ML023050387
| ML023050387 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 07/31/2002 |
| From: | Bosco R Westinghouse |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| FOIA/PA-2005-0108 WCAP-15848-NP, Rev 0 | |
| Download: ML023050387 (51) | |
Text
WCAP-15848-NP July 2002 Revision 0 Fuel Rod Cladding Development Program in Palo Verde Unit 3:
Examination of Fuel Rods with Advanced Cladding Materials at End-of-Cycle 9 (OWestinghouse
LEGAL NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of N,ork sponsored by the Westinghouse Electric Company, LLC. Neither Westinghouse Electric Company, LLC, nor any person acting on its behalf:
A. Makes any warranty or representation, express or implied including tie warranties of fitness for a particular purpose or merchantability, with respect to the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of the information contained in this report, or that the use of any information, apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this report may not infringe privately owned rights; or B. Assumes any liabilities with respect to the use of, or for damages resulting from the use of, an- infonnation. apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this report.
©2002 Westinghoue Electric Company.
LLC 2000 Day Hill Road Windsor. Connecticut 06095-0500 All Righz, Re.served
WCAP-15848-NP Revision 00 Fuel Rod Cladding Development Program in Palo Verde Unit 3:
Examination of Fuel Rods with Advanced Cladding Materials at End-of-Cycle 9 July, 2002 R. N. Bosco Approved:
&Advanced Products Westinghouse Electric Company LLC Nuclear Fuel 4350 Northern Pike Monroeville, Pennsylvania 15146-2886
© 2002 Westinghouse Electric Company LLC, All Rights Reserved
WCAP-1 5848-NP Page 2 of47 Revision 00 Summary Since the late 1980's ABB CE Nuclear Power, now Westinghouse Electric Company, and APS have cooperated in a development program to demonstrate the performance of advanced fuel rod cladding materials. The objective of the program has been to identify cladding materials that offer improved corrosion resistance and dimensional stability in a high temperature reactor. As part of the program, Lead Fuel Assemblies (LFAs), fabricated with fuel rods that utilize cladding with materials specifications that are outside the ASTM Specification for Zircaloy-4, were introduced in Palo Verde 3 in Cycle 7. Two Lead Fuel Assemblies (LFAs) were fabricated as part of Batch J and loaded in Palo Verde 3 at the beginning of Cycle 7. All 236 rods in each LFA were fabricated using the same advanced cladding material, either Alloy A (Assembly P3J408) or Anikuloy (Assembly P3J407). The LFAs operated in Cycles 7 and 8 and were examined during the refueling outages after both cycles of irradiation. The Alloy A assembly was reinserted for continued operation in Cycle 9. The Anikuloy assembly was discharged at the end of cycle 8.
This report documents the examinations that were performed on the Alloy A LFA Assembly (P3J408) following PV-3 Cycle 9. The results of the examinations that were performed on the LFAs following PV-3 Cycle 7and 8 are reported in an earlier test reports.
The primary objectives of the examinations were to characterize and evaluate the overall performance of the test rods with Alloy A cladding after 3 cycles of operation and confirm suitability for continued irradiation of the rods in Cycle 10. The successful operation of the assembly during Cycle 9 would be the prerequisite for reinsertion in Cycle 10. The evaluation criteria were established prior to the Outage (Reference 9) and defined as acceptable visual appearance, oxide thickness limits below established permissible limits and adequate shoulder gap margin.
Examination of the Batch J LFA with Alloy A cladding after three cycles of operation and rod average bumups up to [ ] MWd/kgU have shown that the assembly and rods are in excellent condition. All oxide thickness measurements were below the established permissible limits for the rods measured and adequate shoulder gap margin will exist through the predicted end of life for this assembly. No apparent anomalies were observed that would indicate unacceptable performance.
The inspection results continue to indicate that Alloy A cladding offers improvements of at least
[ ]% in corrosion resistance relative to OPTIN cladding. The maximum circumferentially averaged oxide thickness for the rods with Alloy A cladding ranged from ( ]to [ ] Im after three cycles of operation. Assembly P3J408 was inserted in Cycle 10 for its fourth cycle of operation.
WCAP-1 5848-NP Page 3 of 47 Revision 00 Table of Contents Section Title Pace Summary 2 Table of Contents 3 List of Tables 4 List of Figures 5 1.0 Introduction 6 1.1 Background and Operating Histories 6 1.2 Reactor Operations 7 2.0 Assembly Examinations 11 2.1 Visual Examination 11 2.2 Shoulder Gap Measurements 11 2.3 Guide Tube Length Measurements 12 3.0 Single Rod Examinations and Data Evaluations 20 3.1 Fuel Rod Eddy Current Testing 20 3.2 Visual Examinations 20 3.3 Rod Length Measurements and Fuel Rod Growth 21 3.4 Oxide Thickness Measurements and Corrosion Performance 21 4.0 Assembly Reconstitution 28 5.0 Conclusions 28 6.0 References 29 Appendix A: Shoulder Gap Measurement Data 30 Appendix B: Fuel Rod Eddy Current Test Report 37 Appendix C: Guide Tube Length Measurement Data 40 Appendix D: Oxide Thickness Composites for Fuel Rods Measured after 42 Cycle 9
WCAP-15848-NP Page 4 of 47 Revision 00 List of Tables Table Title Paae 1.1 Reactor Coolant Temperature and Other Pertinent Parameters for 7 PV-3 During Reactor Cycles 7, 8 and 9 1.2 Batch J Rods with Alloy A Cladding Examined Following Cycle 9 8 2.1 Shoulder Gap Measurements for Assembly P3J408 at EOC-9 13 3.1 Maximum Oxide Thickness Data for Rods Measured after Cycle 9 23
WCAP-15848-NP Page5 of47 Revision 00 List of Figures Figure Title Paae 1.1 PV-3 Core Schematic Identifying LFA Locations in 9 Cycles 7, 8 and 9 1.2 Schematic of PV-3 Assembly Showing the Designation 10 System for R6d Location 2.1 Shoulder Gaps for the 00 Face of Assembly P3J408 14 2.2 Shoulder Gaps for the 90 Face of Assembly P3J408 14 2.3 Shoulder Gaps for the 1800 Face of Assembly P3J408 15 2.4 Shoulder Gaps for the 2700 Face of Assembly P3J408 15 2.5 Appearance of Alloy A Rod Surfaces at Span 8, 16 0 ° Face of Assembly P3J408 at EOC-9 2.6 Close Up View of Alloy A Rod Surfaces at Span 8, 16 00 Face of Assembly P3J408 at EOC-9 2.7 Appearance of Alloy A Rod Surfaces at Span 8, 17 900 Face of Assembly P3J408 at EOC-9 2.8 Shoulder Gap Closure for Assemblies P3J407 and P3J408 18 2.9 Palo Verde Guide Tube Growth 19 3.1 Grid Contact Marks at the top of Rod D16, P3J408 24 3.2 Remnant ESAs in Span 8 of Rod D16, P3J408 25 3.3 Vertical Pattern Created by Crud Removal During Handling 26 3.4 Comparison of OPTIN and Alloy A Cladding Corrosion 27
WCAP-1 5848-NP Page 6 of 47 Revision 00 1.0 Introduction The results of fuel examinations that were conducted during the EOC-9 refueling outage for Palo Verde 3 are documented in this report. The examinations performed during this outage are part of an irradiation program that is being conducted by Westinghouse Electric Company and APS. The objective of the program is to assess the potential for improved corrosion resistance of advanced cladding alloys.
The program consists of irradiation of two Lead Fuel Assemblies (LFAs). The LFA program was initiated at BOC-7 in Unit 3. The LFA program utilizes two Batch J assemblies (P3J407 and P3J408) as carriers of rods with composition and fabrication differences. The LFAs were fabricated using only two advanced cladding alloys and all of the 236 rods in each assembly utilize that same alloy. Assembly P3J407 contains rods fabricated with Anikuloy (also called Alloy F) cladding. Assembly P3J408 contains rods fabricated with Alloy A cladding. A description of these alloys is in Reference 1. PV-3 Cycle 7 was the 1 st irradiation cycle for LFAs P3J407 and P3J408. Examinations were conducted on both LFAs and individual rods from each assembly during the EOC-7 and EOC-8 refueling outages. The results of the examination from the EOC-7 outage are reported in Reference 2. The results of the examination from the EOC-8 outage are reported in Reference 3. The Anikuloy LFA was discharged at the end of Cycle 8. The results of the examination from the EOC-9 outage are reported herein for the Alloy A Assembly.
1.1 Background and Operating Histories The Batch J LFAs with Anikuloy and Alloy A cladding (P3J407 and P3J408, respectively) were fresh fuel assemblies at the beginning of Cycle 7. Individual rods in the LFAs and the assemblies were characterized prior to irradiation. Characterization information is documented in Reference
- 4. The LFAs operated in symmetric core locations in Cycles 7 and 8. Figure 1.1 shows their respective locations in these cycles. The assembly average and peak rod bumup for both LFAs at EOC-7 were [ ] and [ I MWd/kgU (Reference 2), respectively, and [ ] and [ I MWd/kgU, respectively, at EOC-8 (Reference 5). The assembly average and peak rod bumup for the Alloy A assembly at EOC-9 was [ 3and [ ] MWd/kgU, respectively (Reference 6).
Individual fuel rods from the Alloy A assembly (P3J408) were examined following Cycle 9. The examinations performed on the assembly included assembly visual inspection with the underwater
WCAP-15848-NP Page 7 of 47 Revision 00 periscope, shoulder gap measurements of peripheral rods and guide tube length measurements.
The examination conducted on the individual rods from P3J408 only characterized corrosion. The individual rods examined from P3J408, and their respective rod average bumup and fiuence at EOC-9, are listed in Part I of Table 1.2. Part II of the table identifies the specific inspections performed on each of the examined rods.
The rod average burnup and fluence values for the examined rods at EOC-9 that are listed in Part I of Table 1.2 were extracted from Figures 3.1.5-9 through 3.1.5-11 in Reference 6. The EOC-9 fluence values from Reference 6 were converted from E>1 MeV to E>0.821 MeV by dividing by 0.89.
1.2 Reactor Operations The reactor coolant temperatures and pertinent parameters for the cycles in which the LFAs were irradiated are listed in Table 1.1. The data were obtained by email communication from APS, Nuclear Fuel Management and are presented for information only.
Table 1.1 Reactor Coolant Temperature and Other Pertinent Parameters for PV-3 During Reactor Cycles 7, 8 and 9
('ore Avg. Power Reactor Inlet Reactor Outlet Reactor Cycle kW/ft Cycle EFPD's Temperature, 'F Temperature, 'F 8
9 L ]
WCAP-15848-NP Page 8 oft47 Revision 00 Table 1.2 Part I Batch J Rods with Alloy A Cladding Examined Following Cycle 9 EOC-9 EOC-9 Rod Serial Location in Rod Avg. Bumup, Cladding Assembly Fluence(1 ) 2x Number TVpe P3J408 MWd/kqU 10"21, n/cm 0500807 Alloy A L16 0500815 Alloy A P14 0500828 Alloy A D16 0500858 Alloy A N16 0500901 Alloy A A9 0500902 Alloy A P8 0500903 Alloy A 116 0501304 Alloy A D14 0501357 Alloy A M14
-I (1) E>0.821 MeV Part II Examinations Performed on Batch J Rods With Alloy A Cladding After Cycle 9 EOC-9 Exams Rod Serial Eddy Current Visual Oxide Number Inspection Inspection Meas.
0500807 X X X 0500815 X X X 0500828 X X X 0500858 X X X 0500901 X X X 0500902 X X X 0500903 X X X 0501304 X X X 0501357 X X X
WCAP-15848-NP Page 9 of47 Revision 00 Figure 1.1 PV-3 Core Schematic Identifying LFA Locations in Cycles 7, 8 and 9 T S R P N M L K J H G F E D C B A 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9
8 7
6 5
4 3
2 1
Flj-i Assembly Serial No. Dxscharaed EOC-8 W 11 1 Cycle E All assemblies were oriented with the Serial Number Northeast.
S
WCAP-1 5848-NP Page 10 of 47 Revision 00 Figure 1.2 Schematic of PV-3 Assembly Showing the Designation System for Rod Locations Serial No.
P3J###
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
WCAP-15848-NP Page 11 of 47 Revision 00 2.0 Assembly Examinations 2.1 Visual Examinations at EOC-9 A visual inspection of Assembly P3J408 was performed during the EOC-9 outage. The visual inspection was conducted using the underwater periscope. Observations of interest and anomalies were recorded using a 35mm camera.
The visual inspection of Assembly P3J408 after three cycles of irradiation found the assembly to be in good condition. No anomalies were observed on any of the peripheral rods or spacer grids.
The shoulder gaps of the peripheral rod were large and relatively uniform.
Figures 2.1 through 2.4 are photographs of the upper end of the rods showing the remaining shoulder gap for Assembly P3J408. Figure 2.5 is a photograph of Span 8 of the 00 face of Assembly P3J408 showing the crud patterns on the surface of the Alloy A rods. One of the center rods is brighter in appearance than the others because crud was removed from its surface when it was examined at EOC-8. Figure 2.6 is a high magnification photograph of the center rods of Span 8 of the 00 face of Assembly P3J408. It shows the uniform appearance of the crud on the Alloy A rods. One rod is cleaner in appearance due to its removal for examination at EOC-8. The rod appears lighter in Figure 2.6 due to the differences in light reflectivity between high and low magnification. Figure 2.7 is a photograph of Span 8 of the 90° face of Assembly P3J408 showing the appearance of the crud and the formation of Elliptical Surface Anomalies (ESA's) on the Alloy A rods. This crud pattern and these ESA's were present at the EOC-7 as noted in Reference 2.
2.2 Shoulder Gap Measurements Shoulder gap measurements were performed on each peripheral rod in Assembly P3J408 following Cycle 9. The measurements were made using the underwater periscope in accordance with Reference 7. Micrometer readings that correspond with the top of the fuel rods and bottom of the upper end fitting flow plate were recorded on data sheets. The difference between these two readings times the magnification factor is the shoulder gap. The magnification factor was determined by making similar measurements on a standard with known gaps. The calculated shoulder gaps, the periscope measurements on the standard, the calculation of the magnification factor, and the periscope measurements for assembly P3J408 is included in Appendix A.
WCAP-1 5848-NP Page 12 of 47 Revision 00 The shoulder gaps, calculated gap closure, and neutron fluence of each of the peripheral rods in Assembly P3J408 after Cycle 9 is presented in Table 2.1. One of the criteria for the LFA to be inserted into Cycle 10 was that the minimum shoulder gap for all peripheral rods at EOC-9 be >
1.2 inch. As evidenced by the data, all peripheral rods met this criterion. Figure 2.8 presents the shoulder gap closures calculated for the measured rods after Cycle 9, as well as the data from after Cycles 7 and 8 (Reference 2 and Reference 3), plotted as a function of rod average fluence.
As noted from the figure, rods with [
2.3 Guide Tube Length Measurements The overall lengths of the guide tubes in Assembly P3J408 were measured following Cycle 9.
Measurements were made in accordance with Reference 14. Guide tube length data is presented in Appendix C. The average growth of Assembly P3J408 guide tubes after 3 cycles of irradiation and a average guide tube fluence of [ ]. The average guide tube growth after one cycle of operation was [ ] with an average fluence of
[ ]. Figure 2.9 presents the guide tube growth data generated for Assembly P3J408 at EOC-7 and EOC-9. The growth data are plotted as a function of average guide tube fluence. Also shown in Figure 2.9 are guide tube growth data for PVI and PV3 assemblies that were previously measured. Those data are from Reference 2, Figure 2.6. In addition to the measurement data, Figure 2.9 shows the best estimate and lower 95% tolerance limit for the SIGREEP predictions for growth of cold worked and stress-relief annealed Palo Verde guide tubes (Reference 15, page 9). Guide tube length measurements were not made following the second cycle of operation. As expected, guide tube growth for the assembly is consistent with other Palo Verde assemblies and the SIGREEP predictions.
WCAP-1 5848-NP Page 13 of 47 Revision 00 Table 2.1 Shoulder Gap Measurements for Assemblv P3J408 at EOC-9
-4 4 4 1 £ £ I
- t 4 4 4 4 I 4- 1
- . .' J & 4- 1
- Rods numbered 1 to 16, left to right across assembly face. **Fluence x 1021 , n/cm2
WCAP-1 5848-NP Page 14 of 47 Revision 00 Figure 2.1 Shoulder Gaps for the 00 Face of Assembly P3J408 Figure 2.2 Shoulder Gaps for the 900 Face of Assembly P3J408
-. 1
WCAP-1 5848-NP Page 15 of 47 Revision 00 Figure 2.3 Shoulder Gaps for the 1800 Face of Assembly P3J408 r
K -I Figure 2.4 Shoulder Gaps for the 2700 Face of Assembly P3J408 r
K J
WCAP-1 5848-NP Page 16 of4[7 Revision 00 Figure 2.5 Appearance of Alloy A Rod Surfaces at Span 8, 0° Face of Assembly P3J408 at EOC-9 C
K Figure 2.6 j
Close Up View of Alloy A Rod Surfaces at Span 8, 00 Face of Assembly P3J408 at EOC-9 K J
WCAP-15848-NP Page 17 of 47 Revision 00 Figure 2.7 Appearance of Alloy A Rod Surfaces at Span 8, 900 Face of Assembly P3J408 at EOC-9
WCAP-15848-NP Page 18 of 47 Revision 00 Figure 2.8 Shoulder Gap Closure for Assembly P3J408 P=
C.
C Rod Average Fluence x OA^21, n/cmAE>0.821 MeV
WCAP-15848-NP Page 19 of 47 Revision 00 Figure 2.9 Palo Verde Guide Tube Growth U
0 I
U.
Average Fluence x 10.21, n/cm2 , E>0.821 MeV
WCAP-15848-NP Page 20 of 47 Revision 00 3.0 Single Rod Examinations and Data Evaluations 3.1 Fuel Rod Eddy Current Testing EOC-9 Inspections The nine fuel rods removed from Assembly P3J408 during the EOC-9 examination program were eddy current tested to evaluate cladding overall integrity. Eddy current testing (ECT) was performed, per Reference 8, [
]. Vector analysis was used to obtain phase angle and signal amplitude for comparison of indications on the rods to calibration standards. The evaluations of ECT indications on each rod are presented in Appendix B.
There were no detectable defects noted by ECT on the three cycle rods with Alloy A cladding.
3.2 Visual Examinations Visual Inspection of Rods from P3J408 at EOC-9 Visual inspections were performed, using an underwater TV system, of the 9 rods removed from Assembly P3J408. Video recordings were made of the rods from P3J408 as they were examined.
All of the rods examined from the LFA were in excellent condition. No anomalies were observed.
The coloration of the oxide on the rods was typical for three cycles of exposure. Figure 3.1 is an example of the grid contact marks seen on these rods. The contact marks shown are from the top of Rod D16 where they are more easily distinguished from the rest of the rod. This same rod was viewed during the EOC-8 examination. There does not appear to be any significant change in the size or depth of these Indications. Figure 3.2 is a photo of the remnant ESAs in Span 8 of Rod D136. Again, this is the same area that was viewed and reported on after the EOC-8 examination.
These ESAs coincide with the area of highest oxide accumulations and may be contributing to the overall oxide thickness at this elevation. The profile of the ESAs is not as well defined in this photo compared to the EOC-8 photo due to an accumulation of crud during cycle 9 and lighting conditions. Figure 3.3 is a photo of rod D16 showing the vertical pattern created on the rod
WCAP-1 5848-NP Page 21 of 47 Revision 00 surface due to contact between the rod and the centering device of the rod handling tool [
].
3.3 Rod Length Measurements and Fuel Rod Growth Rod length measurements were not performed during the EOC-9 examination program.
3.4 Oxide Thickness Measurements and Corrosion Performance Oxide thickness measurements were performed during the EOC-9 examination program. Part II of Table 1.2 identifies the rods measured during the EOC-9 program. A nondestructive eddy current technique was used to measure the thickness of the waterside corrosion layer on the outer surface of the fuel rods. The measurements were performed, per the procedure of Reference 11, with the rods removed from the assembly. Four continuous axial traces of oxide thickness were made for each of the measured fuel rods at azimuthal orientations that were 900 apart. The orientations correspond with the orientation of the rod as it resided in the assembly (e.g., 00 side of the rod faced the 00 face of the assembly, etc.)
The measurement data generated for each rod by the four axial scans were combined to form a composite axial and circumferential map of oxide thickness. Appendix D presents the individual composites for the rods measured after Cycle 9. A maximum, circumferentially averaged oxide thickness was calculated for each rod. Table 3.1 lists the maximum oxide thickness data and other pertinent information for each rod measured after Cycle 9. The maximum oxide thicknesses listed in the table are defined as the thickest oxide layer for any one-inch interval of cladding. The maximum is calculated [
Maximum, circumferentially averaged oxide thicknesses for the measured LFA rods with Alloy A cladding ranged from [ ] to [ ] pim at EOC-9 after 3 cycles of operation. Oxide thickness predictions were made to determine the maximum thickness permissible at EOC-9 to permit continued operation in Cycle 10 (Reference 9). The preliminary W-CE high duty corrosion model was used to calculate the maximum oxide thickness on the outer surface of the fuel rod cladding for selected rods. [
T.
The limits were calculated for each rod on the basis that the predicted oxide thicknesses were not
WCAP-1 5848-NP Page 22 of 47 Revision 00 to exceed 120 microns at EOC-10 (consistent with 100 microns best estimate). These are conservative limits, as the data on Alloy A shows a corrosion rate roughly [
]. All of the rods measured were below the limits established for reinsertion into Cycle 10. Figure 3.4 presents the maximum oxide thickness data from Table 3.1 plotted as a function of rod average bumup. Also the plotted are data for the Batch F LTRs with Alloy A cladding that were measured after each of four cycles that these rods were irradiated (Cycles 4, 5 (Reference 12), Cycles 6, 7 (Reference 2, Figure 3.8). In addition, the best estimate equation for PV-1 Batch D rods Irradiated for 5 cycles rod (LSN Regression, pg. 36 of Reference 13) is plotted to provide perspective. The LFA Alloy A data is consistent with the oxide measurements for the LTR Alloy A rods.
The linear regression for rods with Alloy A cladding that is shown in Figure 3.4 was generated using the measurement data for the Alloy A LTRs and rods from P3J408. Based on a comparison of the best estimate predictions for the Alloy A clad rods and the PV-1 D rods, the Alloy A cladding I I.
WCAP-15848-NP Page 23 of 47 Revision 00 Table 3.1 Maximum Oxide Thickness Data for Rods Measured from Assembly P3J408 after Cycle 9 Maximum Rod Avg. Measurement Azimuthal Orientation(I) Circumferential Rod Location Cladding Bumup, Average, Elevation(2),
Serial No. in Assembly MWd/kaU 90 180 270 Microns inches 500807 L16 Alloy A 500815 P14 500828 D16 500858 N16 500901 A9 500902 P8 500903 116 501304 D14 501357 M14 5/ \I-(1) Azimuthal orientations of rod are identical to assembly orientations: 00 orientation aligned with 00 face of Assembly.
(2) Inches from bottom of rod.
Page 24 of 47 WCAP-1 5848-NP Revision 00 Figure 3.1 Grid Contact Marks at the top of Rod D16, P3J408
WCAP-1 5848-NP Page 25 of 47 Revision 00 Figure 3.2 Remnant ESAs in Span 8 of Rod D16, P3J408
WCAP-1 5848-NP Page 26 of 47 Revision 00 Figure 3.3 Vertical Pattern Created by Crud Removal During Handling
WCAP-15848-NP Page 27 of 47 Revision 00 Figure 3.4 Comparison of OPTINTM and Alloy A Cladding Corrosion 0
Rod Average Burnup, MWd/kgU
Page 28 of 47 WCAP-15848-NP Revision 00 4.0 Assembly Reconstitution were reinserted into Following the examination of individual rods after Cycle 9, all of the test rods the same their original locations. Care was taken to reinsert each rod with azimuthal orientations as prior to removal.
5.0 Conclusions and rod Examination of the Batch J LFA with Alloy A cladding after three cycles of operation condition. No average burnups up to [ ] MWd/kgU have shown that the rods are in excellent in the LFA.
apparent anomalies were observed that would indicate unacceptable performance after three The inspection results indicate that the performance of Alloy A cladding in the LFA cycles of operation are [
- 1. Assembly P3J408 was inserted in 9 show that [
Cycle 10 for its fourth cycle of operation. Measurements performed after Cycle I.
Page 29 of 47 WCAP-15848-NP Revision 00 6.0 References Zirconium Based
- 1. CEN-429-P, Rev. 00-P, "Safety Analysis Report for Use of Advanced August 1996.
Cladding Materials in PVNGS Unit 3 Lead Fuel Assemblies,"
in Palo Verde Unit
- 2. CE NPSD-828-P, Rev. 00, "Fuel Rod Cladding Development Program 6 and 7,"
3: Examination of Fuel Rods with Advanced Cladding Materials at End-of-Cycles January 2000.
in Palo Verde Unit
- 3. CE NPSD-873-P, Rev. 00, "Fuel Rod Cladding Development Program 8," July 3: Examination of Fuel Rods with Advanced Cladding Materials at End-of-Cycle 2000.
February 26,
- 4. A. M. Garde, "Fabrication & Characterization of PV3J LFAs, "AMG-97-001, 1997.
Core Boxes 10 & 65,
- 5. A-PV-FE-0146, Rev. 00, "Calculation of Pin by Pin Data for Quarter Hurt, March 31, 2000.
plus Core Integrated RPD Data for Palo Verde Unit 3 Cycle 8," R. E.
7, 8, 9, and 10 for
- 6. A-PV3-FE-0148, Rev. 001, "Redepletion of Palo Verde Unit 3 Cycles 6, Evaluation of Test Rods," R. E. Hurt, 5/23/02.
13, Rev. 01.
- 8. APS Procedure, "Fuel Rod Eddy Current Defect Examination", 78CP-9FH07, March 15,1994.
to be
- 9. M-PV3-FMDE-2001-006, Rev. 00, "Proposed Workplan for Fuel Examinations 5, Outage," R. N. Bosco October Conducted During the Palo Verde 3 EOC-9 Refueling 2001.
- 10. Not Used 78CP-9FH09, Rev.
- 11. APS Procedure, "Single Fuel Rod Oxide Thickness Measurements",
00, February 1992.
Verde Unit 3: Fuel
- 12. G.P. Smith, Jr. "Fuel Rod Cladding Development Program in Palo January 31, 1996.
Examinations at EOC-4 and EOC-5," Attachment B to CMD-96-001, Rods Corrosion Analysis,"
- 13. A-PV3-FE-0139, Rev. 00, "Palo Verde 3 Cycle 7 Lead Fuel M.A. Krammen, February 10, 1997.
78CP-9FH14, Rev.
- 14. APS Procedure, "Fuel Assembly Guide Tube Length Measurements",
0.
Change Analysis for
- 15. Design Calculation # 3400-610-014, Rev. 00, "Generic Dimensional 16x16 Fuel with SRA Guide Tubes", R. P. Broders, May 10, 1989.
Page 30 of 47 WCAP-15848-NP Revision 00 Appendix A Fuel Rod Shoulder Gap Measurements
- --- I
Page 31 of 47 WCAP-15848-NP Revision 00 fir
WCAP-15848-NP Page 32 of 47 Revision 00
Page 33 of 47 WCAP-15848-NP Revision 00
Page 34 of 47 WCAP-1 5848-NP Revision 00
9 A-.7 I
WCAP-15848-NP Page S o Revision 00 K
WCAP-15848-NP Page 36 of 47 Revision 00
I WCAP-1 5848-NP Page 37 of 47 Revision 00 Appendix B Fuel Rod Eddy Current Test Report
I WCAP-15848-NP Page 38 of 47 Revision 00 Fuel Rod Eddy Current Test Report for EOC-9 Inspections
WCAP-15848-NP Page 39 of 47 Revision 00
WCAP-15848-NP Page 40 of 47 Revision 00 Appendix C Guide Tube Length Measurement Data
WCAP-15848-NP Page 41 of 47 Revision 00 Guide Tube Length Measurement Data for EOC-9
WCAP-15848-NP Page 42 of 47 Revision 00 Appendix D Fuel Rod Oxide Thickness Composites
WCAP-15848-NP Page 43 of 47 Revision 00 Figure D-1: Composite Trace for Fuel Rod 501357 from Assembly P3J408 Location M14 r
K Figure D-2: Composite Trace for Fuel Rod 501304 from Assembly P3J408
)
Location D14 K
WCAP-15848-NP Page 44 of 47 Revision 00 Figure D-3: Composite Trace for Fuel Rod 500828 from Assembly P3J408 Location D16 r
\I-Figure D-4: Composite Trace for Fuel Rod 500858 from Assembly P3J408 Location N16 r
-,I I
WCAP-15848-NP Page 45 of 47 Revision 00 Figure D-5: Composite Trace for Fuel Rod 500901 from Assembly P3J408 Location A9 f
J Figure D-6: Composite Trace for Fuel Rod 500902 from Assembly P3J408 Location P8
(
WCAP-1 5848-NP Page 46 of 47 Revision 00 Figure D-7: Composite Trace for Fuel Rod 500903 from Assembly P3J408 Location 116 V .I Figure D-8: Composite Trace for Fuel Rod 500807 from Assembly P3J408 Location L16 r
K J I
WCAP-15848-NP Page 47 of 47 Revision 00 Figure D-9: Composite Trace for Fuel Rod 500815 from Assembly P3J408 Location P14
Enclosure 3 Westinghouse Electric Company LLC Proprietary Affidavit for Lead Fuel Assembly Unit 3, Cycle 9 Inspection Results
