1Nuclear Materials Technology Division/ Los Alamos National Laboratory

• A U.S. Department of Energy Laboratory

The Actinide Research

Spring 1996 Los Alamos National Laboratory

o f t h e N u c l e a r M a t e r i a l s T e c h n o l o g y D i v i s i o n

Quarterly

In This Issue

1NMT Studies Fuel

Fabrication Methodsto Advance Efforts

in PlutoniumDisposition

4Neutron Source

Recovery Reducesthe Nuclear Danger,

Responds toNational Need

6Division Director

Discusses PlutoniumFuture

8NMT Designs and

Fabricates Standardsfor Nuclear Material

Assay

10Advisory Committee

Rates NMT as“Outstanding/

Excellent”

11Recent Publications

and Reports

12NewsMakers

NMT Studies Fuel Fabrication Methods to AdvanceEfforts in Plutonium Disposition

The disposition of plutonium is an areaof significant importance to the nationalsecurity of the United States. In 1994 theCommittee for International Security andArms Control (CISAC), a standing commit-tee of the National Academy of Sciences,conducted a study on the management anddisposition of excess weapons plutonium.The committee concluded that the use ofplutonium as fuel in existing or modifiedreactors with no subsequent reprocessingof the spent fuel is the leading contenderfor the long-term disposition of weaponsplutonium. In addition to the inventory ofexcess weapons plutonium, the growinginventory of unseparated plutonium inspent nuclear fuel is a concern for main-taining peace and security on a global basis.Using chemical separation methods, theplutonium in spent fuel can be recovered,as is done routinely in France and theUnited Kingdom, and subsequently used

Figure 1: On the left, plutoniumdioxide produced froma dismantled weapon by thehydride/oxidation process.On the right, first MOX fuelpellet produced using theplutonium.

in nuclear reactors. Nuclear Materials Tech-nology (NMT) Division personnel are study-ing two different processes for the eventualfabrication of plutonium fuel sources to powernuclear reactors and reduce the nation’sinventory of plutonium at the same time.

Approximately two years ago, theDepartment of Energy (DOE) formed theOffice of Fissile Material Disposition (FMD),whose charter is to develop plans and tech-nologies for the disposition of excess fissilematerial from the U.S. nuclear weaponsprogram. The FMD is considering the optionof converting weapons plutonium into mixeduranium-plutonium oxide (MOX) fuel for usein domestic or Canadian water reactors.Recently NMT Division did pioneer work onthat option when they dissembled a pit from anuclear weapon, separated the plutonium bythe hydride-dehydride process, oxidized theplutonium, blended the PuO2 with UO2, andpressed and sintered a MOX fuel pellet.

TA55

2 Nuclear Materials Technology Division/ Los Alamos National Laboratory

The Actinide Research Quarterly

Figure 2: Scanning electron micro-graphs of ball milled powder: particleagglomerates and surface ofagglomerate.

Another fuelunder investigationis “nonfertile” fuel,which does notproduce more fissilematerial than is con-sumed when it isburned in a reactor.Nonfertile fuel hasthe potential forallowing new orexisting water reac-tors to become netconsumers of pluto-nium instead of netbreeders. The balanceof this article dis-cusses NMT’s studyof nonfertile fuel.

At the requestof the CISAC, IdahoNational EngineeringLaboratory (INEL)personnel investi-gated the feasibility ofusing a nonfertile fuelform for near-totaldestruction ofweapons plutoniumin existing oradvanced light-waterreactors. Neutronicperformance resultsshow the nonfertilefuel containingweapons plutoniumto be a potential fuelfor use in a pressur-ized-water reactor.

INEL evaluated the neutronic performance ofa PuO2-ZrO2-CaO-Er2O3 fuel form suitable foruse in a commercial boiling-water reactor.Plutonium oxide derived from weaponsplutonium, calcia-stabilized zirconium oxide,and erbium oxide serve as the fuel, fueldiluent, and depletable neutron absorber,respectively. The results show this fuel form tobe suitable for potential use in such a reactor.

Los Alamos StudiesThe Los Alamos study of nonfertile fuel

fabrication is supported with LaboratoryDirected Research and Development Officefunds. One goal of the study is to develop fuelfabrication methods that would allow weap-ons plutonium to be used as fuel in waterreactors. Specifically, we have chosen thePuO2-ZrO2-CaO-Er2O3 evaluated by INELas the fuel composition for our initial fuelfabrication study.

The first phase was the fabrication of asurrogate CeO2-ZrO2-CaO fuel. The purposeof the surrogate study was to 1) evaluate thefeasibility of preparing the fuel by the solid-state reaction method using reagent-gradecalcia (CaO), zirconia (ZrO2), and ceria (CeO2)as oxide precursors, 2) develop a powdercomminution (pulverizing) method acceptableto glove box operations, 3) evaluate the behav-ior of PuO2 in the fuel diluent using CeO2 asthe actinide surrogate, and 4) determine thespecifications for a sintering furnace designand operation. The surrogate fuel enabled usto use a nonradioactive environment to studythe effect of ball milling, green pellet forma-tion, and sintering conditions on the micro-structural development of a pellet of nonfertilefuel.

CIC-1/96-0717

3Nuclear Materials Technology Division/ Los Alamos National Laboratory

The equivalent spherical diameter of theprecursor powders was determined using laserdiffraction analysis. The particle size andmorphology of the precursor powders wascharacterized using scanning electron micro-scopy (SEM). Sintered pellets were ground inan agate mortar and subsequently analyzedfor crystalline phase content using x-raydiffractometry (XRD). Pellets were formed asfollows: Reagent-grade ZrO2 (87.19 wt%), CaO(10.12 wt%), CeO2

(2.69 wt%), stearic acid (1wt%), and polyethylene glycol (1 wt%) weredry ball milled for 24 hours. As shown inFigure 2, large (greater than 500 µm)agglomerates were formed as a result of ballmilling the ZrO2, CaO, and CeO2 precursorpowders for 24 hours. The scanning electronmicrographs show a broad particle-sizedistribution. Submicron particles are visible onthe surface of the agglomerates. The equivalentspherical diameter of the ball milled powderwas determined to be 87.3 µm. The milledpowder was uniaxially pressed into pellets at310 MPa. The green pellets were sintered for5 hours at 1200 °C, 1400 °C, and 1700 °C in anatmosphere consisting of 80% N2 and 20% O2.The bulk density and volume percent of openporosity were determined using the immersiondensity technique. Grain and pore structureincluding average size and size distributionwere determined using optical microscopyand SEM analysis. As shown in Figure 3,significant increases in the bulk density of thesurrogate fuel pellet occurred between thesintering temperatures of 1400 °C and 1700 °C.The XRD data indicate that a sinteringtemperature of between 1400 °C and 1700 °Cis required to form a solid solution of theprecursor CeO2 in calcia-stabilized zirconia.

Spring 1996

Figure 3: Opticalmicrographs ofsurrogate fuelpellets sinteredat 1400 °C and1700 °C.

Summary and ConclusionsDry ball milling of the precursor powders

did not produce a highly reactive powder forpellet fabrication (i.e., pressing and sintering).Future work will examine the feasibility ofusing vibratory and/or attrition millingmethods to produce reactive precursor pow-ders for the solid-state reaction synthesis. Asignificant increase in the bulk density of thesurrogate fuel pellet occurred between thesintering temperatures of 1200 °C and 1400 °C.A significant decrease in open porosity (vol%)of the surrogate fuel pellet occurred betweenthe sintering temperatures of 1400 °C and1700 °C. Formation of the calcia-stabilizedzirconia occurred as a result of sintering thefuel pellets at 1200 °C, complete solid solutionfor-mation between the surrogate (CeO2) andthe stabilized zirconia occurred as a result ofsintering the fuel pellets at 1700 °C, andsignificant grain growth occurred as a resultof increasing the sintering temperature from1400 °C to 1700 °C.

The principal developers of this projectare Kevin B. Ramsey and H. Thomas Blair ofNMT-9, Actinide Ceramics and Fabrication.

4 Nuclear Materials Technology Division/ Los Alamos National Laboratory

Figure 4: Aleaking radio-active sourceused for welllogging wasremoved afterit contaminatedthis shed, atruck, and thewell site. LosAlamos Na-tional Labora-tory personnelresponded tothe emergency.Los Alamos isthe DOE's“Lead Labora-tory” for recov-ering thenuclear materi-als from suchsources.

Neutron Source Recovery Reduces the Nuclear Danger,Responds to National Need

IntroductionThe Neutron Source Recovery Project

reduces the potential for public exposure tonuclear materials through the retrieval ofunwanted or abandoned neutron sources fromthe general public, private industry, or gov-ernment agencies, and the destruction of thesources (chemically) to reduce their radio-logical risks. Radioactive sources have beenowned by the public since the passage of theAtomic Energy Act of 1954, which allowed forthe licensing of qualified public and privateorganizations to possess and use nuclearmaterials for a wide variety of applications.Literally tens of thousands of radioactivesources containing materials such as cobalt-60,cesium-137, americium-241 and plutonium-239 and -238 were manufactured and widelydistributed. The Neutron Source RecoveryProject is concerned primarily with sealedneutron sources, which are used for suchcommon purposes as verifying the compac-tion of materials for road and buildingconstruction, measuring rock porosities forwell drilling, and calibrating a variety ofinstruments.

The Actinide Research Quarterly

In the past when radioactive neutronsources were manufactured and usedextensively, the mechanisms for futuredisposal of those sources were not well-thought-out. Although their manufacturecontinues today (albeit on a reduced scale),there are still no federal or commercialprograms to recover or store excess orunwanted sources. In addition, unwantedsources cannot currently be disposed of aswaste because federal and state restrictionsprohibit such disposal, and no disposalfacilities for these sources exist in the UnitedStates.

Within the last several years, concernshave been raised about the potential risksto the public health and safety from agingneutron sources held by private companies,universities, and government entities. Theaging of these sources, coupled with theincreasing complexity of the licensing ofnuclear materials, has made neutron sourceownership more burdensome and costly.Defense downsizing and the economicdownturn in the oil and gas industry havemade many neutron sources unnecessary;however, source owners who want to get ridof their excess or unwanted sources have nooptions for doing so. The consequences areboth economic and legal. Alternatives suchas improper storage or illegal disposal willlead to public health and safety risks as well.Los Alamos National Laboratory, throughthe Neutron Source Recovery Project, isattempting to alleviate this situation byproviding source owners a safe and legaloption for disposal of their nuclear material.

Emergency ResponsesOver the past two years, the nation has

called upon Los Alamos personnel to assistin the removal of abandoned or damagedneutron sources from a variety of locations.In all of these cases, the sources were deter-mined to be a potential threat to public healthand safety. Six sources were retrieved from asite in Oklahoma, where they were abandoned

5Nuclear Materials Technology Division/ Los Alamos National Laboratory

by a oil well logging company that had goneout of business. Three abandoned sources werepicked up from a derelict vehicle parked fornine months in a vacant lot in Illinois. Adamaged source, leaking radioactive material,was retrieved from a storage shed located ina residential neighborhood in large town inTexas. The source was breached in an oil welllogging incident that resulted in contaminationof the well site, a logging truck, and a storageshed.

ShippingA significant part of this project is the

coordination of shipments and the receipt ofnuclear materials. Project staff provide detailedprocedural information to the owners of thesurplus neutron sources about packaging,monitoring, and shipping. Because of thestringent requirements for shipping nuclearmaterials, Los Alamos personnel work closelywith the shippers to ensure compliance withall regulations. Our highly trained shippingand receiving personnel then efficientlyunpack and batch the sources to thereprocessing area.

Dismantlement and ProcessingNeutron sources are typically made from

long-lived, radioactive materials mixed with alow-atomic-weight, nonradioactive materialand doubly encased in small metal containers.These stainless steel (and sometimes tantalum)capsules must be removed to facilitate therecovery process. A remotely operateddecladding cutter, using the principles of aconventional pipe cutter to reduce or eliminatemetal turnings, is used to remove the capsulesfrom the neutron source material. The sourcematerial is then dissolved in acid to separateout the radioactive elements and reduce theneutron emissions to background levels. It isestimated that the separated source materialsrequire 1/700 of the storage space of theoriginal source.

Spring 1996

Mark Dinehartis the projectleader. Othercontributorsinclude BradSmith, KevinGray, VanceHatler, CecilBrown, TonyGuillen, andDiana Sena ofNMT, KimMartin of MST,Gilbert Peraltaand Max Evansof Ray Rashkins& Associates,Lou Williams ofESH, SherryJones andRandallErickson ofNMSM-ST, andthe NMT-4shipping andreceiving team.

Figure 5: The remote decladder used in the Neutron SourceRecovery Project reduces radiation exposures to personnelworking on the disposal of unwanted radioactive neutronsources.

Remote Material Processing Capability atTA-55

A computer-controlled system allowsremote handling of the decladding anddissolution operations. The process alsoeliminates the need for interim storage, thusreducing operator exposures by approxi-mately 300 percent. The equipment has beenused reliably in the harsh glove box atmos-phere to process more than 100 neutronsources.

Engineers are currently reconfiguring theneutron source processing operations tofurther reduce operator exposures. The newprocessing line concept employs the use ofremote manipulators similar to those used inhot-cell operations. Remote handling capabili-ties coupled with traditional glove box flexi-bility should add a new dimension to theexisting capabilities at the Plutonium Facility.We will be able to handle highly radioactivematerials of all types with greatly reducedexposure to the operator. Other programs thathandle large amounts of americium or otherhighly radioactive materials should be able toutilize this unique processing capability toreduce operator exposures significantly.

continued on page 10

6 Nuclear Materials Technology Division/ Los Alamos National Laboratory

The Actinide Research Quarterly

And They Shall Beat Their

Swords Into Plowshares...

Special Section

Conversion of weapons plutonium intomixed uranium-plutonium oxide fuel forenergy production in civilian power reactorscould make the old prophet's vision come true.In fact, technologists at Technical Area-55made the first step in that direction last yearwhen they disassembled a pit, separated theplutonium by the hydride-dehydride process,oxidized the plutonium, blended the PuO2with UO2, and pressed and sintered a MOXfuel pellet. It was a simply symbolic but trulysignificant piece of technology demonstration.The use of nuclear materials has always hadtwo sides: peaceful energy for civil electricalpower—and weapons of mass destruction.

