Department of Energy
Washington, DC 20585
August 19, 1998
Dr. Douglas J. Raber
National Academy of Sciences National Research Council 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20418

Dear Dr. Raber:

As you requested, we are pleased to clarify the intent of the current task under which the Committee on Electrometallurgical Techniques for DOE Spent Fuel Treatment is reviewing alternatives to electrometallurgical treatment. In a letter to you from Mr. William Magwood dated October 31, 1997, we asked the committee to “review the viability of electrometallurgical treatment technology in light of technical progress in other possible treatment technologies.” We intended that this review be undertaken specifically within the context of Experimental Breeder Reactor (EBR)-II sodium-bonded spent fuel since we are responsible for its dispositioning and are pursuing activities to support a Department of Energy decision on its treatment. This intent was also reflected in my letter to you dated February 12, 1998, which asked that the committee “include an assessment of the applicability of a ‘no-treatment' option in its review of alternatives to the electrometallurgical technology for the disposition of EBR-II spent nuclear fuel.”

We appreciate the council's support in continuing the evaluation of electrometallurgical research and hope this information is beneficial to your efforts to expeditiously publish the results of this review. Please call me at (301) 903-2915 should you have any questions.

Robert G. Lange,
Associate Director for Nuclear Facilities Management

Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement