View
215
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
I
Robust Fuel Program
xfdwkh it sunmfeffm km VW M1I2I WR~~ECONPOEEN7A4L PJORMAhON- Not job.l *rpf. s~
Utilities Formed TheIn 1998
* Today's demanding operatingconditions have reducedoperating margins
* Competitive environment lesseability to fund R & D to ensurefuel performs "as advertised"
* RFP is aimed at ensuring- Optimal fuel performance;
avoiding operational surprises- Regulatory stability- Operating flexibility- Burnup extension
Robust Fuel Program
2.jddt1o~~ho if. io*ro rmER 1 2
1
A-,TACVw~J-T P-
More Demanding Environment
* Increasing discharge bumups and long cycle length
* Increased fuel peaking and enrichment
* Plant uprates
* New water chemistry environments- Elevated pH/lithium and Zn injection for PWRs- NMCA, hydrogen water chemistry and Zn Injection for
BWRs
* Fuel design changes and introduction of newmaterials
Reduced margins and increased unknowns
Fig A > COI PTflAL iORMRM1N-Mdftb h w tjuw d hmEffPAd St P21=121
Trends In Cycle Length -U.S.
650
Sao
100
5500
450
400
350
1990 1991 19 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1"8 1"9 2000 2001 2002p
Year
4an F BAN- ad Aged - t s~l 4Pa Pt ~~~COMtER~~NAL MNOAMATION-Nfof IDh be b"BEsr&ew~hg rf~i*eztohPA' 1=2
2
Trends In Average Initial Enrichment -U.S.
4AW%.
4.600%4.40%
4.20%
1991 t992 199 1994 1t95 M96 1299 199S M99 2000 2001 2002p
Year
g CtFORao dud iil
I Number Of Uprated Applications In U.S.
90
so 11_70 _ EPU - 20%
60 0 Stretch - 7%
so OMUR<2%
40
30
20
10
Approved Over Under Review As Expected OverLast 30 Years of May 2002 Next 5 Years
1i l1ugT__- CONFDeNTALS WAOR TMATIobe ped dbrtrildewkf .,1fnf.b0 adhton mm EEPNal
3
IRobust Fuel Program Utility Steering Committee
SerCor Repmsentave I
Execuysv Comnltte
t BvdqW APb'3I
4 bvod ramWn* UP
Pay.yi
PR 12?uL WMdDH7ZA UEPORw-I brrWurrhnde mm WmRI a2 21
Executive Committee Members
Lyle Bohn, Nuclear Management CompanyKen Canady, Duke EnergyBill Eaton, EntergyLou Long, Southern NuclearJim Malone, Exelon CorpJoe Sheppard, South Texas Project (Chairman)Ausaf Husain, Fuelco
Gary Fader, INPOAlex Marion, NEI
1I?-OA CON~iE7?AL W8VATZ47-RoE b s doitb.ewodwr fM nmfhkmw, ro EP I 2BIF
4
ChairmenNice-Chairmen & ProjectManagers
Working Group I
Working Group 2
Working Group 3
Working Group 4
Chairman
Dan Bryant(South Texas)
Nicolas Waeckel(EdF)
Vice Chairman
Kenny Epperson(Duke Power)
Bob Tsai(Exelon)
Prolect Manager
Jeff Deshon
Odelli Ozer
Kurt Edsinger
Bo Cheng
Dave Hoppes(South Texas)
Bruce Hunt(Southern Nuclear)
Ed Armstrong(Exelon)
1F#-t Pt 14- COfA4MOEn7AL IFORM MAIf-H oE becWddb&O~SWhetgAfft.f 8.0wZnd- fl ci.,m Of=fall
International Participation
2004 Members
US (19 utilities, 80 units)
AmerenUE
Constellation Energy
Detroit Edison
Duke Energy
Energy Northwest
Entergy
Exelon
FirstEnergy Corp.
Nuclear ManagementCorp
Pacific Gas & Electric Co.
PPL Corporation
Public Service Elec. & Gas
So. Tx. Project Nucl. Oper. CoSouthern California Edison Co
Southern Nuclear Operating
Tennessee Valley Authority
TXU Electric
Wolf Creek Nuct. Oper. Corp
International (9 utilIties, 113 units)
EdF (France)
Japan Atomic Power Co. (Japan)
Kansal Eectric Power Co. (Japan)
Kyushu Electric Power Co. (Japan)
Lelbstadt (Switzerland)
Shikoku Electric Power Co. (Japan)
Tokyo Electric Power Co. (Japan)
UNESA (Spain)
Vattenfall (Sweden)
Close Collaboration withINPO; NEI; NRC Research; Global Nuclear Fuel; Westinghouse and Framatome ANP
Iew F-A Pr CONM;fE MN4J FtOMUiiT tofp 1komdwId.ft~ wNh*w*tw Aob.*&d..m PWR 21711
5
Key Issues Addressed
F"1r.&' t I_7"' CONFI6NMlL WORMADOH-AW to b~e opIdfbsdwdithbo.*wIWNf.t..mOIMIOO kanzpm C-=FIrl
Key Fuel Performance Issues
• BWR:- Large number of BWRs experiencing fuel failures, and many
of the root causes are unknown- Needs to assess the impact of Noble Metal Chemical
Application (NMCA) and Zn injection on fuel performance- Excessive channel bow Interferes with control blade insertion
at some BWRs
* PWR:- Grid-rod fretting continues to be the main failure root cause- Axial offset anomaly (AOA) persists but occurrence frequency
and severity are down significantly- RCCA cracking and deformation
~ f~ 12Plew P~~~~t~~r___CONFVENMLtrh 9w4o.,twV.,M ,,fioWktto. E PR) ral
6
Fuel Failure Trend 1980 To 2002
' _
12 M. t _L mLLI60 61 62 83 64 65 6 67 66 66 90 612 60 N0 64 N 66 9 66 6 00 01 02
Ye
o nr13Few PC C-F~~~~~~c@14waf~* ~h, ~fil ~al~o fu, Pr l2
7
Trend In PWR Fuel Failure Root Causes
II
aIs
Ez2
1990 1991 1992 1993 1194 1995 199 1997 199 1999 2o0 201 2D02 acW
Year
.9ef d 1 ,,,,,. 15PR CP -- KMWFRM--ob o#dwf&bw~~rwu.*d i A ~~
RFP Focus
Resolve existing operation and reliability problems- Failure root cause investigations
* Two hot cell shipments planned in late 2003 to identify BWRfailure root causes
* Assisted members In failure root cause investigations- Impact of NMCA and Zinc injection on fuel performance
* Data indicate apparent Increase in clad corrosion and crud* Collect data to quantify the Impact* Work with BWRVIP and Chemistry group to Issue guidelines* Conduct tests to identify alternatives
- Mitigate axial offset anomalies (AOA) and crud deposits* Interim mitigation measures available-UT cleaning, reload core
design, chemistry control, mitigation tool available (BOA code)* Potential solutions are being investigated
new AtFT___ COMME~n'"ra-01im TM .MW ft hcopkc.d 16 . f<dw9 wdnffeah.-tj FM E Pi21
8
Hot Cell Projects To DetermineFailure Root Cause
l
I KKL PCI-like I(GNF fue
.2Il1 l5 ll1
failure La Salle PCI-like failure I'I) I I (Fraratome) l
i-. l-1 10 11I I I ,l , i
, , , , , , _
95 97 99
Xi I |
01 031 05
: f '
07
| TMI C10 Failure crud-| Induced (Framatome fuel) I
Browns Ferry-2 C12| Corrosion failure (GNF) I
Hot cell exams have been successful in identifying failure rootcauses
Fe" 19 Pr__COtdON2IALU WO 17 em 1121ftOMI-lAWIOf be@ASSdadS&ftdW.SswkN w.fahoful, tn PA 1
NMVCA Implementation Status
777775:1 - r-,77- '777r-r
[ Dane'Arnoldfrs i mp etdN CA~n1961
-uane Am IV had scn& app 11t99 nin1,
27 Wks bad N~c~ ~ fJn002OO.,
c1Id,8 ~ewtotst, ioI~I. r, PS 2 2
9
BWR Chemistry Optimization
Materials
Degradation
Requirements for aneffectve NMCA program
and Answedin refief
Fuel PerformanceControl of Claddfng
Conmsion andCnud Deposition
Radiation FieldsZin Injection essential
to control dose rtee Increase
ft ~~~~~~~~ ~19 r wh.wUe,.*f.IffrmER 21 2
RFP Focus (cont'd)
Proactively collect data to ensure margins under high dutyconditions- No data available for modern high-duty fuel- Minimum number and scope hot cell campaigns
performed/planned- The data are crucial to ensure margins AND can also be used for
burnup extension
* Regulatory stability- NRR wants Improved technical basis for licenses already granted- RES and regulatory agencies worldwide are funding research to
revise regulatory criteria for RIA & LOCA* RFP submitted a RIA Topical to NRC for review in 2002* RFP is working closely with NRC to develop the LOCA criteria for
advanced high bumup fuel
20CONFW~mwFGRMN-Nofolmep~dardsri~b*. ftdwolt w,*ton agthwuato.,frunEP 21=2F1a
10
Quantify Operating Margins By Hot cell Exams
Quantify margins of key fuel designs under prototvyical andlimiting conditions by examining fuel with
- Minimum time to reach practical discharge limits (i.e., achievablewithin 5% enrichment limit)* High power* Long cycles
- Representative water chemistry- High temperature (PWR)
The program is designed to avoid the really big surprises!
g!W2> C0n4L~ff0RwN- _Kb0bdt 2fsFIhbrlftjtgwon, EI E2
Hot Cell Projects To Quantify MarginsNorth AnneaI~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[- Robinson 72 GWdIMTU North Anna 70 GWdNMTU 70 GWdWM
(Zry-4) (ZIRLO) (M5)
Vn V )i1 F
U-~~~~~U
498 i9 ~'ec '01 '02 .93 '04 Yes 'c6
Limerick 52 GWd/MTU M Limerick 55 & 65 GWdMTU l
I |,(Zry- Process 5) (Zry-2, Process 5 & Process 6. NMCA)
Major designs covered with minimum number of programsAll hot cell exams complete in 2006
R W [ a CONlF l e I WTO#RUAJtON-N..Io bceoi vsqfrlbhdorrw*gdp o snitnhrEIn fmPRI at1121
11
Strategies: Ultrasonic Fuel Cleaning
PWRs that have now ultrasonically cleaned fuel:CallawayPumose: AOA avoidance
Callaway experienced varying degrees of AOA from Cycle 4 through11. In combination with reducing fuel duty, CY12 was free of AOAand CY13 has had no indications through 7500 MWD/MTU
South Texas Project Unit IPunpose: AOA avoidance, allowed a reduction in fuel assembly
purchases* First cleaning performed in October 2002
South Texas Project Unit 2Purpose: AOA avoidance following SG replacement & up-rate, allowed a
reduction in fuel assembly purchases* First cleaning performed in April 2003
1R""F 1- It?" cDezL FOM1O-Eo pId Y dww*lt23
Strategies: Ultrasonic Fuel Cleaning
Next PWR planning to ultrasonically clean fuel:Vogtle Unit IPlanned Date: October 2003
Purvose: AOA avoidance (in anticipation of Injecting Zn) and dose ratereduction
.......... *.................*............*....*a.............
First BWR planning to ultrasonically clean fuel:Quad Cities Unit 2Planned Date: Spring 2004
Purpose: Dose rate reduction* Mock-up testing taking place at Vallecitos, 16 discharged assemblies will
be cleaned on a pre-trial basis in Fall 2003. Anticipate cleaning first reloadassemblies in Spring 2004.
«tF-tco~~~ss~~rut 24
12
Mission Of WG2 (Response To Transients)
RFP WG2 is the industry's interface with NRCon fuel related regulatory and technical issues
NRR
-Through NEI on regulatory and licensing issues
RES
-MOU between EPRI and RES
>LOCA tests In ANL
>Cabri International Program
~ CGlfOlA11o DbcpderdOmnalfel25Rew rlk~f~ C0KF&WrMN0VRW7M kWI. b oorddsb~fotsd.U.jw~fla.U1zrtofn fm EPRI 2-=I~t
Three Main Regulatory Focus Areas
*RIA- Submitted RIA Topical Report on licensing criteria at high
burnup (for Zr-4)- Participated in the Cabri International Project to confirm margins
* LOCA- Work with NRC to define appropriate LOCA limits for high
burnup fuel rods- Tests on representative high-burnup rods and LOCA tests in
Japan, France and Norway- LOCA response of advanced claddings (eg. Zirlo, M5)
* Industry Guide for licensing burnup extensions- Identify burnup-dependent fuel design criteria and how to
demonstrate compliance at high-burnup
Rew PC CONRDEHT14L VRMA BON- Not gob. 26 dhf rue..dwrI etwWn mmad.ffl" aom E -FPRJ Eral
13
Proposed RIA Criteria
I Coolabilliy Lmit
AVX- 0 IJ - I -----
ISM00 -~ ~ -- Fuel Rod Failure Threshold.---III I I~~~~- - - -II
2 I-- - - - -4 - -I- 8 - - - - - - - - I -I
0 i I 0 so W I so 9
I I I~Ro Avfg Bu u (G I I
I I I I I I I I
I Ongoing LOCA Experimental Programs
Four major international experimental LOCA programs1) NRC-ANL LOCA criteria-related tests on irradiated fuel
Industry collaborate closely with NRC* Provided Robinson and Limerick high-bumup rods and un-
Irradiated Zircaloy archive material from Robinson, Limerick
* Framatome and W provided M5 and Zirlo
* Selected tests with irradiated M5 and Zirlo
2) Separate-effects tests at EDF/CEA in France on unirradiated &pre-hydrided Robinson and Limerick claddings (RFP funded) aswell as M5 and Zr-4 to study oxidation, quench and phasetransformation kinetics
3) JAERI LOCA test program (ALPS) on irradiated fuel
4) HALDEN LOCA tests using high burnup fuel rods
7 28Swf 2 E122FiF~~r CONRU~~nU XFORMTM-M ftb ca~o ddft.Wwltwc,,wNW aw, amk M C1=5l
14
I Separate Effects Tests- Collaboration With EdF
Clad temperature
i} t i m~~~~~~.ie
EDGAR-RFP CINOG-RFP*Metallographic characterization *Oxidation tests*Mechanical properties *quench tests
1w ' P - COmD~NtnL WfORW4T-oto b1 Xed ea~ wdWlboli S .nagA.t.f ft. PRm MR=f2 =I2
I Industry Guide For Burnup Extension
* Being prepared in response to NRC's mandate for anindustry-wide, consistent approach to the licensing ofbumup extensions- 75 GWD/T rod average for PWR and 70 GWD/T for BWR
* Approach:- Reviewed current criteria and design limits (SRP 4.2 and non-
proprietary vendor topicals) - Determined which criteria dependon bumup
- Determine what changes (if any) are needed and what data willbe required to demonstrate compliance with the new limits
* Status:- The draft Industry Guide Is complete except for LOCA-dependent
.Cladding residual ductility" criterion- The LOCA section is being drafted by a 'focus group' including
utilities and vendor LOCA experts- To be submitted to NRC in 2004
IR I Y"' COMFIVNigh 30 mlf on EP e
15
Summary
* Active International participation
* Have addressed several key industry operational andtechnical issues and are well-positioned to obtain datato ensure margins and avoid big surprises- UT cleaning and AOA model & guidelines
- NMCA data and BWR water chemistry guidelines on NMCA &Zn concentrations
- RIA Topical report
* Robust Fuel Program is aimed to ensure- Reliable and efficient fuel operations
- Industry wide collaboration to resolve safety & regulatoryissues in an integrated and effective manner
Rf~ COW LO;Dsu 31_ q 9 pWwdwstbubd .wfto.* wff. aoUMorka~o, m r -. F II l
Industry Interactions
&-I Mfr. M_ &I i�
321qW F.Apr---- COXFIDMMt.MMMA TM -AW to be mpWod1"*~wMmNwft&nzW-ft&t1wftM Mit CEPrall
16
Ultrasonic Fuel Cleaning Technology
NRR
Washington D.C.
October 1, 2003
J DeshonEPRI
Oct: 2X3 _ EPtz Cony D~fILMEPORATIOf-A.Eh 4.Ilwfr.fdwl tsfle t Esdhoutwt. R6 f P Al
ftbo..bn hn an .
