skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Siting and Transportation for Consolidated Used Nuclear Fuel Management Facilities: A Proposed Approach for a Regional Initiative to Begin the Dialogue - 13562

Abstract

The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (BRC) was formed in January 2010 to conduct a comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, and to develop a new national strategy. Over two years, the BRC held dozens of meetings and heard from hundreds of Federal, State, Tribal, and local officials, as well as representatives of trade and labor organizations, technical groups, non-governmental organizations, and other stakeholders. The Commission's final report (issued January 26, 2012) offers a strategy to resolve longstanding challenges to responsible management of the United States' nuclear waste legacy. The Commission recommended Congressional action to rewrite parts of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA); however, a comprehensive legislative overhaul will likely take years to fully implement. The nature and characteristics of nuclear waste, the activities that generated it, and the past history of federal efforts to manage the waste make it virtually certain that finding workable solutions will be controversial and difficult. As the BRC report suggests, this difficulty can be made insurmountable if top-down, federally-mandated efforts are forced upon unwilling States, Tribes, and local communities. Decades of effort and billions of ratepayer and taxpayer dollars have been spent attemptingmore » to site and operate spent fuel storage and disposal facilities in this manner. The experience thus far indicates that voluntary consent and active partnership of States, Tribes, and local governments in siting, designing, and operating such facilities are critical. Some States, Tribes, and local communities have indicated that, given adequate scientific and technical information, along with appropriate incentives, assurances, and authority, they might be willing to consider hosting facilities for consolidated storage and disposal of spent nuclear fuel. The authors propose a new regional approach to identifying and resolving issues related to the selection of a consolidated storage site. The approach would be characterized by informed discussion and deliberation, bringing together stakeholders from government, the non-governmental (NGO) community, industry, and other sectors. Because site selection would result in regional transportation impacts, the development of the transportation system (e.g., route identification, infrastructure improvements) would be integrated into the issue-resolution process. In addition to laying out the necessary steps and associated timeline, the authors address the challenges of building public trust and confidence in the new waste management program, as well as the difficulty of reaching and sustaining broad-based consensus on a decision to host a consolidated storage facility. (authors)« less

Authors:
 [1];  [2]
  1. The Thrower Group LLC, Richmond, VA (United States)
  2. Council of State Governments-Midwestern Office, Sheboygan, WI (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
WM Symposia, 1628 E. Southern Avenue, Suite 9-332, Tempe, AZ 85282 (United States)
OSTI Identifier:
22225127
Report Number(s):
INIS-US-13-WM-13562
TRN: US14V0707046082
Resource Type:
Conference
Resource Relation:
Conference: WM2013: Waste Management Conference: International collaboration and continuous improvement, Phoenix, AZ (United States), 24-28 Feb 2013; Other Information: Country of input: France; 3 refs.
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE WASTES, AND NON-RADIOACTIVE WASTES FROM NUCLEAR FACILITIES; LOCAL GOVERNMENT; MANPOWER; MEETINGS; PERSONNEL; RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT; RADIOACTIVE WASTES; SITE SELECTION; SPENT FUEL STORAGE; SPENT FUELS; STORAGE FACILITIES; TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS

Citation Formats

Thrower, Alex W., and Janairo, Lisa. Siting and Transportation for Consolidated Used Nuclear Fuel Management Facilities: A Proposed Approach for a Regional Initiative to Begin the Dialogue - 13562. United States: N. p., 2013. Web.
Thrower, Alex W., & Janairo, Lisa. Siting and Transportation for Consolidated Used Nuclear Fuel Management Facilities: A Proposed Approach for a Regional Initiative to Begin the Dialogue - 13562. United States.
Thrower, Alex W., and Janairo, Lisa. Mon . "Siting and Transportation for Consolidated Used Nuclear Fuel Management Facilities: A Proposed Approach for a Regional Initiative to Begin the Dialogue - 13562". United States. doi:.
@article{osti_22225127,
title = {Siting and Transportation for Consolidated Used Nuclear Fuel Management Facilities: A Proposed Approach for a Regional Initiative to Begin the Dialogue - 13562},
author = {Thrower, Alex W. and Janairo, Lisa},
abstractNote = {The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future (BRC) was formed in January 2010 to conduct a comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, and to develop a new national strategy. Over two years, the BRC held dozens of meetings and heard from hundreds of Federal, State, Tribal, and local officials, as well as representatives of trade and labor organizations, technical groups, non-governmental organizations, and other stakeholders. The Commission's final report (issued January 26, 2012) offers a strategy to resolve longstanding challenges to responsible management of the United States' nuclear waste legacy. The Commission recommended Congressional action to rewrite parts of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA); however, a comprehensive legislative overhaul will likely take years to fully implement. The nature and characteristics of nuclear waste, the activities that generated it, and the past history of federal efforts to manage the waste make it virtually certain that finding workable solutions will be controversial and difficult. As the BRC report suggests, this difficulty can be made insurmountable if top-down, federally-mandated efforts are forced upon unwilling States, Tribes, and local communities. Decades of effort and billions of ratepayer and taxpayer dollars have been spent attempting to site and operate spent fuel storage and disposal facilities in this manner. The experience thus far indicates that voluntary consent and active partnership of States, Tribes, and local governments in siting, designing, and operating such facilities are critical. Some States, Tribes, and local communities have indicated that, given adequate scientific and technical information, along with appropriate incentives, assurances, and authority, they might be willing to consider hosting facilities for consolidated storage and disposal of spent nuclear fuel. The authors propose a new regional approach to identifying and resolving issues related to the selection of a consolidated storage site. The approach would be characterized by informed discussion and deliberation, bringing together stakeholders from government, the non-governmental (NGO) community, industry, and other sectors. Because site selection would result in regional transportation impacts, the development of the transportation system (e.g., route identification, infrastructure improvements) would be integrated into the issue-resolution process. In addition to laying out the necessary steps and associated timeline, the authors address the challenges of building public trust and confidence in the new waste management program, as well as the difficulty of reaching and sustaining broad-based consensus on a decision to host a consolidated storage facility. (authors)},
doi = {},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Mon Jul 01 00:00:00 EDT 2013},
month = {Mon Jul 01 00:00:00 EDT 2013}
}

Conference:
Other availability
Please see Document Availability for additional information on obtaining the full-text document. Library patrons may search WorldCat to identify libraries that hold this conference proceeding.

Save / Share:
  • The current inventory of used nuclear fuel assemblies (UNFAs) from commercial reactor operations in the United States totals approximately 65,000 metric tons or approximately 232,000 UNFAs primarily stored at the 104 operational reactors in the US and a small number of decommissioned reactors. This inventory is growing at a rate of roughly 2,000 to 2,400 metric tons each year, (Approx. 7,000 UNFAs) as a result of ongoing commercial reactor operations. Assuming an average of 10 metric tons per storage/transportation casks, this inventory of commercial UNFAs represents about 6,500 casks with an additional of about 220 casks every year. In Januarymore » 2010, the Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC) [1] was directed to conduct a comprehensive review of policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle and recommend a new plan. The BRC issued their final recommendations in January 2012. One of the main recommendations is for the United States to proceed promptly to develop one or more consolidated storage facilities (CSF) as part of an integrated, comprehensive plan for safely managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle. Based on its extensive experience in storage and transportation cask design, analysis, licensing, fabrication, and operations including transportation logistics, Transnuclear, Inc. (TN), an AREVA Subsidiary within the Logistics Business Unit, is engineering an integrated system that will address the complete process of commercial UNFA management. The system will deal with UNFAs in their current storage mode in various configurations, the preparation including handling and additional packaging where required and transportation of UNFAs to a CSF site, and subsequent storage, operation and maintenance at the CSF with eventual transportation to a future repository or recycling site. It is essential to proceed by steps to ensure that the system will be the most efficient and serve at best its purpose by defining: the problem to be resolved, the criteria to evaluate the solutions, and the alternative solutions. The complexity of the project is increasing with time (more fuel assemblies, new storage systems, deteriorating logistics infrastructure at some sites, etc.) but with the uncertainty on the final disposal path, flexibility and simplicity will be critical. (authors)« less
  • Abstract not provided.
  • The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP), launched in February, 2006, proposes to introduce used nuclear fuel recycling in the United States (U.S.) with improved proliferation-resistance and a more effective waste management approach. This program is evaluating ways to close the fuel cycle in a manner that introduces the most advanced technologies of today and builds on recent breakthroughs in U.S. national laboratories while drawing on international and industry partnerships. Central to moving this advanced fuel recycling technology from the laboratory to commercial implementation is the development and siting of three proposed GNEP facilities: the Consolidated Fuel Treatment Center (CFTC), themore » Advanced Burner Reactor (ABR), and the Advanced Fuel Cycle Facility (AFCF). These three projects are envisioned to introduce used fuel separations, advanced fuel fabrication, and fast reactor technology in a manner that efficiently recycles material, produces the most energy out of the existing inventory of used fuel, and improves our ability to manage nuclear waste. The CFTC and ABR are sited under GNEP but will depend on industry involvement and will not be covered by this paper. This paper will cover considerations for siting the AFCF. The AFCF will provide the U.S. with the capabilities required to evaluate technologies that separate used fuel into reusable material and waste in a proliferation-resistant manner. The separations technology demonstration capability is coupled with a remote transmutation fuel fabrication demonstration capability in an integrated manner that demonstrates advanced safeguard technologies. In conclusion: As a flexible, multi-purpose demonstration facility, the AFCF will provide the U.S. with a powerful and unique capability to quickly bring innovative nuclear fuel recycling technology from the laboratory to the commercial market with high confidence. The siting of AFCF capabilities at one or more of the six DOE laboratories being evaluated as potential sites in the GNEP PEIS will be addressed as part of the 2008 GNEP ROD. Once built, the AFCF will support existing nuclear fuel recycling operations, help reduce the inventory of accumulated used nuclear fuel, and improve the waste management practices into the future. (authors)« less
