8. For how long is the AEC responsible for monitoring the gas flow from the Rulison well?

Under the Rulison contract (between the Government, represented by the Atomic Energy Commission and the Department of the Interior, and the Austral Oil Company and CER Geonuclear Corporation), Project Rulison is to continue, with the contract in full force and effect between the parties, until such time as the Government unilaterally determines that the project is to be terminated, or under certain conditions upon termination by mutual consent or because of the Government's default. As long as the Rulison contract is in effect, post-detonation safety procedures are to be worked out mutually between the parties but with the Atomic Energy Commission, because of its statutory responsibilities for protection of the health and safety of the public, having the overriding voice in the event of failure to agree. After the contract is no longer in effect, the Austral Oil Company, as lessee of the premises and owner of the Rulison well, would legally be subject to the regulatory requirements of the Atomic Energy Commission, or the State of Colorado to the extent it has jurisdiction as an agreement state under Section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act. As stated in the answer to question 7 above, to the extent that an AEC license might be involved, the Commission would have regulatory responsibility to require that flaring of the gas be conducted with due regard for health and safety of the public, as in the case of other licensed nuclear activities.

9. Devices used for underground engineering purposes, specifically gas stimulation, could be required to perform in a hostile environment within stiff parameters. For example, nuclear devices which can overcome pressures as high as 13,000 pounds per square inch, temperatures of 350 degrees Fahrenheit, and a range of yields may be needed. For Fiscal Year 1971 a single device test is planned.

(a) Realizing that the stated device development goal for FY 1971 is reduced diameter and low tritium generation, what other design factors might be learned with a single test?

The primary objectives of the explosive development test planned for FY 1971 are to test an explosive design which: (1) produces a useful yield; (2) minimizes the amount of tritium; and (3) has the smallest diameter within the available technology.

(b) Is it possible to use the data from the single test to arrive at other desired parameters?

Data obtained from this one test combined with data previously obtained from tests of related explosive designs may indicate the nature of improvements which would be desirable and possible. This would point the direction for future design work and one or more subsequent development tests. The effect on explosives of environmental factors, such as the high temperatures and pressures found at great depths, can be determined to a certain extent in the laboratory and the explosive will be designed to anticipate these conditions as far as feasible in keeping with other design requirements. However, it may not be possible to incorporate all the environmental protection into the explosive itself, but may require techniques external to the explosive. Of course, the environmental protection features cannot be fully proved until a test is carried out in the actual environment.

(c) What happens if the single test is a failure?

If the design of the first test were to be a "failure," we would propose to redesign and test an explosive correcting the "failure." It should be noted that there are other design concepts under study which show promise of satisfying the industrial characteristics that are required; for the first test we have selected the one which appears the most promising. If the test were only partially unsuccessful, the design would have to be improved and further testing would probably be necessary.

10. Are devices which are developed for gas stimulation suitable for: (a) In-place retorting of oil shale?

An explosive that is suitable for gas stimulation would probably be suitable for oil shale fracturing too, since the same characteristics (reduced tritium, small diameter, and ability to withstand increased temperatures and pressures downhole) apply to both applications. However, since the oil shale application

may never involve depths as great as natural gas formations, the small diameter and rugged environmental-survivability characteristics may not be as critical.

(b) In-place leaching of minerals?

For fracturing mineral deposits for in-place leaching it does not appear that the explosive requirements will be as stringent as those for gas stimulation, particularly with regard to the tritium produced. The explosive design might be influenced by specific leaching processes. Certain special nuclear materials might be used to achieve the required yield with the least problem of radioactivity in the mineral product. Beyond this possible requirement we would want the simplest, most economical explosive which will achieve the yield required. While either the gas stimulation explosive or the excavation explosive might be satisfactory for this work, there are probably other designs already available which might be adequate and more economical.

(c) Construction of underground storage cavities?

Construction of an underground storage cavity could probably use an explosive using the same nuclear physics as the gas stimulation explosive. However, a larger diameter explosive of an existing design might be acceptable as a means of obtaining a less expensive total explosion.

(d) Construction of cavities for geothermal energy sources?

For geothermal energy recovery the gas stimulation explosive could be used. However, the geothermal recovery application does not have the same stringent limitation so far as tritium is concerned. Therefore, the simplest and most economical existing design which would provide the yield required should suffice.

(Whereupon at 3:50 p.m., Thursday, March 5, 1970, the Joint Committee recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Wednesday, March 11, 1970.)

PROGRAM STATEMENT AND JUSTIFICATION DATA FOR THE PHYSICAL RESEARCH PROGRAM

Physics

To reach a comprehensive understanding of the fundamental laws which determine the structure and behavior of matter and energy.
and to develop a consistent general theory explaining the behavior of nuclei, nuclear components and nuclear forces.

To develop both theoretical and empirical knowledge of nuclear structure and nuclear processes, and to obtain basic nuclear data important to the development of atomic energy applications.

To improve existing experimental devices, such as accelerators and computers, that are required in the research program, and
to develop advanced devices.

To develop new and improved methods and devices for the analysis of complex problems which are of special interest to the
Commission.

PHYSICAL RESEARCH PROGRAM continued

1.

To obtain fundamental information in those fields of chemical science related to atomic energy.

Chemistry

To develop knowledge, and to generate new concepts relevant to the future development of nuclear science and technology.

To provide the necessary quantities of rare, highly enriched special isotopes for use in the Atomic Energy Program.

Metallurgy and Materials

Controlled Thermonuclear

confinement.

power.