ANS is committed to advancing, fostering, and promoting the development and application of nuclear sciences and technologies to benefit society.
Explore the many uses for nuclear science and its impact on energy, the environment, healthcare, food, and more.
Division Spotlight
Operations & Power
Members focus on the dissemination of knowledge and information in the area of power reactors with particular application to the production of electric power and process heat. The division sponsors meetings on the coverage of applied nuclear science and engineering as related to power plants, non-power reactors, and other nuclear facilities. It encourages and assists with the dissemination of knowledge pertinent to the safe and efficient operation of nuclear facilities through professional staff development, information exchange, and supporting the generation of viable solutions to current issues.
Meeting Spotlight
Conference on Nuclear Training and Education: A Biennial International Forum (CONTE 2025)
February 3–6, 2025
Amelia Island, FL|Omni Amelia Island Resort
Standards Program
The Standards Committee is responsible for the development and maintenance of voluntary consensus standards that address the design, analysis, and operation of components, systems, and facilities related to the application of nuclear science and technology. Find out What’s New, check out the Standards Store, or Get Involved today!
Latest Magazine Issues
Jan 2025
Jul 2024
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
February 2025
Nuclear Technology
January 2025
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
2024: The Year in Nuclear—April through June
Another calendar year has passed. Before heading too far into 2025, let’s look back at what happened in 2024 in the nuclear community. In today's post, compiled from Nuclear News and Nuclear Newswire are what we feel are the top nuclear news stories from April through May 2024.
Stay tuned for the top stories from the rest of the past year.
J. C. Wagner, C. V. Parks
Nuclear Technology | Volume 136 | Number 1 | October 2001 | Pages 130-140
Technical Paper | Radioactive Waste Management and Disposal | doi.org/10.13182/NT01-A3233
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
This research examines the practice of equating the reactivity of spent fuel to that of fresh fuel for the purpose of performing burnup credit criticality safety analyses for pressurized water reactor (PWR) spent-fuel pool (SFP) storage conditions. The investigation consists of comparing keff estimates based on reactivity "equivalent" fresh fuel enrichment (REFFE) to keff estimates using the calculated spent-fuel isotopics. Analyses of selected storage configurations common in PWR SFPs show that this practice yields nonconservative results (on the order of a few tenths of a percent) in configurations in which the spent fuel is adjacent to higher-reactivity assemblies (e.g., fresh or lower-burned assemblies) and yields conservative results in configurations in which spent fuel is adjacent to lower-reactivity assemblies (e.g., higher-burned fuel or empty cells). When the REFFE is determined based on unborated water moderation, analyses for storage conditions with soluble boron present reveal significant nonconservative results associated with the use of the REFFE. Finally, it is shown that the practice of equating the reactivity of spent fuel to fresh fuel is acceptable, provided the conditions for which the REFFE was determined remain unchanged. Determination of the REFFE for a reference configuration and subsequent use of the REFFE for different configurations violates the basis used for the determination of the REFFE and, thus, may lead to inaccurate, and possibly, nonconservative estimates of reactivity.A significant concentration (~2000 ppm) of soluble boron is typically (but not necessarily required to be) present in PWR SFPs, of which only a portion ([less than or approximately equal]500 ppm) may be credited in safety analyses. Thus, a large subcritical margin currently exists that more than accounts for errors or uncertainties associated with the use of the REFFE. Consequently, the findings presented here do not represent a significant safety concern unless/until the subcritical margin associated with the soluble boron (that is not currently explicitly credited) is offset by the uncertainties associated with burnup credit and/or the expanded allowance of credit for the soluble boron.