Most of the waste solidification systems are either 

bitumen or cement and have been bought from U.S. companies. A brochure "Nuclear Industry in 

the Republic of Korea" is included. 

3.6 REPUBLIC OF CHINA (TAIWAN) 

The Republic of China has a very aggressive nuclear energyv development program. Their 

waste management practices are some of the safest in the world. A paper describing the National 

LAN-YU storage sites is included. 

E-43

3.7 FINLAND 


Finland has two nuclear power plants, one of western design and one of USSR design. In 

Finland, all radioactive waste will be disposed of in an on-site repository. The Finnish program is 

described in the enclosed document "Radioactive Waste Management in Finland" (Status Report, 

August 1988). Also, included is a paper "Half -Scale Cementation of Spent Ion-Erchange Resins 

at theLouiisa Planc;" hy a,_ O. L^patti, and "Disposal of Low and Intermediate Level Waste in 

Finland" by Esko Ruakola. 

4.0 OTHER INFORMATION 

included: 

A three volume report on Low-Level Waste from Commercial Nuclear Reactors is 

Part 1. Open Literature Abstracts for Low-Level Waste, ORNLTM-9846/V3-P1 

Part 2. Bibliographic Abstracts of Significant Source References, 

ORNLlItif-98446N3-P2 

Part 3. Treatment, Storage, Disposal and Transportation Technologies and Constraints, 

OR1NLII',`V[-9846/V2 

Also, included is A. H. Kibbey and H. W. Godbee's report entitled "A State-of-the-Art 

Report on Low-Level Waste Treatment," ORYLIIM-7427, September 1980. 

5.0 LPIERATURE REVIEW 

A draft report by A. J. Mattus, "A Literature Review of Potential Candidate Fixation 

Mediums for the Immobilization of Low-Level Waste," October 1985, is included. 

A literature search by Earl W. McDaniel is included which lists 55 titles. Many of the 

reports and papers are being transferred to WHC as part of this milestone. 

E-44


STR?.THGIC PLANNING DOCiJMENT 

This document summarizes the process which will lead to an integrated strategy and 

associated implementation plan for LLW management on the ORR. It is not intended to be a 

final summary of actions needed to address the management of LLW on the ORR. 

E-45



E-46

Contained under four reports: 


APPENDIX F 

THERMOSETTING POLYMER TEST RESULTS 

WHC Trip Report - Test Status (1) 




F-1 



(4) - Stock Equipment Company



F-2

^.yo 

F-SD-W"00-7-003 Rev. 0 

THERMOSETÌING PAI.YNER TEST' RESULTS 

DON'T SAY IT --- Write It! DATE: September 21, 1992 

TO: C. A. Petersen FROM: Dewey A. Burbank, Jr. 

J. A. Swenson 

Telephone: 2 -0 855 

cc: C. 

D. 

n^. 

J. 

W. 

K. 

J. 

T. 

J. 

L. 

D^. 

K. 

G. 

R. 

M. 

L. 

L. 

Benar 

Lamberd 

Lucas 

Pauly 

Riddelle 

Swita 

Weingardt 

Westcott 

Yount 

SUBJECT: Trip Report - Stock Equipment Company, Chagrin Falls, OH, 9/16/92 

Attendees: Dewey Burbank, WHC 

Rich Henkel, UE&C 

Bill Phillips, Stock 

Fred Podmore, Stock 

The attendees met for breakfast and drove to the Stock Equipment Company 

facility in the Bainbridge district near Chagrin Falls. A brief meeting was 

held, where Stock reviewed the progress to date. Successful formulations have 

been developed for waste surrogates type 1(LETF salts, ammonium sulfate) and 

type 3 (183H basin sludge, high nitrate), but problems have been encountered 

with types 2 (Basin sludge, nitrate/sulfate) and 4 (basin crystalline solids, 

high sulfate). The suspected reason is the presence of ionic copper in the 

surrogates. It was explained that transition metal ions are an inhibitor to 

the polymerization reaction due to thier ability to scavenge the free radicals 

that propogate the solidification reaction. Presumably, the copper in type 3 

surrogate is in the non-ionic cupric oxide form. 

Following a brief tour of the manufacturing facilities, we went to the 

laboratoryto prepare the test specimens from types 1 and 3 surrogate, as well 

as a set of control specimens of neat polymer (zero waste loading). A total 

of 54 specimens were poured for each immobilization batch. The test specimen 

molds were made of polypropylene pipe sections, approximately 2 inches long by 

1 inch inside diameter, glued to a plastic base. 

Batch #1 was the control batch. The formulation for this batch was: 

Binder, 5000 grams 

Catalyst, 125 grams 

Promoter, 5 grams 

The batch was mixed in a plastic bucket using a Lightning lab mixer. A 

specimen was transferred to a paper cup for measurement of the exotherm, while 

the remainder was used to pour the test specimens. The batch began to gel 

after Qnly abos(t-20_specimens hadbeen poured. It was decided that although 

54-3000-101 (9/59) (EF) CEF014 

DSI 

F-3


the statement of work requires all specimens to be prepared from a single 

batch, this was not critical for the control specimens and preparation of the 

rest of the control samples could be completed later. 

Batch #2 was the Type 1 surrogate LETF salt. The formula for this batch was: 

Binder, 2000 grams 

Catalyst, 50 grams 

Promoter, 2 grams 

Surrogate, 4000 grams 

Spiking salts: 

Cobalt Chloride, 61.08 grams 

Strontium Chloride, 46.04 grams 

Cesium Chloride, 19.17 grams 

The promoter and binder were mixed, then the spiking salts were added. The 

salts did not appear to get mixed very well, due to the small size of the 

mixer and large batch container size. the surrogate was then added in 

portions, until roughly halfway through, when the mixer stalled several times. 

After this point, mixing was only possible in the top few inches of the batch, 

since the mixer wo.:ldstall if it was submerged more than about 2 to 3 inches. 

After about 20 minutes, the entire quantity of surrogate had been added, and 

the catalyst was added in two portions. The mix was then scooped into the 

specimen molds. A portion of the mix was placed in a paper cup for 

measurement of the exotherm. , 

Batch #3 was Type 3 surrogate basin sludge. The formula for this batch was 

the -same--as-fcr Type-1 sttrrogat-e--sb ive. The mixing procedure was the same, 

with the exception that the spiking salts were added directly into the 

surrogate and mixed with a spatula, due to the semi-liquid consistency of the- 

surrogate. No mixing problems were encountered, and the mixture was poured 

into the specimen molds and a paper cup for exotherm measurement. 

After breaking for lunch, we met in the conference room to discuss the details 

of the formulation development work for types 2 and 4 surrogate. Various 

_ techniyueshad been attempted,_including increasing the amount of promoter 

added, adding ammonium solutions to complex the copper, mixing types I and 2, 

changing the waste loading, roasting the surrogate, and changing order of 

addition of the polymer reagents and the waste. None of these techniques were 

successful. Detailed laboratory notes are attached, and the first progress 

report from Stock will include further discussion of this work. 

After reviewing the results of the formulation work, we concluded that two 

additional attempts should be tried. The first test involves adjusting the pH 

of the surrogate type 2 to around 10. This should result in a surrogate that 

more closely resembles the pH of the actual waste. In the second test, a 

mixture of sodium fluoride and sodium sulfate will be processed to examine the 

possibility that fluoride may be interfering with the polymerization reaction. 

Verbal authorization to proceed with these trials was given by WHC. 

--- -- --Follcwing the-cisctassion of the- polyyner-fttrmulaticn dYvelopment work, we were 

presented with information on Stock's equipment development work for in-drum 

mixing equipment, using preloaded waste and double planetary mixer equipment. 

54-3000-101 (9/59) (EF) GEF014 

DS1 

F-4 

>._r 

;?7


The technology appears to be a very close match with the current conceptual 

design for WRAP 2A and this development work should be followed closely. 

CONCLUSIONS 

The formulation development work that Stock is performing is proceeding more 

slowly than expected for the type 2 and type 4 surrogates, due to apparent 

chemical interactions between the surrogate materials and the polymer system 

chemistry. Several different techniques have been attempted to address the 

problem, with no success. The interaction inhibits the polymerization 

reaction, resulting in a waste form with compressive strength below the 

acceptance criterion of 60 psi. Limited additional development work has been 

authorized to investigate the effects of surrogate pH and fluoride content on 

the final waste form. Successful formulations have been developed for type 1 

and type 3 surrogates. Test specimens have been prepared and testing is 

proceeding as planned. 

We observed three incidents that would indicate improvements could be made in 

the quality of the work being performed. First, the development work was 

performed under an erroneous identification of the waste types; the Stock 

technician had mistakenly_transposed the identities of types 3 and 4 

surrogates. Secondly, the unexpectedly quick gelling of the control batch 

indicates that not enough work-had been done aithth'rs-firrmura to reaHze-that 

there would not be enough time to pour all of the specimens. Thirdly, the 

laboratory mixer used for mixing of Batch #2 ( waste type 1) appeared to be 

inadequate to assure that a homogeneous mixture was obtained in the batch size 

used for specimen preparation. 

The manufacturing facilities are quite modern, with state-of-the-art digitally 

controlled machine tools and fabrication capabilities. The machine design and 

fabrication capabilities are resources that should be considered for possible 

use in fabrication of WRAP facilities specialty mechanical equipment. 

54-3000-101 (9/59) (EF) GEF014 F-5 

ual

.=^... 

^^^5 


CORRESPONDENCE DISTRIBUTION COVERSHEET 

Author Addressee Correspowdence No. 

CZELLATH RA/STOCK BURDANK DA/WHC 9205858 

sub;ect: STOCK POLYMER IMMOBILIZATION TECH. WASTE FORM QUALIFICATION TESTING PURCHASE ORDER 

MANAGEMENT PROJECT ENGINEERING WRAP PROJECT CONTROL 

JA Swenson G6-46 X TA Carlson G6-46 KP Brown G6-47 

DE Ball G6-46 AW Hinkle G6-46 SE Bussman G6-47 - 

SR Briggs G6-47 FH Lee G6-46 C Malstrom G6-47 - 

JE Filip G6-47 ^- JB Payne G6-46 - SW McKinley G6-47 _- 

no 1Uca-s---- - G6-46- - -X -- jG Starkey- G6-46 ------- u"C Riee G6-47 

CA P_etersen --H1-60 -X WR Swita -66-45 ^- BL Trumpour G6-47 - 

TL Yount H1-60 _X RR Wyer G6-46 _X_ ^^ - 

WRAP TECHNOLOGY SW SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SW SYSTEMS ENGINEERING 

CJ Benar H1-60 X 

DA Burbank H1-60 -X _ _ 

oF Campbeil Hi-60 

JD Keck G6-46 

CE McDonald H1-60 

JL Nelson H1-60 - 

KE Parker H1-60 _- 

RM Ybarra H1-60 

SW INTEGRATION SW PROJECTS 

GF Booth G6-46 DR Broz G6-46 _ 

MD LeClair H1-60 ML DeWitt G6-46 

OW Mertz H1-60 EG Erpenbeck G6-46 - 

CR Nash HI-60 TM Greager G6-46 - 

TR Pauly G6-46 RL Louie G6-46 - 

JL Stroup G6-46 KE Smith G6-46 - 

KM Weingardt H1-60 ^- HE Wellsfry G6-46 _ 

RL Anderson G6-45 RJ Roberts N3-13 

Al Ball H1-60 + JG Riddelle H1-79 -X- 

BJ Gire G6-46 _ BA Mayancsik H1-79 -- 

SA Niebel G6-46 MM McCarthy N3-13 

- JB Myers G6-46 

COMMENTS TO LEAD ENGINEER BY: 

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: 

EG Berglin G6-46 VP Ocampo G6-46 

KJ Hull G6-46 - DT Ruff G6-46 - 

RM Horgus H1-60 RA Sexton H1-60 ^ 

SL Kooiker G6-46 JR Weber G6-46 - 

DL Lamberd H1-60 ^ JR Weidert G6-46 - 

ML Lee G6-46 - RH Winkleman G6-46 i 

KJ Leist G6-46 ^ A Zabarauskas G6-46 - 

NJ Monroe H1-60 ^ - 

QA RECORD YES NO 

r e 

r-o 

SUPPORT 

Corr Control 

WRAP DMC 

JR McGee 

E Pennala 

DR Porten 

JM Seimer 

WW Olson 

X 

G6-51 -X 

G6-47 

E2-30 - 

G6-47 - 

G6-47 - 

N1-83 ^ 

DA Smith G6-16 X 

^

loomi^^lC& 

111111111111F .^^.\ 




Attention: Mr. Dewey Burbank, H1-60 

WHC-SD-W100-TI-003 Rev* 0 9205858 

Subject: STOCK Polymer Immobilization Tech. 


Purchase Order No. MMW-SVV-277587 

Stock Reference No. 6996 

Gentlemen: 

October 15, 1992 

Enclosed please find a copy of our Progress Report No. 2 for the subject project. 

This report represents progress through September, 1992. 

Should additional information be required, please advise. 

RAC/kh 

Enclosure 

c: Westinghouse Hanford - Attn: G.M. Wemhoff, Buyer 

S.O.6996 

T. Litchney 

Tickler 11/1/92 w/report 

Very truly yours, 

w/ 

Russell A. Czellath 

Manager-Contracts 

R!7:;=i`JED 

VJR6tP DMC 

OCT 211942 

Stock Equipment Company • 16490 Chillicothe Road • Chagrin Falls, Ohio 44022-4398, U.SA •( 216) 543-6000 • Telex 196071 

A Unit-9f-General Signal F-7 Telefax (216) 543-6678



WESTINGHOUSE HANFORD COMPANY 

STnru Fni rrPT,rRTrr rn 

POLYMER IMMOBILLIZATION TECH. 

WASTE FORM QUALIFICATION TESTING 

MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORT 

NO. 2 

THROUGH SEPTEMBER, 1992 


Westinghouse Hanford Purchase Order No. MMW-SVV-277587 

Stock Order No. 6996 

F-8 

;;:,:•

û9^c 

?fi. ...^ 

.._-, 



Page 

i0 SUMMARY 1& 2 

2.0 SCHEDULE 3 

BAR CHART SCHEDULE 4 

F-9


1.0 


PROGRESS REPORT 

SEPTEMBER 1992 . 

S^;Ry ^/ W^ô Wa 5{ ° -7 

Week Number 1 

Primary effort concentrated on optimizing waste loading of the 

four different surrogate waste forms. Type 1 LETF Salts 

successfully solidified at a loading ratio of 2:1 waste to 

polymer. Initial formulations for Type 2 (Basin #1, #2 Sludge) 

and T;Ye 4(Basin Crystal Solids) proved inconclusive. 

Successful solidification of Type 3 (Basins #3, #4 Sludge) at a 

loading ratio of 2:1 waste to polymer was achieved. 

-BeYow is a synopsis of the experiments to achieve polymer/Type 2 

waste (Basin #1, #2 Sludge) solidification: 

1. Reduced waste loading to 0.5:1 waste to polymer ratio. 

2. Increased the amount of promotor to forty times the required 

amount. 

... 3. Increased the amount of catalyst to twice the required 

amount, along with an increase in promotor (20 times). 

4. Changing the sequence of addition ( the standard way would be - 

polymer and promotor mixed together first, add waste and mix, ".^ 

sd3--the-catall;st- and -firrish -mixing) - th®-promstcsr- and polymer 

were mixedfirst then catalyst was added and "mixed in" the 

waste. 

5. Attempted mixing Type 1 and Type 2 waste together ( equal 

weight ratios 1:1). 

6. Experimented with ammonia water as a corrective additive to 

induce this type of waste to solidify. 

These experiments produced unacceptable results. The samples 

gelled but did not get "rock hard". 

All leach containers and bottles were acid rinsed in preparation 

for the leachability and immersion testing. The core samples 

were prepared. Fifty liter carboys of demineralized water and 

synthetic sea water were prepared. 

Wednesdav. Sentember 16. 1992 

Mr. Dewey Burbank, Westinghouse Hanford, and Mr. Richard Henkle, 

United Engineers & Constructors, visited Stock to observe the 

preparation of samples to be tested. In the morning they 

witnessed the making of the polymer control; Type 1 LETF Salts 

and Type- 3--Basins J+3,#4--Sludge.--- Iviv the--afternoorr we--di.-scussed 

the complications with Type 2 and Type 3 surrogate waste streams 

F-10 

;^x^



and the following two-fold course of action for further testing 

of these waste streams. 

