SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “LICENSES”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2025

Comprehensive Database of Environmental Mitigations Extracted from FERC-Licensed Hydropower Projects Using Artificial Intelligence Techniques, 1998-2023

This dataset provides a comprehensive inventory of environmental mitigation measures required by Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) licensed hydropower facilities from 461 licenses that were issued from 1998 to 2023. These licenses constitute 446 of the 1015 FERC projects that were active at the end of 2023. 17,612 mentions of environmental mitigations were identified and categorized in 128 unique categories. Mitigations were identified using a Natural Language Processing (NLP) approach, specifically with a Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformer (BERT) model. Model-derived results were then reviewed and updated by a subject matter expert as needed. This dataset introduces important enhancements to previous efforts to inventory environmental mitigations, such as including associated license text for each mitigation, tracking the number of instances a mitigation was identified within a license, and providing improved location information. These enhancements significantly expand the dataset's utility, offering greater analytical capabilities and ensuring reproducibility. The dataset is downloadable as a zip file containing the metadata and dataset files.

Ruggles, Thomas [Oak Ridge National Laboratory (OR↗

DOE OSTI2020

Modernization of Technical Requirements for Licensing of Advanced Non-Light Water Reactors: Selection and Evaluation of Licensing Basis Events

This report, “Modernization of Technical Requirements for Licensing of Advanced Non-Light Water Reactors: Selection and Evaluation of Licensing Basis Events,” represents a key element in the development of a methodology for the efficient licensing of advanced non-light water reactors (non-LWRs). It is the result of a Licensing Modernization Project (LMP) led by Southern Company and cost-shared by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). The LMP will result in detailed proposals for establishing licensing technical requirements to facilitate risk-informed and performance-based design and licensing of advanced non-LWRs. Such a methodology acknowledges enhancements in safety achievable with advanced designs and reflects more recent states of knowledge regarding safety and design innovation, creating an opportunity for reduced regulatory complexity with increased levels of safety. The project builds on best practices as well as previous activities through DOE and industry-sponsored advanced reactor licensing initiatives.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2025

Recommendations to Improve Nuclear Licensing: Update to INL/RPT-23-72206, Recommendations to Improve the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Reactor Licensing and Approval Process

In 2023, various stakeholders had asked for BEA’s thoughts and recommendations to improve the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) licensing review and approval process. This included an April 14, 2023 request from the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on “information and recommendations to improve the licensing review and approval process, . . . as well as the siting, licensing, construction, and oversight of advanced nuclear reactor technologies.” In response to these requests, BEA prepared and published INL/RPT-23-72206, Recommendations to Improve the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Reactor Licensing and Approval Process (2023 Report). The 2023 Report included 13 recommendations related to streamlining NRC hearings, expediting NRC safety and environmental reviews, otherwise improving NRC licensing, and providing financial benefits to new reactor projects. Many of these earlier recommendations were addressed through various legislative actions or changes made by the NRC. Section 2 of this report addresses the current status of those earlier recommendations. BEA recently received a new request from the House Committee on Energy and Commerce seeking any suggestions for additional areas to examine or potential reforms “that may assist in modernizing the licensing and regulatory process that affects civil nuclear deployment.” Additionally, the new Secretary of Energy has identified initial DOE actions to support unleashing the golden era of American energy dominance, including “Unleash Commercial Nuclear Power in the United States” and “Streamline Permitting and Identify Undue Burdens on American Energy.” Given these developments, BEA has prepared a new set of updated recommendations in this report. The recommendations include updated versions of recommendations from the 2023 Report which have not been fully adopted, as well as entirely new recommendations. This set of recommendations has a slightly broader focus with some recommendations focused on DOE authorizations and some recommendations related to nuclear licensing beyond new reactors. Each recommendation below also identifies whether the recommendation would require legislative action or could be addressed directly by the respective agency.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2019

Modernization of Technical Requirements for Licensing of Advanced Non-Light Water Reactors: Selection and Evaluation of Licensing Basis Events

