Richland

continued

FY

1972:

$ 2,121,722

FY 1973:

$

3,452,000 2,088,000 1,364,000

FY 1974:

Separations facilities (UNH to UO3) standby between campaigns Deactivation and surveillance of reactors and related facilities

3.030,000 $ 1,825,000 1,205,000

Deacti

The Purex separation facility and the plant for conversion of liquid uranyl nitrate to solid uranium oxide was placed in wet standby during the first quarter of FY 1973. The Purex facility will be maintained in standby until the last quarter of FY 1974, when it is scheduled to restart processing N reactor fuels. The uranium oxide plant will be started up in early FY 1975. vation costs will continue to be incurred on the KE and KW reactors in FY 1974. Surveillance costs will be incurred on Redox and

the B, C, D, DR, F, H and KE and KW reactors.

Savannah River

FY 1972: $ In FY 1973, $330,000 standby costs are provided for L and R reactors provided for L and R reactors in standby.

I.

Transportation and Security Shipments

FY 1972: $ 1,664,573 FY 1973: $ 1,711,000 FY 1974: $ 2,700,000 This category includes the cost of transportation, security guard services and related items in the shipment of AEC special nuclear materials. Following is the breakdown of costs by operations offices.

.....

....

Oak Ridge FY 1972: $ 1,209,510 FY 1973: $ 1,337,000 FY 1974: $ 1,525,00 Included in this estimate are costs of interplant product flows for the gaseous diffusion sites; shipments between the FMPC, RMI and the reactor sites of fuel and target elements for the Richland and Savannah River reactors; FMPC costs to ship U03 to Paducah and thorium nitrate to commercial processors; AEC patrol costs for transporting and for guarding in transit classified matter chargeable to the nuclear materials program; and miscellaneous other shipments. The FY 1974 increase reflects increased tonnages of reactor fuels shipped from the FMPC to RMI and to the reactor sites.

Richland

FY 1972: $ 297,931 FY 1973: $ 114,00 FY 1974: $ 155,000 Enriched uranyl nitrate is converted to uranium oxide at the U03 plant at Richland and shipped to the FMPC to be recycled to additional reactor fuel. In addition, plutonium metal and irradiated tritium targets are shipped to other sites such as Savannah River and weapon production facilities. The increase in FY 1974 is caused by an increase in the scheduled number of shipments of

FY 1972: $ 148,999 FY 1973: $ 200,000 FY 1974: $ 175,000 The FY 1974 estimate provides for a high level of U-235 shipments to Oak Ridge offset by a decrease in miscellaneous shipments and shipments from Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.

Idaho FY 1972: $ 8,133 FY 1973: $ 60,000 FY 1974: $ 60,000 Enriched uranyl nitrate is converted to uranium oxide at the ICPP and shipped to Y-12 for conversion to Savannah River fuel, or to Portsmouth for conversion to UF6 cascade feed.

FY 1972: $ 3,885,627 FY 1973: $ 6,549,000 FY 1972: $ 2,644,185 FY 1973: $ 4,600,000

FY 1974: $ 7,000,000 FY 1974: $ 4,305,000

Costs include warehousing uranium of various forms at all sites, storage of contaminated feed plant equipment at the ORGDP, conversion of depleted UF, to UF at Paducah to achieve lower cost storage, and, beginning in FY 1973, processing, storage and distribution of U-233 ($1,615,000); studies performed for the Division of Production and Materials Management by the Atomic Energy Combined Operational Planning (AECOP) staff ($600,000) as well as special management studies, including conceptual design work (other than for new separation plants) performed at the gaseous diffusion plants ($1,550,000); and work performed by the Oak Ridge contractors and operations office which is not specifically related to other activities ($540,000). The decrease in FY 1974 is attributed to a general reduction in the management studies level.

Richland FY 1972: $ 379,239 FY 1973: $ 976,000 FY 1974: $ 1,750,000 FY 1974 costs include warehousing UO, ($5,000); Douglas United Nuclear employee group insurance costs in excess of employee payments ($530,000); seismic studies to better understand earthquake risks in the Hanford region ($160,000); the cleanup of approximately 2,000 acres of contaminated land associated with the B and C waste disposal cribs located south of the 200 east chemical processing area ($750,000); AEC's commitment to pay the employer's share of insurance (life and health) premiums for certain employees who retired under the General Electric Co., former principal contractor at Richland ($225,000); Douglas United Nuclear employee severance payments ($60,000); work performed by the operations office which is not specifically related to other activities ($20,000). The increase in FY 1974 over FY 1973 of $774,000 is primarily due to the B and C crib cleanup, DUN severance payments and an offsetting decrease in seismic investigations.

FY 1974 costs provide for the continuation of Savannah River's land management program conducted by the U. S. Forest Service for the control of erosion and wildlife and management of an extensive timber stand ($475,000) 1/, warehousing of depleted uranium oxide ($130,000), and continuation of the Cf-252 market development program aimed at promoting the optimum utilization of the product and predicting the potential demand through loans and sales of material for use in industry, medicine, education, environmental control and other fields ($250,000) 2/.

Washington Headquarters

FY 1972: $

35,000

0 FY 1973: $ 148,000 FY 1974: $ Costs provide for fire inspection by Factory Insurance Associates and Factory Mutual Research Corporation of contractor sites. K. Other Procurement and Production FY 1972: $ 1,360,563 FY 1973: $ 1,279,000 FY 1974: $ 1,900,000

For detailed justification see classified page NM-41.

....

L. Process Development FY 1972: $ 30,685,111 FY 1973: $ 32,247,000 FY 1974: $ 39,000,000 This category covers development efforts at each site which are directed toward achieving program objectives in a safe, efficient and economical manner. It includes programs to improve the technology and demonstrate the reliability and economic feasibility of separating uranium isotopes by the gas centrifuge process; improvements in gaseous diffusion technology which can be incorporated into the cascade improvement and cascade uprating programs (CIP and CUP); development of technology to assure ability to respond to change in requirements for reactor produced isotopes; and efforts to improve performance, reduce costs, increase safety, and improve management of radioactive wastes. For detailed justification see classified pages NM-41 NM-46.

Other radio

in rehandling when a decision is reached regarding final treatment and disposition of the transuranium waste. active solid wastes receive special handling at the burial ground and require special burial techniques. In addition to the burial function, overall burial ground operations include preparation of permanent records of the location of each waste emplacement and monitoring required to assure there is no significant migration of radioactivity through the soil from buried wastes.

The $0.4 million increase (from $0.2 million in FY 1973 to $0.6 million in FY 1974) represents an increased program of site evaluations and studies of AEC monitoring techniques. Site characterization studies and monitoring appraisals are needed to provide the knowledge of site geology, hydrology and current site conditions for predicting and verifying the fate of radioactivity at AEC onsite burial grounds. The funds for these activities provide for a variety of studies at several AEC locations related to current and proposed waste storage practices, current site monitoring efforts, the suitability of sites for long-term storage of radioactive solid wastes, detection and control of migration of radioactivity, stabilization of burial ground surfaces to minimize or prevent migration, potential methods for removal or underground treatment, and the potential for radio-isotope migration from various waste forms.

The FY 1974 budget estimate provides $0.1 million for hydraulic fracturing of waste at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. The concentrate from the liquid waste handling system is mixed with cement and other additives and injected deep underground where it sets up as thin sheets of concrete between layers of shale. Periodic injections are required to empty out tank storage space needed to provide for continued operation of the liquid waste handling system. The underground injections require careful control and detailed surveillance.

These funds provide for the development and conceptual design associated with storage and waste repackaging facilities, feasibility studies of new and improved methods of accommodating radioactive waste and the investigation of waste treatment and handling processes. Included in the types of waste to be accommodated for long-term storage are the AEC-produced solid and aqueous waste and commercially generated high-level waste.