AEP-NRC-2009-17, Cycle 17 End of Life Moderator Temperature Coefficient Limit Report
| ML090770150 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 03/03/2009 |
| From: | Hruby R Indiana Michigan Power Co |
| To: | Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| AEP-NRC-2009-17 | |
| Download: ML090770150 (18) | |
Text
INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER Indiana Michigan Power Company Nuclear Generation Group One Cook Place Bridgman, MI 49106 aep.com March 3, 2009 AEP-NRC-2009-17 10 CFR 50.4 Docket No.:
50-316 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001 Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant Unit 2 Unit 2 Cycle 17 End of Life Moderator Temperature Coefficient Limit Report
Reference:
Letter from J. N. Jensen, Indiana Michigan Power Company, to U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control
- Desk, "Supplement to License Amendment Request on the Conditional Exemption from Measurement of End of Life Moderator Temperature Coefficient," AEP:NRC:5132-01, dated June 2, 2005 (ML051650282).
Indiana Michigan Power Company, the licensee for Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant (CNP), made a commitment in the referenced letter to submit the following information for the first three uses of the WCAP-13749-P-A methodology for each unit at CNP as a condition for approval of the conditional exemption of the most negative end of life moderator temperature coefficient measurement technical specification change:
- 1. A summary of the plant data used to confirm that the Benchmark Criteria of Table 3-2 of WCAP-13749-P-A, "Safety Evaluation Supporting the Conditional Exemption of the Most Negative EOL Moderator Temperature Coefficient Measurement," have been met; and,
- 2. The Most Negative Moderator Temperature Coefficient Limit Report (as found in Appendix D of WCAP-13749-P-A).
The information is attached. This transmittal is the third of the three submittals for Unit 2. There are no new commitments made in this submittal.
Awo!
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission AEP-NRC-2009-17 Page 2 Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. John A. Zwolinski, Regulatory Affairs Manager, at (269) 466-2478.
Sincerely, Raymond A. Hruby, Jr.
Vice President - Site Support Services Attachments:
- 1.
Plant Data Used to Confirm Benchmark Requirements
- 2.
Most Negative End of Life Moderator Temperature Coefficient Limit Report for Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant Unit 2, Cycle 17 c:
T. A. Beltz, NRC Washington, DC K. D. Curry, Ft. Wayne AEP, w/o attachments J. T. King, MPSC MDEQ - WHMD/RPS NRC Resident Inspector M. A. Satorius, NRC Region III to AEP-NRC-2009-17 PLANT DATA USED TO CONFIRM BENCHMARK REQUIREMENTS to AEP-NRC-2009-17 Page 2 Plant Data Used to Confirm Benchmark Requirements To facilitate the review of this information, a list of abbreviations used in this attachment is provided.
OF degrees Fahrenheit percent BOL beginning of life CNP Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant EOL end of life HZP hot zero power ITC isothermal temperature coefficient M
measured MTC moderator temperature coefficient MTU metric tons of uranium MWD megawatt-day NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission pcm percent-millirho P
predicted This attachment presents a comparison of the CNP Unit 2 Cycle 17 core characteristics with the requirements for use of the Conditional Exemption of the Most Negative EOL MTC Measurement methodology and presents plant data demonstrating that the Benchmark Criteria presented in WCAP-13749-P-A are met.
The Conditional Exemption of the Most Negative EOL MTC Measurement methodology is described in WCAP-1 3749-P-A. This report was approved by the NRC with two requirements:
only PHOENIX/ANC calculation methods are used for the individual plant analyses relevant to determinations for the EOL MTC plant methodology, and
" the predictive correction is reexamined if changes in core fuel designs or continued MTC calculation/measurement data show significant effect on the predictive correction.
The PHOENIX/ANC calculation methods were used for the CNP Unit 2 Cycle 17 core design and relevant analyses.
Also, the Unit 2 Cycle 17 core design does not represent a major change in core fuel design and the MTC calculation-to-measurement physics database shows no significant effect on the predictive correction.
Therefore, the predictive correction of
-3 pcm/°F remains valid for this cycle.
The Unit 2 Cycle 17 core meets both of the above requirements.
to AEP-NRC-2009-17 Page 3 The following references are applicable to this attachment:
- 1. WCAP-13749-P-A, "Safety Evaluation Supporting the Conditional Exemption of the Most Negative EOL Moderator Temperature Coefficient Measurement," March 1997.
- 2. Letter from J. D. Peralta, NRC, to J. A. Gresham, Westinghouse Electric Company, "NRC Staff Interpretation of WCAP-16260-P-A with Respect to Two Previously Approved Topical Reports WCAP-8846-A, WCAP-1 3749-P-A and Their Associated Safety Evaluations," dated May 23, 2006 (ML061420313).
The following data tables are provided in support of the benchmark criteria:
Table 1 - Benchmark Criteria for Application of the 300 ppm MTC Conditional Exemption Methodology (per WCAP-13749-P-A)
Table 2 - Flux Map Data: Assembly Powers Table 3 - Flux Map'Data: Core Tilt Criteria Table 4 - Core Reactivity Balance Data Table 5 - Subcritical Rod Worth Measurement Test Data (BOL, HZP): ITC Table 6 - Subcritical Rod Worth Measurement Test Data (BOL, HZP): Total Control Bank Worth to AEP-NRC-2009-17 Page 4 Table 1 Benchmark Criteria for Application of the 300 ppm MTC Conditional Exemption Methodology Parameter Criteria Assembly Power (Measured Normalized Reaction Rate)
Measured Incore Quadrant Power Tilt (Low Power)
Measured Incore Quadrant Power Tilt (Full Power)
Core Reactivity Difference BOL HZP ITC Individual Control Bank Worth Total Control Bank Worth
+/-0.1 or10 %
+/-4%
+/-2%
+/- 1000 pcm
+ 2 pcm/°F NA*
+/- 10%
Not required when "The Spatially Corrected Inverse Count Rate (SCICR) Method for Subcritical Reactivity Measurement" (WCAP-16260-P-A) has been performed; see Reference 2.
to AEP-NRC-2009-17 Page 5 Table 2 Flux Map Data: Assembly Powers Assembly Power Determination Map Date Power (Maximum Magnitude of Relative Error)
Measured Design IDesign -
10% of Acceptable Power lPower Measuredl Design 217-01 11/7/2007 23.92 1.109 1.202 0.093 0.120 YES 217-02 11/8/2007 46.58 1.127 1.205 0.078 0.121 YES 217-03 11/9/2007 87.28 0.361 0.341 0.020 0.034 YES 217-04 11/10/2007 99.84 0.361 0.341 0.020 0.034 YES 217-05 12/3/2007 99.92 0.352 0.331 0.021 0.033 YES 217-06 1/7/2008 99.95 0.340 0.321 0.019 0.032 YES 217-07 2/4/2008 99.89 0.312 0.296 0.016 0.030 YES 217-08 3/3/2008 100.02 0.311 0.295 0.016 0.030 YES 217-09 4/7/2008 99.87 1.172 1.109 0.063 0.111 YES 217-10 5/5/2008 99.80 0.316 0.299 0.017 0.030 YES 217-11 6/2/2008 99.97 0.337 0.322 0.015 0.032 YES 217-12 7/8/2008 99.87 0.328 0.309 0.019 0.031 YES 217-13 8/4/2008 99.17 0.355 0.334 0.021 0.033 YES 217-14 9/2/2008 99.75 0.338 0.320 0.018 0.032 YES 217-15 10/6/2008 99.84 0.349 0.328 0.021 0.033 YES 217-16 11/3/2008 99.82 0.355 0.335 0.020 0.034 YES 217-17 12/1/2008 99.90 0.367 0.341 0.026 0.034 YES 217-18 12/29/2008 99.87 0.391 0.368 0.023 0.037 YES Acceptance Criterion: Absolute Value of [Design - Measured] is less than 10% of the Design Value or 0.1, whichever is greater to AEP-NRC-2009-17 Page 6 Table 3 Flux Map Data: Core Tilt Criteria Top Half Incore Quadrant Power Tilt Map #
Power (%)
Maximum Tilt Minimum Tilt Acceptable 217-01 23.92 1.01499 0.97814 Yes 217-02 46.58 1.00679 0.98323 Yes 217-03 87.28 1.00614 0.98711 Yes 217-04 99.84 1.00568 0.98914 Yes 217-05 99.92 1.00585 0.98790 Yes 217-06 99.95 1.00724 0.98775 Yes 217-07 99.89 1.00477 0.98839 Yes 217-08 100.02 1.00356