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2026

U.S. Hydropower Relicensing and License Surrender Data and Metadata, 2026

The U.S. Hydropower Relicensing and License Surrender Database (2026) provides a comprehensive, nationwide snapshot (as of December 31, 2025) of hydropower projects across the United States that are undergoing Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing or license surrender processes. Compiled by Oak Ridge National Laboratory, the dataset includes detailed project-level attributes such as geographic location, ownership type, waterway, project type (hydropower or pumped storage), regulatory milestones (e.g., Notice of Intent, application dates, FERC issuance dates), licensing process type (ILP, TLP, ALP), operational characteristics, capacity changes, settlement agreements, construction or turbine‑generator investments, and project status categories spanning relicensing, surrenders, exemptions, and terminations. Together, the relicensing and surrender records offer a detailed view of regulatory trends, infrastructure transitions, dam removals, and economic drivers influencing the evolution of the U.S. hydropower fleet.

Johnson, Megan [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000290141741)↗

DOE OSTI2010

Intellectual property agreements and licensing for Small Businesses : the role of IP in SBIR/STTR and key red flag issues in licensing.

No abstract prepared.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2012

AP1000{sup R} licensing and deployment in the United States

In recent years, both domestic and foreign utilities have turned to the standardized Westinghouse AP1000 plant design in satisfying their near - and long-term - sustainable energy needs. As direct support to these actions, licensing the AP1000 design has played a significant role by providing one of the fundamental bases in clearing regulatory hurdles leading to the start of new plant construction. Within the U.S. alone, Westinghouse AP1000 licensing activities have reached unprecedented milestones with the approvals of both AP1000 Design Certification and Southern Company's combined construction permit and operating license (COL) application directly supporting the construction of two new nuclear plants in Georgia. Further COL application approvals are immediately pending for an additional two AP1000 plants in South Carolina. And, across the U.S. nuclear industry spectrum, there are 10 other COL applications under regulatory review representing some 16 new plants at 10 sites. In total, these actions represent the first wave of new plant licensing under the regulatory approval process since 1978. Fundamental to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's AP1000 Design Certification is the formal recognition of the AP1000 passive safety design through regulatory acceptance rulemaking. Through recognition and deployment of the AP1000 Design Certification, the utility licensee / operator of this reactor design are now offered an opportunity to use a simplified 'one-step' combined license process, thereby managing substantial back-end construction schedule risk from regulatory and intervention delays. Application of this regulatory philosophy represents both acceptance and encouragement of standardized reactor designs like the AP1000. With the recent AP1000 Design Certification and utility COL acceptances, the fundamental licensing processes of this philosophy have successfully proven the attainment of significant milestones with the next stage licensing actions directed towards deployment. AP1000 Design Certification and COL deployment, and management of the plant construction in accordance with the conditions within these approvals, remain as significant site and corporate responsibilities. These licensing-construction integrated activities must now focus on identifying and resolving 'as-built' departures from the standardized design as assessed against the certified AP1000 technical and licensing basis. Within this paper, significant aspects of the AP1000 U.S. licensing will be discussed, including identifying systems and processes used in ensuring compliance while deploying the standardized design. Critical licensing steps, licensing deployment actions as plant construction progresses and defining the road forward to a successful completion of licensing actions will be addressed. (authors)

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2018

Licensing Modernization Project for Advanced Reactor Technologies: FY 2018 Project Status Report

