ML20247K815

Proposal Submitted to NRC to Meet 10CFR50.64 Requirements for Updating Scheduling of Univ of Florida Reactor Conversion from High Enriched U to Low Enriched U

ML20247K815
Person / Time
Site:	05000083
Issue date:	03/27/1989
From:	Vernetson W FLORIDA, UNIV. OF, GAINESVILLE, FL
To:
Shared Package
ML20247K803	List: ML20247K799 ML20247K815
References
NUDOCS 8904050329
Download: ML20247K815 (15)

Text

, -

1 l

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA TRAINING REA.CTOR l 1

LICENSE NUMBER: R-56 l

l l PROPOSAL SUBMITI'ED TO THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION TO MEET 10 CFR 50.64 REQUIREMENTS FOR UPDATING SCHEDULING OF UFTR CONVERSION FROM HEU TO LEU FUEL i

. 'y  ;

l  :

1 Dr. William G. Vernetson Director of Nuclear Facilities March 27,1989 DEPARTMENT OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING SCIENCES College of Engineering University of Florida Gainesville I l  !!R42888:*s888382 P PDC

.1 UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA TRAINING REACTOR - l LICENSE NUMBER: R-56 i

PROPOSAL SUBMRTED TO THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l

TO MEET 10 CFR 50.64 REQUIREMENTS FOR UPDATING SCHEDULING OF UFTR CONVERSION ,

FROM HEU TO LEU FUEL-  !

i s

l l i l

l Dr. William G. Vemetson Director of Nuclear Facifities March 27,1989 .

l l

l l

1

m t

. )

1 UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA TRAINING REACTOR FUEL CONVERSION FROM HIGH ENRICHED TO LOW ENRICHED URANIUM FUEL 1 l

1 INTRODUCTION This proposal is submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to meet the l

requirement that the licensee for the University of Florida Training Reactor (UFTR), as a licensee of a non povar reactor authorized to possess and use high enriched uranium (HEU) 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 acceptabl6 o the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on a schedule determined pursuant to 10 CFR 50.64 Paragraph f (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:

1. Preparation for Conversion.

1 II. Conversion (assuming NRC order to convert).

Ill. 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.

PHASE 1: PREPARATION FOR CONVERSION Phase I commenced with receipt of funding for conversion from DOE to cover Phase 1 only. This funding was considered to be certified per the letter contained in Appendix I of the 1987 proposal; this proposal was submitted to the Department of 2

Energy and official notice of receipt of funding was received with a letter dated November 12,1987. Because of errors in the contract description provided by DOE, the full approval

, for receipt of funding was delayed until receipt of the confirming letter dated December 21,1987. Copies of both letters as well as the 1987 certification letter are enclosed in Appendix 1. '

Initial efforts in the process to convert the UFTR from use of high enriched to low enriched fuel (HEU-LEU) have consisted 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 be qualified for use in the UFTR. Visual and radiographic test l results to date are positive in this regard. Unfortunately, equipment failures and the need to move the SPERT (SNM-1050) fuel storage facility have impacted the schedule during i this year so the radiographic tests are now expected to be completed by March 31,1989. \

l Phase I will then continue with activities to justify a fuel selection, either SPERT or silicide, based upon results of prequalification testing of existing SPERT fuel nearing completion) and identification of modifications in existing reactor systems necessitated by use of the g new fuel. Several previously unnoted potential complications have been identified during the past year. This effort will address maintaining and/or improving the UFTR neutronics characteristics while minimizing the overall cost of UFTR conversion. The only two fuels being considered are the existing SPERT UO,, stainless steel clad fuel presently under the SNM-1050 license and the newly developed silicide fuel to be available through ine RERTR program at Argonne National Laboratory.

The first choice is to use the already existing SPERT fuel for which a number of neutronics and thermal-hydraulics analyses are in existence. This is the cheaper fuel if acceptable since it is already manufactured. However, even after completion of the I

3

v s

prequalification program for the qualification tests used to assure the SPERT fuel can meet O

UFTR requirements without compromising safety, it is necessary to assure this use can be made without requiring costly modifications which may outweigh the low cost of SPERT fuel (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 and work ;n this area has been progressing, though at a slower than expected rate and with some negative impact on SPERT fuel use.

After selection of an LEU fuel and identification of necessary reactor systems 1

changes, a safety analysis will be performed fcr the selected LEU fuel conversion and associated system changes. Imp lementation of the neutronics codes to be used has been underway during the past six months. Dolays here will necessitate an extension in the DOE grant. In addition to neutronic and thermal-hydraulic analysis, shielding and effluent analyses will be documented to identify any changes in procedures, security plan, technical specifications or other license documents that must be considered as part of conversion. This submittal will also contain documents detailing the various tests and surveillance 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 i

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.

PHASE II. CONVERSION (Assuming NRC Order to Convert)

Phase ll (Conversior.) will begin with receipt of the NRC Order directing the ,

i conversion and any necessary changes to the license, facility and/or procedures per 10 4

CFR 50.64(c)(3). This second phase is not yet funded by the existing DOE grant for which an extension will be requested and 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 11 will then involve s number of key activities aimed ultimately at having LEU 1

fuel replace HEU fuel at the UFTR facility to include: l l

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

2. Qualification of the selected LEU fuel (as applicable).

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

4. Receipt of unirradiated LEU fuel.

5. Documentation of all changes.

6. Completion of all requirements for core loading with LEU fuel followed by

, loading of the LEU fuel and startup testing to low power.

l

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

PHASE lil: REVIEW AND VERIFICATION OF CONVERSION l

Phase Ill (Review and Verification of Conversion) will consist of a series of activities l designed to verify the quality of the conversion process to include both the physical implementation of the LEU fuel and the documentation of the implementation. Activities in Phase lil will include:

l

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

2. Verification and evaluation of UFTR operational characteristics.

3. Review of conversion plan and data for consistency.

i

4. Approval for return of UFTR to normal operations.

5. Return to normal operations.

5

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 I as part of the Order to Convert. j

SUMMARY

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 fuelis presented in Table 1. The current plan is ,

to generate as much of the required safety analysis and design work in-house as I

possible. Only items such ..s new fuel support grids or silicide fuel, if selected, would be designed and manufactured outside the administrative control of the UFTR licensee. At ,

this point, without having identified all required changes, it is not possible to delineate i l

exactly what other external support may be needed. The neutronics and thermal- l l

hydraulics analyses are all planned to be conducted in-house which has necessitated i

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 analysis. Code implementation is now progressing though with delays in identifying graduate student project workers.

l The overall flow diagram for HEU to LEU conversion of the UFTR is presented in l

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 an updated tentative schedule (Revision 3) for the major milestone events in th3 UFTR conversion process commencing with the notification of receipt of funding effect le in December,1987 and concluding with submittal of a final report to NRC and DOE summarizing the results of the conversion by December,1992.

it should be noted that this schedule is tentative and, as required by 10 CFR 50.64, will 1

6

v e

be updated yearly. There has been considerable schedule slippage during the past twelve months. The schedule is also subject to variations caused by availability of  ;

l replacement fuel (either SPERT cr silicide) or other items involved in required facility changes as well as variations in the level of DOE funding after the first two year period for which funding has beon received. Other areas which may impact the schedule are the l availability of a shipping cask especially for irradiated HEU fuel (we are currently using our HEU fuel at a rate of 12-15 MW-Days per year so it will probably require a cask versus a 6M container) and final usage of the UFTR with HEU fuel to provide a basis fcr comparison of changes in operating characteristics or to meet education, research and service commitments. Within these constraints and conditions, the schedule in Table ll l is one which the licensee is committed to meeting and which the licensee considers relatively realistic based upon expected resources.

Although much of the detail of the conversion process depends upon the final selection of fuel types, the informat:on, especially the tentative schedule in Table li l

provided in this proposal, shows that the LEU conversion at the UFTR has progressed l during this year although significant delays occurred during the year due to requirements to move the storage facility for the SPERT fuel. The key decisions will involve final fuel selection and then identification and evaluation of system changes required by the 4 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 1

system changes, such as fuel supports or grid spacers for the LEU fuel. The schedule presented in Table 11 is considered to be somewhat optimistic but should be attainable now that considerable preliminary work has been completed.

7

-v TEST SPERT JUEL HEU to LEU NEUTRONIC ANALYSIS l DEVELOP A P;tEQUALIFICATION CONVERSION THERMAL HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS PLAN FOR GPERT FUEL PREPARATION CHIELDING ANALYSIS SELECT FUEL OPTION RADIOACTIVE EFFLUENT ANALYSIS I

1r IDENTIFICATION OF PREPARATION OF SAFETY ANALYSIS REQUIRED FACILITY LICENSING DOCUMENTS TECH SPEC CHANGES CHANGES SECURITY PLAN CHANGES PROCEDURE CHANGES i

V SUBMITTAL OF APPLICATION ORDER TO CONVERT REVIEW / APPROVAL OF TO NRC WITH ALL CONVERSION CONVERSION DOCUMENTATION DOCUMENTATION BY NRC l .

if ARRANGEMENT FOR POSSESSION DISCONTINUATION OF ANALYSIS FOR SHIPMENT OF OF HEU AND LEU ON INTERIM USE OF HEU FUEL IRRADIATED FUEL BASIS l

l If i

HEU FUEL SHIPMENT CONVERSION DESIGN / IMPLEMENTATION LEU FUEL RECEIPT ACTIVITIES OF FACILITY CHANGES LEU FUEL LOADING FUEL LOAD PREPARATIONS if STARTUP TESTING AND REVIEW AND VERIFICATION SURVEILLANCE AC7/IVITIES OF EEU TO LEU CONVERSION

'I REVIEW / APPROVAL RETURN TO SERVICE OF FULL DOCUMENTATION l

If SUBMISSION OF FINAL REPORT TO NRC/ DOE SUMMARIZING HEU OPERATIONAL CCNDITIONS AND COMPARING WITH SAR PREDICTIONS Figura 1. University of Florida Training Reactor HEU to LEU Conversion Flow Diagram 8

,, 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 lI

l. Pretesting of Selected SPERT Fuel Pins

2. Development of a Qualification Program f or SPERT Fuel Pins I 3.

4.

5.

Completion of Pre-Qualification Testing of SPERT Fuel Evaluation of Comparative Conversion Options (SPERT VS. SILICIDE)

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 Specifientione, 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 Surveillance B. Completion of Power Testing and Surveillance C. Determination of UFTR Operational Characteristics D. Return to Normal Operations

• E. Submission of Final Conversion Report to NRC/ DOE 9

TABLE ll (Revision 3)

University of Florida Training Reactor Tentative Milestone Schedule for HEU to LEU Fuel Conversion I. Effective Date of Receipt of Funding November,1987 II. Date of Full Submittal to NRC of Application to Convert (including all necessary documents) June,1990

, Ill. Date of NRC Order to Convert October,1990 A. Date of Completion of All Plans to Convert May,1991 1

B. Date of Receipt of LEU Fuel July,1991 i

C. Date of Completion of Any Final Tests With I HEU Fuel September,1991 D. Date of Removal of HEU Fuel November,1991 E. Date of Shipment of HEU Fuel February,1992 l F. Date of Loading of LEU Fuel April,1992 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 Predictioria of Safety Analysis September,1992 l

l l

10 l

1 q

I I

I lI I

'I APPENDIX I LETTERS OF NOTIFICATION THAT I FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FUNDING FOR UFTR CONVERSION IS AVAILABLE .tND HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY I

I I

I I

I I

E W

'T 499 4, f JL g Department of Energy Washington, D.C. 20545 g, ,

fl0V 21 1985 '

I Dr. William G. Ve :netson

~ ,;

e Nuclear Facilities livision I University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611

Dear Dr. Vernetson:

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

I You are also reminded that technical assistance for safety documentation review and analysis is available through the RERTR program at the 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 .

Office of Energy Research U.S. Department of Energy Washington, D.C 20585 I

If you have any questions, please call me or Keith Brown on 301-353-3995.

I Sincerely yours,

. ' , .; /, .. ,P' *g I Ha rold H. Young '

Division of Uaiversity & Industry Programs Office of Field Operations Management Offfce of Enc.gy Research cc: R. Stephens, ER-44 A. Travelli, RERTR/ANL

2 0 5 NOV 171987 c

1 Department of Energy Ook Ridge Operations p,[

. i Poet Office Box E

/ ' Oe( lidge, Temessee 37831  !' ?'l l ' 'f '?*

'i'*

November 12,'1987 /-[, - , ,

c Mr. Dillard C. Marshall Assistant Director Office of Research Administration University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611 j

Dear Mr. Marshall:

I GRANT N0. DE-FG05-88ER75387 - AMEN 0 MENT NO. A000 I 1

l Enclosed are two copies of the subject grant document which have been signed on behalf of the Department of Energy. j If this document is satisfactory, please have the two enclosed copies signed by the proper official on behalf of your organization and return one fully executed copy to this office. The remaining fully executed copy is for your 3 '

l retention.

In addition, please have executed the enclosed Assurance of Compliance -

Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs, and return the signed original to this office together with the executed copy of the grant and a completed Fonn DOE-538, Notice of Energy RD80 Project. Please return two copies of the DOE-538.

Sincerely.

i C arles . C row .

Contracting Of ficer Contract Management Branch AD-423:Lyle Procurement & Contracts Division 5

Enclosures:

1. Grant (2 cys.)

2. Assurance of Compliance 1

3. DOE 538 (5 cys) f 4

\ l M, w/

• %*n ~*'* ' Celebrating the U.S. Gmstitution Bicentennial- 1787-1987

<, s

/ 'a Department of Energy

• • 4 Ook Ridge Operations 00bCIf IS8f

?.

I: # Post Office Box E 5

4 m*/ Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831 December ?l,1987 Dr. William G. Vernetson Director of Nuclear Facilities College of Engineering University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611

Dear Dr. Vernetson:

GRANT NO. DE-FG05-88ER75387 (REVISED PROJECT DESCRIPTION)

In response to telephone conversations with you and with Keith Brown at Argonne, enclosed is a revised project description for your grant from the Department of Energy to cover cost of the conversion f rom HEU to LEU fuel in

, University of Florida's training reactor. I apologize for the confusion and'

, P delay in this revision reaching you.

P Please s_uhstitute_.the at1Etted Part 112 Project Description and Reporting Requirements, for the one transmitted to Dillard Marshall on November 12, 1987, 3 I and have Mr. Marshall sign the award and return an original to us as soon as possible. You will not be able to draw down any money from Letter of Credit on is award until the original copy is returned to us.

Thank you for calling our attention to the fact that your award is different from the other reactor fuel conversion awards the Department of Energy has.

l Since rely, l #akid Martha A. Lyle Contract Specialist I AD-423:Lyle Contract Management Rranch Procurement and Contracts Division

Enclosure:

Part 11 of Grant DE-FG05-88ER75387 cc: Dillard C. Marshall, Asst. Dir.

Research Administration University of Florida 223 Grinter Hall Gainesville, FL 32611

%%./

6 w-e-s /

celebrating the U.S. consrirution Bicentemulat - 1787 1987