ML20070T406

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

ML20070T406
Person / Time
Site:	05000083
Issue date:	03/27/1991
From:	Vernetson W FLORIDA, UNIV. OF, GAINESVILLE, FL
To:
Shared Package
ML20070T407	List: ML20070T406
References
NUDOCS 9104040162
Download: ML20070T406 (19)

Text

. - - . -- - - - .= - _ _ - . _ - -

I '

I UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA TRAINING REACTOR I

LICENSE NUMBER: R-56 I

l UPDATED PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO THE h'UCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

!j TO MEET 10 CFR 50.64 REQUIREMENTS FOR UPDATING SCHEDULING OF UFTR l CONVERSION FROM HEU TO LEU FUEL I

lI . .. . :.

l ~

I l Dr. William G. Vernetson Director of Nuclear Facilities

! March 27 1991 g DEPARTMENT OF NUCLEAll ENGINEERING SCIENCES College of Engineering

,g l University of Florida l Gainesville

.l

{$84 A868EPDR$i8S$$m l

,I lI I UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA TRAINING REACTOR LICEL3E NUMBER: R-56 I

I I

I UPDATED PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION TO MEET 10 CFR 50.64 REQUIREMENTS FOR UPDATING SCHEDULING OF UFTR CONVERSION ,

FROM REU TO LEU FUEL l I

I I

Dr. William G. Vernetson Director of Nuclear Facilities I

I I m e u. 1,e1 I

I I

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA TRAININC REACTOR FUEL CONVERSION FROM HIGH ENRICHED TO LOW ENRICHED URANIUM FUEL INTRODUCTION I This proposal is submitted to the. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to meet the requirement that the licensee for the University of Florida Training Reactor (UPTR), as a licensee of a non-power reactor a'tthorized to possess and use high enriched uranium (HEU) fuel shall develop aad submit a proposal to replace all HEU fuel possessed under the R-56 License with available low enriched uranium (LEU) fuel acceptable to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on a schedule deter-mined pursuant to 10 CFR 50.64 Pa rag ra ph( c )( 2 ) . This proposal addresses the overall process of conversion from initial preparations following receipt of I funding to support conversion to final verification, testing and sometary report-ing on the converted UFTR. Three primary phases have been identifled for control and administration of the overall process of conversion as follows:

1. Preparation for Conve rsion II. Conversion (assuming NRC order to convert).

III. Review.and Verification of Conversion.

I Table I contains a listing of key activities involved Ln each phase cf the conversion frov receipt of funding for conversion from the department of energy (DOE) co final submittal of summary reports to DOE and NRC on the conversion.

PRASE 1: PREPARATION FOR CONVERSION Phase I commenced with receipt of funding for conversion f rom DOE to cover Phase I only. This funding was considered to be certified per the letter con-tained in Appendix I of the 1987 proposal; this proposal was submitted to the Department of Energy and official notice of receipt of funding was received with a letter dated November 12, 1987. Because of errors in the contract description provided by DOE, the f ull approval for receipt of funding was delayed until re-ceipt of the confirming letter dated December 21, 1987. Copies of both letters as well as the 1987 certification letter are enclosed in Appendix I along with I -

I l

I l

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA TRAINING REACTOR FUEL CG3 VERS 10N FROM HIGH ENRICHED TO LOW ENRICHED URANIUM FUEL docmentation showing the extension of the current O E g r a n t to support Phase I I work which hau been delayed beyond the or.lginal two-year grant period, Initial efforts In the process to convert the UFTR from use of high enrich *d to low enriched fuel (HEU-LEU) consisted of preliminary tests and an evaluation to determine whether the SPERT-type fuel available to the R-56 licensee but currently under license SNM-1050 could be qualified for use in the UPTR, Visual and radiographic test results to date were positive for most of the fuel in this regard. Unfortunately, equipment failures and the need to move the SPERT (SNM-1050) fuel storage facility impacted the schedule durLng the 1988 year ao t.he I radiographic tests were not completed until, April, 1989 along with relicensing the SPERT fuel storage facility. Overall, the results of the radlographic tests of the SPERT fuel were positive showing that the condition of the fuel ves such that its integrity was assured. Phase 1 then conti 4d with activities to justify a fuel selection, e i t he: r SPERT or s11Leide, based upon resultu of prnqualification testing of existing SPERT fuel and identifyfr.d any modifications in existing reactor systems necessitated by use of the new fuel.

