IR 05000255/1982004
| ML20042C315 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 03/12/1982 |
| From: | Jackiw I, Robinson D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20042C313 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-255-82-04, 50-255-82-4, NUDOCS 8203310202 | |
| Download: ML20042C315 (4) | |
Text
.
e.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION III
Report No. 50-255/82-04 Docket No. 50-255 License No. DPR-20 Licensee: Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, MI 49201 Facility Name: Palisades Nuclear Generating Plant Inspection At: Covert, MI Inspection Conduc ed:
February 23-24, 1982 k
i.N $
Inspector: D L. } obinson 3"11~$ k L
Approved By:
I. N. Jackiw, Chief Test Program Section Inspection Summary Inspection on February 23-24, 1982 (Report No. 50-255/82-04(DETP))
Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspection of Cycle 5 control rod drop time tests; control rod drive and position indication checks; control rod worth measurements; reactor shutdown margin determination; isothermal temperature coefficient measurement; core thermal power evaluation; core power distribution limits; determination of reactivity anomalies; licensee event report. The inspection involved a total of 16 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector including 0 inspector-hours during offshifts.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
82033'0202 820315
PDR ADOCK 05000255 G
,
.
-
-
.
DETAIIS
,
1.
Persons Contacted
- J. Rang, Operations and Maintenance Superintendent
- P.
Bruce, Instrumentation and Control Engineer
- D. Kennedy, Acting Reactor Engineer
- K. Osborne, Supervisory Engineer
- G.
Petitjean, Technical Engineer
- D. VanDenBerg, General Engineer B. Jorgenson, USNRC Senior Resident Inspector
- Denotes those present at exit interview.
2.
Licensee Event Report Followup (Closed) LER 81-109 Radial peaking factor limits revised in the Incore Analysis program, INCA. Review of Cycle 4 operating data indicated that the revised limits were not exceeded. Appropriate corrective action taken by fuel vendor to prevent recurrence.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
3.
Verification of Conduct of Startup Physics Tests
,
The inspector reviewed the Cycle 5 startup physics tests and verified that the licensee conducted the following:
a.
Rod Drive and Rod Position Indication Checks b.
Incore Detector Calibration
,_
c.
Control Rod Worth Measurement d.
Determination of Reactor Shutdown Margin e.
Isothermal Temperature Coefficient f.
Core Thermal Power Evaluation g.
Core Power Distribution Limit h.
Determination of Reactivity Anomalies 4.
Control Rod Drive and Position Indication Checks The inspector reviewed the results of surveillance test R0-22, Revision 8, " Control Rod Drop Times," cond- 'ed on December 16, 1981 for Cycle 5 and concluded that all rod drop..mes satisfied the acceptance-2
<
, *
.
criteria of 2.5 seconds or less required by the Technical Specifica-tions. The inspector also verified that rod drive and rod position
' indication checks were performed in accordance with procedures R0-19, Revision 8, " Control Rod Calibration," and R0-21, Revision 13,
" Control Rod Drive System Interlocks" on November 19, 1981 and
' December 16, 1981, respectively.
No items of noncompliance or devjetions were idencified.
5.
Incore Detector Calibration The inspector reviewed informas'on related to incore detector calibra-tion as described in procedure RI-80, Revision 0, "Incore Monitoring-System Calibration," conducted on December 5-7, 1981 and concluded that the applicable Technical Spacifications had been satisfied. The inspector noted that provisions were being made to ready the excore monitoring system should the incore monitoring system become inoperable.
The inspector concluded that should the system be implemented, addition 21 inspection effort would be warranted to fully evaluate its adequacy.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Control Rod Worth Measurement The inspector reviewed information rejsted to the Cycle 5 determina-tion of control rod worths as described in test procedure T-144 "Zero Power Rod Worth Measurements," conducted on December 26, 1981. Control rod worths were obtained using the boron dilution technique. The rod worth measurement met the review and acceptance criteria in that the individual worths of rod banks 1, 2, 3, and 4 were within 15% of design and the sum of control bank rod worths was within 10% of the Exxon design value given in the Palisades Cycle 5 Startup and Operations Report of September 1981.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
7.
Determination of Shutdown Margin The inspector reviewed information related to the analytical.determina-tion of reactor shutdown margin at beginning of. life (BOL) and end of
- llfe (EOL) conditions as given in the Palisades Cycle 5 Startup and
~ Operations Report of September 1981. The inspector noted that the results of the control' rod worth measurements : are used 'in lieu of-a specific physics test to verify shutdown margin. The inspector con-cluded that all applicable Technical Specifications would be met.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
-3
y
- .
,
8.
Isothermal Temperature Coefficient The inspector reviewed information related to the Cycle 5 measurement of isothermal temperature coefficient (ITC) as described in test procedure.T-143; "Zero Power Isothermal Temperature Coefficient Measurement," performed on December 26, 1981. The inspector concluded that the moderator temperature coefficient (MTC) calculated from the ITC measurement satisfied the licensee's review and acceptance criteria.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
9.
Core Thermal Power Evaluation The inspector reviewed information related to the evaluation of core thermal power as described in GOP-12, Revision 0, " Heat Balance Calculation Procedure," and concluded the procedure was technically adequate for determining core thermal power.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
10.
Core Power Distribution Limits The inspector reviewed the results of full core maps taken at power during the previous cycle and at the beginning of Cycle 5.
The inspector determined that in all prerequisites were met, the onsite computer was using input values from the actual plant conditions, all thermal margins satisfied Technical Specification requirements and the calculated values by the computer were within the acceptance criteria established by the licensee.
The inspector verified that the radial peaking factors used in the Incore Analysis program, INCA, were correct and that these limits had not been exceeded.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
11.
Determination of Radioactivity Anomalies-The inspector reviewed information related to the determination of reactivity anomalies for Cycle 5 as described in test procedure DWT-6, Revision 2, " Core Reactivity-Balance" and concluded that the applic-able Technical Specification was met.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
'12.
Exit Interview The-inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on February 24, 1982. The inspector summarized the purpose, scope, and findings of.the ' inspection.
4'
i