Current Issues: Waste Management of Depleted Uranium (last updated 17 Sep 2003) Contents: Depleted Uranium Trade Tails upgrading (re-enrichment) U.S. DOE Depleted UF6 Management Program Storage of depleted uranium Depleted uranium storage facilities   · Depleted Uranium Trade DU exports of Urenco's Gronau enrichment facility disclosed (Germany) USEC request to import (!) Depleted Uranium to the U.S. Depleted Uranium Counterweights Melted into Aluminum Ingots Import of DU counterweights from United Kingdom to USA for land burial in Texas Starmet requests license amendment to import more DU waste from United Kingdom U.S. NRC Petition for Rulemaking concerning control of disused DU counterweights DU exports of Urenco's Gronau enrichment facility disclosed (Germany) Urenco not only exports depleted uranium hexafluoride to Russia for re-enrichment (see details): the answer of the German Federal Government to a parliamentary question revealed that depleted UF6 from Urenco's Gronau enrichment plant also is exported to a number of other facilities across Europe: Exports of depleted uranium in the form of UF6 to destinations other than Russia [kg U] Year Cogema, Pierrelatte BNFL, Capenhurst BNFL, Springfields Westinghouse Atom AB, Västerås 1998 251,188 125,645 8,504   1999 251,181 83,763     2000 100,354 66,976   17,925 2001, 1st Q. 150,570       [Source: Bundestags-Drucksache 14/6692 (July 16, 2001) (PDF)] The Cogema Pierrelatte (France) facility could be "Usine W" which converts depleted UF6 to U3O8. The BNFL Capenhurst (UK) facility is a former diffusion enrichment plant, where BNFL now operates a "uranic storage facility", where DU obviously is stored in the form of UF6. The BNFL Springfields (UK) facility comprises, among others, a reconversion facility to uranium metal and a fuel production plant for uranium oxide fuel. The Westinghouse Atom AB Västerås (Sweden) facility is a fuel production plant for uranium oxide fuel. (see also: Depleted Uranium Processing and Storage Facilities) The government's answer contains no mention of the purpose of these exports nor the further fate of the exported DU. USEC request to import (!) Depleted Uranium to the U.S. While the U.S. DOE is planning to spend hundreds of millions of Dollars to get rid of a stockpile of 739,000 metric tonnes of depleted uranium hexafluoride (DUF6), the United States Enrichment Corporation (USEC Inc. ) is requesting to import depleted uranium. In a letter dated May 18, 2001, USEC presented its plans to import depleted uranium (DU), under the provisions of a general license. USEC is requesting that NRC confirm that DU can be imported as source material, as opposed to radioactive waste. (a copy of the letter can be obtained from ADAMS under Accession Number: ML012290251). This letter includes the Depleted Uranium Management Plans for Portsmouth and Paducah dated Sept. 15, 2000, containing the following balance for USEC's DU: Table 1. Estimated amount of depleted uranium (DU) generated by USEC and its disposition, in metric tons uranium (MTU) for PORTS and PGDP combined. Year DU Generated by USEC DU Transfers to Starmet CMI DU Transfers to DOE under 6/30/98 agreement(3) Other DU to DOE(2) Estimated net cumulative USEC DU July 1, 1993- June 30, 1997 67,874 0 0 (67,874) 0 FY1998 11,554 0 0 (11,554) 0 FY1999 13,193 (1,085) (820) (373) 10,915 FY2000 11,708 (1,660) (3,367) 0 17,596 FY2001 7,107 (1,355) (2,400) 0 20,948 FY2002 8,881 0 (2,400) 0 27,429 FY2003 8,825 0 (3,800) 0 32,454 July 1, 2003- Dec.31, 2003(1) 4,510 0 (3,887) 0 33,077 Totals 133,652 (4,100) (16,674) (79,801) 33,077 Notes: 1. Projections are provided through current NRC Certification of Compliance expiration date, December 31, 2003. 2. DOE retains liability for depleted uranium generated prior to USEC's privatization (July 28, 1998) per USEC Privatization Act (Public Law 104-134, Sec 3109, paragraph (a)(3)). 3. Total to be transferred to DOE is the quantity in 2026 48G cylinders, estimated to total approximately 16,674 MTU. [USEC paid over US$50 million for this transfer.]   On Aug. 22, 2001, USEC met with NRC staff to make its case that DU could be brought into the U.S. under a general license as source material. Citing U.S. regulations and a recent French court decision, USEC officials said DU should not be considered a waste. (NRC Meeting Notice Aug. 8, 2001; Platts Nuclear News Flashes Aug. 22, 2001) At the meeting, USEC indicated that the total potential quantity is about 5,000 metric tonnes of DU. One potential use would be as feed material for its Silex advanced laser enrichment process. (Nuclear Fuel Sep 3, 2001) A follow-up meeting between USEC and NRC was held on October 3, 2001. In this meeting, USEC withdrew its previous request. USEC now would like the NRC to consider an application for a specific license without having to make a determination of whether or not DU is considered to be radioactive waste. (NRC memorandum Oct. 10, 2001) In a letter to USEC, NRC stated on Jan. 18, 2002, that an import license can only be issued if an acceptable disposal approach is provided, including, for example, an agreement with DOE or a contract with a licensed Low-Level Radioactive Waste disposal site, accepting the material for disposal. Moreover, "for purposes of the issuance of a specific license to import DUF6, this material would be classified as waste since there is not a clear foreseeable use." (emphasis added) Depleted Uranium Counterweights Melted into Aluminum Ingots > see extra page Import of DU counterweights from United Kingdom to USA for land burial in Texas > see extra page Starmet requests license amendment to import more DU waste from United Kingdom Starmet CMI holds NRC Import License No. IW008 to import 80,000 kgs of depleted uranium of depleted uranium metal and oxide in the form of machined swarf/turnings and solid cylindrical pieces from the United Kingdom to its Barnwell, South Carolina facility. The point of origin is the British Ministry of Defense Royal Ordnance Facility in the United Kingdom. The authorized end use is for recycle of the depleted uranium and conversion for production of radiation shielding products. By letter dated September 28, 2000, Starmet requests an increase of the amount of DU to 250,000 kgs, and the addition of the AEA Technologies Harwell facility as a supplier. U.S. NRC Petition for Rulemaking concerning control of disused DU counterweights > see extra page   · Tails upgrading (re-enrichment) Upgrading of French enrichment tails in Russia Tails upgrading: world's largest uranium "mine"? South African enrichment tails delivered to Russia for upgrading Upgrading of Urenco's enrichment tails in Russia See also: Uranium Enrichment Tails Upgrading Upgrading of French enrichment tails in Russia Cogéma sends "a very small percentage" of the enrichment tails of its Eurodif plant to Russia for re-enrichment. (Nuclear Fuel Dec. 28, 1998) Cogema ships about 7,000 MTU [metric tonnes U] of tails (at an assay of about 0.35%) to Russia each year, according to an RWE Nukem analysis. In addition to 1,100 MTU of natural uranium, Cogema also receives back about 130 MT of low-enriched uranium at an assay of about 3.5% U-235. (Nuclear Fuel May 12, 2003) Tails upgrading: world's largest uranium "mine"? "Minatom/Tenex has an estimated 9-million SWU/year of enrichment production capacity in excess of Russia's needs. If Russia uses the 9-million SWU to strip tails from Urenco and other Western enrichers with 0.30% uranium-235 to 0.20% U-235, it would produce 29 million lb of uranium oxide (U3O8) (11,180 tonnes U) per year. It is likely, according to George White, a consultant with Uranium Exchange Co., the Russians have contracted with Urenco to strip tails from 0.3% to 0.25% U-235. But then the Russians probably stripped the tails further, to 0.12 U-235, to produce uranium for their own account and selling it, White suggested. Stripping of uranium tails in this way would reduce the need for natural uranium by about 30%." (WISE NEWS COMMUNIQUE 502, November 13, 1998) If Russia used its excess 9 million SWU/year to strip Urenco's tails in the described way from 0.3% to 0.12% U-235, 7290 tonnes/year of uranium of natural isotope composition would be recovered, 4680 tonnes of which on Russia's own account. > See also: Uranium Enrichment Tails Upgrading · Uranium Enrichment Tails Upgrading Calculator South African enrichment tails delivered to Russia for upgrading From a press release of Edlow of June 16, 1998: " Using a chartered ocean vessel, Edlow International Company delivered 140 cylinders of depleted uranium to Russia on May 29, 1998. Shipped in 48 inch cylinders, the shipment consisted of 461,871 kilograms uranium hexafluoride (UF6). Originating in South Africa, the shipment is significant as it represents half of South Africa's depleted UF6 inventory. The remainder of the country's depleted UF6 will be shipped to Russia at a later date. This shipment was performed by Edlow International under contract to Edlow Resources Ltd. (an Edlow family company) in connection with Edlow Resource's purchase of 2,000 tonnes of depleted UF6 from the Atomic Energy Corporation of South Africa (AEC). The AEC has no remaining use for the material, as it closed its enrichment facility - the Z plant - in March 1995. The depleted UF6 will be re-enriched in Russia and the resulting enriched product will be sold to electricity utilities for use in commercial nuclear power generation. As such, the transaction represents a positive use of what is often regarded as a waste product." > See also: Uranium Enrichment Tails Upgrading Upgrading of Urenco's enrichment tails in Russia The centrifuge enrichment plant of Minatom's Ural Electrochemical Integrated Plant (UEChK, formerly Sverdlovsk-44) at Novouralsk near Ekaterinburg is now enriching tails for Urenco. The tails are enriched to a natural uranium equivalent level of 0.71% U- 235. In 1996, more than 6000 metric tonnes of tails were upgraded. [Nuclear Fuel, October 6, 1997] In 1998, 2,228 metric tonnes of tails were exported to Russia from Urenco's Gronau (Germany) plant alone [Nuclear Fuel, Feb. 21, 2000]. According to Euratom Supply Agency's Annual Report 1998 (p.10), "Re-enrichment of western origin tails in Russia [...] provides a supply in the order of 1 000 to 2 000 tU (natural uranium equivalent) per year." If Scenario 1 is assumed for the mass balance, this means that 13,600 to 27,200 t depleted UF6 would be shipped to Russia per year - two to four times the amount reported for 1996. As a by-product from the re-enrichment of this amount of material, 12,100 to 24,200 t of secondary tails would be produced per year. For the production of the above amount of depleted UF6, Urenco would have to expend a separative work of 5.9 to 11.8 million SWU - much more than its present capacity of 3.4 million SWU. It can, therefore, be concluded that Urenco is currently in the process of drawing down its depleted UF6 inventory at high pressure. According to Euratom Supply Agency's Annual Report 1999 (p.10), "In 1999, deliveries of re-enriched tails to EU utilities represented some 800 tU." According to Euratom Supply Agency's Annual Report 2000 (p.9), "Re-enrichment in Russia for EU enrichers of western origin tails continued in 2000. Deliveries of re-enriched tails to EU utilities represented some 400 tU under purchasing contracts plus 700 tU acquired through exchanges. The Agency concluded 4 new supply contracts for the delivery of about 600 tU as re-enriched tails over the period 2001-2005." According to Euratom Supply Agency's Annual Report 2001 (p.17), "some 1050 [tU] were delivered to EU utilities following the re-enrichment in Russia of tails on behalf of European enrichers", and "3 new supply contracts for the delivery of 760 tU as re-enriched tails in 2002-2004 have been concluded". "A report presented earlier this year [2003] at a World Nuclear Association working group meeting by an RWE Nukem analyst, suggested that Urenco ships about 7,000 metric tons (MT) U of tails (average assay 0.30% U-235) to Russia for re-enrichment every year and receives back about 1,100 MTU of natural uranium." (Nuclear Fuel May 12, 2003) German exports of depleted uranium (kg U as UF6) to Russia for re-enrichment: Year Destination Total Novouralsk Seversk Angarsk 1991 - 1995 No exports 1996   502,395 1997   2,404,585 1998 1,893,100 201,069 133,956 2,228,125 1999 1,574,520 569,312 284,777 2,428,608 2000 1,305,896 200,740 251,273 1,757,909 2001, 1st Q.   284,569 133,863 418,433 [Source: Bundestags-Drucksachen 14/5638 (March 23, 2001) (PDF), 14/6692 (July 16, 2001) (PDF)] > See also Uranium Enrichment Tails Upgrading Calculator According to the answer of the German government (BT-Drs. 13/8810 ) to a parliamentary question of the Greens, the new tails produced during this upgrading process remain in Russia. Since the upgrading process results only in a minor reduction of the amount of tails, Urenco's main purpose of the deal seems to be to get rid of its waste management problem. The Federal Government, however, stresses the results of an investigation it has conducted together with the governments of the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. The study has approved that the re-enrichment in Russia is not connected to a management of residues violating international rules, standards, or obligations. But, this view must be questioned, since the tails upgrading does not make an economic sense, if the recovery of the uranium were its only purpose: under current market conditions, the recovered uranium would be 68% more expensive than fresh uranium, and Urenco would incur a loss of $1700 per t UF6 sent to Minatom. *) The re-enrichment does, however, make sense, if the avoided disposal cost for the tails in the proposed Gorleben HLW deposit are taken into consideration (the German LLW deposits don't allow for storage of such amounts of uranium). The excess upgrading cost over the market value of the uranium recovered would be about 10% only of the storage cost at Gorleben, and Urenco would make a profit of $17300 per t UF6 sent to Minatom. *) *) These figures are calculated on current market prices, a product assay of 3.6% (PWR grade) and a tails assay of 0.3% at Urenco [IAEA 1996 Red Book], and an assumed tails assay of 0.25% at Minatom. The upgrading process would reduce the amount of tails by 10% only under these conditions. The storage cost for a 200-liter barrel at the Gorleben HLW deposit is estimated at 15,000 DM; the volume needed for disposal of the tails as UO2 after cementation in barrels is estimated at 550 litre/t UO2. > See also: Uranium Enrichment Tails Upgrading   · U.S. DOE Depleted UF6 Management Program Jackhammers as a sink for depleted uranium? For tests, U.S. DOE prefers tungsten as substitute, though... Regulatory issues of DU use in civilian products U.S. DOE Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride Conversion Facilities project DU semiconductors to solve DU waste problem? U.S. Department of Energy releases Draft DUF6 Materials Use Roadmap U.S. DOE study sees no problem in near-surface disposal of depleted uranium at Nevada Test Site Nuclear Metals, Inc., receives contract award for pilot scale production of depleted uranium aggregate U.S.DOE: Long-Term Management and Use of Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride Jackhammers as a sink for depleted uranium? For tests, U.S. DOE prefers tungsten as substitute, though... DOE has investigated the possible use of depleted uranium (DU) in jackhammer pistons. However, tests were performed with a tungsten alloy as a substitute for DU: "Although tungsten alloy is much more expensive than DU, it is not radioactive and hence is easier to fabricate and to test." (!) The penetration rate in a concrete slab was 41% faster with the tungsten alloy piston than with the standard steel piston. Demonstration of jackhammer incorporating depleted uranium, by Fischer, L E; Hoard, R W; Carter, D L; Saculla, M D; Wilson, G V; U.S. Department of Energy, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Report No. UCRL-ID-138923, April 1, 2000, 18p > Download full report (2M PDF, LLNL) Regulatory issues of DU use in civilian products In a recent report U.S. DOE analyzes the regulatory issues connected to proposed new uses of depleted uranium for civilian applications, such as catalysts (for destroying volatile organic compounds in off-gases from industrial processes and for hydrodesulfurization[HDS] of petroleum fuels), semiconductors (for fabricating integrated circuits, solar cells, or thermoelectric devices, especially if such articles are expected to have service in hostile environments), and electrodes (for service in solid oxide fuel cells, in photoelectrochemical cells used to produce hydrogen, and in batteries). The report finds that "existing regulations would require most users of products and devices deploying new DU uses to obtain specific source material licenses from the NRC or an Agreement State. This situation would not be improved by pending regulatory modifications. Thus, deployment of new DU uses may be limited because persons having no previous experience with NRC or Agreement State regulations may be hesitant to incur the costs and inconvenience of regulatory compliance, unless using a DU-containing product or device offers a substantial economic benefit over nonradioactive alternatives." As a consequence, the report proposes to perform risk estimates of the new DU uses, to justify - if found to be "acceptable" - adding new exemptions or general licenses to the NRC regulations. In the end, this would allow for dispersal of DU in radiologically uncontrolled areas. Regulation of new depleted uranium uses, by N. L. Ranek, U.S. DOE Report No. ANL/EAD/TM/02-5, Jan. 2003, 52 p. > Download full report (160k PDF) U.S. DOE Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride Conversion Facilities project DOE releases transportation plan for upcoming uranium hexafluoride shipments to planned conversion plant On April 29, 2003, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) released a transportation plan that provides details on plans to ship approximately 2,800 uranium hexafluoride cylinders from the DOE’s East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP) to Portsmouth, Ohio. The majority of the material to be shipped to Portsmouth consists of depleted uranium hexafluoride (DUF6) that is derived from past uranium enrichment operations at ETTP. At Portsmouth, the DUF6 will be converted to a more stable form for future disposition. The plan provides information on the upcoming shipments, including details on emergency preparedness training activities being performed in coordination with the States of Tennessee, Kentucky, and Ohio. DOE plans to begin shipments in 2003 with shipments to be completed by 2005. The remaining cylinders located at the East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP) will be shipped after 2005 under a separate transportation plan to be developed. > View DOE release April 29, 2003 > Download Transportation Plan for the Transport of ANSI N14.1-Compliant UF6 Cylinders from the East Tennessee Technology Park to the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Years 2003 through 2005, BJC/OR-1432 , April 2003 (2.7MB PDF) DOE informs the public of the change in the approach for the NEPA review for the DUF6 conversion projects Federal Register: April 28, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 81) p. 22368-22369 "[...] In light of Public Law 107-206 , and DOE's award of the contract to Uranium Disposition Services, DOE reevaluated the appropriate scope of its NEPA review and decided to prepare two separate EIS's, one for the plant proposed for the Paducah site and a second for the Portsmouth site. The proposed alternatives to be considered in each EIS would focus primarily on where the conversion facilities will be sited at the respective sites, and a no action alternative. DOE will also consider impacts arising from shipment of ETTP cylinders for conversion to each site." Comments received by May 30, 2003, will be considered in the preparation of the draft EISs. DOE awards DUF6 conversion contract The US Department of Energy awarded to Uranium Disposition Services (UDS) a contract