ML042120318
| ML042120318 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 07/22/2004 |
| From: | Bauer S Arizona Public Service Co |
| To: | Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| 102-05128-SAB/TNW/JAP | |
| Download: ML042120318 (7) | |
Text
Scott A. Bauer Department Leader Regulatory Affairs Tel: 623/393-5978 Mail Station 7636 Palo Verde Nuclear Fax: 623/393-5442 P.O. Box 52034 Generating Station e-mail: sbauer~apsc.com Phoenix, AZ 85072-2034 102-05128-SAB/TNW/JAP July 22, 2004 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Mail Station P1-37 Washington, DC 20555-0001
Dear Sirs:
Subject:
Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS)
Unit 1 Docket No. STN 50-528 Unit 1, Cycle 12 Startup Report In accordance with Technical Requirements Manual requirement T5.0.600.2.a.(2),
Arizona Public Service Company (APS) is submitting this startup report for PVNGS Unit 1, Cycle 12.
Unit 1 Cycle 12 core consists of 96 fresh assemblies intermixed with 104 once-burned and 41 twice-burned irradiated assemblies. The fresh assemblies were designed utilizing a new three-enrichment assembly split. The utilization of a new three-enrichment assembly meets criteria (2) of TRM T5.0.600.2.a, requiring a startup report.
Using three different fresh assembly enrichments versus only using two enrichments enhances the PVNGS Unit 1 core design by providing both improved power peaking control and lower predicted crud deposition.
This startup report addresses the tests that were performed to demonstrate that the unit operating conditions affected by the addition the three different fresh assembly enrichments remain within design predictions and specifications.
No commitments are being made to the NRC by this letter.
If you have any questions, please contact Thomas N. Weber at (623) 393-5764.
Sincerely, SAB/TNW/JAP/kg Enclosure cc: B. S. Mallett NRC Region IV Regional Administrator M. B. Fields NRC NRR Project Manager N. L. Salgado NRC Senior Resident Inspector for PVNGS A member of the STARS (Strategic Teaming and Resource Sharing) Alliance Callaway
- Comanche Peak
- Diablo Canyon
- Palo Verde
- South Texas Project
- Wolf Creek
ENCLOSURE Unit 1, Cycle 12 Startup Report
I Enclosure - Unit 1, Cycle 12 Startup Physics Testing Summary Introduction The Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS) Unit 1 Cycle 12 core consists of 96 fresh assemblies (Improved Lattice) intermixed with 104 once and 41 twice-burned irradiated assemblies. The predicted cycle length is 489 EFPD. Reload Analyses shows that this core is typical of the most recent reload cores designed at PVNGS.
Cycle 12 initial criticality occurred at 1532 on May 8, 2004. Low Power Physics Testing (LPPT) began immediately following criticality. A slipped CEA forced a reactor trip, which caused a one-day delay in completion of LPPT. Additionally, the resumption of commercial operations occurred on May 10, 2004. Power Ascension Testing followed and was completed without issues and the unit reached full power on May 14, 2004.
LPPT consisted of:
All Rods Out (ARO), Hot Zero Power (HZP), Critical Boron Concentration Isothermal Temperature Coefficient (ITC) Measurement Control Element Assembly (CEA) Worth Measurement Inverse Boron Worth Measurement Power Ascension Testing, for model verification, consisted of:
Radial Power Distribution - 20% Rated Thermal Power (RTP)
Radial Power Distribution - 70% RTP Axial Power Distribution - 70% RTP Radial Power Distribution - 100% RTP Axial Power Distribution - 100% RTP Verification of the Cycle Independent Shape Annealing Matrix (CISAM)
Hot Full Power (HFP), ARO, Critical Boron Concentration.
Continuing Physics Testing includes the results of the 40 EFPD At-Power Moderator Temperature Coefficient test.
Test Acceptance Criteria The following acceptance criteria apply to each of the tests performed during LPPT and Power Ascension:
Critical Boron Concentration (HZP) + 50 ppm of predicted ITC Measurement LPPT + 3 pcmI 0 F of predicted At-power (40 EFPD) + 1.517 pcm/0 F of predicted I
Enclosure - Unit 1, Cycle 12 Startup Physics Testing Summary Test Acceptance Criteria (continued)
CEA Testing Reference Group + 10% of predicted Test Group(s) + 15% of predicted Total Worth + 10% of predicted Inverse Boron Worth (IBW) + 15 ppm/% AK/K of predicted Radial Power Distribution -20% RTP + 10% of predicted for locations with a Relative Power Density (RPD) > 1.0 Flux Symmetry - 20% RTP < 10% of symmetric group average for instrumented locations with an RPD > 1.0 and
+ 0.1 RPD units for locations with an RPD < 1.0.
Radial Power Distribution -70% RTP + 0.1 RPD and Root Mean Square (RMS) < 5%
Axial Power Distribution -70% RTP + 0.1 RPD and RMS < 5%
Peaking Factors -70% RTP + 10% of predicted Radial Power Distribution -100% RTP + 0.1 RPD and RMS < 5%
Axial Power Distribution - 100% RTP + 0.1 RPD and RMS < 5%
Peaking Factors -100% RTP + 10% of predicted CISAM Verification Axial Shape RMS Error < 7.5%
Core Average Axial Shape Index < 0.075 (ASI) Error (absolute value)
Axial Form AFM Error (absolute value) < 0.10 Critical Boron Concentration (HFP) + 50 ppm of predicted 2
Enclosure - Unit 1, Cycle 12 Startup Physics Testing Summary Low Power Physics Testing All Rods Out (ARO) Critical Boron Concentration (CBC)
This test is performed by obtaining a set of reactor coolant system (RCS) boron samples at equilibrium conditions near ARO (CEA Group 5 - 130" withdrawn) and adjusting this concentration for the Group 5 residual reactivity worth. The measured RCS concentration was 2031 ppm, which was adjusted for an ARO condition to 2037 ppm. The design HZP ARO CBC is 2024 ppm. The difference of 13 ppm is within the acceptance criteria.
