ML18045A208
| ML18045A208 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 06/06/1980 |
| From: | Hoffman D CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| To: | Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8006090291 | |
| Download: ML18045A208 (2) | |
Text
.~*
consumers Power company General Offices: 212 West Michigan Avenue, Jackson, Michigan 49201 * (517) 788-0650 June 6, 1980 Director, Nuclear Reactor Regulation Att Mr Dennis M Crutchfield, Chief Operating Projects Branch No 5 US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 DOCKET 50-255 - LICENSE DPR PALISADES PLANT - H FUEL CYCLE Consumers Power Company was requested in a July 11, 1979 letter (Ziemann to Bixel) to submit information regarding assurance that water hole peaking was adequately considered in the calculation of flux distributions.
On February 26, 1980 a letter was submitted that compared Exxon Nuclear Corporation's standard method for calculating local power peaking for Palisades with a Monte Carlo calculation (XMC).
This letter provides information for the justifica-tion of the use of XMC as a reference calculational method for Palisades.
In XN-NF-80-19 entitled "Exxon Nuclear Methodology for Boiling Water Reactors, Vol 1, Neutronics Methods for Design and Analysis" dated May 1980, ENC pro-vided comparisons among XMC, Diffusion Theory Methods, and gamma scan experi-ments.
This information is applicable to the Palisades XMC local power distribution calculation because of the similarity between the Palisades lattice and the BWR assemblies measured (ie, water gap, zoned enrichment).
In addition, Consumers Power Company has compared the XMC calculation submit-ted for Palisades with an independent Collision Probability Method (EPRI-CPM).
Percent differences between CPM and XMC are shown in. Figure 1.
Twelve energy groups and 30 mesh points were used in the spatial calculation in CPM.
The overall agreement between CPM and XMC is good, with XMC predicting 1.7% higher peaking in the high-power corner pin.
David P Hoffman Nuclear Licensing Administrator CC JGKeppler, USNRC NRC Resident Inspector-Palisades Attachment Figure 1 8006090 ~°1 '
/fool 5
J /1
1*"1*
~;.
-1. 7
+0.5
-0.2 CPM - XMC XMC x 100 Standard Deviation =
WIDE GAP
+0.2
+1.5 0
+0.4
-0.5
+0.1
-0.5
-1. 8
-1.1
+0.1
-3.1 0
-2.5
-1. 6
+3.1
+1.4
-0.6
+0.2 1.5%
Comparison Between CPM and XMC for a Palisades H Assembly FIGURE 1
+0.4
-0.3
-0.1
-0.2
-0.1
-0.2
+0.9
+0.9
+0.5
+0.8
+2.3
+3.4
+1. 6
+1.9 0
CL