ML052720413
| ML052720413 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 09/22/2005 |
| From: | Lobel R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Richard Ennis Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| Download: ML052720413 (29) | |
Text
I Rick Ennis - Fwd: VY feasibility study Page 1 From:
Richard Lobel To:
Rick Ennis Date:
9/22/05 2:14PM
Subject:
Fwd: VY feasibility study byC
?c TD ir-I Be Aht11 P06-tC-.
I -c\\t-e-mpTG-W0000O1.TM P Page 1 I c:\\temp\\GWIOOOOI.TMP Page 1 I Mail Envelope Properties (4332F46A.77C: 5: 49614)
Subject:
Fwd: VY feasibility study Creation Date:
9/22/05 2:14PM From:
Richard Lobel Created By:
RML()nrc.pov Recipients owf4_o.0WFNDO RXE (Rick Ennis)
Post Office Route owf4po.OWFNDO Files Size Date & Time Mail Options Expiration Date:
None Priority:
Standard Reply Requested:
No Return Notification:
None Concealed
Subject:
No Security:
Standard
I Rick Ennis - VY feasibility study -
__Page 1
From:
Ralph Caruso To:
Richard Lobel Date:
9/22/05 1:33PM
Subject:
VY feasibility study This is what Bill Sherman sent me.
O i
Vermonit Yankee Nuclear Power Station Extended Power Uprate Feasibility Study June 28, 2002 Prepared by:
Brian R. Hobbs Michael E. Jacobs Approval Project Manager Vermont Yankee DOCKET >O. 6812 NN1LLlA M K. SI] ERMAN, WITNESS EXHIBIT DPS-X'KS-10 114 PAGES Project Msanager ENTERGY Nuclear CONFIDENTJAL-ATTORNEY-C ]FUNYT PRIVILEGE/WORK PRODUCT
1' Vermont Yankee EPU Feasibility Study is!
Table of Contents Section Pagee LIST OFACROI'JYMS
- 1.
Executlivc Summary
- 2.
Rcsults
- 3.
Financial Analysis 3
4 7
10 1
26
- 4.
Implementation Strategy i REFERENCES APPENDI CES o Appendix A - Pincl Point latrix and Summaries o AppendixB -Required Plant lodirlcations,
o Appendix C -320% UpratePower/F ow Map o Appendix D - EPU Project Level I Schedule o Appendix E - Project Description and Less'onis Liarred I
., I i
0o t
l.
Revision 0 Page 2 6/28102 CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNIEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGEAVORK PRODUCT
Vermont Ylinkee EPU Feasibility Study
- 1STOFACRONYM1S ACRS - Advisor) Committee on Reactor Safeguards AEC-Atomic Energy Commission ARTS-APRM, RBAI Technical Specifications AST-Alternate Source Term 13OP - Balance of Plant C~frG - Ccrtificatc of Public Good DIR - Design Input Request ELLLA - Extended Load Line Limit Analysis EPU -Extended Power Uprate GNTF - Global Nuclear Fuels GSU - Generator Step-Up Transformer IIVjC - Hydrogen Wlater Chemistry I CF - Increased Core Flow MIELLLA - Maximum Extended Load Line Limit Analysis M IELLLA. - Maximum Extended Load LineLImit Analysis Plus
?hIPR -M]PR Associates (Engineering Consultant)
NTS] - Net Positive Suction Head NSSS - Nuclear Steam Supply System WUIT - Original Licensed Thermal Power PCT - Pcak Clad Temperature PEPSE - Performance Evaluation orPower System Efficiencies RA4I-NRC Rcquest for Additional Information RIMR - Residual Heat Removal IUPD - Reactor Internal Pressure DilTerentilal S&W - Slone & Wcbster SER - NlRC Safety Evaluation Report SSCA - Systems, Structures, Components and Analyses T/G - Turbine Generator TSD - Task Scoping Document UFSAR - Updated Final Safety Analysis Report NYINWO - Vlalves Wide Open Revision 0 Page 3 6/28102 CONFIDENTIAL - AlTORNEY-CIE-NT PRIVILEGE/WORK PRODUCT
Verrnont Yankee EPU Feasibility Study
- 1. J7xeculive Summar.
This report presents the results of the Vermont Yankee (VY) Extended Power Uprate Feasibility Study commissioned by Executiv'e Management in December 2001. The feasibility study evaluated the potential to uprate the station's output up to 120% of original licensed thermal power (OLTP), referred to as an Extended Power Uprate (EPU).
This evaluation looked at the technical, regulatory, environmental, scheduling, and financial requirements to achieve an uprate. These reviews have determined that an uprate to 120% OLTP is achievable. Financial analysis indicates that nuclear power plant uprate is financially advantageous when compared with increasing generation with other fuel options (e.g. fossil).
The total installed project cost oft his expected to deliver approximately I00MNNte net additional generation in two stcps uring 2004 and 2005.
Uprating VYNPS provides not only the financial benefit of increased generation capacity at an attractive price but also supports the long term reliable operation.of the facility through its current license and any extended operating period. Component modifications required for the uprate will include considerations for long term operation of the station.
The EPU Project is the most significant project this station and the staff have undertaken since original construction and startup. EPU.will impact all departments and several operating cycles and refueling outages. The net benefit will be increased generation and improved future econonic viability of the station.
