ML19260E078

Summary of 800122 Meeting W/Util,Bnl & Us Army Corps of Engineers in Bethesda,Md Re Adverse Affects of Crud Deposit on Critical Reactor Parameters & Proposed Treatment W/Hydrogen Peroxide to Remove Deposit in Upcoming Shutdown

ML19260E078
Person / Time
Site:	Calvert Cliffs
Issue date:	02/01/1980
From:	Conner E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8002130301
Download: ML19260E078 (31)

Text

.

/

'o UNITED STATES E\\'

'n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

{,

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 9,

a February 1, 1980

%, **.../

Docket No. 50-317 LICENSEE:

Baltimore Gas and Electric Company (BG&E)

FACILITY: Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No.1 (CCNPP-1)

SUMMARY

OF MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 22 TO DISCUSS CRUD BUILDUP AND PROPOSED REMOVAL FROM FUEL ASSEMBLIES AT CALVERT CLIFFS, UNIT NO. 1 The subject meeting was held at the Commission's offices in Bethesda, Maryland. A list of the attendees is given in Enclosure 1.

Introduction In numerous telephone conversations with the BG&E staff (primarily Lippold),

the NRC has aeen aware of a crud buildup on the fuel assemblies of CCNPP-1 during Cycle 4 operations. As explained in the BG&E submittal of November 13, 1979, the cause of the crud buildup was a small air inleakage into the puri-fication system via the instrument air header through two leaking isolation c

valves.

This air source is normally used to assist in spent resin transfer.

BGLE has conservatively operated CCNPP-1 at reduced power level since early November 1979.

The NRC staff requested this meeting to discuss the adverse affects the crud deposit has on critical reactor parameters and the proposed treatment with hydrogen peroxide to remove the crud deposit during the upcoming cold shut-down.

Sumary After opening remarks and introductions by the NRC (Conner), the licensee (Lippold) discussed the important reactor parameters using the data in.

This plot shows how the power level, core AP, Fxy and the INCA ASI have varied with time since September 21, 1979.

He pointed out that:

1.

data points were once per day until October 26 and then once per hear since that date; 2.

addition of Lithium began on November 7,1979; 3.

the spike increases on ASI are due to CEA insertion in preparation for power coefficient measurement; and 8002130 3C{

. the core parameters, with the exception of core AP, have returned to 4.

their nomal range.

Next, CE (Goodwin) presented the physics observations; eighteen viewgraphs His conclusions are presented on the second identified as Enclosure 3.He said the data showed the crud was heaviest page of Enclosure 3.

He, also, concluded that the core, upper and outer portion of the core.

The NRC (Rosenthal) questioned except the core AP, was nearly back to normal.the accuracy of usi or repeat-CE (Goodwin) said the accuracy was not to good but the precision ability of the calculation was very good.

The staff (Conner and Dunenfeld) questioned why the core AP was still high BG&E and CE had no answer when the physics parameters are back to normal.

pointed out that in other crud deposit events, sometimes an increased core LP resulted in reactivity effects (Palisades and present CCNPP-1 events) bu:

and otner times it does not (Ft. Calhoun and the 1974 CCNPP-1 eve To the NRC (Weiss) question regarding possible crud redistribution, CE (Sears) realied that the crud caused a roughness of_ th_e fuel finish and therefore, BG&E (Lippold) cited nore turbulent flow but has no significent thickness.

the 1974 ever.t at CCNPP-1, where an unsuccessful attempt was made to ph sically remove some crud from fuel assemblies, as an example of this

/

condition.

CE (Gcodwin) next discussed two viewgraphs, Enclosure 4, thabillustratedThe staf their thinking on the possible crud / reactivity mechanism.

questioned the affect of the crud deposit on the current safety analysis.

BGLE and CE (Lippold and Goodwin) responded that the safety analysis is not adversely affected because the RCS flow remains greater than that used in the current analysis and the abnormal conditions are bounded by the safety The on-site safety review committee has been involved with tne analysis.

event since its beginning.

The next subject discussed by BG&E (Kupa) was chemical cleaning of the primary He pointed out the findings of the EPRI report NP-592 dated April 1978.

