ML20148J308

Forwards Current Schedule to Meet Requirements for Conversion from Highly Enriched U to Low Enriched U Fuel & Vr Ohlsson Informing Univ That Funding Available for Sept 1987 - Aug 1989 for Fuel Conversion

ML20148J308
Person / Time
Site:	University of Iowa
Issue date:	03/24/1988
From:	Spinrad B IOWA STATE UNIV., AMES, IA
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM)
References
NUDOCS 8803300232
Download: ML20148J308 (34)

Text

o h Department of Nuclear Engineenng 261 Sweeney Hall IOWA STAl E ^" i- smo 22*

UNIVERSITY T e #esis2 = o Docket No. 50-116 March 24, 1988 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Attn: Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Dear Sir:

Pursuant to paragraph (c)(2) of Part 50.64, we are submitting our current schedule to meet the requirements for conversion from HEU to LEU fuel at the Iowa State UTR-10 facility. The schedule is essentially the same as that proposed by us one year ago, in our first communication with NRC regarding fuel conversion.

We submitted our proposal for an assistance grant to DOE May 15, 1987. A copy of this proposal is enclosed. On July 27, 1987, the Contracts and Grants Office at ISU was notified that DOE would support the conversion project with

$134,210 over two years, beginning September 1, 1987 (copy enclosed). The work was initiated then, as described in the DOE proposal, and we plan to submit an updated 3afety Analysis Report to NRR this summer.

The summer of 1989 is still the target date for the conversion. We plan to shut the reactor down in April 1989 and begin shipments of used and unused HEU fuel to DOE then. LEU fuel will be received and installed between June and August of 1989. Adherence to this schedule depends on certain factors beyond our cortrol, such as a timely review of the SAR by NRR, and the availability of LEU fuel, shipping casks, etc.

O s \

$$3 3SOSE SSSS h1[

P

Since the safety analysis of the LEU core is still in progress, it is prema-ture to include necessary changes in the license, facility, or procedures.

The changes will be submitted as part of the updated SAR this summer, Sincerely, Approved:

MNde Richard A Hendrickson Bernard I. Spinrad Reactor Manager Professor and Chair

/rpa C: L. E. Burkhart R. A. Danofsky W. R Madden E. E. Sobottka NRC Region III Enclosures

[ h Department of Energy p- I Chicago Operations Of fice 6

g 9800 South Cass Avenue s,,( Argonne, Illinois 60439 lir. Richard llasbrook Contract and Grants Office JUL 2 7 W Iowa State University 204 Beardshear Itall Ames, Iowa 50011 Dear tir. liasbrookt

SUBJECT:

PROPOSED NEW GRANT NO. DE-FC02-87ER75360 FOR A PROJECT ENTITLED "LOW ENRICittiENT (LEU) FUEL CONVERSION FOR IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY" Subj ect to the award of a Grant document, the Department of Energy can provide support in the amount of $134,210.00 for the proposed period September 1, 1987 through August 31, 1989.

The Project Director for the research described in your proposal la Prof.

Robert E. Williams.

Upon receipt of the items requested on the enclosed Requirements Sheet, a Grant will be prepared for the proposed project. The requested items should be returned by August 15, 1987 to allow award of the Grant by September 1, 1987.

This notification should in no way be construed as a commitment on the part of the Department of Energy to reimburse costs incurred prior t,o the award of the Grant.

Please contact us if you have any questions.

Sincerely, N

'g g y 3, at -

Valdean R. Ohlsson Contract Specialist Acquisition and Assistance Operations Branch Enclosuret

~ ~ ' ~ ~

77 l As Stated '

Ob f hff.

cc Prof. Robert Williams, w/o enc 1. EJ

.e CONilMCl.1,1 r;,gflg

,, n 1._ UilICf.R f b Mr s U+',

Celebrating the U.S. Constitution Bicentennial - 1787-1987

~

Departenent of Nuclear Engineering 261 Sweeney Hall IOWA STATE ^-a. i- >a n UNIVERSITY Teierhoa 5is-244 584o Hay 15, 1987 1

!!r . 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

Dear fir. Stephens:

Enclosed is the official proposal for a assistance grant for the conversion of the ISU reactor to LEU fuel. It is unchanged from the draft copy sent to you earlier.

I apologize for being behind schedule on submitting the proposal. Thank you for your patience.

Sincerely,

%CWatu Robert E. Williams, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor of Nuclear Engineering

/rpa -

Enclosure

A Proposal for an s for the Conves M Iowa State l WM '

UlR-10 Researct low En 8^ ----

Mr. Richard E. Stephens, Director Division of University and Industry Programs Office of Field Operations Management U- S. I Office of Energy Research Offic8 U.S. Department nf Energy Ulvision of Unt' Washington, D.c 20585 IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY DEPAR1 MENT OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING May, 1987 9&rWL Robert E. Williams

_ __ . b.b Richard A. HendrIckson W _.

f J. L4' f

A) f r ed r . Rohach 1

Proposed Period: Appr ved by August 1. 198 7 to Hay 31. 1990 < - -

f-Requested Funds:

$170.915

_gf4M ' M _M( N

,R chard E. Hasb ok

, C ntracts and rants Office

\

TABLE OF CONTENTS  !

I

1. Introduction 1  !

!!. LEU Fuel for the UTR-10 Reactor 2 l l

111. Safety Analysis Phase - Computations 5 IV. Safety Analysis Phase - Experiments 7 V. Fuel Transfer 10 r

VI. Schedule for Conversion 11 .

VII. Budget i6 '

Vill. References 21 i

l Appendix A. Communications with DOE Appendix B. Core Diagrams l

?

k I

i l

1 i

t l

1 B

i l

i r,y_-m- -,-,.,w e -,e... 3 .y-,.,- , - ~ . ,

I. Introduction On March 27, 1986 the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission revised Title X of its Code of Federal Regulations governing non-power nuclear reactors. A licensee using high enrichment uranfum (HEU) fuel must replace all HEU fuel in its possession with available low enrichment uranium (LEU). This revised regulation, 10 CFR 50.64, further states.that this conversion requirement is contin-gent upon (1) the availability of LEU fuel acceptable to the Commission, and (2) Federal Government funding for the conver-sion.

i lhe UTR-10 research reactor at lowa State University, currently 1

us.ng 92% enriched uranium fuel, Is going to be converted to LEU fuel. lhe DOE's RERTR program has developed LEU fuel apparently l suitable for the UTR-10 reactor. Also, DOE has nottfled ISU that l funding is available for the safety analysis phase of the conver-l

[ slon process (See Appendix A),

1 This document is a proposal to DOE for those funds, in the form l of an assistance grant. The proposal summarizes the expected changes in the facility, the computations and experiments needed 1

to carry out the conversion, and the work plan for completion of the task. A DOE reimbursement of $170,915 is requested to cover the direct costs of conversion. ISU will bear the Indirect costs, as requested by DOE (Appendix A).

L

s

!!. LEU Fuel for the UTR-10 Reactor The core of the UTR-10 reactor, as defined in the license techn!-

cal specifications, consists of a 3' 8" by 4' 8" stack of graph-Ite" 4 feet high, in which two rows of fuel assemblies are 2

located . Ordinary water circulates through the assemblies during operation, serving as moderator and coolant. The core tanks, each holding six fuel assemblies, are separated by an 18-in thick Internal reflector (See Appendix B). Control is meintained with four control elements: one regulating rod, one shim-safety rod, and two safety rods. The control elements are actually boral plates located between the core tanks and the external reflector, but the SAR refers to them as control rods.

According to the current plan proposed by the RERTR group at ANL, ISU will be one of 14 reactors to receive standard uranium sill-cfde plates 3 Properties of the existing HEU fuel in the UTR-10 reactor and the proposed standard LEU plates and elements are given in Table 1. The primary consideration in the fuel conver-sfon is that the dimensions of the fuel assemblies do not changes they must be able to be positioned in the 12 existing fuel assem-l bly locations.

! Because the fuel meat thickness of the LEU plates is half that of I

This core definition, including the graphite, is taken from the facility SAR, reference 2. It must be emphasized, however, there is no graphite in the fuel region, and that, strictly speaking, the reactor consists of two independently subcritical cores immersed in a graphite reflector.

2

Table 1. Comparison of HEU and LEU fuels for the UTR-10 Reactor HEU 2 LEU 3 Fuel Heat UA1 - Al U 33I 2 ~ AI x 4 x Enrichment 93% 19.75%

U density (g/cm 3) 0.61 3.47 Fuel meat dimensions:

thickness (mils) 40 20 width (in) 2.75 2.32-2.47 length (in) 23 22.5-24.0 Clad thickness (mils) 20 15 Plates thickness (mils) 80 50 width (In) 3.0 3.0 Grams 235 U per plate 22 12.5 Plates per fuel assembly (a) 12 24 Grams 235 U per assembly 200-262 300(D)

Critical mass (g) 2947 3600(b) l l Notes: (a) The fuel assembly dimensions must remain unchanged l (3" x 5.54" s 29.87").

l (b) To be deteroined more accurately during the j

safety analysis phase of this study.

1 3

the HEU plates, twice as many fuel plates per assembly wlil most likely be necessary. The LEU elements will result in less efff-cient neutron moderation since 1) the water volume will be reduced by 5.27. and 2) the water gap between adjacent fuel plates will be reduced from 0.4 in to about 0.17 in. This dense packing of fuel plates will presumably result in a "harder" neutron flux spectrum, f.e. an increase in the fast neutron flux relative to the thermal flux. Note that although a few reactors will also have to squeeze more LEU plates into their assembly, only ISU will have to double the number of plates.

The hardening of the flux spectrum in concert with the introduc-tion of a great deal of 238 U will cause:

I) an increase in fast fissions,

11) an increase in resonance absorption, Ill) a decrease in the prompt neutron lifetime, and Iv) an increase in fast neutron leakage.

Of these four effects, the dominant one on criticality is the increase in fast neutron leakage. Although the fast fission effect will increase, it will nevertheless still be very small.

Likewise, resonance capture is predicted to be a quite small effect since the ratio of moderator atoms to 238 U atoms in the core will be high. However, fast neutron leakage on the other hand is already large for the HEU core and will become larger for the '_EU core, despite the value of the graphite reflector. As for neutron Ilfetime, although it is expected to decrease, this should not be by a large amount since a significant contribution to lifetime comes from the diffusion time of neutrons thermalized a

4 In the reflector e'.d returning as thermal neutrons to the core.

Finally, the energy spectrum of the neutrons passing through the boral control rods may affect their reactivity worths. Because the rods are positioned between the fuel and the external reflec-tor, they absorb many neutrons that would be reflected into the fuel.

In summary, the dense packing of LEU fusi plates will result in many changes in the UTR-10 reactor. The goal of the computa-tional phase of the conversion will be to predict how the harden-Ing of the flux spectrum will affect reactor parameters.

III. Safety Analysis Phase - Computations A series of calculations are planned to Investigate the effects of the changes described above on the performance characteristics i

of the UTR-10, and on any possible safety related questions that may arfse. This effort has already begun with the receipt from RERTR of a package of computer codes including f) LEOPARD - to calculate few group macroscopic cross l sections needed for 2DBUM from constituent atom densities and its cross section Ilbrary.

II) 2DBUM --- a 2 dimensional diffusion code to predict neutron flux and power distributions I

criticality, reactivity coefficients, etc.

5 l

[

Ill) PLTEMP -- to calculcte fuel and moderator temperatures based on flow conditions and power densities.

Iv) PARET --- to calculate the energy released in reactor transients and resulting heat fluxes and fuel temperatures.

v) NATCON -- to predict the results of a loss of coolant flow on UTR-10 fuel and moderator temperatures.

In order to gain confidence in the above codes, we Intend to perform calculations on the existing HEU fuel load in the UTR-10 reactor. Results of these calculations will be compared with established operating parameters (fuel mass, moderator temper-ature coefficient, control rod worths. etc). We also plan to measure the prompt neutron lifetime and the neutron flux spec-trum, and compare these with calculated values. The comparisons will allow us to assess how likely we will be able to predict t

these parameters for the LEU core.

Some of the calculations may require additional codes. Because of the small size and split core of the UTR-10, the infinite multiplication factor is necessarily about 1.5. The high degree l

l of leakage will probably require the use of 3D codes to accurate-1 ly model this core. In addition, areas with steep flux gradt-

! ents, such as control rods and environs, may require transport theory codes. Predicting the flux spectrum In the moderator between adjacent fuel plates may also require transport codes, rather than the homogenized cells used in 2DBUH.

l-6 l

I

The conversion from HEU to LEU fuel will probably not significan-tly change the accident analyses for the UTR-10. As it is, the design basis accident for the facility is a fuel handling acci-dent in which an element is dropped, the clad is sheared from one side of a fuel plate, and volatile fission products are re-2,4 leased . The switch to LEU fuel will alter this scenario because the radioisotope inventory per fuel plate will drop by about a factor of two. The rate of plutonium production will need to be calculated, however, to determine how the presence of Pu affects the design basis accident.

A factor tha' could exacerbate a reactor transient would be a decrease in the prompt neutron lifetime as a result of conver-sfon. For a sudden Insertion of the allowed excess reactivity of 0.5% Ak/k, the resulting reactor period decreases somewhat w'th the prompt lifetime. The energy release in the transient would therefore increase in this case. The PLTEMP and PARET codes will be used to model this transient. but measured be[g"mustbeused for reliable results.

IV. Safety Analysis Phase - Experiments The conversion from HEU to LEU will, of course, necessitate a series of standard core physics measurements for assurance that no technical specifications are exceeded. In addition, we are proposing two sets of measurements to investigate reactor charac-7

teristics most likely to be effected by the conversion, namely flux spectrum and prompt neutron lifetime measurements. These experiments will be performed on the HEU core and then repeated after the conversion.

Standard core physics measurements include reactivity worths of fuel mass changes and the four control rods, and the moderator temperature coefficient. From these experiments, we can calcu-late the excess reactivity, shutdown margin, reactivity addition rates, and the effects of changing moderator temperature. No doubt, these measurements will be repeated several times, until the optimum distribution of LEU fuel in the UTR-10 is obtained.

(Control rod worths will be particularly sensitive to fuel loca-tion changes.) Following these low power experiments, a full power measurement of core thermal power will be needed to recall-brate nuclear instrumentation. Procedures for all of these meas-urements exist, as they are a major part of our surveillance requirements. Unless some surprises emerge from the calcula-tions, we expect no difficulty in conforming to existing techn!-

l I

cal specifications.

I

( The major change expected as a result of fuel conversion is the hardening of the flux spectrum. The first experiment planned is I

the measurement of the neutron flux as a function of energy midway between adjacent fuel plates, for both HEU fuel assem-l l blies, and LEU assemblies. By activating radiolsotopes produced l via neutron reactions with varying thresholds or resonances, the l

Flux spectrum con be calculated from the foil activities and l 8

energy-dependent cross-section data 5 Conducting these experi-ments will require the design and construction of a foil holder, selection of appropriate sets of activation foils, absolute efff-ciency calibration of our HPGe detector, and unfolding the flux spectrum from computer codes such as LSL-H2 6 or STAY'SL7 A set of flux spectrum measurements will be compared with multigroup diffusion or transport code predictions.

The second experiment planned is the two-part measurement of the ratto of the effective delayed neutron fraction (h) to the prompt neutron lifetime (),"), before and after the conversion, in 1971 and 1975, reactor oscillator and pile noise measurements of fej.

provided a consensus value of 43 sec-I for the UTR-10, the value used for transient analyses in the SAR . 2 Because of the impor-tance of bS /(" in the analyses of power transients, we need '2[(*

measurements with state-of-the-art equipment (1) on the HEU core for verification of the measurement method, and (2) on the LEU core for use in the updated SAR. The kF/ "

values are based on measurements of the upper break frequency of the reactivity transfer function. The upper break frequency is determined from an analysis of data obtained from any of several different meas-urement methods: Two appropriate techniques for the UTR-10 use, i

as inputs to the transfer function, are (1) the inherent neutron noise, or (2) reactivity varfations from a mechanical reactor oscillator. In either case, signals from In-core neutron detec-tors are processed to calculate the magnitude of the transfer function. Although a "small" detector is preferred since it 9

l

minimizes measurement distortions, it has low efficiency because of its small volume and this leads to poor measurement results.

The low-efficiency problem encountered with the neutron noise method can be overcome by using the "two-detector" technique 8 The experiments proposed above constitute an Important part of the conversion process. Since the LEU fuel elements for the UTR-10 are expected to have a significant effect on the flux spec-trum, we have a unique chance to measure differences between the HEU and LEU fuels, and compare measured values with predicted

! values. It is expected that Interested graduate students will investigate these areas and produce one or two H.S. theses.

V. Fuel Transfer l

The Department of Energy is funding all fuel fabrication and delivery costs, directly. DOE is providing shipping casks, and reimbursing transportation costs, as well.Section V of this request for an assistance grant will address only those activ-Ittes necessary at ISU in order to prepare to ship used fuel, and 1

t receive and load LEU fuel.

There are many tasks that must be completed before used HEU fuel I

can be shipped off campus. The reactor staff and Environmental Health and Safety (EH&S) Department staff must assure that all l

DOT and NRC regulations are satisfied. in addition, the Inven-l j tory changes must be documented, and quality assurance and secur-l 10

I'ty procedures must b'e developed and implemented regarding the transportation of used HEU fuel. Our estimate of the number of staff hours is based on our experience'wlth the fuel transfer mandated by NRC in November 1985. We shipped about 750 grams of unused HEU fuel to Oak Ridge in February 1986.

One modification in our fuel handling equipment will be neces-sary. Currently, we have to place our fuel handling cask on top of the reactor shutdown closure or on top of the fuel storage pit to load or remove fuel from the core or pit. The cask is free standing while the grappling tool is used to Ifft or lower a fuel element into or out of the cask, in order to lower an assembly into a MH-IA package, it will be necessary to suspend our cask from the overhead crane while lowering the~ assembly. It is cur-rently impossible to use the grappling tool while the cask is suspended; the suspension mechanism will have to be redesigned.

VI. Schedule for Conversion A summary of milestones in the conversion process and expected ,

datts for completion is presented in Table 2. The entire pro-cess, from receipt of funds to submission of final reports will take Just under three years to complete. We assume 4 at LEU fuel and the necessary shipping casks, will be available, and that no more than a nine month review period will be required by NRC.

I (

Table 2. Proposed Schedule for Completion of HEU to LEU Conversion Date Activity 8/87 Begin calculations required for Safety Analysis Report (I) 6/88 Submit revised Safety Analysis Report to NRR

/

3/89 Receive enforcement order for conversion from NRC(2) 5/89 Begin shipment of HEU from lows State (3) 6/89 Complete shipment of HEU fuel from lows State (3) l 7/89 Receive LEU at lows State and begin loading fuel (3)

8/89 Complete loading of fuel (3) 5/90 Submit final reports to NRC, DOE l ,

(1) Subject to the timely receipt of requested funding from DOE.

(2) Subject to the timely completion of the SAR review by NRR.

(3) Subject to the timely availability of shipping casks and i

j LEU.

l l

12

Our schedule was influenced by two major factors, student partf-ctpation and reactor usage. Graduate students will be assisting with conversion calculations and measurements. While we realize the computations could be completed more quickly by the RERTR group, we wish to utfilze the codes supplled to us by RERTR. It is expected that two or three masters theses will result from conversion-related work.

The second major Factor Is reactor use. Each year, the period of minimum reactor operations is from late Apr!I until early Septem-ber. Our iIcense and limited fuel storage space will preclude operations during the actual fuel exchange period. Scheduling the fuel exchange in the summer of 1989 will result in the least possible disruption in reactor use.

A more detailed work plan for the conversion Is given In Table 3.

The plan outilnes the tasks to be completed in each academic semester.

l l

l l

i 13 l-

Table 3. Details of Conversion Work Plan Fall 1987: Implement RERTR codes at ISU and check benchmarks Begin 2DBUM calculations Assess the need for 3D and/or transport codes Design and order equipment for flux spectrum and e[{"measurements Spring 1988: Complete all neutronics calculations and preliminary safety analysis Procure equipment and begin experiments Compare measurements and calculations of HEU Identify and implement any necessary changes in computational methods Summer 1988: Propose any changes required in technical specifications, emergency and security plans, training and requalification programs, etc.

Prepare and submit to NRC the updated safety analysts (application to convert)

Fall 1988: (Review period)

Make any revisions in conversion plan required by NRC Complete all HEU core experiments Work with B 8 W on LEU fuel assembly design 14

Spring 1989: Prepare for shipping used HEU fuel

--develop procedures consistant with NRC and 00T regulations

--make arrangements for shipping casks

--modify building fuel transfer cask Receive order to convert Begin to ship HEU Summer 1989: Complete HEU shipments Receive LEU fuel plates Construct LEU fuel assembIles Load LEU fuel for initial startup, and low power core physics measurements Fall 1989: Complete all core parameter measurements Repeat flux spectrum and he[y"experiments for LEU fuel Compare predicted and actual LEU core characteristics Analyze any discrepancies and their impact on safety analysis l

Spring 1990: Make final changes in procedures l

Prepare and submit final reports to DOE and NRC l

15 l

VII. Budget The total amount requested of DOC over the period August 1987 through May 1990 is $170,915. As requested, Indirect costs will be born by lowa State University since this is an assistance grant rather than a research proposal. Table 4 is a list of the yearly expenditures, corresponding to the workplan presented in Table 3.

By far, the largest portion of the grant will be salaries of the faculty, students, and technicians working on the conversion pro. lect. The division of labor among the faculty is as follows:

Dr. Richard A. Hendrickson, Reactor Manager and Professor

--administrative functions such as NRC communications. SNM Inven-tory, etc.

--supervision of OE/ " measurements

--assistance in the preparation of the updated Safety Analysis Report Dr. Alfred F. Rohach, Professor

--supervision of computational work in the safety analysis phase

--assistance in the preparation of the updated SAR 16

Dr. Robert E. Wfillams, Assistant Professor and Senior Reactor Operator

--project management, llason with DOE

--supervision-of flux spectrum measurements

--preparation of the updated SAR

--trainina additional technicians, RO's

--supervision of HEU fuel transfer, LEU fuel loading, and startup experiments

--preparation of final reports to DOE and NRC Additional personnel requirements are:

--two half-time craduate research assfstants to pe.rform calcula-tions and conduct experiments

--technicians required by fuel transfer procedures (crane opera-tors, helpers)

--reactor operators required for experimental measurements, fuel loading, start up experiments

--health physles technicians required to monitor all materials removed from the core, monitor all experiments, survey shipping cae's for quality assurance, etc.

[

Faculty member's workload on the conversion project are l

l

--Hendrickson 10%

--Rohach 10% (9 months) 25% (2 months, summer 1988)

--Williams 10% (academic year)

50% (2 months, summer 1988) l 100% (2 1/2 months, summer 1989) l 17

[

1

The ISU Engineering Research Institute policy for budgeting future salarles now calls for 107. Increases per years the Nuclear Engineering Department policy calls for increasing graduate stu-dent monthly salaries by $50 per year.

An additional list of equipment costs is presented in Table 5.

The fission chambers, filters, and picosmmeter are required for the be(("measurementsdescribed in Section IV (ISU already has one picoammetert two will be needed). Folls and flux wires will be needed for the neutron flux spectrum measurements. The prices are 1987 quotations from the vendors indicated. All equipment will be purchased this year because measurements of the HEU core will begin shortly after receipt of funds.

Under the heading of supplies and services, there are a few major items in addition to routine services like phone costs, drafting services, shop time, etc. In the first year four Irradiation foil holdero will have to be built, and NBS callbration services l

will be required for absolute flux measurement. Modifications to the suspension system of the reactor fuel transfer cask will be j made in the second year.

l l

Finally there is a $2,000 request for travel expenses. It is expected that attending future RERTR and TRTR meetings concerning the HEU to LEU conversion will be necessary. There may also be a need to travel to Argonne or Babcock and Wilcox for consulta-tions.

18 l

Table 4. Budget -

First Year Second Year Third Year ~ -

(10 Months)

Paid by Paid by Paid by ~ Paid by Paid by Paid by Item DOE ISU DOE ISU DOE ISU Personnel Costs Principle Investigator, 8,285 16,320 4,750 R. E. Williams 10% time, 9 months (AY) 50% time, 2 months (SS 88) 100% time, 2b months (SS 89)

Co-investigator, 5,600 6,160 _

5,650 R. A. Hendrickson 10% time Co-Investigator, A.F. Rohach 6,415 10% time, 9 months 25% time, 2 months Total Faculty Salaries $20,300 $22,480 $10,400 Faculty Fringe Benefits @ 21.7% 4,405 4,880 2,255 g

Reactor Operators / Technicians RO @ $10/hr 400 hr 4,000 1,000 Technicians @ $6/hr 600 hr 3,600 Health Physics @ $20/hr 320 hr 6,400 Fringe Benefits @ 25.6% 1,640 l Research Assistants, 2 @ $900/ month 21,600 22,800 20,000

( time)

RA Fringe Benefits @ $25/ month / student 600 600 500 Computing 4,000 500 500 Travel 700 1,500 800 Publication Costs 500 1,000 Supplies and Services 2.500 1.250 250 TOIAL DIRECT COSTS $54,605 $69,650 $36,705 19,660 25,075 13,215 INDIRECT COST @ 36%

Eq,uipment 9.955 TOTAL $64,560 $19,660 $69,650 $25,075 $36,705 $13,215 3-Year Cumulative $170,915 $57,950 s,

n .,

Tabte 5. Equipment Budget .

Item

' 2 LND-30772 1" x 8" fleston chambers $3,300

@ $1650 each 2 Krohn-Hite 3321 Varlsble Filters $2,250

@ $1125 each 1 Keithley 485 Plcosmmeter $2,100 Cables, connectors and batteries $ 300 Reactor Experiments:

1 set of Neutron dostmetry foils $1,195 Cat. no. 1553 1 flux-wire evaluation kit $ 810 Cat. no. 1650

$9,955

{

20

VIII. References

1. Title X, Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR 50.64).

2. R. A. Hendrickson, R. A. Danofsky, A. F. Rohach, and D. M.

Roberts, Safety Analysis Report for the Training Reactor UTR-10, Report ISU-ERI-Ames-82418 (August 1981).

3. H. H. Young, K. R. Brown, and J. E. Matos, "Conversion and Standardization of University Reactor Fuels Using Low-Enrich-ment Urantum: Plans and Schedules". Presented at the Inter-national Meeting on Reduced Enrichment for Research and Test Reactors (RERTR), November 3-6, 1986, Gattlinburg, Tennessee.

4. Safety Evaluation Report, related to the renewal of the operating license for the Research Reactor at the Iowa State University, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG-1016 (September 1983).

5. N. Tsoulfanidis, Measurement and Detection of Radiation, pp.

452-456, McGraw Hill (1983).

6. F. W. Stallmann, "LSL-M2: A Computer Program for Least-Squares Logarithmic Adjustment of Neutron Spectra", NUREG/CR-4349 (March 1986).

7. F. G. Perey. "Least Squares Dostmetry Unfolding: The Program S TAYSL , ORNL/TM-6062 (1977); modiffed by L. Greenwood, Argonne National Laboratory (1979).

8. Uhriq, R. E., Random Noise Techniques in Nuclear Reactor Systems, The Ronald Press Company, New York (1970),

l 1

l t

t l

21 l

4 APPENDIX A Conmuni cat ions with DOE l

l l

l i

r I

i

(7tg b g../

t upn e t.... iis n( 17einveju

• U nslii' 8 m . I).f.- . ?.9515 NOV 211986 Dr Robert E. Williams Department of Nuclear Engineering Iowa State University Ames, IA 50011

Dear Dr. Williams:

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

You are also reminded that technical assistance for safety documentation review and analysis 10 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!

}!r. Richard E. Stephens, Director Division of University and Industry Programs Of fice of Field Operations Management i Office of Energy Research I

U.S. Department nf Energy Washington, D.C 20585 If you have any questions, please call me or Keith Brown on 301-353-3995.

i Sincerely yours, Epn.<,J'b..ND*}

llarold 11. Young Division of University & Industry Programs Of fice of Fleid Operations Management Office of Energy Research cc: R. Stephens, ER-44 l A. Trave 111, RERTR/ANL i

Department of Nuclear Engineering 261 Sween'ey lla11 IOWA STATE ^ = .i - 5*ii UNIVERSITY Teierheae 5is 294 584o January 12, 1987 tir. 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

Dear Mr. Stephens:

I received a letter from llarry Young dated flovember 21, 1986, stating that funds for conversion of our UTR-10 reactor at ISU from IIEU to LEU fuel are now available. Ile requested I send our proposal for a DOE assistance grant for the cost of the safety analysis phase of the conversion by January 15, 1987. I am currently working on this propcsal, but I will not be able to meet the January 15 deadline.

On December 12, I talked with Keith Brown by phone, and requested some additional time to get our proposal together. Ile indicated I could take a few more weeks, so my plan is to submit the proposal early in February.

I just wanted to let you know that we have every intention of starting the conversion process as soon as possible, and that you will receive our I proposal shortly.

Please Ict me know if there is anything else I need to do (515-294-9279).

Sincerely, odd EWdhn Robert E. Williams Ph.D.

Assistant Professor of tiuclear Engineering REW:rpa l

9 t

L

h

'j .

Dapartmsnt of Energy

< .I Washington, DC 20585 g ..

-a p

' I4 s APR 211987 Dr. Robert Williams Nuclear Engineering Iowa State University Ames. Iowa 50011

Dear Dr. Williams:

As per our telephone discussion regarding submittal of a proposal for financial assistance to complete the analytical studies required to accomplish conversion of the Iowa State University reactor from high enriched to low enriched uranium fuel, it is appropriate that only the anticipated direct costs be included in the proposal.

fr-Sincerely yours,

...<f

/.4

• b6

seith R. Brown l Division of University and Industry Programs Office of Field Operations Management Of fice of Energy Research l

l l-l l

e- 9 -

yr %w--t --

9 6 9

a O

APPENDIX B Core Diagrams B

e 6 s.

e

.a L r.,

, ,([ .

7 l.y sinmass (y ~ %m I **sparats cons Ass'r o=e er -o >*o g -~ p

%. 6A AcM4 t'%# Te ndl,f e

e o*4 f f =9*#44 ooa f J PA A

• A. F.,s o e..o q.. . -l. .. .< .i Nf,) .- - ? * ".-

j ;~~ % ,Tl ;..; .? "/" - ~ '

sM ff

• o*#$) 1 E I , ,

, ~ ... ,, .aL; c.?'_

ty

-m ,.

II I  ; i IW lip C -

. r a3 fL. gL In-- - ,1 >= 4- -

• I i,.

i i s L-2, ~; , -~~ ; I st ,-,ss a r ,.o

' y. - --',- t;;pg - . - - - - _ - - _

u t auen.

o %g,i ,r 2: .H -: ~'

~~~~~~

Q~. _'.

r-

~t . p av  :":@.~ .savutosw .

s

' W: h b C oorts s<ra r ooo 's .l :

M \i i 1 ' :----

4 _-.

n _ ,'""''

'---*y -.fil'l I 1 i h h!I i -

~

e,-- ---

, [- . <nJ

~

l !/ i-

1IL t +,.

k .b .b l:

-' :ha , = - -

s

..,,,.,,a,,,,-4' es-o-e

~. :

0

. \4 , . 4w. s. ,,, ,.

\,1  ; n- 4.r.g'sf'sn'smne u

-e a strurece ,sou,ca c PLAN-CORE AREA

A e I

= , r.

8 1 of E

. II l

, i

9. .

e e., .

t e,

r a it ~-

5 E8

'  % m

,a .

1.!,

1 g.

P..a;h

. e. .

', 3 f-

}l5 _I j a i i -r et.d t m . . . . ....g* -

'j' l l ,{

y .....-

i

_ e;

~

_. _ _ ) __ -

i _ _

[ _ _ ...

t_ . f, i ,

c- . .a

?.  : : gr_ : : t.::

'.p..

l

. p _ _ 1

-g z g , ,. E.e-. c II l ggl

? o r .

r -- - -

r .7 .

b 1?r i ,

f -

kja {hq . -

= b. h)'

. . c . ...

_ _ , - - . . . . p, '*3 , .w-

-<J M..------ *

,) )

=. : - . , .

jf y <

+{

sugg.n mn .- z

-s -

,m 2

_7 q .

lur MF- T} H

~

-[. ,' M M p=( -

F -

(  : . - ,n

,i

", z m_,

g 9 I i w. r I, t O

i-51 o 5 * ~ .

u /

e-m

• • j i =

_r l [ .q + I# Ir6

• hdLi d '$

m -1  !

l kl- (

,1 j

1 a

t b<

- . la 8 1 '

' on L';[l,l J

j.5 @P  !

gg 46

], {. .___

_o.,9 _. .** . . . _ . . . _ __. . J. _.

q* ; & D

t 19 w=

l

l.IliIil i ma r

• l

t. 1.1

.h's4 -

u >

i

-; - M P, . . . ,

I t__,

4..

. ,L.or-

d. . _ _ . . . h.

l-F I s i '

I 1 il .

i  !

i l

l':[

i ) l 1 i I

l'! )

I 1 i

]

f' .

I I g

, i s i l l i

i l - - _ _ _ - - - -

[ s i-i-- >

N' b jmi .

9(

l t

_.-