1> Adjust the rH of Type 2 wastestream to 10-.5 and *_hen proceed 

with solidification. Actual pH of Type 2 waste was 3.5. 

Mr. Burbank indicated that the pH should be between 10 and 

11. He also indicated that the color of the waste stream 

should be black and appear like surrogate waste stream 

Type 3. 

2. Initially, copper ions were thought to be interfering with 

the polymerization of the polymer since we were able to 

solidify Type 3 waste (concentration of copper equal 112,000 

ppm or 11.2%) and not able to solidify Type 4 waste which has 

less copper. The next consideration was that there is an 

interference from fluoride ion. We discussed trying a 

hydrat_e_d sa__lt__(sodium -sulfa_te 10H.,0) and adding 7% fluoride 

ion to it. Once the fluoride ionîs evenly distributed in 

the sodium sulfate, try to solidify in polymer resin. This 

test is designed to indicate if the fluoride will inhibit 

polymerization. If it does, we can concentrate on isolating 

the fluoride or try to prevent it from interfering in the 

polymerization. 

= Thursday. September 17. 1992 

_Control samples for the leachability/immersion testing were made. 

These samples will not contain any spiking salts. 

- Saturday, Setitember 19. 1992 

Samples were prepared for the leachability/immersion part of the 

= testing. Weights, heights and diameters were recorded and the 

surface area of the samples were calculated so that the 

appropriate amount of leachant solution could be poured for the 

various time points. Leachant was poured for the following time 

points: 30 second rinse, 2 hours, 7 hours and 24 hours. 

Mondav. September 21. 1992 

The leachability/immersion test was started at approximately 8:30 

AM. Time points have been collected for the 30 second rinse, 2 

hours, 7 hours, 24 hours, 2 days, 3 days, 4 days and 5 days. The 

s^pec ime.^.s are currently in the 18 day segment of the test. 

Samples were also taken for compressive strength testing. 

Week of September 29, 1992 

Analysis of the leach samples began. 

r-e-- 

r 11 

r-aa

SIVIR EyUi'y^Tiein P^.vniyany ---- 

LV 

Jl..lILDVLL 

Activitv 

- Prepare Work Plan 

- Submit Work Plan 

- Approve Plan 

- Develop Formulations 

- Prepare Specimens 

- Lab - Analysis 

- Final Report 


+3-- - 

F-12 

Scheduled Actual 

Date Date 

08/01/92 08/01/92 

08/01/92 08/01/92 

08/10/92 08/10/92 

08/21/92 08/21/42 

09/01/92 09/16/92 

12/10/92 

12/23/92 

. ,,

^ i 

w 

STOCK EOUIPMENT COMPANY 

14-OCt-92 

PROJECYSCHEDULE 

WESTINGHOUSE MONTHLY PROGRESS REPORT 

HANFORD COMPANY 

P.O. MMW-SW-277587 PREPARED BY: RUSS A. CZELLATH 

STOCK ORDER: 6996 

1992 

TASK J U L I A U G I S E P I O C T I N O V I D E C 

PREPARE WORK PLAN 

SUBMIT WORK PLAN 

APPROVE WORK PLAN 

DEVELOP FORMULATIONS ^..^^ 

PREPARE SPECIMENS 

LABORATORY ANALYSIS : n 

FINAL REPORT I I I I 

i s 

of 

I E= 

r_ 

i 

r 

us 

i^ 

`c) 

c) 

ui 

xi 

(D < 

c>

samipleN WEIGHT HEIGHT DIAMETER DENSITY AVG. LOAD P'SI ' AVG. 

gnama cm cm grama/cc LBS Itve iiay 

I compressive 

sMrenight 

L1-1 51.4 4.54 3.812 1.104897 17160 108434.37 

11-2 58.8 5.116 3.612 1.12166 17160 10804.37 

L1-3 

1 51 4.502 3.609 1.107391 17^20 10797.11 

11-4 55.3 4.869 3.611 1.109D23 17360 110936.35 

11-5 51.7 4.483 3.611 1.1261 17360 110908.35 

11-6 58.9 5.024 3.609 1.146048 1.12 17400 I10973.7 10,926 

11-7 56.3 4.923 3.611 1.116693 17480 110111.94 

11-8 54.9 4.798 3.611 1.117759 17480 1110111.94 

11-9 56.3 4.991 3.607 1.103923 17520 111061.64 

1-1-10 56.7 4.968 3.609 1.115675 17320 10923.25 

L3-1 73.9 5.112 3.618 1.406134 3520 2208.936 

^ 1-3-2 72.5 5.23 3.616 1.349863 3600 22611 . 639 

p 1-3-3 71.9 5.1 3.614 1.374335 3600 2314.457 

1-3-4 71.1 5.067 3.678 1.320704 4320 2623.239 

L3-5 73.3 5.245 3.663 1.326156 42f10 2595.79 

1-3-6 71.7 5.108 3.668 1.328372 1.33 4280 2613.14 2472 

L3-7 67.1 5.024 3.68 1.255704 3920 2377.76 

1-3-8 72.9 5.212 3.653 1.334547 41150 2560.778 

1-3-9 71.2 5.065 3.683 1.319493 4400 2664.568 

L3-10 72.3 5.194 3.665 1.319467 4080 2495.11 

1-7-1 77.2 5.001 3.614 1.504854 2480 15S9.743 

L7-2 72.8 4.829 3.615 1.468817 2410 1533.737 

1.7-3 76.4 4.837 3.617 1.5372 2490 1506.925 

1-7-4 75.9 4.935 3.611 1.501792 1600 1007.956 

173 73.1 4.976 3.632 1.417932 244,0 1519.413 

L7-6 72.6 4.724 3.627 1.487448 1.48 22fj0 1373.742 1411 

1.7-7 77.4 5.017 3.632 1.489071 2240 1394.871 

L7-8 75.8 5.078 3.627 1.444746 2360 1473.65 

1-7-9 76 5.017 3.614 1.476738 1800 1132.071 

1-7-10 72.6 4.956 3.617 1.425668 2560 1607.387 

E 

N 

L 

Ô 

--1 

.. 

O 

O 

w 

CD < 

O

\. . 1 .: lh,lf^ 

LEACH / IMMERSIONI SAMPLES 

SAMPLE INEIGHT HEIGHT DIAMETER suAacp area volume density AVG 

grams cm cm cm2 ml's gms/co 

L1A1 54.5 4.941 3.607 78.4288 764.268 1.07944 

LIA2 54.9 4.932 3.609 76.37^85 763.785 1.08814 

L1A3 54.4 4.837 3.609 75.3014 753.014 1.09941 1.1 

1181 58 4.946 3.61 76.5641 765.641 11.10619 

1182 55.2 4.833 3.611 75.3091 753.091 1.11526 

1183 53.4 4.722 3.611 74.04i99 740.499 11.10426 

12A1 71.5 5.002 3.615 77.3345 773.345 1.39269 

L2A2 76.2 5.222 3.617 79.8886 798.886 1.42014 

L2A3 73.4 5.113 3.617 78.65 786.5 1.39712 1.4 

1281 70.7 4.941 3.616 76.6668 766.686 1.39334 

L2B2 71.1 4.942 3.616 78.68 766.8 1.40094 

1-2133 75.4 5.218 3.617 79.8431 798.431 1.40631 

c^n 13A1 76.1 5.116 3.615 78.6292 786.292 1.44926 

13A2 71.5 5.002 3.616 77.3616 773.618 1.39192 

L3A3 78 5.11 3.72 81.4505 814.565 1.36841 1.41 

1381 71.1 4.948 3.616 78.74132 767.482 1.39924 

L3B2 75.6 5.117 3.614 78.6131 786.131 1.44026 

L3B3 71.3 5.002 3.618 77.4157 774.157 1.3865 

L6AI 74.8 4.721 3.616 74.1694 741.694 1.54284 

L6A2 73.1 4.508 3.614 71.6987 716.987 1.58076 

L6A3 72.5 4.507 3.615 71.7129 717.129 1.56727 

1681 70.5 4.443 3.618 71.0114 710.114 1.54513 1.56 

L6B2 70.8 4.443 3.618 71.0114 710.114 1.55171 

L683 75.7 4.724 3.616 74.2035 742.035 1.56041 

L7AI 76.3 4.94 3.616 76.6573 766.573 1.50401 

17A2 83.7 5.008 3.616 77.4298 774.298 1.62748 

L7A3 75.5 4.94 3.616 76.6573 766.573 1.48824 

L7B1 78.4 4.945 3.618 76.7679 767.679 1.54214 1.52 

L7B2 76.4 4.941 3.614 76.6149 766.149 t.50734 

L7B3 77 5.11 3.614 78.5337 785.337 1.46894 

^ 

C 

N 

E 

.. 00 

1 

o-r 

0 

CO 

w 

CD < 

0

$-% 

^_.. 4 

Sample ID L7A1 

Elemem COBALT 

Matriz DI water 

(dt)n 

S 

t-sum(dt) 

S 


S.A V Ao 

78.7 50.7 0.191a 

Cone. 

PPM 

an 9 an/Ao SUM 

an/Ao 

DATE OCT 12 1992 

Di L 

7200 7200 0.001 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 7.81 E-16 15.1184 

2 18000 25200 0.5 0.0004 0.0020 0.0020 2.51 E-10 9.6003 

3 81200 86400 1 0.0008 0.0040 0.0060 3E-10 9.5230 

4 88400 172800 0.5 0.0004 0.0020 0.0080 9.26E-11 10.0341 

5 86400 259200 0.4 0.0003 0.0016 0.0098 1 E-10 9.9978 

6 86400 345600 0.8 0.0006 0.0032 0.0128 5.66E-10 9.2475 

86400 432000 1.2 0.0009 0. 0.0176 164E-00 8.7853 

1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0176 0 ERR 

2160000 3974400 0.0000 0.0176 0 ERR 

510 

3888000 7862400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0176 0 ERR 


F_leman} O_f_]R_AI T 

Matric DI WATER 

S.A. V Ao 

T l e1 a ^^ 


(dnn tssum(dt) Cone. an 9 an/AO SUM 

Di L 

S 

S PPM 

an/Ao 

1 7200 7200 0.2 0.0002 0.0008 0.0008 3.OSE-11 10.5163 

2 18000 25200 0.6 0.0005 0.0024 0.0032 3.61 E-10 9.4419 

3 61200 86400 1.3 0.0010 0.0052 0.0084 5.07E-10 9.2951 

4 86400 172800 0.6 0.0005 0.0024 0.0108 1.33E-10 9.8757 

5 86400 259200 0.5 0.0004 0.0020 0.0128 1.57E-10 9.8040 

8 86400 345800 0.9 0.0007 0.0036 0.0164 7.16E-10 9.1452 

7 86400 432000 1.3 0.0010 0.0052 0.0216 1.92E^9 8.7157 

6 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0216 0 ERR 

9 2160000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0216 0 ERR 

10 3888000 7862400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0216 0 ERR 


- r(emar(. COBALT 

Matriz DI WATER 

S.A. V Ao 


(dt)n t-sum(dt) Conc. an 9 an/Ao SUM 

IN L 

S 

S PPM 

en/Ao 

1 7200 7200 0.2 0.0002 0.0008 0.0008 3.05E-11 10.5163 

2 18000 25200 0.4 0.0003 0.0016 0.0024 1.61 E-10 9.7941 

3 61200 88400 1.4 0.0011 0.0056 0.0080 5.88E-10 9.2307 

4 86400 172800 0.5 0.0004 0.0020 0.0100 9.25E-11 10.0341 

5 86400 259200 0.3 0.0002 0.0012 0.0112 5.65E-11 10.2477 

8 86400 345600 1.1 0.0008 0.0044 0.0156 1.07E-09 8.9709 

- 7 ------ - 864'0 4320ini 1.1 0.0008 O.OOaa 0.0200 1.38E-09 8.8808 

B 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0200 0 ERR 

9 2160000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0200 0 ERR 

10 3888000 7862400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0200 0 ERR 

f-16

^;- 

v.4'? 

Sampls ID L781 

Elsment COBALT 

Matri: SEA WATER 


S.A. V Ao 

76.8 50.8 0.1976 

DATI: 6CT 12 1992 

(dt)n t-sum(dt) Cone. an Q aMAO SUM 

Di L 

S 

S PPM 

an/Ao 

7200 7200 0.1 0.0001 0.0004 0.0004 7.61 E•12 11.1184 

2 18000 25200 0.3 0.0002 0.0012 0.0016 9.04E-11 10.0440 

3 61200 88400 1.3 0.0010 0.0052 0.0068 5.07E-10 9.2951 

4 86400 172800 0.3 0.0002 0.0012 0.0080 3.33E-11 10.4778 

5 86400 250200 0.2 0.0002 0.0006 0.0088 2.51 E-11 10.5999 

8 86400 345600 1.1 0.0008 0.0044 0.0132 1.07E-09 8.9700 

7_ 3ot00 -43200F - _4:4 -C.0'v1i- 058 'v.OtoB 2.23'cvo 8.wi4 

8 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0188 0 ERR 

9 2160000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0188 0 ERR 

10 3888000 7862400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0188 0 ERR 

Sampls ID L7B2 

ElNmsn! COBALT 

Matr& SEA WATER 

S.A. V Ao 

78.8 50.7 0.1928 


(d9n t-sYm(dt COne. an a an/Ao SUM 

Di L 

S 

S PPM 

aNAo 

7200 7200 0.1 0.0001 0.0004 0.0004 7.81 E-12 11.1184 

2 18000 25200 0.1 0.0001 0.0004 0.0008 1 E-11 10.9982 

3 61200 86400 1.1 0.0008 0.0044 0.0052 3.63E-10 9.4402 

4 86400 172800 0.1 0.0001 0.0004 0.0056 3.7E-12 11.4320 

5 88400 259200 0.1 0.0001 0.0004 0.0060 6.28E-12 11.2020 

8 86400 345800 1.1 0.0008 0.0044 0.0104 1.07E-09 8.9709 

7 86400 d32000 1.3 0.0010 0.0052 0.0166 1.92E-09 8.7157 

- 8 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0156 0 ERR 

9 2100000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0156 0 ERR 

10 3888000 7852400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0156 0 ERR 

Sa-N':ID L78" 

Elament COBALT 

Mahix SEA WATER 

S.A. V Ac 

78.5 52.4 0.1941 


(dt)n t-sum(dt) Cone. an p an/Ao SUM 

DI L 

S 

S PPM 

an/Ac 

7200 7200 0.1 0.0001 0.0004 0.0004 7.61E-12 11.1154 

2 18000 25200 0.2 0.0002 0.0008 0.0012 4.02E-11 10.3962 

3 61200 86400 1.5 0.0012 0.0060 0.0072 6.75E-10 9.1708 

4 88400 172800 0.2 0.0002 0.0008 0.0060 1.48E-11 10.8299 

3 86400 259200 0.3 0.0002 0.0012 0:0092 5.65E-11 10.2477 

6 86400 345600 1.2 0.0009 0.0048 0.0140 1.27E-09 8.8953 

7 86400 432000 1.5 0.0012 0.0080 0.0200 2.58E-09 8.5914 

6 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0200 0 ERR 

9 2160000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0200 0 ERR 

10 3888000 7882400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0200 0 ERR 

F-17

sI-d 

tlN3 0 99CL'0 0000'0 0000'0 00+Z99L 000899C Ol 

Htl3 0 98EL'0 0000'0 0000'0 004+L6C 00009/Z 6 

SHE 0 98CL'0 0000'0 0000'0 00++L9L 00498C1 9 

LIIC'9 t0•389Y 99CL'0 LZBO'0 6SL0'0 L'OZ 000Z£+ 00+99 L 

LSO4'9 L0-3C6'C 6959'0 £+90'0 Z9L0'0 l'lZ 0099+C 00198 9 

190+'9 LO-3C66C 9149'0 6860'0 Z6L0'0 SZ OOL69Z 00+98 9 

490Z19 L03LZ'9 9LL+'0 _ 6£9L'0 _ 4l£0'0 _ L+ _ O09ZLL_ 00t99 _ + 

99L1'9 L0P3C8'9 9C0E'0 649C0 09£0'0 L+ 00+98 0031.9 C 

LG9+'9 

0096'9 

Ltr3SZ'E 

L0•3l'l 

BeLL'0 

OBfO'0 

BlLO'0 

OB+O'0 

8Et00 

Z600'0 

HL 

Zl 

20Z9Z 

00ZL 

000BL 

00ZL 

oyluv 

Wdd S 

S 

-1 

!0 wns oyM 6 uv rouo0 (Lp)ums_L u(Lp) 

Z66lZ1170 31y0 

COBI'0 co; L'9L 

GM • 

tl31tlM 10 X1+WW 

WnIS30 N+vuN13 

- YYL1 Y16)d^î 

!!tl3 0 9996'0 0000'0 0000'0 OO+39BL 0009996 01 

Htl3 0 9986'0 00000 0000'0 OOriL6E 000091Z 6 

HF13 0 8996'0 0000'0 0000'0 00ri19L OOYZB£l 9 

£6£Z'9 L0-39L'S B996'0 6690'0 CCl0'0 S'ZZ OOOZC+ 00484 L 

09 L'9 L0tr324'9 6949'0 91L 1'0 +LZO'0 6'4Z 0099+C 00198 9 

4Zb0'9 GO-3L0'e +L9L'0 619Lb L6Z0'0 9C 00369Z 00t94 9 

99£6'9 

1966'9 

90-39L'L 

90-310'1 

99L9'0 

L16C'0 

BC33'0 

9l£SO 

0£90'0 

9+f0'0 

99 

99 

0093L1 

00+99 

00Y98 

OOZl4 

+ 

E 

BLEZ'9 LO•34L'4 669L'0 6960'0 f4/0'0 It OOZ93 OOOBI Z 

LOLG'9 LO-3S6'L e£90'0 6E80'0 EZl0'0 9L oOZL 00ZL I. 

