Re: UF6

["Charles Meyer" <cmeyer@brc1.tdh.state.tx.us>]

Date:          Sun, 11 Aug 96 22:09:46 -0500
Reply-to:      radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
From:          Ccja@aol.com
To:            Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
Subject:       Re: UF6

 Anyway, if it
were separate, why not just neutralize/stabilize it chemically/physically and
dispose of it as NORM? Disposal was the original problem presented, I think.
This is all speculation on my part. No doubt some hugely knowledgeable person
will come online tomorrow and politely inform me that I'm all wet.

All the hugely knoweldgeable people were too busy to answer so its up 
to the trench workers, yet again.  It might be better if the the 
U-234 and the DU ( mostly U-238) could be disposed of as NORM, but 
NRC and, therefore, Agreement States count it as source material, if 
it's over 0.05% by weight and, therefore it becomes low-level 
radioactive waste.  And at least a year or two ago at a low-level rad 
waste siting workshop in White Flint, the NRC staff presented 
concerns about a (radium-226?) spike at 20,000 years after closure.  
So if things go the way they usually do, the stuff may be greater 
than class C, or high level rad waste before it's all over.

             ***************************************
               Russ Meyer                            
               Internet: cmeyer@brc1.tdh.state.tx.us 
               tel: 512/834-6688                                                    
               fax: 512/834-6654
             ***************************************