2016 Technology Update Presentation. - NRC: Home Page · 2016 Technology Update Presentation...

ENCLOSURE 5

MFN 16-056

2016 Technology Update Presentation

Non-Proprietary Information – Class I (Public)

INFORMATION NOTICE

Enclosure 5 is a non-proprietary version of the 2016 Technology Update Presentations from Enclosure 4, which has the proprietary information removed. Portions that have been removed are indicated by open and closed double brackets as shown here [[ ]].

1B. R. Moore NRC Tech Update

August 2-3, 2016

2016 Technology Update for the US NRCAugust 2-3

Dr. Brian R. MooreGeneral ManagerCore & Fuel Engineering

August 2-3, 2016

Thank You for Coming

• Safety Minute• Introductions• Housekeeping

• The handouts• The facility

• Why we are here... sharing technical performance and direction.

• NRC Opening Statements

August 2-3, 2016

August 2

Time Subject Presenter Duration (minutes)

OPEN PORTION1300 Welcome/Introductions

NRC CommentsBrian MooreNRC – Joe Golla

1315 DSS Management Remarks NRC – Rob Taylor/ Louise Lund

1330 LIC-500 Revision NRC – Jason Drake 15

1345 NRC Change Process Development NRC – Josh Kaizer 15

1400 NRC ATWSI Testing Description NRC – Diego Saenz 15

1415 Redefined MCPR Safety Limit NRC - Reed Anzalone 15

1430 Public Comment All 15

1445 Adjourn

1445 Break 15

August 2-3, 2016

Safety Limit MCPR RedefinitionLukas Trosman

August 2nd, 2016

SLMCPR Tech Spec RedefinedMCPR95/95(i) = µi + κi*σi

Where,µi is the mean Experimental Critical Power Ratio (ECPR)

ECPR = ( ) σi is the standard deviation of the ECPRs

κi is a statistical parameter chosen to provide 95% probabilityat 95% confidence (95/95) for the one-sided upper tolerance limit thatdepends on the number of samples (Ni) in the critical power database

i is a fuel product line, such as GE14, GNF2, OPTIMA3, ATRIUM10X, etc.

OLMCPR continues to be based on SLMCPR99.9%

SLMCPR Tech Spec Redefined

Standard Deviation, σi (%) MCPR95/95(i)

2.0 1.03

2.5 1.04

3.0 1.05

3.5 1.06

4.0 1.07

4.5 1.08

5.0 1.09

Representative MCPR95/95(i) Values for Ni=1000

SLMCPR Tech Spec Redefined

• BWROG Project with support from GNF and Westinghouse

• Technical Document Completed

• A generic change package (aka Traveler) will be submitted to the NRC

• Pre-submittal meeting expected in 3Q 2016

Imagination at work.

Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)

FeCrAl Cladding for Accident Tolerant Fuel Aug 2016

Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)Acknowledgement

This material is based upon work supported by the Dept. of Energy [National Nuclear Security Administration] under Award Number DE-NE0008221.

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United StatesGovernment 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.

GE is Developing High Performance Accident Tolerant Fuel Cladding for Light Water Power ReactorsA variety of ferritic steel compositions have been investigated within the GE ATF program . Current alloy candidate is APMT (Fe-22Cr-5Al-3Mo) with UO2 fuel pelletsDesired Characteristics:1. Superior oxidation resistance in the event of a severe accident.2. Excellent environmental characteristics under normal operations both for BWR and PWR

coolants3. Improved Material Properties (Strength, Ductility, Cracking, Creep, etc.)4. Eliminate common/current fuel failure mechanisms (Debris, PCI/PCMI, Secondary

Degradation, Hydrogen Embrittlement)5. Improved safety during Design Basis and Beyond Design Basis Accidents

Original Materials in Proposal ID CompositionZircaloy-2 A Zr + 1.2-1.7 Sn + 0.07-0.2 Fe + 0.05-0.15 Cr + 0.03-0.08 NiFerritic steel T91 B Fe + 9 Cr + 1 Mo + 0.2 V Ferritic steel HT9 C Fe + 12 Cr + 1 Mo + 0.5 Ni + 0.5 W + 0.3 VNanostructured ferritic alloys - 14YWT D Fe + 14 Cr + 0.4 Ti + 3 W + 0.25 Y2O3 Newer Identified CandidatesMA956 E Fe + 18.5-21.5 Cr + 3.75-5.75 Al + 0.2-0.6 Ti + 0.3-0.7 Y2O3 APMT G Fe + 22 Cr + 5 Al + 3 Mo E brite H Fe + 25-27.5 Cr + 1 Mo + 0.17 (Ni + Cu) Alloy 33 J 33 Cr + 32 Fe + 31 Ni + 1.6 Mo + 0.6Cu + 0.4 N8 Newer Alloys (4 NFA and 4 Traditional) X Fe-Cr-Al alloys (X9, X12, X16, X20)