Hydrogen The abstract and summary of this report are included as Enclosure 5.

loop.

peroxide is not a new chemical in the reactor core since it is formed in the residual gamma field when the reactor head is removed for refueling.

BGLE has prepared procedures based on the Ft. Calhoun procedures and experien CE We questioned the expected removal.

from tneir treatment in 1975.

(n n Roozen) indicated that possibly 1/3 to 1/2 the crud would be removed.

The staff (Conner) questioned the activity levels expected, the hydrogen l d

Deaoxide concentrations to be used and the number of treatments to be emp oye.

BGLE (Kupa) said:

based on the EPRI Report, BG&E has handled cobalt-58 levels near the 1.

valves reported, 2.

they expect to remove 500 to 1000 Ci of cobalt, the hydrogen peroxide will be added in steps to get an oxygen level 3.

over 1 ppm, it will require about two days to purify the system and get the activity 4.

back to normal, and 5.

hydrazine will be used to reduce the oxygen af ter the trea ment before startup (normal procedure).

In regards to corrective measures to prevent the recurrence of air inleakage, BG&E (Lippold and Kupa) stated that:

the leaking air isolation valves in the purification syste, have been 1.

repai red,

2.

BG&E is investigating means to reduce the oxygen in the makeup water, and the plant staff is now running hydrogen ailalysi_. outinely on the RCS.

3.

Next, BG&E (Lippold) made the following closing statements:

1.

the core physics conditions have improved to near normal, c.'

2.

BG&E is not satisfied to continue operation at 50 percent power level, they dot think the unit should be Operated at 100 percen. power level 3.

" heat more analysis, does not reduce 4.

BGLE dy look at some fuel assemblies if the cleani.i the core aP, and 5.

they plan to shutdown on January 25, 1980, and start the hydrogen peroxide treatment on January 27, 1990.

The staff held a caucus after the meeting.

Important items discussed were:

BG&E has demonstrated a conservative approach to safe reactor operation 1.

throughout this event, we believe extra shutdown margin, about 2 percent AK/K ins ead er the 2.

1 percent rcquired by Technical Specifications; should be available before the hydrogen peroxide treatment, special precautions should be taken di' ring reactor startup as the t. ore 3.

reactivity nay be slightly different than predicted, 4.

extra conservatism should be taken during the power assencion following reactor startup, and 5.

the need for documentation of this event and the results of the hydrogen peroxide treatment in a detailed final report for the NRC.

In a January 23, 1980 telephone conversation between the NRC (Conner) and BG&E (Al Thorton and Lippold), the staff concerns were discussed and they agreed to implement items 2 (shutdown margin will be at least 2 percent AK/K), 3 and 4.

In addition, BG&E (Lippold) will notify the project manager of the critical core parameters, including core AP, when 50 percent power level is reached. BG&E has previously agreed to provide the documentation discussed in the above item 5.

M E. L Conner, Project Manager Operating Reactors Branch #4 Division of Operating Reactors

Enclosures:

1.

List of attendees 2.

Reactor Core Parameters 3.

Physics Observations 4.

Possible Crud / Reactivity Mechanisms 5.

Effects of Hydrogen Peroxide Additions on Shutdown Chemistry Transients at Pressurized Water Reactors MEETING WITH BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY ON CRUD BUILDUP AT CALVERT CLIFFS, UNIT NO.1 January 22, 1980 List of Attendees NRC CE BNL E. L. Conner, ORB #4/ DOR /NRR CT B. Brinkman M. Todosow D. Feino, CPB/NRR N. Shapiro D. van Rooyer R. E. Architlel, IE/ Region 1 J. M. Cicerchia F. Almeter, EB/DPR/NRR C. McCracken M. Dunenfeld, Physics /NRR C. F. Sears S. H. Weiss, RSB/ DOR /NRR W. A. Goodwin S. Diab, RSB/ DOR /*iRR P. W. Kruse M. Chatterton, R66/DCR/NRR J. Rosenthal, RSB/ DOR /NRR BG&E H. Richings, CPB/NRR A. J. Kaupa E. Balckwood, IE/NRC L. B. Russell F. J. Witt, EEB/ DOR /NRR J. Lippold

ii t

p 3 a

g y

or i

o-

_t 4

g g

,l

.. - w e g i

J-oh i.

d_

D

_. 1.