Kev Results The approach to achieving a higher powter level is to increase current rated steam flow and feedwater flow, and not increase maximum reactor recirculation flow orriactb?
vessel operating pressure.
This is referred to as a Constant Pressure Power Uprate (CPPU), and pressure-dependent setpoints are not changed.
Two revisions the' operating Power to Flow Map will be required to provide flow windows at uprated power levels. Conversion from GEI3 to GE14 fuel is required (and is already underway) to support the higher power densities required for an EPU.
Twenty-seven pinch points (required capability greater than installed capability) have been identified and require resolution to achieve 120% uprated output. Modifications to equipment or analyses have been formulated to resolve each pinch point. (A complete description of all modifications is provided in Appendix B of this report).
Major equipment modifications include the following:
o Replacement of the Heigh Pressure Turbine and internal modifications to the Low Pressure Turbines o Replacement of all 4 lligh Pressure Feedwaterileaters o Performance improvements to the Cooling Towers Revision 0 Page 4 6128102 COIN'FIDENTIAL - ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVniEGE/VORK PRODUCT I
r I.
Vermont Yankee EPUJ Feasibilitv St udy o Employing the MlErLLLA and ELLLA+ power to flow operating domain (A description of the MELUA and MELLLA+ operating domain is provided in Appendix C).
O Main Generator Rcwind Changes in the operational approach to the station are also required. Changes identified during (he study include the following:
o Potential for lMI climitcd operations during certain periods of the yar.
o Operation of all three Feedwatei pumps during normal operations.
o Automatic Recirc Pump Runback following trip of a Feedwater/Condensate Pump o Operation in the MELULA and MNELLIA+ power to flow operating domains o Potential increased operation of the Cooling ToWers Thesc changes in operation are considered a standard part of uprates at many stations based on plant specific conditions. They do not represent a risk to the reliable operation of the station.
In addition to the equipment modifications and operating strategy changes identified above, several issues must be resolved to support the uprate to 120% OLTP including the following:
o Circulating Water Cooling Capacity The options available for increased cooling capacity include: additional cooling tower capacity at an estimated cost oJt._'
(included in project cost) or revisions to the NPDES pennir based upon successful 316 demonstrations. An' evaluation must be perfonned to deternnine the optimum resolution with minimal environmenral impact.
o MELLLA+
Operation in the AIELLLA+ operating domain is desirable to achieve flexible flow uiIndows. T7he technology is not licensed at this time and is on hol d pending resolution of currenr Thennal-H-draulic Stability issues. Licensing delays would
- result in delays in achieving economic operation above -115% OLTP.
o Entry into restricted region of the power to flow map. upon.Recirc Pump RunbackfTrip Based on VY-specific analysis, a Recirc Purmp trip or runback may result in entry into the restricted region of the power toJ7fos' map. This may necessitate changes to plant operating procedures.
Rcvision 0 Page S 6/28/02 CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEY.CLIENT PRIVILE-GE\\VORK PRODUCT
Vermont Yankee EPU Fuasibility Study O Fuel performance/Plant Chcmistry VY requires the use of GE)4 fuel to obtain full EPU conditions. The current indusnry issues related to General Electric (GE)fuel must be resolved to allow GEI4 equilibrium core design.
o Site Boundary dose impacts of EPU and Hydrogen Jnjection Thefinal sum effec: of EPU, Hydrogen Injection, and dry cask storage on site boundera dose limits must be evaluated Power ascension testing for EPU and long renn Hydrogen Injection will provide data to determine if additional shielding is required on the Turbine deck to reduce operating dose contribution.
Each of these open issues will be resolved during the EPU Project. Where deemed appropriate and based on quantification of the risk, conservative modification costs have been included in the project cost estimates.
This study has identified synergies with other plant initiatives. In some cases existing plans will be slightly modified to accommodate increased capability requirements for EPU. In other cases EPU wAill provide input data for the affected projects. This approach has identified overall cost reductions to the project of up l Examplesa include:
o Fuel Storage o License Renewal o Planned Station Modifications:
! GSU Replacement - RF023
- Generator Rewind - R. 024
- LPTurbine Overhaul-RF025 This feasibility study was performed using an integrated team approach consisting-of-NSSS supplier (GE), BOP contractor (S&W), turbine generator supplier (GE), technical consultants with specific BWR EPU experience, and the station staff. The team was led by two dedicated team members; the 'Project Manager has o'ei 18 years ofVY engineering and plant experience and the Project Engineer has almost 20 years of nuclear experience including licensing, design basis, and as a GE startup engineer at several stations.
The review employed lessons learned from the feasibility studies and actual uprates at other stations to identify focus areas. The use of a separate BOP contractor to evdluate these SSCA's is considered a strength, based on the wvea1;nesses identified in previous studies benchmarked.
W\\'here initial evaluations identified pinch points, more rigorous quantitative reviews were performed. Benchmarking of other stations' feasibility studies reveals that the VY modification list is more comprehensive and the level of SSCA review more thorough than others previously performed. This has resulted in a more Revision 0 Page 6 6/28/02 CONTFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEY-CUIENT PRJVJLEGEIWORK PRODUCT
Vermont YnnLwe EPU Feasibility Sludy W
accurately defined project in terms of scope and cost. Refer to Appendix E for more details on the approach to the feasibility study and lessons learned for the Feasibility Study and the EPU Project itself.
- 2. Result NSSS The results of GE's NSSS and corc/fuel feasibility study evaluation are contained in the GE report (Reference 7), in which pinch points were identified. GE concluded that there
- were no insurmountable NSSS pinch points.
Specific NSSS areas of interest are listed below:
o VY has a BIVR-4 moisture separator design and a BWAR-3 steam dryer design, which differs from a BNVR4 design in that it does not have perforated plates in the inlet and outlet plenums lo knock down water droplets. Other B\\VNR-3's implementing EPU's have had to modify their dryers by installing a perforated plate. GE concluded that the projected increase in moisture carryover should not require a modification at VY due to the high VY stean separator moisture removal capability. GE has recently,"
issued SIL 644 "BINWRI3 Steam Dryer Failure" which will require further consider.tion during the EPU.
o Core shroud repair structural integrity at EPU conditions -will be evaluated by MPR.
The work scope involves reanalysis of the structural contribution of three 'of the :;
shroud welds currently not credited in the'strcss analysis. VY Engineering has high confidence that crediting the shroud welds will result in sufficient recapture of stress margin and preclude the need to make shroud repair tension adjustments.
o Thc uprated GE-14 equilibrium core fuel cycle analysis concluded that the full 120%
uprate could be achieved in one step, although two steps would result in a lower fuel replacement batch fraction and potentially betier fuel management economy.
Shutdown margins for hot excess reactivity, cold shutdown and Standby Liquid Control Syslem are projected to be adequate at the uprated condition.
Thermal margins for 'the limniling thermal limits are projecied to be met at the uprated condition.
Turbine/ Generator GE Energy Services (GEES) evaluated the major Turbine/ Generator components and support systems (Reference 7). An updated heat balance vas created at 120% Steam flow and for the Valves Wide Open (VWO) condition at -125% Steam Flow. This'heat balance also formed the basis of the PEPSE heat balance model created by the project for use in BOP System evaluations. The list that follows highlights the results of the GEES Evaluation which is contained in the GE Feasibility Study Report.
a High Pressure Turbine - The OIP Turbine is presently at its flow passing capability limit.
Internal modifications (diaphragm machining) can increase capacity up to Revision 0 Page 7 6/28/02 CONMIDENrTIAL - ATTORNIEY-CLIENT PRIVnLEGEI\\W'ORK PRODUCT
Vernmont Yanklee EPU Feasibility Sludy 105%. Above 105% replacement of the rotor and diaphragms is required.
o Low Pressure Turbine - The 8 stage diaphragm weld stresses are exceeded above 105%. Although these diaphragms require replacement, the GEES analysis provided an allowance for operation at 120% with the existing diaphragms for up to 36 months.
o Generator - The main generator reaches its nameplate limit at 104%. As part of the planned generator rcwind, upraled staior bars will be employed find will increase the generator rating to 684 MVA @ 0.959 power factor. This rating 'ields 656 MNYc and 193 MVAR.
o The cross around relief valves, hydrogen coolers, and turbine controls also require modification for any uprale.
Balance ofPlant Stone &k Webster cvaluated key BOP systems potentially affected by EPU (Reference 8).
Highlights of their results arc described below:
o Feedwater/Condensate System - Based on the VY configuration, operation of all three Feedwater pumps will be required at greater thani 05% and a modification to initiate a Recirc Pump Runback, on a Feedwtater or Condensate Pump trip, will be required above I 15%.
o ZIP Feedwater HcatersfMoisture Separators -
These components are presently marginal at 120% uprate and are therefore included in scope as pinch points to the..
uprate.
S&W is performing evaluations in Phase ]B of the feasibility stiudy (Reference 9) to better identify and quantify the pinch points and options for pinch point resolution. These reviews have identified the needs for modifications to the 4 lIP Feedwater heaters and the moisture separators for the turbine.
o Circulating Water Capacity - The increased heat load from the condensing steam must be transferred to the Circulating Water System to maintain Condenser Vacuu'M.'
In turn this heat is rejected to the river (open cycle) -or via the Cooling Towers to the.*
air (closed cycle). Above 105%, revisions to the stations' NPDES permit or increased heat removal capability (and increased operation) of the Cooling Towers will be required. The present plan includes upgrades to the Cooling towers to increase'heat removal capability and the potential for operation of the Cooling Towers for more of the operating cycle.
o Alternate Cooling Systeml Deep Basin 7-Day lneicntory - Extrapolation of the decay heat rates for a 120% uprate indicates a shortfall in existing basin inventory and requires reanalysis and potential modification.
Analyses GE, S&W and VY assessed various Iey analyses to determine the feasibility of upgrading these analyses to 120% EPU operating conditions while maintaining current assumptions.
and methodologies. The following are summaries of analyses that may require additional modifications:
o The current VY large break LOCA analysis results indicate a margin of approximately 3° F to the torus bulk water temperature limit of 1850 F. This limit is specified in order to assure adequate NTSH. for REIR and Core Spray pump operation. VY's Revision 0 Page 8 6128/02 CO\\NFIDENTIAL-AlTORNY-ClJENT PRiV ln.rPrtA\\XCOR1( PR(n1 ClTr__
Vermont Yankee EPU Feasibility Study current analysis does not credit containment overpressure in calculating available NPSH. GE's feasibility assessment concluded that the upraled LOCA analysis will cxceed the torus water temperature limit. GE states that if VY takes credit for containment overpressure, adequate NPSH margin should be available.
O GE concluded that Thermal-Hydraulic Stability Option 1-D should'be adequate for.
VY at uprated conditions for both ARTS/MELLA and MELLLA+. Further analysis will be performed during the EPU project to validate Option 1-D applicability.
According to GE, VY-specific validation of Option ID for EPU/?hIElLA using ODYSY code is likely to be acccplable. If not acceptable, Enhanced Option 1-D should serve as an adequate solution.
VY-specific stability solution for
- PU/AI4ELiLLA+ is dcpendent on the outcome of the current Part 21 DIVOM issue resolution. which is being addressed through ongoing BWR Owners Group efforts.
VY is actively participating in this Owners Group.
-oExtrapolating the current Appendix R analyscs to uprated condition using the existing assumptions mayresult in exceeding thc PCT and torus water temperature limits. The PCT limit was met with margin at 115% uprate conditions (Reference 1).. VY believes that the PCT analysis assumptions contain margins of conservatism greater'.
than required and that reducing excess conservatism wvill result in remaining within the limit at 120% uprate conditions. The torus heat up analysis was adjusied to reflect a 120% uprale decay heat term, which resulted in an additional bulk torus water temperature rise of approximately IO' F above the current analysis. Sensitivity was tested for key variables lo determine impact on results (Reference 2). VY believes that the torus w ater temperature analysis assumptions contain margins of conservatism greater than required and that reducing excess conservatism will result...
in remaining within the torus temperature limit at 120% uprale conditions.
o The VY post accident control room habitability radiological analysis was identifihd b'y':
GE as a pinch point. The basis for this conclusion is GE's review of the cuiiieit' analysis assumptions, eitrapolation of results to 120% uprated conditions 'aind -';
comparison to current regulatory guidelines.
According to GE, control room exposure limits are not met as a result. VY has an approved licensing basis for, control room habitability. If application of the current VY analysis assumptions for control' room habitability with an uprated core fission product inventory results' in' exceeding exposure limits, reduction of conservatism by application of an Alternate Source Term (AS), in accordance w~ith Regulatory Guide 1.183, may be required; A' study previously performed for VY concluded that AST application would result in meeting control room operator exposure limits at EPU conditions.
O The current VY accident radiological analysis demonstrates conformance with 10 cmR 100 limits.
The methods and assumptions contained in this analysis were' approved by the AEC when VY was originally licenscd. Benchmarking with Dresden-and Quad Cities stations has revealed that these plants, with similar vintage' of P
accident radiological analysis wcre able to obtain N'RC EPU approval using existing assumptions and methodologies and changing only the upraled core fission product inventory.
Revision 0 Page 9 6/28/02 CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILE-GE/VORK PRODUCT
Verniont Yankee EPU Feasibility Study o 2001 site boundary direct shine dose is estimated to be 14.46 mnR (Reference 3).
Assuming that hydrogen injection contributes an additional 25% operating plant direct shine when it is implemented, the total with Mf\\ C Would be 17.7mR. Adding an administralivC buffer of I mR results in total direct shine with HVC of 18.7 mR.
That caves a margin of 1.3 mR for power uprate contribution lo site boundary dose.
Evidence fr6m other BI3R's that have implemented EPU's indicates that the increase in turbine building radiation levels at powcr levels up to 120% OLTP is not proportional to the power level increase. Rather, building radiation levels increased less than fire percent. This would indicate that a 1.3 mR VY margin, which equates to approximately 9% incrcase from current direct shine, should be sufficient to suppoit EPU.
- 3. FinancialAnal-sist Based on the evaluations performed and described in this report, pinch points wcre identified. Any system, structure, component, or analysis whose required capability exceeds its existing capability at less than ]20%.Uprale is deemed a pinch point. The pinch point powver level is the maximum power level above 100% OLTP that can be achieved before modification is required. The VY Feasibility Study has identified 27 pinch points. For each of the pinch points the cost to modify/replace the SSC or analysis to remove the constraint to 120% Uprate was identified.
A Pinch Point Matrix.
(Appendix A) has bctn created which includes a summary of each pinch point and its 0
solution options. (Also included in Appendix A are three conlingencypinch points).
Pinch point Costs For each pinch point the study cvaluated and selected a resolution option. For cases Where multiple options exist, the team selected an option based on team and station input and synergies with existing station plans. For the selected option pfice estimates were developed, including engineering, materials, and labor. There are several projects that the station is already planning to implement (generator rewind, Hydrogen cooler replacement) where EPU modification of the existing project scope alleviates the pinch point. In these cases only the incremental project cost lo incorporate EPU considerations is included in the Feasibility Study Financial Analysis. :
_;t~ince the EPU will be dependent on these modifications, they are considered to fall under the EPU Project Scope.
Project Contingency The overall Project Financial estimate and Project Budget contain contingency for scope growilh (new items) and expansion of identified scopes. For wvell-defined base projects where a fixed scope and price exist, a 5% contingency is applied. For all other project elements a I5% contingency is applied.
Project Cost This information was used to determine the cost to achieve each incremental 1% increase in station output. The resulting stair-step curve and matrix (included in Appendix B)
Revision 0 Page J0 6/28/02 CONFIDENTIAL - A7TORNEY-CLIEN7T PRMIIEGE/VOR K PR ODUCT
Vermont Yanmee EPU Feasibility Study W
(PUSAR). These two documents will be based on NTRC approved generic licensing topical reports.
Other tasks, Such as revising system design spccific3tions or BOP equipment analyses and modifications, are performed by the VY EPU Team or selected contractors. -In addition, many other uprate activities must be performed such as: update all Configuration Management documents, procedure and program changes, process computer changes, and simulator modifications. Each of the calculations, modifications, and analyses will be done in accordance with approved station procedures or an approved QAfEngineering Assurance Program.
- 3. Regulatory Review & Approval Regulatory approval from the NIRC is required in order to amend the VY facility operating license to operate at 120% OLTP (I912 MNYh). State of Vermont regulatory approvals will also be required for EPU.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatorv Commission The regulatory review and licensing approval process for the VY EPU will be similar to that of other recent BNNVR extended power uprates. GE has developed an extended power uprate methodology that specifies maintaining-current reactor operating pressure. VY's W
plant-specific engineering evaluation will be performed in accordance with this new guidance, contained in GE licensing topical report (Reference 4). This topical was.*
approved by the NJRC in June 2002. TVA's Browns Ferry expects to submit an EPU request developed in accordance with the CPPU topical report in summer of 2002.
The NRC has indicated that review and approval of an extended power uprate submiittal will take approximately 12 months, with ACRS presentations in the o0th and 11 months (Referencc 5).
The NTRC has indicated that licensees should anticipate that review of the EPU request by the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) will be required. The ACRS has previously informed the NIRC staff that they want to be involved with any uprate beyond 5%.
The VY EPU strategy calls for implementing ARTS/MXELLLA prior to EPU Step I implementation. This will enable expansion of the power/flow operating domain and provide sufficient core flow range margin up to approximately a 115% uprate. A separate license amendment request to incorporate ARTS/MBELLLA will be submitted prior to the EPU submittal. GE-has stated that submittal development wvill take six months and NRC approval will take an additional six months.
GE submitted a generic MIiLLA+ Licensing Topical Report (M+LTR) to the NTRC in W
January 2002, with approval expected I" quarter of 2003. ME1I.LA+ is planned to be implemented at VY as part of EPU implementation Step 2. GE has stated that Revision 0 Page 12 6/28/02 CONFIDENTIAL - A7TORNEY-C IENT PRIVILEGE/WORK PRODUCT
Verniont iankee EPU Feasibilitv StudY identify all project costs including VY, GE, contractor, and NRC for engineering, analysis, licensing and modification to achieve the targeted power uprate. These costs are presentcd in I % increments of uprate to allow determination of project costs for alternate uprate options.
Thc major cost elements of this project (assuming full 120% uprate) arc as follows:
o GE EPU Project B3ase Cost (with incentives included) o Project AE Supponi o Project Team Costs o NRC Licensc Fcc o Other Fces o Equipment/Analysis Modifications o ContingencV o Project Total - Base Case At 120% OLTP uprate the project will deliver 100 MlVe at a cost of, (with Contingency). Thercforc, the Installed cost of this project It Sensitivity cases have also becn prepared evaluating 'best case' and 'worst case' conditions. These show possible worst case cost o0
- nd a best case cost of Based on the selected two step uprate (50 14 in 2004 and 50 M~cV addilional in 2005) and the idenlified project co iy cash flow s'chedules were prepared and financial analyses were performed to deterT-iw-~
e economic feasibility of the uprate.
Note: Project Costs are based on Feasibility Study Estimates at the time the financial analysis was completed.
Any changes since that time will be reflected in the actual project budget and tracking thereof.
- 4. lmplementation Stratelv
- 1. Feasibility-Complete
- 2. Engineering dndAnalysis The second phase involves detailed engineering analyses of reactor, NSSS, and selected BOP Systems, Structures, and Components.
Design of required plant modifications based on revised s)stem design specifications and the results of the feasibility studies, licensing analysis, generation of a submittal for an operating license change to the NRC, and applications for other required permits are also performed.
The GE Nuclear Encrgey effort will be to support a plant license to operate at uprated power and will be limited primarily to safety-related issues. The output of that effort will be approximalely 100 Task Reports and the Power Uprale Safety Analysis Report Revision 0 Pa 11 6/28/02 CONFTDENTIAL - ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGEIWORK PRODUCT
Vermont Ymanlee E3PU Feasibility Study
/ IELLLA+ submittal development will take 18 months and NRC approval will take an additional 18 months (Reference 6). VY plans to submit a separate M 1ELLLA+ license amendment rcqucst after submittal of the EPU request.
State of Vermont Vermont has issued a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit to VY in accordance with the Vermont Water Pollution Control Act. The permit addresses discharge limitations and includes Summerand Winter restrictions on Connecticut River temperature increases resulting from circulating water discharge. The.
existing permit.resIrictions are expected to limit the potential for power uprate; potentially requiring operation of the cooling towers in the Winter and reduced thermal efficiency or derating of the plant to less than 120% power operation in the Summer.
TFhe State of Vermont requires issuance of a Certificate of Public Good (COPG) for electrical generating facilities in Vermont that propose to significantly change their facility. Since EPU will significantly change VY's generating output, it appears that a COPG will be needed. As such, VY intends to petition the State of Vermont Public Service Board to issue a COPG to uprate the plant.
- 4. Operational Implementation The final phase is the operational implementation phase, where the plant is modified to support the uprate and the plant's power output is actually increased.
This effort implements the-design change packages required to perform the hardware and.
documentation changes identified and specified in the detailed system reviews and licensing analysis. In addition, Power Ascension Testing is performed as a special test..
both on startup to 100% OLTP following outage modifications and during actual ascension from 100% OLTP to higher power levels following receipt of the amended.-
license.
A specific plan will be developed for this phase of the project including milestone schedules, roles and responsibilities, and an overall implementation/iest plan.
Project Plan The analysis and licensing work can begin immediately, following approval of ihe project, since both are necessary to support any uprated power level and there is uncertainty in the schedule for the licensing effort.
Hardware modifications can be developed to support the extended power uprate implementation schedule in parallel with.
the license submittal review by the NRC.
Plant modifications can be performed in parallel with NIRC license review and approval.
Since reactor pressure remains constant, there will be minimal impact on safety-related instrument setpoints.
WVith required BOP modifications completed, it is possible to W
complete implementation of power uprate on-line following NRC license approval, as Revision 0 Page 13 6/28/02 CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEY-ClIENT PRIVILEGE/WORK PRODUCT
Vermont 'Yanike EPU Fcasibility Study presently scheduled, with only minimal selpoint changes (Main Steam Line Radiation Monitors, M.NS Line Flowv) and entry into the Power Ascension Test program.
Four implemenltation scenarios were developed to support an economic analysis and assessment of outage schedule impact.
o Scenario1 - Achieves a 5% power uprate in Step 1 (August 2004) and the full 20% uprate in Step 2 (RFO 25).
o SccnnanoO2 - Achieves a-I0% power uprate in Step 1 (August 2004) and the full.
20% uprate in Step 2 (RFO 25). Base Case.
a Scenario 3 - Achieves a 15% power uprate in Step i (August 2004) and the full 20% uprate in Step 2 (RFO 25).
o Scenario 4 - Achieves the full 20% uprate in Step 1 (August 2004).
NTRC issuance of the required license amendment is assumed in August 2004 and is not' expected to provide a constraint to the scheduling approach for uprating the plant.
However, the significant project management, engineering product development, core management, and outage resources required to support Extended Power Uprate must be' factored into the implementation plan. Based on a review of these VY specific aspects, the following implementation strategy was formulated:
A target uprate power of 120% OLTP (100 hVe) should be established.
- Open issues should be' addressed during the EPU Engineering and Analysis phase with milestone delivery dates that insure resolution before non-reversible decisions,
are required.
- A 10% power uprate (Step 1), with licensing and analysis to 120% OLTP, completed in Fall 2004 following receipt of the amended license (based on August 2002 start).
The expected SSCA Modifications for Step I are listed in Appendix B.
- Plant modifications required to achieve the full power uprate (120% of OLTP - Step
- 2) implemented in the cycle/outage following the ]0% power uprate.
- On-line modification activities should be used to'iminimize outage scope impact.
Although completion of some modifications to support the uprate will require a station outage, 'work can be completed on-line for the following requiied modifications:
a) Cooling Tower upgrade b) Condernin Bypass Filter for N-Capability c) SLC concentration change d) RJIRSW Motor Cooling retum line reroute e) ARTSIMELLLA Revision 0 Page 14 6/28/02 CONFIDEN9IAL-ATrORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE/\\WORK PRODUCT.
0 Vermont Yanksee EPU Feasibilit' Study
- 1) H ALL+
The schedule associated with this strategy is provided in Appendix D.
There are numerous advantages to this approach which are as follows:
- 1. SSCA review based on a 120% power level will comprehensively identify design issues that may require resolution.
- 2. Power limitations due to BOP equipment limitations can be resolved as economic conditions warrant without requiring additional licensing actions.
- 3. Design reviews and licensing actions in support of power uprate would be completed prior to development of plant license rencwal requests or conversion to 24 month operating cycles.
- 4. Refueling work activities can be scheduled for completion within a 30 day refueling outage window.
Revision 0 Page ]
6/28/02 CONJDENTIAL - ATrORN"EY-ClIlENT PRJVILEGE/WORK PRODUCT
Vermont Yanhee EPU Feasibility Study RErERENCES
- 1. VYC-2200, Rcv. 0, Appendix R Analysis Using GE-14 Fuel Bundles, December 13,2001.
- 2. NFVY 02-008, Power Uprate -
Suppression Pool Temperature Sensitivity Studies, Duke Engineering & Services, April 1, 2002.
- 3. VYC-2194, Rev. 0, Vermont Yankee Site Boundaiy Direct Dose Determination Methodology, May 14, 2002.
- 4. NEC-33004P, "Constant Pressure Power Uprate", Revision 1, Class m, July 2001.
5S NRC Power Uprate Program WVorkshop, March 19, 2002, Handouts.
- 6. GE Proposal No. 208-IUXSXA-BB, Rev. i, Dated May 21, 2001.
7.. GE Extended Power Upraie/MELLLA+ Fcasibility Study Report (NEDC-33070p), June 2002.
- 8. Stone & Webster Feasibility Study for Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Balance of Plant Extended Power Upratie June 27, 2002.
- 9. Stone & Webster Feedwater Heater & Moisture Separator Evaluations
'- Phase IB Balance of Plant Extended Power Uprate, Vcrmont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, (Later).
Revision 0 Page 16 6/28/02 CONFIDENrlIAL - ATTORINTEY-CLIENT PRJVILEGEIWVORK PRODUCT
'Y FEASJT3BlTY' STID PINCH POINT MATRIX Appendix A Pinch Point Matrix and Summanies i
6
-t0 Ml drPe d cdo--
4.1 I
- .7 0
A-I CONJIDENTLAL - ATTORNEBY-CLIENT PRIVILE-GE/WORK DOCUMENT
Appendix B Required Plant Modifications B-I CONFIDENTIAL -
ITrORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILGE/WORK PRODUCIT
- 0 Mod ifications Required for any EPU Power Level 0 Flow Induced Vibration Testing TM to fmonitor Main Steam, Feedwaterand other key plant piping during Power Ascension Testing and initial EPU operations.
Core Shroud Analysis Due to changes in RIPD for EPU the Core Shroud stress analysis must be revised by MPR.
a Various GE Analyses (Vessel Internals, Piping, ECCS Systems) o SLC Concentration May change concentration requirements for hot excess reactivity and cold shutdown margin.
1 Radiation Analyses (Post Accident and Normal Operating)
Revisions required due higher operational doses and increased core inventory.
o Power to Flow Map - ARTS/MELLLA (CPPU Requirement), including Thermal Hydraulic Stability Revision to the Operating Domain Power to Flow Map to increase the flow window at uprated power levels.
Modifications required to achieve 10% Uprate (Step 1) a Isophase Bus Duct Cooling Capacity Modification is required to inc'rease c6oling capacity for the isophase bus duct and the generator disconnect switch to allow uprated current to be carried.:
o Generator Hydrogen Coolers Generator Hydrogen Coolers are at their maximum heat removal capacity and require replacement to address increased heat load for uprated'conditions.
a Condenser Tube Staking Increased steam flow in the condenser will affect tube vibration. Existing staking is inadequate for uprate conditions.
o Condensate Demrineralizer Capacity At 120% uprate all fiecondemins will be required to be in service to accommodate flow increase. To regain ability to remove a condemin from service for cleaning at full power will require opening the bypass valve. To maintain water purity, a filter will be installed in this line.-
o Generator Rewind Ile generator will be rewound under an O&M activity. For uprate, improved stator bars will be installed.
o High Pressure Turbine Replacement The low-passing capability of the HP turbine is limiting at any uprate. Up to 105% internal grinding could be used to improve this. At any power level greater than 105%, HP Turbine Rotor and casing replacement is required.
B-2 CONFIDENTIAL-ATrORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE/WORK PRODUCT
a Circulating Water Cooling Capacity (Cooling Towers/NPDES)
The existing NPDES permit will not support the additional 20% heat reject to the river. Therefore, increased Cooling Tower capacityis planned through fill modifications.
cl #1 High Pressure Feedwater Heaters (Pending S&W Phase 1B)
The #I Feedwater Heaters require replacement to resolve extraction steam pressure issues.
a Low Pressure Turbine.81h Stage Diaphragms The weld stresses'in the B!h stage diaphragms exceed design. The welds must be strengthened or the diaphragms replaced.
o Moisture'Separator Internals Mechanical wear inside the Moisture Separators.will require internal modifications to be performed.
o Vessel Overpressure Relief Capacity (ATWS)
Increased reactor pressure vessel relief capacity is required under ATWS conditions. The addition of another unpiped Spring Safety Valve will address this issue.
- Torus Temperature/RHRSW Flow The peak torus temperature profile under LOCA and Appendix R scenarios requires reanalysis, including the potential use of Containment overpressure credit to address ECCS Pump NPSH issues.
a Various NSSS Pipinig Supports (Torus Attached Piping) o Various BOP Piping Supports o Various I&C Upgrades based on operating point changes o Various EQ Uogrades (Radiation/ Temperature Life)
Modifications required to achieve 20% Uprate (Step 2) o #2 High Pressure Feedwater Heaters (Pending S&W Phase 1B)
The #2 Feedwater Heaters require replacement to resolve extraction steam pressure issues; a MELLLA+
Revision to the Operating Domain Power to Flow Map to increase the flow window at uprated power levels..
a Alternate Cooling System (Deep Basin Inventory)
Reroute of RHRSW Motor Cooler line to recapture inventory and reperform analyses.
a Recirc Pump Runback (Feedwater/Condensate Pump Trip)
Reduce power following pump trip to stay within capability of remaining pumps.
a Various Additional BOP and NSSS Piping Supports (Torus Attached Piping) a Various Additidnil I&C Upgrades based o'n bperating point changes o Various Additional EQ Upgrades (Radiation/Temperature Life)
B-3 CONFIDENTIAL -AITORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE/WORK PRODUCT
Power Uprate Cost vs Percent Power Uprate Present Estimate i
ii iiI IiIII.
i I -
t I
B-4; CONFENTIAL - ATrORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE/WORK PRODUCr
- Cost per KWe of Additional Output Present Estimates wI Contingency B CONFIDENTIAL-ATORNEY-CLIENT PRIVEGEIWORK PRODUCT S
S 9
% PmmwrrUprato
- in%
OTherrral Power 6octrical Power Addtional Fuel Costs 100.0-A rProlect costs I
E EPU Analsis 100.0'Y' NPIC R e.
Cost 100.0 SWEC EPU Analysis 100.01/_
VY Management & Engineering 100.0_
Legal Fees
'100.0 Equipment Upgrades FIV Tsting..
ore ShroudAnalysis 100.1I*
I GE Analyses (Core Plate. PPV Int. MS iping, RC Pros Pidng. Torus Tenp. MS' iping 831. BOP Piping, EC-S NPSH 100100Y sophase Btis Duct Coollng
.101.07 TumbinnoConlrolis 101.
Ge'eiator Hydrogen Coolers
-101.0 14
- Condenser Tube Stakina 1.
Condensate DOeminerafters (N-t:.
_. L
...t02.05' SLC Concentration lncresse
.. 102.0%
Genetor R~
/ U~
e
- .104.0%
Rad Analyses (Aclddnt Part 100) -'
1D.52 HP Turbine eadeemrnert Cootbig TowerJPDES (Orc Water r..
. Mp0W)
' - ': i -
05.0, FWHealers(HP)ISlt Sta 105.
B-6 CONIDETIA
~rRNEY-CLIENT PRrVILEGE/WORK PRODUCT
.OFDETA
~
XPower Urale 0Inchpoint %I rhermal Power lectrlial Power Additional Fuel Costs 100.0 Prolect Costs.
E EPU Analfsis 100.0°,
NRC ReAew Cost 100.E0?4 SWEC EPU Analysis 1
100.07 1 VY Management & Engineering 100.0V Leqal Fees 100 Equlpment Upgrades FIV Testing o
100%1Y Core Shroud Analysis 100 1b6 GE Analyses (Co;r' Plat&; RPV tnt. MS ioing. RC Pres PInring Torus TernD MS tp 3t 80PoPpi ECCSNPSH
- .Oo.i' Isopgaias Bus Duct Cooding Io
.0¶.0¶ Turbine Controls *'-s 0,*
GeneratorHydrogen Coolers 101.0w Condenser Tube Staing 102.0, 3 Condensate Dernineralizers (N-1) 12 SLC Concertratdn Increasn =
102 Generator RewindUprate.'
1'04 Rad Analyses (Acciden Part 00)1045 HP Turbine Replacement Coig Towera/lipDES (ClrC; Wator".-_
Lepitv)M I
1,05.0%
FW Heaters (HtP) 1st Stage
-* -~ '--4
- 05.074 B-7 CONFIDENTIAL - ATrORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGEIWORK PRODUCT 0
ower Lpiae crx.Xnli_
Ihernial Povmr iJedrical Power LPTu*ne 8th Stage Diaphl'aghm l 105.00
,BOP I&C Lpgrades 10500/.1 ross Aound Relief Val SeUStt 105.0 Misture Separator Intemals 105.00/ $
BOP Pirg*..
'15.00S S
NSSS Piping (Torus Arlacied) 105.00/
SI EOUpgrades 1051.
Dryerreparator
- 105.
Themal I-Wratfic StabifRy (Oplion SRV AWS Relief Capa 110.0
, R SW Sw Increase ITOMus Terip 110.00 Tubi Se ig' 112 FW Heaters (HP)I 2dStagO 115.00 S MELtLA4 115.00 $
altrnale CoolingP~eefl Ba-sin.
IlnveniorY
.15.0 S
p Recdrc Piback (FD I Cond
_ 150 Ptsrip) t150 EPU cost CONI IDE-ANY PRLGE/WORK PRODUCI 71FNTA-A.
RE-CETPIR
I..
Xl#
1.
Thermal Power Eiectrcal Power LP Turbne 8rh Stage Dlaphraghrms 105.01%
8OP I&C Upgrades.
105.0VJ Cross Around Relief Valve Setpolnt 15os.o0A Moisture Separalor Internals
'105.0 BOP ping.
105.OV NSSS Piping (ToMus AltaChn 105.00/
EO Upgrades 1050° Dsyer/Separator IOS.OV FWHeafers (LP) 1050/
ARTS/MEULA 108.00A Thermal -ydratiic Stabrity (Opbion ID) 108.0v1 SRV AiWS Relef CaPacty 1 1.0%I AHR SW Flow Increase /Torus Terrp 1100aI FWHeaters(HP)2ndStage
., 15 MELLLA+
115.01 Alternate Coodin/yDeep Basin
. Inventory 115.0C Redrc Runback (FDWI Cond
. Pr6trp) 115.0/
EPU Cost S.
.1 COFDNIL..,ONYCIN RVIEEWR RDC Mods Cost only EPU Cost vdContingerncy
~~5i
'ri