[ RadSafe ] RE: DU Disposal in Utah

Mon Jul 20 08:07:46 CDT 2009

At least one valid reason for conversion of the DUF6 to a uranium oxide is because the steel cylinders the DUF6 is being stored in are slowly rusting away.  Some of these cylinders date back to the 1950s and were never intended to contain the UF6 indefinitely.  Also, there is no immediate need for the DUF6, so it makes sense to convert it to a chemical form that is no longer a chemical hazard if it leaks out of the cylinder.  

There are over 50,000 cylinders, each containing approximately 28,000 pounds (12,700 kg) stored at two facilities in the U.S. awaiting conversion to U3O8.  Each cylinder must be inspected every 5 years.  Converting the material to an oxide eliminates the inspection requirement.

So, while there was a significant political component to the decision to convert the nation's DUF6 to an oxide, there were also some legitimate scientific and economic reasons.

-Jason Bolling
USEC Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On Behalf Of Franz Schönhofer
Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 8:05 AM
To: radsafe at radlab.nl
Cc: 'Roger Helbig'
Subject: AW: [ RadSafe ] DU Disposal in Utah

RADSAFErs,

I have a very simple question regarding DU. Maybe I miss some point or maybe I am simply naiv. 

Why is everybody so eager to dispose of DU? Why is much work done to convert DU-Hexafluoride into a disposable compound? Wouldn't it be better to keep it for the time, when Pu-breeders will be commercially available? It might be a commercial question, that at the time being there is enough Pu-239 available from surplus weapons that no additional Pu-239 is needed? Or is there any political question like the decision long ago in the USA not to reprocess nuclear fuel? 

My personal opinion is that the worst option of disposing it of is to dispose it in form of ammunition at the battle field.....

Best regards,

Franz

Franz Schoenhofer, PhD
MinRat i.R.
Habicherg. 31/7
A-1160 Wien/Vienna
AUSTRIA

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] Im Auftrag von Roger Helbig
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 16. Juli 2009 08:30
An: radsafe at radlab.nl
Betreff: [ RadSafe ] DU Disposal in Utah

The Utah Radiation Control Board decided to postpone voting on banning disposal of DU at Energy Solutions in Clive, Utah.

Here is an earlier article from the Salt Lake Tribune.  The reporter Judy Fahys actually seems like someone who is interested in learning and does not have her mind made up.  Some of you might want to contact her at fahys at sltrib.com  and provide some advice if there are any glaring errors in this story.

Is depleted uranium too hot for Utah site?

Environment > State Radiation Control Board has decided to look further into the question.

<mailto:fahys at sltrib.com?subject=Salt%20Lake%20Tribune:%20Is%20depleted%20ur
anium%20too%20hot%20for%20Utah%20site?> 

<mailto:fahys at sltrib.com?subject=Salt%20Lake%20Tribune:%20Is%20depleted%20ur
anium%20too%20hot%20for%20Utah%20site?> By Judy Fahys

<mailto:fahys at sltrib.com?subject=Salt%20Lake%20Tribune:%20Is%20depleted%20ur
anium%20too%20hot%20for%20Utah%20site?> The Salt Lake Tribune

Updated: 06/10/2009 03:53:35 PM MDT

Utah's Radiation Control Board will dig deeper into the long-term risks of depleted uranium before it decides whether the unusual form of low-level radioactive waste warrants a moratorium. 

But an attorney for EnergySolutions Inc. cautioned board members about legal and technical challenges they will face if they try banning depleted uranium temporarily or permanently. 

"It's a fairly high bar" for the board to justify a moratorium, said attorney James Holtkamp. 

Board members said they would rather have waited for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to wrap up its own in-depth study of how much DU, as its called, can be safely buried in a shallow disposal site like EnergySolutions' mile-square landfill in Tooele County. 

But the that federal review could take years, and DU is already piled up at government nuclear sites and an equal amount is expected from new uranium enrichment plants coming online in the next few years. NRC estimates the total needing disposal at 1.4 million tons, with just two disposal sites available to take it: EnergySolutions and a yet-to-be-opened Texas landfill.

DU in small amounts clearly falls within Class A for low-level waste, as the NRC reaffirmed a few months ago. But, because DU transforms over time to high-radon "decay" products, it actually gets more hazardous over time and peaks in danger in 1 million years. 

EnergySolutions said it has disposed of 49,000 tons of DU in the past 20 years, but that won't top the state's Class A hazard limit for at least 35,000 years. 

That's a problem for regulators. 

Do they write a law that ensures the safety of public health and the environment for 100 years? A thousand years? A million? 

"First of all, I believe the public should be protected and the environment should be protected," said board vice chair Elizabeth Goryunova, suggesting that the board had a responsibility to consider the need for a moratorium despite hassles that might be involved in imposing one. "That's absolutely a must." 

Board members will hear presentations from Energy-Solutions, the Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah and its legal advisors at its next meeting. 

"I think it behooves us in terms of our responsibility," said board member David Tripp, a University of Utah physicist. 

Vanessa Pierce of HEAL was pleased with the board's decision to take more time on the subject. HEAL requested the moratorium at the board's May meeting. 

"They're showing good due diligence," she said, "in how they are proceeding with this issue." 

fahys at sltrib.com 

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/