Earth Observing 1 (EO-1) Decommission Overview Mission Operation Working Group (MOWG)
This presentation provides an updated status of Earth Observing 1 operations status for the 2016 Mission Operations Working Group.
EO-1 Operations↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “decommissioning”
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Coal-dependent Communities in Transition: Identifying Best Practices to Ensure Equitable Outcomes
The U.S. coal industry is experiencing a sharp increase in the numbers of retired and/or decommissioned coal-fired power plants across the U.S. In the years between 2010-2019, around 102 gigawatts (GW) of coal-fired generating capacity has been announced to be decommissioned, representing more than 546 coal-fired power plant units, and an additional 17 GW is planned to be decommissioned by 2025. This change in the energy production landscape presents an impact on the social, environmental, and economic prospects of coal-dependent communities. This report examined the role of communities in the coal power plant decommissioning process and provided community-identified best practices to ensure an equitable process. The experiences of four coal-dependent communities—Wise County, VA, Muskegon, MI, Anderson County, TN, and Becker, MN—are presented as case studies to understand the impacts of the decommissioning process, and associated best practices, from the communities’ perspective. The report results highlight the need to recognize that the decommissioning decision-making process must be community-based to be equitable. Each community’s input is key to the transition away from coal power because there is no one-size-fits-all development plan. In other words, each community’s trajectory through the decommissioning process—from the retirement decision-making stage to the final site redevelopment phase—is unique because each community has distinct needs and wants from the energy transition. What is best for one community may not be suited for another. Ultimately, the framework for site development and community revitalization post-decommissioning cannot be universal because each community’s profile—from a social, cultural, and economic perspective—is different. Community impacts of power plant decommissioning are not limited to job and revenue losses. Communities are likely to be impacted culturally, socially, environmentally, and have long-term health-based impacts that should be acknowledged and addressed in post-retirement plans. Commonly identified decommissioning best practices include: Early and continued engagement throughout, with a number of mediums for communication and feedback (e.g., in-person sessions, virtual meetings, written comment opportunities); Early planning of post-decommissioning projects to replace lost jobs, revenue, and economic activity; Recognition (and mitigation, if possible) of social impacts on the community due to plant closure; Transparency throughout the process, with trusted information being provided about the decommissioning process and timeline; potential impacts on the workforce, economy, and environment; and the feasibility of alternative site uses; Identification of funding sources, technical experts, and/or strategic partnerships to support decommissioning and the affected communities upfront; and, Acknowledgment of communities as stakeholders who have a role in the conversation and right to determine their futures. Three key areas for assisting coal-dependent communities affected by the energy transition: Technical assistance: assessment of site feasibility for alternative uses or to repower with new technologies; Cross-partnership engagement and collaboration: facilitate knowledge-sharing of “lessons learned” about the decommissioning process between communities and provide guidance for decision-making processes; and, Financial assistance: access to grant and/or loan programs to assist with redevelopment survey, bolster community economic security through job creation, and cover environmental clean-up costs. Technical assistance, cross-partnership engagement, and financial aid can be mobilized to help communities throughout various stages of the decommissioning process, including the retirement decision, the site reclamation phase, and eventual revitalization of the site and surrounding community.
01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
Use of the Manuela 3D/Radiation Scanning Tool at Nuclear Facilities - 20437
Licensees, facility operators and decommissioning contractors have a need for comprehensive, accurate and precise radiological and topographical data to plan and execute safe and efficient Decontamination and Decommissioning (D and D) projects. Traditional approaches rely greatly upon labor and administratively intensive data collection methods that require considerable time and effort to glean the relevant data to plan and perform work in a radiological work area. Orano Decommissioning Services has developed and utilized at French nuclear facilities a lightweight portable scanning instrument called MANUELA (Mobile Apparatus for Nuclear Expertise Localization Assistance). Recently Orano conducted demonstrations at two United States nuclear facilities using MANUELA that may prove useful in areas of the fuel cycle including: - ALARA (As Low As Reasonably Achievable) planning during facility operations; - Scoping and site characterization during the D and D planning phase; - Remedial action support during active decommissioning work; - Radiation and modeling planning for plant modifications; - Support Final Status Survey and demonstration of 'end state' compliance for license termination. MANUELA is currently being evaluated for use during decommissioning of nuclear facilities and could aide in demonstrating compliance with end state criteria after decommissioning. Of particular interest are decommissioning projects planned for various sites across the United States. Most of these sites present unique challenges and opportunities to safely and efficiently decommission in a regulatory compliant manner. The two demonstration site's current conditions of relatively low radiation levels inside containment proved to be ideal platforms to deploy the MANUELA instrument for evaluation of the complex geometries typically found in a nuclear facility. The MANUELA instrument was able to precisely identify local hot spots of the reactor system's primary equipment and was able to simultaneously overlay the