International Conference on Research Reactors:
Safe Management and Effective Utilization

14-18 November 2011, Rabat, Morocco

To improve small RR utilization, simple and inexpensive neutron beam facility could be installed for educational/promotional purposes. Could the IAEA assist in this regard?

Certainly, available instruments like national Technical Cooperation projects could be and are used for similar purposes. However, the IAEA would not own such a facility but rather establish a close cooperation with the respective Member State in the specific areas of RR utilization (e.g., through the framework of the IAEA Collaborating Centres).

In case proficiency tests in different fields (e.g., NAA, neutron imaging, etc.) follow up workshops should be organized to jointly identify sources of errors and propose remediation strategies. Could the IAEA coordinate such initiatives?

Indeed, follow up workshops, expert missions and well-targeted training courses are necessary actions in order to evaluate sources of poor performance in proficiency tests and propose remediation strategies. These are on-going efforts in Africa, Europe and Latin America under active regional TC projects, and are supported by staff of technical departments.

Can good examples of strategic & business plans be made available in order to learn/revise existing RR strategic documents?

Yes, examples of such documents are available and can be obtained on request from the Secretariat. In addition, IAEA TECDOC 1212 "Strategic Planning for Research Reactors"(2001) is going to be revised in the near future, and will include additions such as business strategic planning, RR utilization related performance indicators, case study/example of a typical strategic and business plan.

Can one clearly identify the role of RRs in developing a national NPP programme for newcomer countries? Does the IAEA have an official position regarding this issue?

Historically in the past all nuclear power programmes, without any exception, were built on experience and infrastructure paved by the research reactors. Today the situation has evolved where industrial experience and globalization now significantly facilitate the exchange of information and collaborative resource development. While a new research reactor programme can, over time, serve to facilitate the introduction of nuclear power just like an existing research reactor programme, experience suggests that the support needed by a new nuclear power programme is inadequate on its own to sustain long-term research reactor operation. In other words, a national nuclear programme alone cannot justify the necessity of a new research reactor in the country. In addition, Member States today can benefit from research reactor capabilities through partnerships with others, through either a regional research reactor facility or a coalition. In these cases, the capabilities of the existing reactor, the approach to nuclear safety and security, and the value and relevance of its training programmes can be assessed in advance. This issue is the main topic of the review article “The Role of RRs in Introducing Nuclear Power?” to become available as an annex in the forthcoming Nuclear Technology Review 2012.

Can the IAEA prepare relevant documentation regarding issues associated with RR Utilization and Application?

There are two well-known IAEA TECDOCs, 1212 and 1234, both issued in 2001, specifically dealing with RR utilisation strategic plans and various RR applications. Both of these publications are under revision, and updated versions will be available in the future. One also has to mention a more recent publication, namely Technical Report Series No. 455, "Utilization Related Design Features of Research Reactors: A Compendium," Vienna (2007). Finally, the IAEA is preparing a new publication on commercial products and services of research reactors. (More information can be obtained on request for the Secretariat or found at link).

It seems that the positive contribution of RRs to society is often done on a purely financial basis. What can be done on the international level to promote a more positive impact of RRs for society?

The IAEA has and uses many avenues that could be explored to promote the safe and peaceful use of nuclear energy . This also includes non-nuclear energy related products and services provided by research reactors. For example, the American Nuclear Society recently released an update of the Position Statement on Research and Training Reactors (link). This statement could serve as a dedicated template to inform the public and governments of member states about the benefits of research reactors to society.

Can you provide an example of the RR at low power level (<100 kW) that is fully utilised and self-sustained?

There is a low power RR in Canada (SLOWPOKE, École Polytechnique Montréal) that is able to generate enough revenues in order to be fully self-sustained by running a single application, namely neutron activation analysis on a commercial basis. Other examples are the French Low Power Reactors EOLE and MINERVE that have been used non-stop since the early 1960s for core physic code qualification in support of nuclear industries, Nuclear Data Improvement for NEA/OECD data bank, Education and Training for Students, Engineers and Operators. The strong demand of utilization programmes for these two RRs made them fully self-sustained.

Could one transfer old RRs to universities in the developing countries for training and education purposes? Could one think of such a RR owned by the IAEA?

The transfer of smaller under-utilized research reactors or their components has occurred several times in the past. Several AGN-201 RRs were decommissioned in the USA and transferred overseas (e.g., KRR in South Korea from Colorado State University). The greater radio-activation of components from higher power RRs could limit how much could be transferred to a new user, but it is theoretically possible. The IAEA may use its Member States’ RR facilities for various projects but could not own and operate its own RR.

Can panellists comment on initiatives undertaken at system, facility or network levels to improve supply of electricity in order to improve unwanted power outages at RRs?

If there is a classification of priority in maintenance of networks in a country, good outputs from your RR will help you to join the best network. The reactor manager should ask the other facilities in his institute to have a high level of maintenance of their electrical systems. The implementation of periodic overhaul of electrical system of reactor and the use of voltage sag compensator for reactor protection system to compensate a momentary voltage drop are recommended.

Could IAEA develop and maintain a database containing details of corrective maintenance work done at various RRs world-wide?

In addition to related technical documents and guidelines, already published or in preparation by the IAEA, there is a specific Research Reactor Ageing Database that provides numerous examples and details of maintenance work done at different RR facilities. (More information can be obtained on request from the Secretariat or found at link).

It is strange to see that some high power RRs (>5 MW) are scheduled for training and education purposes? This is not adequate and smaller RRs must be used for this particular purpose.

One certainly should not create very strict classification of RRs according to their power and respective utilization patterns as there is no single ‘best’ research reactor for this purpose. The optimum choice of a reactor depends on the nature of the training to be done. A small research reactor is probably best for most ‘nuclear engineering laboratory’ experiments that would be done as part of a university teaching program. However, if training of operators for a nuclear power plant is the goal, a larger, more complex research reactor would provide a more realistic training experience. In summary, one has to consider the complementarity between Low Power RR which might be specifically designed for education and training purposes (e.g., various experiments related to reactor physics) and High Power RR when it is more question of an “in-field” training for future operators dealing with issues such as management of fuel, waste, safety, including management of personnel and budget. However, in many cases, the optimum reactor for training may not be available, so it is necessary to make the best use of the available facilities.

Good to see many new RR projects using heavy water as a moderator/reflector, best suited for NTD of silicon.

This observation is not surprising since most of the future multipurpose RR facilities are designed to provide NTD of silicon on an industrial scale, and therefore their design is optimized accordingly.

It is suggested that new RRs should use stainless steel rather than aluminium alloys for various structural parts of new RRs (e.g., to minimise issues of corrosion). Could RR designers comment on that?

Aluminium alloys have been extensively used as structural material for RRs, due to their satisfactory mechanical properties in the range of temperatures encountered in such facilities, to low neutronic absorption and gamma heating, to a reduced neutronic activation and a good corrosion resistance. The use of stainless steel instead of aluminium alloys presents the disadvantage of more activation under neutron flux and the formation of ⁶⁰Co which complicates the management of radioactive waste at could be a source of personnel exposure. It should be noted that corrosion can generally be reduced by maintaining water purity and avoiding contact or interaction with different types of materials in the reactor.

After the Fukushima Daiichi NPP accident, shouldn’t “stress tests” be extended to high power RRs in addition to the on-going process for NPPs? What is the position of the IAEA?

Yes, the “stress tests” should be extended to RRs with significant potential hazards to the environment (RRs containing a large inventory of radioactive materials). In this regard, the IAEA is organizing in May 2012 a Technical Meeting on implications of Fukushima accidents for RRs.

What is the best automated equipment/practice to monitor tritium in the heavy water RRs? Could IAEA provide guidance for that?

The IAEA Technical Reports Series No. 324, "Safe Handling of Tritium: Review of Data and Experience" is one such document. There is likely no “best” equipment to monitor tritium but there are several commercial vendors that manufacture automatic airborne tritium monitors. Most facilities find the most reliable method for measuring tritium in liquids is the liquid scintillation method and there are excellent instruments available from commercial vendors.

Please provide examples of Regional Safety Committees. What is the role of the IAEA in this regard?

The IAEA is promoting at the regional level the sharing of knowledge and expertise on safety of research reactors. In this regard, the Agency facilitated the establishment of Regional Advisory Safety Committees in Africa, Eastern Europe, and Latin America regions with clear terms of reference. The role of such Committees is mainly to advise RR operating organizations on important safety issues. The IAEA representatives participate as observers in Regional Safety Committee meetings, and their role is to advise if requested on solving safety issues and to provide clarifications concerning the IAEA safety standards relevant to to the topics covered during the meetings.

It has been suggested to develop guidelines to establish conservative criteria for risk categorization of different types of RRs, including good practices for selection of boundary scenarios.

The IAEA is planning to develop a Technical Document (TECDOC) on risk categorization for research reactors. Such document will provide practical examples and guidance and will be very useful for the application of the graded approach in the field of nuclear safety and security.

It has been suggested to share relevant data and experience in modelling of severe accident propagation and source term; in the same context perform benchmarking and qualification of analytical tools to be used in RR safety analysis.

The IAEA completed in 2010 a Coordinated Research Project (CRP) for research reactors on modelling and analysis of radio nuclides transport and source term evaluation within containment/confinement and release to the environment. The results of this CRP will be made available internationally. Another CRP on benchmark of neutronic and thermal-hydraulic computational methods and tools for safety analysis is on going and its results will also be published and shared within the RRs community. Meanwhile, participants from Member States can attend the CRP meetings as observers.

It has been suggested to develop an integrated database for external events like earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanoes, etc., impacting a RR site.

The IAEA will extend the current NPP data base on earthquakes to include the other external hazards and other nuclear installations (RRs, Fuel Cycle Facilities). There is an international action plan for strengthening the International Emergency Preparedness and Response System. This plan is being considered after the Fukushima Daiichi NPP accident within the implementation of IAEA Action plan on nuclear safety, approved by the GC in September 2011. On the other hand, following the Fukushima Daiichi NPP accident, the IAEA has been asked by Member States to play a more active role following an accident, mainly in terms of communication and assessment of radiological consequences.

RR fuel suppliers should continue taking the spent HEU fuel back to the country of origin. What are the steps the IAEA is taking in this regard? What about shipment of spent LEU fuel?

The IAEA has been supporting the international efforts to return fresh and spent HEU fuel to the country of origin since inception. This support will certainly continue, upon request of the Member States, for as long as the programmes are operational. The IAEA is also coordinating a number of activities to disseminate information on good practices for the long term interim storage of spent fuel from research reactors and analysing available commercial options for the back-end of the research reactor fuel cycle.

How the IAEA is assisting in developing decommissioning plans of shutdown RRs? What about financial support through TC or other IAEA projects?

This is done on request by the Member States through official channels and there is a dedicated section at the IAEA coordinating the decommissioning activities of RRs (as well as NPPs or other nuclear facilities). Indeed, some of the support and assistance can be provided through the TC projects and very often on co-shared basis between the IAEA and the involved Member State.

It has been suggested to develop documentation or a database on good practices of decommissioning of various RRs.

This is already on-going and under coordination by the Waste Technology Section within NEFW. For more information, please visit link or directly contact involved staff.

What are the best options for irradiated nuclear graphite and beryllium when it comes to decommissioning and waste management? Does the IAEA have guidelines in this particular case?

There is currently an international RR group working towards the disposal of irradiated beryllium. Equally, there is a dedicated section at the IAEA responsible for decommissioning of RRs, and there are a few of possible options for irradiated graphite/beryllium under discussion. In the case of irradiated graphite, similar issues are also addressed by the NPP community and certainly one should seek to share their experience and lessons learned. For more information, please visit link or directly contact involved staff.

What would be the best strategy/practice to involve universities in RR utilization programmes both national and regional, in particular for newcomer countries?

Indeed, a university can be and in many cases is an extremely important stakeholder of the RR facility. This is because a well-established RR utilization strategy should not count only on the operating organization (if this is not a university facility). A good practice for the newcomer countries would be to involve universities from the very beginning in planning and utilising the national RR. This can be achieved through seminars, video conferences, technical visits, and, the most efficient, joint research projects. The first important step is to define the purpose of the research reactor. The soon to be published IAEA document “Milestones for a Research Reactor” gives a good process for this step. Defining the requirements for the research reactor can be done in the form of questionnaires, forums and technical specification workshops.
The aim is to build productive relationships that will foster future utilization of the reactor. Inclusion in the standard university curricula, even a few hours of hands-on training using the RR facility is a beneficial investment for the future, both for the university as well as for the RR operating organization (e.g., future staff members, new users, representatives of potential stakeholder). It is important that the necessary skills for operating and utilizing the research reactor are developed prior to the commissioning and operation of the facility. Finally, it is important to be realistic about what can be delivered. The development of a structured business plan will assist with this.

Fresh fuel provision, in particular for TRIGA RRs, is an important issue. What are the measures the IAEA has arranged to overcome these difficulties?

A number of topic related meetings and discussions have been organized and coordinated by the IAEA involving TRIGA RR operating organizations, TRIGA fuel providers as well as other concerned stakeholders as DOE and GA TRIGA Systems. Through a dedicated questionnaire required fresh fuel inventory for the next decade has been evaluated. The efforts will continue to ensure the fuel provision involving all concerned stakeholders.

The number of operational RRs will certainly decrease in the next decade. What actions can be engaged that the global level of knowledge of nuclear engineers and to the safety of RR operation, including support to NPP programmes?

We envisage to strengthen E&T related activities in the area of RRs and these are concrete examples: a dedicated Technical Meeting is already scheduled in late 2012; the RR Group Fellowship course will continue in cooperation with the EERRI coalition; the internet RR project will be extended to other Member States; we will start a number of new TC projects, both regional and national, where E&T is an important component; additional E&T activities are scheduled and will be supported through the PUI projects; we are in the process to prepare a publication on nuclear physics experiments using RRs as part of the standard E&T curricula.

Can the IAEA assist countries in providing the support to cover RR operation and maintenance costs?

The answer is “No.” Certainly, this is not within the mandate and missions of the IAEA.

RR Coalitions and Networks initiative should be acknowledged and certainly the IAEA must continue the efforts to further assist in development of these entities, look for common interests that could be addresses by regional efforts, coordinated by the IAEA. However, to further increase the expected outcome more policy makers and at higher level should be involved.

Indeed, involvement of all potential stakeholders of RRs should be only encouraged, including those at the highest level defining national policy and strategy. This is done by the IAEA through the official representations to the IAEA, country briefs, various meetings and conferences, including web page services and publications. Equally, RR operating and regulating organizations should also do their “homework” to inform/involve their top national authorities using available communication channels.

Can the IAEA assist in providing translation services to facilitate country participation in various initiatives (e.g., questionnaires, data bases, documents and publications)? Quite often some countries are excluded from the community just because of language issues (many initiatives are in English only!).

Yes, the IAEA can and does provide translation services into the six officially recognised languages of the UN. When it comes to the specific questionnaires or other less official documents, such cases should be examined case-by-case and could be translated into other languages on request and subject to justification and available budget.