Question: What is being accomplished in FY 86? Answer: Testing is continuing on the fuel system that is planned as replacement fuel that would allow conversion of the full range of research and test reactors, including the higher power reactors that require the larger quantities of highly enriched uranium (HEU). This fuel system is the low enriched uranium (LEU)-silicide system. This testing is being carried out through incore irradiation of test specimens, or mini-plates, prototype test elements, and a full-core demonstration involving more than 100 fuel elements that will take place over a period of 2 years. This latter activity, the full-core demonstration, is the principal activity ongoing in the program. The full-core demonstration began in January 1986 in the Oak Ridge Research Reactor and is planned to continue through calendar year 1987. Completion of analysis of performance information, both physics and fuels performance, will be carried out in parallel with and following the completion of the full-core demonstration. The program also provides for analytical support to reactor operators in analyzing changes or options to the reactor to allow conversion to take place. Support is also provided to the executive branch (State, NRC, DOD) in the evaluation of requests for export of HEU of U.S. origin pending availability of LEU replacement fuel. Question: Are there technical obstacles for using LEU or converting to LEU in foreign and domestic research reactors? Answer: We believe the technology being developed for the lower density (5.0 g/cc) silicide fuels will provide a sufficient base for conversion of essentially all these reactors except those very few that because of their very high power levels or unique test requirements cannot be converted except by using higher density (7.0 g/cc) silicide fuel. To provide a qualified replacement fuel for the higher-powered reactors, completion of ongoing test programs of the higher density silicide fuel will be required including analysis of results. These technical efforts, that will be based on mini-plate and element tests, are expected to be completed in the FY 1989 time frame when the RERTR program will be completed. Space and Defense Power Question: For the record, provide a breakdown for each activity within both low power systems and multimegawatt power systems with funding levels for FY 85, 86, and 87. Answer: Overall funding has increased in both the low power and multimegawatt power programs. The actual amounts are shown in the following table. Question: For MMW space power systems, provide a breakdown of all funding both DOE and DOD for all activities in FY 85, 86 and 87. Answer: Program funding for the multimegawatt power system has increased. The funding for each Fiscal Year is contained is as follows: Nuclear Energy Research & Development Question: For the record, provide a breakdown of the facilities activities at all facilities with funding levels and FTE's for FY 1985, FY 1986, and FY 1987. Explain any increases or decreases in FY 1987 from FY 1986. Answer: The nuclear energy program's major facilities, which are funded under the facilities element of the budget, are located at the Hanford Engineering Development Laboratory (HEDL), Argonne National Laboratory (ANL)-West, and Energy Technology Engineering Center (ETEC) sites. The facilities located at these sites and the principal activities are as follows: HEDL Fast Flux Test Facility irradiation of prototypical sized fuels and materials; inherent safety testing to determine reactivity feedback contributions to passive safe shutdown margins for mixed-oxide fuel including those for reactor loss-of-flow without scram; feasibility demonstration of producing Cobalt 60 and Gadolinium 153 isotopes for medical uses; irradiation of candidate fuel for the defense SP-100 program; fabrication and irradiation of fuel and blanket test assemblies for joint program with the Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corporation (PNC) of Japan; test demonstration of a 3-year long-life mixed oxide core; irradiation of international fusion program material specimens; and verification of operational reliability of mixed oxide reactor and core systems of Liquid Metal Reactors (LMR's). Fuels and materials Examination Facility and Secure Automated Fabrication (SAF) Line highly automated fabrication of mixed oxide fuel; assembly of fuel pins and fuel assemblies; and storage of NE plutonium inventory. 