september 2007 2007 trtr conference u.s. domestic reactor conversion programs eric woolstenhulme...
TRANSCRIPT
September 2007
2007 TRTR Conference
U.S. Domestic Reactor Conversion Programs
Eric WoolstenhulmeDana Meyer
Background on the current U.S. Domestic Conversion Program at the INL
• Support the National Nuclear Security Administration’s Global Threat Reduction Initiative to reduce the amount HEU by converting 7 U.S. research and training reactors from HEU-to-LEU fuel by 2009
The Conversion Generally Includes:
• Revision of the facilities Safety Documents and
supporting analysis
• Fabrication of new LEU fuel
• Change-out of the reactor core
• Removal of the used HEU fuel (by INL University Fuels
Program)
Three major Reactor Conversion Program milestones have been accomplished since 2006
• The conversion of the TRIGA reactor at Texas A&M University Nuclear Science Center
The conversion of the University of Florida Training Reactor
The conversion of the Purdue University Reactor
The major entities involved are:
• U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
• University reactor department
• Fuel and hardware fabricators
• Spent fuel receipt facilities
• SNF shipping services
• U.S. Department of Energy and their subcontractors
various branches
reactor operations, radiation protection, shipping, procurement, and etc
BWXT, CERCA, GA
SRS, INL/Idaho Nuclear Tech. and Eng. Center
NAC, STS, INL
ANL, INL
Lessons Learned Overview
Purpose: To benefit future conversion and project teams
• Conversion Activities were scored 1 to 5 on performance difficulty
– 1 (extremely challenging) / 5 (exceptional easy)
• Activity Grouping
– Project Initiation
– Conversion Proposal to the NRC
– Fuel Fabrication and Hardware
– Core Conversion
– Spent Nuclear Fuel
• Issues and Recommendations
Lessons Learned: Project Initiation
Average Score: 3.9
• Issues
– University felt that the Conversion Project Team was sometimes segregated
and was not certain that all necessary information was shared appropriately
– Was not always clear that the University’s needs were being addressed
• Recommendations
– Kick-off meetings involving all of the Conversion Project Team
– Clarify roles and expectations better
– Determine technical requirements for the activities
– Direct the universities to provide a list of individuals that will be reviewing
drawings, specifications, etc
Lessons Learned: Conversion ProposalAverage Score: 3.6
• Issues
– Due to the age and history of the reactors, changes in designs and equipment are
likely
– Over conservatism in analyses can limit reactor operations and make fabrication
difficult
• Recommendations
– Advise Universities early to recover historical documents, drawings, etc
– Involve ALL parties (e.g.: analysis, design, fabricators, and university) in ALL
conversations that will impact them directly/indirectly
– Involve the NRC in the process as soon as possible
• Observation
– The NRC discussed their issues and questions with Licensee while reviewing the
proposals. This practice eased the Request for Additional Information process.
Lessons Learned: Fuel Fabrication and HardwareAverage Score: 3.2
• Issues
– Assumptions with regard to design, fit, and function proved invalid, requiring
correction
– Trucks arriving at the universities to deliver the new LEU fuel were not what
was anticipated
– Unfamiliarity with the shipment process when returning empty containers
• Recommendations
– Verify existing equipment (drawings don’t necessarily match existing)
– Ensure the university and the shipper communicate with regard to logistics,
restrictions, tools needed, etc
– Make time early in the process to inform the university about the
requirements for return shipment
Lessons Learned: Core Conversion
Average Score: 3.4
• Issues
– Downtime maintenance created additional schedule impacts
– New hardware had to be re-machined because of lack of information
– Reactivity at intermediate points of loading had not been calculated
• Recommendations
– Schedule activities that can be performed prior to reactor loading as
soon as possible
– Pay close attention to the details of the reactors
– If needed, provide for onsite expertise to resolve startup issues and
have a detailed plan/procedure with a number of hold points
Texas A&M University Nuclear Science Center
• TRIGA conversion reactor, 1 megawatt
• Spent LEU core shipped before
conversion
• Conversion milestone accomplished on
27 September, 2006
• Final HEU SNF shipment complete
• Unirradiated HEU element removed
University of Florida Training Reactor
• Argonaut type reactor, 100
kilowatt
• Spent core shipped before conversion
• Conversion milestone accomplished on September 28, 2006
• Final partial plate assembly completed in August 2007
Purdue University Reactor
• LW moderated pool, plate fuel,1,000 watt
• Spent core to be shipped after conversion
• Conversion milestone accomplished on September 8,
2007
Our near-term projects are to:• Convert Washington State University Nuclear Radiation Center
reactor by Sept 30, 2008
• Convert Oregon State University TRIGA Reactor by Sept 30, 2008
• Convert University of Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor by Sept 30, 2009
• Convert Neutron Radiography Reactor Facility by Sept 30, 2009
2006
2007
2008
2009
TEXAS A&M
Washington State University Reactor
• TRIGA conversion reactor, 1 megawatt
• Spent core to be shipped after conversion
• Conversion Proposal submitted to NRC on 8/16/07
Oregon State University
• TRIGA Mark II, 1.1 megawatt
• Spent core to be shipped after conversion
• Conversion Proposal to be submitted to NRC 9/30
• Fuel is being fabricated
University of Wisconsin
• TRIGA conversion reactor, 1
megawatt
• Conversion Proposal to begin
in October 2008
Neutron Radiography Reactor Facility
• TRIGA conversion reactor, 1 megawatt
• Spent core to be shipped after conversion
• Safety Analysis work has begun