dose information onto the scanned 3D images. Using data like this, a licensee would be able to make informed technical and personnel decisions on methods to remediate, shield or properly dispose of the radioactive source term. MANUELA can be used throughout the decommissioning process to validate progress and continue to refine the work activities to optimize the efforts of the crew which reduces downtime waiting for survey results, whereas traditional survey methodology relies on a physical survey to be performed and the data transcribed onto survey maps that are only two dimensional. The traditional format tends to be inaccurate and difficult to interpret the precise location(s) of hot spots or generalized dose rates. The resultant scan also allows the user to know the exact extent of the survey versus transposing information onto a map with only a portion of the map area scanned. MANUELA also compiles all of the relevant survey data into a downloadable table format which includes the measurement identification number, time stamp, point space location on the XYZ plane, and the dose rate value. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
The Study of TRR Radial Thermal Shielding Dismantling Process - 20063
The decommissioning of nuclear facilities has become an important worldwide topic because many nuclear power facilities will permanently cease operation in the foreseeable future. Taiwan Research Reactor (TRR) has stepped into the decommissioning phase in 2004, and the dismantling processes will start in 2022. TRR is a heavy water reactor designed by Canatom Company with output thermal power 40 MW. On January 3, 1973, it reaches criticality. TRR had been operated for 15 years and was permanently shut down in early 1988. The decommissioning plan of TRR was approved in 2004. According to the Nuclear Reactor Facilities Regulation Act in Taiwan, a nuclear facility must be dismantled in 25 years after stepping into the decommissioning phase. Therefore, TRR decommissioning must be completed before 2029. One of the most important tasks of TRR decommissioning is to dismantle reactor body. In the task of TRR decommissioning, mechanical cutting with remote handling is used to dismantle radial thermal shielding, which are the internal components of the TRR. This study outlines the internal components of the TRR and explains the difficulties encountered during the dismantling processes. Considering the structure and radiation dose rate of TRR and its internal components, the dismantling method and packaging method are properly arranged to complete the TRR dismantling task. This study describes the process of dismantling the radial thermal shielding during the dismantling processes and considers the impact of the radiation dose on the staff during the operation. The calculation of the radiation dose rate for the personnel during the segmentation process is based on the evaluation result by using VRdose. If the calculation of personnel working dose rate is too high, we will increase the shielding or use remote handling to reduce the operator's exposure dose in the dismantling processes to comply with the As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) principle. In this study, the latest developments in the TRR decommissioning program are described. It also provides usable experience and information regarding the future decommissioning of other nuclear facilities or nuclear power plants in Taiwan. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Using Digital and Web-Based Platforms to Enhance Nuclear Power Plant Knowledge Transfer - 20203
As the workforce ages, the loss of experienced personnel can result in a loss of important knowledge. Updating Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) research and guidance with the latest technology developments and operating experience is an important method to transfer knowledge between the retiring and incoming workforce. Studies suggest that the incoming workforce is accustomed to using digital and/or internet-based platforms to find information and may have a higher comfort with these types of platforms than they have with static, written reports. Additionally, the ease and speed of updating and delivering content through digital formats may offer an effective method for knowledge transfer and combining information from multiple reports into a single access point. EPRI has recently produced an online Decommissioning Hub available to members and is working on replicating the effort in the area of radioactive waste management called the Radwaste Web References. EPRI has extensive guidance in both disciplines. The Decommissioning Hub uses a wiki format to provide a platform that allows for both the updating of that guidance resulting from new research and new operating experiences, and combining related topical information from multiple reports. It also allows users to access the information based on key words and topical searches, and can be a tool for users to input experience to share with others. The Decommissioning Hub is accessed via a web-based portal and includes topical pages; experience summaries; a question and answer capability; and a smart search function of all EPRI decommissioning reports. Use of a wiki format allows users to input new experiences or modify existing experience summaries to add additional detail. EPRI moderates all content. The experience data base has been initially populated with information available in published EPRI reports and unpublished information currently available within EPRI. Moving forward, population of the database will continue with information available within the open literature, new information developed from current decommissioning projects, and user inputs. The web site became active in late 2017, and a major update will be issued in early 2020. Larger scale updates are planned biannually, and smaller-scale updates will occur continuously. Capturing and applying lessons learned from industry experiences is a hallmark of the global nuclear industry. This is even more important in the decommissioning technology area since very few plant staff have relevant experience and thus there is a steep learning curve. Moreover, decommissioning involves a number of complex, non-routine and specialized tasks. The web-accessible and searchable experience database provides an easy-to-use resource for capturing and disseminating practical experiences from completed and ongoing decommissioning projects. The