several consecutive locations to obtain maximum economic use of the fuel before it was finally removed as waste. The USNRC changed the legal definition of high-level radioactive waste to include the high-level waste from both nuclear fuel reprocessing and spent nuclear fuel.

For this study, the significance of this closed fuel cycle design is that this entire generation of more than 100 reactors was designed with small spent fuel pools, relying on prompt shipment away from the reactor to the reprocessing plant to make room for later discharges of spent fuel. Early spent fuel shipping casks were being designed with active cooling systems to support shipment of fuel less than a year out of the reactor to a reprocessing plant. BOX D.1 discusses the spent nuclear fuel at reprocessing plants. Supplementary wet and dry storage systems had to be developed to receive the older spent fuel to make room for fresh spent fuel from the reactor. Many plants had to remove and modify the storage racks in their spent fuel pools to accommodate more spent fuel in the pool itself until licensed supplementary systems were available.

D.2 RETRENCHMENT OF U.S. REACTOR PLANS

As noted in Section D.1, in the 1970s the United States was building reactors at a high rate. Then, in the late 1970s, three factors produced a retrenchment in power reactor plans: rising interest rates, reversal of the U.S. fuel reprocessing policy, and the Three Mile Island-2 accident.

D.2.1 Effect of Interest Rates

Commercial power reactors have characteristically high initial capital costs. The regulated public utilities have had to raise the capital with various debt instruments; to build, license, and operate the finished plant for a time before it can be declared commercial; and to change the electricity rates charged consumers to retire the debt on the capital cost. The soaring interest rates in the United States during the late 1970s drove the costs of new nuclear plants that were under construction to extreme heights. This, combined with slackening demand for electricity, led to the cancellation of many plants, some even in advanced stages of construction.

D.2.2 Effect of Reversal of U.S. Fuel Reprocessing Policy

President Carter enunciated a change in U.S. policy for reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel in early 1977. Those reactors then operating and those under construction had to begin modifying their reactor fuel cycle design to go from the closed (reprocessing) cycle to a “once-through” fuel cycle. This induced the designers to go to higher levels of uranium-235 enrichment in the new fuel, but still within the 5 percent licensing limit. It also induced the designers to revise the core loading and operating plans in order to burn or use the fissile content of the fuel to the greatest extent economically possible since the fissile residue could not be retrieved by reprocessing. As a result, spent fuel burnup levels rose to levels that are now almost double the 20–30 GWd/MTU characteristic of the original closed fuel cycle. This results in an increase in the decay-heat power of the spent fuel assembly by the time it is put into the spent fuel pool.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement