Category of Content
Siting Experience Documents Only
Publication Date
Country
Keywords
An Approach for Validating Actinide and Fission Product Burnup Credit Criticality Safety Analyses--Isotopic Composition Predictions
An Approach for Validating Actinide and Fission Product Burnup Credit Criticality Safety Analyses--Isotopic Composition Predictions
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
Sensitivity Coefficient Generation for a Burnup Credit Cask Model Using TSUNAMI-3D
Sensitivity Coefficient Generation for a Burnup Credit Cask Model Using TSUNAMI-3D
Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analysis of Commercial Reactor Criticals for Burnup Credit
Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analysis of Commercial Reactor Criticals for Burnup Credit
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.
Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analysis of Commercial Reactor Criticals for Burnup Credit
Sensitivity and Uncertainty Analysis of Commercial Reactor Criticals for Burnup Credit
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-
Sensitivity and Parametric Evaluations of Significant Aspects of Burnup Credit for PWR Spent Fuel Packages
Sensitivity and Parametric Evaluations of Significant Aspects of Burnup Credit for PWR Spent Fuel Packages
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
An Approach for Validating Actinide and Fission Product Burnup Credit Criticality Safety Analyses-Criticality (keff) Predictions
An Approach for Validating Actinide and Fission Product Burnup Credit Criticality Safety Analyses-Criticality (keff) Predictions
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)
Second Review Meeting, Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management, written questions submitted to Luxembourg
Second Review Meeting, Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management, written questions submitted to Luxembourg
Second Review Meeting, Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management, written questions submitted to Luxembourg
Luxembourg, National Report on the measures taken by Luxembourg to fulfill the obligations laid down in the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management, 2009
Luxembourg, National Report on the measures taken by Luxembourg to fulfill the obligations laid down in the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management, 2009
Luxembourg has signed the Joint Convention on 1st October 1997 and is a Party thereof since 19 November 2001. The Convention entered into force on 21 June 2001. Luxembourg has no nuclear power plant, no other fuel-cycle facility, no research reactor and no other facility generating radioactive substances. Thus many requirements of the Joint Convention do not apply to Luxembourg. It further has no spent nuclear fuel and no high level radioactive waste on its territory.
Luxembourg, National Report on the measures taken by Luxembourg to fulfill the obligations laid down in the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management, 2006
Luxembourg, National Report on the measures taken by Luxembourg to fulfill the obligations laid down in the Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management, 2006
Luxembourg has signed the Joint Convention on 1st October 1997 and is a Party thereof since 19 November 2001. The Convention entered into force on 21 June 2001. Luxembourg has no nuclear power plant, no other fuel-cycle facility, no research reactor and no other facility generating radioactive substances. Thus many requirements of the Joint Convention do not apply to Luxembourg. It further has no spent nuclear fuel and no high level radioactive waste on its territory.
Second Review Meeting, Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management, Answers to the Questions of Contracting Parties on the National Report submitted by Luxembourg
Second Review Meeting, Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management, Answers to the Questions of Contracting Parties on the National Report submitted by Luxembourg
Second Review Meeting, Joint Convention on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management, Answers to the Questions of Contracting Parties on the National Report submitted by Luxembourg