Plutonium Immobilization Form Evaluation PDF Download
Are you looking for read ebook online? Search for your book and save it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Download Plutonium Immobilization Form Evaluation PDF full book. Access full book title Plutonium Immobilization Form Evaluation by . Download full books in PDF and EPUB format.
Author: Publisher: ISBN: Category : Languages : en Pages : 24
Book Description
The 1994 National Academy of Sciences study and the 1997 assessment by DOE's Office of Nonproliferation and National Security have emphasized the importance of the overall objectives of the Plutonium Disposition Program of beginning disposition rapidly. President Clinton and other leaders of the G-7 plus one ('Political Eight') group of states, at the Moscow Nuclear Safety And Security Summit in April 1996, agreed on the objectives of accomplishing disposition of excess fissile material as soon as practicable. To meet these objectives, DOE has laid out an aggressive schedule in which large-scale immobilization operations would begin in 2005. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), the lead laboratory for the development of Pu immobilization technologies for the Department of Energy's Office of Fissile Materials Disposition (MD), was requested by MD to recommend the preferred immobilization form and technology for the disposition of excess weapons-usable Pu. In a series of three separate evaluations, the technologies for the candidate glass and ceramic forms were compared against criteria and metrics that reflect programmatic and technical objectives: (1) Evaluation of the R & D and engineering data for the two forms against the decision criteria/metrics by a technical evaluation panel comprising experts from within the immobilization program. (2) Integrated assessment by LLNL immobilization management of the candidate technologies with respect to the weighted criteria and other programmatic objectives, leading to a recommendation to DOE/MD on the preferred technology based on technical factors. (3) Assessment of the decision process, evaluation, and recommendation by a peer review panel of independent experts. Criteria used to assess the relative merits of the immobilization technologies were a subset of the criteria previously used by MD to choose among disposition options leading to the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision for the Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials, January 1997. Criteria were: (1) resistance to Pu theft, diversion, and recovery by a terrorist organization or rogue nation; (2) resistance to recovery and reuse by host nation; (3) technical viability, including technical maturity, development risk, and acceptability for repository disposal; (4) environmental, safety, and health factors; (5) cost effectiveness; and (6) timeliness. On the basis of the technical evaluation and assessments, in September, 1997, LLNL recommended to DOE/MD that ceramic technologies be developed for deployment in the planned Pu immobilization plant.
Author: Publisher: ISBN: Category : Languages : en Pages : 24
Book Description
The 1994 National Academy of Sciences study and the 1997 assessment by DOE's Office of Nonproliferation and National Security have emphasized the importance of the overall objectives of the Plutonium Disposition Program of beginning disposition rapidly. President Clinton and other leaders of the G-7 plus one ('Political Eight') group of states, at the Moscow Nuclear Safety And Security Summit in April 1996, agreed on the objectives of accomplishing disposition of excess fissile material as soon as practicable. To meet these objectives, DOE has laid out an aggressive schedule in which large-scale immobilization operations would begin in 2005. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), the lead laboratory for the development of Pu immobilization technologies for the Department of Energy's Office of Fissile Materials Disposition (MD), was requested by MD to recommend the preferred immobilization form and technology for the disposition of excess weapons-usable Pu. In a series of three separate evaluations, the technologies for the candidate glass and ceramic forms were compared against criteria and metrics that reflect programmatic and technical objectives: (1) Evaluation of the R & D and engineering data for the two forms against the decision criteria/metrics by a technical evaluation panel comprising experts from within the immobilization program. (2) Integrated assessment by LLNL immobilization management of the candidate technologies with respect to the weighted criteria and other programmatic objectives, leading to a recommendation to DOE/MD on the preferred technology based on technical factors. (3) Assessment of the decision process, evaluation, and recommendation by a peer review panel of independent experts. Criteria used to assess the relative merits of the immobilization technologies were a subset of the criteria previously used by MD to choose among disposition options leading to the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision for the Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials, January 1997. Criteria were: (1) resistance to Pu theft, diversion, and recovery by a terrorist organization or rogue nation; (2) resistance to recovery and reuse by host nation; (3) technical viability, including technical maturity, development risk, and acceptability for repository disposal; (4) environmental, safety, and health factors; (5) cost effectiveness; and (6) timeliness. On the basis of the technical evaluation and assessments, in September, 1997, LLNL recommended to DOE/MD that ceramic technologies be developed for deployment in the planned Pu immobilization plant.
Author: Publisher: ISBN: Category : Languages : en Pages : 67
Book Description
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), in its role as the lead laboratory for the development of plutonium immobilization technologies for the Department of Energy's Office of Fissile Materials Disposition (MD), has been requested by MD to recommend an immobilization technology for the disposition of surplus weapons- usable plutonium. The recommendation and supporting documentation was requested to be provided by September 1, 1997. This report addresses the choice between glass and ceramic technologies for immobilizing plutonium using the can-in-canister approach. Its purpose is to provide a comparative evaluation of the two candidate technologies and to recommend a form based on technical considerations.
Author: Publisher: ISBN: Category : Languages : en Pages :
Book Description
This report documents the results of a technical evaluation of the merits of ceramic and glass immobilization forms for the disposition of surplus weapons-useable plutonium. The evaluation was conducted by a Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP), whose members were selected to cover a relevant range of scientific and technical expertise and represented each of the technical organizations involved in the Plutonium Immobilization Program. The TEP held a formal review at Lawrence Liver-more National Laboratory (LLNL) from July 2%August 1, 1997. Following this review, the TEP documented the review and its evaluation of the two immobilization technologies in this report to provide a technical basis for a recommendation by LLNL to the Department of Energy (DOE) for the preferred immobilization form. The comparison of the glass and ceramic forms and manufacturing processes was a tremendous challenge to the TEP. The two forms and their processes are similar in many ways. The TEP went to great effort to accurately assess what were, in many cases, fine details of the processes, unit operations, and the glass and ceramic forms themselves. The set of criteria used by the Fissile Materials Disposition Program (FMDP) in past screenings and down-selections was used to measure-the two options. One exception is that the TEP did not consider criteria that were largely nontechnical (namely international impact, public acceptance, and effects on other : DOE programs). The TEP s measures and assessments are documented in detail. Care was taken to ensure that the data used were well documented and traceable to their source. Although no final conclusion regarding the preferred form was reached or explicitly stated in this report (this was not within the TEP s charter), no show stoppers were identified for either form. Both forms appear capable of satisfying all the criteria, as interpreted by the TEP. The TEP identified a number of distinct and quantifiable differences between the forms for several of the criteria. These differences ranged from insignificant to moderate, depending on the specific criterion and the context in which it was applied. No summary statement regarding the overall superiority of either form is presented here, as that would imply a weighting of the various criteria, a judgment the TEP was instructed to avoid. This judgment is deferred to the assessment and peer review that will follow this evaluation. The decision to select one form over another will, of course, require the consideration of many additional factors beyond the technical criteria, including the nontechnical criteria, constraints, and policy issues, all of which were outside the scope of this review.
Author: Publisher: ISBN: Category : Languages : en Pages : 180
Book Description
This integrated plan for the DOE Office of Fissile Materials Disposition (MD) describes the technology development and major project activities necessary to support the deployment of the immobilization approach for disposition of surplus weapons-usable plutonium. The plan describes details of the development and testing (D & T) tasks needed to provide technical data for design and operation of a plutonium immobilization plant based on the ceramic can-in-canister technology (''Immobilization Fissile Material Disposition Program Final Immobilization Form Assessment and Recommendation'', UCRL-ID-128705, October 3, 1997). The plan also presents tasks for characterization and performance testing of the immobilization form to support a repository licensing application and to develop the basis for repository acceptance of the plutonium form. Essential elements of the plant project (design, construction, facility activation, etc.) are described, but not developed in detail, to indicate how the D & T results tie into the overall plant project. Given the importance of repository acceptance, specific activities to be conducted by the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (RW) to incorporate the plutonium form in the repository licensing application are provided in this document, together with a summary of how immobilization D & T activities provide input to the license activity. The ultimate goal of the Immobilization Project is to develop, construct, and operate facilities that will immobilize from about 18 to 50 tonnes (MT) of U.S. surplus weapons usable plutonium materials in a manner that meets the ''spent fuel'' standard (Fissile Materials Storage and Disposition Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Record of Decision, ''Storage and Disposition Final PEIS'', issued January 14, 1997, 62 Federal Register 3014) and is acceptable for disposal in a geologic repository. In the can-in-canister technology, this is accomplished by encapsulating the plutonium-containing ceramic forms within large canisters of high level waste (HLW) glass. Deployment of the immobilization capability should occur by 2006 and be completed within 10 years.