This dichotomy hasalways been carefullyseparated in the mindsof policy makers,grudgingly acceptedby scientists andengineers, but closelyconnected in theminds of the public.

Today, fissionenergy producesabout 20% of theworld's electricalpower, but lessthan 1% of theenergy value ofthe uranium fuelmaterial isextracted. Onthe other hand,the UnitedStates and theFormer SovietUnion

produced tens of thou-sands of nuclear warheads, numbers that

are substantially beyond any reasonable

requirement for defense or any conceivableact of aggression. Why military developmentof fission energy has been carried beyondrational need, while peaceful developmenthas been suppressed in this country isbeyond understanding. But indeed that hasbeen the political position; current U.S.policy, established by the Carter Admin-istration and executed by the ClintonAdministration, discourages the use ofplutonium for civil purposes. Europeancountries, Japan, India, and Russia areincreasing or planning to start the recyclingof plutonium in light-water and breederreactors, while in this country, reprocessing,recycling, and breeding are nearly extincttechnologies. While the rest of the world isdeveloping greater reliance on nuclearpower, the U.S. is on a path to foreclose onthat option, which many feel will be essentialfor electrical power, economic growth, andprotection of the environment in the nextcentury. Nevertheless, the U.S. is gettingabout 7% of its electricity from plutoniumcreated by in situ fission in the cores of light-water reactors.

“and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spearsinto pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation,neither shall they learn war anymore.” Isaiah 2:4

Division Director Discusses Plutonium Future Part I

7Nuclear Materials Technology Division/ Los Alamos National Laboratory

Spring 1996Special Section

and international treaties. In 1991 the UnitedStates and the Soviet Union signed the Treatyon the Reduction and Limitation of StrategicOffensive Arms (START I), and both countriesare dismantling nuclear weapons, reducingstockpiles to 8,000 to 9,000 each. The START IItreaty, which is still under negotiation, couldreduce strategic warheads to less than 3,500each. In addition, the legacy wastes in the U.S.are being stabilized and prepared for long-term storage.

These inter-national issues aredefining the futureof TA-55technologies.The goal of theStockpile Surveil-lance Program is toensure the reliabilityand safety of theenduring stockpile, theAdvanced Recoveryand Integrated Extrac-tion System willdemonstrate an auto-mated process fordismantling plutonium pits, the Pit RebuildProgram will maintain the de minimiscapability for manufacturing plutoniumcomponents, the Enhanced SurveillanceProgram will determine the effects ofplutonium property changes on the reliabilityof aging weapons, and the 94-1 ResidueReduction Projects are aimed at stabilizing,separating, and storing legacy plutoniumwastes.

The reduction of nuclear weapons and thestabilization of nuclear wastes isthe correct thing to do; how-ever, the activities have raisednew concerns over safety,security, and final dispositionof the plutonium. In the nextActinide Research Quarterly,I will discuss this approach andits implications for the nationand TA-55.

Bruce Matthews

The ideas in thiseditorial are notoriginal; theyare a synthesisfrom manynational andinternationalstudies, reports,and publicationsand from con-versations withtoday's proph-ets. The recom-mendations,however, aremine; they donot necessarilyrepresent theopinion ofLos AlamosNational Labora-tory, the Univer-sity of Califor-nia, the Depart-ment of Energy,or the U.S.Government.

More plutonium has been synthesizedthan any other man-made element, andbecause of its high energy content andradioactive properties, plutonium is bothattractive and hazardous at the same time.

Plutonium: the most toxic sub- stance known to man.

Plutonium: the enabler of world peace.Plutonium: enough to kill everyone in the world many times over.Plutonium: enough energy to power the world's economy for centuries.

The extremes are as varied as the people withopinions. So where is the truth and whatshould we do with the plutonium? The fact isthat there is a glut of plutonium in the worldtoday. First isolated and identified in 1941 byGlenn Seaborg, plutonium has proliferatedfrom micrograms to hundreds of tons. In theU.S. alone there are 99.5 metric tons left overfrom the nuclear weapons buildup during theCold War. An equal or greater amount existsin Russia, the United Kingdom, France, andChina, the other declared nuclear weaponsstates. A recent DOE study has identified 26metric tons of plutonium wastes in variousforms of solids, compounds, residues, andsolutions that are unsuitable for long-termstorage. This "legacy plutonium," left overfrom the production campaigns during theCold War nuclear weapons buildup, is cur-rently stored at various sites in the weaponscomplex. Los Alamos has 2.6 tons of pluto-nium; about 95% of this plutonium resideshere at TA-55.

Tens of thousands of nuclear warheadscontaining plutonium pits were producedduring the Cold War. Fortunately, because ofworldwide political events and activitiesinitiated by the Bush Administration andcontinued by the Clinton Administration, theseworldwide nuclear stockpiles are beingreduced, as planned by presidential directives

8 Nuclear Materials Technology Division/ Los Alamos National Laboratory

The Actinide Research Quarterly

NMT Designs and Fabricates Standardsfor Nuclear Material Assay

Each NDA instrument varies in theamount of material it is able to measure.Segmented gamma scanners (SGSs) andneutron counters are able to generate precisemeasurements from 0 grams to 250 grams.Calorimeters, depending on chamber size, areable to measure from 0 grams to 5 kilograms.With these limits in mind, various amounts ofnuclear materials are needed to accommodatethe calibration ranges of the instruments. Thestandards also need to demonstrate linearityin the entire range of NDA measurements.For a given set of standards, the instrumentreading should be linearly dependent on thequantity of the materials being measured.

Standards should be fabricated of materialsimilar to that of the actinide being measured.We do not calibrate an instrument with pureplutonium metal if we are measuring oxidesor waste. Measurements on the SGS are doneon residues or low-density materials. Neutroninstruments measure high-density materialssuch as metals, piping, residues not exhibitinghigh alpha-neutron emission, glass, andleaded gloves.

Every standard fabricated is created froma highly pure actinide material. The materialis roasted, sieved, blended, and sampled. Theanalysis of the sample consists of isotopiccompositions (enrichment), actinide percentpurity, and levels of impurities associatedwith the material, such as iron or lead. Avariety of the standards have been subjectedto multiple assays by several analyticallaboratories. The multilaboratory analysis isused to minimize the bias of any one labora-tory assay and to ensure the homogeneity ofthe blended batch. Multiple samples also giveresults that help to develop good statisticalcomparisons among samples and laboratories.

How good is a nondestuctive assay(NDA) measurement? A measurement doneby an NDA instrument is only as good as thestandard that is used to calibrate the instru-ment. Standards are needed to calibratevarious NDA instruments such as neutroncoincidence counters, gamma-ray counters,and calorimeters. These instruments measurea variety of nuclear materials being producedin the DOE nuclear community. The measure-ments help alleviate problems associated withshipper/receiver differences and the measure-ment and storage of residues and waste.Los Alamos National Laboratory has taken alead role in the fabrication of uranium andplutonium standards, along with otheractinides such as neptunium and americium.These standards have been fabricated forseveral laboratories within the DOE complex.

Planning the fabrication of standardsrequires very precisedetailing. Designsencompass compo-nents such as preciseweighing, destructiveanalysis of samples,specialized contain-ers, diluents, and theuse of post-fabrica-tion NDA measure-ments to confirm thatthe standards meetall preliminaryexpectations beforethey are used ininstrumentcalibration.

Figure 6: SGScan standards.Such contain-ers must behandled easilyin a glove boxand compat-ible with theinstrumentthey weredesigned for.

9Nuclear Materials Technology Division/ Los Alamos National Laboratory

Spring 1996

Another important element in thefabrication of calibration standards is thecontainers that hold the standards. Thecontainer shape/size configuration can affectthe radiation and thereby the NDA measure-ments. Each standard-fabrication assignment iscarefully analyzed during the planning stagefor the construction of a container that is easilyhandled in the glove box and compatible withthe instrument it was designed for. SGS canstandards are specialized cans eleven inches inheight and four inches in diameter (Figure 6).These are ideal dimensions to help alleviateproblems in end-effects and for gamma-raytransmission through the standard. SGSstandards consist of oxide diluted withdiatomaceous earth, which is used to homo-genize and transfer the oxide uniformlythroughout the container.

SGS drum standards consist of twentyfour-liter polyethylene bottles, each contain-ing a known amount of oxide diluted indiatomaceous earth. These are stacked in a55-gallon drum to simulate a homogeneousdrum standard. New standards for neutronshuffler drums consist of oxide diluted withdiatomaceous earth in one-inch diameterzirconium vials (Figure 7). The vials arestacked in a 55-gallon drum and can be variedfor instrument calibration simply by adding ordeleting vials to the drum. New calorimeterstandards are now being fabricated with 12%plutonium-240 oxide. These will be distributedthroughout the complex and are measuredthroughout the year to compare calorimeterymeasurements among labs. They also willprovide us with a higher-wattage standard tocomplement the 6% plutonium-240 wattagestandards that already exist. These standardsconsist of two mechanically sealed, “food-packed” cans containing two kilograms ofhigh-burnup oxide.

With the problems associated withshipping materials today, details ondimensions of the standards need to becompatible with the shipping containers.

Containerization must meet all requirementsfor shipping; therefore, certification of pack-aging demands double- or triple-encapsulatedcontainers depending on what Department ofTransportation drums are used.

Designs are greatly affected by theserestrictions. It is therefore imperative thatresearch be done before standards arefabricated. This will alleviate future problemsin supplying a compatible standard used inmeasuring the various types and amounts ofactinide materials and complying with allshipping requirements.

There has been and always will be acontinuous demand for calibration standardsthroughout the NDA community. With newand better technology, Los Alamos will bethe forerunner in producing these neededstandards for the DOE complex and forother actinide measurement users.

Figure 7: Zirconium tubing for shufflerstandards. Oxide is diluted with diato-maceous earth in these one-inchdiameter vials.

The maindesigners of thestandards workare T. Hsue,S. M. Simmonds,J. K. Sprinkle,and P. M. Rinard,all of NIS-5, andV. L. Longmireand S. M. Longof NMT-4.

10 Nuclear Materials Technology Division/ Los Alamos National Laboratory

The Actinide Research Quarterly

Neutron Source Recovery Reduces the Nuclear Danger,Responds to National Need (continued from p.5)

International RequestLos Alamos is currently responding to an

international request to reprocess 316 Pu-239/beryllium neutron sources currently owned bythe German government. These sources wereoriginally part of East Germany’s nuclearmaterials inventory. Most of them arerelatively small and should be accommodatedeasily in existing TA-55 capacities. The Germanrequest expands our response to sealed-sourcedisposal problems into the international arena.

Responding to an Expanded National NeedThe neutron source program will be

expanded to recover additional types ofneutron sources. This effort, the “RadioactiveSource Recovery Program,” will be sponsoredby the U.S. DOE, Environmental ManagementProgram Office. The Department has noted theexperience, personnel expertise, and uniquefacilities that exist at Los Alamos as well asour excellent track record of delivering onemergency requests.

The scope of this program will include theroutine recovery of Am-241 and Pu-238neutron sources at both TA-55 and the CMRBuilding. Use of the CMR Wing 9 Hot Cellswill enable us to handle larger Am-241 sourcesas well as the recovery of Pu-238 neutronsources. While the starting date for receivingsources is presently uncertain, the initialplanning phases of the project are wellunderway. An environmental assessment hasbeen completed for the expanded capability atthe CMR Building with the finding of “nosignificant impact.” Strong support has beenreceived from people across the nation andstate who have a stake in our business, andpress reports have stated the recovery ofneutron sources is valuable for reducingradioactive risks to health and safetynationwide.

Advisory Committee Rates NMT as“Outstanding/Excellent”

The results of the 1995 Science andTechnology Assessment for NMT Divisionwere announced in the NMT DivisionReview Committee’s (DRC’s) final reportdelivered to Laboratory Director SigHecker in late January. The charter ofeach DRC, appointed by the LaboratoryDirector, is to assess a given division’sscience and technology and to advisethe Director and Division Director onimportant issues. The overall LaboratoryScience and Technology Assessment basedon the various DRC reports is then present-ed to the Science and Technology Panel ofthe University of California President’s

Council on the National Laboratories.The NMT Division’s accomplishmentswere highly praised during the reviewperiod, July 1, 1994, to June 30, 1995. TheCommittee noted dramatic improvementson all fronts with an “outstanding/excel-lent” rating in the division’s overallperformance. The next Division Reviewis slated for March 1997. The main themeswill be “Stockpile Stewardship” and the“Space Mission.”

11Nuclear Materials Technology Division/ Los Alamos National Laboratory

Spring 1996

Publications,

Presentations, and Reports

(December 1995–March 1996)

Journal Publications

J. M. Haschke and J. C. Martz, “Plutonium Storage,”Encyclopedia of Environmental Analysis and Remediation,(John Wiley & Sons), New York, January 1996.

J. M. Haschke, T. H. Allen, and J. L. Stakebake,“Reaction Kinetics of Plutonium with Oxygen, Waterand Air: Moisture Enhancement of the CorrosionRate,” LA-UR-96-632, submitted to J. of Alloys andCompounds.

K. K. S. Pillay, “Plutonium: Requiem or Reprieve,”Radwaste Magazine, 3(1), 59-65, 1996.

A. T. M. Golam Mostafa, J. M. Eakman,M. M. Montoya, and S. L. Yarbro, “Prediction ofHeat Capacities of Solid Inorganic Salts from GroupContributions,” Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 35(1), 343-348,1996.

A. S. Gopalan, H. K. Jacobs, P. C. Stark, N. M. Koshti,B. F. Smith, G. D. Jarvinen, and T. W. Robison,“Development of Polymeric Chelators for RadioactiveWaste Remediation,” Int. J. of Environ. Conscious Design& Mfg., 4 (3-4), 19-25, 1995.

Conference Presentations

The following papers were presented at the AmericanChemical Society Meeting in New Orleans, LA, duringMarch 24-29, 1996:

D. D. Padilla, L. Worl, C. F. Prenger, D. D. Hill, andT. L. Tolt, “Magnetic Separation for Treatment ofCaustic Waste,” LA-UR-95-3479.

L. A. Worl, S. M. Bowen, J. M. Berg, D. D. Padilla, andM. Cisneros, “Actinide Removal from Hanford TankWaste,” LA-UR-96-784.

The following papers were presented at the 4thInternational Conference on Nuclear Engineering inNew Orleans, LA, during March 10-14, 1996:

K. B. Ramsey and H. T. Blair, “Fabrication of aNon-fertile Fuel for the Disposition of Weapons GradePlutonium in Water Reactors,” LA-UR-96-0006.

H. T. Blair, “Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Studies inSupport of the Fissile Materials Disposition ReactorAlternatives,” LA-UR-95-3829.

H. T. Blair and K. B. Ramsey, “Experience MakingMixed Oxide Fuel With Plutonium From DismantledWeapons,” LA-UR-95-4085.

The following papers were presented at the 3rdInternational Policy Forum, Management & Disposi-tion of Nuclear Weapons Materials, LansdowneExecutive Conference Center, Lansdowne, Virginia,March 19-22, 1996:

S. M. Dinehart, “Plutonium Stabilization Research and Development.”

T. O. Nelson and J. W. Toevs, “Dealing with Excess Plutonium Prior to UltimateDisposition.”

P. C. Lopez, K. M. Axler, and J. R. Cost, “Differential Scanning Calorimeter Study ofSolid State Phase Transformation in Plutonium,” LA-UR-95-2457, 125th TMS AnnualMeeting and Exhibition, Anaheim, CA, February 4-8, 1996.

D. E. Wedman, H. E. Martinez, and T. O. Nelson, “Electrolytic Decontamination ofStainless Steel Materials in a Sodium Nitrate Electrolyte for Hazardous WasteManagement,” LA-UR-96-0730, WM ‘95 HLW, LLW, Mixed Wastes and Environmen-tal Restoration - Working Towards a Cleaner Environment,” Tucson, AZ, February25-29, 1996.

S. B. Schreiber, R. L. Ames, and S. L. Yarbro, “RFETS Solution Stabilization FlowsheetOptimization,” LA-UR-96-0576, 1996 National AIChE Meeting, New Orleans, LA,February 25-29, 1996.

S. L. Yarbro, S. B. Schreiber, and J. M. Eakman, “Using Distillation to ProcessRadioactive Liquid Waste,” LA-UR-95-3050, 1996 National AIChE Meeting, NewOrleans, LA, February 25-29, 1996.

D. C. Christensen, S. M. Dinehart, and S. L. Yarbro, “Technical Considerations andPolicy Requirements for Plutonium Management,” LA-UR-95-4295, PlutoniumStabilization & Immobilization Workshop, Washington, D.C., December 12-14, 1995.

K. K. S. Pillay, “Safeguardability of the Vitrification Option for Disposal of Pluto-nium,” LA-UR-95-4191, Plutonium Stabilization & Immobilization Workshop,Washington, D.C., December 12-14, 1995.

S. Eaton, J. J. Buksa, C. J. Heitman, and J. Park, “Management of Global PlutoniumInventories Through the Application of a Non-Fertile Mixed Oxide Fuel,” LA-UR-95-2149, ASME Conference, 4th International Conference on Nuclear Engineering, NewOrleans, LA, March 10-14, 1996.

ReportsG. H. Rinehart, “Light Weight Radioisotope Heater Unit (LWRHU) Production for theCassini Mission,” Los Alamos National Laboratory Report to the U.S. Department ofEnergy, Office of Special Allocations, March 1996.

S. B. Schreiber, R. L. Ames, and M. J. Palmer, “Precipitation Flowsheet Developmentfor RFETS Solution Stabilization,” LA-13039, December 1995.

M. A. Reimus and T. G. George, “General Purpose Heat Source: Research andDevelopment Program; High Silicon Fuel Characterization Study; Half ModuleImpact Tests 1 and 2” and “General Purpose Heat Source: Research and DevelopmentProgram; Cold Process Verification Test Series,” submitted to Office of SpecialApplications, U.S. DOE, LA-13101-MS, December 1995.

T. G. George, “Monthly Progress Report: Heat Source Technology Programs: April1995,” Space and National Security Programs, U.S. DOE, LA-13117-PR, January 1996.

E. Garcia, “High Temperature Vacuum Distillation Separation of Plutonium WasteSalts,” Summary of FY96 Projects funded by U.S. DOE/EM-50, January 1996.

