-:T’ 34;) - "w"‘Lé. k‘? . H I Kw...“ 3 l"""" ’ Report No. 80-204 L V%“i V? in ._-.~\ e _-‘.';..? 15,)-‘ I} In 3‘ .4 '\" ‘ TE 1? 7 E '1‘/r ' Q’ ‘I . v ' - 1" L 4 -1"‘-.. ‘-\_ €’ ;”t~’. " 9' 7 J ,1 3 3*»: xi ...l. ‘- " .3‘. T7 ‘-1 3-“: ”-v —y. . ;‘ L; ,»-5, 5' I. 3“ ‘W I‘ 4"" ~- /41 "4 ;‘L°{.,__‘A!JBx xgi " '\ '? . " *4 ‘UM: .1 H.-4.1;:-.«x.~_~ 0.‘.-3 ,_ F.‘ 1; . > .- ‘*l&WmugCm»sJ;Evaa3mV NUCLEAR REACTOR FUEL REPECCESSINC: ’C' .1i,I SELECTED REFERENCES, 1976-1980 by Bonnie F. Mangan Science Bibliographer Library Services Division December 4, 1980 ' 0 A A QC 170 Gen. olu ujn‘fix1i4I»»4IIt niversit[/ of Missouri 010-10386010 . . . The Congressional Research Service works exclusively for the Congress, conducting research, analyzing legislation, and providing information at the request of committees, Mem- bers, and their staffs. The Service makes such research available, without parti- san bias, in many forms including studies, reports, compila- tions, digests, and background briefings. Upon request, CRS assists committees in analyzing legislative proposals and issues, and in assessing the possible effects of these proposals and their alternatives. The Service’s senior specialists and subject analysts are also available for personal consultations in their respective fields of expertise. ABSTRACT This bibliography presents works on commercial reactor fuel reprocessing. The major thrust of the bibliography is towards environmental and economic issues. However, since one of the major criticisms directed at reprocessing is that it can contribute to the spread, or proliferation, of nuclear weapons, some works on proliferation are included. CRS-v PREFACE This bibliography presents works on commercial reactor fuel reprocessing, i.e., ghe chemical process that recovers residual uranium and plutonium from used, or spent, reactor fuel. Though the Carter Administration in April 1977 decided to "defer indefinitely" commercial reprocessing, future energy needs may necessitate reprocessing to "close the back-end" of the nuclear fuel cycle and to fuel a breeder reactor program. The major thrust of the bibliography is toward environmental and economic issues in reprocessing. However, since one of the major criticisms directed at reprocessing is that it can contribute to the spread, or proliferation, of nuclear weapons, some works on proliferation are included. An attempt to stem proliferation lies behind the present U.S. ban on repro- cessing. The International Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation (INFCE) was initiated by the Carter Administration in 1977 in an attempt to find a more proliferation resistant alternative to the plutonium fuel cycle. Proliferation considerations were behind President Carter's decision to delay indefinitely reprocessing and to concentrate on the once-through nuclear fuel cycle in light water reactors. The final report of INFCE was issued on February 26, 1980. It concluded that uranium reserves in the non-Communist world would not last beyond 2025 without a switch to fast breeder reactors. The development of a breeder cycle would necessitate reprocessing of nuclear fuels and the recycling of plutonium. INFCE also recognized reprocessing as "an essential preliminary" for many of the possible fuel cycles considered. Reconsideration of the 1977 ban on reprocess- ing in light of INFCE findings may generate renewed interest in the need for CRS-vi reprocessing among U.S. policy makers. The bibliography covers the period January 1976 to the present. Most cita- tions are annotated and have been drawn from the computerized bibliographic data base created and maintained by the Library Services Division of the Congressional Research Service. The remaining material was selected from the Library of Congress catalogs and published indexes covering the field of nuclear energy. The material is arranged chronologically by year; within each year, the order is alphabetical by main entry. Citations to items in the classified :ollections of the Library of Congress are provided with call numbers. Journal articles are provided with the call number for the bound volumes of the journal regardless of whether the issues cited have been bound at this time. A number of items published by the National Technical Information Service that are not in the classified collections of the Library of Congress can be found on microfiche in the Science and Technology Division of the Library. A glossary of terms is included as an appendix. CRS-Vii CONTENTS I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 5 19770ooocooooooooonooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo-ooooococoa 19760ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo GloSSaryIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Acknowledgments The author would like to thank Robert Civiak, Analyst in Energy Technology, Science Policy Research Division, for the technical advice he provided throughout the preparation of this bibliography. Stephen Powitz ably input the bibliography after principal review of the bibliography by Richard Gigax, Assistant Head of the Subject Specialization Section of the Library Services Division. International Energy Associates. International Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation. Manne, Alan S., and Richard G. Richels. Marshall, Walter. NUCLEAR REACTOR FUEL REPROCESSING: SELECTED REFERENCES, 1976-1980 1980 Study of the potential uses of the Barnwell Nuclear Fuel Plant (BNFP): final report. Washington, 1980. 295 p. Evaluates the possible international and domestic uses for the Barn- well Nuclear Fuel Plant after the conclusion of the International Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation. Establishes a set of guidelines relating to energy, nonproliferation, cost-effectiveness, and local acceptability concerns that are used in assessing the potential uses of the Barnwell facility. Reprocessing, plutonium handling, recycle: report of INFCE Working Group 4. Vienna, International Atomic Energy Agency, 1980. 297 p. Sets forth the findings of the INFCE Working Group 4, which was requested to study the technological, economic, environmental and energy aspects of reprocessing and recycling plutonium in thermal reactors on an industrial scale. Also examines conditions and restrictions for handling plutonium, including its storage and transportation. Working Group 4 was set up as one of eight Working Groups appointed by the Organizing Confer- ence of the International Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation in Washington on 19-21 October 1977. Evaluating nuclear fuel cycles: decision analysis and probability assessments. Energy policy, v. 8, Mar. 1980: 3-16. HD9502.AlE54, v. 8 After conducting a decision analysis experiment among 16 experts on the subject of plutonium fuel cycles, the authors find that the choice to use or not to use fast breeder reactors is a polarized debate that pre- cludes arriving at an objective scientific judgment concerning the risk of proliferation versus economic benefits. Plutonium breeds international unity. New scientist, v. 85, Mar. 6, 1980: 730-733. Q1.N52, v. 85 Considers that the most efficient use of global nuclear resources is to fuel fast breeder reactors with the spent fuel from thermal reactors. Reasons that fuel reuse will encourage international cooperation since few countries will be able to afford to operate both types of reactors. Congress. House. Comittee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. Sub- committee on Energy and Power. Spent fuel storage and disposal. Hear- ings, 96th Congress, lst session, on H.R. 2586, H.R. 1071, H.R. 1791, and H.R. 2762. June 26-27, 1979. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1980. 342 p. KF27.I5542 1979p "Serial no. 96-97" Hearings explore the use of proposed reprocessing plants like Barnwell as temporary storage sites for spent nuclear fuel. They examine the econ- omics of storing spent fuel and how it relates to the overall cost of re- processing if reprocessing subsequently takes place- CRS-2 U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Science and Technology. Subcommittee on Energy Research and Production. International nuclear energy issues. Hearing, 96th Congress, lst session. Oct. 31, 1979. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1980. 155 p. KF27.S3936 1979 "No. 76" Includes testimony on the status of nuclear fuel reprocessing programs and investigates the potential of using the Barnwell reprocessing plant as an international nuclear fuel reprocessing demonstration center. U.S. General Accounting Office. Nuclear fuel reprocessing and the‘problems of safeguarding against the spread of nuclear weapons; report to the Congress by the Comptroller General of the United States. [Washington] 1980. 65 p. "EMD-80-38, Mar. 18, l980."’ Concludes that the Carter policy of indefinitely deferring commercial spent fuel reprocessing in the U.S. has hindered the research and develop- ment of ways to safeguard against the diversion of nuclear material from reprocessing plants for nonpeaceful purposes. U.S. Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service. Alternative breeding cycles for nuclear power: an analysis (revised August 1980); report prepared for the Committee on Science and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives, Ninety-sixth Congress, second session. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1980. 124 p. ~ At head of title: Committee print. "Serial AAA" Prepared by Marcia Smith, Carl Behrens and Warren Donnelly. Examines five alternative breeder reactors with consideration to their stages of "technological development, safety, commercial attractive- ness, and proliferation risks." All the alternative breeders considered involved the processing of spent fuels. U.S. Library of Congress. Environment and Natural Resources Policy Division. Nuclear proliferation factbook. Prepared for the Subcommittee on Energy, Nuclear Proliferation, and Federal Services of the Committee on Govern- mental Affairs, U.S. Senate, and the Subcommittee on International Econ- omic Policy and Trade of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, U.S. House of Representatives. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1980. 531 p. At head of title: 96th Congress, 2d session. Joint committee print. Contains basic information on the nuclear fuel cycle and statistics on reprocessing and plutonium recycling. :l979 Allardice, R. H., and H. A. Taylor. Plutonium processing for the fast reactor fuel cycle. Nuclear engineering international, v. 24, Nov. 1979: 52-55. TK900l.N75, V. 24 Discuss the necessity of a safe, reliable plant to process plutonium with maximum containment and the future of the fast reactor plutonium fuel cycle. Information from the operation of Britain's Dounreay and Windscale reprocessing plants points to how to improve plant design for larger scale operations. CRS-3 Blumfield, C. W. Experience from a collocated fast reactor fuel cycle. Nuclear engineering international, v. 24, Feb. 1979: 32-35. TK900l.N75, v. 24 Points to the benefits of locating fuel fabrication and reprocessing plants at one site. The Dounreay Fast Reactor is described, as well as its fuel fabrication and reprocessing facilities. Culler, Floyd L., Jr. Precedents for diversion-resistant nuclear fuel cycles. Nuclear engineering and design, v. 51, Jan. 1979: 113-118. TK9001.N755, v. 51 Surveys various separations processes that could be used within the development of the Civex reprocessing system. De Volpi, Alexander. Proliferation, plutonium, and policy: institutional and technological impediments to nuclear weapons propagation. New York, Pergamon Press, 1979. 361 p. (Pergamon policy studies, no. 13) JX1974.73.D48 1979 Proposes the use of isotopically-denatured plutonium to prevent pro- liferation. Claims that by diluting fissile plutonium with sufficient non-fissile PU-238, PU-240, and PU-242, the material would be made perma- nently unsuitable for fission-explosive use. Heising-Goodman, Carolyn DeLane. The reprocessing decision: a study in policy-making under uncertainty. New York, Garland Pub., 1979. 1 v. (various pagings) HD9698.U52H44 1979 Originally presented as the author's thesis, Stanford University, 1978. Explores the justification for the policy of deferring reprocessing by analyzing and comparing the social benefits of available reprocessing alternatives with their social costs. Measures "direct" and "indirect" economic benefits of reprocessing as well as the social costs from health, environmental and safety technological risks and the risks associated with nuclear theft and sabotage. Concludes from the comparison that the option to permit reprocessing has the largest positive margin of benefits over costs. Levenson, Milton, and Edwin Zebroski. A fast breeder system concept: a diver- sion resistant fuel cycle. Nuclear engineering and design, v. 51, Jan. 1979: 119-132. TK9001.N755, v. 51 The authors suggest methods of making a Civex reprocessing plant as terrorist proof as possible. They include flow charts for the Purex and Civex methods of reprocessing and examine the potential risk of forced diversion of nuclear materials from each process. Power, Paul F. The Carter anti-plutonium policy. Energy policy, v.’7, Sept. 1979: 215-231. A HD9502.A1E54, v. 7 Analyzes President Carter's nuclear nonproliferation policy through an evaluation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978 and its impact on countries which rely on U.S. nuclear exports- Rippon, Simon. Recycle capability: a Belgian specialty. Nuclear news, v. 22, Apr. 1979: 59-60. QC770.N75, v. 22 Describes the mixed oxide fuel plant in Dessel, Belgium, and the attempt by Belgonucleaire and the Centre d'etude de l'energie nucleaire of Belgium to demonstrate the commercial feasibility of thermal recycling of plutonium. Salander, Carsten. Starr, Chauncey. Wilkie, Tom. Zabaluev, Y. V. CRS-4 Gorleben hearing clears the air. Nuclear engineering international, v. 24, May 1979: 6-7, 9. TK900l.N75, V. 24 Gives results of a meeting on the pros and cons of building a nuclear fuel reprocessing and waste disposal facility at Gorleben, West Germany. The separation of nuclear power from nuclear proliferation. Nuclear engineering and design, v. 51, Jan. 1979: 105-118. TK900l.N755, v. 51 Addresses the technical question of whether a chemical reprocessing method can be developed which meets the economic requirements for com- mercial fuel and which minimizes or removes the risk of plutonium diver- sion. The author is critical of the Purex method of reprocessing because of its high external fuel inventory. He views the Civex method of repro- cessing as a more diversion proof method for recycling of plutonium in light water reactors. Subcom- Oversight Congress. House. Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. mittee on Energy and Environment. Nuclear waste management. hearings, 96th Congress, lst session. Jan. 25-26, 1979. Govt. Print. Off., 1979. 602 p. KF27.I5l8 1979 "Serial no. 96-l" Hearings include testimony that the reprocessing option must be considered as part of the ultimate disposal of nuclear waste. Congress. House. Committee on International Relations. Subcommittee on International Economic Policy and Trade. Nuclear fuel transfer for reprocessing: pending cases. Hearings, 95th Congress, 2d session. Wash- ington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1979. 