The promise of new nuclear technology and the future of commercial power in the United States (U.S.) are linked to the existence of an efficient and safety-focused regulatory review and licensing process. With an appropriate regulatory framework, reactor suppliers and regulators can design, license, build, and export advanced reactor units more effectively and efficiently and thereby help meet the growing need for clean and reliable energy. To help address the challenge of maintaining compatibility between the regulatory environment and new commercial nuclear plant designs, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is supporting an industry-led effort called the Licensing Modernization Project (LMP). This cost-shared initiative, started in 2016 and scheduled to continue through mid-2019, targets amendment to key elements of the U.S. nuclear power reactor regulatory framework to specifically address licensing barriers in advanced-reactor concepts. The project is focused on updating guidance for certain technical licensing requirements that are largely incompatible with non-light-water reactors (non-LWR) and establish a new pathway for design-safety evaluations and license-application development. Upon completion, the project will have created a new pathway, founded on modern probabilistic assessment techniques, that offers developers, suppliers, regulators, and owner/operatorowner-operators greater clarity and assurance in design and licensing decisions. The LMP employs a team of advanced reactor technology and licensing subject matter experts working closely with U.S. regulators, affected industries, and interested members of the public. The project is managed by Southern Company and supported through a cost share arrangement with DOE. Technical contributions are also provided to the project from the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Regulatory Development area, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The LMP identified a suite of high priority issues that provided significant uncertainty within the regulated non-LWR community. It was determined that much of this uncertainty could be retired by issuing updated licensing guidance founded on safety performance demonstrations and modern probabilistic methodologies. The success criteria for the project were established as: • Generate sets of technology inclusive (TI), risk-informed, and performance-based (TI-RIPB) technical requirements, recommendations, and proposals that could be reviewed, amended, and adopted for use by both NRC staff and industry. The proposals would create an optional-use regulatory framework without imposing additional (i.e., mandatory) requirements. • Support LMP the recommended updates of LMP such that they can be finalized, endorsed by NRC, and used by applicants within 5 years. This also supports the DOE advanced- reactor development and deployment goal of completing licensing reviews for technically mature non-LWR concepts sufficient to allow construction to proceed by the early 2030’s. • Further overall programmatic objectives established by DOE’s Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear (GAIN) initiative by resolving technology-inclusive policy issues that adversely impact regulatory reviews, siting, permitting, and/or licensing of non-LWRs. This would provide significantly more regulatory certainty for advanced reactor developers.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2019

Developments in the Regulatory Framework of Nuclear Waste Management in Germany - Licensing Procedures for storage of SNF and Public Involvement - 19612

According to article 6 of the German Atomic Energy Act (AtG), storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel requires a license. The competent licensing authority in this field is the Federal Office for Safety of Nuclear Waste Management (BfE). According to the Act for selecting a repository site for heat-generating radioactive waste (HAW) (Site Selection Act - StandAG) dating from 2017, BfE has been assigned the task of developing, conducting, and evaluating public participation procedures in the process of site search and selection for a deep geological repository for radioactive waste and SNF. Article 6 AtG applies to interim storage of SNF. If the legally defined licensing conditions by article 6 (2) AtG are met, the storage license applied for has to be granted. For on-site facilities, interim storage has been limited to 40 years. The licensing procedures for interim storage of SNF are carried out in accordance with the general administrative procedural rules. In certain cases due to the Environmental Impact Assessment Act (EIA Act), an EIA has to be carried out. In these cases, a formalized licensing procedure including an involvement of the public is conducted. The Nuclear Licensing Procedure Ordinance (AtVfV) originating from 1977 and reformulated in 1995 defines formalized rules for the public participation procedure which have to be followed strictly. These include a public hearing. The risen objections are evaluated by the licensing authority and taken account of in the licensing decision. The process of repository site selection defined by the StandAG exceeds these formalized procedures significantly: The objective of this process is to achieve a broad social consensus about the site selection procedure and about a repository site that will offer the best possible safety for one million years. Therefore, the process has to be particularly transparent, and involvement of the public - including newly developed forms of public involvement - is an essential part of it. BfE as competent authority in both the fields of repository site search and selection and licensing of interim storage of SNF has recently developed new strategies of involving the public concerning interim storage of SNF. Supplementing the standard licensing procedures, BfE presently informs and involves the public about topical issues regarding the present state and recent developments in the field of interim storage of SNF. Current central topics are for example the return of HAW and MAW from reprocessing of SNF in France and UK as well as perspective longer interim storage periods on the interface with final disposal. Regarding longer interim storage, host communities of interim storage facilities are concerned that interim storage might be extended indefinitely. Additionally, there is a strong fear of transports of radioactive waste and SNF from one place to another. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2018

