Developing a Concept for a National Used Fuel Interim Storage Facility in the United States

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Wayne Lewis
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Waste ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
The United States ◽  
Yucca Mountain ◽  
Storage Facility ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Geological Repository ◽  
Interim Storage

In the United States (U.S.) the nuclear waste issue has plagued the nuclear industry for decades. Originally, spent fuel was to be reprocessed but with the threat of nuclear proliferation, spent fuel reprocessing has been eliminated, at least for now. In 1983, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 [1] was established, authorizing development of one or more spent fuel and high-level nuclear waste geological repositories and a consolidated national storage facility, called a “Monitored Retrievable Storage” facility, that could store the spent nuclear fuel until it could be placed into the geological repository. Plans were under way to build a geological repository, Yucca Mountain, but with the decision by President Obama to terminate the development of Yucca Mountain, a consolidated national storage facility that can store spent fuel for an interim period until a new repository is established has become very important. Since reactor sites have not been able to wait for the government to come up with a storage or disposal location, spent fuel remains in wet or dry storage at each nuclear plant. The purpose of this paper is to present a concept developed to address the DOE’s goals stated above. This concept was developed over the past few months by collaboration between the DOE and industry experts that have experience in designing spent nuclear fuel facilities. The paper examines the current spent fuel storage conditions at shutdown reactor sites, operating reactor sites, and the type of storage systems (transportable versus non-transportable, welded or bolted). The concept lays out the basis for a pilot storage facility to house spent fuel from shutdown reactor sites and then how the pilot facility can be enlarged to a larger full scale consolidated interim storage facility.

scholarly journals The Need for Integrating the Back End of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle in the United States of America

MRS Advances ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (19) ◽  
pp. 991-1003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evaristo J. Bonano ◽  
Elena A. Kalinina ◽  
Peter N. Swift
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
The United States ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Dry Storage ◽  
The Us

ABSTRACTCurrent practice for commercial spent nuclear fuel management in the United States of America (US) includes storage of spent fuel in both pools and dry storage cask systems at nuclear power plants. Most storage pools are filled to their operational capacity, and management of the approximately 2,200 metric tons of spent fuel newly discharged each year requires transferring older and cooler fuel from pools into dry storage. In the absence of a repository that can accept spent fuel for permanent disposal, projections indicate that the US will have approximately 134,000 metric tons of spent fuel in dry storage by mid-century when the last plants in the current reactor fleet are decommissioned. Current designs for storage systems rely on large dual-purpose (storage and transportation) canisters that are not optimized for disposal. Various options exist in the US for improving integration of management practices across the entire back end of the nuclear fuel cycle.

Measurement of Atmospheric Sea Salt Concentration in the Dry Storage Facility of the Spent Nuclear Fuel

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masumi Wataru ◽  
Hisashi Kato ◽  
Satoshi Kudo ◽  
Naoko Oshima ◽  
Koji Wada ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Sea Salt ◽  
Storage Facility ◽  
Japan Society ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Dry Storage ◽  
Storage Methods ◽  
Interim Storage

Spent nuclear fuel coming from a Japanese nuclear power plant is stored in the interim storage facility before reprocessing. There are two types of the storage methods which are wet and dry type. In Japan, it is anticipated that the dry storage facility will increase compared with the wet type facility. The dry interim storage facility using the metal cask has been operated in Japan. In another dry storage technology, there is a concrete overpack. Especially in USA, a lot of concrete overpacks are used for the dry interim storage. In Japan, for the concrete cask, the codes of the Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers and the governmental technical guidelines are prepared for the realization of the interim storage as well as the code for the metal cask. But the interim storage using the concrete overpack has not been in progress because the evaluation on the stress corrosion cracking (SCC) of the canister is not sufficient. Japanese interim storage facilities would be constructed near the seashore. The metal casks and concrete overpacks are stored in the storage building in Japan. On the other hand, in USA they are stored outside. It is necessary to remove the decay heat of the spent nuclear fuel in the cask from the storage building. Generally, the heat is removed by natural cooling in the dry storage facility. Air including the sea salt particles goes into the dry storage facility (Figure 1). Concerning the concrete overpack, air goes into the cask body and cools the canister. Air goes along the canister surface and is in contact with the surface directly. In this case, the sea salt in the air attaches to the surface and then there is the concern about the occurrence of the SCC. For the concrete overpack, the canister including the spent fuel is sealed by the welding. The loss of sealability caused by the SCC has to be avoided. To evaluate the SCC for the canister, it is necessary to make clear the amount of the sea salt particles coming into the storage building and the concentration on the canister. In present, the evaluation on that point is not sufficient. In this study, the concentration of the sea salt particles in the air and on the surface of the storage facility are measured inside and outside of the building. For the measurement, two sites of the dry storage facility using the metal cask are chosen. This data is applicable for the evaluation on the SCC of the canister to realize the interim storage using the concrete overpack.

Consolidated nuclear waste storage in Andrews, Texas: An integrated technical and policy risk analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 0958305X2110513
Author(s):  
Adam J. Mallette ◽  
Aparajita Datta ◽  
Ramanan Krishnamoorti
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Waste ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Industry ◽  
Successful Implementation ◽  
Storage Facility ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Waste Storage ◽  
Waste Storage ◽  
Interim Storage ◽  
The Impact

Over the last 50 years, nuclear energy has reduced US energy-related CO2 emissions by over 30 gigatons compared to if the same electricity were produced by fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas. However, many kilotons of spent nuclear fuel have accumulated at different sites across the country, and sociopolitical factors have frustrated efforts to address the challenge of nuclear waste disposal. Presently, a consolidated interim storage facility in Andrews, Texas, provides a promising temporary solution. In this paper, we compare the technical and policy risks of the project to continued storage at independent spent fuel storage installations. Our results indicate that the cost of the radiological risk is low (<$30,000) for both scenarios. However, policy and societal considerations will impact the viability of the proposed consolidated interim storage facility. The safety and suitability of this interim storage facility will be affected by when a permanent repository becomes available, whether insurance for offsite waste storage is available, and the impact of climate risks. Although a consolidated interim storage facility at Andrews can potentially serve as a safe and economically advantageous solution, we highlight why these concerns must be addressed for the successful implementation of this facility, and more broadly for the future of the US nuclear industry.

United States high-level radioactive waste management programme: Current status and plans

1997 ◽  
Vol 211 (5) ◽  
pp. 381-392 ◽  
Author(s):  
J A Richardson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Radioactive Waste ◽  
Waste Management ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Waste ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Management Programme ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Dry Storage ◽  
High Level

Commercial reactor nuclear power generation in the United States is produced by 107 units and, during 1996, represented over 21 per cent of the nation's electricity generation in 34 of the 50 states and, through electric power wheeling, between states in most of the 48 contiguous states. Spent fuel is stored in fuel pools at 70 sites around the country and the projected rate of spent fuel production indicates that the current pool storage will be exceeded in the out years of 2000, 2010 and 2020 at 40, 67 and 69 of these sites respectively. The total accumulation projected by the end of 1996 at reactor sites is 33 700 metric tons of heavy metal (MTHM), with projections for increasing accumulations at annual rates of between 1800 and 2000 to produce an end of life for all commercial nuclear reactors of about 86 000 MTHM. There are presently eight facilities in six states with out-of-pool dry storage amounting to 1010 MTHM and this dry storage demand will increase. Based on all current commercial reactors achieving their 40 year licensed operation lifetimes, the dry storage needs will increase to 3128 MTHM at 28 sites and 20 states by 2000 and 11 307 MTHM at 58 sites in 32 states by 2010; the year 2010 is the present scheduled operation date for the federal mined geological disposal repository being characterized by the USDOE at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. The enabling statute for the federal high-level radioactive waste management programme is the 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) which charges the USDOE with the responsibility for the disposal of HLW and spent nuclear fuel. The Act also charges the utilities with the responsibility for managing their spent nuclear fuel until the USDOE can accept it into the federal waste management system. The funding for the federal programme is also stipulated by the Act with the creation of the Nuclear Waste Fund, through which the electric utilities entered into contract with the USDOE by payment of a fee of 1 mill per kilowatt hour sold and for which the USDOE would start collection of spent fuel from the reactor sites starting 31 January 1998.

A Comparative Evaluation of Licensing Requirements for Dry Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in the United States, Germany, Canada and the Russian Federation

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward Wonder ◽  
David S. Duncan ◽  
Eric A. Howden
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
The United States ◽  
Approval Process ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Regulatory Requirements ◽  
Fuel Storage ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Republic

Technical activities to support licensing of dry spent nuclear fuel storage facilities are complex, with policy and regulatory requirements often being influenced by politics. Moreover, the process is often convoluted, with numerous and diverse stakeholders making the licensing activity a difficult exercise in consensus-reaching. The objective of this evaluation is to present alternatives to assist the Republic of Kazakhstan (RK) in developing a licensing approach for a planned Dry Spent Fuel Storage Facility. Because the RK lacks experience in licensing a facility of this type, there is considerable interest in knowing more about the approval process in other countries so that an effective, non-redundant method of licensing can be established. This evaluation is limited to a comparison of approaches from the United States, Germany, Russia, and Canada. For each country considered, the following areas were addressed: siting; fuel handling and cask loading; dry fuel storage; and transportation of spent fuel. The regulatory requirements for each phase of the process are presented, and a licensing approach that would best serve the RK is recommended.

