ML12320A481

Meeting Slides Regarding Browns Ferry Xm Fuel Transition Update

ML12320A481
Person / Time
Site:	Browns Ferry
Issue date:	11/15/2012
From:	Tennessee Valley Authority
To:	Ellen Brown Plant Licensing Branch II
Brown, Eva A.
References
Download: ML12320A481 (16)

Text

Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant N l Nuclear Browns Ferry XM Fuel Transition Update November 15, 2012

Nuclear Agenda

• Review June Meetingg Highlights g g

• LAR Overview and Status

• Review schedule

• Future EPU issues 2

Nuclear June Meeting Summary

• TVA desires to transition to ATRIUM-10 XM fuel

- Industry proven design

- Approved for Brunswick (similar plant)

- XM design is compliant with ANF-89-98(P)(A)

- NRC audited XM compliance documentation in November 2010

• LAR will be for all three Browns Ferry units

• First targeted XM reloads by unit

- Unit 2 spring 2015, Unit 3 spring 2016, Unit 1 fall 2016

• Transition work will use Unit 2 cycle 19 as the basis for review

- Will demonstrate transition from current ATRIUM-10 fuel to XM fuel

- Will demonstrate application of several additional methods to BFN

• Transition cores will only contain AREVA fuel types

- No multi vendor core issues

• TVA requesting q g approval pp for current ppower level onlyy 3

Nuclear June Meeting Summary (cont)

• Implementation requires use of additional AREVA methods

- RODEX4

- SAFLIM-3D

- ACE

• The additional methods will be added to TS 5 5.6.5.b 65b

• Application of existing AREVA methods in TS 5.6.5.b to Browns Ferry has received extensive NRC review

- NRCC methods h d audit di August 2008

- Unit 1 ATRIUM-10 LAR

• TVA suggested the LAR focus on application of the three new methodologies to Browns Ferry

• NRC requested thermal conductivity degradation be addressed in the LAR 4

Nuclear June Meeting Summary (cont)

• LAR similar in content to the Unit 1 ATRIUM-10 LAR (TS-473)

- Supplement pp with additional information

• Application of the three additional methodologies to Browns Ferry

• Address thermal conductivity degradation issue

• Address ACE K factor issue (plant specific supplement)

• LAR will ill iinclude l d a request to revise i the h SSLMCPR ffor Unit i 2

- SAFLIM-3D based 5

Nuclear LAR Overview and Status

• Submittal Tech Spec change number assigned: TS-478

• Transition work essentiallyy complete p

- All reports except Reload Safety Report received

• Reports being docketed for TS-478 (similar to TS-473)

- Bundle mechanical design g report p ((ANP-3150))

- Thermal hydraulic compatibility report (ANP-3082)

- Fuel cycle design report (ANP-3145)

- Reload safety analysis report (ANP-3167)

- LOCA break spectrum report (ANP-3152)

• LOCA analysis uses revised core spray modeling method

- Licensing methods compendium (ANP-2637) - revised

- RAI report (ANP-2860)

(ANP 2860) - supplemental

• RAI report

- Prior RAIs in ANP-2860 screened along with Brunswick RAIs

- Questions impacted by fuel type changes screened in

• Updated responses included in the supplement 6

Nuclear LAR Overview and Status (cont)

• Additional reports being docketed

- Fuel rod thermal mechanical report p ((ANP-3159))

- Equilibrium fuel cycle design report (ANP-3148)

- SLMCPR analysis report

• SAFLIM 3-D based

- Conductivity degradation report (ANP-3170)

- BFN specific ACE supplement (ANP-3140)

• ACE supplement

- Approved ACE methodology has a known issue

• Axial averaging process for K factor

- Generic ACE supplement pp still under review byy NRC

- Tech Spec markups for TS 5.6.5.b will reflect the BFN specific supplement

• TVA will evaluate revising LAR to reflect generic supplement if approved prior to TS 478 TS-478 7

Nuclear LAR Overview and Status (cont)

• Thermal conductivity degradation issue

- RODEX2 still used for transient and LOCA analyses y

• Legacy ATRIUM-10 fuel will still utilize this method for thermal-mechanical evaluations

- RODEX4 addresses conductivity degradation

• Used U d ffor th thermal-mechanical l h i l evaluations l ti ffor XM ffuell

- A BFN evaluation report has been prepared (ANP-3170)

- Report address impacts of conductivity degradation on:

• Transient AOO events

• Overpressure events

• LOCA

• Stability

• Fire protection events 8

Nuclear LAR Overview and Status (cont)

• LAR License Commitment

- Brunswick SER for use of RODEX4 raised an issue

- NRC had concerns over oxide thickness

• 130 micron limit in the topical report

- Concerns that significant oxide spalling could occur at these levels

- Available AREVA fuel data shows no concerns up to 85 microns

- Brunswick committed to restricting calculated oxide to 85 microns when using RODEX4

• TVA will comply with this same reduced limit

- Browns Ferry LAR contains a commitment to this effect 9

Nuclear LAR Overview and Status (cont)

• Other Emerging Issues Addressed in RAI Process

- Upcoming p g Regulation g and SRP revision

• Reactivity Insertion Accident (RIA), LOCA, Hydrogen Content, etc.

- Plant specific responses needed to address emerging concerns

• No Regulation/SRP in place to provide final criteria for evaluation

• Approved methods are not in place yet to address all emerging issues

• Potential for understanding of phenomena, NRC focus of concern, and methods of evaluation to evolve over time

- NRC TTop FFuell paper suggests t ththatt emerging i RIA iissues will ill b be addressed in RAI process (Paul Clifford)

If an existing licensee voluntarily seeks a license amendment or change and (1) the NRC staffs consideration of the request involves a regulatory issue directly relevant to RIA and (2) the specific subject matter of this new guidance is an essential consideration in the staffs determination of the acceptability of the licensees request, then the staff may request that the licensee either follow the new guidance or provide an equivalent alternative process that demonstrates compliance with the underlying NRC regulatory requirements.

requirements 10

Nuclear LAR Overview and Status (cont)

• Reactivity Insertion Accident

- RIA Criteria that will be supported by LAR

• Show the current radiological source evaluation bounds the number of rods failed based on peak radial average fuel enthalpy rise criteria of 170 cal/g (high cladding temperature failure criteria for zero power conditions)

• Show that interim criteria for core coolability of 230 cal/g peak average fuel eenthalpy t a py rise se iss met et

- Compliance with other underlying NRC regulatory requirements will be demonstrated as requested during RAI process 11

Nuclear LAR Overview and Status (cont)

• Technical Specifications

- All three units will have changes g to TS 5.6.5.b

• Remove reference to ANF-524PA (SAFLIM2)

• Add reference to ANP-10307PA (SAFLIM-3D)

• Add reference to BAW-10247PA (RODEX4)

• Add reference to ANP-10298PA ANP 10298PA (ACE for XM)

• Add reference to ANP-3140P (BFN ACE supplement)

- Unit 2 will also have a change g to TS 2.1.1.1 (SLMCPR)

( )

• Tech Spec markup will show values of 1.06 for TLO and 1.08 for SLO

- 0.02 reduction from current Unit 2 SLMCPR values

• Conservatively selected relative to SAFLIM-3D calculated values

• TVA is choosing not to pursue all the margin SAFLIM SAFLIM-3D 3D can provide

- Intention is to make the new SLMCPR cycle independent

• TVA will request a change for Units 1 and 3 as part of the normal reload cycle process for first XM use at those units 12

Nuclear LAR Overview and Status (cont)

• Technical Specification Bases changes

- All three units TS Bases will be modified

• B 2.1.1 Reactor Core SLs

• B 3.2.1 APLHGR

• B 3.2.2 3 2 2 MCPR

- References in these Bases will be updated to reflect new methods

- Modify discussion of low power SL to reflect new CPR correlation

• UFSAR

- UFSAR changes will be made under 10CFR50.59 process 13

Nuclear Schedule

• Target date for LAR submittal

- January 2013

• SER need date

- End of Februaryy 2014

- Need date is tied to reload design and fuel fabrication milestones for Unit 2 cycle 19 14

Nuclear Future EPU Issues

• EPU versus XM timing

- First XM application pp ((unit 2 cycle y 19)) not targeted g for EPU

- 2016 reloads are potential EPU cycles

• Unit 3 cycle 18

• Unit 1 cycle 12

- Potential for concurrent EPU and XM intro in these two cycles

- TVA views this as acceptable under the ELTR process

• Lead XM reload would not be EPU concurrent

• Additional EPU LAR information

- Information docketed for EPU does not consider XM

• Only GE14 and ATRIUM-10 considered

- Meeting needed to discuss how to supplement EPU LAR to account for XM fuel 15

Nuclear Discussion 16