Abstract
In 1957 Glenn T. Seaborg conceived and advocated for the construction of the High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) and the Transuranium Processing Plant (since then renamed the Radiochemical Engineering Development Center, or REDC) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Heavily shielded hot cells, glove boxes, and laboratories allow recovery of transuranium elements produced in substantial quantities. Seaborg’s vision of HFIR and REDC producing milligram quantities of berkelium, californium, and einsteinium has been fulfilled beginning in 1966 through May 2019 with 78 production campaigns yielding a cumulative totals of 1.2 g of 249Bk, 10.2 g of 252Cf, 39 mg of 253Es, and 15 pg of 257Fm. Notably, 252Cf is a neutron source used in many industrial applications including oil exploration; process control systems for the cement industry, coal analysis, and power production; sources to start nuclear reactors and perform nondestructive materials analyses; homeland security and national defense detection devices; and medical research. Isotopes made available through transplutonium production at HFIR/REDC have enabled scientists to study the nuclear properties and reactions, chemical properties, optical properties, and solid-state properties of transplutonium elements. Long-lived isotopes have served as targets in heavy ion accelerators to produce heavier elements leading to the discovery of 104Rf, 105Db, 106Sg, 113Nh, 114Fl, 115Mc, 116Lv, 117Ts, and 118Og. This paper reviews the evolution of the processing flowsheets to produce, separate, and purify transplutonium isotopes, which have evolved over 50 years of operation at HFIR and REDC, and summarizes directions of future work to improve the efficiency of the production operations.
Funding source: U.S. Department of Energy
Acknowledgment
This manuscript has been authored by UT-Battelle, LLC, under Contract No. DE-AC05-00OR22725 with the US Department of Energy. The United States Government retains and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the United States Government retains a nonexclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, worldwide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript, or allow others to do so, for United States Government purposes.
The authors thank the staff members at HFIR and REDC for their diligence in producing and separating the transplutonium isotopes. The authors also acknowledge support from the US DOE Office of Science, Office of Nuclear Physics, Isotope Program, and Low Energy Nuclear Physics Program.
Author contribution: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.
Research funding: The research was funded by U.S. Department of Energy under the grant DE-AC05-00OR22725.
Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding this article.
References
1. Subcommittee on nuclear and radiochemistry. Committee on Chemical Sciences; Assembly of Mathematical and Physical Sciences; National Research Council: A Review of the Accomplishments and Promise of U.S. Transplutonium Research – 1940-1981; Keller, O., Wymer, R., Eds.; National Academies Press: Washington, D.C., 1982.Search in Google Scholar
2. Seaborg, G. The synthetic actinides: from discovery to manufacture. In Modern Alchemy. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission: Washington, D.C., 1994; pp. 227–247.10.1142/9789812795953_0046Search in Google Scholar
3. Osborne-Lee, I., Alexander, C. Californium-252: A Remarkable Versatile Radioisotope. ORNL/TM-12706; Oak Ridge National Laboratory: Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 1995.10.2172/205871Search in Google Scholar
4. Roberto, J., Alexander, C., Boll, R., Burns, J., Ezold, J., Felker, L., Hogle, S., Rykaczewski, K. Actinide targets for the synthesis of super-heavy elements. Nucl. Phys. A 2015, 944, 99–116; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2015.06.009.Search in Google Scholar
5. Roberto, J., Rykaczewski, K. Discovery of element 117: super-heavy elements and the “Island of stability”. Separ. Sci. Technol. 2018, 53, 1813–1819; https://doi.org/10.1080/01496395.2017.1290658.Search in Google Scholar
6. Bigelow, J., Corbett, B., King, L., McGuire, S., Sims, T. Production of transplutonium elements in the high flux isotope reactor. In Actinide Separations. ACS Symposium Series; Navraitl, J., Schulz, W., Eds.; American Chemical Society, Vol. 161, 1981.10.1021/bk-1981-0161.ch001Search in Google Scholar
7. Overback, W., Ice, C., Dessauer, G. Production of Transplutonium Elements at Savannah River, DP-1000; Savannah River Laboratory: Aiken, South Carolina, 1965.10.2172/4578949Search in Google Scholar
8. Eubanks, I., Burney, G. Curium Process Development. DP-1009; Savannah River Laboratory: Aiken, South Carolina, 1966.Search in Google Scholar
9. Orth, D., McKibben, J., Prout, W., Scotten, W. Isolation of transplutonium elements. Proceedings of the International Solvent Extraction Conference; Society of Chemical Industry: London, Vol. I, 1971; pp. 534–555.Search in Google Scholar
10. Harbour, R., Ice, C., Hale, W., Lowe, J. Development of chemical processes and equipment to recover curium-244 and californium-252. Processing of 50 Years of Excellence in Science and Engineering at the Savannah River Site Conference, WSRC-MS-2000-0061; Aiken: South Carolina, 2000.Search in Google Scholar
11. Robinson, S. S., Benker, D., Patton, B., Phelps, C. Mark-18A (Mk-18A) Target Processing at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. ORNL/TM-2015/577; Oak Ridge National Laboratory: Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 2015.Search in Google Scholar
12. Hogle, S., Alexander, C., Burns, J., Ezold, J., Maldonado, G. Sensitivity studies and experimental evaluation for optimizing transcurium isotope production. Nucl. Sci. Eng. 2017, 185, 473–483; https://doi.org/10.1080/0025639.2016.1272973.Search in Google Scholar
13. Collins, E., Benker, D., Chattin, F., Felker, L., Bailey, P., Vedder, R., Del Cul, G., Spencer, B., Jubin, R. Spent nuclear fuel RDD&D experience, accomplishments, and capability at ORNL. American Nuclear Society Global/Top Fuel Conference: Seattle, Washington; pp. 22–26 September, ans.org/store/item - 700433, 2019.Search in Google Scholar
14. King, L., Collins, E., Summary of the Campaign During February 1969 to Process Six Irradiated HFIR Targets in the Transuranium Processing Plant, ORNL-TM-3343; Oak Ridge National Laboratory: Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 1971.10.2172/4740165Search in Google Scholar
15. Collins, E., Bigelow, J. Chemical process engineering in the transuranium processing plant. Proc. 24th Conf. Remote Syst. Technol.; American Nuclear Society, 1976; pp. 130–139.Search in Google Scholar
16. Bigelow, J., Chattin, F., Vaughen, V. Plant practice in solvent extraction processing of alpha-emitting nuclides of high specific activity. Proceedings of the International Solvent Extraction Conference; Society of Chemical Industry: London, Vol. I, 1971; pp. 534–555.Search in Google Scholar
17. Baybarz, R., Weaver, B., Kinser, H. Isolation of transplutonium elements by tertiary amine extraction. Nucl. Sci. Eng. 1963, 17, 457–462; https://doi.org/10.13182/nse63-a17399.Search in Google Scholar
18. King, L. Safety Analysis for the Transuranium Processing Plant, Building 7920. ORNL-3954; Oak Ridge National Laboratory: Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 1968.10.2172/4530361Search in Google Scholar
19. Baybarz, R., Knauer, J., Orr, P. Final Isolation of the Transplutonium Elements from the Twelve Campaigns Conducted at TRU during the Period August 1967 – December 1971. ORNL-4672; Oak Ridge National Laboratory: Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 1973.10.2172/4533114Search in Google Scholar
20. Hobart, D., Peterson, J. Berkelium. The Chemistry of the Actinide and Transactinide Elements, 4th ed. Morss, L., Edelstein, J, Fuger, J., Eds.; Springer: The Netherlands, Vol. 2; pp. 1444–1498, 2010.10.1007/978-94-007-0211-0_10Search in Google Scholar
21. Bigelow, J., Collins, E., King, L. The “Cleanex” process: a versatile solvent extraction process for recovery and purification of lanthanides, americium, and curium. In Actinide Separations. ACS Symposium Series, No. 117, Chap. 11; Navraitl, J., Schulz, W., Eds.; American Chemical Society, 1979; pp. 147–155.10.1021/bk-1980-0117.ch011Search in Google Scholar
22. Hulet, E., Gutmacher, R., Coops, M. Group separation of the actinides from the lanthanides by anion exchange. J. Inorg. Nucl. Chem. 1961, 17, 350–360; https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1902(61)80161-9.Search in Google Scholar
23. Collins, E., Benker, D., Chattin, F., Orr, P., Ross, R. Multigram group separation of actinide and lanthanide elements by LiCl-based anion exchange. In Actinide Separations. ACS Symposium Series; Navraitl, J., Schulz, W., Eds.; American Chemical Society, Vol. 161, 1981.10.1021/bk-1981-0161.ch009Search in Google Scholar
24. Campbell, D. The application of pressurized ion exchange to separations of transplutonium elements. In Actinide Separations. ACS Symposium Series; Navraitl, J., Schulz, W., Eds.; American Chemical Society, Vol. 161, 1981.10.1021/bk-1981-0161.ch012Search in Google Scholar
25. King, L., Bigelow, J., Collins, E. Experience in the separation and purification of transplutonium elements in the transuranium processing plant at Oak Ridge national laboratory. In Actinide Separations. ACS Symposium Series; Navraitl, J., Schulz, W., Eds.; American Chemical Society, Vol. 161, 1981.10.1021/bk-1981-0161.ch008Search in Google Scholar
26. Choppin, G., Harvey, B., Thompson, S. A new eluant for the separation of the actinide elements. J. Inorg. Nucl. Chem. 1956, 2, 66–68; https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1902(56)80105-x.Search in Google Scholar
27. Benker, D., Chattin, F., Collins, E., Knauer, J., Orr, P., Goss, R., Wiggins, J. Chromatographic cation exchange separation of decigram quantities of californium and other transplutonium elements. In Actinide Separations. ACS Symposium Series; Navraitl, J., Schulz, W., Eds.; American Chemical Society, Vol. 161, 1981.10.1021/bk-1981-0161.ch010Search in Google Scholar
28. Alexander, C., Collins, E., Benker, D. Heavy element production and recovery at the Oak Ridge national laboratory; Glenn, T., Ed.; Seaborg Nuclear Chemistry Award Symposium, 237th American Chemical Society National Meeting, Division of Nuclear Chemistry & Technology Presentation NUCL, Vol. 11: Salt Lake City, Utah, 2009.Search in Google Scholar
29. Garrison, J., Benker, D., Burns, J., Ezold, J., Weaver, R. Campaign 75 – Production of Californium-252 and the Recovery of Curium Feed Material at the Radiochemical Engineering Development Center. ORNL/TM-2014/543; Oak Ridge National Laboratory; Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 2015.Search in Google Scholar
30. Ezold, J., Hogle, S. Oak Ridge national laboratory’s isotope program unique and dynamic. American Chemical Society Spring Meeting 2019, Division of Nuclear Chemistry & Technology Presentation NUCL 35: Orlando, Florida, April 2019.Search in Google Scholar
31. Delmau, L., Dryman, J., Benker, D. Extraction of Trivalent Actinides and Lanthanides from Californium Campaign Rework Solution Using TODGA-based Solvent Extraction System. ORNL/TM-2017/317; Oak Ridge National Laboratory: Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 2017.10.2172/1394273Search in Google Scholar
32. Benker, D., Boll, R., Dyer, t., Ezold, J., Phelps, C., Phillips, K., Porter, C., Rayburn, J., Riley, F., Sims, N.,et al. Separation and Purification of Berkelium-249 and Einsteinium-254. ORNL/TM-2019/1283; Oak Ridge National Laboratory: Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 2019.Search in Google Scholar
33. Hogle, S., Boll, R., Ezold, J., Bennett, K. Production of heavy actinides for support of super heavy element discovery. Symposium in Celebration of the Centennial of Rutherford’s First Nuclear Reaction. American Chemical Society Fall 2019 National Meeting, Division of Nuclear Chemistry & Technology Presentation NUCL 41: San Diego, California, 2019.Search in Google Scholar
34. Burch, W. D., Bigelow, J. E., King, L. J. Transuranium Processing Plant Semi-annual Report of Production, Status, and Plans Period Ending December 31, 1971. ORNL-4767; Oak Ridge National Laboratory: Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 1972.10.2172/4650801Search in Google Scholar
35. Robinson, S., Patton, B., Benker, D., Phelps, C. Lessons learned from processing mark-18A targets at Oak Ridge national laboratory. Proceedings of the 57th Annual Meeting of the Institute of Nuclear Materials Management: Atlanta, Georgia, 2016; pp. 1752–1761.Search in Google Scholar
36. Patton, B. D., Benker, D., Collins, E., Robinson, S., Warburton, J. Proceedings of mark-42 target materials for recovery of americium and curium. Processing of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Institute of Nuclear Materials Management: Atlanta, Georgia, 2013.Search in Google Scholar
37. Iris, E., Reas, W. The purex process, a solvent extraction reprocessing method for irradiated uranium.HW-49483A, AEC Res. Develop. Rep. 1957.10.2172/4341712Search in Google Scholar
38. Weaver, B., Kappelmann, R. TALSPEAK: A New Methods of Separating Americium and Curium from the Lanthanides by Extraction from an Aqueous Solution of an Aminopolyacetic Acid Complex with a Monoacidic Organophosphate or Phosphonate. ORNL-3559; Oak Ridge National Laboratory: Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 1964.Search in Google Scholar
39. DePaoli, D., Benker, D., Delmau, L., Sherman, S., Riley, F., Bailey, P., Collins, E., Wham, R. Process Development for Plutonium-238 Production at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Nuclear and Emerging Technologies for Space; American Nuclear Society Topical Meeting: Richland Washington, E-print: http://anstd.ans.org/February, 2019.Search in Google Scholar
40. DePaoli, D., Benker, D., Delmau, L., Sherman, S., Riley, F., Bailey, P., Collins, E., Wham, R. Status Summary of Chemical Processing Development in Plutonium-238 Supply Program. ORNL/TM-2017/363; Oak Ridge National Laboratory: Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 2017.10.2172/1430620Search in Google Scholar
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