Author: Publisher: ISBN: Category : Languages : en Pages : 15
Book Description
In the aftermath of the Cold War, the US and Russia agreed to large reductions in nuclear weapons. To aid in the selection of long-term management options, DOE has undertaken a multifaceted study to select options for storage and disposition of plutonium in keeping with US policy that plutonium must be subjected to the highest standards of safety, security, and accountability. One alternative being considered is immobilization. To arrive at a suitable immobilization form, we first reviewed published information on high-level waste immobilization technologies and identified 72 possible plutonium immobilization forms to be prescreened. Surviving forms were further screened using multi-attribute utility analysis to determine the most promising technology families. Promising immobilization families were further evaluated to identify chemical, engineering, environmental, safety, and health problems that remain to be solved prior to making technical decisions as to the viability of using the form for long- term disposition of plutonium. From this evaluation, a detailed research and development plan has been developed to provide answers to these remaining questions.
Author: E.R. Merz Publisher: Springer Science & Business Media ISBN: 9780792338413 Category : Science Languages : en Pages : 360
Book Description
This NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Disposal of Weapons Plutonium is a follow-up event to two preceding workshops, each dealing with a special subject within the overall disarmament issue: "Disposition of Weapon Plutonium", sponsored by the NATO Science Committee. The first workshop of this series was held at the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London on 24-25 January 1994, entitled "Managing the Plutonium Surplus, Applications, and Options". Its over all goal was to clarify the current situation with respect to pluto nium characteristics and availability, the technical options for use or disposal, and their main technical, environmental, and economic constraints. In the immediate term, plutonium recovered from dismantled nuclear warheads will have to be stored securely, and under international safeguards if possible. In the intermediate term, the principal alter natives for disposition of this plutonium are: irradiation in mixed oxide (MOX) fuel assemblies in existing commercial light-water reac tors or in specially adapted light-water reactors capable of operation with full cores of MOX fuel .and irradiation in future fast reactors. Another option is to blend plutonium with high-level waste as it is vitrified for final disposal in a geologic repository. In both cases, the high radioactivity of the resulting products provides "self shielding" and prevents separation of plutonium without already developed and available sophisticated technology. The so-called "spent fuel standard" as an effective protection barrier is - quired in either case.
Author: Publisher: ISBN: Category : Languages : en Pages :
Book Description
Safe Pu management is an important and urgent task with profound environmental, national, and international security implications. Presidential Policy Directive 13 and analyses by scientific, technical, and international policy organizations brought about a focused effort within the Department of Energy (DOE) to identify and implement long-term disposition paths for surplus Pu. The principal goal is to render surplus Pu as inaccessible and unattractive for reuse in nuclear weapons as Pu in spent reactor fuel. In the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision for the Storage and Disposition of Weapons- Usable Fissile Materials (1997), DOE announced pursuit of two disposition technologies: (1) irradiation of Pu as MOX fuel in existing reactors and (2) immobilization of Pu into solid forms containing fission products as a radiation barrier. DOE chose an immobilization approach that includes use of the can-in-canister option. . for a portion of the surplus, non-pit Pu material. In the can-in-canister approach, cans of glass or ceramic forms containing Pu are encapsulated within canisters of HLW glass. In support of the selection process, a technical evaluation of retrievability and recoverability of Pu from glass and ceramic forms by a host nation and by rogue nations or subnational groups was completed. The evaluation involved determining processes and flowsheets for Pu recovery, comparing these processes against criteria and metrics established by the Fissile Materials Disposition Program and then comparing the recovery processes against each other and against SNF processes.
Author: Publisher: ISBN: Category : Languages : en Pages : 12
Book Description
This report identifies and documents the most appropriate bagless transfer can size to support Plutonium Immobilization Can Loading operations. Also, this report considers can diameter, can wall thickness, and can length.
Author: 
Author: 
Author: 
Author: 
Author: 
Author: 
Author: 
Author: E.R. Merz
Author: 
Author: 
Author: