[en] Although regulatory agencies have shown a special interest in incorporating best estimate approaches in the fuel licensing process, fuel codes are currently licensed based on only the deterministic limits such as those seen in 10CRF50, and therefore, may yield unrealistic safety margins. The concept of uncertainty analysis is employed to more realistically manage this risk. In this study, uncertainties were classified into two categories: probabilistic and epistemic (owing to a lack of pre-existing knowledge in this area). Fuel rods have three sources of uncertainty: manufacturing tolerance, boundary conditions, and physical models. The first step in successfully analyzing the uncertainties involves performing a statistical analysis on the input parameters used throughout the fuel code. The response obtained from this analysis must show proportional index correlations because the uncertainties are globally propagated. The Dakota toolkit was used to analyze the FRAPTRAN transient fuel code. The subsequent sensitivity analyses helped in identifying the key parameters with the highest correlation indices including the peak cladding temperature and the time required for cladding failures. The uncertainty analysis was performed using an IFA-650-5 fuel rod, which was in line with the tests performed in the Halden Project in Norway. The main objectives of the Halden project included studying the ballooning and rupture processes. The results of this experiment demonstrate the accuracy and applicability of the physical models in evaluating the thermal conductivity, mechanical model, and fuel swelling formulations. (author)