Taking credit for the reduced reactivity of spent nuclear fuel in criticality analyses is referred to
as burnup credit. Criticality safety evaluations employing burnup credit require validation of the
depletion and criticality calculation methods and computer codes with available measurement
data. To address the issues of burnup credit criticality validation, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission initiated a project with Oak Ridge National Laboratory to (1) develop and establish

Spent Fuel Project Office Interim Staff Guidance - 8

Spent Fuel Project Office, Interim Staff Guidance - 8, Revision 1

This paper provides insights into the neutronic similarities between a representative high-capacity rail-transport cask containing typical pressurized water reactor (PWR) spent nuclear fuel assemblies and critical reactor state-points, referred to as commercial reactor critical (CRC) state-points. Forty CRC state-points from five PWRs were analyzed, and the characteristics of CRC state-points that may be applicable for validation of burnup-credit criticality safety calculations for spent fuel transport/storage/disposal systems were identified.

Spent Fuel Project Office, Interim Staff Guidance - 8, Revision 2 - Burnup Credit in the Criticality Safety Analyses of PWR Spent Fuel in Transport
and Storage Casks

The purpose of this study is to provide insights into the neutronic similarities that may exist between a
generic cask containing typical spent nuclear fuel assemblies and commercial reactor critical (CRC) state-
points. Forty CRC state-points from five pressurized-water reactors were selected for the study and the
type of CRC state-points that may be applicable for validation of burnup credit criticality safety
calculations for spent fuel transport/storage/disposal systems are identified. The study employed cross-

Spent fuel transportation and storage cask designs based on a burnup credit approach must
consider issues that are not relevant in casks designed under a fresh-fuel loading assumption. For
example, the spent fuel composition must be adequately characterized and the criticality analysis
model can be complicated by the need to consider axial burnup variations. Parametric analyses are
needed to characterize the importance of fuel assembly and fuel cycle parameters on spent fuel

Taking credit for the reduced reactivity of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) in criticality analyses is referred to as burnup credit (BUC). Criticality safety evaluations require validation of the computational methods with critical experiments that are as similar as possible to the safety analysis models, and for which the keff values are known. This poses a challenge for validation of BUC criticality analyses, as critical experiments with actinide and fission product (FP)

This Interim Staff Guidance (ISG) provides guidance to the staff for determining if
storage systems to be licensed under 10 CFR Part 72 allow ready retrieval of spent fuel.
This guidance is not a regulation or a requirement.

This Interim Staff Guidance (ISG) provides guidance to the staff on classifying spent nuclear
fuel as either (1) damaged, (2) undamaged, or (3) intact, before interim storage or
transportation. This is not a regulation or requirement and can be modified or superseded by
an applicant with supportable technical arguments.

Revision 2

The closure weld for the outer cover plate for austenitic stainless steel designs may be
inspected using either volumetric or multiple pass dye penetrant techniques subject to the
following conditions:
• Dye penetrant (PT) examination may only be used in lieu of volumetric
examination only on austenitic stainless steels. PT examination should be done
in accordance with ASME Section V, Article 6, “Liquid Penetrant Examination.”
• For either ultrasonic examination (UT) or PT examination, the minimum

Several changes have occurred since the issuance of NUREG-1536, “Standard Review Plan
(SRP) for Dry Cask Storage Systems,” that affect the staff’s approach to confinement
evaluation. The attachment to this ISG integrates the current staff approach into a revision of
ISG-5. The highlights of the changes include:
• Reflects October 1998 revisions to 10 CFR 72.104 and 10 CFR 72.106.
• Expands and clarifies acceptance criteria associated with confinement analysis and
acceptance of “leak tight” testing instead of detailed confinement analysis.

The Standard Review Plan, NUREG-1536, Chapter 5, Section V, 2 recommends that “the
applicant calculate the source term on the basis of the fuel that will actually provide the
bounding source term,” and states that the applicant should, “either specify the minimum initial
enrichment or establish the specific source terms as operating controls and limits for cask use.”
A specified source term is difficult for most cask users to determine and for inspectors to verify.

Staff raised two major issues concerning the adverse effects of fission gases to the gas-mixture
thermal conductivity in a spent fuel canister in a post accident environment. The two major
concerns were: (1) the reduction of the thermal conductivity of the canister gas by the mixing of
fission gases expelled from failed fuel pins and (2) the resultant temperature and pressure rise
within the canister. Since the fission gas is typically of a lower conductivity than the cover gas,

Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 71, Packaging and Transportation of
Radioactive Material, and 10 CFR Part 72, Licensing Requirements for the Independent
Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level Radioactive Waste, and Reactor-Related Greater
Than Class C Waste, require that spent nuclear fuel (SNF) remain subcritical in transportation
and storage, respectively. Unirradiated reactor fuel has a well-specified nuclide composition
that provides a straightforward and bounding approach to the criticality safety analysis of

The purpose of this ISG is to clarify the technical criteria for types of materials that will be |
considered associated with the storage of spent fuel assemblies. While control rods are |
mentioned in the Standard Review Plan as possible contents, specific information and guidance
is lacking.

Revision 1

There is no existing American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code for the design
and fabrication of spent fuel dry storage casks. Therefore, ASME Code Section III, is
referenced by NUREG-1536, “Standard Review Plan for Dry Cask Storage Systems,” as an
acceptable standard for the design and fabrication of dry storage casks. However, since dry
storage casks are not pressure vessels, ASME Code Section III, cannot be implemented
without allowing some alternatives to its requirements.

Revision 1

The staff has broadened the technical basis for the storage of spent fuel including assemblies
with average burnups exceeding 45 GWd/MTU. This revision to Interim Staff Guidance No. 11
(ISG-11) addresses the technical review aspects of and specifies the acceptance criteria for
limiting spent fuel reconfiguration in storage casks. It modifies the previous revision of the ISG
in three ways: (1) by clarifying the meaning of some of the acceptance criteria contained in

Fuel rod buckling analyses under bottom end drop conditions have traditionally been performed
to demonstrate integrity of the fuel following a cask drop accident. The methodology described
by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) to analyze the buckling of irradiated spent
fuel assembly under a bottom end drop in their report UCID-21246 is a simplified approach. It
assumed that buckling occurred when the fuel rod segment between the bottom two spacer
grids reached the Euler buckling limit. The weight of fuel pellets was neglected in the analysis;

The purpose of this guidance is to, (1) clarify the meaning of a real individual as used in 10
CFR 72.104, (2) specify how the applicant may perform dose evaluations beyond the controlled
area for site-specific and general Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) licenses,
and (3) clarify standard review plan (SRP) text regarding dose calculations outside the
controlled area.

Guidance regarding supplemental shielding that may be installed at an independent
spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 72.104(a).

Due, in part, to a number of material-related issues identified during dry cask storage system
(DCSS) and transportation package application reviews and field implementation, the staff has
recognized the need for specific guidance for the review of materials selected by the applicant
for its DCSS or transportation package.

Issuance of specific guidance for review of Emergency Plans for facilities licensed pursuant to
10 CFR Part 72 and removal of the reference to Regulatory Guide 3.67, "Standard Format and
Content for Emergency Plans for Fuel Cycle and Materials Facilities," as included in NUREG-
1567, Standard Review Plan for Spent Fuel Dry Storage Facilities (March 2000).