loca equivalent clad reacted (ecr) criteria. · loca equivalent clad reacted (ecr) criteria anl...

Westinghouse Non-Proprietary Class 3

LOCA Equivalent Clad Reacted (ECR) Criteria

NRC/Westinghouse MeetingRockville, MD

August 17, 2005

SHdel �Westinghouse

*BNFL Slide 1 OWestinghouse


ACRS subcommittee meeting on Reactor Fuels met on July 27, 2005

Ralph Meyer of NRC/RES presented a summary of the Argonne National Labs(ANL) program and their proposed LOCA criteria which was:

* ECR including both operational corrosion and transient oxidation <17%with the transient oxidation calculated by Cathcart-Pawel (C-P)

* Total time for transient < 2700 sec (45 minutes)* Peak Cladding temperature (PCT) < 2200 OF

This was unexpected since ANL had earlier issued an embrittlement correlationwhich was more phenomenological based

0 BNFL Slide 2 QWestinghouse


ANL presented the results of LOCA simulation testing performed at ANL

ANL program plan is to wrap-up the program following the completion of theirradiated ZIRLOTm and M5 tubing tests and the integral test of the HBR rodsegments

EPRI and ANATECH both made presentations which claimed that there are stillunanswered questions from the ANL testing and that the ANL results do notcorrelate with the results from other programs

*BNFL Slide 3 Westinghouse

(BNFL Slide 3 OWestinghouse

LOCA Equivalent Clad Reacted (ECR) CriteriaFANP presented joint EDF/CES/FANP data which showed much greaterreduction in post test ductility as a function of hydrogen compared to ANL data

Rationale for this appears to be the direct quench used in the French tests

Apparently this lock in the high temperature morphology in the P-layer, whereslower cooling provided time for segregations of oxygen and hydrogen in the II-layer providing greater ductility

NRC/RES stated that EPRI was not doing enough work to develop new limits, butonly enough to verify the existing interpretation of the LOCA limits for highburnup fuel



ACRS question related to "What is the impact of up and down temperaturesvariations during high temperature oxidation on ECR and post test ductility?

Slide 5 ��We�tfnghouse

*BNFL Slide 5 O@Westinghouse


Reactivity Initiated Accident (RIA) Criteria


August 16, 2005

*BNFL Slide 6 9 Westinghouse(BNFL Slide 6 OWestinghouse


NRC/RES presented a summary of their analysis of RIA tests and his proposedcriteria. The most limiting aspect of the proposed criteria was the collapse of thecoolability limit onto a low cladding failure limit. The cladding failure limit wasgiven as a function of maximum fuel rod corrosion

EPRI and ANATECH presented the industry proposed criteria and the methodsused to produce it

Westinghouse presented summary of comments on proposed RIA criteria alongwith a sample analysis to demonstrate how limited the volume was of the coreclose to peak power and how unlikely conditions of high rod worth were

9 BNFL Slide7 OWestinghouse


ACRS indicated that they thought the N RC/RES proposed criteria was veryconservative

ACRS indicated that although they thought separate coolability and clad failurelimits were reasonable, they were skeptical that the onset of fuel melt was thebest limit and a lower one might be easier to justify

*BNFL Slide 8 �WestinghouseGBNFL Slide 8 OWestinghouse


ACRS was skeptical of the methods ANATECH used to treat cladding test data todevelop critical strain energy density (CSED) relationships as a function oftemperature and oxide thickness.

ACRS though the method non-conservative, and the overall method usingFALCON too obscure to easily understand

ACRS was skeptical that oxide spalling could be ruled out and thought that testswith spalled cladding should be included in developing the limit as was done byNRC/RES

*BNFL Slide9 Westinghouse


AGENDAWestinghouse Semi-Annual Fuel Performance Update

August 16,2005Westinghouse Office

Rockville, MD

Tuesdav, Aue 16

8:00- 8:10 am

8:10 - 8:20 am

8:20- 10:15 am

10:15- 10:30am

10:30- 11:00am

11:00 - 11:20 am

11:20 - 11:40 am

11:40 - 11:50 am

11:50 - 1:00 pm

1:00 - 3:00 pm

3:00 - 3:15 pm

3:15 - 3:35 pm

3:35 - 4:00 pm

4:00 - 4:30 pm

4:30 - 4:50 pm

4:50 - 5:00 pm

BWR Fuel Update

Welcome

BWR Organization & Overview

Fuel Performance Update

Break

Application of European Experience Baseto U.S. Plants

] 1a"c Nuclear Benchmark Results

Westinghouse BWR Short & Long TermInteractions with the USNRC

Wrap-up

Lunch/Informal Discussion between NRC,Customers & Westinghouse

PWR Fuel Update

Fuel Performance Update

Break

Oden CHF Loop Update

[ ].C Creep/Growth Test

Reactivity Insertion Accident Feedback

Update on APA DevelopmentActivities

Wrap-up

]3,c

Iac

]a,c

Ia'c

]8c

] ac

[ I2ac

I

I

I

I

]a,c

I2,C

]ac

DRESS IS BUSINESS CASUAL


Westinghouse Presentationon

Westinghouse Fuel Performance Update MeetingBWR / PWR Fuel Update

(Slide Presentation of August 16, 2005)

