B. Fuel Regeneration Options to Support an International Nuclear Fuel Cycle.


Primary Issues:

  1. Compare the uranium recovery by extraction plus (UREX+), the plutonium and uranium recovery by extraction (PUREX) process, and other processes being considered by the Russian Federal Agency for Atomic Energy for separation of fissile and other materials from spent or irradiated nuclear fuel. Consider the resulting waste streams and what can and should be done with these waste streams.

  2. Compare the burn up and the number of cycles needed to reach an acceptable level of destruction of actinides in the conceptual advanced burner reactor proposed in the U.S. Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) and in the Russian BN-600 and BN-800 reactors.

  3. What impact could new technologies have on these proposals?

Secondary Issues:

  1. Compare the fuel to be produced from the processes examined in (1) for use in appropriate reactors (LWRs, High Temperature Gas Cooled Reactors, and fast reactors). What are the advantages and disadvantages of each type of fuel?

  2. Compare the repository requirements for the waste produced by the processes proposed in the GNEP concept with that from a system based on PUREX and one based on Russian plans.

  3. Are new laws and/or regulations required for either the U.S. or the Russian approach to the internationalization of the fuel cycle? Will either approach require any existing laws or regulations to be repealed or changed?

Because the scale of the full study task is large and the details of proposed fuel cycle strategies are in flux, the study will be carried out in two phases. In Phase I, the joint committees will identify distinct strategies that represent the range of fuel cycle options and gather the key technical and legal/regulatory and other information needed to analyze those options. This information-gathering stage will culminate with an international workshop. In Phase II, the joint committees will carry out the analysis and offer consensus findings and recommendations in a final report on the criteria necessary to achieve an international fuel cycle beneficial for suppliers and consumers alike and supportive of international nonproliferation efforts. The final report will be subject to the NAS/National Research Council report review process, and will be sent to Russian reviewers as well as to U.S. reviewers.



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