INFCE International Nuclear Fuel INFCE/DEP/WG.6/'S M» Cycle 0 Evaluation
RESPONSES TO TASK 1 QUESTIONNAIRE OF INFCE WORKING GROUP 6 SUPPLIED BY PARTICIPATING STATES March 1978
INPCE/GROUP VI - QUESTIONNAIRE
COUNTRY: ARGENTINA
1. Nuclear power forecast (MWe)
1980 1990 2000
REF 1.000 HIGH 3.300 10.000
LOW 2.700 8.000
2. Spent fuel forecast (tons UO-)
» 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
REF 780 2.360
HIGH 5.500 10.650 23.900 LOW 5.350 10.275 19.100
3. Pool reactor spare capacity (ton U02)
(a) full core discharge 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
REF 250 400
HIGH 850 1.450 2.500
LOW 700 1.250 2.000
4. Under the fuel cycle conditions which you anticipate in your country what requirements have you identified for away-from- reactor (AFR) storage?
To be considered after 1985.
- 49 - 5. Current programme
(a) At reactor storage
Present Under Construction
ton U0- years tons U02 years
Atucha I 500 5 1.300 13
Embalse 1.500 10
(b) Away from reactor storage - national
none
(c) Away from reactor storage - Multinational
Not envisaged by the time being
6. Spent fue) storage short-fall
Not envisaged
7. Spent fuel future plans
(a) At reactor storage
All units will be required a minimun holding capacity, in site, equivalent to 10 years full power operation (80% load factor) plus full core discharge reserve.
(b) Away from reactor storage
The position will be reviewed after 1985.
(c) Go/no-go decision factors
The development of the overall energy programme, particular ly the hydrc-electric programme.
The nuclear programme up to 1990 is already commited.
New decisions are not spected before 1985.
-50- 8. Spent fuel storage short-fall
Not envisaged.
9. With respect to current programme (5) and future plans (7), identify spent fuel movement and AFR storage constraints.
l.(c) - National policy
2.(b) - Regulations on radiological protection.
- 51 - 125/11/5/2/6 IA 10/78 20 January 1978
Dear Sir, Further to your letter of 12 January 1978 concerning questionnaires distributed during the first meeting of INFCE Working Group VI we would like to advise the following. In reference to the questionnaire on spent fuel storage requirements, Australia has no plans at this tise for the introduction of nuclear power planta and therefore will have no requirecents for the storage of spent fuel from such reactors in the foreseeable future. For the second questionnaire, regarding participation in Working Group VI, the answers are as follows - • Participating Country - Australia Question 1. Not at this time. . Question 2. (a) Calculation of international spent fuel generation from basic reactor data. (b) Analysis of data provided in response to requirements questionnaire. (c) Analysis of institutional matters. Question 3« Or D.B. Walker, Australian Atomic Energy Commission, 45 Beach Street, Coogee, 9.S.V. 2034 Australia. Telephone (2) 665 1221 Telex AA 20273* Tours sincerely,
^ (J.W.c; Cumes) Resident Representative Mr R.A. Estrada-Oyuela, Embassy of the Republic of Argentina, VIENNA. Austria Task 1 - March 1978
1NFCE OUESTIOMMAIRE - GROUP VI -I II I II ^. I ^—^— —I l.l-ll ■ III- II- .1 III -I—I.I ■
1. Nuclear power forecast
At this time the first nuclear power station is close to completion date.
The quantity of produced electric energy will be approx. f*,2 x 109 kwh/a.
Further use of nuclear energy in Austria at this time is not visualized.
2. Spent fuel generation by year
After start up of the first austrian nuclear power plant the average amount of spent fuel elements will be approx. 22 t U/a.
3. Pool reactor spare capacity requirements
The present storage pond provides for one core-discharge and one yearly discharge.
An enlargement of this storage pond is planned, thereby the storage pond will have a capacity of approx. nine yearly dis charges plus one core discharge.
'♦. Under the fuel cycle conditions which you anticipate In your country, what requirements have you identified for away-from- reactor (AFR) storage?
Cn this subject a project for an external storage pond for spent fuel elements and a project for the final disposal of
-53- radioactive waste has been developed.
The capacity of the external storage pond is approx. 2900 fuel elements.
Further to this the external storage pond (wet storage) can be adapted to dry-storage as required.
The project for the final disposal of radioactive waste is adjustable to the various amounts of waste.
The project of the external storage pond takes into account that a reprocessing contract would not be forthcoming for some time.
Furthermore this storage pond ensures an alternative for storing . unreprocessed fuel elements returned from the reprocessing piant.
The project for the final disposal of radioactive waste had been influenced on the one side to make provisions for taking back the high active level waste from the reprocessing plant and on the other side by the provisions for the final disposal of the Internal waste (LLW, MLW).
5. Current prograrme (existing; building under construction; and conmitted) spent fuel disposition facilities by year:
5.1 At reactor storage
The storage pond available at this tlrne has a capacity of approx. 650 fuel elements;
this corresponds to \,V* core discharges.
The planned compact storage will have a capacity of approx. 1560 fuel elements; this corresponds to 3,2 core discharges.
Planned enlargement costs will be approx. 3 Mlo US i.
- 54 - 5.2 Away from reactor storage - national (In-country)
At this present time, no permission has been granted for the site for the external storage pond.
The capacity of the external storage pond will be for approx. 2900 fuel elements; this corresponds to approx. 6 core discharges.
Construction costs will be approx. 125 Mlo US S and for the operation costs approx. 2,5 Mio US S/a.
Safety and environmental aspects have been integrated in the planning.
5.3 Storage site suitability
The basic design criteria as far as site is concerned were chosen to be the same as for the nuclear power plant.
5.*» General description of transportation system:
The International guidelines for transportation of radioactive material will be followed, i.e. RID, ADR, IAEA ....
5.5 Safeguard considerations
The safeguard descriptions wfli be based on the valid lAEA-guidelines.
5.6 Physical protection
The reccfimendations of IAEA concerning the physical protection (Inf. clrc. 225/corr) have been taken Into account.
-55- 6. Away from reactor storage - (multi-national arrangements)
In spite of contacts with various countries, no satisfactory answers can be given at this time on these questions.
-56- S.C.K./C.E.N. Mol. 07/03/76 L.H.M.A. TEC/39.3601/B/04/AC0/fq
BELGIUM
INTERNATIONAL NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE EVALUATION (INFCE)
Technical Co-ordinating Comnittee - Group VI "Spent Fuel Storage"
Questionnaire
1. Nuclear power forecast •* by year
la) Reference (b) Low (c) High
1983 (a) Ref. 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1984 1985 Total quantity 2000ITWe 2000HWP 3000MWe 3000MWe 4000riw"e 4000MWe 5000NWe
(b) idem ' (c)
2. Spent fuel generation - by year
(a) associated with reference forecast (b) associated with any high probability variance (high or low)
1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1966
55 ton 55 ton 55 ton 74 ton 74 ton 95 ton 115 ton
3. Pool reactor spare capacity requirements, by reactor type ; ex. gr. 900 MWe
(a) full core discharge (b) one normal discharge fc) discussion of possible changes in requirements a. ?0 Ton b. 23 Ton c. is sufficient for the moment/ if agreements are signed with the reprocessing plants. - 60 - 4. Under the fuel cycle conditions which you anticipate In your country what requirements have you identified for away-from-reactor (AFR) storage ?
These requirements would be governed by plans (timing, capacities, usage, duration) for reprocessing recovery, interim storage or final disposal of fuel elements. It would be helful if response would include a brief discussion of the factors that have influenced planning.
New away-from-reactor (AFRJ storage will be made at the reprocessing plant. Dimension not Known yet.
5. Current programme (existing i building under construction j and committed) spent fuel disposition facilities by year :
(a) At reactor storage, by' reactor type
(1) Capacity and usage by year (2) Programme to increase storage capacity (3) Costs, terms or conditions (non-proprietary information)
1. Generally speaking, a fourth of the capacity is used per year of the full capacity (empty) of the storage tanks.
2. Parallel with the growth of the nuclear power reactor capability, a linear growth of the on-site, spent fuel storage is planned. A spent fuel capability storage tank per reactor is planned which is always much larger than the fuel-load of the reactor.
3. Costs are not available.
(b) Away from reactor storage - national (in-country)
(1) Location(s) (2) Storage description :
la) capacity and usage, by year (b) facility lifetime(s) (c) significant maintenance operation (d) cost (operation and construction) (e) safety and environmental protection
The industrial away-from-reactor storage tank facilities are only planned at the reprocessing plant. The detailed description can net be given as the decision to study the new facilities are not yet taken.
- 61 - (3) Storage site suitability. Give basis of determination
The existence of the EUROCHEMIC PLANT at DESSEL (near MOD
{4] General description of transportation system :
(a) casks (b) vehicles (c) routes, restrictions (d) handling equipment (e) carriers/suppliers Cf) shipping duration (g) cost (construction and operational} non proprietory information
a. Different casks are used provided by firms such as Transnucleaire, Transnuble and others.
b. The vehicles are trucks
c. Certain routes are used determined by restrictions such as weight limits at bridges and height of viaducts.
d. Cranes are always used.
.e. Indefinite
f. The shipping duration is only a few hours to a few days (Eui> oean transport)
g. Cost estimation not available.
(6) Safeguards considerations - approach and criteria
(a) design (b) operations
The normal safeguards considerations are used which are imposed by EURATON and IAEA.
(6) Physical protection
The nuclear sites treating spent nuclear fuel are surrounded by high metallic fences.
- 62 - Ic) Away from reactor storage - multinational arrangements
(1) Storage location(s)
At the new fuel reprocessing plant
(2) Storage description
(a) size (b) usage allotment or quota (from each participating country) (c) lifetime (d) cost (operational and construction)(non-proprietor information) (e) safety and environmental protection
a. Not decided yet
b. Mainly for Belgian usage, but can bo used by ether countries if special agreements are signed
c.d. Not defined yet
e. The nuclear facility will be surrounded by metallic fences.
(3) Storage site suitability. Give rationale on tha site of the reprocessing plant.
(4) General description of transportation system :
' (a) casks (b) vehicles (c) routes (d) handling equipment (e) port facilities (f) carriers/suppliers (g) shipping duration (construction and operational) (h) lost, terms of conditions
See 5-b-4.
(5) Safeguards considerations - approach and criteria
(a) design (b) operation
See 5-b-5
(6) Physical protection
See 5-b-6.
-63- (7) Description of multi-national agreements (non-proprietary information)
(a) identification of participants (b) storage allotment - by year (c) return of spent fuel (d) cancellation or modification (e) other contingencies
a. The private electric companies of Belgium and France (partim)
b. Each reactor has its storage facility
c. d. and e. No definite answer possible * 6. Spent fuel storage short-fall (by year) based on (1)-(5)
No short-fall if agreements are signed on due time.
7. Spent fuel disposition future plans (planned, but not committed)
(d-b) repeat items under (5) (c) identify go/no-go decision factors, timing of decision and contingency planning.
No planned and not committed, except at the reprocessing plant.
8. Spent fuel storage short-fall (by year) based on (1)-(7)
No short-fall-forseable at the reactors if spent fuel will be forwarded on due time to the reprocessing plants.
9. With respect to current programme (5) and future plans (7), identify spent fuel movement and AFR storage constraints (a) Transport infrastructure capability (b) Regulations, agreements (c) National policy
a. 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982
55 Ton 55 Ton 55 Ton 74 Ton 74 Ton
The transport is generally performed with the aid of international companies. The AFR storages will be made at the site of the reprocessing plant. b. Agreements have to be signed with neighbouring countries by the government very soon. Belgian has e whole set of legal regulations about transport and storage.
c. The national policy will be redetermined in the course of 1978.
»
•
-65- SYNATO.vi Brussels, April 3, 1978. pv/br Note n« 78/78. 740.086
QUESTIONNAIRE OF WG 6 Spent Fuel Management
- Table 1 presents the forecasts for nuclear power in Belgium, according to two scenarii pending on the outcome of the future debate in parliament.
- Table 2 gives some characteristics of the plants (in operation, under construction and foreseen) from which the spent fuel should come, accord ing to both scenarii.
- Table 3 presents, per year, the capacity requirements till 2000.
- Table 4 gives tne storage capacity available at reactors.
- It is contemplated to store a certain number of assemblies (around 350) of different sizer (total around 120 t U) in a pool on the site of Lh<> EUROCKEMIC plant, starting around 1980, with a possibility to extend that capacity up to 1000 fuel assemblies later on.
- Transportation of subassemblies will be secured between the power plant and the reprocessing plants (La Hague and EUROCHEMIC) in accordance with the regulations of IAEA.
- Evacuation of fuel from the reactor plants is foreseen :
. from 1978 to 1991 partially to the reprocessing plant of La Hague, . from 1980 to 1992 partially to the reprocessing plant of Dessel.
If this is achieved as scheduled, the storage capacity in power plant* will be sufficient until about 1990.
- Without evacuation of the fuel discharged after 1976, fuel storage shortage in Doel 1 and 2 and in Tihange 1 could occur respectively at the end of 1979 and the end of 1980.
■ooOoo-
- 66 - 78/78
TABLE 1
NUCLEAR POWER FORECAST* (including 100 X of Tihange 1 and excluding Chboz)
PWR (GWe) Year High Low
1977 1.7 1.7 78 1.7 1.7 79 1.7 1.7 1980 3.5 3.5'
81 3.5 3.5 82 3.5 3.5 83 5.5 5.5 84 5.5 5.5 1985 . 5.5 5.5
86 6.8 5.5 87 5.5 88 8.1 6.8 89 8.1 6.8 1990 9.4 6.8
91 9.4 6.8 92 10.7 6.8 93 10.7 8.1 94 12.0 8.1 1995 12.0 3.1
96 13.3 ' 8.1 97 13.3 9.4 98 14.6 9.4 99 14.6 9.4 2000 14.6 9.4
* basis for INFCE
- 67 - TABLE 2 78/78
CHARACTERISTICS OF POWER PLANTS AKD REACTORS
Date of <>peratio n Power Number of assemblies Number of assemblies Weight of Reactor Present status Type name (MWe) per total core per normal discharge normal discharge High Low (TUeo) Doel 1 1975 1975 oper. PWR 390 121 40 10 Doel 2 1976 1976 oper. PWR 390 121 40 10 Tihange 1 1975 1975 cper. PWR 870 157 52 24 Doel 3 1980 1980 under constr. PWR 900 157 52 24 Tihange 2 1980 1980 under constr. PWR 900 157 52 24
NDoel 4 1983 1983 under constr. PWR 1000 157 52 27 ! D under constr. Tihange 3 1983 1983 PWR 1000 157 52 27 unnamed 1 1986 1988 - PWR 1300 (193) (64) (34) 1988 1993 - PWR 1300 (193) (64) (34) ■ " 3 1990 1997 - PWR 1300 (193) (64) (34) H ^ 1992 2002 - PWR 1300 (193) (64) (34) " 5 1994 (2007) - PWR 1300 (193) (64) (34) 6 1996 (2012) - PWR 1300 (193) (64) (34) " 7 1998 (2017) - PWR 1300 (193) (64) (34) 8 2001 - - PWR 1300 (193) (64) (34) 9 2003 - PWR 1300 (193) ' (64) (34) • TABLE 3
SPENT FUEL GENERATION (TUea)
High Low Year annual cumulative annual cumulative
1976 44 44 44 44 77 20 64 , ■ 20 64 78 44 108 44 108 79 44 152 44 • 152 1980 44 196 44 196 81 92 288 92 ' 288 82 92 380 92 380 83 92 472, 92 472 84 146 618 146 618 1985 146 764 146 764 86 146 910 146 • 910 87 180 1090 146 1056 88 180 1270 146 1202 89 214 1484 180 1382 1990 214 1698 180 1562 91 248 1946 180 1742 92 248 2194 180 1922 93 282 2476 180 2102 94 282 2758 214 , 2316 1995 316 3074 214 2530 • 56 316 3390 214 2744 97 350 3740 214 2958 98 350 4090 248 3206 99 384 4474 248 3454 2000 384 4858 248 3702
-69- 78/78
TABLE
CAPACITIES (AT REACTOR STORAGE)
(2) Date of capacity T operational Ueq' regular pool status of pool number of operation assemblies
Existing units Doel 1 and 2*1' 275 70 in operation • T^hange 1 172 79 in operation
Units under construction Doel 3 326 150 under constr. 1980 Doel 4 326 175 under constr. 1963 Tihange 2 326 150 under constr. 1980 Tihange 3 326 175 under constr. 1983
Units foreseen year of Unnamed 1 to 9, each (400) (216) foreseen reactor oper.
(1) Pool is common to both units. (2) Excluding spare capacity Tor unloading one total core for each reactor.
- 70 - 15 Mu-ch 1978
INFCE QUESTIONNAIRE - GROUP VI
1. Nuclear power forecast - by year 2000
(a) Reference —80 GWe - See Figure 1 (b) Low ~65 GWe (c) High -100 GWe
2. Spent fuel generation - by year 2000
(a) Associated with reference forecast (1(a)) -75 Gg - See Figure 2 (b) The reference arisings could vary by+-25Z depending on load growth and station capacity factor. Assume 5 year cooling period.
3. Pool reactor spare capacity requirements, by reactor type (CANDU)
(a) Full core discharge 134 kgU/MWe for a 600 MWe reactor (b) One normal discharge.
The CANDU reactor uses on-power refuelling. The fuel discharge rate is —166 kgU/MWe-a. Sufficient storage capacity is required to provide for a 5 year cooling period. (c) Discussion of possible changes in requirements.
Exceptionally high capacity factor of the Pickering nuclear station has made it necessary to supplement its existing spent fuel storage bay with an auxiliary bay by 1978. A similar auxiliary bay is being planned for the Bruce A generating station which has just come on-line with three of its four units.
4. Under the fuel cycle conditions which you anticipate in your country, what requirements have you identified for away-from-reactor (AFR) storage?
At present we have no "requirement" for AFR storage but our anticipated AFR storage proposals consist of a central site with water pools, concrete canisters or convection vaults providing a retrievable interim spent fuel storage capability. Consideration is being given to the choice of a site which would also be suitable for the construction of a deep underground geologic waste repository. A central fuel storage facility in Canada .would not be operational before the mid-1980s. Transportation to the site would be by railroad and highway transport.
5. Current programme (existing: building under construction, and committed) spent fuel disposition facilities by year 2000?
(a) At reactor storage, by reactor type (CANDU)
(1) Capacity Pickering — 18 station years Bruce ~ 12 station years Gent illy 2 ~ 10 station years Lepreau ^ 10 station years
Fuel throughput for all reactors is -"130 kgU/Mtfe assuming an average annual burnup of 650 GJ/kgU and a station capacity factor of 80%.
(2) Programme to increase storage capacity.
- 72 - An auxiliary water bay has been constructed at the Pickering generation station with a storage capability of 4 Gg of natural uranium fuel and a similar auxiliary bay is being planned for the Bruce A station.
(3) Costs, terns or conditions (non-proprietary information).
The Pickering Auxiliary Spent Fuel bay cost $14.5 million (1976 dollars).
(b) Away from reactor storage - national (in-country).
(1) Location(s)
None selected yet.
(2) Storage description
Preliminary engineering studies have been done on a concept with the following characteristics:
(a) capacity and usage, by year
Capacity - adequate to handle all Canadian CANDU fuel arisings well into the next century. Usage by year - will have stored ^86 Gg of spent CANDU fuel by the year 2000.
(b) Facility lifetime(s) - between 50 and 100 years
(c) Significant Maintenance Operation
Maintenance will be an insignificant problem if canisters or convection vaults are used since both are passive systems. If water pools are used the maintenance requirements will be similar to present day water pool requirements.
(d) Cost, (operation and construction)
Engineering studies and cost estimates are available but the only actual costs available are for the Pickering Auxiliary Spent Fuel Bay, Question 5(a).
(e) Safety and environmental protection.
The prime safety objective is to keep the spent fuel isolated from the biosphere. Any storage system must therefore be capable of providing this isolation under all credible conditions. With reference to CANDU fuel bundles, the fuel sheath provides the first isolation barrier. Bundles with failed sheaths are canned before being stored. Tf fuel sheathing should fail during storage further barriers are provided to prevent the release of
- 73- active contaminants. In the case of water pool storage systems, active contaminants that escape from the fuel are isolated and retained by ion exchange columns in the cooling circuit and by filters and absorbers in the ventilation air system. In the case of concrete canisters or convection vaults, isolation is maintained by at least a further two additional sealed barriers. Protection from the fuel irrad iation field is provided by water cover or thick concrete shielding walls. The systems meet the requirements of current safety codes, standards and guidelines recommended by nationally recognized regulatory, institutional and technical bodies.
(3) Storage site suitability. Give basis cf determination.
If the storage site was to be colocated with a waste repository, the site would be located on homogenous crystalline rock (pluton or batholyth) with acceptable hydrogeology, near adequate surface water and power lines. A pluton or batholyth with relatively few fractures and geologically old hydrology is a basic requirement for a geological repository. A river or lake is necessary to provide the domestic and service water requirement, while access to an electrical grid is desirable to provide the site power requirements. Access to the site by highway and railroad to accommodate rail and truck flask shipments and other commercial and domestic traffic is also a requirement.
From a sociological point of view, it is important that the proposed facility receives community acceptance: that wherever practical the local labour force is used to fill job vacancies and that facilities such as schools, recreational facilities and community services be utilized to best advantage. If local public acceptance can not be obtained then it will be necessary to site the facility in a sparsely populated area and provide, at additional expense, the necessary services and labour force.
(4) General Description of transportation system.
(a) Casks
Two sizes of cask will be provided, one will be sized for road transport and will have a mass of *"35 Mg with a load capacity of "2 Mg; the other will be sized for rail transport and will have a mass of ~ 60-70 Mg and a load capacity of «•* 6 Mg. Both flasks will be capable of operating in the dry and wet mode and will be licensed to meet transport regulations. Design detailing has not been completed for either flask.
(b) Vehicles
Rail or truck transport are envisioned.
-74- (c) Routes, restrictions - Site has not been selected
(d) Handling equipment - Not resolved yet but we do not foresee any development work in this area.
(e) Carrier/supplier - We expect to use existing commercial carriers on a contract basis.
(f) Shipping duration - First shipments will start when a central storage facility is built and will continue well into and possibly through the 21st century.
(g) Cost - Not available yet.
(5) Safeguard considerations - approach and criteria
Canada's safeguards policy vis-a-vis nuclear exports and cooperation requires a binding commitment to the non-proliferation of nuclear explosive capability as well as acceptance of full-scope safeguards. In this context Canada's approach to safeguards associated with spent fuel storage is to cooperate with and to assist the IAEA in its efforts to verify the nature and quantity of spent fuel at the point of entry into storage and at all times thereafter. Criteria for systems to meet this objective are considered to be simplicity, effectiveness, reliability and accuracy taking tnto account cost and operational factors. Devices for reliable attribute assessment at the point of entry and prototype systems for inventory verification are currently in operation. Research is proceeding in Canada to further develop and refine these devices.
Cooperation will continue with other countries in the development of safeguard devices, systems and techniques relevant to storage facilities. Several of these systems are in actual operation at both water pool and concrete sites and further systems are being planned.
(6) Physical protection
Physical protection is provided by security personnel with assistance from warning devices and visual aids. The emphasis is placed on alerting law enforcement agencies in the event of intruder penetration rather than providing major defences.
(c) Away from reactor storage - multinational arrangements.
Canada is not active in a multinational sprat fuel storage program.
6. Spent fuel sto.age short-fall by year 2000 based on (1) - (5).
Canadian policy has always been to store fuel retrievably until there is a need for further handling. No storage short-fall is expected.
7. Spent fuel disposition future plans (planned, but not committed).
-75- Canada's future plans have been outlined in question (S).
Spent fuel storage short-fall by year 2000 based on (1) - (7).
Already covered by question (6).
With respect to current programme (5) and future plans (7), identify spent fuel movement and AFR storage constraints.
Ve foresee no serious constraints on our present or future program as far as the technical feasibility aspects are concerned. There nay be constraints, however, because of public perceptions, interprovincial and federal-provincial agreements, program costs and international attitudes. Howe: .r, it is a matter of national policy that a waste management program will be developed to support the CANDU reactor system of which fuel storage is one component.
-76 - BIBLIOGRAPHY
[AECL-4510> RETENTION Oi RADIONUCLIDES DEPOSITED IN THE CHALK RIVER NUCLEAR LABORATORIES HASTE MANAGEMENT AREAS. Merritt, W.F., Mawson, C.A.
(AECL-5111) AECL'S RESPONSIBILITIES ANP PROGRAMS FOR MANAGEMENT OF HIGH LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTES. Dyne, P.J.
(AECL-5249) HASTE MANAGEMENT IN CANADIAN NUCLEAR PROGRAMS. Dyne, P.J.
(AECL-5310) DRY STORAGE OF SPENT FUEL. Maynan, S.A.
(AECL-5597) THE CANADIAN PROGRAM FOR STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OF SPENT FUEL AND HIGH-LEVEL WASTES. Barnes, S.A. et al.
(AECL-5706) MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE WASTES FROM NUCLEAR FUELS AND POWER PLANTS IN CANADA. Tomlinson, M. et al.
(AECL-5959) REPORT BY THE COMMITTEE ASSESSING FUEL STORAGE, (in publication)
(AECL-5965) THE CONCRETE CANISTER PROGRAM. Ohta, M.M. ftinpublication)
(WNRE-269) CONCEPTUAL DESIGN STUDY OF A CONCRETE CANISTER SPENT FUEL STORAGE FACILITY. Lidfors, E.B., Tabe, T. and Johnson, H.M.
(PP-23) THE MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE BY-PRODUCTS FRJM A NUCLEAR REACTOR. Campbell, W.M.
(TDI 8) AN ESTIMATE OF THE HAZARDOUS LIFE OF SPENT CANDU FUEL. Campbell, W.M.
(INIS- THE CANADIAN PROGRAM FOR MANAGEMENT OF SPENT FUEL AND HIGH nf-3053) LEVEL WASTES. Barnes, R.W., Mayman, S.A.
WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FOR CANDU-PHW REACTORS. Drolet, T.S., Choi, E.C., Sovka, J.A. American Nuclear Society 1975 winter meeting. Am. Nucl. Soc. (Nov. 1975) v. 22 p.354.
SPENT-FUEL MANAGEMENT IN THE CANDU FUEL CYCLE. Barnes, R.W., Mayman, S.A., Transactions of the American Nuclear Society 1976 annual meeting. (June, 1976)
WASTE MANAGEMENT IN CANADIAN NUCLEAR PROGRAMS, Dyne, P.J., Canadian Nuclear Association, Toronto, Ontario, Volume 5. (75-CNA-600)
MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE WASTES FROM NUCLEAR FUFLS AND POWER PLANTS IN CANADA. Tomlinson, M., Mayman, S.A,, Tammemagi, H.Y. et al. Intematicn conference on nuclear power and its fuel cycles. Salzburg, Austria 2 - 13 May 1977. IAEA-CN-3C/178. .977.
-77 - BIBLIOGRAPHY *
CONCRETE CANISTERS FOR INTERIM DRY STORAGE OF SPENT; IRRADIATED CANDU FUEL. Boase, D.G. Vandergraaf, T.T. Nuclear Technology January 1977 v. 32(1) p. 6C-71.
THE MANAGEMENT OF IRRADIATED FUEL IN ONTARIO, VOLUME 1, A REVIEW,-Barnes, R.W. October 1976. (Ontario Hydro) GP-76014
(AECL-4867) THE MANAGEMENT OF SPENT CANDU FUEL. Morgan, W.W.
(AECL-5136) MANAGING NUCLEAR WASTES. Dyne, P.J.
(AECL-5959/2) REPORT BY THE COMMITTEE ASSESSING FUEL STORAGE. Appendix D and E. Edited by Morgan, W.W.
THE MANAGEMENT OF CANADA'S NUCLEAR WASTES. Aifcin, A.M., Harrison, J.M. and Hare, F.K. Energy. Mines and Resources Report EP-77-6.
USED FUEL STORAGE AND DISPOSAL OPTIONS FOR HEAVY WATER REACTORS (CANDU-HWR'S) Tomlinson, M. October 1977. Nuclear Engineering International Special Issue.
MANAGEMENT OF IRRADIATED FUEL AND HIGH LEVEL WASTES IN CANADA. Mayman, S.A., Tammemagi, H.Y. and Strathdee, G.G. Paper for presentation at the American Ceramic Society Meeting, Chicago, April 25-28, 1977.
-78- ="*•-^
*' ■ *i*M*f "It*** f * -•
Ii!Si£|f?sgam& ^::£t::f:::rhlli
••'•»"• »-l«v.#| .«|...«..» I* rr.zhzzr-rrvr.r.:p:*^»? rrr:T:rWrrrri.Ttw-T"-Tr^pr.?*""
..".i:r:i; --« ».-(**-».. -. -..,1.,.,
iii;:iir;iiL;!::;: •nnt fJ%>*>» »*4 I -if *. .ft -- i*,, j.. » -*-^»fr,-rpr*-J'fIf-—»f- -** :?::::ni::r::;:u--::!.-:r ■*-Nft**»fi, "'
*t»**T!'' -*•-**• -nit! *• '
- iT. Ji',!'.
..,*.,.. .|t*ifi»t<*},».■ .. ..«>..f/- - *f *•*• ••*«■ r lsH|iii J:;:: u:;li:t; •..::■ ;;,v. fSiiS IrHlrrn: .■a:si;;j;jy;::;:: r,::j;y;i:;: ■••::::»;;♦: - — -l-'-v ret? *' —••••^ I ;i»tt:;s ::tt ... *«*t *••• "»- *j.»».f* » .-..«-i i;.;i;n^{{;? -mmfr, T* ^ i»a!lf9Si!? *•,;:: :-.!'*f'.i ».:'.! -..in •:::•:{::.:;;: 'flSHKrl?:' 'Jj.'iji:; :,;;|:;.{;.;,;,;«.'Jx;::::.;:i. •,:;..:• ..'«; .'.i.:;:t..•:;!:[. t . ::.:.::-.;;:{::;;|^::j;:;::;;;:
■*f*l**#- »f«ni».- ■»•«»[»»' If." •■••.*•. .kf.-... ^>*.f..f, ,,»,.«. ,}.,J.. .1 ••..!.,
-79- • {stnft^t:::?;:::
];;:#: :t:;;r.:
"* ♦•
:t;;?G: 2uitt;::.'t fiu!;^. :..^.r..*;U- T*rtr;tn-r:n*.TT::: r^tr^r «il:?j?s?i
•'*f*fi'-•
K h
* ^se^^a^i^^ If-'r 'r'4»?-'","*' r •r;r:r-i
- — , .. — *•••#' * —'*•••»»" .IT.'' *">%&"*?<"". ,'■'■' .:{-: -•-irrr f::;-.-?' .jr'rrr^jp.T-r.'rrs.'rrjr. '''i J."J V".* • = Tr.-rrr:r-..-rfcr:r!r:7 r;;-»r— rrrrrtrrr - ;::\y. 5 ;: r;..-fr;: -HfHr imF^ v:|- ,»: ,.... :sxill'.'-V-'''i'-'i ;h:;;;-i:i »wT--».. I,...... £_!-1 -*| •!;#;■*- t» .•*•-- .t»kl.r. ». . ... *,;., ,,;.,- ,. ., -, J. f... f ...]..,.i„.ir.rfirl,r..f r fmE t
1 ..*:iiii i.»..k....,.- •■(■ •-...-•[,;•-!*. •»•'.' ...» IfjlKiflJin...... ;..!.{. ,£....i....I....».'.„lW}.lr, ■. •. f*Hl:T:l5jrr::." ■:;^: :|.':...r.'(?r.-;;-rrrtt?trr?nt:.-trr- Mijtttt:«;t;;!.:;: -:::n;.!i:.! ,i.^;i::; --.:;■::•;■ ir-iif:*:::.,}.;': Iti'iaf!:!!;!::::;: :;^h:iit::!.;uzi:{.:tt:.::::f f; ■.:::■ iiv.V.'^u : \~i: ::;;::•:•• ::•::•: ■:: :;:■::»: ,:::::i:::t;:.:..-:• :::[r*::f:: {;•;• t! ttuil.::;!'.:. I ill? }K:t::ri; " o w .'*.><«» I* •' "*- ^ '- IIII|M I ,-*»#.-•■•• - ■ •*■»..-•#- -■ • .->...... »....((».i .|.,.. J..,. J-*, *,-,. W ISinn?
C^?ar - DENMARK
Vienna, lo October 1978
1. Nuclear Power Forecast (a) Reference Year: 199o 1995 2ooo Mwe : looo 3ooo 6ooo . Spent Fuel Generation (a) Year: 1992 1997 2oo2 Tons U/year: 4o 12o 24 o
3. and - No requirements have been formulated so far 4.
5.-9. No programmes have been established so far
-83- VALTION TEKNILLINEN TUTKIMUSKESKUS STATENS TEKNtSKA FORSKNINGSCENTRAL V- TECHNICAL RESEARCH CENTRE OF FINLAND • JLicI^ar Fngineering Laboratory Helsinki February 3, 1978
QUESTIONNAIRE /INFCE/ WG. 5 (FINLAND)
Referring to the questionnaire sent on behalf of the co- chairmen of WG.6 of INFCE we hereby send the information
requested on actual and future needs of spent fuei storage capacity ana related if-:ms concerning Finland. Given in formation covers the time period until the year 20CO.
1. Nuclear power forecast
Table I includes the reference, low and high forecasts for the nuclear power capacity in Finland.
2 . Spent r 'j a 1 TT e n -. r n {• j o n
The figures for annual spent fuel generation associated with the reference and high nuclear power forecasts are presented in Table II.
3. Sparc capacity requi rpmejit_s
The following requirements I-WK bs?r:n set by the Finnish safety authorities for the spare capacity of hhe spent fuel storage at reactor plants: a) full core discharge b) discharge of any pool, which implies that at least two separate pools should exist (a and b not simultaneously) These requi rementr, arc taken into account in the figures for
storage capacity urni'ii' t::i' a nd 7 .
-85- 4. Requirements for away-from-reactor storage
The plans concerning possible national (or multinational) away-from-reactor storage facilities have not been brought to s level where any specific requirements could have bean identified.
5. Spent fuel disposition according to the current programme
The capacity and usage of the spent fuel storage pools at the power plants are presented in Table III by reactor type.
6. Spent fuel .--.borage shortfall based an (1)...(5)
The differences between the sp-nt fuel accumulation and the existing cr originally planned storage capacities are shewn in Table III.
7. Spent fuel disposition future plans
The capacity and usage of the spent fuel storage pools at the power plants are presented in Table IV. Future plans for the BWR plants under construction consist of the enlarge ment rf the: storage capacity by high-capacity racks and feasibility of transfer between the units. For the planned addition.,]]. plants similar high-capacity r..:cks are assumed as wel 1.
8. Spent fuel storage shortfall based on (1)...(7)
The differences between the spent fuel accumulation and the storage capacities based on either existing facilities nr currently planned enlargements are shown in Table IV.
- 86 - 9. Spent fuel movement constraints
All regulations are basically similar to the IAEA recommendations and international transport agreements,
Further specifications can be requested from: y\r. Seppo Vuori Technical Research Centre of Finland Nuclear Engineering Laboratory Lcnnrotinkatu 37 SF-C0180 Helsinki 18 Finland teleph. 358-0-648 931 telex 1223 72 vttin sf
- 87 - • •
FABLE I Nuclear Power Capacity Forecast in Finland, MW.'
1 1 Commi tted Forecast for additiona . plants TOTAL 1! YEAR 1| i j PWR I BWR LCtV REFER. HIGH LOW REFER. HIGH i > 1978 ! 420 420 420 420 79 I 420 660 1000 1080 1080 ' 1930 ! 840 i 660 1500 1500 1500 '> a i s 840 ! 1320 2160 2160 2160 : 52 ! 640 i 1320 2160 2160 2160 33 ! 340 ; 1320 2160 2150 2160 P4 I 340 I 1320 2160 2160 2160 ; 1535 '■ 640 i 1320 2160 2160 2160 ; 55 ; 840 i 1320 2160 2160 2160 67 : 940 ! 1320 2160 2160 2160 ; ! 33 840 i 1320 1000 2160 2160 3160 : 39 • 840 ! 1320 1000 1000 2160 3160 3160 lg-io ; 840 | 1320 1000 1000 2160 3160 3160 840 ! 1320 1000 200G 2160 3160 4160 32 i 840 i 1320 1000 1000 2000 3160 3160 4160 3 3 840 | 1320 1000 2000 2000 3160 4160 4160 34 840 i 1320 | 1000 20Q0 3000 3160 4160 5160 19 3 5 . 840 i 132D 1000 2 00 0 3000 3160 4160 5160 ~ 5 i 840 I 132C 1 1000 2000 I 3000 3160 4160 5160 37 : 840 ! 1320 | 1000 2000 ' 4000 3160 4160 6160 3 5 S40 | 1320 ; 1000 3000 4000 3160 5160 6160 -:3 t!40 I 1320 2000 3 00 0 4000 4160 5160 6160 ' Cu3 640 1320 2000 3000 5000 4 1 B0 5160 7160 I
( i ' • •
TAi?Lf: II Spent Fuel generation accordinj; to the reference and high forecasts by reactor typu > UJ/ytiar
Reference forecast High f o recas L Cc:rmit tad YEAR PWR BWR planned* TOTAL planned* TUTAL
1973 14 14 14 79 14 14 14 1383 28 28 28 31 28 45 73 73 0 ? 28 18 46 46 f ] 28 63 91 91 4 28 36 64 64 1335 28 35 66 66 i 56 28 38 66 6 6 I 87 28 40 68 68 I A q 23 40 68 63 5 J 2 3 40 6 8 30 98 1 a 3 Q 28 40 30 98 30 98 91 28 40 30 90 30 98 32 20 40 30 90 60 126 33 23 40 30 98 60 128 34 28 4 0 60 128 60 128 1995 23 40 B0 128 90 158 3 5 28 40 60 128 90 158 37 23 40 6Q 123 9Q 15b 3 8 28 40 60 128 120 188 9 3 28 40 90 158 120 180 ~> <~t n f* C O i.' cJ 26 40 9C 158 120 108
* assur; = d to be PWR'3 TABLE III Capacity, usage and short-fall of spent fuel disposition at reactor pools according to the current programme ami original fuel racks, til.,
YEAR Capacity Usage Short-fall ! PWR BWR PWR* | BWR PWR* j BWR**
■ j 1978 42 14 ! 79 42 28 ! 19 30 64 42 ' 81 84 53 56 45 I 82 84 53 70 53 10 83 34 106 70 1C6 28 84 84 106 7 J 106 56 I 1935 84 106 70 105 94 0 ij 84 106 70 10F 132 6*7 84 106 70 106 172 I 83 84 106 70 106 212 39 84 106 70 106 252 1C90 84 106 70 106 292 91 34 106 70 106 332 92 84 106 70 106 372 93 84 106 70 106 412 94 84 106 70 106 452 199 5 84 106 70 106 492 95 84 106 70 106 632 97 34 106 70 106 672 93 84 106 70 106 712 39 84 106 70 106 752 2000 84 106 70 106 792
The spen t fuel will expectedly be shipped outside the country a f •; = r 3 years cooling in pools.
1 h55i to r»:<: i i n i f FR-s tn rap f. TABLE IV Spent fut.:l disposition future plans accord i rip, to rRf'Kniiice nuclear power foremast .issuiiinp installation of h i ;; h capacity racks for' HWRs and foi additional plant:.;, tIJ
YEAR Capacity Usag e Short-fall PWR BWR planned PWR BWR planned PWR DWR planned
1973 42 14 7 3 42 28 1350 S4 42 31 84 416 56 45 82 84 416 70 13 33 84 415 70 126 84 34 416 70 162 138 5 84 416 70 200 85 84 416 70 238 I 87 84 416 70 278 VO 33 84 416 70 318 8 3 84 415 3Q0 7 0 3 58 13 3 0 0 -* 413 300 70 398 30 91 84 416 300 70 416 60 22* 92 84 M6 300 70 416 3 0 E2 93 84 4 16 600 70 416 12G 102 94 84 416 600 70 416 160 142 1935 64 416 600 70 416 24 0 182 SB 34 416 . 600 70 416 3 0 Q 222 9 7 84 416 ■on 70 416 36 0 262 93 84 416 900 70 416 42 0 302 9 3 64 416 900 70 416 510 342 ■*> n n n J. L- ~ w 84 416 903 70 416 6 00 382 (30)** I . .
* The decision of the AFR-storage will be needed before 1986 if 5 years construction time is assumed.
** Wo transfer possibility between the -''"" p i an !: b as?; urned CBTHY --= O' i i K UM lAfeA RKGU7I-.Y -\<^X *RO.M, 'rV':*..*:-11'
VALTION TEKNILLINEN TUTKIMUSKESKUS Dfto STATENS TEKNiSKA FORSKMNGSCENTRAL TECHNICAL RESEARCH CENTRE OF FINLAND Nuclear Engineering Laboratory Helsinki, June 26, 1978 IKJF-Cfcjzfeo Lonnrotinkatu 37 SE-00180 Helsinki 18 1 Scientific Secretary Mr. J.P. Colton c 0 Jvit lwi'5 I ——— -»» INFCE office ACTION £/o IAEA
Virw/R«f
Asia/Subject
/=! THS RESPONSE OP FIKLAHD TO THE REQUEST OF ADDITIOIJAL hJcL** C-V-- INFORMATION NEEDED FOR IKFCE QUESTIONNAIRE VG 6, TASK 1 \
Question 3
The existing spare capacity requiren.er.ts are considered ll to be sufficient and changes are not probable.
YL.^OVH O w>je. Question 5b . CW---V >S-*<'*J
According to the current programme no coraittsients to J construct an away from reactor storage have been made.
Question 5c
For the time being Finland does not participate in multinational arrangeaents of avay from reactor storages,
Question 7
Besides the plans to enlarge ^he storage capcity in the reactor pools by high-capacity racks there axists a principal plan of a separate fuel storage for the srent fuel of the two BWR's.
7.b.1 The storage will be located at the Olkiluoto nuclear power plant site.
7.b.2.a. The storage facility constructed at the first stag-j would consist cf 3 water pools each with t'r.e capacity of 350 t/U. The storage roorz can be expanded by adding new storage pools.
D VttotimiaKeritia S D Pottiloktro 520 D p3»trlokero 181 07150 ESP00 1S innm 33101 TAMPERE 10 90101 OULU 10 Puh 90-4561 Tfitx 12-2072 iHlii iii.A RtGIST: V --"- Cwi'\ i:i\OV i.v.A Kl. ..li ljO
T.b.3. The selection of Olkiluoto nuclear power plant site is based on the' following basis:
- According to the present plans spent fuel requiring interin storage room will be accumulated only at the Olkiluoto nuclear power plants.
- Licencing is simple because of previous licencing activities.
- Power plant systeas, security arrcngesents and operating personnel can he utilized.
T.b.k. The spent fuel will be transported from reactor pods to the interin storage in transport casks. Any specific technical problems are not expected to occur.
T.b.5. Criteria for safequards and physical protection have 7.b.6. not yet been brought to such a level that specific cescriptions could be given.
7-c. The need of the interim storage is of current interest is the late 1980's. Therefore, decision on the construction of the storage is needed about 1935.
Question 8
According to (l)-(7) there is no shcrt-fall cf spent fuel storage.
Question 9
a) The transport infrastructure capability fcr existing realtors or for those under construction sets no limitations. Fron the Loviisa nuclear power plant spent fuel will expectedly be transported by trail to Lcviisa railway station and therefron by train to U.S.S.R. using Soviet transport casks and vechicle3. Proa Olkiluoto spent fuel will be transported by ship.
b) All regulations are basically sicilar tc the IAEA recoccend&t: and international transport agreements.
c) The nuclear program of Finland is rather small and future plans are treated on the case-by-cas* basis.
-93- CK I.M-:A RHG'VTdY = COPY fI\OM. IAEA KT.GISTB.Y ~. COPY IRON! IA".A REGISTRY
COMMISSARIAT A L'ENERGIE ATOMIQ^E DIVISION de M^TALLURGIE et d'ETUDE lUr^(l60 des COMBUSTIBLES NUCliAIRES C. E.N. SACLAY K 2 • 91190 Gil sax Yvette 941 8000 paste 2207
DMECN/78-20'2 MB/ml
IAEA Subject ; INFCE WG Task 2, Scientific Secretary of INFCE WG VI KARTNER Ring 11 P. O. Box 590 A 1011 VIENNE Autriche J
14.4.78
Sir,
Copy of an answer to a questionnaire needed by WG 1 and 2 but useful for many groups
Yours.
M. BUFFEREAU
[2 1 APR iSiJjJ A C T I Q N P.J. 1 ACTIO* OW,.J. _
WHY: ACTION CO' "i "TED: MO ACTION'"
KoUc^ ^ c££c_ J02848 (1 cv^vw/L^c^j [V)c>-^ August 1978
FOREWORD
When speaking of irradiated fuels, four cases can be considered:
The first relates to countries (or utilities) which have access to a reprocessing plant. Alter deactivation storage in the reactor, the fuels are transported to the input storage unit of the reprocessing plant. The operations which follow the minimum deactivation period depend on technical, economic and commercial considerations.
The second case relates to countries (or utilities) which, although wishing to have their fuels reprocessed, do not currently ha/e access to reprocessing facilities. It is clear that, with rare exceptions, a certain delay has occurred in the establishment and commissioning of re processing facilities. Despite a clear intention to reprocess, the fuels have to be stored for a certain period.
The third case relates to countries (or utilities) which are reluctant to consider their fuels as wastes, but which do not decide to have them reprocessed, her."e prolonged storage.
Finally, those who never plan to reprocess their irradiated fuels. This is a very serious problem requiring discussion by Group VII of the INFCE.
Matters are simple in France because PWR power plant fuels are and will continue to be reprocessed. Fuel movement from the power plant to the reprocessing facility should be considered at the same time as reprocessing, but within a framework of international technical collaboration, because it is normal to attempt jointly to find technical solutions which are likely to help those who reed them, until the time when adequate reprocessing capacity is available.
