Alternate form and placement of short lived reactor waste and associated fuel hardware for decommissioning of EBR-II

Upon the termination of EBR-II operation in 1994, the mission has progressed to decommissioning and waste cleanup of the facility. The simplest method to achieve this goal is to bury the raw fuel and activated steel in an approved burial ground or deep geologic repository. While this might be simple, it could be very expensive, consume much needed burial space for other materials, and leave large amounts of fissile easily available to future generations. Also, as with any operation, an associated risk to personnel and the public from the buried waste exists. To try and reduce these costs and risks, alternatives to burial are sought. One alternative explored here for EBR-II is to condition the fuel and store the fission products and steel either permanently or temporarily in the sealed primary boundary of the decommissioned reactor. The first problem is to identify which subassemblies are going to be conditioned and their current composition and decay time. The next problem is to identify the conditioning process and determine the composition and form of the waste streams. The volume, mass, heat, and curie load of the waste streams needs to be determined so a waste-assembly can be designed. The reactor vessel and internals need to be analyzed to determine if they can handle these loads. If permanent storage is the goal, then mechanisms for placing the waste-assembly in the reactor vessel and sealing the vessel are needed. If temporary storage is the goal, then mechanisms for waste-assembly placement and retrieval are needed. This paper answers the technical questions of volume, mass, heat, and curie loads while just addressing the other questions found in a safety analysis. The final conclusion will compare estimated risks from the burial option and this option