ML082320015
| ML082320015 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 08/18/2008 |
| From: | Funderburk C Dominion Resources Services |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Region 2 Administrator |
| References | |
| 08-0515 | |
| Download: ML082320015 (54) | |
Text
Dominion Resources Services, Inc.
')()()() Dominion Boulevard, Glen Allen, VA 2 \\()/"
\\Vd, Address: www.dom.com August 18, 2008 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regional Administrator - Region II Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center Suite 23 T85 61 Forsyth Street, SW Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8931 VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY (DOMINION)
SURRY POWER STATION UNIT 2 CYCLE 22 STARTUP PHYSICS TESTS REPORT Serial No.:
08-0515 NLOS/mbb Docket No.:
50-281 License No.: DPR-37 As required by Surry Technical Specification 6.6.A.1, enclosed is the Virginia Electric and Power Company (Dominion) Technical Report NE-1543, Revision 0, entitled "Surry Unit 2 Cycle 22 Startup Physics Tests Report." This report summarizes the results of the physics testing program performed following initial criticality of Cycle 22 on May 20, 2008. The results of the physics tests were within the applicable Technical Specification limits.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Mr. Gary Miller at (804) 273-2771.
Very truly yours, i;?;C/7--
C. L. Funderburk, Director Nuclear Licensing and Operations Support Dominion Resources Services, Inc. for Virginia Electric and Power Company Enclosure Commitments made in this letter: None
Serial No. 08-0515 Surry 2 Cycle 22 Startup Physics Tests Report, Rev. 0 cc page 1 of 1 cc:
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Mr. S. P. Lingam U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 NRC Resident Inspector Surry Power Station
ET-NAF-08-0071 Rev 0 Technical Report NE-1543 Rev 0 Surry Unit 2 Cycle 22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 0 of 51
Technical Report Cover Sheet Page 1 of51 Rev. 0 NDCM-3.11 TECHNICAL REPORT No. NE-1543 Rev. 0 SURRY UNIT 2 CYCLE 22.
STARTUP PHYSICS TESTS REPORT Surry Power Station Unit 2 Nuclear Analysis and Fuel NUCLEAR ENGINEERING DOMINION August200B Prepared by: ~ J;t1:J J:MartOS Reviewed by: --:::---""::-=={,------;-y----T"J-.7--_----
Reviewed by: _.L--.::.:---:~~~~_---=--------
Approved by: ----!~~..O.-~--..:;....;;;.~-~~---
QA Category: Safety Related Key Words: S2C22, SPTR oalla Id8 6ate' C-/J.3/0 Y Date
~/13/0~
Date
'gjI4/CfrJ Date (June 2006)
CLASSIFICATIONIDISCLAIMER The data, techniques, infonnation, and conclusions in this report have been prepared solely for use by Dominion (the Company), and they may not be appropriate for use in situations other than those for which they have been specifically prepared. The Company therefore makes no claim or warranty whatsoever, express or implied, as to their accuracy, usefulness, or applicability.
In particular, THE COMPANY MAKES NO WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, NOR SHALL ANY WARRANTY BE DEEMED fO ARISE FROM COURSE OF DEALING OR USAGE OF TRADE, with respect to this report or any of the data, techniques, infonnation, or conclusions in it. By making this report available, the Company does not authorize its use by others, and any such use is expressly forbidden except with the prior written approval of the Company. Any such written approval shall itselfbe deemed to incorporate the disclaimers of liability and disclaimers of warranties provided herein.
In no event shall the Company be liable, under any legal theory whatsoever (whether contract, tort, warranty, or strict or absolute liability), for any property damage, mental or physical injury or death, loss of use of property, or other damage resulting from or arising out of the use, authorized or unauthorized, of this report or the data, techniques, infonnation, or conclusions in it.
NE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 2 of 51
TABLE OF CONTENTS CLASSIFICATIONillISCLAIMER 2
r ABLE OF CONTENTS 3
LIST OF TABLES 4
LIST OF FIGURES 5
PREFACE 7
SECTION 1 -- INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARy 9
SECTION 2 -- CONTROL ROD DROP TIME MEASUREMENTS 18 SECTION 3 -- CONTROL ROD BANK WORTH MEASUREMENTS 22 SECTION 4 -- BORON ENDPOINT AND WORTH MEASUREMENTS 27 SECTION 5 -- TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENT MEASUREMENT 31 SECTION 6 -- POWER DISTRIBUTION MEASUREMENTS 33 SECTION 7 -- STARTUP PHYSICS TESTING RESULTS
.41 SECTION 8 -- REFERENCES 43 APPENDIX -- STARTUP PHYSICS TEST
SUMMARY
SHEETS 45 NE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 3 of 51
LIST OF TABLES
'Table 1.1 Chronology of Tests 13
'Table 2.1 Hot Rod Drop Time Summary 19
'fable 3.1 Control Rod Bank Worth Summary 24
'Table 4.1 Boron Endpoint Summary 28 Table 4.2 Boron Worth Coefficient 29 Table 5.1 Isothermal Temperature Coefficient Summary 32 Table 6.1 Incore Flux Map Summary 35 Table 6.2 Comparison of Measured Power Distribution Parameters with their Core Operating Limits 36
~E-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 4 of 51
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1 Core Loading Map 14 Figure 1.2 Beginning of Cycle Fuel Assembly Burnups 15 Figure 1.3 Available Incore Moveable Detector Locations 16 Figure 1.4 Control Rod Locations 17 Figure 2.1 Typical Rod Drop Trace 20 Figure 2.2 Rod Drop Time - Hot Full Flow Conditions 21 Figure 3.1 Control Bank B Integral Rod Worth - HZP 25 Figure 3.2 Control Bank B Differential Rod Worth - HZP 26 Figure 6.1 Assemblywise Power Distribution 29.6% Power 37 Figure 6.2 Assemblywise Power Distribution 68.4% Power 38 Figure 6.3 Assemblywise Power Distribution 99.85% Power 39
'JE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 5 of 51
NE-1543 Rev. 0 This page left intentionally blank.
S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 6 of 51
PREFACE This report presents the analysis and evaluation of the physics tests which were perfonned 10 verify that the Surry Unit 2, Cycle 22 core could be operated safely, and makes an initial evaluation of the perfonnance of the core. It is not the intent of this report to discuss the particular methods of testing or to present the detailed data taken. Standard testing techniques and methods of data analysis were used. The test data, results and evaluations, together with the detailed startup procedures, are on file at the Surry Power Station. Therefore, only a cursory discussion of these ltems is included in this report. The analyses presented include a brief summary of each test, a comparison ofthe test results with design predictions, and an evaluation of the results.
The Surry Unit 2, Cycle 22 startup physics test summary sheets are included as an appendix 10 provide additional infonnation on the startup test results. Each data sheet provides the following mfonnation: 1) test identification, 2) test conditions (design), 3) test conditions (actual), 4) test results,S) acceptance criteria, and 6) comments concerning the test.
These sheets provide a compact summary of the startup test results in a consistent fonnat. The design test conditions and design values (at design conditions) of the measured parameters were completed prior to the startup physics testing. The entries for the design values were based on calculations perfonned by Dominion's Nuclear Analysis and Fuel Group.
During the tests, the data sheets were used as guidelines both to verify that the proper test conditions were met and to facilitate the preliminary comparison between measured and predicted test results, thus enabling a quick identification of possible problems occurring during the tests.
- \\lE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 7 of 51
"JE-1543 Rev. 0 This page intentionally left blank.
S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 8 of 51
SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION AND
SUMMARY
On 27 April 2008, Unit No.2 of the Surry Power Station completed Cycle 21 and began refueling [Ref. 1]. During this refueling, 60 of the 157 fuel assemblies in the core were replaced with 60 fresh Batch S2/24 assemblies [Ref. 8]. The Cycle 22 core consists of 10 sub-batches of fuel: four fresh batches - S2/24A, S2/24B, S2/24C and S2/24D, four once-burned batches -
S2/23A, S2/23B, S2/23C and S2/23D, and two twice-burned batches - S2/22A and S2/22B.
Batches S2/22, S2/23, and S2/24 are of the SIF/P+Z2 fuel type [Ref. 8].
All fuel batches are SIF/P+Z2 fuel assemblies. Both Westinghouse SIF/P+Z and SIF/P+Z2 fuel assembly designs incorporate ZIRLO fuel cladding, intermediate grids, guide tubes, lllstrumentation tubes, and debris resistance features that are part of the Westinghouse PERFORMANCE+ design. SIF/P+Z2 assemblies are of the same basic design as SIF/P+Z, but use a slightly longer (0.2 inch) fuel pin and bottom end plug to enhance resistance to fretting wear, along with other small dimensional changes [Ref. 1, pp. 13-14].
This is the second Surry Unit 2 cycle to use the Westinghouse Integral Fuel Burnable
'\\bsorber (IFBA) fuel product and is the first Surry Unit 2 cycle to use exclusively IFBA as a burnable poison. No discrete burnable poison rods were used in Cycle 22. All physical changes for lFBA are internal to the fuel rod cladding, with no apparent difference from existing fuel assemblies in any external features. The IFBA design involves the application of a thin (0.0003125 lllch) coating of ZrB2 on the fuel pellet surface during fabrication. Pellets with the IFBA coating are placed in specific symmetric patterns in each fresh assembly, typically affecting from 16 to 148 rods per assembly. The top and bottom 6 inches of the fuel pellet stack in the IFBA rods will contain pellets that have no IFBA coating, and have a hole in the center (annular). This additional void space helps accommodate the helium gas that accumulates from neutron absorption in ZrB2.
IFBA rods generate more internal gas during operation because neutron absorption in the ZrB2 coating creates helium gas in addition to the fission gas created during irradiation of the fuel.
fherefore, the initial pressure is set lower so the internal pressure early in lifetime may be lower. A low leakage pattern with all of the fresh fuel loaded in the interior is the fuel management strategy employed in this cycle. The pattern is modified from previous strategies to account for the
'JE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 9 of 51
transition to IFBA fuel product. Westinghouse performed a new generic end plug weld integrity analysis for Surry in support of the initial transition to IFBA fuel. A cycle-specific analysis to demonstrate the end plug weld integrity limits were met as required by the reload core design for Surry 2 Cycle 22. It has been determined that all Westinghouse fuel rod design criteria will be satisfied during the planned operation of Cycle 22 [Ref. 8].
Note that there are no thimble plugging devices or secondary sources inserted in Surry Unit
- 2 for this cycle. The cycle design report [Ref. 1] provides a more detailed description of the Cycle 22 core.
The S2C22 full core loading plan [Ref. 12] is given in Figure 1.1 and the beginning of cycle fuel assembly bumups [Ref. 6] are given in Figure 1.2. The available incore moveable detector locations used for the flux map analyses [Ref. 7] are identified in Figure 1.3. Figure 1.4 identifies the location and number of control rods in the Cycle 22 core [Ref. 1].
According to the Startup Physics logs, the Cycle 22 core achieved initial criticality on 20 May 2008 at 12:05 [Ref. 9]. Prior to and following criticality, startup physics tests were performed as outlined in Table 1.1. This cycle used the FTI Reactivity Measurement and Analysis System (RMAS) to perform startup physics testing.
Note that RMAS v.6 was used for S2C22 Startup Physics Testing [Ref. 10]. The tests performed are the same as in previous cycles. A summary of the test results follows.
The measured drop time of each control rod was within the 2.4 second Technical Specification [Ref. 4] limit, as well as the 1.61 second administrative limit [Ref. 11].
Individual control rod bank worths were measured using the rod swap technique [Ref. 2],
[Ref. 5], incorporating the recommendations of [Ref 10].
The sum of the individual measured control rod bank worths was within -2.6% of the design prediction. The reference bank (Control Bank B) worth was within -3.5% of its design prediction (corresponding to 47.0 pcm). The other control rod banks were within +/-4.l % (-4.1 % was recorded for Bank SB, which corresponds to a difference of 46.6 pcm) of the design predictions, which was the greatest percent difference of all NE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 10 of 51
control rod banks with design predictions greater than 600 pcm. For individual banks worth 600 pcm or less (only Control Bank A fits this category), the difference was within -3.4 pcm, or -1.3%,
of the design prediction.
These results are within the design tolerances of +/-15% for individual banks worth more than 600 pcm, +/-10% for the rod swap reference bank worth, +/-100 pcm for mdividual banks worth 600 pcm or less, and +/-10% for the sum of the individual control rod bank worths.
Measured critical boron concentrations for two control bank configurations (ARO and B-bank in) were within 19 ppm of the design predictions.
These results were within the design tolerances and also met the Technical Specification [Ref. 4] criterion that the overall core reactivity balance shall be within +/-1%
~k/k of the design prediction. The boron worth coefficient measurement was within -2.5% of the design prediction, which is within the design tolerance of tlO%.
The measured isothermal temperature coefficient (ITC) for the all-rods-out (ARO) configuration was within -0.143 pcm/oF of the design prediction. This result is within the design tolerance of+/-2.0 pcm/oF.
Core power distributions were within established design tolerances. The measured core power distributions were within +/-5.1 % of the design predictions, where a 5.1 % maximum difference occurred in the 29.6% power map.
The heat flux hot channel factors, FQ(z), and enthalpy rise hot channel factors, F~I' were within the limits of COLR Sections 3.3 and 3.4, respectively. All power flux maps were within the maximum incore power tilt design tolerance of 2% (QPTR ::: 1.02).
The total RCS Flow was successfully verified as being greater than 273000 gpm as required by Technical Specification 3.12.F.1. The total RCS Flow was measured as 292721 gpm.
In summary, all startup physics test results were acceptable.
Detailed results, specific design tolerances and acceptance criteria for each measurement are presented in the following NE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 11 of 51
sections of this report. The screening (PRC, CDS, and AC) for this technical report will be included in the engineering transmittal that implements and distributes the report.
'.JE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Pagel2of51
Table 1.1 SURRY UNIT 2 - CYCLE 22 STARTUP PHYSICS TESTS CHRONOLOGY OF TESTS Reference Test Date Time Power Procedure Hot Rod Drop-Hot Full Flow 05119/08 1412 HSD 2-NPT-RX-014 Reactivity Computer Checkout 05/20108 1326 HZP 2-NPT-RX-008 Boron Endpoint - ARO 05/20108 1326 HZP 2-NPT-RX-008 Zero Power Testing Range 05/20108 1326 HZP 2-NPT-RX-008 Boron Worth Coefficient 05120108 1442 HZP 2-NPT-RX-008 Temperature Coefficient - ARO 05/20108 1358 HZP 2-NPT-RX-008 Bank B Worth 05120108 1442 HZP 2-NPT-RX-008 Boron Endpoint - B in 05120108 1621 HZP 2-NPT-RX-008 Bank A Worth - Rod Swap 05120108 1644 HZP 2-NPT-RX-008 Bank SA Worth - Rod Swap 05120108 1644 HZP 2-NPT-RX-008 Bank C Worth - Rod Swap 05120108 1644 HZP 2-NPT-RX-008 Bank D Worth - Rod Swap 05120108 1644 HZP 2-NPT-RX-008 Bank SB Worth - Rod Swap 05/20108 1644 HZP 2-NPT-RX-008 Total Rod Worth OS/20108 1644 HZP 2-NPT-RX-008 Flux Map - less than 30% Power 05/21/08 0406 29.6%
2-NPT-RX-002 Peaking Factor Verification 2-NPT-RX-008
& Power Range Calibration 2-NPT-RX-005 Flux Map - 65% - 75% Power 05122108 0158 68.4%
2-NPT-RX-002 Peaking Factor Verification 2-NPT-RX-008
& Power Range Calibration 2-NPT-RX-00S Flux Map - 9S% - 100% Power OS/27/08 13S1 99.85%
2-NPT-RX-002 Peaking Factor Verification 2-NPT-RX-008
& Power Range Calibration 2-NPT-RX-005 RCS Flow Measurement 06/04/08 0900 HFP 2-NPT-RX-009
\\JE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 130f51
Figure 1.1 SURRY UNIT 2 - CYCLE 22 CORE LOADING MAP 5t.'1UtY UlII"IT 2 CYCLE 2:2 PULL. CORE!
LO~llQG
.t>w..N RL:V1 giON NO.
0 PAIn:
~ of 1
A C
D
- 3
- In
!lee:
4 5Q\\!
111' 5
27\\,'
4llv 50'!"
ReC FJCC 6
53U 1'1V UT ilGC ntr ilJ\\'
S5V JOl' F.CC 6
2111 11\\1 500 06'1' IICC 9
300 (I~V
!l9V 4U lICC llI:;C 10 4EU 19V J$lT 11 JOV 4~J "In RCl; 12
!llV 11'1 13 13'1 14 15 E
- r
!'tce
~~'i' 4liT
- rlv 43U R(:C 4.7U 12U
!'lce l7U 040 l1IOC
$$"0 1!5'v i4V uv JlOt 541' 54V JU;:C lllU l'I('C
~go 19U 3JU 600 31V J
M G
34'1 CST
- 111" lICC
$;)'.'
4llt1
,51'\\1 flCC
- Jlt;C 01'1 l;IV OBflI II y~
!lCC 4.1'£'
$~'i' O!l't' 4111 HI(
- flee
!<<X' (y/'I' 51\\'
25\\1 59t!
JlOt cd!Jv 29v OlU up ilCC 1l:Cl:
2 (IV 4311 H!,I 54\\1 RJ;C
<llSv
}3t!
4;;10' 3811 llce 10\\1
~01;1 UV 34U
~oc 04V 2fi" UU Hi..,
FJ..--C ReC illV 51'J -;;H SUI p
}l't' 47V nte"OP: t:J1':'1<"tCl: X::<<$tIt,;r~;
lID:-
f'!i.1U. Lm::rrK 0iltn'ML.1!r.lD Cow:u.c.ceoee Ely: __~..:;;=;"".;:.
11/2.9/07
,,/z..im oate' NE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 14 of 51
Figure 1.2 SURRY UNIT 2 - CYCLE 22 BEGINNING OF CYCLE FUEL ASSEMBLY BURNUPS, GWD/MTU R
P N
M L
F J
H G
F E
D C
B A
I 41.051 38.181 41.011 1 40.961 38.191 41.021 I 44.331 39 731 0.001 19.131 0.001 39.921 43.651 I 43.781 39 671 0.001 19.051 0.001 39.711 43.761 I
MEASURED I I PREDICTED I I 42.741 0.001 I 43.111 0.001
.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 43.061 001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 43.081 1 42.951 0.001 0.001 20 401 24.141 22.721 24.671 19.971 0.001 0.001 43.371 I 43.051 0.001 0.001 20 241 24.271 22.761 24.241 20.251 0.001 0.001 43.091 I 43.891 0.001 0.001 23.771 24.681 22.171 0.001 22.071 24.701 23.561 0.001 0.001 43.601 I 43.771 0.001 0.001 23.641 24 701 21.991 0.001 21.991 24.741 23.641 0.001 0.001 43.811 139.731 0.00120.31124.701 19271 0.00123.621 0.00119.03125.17120.121 0.00139.521 139.731 0.00120.24124.66119141 0.00123.371 0.00119.14124.67120.231 0.00139.711 I 41.181 0.001 0.001 24.351 22.011 0.001 23.741 20.671 23.761 0.001 22.051 24.351 0.001 0.001 40.901 I 40.981 0.001 0.001 24.251 22.001 0.001 23.601 20.491 23.601 0.001 22.011 24.281 0.001 0.001 40.911 138.08119.241 0.00122.771 0.00123.44120.43124.53120.54123.511 0.00122.761 0.00119.11138.051 I 38.121 19.051 0.001 22.781 0.001 23.411 20.491 24.501 20.491 23.41\\
0.001 22.781 0.001 19.061 38.141 I 40.761 0.001 0.001 23.891 21.81!
0.001 23.771 20.191 23.961 0.001 22.321 24.341 0.001 0.001 41.221 I 40.911 0.001 0.001 24.281 22.011 a 001 23.601 20.491 23.601 0.001 22.001 24.251 0.001 0.001 40.981 139.751 0.00120.40124.631 19.111 0.00123.621 0.00119.16124.67120.181 0.00139.401 139.711 0.00120.23124.67119.141 0.00123.371 0.00119.13124.66120.241 0.00139.731 143.881 0.001 0.00123.70124.78122.251 0.00122.16124.84123.761 0.001 0.00143.771 143.811 0.001 0.00123.63124.74121.991 0.00121.99124.70123.631 0.001 0.00143.771 143.111 0.001 0.00120.32123.97122.85124.39120.231 0.001 0.00142.741 I 43.091 0.001 0.001 20.251 24.241 22.761 24.271 20.241 0.001 0.001 43.051 I 43. 04 1 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001
- 43. 20 1 I 43.081 0.001
- o. 00 I 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 43.121 I 43.721 39.661 O. 00 I 19.341
- o. 00 I 39.751 43.861 I 43.761 39.711 0.001 19.061
- o. 00 I 39. 67 1 43.781 I 40.911 38.141 40.971 I 41.021 38.241 40.961 10 11 12 13 14 15 R
P N
M L
K J
H G
F E
D C
B A
'JE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 150f51
Figure 1.3 SURRY UNIT 2 - CYCLE 22 AVAILABLE INCORE MOVEABLE DETECTOR LOCATIONS R
p N
M L
K J
H G
F E
D C
B A
MD MD
+
MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD 1\\
MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD MD
+
MD MD MD MD - Moveable Detector Locations Not Available For Flux Map 1,2 and 3 for S2C22 Locations Not Available For Flux Map 1
~
- Locations Not Available for Flux Map 3 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 NE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 16 of 51
Figure 1.4 SURRY UNIT 2 - CYCLE 22 CONTROL ROD LOCATIONS R
p N
M L
K J
H G
F E
D c
B A
A D
A SA SA C
B B
C SB SB A
B D
C D
B A
C C
B D
C D
B A
SB SB C
B B
C SA SA A
D A
2 3
4 5
6 7
270 0
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 D = Control Bank D C = Control Bank C B = Control Bank B A = Control Bank A SB = Shutdown Bank SB SA = Shutdown Bank SA
\\JE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 17 of 51
SECTION 2 -
CONTROL ROD DROP TIME MEASUREMENTS The drop time of each control rod was measured in hot shutdown with three reactor coolant pumps in operation at full flow and with Tave greater than 530 OF as per 2-NPT-RX-014. This test verified that the time to entry of rod into the dashpot was less than or equal to the maximum allowed by Technical Specification 3.12.C.1 [Ref. 4].
Surry Unit 2 Cycle 22 used the rod drop test computer (RDTC) in conjunction with the Computer Enhanced Rod Position Indication (CERPI) system.
The CERPI system equipment replaced the Individual Rod Position Indication (lRPI) system. The rod drop times were measured hy withdrawing all banks to their fully withdrawn position and dropping all 48 control rods by opening the reactor trip breakers. This allows the rods to drop into the core as they would during a plant trip.
The current methodology acquires data using the secondary RPI coil terminals (/3 & /4) on the CERPI racks for each rod. Data is immediately saved to the rod drop test computer (RDTC) which calculates the rod drop time automatically. Original data is also saved as an ASCII file and hurned to a CD-R. Further details about the RDTC can be found in [Ref. 13].
A typical rod drop trace for S2C22 is presented in Figure 2.1. The measured drop times for each control rod are recorded on Figure 2.2 in accordance with station procedure 2-NPT-RX-014.
The slowest, fastest, and average drop times are summarized in Table 2.1. Technical Specification
- U 2.C.l [Ref. 4] specifies a maximum rod drop time to dashpot entry of 2.4 seconds for all rods.
This Technical Specification (TS) requires that the RCS is at hot, full flow conditions. These test results satisfy the TS limit as well as the administrative limit [Ref. 11] of 1.61 seconds.
In addition, rod bounce was observed at the end of each trace demonstrating that no control rod stuck 111 the dashpot region.
NE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 18 of 51
Table 2.1 SURRY UNIT 2 - CYCLE 22 STARTUP PHYSICS TESTS HOT ROD DROP TIME
SUMMARY
ROD DROP TIME TO DASHPOT ENTRY SLOWEST ROD FASTEST ROD AVERAGE TIME F-06 1.39 sec.
K-04, J-03, 1.26 sec 1.295 sec.
L-05 NE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 19 of 51
Figure 2.1 SURRY UNIT 2 - CYCLE 22 STARTUP PHYSICS TESTS TYPICAL ROD DROP TRACE Time Stamp or Roo Drop; Graph ofF2 Path of ASCiI Rod Drop Oata File:
IO:\\rdtlQ;ll80S1914B01s2c22.brt Beginning of Dashpot Entry (Extreme Drop in Voltage) 1 3
US Maf\\Uillly COmputed Rod. Dro!> Tlm@; 1.29, seOOrid~
'mIt ComiNted Time: 1.29 SecOllo/J$
\\fE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 20 of 51
Figure 2.2 SURRY UNIT 2 - CYCLE 22 STARTUP PHYSICS TESTS ROD DROP TIME - HOT FULL FLOW CONDITIONS R
p N
M L
K J
H G
F E
D c
B A
1.29 1.28 1.29 1.26 1.30 1.29 1.26 1.31 1.31 1.26 1.29 1.28 1.27 1.30 1.30 1.39 1.29 1.38 1.30 1.31 1.31 1.30 1.27 1.29 1.29 1.30 1.30 1.29 1.30 1.28 1.29 1.28 1.31 1.30 1.32 1.27 1.31 1.28 1.29 1.28 1.27 1.30 1.28 1.29 1.29 1.33 1.28 1.32 Q = Rod drop time to dashpot entry (sec.)
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 NE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 21 of 51
SECTION 3 - CONTROL ROD BANK WORTH MEASUREMENTS Control rod bank worths were measured for the control and shutdown banks using the rod swap technique [Ref. 2] [Ref. 5].
The initial step of the rod swap method diluted the predicted most reactive control rod bank (hereafter referred to as the reference bank) into the core and measured its reactivity worth using conventional test techniques. The reactivity changes resulting hom the reference bank movements were recorded continuously by the reactivity computer and were used to determine the differential and integral worth of the reference bank.
For Cycle 22, Control Bank B was used as the reference bank. Surry 2 used a dilution rate of 1100 pcm/hr for the reference bank measurement [Ref. 15].
After completion of the reference bank reactivity worth measurement, the reactor coolant system temperature and boron concentration were stabilized with the reactor near critical and the reference bank near its full insertion. Initial statepoint data (core reactivity and moderator temperature) for the rod swap maneuver was next obtained with the reference bank at its fully inserted position and all other banks fully withdrawn. To avoid a possible problem of stuck rods, the S2C22 startup physics testing campaign used 2 steps withdrawn for all conditions requiring control rods to be manually fully inserted [Ref. 14].
Test bank swaps proceed in sequential order from the bank with the lowest worth to the hank with the highest worth. The second test bank should have a predicted worth higher than the tlrst test bank in order to ensure the first bank will be moved fully out. The rod swap maneuver was performed by withdrawing the previous test bank (or reference bank for the first maneuver) several steps and then inserting the next test bank to balance the reactivity of the reference bank withdrawal. This sequence was repeated until the previous test bank was fully withdrawn and the test bank was nearly inserted. The next step was to swap the rest of the test bank in by balancing the reactivity with the withdrawal of the reference bank, until the test bank was fully inserted and the reference bank was positioned such that the core was just critical or near the initial statepoint condition.