Westinghouse Electric Company LLCP.O. Box 355

Pittsburgh, PA 15230-0355

O 2005 Westinghouse Electric Company LLCAll Rights Reserved


Westingho usevA BNFL Group company

*BNFL Slide 1 (OWestinghouse


BWR Fuel Performance Update

NRC/Westinghouse MeetingRockville, MDAugust 2005

BNFL ��Westinghouse

@>BNFL Slide 2 (Westinghouse

Outline of PresentationOStatistics 0 Development

* Deliveries OSecondary FuelDegradation ProgrameBurnup

*Failures @Fuel PerformanceIn-Reactor Performance

*Pellet*Cladding

e Liner*Outer Component

*Channel

ProgramOSummary

*BNFL Slide 3 @ Westinghouse

BWR Fuel Deliveriesa, c

BNFL Westinghouse

(DBNFL Slide 4 GWestinghouse

BWR Fuel Burnup Experience, 2004a, c


All Fuel Failures in Westinghouse 1 OxI 0 fuela, c

J*BNFL Slide 6 eWestinghouse

Primary Fuel FailuresWestinghouse BWR Experience

a, c


Age Distribution of Debris Fretting Failuresa, c

*BNFL Westinghouse

(DBNFL Slide 8 -Westinghouse

Axial Distribution of Debris Fretting Failuresa,c

BNFL Westinghouse

(BNFL Slide 9 Wefstinghouse


*Deliveries*Burnup*Failures

@In-Reactor Performance*Pellet*Cladding

* LinerI *eOuter Component

*Channel

OSecondary FuelDegradation Program

@Fuel PerformanceProgram

OSummary

BNFL ��Westinghouse

(BNFL Slide 1 0 MWestinghouse

What is ADOPT?a, c

'I

(DBNFL Slide 1 1 -kWestinghouse

Technical Objectivesa, c

9 BNFL Westinghouse

(DBNFL Slide 12 (Westinghouse

Development of ADOPTa, c

*BNFL Slide 13 O)Westinghouse

ADOPTDeliveries

a, c

j.

BNFL Westinghouse

(qBNFL Slide 14 MWestinghouse

ADOPT - Next Stepsa, c

*BNFL Slide 15 WWestinghouse

Outline of PresentationOStatistics § Development

*Deliveries OSecondary FuelDegradation Program*Burnup

*Failures OFuel Performance@In-Reactor Performance

*Pellet*Cladding

*Liner*Outer Component

*Channel

ProgramOSummary

*BNFL Slide 16 ( Westinghouse

Liner Cladding - Backgrounda, c

-

t


Three Ramp Tests Performed in 2004-2005-

a, c


PIE after Stair-Case Ramp of 62 MWd/kgUSegment

a, c

*BNFL Westinghouse

' BNFL Slide 19 OWestinghouse

PIE after Stair-Case Ramp of 62Segment

MWd/kgU

a, c

(BNFL Slide 20 MWestinghouse

Secondary degradationMono and Liner Fuel byDegradation Type

a, c

*BNFL Slide 21 WWestinghouse

Liner Cladding - Summarya, c

*BNFL Slide 22 MWestinghouse


* Deliveries OSecondary FuelDegradation Program*Burnup

*Failures @Fuel Performance0 In-Reactor Performance Program

*Pellet OSummary*Cladding


*Channel

BNFL Westinghouse

(qBNFL Slide 23 '-'Westinghouse

Westinghouse BWR Claddinga, c

i

I

*BNFL Westinghouse

(DBNFL Slide 24 --Westinghouse

Cladding Outer Componenta,b,c

* Improve high burnupperformance

>Development of LK3

* Verify high burnup performance>Pool-side and hot-cell examinations of leading fuel rods

-Corrosion-Rod growth-Hydriding

(DBNFL.1;

BNFL Westinghouse

Slide 25 G@Westinghouse

LK3 - Achieved Burnupa, c

BNFL ISlide 26 i Westinghouse

Two-Life RodsRod positions I

ac

*BNFL Westinghouse

' BNFL Slide 27 MWestinghouse

Two-Life RodsPower history

F a,bc

L*)BNFL Slide 28 O)Westinghouse

Cladding CorrosionM'idspan Oxide Thickness by Cladding Type

a, b, c

LBNFL O WestinghouseSlide 29

Rod GrowthBy Cladding Type

a, b, c

OBNFL Slide 30 e)Westinghouse

Two-Life RodsPlanned hot-cell PIE

-

* Slide 31 OWestinghouse

Clad Hydrogen Pick-Upa, c

@BNFL Westinghouse

(OBNFL Slide 32 ftWestinghouse

5-6 Cycle LK3 and 6 Cycle LK2 & LK2+Secondary Phase Particle Size Distribution

r 'ma,C

L*BF Slide 33 O)Westinghouse

'I

Cladding Outer Component - Summarya, c

.,.

IBNFL

Westinghouse(DBNFL Slide 34 M)Westinghouse


* Deliveries*BurnupeFailures

@ln-Reactor Performance*Pellet*Cladding

* Liner*Outer Component

*Channel


OFuel PerformanceProgram

OSummary


B:WR Fuel PerformanceChannel Material Evolution

a, c

*DBNFL Slide 36 O)Westinghouse

Channel Corrosiona, b, c

(3BNFLl

Slide 37 *Westinghouse

Hydrogen Pick-Upa, b, c

.i

tI

(DBNFL Slide 38 -)Westinghouse

Hydrogen Pick-UpOuter Zry-2 Channel at 45 MWd/kg UF a, b, c

L*)BNFL Slide 39 W estinghouse

Channel Bow & Irradiation Induced Growtha, c


Channel Growtha, b, c


Channel Bow in Symmetric Latticea, b, c

BNFL Westinghouse

(DBNFL Slide 42 (IM-Westinghouse

Channel- Summarya, c

BNFL ��Westinghause

G)BNFL Slide 43 OWestinghouse


*Deliveries*Burnup*Failures


@Fuel PerformanceS I n-Reactor Performance Program

oPellet OSu mmary*Cladding

*Liner*Outer Component

I *Channel

* BNFL Westinghouse

(DBNFL Slide 44 M)Westinghouse

Alternative Cladding Alloys-Modified Zircaloy-2

a, c

*BNFL Slide 45 (O Westinghouse

Alternative Cladding AlloysZI RLOTM

a, c

.1

BNFL Westinghouse

(DBNFL Slide 46 O)Westinghouse

Alternative Cladding AlloysZI RLOTMF

-

a, c

L*BNFL Slide 47 (a Westinghouse

ZIRLOTM Channelsa, c

(DBNFL Slide 48 9Westinghouse


* Deliveries OSeconda ry FueleBurnup Degradation ProgramoFailures @Fuel Performance

@In-Reactor Performance*Pellet*Cladding

ProgramOSummary

e LinereOuter Component

*ChannelI'

* BNFL (� Westinghouse

(BNFL Slide 49 GWestinghouse

Background & Time Schedulea, c

BNFL Westinghouse

(DBNFL Slide 50 -- estinghouse


* Deliveries*Burnup*Failures

n-Reactor Performance


OFuel PerformanceProgram01

oPellet OSum mary*Cladding


eChannel

*BNFL Slide 51 @)Westinghouse

Fuel Performance ProgramAims and Goals

a, c

*BNFL Westinghouse

'mBNFL Slide 52 --Westinghouse

Fuel Performance ProgramSupport to other research amrocrams

. -w-

a, c

*BNFL Westinghouse

(DBNFL Slide 53 O)Westinghouse

Fuel Performance ProgramSummary of Rods Used for PIE

a, b, c

*DBNFL Slide 54 O)Westinghouse

F'uel Performance Program Continuation;I

a, c

.i

!

*BNFL Westinghouse

(DBNFL Slide 55 -Westinghouse


e*Deliveries*Burnup

I *Failures§In-Reactor Performance

*Pellet*Cladding


OFuel PerformanceProgram

OSummary

* LinereOuter Component

*Channel.,

*BNFL Westinghouse

(33BNFL Slide 56 O)Westinghouse

I

Summarya, c

(BNFL Slide 57 ftWestinghouse

Summary, cont.

.,

a,c

*BNFL Westinghouse

(DBNFL Slide 58 MWestinghouse


Application of European Experience Base toU.S. Plants


August 16, 2005

*BNFL Slide 1 �WesUnghause

(BNFL Slide I O)Westinghouse

Topics - Application of European Experience

* Background* Overall Approach* Application Confirmation

- Thermal-Hydraulic- Nuclear- Mechanical- Dynamic

- AQOs, CRDA, Sta bi I ity, LOCA

G BNFL Slide 2 Westinghouse

Background

* Recent 10 Year Reload Experience a, c

* Illustrates need for robust, flexible, and portablemethods

(DBNFL Slide 3 9SWestinghouse

Overall Approach - Processes

* Flexible and Robust methods versus validation of tunedmodels to each application

* Phenomenological methods applicable to intendedapplications

* Generalized methodology applicable to intended applications

* Formulation in terms of analyses input which capturing plant-specific requirements

* Application of performance data in an applicable manner

* Application of methods based on test data within data rangeor conservative

O BNFL Slide4 Westinghouse

I

Overall Approach - Fuel/Plant Data

* Major data transfer to support application ofgeneric methods to a specific plant - Steady-state

* Mechanical - core and legacy fuel data

i

* T/H - core, legacy fuel hydraulic andCPR data, core heat balance

* Nuclear legacy fuel description,previous cycle core follow, LPRMsystem, etc.

*BNFL Slide 5 (d)Westinghouse

Overall Approach - Fuel/Plant Data

Major data transfer to support dynamic applications

Plant geometries and volumes, water levels andtrips/alarms,Safety/relief/isolation/bypass/control valve data(e.g. pressures, timing, tolerances),recirculation/jet pump data, scram and RPSdata, LPRM/APRM/RBM/OPRM data,

containment, suppression pool, drywell data,

safety systems (LPCS, HPCS, HPCI, LPCI,ADS, etc) description and logic, seismic data

(DBNFL Slide 6 Westinghouse

Application Confirmation

* Steady-state Thermal-hydraulic modeling

* Confirmation that core pressure drops and flowsplits obtained from utility accurately predictedin Westinghouse T/H models

* T/H Compatibility evaluation for mixedWestinghouse fuel/Legacy fuel cores

* T/H models embedded in 3D core simulator(POLCA7)

9 BNFL Slide 7 Westinghouse

G)BNFL Slide 7 O@Westinghouse


* Nuclear Model Verification

* Analyses of cycles prior to initial loading ofWestinghouse fuel to confirm:

* Acceptable hot reactivity performance (keff)

* Acceptable cold reactivity predictions

* Acceptable power distribution predictions(comparison with TIP data)


GBNFL Slide 8 (OWestinghouse


* Assembly/Rod performance verification

* Application of assembly and fuel rod corrosion,growth, etc.

a, c

*BNFL Slide 9 deWestinghouse

Application Verificationa, b, c

Slide 10 Westinghouse

*BNFL Slide 1I0 (DWestinghouse


*BNFL Slide 1 1 dWestinghouse


*BNFL Slide 1 2 l1Westinghouse

Application Verificationa, D, c

Slide 13 ��We�tinghause

*BNFL Slide 1 3 Wesincrhouse


* Fast AOO Models (BISON)a,c


*BNFL Slide 1 4 (Westincghouse

Application Confirmationa, b, c

*BNFL 5!�de 15 Westinghouse

G)BNFL Slide 1 5 (O Westinghouse

Application Confirmationa, b, c


G)BNFL Slide 1 6 (i -) Westingrhouse


* CRDA Models (RAMONA) a, c


(DBNFL Slide 1 7 O)Westinghouse


* Stability Models (RAMONA) a, c

*BNFL Slide 18 Westingha use

C)BNFL Slide 1 8 O)Westinghouse

Application Confirmationa,b,c

*BNFL Slide 19 ��Westinghause

1G3BNFL Slide 1 9 I@)Westinghouse


* LOCA Models (GOBLIN/DRAGON/CHACHA) a, c

Slide 20 ��Wesflnghouse



I ]ac Nuclear Design Benchmark


August 16, 2005

Slide 1 ��Westinghouse

*)BNFL Slide 1 _)Westinghouse

Introduction

Overview:BWR Nuclear Design Code System

Nuclear Benchmark:[ ac Cores

Summary and Conclusions

*)BNFL Slide 2 d2Westinghouse

Overview

* Neutronic Codes for BWR steady State Nuclear Design

+ PHOENIX4: 2D multi-group transport theory codeused to calculate lattice physics constants

+ POLCA7: 2-group nodal code used for 3-dimensionalsimulation of nuclear and thermal-hydraulicconditions in BWR cores


GBNFL Slide 3 eWestinghouse

Overview

Figure 1.1: Westinghouse Code System for BWR Nuclear Design and Analysis

FOBUS: Monte Carlo transporttheory code for burnableabsorber cross sectiongeneration

HEBE & Library processing codesPHULCAN: for nuclear cross section

data and depletion chains

IFIGEN: Input data generation forPHOENIX

PHOENIX: Two-dimensional multi-group transport theory codefor lattice physics constants

CoreLink & PHOENIX outputTABBE: processing codes for

nuclear data generation

POLCA: Three-dimensional, two-group nodal code forsteady-state reactor coresimulation

(DBNFL Slide 4 9dWestinghouse

Overview

* Approved Topical Reports for PHOENIX/POLCA:

+ BR 91-402: ABB Atom Nuclear Design and AnalysisPrograms for Boiling Water Reactors: ProgramsDescription and Qualification, May 1 991

+ CENPD-390-P-A: The Advanced PHOENIX andPOLCA7 Codes for Nuclear Design of Boiling WaterReactors, December 2000.

* Slide 5 Si5Westinghouse

Overviewa, c

*BNFL Slide 6 dWestinghouse

Overview,a, c

*BNFL ld7WestinghouseSlide 7

Overviewa, c

(DBNFL 9WestinghouseSlide 8

Overview

* The hot target keff determined from the core follow is usedfor the design cycle to predict+ Cycle length+ Number of fresh assemblies+Enrichment level+Hot excess reactivity+ Control rod patterns

BNFL Slide 9

Westinghouse@)BNFL Slide 9 IWesinghouse

Overview

* The cold target keff determined from the past cyclesmeasurement is used for the design cycle to predict

+Cold shutdown margin+Burnable absorber design+Standby Liquid Control System+Startup prediction

(SLCS) Verification

*BNFL Slide 1 0 dWestinghouse

Overview

* TIP and other nuclear benchmark comparisons are used to verifyhow well the axial and radial power distributions are computed

+Used as a guide in establishing the design thermal margins

... POLCA meas

100

90 ______ _

8070

60

50

40

30

20

10

00 20 40 60 80 100 120 140

OBNFL Slide 1 1 (BlWestinghouse

Overview

* In Summary, the Nuclear Benchmark

+gives confidence that BWR core is correctly modeled

+forms the basis for cycle nuclear design

+provides starting point for licensing analyses

*BNFL Slide 1 2 SWestinghouse

OverviewPHOENIX4/POLCA7 Codes Application

PHOENIX4/POLCA7 have been used in:

Plant Name Reactor Class Size (Bundle)

[ ]a,c BWR-6 624

[ ]a,c BWR-6 648

[ ]a,c BWR-4 764

[ ]a,c BWR-3 724

KWU Designs

Westinghouse-Atom

Designs1 _________________________________ .1. i a

OBNFL Slide 13 d1Westinghouse

Benchmark Results

I ]ac Nuclear Benchmark

* Hot keff results from core follow

* Cold critical measurements keff results

* TIP comparison+Nodal RMS+Radial RMS

resu Its


OBNFL Slide 1 4 OWestinghouse

Benchmark Results: General Informationa, c


*BNFL Slide 1 5 (OWestinghouse

Benchmark Results: Core Reactivitya, c


*BNFL Slide 1 6 (aWestinghouse


*BNFL Slide 1 7 (S7Westinghouse

Benchmark Results: Core Reactivity,a, c

*BNFL Slide 18 ��Westinghouse

G)BNFL Slide 1 8 O@Wesincghouse


l

BNFL Slide 19 �Westinghauseg"5BNFL Slide 1 9 )Westincghouse



OBNFL Slide 20 (a Westinahouse


G)BNFL Slide 21 9lWestinghouse

Benchmark Results: Core Reactivity,a, c

l


(DBNFL Slide 22 O@Westinghouse

Benchmark Results: Cold Critical,a, c

l

*BNFL Slide 23 (S2Westinghouse

Benchmark Results: Cold Criticala, c


*BNFL Slide 24 G@Wesfing~house

Benchmark Results: Cold Criticala, c

9 BNFL Slide 25 O@Westinghouse

)

Benchmark Results: TIP Comparisona, c


I

Benchmark Results: TIP Comparisona, c

(DBNFL Slide 27 (OQWestinghouse

I

Benchmark Results: TIP Comparison, a, c


OBNFL Slide 28 (OWestinahouse

Benchmark Results: TIP Comparison,a, c

*BNFL Slide 29 (a Westinghouse

20

Summary and Conclusions

* Hot keff Core Follow Results+ Post Uprate Cycles consistent and stable, good confidence on

hot target keff curves to be selected for designs

* Cold Critical Results+Few results, but considerably consistent

* TIP Comparison Results+ Larger differences are as expected in the first few cycles of

simulation

+Large variability on RMS differences is consistent with neutronTIP experience

BNFL Slide 30 Westinghouse


USNRC - Westinghouse BWR Short and LongTerm Interactions with the USNRC


August 16, 2005


(DBNFL Slide I OWestinghouse

Topics - USNRC/Westinghouse StrategicalDiscussion* Planned Submittals* Application Implementations* Exelon Related Issues* Open


(DBNFL Slide 2 S)Westinghouse

Planned Submittals'p, c

*BNFL Slide 3 (eWestinghouse

Planned Submittalsa. c

DBNFL Slide 4 SlWestinghouse

Application Implementationsa, c


BNFL Slide 5 O)Weslinghouse

Exelon Related Issuesa, c

Safety Limit Submittal-Format or guideline requirements from the USNRC?

*BNFL Slide 6 SeWestinghouse

Open

* Any advisement from USNRC on Sump Screen LOCAissue specific for BWR application-Westinghouse is keenly aware of PWR concerns and some

impending BWR concerns, what would the USNRC like forWestinghouse to be doing-soon or to be prepared for concerningBWR?

* Other?

*BNFL Slide 7 (SWestinghouse


PWR Fuel Performance Update


August 1 6, 2005

9 BNFL Slide 1

Westinghouse(DBNFL Slide 1 OWestinghouse

Outline* Fuel Reliability Overview A��

* 17 OFA Root Cause Investigation Update and recent PIE results

* Future PIE & Hot Cell Plans

* Status of LTA Programs

* RCCA Update


(DBNFL Slide 2 GWestinghouse

Westinghouse PWR Fuel Reliabilitya, c

()BNFL Slide 3 Bd)Westinghouse

Leakage Mechanisms in Westinghouse PWR Fuel: 2004a, c

Slide 4 ��Westinghause


Leakage Mechanisms in Westinghouse PWR Fuel:2005 YTD (May)

a, c

Slide 5 ��Qwestinghause


Fuel Performance Trenda, c


*BNFL Slide 6 (OWestinlghouse

2004 - 2005 Leaking Rods by Major Product Familya,c


G)BNFL Slide 7 O)Westinghouse

Grid-Rod Fretting Solutions Being Implementeda, c

*BNFL Slide 8 ��WestinghauseC)BNFL Slide 8 OWesinghouse

1 7x1 7 RFA/RFA-2 Experiencea, c

Slide 9 Westinghause


Current Status of RFAa, c

Siide 10 ��Wesfinghause

*BNFL Slide 1 0 (I)fWestinghouse

CE Improved Designs Implementationa, c

*BNFL Slide 11 c�Westinghause

(DBNFL Slide I I OWestinghouse

Summarya.C-1 -

Slide 12 Westingha use

*BNFL Slide 1 2 (OWestinghouse

Outline* Fuel Reliability Overview




* RCCA Update

Id|


(DBNFL Slide 1 3 (Westinghouse

17 OFA Fuel Performance -l,


G)BNFL Slide 1 4 (a Westinghouse

Recent 1 7 OFA PIE Results - [ I a,ca, c

OBNFL*BNFL Slide 15 Westinghouse

Slide 1 5 OWestinghouse

Recent 17 OFA PIE Results - [ Ia,c

a, c


(BNFL Slide 1 6 (Westinghouse

1 7x1 7 OFA Leaking Fuel Since 2002a, c


C)BNFL Slide 1 7 O)Weslinghouse

Proactive Approach to Identify Leakage Mechanisms in 17 OFA Fuela, c

Siide 18 ��Westinghouso

*BNFL Slide 1 8 (O Westinghouse

Potential Leakage Mechanisms a, cT


-OBNFL Slide 1 9 (IM)Westinghouse

Summary of Actions to Address Most Likely OFA Leakage Mechanismsa, c

Slide 20 ��Westinghause

*BNFL Slide 20 OWestinahouse

Revised pellet chip criteria statusa, c

G)BNFL Slide 21 9dWeslinghouse





* RCCA Update


(DBNFL Slide 22 (O)Westinghouse

Planned Inspections for 1 7x1 7 OFAa, c

*BNFL Slide 23 ��Westinghause


Leaking Rod Hot Cell Programa, c


*BNFL Slide 24 (@Westincrhouse





* RCCA Update

46��

*BNFL Slide 25 SWestinghouse

Westinghouse High Burnup ZIRLOT LTA Summarya, c


G)BNFL Slide 26 OWestinghouse

Other Test Programsa, c

S!ide 27 Westinghouse


Status of Optimized ZIRLOM LTA Programsa, c


(DBNFL Slide 28 (OWestinghouse





* RCCA Update

*BNFL Slide 29 l2Westinghouse

I Ia,c Separated RCCA Rodlet* One of twenty-four rodlets separated from a single EP-RCCA

- rodlet was located in the thimble tube of host fuel assembly- event occurred during Cycle 10 and was discovered at EOC-10- no affect on RCCA insertion during plant shutdown at EOC

* RCCA was manufactured prior to 1995


*BNFL Slide 30 (GWestinghouse

Root Cause Status* Final Westinghouse CARB review performed in January, 2005

* Additional corrective actions completed 2005 YTD

- [ I a, c

- [- [

I a,c

I a, c

* Longer-term corrective actions

* Evaluate current RCCA design

*BNFL Slide 31 (S 3Westinghouse

l

[I a,c - Possible Separated RCCA Rodlet(s)

* No further RCCA performance issues

* Poolside PIE scheduled forthe next outage in FaIl 2005



4

[ Iac Incomplete Rod Insertion* [ a1C has a non-standard core comprising non-Westinghouse 1 4x1 4 fuel

design with an 8 ft active length

* The RCCAs are the Westinghouse EP design and are close to their design lifeof 12 EPFY

* A single RCCA stuck in the fuel assembly dashpot

* Swelling of the absorber was the most probable cause

* Westinghouse is working to ensure this experience is integrated into its RCCAoperating guidelines

(DBNFL Slide 33 (BiWestinghouse

I

Summary* Fuel performance has improved in some areas, but deteriorated in others

* Programs and action plans are in place and being implemented

* Fuel designs susceptible to grid to rod fretting being replaced with improvedproducts that are performing well

* Most pressing issue at this time is resolution of 1 7X1 7 OFA leakers

- [- [

I a, c

] a, c




Oden CHF Loop Update


(DBNFL Slide I BdWestinghouse

Outline* Overview of Oden Facility

* Status of Loop Design/Construction

* Test Loop Description and Characteristics

* Qualification Test Plan

* Schedule


*BNFL Slide 2 (SWestinghouse

Vasteras Fuel T/H-Testing Facilitya,c

*BNFL Slide 3 Sd3Westinghouse

Loop Design & Construction (1) - schematica, c

*BNFL Slide 4 SWestinghouse

Loop Design & Construction (2)a, c

(BNFL Slide 5 BeWestinghouse

Loop Design & Construction (3)a, c

(DBNFL Slide 6 BeWestinghouse

Loop Description, Characteristicsa, C


(DBNFL Slide 7 OWestinghouse

Qualification Test Plan (1) - Objectives1. Characterize Oden loop response to changing conditions