L 

^ 

!0 

Z66LZtL7O31V0 

oYNv 

WnS oyM 6 w 

Wdd 

rouo0 

lLZ'0 1 1 +'l9 LL 

oV A 'y'S 

S 

(lplwnv-i 

S 

ON 

Ll31yM 10 nMW 

WnIS30 Luau+a!3 

ZVL1 01 vIdwvS 

ldtl3 0 ZZ9G'0 0000'0 0000'0 

OOOB9BE Ol "--' 

tltl3 0 ZZ9L'0 0000'0 0000'0 I 

00Y+L6C 000091Z 6 _ 

583 0 ZZ9L'0 0000'0 0000'0 00ri101 00+Z9C1 9 

L+91'9 L0tr3L ZZ9L'0 1660'0 0610'0 0003C+ 00199 L 

+£1.1119 10-399'£ 1C99'0 9£90'0 091,0'0 640Z 0092/C 00099 9 

OZLE'9 LO-3CZY SeLS'o 6COl'0 eel0•0 9Z OOZ6SZ 00f94 9 

eLR•a LO•3Z6•5 951t•0 - d6sL•0 - L6£o^ - 0>-- - -- -009U L - - -00l9a- -- - -- --- - - -- -^-- - - - - 

099Z•9 Lo-39919 991 £•o e14L•0 oEEO•0 C+ 00999 oozl9 £ 

BCSE'9 to-3E+'r 6E+0 6£BO'0 L9LO•0 LZ o0Z9Z 0009 L Z 

za9L'9 co-3LCl 0090•0 0090ro sllo'a sL oozL ooZL t 

^ 

10 

z6e1 4 1. lOO31y0 

oyluv 

WnS oyNs 6 uv 

Wdd 

ûo0 

+Z61'0 4'O9 1.'91. 

oy A rS 

S 

(LP)uLnv-i 

0 'nea £00-Il-OOIM-US-7HM 

S 

upp) 

»LvM 10 xi+lvW 

WnIS3J Luawvl3 

LrL-1 OI •IduLVg 

.i? 

;..,^

4.a

^ _• 

Sample ID L7AI 

- EIamenY JIROI\IIVM 

Matrix DI water 

--- 

e 

-^ 

S 


=wm(tl1) 

S 

S.A. V Ao 

x 

PPM 

û./ 0.1024 

sn0 ayAa SUM 

aNAo 


- - -- - - i - - - - - iz00 7200 0.38 0.0003 0.0013 0.0015 1.1 E-10 9.9588 

2 - - -- - 18000 25200 0.54 0.0004 0.0022 0.0037 2.93E-10 9.5335 

3 61200 86400 0.9 0.0007 0.0036 0.0073 2.43E-10 9.8145 

4 88400 172800 0.72 0.0000 0.0029 0.0102 1.92E-10 9.7173 

5 86400 259200 0.87 0.0007 0.0035 0.0136 4.75E-10 9.3229 

e e6400 345600 0.1 0.0001 0.0004 0.0140 8.84E-12 11.0537 

7 88400 432000 0.007 0.0000 0.0000 0.0141 5.58E-14 13.2534 

8 1382400 1614400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0141 0 ERR 

9 2160000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0141 0 ERR 

10 3888000 7862400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0141 0 ERR 


Element STRONTIUM 

Matrix DI WATER 

(dt)n 

S 

t-sum(dt) 

S 

S.A. V Ao 

77.4 51.4 0.211 

Cone. 

PPM 

an9 an/Ao SUM 

en/Ao 

Di 

. 

^ 


Di L 

1 7200 7200 0.17 0.0001 0.0007 0.0007 2.2E-1 1 10.6575 

2 18000 25200 0.33 0.0003 0.0013 0.0020 1.09E-10 9.9612 

3 61200 86400 0.76 0.0006 0.0030 0.0050 1.73E-10 9.7613 

4 86400 172800 0.41 0.0003 0.0016 0.0067 8.22E-11 10.2064 

5 88400 259200 0.35 0.0003 0.0014 0.0081 7.68E-11 10.1138 

8 88400 345800 0.15 0.0001 0.0008 0.0087 1.99E-11 10.7015 

7 86400 432000 0.18 0.0001 0,p007 0.0094 3.69E-11 10.4331 

8 1382400 11f14400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0094 0 ERR 

9 2160000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0094 0 ERR 

10 3888000 7862400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0094 0 ERR 




S.A. V Ao 

76.7 50.7 0.1903 


- 

(dt)n t-sum(dt) Cone* an g an/AO SUM 

DI L 

S 

S PPM 

an/Ao 

1 7200 7200 0.42 0.0003 0.0017 0.0017 1.34E-10 9.8719 

2 18000 25200 0.22 0.0002 0.0009 0.0026 4.88E-11 10.3134 

3 61200 86400 0.83 0.0005 0.0025 0.0051 1.19E-10 9.9243 

4 85400 172800 0.57 0.0004 0.0023 0.0074 1.2E-10 9.9203 

5 88400 259200 0.33 0.0003 0.0013 0.0087 6.84E-11 10.1649 

6 86400 345800 0.4 0.0003 0.0016 0.0103 1.41 E-10 9.8495 

7 86400 432000 0.44 0.0003 0.0018 0.0120 2.2E-10 9.6567 

8 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0120 0 ERR 

9 2160000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0120 0 ERR 

10 3888000 7862400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0120 0 ERR 

F-20

Sanp)a ID L781 

Elamant STRONTIUM 

Matrix SEA WATER 

(dt)n 

S 


t-sum(dt) 

S 

S.A. V Ae 

76.9 so.8 0.1976 

Cone. 

PPM 

an9 an/AO SUM 

an/Ao 


Di L 

1 7200 7200 0.85 0.0007 0.0034 0.0034 5.5E-10 9.2595 

2 18000 25200 1.23 0.0009 0.0049 0.0083 1.52E-09 8.8184 

3 81200 86400 1.99 0.0015 0.0060 0.0163 1.19E-09 8.9253 

4 06400 172800 1.43 0.0011 0.0057 0.0220 7.56E-10 9.1213 

6 06400 259200 1.44 0.0011 0.0058 0.0277 1.3E-09 8.8852 

6 86400 345800 0.79 0.0006 0.0032 0.0309 5.52E-10 9.2584 

7 8100 432000 0.71 0.0005 • 0.0028 0.0337 5.74E-10 9.2411 

8 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0337 0 ERR 

9 2160000 3074400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0337 0 ERR 

10 3888000 7862400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0337 0 ERR 

Sampla ID L782 

Elamant STRONTIUM 


S.A. V Ao 

78.8 50.7 0.1926 


(dqn t-sum(dq Cone. an 9 an/Ao SUM 

Di L 

S 

S PPM 

an/Ao 

1 7200 7200 0.99 0.0008 0.0040 0.0040 7.46E-10 9.1271 

--- - 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 18000 =e3200 0.4 0.0003 0.6616 0.0056 1.61 E-10 9.7941 

3 01200 86400 1.87 0.0014 0.0075 0.0130 1.05E-09 8.9793 

4 86400 172800 1.3 0.0010 0.0052 0.0182 6.25E-10 9.2041 

5 86400 259200 1.07 0.0008 0.0043 0.0225 7.19E-10 9.1432 

8 86400 345600 1.13 0.0009 0.0045 0.0270 1.13E-09 8.9475 

7 86400 432000 0.94 0.0007 0.0038 0.0308 1.01 E-09 6.9974 

8 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0306 0 ERR 

9 2160000 3074400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0308 0 ERR 

t0 3888000 7862400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0308 0 ERR 

Sampla ID L783 

Elanant STRONTIUM 


--------^ ---- DATEOCTt21992 

S.A. V Ao 

78.3 52.4 0.1941 

(dt)n t-sum(dt) Cone. an9 an/Ao SUM 

Di L 

S 

S PPM 

an/Ao 

1 7200 7200 0.65 0.0005 0.0028 0.0026 3.22E-10 9.4925 

2 18000 25200 0.39 0.0003 0.0016 0.0042 1.53E-10 9.8161 

3 61200 86400 1.73 0.0013 0.0069 0.0111 8.98E-70 9.0469 

4 86400 172800 1.1 0.0008 0.0044 0.0155 4.47E-10 9.3492 

5 86400 259200 1.32 0.0010 0.0053 0.0207 1.09E-09 8.9808 

8 86400 345600 1.03 0.0008 0.0041 0.0249 9.38E-10 9.0280 

7 88400 432000 0.9 0.0007 0.0036 0.0285 9.22E-10 9.0351 

8 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0285 0 ERR 

9 2180000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0285 0 ERR 

10 3888000 7862400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0285 0 ERR 

F-21


Element COBALT 

Matrix DI watar 

(dt)n 

S 

t.sum(dt) 

S 


S.A. V Ao 

76.7 50.7 0.1919 

Cone. 

PPM 

an 9 eryAO SUM 

WAo 


1 L 

1 7200 7200 8.4 0.0064 0.0336 0.0338 5.37E-08 7.2898 

2 18000 25200 7.5 0.0058 0.0300 0.0636 5.65E-08 7.2481 

3 61200 86400 7.8 0.0060 0.0312 0.0947 1.82E-08 7.7388 

4 86400 172800 10.7 0.0082 0.0428 0.1375 4.23E.08 7.3732 

5 86400 259200 8.9 0.0068 0.0356 0.1731 4.98E-08 7.3032 

6 86400 345600 9.2 0.0071 0.0368 0.2098 7.48E-08 7.1261 

7 86400 432000 7.9 0.0061 0.0316 0.2414 7.11 E-08 7.1484 

6 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.2414 0 ERR 

9 2160000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.2414 0 ERR 

3888000 7862400 0.0000 0.0000 0.2414 0 ERR 




S.A. V Ao 

77.4 51.4 0.1803 


(dt)n t>•sum(dt) Cone. an 0 WAO SUM 

Di L 

S 

S PPM 

an/Ao 

1 7200 7200 7.1 0.0054 0.0284 0.0284 3.84E-08 7.4159 

2 18000 25200 6.3 0.0048 0.0252 0.0538 3.99E-08 7.3996 

3 81200 85400 15.6 0.0120 00624 0.1159 7.3E-08 7.1367 

4 86400 172800 11.4 0.0087 0.0456 0.1615 4.81 E-08 7.3182 

5 88400 259200 10 0.0077 0.0400 0.2014 6.28E-08 7.2020 

8 86400 345600 9.9 0.0076 0.0396 0.2410 8.66E.08 7.0624 

7 86400 432000 6.8 0.0052 0.0272 0.2682 5.26E-08 7.2786 

8 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.2682 0 ERR 

9 2160000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.2682 0 ERR 

10 3888000 7882400 0.0000 0.0000 0.2682 0 ERR 



matriz DI WATER 

(dt)n 

S 

t-sutn(dt) 

S 

S.A. V Ae 

81.5 55.5 0.1918 

Cone, 

PPM 

an 9 an/AO SUM 

an/Ao 


DI L 

1 7200 7200 5.2 0.0040 0.0208 0.0208 2.06E-08 7.6864 

2 18000 25200 8.1 0.0047 0.0244 0.0452 3.74E-08 7.4276 

3 61200 86400 14.8 0.0114 0.0592 0.1043 6.57E-08 7.1824 

4 86400 172800 10.2 0.0078 0.0408 0.1451 3.85E-08 7.4148 

5 86400 259200 9.2 0.0071 0.0368 0.1819 5.32E-08 7.2744 

6 86400 345600 12.6 0.0097 0.0504 0.2322 1.4E-07 6.8529 

7 86400 432000 13 0.0100 0.0520 02842 i '.92E-07 6.7157 

8 1362400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.2842 0 ERR 

9 2160000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.2842 0 ERR 

_10. 3atumn 7nw2am 0.0000 0.0000 0.2842 0 ERR 

F-22 

J6

.^ 

"-; SampI81D L3B2 

Z 

e"- 

^.;;. 

Sample ID L3B1 

Eiemsnt COBALT 

Metra SEA WATER 

MVOAL^ 

Metta SEA WATER 


S.A. V Ao 

78.8 50.8 0.1792 


(dUn t-sum(dt) Cone. an 0 WAO SUM Of L 

S S PPM an/Ao 

7200 7200 6.6 0.0051 0.0204 0,0264 3.32E-08 7.4793 

2 18000 25200 8.8 0.0052 0.0272 0.0538 4.64E-08 7.3332 

3 61200 68400 20 0.0153 0.0799 0.1335 1.2E-07 8.9209 

4 66400 172600 19.4 0.0149 0.0775 0.2110 1.39E-07 8.8564 

-3 --38400 --259200 -I.2.B -0.0096 -0,0512 --02622 t.03E-07 6.9875 

6 86400 345600 14.6 0.0112 0.0584 0.3205 1.88E-07 6.7250 

7 - - 86400 432000 14.6 0.0112 0.0064 --6.3789 1.43E-07 -8.et49 

8 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.3789 0 ERR 

9 2180000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.3789 0 ERR 

10 3868000 7862400 0.0000 0.0000 0.3789 0 ERR 

(dqn 

S 

t-sum(dQ 

S 

S.A V Ao 

Cone. 

PPM 

an 9 an/Ao SUM 

anlAo 


Di L 

1 7200 7200 5.1 0.0039 0.0204 0.0204 1.98E-08 7.7032 

2 18000 25200 5.6 0.0043 0.0224 0.0428 3.15E-08 7.5019 

3 61200 88400 15.4 0.0118 0.0616 0.1043 7.11 E-08 7.1479 

4 86400 172800 10.2 0.0078 0.0408 0.1451 3.85E-08 7.4148 

S 86400 259200 9.2 0.0071 0.0388 0.1819 5.32E-08 7.2744 

6 86400 345600 8.8 0.0066 0.0344 0.2162 6.54E-08 7.1847 

7 88400 432000 10.8 0.0083 0.0432 0.2594 1.33E-07 6.8768 

8 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.2394 0 ERR 

9 2160000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.2594 0 ERR 

10 3888000 7862400 0.0000 0.0000 0.2594 0 ERR 

2 

3 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

Sampls ID 1393 S.A. V Ao 

Element COBALT 77.4 31•4 0.-1797 

Miwi SEA WA 


- - - - 

(dt)n t-sum(dt) Cone. en p WAe SUM 

Di L 

5 

S PPM 

WAo 

7200 7200 6.3 0.0048 0.0252 0.0252 3.02E-08 7.5197 

18000 25200 4.1 0.0031 0.0164 0.0416 1.89E-08 7.7727 

81200 66400 13.8 0.0106 0.0552 0.0967 5.71 E-08 7.2432 

- - -- -6e400 172806 --11 A 00091 -0-.5472- -01439 315E-08 7.2882 

-259200-----_94--t0072- 

N471. 0.0376 0.1615 SSSE08 7.2357 

345800 12.4 0.0095 0.0496 0.2310 1.36E-07 8.8668 

43zooo 13.2 0.0101 0.os28 0.2838 1.98E-07 8.7025 

814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.2638 0 ERR 

974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.2838 0 ERR 

862400 0.0000 0.0000 0.2838 0 ERR 

F-23

ti 

Sampla ID L3A7 

Element CESIUM 


(dt)n 

S 


t-sum(dt) 

S 

S.A V Ao 

76.7 80.7 0.1919 

Cone. 