Reprocessing of Spent Nuclear Fuel: A Policy Analysis

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Todd P. Lagus
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Energy Content ◽  
The United States ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Cycle System ◽  
Spent Fuel Reprocessing ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Fuel Reprocessing

Nuclear spent fuel reprocessing has lately reemerged as a subject of debate in the energy policy world. Since a 1977 Presidential Directive which deferred reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel (SNF), the United States has utilized a “once through” or “open cycle” system of nuclear fuel processing, which leaves most of the energy content in uranium unused. Current reprocessing technology increases the cost of nuclear electricity while only offering limited storage benefits. Advanced technologies have the potential to increase proliferation resistance, the need for more geologic repositories, and allow the United States to regain an international presence in reprocessing technology. The United States should not immediately engage in spent fuel reprocessing, but should begin aggressive research and development for new reprocessing technologies.

Changes in spent nuclear fuel due to dry interim storage

2012 ◽  
Vol 1475 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Duro ◽  
O. Riba ◽  
A. Martínez-Esparza ◽  
J. Bruno
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Initial Conditions ◽  
Critical Discussion ◽  
Fuel Pellet ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Geological Repository ◽  
Irradiation Period ◽  
Interim Storage ◽  
Small Bubbles

ABSTRACTThe assessment of the main changes expected for spent nuclear fuel from its discharge to its deposition in a deep geological repository is of the outmost relevance to establish the initial conditions of the disposal. In this work, a literature review and a critical discussion of the main processes that will affect the structure and the inventory of the spent nuclear fuel during its interim dry storage is presented. Once the irradiation period is finished, the following changes are observed: i) the fuel pellet is fragmented due to the temperature gradient established during the irradiation stage. On average between 10-15 fragments are observed per pellet. ii) the initial gap existing between the pellet and the cladding decreases or disappears depending on the burnup. iii) a radial zonation is observed in the microstructure of the pellet. For burnup over 40MWd/KgU, the rim develops a porosity increase due to the high local burnup and the low temperature in the periphery. The rim also presents small bubbles of fission gases. This high burnup structure implies a degradation of the thermic conductivity in the pellet, that leads to a temperature increase in the center of the pellet with a subsequent migration of the fission gases and other impurities to the grain boundaries. The implications that all these changes may have on the spent fuel behaviour is presented and discussed.

Last Developments About Spent Fuel Management in Belgium

2001 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Wittebolle
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Research Centre ◽  
Total Output ◽  
Storage Facility ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Fuel Management ◽  
Dry Storage ◽  
Wet Storage ◽  
Interim Storage

Abstract In Belgium 57% of the electricity is presently generated by 7 nuclear units of the PWR type located in Doel and Tihange. Their total output amounts to 5632 MWe. Part of the spent fuel unloaded from the first three units has been sent till 2000 for reprocessing in the Cogema facility at La Hague. As the reprocessing of the spent fuel produced by the last four units is not covered by the contracts concluded with Cogema, Synatom, the Belgian utilities’ subsidiary in charge of the front- and back-end of the nuclear fuel cycle for all PWR reactors in Belgium, decided to study the possible solutions for a temporary storage of this spent fuel. End of 1993, the Belgian government decided that reprocessing (closed cycle) and direct disposal (open cycle) of spent fuel had to be considered as equal options in the back-end policy for nuclear fuel in Belgium. The resolution further allowed continued execution of a running reprocessing contract (from 1978) and use of the corresponding Pu for MOX in Belgian NPP’s, but requested a reprocessing contract concluded in 1990 (for reprocessing services after 2000) not to be executed during a five-year period. During this period priority was to be given to studies on the once-through cycle as an option for spent fuel management. Figure 1 is a chart showing the two alternatives for the spent fuel cycle in Belgium. In this context, Synatom entrusted Belgatom1 to develop a dedicated flask (called “bottle”) for direct disposal of spent fuel, to perform a design study of an appropriate encapsulation process and to prepare a preliminary feasibility study of a complete spent fuel conditioning plant. Meanwhile preparation works were made for the construction of an interim storage facility on both NPP sites of Doel and Tihange in order to meet increasing storage capacity needs. For selecting the type of interim storage facility, Belgatom performed a technical-economical analysis. Considerations of design and safety criteria as well as flexibility, reversibility, technical constraints, global economical aspects and construction time led to adopt dry storage with dual purpose casks (in operation since end 1995) for the Doel site and wet storage in a modular pool for the Tihange site (in operation since 1997). In parallel, ONRAF/NIRAS, the Belgian Agency for the management of radioactive waste and enriched fissile materials and the Belgian nuclear research centre, SCK•CEN, conduct underground investigations in view of geological disposal. The paper describes the methodology that Belgatom has developed to provide the utilities with appropriate solutions (reracking, dry storage in casks, wet storage in ponds, etc.) and how Belgatom demonstrated also the feasibility of spent fuel conditioning with a view to direct disposal in clay layers. The spent fuel storage facilities in operation in Belgium and designed and built by Belgatom are then briefly presented.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document