162 p. KF27.I54924 l978e Hearings held Sept. 26 and Oct-\3, 1978. Dounreay rebuilds its reprocessing plant safely and economi- Nuclear engineering international, v. 24, Apr. 1979: 32-34. TK900l.N75, V. 24 Describes the process by which the original reprocessing plant at Dounreay, Scotland, was gutted and refurbished at.a cost of L1 million. Points out that decommissioning and decontamination are feasible. cally. Management of radionuclides from reprocessing plant gaseous effluents. 23‘3lo QC770oI4955, V0 21 Reports on the results and conclusions of an International Atomic Energy Commission Technical Committee meeting in Sept. l976 on the disposal of gaseous radionuclides from airborne effluents of fuel reprocessing. Washington, U.S. International Atomic Energy Agency bulletin, v. 21, Feb. 1979: CRS-5 1978 Barnaby, Frank. fhe politics of reprocessing. New scientist, v. 78, Apr. 6, 1978: 18-199 QloN52, V0 78 "This article summarises the political-and commercial--pressures acting toward a fast breeder economy." Since adequate supplies of pluto- nium to fuel breeder reactors can only be obtained from reprocessing, the author predicts that if reprocessing and the breeder reactor are delayed, nuclear proliferation may be slowed. Bettauer, Ronald J. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978. Law and policy in international business, v. 10, no. 4, 1978: 1105-1180. K12.A92, v. 10 Describes licensing procedures under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978 whereby the U.S. agrees to transfer nuclear material and technology to foreign nations. Considers the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act the first comprehensive change since the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 relating to the terms and conditions of U.S. peaceful nuclear foreign trade. Examines U.S. control of reprocessing spent fuel resulting from U.S. supplied enriched uranium. Civex: a diversion-proof plutonium fuel cycle. Electronic Power Research Institute journal, v. 3, Apr. 1978: 11-13. TKl.E233A, v. 3 Unlike the Purex process which produces pure plutonium, pure uranium and waste products, the Civex system separates out the bulk of the wastes but leaves a small percentage of the waste with the uranium and plutonium in a dilute concentrate which proponents of Civex claim makes them useless for weapons purposes. The reusable nuclear fuel material is still radio- iactive and can be handled safely only by remotely operated tools, whereas pure plutonium emitting weak alpha rays can be handled with rubber gloves. Sees the benefit of Civex in removing the threat of plutonium diversion from the fast breeder cycle. Civex: solution to breeder/diversion dilemma? Nuclear news, v. 21, 1978: 32-37. QC770.N75, v. 21 Describes the Civex process of reprocessing as a "constructive response" to President Carter's call for the International Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation to develop more proliferation-proof systems for the nucle- ar fuel cycle. Claims that the solution of what to do with plutonium pro- duced in thermal reactors is to use it in breeder reactors. Cooper, Hal B..H., and Sulaksh R. Gautam. A technical and economic evaluation of the atmospheric containment technology for radioactive isotope'releases from nuclear fuel reprocessing plants. [Austin] Center for Energy Studies, University of Texas at Austin, 1978. 82 p. (Environmental study, no. 2) TD899.R3C66 The authors examine the control technology and evaluate its economic feasibility for containing releases to the atmosphere of radioactive iso- topes from nuclear fuel reprocessing plants. CRS-6 Feiveson, Harold A. Proliferation resistant nuclear fuel cycles. Annual review of energy, v. 3, 1978: 357-394. TJl63.2.A55, v. 3 Points to the increased chance of proliferation in the reprocessing and recycling of plutonium. Discusses the economic viability of alterna- tive fuel cycles. Expresses caution over the development of a large scale breeder program which would necessitate plutonium reprocessing. Gilinsky, Victor. Plutonium proliferation and the price of reprocessing. Foreign affairs, v. 57, winter 1978-1979: 374-386. D410.F6, v. 57 Examines the implications of the French and British decision to pursue reprocessing in light of the U.S. attempt to restrict plutonium trade until better safeguards are developed. Claims U.S. nonproliferation policy must attempt to be balanced between restrictions on plutonium and support of Western European nuclear programs. Goldsmith, Edward, Peter Bunyard, and Nicholas Hildyard. 3 Reprocessing the truth: The Ecologist analyses the Windscale report. Wadebridge, The Ecolo- gist, 1978. 8 p. 3 TD195.R4G64 The authors are critical of the report favoring the expansion of British Nuclear Fuels Limited's reprocessing facility at Windscale and claim that Justice Parker ignored basic evidence in reaching his decision. Arguments against the economic feasibility of commercial reprocessing and the possibility of proliferation are cited as evidence that the sanctioning of the Windscale project was wrong. Heising, Carolyn D. The reprocessing decision. Electric Power Research Institute journal, v. 3, Dec. 1978: 18-22. TKl.E233A, v. 3 Postulates that the United States can either permit, delay or prohibit commercial reprocessing of nuclear fuel. Using Bayesian decision analysis, examines reprocessing costs associated with risks and economic benefits. Concludes that permitting reprocessing now is preferable to delaying or prohibiting it. Kamieniecki, Sheldon, and Lester W. Milbrath. The views of West Valley area residents concerning the Nuclear Fuel Services facility at West Valley, New York. Buffalo, State University of New York at Buffalo, 1978. 36 p. "ANL-K78-4421-1" "A report to Argonne National Laboratory." The authors assess local reaction to the presence of a nuclear fuel vreprocessing plant. A telephone survey of a random sample of West Valley area residents was conducted in the spring of 1978. Based on data from 533 interviews the authors found that a slight majority of those in West Valley and Springville, areas closest to the reprocessing plant, favored removal of the plant and restoration of the area. Eighty-five percent were concerned about the health effects of the plant- Kawakami, Koichi. The nuclear fuel cycle in Japan. Bulletin of the atomic scientists, v. 34, June 1978: 17-19. TK9145.A84, v. 34 4 After investing in reprocessing and recycling of plutonium, Japan is apprehensive over accepting alternatives to the plutonium cycle unless there is a definite advantage. Miller, Sarah. Nye, Parke Rippon, Simon. Rochlin, Gene I., and others. cRs-7 Chemtech, v. 8, Dec. 1978: 740-742. TP1.I612, v. 8 Assesses the opposition of foreign nations, especially Germany, France, and Japan, to the decision by the U.S. to delay conversion to a "plutonium economy" because of sufficient uranium supplies. Reprocessing and the development of breeder reactors are viewed as means of helping even resource-poor countries achieve a level of energy independence. .The nuclear question: two answers. Joseph A. Balancing nonproliferation and energy security. Technology review, v. 81, Dec. 1978: 48-57. Tl71.M47, v. 81 The author, a member of the International Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evalua- tion group, summarizes arguments against reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel. He assesses global security risks and the need for reprocessing in energy-poor nations. r, Roger Jocelyn. The Windscale inquiry: report by the Hon. Mr. Justice Parker, presented to the Secretary of State for the Environment on 26 January 1978. London, H. M. Stationery Off., 1978. 3 v. HD9698.G74B746 Vol. 1 contains the final report of Mr. Justice Parker, which examines issues of risk, terrorism and civil liberties, proliferation, the need for reprocessing oxide fuel and reprocessing's relationship to fast breeder reactors, as well as the size of British Nuclear Fuels Limited's Windscale plant and public hostility toward it. Concludes that the Windscale plant should be allowed to reprocess and that its size should be expanded to handle spent fuel from foreign nations. Vol. 2 contains a list of wit- nesses at the Windscale inquiry and a list of the documents presented as evidence. Vol. 3 is an index. The findings of the report are summarized in Waugh, Alyson. Inquiry report supports BNFL reprocessing plan. Energy international, v. 15, May 1978: 17-19. TJ1.E47, v- 15 Germany plans integrated fuel cycle complex. Energy inter- national, v. 15, Oct. 1978: 17-20. TJl. E47, v. 15 Examines the Gorleben project in West Germany, which is designed to serve as an integrated center for the management of nuclear waste and the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel. Advantages in the management of waste disposal and the curtailment of the possibilities of proliferation and terrorism are stressed. Antinuclear forces hope to halt or delay the construction of the Gorleben project by stimulating local opposition to the project. Proponents of the plant claim that halting the reprocessing and waste disposal center will result in effectively blocking licenses for all new nuclear power plants. repro- 21 the as La Hague: French face bright prospects for commercial oxide fuel cessing. Nuclear news, v. 21, Nov. 1978: 58-62. QC770.N75, v. Outlines France's projected reprocessing capacity. Describes physical site of the La Hague plant, and discusses its suitability reprocessing center and the reprocessing procedure at the plant. West Valley: remnant of the AEC. Bulletin of the atomic scientists, v. 34, Jan. 1978: 17-26. TK9145.A84, v. 34 Discuss the history and present status of the nuclear fuel reprocessing plant at West Valley, New York. Selvaduray, Guna, Mark K. Goldstein, and Robert N. Anderson. Solomon, Kenneth A. Traill, Susan. Trumbule, Robert. 21978: 35-40. CRS-8 Separation Nuclear engineering international, v. 23, Aug. TK9001.N75, v. 23 The authors identify 32 spent fuel reprocessing techniques and present the information in a table. Reprocessing techniques studied include: 1) processes designed for the separation of uranium only; 2) processes designed for the separation of plutonium only; 3) processes for separation of uranium and plutonium only; 4) processes designed for concentration of tail-end products; and 5) processes designed for low decontamination, fast recycle. technologies reviewed. Nuclear reactor spent fuel valuation: procedure, applica- tions, and analysis. Santa Monica, Calif., Rand, 1978. 43 p. (Rand Corporation. Rand report, R-2239-DOE) AS36.R3 R-2239 Presents a cost-benefit analysis of reprocessing spent fuel from light water reactors. The widely divergent perceived values of spent fuel are due to the uncertainties of the future costs for reprocessing uranium min- ing and milling, and light water reactor fuel fabrication and enrichment. Much of the information is presented in graphical and statistical formats. Belgian report proposes regional nuclear fuel centers. Energy international, v. 15, Oct. 1978: 21-23. TJ1.E47, v. 15 Discusses Belgianucleaire's report to the EEC on the possible develop- ment of nuclear fuel reprocessing centers that would group all reprocessing and waste disposal activities on one site. Safety advantages, improved efficiency and ease of international inspection are reasons given for regional reprocessing centers. Sumary of hearings on the nuclear fuel cycle. In U.S. Library of Congress. Environment and Natural Resources Policy Division. Report prepared for the Subcommittee on the Environment and the Atmosphere of the Committee on Science and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives, 95th Congress, 2d session. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1978. p. 862-898. TD194.6.U54 1978 At head of title: Comittee print. Examines the need for research on the environmental and health prob- lems related to the nuclear fuel cycle. Witnesses called for retrievable storage of spent fuel if the reprocessing option is to be pursued in the future. The need for research on the health and environmental effects of the uranium-plutonium fuel cycle is stressed. Congress. Senate. Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Subcommittee on Science, Technology, and Space. Nuclear waste disposal and utilization. Hearing, 95th Congress, 2d session. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1978. 159 p. KF26.C697 1978c "Serial no. 95-92" Hearing held in Albuquerque, N.M., Mar. 31, 1978. Though mostly concerned with geologic storage of nuclear wastes, this hearing also raises questions about the need for reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel. CRS-9 U.S. General Accounting Office. An evaluation of Federal support of the Barn- well reprocessing plant and the Department of Energy's spent fuel storage policy; report by the Comptroller General of the United States. Washing- ton, 1978. 27 p. "EMD-78-97, July 20, 1978" Report "concludes that (1) Federal funding of short-term research activities at the Barnwell, South Carolina reprocessing plant should con- tinue until the completion of a major international study of alternative fuel cycle technologies and (2) the Department of Energy should not build a Government financed spent fuel shortage facility until other alternatives are fully explored and the work of an interagency task force on waste man- agement is completed." ----- Quick and secret construction of plutonium reprocessing plants; a way to nuclear weapons; report by the Comptroller General of the United States. Washington, 1978. 26 p. "EMD-78-104, Oct. 6, 1978" Assesses the validity of a 1977 Oak Ridge National Laboratory memoran- dum that provided a conceptual design of a small reprocessing plant that could recover plutonium from spent fuel only four to six months after con- struction begins. The memorandum estimated that enough plutonium could be recovered for more than one nuclear weapon a week. GAO concludes that non- nuclear weapons nations could build and operate reprocessing plants similar to the one described in the Oak Ridge memorandum. The implications for the nonproliferation policy of the U.S. are also explored. Walsh, John. Fuel reprocessing still the focus of U.S. nonproliferation policy. Science, v. 201, Aug. 25, 1978: 692-697. Ql.S35, v. 20l Examines the impact of U.S. nonproliferation policy on European nations. Notes that energy reserves in coal, oil, natural gas and uranium are far less in Italy, France and Germany than in the United States. Europeans see the U.S. policy of nonproliferation as coinciding with the interests of the U.S. nuclear industry in world markets. Western New York Nuclear Service Center options study: public meeting. [Wash- ington] U.S. Dept. of Energy [available from NTIS] 1978.; 1 v. (various pagings) "CONF-780323, UC-70" Study includes the transcript of the public hearing held at West Valley, New York, March 18, 1978, to receive views on the problems of radioactive waste disposal at the Nuclear Fuel Services site. Wohlstetter, Albert. Must we decide now for worldwide commerce in plutonium fuel? In Nuclear policies: fuel without the bomb; a policy study of the California Seminar on Arms Control and Foreign Policy. Cambridge, Mass., Ballinger Pub. Co., 1978. p. 21-56 JXl974.73.N8 Contains the author's testimony at the Windscale inquiry. Indicates that though the economic penalty for delaying the plutonium cycle and re- processing may be great, and may untimately be borne by the users of elec- tricity, the political and military penalties of a commitment to the pluto- nium cycle may be "substantially irreversible." Calls into question the economic benefits of immediate reprocessing. Concludes that England should defer selling separated plutonium to nonweapon states until safer interna- tional conventions on the limits of civilian nuclear energy can be devised. CRS-10 1977 Barnaby, Frank. Nuclear power and proliferation. New scientist, V. 75, July 21, 1977: 168-170. Ql.N52, v. 75 Views a moratorium on reprocessing as a major step in minimizing proliferation. Also calls for halting construction of fast breeder reactors until the need for them can be fully demonstrated. California. Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission. Nuclear fuel reprocessing and high level waste disposal: informational hearings, Sacramento, California.‘ [Sacramento] 1977. 16 v. TD898.C34 1977 Cover title: Hearings on nuclear fuel reprocessing and high-level waste management. Hearings held Jan. 31-June 17, 1977. Hearings held pursuant to an order from the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Comission. State law required the Commission to ascertain facts about the back-end of the nuclear fuel cycle. The State Legislature would have to validate these facts before any final site and facility certification could be granted for proposed nuclear power plants in California.f Before final certification for nuclear power plants could be granted it must be determined that adequate technology and capacity existed to "reprocess spent fuel and store it away from reactor sites if storage was approved in lieu of or in addition to reprocessing." Stresses the role and responsibility of state governments in nuclear policy decision making. Vols. 4 and 5 contain testimony and reports on the technology of reprocessing. ’ Gilinsky, Victor. Plutonium, proliferation, and policy. Technology review, v. 79, Feb. 1977: 58-65. T17l.M47, v. 79 The plutonium in spent fuel from civilian nuclear power reactors can be separated by reprocessing for recycling in nuclear power plants and stored for future use in breeder reactors. However, reprocessing plants may allow easy access to plutonium which can be used in nuclear weapons. The author disputes the-notion that "reactor-grade" plutonium cannot be used to make viable nuclear weapons. He calls for standards to control nuclear exports, and sees the Nonproliferation Treaty as a means of control. International arrangements for nuclear fuel reprocessing. Edited by Abram Chayes [and] W. Bennett Lewis. Cambridge, Mass., Ballinger Pub. Co., 1977. 251 p. A TK9360.I58 Contains papers prepared for a U.S.-Canadian Pugwash symposium on "Internation Arrangements for the Nuclear Fuel Cycle," held in May 1976. Focuses primarily on technical questions and institutional arrangements relating to nuclear fuel reprocessing. The symposium refrained from supporting any large-scale reprocessing facilities-national or multi- national--since it is not clear that reprocessing will be necessary for the nuclear energy economy. Papers examine such topics as the fuel cycle and proliferation, technical and economic considerations in reprocessing, multinational reprocessing centers, safeguarding reprocessing facilities, and radioactive waste storage. CRS-11 International Atomic Energy Agency. Regional nuclear fuel cycle centres. Vienna, 1977. 2 v. TK9360.I59 1977 "STI/PUB/445" Vol. 1 synthesizes the findings of the IAEA's Study Project on Regional Fuel Cycles Centres, which was initiated to examine the economic, safety, and security aspects of a multinational nuclear fuel cycle approach. Vol. 2 contains the full reports of the Study Project. Chapter II is devoted to technical aspects of reactor fuel reprocessing. International fuel cycle centres offer large economies and easier financing. Nuclear engineering international, v. 22, May 1977: 56-59. TK9001.N75, v. 22 A summary of the IAEA study project on multi-national regional fuel cycle centers. Concludes that recycling nuclear fuels at regional centers will be more economical than at national fuel cycle facilities. Regional centers are also seen as a nuclear security measure limiting proliferation on the national level. However, the economic arguments for regional centers are seen as the most convincing aspect of the IAEA study. Koch, Leonard J. Plutonium is an energy resource. Nuclear news, v. 20, Feb. 1977: 42-44. QC770.N75, v. 20 Claims that the U.S. moratorium on reprocessing and plutonium recy- cling only serves to persuade non-weapon states to become self-sufficient in nuclear power. Previous commitments to buy back irradiated fuels no longer make economic sense if the spent fuel is not to be reprocessed. U-238 being stored in the U.S. is a significant energy resource if it could be reprocessed. Lester, Richard K., and David Rose. The nuclear wastes at West Valley, New York. Technology review, v. 79, May 1977: 20-29. T171.M47, v. 79 The authors describe the Purex method of reprocessing fuel at the West Valley plant. Also, address the question of disposition of all nuclear waste, whether from West Valley, commercial power plants, or "weapons waste.’ Levenson, Milton, and Maurizio Zifferero. The public issues of fuel reprocess- ing and radioactive waste disposal. Nuclear news, v. 20, Feb. 1977: 45-48. - QC77O.N75, v. 20 The authors claim that economic and financial questions can account for the lack of reprocessing facilities and posit that the public's fears of proliferation and health hazards from reprocessing are based more on initial perceptions than fact. ,Masters, Richard, Pearl Marshall, and David Smith. The economic and environ- mental benefits of reprocessing and recycle. Nuclear engineering inter- national, v. 22, May 1977: 31-37. C TK9001.N75,’v. 22 Present four short articles on the economic, environmental, and re- source conservation benefits of reprocessing plutonium as nuclear fuel. Look at American and foreign attitudes and note that countries like Switz- erland, West Germany and Brazil prefer reprocessing with safeguards to the United States ban on reprocessing to limit proliferation. Metz, William D. Reprocessing alternatives: the options multiply. Science, v. 196, Apr. 25, 1977: 284-288. Q1.S35, v. 196 Examines alternatives to the Purex method of reprocessing. Metz, William D. Nuclear Energy Policy Study Group. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Rippon, Simon. Schneider, K. J., and others. Severo, Richard. .Pacific Northwest Laboratory, 1977. CRS-12 Reprocessing: how necessary is it for the near term? Science, v. 196, Apr. 1, 1977: 43-45. Ql.S35, v. 196 Describes technological problems faced by commercial reprocessing facilities. 4 Cam- HD9698.U52N79 1977 Nuclear power issues and choices. bridge, Mass., Ballinger Pub. Co., 1977. 418 p. "Sponsored by the Ford Foundation." Attempts to put issues of nuclear power in perspective relative to broader economic, social and security objectives. The cost-effectiveness of nuclear power production is assessed for uranium mining through radio- active waste disposal. Report analyzes issues involved in the U.S. deci- sion on reprocessing and concludes that "there is little or no economic incentive to use plutonium in the LWR fuel cycle and that wide use of breeders is so far in the future and uncertain that reprocessing for this purpose is unnecessary for many years." Also, it asserts that the primary social and international considerations which argue against reprocessing and recycle are the dangers of proliferation of nuclear weapons and the potential for theft of plutonium. Nuclear Energy Agency. Reprocessing of spent nuclear fuels in OECD countries. [Paris] 1977. 47 p. TK9360.073 1977 Assesses the reprocessing capabilities of OECD countries and estimates the possible growth of nuclear power and the potential demand for and availability of reprocessing services. Also, addresses economic and regu- latory problems facing commercial reprocessing. Reprocessing debate aired at Windscale. Nuclear industry, V. 24, Sept. 1977: 11-13, 27. HD9698.AlA8, v. 24 Describes the public inquiry process being conducted in Great Britain over the necessity for or advisability of expanding the Windscale nuclear fuel reprocessing plant. Technology, safety, and costs of decommissioning a reference nuclear fuel reprocessing plant. Richland, Wash., Battelle 1 v. (various pagings) "NUREG-0278" 0 The authors summarize "the results of a study to investigate the con- ceptual decommissioning of a reference fuel reprocessing plant (FRP). The primary purpose of the study is to evaluate the safety, costs, and other related aspects of decommissioning a fuel reprocessing plant. The study is intended to provide background information for future regulations, designs, and operational characteristics of fuel reprocessing plants with regard to their decommissioning." Too hot to handle. New York times magazine, Apr. 10, 1977: 15-19, 34-36. AP2.N6575 Describes what went wrong at the reactor fuel reprocessing plant of Nuclear Fuel Services in West Valley, New York. Congress. House. Committee on Government Operations. West Valley and the nuclear waste dilemma; twelfth report together with additional and dissenting views. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1977. 36 p. (95th Congress, lst session. House. Report no. 95-755) An examination of the "true and final cost" of the back-end of the fuel cycle, i.e., reprocessing and nuclear waste disposal. CRS-13 U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Government Operations. Environment, Energy, and Natural Resources Subcommittee. Nuclear waste disposal costs (West Valley, New York). Hearings, 95th Congress, lst session. Mar. 8 and 10, 1977. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1977. 302 p. * KF27.G655 1977 Inquires into who is responsible for the disposal of high level nucle- ar waste left at the reprocessing plant operated by Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., at West Valley, N.Y. The State of New York claims that since the Atomic Energy Commission encouraged private industry to become involved in reprocessing spent fuel and agreed to supply West Valley with enough spent fuel to assure its success as a commercial reprocessing facility and be- cause a change in Federal regulations meant that theaplant could no longer operate profitably, the Federal Government should take over the plant. U.S. Congress. House. Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. Subcommit- tee on Energy and the Environment. Proposals affecting use of plutonium as a reactor fuel. Hearings, 95th Congress, lst session, on H.R. 5234 [and] H.R. 2145. Apr. 26, 28, and 29, 1977. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1977. 160 p. KF27.I5l8 1977a "Serial no. 95-ll" Hearings on H.R. 5234, a bill to amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to prohibit licensing of commercial nuclear fuel reprocessing facilities and plutonium-fueled reactors, and H.R. 2145, a bill to prohibit the licen- sing of certain activities regarding plutonium until expressly authorized by Congress, and to provide for a comprehensive study of plutonium recy- cling. These bills were proposed in conjunction with President Carter's nonproliferation policies, deferral of reprocessing and the development of alternative fuel cycles. ---- Recycling of plutonium. Oversight hearings, 94th Congress, 2d session. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1977. 1112 p. KF27.I518 l976e "Serial no. 94-73" Hearings held Sept. 20-28, 1976. U.S. Congress. flouse. Committee on Science and Technology. Subcommittee on the Environment and the Atmosphere. Decommissioning and decontamination. Hearings, 95th Congress, lst session. June 15-16, 1977. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1977. 276 p. KF27.S396 1977a Hearings on the disposition of 600,000 gallons of liquid high-level waste stored at the reprocessing plant in West Valley, N.Y., operated by Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. Cost estimates of decommissioning the repro- cessing plant reached $600 million. U.S. Congressional Budget Office. Nuclear reprocessing and proliferation: alternative approaches and their implications for the Federal budget. Washington, For sale by the Supt. of Docs., U.S. Govt. Print. Off. [1977] 59 p. « HD9698.U52U533 1977 Examines the budgetary requirements to 1986 and beyond for repro- cessing spent nuclear fuel and for continuing the development of the liquid metal fast breeder reactor., Assumes that given other items in the Federal budget the expenditure is not great, but that the economic consequences could be quite large. Posits that a congressional decision on reprocessing would have to compare containment of proliferation to the economic benefits to be derived from reprocessing and development of the breeder reactor. Contains charts describing the Purex system of reprocessing fuel and the nuclear fuel cycle for the light water reactor. CRS-14 U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration. Light water reactor fuel reprocessing and recycling. Washington [Available from NTIS] 1977. 499 p. "ERDA-77-75" Discusses the environmental effects of reprocessing and recycling plutonium and uranium from spent light water reactor fuel. Estimates the long- and short-term gains of closing the LWR fuel cycle. Cost-benefit analysis indicates that no excessive adverse environmental effects would, result from reprocessing and recycling. U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration. Office of the Assistant Administrator for Nuclear Energy. Report to the LMFBR Steering Committee on Resources, Fuel & Fuel Cycles, & Proliferation Aspects. [Washington, Available from NTIS] 1977. 37 p. "ERDA 77-60" Evaluates eight fuel cycles on the basis of resource utilization, fissile material availability, economics and ease of commercialization. Except for the once-through cycle, the current U.S. cycle where light water reactors are fueled with U235, all the cycles involve reprocessing. Finds that denaturing, coprocessing, or spiking cannot prevent proliferation. U.S.‘ General Accounting Office. An evaluation of the Administration's pro- posed nuclear non-proliferation strategy; report to the Congress by the Comptroller General of the United States. [Washington] 1977. 70 p. » JXl974.73.U54 1977 Analyzes the effects of the non-proliferation policies announced by President Carter in April, 1977, on U.S. reliability as a supplier of en- riched uranium and reprocessing services. ’ ---- Issues related to the closing of the Nuclear Fuel Services, Incorporated, reprocessing plant at West Valley, New York; report to the Conservation, Energy, & Natural Resources Subcommittee, House Comittee on Government Operations by the Comptroller General of the United States. [Washington] 1977. 34 p. TK9360.U56 1977 "EMD-77-27, Mar. 8, 1977" Decommissioning of the West Valley site must await the development of guidelines for the decommissioning of reprocessing plants by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Estimates of the cost of decommissioning the plant vary greatly. Report examines means of managing the radioactive waste at the plant, and reports that as yet none of the solidification processes has been demonstrated to be completely effective. It calls upon the NRC to develop criteria for decommissioning waste storage facilities and guide- lines for decommissioning the reprocessing plant and site. U.S. President, 1977- (Carter). Nuclear power policy; remarks and a ques- tion-and-answer session with reporters on decisions following a review of [U.S. policy, April 7, 1977. In U.S. President. Public papers of the Presi- dents of the United States; Jimy Carter, 1977, Book I--Jan. 20 to June 24. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off. 1977. p. 581-588. J80.A283, v. 1, Jan. 20- June 24, 1977 President Carter's statement of April 7, 1977, announced that the U.S. would "defer indefinitely" comercial reprocessing and recycling of pluto- nium produced in the U.S. nuclear power program. The announcement ruled out Federal funds to complete the reprocessing facility at Barnwell, South Carolina, and the export of uranium enrichment and chemical reprocessing technology. 9 CRS-15 Waldrop, Mitch. The technology behind nuclear proliferation. Chemical and engineering news, v. 55, July 25, 1977: 17-23. TPl.C35, v. 55 Recovery of plutonium from the spent fuel of nuclear power plants is seen as a factor leading to proliferation. However, the author claims that the plutonium extracted is not the most suitable for nuclear bombs. 1976 Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, Ohio. Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington. Alternatives of managing wastes from reactors and post-fission operations in the LWR fuel cycle. [Springfield, Va., Available from NTIS] 1976. 5 v. Presents an overview of three alternative fuel cycle and waste manage- ment systems: no reprocessing, the once-through fuel cycle, recycling of uranium and storage of plutonium, recycling of uranium and plutonium. Modifications in reactor fuel reprocessing and the wastes generated during reprocessing are described in vol. 2. Bebbington, William P. The reprocessing of nuclear fuels. Scientific American, v. 235, Dec. 1976: 30-41. Tl.S5, v. 235 "The economics of fission power would be much improved if spent fuel were processed to remove fission products and plutonium and reclaim uranium. The industry needed for the task does not yet exist in the U.S." Donnelly, Warren. Countries and industrial companies capable of supplying items, services and assistance for nuclear fuel reprocessing. In U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Government Operations. Export Reorganiza- tion Act of 1976. Hearings, 94th Congress, 2d session, on S. 1439. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1976. p. 1319-1325. KF26.G6 1976f Feiveson, Harold A., and Theodore B. Taylor. Security implications of alterna- tive fission futures. Bulletin of the atomic scientists, v. 32, Dec. 1976: 14-18, 46-48. A TK9145.A84, v. 32 Study criticizes the "plutonium economy" and the "once-through" fuel cycle for having serious safeguard problems. Favors a thorium cycle devel- oped and operated within an international nuclear energy system. Hammond, Allen L. Nuclear proliferation. Science, v. 193, July 9, 1976: 126- 128, 130; July 16: 217-218. Ql.S35, v. 193 Contents.--Warnings from the arms control community.--Will fallout kill domestic recycle? ’ Describes the debate over the use of plutonium in the nuclear fuel cycle. Environmentalist groups and arms control analysts oppose the con- struction of more fuel reprocessing facilities in the U.S. or abroad. Joskow, Paul. The international nuclear industry today. Foreign affairs, V. 54, July 1976: 788-803. D410.F6, v. 54 Considers any U.S. unilateral restriction on exports of nuclear tech- nology as a poor approach to the control of proliferation. Outlines the past and future markets in reactors, including breeders, and enrichment and reprocessing techniques. CRS-16 Lamarsh, John. On the construction of plutonium-producing reactors by small and/or developing countries. In U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Government Operations. Export Reorganization Act of 1976. Hearings, 94th Congress, 2d session, on S. 1439. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1976. p. 1326-1355. KF26.G6 1976f Concludes that many small and developing nations could build reactors capable of producing plutonium that could be used as a nuclear explosive. States that the necessary design information is found in the open litera- ture and all material and components, except for uranium, are also avail- able on the open market. Since uranium is widely distributed throughout the world, many nations have the capability of producing their own pluto- nium. The author claims that though policies to prevent proliferation are necessary there can be no absolute assurance that weapons grade material could not be acquired by nonweapon nations. Meckoni, Vinay. Regional nuclear fuel cycle centres. International Atomic Energy Agency bulletin, v. 18, Feb. 1976: 2-11. QC770.I495S, v. 18 Describes the objectives, scope, assumptions, and proposed implementa- tion of an International Atomic Energy Agency feasibility study of nuclear fuel cycle facilities established on a regional basis. Norman, Colin, and Gillian Boucher. Reprocessing. Nature, v. 264, Dec. 23, 1976: 691-696. 6 Q1.N2, v. 264 The authors present three articles on reactor fuel reprocessing cover- ing the general subject and experience in the U.S. and in Great Britain. Rippon, Simon. Reprocessing--what went wrong? Nuclear engineering interna- ' tional, v. 21, Feb. 1976: 21-27. TK9001.N75, v. 21 Reports on 1976 current and projected operations for the reprocessing of highly irradiated oxide fuel in the United States and Europe. Problems with licensing by regulatory bodies and delays in decision making have hin- dered commercial reprocessing. The author characterizes reprocessing tech- nology as exotic, but foresees the technological development of the indus- try and projects that reprocessing will be established by the late 1980's. Rueth, Nancy. Reprocessing nuclear power's spent fuel. Mechanical engineer- ing, V. 98, Dec. 1976: 32-39. TJ1.A72, v. 98 Maintains that technology for reprocessing and the vitrification of waste can be developed but that the movement toward reprocessing will be delayed by economic and regulatory considerations. Contains diagrams on various solidification processes. Spent fuel: decisions needed. Nuclear industry, v. 23, Sept. 1976: 3-8. HD9698.A1A8,,v. 23 "In February the Energy Research and Development Administration asked for ‘expressions of interest‘ in ways that industry and government can co- operate to develop a commercial reprocessing and recycle industry. ... This article deals with the approaches some of the respondents recommend to speed the close of the back end of the fuel cycle." U.S. Woodhall, Colman B., and John E. Kenton. CRS-17 Congress. House. Committee on International Relations. Subcommittee on International Security and Scientific Affairs. Nuclear proliferation and reprocessing. Hearing, 94th Congress, 2d session. June 7, 1976. Washing- ton, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1976. 32 p. KF27.I5495 1976b Examines the question of international safeguards applied to reactor fuel reprocessing and plutonium storage. Benefit analysis of [Washington, Energy Research and Development Administration. reprocessing and recycling light water reactor fuel. Available from NTIS] 1976. 31 p. “ERDA-76/121" Contains a description of the light water reactor fuel cycle and an economic analysis of reprocessing and recycling LWR spent fuel vs. the "once-through" cycle. Concludes that recycling is economically beneficial and desirable from the standpoint of utilizing uranium resources. The delay or absence of reprocessing could reduce possible LWR growth in later years. Energy Research and Development Administration. Savannah River Operations Office. Division of Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Production. LWR spent fuel dis- position capabilities, 1976-1985. [Washington, Available from NTIS] 1976. 