Current Issues: Waste Management of Depleted Uranium
(last updated 6 May 2008)
Contents:
> see also:
Regulators' views are not exactly conclusive regarding this question:
- On Jan. 18, 2005, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission decided that depleted uranium is a low level waste - and the DU therefore may be transfered to DOE for disposition, as requested by the license applicant.
(view details)
- On Sept. 26, 2001, the Texas Department of Health approved the disposal of DU counterweights at a land burial facility not even licensed for disposal of radioactive waste, as requested by the license applicant.
(view details)
- On Nov. 5, 1998, a French appeals court, revoking a lower tribunal's decision, ruled that depleted uranium is no waste, but a "directly usable raw material that is effectively used for multiple uses" - and the DU therefore may be stored indefinitely in the form of U3O8 in purpose-built storage buildings, as requested by the license applicant.
(view details)
- On Oct. 22, 1997, the German government stated that re-enrichment of Urenco's tails in Russia is not connected to a management of residues violating international rules, standards, or obligations, though the secondary tails remain in Russia and their avoided disposal cost appears to be Urenco's main purpose for the re-enrichment deal.
(view details)
> See extra page
(see re-enrichment details)
> See Upgrading of French enrichment tails in Russia
On Jan. 21, 2004, Manufacturing Sciences Corp., Oak Ridge, Tennessee, applied for an export license (XSOU08801) to export 10.25 metric tonnes of depleted uranium U3O8 (max. 0.2 weight-percent U-235) to Canada as "Test material to make depleted uranium oxide in the Cameco Corporation facilities in Port Hope, Ontario".
The license was issued on March 17, 2004.
(see re-enrichment details)
> See also: Urenco Almelo current issues
Dutch Council of State backs Urenco's shipments of depleted uranium from Almelo to Russia
Urenco's uranium enrichment plant in Almelo may continue the shipping of depleted uranium waste to Russia. On April 23, 2008, the Council of State (Raad von State 
, zaaknummer 200704127/1) dismissed the claim by Greenpeace that these shipments constitute an illegal dumping of waste.
Dutch Ministry discloses statistics of Urenco Almelo's depleted uranium trade with Russia and France; re-import from Russia also includes enriched uranium
On Jan. 22, 2008, the Dutch Ministry of Environment (VROM), in an answer to a parliamentary question, disclosed the transport statistics of the depleted uranium generated at Urenco's Almelo enrichment plant. The table shows the exports of depleted uranium from Almelo to Russia, the re-import of natural-grade and - so far unknown - enriched uranium from Russia, and the export of depleted uranium to France (for conversion to U3O8).
| Year |
UF6 [x 1000 kg]
to Russia
depleted |
UF6 [x 1000 kg]
back from Russia
0.7% 235U |
UF6 [x 1000 kg]
back from Russia
approx. 4.5% 235U |
UF6 [x 1000 kg]
to France for
conversion to U3O8 |
|---|
| 1996 | 4146 | 671 | | |
| 1997 | 5639 | 447 | 52 | |
| 1998 | 5139 | 497 | 45 | |
| 1999 | 4895 | 707 | 5 | |
| 2000 | 5209 | 731 | 57 | |
| 2001 | 5147 | 1092 | 36 | |
| 2002 | 6175 | 148 | 105 | |
| 2003 | 4315 | 595 | 78 | 1140 |
| 2004 | 1910 | | 68 | 1625 |
| 2005 | 2726 | | 112 | 1460 |
| 2006 | 3779 | | 103 | 2648 |
| 2007 | 4603 | 416 | 68 | 3409 |
> Download Beantwoording Kamervragen lid Poppe 2070806430 over kernafvaltransporten (MS Word - in Dutch)
Dutch Ministry discloses details on Urenco Almelo's depleted uranium exports to Russia
On Nov. 27, 2007, the Dutch Ministry of Environment (VROM), in an answer to a parliamentary question, disclosed that almost half of the depleted uranium generated at Urenco's Almelo enrichment plant is sent to Russia for re-enrichment. On average, an annual amount of 3700 t of depleted uranium is sent to Russia, and 740 t of natural-equivalent uranium are returned from Russia. The secondary tails generated from the re-enrichment process remain in Russia.
> Download Beantwoording Kamervragen lid Poppe 2070802570 over transport van kernafval (MS Word, in Dutch)
Protests in Almelo against depleted uranium exports to Russia
On May 13, 2007, activists from the Netherlands, Germany, and Russia protested in Almelo against Urenco's depleted uranium exports to Russia. The protests were held in front of the Theater Hotel in Almelo, at the occasion of a conference on uranium enrichment held there by Urenco.
(Ecodefense May 13, 2007)
Greenpeace takes legal action against depleted uranium exports to Russia
On April 2, 2007, the Dutch Raad van State heard the case filed by Greenpeace against VROM's export license for the transport of depleted uranium from Urenco's Almelo enrichment plant to Russia. A decision is still pending (zaaknummer 200702014/1).
On April 16, 2007, the Raad van State dismissed the case.
Blockade of Almelo enrichment plant
On Nov. 8, 2006, environmental activists from the Russia, Germany, and The Netherlands blocked the access road to the Almelo enrichment plant.
(see re-enrichment details)
> See also: Urenco Gronau current issues
Urenco's exports of depleted uranium to Russia to be terminated in 2009
On April 30, 2008, Urenco shareholder e.on confirmed at its AGM in Essen that the export of depleted uranium to Russia will be terminated in 2009, when the contracts with Russia expire. (SOFA Münster May 1, 2008)
Protests against depleted uranium transport from Gronau to Russia; environmentalist arrested in St Petersburg
On April 9, 2008, another night-time rail transport of depleted uranium hexafluoride started from the Gronau (Germany) enrichment plant destined for the Rotterdam port. The depleted uranium is to be shipped to Russia for re-enrichment. Protests were held along the itinerary of the train in Gronau, Steinfurt, Altenberge, Münster, Emsdetten, and Almelo.
(SOFA Münster April 9, 2008)
A Bellona activist was arrested on April 18, 2008, and one from Ecodefence fled police custody during a protest the two organizations arranged against the ongoing shipments of depleted uranium hexafluoride from German enrichment giant Urenco, another load of which put in to the Port of St. Petersburg on April 17, 2008.
(Bellona April 18, 2008)
Protests against depleted uranium transport from Gronau to Russia
On March 5, 2008, another night-time rail transport of depleted uranium hexafluoride started from the Gronau (Germany) enrichment plant destined for the Rotterdam port. The depleted uranium is to be shipped to Russia for re-enrichment. Protests were held along the itinerary of the train in Burgsteinfurt, Münster, Emsdetten, Rheine, and Almelo.
(SOFA Münster Mar. 5, 2008)
Protests against depleted uranium transport from Gronau to Russia; blockade stops train for six hours; environmentalists detained near St Petersburg
On Jan. 16, 2008, another night-time rail transport of depleted uranium hexafluoride started from the Gronau (Germany) enrichment plant destined for the Rotterdam port. The depleted uranium is to be shipped to Russia for re-enrichment. Protests were held along the itinerary of the train.
Near Burgsteinfurt, a blockade stopped the train for six hours.
(SOFA Münster Jan. 16/17, 2008)
On Jan. 24, 2008, Ecodefense and Bellona held a demonstration in St Petersburg against the arrival of the vessel MV Schouwenbank, carrying approx. 2000 t of depleted uranium.
On Jan. 30, 2008, three environmentalists and a photographer were detained at Kapitolovo train station near St. Petersburg when trying to monitor radiation levels near the train. The four were later released without charge.
(St Petersburg Times Feb. 1, 2008)
Protests against depleted uranium transport from Gronau to Russia; train passes unsecured level crossing; demonstration held in St. Petersburg in spite of ban
On Oct. 4, 2007, another night-time rail transport of depleted uranium hexafluoride started from the Gronau (Germany) enrichment plant destined for the Rotterdam port. The depleted uranium is to be shipped to Russia for re-enrichment. Protests were held along the itinerary of the train in Gronau, Altenberge, Münster main station, Münster-Sprakel, Greven and Rheine.
(SOFA Münster Oct. 5, 2007)
At Burgsteinfurt, the train passed an unsecured level crossing. The German Railway was aware that the warning lights and the automatic barrier were out of function that night, but did not take any special precautions to protect the crossing of the hazardous freight train. (Steinfurter Kreisblatt Oct. 10, 2007)
Environmental organisation Ecodefense was denied the right to hold a demonstration at the arrival of the transport in St. Petersburg harbour on Oct. 11, 2007. (Ecodefense Oct. 9, 2007)
On October 11, 2007, Ecodefense held a demonstration in St. Petersburg in spite of the ban. The police terminated the demonstration after 15 minutes and detained 9 persons. (Ecodefense Oct. 11, 2007)
Protests against depleted uranium transport from Gronau to Russia
On May 9, 2007, another night-time rail transport of depleted uranium hexafluoride started from the Gronau (Germany) enrichment plant destined for the Rotterdam port. The depleted uranium is to be shipped to Russia for re-enrichment. Protests were held along the itinerary of the train in Gronau, Burgsteinfurt, Altenberge, Münster, Greven, Emsdetten, Rheine und Hengelo.
(SOFA Münster May 10, 2007)
Protests at E.ON Annual Shareholders Meeting against Urenco's depleted uranium exports to Russia
During the Annual Shareholders Meeting of Urenco shareholder E.ON held in Essen on May 3, 2007, activists of Ecodefense Russia and Aktionsbündnis Münsterland raised the issue of Urenco's exports of depleted uranium to Russia.
(SOFA Münster May 3, 2007)
Protests at E.ON headquarter against Urenco's depleted uranium exports to Russia
On March 26, 2007, German and Russian activists held a demonstration in front of the E.ON headquarter in Düsseldorf, Germany. They protested against uranium enrichment and depleted uranium tails exports to Russia. E.ON is an utility owning one sixth of uranium enricher Urenco.
(SOFA Münster March 26, 2007)
Protests against depleted uranium transport from Gronau to Russia
On February 28, 2007, another night-time rail transport of depleted uranium hexafluoride started from the Gronau (Germany) enrichment plant for re-enrichment in Russia. Protests were held along the train's itinerary in Germany in Gronau, Burgsteinfurt, Münster, Greven, and Emsdetten, and in the Netherlands in Almelo. (SOFA Mar. 2, 2007)
Abstract
Urenco Deutschland GmbH has disclosed that it is underfeeding its Gronau (Germany) uranium enrichment plant since 2004: while from 1991 to 2002, the natural uranium feed consumption of the plant virtually followed the continuous capacity increase of the plant, the feed consumption no longer followed the capacity increase from 2004 - it even began to decline. Urenco explains this with changes in product and/or tails assays, without giving any details.
Given the rapid increase of the price of fresh uranium, underfeeding may make sense, since it allows to reduce natural uranium consumption at the expense of increased separation work. A closer analysis shows that the observed decline in feed consumption must be mainly caused from a reduced tails assay.
As most of Urenco‘s depleted uranium tails are exported to Russia for re-enrichment, a reduced assay of the tails exported has serious consequences on the viability of any re-enrichment of these tails. It turns out that the assay of the tails delivered to Russia comes close to the assay that Urenco most likely has contracted with Russia for re-enrichment on Urenco‘s behalf. Therefore, unless the contractual arrangements have been changed, almost nothing remains to be re-enriched in Russia on these tails on Urenco‘s behalf, and the amount of recovered natural uranium sent back to Urenco tends towards zero.
This means that the official justification for sending the tails to Russia (recovery of usable uranium from the tails) has become obsolete. Since the transfer of tails to Russia rather continues, this can be seen as a further hint
on the true reason for these exports: to provide a cheap tails disposition route to Urenco.
> Download full paper (39k PDF - in English)
Also available in German:
Geänderte Betriebsweise in Urencos Urananreicherungsanlage Gronau führt dazu, daß die Begründung für die Exporte des abgereicherten Urans nach Rußland hinfällig wird
> Download full paper (40k PDF - in German)
Protests against depleted uranium export from Gronau to Russia
On January 31, 2007, another night-time rail transport of depleted uranium hexafluoride started from the Gronau (Germany) enrichment plant for re-enrichment in Russia. Protests were held in Gronau, Burgsteinfurt, and Münster, along the train's itinerary in Germany. (SOFA Feb. 1, 2007)
Ecodefense calls for legal action against Urenco for DU exports to Russia
The Russian non-governmental environment group Ekozashchita (Ecodefense) asked a German public prosecutor "to investigate the activities of the German branch of Urenco which illegally delivers nuclear waste to Russia," a spokesman for the group, Vladimir Sliviak, told AFP.
The group accused the company of transporting 20,000 tonnes of waste depleted uranium to Russia for further enrichment since 1996 under a deal with the Russian uranium-enrichment company Techsnabexport.
Some 90 pct of the waste uranium has since remained in Russia, the group alleged, claiming that such movement of nuclear material is forbidden under Russian and German environmental laws.
Techsnabexport rebuffed the charge, telling AFP that it had transported "not nuclear waste, but primary materials". It was backed up in this claim by the Russian nuclear authorities.
(AFX Nov. 10, 2006)
(Staatsanwaltschaft Münster, Aktenzeichen: 540 Js 1814/06)
On May 18, 2007, the public prosecutor dropped the charge.
Blockade in Gronau against upcoming depleted uranium export to Russia
In the morning of Nov. 6, 2006, German und Russian environmentalists blocked the access road to the Gronau enrichment plant. Approx. 20 participants protested an upcoming transport of depleted uranium to Ekaterinburg in Russia.
(WDR Nov. 6, 2006)
Protests and blockade against DU transport from Gronau to Russia
On May 31, 2006, another night-time rail transport of depleted uranium hexafluoride started from the Gronau (Germany) enrichment plant for re-enrichment in Russia. Demonstrators stopped the train for a short period of time at Burgsteinfurt. (SOFA Münster May 31, 2006)
On June 7, 2006, the vessel Doggersbank shipping the DU from Rotterdam arrived in St Petersburg.
Speaker of the legislative assembly of St. Petersburg Vadim Tyulpanov has expressed indignation with the arrival of the ship Doggersbank carrying 1,000 tonnes of depleted uranium at the seaport of the city.
"It is shocking that St. Petersburg is being used as a transit point
for radioactive waste from all over Europe. The traffic of such waste
across Russian territory must be stopped". (Interfax June 7, 2006)
Environmental organisation Ecodefense appealed to the St Petersburg prosecutor officially with the demand to investigate the radioactive waste transport and stop it, since art 48 of the Russian Law on nature protection says that import of radioactive waste is forbidden.
On June 8, 2006, environmental organisation Ecodefense held protests in Ekaterinburg, near the presumed destination of the transport (Novouralsk). Ecodefense also transmitted a petition to the Consul-General of Germany in Ekaterinburg demanding to halt German-Russian transportation of radioactive waste immediately.
(Ecodefense June 8, 2006)
Protests against DU transport from Gronau to Russia
On April 19, 2006, another night-time rail transport of depleted uranium hexafluoride started from the Gronau (Germany) enrichment plant for re-enrichment in Russia. The train consisted of 18 railcars carrying a total of approx. 900 t UF6. Protests were held in Münster and Greven. (Wigatom April 19, 2006)
Protests against DU transport from Gronau to Russia
On January 25, 2006, about 100 anti-nuclear activists protested a night-time rail transport of depleted uranium from the Gronau (Germany) enrichment plant to Russia. The train traveled via Münster and Rheine to the Rotterdam harbour (Netherlands). Vigils were held at various stations along the train's itinerary.
(WDR Jan. 26, 2006)
On March 8, 2006, the anticipated arrival date of the transport in St Petersburg, the environmental NGO Ecodefense called for an immediate stop of such illegal imports of radioactive waste to Russia. (Ecodefense March 8, 2006)
According to Viktor Seredenko, a department head at the Institute of Chemical Technologies, the depleted uranium hexafluoride was not considered radioactive waste by international standards. (RIA Novosti March 9, 2006)
Protests against DU transport from Gronau to Russia
On April 13, 2005, about 150 anti-nuclear activists protested a night-time rail transport of depleted uranium from the Gronau (Germany) enrichment plant to Russia. Protests and vigils were held in the cities of Gronau, Münster und Greven, among others.
(NRZ April 14, 2005)
At several locations in northwestern Germany, more than 120 anti-nuclear activists protested a train transport of depleted UF6 with vigils and blockades. The transport started from Gronau at 19:30 hrs on March 2, 2005, and traveled to The Netherlands.
Vigil at Gronau enrichment plant against DU transport to Russia
On June 21, 2004, anti-nuclear groups began a vigil against an anticipated large transport of depleted uranium hexafluoride to Russia for re-enrichment. The material is loaded on 16 railcars, and it is expected that the train will depart for the Rotterdam (Netherlands) seaport at 17:00 hrs on June 22.
(ddp June 21, 2004)
Green State Parliament Group member Rüdiger Sagel called for an end to the transports, for a denial of the requested license amendment for further expansion of the Gronau enrichment plant, and for a halt to all enrichment operations in Gronau. These would interfere with the principal logic of the nuclear phase-out plan adopted for Germany.
Green Parliament Group Northrhine-Westphalia release, June 24, 2004 (in German)
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.
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)
> see extra page
> see extra page
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.
