Mosi Dayani, MFFF Project Engineer U.S. Department of Energy, NNSA Presentation to the DOE Operating Experience Committee, 2010 ISM Champions Workshop.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility: Leading the Nuclear Renaissance
Advertisements

Antti Piirto The first EPR under Construction in Finland International Nuclear Forum 2008 ”Bulgarian Nuclear Energy – National, Regional and.
EMS Checklist (ISO model)
CREW CAMP ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW L. David Glatt, P.E. North Dakota Department of Health Environmental Health Section.
DOE’s Plutonium Disposition Infrastructure with a Focus on the Savannah River Site Tom Clements Adviser to the South Carolina Chapter of the Sierra Club.
Idaho Cleanup Project _____________________ ICP Spent Nuclear Fuel Examination Barbara Beller for Kathleen Hain, PBS-12 FPD April 15, NSNFP Strategy Meeting.
1 EM Update and Perspective David Huizenga Senior Advisor for Environmental Management 2012 DOE Project Management Workshop April 3, 2012.
UNRESTRICTED Infrastructure Assessment as Viewed by Technology Holders IAEA Technical Meeting December 10-12, 2008 R. Godden.
Nuclear Fuel, Uranium Enrichment, Fuel Fabrication, MOX Seminar on Nuclear Science and Technology for Diplomats P. Adelfang (+)Division of Nuclear Fuel.
Long Term Storage, The Failure of the Federal Government, and NIMBY.
School for drafting regulations Nuclear Safety Decommissioning Vienna, 2-7 December 2012 Tea Bilic Zabric.
Safety  performance  cleanup  closure M E Environmental Management National Spent Nuclear Fuel Program Role in DOE’s Transformation Barb Beller, Project.
INSAG DEVELOPMENT OF A DOCUMENT ON HIGH LEVEL SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NUCLEAR POWER Milestone Issues: Group C. Nuclear Safety. A. Alonso (INSAG Member)
Managing the Information Technology Resource Jerry N. Luftman
MSIS 110: Introduction to Computers; Instructor: S. Mathiyalakan1 Systems Design, Implementation, Maintenance, and Review Chapter 13.
Near Term Planning for Storage and Transportation of Used Nuclear Fuel Jeff Williams Project Director Nuclear Fuels Storage and Transportation Planning.
Indian strategy for management of spent fuel from Nuclear Power Reactors S.Basu, India.
Spent Nuclear Fuel Timothy Pairitz. Nuclear Power 101 Uranium-235 is enriched from 0.7% to 3-5%. Enriched fuel is converted to a uranium oxide powder.
IAEA Perspective and Lessons Learned in Shipping HEU Spent Fuel to Russia Institute of Nuclear Materials Management 48 th Annual Meeting July , 2007.
Siemens sans siemens sans bold siemens sans italic siemens sans italic bold siemens sans black siemens black italic Siemens Building Technologies.
Engineering Standards Working Group Annual Meeting June 24-25, 2002 DOE Nevada Support Facility June 2002 Joe B Stringer, PE Framatome ANP DE&S.
Commissioning of Fire Protection and Life Safety Systems Presented by: Charles Kilfoil Bechtel National Waste Treatment Plant Richland WA.
1 “Lessons Learned - Construction of the National Enrichment Facility” Stephen Cowne Director, Quality & Regulatory Affairs Louisiana Energy Services (LES)
From Research Prototype to Production
Presented by: Pechanga Environmental Department Designing and Managing a Recycling Program Source Reduction Strategies for Tribal Solid Waste Programs.
MOX Safety Fuels the Future Integration of Safety in Design in MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility Sue King.
Tom MAZOUR IAEA, Division of Nuclear Power
Principles of Information Systems, Sixth Edition Systems Design, Implementation, Maintenance, and Review Chapter 13.
08 October 2015 M. Ammar Mehdi Introduction to Human Resource Management & SSG-16 Actions 4 th Steering Committee on Competence of Human.
Thorium for Use in Plutonium Disposition, Proliferation Resistant Fuels, and Future Reactors Brian Johnson WISE 2006
Nuclear Power Plants. History of nuclear power 1938– Scientists study Uranium nucleus 1941 – Manhattan Project begins 1942 – Controlled nuclear chain.
 Principles of nuclear energy  Fission reactions  Nuclear reactor  Nuclear power plants.
1 Attributes of a Successful Nuclear Construction Project – A Regulator’s Perspective Victor M. McCree Deputy Regional Administrator for Operations U.S.
Uranium Mining and Remediation Exchange Group, UMREG2012 Vienna 7 – 8 November 2012, DEVCO Nuclear Safety 1 EU - Instrument for Nuclear Safety Cooperation.
MD Digital Government Summit, June 26, Maryland Project Management Oversight & System Development Life Cycle (SDLC) Robert Krauss MD Digital Government.
School for drafting regulations Nuclear Safety Operation Vienna, 26 November -7 December 2012 Tea Bilic Zabric.
GROUP 3:Bangladesh, Croatia, Egypt, Jordan, Montenegro, Namibia, Senegal, Syria, Vietnam and Yemen Moderator: Dr. I. Rotaru, IAEA consultant Reporter:
Integrating ISMS Safety Concepts and Tools into the Design of CH2M HILL’s Demonstration Bulk Vitrification System September 12-13, 2006.
Small Modular Reactor Licensing Design Specific Review Standards 11/29/20121 Joseph Colaccino Acting Deputy Director Division of Advanced Reactors and.
Configuration Management in New Reactor Construction Tom Kozak, NRO/DCIP/CAEB
Principles of Information Systems, Sixth Edition Systems Design, Implementation, Maintenance, and Review Chapter 13.
MODULE “PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL” SAFETY ASSESSMENT DURING DECOMMISSIONING SAFE DECOMMISSIONING OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS Project BG/04/B/F/PP ,
National Cleanup Workshop Managing Large Capital Projects Ken Picha Deputy Assistant Secretary for Tank Waste and Nuclear Material.
1 By Jim McCormick-Barger DOE, WTP Lead Construction Inspector Quality Challenges with the Construction of the First Large Nuclear Facility in the Past.
Programme Performance Criteria. Regulatory Authority Objectives To identify criteria against which the status of each element of the regulatory programme.
Integrated Used Nuclear Fuel Management Regulatory Information Conference U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission March 11, 2009 Steven P. Kraft Senior Director.
C O N T R A C T O R I N F O R M A T I O N E X C H A N G E LashCIE Presentation 1/98 1 Recent Accomplishments and Future Directions Dan Giessing U.S. Department.
International Atomic Energy Agency Roles and responsibilities for development of disposal facilities Phil Metcalf Workshop on Strategy and Methodologies.
1 ISMS/EMS Lessons Learned on Plutonium Disposition Projects at SRS Presented by: Joan S. Bozzone NNSA Environmental Manager NNSA Site Engineering and.
Principles of Information Systems, Sixth Edition 1 Systems Design, Implementation, Maintenance, and Review Chapter 13.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Methodology and Responsibilities for Periodic Safety Review for Research Reactors William Kennedy Research Reactor.
International Atomic Energy Agency Regulatory Review of Safety Cases for Radioactive Waste Disposal Facilities David G Bennett 7 April 2014.
23 January 2016 Gustavo C ARUSO Head, Regulatory Activities Section Division of Nuclear Installations Safety Department of Nuclear Safety and Security.
1 EM Update Presented to the National Governors Association Federal Facilities Task Force Dr. Inés Triay Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Environmental.
JORDAN ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (JAEC) Building of National Safeguards Capabilities in Jordan IAEA’s Technical Meeting/Workshop on National Infrastructure.
Request for Information & Capability Statements Richland Acquisitions Post-FY 2018 November 17-19, 2015.
The Challenge of Getting What You Asked For Integrated Safety Management Summit Knoxville TN August 24-27, 2009 Presented By: Patrice McEahern HNF
Role of Self-Assessment V.C. Agarwal, Director (HR) NPCIL,INDIA.
IAEA Training Course on Safety Assessment of NPPs to Assist Decision Making Workshop Information IAEA Workshop Safety Assessment Process. Plant Modification.
Organization and Implementation of a National Regulatory Program for the Control of Radiation Sources Program Performance Criteria.
South Carolina Nuclear Advisory Council SRS Update and FY 2017 Budget Service ● Safety ● Security ● Stewardship ● SRNL ● Sustainability April 14, 2016.
American Recovery & Reinvestment Act Office of Environmental Management Presentation to Regulators March 6, 2009 Cynthia V. Anderson, EM Recovery Act Program.
Savannah River Site Watch Columbia, South Carolina
FLEX Mitigation Strategies Overview (Rec 4.2) Fukushima Regulatory Response Workshop April 5, 2012.
DDG Nuclear Energy: Mr Zizamele Mbambo
NRC Update of Low Level Waste Emerging Issues
CR3 and Crystal River Energy Complex
NRC Cyber Security Regulatory Overview
DOE Review of the LCLS Project October 2006
Software Reviews.
Presentation transcript:

Mosi Dayani, MFFF Project Engineer U.S. Department of Energy, NNSA Presentation to the DOE Operating Experience Committee, 2010 ISM Champions Workshop MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility: Leading the Nuclear Renaissance

At the end of the Cold War, U.S. and Russia began to cooperate to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction In 1995 National Academy of Sciences studied and recommended disposal options for Weapons Grade fissile materials –Plutonium: mix with depleted U to produce mixed oxide fuel (MOX Program) In 2000, both countries signed agreement –Each to dispose of 34 metric tons of surplus weapons-grade plutonium Enough for thousands of nuclear weapons –Convert to MOX Fuel for power reactors Pu Disposition Program Obj. 1

Pu Disposition Program Weapons Dismantlement at Pantex Interim Storage at Pantex Pit Disassembly & Conversion at Savannah River MOX Fuel Fabrication (MP) Plutonium Pits Clean Metal Spent fuel is unsuitable and unattractive for use in nuclear weapons Aqueous Purification (AP) Capability Obj. 1 Non-Pit Plutonium* Impure Plutonium Oxide Interim Storage at SRS

MFFF Prime Contract MFFF prime contract awarded in 1999 to Duke Cogema Stone & Webster, now Shaw AREVA MOX Services Base Contract - Design, Licensing, Reactor Upgrades, Lead Test Assemblies Option 1 - Construction and Cold Start-up Option 2 - Hot Start-up, Fuel Production Operations, and Irradiation Services Option 3 - Deactivation

MFFF Main Functions Aqueous Polishing (AP) - Purify PuO 2 to produce a feed stock to suitable for MOX fuel. Manufacturing Process (MP) - Blend PuO 2 with DUO 2, produce fuel pellets, and load into MOX fuel assemblies. Obj. 2

Regulatory Requirements U.S. Congress mandated (Public Law , 17 October 1998, Section 3134) the MFFF will be: –Licensed and regulated by the NRC (10 CFR 70) –Comply with Occupational Safety and Health Administration Act of 1970 DOE and NRC requirements met for Physical Security NRC requirements (10 CFR 74) for Material Control and Accountability Supplemented by a selected set of DOE Directives imposed by contract for project management, financial management, record keeping, etc.

MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility Irradiate MOX fuel assemblies Purify plutonium oxide Mix with uranium oxide Fabricate Pellets Fabricate fuel assemblies MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility Commercial Nuclear Reactors

MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility La Hague Melox Paris 630 miles MFFF Design Reference Plants MELOX - model for the MFFF MP Process - > 1400 tons MOX fuel produced at MELOX La Hague – model for the MFFF AP Process - 20,000 tons of spent fuel reprocessed at La Hague

MOX Fuel Process Overview Aqueous Polishing (AP) used to remove contaminants (primarily Ga, Am, and Cl) PuO 2 Dissolution Purification Cycle PuO 2 Conversion Powder Master Blend & Final Blend Pellet Production Rod Production Fuel Assembly MOX Process (MP) process blends UO2 and PuO2 powder into pellets loads pellets into rods manufacture of fuel assemblies

Oxide Powder Blending 1 - Primary blending of Powder to 20% Pu0 2 mixture 2 - Secondary blending of Powder to 5% Pu0 2 mixture Scrap U0 2 Pu0 2 (From AP Process) U0 2 Primary Blend

Pellet Prod. & Rod Assembly 1 - Blended PuO2 Powder2 - Pellet Pressing3 - Pellet Sintering 4 - Pellet Grinding 5 - Rod Loading 6 - Assembly Fabrication

MFFF Production Rates 3.5 metric tons of Pu per year 70 tons of MOX fuel per year production capacity 1 Assembly built per day

MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility MFFF Process Building is a 500,000 ft highly secure, seismically-resistant steel reinforced concrete structure Construction approved in April 2007 Began Construction in August 2007 Baseline –Total Project Cost $4.86 Billion –Project Completion, October 2016

MFFF Design Facts Three discrete facilities combined in a single building: –Aqueous Polishing building: 7 levels including underground –Fuel Fabrication building: 3 levels all above ground –Shipping and Receiving building: 3 levels including underground Complex architecture and layout –598 rooms/cells –300 glove boxes Highly automated systems –40,000 Control Inputs/Outputs –80 non-safety Programmable Logic Controllers (PLC) –13 safety PLCs –Manufacturing Management Information System (MMIS): 2 million lines of code drives the production process

Safety & Security Design Nuclear Material Confinement Criticality Prevention External Events Radiation Protection Fire Protection Security Functions

MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility

MFFF Construction Site August 2007 Start of Construction

MFFF Construction Site May 2010

MFFF Construction Interior wall rebar installation

MFFF Construction Floor section ready for concrete placement

MFFF Construction Wall Rebar Installation

MFFF Construction Site Rod Storage Room, Aug. 2010

MFFF Construction Site Sintering Furnace Cooling Water Tank, Aug. 2010

MFFF, Aug Setup of KCB unit gloveboxes for assembly and test

25 DOE Experience Microcosm of larger nuclear industry No large new nuclear facilities built for nearly 20 years Emergence of several major projects in recent years Hanford Waste Treatment Plant Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility Uranium Processing Facility Chemical and Metallurgical Replacement Pit Disassembly and Conversion Salt Waste Processing Facility

DOE Experience Supplier network not in place to support multiple large projects Existing qualified suppliers could only support ongoing operations, maintenance and smaller projects New projects have had to address supplier challenges

27 Meeting the Challenge Sponsor and support vendor workshops to highlight opportunities and requirements for nuclear work Develop flexible acquisition strategies that address alternatives when suppliers cant perform Plan for and allocate budget to offset cost and schedule risks of supplier issues

Meeting the Challenge Enhance the technical capabilities and training of federal oversight staff to assess supplier work Perform risk-based supplier reviews and assessments against requirements Exchange lessons learned and supplier information with other DOE projects

Obtaining Desired Results

Lessons Learned Construction Approach – Develop Construction Management Plan very early in the project in enough detail so the reader knows the intent and goals of each section, get peer and client buy in, modify as project progresses and assure revisions are disseminated to Eng. QA, Procurement etc. (try and keep everyone on the same page) Host Site Integration – Make sure the roles, responsibilities and protocols are formalized in a document and agreed upon Readiness for Construction – Perform a detailed assessment on all articles and activities necessary to start and maintain construction activities (the results will surprise you)

Lessons Learned Readiness for Construction II – Perform a second detailed assessment to guarantee all findings from the 1st assessment are implemented Imbed Construction with Design – During the design phase perform constant constructability reviews (add disciplines as design matures, and also perform formals constructability reviews at 30, 60, 95 % design complete (otherwise design will never complete) Procurements – Vendors with a NQA-1 qualified program are very scarce, fabricators are better but the population is limited, Installation subcontractors with a NQA-1 qualified program are almost extinct because they have not used their programs in many years. Put all installation under one program or the record keeping will become chaotic - Prequalify as many vendors, fabricators and subcontractors as you can if you intend on bidding the entire project scope - Increase your lead time on procurements and carefully examine your schedule for long lead procurements - Develop and qualify your Commercial Grade Dedication program early. - Use the best value approach when subcontracting, it is more work than low bid technically qualified but allows you to select the best subcontractor

Lessons Learned Concrete Batch Plant – If you are going to establish an onsite batch plant (recommended for large NQA-1 concrete projects) you should - Allow one year to set it up and get it qualified - Qualify all your mix designs during batch plant qualification - Operate the plant yourself and use your QA/QC program for material qualification and inspection - Evaluate your concrete placement schedule and size the plant material storage for at least 1 ½ more than the largest pour Material Receipt - Operate the warehouse and lay down in accordance with your QA/QC requirements - Establish the program responsibilities i.e. what group is responsible for inspection, inventory etc - Determine storage parameters and size warehouse appropriately - Determine quality inspection attributes - Quality level 1 material must be controlled in a chain of custody Plan and Execute the construction by procedure and written work plans that are constantly reviewed for accuracy

Project Performance Summary Project is 46% complete overall –Facility construction is 32% complete Process Building construction continues on schedule and cost Project safety continues to be excellent

MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility: Leading the Nuclear Renaissance END……….Questions?