Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Waste Acceptance Criteria”

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.

129 records · Page 8
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Automated Inspection of Criticality Control Overpacks for Surplus Plutonium Disposition: Qualification Update – 25313

In an effort to reduce the amount of nuclear waste in South Carolina, the Department of Energy (DOE) tasked the Savannah River Site (SRS) with diluting and disposing of the amount of plutonium in the state. This process involves the movement and shipment of over 100,000 criticality control overpacks (CCOs) throughout the project lifespan, lending itself to the use of automation to reduce worker radiation exposure and more efficiently utilize human capital. Due to the large scope, this overarching process was broken down into several different “automation projects” to be developed. The first opportunity pursued was the receipt and inspection of empty CCO drums coming into SRS, identified as Automation Project 1 (AP1), and is the focus of this paper. AP1 was developed to unpack incoming CCOs and inspect them for unwanted foreign objects and any damage to the drum or its contents. This process is accomplished by the combination of an automated guided vehicle (AGV) that delivers CCOs to a robotic arm which uses a suite of custom tools to disassemble a CCO, inspect the inside and outside of the CCO and its inner criticality control container (CCC), reassemble the CCC and CCO, and apply a tamper indicating device (TID) to the inspected drum. In past years, the robotic work cell had been developed in a small-scale testing facility for proof-of-concept. This year, major improvements were made to the robotic work cell to perform the process, including integration into the final facility where CCOs will be inspected. Other technical improvements include the implementation of sensor feedback and safety relays into the control system to allow the state of the work cell to be better tracked, and additional development of the TID application process to complete the robotic inspection. Further enhancements were made to the robotic vision processes and robot pathing, as well as development on a computer vision inspection process to detect inspection criteria anomalies in CCOs. In addition to developmental improvements, the work cell underwent a six-month testing period to ensure the project requirements were met. Results of this testing period demonstrate the work cell’s capability to meet project throughput goals at an acceptable level, successfully document the status of each CCO inspected, and reduce the toll on technical operations’ human power by two thirds. At the time of this paper, the work cell is capable of autonomously handling up to eight CCOs with an AGV, delivering CCOs to and from the robot work cell, and having a robotic arm perform a full receipt and inspection procedure on each CCO. Moving forward, repeatability will be improved so that these CCOs can be run back-to-back seamlessly, as well as improving the system to handle more significant edge cases and failure modes.

Spivey, Nicholas↗
DOE OSTI2020

Proposed guidance for preparing and reviewing a molten salt non-power production or utilization facility application

Development of non-power molten salt reactors (MSRs) are under consideration to further establish an MSR experience base, support the requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.43(e), and provide any additional analyses needed for development of a full-scale MSR. Guidance provided in this report is based on MSRs operating with liquid fuel (i.e., fuel dissolved within a molten salt). These reactors, unless owned by the DOE or DOD, will require licensing by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff. Standard review plan (SRP) guidance for large light water reactors (LWRs) is available in NUREG-0800, Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants; Light Water Reactor (LWR) Edition. However, NRC staff observed that NUREG-0800 is very cumbersome to apply to non-power reactors “because of the great differences in complexity and hazards between non-power reactors and nuclear power plants.” Therefore, a program to develop performance-based guidance applicable to non-power reactors was initiated. In 1996, NUREG-1537, Parts 1 and 2, Guidelines for Preparing and Reviewing Applications for the Licensing of Non-Power Reactors, was published. Part 1, the format and content guide, suggests a uniform format for presenting information in non-power reactor applications that is acceptable to the NRC staff, but conformance with the format and content is not required. Part 2, the SRP, ensures the quality and uniformity of the staff review of an application. Unfortunately, the application guidelines and SRP do not provide adequate guidance for all advanced non-LWR technologies and applications. This discrepancy eventually led to the 2012 development of interim staff guidance (ISG) for NUREG-1537, which includes criteria for describing and reviewing aqueous homogeneous reactors (AHRs). Specifically, NUREG-1537 ISG, 2012 expanded the original document to address three areas: 1. updated criteria for heterogeneous non-power reactors, 2. criteria for licensing AHRs, and 3. criteria for licensing a Part 50-licensed isotope production facility. In 2015, the US Department of Energy (DOE) opted to build on the AHR NUREG-1537 ISG experience by performing a gap analysis of the guidance that would be used to license a non-power MSR. MSRs represent one of the advanced non-LWR technologies selected by DOE for development through a multiyear cost share award with Southern Company Services. Under this Advanced Reactor Concepts 2015 (DOE Advanced Reactor Concepts [ARC] 15) award program, the DOE tasked Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) to evaluate the guidance changes that the NRC may need to consider when licensing an MSR non-power reactor. ORNL staff, with support from Boston Government Services, LLC, focused on five system-related chapters in NUREG-1537 that were considered most relevant to inform the effort that would be required for a non-power MSR applicant. ORNL documented this review in a technical report, ORNL/TM-2018/834, Proposed Guidance for Preparing and Reviewing Molten Salt Non-Power Reactor License Applications (NUREG-1537). The report was subsequently shared with industry and the NRC. The 2018 review was limited in scope, focusing on key system chapters based on the expected significance of each chapter relative to expected differences in addressing advanced non-LWR technologies, specifically non-power MSRs, compared with heterogeneously fueled non-power reactors. In the ORNL report, proposed generic adaptations were suggested for the following NUREG-1537 chapters: Chapter 4, “Reactor Description”; Chapter 5, “Reactor Coolant Systems”; Chapter 6, “Engineered Safety Features”; Chapter 9, “Auxiliary Systems”; Chapter 11, “Radiation Protection Program and Waste Management” The inclusion of Chapter 11 in the previous review effort was intended to provide guidance for categorizing the waste-handling process for an MSR operating with homogenous fuel. The introductions from Parts 1 and 2 of the 2012 NUREG-1537 ISG provide guidance for the application and review of production facilities. After a period of operation, non-power MSRs with homogenous fuel will include gaseous and soluble fission products. The gaseous fission products will be collected and held for decay in an off-gas system. There might also be an initiative to polish or filter the soluble fission products in the fuel salt by some mechanical or chemical means. The treatment and handling of fission products in the non-power MSR fuel salt and the description of this process in the safety analysis report (SAR) must be very precise to avoid the waste treatment facility being construed as a co-located special nuclear material (SNM) fuel cycle facility (see Section 2.3 of this report). Subsequent to the release of ORNL/TM-2018/834, NRC staff expressed a desire to continue the regulatory gap analysis that was begun in that report. This would provide additional clarity and information addressed in certain sections of the original report, while also providing new guidance on certain topics not addressed in the original report. This revision would benefit the NRC staff reviewing applications involving non-power MSR designs and would help developers understand how the NRC staff might approach the review of such applications. The focus of this report is to provide infrastructure support to the NRC staff for the regulatory review of non-power MSRs.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2024

CORE-CM in The Greater Green River and Wind River Basins: Transforming and Advancing a National Coal Asset (Final Report)

The following document summarizes project results from “CORE-CM in the Greater Green River and Wind River Basins: Transforming and Advancing a National Coal Asset”. This project is part of the U.S. Department of Energy’s (“DOE”) National Energy Technology Laboratory’s (“NETL”) Carbon Ore, Rare Earth Elements, and Critical Minerals (CORE-CM) Initiative. This report concludes that the Greater Green River and Wind River Basins (GGRB-WRB) Area-of-Interest (AOI 9) is the ideal region for continued research and development in progressing the broader CORE-CM goals outlined by the DOE. Based upon the extensive analyses of technical, social, and community criteria, this report illustrates that the GGRB-WRB hosts numerous potential CORE-CM feedstocks (both coal- and non-coal based), diverse opportunities for utilizing existing industrial waste streams, ample infrastructure and industry to support new CORE-CM-focused technologies, and a highly motivated, well educated, and adaptable workforce to further develop the regional and national CORE-CM supply chain. Additionally, some potential solutions for technological gaps suggest that the GGRB-WRB's diverse resources can play a significant role in achieving the national goal of critical materials independence. With full community participation, meaningful involvement of regional Tribal Nations, and building upon the stakeholder engagement demonstrated here, the GGRB-WRB region presents a unique opportunity for advancing the CORE-CM Initiative. This project was designed to bring together coal-based communities and stakeholders from across the GGRB-WRB to advance new industries for CORE-CM resources. The University of Wyoming (UWyo) School of Energy Resources (SER) led a project team of experts from the Colorado Geological Survey (CGS), Colorado School of Mines (CSM), Los Alamos National Lab (LANL), and local community colleges. Input from basinal, regional, and national experts bolstered the coalition in order to advance the mission of DOE’s CORE-CM initiative and develop the domestic CORE-CM supply chain. Phase I of this project was designed to address the goal of developing and catalyzing economic growth, job creation, and technology innovation in the GGRB-WRB of Wyoming and Colorado, by increasing the supply of CORE-CM to manufacturers of non-fuel Carbon Based Products (CBP) and products reliant upon CM. The GGRB-WRB CORE-CM project worked toward providing benefit through several avenues of performance and research. • Develop a coalition team to achieve project objectives • Complete detailed assessments, including State-of-the-Art (SOTA) Data acquisition of potential CORE-CM materials across the AOI, and meaningfully contributes to DOE’s CORE-CM goals nationally. • Strategic planning for regional economic growth, job creation, and associated technology innovation around coal materials, including plans to maximize the development of potential CORE-CM resources and technology by creating regional public-private partnerships. • Define regional economic growth potential around existing strengths, energy infrastructure, business and industry, including planning for the leveraging of highly trained workforces, existing and novel coal technologies, and energy infrastructure in development of CORE-CM supply chains. • Develop a preliminary strategic plan for increasing the supply of CORE-CM materials to manufacturers of non-fuel Carbon Based Products (CBP) and products reliant upon CM, focusing on regional strengths that result in an emerging diversified CORE-CM economy. • Assemble a committed network of stakeholders and communities that learn about, accept, and grow new energy technologies within coal regions. Additionally, the project team significantly contributed to the CORE-CM Initiative’s national goals, through cross-regional scoping, collaborating with CORE-CM projects in other AOIs, and including parallel regional project experts. In addition to active inclusion and meaningful engagement and contribution to DOE-led working groups, the project team focused on engaging with regional communities including Tribal Nations, economic development groups, and regional government organizations. The project’s CORE-CM development and commercialization plan identified diverse CORECM feedstocks, potential routes towards integration with existing industries, methods for supply-chain development that leverage existing infrastructure and businesses considering the regional economy, identified entry barriers for incorporating traditional and new technologies in those supply chains, recognized opportunities for public-private partnerships to develop technology innovation centers, identified diverse workforces, and conducted stakeholder outreach and education to build a community of understanding on CORE-CM potential in the GGRB-WRB region. Detailed task descriptions can be found in each chapter.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