A COMPARISON BETWEEN PROPOSED SMALL MODULAR REACTORS AND EXISTING POWER REACTORS WITH REGARD TO SPENT FUEL NUCLEAR MATERIAL ATTRACTIVENESS A COMPARISON BETWEEN PROPOSED SMALL MODULAR REACTORS AND EXISTING POWER REACTORS WITH REGARD TO SPENT FUEL NUCLEAR M

ABSTRACT The nuclear material attractiveness of used fuel from proposed small modular reactors is evaluated relative to used fuel from the existing fleet of power reactors. Irradiated fuels at several burn-ups and cooling times are considered. The methodology for evaluating the materials attractiveness is based on previously used metrics and binning approaches and is consistent with the "attractiveness levels" that are normally reserved for nuclear materials in DOE nuclear facilities. Commercial power reactor fuels are unattractive at charge but may become attractive after discharge and age, depending upon the degree of burn-up, the fuel composition, and the reactor type. Some used Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) and Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) fuels in the US are over 40 years in age and their radiation dose rates continue to decline, calling into question the "self protecting" nature of these older used fuels. This study examines the attractiveness of used fuel assemblies from typical BWR 7x7, BWR 8x8, PWR 17x17, PWR-MOX 17x17, and VVER-440 reactors. A new generation of small modular reactor (SMR) designs promises a number of benefits relative to the existing fleet of commercial power reactors, including portability, viable initial investment level, scalability due to modularity, and improved security. The somewhat shorter length (and hence lighter weight) of SMR fuel assemblies along with the potential for greater decentralization are additional factors that need to be considered. Like commercial power reactors fuels, the two candidate SMR fuels are unattractive at charge, but may become attractive after discharge and age, depending upon the degree of burn-up, the fuel composition, and the reactor type. For all practical purposes the attractiveness of the used commercial power reactor fuels and used fuels from the two SMRs under consideration in the US are identical. The differences between the existing power reactors and the two proposed SMRs largely comes down to differences in fuel assembly size and facility characteristics. This study is consistent with previous studies that demonstrate the importance of ensuring tha