None

This study investigates the performance of the YALINA Booster subcritical assembly, located in Belarus, during operation with high (90%), medium (36%), and low (21%) enriched uranium fuels in the assembly's fast zone. The YALINA Booster is a zero-power, subcritical assembly driven by a conventional neutron generator. It was constructed for the purpose of investigating the static and dynamic neutronics properties of accelerator driven subcritical systems, and to serve as a fast neutron source for investigating the properties of nuclear reactions, in particular transmutation reactions involving minor-actinides. The first part of this study analyzes the assembly's performance with several fuel types. The MCNPX and MONK Monte Carlo codes were used to determine effective and source neutron multiplication factors, effective delayed neutron fraction, prompt neutron lifetime, neutron flux profiles and spectra, and neutron reaction rates produced from the use of three neutron sources: californium, deuterium-deuterium, and deuterium-tritium. In the latter two cases, the external neutron source operates in pulsed mode. The results discussed in the first part of this report show that the use of low enriched fuel in the fast zone of the assembly diminishes neutron multiplication. Therefore, the discussion in the second part of the report focuses on finding alternative …

The goal of this study was to examine two different software tools designed to account for the environmental impacts of remediation projects. Three case studies from the Savannah River Site (SRS) near Aiken, SC were used to exercise SiteWise (SW) and Sustainable Remediation Tool (SRT) by including both traditional and novel remediation techniques, contaminants, and contaminated media. This study combined retrospective analysis of implemented projects with prospective analysis of options that were not implemented. Input data were derived from engineering plans, project reports, and planning documents with a few factors supplied from calculations based on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Conclusions drawn from software output were generally consistent within a tool; both tools identified the same remediation options as the 'best' for a given site. Magnitudes of impacts varied between the two tools, and it was not always possible to identify the source of the disagreement. The tools differed in their quantitative approaches: SRT based impacts on specific contaminants, media, and site geometry and modeled contaminant removal. SW based impacts on processes and equipment instead of chemical modeling. While SW was able to handle greater variety in remediation scenarios, it did not include a measure of the effectiveness of the scenario.

None

None