Major Modification Determination Process Utilized for Proposed Idaho National Laboratory Projects

Conference · Thu May 01 00:00:00 EDT 2008

OSTI ID:940031

Michael A Lehto, Ph D; Christensen, Boyd D

Over the past three years, several new projects with the potential for major modifications to existing facilities have been considered for implementation at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL). These projects were designated to take place in existing nuclear facilities with existing documented safety analyses. 10 CFR 830.206 requires the contractor for a major modification to a Hazard Category 1, 2, or 3 nuclear facility to obtain Department of Energy (DOE) approval for the nuclear facility design criteria to be used for preparation of a preliminary documented safety analysis (PDSA), as well as creation and approval of the PDSA, before the contractor can procure materials or components or begin construction on the project. Given the significant effort and expense of preparation and approval of a PDSA, a major modification determination for new projects is warranted to determine if the rigorous requirements of a major modification are actually required. Furthermore, performing a major modification determination helps to ensure that important safety aspects of a project are appropriately considered prior to modification construction or equipment procurement. The projects considered for major modification status at the INL included: treatment and packaging of unirradiated, sodium-bonded highly enriched uranium (HEU) fuel and miscellaneous casting scrap in the Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) Fuel Manufacturing Facility (FMF); post irradiation examination of Advance Fuel Cycle Initiative (AFCI) fuel in the MFC Analytical Laboratory (AL); the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) gas test loop (GTL); and the hydraulic shuttle irradiation system (HSIS) at ATR. The major modification determinations for three of the proposed projects resulted in a negative major modification. On the other hand, the major modification determination for the GTL project concluded that the project would require a major modification. This paper discusses the process, methods, and considerations used by the INL for the four major modification determinations. Three of the four major modification determinations discussed herein were completed using the guidance specified in the draft of DOE STD-1189, “Integration of Safety into the Design Process.” DOE-STD-1189 was released as a draft document in March 2007 and provides guidance for integrating safety considerations into the early design activities for constructing new facilities or making modifications to existing nuclear facilities. The fourth major modification determination was prepared prior to the existence of DOE STD-1189 and was evaluated solely by the definition of a major modification given in 10 CFR 830.206. For all four projects, consideration was given to: • Facility hazard categorization change and material inventory • Facility footprint change with the potential to adversely affect credited safety function • New or changed processes resulting in a change to the safety basis • The use of new technology or equipment not approved for use in the facility • The need for new or revised safety basis controls • Hazards not previously evaluated in the safety basis.

• Research Organization: Idaho National Lab. (INL), Idaho Falls, ID (United States)
• Sponsoring Organization: DOE - NE
• DOE Contract Number: DE-AC07-99ID-13727
• OSTI ID: 940031
• Report Number(s): INL/CON-08-13849; TRN: US0806956
• Resource Relation: Conference: Energy Facility Contractors Group (EFCOG),Richland, WA,05/03/2008,05/08/2008
• Country of Publication: United States
• Language: English

Related Subjects

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS
CASTING
CONSTRUCTION
CONTRACTORS
FUEL CYCLE
HIGHLY ENRICHED URANIUM
HYDRAULICS
IMPLEMENTATION
IRRADIATION
MANUFACTURING
MODIFICATIONS
NUCLEAR FACILITIES
PACKAGING
POST-IRRADIATION EXAMINATION
PROCUREMENT
SAFETY ANALYSIS
SCRAP
TEST REACTORS
10 CFR 830
Documented Safety Analysis
Nuclear Safety