Oxidizer Testing on Alternative Absorbents for Los Alamos National Laboratory - 18656
- Los Alamos National Laboratory (United States)
In the summer of 2016, during glovebox operations in TA-55, cheesecloth, a cellulosic material, was used to clean up a small spill of 9.8 molar nitric acid (oxidizer). Because cellulosic materials and oxidizers are incompatible, this prompted a chemical compatibility evaluation of the waste in TA-55 to determine if this waste was Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) ignitable waste (D001) or RCRA reactive waste (D003). After testing and consulting with the Carlsbad Field Office in Carlsbad (CBFO), Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) NPI-7 decided to look for alternative absorbents to use in the gloveboxes that would not create an incompatibility issue with an oxidizer. While small spills are infrequent, they do happen and LANL wanted to be proactive and search for a material that would be compatible with an oxidizer. In December 2016, LANL NPI-7 requested LANL-Carlsbad's (LANL-CO) Difficult Waste Team to perform compatibility testing on potential alternative wipes for disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). The purpose for testing was to meet the Operational Experience Level 3 (OE-3) requirements that states 'any proposed use of organic absorbents or engineered absorbents in combination with potentially oxidizing TRU waste, wet or dry, should be evaluated and approved by the National TRU Program, Carlsbad Field Office' [1]. LANL NPI-7 requested LANL-CO to perform these tests because they were the group that performed all of the oxidizer testing for CBFO for the Basis of Knowledge (BoK) [2]. LANL NPI-7 chose nine fabrics and KMI Zeolite to be tested. The testing in Carlsbad took approximately 2 months to prepare the procedures, test plans and for the procurement of items. The burn rate testing was done in accordance with the requirements discussed in the BoK and approved by the LANL-CO Difficult Waste Team. Each absorbent was tested for 1) capacity limiting tests, 2) verifying the non-oxidizer threshold concentration of the oxidizer and 3) establishing the non-oxidizer concentration based on the experimental results. The effect of rinsing cheesecloth samples that have absorbed an oxidizer was also tested [3]. The burn rate testing provided three potential alternative absorbents (Spilfyter Hazmat Sorbent SM Pads Premium, Kimtech Pure W4 Wipers and Polybenzimidazole (PBI) Staple fiber) that produced a non-oxidizer result as defined by the BoK. Two wipes Spilfyter Hazmat Sorbent SM Pads Premium and Kimtech Pure W4 Wipers were able to absorb the highest concentration of potassium nitrite and still produce a non-oxidizer. TA-55 has used Spilfyter Hazmat Sorbent SM Pads Premium for a number of years in several of the processes and has ordered Kimtech Pure W4 Wipers for use in the facility. PBI fabric passed at 25 wt. % solution. (authors)
- Research Organization:
- WM Symposia, Inc., PO Box 27646, 85285-7646 Tempe, AZ (United States)
- OSTI ID:
- 22977893
- Report Number(s):
- INIS-US-20-WM-18656; TRN: US21V0521017938
- Resource Relation:
- Conference: WM2018: 44. Annual Waste Management Conference, Phoenix, AZ (United States), 18-22 Mar 2018; Other Information: Country of input: France; 3 refs.; Available online at: https://www.xcdsystem.com/wmsym/2018/index.html
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
Similar Records
Basis of Knowledge for Oxidizing Chemicals in TRU Waste - 18654
Results of Testing the Relative Oxidizing Hazard of Wipes and KMI Zeolite