36Th Annual Radioactive Waste Management Symposium 2010

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

36th Annual Radioactive Waste Management Symposium 2010 (WM 2010) Phoenix, Arizona, USA 7-11 March 2010 Volume 1 of 6 ISBN: 978-1-61738-797-5 TABLE OF CONTENTS VOLUME 1 SESSION 01 - WM2010 SYMPOSIUM PLENARY SESSION 2010 Waste Management Symposia - Environmental Management 1 Ines Triay The Current Geological Disposal in China 36 WongJu Waste Management Conference 2010 - Improving the Future by Dealing with the Past 95 Bruce A. Stanski SESSION 02 - HOT TOPICS IN US DOE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Hot Topics in US DOE Environmental Management 109 James Gallagher, Edward Helminski, Leslie Jardine SESSION 03 -WORLDWIDE PERSPECTIVES ON WASTE MANAGEMENT ISSUES Worldwide Perspectives on Waste Management Issues 112 John Mathieson, Mark Matthews The Current Geological Disposal in China 115 Wang Jit Sellaficld Ltd's Experience with International Waste Management 172 Mike Johnson RW Management in Ukraine: Current State and Perspectives 183 V, V. Tokarevsky Transparency Programme of the Swedish National Council for Nuclear Waste - Risk Communication & Management 205 Carl Reinhold Brakenhielm U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board's Post-Yucca Mountain Role 213 Daniel Metlay SESSION 04 - HOW CAN NETWORKS IMPROVE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ER PROJECTS? The EURSSEM Initiative/Network (Environmental Radiation Survey and Site Execution Manual) 220 L P. M. Van Valzen. R. Schtiltz How Can Networks Improve the Implementation of Environmental Remediation Projects 236 Peter M. Booth SESSION 05 - WORLDWIDE TOPICS IN PACKAGING DESIGN AND TESTING Scale Testing of Battelle Energy Alliance (BEA) Research Reactor Cask (BRRC) In Support of Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Licensing -10459 264 Charles Tennis Recent Experiences in Mechanical Design Assessment of Spent Fuel and HLW Casks by Competent Authority in Germany-10093 274 Frank Wills, Bcrnhard Drosle, Karslen Milller, Uwe Zencker Drop and Fire Testing of Spent Fuel and HLW Transport Casks at "BAM Test Site Technical Safety" - 10079 284 BernhardDroste, Karslen Miillcr, Thomas Qnereetti, Andre Mttsolff Static and Dynamic Calculation Approaches for Mechanical Design Assessment of Type B Packages for Radioactive Material Transport -10193 295 Steffen Komann, Martin Neumann, Viktor Ballheimer, Frank Wille, Mike Weber, Linan Qiao, BernhardDroste SESSION 06 - HLW AND SNF - PROCESSES. TECHNOLOGIES AND OPERATIONS Updating the Regulatory Framework for Spent Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing - 10127 304 Thomas Hillz, Allen Croff, Raymond Wymer Signature Research on Spent Fuel and Nuclear Materials at the National Nuclear Laboratory, United Kingdom - 10361 318 Zara Banfleld, Chris Rhodes, MattChugh Completing the Resolution of Technical Issues Identified by Two Major Reviews of the Waste Treatment Plant - 10474 328 Garth Duncan, Richard Edwards, Walter Tamasaitis Optimization of Spent Fuel Direct Disposal Technology for a Geological Repository in Rock Salt in Germany - 10S04 336 Bernt Haverkamp, Enrique Biurrun, Wilhelm Bollingerfehr, Wolfgang Filbert. Reinhold Graf SESSION 07 - WASTE CERTIFICATION. ACCEPTANCE AND DISPOSAL FOR LLW, ILW, AND MW Measurements