ML22230D012

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
NRC Slides for the Higher Burnup Workshop III on August 24, 2022
ML22230D012
Person / Time
Issue date: 08/24/2022
From:
Licensing Processes Branch
To:
Devlin-Gill S, NRR/DORL/LPL2-1
References
Download: ML22230D012 (65)
v • d • e


Text

Higher Burnup Workshop III

August 24, 2022 9:00 am - 11:30 am Workshop Agenda Time Topic Speaker 9:00- 9:05 Welcome and Meeting Logistics NRC 9:05-9:15 Overview and Status Update (IE Rulemaking & R FA A Ta b l e ) NRC 9:15-9:35 Research Information Letter (RIL) on Fuel Fragmentation, Relocation, and Dispersal (FFRD) on Higher NRC Burnup Fuel 9:35-9:55 Update on FFRD and Licensing Implications Industry 9:55-10:10 Discussion NRC and Industry 10:10- 10:20 B re a k All 10:20- 10:35 Storage and Transportation NRC 10:35-10:45 Performing an Environmental Evaluation of the Transportation of Accident Tolerant Fuel (ATF) NRC 10:45-11:05 Update on the Collaborative Research on Advanced Fuel Technologies for Light-Water Reactors Industry (CRAFT) 11:05-11:20 Discussion NRC and Industry 11:20- 11:30 Public Comments Public Opening Remarks

Joe Donoghue Bo Pham Director Director Division of Division of Safety Systems Operating Reactor (DSS) Licensing (DORL)

Wel come and I ntroductions

Introductions

  • Daniel King, NRR/DORL - ATF & Increased Enrichment (IE) Rulemaking DORL Project Manager
  • Joey Messina, NRR/DSS - Technical Reviewer, Nuclear Methods & Fuels Analysis Branch
  • Stacy Joseph, NMSS - IE Rulemaking Project Manager
  • Drew Barto, NMSS - Senior Nuclear Engineer
  • John Wise, NRR/ DNRL - Senior Technical Advisor
  • Don Palmrose, NMSS - Senior Reactor Engineer Meeting Logisti cs
  • Meeting visuals and audio are through MS Teams.
  • Participants are in listen-only mode until the discussion and public feedback period. During which, the NRC will allow attendees to un-mu te.
  • This is an Observation meeting. Public participation and comments are sought during specific points during the meeting.

- NRC will consider the input received but will not prepare written responses.

- No regulatory decisions will be made during this meeting.

  • This meeting is being recorded.

Me et i ng Pur pos e

  • Provide all stakeholders with updated information about current NRC and industry activities for higher burnup and increased enrichment.
  • Exchange of information between NRC and industry on higher burnup and increased enrichment activities.
  • Provide an opportunity for members of the public to ask questions of the NRC staff.

Increased Enrichment Rulemaking Update

Carla Roque-Cruz, NRR/DORL Stacy Joseph, NMSS/REFS Status of Rulemaking Activity

  • Comment-Gathering Public Meeting held on 6/22/2022
  • NRC staff is developing the regulatory basis
  • Discusses regulatory issues and alternatives to resolve them
  • Considers legal, policy, and technical issues
  • Considers costs and benefits of each alternative
  • Identifies the NRC staff's recommended alternative
  • Considers feedback obtained from the 6/22/2022 public meeting
  • Possible alternatives:
  • Maintain status quo
  • Revise regulations
  • Revise guidance N ex t S te ps

Public Comment Commission Public Comment SRM Pe ri o d Review Pe ri o d 3/16/22 9/16/23-12/1/23 12/16/24-3/16/25 4/17/25-6/30/25 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026

Revise Regulatory Basis Proposed Rule Package Proposed Final Rule to 3/16/22-9/15/23 12/2/23-12/16/24 Rule Commission 3/17/25-6/30/26 4/16/25 Note: Dates listed are estimates only, and thus are subject to change.

Stay Updated on I E Rul emaking

Regulatory Framework Applicability Assessment

Joseph Messina Nuclear Methods and Fuel Analysis Branch Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

12 Introduction

  • The Regulatory Framework Applicability Assessment was issued in May 2022 and can be accessed at ADAMS Accession No. ML22014A112

13 Pur pose

  • Improve upon the initial scoping study presented in Tables A.1, A.2, and A.4 in the previous revision of the ATF Project Plan (version 1.1)
  • Evaluate the applicability of existing regulations and guidance, as well as identify any updates needed

14 Initial Scoping Study

  • An initial, rough scoping study was presented in Appendix A of version 1.1 the ATF Project Plan

15 16 Re gulator y Framework Applicability Assessment

  • NRC staff has more thoroughly assessed its regulatory framework and expand Tables A.1, A.2, and A.4 in version 1.1 of the ATF Project Plan
  • This applicability analysis assesses the NRC s regulatory framework to specifically:
  • identify regulations and guidance that are impacted,
  • whether pertinent regulations and guidance do not speak to phenomena unique to high burnup, increased enrichment, or near-term ATF concepts
  • how those could be addressed

17 Example 1

18 Applicability: identified as fully applicable or not fully applicable

Reason(s) stated for why the regulation or guidance is not fully applicable

If closure is necessary and has been identified, it is listed here

19 Example 2

  • Green text indicates that the NRC may have an action to facilitate closure

20 Ne xt Ste ps

  • Update the Regulatory Framework Applicability Assessment table as necessary
  • Pursue closures identified in the table

21 Research Information Letter on Fuel Fragmentation, Relocation, and Dispersal

James Corson, Ph.D.

Reactor Systems Engineer Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research

22 Experiments have shown that fuel can fragment during Loss of Coolant Accident

Current rod average burnup limit = 62 G Wd /MTU

23 NRC Has Studied FFRD and Published Findings

  • RIL 2008- 01, Technical Basis for Revision of Embrittlement Criteria in 10 CFR 50.46
  • NUREG-2121, Fuel Fragmentation, Relocation, and Dispersal During the Loss -of-Coolant Accident
  • S ECY 0148, Evaluation of Fuel Fragmentation, Relocation and Dispersal under Loss-of-Coolant Accident (LOCA) Conditions Relative to the Draft Final Rule on Emergency Core Cooling System Performance during a LOCA (50.46c)
  • RIL 2021-13, Interpretation of Research on Fuel Fragmentation, Relocation, and Dispersal at High Burnup

24 RES Staff Has Communicated Recent FFRD Findings in RIL 2021-13

  • Research Information Letters summarize research findings and discuss how information may be used in regulatory decisions

- RIL 2021-13 is addressed to technical staff in NRR

- RILs are not guidance

  • Goal of RIL is to synthesize recent FFRD research

25 Data Sources for RIL 2021-13

ORNL, Hot-cell

SCIP-III, Halden, Hot-cell In-Pile NRC

@Studsvik, Hot-cell

S E

C Y

2000 20202010

26 Most tests reported in RIL 2021 -13 were performed in hot cells

Pressure line establishes segment pres s ure

30- 50 cm refabricated fueled 4 heating segment elements in f ro m furnace commercially irradiated rod

27 RIL 2021-13 Addresses Five Elements of NRC s Interpretation of FFRD Research

1. Fine fragmentation burnup threshold
2. Strain threshold for fragmentation
3. Dispersible mass fraction
4. Transient fission gas release
5. Fuel packing fraction

28 Element 1: Empirical threshold at which fuel pellets become susce ptible to fine fragmentation

Segment from NRC s ANL LOCA program at 55 GWd/MTU before and after testing

Research supports a pellet-average burnup conser vative limit of 55 G Wd/MTU as the onset of fine fuel fragmentation FFRD

29 Element 2: A local cladding strain threshold below which relocation is limited

Strain Strain NRC test # threshold, threshold, top (%) bottom (%)

189 6.0 3.0 191 6.0 4.0 192 5.0 4.0 193 1.0 4.0 196 3.0 5.0 198 4.5 9.0

Research sug gests fuel relocation is limited in regions of the fuel rod experiencing less than 3% cladding strain.

FFR D

30 Element 3: A conservative value for the mass of dispersible fuel as a function of bur nup

What do dispersal measurements look like?

Dispersal during the test

31 Element 3: A conservative value for the mass of dispersible fuel as a function of bur nup

What do dispersal measurements look like?

Video

Dispersal during shaking

32 Element 3: A conservative value for the mass of dispersible fuel as a function of bur nup

FFRD

33 Element 3: A conservative value for the mass of dispersible fuel as a function of bur nup

Difference between dispersal predicted by the model and all mobile fuel observed in the experiment SCIP test Mass (g) Prediction/Measured OL1L04-LOCA-2 125 250%

N05-LOCA -19 76%

VUR1-LOCA-1 15 109%

WZR0067-LOCA -16 83%

VUL2-LOCA1 -7 94%

VUL2-LOCA3 8 105%

VUL2-LOCA4 5 102%

the mass of fuel dispersal to be all fuel above Recommend a conser vative model to predict the burnup threshold of 55 length of the rod with greater than 3% G Wd /MTU in the cladding strain to disperse.

FFRD ALL collected 34 fuel Element 4: Provide evidence of significant tFGR that may impact ballooning and bur st behavior of high bur nup fuel rods

Data shows increasing transient fission gas release with burnup. However, many other factors besides burnup impact tFGR (e.g., fuel temperature, stresses in fuel).

Licensees will need to address tFGR in their LOCA evaluation models. Some models 35 exist for tFGR, but more validation of those models is needed.

Element 5: Establish a value for the packing fraction of relocated but non-dispersed fuel in the balloon re gion

It is reasonable to use packing fraction values between 70 to 85 percent for fuel susceptible to fine fragmentation. (Fuel at lower burnup would FFR Dlikely have a lower packing fraction).

Texamine a range of packing fractions to account for these effects.o determine the impact on ballooning and burst, it is important to 36 T he RIL helps identify which rods are susce ptible to FFRD

Relocation Dispersal Fine Overlap fragmentation requires fine re q u i re s influenced by:

fragmentation, re q u i re s ~ 55 balloning relocation and GWd/MTU burst

  • Plant design
  • Loading p attern
  • Fuel and cladding design

This information is prototypical of PWR. BWRs will have few if 37 any rods susceptible to dispersal due to different operating practices, system pressure, etc.

There are limitations to the conclusions of the RIL

  • Limits are not applicable to doped fuel or coated cladding.
  • Limits are simplistic, derived as a function of burnup only
  • Limits anticipate accurate prediction of cladding strain along the axial length of a fuel rod
  • Burst opening size is presumed to be stochastic and therefore limits assume large opening size

38 NRC continues to participate in programs related to FFRD

  • SCIP-IV (2019-2024) includes tests near burnup threshold identified in the RIL and tests on doped fuel

- NRC is currently reviewing Studsviks proposals for next phase of SCIP

  • Idaho National Laboratory is working on a LOCA test plan for the TREAT reactor

- NRC has provided feedback through EPRIs Collaborative Research on Advanced Fuel Technologies program

39 RIL 2021-13 Provides a Snapshot in Time of Our Understanding of FFRD and t FG R

  • NRC continues to participate in experimental programs that may provide new information
  • NRC encourages industry to engage with us to understand the impact of FFRD on licensing
  • NRC welcomes questions and challenges from industry regarding our current understanding of FFRD outlined in the RIL

40 Questions?

41 Industry Presentation:

Update on FFRD and Licensing Implications Discussion Period Break High Burnup and Increased Enrichment Spent Fuel Transportation and Dry Storage Research and Licensing

Andrew Barto Division of Fuel Management Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

45 Overview

  • Phase 1, 2, and 3 ATF/HALEU Research
  • Other DFM-Sponsored Research related to ATF/HALEU
  • ATF/HALEU Licensing Activity

46 ATF/HALEU Phase 1

  • ORNL/TM-2020/1725: Assessment of Existing Transportation Packages for Use With HALEU (ML21040A518)
  • ORNL/TM-2020/1833: Isotopic and Fuel Lattice Parameter Trends in Extended Enrichment and Higher Burnup LWR Fuel, Vol. I: PWR Fuel (ML21088A336)
  • ORNL/TM-2020/1835: Isotopic and Fuel Lattice Parameter Trends in Extended Enrichment and Higher Burnup LWR Fuel, Vol. II: BWR Fuel (ML21088A354)
  • ORNL/TM-2021/1961: Extended Enrichment Accident-Tolerant LWR Fuel Isotopic and Lattice Parameter Trends (ML21088A254)

ATF/HALEU Phase 2

  • ORNL/TM-2021/2330: Impacts of LEU+ and ATF on Fresh Fuel Storage Criticality Safety (ML22098A137)
  • Impacts of LEU+ and HBU Fuel on Decay Heat and Radiation Source Term
  • Light Water Reactor LEU+ Lattice Optimization
  • Assessment of Core Physics Characteristics of Extended Enrichment and Higher Burnup LWR Fuels using the Polaris/PARCS Two -Step Approach Vol. 1: PWR Fuel
  • Assessment of Core Physics Characteristics of Extended Enrichment and Higher Burnup LWR Fuels using the Polaris/PARCS Two -Step Approach Vol. 2: BWR Fuel
  • SCALE 6.2.4 Validation:

- Criticality Safety

- Radiation Source Term

- Spent Fuel Applications ATF/HALEU Phase 3

  • Nuclear Data Updates for SCALE 7
  • Polaris+PARCS Micro Depletion Assessment
  • Detailed investigation of Decay Heat Validation at higher burnup for LEU+
  • LEU+ Impact for Burnup Credit
  • SCALE 6.3 Validation:

- Criticality Safety

- Radiation Shielding

- Spent Fuel Applications

- Reactor Physics Additional DFM HALEU Research

- Include bias estimates for new cross section data (ENDF/B -VII.1)

- include new radiochemical assay measurements (e. g., DOE sibling rod HBU RCA samples w/BU up to 66 G Wd /MTU)

- Include fission product bias estimates for new cross section data (ENDF/B -VII.1)

- Evaluate applicability of French HTC critical experiments at higher burnups

  • Develop NUREG/CR with recommendations for sensitivity uncertainty (S/U) methods to select critical experiments for criticality code validation ATF/HALEU Transpor tation Licensing
  • BU-D: Fresh UO2 powder package

- DOT Revalidation request to increase enrichment from 5% to 10%

  • Traveller: Fresh PWR fuel assembly package

- Loose rods enriched up to 7%

- Fuel assemblies enriched up to 6%

  • Ve r s a-Pac: Various uranium contents

- Increased mass for uranium enriched up to 20%

ATF/HALEU Transpor tation Licensing, continued

  • DN-30X: UF6 package

- Modification of existing DN-30 package to transport 30B -X UF6 cylinders

- 30B-10 for up to 10% enriched UF6

- 30B-20 for up to 20% enriched UF6

- Internal criticality control system

- Still under review - Certificate of Compliance anticipated by end of calendar year 2022.

Key Messages

  • We are proactively working on our regulatory readiness for the front and back end of the nuclear fuel cycle to enable the safe use of new fuels to support industry s timelines for deployment of ATF/HALEU LWR fuel
  • We are actively certifying transportation packages for new fuels.

Performing a Transportation Evaluation of ATF with Increased Enrichment and Higher Burnup

Donald Palmrose, PhD Senior Reactor Engineer Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards August 24, 2022 10 CFR 51.52 and Table S-4

Past NRC Transportation Analyses and Assessments

Need for a New Evaluation Outline Leveraging Prior Transportation Reports and New ATF Studies

Methodology

Summary of Efforts to Date 10 CFR 51.52 and Table S-4

  • 10 CFR 51.52, Environmental effects of transportation of fuel and waste -

Ta b l e S-4

  • Environmental Reports for CPs, ESPs, or COLs of a light -water-cooled nuclear power reactor shall contain a statement concerning transportation of fuel and waste
  • The transportation of fuel and waste can be considered a connected action under NEPA
  • Two options under § 51.52
  • Meet the conditions of § 51.52(a) for use of Table S-4 (§ 51.52(c)), or
  • Provide a full description and detailed analysis of the environmental effects
  • NUREG-1437 Revision 1 (2013) extended the § 51.52(a)(2) and (3) conditions to:
  • Not to exceed 5 percent by weight for uranium enrichment
  • Not to exceed 62 G Wd/MTU for the average level of burnup
  • WA S H-1238 (1972) and Supplement 1 to WASH-1238 (NUREG-75/038 in 1975) for the basis of Table S-4
  • NUREG-0170 (1977) Final Environmental Statement on the Transportation of Radioactive Material by Air and Other Modes
  • NUREG/CRHighway and Railway Accident Conditions also known as the - 4829 (1987) Shipping Container Response to Severe Modal Study
  • NUREG-1437 Addendum 1 (1999) in part for Section 6.3 -Transportation
  • NUREG/CRRisk Estimates-6672 (2000) Reexamination of Spent Fuel Shipment
  • NUREG/CRBurnup-6703 (2001) on Environmental Effects of Extending Fuel
  • NUREG-1437, Revision 1 (2013) with Section 4.12.1.1
  • NUREG-2125 (2014) Spent Fuel Transportation Risk Assessment Need for a New Evaluation
  • As shown by past transportation analyses, the NRC has made generic assessments to extend conditions in § 51.52(a) and allow use of Table S-4
  • Industry plans to deploy ATF concepts with increases in enrichment above 5 weight -

percent U-235 and burnup higher than 62 G Wd /MTU (i.e., outside of current conditions)

  • There are two options on the N E PA evaluation of ATF deployment
  • Assess transportation effects at the time of an ATF LAR submittal with the potential of a site-specific transportation evaluation for every NPP site
  • Perform a transportation study of ATF deployment now to assess the potential application of Table S-4 insupport of the environmental review of an ATF LAR submittal
  • Staff is pursuing the second option in line with past practices Leveraging Prior Transportation Reports and New ATF Studies
  • Staff is applying information from these past studies
  • NUREG/ CR-6672 for accident release cases and release fractions
  • NUREG/ CR-6703 for the scope of the analysis and other information
  • NUREG-2125 to help inform transportation parameter va l u e s
  • Applying information from ATF studies performed by ORNL for the NRC regarding radionuclide inventories at increased enrichment and higher burnup levels

https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/transport-spenfuel-radiomats-bg.html#spent Methodology

  • Applying the guidance of:
  • DOEs A Resource Handbook on DOE Transportation Risk Assessment (2002)
  • NUREG-1555 Standard Review Plan for Environmental Reviews for Nuclear Power Plants (1999)
  • Regulatory Guide 4.2, Revision 3, Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Stations, (2018)
  • Use of NRC-RADTRAN (radiological transportation risk) with WebTRAGIS (routing)
  • Certain parameter values selected from prior analyses to aid in direct comparison to Table S-4 (e.g., 0.5 MTU per spent fuel truck shipment)
  • Incident-free and accident risk impacts for fresh fuel and spent fuel shipments
  • Updated data and sensitivity cases as necessary (e.g., population density and shipment by rail)
  • Staff sees the need to perform a study now to
  • Determine if Table S-4 can bound increases in enrichment and higher burnup levels
  • Inform future numerous ATF LARs environmental reviews Summary of Efforts
  • NRC-RADTRAN analysis for the selected sites ongoing to D ate
  • Would not address longer term ATF concepts (e.g., SiC cladding and extruded metallic fuel)
  • Study to be published in a NUREG
  • Draft version for public comment
  • Goal to have a published final NUREG prior to first ATF deployment LAR References
  • Supplement 1 to WASH -1238 (NUREG-75/038 in 1975) - ML14091A176
  • NUREG-1437 (1996) -collections/nuregs/staff/sr1437/index.htmlhttps://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-
  • NUREG-1437, Revision 1, Volume 1 (2013) -collections/nuregs/staff/sr1437/index.htmlhttps://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-

Update on the Collaborative Research on Advanced Fuel Technologies for Light-Water Reactors (CRAFT)

Discussion Period Public Comment Period Adjourn

How did we do?

Link to NRC meeting feedback form:

https://feedback.nrc.gov/pmfs/

Meeting Code: 20220789

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML22230D012&oldid=3722646"