EPRI Radwaste Web References will build upon the philosophy and objectives of the Radwaste Desk References that were published in the 1990's. The purpose of the original Radwaste Desk References was to provide nuclear power plant professionals with a how-to manual for managing radioactive waste. The Radwaste Web References will adopt this original purpose and will be a wiki type web site that provide fundamental practical and theoretical information, operating experience (OE), and information about advanced technologies and methods. As much as practicable, features that allow for interaction between users to share OE, best practices, and benchmarking will be added. Where they exist and are appropriate, the various EPRI Guidelines documents on radwaste topics will be updated and incorporated into the Radwaste Web References. The first Radwaste Web Reference will be on Low Level Waste Characterization and will build upon the EPRI Low Level Waste Characterization Guidelines (EPRI Report TR-107201, 1996) and will be available in 2020. The next Radwaste Web Reference will be on the topic of liquid radioactive waste processing and management, tentatively set for unveiling in 2021. This paper summarizes the EPRI's previous experiences with web-based platforms and future plans in this area. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
The TRANSCEND University Consortium: An Overview - 20106
The UK government is committed to nuclear energy having an important role in delivering a secure, low-carbon and affordable energy future. Projections indicate that between now and 2035, ∼14 GW of new nuclear generating capacity may be built. Successful delivery of this strategy recognises the need for research and development, skills development and international collaboration as key enablers. One key area is the decommissioning and clean-up of all civil nuclear licensed sites and the implementation of geological disposal of highly active wastes, with a central component being a joined-up approach to nuclear R and D across government, industry and academia which benefits the UK economy and ensures the security of supply. Essential to public acceptance of this strategy remains a demonstrable ability to safely manage and dispose of waste, with acceptance directly linked to having scientifically robust routes for its safe clean-up and disposal. There therefore remains an ongoing need for further research in the areas of decommissioning, immobilisation and management of nuclear waste, and there is significant government and stakeholder support for such research. Given the needs of both new nuclear power generation and legacy wastes, there is a requirement to develop innovative approaches to waste management and decommissioning. Following on from earlier, highly successful projects supported by UK Research and Innovation's Energy Programme, the work of the TRANSCEND (Transformative Science and Engineering for Nuclear Decommissioning) consortium is part of the response to these needs, providing support to a strong and internationally leading group of researchers in this key technology area. The consortium is a collaboration between 11 universities, supported by 8 key industry partners, with a total funding of UK Pounds 9.5 M from the UK Engineering and Physical Research Council, the universities and key project partners. The research being carried out is multidisciplinary and covers both fundamental and applied topics, with 40 research projects clustered in four technical themes: integrated waste management; site decommissioning and remediation; spent fuels; and nuclear materials. Key aims of the consortium are to extend and further develop a relevant academic skill base in the UK associated with the needs of nuclear waste management and decommissioning, to train the next generation of UK researchers, equipping them with skills and experiences relevant to nuclear waste management and decommissioning issues, and to carry out cutting-edge research that has the potential to provide new and innovative pathways to better management of both legacy and future nuclear wastes. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
New Beginnings: Optimising Waste and End-state at UK Nuclear Sites to Enable Environmental Permit surrender (the GRR) - 20193
The decommissioning of nuclear sites involves the management of large volumes of radioactive waste, other conventional waste, and the clean-up of land and groundwater contamination. In the UK, the disposal of radioactive waste from nuclear sites is regulated by the Environment Agency (England), Natural Resources Wales (Wales) and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Scotland). All three environment agencies seek to make sure that the generation and disposal of radioactive waste is optimised: ensuring impacts to people are 'as low as reasonably achievable' (ALARA). With a large proportion of UK nuclear sites embarking on decommissioning, the environment agencies have collaboratively developed new guidance: the 'Management of radioactive waste from the decommissioning of nuclear sites: Guidance on the Requirements for Release from radioactive substances regulation' (referred to as the GRR)[1]. The environment agencies worked in liaison with the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR), the UK nuclear safety regulator, and the UK government body responsible, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA). Prior to finalising the guidance, a 12 month trial was completed at three of the NDA's nuclear sites, enabling the environment agencies to test their draft GRR guidance against 'real world scenarios' and the challenge of incorporating its requirements into decommissioning plans. Experience gained during the trial was incorporated into the current version of the GRR, published in July 2018. The GRR represents the 'new beginning' of this paper's title because for the first time, the UK environmental regulators have expressed in detail their requirements for surrender of environmental permits for nuclear sites. The GRR provides a framework for a UK nuclear site to plan, assess and justify its management of radioactive waste and deliver through decommissioning, an optimal, environmentally safe and sustainable end-state. This paper will describe the requirements and technical standards within the GRR, the establishment of defensible clean-up criteria and the production of a Waste Management Plan (WMP), supported by a Site-Wide Environmental Safety Case (SWESC). It will describe the experience gleaned by operators and regulators during the trial and it will highlight current work by regulators to implement the new approach proportionately. Finally, this paper will look forward and outline planned amendments to legislation in the UK affecting nuclear sites that should enable the full benefits of the GRR to be realised in the future. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Special Considerations for the Removal and Disposal of Micro-Reactor Experiments