Environmental licensing in Brazilian's crushed stone industries

Highlights: • Failures in environmental reporting compromise the effectiveness of the environmental license process • The infrastructure of environmental agencies must be improved • The participation of society is essential for monitoring industries - Abstract: The crushed stone industries' activities are characterized by the extraction and processing of stones for use as aggregates in construction. The sector causes environmental impacts that can be mitigated by the implementation of control instruments, namely, environmental licensing, whose purpose is to carry out monitoring of potentially polluting activities. In this paper, it was analyzed the environmental studies of three industries located in Monsenhor Gil, Piauí, Brazil, elaborated as requisites for obtaining the environmental and mineral licenses. There were made visits to the State Department of Environment and Water Resources (SEMAR) and to the National Department of Mineral Production (DNPM) to verify the environmental reports and the environmental and mineral licensing processes. There were also made visits to the analyzed industries, with the aim of comparing the information contained in the studies, with the reality and verifying the implementation of the mitigating measures proposed in them, through the observation of the industries operation, and interviews with the responsible managers. Furthermore, it was made a research in the scientific literature, to know the licensing process in other countries, to compare with the Brazilian reality. From the research, in Brazilian industries, it was observed that, although all the legal steps to obtain the licenses have been fulfilled, the environmental reports have elaboration failures, such as the lack of a multidisciplinary team and the fact that some data diverge from the reality, decreasing the reliability of the evaluation of the environmental impacts caused by the projects. Also, the environmental replacement cost is not accounted in the final value of the product, and any of the industries have started the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures since they do not have mineral depletion areas. SEMAR was delayed in issuing licenses within the period established by law, and there are no periodic inspections by both the environmental agency and DNPM. It should also be pointed out that the community did not claim public hearings and there is no participation in environmental education projects, factors that compromise the effectiveness of the environmental licensing process. Regarding the process in other parts of the world, in some countries, such as Uruguay and Paraguay, the agency responsible for licensing and inspection is federal. In Argentina, as in Brazil and USA, states have autonomy to legislate on environmental issues. There is also divergence in the period of execution of the licenses, being 12 months in Brazil, while in Thailand it can be up to 56 days. In Peru, the society participation is much more representative than in Brazil, and there is differentiation in the collection form of environmental compensation fees, among countries. The failures pointed out in the Brazilian process, as well as the system of other countries, can serve as parameters for the improvement of the process' effectiveness, both in Brazil and in other parts of the world, aiming at the conservation of the environment.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2019

FERC Hydropower Licensing: A Review of Utilization of the ILP, TLP, and ALP

A preliminary consideration for license applicants seeking to develop non-federal hydropower projects includes determining whether the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has authority over the development, and if so, what licensing procedures are required or may be an option for authorizing the project. Projects subject to FERC jurisdiction, which do not meet the qualification requirements for an exemption from FERC hydropower licensing, must complete the FERC hydropower licensing process utilizing one of FERC's three licensing processes: The Integrated Licensing Process (ILP), Traditional Licensing Process (TLP), or Alternative Licensing Process (ALP). Effective after July 23, 2005, the ILP became the default hydropower licensing process under the FPA [18 CFR Section 5.3(a)(2)] and any license applicant seeking to use the TLP or ALP is now required to submit to FERC a request to use the TLP or ALP with their Notice of Intent (NOI) and Pre-Application Document (PAD) and receive approval before initiating either of those processes.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Basin-Wide Approaches to Hydropower Licensing

This presentation summarizes findings from a 2020 NREL technical report including the FERC relicensing process for non-federal hydropower projects, analyzes FERC-licensed projects with license expiration dates from 2018-2037, discusses FERC's authority to coordinate license terms of hydropower projects within a shared river basin and provides basin-wide case studies and considerations to hydropower relicensing. In the United States there are 1,043 active FERC-licensed hydroelectric projects with a total capacity of 56,097 MW. Of those, 647 with a total capacity of 21,870 MW have license expiration dates from 2018-2037. The expected workload in conjunction with the time, cost, and complexity associated with issuing a single new license has led to initiatives that aim to increase the efficiency of the relicensing process. Federal and state regulators and licensees in California, Maine, New York, and Wisconsin have begun to develop approaches to look at hydropower relicensing as part of a larger system - a river basin. These basin-wide approaches seek to coordinate different stages of the relicensing process for multiple projects at the same time. The goal of these basin-wide approaches is to increase the efficiency of the relicensing process and allow for a more comprehensive analysis of the cumulative impacts of the projects within the basin. These innovative approaches to relicensing could also reduce the workload for regulators and costs associated with relicensing. This presentation discusses some of the findings from the Basin-wide Approaches to Hydropower Relicensing: Case Studies and Considerations including a summary of the key considerations for the FERC relicensing process for non-federal hydropower projects, key findings from the analysis of FERC-licensed projects with license expiration dates from 2018-2037, discusses FERC's authority to coordinate license terms of hydropower projects within a shared river basin and provides basin-wide case studies and considerations to hydropower relicensing.

basin-wide↗

DOE OSTI2018

A safety and licensing roadmap to identify the research and development gaps of commercial molten salt reactors

Molten salt reactors (MSRs) both inherently and through good design possess highly desirable safety attributes. Successful commercial deployment of MSRs is heavily dependent on establishing their safety characteristics in a well-coordinated licensing requirements program. The approach outlined is based on adapting the MSR licensing process to the current LWR–based NRC process that exists today, which has been the traditional approach used by new technologies such as the Pebble Bed Reactor licensing application, the Clinch River Breeder Reactor licensing application, and more recently the NuScale licensing application. NRC has recognized some of the unique passively safe aspects of advanced non-LWR reactors and has introduced an advanced reactor strategic plan which will address policy issues that need to be addressed to accommodate advanced reactor concepts within the existing regulatory framework. Examples of some of these policy issues are the use of functional containment, the use of mechanistic source terms, and more reliance on performance-based and risk-informed regulatory processes, such as the Licensing Modernization Project, which emphasizes the use of risk-informed processes to select licensing basis events, safety categorization of SSC, and well-defined defense-in-depth systems. Applying performance-based, risk-informed regulatory processes is, consequently, vital to substantially decreasing the cost, time, and uncertainty of commercial MSR reactor licensing while providing for the health and safety of the public and protecting the environment. This document is intended to provide a roadmap for the MSR licensing and safety activities necessary to provide a success path to commercialization.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2018

Regulatory and Licensing Strategy for Microreactor Technology

With electricity demand on the rise, an increase in the use of nuclear energy is needed in order to meet future energy demands. The use of nuclear energy will not only begin to positively address this demand, but will also mitigate the negative impacts of carbon-induced climate change and provide energy security to the United States. An appropriate option to address the increasing energy demand is the use of advanced reactor systems like microreactors. Microreactors, often referred to as special-purpose reactors or vSMRs, are neutronically simple, factory manufacturable, easily transportable, and designed to produce less than 20 MWt (for classification as Hazard Category 2 per 10 CFR 830, DOE STD 1027). These reactors are decentralized energy sources that have the ability to provide sustainable and affordable power to remote communities and to industrial users, while having self-contained geometry that requires very low maintenance care. In order for microreactors to be approved for operation, they must abide by and successfully complete a rigorous regulatory and licensing process monitored by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), the Department of Energy (DOE), or the Department of Defense (DoD). Because microreactors are a relatively new and disruptive technology, there is no clear licensing path for them to follow. Current licensing frameworks are tailored specifically to large, traditional light water reactors (LWRs) that have been developed and understood by the nuclear industry for many years. Unlike LWRs, microreactors have major design differences, specifically in the materials, coolant, reflectors and potential technology applications used. They also have higher in-core operating temperatures, which have the potential to push the materials used past their allowable limits. Because they are much smaller, safety margins, the amount of space required for assembly, and the distances required to meet dose-based regulatory criteria can technically be altered to better fit their new size. The following strategies and recommendations are intended to assure that key licensing issues do not influence the path to microreactor development, demonstration, and commercialization: Nuclear Regulatory Commission • The NRC should address the lack of knowledge and support of risk informed decision-making concepts from staff members and continue to advance and communicate risk initiatives using their Risk Informed Steering Committee • More research should be done into whether or not microreactors, which are small Class 103 facilities, can be licensed using Class 104-type guidance (e.g., NUREG 1537) • The NRC should use frequency-consequence curves to incrementally reduce regulatory uncertainty and risk to facilitate future construction and operation of advanced reactor designs Department of Energy • The DOE should continue to implement their multi-step Phenomena Identification and Ranking Table process in order to help detect and recommend the major design and technology work needed for licensing future reactor systems • The DOE should consider a joint licensing approach with the NRC where microreactors first go through the DOE process, then finish with the NRC process, providing an advantage for both applicants and NRC staff Department of Defense • The DoD should invest in personnel with sufficient expertise, incorporate their military reactors into tactical power systems, and self-regulate using Section 91b of the Atomic Energy Act Transportation • Licensees should convert enriched uranium hexafluoride into metal or oxide at an enrichment facility and then transport them to a fabrication facility • To avoid transportation issues altogether, licensees should consider positioning the enrichment and fabrication facilities on the same site • The DOE should provide their support in developing new shipping packages for safe transport, criticality benchmark data needed to license high-assay low-enriched uranium fuel facilities and transport packages, and provide financial and technical help to the Department of Transportation; and, • The NRC should help transportation efforts by finalizing and developing guidance for implementing 10 CFR 73 and 10 CFR 74 specifically for Category 2 Special Nuclear Material.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2012

