ML23213A047
| ML23213A047 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/20/2023 |
| From: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NRC-2443 | |
| Download: ML23213A047 (1) | |
Text
Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Title:
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards Fuels, Materials, and Structures Subcommittee Open Session Docket Number: (n/a)
Location: teleconference Date: Tuesday, June 20, 2023 Work Order No.: NRC-2443 Pages 1-23 NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.
Court Reporters and Transcribers 1716 14th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20009 (202) 234-4433
1 1
2 3
4 DISCLAIMER 5
6 7 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIONS 8 ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS 9
10 11 The contents of this transcript of the 12 proceeding of the United States Nuclear Regulatory 13 Commission Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, 14 as reported herein, is a record of the discussions 15 recorded at the meeting.
16 17 This transcript has not been reviewed, 18 corrected, and edited, and it may contain 19 inaccuracies.
20 21 22 23 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
1 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3 + + + + +
4 ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS 5 (ACRS) 6 + + + + +
7 FUELS, MATERIALS, AND STRUCTURES SUBCOMMITTEE 8 + + + + +
9 OPEN SESSION 10 + + + + +
11 TUESDAY 12 JUNE 20, 2023 13 + + + + +
14 The Subcommittee met via hybrid in-person 15 and Video Teleconference, at 1:00 p.m. EDT, Ronald 16 Ballinger, Chairman, presiding.
17 18 COMMITTEE MEMBERS:
19 RONALD G. BALLINGER, Chair 20 CHARLES H. BROWN, JR., Member 21 VICKI BIER, Member 22 VESNA DIMITRIJEVIC, Member 23 GREGORY HALNON, Member 24 WALT KIRCHNER, Member 25 JOSE MARCH-LEUBA, Member NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
2 1 JOY L. REMPE, Member 2 MATTHEW SUNSERI, Member 3
4 ACRS CONSULTANT:
7 DESIGNATED FEDERAL OFFICIAL:
10 ALSO PRESENT:
11 MORRIS BYRAM, Framatome 12 NGOLA OTTO, NRR 13 YUSEN QI, Framatome 14 ADAM RAU, NRR 15 JACKI STEVENS, Framatome 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
3 1 P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S 2 (1:00 p.m.)
3 MEMBER BALLINGER: Good afternoon. The 4 meeting will come to order. I'm assuming everybody 5 can hear me.
6 This is a meeting of the Fuels, Materials, 7 and Structures Subcommittee of the Advisory Committee 8 on Reactor Safeguards.
9 I'm Ron Ballinger, Chairman of today's 10 Subcommittee meeting.
11 ACRS members in attendance are Jose March-12 Leuba, Matt Sunseri, Joy Rempe, Walt Kirchner, Vicki 13 Bier, Charlie Brown, and I think Greg Hanlon -- yes, 14 he's here -- Vesna Dimitrijevic is here, and that may 15 be it. Yes, that's it.
16 Chris Brown of the ACRS staff is the 17 designated federal official for this meeting.
18 During today's meeting, the Subcommittee 19 will receive an information briefing on the staff's 20 draft SER for Topical Report, ANP-10340P-A, Revision 21 Zero Supplement 1. Revision Zero, Incorporation of 22 Chromia-doped Fuel Properties, and Framatome PWR 23 Methods.
24 Subcommittee will hear presentations and 25 hold discussions with the NRC staff, Framatome, and NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
4 1 other interested persons, regarding this matter.
2 Part of the presentations by the applicant 3 and the NRC will no doubt be closed, in order to 4 discuss information that is proprietary to the 5 licensee and its contractors, pursuant to 6 5 USC 552b(c)(4).
7 Attendance at the meeting that deals with 8 such information will be limited to the NRC staff and 9 its consultants.
10 Framatome and those individuals and 11 organizations who have entered into an appropriate 12 confidentiality agreement with them will be allowed.
13 Consequently, we need to confirm that we 14 have only eligible observers and participants in the 15 closed part of the meeting.
16 The rules for participation in all ACRS 17 meetings were announced in the Federal Register on 18 June 13, 2019.
19 Our NRC public website provides the ACRS 20 charter, bylaws, agenda, letter reports, and full 21 transcripts, of all Subcommittee meetings, including 22 slides.
23 The agenda for this meeting was posted 24 there, along with the MS Teams link. We have received 25 no written statements or requests to make an oral NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
5 1 statement from the public.
2 The Subcommittee will gather information, 3 analyze the relevant issues and facts, and formulate 4 proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for 5 deliberation by the full committee.
6 A transcript of the meeting is being kept, 7 and will be made available.
8 Today's meeting is being held in person 9 and over Microsoft Teams. There is also a telephone 10 bridge line and an MS Teams link, allowing for 11 participation of the public.
12 When addressing the Subcommittee, the 13 participants should first identify themselves and 14 speak with sufficient clarity and volume, so that they 15 may be readily heard.
16 When not speaking, we request that 17 participants mute your computer microphone by pressing 18 star-six.
19 We'll now proceed with the meeting. Let's 20 start by calling on Greg Suber from NRR, and I think 21 Jackie Stevens from Framatome will provide opening 22 remarks. So, Greg, are you out there?
23 (Pause.)
24 MEMBER BALLINGER: You should probably 25 state your name and company.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
6 1 MR. OTTO: Sure. Good afternoon, I'm 2 Ngola Otto. I'm the project manager for Framatome 3 Topical Report Reviews, and I'm the project manager 4 for this particular topical report review.
5 Today, we're going to hear from the staff 6 based on their review of the Chromia-dope topical 7 report, which is a supplement to what was approved 8 back in 2018. We did approve Provision Zero, which 9 was based on PWR methods.
10 So, Adam, he's going to be presenting here 11 today, based on his review on the Chromia-dope aspect 12 of the PWR, and also we did use the ARITA methodology 13 to analyze Chromia-dope.
14 So, the plan is that we will issue a final 15 safety evaluation after completing the ARITA final 16 safety evaluation. So, I wanted to mention that.
17 With that, I'll turn it over to Framatome.
18 MEMBER BALLINGER: Jackie Stevens, are you 19 out there?
20 MS. STEVENS: Yes, I am. Thank you, 21 Ngola. Can everyone hear me okay?
22 MEMBER BALLINGER: I think so.
23 MS. STEVENS: Okay, great. Good 24 afternoon. Welcome to all who are attending our 25 discussion today on Framatome's topical report, AMP-NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
7 1 10340PA, Revision Zero, Supplement 1P, Incorporation 2 of the Chromia-dope Fuel Properties into Framatome's 3 PWR Methods.
4 This topical report is the result of 5 efforts of our fuel organization's Dr. Yusem Qi, 6 Morris Byram, and others.
7 Their time and efforts resulted in a 8 quality submittal to the NRC in June of 2021, and 9 NRC's review of the report in approximately two years.
10 Thank you, gentlemen, for your efforts.
11 I would also like to recognize Mr. Beaton 12 and the other NRC reviewers for their detailed review 13 of the report, and the timely and efficient manner of 14 performing the review.
15 Framatome has found that the reviewers 16 were well-prepared and had a full understanding of 17 Framatome's responses, before each audit meeting.
18 The reviewers' commitment to understanding 19 Framatome's PWR methodologies, before and during the 20 audit, resulted in an efficient and effective review.
21 Framatome's objective is to bring 22 innovation and improved performance methods to the 23 industry. And when both our submittal and the NRC's 24 review are as cohesive and efficient as the review on 25 this topical report, then we were able to meet that NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
8 1 objective.
2 As we continue to work towards quality 3 reports for all of our submittals, I'd like to 4 encourage the NRC to continue to develop the reviewers 5 to be able to perform these audits for understanding, 6 that result in a draft SC during the audit, or in a 7 short duration afterwards.
8 I understand that some of our topical 9 reports are more complex than others, but we have 10 found that if there is a large time lapse between 11 audits and discussions with our subject matter 12 experts, then context and understanding may not be as 13 distinct.
14 Framatome is open to improving our own 15 processes, to help the NRC reviewers become 16 knowledgeable of our methodologies, and we continue to 17 encourage open communication with the staff reviewers, 18 while also assuring transparency for the public.
19 Again, thank you for your time today. We 20 welcome your questions, feedback, and insights, 21 throughout the meeting.
22 MEMBER BALLINGER: Thank you. I think, 23 Morris, are you up next?
24 MR. BYRAM: Yes, I am.
25 MEMBER BALLINGER: Okay, you're on.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
9 1 MR. BYRAM: Great. Can everybody see the 2 slides okay?
3 MEMBER BALLINGER: Yes.
4 MR. BYRAM: Great. Okay, so as Jackie 5 mentioned, this is AMP-10340, Rev. Zero, 6 Supplement 1P, Rev. Zero, Incorporation of Chromia-7 dope Fuel Properties and Framatome PWR Methods.
8 I'm Morris Byram and I am manager for 9 licensing for this topical report.
10 And on the agenda for the open session for 11 Framatome today, we're going to talk about key 12 milestones.
13 Backing up what Jackie said about the 14 efficient review of this topical report, advanced 15 codes and methods topical reports, we're going to go 16 through where this topical report fits into the 17 overall scheme of advancement that's in codes, and 18 we're going to talk about approval requests and the 19 limitations that were placed in issue when it was 20 submitted, and for the draft SC on this topical 21 report, and then go through a topical report outline.
22 Key milestones. Pre-submittal of meeting 23 was held October 2020. The topical report was 24 submitted for review in June 2021. It was accepted 25 for review July 2021.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
10 1 We had the audit for understanding with 2 the NRC in November and December of 2021, and RAIs 3 were received in December of 2021. We submitted the 4 RAI responses in April of 2022, and the draft SC was 5 received April of 2023.
6 Framatome PWR codes and methods. This is 7 a depiction of all of the Framatome codes and methods 8 will be used going forward, with ATF-type topical 9 reports.
10 You can see in the blue that these are 11 older methods, and the green are the newer methods 12 which have been approved for use in Framatome PWR 13 codes.
14 The main effect of this topical report, 15 Chromia-doped fuel and PWR methods, is through the 16 fuel performance code GALILEO.
17 You can see through the orange arrows that 18 these are the connections between the methods that are 19 used for licensing applications, and also note for the 20 non-LOCA analyses, the area which is rod ejection, and 21 includes the ARITA topical report.
22 The ARITA is in yellow, and that is the 23 only one of these topical reports which has not been 24 approved yet, but is very close.
25 So, I think that's the overview NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
11 1 discussion. And again, this topical report supplement 2 that we are talking about today is mainly impacting 3 the fuel performance code GALILEO.
4 And there are more connections between the 5 codes and methods for Framatome, but this shows just 6 the measure of connections.
7 To describe the topical report for what 8 was submitted, this is a supplement, the base topical 9 for PWR methods, which was approved in 2018. It uses 10 the regulatory guidance from the SRP, NUREG-0800, 11 Sections 4.2 and 4.4.
12 Generic parts of the base topical report, 13 not repeating this supplement, but mentioned and 14 addressed as applicability for the PWR methods, are 15 materials properties, behavioral assessment, 16 qualification database, and operating experience. And 17 there are no changes required to currently approve 18 methods to approve this topical report.
19 The approval request in the topical report 20 was to extend the applicability of existing approved 21 PWR methods, to include Chromia-doped fuel for 22 licensing applications.
23 Limitations in the topical report and 24 applied in the draft SC are consistent with the 25 approval topicals.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
12 1 Grain size for standard fuel is unchanged 2 from GALILEO. Current burn-up limitations apply for 3 UO2 fuel. Chromia-doped concentration range is 4 consistent with the base topical report. And with the 5 draft SC, applies additional limitation for burn-up on 6 the Gad fuel.
7 And getting to the topical report outline, 8 the applicability of the base topical report goes over 9 and mentions, describes what is in the base topical 10 report for materials, properties, behavioral 11 assessment, accident behavior, and qualification data.
12 And the next section deals with the 13 qualification of GALILEO, the GALILEO thermal-14 connectivity model, the fission gas release model, 15 intergranular gas use swelling model, and the 16 validation of the three rod tree volume and internal 17 pressure.
18 Next section is the Qualification of 19 Framatome Methods to Chromia-doped Fuel, and the 20 following section is Qualification of Rod Growth to 21 Chromia-doped Fuel.
22 And then the next section deals with the 23 licensing criteria assessment for fuel rod thermal-24 mechanical evaluation, including cladding collapse, 25 cladding fatigue, maximum rod internal pressure.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
13 1 Safety analysis evaluations were performed 2 to point out the changes due to Chromia-doped fuel for 3 PWR methods in non-LOCA, using the ARITA methodology 4 in LOCA, and for control rod ejection. And then the 5 impacts of nuclear design requirements are also 6 included.
7 And so, that is the end of the open 8 presentation for Framatome. Are there any questions?
9 MEMBER KIRCHNER: Morris, this is Walt 10 Kirchner. You gave a nice outline of what you're 11 covering in your topical report.
12 Could you just, for the public record, say 13 what the overall change or impact of Chromia-doped 14 fuel is, and why it would change the methodology, 15 without going into any proprietary descriptions?
16 Why are you doping fuel with Chromia?
17 Just for the public record. And what would be the 18 general mechanical or other material impacts on your 19 methodologies?
20 MR. BYRAM: There are slight impacts on 21 the methodologies, and the effects of the calculated 22 evaluations.
23 The major impact and benefit of the 24 Chromia-doped fuel is to increase grain size, and 25 therefore impact in a positive way fission gas NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
14 1 release. That is the overall positive impact.
2 There are others. As pointed out, there 3 are other model adjustments to the PWR Chromia-doped 4 that will go into more detail with Yusen's 5 presentation for the closed section. But that's the 6 overall impact.
7 MEMBER KIRCHNER: So, when you say 8 positive, with regard to fission product release, 9 you're saying less fission product gases, fission 10 product release. Is that correct?
11 MR. BYRAM: Correct. Correct.
12 CHAIR MARCH-LEUBA: This is Jose March-13 Leuba. See, we're talking generalities, again 14 remember we're in the open session.
15 Clearly, chromium is a neutron poison 16 which reduces the neutronic efficiency of the core.
17 And my first impression is you are going to be 18 discharging more U235 out of the core at the end of 19 the cycle, simply because there's extra poison and you 20 have to shut down earlier.
21 So, it has an impact on economics.
22 Obviously, the thinking of Framatome is that a balance 23 between more fission gas release and maybe spending a 24 little bit more on enrichment, has some benefits. Can 25 you discuss the economic impact of this? Again, we're NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
15 1 in open session, so don't disclose any proprietary.
2 MR. BYRAM: Right. Working with increased 3 enrichment and increased burn-up for the fuel cycle, 4 it should give good economic impact, as far as making 5 the fuel more efficient.
6 But again, apart by itself, there is not 7 a large economic impact. I don't believe that working 8 with increased enrichment and high burn-up will yield 9 a greater economic impact and a positive effect.
10 CHAIR MARCH-LEUBA: But to compensate for 11 the drop in reactivity, because chromium is present in 12 another cycle, you must discharge additional U235 13 before, in the form of its view, separate work units 14 of the enrichment facility.
15 So, my question -- let me make it more 16 succinct. Have you, Framatome, done a study and 17 analysis, have you designed a core with Chromia-dope, 18 and is it economical? Is it worthwhile for you or the 19 licensees?
20 MR. BYRAM: Jose, I don't have an answer 21 for you on that right now. Could I get back with you 22 on that?
23 CHAIR MARCH-LEUBA: Sure. Yes, send it to 24 Chris Brown.
25 MR. BYRAM: Yes.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
16 1 CHAIR MARCH-LEUBA: But whatever you need 2 to send, don't send it to me. Send it to --
3 MEMBER KIRCHNER: Yes. I think, Jose, I 4 mean, the short answer is -- I was just trying to 5 tease it out of Morris -- is that if you have better 6 fission product retention, you can go to hard burn-up.
7 CHAIR MARCH-LEUBA: But still, at the end, 8 you are going to discharge more U235, because you have 9 to compensate for the negative reactivity. So, there 10 has to be a balance.
11 Just curious. It has no safety concern, 12 as Clea said.
13 MR. BYRAM: Yes.
14 MEMBER BALLINGER: Other questions from 15 members?
16 MR. QI: This is Yusen speaking. Just add 17 a little bit for Morris. The amount added is super-18 small. And also, PWR planned to -- actually, they're 19 using the doped fuel. So, we do have core designs.
20 Okay, thank you.
21 MEMBER BALLINGER: Now, do I understand 22 that Yusen's presentation is not going to be given?
23 Did I hear you say that you completed the open 24 presentation?
25 MR. BYRAM: Yeah, for Framatome.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
17 1 MEMBER BALLINGER: Okay, so my agenda is 2 a little bit mixed up. So, I know got to go to add --
3 because that's done.
4 All right, sorry about that. Yeah, Adam, 5 are you ready to go?
6 MR. RAU: Yeah. I'll pull up the slide.
7 Thank you. I'll be ready when Ngola pulls up the 8 slides.
9 MEMBER BALLINGER: Oh, okay.
10 MR. RAU: Thank you.
11 (Pause.)
12 MEMBER BALLINGER: While we're waiting, I 13 might remind the Subcommittee that we had a very 14 extensive presentation that included a lot of this, 15 from Framatome during our recent visit to the facility 16 in Richland.
17 So, for those that are looking for 18 additional information, that presentation is part of 19 the package, was very extensive, and the reason, the 20 actual reason.
21 (Pause.)
22 MR. RAU: Can you all hear me?
23 MEMBER BALLINGER: Yeah.
24 MR. RAU: Okay. All right, so thank you 25 very much. My name is Adam Rau, I'm a technical NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
18 1 reviewer in the Nuclear Systems Performance Branch.
2 I need to thank Robert Beaton at the beginning of the 3 presentation for carrying out the bulk of the topical 4 report review. I came on later in the process, but 5 I'll be presenting the safety evaluation for NRR 6 today.
7 So, struck for the presentation to follow 8 the form of the safety evaluation, so we'll start out 9 talking about the specific licensing criteria that are 10 intended to be met, the applicability of the base 11 topical report as it's been discussed.
12 The report is about the addition of 13 Chromia-dope into the fuel, and so the impact is 14 primarily on the thermal-mechanical performance. And 15 so, I've bolded number four because the bulk of the 16 technical content is on GALILEO. Next slide, please.
17 So, we're discussion fuel thermal-18 mechanical performance. Relevant regulations are 19 general design criteria ten for the SAFDLs for fuel.
20 10 CFR 5046 for emergency core cooling system design 21 and loss of coolant accident, as well as general 22 design criteria 28 requires analysis of the rod 23 ejection accident.
24 These objectives are summed up fairly well 25 in SRP 4.2, that the fuel system should not be damaged NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
19 1 as a result of normal operation and anticipated 2 operational occurrences, but the number of fuel rod 3 failures should not be underestimated for postulated 4 accidents, and that coolability should be maintained, 5 and for rod insertion should be possible. Next slide, 6 please.
7 So, as has been stated, this is a 8 supplement to an approved topical report. So, the 9 goal of the supplement is to extend the applicability 10 of Framatome pressurized water reactor methods to 11 Chromia-doped fuel.
12 The topical report for boiling water 13 reactor methodologies has been reviewed and approved, 14 so there some common material between the two, as has 15 been discussed.
16 The supplement that's under review 17 contains code-specific implementations for Chromia-18 doped material property models, some additional 19 measurement data, as well as a licensing criteria 20 assessment for pressurized water reactors. Next 21 slide, please.
22 So, discussion was provided for the 23 behavior of Chromia-doped fuel during accidents, 24 specifically for the loss-of-coolant accidents, and 25 for the rod ejection accident.
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
20 1 The conclusion. Framatome provided 2 information that the acceptance criteria for the loss-3 of-coolant accident and the rod ejection accident are 4 still applicable when Chromia-doped fuel was used.
5 In general, the behavior of the doped fuel 6 is similar to the standard U02, and where the behavior 7 does differ because the properties of the doped fuel 8 are different than the standard fuel, these changes 9 are explicitly modeled in GALILEO. Next slide, 10 please.
11 So, Framatome provided the implementation 12 of the thermal-connectivity models for Chromia-doped 13 fuel in the topical report. This implementation was 14 supported by measurement data for unradiated fuel, as 15 well as integral effects tests for radiated fuel.
16 NRC staff reviewed this information and 17 found that it was satisfactory for both Chromia-doped 18 urania fuel, and Chromia-doped urania-gadolinium fuel.
19 Next slide, please.
20 Framatome also provided implementation of 21 models for the fuel melting temperature. Again, 22 similarly, information was provided for the Chromia-23 doped urania and urania-gadolinium fuel.
24 The NRC staff reviewed this information 25 and found that it was consistent with the supporting NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
21 1 qualification data. Next slide, thank you.
2 For fission gas release, Framatome 3 provided the implementation of fission gas release 4 models for Chromia-doped fuel, as well as the basis 5 and comparisons between measured and cryptic results.
6 And in addition to this, comparative 7 analysis was provided for Chromia-doped urania-8 gadolinium fuel.
9 For standard U02, NRC staff was able to 10 review the models, and found that it was consistent 11 with experimental data for fission gas release fuel.
12 For Chromia-doped urania-gadolinium fuel, 13 a limitation and condition was placed to ensure the 14 appropriate therapies are used appropriately. Next 15 slide, please.
16 So, rod growth models were originally 17 reviewed and approved in the M5 cladding topical 18 report.
19 For the Chromia-doped supplement, 20 Framatome provided the specific information about what 21 rods in the measurement database were Chromia-doped.
22 NRC staff reviewed this comparative.
23 And there was some discussion about 24 Chromia-doped gadolinium fuel rods, as well as the 25 cladding type that's specific to these fuel types, and NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
22 1 NRC staff reviewed this and found this acceptable.
2 So, Framatome also provided the impact of 3 the implementation on other safety analysis 4 methodologies, including ARCADIA, AREA, ARITA, and 5 LOCA, methodologies, obviously with the caveat that 6 ARITA is still under review.
7 General conclusions from this evaluation 8 were that the Chromia-doped properties are explicitly 9 modeled in GALILEO. I threw a couple in with GALILEO 10 for implementation of GALILEO as RELAP5, and that the 11 use of the Chromia-doped properties don't alter the 12 workflow of these calculations.
13 And finally, Framatome provided a 14 licensing criteria assessment, both for thermal-15 mechanical evaluations and safety analyses. General 16 conclusions for these were that the changes as a 17 result of the doping were small, and consistent with 18 the field property changes. And so, NRC staff was 19 able to accept this as well.
20 So, conclusions. Material property 21 changes were implemented in GALILEO, and these were 22 consistent with qualification data. The impact of the 23 doping on the field performance was adequately 24 analyzed and the thermal-mechanical performance was 25 addressed, and generally, the impact on safety NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
23 1 analysis was smaller than expected.
2 And I believe on the next slide, Framatome 3 also discussed the limitations and conditions already.
4 So, I won't repeat these here. But we can -- yeah, 5 so. All right, thank you. Are there any questions?
6 MEMBER BALLINGER: Questions from members?
7 Okay, this concludes the open part of the 8 meeting. So, we need to go out and ask if there are 9 members of the public that would like to make a 10 comment.
11 If you are out there and you would like to 12 make a comment, please state your name first, and then 13 make your comment.
14 Hearing none, thank you very much. This 15 will close the open part of the session. Now, we need 16 to transfer to the closed part, and that always 17 entails a little bit of effort.
18 So, we'll take a ten-minute break and come 19 back to the closed session, since it's now 1:32, let's 20 try 1:45. That's more than ten, but I'm sorry.
21 (Whereupon, the above-entitled matter went 22 off the record at 1:32 p.m.)
23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
ANP-10340, Revision 0, Supplement 1P, Revision 0 Incorporation of Chromia-Doped Fuel Properties in Framatome PWR Methods (OPEN)
Morris Byram ACRS Subcommittee June 20, 2023 ANP-10340P-A, Revision 0, Supplement 1, Revision 0 (Open) - ACRS Subcommittee - June 20, 2023 1
Agenda Key Milestones Advanced Codes and Methods Topical Reports Approval Request and Limitations Topical Report Outline ANP-10340P-A, Revision 0, Supplement 1, Revision 0 (Open) - ACRS Subcommittee - June 20, 2023 2
Key Milestones Pre-submittal meeting: October 2020 Submitted ANP-10340, Supplement 1 for review: June 2021 Accepted for review: July 2021 Audit for Understanding: November/December 2021 RAIs received: December 2021 Submitted RAI Responses: April 2022 Draft SE: April 2023 ANP-10340P-A, Revision 0, Supplement 1, Revision 0 (Open) - ACRS Subcommittee - June 20, 2023 3
Framatome PWR Codes and Methods Overview Only major methodology connections shown ANP-10340P-A, Revision 0, Supplement 1, Revision 0 (Open) - ACRS Subcommittee - June 20, 2023 4
Topical Report Introduction Supplement to base topical for BWR methods approved in 2018 Regulatory guidance: NUREG-0800 Sections 4.2 and 4.4 Generic parts to the base topical not repeated in supplement, but are addressed
- Material properties
- Behavioral assessment
- Qualification database
- Operating experience No changes to currently approved methods ANP-10340P-A, Revision 0, Supplement 1, Revision 0 (Open) - ACRS Subcommittee - June 20, 2023 5
Approval Request Extend the applicability of existing approved PWR methods to include chromia-doped fuel for licensing applications Limitations Consistent with Approved Topicals Grain size for standard fuel is unchanged from GALILEO Current Burnup limitations apply for UO2 Chromia-doped concentration range is consistent with base topical Additional Burnup limitation on UO2-Gd2O3 (SER)
ANP-10340P-A, Revision 0, Supplement 1, Revision 0 (Open) - ACRS Subcommittee - June 20, 2023 6
Topical Report Outline Applicability of base topical report
- Materials properties
- Behavioral assessment
- Accident behavior
- Qualification data Qualification of GALILEO
- GALILEO thermal conductivity model
- GALILEO fission gas release model
- GALILEO intergranular gaseous swelling model
- Validation of rod free volume and internal pressure ANP-10340P-A, Revision 0, Supplement 1, Revision 0 (Open) - ACRS Subcommittee - June 20, 2023 7
Topical Report Outline (Cont.)
Qualification of Framatome methods to chromia-doped fuel Qualification of rod growth to chromia-doped fuel Licensing criteria assessment
- Fuel rod thermal-mechanical evaluation
- Cladding collapse
- Cladding fatigue
- Maximum rod internal pressure
- Safety analysis
- Non-LOCA (ARITA methodology)
- Control rod ejection accident
- Impacts of nuclear design requirements ANP-10340P-A, Revision 0, Supplement 1, Revision 0 (Open) - ACRS Subcommittee - June 20, 2023 8
Acronyms AREA - ARCADIA Rod Ejection Accident LOCA - Loss of Coolant Accident ARITA - ARTEMIS/RELAP Integrated Transient NRC - U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Analysis PWR - Pressurized Water Reactor CE - Combustion Engineering RLBLOCA - Realistic Large Break Loss of Coolant Accident CHF - Critical Heat Flux SB - Small Break EM - Evaluation Model SBLOCA - Small Break Loss of Coolant FPC - Fuel Performance Code Accident UO2 - Standard Fuel LBLOCA - Large Break Loss of Coolant Accident UO2-Gd2O3 - Gadolinia Fuel LB - Large Break W - Westinghouse ANP-10340P-A, Revision 0, Supplement 1, Revision 0 (Open) - ACRS Subcommittee - June 20, 2023 9
DOE Acknowledgment and Disclaimer Acknowledgment: This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Energy under Award Number DE-NE0009034.
Disclaimer: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.
ANP-10340P-A, Revision 0, Supplement 1, Revision 0 (Open) - ACRS Subcommittee - June 20, 2023 10
Any reproduction, alteration, transmission to any third party or publication in whole or in part of this document and/or its content is prohibited unless Framatome has provided its prior and written consent.
This document and any information it contains shall not be used for any other purpose than the one for which they were provided. Legal action may be taken against any infringer and/or any person breaching the aforementioned obligations ARCADIA, AREA, ARITA, COPERNIC, GAIA, GALILEO, M5Framatome, PROtect, and S-RELAP5 are trademarks or registered trademarks of Framatome or its affiliates, in the USA or other countries.
ANP-10340P-A, Revision 0, Supplement 1, Revision 0 (Open) - ACRS Subcommittee - June 20, 2023 11
ANP-10340P-A, Revision 0, Supplement 1, Revision 0 (Open) - ACRS Subcommittee - June 20, 2023 12 Staff Review of Supplement 1 to ANP-10340P-A Topical Report Incorporation of Chromia-Doped Fuel Properties in Framatome PWR Methods Adam Rau, PhD June 20th, 2023 Division of Safety Systems Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Presentation Outline
- 1. Licensing Criteria
- 2. Applicability of Base Topical Report
- 3. Impacts of Chromia-Doped Fuel During Accidents
- 4. Qualification of Galileo for Chromia-Doped Fuel
- 5. Qualification of Rod Growth to Chromia-Doped Fuel
- 6. Qualification of Framatome Methodologies for Chromia-Doped Fuel
- 7. Licensing Criteria Assessment 2
Licensing Criteria Regulations:
GDC 10 (SAFDLS) 10 CFR 50.46 GDC 28 (Rod Ejection)
SRP Section 4.2 Objectives:
The fuel system is not damaged as a result of normal operation and anticipated operational occurrences (AOOs),
Fuel system damage is never so severe as to prevent control rod insertion when it is required, The number of fuel rod failures is not underestimated for postulated accidents, and Coolability is always maintained.
3
Applicability of Base Topical Report Supplement Goal: Extend applicability of existing Framatome PWR topical reports to Chromia-Doped Fuel Base TR sections applicable to PWR/BWR Applications:
Material Properties Behavioral Assessment Qualification Database Operating Experience PWR-Specific Supplement:
Code-specific implementation Additional measurement data Licensing criteria assessment 4
Impacts of Chromia-Doped Fuel During Accidents General conclusions Use of Cr-doped fuel does not alter acceptance criteria Similar behavior to undoped fuel Impacts of chromia-doped fuel explicitly modeled by GALILEO Supported by review of material properties, sample accident analysis 5
GALILEO Qualification:
Thermal Conductivity Framatome Evaluation Good agreement demonstrated between GALILEO predictions and test data for 2006 and 2015 test campaigns For irradiated fuel, REMORA2 test demonstrates validity of thermal models including thermal conductivity NRC Evaluation NRC staff found the benchmarking of GALILEO thermal conductivity models satisfactory.
Conclusion The NRC staff determined that Framatomes thermal conductivity models for chromia-doped fuel and chromia-doped (U-Gd)O2 are acceptable.
6
GALILEO Qualification:
Fuel Melting Temperature Framatome Evaluation Provided equations implemented in GALILEO and supporting qualification data NRC Evaluation Reviewed GALILEO implementation for chromia-doped UO2 and chromia-doped (U-Gd)O2 Conclusion GALILEO appropriately captures the results of JRC-ITU experiments 7
GALILEO Qualification:
Fission Gas Release Framatome Evaluation Provided GALILEO implementation and basis, including comparisons of predicted and measured results Provided comparative analysis for doped UO2-Gd2O3 NRC Evaluation Reviewed data and found that FGR models for doped UO2 are satisfactorily benchmarked to experimental data FGR models for doped UO2-Gd2O3 are suitable provided that a new limitation is met Conclusion Finds that FGR models are suitable per use provided that limitations and conditions are met 8
Qualification of Rod Growth Framatome Evaluation Compared rod growth model to experimental database NRC Evaluation Reviewed measured to predicted comparison Discussed chromia-doped gadolinia fuel rods, cladding Conclusion Rod growth model is acceptable for use with chromia-doped fuel 9
Qualification of Framatome Methodologies Framatome Evaluation Discussed implementation in ARCADIA, AREA, ARITA, W&CE LOCA Methodologies NRC Evaluation Chromia-doped properties are explicitly implemented through coupling with GALILEO Chromia-doped properties do not alter calculation methodologies Conclusion Use of ARCADIA, AREA, ARITA, and W&CE LOCA methodologies to model chromia-doped fuel is acceptable 10
Licensing Criteria Assessment Framatome Evaluation Provided sample fuel rod thermal-mechanical evaluations and safety analysis NRC Evaluation Changes in results were small and predictable results of fuel property changes Conclusion Results of the licensing criteria assessment are acceptable 11
Conclusions Material property changes implemented in GALILEO and other Framatome PWR methodologies are supported by qualification data Impact of chromia dopant on fuel performance has been adequately analyzed Thermal-mechanical performance adequately addressed with the application of GALILEO Impacts on safety analysis are small and expected 12
Conclusions:
Limitations and Conditions
- 1. The limitation imposed on grain size of standard fuel in Reference 7 (GALILEO TR, Rev. 1) is unchanged.
- 2. Chromia-doped fuel is limited to a specified rod average burnup limit.
- 3. Chromia concentration is limited to a specified range. The limit also applies to chromia-doped gadolinia fuel.
- 4. Limitation on chromia-doped UO2-Gd2O3 fuel 13
Questions 14
Acronyms AOO - Anticipated Operational Occurrence AREA - ARCADIA Rod Ejection Accident BWR - Boiling Water Reactor FGR - Fission Gas Release JRC-ITU - Joint Research Centre - Institute for Transuranium Elements LOCA - Loss of Coolant Accident PWR - Pressurized Water Reactor REA - Rod Ejection Accident RG - Regulatory Guide RLBLOCA - Realistic Large Break Loss of Coolant Accident TR - Topical Report UO2 - Uranium Dioxide (or Urania)
UO2-Gd2O3 - Urania-Gadolinia 15