.0.99335 Yes 217-09 99.87 1.00167 0.99737 Yes 217-10 99.80 1.00337 0.99657 Yes 217-11 99.97 1.00256
.0.99822 Yes 217-12 99.87 1.00403 0.99674 Yes 217-13 99.17 1.00436 0.99316 Yes 217-14 99.75 1.00446 0.99483 Yes 217-15 99.84 1.00384 0.99669 Yes 217-16 99.82 1.00452 0.99447 Yes 217-17 99.90 1.00296 0.99400 Yes 217-18 99.87 1.00538
,0.99639 Yes Bottom Half Incore Quadrant Power Tilt Map #
Power (%)
Maximum Tilt Minimum Tilt Acceptable 217-01 23.92 1.01534 0.98188 Yes 217-02 46.58 1.00549 0.98754 Yes 217-03 87.28 1.00665 0.98812 Yes 217-04 99.84 1.00705 0.98846 Yes 217-05 99.92 1.00815 0.98299 Yes 217-06 99.95 1.00810 0.98371 Yes 217-07 99.89 1.00645 0.98531 Yes 217-08 100.02 1.00685 0.98993 Yes 217-09 99.87 1.00766 0.99126 Yes 217410 99.80 1.00404 0.99583 Yes 217-11 99.97 1.00526 0.99636 Yes 217-12 99.87 1.00548 0.99558 Yes 217-13 99.17 1.00393 0.99594 Yes 217-14 99.75 1.00317 0.99511 Yes 217-15 99.84 1.00290 0.99631 Yes 217-16 99.82 1.00264 0.99457 Yes 217-17 99.90 1.00370 0.99519 Yes 217-18 99.87 1.00325 0.99769 Yes Acceptance Criteria:
High power maps -maximum power tilt: 1.02; minimum power tilt: 0.98 Low power maps - maximum power tilt: 1.04; minimum power tilt: 0.96 to AEP-NRC-2009-17 Page 7 Table 4 Core Reactivity Balance Data Unit 2 Cycle 17 Boron Letdown Curve Date Burnup Delta Reactivity, Acceptable (MWD/MTU)
(pcm)
November 17, 2007 387.89
-150.6 Yes November 20, 2007 520.51
-89.6 Yes November 24, 2007 689.82
-57.9 Yes November 27, 2007 820.69
-17.8 Yes December 1,2007 989.93 18.5 Yes December 4, 2007 t,121.13 31.6 Yes December 8, 2007 1,291.29 33.9 Yes December 11,2007 1,421.96 64.8 Yes December 15, 2007 1,593.01 60.1 Yes December 18, 2007 1,722.85 61.6 Yes December 23, 2007 1,935.96 33.1 Yes December 28, 2007 2,153.58
-22.4 Yes December 31, 2007 2,282.53 13.1 Yes January 8, 2008 2,625.55
-30.9 Yes February 5, 2008 3,802.90 82.7 Yes March 4, 2008 5,005.60 127.0 Yes April 8, 2008 6,499.34 258.7 Yes May 6, 2008 7,702.23 184.8 Yes June 3, 2008 8,849.47 97.5 Yes July 8, 2008 10,352.90 63.8 Yes August 5, 2008 11,555.70 150.7 Yes September 2, 2008 12,527.70 203.9 Yes October 7, 2008 14,038.50 82.2 Yes November 4, 2008 15,242.90 81.1 Yes December 2, 2008 16446.10 23.6 Yes December 30, 2008 17649.60 0.0 Yes Acceptance Criterion: +/- 1000 pcm to AEP-NRC-2009-17 Page 8 Table 5 Subcritical Rod Worth Measurement Test Data (BOL, HZP): ITC Measured ITC Predicted ITC ITC Error (M-P)
Acceptable (pcm/°F)
(pcm/°F)
(pcm/°F)
-0.76
-1.144 0.384 Yes Acceptance Criterion: ITC error within +/- 2 pcm/°F Table 6 Subcritical Rod Worth Measurement Test Data (BOL, HZP): Total Control Bank Worth Measured Predicted Delta Worth Worth %Error Worth Worth (M-P)
(M-P)x100%
Acceptable (pcm)
(pcm)
(pcm)
P Total Measured 5930 5874 56 0.195 Yes Worth Acceptance Criterion: Total Measured Worth % error within +/-10%
to AEP-NRC-2009-17 MOST NEGATIVE END OF LIFE MODERATOR TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENT LIMIT REPORT FOR DONALD C. COOK NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT 2, CYCLE 17 to AEP-NRC-2009-17
.. Page 2 Most Negative End of Life Moderator Temperature Coefficient Limit Report for Donald C. Cook Unit 2, Cycle 17 To facilitate the review of this information, a list of abbreviations used in this attachment is provided.
OF degrees Fahrenheit A
delta
,percent AFD axial flux difference ARO all rods out BOL beginning of life CB Reactor Coolant System boron concentration CNP Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant COLR Core Operating Limits Report EOL end of life HFP hot full power HZP hot zero power ITC isothermal temperature.coefficient M
measured MTC moderator temperature coefficient MTU metric tons of uranium MWD megawatt-day pcm percent-millirho ppm parts per million P
predicted RCS Reactor Coolant System RTP reactor thermal power PURPOSE:
The purpose of this document is to present cycle-specific best estimate data for use in confirming the most negative EOL MTC limit in CNP Technical Specification 3.1.3. This document also summarizes the methodology used for determining if a HFP 300 ppm MTC measurement is required.
PRECAUTIONS AND LIMITATIONS:
The EOL MTC exemption data presented in this document apply to CNP Unit 2 Cycle 17 only and may not be used for other operating cycles.
to AEP-NRC-2009-17 Page 3 The following references are applicable to this document:
- 1.
WCAP-13749-P-A, "Safety Evaluation Supporting the Conditional Exemption of the Most Negative EOL Moderator Temperature Coefficient Measurement," March 1997.
- 2.
Letter from J. D. Peralta, NRC, to J. A. Gresham, Westinghouse Electric Company, "NRC Staff Interpretation of WCAP-16260-P-A with Respect to Two Previously Approved Topical Reports WCAP-8846-A, WCAP-13749-P-A and Their Associated Safety Evaluations," dated May 23, 2006 (ML061420313).
PROCEDURE:
All core performance benchmark criteria listed in Table 1 must be met for the current operating cycle. These criteria are confirmed from startup physics test results and routine HFP CB and incore flux map surveillances performed during the cycle.
If all core performance benchmark criteria are met, then the Revised Predicted MTC shall be calculated per the algorithm given in Table 2. The required cycle-specific data are provided in Tables 3 and 4, and Figure 1. This methodology is also described in Reference 1. If all core performance benchmark criteria are met and the Revised Predicted MTC is less negative than COLR Limit 2.2.2b, then a measurement is not required.
to AEP-NRC-2009-17 Page 4 Table 1 Benchmark Criteria for Application of the 300 ppm MTC Conditional Exemption Methodology Parameter Criteria Assembly Power (Measured Normalized Reaction Rate)
Measured Incore Quadrant Power Tilt (Low Power)
Measured Incore Quadrant Power Tilt (Full Power)
Core Reactivity Difference BOL HZP ITC Individual Control Bank Worth Total Control Bank Worth
+/-0.1 or 10%
+4%
+/-2%
+/- 1000 pcm
+ 2 pcm/OF NA*
+/- 10%
Not required when "The Spatially Corrected Inverse Count Rate (SCICR) Method for Subcritical Reactivity Measurement" (WCAP-16260-P-A) has been performed; see Reference 2.
to AEP-NRC-2009-17 Page 5 Table 2 Algorithm for Determining the Revised Predicted Near-EOL 300 ppm MTC The Revised Predicted MTC Predicted MTC + AFD Correction - 3 pcm/°F Where:
Predicted MTC is calculated from Figure 1 at the burnup corresponding to the measurement of 300 ppm at RTP conditions, AFD Correction is the more negative value of the following:
0 pcm/°F or (AAFD
- AFD Sensitivity)
AAFD is the measured AFD minus the predicted AFD from an incore flux map taken at or near the burnup corresponding to 300 ppm AFD Sensitivity = 0.05 pcm / OF / %AAFD Predictive Correction is -3 pcm/°F, as included in the equation for the Revised Predicted MTC.
