Global Nuclear Fuel Assurance

Transcription

1 Global Nuclear Fuel Assurance William Szymanski Director, Global Nuclear Fuel Assurance Office of Nuclear Energy U.S. Department of Energy February 25, 2009

2 International Activities International Nuclear Fuel Service and Assurance Frameworks and Mechanisms The Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) and the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) co-chair for the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) working group on Reliable Nuclear Fuel Services. Evaluate impacts of global fuel assurance frameworks and mechanisms (examples: international fuel cycle centers, fuel leasing, and fuel banks) on nuclear fuel supply. Partnership with US Industry Lead in coordinating NE-wide reviews of overseas transfers of technology by industry in advance of NNSA recommending approval by the Secretary of Energy under 10 CFR part 810. Support U.S. Government s facilitation of nuclear commerce (led by Commerce Department). Leverage industry technical expertise in international nuclear cooperation (example: GNEP). 2

3 Mining/Milling Global Nuclear Fuel Assurance Proposals Front End Fuel Cycle Conversion Enrichment Fuel Fabrication Recycling Back End Fuel Cycle Storage/Disposal Japan U.S. Reliable Fuel Bank IAEA Expert Group Recommended Approaches Reliable Access to Nuclear Fuel 6-Nation Proposal World Nuclear Association Nuclear Threat Initiative Austria European Union GNEP Russia Global Nuclear Power Infrastructure United Kingdom Germany Assured Services Reliable Access to Nuclear Fuel 6-Nation Proposal World Nuclear Association Austria European Union IAEA Expert Group Recommended Approaches Less certain implementation path 3

4 Working Group: Terms of Reference Objective Establish international supply frameworks to enhance reliable, cost-effective fuel services and supplies to the world market, providing options for generating nuclear energy and fostering development while reducing the risk of nuclear proliferation by creating a viable alternative to acquisition of sensitive fuel cycle technologies. Note: Words are emphasized for discussion purposes only; such emphasis is not contained in the terms of reference as approved by the Reliable Nuclear Fuel Services Working Group. 4

5 Working Group: Terms of Reference Scope The Working Group will identify common interest among the Partners and recommend practical measures for moving towards reliable comprehensive fuel service arrangements, including spent fuel management. In developing these measures, the Working Group will: Emphasize the need for approaches that are consistent with equal rights and obligations, without prejudice to market and commercial operations; Seek solutions that are independent of the specific country or region; and Emphasize the need for solutions that meet public acceptability requirements and are technically feasible and economically viable. 5

6 Working Group: Terms of Reference Activities Exchange views on, and as appropriate, identify, assess and develop appropriate responses on: Government and non-governmental capabilities Common practices Limitations Recipient and user requirements Respective legal and regulatory frameworks Respective commercial frameworks The relationship between state-level fuel supply assurances and commercial providers of uranium and fuel cycle services Public acceptability requirements 6

7 Working Group: Terms of Reference Activities (Continued) Consult with other GNEP working group(s) as needed. Submit a report summarizing the work accomplished, recommending practical measures to move towards comprehensive reliable fuel service arrangements and next steps. 7

8 Working Group: Identified Work Themes Themes for future work were developed based on responses by Working Group members to a survey questionnaire and discussion of partners views on the fuel cycle. Further discussions identified four high priority areas to be addressed by Sub-Groups of the Working Group ( sub-working groups ). Views and perspectives were considered from partner countries involved in various aspects of nuclear power as well as countries contemplating the use of nuclear power for the first time. 8

9 Working Group: Sub-Working Groups Poland and France co-lead sub-working group for compiling lessons learned and perspectives for resource requirements. Reports to be presented at the next Working Group meeting. France leads sub-working group on elements and criteria for closing the fuel cycle. Draft terms of reference and schedule of deliverable to be presented at the next Working Group meeting. Working Group Co-Chairs are seeking expressions of interest for leads or co-leads for remaining two remaining sub-working groups. Mechanisms needed to increase the diversity of fabricated fuel supply. Assurances a country should seek as sufficient for nuclear supply. 9

10 Working Group: Summary Themes for future work were developed based on responses by Working Group members to a survey and discussion of partners views on the fuel cycle. Two Sub-Working Groups established and two others identified for startup to address priority work areas. Views and perspectives were considered from partner countries involved in various aspects of nuclear power as well as countries contemplating the use of nuclear power for the first time. Industry input will be critical to the success of the Working Group in meeting its objectives. 10

11 Next Meeting of the Working Group March 20, 2009, in Cherbourg, France Agenda: Report by Sub-Working Group for Compiling Lessons Learned and Perspectives for Resource Requirements Report on a a draft working plan by the Sub-Working Group on Elements and Criteria for Closing the Fuel Cycle Start-up of sub-working groups identified at September 2008 meeting: Mechanisms needed to increase the diversity of fabricated fuel Assurances a country should seek as sufficient for nuclear supply Update on international fuel assurance proposals 11

12 Contact Bill Szymanski Office of Nuclear Energy U.S. Department of Energy Phone: (202)