PPM 

an 9 anlAo SUM 

anlAo 


Di L 

1 7200 7200 23 0.0176 0.0919 0.0919 4.03E-07 6.3949 

2 18000 25200 21 0.0161 0.0839 0.1759 4.43E-07 8.3538 

3 81200 86400 29 0.0222 0.1159 0.2918 2.52E-07 8.5982 

4 86400 172800 27 0.0207 0.1079 0.3997 2.7E-07 6.5693 

5 66400 259200 23 0.0176 0.0919 0.4916 3.32E-07 6.4785 

8 86400 345600 15.2 0.0117 0.0608 0.5524 2.04E-07 6.6900 

7 88400 432000 12 0.0092 0.0480 0.8003 1.84E-07 8.7853 

8 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.6003 0 ERR 

9 2160000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.6003 0 ERR 

10 3888000 7802400 0.0000 0.0000 0.6003 0 ERR 

Sampie ID L3A2 

Elament CESIUM 

Matrct DI WATER 

(dt)n 

9 

t-sum(dt) 

S 

.A . 

77.4 

P 

Cone. 

PPM 

51.4 0.1803 

an g an/Ao SUM 

an/Ae 


Di L 

1 7200 7200 19 0.0146 0.0759 0.0759 2.75E-07 8.5809 

2 18000 2_5 200 20 0.0153 0.0799 0.1550 4.02E-07 8.3962 

3 61200 86400 28 0.0215 0.1119 0.2678 2.35E-07 6.8288 

4 88400 172800 29 0.0222 0.1159 0.3837 3.11 E-07 6.5072 

5 86400 259200 24 0.0184 0.0959 0.4796 3.62E-07 6.4415 

8 86400 345600 13.6 0.0104 0.0544 0.5340 1.63E-07 6.7886 

7 86400 432000 8.6 0.0086 0.0344 0.54 68 8.42E-08 7.0746 

8 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.5684 0 ERR 

9 2160000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.5684 0 ERR 

10 3888000 7862400 0.0000 0.0000 0.5684 0 ERR 


Element CESIUM 


- - - 

(dt)n 

S 

t-sum(dt) 

S 

S.A. V Ao 

81.5 55.5 0.1916 

Cone. 

PPM 

an 9 eNAo SUM 

anlAo 


Di L 

1 7200 7200 19 0.0146 0.0759 0.0759 2.75E-07 6.5609 

2 18000 25200 20 0.0153 0.0799 0.1559 4.02E-07 6.3962 

3 61200 86400 29 0.0222 0.1159 0.2718 2.52E-07 6.5982 

4 86400 172800 27 0.0207 0.1079 0.3797 2.7E-07 8.5693 

5 88400 259200 23 0.0176 0.0919 0.4716 3.32E-07 6.4785 

6 86400 345600 15.4 0.0118 0.0616 0.5332 2.1 E-07 6.6786 

- - - 7 ---- - - - -- - -- - -664D0- -d32000- -- 14.1 0. 01 We 0.0564 0.5895 2.26E-07 6.6452 

8 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.5895 0 ERR 

9 2160000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.5895 0 ERR 

10 3888000 7882400 0.0000 0.0000 0.5895 0 ERR 

F-24 

4

Sample 10 L3B1 

Elsmant CESIUM 

Matrix Sve wstER 


S.A. ^ V Ao 

78.6 50.8 0.1702 


(dt)n t-sum(dt) Cone. en 0 eNAo SUM 

DI L 

----- - - 1- -- - --- - 

S 

7200 

S 

7200 

PPM 

31 0.0238 0.1230 

aNAo 

0.1239 7.32E-07 6.1357 

2 18000 25200 29 0.0222 0.1159 0.2398 8.44E-07 8.0734 

3 61200 66400 55 0.0422 0.2198 0.4596 9.07E-07 0.0422 

4 86400 172800 42 0.0322 0.1679 0.6275 6.52E-07 6.1855 

5 86400 250200 31 0.0238 0.1239 0.7514 6.04E-07 6.2192 

6 86400 346600 30.3 0.0232 0.1211 0.8725 8.11 E-07 6.0908 

7 86400 432000 18.4 0.0141 0.0735 0.9461 3.85E-07 6.4140 

Sample ID L3B2 

= `^! Elsnlsnt CESIUM 


6 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.9461 0 ERR 

9 2160000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.9461 0 ERR 

10 3888000 7862400 0.0000 0.0000 0.9461 0 ERR 

S.A. V Ao 

78.6 52.5 0.1906 


(dt)n t-sum(dt) Cono. an 9 aNAo SUM 

Di L 

S 

S PPM 

eNAo 

1 7200 7200 20 0.0153 0.0799 0.0799 3.05E-07 6.5163 

2 18000 25200 24 0.0164 0.0959 0.1759 5.78E-07 6.2378 

3 61200 86400 36 0.0276 0.1439 0.3197 3.89E-07 6.4104 

4 86400 _172800 27 0.0207 0.1079 0.4277 2.7E-07 6.5693 

5 86400 259200 22 0.0169 0.0879 0.5156 3.04E-07 6.5171 

8 88400 345600 13.0 0.0107 0.0558 0.5712 1.71 E-07 6.7676 

7 86400 432000 11.4 0.0087 0.0456 0.6167 1.48E-07 8.8298 

8 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.6167 0 ERR 

9 2180000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.8167 0 ERR 

io 3888000 7862a00 0.0000 0.0000 0.t1167 0 ERR 

_ _ `=n€!e!0 l-4B..' 

Elwnsnt CESIUM 

Mstrix SEA WATER 

V Ao 

V'77.a s1.4 0.1797 


- - - (dt)n t-sum(dt) Cone. an 0 aNAo SUM 

DI L 

S .8 PPM 

anfAo 

1 7200 7200 22 0.0169 0.0879 0.0879 3.69E-07 6.4335 

2 18000 25200 20 0.0153 0.0799 0.1679 4.02E-07 6.3962 

3 61200 86400 32 0.0245 0.1279 0.2958 3.07E-07 8.5127 

4 86400 172800 29 0.0222 0.1159 0,4117 3.11 E-07 6.5072 

5 86400 259200 23 0.0178 0.0919 0.5036 3.32E-07 6.4785 

6 88400 345600 19.3 0.0148 0.0771 0.5807 3.29E^07 6.4825 

7 864 432000 12.2 0.0004 0.0a88 0.6295 7.89E07 6.7709 

B 13824 22 00 1 1874400 0.0000 0.0000 0.6293 0 ERR 

9 

10 

n^^ 

7888000 

3ff74400 

7862400 

--- - O.vOvO 

0.0000 

0.0000 

0.0000 

0.8295 

0.6295 

0 

0 

ERR 

ERR 

F-25

^-s 

".^. 

z, 

...,..4 

-: ^ 

...i^^;.,. 

Sample ID L3AI 



,:.., 

Wur-SD-W100-TI-003 Rev. 0 

S.A V Ao 

78.7 30.7 O.1B1B 


(dt)n t-sum(dt) Cone. an 9 an/Ao SUM 

Di l 

8 

S PPM 

aNAo 

1 7200 7200 1.51 0.0012 0.0060 0.0080 t.74E-09 8.7604 

2 18000 25200 1.88 0.0014 0.0075 0.0135 3.55E.09 8.4499 

3 61200 86400 2.06 0.0016 0.0082 0.0218 1.27E-09 8.8982 

4 86400 172800 1.92 0.0015 0.0077 0.0295 1.36E-09 8.8854 

8 86400 259200 1.86 0.0014 0.0074 0.0369 2.17E-09 8.6629 

- - - - 11- -- - - - - - - - - 66400 345600 i.32 0.0010 0.0053 0.0422 1.54 E-09 8.8125 

7 86400 d32000 1.03 0.0008 0.0042 0.0464 1.26E-09 8.9013 

8 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0464 0 ERR 

0 2160000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0464 0 ERR 

10 3888000 7862400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0464 0 Co. 




S.A. V Ac 

77.4 s1.4 0.1803 


(dt)n t-sum(tlt) Conc. an p aNAo SUM 

Di I. 

S 

S PPM 

an/Ao 

1 7200 7200 1.75 0.0013 0.0070 0.0070 2.33E-09 8.6323 

2 18000 25200 2.04 0.0016 0.0082 0.0151 4.18E-09 8.3790 

3 61200 88400 2.15 0.0016 0.0086 0.0237 1.39E-09 8.8581 

4 86400 172800 1.83 0.0014 0.0073 0.0311 1.24E-09 8.9071 

5 86400 259200 1.48 0.0011 0.0059 0.0370 1.38E.09 8.8614 

8 

7 

8 1 1 

86400 

86400 

1382400 

345800 

432000 

1814400 

1.19 

1.31 

0.0009 

0.0010 

0.0000 

0.0048 

0.0052 

0.0000 

0.0417 

0.0470 

0.0470 

1.23E-09 

1.93E-09 

0 

8.9026 

8.7091 

ERR 

9 2180000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0470 0 ERR 

10 3888000 7862400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0470 0 ERR 




S.A. V Ao 

81.5 33.3 0.1916 

DATE OCT 121992 

(dt)n t-sum(tlt) Conc. an p aNAO SUM 

Di L 

S 

S PPM 

aNAo 

1 7200 7200 1.21 0.0009 0.0048 0.0048 1L11 EO9 8.9528 

2 16000 25200 1.77 0.0014 0.0071 0.0119 3.15E-09 8.5023 

3 61200 86400 2.02 0.0015 0.0081 0.0200 1.22E-09 8.9123 

4 86400 172800 1.08 0.0005 0.0043 0.0243 4.31 E-10 9.3652 

8 86400 259200 1.35 0.0010 0.0054 0.0297 1.14E-09 8.9413 

8 86400 345600 0.93 0.0007 0.0037 0.0334 7.64E-10 9.1167 

7 86400 432000 1.36 0.0010 0.0054 0.0388 2.11 E-09 8.8766 

8 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0388 0 ERR 

9 2180000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0388 0 ERR 

10 3888000 7862400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0388 0 ERR 

F-26 

rl

Sample ID W B1 

Elemant STRONIIUM 


- ----- - -- - - - - (a'Yn 

S 


R, 

lasum(di) 

S 

S.A V Ao 

76.7 50.8 0.1792 

Conc. 

PPM 

an0 an/Ao SUM 

udAo 


Di L 

1 7200 7200 2.46 0.0019 0.0098 0.0098 4.81 E-09 8.3365 

2 18000 25200 1.92 0.0015 0.0077 0.0175 3.7E-09 8.4318 

3 61200 86400 3.32 0.0025 0.0133 0.0306 3.31 E-W 8.4807 

4 86600 172800 2.36 0.0018 0.0094 0.0402 2.06E-09 6.6862 

5 86400 259200 1.83 0.0014 0.0073 0.0475 2.1 E-09 8.6771 

8 86400 345800 1.98 0.0015 0.0079 0.0554 3.46E-09 8.4803 

7 66400 432000 1.9 _ 0.0015 0.0076- 0.0630 4,11E-08 8,3681 

6 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0630 0 ERR 

9 2160000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0830 0 ERR 

10 3866000 7882400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0630 0 ERR 

Sample ID L382 

Elnnant STRONTIUM 

Matrix SEAWATER 

S.A. V Ao 

78.8 52.5 0.7908 


(dt)n t-sum(dt) Cone, an 9 aNAo SUM 

Di L 

S 

S PPM 

an/Ao 

1 7200 7200 2.99 0.0023 0.0120 0.0120 6.81 E-09 8.1670 

2 18000 25200 1.81 0.0014 0.0072 0.0192 3.29E-09 8.4829 

3 61200- 8_6400 __- _2.45 00019_ .__0,0098 0.0290 1 eF-m 8.7448 

4 86400 172800 1.37 0.0011 0.0053 0.0343 6.94E-10 9.1586 

5 86400 259200 1.65 0.0013 0.0066 0.0410 1.71 E-09 8.7670 

8E400- 345800 0.1,111 ^v.006.5 0.0476 2.35E.09 8.6293 

7 68400 432000 1.7 0.0013 0.0088 0.0544 3.29E-09 8.4827 

8 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0544 0 ERR 

9 2160000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0544 0 ERR 

3866000 7862400- 0.0003 - 0.0006 - 0.0544 0 ERR 

Sample ID L383 



S.A. V Ao 

77.4 61.4 0.1797 


(dt)n t-sum(dt) Cone. ang an/Ao SUM 

DI L 

S 

S PPM 

an/Ao 

7200 7200 3.05 0.0023 0.0122 0.0122 7.08E09 8.1498 

2 16000 25200 1.63 0.0013 0.0065 0.0187 2.67E-09 8.5739 

3 61200 86400 2.81 0.0022 0.0112 0.0299 2.37E-09 8.6255 

4 86400 172600 1.55 0.0012 0.0062 0.0361 8.88E•10 9.0513 

5 86400 259200 1.3 0.0010 0.0052 0.0413 1.06E-09 8.9741 

6 86400 345600 2.08 0.0016 0.0083 0.0496 3.82E.09 5.4175 

7 86400 432000 1.79 0.0014 0.0072 0.0368 3.86E09 8.4379 

6 1382400 1814400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0568 0 ERR 11 

9 2160000 3974400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0568 0 ERR 

10 3888000 7862400 0.0000 0.0000 0.0568 0 ERR 

F-27


-f'ÔRR-EsP£3'^14I3ENC€VI3;R1BU TiOU MIERjHEEi 

Author Addreaaee Correepondance No. 

RA CZELLATH/STOCK DA BURBANK/WHC 9205883 

swlect: STOCK POLYMER IMMOBILIZATION TECH. WASTE FORM QUALIFICATION TESTING PURCHASE ORDER 

NO. MMW-SVV-277587 STOCK REFERENCE NO. 6996 

I9AnAUG7tn1 rKUJCGI enulKttKlnG tlKAr rKUJtt.l GUnIKUL 

JA Swenson G6-46 TA Carlson G6-46 KP Brown G6-47 

DE Ball G6-46 AW Hinkle G6-46 SE Bussman G6-47 - 

SR Briggs G6-47 FH Lee G6-46 C Malstrom G6-47 - 

JE Filip G6-47 _ _ 

JB Payne G6-46 SW McKinley G6-47 - 

DR Lucas G6-46 X- JG Starke _v 

G6-45__ GC-Jtice G6-47 - 

CA Petersen Hl-60 -X WR Swita G6-46 -7- BL Trumpour G6-47 - 

Ti Yount H1-60 _ 

X_ RR Wyer G6-46 =X_ 

- 

WRAP TECHNOLOISY SW SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SW SYSTEMS ENGINEERING 

CJ Benar HI-60 K EG Berglin 

DA Burbank H1-60 X KJ Hull 

BF Campbell HI-60 RM Horgus 

JD Keck G6-46 ! SL Kooiker 

CE McDonald Hi-60 DL Lamberd 

JL Nelson H1-60 ML Lee 

KE Parker H1-60 - KJ Leist 

RM Ybarra HI-60 _-- 1 N.t Monroe 

G6-46 VP Ocampo G6-46 

G6-46 - DT Ruff G6-46 - 

H1-60 RA Sexton H1-60 - 

G6-46 _ JR Weber G6-46 _ 

H1-60 _ JR Weidert G6-46 

G6-46 RH Winkleman _ 

G6-46 

G6-46 - A Zabarauskas G6-46 - 

H1-60 

SW INTEGRATION SW PROJECTS SUPPORT 

GF Booth G6-46 DR Broz G6-46 Corr Control X 

MD LeClair H1-60 - ML DeWitt G6-46 = WRAP DMC G6-51 _X= 

DW Mer_tz_ H1-6Q_- , rG ErnenherL G6-46 JR McGee G6-47 

CR Nash H1-60 TM Greager G6-46 - E Pennala E2-30 

TR Pauly G6-46 RL Louie G6-46 DR Porten G6-47 ^ 

Jt Stroup G6=46 KE Smith--- G6-46 JM Seimer G6-47 - 

KM Weingardt H1-60 ^- HE Wellsfry G6-46 ^ I WW Olson N1-83 = 

StLKt 1 AK 1 tJ rKUIaKHI94 U 1 RC.KJ 

RL Anderson G6-45 RJ Roberts N3-13 DA Smith _G6-16 

Al Ball H1-60 = JG Riddelle H5-33 - - 

BJ Gire 

G6-46 BA Mayancsik H5-33 

SA Niebel G6-46 MM McCarthy N3-13 - 

I JB Myers G6-46 


SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: 

QA RECORD - YES - NO 

F-28 

_




Attention: Mr. Dewey Burbank, H1-60 


. .__^ . ,.. - 

Sublect: cUCKolymer lmmobtlization Tech. 




Gentlemen: 

November 4, i9it 

92RAC WH008 

9205883 


This report represents progress through October, 1992. 


RAC/kh 

Enclosure 


S.O. 6996 

T. i.itcfiney 

-Tickier 1211192 w%report 


Russell A. Czellath 


R :'sq; ; ^0 

^py 2 41992 

Stock Equipment Company • 16490 Chillicothe Road • Chagrin Falls, Ohio 44022-4398, U.S.A. • (216) 543-6000 • Telex 196071 

A Unit of General Signal Telefax ( 216) 543-6678 

F-29

Stock Equipment Company WHC-SD-W100-TI-003 Rev. 0 


STOCK EQUIPMENT CO. 




NO. 3 

THROUGH OCTOBER, 1992 


Westinghouse Hanford Purchase Order No. MMW-SW-277587 


F-30

--- - ftCR-e4Uip1P1eFf Company WHC-SD-W100-TI-003 Rev. 0 

1.0 SUMMARY 

2.0 SCHEDULE 

BAR CHART SCHEDULE 


F-31 

PaEg 

1,2&3 

4 

5

1.0 SUNYNARY 


Weeks of September 28. 199 2 and October 5. 1992 

I started and completed the assays for the following leach time 

points: 30 second, 2 hour, 7 hour, 24 hour, 2 day, 3 day, 4 

day, and 5 day. The leachants were assayed for the following 

elements: Cesium, Cobalt and Strontium. I have calculated the 

leachability index numbers for the above time points. The 18 

day leach interval has arrived and the samples were changed. 

= The samples are intact; no apparent degradation. I have 

assayed the 18 day leach interval. The leachability 

calculations have been updated with the 18 day leach interval. 

------------ 

Week of October 19. 1992 

I started the thermal cycling portion of the test. The thermal 

__-----cymli^g-test-will be complete early November. The compressive 

strength results will be noted in the November progress report. 

Stock contracted with a consultant from the University of Akron 

Polymer Department to discuss the problem in trying to solidify 

TYPE 2 & 4 surrogate waste streams. The consultant has 

S'2ige


Russ Czellath -2- November 2. 1992 

--------------I-also-tr3Ed-more--experimentG-involving TYPE 2 surrogate waste. 

I adjusted the pH of the waste to 10.5 and tried to solidified 

it. The best result obtained was a gell. I also tried the 

same thing to surrogate waste TYPE 4 with the same results. I 

tried to minimize the amount of energy input for mixing the 

waste. The theory here is that oxygen may inhibit 

polymerization, so I decided to hand mix two (2) 

se3idificatio.^.s, a type 2(pH 10.5) and a type 4(pH 10.5) 

surrogate. These solidifications have obtained the best gell 

of all the variations tried (these gells are very firm). 

I.. _y 

p*:; 

I ordered copper sulfate to attempt solidification with the 

derakane resin; it's possible the compound that the copper is 

in might be inhibiting the polymerization. I have ordered 

another polymer that is more reactive than the current polymer 

being used for this testing program. Early indications show 

that TYPE 4 surroaate waste can be solidified in this new 

polymer. I have been working on optimizing the loading ratio 

(waste to binder) for TYPE 4 surrogate waste. The following 

experiments have been performed: 

ID BINDER 

(gms) 

A 100 

B --100 

C --- - 

lnn 

D 100 

CATALYST PROMOTOR WASTE 

(gms) (gms) (gms) 

2.5 1.0 

- - 2,5 0.2 

-2=5 

0.4 

2.5 1.0 

E 100 2.5 1.0 

100 

200 

200 

200 

150 

SPEED POWER 

(rpm) (watts) 

1800 6.1 

1799 8.4 

1815 8.1 

1000 3.8 

1000 2.2 

Sample "A° set up rock hard in a very few minutes, this waste 

had a pH adjustment of 10.5. All the samples after "A" have no 

pH adjustment. Sample "B" has set up but not rock hard. 

Sample "C" a little better results than "B". Sample "D" 

results are the same as "C". Sample "E" set rock hard. I can 

only assume that the maximum waste to binder loading will be 

greater than 1.5/1 but less than 2/1. Type 2 surrogate waste 

solidification is promising but there still maybe the problem 

of copper concentration. 

F-33


-3- Nov 

I assayed type 2,3,4 surrogate waste for it's copper 

concentration. Type 2,3 surrogate wastes fall in line with the 

reported concentration supplied by Westinghouse Handford. Type 

4 surrogate waste was approximately 30 percent higher than the 

reported concentration provided by Westinghouse Handford. The 

results are as follows: 

TYPE 2 - 127,875 ppm 

TYPE 3 - 108,747 ppm 

TYPE 4 - 87,175 ppm 

F-34


3:0 -SCFIEDLTLE 

WHC-SD4100-TI-003 Rev. 0 

Scheduled Actual 

Activity Date Date 

- Prepare Work Plan 08/01/92 08/01/92 

- Submit Work Plan 08/01/92 08/01/92 

- Approve Plan 08/10/92 08/10/92 

- Develop Formulations 08/21/92 08/21/92 

- Prepare Specimens 09/01/92 09/16/92 

Lab - Anaiysis 17/10i^ 

Final Report 12/23/92 

F-35 

,...4.-

0 

co 

Cr' 

°``^,. 

04-Nov-92 

PROUECT SCHEDULE 

WESTINGHOUSE 


P.O. MMW-SVV-277587 


TASK 






LABORATORY ANALYSIS 

FINAL REPORT 


PREPARED BY: RUSS A. CZELL.ATH 

JUL 1 A UG 

^ 

STONJK EOUIPMEINT COMPANY 

1992 

E P O C T N O V I D E C 

0 

3r x 

c 

1/1 

3r6 

. 0 

^ 

.. 

0 w 

m < 

0

THERMAL CYCLING SAMPLES 

BEFORE THE START OF THE TEST 

.. 1 !.4 U.. 

SAMPLE ID HEIGHT.(in) DIAMETER (in) WEIGHT (gms) DENSITY (gnns/cc) DENSITY 

avg 

ILi-11 1.937 1.418 56.112 1.12 

1-1-12 1.915 1.420 55.01 1.11 1.11 

1-1-13 1.919 1.423 54.85 1.10 

1.3-11 2.039 1.452 78.09 1.41 

1 . 3-12 

L.3-13 

2.063 

2.019 

1.445 

1.447 

77.96 

77.25 

1.41 

1.42 

1.41 = C -) 

v°, 

0 

^ 

g 

w 

^. 

t 

o 

V L.7-11 2.035 1.464 84.9 1.51 

° 

1-7-12 2.036 1.458 84.72 1.52 1.52 

L7-13 2.009 1.455 83.65 1.53 o 

< 

0

co 

SAMPLE ID 

L1-17 

L1-'18 

L1-'19 

L3-17 

L3-118 

L3-19 

L7-17 

L7-18 

L7-19 

K,. 

'^;. ^c 

RADIATION SAMPLES BEFORE 

THE START OF THE TEST 

DIAMETER (in) HEIGHT (in) 

1.424 1.884 

1.426 1.839 

1.430 1.892 

WEIGFIT (gms) DENSITY (gms/ccc DENSITY' (gms/cc) 

AVG 

54.67 1.11 

53.64 1.12 1.11 

55.17 1.11 

1.454 2.048 73.55 1.32 

1.456 2.082 76.93 1.35 1.35 

1.454 2.076 77.67 1.38 

1.464 2.052 82.68 1.46 

1.461 2.049 86.57 1.54 1.51 

1.461 2.027 84.90 1.53 

s 

x 

N 

C 

,.. 

Cl 

0 

^ 

C. 

0 

w 

z 

m < 

0

BIODEGRADATION SAMPLES 

BEFORE THE START OF TEST 

SAMPLE ID DIAMETER (in) HEIGHT (in) WEIGHT (gms) DENSITY (gms/cc DENSITY 

AVG 

L1-14 1.423 1.846 53.38 1.11 

Li -15 1.422 2.022 56.84 1.08 1.08 

L1-16 1.425 1.948 53„37 1.05 

L3-14 1.4$8 2.060 73.24 1.30 

L3-15 1.453 1.996 74.66 1.38 1.36 

1-3-16 1.461 2.023 76.85 1.40 

L7-14 1.430 1.981 78.31 1.50 

L7-15 1.425 2.006 81.68 1.56 1.47 

'O 1-7-16 1.430 1.865 66.84 1.36 

^ 

x 

H 

t 

0 e 

-^ 

0 

w 

m 

0

0 

a. 

cc: 

cn 

0 

h- i 

O 

0 

0 

N 1 

U 

3 

Y ` 

sl ^ R 

A .k 

1^1 

6 

pA 

q s6 

„ q A q 4 4 

11 9 F ^ ^ - R 

0 3 l I 5 9 1 ' 1 

e 

S^ 

i ^ ` 

j. ^ 9 E E A R 7 ^ ^ ! 

P: 

im 

• d dd bb dd d b dd 

J 

s ^ ^^ ^^ a^ 

a 

f9 

T 

08 

a 

S^ 

^ 

^^- 

^ ^ ^ : ^ :: ^ 7 E E 

a 

^ 

q 

9 

a 

7 

q e e^ q 

M 

q F g 

e 

6 

^ ^ ^ 

f• C ^ ^ i E 3 p E ^ 

• F Y ` 

Ep EE pR Es 4 q a 

^X^ MS 

^ S 

N ^ NM ^N M ^M 

k 

•° 

i 

I R 

fe • 

P3 [ 

^S6 

Q 

e q q R s q 

ai d a 3 

9 5 9^ ^ 2 9 ^ ^ 2 i 

9 °a dl a ^ s @ ^ ^ 

^^ - 

A• ^ 4 i E a g 

^^ •y y• XM yN ^N YM ^` :M 

O 

er ^ 

^

C/ 

0D 

OC 

M1 

0, 

^yII 

i..) 

d 

tl 

^ 

a 

I >d 

N7 

M ^k 

( 

9s: 

F ^ 

p p 5 p a 8 p p ° 

a !! 

bs ! 

b ! 

" ! 

"s ! 

S ! 

b ^ 

^ ^ ^ 

^ ^ !^ 

l . 

i 

Ct 

a 

al Yk 

PS 

7^3 

e a p p p p 6 p 

A °A yl ^ Fi b_ ! 

^n C A 

^ w ^ 

F 

N ^ f ! ^ Y 

• • ^ 

^, a b ^ b b b b b bb b a b b 

_X X Y Y Y Y IIY X Y Y • 

al rp 

[• 

pi 

^ 

rQ 

a 

9it 

. h 1 

F F F .^ w 9 ^ ^ 

'• 

al l ; 3 ! 1 I I I l I 

{y 

7 i ^ __ _ .r7 ^ 

^Y ^ N • ^ 

^w k ^ ^ 

^ ^ 

V ! 1Y 

^ ^ ^ U ^ 8 n 

br , ^ b ^ ^^ 

^ IY 

tl li 

î l 

i^ ^, 

ti 

^ 

1uY 

^

^ 

^ 

A 

N 

. ^ +a aii aa ^ 6 

oi l' yP 

a 

^ 6 6 ^ B ^ ^ I e ^ E 

- Y 6 - - a 

i r s 

S e e e e e a e ' 

es 

pr 

^ 

^ 

^ 

Y e j j 

'yFL 

a 

f 0 ^ f 

^ _^ ^ n ^ x ^ ^ ^ Q 

i f , i 

se 

p^ 

1 

t 

le 

SS ii S i1 1f {S SY pq ^s $^ 

I 

I I ^ t IE t 3 ^ ^ ^ °s 

Y I^ i e e i 

^ 

(G 

^ 

[ ^ 

: :i' 

N 

O ^ 

E 

Co 

^ 

^• 

0 

w 

m 

< 

0

T 1 

A 

w 

^ • 

$ ^py yf ; pp V ^ py tl yp ; g Yp ^ ^ ^ ^ s s ^ P t^^ 

i t 7l t ^ ^1 i 1 1 ^ Y i i il i l i E s 

i ,: c L e - e e ^^ : 

i i i I 8 9 H ^ $ F^ 

4 

e 

[ ^ 

y 

6 R 

b 

R 

q^ 

F 

^ 

_ ^ v 

E e : : 'e, e L e : 

:. 

1 

t le 

6 6 

" P O 

s e eal e i[ i 0ii1 

Et^ + 

_ 7 4 4 y3 

ur 

i 

^ 

Ie 

i i 

la l I i I i 1 1 

3 1 ii 

E^^ + 

e^s 

y 

^ 

i 

i l.

co 

o^ 

rn 

.., 

F^ 

0 

m 

3c 

^^ 

4` 

V 

3 

r 

F 

a 

c^ e 

^ ^ . 

#'I 1 

7 I 7 9 7 + ^ ^ 

a a s s s sn e 

^; 9 e F^ ^ ^ ^ a ! ! !^ 

s I ^ 8 a ^ °e ^ a ^ e 

e I A - A F A _a ' 3 

Q. ^ 3 E E E ^ 0 ^ 

` A A Y Y A Y Y 

h ! 

i 

S 

i^ 

^ 

r--, 

, 

9 : i 5 .i ^ E E 

a ss a 4 a^t 6fI afI 9 ° 

i ` j a 

^ i °a ^ â 3 °e e e ^ e ^ 

^• ^ ^ i E. ^ ^ @ g Fi f 

o ee e e ee g g= . q 

R 

Î I 

AS 

T 

9 5 

Jtla 

0 

3 7 9 9 : S 7 9 E E 

a ^ ^ ^ ^ s ^ s 4 

i 

A 

d 

A 

^ 

A 

a 

^ 

e 

n 

^ 

A 

e 

° 

° 

A 

^ 

+^ ! A A F A ^ : j 

3 

ie ^ A i E A £ 9 ^ F ^ 

^ b^ ^ ^ ^ d dd bd db bd db 

^ 

e 

^ 

a

T 

1 

A 

^ 

!^^ + 

^ 

i 

•^^w^:rwwwwrpR^=_ ^t 

' ^ i Y 9 Y Y Y ^^ Y 

ii i ^ i f i! " ^ ° ^ ^ • r 

fi 

0 

^ 

3 

le 

I Ur'^ 

l i G Y 6 Y Y ^Î ^ 

Et^ + 

= ^ 

y 

^ 

^ 

N 

O I 

E 

.... 

O 

--1 

^-. 

O 

O 

W 

< 

CO

^ 

7 

d 

M 

O 

O 

I 

O 

3 

N I 

U 

3 

! 

a 

gyl I 

F^ 'k 

J^ . 

3 ` 

R7 

R 

I I 

7 7 7 3 3 : E ^ 

^ °Y R J ^ 'J a^ 

^ ^ tl ^ 

e e 3 e ^'a 3 ^ 

; ^ _ 9 Y R `^ 5 

^ 

3 ' 

tA 

R7 

Eg^ 

^. 

I t 

+ 9 ^ 9 : 7 7 3 i^ F 

a t A 

^ e P e ^ e 

2 9 a a s ^ ^ ^ 9 4 

^ ^ R R R p • 

%I I , 

Y: 

^^ 

1 

A9 

n^ N 

^ 

j^ 

its 

R 

^ 7 7 7 3 3 7 : F E 

s 6 C s g g a 

i ^ ê g 3 ^ ^ a 9 ^ ê 

^• ^ ^ ^ ^ A ^t 4 ^ ^ ^ 

S li^ ^ ^R RR RN IiF Rd NR RR 

NY YY iY` YY iY YY 

l 

to 

^ 

LL

'i 

A 

v 

lf^. 

j^^ 

u e e - - I I I 

a 

i 

er 

^ 

i i i 

r t _ r r _ ^^ : 

a Be 

a 

i 

er 

i 

^ 

I° 

F^^ • 

^^- 

a Y : - r r - _ `^ ^ • 

al 

a 

i 

^ 

i 

N 

s 

«. 

O Co 

-i 

OI 

O 

w 

A N< 

O

0 

> d 

cl: 

M 

O 

O 

H I 

O 

0 

3 

C 

N 

S 

/ 

tF 

YI ^ a 

R7 

Je 

^^vt 

! 

,^j 9 5E 7 ^ 8 ^ ^ 9 S 

^2 n - 

A A 4 - 

A - 

A - 

4 A 

^• ^ A 9 F p 

e. ^ a ! ^ 3 1 1 ^ i ^ 

^; d b b„ d Y d Y d Y dd 

YY d Y b Y d 

YY dd 

YY 

E P @@ _ gt !g ^FI ^pI ^!t 

el 

9 

^ 

R7 

e 

Fr 

S 7 ^ i i i 7 a E^ 

e s a e q A q = 

ia 7 3 

• ^ A i E A R 4 ^ ^ ^ 

k d Y Y d d d d d d d d d d 

i^ 3 Y - - B YY ' Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y 

i 

r 

^ 

I a 

w 

aX A 

Jfl 

Rt 

It 

Êa 

v 

71 3 7 ^ 7 - ^ If E 

î 11 3 5 ^ $ ^ 3 l Î ! 

F 1 3 I i i J I 

J^ ^ F v A A ^ A ^ 

^^ ^j E R ^ A R 5 i Î ^ 

s 

^ " s a 

its 

^^ di 

Go 

v 

ti.

0 

> d 

C.) 

O O 

F- 

0 0 

3 

G NI 

U 

3 

^ 

cl ^ ^ 

a 

a, _ a 

^ 

6 

7 + i 's 7 3 7 1 F^ ^ 

, 

= 

q 

^ 

q 

N 

q 

n 

e 

^ 

q 

^ i 

^; •^ i a ^ ^ ? ! ^ ^ R5 

^ 3 

_ - - 

^^', ^ b b ^ ^ 9 aa b a a a a a 

î ^ ^ € e F i eF e ^ ^ S^ 

6 

^ 

N 

i^ 

7 : S 7a a° E E 

q e ° , 0 A'C 

a @ ^ ae § a^ ^ ^ 

R t j n _ N 

J;. 

E A i E A $ ^ g ^ ^ 

. ^ ! ! i ! i i ^ 9 A 

y^^ b ^ b ^ ^ d d d d b db ^ d d ^ 

r 

^ 

7• c 

N7 

a 

: : I 7 7 S I ^ F^ 

d ^ 6 tl ^ tl • d ^ d 

^ ^ ^ 2 $ ^ ^ ^ 8 a 2 

t. ^ ^ ^ t s l t ^ i ^ 

Y ^ ^ M II Y M .Y ^^ Y N Y ^ 

re ^g g 

€ 8 î ^^ ^5 _ 

rn 

4.

O 

7 

d 

O 

H i 

O 

N 

U 

3 

el 

^ 

rC 

2e 

e{ 

°e 9 7 i 9 ? a : E F^ 

a _ 6 § ; j ^ 3 

^; ^ ^ ^ $ $ 5 $ 3 $ $ 

S e ^ 3 ^ EI Y° ^ ^ ^ 3 

[^ $ $ a " ° ! $ 

s° ^ t R 3 'il i t ^ l ^ 

a MR RW 

MY WR 

YY I^^ 

i^ I 

R Y WW 

YY FW 

Y Y RW 

t^ 1 ir 

1^ [ YtEY ^ Sp SS Sl 66 ilI S ^ 

S! 6¢ 

$ 

j3 

^ 

I B 

M1 

S ^ _r v.. . ... .. af . _. , ;.I 

a °Y 2 ^ Y' 2 'e E^ F 

d § d ^ 

f ^ tl d ^ 2 e ^ a ^ 2 

3 i a d e e d e - q 

tl i . 8& S 

l 

r 

YI i 

3 Y z 

1j 

v 

F 

^ 

7 e 

a ^ ^1 N p 4 19 

e n • i d, ^ F 

S R 12 

P 

; ê ! ^ 5 $ $ ^ ^ 5 9 

;• ^ ^ ^ ^ A R 7 ^ R ! 

^^ Yy yM ^: Y^ YY Ay `^ Y 

SS SS Sl ^6 l^ !l d6 6 

u 

^^. 

O 

N 

I 

U.

en 

a-. 

p g 

aQ 

i 

^ 

rr 

it 

- l r rF e^ r^`^ 

il+ 

7 

tls 

n 

er 

F 

,,.^ 

E^G 

a 5 y k 1: Y b e ^^ : 

. 

iQ 

7 

i 

re 

ê 

^ 

H 

0 

z 

O 

O 1 

-4 

^ 

01 

0 

w 

< 

Co


---CAORRFSP-OMDEIÌCE ^?ISTRIBUT1ON Cl]VERSHFFT 

- Author Addressee Correspondenoe No. 

RA CZELLATH/STOCK DA BURBANK/WHC 9208502 

s:îeatT- STP.CK-POLY-MER-IMMOLBILIZ_AT10N TELH, WASTE FORM I1llAL1FICATION-TESTINGPllRCHASE 

ORDE-ft-NO. MMW-SVY-277587--STOCK--REFERENrE NO. FoaF 

9XnXhG9cnI rnvact.i cnaanc¢nana wnnr rnvucul wninv6 

.ia cwer.son G6-46 - -- -- - TA CarlcIIn G6-46-------- KP $rown G6-47 

DE Ball G6-46 _ AW Hinkle G6-46 SE Bussman G6-47 - 

SR Briggs G6-47 _ FH Lee G6-46 - C Malstrom G6-47 - 

JE Filip G6-47 

JB Payne G6-46 SW McKinley G6-47 - 

DR Lucas G6-46 ^ JG Starkey G6-46 GC Rice G6-47 - 

CA Petersen H1-60 _X WR Swita G6-46 ^ BL Trumpour G6-47 

TL Yount H1-60 =X_ RR Wyer G6-46 =X= - 

WRAP TECHNOLOGY SW SYSTEMS ENGINEERING SW SYSTEMS ENGINEERING 

CJ Benar H1-60 X EG Berglin G6-46 _ VP Ocampo G6-46 _ 

DA Burbank _ N1-6n -X _ KJ Hull 

G6-46 _ DT Ruff G6-46 _ 

BF Campbell H1-60 

RM Horgus H1-60 _ RA Sexton H1-60 _ 

JD Keck G6-46 SL Kooiker G6-46 JR Weber G6-46 

CE McDonald- H1-60 _ DL Lamberd Hi-60 - JR Weidert G6-46 - 

JL Nelson H1-60 = ML Lee G6-46 - RH Winkleman G6-46 - 

KE Parker H1-60 KJ Leist G6-46 - A Zabarauskas G6-46 

RM Ybarra H1-60 

NJ Monroe H1-60 

n 

SW INTEGRATION SW PROJECTS SUPPORT 

GF Booth G6-46 _ DR Broz G6-46 _ Corr Control _X 

MD LeClair H1-60 ML DeWitt G6-46 WRAP DMC G6-51 X 

DW Mertz H1-60 EG Erpenbeck G6-46 JR McGee G6-47. _ 

CR Nash H1-60 TM Greager G6-46 E Pennala E2-30 _ 

TR Pauly G6-46 RL Louie G6-46 DR Porten G6-47 _ 

JL Stroup G6-46 KE Smith G6-46 JM Seimer G6-47 

KM Weingardt H1-60 HE Wellsfry G6-46 _ WW Olson N1-83 _ 

RL Anderson G6-45 = RJ Roberts N3-13 - 

I DA Smith_ _G6-16 _X = 

AI Ball H1-60 

JG Riddelle H5-33 

. . . 

ts^ Gi uiG6-4' 

re 

BA Mayan^îw ---' H-33 

SA-Niebel --------G6-46 MM McCarthy- ---N3-17 - 

JB Myers G6-46 

OL Kruger H5-33 


SPECIAL INST RUCTIONS: 

QA RECORD YES NO

' iO`F*'P\^ 




WHC-SD-W100-TI-003 Rev. 0 9208502 

Lf= Attention: Mr. Dewey Burbank, H1-60 

0^^. 

Subject: STOCK Polymer Immobilization Tech. 




Gentlemen: 

December 1, 1992 

92RAC WH007 


This-reportrepresents-progress through ^:rember, 19Q2. 


RAC/kh 

Enclosure 


S.O. 6996 

T. Litchney 

Tickler 1/1/93 w/report 


RussellA. Czellath 


RECEIVED 

WRAP DMC 

t?EC 141942 

Stock Equipment Company • 16490 Chillicothe Road • Chagrin Falls, Ohio 44022-4398, U.SA • (216) 543-6000 • Telex 196071 


Telefax (216) 543-6678 

F-53




STOCK EQUIPMENT CO. 




NO. 4 

THROUGH NOVEMBER, 1992 


Westinghouse Hanford Purchase Order No. MMW-SW-277587 


F-54


1.0 SUMMARY 



2.0 SCHEDULE 4 

BAR CHART SCHEDULE 

F-55 

Pam 

1,2&3


1.0 SUq91RY 

November 5, 1992 

The 45 day leach interval. 


The samples are in intact with no apparent degradation. They 

---- ------ -- -- will be assayed for cesium, cobalt, and strontium. The current 

leachability calculations have been included. 

---.- 


The Thermal Cycling Test for samples L1, L3, and L7 were 

completed. The results are as follows: 

SAMPLE 

ID 

HEIGHT 

(inch) 

DIA. 

(inch) 

WEIGHT 

( grams) 

DENSITY 

( gm/cc) 

LOAD 

(lbs) 

FORCE 

(psi) 

L1-11 1.954 1.418 56.11 1.11 17,520 11,094 

-Li-12 1.926 3.425 55.01 1.09 17,560 11,010 

L1-13 1.913 1.42i 54:84 1.10 17,600 11,082 

L3-11 2.046 1.453 77.51 1.39 7,200 4,342 

L3-12 2.113 1.453 77.22 1.34 8,400 5,066 

L3-13 2.044 1.454 76.71 1.38 9,840 5,926 

L7=11 2.049 1.456 81.59 1..46 1,400 841 - 

L_7-12 2.025---- 1.446 81.01---- 1.49----- 1,720 1,047 

L7-13 1.987 1.448 80.01 1.49 1,780 1081 

November 17. 1992 

Thermal cycling was initiated for the samples L5 (TYPE 2) and 

L9 (TYPE 4). 

Week of November 9. 1992 

Surrogate waste samples Type 2 and Type 4 were sent out to have 

the following tests performed: 

irrariiatinn 

.......... .. ., 

biodegradation, and 

TCLP. 

-i 

F-56



Due to combustible considerations the samples prepared for TCLP 

were ground-at-Steck prior to submittal to the contracted 

laboratory. 

Samples L5 and L9 (Type 2 and Type 4) were spiked with cobalt, 

cesium, and strontium. Then casted into 1.5" by 2" cylinders. 

An exotherm profile on the prepared samples was obtain. 

November 16. 1992 

The leachability study was started for surrogate waste Types 2 

and 4. The following time points have been pulled: 

30 seconds, 

2 hour, 

5 hour, 

-24_hnur, 

2 day, 

3 day, 

4 day, and 

5 day. 

The 90 day sample will be pulled on February 15, 1993. An 

amendment to the original report will follow within a week of 

the 90 day leach interval for TYPE 2 and TYPE 4 surrogate waste 

streams. 

All time points up to and including 5 days have been assayed. 

Leachability calculations are in progress. 

Samples of surrogate wastes TYPE a. and-TYPE-1_were-successfully 

solidified in the alternate polymer, exotherm data was 

recorded. The formulations are identical to the one used for 

the sample preparation for all the testing. I also have done 

an exotherm profile on TYPE 4 surrogate waste. 


TCLP extraction was started on L3, L5, L7 and L9 samples. The 

samples will be assayed for their metals. 

F-57 

--M@---


FORMULATION DATA FOR EXOTHERMS 

Sample Binder 

(gms) 


BPO 

(gms) 

DMT 

(gms) 

Waste 

(gms) 

Speed 

(rpm) 

Power 

watts 

peak 

tmp °C 

Control 100 2.58 0.1 0 500 0.1 105 

LETF 100 2.53 0.1 200 1800 14.6 67 

TYPE 2 100 T.50 2.0 100 1800 `` 11 5.7 70 

TYPE 3 100 2.60 0.1 200 1797 6.4 54 

TYPE 4 1 00 5. 1 6 1.1 150 180 3 5.7 64 

All the samples have been returned from the irradiation testing 

facility. The samples were tested for compressive strength. 

The compressive strength has increased for the samples tested. 

This increase is due to the probability of the embrittlement of 

the vinyl esther resin. Reference the attached Data Sheet for 

the results. 

We are currently collecting data toward preparation of the 

final report which will include the December Monthly Report. 

Awaiting purchase order revision concerning Westinghouse Hanford decision 

to proceed with additional testing. 

F-58 

...d=.

2a0 SCHEDULE 

Activitv 

- Prepare Work Plan 

- Submit Work Plan 

- Approve Plan 

- Develop Formulations 

Prepate Specimens 

- iab - Analysis 

- Final Report 


--4 F-59 

Scheduled 

D ate 

08/01/92 

08/01/92 

08/10P92 

08R1/92 

09/01/92 

i2ii0iy2 

1223/'92 

Actual 

Date 

08/01/92 

08/01/92 

08/10/92 

0821/92 

09/16N2

^ 

Ti 

rn 

0 

01-Dec-92 

PROJECT SCHEDULE 

WESTINGHOUSE 


P.O. MMW-SW-277587 


TASK 






LABORATORY ANALYSIS 

FINAL REPORT 

^t,y 


PREPARED BY: RUSS A. CZELLATH 

1992 

J U L A U G S E P O C T 

0 

!;` f 

STOCK EQU IPMENT COMPANY 

N O V I D E C 

E 

x 

N 

S 

0 

21 

0 

w 

m 

< 

0

T 1 

o+ 

THERMAL CYCLWG SAMPLES 

BEFORE THE STARfOF THE TEST 

SAMPLE ID HEIGHT (Inp DIAMETER pn) WEIGHT (pms) DENSITY (pms/cc) DENSITY (pms/cc) 

avq 

LI-11 1.937 1.418 56.12 1.12 

11-12 1.915 1.420 55.01 1.11 1.11 

11-13 1A19 1.423 54.85 1.10 

1341 2.039 1.452 78.09 1.41 

L3-12 12.063 1.445 77.98 1.41 1.41 

1.3-13 2.019 1.447 77.25 1.42 

17-11 2.035 1.484 64.9 1.51 

17-12 2.036 1.458 84.72 1.52 1-52 

1-7-13 2.009 1.455 83.65 1.53 

THERMAL CYCLING SAMPLES 

AT THE COIMPLETION OF THE TEST 

SAMPLE ID HEIGHT QMI DIAMETER (IN) WEIGHT (9ms) DENSITY (pms/cc) LOAD (Ibs) 

11-11 1.954 1.416 56.11 1.11 17520 

L I-12 1.926 1.425 55.01 1.09 17560 

11-13 1.913 1.422 54.84 1.1 17800 

L3-11 2.046 1.453 77.51 1.39 7200 

L3-12 2.113 1.453 77.22 1.34 8400 

L3-13 2.044 1.454 76.71 1.38 9840 

L7-11 2.049 1.456 81.59 1.48 1400 

L7-12 2.028 1.446 81.01 1.49 1720 

17-13 1.967 1.448 80.01 1.49 1780 

COMPRESSIVE STRENGHT (psq 

11094 

11010 

11082 

4342 

5066 

5928 

841 

1047 

1081 

..^

" 

N 

^^. 

U 

w 

w 

V 

w 

0 

WE:STING1-'ÔUSE HANDFORD 

LETF SURROGATE WASTE 

0.0 19.9 40.8 61.8 83.9 106.0 130.3 154.7 180.2 205.8 227.5 

TIME minutes 

^ 

N 

^ 

0 

-1 

o--r 

O 

O W 

N 

< 

O

T 1 

OI 

80 

70 

U 60 

VJ 

w 50 

w 

0 40 

30 

20 0 

WESTINGHOUSE HANDFORD 

TYPE 2 SURROGATE WASTE 

WASTE LOADING 1 TO 1 

. 00 27.65 56.4.1 13627 114313 1 37 .x;fl 1 R1 AS 1 R7 4-q 91 d 19 

TIME minutes 

^ 

N 

^ 

O 

O 

C3O 

W 

co< 

0

^ I 

A 

0 

co ww 

^ 

C'J 

w 

0 

55 

50 

45 

40 

35 

30 

25 

I 

HANDFORD 


WASTE LOADING 2TO 1 

20 - 

15 0.0 16.9 34.4 52.6 71.2 90.5 110.3 130.7 151.9 173.6 195.0 

TIME minutes 

`:i =^ 

^ 

N O 

^ 

C. Co 

^ 

0 

Cl W 

^ -C 

0

^ 

°' 

cn 

l .:. 

U 

CD w 

a: 

w 

r' i ^ I ^ ^^ a I I p ^J ' 

WESTIN^GHOUSE-HANGFO^RD 


65 -- 

60 

55 

50 

45 

40 

35 

30 

25 

20 

WASTE LOADING 1.5 TO 1 

15 0.0 16.9 34.4 52.6 71.2 90.5 110.3 130.7 151.9 173.6 195.0 

TIME minutes 

] 

^ 

N 

v iz 

0 ^^ 

C3 

^w 

CD< 

0

11 0 

100 

90 

80 

;^ V 70 

`" w 

w 60 

C7 

0 50 

tr!` 

4 C 

30 

20 

WESTINGHOUSE HANDFORD 

CONTROL 470-45 RESIN 

- -^- 

^ -- - 

1 0 

0.0 16.9 34.4 52.6 71.2 90.5 110.3 130.7 151.9 173.6 195.0 

TIME minutes 

^ 

N 

^ 

0 

^ 

CD 

^W 

CD < 

0

SAMPLE ID 

Li-117 

L1-118 

L1-19 

L3-17 

L3-18 

L3-19 

L5-17 

L5-18 

L5-19 

^ 

^ L7-17 

-4 

L7-16 

L7-19 

L9-17 

L9-18 

L9-19 

RADIATION SAMPLES AFTER TEST 

DIAMETER (cm) HEIGHT (cm) WEIGHT (gms) 

AVG 

DENSITY (gms/cc) DENSITY (gms/cc) LOAD (Ibs) 

3.640 4.830 54.64 1.0871 17720 

3.640 4.745 53.61 1.0857 1.0928 17520 

3.615 4.860 55.15 1.1056 17520 

3.670 5.250 72.79 1.3107 5920 

3.700 5.320 76.25 1.3330 1.3253 10320 

3.7135 5.335 76.62 1.3321 9320 

3.615 4.965 63.43 1.2311 11400 

3.6'15 4.940 62.71 1.2368 1.2367 7880 

3.620 4.815 61.56 1.2422 9640 

3.710 5.230 80.95 1.4318 1480 

3.690 5.215 84.07 1.5075 1.4801 1520 

3.680 5.160 82.39 1.5012 1800 

3.810 5.105 84.05 1.4441 3840 

3.820 4.850 79.73 1.4254 1.4409 3440 

3.765 5.050 81.70 1.4532 6240 

,pu'1r 

.î 

COMPRESSIVE AVG 

STRENGTH (psi) STRENGT 

10986 

10862 10954 

11013 

3610 

6192 5127 

5577 

7087 E 

4953 6028 n 

6043 rn 

883 O 

917 964 °0 

1092 

0 

2173 

1936 2575 ;o 

3616 

0


wnplM WEIGHT HEIGHT DIAMEfER DENSRY AVG. LOAD PSI AVG. 

Oremi cm em grams/cc LBS 6vo day 

comprMdvw 

s1nnOM 

1.1-1 51.4 4.540 3.612 1.1049 17160 10804 

L1-2 68.6 5,116 3.612 1.1217 17160 10604 

L1 J 51.0 4.502 3.609 1.1074 17120 10797 

Lt-4 55.3 4.869 3.611 1.1090 17360 10936 

---- L+.-5 51..' 4453 3.611 1.1261 17380 10936 

U$-_ __Sl"9 S.r_24 --- 3.809- ----7:146D 1.12- ---17400- i 0974 iw26 

L1-7 56.3 4.923 3.811 1.1167 17480 11012 

1.1-8 54.9 4.796 3.811 1.1178 17480 11012 

L?a 56.3 4 .:94. 3.^'^••7 1.1039 17520 11062 

Lt-10 66.7 4.968 3.609 1.1157 17320 10923 

1.3-1 73.9 5.112 3.618 1.4061 3520 2209 

1.3-2 72-3 5.230 3.616 1.3490 3600 2262 

1.3.1 71.9 5.100 3.614 1.3743 3680 2314 

1.34 71.1 5.067 3.678 1.3207 4320 2623 

L7-5 . 73.3 5.245 3.663 1.3262 4240 2596 

.,a.--. 

71.7 5.108 3.868 1.3284 1.33 4280 2613 2472 

--- - 1.3-7 ---- ---- 67.1 5.024 3.680 1.2557 3920 2378 

13-8 72.9 5.212 3.653 1.3345 4180 2561 

134 71.2 5.065 3.883 1.3106 4400 2665 

'-'-' 1.3-10 72.3 5.194 3.665 1.3195 4080 2495 

L8-1 82.7 4.885 3.665 1.6047 1840 1125 

1.6-2 80.7 4.745 3.655 1.6210 1760 1082 

1.53 82.7 4.890. 3.660 1.6075 1800 1104 

1.54 80.6 4.865 3.645 1.5877 1800 1113 

1.5-5 82.3 4.850 3.860 1.6129 1.63 1800 1104 1065 

1.5-6 90.3 5.175 3.650 1.6676 1680 1036 

1.5-7 87.4 5.095 3.610 1.6760 1680 1059 

1-54 84.9 5.000 3.640 1.6317 1720 1066 

L3-9 - - -- O5.8 5.033 3.625--- ..,,.... 1720 1075 

t3-10 77.3 4.890 3.695 1.5370 2680 1612 

L?-? 77.2 5.001 3.614 1.5049 2480 1560 

1.7-2 72.8 4.829 3.815 1.4688 2440 1534 

1.7.7 76.4 4.837 3.617 1.5372 2400 1507 

1.74 75.9 4.935 3.611 1.5018 1600 1008 

1.7.5 73.1 4.976 3.632 1.4179 2440 1519 

1.7-0 72.6 4.724 3.627 1.4874 1.48 2200 1374 1411 

1.7-7 77.4 5.017 3.632 1.4891 2240 1396 

1.7-0 75.8 5.078 3.627 1.4447 2380 1474 

1.7-0 76.0 5.017 3.614 1.4767 1800 1132 

1.7-10 72.6 4.956 3.617 1.4257 2560 1607 

1.9-1 63.3 4.725 3.550 1.3535 1640 1089 

19-2 58.3 4.890 3.595 1.1746 1640 1042 

1.9.1 74.3 4.805 3.650 1.4506 1520 937 

L9-4 70.2 4.845 3.635 1.3962 1600 905 

1.9-5 64.7 4.850 3.630 1.3445 1.36 1600 997 941.7 

1.94 55.6 4.500 3.570 1.2343 1360 877 

1.9-7 78.7 4.990 3.660 1.4991 1320 809 

L9-0 70.6 4.990 3.595 1.3939 1400 890 

L9-0 74.7 4.950 3.6880 1.4344 1400 859 

1.9-10 69.9 4.990 3.575 1.3955 1400 900 

F-68

T 

°,w 

^ 

- : C s 0 n a ^^ 

s 

^ 

i 

^- 

I k 

- aaiiaR ^è 

I^^6^^^^ ^^ g^^ 

i' aaasai1•1 

111 1 1 1 1 !11 1 101 

S 5 e e s . a a a ^` ^ • 

^ 

i 

^ 

1 

R 

i i i ^ i i A ii a a P aê 

P' P F Y f P • 1 P ^ ^ f P ^ " g' p ^ g^ IEF 

^ i f a a a a $ î ^ •^ 

^ ^ a 6 1 1 ^ t oI ^ -t 

Y ^ a E o s a a ^^' ? ^ 

6 6 i i i @ 3 e ii ^ ^ ^ t 

^ Y a A 8 h ^ A 9 p 

i e : e e e c 

I 

^ 

^ 

l 

IC 

_ 

N 

O I^ 

s 

1 

O 

0 

w 

a 

m 

< 

O

O 

co 

ac 

oI 

Ci i ^ 

^. 

Fcr^ 

a 

C) 

3 q 

G1 I 

v) ! 

I 

2 

ae e a 

d ^ 

a if 

9^k 

11^ 

9 9 3 : : 9 7: 9 ^ E 

f 

# a^ ^s ^ ^-a e ^ le ^ 3 

^^ d^ b^ •d 

d 

!t t! !! t 

dd ^ 

g 

dd dd b ^f dd d 

I 

°.I 

^ 

aa 

1 

a 

a 

I 

^ 3 7 9 7 : 7 ^ 8 E 

a ^ 1 a^-, 

a ? 9 ê ' 

• 

^ s 

N 

I 

s 

^ 

^7 ^ a z a p a a _ p a 

^• ^ 11 ! ! ^ A 4 6 ^ 

^• ^ ^ 2 ^ i i E ^ 

yai ^ dd d^ • d1 d b^ b di^ ^d d 

!Y 

q 

9 

^ 

1 

a 

b c 

Nl 

3ii 

ili 

7 9 5 S 5 3 2 E 

^ d^ ^^ • d bb dd dd dd dd ^d d 

t!' !t 

l6 

lA lE 6l ^6 S3 3^ ^ 

O 

n i 

W

71 

I 

V 

y,,} 

^ • 5il i ^ ^^ ^ ^ ^ li î i ^^ S 

P Y^ 'IP 'P q• $• PP p° ^p °• ^ ^^^ 

^ 8 !{ 1 t t 1 ^ f ^ '; 

5 î a : r F F c c ^^ 

P. 

i i i " 

^ Y 9 8 ^ 6 i ^ 

c Y L \ 

^ 

i 

i 

e II 

^ 

IIP 

rj r" f tl I 

p ^^ ^ • P ^ ^^ q^ ^^ ^ g ^^ 

^ @ ^ ^ f 3 t i i ^ •^ 

^ ^ 

1 e r : > r r r i^ ' 

' 

0 

b 

^ 

S 

0 

C 

` 

4 

a 

= 

O t v 

; 0. c Y b Y 4 L 

...°JJ 

p^ 

^ 

e e i : ,: c 3^ 

Iit 

° ^ 

9 t 

i S e: c> : n i 

^ y 

Ira 

^ 

t Ic 

N 

^ 

O 

^1^1 

^ 

O 

{F^ 

< 

O

^^^^tqYqYYYPpT• ^ppt 

^^^îî^^^•I 

^ t r : E t : ^^ 

i i i a 1 i i e i i = = 

T ' ^ B 8 1 1 1 1 0 ^ PI 

V 

ro n 

... 

i Y C L Y Y Y 

. 

If 

tn 

p^ 

S 

i 

^^Sd^,i^^^^•^2Diid^^^ ^Cê 

O • •. 1• fl •MNOA ^ 

^sîti^[^^•^ 

i i i i i i i i i i ^ 4 t 

r i 

gy3 = 

^ • 

` i^ Y 5 Y 6 h e 

Y : M Y 

1 1 

, 

i 

ÎS 

1 L E ! E : n : : ^^ ^ 

• r 

^ Cp p 

^^! 61 6 A 6 0 

î Pi 4 C Ci c ri ri 4 i ... • 

. % 

tj 

n^ 

r 

x 

N 

S 

0 

1^1 

0 

0 

{1^ 

^L 

^

0 

a^ 

on 

O 

O 

M 

F- 1OCD 

3 1 

G N^ 

U 

il 

> > 7 7 y 7 F^ 

7 : i $ 5 7 2 ^ s ^ 8 5 9 

' p t 3 ^ 7 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 7 9 

:I 

.^ 

7 d 

Jk 

e Q 

1 

a 

7 a o 7 7 7 7 'y i F^ 

q 

^ 

q6 

7 

q 

4 

q 

^ 

qy 

i f F 

b! ! 14 

A .b b a ^ Î a^ ^^ â 

fS i 

t 8 ^ ^ i ^' ^^ ^^ €^ 

= 

^ 

qa 

7 

° 

^ 

il 

a- ^ ^ ^ s t t t ^ ^ ^ 

^^s ^ . a^ a, aa ^b aa ba â a^ ^, a 

o tt llE !! 

n"1 

^. 

LL.

0 

„_. 

„ .. 

c., 

0 i 

~ a 

CD, 

3 a 

c 

u 

3 F w 

3 

OS 

- R 

ot i 

7 3 3 ! 3 3 9 Z 7 E 

!i 5 a ^ ^ ! ^ ^ ^ g € 

1 7 s 9 ^ 7 7 ^ ^ ^ ^ 

3E ^ e a ^ v R - : : 

^• i ' ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 

^ ba a- -a aa aa ba aa a^ b^ a 

z. 

^. 

^ rt 

Yl 

Y 

^ 

0 Y 0 ? 9 9 0 ' 9 ° 

8 9 ^ i °s a 2 'a 'a 

° f 9 ^ ^ ^ 7 3 3 ^ , ^ 

^^ a ^ ^ a 9 4 = e s 

(• ^ 

. ^ 

^ 

a 

j 

^ 

^ 

^ 

A 

^ 

R 

^ 

7 

s 

^ 

p 

R 

r 

! 

p 

"l a 

t 

p 1- p ^p 

^^ b^ ^^ a 

p pp p^ 

1 

1 

^ 

RI ^^ 

3 ^ 

P7 

° 

: 7 7 9 : 7 3 ^ 7 E 

^ v v v e v Y 

31 5 ^ ^ 4 $ ! R e 

^^ i v : v ^ v F g a 

^ ^d d^ °d d^ db dd db d dd 

if

O 

> W 

C 

f.) 

O 

O 

1-- 

^ 

O HI 

6./ 

3 

^ 

I Ê 

fai 

i! 

6- a 

. 

tl^ 

9I 

^ 

^d 

p! 

7 7 7 9 + 7 7 7 e F^ 

z . a . F d a ! 

f^^ d S S SS pe ^ S ^ S SS ^ S ^ ^ !I ^ ^ 

°w) 

^ 

i^ 

M7 

9 9 7 7 i 3 7 * F^ 

4f 6 6 5 6 B 9 C 

A S ^ ^ 5 1 2 l ot S i f 

^tle a Y tl "«^ h h 1h h :Y h YY l 

^^^ d $ $ $$ $^ ^^ ^ $ $S ^S B^ ^ S 

it 

i 

LO 

r.,

T 

14 

Of 

3^,^ • yo $$3 ia $ sos^$t ^ ^ 

Î^t^ttîa•^ 

^^1 1 1 1 1li11g•i 

C w ¢ e s - - }r 

B 4 6 tl 8 ! n " s 3 t' 

^ p 

N r s I f i ! 5 i ! F ! 

n 

1 

r^ 

°IL 

Fîai"P C e 

rrrr^rr^rrrrr"r""`^r^ 

^^^^3t:ttii^•s 

âlaî!9^t^^•1 

F! LU. 

® Y A ^ ^ ^^ i n 8 5 ^ 

B i 3 ! ! ^{ F ^ 6 4 ^ i s 

r 

u 

^ 

fi1„.i 

a^ 

^ 

^ 

IL 

^ i $ E 3 6 3 E ^ ^ •! 

l ^ t i ^ l ^ 3 l ^ -1 

t a C ^ : n n ^^ ^ 

t y e i ^ i c ^ i l ^ a 

. 0 6 A § h A ^ a 0 4 

L : L : n' 

ta 

p^ 

I 

1 

3C 

x 

N 

O 

^... 

E 

O 

Co 

-^ 

., 

O 

O 

W 

N < 

O

0 

> ar 

oe 

M 

0 c 

C3, I 

O 

c 

V 

3 

Î 

d 

its 

i 

11^ 

A a a 3 ^ a a 9 ^ ^ 

e ^ ! ! 9 ^ ! ^ ! ^ • 

î ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 

; ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 

; ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 3 ! 

+ ^ 

d 

^ a - a a a s ^ q 

8 r 

^. ^ a ! t t ^ t ^ l p 

p! ![ t 

al 

[ 

id 

! 

R 

a 

t^t 

, a a s ^ a a a ^ a q 

e ^ 

: s s s s 0 ^ - 

î ! ! ! ! ^ 5 ! 5 ! ! 

1 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 

1 ! ! ! ! ! ! 3 ! ^ ! 

n a 

^. ^ ! w ^ t 3 l ^ i ^ 

^5 ^^ /l 6L tl tt ! ! t° ^^ ^ 

aI 

J 

'w 

R! 

^ 

R 

Sp 

ê6 

R 

l^1 

, a a a s a s a ^ a ^- 

a 

2 2 

^^ 9 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! _ 

^ ! ! ! l i 3 1 9 ! ! _ 

1 ! ! 3 ! ! ! ! ! 

^• ^ 

! _ 

x^'^ 

rl 

n

co 

•• ^^ • •x^ff+ww-a^ f 

^^kPk^kPK^1^^P"^qpkk ^^5 

J 6 

11I•t 

S i ^ w C L ^ L e ^^ : 

I C E L C C^ C:- ^ 

er 

i 

J _ a 

^re 

IL k 

^ i > c L C ij C 

>^S 

^k6o4^_jj_pko 

r n 

C ^ J C is 

tY 

pi 

^ 

^ 

N 

O 

O I 

1 

ti 

O 

O 

CJ 

N < 

O

TI 

V 

40 

IN 

s i 

s : s 

^l l i 

" p p l' 4i 

^ ^ 8 8 i ^ 8 A Y 9 ~^ I 

y : i : 5 5 6 & S ^^ ?! 

^ ^ i C ! 1 8 ! 1 ^ F^ 

5 e e e e E e e 

I c 

r^ 

î 

If 

b b f v n f 

rz 

I[l 

va,ol 

:d 

Ill 

(vp 

6 i ^ e 6 6 e g i ^^ ^ : 

r^ 

ii 

Ig 

^x 

E 

.^ 

0 

^ 

0 

w 

CD < 

O

T I 

O 

tk O 

kk 

1 

kk 

° 

kk 'kk •1 

kk k 

Vp 

k a 

kk ^ 

^ I ^ i i i 3 i i ^ •^ 

^ ^ ^ I ^ l ^ t i ^ •^ 

5 5 e e a c S 6 

c - s - 6 - s 's s 

^1 e : e S C L S S S r 

^ ^ 

i^^ 

!It 

a:li 

= G g s c 6 s i }^^ x 

^t 

. 

i i 4 i Î c S c ''l i ` p 

Ll i i i i i = 

^^' ^ ^ 

^ 

f'f 

N 

S 

O 

0 i 

1 

^-r 

O 

0 

w 

70 

m< 

O


APPENDIX G 

OVERVIEW OF SOLIDIFICATION TECHNOLOGIES 

This is an internal WHC memo report that was prepared as a review of all 

available solidification technologies, important processing considerations, 

general advantages and disadvantages of various technologies. The report is 

not specific to WRAP 2A and is intended to provide general background needed 

to begin evaluating the various waste forms. 

G-1

NHC-SO-w10o-Tr-nna Rev. 0 


G-2


_QVrDvrru nc cen rnTcrreT*nu T rruNn1 nn 

,S^nnu6Y0IES 

Waste immobilization matrices fall into several general categories. Inorganic 

--- binders, thermoplastics, organic polymers, ceramics, and glasses are the 

matrices that have been widely used for radioactive waste immobilization. 

Inora anic Binders 

Inorganic binders are commonly used materials for waste stabilization and 

immobilization. They are inexpensive, readily available, and well established 

in the radioactive waste management field. 

Portland cement 

Portland cement is the most common immobilization matrix. It is the same 

material used in construction of concrete structures. Portland cement 

consists mostly of hydrated calcium silicates, with some aluminates and 

magnesium content. The calcium hydroxide content causes portland cement to 

exhibit a high pH. The three predominant types are described below. 

Type I (ordinary) 

Ordinary portland cement ( OPC) is widely used for construction purposes. It 

requires about one month to cure to full strength. 

Type II ( sulfate-resistant) 

Type II cement is resistant to sulfate ions. This gives increased durability 

in saline environments. 

Type III ( high-early-strength) 

Type III cement is ground more finely thus increasing its reactivity. High 

early strength creates higher curing exotherms. 

Pozzolanic cement additives 

Pozzolanic additives are used to modify the reactivity, curing time, and 

ultimate strength of cement grout. Two commonly used additives are ground 

blast furnace slag, and pulverized coal fly ash. 

Blast furnace slag 

Blast furnace slag his a higher silica content that cement. This decreases 

the reactivity and eliminates the high curing exotherm. It also increases the 

curing time required to attain full strength. 

Pulverized fly ash 

G-3


Pulverized fly ash contains mostly silica and alumina, with very little 

calcium. The lack of calcium requires addition of lime or cement to activate 

this material. Fly ash can be added in ratios as high as 10:1 and still 

obtain a suitable final waste form. 

Gypsum cement 

Gypsum cement is composed of hydrated calcium sulfate. It has a lower 

compressive strength than portland cement. The elimination of calcium 

hydroxide gives this material a lower pH than OPC. 

Plaster of paris 

Plaster of paris is the most recognizable gypsum cement. This same material 

is also used in wallboard. 

Envirostone"'") 

This material is a proprietary mixture based on gypsum cement. The 

proprietary additives are claimed to make this mix more compatible with 

organic and acidic wastes. 

Modified cements 

Cement mixtures can be modified to enhance their ability to incorporate 

difficult wastes, and to increase their resistance to loss of soluble waste 

constituents through leaching. 

Physical absorbents 

Physical absorbents are used to incorporate non-hydraulic materials such as 

_liquid arganics _into the -waste matrix. 

Polymer impregnated cement 

Polymer impregnation is a method to decrease leachability be filling the 

interstitial pores with water-resistant polymer. 

Thermoplastic Polymers 

Thermoplastic polymers are a class of materials that melt at elevated 

temperatures. These matrices can be used to immobilize materials through 

micro- and macroencapsulation. 

Bitumen ( asphalt) 

Bituminous polymers are familiar materials used in the construction of roads, 

and in the roofing industry. They are produced from crude oil, and can have 

varying physical properties. 

Straight run 

G-4

^-_- 

.,:... 


This is the raw material as is comes directly from the distillation column. 

It has a low softening temperature, high penetration, and low compressive 

strength. 

Pitch 

This is straight-run bitumen that has been 

solvents. The material solidifies when the 

controls are required. 

Oxidized 

liquefied by dilution with organic 

solvent evaporates. Solvent vapor 

Oxidized bitumen is produced by blowing air through straight-run material. It 

is commonly used for roofing applications. This material is stronger, harder, 

and less sensitive to temperature changes than straight-run. This results in 

hig,i'cr nieitiny^ p"uint proccssing temperatures. 

Cracked 

Cracked bitumen is more fe^Ci *ive to temperature changes than other types. 

This imparts a quick-hardening nature, giving high strength combined with low 

penetrat-ion--and--a high softening point. Cracked bitumens can become brittle 

at low temperature. 

Emulsions 

Bitumen emulsions are similar to pitch, except the solvent is aqueous with 

surfactants to prevent phase separation. The material solidifies when the 

wat2r--i-s-evaporated. 

Sulfur 

Sulfur has several possible uses in radioactive waste treatment in WRAP Module 

2A. It can be used as a solidification matrix, a hardener, and as an amalgam 

for mercury treatment. 

Immobilization matrix 

Sulfur "cement" can be used in a manner similar to other thermopolymers. It 

exhibits high strength and low penetration. Vapor controls are necessary and 

there is some concern about potential phase changes in the final waste form 

causing ioss of structural properties over time. 

Bitumen hardener 

_-____Sulfur can be added to straight-run bitumen to increase its hardness and 

compressive strength. Sulfur hardening of bitumen is a non-reversible 

process. 

Polyethylene 

G-5


Polyethylene (and other thermoplastics) can be used to encapsulate wastes, by 

using melt processes similar to those used for bitumens. The molten material 

is mixed with waste and allowed to cool, forming a solid plastic block. 

Encapsulation 

Macro-encapsulation is used to isolate large waste items from the surroundings 

by use of primary physical barriers. Thermoplastics are well suited for this 

application. Micro-encapsulation involves the intimate mixing of waste and 

polyethylene, as in a screw-type extruder, to form a thorough coating on 

particulate waste. Although such a process does not chemically bind the waste 

constituents, the coating would be complete enough to prohibit release by 

normal mechanisms (ie. leaching). 

Chemical (Thermosetting) Polymers 

Thermosetting polymers are produced through chemical reaction between organic 

monomers. They are strong, tough, and are not adversely affected by high 

temperatures. The exact types and proportions of the raw materials is often 

proprietary information. Many of the raw materials are hazardous or toxic 

chemicals. 

Polystyrene 

Polystyrene is formed by adding a catalyst (i.e acrylonitrile) to styrene. 

-The-re-acti3n i-s-exathermic;-producing a-strong, forittie piastic matrix. The 

material is not useful for encapsulating water-bearing wastes. 

"o • iyester resins 

Pnlyester resins ,arre formed-by a chemical reaction between a resin (i.e. 

styrene), promoter ( i.e. phthalic acid), and a catalyst ( i.e organic 

peroxide), to form a encapsulating matrix around the waste. The reaction is 

exothermal and can produce temperatures around 60°C. Modified polyesters have 

been developed with enhanced water encapsulation abilities. 

Urea-formaldehyde resin 

Urea-formaldehyde polymers are created by 

aqueous emulsion of urea and formaldehyde 

reaction, and this process has been used 

material is susceptible to embrittlement 

time. 

Epoxy resins 

adding a mineral acid catalyst to an 

Water is a byproduct of the 

to encapsulate aqueous wastes. The 

by dehydration and "bleeding" over 

Epoxies are produced by reactions between phenols and epoxides, in the 

presence of alkali to neutralize the HC1 byproduct. Chemicals which enhance 

water compatibility and modify structural properties_can_be added. The 

reaction is only mildly exothermic, but the materials are generally more 

expensive than other polymers. 

Other 

G-6

Ceramics and glass 


Ceram-ir- and- -g1 ass matr-i ces - .a-re -fo^med by subj^'ctiîg ^rastes to high temperature 

treatment. Ceramic aluminosilicates or vitreous borosilicates are added to 

- produce a strong, almost impervious final waste form. 

Calcination 

Calcination refers to processes that heat the waste to just below the point of 

fusion (melting). The final product is a granular material that can be 

processed by ceramic and powder metallurgy techniques into a suitable final 

form. 

Vitrification 

Vitrification refers to processes where the waste is heated to a temperature 

above its melting point. Glass-forming minerals are often added to modify the 

`.a properties of the final waste form. 

IMMOBILIZATION PROCESSES 

The physical and mechanical systems used to incorporate waste materials into 

= the immobiiization matrix are dependent on the chemical and physical 

3; properties of the waste, the type of immobilization matrix, and the treatment 

process. A brief description of process technologies follows. 

^ 

Cementation 

Cementation processes are typified by dry materials handling using bins, 

hoppers, and solids mixers. If properly configured, the same equipment may be 

used to prepare several different immobilization matrices (i.e. ordinary 

cement, pozzolanic cements, and gypsum cements). 

Dry material handling 

Bins & hoppers 

Bulk and day storage equipment for dry solids require proper bin and hopper 

design to assure free flow of the powders. Storage facilities should be 

designed with mass flow hoppers to maximize storage capacity. 

Pneumatic conveying 

Most dry powder handling systems use pneumatic conveyors for unloading bulk 

trucks and transfer from storage to process units. Pneumatic conveyor systems 

are subject to erosion failure, and improper design can cause plugging or 

unsteady flow problems. 

Dust control 

ThEnature-o€--cem*nt-raw-arater-i^ls-regu3res the-use of dust control equipment. 

The use of cyclones, bag filters and air recirculation are typical methods for 

controlling dust. 

G-7

In-drum mixing 

Drum tumbler 


In this method of mixing, 

along with a dense mixing 

several minutes while the 

the materials to be mixed are added to the drum 

weight. The drum is then lifted and tumbled for 

weight mixes the contents. The weight remains 

--- 

J 

inside 

a 

the 

J._..urum 

ra_._ 

arcer mixing. 

Lost-paddle mixing 

In this method, a collapsible mixing blade is inserted through the bung hole 

and attached to a motor. the drum is stationary while mixing proceeds. The 

mixing blades remain in the drum following mixing. 

Batch mixing 

Screw mixers 

A slow-speed screw is positioned at the bottom of a V-shaped trough. The dry 

materials are added to the trough and mixed. 

Planetary mixers 

Planetary mixers areused in vertical tanks to provide higher shear and more 

complete mixing than screw or paddle mixers. 

Mixing pumps 

Positive-displacement pumps which have been modified to provide enhanced 

mixing are available for processing high-viscosity grout mixtures. 

Melt Processes 

Melt processes are used with thermoplastic polymer matrices. These processes 

typically operate near 150°C and require control of gaseous effluents from the 

melter. 

Batch melter/mixer 

The batch process consists of a heated, stirred tank, where the matrix 

material is melted prior to addition of the waste. After the.wastes are 

added, the mixture is transferred to disposal containers and allowed to cool 

and solidify. 

Thin-film evaporator 

The thin-film evaporator process is used with bitumen emulsions of aqueous 

wastes. As the emulsion passes through the evaporator, the water is driven 

off, and the remaining waste materials are mixed into the bitumen. The molten 

mixture then flows into disposal containers, where it solidifies upon cooling. 

G-8

,. ., 

Extruder/melter 


In this process, the waste and matrix material are added to a screw-type 

extruder. The mechanical power applied to the extruder screws heats and melts 

the matrix, mixing it with the waste and evaporating any water that may be 

present. Some extruders also use external heating. The mixture is then 

transferred to the disposal container and allowed to cool and solidify. 

Polymer Encapsulation 

Polymer encapsulation processes require facilities to store, transfer, and mix 

the organic liquid reactants with the waste. Control of volatile vapors from 

the process is also required. 

Liquid handling 

The raw ingredients for thermosetting polymers are liquid organic chemicals. 

These chemicals may be flammable but can be handled with conventional 

processing equipment. 

Tanks & pumps 

Carbon steel tanks and centrifugal pumps are suitable for most applications. 

Some organic acids ( promotors or catalysts) may require stainless steel 

equipment. 

Pipes & val'ves 

Materials are transferred through piping and control valves. Fugitive 

emissions from piping systems must be minimized. 

Vent vapor control 

Control of flammable or corrosive organic vapors from tank vents is required 

for raw materials storage systems. 

In-drum mixing 

In-drum mixing can be used when the waste is granular, powdery, or a 

reasonably fluid material. In-drum mixing methods are similar to those used 

for cementation. 

High-shear mixing 

The organic binder material is charged to the drum. The waste is added while 

the binder is mixed with a propeller type mixer. When mixing is complete, the 

mixer is withdrawn and excess binder is flung off into an empty drum. 

Lost-paddle mixer 

The collapsible mixer is inserted tkrough-the bung hole of the drum. 

- - Following mixing, the paddle remains in the drum. 

G-9

Batch processes 


Thermosetting polymers can be processed in batch equipment with the capacity 

for filling large containers or many drums. There are two approaches for 

using batch mixers. 

Microencapsulation 

In this method, the waste and binder are mixed in a vessel. As the mixture is 

transferred to the drum, the catalyst and promotor are added and mixed in-line 

just before entering the drum. 

Macroencapsulation 

In this method, the mixing tank does not contain waste. The polymer mixture 

is added to the drum which contains_large_waste_items._The drum is on a 

vibrating table to remove air bubbles. 

G-10 

N,

View Document Here - Hanford Site

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?