Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T10:33:38.488Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Neptunium Solubility in the Near-Field Environment of a Proposed Yucca Mountain Repository

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2011

David C. Sassani ,
Abraham Van Luik  and
Jane Summerson
David C. Sassani
Affiliation:
Management and Technical Support Services/Golder Associates Inc., Las Vegas, Nevada 89134, USA
Abraham Van Luik
Affiliation:
Office of Repository Development, U.S. Department of Energy, Las Vegas, Nevada 89134, USA
Jane Summerson
Affiliation:
Office of Repository Development, U.S. Department of Energy, Las Vegas, Nevada 89134, USA
Get access

Abstract

For representing the source-term of a proposed repository at Yucca Mountain, NV, the performance assessment (PA) approach evaluates the disequilibrium degradation of the waste forms to capture a bounding rate for radionuclide source-term availability and use solubility constraints that are more representative of longer-term, equilibrium processes to limit radionuclide mass transport from the source-term. These solubility limits capture precipitation processes occurring either as the waste forms alter, or in the near-field environment as chemical conditions evolve. A number of alternative models for solubility controls on dissolved neptunium concentrations have been evaluated. These alternatives include idealized models based on precipitation of simple, discrete neptunium phases and more complex considerations of trace amounts of neptunium being incorporated into secondary uranyl phases that form during waste form alteration. Thermodynamic constraints for neptunium under oxidizing conditions indicate that tetravalent neptunium solids (e.g., NpO2) are more stable relative to pentavalent phases (e.g., Np2O5), and therefore have solubilities that set lower dissolved concentrations of neptunyl species. Within solution, the pentavalent neptunyl ion (NpO2+) and its complexes dominate. Data on solids and solutions from slow flow-through (dripping) tests on spent nuclear fuel (SNF) grains indicate that neptunium is tetravalent in the SNF and that, over the ∼9 years duration of the tests, the dissolved neptunium concentrations are near to, or below, calculated NpO2 solubility. Currently, the NpO2 solubility model is applied at the waste forms within waste packages because the degradation of SNF and corrosion of alloys ensures active reduction reactions. The more conservative Np2O5 solubility model is applied in environments distal to the waste forms (i.e., the invert below waste packages) where reduction of dissolved pentavalent neptunium is less certain. Consideration of Np incorporation into secondary uranyl phases suggests that both of these idealized models will provide conservative estimates of neptunium release to the geosphere.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 932: Symposium – Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XXIX , 2006 , 10.1
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. U.S. Department of Energy, Yucca Mountain Science and Engineering Report, Revision 1(DOE/RW-0539-1 2002).Google Scholar
2. BSC (Bechtel SAIC Company, LLC), Total System Performance Assessment-LicenseApplication Methods and Approach, TDR-WIS-PA-000006 REV 00 ICN 01 (BSC, LasVegas NV, 2003).Google Scholar
3. BSC (Bechtel SAIC Company, LLC), Technical Basis Document No. 7: In-PackageEnvironment and Waste Form Degradation and Solubility Revision 1(BSC, Las Vegas NV,2004).Google Scholar
4. BSC (Bechtel SAIC Company, LLC), Dissolved Concentration Limits of RadioactiveElements, ANL-WIS-MD-000010 Revision 05 (BSC, Las Vegas NV, 2005).Google Scholar
5. Wilson, C. N., Results from NNWSI Series 2 Bare Fuel Dissolution Tests, (PNL-7169, PNLSeptember, 1990).Google Scholar
6. Wilson, C. N., Results from NNWSI Series 3 Spent Fuel Dissolution Tests, (PNL-7170, PNLJune, 1990).Google Scholar
7. CRWMS M&O, Measured Solubilities, Argonne National Lab High Drip Rate Tests, InputTransmittal 00333.T, MOL.20000919.0019, (CRWMS M&O, Las Vegas, NV, 2000).Google Scholar
8. CRWMS M&O, Commercial Spent Nuclear Fuel Degradation in Unsaturated Drip Tests, Input Transmittal WP-WP-99432.T, MOL.20000107.0209, (CRWMS M&O, Las Vegas, NV, 2000).Google Scholar
9. BSC (Bechtel SAIC Company, LLC), Transmittal of Unsaturated Testing of Bare Spent UO2 Fuel Fragments: Data Report, Argonne National Laboratory, IOC 0702037939, MOL.20030702.0116, MOL.20030311.0097, (BSC, Las Vegas NV, 2003).Google Scholar
10. BSC (Bechtel SAIC Company, LLC), Qualification of Thermodynamic Data forGeochemical Modeling of Mineral-Water Interactions in Dilute Systems, ANL-WIS-GS-000003 Revision 00 (BSC, Las Vegas NV, 2004).Google Scholar
11. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) Nuclear EnergyAgency, eds, Chemical Thermodynamics Volume 4. Chemical Thermodynamics ofNeptunium and Plutonium, (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2001).Google Scholar
12. Nitsche, H., Gatti, R. C., Standifer, E. M., Lee, S. C., Muller, A., Prussin, T., Deinhammer, R. S., Maurer, H., Becraft, K., Leung, S., and Carpenter, S. A., Measured Solubilites and Speciationsof Neptunium, Plutonium and Americium in a Typical Groundwater (J-13) from the YuccaMountain Region, (LA-12562-MS UC-802, LANL 1993).Google Scholar
13. Efurd, D. W., Runde, W., Banar, J. C., Janecky, D. R., Kaszuba, J. P., Palmer, P. D., Roensch, F. R., and Tait, C. D., Environmental Science & Technology, 32, 3893–3900 (1998).Google Scholar
14. Roberts, K. E., Wolery, T. J., Atkins-Duffin, C. E., Prussin, T. G., Allen, P. G., Bucher, J. J., Shuh, D.K., Finch, R. J., and Prussin, S.G., Radiochimica Acta. 91, 87–92 (2003).Google Scholar
15. Finch, R. J., in Sci. Basis For Nuclear Waste Mgt. XXV, ed. By McGrail, B. & Cragnolino, G.,(Mat. Res. Soc. Proc. 713, Warrendale, PA, 2002), pp. 639–646.Google Scholar
16. Burns, P. C., Ewing, R. C., and Miller, M. L., Journal of Nuclear Materials, 245, 1–9 (1997).Google Scholar
17. Chen, Y., Loch, A. R., Wolery, T. J., Steinborn, T. L., Brady, P. V., and Stockman, C. T., in Sci.Basis For Nuclear Waste Mgt. XXV, ed. By McGrail, B. & Cragnolino, G., (Mater. Res. Soc.Proc. 713, Warrendale, PA, 2002), pp. 775–782.Google Scholar
18. Chen, Y., Computers & Geosciences, 29, 385–397 (2003).Google Scholar
19. Wronkiewicz, D. J., Bates, J. K., Gerding, T., Velechis, E., and Tani, B., Journal of NuclearMaterials, 190, 107–127 (1992)Google Scholar
20. Wronkiewicz, D. J., Bates, J. K., Wolf, S. F., and Buck, E. C., Journal of Nuclear Materials,238, 78–95 (1996).Google Scholar
21. Finch, R. J., Buck, E. C., Finn, P. A., and Bates, J. K., in Sci. Basis For Nuclear Waste Mgt.XXV, ed. by Wronkiewicz, D. J. and Lee, J. H., (Mat. Res. Soc. Proc. 556, Warrendale, PA,1999), pp. 431–438.Google Scholar
22. Finch, R. J. and Ewing, R. C., Journal of Nuclear Materials, 190, 133–156. (1992).Google Scholar
23. Pearcy, E. C., Prikryl, J. D., Murphy, W. M., and Leslie, B. W., Applied Geochemistry, 9, 713–732 (1994).Google Scholar
24. Burns, P. C., Deely, K. M., and Skanthakumar, S., Radiochimica Acta 92, 151–159 (2004).Google Scholar
25. Ebert, W. L., Fortner, J. A., Finch, R. J., Jerden, J. L., and Cunnane, J. C., Yucca MountainProject FY 2004 Annual Report for Waste Form Testing Activities (ANL- 05/08. ANL, March 2005).Google Scholar
26. Murphy, W. M. and Smith, R. W., Radiochimica Acta 44/45, 395–401 (1988).Google Scholar