ML20205H559

Proposal to Meet NRC Requirements for Conversion from High Enriched U to Low Enriched U Fuel

ML20205H559
Person / Time
Site:	05000083
Issue date:	03/26/1987
From:	Vernetson W FLORIDA, UNIV. OF, GAINESVILLE, FL
To:
Shared Package
ML20205H539	List: ML20205H533 ML20205H559
References
NUDOCS 8704010096
Download: ML20205H559 (13)

Text

_.

I ~

I

,l UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA TRAINING REACTOR R-56 LICENSE l PROPOSAL TO MEET NRC REQUIREMENTS FOR CONVERSION FROM HEU TO LEU FUEL WILLIAM G. VERNETSON DIRECTOR OF NUCLEAR FACILITIES MARCH 26, 1987 I

I .. .

I . , ;. . 'I I

I NUCLEAR FACILITIES DIVISION I

g DEPARTMENT OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING SCIENCES College of Engineering l

University of Florida l Gainesville g gg4oggg g g;ggggg, PDR P

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA TRAINING REACTOR R-56 LICENSE PROPOSAL TO MEET NRC REQUIREMENTS FOR CONVERSION FROM HEU TO LEU FUEL WILLIAM G. VERNETSON DIRECTOR OF NUCLEAR FACILITIES l

MARCH 26, 1987 c .. ..

4.i NUCLEAR FACILITIES DIVISION DEPARTMENT OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING SCIENCES College of Engineering University of Florida Gainesville pfS4 188EIS$8S$6gg3 P

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA TRAINING REACTOR LICENSE NUMBER: R-56 PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO THE NUCLEAR REGUIATORY COMMISSION TO MEET 10 CFR 50.64 REQUIREMENTS FOR SCHEDULING UFTR CONVERSION FROM HEU TO LEU FUEL Dr. William G. Vernetson Director of Nuclear Facilities MARCH 26, 1987

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA TRAINING REACTOR FUEL CONVERSION FROM HIGH ENRICHED TO LOW ENRICHED URANIUM FUEL INTRODUCTION This proposal is being submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to meet the requirement that the licensee for the University of Florida Training Reactor (UFTR), as a licensee of a non-power reactor authorized to possess and use high enriched uranium (MEU) fuel shall develop and submit a proposal to replace all HEU fuel possessed under the R-56 license with available low enriched uranium (LEU) fuel acceptable to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on a schedule determined pursuant to 10 CFR 50.64 Paragraph (C)(2). This proposal addresses the overall process of conversion from initial preparations following receipt of funding to support conversion to final verification, testing, and summary reporting on the converted UFTR. Three primary phases have been identified for control and administration of the overall process of conversion as follows:

I. Preparation for Conversion II. Conversion (assuming NRC order to convert).

III. Review and Verification of Conversion Table I contains a listing of key activities involved in each phase of the conversion from receipt of funding for conversion from the Department of Energy (DOE) to final submittal of summary reports to DOE and NRC on the conversion.

1

PHASE I: PREPARATION FOR CONVERSION Phase I commences with receipt of funding for conversion from DOE. This funding is considered to be certified per the letter contained in Appendix I of this proposal; the proposal requested by this letter to obtain funding is in preparation. Initial efforts in the process to convert the UFTR from use of high enriched to low enriched fuel (HEU-LEU) will consist of preliminary tests and an evaluation to determine whether the SPERT-type fuel available to the R-56 licensee but currently under license SNM-1050 can likely be qualified for use in the UFTR. Phase I will then continue with activities to select a fuel, either SPERT or silicide, based upon prequalification testing of exist-ing SPERT fuel and identification of modifications in existing reactor systems necessitated by use of the new fuel.

This effort will address maintaining and/or improving the UFTR neutronics characteristics while minimizing the overall cost of UFTR conversion. The only two fuels planned to be considered are the existing SPERT UO 2 , stainless steel clad fuel presently under the SNM-1050 license and the newly developed silicide fuel to be available through the RERTR program at Argonne National Laboratory. The first choice would be ,

to use the already existing SPERT fuel for which a number of neutronics and thermal-hydraulics analyses are in existence. Clearly this is the cheaper fuel if acceptable since it is already manufactured. However, a prequalifi-cation program will have to be developed and, after approval, the qualifi-cation tests used to assure the SPERT fuel can meet UFTR requirements without compromising safety and without requiring costly modifications which may out-weigh its own low cost (no manufacturing costs) and positive impact on core neutronics per earlier analyses. The Department of Energy is receptive to this evaluation of the two fuels.

2

After selection of an LEU fuel and identification of necessary reactor systems changes, a safety analysis will be performed for the selected LEU fuel conversion and associated system changes. In addition to neutronic and thermal-hydraulic analysis, shielding and effluent analyses will be documented to identify any procedural, security plan, technical specification and other license changes that must be considered as part of conversion. This submittal will also contain documents detailing the various tests and surveillances planned as part of the conversion. At this point a complete set of licensing documents for the conversion will be submitted along with a conversion application for review and approval. Assuming resolution of all questions, this submittal will conclude the Phase I licensee efforts. Phase I will then conclude with the issuance by the NRC of the specific Order to Convert.

j PHASE II: CONVERSION (Assuming NRC Order to Convert)

Phase II (Conversion) will begin with receipt of the NRC Order directing the conversion and any necessary changes to the license, facility and/or procedures per 10 CFR 50.64(c)(3). This phase will include all final tests conducted with the HEU fuel to serve primarily as the basis for later comparison with similar tests with LEU fuel. Phase II will then involve a number of key activities aimed ultimately at having LEU fuel replace HEU fuel at the UFTR facility to include:

1. Shutdown core decay for several weeks followed by shipment of irradiated HEU fuel.

2. Qualification of the selected LEU fuel.

3. Implementation of required facility changes necessitated for use of LEU fuel.

4. Receipt of unirradiated LEU fuel.

3

5. Documentation of all changes.

6. Completion of all requirements for core loading with LEU fuel fol-lowed by loading of the LEU fuel and startup testing to low power.

7. Documentation and record organization for the LEU fuel implementation.

PHASE III: REVIEW AND VERIFICATION OF CONVERSION Phase III (Review and Verification of Conversion) will consist of a series of activities designed to verify the quality of the conversion process to include both the physical implementation of the LEU fuel and the documenta tion of the implementation. Activities in Phase III will include:

1. Completion of startup as well as power testing and related surveillances.

2. Verification and evaluation of UFTR operational characteristics.

3.

Review of conversion plan and data for consistency.

4. Approval for return of UFTR to normal operations.

5. Return to normal operations.

6. Submission of Final Report to NRC/ DOE summarizing HEU operational conditions and comparing these results with the predictions contained in the Safety Analysis submitted to NRC at the end of Phase I and approved as part of the Order to Convert. .

SUPMARY CONCLUSIONS As noted earlier, a relatively detailed list of the various elements that must be obtained, produced or otherwise generated as required throughout the three phases of the UFTR conversion from HEU to LEU fuel is presented in Table I.

The current plan is to generate as much of the required safety analysis and design work in-house as possible. Only items such as new fuel support grids or silicide fuel, if selected, would be designed and manufactured outside the 4

administrative control of the UFTR licensee. At this point, without having identified all required changes, it is not possible to delineate exactly what other external support may be needed. The neutronics and thermal hydraulics analyses are all planned to be conducted in-house which may necessitate some external support from the RERTR program at Argonne National Laboratory to assure proper code implementation at the University of Florida to carry out the required safety analyses.

The overall flow diagram for HEU to LEU conversion of the UFTR is pre-sented in Figure 1. Key stages in the three phases, as well as key input items at the various stages, are indicated at each stage.

Finally Table 11 contains a tentative schedule for the major milestone events in the UFTR conversion process commencing with the planned receipt of funding by September 30, 1987 per telephone conversation with Department of Energy personnel and concluding with submittal of a final report to NRC and DOE summarizing the results of the conversion by September,1992. It should be noted that this schedule is tentative and, as required by 10 CFR 50.64, will be updated yearly. The schedule is also subject to variations caused by availability of replacement fuel (either SPERT which needs to be qualified for use in a 100 KW reactor environment or silicide which must be obtained from DOE suppliers) or other items involved in required facility changes as well as variations in the level of DOE funding. Other areas which may impact the schedule are the availability of a shipping cask especially for irradiated HEU fuel and final usage of the UFTR with HEU fuel to provide a basis for compari-son of changes in operating characteristics or to meet education, research and service commitments. Within these constraints and conditions, the schedule in Table 11 is one which the licensee is committed to meeting and which the licensee considers realistic based upon expected resources.

5

Although much of the detail of the conversion process will depend upon the selection of fuel type, the information, especially the tentative schedule in Table II provided in this proposal, shows that the LEU conversion at the UFTR is ready to proceed during this year. The key decisions will involve fuel selection and then identification and evaluation of system changes required by the conversion. The schedule will be most impacted, however, by the times required for safety analysis and to design and perhaps manufacture items to implement any required system changes, such as fuel supports or grid spacers for the LEU fuel. The schedule presented in Table II is considered to be realistic and should be attainable.

6

TEST SPERY FUEL HEU to LEU NEUTRONIC ANALYSIS DEVELOP A PREQUALIFICATION CONVERSION PLAN FOR SPERT FUEL THERMAL HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS PREPARATION SHIELDING ANALYSIS SELECT FUEL OPTION RADI0 ACTIVE EFFLUENT ANALYSIS U

IDENTIFICATION OF PREPARATION OF SAFETY ANALYSIS REQUIRED FACILITY LICENSING DOCUMENTS TECH SPEC CHANGES CHANGES SECURITY PLAN CHANGES PROCEDURE CHANGES u

SUBMITTAL OF APPLICATION ORDER TO CONVERT REVIEW / APPROVAL OF

! TO NRC WITH ALL CONVERSION DOCUMENTATION CONVERSION DOCUMENTATION BY NRC If ARRANGEMENT FOR POSSESSION DISCONTINUATION OF ANALYSIS FOR SHIPMENT OF OF HEU AND LEU ON INTERIM USE OF HEU FUEL BASIS IRRADIATED FUEL if HEU FUEL SHIPMENT CONVERSION LEU FUEL RECEIPT DESIGN / IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES OF FACILITY CHANGES LEU FUEL LOADING FUEL LOAD PREPARATIONS If STARTUP TESTING AND REVIEW AND VERIFICATION SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES OF HEU TO LEU CONVERSION II REVIEW / APPROVAL RETURN TO SERVICE OF FULL DOCUMENTATION if SUBMISSION OF FINAL REPORT TO NRC/ DOE SUMMARIZING HEU OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS AND COMPARING WITH SAR PREDICTIONS Figure 1.

University of Florida Training Reactor HEU to LEU Conversion Flow Diagram

. 7 _ _ _ _ _ - - - - . _ _ _ _ .

TABLE I University of Florida Training Reactor Key Activities for HEU to LEU Fuel Conversion I. PHASE I - PREPARATION FOR CONVERSION A. Receipt of Funding from Department of Energy B. Analysis of UFTR-Specific LEU Conversion Options

1. Pretesting of Selected SPERT Fuel Pins

2. Development of a Qualification Program for SPERT Fuel Pins

3. Completion of Pre-Qualification Testing of SPERT Fuel

4. Evaluation of Comparative Conversion Options (SPERT VS. SILICIDE)

5. Selection of LEU Fuel Option for UFTR Conversion C. Safety Analysis / Licensing Studies

1. Neutronic Analysis for LEU-Fueled UFTR

2. Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis for LEU-Fueled UFTR

3. Shielding Analysis for LEU-Fueled UFTR

4. Radioactive Effluent Analysis as Required D. Identification of Changes in the R-56 License, Technical Specifications, Facility, Security Documents and Procedures Under the Scope of 10 CFR 60.64(c)(3) as Necessitated by Fuel Conversion E. Preparation of Full Submittal to NRC to Support Conversion Including All Supporting Documents II. PHASE II - CONVERSION A. NRC Order to Convert B. Fuel-Related Activities

1. Qualification of Selected LEU Fuel

2. Final UFTR Operations with HEU Fuel

3. Shipment of Irradiated Fuel

4. Receipt of LEU Fuel C. Implementation of Required Changes in R-56 License per Item ID.

D. LEU Fuel Loading Activities

1. Completion of Preparations for Core Load

2. Loading of LEU Fuel

3. Startup Testing and Surveillance E. Completion of Startup Documentation III. PHASE III - REVIEW AND VERIFICATION OF CONVERSION A. Completion of Startup Testing and Related Surveillances B. Completion of Power Testing and Surve111ances C. Determination of UFTR Operational Characteristics D. Return to Normal Operations E. Submission of Final Conversion Report to NRC/ DOE 8 _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _

Table II University of Florida Training Reactor Tentative Milestone Schedule for HEU to LEU Fuel Conversion I. Date of Receipt of Funding (expected)............................. September 30, 1987 II. Date of Full Submittal to NRC of Application to Convert (including all necessary documents)....................................... June, 1990 III . Date of NRC O rde r to Conve rt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0c tobe r, 1990 A.

Date of Completion of All Plans to Convert . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .May, 1991 B. Date of Receipt of LEU Fuel........................................... July, 1991 C. Date of Completion of Any Final Tests with HEU Fuel.............. September, 1991 D. Date of Removal of HEU Fuel....................................... November, 1991 E.

Da te o f Shipment of HEU Fuel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . February, 1992 F.

Da t e o f Loading o f LEU Fuel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . April , 19 9 2 G.

Date of Completion of Determination of Initial Operational Parameters With LEU (Startup and Power Operations Testing)............ June, 1992 H.

Date of Submittal of Report to NRC/ DOE Summarizing New Operational Characteristics and Comparing with Predictions o f Sa f e ty Analys is . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .S ep tembe r , 199 2 9

APPENDIX I LETTER OF CERTIFICATION THAT FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FUNDING FOR UFTR CONVERSION IS AVAILABLE THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY l

10

9 k ."

n w..

! *~".C,y Department of Energy .? - t Washington, D.C. 20545

.- / -f'-

egy , ,,

NOV 21 1985 /

'/ ,

m. l

^W j sg ... ,

. , r, Dr. William G. Vernetson Nuclear Facilities Division University of Florida Cainesville, FL 32611

Dear Dr. Vernetson:

This letter is to inform you that funding is available during FY-87 through the U.S. Department of Energy to initiate the conversion of your reactor from HEU to LEU fuel. It is requested, therefore, that you submit a proposal, including a detailed cost estimate, to accomplish the safety analysis phase of the conversion. The proposal should not include since costs for the new fuel, spent fuel cask rental, or fuel shipping these tasks are being handled by others.

l You are also reminded that technical assistance for safety documentation l

review and analysis is available through the RERTR program at the i

I Argonne National Laboratory. Your proposal should be coordinated with and reflect the degree of support to be provided by RERTR/ANL.

We would like to receive your proposal by January 15, 1987 Please direct it to:

Mr. Richard E. Stephens, Director Division of University and Industry Programs Office of Field Operations Management Of fice of Energy Research U.S. Department of Energy Washington, D.C 20585 If you have any questions, please call me or Keith Brown on 301-353-3995.

Sincerely yours,

.l; h s/;/ ~.f.l < i s Harold H. Young / U Division of University & Industry Programs Office of Field Operations Management Office of Energy Research cc: R. Stephens, ER-44 A. Travelli, RERTR/ANL

__ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .