ML20198R087
| ML20198R087 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/07/1997 |
| From: | Stewart Magruder NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Essig T NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| References | |
| PROJECT-669, PROJECT-689 NUDOCS 9711130152 | |
| Download: ML20198R087 (9) | |
Text
.
November 7, 1997 MEMORANDUM TO: Thomas H. Essig, Acting Chief Generic Istues and Environment:1 Projects Brcnch Division of Reactor Program Management, NRR e.
FROM:
Stewart L Magruder, Project Manager Melinda Malloy for/
Generic issues and Environmental Projects Branch Division of Reactor Program Management, NRR
SUBJECT:
NOTICE OF MEETING WITH NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE (NEI),
ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE (EPRI), AND NUCLEAR FUEL VPJDORS DATE AND TIME:
November 1819,1997 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
November 20,1997 8:30 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.
LOCATION:
Doubletree Hotel 1750 Rockville Pike Rockville, Maryland 20852
}
PURPOSE:
To discuss issues related to high burnup levels of nuclear fuel. A proposed agenda is attached.
PARTICIPANTS:
NRC INDUSTRY
^
G. Holahan J. Butler - NEl R. Meyer R. Yang EPRI, et al.
H. Scott L. Phillips, et al.
Project Nos. 689 & 669
Attachment:
Age ida cc: See next page Meetings between the NRC technical staff and applicants or licensees are open for interested
/
members of the public, petitioners, intervenors, or other parties to attend as observers pursuant j
to " Commission Policy Statement on Staff Meeting Open to the Public," 59 Federal Registar 48344,9/20/94. Members of the public who wish to attend should contact Stewart Magruder at (301)415-3139.
Distribution: See next page DOCUMENT: G:\\stm\\m)d1118.not
/J SC:PMjh I N bN OFFICE PGQByh SRXB SMagrudek - LPhillipsk /g FAkstu$wic::
,g JYb NAME DATE 11/ 7/97 11/ 7/97 #[
11/ /f97 w, rv3 lllI.I.1:1 llll.III.II.li g.m P
C a
~ ~
~
[
-t UNITED STATES
- ].
}
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION e
WAsHlNGTON, D.C. 306664201 o
%'**.*l i
November 7, 1997 MEMORANDUM TO: Thomas H. Essig, Acting Chief Generic lasues and Environmental Projects Branch Division of Reactor Program Management, NRR g7p-FROM:
$ewart L. Magruder, Project Manager M4,u
}jg Generic issues and Environmental Proje Branch Division of Reactor Program Management, NRR
SUBJECT:
NOTICE OF MEETING WITH NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE (NEI),
ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE (EPRI), AND NUCLEAR FUEL VENDORS DATF. AND TIME:
November 1819,1997 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
November 20,1997 8:30 a.m.
12.00 p.m.
LOCATION:
Doubletree Hotel 1750 Rockville Pike Rockville, Maryland 20852 PURPOSE:
To discuss issues related to high bumup levels of nuclear fuel. A j
proposed agenda is attached.
. PARTICIPANTS':
NRC INDUSTRY G. Holahan J. Butler NEl R. Meyer R. Yang EPRI, et al.
H. Scott L. Phillips, et al.
Project Nos. 689 & 669
Attachment:
Agenda cc; See next page
" Meetings between the NRC technical staff and applicants or licensees are open for interested members of the public, petitioners, intervenors, or other parties to attend as observers pursuant to " Commission Policy Statement on Staff Meeting Open to the Public," 59 Federal Register 48344, 9/20/94. Members of the public who wish to attend should contact Stewart Magruder at
.(301)415-3139.
p
Nuclear Energy Institute Project No. 68g J
. cc:
Mr. Ralph Beedle Ms. Lynnette Hendricks, Director
- Senior Vice President Plant Support 2
and Chief Nuclear Officer Nuclear Energy Institute Nuclear Energy Institute Suite 400 i
Suite 400 17761 Street, NW 1776 l Street, NW Washington, DC 20006 3708
~
,4
~ Washington, DC 20006-3708 y.
Mr. Alex Marion Director Programs Nuclear Energy Institute
+
Suite 400 1776 i Street. NW Washington, DC 20006 3708
~
. Mr David Modoen, Director Engineering Nuclear Energy Institute t
Suite 400 1776 i Street, NW Washington, DC 20006 3708 Mr. Anthony Pietrangelo, Director Licensing Nuclear Energy Institute Suite 400 1776 l Street, NW Washington, DC 20006-3708 Mr. Nicholas J. Liparulo Manager Nuclear Safety and Regulatory Activities Nuclear and Advanced Technology Division Westinghous6 Electric Corporation P.O. Box 355 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Mr. Jim Davis, Director Operations-Nuclear Energy Institute Suite 400 1776 l Street, NW Washington, DC 20006-3708 k
?'
s
. I,^.
..h:-
dl.
/
>+,
-i Distribution: Mtg. Notice w/NEI/EPRI Dated. Nov _7.
1997
- 1
- V.
HentCopy W Fh
' y Central Files PUBLIC
. PGEB R/F OGC.
ACRS i
SMagruder!
- SCollins/FMiraglia BSheron RZimmerman JRoo
+
DMattheves TEssig FAkstulewicz SMagruder MMalloy JHWilson WDean, OEDO PMNS OPA GHolahan SNewberry TCollins LPnillips RMeyer, RES HScott, RES v
U b
P I
P' t
y
.4 t -
m
1 t
i 6
Project No. 669 Electric Power Research Institute Mr. Raymond C. Torok 1
Project Manager. Nuclear Power Group Electric Power Rese6rch Institute Post Office Box 10412 Palo Alto. CA 94303 Mr. Gary L. Vine Senior Washington Representative Electric Power Research Institute 2000 L Street. N.W.. Suite 805 Washington, DC 20036.-
r L
I h,, :s t
v, c
4 4
s 7
,d-r;/ q.
~
~
7 r,.
3 r
i
,.4
- N
?
L i
'V2,s f
t 5-A
. l*
- 4 t
/
A
i
,y PROPOSED AGENDA NRC-INDUSTRY MEETING HIGH BURNUP FUEL ISSUES November.18._1997 (Hot Cell Program at Argonne) 1.
R. Meyer (NRC) and R. Yang (EPRI): Introductions.
2..
L. Neimark, H. Chung, A. Cohen, M. Billone (ANL):
Description of hot-cell program on LOCA and mechanical properties.
4 3:
R. Yang (EPRI): Industry's new Robust Fuel Program i
November 19.1997 (RIA Technical Discussions) 1.'
L. Phillips (NRC): Introduction.
. s
.'2.
R. Meyer (NRC): Assessment of RIA test data.
y s
' b
.e s_,
_,'s
- 3.,
T. Fuketa (JAERI): NSRR test data.
4 F. Schmitz (IPSN): CABRI test data.
2 s
c
'y., -
' 5.
R. Yang (EPRI): Overview of industry approach for RIAs.
/
6.
J. Rashid (Anatech): SED and failure criteria.
. 7.
R. Montgomery (Anatech): Analysis of data with FREY.
8.
N. Waeckel(EdF): Mechanical properties data and French licensing strategy.
4
(
l 9.
U.S. Vendor #1: Neutronics for BWRs.
10.
U.S. Vendor #2: Neutronics for PWRs.
1 L
Attachment
.?',s November.20._1997 (NRC-NEl Questions and Answers) 1.
Introduction (G Holahan, Director, DSSA/NRR)
Purpose and Agenda (NRR 10 minutes)
' 2.
RIA Criteria for Current Fuel and Core Designs
~
NRC Assessment of Need for Interim Criteria (NRR - 10 min)
Discussion (15 minutes) 3.
RIA Criteria for Advanced Fuel Designs and Extended Burnup NRC Evaluation of RlA Acceptance Criteria for Extended Burnup (L. Phillips, NRR-15 min)
High Burnup t.nonsing Position (NRR - 15 min) 3 D Analysis Methodology Development and Licensing (Swindlehurst, Duke Energy - 15 min)
Discussion (20 minutes) 4.
Future Activities to Address High Burnup FuelIssues NRC Activities (NRC - 15 min)
Industry Activities (J. Mihalcik, BG&E - 15 min)
Discussion (20 min) 5.
Implementation Activities for Revised RIA Acceptance Criteria Discussion - See specific industry questions on following pages (30 min) 4 u
V J
4 i
- s; V
Specific industry questions for discussion:
The August 12,1997, letter from G. Holahan concludes that reactivity accidents are of low safety significance and are not an immediate safety concern with respect to fuel behavior for current cores restricted to a 62 GWD/MTU lead rod average burnup limit. The industry remains concerned that, in spite of this conclusion, changes or restrictions may be planned by NRC staff to the application of current criteria and current methods for RIA analyses of current core designs.
- 1. The August 12,1997, letter from G. Ho'ahan states "the staff will continue to assess the need for any action by operating reactor licensees as new information becomes available." The industry understanding, based on this and other statements in the letter, is that the NRC has concluded, absent the introduction of new information to the contrary, that no changes or restrictions to the applicatir.,r, of current criteria and current methods for RlA analyses of current core designs are necessary or planned. Is this an accurate interpretation of the statements in the letter?
2 The June 3,1997, letter from G. Holahan states that "If the NRC ultimately decides to place new requirements for RIAs on licensees, any costs, such as additional 3 D analyses, will be addressed as part of the backfit decision." If a decision is made in the future to place new requirements for RIAs on licensees, will the necessary backfit analysis address costs associated with development, review and approval of advanced computer methods necessary to support the new requirements? What is the current cost estimate for NRC review and other technical resources required to support this effort?
- 3. The July 15,1997, SECY to the Commission on regulatory guidelines and licensing criteria for high burnup fuel states "[t]he regulatory acceptance criteria 6 should have a technical basis consistent with the current state of knowledge before extending the burnup limits." The August 12,1997 letter from G. Holahan to D. Modeen states "the staff has completed an interim technical assessment of the regulatory criteria for reactivity insertion transients and has concluded that 100 cal /g is a reasonable enthalpy limit to ensure the integrity of Zircaloy fuel cladding within currently approved burnup limits" Will the industry be provided with the technical bases for the staff determination of the "reasonablei.cn" of this proposed limit?
- 4. An interim fuel enthalpy limit has been proposed by NRC-RES. Little detail is available on how this proposed limit might be applied to advanced fuel designs and fuel burnup extensions beyond 62 GWd/MT. What implementation details are available concerning the application of revised RIA criteria to advanced fuel designs and fuel burnup extensions?
- 5. The radially averaged peak fuel enthalpy limit proposed by NRC-RES ic considered to be interim *because the current database is limited and contains uncertainties from atypical test conditions"(NRC Research Information Letter No.174). As additional data has become available and further evaluation of test conditions are completed, when will NRC staff be receptive to industry proposed criteria for application to high burnup fuel which have a clearer nexus between regulatory criteria and fuel failure phenomena? What additionalinformation from industry and/or additional NRC review is rec,uired to establish such a position for high burnup fuel?
2-
- 6. With transition to new criteria, new 3-D analysis methodologies will be needed. Currently approved 3-D methods, as applied to current criteria, continue to employ a number of corservative methods and assumptions. Scoping calculations using these approved 3-D
~. methods have chow results which exceed the proposed 100 cal /g limit for core designs which meet current criteria using point kinetic and 1-D methods at low to moderate burnup. This identifies a need to resolve an imbalance in the level of safety provided through new
' methodologies applied to new criteria compared with the level of safety provided by current criteria coupled with current methods. Will the development of new criteria, as well as the review and approval of new analysis methodologies, be performed in a manner which maintains the cunent level of safety?
_ _ _ _ _ _ _