1 / 29

Team Members Pacific Northwest National Laboratory: Brady Hanson

EPRI Extended Storage Collaboration Project December 7-8, 2010 Charlotte, North Carolina Preliminary DOE Gap Analyses and R&D Needs. Team Members Pacific Northwest National Laboratory: Brady Hanson Sandia National Laboratories: Christine Stockman

talon-holloway
Download Presentation

Team Members Pacific Northwest National Laboratory: Brady Hanson

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. EPRI Extended Storage Collaboration ProjectDecember 7-8, 2010Charlotte, North CarolinaPreliminary DOE Gap Analyses and R&D Needs Team Members Pacific Northwest National Laboratory: Brady Hanson Sandia National Laboratories: Christine Stockman Oak Ridge National Laboratory: John Wagner Idaho National Laboratories: Sandra Birk, Abdelhalim Alsaed Savannah River National Laboratory: Natraj Iyer Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory: Bill Halsey

  2. Policy Issues Consequences Policy • The Administration’s decision to cancel Yucca Mountain means that the nation will need to store used fuel for the foreseeable future (>120 yrs). Issues • Licenses for long term dry storage of used fuel are issued for 20 years, with possible renewals up to 60 yrs. A new rule-making will allow the initial license for 40 years with one possible 40-year extension. • Questions regarding • retrieval and transport of used fuel after long term storage • storage and transportation of high burnup fuel (>45 GWD/MTU) Consequences • Technical bases need to be developed to justify licensing; • used fuel storage beyond 60 to 80 years • retrievability and transportation of used fuel after long-term storage • transportation of high burnup fuel

  3. UFD Storage Work PackagesHow do we address these consequences? • R&D Opportunities • Data gap analysis • Plan to address gaps • Development of technical basis • Security • Regulatory assessment • Identify areas peculiar to long-term storage • Evaluate vulnerability analysis methodology • improvements • Conceptual Evaluations • Develop process for development of • technical basis • Evaluate several scenarios for decision • makers • Transportation • UFD Storage Implementation Plan Goals • 1 yr: Project Implementation Plan Framework • 5 yr: Project Implementation Plan & • Development of Technical Basis • 10 yr: Field operating project

  4. Assumptions • At some point, DOE will be responsible for very long term storage (VLTS) of used fuel • Active monitoring and aging management plans to mitigate issues if they arise • Followed by ultimate disposition- awaiting Blue Ribbon Commission recommendations • Geologic repository • 8 generic scenarios being investigated by the Used Fuel Disposition Campaign • Reprocessing facility • Retrievability (integrity) of used fuel after VLTS must be maintained • Defense in depth suggests desire to maintain clad integrity and fuel source term • Especially important for repository scenarios with advective flow • Maintain ability to tailor fuel content under reprocessing scenarios • Potential for multiple movements of used fuel • From orphaned sites? • Centralized storage? • Ultimate disposition

  5. If Geologic Disposal is Recommended • The DOE needs may be more “conservative” than current practice • Meet fuel retrievability as defined in ISG-2, Rev. 1 • May desire minimization of cladding breaches (including pinhole leaks and hairline cracks) and not just “protected…against degradation that leads to gross rupture” (ISG-1, Rev. 2)

  6. R&D Opportunities Objectives • Develop the technical bases to demonstrate VLTS • for a period of up to 300 years. • Low and high burnup fuel • Develop technical bases for fuel retrievability and • transport after long term storage. • Develop the technical basis for transport of high burnup fuel. • Compare DOE gap analyses with those of NRC and NWTRB • Obtain industry input • Solicit data and information • Reevaluate and prioritize gaps and needs 6

  7. Tasks • Identify major storage system components • Define functional requirements • Identify mechanisms affecting VLTS • Identify gaps • Prioritize testing needs • Conduct tests/analyses • Initiate modeling and simulation work • Develop monitoring capability INL Dry Cask Storage Characterization (DCSC) Project

  8. Storage System Components • Fuel • Pellet • Fuel/Clad • Assembly • III. ISFSI • Pad • Rebar • Physical Protection • Cask • Basket • Internals • Canister • Overpack • Monitoring Systems • Remote inspection • In-package sensors • Security 8

  9. Storage Functional Requirements • Regulatory Requirements: • 10CFR72 • Allows for storage up to 120 years (60 yrs in-pool and 60 yrs dry storage) • Used fuel cladding must be protected against degradation that leads to gross failure • Must maintain confinement of intact and damaged used fuel • Must be retrievable • NUREG-1536 requires maintenance of; • Protection against environmental conditions • Thermal performance • Radiological performance • Confinement • Sub-criticality • Retrievability • Minimize cladding breaches 9

  10. Identify mechanisms effecting VLTS A Features, Events, and Processes (FEPS) methodology combined with an extensive literature review is used to identify degradation mechanisms • Systems analyzed: • Fuel/clad system • Fuel assembly • Hardware • Baskets • Neutron Poisons/Shields • Container • Over pack • Pad • Monitoring, security, institutional control • Topics investigated for each system: • Goes back to Functional Requirements: • Thermal • Radiation • Confinement • Criticality • Retrievability/Transportation FY10 focus on commercial LWR used fuels under normal operating conditions 10

  11. Current Technical Bases • Industry Experience: Technical issues addressed from past R&D program; [EPRI/DOE/NRC Dry Cask Storage Characterization (DCSC) Project at INL] • No cask functional degradation observed after 15 years • Assemblies look the same • No sticking; no significant bowing upon removal • No visual signs of degradation • No leaks during storage • No significant additional fission gas release to • rod internals • No significant hydride reorientation • Nocreep during storage • “Creep life” remains • Most severe conditions during first 20 years??? Challenge: Demonstrate similar behavior for up to 300 years 11

  12. Technical Bases Required • Industry Experience: What hasn’t been addressed? • Effect of marine environment • Cannot rule out corrosion andstress corrosion cracking • Advanced cladding materials and assembly designs • Bulk of publicly available data is on Zry-2 and Zry-4 • MOX fuel • Long-term concrete degradation • High burnup fuel (>45GWD/MTU) • Hydride reorientation • Hydride embrittlement • Creep • Plenum gas pressure • Corrosion Challenge: Demonstrate material degradation behavior for high burnup used fuel over a long storage period. 12

  13. Criteria for Ranking • Are there multiple Systems, Structures, and Components (SSCs) Important to Safety (ITS) to fulfill the function? • Is it a primary SSC ITS? • What is the likelihood of occurrence? • What are the potential consequences? • Would it occur under geologic disposal conditions anyway? • Can it be readily mitigated? • Assume repackaging or repairs are possible

  14. General Needs- Temperature Profiles (High) • Since most mechanisms are temperature dependent, accurate (i.e., not conservative or peak) temperature profiles (axial and radial) of fuel and cask materials must be modeled and validated • Need detailed temperature history • During wet storage for X years • During drying • Over very-long-term storage periods (i.e., up to 300 years) • Industry input • Temperature profiles and associated assumptions • Typical loading patterns to date • Future loading (how long will oldest fuel be in pool?)

  15. General Needs- Drying Issues (High) • Since many degradation mechanisms are dependent on or accelerated by the presence of water, need to model and measure how much water remains in a cask after drying. • Develop dryness criteria and methods for achieving and verifying compliance • Determine how much water remains in a cask after drying • Chemisorbed, physisorbed, free, trapped • Understand the influence of fuel condition on drying and verifying dryness • Determine need for mitigation • Industry input • Experience, Lessons Learned • Participation in ASTM Standard update

  16. General Needs- Fuel Retrieval (High) • Investigation of retrieval methods and potential impacts on ITS SSCs • Wet (back in pool) • Lower temperature • “Quench” • Breached fuel • Dry Transfer System • Examine fuels from one or more ISFSIs • Near-term need to address orphan fuel problem • Industry input • Experience, Lessons Learned • Details on dry transfer systems

  17. General Needs- Monitoring Systems (High/Medium) • Monitoring and Sensor systems (to minimize need to open package frequently) • Internal • Temperature • Pressure • H2O • Xe, Kr • O2 • Dimensions (creep, bowing, etc.) • External • Dose • Welds (or develop welding techniques that are less susceptible to SCC) • Security • Industry input • Package designs/how instrumentation could be accommodated

  18. Reexamine INL DCSC (Medium/High) • Additional 10+ years • Obtain data on low burnup fuels and cask components • Don’t have baseline data • Instrument casks • Obtain information for development of the Test & Evaluation Facility for high burnup fuels INL Dry Cask Storage Characterization (DCSC) Project

  19. General Needs- Subcriticality (Medium) • Demonstrate subcriticality for transportation and retrieval operations • Burnup Credit • Radiochemical assay data for isotopic concentration validation • Critical benchmark experiments for credited isotopes • Fuel depletion characteristics • Moderator Exclusion • Industry input • Code validation data • Needs?

  20. FY10 Initial Findings: Fuel Example of Pellet Cracking and Flow Path for ATM-106 rod NBD-107 (taken from Guenther et al. 1988, Figure E.1.g) 20

  21. FY10 Initial Findings: Cladding Radial hydrides from Kubo et al., 2010 LWR Fuel Performance Mtg. 21 Inner clad oxidation from CSNF Abstraction Model

  22. FY10 Initial Findings: Grid Spacers, Fuel Baskets Grid Spacers Upper grid spacer and differing fuel rod growth from INL test Fuel Baskets Top weld crack in fuel basket from 15-yr demo at INL 22

  23. FY10 Initial Findings: Neutron Poisons and Shields Neutron Poisons Neutron Shields Example of BORAL blisteringfrom EPRI 23

  24. FY10 Initial Findings: Container Cask bottom cover plate bolt corrosion observed in 15-yr demo at INL White coloring on metal gasket from remainingwater after 5 yr storage. Aida et al., IAEA 2010 24

  25. FY10 Initial Findings: Overpack Examples of concrete degradation at INL ISFSI

  26. Preliminary List of High and Medium Priority R&D Needs (Normal Conditions) 26

  27. Accident Conditions & Data Needs • Which SSCs are important to analyze? • Which mechanisms? • If systems are monitored, then corrective actions can be taken to mitigate any accidents • Have to assure that dose and release criteria are met

  28. ESCP Input & Assistance • Provide better quality pictures of DCSS and ISFSIs • Provide release of pictures • Participate in the fuel survey led by SRNL • Availability of fuel, provide history, wet or dry, cask handling, schedule, cost • Provide data on newer cladding (M5, ZIRLO, etc.) and assembly designs (e.g., partial length rods) • “Waste” • Is any utility willing to take sectioned pieces of fuel rods, remaining fuel rods, etc. after testing back?

  29. FY11 Work Plan & Pathforward • Objectives: • Complete gap analyses (by February 2011) • Accident conditions • Transportation • Develop Experimental and Modeling Plan • DOE workshop February 2011 • Prioritize data needs (by end of March 2011) • Input from EPRI ESCP committee • Compare with NRC and NWTRB gap analyses • Input from international collaborators • Develop testing and modeling needs for TEF • Issue M1 Milestone Report (June 2011) • Initiate testing and modeling to fill gaps 29

More Related