Re: AW: DOE still trying to dump contaminated nickel

[Kai Kaletsch <eic@shaw.ca>]

Susan,



Assuming that it remains politically unacceptable to recycle it, how about

sending it through a uranium mill with a nickel recovery circuit?



I don't think that there are any currently operating, but there are a couple

in the feasibility study stages. Adding tens of 1000's of tons of Ni to the

equation would probably make a big difference in the feasibility of having a

Ni recovery circuit.



Your Ni would stay out of the low-level waste dump and the Ni in the U ore

would stay out of the tailings. (Some of the high grade U deposits contain a

lot of Ni.)



Kai



----- Original Message -----

From: "Susan L Gawarecki" <loc@icx.net>

To: "RADSAFE" <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>; <franz.schoenhofer@CHELLO.AT>

Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 10:18 AM

Subject: RE: AW: DOE still trying to dump contaminated nickel





> Franz asked:

>

> > Can anybody enlighten me, of what kind the radioactive contamination is?

The

> > only contamination I can think of would be uranium isotopes. It should

not

> > be too difficult to recycle it and to separate the uranium from the

nickel.

> > As a chemist I know, that nickel and uranium behave chemically quite

> > differently.

>

> At Oak Ridge the contamination is primarily uranium; there are also

> minor amounts of technicium-99 and possibly traces of transuranics.  The

> Citizens' Advisory Panel of the Local Oversight Committee (LOC)

> researched the original recycling method and the verification process in

> depth and is satisfied that nickel can be recycled with only

> insignificant amounts of radionuclides remaining.

>

> When the process was initially proposed, the Tennessee Division of

> Radiological Health modeled the dose from a prosthetic hip made from the

> recycled nickel and specified a very conservative release level based on

> that.  The recycling subcontractor at the time, Manufacturing Sciences

> Corp, had no trouble meeting that level.

>

> Difficulties arose from the political perspective because the state's

> permit was for volumetric contamination, while the pertinent NRC

> regulations dealt only with surface contamination.  The process deals

> with volumetric contamination because the nickel is from the barriers in

> the gaseous diffusion process, and they must be melted to protect the

> top secret design and form of the nickel.

>

> The LOC would like to see recycling resume.  There is no health-based

> justification for the current moratorium, and the process will help fund

> the environmental cleanup and divert a valuable resource from being

> disposed of as low-level waste.

>

> Susan

> --

> .....................................................

> Susan L. Gawarecki, Ph.D., Executive Director

> Oak Ridge Reservation Local Oversight Committee

> 102 Robertsville Road, Suite B, Oak Ridge, TN 37830

> Toll free 888-770-3073 ~ www.local-oversight.org

> .....................................................

> ************************************************************************

> You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

> send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

> radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

> You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/

>



************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/