3

Waste Forms

The final charge of the statement of task for this study (see Box 2.1 in Chapter 2) calls for the identification and description of “potential new waste forms that may offer enhanced performance or lead to more efficient production.” This chapter, which is written primarily for technical audiences, addresses this charge by providing a brief review of waste form materials and an assessment of their potential applicability to Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM) waste streams. Possible applications are also highlighted in Chapter 1.

A voluminous technical literature on waste form materials has developed over the past six decades. A comprehensive review of this literature is well beyond the scope of this study. However, the committee has included key historical and review article references in this chapter for interested readers.

3.1 WASTE FORM DEVELOPMENT

The concept of immobilizing radioactive waste in either vitreous or crystalline materials is more than 50 years old. In 1953, Hatch (1953) of Brookhaven National Laboratory introduced the concept of immobilizing radioactive elements in an assemblage of mineral phases. The first borosilicate glass formulations were developed in the United States between 1956 and 1957 by Goldman and others at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Eliassen and Goldman, 1959; Goldman et al., 1958; Mawson, 1965). These researchers examined calcium-aluminosilicate porcelain glazes



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 29
3 Waste Forms T he final charge of the statement of task for this study (see Box 2.1 in Chapter 2) calls for the identification and description of “potential new waste forms that may offer enhanced performance or lead to more efficient production.” This chapter, which is written primarily for technical audiences, addresses this charge by providing a brief review of waste form materials and an assessment of their potential applicability to Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Management (DOE-EM) waste streams. Possible applications are also highlighted in Chapter 1. A voluminous technical literature on waste form materials has devel- oped over the past six decades. A comprehensive review of this literature is well beyond the scope of this study. However, the committee has included key historical and review article references in this chapter for interested readers. 3.1 WASTE FORM DEVELOPMENT The concept of immobilizing radioactive waste in either vitreous or crystalline materials is more than 50 years old. In 1953, Hatch (1953) of Brookhaven National Laboratory introduced the concept of immobilizing radioactive elements in an assemblage of mineral phases. The first boro- silicate glass formulations were developed in the United States between 1956 and 1957 by Goldman and others at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Eliassen and Goldman, 1959; Goldman et al., 1958; Mawson, 1965). These researchers examined calcium-aluminosilicate porcelain glazes 29

OCR for page 29
30 WASTE FORMS TECHNOLOGY AND PERFORMANCE to which boron oxide (B2O3) had been added to achieve a pourable glass and minimize radionuclide volatilization. The most promising vitreous sys- tems for future development were determined to be borosilicate based, e.g., CaO-Al2O3-B2O3-SiO2 and Na2O-CaO-Al2O3-B2O3-SiO2. In 1970, the singular requirement for a waste form from the Office of Nuclear Waste Isolation1 (ONWI) was that it be a stable solid (DOE, 1981; Walton et al., 1983). By the mid-1970s, innovative proposals for produc- ing stable solid waste forms were being offered—for example, supercalcine ceramics by Rustum Roy and colleagues at Pennsylvania State University (McCarthy, 1977; Roy, 1975, 1977, 1979); alumina-based tailored ceram- ics by Rockwell International Science Center (Jantzen et al., 1982b; Mor- gan et al., 1981); and titania-based SYNthetic ROCk (SYNROC) by Ted Ringwood and colleagues at the Australian National University and the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (Reeve et al., 1984; Ringwood, 1978, 1985; Ringwood et al., 1978). The first systematic compilations of potential crystalline waste form phases were also made at this time (Haaker and Ewing, 1981). There were extensive research and development (R&D) programs on nuclear waste forms during the late 1970s and early 1980s, resulting in the examination of a wide variety of single-phase and polyphase ceramics. By this time “low leachability” had become the main criterion for waste form comparisons (DOE, 1981; Walton et al., 1983), and such comparisons between crystalline ceramics and glass generated considerable controversy (Kerr, 1979a,b). Beginning in 1978, there was intense study of alternative waste forms that culminated in a review (Garmon, 1981) that recommended borosilicate glass for immobilizing high-level radioactive waste (HLW) at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina and West Valley in New York and also identified SYNROC/tailored ceramics as promising alternatives (Hench et al., 1981). Glass was considered to be a more proven technology, and there were questions about the maturity of production technologies for ceramic waste forms. Nevertheless, Hench et al. (1981) made a strong recommen- dation for continued research and development for ceramic waste forms, including SYNROC and titanate- and alumina-based ceramics. These alter- native waste forms were later determined to be difficult to process, more costly to implement, and not as flexible for accommodating variations in waste composition as borosilicate glass (De et al., 1976; Dunson et al., 1982; Lutze et al., 1979; McCarthy, 1973; McCarthy and Davidson, 1975; Morgan et al., 1981; Ringwood et al., 1981; Schoebel, 1975), even though 1 The Office of Nuclear Waste Isolation was located at the Battelle Memorial Institute. It conducted research and published technical reports on technical aspects of nuclear waste isolation.

OCR for page 29
31 WASTE FORMS many were found to have superior product quality (Hench et al., 1981; Walton et al., 1983). High-temperature processing of these alternative waste forms fre- quently resulted in the formation of an intergranular glass phase, espe- cially when alkali-containing wastes were processed. This intergranular glass limited product stability and durability because radionuclides such as cesium-137 and strontium-90, which were frequently incorporated into the intergranular glass phases (Buykx et al., 1988; Clarke, 1981; Cooper et al., 1986; Zhang and Carter, 2010), were determined to leach at the same rates as those from glass waste forms (Jantzen et al., 1982a). Because little was understood at the time about the degradation mechanism of a single-phase glass versus glass-ceramic materials (i.e., materials that contain both glass and crystalline phases), borosilicate glasses were selected for continued development over the alternative waste forms (Walton et al., 1983). Research activity on alternative waste forms was severely curtailed as a result of the 1981 decision in the United States to immobilize defense HLW in borosilicate glass and the subsequent construction of the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF) at SRS and the West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) at West Valley. The R&D effort on nuclear waste forms during this period has been summarized by Lutze and Ewing (1988). More recently, there has been a resurgence of interest in crystalline waste forms because of the need to develop durable materials for the stabilization and disposal of actinides such as plutonium from defense and civilian pro- grams (Burakov et al., 2010; Ewing, 1999; Ewing et al., 1995b; Oversby et al., 1997). There has been additional R&D work on minerals and their ana- logues (e.g., apatite, monazite, zirconolite, zircon, and pyrochlore) (Ewing et al., 1995a) and SYNROC formulations (Ryerson and Ebbinghaus, 2000) as well as another down selection between glass and ceramic waste forms (Meyers et al., 1998). Crystalline waste forms made from clay have been studied almost continuously since 1953 (Hatch, 1953; Lutze et al., 1979). Roy (1981) proposed low-temperature, hydrothermally processed, low-solubility phase assemblages consisting of mineral analogues of mica, apatite, pollucite, sodalite-cancrinite, and nepheline, many of which could be made from reactions between clays (kaolin, bentonite, and illite) and waste. Mineral analogue waste forms made from clays have been recently re-examined for the immobilization of high-sodium, salt supernate HLW at the Hanford Site in Washington; high-sodium recycle streams from tank cleaning at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL), and low-activity waste melter off-gas condensates at Hanford. These mineral analogue waste forms are made using a moderate-temperature (700°C-750°C) thermal pyrolysis treatment (Mason et al., 1999, 2003) (i.e., steam reforming; see Chapter 4) by add- ing clay to the waste to form feldspathoid mineral analogues (sodalite and