Isothermal Temperature Coefficient (ITC)
Raising and lowering the RCS temperature and measuring the associated changes in core reactivity performs this test. The measured ITC with Group 5 at - 130" withdrawn was -1.575 pcm/F. The predicted ITC was -1.29 pcm/°F and was corrected to test conditions. The corrected ITC was -1.219 pcmn/F. The measured ITC met the acceptance criteria and satisfied the surveillance requirement of Technical Specification 3.1.4.1.
CEA Rod Worth Measurements Rod worth was measured using the Rod Swap method. The Reference Group (regulating groups (RGs) 3 + 4) was diluted into the core. The worth of the reference group was swapped with the worth of the test group. The results are summarized in the following Table:
CEA Group Measured Predicted % Difference Acceptance Worth (pcm) Worth (pcm) Criteria Reference Group (RG3 & RG4) -1021.0 -1071.2 4.91 < 10%
Test Groups:
RG2 & SD'B'#10 & #16 -1053.0 -961.9 -8.65 < 15%
SD'A'#2 & #3 -708.6 -753.4 6.32 < 15%
RG5 & SD 'B' #9 -936.3 -926.3 -1.06 < 15%
RG5 & RG1 -929.5 -907.3 -2.33 < 15%
RG5 & SD 'B' #7 -804.5 -812.2 0.95 < 15%
RG5 & SD 'A' #19 & #20 -883.9 -848.6 -4.00 < 15%
RG5 & SD 'B' #6 -808.8 -814.9 0.75 < 15%
Total CEA Worth -5452.9 -5432.9 -0.37 < 10%
All test results met the acceptance criteria.
Inverse Boron Worth (IBW)
The IBW was determined by obtaining the measured worth of the CEA Reference 3
Enclosure - Unit 1, Cycle 12 Startup Physics Testing Summary Group and the change in the CBC from the dilution of the Reference Group to the control element assembly (CEA) lower electrical limit (LEL). The measured IBW was 142.0 ppm/% AK/K. The predicted IBW was 136.7 ppm/% AK/K. The acceptance criteria were met.
Power Ascension Testing Flux Symmetry Verification - 20% RTP Obtaining a flux map, by processing a CECOR snapshot and comparing symmetrical Relative Power Densities (RPD) performs this test. All deviations from the average of the instrumented powers were well within 10% or 0.1 RPD units.
Radial Power Distribution and Flux Symmetry - 20% RTP A comparison of predicted and measured RPD's was made using data from ROCS and CECOR at - 20% RTP. The maximum difference for assemblies with an RPD greater than or equal to 1.0 was less than the acceptance criteria of 10%. Measured powers in symmetric, instrumented assemblies were within 10% of the symmetric group average for assemblies with RPD's greater than 1.0 and within 0.1 RPD units for assemblies with an RPD less than 1.0.
Radial and Axial Power Distributions and Peaking Factor Comparisons - 70% RTP A comparison of predicted and measured RPD's was made using data from ROCS and CECOR at - 70% RTP. Measured versus predicted RPD's were within the requirement of + 0.1 RPD and a root mean square (RMS) of s 5% for both the radial and axial comparisons. Additionally, CECOR and ROCS comparisons of the Peaking Factors were made. The acceptance criteria of + 10% were also met.
Radial and Axial Power Distributions and Peakinq Factor Comparisons - 100% RTP A comparison of predicted and measured RPD's was made using data from ROCS and CECOR at - 100% RTP. Measured versus predicted RPD's were within the requirement of + 0.1 RPD and an RMS of s 5% for both the Radial and Axial comparisons. Additionally, CECOR and ROCS comparisons of the Peaking Factors were made. The acceptance criteria of + 10% were also met.
Verification of the Cycle Independent Shape Annealing Matrix (CISAM)
Evaluation of the CEFAST output data was performed to validate the use of the CISAM in the plant Core Protection Calculator (CPC). The requirement that the axial shape index (ASI) RMS error be s 7.5% for each CPC channel was met. Additionally, the absolute values of the Core Average ASI Error and the Axial Form AFM Error were s 0.075 and s 0.10, respectively.
4
Enclosure - Unit 1, Cycle 12 Startup Physics Testing Summary Critical Boron Concentration (Hot Full Power)
The requirement for the measured versus predicted CBC at HFP is + 50 ppm. This acceptance criterion was met for the Power Ascension Testing, as the predicted HFP, equilibrium Xenon, CBC was 1474 ppm and the measured value was 1447 ppm.
Continuing Physics Testing 40 EFPD Moderator Temperature Coefficient (MTC) Test This test is performed by measuring the at-power Isothermal Temperature Coefficient to verify that the MTC is within allowed Technical Specification limits. The measured MTC was -11.10 pcm/PF. The predicted MTC was -11.17 pcm/0 F, after adjusting the prediction to test conditions. The difference of 0.07 pcm/PF is within the acceptance criterion.
5