Proprietary Affidavit I, Ian. C Rickard, depose and say that I am the Ucensing Project Manager, Windsor Nuclear Licensing, of Westinghouse Electric Company LLC (WEC), duly authorized to make this affidavit, and have reviewed or caused to have reviewed the information which is identified as proprietary and described below I am submitting this affidavit in conformance with the provisions of 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations for withholding this information. I have personal knowledge of the cnteria and procedures utilized by WEC in designating information as a trade secret, privileged, or as confidential commercial or financial information.
The information for which proprietary treatment is sought, and which documents have been appropriately designated as proprietary, is contained in the following:
WCAP-1 5848-P, Rev. 0, "Fuel Rod Cladding Development Program in Palo Verde Unit 3: Examination of Fuel Rods with Advanced Cladding Materials at End-of-Cycle 9", July, 2002 Pursuant to the provisions of Section 2.790(b)(4) of the Commission's regulations, the following is furnished for consideration by the Commission in determining whether the information included inthe documents listed above should be withheld from public disclosure.
- i. The information sought to be withheld from public disclosure is owned and has been held in confidence by WEC. Itconsists of information concerning examination data supporting the development of advanced fuel rod cladding materials including specific examination methods developed by WEC, operational parameters, inspection data, data correlations and photographs ii. The information consists of test data or other similar data for the design, development and concerning advanced fuel rod cladding materials, specific examination methods developed by WEC, operational parameters, inspection data, data correlations and photographs, the application of which results insubstantial competitive advantage to WEC.
iii. The information is of a type customarily held inconfidence by WEC and not customarily disclosed to the public iv. The information is being transmitted to the Commission inconfidence under the provisions of 10 CFR 2.790 with the understanding that it is to be received in confidence by the Commission.
- v. The information, to the best of my knowledge and belief, is not available in public sources, and any disclosure to third parties has been made pursuant to regulatory provisions or proprietary agreements that provide for maintenance of the information in confidence vi. Public disclosure of the information is likely to cause substantial harm to the competitive position of WEC because:
a Asimilar product is manufactured and sold by major competitors of WEC.
- b. WEC invested substantial funds and engineering resources in the development of this information A competitor would have to undergo similar expense ingenerating equivalent information.
- c. The information consists of examination data supporting the development of advanced fuel rod cladding materials including specific examination methods developed by WEC, operational parameters, inspection data, data correlations and photographs, the application of which provides a competitive economic advantage. The availability of such information to competitors would enable them to design their product to better compete with WEC, take marketing or other actions to improve their product's position or impair the position of WEC's product, and avoid developing similar technical analysis insupport of their processes, methods or apparatus.
- d. Inpricing WEC's products and services, significant research, development, engineering, analytical, manufacturing, licensing, quality assurance and other costs and expenses must be included. The ability of WEC's competitors to utilize such information without similar expenditure of resources may enable them to sell at prices reflecting significantly lower costs
- e. Use of the information by competitors in the international marketplace would increase their ability to market a competing product, reducing the costs associated with their technology development.
[an. &-ed Licensing Project Manager Westinghouse Electric Company LLC Swom to before me this 29th day of August, 2002 No ry*Public...
commission expires:
/