a u.s. department of energy laboratory t 55a the actinide ...€¦ · nuclear materials technology...

1Nuclear Materials Technology Division/ Los Alamos National Laboratory

TA55

• A U.S. Department of Energy Laboratory

The Actinide Research

Fall 1997 Los Alamos National Laboratory

o f t h e N u c l e a r M a t e r i a l s T e c h n o l o g y D i v i s i o n

Quarterly

Conference Provides International Forumon Plutonium Science

In This Issue

1Conference ProvidesInternational Forum

on PlutoniumScience

4X-Ray FluorescenceIs Useful for Actinide

Characterization

6LANL FacesInstitutional

Challenges in ItsNuclear Future

9Recent Publications,Presentations, and

Reports

11Personas Elementum

12NewsMakers

*Austria, Australia, Belgium, Canada,France, Germany, Japan, Kazakhstan,Korea, Russia, Spain, Sweden, UK, USA

The 300 participants registered for the international conference“Plutonium Futures—The Science” represented 14 countries* as wellas Department of Energy national laboratories and other federal andinternational institutions, universities, and industries. Among theattendees were 20 students and 17 faculty members, representing 14universities from the USA, France, and Sweden. Los Alamos NationalLaboratory in cooperation with the American Nuclear Society spon-sored the conference to discuss the current state of plutonium andactinide sciences and to rejuvenate the science needed to solve theinternational issues surrounding these materials.

The conference, which ran from August 25 through 27, 1997, at theHilton Hotel in Santa Fe, New Mexico, began with a welcoming mes-sage by Laboratory Director Sig Hecker followed by five plenary lec-tures. In a videotaped presentation Dr. Glenn Seaborg, awarded a 1951Nobel Prize in chemistry for his discovery of plutonium, talked aboutthe history of the discovery of the element and his personal perspectiveon the evolving use of plutonium in our society. Dr. Seaborg, in a class-room setting at the University of California, Berkeley, emphasized theimportance of attracting young researchers to the field.

"A great deal ofmodern life revolvesaround science. Weneed scientists andengineers to makethe discoveriesand developmentsnecessary to competein a highly techno-logical world...Weneed a higher levelof science literacy inthe general popula-tion in order thatits members mayperform adequatelyin a technologicalsociety."Dr. Glenn Seaborg

2 Nuclear Materials Technology Division/ Los Alamos National Laboratory

The Actinide Research Quarterly

Dr. Seaborg set in motion another theme ofthe conference, that of the utility and impor-tance of plutonium and other transuranicelements in medical applications and energyand the need to better educate the publicabout the risks and benefits of these elements.He characterized nuclear energy as a rationalapproach to the dangers of various other en-ergy sources and predicted that the depletionof those other sources willmean an eventual returnto breeder reactors andnuclear energy using bothplutonium and the mostabundant isotope of ura-nium, 238U.

Other plenary speak-ers included Dr. VictorMourogov of the Interna-tional Atomic EnergyAgency, Dr. Alan Waltar,Dr. Daniel Kerlinsky, andDr. Darleane Hoffman.The speakers addressedthe core science issues associated with nuclearproliferation and nuclear energy: the safestorage and ultimate disposal of surplusweapons material and management of largeinventories of actinides from civilian nuclearpower generation. Representing the “loyalopposition,” Daniel Kerlinsky, Physicians forSocial Responsibility, agreed that these werethe basic science issues and also urged interna-tional cooperation. The final plenary speaker,Dr. Darleane Hoffman, echoed Dr. Seaborg’smessage emphasizing the challenges and op-portunities for basic research that plutoniumand the other actinides present.

The five technical sessions that followedduring the two and a half days covered topicsunder the broad categories of materials sci-ence, transuranic waste forms, nuclear fuelsand isotopes, separations, actinides in theenvironment, detection and analysis, pluto-nium, and actinide compounds and complexes.The papers within these areas spanned anextremely wide range of technical topics andgave attendees a chance to learn about currentresearch outside of their particular specialties.There were more than 100 papers presentedat the conference. Among those were 12 inmaterials science, 26 in transuranic wasteforms, 5 in nuclear fuels and isotopes, 19 inseparations, 12 in actinides in the environment,9 in detection and analysis, and 13 in pluto-nium and actinide compounds and complexes.

Topics covered the entire gamut from thegeneral, e.g., overview of work at the V. G.Khlopin Radium Institute, to the specific, e.g.,specific separations techniques for specifictypes of mixed wastes, material and thermody-namic properties, and spectroscopic studies ofactinides.

In the discussions of nuclear fuels,Dr. Seaborg and a number of other speakersnoted that nearly 20% of the electricity gener-ated around the world presently comes fromfission energy of plutonium in nuclear reac-tors. Others noted that about 60 metric tons ofexcess plutonium will be recovered from war-heads being dismantled under the START I

A Web pagehas beenestablished forsuggestionsand commentsconcerning theconference:see http://www.lanl.gov/puconf97/

This article wascontributed byAnn Mauzy, CIC-1,who covered theconference forActinide ResearchQuarterly.


Fall 1997

“Moralizingabout subjectsthat are essen-tially technical(disease wasonce considereda punishmentfrom God)blocks thepath to findingsolutions.”

Richard Rhodes

Rhodes ChallengesPlutonium Scientists

Pulitzer Prize-winning author (TheMaking of the Atomic Bomb) RichardRhodes challenged the conferenceattendees to use the public healthmodel, the one that has eradicatedsmallpox from the earth, in solvingproblems of nuclear proliferation andnuclear energy. In his talk entitled“Public Health, Public Knowledge,Public Peace” he pointed out, “Moraliz-ing about subjects that are essentially technical (disease was onceconsidered a punishment from God) blocks the path to finding solu-tions.” He placed the ban on reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel in thiscategory and pointed out that this decision ignored the fact that thereare much easier routes for proliferation.

In furthering the metaphor, he urged declassification of necessaryfacts, shared open knowledge, committed individuals, and an interna-tional, nonpoliticized regime of nongovernmental agencies to enable anuclear materials management system to oversee retrievable storageof plutonium, its separation, and its burnup in power reactors. In work-ing together, he concluded, we will be furthering the greater good: theprevention of nuclear weapons proliferation and the production ofelectrical power necessary for civilization.

and II agreements.The central questionis, “What is the bestway to use/disposeof this plutonium?”

The need for in-ternational coopera-tion in answering thisquestion was nicelysummed up by Rich-ard Rhodes, thebanquet speaker(see inset). Rhodessees plutonium as anessential resource toensure humankind’sright to live withoutstarvation. He seesnuclear energy andnuclear proliferationas global problemsthat can only besolved with globalsolutions.



X-Ray Fluorescence Is Useful forActinide Characterization

Although there is no “silver bullet” ana-lytical method that can answer all questionsabout all actinide sample types and problems,x-ray fluorescence (XRF) spectrometry is oneof the myriad of analytical methods that areavailable to answer such questions. X-rayfluorescence spectrometry is a mature analyti-cal method used to determine elementalcomposition in a wide range of sample types.

The fundamental process is based uponthe removal of a core electron from the sampleby x-rays from an x-ray tube. The resultingcore electron vacancy is filled by an outer-shellelectron, which emits an x-ray that is character-istic of the element. This provides the qualita-tive part of the analysis or answers thequestion, “what elements are present?” Theintensity of the x-ray fluorescence detected isdirectly proportional to the concentration ofthe element in the specimen. This value givesthe quantitative part of the analysis or answers

the question, “how much of theelement is present?” This rela-tively simple process is usedthroughout the world in analyti-cal laboratories and plants tomonitor processes, identify con-taminants, and solve problems.At Los Alamos, XRF is an impor-tant tool in providing character-ization information on a widevariety of samples and support-ing a number of differentprograms.

Although the fundamentalprocess is simple, the instrumen-tation used in XRF is neithersimple nor inexpensive. Thebasic instrumentation of powersupply, excitation source, anddetector is universally similar,but the hardware details are suf-ficiently complex to push instru-ment base prices over $100K.There are two types of XRFinstruments available, wave-length-dispersive XRF (WDXRF)and energy-dispersive XRF(EDXRF). While x-ray tubes arecommon to all XRF instruments,

they vary in output depending upon the instru-mentation. Most WDXRF systems have high-power tubes, typically 3 kW–4 kW and usecrystals for diffracting the emitted x-rays beforethey are detected. The WDXRF instrument thusdetects elements sequentially, one at a time.There are simultaneous instruments; however,these simply have separate detector channelsfor each element. The WDXRF instruments offersensitivity, resolution, and both long- andshort-term stability.

The EDXRF instruments utilize a solid-statedetector that captures all elemental x-rayssimultaneously. Their rapid analysis is offeredat the expense of spectral resolution and ulti-mate sensitivity. In general, both instrumentscan handle solid and liquid samples with sensi-tivities in the tens of parts per million. The de-tection limits vary by element as well as by thematrix.

The routine samples we analyze by XRFinclude gallium and trace uranium in pluto-nium and plutonium oxide samples. Althoughother elemental methods are capable of detect-ing these elements, the nature of the plutoniummatrix creates additional challenges that affectthe accuracy, precision, and speed of the analy-sis in these other methods.

The gallium and uranium analyses beginthe same with sample dissolution, followed byremoval of the plutonium matrix with ion ex-change resins. The gallium is eluted from theion exchange column and collected in a beaker.Then a zinc internal standard is added, and thesample is analyzed directly. This process canprovide precision with values approaching± 0.1%. The trace uranium, on the other hand,is collected and then concentrated on a resin-impregnated filter paper. This offers us sensi-tivities in the low parts-per-million range.While precision is not an issue, this methodavoids the isotopic interference from the pluto-nium matrix. Both of these analyses supportsuch programs as pit rebuilding, surveillance,and development of mixed-oxide (MOX) fuels.