J. Foropoulos, Jr., “Solid Alkali Destruction of Volatile Chlorocarbons,” LA-13042-MS,December 1995.

P. D. Kleinschmidt, “Deflagration in Stainless Steel Storage Containers ContainingPlutonium Dioxide,” LA-13114-MS, February 1996.

R. Fernandez, D. R. Horrell, C. W. Hoth, S. W. Pierce, N. A. Rink, Y. M. Rivera, andV. D. Sandoval, “Plutonium Metal and Oxide Container Weld Development andQualification,” LA-13029, January 1996.

12 Nuclear Materials Technology Division/ Los Alamos National Laboratory

The Actinide Research Quarterly

Nuclear Materials Technology DivisionMail Stop E500Los Alamos National LaboratoryLos Alamos, New Mexico 87545505/667-2556 FAX 505/667-7966

LosN A T I O N A L L A B O R A T O R Y

AlamosLos Alamos, New Mexico 87545

LosN A T I O N A L L A B O R A T O R Y

AlamosLos Alamos, New Mexico 87545

The Actinide Research Quarterly is publishedquarterly to highlight recent achievements and ongoingprograms of the Nuclear Materials Technology Division.We welcome your suggestions and contributions.

LALP-96-3Director of NMT: Bruce MatthewsDeputy Director: Dana C. ChristensenChief Scientist: Kyu C. KimWriter/Editor: Ann MauzyDesign and Production: Susan L. Carlson

Los Alamos National Laboratory, an affirmative action/equal opportunity employer, is operated by the University of California for the Department of Energy under contract W-7405-ENG-36.All company names, logos, and products mentioned herein are registered trademarks of their respective companies. Reference to any specific company or product is not to be construed as anendorsement of said company or product by the Regents of the University of California, the United States Government, the U.S. Department of Energy, nor any of their employees. Allcompany names, logos, and products mentioned herein are trademarks of their respective companies. Reference to any specific company or product is not to be construed as an endorsementof said company or product by The Regents of the University of California, the United States Government, the U.S. Department of Energy, nor any of their employees. The Los AlamosNational Laboratory strongly supports academic freedom and a researcher's right to publish; therefore, the Laboratory as an institution does not endorse the viewpoint of a publication orguarantee its technical correctness.

NewsMakers

■ NMT Earmarks Funds for Awards The Los Alamos Award Program (LAAP) enables Lab managers to recognize the excep-tional contributions and noteworthy achievements of their employees in a timely manner. NMTwill earmark a sizable portion of its LAAP funds to recognize and reward the accomplishmentsof individuals and teams for their science and technology efforts. The cash awards will recognize excellence in publications, patents, technology transfer,major program developments, science education, and other technological innovations. A teamheaded by Chief Scientist K. C. Kim will review nominations and make recommendations toDivision Director Bruce Matthews. Nominations for single individuals or teams may be made atany time, but nominations for this year's awards are due to Kim by May 31. Self-nominations arewelcome. The nomination should describe specific accomplishments within the period June 1,1995, through September 30, 1996. If you have any questions or suggestions about NMT's part inthe LAAP, contact Kim at 7-7753 or via e-mail: kck@lanl.gov.

The following NMT members have been appointed to the Laboratory "core competency"teams: Larry Avens in Complex Experimentation and Measurement, Brett Kniss in NuclearWeapons Science and Technology, and Walt Stark and Steve Yarbro in Nuclear and AdvancedMaterials. The teams operate under the guidance of the Science and Technology Base (STB)Program Office and the Core Competency Senior Advisory Committee, composed of a numberof the Laboratory directors. The teams provide a link with the Laboratory technical staff andreport quarterly to Technical Working Group of the Laboratory Leadership Council (LLC) onthe "status of the science and technology base." In addition, Tim Nelson was appointed to the Science and Engineering Advisory Council,which reports directly to the director of STB Programs and provides input to the LLC workinggroups. Other NMT members continue to contribute to a number of advisory groups. Lookingat all the recent appointments, it appears that these days the Laboratory listens when the NMTDivision talks.

K. M. Chidester (Project Leader), “Nuclear Material Stabilization and Packaging,” 72, Quarterly Progress Report,October 1 - December 31, 1995, LA-UR-96-3, February 1996.

M. Dinehart (Project Leader), “94-1 Research & Development Project, Lead Laboratory Support,” Status ReportOctober 1 - December 31, 1995, LA-13133-SR, February 1996.

N. G. Pope, R. E. Brown, W. J. Turner, K. Courtney, E. L. Joseph, D. Jones, and S. Prueitt, “Implementation Planfor the Operations Center Upgrade Project,” LA-13141-MS, April 1996.

G. W. Veazey, P. D. Shalek, A. R. Schake, D. A. Romero, and C. A. Smith, “Waste Form Development for Conver-sion to Portland Cement at Technical Area 55 (TA-55),” LA- 13125, March 1996.

Publications, Presentations, and Reports (continued)

TA55