300 area fabrication of the international fusion program materials open test article; fuel and blanket test assemblies under the joint DOE program with PNC of Japan; and fabrication of the long-life mixed oxide fuel. Experimental Breeder Reactor-II irradiation of both advanced converter and defense reactor (SP-100) fuels and materials in a fast flux sodium environment to determine their performance; irradiation of breached oxide fuel under joint program with Japan, to determine its behavior under normal and off-normal operating conditions and its effect on the reactor primary system; irradiation of metal fuels to demonstrate their behavior and burnup limit; inherent safety testing to determine reactivity feedback contributions to passive safe shutdown margins for reactors, including tests for loss-of-flow, loss-of-heat-sink and control rod withdrawal, all without scram; and verification of operational reliability of reactor and core systems of LMR's with plant lifetime exceeding 22 years. Zero Power Plutonium Reactor critical measurements to check the accuracy of methods of calculations used by reactor designers and to verify core designs. Transient Reactor Test Facility testing of reactor fuels under conditions simulating various types of extreme off-normal conditions in order to determine fuel performance, reliability and safety margins. Hot Fuel Examination Facility assembly, disassembly, and examination of fuels and materials irradiated in the FFTF, ETEC Sodium Components Test Facility performance and endurance Thermal Transient Facility non-sodium, thermal, seismic, and mechanical stress testing of piping systems, fittings, and components to failure. Other Facilities testing small components, instruments and small models of components and systems at prototypic conditions in support of advanced reactor designs. The budgets and average staffing for these sites for FY 1985, FY 1986 and FY 1987 are indicated in the following table. The differences indicated between the FY 1986 and FY 1987 budgets and average staffing levels are a consequence of improvements in operational efficiencies, and other program related changes as follows: O O O HEDL-The FY 1987 facilities budget element includes SAF funding reflecting completion of equipment installation in FY 1986 and the transition to integrated system checkout. In FY 1986, SAF funding of $9.5 million was provided under other breeder program budget elements. Estimated average FY 1986 staffing for SAF was approximately 100 people, bringing FY 1986 staffing for Facilities and SAF line to approximately 910. ANL-West-The decrease in funding between FY 1987 and FY 1986 for facilities activities primarily reflects a stretchout in the metal fuels development and demonstration testing program. ETEC-The decrease between FY 1987 and FY 1986 primarily results Question: Explain in more detail your proposed cost-sharing approach for key facilities. What level of cost-sharing is anticipated? Answer: The proposed cost sharing approach discussed in our budget submission is being developed as part of a facilities optimization study that is currently underway. The facilities are managed as integrated units that conduct required tests in support of the defense, space, and civilian power programs for the DOE and other users. The Department is reviewing the current system of assessing user fees with the goal of developing appropriate, alternative approaches. Because the Department has not completed this review, it is premature to estimate how much money any revised method might yield. However, because implementation of any revised method would be initiated sometime in FY 1987, the incremental yield is anticipated to be small. Full application of any revised method would occur in FY 1988. Question: How much non-DOE work is anticipated at the key facilities in FY 1986 and FY 1987? Answer: In FY 1986, HEDL will receive approximately $15 million for performance of non-DOE work; ANL-West will receive approximately $3 million; and ETEC approximately $1.3 million. Current estimates for FY 1987 indicate that for non-DOE work, HEDL will receive approximately $15 million, ANL-West approximately $4 million, and ETEC approximately $3 million. These FY 1987 estimates could change slightly depending upon the results of our facilities optimization study which is in progress. Program Direction Question: Explain the need for an increase in program direction in FY 87 in view of the reduced program level for nuclear R&D. Answer: Although the requested FY 1987 program funding level for the Nuclear Energy R&D decision unit is reduced, the program direction funding reflects a slight increase over the originally planned FY 1986 obligation. We are nearing the lower limit of personnel required to manage a viable R&D program and, as such, have increased the workload on our remaining staff. To alleviate additional disruptions and to avoid the high cost of layoff, we have attempted to achieve personnel reductions through attrition, rather than through reduction-in-force procedures. Although effective, this method is not predictable during a given period of time. Therefore, the FY 1987 funding provides some contingency, with minimum escalation, in the event that retirements and other attritions do not occur in the specific fiscal year being planned. Question: Provide funding levels and FTE's requested and consumed for FY 85, 86, and 87. Answer: The following table provides the requested data for the Nuclear Energy R&D decision unit. |