Every year, more than 300 million packages of hazardous material are shipped in the
United States (U.S.). Most of the hazardous material shipped – about 97 percent – is
flammable, explosive, corrosive or poisonous. About 1 percent – three million packages –
of the hazardous materials shipped annually contains radioactive material, most of them
from medical and industrial applications. [DOT 1998b]
Spent nuclear fuel comprises a very small fraction of the hazardous materials packages

Dear Secretary Chu:
At the direction of the President, you charged the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s
Nuclear Future with reviewing policies for managing the back end of the nuclear fuel
cycle and recommending a new plan. We thank you for choosing us to serve as Co-
Chairmen of the Commission and for selecting the talented and dedicated set of
Commissioners with whom we serve.
We have sought to ensure that our review is comprehensive, open and inclusive. The
Commission and its subcommittees have heard from hundreds of individuals and

The purpose of this calculation is to determine the required minimum burnup as a function of initial pressurized water reactor (PWR) assembly enrichment that would permit loading of fuel into the 21 PWR waste package (WP), as provided for in QAP-2-0 Activity Evaluation, Perform Criticality, Thermal, Structural, & Shielding Analyses (Reference 7.1).

Hydrogen-induced cracking is characterized by the decreased ductility and fracture toughness of a material due to the absorption of atomic hydrogen in the metal crystal lattice. Corrosion is the source of hydrogen generation. For the current design of the engineered barrier without backfill, hydrogen-induced cracking may be a concern because the titanium drip shield can be galvanically coupled to rock bolts (or wire mesh), which may fall onto the drip shield, thereby creating conditions for hydrogen production by electrochemical reaction.

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)

The purpose of this report is to evaluate the potential for penetration of the Alloy 22 (UNS N06022) waste package outer barrier by localized corrosion due to the deliquescence of soluble constituents in dust present on waste package surfaces. The results support a recommendation to exclude deliquescence-induced localized corrosion (pitting or crevice corrosion) of the outer barrier from the total system performance assessment for the license application (TSPA-LA).

There are more than 250 forms of U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)-owned spent nuclear fuel (SNF). Due to the variety of the spent nuclear fuel, the National Spent Nuclear Fuel Program (NSNFP) has designated nine representative fuel groups for disposal criticality analyses based on fuel matrix, primary fissile isotope, and enrichment. Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) fuel has been designated as the representative fuel for the mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel group which is a mixture of uranium and plutonium oxides.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate dissolved concentration limits (also referred to as solubility limits) of elements with radioactive isotopes under probable repository conditions, based on geochemical modeling calculations using geochemical modeling tools, thermodynamic databases, field measurements, and laboratory experiments.

The purpose of this design analysis is to determine the accuracy of the SAS2H module of SCALE 4.3 in predicting isotopic concentrations of spent fuel assemblies. The objective is to develop a methodology for modeling assemblies similar to those evaluated within this analysis and to establish the consistency of SAS2H predictions. The results of this analysis may then be applied to future depletion calculations using SAS2H in which no measurements are available.

The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) is responsible, under the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, for the transportation of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste from point of origin to destination at a federal storage or disposal facility. Section 180(c), written into the Nuclear Waste Policy Act Amendments of 1987, requires OCRWM to prepare public safety officials along the routes for these shipments.

This new report from the National Research Council’s Nuclear and Radiation Studies Board (NRSB) and the Transportation Research Board reviews the risks and technical and societal concerns for the transport of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste in the United States. Shipments are expected to increase as the U.S. Department of Energy opens a repository for spent fuel and high-level waste at Yucca Mountain, and the commercial nuclear industry considers constructing a facility in Utah for temporary storage of spent fuel from some of its nuclear waste plants.

Dear Representatives Upton and Shimkus,
At the direction of the President, the Secretary of Energy established the Blue Ribbon
Commission on America’s Nuclear Future and charged it with reviewing policies for
managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle. We are serving as the Co-Chairmen of
the Commission and have taken note of your recent comments about the Commission’s
work.
Your comments echo those we have heard from several members of Congress and from
people across the country who believe the United States should not abandon the

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

The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA), as amended, authorized the DOE to develop and manage a Federal system for the disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) and High-Level Radioactive Waste (HLW). The Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste (OCRWM) was created to manage acceptance, transportation and disposal of SNF and HLW in a manner that protects public health, safety, and the environment; enhances national and energy security; and merits public confidence.

US policy for management of used nuclear fuel (UNF) and high level radioactive wastes (HLRW) is at a crossroads, and the success of new policy directions will depend in part on broad public acceptance and support. In this paper I provide an overview of the evidence concerning the beliefs and concerns of members of the American public regarding UNF and HLNW. I also characterize the evidence on American’s policy preferences for management of these materials.

Burnup credit (BUC) is a concept applied in the criticality safety analysis of spent nuclear fuel
in which credit or partial credit is taken for the reduced reactivity worth of the fuel due to both fissile
depletion and the buildup of actinides and fission products that act as net neutron absorbers.
Typically, a two-step process is applied in BUC analysis: first, depletion calculations are performed
to estimate the isotopic content of spent fuel based on its burnup history; second, three-dimensional

This analysis is prepared by the Mined Geologic Disposal System (MGDS) Waste Package Development (WPD) department with the objective of providing a comprehensive, conservative estimate of the consequences of the criticality which could possibly occur as the result of commercial spent nuclear fuel emplaced in the underground repository at Yucca Mountain. The consequences of criticality are measured principally in terms of the resulting changes in radionuclide inventory as a function of the power level and duration of the criticality.

The issue of interim storage of used (spent)1 fuel is dependent on a number of key factors, some
of which are not known at this time but are the subject of this study. The first is whether or not
the Yucca Mountain Project continues or is cancelled such that it may be able to receive spent
fuel from existing and decommissioned nuclear power stations. The second is whether the United
States will pursue a policy of reprocessing and recycling nuclear fuel. The reprocessing and

Following the proposals for nuclear fuel assurance of International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) Director General Mohamed El Baradei, former Russian President Vladimir V.
Putin, and U.S. President George W. Bush, joint committees of the Russian Academy of
Sciences (RAS) and the U.S. National Academies (NAS) were formed to address these and other
fuel assurance concepts and their links to nonproliferation goals. The joint committees also
addressed many technology issues relating to the fuel assurance concepts. This report provides

There has been a substantial resurgence of interest in nuclear power in the United States
over the past few years. One consequence has been a rapid growth in the research
budget of DOE’s Office of Nuclear Energy (NE). In light of this growth, the Office of
Management and Budget included within the FY2006 budget request a study by the
National Academy of Sciences to review the NE research programs and recommend
priorities among those programs. The programs to be evaluated were: Nuclear Power

Dear Co-Chairs Hamilton and Scowcroft:
The Obama Administration believes that nuclear energy has an important role to playas America moves to a clean energy future. One of my goals as Secretary of Energy is to help restart America's nuclear industry, creating thousands of new jobs and new export opportunities for the United States while producing the carbon free energy we need to power America's economy.

The purpose of this calculation is to perform waste-form specific nuclear criticality safety calculations to aid in establishing criticality safety design criteria, and to identify design and process parameters that are potentially important to the criticality safety of Department of Energy (DOE) standardized Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF) canisters.

The purpose of this document is to summarize the degraded waste package disposal criticality evaluations which were performed in fiscal years I995 and I996. These evaluations were described in detail in 4 previous documents (Refs. I through 4). The initial version of this summary has been described in the I996 Disposal Criticality Analysis Methodology Technical Report (Ref. 5). A topical report planned for 1998 will present the methodology in its final form for approval by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.