OCR for page 29
32 WASTE FORMS TECHNOLOGY AND PERFORMANCE nepheline) or dehyroxylated mica (Jantzen et al., 2008), depending on clay composition. Stabilization and solidification with cement-based binders has been used to immobilize radioactive wastes since the beginning of the nuclear age. The process has been used to encapsulate solid waste, solidify liquid waste (including tritiated water), stabilize contaminated soils, stabilize tank-heel residues after tanks are emptied, and as low-permeability barriers. Cements have also been used as binders and to encapsulate granular or cracked waste forms. A recent comprehensive review of cement systems for radioactive waste disposal can be found in Pabalan et al. (2009). Long-term cement durability comparisons have been made using ancient cements, geopolymers, and mortars (Jiang and Roy, 1994; Kovach and Murphy, 1995; Krupka and Serene, 1998; Miller et al., 1994; Roy and Langton, 1983, 1984, 1989; Steadman, 1986), some of which may also serve as natural analogues for geopolymer waste forms (Barsoum et al., 2006, but see also Jana, 2007). Recent reviews of developments in waste form research are provided in the following papers: Caurant et al. (2009); Donald et al. (1997); Ewing (1999, 2001); Ewing et al. (2004); Lee et al. (2006); Lumpkin (2001, 2006); Lutze and Ewing (1988); Ojovan and Lee (2005, 2007); Stefanovsky et al. (2004); Weber et al. (2009); and Yudintsev et al. (2007). The most recent interest has been associated with the desire to create new waste forms as part of advanced nuclear fuel cycles involving recycling of irradiated fuel (Peters and Ewing, 2007). Recent reviews of radiation effects in waste forms can be found in a series of papers by Ewing and others (1995b); Ewing and Weber (2010); and Weber and others (1997, 1998). Reviews of natural analogues that provide long-term data on the durability of glass and crystalline ceramics have been provided in a number of papers, including Allen (1982); Ewing (1979, 1999); Haaker and Ewing (1981); Jantzen and Plodinec (1984); Malow et al. (1984); Morgenstein and Shettel (1993); and Verney-Carron et al. (2010). 3.2 ROLE OF WASTE FORM IN WASTE IMMOBILIZATION As noted in Chapter 2, the primary role of a waste form is to immobi- lize radioactive and/or hazardous constituents (hereafter simply referred to as constituents) in stable, solid matrices for storage and eventual disposal. Immobilization can occur through chemical incorporation, encapsulation, or a combination of both processes. Table 3.1 provides a pictorial rep- resentation of the different combinations of chemical incorporation and encapsulation for the waste form materials described in Section 3.3. Encapsulation is achieved by physically surrounding and isolating con- stituents in a matrix material, which traps waste ions on grain boundaries and in some cases sequesters constituents in hydrated products. Cements,

OCR for page 29
TABLE 3.1 Key Properties of the Waste Form Materials Described in this Chapter Retention Waste Form Class (see text) Mechanism Graphical Representation Waste Form Properties Examples 1. Single-Phase Glasses Chemical a. Moderate waste loading Borosilicate incorporation b. Good overall durability glasses, Constituents are atomically bonded c. Easy to model constituent aluminosilicate in the glass structure, usually to release from a single phase glasses, oxygen that is also bonded to other phosphate matrix elements (e.g., Si, Al, B, P) glasses by short-range order (SRO) and medium-range order (MRO). 2a. Glass-Ceramic Material Chemical a. Higher waste loadings for high Higher Table 3.1-1.eps incorporation Cr, Ni, and Fe wastes waste-loaded Constituents are present in the b. Good overall durability borosilicate, glass matrix, and benign crystals c. Easy to model constituent alumino-silicate, such as spinels (Cr, Ni, and Fe release from single-phase glass or phosphate species) are allowed to crystallize because there is minimal impact glasses ( ). These crystals do not contain from grain boundary dissolution radionuclides but may contain (has to be determined by hazardous constituents (e.g., Cr, experimentation) Ni). Table 3.1-2a.eps 33 continued

OCR for page 29
TABLE 3.1 Continued 34 Retention Waste Form Class (see text) Mechanism Graphical Representation Waste Form Properties Examples 2b. Glass-Ceramic Material Chemical a. Higher waste loadings if soluble Glass-bonded incorporation constituent phases are not formed sodalite Constituents are present in the and b. Overall durability may be glass matrix and in the crystalline encapsulation greater or less than homogeneous phases. Example shows Cs in glass the glass and in a secondary c. More complex to model phase ( ). Secondary phase constituent release from multiple may be more soluble than glass phases (glass and crystal) and grain boundaries (has to be (e.g., (Na,Cs)2SO4) or more durable than glass (e.g., pollucite determined by experimentation) (Cs,Na)2Al2Si4O12). Table 3.1-2b.eps 3a. Crystalline Ceramics: Chemical a. High waste loading for single Pyrochlores for Single Phase incorporation constituents single actinide 4a. Metals: Single Phase b. Good overall durability stabilization, c. Easy to model constituent zeolites Consists of only one main release from a single phase for single crystalline phase which contains radionuclide the same radionuclide(s). May be stabilization granular or monolithic. Table 3.1-3a.eps

OCR for page 29
3b. Crystalline Ceramics: Chemical a. High waste loading SYNROC, Multi-Phase incorporation b. Superior overall durability tailored 4b. Metals: Multi-Phase c. Difficult to model constituent ceramics, release from multiple phases Pu ceramics, Individual phases contain one or d. Need to tailor for and supercalcines, multiple constituents (e.g., solid know/determine radionuclide minerals partitioning amongst phases for actinide solution indicated between UO2 e. May require precalcining for stabilization and ThO2). Some phases do not incorporate any constituents (gray waste form processing to work shading). May be granular or efficiently monolithic. 3a, 3b. Granular Crystalline Chemical a. High waste loadings only if Fluidized bed Table 3.1-3b.eps Ceramic incorporation binder (monolithing agent) is seam reforming 4a, 4b. Metal Composites and minimized for Hanford encapsulation b. Superior overall durability- low-activity Granular waste forms must be double containment waste or Waste monolithed for disposal if not c. Difficult to model constituent Treatment containerized. The monolithing release from multiple phases Plant secondary agent does not incorporate d. Need to tailor for and wastes in constituents (gray shading). Also know/determine radionuclide geopolymer known as composite waste forms. partitioning amongst phases matrices e. May require precalcining for waste for processing to work Table 3.1-3c.eps efficiently 35 continued

OCR for page 29
TABLE 3.1 Continued 36 Retention Waste Form Class (see text) Mechanism Graphical Representation Waste Form Properties Examples 5, 6, 7, 8. Cements, Geopolymers, Encapsulation a. Low waste loading Savannah River Hydroceramics, Ceramicretes b. Lower overall durability Site Saltstone c. Difficult to model constituent Hydrated phases weakly release from multiple phases and incorporate constituents or retain hydrated secondary phases them by sorption. Encapsulation is d. Easy to process—usually mix by solidification or precipitation of and set constituents on grain boundaries where non-constituent phases hydrate or crystallize. Example shows Tc sequestered by C-S-H hydrates and sequestered by secondary fly-ash granules. Table 3.1-3d.eps Key: Cs U Tc Pu

OCR for page 29
37 WASTE FORMS geopolymers, ceramicrete, and hydroceramics (see Section 3.3) can be used as waste forms or as binders for other waste form materials. Encapsulation is typically used to immobilize low-level or intermediate-level wastes. Chemical incorporation involves the atomic-scale bonding of radioactive constituents into radiophases of the waste form material, which are durable structures with any combination of short-range order (SRO),2 medium-range order (MRO),3 or long- range order (LRO).4 Glasses incorporate constituents into their atomic structures by SRO and MRO. Recent experimentation has shown the existence of large, cation-rich clusters in glass. These more highly ordered regions of MRO often have atomic arrangements that approach those of crystals (Box 3.1). Crystalline ceramics incorporate constituents by a combination of SRO, MRO, and LRO. LRO defines the periodic structural units characteristic of crystalline ceramics. There are two approaches for immobilizing radioactive waste in crys- talline materials (Roy, 1975, 1977): 1. Radionuclides can be incorporated into the atomic structure of the phase. Individual radionuclides occupy specific sites in the struc- ture, generally according to atomic size and charge constraints. For complex waste streams, crystalline structures with multiple cation sites are required to accommodate different radionuclides. 2. The radionuclide-bearing radiophases can be encapsulated in another non-radionuclide bearing material to form a composite waste form.5 Encapsulating materials, such as TiO2 or ZrO2, can have high durability. 3.3 WASTE FORM MATERIALS A wide range of materials are potentially suitable for immobilizing radioactive waste. For simplicity of discussion, these waste form materials have been grouped into eight classes based on their phase properties: 1. Single-phase (homogeneous) glasses 2. Glass-ceramic materials 2 SRO: radius of influence ~1.6Å-3Å around a central atom, e.g., such as tetrahedral and octahedral structural units. 3 MRO: radius of influence ~3Å-6Å encompasses second- and third-neighbor environ- ments around a central atom. The more highly ordered regions, referred to as clusters or quasicrystals, often have atomic arrangements that approach those of crystals. 4 LRO extends beyond third-neighbour environments and gives crystalline ceramic/mineral structures their crystallographic periodicity. 5 For example, waste constituents can be chemically incorporated into a crystalline ceramic phase and then encapsulated in another material that provides an additional barrier to release.

OCR for page 29
38 WASTE FORMS TECHNOLOGY AND PERFORMANCE BOX 3.1 How Structural Characteristics of Borosilicate Waste Glass Control Physical and Chemical Characteristics The polymerization of the SRO and MRO in borosilicate glasses provides more flexibility for atomically bonding waste constituents than in crystalline materials. The glass-forming SRO structural groups are usually tetrahedral Si, B, Al, Fe, P surrounded by four oxygen atoms or trigonal B surrounded by three oxygen atoms. The tetrahedra link to each other via bridging oxygen bonds (BO). The remaining non-bridging oxygen atoms (NBO) carry a negative charge and, in turn, ionically bond to positively charged cations such Cs+, Sr+2, Ca+2, and other positively charged constituents. These linkages create MRO structural groups, e.g., (Cs,K,Na,Li)AlO2, (Cs,K,Na,Li)FeO2, (Cs,K,Na,Li)BO2, (Cs,K,Na,Li)SiO4 (Ellison and Navrotsky, 1990), or (Cs,K,Na)AlSiO4 (Li et al., 2000), which form sheet-like units, chain-like units, and monomers (White, 1988) that further bond waste constituents ionically. The modified random network model (MRN Model) (Porai-Koshits, 1958; Warren, 1933; Zachariasen, 1932, 1933) for glass is able to account for the exis- tence of large cation-rich clusters in glass (e.g., clusters of Ca in CaSiO3 glasses and Na in Na2MoO4). These more highly ordered regions of MRO, which are referred to as clusters (or quasicrystals in the older literature) can have atomic arrangements that approach those of crystals (Burnham, 1981). These clusters govern constituent solubility (Calas et al., 2003; Cauranta et al., in press; Hyatt et al., 2004; Nyholm and Werme, 1981) (see Box Table) and crystal formation dur- ing cooling. The process model in use at the DWPF uses a quasicrystal model to prevent unwanted crystallization in the Joule heated melter. In the MRN model, tetrahedra define the network regions and the NBO-cation regions represent percolation channels (see Box Figures and Figure 9.1 in Chap- ter 9) that can act as ion-exchange paths for elements that are ionically bonded to the NBO. Such percolation channels are also found in rare-earth (lanthanide) alumino-borosilicate (LaBS) glasses (Caurant et al., 2009). The molecular structure of glass controls constituent release by establishing ion exchange sites, hydrolysis sites, and the access of water to those sites through the percolation channels. The mechanisms of constituent release are similar to those for natural analogues glasses (basalts) and minerals. BOX TABLE Solubility of Elements in Silicate Glass Solubility Element (mass %) Al, B, Ca, Cs, K, Na, Pb, Rb, Si, U >25 Ba, Fe, La, Li, Mg, Nd, Sr, Zn 15-25 Be, Bi, Cu, F, Ga, Ge, Mn, P, Pr, Pu, Th, Ti, V, Zr 5-15 Am, As, C, Cd, Ce, Cl, Cm, Co, Cr, Cy, Eu, Hf, Mo, Ni, Np, Pm, Re, 1-5 S, Sb, Se, Sm, Sn, Tc, Te, Tl, W, Y Ag, Au, Br, Hg, I, N, Pd, Pt, Rh, Ru <1 SOURCE: Ojovan and Lee (2007).

OCR for page 29
39 WASTE FORMS Modifying Cations (M) Network Formers (G) Oxygen atoms BOX FIGURE 1 A modified random network (MRN) for a glass of nominal compo- sition M2O3(G2O3)2, where M represents the modifying cations and G represents the tetrahedral cations. Covalent bonds are 1.epsby the solid lines and ionic Box Figure shown bitmap wedges w vector type bonds by the dotted lines. The dashed regions are defined by the boundary, which runs along the G–O (i.e., non-bridging) bonds. The undashed regions represent the percolation channels defined by the M–O bonds that run through the glass network. SOURCE: Greaves (1989). continued

OCR for page 29
76 WASTE FORMS TECHNOLOGY AND PERFORMANCE Komameni, S. and W. B. White. 1981. “Stability of Pollucite in Hydrothermal Fluids,” Scien- tific Basis Nuclear Waste Management III, J. G. Moore (Ed.), New York, Plenum Press, 387-396. Kovach, L. A., and W. M. Murphy (Eds.) 1995. Proceedings of the Workshop on the Role of Natural Analogs in Geologic Disposal of High-Level Nuclear Waste, NUREG/CP-0147 (CNWRA 93-020), Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses, San Antonio, Texas. Kriven, W. M., M. Gordon, and J. Bell. 2004. “Geopolymers: Nanoparticulate, Nanoporous Ceramics Made Under Ambient Conditions,” Microscopy and Microanalysis ‘04 (Proc. 62nd Annual Meeting of Microscopy Society of America) 10, 404-405. Krupka, K. M. and R. J. Serene. 1998. Effects on Radionuclide Concentrations by Interac- tions in Support of Performance Assessment of Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facilities, NUREG/CR-6377 (PNNL-11408), Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Wash. (May). Lashtchenova, T. N. and S. V. Stefanovsky. 1998a. “Immobilization of Incinerator Ash in Synroc-Glass Material,” In Proceedings of the IT3 International Conference on Incinera- tion & Thermal Treatment Technologies, Salt Lake City, Utah, 603-607. Lashtchenova, T. N. and S. V. Stefanovsky. 1998b. “Titanium-Silicate Based Glass-Crystalline Wasteforms,” In M. K. Choudhary, N. Y. Huff, and C. H. Drummond III (Eds.), Proceed- ings of the XVIII International Congress on Glass, San-Francisco, Calif. Laverov, N. P., S. V. Yudintsev, T. S. Livshits, S. V. Stefanovsky, A. N. Lukinykh, and R. C. Ewing. 2010. “Synthetic Minerals with the Pyrochlore and Garnet Structures for Immo- bilization of Actinide-Containing Wastes,” Geochem. Int. 48, 1-14. Lee, W. E., M. I. Ojovan, M. C. Stennett, and N. C. Hyatt. 2006. “Immobilisation of Radioactive Waste in Glasses, Glass Composite Materials and Ceramics,” Adv. in Appl. Ceram. 105(1), 3-12. Li, H., Y. Su, J. D. Vienna, and P. Hrma. 2000. “Raman Spectroscopic Study—Effects of B2O3, Na2O, and SiO2 on Nepheline (NaAlSiO4) Crystallization in Simulated High Level Waste Glasses,” Ceram. Trans. 107, 469-477. Lian, I., S. V. Yudintsev, S. V. Stefanovsky, O. I. Kirjanova, and R. C. Ewing. 2002. “Ion Induced Amorphization of Murataite,” Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 713, 455-460. LLNL (Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory). 1996. Fissile Material Disposition Program–Screening of Alternate Immobilization Candidates for Disposition of Surplus Fissile Materials, UCRL-ID-118819, L-20790-1, LLNL, Livermore, California. Loiseau, P., D. Caurant, N. Baffler, L. Mazerolles, and C. Fillet. 2001. “Development of Zirconolite-Based Glass-Ceramics for the Conditioning of Actinides,” Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 663, 179-187. Lumpkin, G. R. 2001. “Alpha-decay Damage and Aqueous Durability of Actinide Host Phases in Natural Systems,” J. Nucl. Mat. 289, 136-166. Lumpkin, G. R. 2006. “Ceramic Waste Forms for Actinides,” Elements 2, 365-372. Lutze, W., J. Borchardt, and A. K. De. 1979. “Characterization of Glass and Glass Ceramic Nuclear Waste Forms,” in Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management I, G. J. McCarthy (Ed.), Plenum Press, New York, 69-81. Lutze, W. and R. C. Ewing. 1988. Radioactive Waste Forms for the Future, North Holland, Amsterdam. Maddrell, E. R. 2001. “Generalized Titanate Ceramic Waste Form for Advanced Purex Reprocessing,” J. Amer. Ceram. Soc. 84, 1187-1189. Malow, G., W. Lutze, and R. C. Ewing. 1984. “Alteration Effects and Leach Rates of Basaltic Glasses: Implications for the Long-Term Stability of Nuclear Waste Form Borosilicate Glasses,” J. Non-Cryst. Solids 67, 305-321.

OCR for page 29
77 WASTE FORMS Marasinghe, G. K., M. Karabulut, C. S. Ray, D. E. Day, M. G. Shumsky, W. B. Yelon, C. H. Booth, P. G. Allen, and D. K. Shuh. 1997. “Structural Features of Iron Phosphate Glasses,” J. Non-Cryst. Solids 222, 144-152. Marasinghe, G. K., M. Karabulut, C. S. Ray, D. E. Day, C. H. Booth, P. G. Allen, and D. K. Shuh. 1998. “Redox Characteristics and Structural Properties of Iron Phosphate Glasses: A Potential Host Matrix for Vitrifying High Level Nuclear Waste,” Ceram. Trans. 87, 261-270. Marasinghe, G. K., M. Karabulut, C. S. Ray, D. E. Day, P. G. Allen, J. J. Bucher, D. K. Shuh, Y. Bagyal, M. L. Saboungi, M. Grimsditch, S. Shastri, and D. Heaffner. 1999. “Effects of Nuclear Waste Composition on Redox Equilibria, Structural Features, and Crystalliza- tion Characteristics of Iron Phosphate Glasses,” Ceram. Trans. 93, 195-202. Marasinghe, G. K., M. Karabulut, X. Fang, C. S. Ray, and D. E. Day. 2000. “Vitrified Iron Phosphate Nuclear Waste Forms Containing Multiple Waste Components,” Ceram. Trans. 107, 115-122. Marasinghe, G. K., M. Karabulut, X. Fang, C. S. Ray, and D. E. Day. 2001. “Iron Phos- phate Glasses: An Alternative to Borosilicate Glasses for Immobilizing Certain Nuclear Wastes,” Environmental Issues and Waste Management Technologies VI, Ceram. Trans. 119, 361-368. Marra, J. C., D. K. Peeler, and C. M. Jantzen. 2006. “Development of an Alternate Glass For- mulation for Vitrification of Excess Plutonium,” WSRC-TR-2006-00031, Westinghouse Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C. (January). Marsden, K. C. and B. Westphal. 2006. “Production-Scale Metal Waste Process Qualifica- tion,” Proc. 2006 Int. Pyroprocessing Conf., Idaho Falls, Idaho, August 8-10. Martin, C., I. Bibet, and T. Advocat. 2002. “Alteration of a Zirconolite Glass-ceramic Matrix under Hydrothermal Conditions,” Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 713, 405-411. Mason, J. B., T. W. Oliver, M. P. Carson, and G. M. Hill. 1999. “Studsvik Processing Facility Pyrolysis/Steam Reforming Technology for Volume and Weight Reduction and Stabiliza- tion of LLRW and Mixed Wastes,” WM’99 Conference, Tucson, Ariz., Available at http:// www.wmsym.org/archives/1999/60/60-3.pdf. Mason, J. B., J. McKibben, K. Ryan, and D. Schmoker. 2003. “Steam Reforming Technology for Denitration and Immobilization of DOE Tank Wastes,” WM ‘03 Conference, Tucson, Ariz., Available at http://www.wmsym.org/archives/2003/pdfs/302.pdf. Mattigod, S. V., B. P. McGrail, D. E. McCready, L. Wang, K. E. Parker, and J. S. Young. 2006. “Synthesis and Structure of Perrhenate Sodalite,” J. Microporous & Mesopourous Mat. 91(1-3), 139-144. Mattus, C. H. 1998. “Sulfur Polymer Cement for Macro Encapsulation of Mixed Waste Debris,” Spectrum ’98, Denver, CO, 652. Mawson, C. A. 1965. Management of Radioactive Wastes. D. VanNostrand Co., Inc., Princeton, New Jersey. McCarthy, G. J. 1973. “Quartz-Matrix Isolation of Radioactive Wastes.” J. Mat. Sci. 8, 1358-1359. McCarthy, G. J. 1977. “High Level Waste Ceramics: Materials Considerations, Process Simu- lation and Product Characterization.” Nucl. Tech. 32, 92-105. McCarthy, G. J. and M. T. Davidson. 1975. “Ceramic Nuclear Waste Forms” Am. Ceram. Soc. Bull. 54(9), 782-786. McCarthy, G. J., J. G. Pepin, and D. D. Davis. 1979a. “Crystal Chemistry and Phase Relations in the Synthetic Minerals of Ceramic Waste Forms: I. Fluorite and Monazite Structure Phases,” Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management, Plenum Press, New York, 297-306.

OCR for page 29
78 WASTE FORMS TECHNOLOGY AND PERFORMANCE McCarthy, G. J., J. G. Pepin, D. E. Pfoertsch, and D. R. Clarke. 1979b. “Crystal Chemistry of the Synthetic Minerals in Current Supercalcine-Ceramics,” Ceramics in Nuclear Waste Management, CONF-790420, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia, 315-320. McCready, D. E., M. L. Balmer, and K. D. Keefer. 1997. “Experimental and Calculated X-ray Diffraction Data for Cesium Titanium Silicate, CsTiSi2O6,5: A New Zeolite,” Powder Diffr. 12(1), 40-46. McDaniel, E. W. and D. B. Delzer. 1988. “FUETAP Concrete,” In Radioactive Waste Forms for the Future, W. Lutze and R. C. Ewing (Eds.), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 565-588. McFarlane, H. F., K. M. Goff, F. S. Felicione, C. C. Dwight, and D. B. Barber. 1997. “Hot Demonstrations of Nuclear-Waste Processing Technologies,” JOM 49(7), 14-21. McGlinn, P. J., T. Advocat, E. LoI, G. Leturcq, and J. P. Mestre. 2001. “Nd- and Ce-doped Ceramic Glass Composites: Chemical Durability under Aqueous Conditions and Surface Alteration in a Moist Clay Medium at 90°C,” Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 663, 249-258. McPhee, D. E. and F. P. Glasser. 1993. “Immobilization Science of Cement Systems,” Mat. Res. Soc. Bull. 18, 66-71. Meldrum, A., L. A. Boatner, and R. C. Ewing. 2000. “A Comparison of Radiation Effects in Crystalline ABO4-type Phosphates and Silicates,” Mineral. Mag. 64, 185-194. Merz, R. and M. Y. Khalil. 1992. “Geopolymer and Cement Glass: Promising Fixation and Solidification Matrices for Nuclear and Hazardous Wastes,” Spectrum ’92, International Topical Meeting, Nuclear and Hazardous Waste Management, Vol. 2, Boise, Idaho, 914. Mesko, M. and D. E. Day. 1999. “Immobilization of Spent Nuclear Fuel in Iron Phosphate Glass,” J. Nucl. Mat. 273(1), 27-36. Mesko, M., D. E. Day, and B. C. Bunker. 1998. “Immobilization of High-Level Radioactive Sludges in Iron Phosphates Glasses,” In Science and Technology for Disposal of Radio- active Tank Waste, W. W. Schulz and N. J. Lombardo (Eds.), Plenum Publishing Corp., New York, 379-390. Mesko, M., D. E. Day, and B. C. Bunker. 2000. “Immobilization of CsCl and SrF2 in Iron Phosphate Glass,” Waste Manage. 20(4), 271-278. Meyers, B., G. A. Armantrout, C. M. Jantzen, A. Jostsons, J. M. McKibben, H. F. Shaw, D. M. Strachan, and J. D. Vienna. 1998. “Technical Evaluation Panel Summary Report: Ceramic and Glass Immobilization Options,” UCRL-ID-129315, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, Calif. (January). Miller, J. E. and N. E. Brown. 1997. “Development and Properties of Crystalline Silicotitanate (CST) Ion Exchangers for Radioactive Waste Applications,” SAND97-0771, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, N.M. Miller, W., R. Alexandeq, N. Chapman, I. McKinley, and J. Smellie. 1994. “Natural Analogue Studies in the Geological Disposal of Radioactive Wastes,” Studies in Environmental Science 57, Elsevier, New York. Mimura, H., M. Shibata, and K. Akiba. 1990. “Surface Alteration of Pollucite Under Hydro- thermal Conditions,” J. Nucl. Sci. Tech. 27, 835-843. MMES (Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc.), EG&G Idaho, Inc., Westinghouse Company, and Westinghouse Savannah River Company. 1992. Radiological Performance Assess- ment for the Z-Area Saltstone Disposal Facility, WSRC-RP-92-1360, Westinghouse Savannah River Company, Aiken, S.C. Mogus-Milankovic, A., M. Fajiic, A. Drasner, R. Tojiko, and D. E. Day. 1998. “Crystallization of Iron Phosphate Glasses,” Phys. and Chem. of Glasses 39(2), 70-75. Montel, J. M., B. Glorieux, A. M. Seydoux-Guilaume, and R. Wirth. 2006. “Synthesis and Sintering of a Monazite-brabantite Solid Solution Ceramic for Nuclear Waste Storage,” J. Physics and Chemistry of Solids 67, 2489-2500.

OCR for page 29
79 WASTE FORMS Moore, J. G. 1981. “A Survey of Concrete Waste Forms,” In Proceedings of a Conference on Alternative Nuclear Waste Forms and Interactions in Geologic Media, J. G. Moore, L. A. Boatner, and G. C. Battle (Eds.), NTIS 194-216, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va., 194-216. Morgan, P. E. D., D. R. Clarke, C. M. Jantzen, and A. B. Harker. 1981. “High Alumina Tailored Nuclear Waste Ceramics,” J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 64(5), 249-258. Morgan, P. E. D. and F. J. Ryerson. 1982. “A New “Cubic” Crystal Compound,” J. Mat. Sci. Lett. 1, 351-352. Morgenstein, M. E. and D. L. Shettel Jr. 1993. “Evaluation of Borosilicate Glass as a High- Level Radioactive Waste Form,” In High Level Radioactive Waste Management, Proc. Fourth Annual International Conf., Vol. 2, Am. Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, Ill., 1728-1734. Morss, L. R., M. L. Stanley, C. D. Tatko, and W. L. Ebert. 2000. “Corrosion of Glass Bonded Sodalite as a Function of pH and Temperature,” Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Man- agement XXIII, R. W. Smith and D. W. Shoesmith (Eds.), Materials Research Society, Pittsburgh, Penn., 733-738. Moschetti, T., W. Sinkler, T. Disanto, M. H. Hois, A. R. Warren, D. Cummings, S. G. Johnson, K. M. Goff, K. J. Bateman, and S. M. Frank. 2000. “Characterization of a Ceramic Waste Form Encapsulating Radioactive Electrorefiner Salt,” Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XXIII, R. W. Smith and D. W. Shoesmith (Eds.), Materials Research Society, Pittsburgh, Penn., 577-582. Nakazawa, T., H. Kato, K. Okada, S. Ueta, and M. Mihara. 2001. “Iodine Immobilization by Sodalite Waste Form,” Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 663, 51-57. Ninomiya, M., T. Yamanaka, T. Sakane, M. Hora, S. Nakamura, and S. Kawamura. 1981. “Diopside Glass-Ceramic Material for the Immobilization of Radioactive Wastes,” Pro- ceedings of the International Seminar on Chemistry and Process Engineering for High- Level Liquid Waste Solidification, R. Odoj and E. Merz (Eds.), Julich, FRG, Juel-Conf 42(1), 675-692. Nyholm, R. and L.O. Werme. 1981. “An ESCA Investigation of Molybdenum Containing Silicate and Phosphate Glasses,” Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management III, Plenum Press, New York. Nyman, M. D., T. M. Nenoff, and T. J. Headley. 2001. “Characterization of UOP IONSIV IE-911.” SAND2001-0999, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, N.M. O’Holleran, T. P., S. G. Johnson, S. M. Frank, M. K. Meyer, M. Noy, E. L. Wood, D. A. Knecht, K. Vinjamuri, and B. A. Staples. 1997. “Glass-Ceramic Waste Forms for Immo- bilizing Plutonium,” Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 465, 1251-1258. Ojovan, M. I., W. E. Lee, I. A. Sobolev, O. K. Karlina, and A. E. Arustamov. 2004. “Metal Matrix Immobilisation of Sealed Radioactive Sources for Safe Storage, Transportation and Disposal,” Proc. WM’04 Conference, Tucson, Ariz., Available at http://isl.group. sheffield.ac.uk/papers/MIOWM04Metalpaper.pdf. Ojovan, M. I. and W. E. Lee. 2005. An Introduction to Nuclear Waste Immobilisation, Elsevier, Amsterdam. Ojovan, M. I. and W. E. Lee. 2007. New Developments in Glassy Nuclear Wasteforms, Nova Science Publishers, New York. Olson, A. L., N. R. Soelberg, D. W. Marshal, and G. L. Anderson. 2004. “Fluidized Bed Steam Reforming of INEEL SBW Using THOR Mineralizing Technology,” INEEL/EXT-04- 02564, Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho Falls. Orlova, A. I., Y. F. Volkov, R. F. Melkaya, L. Y. Masterova, I. A. Kulikov, and V. A. Alferov. 1994. “Synthesis and Radiation Stability of NZP Phosphates Containing F-elements,” Radiochem. 36(4), 322-325.

