4. Removal of specific fission products for use as radiation sources - 
desirable to provide revenue to cover costs of waste disposal, but 
does not eliminate the need for an ultimate disposal need. 
To summarize, there is no obvious answer to the ultimate disposal of fission 
products. A most ingenious invention is required, and a large and expensive 
development program will be necessary to answer the safety problems of ultimate 
disposal. It is my opinion that there is no very promising method for ultimate 
disposal. 
New Reactors and Their Effects on the Wastes 
Reactors which differ from those discussed above, will produce wastes of 
different character. Proposed reactors using difficultly soluble fuel elements 
such as those containing zirconium or stainless steel, will greatly increase the 
wastes from aqueous processes. The temperature resistant fuels required for 
mobile power reactors require large dilutions of uranium with materials such 
as stainless steel, inconel, or zirconium. Dissolution of these materials in 
inorganic acids results in high concentrations of inactive salts in the fission 
product wastes. Corrosive anions such as SO,» Cl; F also may be present. It 
is possible that such fuels can be reprocessed by utilizing the volatility of 
UF 6 to separate it from fission products. The volume of waste from such a 
process probably would be small. However, the heat and corrosion problems 
still would be present. 
Reactors of the homogeneous type offers some hope for isolating fission 
products in small packages. It may be possible to remove precipitated fission 
products with essentially no diluant from homogeneous reactor fuels. However, 
problems of ultimate disposal remain unchanged. 
Approximate Economic Requirements for Waste Disposal in a Power Economy 
Assuming that power in the United States should cost approximately 8 mils/kwh 
to be competitive, assuming that chemical reprocessing should cost not more than 
DECLASSIFIED 