valued at $558-million to build two facilities to convert depleted uranium hexafluoride at three DOE sites to the more stable form of U3O8, which will then be suitable for final disposal. UDS -- a venture of Framatome ANP Inc, Duratek Federal Services Inc, and Burns and Roe Enterprises Inc -- will build conversion facilities at Paducah, Kentucky, and Portsmouth, Ohio. The contract also calls for the venture to operate the facilities for five years. DOE has some 700,000 metric tons of DUF6 currently in storage. It is estimated that conversion of all that material will take about 25 years. (Platts 29 Aug 2002) > View DOE release Aug. 29, 2002 DOE issues new schedule for DUF6 conversion facilities project The draft EIS for the DUF6 Conversion Facilities is scheduled to be published by September 2002, and the final EIS is scheduled for December 2002. (DOE June 2002) Decision on DUF6 conversion project deferred The contract for the acquisition of facilities and services for conversion of depleted Uranium Hexafluoride (DUF6) has not been awarded. The Department is reviewing its requirements for the number and location of conversion facilities to be constructed. The Department anticipates making this decision in early 2003 and will then continue the acquisition process. (DOE Apr. 8, 2002) U.S. DOE Releases Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride Conversion Facilities DOE invites public comments on the proposed scope of the DUF6 conversion facilities EIS. The department has extended the written comment period an additional 46 days. To ensure consideration, comments now had to be postmarked by January 11, 2002. > View DOE Release Oct. 30, 2001 > View Federal Register Notice, Sep 18, 2001 > See also Federal Register Notice, May 7, 2001 Background documents (DOE EAD): Depleted UF6 Conversion EIS Public Scoping Meeting Materials NEPA Compliance: DUF6 Conversion EIS News and Events U.S. Department of Energy Issues Request for Proposals to Build DUF6 Conversion Plants in Ohio and Kentucky The Department of Energy issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the design, construction and operation of new facilities at uranium enrichment plant sites in Ohio and Kentucky. Once built, these facilities will convert the federal government's large inventory of depleted uranium hexafluoride (DUF6) to a more stable form and prepare the material for disposal or potential reuse. Proposals must be submitted by Feb.1, 2001, and the contract is expected to be awarded during the summer of 2001. > View DOE release Oct. 31, 2000 > Download Request for Proposals U.S. DOE Seeks Industry Input into Plan to Convert Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride to a Safer Form "The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today issued a solicitation seeking private sector solutions for converting tons of depleted uranium hexafluoride stored at government facilities in Kentucky, Ohio, and Tennessee to a safer form. The solicitation for 'Expressions of Interest,' asks private industry to submit innovative strategies for transforming the 700,000 metric tons of depleted uranium hexafluoride (DUF6) to a safer, more environmentally benign state. The DOE is seeking ideas from industry to help it construct the conversion plants at Paducah, Kentucky and Portsmouth, Ohio, well before the construction deadline of January 31, 2004." (DOE News Release March 5, 1999 ) > View the complete solicitation of Expressions of Interest > Download DOE's Final Plan for the Conversion of Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride , July 1999 (362k PDF format). > View related DOE press release of July 6, 1999 > View DOE's Preconceptual Design Studies and Cost Data of Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride Conversion Plants (July 26, 1999). On March 23, 2000, DOE announced a deferral of the plans for construction of the conversion facilities, to allow for an assesmment of the possible presence of transuranics such as plutonium and neptunium in its DU stockpile. (DOE release March 23, 2000 ) Depleted Uranium Recycling Bill Signed (USA) On July 21, 1998, President Clinton signed legislation that will provide $400 million to build uranium-recycling plants in Ohio and Kentucky. The new plants will treat and recycle depleted uranium, getting rid of some of the 40,000 leftover uranium cylinders that are stacked around the Piketon and Paducah sites. The cylinders represent a liability of more than $4 billion, according to the Department of Energy. Construction must start no later than Jan. 31, 2004, but it could begin as early as the end of next year. (from AP July 21, 1998) > Public Law 105-204: View Text · Download PDF DU semiconductors to solve DU waste problem? The following DOE presentation gives an overview of the research being conducted on possible uses of depleted uranium. In addition to uses discussed earlier, such as radiation shielding, catalysts, etc. it also mentions the possible use of DU as a replacement for silicon in semiconductors: Haire, M.J. and R.R. Price 2001. "Technical