OCR for page 29
80 WASTE FORMS TECHNOLOGY AND PERFORMANCE Oversby, V. M., C. C. McPheeters, C. Degueldre, and J. M. Paratte. 1997. “Control of Civilian Plutonium Inventories Using Burning in a Non-fertile Fuel,” J. Nucl. Mat. 245, 17-26. Pabalan, R. T., F. P. Glasser, D. A. Pickett, G. R. Walter, S. Biswas, M. R. Juckett, L. M. Sabido, and J. L. Myers. 2009. “Review of Literature and Assessment of Factors Relevant to Performance of Grouted Systems for Radioactive Waste Disposal,” CNWRA 2009-001, Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analysis, San Antonio, Texas. Park, H. S., I. T. Kim, H. Y. Kim, K. S. Lee, S. K. Ryu, and J. H. Kim. 2002. “Application of Apatite Waste Form for the Treatment of Water-soluble Wastes Containing Radioactive Elements. Part 1: Investigation on the Possibility,” J. Indus. and Eng. Chem. 8, 318-327. Park, T. J., S. Li, and A. Navrotsky. 2009. “Thermochemistry of Glass Forming Y-Substituted Sr-Analogues of Titanite (SrTiSiO5),” J. Mat. Res. 24, 3380-3386. Perera, D. S., A. Zaynab, E. R. Vance, and M. Mizumo. 2005. “Immobilization of Pb in a Geopolymer Matrix,” J. Am. Ceram. Soc., 88(9), 2586-2588. Perez, J. M., Jr., D. F. Bickford, D. E. Day, D. S. Kim, S. L. Lambert, S. L. Marra, D. K. Peeler, D. M. Strachan, M. B. Triplett, J. D. Vienna, and R. S. Wittman. 2001. High-Level Waste Melter Study Report, PNNL-13582, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Wash. Peters, M. T. and R. C. Ewing. 2007. “A Science-Based Approach to Understanding Waste Form Durability in Open and Closed Nuclear Fuel Cycles,” J. Nucl. Mat. 362, 395-401. Pichot, E., N. Dacheux, V. Brandel, and M. Genet. 2000. “Investigation of Cs-137(+), Sr- 85(2+) and Am-241(3+) Ion Exchange on Thorium Phosphate Hydrogenphosphate and Their Immobilization in the Thorium Phosphate Diphosphate,” New J. Chem. 24, 1017-1023. Plodinec, M. J. and J. R. Wiley. 1979. “Evaluation of Glass as a Matrix for Solidifying Savannah River Plant Waste: Properties of Glasses Containing Li2O,” U.S. DOE Report DP-1498, E.I. duPont deNemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C. (February). Poinssot, C., C. Ferry, M. Kelm, B. Grambow, A. Martinez-Esparza, L. Johnson, Z. Andriambololona, J. Bruno, C. Cachoir, J. M. Cavedon, H. Christensen, C. Corbel, C. Jegou, K. Lemmens, A. Loida, P. Lovera, F. Miserque, J. de Pablo, A. Poulesquen, J. Quiñones, V. Rondinella, K. Spahiu, and D. Wegen. 2005. “Spent Fuel Stability under Repository Conditions—Final Report of the European Project, European Commission,” Available at ftp://ftp.cordis.europa.eu/pub/fp5-euratom/docs/fp5-euratom_sfs_projrep_en.pdf. Porai-Koshits, E. A. 1958. The Structure of Glass, E. B. Uvarov (Trans.), Consultants Bureau, NY. Ramsey, W. G. 1989. Durability Study of Simulated Radioactive Waste Glass in Brine Environ- ment, Unpublished M.S. Thesis, Clemson University, Clemson, S.C. Ramsey, W. G., N. E. Bibler, and T. F. Meaker. 1995. “Compositions and Durabilities of Glasses for Immobilization of Plutonium and Uranium,” Waste Management ’95, Tucson, Ariz. Ray, C. R., X. Fang, M. Karabulut, G. K. Marasinghe, and D. E. Day. 1999. “Iron Redox and Crystallization of Iron Phosphate Glass,” Ceram. Trans. 43, 187-194. Reeve, D. D., D. M. Levins, J. L. Woolfrey, and E. J. Ramm. 1984. “Immobiliation of high- level Radioactive Waste in SYNROC,” Advan. in Ceram. 8, 200-208. Riley, A., S. Walker, and N. R. Gribble. 2009. “Composition Changes and Future Challenges for the Sellafield Waste Vitrification Plant,” Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Manage- ment XXXIII, 267-273. Ringwood, A. E. 1978. Safe Disposal of High-Level Nuclear Reactor Wastes: A New Strategy, Australian National University Press, Canberra. Ringwood, A. E. 1985. “Disposal of High-Level Nuclear Wastes: A Geological Perspective,” Mineral. Mag. 49, 159-176.

OCR for page 29
81 WASTE FORMS Ringwood, A. E., S. E. Kesson, N. G. Ware, W. Hibberson, and A. Major. 1978. “Immobilisa- tion of High Level Nuclear Reactor Wastes in SYNROC,” Nature 278, 219-223. Ringwood, A. E., S. E. Kesson, N. G. Ware, W. O. Hibberson, and A. Major. 1979. “SYNROC Processes—Geochemical Approach to Nuclear Waste Immobilization,” Geochem. J. 13(4), 141-165. Ringwood, A. E., V. M. Oversby, and S. E. Kesson. 1981. SYNROC: Leaching Performance and Process Technology, Proc. Seminar on Chemistry and Process Engineering for High- Level Liquid Waste Solidification, R.Odoj and E. Merz (Eds), Julich, FRG, Juel-Conf 42(1), 495-506. Ringwood, A. E., S. E. Kesson, K. D. Reeve, D. M. Levins, and E. J. Ramm. 1988. “SYNROC,” In Radioactive Waste Forms for the Future, W. Lutze and R. C. Ewing (Eds.), North- Holland, Amsterdam, 233-334. Roy, D. M. and C. A. Langton. 1983. “Characterization of Cement-Based Ancient Building Materials in Support of Repository Seal Materials Studies,” BMI/ONWI-523, The Penn- sylvania State University, State College, Penn. Roy, D. M. and C. A. Langton. 1984. “Longevity of Borehole and Shaft Sealing Materials: Characterization of Ancient Cement Based Building Materials,” In Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management VII. G. L. McVay (Ed.), Materials Research Society Sympo- sium Proceedings, North-Holland, New York, 543-549. Roy, D. M. and C. A. Langton. 1989. “Studies of Ancient Concrete as Analogs of Cementitious Sealing Materials for a Repository in Tuff,” LA-11527-MS, Los Alamos National Labora- tory, Los Alamos, N.M. Roy, R. 1975. “Ceramic Science of Nuclear Waste Fixation,” Abstract, Am. Ceram. Soc. Bull. 54, 459. Roy, R. 1977. “Rational Molecular Engineering of Ceramic Materials,” J. Amer. Ceram. Soc. 60, 358-359. Roy, R. 1979. “Science Underlying Radioactive Waste Management: Status and Needs,” Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management I, G.J. McCarthy (Ed.), Plenum Press, New York, 1-20. Roy, R. 1981. “Hydroxylated Ceramic Waste Forms and the Absurdity of Leach Tests,” Proc. Seminar on Chemistry and Process Engineering for High-Level Liquid Waste Solidifica- tion, R. Odoj and E. Merz (Eds.), Julich, FRG, Juel-Conf 42(1), 576-602. Ryan, J. V., E. C. Buck, J. Chun, J. V. Crum, B. J. Riley, D. M. Strachan, S. K. Sundaram, L. A. Turo, and J. D. Vienna. 2009. Alternate Waste Forms: Aqueous Processing, AFCI- WAST-PMO-MI-DV-2009-000360, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Wash. (September). Ryerson, F. J. and B. Ebbinghaus. 2000. Pyrochlore-rich Titanate Ceramics for the Immo- bilization of Plutonium: Redox Effects on Phase Equilibria in Cerium- and Thorium- Substituted Analogs, UCRL-ID-139092, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, Calif. (May). Saidl, J. and J. Ralkova. 1966. “Radioactive Waste Solidification by Means of Melting with Basalt,” Atomic Energy 10, 285-289 (in Russian). Sales, B. C. and L. A. Boatner. 1984. “Lead-Iron Phosphate Glass: A Stable Storage Medium for High-Level Nuclear Waste,” Science 226, 45-48. Sava, D., T. J. Garino, and T. M. Nenoff. 2011. “Iodine Confinement into Metal-Organic Frameworks (MOFs): Low Temperature Sintering Glasses to Form Novel Glass Com- posite Material (GCM) Alternative Waste Forms,” Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. DOI:10.1021/ ie200248g. Scheetz, B. E. and R. Roy. 1988. ”Novel Waste Forms,” In Radioactive Waste Forms for the Future. W. Lutze and R. C. Ewing (Eds.), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 596-599.

OCR for page 29
82 WASTE FORMS TECHNOLOGY AND PERFORMANCE Scheetz, B. E., D. K. Agrawal, E. Breval, and R. Roy. 1994. “Sodium Zirconium-Phosphate (NZP) as a Host Structure for Nuclear Waste Immobilization–A Review,” Waste Manage. 14, 489-505. Scheetz, B. E. and J. Olanrewaju. 2001. “Final Report Determination of the Rate of Formation of Hydroceramic Waste Forms made with INEEL Calcined Wastes,” Available at http:// www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/801196-G2Zift/webviewable/801196.pdf. Schneider, K. J. (Ed.) 1969. Waste Solidification Program, Vol. 1, Process Technology–Pot Spray, and Phosphate Glass Solidification Processes, BNWL-1073, Pacific Northwest Laboratories, Richland, Wash. (August). Schoebel, R. O. 1975. “Stabilization of High Level Waste in Ceramic Form,” Bull. Amer. Ceram. Soc. 54(4), 459. Sheppard, L. M. 2005. “Geopolymer Composites: A Ceramics Alternative to Polymer Matrices,” Available at http://composite.about.com/library/weekly/aa030529.htm (April). Sickafus, K. E., R. J. Hanrahan, K. J. McClellan, J. N. Mitchell, C. J. Wetteland, D. P. Butt, P. Chodak, K. B. Ramsey, T. H, Blair, K. Chidester, H. Matzke, K. Yasuda, R. A Ver- rall, and N. Yu. 1999. “Burn and Bury Option for Plutonium,” Amer. Ceram. Soc. Bull. 78(1), 69-74. Sinkler, W., T. P. O’Holleran, S. M. Frank, M. K. Richmann, and S. G. Johnson. 2000. “Char- acterization of a Glass-Bonded Ceramic Waste Form Loaded with U and Pu,” Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XXIII, R. W. Smith and D. W. Shoesmith (Eds.), Materials Research Society, Pittsburgh, Penn., 423-429. Smith, J. V. 1963. “Structural Classification of Zeolites.” Mineral. Soc. Amer. Spec. Pap. 1, 281. Smith, J. V. 1976. “Origin and Structure of Zeolites,” In Zeolite Chemistry and Catalysis 171, J. A. Rabo (Ed.), American Chemical Society. Sobolev, I. A., S. V. Stefanovsky, B. I. Omelianenko, S. V. loudintsev, E. R. Vance, and A. Jostsons. 1997a. “Comparative Study of Synroc-C Ceramics Produced by Hotpressing and Inductive Melting,” Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 465, 371-378. Sobolev, I. A., S. V. Stefanovsky, S. V. Loudintsev, B. S. Nikonov, B. I. Omelianenko, and A. V. Mokhov. 1997b. “Study of Melted Synroc Doped with Simulated High-level Waste,” Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 465, 363-370. Sokolova, E. V., R. K. Ratsvetaeva, V. I. Andrianov, Y. K. Egorov-Tismenko, and Y. P. Men’shikov. 1989. “Crystal-Structure of a New Natural Sodium Titanosilicate,” Dokl. Akad. Nauk. Sssr 307, 114-117. Steadman, J. A. 1986. “Archaeological Concretes as Analogues,” In Commission of the European Communities. Natural Analogue Working Group, Second Meeting, Interlaken, Switzerland, June 17-19, 1986, B. Cbme and N. A. Chapman (Eds.), CEC Report No. EUR 10671, Commission of the European Communities, Luxembourg, 165-171. Stefanovsky, S. V. 2009. “Ceramic and Phosphate Glass Waste Forms and Cold Crucible Melting Technology,” presented at the Committee on Waste Forms Technology and Performance, Meeting #3, November 4, 2009, Washington, D.C. Stefanovsky, S. V., S. V. Yudintsev, R. Giere, and G. R. Lumpkin. 2004. “Nuclear Waste Forms,” Geological Society of London Special Publications 236, 37-63. Stefanovsky, S. V., A. G. Ptashkin, O. A. Knyazev, S. A. Dimitriev, S. V. Yudintsev, and B. S. Nikonov. 2007a. “Inductive Cold Crucible Melting of Actinide-bearing Murataite-based Ceramics,” J. Alloys and Compounds 444, 438-442. Stefanovsky, S. V., S. V. Yudintsev, B. S. Nikonov, O. I. Stefanovsky. 2007b. “Rare Earth- Bearing Murataite Ceramics,” Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 985, 175-180. Stefanovsky, S. V., S. V. Yudintsev, S. A. Perevalov, I. V. Startseva, G. A. Varlakova. 2007c. “Leach Resistance of Murataite-based Ceramics Containing Actinides,” J. Alloys and Compounds 444, 618-620.

OCR for page 29
83 WASTE FORMS Strachan, D. M. and W. W. Schulz. 1979. “Characterization of Pollucite as a Material for Long-Term Storage of Cesium-137,” Amer. Ceram. Soc. Bull. 58(9), 865-871. Su, Y., M. L. Balmer, and B. C. Bunker. 1996. “Evaluation of Cesium Silicotitanates as an Alternate Waste Form,” Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 465, 457-464. Su, Y., M. L. Balmer, L. Wang, B. C. Bunker, M. Nyman, T. Nenoff, and A. Navrotsky. 1999. “Evaluation of Thermally Converted Silicotitanate Waste Forms,” Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 556, 77-84. Tolstova, O. V., T. N. Lashtchenova, and S. V. Stefanovsky. 2002. “Glassy Materials from Basalt for Intermediate-Level Waste Immobilization,” Glass and Ceramic 6, 28-31 (in Russian). Urusov, V. S., N. I. Organova, O. V. Karimova, S. V. Yudintsev, and S. V. Stefanovsky. 2005. “Synthetic “Murataits” as Modular Members of Pyrochlore-Murataite Polysomatic Series,” Doklady Earth Sci. 401(2), 319-325. Utsonomiya, A. S., L. M. Wang, S. V. Yudintsev, and R. C. Ewing. 2002. “Ion Irradiation Effects in Synthetic Garnets Incorporating Actinides,” Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 713, 495-500. Utsunomiya, S., S. Yudintsev, L. M. Wang, and R. C. Ewing. 2003. “Ion-beam and Electron- beam Irradiation of Synthetic Britholite,” J. Nucl. Mat. 322, 180-188. van Jaarsveld, J. G. S., J. S. J. van Deventer, and L. Lorenzen. 1996. “The Potential Use of Geopolymeric Materials to Immobilise Toxic Metals, Part I. Theory and Applications,” Miner. Eng. 10(7), 659-669. Vance, E. R. 1994. “SYNROC—A suitable waste form for actinides,” MRS Bull 19(12), 28-32. Vance, E. R., C. J. Ball, R. A. Day, K. L. Smith, M. G. Blackford, B. D. Begg, and P. J. Angel. 1994a. “Actinide and Rare Earth Incorporation in Zirconolite,” J. Alloys and Comp. 213/214, 406-409. Vance, E. R., P. J. Angel, B. D. Begg, and R. A. Day. 1994b. “Zirconolite-Rich Titanate Ceramics for High-Level Actinide Wastes,” In Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Manage- ment XVII, A. A. Barkatt and R. Van Konynenburg (Eds.), Mat. Res. Soc. 333, 293-298. Vance, E. R., P. J . Angel, D. J. Cassidy, M. W. A. Stewart, M. G. Blackford, and P. A. McGlinn. 1994c. “Freudenbergite: A Possible Synroc Phase for Sodium-Bearing High-Level Waste,” J. Amer. Ceram. Soc. 77, 1576-1580. Vance, E. R., R. A. Day, M. L. Carter, and A. Jostons. 1996a. “A Melting Route to Synroc for Hanford HLW Immobilization,” Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 412, 289-295. Vance, E. R., R. A. Day, Z. Zhang, B. D. Begg, C. J. Ball, and M. G. Blackford. 1996b. “Charge Compensation in Gd-doped CaTiO3,” J. Solid State Chem. 124, 77-82. Vance, E. R., M. L. Carter, Z. Zhang, K. S. Finnie, S. J. Thomson, and B. D. Begg. 2004. “Uranium Valences in Perovskite, CaTiO3,” Environmental Issues and Waste Manage- ment Technologies in the Ceramic & Nuclear Industries IX, Ceram. Trans. 155, 3-10. Verney-Carron, A., S. Gin, P. Frugier, and G. Libourel. 2010. “Long-Term Modeling of Alteration-Transport Coupling: Application to a Fractured Roman Glass,” Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 74, 2291-2315. Vinjamuri, K. 1995. “Candidate Glass-Ceramic Waste Forms for Immobilization of the Calcines Stored at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant,” Ceram. Trans. 61, 439-446. Wagh, A. S. and D. Singh. 1997. “Method for Stabilizing Low-Level Mixed Wastes at Room Temperature,” U.S. Patent 5,645,518. Wagh, A. S., M. D. Maloney, G. H. Thomson, and A. Antink. 2003. “Investigations in Ceramicrete Stabilization of Hanford Tank Wastes,” WM’03, Phoenix, Ariz., Available at http://www.wmsym.org/archives/2003/pdfs/257.pdf.

OCR for page 29
84 WASTE FORMS TECHNOLOGY AND PERFORMANCE Walton, Jr., R. D., W. B. Wilson, and D. E. Gordon. 1983. “Department of Energy’s Selection of High Level Waste Forms,” In The Treatment and Handling of Radioactive Wastes, A. G. Blasewitz, J. M. Davis, and M. R. Smith (Eds), Battelle Press, Columbus Ohio, 307-311. Warren, B. E. 1933. “X-ray Diffraction of Vitreous Silica,” Zeit. Krist. 86, 349-358. Weber, W.J. 1982. “Radiation-Damage in a Rare-Earth Silicate with the Apatite Structure,” J. Amer. Ceram. Soc. 65, 544-548. Weber, W. J. 1983. “Radiation-Induced Swelling and Amorphization in Ca2Nd8(SiO4)6O2,” Rad. Effects and Defects in Solids 77, 295-308. Weber, W. J. 1993. “Alpha-Decay-Induced Amorphization in Complex Silicate Structures,” J. Amer. Ceram. Soc. 76(7), 1729-1738. Weber, W. J., R. C. Ewing, and A. Meldrum. 1997a. “The Kinetics of Alpha-Decay-Induced Amorphization in Zircon and Apatite Containing Weapons-grade Plutonium or Other Actinides,” J. Nucl. Mat. 250(2-3), 147-155. Weber, W. J., R. C. Ewing, C. A. Angell, G. W. Arnold, A. N. Cormack, J. M. Delaye, D. L. Griscom, L. W. Hobbs, A. Navrotsky, D. L. Price, A. M. Stoneham, and M. C. Weinberg. 1997b. “Radiation Effects in Glasses Used for Immobilization of High-Level Waste and Plutonium Disposition,” J. Mat. Res. 12(8), 1946-1978. Weber, W. J., R. C. Ewing, C. R. A. Catlow, T. Diaz de la Rubia, L. W. Hobbs, C. Kinoshita, Hj. Matzke, A. T. Motta, M. Nastasi, E. H. K. Salje, E. R. Vance, and S. J. Zinkle. 1998. “Radiation Defects in Crystalline Ceramics for the Immobilization of High-level Nuclear Waste and Plutonium,” J. Mat. Res. 13(6), 1434-1484. Weber, W. J., A. Navrotsky, S. Stefanovsky, E. R. Vance, and E. Vernaz. 2009. “Materials Sci- ence of High-Level Nuclear Waste Immobilization,” MRS Bull. 34, 46-53. White, W. B. 1988. “Glass Structure and Glass Durability,” In Materials Stability and Envi- ronmental Degradation, A. Barkatt, E. D. Vernik, and L. R. Smith (Eds.), MRS Symp. Proc. 125, 109-114. Wicks, G. G., W. D. Rankin, and S. L. Gore. 1985. “International Waste Glass Study— Composition and Leachability Correlations,” Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Manage- ment VIII, C. M. Jantzen, J. A. Stone, and R. C. Ewing (Eds.), Materials Research Society, Pittsburgh, Penn., 171-177. Wronkiewicz, D. L., S. F. Wolf, T. S. Disanto. 1996. “Apatite- and Monazite-bearing Glass- Crystal Composites for the Immobilization of Low-level Nuclear and Hazardous Wastes,” Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 412, 345-352. Xu, H., A. Navrotsky, M. D. Nyman, and T. M. Nenoff. 2000. “Thermochemistry of Micro- porous Silicotitanate Phases in the Na2O-Cs2O-SiO2-TiO2-H2O System,” J. Mat. Res. 15, 815-823. Xu, H., A. Navrotsky, M. L. Balmer, Y. Su, and E. R. Bitten. 2001. “Energetics of Substi- tuted Pollucites Along the CsAlSi2O6-CsTiSi2O6,5 Join: A High-Temperature Calorimetric Strudy,” J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 84(3), 555-560. Yakovenchuk, V. N., E. A. Selivanova, G. Yu. Ivanyuk, Y. A. Pakhomovsky, D. V. Spiridonova, and S. V. Krivovichev. 2008. “First Natural Pharmacosiderite-Related Titanosilicates and Their Ion-Exchange Properties,” Miner. Advan. Mat. I, 27-35. Yanagisawa, K., M. Nishioka, and N. Yamasaki. 1987. “Immobilization of Cesium into Pollucite Structure by Hydrothermal Hot-Pressing,” J. Nucl. Sci. Tech. 24(1), 51-60. Yu, B., J. Chen, and C. Song. 2002. “Crystalline Silicotitanate: A New Type of Ion Exchanger for Cs Removal from Liquid Waste,” J. Mater. Sci. Tech. 18(3), 206-210. Yu, X. and D. E. Day. 1995. “Effect of Raw Materials on the Redox State of Iron and Prop- erties of Iron Phosphate Glasses,” In Proceedings of the 17th International Congress on Glass 2, International Academic Publishers, Beijing, The Peoples Republic of China, 45-51.

OCR for page 29
85 WASTE FORMS Yudintsev, S. V. 2001. “Incorporation of U, Th, Zr, and Gd into the Garnet-structured Host,” In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Radioactive Waste Management and Environmental Remediation, The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York. Yudintsev, S. V. 2003. “A Structural-Chemical Approach to Selecting Crystalline Matrices for Actinide Immobilization,” Geol. Ore Depos. 45, 151-165. Yudintsev, S. V., M. I. Lapina, A. G. Ptashkin, T. S. Ioudintseva, S. Utsonomiya, M. L. Wang, and R. C. Ewing. 2002. “Accommodation of Uranium into the Garnet Structure,” Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 713, 477-480. Yudintsev, S. V., S. V. Stefanovsky, and R. C. Ewing. 2007. “Actinide Host Phases as Radioac- tive Waste Forms,” In S. V. Krivovichev, P. C. Burns and I. Tananaev (Eds.), Structural Chemistry of Inorganic Actinide Compounds, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 457-490. Zachariasen, W. H. 1932. “The Atomic Arrangement in Glass,” J. Am. Chem. Soc 54, 3841-3851. Zachariasen, W. H. 1933. “The Vitreous State,” J. Chem. Phys. 3, 162-163. Zeolite structural information from the International Zeolite Association (IZA), website, http://www.iza-structure.org/databases/see: Cancrinite (CAN). Zeolite structural information from the International Zeolite Association (IZA), website, http://www.iza-structure.org/databases/see: sodalite (SOD). Zhang, Y. J. and E. R. Vance. 2008. “Plutonium in Monazite and Brabanite: Diffuse Reflec- tance Spectroscopy Study,” J. Nucl. Mat. 375, 311-314. Zhang, Y., M. W. A. Stewart, H. Li, M. L. Carter, E. R Vance, S. Moricca. 2009. “Zirconolite- rich Titanate Ceramics for Immobilization of Actinides—Waste form/HIP Can Interac- tions and Chemical Durability,” J. Nucl. Mat. 395, 69-74. Zhang, Z. and M. L. Carter. 2010. “An X-Ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy Investigation of Highly Soluble Grain-Boundary Impurity Films in Hollandite,” J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 93(3), 894-899. Zhao, D., L. Li, L. L. Davis, W. J. Weber, and R. C. Ewing. 2001. “Gadolinium Borosilicate Glass-bonded Gd-Silicate Apatite: A Glass-Ceramic Nuclear Waste Form for Actinides,” Mat. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 663, 199-206. Zosin, A. P., T. I. Priimak, and K. B. Avsaragov. 1998. ‘‘Geopolymer Materials Based on Magnesia-Iron Slags for Normalization and Storage of Radioactive Wastes,’’ Atomic Energy 85, 510-514. Zyryanov, V. N. and E. R. Vance. 1997. “Comparison of Sodium Zirconium Phosphate- Structured HLW forms and Synroc for High-Level Nuclear Waste Immobilization,” In Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XX, W. J. Gray and I. R. Triay (Eds.), Materials Research Society, Pittsburgh, Penn., 409-416.

OCR for page 29