1 / 38

Current DOE Efforts in Nuclear Materials Management

Current DOE Efforts in Nuclear Materials Management. Patrice M. Bubar Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Integration and Disposition (EM-20) National Governors Association April 2001. Topics. “At-risk” nuclear materials

callum
Télécharger la présentation

Current DOE Efforts in Nuclear Materials Management

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Current DOE Efforts in Nuclear Materials Management Patrice M. Bubar Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Integration and Disposition (EM-20) National Governors Association April 2001

  2. Topics • “At-risk” nuclear materials • EM efforts to identify and plan for disposition of surplus nuclear materials • DOE corporate nuclear materials stewardship initiatives • Current EM nuclear materials stewardship efforts

  3. “At-Risk” Nuclear Materials • DNFSB Recommendation 00-1/94-1, Remediation of Nuclear Materials at the Defense Nuclear Facilities Complex • DNFSB Recommendation 97-1, Safe Storage of Uranium-233

  4. Materials Stabilization Status • All plutonium in contact with plastic has been repackaged; solution and residue drums have been vented pending stabilization or repackaging  Mitigated risk of hydrogen explosion • Over 90% of all plutonium solutions have been stabilized to a solid form • Over 50% of plutonium residues have been stabilized and repackaged • All highly-enriched uranium solids have been stabilized • All SNF at Idaho is in the process of being moved to improved storage

  5. DNFSB Recommendation 97-1 • Scope of Recommendation 97-1 (issued 05/97) concerns safe storage of Department’s 233U inventory • Inventory is primarily at ORNL and INEEL (~400kg each) with minor amounts at other sites • 233U is a legacy material from past nuclear development programs and presence of certain decay isotopes in the inventory creates a radiological hazard which makes handling difficult • It is weapons usable but its promise was primarily as a reactor fuel

  6. DNFSB Recommendation 97-1Implementation Status • Department completed all commitments at LANL, INEEL and in process of consolidate small holdings • Major issue concerns integrity of 233Upackages in storage at ORNL • Department’s plan is to begin package sample inspection program in late summer of FY01; remote handling system for packages to be used • Department considering making 233U inventory available for commercial processing of beneficial isotopes • would disposition inventory and resolve storage problems at ORNL • provide greater supply of much needed isotopes to medical community for cancer research an potential treatment

  7. NUCLEAR MATERIALS DISPOSITION National Resource Nuclear Materials Inventory Assessment National TRU Program WIPP National Security Materials LLW Program LLW Disposal Sites Non-National Security Programmatic Materials NSNFP Geologic Repository Surplus Materials Nuclear Materials Stewardship Program MD (NN-60) Characterization/ Inventory/ Disposition Planning Disposition/Interface Management Disposal

  8. Materials# of PathsGreenTBDYellowRed Not Assessed • Am-241 13 4 7 2 0 0 • Np-237/Pu-238 43 2 29 4 8 0 • Pu-239 101 9 21 14 56 1 • Pu-242 13 6 3 0 4 0 • HEU 157 129 1 20 2 5 • U-233 29 0 29 0 0 0 • Th-232 37 1 35 0 0 1 • b/ emitters * 47 20 24 3 0 0 • Sealed Sources 222 100 55 67 0 0 • DU 139 5 130 0 0 4 • LEU 113 7 103 2 0 1 • NU 70 4 66 0 0 0 • Heavy Isotopes 27 5 12_ 010 0 • 1011 292 515 112 80 12 * Includes Cs/Sr EM Nuclear MaterialDisposition Path Analysis

  9. NMI PROJECT (1998) IDENTIFIED AND ASSESSED 1011 DISPOSITION PATHS 112 Yellow 292 Green 515 TBD 80 Red

  10. Highlights of Activities to Focus on Identifying Disposition Paths for Nuclear Materials • Performed Options Analysis and Trade Studies for High Return Nuclear Materials • Assisting Individual Sites with Analysis of “TBD” Material Streams • Made Decisions on 3 Major Categories of Materials • 233U oxides, metals, and fluorides at Oak Ridge • Mark 18 A Targets at Savannah River • Am/Cm tank solutions at Savannah River

  11. 3 Recent Decisions on Nuclear Materials - 233U, Mark 18A targets, and Am/Cm solutions - all considered as potential “National Resources” • 233U at OR - decision was made to make available to private sector, via a current draft Request-for-Proposals, to extract 229Th decay daughter for use in medical research/cancer therapy • Mark 18A Targets at SR contain 244Pu and other heavy isotopes - decision was made keep for several years while DOE programs (esp. Office of Security and Emergency Operations & Office of Nonproliferation and National Security) seek $ to extract 244Pu • 241Am/244Cm in tank 17.1 solutions at SR - recovery for reuse/commercial sales not deemed economical; will proceed to vitrify and dispose unless a viable use is identified in near term

  12. Tackle High-Return Nuclear Materials Perform Options Analysis: • Pu Storage Study (11/00) • SRS Canyon Materials Identification Study (2/01) • Off-Spec HEU Study • Classified Parts Disposition * • “Special Item” Disposition • DU/NU/LEU Trade Study * • Cs-137/Sr-90 Trade Study * = discussed next in greater detail

  13. Classified Parts Disposition • Complex-wide Inventory of Classified Parts Completed • Disposition Options Identified. Options Include • Sanitization with Disposal as TRU waste • Disposal as Classified TRU waste • Rocky Flats has a Critical Need to Disposition their Classified Waste. No centralized or on-site sanitization capability exists. • DOE is Exploring Disposal of Rocky Flats Classified Waste at WIPP

  14. DU/NU/LEU Trade Study • Complex-wide Assessment of Inventory shows ~300 TBDs • Study Considers Disposition Options: • Relatively Pure Material can be kept for future blending/reuse • Contaminated Material is too costly to process and cheaper to dispose of • Study Considers Relative Costs for Storage, Reuse, or Direct Discard • Likely Result is a set of “Threshold for Discard” Criteria • based on future uses • to be used by programmatic owners to make informed decisions about disposition pathways for their materials • Draft Trade Study is being finalized

  15. “TBD” Analysis and Support • Provide recommendations to Fernald and Rocky Flats on disposition paths for “TBDs” • Providing assistance to Richland and INEEL in FY01 on TBDs • Performed analysis with recommendation for off-site storage location for uranium from Fernald & Hanford to Portsmouth • Assisted Mound with de-inventorying all surplus nuclear materials

  16. Continued Activities in FY01 • Consider use of Nuclear Materials Management Groups • Pu • U • Heavy (i.e., transplutonium) Isotopes • Nonactinide Isotopes and Sealed Sources • Ensure Packaging and Transportation Infrastructure Exists to Transport Nuclear Materials • Continue Interfaces with other DOE Programs

  17. Backup Slides

  18. Deinventory of Closure Sites (Mound, Fernald, Rocky Flats) Assisted Mound to COMPLETELY de-inventory major holdings of surplus nuclear material in October 2000 Assistance to Fernald includes • technology development automation to facilitate U repackaging, and • consolidation of some U to Portsmouth for storage • recommendations to resolve remaining TBD’s Assistance to Rocky Flats includes: • classified parts disposition • disposition of sealed sources • recommendations to resolve remaining TBD’s

  19. Uranium from Fernald in safe storage at Portsmouth

  20. Chemically reactive plutonium scrap/residues in PFP gloveboxes at Hanford are hazardous to workers and must be inspected daily.

  21. (SRS) Can containing plutonium metal button showing oxide produced during storage; Metal remaining after removal from can

  22. Plastic bottles with plutonium solutions in Building 771 gloveboxes at Rocky Flats

  23. Corroding MK-31 targets at Savannah River, stabilized under DNFSB 94-1 in 1997.

  24. 3013 Container

  25. U Materials at Fernald Up to 1000 metric tons of uranium at Fernald will require processing to dispose as low level waste. Billet In Water Slag Thin Rods Fines Flat Billets Crucible Charge Large Rods Tubes

  26. Hanford Material Project • T-Hoppers • ~ 700 MTU • Average enrichment 0.84% • UO3 Powder Stable materials being moved from Hanford to Portsmouth by the Uranium Management Group with coordination from EM-20. • Uranium Billets • ~ 200 MTU • Enrichment 0.20 - 1.25% • Metal • Fuel Assemblies • ~ 800 MTU • Enrichment 0.71 - 1.25% • Finished/Unfinished/Clad Metal

  27. Integrated Nuclear Materials Management Plan Action Categories • Nuclear Materials Stewardship Infrastructure. Sustain Nuclear Materials Stewardship processes, capabilities, and decision-making infrastructure. • Integrated Planning for Facilities and Infrastructure. Develop integrated strategy and plan for modernizing nuclear materials complex. • Budgeting and Financial Accounting. Build a budget and financial accounting system to facilitate corporate nuclear materials management budgeting and decision making

  28. Integrated Nuclear Materials Management Plan Action Categories • Excess Nuclear Materials Disposition. Complete disposition decisions for excess nuclear materials. • Research and Development Coordination. Identify and implement opportunities for nuclear materials technology information exchanges and R&D coordination. • Information Management System Reengineering. Undertake corporate nuclear materials information management system reengineering and process improvements. • Transportation and Packaging Process Improvements. Secure transportation and packaging integration and process improvement opportunities.

  29. Recommendation 2000-1 • Board’s Recommendation issued January 14, 2000 • Re-emphasized the remaining 94-1 stabilization actions • Department’s Implementation Plan issued June 8, 2000; addressed the nine technical sub-recommendations from 2000-1 related to stabilization • Revision 1 of 2000-1 Implementation Plan issued January 19, 2001; incorporated several individual milestone changes as well as a new baseline for LANL stabilization

  30. DNFSB Recommendation 97-1Recent Developments • Secretarial public commitment to ensure availability of 233U material for cancer treatment clinical trials (6/00) • ORNL EOI (6/00) • DOE Decision to issue RFP at ORNL(9/00) • Draft RFP issued for ORNL Inventory (1/01); comments are being evaluated • INEEL began trade studies to examine and validate potential beneficial uses of 233U and infrastructure to support prospective uses

  31. EM Nuclear Materials Stewardship Program Participants: • AL • Technology • Transportation • NISS MG • SR • Facility • Data • Pu MG • EM • Policy • Cross-Program • Issues • OR • U MG • HI MG • ID • Integration • Support

  32. Phases of Surplus Nuclear Materials Disposition Resolve Policy Issues Define Problem Identify Issues Develop Tools to Assist Sites Implementation Inventory Nuclear Materials Tackle High-Return Nuclear Materials

  33. Achievements of the 1997-99 “Nuclear Materials Initiative” Project • “Material Evaluation Teams” were formed to identify inventories and develop disposition plans for ... • transuranics (plutonium and heavy isotopes) • uranium • non-actinide isotopes and sealed sources These teams canvassed DOE sites • Products : • Draft “Material Management Plans” = summary reports of teams • Inventory of Nuclear Materials by Sites • >1,000 Disposition Maps for Surplus Nuclear Materials Streams • These maps are (unclassified) HQ rep’n of disposition plans • & a major decision support tool - example shown next • Identified some ways to resolve “TBDs” shown on maps

  34. Motivation for Corporate Action • 8programs with divergent objectives manage nuclear materials at or through 36 locations • Deinventory and close high mortgage, low value facilities to facilitate infrastructure modernization • Improve reporting accuracy and completeness of nuclear materials inventory data • Avoid premature shutdown of facilities required to disposition excess nuclear materials • Need to save valuable or unique materials or dispose of surplus materials that are expensive to maintain • Improve cross-program cooperation • Be responsive to external oversight [e.g., DNFSB 94-1 & 97-1; Congress]

  35. FY00 Accomplishments • Developed two DOE Storage Standards • DOE-STD-3013 - for surplus Pu materials packaged and stored in a “3013” can - this standard jointly developed and owned by DP/MD/EM • DOE-STD-3028 - long-term storage standard for 233U • Assistance to Closure Sites (Mound, Fernald, Rocky Flats) on specific TBD issues. • Report on Consolidated Storage Options for Surplus Non-Pit 239Pu • which sites ship just-in-time to MD/SR, which ship in advance • Contributions to other corporate (NMSI) and EM initiatives • NMSI-SIM business case for data

  36. Planned Plutonium Flow [result of Plutonium Storage Study]

  37. Major Challenges with Sites and Other Programs • Improve coordination with EM program offices and sites to plan and facilitate implementation of nuclear material disposition • Interface with NN for disposition of weapons-usable nuclear materials • Interface with RW to dispose of DOE spent fuel/ “orphans”, decide on transport system, and integrate repository receipt schedule • Interface with DP on transfer of surplus nuclear materials and responding to DNFSB Recommendations (00-1/94-1, 97-1 & 97-2) • Interface with NE on 233U procurement at ORNL (97-1), National Resource related issues • Support corporate level “Nuclear Materials Stewardship Initiatives” • Determine cost/benefit of Nuclear Material Management Groups • Decide on discard criteria for DU/NU & LEU • Integrate site SNF stabilization activities to share lessons learned, improve efficiency, and prepare DOE SNF for repository

  38. Glass Pu Dispositioning via Can-In-Canister Immobilization Puck Dimensions: ~2.6 in D x 1 in H • ~ 20 in. high by 3 in. OD • 20 pucks per can • 1.02 kg Pu per can • Ceramic Form • Titanate mineral phases • Fraction of key elements: • 10 wt% Pu (~ 50 g) • 20 wt% U • Pu/Hf ~ 1; Pu/Gd ~ 1 Can of Pu-Ceramic Pucks No. of Pu Can-in-Cansiter Forms • Primary phase is pyrochlor: • A B (Ti2O7) where • A = Ca & Gd; B = Pu, U, & Hf • “17” MT case: 635 (77 extra) • “50” MT case: 1744 (210 extra)

More Related