  • In some countries nuclear waste facility siting programs include social and economic benefits, compensation, local empowerment and motivation measures and other incentives for the potential host community. This can generally be referred to as an 'added value approach'. Demonstration of the safety of a repository is seen as a precondition of an added value approach. Recently much focus has been placed on studying and developing public participation approaches but less on the use of such incentive and community benefit packages, although they are becoming a more common element in many site selection strategies for nuclear waste management facilities. The primarymore » objective of this paper is to report on an ongoing study of stakeholders' opinions of the use of an added value approach in siting a radioactive waste facility in the Czech Republic, Poland and Slovenia. The paper argues that an added value approach should adapt to the interests and needs of stakeholders during different stages of a siting process. The main question posed in the study is as follows: What are the measures which should be included in 'added value approach' according to the stakeholders? The research data consists of stakeholders' responses to a survey focusing on the use of added value (community benefits) and incentives in siting nuclear waste management facilities. The survey involved use of a questionnaire developed as part of the EU-funded IPPA* project in three countries: the Czech Republic, Poland and Slovenia. (* Implementing Public Participation Approaches in Radioactive Waste Disposal, FP7 Contract Number: 269849). The target audiences for the questionnaires were the stakeholders represented in the national stakeholder groups established to discuss site selection for a nuclear waste repository in their country. A total of 105 questionnaires were sent to the stakeholders between November 2011 and January 2012. 44 questionnaires were returned, resulting in a total response rate of 41% (10/29 in the Czech Republic, 11/14 in Poland and in 23/64 in Slovenia). (authors)« less
  • EnergySolutions and its team partners, NAC International, Exelon Nuclear Partners, Talisman International, TerranearPMC, Booz Allen Hamilton and Sargent and Lundy, have carried out a study to develop concepts for a Consolidated Storage Facility (CSF) for the USA's stocks of commercial Used Nuclear Fuel (UNF), and the packaging and transport provisions required to move the UNF to the CSF. The UNF is currently stored at all 65 operating nuclear reactor sites in the US, and at 10 shutdown sites. The study was funded by the US Department of Energy and followed the recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclearmore » Future (BRC), one of which was that the US should make prompt efforts to develop one or more consolidated storage facilities for commercial UNF. The study showed that viable schemes can be devised to move all UNF and store it at a CSF, but that a range of schemes is required to accommodate the present widely varying UNF storage arrangements. Although most UNF that is currently stored at operating reactor sites is in water-filled pools, a significant amount is now dry stored in concrete casks. At the shutdown sites, the UNF is dry stored at all but two of the ten sites. Various types of UNF dry storage configurations are used at the operating sites and shutdown sites that include vertical storage casks that are also licensed for transportation, vertical casks that are licensed for storage only, and horizontally orientated storage modules. The shutdown sites have limited to nonexistent UNF handling infrastructure and several no longer have railroad connections, complicating UNF handling and transport off the site. However four methods were identified that will satisfactorily retrieve the UNF canisters within the storage casks and transport them to the CSF. The study showed that all of the issues associated with the transportation and storage of UNF from all sites in the US can be accommodated by adopting a staged approach to the construction of the CSF. Stage 1 requires only a cask storage pad and railroad interface to be constructed, and the CSF can then receive the UNF that is in transportable storage casks. Stage 2 adds a canister handling facility, a storage cask fabrication facility and an expanded storage pad, and enables the receipt of all canistered UNF from both operating and shutdown sites. Stage 3 provides a repackaging facility with a water-filled pool that provides flexibility for a range of repackaging scenarios. This includes receiving and repackaging 'bare' UNF into suitable canisters that can be placed into interim storage at the CSF, and enables UNF that is being received, or already in storage onsite, to be repackaged into canisters that are suitable for disposal at a geologic repository. The study used the 'Total System Model' (TSM) to analyze a range of CSF capacities and operating scenarios with differing parameters covering UNF pickup orders, one or more CSF sites, CSF start dates, CSF receipt rates and geologic repository start dates. The TSM was originally developed to model movement of UNF to the Yucca Mountain repository and was modified for this study to enable the CSF to become the 'gateway' to a future geologic repository. The TSM analysis enabled costs to be estimated for each scenario and showed how these are influenced by each of the parameters. This information will provide essential underpinning for a future Conceptual Design preparation. (authors)« less