> see extra page
See also: Uranium Enrichment Tails Upgrading
GAO urges DOE to hurry up with assessment of re-enrichment options for its depleted uranium tails
The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report urging the Department of Energy (DOE) to complete an analysis of the management options for its stocks of depleted uranium tails. GAO wants the DOE to consider the options for re-enrichment and/or sale of the unprocessed tails, to take advantage of the currently high market price for uranium.
Since DOE's legal authority to sell the unprocessed tails is doubtful, GAO moreover asks Congress to grant such legal authority.
Nuclear Material: DOE Has Several Potential Options for Dealing with Depleted Uranium Tails, Each of Which Could Benefit the Government, U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-08-606R, March 31, 2008
> Download full report (213k PDF)
On April 3, 2008, the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce held a hearing titled: Selling the Department of Energy's Depleted Uranium Stockpile: Opportunities and Challenges
Life extension of Paducah enrichment plant by re-enrichment of depleted uranium?
> View here
DOE has agreed to transfer up to 8.5-million kilograms of depleted uranium to
the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) for re-enrichment by USEC Inc. and use in Energy Northwest's (EN) Columbia BWR over the period 2009 to 2017. DOE
has some 700,000 metric tons of depleted uranium but only a small percentage
are at assays above 0.4% U-235 and therefore clearly economical in today's
market to re-enrich, according to a source familiar with what he described as
this "pilot" program. He said that if all 8.5-million kg were re-enriched, it
might generate about 1.9-million kg of natural UF6, and could save EN millions
of dollars in fuel costs if today's UF6 prices remain at current market levels
(about $87.25/kgU as UF6). But the actual feasibility of recycling DOE's
depleted UF6 for use in a commercial reactor has not been tested, he said,
given questions over how much of the depleted uranium is contaminated with
unwanted radioactive isotopes. This pilot project will provide DOE with the
information to support a decision regarding any subsequent action to reuse any
of the remaining DUF6 inventory, he said.
(Platts 6 July 2005)
> See also: Re-enrichment of depleted uranium tails in Gaseous Diffusion Plants (300k PDF)
> See also: Compostion of the U.S. DOE Depleted Uranium Inventory (70k PDF)
> See also: Fact Sheet: Hazards from depleted uranium produced from reprocessed uranium (290k PDF)
Russia to terminate re-enrichment of imported depleted uranium tails, once current contracts expire
Over a year ago, Rosatom, the Russian Federal Atomic Energy Agency, decided not to sign new contracts for imports of depleted uranium from Europe for enrichment and plans only to implement contracts signed in the 1990s, Atomic Energy Agency Director Sergei Kirienko told journalists in Angarsk.
"We decided over a year ago that we would not sign new contracts or
extend old ones, but we cannot tear up agreements that we already have -
they expire in 2009-2010," he said.
"We consider it incorrect to import hexafluoride until the issue of its potential chemical danger is resolved," Kirienko said.
Kirienko said that contracts to import depleted uranium from Europe were signed in the 1990s "at a good price."
(Interfax June 22, 2007)
Protest in Irkutsk against import of depleted uranium tails from Western Europe to Russia
> See here
Protest in Moscow against import of depleted uranium tails from Germany to Russia
On Oct. 12, 2006, environmentalists staged a brief protest in front of Germany's embassy in Moscow against long-standing shipments of German nuclear waste to Russia.
Brandishing a banner scrawled with "Stop the entry of nuclear waste", a dozen Germans and Russians demonstrated for about 10 minutes before the
Russian protesters were seized, handcuffed and hauled away by police.
"German authorities must stop burying radioactive waste in Russia which
threatens the health of future generations of Russians," Vladimir Sliviak of
the Russian environmental group Ecodefense, said in a statement.
"German authorities must not take advantage of the fact that the Russian atomic industry can violate laws and ignore public opinion," he added.
According the Ecodefense, some 100,000 tons of nuclear waste have been imported
to Russia over the past decade. Up to 90 percent of the waste is stored by
Russian companies, awaiting final disposal, the group said.
The radioactive material arrives in Saint Petersburg's port in the northern part
of the country, Ecodefense said, where it is carried by train toward the Ural
mountains, and western and eastern Siberia.
(Ecodefense Oct. 12, 2006)
Protests in Tomsk against import of depleted uranium tails from Western Europe to Russia
On August 1, 2006, activists from ten Russian cities protested in Tomsk against the import of depleted uranium tails from Western Europe for re-enrichment in Russia. They were participants of an anti-nuclear camp held by the organisation Ecodefense from July 26 to August 3, 2006.