Uranium-Loaded Water Treatment Resins: 'Equivalent Feed' at NRC and Agreement State-Licensed Uranium Recovery Facilities - 12094

Community Water Systems (CWSs) are required to remove uranium from drinking water to meet EPA standards. Similarly, mining operations are required to remove uranium from their dewatering discharges to meet permitted surface water discharge limits. Ion exchange (IX) is the primary treatment strategy used by these operations, which loads uranium onto resin beads. Presently, uranium-loaded resin from CWSs and mining operations can be disposed as a waste product or processed by NRC- or Agreement State-licensed uranium recovery facilities if that licensed facility has applied for and received permission to process 'alternate feed'. The disposal of uranium-loaded resin is costly and the cost to amend a uranium recovery license to accept alternate feed can be a strong disincentive to commercial uranium recovery facilities. In response to this issue, the NRC issued a Regulatory Issue Summary (RIS) to clarify the agency's policy that uranium-loaded resin from CWSs and mining operations can be processed by NRC- or Agreement State-licensed uranium recovery facilities without the need for an alternate feed license amendment when these resins are essentially the same, chemically and physically, to resins that licensed uranium recovery facilities currently use (i.e., equivalent feed). NRC staff is clarifying its current alternate feed policy to declare IX resins as equivalent feed. This clarification is necessary to alleviate a regulatory and financial burden on facilities that filter uranium using IX resin, such as CWSs and mine dewatering operations. Disposing of those resins in a licensed facility could be 40 to 50 percent of the total operations and maintenance (O and M) cost for a CWS. Allowing uranium recovery facilities to treat these resins without requiring a license amendment lowers O and M costs and captures a valuable natural resource. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2019

NUREG/CR-7239, “Review of Fissile Material Exemptions and General Licenses in 10 CFR Part 71,” and Proposed Revisions to Harmonize with IAEA SSR-6 Fissile Material Requirements

Title 10 of the United States (US) Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 71, Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material, includes requirements for the transport of fissile material in packages. These regulations provide requirements for packaging that is certified by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to transport fissile material. The regulations also include provisions that allow for shipment in packages that are not required to be certified by the NRC. These provisions include criteria for exemptions from classification as fissile material (§71.15) and permit general licenses for limited quantities of fissile material and plutonium-beryllium special form sources (§71.22 and §71.23, respectively). This paper will discuss recommendations that NRC has made on the use of the fissile material exemptions and general license provisions in a recently published NUREG/CR, and changes to these provisions proposed for an upcoming rulemaking action.NUREG/CR-7239, “Review of Fissile Material Exemptions and General Licenses in 10 CFR Part 71,” was recently developed by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) for the NRC. This document provides technical recommendations to fissile material licensees on how to apply the fissile material exemption and general license regulations. This paper will outline this NUREG/CR, including: 1) the technical basis, intent, and anticipated usage of each of the fissile material exemption and general license provisions; 2) the recent regulatory history of the Part 71 fissile material exemptions and general licenses; and 3) example problems which illustrate how the provisions might be applied and justified.In 2012, IAEA made several significant changes to the fissile material requirements in SSR-6, including the fissile exception provisions and provisions similar to the U.S. fissile material general licenses. In 2016, the NRC began a rulemaking effort to consider these changes (among others), and to decide how to best harmonize the domestic U.S. regulations. This paper will review the 2012 changes made to SSR-6, discuss the NRC staff consideration of those changes, and detail the proposed revisions to 10 CFR Part 71 that NRC is considering for the fissile material exemptions and general licenses.

Barto, Andrew↗

DOE OSTI2010

License Structure for Multi-Module Facilities

The Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Project is intended to be the prototype for multi-module commercial high temperature gas reactors (HTGRs) for process heat and/or electricity generation. Part of the objectives of the project are to establish the conditions that would govern or enhance the design, licensing, construction and operation of numerous, modular nuclear plants, particularly suited for industrial applications or that could reduce the risk of such projects. A determination is desired regarding whether a multi-module reactor plant can be licensed with a single Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) review, hearing, and safety evaluation report. If it is determined that a multi-modular reactor plant can be licensed under a single review/hearing process, the structure and the duration of the license for each module will also need to be determined. The purpose of this paper is to describe for the NRC the NGNP position on these two issues and obtain either NRC general concurrence or comments on the approach to these issues. While the current NGNP planning provides for only a single reactor module, the project is intended to provide the basis and establish a licensing framework that can be used by future commercial HTGRs and other reactor designs, including a variety of small modular reactor technologies, with configurations reflecting design standardization of multi-module plants. Therefore, it is important to identify a path for addressing these modular reactor plant issues so that the resolution can be factored into the NGNP Project planning. The NGNP position is that a single combined license (COL) application can be submitted for a multi-modular reactor facility, the COL application can undergo a single NRC review/hearing process, and each module should be issued a separate license.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2016

Development of the Licensing Procedure and Regulatory Framework for the Spent Fuel Storage facility in Korea - 16423

The Public Engagement Commission on SNF management (PECOS) published the recommendation report on the spent fuel management of Korea in June, 2015. Based on this report, the future national policy for spent fuel management of Korea has been established, taking into consideration the national/international trends on policy and technology development. Regardless of the recommendation report of PECOS, Spent fuel storage casks are necessary in Korea. Therefore, various types of spent fuel storage casks are now being developed by Korea vendors. For example, Concrete storage casks and dual purpose metal casks are now under development by the KORAD (Korea Radioactive waste agency) for future use in the interim storage facility. Unfortunately, there is no independent licensing procedure for spent fuel storage casks in Nuclear Safety Act (NSA) because is the casks are considered an integral part of the interim storage facility safety equipment. Furthermore, the definition of radioactive waste in the NSA was changed recently. Now, spent fuel is separated from the definition of 'radioactive waste'. Spent fuel can only become radioactive waste by the decision through the meeting of the relative ministers of Korea government. For that reason, the licensing procedure for interim spent fuel storage facilities was separated from the current 'disposal facility, etc.' in accordance with the article 63 of NSA. The aim of this study is to develop the licensing procedure for the storage cask, and also to develop a revised draft of interim storage facility procedure within the NSA. Once this independent licensing procedure on the spent fuel storage cask is introduced to the NSA, it is expected that developers or operators can develop and commercialize the storage cask in Korea. In this study, an independent licensing procedure for the spent fuel storage facility was developed including the storage cask licensing procedure for the NSA. The procedure was composed of the permit for construction and operation of interim storage facility, criteria for permit, inspection criteria, periodic safety review, and decommissioning criteria, etc. The detailed contents of these requirements were also developed to introduce the regulatory framework for the interim storage facility. Particularly, periodic safety review and decommissioning criteria were developed in accordance with the recommendation of IRRS (International Regulatory Review Service) of IAEA. The developed licensing procedure for spent fuel storage facility will be introduced in NSA in response to the revised definition of NSA and the recommendation report of PECOS. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