Fwd: [ RadSafe ] RE: DU Disposal in Utah

Mon Jul 20 11:15:21 CDT 2009

Anfang der weitergeleiteten E-Mail:

> Von: marco bähler <m.c.baehler at bluewin.ch>
> Datum: 20. Juli 2009 18:03:43 GMT+02:00
> An: "Bolling, Jason E" <bollingje at Ports.USEC.com>
> Betreff: Re: [ RadSafe ] RE: DU Disposal in Utah
>
> thankyou jason!

> for finally hitting the nail, as we call it.
> there is also an ethical reason

> marco
>
>
>
> Am 20.07.2009 um 15:07 schrieb Bolling, Jason E:
>
>> 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/
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/
>