ML102020633

July 21, 2010, Areva Meeting Slides

ML102020633
Person / Time
Site:	Palisades
Issue date:	07/21/2010
From:	AREVA
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Chawla M, NRR/DORL, 415-8371
References
Download: ML102020633 (21)

Text

A AREVA Palisades-NRC Pre-submittal meeting AREVA and Entergy July 21,2010 A

AREVA 1

Agenda

~ Palisades Status '--, I

~ Overview and Background This Analysis Plan Prog rams - KENO, CASM03

~ KENO Benchmarking HTC Benchmarking Efforts for Actinides OECD Fission Product Benchmarks

~ Methods of Analysis Basic methods and occurrences evaluated Bumup Credit Methods Selection of Conservative Depletion Parameters (Le. Harden the spectrum)

Pin by Pin analysis versus assembly averaged enrichment The Lumped Fission Product equivalent How the physical changes during depletion are modeled Legacy Fuel Treatment (burnup penalty)

Misload assumptions

~ Palisades Rack Model Carborundum Poison Rack Distortion and Void Stuck Assemblies A

Palls.ades-NRC Pre-Subm inal Meeting - AREVA and Entergy - JUly 2 1, 2010 - p.3 AREVA Palisades Status

~ 2009 LAR submittal:

Submitted September 1, 2009 Included burnup credit and soluble boron credit No Carborundum credit Included minimal rack voiding; with wall deformation Supplemental information requested by NRC a) Swelling Model b) KENO-V.a validation c) Burnup Credit Methodology LAR Withdrawn on 10/29/09 A

Palisades-NRC Pre-Submlttal Meeting -AREVA and Entergy

• July 21. 2010 - p.4 AREVA 2

Palisades Status

/

~ Previous LAR submitted on 11/25/08 for SFP Region I:

Approved February 6, 2009, License Amendment 236 Fresh fuel assumed with soluble boron No Carborundum credit Resulted in 2/4 checkerboard pattern A

Palisades--NRC Pre-5ubmittal Meet ing - AREVA and Enterg y - July 21, 2010

• p.5 AREVA

/

Palisades Status

~_./

ANALYSIS PLAN Dates of Activity Activity 7/21/2010 Meeting with NRC to discuss and plan and schedule for LAR Mid January 2011 Submit LAR Mid January 2011 NRC review, RAJ's issued and answered, final NRC review Mid February2012 Mid February 2012 Receive SER Mid February 2012-End Implement New Technical Specifications of February (2 weeks)

Early March 2012 Fuel Receipt Early April 2012 Refueling Outage #22

~

Palisades-NRC Pre..submittal Meeting - AREVA and Enteray

• July 21. 2010 - p.6 AREVA 3

Overview and Background 1_/

~ This Analysis Plan Include burnup credit and soluble boron credit No Carborundum credit Maximal rack voiding, with wall deformation ; throughout racks Added HTC and Fission Product benchmarks for KENO benchmark Treat explicitly all available isotopes from CASM03 depletion

• Model 2 lumped fission products as Nd145.

A Palis ades-NRC Pre-5ubm ittal Meeting - AREVA and Enlergy - July 21. 2010 - p.7 AREVA Overview and Background,

~ KENO-V.a, SCALE 4.4a, with 44 group library Programs .

• Bias and uncertainty evaluation will follow similar methods shown in recent submittals Guided by NUREG*6698: 100 benchmark problems (including MOX),

trending analysis, normality, description of applicability Added HTC and limited fission product benchmarks

• New bias and uncerta inty results will be incorporated All available benchmarks have been evaluated

• Explicit isotope treatments will be used .

