72. 



DR. HEDMAN: What is the basis for your 50 tons? 



DR. MORGAN: Conformity with the existing I.C'.C. regulations. 



DR. WATKINS: It seems probable that with a homogeneous re- 

 actor, the disposal facilities are to be at the site; with a heterogeneous 

 reactor, the processing plant can be at some distance from the reactor. 



DR. CULLER: I don't think that is true. The homogeneous re- 

 actor materials can be shipped just as can the heterogeneous elements. 

 The processing on the heterogeneous system consists of drawing a 

 small amount off the reactor, and shipping it as the reactor fuel ele- 

 ment, I suspect. It has a higher potential of spillage than does a metal 

 container, but you are not shipping thousands of gallons. In the homo- 

 geneous system you do not withdraw uranium; you withdraw fission 

 products, and from the external core. The cycle or turnover time for 

 the core is about 270 days, and the amount of material that we have to 

 take out per day may be in the neighborhood of 100 to 200 litres. The 

 liquid might be transported in relatively small volumes, or as a dry 

 solid. It is necessary to boil off heavy water and return it to the homo- 

 geneous system before the stuff drawn off the reactor leaves the plant. 

 We probably would be transporting dry sodium oxide. 



DR. RUSSELL: That would be at high temperature? 



DR. CULLER: At a high temperature in a cooling system. 



DR. HUBBERT: It seems to me we have been very premature 

 indeed if we come to any conclusion that the waste cannot be trans- 

 ported. The difficulties are great and the costs appear high but ad- 

 mittedly the estimates are subject to many modifications and are based 

 on inadequate data. There are endless opportunities for corrections 

 and improvements, therefore, the imposition of limiting suppositions 

 may seriously jeopardize the usefulness of the committee. 



DR. CLAUS: In our committee work should we consider prima- 

 rily our immediate problem, and by immediate I mean the next ten to 

 twenty years, or should we consider it in terms of the vast quantities 

 that have been discussed in connection with possible production by the 

 year 2000? Furthermore, should we think primarily in terms of prob- 

 lems in the United States, or should we take a wider view? England, 

 for example, expects to have a large number of reactors and some are 

 under construction. Their waste disposal plans are unknown to most 



