ML20205H743

Summary of 990113 Meeting with Robust Fuel Program in Rockville,Md.Purpose of Meeting to Provide Industry Opportunity to Present Overview of RFP

ML20205H743
Person / Time
Issue date:	04/06/1999
From:	Stewart Magruder NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Carpenter C NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
References
PROJECT-689 NUDOCS 9904090058
Download: ML20205H743 (28)

Text

.,

.. 6 6 0 0" "* %

ye .

. UNITED STATES 8 "'

E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f WASHINGTON. D.C. 20555-0001

%, ,,# April 6,1999 MEMORANDUM TO: Cynthia A. Carpenter, ( hief Generic Issues and Environmental Projects Branch Division of RegulatoryIraprovement Programs Orfice of Nuclear Resctoc Regulation FROk Stewart L. Magruder, Project Manager Aid I Age Generic issues and Environmental Projects Branch U Division of Regulatory improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUMMARY

OF JANUARY 13,1999, MEETING WITH THE ROBUST FUEL PROGRAM TO DISCUSS BURNUP EXTENSION Members of the industry Robust Fuel Program (RFP) met with Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff on January 13,1999, at the NRC offices in Rockville, MD. Meeting attendees are identified in Attachment 1. The purposes of the meeting were to (1) provide the industry an opportunity to present an overview of the RFP, (2) initiate the technical discussions on the required criteria, data and analysis for burnup extension licensing, (3) present the industry t.Jrnup extension licensing framework, and (4) discuss the process and schedule for future interactions between the RFP and the NRC.

After introductions, Terry Rieck of Commonwealth Edison, Chairman of Working Group 2 (Response to Transients) of the RFP began the first presentation. His presentation materialis I included as Attachment 2. Highlights of the discussion are as follows:  ;

1. The main purpose of technical meetings between the RFP and the NRC is to determine /6 vvhat set of data needs to be collected.

(\

2. The RFP used Standard Review Plan Section 4.2 to establish the initial scope of their review in developing an industry guide.

3. The NRC staff noted that it was important for the industry to have a systematic and comprehensive plan for burnup extension. The staff also noted that several working-level meetings to discuss critoria would make the process smoother.

4. The NRC staff noted that the data developed to support the industry criteria would have to be non-proprietary so it could be made public.

5. The oiscussion of reactivity insertion accidents (RIAs) included questioning of whether a rod ejection accident should still be considered in light of risk insights.

9904090058 990406 hk O PDR ORG NRRA  ?

PDR b 4>5 1

EEE

' s C. Carp:ntar 6. The NRC staff believes more data may be required to support new criteria for RIAs, however, the industry disagrees.

7. The NRC staff noted that more testing may be required to understand loss-of-coolant accident effects for higher burnup limits. The NRC committed to work closely with EPRI to make sure representative fuelis tested.

8. More analysis and testing may be required to understand anticipated transient without scram effects for higher burnup limits.

Following the industry presentation, Muffet Chatterton of Reactor Systems Branch, NRR gave a short presentation on the staff's views of defining the regulatory basis for burnup extensions.

Her presentation materials are included as Attachment 3. The main message from her presentation was that industry's justification of limits should be well documented and that the process must be systematic and comprehensive. After her presentation, the group agreed that there is a need to work through the industry process with some specific criteria in future meetings.

Project No. 609 Attachments: As stated DISTRIBUTION: See attached page Document Name: g:\SLM1\msum0113.wpd OFFICE PM:RCEB SRXB,g , (A)SC:RGEB NAME SMagrudeM MChake'rton TBergmarfM _

DATE 4/ (o /99 4/ // /99 4/d/99 i

_- J

9'6C-3 Distribution: Mtg. Summary w/ Robust Fuel Program Dated I n7.[-/~f9'7 I

Hard Copy sCef) tral Files PUBLIC RGEB R/F OGC ACRS SMagruder MChatterton EMail SCollins/RZimmerman BSheron WKane DMatthews SNewberry CCarpenter TBergman GTracy, EDO GHofar.an TCollins JWermiel MChatterton EKendrick SWu TKing, RES FEltawila, RES RMeyer, RES HScott, RES JRosenthal, RES MEl-Zeftawy, ACRS ACronenberg, ACRS l

l

I 1 1 l' s Nuclear Energy institute Project No. 689 l

l~ cc: Mr. Ralph Beedle Ms Lynnette Hendricks, Director L Senior Vice President Plant Support and Chief Nuclear Officer Nuclear Energy Institute Nuclear Energy institute Suite 400 Suite 400 1776 i Street, NW 1776 i Street, NW Washington, DC 20006-3708 ,