Other analyses involving actinide materialsare applied to samples from Hanford andRocky Flats. In these analyses, the sludge or ashparticles are analyzed directly to provide aqualitative identification of the elements

At the bottomis a sample ofprocess residuefrom Rocky Flatsin the form ofash, placed on apiece of tape.At the top is anelemental mapof the plutoniumdistributionwithin the ashsample usingx-raymicrofluorescence.The elementalmap was ac-quired with a100-micronaperture.


Fall 1997

In addition toPrincipalInvestigatorGeorge J. Havrilla,the XRF TeamincludesBill Hutchinson,Margie Moore,Lisa Colletti,Forrest Weesner,and ChristopherWorley ofCST-8 and JonSchoonover ofCST-4.

present. We are currently developing asemiquantitative method that will provideboth qualitative identification and relativequantitative values of the detected elements.Although this analysis will not provide abso-lute concentrations, the values will be refer-enced to known standards for lot-to-lotcomparisons. This procedure takes advantageof the rapid sample analysis and minimumsample preparation requirements, keeps theper sample costs low, yet still provides theneeded composition information on thesample.

The Source Term Testing Program (STTP)project is another area where XRF is providingqualitative and quantitative data. In STTPbrine samples are withdrawn from test con-tainers and filtered. The XRF team receivesboth the brine and filters for analysis. The XRFresults give a picture of what is dissolved inthe brine and what is suspended within theliquid phase of the test material. Both sampletypes offer challenges in analysis since calibra-tion standards that match the matrix of the un-knowns must be fabricated. Although theseanalyses are not absolute because of the widelyvarying test container compositions, the valuesprovide a relative scale for comparing the ef-fects of the brine interactions with the differentwaste forms being tested.

In addition to these routine methods, weare actively pursuing new and innovativeways to use XRF so we can meet future charac-terization needs. One area of research is theuse of x-ray microfluorescence (XRMF), whichutilizes a spatially restricted x-ray beam to ex-cite a specific location on a specimen. The de-tected x-rays are localized and can provideinformation on heterogeneity, inclusions, thinfilms, and interfaces. Our current program hasseveral thrusts that offer new approaches toactinide characterization. The dried spotmethod has the potential for rapid, multiele-mental analysis on small masses of volumesof material. The method utilizes 10-ml to 50-mldrops of solution, which are dried. The result-ing dried residue, which is mere microgramsof material, is analyzed with sensitivities ap-proaching less than 1 part per billion. This is 3orders of magnitude better than conventional,

Joel Dahlby,CST-8, operatesan x-raymicrofluorescenceinstrument, aninnovative use ofXRF to excite aspecific locationon a specimen.The techniquecan be used toperform spatiallyresolvedelementalanalysis forconcentrations of10 ppm to weightpercent levels.

bulk XRF. Theprimary advan-tage lies in thesmall samplesize, which alsohelps to keep ex-posures to per-sonnel as low asreasonablyachievable insample handlingand analysis.

Rapid, spatially resolved analysis of MOXsurrogates is providing insights into the evo-lution of gallium from potential MOX reactorfuel pellets. The presence of gallium is a criti-cal issue for disposing of weapons plutoniumin MOX fuel. Although most of the galliumcan be removed, the mechanism of the re-moval process and behavior of the residualgallium need to be studied. The capabilities ofXRMF allow us to study the gallium behavioron a scale that does not require the high reso-lution of a scanning electron microscope.

Finally, the ultimate goal is to develop aninstrument that uses chemical images to pro-vide both elemental and molecular informa-tion simultaneously. These chemical imageswill rapidly transmit both qualitative andquantitative, spatially resolved information onthe elemental and molecular composition ofthe sample. This vision is based on integratingelemental and molecular spectroscopic datafrom XRMF, micro-Raman, micro-FTIR (Fou-rier transform infrared spectroscopy) andx-ray microdiffraction. The principal advan-tage of this integrated approach is thenondestructive, comprehensive chemicalinformation on either small samples orspatially resolved images of macroscalespecimens. This multiplexing of spectroscopicinformation would improve characterizationaccuracy and minimize multiple samplepreparations to solve analytical problems.

This is just a snapshot of the importanceof only one analytical method and how ana-lytical chemistry as a whole underpins ac-tinide science and actinide production effortsand how analytical science impacts all of thescientific efforts at Los Alamos.



LANL Faces Institutional Challengesin Its Nuclear Future

Todd LaPorteis a professor ofPolitical Scienceat the Universityof California,Berkeley.

Social scientists rarely have the opportu-nity to become familiar with operations thatcombine demanding technologies, high na-tional purpose, and extraordinary institutionalchallenges. Such an opportunity was affordedme this year by the Nuclear Material Technol-ogy (NMT) Division and the Nuclear Materials

and Stockpile Management Pro-gram Office. The experience wasat once engaging, informing, andunsettling. This editorial reflectsmy unusual view of LANL’s evo-lution and could be seen, in part,as a letter to those who so gra-ciously became my teachers.

As the readers of this quar-terly know, LANL, especially itsplutonium-handling facilities(Technical Area-55, managed byNMT), has been tasked to demon-strate its ability to become thenation’s leading organizationwith the capacity for “pit

remanufacture,” i.e., periodic remanufactureof the plutonium components needed to main-tain nuclear weapons in a state of highly reli-able readiness. Since there is no other facilitywith sufficient capacity, TA-55 is, in effect, theU.S. plutonium fabricator of last resort, a facil-ity that is likely to be required for the foresee-able future.

In taking up its expanded role, LANL hasjoined with DOE in using the metaphor of“stewardship” to focus on these responsibili-ties and public service. With regard to manag-ing nuclear materials, especially in the comingera of regulatory transparency, the role of “in-stitutional steward” is quite extraordinary. Tothe attentive public, “stewardship” is likely toimply that LANL and DOE are claiming theycan assure highly reliable operations for manywork and management generations, perhapsfor hundreds of years, in a manner that evokesdeep, sustained public trust and confidence.

From an institutional perspective, these arevery demanding goals to achieve and sustain.Indeed, the recent extension of LANL’s mis-sion challenges our capacity to maintain anorganization’s operational balance and tosuccessfully navigate the turbulent watersof national politics.

The Lab and NMT already demonstratean understanding of highly reliable opera-tions. The requisites for evoking the public’strust and confidence are more problematicbut have drawn a good deal of comment andsome analysis. I leave this discussion for an-other venue. Assuring high performance inthe spirit of stewardship for many genera-tions, i.e., “institutional constancy,” is anothermatter. It is an unexpected, unfamiliar, thoughapt challenge. Institutional constancy is aprime condition undergirding the exercise ofhonorable institutional stewardship. It is notwell understood and is unexpected within anAmerican political culture that lauds changeand shrinks from continuities of power.Institutional constancy implies the faithfuladherence to a mission and its operationalimperatives in the face of a variety of socialand institutional changes and requiresadaptability to meet institutional andpublic commitments.

LANL already seeks to assure continuityof top technical talent in its recruiting andmentoring activities, key mechanisms in so-cializing and training generations of able pro-fessionals in the spirit of enterprise. But thereare only meager analytical bases for achievingorganizational qualities that address the chal-lenge of constancy. What little that has beendone suggests that these qualities requiresteadfast political will and what one mightcall the “organizational infrastructure ofconstancy.”

Dr. LaPorte wasan "ex officio"member of the1996 NMTScience andTechnologyAssessmentReviewCommittee.


Fall 1997

continued on next page

"Indeed,the recentextensionof LANL’smissionchallengesour capacityto maintain anorganization’soperationalbalance andto success-fully navigatethe turbulentwaters ofnationalpolitics."

Political will is likely to be enhanced bystrong articulation of commitments by agencyleaders to unswerving adherence to the spiritof the initial agreement as well as vigorous ex-ternal reinforcement from regulatory agenciesand public “watchdog groups.” The organiza-tional infrastructure of constancy is less famil-iar and includes

• administrative and technical capacitiesto carry out constancy-assuringactivities reinforced by agency rewardsfor pursuing them;

• adequate resources and activities toassure the transfer of technical andinstitutional knowledge from one workand management generation to the next;

• analytical resources for future impactanalyses; and

• capacities to detect and remedy the earlyonset of likely failure related toprocesses that threaten the future, aswell as assurance of remediation iffailures actually occur.

Institutional constancy must be seen interms of the missions animating an institu-tion—in the case of LANL and NMT—researchand development goals. The challenge in thefuture will be to integrate R&D with excellencein specialty production, activities that someobservers believe to be intrinsically at odds.The dimensions of this challenge are suggestedby the objectives the U.S. seems to be pursu-ing, i.e., to manage nuclear materials in a man-ner that 1) emphasizes a self-conscious spirit ofsustained institutional stewardship; 2) aims tobe the best in the world, not only in the U.S.;and 3) equips technical and operational profes-sionals to demonstrate, via their interactionswith professional counterparts throughout theworld, that the U.S. retains an effective nuclearweapons deterrent capacity for the indefinitefuture.

These are as unusual and demanding a setof institutional goals as ever to be proposedfor technical organizations and programs.Goals 1) and 3) above have rarely been sought,authorized, or supported by sponsors in thepast, nor are they particularly honored by po-litical, media, or economic leaders in our po-litical culture. Yet the multigenerationaldemands of these goals raise the issue of “in-stitutional honor,” a topic almost absent fromorganizational studies and broached only hesi-tantly in technical professional conversation.

Our generation is, in effect, handing downundeniable demands to the fourth and fifthgenerations. Meeting these demands will bedifficult, especially in view of the fact that themajor benefits of nuclear deterrence have ac-crued to the present generation but with muchof their cost deferred to future generations.Will these obligations requiring some of theirgenerations’ best and brightest be readilytaken up by our descendants? Will it be anhonorable and honored “taking up”? As thepolitical situation that bolstered the dedicationof national resources to nuclear stewardshipattenuates with time, future generations with-out our frame of reference may find our “gift”increasingly onerous. The conditions neces-sary to nurture an honored institution withinthe society at large apply as well to accordinghonor to technical production activities andresearch and development so that sustained,high-quality technical operations may beensured.

In the context of LANL’s past, this discus-sion may seem unduly alarming. After all,LANL, under the benign oversight of the Uni-versity of California system, has repeatedlymade unique and invaluable contributions toadvance basic scientific knowledge and toovercome a vigorous adversary. Couldn’t weexpect the same “world class” performancein the new era? Perhaps, but to leave it theremisses the emerging public skepticism regard-ing technical systems generally, a particularly



acerbic skepticism regarding the nuclear enter-prise. It can be argued that those who aretechnically engaged in the various aspects ofthis enterprise have not been particularly wellserved by their governmental or commercialsponsors and promoters. Recent history sug-gests failures of institutional competence,policy determination, and public disclosure.The accumulation of these failures exhaustspublic patience, erodes confidence in technicalprofessionals (and their overseers), andaccretes layers of resentment harbored in thesocial psyches of a distracted and anxiouspublic.

While the technical parameters of “sci-ence-based stockpile stewardship” may be inthe process of becoming clarified, operationallineaments remain opaque and institutionalimperatives illusive. This presents the currentleadership not only with demanding technicalobstacles, but with extraordinary institutionalones as well. The metaphor of stewardship isapt and warranted. Offered in the face of his-torical residues and evolving conditions, thatstewardship lays demanding charges uponcurrent leadership and taxes our institutionalcapacities. It also taxes our abilities to frameperspectives that acknowledge the politicalstrain intrinsic to maintaining those technicalcapabilities that have been central to achievingglobal dominance.

It is possible, perhaps likely, that leadersin Washington have neither the capacity northe full resolve to initiate the necessary stew-ardship-enhancing changes. To the degree thisis so, developments in the relationships ofLANL with the external world and changeswithin the weapons programs themselvesmust be initiated mostly from within the Lab,probably in the face of at least residual resis-tance from its overseers. But if stewardship-enhancing measures are broadly effective,technical and institutional leaders will recoverthe confidence of able Americans. This is arequisite to nurture a climate of understandingand honor in which each generation assumesthe obligation of managing the burden ofnuclear weapons and materials in such a waythat their successors in the “fourth generation”will inherit a system at least no more difficultto manage than the one they received.

It will be a challenge. There is no crediblebasis for confidently selecting out those orga-nizational solutions that will be suitable forthe future on the basis of short-term manage-rial, economic, or political considerations. Ineffect, we could, in all good-hearted earnest-ness, start out wrong, as history would surelynote.

LANL Faces Institutional Challengesin Its Nuclear Future (continued)

Todd LaPorte

The ideas presented in this editorial are theauthor's and do not necessarily represent theopinion of Los Alamos National Laboratory, theUniversity of California, the Department ofEnergy, or the U.S. government.


Publications,Presentations, and Reports(April 1997–September 1997)

Fall 1997

Journal Publications

M. P. Neu, S. D. Reilly, and W. Runde, “Plutonium Solubility andSpeciation to be Applied to the Separation of Hydrothermal WasteTreatment Effluent,” Materials Research Society Symposium ProceedingsSeries, II. Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management XX, Volume 465,in press.

H. T. Hawkins, B. E. Scheetz, and G. D. Guthrie, Jr., “Preparation ofMonophasic (NZP) Radiophases: Potential Host Matrices for the Immo-bilization of Reprocessed Commercial High-Level Wastes,” MaterialsResearch Society Symposium Proceedings Series, II. Scientific Basis forNuclear Waste Management XX, Volume 465, W. J. Gray and I. R. Triayeds., 387-394, Materials Research Society, Pittsburgh, PA (1997).

M. D. Diener, C. A. Smith, and D. K. Veirs, “Anaerobic Preparation andSolvent Free Separation of Uranium Endohedral Metallofullerenes,”J. Chem. of Materials, 9(#8), 1773–1777, (1997).

D. G. Kolman and J. R. Scully, “On the Requirement for a Sharp Notchor Precrack to Cause Environmentally Assisted Crack Initiation of Beta-Titanium Alloys Exposed to Aqueous Chloride Environments,” to bepublished in Effects of the Environment on the Initiation of Crack Growth,ASTM STP 1298, (W. A. Van der Sluys, R. S. Piascik, and R. Zawierucha,Eds., American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA1997).

D. G. Kolman and J. R. Scully, “An Explanation for the pH and PotentialDependency of b-Titanium Alloy EAC Initiation in Aqueous ChlorideEnvironments Based on an Investigation of Crack Tip Electrode Kinet-ics,” Metallurgical Transactions A, in press.

D. G. Kolman and J. R. Scully, “Comparison of Anodic Current Tran-sients Resulting from Film Rupture on a Dynamically Strained Meta-stable b-Titanium Electrode to Those Observed Following FracturedThin Film and Scratch Depassivation,” J. Electrochem. Soc., in review.

Conference Presentations

The following papers were presented at the American Chemical SocietyNational Meeting, San Francisco, CA, April 13–17, 1997: U. F. Gallegosand M. A. Williamson, “Molten Salt Electrochemistry”; R. R. Salazar,B. J. Griego, L. D. Schulte, S. D. McKee, W. B. Smith, M. J. Palmer, andV. A. Hatler, “Oxalate Precipitation of Pu(III) from Very Dilute HClSolutions”; G. M. Purdy, G. D. Jarvinen, B. F. Smith, M. Cournoyer,and R. R. Gibson, “Polymer Filteration: An Emerging Technology forSelective Metals Recovery” (Division of Chemical Technicians);J. L. Lugo, D. E. Wedman, and T. O. Nelson, “Electrochemical Decon-tamination of Actinide Processing Gloveboxes”; R. B. Vaughn,J. M. Berg, and M. R. Cisneros, “The Use of Absorption Spectroscopyof Plutonium to Minimize Waste Streams”; L. A. Worl, D. D. Padilla,

D. K. Veirs, S. J. Buelow, L. A. Le, andJ. H. Roberts, “Hydrothermal Processing ofActinide Contaminated Organic Wastes,”LA-UR-96-3796; M. Barr, G. Jarvinen,S. F. Marsh, and R. Bartsch, “Developmentof Anion-Exchange Resins for Separationsof Actinides,” LA-UR-96-3933; D. K. Ford,R. Scott Lillard, and D. P. Butt, “CorrosionStudy of Candidate APT Engineering Materi-als,” LA-UR-96-4078; and J. M. Berg,R. B. Vaughn, M. R. Cisneros, D. K. Veirs, andC. A. Smith, “Optical Studies of the Stoichiom-etry and Thermodynamics of Plutonium (IV)Nitrate Complexes in High Ionic StrengthAcidic Solutions,” LA-UR-96-4537.

The following papers were presented at theANS Topical Conference on Methods andApplications of Radioanalytical Chemistry,Kailua-Kona, Hawaii, April 6–11, 1997:K. W. Fife, “A Kinetic Study of PlutoniumDioxide Dissolution in Hydrochloric AcidUsing Iron(II) as an Electron Transfer Cata-lyst”; S. L. Yarbro, S. B. Schreiber, E. A. Ortiz,and R. L. Ames, “Reducing Pu(IV) to Pu(III)with Hydroxylamine in Nitric Acid Solu-tions”; G. D. Jarvinen, M. E. Barr, S. F. Marsh,and R. A. Bartsch, “Bifunctional Anion-Exchange Resins for Improved Separations ofNuclear Materials,” LA-UR-96-3835; andD. K. Veirs, J. M. Berg, and C. A. Smith, “NewSpectroscopic Studies of Plutonium (IV)Nitrate Complex Formation in Solution andon Ion Exchange Resins.”

The following papers were presented at the21st Actinide Separations Conference,Charleston, SC, June 23–26, 1997:J. A. McNeese, W. J. Griego, and E. Garcia,“Pyrochemical Oxidation of Residue Salts”;E. Garcia, J. A. McNeese, W. J. Griego, andV. R. Dole, “Demonstration of the Salt Distilla-tion Process”; V. R. Dole and E. Garcia,“Aqueous Dissolution of Oxidized CalciumChloride DOR Residues”; A. J. Vargas,G. D. Bird, and E. Garcia, “In-Situ Chlorina-tion of Plutonium Metal”; and S. B. Schreiberand S. L. Yarbro, “Impacts of the WasteIsolation Pilot Plant Waste AcceptanceCriteria on Transuranic Waste Handling.”



The following papers were presented at theJOWOG 22 Meeting, Aldermaston WeaponsEstablishment, United Kingdom, June 11–13,1997: S. D. Owens, G. Bird, and A. Vargas,“Americium Extraction by In-Situ Chlorina-tion” and S. D. Owens and T. E. Ricketts,“Plutonium Metal Oxidation.”

The following papers were presented at theAmerican Chemical Society National MeetingNuclear Chemistry and Technology Division,Las Vegas, NV, September 7-11, 1997:D. K. Veirs, G. M. Rosenblatt, C. R. Heiple, andJ. P. Baiardo, “The Use of Acoustic ResonanceSpectroscopy to Detect Changes within StorageContainers” and E. Garcia, J. A. McNeese,W. J. Griego, and V. R. Dole, “Demonstrationof the Salt Distillation Process for Rocky FlatsSalt Residues.”

P. L. Wallace, “Crystal Chemistry PrinciplesApplied to the X-ray Diffraction Identificationof Metallurgical Phases,” 1997 Denver X-rayConference, Steamboat Springs, Colorado,August 5, 1997.

D. G. Kolman, D. K. Ford, T. O. Nelson, andD. P. Butt, “General and Localized CorrosionBehavior of 304 Stainless Steel Exposed toRoom and High Temperature Nitric Acid/Halide Solutions,” NACE 97 (National Associa-tion of Corrosion Engineers), Symposium onCorrosion Issues in Liquid Radioactive WasteStorage, New Orleans, LA, March 9–14, 1997.

J. R. Hurd, G. W. Veazey, T. H. Prettyman,G. A. Sheppard, T. E. Ricketts, andR. K. Nakaoka, “Performance of NDA Tech-niques on a Vitrified Waste Form,” 38thAnnual Meeting of the Institute of NuclearMaterials Management, Phoenix, Arizona, July20–24, 1997.

R. C. Hagan, J. Gladson, and T. Wickland(Nuclear Technology Technology, Inc.),“Containers for Short-Term Storage of NuclearMaterials at the Los Alamos Plutonium Facil-ity,” American Nuclear Society 1997 AnnualMeeting, Orlando, Florida, June 1–5, 1997.

W. J. Turner, R. Brown, and G. D. Rael, “Instru-mentation System to Implement Leak TestProgram,” 1997 IEEE Instrumentation &Measurement Technology Conference, Ottawa,Canada, May 19–21, 1997.

N. G. Pope and J. C. Higgins (BrookhavenNational Lab), “Human Factors Aspects of theMajor Upgrade to the Control Systems at theLANL Plutonium Facility,” Global Perspectiveof Human Factors in Power Generation, ThePower Engineering Society of IEEE, 1997 IEEE6th Conference on Objectives, Orlando, FL, June8–12, 1997.

N. G. Pope and T. Donovan, “Lessons Learnedfrom the TA-55 Operation Center UpgradeProject,” Conduct of Operations Training,Nevada Test Site, April 2, 1997.

J. M. Macdonald, “Implementation of anIntranet for Industrial Control,” IndustrialSociety of America (ISA), Anaheim, CA,October 1997.

J. T. McFarlan, “Modifications to VacuumAtmospheres MO-40-2 Dri-Train to PreventPressure Changes in Plutonium Processing,”American Glovebox Society Conference,Denver, CO, July 21–24, 1997.

R. L. Long (NMSU) and S. L. Yarbro, “Applica-tions of a New Interfacial Area TransportEquation,” Mixing XV Conference,Williamsburg, VA, June 23–27, 1997.

P. C. Stark, B. F. Smith, T. W. Robison, G. D.Jarvinen, M. R. Lin, J. E. Anderson, “Solid-StateEuropium Luminescence for the Investigationof Metal-Binding to Water-Soluble ChelatingPolymers,” MARK IV Conference, April 6–11,1997, Honolulu, HI.


Fall 1997

EditorialPersonas Elementum

196.9665

Au79

1.0079

H1

(244)

Pu94

28.0855

Si14

K.C. Kim

From a human viewpoint, elements arenot born equal. Some elements enjoy affection-ate attention throughout human history, someare cast as villains with bad reputations, anda majority of the others are destined to liveforever in the blue-color working class of theelemental hierarchy. Take the example of cop-per. The advancement of the early tool-makinghuman society was much aided by copper sothat this particular epoch was called the“Bronze Age” after copper combined with itsminor partner, tin. Gold, among several cel-ebrated aristocratic elements, has been usedfor adornment as a precious and decorativeelement, and it appears that gold will not loseits luster for the foreseeable future. Then thereis the element lead, which followed the riseand fall of the Roman Empire. This elementeven stirred up the modern day public’s anti-element sentiment as in “no-lead” gasoline.Silicon is, of course, a modern-day “hero”element. In its embodiment in the form ofmicrochips, it already controls our daily livesin every imaginable way. The anecdotal storiesgo on and on. It would take many book vol-umes to tell a significant part of every elemen-tal story.

Take another example, that of iron. Canyou imagine a world without iron? Not onlyrenowned for its muscular forms of everyshape, this forget-me-not element will alsomake you feel good and energetic if you donot ignore it in your diet. On the other hand,there are many working-class elements thatare doomed to remain forever in the ordinary,humdrum status like the lackluster carbon(when it’s not in the form of a diamond!).All living forms, miraculous as they are, repre-sent extraordinary arrangements of severalordinary elements such as carbon, nitrogen,oxygen, etc. Once in a while, an element risesto a meteoric status because of its role in someextraordinary discoveries. Look at the case ofiridium. With their fascination for dinosaurs,Luis Alvarez and other prominent scientistsfound out that iridium is the “smoking gun”for all dinosaur extinction, only claiming itsnotoriety some 65 million years later!

Then there is the mother of all elements:hydrogen. She is most unassuming and yetperhaps the most abundant in the universe.

All other elements, therefore, all things, livingand dead, derived their existence from hydro-gen. To this day most living things on Earth,for example, owe their existence to the sun’shydrogen energy. We should be praisinghydrogen. Hydrogen’s glory days may yet becoming.

The trend of elemental discovery is, ofcourse, toward heavy elements—elementswith shorter lifetimes than their lighter breth-ren. A relatively more recent element that isbuilding its reputation is plutonium. Scientistsclaim that plutonium is man-made, elevatingman’s status to that of Creator. Regardless ofthe claim, this element from its infancy causedsuch havoc that on several occasions it threat-ened to destroy all living things on the earththereby claiming its dominance over the entireelemental family.

Pioneering scientists gave the name“actinide” to a family of heavy elements thatincludes plutonium. Almost simultaneously,human beings entered the “Nuclear Age.”It is interesting to note that the first phase ofthe Nuclear Age began with the developmentof weapons using these elements just as the“Bronze Age” may have begun with weaponsor hunting tools. The similarities are striking.The element plutonium was named after thefarthest sun-orbiting planet Pluto by itsdiscoverer Glenn Seaborg. Immediately afterits introduction the “hyperactive” plutoniumtried to assert its superiority by launchingactions designed to ensure its dominance overall things, dead or alive. It declared waragainst all other elements.

Scientists in general like to find out thereal personality of an element. For well over50 years now, a countless number of smartpeople have probed plutonium to discover itsinner workings as well as its relationshipswith its other elemental brethren. Once in awhile during the course of an elemental ado-lescent period, we have in hand a real tempertantrum to deal with. This seems to be the casewith plutonium. Presently we seem to begroping for ways of taming plutonium forpeaceful elemental coexistence. No doubt,history will note how well we succeeded.



NewsMakers ■ NMT starts out fiscal year 1998 with a record amount of Laboratory-Directed Researchand Development (LDRD) funds, $2.76M. The projects are “Plutonium Aging: Investigation ofChanges in Weapon Alloys as a Function of Time,” Principal Investigator (PI) Barbara Cort(NMT-5); “Development of a System for Endoscopic Imaging and Spectroscopy of Pit Interiors,”PI Kirk Veirs (NMT-6); “Actinide Molecular Science: f-Electronic Structure in Synthesis,Spectroscopy, and Computation,” PI Larry Avens (NMT 6); “Hydrothermal Combustible WasteTreatment Process,” PI Laura Worl (NMT-6); “A New Paradigm in Separations: MolecularRecognition Membranes,” PI Gordon Jarvinen (NMT-6); and “Salt Recycle in Support of MoltenSalt Oxidation of 238Pu-Contaminated Combustible Waste,” PI Kevin Ramsey (NMT-9). Thethird and fifth projects are in the category of competency development (CD) and are in theirsecond and first years, respectively, of the five-year project duration.

■ Science and Technology winners for the second and final year of the Los AlamosAchievement Program are Kevin Ramsey (NMT-9), Louis Schulte (NMT-6), and Jacob Espinoza(NMT-9). This team was awarded in the area of program development for their work on aqueousscrap recovery of 238PuO2. In the past two years this team has been responsible for demonstratingto our program sponsors at DOE that Los Alamos possesses the requisite expertise to bring on-line the capability for production-scale recovery of plutonium oxide for heat sources.

■ Michael D. Diener received his Ph.D. degree in May 1997 from Rice University. His thesiswas entitled “Purification of Small Bandgap Fullerenes.” Kirk Veirs served as Diener’s mentor atLos Alamos while Diener was doing his thesis work.

TA55

LosN A T I O N A L L A B O R A T O R Y

Alamos

Los Alamos National Laboratory, an affirmative action/equal opportunity employer, is operated by the University of California for the U.S. Department of Energy under contract W-7405-ENG-36.All company names, logos, and products mentioned herein are trademarks of their respective companies. Reference to any specific company or product is not to be construed as an endorsementof said company or product by the Regents of the University of California, the United States Government, the U.S. Department of Energy, nor any of their employees. Los Alamos NationalLaboratory strongly supports academic freedom and a researcher's right to publish; as an institution, however, the Laboratory does not endorse the viewpoint of a publication or guarantee itstechnical correctness.

Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545

LALP-97-5Director of NMT: Bruce MatthewsDeputy Director: Dana C. ChristensenChief Scientist: Kyu C. KimWriter/Editor: Ann MauzyDesign and Production: Susan L. Carlson

The Actinide Research Quarterly is published quarterly to highlight recent achievements and ongoingprograms of the Nuclear Materials Technology Division. We welcome your suggestions and contributions.If you have any comments, suggestions, or contributions, you may contact us by phone, by mail, or on e-mail([email protected]). ARQ is now on the Web also. See this issue as well as back issues on-line (http://www.lanl.gov/Internal/organizations/divisions/NMT/nmtdo/AQarchive/AQindex/AQindex.html).

Nuclear Materials Technology DivisionMail Stop E500Los Alamos National LaboratoryLos Alamos, New Mexico 87545505/667-2556 FAX 505/667-7966

a u.s. department of energy laboratory t 55a the actinide ...€¦ · nuclear materials technology...

Documents