to AEP-NRC-2009-17 Page 6 Table 3 Worksheet for Calculatinq the Revised Predicted Near-EOL 300 ppm MTC Unit:
2, Cycle 17 Date:
1/11/2009 Time:
22:49 Reference for Cycle-Specific MTC Data:
CNP, Unit 2 Cycle 17, COLR Part A. Predicted MTC A.1 Cycle Average Burnup corresponding to the HFP ARO equilibrium xenon CB of 300 ppm.
A.2 Predicted HFP ARO MTC corresponding to burnup (A.1)
Part B. AFD Correction B.1 Burnup of most recent HFP, equilibrium conditions incore flux map B.2 Measured HFP AFD at burnup (B.1)
Reference incore flux map:
Map #
217-18 Date:
12/29/08 B.3 Predicted HFP AFD at burnup (B.1)
B.4 MTC Sensitivity to AFD B.5 AFD Correction, more negative of the following:
0 pcm/0 F or [B.4 *(B.2 - B.3)]
Part C. Revised Prediction C.1 Revised Prediction (A.2 + B.5 - 3 pcm/OF)
C.2 Surveillance Limit (COLR.2.2.2b) 18168.8 MWD/MTU
-25.06 pcm/°F 17607.5 MWD/MTU
-2.19
% AFD
-1.24
% AFD 0.05 pcm/°F/%AAFD
-0.05 pcm/°F
-28.11 pcm/°F
-32.0 pcm/°F If C.1 is less negative than C.2, then the HFP 300 ppm MTC measurement is not required per Technical Specification Surveillance Requirement 3.1.3.2.
to AEP-NRC-2009-17 Page 7 Table 4 Data Collection and Calculations Required to Complete the Table 3 Worksheet of the Most Negative Moderator Temperature Coefficient Limit Report Data at the 300 ppm Boron Point:
RCS Boron at 300 ppm at 22:49 on 1/11/2009 Burnup at 300 ppm: 18168.8 MWD/MTU (A.1)
Predicted MTC: -25.06 pcm/°F (A.2)
Data from Last Flux Map:
Flux Map Number: 217-18 (B.2)
Reactor Power (RP): 99.87% RTP Burnup: 17607.5 MWD/MTU (B.1)
Measured Axial Flux Difference (MAFD): -2.19% (B.2)
MAFD = Measured Axial Offset
- RP / 100%
= -2.193%
- 99.87% / 100%
= -2.19%
Predicted Axial Flux Difference (PAFD): -1.24% (B.3)
PAFD Predicted Axial Offset
- RP / 100%
= -1.24%
- 99.87% / 100%
= -1.24%
A AFD = (MAFD-PAFD)
= (-2.19% - -1.24%)
= -0.95%
Determination of the Revised Predicted MTC AFD Sensitivity: 0.05 pcm/°F/ %AAFD (B.4)
AFD Correction: -0.05 pcm/°F (B.5) where: AFD Correction is the more negative of the following:
0 pcm/°F or (AAFD
- AFD Sensitivity) 0 pcm/°F or (-0.95%
- 0.05 pcm/°F/ %AAFD) 0 pcm/°F or -0.05 pcm/°F
.-.-0.05 pcm/°F Revised Predicted MTC = Predicted MTC + AFD Correction -3 pcm/°F
= -25.06 pcm/°F + -0.05 pcm/°F -3 pcm/°F
= -28.11 pcm/°F (C.1) to AEP-NRC-2009-17 Figure 1 Unit 2 Cycle 17 Predicted HFP ARO 300 ppm MTC Versus Burnup Page 8
-2.40 E-04
-2.42E-04 44E-04 S-2.46E-04
.1, E: -2.48E-04 52E-04
.7
-2.54E-04 56E-04
-2,58E-04 60E-04 1E6000 17000 18000 19000 Cycle Bumup (MWDIMTU) 20000 Burnup (MWDJMTU)
MTC (Ak/kI0F) 16000
-. 21E 17000
-2.4623E4_________________
18000
-2.4992E-4________________
19000-259E 20000
-2.5790E-4