No Slide Title

							U.S. Domestic Reactor
Conversion Programs
Eric Woolstenhulme
Dana Meyer
2007 TRTR Conference

September 2007
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
     various branches

• University reactor department
     reactor operations, radiation protection, shipping, procurement, and etc

• Fuel and hardware fabricators
     BWXT, CERCA, GA

• Spent fuel receipt facilities
     SRS, INL/Idaho Nuclear Tech. and Eng. Center

• SNF shipping services
     NAC, STS, INL

• U.S. Department of Energy and their subcontractors
     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 Proposal
Average 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
Hardware
Average 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

     TEXAS A&M




   2006              2007              2008               2009
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