SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Nuclear Plant Management”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 127 records · Page 7

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI1996

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 37, No. 3, July-September 1996]

Nuclear Safety is a journal that covers significant issues in the field of nuclear safety. Its primary scope is safety in the design, construction, operation, and decommissioning of nuclear power reactors worldwide and the research and analysis activities that promote this goal, but it also encompasses the safety aspects of the entire nuclear fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing and handling, and nuclear waste disposal, the handling of fissionable materials and radioisotopes, and the environmental effects of all these activities. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS 181 Attitudes and Practices Regarding Disposal of Liquid Nuclear Waste at Clinton Laboratories in the Very Early Years: A Historical Analysis, S. H. Stow; 202 Off-Site Nuclear Emergency Management in Germany Under the Auspices of the Federal Structure, A. Bayer, S. Bittner, and H. Korn; DESIGN FEATURES: 211 Twenty-Fourth DOE/NRC Nuclear Air-Cleaning and Treatment Conference, R. R. Bellamy, J. J. Hayes, R. D. Porco, and M. W. First; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 222 Explosion in the Tomsk-7 Reprocessing Plant on April 6, 1993, M. L. Hyder, W. G. Lussie, and F. E. Witmer; 234 Reactor Shutdown Experience, Compiled by J. W. Cletcher; U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION INFORMATION AND ANALYSES: 237 Assessment of Spent Fuel Cooling, J. G. Ibarra, W. R. Jones, G. F. Lanik, H. L. Ornstein, and S. V. Pullani; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 256 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides, D. S. Queener; 260 Proposed Rule Changes as of June 30, 1996; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 210 Tennessee Industries Week; 221 21st International Symposium on The Scientific Basis for Nuclear Waste Management; 259 IAEA Programme of Scientific Meetings for 1997; 270 PSAM 4 (International Conference on Probabilistic Safety Assessment and Management); 265 The Authors; 268 Errata.

05 NUCLEAR FUELS↗

DOE OSTI2022

The First ICNC February 10-12, 1981 [Slides]

The first meeting that became the International Conference on Nuclear Criticality—ICNC—was held at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in February 1981. This presentation includes information on that meeting, including several experiments performed around that time period.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2022

FY21 Progress of the Oak Ridge Health Physics Research Reactor CAAS Benchmark Evaluation [Slides]

The FY21 version of the evaluation, focusing on element 57 dose at 3 meters, was presented at the ICSBEP Technical Review Group meeting in October 2021 and was not accepted for 2022 publication in the handbook. The main issue was identified and replacement of the element 57 neutron dose benchmark metric by neutron fluence (closer to what was measured) is required. A subgroup was formed, confident for the updated neutron fluence evaluation to be accepted in the ICSBEP handbook. The updated evaluation will be presented again at the 2022 ICSBEP TRG for publication in the 2023 handbook.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2021

Experiments for SINBAD: Evaluation of Oak Ridge Health Physics Research Reactor Operation Data for CAAS Benchmark Creation [Slides]

This report was a real information preservation and dissemination work with a lot of legacy content that was found and used. There was an abundance of uncertainty, discrepancy, and contradictory information. Yet, a detailed, functional SCALE model was built, and the benchmark created is useful for shielding and CAAs validation work. Sulfur fluence C/E ratios are large (2 to 5), so different benchmark metrics were studied. Neutron fluence, element 57 dose, and other dosimetry responses at 3 meters C/E ratios are below 1.5 for bare and steel configurations. Additional promising metrics as dose per unit fluence and steel shield attenuation were computed.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2025

PMDT: AI-Enabled Predictive Maintenance Digital Twins for Advanced Nuclear Reactors

Our team made substantial technical progress on various fronts during the course of the program. Multiple milestones were geared towards demonstrating the feasibility of machine learning based predictive maintenance digital twins towards reducing O&M costs, whereas some other milestones actually focused on identifying technical gaps and developing technologies such as humble AI to provide necessary robustness to the ML-based models. We were able to demonstrate in many cases that Machine learning-based methods can be successfully adapted for Nuclear plant environments especially for remote monitoring applications. Detailed analyses were carried out with plant and full scope simulation data along with capabilities of enhanced analytics to assess and set realistic expectations on cost reductions in O&M. These assessments are paving the way for investments towards reactor design improvements as well project planning for SMR projects as they develop and mature in the next few years. Technology developed under this program got direct visibility to GE Hitachi and their utility customers and resulted in positive intents to deploy some of the elements from design phase. The project additionally resulted in several reports, publications, software and data generation that will be useful in deployment and O&M services for BWRX300 fleets.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2020