25 p. "ERDA-76-25" An interesting though dated study which reviews projected reprocessing and storage facilities for nuclear waste at the Nuclear Fuel Services plant in West Valley, and the Allied General Nuclear Services, Inc., facility at Barnwell, S.C. It points out that LWR spent fuel storage space is limited. Data presented show that additional storage capacity for the long term will depend on the timing of reprocessing plant startups and the capacity of these plants. Material is presented in graphic format. Office of Nuclear Safety and Safeguards. Final generic environmental statement on the use of recycle plutonium in mixed oxide fuel in light water cooled reactors--health, safety and environment. [Washington, Available from NTIS] 1976. 5 v. "NUREG-OOO2, ES" An environmental impact statement which includes a cost-benefit analy- sis of the health, safety, and environmental aspects of the widespread use of mixed oxide fuel, i.e., fuel containing recycled plutonium. ‘Reprocessing. In Woodhall, Colman B., Recyclable nuclear fuel, a national 1976. 1. 1-47 (part 1) TK9360.W58 The authors assess reprocessing demand and capacity in the United States. Though no commercial reprocessing is being done now, all available reprocessing plants in the U.S. are surveyed. Major stumbling blocks to reprocessing noted are licensing procedures, political considerations and public acceptance. This study gives a statistical presentation of repro- cessing commitments to the various reprocessing plants. John E. Kenton, and Fred P. Powell. asset. Atlanta, Nuclear Assurance Corp., CRS-18 GLOSSARY Actinides - The group of elements of atomic number 89 through 103. Back-end of the fuel cycle - Those fuel cycle processes concerned with the treatment of spent fuel discharged from reactors. ,Chemical or fuel reprocessing - Operations involved in the recovery of fissile material from irradiated fuel assemblies by chemical treatment. Chemical processing is usually done by dissolving the fuel in acids and performing separation of products (U and Pu) from wastes by various chemical processes. Chemical reprocessing includes such operations as dissolving fuel, extract- ing solvent, heating or transferring process solutions, and adjusting chemical composition of process solutions. Breeder reactor - A nuclear reactor that produces more fissionable material than it consumes. Chop and leach (fuel reprocessing) - A method for preparing irradiated fuel elements for reprocessing by cutting the fuel assemblies into pieces and subsequently dissolving selectively the fuel material by leaching with acid. Civex — A method of reprocessing which leaves a small percentage of radioactive waste with the uranium and plutonium in a dilute concentrate making it then \ difficult to use as weapons material. Colocation - Locating nuclear power plants, reprocessing and fuel fabrication facilities at the same site in order to eliminate the transportation of materials that could be used in making nuclear weapons. Coprocessing - Reprocessing uranium and plutonium together, without ever producing a separate stream of plutonium. Denaturing - Mixing non-fissionable isotopes of the same substance with fissionable material so that complex isotope separation procedures would be necessary before weapons grade material could be produced. Diversion - Misuse by a national government or a subnational group of nuclear fuel cycle facilities in an attempt to manufacture nuclear weapons. Enrichment - l) The fraction of atoms of a specified isotope in a mixture of isotopes of the same element when this fraction exceeds that in the naturally occurring mixture. 2) Any process by which the content of a specified isotope in an element is increased. Fissile - l) Of a nuclide, capable of undergoing fission by interaction with slow neutrons. 2) Of a material, containing one or more fissile nuclides. CRS-19 Fission - The splitting of an atomic nucleus, such as uranium, into two or more parts. The splitting releases energy (in the form of heat), as well as neutrons and gamma radiation. The pieces of the split nuclei are called fission products and emit alpha, beta and gamma radiation. Front-end of the fuel cycle - All those fuel cycle processes from prospecting for uranium to the preparation of uranium fuel for insertion in reactors. Fuel assembly - A grouping of fuel elements that supply the nuclear reactor. A fuel element is the smallest structurally discrete part of a reactor or fuel assembly that has nuclear fuel as its principal constituent. Fuel cycle - The series of steps involved in supplying fuel for nuclear power reactors. See front end and back end. Fuel element - A rod, tube, plate, or other form into which nuclear fuel is fabricated for use in a reactor. Fuel, enriched - Nuclear fuel containing uranium which has been enriched in one or more of its fissile isotopes or to which chemically different fissile nuclides have been added. Fuel, nuclear - Material containing fissile nuclides which when placed in a reactor enables a self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction to be achieved. Heavy water - A compound of hydrogen and oxygen containing a higher proportion of the hydrogen isotope deuterium than does naturally occurring water. HWR - Abbreviation for heavy water‘reactor.~ A nuclear reactor in which the coolant and the moderator are heavy water. Irradiation - Exposure to ionizing radiation. Isotope - Atoms of the same element, the nuclei of which have the same number of protons but a different number of neutrons. There are over 800 radioactive isotopes. LMFBR - Abbreviation for liquid metal fast breeder reactor. LWR - Abbreviation for light water reactor. A nuclear reactor in which the coolant and the moderator are ordinary water. MOX - Acronym for mixed oxide. A mixture of uranium and plutonium~dioxide. Partial processing - Methods of producing a mixture or solution containing uranium and/or plutonium that is produced in a nuclear fuel processing plant by a process in which the fission products and/or the transplutonium actinides are not completely separated. See also coprocessing and spiking. Purex - A reprocessing method that produces purified streams of plutonium and uranium. The isolated plutonium enhances the possibility of its diversion for weapons uses. Short for Plutonium and URanium EXtraction. CRS-20 Radioactivity - The spontaneous emission of radiation, such as gamma rays, neutrons, and alpha and beta particles. Reprocessing - The processing of nuclear fuel, after its use in a reactor, to recover uranium and plutonium for recycling as commercial reactor fuel and to remove fission products for disposal as waste- Spent fuel - Nuclear fuel removed from a reactor following irradiation, or which is no longer usable because of depletion of fissile material, poison buildup, or radiation damage. Spiking - The deliberate addition of a highly radioactive material to a material for the purpose of making illicit removal of the material more difficult. Transuranic elements - Elements that have atomic numbers greater than 92; all are radioactive, are products of artificial nuclear changes, and are members of the actinide group. They are also known as transuranium elements. Principal sources for glossary: American Nuclear Society. Standards Committee. Subcommittee ANS-9. American National Standard glossary of terms in nuclear science and technology. Hinsdale, Ill., c1976. 110 p. QC772.A43 1976 McGraw-Hill dictionary of scientific and technical terms. 2d ed. New York, McGraw-Hill, 1978. 1771, A58 p. Q123.Ml5 1978 U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Environment and Public Works. Subcommit- tee on Nuclear Regulation. Nuclear accident and recovery at Three Mile Island. Washington, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1980. 423 p. At head of title: 96th Cong., 2d sess. Committee print. "Serial no 96-14" Glossary: p. 365-375. gs; 3:; 3*":-mi‘ »_P‘.~‘{,*' W: .,-'‘>_:» .- V-~. r_ .7 W *2 :«...u '«..-13:: - Km‘-.13. -,, -x.-vs !'.—?‘!‘*.."J‘I"T""I“r‘.r‘."'.“ *3-v-:1 ~:- -4-. n-,.~=»«-_~.« .