Several previously unconsidered potential compli:ations noted in late 1988 I were investigated in 1989. This effort was directed to maintaining and/or improving the UFTR neutronics characteristics while minimizing the overall cost of UFTR conversion. The only two fuels that ha/e Laen considered are Lhe existing SPERT 00 , statnless steel clad fu 1 pres nely under the SNM-1050 2

license and the newly developed silicide fuel to be available through the RERTR program at Argonne National Laboratory.

I The fLrst choice had been to use the already existing SPERT fuel for whAch a number of neutronics and thermal-hydraulics analyses are in existence. This would be the cheaper fuel if acceptable since it ts already manufactured. Ho1-ever, even after completion of the prequalification program for the quali fica-tlon tests used to assure the SPERT fuel can meet UFTR requirements without com-promising s ,. f e t y , it wau necessary to assure this SPERT fuel could be used 3

I UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA TRAINING REACTOR FUEL CONVERSION FROM HIGli ENRICllED TO LOW ENRICllED URANIUM FUEL without requiring costly modifications watch could outweigh the low initial cost of SpERT fuel (no manuf acturing conts) and have impact on core neutronico per earlier -aalyses. The De pa r tment of Energy was receptive of this evaluation of the two fuels and work in this area progressed well last year. Unfortunately, I the complexity and cost of potential structural (tne SpERT fuel ' loading would weigh about 2000 pounds versus the present 50 pound core tcading), ablelding, fuel arrangement and cooling system :h v es ne mssitated by use of the SPERT fuel reselted in a c ilestone decision in August, '89 not to utilize the SPERT fut.l for conversion but rather to uttitze t.he atm card plate-type silicide fuel.

The anticipated cooling system f uel arrangement and shielding changes potential-ly necessitLtud by . use or the SPERT f uel were especially strong factors in the decision since space in the UF'll. f acility is already limited and the facility I

had been cited for two violations related to radiation levels in 1989.

In parallel with selection of the plate type, silicide LCU fuel and identification of necessary reactor systems changes, i safety analysis was being pe r fo rmed for the selected LEU fuel conver alon and associated nystem changes.

Implementation of the neutronics codes to be used was underway during 1989 and several codes had been implemented and run for test cases. Therefore, UFTR conversion calculations were progressing reasonably well until the loss in Augect, 1989 ot ;. t e graduate student performing the neutronics calculations as The unavaila-I he decided to pursue his advanced degree at another university.

bility of another qualified student committed to assume this responsibility resulted in further delay' in late 1989 and early 1990. Nevertheless, a student project in Fall, 1989 resulted in some progress in assuring the s ele c t ed neutronics methodology would be adequate though many calculations had to be updated and repeated due to errors in and poor documentation of the pre rious work. As expressed in last year's proposal, it was hoped that this indiviaual would remain on the project for his thesis project work; although this reteutton offort was successful, the analyses were not able to move forward as projicted ,

in last year's ptsposal.

I

I UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA TRAINING REACTOR FUEL CONVERSION FROH HICil ENRICHED TO LOW ENRICHED URANIUM FUEL I

Several errors due to poor documentation necessitated restarting the snfety analysis when a student began work on it in early 1990. Although he spent a period at Argonne National Laboratory working with the RERTR group to receive training in the use of the codes, it still required some time for the student to become profLeient in use of the codes. Unfortunately several formatting and I other flaws in the implemented codes used for the neutronics enalysis have alao slowed progress this past year, though these have now been cleared up as part of the work on assuring proper code methodology during this year.

Currently, a student thesis project has resulted in good progresa in assuring the neuttantes methodology is adequate and the necessary " benchmark" modelling of the existing core is nearly complete. Only scoping calculation have been completed for the LEU core with the number of of fuel platen per bundle not yet set. It is expected that DOE-nupplied funding support of ,his I work will be extended beyond the current April 30, 1991 end date so this work can be concluded along with basic thermal-hydraulic analyses to conclude the required ilEU-t o-LEU conve rsion s a f e ty analys e.s . It is expected that the individual workir.g on this neutronics analysis wLil complete his thests t ek by September, 1991, After the number of fuel plates per bundle is set, several thermal-hydraulics calculations will be required; these shuuld be completed by November, 1991. The entire package of results will then be assembled as a Revision to the UFTR Saf ety Analysis Re po r t by Ja nua ry , 1992 with the project then expected to progress as indicated in Table II.

I Previous delays have necessitated in extension in the initial DOE grant which has been received as docuaented in f.ppendix I with another extensi7n to be requuted as indicated above. In addieion to neutronic and thermal-hydraulic analysis, shielding and effluent analyses will be documented to identify any changes in procedures, security plan, technical specifications or other license documents that must be considered as part of conversion. This submittal will also contain docuinentation detalling the various tests and surveillances planned S

I

I I UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA TRAINING REACTOR FUEL CONVERSION FROM lilC:1 ENRICllED TO LOW ENRICilED URANIUM FUEL I as part of the conversion. At tMs point a complete set of licensing documents for the conversion will be submitted along with a conve st on application for review and approval. Assuming resolution of all questions, this submittal will conclude the Phase I licensee efforts. Phase 1 will then conclude with the issuance by the NRC of the specific Order to Convert.

• PHASE 11. CONVERSION (Assuming NRC Order to Convert)

Phasc 11(Conversion) will begin with receipt of the NRC Order directing the conversion and any nucessary changes to the license, facility and/or procedures hI per CFR 50.64(c)(3). This second phase is not yet funded by the existing DOE grant f or shich a accond e*. tension will be requet;'d and will include all !inal tests conducted with the llEU fuel t- serve primarily an the basis of later

< marison wit h similar tests with LI U fuel. Phase 11 will then involve 1 I , cat >e r of my activitien aimed ottimately at havinr, LEU iuel replace HEU fuel 2t the UFTR facility to includet

1. Shutdown cora decay for several weeks followed by core unloading :.nd shipment of irradiated HEU fuel.

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

3. Implemeatation of required f ar. titty changes necessitat.ed f or use of LEU fuel.

4 Receipt of unitradiated LEU fuel.

5. Documentation of all changes

6. Completion of all requirements for core loading with LEU fuel I followed by loading of the LEU fuct and startup testing to low powet.

7. Documentation and record organization f or the LEU fuel implementation.

ne I

l_

I

I I UNIVERS'TY OF FLORIDA TRAINING REACTOR FUEL CONVERSION FPsH li1GH ENR1CHED TO LOW ENRICllED URANIUM FUEL I

FRASE III: REV11W AND VERIFICATION OF CONVERSION Phase III(Revic s and Verification of Conversion) will consist of a series of activities designed to verify the quality of the conversion process te include both the physical implementation of the LEU fuel and the documentation of the impleine n t a t ion. Activities in Phase III will include; i

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

2. Verift:ation and evaluas a of UFTR operational characteristics.

3. Review of conversion plan and data for consistency.

4. Approval for return of UFTR to normal operations.

S. Return to normal operations.

6. Submiosion of Final Report to NRC/ DOE summarizing flEU operational conditions and comparing these results with the predictions contained in the Safety Analysis submitted to NRC at the end of Phase I wi approved as part of the Order to Convert.

f

SUMMARY

CONCLUSIONS A

^

Au noted earlier, a relatively detailed list of the various elements that g must be obtained, produced or otherwise generated as required throughout the

" three phases of the UFTR conversion from HEU to LEU fuel is presented in Table

1. The current plan continues to be to generate as much of the required safety I analysis and design work in-house as passible. Only items such as silicide fuel (now the selected fuci) and fuel handle supports would be designed and manufactured outside the administrative control of the UPTR licensee. At this point, without having identified all required changes, it is not poss'ble to delineate exactly what other external support may be needed. The neutronics and tt.ermal hydraulics analyses are all planned to be conducted in-house which has 7

I

_ ,_. - - _ _ _._t, : __. .m _ . _a_.a .

I UNI'lERSITY OF FLORIDA TRAINING REACTOR FUEL CONVERSION FROM llIGil ENRICHED TO LOW ENRICllED URANIUM FUEL necessitated some external support frem the RERTR program at Argonne Natlonal Laboratory to assure proper code implementation at the University of Florida to carry out the required saf ety analysis. Code imple:tentation is now progressing though with delays due to SpERT fuel inspection delays, graduate student changes and inability to identify qualified graduate students to work on the project for I their thesis work up until this 'l a s t year when progress on the use of the neutronics methodology has been delayed by several code inconsistencies which have now been corrected.

The overall flow diagram for !!EU to LEU conversion of the UFTR is presented in Figure 1. Key stages in the three phanns, as well as key ing."t items at the various stages, are indicated at each st. age in the Figure.

I Finally, Table Il contains an updat.ed tentatise schedule (Revision $) f o r t tm

najor milestone events in the UFTR conversion process commencing with the notification of receipt of funding etfective in De cembe r , 19?? and concluding with submittal of a final report to NRC and DOE summarizing the results of the conversion by May, 1994 It should be noted that this schedule la tuntative and, as required by 10 CFR 50.64, will be updated yearly. There has been considerable schedule slippage during the past three years. The schedule is also subject te variations caused by availability of replacement fuel or other items involved in required facility changes as well as variation in the level of DOE funding after the first two year period (now extended) for which funding has

'I been received. Other areas which may- impact the schedule are the availability of a shipping cask especially for irradiated HEU fuel (we are currently using our ilEit fuel at a rate of about 1. 0- 1. 5 MW-da y s energy generation per year so it will probably require a fuel cask versus a 6M container though this may depend on the cooling period) and final usage of the UFTR with ilEU fuel to provide a l

lI lI l

I .

I UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA TRAINING REACTOR FvEL CONVERSION FROM llIGil ENRICllED TO LOW ENRICilED URANIUM FUEL basis for comparison of changes in operating characteristics or to meet educa-tion, research and service commitments. Within these constraints and condi-tions, the schedule in Table 11 is one which the licensee is committed to I meeting and which the licensee considers relative realistic based upon expected resources and recent progress with neutronics calculations.

I Although tauch of the detail of the conversion process has depended upon the final selection of fuel types, this selection is now finalized; therefore, the information, especially the tentative schedule in Table II provided in this updated proposal, shows that the LEU conversion at the UFTR has progressed during this past year, although significant delays occurred during the early part of the year due to requirements to train a new student and assure proper, ras consistent neutronien methodology. The key decisions remaining will involve identification and evaluation of system changes required by the conversion, shipment of ured fuel and delivery of new fuel as well as development and implementation of a test program for both the llEU and LEU cores. The schedule will likuly be most impacted, however, in the near term by the times required for perf orming and documenting the safety analysis and perhaps for manufacture of the LEU fuel. The schedule presented in Table II is considered to be realistic and should be attainable now that the neutronics methodology has been proven acceptable, neutronics calculations are nearly complete for the HEU core serving as a benchmark and neutronics calculations are proceeding well to identify and analyze an acceptable LEU core. The ass,ciated thermal-hydraulics calculations will follow the selection of the LEU core design and should be able to be concluded in a few additional months ,naking the proposed schedule for first submittal realistic.

l l

l L

TEST SPERT FUEL ,

HEU to LEU NEUTRONIC ANALYSIS DEVELOP A PREQUALIFICATION CONVERS ION THERMAL KYDRAULIC ANALYSIS PLAN FOR SPERT FUEL PREPARATION SHIELDING ANALYSIS RADI0 ACTIVE f,FFLUENT ANALYSIC SELECT FUEL OPTION v

FREPARATION OF SAFETY ANALYSIS I IDENTIFICATION REQUIRED FACILITT CHANGES OF LICENSING DOCUMENTS TECH SPEC CHANGES SECURITY PLAN CRANGES PROCEDURE CHANGES

't SUBMITTAL OF APPLICATION ORDER TO CONVERT REVIEW / APPROVAL OF TO NRC WITH ALL CONVERSION CONVERSION DOCUMENTATION BY NRC I

DOCUMENTATION _

't ARRANGEMENT FOR POSSESSION DISCONTINU ATION OF ANALYSIS FOR SHIP!' INT OF OF HEU AND LEU ON-INTERIM USE OF dEU FUEL IRRADIATED FUEL BASIS Y'

EEU FUEL SHIPMENT CONVERSION DESIGN / IMPLEMENT!. TION LEU FUEL RECEIFT ACIVITIES OF FACILI Y CHANGES LEU FUEL LOADING FUEL LOAD PREPARATIONS V

STAATUP TESTING AND REVIEW AND VERIFICATION OF HEU TO LEU CONVERSION I SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES _.

if REVIEW / APPROVAL RETURN TO SERVICE OF FULL DOCUMENTATION If SUBMISSION OF FINAL REPORT TO NRC/ DOE SUMMARIZING HEU OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

^"

AND COMPARING WITH SAR PREDICTIONS IFigure1. University of Florida Training Reactor HEU to LEU Conversion Flow Diagrain  !

lu

TABLE :

I .

University of Florido Training Rosetor Key Activities for REU to LEU Fuel Conversion I. PRASE 1 - PREP ARATION FOR CONVERSION A. Receipt of Funding from Department of Energy

3. Analysis of UPTR-Specific LEU Conversion Options

1. Pretesting of Selected SPERT Fuci Pins

2. Development of a Qualification Program for SPERT Fuel Pins

3. Completion of Pre--Qualification Testing of SPERT Fuel

• . Evaluation of Compuestive Conversion Options (SPERT VS. SILICIDE)

5. Selection of LEU Fuel Opc1on for UFTR Conversion C. Safety Analysis / Licensing Studies

1. Neutronic Analysis for LEU-Fueled UFTR

2. Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis for LEU-Fueled UPTR I 3.

4 Shielding Analysis for LEU-Fueled UPTR Radioactive Effluent Analysis as Required I D. Identification of Changes in the R-56 License, Technical Specifientions, Facility, Security Documents and Procedures Under the Scope of 10 CFR 60.64(c)("

as Necessitated by Fuel Conversion

~ ~ ~

E. Preparat1cn -r!-Tui1 Submittal to NRC to Support Conversion Including All Gupporting Documents II. PHASE II - CONVERSION A. NRC Order to Convert B. Fuel-Related Activities I 1.

2.

3.

Qualification of Selected LEU Fuel Final UPTR Operations with REU Funi Shipment of Irradiated Fuel 4 Receipt of LEU Fuel C. Implementation of Required Changes in R-56 License per Item ID.

D. LEU Fuel Loading Activities 1, Completion of Preparations for Core Load

2. Loading of LEU Fuel

3. Startup Testing and Surveillance E. Completion of Startup Documentation III. PRASE III - REVIEW AND VERIFICATION OF CONVERSION A. Completion of$Startup Testing and R41sted Surveillances B. Completion of Power Testing and Surveillances C. Determination of U NR Operational Characteristics D. Return to Normal Operations l Submission of Final Conversion Report to NRC/ DOE E E.

11

jI .

I

TABLE II (Revision 5)

Un.tversity of Florida Training Reactor Tentative Milestone Schedule for IIEU to LEU Fuel Conversion I. Ef f ective Date af Receipt of Funding November, 1987 II. Date of Full Submittal to NRC c* Application to Convert (including all necessary documents) January, I III. Date of NRC Order to Convert May, 1992 1992 A. Date of Completion of All Plans to Convert December, 1992 B. Date of Kencipot of LEU Fuc1 february, 1993 .

C. Date of Completion of Any final Tests with ilEU Fuul May, 1993 D. Date of Removal of flEU Fuel July. 1993 l

E. Date of Shipment of HEU Fuel October, 1993 F. Date of Loading of LEU Fuel December, 1993 l G. Date of Completion of Determination l of Initial Operational Parameters With l

LEU (Startup and Power Operations Testing) March, 1994 I H. Date of Submittal of Report to NRC/DOJ Summarizing New Operational Characterisites and Comparing With Predictions of Safety Analysis May, 1994 I

l l

12 3/91 l

I

I .

I I

I I

I APPENDIX 1 LETTERS OF NOTIFICNTION THAT I FEDERAL GOVERNMENT FUNDING FOR UFTR CONVERSION IS AVAILABLE AND HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM THE I DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY I

I I

I

.I I

I  ;

l I

. ~ ,I I

af .. 4

%c,a# '

l Departn.ent of Energy Washington, D.C. 20545 .

f,,,

,iOV 21 1Cpc I

I Dr. William G. Ve rne t s on Nuclear Facilities Division University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611

Dear Dr. Ve rnetaon:

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

You are also reminded that technical assistance for safety documentation review and anarynis La available through ene RERTR program at the I Argonne National Labora tory. Your proposal should be coordinated with and reflect the degree of support to be provided by RERTR/ANL.

I We would like to receive your proposal by January 15, 1987.

direct it tot Mr. Richard E. Stephens, Director Please Division of University and Industry Programs I Of fice of Field Operations Management Of fice of Energy Research U.S. Department of Energy Washington , D.C 20585 1

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

i.

I Sincerely yours,

., U. '}

Ha rold H. Young

• Division of University & Indust ry Programs Of fIce of Fle1d Operations Management Of fice of Energy Research cc: R. Stephens. CR-44 A. Travelli, RE R TR / Atll,

I I P, 20mn=

e.

Department of Energy os, =+ -

Post OMe, Son (

[ '

e Oak Recige, Temenee 37831 } , ',

• l

~

November 12,19A7

• 1 Mr. Oillard C. Ma rshal .

Assistant Director I Of fice of Research Administration University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611

Dear Mr. Marshall:

GRANT NO. DE-FG05-88ER75387 - AMEN 0 MENT NO A000 Enclosed are two copies of the subject grant document which have been signed on behalf of the Department of Energy. -

If this document is socisf actory, please have the two enclosed copies signed by the proper of ficial on behalf of your organization and return one fully I executed copy to this office.

retention.

The remaining fully executed copy is for your In addition, plea 3e have executed the enclosed Assurance of Compliance -

I Nondiscrimination in Federally Assisted Programs, and return the signed original to this office together with the executed copy of the grant and a completed Form 00E-538, Notice of Energy RD&D Project. Please re, urn two copies of the 00E-538.

Sincere 1y, I

l CQ &&&CL Contracting Of ficer Contract Management Branch AD-423:Lyle Procurement & Contracts Division

Enclosures:

1. Grant (2 cys.)

I 2. Assurance of Compliance

3. 00E 538 (3 cys)

(%%

(

I v*I U

Celebrarong the U.S. Consterution Bicentennial - 17M71987

I .

t

Department of Energy 0 0bC27 ISSf

• , , Oet Rege Operations ,

g L, :j f.7) Post Othee Bos E g "g / Oak Riogo. Tennence 37831 December 21, 10R7 r

3 0. . William G. Vernetson

!q Director of Nuclear Facilities College of Engineerino University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611 Dee - Dr. Vernetson:

GRANT NO. OE-FG05-88ER75387 (krvter" oe0 JECT DESCRIPTION)

In response to telephone er ,,is with you and with Keith Brown at I

Argone,/ , enclosed is a rev se project description for your grant from the Depart. ment of Energy to cover cost of the conversion f rom HEU to LEU fuel in Univsrsity of Florida's training reactor. I apologize for the confusion and piay in this revision reaching you.

'?l' " ['Please _ substitute _the aWbri Pa rt 11 1 Project Description and Reporting Requiremen;s, fo' the one transmitteo to Dillard Marshall on Novemoer l?.,1987, and have Mr. Marshall sign the award anu return an original to us as soon as possible. You will not be able to draw down any money f rom letter of Credit on this award until the original copy is returned to us.

Thank you for calling our attention to the f act that your award is dif ferent f rom the othe reactor fuel conversion awards the Jepartment of Energy has.

Since rely ,

jf/)

I Ma rtha A.1.yle Contract Specialist Contract Management Rranch AD-423:Lyle Procurement and Contracts Di'tision

Enclosure:

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

Research Administration I university of Florida 223 Grinter Hall Gainesville, FL 32611

.<" 4 %

( M.

I  %. eAw/

ei... *'

5 Celebrating the t:.L Carnstiturn>os Bou ourenonal - 1787 1937

'{

gz ,

a Department of Energy Idaho Operabons Oflice 4 - 785 00E Place f i *' idaho Fal's, Idaho 83402 December 19, 1989 I

Mr. Dillard C. Marshall University of Florida 223 Grinter Hall Gainesville, Florida 36211

SUBJECT:

Grant No. DE-FG07-88ER75387

Dear Mr. Marshall:

We are enclosing three copies of the subject grant which have been I signed on behalf of 00E. Please have all three copies signed by an authorized of ficial and return two fully executed copies to this of fice within two weeks from the date of this letter. The third fully executed copy is for your retention.

_I Should you have any questions, please contact Ann Rydalch on (208) 426-9617..

Sincerely, Tru A. Thorne Contract Specialist Financial Assistance Branch Enclosure I

I I

I I

I

l - ~-

1. ! UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA L < ' OFFICIAL AWARD ACCEPTANCE DATE PRINTED 12/ 21 ' M QUE STIONS . PLEASE CONTACT THE Ur Olvisic-TIFICATION OF ACCEPTANCE tNOAi FCR THE PItESIDENT SICNSORED RESEARCH. AWARD ADr 4NtSTR ATV e JF MIE UNIVER$1TY OF Ft.C IID A. AC'ING ON SENALF OF 205 GRINTER HALL. 392 1582

. BOARD OF RECENTS n TtE: PoOPOEAL FOR COV'T SUPPORT TO COVER COST OF UPTR CotiVERs wN recu u rn M 'Jn Fort I

JPN*: 87081002 RELATED UPN 8?

ADMINISTRATIVE D ATA

' F 0 4 8J P t..

AWARD DATE VERNETSON W G 01/05/38 ENCY: U S DEP* O E EMEEC'! ssN 216-44-9124 I1SiON . oG 0 5- 9 8 EE7 5 3 87 ogNcy NO:-_DE ceii ETES - CIGINEERING DEPT:. NU CL EAE ENGINEER NO ECT ENCET

? PE: NEWIN) CONT 1NUATION tC)

C O. p!

- RE NEWAL (R) SUPPt.EMEEn.L (S) ~ ~

REvtSED SSN_

3 EXTENSION -

1. RESEARCHiR) TRAINING tT) COU CATECORY:

DEPT.

OTHERto) 10920 PUR. ORDER (P) HEGIS a CONTilACT (C)

IOGRAM: _ COOP. AGREE ( A) spats) HUMAN SUUJECTS APAROVAL e-MEMO OF UND (M) b GRANTIG) MS APPROVAL EXP1RESa LAB ANIMAL APPROVAL n-MP: GUARANTEED OY: BIOHAZARCS.

IRM: SUPERSEDES:

11/15/87 BUDO END: 04/30/91 AECOM81NANT DNA/RN A:

PROPHIETARY/CC NFIDENT1AL 103 DEG.

OJ aEG; 11/15/87 DROJ ENO: 04/3_0__O 1 SUBCONTHACTOR: UF-87081002 r-- yAue:

OJECT PERIOD .

FUNDS RESTitlCTED 3 YES - NO P:

. . _ 1THE R JTORY UPNat 87081002 Ftx ogMo pro;; N COST D ATA ION.C A MPUS APDUCABLE :ND: RECT COST WILL ACCRUE 'O THE UNii(S) AS SPEC:FiED ON ?ROPOSAL OUAL INVCLVEM ENT:

OC RETURN CODE

O FF.C AM PU S Y

450812612 ACCOUNT NO-SCOUNT No: NO COST EXT OtRECT AMOUNT, S BRECT AMOUNT: S INDIRECT AMOUNT; $ "' O ~ :NOIRECT AMOUNT S SASE TE 45.0% BASE. MTU RATE NO COST EXT TOTAL AMOUNT: S FSTAL AMOUNT:

COST SHARING REOUIRED: S S. COST SHARING REQUIRED: $

NO COST EXT TOTAL FUNDING OF THis AWARD: S I TOTAL COST SHARING OF THIS AWARD: S UNRECOVERED INDIRECT COST: $

CUMULATIVE PRosECT FUNDING. S 169.431.00 CFDAs:

REMARKS 0

Ogpy EON 7Ac7' EIES

/ bb#// N4 7'-

AUTHCRIZED UNIVERSITY ACCEPTANCE SIGNATURE

,IDOAESS OlvtS10N CF SPONSOREO RE SE ARCH DILLARD C. M/7SHALL Naut m.E ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF RESEARCE I*.R*"Unm ,,_ m g MW R

'MI',in A t Arm ja r _ _ ,ncy !>.JA + N ra v , pmy rgt _ rr,L;cw 9 mor , 7 w pl . 'i - W ACC! NO

._