The United States (US) energy system is a large water user, but the nature of that use is poorly understood. To support resource comanagement and fill this noted gap in the literature, this work presents detailed estimates for US-based water consumption and withdrawals for the US energy system as of 2014, including both intensity values and the first known estimate of total water consumption and withdrawal by the US energy system. We address 126 unit processes, many of which are new additions to the literature, differentiated among 17 fuel cycles, five life cycle stages, three water source categories, and four levels of water quality. Overall coverage is about 99% of commercially traded US primary energy consumption with detailed energy flows by unit process. Energy-related water consumption, or water removed from its source and not directly returned, accounts for about 10% of both total and freshwater US water consumption. Major consumers include biofuels (via irrigation), oil (via deep well injection, u...

Water Use in the United States Energy System: A National Assessment and Unit Process Inventory of Water Consumption and Withdrawals

The quality of water directly affects the corrosion susceptibility of metals. In reactor systems, both the fuel cladding and structural materials are subject to corrosion in poor quality water. A brief overview of important water quality parameters, and the types of corrosion of metals that can occur in poor quality water, are summarized. The discussion is focussed on aluminiumclad fuel used in research reactors since it is the material system most susceptible to a variety of types of corrosion in water. A laboratory approach to identify the impact of chemical impurity species on corrosion susceptibility of aluminium is described.

/pdf/water-quality-and-corrosion-considerations-for-nuclear-29ib4yruu3.pdf

Water Quality and Corrosion: Considerations for Nuclear Reactor Systems

Uncertainty analysis of criticality safety for the plate type fuel assembly storage rack

NUREG-1520 iii ABSTRACT This “Standard Review Plan (SRP) for the Review of a License Application for a Fuel Cycle Facility” (NUREG-1520) provides guidance to the staff reviewers in the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS) who perform safety and environmental impact reviews of applications to construct or modify and operate nuclear fuel cycle facilities. As such, this SRP ensures the quality, uniformity, and predictability of the staff reviews. This SRP also makes information about licensing acceptance criteria widely available to interested members of the public and the regulated industry. Each SRP section addresses the responsibilities of the staff reviewers, the matters that they review, the Commission's regulations pertinent to specific technical matters, the acceptance criteria used by the staff, the process and procedures used to accomplish the review, and the conclusions that are appropriate to summarize the review. This SRP also addresses the long-standing health, safety, and environmental protection requirements of Title 10, Parts 20 and 70, of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR Parts 20 and 70) as well as the amended accident safety requirements reflected in the new Subpart H of 10 CFR Part 70. For example, the chapters concerning radiation safety, environmental protection, emergency management, and decommissioning contain acceptance criteria that are primarily set by regulations that remained unaffected by the recent revision to 10 CFR Part 70. The new Subpart H of 10 CFR Part 70 identifies risk-informed performance requirements and requires applicants and existing licensees to conduct an integrated safety analysis (ISA) and submit an ISA Summary, as well as other information. Chapters 3 (ISA) and 11 (Management Measures) of this SRP are the primary chapters that address the staff’s review in relation to the performance and other related requirements of Subpart H. This SRP is not a substitute for NRC regulations and compliance is not required. The approaches and methods in this report are provided for information only. Methods and solutions different from those described in this report will be acceptable if they provide a basis for the staff to make the determination needed to issue or continue a license. This SRP focuses on safety and environmental impact reviews. Review criteria applicable to the safeguards sections of license applications were developed earlier and are published in NUREGs 1280 and 1065.

Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001

Public comments are being solicited on this draft guide (including any implementation schedule) and its associated regulatory analysis or value/impact statement. Comments should be accompanied by appropriate supporting data. Written comments may be submitted to the Rules and Directives Branch, Office of Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001. Comments may be submitted electronically through the NRC’s interactive rulemaking Web page at http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/regulatory/rulemaking.html. Copies of comments received may be examined at the NRC’s Public Document Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD. Comments will be most helpful if received by December 15, 2006.

A. Introduction

Papers

Spent fuel storage facility design basis