Skip to main content

Advances in Applications of Burnup Credit to Enhance Spent Fuel Transportation, Storage, Reprocessing and Disposition-Proceedings of a Technical Meeting held in London, 29 August-2 September 2006

This publication records the proceedings of a technical meeting organized by the IAEA and
held in London 29 August–2 September 2005 with sixty participants from 18 countries. As
indicated in the title, the objective of this meeting was to provide a forum for exchange of
technical information on spent fuel burnup credit applications and thereby compile state-ofthe-
art information on technical advances related to spent fuel transportation, storage,
reprocessing and disposition.

Community

U.S. Regulatory Recommendations for Actinide-Only Burnup Credit in Transport and Storage Casks

In July 1999, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Spent Fuel Project Office
(SFPO) issued Interim Staff Guidance 8 Revision 1 (ISG8R1) to provide recommendations for the use
of burnup credit in storage and transport of pressurized-water reactor (PWR) spent fuel. Subsequent to
the issuance of ISG8R1, the NRC Office of Regulatory Research (RES) has directed an effort to
investigate the technical basis for extending the criteria and recommendations of ISG8R1 to allow

Community

A Coordinated U.S. Program to Address Full Burnup Credit in Transport and Storage Casks

The benefits of burnup credit and the technical issues associated with utilizing burnup credit in spent
nuclear fuel (SNF) casks have been studied in the United States for almost two decades. The issuance of the
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff guidance for actinide-only burnup credit in 2002 was a
significant step toward providing a regulatory framework for using burnup credit in transport casks. However,
adherence to the current regulatory guidance (e.g., limit credit to actinides) enables only about 30% of the existing

Community

Application of Sensitivity/Uncertainty Methods to Burnup Credit Criticality Validation

The responsible use of calculational methods in nuclear criticality safety includes a determination of bias and bias uncertainty that may exist between the calculated results and reality. Such biases exist due to approximations used to model the real world, uncertainties in nuclear data, and approximations associated with the calculational method (e.g., Monte Carlo method). The bias and bias uncertainty are typically determined by using the modeling approximations, nuclear data, and calculational method to model well-known, usually critical, systems.
Community