• Only lumped fission products will use an equivalency method

- -0.01 of 0.10 delta-kinf

• CASM03-Prism and Nemo topical reports demonstrate good performance against reactor operation

• 5% of reactivity bum up cred it is adequat e conservatism for this application

• In addition . 10% measurement uncertainty is included . when applying limits A

Palisades-NRC Pre-5ubmittal Meeting - AREVA and Entergy

• Juty 21. 2010

• p.6 AREVA 4

Overview and Background, Programs

~ CASMO-3 Used to generate cross sections for the fuel cycle calculations Will be used for generation of depletion inventories

• NEMO and PRISM Topical Reports Will not be used for tolerance calculations A

Palis.ades-NRC Pre-Submlttal Meeting - AREVA and Entergy - Juty 21.2010 - p.9 AREVA

/"

KENO Benchmarking

~ Previous KENO benchmarking included:

100 LEU fresh fuel benchmarks, including 10 MOX

~ HTC Benchmarking added:

-156 benchmarks with isotopic concentrations representative of 4.5%

enriched PWR fuel burned to 37.5 GWd/MTU, but without any fission products (11 were recommended for exclusion by ORNL, leaving 145)

~ In addition, 3 OECD Fission Product Benchmarks were evaluated:

LCT-050 : 149Sm Solution Tank in the middle of water-reflected 4.74 wt%

U02 fuel rod arrays (18 benchmarks)

LCT-079: Water-moderated 4.3 wt% U02 fuel rod lattices containing rhodium foils (10 benchmarks)

LMCT-005: STACY: 60cm Diameter Water-reflected tank containing 5 wt%

enriched U02 fuel rods in 6% Uranyl Nitrate solutions poisoned with pseudo-fission-product elements (12 benchmarks)

• Excluded due to NITAWL issue in SCALE 4.4a , and inapplicability of fissile solution A

Paflsades-NRC PreoSubmittal M&etlng -AREVA and Enlergy ~ JlJy 21, 2010 - p.10 AREVA 5

/

KENO Benchmarking (cont'd)

~ Previous Statistical Evaluation of 100 Benchmarks:

Bias, 95/95 uncertainty and lower tolerance limit:

-0.00542, 0.00985, 0.98473

... Statistical Evaluation of HTC Benchmarks:

Bias, uncertainty, and lower tolerance limit:

-0.0041,0.0049,0.9910

~ Statistical Evaluation of HTC and OECD Benchmarks:

Bias, uncertainty, and lower tolerance limit:

• -0.0046, 0.0054, 0.9900 including all except 11 (ORNL-recommended)

LTL = 0.9931 if also reject 83 benchmarks containing dissolved gadolinium or thick lead or steel reflectors

... Plan to incorporate new bias and uncertainty A

Palisades-NRC Pre-5ubmittal Meeting - AREVA and Entergy - July 21, 2010 - p,11 AREVA KENO Benchmarking (cont'd) [.

1'020,-----..,-----,.-----,-------r-------,r----,--------, L I 1.Ci1S ---+-u----+-----+-----+------lI------1------j 1MO ---+-----+-----+-----+----I------1------j o

n o

o

+

r 8

....0 +----+-----+-----+----"----+-------=-I------1-----l 0.975 +-~~~-l-~~~-+-~~~-+~~~----+~~~~i---'-~~~+-~~~-l o

Pin Pitch (em)

I _HTe Ph.tH 1 I . HTC Ph.l se 4 Steel

• KTC Ph,no2 G3d xLCT*050

.. HTC Ph,1U 2 Boron. HTe Ph;>>. 3

+ leT -079 u Or$gln.ll. Uon*HTC IIHTCPh..... Lud I Figure 4*19: Overview of Normalized ken versus Pin Pitch A

PaJisades-NRC Pre-5ubmittal Meeting - AREVA and Entergy - July 21, 2010 - p.12 AREVA 6

KENO Benchmarking (cont'd) { ,

1..020 I 1>>"

0 0

0 1.006 1

Ii 0

o. 0

!* I i ,... 11 +

.~ o I 0

Ig O..t95 01 0 j +

<fI.,O z

0.,"0 0

0 0

~

..... e u

..... 0 0..915

• 200 ... ...

UocNraUng ROlOO, H:X

... ,... ,,.. 1400 I ~ HTCPh"'"

• HTC Ph",." Stul

• me Ph.ut 2 Gold K l eT..o&l

.. HTe PholS&:2 8oron

• HTe Pn.\eoeJ

+lCT-019 o Original. 'lon-H1C o HTe Phue 4l..ad I Figure 4*20: Overview of Normalized kellversus H/X A Palls.ades..NRCPre-Subm ittal Meeting -AREVA and Entergy . July 21, 2010

• p.13 AREVA KENO Benchmarking (cont'd) ( ,

1.02. ,------,-------r------r------,------,-----...,

1.015 +-- - - - ---1' - -- - - --1----",-- - - + - - - - - - - - --f- - - - - --I

'.010 + - - - - - - - - 1 f - - - - - - - - - - - - + - - - - - + - - - - - - - f - - - - ---I

,.ecs t--'lwo--"---If------+-----+-----t------I-------1 Iit ... ~ ~r.=-o°rt - + - - - + - : - - - - t - - - - I - - - ' V " I I - -----I I

o

~ -0 o 0 0

+--,~p:.r.-_8r_\-,;------::__+----__f----+----+-------1 0

o z

..... t--i~!t---If------+-----+-----t------I-------1 o

o

. .. " -I-~~~~-~~~~~_+~-~~~-+-~~~-~+-~~~~~'_~~~~--l

• ,.s

£ALF leV)

,.5

• HTe Phi:lae t

• HTCPhase 2 G.cr

• HTe PhGs.o" Steel )( leT.o5O

.. KTe Ph""e:2 Boron

• HTe Pheu :J

+ lCT .l)79 o Original. tlon.H1C 0 HTC PluM

• teed I Figure 4-21: Overview of Normalized kill versus EALF A

Pallsados-NRC Pre-5uDm lttal Meeting - AREVA and Em_illY ' July 21. 2010

• p.14 AREVA 7

/

KENO Benchmarking (cont'd) ,/

.. Normalized keff data obtained from the HTC and fission product criticality experiments is more tightly grouped with less scatter about a mean value close to 1

.. The original non-HTC data has a larger scatter and a lower mean value

.. This observation suggests a lower bias and bias uncertainty would result from the pooling of all data: HTC, fission product, and the original non-HTC data

.. HTC and fission product experiments are generally more highly moderated. resulting in lower EALF values.

.. Initially, rather than pooling all of the data, it was considered prudent to analyze the HTC and fission product data by itself to determine the bias and bias uncertainty, which showed that the original bias is conservative

.. Plan to incorporate new bias and uncertainty A

Pallsades-NR C Pre-Submittal Meeting - AREVA and Enlergy - Jury 21. 2010* p.15 AR EVA Methods of Analysis - Basic ,

Methods and Occurrences

.. Will follow closely with recent AREVA submittals.

.. Abnormal occurrences that are evaluated, include:

• Tipping or falling of assembly De-boration of pool Misplacement of fresh assembly in rack Misplacement of fresh assembly adjacent to rack Stuck assembly Off center assembly (horizontal movement)

A Palisades-NRC Prll-5ubmittal Meeting - AREVA and Entergy - July 21, 2010

• p.16 AR EVA 8

/

Methods of Analysis Analytical I Requirements & Assumptions ./

~ Burnup credit methods:

Explicit rack modeling with no leakage, or full reflection.

Design basis fuel assembly characteristics:

• 4.54 w/o

• active fuel length with no axial blankets

• no burnable poison bearing fuel rods Soluble boron credit - 850 ppm, or 1350 ppm for misload accident Flat axial burnup profile at low burnups, explicit determination of the "breakpoint", custom burnup profile used above the "breakpoint" CASMO depletion performed with conservative parameters Uncertainty equal to 5% of reactivity decrement to the burnup of interest In addition, 10% measurement uncertainty is included, when applying limits A

Pallsadas-NRC Pre-Subm inal Meeting -AREVA and Entergy

• July 21,2010

• p.17 AREVA

/

Methods of Analysis Assembly Selection -'

~ Selection of limiting assembly type

~ What is modeled, what is omitted End details (top & bottom nozzles) omitted Guide bars included Grid spacers were evaluated

~ Conservatively assume uniform, maximum nominal, planar average U235 enrichment, over the axial length and cross sectional area of the assembly

~ Review of assemblies in the pool, and what is anticipated

~ Consider special items (pin holders, dummy assemblies, control blades, ... )

A Palisades-NRC Pre-Subm lttal Meeting - AREVA and E nt~rgy - July 21, 2010 - p.18 AREVA 9

/

Analysis Methods - Depletion Parameters

~ Methods of Analysis - Conservative Depletion Parameters Selection of Conservative Depletion Parameters (i.e. Harden the spectrum)

• See following lable . Also, Spectral affects from operation with control blades fUlly or partially inserted:

• Palisades typically operates with all control blades fully withdrawn, however, certain transients require operation with some control blades partly or fully inserted (Section 2.2 of Core Operation Limits Report)

• 1 GWD/MTU of each assembly bumup is modeled with adjacent blade fully inserted A

Palisades*NRC Pre-5ubmtttal Meeting - AREVA and Entergy - July 21,2010 - p.19 AREVA 1l. . . . . .

~V~.:tl" 'l. 3 - n

""" Para meter Valuef)lodei Comm ent ,

Bumup Uncertainty S% of the rca.:ti\ it) decrement from 0 Standard value consistent with Kopp 1 bum up and the bumu p of inter es t memo Measured Burnup Uncertainty Sm Equ ilib rium val ue More conservative than using peak Sm.

Peak Sm is less for low power operation 3.1end of cycle.

Xc Ze ro, Decayed to Cs Pu239""Pu24 1 Buildup Mode rator temperature chose n (0 maximize Pu production b~

hardening the spe ctrum All ~p~239 is assumed instantly dec ayed 10 Pul39.

A:'lialBumup Profile 10 a,ial nodes used 3 axial shapes taken from t'L" REG-6S0 I, valid ated aga.insl core monitoring data.

f uel Temperature 1260 OF(9l HK) 100 OF higher Conservatively high to increase:

than maximum predicted fuel production of Pu through resonance:

temperature . absorption Moderato r Temperature A boundi ng axial tem perature Coescrvanvcly hig.h to hard..-n spectrum profile \\ 35 calcul ated . and increase Pu production Soluble Boron Concentration Cycle-average concentration of 700 pp m.

Con: Power Nominal value of2 565.4 MW Op erat ing History No minal, I GWD/MT U rcdd cd Fixed/Integral Burnable absorbers None modeled Coescrveuvc to ignore Gad integral poisons, and lumped burnable poisons arc currently nOI used.

A Pallsades-NRC Pre-5ubmittal Meeting - AREVA and Entergy

• July 21, 201a

• p.20 AREVA 10

Analysis Methods - Assembly Average Enrichment

~ Pin by Pin analysis versus Assembly averaged:

flgur. 8-5: PIn Arungomont' ro.* BOlchX Fuel AmmbUes Xl X2 XJ A

Palisade s*NRC Pre-Submittal Meeting - AREVA and EnlergV* July 21, 2010* p 21 AREVA Analysis Methods - Assembly 7

Average Enrichment (cont.)

~ Conservatively assuming uniform, assembly averaged

~ Pin by Pin analysis versus Assembly averaged:

~ Reported in Appendix B of ANP-2779NP-001 (approved)

~ Uniform planar average results were more reactive than pin by pin model results By over 0.01 delta-k, for 4-of-4 loadings in C-rack, and By 0.007 to almost 0.01 for 4-of-4 loadings in E-rack Smaller differences for 3-of-4 and 2-of-4 loadings Considered 8 different assembly orientations, including rotations to maximize reactivity, and offset locations within storage cells A

Palisad.WlRC Pre-Submittal Meeting -AREVA and Ent.rgy* July 21. 2010 - p.22 AREVA 11

/

Analysis Methods - Lumped Fission Product Equivalent ,,!

~ Changing to Nd145 equivalent To represent only 2 Lumped Fission Products (LFP) used by CASMO-3 Reference ORNL-TM-1658 (previously submitted to NRC) for LFP isotopic contents

~ Reduction in what is represented by fission product equivalent Takes all available explicit isotopes to KENO - see following list Nd145 equivalent represents the 2 lumped fission products, only Study has been performed showing:

• All fission products: -0.1 reactivity worth, at high burnup

• 2 lumped FP: - 0.01 reactivity worth A

Pal is ades -NRC Pre-5ubm ittal Meeting - AREVA and Entergy - July 21 , 2010 - p.23 AREV A

/

Analysis Methods - CASMO -3 with ,

Nd Lumping Versus 810 Lumping Previous models, with 8-10 Reactivity Equivalent Modeled Modeled as 8 *10 ExpliciUy Equivalent U235 U234 Np239 U236 U239 Kr83 U238 Np237 Rh103 Pu239 Pu238 Rh105 Pu240 Pu242 Rh109 Pu241 Am241 Xe131 Sm149 Am242 Cs133 016 Am243 Cs134 Cm242 Cs135 Cm244 Nd143 Sm147 Nd145 Sm150 Pm147 Sm151 Pm148 Sm152 Pm148m Eu153 Pm149 Eu154 FP Lump 1 Eu155 FP Lump 2 Note: Should be considered illustrative, subject to minor changes A

Pallsades-NRC Pre-Submittal Meeting - AREVA and Entergy - July 21, 2010 - p.24 AREVA 12

Analysis Methods - CASMO-3 with Nd Lumping Versus 810 Lumping Current models, with Nd145 Reactivity Equivalent Modeled Modeled 8S Nd145 Explicitly Equivalent U234 Sm147 FPLumpl l U235 U236 Sm149 (Incl. Pm149)

Sm150 I FP Lump 2 I U238 Sm151 Pu238 Sm152 Pu239 (Incl. U239 & Np239) Eu153 Rhl0J=O Pu240 Eu154 Rhl05=O Pu241 Eu155 Ndl4J=O Pu242 Kr83 Pm148=O Np237 Rhl09 Pm148m=O Am241 Xe131 Am242 Csl33 Am243 Csl34 Cm242 Cs135 (Incl. X135,1135)

Cm244 Pm147 016 Note: Should be considered illustrative, subject to minor changes A

Palis.ades~RC Pre-Submittal Meeting -AREVA and Enlergy - July 21, 2010 - p.25 AREVA Analysis Methods - Physical /

Changes with Burnup ,I

~ How the physical changes during depletion are modeled

• Evaluating clad thinning, fuel densification, reduction in fuel pellet/clad gap, and change in active fuel height Sensitivities to all (except fuel height) were included before positive tolerance reactivity effects are related to: increase in rod pitch,

%TO, or pellet diameter, and a reduction in the clad 00.

Increased density, increased pellet diameter or increased active fuel height increases the mass of fissile material in the assembly, if nothing else is changed, to conserve mass

• In reality, increased pellet diameter or increased fuel height are concurrent with decreased average density, a compensating change

• Increased rod pitch or reduced clad 00 provides additional water to a generally under-moderated configuration.

• Change in average rod pitch is not expected Expected density change is bounded by manufacturing tolerance

• Expected Clad 00 decrease is bounded by manufacturing tolerance A

Palisades-NRC Pre-5ubmittal Meeting - AREVA and Entergy - July 21>2010 - p,26 AREVA 13

Analysis Methods - Legacy Fuel

~ Analysis Assumptions - Legacy Fuel Treatment Some older assemblies may have had lumped burnable absorber pins, or may have fuel rods replaced with either stainless steel rods or empty pin

' cells Were examined in previously approved submittal for fresh fuel Empty pin cells may result in a reactivity increase as much as 0.005 .6k Burnup reactivity effects are bounded by an additional 0.005.6k penalty.

A 1.0 GWD/MTU penalty is subtracted from the burnup as indicated by the core monitoring system Determined by examining fuel depletions of similar, lower enrichment This burnup penalty covers approximately 0.01 .6k reactivity bias of these assemblies A

Pallsades-NRC Pre.submittal Meeting -AREVA and Enterqy- July 21,2010 - p_27 AREVA

/

Analysis Assumptions - Misload

~ Analysis Assumptions, Misload analysis:

Misload analysis will evaluate a single misload of a fresh assembly in locations expected to produce highest increase in reactivity Credit for soluble boron will be taken

• 1350 ppm credit, of 1720 ppm tech spec limit Consistent w ith February 2009 analysis A

Palisades-NRC Pre-Submtnal Meeting -AREVA and Entergy* July 21. 2010* p.28 AREVA 14

Methods of Analysis - Rack Models

~ Due to Carborundum degradation, no credit is taken for Carborundum poison in the spent fuel rack.

Carborundum region is completely voided

~ Due to distortion and the possibility of voiding in the poison region, a conservative swelling model has been prepared, including:

Deformation of structure, with mass conserved Voiding of poison and flux trap regions, and assembly side (exterior to assembly)

A Pallsades-NRC Pre~ubmlnal Meeting - AREVA and Entergy - July 21, 2010 - p.29 AREVA I

I Palisades Rack Models

~ Will show:

~ Nominal geometry of the rack

~ Figures showing deformation and voiding assumed for the criticality model

~ Will choose deformation with highest k-effective

~ This model negates concerns of previous acceptance review question #1 A

Palisades-NRC PI"4!I..submittalMeeting - AREVA and Entergy . July 21, 2010 - p.30 AREVA 15

Rack Models - Nominal Design A

Palisades.NRC Pre..submittal Meeting - AREVA and Entergy - July 21, 2010

• p.31 AREVA Rack Models - Nominal Design (isJEZ'lifl~

Region I (NUS) Storage Racks IEJEj

.t' r-

• 1 P-'. -~ l .

. I -"

~ -=,

A Palisades*NRC Pre-Subm ittal Meeting -AREVA and Entergy - Jury 21. 2010

• p.32 AREVA 16

/

Rack Models - Analysis

~ For C-racks and the E-rack:

The entire fuel-to-water gap is voided, and the entire flux trap water gap is voided This simulates maximum expansion of the walls to the constraints of contact with the fuel assembly, and contact with other rack walls in the flux trap Additionally, using conservation of mass, the two stainless steel panels that enclose the Carborundum material are positioned and thinned on either side of the Carborundum plate, so as to maximize Keff.

This requires three deviations from nominal dimensions to define the worse case. The following diagrams illustrate the concept for the C*rack.

The only water in the model is the water within the assembly envelope.

• Will be evaluated both with and without the presence of soluble boron.

A Pallsad es-NRC Pre-5ubm lttal Meellng - AREVA and Entergy - July 21 , 2010 - p.33 AREVA Rack Models - Nominal versus Modeled Nominal, C-Rack :

Deformed, Carborundum Voided , C-rack :

Pall sade.-NRC Pre-Subm illal Meeting - AREVA and Enlergy - July 21. 2010 - p.J.4 AREVA 17

/

Rack Models - Stuck Assemblies

~ Impact of Stuck assemblies Considered when defining and evaluating acceptable loading patterns Constrains loading of other assemblies around stuck locations Requires additional evaluation Considered for misload analysis Considered when determining assumptions for rack deformation model Precludes misload into stuck locations (no impact on analysis)

• Requires consideration of possibility of additional locations A

Palisades-NRC Pre-5ubmittal Meeting - AREVA and Enlergy - July 21,2010 - p.35 AREVA Rack Models - Validity with Time I

~ Validity of the rack model with time Fuel assemblies could not be loaded into storage locations if deformation was more than is being assumed Any further reduction of pin pitch is expected to reduce k-eff A

Pailsades4NRC Pre-$ ubmittal Meeting - AREVA and Entergy - July 21, 2010

• p.36 ARE VA 18

/

Conclusion Questions?

A Palisades-NRC Pre-Submittal Meeting -AREVA and Entergy* July 21, 2010 - p.37 AREVA 19