Taken in Support of Qualification of Processing Savannah River Site Low-Level Liquid Waste into Saltstone - 10160 348 Marissa Reigel, NedBibler, Alex Cozzi, Cecilia Diprele, Jeffrey Ray, Aaron Slaub Overview of Nevada Test Site Radioactive and Mixed Waste Disposal Operations - 10280 358 J. T. Carilli, Susan Krenzien, Patrick Arnold, Sydney Gordon, John Wrapp Nevada Test Site (NTS) Radioactive Waste Acceptance Program (RWAP) and the Disposal of Unique Waste Streams-10332 370 Gregg Geisinger, Sydney Gordon, Katie Tanaka Topical Aspects of Waste Container Approval for the Upcoming KONRAD Repository - 10012 381 Holger Va'lzke, Volker Noack, Manel Ellauz SESSION 08 - ACCELERATED DEACTIVATION AND DECOMMISSIONING OF FACILITIES Accelerating Decommissioning at Scllaficld: A New Management Approach - 10052 393 Russell Mel/or Challenges to Planning for and Executing Successful Waste Management in a Complex Decommissioning Environment - A Sellafield Perspective -10503 403 Helen Cassidy Expedited Release Process for the Decommissioning of Sites with Low Residual Levels - 10152 414 Kenneth Duvall, Carol Berger, Alan Duff, Eric Barbour, Bill Thomas Savannah River Site R-Reactor Disassembly Basin In-Situ Decommissioning - 10499 426 Christine Langton, Mike Serralo, John Blankenship, William Griffin - SESSION 09 - US DOE SITE SPECIFIC AND CITIZEN ADVISORY BOARDS (CABS) PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT MAKES A DIFFERENCE Working Logic: Waste Project Management for the 21st Century - 10495 437 Peter Basion, J. D. Campbell, Ralph Phelps Educating Volunteers, Stakeholders, and Workers by the Use of Input/Output Analysis Graphics at Savannah River Site (SRS) -10331 452 Manuel Betlencourt Effective Citizen Advocacy of Beneficial Nuclear Technologies: Being the Nuclear Voice - 10108 463 Susan Wood, Clinton Wolfe Engaging Citizens - Dialogue with the Stakeholders is at the Core of AREVA's Strategy -10389 474 Laurence Pernot, Remi Bera - SESSION 10 - SAFEGUARDS AND CONSEQUENCE MANAGEMENT NEXT GENERATION REACTORS TO RDD International Development of Safeguards by Design of Nuclear Facilities and Processes - 10030 478 David Hebditch, Michelle Wise, Jon Martin, Sinclair J. Third Performance Evaluation of Decontamination Technologies for Dirty Bomb Cleanup - 10036 493 John Drake, Rick Demmer, Ryan James A First-Order Estimate of Debris and Waste Resulting from a Hypothetical Radiological Dispersal Device Incident -10232 499 Paul Lemieux, Joe Wood, Daniel Schultheisz, Thomas Peake, Mario lerardi, Colin Hayes, Molly Rodgers - SESSION 11 - US DOE FEATURED SITE: HANFORD ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND CHALLENGES US DOE Featured Site: Hanford - Accomplishments and Challenges 513 Dave Brockinan, Stacy Charboneau, Todd Nelson Hanford Site Overview 517 DavidBrockman Hanford Site Office of River Protection 529 Stacy Charboneau Mission Support Alliance 543 Frank Figueroa Cleaning Up the Columbia River Corridor 553 Ryan Dodd PNNL Impact on Hanford Cleanup: S&T Innovations Transforming Subsurface Remediation 565 Wyane Johnson 573 Mobile Arm Retrieval System , .............. , . ..... Scott Saunders PNNL Impact on Hanford Cleanup: S&T Underpinning of Hanford Tank Waste Treatment 584 Tom Broims SESSION 12 -HOT TOPICS AND EMERGING ISSUES IN US COMMERCIAL LOW LEVEL RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT 12 Hot Topics and Emerging Issues in US Commercial Low Level Radioactive Waste Management 590 Marcia Man, Kathryn Haynes] Linda Beach WCS' Hot Topic Items 594 RodBaltzer U.S. Army Joint Munitions Command: Low-Level Radioactive Waste Status Update 601 Kelly Crooks SESSION 13 - SELECTED KEY TOPICS IN US COMMERCIAL LLW MANAGEMENT - Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management in the United States - Where Have We Been: Where Are We Going 10417 613 Lany Camper The Continuing Expansion of Waste Control Specialists LLC Licenses & Capabilities - 10514 635 Michael Lauer Importing and Exporting Radioactive Materials and Waste for Treatment, Processing and Recycling - 10S7S 639 John Greeves, Jim Lieberman SESSION 14 - YUCCA MOUNTAIN. WHAT'S NEXT? PLUS AN INTERNATIONAL UPDATE ON NATIONAL STRATEGIES FOR SNF MANAGEMENT AND DISPOSAL Yucca Mountain Project, What's Next? Plus and International Update on National Strategies for SNF Management and Disposal 651 Robert Edmonds Status of Final Repository Development in the Federal Republic of Germany 654 Enrique Bhimm Swedish Program for Final Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel & Nuclear Waste 670 Carl ReinholdBrakenhielm, Lena Andersson-Skog, Yvonne Brandberg, Willis Foisting, Tuija ffilding-Rydevik, Gerl Kmttsson, Inga-Britt Lindblad, Clas-Ollo Wene NYE County NWRPO: If Not YM - What Else: How We Got Here, What Did We Dod Wrong, Where Will We Go 704 Darrell Lacy History - Why Arc We At This Stage? 720 Frank L. Parker SESSION 15 - OPERATING EXPERIENCE AND PROGRESS IN THE CONDITIONING, STORAGE OR DISPOSAL OF HLW AND SNF The Design and Manufacture of Equipment for the Automated Sampling of Process Streams for the Hanford Waste Treatment Project -10267 727 Nicholas Doyle La Hague Continuous Improvement Program to go Beyond the Current High Level of Equipment Availability of the Vitrification Facility: Operation Support with Specific Numerical Tools -10128 740 Julien Lauzel, Eric Chauvin, Eric Tranche, Nicolas Hvon, Fabrice Pereira Mendes, Philippe Malmt, Philippe Gntber Functional Design and Operational Requirements for a Storage Facility for High-Levcl Waste Canisters, New York, USA- 10309 750 Letlie Chilson, K. K, Gupta, Cynthia Dayton, MarkBellis Caustic Side Solvent Extraction at the Savannah River Site: Operating Experience and Lessons Learned - 1O10S 762 Steven Brown Sludge Mass Reduction by Aluminum Dissolution at the Savannah River Site -10428 773 Hasmukh Shah, MarkKeefer, JeffGillam Idaho Closure Project Integrated Waste Treatment Project Construction and Startup Status and Lessons Learned -10433 784 Ray Geimer SESSION 16 -APPLICATION OF INNOVATIVE D&D TECHNOLOGIES Innovative Manned and Robotic Techniques that Reduce Dose and Increase Decontamination and Decommissioning Efficiency and Safety - 10132 794 Charles Vallance, John Bramble), Rex Wamshet; Robert Walcheski - 806 In-Situ Measurement of Low Enrichment Uranium Holdup in Process Gas Piping at K-25 10244 Brandon Rasmussen, Martin Clapham, Steve Smith - 821 Evaluation of Trcnchless Technologies for Installation of Pipelines in Radioactive Environments 10249 Sharon Robinson, Nick Sullivan, Bradley Patlon, Robert Juhin, Kathy Bugbee at Savannah River Control Testing of
Recommended publications
  • Spent Nuclear Fuel Pools in the US