2. Demonstrate Oden repeatability

3. Benchmark Oden data to HTRF data

4. Develop experience base


(BNFL Slide 8 SWestinghouse

Qual ification Test Plan (2) - Overviewa, c


(DBNFL Slide 9 G)Westinghouse

Qualification Test Plan (3) - Current Test Geometry Selection

a, c

-


(DBNFL Slide 10 SWestinghouse

v

Schedulea,c


* Slide I 1 O)Weslinghouse


]a~c Creep/Growth Test

Westinghouse/NRC MeetingRockville, MD

August 16, 2005

*BNFL Slide I dWestinghouse

Presentation Outline

* Test overview and status

* Optimized ZIRLO' irradiation growth and creep

* Determined sample stresses

* Tensile and compressive stress irradiation creep

* Completion of NRC commitments


(DBNFL Slide 2 (SWestinghouse

Test Status* Test assembly Al

- Completed irradiation (1 cycle)- Completed PIE/NDE measurements- Evaluation of NDE data is in-progress

* Optimized ZIRLO I AD/D 0 data are available* ZIRLOt m AD/Do tensile and compressive stress data are available

- Destructive examination may be performed after the NDE evaluation iscomplete

* Irradiation is continuing for test assemblies A2, A3, A4 & A5

(DBNFL Slide 3 Westinghouse

Irradiation Schedule, a, c

Slide 4 ��QWesflnghouse

OBNFL Slide 4 (OWestinghouse

Data Acquisition Measurement Methodology 7 a, b, c

(DBNFL Slide 5 9SWestinghouse

Irradiation Growth and Irradiation Creep Data (1/2)* Irradiation growth measurements were made on tube samples open to coolant

water flow- Ensured a stress-free condition

* Irradiation creep measurements were made on internally Helium pressurizedtube samples- Irradiation creep, AD/D0(ic), was calculated from the total diameter

change, AD/D 0 (total), and the irradiation growth, AD/Df(ig), accordingto, AD/D0(ic) = AD/D 0 (total) -AD/D0(ig)

(DBNFL Slide 6 *i6Westinghouse

Irradiation Growth and Irradiation Creep Data (2/2)

* OD accuracy is outstanding

- [ Ia, b, c laser OD measurements on each sample

- 95% confidence interval is [ Ia, b, c

- Pre and post-test measurements were performed with the same facility-minimizes measurement errors

* Each data point in the following graphs represents one sample

*BNFL Slide 7 (SeWestinghouse

ZIRLOTM and Optimized ZIRLOTM Irradiation Growtha, bc

*DBNFL Slide 8 (SeWeslinghouse

ZIRLOTM and Optimized ZIRLOT Irradiation Creepa, b, c

7


@IBNFL Slide 9 (OWeslinghouse

ZIRLOTM and Optimized ZIRLOT Resultsa, b, c


(DBNFL Slide 1 0 S)Westinghouse

Creep and Growth Sample Designa, bc

* Evaluated the sample temperatures, the internal Helium gas pressure andhoop stress using the actual gamma-heat rate- All test parameters are based on experimental measurements when the

dosimetry analysis is finalized (AD/DoT, ae & 4)t)


*BNFL Slide 1 1 Owestinghouse

Creep and Growth Sample Designa, b, c

*BNFL Slide 1 2 SeWestinghouse

Determination of the Gamma-Heat Rate & Hoop Stress* Performed parametric calculations of the sample hoop stress as a function

of the gamma heat rate

I. I a, bc

* Actual gamma-heat rate is given by the maximum regression R2 coefficientassociated with AD/D 0(ic) versus hoop stress- Corresponds to the minimum deviation of the data from the regression

line- (Perfect regression fit is associated with an R2 coefficient of 1.0)


(DBNFL Slide 13 O@Westinghouse

Hoop Stress Variation with the Gamma-Heat Ratea, b, c


*DBNFL Slide 14 (OWeslinghouse

Regression R2 Coefficient Versus Gamma-Heat Ratea, b, c

*BNFL Slide 1 5 Sd1Westinghouse

Irradiation Creep versus Hoop Stress, a,bc

9 BNFL Slide 16 ��Westinghouse

OBNFL Slide 1 6 (a)Westinghouse

Tension and Compression Irradiation Creep Results

* Gamma-heat rate is [ Ia, b,c

* Replicate sample-to-sample consistency is excellent

* Irradiation creep is the same in tension and compression for WestinghouseZIRLO™ and Optimized ZIRLO'- AD/D 0 (ic) versus se is [

- [-[ ]a, b c hoop stresses: [

I a, b,c

I a, b, c

]a, b, c compression and [ Ia, b, c tension

Siide 17 ��Westinghause

*BNFL Slide 1 7 (D)Westinchouse

Completion of NRC Commitments* Completed PAD 4.0 SER commitment in Section 2.1 to initiate a clad

irradiation growth and creep test to provide a more accurate measurement ofirradiation creep under tension and compression stresses and share the datawith the NRC

* Completed Optimized ZIRLO' SER commitment in Section 5.0, Item 7 a & b toreport the [ ]aC Creep/Growth Optimized ZIRLOt data and showOptimized ZIRLO' irradiation creep is consistent with ZIRLO'

* Confirmed that tension and compression irradiation creep of Westinghouse

ZIRLO' and Optimized ZIRLO' are equal- No impact on Westinghouse rod pressure analysis (Optimized ZIRLO' SER

Section 5.0, Item 7)

(BNFL Slide 18 Westinghouse

Conclusions

* Different processing methods such as PRXA or SRA may be used to fabricateOptimized ZIRLOTM with the same irradiation creep as ZIRLOT

lac data confirms creep behaviour for Ootimized ZIRLOT- r

* Irradiation creep is the same in tension and compression for Westinghouse

ZIRLOt and Optimized ZIRLO'- ]a c data confirms the Westinghouse model for tensile creep

* Westinghouse commitments to the NRC concerning the [Creep/Growth test are complete

Iac

J


*BNFL Slide 1 9 O)Weslinghouse

Future Data Currently In-Process

]a, b, c

* Beneficial effect of hydrogen on reducing irradiation growth and creep isunder evaluation- Importantfordrystorage


*DBNFL Slide 20 Oftetinghouse


Reactivity Insertion Accident Feedback


August 16, 2005I BNFL Slide 1 Westinghouse

gBNFL Slide I OWestinghouse

Status

* Tests in '90s indicated need to reexamine the limit for reactivity insertionaccidents (RIA)

* Using more accurate 3-D analyses provide significant margin compared toolder 1-D based analyses- So no safety concern in operating plants

* EPRI, representing the industry, submitted report recommending new limit

* Westinghouse submitted 3-D rod ejection methodology for review andreceived SER

* NRC-NRR rejected EPRI report and is proposing new limits

*BNFL Slide 2 S 2Westinghouse

Driver

* Would like to close out this issue- Creates uncertainty in licensing space- Is diverting resources- Permit licensing of high burnup fuel

* But with acceptable limits

(BNFL Slide 3 SeWestinghouse

NRC-NRR Proposed CriteriaSelect one of the following:

1. Ejected rod worth of $2.20 or less with oxide thickness of 70 microns, or$1.70 if greater oxide

2. Reactivity excursion should not exceed cladding failure threshold curve inRES RIL-0401 Figure 1

3. Dose calculations for rods exceeding limit, plus coolability limit based onlimiting pressure pulse resulting from fuel dispersal

)BNFL Slide 4 SeWestinghouse

-

RES RIL-0401 Figure 1300

A250

-O 200

>1X

100

50

<:~BWR cold RtA

0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120Oxide Thickness (u)

Figure 1. Cladding failure data with adjustments from the scaling analysis andlower-bound failure correlations. The lowest point at 80 microns of oxidethickness is for a test that has been discredited.

*BNFL Slide 5 Westinghouse(3BNFL Slide 5 O)Westinghouse

Ejected Rod Worth* Highly dependent on the control rod pattern, loading pattern and bank

insertion limits

* Based on most adverse allowable operational conditions

* Ejected rod worth has been increasing- Longer cycles (higher enrichments, axial burnup effects)- IRI concerns places feed fuel in most control rod locations

* Operation can impact ejected rod worth- Control rod shadowing- Cl PS

* Occurrence of operational restrictions even with $ 2.1 5

( BNFL Slide 6 Westinghouse

Feedback on ER Worth Limit* Would assume corrosion thickness is nominal value

* Rod ejection is a local event- Fuel enthalpy dependent on local peaking and core power- Significant local peaking only in area of ejected rod- Only neighborhood of ER sees significant fuel enthalpy increase- Fuel failure, if it occurred, would be local to ejected rod

* High oxide on high burnup rods- Low reactivity, lower peaking factor- Could restrict use of fuel from spent fuel pool

* Failure limit should reflect local fuel enthalpy

Q BNFL Slide 7 Westinghouse

Fuel Failure Limit

* Discussed in NRC/EPRI meeting on July 7, 2004 and ACRS FuelSubcommittee meeting on July 28, 2005- Difference in failure limits due to different methods of adjustment of

experimental data- Difference of opinion on need to include spalled cladding data

* Compromise position may include- Limit on fuel enthalpy increase of 100-125 cal/gm- Some reduction with burnup to reflect corrosion impact- Separate penalty for spalled cladding, if expected (25 cal/gm)

(BNFL Slide 8 OWetinghouse

Coolability Limit* Separate coolability limit is appropriate

* Limit can be set to prevent fuel melting- Pressure pulse would require much higher energy input- Dose calculation assumptions valid for whole transient

* Compromise position could include:- Initial limitofl75-200 cal/gm- Small reduction with burnup to reflect melting point change

*BNFL Slide 9 d)Westinghouse

Comparison of Potential LimitsI- - EPRI Coolability Limit -EPRI Failure Limit - RES RIL-0401 -W Interim Limit|

250 :

225

200E

M- 175

L 150,E

*; 125aL

s 100C

-6 75U-

50

25

0

.. ..--- - ............... .... ........... ... .. …*... ....