Review of Depleted Uranium Uses Research and Development Program," Office of Environmental Management, Washington, DC USA, U.S. Department of Energy, 01/16/2001. > Download full presentation (1.9MB PDF) excerpt: "Task Justification Semiconductor devices that are based on uranium oxides appear possible and could offer significant improved performance compared to conventional Si, Ge, and GaAs materials If depleted uranium (DU) were used instead of silicon for semiconductive devices, 42,000 t/y of DU would be consumed. Approximately 20,000 t/y of DU is produced each year as tails from uranium enrichment operations Objective is to develop order of magnitudes improvements, new markets, and consume entire DU inventory" A first UO3 Schottky diode has been fabricated. For technical details, see also: Uranium Oxide Semiconductors (DOE ANL EAD) U.S. Department of Energy releases Draft DUF6 Materials Use Roadmap The Department of Energy (DOE) has issued a draft Roadmap that it intends to use to guide any future research and development (R&D) activities for the materials associated with its depleted uranium hexafluoride (DUF6) inventory and certain other depleted uranium. Comments on the draft Roadmap will be accepted during a public comment period that ends on October 20, 2000. > View Federal Register Notice, September 7, 2000 U.S. Department of Energy: Draft DUF6 Materials Use Roadmap, September 1, 2000 > Download full text (2.8M PDF) U.S. DOE study sees no problem in near-surface disposal of depleted uranium at Nevada Test Site On July 28, 2000, U.S. DOE released a study on disposal options for its stockpile of 700,000 metric tonnes of depleted uranium (DU), currently stored in UF6 cylinders. The study sees no problem in near-surface disposal of the depleted uranium at the Nevada Test Site (NTS), even if in the less stable chemical forms of UF4 or uranium metal, rather than the more stable oxides UO2 and U3O8 considered preferrable so far. At the NTS, the DU would be disposed of in subsidence craters from past underground nuclear weapons tests and/or in designated shallow land burial areas. Assessment of Preferred Depleted Uranium Disposal Forms, by A. G. Croff, J. R. Hightower, D. W. Lee, et al., Chemical Technology Division, OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, ORNL/TM-2000/161, June 2000, 24 p. > download ORNL study (125k PDF) Nuclear Metals, Inc., receives contract award for pilot scale production of depleted uranium aggregate (from NMI News Release, May 5, 1997) Nuclear Metals, Inc., a Concord, Massachusetts based advanced metals technology company, has today announced the receipt of its first contract to demonstrate production of several tons of depleted uranium (DU) aggregate. This aggregate (Trade-named DUCRETE ), when combined with cement, will be used to produce low cost radiation shielding for nuclear waste applications. [Nuclear Metals later was renamed Starmet Corp. ] U.S. DOE: Long-Term Management and Use of Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride On Aug. 28, 2003, DOE amended the 1999 Record of Decision for the Long-Term Management and Use of DUF6: "The DOE has now decided to transfer up to 1,700 of the approximately 4,700 cylinders containing DUF6 from the East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP) in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, to its storage facilities at DOE's enrichment facility at Portsmouth, Ohio, between 2003 and 2005." > See Federal Register: September 11, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 176) p. 53603-53605 (download full text ) On August 2, 1999, Energy Secretary Bill Richardson signed the Record of Decision for the Long-Term Management and Use of DUF6. > Download DUF6 ROD (59k PDF format) > View related notice in Federal Register: August 10, 1999 (Vol. 64, No. 153) p. 43358-43364 (download full text ). On April 22, 1999, U.S. DOE released the Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Alternative Strategies for the Long-Term Management and Use of Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride, U.S. Department of Energy, DOE/EIS-0269, April 1999 > View Notice of availability (Federal Register April 29, 1999) > View DOE Press Release (April 22, 1999) > Download PEIS from ANL or DOE EH The PEIS assesses the potential environmental impacts of alternative strategies for the long-term management and use of 739,000 metric tonnes of depleted uranium hexafluoride (UF6) currently stored in cylinders at the three gaseous diffusion plant sites located near Paducah, Kentucky; Portsmouth, Ohio; and Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Compared to the Draft PEIS, the preferred alternative has been revised to begin conversion of the UF6 to safer chemical forms as soon as possible, independent of the identification of potential uses of the material. Excerpts from the Final PEIS Executive Summary: "DOE's preferred alternative is to begin conversion of the UF6 inventory as soon as possible, either to uranium oxide, uranium metal, or a combination of both, while allowing for use of as much of this inventory as possible. Conversion to oxide for use or long-term storage would begin as soon as practicable, with conversion to metal occurring only if uses are identified. The preferred alternative would allow beneficial use of the material with regard to environmental, economic, technical, and other factors." [...] "Large-scale uses for the depleted uranium products are under development. These uses include radiation-shielding applications, in which uranium oxide is used as a substitute for the aggregate in concrete. Concrete made with depleted uranium would be a more effective shielding material than conventional concrete and would provide the same level of radiation shielding with less thickness than conventional concrete. Among other uses, this concrete could be fabricated into casks for storage of spent nuclear fuel or HLW. In addition to the above potential large-scale uses of the depleted UF6, small-scale use of some depleted UF6 is being considered in industrial applications and by other DOE program decisions and NEPA analyses, such as that for the disposition of surplus plutonium." [...] For details, see Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (U.S. DOE Argonne National Laboratory - Environmental Assessment Division) In addition, the full text of the following reports is available for download from LLNL Documents On-Line : Engineering analysis report for the long-term management of depleted uranium hexafluoride: (Summary: Download PDF 98k ) · Select and download full text: Vol. 1 · Vol. 2 Cost Analysis Report for the long-term management of depleted uranium hexafluoride: (Summary: Download PDF 221k ) · download full text (PDF, 19 MB) > View IEER comments on the draft PEIS (March 1998) > View What's Ahead for the Nation's Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride? by Mary Byrd Davis, Yggdrasil Institute (May 1999)   · Storage of depleted uranium BNFL Capenhurst (UK) Urenco Gronau (Germany) Cogéma (France): Bessines · Miramas US DOE Savannah River Site (Aiken, South Carolina) BNFL's depleted uranium storage facility at former Capenhurst gaseous diffusion plant (UK) BNFL installs windows at DU storage facility to enhance transparency... "2.3 Long Term Storage of Uranium at Capenhurst Progress continues to be made in the construction of stores in the ex Diffusion Plant Building. These stores are being provided with windows so that the stores and their contents can be viewed by the public." (BRITISH NUCLEAR FUELS PLC, CAPENHURST WORKS, QUARTERLY REPORT FOR 1 APRIL 2001 TO 30 JUNE 2001 ) Urenco's Depleted Uranium Storage Project (Germany) Urenco plans storage of depleted uranium as oxide Together with the application to increase the enrichment capacity of its Gronau, Germany, enrichment plant to 4000 tonnes SWU/year (details here), Urenco has filed an application for the construction of two storage buildings for its depleted uranium waste. The depleted uranium is currently being stored as uranium hexafluoride in cylinder yards next to the plant with a licensed capacity of 38,000 tonnes of UF6. For storage, the depleted uranium is to be converted to the more stable form of U3O8 at the Pierrelatte facility in France. The buildings are to be designed for a capacity of 50,000 tonnes of uranium oxide. (Gronauer Nachrichten, April 30, 1999; Westfälische Nachrichten July 31, 1999) Cogéma's Depleted Uranium Storage Project (France) Depleted uranium storage at Bessines former uranium mill site (Haute Vienne) The long history of disposal of any kinds of wastes on former uranium mine and mill sites is being enriched by a new project: France's nuclear fuel company COGEMA is going to store 199,900 tonnes of depleted uranium (DU) at the site of the former uranium mill of Bessines-sur-Gartempe (Haute Vienne) near Limoges. The project was licensed on 20 December 1995. This license was revoked by the Administrative Tribunal of Limoges on July 9, 1998. The license was revoked mainly for the reason that the DU has to be regarded as a waste under current conditions, though an extraction of the residual uranium-235 might be viable in the future. On Nov. 5, 1998, a Bordeaux appeals court ruled that the material is no waste, but a "directly usable raw material that is effectively used for multiple uses". Following this court decision, COGEMA sent the first DU shipment to Bessines on Nov. 12, 1998. On May 23, 2001, the Conseil d'Etat finally turned down the appeal of the environmental organization ADEPAL against the Bordeaux appeals court ruling. The Conseil d'Etat followed the appeals court's ruling that the material is not a waste. ADEPAL was sentenced to pay 20,000 Francs (US$ 2,600) in damages to COGEMA. At the time of this ruling, five of eleven storage buildings have been completed and 32,600 tonnes of depleted uranium have already been stored. (Info Nucléaire May 31, 2001 )   Originally, COGEMA had applied for the storage of 265,000 tonnes, but during the hearings held on the project, it became obvious that COGEMA had "forgotten" to consider some radionuclides in its calculation of the total activity inventory: The specific activity of the depleted uranium is 21,100 Bq/g instead of 15,902 Bq/g. The project would therefore have exceeded the 100,000 Curie limit, requiring a different type of license (Installation Nucléaire de Base) involving wider public participation. During a public enquiry, conducted between 18 Nov 1994 and 2 Jan 1995, 10,182 citizens and organizations had voted against the DU disposal project at the Bessines site. A review panel (commission d'enquête) that was installed to conduct a public enquiry on the project and to produce a recommendation on it, followed the main views of the opponents and issued a recommendation against the proposed project on 23 March 1995. The reasons for this vote were the neglected existence of artificial uranium-236 in the enrichment wastes and the thus too high total inventory of the deposit that would have exceeded the 100,000 Curie limit, among others. COGEMA was not able to provide a reasonable explanation for the presence of the uranium-236. The depleted uranium is a residue of the Eurodif Tricastin gazeous diffusion enrichment plant in the Rhône valley. Its residual contents of uranium-235 is 0.2 to 0.3 % and it has the chemical form of uranium hexafluoride (UF6). But, COGEMA doesn't declare it a waste, but wants to store it for possible future use. COGEMA hopes that the stored DU can be useful, if future enrichment techniques would allow for economic extraction of the residual uranium-235, or if uranium prices would rise significantly. For storage, the UF6 is to be converted to the chemically more stable form of U3O8 at COGEMA's Pierrelatte facility. Then it is to be transported by rail to the Bessines site and to be stored as a powder in iron containers. The containers (8.5 or 11 tonnes each) are to be stored in 11 special storage buildings of 3000 m2 each, according to the original plan. Each building can store 2500 containers. The maximum dose that an individual would be exposed to at the fence of the facility, is calculated at 0.7 mSv (70 mrem) per year, far below the (extremely high) French limit of 5 mSv (500 mrem) for the public. The Bessines uranium mill has ceased operation in july 1993, since the associated uranium deposits are worked out or cannot be mined any more under the current uranium market conditions. So the area now faces high unemployment of former miners, and any kind of new business is welcome. Knowing this, COGEMA now offers to build that DU disposal facility. The total investment is planned at 60 million French Francs (approx. US$ 10 million) over a period of 15 years. The storage of DU at the Bessines site is only the first of a series of proposals made by COGEMA: others are for the treatment and storage of thorium-wastes from the Cadarache facility, treatment of mercury-containing wastes, and storage of natural uranium (yellow cake). Contact: Fédération Limousine pour l'Étude et la Protection de la Nature - FLEPNA Maison de la Nature, 11, rue Jauvion, 87000 Limoges, France Tel. +33-5-55-329558, Fax: +33-5-55-327746   Depleted uranium storage at Miramas (Bouches du Rhône) Information about Miramas facility (Nuclear Safety Authority - ASN, in French)   Savannah River Site (Aiken, South Carolina) Savannah River Site completes depleted uranium metal shipments to Utah disposal site The Savannah River Site has completed the final shipments of depleted uranium metals from an old manufacturing area at the complex, clearing the way for demolition of six buildings. The M area buildings were the facilities where "target" materials for the site's five reactors were manufactured (The reactors produced plutonium for nuclear weapons). Between March and June 2003, more than 2,600 metric tons of depleted uranium metal were shipped from the Savannah River Site to the Envirocare of Utah disposal site. Officials also plan to ship 3,270 drums of depleted uranium oxide to EnviroCare in summer 2003 as part of a pilot program. The remaining 33,000 drums would be shipped during the next few years. (Augusta Chronicle June 10, 2003) SRS uranium storage raises concern A federal review board has questioned whether uranium is being stored safely at Savannah River Site. The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board found that depleted uranium is being stored in corroded drums and in deteriorating buildings at the federal nuclear-weapons site. In some cases, wooden pallets supporting stacked drums of uranium had rotted, and "significant numbers" of the drums had tilted, the board wrote. The board also raised concerns that uranium was stored in wooden crates and cardboard boxes, increasing the risk of a fire that could affect public health beyond the boundaries of the 310-square-mile (803 km2) site. The U.S. Department of Energy stores about 24,200 tons (21,954 tonnes) of depleted uranium at SRS. According to the board, little progress has been made in addressing the potential safety issues which were first identified in October 1998. (Augusta Chronicle March 21, 2002) compiled by: WISE Uranium Project (home)