This measured critical position (MCP) of the reference bank with the test bank fully lllserted was used to determine the integral reactivity worth of the test bank.
"JE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 22 of 51
The core reactivity, moderator temperature, and differential worth of the reference bank were recorded with the reference bank at the MCP. The rod swap maneuver was then repeated for the remaining test banks. Note that after the final test bank was fully inserted, the test bank was swapped with the reference bank until the reference bank was fully inserted and the last test bank was fully withdrawn. Here the final statepoint data for the rod swap maneuver was obtained (core reactivity and moderator temperature) in order to verify the reactivity drift for the rod swap test.
A summary of the test results is given in Table 3.1. As shown in this table and the Startup Physics Test Summary Sheets given in the Appendix, the individual measured bank worths for the control and shutdown banks were within the design tolerance of +/-10% for the reference bank,
=:15% for test banks of worth greater than 600 pcm, and +/-100 pcm for test banks of worth less than or equal to 600 pcm. The sum of the individual measured rod bank worths was within -2.6% of the design prediction.
This is well within the design tolerance of +/-10% for the sum of the individual control rod bank worths.
The integral and differential reactivity worths of the reference bank (Control Bank B) are shown in Figures 3.1 and 3.2, respectively. The design predictions [Ref. 1] and the measured data from station procedure 2-NPT-RX-008 are plotted for comparison. In summary, the measured rod worths were found to be satisfactory.
NE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 23 of 51
Table 3.1 SURRY UNIT 2 - CYCLE 22 STARTUP PHYSICS TESTS CONTROL ROD BANK WORTH
SUMMARY
MEASURED PREDICTED PERCENT WORTH WORTH DIFFERENCE (%)
BANK (PCM)
(PCM)
(M-P)/P x 100 B - Reference 1305.0 1352.0
-3.5 D
1105.1 1131.1
-2.3 C
1032.8 1052.0
-1.8 A
262.3 265.7
-1.3(a)
SB 1097.0 1143.6
-4.1 SA 720.3 726.0
-0.8 Total Bank Worth 5522.5 5670.4
-2.6 (a) M - P = -3.4 pcm "JE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 24 of 51
Figure 3.1 SURRY UNIT 2 - CYCLE 22 STARTUP PHYSICS TESTS CONTROL BANK B INTEGRAL ROD WORTH - HZP ALL OTHER RODS WITHDRAWN Reference Bank Integral Worth
-+-- Measured
__ Predicted 250 200 150 100 50
,...'- 1-..
-"".."'- I-
+::::.
.._-~"11;_.. I*
f****
~k
~
f-.
I--I-- --1---
~
\\~
1 1
1--
. -I I**
1-1\\
I**
-1*-
1*-
~
~
,...- j--
j._.
~
. _. j.
1----
.._...I**
i I-
~
I
\\
I*
~
~
-- 1--
- 1**
..- 1**--I*
I i\\
.~
1--
~
_. 1-*
~~
o o
200 400 1600 1400 1200 El 1000 u
.l:l
.I-l Iol 0:;:
~
800 r::
C1l III
.-l C1l Iol tlI III
.I-l 600 r::
H
\\IE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 25 of 51
Figure 3.2 SURRY UNIT 2 - CYCLE 22 STARTUP PHYSICS TESTS CONTROL BANK B DIFFERENTIAL ROD WORTH - HZP ALL OTHER RODS WITHDRAWN Reference Bank Differential Worth
-+- Measured
__ Predicted 250 200 150 100 50 I
i i
.~l
/
r..;.
If r \\~
/
I
~
! r
~
/1/
i
\\.
~
~'-
/
-~~
A :!..
/
I
\\\\
J
~
I i
\\
~
\\ \\
/
I
. ~
1\\
I I
I I
I
~
i I
i I;
if I
i I
I
~
I i
II' 2.0 0.0 o
10.0 12.0 1JI 8.0 Q)
.jJ III
""-au 1JI
.r:
.jJ k
0:;:
6.0
'tl 0
II::
.-i III
- M
.jJ s::
Q) k Q)........
4.0
- M Q
Bank position (steps)
'JE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 26 of 51
SECTION 4 - BORON ENDPOINT AND WORTH MEASUREMENTS Boron Endpoint With the reactor critical at hot zero power, reactor coolant system (RCS) boron concentrations were measured at selected rod bank configurations to enable a direct comparison of measured boron endpoints with design predictions.
For each critical boron concentration measurement, the RCS conditions were stabilized with the control banks at or very near a selected endpoint position. Adjustments to the measured critical boron concentration values were made to account for off-nominal control rod position and moderator temperature, if necessary.
The results of these measurements are given in Table 4.1. As shown in this table and in the Startup Physics Test Summary Sheets given in the Appendix, the measured critical boron endpoint values were within their respective design tolerances.
The ARO endpoint comparison to the predicted value met the requirements of Technical Specification 4.10.A [Ref. 4] regarding core reactivity balance. In summary, the boron endpoint results were satisfactory.
Boron Worth Coefficient The measured boron endpoint values provide stable statepoint data from which the boron worth coefficient or differential boron worth (DBW) was determined. By relating each endpoint concentration to the integrated rod worth present in the core at the time of the endpoint measurement, the value ofthe DBW over the range ofboron endpoint concentrations was obtained.
A summary of the measured and predicted DBW is shown in Table 4.2. As indicated in this table and in the Appendix, the measured DBW was well within the design tolerance of:!:10%.
in summary, the measured boron worth coefficient was satisfactory.
\\lE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 27 of 51
Table 4.1 SURRY UNIT 2 - CYCLE 22 STARTUP PHYSICS TESTS BORON ENDPOINTS
SUMMARY
Measured Predicted Difference Control Rod Endpoint Endpoint M-P Configuration (ppm)
(ppm)
(ppm)
ARO 1567 1548
+19 B Bank: In 1390.5 1389*
+1.5
- The predicted endpoint for the B Bank: In configuration was adjusted for the difference between the measured and predicted values of the endpoint taken at the ARO configuration as shown in the boron endpoint Startup Physics Test Summary Sheet in the Appendix.
NE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 28 of 51
Table 4.2 SURRY UNIT 2 - CYCLE 22 STARTUP PHYSICS TESTS BORON WORTH COEFFICIENT Measured Predicted Percent Boron Worth Boron Worth Difference (%)
(pcm/ppm)
(pcm/ppm)
(M-P)/P x 100
-7.41
-7.60
-2.5
\\fE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 29 of 51
NE-1543 Rev. 0 This page intentionally left blank.
S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 30 of 51
SECTION 5 - TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENT MEASUREMENT The isothennal temperature coefficient (ITC) at the all-rods-out condition is measured by controlling the reactor coolant system (RCS) temperature with the steam dump valves to the condenser, establishing a constant heatup or cooldown rate, and monitoring the resulting reactivity changes on the reactivity computer.
Reactivity was measured during the RCS heatup of 2.95°F followed by a cooldown of
- 2.86°F. Reactivity and temperature data were taken from the reactivity computer. Using the statepoint method, the temperature coefficient was detennined by dividing the change in reactivity by the change in RCS temperature.
The predicted and measured isothennal temperature coefficient values are compared in Table 5.1. As can be seen from this summary and from the Startup Physics Test Summary Sheet given in the Appendix, the measured isothennal temperature coefficient value was within the design tolerance of +/-2 pcmtF. The measured ITC of -2.324 pcmtF meets the Core Operating Limits Report (COLR) 3.1.1 criterion [Ref. 8] that the moderator temperature coefficient (MTC) be Jess than or equal to +6.0 pcmtF.
When the Doppler temperature coefficient [Ref. 1] of -1.81 pcmtF and a 0.5 pcmtF uncertainty are accounted for with the MTC limit, the MTC requirement lS satisfied as long as the ITC is less than or equal to +3.69 pcm/oF.
NE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 31 of 51
Table5.l SURRY UNIT 2 - CYCLE 22 STARTUP PHYSICS TESTS ISOTHERMAL TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENT
SUMMARY
BANK TEMPERATURE BORON ISOTHERMAL TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENT RANGE (OF)
(PCMfF)
POSITION LOWER UPPER CONCENTRAnON COOL-HEAT-AVG.
DIFFER (STEPS)
LIMIT LIMIT (ppm)
DOWN UP MEAS PRED (M-P)
])/208 545.67 548.84 1559.3
-2.286
-2.362
-2.324
-2.181
-0.143 NE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 32 of 51
SECTION 6 - POWER DISTRIBUTION MEASUREMENTS The core power distributions were measured using the moveable incore detector flux mapping system.
This system consists of five fission chamber detectors which traverse fuel assembly instrumentation thimbles in up to 50 core locations.
Figure 1.3 shows the available locations monitored by the moveable detectors for the ramp to full power flux maps for Cycle 22.
For each traverse, the detector voltage output is continuously monitored on a recorder, and scanned for 610 discrete axial points. Full core, three-dimensional power distributions are detennined from this data using a Dominion-modified version of the Combustion Engineering computer program, CECOR [Ref. 3]. CECOR couples the measured voltages with predetennined analytic power-to-t1ux ratios in order to detennine the power distribution for the whole core.
A list of the full-core flux maps [Ref. 7] taken during the startup test program and the measured values of the important power distribution parameters are given in Table 6.1.
A comparison of these measured values with their COLR limits is given in Table 6.2. Flux map 1 was taken at 29.6% power to verify the radial power distribution (RPD) predictions at low power.
Figure 6.1 shows the measured RPDs from this flux map. Flux maps 2 and 3 were taken at 68.4%
and 99.85% power, respectively, with different control rod configurations. These flux maps were taken to check at-power design predictions and to measure core power distributions at various operating conditions. The radial power distributions for these maps are given in Figures 6.2 and 6.3.
The radial power distributions for the maps given in Figures 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 show that the measured relative assembly power values deviated from design predictions by at most 5.1% in the
- ~9.6% power map, 3.8% in the 68.4% power map, and 3.2% in the 99.85% power map, in core location HI for map 1, and D5 for maps 2 and 3. The maximum positive quadrant power tilts for 29.6%, 68.4%, and 99.85% power maps were +1.00% (1.0100), +0.83% (1.0083), and +0.52%
(1.0052), respectively. These power tilts were within the design tolerance of2% (1.02).
The measured FQ(z) and FL1~1 peaking factor values for the at-power flux maps were within the limits ofCOLR Sections 3.3 and 3.4 [Ref. 8], respectively. Flux Maps 1,2, and 3 were used for NE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 33 of 51
power range detector calibration or to confirm existing calibrations.
The flux map analyses are documented in [Ref. 7].
In conclusion, the power distribution measurement results are considered acceptable with respect to the design tolerances, the accident analysis acceptance criteria, and the COLR [Ref. 8].
It is therefore anticipated that the core will continue to operate safely throughout Cycle 22.
NE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 34 of 51
Table 6.1 SURRY UNIT 2 - CYCLE 22 STARTUP PHYSICS TESTS INCORE FLUX MAP
SUMMARY
F:H Hot No.
Bum Bank Peak FQ(z) Hot CoreFz Core Tilt (2)
Axial Map Map up Power Channel Factor (I)
Channel Factor Max Of Date MWD/
(%)
D Offset Thim-Description No.
Steps
- AxiaL F:H Axial Max I Lac
(%)
MTU Assy :Point: FQ(Z)
Assy Point Fz bles Low Power I
OS/21/08 2
29.6 170 C5 26,2.343 C5 1.582 26 1.381 1.0100: NE
+6.235 43 lIlt. Power (3) 2 OS/22/08 34 68.4 190 C5 i 26 i2.024 C5 1.522 26 1.229 1.0083' NE
+3.396 45 Hot Full Power 3
OS/27/08 221 99.85 227 C5 i 26 - 1.874 C5 1.464 26 1.168 1.0052-SE
+3.899 43 NOTES: Hot spot locations are specified by giving assembly locations (e.g. H-8 is the center-of-core assembly) and core height (in the "Z" direction the core is divided into 61 axial points starting from the top of the core). Flux Maps 1,2, and 3 were used for power range detector calibration or were used to confirm existing calibrations.
(1) FQ(z) includes a total uncertainty factor of 1.08 (2) CORE TILT - defined as the average quadrant power tilt from CECOR. "Max" refers to the maximum positive core tilt (QPTR > 1.0000).
(3) lnt. Power - intermediate power flux map.
\\JE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 35 of 51
Table 6.2 SURRY UNIT 2 - CYCLE 22 STARTUP PHYSICS TESTS COMPARISION OF MEASURED POWER DISTRIBUTION PARAMETERS WITH THEIR CORE OPERATING LIMITS Peak FQ(z) Hot FQ(z) Hot F:H Hot Map Channel Factor*
Channel Factor**
Channel Factor (At Node of Minimum Margin)
No.
Meas.
Limit Node Meas.
Limit Node Margin Meas.
Limit Margin (M)
(L)
(%)
(%) ***
1 2.343 4.582 26 2.341 4.570 25 48.79 1.582 1.889 16.25 2
2.024 3.349 26 2.015 3.324 23 39.38 1.522 1.708 10.89 3
1.874 2.294 26 1.870 2.283 24 18.08 1.464 1.561 6.21
- The Core Operating Limit for the heat flux hot channel factor, FQ(z), is a function of core height and power level. The value for FQ(z) listed above is the maximum value of FQ(z) in the core. The COLR [Ref. 8] limit listed above is evaluated at the plane of maximum FQ(z).
- The value for FQ(z) listed above is the value at the plane of minimum margin. The minimum margin values listed above are the minimum percent difference between the measured values of FQ(z) and the COLR limit for each map. The margin is calculated at the node of minimum margin directly by CECOR using the formula below.
- % Margin = 100 * {(L-M) / L}
The measured FQ(z) hot channel factors include 8% total uncertainty.
\\IE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 36 of 51
Figure 6.1 Surry Unit 2 Cycle 22 Startup Physics Tests Assemb1ywise Power Distribution 29.6% Power N
M L
K J
H G
F E
D c
B A
PREDICTED MEASURED
. peT DIFFERENCE.
.316
.318
.7 S:Hi
.543 1
3
.283
.290 2.7 1.119 1.142 2.1
.331
.347 5.1
.884
.909 2.8
.277
.285 3.2
- 1. 095 1.124 2.7
.529
.545 2.9
.313
.321 2.5 PREDICTED MEASURED
. peT DIFFERENCE.
.417 1.150
.417 1.155
.1
.4
.2S"l 267 8
- 1. 075 1.092 1.5
- 1. 006
- 1. 039 3.3 1 064
- 1. 087 2.1
.247 272 2.0 1.143 1.170 2.3
.415
.427 2.9
.416
.416
-.2
- 1. 183
- 1. 182
-.1 1 264
- 1. 265
.1 337 J4iJ J
1.190 1.196
.6 1.119
- 1. 123
.4 1.185 1.197 1.0
- 1. 331 1 347 1.3
- 1. 259 1 288 2.3 1.179 1.221 3.5
.415
.428 3.2
.313 1.146
.312 1 143
-.2
-.2
- 1. 263 1 257
-.5 1.149 1.135
-1.3 Lid 1"74 3
254 1.196 253 1.191
.0
-.4
.253 254
.0
.175
.182
.6 1.146 1.177 2.7 260
.321 4.8 1 143 1.177 3.0
.312
.309
-.8
.530
.530
.0 249 249
.0 335 1.184 332 1.182
-.2
-.2 214 1.244 206 1.232
-.7
-.9
- 1. 248
- 1. 226
-1.8 248
- 1. 236
-1. 0 214 1.192
-1. 8 1.182 1.190
.7
- 1. 333 1 357 1.8 246 271 1.9
.528
.539 2.0
~79
~78
'.4
. U2 326
- L. 7
)78
)76
.8
- 1. 099 1.100
.1
.869
.865
-.5 094 089
-.5
.528
.526
-.6
.312
.309
-1. 0
- 1. 063
- 1. 068
.5
.993
.990
-.3
.061 055
-.6
- 1. 247
- 1. 241
-.4
.144 1.130
-1. 1
.415
.407
-2.0 1.186 1.184
-.2 1.115 1.109
-.6 1.186 1.175
-.9
- 1. 334
- 1. 318
-1. 2
- 1. 261
- 1. 239
-1. 7 1.180 1.160
-1. 6
.415
.409
-1. 4
.258
.252
-.5
.198
.187
-.9
- 1. 258
- 1. 241
-1. 3 1.183 1.164
-1 5
1.147 1.115
-2.8
- 1. 260 1 239
-1. 6 1.144 1.131
-1 1
2S2 212 8
248 237 9
251 2 J I
- 1
[
2[*1 198
- 1 3
175 160
-1. J
.311 3i9 9
247 239
-. J 1 178 1.168
-.9 314 303
-.9 1.180 1.170
-.8 248 239
-.7 253 244
-.7 1.185 1.188
.2
.065 063
-.1
- 1. 315
- 1. 302
-1. 0
- 1. 228 1.218
-.8
- 1. 315
- 1. 303
-.9 248 237
-.9 1.196 1.184
-1. 0 1.119 1.116
-.2
- 1. 006 1.007
.1 1.180 1.177
-.3
.314 304
-.7 1.178 1.166
-1. 0 1.244
- 1. 231
-1. 0 254 245
-.7 1.190 1.189
.0
- 1. 075
- 1. 080
.4 1 251
- 1. 240
-.9 249
.238
-.9
- 1. 252
- 1. 236
-1. 3
- 1. 215
- 1. 200
-1. 2 1.178 1.168
-.8
.337 339
.2 1 257
- 1. 273 1.3
- 1. 258
- 1. 253
-.4
- 1. 198 1.189
-.7 258 247
-.9 1.184
- 1. 173
-.9 1.149 1.135
-1. 2 264 267
.3 1 150
- 1. 160
.9
.185 179
-.5 1.115 1.108
-.6 1.186
- 1. 179
-.6
- 1. 335 1 325
-.8
.263
.260
-.3 1.183 1 200 1.4
.417
.422 1.1
- 1. 061
- 1. 071 1.0
.993
.988
-.5
- 1. 062
- 1. 059
-.3 1 248
- 1. 245
-.3 145 142
-.3
.416
.414
-.7 1 094 1.127 3.0
.869
.874
.5 1 099 1.102
.3
.530
.534 8
.313
.313
.0
.278
.285 2.5
.332
.335
.9
.279
.280
.1 10 11 12 13
.313 312 5
STANDARD DEVIATION
. 932 S291.095
.528 1.098 J
.3
.277
.282 1.9
.884
.886
.3
.330
.332
.7 1.118 1.125
.6
.282
.284
.6
.536
.541
.9
.316
.318
.8 AVERAGE
.peT DIFFERENCE.
1.1 14 15 Map No: S2-22-01 Summary:
Date:
OS/21/2008 Power:
29.6%
Control Rod Position:
D Bank at 170 Steps F7 Bumup 2.343 1.582 1.381 2 MWDIMTU QPTR:-~1.-:-00::-C1"""3--t-~1.-:-01-=0"""0-0.9898 0.9989 Axial Offset (%) = +6.235 NE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 37 of 51
Figure 6.2 Surry Unit 2 Cycle 22 Startup Physics Tests Assemblywise Power Distribution 68.4% Power N
M L
K J
H G
F E
D C
B A
PREDICTED MEASURED peT DIFFERENCE.
.324
.325
.6
.303
.308 1.7 549 1.137 555 1.157 1
]
- 1. 7
.359
.365 1.8
.937
.955 1.9
.298
.302 1.6 1.116 1.134 1.6
.543
.548
.8
.322
.326 1.4 PREDICTED MEASURED
. peT DIFFERENCE.
J61 J 55
- L. 6
.321
.320
-.3
.544
.542
-.3 1.121 1.118
-.2
.925
.920
-.5
.420
.418
-.3 1.121 1.117
-.3
- 1. 228 1 226
-.2 1 071
- 1. 070
-.1
- 1. 016 1.011
-.4
.420
.416
-.9 1.152 1.150
-.2
.233
.227
-.5
- 1. 308
- 1. 305
-.3 1.178 1.175
-.3 1.118 1.112
-.5 1.124 1.128
.4 233 236
.2 1.139 1.128
-.9
- 1. 182
- 1. 181
-.1
- 1. 251
- 1. 246
-.4 1.194 1.187
-.5
- 1. 235 1 244
.8 1.31lY
- 1. 312
/.
.1'76 1"/2 4
1 253
- 1. 24,1
.)
.254 244 B
241 211 8
- 1. 082 1.100 1.6 1.181 1.186
.4
- 1. 247
- 1. 240
- _5
- 1. 246
- 1. 234
-1. 0 1.177 1.163
-1.2
- 1. 301
- 1. 289
-.9 027 056 2.8 1.120 1.122
.1 1.192 1.186
-.5
- 1. 240
- 1. 224
-1.2
- 1. 301
- 1. 288
-1.1
- 1. 217
- 1. 207
-.9 073 089 1.5 1.178 1.186
.7
- 1. 247
- 1. 247
.1 251 241
-.8 179 168
-.9 301 289
-.9 227 243 1.3
- 1. 305 1.317 1.0 1.174 1.184
.8
- 1. 253
- 1. 245
-.7
- 1. 254
- 1. 246
-.6 241 234
-.5 1.120 1.139 1.7 230 254 1.9 1.137 1 167 2.6 1.181 1.193 1.0
- 1. 251
- 1. 252
.0 1 194 1.190
-.3
.419
.428 2.2 1.150 1.182 2.8 1 231
- 1. 278 3.8 307
.329 1.7 1.178 1.180
.1
.118 116
-.1
.419
.429 2.5 1.119 1.145 2.2 227 248 1.7 070 083 1.2 016 014
-.2
.320
.313
-2.4
.543
.553 1.9 1.117 1.154 3.4
.925
.926
.1
.300
.307 2.5
.361
.362
.2 lOO 297
-.8 1.117 1.112
-.5
- 1. 070
- 1. 064
-.5 1.178 1.170
-.7
- 1. 251
- 1. 239
-.9 254 242 1
0 1.179 1.171
-.7
- 1. 301
- 1. 290
-.9 1.177 1.163
-1.2 254
- 1. 251 247
- 1. 246
-.5
-.4 1.178 1.176
-.2
- 1. 071 1
070
-.2 1.121 1.122
.1
.301
.295
-1. 9
.543
.540 5
- 1. 227 1 223
-.3
- 1. 307
- 1. 293
-1.1 1.181 1.165
-1. 4 254 239
-I 2
251
.246
-.4 240 229
-.8 247 236
-.9 253 244
-.7 1.182 1.176
-.6 308 302
-.5
.228 228
-.1
.544
.550 1.1
.320
.317
-1. 0 1.119 1.106
-1. 2
- 1. 231
- 1. 209
-1.8 1.137 1.103
-3.0 175 1':)8
-1
- 1 247 237
-.8 1.192 1.176
-1. 4 247 1.177 240 1 173
-.6
-.3 1.139 1.127
-1. 0 233 233
.0 1.121 1.119
-.1
.321
.322
.3 11
.419
.409
-2.4 1.150 1.129
-1. 8
.419
.412
-1. 7
- 1. 230
- 1. 207
-1. 9 1.120 1.104
-1. 4 1 305 291
-1 iJ 227 218 8
1.178 1.178
.0
- 1. 073 1.072
-.1 1.120 1.118
-.2
- 1. 027
- 1. 032
.5 181
.184
.3 1 082
- 1. 095 1.2 309
.315
.5
- 1. 235
- 1. 251 1.4 233 241
.6 1.124 1.137 1.1 1.152 1 176 2.0
.420
.426 1.5
.420
.414
-1. 2 12 13 STANDARD DEVIATION
. 765
.322
.315
-2.0 543 1 116 5411.122 5
.5
.297
.299
.7
.937
.949 1.3
.359
.363 1.4 1.137 1 170 2.8
.303
.311 2.4
.549
.560 1.9
.324
.328 1.3 AVERAGE
.PCT DIFFERENCE.
1.0 14 15 N
M L
K J
H G
F E
D C
B A
Map No: S2-22-02 Summary:
Date:
05/22/2008 Power:
68.4%
1.522 1.229 34 MWD/MTU Control Rod Position:
D Bank at 190 steps F N "H
Fz Bumup 2.024 QPTR:--0-.9-9-9-8-+--1-.0-08-3--
0.9901 1.0018 Axial Offset (%) = +3.396 NE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 38 of 51
Figure 6.3 Surry Unit 2 Cycle 22 Startup Physics Tests Assemblywise Power Distribution 99.85% Power N
M J
H G
F E
D C
B A
PREDICTED
.312
.374
.306 PREDICTED MEASURED
.317
.381
.311 MEASURED
. PCT DIFFERENCE.
1.6 1.8 1.4
. PCT DIFFERENCE.
.321
. S4 ti
- 1. 133
.983
- 1. 113
.542
.320
.323
.553
- 1. 152
- 1. 000
- 1. 128
.546
.322
.4 1
(J 1.7 1.7 1.3
.8
.8
.414
- 1. 090
.209
- 1. 083 1 043
- 1. 074
- 1. 202 087
.413
.410
- 1. 092 1.217 1.102
- 1. 066
- 1. 085
- 1. 210 096
.418
~.9
.2 1.7 2.2 1.0
.7
.9 1.4
.413
- 1. 119
- 1. 209
- 1. 286
- 1. 175 123 1.172
- 1. 282 206
- 1. 117
.413
.411
- 1. 113
- 1. 207
- 1. 28"
- 1. 178 114 1.174
- 1. 286 216
- 1. 138
.420
~. 5
~. 5
~
1
.2
~.7
.2
.3
.8 1.9 1.8
.319 1 087 209
- 1. 134
.184 252
- 1. 202
- 1. 252 1.183 1.133 207
- 1. 086
.318
.317
- 1. 081 200 1.123 180 248 1.196
- 1. 250 1.185 1.139 246
- 1. 106
.312
~. 6
~. 6
-.7
~1.0
~
3
~.3
-.5
-.2
.2
.5 3.2 1.8
-2.0
.543 1 203 285
- 1. 190
.323 273 250 1.277
- 1. 324 1.189 1 285 1 202
.542
.539
- 1. 196 278
- 1. 186
.316 265 243 1.271
- 1. 319 1.193
- 1. 298
- 1. 217
.550
~. 6
-.6
~.5
~. 3 S
~.6
-.5
-.5
-.3
.3 1.0 1.3 1.5 310
- 1. 118 073 1.172
- 1. 256
- 1. 280 1.192
- 1. 304
- 1. 193
- 1. 280
- 1. 256
- 1. 172
.072
- 1. 113
.309 107
- 1. 111
.068
- 1. 166 1 249 271 1.182
- 1. 297
- 1. 187
- 1. 276
- 1. 254
- 1. 165 081 1.145
.316
-.8
-.5
-.5
-.5
-.6
-.8
-.6
-.5
-.3
-.2
-.6
.9 2.8 2.3 177
.971
.032
- 1. 120
- 1. 204 2l)(J 304 219
- 1. 304
- 1. 251
- 1. 204
- 1. 120 032
.971
.376 371
.964 025
- 1. 113 1 195
.24 :
295 214
- 1. 300 1 250
- 1. 203
- 1. 120 037
.983
.380
-].5
-.7
-.7
-.7
-.7
-.7
-.6
-.4
-.2
-.1
-.1
.0
.5 1.3 1.0
. ~O9
- 1. 114 072
- 1. 172
- 1. 256 280 1.193 304 1.192 280 256 1.172 073
- 1. 117
.310 306
- 1. 107 065 1 163 1.244 769 1.187 299 1.192 285 258
- 1. 175 077
- 1. 125
.306
.9
-.6
~.6
-.7
-1. 0
.. 9
-.6
-.4
.0
.4
.1
.2
.3
.7
-1. 2
.542 1 202
- 1. 285 1.189
.324
- 1. 277
.250
- 1. 273
- 1. 324 1.190 285 203
.543
.539
- 1. 198 1.272 1.175
.31 ]
- 1. 269 242
- 1. 268
- 1. 320 1.191 286
.206
.547 10
-.5
-.3
-1. 0
-1. 2
-1. 1I
-.7
-.6
-.4
~. 3
.1
.0
.3
.7
.318
- 1. 086
- 1. 208
- 1. 133 1 18J
- 1. 252 1 202
- 1. 252 1.185
- 1. 134 1.209
.088
.319
.315
- 1. 076 1.189 1.106 1.169
- 1. 242
- 1. 191
- 1. 245 1.172
- 1. 136
- 1. 216 091
.320 11
-.9
-1. 0
-1. 5
-2.4
-1 2
-.8
-.9
-.5
-1.1
.1
.6
.3
.4
.413 1.117
- 1. 206 28L 1.172
- 1. 123
- 1. 175 286
- 1. 209
- 1. 119
.413
.405
- 1. 099 1.187
.270 1.168
- 1. 121
- 1. 178 292
- 1. 221
- 1. 143
.411 12
-1. 9
-1. 5
-1. 6
-1 0
-.3
-.2
.3
.4 1.0 2.2
-.7
.413
- 1. 087
.7,02 074 1 043
- 1. 083 209 090
.414
.407
- 1. 073
.19J
.073
- 1. 047
- 1. 096 229 106
.421 13
-1. 5
~1. 3 8
-.1
.4 1.2 1.7 1.4 1.8
.320 54:!
.113
.983
- 1. 133
.548
.321
.312
.53Cj
.118
.994
- 1. 162
.559
.326 14
-2.3 S
.5 1.2 2.6 2.0 1.6 STANDARD
.306
.374
.312 AVERAGE DEVIATION
.309
.379
.319
. peT DIFFERENCE.
15
. 626 1.0 1.3 2.2
.9 Summary:
Map No: S2-22-03 Date:
OS/27/08 Power:
99.85%
Control Rod Position:
D Bank at 227 Steps 1.874 1.464 1.168 221 MWD/MTU QPTR:__0_.9_9_8_8_-+--_1._0_05_0__
0.9910 1.0052 Axial Offset (%) = +3.899 "JE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 39 of 51
\\lE-1543 Rev. 0 This page intentionally left blank.
S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 40 of 51
SECTION 7 - STARTUP PHYSICS TESTING RESULTS S2C22 STARTUP PHYSICS TESTING RESULTS Parameter Measured Predicted Olff (M-P) or Design (M)
(P)
(M-P)fP,%
Toler Critical Boron Concentration (HZP ARO). ppm 1567 1548 19 150 Critical Boron Concentration (HZP Ref Bank in), ppm 1391 1389 2
- 1:28 Isothermal Temp Coefficient (HZP ARO), pcmlF
-2.324
-2.181
-0.143
- 1:2 Differential Boron Worth (HZP ARO), pcrn/ppm
-7.41
-7.60
-2.5%
+/-10%
Reference Bank Wortll (B-bank, dilution), pcrn 1305.0 1352,0
-3.5%
+/-10%
Rod Worth :s 600 pcm:
A-bank Worth (Rod Swap). pcrn 262.3 265.7
-3.4
+/-100 SA-bank Worth (Rod Swap), pcrn 720.3 726.0
-0.8%
+/-15%
C-bank Worth (Rod Swap). pcrn 1032.8 1052.0
-1.8%
- 1:15%
D-bank Worth (Rod Swap), pcm 1105.1 1131.1
-2.3%
+/-15%
S6-bank Worth (Rod Swap), pcrn 1097.0 1143.6
-4.1%
+/-15%
Total Bank Worth, pcm 5522.5 567004
-2.6%
+/-10%
S2C22 testing time:
6.2 hrs
[criticality OS/20/08 @ 1205 to end of rod swap on 05120/08 @ 1817J Recent Startups:
S1C22 testing time:
S2C21 testing time:
S1C21 testing time:
S2C20 testing time:
S1C20 testing time:
S2C19 testing time:
S1C19 testing time:
8.0 hrs 5.8 hrs 5.0 hrs 8.0 hrs 7.6 hrs 7.25 hrs 10.4 hrs Notes: If Roo Worth >600 pcm, calculate % diff; otherwise, just diff in worth. Rod worths are fisted in the order in which measurements were made.
. ~
A-/>
Prepared by,'~- /
yc;.r-0 (11/1'/08 J.N.M os It !
,..., c... ~~
~
l 'Z-2.6Q~
Reviewed by:........;."":::?_/
__"V_.
5.S. Kare NE-1543 Rev. a S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 41 of 51
NE-1543 Rev. 0 This page intentionally left blank.
S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 42 of 51
SECTION 8 - REFERENCES 1.
S. A. Thompson, "Surry Unit 2 Cycle 22 Design Report," Technical Report NE-1535, Rev. 0, May 2008 2.
R. W. Twitchell, "Control Rod Reactivity Worth Determination by the Rod Swap Technique,"
Topical Report VEP-FRD Rev. 0.2-A, September 2004
~\\.
D. A. Pearson, "The Virginia Power CECOR Code Package," Technical Report NE-0831, Rev. 8, August 2004 4.
Surry Units 1 and 2 Technical Specifications, Sections 3.12.C.1, 4.1 O.A.
).
Letter from W. L. Stewart (Virginia Power) to the USNRC, "Surry Power Station Units 1 and 2, North Anna Power Station Units 1 and 2: Modification of Startup Physics Test Program -
Inspector Followup Item 280, 281/88-29-01," Serial No.89-541, December 8,1989 6.
A. M. Scharf, "Surry 2 Cycle 22 TOTE Calculations," Calculation PM-1234, Rev. 0, May 14, 2008 7.
J. L. Meszaros et aI, "Surry 2 Cycle 22 Flux Map Analysis," Calculation PM-1236, Rev. 0, and Addenda A and B, May 21, 22, and 28, 2008.
~.
M. A. Powers, "Reload Safety Evaluation Surry 2 Cycle 22 Pattern ASP," EVAL-ENG-RSE-S2C22, Rev. 0, April 2008, includes Core Operating Limits Report as Appendix 9.
S. B. Rosenfelder, "Surry 2 Cycle 22 Startup Physics Testing Logs and Results," MEMO-NCD-20070049-0-A, June 2, 2008
- 10. S. B. Rosenfelder and S. S. Kere, "RMAS v6 Verification," Calculation PM-1075, Rev. 0, May 5,2005
- 11. W. R. Koh1roser, "Administrative Limits on Hot Rod Drop Time Testing for Use as Acceptance Criteria in 1/2-NPT-RX-014 and 1I2-NPT-RX-007," Eng Transmittal ET-NAF-97-0197, Rev. 0, August 21,1997
- 12. S. B. Rosenfelder, "Surry Unit 2 Cycle 22 Core Loading Plan," Eng Transmittal ET-NAF 0079, Rev. 0, December 3,2007
- 13. N. A. Yonker, "Validation of Rod Drop Test Computer for Hot Rod Drop Analysis,"
Calculation PM-1044, Rev. 0, November 1,2004 NE-1543 Rev. a S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 43 of 51
]4.
A. H. Nicholson, "Justification for Defining 0 to 2 steps withdrawn as Fully Inserted when Measuring Control and Shutdown Banks during the Surry Startup Physics Testing Program," Eng Transmittal ET-NAF-06-0046, Rev 0, April 30, 2006
!5. R. W. Twitchell, "Implementation ofVEP-FRD-36-Rev. 0.2-A for Surry Units 1 and 2," Eng Transmittal ET-NAF-04-0075, September 9,2004 NE-1543 Rev. 0 S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 44 of 51
NE-1543 Rev. 0 APPENDIX STARTUP PHYSICS TEST
SUMMARY
SHEETS S2C22 Startup Physics Tests Report Page 45 of 51
Z tTl I,......
Surry Power Station Unit 2 Cycle 22 Startup Physics Test Summal'y Sheet - Formal Tests (Page 1 of 6) eterences1.) m:-l535,Rev.
2.) Memorandum from C.T. Snow to E.J. Lozito, dated June 27,1960 3.) WCAP~7905. Rev. 1 4.) ET-NAF~08-Q052, Rev. 0 NfA No V
Yas
~""--
No No No
-L Yes No
'-L Yesl 1,:,,6
~.
NJA S/tr/f)'
1':(2(,
R~
~ Yes
- s1*:I if#.
N/A I
No NlA laCe x A(Ce)AAOI s 1000 pom IT-S. 4.10.A]
NJA
¥~.
where;
- 1
- I: 2 pcmfF l{(Pc
- pJfPtl'1 x 100% S; 4.0 %3 The allowable range is set to the larger of the measured results or the pre-critlcalbenchtesl.
Pre-erilical Bench Test Resutts
'!: ft'-
pcm Allowable range
- t 100 pcm
{arISO}MAAO* (aTISO)ARO =..0*14) pcm/F le""'1'=' 1352::t: 10%
porn I 100x(Mea3. - Des.)IDes. =-3.S
- ~,Wt;;zl~~1
¥rllh~~~~~;
ZPTR=
-If
?.Q ' /0 to
/.0'10-:
amps Po= 1;('r.5 I..1. ~_pcm (measured reactivity)
Pt'" st.rL. -Qi.Jr1 pcm (predicted reactivity)
%D ={(pc - pf)/pt}){ 100%
%0 =<1-04"6
- 2.31-/'
f (a/sO)"'ARO::.,Qw... g1Jl6V
!(aT1SO}ARO'::' -t,t.111
~1 pcm/F I REFilL B
-,jar
[/).
Nn N
N
[/).
}
'l:i
~
(")
C/J
>--3 (l)
C/J.....
C/J Vl
.j::..
w
- tl (l) o
- tl
,g
§.
'l:i P'
(TO (l)
.j::..
0'\\
o
>"+)
Vl
Z tTl I......
(Celli.B"'.
- JI!;1~c/
.art'(
ppm 139,:;1,s'"
Irot.::
I (110181)4=
!C10*Y +/- 10%
S:~:f~_ pcm 1OOx(Meas, - Des.)lDes. '" -2.G %
N/A WiiM,.Y*
Design I IDate!
Criteria Acceptance TIme of Preparerl CrltodaMeI Tosll_
(C6>&",1 1370+l\\(Ca)ARO +/- 28 ppm l\\(Ce)AAO'" ~ ppm (h'orn above)
(Ca)e'" Ltie;
+/- 28 ppm (Ce)NB* {Cu)e=..*~S ppm
~ii&iiii" References 1.) NE-1535. Rev. 0 2.} MemorandUm from C.T. Snow to E.J. lozito. dated June 27, 1980 3.) WCAP*7905. Rev. 1 4.) ET*NAF.()8.oo52, Rev. 0 Surry Power Station UnIt 2 Cycle 22 Startup Physics Test Summary Sheet - Formal Tests (Page 2 of 6)
,?zo, "3 pcm I o'l7_Q. pcm Q
/os2,o_pcm 11()~l_pcm lARS",
I RS_
C ID RS::
IS6RS",
VI oj::.
VJ
- 0 (ll o
""'0 P:>
(JQ (ll oj::.
--.I o
>-+,
VI
(/J Nn N
N
(/J
~
""'0
~
(')
CFJ
.....-j (ll CFJ CFJ
- 0
,g o
- 4.
Z tTl I-Vl
~
w i':J
~
o Surry Power Station Unit 2 Cycle 22 Startup Physics Test Summary Sheet M Formal Tests (Page 3 of 6) gn I ICbd~
Criteria Acceptance Time of Met Criteria Met Test Rodded Flux Map CtlterlOIl (If either etlterlon t. met, I rodded flux maD ~% DCl¥.rwllh rods at the insertion limit ill notrequlNd)
- rfa4. ~
MaxfIPO%OIFp.::~*..
NlA
- 1012.4%
NlA b'{6f.
4.
/'
I(A/1 for P > 0.9 Yes 4
~
No NtA
/Y8S
............ V8S NlA NlA
~
No N/A FAH(N~U6(1+().3(1.p>>)
(COLR 3.4J NlA NJA S 1.0:t
,.~z...
Tilt'"
/. Of0 0 fl~~P,~..
I I-V_,
I
%lllfl" 1..g
%~~ "'..
fl'"~P,<U' NtA No" "I>
sfaUt
!:(
% for P
.9 (PI. !t!!Y poy_i.a O'~ o~
Hucltlr Enthalov RIse Hot ClNlnnel factor. F, FAH Maximum PosltiYItmcor. Quadrant PowerTIlt
'Total Heat Flux Hot a.annel Factor, F~.64"l<<Z) [COLR 3.3]*->t
..... 1""9(,)= "... - c..o I
1~lntoCOLRUnlt= Ll8.1'1 ff}o I
I No I r./1 tvn tv tv r./1
~
'"0
'"0
- r' Cf).o' Cf).....,
(l)
Cf)......
Cf).
i':J
~o
- 4.
References 1.fNE':1635, Rev. 0 2.) Memorandum from C.T. Snow to E.J. lozlto. dated June 27, 1980 3.) WCAP-7905, Rev. 1 4.) ET-NAF-OS-OOS2, Rev. 0 6.) PM~1191 Rev.O/OOA
'i:l
~
~
00 o-,
VI OR S)'lllhesized I'dH at limiting power $
,.;I A NlA FAH s1.56(1+0.3(1-P)} [COLR 3.4]
NJA No
- ' ?.=AK. FOlC?)
'fIorCN4,vNIS~ FAC77JR...
- ~ t:!At.CCI~l:> /fr AoOoOE ~F,nZA/.l',HvNl /HII~rAJ
Z tTl I
Vl
+:.
w
- tJ (D
o Surry Power Station Unit 2 Cycle 22 Startup Physics Test Summary Sheet - Formal Tests (Page 4 of 6)
- r NlA No No NlA
,/
V88 Vet
/Yes No NlA NIl\\.
./ Ya No De8lunl*..
- ~Datel CrIterIa Accepta.".C8 Time. ofl Preparerf Met
.Crtterta Met Teet RevIewer NlA iSl' Il1'$/JOfoll Nil>.
FAH(N}s:1.5eCHO.3(1*P)} (COlR 3.04]
F~~*K(.Z} [COLR3.31 it ~
Ma~nIo~"
,,~. ¥1'! 39.r%
1,:1 Nil\\.
~1.or NI"
- 1:15% for P,<O.9
- 1:10% for PI l!O.9 p,.
/.co'93
%04FF=
- 5. 8"
% for PI ~.9' 2.>% b Pr<O.9 Nuc".l!!ntttalIWR" Hot Ch8nMI FICtOr. 'AHeN FAH(N)-
I.![Z '2-TIlt:
(/J Nn N
N
(/J
~
""'0
- r'
'a(s.
Vl.....,
(D Vl.....
Vl
- tJ (D
"0o
- +
Referel'lOe$ 1.} NE*1535, Rev. 0 2.} Memorandum from C.T. Snow to E.J. LOzito, dated June 27, 1980 3.} WCAP-7905. Rev. 1 4.) ET-NAF-os.o052, Rev. 0
""'0
~
+:.
\\0 o
.-+,
Vl
-¥- F~(7-)
~l:"M+VN!"L FAc~
(A7-A/ooe o~ ""rA/,ImVNt MA.eGXAI)
- ' ~ CAtLVtA7"Eb /9'/ pOD' oF /HZ'A;I>>tUrJ1 A'lA/l.t:W
IZ rluJtt sliJ1P't NlA No No MfA
/
Yes
~Vel No NO NlA NlA v
V,"
Deaign **1-**************
DateI Criteria
~phmc8 Time of Met CrtterIa Met Test Lves N/A NlA FAH(Nl;S1.51!(1..o.3{1.p>>) (COLA 3.4)
Fo(Z);SI2,32IP)'K{Z} [cotl~,!.o'i
~
,:;;~
Maroln to COlR Umlt"'~i,,'Ihlt">
f,t NfA N/A 51.02'
- 1:10% for PI ao.9./
- 1:16% lOr P~O.9 ;,/
~
Surry Power Station Unit 2 Cycle 22 Startup Physics Test Summary Sheet - Formal Tests (Page 5 of 6)
RlIKl Hot CttanI'Iel P8iCIOr, f'AH 16L\\
Ot~t~
F'AH(N)"
Total Heat F1Ull HotCblInnei Factor. 1'"
%DlFF._3?~% for Pi i!:O.
- 'a :~_.% for P~O.9 HUG"-' Enth<ll TNt'"
Maldmum Po8tlMt Incore Quadrant PowerTIft Z
tTl I......
Vl
.j:::..
W
~
(D
~
o
[/}
N()
N N
[/}
......j
'"t;j
~
(')
en
>-:l (Den......
en
~.g o
- t.
References 1.) ME-1535, Rev. 0 2.) Memorandum from C.T. Snow to E.J.l.ozlto, dated June 27, 1080 3,) WCAp*7905, Rev. 1 4.) ET-NAF.Q8.0052. Rev. 0
'"t;j
~
(D Vlo o
Vl
~ PEAk!.
FOl(~)
1'-;t!Tr ~IYAA/NCt.. p",c~
~~ CALce;U/"E,o /9r~ or~:rAP~lP'1,/UIf/£cZ/\\/
Surry Power Station Unit 2 Cycle 22 Startup Physics Test Summary Sheet - Formal Tests (Page 6 of 6)
L tTl I.......
!JI
+:0-w
~
(l)
~
o
[/1 Nn N
N
[/1
.......j
""'c::l
~
enO*
en
>-3 (l) en en
~
.g o:4
""'c::l Pl (JQ (l)
!JI o
>-+,
!JI L~2 N/A 2.,
aom References 1.) NE-1535, Rev. 0 2.) Memorandum from C.T. Snow to E.J. Lozito, dated June 21, 1980 3.) WCAP-7905. Rev, 1 4.) ET-NAF..o8-0052, Rev. 0 DesignI IDate!
Criteria Aceeplance TlfM of Met CrlteriaMet Test NlA No