Superior Oxidation Resistance at High Temperatures

~Three Orders of Magnitude Reduction in Oxidation Rates

0.55 0.60 0.65 0.70 0.75 0.8010-7

10-3 Baker-Just Leistikow-Schanz Urbanic-Heidrick Pawel-Cathcart Moalem-Olander Zry-4 Duplex Zirlo M5 E110

Iron Alloys 304SS - Ishida et al. 304SS - Brassfield et al. 310SS - Pint et al. APMT - Pint et al.

100011001400

k p [g

1000/T [K-1]

CVD-SiC

1500 1300 1200

Temperature [°C]

Zirconium Alloys

K.A. Terrani, S.J. Zinkle, L.L. Snead, “Advanced oxidation-resistant iron-based alloys for LWR fuel cladding,” J. Nucl. Mater., 448, (2014) 420.

Zirc-2, Oxide thickness ~ 1.23 μm APMT, Oxide Thickness ~ 0.278 μm

Environmental CharacteristicsOxidation during Normal Operations

Comparative assessment of oxide thickness between Zirc-2 and APMT coupons exposed to BWR simulated conditions for one year (288°C + 2 ppm O2)

Environmental CharacteristicsOxidation during Normal Operations

Surface & cross-section of the oxide formed on APMT coupon exposed for 1 year

BWR, pure water + 2 ppm O2 at 288°C139 nm oxide thickness

PWR, pure water + 3.75 ppm H2 at 330°C87 nm oxide

Environmental Characteristics / Material Properties

Mitigation of Shadow Corrosion

Resistant to Stress Corrosion Cracking

Under constant loadK = 25 ksi√in, Crack Growth Rate (CGR) for austenitic type SS = 3 x 10-7 mm/s

No separation in the electrochemical potential between APMT grid and X-750 spacer

Material PropertiesStress-Strain, Creep Behavior

0 100 200 300 400 500

Temperature (°C)

Yield Stress ‐ Longitudinal

Zirc‐2

0 100 200 300 400 500

Temperature (°C)

UTS ‐ Longitudinal

Zirc‐2

0 100 200 300 400 500

Temperature (°C)

Elongation to Failure ‐ Longitudinal

Zirc‐2

APMT 0.1

0 10 20 30 40 50

LMP - Temp (K) & time (h)

Zircaloy‐2

Zirc-2 = 149°C to 538°C (300°F to 1000°F)APMT = 800°C to 1200°C (1472°F to 2192°F)

Up to 400°C

Material PropertiesFabrication, Manufacturability

Drawn FeCrAl alloy tube samples at Rhenium Alloys Inc., North Ridgeville, OH.

The C35M3 (Fe-13Cr-5.2Al-2Mo-0.2Si-Y, wt.%) was drawn into the aim tube size with 9.5 mm OD and <0.40 mm wall thickness (Y. Yamamoto)

Manufacturability - Welding

Fabrication

Initial investigation shows FeCrAl can be welded using a variety of techniques (TIG, Laser, etc.).

PRW under investigation

Fuel Failure MechanismsDebris Fretting, PCI/PCMI

PCI/PCMI

Debris Resistance

Coping TimeStation Black Out5

PCT marginImpact of FeCrAl on Safety System Operational Requirements5

Non-Proprietary Information - Class I (Public)DOE Program Timeline

Sept 2016 Phase 2 Award (2 Years – 2017, 2018)

Proposed GNF Program Timeline[[

Areas of Continued Investigation[[

Summary and Conclusions• GE concept for Accident Tolerant Fuel utilizes a FeCrAl alloy cladding with UO2

fuel pellets material.– Orders of magnitude more resistant to reaction with superheated steam than zirconium

– Less combustible hydrogen release and less heat of reaction.

– Maintain coolable geometry for longer time allowing for quenching measures.

• Phase 1 tasks adequately demonstrate feasibility.– Environmentally compatible

– Material properties compatible

• NRC engagement– Lead Rod Assembly Insertion

– Long Term Regulatory Framework

Channel Performance Update

Dan Lutz, Paul Cantonwine and Kevin LedfordFuel Performance and Design

August 2016

• Recent Interference Observations

• NSF Channel Performance

Outline

Channel Distortion Mechanisms

Top view Front view Top view Front view

LBow Δ∝ PBulge Δ∝

Fluence Gradient Bow

FL Δ∝Δ

Zircaloy

Channel performance in GNF core designs

2003 Issued first monitoring guidance

2004 Began to rechannel to remove high-bow channels

2005 Began optimizing core design to minimize channel distortion

Inserted first large quantities of Zircaloy-4 channels

Inserted first NSF mini-batch

First NSF ReloadStill Observing Channel – Control Blade Interference with both Zircaloy-2 and Zircaloy-4 Channels

Recent Interference Observations

• Ten no-settles among one D, one C, and four S lattice plants

• Cells all Zircaloy-2, all Zircaloy-4 or mixed Zircaloy-2 and Zircaloy-4

• Not always well-predicted by CFM model

• None in NSF cells

C-lattice Interference and CFM Map Example

NSF expected to drive further improvement

NSF Channel Performance Report(Required per the SER)

Recent NSF Inspections

Perry Cycle 15 (partially reported in 2015)

Limerick 1 EOC16 LUCs (new)• 2nd Cycle Etched and Pre-ox (3 channels)• 4th Cycle Etched (lead LUC from 2002)• Visuals and length

Grand Gulf EOC20 (new)• 1st cycle Pre-ox (lead mini-batch, 4 channels)• Visual and length

NSF Channel SIMCHAD/Length Measurement Database

NSF Irradiation Growth Data[[

NSF Channel Creep Bulge[[

NSF Channel Bow[[

NSF Channel Shadow Bow[[

Limerick 1 4th Cycle Etched NSF[[

Limerick 1 2nd Cycle Pre-Ox NSF[[

Limerick 1 2nd Cycle Etched NSF[[

Grand Gulf EOC20 Inspection[[

NSF Update - Lead-Use Channel Programs

NSF Licensing/Transition• 2015

– September received NRC approval for full NSF reloads– Implemented the approved NSF shadow bow model which

is equal to 20% of Zircaloy-2 shadow bow model

• 2016– NSF batch use now integrated into GESTAR– March 2016 inserted first NSF batch reload of 320 channels in Grand

Gulf C21– More batch reloads followed in Limerick 1 and Clinton– Approximately 3600 NSF channels in use or fabricated by Fall 2017

Summary for 2016• Interference still occurring with Zircaloy-2 and Zircaloy-4

channels• But is being well managed by plants following either

SC08-05 (BWR/6) or SC11-05 (BWR/2-5)• NSF performance data continues to demonstrate

resistance to both fluence and shadow bow with acceptable corrosion

• NSF licensing is complete• GNF started inserting full NSF reloads in 2016

2016 Technology Update: US NRC

Fuel Experience Update

Rob Schneider, GNF Fuel Reliability

2Fuel Performance

August 2016

Agenda• Fuel Experience Summary

Total, current designs

• Reliability Trend

historical, recent trends

• GNF2 experience details – including title slide

• Details regarding recent fuel failures

• New Fuel Reload Surveillance Status

• LUA Surveillance Status & Objectives

• Rod Gap Observations

3Fuel Performance

August 2016

GNF Fuel Experience[[

4Fuel Performance

August 2016

NRC requested formats for reliability data

Fuel Performance formats

• TOTAL Number of failed rods per year (not failed assemblies)

this is provided in slide #9 and 10

• Failed rods per year broken down by failure mechanism

this is provided in slide #11

• Failure Rate (failed rods per million manufactured) in US

this is provided in slide #5 by product line and #8 as fn. of time

5Fuel Performance

August 2016

Fuel Experience Update (through July 2016, 10x10 fuel)

6Fuel Performance

August 2016

Fuel Experience Update[[

7Fuel Performance

August 2016

GNF2: Reloads & LUAs, Experience Summary[[

8Fuel Performance

August 2016

Historical Reliability Trends[[

9Fuel Performance

August 2016

GNF Fuel Failures per Year[[

10Fuel Performance

August 2016

GNF Fuel Failures per Year – International[[

11Fuel Performance

August 2016

Failed rods per year: by failure mechanism

12Fuel Performance

August 2016

Rod Gap Surveillance[[

13Fuel Performance

August 2016

Rod Gap Surveillance[[

14Fuel Performance

August 2016

Lead Use Assembly Surveillances• GE14 LUA Irradiations & Inspections complete

• GNF2 LUAs Irradiations & Inspections essentially complete also• Only Hatch & several Gun-C remain in operation

15Fuel Performance

August 2016

GNF3 Inspection Plans

Poolside inspections• Focus on new features • Visual exams & COINs (oxide, crud profilometry/diameter)

periodically as outage schedules support• Selected dimensional measurements at various exposures• Some bundles not disassembled until end of life inspection

GNF3 is a variant on GNF2[[

16Fuel Performance

August 2016

Summary• Fuel Experience:

• 10x10 experience base now ~5 million rods

• Reliability Trends• Only seeing debris fretting failures, and most are in a small # of plants. GNF working with

/ supporting those plants.• Operation with failed fuel / very low activity release routinely accomplished to ~18-20 months

• GNF2 experience details• Transition to GNF2 reloads is nearly complete

• New Fuel Reload Surveillance Status• Complete for legacy designs; extensive inspections; essentially complete for GNF2

• LUA Surveillance Status & Objectives• Planning GNF3 Inspections to start winter ‘17

MELLLA+ L&C 23 Update

NRC Technology UpdateAugust 2016

2Aug 2016

NEDC-33173P Limitation & Condition 23Quote from Safety Evaluation:

“In the first plant-specific implementation of MELLLA+, the cycle-specificeigenvalue tracking data will be evaluated and submitted to the NRC toestablish the performance of nuclear methods under the operation in thenew operating domain. The following data will be analyzed:

• Hot critical eigenvalue

• Cold critical eigenvalue

• Nodal power distribution (TIP Nodal RMS)

• Bundle power distribution (TIP Radial RMS)

• Thermal margins (3DM vs. offline)

• Core flow and pressure drop uncertainties

• Minimum Critical Power Ratio Importance Parameter (MIP)”

3Aug 2016

Approved NRC Clarification Letter [Nov 20, 2015]Changes to NEDC-33173P L&C 23:

NEDC-33173P L&C 23 NRC Clarification Letter

Number of Plants ONE (1)1st plant-specific implementation

FOUR (4)Four plants to better represent fleet

including higher power density

Parameters • Hot critical eigenvalue• Cold critical eigenvalue• Nodal power distribution • Bundle power distribution • Thermal margins • Core flow and pressure drop

uncertainties• MCPR Importance Parameter

• Hot critical eigenvalue• Cold critical eigenvalue• Nodal power distribution • Bundle power distribution • Thermal margins • Core flow and pressure drop

uncertainties• MCPR Importance Parameter

NRC Reporting • Submit report following first cycle • Annual presentation at NRC TechUpdate for 3-6 years

• Submit report following first fulloperating M+ cycle which containssubstantial TIP data in M+ domain

4Aug 2016

Plant-Specific MELLLA+ Implementations

• Monticello (2Q’14)

• Nine Mile Point Unit 2 (3Q’15)

• Peach Bottom Unit 2 (2Q’16)

• Peach Bottom Unit 3 (2Q’16)

• Grand Gulf (Future) – Not included in this compilation

Limited operational data in the MELLLA+ operating domain to date

5Aug 2016

Comparison Approach

• Presentation of requested metrics based on operational data in the MELLLA+ domain has limited value without historical context

• For each metric being compared, the following is provided to help establish methods performance on a comparative basis:– Fleet data from IMLTR or MELLLA+ submittals (if applicable)

– Previous 3 cycles of information for each plant

– Highlighted points where any cycle was operating in the MELLLA+ domain (Cold eigenvalues highlighted if any point in cycle MELLLA+)

Hot Critical Eigenvalue

7Aug 2016

Historical Basis – Source: IMLTR SE[[

8Aug 2016

Monticello[[

9Aug 2016

Peach Bottom Unit 2[[

10Aug 2016

11Aug 2016

Nine Mile Point Unit 2[[

Cold Critical Eigenvalue

13Aug 2016

Historical Basis – Source: IMLTR SE[[

14Aug 2016

Cold Eigenvalue[[

Nodal Power Distribution

16Aug 2016

Nodal TIP Comparisons[[

17Aug 2016

Nodal TIP Comparisons[[

Bundle Power Distribution

19Aug 2016

Radial TIP Comparisons[[

20Aug 2016

Radial TIP Comparisons[[

Thermal Margins:Online Adapted (3DM) / Offline Non-Adapted (P11)

