DOCSLIB.ORG

Heu Repatriation Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Heu Repatriation Project HEU REPATRIATION PROJECT RATIONALE In April 2010, the governments of Canada and the United States (U.S.) committed to work cooperatively to repatriate spent highly- enriched uranium (HEU) fuel currently stored at the Chalk River Laboratories in Ontario to the U.S. as part of the Global Threat Reduction Initiative, a broad international effort to consolidate HEU inventories in fewer locations around the world. This initiative PROJECT BACKGROUND promotes non-proliferation This HEU is the result of two decades of nuclear fuel use at the by removing existing weapons Chalk River Laboratories for Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) grade material from Canada research reactors, the National Research Experimental (NRX) and and transferring it to the National Research Universal (NRU), and for the production of U.S., which has the capability medical isotopes in the NRU, which has benefitted generations of to reprocess it for peaceful Canadians. Returning this material to the U.S. in its existing solid purposes. In March 2012, and liquid forms ensures that this material is stored safely in a Prime Minister Harper secure highly guarded location, or is reprocessed into other forms announced that Canada and that can be used for peaceful purposes. the U.S. were expanding their efforts to return additional Alternative approaches have been carefully considered and inventories of HEU materials, repatriation provides the safest, most secure, and fastest solution including those in liquid form. for the permanent disposition of these materials, thereby eliminating a liability for future generations of Canadians. For more information on this project contact: Email: [email protected] Canadian Nuclear Laboratories 1-866-886-2325 or visit: www.cnl.ca persons who have a legitimate need to PROJECT GOAL know, such as police or emergency response To repatriate highly-enriched uranium forces. The transportation routes and (HEU) materials to the United States security measures put in place are pre- as part of the Global Threat Reduction approved and agreed to by authorities in Initiative. both Canada and the U.S. THE PLAN ACTIVITIES HEU is transported in packages (casks) 1996 – The Global Threat Reduction that are specifically designed and Initiative established, since then 3,500 certified by the Canadian Nuclear Safety kilograms of HEU and plutonium have Commission (CNSC), the U.S. Nuclear been removed from 22 countries (Austria, Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the Brazil, Bulgaria, Chile, Colombia, Denmark, U.S. Department of Transportation in Greece, Latvia, Libya, Mexico, Philippines, accordance with international safety Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovenia, South requirements established by the Korea, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, Thailand, International Atomic Energy Agency Turkey, and Ukraine). (IAEA). 2010 – Formal commitment to repatriate Canada has an excellent safety record for spent highly-enriched uranium located at the transport of radioactive material. The Chalk River Laboratories. CNSC will not allow the shipment of any 2012 – Completed the repatriation of used radioactive material unless it is convinced Highly Enriched Uranium fuel from CNL’s shut the safety and security of both Canadians down research Pool Test Reactor. and the environment will be protected. 2013 – Completed the repatriation of two Furthermore, stringent security plans for disassembled Highly Enriched Uranium each shipment are required to avoid any SLOWPOKE research reactor fuel cores to risk of material falling into the hands of the U.S. unauthorized persons or organizations. Specific details on shipments are considered sensitive, and are limited to Date of Issue: April 2014 For more information on this project contact: Email: [email protected] Canadian Nuclear Laboratories 1-866-886-2325 or visit: www.cnl.ca.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SAFETY RE-ASSESSMENT of AECL TEST and RESEARCH REACTORS D. J. WINFIELD Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories ATOMIC ENERGY of CANADA
    309 IAEA-SM-310/ 94 SAFETY RE-ASSESSMENT OF AECL TEST AND RESEARCH REACTORS D. J. WINFIELD Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA LIMITED 310 IAEA-SM-310/94 SAFETY RE-ASSESSMENT OF AECL TEST AND RESEARCH REACTORS ABSTRACT Atomic Energy of Canada Limited currently has four operating engineering test/research reactors of various sizes and ages; a new isotope-production reactor MAPLE-X10, under construction at Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories (CRNL), and a heating demonstration/test reactor, SDR, undergoing high-power commissioning at Whiteshell Nuclear Research Establishment (WNRE). The company is also performing design studies of small reactors for hot water and electricity production. The older reactors are ZED-2, PTR, NRX and NRU; these range in age from 42 years (NRX) to 29 years (ZED-2). Since 1984, limited-scope safety re-assessments have been underway on three of these reactors (ZED-2, NRX and NRU). ZED-2 and PTR are operated by the Reactor Physics Branch, all other reactors are operated by the respective site Reactor Operations Branches. For the older reactors the original safety reports produced were entirely deterministic in nature and based on the design-basis accident concept. The limited scope safety re-assessments for these older reactors, carried out over the past 5 years, have comprised both quantitative probabilistic safety-assessment techniques, such as event tree and fault tree analysis, and/or qualitative techniques, such as failure mode and effect analysis. The technique used for an individual assessment was dependent upon the specific scope required. This paper discusses the types of analyses carried out, specific insights/recommendations resulting from the analysis and indicates the plan for future analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
    Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission Performance Report For the period ending March 31, 2007 ________________________ ________________________ The Honourable Gary Lunn Linda J. Keen, M.Sc. Minister President and Chief Executive Officer Natural Resources Canada Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission Table of Contents SECTION I: OVERVIEW........................................................................................................... 1 Message from the President and Chief Executive Officer...................................................................3 Management Representation Statement ...............................................................................................4 Summary Information..................................................................................................................... 5 Mission.................................................................................................................................... 5 Governance ............................................................................................................................. 5 Regulatory Framework ........................................................................................................... 5 Funding of CNSC Operations................................................................................................. 6 Additional Funding Resources Received for 2006-07............................................................ 6 Financial Resources ...............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • NPR81: South Korea's Shifting and Controversial Interest in Spent Fuel
    JUNGMIN KANG & H.A. FEIVESON Viewpoint South Korea’s Shifting and Controversial Interest in Spent Fuel Reprocessing JUNGMIN KANG & H.A. FEIVESON1 Dr. Jungmin Kang was a Visiting Research Fellow at the Center for Energy and Environmental Studies (CEES), Princeton University in 1999-2000. He is the author of forthcoming articles in Science & Global Security and Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology. Dr. H.A. Feiveson is a Senior Research Scientist at CEES and a Co- director of Princeton’s research Program on Nuclear Policy Alternatives. He is the Editor of Science and Global Security, editor and co-author of The Nuclear Turning Point: A Blueprint for Deep Cuts and De-alerting of Nuclear Weapons (Brookings Institution, 1999), and co-author of Ending the Threat of Nuclear Attack (Stanford University Center for International Security and Arms Control, 1997). rom the beginning of its nuclear power program could reduce dependence on imported uranium. During in the 1970s, the Republic of Korea (South Ko- the 1990s, the South Korean government remained con- Frea) has been intermittently interested in the cerned about energy security but also began to see re- reprocessing of nuclear-power spent fuel. Such repro- processing as a way to address South Korea’s spent fuel cessing would typically separate the spent fuel into three disposal problem. Throughout this entire period, the constituent components: the unfissioned uranium re- United States consistently and effectively opposed all maining in the spent fuel, the plutonium produced dur- reprocessing initiatives on nonproliferation grounds. We ing reactor operation, and the highly radioactive fission review South Korea’s evolving interest in spent fuel re- products and transuranics other than plutonium.
    [Show full text]
  • Supplementary Information Written Submission from Lake Ontario
    CMD 19-M24.7A Date: 2019-10-30 File / dossier : 6.02.04 Edocs pdf : 6032342 Supplementary Information Renseignements supplémentaires Written submission from Mémoire de Lake Ontario Waterkeeper Lake Ontario Waterkeeper et and Ottawa Riverkeeper Sentinelle Outaouais Regulatory Oversight Report for Rapport de surveillance réglementaire Canadian Nuclear Laboratories des sites des Laboratoires Nucléaires (CNL) sites: 2018 Canadiens (LNC) : 2018 Commission Meeting Réunion de la Commission November 7, 2019 Le 7 novembre 2019 This page was intentionally Cette page a été intentionnellement left blank laissée en blanc Amendments have been made to these submissions to reflect additional information that has been received by Ottawa Riverkeeper and Lake Ontario Waterkeeper since October 7. In addition to some typographical corrections, the following changes were made to these previously submitted main report: 1) Recommendation #20 no longer requires that CNL confirm whether a DFO permit has been issued for any Chalk River facilities. This recommendation still requests that any assessments accompanying the permit application be provided. Now it also requests a timeline for CNSC staff consideration of the permit; 2) Recommendation #21 no longer requires that CNL confirm whether there are any ECAs for the Chalk River site. This recommendation still requests any assessments that were undertaken to determine whether one was necessary; 3) Discussions of issues concerning DFO permits and ECAs on page 20 have been updated to reflect the fact that Ottawa Riverkeeper is no longer waiting for confirmation of whether there are any DFO permits or ECAs for the Chalk River site. However, formal access to information requests are still ongoing to provide more background information on both DFO and ECA assessments, and CNL has still been asked to provide this information as well; and 4) Discussions of the Port Hope Harbour wall collapse on page 26 have been amended to reflect additional disclosures received since October 7.
    [Show full text]
  • National Neutron Strategy-Draft
    DRAFT FOR CONSULTATION A National Strategy for Materials Research with Neutron Beams: Discussion on a “National Neutron Strategy” This consultation draft was updated in February 2021, following the outcomes of the Canadian Neutron Initiative Roundtable: Towards a National Neutron Strategy, organized in partnership with CIFAR on December 15–16, 2020. 1 DRAFT FOR CONSULTATION This Canadian Neutron Initiative (CNI) discussion paper and associated Roundtable Meeting are produced in partnership with CIFAR. We also thank the following sponsors: 2 DRAFT FOR CONSULTATION Contents 1 Executive summary and overview of the national neutron strategy ................................................... 5 2 Consultation on the strategy ................................................................................................................ 9 3 The present: A strong foundation for continued excellence .............................................................. 10 3.1 The Canadian neutron beam user community ........................................................................... 10 3.2 McMaster University ................................................................................................................... 14 3.3 Other neutron beam capabilities and interests .......................................................................... 15 4 Forging foreign partnerships ............................................................................................................... 17 4.1 Global renewal of advanced neutron sources ...........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Inventory of Radioactive Waste in Canada 2016 Inventory of Radioactive Waste in Canada 2016 Ix X 1.0 INVENTORY of RADIOACTIVE WASTE in CANADA OVERVIEW
    Inventory of RADIOACTIVE WASTE in CANADA 2016 Inventory of RADIOACTIVE WASTE in CANADA 2016 Photograph contributors: Cameco Corp.: page ix OPG: page 34 Orano Canada: page x Cameco Corp.: page 47 BWX Technologies, Inc.: page 2 Cameco Corp.: page 48 OPG: page 14 OPG: page 50 OPG: page 23 Cameco Corp.: page 53 OPG: page 24 Cameco Corp.: page 54 BWX Technologies, Inc.: page 33 Cameco Corp.: page 62 For information regarding reproduction rights, contact Natural Resources Canada at [email protected]. Aussi disponible en français sous le titre : Inventaire des déchets radioactifs au Canada 2016. © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Natural Resources, 2018 Cat. No. M134-48/2016E-PDF (Online) ISBN 978-0-660-26339-7 CONTENTS 1.0 INVENTORY OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE IN CANADA OVERVIEW ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 1 1�1 Radioactive waste definitions and categories �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 3 1�1�1 Processes that generate radioactive waste in canada ����������������������������� 3 1�1�2 Disused radioactive sealed sources ����������������������������������������� 6 1�2 Responsibility for radioactive waste �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� 6 1�2�1 Regulation of radioactive
    [Show full text]
  • Signatures of Weapon-Grade Plutonium from Dedicated Production Reactors Alexander Glaser Program on Science and Global Security, Princeton University
    Signatures of Weapon-grade Plutonium from Dedicated Production Reactors Alexander Glaser Program on Science and Global Security, Princeton University 49th INMM Annual Meeting, Nashville, TN July 16, 2008 Revision 4 available at http://cstsp.aaas.org A. Glaser, Signatures of Weapon-grade Plutonium from Dedicated Production Reactors, 49th INMM Annual Meeting, July 13-17, 2008, Nashville, TN Overview Scope and Objective Quantify the range of isotopic variations that can be expected for plutonium produced with different types of dedicated production reactors Understand the relative importance of predictive versus empirical (isotopic) plutonium signatures (relevant, in particular, for nuclear forensic analysis) Methodology Neutronics calculations for several important production reactor types Using continuous-energy (MCNP) cross-section libraries to generate spectrum-averaged one-group cross-sections for burnup calculations and to assure that differences between results are not due to inconsistent cross-section data A. Glaser, Signatures of Weapon-grade Plutonium from Dedicated Production Reactors, 49th INMM Annual Meeting, July 13-17, 2008, Nashville, TN Isotope Ratio Correlations K. Mayer, M. Wallenius, and I. Ray, “Nuclear Forensics — A Methodology Providing Clues on the Origin of Illicitly Trafficked Nuclear Materials,” Analyst, Royal Society of Chemistry, 130 (2005), pp. 433–441 Production Reactor Types A. Glaser, Signatures of Weapon-grade Plutonium from Dedicated Production Reactors, 49th INMM Annual Meeting, July 13-17, 2008, Nashville, TN Production Reactor Types Graphite moderated Heavy-water moderated Driver fuel with external H2O cooled CO2 cooled H2O cooled D2O cooled DU targets United States Hanford Savannah River Russia “Tomsk-7” U.K. Calder Hall France G-Series Célestin China “Jiuquan” Israel Dimona India Cirus/NRX Dhruva Pakistan Khushab DPRK Yongbyon A.
    [Show full text]
  • Fuels for Canadian Research Reactors
    XA04C1592 FUELS FOR CANADIAN RESEARCH REACTORS M. A. Feraday Atomic Energy of Canada, Ltd. Chalk River, Ontario INTRODUCTION Originallywhen I was requested to attend the meetingit was to be as an observer. Last Friday David Stahl asked if I would make an informal presenta- tion on the Canadian situation. The remarks I will make will be of a general -nature and should not necessarily be construed as official policy of AECL. They will be personal observations on several aspects of the program. Although my 22 years experience in the nuclear field ranges from reactor operations, fuel development, and now designing of remotely operated fuel plants for gamma active 233U-Th fuels, I am not expert in the fields of reactor physics, reactor safety, and the political implications of changing the enrichment in our two large research reactors. So what I would like to do this morning is: - say a few words on the uranium silicide fuels for which we have significant fabrication, irradiationand defect performance experience. - describe the two Canadian high flux research reactors which use high enrichment uranium (HEU) and the fuels currently used in these reactors. - comment on the limited fabrication work we are doing on Al-U alloys to uranium contents as high as 40 wt%. This work is aimed at our fast neutron program. I will then try and apply this experience in general terms to the NRX and NRU designs of fuel. U3Si PROGRAM For a period of about 10 years AECL had a significant program looking into the possibility of developing U3Si as a high density replacement for the U02 pellet fuel in use in CANDU power reactors.
    [Show full text]
  • NRC Collection of Abbreviations
    I Nuclear Regulatory Commission c ElLc LI El LIL El, EEELIILE El ClV. El El, El1 ....... I -4 PI AVAILABILITY NOTICE Availability of Reference Materials Cited in NRC Publications Most documents cited in NRC publications will be available from one of the following sources: 1. The NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW., Lower Level, Washington, DC 20555-0001 2. The Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, P. 0. Box 37082, Washington, DC 20402-9328 3. The National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161-0002 Although the listing that follows represents the majority of documents cited in NRC publica- tions, it is not intended to be exhaustive. Referenced documents available for inspection and copying for a fee from the NRC Public Document Room include NRC correspondence and internal NRC memoranda; NRC bulletins, circulars, information notices, inspection and investigation notices; licensee event reports; vendor reports and correspondence; Commission papers; and applicant and licensee docu- ments and correspondence. The following documents in the NUREG series are available for purchase from the Government Printing Office: formal NRC staff and contractor reports, NRC-sponsored conference pro- ceedings, international agreement reports, grantee reports, and NRC booklets and bro- chures. Also available are regulatory guides, NRC regulations in the Code of Federal Regula- tions, and Nuclear Regulatory Commission Issuances. Documents available from the National Technical Information Service Include NUREG-series reports and technical reports prepared by other Federal agencies and reports prepared by the Atomic Energy Commission, forerunner agency to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Documents available from public and special technical libraries include all open literature items, such as books, journal articles, and transactions.
    [Show full text]
  • The Slowpoke Licensing Model
    AECL—9981 CA9200276 AECL-9981 ATOMIC ENERGY ENERGIEATOMIQUE OF CANADA LIMITED DU CANADA LIMITEE THE SLOWPOKE LICENSING MODEL LE MODELE D'AUTORISATION DE CONSTRUIRE DE SLOWPOKE V.G. SNELL, F. TAKATS and K. SZIVOS Prepared for presentation at the Post-Conference Seminar on Small- and Medium-Sized Nuclear Reactors San Diego, California, U S A. 1989 August 21-23 Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories Laboratoires nucleates de Chalk River Chalk River, Ontario KOJ 1J0 August 1989 aout ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA LIMITED THE SLOWPOKE LICENSING MODEL by V.G. Snell, F. Takats and K. Szivos Prepared for presentation at the Post-Conference Seminar on Small- and Medium-Sized Nuclear Reactors San Diego, California, U.S.A. 1989 August 21-23 Local Energy Systems Business Unit Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories Chalk River, Ontario KOJ 1JO 1989 August ENERGIE ATOMIQUE DU CANADA LIMITED LE MODELS D'AUTORISATION DE CONSTRUIRE DE SLOWPOKE par V.G. Snell, F. Takats et K. Szivos Resume Le Systeme Energetique SLOWPOKE (SES-10) est un reacteur de chauffage de 10 MW realise au Canada. II pent fonctionner sans la presence continue d'un operateur autorise et etre implante dans des zones urbaines. II a des caracteristiques de surete indulgentes dont des echelles de temps transitoires de l'ordre d'heures. On a developpe, au Canada, un precede appele autorisation de construire "d'avance" pour identifier et resoudre les questions reglementaires au debut du processus. Du fait du marche possible, en Hongrie, pour le chauffage nucleaire urbain, on a etabli un plan d'autorisation de construire qui comporte 1'experience canadienne en autorisation de construire, identifie les besoins particuliers de la Hongrie et reduit le risque de retard d'autorisation de construire en cherchant 1'accord de toutes les parties au debut du programme.
    [Show full text]
  • General Vgs Template
    Chapter 5 - Safety Systems Introduction - Special Safety Systems Functions In previous chapters we have referred to the four safety functions required in a nuclear reactor: • shut down the reactor • remove decay heat • contain any radioactivity • monitor the state of the plant. In this chapter we shall describe the major systems that perform these functions. We shall concentrate on CANDU for our examples, although other reactor types have similar systems. Shutdown Systems Shutdown is one of the most important safety functions in a reactor because it reduces the amount of energy that has to be removed from the fuel after an accident. It is usually accomplished through rapid insertion of a neutron-absorbing material into the core. Another way is to remove from the core material which is essential to the chain reaction - e.g. the moderator. There are more radical concepts possible in principle, such as removing fuel or changing the core geometry, but they are not in widespread use for fast shutdown. Before a shutdown system is designed, the requirements should be defined (although again historically, the two went along together). Here are some of the questions that must be asked, and answered: • how do we get negative reactivity into the core? • how fast does the system have to act, once it receives a signal? • how much reactivity depth must it have (how many negative milli-k?) • how reliable must it be? • what are the acceptance criteria? • what sort of signals are available and practical to trigger the shutdown system for each accident? • what sort of environment must the shutdown system be designed to withstand? • how do we ensure that a fault which could affect the control system or a shutdown system does not affect both? Or both shutdown systems? • how do we know the systems will work as designed? • how does the operator know the system has been required, and that it has worked? 1 Chapter 5 - Safety Systems.wpd Rev.
    [Show full text]
  • Canada's Chalk River
    Volume 15, No. 39 Published by BNL Personnel Office June 5,1962 EIGHTEENTH BROOKHAVEN LECTURE CANADA’S CHALK RIVER by JOHN BLEWETT, Accelerator Dept. Title: “Accelerators of the Future” With the following article on Canada’s Chalk River facility, the BULLETIN BOARD continues its series on BNL’s sister laboratories in this country and Lecture Hall, 8:00 p.m., Wed., June 13 similar laboratories abroad. A buffet supper ($2.75) will be served at the Brookhaven Center before the lecture, beginning ot 600 p.m. Reselva- tions should be made ot least one (day in advance by calling Ext. 2302 before 500 p.m., or Ext. 2453 in the evenings. Refreshments will be available in the Research Staff Lobby following the lecture. FOURTH PEGRAM LECTURESHIP This year, the Pegram Lectures will be given in June rather than in the autumn. The George B. Pegram Lecturer for 1962 is Professor Derek J. de Solla Price of Yale University, who is an eminent historian of science. In his lecture series, entitled “Little Science, Big Science,” Professor Price will consider the chang- ing circumstances in the life of the Night view of the ChalkRiver establishment of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited. scientist since the late nineteenth cen- tury and the profound effects which Canada’s main atomic research and development center is located at these changes have had on the behavior Chalk River, Ontario, and is operated by the crown company, Atomic Energy and attitude of scientists as well as on of Canada Limited. AECL is an agency of the federal Canadian government their organizations and publications.
    [Show full text]