CIFI2I Fuel Cleaning Technology Background
* Identified advanced ultrasonics technology for this use (1997)- Omni-directional ultrasonic field provides enhanced bundle penetration efficiency
* Commissioned mockup testing facility and began development ofQA testing procedures (1998)
* Confirmed fuel pellet integrity (1999)- Cladding vibration amplitudes measured in mockup facility- Cladding vibrations bounded by normal operating flow-induced vibration amplitudes- Fuel vendor review, concurrence obtained- No problems during Callaway start-up ramps & trip (November 1999)
* Manufactured and deployed single channel commercial prototypesystem at Callaway (1999) - to demonstrate technology with crudreduction and AOA avoidance in mind
3dowam3 -2- pe
1
MERM Fuel Cleaning System Employs AdvancedUltrasonic Transducers
Push-pulltransducer
Omni-directionalenergy field enhances
bundle penetration
OcdolmrZO -3- ", ~ r. n --
SsSchematic of Ultrasonic Fuel Cleaning System
ii
11qz
-
.--FuetOrpple
1. Fud .appmed yWpp
j Ultaoonc Trmodu=~
F dc AsoudfbW ei d
CLcming FcbM c
Cleaning fxture may be suspendedby cables or set on the bottom orthe pod
Filtration unit Is supported by theedge of tFe pool
CRilPkm-
Rigid pIp Conncts to home. Pipe has r diameter hole forL . draining & fitling nd alo provides flow path for dcay hedremoval rough natural cornection 1 pump falls
-4-P44-t P-C
2
Callaway Plant 50.59 Evaluation
* Thermal-hydraulic analyses of forced and naturalconvection cooling of hot fuel assembly
* All seismic issues satisfied* Fuel Pellet and cladding vibrations are bounded by normal
operating flow-induced vibration amplitudes
* Fuel vendor review completed, concurrence obtained
Odctorbe3 2 DDp s
Installation of Prototype Fuel Cleaning System: Callaway
Filtration Module
Cleaning ModuleO�er 2�3 4-Octbr 2DX3 4-6
3
Demonstration Cleaning at Callaway(16 reload assemblies during RFIO, October 1999)
Before After F F
Fuel Cleaning Continues at Callaway
Endorsed by plant management for Refuel 1 1 & 12:- To Eliminate AOA risk on high duty, second cycle fuel
- To Reduce risk of early AOA onset on feed fuel by eliminatingredistribution of reload CRUD from low to high peaking assemblies
- To Control particulate inventory long term, recognizing that high dutyfuel deposits do not effectively dissolve by established shutdownchemistry evolutions
- To Minimize personnel radiation exposure during refueling outages,recognizing that lower particulate inventory results in lower shutdownradiation fields
Odober 2003 4- P6Wt F
4
Fuel Cleaning Performance at Callaway
* Safe and efficient demonstration of production cleaning inspent fuel pool
* Equipment operating procedures field proven* 10CFR50.59 approved by plant safety review committees* No adverse radwaste releases
- No HP alerts- Acceptable filter handling and storage
* Outstanding plant staff efforts
October 2003 4- , Z ,-_ V--_ -
Advancements in Ultrasonic Fuel Cleaning Design
* The second generation fuelcleaner is a dual chamber, freestanding design.
* Each chamber includes aIfWlfWtl transducer basket assembly
Installed inside a reflectorhousing.
* Vertically mounted transducerslabd on all sides were used in this
design vs. horizontally mountedtransducers on two opposingsides in the Callaway design,allowing ten transducers to beused for effective cleaning vs.sixteen for Callaway.
Octber 2003 -10- irY C -R._ 13Ac
5
Advancements in Ultrasonic Fuel Cleaning Design
. A dual chamber design allows oneassembly to be Inserted and
i ! | S cleaned while the spent fuel bridgeoperators return the previouslycleaned assembly to its storage
* g blocation in the spent fuel racks.* Software records all of the
monitored data points for each fuelassembly, Including the Incrementalchange In filter dose rate. This dataalong with activity analysis ofcleaner effluent samples drawnduring the cleaning allow for a curie
i , l a l removal mapping for the core. Thisinformation may be helpful to theplant staff in determining where thecrud is building up on the core.
-II- :r-O -
FezM Fuel Cleaning SystemCleaning Fixture Internal Cross Section
T.,.&,=c --
Trandum Suppon1 Forac
Vericel Suppunt and GuiIS
Od� *12-
WOW2M0 -12-
6
Cooling Safety Feature (dual channel)
* For the dual channel system,emergency cooling ports have
lW A-Id* been provided at the bottom ofeach cleaning fixture to allownatural convection (driven by the
| rye I decay heat of the fuel). This wasdone to ensure flow would besupplied only the channel in use.
* Using bounding assembly anddecay heat conditions,engineering calculationsdemonstrate that the maximumclad temperature achieved whileIn the natural circulation mode iswell below DNB.
Odcaer 2D03 _13_ ,, ,-._
7
Recommended