Separation techniques for the clean-up of radioactive mixed waste for ICP-AES/ICP-MS analysis

Technical Report · Wed Mar 17 00:00:00 EST 1993

DOI:https://doi.org/10.2172/6594000· OSTI ID:6594000

Swafford, A. M.; Keller, J. M.

Two separation techniques were investigated for the clean-up of typical radioactive mixed waste samples requiring elemental analysis by Inductively Coupled Plasma-Atomic Emission Spectroscopy (ICP-AES) or Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS). These measurements frequently involve regulatory or compliance criteria which include the determination of elements on the EPA Target Analyte List (TAL). These samples usually consist of both an aqueous phase and a solid phase which is mostly an inorganic sludge. Frequently, samples taken from the waste tanks contain high levels of uranium and thorium which can cause spectral interferences in ICP-AES or ICP-MS analysis. The removal of these interferences is necessary to determine the presence of the EPA TAL elements in the sample. Two clean-up methods were studied on simulated aqueous waste samples containing the EPA TAL elements. The first method studied was a classical procedure based upon liquid-liquid extraction using tri-n- octylphosphine oxide (TOPO) dissolved in cyclohexane. The second method investigated was based on more recently developed techniques using extraction chromatography; specifically the use of a commercially available Eichrom TRU[center dot]Spec[trademark] column. Literature on these two methods indicates the efficient removal of uranium and thorium from properly prepared samples and provides considerable qualitative information on the extraction behavior of many other elements. However, there is a lack of quantitative data on the extraction behavior of elements on the EPA Target Analyte List. Experimental studies on these two methods consisted of determining whether any of the analytes were extracted by these methods and the recoveries obtained. Both methods produced similar results; the EPA target analytes were only slightly or not extracted. Advantages and disadvantages of each method were evaluated and found to be comparable.

• Research Organization: Oak Ridge National Lab. (ORNL), Oak Ridge, TN (United States)
• Sponsoring Organization: USDOE; USDOE, Washington, DC (United States)
• DOE Contract Number: AC05-84OR21400
• OSTI ID: 6594000
• Report Number(s): ORNL/TM-12329; ON: DE93012726
• Country of Publication: United States
• Language: English

Related Subjects

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE WASTES FROM NUCLEAR FACILITIES
37 INORGANIC
ORGANIC
PHYSICAL AND ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
CHEMICAL WASTES
CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
RADIOACTIVE WASTES
REMEDIAL ACTION
SAMPLING
CYCLOHEXANE
EMISSION SPECTROSCOPY
EXTRACTION CHROMATOGRAPHY
MASS SPECTROSCOPY
ORNL
SEPARATION PROCESSES
SLUDGES
THORIUM
TOPO
URANIUM
ACTINIDES
ALKANES
CHROMATOGRAPHY
CYCLOALKANES
ELEMENTS
HYDROCARBONS
MATERIALS
METALS
NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
NONRADIOACTIVE WASTES
ORGANIC COMPOUNDS
ORGANIC PHOSPHORUS COMPOUNDS
OXYGEN COMPOUNDS
PHOSPHINE OXIDES
PHOSPHINES
PHOSPHORUS COMPOUNDS
RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS
SPECTROSCOPY
US AEC
US DOE
US ERDA
US ORGANIZATIONS
WASTES
052000* - Nuclear Fuels- Waste Management
400105 - Separation Procedures
400102 - Chemical & Spectral Procedures