[AREVA] Task Order 11 – Development of Consolidated Fuel Storage Facility Concepts Report

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Under a contract with the Department of Energy (DOE), the AREVA Team has evaluated the alternatives for developing a used nuclear fuel (UNF) Consolidated Storage Facility (CSF) for UNF from US reactor plants. The study, based upon specific criteria and requirements for the US, considered numerous credible storage options and selected the one that met the needs of the country. For this task, the AREVA Team comprises AREVA, URS, Duke Energy, Dominion, and Coghill Communications, Inc.

1.1 Purpose

DOE is seeking alternatives to support an evaluation and possible future selection of a concept that can be developed as an option for consolidated storage of commercial UNF. The concept must address: all activities required to take the commercial UNF from its current location and configuration; transport it to a location of consolidated storage, prepare the fuel as needed, and place it in storage; and the subsequent facility storage operations and maintenance. Consideration must be given to the fact that DOE is evaluating various geologic media for eventual disposal and that there is a need to be flexible with respect to final waste packaging scenarios for disposal. Defense nuclear waste, DOE UNF, and Naval Nuclear Power Propulsion UNF are not included in these scenarios.

The UNF CSF will not be part of a DOE facility, will be constructed in accordance with industry standards, and must be licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Construction of the facility would begin before the end of the current decade; most likely in 2018 to 2020 and is anticipated to have a design life of 100 years.

The AREVA Team developed a systems concept that addresses a complete process for taking the commercial UNF from its current storage mode and configuration including: the preparation and transportation of that fuel to a consolidated storage site; the handling and additional packaging, where required; and the subsequent storage, operations, and maintenance of the CSF. The systems concept considers life cycle cost and ease of decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) the facility at end-of-operations. A discussion of the ability to expand storage over time is included. Assumptions or limitations on fuel age (radiation levels/heat) are identified for the proposed facilities, operations, or storage systems. This report identifies all facilities required (e.g., cask handling, hot cells, storage, etc.) and estimates staffing to implement the concept. Where possible, this report addresses potential opportunities to optimize designs for operational and cost efficiencies. A cost range was developed for the concept, and it includes an estimate of capital costs, operational costs, and total lifecycle costs (through the D&D) per unit of UNF.

1.2 Scope

Systems analyses and design studies were performed to develop a design concept for a highly flexible UNF storage facility. The system engineering analysis employed best industry practices and the results and conclusions are included in this report. A description of functions and requirements used to support the infrastructure and facility design concept and associated transportation is included.

The AREVA Team conducted analyses and studies to identify the most efficient, economical methods of transporting and storing commercial UNF. Our studies considered NRC storage and licensing requirements in 10CRF72 and packaging requirements in 10CFR71.

The report addresses operational considerations, security requirements, transportation, and the research and development (R&D) needed to support the future consolidated fuel storage facility. This is an American Association of Cost Engineers (AACE) Class 5 level, Order of Magnitude Estimate used to determine the cost of the facility’s construction and demolition. This estimate is prepared using standard code of accounts. Section 12 provides the account breakdown.