DISCLAIMERThis document was ptepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the Univdty of California nor any of their employees, makes any w a r r a n t y , express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or proces disclosed, or represents that its use would not inhinge privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial produd,. process, or service by trade name, trademark, manhcturer, or otherwise, does not necessanl * y constitute cir imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or the University of cazifornia The views and opiniorrs of authors exprewd herein do not neceSSarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or the University of California, and shall not be used for advertising or pmduct e n d m e n t purposes. Thisreporthasb€€nreproduced PurposeThe purpose of this feed report is to provide a list of plutonium-bearing feed materials, by location and type, c m n t l y considered excess to Defense Programs. DOE/MD will use this complete listing of possible feed materials for its determination of the feed materials which fall within the scope of the Materials Disposition Program for purposes of the programmatic environmental impact statement (PEIS) and record of decision (ROD) activities currently underway. This report will be updated should significant changes in stockpile predictions or other conditions warrant. Objectives 0To provide a database for MD to use in establishing a reference feed inventory for consideration by disposition alternatives. To adequately categorize the present plutonium inventory with respect to possible feeds for potential processing scenarios which may be utilized by the various DOE programs. To pmvide material input stream characterization information which will become the basis for bounding cases with regard to environmental impacts and costs of the plutonium disposition altel-MtiVes. To facilitate a systematic assessment of each disposition alternative. To provide the materials inventory basis for evaluating potential additional benefits that could be realized by the ability of some disposition alternatives to help accomplish the missions of other organizations. ScopeAll plutonium-bearing materials reported to the DOE Nuclear Materials Management and Safeguards System (NMMSS) and which are excess to Defense Program needs are included in this report. Plutonium-bearing materials that have already been discarded as low-level waste, transuranic (TRU) waste, or high-level waste are no longer tracked by the NMMSS and are excluded from this report.

No abstract

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency ofthe United States Government. Neither The Regents of the University of California, the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for theaccuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents thnt its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or semice by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by The Regents of the University of California, the United States Government, or any agency thereof The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or refrect those of The Regents of the University of California, the United States Government, or any agency there@ The Los Alamos National 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 or guarantee its technical correctness.

Spent Fuel Burnups and Ages at Emplacement Normalized 99 to Energy Information Agency (EIA) 1983 Midplane Projections 3.2-2 Year of Emplacement Based on Projected Inventories of Spent Fuel 3.2-3 Photon Release Rates and Energies for Reference PWR Fuel 3.2-4 Average Thermal Properties of TSw2 Rock 3.2-5 Corrosion Rates of Candidate Waste Container Alloys 3.2-6 Average Cracking Time for Commercial Fe-Ni-Cr Alloys Exposed to Boiling MgCl(2) at 154'C 3.2-7 Characteristics of Spent Fuel Assemblies 4.1 Definitions of the WADCOM II Nuclear Waste Disposal Paths 4.2 WADCOM II USERFILE 4.3 WADCOM II USERFILE: Yucca Mountain Repository Project Highlights 4.4 Summary Cost Matrix I: Project Criteria for Yucca Mountain 4.5 Breakdown of the Summary Cost Matrix 4.6 Summary Cost Matrix: Independent Evaluation 5.1 System Design Highlights 205 V LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 2.1 Castor Cask Cross-Section 2.2 Castor Cask Dry Storage Cask 2.3 Castor Cask Dose Rates 2.4 Castor Cask Temperature Profiles 2.5 Overweight Truck Design Envelope 2.6 Heavy Rail Car Design Envelope 2.7 Repository Site Layout 2.8 Primary Facility Layout 2.9 Buffer Storage Facility Layout 2.10 Cask Transporter 2.11 Repackaging and Handling Facility Overview 43 2.12 General Process Description 2.13 General Cask Unloading/Loading Design Description 2.14 Schematic Representation of Unloading/Loading Room Equipment 2.15 Loading Canister Procedure 2.16 Repository Specific Disposal Canister 2.17 Canister Sealing Cell 2.18 Welding and Backfilling/Leak Testing Stations 2.19 Canister-Carrying Rail Car 2.20 Decontamination Cell 2.21 Schematic Lag Storage Room Description 2.22 Lag Storage Heat Removal Principle 2.23 Safety Canister Hook Design 2.24 Corridor Sequence Operation 2.25 Canister Emplacement Sequence Operation 2.26 Emplacement Cask Loading Cell 2.27 Canister Downender 2.28 Emplacement Cask Loading Operations Sequence 3.2-1 Spent Fuel Thermal Source Up to 100,000 Year Cooling Time 100 3.2-2 Toxicity of Nuclear Waste Over Time (Relative to that of Average Mineral Ores of Toxic Elements) Compared to Times of Social or Geologic Significance 3.2-3 Spent Fuel Container Configurations 106 3.2-4 Unit Cell for Calculation of Repository Pitch for a 107 57 kw/acre Areal Thermal Loading 3.2-5 Effective Spent Fuel Thermal Conductivity 109 3.2-6 Thermal Profiles for Horizontal Emplacement 110 57 kw/acre, 25 m pitch, 2200 watts/ canister 3.3-1 Location of Yucca Mountain Site in Southern Nevada 123 3.3-2 Physiographic Features of Yucca Mountain 124 3.3-3 North-South Stratigraphic Correlation Between 126 Selected Drillholes at Yucca Mountain 3.3-3b Index Map for Selected Drillholes 127 3.3-4 Petrographic Textural Percentages: Topopah Springs Member 128 3.3-5 Usable Portion of the Primary Area and Expansion Areas 131 3.3-6 Cross Section of Emplacement Rooms 136 3.3-7 Plan View of the Repository 138 vi 3.3-8

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness. or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Refcrence herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recornmendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.