National Academies Press: OpenBook
Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×

Affordable Cleanup?

Opportunities for cost reduction in the decontamination and decommissioning of the nation's uranium enrichment facilities

Committee on Decontamination and Decommissioning of Uranium Enrichment Facilities

Board on Energy and Environmental Systems

Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems

National Research Council

NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, D.C.

Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×

NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.

This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Harold Liebowitz is president of the National Academy of Engineering.

The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.

The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. Harold Liebowitz are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.

This report and the study on which it is based were supported by Grant No. DE-FC01-94EW54069 from the U.S. Department of Energy.

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 96-67092

International Standard Book Number: 0-309-05438-9

Limited copies of this report are available from the Board on Energy and Environmental Systems, National Research Council, 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20418.

Additional copies are available for sale from the:
National Academy Press
2101 Constitution Avenue, NW Box 285 Washington, DC 20055 800-624-6242 or 202-334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area)

Copyright 1996 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Printed in the United States of America

Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×

Committee On Decontamination And Decommissioning Of Uranium Enrichment Facilities

DALE F. STEIN, Chair,

NAE, Michigan Technological University, Tucson, Arizona

GREGORY R. CHOPPIN, Vice Chair,

Department of Chemistry, Florida State University, Tallahassee

EULA BINGHAM,

IOM, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio

JOSEPH S. BYRD,

University of South Carolina, Columbia

JOEL I. CEHN,

Applied Sciences Company, Oakland, California

PHILIP R. CLARK, SR.,

NAE, GPU Nuclear Corporation, Parsippany, New Jersey

ROBERT E. CONNICK,

NAS, University of California at Berkeley

FRANK P. CRIMI,

Lockheed Martin Environmental Systems & Technologies, Houston, Texas

WOLTER J. FABRYCKY,

Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University, Blacksburg

ROBERT A. FJELD,

Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina

BERND KAHN,

Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta

CHARLES KIMM,

Pacific International Center for High Technology Research, Honolulu, Hawaii

PETER B. LEDERMAN,

New Jersey Institute of Technology, University Heights, Newark

WALTER G. MAY,

NAE, University of Illinois, Urbana

ALVIN H. MUSHKATEL,

Arizona State University, Tempe

M. ELISABETH PATE-CORNELL,

NAE, Stanford University, Stanford, California

WILLIAM R. PRINDLE,

NAE, (retired), Corning, Santa Barbara, California

CAROLYN RAFFENSPERGER,

Science Environmental & Health Network, Washington, D.C.

GEOFFREY S. ROTHWELL,

Stanford University, Stanford, California

RAY O. SANDBERG,

Bechtel National, San Francisco, California

ALFRED SCHNEIDER,

Georgia Institute of Technology, Dunwoody

RICHARD I. SMITH,

Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories, Richland, Washington

Liaison from the Board on Energy and Environmental Systems

RICHARD MESERVE,

Covington & Burling, Washington, D.C.

Project Staff

Board on Energy & Environmental Systems

MAHADEVAN MANI, director (January 1991-January 1996)

JAMES ZUCCHETTO, study director and board director

TRACY WILSON, senior program officer

JILL WILSON, senior program officer

SUSANNA CLARENDON, senior project assistant

ANN COVALT, editor

Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×

Board on Chemical Sciences and Technology

DOUGLAS RABER, director

SCOTT WEIDMAN, senior program officer

MARIA JONES, senior project assistant

Board on Radioactive Waste Management

KARYANIL T. (K. T.) THOMAS, senior program officer

VERNA BOWEN, administrative assistant

Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×

Board On Energy And Environmental Systems

H. M. (HUB) HUBBARD, Chair, (retired),

Pacific International Center for High Technology Research, Honolulu, Hawaii

RICHARD A. MESERVE, Vice Chair,

Covington & Burling, Washington, D.C.

ROBERT D. BANKS,

World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.

ALLEN J. BARD,

NAS, University of Texas at Austin

JAN BEYEA,

National Audubon Society, New York, New York

DAVID E. DANIEL,

University of Texas at Austin

LINDA C. DOLAN,

Martin Marietta, Electronics and Missiles, Orlando, Florida

FRANCOIS HEUZE,

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, California

ROBERT L. HIRSCH,

Energy Technology Collaborative, Inc., Washington, D.C.

THOMAS D. O'ROURKE,

NAE, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York

LARRY T. PAPAY,

NAE, Bechtel Group, San Francisco, California

RUTH A. RECK,

Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois

JOEL SPIRA,

NAE, Lutron Electronics Company, Coopersburg, Pennsylvania

Former Members Active during Reporting Period:

STEPHEN D. BAN,

Gas Research Institute, Chicago, Illinois

BARBARA R. BARKOVICH,

Barkovich and Yap, Consultants, San Rafael, California

CHARLES D. KOLSTAD,

University of California at Santa Barbara

JANE C. S. LONG,

Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley, California

S. L. (CY) MEISEL,

NAE, (retired), Mobil R&D Corporation, Princeton, New Jersey

SHLOMO NEUMAN,

NAE, University of Arizona, Tucson

MARC H. ROSS,

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

HAROLD H. SCHOBERT,

The Pennsylvania State University, University Park

JON M. VEIGEL,

Oak Ridge Associated Universities, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

Liaisons for the Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems

RICHARD A. CONWAY,

NAE, Union Carbide Corporation, South Charleston, West Virginia

TREVOR O. JONES,

NAE, (retired), Libbey-Owens-Ford Company, Cleveland, Ohio

Board on Energy and Environmental Systems Staff

MAHADEVAN MANI, director (January 1991–January 1996)

JAMES ZUCCHETTO, director

SUSANNA CLARENDON, project and administrative assistant

HELEN JOHNSON, administrative associate

WENDY LEWALLEN, project assistant

AMELIA MATHIS, project assistant

JILL WILSON, senior program officer

TRACY WILSON, senior program officer

Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×
This page in the original is blank.
Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×

Preface

This report was prepared in response to a request by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) following on the Energy Policy Act of 1992, which calls for the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a study and provide recommendations for reducing costs associated with the decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) of the nation's uranium enrichment facilities located at Oak Ridge, Tennessee; Paducah, Kentucky; and Portsmouth, Ohio. The committee was also asked to assess options for the disposition of the large inventory of depleted uranium hexafluoride that is stored in steel cylinders at these three sites (see Appendix A for the committee's full statement of task).

The D&D of these large facilities will occur following the closure of the plants. The Oak Ridge plant has already been shut down; the Paducah and Portsmouth plants are being leased by the United States Enrichment Corporation from the federal government to produce enriched uranium for the electric utility sector. Cost estimates have been made for the D&D of the three plants, and DOE is currently engaged in planning for the effort. This large effort, with a projected cost of billions of dollars, will entail cleanup of radioactive and hazardous materials within a complex regulatory environment and will face numerous uncertainties before it is complete.

Given the multifaceted nature of the subject, the committee at its first meeting in February 1994, divided itself into three panels: the Cost Analysis Panel, which analyzed existing cost estimates and the costs of previous D&D experiences; the Decision and Process Analysis Panel, which focused on such issues as risk, end states of the sites, stakeholder involvement, and the management approach; and, finally, the Technology Panel, which considered the host of technologies needed for D&D (see Appendix B for more on the committee's panel structure). In addition to participating in full committee meetings, the panels met separately through January 1995, producing analyses that were used by the committee in its report (see Appendix C for a description of all the committee and panel meetings and activities).

The committee was large, with widely varying backgrounds and expertise (see Appendix D for biographies), yet the members worked effectively and harmoniously to find ways to substantially reduce the cost of the D&D safely and securely. I express my appreciation to the committee members for their time, dedication, and above all, frank and professional discussion. This group of highly able people devoted themselves to an important national problem and worked together to achieve an objective. It was a privilege to work with them.

Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×

The interdisciplinary nature of the study required a cooperative effort by several boards at the National Research Council (NRC). The Board on Energy and Environmental Systems (BEES), Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems, led the effort with staff in support of the committee as follows: Dev Mani, Director, BEES; James Zucchetto, Study Director; Jill Wilson, who worked with the Technology Panel and on the problem of options for disposition of uranium hexafluoride; and Tracy Wilson, who worked with the Decision and Process Analysis Panel. Susanna Clarendon, Administrative and Project Assistant, provided invaluable assistance in the logistical arrangements for the meetings and site visits and in preparing the many drafts of the committee's report. The BEES staff worked with the committee throughout the study effort, including the completion of the committee's report. NRC staff Douglas Raber, Director, Chemical Sciences and Technology Board (BCST), Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Applications, and Scott Weidman, BCST, with the assistance of Maria Jones, Senior Project Assistant, worked with the Technology Panel from February 1994 to January 1995; and NRC staff K. T. (Karyanil) Thomas, Board on Radioactive Waste Management, Commission on Geosciences, Environment and Resources, with the assistance of Verna Bowen, Administrative Assistant, provided support to the Cost Analysis Panel from March 1994 to January 1995. My compliments to the NRC cooperative staff effort in this study.

I also appreciate contributions by Roger Shaw, GPU Nuclear Corporation, who worked with committee member Philip R. Clark, Sr., on the committee's behalf, and Keith Compton, graduate student at Clemson University, who worked with committee member Robert Fjeld and other committee members in collecting information and addressing selected tasks.

I wish to express my sincere thanks to the many people at DOE/EM-40, the Oak Ridge Operations Office, Lockheed Martin Energy Systems (formerly Martin Marietta Energy Systems), and Lockheed Martin Utility Systems who arranged the informative visits to the three plant sites. I would also like to thank the numerous people from government, the private sector, universities, local groups at the sites, the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers International Union, and others for the time they contributed to presentations and discussions at the committee meetings, as well as at the committee's June 1994 workshop. These were all important inputs to the committee's work.

DALE F. STEIN, chair

Committee on Decontamination and Decommissioning of Uranium Enrichment Facilities

Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×
Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×
   

Capenhurst Technologies

 

64

   

CIP/CUP Technologies

 

69

   

Conclusions and Recommendations

 

69

   

References

 

74

4

 

ANALYSES OF THE D&D COST ESTIMATES FOR THE GDPs

 

79

   

Previous Cost Estimates

 

79

   

Identification of Major Cost Elements

 

86

   

Time Profile of Income and Expenditures for the D&D Fund

 

88

   

Estimating U.S. GDP D&D Costs from Capenhurst D&D Costs

 

89

   

The Shippingport Reactor D&D Project

 

96

   

Conclusions and Recommendations

 

97

   

References

 

100

5

 

PLANNING THE D&D PROGRAM

 

103

   

Public and Stakeholder Involvement

 

103

   

End-State Alternatives

 

105

   

Development of an Integrated Regulatory Program

 

109

   

Coordinated Planning

 

114

   

Management Issues

 

120

   

Recommendations

 

121

   

References

 

125

6

 

OPPORTUNITIES FOR D&D COST REDUCTION

 

127

   

Program Integration

 

128

   

Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management

 

133

   

Decontamination and Decommissioning

 

136

   

Support Facilities

 

144

   

Cost Estimate Assumptions

 

146

   

Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations

 

150

   

References

 

154

7

 

DISPOSITION OF THE DUF6

 

157

   

DUF6 Inventory

 

157

   

Uses for Depleted Uranium

 

158

   

Depleted Uranium Management Options

 

163

   

Analysis of Cost Estimates for Conversion

 

170

   

Opportunities for Cost Saving

 

173

   

Conclusions and Recommendations

 

177

   

References

 

179

8

 

MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS

 

183

   

Coordinated Planning

 

184

   

Contracting and Management

 

185

   

Prioritized Cost and Risk Reduction

 

185

   

Regulatory Coordination

 

187

Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×
Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×

List of Tables

1-1

 

Estimated Costs for Prompt Dismantlement of the Gaseous Diffusion Plants

 

23

2-1

 

Characteristics of the Uranium Enrichment Facilities

 

32

2-2

 

Expenditures on Surveillance and Maintenance at the Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant

 

34

2-3

 

Estimated Radioactive Scrap Metal Streams from the D&D of the GDPs

 

34

2-4

 

Radionuclide Decay Characteristics

 

36

2-5

 

Estimated Percentages of Surface Areas at the Oak Ridge GDP Contaminated with Radioactive Materials

 

37

2-6

 

Estimated Uranium Deposits at the Oak Ridge GDP

 

39

2-7

 

Estimates of Key Hazardous Contaminants at the Uranium Enrichment Facilities

 

40

2-8

 

Cascades and Stages in the Process Buildings at the Three GDP Sites

 

43

4-1

 

Summary of Previous GDP D&D Cost Estimates

 

80

4-2

 

Comparison of Major Parameters in the Ebasco and TLG Cost Estimates

 

83

4-3

 

Comparison of Selected Unit Cost Factors for Equipment Removal Used in the Oak Ridge GDP Cost Estimates

 

83

4-4

 

Ebasco and SAIC Estimated D&D Costs for the GDPs

 

85

4-5

 

Principal Cost Drivers for the Oak Ridge GDP

 

87

4-6

 

Comparison of Estimated Costs for Equipment Removal and Decontamination Activities at the Oak Ridge GDP

 

87

4-7

 

Scaling of Capenhurst Costs to Estimate D&D Costs for the Oak Ridge GDP

 

93

4-8

 

Weight of Process Equipment at the Oak Ridge GDP

 

94

5-1

 

End-State Alternatives for the D&D of the GDPs

 

106

5-2

 

Suggested Approach for Managing the D&D Process

 

122

6-1

 

Cost Reduction Opportunities

 

129

6-2

 

Person Hours and Duration for Converter Removal During Operations and During Decontamination and Decommissioning

 

141

7-1

 

DOE DUF6 Inventory at the Three GDPs

 

158

7-2

 

Breached DUF6 Cylinders

 

165

7-3

 

Comparison of Management Options for DUF6

 

171

7-4

 

Conversion and Waste Management Costs

 

174

7-5

 

Cost Comparison for the Conversion of DUF6 to Oxide

 

175

7-6

 

Comparison of Unit Conversion Costs Including Annual Private Capital Costs

 

175

B-1

 

Committee Panels and Membership

 

197

E-1

 

Estimated Radioactive Contaminants Received by Paducah GDP

 

221

E-2

 

Conventional Radionuclide Characterization Instruments and Techniques

 

224

E-3

 

Recent Characterization Developments

 

227

E-4

 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Acceptable Surface Contamination Levels

 

228

Page xiii Cite
Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×

E-5

 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Default Radionuclide Concentration Values for Various Exposure Scenarios

 

229

E-6

 

EPA Review Draft Generic Site Concentration Values for Various Exposure Scenarios

 

229

E-7

 

IAEA Recommended Unconditional Clearance Levels

 

230

G-1

 

Single-Parameter Limits for Uniform Aqueous Solution of 235U

 

239

G-2

 

Subcritical Limits for Aqueous Solution of 235UO2F2 with a Water Reflector

 

239

G-3

 

Subcritical Limits for Uniform Aqueous Solution of Low-Enriched Uranium for Different 235U Enrichment Levels

 

240

G-4

 

Critical Parameters for Solid UO2 Dispersal in Water with 300-mm-Thick Water Reflector

 

241

H-1

 

Comparison of Capenhurst and Oak Ride GDP Design Characteristics

 

252

H-2

 

Comparison of Capenhurst and U.S. GDP Material Quantities

 

253

H-3

 

Quantity Ratios of the Oak Ridge GDP to Capenhurst GDP

 

253

J-1

 

Ebasco's 1991 Cost Estimates

 

264

J-2

 

Comparison of MMES and Ebasco Cost Estimates

 

270

J-3

 

Comparison of SAIC and Ebasco Cost Estimates

 

273

J-4

 

Ebasco and TLG Waste Volume and Waste Management Cost Comparison

 

280

J-5

 

Ebasco Program Integration (PI) Costs Related to Waste Management (WM)

 

280

J-6

 

Ebasco Waste Management (WM) Cost Summary for the three GDPs

 

281

J-7

 

Ebasco Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (WM) Cost Summary for the Oak Ridge GDP

 

282

J-8

 

Ebasco Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (WM) Cost Summary for the Paducah GDP

 

283

J-9

 

Ebasco Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (WM) Cost Summary for the Portsmouth GDP

 

284

J-10

 

Ebasco Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (WM) Cost Summary for the Three GDP Sites

 

285

J-11

 

Types of Packaging Assumed in the Ebasco Cost Estimate

 

286

J-12

 

Net Packaging Unit Cost

 

286

J-13

 

Local Transportation Cost Summary for Waste Disposal at the Three GDPs

 

287

J-14

 

Interstate Transportation Cost Summary for Waste from the Paducah and Portsmouth GDP

 

287

J-15

 

Disposal Cost Summary by GDP Site

 

289

J-16

 

Storage Cost Summary for the Three GDPs

 

289

J-17

 

Waste Management Unit Cost Summary

 

290

J-18

 

Waste Management Unit Cost Summary for Level I Waste

 

290

J-19

 

Waste Management Unit Cost Summary for Level III Waste

 

291

J-20

 

Waste Management Unit Cost Summary for Hazardous Material Waste

 

291

J-21

 

Waste Management Unit Cost Summary for Clean/Recycle Material

 

292

Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×

List of Figures

1-1

 

The geographical relationship of the three GDPs

 

18

1-2

 

Photograph of the interior of a process building showing the repetitive arrangement of the cascades

 

20

1-3

 

The Oak Ridge GDP site

 

21

2-1

 

Operating principle of a converter

 

28

2-2

 

Gaseous diffusion stage schematic

 

28

2-3

 

Photograph of a large converter

 

29

2-4

 

Arrangement of large converters showing 2 cells with 10 stages each

 

30

3-1

 

Simplified decontamination flow diagram

 

50

5-1

 

Organizational framework for D&D of the GDPs

 

120

6-1

 

Break-even metal recycling value versus total waste disposal costs

 

138

7-1

 

DUF6 cylinder storage yards at Paducah

 

159

7-2

 

Cylinders stored at Portsmouth

 

159

Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×
Page R1
Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×
Page R2
Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×
Page R3
Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×
Page R4
Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×
Page R5
Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×
Page R6
Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×
Page R7
Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×
Page R8
Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×
Page R9
Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×
Page R10
Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×
Page R11
Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×
Page R12
Page xiii Cite
Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×
Page R13
Suggested Citation:"FRONT MATTER." National Research Council. 1996. Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/5114.
×
Page R14
Next: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY »
Affordable Cleanup?: Opportunities for Cost Reduction in the Decontamination and Decommissioning of the Nation's Uranium Enrichment Facilities Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $85.00 Buy Ebook | $69.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The Energy Policy Act of 1992 called on the National Academy of Sciences to conduct a study and provide recommendations for reducing the costs of decontaminating and decommissioning (D&D) the nation's uranium enrichment facilities located at Oak Ridge, Tennessee; Raducah, Kentucky; and Portsmouth, Ohio. This volume examines the existing plans and cost estimates for the D&D of these facilities, including such elements as technologies, planning and management, and identifies approaches that could reduce D&D costs. It also assesses options for disposition of the large quantities of depleted uranium hexafluoride that are stored at these sites.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!