    Spent Nuclear Fuel Pools in the US

    Spent Nuclear Fuel Pools in the U.S.: Reducing the Deadly Risks of Storage front cover WITH SUPPORT FROM: WITH SUPPORT FROM: By Robert Alvarez 1112 16th St. NW, Suite 600, Washington DC 20036 - www.ips-dc.org May 2011 About the Author Robert Alvarez, an Institute for Policy Studies senior scholar, served as a Senior Policy Advisor to the Secre- tary of Energy during the Clinton administration. Institute for Policy Studies (IPS-DC.org) is a community of public scholars and organizers linking peace, justice, and the environment in the U.S. and globally. We work with social movements to promote true democracy and challenge concentrated wealth, corporate influence, and military power. Project On Government Oversight (POGO.org) was founded in 1981 as an independent nonprofit that investigates and exposes corruption and other misconduct in order to achieve a more effective, accountable, open, and ethical federal government. Institute for Policy Studies 1112 16th St. NW, Suite 600 Washington, DC 20036 http://www.ips-dc.org © 2011 Institute for Policy Studies [email protected] For additional copies of this report, see www.ips-dc.org Table of Contents Summary ...............................................................................................................................1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................4 Figure 1: Explosion Sequence at Reactor No. 3 ........................................................4 Figure 2: Reactor No. 3
  • The Nuclear Waste Primer September 2016 What Is Nuclear Waste?

    The Nuclear Waste Primer September 2016 What Is Nuclear Waste?

    The Nuclear Waste Primer September 2016 What is Nuclear Waste? Nuclear waste is the catch-all term for anything contaminated with radioactive material. Nuclear waste can be broadly divided into three categories: • Low-level waste (LLW), comprised of protective clothing, medical waste, and other lightly-contaminated items • Transuranic waste (TRU), comprised of long-lived isotopes heavier than uranium • High-level waste (HLW), comprised of spent nuclear fuel and other highly-radioactive materials Low-level waste is relatively short-lived and easy to handle. Currently, four locations for LLW disposal exist in the United States. Two of them, Energy Solutions in Clive, Utah and Waste Control Specialists in Andrews, Texas, accept waste from any U.S. state. Transuranic waste is often a byproduct of nuclear weapons production and contains long-lived radioactive elements heavier than uranium, like plutonium and americium. Currently, the U.S. stores TRU waste at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, New Mexico. High-level waste includes spent nuclear fuel and the most radioactive materials produced by nuclear weapons production. Yucca Mountain is the currently designated high-level waste repository for the United States. 1 | What is Spent Nuclear Fuel? Spent nuclear fuel (SNF), alternatively referred to as used nuclear fuel, is the primary byproduct of nuclear reactors. In commercial power reactors in the U.S., fuel begins as uranium oxide clad in a thin layer of zirconium-aluminum cladding. After several years inside of the reactor, around fi ve percent of the uranium has been converted in some way, ranging from short-lived and highly radioactive fi ssion products to long-lived actinides like plutonium, americium, and neptunium.
  • Nuclear Transmutation Strategies for Management of Long-Lived Fission

    Nuclear Transmutation Strategies for Management of Long-Lived Fission

    PRAMANA c Indian Academy of Sciences Vol. 85, No. 3 — journal of September 2015 physics pp. 517–523 Nuclear transmutation strategies for management of long-lived fission products S KAILAS1,2,∗, M HEMALATHA2 and A SAXENA1 1Nuclear Physics Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai 400 085, India 2UM–DAE Centre for Excellence in Basic Sciences, Mumbai 400 098, India ∗Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] DOI: 10.1007/s12043-015-1063-z; ePublication: 27 August 2015 Abstract. Management of long-lived nuclear waste produced in a reactor is essential for long- term sustenance of nuclear energy programme. A number of strategies are being explored for the effective transmutation of long-lived nuclear waste in general, and long-lived fission products (LLFP), in particular. Some of the options available for the transmutation of LLFP are discussed. Keywords. Nuclear transmutation; long-lived fission products; (n, γ ) cross-section; EMPIRE. PACS Nos 28.41.Kw; 25.40.Fq; 24.60.Dr 1. Introduction It is recognized that for long-term energy security, nuclear energy is an inevitable option [1]. For a sustainable nuclear energy programme, the management of long-lived nuclear waste is very critical. Radioactive nuclei like Pu, minor actinides like Np, Am and Cm and long-lived fission products like 79Se, 93Zr, 99Tc, 107Pd, 126Sn, 129I and 135Cs constitute the main waste burden from a power reactor. In this paper, we shall discuss the management strategies for nuclear waste in general, and long-lived fission products, in particular. 2. Management of nuclear waste The radioactive nuclei which are produced in a power reactor and which remain in the spent fuel of the reactor form a major portion of nuclear waste.
  • 小型飛翔体/海外 [Format 2] Technical Catalog Category

    小型飛翔体/海外 [Format 2] Technical Catalog Category

    小型飛翔体/海外 [Format 2] Technical Catalog Category Airborne contamination sensor Title Depth Evaluation of Entrained Products (DEEP) Proposed by Create Technologies Ltd & Costain Group PLC 1.DEEP is a sensor analysis software for analysing contamination. DEEP can distinguish between surface contamination and internal / absorbed contamination. The software measures contamination depth by analysing distortions in the gamma spectrum. The method can be applied to data gathered using any spectrometer. Because DEEP provides a means of discriminating surface contamination from other radiation sources, DEEP can be used to provide an estimate of surface contamination without physical sampling. DEEP is a real-time method which enables the user to generate a large number of rapid contamination assessments- this data is complementary to physical samples, providing a sound basis for extrapolation from point samples. It also helps identify anomalies enabling targeted sampling startegies. DEEP is compatible with small airborne spectrometer/ processor combinations, such as that proposed by the ARM-U project – please refer to the ARM-U proposal for more details of the air vehicle. Figure 1: DEEP system core components are small, light, low power and can be integrated via USB, serial or Ethernet interfaces. 小型飛翔体/海外 Figure 2: DEEP prototype software 2.Past experience (plants in Japan, overseas plant, applications in other industries, etc) Create technologies is a specialist R&D firm with a focus on imaging and sensing in the nuclear industry. Createc has developed and delivered several novel nuclear technologies, including the N-Visage gamma camera system. Costainis a leading UK construction and civil engineering firm with almost 150 years of history.
  • Spent Fuel Reprocessing

    Spent Fuel Reprocessing

    Spent Fuel Reprocessing Robert Jubin Oak Ridge National Laboratory Reprocessing of used nuclear fuel is undertaken for several reasons. These include (1) recovery of the valuable fissile constituents (primarily 235U and plutonium) for subsequent reuse in recycle fuel; (2) reduction in the volume of high-level waste (HLW) that must be placed in a geologic repository; and (3) recovery of special isotopes. There are two broad approaches to reprocessing: aqueous and electrochemical. This portion of the course will only address the aqueous methods. Aqueous reprocessing involves the application of mechanical and chemical processing steps to separate, recover, purify, and convert the constituents in the used fuel for subsequent use or disposal. Other major support systems include chemical recycle and waste handling (solid, HLW, low-level liquid waste (LLLW), and gaseous waste). The primary steps are shown in Figure 1. Figure 1. Aqueous Reprocessing Block Diagram. Head-End Processes Mechanical Preparations The head end of a reprocessing plant is mechanically intensive. Fuel assemblies weighing ~0.5 MT must be moved from a storage facility, may undergo some degree of disassembly, and then be sheared or chopped and/or de-clad. The typical head-end process is shown in Figure 2. In the case of light water reactor (LWR) fuel assemblies, the end sections are removed and disposed of as waste. The fuel bundle containing the individual fuel pins can be further disassembled or sheared whole into segments that are suitable for subsequent processing. During shearing, some fraction of the radioactive gases and non- radioactive decay product gases will be released into the off-gas systems, which are designed to recover these and other emissions to meet regulatory release limits.
  • GAO-15-141, SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL MANAGEMENT: Outreach

    GAO-15-141, SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL MANAGEMENT: Outreach

    United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Requesters October 2014 SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL MANAGEMENT Outreach Needed to Help Gain Public Acceptance for Federal Activities That Address Liability GAO-15-141 D October 2014 SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL MANAGEMENT Outreach Needed to Help Gain Public Acceptance for Federal Activities That Address Liability Highlights of GAO-15-141, a report to congressional requesters Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found DOE is responsible for disposing of Spent nuclear fuel—the used fuel removed from nuclear power reactors—is commercial spent nuclear fuel. DOE expected to accumulate at an average rate of about 2,200 metric tons per year in entered into contracts with owners and the United States. This spent nuclear fuel is mostly stored wet, submerged in generators of spent nuclear fuel to pools of water. However, since pools have been reaching their capacities, begin disposing of it beginning in 1998, owners and generators of spent nuclear fuel (typically utilities and reactor with plans for disposal in a national operators) have been transferring it to canisters that are placed in casks on repository. DOE, however, was unable concrete pads for dry storage—which is an expensive and time-consuming to meet the 1998 date and, as a result process. When operating reactors’ licenses begin to expire in the 2030s, the rate of lawsuits, the federal government has of spent nuclear fuel accumulation is expected to decrease, but the amount in dry paid out about $3.7 billion for storage storage will increase as the pools are closed and all spent nuclear fuel is costs.
  • Radiological Basics

    Radiological Basics

    Transportation Emergency Preparedness Program MERRTT Radiological Basics INTRODUCTION The reliance upon, and use of, radioactive material in agriculture, notesnotes industry, and medicine continues to increase. As the manufacture, notesnotes use, and disposal of radioactive material has increased, so has the need to transport it. Consequently, the potential for you as a responder to encounter an incident involving some type of radioactive material has increased. Having knowledge of radiological hazards, and the terminology used to describe them, will increase your ability to quickly recognize, safely respond, and accurately relay information during an incident involving radioactive material. PURPOSE Upon completion of this module, you will have a better understanding of the basic structure of an atom and the fundamentals of radiation. MODULE OBJECTIVES Upon completion of this module, you will be able to: 1. Identify the basic components of an atom. 2. Define ionizing radiation, radioactivity, radioactive material, and radioactive contamination. 3. Distinguish between radiation and contamination. 4. Identify some commonly transported sources of radioactive material. 01/05 rev. 3 2-1 Transportation Emergency Preparedness Program MERRTT Radiological Basics BACKGROUND notesnotes Radiation is all around us and has been present since the birth of notesnotes this planet. Today, both man-made and natural radioactive material are part of our daily lives. We use radioactive material for beneficial purposes, such as generating electricity and diagnosing and treating medical conditions. Radiation is used in many ways to improve our health and the quality of our lives. In 1895, while working in his laboratory, Wilhelm Roentgen discovered a previously unknown phenomenon: rays that could penetrate solid objects.
  • Nuclear Energy & the Environmental Debate

    Nuclear Energy & the Environmental Debate

    FEATURES Nuclear energy & the environmental debate: The context of choices Through international bodies on climate change, the roles of nuclear power and other energy options are being assessed by Evelyne ^Environmental issues are high on international mental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which Bertel and Joop agendas. Governments, interest groups, and citi- has been active since 1988. Since the energy Van de Vate zens are increasingly aware of the need to limit sector is responsible for the major share of an- environmental impacts from human activities. In thropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, interna- the energy sector, one focus has been on green- tional organisations having expertise and man- house gas emissions which could lead to global date in the field of energy, such as the IAEA, are climate change. The issue is likely to be a driving actively involved in the activities of these bodies. factor in choices about energy options for elec- In this connection, the IAEA participated in the tricity generation during the coming decades. preparation of the second Scientific Assessment Nuclear power's future will undoubtedly be in- Report (SAR) of the Intergovernmental Panel on fluenced by this debate, and its potential role in Climate Change (IPCC). reducing environmental impacts from the elec- The IAEA has provided the IPCC with docu- tricity sector will be of central importance. mented information and results from its ongoing Scientifically there is little doubt that increas- programmes on the potential role of nuclear ing atmospheric levels of greenhouse gases, such power in alleviating the risk of global climate as carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane, will cause change.
  • Radioactive Waste

    Radioactive Waste

    Radioactive Waste 07/05/2011 1 Regulations 2 Regulations 1. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) 10 CFR 20 Subpart K. Various approved options for radioactive waste disposal. (See also Appendix F) 10 CFR 35.92. Decay in storage of medically used byproduct material. 10 CFR 60. Disposal of high-level wastes in geologic repositories. 10 CFR 61. Shallow land disposal of low level waste. 10 CFR 62. Criteria and procedures for emergency access to non-Federal and regional low-level waste disposal facilities. 10 CFR 63. Disposal of high-level rad waste at Yucca Mountain, NV 10 CFR 71 Subpart H. Quality assurance for waste packaging and transportation. 10 CFR 72. High level waste storage at an MRS 3 Regulations 2. Department of Energy (DOE) DOE Order 435.1 Radioactive Waste Management. General Requirements regarding radioactive waste. 10 CFR 960. General Guidelines for the Recommendation of Sites for the Nuclear Waste Repositories. Site selection guidelines for a waste repository. The following are not regulations but they provide guidance regarding the implementation of DOE Order 435.1: DOE Manual 435.1-1. Radioactive Waste Management Manual. Describes the requirements and establishes specific responsibilities for implementing DOE O 435.1. DOE Guide 435.1-1. Suggestions and acceptable ways of implementing DOE M 435.1-1 4 Regulations 3. Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR 191. Environmental Standards for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-level and Transuranic Radioactive Wastes. Protection for the public over the next 10,000 years from the disposal of high-level and transuranic wastes. 4. Department of Transportation 49 CFR Parts 171 to 177.
  • Data Base for Radioactive Waste Management, Waste Source Options Report

    Data Base for Radioactive Waste Management, Waste Source Options Report

    NUREG/CR-1759 Vol. 2 Data Base for Data Base for, Radioactive Waste Management Waste Source Options Report Manuscript Completed: August 1981 Date Published: November 1981 Prepared by R. E. Wild, 0. I. Oztunali, J. J. Clancy, C. J. Pitt, E. D. Picazo Dames and Moore, Inc. 20 Haarlem Avenue White Plains, NY 10603 Prepared for Division of Waste Management Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20556 NRC FIN B6420 Availability of Reference Materials Cited in NRC Publications Most documents cited in NRC publications will be available from one of the following sources: 1. The NRC Public Document Room, 1717 H Street., N.W. Washington, DC 20555 2. The NRC/GPO Sales Program, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555 3. The National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161 Although the listing that follows represents the majority of documents cited in NRC publications, it is not intended to be exhaustive. Referenced documents available for inspection and copying for a fee from the NRC Public Document Room include NRC correspondence and internal NRC memoranda; NRC Office of Inspection and Enforce- ment bulletins, circulars, information notices, inspection and investigation notices; Licensee Event Reports; vendor reports and correspondence; Commission papers; and applicant and licensee documents and correspondence. The following documents in the NUREG series are available for purchase from the NRC/GPO Sales Pro- gram: formal NRC staff and contractor reports, NRC-sponsored conference proceedings, and NRC booklets and brochures. Also available are Regulatory Guides, NRC regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations, and Nuclear Regulatory Commission Issuances.
  • Characteristics of Spent Nuclear Fuel and Cladding Relevant to High-Level Waste Source Term-CNWRA 93-006 Property of CNWRA 93-006 CNWRA Library

    Characteristics of Spent Nuclear Fuel and Cladding Relevant to High-Level Waste Source Term-CNWRA 93-006 Property of CNWRA 93-006 CNWRA Library

    CNWRA 93-006 :~~~~~~~~~ I I S _~~~~~~~~~~~ Prepared for Nuclear Regulatory Commission Contract NRC-02-88-005 Prepared by Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses San Antonio, Texas May 1993 462.2 --- T19930511000 8 Characteristics of Spent Nuclear Fuel and Cladding Relevant to High-Level Waste Source Term-CNWRA 93-006 Property of CNWRA 93-006 CNWRA Library CHARACTERISTICS OF SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL AND CLADDING RELEVANT TO HIGH-LEVEL WASTE SOURCE TERM Prepared for Nuclear Regulatory Commission Contract NRC-02-88-005 Prepared by Hersh K. Manaktala Center for Nuclear Waste Regulatory Analyses San Antonio, Texas May 1993 PREVIOUS REPORTS IN SERIES Number Name Date Issued CNWRA 92-017 An Assessment of Borosilicate Glass as a High-Level Waste Form September 1992 CNWRA 92-018 Leaching of Borosilicate Glass Using Draft ASTM Procedure for High-Level Waste August 1992 ii --- ABSTRACT This report, based on literature study, describes characteristics of light water reactor (LWR) fuel assemblies for boiling water reactors (BWR) and pressurized water reactors (PWR) and the changes that take place in both cladding and uranium dioxide fuel during service in commercial power reactors. This information is provided as a background for the evaluation of important factors related to fuel stability under geologic repository conditions. Data related to discharged fuel storage (both wet and dry) are also provided, along with the condition of the fuel in terms of damaged and leaking fuel assemblies. The degradation of spent fuel and cladding while in service in the reactor and likely degradation in a geologic repository are discussed in terms of cladding oxidation and corrosion, and fuel-pellet cracking, fuel restructuring, microstructure and fission product mobility, inventory and distribution of fission products, fuel pellet rim effect, and fission gas release and pressure increase.
  • Radioactive Waste Management of Fusion Power Plants

    Radioactive Waste Management of Fusion Power Plants

    14 Radioactive Waste Management of Fusion Power Plants Luigi Di Pace1, Laila El-Guebaly2, Boris Kolbasov3, Vincent Massaut4 and Massimo Zucchetti5 1EURATOM/ENEA Fusion Association, ENEA C.R Frascati 2University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin 3Kurchatov Institute, Moscow 4SCK – CEN, Mol 5EURATOM/ENEA Fusion Association, Politecnico di Torino, Torino 1,5Italy 2USA 3Russia 4Belgium 1. Introduction This chapter outlines the attractive environmental features of nuclear fusion, presents an integral scheme to manage fusion activated materials during operation and after decommissioning, compares the volume of fusion and fission waste, covers the recycling, clearance, and disposal concepts and their official radiological limits, and concludes with a section summarizing the newly developed strategy for fusion power plants. As fusion plays an essential role in the future energy market providing an environmentally attractive source of nuclear energy (Ongena & Van Oost, 2001), it is predictable that there will be tens of fusion power plants commissioned worldwide on an annual basis by the end of the 21st century. The ability of these fusion power plants to handle the radioactive waste stream during operation and after decommissioning suggests re-evaluating the underground disposal option at the outset before considering the environmental impact statement needed for licensing applications. Adopting the 1970s preferred approach of disposing the activated materials in geological repositories after plant decommissioning is becoming difficult to envision because of the limited capacity of existing repositories, difficulty of building new ones, tighter environmental control, and radwaste burden for future generations. Alternatively, fusion scientists are currently promoting a new strategy: avoid underground disposal as much as possible, implement at the maximum extent the recycling of activated materials within the nuclear industry, and/or the clearance and release to commercial markets if materials contain traces of radioactivity.