IR 05000295/1981008
| ML20009C609 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zion File:ZionSolutions icon.png |
| Issue date: | 07/09/1981 |
| From: | Jackiw I, Robinson D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20009C598 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-295-81-08, 50-295-81-8, NUDOCS 8107210259 | |
| Download: ML20009C609 (6) | |
Text
--
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
'
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-295/81-08 Docket No. 50-295 Licease No. DPR-39 Licensee: Commonwealth Edison Company P. O. Box 767 Chicago, IL 60690 Facility Name:
Zion Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 Inspection At:
Zion, IL Inspection C n g d:
April 9, 15-17, June 24-26, 1981 h
sb%~
4M.,S1 Inspector:
D. L.
binson
,.
s
/
,
Approved By:.II N.'Jac w Acting ':hief Test P gram Section Inspection Summary Inspection'on April 9, 15-17, June 24-26, 1981 (Report No. 50-205/81-08)
'
Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspection of Cycle 6 scram time tests; reactor thermocouple /RTD cross calibration; incore/excore calibration; control rod worth measurements; reactor shutdown margin determination; isothermal temperature coefficient measurement; power coefficient of reactivity measurement; target axial flux difference calculation; core
' thermal power evaluation; core power distribution limits; determination of reactivity anomalies. The inspection involved a-total of 34 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector including four inspector-hours onsite during off-shifts.
Results: No items of noncoupliance or deviation's were identified.
.
8107210259 810710
~
-PDR ADOCK 05000295
,
O PDR
!
.
..
.
.
..
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _
_
_.._
-
.
._
_.
_
_.
_
_
'
..,
'6 DETAILS 1. -
Persons Contacted
- K.. Graesser, Station Superintendent L. Soth, Assistant Superintendent
- G.
Plial, Assistant. Superintendent
- T. - Miosi, Technical Staff Supervisor T. Rieck, Assistant Technical Staff-Supervisor
- W. T'Niemi, Nuclear Group Leader
- T.-Primtz, ??.ermal Group Leader K. Kovar, Nuclear Engineer R. Mertogul, Nuclear Engineer
- R.
Y. Chin, Nuclear Engineer D. Grau, Nuclear Engineer J. Ballard, Nuclear Engineer
- M. Kupiak,1 Quality Assurance Staff
- B.
Harl, Quality Assurance Staff
- J. Kohler, NRC Senior Resident Inspector
- J. Waters, NRC Resident Inspector
- Denotes those present during the exit interview.
2.
Verification of Conduct of Startup Physics Testing
. The inspector reviewed the startup physics testing for Zion 1 Cycle 6 and verified that the licensee conducted the following:
a.
Rod Drive and Rod Position Indication Checks b.
Reactor Thermocouple /RTD Cross Calibration c.
Core Power Distribution Limits d.
Incore/Excore Calibration
e.
Core Thermal Power Evaluation f.
Determination of Reactor Shutdown Margin g.
Isothermal Temperature Coefficient h.
Power Coefficient of Reactivity Measurement i.
Control Rod Worth Measurement j.
Target Axial Flux Difference Calculation k.
Determination of Reactivity Anomalies
'
3.
Control Rod Drive and Position Indication Checks The inspector. reviewed the results of surveillance test T.S.S.
15.6.26, " Control Rod System Checkout", dated March 12, 1981 for Zion 1 Cycle 6 and concluded that all rod drop times satisfied the acceptance criteria of 1.8 seconds or less required by the Technical Specifications. The inspector also verified that rod drive and rod position indication checks were performed as part o' the surveillance on April 11-14, 1981.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
i
.
2-
-
-
w gy
+-e t.9---mw
=-.,,.m.---
--ww,.
--v----y--,a c---
-9,-
w-----y-ywr-
--t v.
w-
---
yra-
- ------
t--
- - - - - - ---- - +
pa.*------
-e
=
_ _ _
_
_.__ _.
. _.
.
.
..
.
'
'
~.
..
,
4.
' Reactor Thermocouple /RTD Cross Calibration The inspector reviewed information related to reactor thermocouple / RID cross calibration as described in surveillance procedure T.S.S.15.6.72, j'
"RTD Cross Calibration", dated October 17, 1978. The inspector noted-tF 4t the narrow range RTDs were within the 10.5* F acceptance criteria established by the licensee and that all applicable Technical Specifi-cations were satisfied.
The inspector verified that the wide range
RTDs and the reactor thermocouples were also calibrated at this time.
No items.of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
.
'
5.
Incore/Excore Detector Calibration
'
The inspector reviewed information related to incore/excore detestor calibration as described in surveillance procedure T.S.S. 15.6.2,
"NIS Calibration," dated June 1, 1978.
The inspector reviewed the graphs of incore axial offset versus excore axial offsets for the four power range channels and noted that.the calibration currents were properly obtained for the upper and the lower excore detectors.
The inspector determined that the licensee had satisfied the Technical
Specification requirement to calibrate the nuclear power range channels quarterly.
!
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
!
6.
Control Rod Worth Measurement The inspector reviewed information related to the Zion 1 Cycle 6 determination of control rod worths as described in surveillance 3'
procedure, T.S.S. 15.6.55, " Rod and Boron Worth Measurements," dated March 19, 1981. The reactivity of the reference bank (Bank D) was
measured using the boration/ dilution technique and the. reactivity
'
worth of the remaining banks was inferred using rod swap reactivity
'
comparisons to the reference bank. The inspector concluded that the
'
results of the rod swap procedure satisfied all acceptance and review criteria as outlined in a February 4, 1981 letter from J. S. Abel (CECO) to H. R. Denton (NRR). 'The difference between measured and
predicted integral worth for the reference bank was approximately
<
5%. The maximum difference between the inf' erred and predicted in-tegral worths for all other banks was less than 8%.
The difference between-the sum of the measured / inferred bank worths and the sum of the predicted worths was approximately 5%. The inspector noted Laat
<
the licensee received NRR approval to use the rod exchs ge technique in a letter from S. A. Varga (NRR)Jto J. S. Abel dated March 12, 1981.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifieu.
i
i-3-
-.
--
-. -. -
. - -.. -.
.-
.-
-. -.
- - - _,
- _, -.
.
.
7.
Determination of Shutdown Margin The inspector reviewed information related to an analytical determin-ation of Cycle 6 shutdown margin at beginning of life (B0L)~ and end of life (EOL) conditions as given in Westinghouse Report WCAP-9859,
'" Core Physics Characteristics on the Zion Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, Cycle 6," dated February 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 reviewed the licensee's minimum shutdown margin calculations for both BOL and EOL conditions and concluded that the applicable Technical Specifications would be met.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
8.
Isothermal Temperature Coefficient The inspector reviewed information relating to Cycle 6 determination of the isothermal temperature coefficient as described in. surveillance procedure T.S.S. 15.6.54, " Isothermal Moderator Temperature Coefficient Measurements", dated March 29, 1979. The Technical Specifications require, except during low power physics testing, that the moderator temperature coefficient (MTC) be negative.
In addition, the licensee's acceptance criteria requires that the isothermal temperature coefficient be_within i3 pcm/*F of the predicted value.
The inspector determined that these requirements were satisfied for both the all rods out (ARO) condition and when the reference bank (Bank D) was inserted.
The inspector noted that special operating restrictions were in effect concerning Tave and boron concentration during startup to further insure that the MTC would remain negative.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
9.
Power Coefficient of Reactivity The inspector reviewed information relating to the Cycle 6 determin-ation of power coefficient of reactivity as described in su'veillance procedures T.S.S. 15.6.61, "At Power Physics Measurements Following Refueling", dated April 1,1981, T.S.S. 15.6.62, " Moderator reaperature
Coefficient", dated July 9, 1980, and T.S.S*. 15.6.63, "Dopple.r Coefficient Measurement", dated July 9, 1980.
The predicted design
.
values for the power coefficient were -9.5, -8.9, and -8.6 pcm/% power
at 72%, 89%, and 99% power, respectively. The corresponding measured t
values were -9.5,
-8.7, an<1 -8.0 pcm/% power.
I No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
I 10.
Target Axial Flux Difference Calculations The inspector reviewed information related to the determination of i
target axial flux difference as described in surveillance procedure l.
T.S.S.15.5.1, " Determination of AI Operating Limits", dated March 3, l-r-4-
!
l u
-
-.
.
.
1977. The inspector examined surveillance test data taken on June 4, 1981 as well as data from Cycle 5 and concluded that the licensee had satisfied the Technical Specification requirements to determine the target axial flux differance at least once per equivalent full power quarter and to update target differences monthly.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
11.
Core Thermal Power Evaluation The inspector reviewed information related to the evaluation of core thermal power as determined by the onsite computer calorimetric and by hand calculation as described in procedure PT-0, Appendix M,
" Calorimetric", dated March 5, 1979. The inspector verified that the onsite computer program was working properly, and that the core thermal power calculated with the above procedure was in good agree-ment with that determined by the computer.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
12.
Core Power Distribution Limits The inspector reviewed the surveillance proce.are T.S.S. 15.6.0,
" Flux Map Data Acquisition, Power Distributics, and Incore/Excore Axial Imbalance Checks", dated April 14, 1980 and the results of full core maps taken at 99% power on June 3, 1981. The inspector determined that 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 acceptable cri-teria established by the licensee.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified?
13.
Determination of Reactivity Anomalies
,
!
The inspector reviewed information related to the determination of (
reactivity anomalies for Cycle 6 as described in surveillance procedure T.S.S. 15.6.29, " Reactivity Anomaly Check",, dated August 5, 1977 and concluded that the applicable Technical Specification was met.
The inspector noted that the licensee routinely performs a periodic l
surveillance on reactivity anomalies in addition to the point check required by Technical Specifications. The inspector recommended that
!
the licensee consolidate the two procedures to facilitate record control and provide more complete documentation.
The licensee acknow-l ledged the inspector's concern.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
!
!
-3-l l
.
.
..
- -.
... _
-. -
_ __. -
..
-
- -..
.
,.
.
14.
Exit Interview The inspector met with-licensee representatives (denoted in Par & graph 1)
at the conclusion of the inspection on June 26,-1981.
The inspector summarized the. purpose, the scope'of the inspection, and the findings.
l
'
.
l l
h l
l l
L l
I t
l-6-
,
i