22Aug 2016

MFLPD Bias[[

23Aug 2016

MAPLHGR Bias[[

24Aug 2016

MFLCPR Bias[[

Core Flow & Pressure Drop Uncertainties

26Aug 2016

27Aug 2016

28Aug 2016

Nine Mile Point Unit 2[[

29Aug 2016

Monticello[[

Closing Remarks

31Aug 2016

Closing Remarks

• Limited data available for MELLLA+ operation to date

• Initial data demonstrates Methods’ performance in the MELLLA+ domaincontinues to meet expectations set by prior submittals and historicaldata at non-MELLLA+ conditions

• Intent is to add to information each year in the same format it waspresented here. Interested in NRC feedback to make sure this is aseffective as possible.

GNF3 Update

Russ Fawcett

August 3, 2016

GNF3: Fueling the Future

GNF3 vs. GNF2

GNF3 vs. GNF2 (cont.)• Spacers

– [[

GNF3 vs. GNF2 (cont.) [[

Testing Summary

Full Scale CP/DP Testing at STERN Labs.

Mechanical Testing

GNF3 LUA Status

LUA Irradiations Proceeding]]

GNF3 Program Schedule/Timeline

Summary

2016 Technology Update Presentation. - NRC: Home Page · 2016 Technology Update Presentation...

Documents

Transcript of 2016 Technology Update Presentation. - NRC: Home Page · 2016 Technology Update Presentation...

FIPS 140-2 Non-proprietary Security Policy …...Non-proprietary security policy May be reproduced only in its original entirety without revision. Page 1 of 23 FIPS 140-2 Non-proprietary

FIPS 140-2 Non-proprietary Security Policy - NIST

International non-proprietary name: apalutamide Procedure No. … · International non-proprietary name: apalutamide . Procedure No. EMEA/H/C/004452/II/0001 . Marketing authorisation

Attachment 3 WCAP-17256-NP, Revision 5 (Non-Proprietary) · 2013-10-08 · WCAP-17256-NP, Revision 5 (Non-Proprietary) Attachment 3 WESTINGHOUSE NON-PROPRIETARY CLASS 3 WCAP-17256-NP

Enclosure 8, AREVA Report ANP-3434P, Non-Proprietary ...

Non-Proprietary Elevator Controls - Lift Serve

International Non-proprietary Name: Leflunomide Procedure No: EMEA

Specifications, Elevator Products · tics are furnished regardless of the elevator manufacturer: • Provide MCE non-proprietary diagnostics. • Provide non-proprietary diagnostics

Non-Proprietary - Independent MELCOR Confirmatory Analysis ...

Document ID 5025043 Non-Proprietary Attachment 3 AFFIDAVIT ...

ENCORE DDS Guide - Developer Reference Non-Proprietary ... · for use as a Non-Proprietary Transmission mapping reference ... A level of computer responsiveness that a user ... Non-Proprietary

Non Proprietary Security Policy - NIST

International Non-proprietary Name: Imipenem monohydrate ...

Data Driven Non-Proprietary Plant Optimization

Sliding Evaluation and Results Non-Proprietary Version

ENCLOSURE 2 MFN 10-160 Presentation Material Non ... · ENCLOSURE 2 MFN 10-160 Presentation Material Non-Proprietary Information IMPORTANT NOTICE Enclosure 2 is a non-proprietary

9 Matt Eyre - BADGER 2p0 - Non-proprietary. · 9 Matt Eyre - BADGER 2p0 - Non-proprietary. Created Date: 10/9/2012 1:30:55 PM ...

Vogtle, Units 3 & 4, Transmittal of Proprietary and Non-Proprietary … · 2012. 8. 22. · Plans" from March 28, 2012 meeting (Non-Proprietary) Enclosure items la., 2a. and 3a. are

2.2 Non-Proprietary & Proprietary File Format · PDF file02.12.2010 · 2.2 Non-Proprietary & Proprietary File Format C5603 Graphic & Multimedia Mohd Khairuddin Bin Abd Karim Civil

【機密性 2 Report on the Deliberation Results Non-proprietary ... · Non-proprietary Name Idarucizumab (Genetical Recombination) (JAN*) Applicant. Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim