Waste Form Release Data Package for the 2005 Integrated Disposal Facility Performance Assessment

Pierce, Eric M.; McGrail, B. Peter; Rodriguez, Elsa A.; Schaef, Herbert T.; Saripalli, Prasad; Serne, R. Jeffrey; Krupka, Kenneth M.; Martin, Paul F.; Baum, Steven R.; Geiszler, Keith N.; Reed, Lunde R.; Shaw, Wendy J.

doi:10.2172/15020942

Cited by 39 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The difference in chemical potential between the glass and aqueous phase decreases, which decreases the dissolution rate. This decrease in the rate of matrix dissolution is partially due to the effect H 4 SiO 4 (aq) has on the dissolution rate and the formation of the hydrated surface layer (Abraitis et al, 2000;Pierce et al, 2004). In other words, as the activity of H 4 SiO 4 (aq) increases in the aqueous solution the rate of glass dissolution decreases.…”

Section: Short and Long-term Corrosion Ratesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mathematical Formulation Requirements and Specifications for the Process Models

Steefel¹,

Moulton²,

Pau³

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Short and Long-term Corrosion Ratesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An alternate approach to modeling the effect of glass alteration layers has been used at the Hanford Site (Pierce et al, 2004). Alteration products were modeled as a series of amorphous solids.…”

Section: Glass Passivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mathematical Formulation Requirements and Specifications for the Process Models

Steefel¹,

Moulton²,

Pau³

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A list of potential secondary phases that form from long-term weathering experiments with the various waste glass formulations and from modeling the solution chemistry observed in experiments with the EQ3/6 code is provided in Pierce et al (2004aPierce et al ( , 2004b. A large number of phases were eliminated from consideration because 1) formation of the phase is kinetically prohibited at the disposal system temperature of 15°C, 2) selection of the phase would violate the Gibbs phase rule, 3) simulations show that allowing the phase to form is inconsistent with a large body of laboratory test data with borosilicate glasses, or 4) the phase is unstable over the range of chemical environments expected for the IDF system.…”

Section: Solid Speciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The unknown parameters in Equation (2) ( k , E a , K g , and η) have been determined for LAW glasses (Pierce et al 2004a) and bulk vitrification glasses (Pierce et al 2004b); these values are given in Table 10.…”

Section: Hydrogen Ion Activity (Variable To Be Calculated By Storm)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The rate of this reaction 2.13 has been determined from single-pass flow-through experiments (Pierce et al 2004a;Pierce et al 2004b). STORM keeps track of the amount of hydrated glass formed via reaction (3) and then allows it to dissolve according to the same kinetic rate law (reaction 2) as the parent glass.…”

Section: Hydrogen Ion Activity (Variable To Be Calculated By Storm)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Waste Form Release Calculations for the 2005 Integrated Disposal Facility Performance Assessment

Bacon¹,

McGrail²

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryA set of reactive chemical transport calculations was performed with the Subsurface Transport Over Reactive Multiphases (STORM) code to evaluate the long-term performance of a representative lowactivity waste glass in a shallow subsurface disposal system located on the Hanford Site. Twodimensional simulations were run until the waste form release rates reached a quasi-stationary-state, usually after 2,000 to 4,000 yr. The base case for this analysis was four vertically stacked LAWA44 glass waste packages under a recharge rate of 0.9 mm yr -1 . The maximum normalized technetium release rate from LAWA44 glass under a constant recharge rate of 0.9 mm yr -1 was 0.09 Myr -1 . The unit Myr -1 stands for "per million years," indicating the rate at which the technetium, normalized by the amount originally in the four waste packages, would be released per million years. The primary difference between the waste form release simulations for the 2001 Immobilized Low Activity Waste Performance Assessment (ILAW PA) and the simulations described in this document is the number of materials considered. Whereas the ILAW PA considered only LAWABP1 glass, the current IDF PA also describes radionuclide release from three Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) glasses (LAWA44, LAWB45 and LAWC22), two bulk vitrification glasses (six-tank composite and S-109), and three grout waste forms (containing AgI, BaI 2 , and Ba(IO 3 ) 2 ). All WTP and bulk vitrification glasses perform similarly. However, the Tc-99 release from the salt in the cast refractory surrounding the bulk vitrification waste packages is 2 to 170 times higher than the glass release rate and dependent on the water recharge rate. Iodine-129 release from grouted waste forms is highly sensitive to the solubility of the iodine compound contained in the grout. The normalized iodine release rate from grout containing barium iodate is 9.1×10 -1 Myr -1 .v

show abstract

Influence of Organic, Micro‐Organism and Microbial Activity on Wasteform Integrity

Donald

2010

Waste Immobilization in Glass and Ceramic Based Hosts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Waste Form Release Data Package for the 2005 Integrated Disposal Facility Performance Assessment

Cited by 39 publications

References 49 publications

Mathematical Formulation Requirements and Specifications for the Process Models

Mathematical Formulation Requirements and Specifications for the Process Models

Waste Form Release Calculations for the 2005 Integrated Disposal Facility Performance Assessment

Influence of Organic, Micro‐Organism and Microbial Activity on Wasteform Integrity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About