Panel Session 67: US Savannah River Operation Office: Nuclear Materials Management

The Savannah River Site (SRS) has a proud 70-year history of nuclear materials management and processing. This panel provided an overview of the history, current status, and a look at potential future missions related to spent nuclear fuel (SNF), nuclear materials, and facilities at SRS. Panelists with presentations: SRS Nuclear Materials Management (Maxcine Maxted, Janice Lawson, Michael Mikolanis)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2022

Feasibility of lead-bismuth-cooled fast reactor with fuel shuffling strategy

This paper investigates the feasibility of fuel shuffling of the Advanced Nitride-fueled Simplified 100 MWe (ANTS-100e) Lead-bismuth-cooled Fast Reactor (LFR). The preliminary design has the active core of 235 cm in diameter and 100 cm high. The core is composed of 138 hexagonal fuel assemblies enclosed with a 15-15Ti steel duct. The core adopts the onion zoning with the two zones of low-enriched uranium for a better breeding capability to maximize the first cycle length to 10 effective full-power years (EFPYs). The fuel shuffling study is performed by using the UNIST in-house Monte Carlo code MCS. The neutronic parameters such as the multiplication factor and burnup are being investigated. The fuel shuffling strategy is evaluated through several loading patterns for flattening radial power distribution. It is also found that the core with fuel shuffling could lengthen the core lifetime by more than 5 EFPYs without introducing fresh fuel. Thus, it appears that the ANTS-100e can be principally designed to have the second cycle with another 10 EFPYs if introducing fresh fuel into the core. (authors)

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI1992

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 33, No. 1, January-March 1992]

Nuclear Safety is a review journal that covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. Its scope includes the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, the safety aspects of the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 1 Technical Note: A New Approach to Fission Reactor Safety, Yu. V. Petrov; 5 Erratum; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 6 Analysis and Modeling of Fission Product Release from Various Uranium-Aluminum Plate-Type Reactor Fuels, R. P. Taleyarkhan; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 23 Applications of a Surveillance and Diagnostics Methodology Using Neutron Noise From a Pressurized-Water Reactor, R. T. Wood, L. F. Miller, and R. B. Perez; DESIGN FEATURES: 36 Westinghouse Advanced Passive 600 Plant, B. A. McIntyre and R. K. Beck; 47 System 80+™ PWR Safety Design, C. W. Bagnal, R. A. Matzie, and R. S. Turk; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: 58 The MATS Experiments—Mesoscale Atmospheric Transport Studies at the Savannah River Site, A. H. Weber, S. Berman, R. J. Kurzeja, and R. P. Addis; 75 Book Review: Environmental Radioactivity in the European Community 1984-1985-1986, C. A. Little; WASTE AND SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT: 76 Activities Related to Waste and Spent Fuel Management, M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 87 Aging Assessment of BWR Control Rod Drive Systems, R. H. Greene; 100 Reactor Shutdown Experience, Compiled by J. W. Cletcher; 103 Selected Safety-Related Events, Compiled by G. A. Murphy; 110 Operating U.S. Power Reactors, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 129 General Administrative Activities, Compiled by M. D. Muhlheim and E. G. Silver; 139 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides, D. S. Queener; 143 Proposed Rule Changes as of Sept. 30 1991; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 128 Harvard School of Public Health Announces Short Courses; 128 16th Biennial ANS Topical Meeting on Reactor Operating Experience: Present and Future Technologies—Applying Lessons Learned (Call for Papers); 147 The Authors; 150 Indexes to Nuclear Safety, Volume 32; 154 Errata.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2022

Development and assessment of a reactor system prognosis model with physics-guided machine learning

Autonomous control systems provide recommendations to help operators in decision-making during plant operations ranging from normal operation to accident management. An important step of autonomous control is prognosis. In nuclear engineering domain, prognosis is the process of predicting future conditions of a system or equipment based on present signs and symptoms of a fault. The prognosis model allows predicting future reactor states for possible candidate control strategies so that the outcomes can be evaluated to determine the best control strategy. The prognosis model requires representing direct relationships between the symptoms and the predictions. In nuclear engineering, computational simulations are approximate representations of the operation of the real system. However, prognosis with computational simulations requires high computation power and time due to possible large number of scenarios. Necessary computation resources can be reduced with machine learning (ML) approach for fast predictions by building a surrogate function using the simulation data. A critical issue is, ML models are ignorant of physical knowledge, and these models approximate statistical relationships between the system variables. This ignorance can produce results that are inconsistent with physical laws, even if an optimal result is achieved from a mathematical point of view. Physics-guided machine learning (PGML) is an approach to tackle this issue. Here, this work formulates and illustrates a framework to guide development and assessment of the ML-based prognosis model for autonomous control systems. The development of the prognosis model considers the training of a ML model which consists of optimizing many aspects of the ML approach. The assessment of the prognosis model considers training data limitations and uncertainties of the ML approach. Prognosis models with standalone ML and PGML are developed and assessed on the loss-of-flow scenario of Experimental Breeder Reactor II. The results indicate that PGML based prognosis model has the best performance compared to other prognosis models.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2022

The evolution of the Human Systems and Simulation Laboratory in nuclear power research

The events at Three Mile Island in the United States brought about fundamental changes in the ways that simulation would be used in nuclear operations. The need for research simulators was identified to scientifically study human-centered risk and make recommendations for process control system designs. This paper documents the human factors research conducted at the Human Systems and Simulation Laboratory (HSSL) since its inception in 2010 at Idaho National Laboratory. The facility’s primary purposes are to provide support to utilities for system upgrades and to validate modernized control room concepts. In the last decade, however, as nuclear industry needs have evolved, so too have the purposes of the HSSL. Thus, beyond control room modernization, human factors researchers have evaluated the security of nuclear infrastructure from cyber adversaries and evaluated human-in-the-loop simulations for joint operations with an integrated hydrogen generation plant. Lastly, our review presents research using human reliability analysis techniques with data collected from HSSL-based studies and concludes with potential future directions for the HSSL, including severe accident management and advanced control room technologies.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI1992

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 33, No. 1, January-March 1992]

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI1988

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 29, No. 3, July-September 1988]

Nuclear Safety is a review journal that covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. Its scope includes the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, the safety aspects of the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 259 Fifteenth Water Reactor Safety Information Meeting by E. G. Silver; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 284 Reliability Technology to Improve and/or Maintain Emergency Diesel Generator Performance by S. Karimian and J. H. Taylor, 293 A Noise Diagnostics System for Operator Advice by G. Hessel, P. Liewers, P. Schumann, W. Schmitt, and F.-P. Weiss; PLANT SAFETY FEATURES: 307 A Passive Containment System for Advanced Light-Water Reactors by O. B. Falls, Jr., and F. W. Kleimola; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: 318 Data Base Construction for a Computerized Radiological Risk Investigation System by L. M. Hively, J. E. Nyquist, J. L. Bledsoe, and A. L. Sjoreen, 326 Erratum to "Radiation Hormesis and Nuclear Safety," Vol. 29, No. 1; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 327 Operational Safety Experience and Passive Safety Testing at the Fast Flux Text Facility by Q. L. Baird, J. L. Rathbun, D. D. Stepnewski, R. L. Stover, and A. E. Waltar, 344 Backfilling of Independent Residual Heat Removal Systems in West Germany and Switzerland by G. Eckert and Y. Salomon, 353 Reactor Shutdown Experience Compiled by J. W. Cletcher, 356 Selected Safety-Related Events Compiled by G. A. Murphy, 363 Operating U.S. Power Reactors Compiled by E. G. Silver; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 384 General Administrative Activities Compiled by E. G. Silver, 390 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides by D. S. Queener, 395 Status of Power-Reactor Projects Undergoing Licensing Review Compiled by E. G. Silver, 400 Proposed Rule Changes as of Mar. 31,1988; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 283 International ENS/ANS Conference on Thermal Reactor Safety "NUCSAFE 88", 317 Northwestern University Short Course on Radiation Safety, 407 Second International Seminar on Small- and Medium-Sized Nuclear Reactors, 407 International Workshop on New Developments in Occupational Dose Control and ALARA Implementation at Nuclear Power Plants and Similar Facilities, 408 Fourth International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Reactor Thermal Hydraulics (NURETH-4), 404 The Authors.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI1988

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 29, No. 3, July-September 1988]

Nuclear Safety is a review journal that covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. Its scope includes the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, the safety aspects of the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 259 Fifteenth Water Reactor Safety Information Meeting by E. G. Silver; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 284 Reliability Technology to Improve and/or Maintain Emergency Diesel Generator Performance by S. Karimian and J. H. Taylor, 293 A Noise Diagnostics System for Operator Advice by G. Hessel, P. Liewers, P. Schumann, W. Schmitt, and F.-P. Weiss; PLANT SAFETY FEATURES: 307 A Passive Containment System for Advanced Light-Water Reactors by O. B. Falls, Jr., and F. W. Kleimola; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: 318 Data Base Construction for a Computerized Radiological Risk Investigation System by L. M. Hively, J. E. Nyquist, J. L. Bledsoe, and A. L. Sjoreen, 326 Erratum to "Radiation Hormesis and Nuclear Safety," Vol. 29, No. 1; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 327 Operational Safety Experience and Passive Safety Testing at the Fast Flux Text Facility by Q. L. Baird, J. L. Rathbun, D. D. Stepnewski, R. L. Stover, and A. E. Waltar, 344 Backfilling of Independent Residual Heat Removal Systems in West Germany and Switzerland by G. Eckert and Y. Salomon, 353 Reactor Shutdown Experience Compiled by J. W. Cletcher, 356 Selected Safety-Related Events Compiled by G. A. Murphy, 363 Operating U.S. Power Reactors Compiled by E. G. Silver; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 384 General Administrative Activities Compiled by E. G. Silver, 390 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides by D. S. Queener, 395 Status of Power-Reactor Projects Undergoing Licensing Review Compiled by E. G. Silver, 400 Proposed Rule Changes as of Mar. 31,1988; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 283 International ENS/ANS Conference on Thermal Reactor Safety "NUCSAFE 88", 317 Northwestern University Short Course on Radiation Safety, 407 Second International Seminar on Small- and Medium-Sized Nuclear Reactors, 407 International Workshop on New Developments in Occupational Dose Control and ALARA Implementation at Nuclear Power Plants and Similar Facilities, 408 Fourth International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Reactor Thermal Hydraulics (NURETH-4), 404 The Authors.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI1989

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 30, No. 1, January-March 1989]

Nuclear Safety is a review journal that covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. Its scope includes the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, the safety aspects of the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated. Table of Contents for this issue follows. GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 1 International Conference on Thermal Reactor Safety: NUCSAFE 88 by A. P. Malinauskas and J. G. Pruett; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 18 Chernobyl Today: State of Research by A. Yu. Gagarinskii; CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION: 23 Problems Associated with Routine In-Plant Radioactive Effluent Monitoring Systems at U.S. Light-Water Reactors by Barry G. Wahlig, David M. Walker, Mahmoud R. Ghavi, and John M. Palms; DESIGN FEATURES: 34 Twentieth DOE/NRC Nuclear Air-Cleaning Conference by R. R. Bellamy, D. W. Moeller, and M. W. First, 46 Design Options for the Core Support Structure for Liquid-Metal-Cooled Reactor Plants by J. P. Burelbach, W. J. Kann, J. G. Saiveau, and R. W. Seidensticker; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: 53 The Radiological Consequences of the Chernobyl Accident by L. V. Konstantinov and A. J. González; WASTE AND SPENT FUEL MANAGEMENT: 70 Activities Related to Waste Management Compiled by E. G. Silver; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 80 Fuel Performance Annual Report for 1986 by W. J. Bailey, 103 Safety Considerations Related to 12-Hour Shift Schedules by S. Gould, 105 Reactor Shutdown Experience Compiled by J. W. Cletcher, 108 Operating U.S. Power Reactors Compiled by E. G. Silver; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 130 General Administrative Activities Compiled by E. G. Silver, 140 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides by D. S. Queener, 145 Status of Power-Reactor Licensing Activities Compiled by E. G. Silver, 153 Proposed Rule Changes as of Sept. 30, 1988; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 69 Northwestern University Short Course on Radiation Safety, 79 International Seminar on Fission Product Transport Processes in Reactor Accidents, 129 Harvard School of Public Health Offers Short Courses, 152 MIT Offers Summer Short Courses on Reactor Safety and Nodal Analysis, 152 Seminar on Use of PCs in Probabilistic Safety Analysis, 157 The Authors, 160 Indexes to Nuclear Safety, Volume 29.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2020

The Cost of (In-) Accurate Waste Characterization in the U.S. Nuclear Power Industry - 20066

Proper disposal of waste has never been a human priority. Our history is full of examples of throwing away things with minimal effort or thought to consequence. That is until disease or toxicity become apparent and we realize we need to change. Unfortunately, we almost never have all the information we need at the time we make decisions. In addition to the technical and scientific issues, profits and politics are also factors. Newton's third law also applies to politics and so for every policy (action) put in place, there will be (opposite reaction) forces in play to push back against it. These forces are seldom balanced and so the reaction to the discovery of harm is to over-correct and destroy the benefit to be had. This of course causes those who want the benefit, or profit from it, to work to undermine or repeal those measures put in place to eliminate the harm. The issue is exacerbated when the problem to be solved is highly technical and at the edge of our science so that the harm and benefit cannot be easily or accurately quantified. At these times, reason often goes out the window and our decision makers are influenced by either greed or fear as these emotions are much easier to stoke. Those of us in the middle, with the charge to 'do the right thing for the least cost', are therefore frequently constrained and forced into actions that are neither technically the right thing to do and not cost effective. The cost of radioactive waste disposal is based on the concentrations of various radioisotopes in the waste. Some of these isotopes are relatively easy to quantify and some are not. Most laboratory methods for quantification are limited in the amount of activity that can be present during the measurement process. Current nuclear plants were not designed with the idea that taking truly representative waste samples would be important. The limits used to define waste class and therefore cost are precisely defined but the methods for determining those concentrations are far less precise. Improving the accuracy of radioactivity concentrations in waste and having consistent and reasonable oversight can reduce waste costs through active management of the process. So what can we do about it? Science may provide an answer. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

Optimization of the Post-Operational Phase on Two Belgian Multi-Unit Nuclear Power Plants: the Case of the Non-Fissile Irradiated Core Items - 20156

The current legal framework in Belgium foresees the progressive phase out of nuclear power between October 2022 (Doel 3) and December 2025 (Doel 2). Upon its definitive shutdown, each unit of the Tihange and Doel sites will enter a Post-Operational Phase (POP) and be prepared for its Decontamination and Decommissioning (D and D). Prior to obtaining the D and D license, the Operator Electrabel is legally required to remove any non-fissile irradiated core items stored in the deactivation pools. The non-fissile irradiated core items consist essentially of control rods, poison rods and source thimbles as well as thimble plugs and foreign materials irradiated during operation: - Their significant content in highly radiant radionuclides (up to 6 TBq of Co-60 per kg of irradiated material) renders all existing operational waste management processes inadequate due to insufficient biological shielding; - Their high concentrations in long-lived radionuclides call for their disposal in a geological repository for which no final design nor waste acceptance criteria are expected prior to 2050. Uncertainties in the Belgian energy supply and security, however, require the Operator to be prepared for a partial nuclear phase out, where one or more units would benefit from lifetime extension while the remaining units would undergo decommissioning. The present paper aims at presenting how Electrabel, in partnership with Tractebel, addressed this challenge by maximizing the use of synergies within the respective sites as well as between both sites themselves, all the while accounting for site specificities. The most recent results and state of progress of the project will be detailed and the first lessons learned will be shared. The project has been split in multiple tasks and phased as follows: - An inventory phase aimed at mapping the contents, origin, composition and history of the non-fissile irradiated core items; - A pre-characterization phase based on neutron activation models; - A waste sorting phase aimed at separating waste forms for which an evacuation route exists from those for which such route does not exist; - A feasibility phase aimed at exploring all possible scenarios for the management of non-fissile irradiated core items and identifying the optimal feasible solution for each site; - A preparation phase (currently ongoing), developing further the optimal solution and ensuring that back-up solutions are available for any foreseeable change of context (licensing issue, modification in the nuclear phase-out program, etc.) and initiating early contacts with potential subcontractors for segmentation works and cask manufacturers, as well as the Belgian regulatory body and waste management agency. This phase also foresees the investigation of destructive and non-destructive radiological measurements to support the detailed characterization of the waste forms; - A realization phase (future work). (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2023

Laboratory Instrument Software Controlled Spread Spectrum Time Domain Reflectometry for Electrical Cable Testing

This research discusses development of a software-controlled laboratory instrument based spread spectrum time domain reflectometry system (SSTDR). This constitutes one task within PNNL’s Light Water Sustainability Program (LWRS) whose mission includes advancing nondestructive examination (NDE) techniques for off-line and on-line in-situ cable condition monitoring. In 2022, PNNL evaluated SSTDR for detection and characterization of a number of cable anomalies (Glass et al. 2022). The review included comparison of SSTDR to Frequency Domain Reflectometry (FDR) techniques which have enjoyed encouraging feedback and are starting to be used in nuclear power plants for periodic cable condition monitoring of cable systems as part of the plant’s overall cable aging management program. The FDR test introduces a broad-band chirp onto the cable at the cable end then listens for any reflection from a change of impedance along the cable caused by a damaged conductor or insulation, splices, contact with moisture, or other cable anomalies. The signal is captured in the frequency domain then transformed back to the time domain using an inverse Fourier transform (IFT). Based on the velocity of propagation, the impedance response signal is plotted against distance along the cable. Peak locations along the X-axis indicate the distance along the cable where a portion of the signal has been reflected back to the instrument as a result of a cable anomaly. The FDR test is considered the gold standard of reflectometry however it does require the cable to be de-energized to perform the test. The LIVEWIRE commercial SSTDR produces a similar plot to the FDR however all processing is in the time domain. A pseudo-random noise code (PN code) is input onto the cable conductor and the instrument listens for any reflected response from cable anomalies. The SSTDR processes the signal as an autocorrelation comparing the input PN code to any reflected signal detected. The autocorrelation analysis for thermal aging, water and water ingress detection, ground fault and phase-to-phase fault detection at various locations along the cable and with the cable attached and detached from a motor load, and on both energized and un-energized conditions were performed. These results were contrasted to Frequency Domain Reflectometry (FDR) measurements of the un-energized cable. Results were encouraging but indicated more work was warranted – particularly with the SSTDR, it seemed that the insulation damage would likely be better evaluated with multiple bandwidth cable tests particularly including larger bandwidths than were possible with the current commercial instrument. The commercial instrument’s bandwidth was set at 6, 12, 24, and 48MHz but note that SSTDR and FDR definitions of bandwidth trend similarly but are not the same. The FDR response could be more broadly adjusted, and the bandwidth of 100 to 500 MHz produced the best responses. FDR responses to anomalies were clearer than SSTDR responses and indications were that a broader bandwidth SSTDR may lead to improved SSTDR detection capability. This project used a laboratory instrument based SSTDR (primarily using an Arbitrary Waveform Generator (AWG) and a digital oscilloscope plus Python in-house software) that allowed software adjustment of the SSTDR bandwidth, window functions applied to the exciting Pseudo-random Noise (PN) code plus and other aspects of the SSTDR signal processing. Hereafter, this will be referred to as the PNNL SSTDR. Evaluating specific performance of the PNNL SSTDR is left to a separate report. This report documents hardware and software development to produce the SSTDR cable test system.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2020

DEM and MELT In-Can Vitrification Process for Fukushima Daiichi Water Treatment Secondary Waste - 20034

Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station was severely damaged by a tsunami induced by the earthquake on March 11, 2011. A large amount of water treatment secondary waste has been generated from the purification work of contaminated water that consists of the water flowing into the reactor building. The Mid and Long-Term Road map specifies that solid waste at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station should be stored safely and reasonably according to its characteristics. In order to meet this goal, a versatile treatment solution is needed, and the In-Can vitrification seems to be a suitable solution. The DEM and MELT In-Can vitrification process is being developed and qualified in France to treat waste arising from decommissioning and dismantling operations. This qualification is carried out through the consortium of the DEM and MELT project coordinated by CEA which gathers Orano, ECM technologies and Andra. The DEM and MELT In-Can vitrification process is a robust, simple and versatile in situ vitrification process. It is designed for high or intermediate level waste and is compact enough to be implemented in an existing facility or close to the waste to be treated. It is developed to treat liquid and solid waste, to produce a small amount of secondary waste and to minimize investment and operating costs. The DEM and MELT In-Can vitrification process is also developed with a modular design in order to be adapted to nuclear operators needs and requirements. The In-Can melting process has already been developed and fully qualified by the CEA for Alpha liquid waste and can be rated TRL 7 for this scope. The In-Can vitrification technology is considered as a qualified solution that could be applied for the treatment of waste resulting from the D and D work in Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station. The feasibility evaluation of the DEM and MELT In-Can vitrification process for Fukushima Daiichi water treatment secondary waste is a project led by Orano, CEA and ANADEC. This R and D project is performed by the funds from the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry as The Subsidy Program 'Project of Decommissioning and Contaminated Water Management'. This paper presents the first results of this feasibility evaluation, from the scenarios and glass formulation definition to the industrial implementation feasibility. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