Idaho National Laboratory (INL) is preparing to host several microreactor experiments through 2030 and beyond. Two new test beds currently under development will operate as microreactor or nuclear system experiment user facilities. Test bed experiments will be performed in series, with each nuclear experiment installed, operated, and removed before installation of the subsequent experiment. The necessarily brief transition period between experiments introduces unique equipment removal and radioactive waste disposal challenges. This paper evaluates equipment removal and radioactive waste management topics associated with tight sequencing of nuclear experiments and presents some of the solutions and approaches currently planned to meet these special considerations for one such experiment, the Molten Chloride Reactor Experiment (MCRE), slated for operation at INL’s Laboratory for Operation and Testing in the United States (LOTUS). The MCRE project is a collaboration between Southern Company Services, TerraPower, and INL, among others, to provide integral nuclear data that will advance molten salt fast reactor technology. MCRE will be the first critical fast-spectrum circulating fuel system ever operated and the first experiment operated in the LOTUS test bed. The experiment will nominally operate at zero power with planned low power excursions as part of operational planning for MCRE has been to minimize at-power operations to limit fission product formation while still achieving experimental objectives. After the experiment is complete, MCRE will be allowed to radioactively decay for a short period (nominally 90 days) prior to system defueling, flushing, removal, and disposal of all MCRE equipment, readying the test bed for the next nuclear experiment. Equipment removal and radioactive waste disposal have been integral to MCRE project planning since the Cooperative Research and Development Agreement was formalized in 2021. Due to requirements for future use of the test bed, the MCRE system, of necessity, must be removed in a much shorter time frame than typical for historic reactor decommissioning projects at INL. This results in minimal time for radioactive decay, resulting in not only elevated radiation dose rates but also the presence of short-to-medium-lived isotopes not typically encountered in the reactor decommissioning and radioactive waste management space. Additional unique constraints placed on the project include lack of intrinsic remote-operations capabilities in the test bed, space constraints in the test bed once MCRE has been installed, and contamination minimization requirements to return the test bed to as-found conditions to enable future use. This paper discusses planned solutions to these challenges. Approaches for implementing remote or semi-remote technologies in a non-hot cell environment with limited space availability are discussed. The paper also summarizes the systems engineering approach for concept development and design of equipment removal systems, which are being implemented concurrent with the MCRE design phase, providing feedback to system designers to incorporate features enabling efficient and safe equipment removal approaches. The timing of this paper at a relatively early phase of the project is meant to highlight the importance of early planning for nuclear system decommissioning while reactor design is ongoing to allow design feedback on componentry driven from decommissioning system needs. As new, innovative nuclear reactor technologies enter the nuclear market sector, reactor experiments are crucial for providing new integral nuclear data that establish safe operational margins for technology advancement. Microreactor experiments at INL will require safe, effective, and timely decommissioning approaches, which in turn require nuclear systems designed to expedite decommissioning. In addition to the advancement of nuclear reactor technologies, these nuclear experiments provide an opportunity to demonstrate, deploy, and test new removal and disposal capabilities to support the next generation of nuclear reactor technology.
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Development of a Regulatory Strategy for Post Operational Clean Out Activities at Sellafield Limited Nuclear Licensed Site - 20273
The Thermal Oxide Reprocessing Plant (THORP) at the Sellafield nuclear licensed site carried out its final commercial shear of spent nuclear fuel in November 2018, since when the facility has undergone rundown prior to cessation of operations. The Magnox Reprocessing Facility (MRF) is also due to cease operating, around the end of 2020. Following the cessation of spent fuel reprocessing, the facilities and supporting infrastructure will transition into Post Operational Clean Out (POCO), which will become an increasingly significant portion of Sellafield Limited's (SL) activities. POCO is defined as the set of activities undertaken directly after a nuclear facility comes to the end of its operational life, in order to place the plant in a suitable state for the subsequent decommissioning steps. The decommissioning strategy at SL is for deferred dismantling of these facilities, which will be subject to a period of Surveillance and Maintenance (S and M) following completion of POCO. This paper outlines the development and implementation of a regulatory strategy for POCO activities at the Sellafield site by the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR), the independent nuclear safety, transport and security regulator in the United Kingdom. The paper also describes how this regulatory strategy is applied to nuclear installations undergoing transition into POCO and subsequent decommissioning. ONR works jointly with the Environment Agency, as the environmental regulators in England, to ensure that matters relevant to them have been duly considered. In developing a regulatory strategy, ONR has taken a site-wide approach, moving away from regulation on a facility-by-facility basis, to promote consistency, as well as maximising efficiency and effectiveness. The aim of this integrated approach was to prevent complications during future decommissioning and dismantling that have been experienced previously at similar facilities in France. The strategy recognised that once reprocessing operations are concluded, the hazard present will be reduced significantly, which provides the opportunity for ONR to consider how best to deliver a proportionate approach to regulatory interventions. Once POCO has been completed and the facility has transitioned into a period of S and M, the scale and frequency of ONR's interventions will reduce, commensurate with the safety case covering the remaining hazard and activities associated with maintaining the facility prior to final decommissioning. This approach allows ONR to consider risks holistically, considering the full life cycle of the facility and by taking due account of the interdependencies between facilities across the site. The strategy also aligns with existing regulation of high hazard and risk reduction activities, which remain ONR's top priority. As SL progresses with POCO activities in THORP and across the rest of the site, ONR will review its regulatory strategy to ensure that the intended safety benefits are realised. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
The Evaluation of Chemical Decontamination for Contaminated Carbon Steel Scrap by Multiphase Treatment Process - 20249
There is a significant growth in the field of decommissioning of nuclear facilities due the fact that for a lot of them their end of life is nearing. In Taiwan, the government plans to steadily reduce the dependence on nuclear power and moves gradually towards a nuclear-free homeland. Therefore, the development of decommissioning technology becomes the significant issue for the next coming years. The decommissioning of a nuclear power plant is a long process and practical work including radiological surveys, decontamination, dismantling, and the subsequent waste management. Chemical decontamination is an important task in the decommissioning of nuclear power plants and is usually performed by circulating the chemical solution in selected systems or full systems in order to reduce dose levels. However, the decontamination of segmented metal parts is also considered to reduce the contamination to such levels that they may be disposed of at a lower classification or be unconditionally released, and it helps to achieve the goal of waste minimization and provide a more economical cost for disposal management. Chemical decontamination technology is used to remove the contaminated oxides deposited on the surface of metals by dissolving them with chemical mechanisms, such as chelation, acidic or alkaline dissolution, redox reaction and so on. Carbon steel is the major material used in systems and pipelines in the nuclear power plant, thus it is also commonly selected as the target to be decontaminated in the decommissioning process. In this study, the effectiveness of chemical decontamination is evaluated by using multiphase treatment process including the reduction and the oxidation steps. In the step of redox reaction, the oxidation state of the substance is very important. Especially metals of some oxidation states show solubility in water, which has a decisive influence on the chemical decontamination. The experiment of decontamination of metal scraps is carried out by the immersion method within a chemical solution. The relative operation parameters such as temperature, pH, and concentration of the chemical solution are recorded to demonstrate the effect of the decontamination process. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Development of wind turbine blade recycling baselines in the United States
Over the past several years, the wind energy industry has received scrutiny regarding wind turbine blade (WTB) recycling due to the landfilling of WTBs caused by a lack of industrially viable recycling solutions. The amount of WTBs that will need to be recycled is set to increase in the United States as the deployment of wind energy is expected to rapidly grow to meet the nation's energy goals by 2035. While significant progress has been made worldwide, it is still unclear which WTB recycling solutions would be the most cost and energy effective within the United States for the existing fleet of wind turbines. To guide researchers and industry with a clear path forward, a range of options for WTB recycling in the United States are modeled through development of baseline scenarios and the use of formal life cycle assessment (LCA). Model data have been collected through literature review, industry engagement, and expert opinion regarding current end of life practices and considerations surrounding equipment, labor, and logistics. A detailed baseline for WTB decommissioning processes has been developed and used to assess alternative approaches, such as on-site shredding to compare the impacts on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The developed LCA model and baseline scenarios for WTB recycling is used to assess the current WTB decommissioning practices in the United States along with emerging recycling pathways, including cement kiln co-processing and pyrolysis. Initial findings indicate that there are different approaches to decommissioning WTBs in the United States, each of which has unique implications for recycling. In light of this finding, additional results from the modeling will be used to better understand decommissioning practices and assist in making educated decisions on recycling pathways for the future. Throughout the analysis, focus was given to where international efforts might differ from the United States. WTB recycling is occurring worldwide, and different countries have different drivers for creating markets for recycled WTB materials. The contrasts and similarities between the United States and other countries offer insight to areas of opportunity that the United States could investigate and areas that can be readily transferred from existing solutions. By modeling and characterizing the current decommissioning practices and potential recycling solutions for the United States, a clearer vision will be created for pathways forward as to how to handle end of life WTBs to enable more efficient and cost-effective opportunities for material recovery from end-of-life WTBs.
Korey, Matt↗
Recommendations for an Applicant to Calculate Activity Data for Greenhouse Gases Estimates
In 2009, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) directed the NRC staff to address climate change issues and consider the impacts of the emissions of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and other greenhouse gases (GHGs) in its environmental reviews for major licensing actions (NRC 2009b). To implement this direction from the Commission, the staff issued guidance in 2011 and updated guidance in 2014 in Attachment 1 to Interim Staff Guidance COL/ESP-ISG-026 (NRC 2011; NRC 2014). This guidance provides a simpler method than the method described in RG 4.2 Rev. 3, that an applicant can use to meet the plant parameter envelope (PPE) value from the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Licensing of New Nuclear Reactors (NR GEIS). NRC staff estimated the 97-year lifecycle GHG emissions from a reference 1000 megawatt electrical (MWe) light-water reactor (LWR) for various activities associated with construction, operation (including uranium fuel cycle), and decommissioning of nuclear power plants and presented the results in Appendix H of the NR GEIS. Appendix H of the NR GEIS includes estimates of direct emissions from construction equipment and emergency diesel engines in a nuclear facility and indirect emissions from workforce vehicular traffic, fuel transportation and the uranium fuel cycle. The NR GEIS Section 3.3 extended the estimates in Appendix H for the installation of two 1000 MWe nuclear reactors on the same site. Scaling factors were used to extrapolate the GHG emissions of a reference 1000 MWe reactor to a two-unit nuclear reactor plant (each reactor unit generating 1000 MWe). GHG emission estimates for building, operation, decommissioning and safe storage (SAFSTOR) for a two-unit nuclear reactor plant would be based on the plant’s physical size, and therefore estimates for these source categories were assumed to be twice the value of the reference 1000 MWe reactor. However, GHG emissions from the fuel cycle (including fuel transportation) were scaled upward by a factor of 3, based on plant efficiencies greater than the 80 percent assumption in Appendix H. Table 1 below shows the PPE emissions for two 1000 MWe nuclear reactors as provided in NR GEIS. The total GHG emissions for two 1000 MWe reactors were calculated as 2,534,000 metric tons (MT) of CO 2 equivalent (CO 2 (e)) based on a 97 year GHG life cycle period. The GHG emissions lifetime of 97 years for a reference nuclear reactor includes a 7-year building phase, 40 years of operation, 10 years of active decommissioning, and 40 years of SAFSTOR operations (NRC 2024). Construction equipment and vehicular traffic from workers commute would contribute to the GHG emissions during a 7-year building phase. Uranium fuel cycle, vehicular traffic, fuel and waste transportation, and testing of standby diesel generators would contribute to GHG emissions during the 40-year operations phase. While NRC’s regulations allow up to 60 years of reactor facility decommissioning, Appendix H estimated that most of the GHGs would occur over an estimated 10-year period during which to the licensee would engage in significant demolition and earth-moving activities, as discussed in Supplement 1 to NUREG-0586 (NRC 2002). Vehicular traffic by the workforce during a 40-year SAFSTOR period would additionally contribute GHG emissions. The carbon footprint for a 40-year SAFSTOR period was separately analyzed from the decommissioning activities as provided in Table YYYY-2 of the staff issued guidance in 2011 (NRC 2011).
22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
Comparing Legacy Waste Management to Advanced Reactor Waste Management
The Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) and Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) are organizing an international workshop on the implementation of radioactive waste management and decommissioning strategies in small modular reactors (SMRs) and advance reactor technologies. The event will take place in Ottawa, Canada on 7-10 November 2022. The workshop will convene participants from various fields of expertise in the areas of radioactive waste management, decommissioning, nuclear science and development, transportation, as well as young professionals, communication experts and researchers. The goal of the workshop is to devise a guideline document that will serve implementers in understanding key issues in decommissioning and waste management of new reactors from the design perspective, aiding in the licensing process and in future decommissioning and waste management activities. DOE has invested considerably in the innovation of advanced reactors. Interaction in this workshop allows INL and DOE to articulate the importance of looking at the back-end of the fuel cycle for advanced reactors. The back-end of the fuel cycle is important to the success of advanced reactors, and DOE may need to manage this material in the future after it is discharged from reactors. I have been asked to present at the track titled "Operational and Design Optimization Consideration Related to Decommissioning and Radioactive Waste Management for SMRs/Advanced Reactors".
11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
A Circular Economy for Solar Photovoltaic System Materials: Drivers, Barriers, Enablers, and U.S. Policy Considerations
As PV capacity increases, owners are also decommissioning older system assets. Estimates based on a 30-year lifetime assumption found that cumulative U.S. end-of-life (EoL) PV modules could total one million metric tons (Mt) by 2030 and up to 10 million Mt by 2050 (Weckend, Wade, and Heath 2016). Beyond maintenance replacements, early retirements that are due to efficiency upgrades and extreme weather, as well as PV deployment beyond earlier expectations, would increase these projections. PV system owners must evaluate equipment management options for used modules and system components retired during maintenance activities, refurbishment, repowering and system decommissioning. PV manufacturers must also evaluate material management options from customer returns, defects, and scrap. Management options for early retired and EoL PV system material include reuse, repair for reuse, recycling-based resource recovery, storage, and disposal. Disposal of PV system material increases the burden on landfill capacity, while reuse, repair for reuse, and recycling-based resource recovery (reuse/repair/recovery) options salvage valuable materials and provide secondary market opportunities and ancillary benefits (Weckend, Wade, and Heath 2016; EPA 2019c; SWEEP 2019). PV system owners may also decide store used modules and components as spares, or in the interim before a reuse or EoL management decision is made. Despite potential secondary market opportunities and the potential benefits associated with the repair/reuse/recovery of PV system material, anecdotal evidence suggests that in the United States decommissioned PV modules are stored, landfilled or otherwise disposed of (Salim et al. 2019; CPUC 2019b; DTSC 2019b; NREL 2019a). Some modules are being disposed of in municipal nonhazardous landfills and federally regulated hazardous treatment, storage, and disposal facilities, and others are being stored in warehouses until economically viable repair/reuse/recycling becomes available (CPUC 2019b; DTSC 2019b; NREL 2019a; Libby and Shaw 2018). As awareness of current practices grows, and the demand for critical PV module material increases, U.S. industry stakeholders, regulators, and policymakers are starting to (1) consider solutions to drive and enable environmentally sustainable materials management decisions and behaviors and (2) identify barriers to a circular economy for PV system materials. Circular economy principles attempt to transition from a "take-make-consume-dispose" linear economic system to a circular system that allows for the long life, and the reuse/repair/recovery of products and materials (Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2020). We begin this report by summarizing the drivers, barriers, and enablers to a circular economy for PV system materials in the United States. We then report on our analysis of federal and state regulatory considerations that may impact the repair/reuse/recovery of PV materials, and potential civil and criminal liabilities associated with noncompliance. We then discuss state policies and initiatives in the United States that expressly address PV system decommissioning and repair/reuse/recovery of PV materials. We conclude by providing case studies of U.S. business models for the repair/reuse/recovery of PV system materials. Our results are based on legal and literature-based research and interviews with solar industry stakeholders, regulators, and policymakers.
14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
Panel Session 4 and 15: Japan Fukushima Daiichi D and D Update and Technological Challenges at Japan Fukushima Daiichi D and D and Update on Nuclear Overview and Development in Japan - Nuclear Fuel Cycle
Sessions 4 and 15 represent a two-part panel series that discusses progress and challenges associated with cleanup at Fukushima. Severe limitations on availability of original panelists from Japan due to strict restrictions put in place to alleviate the spread of coronavirus necessitated changes to both panels. The result was a significantly modified panel for Session 04 (shown above) and the elimination of all panelists for Session 15. The 4 and 15 Panel Sessions provide an overview of activities related to both the progress and challenges of cleanup and decommissioning of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station (NPS) in Japan. Five panelists discussed perspectives of the cleanup following a Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) video showing the progress on site since the devastating Great East Earthquake and tsunami that caused the explosions at three of the six reactors on the site. Three of the five panelists discussed on-going work being performed for the effort, while the other two provided expert perspectives of on strategic efforts at the site. The panel was attended by over 80 technologists and policy makers spanning the globe and was opened by Dr. Monica Regalbuto of Idaho National Laboratory and a short video provided by TEPCO. The video described changes at the site that spanned the cleanup efforts from stabilizing water intrusion into the contaminated reactor buildings to construction of new administrative facilities. The video explained the processes underway to retrieve spent fuel rods and challenges in retrieval of the compromised fuel debris. The video highlighted working condition improvements that included establishment of rest housing and a small convenience store on the site, and the rollback of protective equipment around the site due to decreases contamination. Panelists with presentations: Revision of 'the Mid-and-Long-Term Road-map towards the Decommissioning of TEPCO's Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station' (Paul Dickman); Sharing UK experience at Fukushima Daiichi (Adrian Simper); SRNL Japan (Andrew Fellinger); ABLE's Initiative to Dismantle the Exhaust Stack (Daniel Walter); JAEA R and D in Fukushima (Tokio Fukahori); TEPCO - Overview and Update of the Fukushima Decommissioning Process (Monica Regalbuto); Toshiba's Involvement in the Decommissioning of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant (Yasuhiro Yuguchi); Remote Dismantling of the Exhaust Stack At Fukushima Dai-ichi NPS (Takashi Okutsu)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Certifying the Performance of Fixative Technologies under Open Air Demolition Activities for D and D - 20096
Department of Energy (DOE) facilities undergoing deactivation and decommissioning (D and D) activities struggle with safety concerns of residual radioactive contamination leftover after gross decontamination efforts have concluded. The positive effects of implementing fixative technologies for decommissioning and maintenance is known across the DOE complex. However, there is no standardized metric in place that quantifies the performance of these technologies such as incombustible fixative platforms that immobilize the contamination in a solid polymer material under normal operating conditions or when exposed to stressors. The primary focus of this research is to provide the empirical data necessary to properly characterize the effects of implementing fixative technologies on mitigating the release of contamination. In addition, this effort has been used to identify and establish uniform testing protocols to quantify operational parameters of fixating platforms and properly credit such systems under a variety of operational conditions and stressors that can arise during open air demolition efforts (e.g. impact, water, thermal, etc.). The established protocols will be provided to the ASTM International E10.03 Subcommittee on Radiological Protection for Decontamination and Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities and Components for the potential of formal standardization. Attributes to be addressed during testing are material compromise from impact stress, thermal stress for incombustible fixative materials, and immobilization factors (how well an immobilizing platform is capable of retaining fixated material during thermal and impact stressors). In developing these test methods, a greater understanding of the material's behavior under anticipated and unanticipated events, such as decommissioning activities and contingency events as outlined in the Basis of Interim Operations (BIO), can be successfully characterized. There are several key components of the experimental methodology that is essential in empirically certifying fixative technologies. A surrogate contaminant with a unique signature has been utilized with the implementation of a uniform contamination process of test coupons that is quantifiable and replicable for direct fixative comparisons. A modular test chamber has also been used to apply the various stressors of interest. Collection of released contamination that includes airborne and resettled contaminant particles and analyzed using mass spectrometry. This research directly supports DOE complex-wide concerns in terms of final disposition of nuclear facilities and the considerations made during their time between ceasing facility operation and final disposition. The results of this effort aims to provide a standardized road map and logical decision flow to better facilitate fixative technologies into D and D activities required to achieve the desired facility end state. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Updates to a Preliminary Probabilistic Performance Assessment Model for Radiological and Chemical Contamination at the West Valley Site, New York - 20420
The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) is the owner of the Western New York Nuclear Service Center (WNYNSC), a 1,351-ha site located approximately 48 km south of Buffalo, New York. In 1962, Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. (NFS) entered into agreements with the Atomic Energy Commission and New York State to construct the first commercial reprocessing plant of nuclear fuel in the United States at the WNYNSC. NFS built and operated the spent fuel reprocessing plant and waste disposal facilities, processing 640 Mg (640 metric tons) of spent nuclear fuel from 1966 to 1972 under an Atomic Energy Commission license. Nuclear fuel reprocessing operations halted in 1972 and never restarted, leaving behind radioactive and chemical wastes. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) was required to complete certain waste management activities under the West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) Act of 1980 including decommissioning of WVDP facilities. As collaborating agencies, NYSERDA and the DOE are tasked with making decisions about decommissioning and risk reduction for the West Valley Site. Neptune and Company, Inc. (Neptune) was contracted to develop a probabilistic performance assessment (PPA) model to assist the agencies in their decision making process for decommissioning the WVDP and WNYNSC. One important tool that is needed in order to inform the decision-making process is a science-based model of the West Valley Site that evaluates potential future consequences for human health and the environment. This forms the core of the spatial domain of the West Valley PPA Model. The PPA Model, developed using the GoldSim system modeling software, is a tool intended to provide support for decision making that evaluates uncertainty, in a manner that is transparent, defensible, and robust. The PPA Model includes contaminant transport and health effects components, and is organized around geographically-grouped contaminated facilities. These include the waste disposal areas licensed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the State of New York, a waste tank farm for storage of high level radioactive waste resulting from reprocessing operations, and several areas contaminated with radioactive and chemical constituents. The PPA Model evaluates contaminant transport from these sources to points of exposure across the site and into receiving surface waters and sediments. Hypothetical people and wildlife could be exposed to contamination at these locations, and the effects of these exposures are evaluated. Contaminant transport processes to be evaluated in the PPA Model include groundwater and surface water transport, contaminant translocation by plants and animals, diffusion, and erosion. The evaluation of exposures to people in this preliminary model is limited to a resident farmer scenario, and ecological assessment is performed at the level of a screening analysis. The results of these preliminary evaluations inform future model developments. PPA Model results are subjected to sensitivity analysis in order to determine those pathways and parameters that are most significant in influencing the results. This information allows analysts and decision makers to focus on those aspects of Site behavior and processes. With this information, the decision makers can drive informed, defensible decisions regarding decommissioning of the Site. This paper includes an update of the information presented at WM2019 [1]. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Best Practices at the End of Photovoltaic System Performance Period
Responsible and cost-effective dissolution of photovoltaic (PV) system hardware at the end of the performance period has emerged as an important business and environmental consideration. Alternatives include extending the performance period and existing contracts for power purchase, lease, and utility interconnect; refurbishing the plant by correcting any deficiencies; repowering the plant with new PV modules and inverters; or decommissioning the plant and removing all the hardware from the site. Often key decisions are made very early in the project development and might require decommissioning by some certain date after the end of a power purchase agreement. To “abandon in place” is not an alternative acceptable to landowners and regulators, so any financial prospectus should include costs associated with decommissioning, even if those costs are deferred by extending operations, refurbishment, or repowering. Decommissioning costs are driven by regulations regarding the handling and disposal of waste, with reuse and recycling of PV modules and other components preferred as a way to reduce both costs and environmental impact. Each alternative is discussed with order-of-magnitude costs, and recommendations are provided considering site-specific details of that situation, such as estimated costs to refurbish or repower, projected revenue from continued operations, and tax considerations.
14 SOLAR ENERGY↗