90 o0 OO 00000 0. 00000 OOo ee 000 ;OO OOO

io e 00 ooo8ooooooo

@0 ooooooooo 00oo oo0

o 0 0 G o 0 f a 0 o o o 0000o000 o

-------- _-------o

~~~~~~~~~~. .... .. ......... ......s___

REL RIL-0401 Values with Oxide ThicknessConverted to Bumup Using Best EstimateCorrosion Fit for ZirloTM

Coolability

Failure

-

-I.

10 20 300 40 50 60 70 80

Burnup (GWd/MtU)

(BNFL Slide 1 0 BWestinghouse

Realistic Conservatism* PWR rod ejection most limiting over very small and unlikely operational space

- EOC, HZP, rods at insertion limit and critical

* Conservatism applied to peaking factors and ejected rod worth

* The EPRI curves would be appropriate limits

* Some compromise position may be acceptable

G)BNFL Slide 1 1 SlWestinghouse

Summary

* Westinghouse believes NRC-NRR proposed limits should be revised

* Westinghouse will continue to work with EPRI to define industry position

* Westinghouse believes it is in the best interests of everyone to bring thisissue to closure


*BNFL Slide 1 2 O)Westinghouse


Update on APA Development Activities



GBNFL Slide I O)Westinghouse

NEXUS Project - Descriptionm1 ac

*BNFL Slide 2 dWestinghouse

ANC and Related Technology Developmenta,c

*BNFL Slide 3 deWestinghouse

ANC 9 / NEXUS Project - Status and Actionsa,c

*BNFL Slide 4 SdVWestinghouse

ANC 9 Production Rollout Project - Descriptiona, c

(*BNFL Slide 5 I@) Westinghouse

ANC 9 Production Rollout Project- Status and Actionsa, c

6-*BNFL Slide 6

Westinghouse(DBNFL Slide 6 (Westinghouse

ANC 9 / SPNOVA Merge Project - Status and Actionsa,c

* Slide 7 d7Westinghouse

WestinghouseA BNFL Group company

Slide 8 c��Westinghause

*IBNFL Slide 8 OWesinghouse


AGENDAWestinghouse Semi-Annual Fuel Performance Update

August 17,2005Westinghouse Office

Rockville, MD

Wednesday, Au! 17 Licensing Review (Westinghouse & NRC)

8:00 - 9:00 am Brief Overview of Westinghouse OrganizationPWR/BWR Topicals and Schedule

I

[ ]a,c

]a,c[

I21c

9:00- 11:50 am General Licensing Concerns & Issues[

All

]a,c

11:50 - noon

noon - 1:00 pm

Wrap-upNext meeting

Lunch/Informal Discussion between NRC &Westinghouse

DRESS IS BUSINESS CASUAL


Westinghouse Presentationon

Westinghouse Fuel Performance Update MeetingManagement Licensing Overview

(Slide Presentation of August 17, 2005)

Westinghouse Electric Company LLCP.O. Box 355

Pittsburgh, PA 15230-0355

°2005 Westinghouse Electric Company LLCAll Rights Reserved

I Westinghouse Non-Proprietary Class 3

estnghusA BNFL Group company

*BNFLL Slide I e)Westinghouse Nestinghouse

Westinghouse Organization(NRC Interface)

a, c


GBNFL Slide 2 O)Westinghouse


Topical Report Status

Westinghouse/NRC MeetingRockville, MD

August 16, 2005

*BNFL Slide 1 WestinghouseGBNFL Slide 1 (Westinghouse

PWR Topical Reports Under Reviewa, c

7

(DBNFL BNFL Slide 2 Westinghouse

Slide 2 -)Westinghouse

PWR Topical Reports Planneda, c

*BNFL Slide 3 eWestinghouse

BWR Topical Reports Under Review a,c___ ______________________________a

-


(DBNFL Slide 4 OWestinghouse

BWR Topical Reports PlannedaI C


*BNFL Slide 5 (OWeslinghouse

BWR Topical Reports Planneda; ra, -9

*BNFL Slide 6 d6Westinghouse

I


IRI Update


August 17, 2005

@BNFL Slide 1 Westinghouse

(DBNFL Slide I Wefstinghouse

IRI Update - Background

* NRC Bulletin 96-01 and Draft Supplement regarding IRI for Westinghouse NSSS fleet

* WOG Program initiated to respond

a, c

* WOG Program Successful; NRC canceled plans to issue Supplement 1 to Bulletin 96-01

- Last WOG communication in January 2001 to NRC, and 2002 to WOG utilities


(DBNFL Slide 2 -'Westinghouse

IRI Update -Burn-up Threshold Summary-

* IRI Burn-up Thresholda, c


(DBNFL Slide 3 _)Weslinghouse

IRI Update - Recent Activities

* Overtures from several utilities to extend burnup threshold for fuel assemblies inrodded locations- Core Designs challenging threshold- No recent IRI issues- Preclude IRI, susceptibility evaluations- Extend BU threshold requiring IRI susceptibility evaluations


()BNFL Slide 4 O)Westinghouse

IRI Update - Summary* Positive Aspects

* No IRI for instances with rodded assembly > burn-up threshold

* Improved fuel design features to resist IRI* Continued low risk of IRI at current approved limits

*9BNFL Slide 5 W estinghouse




August 17,2005

SIide� Westinghouse



ACRS subcommittee meeting on Reactor Fuels met on July 27, 2005

Ralph Meyer of NRC/RES presented a summary of the Argonne National Labs(ANL) program and their proposed LOCA criteria which was:

* ECR including both operational corrosion and transient oxidation < 17%with the transient oxidation calculated by Cathcart-Pawel (C-P)

* Total time for transient < 2700 sec (45 minutes)* Peak Cladding temperature (PCT) < 2200 OF

This was unexpected since ANL had earlier issued an embrittlement correlationwhich was more phenomenological based



ANL presented the results of LOCA simulation testing performed at ANL

ANL program plan is to wrap-up the program following the completion of the

irradiated ZIRLOTm and M5 tubing tests and the integral test of the HBR rod

segments

EPRI and ANATECH both made presentations which claimed that there are still

unanswered questions from the ANL testing and that the ANL results do not

correlate with the results from other programs

*BNFL Slide 3 leWestinghouse


FANP presented joint EDF/CES/FANP data which showed much greaterreduction in post test ductility as a function of hydrogen compared to ANL data

Rationale for this appears to be the direct quench used in the French tests

Apparently this lock in the high temperature morphology in the ,8-layer, whereslower cooling provided time for segregations of oxygen and hydrogen in the p-layer providing greater ductility

NRC/RES stated that EPRI was not doing enough work to develop new limits, butonly enough to verify the existing interpretation of the LOCA limits for highburnup fuel

GBNFL Slide 4 Westinghouse


ACRS question related to "What is the impact of up and down temperaturesvariations during high temperature oxidation on ECR and post test ductility?


()BNFL Slide 5 S)Westinghouse




August 16, 2005

(*BNFL Slide 6 SWestinghouse


NRC/RES presented a summary of their analysis of RIA tests and his proposedcriteria. The most limiting aspect of the proposed criteria was the collapse of thecoolability limit onto a low cladding failure limit. The cladding failure limit wasgiven as a function of maximum fuel rod corrosion

EPRI and ANATECH presented the industry proposed criteria and the methodsused to produce it

Westinghouse presented summary of comments on proposed RIA criteria alongwith a sample analysis to demonstrate how limited the volume was of the coreclose to peak power and how unlikely conditions of high rod worth were

GBNFL Slide 7 Westinghouse


ACRS indicated that they thought the NRC/RES proposed criteria was veryconservative

ACRS indicated that although they thought separate coolability and clad failurelimits were reasonable, they were skeptical that the onset of fuel melt was thebest limit and a lower one might be easier to justify


* Slide 8 O)Westinghouse


ACRS was skeptical of the methods ANATECH used to treat cladding test data todevelop critical strain energy density (CSED) relationships as a function oftemperature and oxide thickness.

ACRS though the method non-conservative, and the overall method usingFALCON too obscure to easily understand

ACRS was skeptical that oxide spalling could be ruled out and thought that testswith spalled cladding should be included in developing the limit as was done byNRC/RES


loca equivalent clad reacted (ecr) criteria. · loca equivalent clad reacted (ecr) criteria anl...

Documents