(Ecodefense July 26 and Aug. 1, 2006)
Russia could expand re-enrichment of foreign depleted uranium tails
Russia could increase its share of the global market for the treatment of depleted uranium to 45% by 2010, from 40% at present, Vladimir Korotkevich, director of the state-owned Siberian Chemical Combine at Tomsk, told reporters. He also said that Techsnabexport, the Russian government's authorized exporter of nuclear materials and nuclear power plant fuel, had contracts worth more than $3 billion annually to process depleted uranium hexafluoride from abroad. This does not include contracts signed under the Megatons to Megawatts deal with the United States.
(Interfax Dec. 28, 2005)
Ecodefense calls for end of import of depleted uranium tails from Western Europe to Russia, releases detailed report on re-enrichment business
On August 2, 2005, Ecodefense Russia held a press conference in Moscow demanding an end to the imports of depleted uranium tails to Russia for re-enrichment. Since the secondary tails remain in Russia, the import would represent an illegal import of radioactive waste.
> View Ecodefense release Aug. 2, 2005 (in Russian)
> View Bellona article Aug. 4, 2005
At the occasion of this press conference, Ecodefense released a detailed report on this issue titled "Re-enrichment of West European Depleted Uranium Tails in Russia".
> View abstract and download report.
On August 6, 2005, Ecodefense opened the 6th Antinuclear Camp near the Urals Electrochemical integrated plant, where part of the re-enrichment takes place. The camp will be open for one week.
On August 11, 2005, a protest action with 40 participants was held at Ekaterinburg against the tails import from West European countries to Russia. One activist was detained.
> View Ecodefense release Aug. 11, 2005 (in Russian, with photos)
Greenpeace tries to block entry of depleted uranium shipment from France into St Petersburg port (Russia)
On Dec. 7, 2005, Greenpeace Russia tried to block the entry of the container ship "Kapitan Kuroptev" into the port of St Petersburg. The ship carried 450 t of depleted uranium waste from France, being sent to Russia for re-enrichment. Three boats with 11 activists on board tried to stand in the ship's way, burning signal lights and putting buoys warning of a floating radiation hazard. However, the ship picked up speed and used water cannons, and the activists had to retreat. (RIA Novosti Dec. 7, 2005)
> Download: International trade in wastes of the nuclear industry based on the example of depleted uranium hexafluoride , Greenpeace report, Dec. 6, 2005, (in Russian)
Greenpeace blocks depleted uranium export to Russia at Le Havre (France)
On Dec. 1, 2005, Greenpeace France blocked a transport of 450 t of uranium wastes at Le Havre. The material was to be exported to Russia. It consisted mainly of depleted uranium, to be re-enriched in Russia, and possibly some reprocessed uranium (RepU), to be swapped to natural uranium. It had arrived by train from the enrichment plant at Pierrelatte, and was to be loaded on the container ship "Kapitan Kuroptev" for sea transport to St Petersburg. (Greenpeace France, Dec. 1, 2005)
> Download: Europe's radioactive secret - how EDF and European nuclear utilities are dumping nuclear waste in the Russian Federation , Greenpeace International Briefing paper, November 18th 2005 (in English)
> Download: Note d’information: Comment eDF et les opérateurs électriques européens exportent leurs déchets nucléaires en Russie , Greenpeace, Novembre 2005 (in French)
Vladimir Korotkevich, director of the state-owned Siberian Chemical Combine at Tomsk, where some of the re-enrichment takes place, alleges this blockade was initiated and paid for by competitors of the Russian enrichment facilities(!) (Interfax Dec. 28, 2005). This allegation shows, what serious blow the dragging of the re-enrichment business into the limelight presents to the Russian enrichers...
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)
> For details on this issue, view the report "Re-enrichment of West European Depleted Uranium Tails in Russia".
"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
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
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.
> For details on this issue, view the report "Re-enrichment of West European Depleted Uranium Tails in Russia".
> See also:
U.S. NRC to regulate only certain new uranium conversion and depleted uranium deconversion facilities
> View here
NRC License No.
NRC Docket No. 04009058
International Isotopes Inc.
International Isotopes Inc. announces the successful start of high purity germanium tetrafluoride production from depleted UF4
On Nov. 20, 2006, International Isotopes Inc. announced the successful
start of germanium tetrafluoride production using the Fluorine Extraction
Process (FEP). The Company had previously announced completion of the plant
construction and initial operational testing in January 2006. Since that
time the Company had been testing production systems, developing laboratory
analysis protocol, and implementing necessary system design alterations.
(International Isotopes Inc. Nov. 20, 2006)
On Jan. 25, 2006, International Isotopes Inc. announced the successful start of high purity germanium tetrafluoride gas production operations at their newly completed production facility in Idaho Falls, Idaho using the Fluorine Extraction Process (FEP).
FEP is a patented process that allows fluorine to be extracted from depleted uranium tetrafluoride (UF4) and react with metal oxides to form ultra high purity fluoride gases such as GeF4, BF3, SiF4, to name a few. These gases are ideally suited to specialty applications in the semiconductor industry where ultra high purity gases are required.
(International Isotopes Inc. Jan. 25, 2006)
U.S. NRC issues operating license for International Isotopes Inc. Fluorine Extraction Process (FEP) production plant project, Idaho, USA
On Oct. 31, 2005, International Isotopes Inc. announced they have received their
operating license from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for the company's Fluorine Extraction Process (FEP).
The company acquired the exclusive patent technology for production of ultra pure inorganic fluoride gases in January 2004. Since then, the company has designed and constructed a state-of-the-art high-purity gas production facility. The plant, located in the St. Leon Business Park north of Idaho Falls, Idaho, is now nearly complete.
The NRC operating license is required before the Company may store and process sufficient quantities of depleted uranium tetrafluoride (UF4) to support commercial scale fluoride gas production and is the last license or permit required before the company can begin commercial fluoride gas production.
(Intl. Isotopes Oct. 31, 2005)
International Isotopes Inc. applies for operating license for Fluorine Extraction Process (FEP) production plant project, Idaho, USA
On April 21, 2005, International Isotopes Inc. submitted an application to possess and utilize depleted uranium (DU), solid form as uranium tetrafluoride (UF4) or uranium oxide (UO2 or U3O8). The company requests to receive and to store up to 5000 kilograms of DU per year with an additional 1000 kilograms of DU in process equipment. The proposed licensed activity will be to produce high purity fluorine gas compounds, such as germanium tetrafluoride (GeF4) or boron trifluoride (BF3). This robust chemical reaction converts UF4 into U3O8/UO2 during the fluorine gas production process.
> See extra page
Urenco has filed a license application for the construction of a tails deconversion plant (UF6 to U3O8) at its Capenhurst site. (Urenco Annual Report 2005)
A Memorandum of Agreement has been signed with Cogéma to supply Urenco with a tails deconversion plant which is a copy of their plant Usine W that has operated since the 1980's. It is intended to sign the full contract by the end of the year 2005 with construction commencing in 2007.
(Minutes of the Urenco (Capenhurst) Ltd Local Liaison Committee, 30 Nov. 2005)
Urenco plans to construct a Tails Hex Deconversion Facility, Hex Cylinder Wash Plant and Tails Oxide Store. Construction work is scheduled to start in 2007 with active operations commencing in 2011.
(Minutes of the Urenco (Capenhurst) Ltd Local Liaison Committee, 30 June 2005)
INB No. 155
Information about Usine W (Nuclear Safety Authority - ASN, in French)
Hydrofluoric acid enters Tricastin site cooling water system
On Sep. 13, 2007, a significant amount of hydrofluoric acid entered the cooling water circuit at the deconversion plant for depleted uranium "Usine W". The cooling water system is serving the whole Tricastin site. Due to the cooling water becoming corrosive, several small leakages of the cooling water system were observed. After assuring the security of the plant and the employees, the cooling water system was emptied. The acidic water recovered was treated and released, leading to an exceedance of permitted short term release limits. Preliminary assessments suggest that the environmental impact of the event was not significant.
(ASN Oct. 5, 2007)
Russia plans to install two depleted uranium hexafluoride de-conversion plants
The Russian Federal Atomic Energy Agency (Rosatom) is implementing a number of projects to set up units that will process hexafluoride into chemically less dangerous compounds. In particular, at the Angarsk combine it is planned to install a Cedar unit by 2010-2011, which will use Russian processing technology, and a unit using French technology, which Rosatom acquired and plans to actively use, will be installed at another Rosatom enrichment company by 2009.
(Interfax June 22, 2007)
Areva signs technology transfer agreement with Tenex for depleted uranium hexafluoride de-conversion
AREVA and the Russian company TENEX signed a technology transfer agreement worth 50 million Euro for the construction of a uranium defluorination plant in Siberia.
This transfer includes the design of the installation, equipment supply, supervision of erection and testing and training in operation and maintenance.
AREVA will follow the contract to the end in 2009.
AREVA currently owns the only such plant in the world. Situated on the Pierrelatte site in the Drôme region of France, it has been transforming depleted uranium hexafluoride into U308, since 1984.
(Areva May 2, 2005)
> See also: British Nuclear Group Sellafield Limited Capenhurst site
Nuclear Installations Inspectorate presses British Nuclear Group to deal with hazard from uranium hexafluoride tails stored at Capenhurst
"[...] NII continues to actively press the licensee to develop the options to bring forward the date for the commencement of processing or disposing of the legacy 'Hex Tails' uranic and other materials currently stored on site, taking account of wider developments. The licensee continues to provide the site inspector with visibility of the ongoing work to review acceleration options. NII was encouraged that the licensee was now actively engaged in reviewing the options to address the 'Hex Tails' legacy, with a view to reducing the potential hazard from this legacy material, earlier than currently programmed in the Lifetime Plan. Some interim acceleration milestones were incorporated within the 2007/08 Lifetime Plan. NII will continue to press for progress to be made by the licensee towards the timely reduction of this medium term site hazard."
(British Nuclear Group Sellafield Limited Capenhurst Works, NII site inspector's quarterly report to the local stakeholder group for 1 January 2007 to 31 March 2007)
"[...] NII continues to actively press the licensee to develop the options to bring forward the date for the commencement of processing the legacy 'Hex Tails' uranic materials currently stored on site, taking account of wider developments. The licensee has agreed to present the outcome of the current review of acceleration options to NII and EA before the end of 2006. NII was encouraged that the licensee was now actively engaged in reviewing options to address the 'Hex Tails' legacy, with a view to reducing the potential hazard from this legacy material, earlier than currently programmed. NII will continue to press for progress to be made in the timely reduction of this medium term site hazard." (British Nuclear Group Sellafield Limited Capenhurst Works, NII Site Inspector's Quarterly Report to the Local Stakeholder Group for 1 July 2006 to 30 September 2006)
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)
Dutch Ministry discloses details on Urenco Almelo's depleted uranium disposition at COVRA
On Nov. 27, 2007, the Dutch Ministry of Environment (VROM), in an answer to a parliamentary question, disclosed that approximately an annual amount of 3700 t, that is almost half of the depleted uranium generated at Urenco's Almelo enrichment plant, is sent to the Centrale Organisatie Voor Radioactief Afval (COVRA) radioactive waste facility, where it is stored.
> Download Beantwoording Kamervragen lid Poppe 2070802570 over transport van kernafval (MS Word, in Dutch)
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)
On October 14, 2004, traces from an impact and a hole were detected in a container carrying depleted uranium in the form of U3O8 from Cogéma's conversion facility Usine W in Pierrelatte to the DU storage site in Bessines (Haute Vienne). The 28 mm-long fissure was detected on top of the container on arrival of the rail shipment in Bessines. It is assumed that the fissure occured during handling of the container at Pierrelatte. No traces of any release of radioactive material were detected.
> View ASN release Nov. 8, 2004 (in French)
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
former Installation nucléaire de base N°134 (Magasin d'uranium de Miramas)
Information about Miramas facility (Nuclear Safety Authority - ASN, in French)
On Oct. 2, 2007, the Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) announced that the license for the Miramas uranium storage site has been retracted after the facility has been dismantled.
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)
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is conducting a
strategic assessment of its low level radioactive waste (LLW)
regulatory program. The objective of this assessment is to identify and
prioritize activities that the staff can undertake to ensure a stable,
reliable and adaptable regulatory framework for effective LLW
management, while also considering future needs and changes that may
occur in the nation's commercial LLW management system.
The public comment period begins on July 7, 2006, and continues for 30 days.
Federal Register: July 7, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 130) p. 38675-38676 (download full text )
Strategic Assessment Issues Paper, DSI 5: Low Level Waste, Sep. 16, 1996 (1.8M PDF - ADAMS ML061700297)
Transcripts of NRC's Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste (ACNW): May 23, 2006 · May 24, 2006 (PDF)
U.S. NRC finds that depleted uranium is low level waste
> See here
Import of DU counterweights from United Kingdom to USA for land burial in Texas
> See here
U.S. NRC Petition for Rulemaking concerning control of disused DU counterweights
> See here
U.S. NRC Radiological Assessment of Exemptions for Source and Byproduct Materials
> See here
> See extra page