This article’s introduction section may not adequately summarize its contents. To comply with Wikipedia’s lead section guidelines, please consider expanding the lead to provide an accessible overview of the article’s key points. (April 2009)

Nuclear reprocessing separates components of spent nuclear fuel such as:

Actinides:	Lighter elements:
Reprocessed uranium	Fission products
Plutonium	Activation products
Minor actinides	Cladding

Contents 1 Purposes 2 History 3 Aqueous / organic solvent methods 3.1 PUREX 3.2 UREX 3.3 TRUEX 3.4 DIAMEX 3.5 SANEX 3.6 UNEX 3.7 Electrochemical method in aqueous alkali 3.8 Obsolete methods 3.8.1 Bismuth phosphate 3.8.2 Hexone or Redox 3.8.3 Butex, ?,?’-dibutyoxydiethyl ether 4 Pyroprocessing 4.1 Advantages and disadvantages 4.2 PYRO-A and -B for IFR 4.3 Voloxidation 4.4 Volatilization in isolation 4.5 Fluoride volatility 4.6 Chloride volatility and solubility 5 Economics of reprocessing nuclear fuel 6 List of nuclear reprocessing sites 7 See also 8 Notes 9 References 10 External links

Purposes

Reprocessing serves multiple purposes, whose relative importance has changed over time:

• Producing plutonium for nuclear weapons
• Recycling all actinides for fast breeder reactors, closing the nuclear fuel cycle, multiplying the energy extracted from natural uranium by more than 60.
• Recycling plutonium once as MOX fuel for thermal reactors, extending energy extracted by about 12% and slightly reducing plutonium stocks
• Allowing separate management (destruction or storage) of nuclear waste components:

components	disposition
plutonium, minor actinides, some reprocessed uranium	nuclear fission in a fast reactor or subcritical reactor
some long-lived fission products (99Tc, 129I) and activation products	nuclear transmutation by neutron capture
other long-lived fission products and activation products	permanent storage in a deep geological repository
reprocessed uranium and other bulky but low-level waste	less stringent storage
medium-lived radionuclides such as 137Cs and 90Sr	secure short-term decay storage
useful radionuclides	industrial and medical uses

Also possible is the extraction of ruthenium and rhodium, which may be economically feasible, as both are costly noble metals. (See Synthesis of noble metals).

History

The first large-scale nuclear reactors were built during World War II. These reactors were designed for the production of plutonium for use in nuclear weapons. The only reprocessing required, therefore, was the extraction of the plutonium (free of fission-product contamination) from the spent natural uranium fuel. In 1943, several methods were proposed for separating the relatively small quantity of plutonium from the uranium and fission products. The first method selected, a precipitation process called the Bismuth Phosphate process, was developed and tested at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) in the 1943-1945 period to produce quantities of plutonium for evaluation and use in weapons programs. ORNL produced the first macroscopic quantities (grams) of separated plutonium with these processes.

The Bismuth Phosphate process was first operated on a large scale at the Hanford Site, in the latter part of 1944. It was successful for plutonium separation in the emergency situation existing then, but it had a significant weakness: the inability to recover uranium.

The first successful solvent extraction process for the recovery of pure uranium and plutonium was developed at ORNL in 1949. The PUREX process is the current method of extraction. Separation plants were also constructed at Savannah River Site and a smaller plant at West Valley, New York which closed by 1972 because of its inability to meet new regulatory requirements.

Reprocessing of civilian fuel has long been employed in Europe, at the COGEMA La Hague site in France, the Sellafield site in the United Kingdom, the Mayak Chemical Combine in Russia, the Tokai plant in Japan, the Tarapur plant in India, and briefly at the West Valley Reprocessing Plant in the United States.

In October 1976, fear of nuclear weapons proliferation (especially after India demonstrated nuclear weapons capabilities using reprocessing technology) led President Gerald Ford to issue a Presidential directive to indefinitely suspend the commercial reprocessing and recycling of plutonium in the U.S. This was confirmed by President Jimmy Carter in 1977. After that, only countries that already had large investments in reprocessing infrastructure continued to reprocess spent nuclear fuel. President Reagan lifted the ban in 1981, but did not provide the substantial subsidy that would have been necessary to start up commercial reprocessing.

In March 1999, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) reversed its own policy and signed a contract with a consortium comprised of Duke Energy, COGEMA, and Stone & Webster (DCS) to design and operate a Mixed Oxide (MOX) fuel fabrication facility. Site preparation at the Savannah River Site (South Carolina) began in October 2005.

The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, announced by the secretary of the Department of Energy, Samuel Bodman, on February 6, 2006, is a plan to form an international partnership to reprocess spent nuclear fuel in a way that renders the plutonium in it usable for nuclear fuel but not for nuclear weapons.

Aqueous / organic solvent methods

PUREX

Main article: PUREX

PUREX, the current standard method, is an acronym standing for Plutonium and Uranium Recovery by EXtraction. The PUREX process is a liquid-liquid extraction method used to reprocess spent nuclear fuel, in order to extract uranium and plutonium, independent of each other, from the fission products. This is the most developed and widely used process in the industry at present. When used on fuel from commercial power reactors the plutonium extracted typically contains too much Pu-240 to be useful in a nuclear weapon. However, reactors that are capable of refuelling frequently can be used to produce weapon-grade plutonium, which can later be recovered using PUREX. Because of this, PUREX chemicals are monitored.

UREX

The PUREX process can be modified to make a UREX (URanium EXtraction) process which could be used to save space inside high level nuclear waste disposal sites, such as Yucca Mountain, by removing the uranium which makes up the vast majority of the mass and volume of used fuel and recycling it as reprocessed uranium.

The UREX process is a PUREX process which has been modified to prevent the plutonium from being extracted. This can be done by adding a plutonium reductant before the first metal extraction step. In the UREX process, ~99.9% of the Uranium and >95% of Technetium are separated from each other and the other fission products and actinides. The key is the addition of acetohydroxamic acid (AHA) to the extraction and scrub sections of the process. The addition of AHA greatly diminishes the extractability of Plutonium and Neptunium, providing greater proliferation resistance than with the plutonium extraction stage of the PUREX process.

TRUEX

Adding a second extraction agent, octyl(phenyl)-N, N-dibutyl carbamoylmethyl phosphine oxide(CMPO) in combination with tributylphosphate, (TBP), the PUREX process can be turned into the TRUEX (TRansUranic EXtraction) process. TRUEX was invented in the USA by Argonne National Laboratory and is designed to remove the transuranic metals (Am/Cm) from waste. The idea is that by lowering the alpha activity of the waste, the majority of the waste can then be disposed of with greater ease. In common with PUREX this process operates by a solvation mechanism.

DIAMEX

As an alternative to TRUEX, an extraction process using a malondiamide has been devised. The DIAMEX (DIAMideEXtraction) process has the advantage of avoiding the formation of organic waste which contains elements other than Carbon, Hydrogen, Nitrogen, and Oxygen. Such an organic waste can be burned without the formation of acidic gases which could contribute to acid rain. The DIAMEX process is being worked on in Europe by the French CEA. The process is sufficiently mature that an industrial plant could be constructed with the existing knowledge of the process. In common with PUREX this process operates by a solvation mechanism.

SANEX

Selective ActiNide EXtraction. As part of the management of minor actinides it has been proposed that the lanthanides and trivalent minor actinides should be removed from the PUREX raffinate by a process such as DIAMEX or TRUEX. In order to allow the actinides such as americium to be either reused in industrial sources or used as fuel the lanthanides must be removed. The lanthanides have large neutron cross sections and hence they would poison a neutron driven nuclear reaction. To date the extraction system for the SANEX process has not been defined, but currently several different research groups are working towards a process. For instance the French CEA is working on a bis-triazinyl pyridine (BTP) based process. Other systems such as the dithiophosphinic acids are being worked on by some other workers.

UNEX

The UNiversal EXtraction process was developed in Russia and the Czech Republic; it is designed to completely remove the most troublesome radioisotopes (Sr, Cs and minor actinides) from the raffinate remaining after the extraction of uranium and plutonium from used nuclear fuel. The chemistry is based upon the interaction of caesium and strontium with poly ethylene oxide (poly ethylene glycol) and a cobalt carborane anion (known as chlorinated cobalt dicarbollide). The actinides are extracted by CMPO, and the diluent is a polar aromatic such as nitrobenzene. Other dilents such as meta-nitrobenzotrifluoride and phenyl trifluoromethyl sulfone have been suggested as well.

Electrochemical method in aqueous alkali

An exotic method using electrochemistry and ion exchange in ammonium carbonate has been reported.

Obsolete methods

Bismuth phosphate

The bismuth phosphate process is a very old process which adds lots of material to the final highly active waste. It was replaced by solvent extraction processes. The process was designed to extract plutonium from aluminium-clad uranium metal fuel. The fuel was declad by boiling it in caustic soda. After decladding, the uranium metal was dissolved in nitric acid. The plutonium at this point is in the +4 oxidation state. It was then precipitated by the addition of bismuth nitrate and phosphoric acid to form the bismuth phosphate. The plutonium was coprecipitated with this. The supernatant liquid (containing many of the fission products) was separated from the solid. The precipitate was then dissolved in nitric acid before the addition of an oxidant such as potassium permanganate which converted the plutonium to PuO₂²⁺ (Pu VI), then a dichromate salt was added to maintain the plutonium in the +6 oxidation state. The bismuth phosphate was then re-precipitated leaving the plutonium in solution. Then an iron (II) salt such as ferrous sulfate was added and the plutonium re-precipitated again using a bismuth phosphate carrier precipitate. Then lanthanum salts and fluoride were added to create solid lanthanum fluoride which acted as a carrier for the Pu. This was converted to the oxide by the action of a base. The lanthanum plutonium oxide was then collected and extracted with nitric acid to form plutonium nitrate.

Hexone or Redox

This is a liquid-liquid extraction process which uses methyl isobutyl ketone as the extractant. The extraction is by a solvation mechanism. This process has the disadvantage of requiring the use of a salting out reagent (aluminium nitrate) to increase the nitrate concentration in the aqueous phase to obtain a reasonable distribution ratio (D value). Also hexone is degraded by concentrated nitric acid. This process has been replaced by PUREX.

Pu⁴⁺ + 4NO₃^- + 2S –>

Butex, ?,?’-dibutyoxydiethyl ether

A process based on a solvation extraction process using the triether extractant named above. This process has the disadvantage of requiring the use of a salting out reagent (aluminium nitrate) to increase the nitrate concentration in the aqueous phase to obtain a reasonable distribution ratio. This process was used at Windscale many years ago. This process has been replaced by PUREX.

Pyroprocessing

Pyroprocessing is a generic term for several kinds of Pyrometallurgical Reprocessing. These processes are not currently in significant use worldwide, but they have been researched and developed at Argonne National Laboratory and elsewhere. The principles behind them are well understood, and no significant technical barriers exist to their adoption. The primary economic hurdle to widespread adoption is that reprocessing as a whole is not currently (2005) in favor, and places that do reprocess already have PUREX plants constructed. Consequently, there is little demand for new pyrometalurgical systems, although there could be if the Generation IV reactor programs become reality.

Pyrometallurgical processing techniques involve several stages: volatilisation, liquid-liquid extraction using immiscible metal-metal phases or metal-salt phases, electrorefining in molten salt, fractional crystallisation, etc. They are generally based on the use of either fused (low-melting point) salts such as chlorides or fluorides (eg LiCl+KCl or LiF+CaF2) or fused metals such as cadmium, bismuth or aluminium. They are most readily applied to metal rather than oxide fuels.

Advantages and disadvantages

Advantages

• Readily applied to high-burn-up spent fuel and spent fuel which has had little cooling time, since the operating temperatures are high already.
• Does not use water, which is problematic in nuclear chemistry because it is a neutron moderator, easily contaminated, not easily cleaned up, and can evaporate taking tritium with it.
  • Alternatively, #Voloxidation can remove 99% of the tritium from used fuel and recover it in the form of a strong solution suitable for use as a supply of tritium.
• Can separate many or even all actinides at once and produce fuel that is spiked with heavy actinides. This makes it hard to manipulate, steal, or make nuclear weapons from the fuel. (However, the difficulty has been questioned.) In contrast the PUREX process was designed to separate plutonium, and also leaves alkaline minor actinides (americium, curium) behind, producing waste with more long-lived radioactivity.
• More compact than aqueous methods, allowing on-site reprocessing at the reactor site, which avoids transportation of spent fuel and its security issues, instead storing a much smaller volume of fission products on site as high-level waste until decommissioning.
• Less long-lived waste. Most of the long-term (roughly 10²~10⁵ years) radioactivity is produced by actinides, since there are no fission products with half-lives in this range. These actinides can fuel fast reactors, so extracting and reusing (fissioning) them reduces the long-term radioactivity of the waste and reduces fuel needs.

Disadvantages

• The used salt from pyroprocessing is less suitable for conversion into glass as the raffinate from PUREX processing.

PYRO-A and -B for IFR

These processes were developed by Argonne National Laboratory and used in the Integral Fast Reactor project.

PYRO-A is a means of separating actinides (elements within the actinide family, generally heavier than U-235) from non-actinides. The spent fuel is placed in an anode basket which is immersed in a molten salt electrolyte. An electrical current is applied, causing the uranium metal (or sometimes oxide, depending on the spent fuel) to plate out on a solid metal cathode while the other actinides (and the rare earths) can be absorbed into a liquid cadmium cathode. Many of the fission products (such as caesium, zirconium and strontium) remain in the salt. As alternatives to the molten cadmium electrode it is possible to use a molten bismuth cathode, or a solid aluminium cathode.

As an alternative to electrowinning, the wanted metal can be isolated by using a molten alloy of an electropositive metal and a less reactive metal.

Since the majority of the long term radioactivity, and volume, of spent fuel comes from actinides, removing the actinides produces waste that is more compact, and not nearly as dangerous over the long term. The radioactivity of this waste will then drop to the level of various naturally occurring minerals and ores within a few hundred, rather than thousands, years.

The mixed actinides produced by pyrometallic processing can be used again as nuclear fuel, as they are virtually all either fissile, or fertile, though many of these materials would require a fast breeder reactor in order to be burned efficiently. In a thermal neutron spectrum, the concentrations of several heavy actinides (Curium-242 and Plutonium-240) can become quite high, creating fuel that is substantially different from the usual Uranium or mixed oxides (MOX) that most current reactors were designed to use.

Another pyrochemical process, the PYRO-B process, has been developed for the processing and recycling of fuel from a transmuter reactor ( A Fast breeder reactor designed to convert transuranic nuclear waste into fission products ). A typical transmuter fuel is free of uranium and contains recovered transuranics in an inert matrix such as metallic zirconium. In the PYRO-B processing of such fuel, an electrorefining step is used to separate the residual transuranic elements from the fission products and recycle the transuranics to the reactor for fissioning. Newly-generated technetium and iodine are extracted for incorporation into transmutation targets, and the other fission products are sent to waste.

Voloxidation

Voloxidation (for volumetric oxidation) involves heating oxide fuel with oxygen, sometimes with alternating oxidation and reduction, or alternating oxidation by ozone to uranium trioxide with decomposition by heating back to triuranium octoxide. A major purpose is to capture tritium as tritiated water vapor before further processing where it would be difficult to retain the tritium. Other volatile elements leave the fuel and must be recovered, especially iodine, technetium, and carbon-14. Voloxidation also breaks up the fuel or increases its surface area to enhance penetration of reagents in following reprocessing steps.

Volatilization in isolation

Simply heating spent oxide fuel in an inert atmosphere or vacuum at a temperature between 700°C and 1000°C as a first reprocessing step can remove several volatile elements, including caesium whose isotope Cs-137 emits about half of the heat produced by the spent fuel over the following 100 years of cooling (however, most of the other half is from Sr-90 which remains). The estimated overall mass balance for 20,000 grams of processed fuel with 2,000 grams of cladding is:

	Input	Residue	Zeolite filter	Carbon filter	Particle filters
Palladium	28	14	14
Tellurium	10	5	5
Molybdenum	70		70
Caesium	46		46
Rubidium	8		8
Silver	2		2
Iodine	4			4
Cladding	2000	2000
Uranium	19218	19218			?
Others	614	614			?
Total	22000	21851	145	4	0

Tritium is not mentioned in this paper.

Fluoride volatility

Main article: Fluoride volatility

Blue elements have volatile fluorides or are already volatile; green elements do not but have volatile chlorides; red elements have neither, but the elements themselves are volatile at very high temperatures. Yields at 10^0,1,2,3 years after fission, not considering later neutron capture, fraction of 100% not 200%. Beta decay Kr-85?Rb, Sr-90?Zr, Ru-106?Pd, Sb-125?Te, Cs-137?Ba, Ce-144?Nd, Sm-151?Eu, Eu-155?Gd visible.

In the fluoride volatility process, fluorine is reacted with the fuel. Fluorine is so much more reactive than even oxygen that small particles of ground oxide fuel will burst into flame when dropped into a chamber full of fluorine. This is known as flame fluorination; the heat produced helps the reaction proceed. Most of the uranium, which makes up the bulk of the fuel, is converted to uranium hexafluoride, the form of uranium used in uranium enrichment, which has a very low boiling point. Technetium, the main long-lived fission product, is also efficiently converted to its volatile hexafluoride. A few other elements also form similarly volatile hexafluorides, pentafluorides, or heptafluorides. The volatile fluorides can be separated from excess fluorine by condensation, then separated from each other by fractional distillation or selective reduction. Uranium hexafluoride and technetium hexafluoride have very similar boiling points and vapor pressures, which makes complete separation more difficult.

Many of the fission products volatilized are the same ones volatilized in non-fluorinated, higher-temperature volatilization, such as iodine, tellurium and molybdenum; notable differences are that technetium is volatilized, but caesium is not.

Some transuranium elements such as plutonium, neptunium and americium can form volatile fluorides, but these compounds are not stable when the fluorine partial pressure is decreased. Most of the plutonium and some of the uranium will initially remain in ash which drops to the bottom of the flame fluorinator. The plutonium-uranium ratio in the ash may even approximate the composition needed for fast neutron reactor fuel. Further fluorination of the ash can remove all the uranium, neptunium, and plutonium as volatile fluorides; however, some other minor actinides may not form volatile fluorides and instead remain with the alkaline fission products. Some noble metals may not form fluorides at all, but remain in metallic form; however ruthenium hexafluoride is relatively stable and volatile.

Distillation of the residue at higher temperatures can separate lower-boiling transition metal fluorides and alkali metal (Cs, Rb) fluorides from higher-boiling lanthanide and alkaline earth metal (Sr, Ba) and yttrium fluorides. The temperatures involved are much higher, but can be lowered somewhat by distilling in a vacuum. If a carrier salt like lithium fluoride or sodium fluoride is being used as a solvent, high-temperature distillation is a way to separate the carrier salt for reuse.

Molten salt reactor designs carry out fluoride volatility reprocessing continuously or at frequent intervals. The goal is to return actinides to the molten fuel mixture for eventual fission, while removing fission products that are neutron poisons, or that can be more securely stored outside the reactor core while awaiting eventual transfer to permanent storage.

Chloride volatility and solubility

Many of the elements that form volatile high-valence fluorides will also form volatile high-valence chlorides. Chlorination and distillation is another possible method for separation. The sequence of separation may differ usefully from the sequence for fluorides; for example, zirconium tetrachloride and tin tetrachloride have relatively low boiling points of 331°C and 114.1°C. Chlorination has even been proposed as a method for removing zirconium fuel cladding, instead of mechanical decladding.

Chlorides are likely to be easier than fluorides to later convert back to other compounds, such as oxides.

Chlorides remaining after volatilization may also be separated by solubility in water. Chlorides of alkaline elements like americium, curium, lanthanides, strontium, caesium are more soluble than those of uranium, neptunium, plutonium, and zirconium.

Economics of reprocessing nuclear fuel

The relative economics of reprocessing-waste disposal and interim storage-direct disposal has been the focus of much debate over the past ten years. Studies have modeled the total fuel cycle costs of a reprocessing-recycling system based on one-time recycling of plutonium in existing thermal reactors (as opposed to the proposed fast breeder reactor cycle) and compare this to the total costs of an open fuel cycle with direct disposal. The range of results produced by these studies is very wide, but all are agreed that under current (2005) economic conditions the reprocessing-recycle option is the more costly.

If reprocessing is undertaken only to reduce the radioactivity level of spent fuel it should be taken into account that spent nuclear fuel becomes less radioactive over time. After 40 years its radioactivity drops by 99.9%, though it still takes over a thousand years for the level of radioactivity to approach that of natural uranium. However the level of transuranic elements, including plutonium-239, remains high for over 100,000 years, so if not reused as nuclear fuel, then those elements need secure disposal because of nuclear proliferation reasons as well as radiation hazard.

• Recycled Nuclear Fuel Cost Calculator designed by the WISE Uranium Project

List of nuclear reprocessing sites

Country	Reprocessing site	Fuel type	Procedure	Reprocessing capacity tU/yr	Commissioning or operating period
Belgium	Mol	LWR, MTR (Material test reactor)		80	1966-1974
Germany	Karlsruhe, WAK	LWR		35	1971-1990
France	Marcoule, UP 1	Military		1,200	1958-1997
France	Marcoule, CEA APM	FBR	PUREX DIAMEX SANEX	6	1988- present
France	La Hague, UP 2	LWR	PUREX	900	1967-1974
France	La Hague, UP 2-400	LWR	PUREX	400	1976-1990
France	La Hague, UP 2-800	LWR	PUREX	800	1990
France	La Hague, UP 3	LWR	PUREX	800	1990
UK	Windscale	Magnox		1,000	1956-1962
UK	Sellafield, B205	Magnox	PUREX	1,500	1964
UK	Dounreay	FBR		8	1980
UK	THORP	LWR	PUREX	1,200	1990
Italy	Rotondella	Thorium		5	1968 (shutdown)
India	Kalpakkam	Military		100	1998
India	Trombay	Military	PUREX	60	1965
India	Tarapur	CANDU		100	1982
Japan	Tokaimura	LWR		210	1977
Japan	Rokkasho	LWR		800	2005
Russia	Mayak Plant B	Military		400	1948-196?
Russia	Mayak Plant BB, RT-1	LWR	PUREX + Np separation	400	1978
Russia	Zheleznogorsk (Krasnoyarsk-26), RT-2	WWER		1,500	under construction
USA, NY	West Valley	LWR		300	1966-1972

See also

Energy portal

• Nuclear fuel cycle
• Nuclear breeder reactor
• Spent nuclear fuel shipping cask
• Global Nuclear Energy Partnership announced February, 2006
• Megatons to Megawatts Program

Notes

1. ^ “Supply of Uranium: Nuclear issues briefing paper #75″. Uranium Information Centre,. http://www.uic.com.au/nip75.htm. Retrieved on 2007-06-17. 
2. ^ Information from the World Nuclear Association about MOX
3. ^ “Plutonium Recovery from Spent Fuel Reprocessing by Nuclear Fuel Services at West Valley, New York from 1966 to 1972″. U.S. Department of Energy. February 1996. http://www.osti.gov/opennet/document/purecov/nfsrepo.html. Retrieved on 2007-06-17. 
4. ^ Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing: U.S. Policy Development
5. ^
6. ^ “U.S.-Russia Team Makes Treating Nuclear Waste Easier”. U.S. embassy press release(?). 2001-12-19. http://www.usembassy.it/file2001_12/alia/a1121910.htm. Retrieved on 2007-06-14. 
7. ^ J. Banaee et al. (2001-09-01). “INTEC High-Level Waste Studies Universal Solvent Extraction Feasibility Study”. INEEL Technical report. http://www.osti.gov/bridge/product.biblio.jsp?osti_id=765723. 
8. ^ J.D. Law et al. (2001-03-01). “Flowsheet testing of the universal solvent extraction process for the simultaneous separation of caesium, strontium, and the actinides from dissolved INEEL calcine” (PDF). WM 2001 conference proceedings. http://www.wmsym.org/Abstracts/2001/62/62-7.pdf. Retrieved on 2006-06-17. 
9. ^ Asanuma, Noriko, et al. (2006). “Andodic dissociation of UO₂ pellet containing simulated fission products in ammonium carbonate solution”. Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology 43: 255–262. doi:10.3327/jnst.43.255. http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jnst/43/3/255/_pdf. 
10. ^ Gerber, Michelle. “The plutonium production story at the Hanford Site: processes and facilities history (WHC-MR-0521) (excerpts)”. Department of Energy. http://www.bonestamp.com/sgt/process.htm. 
11. ^ Seaborg, Glenn T. et al. (1960-08-23). “Method for separation of plutonium from uranium and fission products by solvent extraction”. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. http://www.osti.gov/energycitations/product.biblio.jsp?osti_id=4134289. 
12. ^ L.W. Gray (1999-04-15). “From separations to reconstitution–a short history of plutonium in the U.S. and Russia (UCRL-JC-133802)” (PDF). Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory preprint. http://www.llnl.gov/tid/lof/documents/pdf/235702.pdf. 
13. ^ “PYROPROCESSING PROGRESS AT IDAHO NATIONAL LABORATORY” (PDF). Idaho National Laboratory article. 2007-09. http://www.inl.gov/technicalpublications/Documents/3931942.pdf. 
14. ^ ^{a b c} Guillermo D. Del Cul, et al.. “Advanced Head-End Processing of Spent Fuel: A Progress Report” (PDF). 2005 ANS annual meeting. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. DOE. http://www.ornl.gov/~webworks/cppr/y2001/pres/123514.pdf. Retrieved on 2008-05-03. 
15. ^ “Limited Proliferation-Resistance Benefits from Recycling Unseparated Transuranics and Lanthanides from Light-Water Reactor Spent Fuel” (PDF). 4. http://www.princeton.edu/~globsec/publications/pdf/13_3%20Kang%20vonhippel.pdf. 
16. ^ “Development of pyro-process fuel cell technology” (PDF). CRIEPI News. July 2002. http://criepi.denken.or.jp/en/e_publication/pdf/den363.pdf. Retrieved on 2009-06-22. 
17. ^ Masatoshi Iizuka (2001-12-12). “Development of plutonium recovery process by molten salt electrorefining with liquid cadmium cathode” (PDF). Proceedings of the 6th information exchange meeting on actinide and fission product partitioning and transmutation (Madrid, Spain). http://www.nea.fr/html/pt/docs/iem/madrid00/Proceedings/Paper56.pdf. Retrieved on 2009-06-22. 
18. ^ http://www.nea.fr/html/pt/iempt8/abstracts/Abstracts/Session_II/zvejskova.ppt
19. ^ Elecrochemical Behaviours of Lanthanide Fluorides in the Electrolysis System with LiF-NaF-KF Salt
20. ^ The Merck Group - Home
21. ^ “Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative”. U.S. Department of Energy. http://www.ne.doe.gov/AFCI/neAFCI.html. Retrieved on 2008-05-03. 
22. ^ Wolverton, Daren et al. (2005-05-11). “Removal of caesium from spent nuclear fuel destined for the electrorefiner fuel treatment process” (PDF). University of Idaho (dissertation?). http://web.mac.com/mosb1000/iWeb/Bob’s%20Site/Examples_files/Sr_Design_Rpt.pdf. 
23. ^ http://books.google.com/books?id=SJOE00whg44C&pg=PA66&lpg=PA66&dq=fission+product+cross+sections&source=web&ots=G5cQlwmIEq&sig=2K5eRWNKbAJ0T_jDpckg1tCAMSQ&hl=en#PPA66,M1
24. ^ “Waste Management and Disposal”. World Nuclear Association. http://www.world-nuclear.org/how/wastemanag.html. Retrieved on 2008-05-03. 
25. ^ “Radioactive Wastes: Myths and Realities”. World Nuclear Association. 2006-06. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf103.html. Retrieved on 2008-05-03. 
26. ^ ^{a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z aa ab ac ad ae af ag ah ai aj ak} “Reprocessing plants, world-wide” (in English). European Nuclear Society. http://www.euronuclear.org/info/encyclopedia/r/reprocessing-plants-ww.htm. Retrieved on 2008-07-29. 
27. ^ ^{a b c d e f g h i j} “Civil Reprocessing Facilities” (in English) (PDF). Princeton University. http://www.princeton.edu/~ota/disk1/1995/9530/953007.PDF. Retrieved on 2008-07-30. 
28. ^ “Marcoule - Valrho” (in English). Global Security. http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/france/marcoule.htm. Retrieved on 2008-07-30. 
29. ^ Dominique Warin (2006-11-24). “http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jnst/44/3/410/_pdf” (in English). JSTage. http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jnst/44/3/410/_pdf. Retrieved on 2008-08-10. 
30. ^ ^{a b c d} “BASSE-NORMANDIE- LOWER NORMANDY, La Hague” (in English). France Nucleaire. http://www.francenuc.org/en_sites/lnorm_hague_e.htm. Retrieved on 2008-07-31. 
31. ^ ^{a b} “Kalpakkam Atomic Reprocessing Plant ” (in English). Global Security. http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/india/kalpakkam.htm. Retrieved on 2008-07-30. 
32. ^ “CIRUS and DHRUVA Reactors, Trombay” (in English). Global Security. http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/india/kalpakkam.htm. Retrieved on 2008-07-30. 
33. ^ “Tokai Reprocessing Plant (TRP)” (in English). Global Security. http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/japan/tokai.htm. Retrieved on 2008-07-30. 
34. ^ “Chelyabinsk-65″ (in English). Global Security. http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/chelyabinsk-65_nuc.htm. Retrieved on 2008-07-29. 
35. ^ S. Guardini et al. (2003-06-16). “Modernization and Enhancement of NMAC at the Mayak RT-1 Plant” (in English) (PDF). INMM. https://archive.ugent.be/retrieve/1480/Mayak+inmm+paper(3)+-+SG-BH-JW-GJM.pdf. Retrieved on 2008-08-09. 

References

This article includes a list of references or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations where appropriate. (April 2009)

• OECD Nuclear Energy Agency, The Economics of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle, Paris, 1994
• I. Hensing and W Schultz, Economic Comparison of Nuclear Fuel Cycle Options, Energiewirtschaftlichen Instituts, Cologne, 1995.
• Cogema, Reprocessing-Recycling: the Industrial Stakes, presentation to the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, Bonn, 9 May 1995.
• OECD Nuclear Energy Agency, Plutonium Fuel: An Assessment, Paris, 1989.
• National Research Council, “Nuclear Wastes: Technologies for Separation and Transmutation”, National Academy Press, Washington D.C. 1996.

christian louboutin sacha

giottos

Coordinates: 22°20?30?N 89°18?00?E? / ?22.3417°N 89.3000°E? / 22.3417; 89.3000

Koyra Upazila
Koyra
Division name  - District	Khulna Division  - Khulna District
Coordinates	22°20?30?N 89°18?00?E? / ?22.3417°N 89.3000°E? / 22.3417; 89.3000
Area	1775.41 km²
Time zone	BST (UTC+6)
Population (1991)  - Density	165473  - 93/km²
Maplink: Official Map of Koyra

Koyra (Bengali: ?????) is an Upazila of Khulna District in the Division of Khulna, Bangladesh.

Contents 1 Geography 2 Demographics 3 Administrative 4 See also 5 References

Geography

Koyra is located at 22°20?30?N 89°18?00?E? / ?22.3417°N 89.3000°E? / 22.3417; 89.3000 . It has 28061 units of house hold and total area 1775.41 km².

Demographics

As of the 1991 Bangladesh census, Koyra has a population of 165473. Males constitute are 49.68% of the population, and females 50.32%. This Upazila’s eighteen up population is 80830. Koyra has an average literacy rate of 32.4% (7+ years), and the national average of 32.4% literate.

Administrative

Koyra has 7 Unions/Wards, 72 Mauzas/Mahallas, and 131 villages.

See also

• Upazilas of Bangladesh
• Districts of Bangladesh
• Divisions of Bangladesh

bald head

Palmyra is the Greek name for the Syrian caravan city of Tadmor.

Palmyra may also refer to:

Places

In Australia:

• Palmyra, Western Australia

In the United Kingdom:

• Palmyra Square, part of the cultural quarter, location of Parr Hall in the town of Warrington, Cheshire

In the United States of America:

• Palmyra, Illinois
• Palmyra, Indiana
• Palmyra, Maine
• Palmyra, Missouri
• Palmyra, Nebraska
• Palmyra, New Jersey
• Palmyra (town), New York
• Palmyra (village), New York
• Palmyra, Pennsylvania
• Palmyra, Tennessee
• Palmyra, Utah
• Palmyra, Virginia
• Palmyra (town), Wisconsin
• Palmyra, Wisconsin, village
• Palmyra Atoll in the Pacific Ocean

See also: Palmyra Township and Palmyra High School

elc fuel saver

dip pens

Canadian trade-mark law provides protection to marks statutorily under the Canadian Trade-mark Act and also at common law. Trade-mark law provides protection for distinctive marks, certification marks, distinguishing guises, and proposed marks against those who appropriate the goodwill of the mark or create confusion between different vendors’ wares (i.e., goods) and services or both. A mark can be protected either as a registered trade-mark under the Act or can alternately be protected by a common law action in passing off.

Contents 1 Passing off 2 Registerable marks 3 Infringement 4 External links

Passing off

Most of the law of passing off has been inherited from the UK case law. For a successful action in passing off the claimant must first show that the owner of the wares had goodwill or reputation within an identifiable market area. Second, the claimant must show that the other party’s use of the mark constitutes misrepresentation of their wares as those of the claimants. Third, the claimant must show that the misrepresentation could potentially or actually did cause harm.

Registerable marks

A mark must be registerable in order to be fully protected under the Act. Generally, all visual marks can be registered with the exception of marks that possess certain characteristics prohibited by the Act. Among the prohibited characteristics include:

• a mark cannot be registerable if it is “primarily merely” a family name.
• a mark that can produce confusion with another vendor’s mark
• a mark that is “clearly descriptive” or “deceptively misdescriptive” of the associated wares or services.
• one of an enumerated prohibited marks such as government, royal, or international marks.

Infringement

A mark that has been validly registered gives the exclusive right to the owner to use the mark throughout Canada, and to sue another party who uses a mark that interferes with the owner’s right. Under section 20 of the Act, the owner must have a) registered the mark, b) used the mark, and c) used it for the sale of identical wares or services.

silver handmade

digital camera

AEL

Jump to: navigation, search

AEL is a three-letter acronym that may refer to:

• AEL 1964 FC, or Larissa, a Greek football club
• AEL 1964 BC, AE Larissa GS, Greece professional basketball club
• AEL FC, a Cypriot football club
• EKA AEL, a Cypriot basketball club
• African Explosives, a mining services company headquartered in Johannesburg
• Arab European League, in Belgium and the Netherlands
• Association Electronique Libre
• Asiatic Exclusion League, in the United States and Canada
• Asterisk Extension Language, see also Asterisk PBX
• Analog Expression Language, an expression language used e.g. in various electronics design and simulation software
• AutoExposure Lock, in photography
• Anti Emo League, Miami-based organization
• Acute Eosinophilic Leukemia, a form of leukemia
• Axial Eye Length, a parameter of the eye

This disambiguation page lists articles associated with the same title. If an internal link led you here, you may wish to change the link to point directly to the intended article.

Retrieved from “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AEL”
Categories: Disambiguation pagesHidden categories: All disambiguation pages | All article disambiguation pages

Views

• Article
• Discussion
• Edit this page
• History

Personal tools

• Log in / create account

Navigation

• Main page
• Contents
• Featured content
• Current events
• Random article

Search

 

Interaction

• About Wikipedia
• Community portal
• Recent changes
• Contact Wikipedia
• Donate to Wikipedia
• Help

Toolbox

• What links here
• Related changes
• Upload file
• Special pages
• Printable version
• Permanent link
• Cite this page

Languages

• Deutsch
• ????????
• Esperanto
• Français
• Italiano
• Nederlands
• ???

• This page was last modified on 17 September 2008 at 07:33.
• Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License;
  additional terms may apply.
  See Terms of Use for details.
  
  Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
• Privacy policy
• About Wikipedia
• Disclaimers

psp umd

top flowers

Exchange Bank

Jump to: navigation, search

This disambiguation article containing NRHP entries is undergoing cleanup to meet fully Wikipedia’s disambiguation page quality standards, including ensuring at least one bluelink page linked and one bluelink per NRHP entry. New articles will be created, if necessary, to ensure that some actual wikipedia articles are included. Please don’t PROD or otherwise start deletion processes. Note red-link NRHP entries are permitted by MOS:DABRL and should be retained, but should be edited to include a blue-link to a relevant state or county list of NRHPs having the same red-link. See this extended past discussion at WikiProject Disambiguation. Please improve this disambiguation article if you can.

Exchange Bank or Exchange Bank Building may refer to:

On the U.S. National Register of Historic Places:

• Exchange Bank (Golden, Illinois)
• Exchange Bank (El Dorado, Arkansas)

Exchange Bank Building may refer to:

On the U.S. National Register of Historic Places:

• Exchange Bank Building (Little Rock, Arkansas)
• Exchange Bank Building (Tallahassee, Florida)

in the United States

(by state)

• Exchange Bank Building (Little Rock, Arkansas), listed on the NRHP in Arkansas
• Exchange Bank Building (Farmington, Minnesota), listed on the NRHP in Minnesota
• American Exchange Bank, Madison, WI, listed on the NRHP in Wisconsin

more NRHP ones in progress...
84000981 	Davis-Exchange Bank Building 	Albany 	GA 	Infobox/Commons 	Davis-Exchange Bank Building
x86003714 	Exchange Bank 	Golden 	IL 	Infobox/Commons 	Exchange Bank
86002896 	Exchange Bank Building 	Little Rock 	AR 	Infobox/Commons 	Exchange Bank Building
84000262 	Exchange Bank Building 	Tallahassee 	FL 	Infobox/Commons 	Exchange Bank Building
79001226 	Exchange Bank Building 	Farmington 	MN 	Infobox/Commons 	Exchange Bank Building
73001685 	Farmers' and Exchange Bank 	Charleston 	SC 	Infobox/Commons 	Farmers' and Exchange Bank
79000796 	Genesee Exchange Bank 	Genesee 	ID 	Infobox/Commons 	Genesee Exchange Bank
82000223 	Meridian Exchange Bank 	Meridian 	ID 	Infobox/Commons 	Meridian Exchange Bank
79003374 	National Loan and Exchange Bank Building 	Columbia 	SC 	Infobox/Commons 	National Loan and Exchange Bank Building
06000295 	Smithfield Exchange Bank 	Smithfield 	RI 	Infobox/Commons 	Smithfield Exchange Bank
83004173 	Stock Exchange Bank 	Fargo 	OK

This disambiguation page lists articles about distinct geographical locations with the same name. If an internal link led you here, you may wish to change the link to point directly to the intended article.

Retrieved from “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exchange_Bank”
Categories: Place name disambiguation pagesHidden categories: NRHP dab needing cleanup | All pages needing cleanup | All disambiguation pages | All article disambiguation pages

Views

• Article
• Discussion
• Edit this page
• History

Personal tools

• Log in / create account

Navigation

• Main page
• Contents
• Featured content
• Current events
• Random article

Search

 

Interaction

• About Wikipedia
• Community portal
• Recent changes
• Contact Wikipedia
• Donate to Wikipedia
• Help

Toolbox

• What links here
• Related changes
• Upload file
• Special pages
• Printable version
• Permanent link
• Cite this page

• This page was last modified on 15 June 2009 at 01:47.
• Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License;
  additional terms may apply.
  See Terms of Use for details.
  
  Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
• Privacy policy
• About Wikipedia
• Disclaimers

peanut shell

?cala
Acala at Mount Koya, Japan
Sanskrit:	Acala
Chinese:	???? Budongmingwang
Japanese:	???? Fud? My??
Information
Venerated by:	Vajrayana
Attributes:	Immovable One
Portal:Buddhism

In Vajrayana Buddhism, ?cala (alternatively, Achala or Acala in Sanskrit, Fud? My?? in Japan) is the best known of the Five Wisdom Kings of the Womb Realm. He is also known as ?calan?tha, ?ry?calan?tha, ?cala-vidy?-r?ja and Ca??amah?ro?a?a. The Sanskrit term?cala means “immovable”; ?cala is also the name of the eighth of the ten stages of the path to become a bodhisattva. His siddham seed-syllabe is “h??“.

?cala is the destroyer of delusion and the protector of Buddhism. His immovability refers to his ability to remain unmoved by carnal temptations. Despite his fearsome appearance, his role is to aid all beings by showing them the teachings of the Buddha, leading them into self-control.

He is seen as a protector and aide in attaining goals. Temples dedicated to ?cala perform a periodic fire ritual in devotion to him.

The buddha Akshobhya, whose name also means “the immovable one”, is sometimes merged with ?cala. However, ?cala is not a buddha, but one of the Five Wisdom Kings of the Womb Realm in Vajrayana as found in the Indo-Tibetan tradition, as well as the Japanese Shingon sect of Buddhism.

As Fud? my??, ?cala is considered one of the Thirteen Buddhas in Japan. Fud? my??, meaning “Immovable Wisdom King”, is the patron deity of the Yamabushi. He usually holds a sword and a lariat, is clad in rags, has one fang pointing up and another pointing down, and a braid on one side of his head. His statues are generally placed near waterfalls and deep in the mountains and in caves.

Notes

1. ^ Snyder 1999, pg. 244

References

• Snyder, Gary. The Gary Snyder Reader (1999) Counterpoint. ISBN 1-887178-90-2

Weight Wieght

The Players’ National League of Professional Base Ball Clubs, popularly known as the Players’ League (sometimes rendered as Players League), was a short-lived but star-studded professional American baseball league of the 19th century. It emerged from the Brotherhood of Professional Base-Ball Players, the sport’s first players’ union.

The Brotherhood included most of the best players of the National League. Brotherhood members, led by John Montgomery Ward, left the National League and formed the Players’ League after failing to change the lopsided player-management relationship of the National League.

The PL lasted just the one season of 1890, and the Boston franchise won the championship. Although known to historians as the Players’ League, newspapers often reported the standings with the shorthand titles of “League”, “Association” and “Brotherhood”. The PL was well-attended, at least in some cities, but was underfunded and its owners lacked the confidence to continue beyond the one season.

In 1968, a committee appointed by Major League Baseball Commissioner William Eckert ruled that the Players’ League was a major league.

Contents 1 Players’ League franchises and final standings 2 Highlights 3 Legacy 4 External links 5 References

Players’ League franchises and final standings

Players’ League	W	L	Pct.	GB
Boston Reds	81	48	.628	–
Brooklyn Ward’s Wonders	76	56	.576	6½
New York Giants	74	57	.565	8
Chicago Pirates	75	62	.547	10
Philadelphia Athletics	68	63	.519	14
Pittsburgh Burghers	60	68	.469	20½
Cleveland Infants	55	75	.423	26½
Buffalo Bisons	36	96	.273	46½

Highlights

The Players League Triple Crown leaders were Hall-of-Famer Roger Connor with 14 home runs, Pete Browning with a .373 batting average, and Hardy Richardson with 146 RBI. For pitchers, Mark Baldwin had 34 wins, Silver King had a 2.69 ERA, and Mark Baldwin struck out 211 batters.

On June 21 King threw an unofficial eight-inning no-hitter.

Oddly, in its one season of operation, the Players League saw seven triple plays: the Giants on June 14, the Red Stockings on June 30, the Pirates on July 15, the Pirates again on July 30, the Burghers on August 15, Ward’s Wonders on September 6, and the Bisons on September 29.

Legacy

The Boston and Philadelphia franchises joined the American Association after the Players’ League folded. The Brooklyn, New York, Chicago and Pittsburgh franchises each merged with their National League counterparts after the season.

Although the league was started by the players themselves, essentially as an elaborate job-action to improve their lot, the venture proved to be a setback for them in the longer term. The infamous reserve clause remained intact, and would remain thus for the next 85 years or so. The already-shaky AA had been further weakened by the presence of the PL. The Lou Bierbauer incident caused a schism between the NL and the AA, and the AA failed a year later, reducing the total number of major league teams (and players) significantly, giving the remaining owners much greater leverage against the players.

One benefit of the league, from the management standpoint, was the construction of new facilities, several of which were used for a while by the established major league clubs. The most prominent of these was a new Polo Grounds, originally constructed for the New York Giants of the Players League, which served afterwards as the home of the National League’s New York Giants from 1891 to 1957 (it was rebuilt in steel and concrete in 1911) and of the New York Mets in their first two seasons. It was also the site of many other famous sporting events through its 75 years of existence.

Chicago’s still-standing Wrigley Field has been called a “silent monument” to the Federal League experiment of 1914-1915, and it was likewise with the Polo Grounds and the Players’ League. Once the demolition of the Polo Grounds began in 1964, the game’s historians realized that this was not only the end of an era in general, but also in a sense it was the final chapter of the Players’ League.

External links

• Ethan Lewis, “A Structure To Last Forever: The Players’ League And The Brotherhood War of 1890″

dixie narco 522

iogear

Avioane Craiova SA

Jump to: navigation, search

Avioane Craiova S.A.

Type	Aeronautics
Founded	1972
Headquarters	Craiova, Romania
Website	http://www.acv.ro/

Avioane Craiova S.A. is an aeronautical company based in Gherce?ti, near Craiova, Romania. It is the main builder and maintainer of the IAR-93 (built 1975-1992, retired in 1998) and IAR-99 (built 1979-present, upgraded in collaboration with Elbit).

This Romania-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

This European corporation or company article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

Retrieved from “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avioane_Craiova_SA”
Categories: Romania stubs | European company stubs

Views

• Article
• Discussion
• Edit this page
• History

Personal tools

• Log in / create account

Navigation

• Main page
• Contents
• Featured content
• Current events
• Random article

Search

 

Interaction

• About Wikipedia
• Community portal
• Recent changes
• Contact Wikipedia
• Donate to Wikipedia
• Help

Toolbox

• What links here
• Related changes
• Upload file
• Special pages
• Printable version
• Permanent link
• Cite this page

Languages

• Italiano
• Român?

• This page was last modified on 18 October 2008 at 07:56.
• Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License;
  additional terms may apply.
  See Terms of Use for details.
  
  Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
• Privacy policy
• About Wikipedia
• Disclaimers

complete lot

shot set

Best Of…. Volume I
Studio album by Throbbing Gristle
Released	1975
Genre	Industrial
Label	Industrial Records IRC 0
Producer	Throbbing Gristle
Throbbing Gristle chronology
””’ Best Of…. Volume I (1975)

Best Of…. Volume I is a cassette release by industrial group Throbbing Gristle. It is the first ever recorded material by Throbbing Gristle.

The liner notes state: “All material previously unreleased. This tape was originally hand copied and sent to friends”.

On Genesis’ website, he says this cassette was released in November-December 1975, and sent to mail art friends. He distributed it with Cosey. This is fact is not true though since some of the material was recorded on July 30 of 1976 with Albrecht D. It was originally limited to 12 copies and sent out to mail art contacts. Throbbing Gristle later denied its existence simply to create confusion, which was why it was given the catalogue number IRC0. The cassette is a three-quarters full C90, incorrectly marked as a C60 on the tape.

The second last track on the tape is a recording of an American magician explaining a trick. The last track is a very distorted recording of two Neil Young songs - “New Mama” starts, then is restarted and runs into “Look Out Joe”, which are sequential tracks from Side 2 of Young’s 1975 album Tonight’s The Night. Whether these non-TG tracks feature on the original master cassette, or only on the cassette owned by the individual responsible for uploading their copy to the internet (which turns up periodically on various Blogger sites/file sharing networks, so far always with these tracks included), remains unclear.

Track 12 is actually the same exact version of “Scars Of E” that appeared on the The First Annual Report, except that this version has a a few seconds cut off of the beginning, a fade-in, and more laughing at the end. Tracks 14, 15, 16, and 17 were taken from an hour long session on July 30 of 1976 with Albrecht D. “Very Friendly Pt. 1″ was later released on “Best of Vol. II” with a shorter ending. Part 2 is just certain words and names from Part 1 being looped for 9 minutes. Different versions of Very Friendly can be found on the “New T.G.” bootleg, “The First Annual Report”, and other early IRC releases. Both versions of “We Hate You” can be found on the “Nothing Short Of A Total War” bootleg. The versions on that bootleg are in complete form.

womens biker