-95- CONTENTS
Foreword
The storage of irradiated fuel elements near the reactor Fuel building Fuel storage and handling . Design criteria . Pond cooling and filtration circuit . Assumptions made for component design and dimensioning . Safety conditions . Activity measurements . Handling of the spent fuel transport container
Storage of irradiated fuel elements entering the reprocessing facility
. Basic data . Transfer and pond storage of fuel elements . Fond water purification . Treatment of purification effluents of pond and caisson water
Spent fuel transport
Annexes
Some special points relating to storage facilities
Projection of nuclear electrical capacity by reactor type
Projection of total primary energy demand
Current nuclear power program on status
- 96 - THE STORAGE OF IRRADIATED FUEL ELEMENTS NEAR THE REACTOR
Preliminary remark
With the continuing construction of nuclear power plants, Chooz, Tihange, Feissenheim, etc., new developments have occurred. The indications given below correspond to the current state of technology.
2.1 Design criteria
Spent assemblies are stored in open racks consisting of individual vertical elements, grouped into modules of several elements and placed in the spent fuel assembly storage pond.
The spent assembly storage racks have a capacity of 459 elements with a center-to-center distance of 410 mn, or about 7/3 of a core.
Remark
3 reactors capacity about 4/3 of a core. Expansion under study for 5/3.
900 MW reactors capacity about 7/3 of a core.
1300 MW reactors capacity about 7/3 of a core.
It is not planned to expand these capacities.
All surfaces in contact with the assemblies are of austenitic stainless steel.
The spent fuel storage racks consists of removable modules with lifting rings held together by mechanical connection. Each module (of stainless steel) consists of a group of cavities in the form of boxes provided with guide funnels. The cavities are assembled on a top plate and bottom plate with adjustable feet.
A rack retaining system at the pond walls ensures maintenance of the assembly when subjected to seismic loads.
- 97 - The 410 nm center-to-center distance between the spent assemblies is sufficient for Keff to be less than or equal to 0.95, even if non-boric water is used to fill the deactivation pond.
The spent assembly storage rack arrangement is designed so that it is impossible to insert spent assemblies in locations other than those specifically provided for them, thus avoiding any possibility of accidental criticality.
2.2 Pond cooling and filtration circuit
The ponds perform the role of:
irradiated fuel storage for decay of its activity before shipment for reprocessing.
The ancillary functions enabling the ponds to perform their role are:
cooling
Removal of the residual power liberated by the irradiated fuel elements stored in the deactivation pond.
purification and reprocessing
Elimination of corrosion products, fission products and particles in suspension present in the water of the reactor pond and the deactivation pond, by filtration of the entire body of water (deionization and surface skimming).
The design of the pond water cooling and treatment circuit meets the following criteria:
Annex A of 10 CFR 50 of the NRC (15 July 1971 edition):
criterion 2 : protection against natural phenomena; criterion 4 : protection against external aggression and missiles; criterion 5 : separation of structures, systems and important safety components of different reactors; criterion 56 : isolation of the primary containment; criterion 61 : monitoring of storage and handling of the fuel and radioactive materials; criterion 62 : prevention of criticality during fuel storage and handling; criterion 63 : monitoring of storage of fuel and radioactive wastes.
- 98 - Regulatoty Guides:
RG 1-13 : design basis of the fuel storage system; RG 1-29 : earthquake classification.
The ponds are designed to keep the fuel under water in case of an earthquake overestimated with a safety margin and of the crash of a civilian aircraft, as veil as the fall of a spent fuel container during handling operations.
2.3 Assumptions made for component design and dimensioning
The design bases are set:
For flowrate: by extraction of the residual power due to:
normal spent fuel storage corresponding to 1/3 of a core, to which is added 1/6 of a core provided for load modulation, corresponding to about 4.9 MM.
complete storage of 7/3 of a core resulting from the unloading of a core after return to full power, while 4/3 of a core is already in the deactivation pond. The maximum residual power corresponds to a complete unloading of the reactor after about 300 days (full power equivalent) following the last normal refueling, which corresponds to about 10 MW.
Temperature: the maximum temperatures are as follows:
in normal storage: maximum temperature reached by the pond water ■ 50* C.
in exceptional storage of 7/3 of a core: maximum temperature reached by the pond water * 60° C.
The purification loop eliminates corrosion products and solid fission products contained in the deactivation pond water.
The activity of the pond water in fission products cannot exceed the activity in the primary circuit.
The intake of the purification circuit is located at the bottom of the damaged fuel racks, ensuring permanent drainage of the latter.
-99- 2.4 Safety conditions
The redundancy of the cooling circuit and the thermal inertia of the pond, even for storage of 7/3 of a core, ensures maintenance of the stored fuel elements under water.
To prevent gravity drainage of the deactivation pond, the intake pipe of the cooling circuit is placed at a level such that the stored fuel assemblies always remain immersed under an adequate water height to ensure a biological shield in the vicinity of the pond.
2.5 Activity measurements
Periodic activity measurements are taken and are concerned with:
activity measurement of rare gases, aerosols and iodine contained in the air of the building.
measurements are taken at the water surface.
During operation, analyses of samplings are required to:
check the condition of the deionizer resins; check the effectiveness of the filters; check the boron concentration.
The fuel handling system consists of equipment and structures exhibiting sufficient safety for refueling operations. The fuel handling system has been designed in accordance with the following elements:
Fuel handling devices feature systems designed to avoid dropping or collisions of fuel assemblies during transfer operations.
Fuel lifting and handling devices are capable of withstanding maximum loads in line with data corresponding to an earth quake overestimated with a safety margin.
The fuel transfer system is designed to respect the integrity of the containment at the penetration.
Overhead traveling cranes and hoists used to life spent assemblies have a limited lifting height, co that the minimum thickness of the water shield is maintained.
The overhead traveling cranes and hoists used are designed to avoid any dropping of fuel handling devices during fuel transfer operations.
- 100 - 2.6 Handling of the spent fuel transport container
While the facilities are designed to reduce the risks of a falling container to the minimum, the buildings and equipment are built to account for the potential risks of such a fall:
the building is designed to guarantee complete tightness of the pond so that the stored fuel elements are always under water (cooling),
protection of the water table is guaranteed with respect to any contamination resulting from a damajfged container,
attempts are made to maintain the containment, in relation to the exterior, of solid and gaseous products released by the container. In consideration of the age of the fuel removed, however, there is no site restriction problem.
The characteristics adopted are those of a cask of about 110 tons, capable of transporting 12 fuel elements, without excluding the use of a smaller container.
The total weight to be handled i- about 130 tons.
STORAGE OF IRRADIATED FUEL ELEMENTS ENTERING THE REPROCESSING FACILITY
This head storage consists of intermediate storage of irradiated fuel elements from reactors, prior to reprocessing.
As in the case of storage facilities near the reactors, the indications given here torrespond to the current state of technology relating to storage ponds and entry into a reproces sing facility.
Note that the reprocessing facility is located at La Hague and that it includes several sections in operation, under con struction or planned.
- 101 - 1. 3ASIC DATA
1.1 Fuel
Initial enrichment before reactor: 3.5Z of U 235
Average buvmip: 33,000 MWdT~
Maximum burnup: 43,000 MWdT ~
1.2 Fuel storage
The fuel elements are stored in isolated caissons to reduce contamination of the storage pond water. The isolated caisson is a water-filled container closed by a field cover featuring a breather filter for the caisson. At present, not all cais«ons are equipped with a sealed cover. Contamination is thus confined to the interior of the caisson, which is compartmented internally to accommodate 12 bare unfailed fuel elements.
Special baskets are provided to accommodate failed elements stored in bottles on leaving the reactor.
1.3 Storage ponds
The caissons are stored in storage ponds of 1000 t capacity. The pond water does not contain any nuclear poison.
1.4 Operating requirements
The pond water is kept permanently clear to allow visual inspection, and at a nominal temperature of 35 ± 5° C.
1.5 Criticality risk
The caisson mesh is such that there is no risk of criticality accident, even if the water in the caisson boils.
- 102 2. TRANSFER AND POND STORAGE OF FUEL ELEMENTS
2.1 Purpose of the installation
Remove the fuel elements from the casks, which are first put alongside a shielded cell.
Place the fuel elements in isolated caissons.
Store the caissons containing the fuel elements in the pond.
2.2 Description of the installation
The installation includes the following:
a shielded input cell alongside of which the cask is placed.
an input pond adjacent to a storage pond. This pond communicates with the storage pond through an opening, normally closed, which is opened to transfer the caissons.
a 1000 t storage pond.
an output pond adjacent to the storage pond. This pond communicates with the storage pond through an opening, normally closed, opened to transfer the caissons.
equipment for making identification checks of the fuel elements.
2.3 Fuel path
2.3.1 Cask unloading The cask is placed alongside the input cell and opened, the fuel elements are extracted one by one and transfered to the immersion zone of the input pond on a receiving unit. Transfers made in the input cell are carried out by remote-controlled or automatic equipment.
2.3.2 Caisson loading
Fuel elements from the immersion zone are loaded into the open caisson, placed in the input pond. Once loaded, the caisson is closed and transfered to the adjacent storage pond through the open communicating door, which is closed after transfer.
- 103 - Water circulation is provided to avoid any contamination of a less contaminated zone by a more contaminated zone.
2.3.3 Caisson storage
Loaded caissons are stored in the storage pond.
2.3.4 Caisson unloading
The caisson to be unloaded is transfered to the output pond through the communicating opening with the storage pond. The caisson is raised until the upper edge is above the pond water level. After the cover is removed, the fuel elements are extracted one by one and transfered to the chopping cell after an identification check.
The unloaded caisson is rinsed and filled with clean water. It is then closed and transfered to the storage zone for caissons awaiting unloading.
Operations carried out in the output cell are performed by remote-controlled equipment.
3. POND WATER PURIFICATION
3.1 Purpose of installations
Guarantee perfect clarity of the water to facilitate handling operations.
Permit visual inspection.
Keep the water activity at a suitable level.
3.2 Description
3.2.1 Input pond The water of this pond is purified by continuous treatment, pxrept during periods of replacement of filtration prelayers and resin regeneration or elimination.
3.2.2 Storage pond
The pond water is clarified by filtration through a filter with a prelayer of crushed resin.
- 104 - Radiochemical purification is carried out by deionization on cationic and anionic resins to resorb accidental pollution.
3.2.3 Output pond The water of this pond is purified by means of an installation which is identical in all respects to the installation for the input pond.
PRODUCTION OF HASTES AND EFFLUENTS
Nature Average annual volume Crushed resin sludges w w 2 H Cationic resins 50 m Anionic resins
Cationic resin re generation eluates w Cationic resin rinse . z water 805 m g -> ... £ Cationic resin , w ejection water 1435 m Anionic resin ejection water
4. TREATMENT OF PURIFICATION EFFLUENTS OF POND AND CAISSON WATER
4.1 Purpose of installations Regenerate the reagents of the pond water purification columns. These reagents are:
eluates from the cationic resin columns rinse water from the cationic resin columns and resin ejection water. Purify the water of the storage caissons.
- 105 - 4.2 Operating characteristics
4.2.1 Materials treated
Eluates: acidic solution.
Rinse water from cationic resin columns.
Resin ejection water.
Caisson water.
4.2.2 Storage capacities
Purification effluents of pond water. The effluents, produced in a batch system, are stored before treatment in separate tanks for the eluates and the rinse water.
The storage volumes are calculated to contain effluents produced by regeneration of all the cationic resin columns.
Caisson water:
The caisson water, which is produced in a batch system, is stored before treatment. The storage volume is calculated to absorb the effluents produced by two caissons.
Evaporator concentrates:
Temporary storage before removal is provided for the evaporator concentrates, approximately representing one week's production of the evaporator.
4.3 Description of the installations
4.3.1 Pond water purification effluent treatment installation
includes the following:
separate storage of eluates;
evaporator;
rectification column;
- 106 - condenser;
separate storage of regeneration reagents: acid, rinse and ejection water.
4.3.2 Caisson water treatment installation
This includes the following:
caisson war.er storage;
evaporator;
condenser;
- water storage.
SPENT FUEL TRANSPORT
Irradiated fuel element transport is described in the two enclosed paper:
Le transport Jes combustibles irradies dans le cycle du combustible - M. Labrousse, Bist 1977, 55-62, 223.
Systeme de transport et de manutention du combustible irradie adopte par 1c pare nucleaire E.D.F. - Messrs. Le Noc et Bertonneau (EDF), Labrousse (COGEMA) and Aupetit (Transnucleaire). AIEA/CN-36-240.
- 107 - SOME SPECIAL POINTS RELATING TO STORAGE FACILITIES
Reactor storage Reprocessing facility input storage
Considération of earthquakes yes yes
Falling aircraft light aircraft (tourism) light aircraft (tourism
Normal pond température 50° C 35 + 5° C
Température vhich can be 60° C reached in spécial conditions
Redundancy of cooling System yes yes Considération of fall of cask or Mn yes yes
Considération of fall of assembly yes yes in the zones concerned Question 1 e.
Projection of Nuclear Electrical Capacity, by reactor Type (Installed Capacity, net GW Ce], of plants in conrnercial operation by the end of the year stated)
1 YEAR UJR >r,m AGR GG KTRl**) FBR TOTAL High*)| Lo\**) High Low High Low High Low High Low High Low High Low
1S77 1,2 1.2 I 1 \ \ 2,4 \ \ \ 0,2 0,2 3,8 3,8 78 3,9 3,9 \ \ \ \ 2,4 \ \ \ 0,2 0,2 6,5 6,5 . 79 9.4 9.4 \ \ \ \ 2,4 \ \ \ 0,2 0,2 12 12 19?0 M.9 14,9 \ \ \ \ 2,4 \ \ \ 0,2 0,2 17,5 17,5 ei 20,4 20.4 \ \ \ \ 2,3 \ \ \ 0,2 0,2 22,9 22,9 82 22,2 22,2 \ \ \ \ 2,2 \ \ \ 0,2 0,2 24,6 24,6 e-5 26,7 26,7 \ \ \ \ 2,2 \ \ \ 1,4 1,4 3Q,3 30,3 tv. 30.6 30,6 \ \ \ \ 2,2 \ \ \ 1.4 1,4 34,2 34,2 iss? 35,6 35,6 \ - \ \ \ 2 \ \ \ 1,4 1,4 39 39 o: 42,6 40,6 \ \ \ \ 2 \ \ \ 1,4 '1»4 46 44 07 47,6 44,6 \ \ \ \ 2 \ \ \ 1,4 1,4 51 ■ 48 en 52,1 40,1 \ \ \ \ 2 \ \ \ 2,9 2,9 57 • 53 69 55,4 49,1 \ \ \ \ 1,5 \ \ \ 4,4 4,4 61 55 1SS0 59,6 53,1 \ \ \ \ 1,5 \ \ \ 5,9 4,4 67 59 95 72 63 \ \ \ \ 0 \ \ \ 12 10 84 73 2000 86 .71 0 20 15 106 86 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ \
(*) The terms "High" and "Low" pertain to estimates of nuclear power growth {••) Only heating HTR are planned at thie time but development of electric power HTR is possible by 2000. Question 1 b.
Projection of Nuclser Electrical Capacity, by reactor Type (Installed Capacity, net GW (e). of plants in commercial operation by the end of the year stated)
CWR HWR AGR GG HTR FB3 TOTAL YEAR
High*) Low*) High Low High Low High Low High Low High Low High Low
2000 85 71 21 15 106 66
20CS 81 70 •39 23 120 93
2010 75 68 57 32 132 100
2015 68 65 75 41 143 106
2020 59 62 94 50 153 • 112
2025 50 58 J 112 58 162 116 / '
t*) The terms "High" and "Low" pertain to estimates of nuclear power growth Electrical Energy Demand, Electric Power Capacity, and Nuclear Power Capacity r "^^^^^ YEAR 1978 1900 1985 1990 1S95 2000 End of Year End of Year End of Year End of Year End of Year End of Year I TERM (UNITS) ^^^ Total Primary High 9,63 (230) 11,3 (270) 13.2 (315) 15,1 (360) Energy** 7.74(185(1)) 8,56 (205) P-oc-:i regents (10-r^ joules) Low 9,00 (215) 10,0 (240)^ 11.3 (270) 12,6 (200) Electrical r.nergy 364 461 565 662 223 265 Low 332 410 466 555 Total Installed High 91 200 116 700 139 750 162 800 s Eluctric power 53 800 67 200 casecity 87 700 113 200 134 150 —x^^:i- 1 Low 155 100 •Ir.Et.-.IirJl Nuclear High 67 100 83 800 106 COO "over Causcity 6 500 17 500 39 100 Low 59 300 72 900 ee coo , ■ r-—_ YE.\n 2005 2010 2C15 2020 2025 i "—---^_ End of Year Er.d of. Year Er.d of Year End of Year End of Year jpi 722W (UNITS) "-—^^ ' Total Fri:r.c-.ry Snercy High 16,3 (390) 17,6 (420) 18,4 (440) 19,2 (460) 20,1 (4S0) •• Requirements Low 13,2 (515) 13,8 (350) 14,2 (540) 14,4 (345) 14,6 (350) Electrical Er^rgy High 755 850 930 1010 1C30 Demand 610 670 720 (r.-.-M Low 760 790 Total Installed HiGh 177 800 192 800 202 800 212 800 222 800 Electric Power Low 165 100 175 100 180 100 185 100 190 100 I Installed ::uclear |Hi5'> 120 000 j 132 COO 143 000 power caoacity 153 000 | 162 000 93 000 | 100 000 106 000 '112 000 ! 116 COD 1 (O N Tep Question 3 CURRENT NUCLEAR POVfER PROGRAMME STATUS AND LSAD TIMS ASSUMPTIONS
I) For the following catesories, the respective nuclear capacity as of January 1st, 1978, was: Category Number of Reactors Capacity (jWo
a) Operation 12 4900 b) Reactors currently under construction 21 27000 Reactors for which c) financial decision has been taken 35 36000 Reactors for which all d) authorisations have been obtained but for which construction has not yet begun c) Reactors planned for which permit requests 16 19000 have been filed but not yet granted f) Other planned capacity (cf. tableaux 1 a-b)
II) Lead Time Assumptions (months) a) Tine from beginning of construction to potential 52 a 60 mois (pour 900 M ) 60-72 mois fuel load (1300 m) b) Tine from site approval .to beginning of construction 6-24 inois c) Tine from financial decision to beginning of construction 3-12 mois d) Time frora planning decision to beginning of construction 2 a 4 ans c) Time fronj initial request for licences to beginning of 18 a 36 moi3 construction
112 - V* DER BUNDESMINISTER FUR FORSCHUNG UND TECHNOLOGY ' • 31 z - INFCE - S064 - 096 - 8/78 o>re»«»«-N. 59- 3561 Datum 30.06.78 Bei Anrworlschtfrben t.:te u-eses Ge«hafH2°x^-* anyrtwn
DM Bund»Mwli*t*r lui Foretfnmg uix) T*chnologi>. PMH. 2O07M. S30O Bean 2 HOf^Z-CeO Bitla neut Anschrilt baachten! Mr. J.t'. Colton 0 6 JUL 15/8 INFCE Office c/o IAEA ACTION P.O.Box 590 A - 1011 Vienna 7t£t Wv^ OA;^. Sivj.4KIl.ti_; HF-TY: x „ : r '•• ::o •' "Or ' KO ».r..i OM Ref.: INFCE/WG 6/Task ;ais
Dear Mr. Colton!
With regard to your request for additional information and in completion of our response to the WG 6 - Questionnaire we can give you the following data: Ref.: Question 1 Nuclear power forecast by year (Gross Reference Data) For the period until 1990 we would prefer fixed projections without splitting into "high" and "low", based on a certain growth of the domestic economy, connected with the growth of national electricity demand. For the period after 1990 we can give you a low and high variance by which you can recognize that we run into decreasing increments of nuclear power installations.
Ref.: Question 2 Spent fuel generation by year These data are based on the reference nuclear power forecast.
Ref,: Question 5(a) At reactor storage, by reactor type, capacity and usage by year. The given data describe the situation without consideration of planned usage of compact ra-:ks and without neighbourship 012216 COPY ! :.OM »A::- ;'i-/-ilVi KY -■■ COPY !->U'Ni I Ail A XXv.^YKY
4 t
assistance but including reprocessing contracts with Cogema (time period 1980 - 1983), storage at the independent storage facility in Ahaus (from 1983) and storage at the Gorleben fuel cycle center (from 1986). Using compact racks in plants which are designed against airplane crash we will have an increased storage capacity at reactor of a factor 2 to 2.5.
We hope you will be satisfied by this additional information.
Sincerely yours, tv/V/Kv Dr. H.-F* Wagner
- 126 - Nuclear power forecast by year (MWe)
(Gross Reference Data; smoothed) year low LWR high
1978 10.400
1979 10.400
1980 13.500 81 14.900 82 18.200 83 19.100 84 21.400
1985 24.000 86 26.500 87 29.400 88 32.700 89 36.200
1990 40.000
91 42.800 • 92 46.400 93 49.000 94 52.500
1995 50.000 55.000 57.000 96 57.600 97 61.000 98 64.000 99 67.000
2000 55.000 69.500 75.000
- 127 - At Reactor Storage, by Reactor Type,
Capacity and Usage by year (MTU)
Capacity Usage year PWR BV7R PWR BWR
1978 200 175 200 175
1979 220 175 220 175
1980 280 175 280 175
81 340 300 310 220
82 390 360 340 250
83 450 360 370 250
84 540 360 410 250
1985 650 360 590 320 86 1.120 1.000
87 1.230 1.100
88 1.380 1.250
89 1.540 1.380
1990 1.700 1.530 91 1.840 1.650
92 2.000 1.800
93 2.080 1.870
94 2.300 2.100
1995 2.440 2.180
96 2.530 2.270
97 2.700 2.400
98 2.810 2.520
99 3.000 2.700
2000 3.200 2.850
- 128 - Spent fuel generation by year
(MTU) year LHR
1978 165 1979 210
1980 280 81 370 82 440 83 480 84 540
1985 580 86 670 87 730 88 820 89 910
1990 960 91 1.100 92 1.200 93 1.235 94 1.350
1995 1.400 96 1.450 97 1.550 98 1.600 99 1.700 2000 1.750 i.
129 - 1 ' ' l \ . ':.. 1 8 , . 1 r v . sw* **. < ■'. ■- r P rol.il / ;• :'1.nii Ly I tin und uf t:l, i yt-.ir ut>it.ud)
*P + J rH h L'.i i H'.VR ACR GO HTR FSR TOTAL • Y15AK f
High*) Low* ) Hijjii Low ,! i., ■;; I Low Hirch Low High Low High Lo-..- | I-L---h Low
1977 420 420 220 220 i f40 R40 78 420 420 220 220 - i «40 "*0 79 420 420 440 440 6*0 ;! r I 1980 420 420 67 5 440 m j lC'-'f: ? o 81 420 420 "75 440 «• ■ 5.0'^ •-T i-i 82 420 420 910 675 ^ - i l.-^O 1^5 a 03 420 420 1145 910 ^ . i 15" 5 i ?.-
(*) The torr;!3 •'Ki.rf-h" "Low" i'U'.i.ui r>) ;n of nuclear power ^ro-./th 11',.•'.! M'J .u.MO'.l ,:i ; ,.i ■.i.-rjt'i'.ij v.;n i.\ v.\v\vn\ „MO"|M puu „i|'lfn„ <.UM\ .ii|( (
......
9tf>d ooosx - ■» r.<:az Si>Si3 OOSOd 0058T 0093* 0>65 0003 T - mm 0N8T OOOtt OOSST ooosi o,:o^ St$S OWiT - - S>d2T omi 0006 00002 'JIOZ 0*8» sraiT - urt.i^ 0S86 S>922 0009 00021 r OOJO - «• .r,cz OiSo OOTjT 00S2 003d OiOt «• 063> 02S0T OOST 0002 06/3 023 A " nonz
1 Mr MOT :\v\ Ma>:-i MUT M3TH MOT M:^TH MO"| ••; .".CT| M°TH ( n V1*1™
WV3A ivi 01 fclttd HIH 33 >J3V >HM HM1
(pa^o^s jesA" acn >o pua aqi Aq uoi^i.'jorio XBTa;f>:uuoj uf u^nr.'xd j-o '(o) ,vg t-w 'A} J:H-?III?J p~'TT'<-' + *ui) .. Htt-lG _ n a-jAi -i.- ,ai'JJ Ac) 'A^fOLiuiifj !_---■' t:j;-J-:it;7*:y;n"^iif77o CnfisciTo-'d
•c| l iy,^-..j!iO .'■«*
nggas TO wottmig moo? 6 QOESTiaomBB
1. (bM Saaa forecast as agaiast Group 1 Qaostieaaaire opt* (•)! 7«r 2025 (Stateaeat attached).
2. (b) About 140 ag of heavy e»tal la fuel p«r yitr per MM iastalled for heavy water reactor, about 45 Kg of hoary aetal per year per MV for the oaly UR statica •ad about 30 Kf of hoary aetal por year par MM for fast breeder reactors, asaaaiag 75% capacity factor,
5. (•) »tiok« a»rk
4. Moac. Platoaloa aad depletod uiwalua to bo reeerered f.raa r^pr»eoaaia^la.rja^rod,foxjau«loar power pregnane.
5. (a) la About 5 yoara of aoraal discharge 2. Oaderwsy for tba oaly LWR statloa S. Goat laeloded la total statloa cost
(b) Koao for tho praaaat (t) Kpae for tho prescat
6. Roao earisaged at presoat. Beproeesslag will bo deao to raloaso apeat fuel storage pead eapecity.
7, (a)I (b)(bjIl Plaa to carry out reproeeasiag as required 8* Hoao earlsaged at prasaat. 9. (a)I >o coastraiata carleagod for spaat fuel aoreaeat. laf restructure aad capability exists for traasportetloa m\\ of spoat fuel froa reactor to reprecessiag pleat. - 133- IY FROM IAEA REGISTRY = COPY FROM. IAEA KEQ1SIRY =-- COPY FROM IAEA REGISTRY = COPY iMF^ejzco PERMANENT MISSION OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA TO THE INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY No. 499/AT.181U/VIII/78. Vienna, 2 August 1978. Dear Mr. Colton. Referring to your letter of 27 February 1978 concerning the questionnaire of Working Group 6, 1 I have the honour to inform you herewith that BATAN regrets very much, at the momentJnot in a position to submit reply to the saACTquestionnaire, as activities in the country Asr of a preliminary nature in the preparatory stage of nuclear power planning7\ With best regards. Yours sincerely, For the Resident Representative, Nazir Abdullah Alternate Mr.J.P. Colton Scientific Secretary Working Group 6 INFCE \JJ AUG s/sj X* A* £. A. ACTION V_ien n a.- *oi>Ta> ■wnhrs—arr—ussrfterr / TO: TFrrrcn 0£?rsr?T!OM: / 0*5484 l-'i-.OM i.it-.A K;-.G.'.; TK'i COPY i-KOM HK-\ .KKGiJVl^V COPY 1-KOM IAEA UKGISThV ^£' PERMANENT MISSION! OF IRELAND TO THE INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS IN VIENNA P.O.Box 139 A-1030 Vienna 22 June, 1978 \ 2 3 JUK1S78 I ir^JU Mr. J.P. Colton Scientific Secretary ACT I O N u INFCE Working Group 6 ! ^^faw^ypcx) 1 IAEA P.O.Box 590 1011 Vienna s*otx:. "S h Sir, I have the honour to refer to INFCE questionnaire from O , Working Group 6 on Spent Fuel Management dated 14 February * 1978 and to transmit to you the following reply on behalf \^\*UA^6^T>*- of my authorities: TAlthough there is a Government decision in prin ciple v/hich allows for the setting up of a nuclear power station, it is unlikely that such a power station would be commissioned before the late 1980s. There has been no major consideration of whether there should be any further continuation of a nuclear programme beyond that date. In view of this the Irish authorities feel that it would be premature to attempt a reply to the questionnaire^ Accept, Sir, the assurances of my highest consideration. P. L Philomena Murnaqhan 010654 Adviser to the Resident Representative 21 iTune 1978 •it ITALY ANSWER TO THE INFCE QUESTIONNAIRE, GROUP VI NUCLEAR POWER FORECAST, BY YEAR Three nuclear power stations, for a total installed net power of 560 Mwe, have been operating in Italy for the last fifteen years. A fourth one, a 840 MWe BWR, is starting commercial operation now. The relevant data are listed in the following table: Power reactors operating in Italy • Name Type of reactor Year of commercial net Power operation (MWe) Latina GCR Magnox 1963 150 (derated) Garigliano BWR 1964 150 Trino PWR * 1965 260 C,aorso BWR 1978 840 As far as future programs are concerned, the resolution of the italian CIPEflntermiiiisterial Committee for Economic Planning) of Dec. 23 1977, follo'/ing a vote of the Italian Parliament of Oct. f>, has approved a plan for'twelve 1000 MWe LWRs, of which: four, al ready ordered (2 BWR and 2 PWR) ; four, to be ordered; four, optional, subject to the growth of future energy demand. Two CANDU type units, 600 MWe each, are also envisaged. - 137 - No commitments have been taken yet for nuclear power to be added subse quently. The most recent projection of nuclear electrical capacity to be installed in Italy up to 1990 is given in the following table: f SOff-CTlON Or MJCIE»R ELECTRICAL CAPACITY. BY R E * C TO R TVPi! | n e I . M *.v j 1 t W R HWR CC Total j 9 Year K.?h Low Hi;h Low Hi*fh Low Kiih L.-.v 1 1 1977 40O' 400 ISO 150 S30 550 1978 1 250 1 250 ISO 150 1 400 1 400 l?S0 1 250 1 25C ISO 150 1 400 1 400 19S3 1 250 1 250 150 ISO 1 400 1 400 I9S4 2 250 2 250 150 150 2 400 2 4CO 19s5 7 250 S250 ISO ISO 7 400" S 400 195,6 32 250 S250 150 . ISO 12 4CO S 400 J987 17 000 11 250 .ISO 150 17 150 11 100 IMS 22 COO 15 750 ISO 150 22 :50 t5 y.o IPs9 , 27 W0 IS 500 600 600 150 ISO 27 750 20 2^0 J J?S0 32 0CO 24 500 1 200 1 200 150 150 33 350 25 S;0 2- SPENT FUEL GENERATION (t U). BY YEAR a) LWR_ Spent fuel generation consequent to the above projection is given in the next two tables. The assumption has been made that BWRs and PWRc will contribute 50% each to total LV/R power. -138- • al) LWR SPENT FUEL GENERATION (j- U). BY YEAR - HIGH PROJECTION ■■" -J~ Tate oT ,_, MW e Pover plant 73 80 81 e>2 83 84 86 87 83 90 92 opera*.j Cum. 79 35 89 91 Gariglians 1963 • 150 150 24 10 10 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Trino V.se 1964 260 410 27 12 11 12 11 12 11 12 11 12 11 Caorso 1978 84O 1.250 56 28 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 1 3VR 1934 1.000 2.250 35 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 2 Fv.'R 1985 2.000 4.2S0 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 3 BWR 1935 3.000 7.250 105 90 90 90 9d 90 90 3 FWR 1936 3.000 10.250 81 81 81 81 81 81 2 BWfl 1986 2.000 12.250 70 60 60 60 60 60 1 FA'E 1987 1.000 13.250 27 27 27^ 27 27 2 BV;R 1937 2.500 15.750 88 76 76 76 76 1 PWR 1987 1.25C 17.000 • 1 34 34 3; 34 34 2 BA'R 1938 2.500 19.500 88 76; 76 76 2 PWR 1588 2.500 22.000 68 68 68 68 2 SWR 1939 2.500 24.500 88 76 76 2 FVJR 1989 2.500 27.000 63 68 68 2 3v?a 1990 2.500 29.500 66 76 2 FrfR 19901 2.500 32.000 68 68 Puel annual discharge 51 10 12 77 40 35 37 82 235 351 511 654 790 931 930 Ctsaula*ive Pael 51 61 73 150 190 225 262 344 579 930 1441 2095 2885 3816 4746 2) I.WR SPENT FUEL GENERATION (t U). BT YEAR-LOW PROJECTION _, ——1 Tata of Power plant IW e 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 92 operat. Cum* 91 Garigliano 1963 150 150 24 1^ 10 9 9 Q 9 9 9 9 Trino V.se 1964 260 410 27 12 11 12 11 12 11 12 ,. M 12 11 Caoi-so 1978 84O 1.250 56 28 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 1 3WR 1984 1.000 2.250 35 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 1 7«R 1S8" 1.000 3.250 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 ' y ^- > 2 :>RR 1935 1.000 4.250 70 60 60 60 60 60 60 «» R-JR 1986 1.000 5.250 54 54 ■»4 y 54 54 1 B>:R 1986 1.000 6.250 3b 30 30 30 30 30 2 ?>:a 1967 1.000 7.250 54 54 54 54 1 SWR 1937 1.000 8.2S0 35 30 30 30 30 1 PWR 1953 1.C00 9.250 27 27 27 27 1 PVR 1988 1.000 10.250 35 30 30 ■>.o 1 FV.'R 1988 1.250 11.500 34 34 34 34 • BV;R 1938 1.250 12.750 44 38 38 38 2 BWR 1989 1.250 14.000 88 76 76 1 RvR 19£;5 1.250 15.?r?0 34 34 14 2 BV'R ^990 1.250 16.5CO b8 76 2 n;n 1990 1.550 17.750 66 63 Fuel annual discharge 51 10 12 77 40 35 37 82 173 232 337 471 574 715 714 Cumulative fuol 51 61 73 150 190 225 262 344 517 749 1086 1557 2131 2846 3560 ! b) HWR Two Candu units, 600 MWe each, are also envisaged. Initial operation expected by 1989 and 1990 respectively. Discharges evaluated as 78 ! ton of uranium per year for each reactor. c) GGR -'"'" The Latina Gas Graphite reactor discharges an average of 55 t of uranium per year. As far as forecasts beyond lt»90 are concerned we think that such fore casts should be based on regional rather than national assessments. The recent NEA report "Fuel cycle requirements"(feb. 1978), prepared by a group of experts of 14 countries, includes in our opinion all the fuel cycle relevant data for the long term forecast. - 141 - POOL REACTOR SPARE CAPACITY REQUIREMENTS, BY REACTOR TYPE. As regards the Latina gas cooled Magnox reactor, it is necessary to ship spent fuel to reprocessing after six-eight months from discharge, due to corrosion problems of the Magnox cans. Therefore, the existing pool is strictly a transit pool, for cooling down. As regards PWRs space for full core discharge in the pool is required ■o • •-. to allow in service inspection. As regards BWRs, space for full core discharge is only recommended, for possible maintenance work. >. UNDER THE FUEL CYCLE CONDITIONS WHICH YOU ANTICIPATE IN YOUR COUNTRY WHAT REQUIREMENTS HAVE YOU IDENTIFIED FOR A WAY-FROM-REACTOR (AFR) STORAGE? Due to the shortage of domestic energy resources and to the heavy depc-n- dance on oil imports, fast breeder development is considered of vital impor tance to solve Italy's future energy needs. On its turn FBR's develop ment implies the availability of reprocessing services. Therefore Italy plans to install an industrial reprocessing plant as soon as possible. On the other hand, due to the somewhat limited size of the italian short term nu- - 142- ■ -j ■ clear plan, on economic grounds it would not be justified to start imme- diatly the construction of such a plant. Although no firm commitment has been taken yet, the Italian reproces sing plant is foreseen to start operation in the early 90's. Therefore Ita ly will be facing a problem of fuel storage in the next few years. Although some relief can be obtained by storing fuel at the reactor sites and pos sibly by using the pool of an old research reactor, as explained here in- below, it is urgent to build a large central pool where to store spent fuel. Such a pool is now being designed, and should become operational by the end of 1982. Although the reprocessing plant is foreseen to be built subse quently at the same site, the pool can operate as an independent unit. 5. CURRENT PROGRAMME (EXISTING; BUILDING UNDER CONSTRUCTION; AND COMMITTED) SPENT FUEL DISPOSITION FACILITIES BY YEAR; a) At reactor storage, by reactor type • 1) Capacity and usage by year t U Garigliano (150 MWe BWR) 55 Total capacity 46 Full core requirements 9 Spare capacity .21 Spent fuel stored, end of 1977 21 Spent fuel stored, end of 1978 30 Spent fuel stored, end of 1979 39 Spent fuel stored, end of 1980 - 143 - (■ ■ Trino (260 MWe PWR) tu Total capacity 50 Full core requirements 35 Spare capacity 15 Spent fuel stored, end of 1977 23 Spent fuel stored, end of 1978 34 Spent fuel stored, end of 1979 46 Spent fuel dared, end of 1980 46 Caorso (840 MWe BWR) t U Total capacity 158 Full core requirements 104 Spare capacity 54 Spent fuel stored, end of 1979 Spent fuel stored, end of 1980 21 Spent fuel stored, end of 1981 63 Spent fuel stored, end of 1982 90 2) Programme to increase storage capacity It is very difficult to increase the storage capacity of the Gariglia- no and Trino reactors. According to the results of a study vhich has been recently completed, the Caorso capacity can be increa sed by 50%. As yet no firm commitments have been taken to implement such increase. 3) Costs, terms_or conditions (nonproprietary information) Information and data not available up to now. - 144 - Away from reactor storage-national (in-country) To overcome difficulties due to the lack of reprocessing and to the fshort term lack of storage space, the Avogadro reactor (Saluggia) pool is being fitted for the temporary storage of the Trino and Gari- gliano spent fuel. 1) Location "" Saluggia (Vercelli) inside a nuclear establishment. 2) Storage description a) Capacity and usage, by year Capacity 139 tU The facility is expected to start operation during 1979. [Derailed time schedule for fuel shipments from Trino and Gari- gliano is not available yet. b) Facility lifetime It is related to the availability of the large central pool described hereinbelow. It has been anticipated to be 10 years. c) Significant maintenance operation comment No comment. d) Cost No comment e) Safety and environmental protection The pool v/as once used for a swimming pool reactor and it is therefore equipped with ail the auxiliary systems and facilities to operate such a reactor. The building is located inside a nuclear center, where pilot plants for fuel fabrication and reprocessing are operating. Therefore - 145 - k i ■ 'i -; a safety and environmental protection system is already operating for the center as a whole. 3) Storage site suitability See considerations under 1) and 2e). 4) General description of transportation system a) Casks A 55 t cask, complying with the IAEA requirements, is under procurement. b) Vehicles The cask will be carried by a special vehicle, by road. c) Routes Up/to now, the use of the it all an route system is limited only by the vehicle w_eight and height . Police escort is required. d) Handling equipment The handling equipment to be used will be similar to that already in use at the reactor site. e) Carriers - suppliers To be decided f) Shipping duration One or two days, not including charge and discharge operation. 5) Safeguards considerations- approach and criteria IAEA-EURATOM safeguards will apply. 6) Physical protection The building is cli.sed, with controlled access. The site is surroun ded by a 2 m fence. Night and day inspection by an armed patrol is provided. - 146 - c) Away from reactor storage-multinational arrangements No multinational arrangements are foreseen for the time being. SPENT FUEL STORAGE SHORT FALUBY YEAR) BASED ON (l)-(5). Storage requirements are expected tobemetbytheSaluggiapooHseepoint SbHnthc next few years, by the Rotondella central pool (see point 7) from the end of 1982 onwards. SPENT FUEL. DISPOSITION FUTURE PLANS a) At reactor storage, by reactor type Future plants will be equipped with pools of capacity 184 and 120 t for BWR's and PWR's respectively. Further increase in capacity could be obtained by use of compact racks. :b) Away ft-om reactor storage, national As mentioned at the beginning of point 4), it is necessary to build a large central pool for future storage of spent fuel. The tentative time sche dule relevant to such pool is the following: Central pool completion time schedule Conceptual design, completed end 1977 Preliminary design, completed end 1978 Licensing, completed mid 1979 Detailed design, completed end 1979 Construction, completed mid 1982 Operation, start end 1982 1) Location Rotondella (Matera) inside the nuclear centre of Trisaia, where - 147 - a reprocessing pilot plant and a nat. U Magnox fuel fabrication plant are already operating and where a mixed oxide fuel fabri cation plant will be built. An industrial reprocessing plant is expec- the tod to be built in due time on/same site. 2) Storage description a) Capacity and usage, by year - = Reference capacity 2000 t Initial capacity 1000 t Modular design, the capacity of each module being 500 t at least. When operating, this storage pool is expected to store all the fuel discharged from the italian power stations, as given un der point 2). b)_ Facility lifetime Facility designed for 50 years lifetime c) Significant maintenance operation Modular interchangeable racks, for inspection by transfer into maintenance area. d) Cost No data available up to now. e} Safety and environmental protection Double containment applied as a criterion of design. For defec ted fuel, enclosure into a tight container is foreseen. The plant is located inside a nuclear center, where other fuel cycle plants and more specifically other plants of the back end of the fuel cy cle are and will be operating. Therefore a safety and environ mental protection system is already operating for the center as a wcte. Such system will be integrated according to the plant speci fic requirements. - 148 - 3) Storage site suitability Site qualification almost completed. Due to double containment, releases are estimated to be low, .not posing significant environ mental problems. 4) General description of transportation system a) Casks A 55 t cask prototype of national design complying with IAEA requirements is expected to be ready by 1979. Construction of other casks of the same type will follow according to de mand. 5) Safeguards considerations IAEA-EURATOM safeguards will apply. 6) Physical protection The physical protection system will consist of a series of physical barriers, as passive deterrents. The operating procedures of such system will be agreed with the concerned national bodies. - 149- 4 % * Answers to INPCE Questionnaire-Group VI JAPAN 1. Nuclear power forecast (Million KW) fiscal year 1976 1985 1990 (a) Reference 7.43 33.00 60.00 (b) Low 7.43 26.00 45.00 (Note) the power generation scales in 1985 and 1990 are in compliance with the published Government forecast. * 2. Spent fuel generation (cumulative) (Metric Ion U) fiscal year 1976 1985 1990 (a) Reference 720 3,800 8,200 (b) Low 720 3,800 7,800 (Note) 1. In the figvt-e for 1976, 490*™ of spent fuel from a Gas Cooled Reactor is included. 2. Spent fuel generation from a Gas Cooled Reactor is assumed to be 47MTU/Year since 1977. 3. Pool reactor space capacity requirements, by reactor type. In Japan the capacity of spent fuel storage facilities is obliged to have more full core reserve, with no respect to differing reactor types. 4. Away-fran-reactor storage. In Japan there is no plan to store the spent fuel in APR storage to reprocess the spent fuel because effective utilization of uranium resources has to be acliieved and it is very difficult to store the spent fuel for a long period of time. 6. Spent fuel storage short-fall. As it is nece sary for Japan to have effective utilization of Uranium resources, and because it is difficult to store spent fuel for a long time, spent fuel is to be- reprocessed. To meet reprocessing demands, reprocessing will be done by domestic plants and consignment abroad, and then a short-fall of spent fuel storage capacity will not occur. 9. With respect to the current program and future plans, identify spent fuel movement and AFR storage constraints. (a) There is no special major constraint on transport infrastructure capability. (b) There is the Law for the Regulation of Nuclear Source Material, ' Nuclear Fuel Material and Reactors, the Law for the Safety of Ships, and Law for Aircraft Navigation, etc.; domestic laws to regulate safety in transportation of radioactive - . material, which are not constraints on spent fuel transport. And in the case of sending the spent fuel abroad, there is the bi-lateral agreement requiring the fuel supplier's approval. M tf 1978-10-10 TO: Mr. J. P. Colt en Scientific Secretary TV IKPCE Working Group 6 FROM: Y. Kuge Delegate of Japan to IKPCE WG 6 Pear Hr. Colton, I am pleased to submit herewith our contribution papers to Task 1, "Addition of data to Table lw and "Correction to Table 2" of Task 1 Draft report (IBPCE, Co-Chairmen KG 6/4, 1978-08-21). I will appreciate it if the contents of the papers will be included in the next edition of Task 1 report* Tours sincerely. Jftfeushi Kuge J /Japanese Delegate [__! 1 CCT1373_ ACTI O N Enclosures Hi*; >r"T» •.s - >a ■^ «. itw. U< 1 c^ 023109 NUCLEAR roWI'll VOKIXMJT CuwuluLt • c:vJo Federal Republic France Italy Japan Year of Germany I ad la a L H R L 11 R L It R L 11 n. L H 7.43 7.43 (1976, 1978 , 6,5 6.5 10.4 0,64 0.64 1.4 1.4 1979 12.0 12.0 10,4 0.86 0.86 1.4 -1,4 « 1980 17.5 17.5 13.5 0,06 1.10_ 1.4 1.4 1981 22.9 22.9 14.9 0.06 1.00 1.4 1.4 1982 24.6 24.6 18.2 " 1.10 1.33 1.4 1.4 1983 30.3 30.3 19.1 1.33 1.57 1.4 1.4 1984 34.2 34.2 21.4 1.33 1.00 2.4 2.4 1985 39.0 39.0 24.0 1.57 1.80 5.4 7.4 33.0 26. 0 1986 44.0 46.0 26.5 1.57 2.04 0.4 12.4 1987 48.0 51.0 29.4 1.30 2.27 11.4 17.15 1988 • 53.0 57.0 32,7 2.04 2.51 15.9 22.15 1989 55.0 61.0 36.2 2.04 2.74 20.25 27.75 1990 59.0 67.0 40.0 2.27 2.74- 25.05 33.35 60.0 45. 0 x'Ul. 42.8 ■ • 1992 46.4 , 1993 49.0 ' 1994 52,5 1995 73.0 84.0 55.0 50.0 57.0 32.4 6.24_ 1996 57.6 1997 61.0 * 1998 64.0 1999 67.0 2000 ao 86.0 106.0 69.5 55.0 75.0 4.29 1Q.32_ .ISO. , J J GCR and FBR HWR and FBR Includes 0.15 GWe included. included.' GCR and 0.6 and *. u 1.2 Give from 11WR in 1989 and 1990 i respectively. OS . R ■> Reference, h - Low, 11 » High Tub.V .. Itjut/'cL Italy Japan Republic of Korea Netherlands Year _.f. C % AC %- AC* ■-*■' G -IV 720 (1976) 1978 51 17.5 1979 10 17-5 3980 12 73 16 16 > 17.5 52.5 0 1981 77 16 17.5 1982 40 16 17.5 1983 35 78 17.5 1984 37 ; 105 . 17.5 1985 82 344 - 4&l - 116 347 17.5 140 0 — J|UUW ^ 1986 235 17.5 1987 351 '32.5 1988 5U 'J2.5 1989 654 87.5 1990 7Q0 2.89S - 326 1,448 37.5 437 0 r r 1991 931 37.5 1992 930 122.5 1993 122.5 1994 i 523 3,603 122.5 1995 122.5 1015 0 1996 122.5 . 1997 157.5 1998 157.5 1999 1»025 7,663 157.5 2000 1*7.£ 1767 0 Data for the high Annual data not Saba from the projection. Only provided. Only Reference and high LWR fuel. The GCR reference data two answers data are the same. w discharges 55N*u/ provided. U year and the HWPs 3 will diacharge 78 MTU/year each i beginning 90+91^| ^./ : A RKGiST.'.V ~ C.OVi ji;'>\: lM-.\ y.lWK'l ll\ ■-■-■ COI Y ri.iA: i *•'..'. KKC-'^TKY - : P v \VJ.?C-eK^G I EMltASSY OF THE REIM'BMC OF KOKKA VIBSSA June 29, 1978 Dear Mr.Colton, With reference to your letter dated May 2, 1978 concerning the Questionnaire for INFCE WG 6, I have the honour to transmit herewith the additional in formation needed for INFCE Questionnaire of WG 6, TASKI. Accept, Sir, the assurances of my highest con sideration. Gun Bac Lee Alternate Representative to the IAEA Mr.J.P.Colton Scientific Secretary INFCE Working Group 6 INFCE Office c/o IAEA Vienna 0 3 WJWa J . 12713,30 I H CO [j^ £yW2X<-^ AC■7.O N n- «—C ^o%^UJb^--«\ WKST JrCtj |U<:A*~^~ M^cn 0lle 'C:. ... ^^ '^X'*,:.--...Jl. I 29 June 1978 * ■- • 1. '."uclesr Ic-.'^r lorecsst-by yc-^r fcit K:8 Year 1960 19S5 1990 1995 2000 ?ct=l Installed l=?-city 595 „72? 11,0^0 25,400 4t,200 (.s'f.-tnce) 2. Spent Fuel Generaticn-by year • Unit MTU Vear 1980 19£5 1990 ' 1995 2000 vr^inual 16 116 326 523 1025 p ..pn T 7*^> — ::■ nt Cu:-:U- l-:'tive 16 347 1,44£ 3,603 7663 » 3» Current prc.-raa-.e ~per.t fuel disposition ;aoiliti.s by rear Unit I-!TU Unit Type 'SO '65 '90 '95 2000 Renark )Ko-f.i r/i :'.."> 223 225 225 225 225 4| core ,^-:ii ■:.? }'„" 0 136 136 136 136 2f core Jolsung /,1 i-ii/H *0 924 924 924 924 10year + 1 Full core r.'ucle-.r ;-5 .".-/K 0 167 187 187 187 2\ core .'uclear #6 P..r:-. n 1P.7 187 1S7 11-7 ?.'- core - 159- Mm Utrcchtseweg 310. Arnhem The Netherlands, telephone C85-4570 57, telex 45016 nl I \J&J£VL(oO ~~ — ~ —~~ —— your letter .2nd May 1978 INFCE Office Att. J.P. Colton, J. Gabolde your reference c/o IAEA our reference RF vdH/EWK-332 Kartner Ring 11 A-1011 VIENNA Oostenrijk treated by archives coda KE-02-Alg .B. subject Arnhem, 27th June 1978 Dear Sirs, We herewith sent you the additional information you asked for in your letter dated 2nd May 1978. We hope that this information will answer sufficiently your questions. Sincerely yours, N.V. KEMA [_0 5 JUL !9?BJ ACTION *3~i o' TCC-U St. °12019 N.V. tot Keuring van E!sMro!cc*.niseh9 Ma'.orislen. Registered Arnhem nr. 6404 V?>*-\ <^v*j% ffc-».vC~«Hf—^ Joint Laboratories anj Convening Services of the D'j'ch Elor.trioity Gupp!;' Companies PM/EWK-063 78-02-08 Answers to INFCE questionnaire Group VI 1) Nuclear Power Forecast (GW) Year low re ference high 1980 0,5 0,5 0,5 1990 0,5 3,5 5,5 2000 0,5 13 21 Spent fuel generation per year (tons Year low reference high 1980 15,8 15,8 15,8 1990 15,8 116 189 2000 15,8 428 690 3). 1 full core + one normal discharge * 4) No requirements for away-from-reactor storage. Storage is incorporated in the reprocessing contract. 5) a At one reactor PWR there are plans for extension of the storage capacity to approx. four full core loads. There are no plans for this extension at the other reactor. The plans for increase of storage capacity are not yet in a state that a price estimate could be given. b There are no plans for away-from-reactor storage. 6) No storage short fall is expected. 7) n.a. 8) n.a. 9) n.a. - 1*1 - 2 May 1978 Question 1 and 2 are answered with table 1. Table 1 Forecast of installed nuclear capacity and spent fuel generation Installed capacity (MWe) Spent fuel generati on (te H.M./year) Year high i low high* J low* 1978 500 ! 500 17.5 j 17.5 1979 500 I 500 17.5 J 17.5 1980 500 • 500 17.5 i 17.5 1981 500 i 500 17.5 1982 500 ! 500 17.5 1983 500 ; ■ 500 17.5 1984 500 i 500 17.5 1985 500 ! 500 17.5 1986 1500 ' 500 17.5 J 1937 1500 i 500 52.5 | 1988 2500 ! 500 52.5 ^89 2500 j 500 87.5 #90 2500 i 500 87.5 1991 3500 J 500 87.5 1992 3500 J 500 122.5 1993 3500 i 500 122.5 1994 3500 | 500 122.5 1995 3500 ' 500 122.5 • 17.5 1996 4500 I 500 122.5 i 17.5 1997 4500 ! 500 157.5 J 17.5 1998 4500 j 500 157.5 | 17.5 1999 4500 i 500 157.5 i 17.5 2000 4500 ! 500 157.5 ! 17.5 2005 2010 No realistic indications are possible 2015 2020 1i i 2025 i | ^Jote: Low means no further increase of nuclear capacity ! w High is identical to reference forecast Question 3 Only LWR-type nuclear reactors are foreseen. The required pool capacity of every nuclear power plant amounts 1 full core load + 1 annual discharge : 1 1/3 full core load. Tnis capacity may be increased by applying so called high density racks which allow a 2 times higher storage capacity within the existing pool-volume. - 162 - Question 5 5a 1) At this moment both the nuclear power plants havs a pool storage capacity of about 1 1/3 times the fuel core load. So: 500 KWe installed capacity : 100 te H.M. pool storage capacity From table 1 the pool storage capacity by year can be derived if the programmes are realised: Table 2 Total pool storage capacity Year High (te H.M.) Lo» (te H.M.) 1978-1985 100 100 1986-1987 300 100 1987-1990 500 100 1991-1995 700 100 1996-2000 900 100 2000 900 100 2) The only programm to increase pool storage capacity at the present moment is the capacity-increase of the Borssele N.P.P. from 87.5 te H.M. to 200 te H.M. by applying so called high density fuel racks in the pool. The realisation of this programm means an increase of 112.5 te H.M. of the storage capacity. Question 5b/5c At the present there is no real APR programme. Question 6 It is not correct (in the case of the Netherlands) to define the short fall as the difference between table 1 (item 1) and table 2 (item 5), since used fuel will be reprocessed. Both N.P.P. in the Netherlands have reprocessing contracts for their fuel. Taking this into consideration there is no short fall of storage capacity for the present nuclear capacity. For future N.P.P. the way of reprocessing is favoured above a long-term storage of spent fuel. - 163- Question 7 Future Plans For the Dodewaard N.P.P. preliminary plans are under discussion to increase the pool storage capacity with a factor of about 2 by applying high density racks. Realisation of this plan should increase the spent fuel storage capacity with about 25 te H.M. Preliminary plans are under discussion to build an AFR with a total capacity of 80 te H.M. spent fuel. Question 8 As indicated in 6) there is no short fall since it is expected that fuel will be reprocessed. Question 9 No indication possible. 164 V iKOV. i.AliA_HF.GlSTRV^_= CtJTJ." FROM IAEA jtEGIST V.' =^_ COPY i-KOMJAEA REGISTRY — COPY PERMANENT MISSION OP NORWAY TO THE Vienna, 13 Aine 1978 INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS IN VIENNA Jnr. 49/78 -/■I —in r-Ct With reference to your letters of 14 February and 27 April 1978 the Permanent Mission of Norway to the International Atomic Energy Agency has been instructed to give you the following information: &[Norwa" y has at present no nuclear power reactors neither in operation, under construction, in order or in the planning stage. As for the long term perspective, the national policies concerning use of nuclear energy have not yet been determined.] Under these circumstances vue must regret that it is not possible to furnish the specific data requested in your Questionnaire - Group VI. Accept, Sir, the assurances of my highest consideration. 0\A Jan Naerby Alternate/Resident Representative of Norway Mr. 3.P. Colton Scientific Secretary 00965$ INFCE Working Group 6 International Atomic Energy Agency Vienna . pp,l\fpltf£S March 1978 "jIH'T.!-: O.UI-L-i'IOTn.'AIUE - GL.OUP VI 1. Nuclear nouer forecast - by year / x " „ - One, 6G0MWe Nucleor operotionol bv (a) Reference 1982; another one, oOOMWe Nuclear operational by (b) Lou 1988 (planned),-others - under study (c) IIi,;h 2. Spent fuel gencrat on - by year Approximately 16,500 KgU discharged every year beginning 1984 coming for,obout 3.4JS enriched I WR f..«i (ft)(one 0fii%3Vatcd with rcfcrnncR forecast fc *^ enncnea LWK tuel (b) associated with any hiph probability variance (high or loxj) 3. Pool reactor jpare capacity requirements, by reactor type _ present (a) full core Uncharge contract states 1-1/3 core storage. Being /,\ -.it. expanded to as much as 4-1/3 core storoae \b) one normal discharge . . , ,_ , ' w*c 9ll)lu9e ) ' adequate for 10 years (one unit). (c) discussion of possible changes m requirements i 4« Under ths fuel cycle conditions which you anticipate in your country what requirements have you identified for away-from-reactor (AF:?) stora-c? Under study by the "RecjioncI Fuel Cycle Center Committae. in th« Philippines?" r'jrn™ts :''oul': oe Cursed tfy pl'Yu; {UnY3g7\£^i¥lcy}"- usage, duration) for rorrocessing recover'/, interim storage or final disposal of fuel clcr.er.be. It vronld be helpful if response would include r- brief discussion of tie factors that have influenced planning. 5. Current programme (existing; building under construction; and comittcd) nprjjit fuel disposition facilities by year: (a) At reactor storage, by reactor type _ As in (3) (1) Capacity and usage by year '• (2) Progi ninns to increase storage capacity (3) Costr, terras or conditions (non-proprietary information) (b) /way from reactor storngc - national (in-country) _ Understudy , .by the RFCC.Committee in the Philippines (l) 7Loca-!ion(s) (?) Gtor.'ge description: (a) capacity aw?, ursa^e, by year (b) facility lifetimes) (c) significant maintenance operation (d) cost, (operation and construction) (e) n.Tfdty at«l environmental, protection - 167 - (c) carriers/suppliers (f) shipping duration (e) • -oost (covstruction and operational) non-propiiotory information (5)" Safeguards coi sideratior.s - approach and criteria (a) design (b) op:;ratioi"S (y) Physical proti ction (c) AtK?.y fron reactor r tora.-c - multinational arrangements - in the (*$*v%WrP*esfotd^.Ojf^tJje RFCC Committee (2) storage description (a) size (b) usago allotment or quota (fron each participating country') (c) lifetime (d) cost, (or ^rational and construction)(r.on-proprietor informr.t icn) (e) Safety a» d envJror.r.icnt.-1 protection (3) Storage site ruitability. Cive rationale (4) General description of transportation system: (a) casks (b) vehicles (c) router. (d) hfaidl in;; equipment (c) port fac lition (f) carrier:: ;-upplicrs (c) shipping duration (construction ami operational) (h) cost, to rat; of conditions (5) rviTiv^rtrdr, no sidoralionu - approach and criteria (a) deui;?» (b) opi-rat i O: 168 - Wo-' oxr.-r.yno'r..\if\ - CUOUP VI Q p.-V>TVV»Cc * (6) Physical protecti on (7) description or !::uUi-M.'.tio;i. I ivp^eemcnts (non-proprietary inforav.tior.) (a) idcnti t'ic.:tioti of participants (b) Gtorrvjo allotncnt - by -raxr (c) return of rpnvt fuel (d) c?.nr..vl Intioti or modi fievtion (c) other coiitin'j'-ncios 6. Spent fuel nt>rajc nhort-rr U (hy year) i ised on 'l)-(5)»- Note: 2 and 3 are for one unit which is unJor construction and vhus no shortfall is 7 bpent fuel en rposition r jti:n- pi::)!; (p*.?.r.ncd, out no,, coiraittrci). Under study by the RFCC Committee (a-b) reper.; itcran u:ul-.r (',>) : (c) identify go/no-;; > itocixion factor.;, timing of decision end ontin/jenrv -jl.".t;ninr. 8. Spent fuel :;torr.,-;e shori-f-.11 (by year) based on 0-)-(7).- Under study „ by the RFCC Committee ,. , . 9. Uixn resncci to currrui. >rc;;.-::r.r:ie (5) "--* luture plans ^7;» identify cpent fuel movement and Al''i< i:tora/je constraints. - Under study by the RFCC Committee , . , , \&J Transport mira:: i.ructure capaoility (b) liesulationo, r.';r cn;ntc; (c) national policy. 1 ( ntinuation of answer to No. 6 - expected except possible time delay which is presently not anticipated. - 169 - / VCOMPANHIA PORTUGUESA DE ELECTRICIDADE-CPE SA.RL. EMHUBA HAOONAUZADA DIRECQAO DE EQUIPAMENTO TERMICO ltyaM r ~i International Atonic Energy Besearch e/o Permanent Mission of the Argentina Republic Kirttner Ring 11, P.O. Box 590, A-1011 VIENNA AUSTRIA L J 19,December, 1977 B8.830/EPCH xssMtfc INFCE Questionnaire - Group VI 0 49G 3w X!i f5?0 Deer Sirs, We acknowledge with thanks the receipt of your letter above mentioned as well as the enclosed questionnaire. As you asked for we completed the questionnaire but only until question 5» because, as we refer in our answer, in our country we do not consider, at the present moaent, any program for construction of 1 ant fuel storage facilities, once we consider reprocessing as the correct back end of nuclear fuel cycle. With our best regards, we .remain, £ yours faithfully, egtyk DO ISETWUM* TftlMW 4cw« *>/&*ao End.: as above mentioned. CH Mhmii -"'» aJllffWa041OtlMm*UQr Answers to the questionnaire presented to the IHFCE-Group VI aenbers Answer 1. (a), (b) and (c) HVe Reference Low High Tear 950 950 950 1987 950 950 950 1988 950 950 1 900 1989 1 900 1 900 1 900 1990 1 90C 1 900 2 850 1991 2 850 1 900 2 85O 1992 -2 850 2 850 3 800 1993 5 800 2 850 3 800 199«» 3 800 2 830 ^ 750 1995 *■ 750 3 800 5 700 1996 ■% 750 5 800 6 650. 1997 5 700 * 750 7 600 1998 5 700 * 750 7 600 1999 Answer 2. (a) «J Year 28 1988 28 1989 28 1990 56 1991 56 1992 8 5M!n COMPANMA PORTUGUESA OE ELECTnCDAOE-CPE S.A.K.I. Answer 2. (b) Without interest. Answer 3* The first reactor pool capacity will be 3 1/3 cores (1986/7)* The pool capacity of the subsequent reactors will be 2 2/3 cores. Answer %. Ve antecipate the possibility of getting access to reprocessing services fro* 1995 onwards. In that ease we do not antecipate any area for spent fuel interaediate storage. The needs, in the case of non-reprocessing capability available, will be as follows: Tear tu 1995 56 1996 112 1997 196 1998 279 1999 391 2000 302 Answer 5. (a) (1) first reactor 3 1/3 cores subsequents 2 2/3 cores (2) none (3) unknown (b) In our country we do not consider, at the present moment, any program for construction of spent fuel storage fa cilities once we consider reprocessing as the eorrect back end of nuclear fuel cycle. 17 Karch 1978 SOUTH AFRICAN RESPONSE TO INFCE WORKING GROUP VI QUESTIONNAIRE Nuclear Power Forecast (MWe) Year (a) Reference (b) Low (c) High 1981 0 0 0 1982 0 0 0 1983 921,5 \ 0 921,5 1984 1843 921,5 1843 1985 1843 1843 1843 1986 1843 1843 1843 1987 3070 1843 3070 1988 3070 1843 3070 1989 3070 1843 3070 1990 3070 3070 3070 1991 3070 3070 3070 1992 4300 3070 4300 1993 4300 3070 4300 1994 4300 3070 4300 1995 4300 4300 5550 1996 5550 4300 6800 1997 5550 4300 8050 1998 5550 4300 9300 1999 5550 4300 10550 2000 6800 4300 11800 - 174- 2. Spent Fuel Generation (tons of original U per annum) 1 Year (a) Reference (b) Low (c) High 1984 24 0 24 1985 48 24 48 1986 48 48 48 1987 48 48 48 1988 80 48 80 1989 80 48 80 1990 80 48 80 1991 80 80 80 1992 80 80 80 1993 112 80 112 1994 112 80 112 1995 112 80 112 1996 112 112 144 1997 144 112 176 1998 144 112 208 1999 144 112 240 2000 144 112 272 3. Pool Reactor Spare Capacity Requirements (by reactor type) The intent of this question is difficult to fathom. It is assumed that all reactors will be of the LWR type, probably PWR's. Spare capacity requirements are, in general, for full core discharge, plus an appropriate number of annual reload discharges. At present the latter is planned so as to be sufficient for four years for each reactor, with high- density racks. This quantity may be increased for future reactors (after 1985) depending upon the availability of reprocessing services and decisions (yet to be taken) on away-from-reactor (APR) storage. Space for full-core discharge plus four annual discharges amounts to 180 t/GWe. 4. APR Storage It is hoped that foreign reprocessing services will become available in time to obviate the need for AFR storage. If this cannot be accomplished, AFR storage will have to be installed to cope with spent fuel within four years of reactor discharge. The definition of AFR storage may include on-site storage in pools separate from the reactor pools, - 175 off-site pools and, in the longer term passive storage of some kind. It is not the intention to dispose of spent fuel at any stage, in view of residual fuel values contained within discharged elements. The remaining questions cannot be answered, as plans have not yet been formulated to manage spent fuel. PELINDABA 78-03-17 - 176 - 4 7 February 1978 TNFCE QVV,ST I ONA3RE GRnirp vr rpent Fuel Management (Spain) 1. Nuclear Power forecast (M\v). LV.'R's only (l) Year Low Reference High 78 620 620 620 79 1550 1550 1550 80 4340 4340 4340 8l 6200 6200 7175 82 6200 717 5 8125 8.3 7175 8125 10130 84 8125 1013^ 11200 85 10130 11200 14155 86 11200 12175 14155 87 12175 14155 15185 (1) Vandcll6s I (GCR 460 MW) not i> r-.luded -178- Spent Fuel Generation (metric tons of uranium) Year Low Reference High 79 20 20 20 80 ' 40 40 40 81 100 100 100 82 140 140 175 83 140 175 190 84 175 190 250 85 190 250 265 86 250 265 340 87 265 295 340 88 295 340 370 Pool reactor spare capacity requirements. (a) fuel core capacity discharge required, for both BWR's and PWR's, by licencing authorities. (b) (c) new requirements of minimum spore capacity, covering several years of operation are under study by govern ment authorities. Under the present situation and perspectives of the back-end of the fuel cycle no commitments have been taken. However gji ven the commited and expected spent fuel, storage capacity in reactors, the necessity of national AFR storage is shifted to the second hal<" of the next decade. - 179- 5. Current p- ro.'xram' ■■■ of spu:.: i'tel (!; .- ■I'ositi on facilities (a) At read oe s-cor.-;j,i: Ope rati nq reactors factua J capacity_) (i) Cab.?-ora (PV/R) 1.3 enrss Garofia (BWR) 1.5 M (ii. ) Reac' ors uy. <"e r con.;!■ r;;cI'.ion PWK's 3. 3 - 3.9 cor-s DWR's . S.-2 " (iii) Con: ;:>tt_ed_r. -tors KV.'R's 3.| - 3.9 cores B\VR'^ 5 • 2 " (b) APR slora/ye - i:at ie,]._al f i n_ £2'iIi!l£X.) (1) Local.inn: A. wrvey on a national scale of possible sites lias b.-aii iiii e.-'ai'.od for spent fuel storage. (2) A pi cliniina! j study has been iniciated to identify needs and to tie fine a programme for the design and. construction of a modular facility. (3) Wiir'ar consideration (4) ,r " (5) " (6) Contemplated (c) AFR slorap.c - m»'Jti.nat.j onal _arr,i,ri.i.-e[nents have not arisen, but pes si hi litie,-. would h:z considered. 6* Spent fuel storage shori-fa 11_ In the case of Cabrera (jVdi) and Carofia (UWR) a combined short-fall of about 20 tons/year will happen, starting 1978, and for a still underto)'mined period , until the t two by which difficulties of expanding current capacity were overcome or other storage po.s.si bilit.ios AFK become available. - 180 - 7. Planned pool expansion of operating' reactors Cabrera (PWR) to 3.9 cores Garon.-. (BWR.) to 3.4 cores 8• Spcmt fuel short-fall based on (l) to (7)_ 20-^5 tons/year until completion of expansion and depending of approval of current Mii-10 aplications. 9. PossibLe expected constraints for AFR storage are mainly regal Lions, 2.G.78 - 181 - 5.*.78 INFCE QUESTIONAIRE Group VI SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT (SPAIN) 1. Nuclear Power Forecast (Mw) Lull's only (l) YEAR LOW-REFERENCE HIGH 78 620 620 79 1550 1550 80 3-Uo 4340 81 4340 5270 82 62oD 6200 83 7170 7170 84 8170 8170 85 9200 9200 86 9200 11200 87 10200 13200 (1) Vandellos I (GCR 460 Mw) not included. - 1G2 f 5.X.78 • 2. Spent Fuel Generation (Metric tons of uranium) Year Low/Re fe rence 79 20 20 80 40 40 81 80 100 82 100 120 83 140 140 84 165 165 85 187 187 86 207 209 87 209 253 88 231 297 - 183 - SPAIN Reactor Spent Fuel Storage Short term plans consist in extending the spent fuel storage capacity in the nuclear power plants, using compact racks. This action will be undertaken as well at the reactors in operation as in construction. The capacities of the cooling pools at light water reactors were designed to storage 1 1/3 (PWR) and 1 l/2 (BWR) full cores. At present all nuclear power reactors in construe tion are increasing their storage capacity, taking into account its possibilities and particular circunstances. The reactors in operation have developed projects in order to realize its extension as soon as possible. Table I shows storage capacities at the nuclear - power plants in operation and construction. Thbse plans are beeing carried out by the electrical utilities which are owners of the reactors. i 5.X.78 - 184 - TO W o 55 H H u ♦J Q o < o oo s O ■* -* «n W _) O ""* <* ^ "* "* o oi oo rf <«» «* •** ■<* ** ■* J: TO -P TO 2 ■< c •-) •H U !=> « © •H rH .Q 6 (fol 0) (9 H- 8 2 0 TO £ O O to to to U-> rt iH 3 >« O \D v> IT) lO «0 CO CO «W c* O* *t rt cj ro T* Tt H 10 S H H TO H 3 H O C W PL. •rl d. < B PL. W TO >> ■P •rl S O TO BJ 55 a a 55 O o (9 H H < O rf -«t ►< o m 1) H fcfl ■«* oc oo (9 H 8 TO o o «+ O H yO vO (-1 H r-t i-l ec oc U < U c* CO >o vO 0 PL. •< ■P H CO < V o O < PD H H c w (9 0 ■P ■rl 3 0 •P ei H <9 o S o TO D TO p (4 X •rf 55 H M ■P U) W •H a" O 0c U a y TO 55 a TO H O to to t>. to -* rt to to in m M s» 4> 55 O u IT) W> H H vO Ti W r-l rt . PL. 4) 0 C TO W • Ptf fcfl H 3 E> ft, O * o U >, >. (t, w-o • 0 0 •P C P • ^! 0 « a >> O •H s •o fl) ■P » •rl ^ a - 185 - i SPAIN Away - From - Rector Spent Fuel Storage Medium terra plans are fundamentally the construction of an independent spent fuel storage facility to cover the natio nal demand as required, until availability of reprocessing servi^ ces. The size of the first module of the ISFSI will be 1500 t U. The independent spent fuel storage facility will be consi dered as a self-contained installation for storing spent fuel, with all the services required for a nuclear facility. If during this medium term period no acceptable solutions, should be envisaged for the backend of the nuclear fuel cycle,ad ditional storage units would be installed at the required rate. - 186 - «s 6 February 1978 ANSWERS TO INFCE QUESTIONNAIRE-GROUP 01 1. (a) Reference Expected nuclear power forecast (LWR) in Sweden given in GW (e). 1976 1980 1985 3,2 7,4 9,4 2. (a) associated with reference forecast, MTU per year. 197o 1980 1985 90 210 260 The amount of fuel discharged is based upon 28 tons of uranium per installed GW electrical effect. Table below gives accumulated amount of irradiated fuels based on actual national nuclear program. 3. (a) full core discharge. 4. A nuclear power plant is always provided with storage pools for spent nuclear fuel. These are needed so that if necessary the fuel can be discharged from the reactor core, and also to provide storage space for spent nuclear fuel before it is sent out for reprocessing or for storage somewhere else. Today, the available reprocessing capacity is limited, and there is considerable uncertainty about to which extent spent nuclear fuel will be reprocessed in the future. As a result, it is necessary to expand storage capacity for spent nuclear fuel. For economic reasons and to facilitate the planning of the final stage of the nuclear fuel cycle, this expansion should not be implemented at nuclear power plants. Instead, a central fuel storage facility should be provided. -188- This facility is needed regardless of whether the spent nuclear fuel is to be reprocessed or not before final storage. The fuel ce.ii be stored in this fuel storage facility at least for 20 years. 5. (a) (1) + (2) Storage capacity at the different Swedish nuclear station. Nuclear Power Power Fuel racks filled by year Station MWe With planned or actual With max. possible desided storage capacity storage capacity Barseback 1 580 1983 1985 Barseback 2 580 1983 1986 Forsmark 1 900 1985 1985 Forsmark 2 900 1987 1987 Forsmark 3 1000 1988 Oskarshamn 1 450 1981 1984 Oskarshamn 2 580 1983 1985 Oskarshamn 3 1000 1989 Ringhals 1 760 1984 1984 Ringhals 2 820 1982 1985 Ringhals 3 900 1984 1987 Ringhals 4 900 1985 1988 The yearly fuel discharge may be calculated from the MWe installed at each power station. 5. (a) (3) Considered as commercial information. 5. The fuel will normally be kept up to ten years in this central storage facility. It will be built up in stages for a total capacity of 3000 tons of spent fuel, corre sponding to some 100 reactor years of operation. It will consist of a rock cavity, 180 m x 21 m x 25 m, housing a number of storage ponds for spent fuel. An underground location for the storage ponds is planned for safety reasons/ including physical security. The receiving area and the auxiliary facilities are placed at groundlevel. - 189- Additional costs for this underground construction are very low at the places for the facility. Building permission has been applied for three sites . adjacent to nuclear installations on the Baltic coast, namely Forsmark, Simpevarp and Studsvik. A final choice will be made after an initial scrutiny by the authorities involved. Construction work should start in 1979 with operation planned for 1983-84. 5. (b) {3} As all of the Swedish nuclear power stations are located along the coast it is quite logical to locate the central fuel storage to one of these facilities. Further it is foreseen to transport the spent fuel to the central storage facility by pea. For this purpose a specially adopted ship has been preprojected. 5. (b) (4) (a-g) The Swedish transportation need has been studied for the period 1976-1991. In 1976 discussions were initiated with European and American organizations which work in the field of transportation of spent fuel. Negotiations are actually going on with European organizations in this field. It is important that any transportation system adopted should be compatible with any existing European standard system. 5. (b) (5) (a-b) In 1976 Sweden entered an agreement with IAEA concerning the control of nuclear fissile material according to the NPT rules. The Swedish Nuclear Inspectorate is that authority in Sweden who is controlling that the agreement is followed. Safeguard rules in connections with the central storage facility will be worked out according to the directive given by the Nuclear Inspectorate. 5. (b) (6) Physical protection is partly fullfilled by locating the storage pools in a rock cavity. In addition, necessary above ground level arrangements will be fullfilled according to the national rules established by the Swedish nuclear inspectorate. 5. (c) (1-7) Negotiations are actually going on with European reprocessor in this field. At present any information is considered as commercial. - 190 - . Assuming the actual time schedule can be kept as far as hig.« density cooipactation at the different nuclear power plants, central storage for spent fuel and to some extent reprocessing contracts fullfillment, there should be no spent fuel short-fall in the next 10 - 15 years. . The central storage will be constructed in such a way that it may be extended to 3 x 3000 tons of uranium storage capacity. . See chapter 6. - 191 - niPCK QunsrcanrAins - cnoup vi 1. Unclear power forecast - by year (a) Reforence (b) Low (c) High 2. Spent fuel generation - by year (a) associated with reference forecast (b) associated with any high probability variance (high or low) 3. Pool reactor spare capacity requirements, by reactor type (a) full core discharge (b) one normal discharge (o) discussion of possible changes in requirements 4» 1fc><5cr the fuel cycle conditions v.-hich you anticipate in your country what requirements have you identified for away-frora-reactor (A?3) storage? These requirements would be governed by pl*?ns (timing, capacities, usage, duration) for reprocessing recover;'', interim storr^e or final disposal of fuel elements. It trould be helpful if response would include a brief discussion of the factors that have influenced planning. 5» Current pro^rscsse (existinn; building under construction; and conmitted) spent fuel disposition facilities 'o^ year: (a) At reactor storage, by reactor type (1) Capacity and usage by year (2) Procr.tr.no to increase storage capacity (3) Cost3, terms or conditions (non-proprietary information) (b) Away from reactor storage - national (in-country) # (1) Location, (s) »• (2) Storage description: (a) capr'.city and usa#e, by year (b) facility lifctirae(«) (c)- nigntfiennt maintenance operation (d) coct, (operation rnd construction) (o) safety and environmental protection - 192 - Erpcn QiFSTiornrAiR^ - CROUP VI page P. • ' (3) Storage site suitability. Give basis of determination (4) General description of transportation syeteo: (a) casks (0) vehicles (c) router 1 restrictions (d) handling equipment (e) carriers/suppliers (f) shipping duration . (g) cost (construction and operational) non-proprictory inforcetion (5) Safeguards considerations - approach and criteria (a) design (b) oparations (6) Phyfiical protection . ' ' .(c)'" Away fron reactor storage - multinational ar:v-nceser-ts (1) Storage location(s) (2) storage description (a) size (b) usage allotment or epiota (fron each participating country) (c) lifetime , (d) coot, (opsrational and construction) (non-proprietor ' information) (e) Safety and environmental protection (3) Storage Bite suitabilit". Give rationale (4) General description of transportation system * • " (a) casks (b) vchlcloc (c) routcn (d) handling esruipsiont (e) port facilities (f)' carriers/suppliers ' (c) shipping duration (construction and operational) (h) costy terns of conditions (5) Snfogitardn considerations - approach and criteria (a) ior.i^n (b) operation - 193 - ' IKPCB QlBOTIGTIHAIflS - C.TOUP VI page 3 (6) Physical protection • (7) description of nulti-natipnal agreeoents ■ (non-proprietary inforsation) (a) identification of participants (b) storage allotncnt - by year (o) return of spent fuel (d) cancellation or modification (e) other contingencies 6. Spent fuel storage short-fall' (by year) based on (l)-(5)» 7* Spent fuel disposition future plans (planned, but not committed). (o-b) repeat items under (5) (c) identify go/no-30 decision factors, tiding of decision and contingency plpnning. 8* Spent fuel storage short-fall (by year) based on (l)-(7).' . <>• With respect to current prosratme (5) 2nd future plans (7)t identify spent fuel movement and APR storage constraints. (e) Transport infrastructure capability (b) Regulations, r-sreraonte (c) National policy. • - 194 - ^'lT_!".i5*L_J:it.-l V KboliiRt tUt"X t S\<~> i_ lAti.'i. i-.t-V"^* 1-1 '-- V-*Ji » " KV. SVEMSK KKfWBnfcMSlEFOnS»RJN!NG AB \» r») ta^fer? Sweets* Nuclear Fuel Supply Co 'oj^au 5" - \ MaKng address: Feck. S-102 40 Stockholm 5. Sweden t» Office: Brahcg atan 47. Stockholm Telephone: C8-679S 40 ^ Telex: 131 03 COL Hr J P Colton INFCE Office C/o IAEA Kartner Ring 11 P 0 Box 590 A - 1011 VIENNA DSTERRIKE C w•W Hitf^WC* Owraftttac* August 24, 1978 B Gustafsson Dear Kr Colton, C Referring to your letter dated May 2, 1978, I. should like to forward the following answers to your questions. guestionjjo: 1. The figures given are based on a decision by the 1975 Swedish Parliament as the framework for Sweden's nuclear power plant programme up to 19S5. As still no new de cision is taken as far as nuclear power programme beyond 1985 I cannot give any forecast as from 1985. 2. Accumulated quantities of spent fuel in tons of uranium from the operation of 13 reactors in Sweden. At year-end Reactors in operation 1-16 1-13 AUG 28 1378J 9. As the situation at present is not very clear regar ding the spent fuel management in Sv/eden it is not pos sible to answer this question. Obviously different al ternatives are discussed and negotiation going on but it is still to'early to make some'statements. Sincerely yours. Bo/6ustafssoT 7 n End. 23 Ptebruary 1978 INFCE - QUESTIONNAIRE, Group VI ANSWERS FROM SWITZERLAND 1. NUCLEAR POWER FORECAST in MWe pet Reference Case only, no considerations of low or high forecast End Year Reference 1978 1940 79 1940 1980 1940 81 2900 82 2900 83 2900 84 3800 1985 3800 86 4950 87 4950 88 4950 89 4950 1990 4950 1995 5900 2000 5900 Fig. 1: Reference Forecast of installed nuclear capacity, im MWe net - 198 - 2. SPENT FUEL GENERATION Case a) and b)* Reactor End year of Spent Fuel, MTU/yr 1. discharge individual total per year (as per 1.1.78) Beznau I 1971 13 till 1976 afterw. 10 10 Beznau II 1973 13 23 Miihleberg 1974 11 34 Gosgen 1980 24 58 Leibstadt 1983 30 88 Kaiseraugst 1986 29 117 Graben 1988 34 151 unnamed 1990 - 1995 30 181 Fig. 2: Spent Fuel Generation, in MTU/yr * Reference Forecast jjs high probability variance 199- 3. POOL REACTOR SPARE CAPACITY REQUIREMENTS (a) Full Core Discharge, and (b) one normal discharge r ■ .... i . Reactor, Type Full Core Discharge One normal discharge assemblies MTU assemblies MTU Beznau I, PWR 121 40 30 10 Beznau II, PWR 121 40 40 13 Muhleberg, BWR 240 44 60 11 Gosgen, PWR 177 72 60 24 Leibstadt, BWR 648 118 170 30 Kaiseraugst, BWR 624 114 156 29 Graben, BWR 748 136 187 34 unnamed, - 648 118 170 30 Fig. 3: Size of Discharge (c) no changes in requirements - 200 - 4. REQUIREMENTS OF AWAY-FROM-REACTQR (AFR)-STORAGE The following is a general scope of the Swiss disposition for the rtuclear Fuel Cycle: -all uranium must be procured abroad and imported - no enrichment, fuel element production or reprocessing facility is planned in Switzerland -all nuclear fuel will be definitely reprocessed, either by private reprocessors - with or without Swiss participation-, by multinational facilities or by international regional centers. - Switzerland must be prepared to take back and store highly active solidified waste (HAW) from the reprocessor(s) after 1990. Therefore, the following time schedule is planned: 1985: Site and construction permit for a intermediate HAW-storage facility. 1990: Site and construction permit for a final HAW-storage facility. To ensure operation of the Swiss nuclear power stations even in a case of longer interruption of delivery of spent fuel to a reprocessor, a project is in evaluation for the intermediate storage of fuel assemblies in an underground cavern at the site of the former experimen tal nuclear plant of Lucens. The pool storage shall contain 3000 BWR- or 1500 PWR-assemblies, resp. Final decisions on the project are expected to be taken in 1979. (For further information please refer to point 7.b) - 201 - 5. CURRENT PROGRAM (existing; under construction; committed) 5. (a) ARS (At-Reactor-Site)-Storage (l)and (2) * Total Capacity Reactor Usage per year per 1.1.78 future assy MTU assy MTU year assy MTU Beznau I 30 10 163 54 1978 323 107 Beznau II 40 13 163 54 1978 323 107 Huhleberg 60 11 300 55 1979 672 122 Gosgen 60 24 (369) 149 1979 656 265 Leibstadt 170 30 1981 2144 390 Kaiseraugst 156 29 1984 1872 341 Graben 187 34 1986 2250 410 unnamed 170 30 1980-1995 2144 390 Fig. 4: ARS Capacity * identical to Fig. 3. "Pool Reactor Spare Capacity Requirements" 5. b) flFR, national There are no existing, under construction or committed national storage arrangements. 202 5. c) AFR, multinational arrangements There are no existing, under construction or committed multinational storage arrangements with Swiss participation. Swiss utilities have, however, sent some 110 MTU of irradiated fuel to French and British reprocessois; therefore the data for transportation of spent fuel assemblies can here be contributed. 5. c) (4) Tranport (a) through (g) Reactor Transport Flask mode destin. time typ load weight (weeks) (Elements/Flask) MT Beznau I, II rail/ship Windscale 2 NTL4/5 5 PWR 73 or La Hague NTL 11 7 PWR 75 Munieberg truck La Hague 1 NTL 11 7 BUR 75 Gb'sgen rail La Hague 2 NTL 11 7 PWR 75 or NTL 12 12 PWR 95 Fig. 5; Transportation Data - 203 - 6. SPENT FUEL STORAGE SHORT-FALL, (1) - (5) 200 I ANNUAL SPENT FUEL DISCHARGES (MTU/YR) REPROCESSED BEFORE 1961 UNNAMED AT REACTOR STORAGE 150-- OSS WITH FULL CORE RESERVE 1COGCCO- !o 100 50 1970 1980 1990 END YEAR 2000 Fig. 6: Spent Fuel Storage Short-Fall (Data According (1) to (5)) - 204 - 7. SPENT FUEL DISrOSITION-FUTURE (planned, but not committed) 7. a) ARS There are no planned ARS-storage arrangements 7. b) AFR-national As mentioned under Point 4, there is a plan for a national Swiss AFR-storage center. It is emphasized however that this center is a pre-project of the utilities, to date with no federal partici pation. Furthermore, the local public opinion strongly resents the project. The attitude of the licensing authorities is not known, as no permits have been asked for so far. (1) Location: Lucens VO (2) Storage description (a) capacity: 3000 BWR - assemblies or 1500 PWR - assemblies The usage by year is yet unknown. According Fig. 6, operation should start in 1983; consequently, the pools would be filled up in 1991. - 205 - (7. b) (2) cont. ) (b) unknown (c) identical to ARS-storage pool maintenance (d) construction: strongly dependent on licensing orders operation: identical to ARS storage pool costs (e) according Swiss Nuclear Regulations (3) Artificial cavern in a rock formation, underground. An experimental nuclear power plant of 5 HWe was in operation at the site from 1967 - 69. The nuclear plant is dismantled, but auxilary systems and facilities are still there and operationable. (4) Similar to Point 5.c) (4) (5) According to Swiss Nuclear Regulations; under international super vision and control (6) like a operating nuclear power plant - 206 - 7. c) AFR-storage: multinational arrangements There are no planned multinational storage arrangements with Swiss participation. Swiss utilities plan, however, to send some 470 MTU of irradiated fuel to a French reprocessor in the years 1931 through 1990. Contract negotiations are in a final stage, but not concluded. 8. SPENT FUEL STORAGE SHORT-FALL, BASED ON (1) to (7) The spent fuel ^hort-fall depends mainly on three conditions: - if the licensing authorities accept the ARS-pool expansions, - if no foreign political decisions hinder reprocessing, and - if the AFR national storage pools can be operated, then there should be no short-fall before the end of this century. But only one condition turned down - where as for the latter two uncertainty is growing - and the Swiss utilities could be heavily embarassed. 9. SPENT FUEL MOVEMENT AND STORAGE CONSTRAINTS Future conditions for transportation and storage of spent fuel with regard to infrastructure, regulations, and federal policy are currently under work; to date, no final draft has been edited. Januar 1973 Dr. H.N. Patak Elektrizitatsgesellschaft Laufenburg CH - 4335 Laufenburg - 207 - 21 June 1978 INFCE GROUP 6 QUESTIONNAIRE UNITED KINGDOM Nuclear Power Forecast by Year High and low programmes - see Appendix 1. Spent Fuel Generation by Year High and low programmes - see Appendix 2. Pool Reactor Spare Capacity Requirements by Reactor Type Neither the CEGB nor the Scottish Boards operate any pool type water reactors at present or in the foreseeable future. Requirements for Away-from-Reactor (AFR) Storage In the United Kingdom we have not assumed any requirements for away-from-reactor storage except for ponds sited at reprocessing plants where the storage is assumed to be for cooling and fnr awaiting the availability of reprocessing plant capacity. Current Programme/Existing: Building under Construction, and committed) Spent Fuel Disposition Facilities by Year a.l At-reactor storage by reactor type AGR fuel storage:- Hinkley Point B nominal ponds storage capacity 34 tes Dungeness B " " " " 37 tes Heysham " " " " 31 tes Hartlepool " " M " 31 tes Hunterston B " " " " 22 tes The normal working period for AGR fuel will be 100 days before transportation-to Windscale for storage and reprocessing. a.2 Ko present plans to increase the storage capacity for oxide fusl. b Away-from-Reactor Storage - national (in country) b.l The only planned storage away from the reactor sites is at the reprocessing plant (see 4 above) b.2 The current plans for oxide fuel storage at Windscale reprocessing plant are as follows:- 209- 1978-79 1000 te U 1980-81 1400 •• •• 1982-83 2400 •• ii 1984 3400 •i •i 1985 4400 •i II 1986-90 5400 •• it The division of storage between AGR and PWR fuel will be made to meet the requirements of the UK reactor programme and over seas contractual commitments. Further pond construction beyond 1990 is likely but cannot be quanitifed at this stage. b.3 Storage site suitability - the storage sites will be at reactor sites and adjacent to the reprocessing plant. b.4 General description of transportation system Transportation system - AGR fuel. Casks The flasks are constructed from 90 mm steel plate welded to form a box which, with its 330 mm thick lid fitted, is 2.In. by 2.4m by 2m high. Radiation shielding is provided by a 220 mm thick stainless steel clad lead line*- fitted inside the steel body. Up to 1 te (U weight) of AGR fuel can be carried under water in the flask which has a gross laden weight of 53 te, including an aluminium shock absorber. Vehicles Flasks are transported either from a rail siding into the power station or from a nearby railhead, on purpose built wagons used only for nuclear flask traffic. If dispatch is made from a railhead, a specially designed road transporter is used to take the flask there, and a gantry crane to tranship it to the rail wagon. The rail vehicles are constructed to standards which allow them to run in normal scheduled freight trains. Routes Restrictions The rail routes are net subject to specific restrictions; road routes between stations and railhead are subject to the approval of local authorities concerned with road and route licensing. Handling Equipment Gantry cranes and lifting beams at stations and railheads are dedicated specifically to flask handling. - 210 - Carriers/SuppIiers Road transport - station staff used. Rail transport (including railhead cranes) - British Rail staff used. Shipping Duration Normally 2 days, occasionally 3 days. Transportation System - LWR Fuel Since the construction of a light water reactor in the UK is not yet confirmed, no details of transportation are available. b.5 Safeguards considerations - The storage ponds will be Material Balance Areas of the respective reactor or reprocessing site, and will be subject to Euratom and IAEA inspections and procedures. b.6 Physical protection - The storage ponds will be within the site boundaries and will be covered by the appropriate procedures either at the reactor or the reprocessing plant sites. c Away-from-reactor Storage - multinational arrangements. Not applicable to the United Kingdom (see 4 abcve). Any fuel received from other countries will be stored at the reprocessing plant. Spent Fuel Storage Short-fall The spent fuel storage is planned to meet all requirements (see Sb); if necessary the planned capacity will be extended and no short-fall is anticipated in the UK. Spent Fuel Disposition Future Plans (planned but not committed) Present plans are to reprocess up to 6000 te of oxide fuel from thermal reactors during the period 1987-1996. This will include fuel arising from UK reactors and fuel received from other countries. The provision of further reprocessing capacity after 1996 is still being studied; it is planned to cater for UK arisings and to consider the possibility of further overseas contracts. Spent Fuel Storage Short-fall No short-fall is anticipated for the storage of spent fuel. Spent Fuel Movement and AFR Storage Constraints a Transport capability in the UK is sufficient to deal with the current programme, and no problems are anticipated in coping - 211 - with the requirements of any future expansion. b Regulations - Current regulations and licensing requirements are fulfilled (see 5 above). c National Policy - UK policy is to store fuel at the reactor site for the required cooling time, and then transport to the reprocessing plant for further storage and subsequent reprocessing. - 212 L.-SD S-NOLCrt tue«:io:; 1 INJ'CE GROUP 6 QU3STI0NNAIRE Projectio^M' Nuclear Elejtncal Capacity, by reactor Type APPENDIX 1 (installed Capacity, net GV 1 KnCu.OX AGS VVH/„CM PWR SGHWR r»2 TC 1'i.AB * High •Low High Low Hicli Low High Low High Low Hich ' Low High ..ov 1977 4.1 4.1 1.4 1.4 0.1 0.1 0.25 0.25 5.9 5.9 1978 4.1 4.1 1.9 1.9 0.1 6.4 b.4 1979 4.1 4.1 1.9 1.9 0.1 6.4 6.4 19SO 4.1 4.1 2.9 2.9 0.1 7.4 7.4 1981 4.1 4.1 4.9 4.9 0.1 9.4 9.4 1982 4.1 4.1 4.9 4.9 0.1 9.4 7.4 1983 4.1 4.1 4.9 4.9 0.1 9.4 9.4 196". 4.1 4.1 4.9 4.9 0,1 9.4 9.4 "9?i 4.1 4.1 4.9 4.9 0.1 9.4 9.4 193a *.1 4.1 6.15 6.15 0.1 10.7 1'-■. / 1937 3.6 3.6 7.4 7.4 0.1 11.4 11.4 19S3 3.6 3.6 7.4 • 7.4 0.1 11.4 1-.4 19^9 3-3 3-5 7.4 7.4 1.25 1.25 0.1 12.3 12.3 1990 2.1 2.1 7.4 7.4 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 0.1 0.1 C.25 C.25 12.3 12.3 I 19''^ 0.8 0.8 7.4 7.4 10.0 10.0 1.25 1.25 - - (1.5) 0.25 19.7 19.7 2CG0 _ , 7.4 7.4 31.25 18.75 1.25 1.25 • _ (2.8) 0.25 4C.2 :-7.4 ! 1 2010 85.0 co.o ro 2C25 165.0 icc.o .Notes : "The terms 'high' and "low" pertain to assumptions about economic growth. The high case (the reference c.ioe of the UK Green Paper or. fcnergy policy, Ci.nd 71C1) aaswes an average growth rate of just under 3 per cent annually to £000. The low growth ease averages about 2 per cent annually to 20CC. 1: Type not yet determined. 2l Bracketed figures are notional and correspond to commissioning of a demonstration reactor in 1991 followed by a secoad in r.Ojn. The installation of ti.T.o and additional stations will depend on future policy decisions and the outcone of any public inquiry. Beyond the end of the century the* fast reactor component within the listed total could lie anywhere between zero and the maximum consistent with plutoniua availability. 3: The figures for 2010 and 2025 are drawn from a recent UK exercise which illustrates possible pat*ernn of energy supply be'ond the year 20C0, on an ass-.-npticr. of continuing treads. More authoritative figures are not available. The UK authorities do not consider it possible to cake meaningful forecasts for a period so far ahead, given the great uncertainty which surrounds future levels of energy demand and the contribution which other sourcas of energy may sake. The figures are therefore highly speculative and are not regarded as a basis for long-term decisions on energy policy. There is no implication that either case represents a preferred or official strategy. /- This reply is identical to the United Kingdom's reply to Questions 1a and 1b of the Vor-iing Group 1A/2A questionnaire. APPENDIX 2 CPMPLATIVE ARI3INGS OF SPENT FUEL (BY YEAR) ( TE U) /fhese figures cover the arisings of oxide fuel only. The arisings of 'natural uranium aetal fuel have been excluded since, as this fuel is subject to corrosion and early reprocessing is essential, it is considered to be outside the scope of this review7 (a) HIGH PROGRAMME | YEAR AGR PWR TOTAL 1978 100* 100 9 200 200 80 300 300 1 400 400 2 600 600 3 800 800 4 900 900 5 1000 1000 6 1300 1300 7 1500 1500 8 1800 1800 9 2000 2000 1990 2300 2300 1 2700 100 2800 2 3000 100 3100 3 3400 200 3600 4 3800 300 4100 5 4200 400 4600 6 4600 600 5200 7 5200 800 6000 8 5800 1000 6800 9 6400 1400 7800 2000 7200 1800 9000 (b) LOW PROGRAMME - as High programme to 1995 1996 4500 600 5100 7 5100 800 5900 8 5700 1000 6700 ; 9 6200 1300 7500 \ 2000 6900 1500 8400 \ * Includes ^ 40 te of prototype reactor fuel in store at December 1977* Small quantities arising from prototype reactors in lat»r years have, for the purposes of this questionnaire, been ignored. 214 - w •-. f • 3 Karch 1978 Reply from the United States of America to the Questionnaire of the International Fuel Cycle Evaluation Working Group VI March 3, 1978 Question; 1. Nuclear power forecast - by year (a) Reference (b) Low (c) High Answer; 1. The U.S. Department of Energy is currently reviewing nuclear power forecasts for submission to INFCE and those figures were not avallabile when this document was put together. - 216 - Question: 2. Spent fuel generation - by year (a) associated with reference forecast (b) associated with any high probability variance (high or low) Answer: 2. Spent Fuel Generation by Years In Metric Tons of Heavy Metal (b) (a) High Reference . Probability . Tear Forecast —' Variance -' Prior to 1977 1900 1900 1977 3000 2900 78 4300 4000 79 5800 5300 1980 7700 6600 81 9600 8000 82 12100 9600 83 14900 11500 84 18200 13700 1985 22200 16400 86 26500 19300 87 31200 22700 88 36300 26300 89 41500 30200 1990 46700 34400 y Utility estimates If DOE estimates - Ill - - '.. ^MT-*',.fi;<\-,Lem;.wtrtN- Question; 3. Pool reactor spare capacity requirements, by reactor type (a) full core discharge (b) one normal discharge (c) discussion of possible changes in requirements Answer; 3. (a) - (c) Reactor Pool Spare Capacity Requirements (LWR's) The NRC does not have statutory requirements on reactor pool capacity. For new single-unit applications, the HRC expects a fuel pool capacity of at least one core plus one refueling load (1/3 of a core for PWR's, 1/4 of a core for BVR's). Almost all single unit stations equal or exceed this capacity* For two unit stations* the minimum storage capacity Is about 1-2/3 cores, with many of the newer stations greatly exceeding this capacity. Most nuclear utilities plan Increases in the storage capacity of existng plants, generally by reducing the spacing between fuel assem blies, with or without employment of poisons (e.g. boral, stainless steel with some boron addition). The percentage of storage increase varies from about 20Z to 250Z for individual stations. We are not aware of any contemplated major changes in NRC requirements. PWR reactor vessel inspection requirements necessitate removal of the fuel once in a 10 year period. This could result in the fuel storage capacity being exceeded for some stations. At least one plant (Point Beach) has chosen to do this inspection much earlier than the 10th year to avoid exceeding the plant's spent fuel storage capacity. Question; 4. Under the fuel cycle conditions which you anticipate in your country what requirements have you identified for away-froa-reactor (APR) storage? These requirements would be governed by plans (timing, capacities, usage, duration) for reprocessing recovery, Interim storage or final disposal of fuel elements. It would be helpful If response would Include a brief dis cussion of the factors that have influenced planning. Answer; The U.S. has indefinitely deferred fuel reprocessing and recycle while alternative fuel cycles and processes which may have improved nonpro- liferation characteristics are evaluated. To provide for the increased - 218 - -- *•■■ :i'IT":-.' -VAJUL^U- •pent fuel storage requirements resulting from this deferral, the D.S. Departaent of Energy (DOE) announced a prograa whereby it plans to accept U.S. and some foreign* spent fuel for storage and possibly disposal. DOE would accept and take title to the spent fuel upon delivery to an approved storage site and payaent of a fee calculated to include both interim storage and disposal, if necessary. Retrievable spent fuel storage in a geologic facility capable of permanent disposal is being evaluated. Prior to the possible availability of retrievable geologic storage, fuel must be stored in interim storage facilities away-froa-reactors (AFR's). In order to determine fuel storage requirements In AFR's, D.S. utilities were recently requested to inform DOE of their possible fuel transfers to DOE. The following table lists the annual and cumulative transfers reported by the utilities and provides the basis for estimating AFR requirements in the U.S. In the past, utility estimates have been high, but use of this estimate provides a conservative planning base. AFR Requirements In Metric Tons of Heavy Metal Annual Cumulated Year Additions Quantities 1978 (temporary arrangements 450 currently in existence) 83 1200 1700 84 900 2600 1985 1600 4200 86 1500 5700 87 i700 7400 88 2000 9400 89 2100 11500 1990 2800 14300 *The terms, conditions, timing and amount of foreign spent fuel disposal in the U.S. are currently under evaluation* Further DOE analysis and subsequent Congressional approval will be required prior to implementa tion of this program. - 219 - Question; 5. Current programme (existing; building under construction; and committed) spent fuel disposition facilities by year: (a) At reactor storage, by reactor type (1) Capacity and usage by year (2) Programme to increase storage capacity (3) Costs, terms or conditions (non-proprietary information) (b) Away from reactor storage - national (In-country) (1) Location(s) (2) Storage description: (a) capacity and usage, by year (b) facility lifetime(s) (c) significant maintenance operation (d) cost, (operation and construction) (e) safety and evironoental protection (3) Storage site suitability. Give basis of determination (4) General description of transportation system: (a) casks (b) vehicles (c) routes, restrictions (d) handling equipment (e) carriers/suppliers (f) shipping duration (g) cost (construction and operational) non-proprietary information (5) Safeguards considerations - approach and criteria (a) design (b) operations (6) Physical protection (c) Away from reactor storage - multinational arrangements (1) Storage locatlon(s) (2) storage description (a) size (b) usage allotment or quota (from each partici pating country) (c) lifetime (d) cost, (operational and construction) (non-proprietor Information) (e) Safety and environmental protection (3) Storage site suitability. Give rationale - 220 Question 5: (cont'd) (4) General description of transportation system: (a) casks (b) vehicles (c) routes (d) handling equipment (e) port facilities (f) carriers/suppliers (g) shipping duration (construction and operational) (h) cost, terms of conditions (5) Safeguards considerations - approach and criteria (a) design (6) Physical protection (7) description of multinational agreements (non-proprietary information) (a) identification of participants (b) storage allotment - by year (c) return of spent fuel (d) cancellation or modification (e) other contingencies Answer: 5. (a) (1) At Reactor Spent Fuel Storage (in Metric Tons of Heavy Metal)* (It should be noted that cumulative capacities do not identify individual reactor requirements.) Capacity at Reactors Stored at Reactors BWR PWR BWR PWR 1978 7700 13900 1800 2100 79 8800 18000 2400 3000 7930 9600 20600 3000 4300 81 9700 21900 3400 580 0 82 10000 22400 4100 7600 83 10200 22600 4600 8700 84 10200 22600 5300 10600 1985 10300 22600 5500 12400 86 10300 22600 6100 14600 87 10500 22600 6500 17100 88 10500 23100 7000 19700 89 10500 23100 6900 22900 1990 10500 23600 7300 25000 - 221 5. (•) (2) Most utilities with operating reactors have taken or are taking steps to expand their own storage basins through reracking and additional pools* Several utilities with reactors beginning commercial operation within the next five years are expanding their basins currently* Some utilities are requiring expanded basins at the design stage. Most utilities will have capacity to store 5 to 7 annual discharges in addition to the capacity for a full core discharge until aloost 1990. The Government's announced spent fuel storage program has been received with interest and the future plans of individual utilities will depend very much on the specific details for this program. The Government has no plans for direct assistance in the nst reactor" storage expansions. Licensing applications for such expansions have been readily approved* Very little fuel is shipped between reactors for storage. 5. (a) (3) One study of 19 documented expansions has shown that an average cost for reracking a reactor basin with existing storage racks including design, licensing, fabrication, installation and removal of the original racks is $2.7 million. The range of costs was $0.5 million to $5.2 million. For reactors whose storage basins have yet to be designed the average cost would be $0.5 oillion additional for material only. Future reac tors not yet purchased will have high capacity fuel storage basins as standard. 5. (b) (1-2) Away from reactor storage - national 1) General Electric-Morris The GE-Morris facility has the capacity and is licensed to store 750 MTU of fuel. As of January 1, 1978, the facility was about 40Z filled. GE submitted sn application to NRC seeking approval to expand the facility by an additional 1100 MTU, but subsequently requested suspension of the licensing proceedings. Licensing review work by NRC staff is continuing. 2) Nuclear Fuel Services (NFS) - West Valley The NFS facility is presently licensed to store 250 metric tons. 170 metric tons are presently stored at the facility* Spent fuel is not being received at this tlae. The NFS pool has the capability for considerable increase In storaga capacity* 222 . i^-awnr—"'f---* ;-;^ '',A*W^.-*,&-•- 3) Allied-General Buclear Services (AGWS) - Barnwell The AGNS facility has a storage capacity of 360 Metric tons* The facility is not licensed, and no fuel is stored there. 4) Wuclear Shore Facility (Todd Shipyard) - Calv ston This facility is presently licensed to store 36 unirradiated R. S. Savannah Core II fuel eleoents. Ho fuel is actually In storage* The facility would have to be rellcensed for spent fuel storage. The existing fuel pool sight have a capacity of about 100 aetrlc tons with aaxlnum densification. 5) Exxon Wuclear Corporation Exxon has indicated an Interest In construction of a fuel reproc essing plant at Oak Ridge which would include a fuel storage facility capable of storing up to 7000 metric tons. Preliminary licensing documents have been submitted to HRC. Due to the deferral of reprocessing It does not appear that Exxon will proceed with any facilities at Oak Ridge at this tine. BOTE: Information on facility lifetime, significant maintenance opera tion, cost and safety and environmental protection are not available at the present time. Host of these facilities were originally constructed as reprocessing plants. 5. (b) (3) Spent fuel storage facilities do not require siting requirements signifi cantly different from other surface nuclear facilities (low geismlc risk, plentiful water supply, relatively low-population density, etc.). No special restrictions are required. However, transportation requirements, including proximity to reactors, should be considered. In addition, collocation with a geologic facility suitable for disposal of nuclear waste would be desirable should this be necessary* 5. (b) (4) General description (a) Spent fuel shipping casks vary in size and capacity, and weigh between 25 and 100 tons. They must meet stringent regulatory design and fabrication requirements prior to approval* These casks are constructed of thick steel walls which may be filled with dense shielding materials such as lead, tungsten or depleted uranium. Truck type casks (25 to 33 tons each) can accommodate 1 to 3 PWR or 2 to 7 BWR fuel elements. Ball type eari.? (50 to 100 tons each) accommodate 7 to 12 PWR or 18 to 32 BWR fuel elements. Truck/rail type casks are generally approved and suitable for water transport* Such casks ara - 223 - designed and built so they will not breach nor lose their radioactive contents under normal transportation as veil as extreme hypothetical accident conditions. There are about 13 assorted casks available now for the transportation of spent fuel, and there are not sufficient pro curement/fabrication plans to meet any increased future requirements. (b) O-dinary transportation vehicles may be used for transporting spent futl shipping casks; however, due to special tie-down arrangements, carrier equipment unavailability, particularly heavy duty rail flat cars, permanently attached integrated cask/vehicle containment systems for truck and rail are becoming a norm in the industry for the heavier pay load, more efficient casks. Surface spent fuel shipping systems are adaptable to water mode vessels. (c) In the U.S., commercial freight routes (routings) are generally determined by each carrier's operating authority prescribed by the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC). This includes truck, rail, and intercoastal waterways. State and local governments may pre scribe routing restrictions, weight limitations, etc. to meet certain conditions. There are few known present restrictions pertaining to routings through dense population areas (ICC regula tions require that these be avoided where practicable), including port areas, with the exception of prohibitions over certain bridges, turnpikes, and through tunnels. Present intermodal routes are adequate to meet future high volume spent fuel transportation requirements. (d) Handling equipment, floating barges, cranes, etc., are generally adequate to meet foreseeable requirements. (e) Port facilities are assumed to be adequate; however, detailed information will be required prior to routing spent fuel through specific ports. (f) Carrier plant and operating facilities are in acceptable physical condition to meet any required spent fuel shipment scheduling. Suppliers of spent fuel shipping casks will require long lead times (up to 5 years) to meet requirements of an Increased spent fuel shipping campaign. (g) Shipping duration depends entirely upon policy, fuel discharges, etc. 5. (b) (5) The U.S. approach is to define safeguards concerns, concepts snd opera* tional requirements for spent fuel storage facilities and to develop and - 224 - wexsm*gmz>' ■ ."*■-■*■• ■;!:.:;?-«■ - if*wvf*".:; demonstrate. In operating environments, advanced safeguard system elements which can be considered in order to upgrade spent fuel safeguards* Spent fuel safeguards activities include: (i) Operations control analysis leading to Preliminary Safeguards Concepts for spent fuel storage facilities, Including a) containment and surveillance b) practicable material control and accounting systems (ii) Design, development and installation of selected containment and surveillance elements* (Hi) Experiments and calculations required to define measurement methods for the assay of plutonlum in spent fuel will be performed. A Final Report on state-of-the-art measurement capabilities for irradiated fuels will be issued early 1978. Experimental investigations of assay methods for expended reactor fuels will be continued and a complete prototype conceptual design will be based on optimum combination of methods. 5. (b) (6) Physical protection techniques will be assessed snd Integrated for use In spent fuel storage facilities, and will utilize conventional physical protection methodologies developed as part of the ongoing safeguards and security program. 5. (c) (1-7) As discussed in answer A, the U.S. has recently announced a program to accept and take title to U.S. and some foreign spent fuel, while facilities provided under this program will not be multinational spent fuel storage facilities with multinational ownership, they will under certain circumstances provide storage for fuel from countries other than the U.S. Ultimately the U.S. does seek the investigation and possible establishment of international spent fuel storage facilities and is actively investi gating the requirements and logistics of such arrangements. The results of these studies will be offered to XNFCE Working Croup 6 in mid-1978. - 225 - -4 QuestIon; 6. Spent fuel storage short-fall (by year) based on (l)-(5). Answer; As moted in response 4, the current D.S. program* is to provide Government approved storage facilities to meet any projected storage "short-fells." Question: 7. Spent fuel disposition future plans (planned, but not committed). (a-b) repeat items under (5) (c) identify go/no-go decision factors, timing of decision and contingency planning. Answer; 7. (a-b) See 6 above. 7. (c) The U.S. will decide on APR requirements during 1978 a.-d facilities should be available in the mid 1980's to meet interim storage require ments prior to the availability of retrievable geologic facilities. Question: 8. Spent fuel storage short-fall (by year) based on (l)-(7). Answer; See 6 above. - 226 - Question; 9* With respect to current programme (5) and future plans (7), identify spent fuel aovement and AFR storage constraints* (a) Transport infrastructure capability (b) Regulations, agreements (c) National policy. Answer; (a) The transportation systems (truck, rail, water, and air) serving the U.S. are owned and operated by commercial carriers* It should be noted that some rail carriers are reluctant to handle spent fuel shipments in normal freight train service, and that cask fabricators are reluctant to build and license the necessary spent fuel contain ment systems without more clearly defined government policy* With these exceptions there are no known serious obstacles to moving Increased spent fuel shipment volumes* (b) Regulations for the safe movement of spent nuclear fuel will be governed by the domestic laws, rules and regulations of the country where the shipment takes place* These shipments will also be generally consistent with the provisions of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and Department of Transportation (DOT) are the two U.S. domestic safety regulators of spent nuclear fuel shipments. The Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), Federal Maritime Administration (FMA) and Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) are responsible for regulating the economic aspects, operating authorities, etc., for surface, water, and air transport via commercial carriers* (c) National policy is in support of additional spent fuel storage while alternative fuel cycles are evaluated. 227 - 30 August 1978 Members of Working Group 6 Spent Fuel Management The preliminary draft of the summary data base for Working Group 6 along with the responses to the Questionnaire have been sent to you in a separate letter. Attached you will find the response to the Questionnaire from the USSR which has not yet been included in the draft report. Any additional responses will be submitted to you as I receive them. John P. Colton Scientific Secretary MFCE WG 6 Attachment V ГКО-: IAEA RMCiSTRY = COi'Y iilUM |ЛьЛ iU.o^ii.I \.u.1' 1 гли.ч 1яг.л acvHOi KI ПОСТОЯННОЕ ПРЕДСТАВИТЕЛЬСТВО СССР при IwcEjЪЫ ) МЕЖДУНАРОД! 1ЫХ ОРГАНИЗАЦИЯХ В ВЕНЕ "/*У " августа 1978 года Уважаемый профессор Келудев, Позвольте направить Вам для передача г-ну Дв. Колтоку доклад "Организация хранения и транспорта тошшза реактороз ЗЗЗР" и ответы на вопросник по группе 6 З.ЮЯТЦ. Приложение: упомянутое, на русском и англий ское языках. С уважением, TCVCJCJ/-A-O' В.Ерофеев £~ Постоянный Представитель СССР £ при мехдунаводных оэгак-лзацпях ' в Бене " | 2 % A'j'g М\ ъ 7ЛР- t> г/ Про$sec ору И.С.'Нелудеву, U*j ACTION Заместителю Гендиректора МАГАТЭ то. 1 г. Вена KIJI. — 017682 __ 6'-' v J • u y»8" c -^V-»^. £1—._ ( 2 f- - Л- , ^. *-*«*/ fe -I- BB3P - TIPE REACTOR SPEET FUEL STORAGE AKD TRANSPORTATION State Committee for the Utilization of Atomic Energy, USSR I. IHTRODUCTIOH The development of nuclear energetics in the USSR sets forth the problem of establishing the closed fuel cycle con cept with the organisation of radiochemical reprocessing of tho reactor spent fuel. The closed fue'l cycle v/ill give cer tain economical advantages duo to reduced ttemand in natural uranium, for the chemical reprocessing makes possible the re cycling of uranium and plutoniuai in thermal and fast reactors respectively. The closed cycle involves 3 year cooling of the fuel discharged froa the reactor in the reactor cooling pond for the radioactivity decay and decay heat removal. This simpli fies both the problem of fuel transportation to a radiochemi cal reprocessing plant and that of nuclear shielding end en- virorcaental protection in the plant area. Relatively short spent fuel cooling periods decrease considerably require ments for fuel stability during its storage, for fuel cladd ing corrosion in the storage nodius, for cladding material . 2 . ccing co vrall ca for corrosion-oi fuel osconbly ntractural cleacnto. Spent fuel rcprocenoins t7ill cicplify the problem of lone-tern or "perEjazicnt" 0torace» v/hleh io charactcriotic for the open cycle, 2c- E2CIEIICAL BESCIlIPIIOII 02? SESHT HBL AED 155 CHAIUCESRISTICS. Kearly half cf oil nuclear poucr plants v/hich are built, being built end planned for the nearest 20 - 25 years ere to bo equipped with, BS^ — type reactors (cirdlar to F«7B - type reactors). Euclear power plants of the first generation \7ith a 440 l?>?(e) pov-er unit ere baced on the &&>P ~ kho reactor while at present nuclear povrer plants? of the second generation based ca the B8?P« 1000 reactor are fcsins built. Sable 1 presents r:ain charactcriotics of the 633 p • type reactor fuel. Cable 1 [1,23 Char ac tor-is ties Reactor typo «B^P - 1000 (Lyi373 LV/) (%."30O0 li'J) 1.ini tic.1 chars© 2U 42 te 2«J'u-sl cjrei ch? ent 3.5 3.3 f M (ctationary) 55 28*6 • 103 (25.0 - 'fO.O) • 103 3*2rradi&tion rate KV/d/t'J 4. /isnuaL discharge Eg 14.0 33.0 - 22.0 from the reactor y~ 5.Sr>3nt ft:r;l crrich- f.en-i; * 1.2 1.26 6JJur!h-jr of csscni- blicu in tho reac tor piecoo 349 7.Huu.ber of fuel elements psr asociubly pieces 126 331 8.Uranlun per essesibly kg 120 437 9.Assembly size (across iacsa- ■dron flats) nm 144 238 10. Length of the active part nna 2500 3550 11.Pull assembly length sun 3200 4465 12.Puel element Disci outer diaaeter ess 9#1 9.1 pellet diameter ran 7.58 7.58 cladding thletaiGss # /. (Zr-alloy) na 0.65 0.65 Table 2 precents radioactivity end decay heat rates of the epent fuel. Table 2 Cooling period, Reactor type days BBOT-^0 EBOP-1000 KCi/tU kY//tU KCi/tU ktf/tU 0 134 330 160 400 120 5.0 18.0 6.0 t 22.0 365 2.2 8.3 2.6 10.0 t 102? 0.65 3.0 0.78 3^6 - 4 - The following iso topic content is characteristic of the spent fuel discharged /2/: U-235 - 1.26%; U-236 - 0.5%; Pu-239 - 0.56*; Pu-240 - 0.21%; Pu24i - 0.183. 3. THE CURRENT EXPERIEffGE POR STORAGE OF SPENT FUEL; Spent fuel discharged from the reactor is directed to the reactor water cooling pond for 3 year storage prior to its transportation to a chemical reprocessing plant. She storage must meet the following engineering requirementr 1) provide radiation safety to the B tor age operation per sonnel; 2) provide the cooling pond water cooling with the spent fuel decay heat removal; 3) provide the cooling pond water purification from cor rosion products and from the radioactivity released from defec tive fuel elements; 4) provide the environmental safety by the engineered features which eliminate water leakage operation; 5) exclude radioactivity release into the atmosphere from the storage ventilation system; 6) locate fuel elements in the cooling pond in such a geo metry which assures nuclear safety during storage and fuel trans fer into the pond; 7) provide the storage of assemblies with defective fuel elements; 8) organize spent fuel transport operations to the chemi cal reprocessing plant; - 5 - 9) control fuel storage! arrange guard ond safeguards system to ascure fuel safekeeping in the storage* 4 4 4 3.1. Radiation safety of the storage* As table 2 shots:, the fuel discharged from the reactor « is highly active. Radiation safety of the water storage i3 reached by both the use of a proper thickness water layer rrhich reduces radiation level to permissible values and the use of concrete trails of the pond. According to the standards of shielding end water 103s the system of the cooling water filling is de signed to prevent non-controllable water level drop below that of tolerable. 3.2. A water cooling system is provided in the storage which assures reliable decay heat removal* She cooling system capaci ty is determined on the basis of the regiroe of the pond fuel load- ing, tine function cf energy release fluctuations and the du ration of fuel hold-up in the cooling pond. The pond cooling system is either equipped with cooling coils located directly in the pond cavity or with external heat- exchangers through which the cooling water circulates, 3.3. Due to corrosion attack of fuel eleaent cladding, fuel acsenb- ly structural naterialc end of the contents of fuel elements having defective cans some quantities of radioisotopes are re- leased into the cooling pond water during the fuel storage. Eleneni.3 of poor solubility ere absorbed by cuspcrded particles - oechanical icpuritios of water-, vliile strontium end cesium iso topes are dissolved in water. The cooling pond water purification system usually consists of mechanical filters removing suspended particles from water end maintaining Its clarity and ion-exchange filters maintain- fi 7 ing water radioactivity level vrithin the range of 10 — 10"'Ci/l. 3.4. Thanks to the use of safe waterproof system, metal wall and bottom lining and any leakage draining, the storage design pre- vents radioactive water entry into environment end ground waters. Che cooling pond water evaporation being the main way of radioactivity release into the atmosphere, the cir of the cool ing pond above-water space i3 passed through special filters befox'c its discharge to the atmosphere. Ventilation of the above- rater space prevents accumulation of hydrogen in dangerous -from the point of viev/ of explosion- quantities, formed in the process of pond water radiolysis. Sources of radioactive solid wastes, arising from cooling ponds, are water purification filters and ion exchange resins. 3.5, 2hs major problem of a cooling pend design is to provide nuclear safety la fuel disposition storage and transportation operations in the pond. Euclcar safety is achieved by disposition of fuel assemblies with a spacing assuring the multiplication factor of the system less than a unit, by rigid fixing of the fuel assemblies to be stored and by oaf© distances between the assemblies transferred within the storage. To save the storage opace and area absorbing Inserts, caii3{ pertitiens or boratsd water may be uooci, which mclce possible more close dicposltion of fuel* -7- 3.6. In the storage e special coiapartaeat for fuel assemblico with defective cladding ia provided. Such, assemblies are detect- od by the system of fuel element cladding tightness control (which is available in the reactor) and arc additionally checked during fuel reloading. JPuel assemblies with defective cladding ore placed in sealed cans which are stored in a special compart ment. 3.7. The storage design allows for the preparatory operations for fuel transportation to a cheaical reprocessing plant to be carried out: preparation and loading of fuel into transport con tainers , check and decontamination of the transport containers, disposition and fixing of containers on a railroad truck. With this in view a special compartment in the storage is available, which adjoins the passage of the railroad entrance and is equipp ed with handling equipment and neans of transport container and railroad truck decontamination. 3*8. Physical protection and nuclear material safeguards* Itee of low-enricLcient uranium as a fuel in BBSP-typc* reactors simplifies the problem of nuclear weapon proliferation danger fox"1 it cannot be directly used as a weapon but is a raw material for a uraniun enrichment plant. The existence of such a plant in any country is easily detectable and its operation is controllable. However tho reac tor spent fuel \2o:j b>, radiochcmically reprocessed to recover plutonim uhich is suitable a3 a nuclear z:i?.ter-.al for military purposes. Tor this reason the problem of nuclear rcaterSal (nuclear weapon) non-prolifirntlon at tb:? discharged fi-.cl stage nay be solved by methods of p!r-/cical protection and nuclear material safeguarding* The BBS? - type reactor core consists of hezuhedral assemblies non-disKCCfftable by simple neons, with fuel elements fixed in the upper and loner Grid sockets. On the cue hand, this fuel element design permits to check all reactor fuel p-cenblie3 presence in the storage, as well as t& identify their works number and their state. These lumbers are recorded on fresh fuel receipt thus avoiding nuclear materiel concealment, either of a fuel assembly as a whole or c part of it. High radioactivity of fuel prevents free handling of en asced- bly caking impossible its concealment or dismantling for partial diversion of its contents without use of a refuelling machine, oaaipulators or shielded containers. Ehis provides for accountability and strict control of all nuclear po?;cr plant nateriala with accurate documentation- keeping, and provision of plant certificates for each assembly received. Control of an essenbly transfer to ths? .storage should be provided at nuclear poorer plants with book registering and wateb- ing the operations over a TV set with tape recording sealed by an IAEA inspector, Watch end rccox*d over a TV set obould probably begin frca the time of fresh fuel assemblies receipt from a storehouse, during charge-die charge* operations in the reactor core, during assembly disposition in the cooling pond storage and during do- livery end loading of assemblies into n container for their transportation to a cnornical reprocessing plent. At all these stages identification of works mraberc nuct be provided* - 9 Should direct assessment of a nuclear material quantity (uranium-235, plutoniua isotopes) be impossible, it uill be more difficult to check the balance of nuclear materials, which are transferred from the nuclear power plant storage to a repro cessing plant. In this cose one must use calculational methods to assess nuclear material contents as a function of a given assembly power and of the reactor irradiation conditions* 134 She method of en assembly gasma-scanning for Cs and 137 Cs Isotope correlation may be used to evaluate uranium burn- up, what makes possible to check and supplement the assembly characteristics, obtained from calculations* Por reliable control of nuclear power plants rjith B33P-type reactors vjhich are furnished by the USSR to other countries tv;o scheduled inspections a year by IAEA seem to be adequate: one at the stage of the scheduled reactor refuelling and the other at the stage of fuel dispatch for reprocessing. In the USSR all nuclear materials In any shape or quan tits' are the property of the state so that guarding and safeguarding of nuclear materials are accomplished by state agencies. Physical protection of nuclear materials found in storage ponds is based on a guard cone principle vrith the access permitt ed to persons directly engaged in the storage operation. JTuel assembly end nuclear material transfer within tho guarded zone and their delivery for transportation arc carried out under the operators supervision (r:ho are responsible for the material cafe guarding) v/ith adequate records and document keeping. - 10 - 4.1.(2.2.1.3) r£ha current practice of nuclear fuel transportation. 1* In the USSR the meat convenient and economic means for nucleor fuel transportation froa a nudoar power plsnt storage to a chemical reprocessing plant is the railway transport* The ad vantages of *his trensport means are the vcs-i; net of railways in the USSR, spur-tracks availability at all nuclear power plan to, possible U36 of large capacity containers and the resulting ca- pability of a large nuclear fuel hatch transportation at a tine* Specially designed container cars end specially equipped railway care are used for this purpose* She container car is a multia?:iG railway trucl: with a body and a packaging fixed on it* A packag ing consists of a shielded container, a pulled out insert and a set of cans for defective assemblies transportation. Tha packaging includes aa well a set of instruments for the container technological parameters control* She shielded con- * tainer is a cylindrical vessel with a leak-tight cover. Steel walls of the cylindrical vessel protect fuel a3cenblies* from failure, thu3 providing radiation safety to the personnel and to the environment under noxrcal transportation conditions and under different accident conditions with the radioactivity re- lease into the environment being excluded, 0.1ie inner cavity of the container vessel is lined with ctaia- leas steel, where as the outer surface is covered with the material amenable to decontamination. Table h gives main characteristics of containers used for the B£33?~typc reactor fuel transportation. - 11 - Table 4 [3] Reactor Containe«iTWr Overall else Shielding Uass, Fuel Assembly Buapc thickness, t charge auabor . diem.,n height, a m t BE3?-400 vertical ' - cylinder 2.3 4.* 0.365 90 3.£U02 30 BE3?-1000 horizon- ... ta2\,f£lia~ 2.1 6.1 0.380 110 3.0'J0 6 der steel o 0.150 hydroge- neous raa- terial The insert of the container is used for fuol assembly dis position; it has a shape of a basket with upper and lower grids fixing the assemblies at distances assuring nuclear safety and preventing the assemblies fron contacting in any accident situ ation. H.2, The existing practice of transport Keens operation. 2o transport fuel from a nuclear power plant a container car is moved into a transfer passage directly adjoining the sto rage pond. The container is disengaged froa the true!: and by a crone is transferred to a special compartment of the ctcrarre. Itfith the help of the refuelling machine fuel assemblies arc taken fron the storage pond sockets and put into the container insert cells. She filled container is humetieally Pealed rrith a cover and taken out of the pond. She container is then trashed by water, equipped with control instruments and nonitared for radiation. Watching the container filling process over a IVset v/ith the recording end, identification of charged osce&bly iwaabcro - 12 - rules out nuclear material diversion. A container sealed by en IAEA inspector after the parame ter stabilisation - water temperature and pressure - is fixed on a transport truck and covered by the truck body. She body serves to prevent strangers access to the trans port container and to arrange the necessary equipment, control instruments and decontamination means• Por a filled container the necessary documentation is com pleted: certificates for charged assemblies with indication of their works numbers, the insert chargcing chart and the radiation control form. After all containers are filled a railway train is formed of container cars, accompanying care and protecting cars. 2he latter are coupled in the head and in the tail of the train to assure safe fuel transportation, Che train has telephone corarau- nication and>convoyed by guard along the whole route. For the cargo safeguarding the receiver is.informed about the train departure time and the probable time of its arriving to the destination. The U3SH acsuro3 transport services for all nuclear power stations built in other countries by agreement with the USSI* according to the "Rules of nuclear fuel transpor tation" developed for the CEIJA countries [ 4> • K3. The ma^or attention at the transport container design stage is paid to safety for the personnel and the environment. A scrieo of temperature end strength calculations as well as of nuclear and radiation oofcty grounding calculations is performed. Pocaiblo consequences of accidents are considered: -.foiling - 13 - of a container from the vehicle, tightness loss with radio activity release into the environment. Transport containers are tested for mechanical strength and tightness by dropping a container on a hard base from 9 m height and on a steel pin from 1 m height. Fire tests are carried out. Model and duzmy container survey permits to get assurance in absolute safety of containers of existing design for the personnel end for the environment during fuel transportation froa a nuclear power plant. V A-.4 (2.2.1.6J A reactor storage working area and capacity need ed for BB?P - type reactor fuel disposition under nuclear safe- 2 '3 ty and radiation cafety conditions are 0.75 m / tU and 6.3 m /-r respectively. In this case to receive the fuel from full reac- tor core discharge a 50 a /G We storage is required, and for 3 year cooling of annually discharged fuel a 70 m / G We storage is required. Overall area and capacity of nuclear power plant 2 3 ' storage are 120 m /G We and 1000 m / G We respectively. / 4 / * . 4,5 (2.2.1.7) Cost estimates of spent fuel storage. Capital investments in spent fuel storage construction greatel/ depend on the total capital investments in a nuclear power plant, v.-hich in turn depend on a station location, nuclear power plant site characteristics, region eeiemicity, ground v/atcr depth etc and general capital investnents in nuclear power plants. Op&rating coots of nuclear power plant spsnt fuel ctorr.gc can contribute up to 1.0/* into the fuel conponcnt prime coot - 14 - of a Jeff electricity, more than 60# of these referring to amor tization costs o? the storage and engineering construction cost. Expences for fue? transportation from a nuclear power, plant to a chemical reprocessing plant may reach 15 - 20 % from overall charges for radio chemical reprocessing. - Iff - LITERATURE 1. Пегросянц А.Н. Атомная техника в СССР. Ы., Атомиздат, 1975 г. 2. Вознесенский В.А., Нихацкин А.Р. и до. 1АЕА-СП-36/336. "Huclear power and its fuel cycle". ->c. of the confe rence. IAEA, Salzburg,1977. 3. Кондратьев A.II., Косарев И.А. и др. IAEA-CN-36/3I6. • •'Kuclear power and its fuel cycle", Proc» of the confe rence. IAEA, Salzburg, 1977. 4. Правила перевозки отработавшего топлива от атомных электро станций страк-аденов СЭЗ. Изд.секретариат СЗВ. М.,1978г. 5. Дергачев К.П., Крутлов А.К., Седов ВЛЦ, Шуклин СВ. 1АЕА-СК-36/333. "Kuclcar power and its fuel cycle". Proc of the conference. IAEA, Salaburg,1977. I(c ASSSEB3 tf> QUESTIOIIS (IKFCE QUESTIOiniAlBE - G20UP VI), USSR 1. nuclear power development forecast. According to the five-year pi en of fclio USSR national econo my development in 1276 - 19-30 the nuclear power plants will roach tha total capacity of 19 - 21 G:J by 1930. In nuclear energetics of the U5S2 EB3P - type reactors (Similar in design to PYJUtypo reactors) end P5IJK - type reac tors (Craphitc-eoclcrcted boilins-watcr channel roactorc) are used in the proportion of 1 : 1. 2. Accumulation of the reactor spent fuel (tU) without taldng into account ito radiochemical reprocessing will result in the fcllov.-inc: by 1930 BB3P - 800 PBKK - 1200 3.£eactcr cooling pond capacity required for the opent fu,cl ctorace. 3.1. BJ33P - typo reactoro. The reactor core fuel charge - 65 tU/GV/. AruiUal fuel die charge from the reactor - 32 tU/dT'yr. Reactor cooling pond capacity considering 3-year cooling: a) for full core die chores - 50 u /£;; b) for aaiual fuel die choree - 23.3 m2/C17«jr. Reactor cooling ponil area - 120 ET/G.7. Reactor co-olios pond volusc - 1000 n'/V*.; by 3.3 a deep. /?- 3.2. P;UK . typo reactors. Tho reactor core fuel charge - 183 tiJ/GYJ. Annual fuel discharge from the reactor - 4$ tU/G»7»yr. The cooling pond capacity: a) for full core discharge - 93 cr/GSf. b) for annual fuel discharge - 24 n /Gtf'yr. Overall area of the reactor cooling pond with safo fuel arrangement and 3-year cooling before chemical reprocessing - 165 n2/Gi7. Reactor cooling pond volume by 12 m deep - 2000 m /GM. 4. At present, the closed fuel cycle is being planned with spent fuel radiochemical reprocessing. She urcnium after chemical reprocessing is returned to tho BB ? and P L2C - type reactors, while tho plutoniua is supposed to bo used in fast reactors. 5. Current progress of reactor storage comiBsioning (water- cool ing ponds). Sotal area of cooling ponds Sotal volume of cooling ponds Year B3 P P in: BB P P UK po\7er plants power plants power plants power plants 1930 1200 1650 10 000 20 000 A delay of fast reactor co:*sicsioning cay bring to a delay of radiochemical reprocessing end would require an increase of the reactor storage capacity or construction of a national sto rey facility. 1? 5.1* The problem of the national storage facility ie not dis cussed at present. 5.b. Should the construction of the national storage facility be necessary, the following requirements must be satisfied. 5.b.3. Location - as a rule, It should be not for from the reprocessing plants - in a region with low density of population; - in a non - seismic area; - in a rogion with convenient Beans of transportation; - in a region with capability of final waste disposal. 5.b.4. Description of transport system. a) Steel cylinder containers (ribbed) uita natural convec tion cooling. Charge of a container: 3 - 4* t of the BB9P reactor fuel; 1.3 t of the PftUK reactor fuel. b) In the USSR containers ere transported by railroad on special vehicles. c) She train is accompanied by guard up to the destination. d) The transportation is accomplished according to "She rules of nuclear fuel safe transportation", (SUA, 1977. H.P.Dorcatchev. »V ; -.'/»>.' IAKA HE0.1S1UV == COPY j-'ROM, 1A_V>._.»AG1STRY cc:-' I'M-;A K;:Gt!"KV REPUBLICA DE VENEZUELA 06/0273 IWrCfc^fc o WtNISTERIO DF ENERGIA V MINMS CONSEJO NACIONAL PARA EL OESARROLLO DE LA MDUSTRIA NUCLEAR Caracas, 5 de Junio de 1.978 r 1 2 JiiN '.3/3 Mr. J. P. (PLTOK ACTION Scientific Secrtf&rV0 «C7IO-« Dear sir, TO: r. s- 6~-» r»" Regarding to the Questionaire we received the 27/04/78, for the collec_ ti6n of the basic data on task 1 foT INFCE working group 6, spent fuel - management, I am enclosing the answer of Question 1, (Nuclear power fore cast) . We cannot answer the rest of the questions because our nuclear po wer Programme is now in the early stage of planning and, of course we ha ve not decided yet the tipe of reactors or fuel cycle to be used. In this situation it is dificult to make an asessment of the neds for spent fuel storage and transportation. yours sincerely ^-IS?. \jMw*&!Hc\- ""~J LUISHARTMANN R. Coordinacion de Reactores Nucleares. LH/fa. (Lc^r^C^y .. O *--'-»''■»(A.- 0090V8 vy 1) NUCLEAR POWER FORECAST. C V\oOe) ^"***-«^Jfear 1978 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Reference - 0 0 0 600 2400 10800 20200 35000 50000 58000 Low - 0 0 0 0 1200 9600 19200 33600 49200 54000 High - 0 0 0 600 3600 12000 24000 39600 52800 60000 VENEZUELA 1 C*9S3*M K0XV1TET 3* £MJPf JTMKy M MHflVCrMW I Kj £T f-J^J *J . f S*V-2M KOM1TET Zh CKcitGETKU I INOUSIBUI » * T ,-N- i C '. « 2Ve2» KOU-Tc Z» ENERGETKO M IMDU5TWJO COJy3£M KC>4*TET 3* EMEPTCTMKA M HHAVCTPMJ* ^ _ *»■ i I800 St ..S7...;?r»*J3«WW. /gj INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY VIENNA KARNTNER RING 11. GENTLEMEN, I would like to apologize for being so late in sending you -the replies to the Questionnaires con cerning the INFCE study. However, I do hope that they will be of some use in making the final version of the Study. I would like to point out that Yugoslavia has not made a long-term programme on the nuclear energy development yet, therefore the estimates of the future development of the country in this field, given in . connection with the WG1A/2A, should be taken just as approximate ones. May I also add that there are no changes in the uranium resources in Yugoslavia as to the ones given in the Joint report NEA/IAEA (Uranium resources, production and demand, December 1977) therefore all the necessary data for the INFCE study concerning the nuclear raw material potential can be found in this report. ""^ J PRESIDENT J OF THE FEDERAL COMMITTEE FOR ENERGY AND INDUSTRY Eng. S.Matkaliev PERMANENT MISSION O* It-- SOOAlttt FEDERAL REPUBLIC CF VUGOSIAVIA lO IHE INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY VIENNA International Atociic 2ner£y Arency I 27 J C 3 office Viehna, taratner Ring 11 Enclosed please find iu3stionnaire3 coccercisg the IETCS study v:hich have oasn prepared by federal authorities^ of Yugoslavia. ^' Dr Petar Strohal, counselio; 1 Vienna, Ilsy 30, 1979. ■ 3 0 M„ \r | A C T • D M Enclosure -3 ^" JJi£i^Sib) <. + ui* IX<-«_ «» JU^tr/j- 017310 YUGOSLAVIA T :.iJr- -MiiJJ-JJlU'iriAliisi - -J-tti-UPVI 1. '.uclear pcn.er forecost by year l'enta.ive forecast of power available untill the year 2CG0. The share of nuclear power is estimated at: YiAR 1935 1990 1995 2000 I:! i^ALi^D ITUCL'JAR CAPACITY (GV/e) 0,6 3,4 ?,o 11,5 2. Spent fuel generation by year Only the spent fuel generation from the Nuclear rower Plant Krsko could be indicated, amounting to 17 t/y of P3H spent fuel. Since the type of the reactor fcr future power plants is not selected as yet no further data on spent fuel feneration could be given. 5» Pool reactor spore capacity requirements by reac.-or type (a) P'.7H : full core discharge 4. Under the fuel cycle conditions which you anticipate in your country what requirements have you identified for away from reactor (AFR) storage? There are no plans for the back-end fuel cycle facilities for the time being. Therefor no specific consideration was given to the problem of Ai-'S storocte so far* 5« Current propjaroiae ( existing; building under construe tion and commited) spent fuel disposition facilities by year 2. (a) At reactor storoKe, by reactor type: (1) Kir? Krsko.PtfK under construction has 4-/3 spent fuel storage pool capacity* (2) Storage capacity is planned to increase for another lo/3 by installing the cortpoct racks. (b) i'here are no plans for AFi? storage. (c) There ore no plans for an international participation yet. The Governraent of Yugoslavia is prepared to store the HVP Krsko irradiated fuel in an adequate storage facility on the teritorry of the SFR of Yugoslavia for a sufficiently long period to enable its possible subsequent utilization for the requirements of the econo mic development of Yugoslavia* The Si'HY has also expressed its readiness to extend the temporary spent fuel storage capacities, while the USA notified on their readiness to render adequate assistance. 6. future nuclear power plants are planned to have sufficient storage capacity to avoid storage short fall. 7* Spert fuel disposition future plans ( planned but not comraited) (a) The initial loading and first few reloads will be stored due to imposed conditions* No decision has been reached for further reloads 3. 0. .i;>ont fuel short-fall ( by year) based on (1) to (7). iio short-fail is planned. 9. /ith respect to current programme (5) and future plans (7) identify spent fuel Eoveuent end Ai'3 storo^e constraints. (a) Due to the United nuclear power programme, the transport infrastructure should net pose additional constraints. It is plsnned to initial ly lease the casks for spent fuel transportation. (b) At present , no particular problems viith regu lations and/or agreements ere envisaged, pro vided the imposed conditions on fresh fuel sup ply are interpreted in lautuclly acceptable ter:i:s ond international principles. t. +> «> r. -H XI 01 a H H « P •rl 06 r« iH H H H cfl a o H t, H O V o o •rl V H W w t> u. •rl «3 (« e u rf 6 g 1 s o o CM s 2 O rt K I*) Tf IO o <9 H o w N < rj < < u