Washington, DC 20006-3708 i

Mr. Alex Marion, Director Mr. Charles B Brinkman, Director Programs Washington Operations  ;

Nuclear Energy Institute ABB-Combustion Engineering, Inc. '

Suite 400 12300 Twinbrook Parkway, Suite 330 1776 i Street, NW Rockville, Maryland 20852 Washington, DC 20006-3708 )

l Mr. David Modeen, Director l Engineering ]

Nuclear Energy Institute Suite 400 1776 l Street, NW Washington, DC 20006-3708 Mr. Anthony Pietrangelo, Director Licensing Nuclear Energy Institute Suite 400 1776 i Street, NW Washington,~ DC 20006-3708 Mr. Nicholas J. Liparuto, Manager -

Nuclear Safety and Regulatory Activities Nuclear and Advanced Technology Division Westinghouse Electric Corporation P.O. Box 355 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Mr. Jim Davis, Director i Operations ,

Nuclear Energy Institute  !

Suite 400 1776 i Street, NW ' 1 Washington, DC 20006-3708 l

l l

l

I. .

S NRC/RFP Meeting LIST OF ATTENDEES January 13,1999 NAME ORGANIZATION Stu Magruder NRC/NRR Muffet Chatterton NRC/NRR Terry Rieck Comed Ralph Meyer NRC/RES Rosemary Reeves NUS-LIS Tom King NRC/RES l

Farouk Eltawila NRC/RES John Butler NEl Tim Collins NRC/NRR Rosa Yang EPRI Elaine Hiruo NuclearFuel Glen Watford GE Sumit Ray Westinghouse Gary Darden Virginia Power Bert Dunn FTl Harold Scott NRC/RES Med El-Zeftawy NRC/ACRS Larry Philips Consultant Jerry Holm SPC Joe Mihalcik BGE lan Rickard ABB-CE l Roger Anderson NSP l Edward Kendrick NRC/NRR  !

Whee Choe TU Electric W. Brunson FCF I

- Jim Lyons- NRC/NRR Shih-Liang Wu NRC/NRR Gus Cronenberg NRC/ACRS Jack Rosenthal NRC/RES Attachment 1

1 Burnup Extension Licensing Framework l l

I NRC/ Industry Meeting Washington,D.C.

January 13,1999

- ,,.. e . . ,

= , .

l l

Meeting Objectives Present an overview of Robust Fuel Program Initiate the technical discussions on the required criteria, data and analysis for burnup extension licensing Present industry bumup extension licensing framework. This meeting to focus on

- Approach and data lanalysis needs to address RIA, LOCA and BWR ATWS Discuss process and schedule for future interactions with NRC aooe.i ro. p<oo, ,

gy, .

A+.tachment 2 1

r a 6-l Robust Fuel Program Launched e An industrywide initiative

- Run by utilities (domestic and international)

- Coordinated with NEI, INPO, and Owners Groups

- Direct participation by fuel vendors (WGs and Executive Committee) e 5-year program (1998-2002)

- Total program budget -S43M

- 1998 budget $5M i

)

l Rooust Fusi Progtam Q+yw, i

Robust Fuel Program L'tility Steering Committee Senior Representau.es

% Dooca Decut.ve Comrmnee l f 9Aeranth l

j rm=c emeeme eTe".,"..=a l Intagranon f . - -- Target Steenng Comttee i I I -l F ust /Wa.e' Cnemstry * *# 9'#

te T ans s

. Crue tranwort & Ne' . Des 4gn eas.s for RiA . Techmcal Reavirements ano . Fadu re root:e .se decet enemstrF transent ana ps marges for Rooust Fuel evestgaton F we; Wormase mar' . Irioustry Guide for Hotcett & pas.oe ema'ns on . utgauon a fadure &

chemstry soebves n,gn bmp Let h'gn tumup fuel seconda7 dessoation

- Urgent and hcensing Ennanceo poossee mspecten . Ceseng ano cornponent ernerges issues . ECCS acceptance tecnmoves corros.on & hyanoing Cnems'ry oput to crea . Demonsvat:en LTA for Roovst . Fa ture momic vg tools intergroup actaches Fuel ceses Fue. oter' ace to EPRI Cnemstry & Matenats i

o o 6-Objectives of the Robust Fuel Program

1. Resolve outstanding performance, reliability, operational and regulatory issues of current fuel designs and core conditions

2. Understand and quantify performance margins for current fuel designs and avoid regulatory mandates of overly restrictive operational limits

3. With the direct involvement of NEl, serve as the focal point on industrywide, fuel-related regulatory issues

4. Provide technology needed to gain regulatory acceptance for fuel designs and operation to higher burnups tooo.i s pry.m

=y ,

Potential Benefits Provide technology to reduce / eliminate the impact of fuel-related problems on plant operations Provide an industry forum to proactively address regulatory issues

- Criteria and data needs for burnup extension (>62 GWDT)

- LOCA and RIA criteria at high burnup

^

• Provide technology for bumup extension

m RoDust Fuei Program 3

p I

l g ,

i RFP Executive Regulatory Group l

Membership '

- Louis Long (Southern Nuclear)

- Kenneth Canady (Duke)

- Michael ! yster (Comed)

- Alan Passwater (AmerenUE)

-Roger Anderson (NSP) l Met with NRC management on January 5,1999

• ' , ' , *,, Roouse Fwa Program Interaction at Technical Level Through Robust Fuel Program Working Group 2 (Response to Transients)

- Chairman T. Rieck (Comed)

- Vice Chairman N. Waeckel (EdF)

- Executive Sponsor M. Lyster (Comed)

- EPRI Manager R. Yang

- NEI Project Manager J. Butler

- Utility and vendor representatives I

Prepare Industry Guide and interact with NRC to reach consensus eg ,. R..,r- % ,,

i 4

i Strong Utility Interest in Burnup Extension Economic benefit and operational flexibility Development of new materials for high burnup application (Vendors)

• Lead Test Assembly programs in progress Utilities need bumup extension to target level in 3-5 years Robust Fuel Propam

{C* N, Industry Target Burnup l

1 Do not plan to go beyond 5 w/o U-235 enrichment Peak rod average

-PWR 75 GWd'T

-BWR 70 GWd'T ace .ro. eror.-

g ,; ,,.

3

ee.

Benefits of Burnup Extension Flexibility in reload designs and operation Reduce spent fuel storage needs and cost At least 1-2% fuel cycle savings (for 18 month-cycle) to 70-75 GWd/T

- 1% fuel savings = $500M over remaining of plant lives or S40M per year 1

rnonths cycle savings are higher l l

= p. ,

Industry Burnup Extension Strategy I

Industry strategy is consistent with NRC guidance (as outlined in Nov. '97 NRC Industry meeting and April  !

'98 Chatterton pru. atation to ACRS) 1

- Use risk-informed approach

- Robust Fuel Program develops industry wide criteria, data, analysis and methodology (may not cover comprehensive data for all five vendors)

- Vendors to produce data and methodology to obtain license approval aceo.i ro.i eroor.m gp.

6

. m ,

1 Industry Guide Development Process )

Use Standard Review Plan Section 4.2 to establish initial scope of review Identify the phenomena associated with each current acceptance criterion Evaluate the impact of bumup on the phenomena (theoretical considerations and available data)

Assess continued applicability of current acceptance I criteria Develop and support any necessary criteria revision l

, _ , . . I

= ;f , .

1 I

l Lead Test Assembly Programs With prototypical irradiation conditions Poolside examination data includes

- Oxide and Crud Thickness for Clad, Spacer Grid, and Guide Tube

- Cladding Diameter

- Fuel Rod and Assembly Growth

- Fuel Rod Bow

- Guide Tube Distortion and Fuel Assembly Bow Hotcell examination data includes

- Rod Internal Pressure

- Clad Ductility

- Oxide Thickness

- Hydride Content

- Fuel Microstructure gy;m Roewst Fue4 Program

, 7 i

g

~

Ac e d

mp mp l .

e p t m i

e it t i i w n Y d n uiiiL

. mmm o ara uu . .

u

.w %f ir u nm i

f r

n i

f r

n u

m r BuT d

n e%I 0 u B LL c c c GeBB e B e n 0 o u C

o o u Cb o

t ia .l o u o votoI. Cb t

i d 1 B t oiii f f f i i d Ct o t s t 1 o o o oot a a ice cr c r a ed d is de b d u > t r > ed ee t t t c y r v e p p pi lz e e a eB y nd n nd o o e i

fi it t zt t L t a e af t t i oe t nl u aSSS t

i y ol a a Ol el oet l i i t it i t al a t

s UiCl B e l t u t c e r r o r o r o b N er r e r S rn e c t

c u ala a u er J < u ue nd d d de -o n n n u e lu s D igU en e nei nt t UU U Uf f Dla nr a la n EvU

- v s

e t a VVVimd o E EvU E r

t S

F L R e

c n

a h

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o oo s e o o o o s e o o o C N Y NNN i

a NNNNNNNNNNN NNNNN Y NNN r

i t

e r

w C i

e

) ) ) -

w e u

e e u u R g g igi n it a aa t t s

i r F F F K s n iaK t

a / //

n n n -

x er i o r e x gi t i i

r iia a

r r r t ia nd ns t a t idr C t t i t

d c n e SSS l e ed ix t np .

2 ///

s s s mpi y p e l o ep 4 s s s e  %

n e r re r e e g t sl eA d 7 mA e0 o t SSS t t d r a i u0 e t 1 l 5

i s e u m imf 5 a d t

t ir R -

t c ~i a eiii n n n i f

t s a L oRi n b F R r Cd a nF i

e lc e e e s s s t i o D a mC S t r

e yd d d iis s

y yJ u m m P o0 rr p E0 1 -

n i

C u u u e C i n BR0%1 r %

r m g a C nc o n cn cn l l l la la r n n o m a

t s

g /

o0 e nor l

P e c I( ii

( ( AA e e r g

y it 1 9 t i d 7 n  : 2< d 0

d ed ed gng ns uorrc / Stsl i e N <5 7 < d a da15 A e mmD;n 1 s 1 t w a 1 I e e m l l

c ix e

1 l a

ii nn ;iiii .st s t t s F C1 d t t i FuL ein ma p _

i v

e e

c i o os it s mmmmee er n i i i i DDP w l l r

g

- e nRl gt i 1 s r

e r e ka my gb en d e c

t c c e l l os Pe r

sisdu t

el /

iu pp

/

R A eet rbbe be be e n ni md o r p c ad Ct n la i

p ad c 0 f eGA SSS c r i

dr a

t n EE nl d d d d eet d d s de i mlo e/e l

r R 0 o mGed F 0

i s

0 8 it gP l l e

l i .

u u u u u u y o l 0 c veBC 7 ifn eg pp .l d

n r

r u

MMo SS2 ooo h h h olh c cSH l 2 o oNo 1 2 2 a eR a C AA < SSSSiin< n < < NCDN < URA 2 < SRS .

t s S t e n g gl l i

o t l

en ne y ac t g n ui t n o

e r

iP d p r n eF l e gi e

u s dl a u e h l atne i

r u mfoMn e at a h s a sd g se l CF t c

l t

oa in nd om r a

t wre o n p t i n g a it m s n e r o'P l e i

d a f f oo E in reFr y b is Clofo r

l l

l a e Emud i l a r t r D si ear u g a e Gs aL f i

lu d lo r

yC gg nn ud l

ed ula t i

l p eB D aWng x za i l i t r a H i i F a pic b gelid it wonGci t t t m t g aa SS la l

o n F n g ee sC u/ nR a int a Rt o ru e F gi oila ua l l ai o d nr nn i t d e mra o d e nl e u cr t

nt ai d mdd inhh ee s t

s B o e h di ed g r r e a e vv xclled c t

y s ig ni dx yud r d C l S

i s

i ateid t

r o at y R t ela e a oe ut i

CVGF S t l r r nCF OOEPCM l

e et r r inh l

e l

e l

e u

DDSF OHCRI r u

I F

u F F 2 3 1

L

s.

/

l i

i Summary of Vendor LTA Programs )

m ~ _ ,

-.- i

~ -, 1 F0F Innes4 Am (M%ee. !19640 4 6 70 j 2090003 4 heere44 Aes enertad, ! &%40.44& f0 200' 7 % 3 F2 44ws 5 Ass thal) l 44'42 44&10 120%29]t 4 Ames.es MS Ase >$142. 46 4 { 20t&2Te

'All&GE 4 As,ew.ee swasu, 5% '0

. 4 4*geg S ves% q$tg S

, As

_ esse ,.b ., r aw%

%.ior m.o m.awee : eo a u

+ -i

+

I

• earv6 '84 Chapea sagded ,

I

~ b #*****wes m ww  ;

Lai $46 '.> i g 2IAO67 As l Sa'0 27 l IGE .

4 ... . .. -.  ; i n ov ss sas ~c ,2w an f 8 *4 .4'" 2(aY,J1J l

..i r ~.,

=;;> ,,.

Approach to RIA Establish Enthalpy Cnteria Using Existing CABRI Data (Applicable to 75 GWd/T)

U . Low Probability Event (<10"/yr)

Use risk informed approach to identify

- 100% of 10 CFR 100 Dose Limit level of conservatism and level of data

. No additonal RIA test data necessary required to support criteria Obtain oxide data of advanced alloys to demonstrate compliance Roovst Fuel Program gl;.*,,

8

1 l

RIA Design Criteria l

Industry will propose separate clad failure and coolability criteria, consistent with risk-infomaed approach

- REAs are low-probability and localized events

- Test data show significant enthalpy difference between failure j and fuel dispersal 1

- Link between fuel dispersal and coolability not established 1

i 1

; ,,. -s,,- ~ .

)

Schematic of RIA Criteria Schernatic of RfA Cnteria as Fun:t:en of Oxide Layer Thickness e

Colabdly Limd E _Faduce Lmt r

I W

l l

~

once Layer Thickness Rest Fuel Program Q';m,,,

9

i

(

, . o ,

RIA Design Criteria (continued) l Two possible means to develop an RIA criteria

- Rely on empirical RIA simulation tests

- Coupled analytical and experimental approach Mechanical approach ( SED or strain) including separate effects mechanical property 'ests

" Selected RIA simulation tests i

) I

• • N RODust Fse* Prog am j 6 sm A .*$

Oxide or burnup dependent criteria?

Oxide

+ Decrease in clad cactility related to H levelloxide thickness

+ CABRI data (representative LWR temperature) show strong oxide dependence

+ Easier tc apply to other alloys

- May require additional analytical effort to correlate oxidation to burnup 1

l l

nacssi ro. Prog. -

4

- 4;>=,, .

10

l  :'

• 1 l > \

i l

Oxide or burnup depen @nt criteria?

Burnun

+ Easy to implement

- Data show a weak bumup dependence

- May require more RIA tests I

l SJh A l

i Testings / Analysis Needs for RIA CrReria Analyze existing data to develop conservative RIA l criteria Discuss and reach consensus (industry /NRC) on assumptions and uncertainties used in 3-D neutronic calculation methodology Demonstrate margins between LWR conditions and RIA criteria Obtain in-reactor oxide data of advanced alloys to demonstrate compliance i

l 1 -

.-.*y S3E 22 -

1

// ,

i

I y

i 1

l Industry's View on CABRI Water Loop Project l

Additional Data act needed for burnup extension l - Rod Ejection Accidents Low Probability and Low Risx Events

- Sufficient margins exist between test data and LWR conditions l If the Project goes forward, the industry will consider financial support of CABRI Project to obtain data to relax conservatism. The tests should be conducted under the following conditions

- Conditiens be clos'e to LWR conditions

- focus on advanced cladding and high burnup fuel (~70 GWd/T) l -

g ,, . -.m. -

1 l

Approach to LOCA Support NRC LOCA Expenmental Program on irradiated Fuel Rods l

v Use Res .;ts to Confirm Existing Cnteria at Current and Extended Bumup Limit 8

No irradiated LOCA Testing Required for Bumup Extension Because irradiation Effects of 2r-4 Can Be Applied to Advanced Alloys

~

e m  % a , prog em 12

Approach to BWR ATWS l ATWS is beyond design basis accident l 8

Support continued application of ATWS rule 10CFR50.62, plant modifications (ARI, RPT and SLCS),

and Emergency Protection Guidelines (EPG's)

S U Evaluate impact of bumup on Use risk-informed approach to enalysis results presented in identify importance of BWR NEDE-24222, NEDO-32047 and power oscillation event NEDO-32164 l

a~ , ~ .- l i

i Schedule for RFP/NRC Working Meetings Date  ; Activity l

March 99 jDetaded Discussion on SRP 4.2

, March 99 iDetaded Drscussion on BWR ATWS IMay 99 ti nctstry Proposed RIA Analysis

' Assumpoons l

[ i jMay 99 inndustry Proposed RfA Cntena

! July 99 :Datailed D:scussion on LOCA Approach and '

' ' Data Needs I

7 Otner Meetings with NRC

• Rabust Fues Program

,f 13

s l

Summary

- Utilities have a strong interest in burnup extension

- Will take an industrywide approach j

- Need license approval in 3-5 years l 1

- Interaction between the industry and NRC

- Through Robust Fuel Program Executive Regulatory  ;

Group and Working Group 2 l

- Frequent meetings to resolve issues in a timely manner

- R&D should support regulatory actions' criteria 1

l l

I Robust FW Pregam j u '[ *.

l 14

(

a OVERALL OBJECTIVE: TO DEFINE REGULATORY BASIS FOR BURNUP EXTENSIONS WHY DO WE NEED A STRATEGY AND PLAN?

o CONSTRAINTS o COMPLEXITY OF ISSUES CONSTRAINTS: ,

l o TECHNICALLY SOUND o CLEAR AND WELL DOCUMENTED DECISIONS i

o EFFICIENTLY DEVELOPED l

o PRACTICAL i o RISK INFORMED o MEET INDUSTRY SCHEDULER NEEDS i

Attachment 3

p

(

l HOW DO WE GET THERE?

• EXAMINE AREAS OF OPERATION o NORMAL OPERATION 4

o TRANSIENTS o ACCIDENTS l 1

• GDC'S PROHIBIT VIOLATION OF SPECIFIED ACCEPTABLE FUEL DESIGN LIMITS (SAFDLs) e SAFDLs VARY FOR DIFFERENT EVENTS o THERMAL LIMITS o STRAIN LIMITS o ENTHALPY LIMITS l o OXIDATION LIMITS '

I e FOR HIGHER BURNUPS ADEQUACY OF CURRENT LIMITS IS QUESTIONABLE I

\ l l

• INDUSTRY MUST THEREFORE:

i l

o JUSTIFY WHY CURRENT LIMITS APPLY

, -O R-I o JUSTIFY REVISED LIMITS OR-o JUSTIFY REMOVAL OF LIMIT FROM LICENSING BASIS

.J

f.

[ .

l LL

• APPROACH TO REVISIONS SHOULD BE RISK INFORMED o PROBABILITY & CONSEQUENCES o DEFENSE IN DEPTH o ADEQUATE SAFETY MARGIN o ADDRESS UNCERTAINTIES 1

'1 1

c .

h JUSTIFICATION OF LIMITS e IDENTIFY APPROACH FOR EACH LIMIT e DEFINE TEST AND ANALYSIS PLAN FOR EACH LIMIT:

• TEST AND ANALYSIS PLAN SHOULD:

o IDENTIFY GOVERNING PHENOMENA USING SYSTEMATIC PROCESS SUCH AS PIRT o DEFINE APPROACH TO CHARACTERIZATION OF PHENOMENA (MODELING) o DEFINE DATA NEEDED FOR CHARACTERIZATION o DEFINE TEST PROGRAM TO GATHER NEEDED DATA SEPARATE EFFECTS TESTS INTEGRAL TESTS LTA PROGRAMS FUEL PERFORMANCE MONITORING o DEFINE METHODS DEVELOPMENT NEEDS o DEFINE METHODS QUALIFICATION PROGRAM. .

o DEFINE DATA ANALYSIS PROGRAM TO CONFIRM ADEQUACY OF PROPOSED LIMITS

7 .

i s

i BURNUP EX'idNSION REQUIREMENTS SMALL INCREMENTS UP TO 62 GWD/MT WILL BE CONSIDERED CASE BY CASE FURTHER. EXTENSIONS REQUIRE:

- TESTING / ANALYSIS FOR RIA, LOCA, ATWS

- PROTOTYPICAL LTA PROGRAM UP TO PROPOSED LIMIT

- ADDRESSING ALL POINTS IN CURRENT LICENSING i BASIS (SRP, FUEL DESIGN CRITERIA, GDC)

- BE RISK INFORMED IF RELAXATIONS PROPOSED

- FUEL PERFORMANCE MONITORING PROGRAM (e.g., OXIDATION, GEOMETRY CHANGES)

i a ,

r t

e _

i r

C y

r

_~

t o -

l a 2 D

N \

u 3

t g t t

a htcs uiot n e #

e t

- h. -

('

ee ad cr r ni ef i nos c R

acn c uhe a s r

,wt ' i ssac gec. x m r dR s a '.

ams e n nur u s d 8 o l idsy iorac e '*

4 n oCmim u / - *==

6 "** s eR ah mN o

mb e

F -

/ .'

a n

\

t n -

y

.c p n e ,

, e se ne k" I.

m us

,ic i

r "

n m

s L rT

• D A

e s

e s

s .

A y

,i" f

%.\s [

c .e

.n l

_ 9 , '

db.?*'. r :{

a e e u =dl

..: 8 n

=a .

q .m dM f1

e. o l" 2 e eN t

E e s " o e .

e. R l .

wyC Y ""'

M d

• d E'

". m. b e M *?

i a

I.aa

.c t -

A ' pe

-* Ps.pi5*a . u w d =

Ai n

=

" ",~

.' _~

f o

t s

n e

m l

e E

, t a e a y

s g n

d o M w l

e i r C t

n e t y d e L o e u i s B b d m l a i f D n i

c m o l a r a t

s per e

i p o r

y l

i W

T t

r y p o )

s eE x t o

i l

a l i t m c e v i n he t o o g a s y

I P

r C i

p y

d o

n h e l a

f o n i t

d h

t a t o M y

i B n ida e w t

o n k t A r e e ru v e P r

A n

i n r a t e m & t a i s D o s o

a l P

t a r a d C e ee e S t n m R ht e D d

nMl do ol l t

B y B e

y m

e e l A

M c a t n e r u d n a t

cW y pa M a u b n

a i

n a

pd l e mtn M

y s

a e e a

n o mn a ar t

I e c a M d o

s e i

t I

g d uc e e me r u

t c e C a t a r n

t m c ni c t r u c a a e e sa c p r ht o i b A u o mcc i

n f t d A n i

c aih d e oM i e e iEn x a n d I A

i d

t h p m M; e l l e a P S ol y y l s d e

l d

e a mte d

t n

i c f o t s s t

Diic c Hib ii l

t a t o MSs i

b s

e r

e f e e a p p nhd x x l i l

a i

h p _

c o x e s e HE x e l

i TtnH E E t n nEi R _

n t a

n

,e gmoB n e e B e e mW n e mB or eB nd oB B e _

e r o i s s el d n d od p d c s mu o u d

I p l a e l

n ;6 ml d al u o e oo u n o l

u o

m S s oh hPSh hC o oh h a I t ( nS e S A h n n >= na S e t h nS S _

e s n n ir v e t nd e nP > en en kn nwn o o oh Pa nc h onte o n

e t e ma k omme e e e e n e ne o Rmoo mm >=or m aocmi at =

l n o k t m it eI r n n n n nS n n no ni o Rf e e a e eh me e a e p er f n e o pmRh x P P i uPBh e h P RPImhh Pca .

e h oEph t i r oigOO d eO O wO O s a el;H o .

h kn ne d M L P i a c u e 6 B S RS GD O O

T:

.m .

Qs = & '

C. Carpenter 6. The NRC staff believes more data may be required to support new criteria for RIAs, however, the industry disagrees.

-7. The NRC staff noted that more testing may be required to understand loss-of-coolant accident effects for higher burnup limits. The NRC comm'tted to work closely with EPRI to make sure representative fuelis tested.

8. More analysis and testing may be required to understand anticipated transient without scram effects for higher burnup limits.

Following the industry presentation, Muffet Ohatterton of Reactor Systems Branch, NRR gave a short presentation on the staff's views of defining the regulatory basis for burnup extensions.

Her presentation materials are included as Attachment 3. The main message from her presentation was that industry's justification of limits should be well documented and that the process must be systematic and comprehensive. After her presentation, the group agreed that there is a need to work through the industry process with some specific criteria in future meetings.

Project No. 689 Attachments: As stated cc w/att: See next page s

,