.1_ _L._

Q:d I

a.

• v

_u i.

.g.

n a

g n

a

..l.

_} {

2

-1

=

t

>l

j, 4

.i y

g i

n

}.

p

.t.

=

i.

i<

G t

y i

4

_=

,6 a

i i

.*~

I.

i r

r..

4 i

=~

- 1I'M-

%~

g i

r n

-a,,--

J, g

'a -

y 1 ;,,,

l-r

.2 i

t.

-{

4 m-

,. p_

i p

w

=(

.i:

g 4

-[

, i..

,T..y f

y' g

- l-.

y g

~

@y

[Qt; j.

_~

~

p_J A

i

/c j h j

-3.L.l s

r g*

. ; g-i i

g.

y 3

~

-0 4

p

~-

}..

.t

.. i -

i S_i I

e N

g t

si fT-l i

n.

J.-

.+

4 ar i

g u_,

.,q 6

-l o

ii_

m

. =.

l f

e.%

=3

. -l..

1 g

i fi:

.i e,

.I i

1.

(

-j -

yi i J i..

j_

f_fc}

i' i

w

=-

e S,

p i

3-L, 6%

t

r..

'{!

Z l-J..

_i a.:

_j

=

f.___p L

r.

2

_m

=

=

f{--

j "=9.v _

. l.-

.r t

h[__

i-(

i k.

p-u i1 i=

=

+.i i

-i

, g; 6

_3 4

l

_a-s-

-z 7

n, s.

e.'

~

p

_i _

I, iSi-

.i ff.5%

J g

( 6..

=

=

e i.

. 1

.g e t.. <

r -

-b -r

's i

=

~

t-

-l, g=J--

)

,1 1 i

1

.i._

.u m.,

_t-

45... i i _-_4 i

h'~

i

.i 8

i

$s 1

i1 i 4

4

1. v.

4 4..

HF i

-J 4

=

...i i i:

~

4~

.3 e

iF r.,

Mi M

l~~~~

l

.'t i

=-

d C

i-dTi Pi i Li i4 I

l '-

i

.t A6-ik I i

i f

i i

.. i.

i

~

k

' h' qkh

,l

,.. 'g 1

g i

6 A

T-t--

_3 1

1 r\\ I i, i i

i

~iTi-h f

\\

kY Mk L T g p

g

_(_

'i

-h

-- [

L --

F

- -i-b

- I5 1-.

_(

f j

'~

O h M

.h h

l..

M-

- t_

M

~

ia l

M p..

J__

.v, i

f

.h L-j y

{

=

4--,

- 7 1

p..

[

p

- i[..+

4 q

}

.3 l

g

'4 n

n n g g g I'

=

=

=

a a

s. a 8

8 8 33a.: f111.

~ ~

EHH.ElH__a!_E_R_ ESSE *n 6

{

f~

PHYSICS OBSERVATIONS AGENDA 1.

REACTIVITY 2.

POWER DISTRIBUTION 3.

POWER COEFFICIENT

PHYSICS OBSERVATIONS CONCLUSIONS 1.

POWER DEPEi1 DENT REACTIVITY LOSS 2.

POWER DEPENDENT POWER DISTRIBUTION DISTORTION AXIALLY, POWER PUSHED TO BOTTOM RADIALLY, POWER PUSHED TO CENTER AT UPPER ELEVATIONS 3.

POWER COEFFICIENT HIGHER TilAN NORMAL

~

4.

SIGNIFICANT RECOVERY SINCE LATE DECEMBER

C o lve/t C l,4b E

C_yaeA_

fead.v,4 Dhit. vs Pow ev-Levc l y

i i

i 1

i i

i i

o ct z4-D N.1 48

+

Nov 6 3

N 3

/

(?,

2. '_

idoo tA-6' i

ooo n N/*

s 0

oy O

og M., in Dec.z3 T

O j

_ #. _.9._.__ _.-. __ __ __ g e

~

n

( )

/

T -

n 3 " 83 h 5~

L o ( 4--

e Ma

.Z.

o

{

o = P<e.- eues-t a v umu (N _,+

O = ovo nD e.v.2 e

}

e =

D u <. <9 ec.e v ny r

e 9

i i

f I

i i

i i

7_ o 40 Go EO loo Iower

[o 2.706 M W/I-o

)

AXIAL SHAPE INDEX BOTTOM HALF POWER -TOP HALF POWER BOTTOM HALF POWER + TOP HALF POWER ASI POSITIVE + AXIAL PEAK IN BOTTOM ASI NEGATIVE + AXIAL PEAK IN TOP b ASI = MEASURED ASI -CALCULATED ASI A ASI POSITIVE -+ MEASURED AXIAL SHAPE MORE BOTTOM PEAKED THAN CALCULATED SHAPE a ASI NEGATIVE -+ MEASURED AXIAL SHAPE LESS BOTTOM PEAKED THAN CALCULATED SHAPE

OA

.-t. e i &

I C, &A--

Ale 2uea Aoal sNgo Ina.x (As20 v s. Povi-

• Tim o i

I I

I 5

8

'I Tc c.A, sPcb"T A

. I E- -

8 ///

2 O I%%<o e.ae3 ll/2-

^

\\\\

.I a IOlES O V3 3.r, m e.y u t

.I

. O 'b U

o.

e O vvir (eC oV ev-g

.ob scho A

I,-l

.C+

/, pit /3

'c e ll,. R.. ha 9

.ot

^

)

,,j,.,

2 olii o ioli o j-s o

a

'3 T.p ~"/l4 o

)

. o 2.

? nils-v a

Top Pe,xcc; s)

. os.

'S

'N

{

.oc,

/

it/zs

.o8

)

1 i

i e

a i

f.

2.0 9O 60 To ICX3 Powes, % d z700 Anw

..y

-- Q.. l o I

I i

o a.

O i

l hl k

l l

b

/F l l I

I I

i i/

i t i i i t i

i i

9 ii

.i i i i L +9' !

6 i i l i4 l

i 4t l 1

,I i

,{

e I,w-q 1

-l.

i

.i.

1

. i.

i g

3 i

i

.-t

._ y

,l

&]

.I-f.

-l 1

il

..q.

3 i

i 4l

. /....I -._

a.._

U)

{g j

/

n.

4

__;.. m l

I I

I I

I i

I i >.

l i

, q.....e%.,...,.

1 l

blI ih I d 'l' i I

d-

}

t f

f-i d

~h

'.7

==a""

e

. g..

. g..

_...9

.i.

.l i

I.

id le i.,

i

(

i i-i o

5 M

i

<C ~;.g ' O I-i

i e

i

' 4... _r.l L

_..J

_% Ls.j._

.._ t _t

__ j.

l I

l li

-LI l

1 !

w i

i 4

(,,4,

.l f.. h i -

l I

l'

.R-6 x..

_l. _

C

!1

}

i i

l R

i i

__o o

h,._j _...f.._.!_

y l

l

~j i

f Y

i i

i L

_.._ q _._.- d l

. i j.. I. M$ ]L l

i2.

J q

{ {\\

l3l i

l

'I

~~

1 i l

l i!

$5 Q[ 'i ! ' l i i ! \\h i Q l

t '

3 d

l%i,:

I !.i l

p

3. _ '_

g 7

n 2

7 r

i y

t r

n t v, i o..i i

n i

i,I.l.

L I

i c ',

6 l

'.i Q_.

l...

..l l J L._

l

.. L

-l !-

il l

I! Nl i

l j

lL i

i it i ii'i,i m i 'i i

i i I i I

.I

! ! ! l l

Ms !

I l

I i

g

'I

~~

1 I I I

iIXIsi l i I

', i i

o 4

IN. N,- l l

! i l i li I I i l i i

-O

.g 4

g 4

.g 7m o

..t. 7.:. 7 i,.., s i

4, i-,-

yi.._3 i

q.

3_ _ _.i.._

q g

f l.

I

.l

-k-

.y

}g 5-I IL l--. -} -

3 i

i i

i i

i l

I:

-l' i

l l

l I. l.

I

...l....L._..

i.. l i

.i

>.gie*

O 1 O

_ _ _ _. j __ _. __ j

.-r

,I i

- }_O

/

/

/

(l-

/

/

o D

p 3

R

/

t

==

l h_.

(

7 m

el I

4' H

.i vLa n

v3 g

D l

n r

<C 0

\\

n' i

<3

+

4

.1 E

o l

0 f,s.

s

_Q d

I' oJ' I

}.,

e s

l 0

C.

o a

=

v c

l

+

+

2

<i j

s ni o

Il

~ ~

O 6

i gg

. i.

i

]

3

,4 w

t 0

c ')

l

-U g

3 g

h H

33 i

'/

5 c3 i

(1-g O

ty g

e

\\

P s

t s.s SN 1

o i

+.

_4 0

a t.

9 o

MI D,$ sk em

o D_

op i

i 7

i i

l

o

)

/

4

/

)

gi

/

4 I

02 9-o g

f, p

ro

/)

0 l' 8 i

v s

+

f o

3

\\(

o i

n, to M

r

\\

D to

^

0 g

0

<1 s

\\

Y

.L

\\

3

\\

l-\\ '

l' h

0 p

\\

E.

'O

'l a

f)

)

U y

h@l

,O

)

\\

't o

5

,y

'\\

3

_ st Lt; O

H

\\

0 t ]%

m n

1 m-sp

't g

Z7 0

}\\

Nk

\\

E O

_o g\\

a p

h 1

2 s

G 6

\\

h I

}

's N

O g

g i

1-

'- t i

O Q

ed O

(n

+

N o,

N J

2

- sop eg vi,M 6D lb!ky

O b

_ }_O

._.,___....___.1 I

O

/

0

/

/

=

~

m 9

R o

o

\\

tn I

~

m 3

0 V) l g

g I-l I

3

[

o

-s p

^

O.

I

\\

=;C

.s 3

m

+

n t/ )

b I

7 O.

o

\\

N) 2 2

R

I h

O o

+

i j

D.

\\

'sp x

g w.)

2 x

'l I

U 7

o o

ii

'9 1.+".

e O

q.

i i

pd 4

i 0

n

\\

0 0

6 p

!f

\\f EO

)

\\

3

(

7 x

}s.)

e o

a

')

n G

0 V

s f.)

0 0

l N

t e

?

~,

st.

a m

a e3-apy % yag jwwy

0 0_

_.1

.I--

_. I I

-l 3-

_O p

./

/

b;

/

O 9

I

/

-=

_ (

f'

[

O e

o 3

sh l

(f 'p I

4 y

\\

o o

F 0'

d<

o

({.

O

}-

l P

y

,)

j i

Q

,)

8g 9

\\

.s

{

4 5

\\n v3 x'

a lt

]+

i J

l T

0 5

a e

o

~

l l

O 2

] t, o

g a

s

• o i

r/

v e

o

\\

0 6

E O

^

]A

\\

y s

g

.)

n

\\

O' g)

N E

N 's 0

O$

_J _ _

f f

\\t

'I I

t

<1 9

m o

e.

o.

m

q o

,w

~

x e

,, illee..{g 'e..... ~..

~

. yl 9..

g.

l f

j j';

l h

b l

t, aji i

o o._

Y

j. l lH l !

I I

t I

l' I

i1-i i

)

I I I 'l [ h "'

1 l h l-l

! I f_,,,

l _

l 9

1 1o 1

i wi ii i.t i.

i -

i i :

i 8 i:

'i '..l

1. I 1 I

i

, /

mim

'l

/

j in

.I

"

rj iii,! $ 4'

]

l l

[., y. h

)

[, _..j

{> 'h,/

]

L.

,+,

i i

i

._ m e

s I

y c

"i a-g or

-l-l-

i

. :q'!

.d I:o g

1 t:

'u mo._

+

N 1

80

.].

l

. '. li f.i{ 1.9.:a, #'..,.)h.. "i ':pllpi gl j, si ; lh M, w' 8*..s a[..

', j I

ti

.f i

H.

p ip

. a.

o.

!,e

,?

I e

1:

];

. f.

j --

l!.

i;'

t' d

t 3 l l,

~

s._.

...a 4.

'," i. f 71 j

!},., E, j l,,g ' I, sy

-' y 7 m) o' H

• e

\\..;

= __

o i

y

.f g.

p<1, y c

4.:

, e ; h }r gr q.

j.

'z i

~

pj g

~ ~-t - - '---- F

-F

-' 7 m ~ 'N '

.L' c]..M.' y'. :.

i 1

f j'

'l:

{J..

k.~u O l' 7

y

. r- ~

i i-

,1

.1 o,, ' 4 mlp,

,i

't J

IL 3

'k l

0

.l!.

},i:

8 41 np

. x 3p

-l,i I :i.

H

- r, ' F oi i

I,

,N..., q:.j L 4 s

i i

e us,

oLo, x

..r e

.p 4.

i.a.#. a.

u.. c.

i L

t.

.I l.

.i

.l 1

- M. i..

_ l.._ >F 1

1_

i i

i_

o.-

L

.t...

. a..

a T

-- 7, d

i i

u-

' }..

....!.... l.

.I l..[I!

', ' '..t;.lI

. I. i.......... ; : !.

.)

7 i.

7 t

p_

A

, %/....

_.....{._..

M,

2.. g

! g#

i g

j l:7 y

j

,j-(

0 j,

m p

, q q.4 v

-.r';c s

s t

E

.i.

.a.,

j j.

I 1

.. g'

,4

..n ]

. } O '

.i

-l i.

.i.

i, 4

N.

l

. _ '._' l.

'l.

t; l

I

j

- w, _

4- '

_ p._.

i s

a,

f.

f f__

m

.f I

lji 3

l' i

F

!ll l

l' l(! J 4 7

5Q1

@ l!j:

o

.a.

.7

. a._.

l.

g I

s G

l..

..).

.4....

.2 -

..i.

l 3

1 1 -

d' l

~

1...

p

'Jl..

l --.

l-

f. ~

h' c) 1 i

j l

[

I l

)

l t.

.'l

. \\,.

.L

...[_..

4 i

[

t g 4.g 7.g

.p p +

j 3

i' l l l

.I l'! \\ %

d.'

I l! !

l'1 l i j

-l 1

.c L _

.g M4 i I ! I i ! I I

1 i

l !

I l i i l i I l. i NN w I.i l I

i l

k MA 17.L mt '

Il l l.

I I I I I 1:

,i, l.

,1 0-

,,j.,,g.

7 4

4

i. 4.

. o P

,k I.'

,b-3

'M

. _.. _ _;-..~..

p i [. ".

p

.q i '.'

'I!.. a'.

j

g

.c.;p

.p e

.ia-p d

q.:.. d 4..

._,'.l.... L.

.J..

4lh Ih !f 1

p

.' ' l 1

' q..

a 1

l g

i i

4.

l.

' a&.

t,m _'u_

.. j._

...J.

g..

e R,

m i

l i

n i.

p

4..'e a w

j.- t t

.u i

i i-OO e

i

\\ - JJE dl

.W s;;L

. n -.

I Cml vet Ch{%'I C cJe 4-y Asr D;Weme.e vs. Po wer l' ve l i

s a

8 i

N o v (p %

.lo -

.o? -

o i

V

-f--

i 3 %.

U

. olo i

G D ou Z.* g Do

, co.

/JovI4-bn Gy G

.oZ d

9.e.- E ua t e

kc= m go et

<_.)-

O d

O < z___ yo

,4 N

M Z-3 %

.o2.

0 0 % 'I a v s_._

i I

8 l_.

~2.o 40 lo o 70 100 Po w, % & z.,oa avs

Celvc;r cirR I C c6 4-y Mc n.unct pla an Peak; Fa do< ( Fry )

vs. Pevse,.t % u i

i e

e e

i

),(,4 Tech $pec, bimiD ll/4, 1.62. -

g (Af,,,c,,y,vg I.L o -

O O v 'n M cueits tolzg y

g Ou^r) (ccove G

~C J

A l.Q,

, zj3 2

to/zf D

l.5d 12/f

?

tF l.52-O l olZ.o h

li/11 O 'YM IL 1.fo T-; g p

7 rr-f i l.48 t/l4,

• p 0 10/ (

S

,zjz 3 b

l.40, 62/s.7

'/5-

• ~

l.na-1,4 L I

I a

e i

i i

'20 Co bo 30 loo Po v a, % di zn o o n uj s

RADIAL POWER DISTRIBUTION INDICATOR RATIO 0F PREDICTED TO MEASURED POWER IN R

=

CENTRAL' ASSEMBLIES PREDICTED POWER IN 9 CENTRAL ASSEMBLIES

=

MEASURED POWER IN 9 CENTRAL ASSEMBLIES P / pM P

=

1-R =

PM-PP M

P FRACTIONAL DIFFERENCE IN MEASURED AND PREDICTED

=

POWER IN CENTRAL CORE REGION IF 1-R IS POSITIVE -> MEASURED POWER IS HIGHER THAN PREDICTED IN CENTRAL REGION MEASURED POWER IS LOWER THAN PREDICTED AT CORE PERIPHERY

Ca ver'r Clifs I Cyc\\e 4 Covnparisons o Measured and Adidut h'ial Pouc mbibuM[ons ch 20 y Elev4 ion v s.

9ower level i

i i

i i

W=

G,t io o{ Gdculded 12.

Lo Mea suved Pouc 9 Gdcal sw k nunblies

\\o -

E -

9L Oc 6

.J.

0 12.4 4

Novl4 Dec21 h Jan 14 9 O D 3 Y'cc - livt n O

~'

9 i

i__.

__ u _.

2._..

i o

20 40 60 to

\\ <>o 90 w er, Y ch 2.~10o MWr

Ca verb Clijs I Gycle 4 Compar dow c{ Nasuced cmd PicSc\\al Radio \\

Power bis tiibuhows ak %o'/ Elevakon vs.

Powe# Level i

R=9akia ch Ca\\culabed oc 24 O bo Heasured 90w u O pec 3 '

G in 9 cesa rai

~

A StembYles 10

~

O Nov 14 8

mb" v

g 6

~

i vs 4

7an 14 2.

Dec23 $

Prc-Everk G 34w 5 wap%

o

,1 I

i 1 -.

I - --- -

o 2.o 40 60 EO

'UU 90wer, '/c(2700MWL

Cc,lveA CliFh I C yc6 4-CucHie,e,$ ys.Tse v PO V)~

i i

i i

I i

8'.

i

- 1L n

O

~

O e

e i

-lo S

e&

D~

x o

N O

A x_,

o x

e o

(

6 O

s t

io 5

')

. (,

O Men ouvecl d uvia-c uc5t O

ep e M ec3 v<cd cluvig fcc odevy M;

.4 Glculdeci O

O U

A Ce lc ulot ec/, ()n,6 z_, Cy3 3

. 2,

/d e.q 30veci Un ;6,7 Cy3 O

x 0

O Z.o

'5 o lo Zo So cf 19 VoV Th Te v Tim o cl i)5ded whoo 6 ccc550V{fo IU o f OM/C#

3 3

C.,I v e t C l;f ( s E C yc.64-Ca LuloLJ - bs avecj Pom r J b cW-o o

D_

-(%.

V ".>.Ti m v

<r l

I I

I I

I Io 5

O Du<, %eyest v

J

.a 0

O O

3 O

" ' V "7 O

o O

s

. A-J=-

A Ur,t c o

O I

'U v

o v

+}

_h-

_o--______

a

.c kT

• g e___ __ _

_. ___ ___ g._

v P., i a s O

['

].

A v.

..;[_- f.____.._______.____._____

sv O

^

-f l_\\'

s.-

LF-v

~

.)

pp (J_

i l) j V

7._

t.

BJ

.,3 i

e t

i i

I Zo So IO 7_O So 9

19 Nov TDec.

Tah

POSSIBLE CRUD / REACTIVITY MECHAfilSMS 1.

POISONING EFFECT OF CRUD ITSELF NEUTR0f1 ABSORPTI0l1 IN Ni, FE, ETC.

BOILIllG ENHAl1CES CRUD FORMAT 10f1 MAY BE POWER-DEPEilDEllT, BUT SLOW (DAYS TO WEEKS) 2.

BOR0f1 C0flCEilTRATION IN CRUD BOR0f1 IS C0flCENTRATED lll POROUS CRUD BY

-- ADSORPTION (10f1 EXCHANGE)

-- B0lLIt1G IS POWER-DEPENDENT (MINUTES TO WEEKS)

POSSIBLE CRUD / REACTIVITY MECHANISMS, CONTINUED 3.

FUEL TEMP. INCREASE DUE TO CRUD INSULATION REACTIVITY EFFECT DUE TO D0PPLER POWER-DEPENDENT AND FAST (SECONDS)

POROUS, NONINSULATING CRUD LIKELY CLAD SURFACE MAY REACH TSAT (50-75 F INCREASE) 4.

CONCLUSION NO SINGLE EFFECT CAN EXPLAIN BEHAVIOR PROBABLY A COMBINATION OF ALL THREE 9

Effects of Hydrogen Peroxide Additions on Shutdown Chemistry Transients at Pressurized Water Reactors NP-692 Research Project 821-1 Final Report, April 1978 Prepared by NUCLEAR WATER AND WASTE TECHNOLOGY 1140 Pedro San Jose. California 95126 Principal Investigatcrs S. G. Sawocnka P. S. Wall J. Leibovitz W. L Peari Prepared for Electric Power Researen Institute 3412 Hillview Avenue Palo Alto, California 94304 EPRI Project Manager R.A.Shaw Nuclear Power Divisicn

A3STRACT Hydrogen peroxide injection has been employed on initial cooldown prior to a refueling outage at numerous pressurized water reactors. The injection in-creases primary coolant Co-58 levels duribg a period when purification can be used to remove the released activity without i=paccing oa the refueling schedule. To q tantify the effects of the, pero:t.de injection, test programs were performed at Turkey Point 3 where peroxide..was employed'and Kevaunce where no addition vas =ade.

Results of these progra=s and of a limited survey of other utility (xperience are discussed herein.

In so - ry, hydrogen peroxide injection results in an accelerated release of activated corrosion prcducts which would occur.or: ally when the primary system is vented to the at:csphere. The technique can be of signficant value in eliminating the occurrence of significant releases when purifi-cation to reduce refueling platform manpower exposures vould impact on the refueling outage schedule.

4, o 4

.e 111

SU 2'.ARY Hydrogen peroxide injection has been employed on 'nitial cooldown prior to a refueling outage at numerous pr:ssurized water reactors. The injection in-creases prinary coolant Co-58' levels during a period when purification can be used to renove the released activity without impacting on the rafueling schedule. To quantify the ef f ects of the peroxide injection, test progra=s were perfor:ed at Turkey point 3 where peroxide was employed and Kevaunee where no addition was =ade.

Results of these programs and of a li=1ted survey of other utility experience can be su==arired as follows:

1.

A significant increase in Co-58 concentration occurs prior to oxygen-This is associated with bora*1on (pH decrease) ation of a pri=ary syste:.

and with the te=perature decrease and is hypothesized to result from the decomposition of nickel f errite to nickel metal and nagnetite.

2.

Greater than 90% of the Co-58 activity in the pri=ary coolant is non-filterable subsequent to the peroxide injection or oxygenation.

3.

In-core deposits are the :ajer source of the activity released during shutdown with or without peroxide injection.

4.

Pero::Idc or o., _2r : Ji:i:n ::d n: :sjor i:;::t on prirary syntes shutdoun radia:ic: lial.':.

5.

No significant changes in iodine concentrations are associated with peroxide injection.

6.

Oxygenation and hydrogen peroxide additions produce similar effects on the release of Co-58.

This results from the interrelationship of oxygen and hydrogen peroxide caused by radiolytic effects in the core.

7.

Continued solubilization of Co-58 during the refueling or subsequent to isolation of the letdovu purification system indicates that significantly of Co-58 could be removed from the pri=ary system if greater amounts purification were =aintained for a longer eine.

In particular, the results of Indian Point 2 where 1100 curies of Co-58 vere re=oved during a shut-down emphasize this conclusion.

S-1

8.

Soluble nickel and co-58 concoceration increases occur si=ultaneously.

Nickel. is present primarily as a soluble species. Only a negligible effect on iron concentragion is associated with the peroxide injection with a significant fraction of the iron in an insoluble form.

9.

The behavior of Co-60 parallels that of Co-58.

10.

Removal efficiency of the letdown purification de=ineralizer for Co-58 is generally greater than 90%.

11.

Since Co-58 is present predominantly as a confilterable species subsequent to oxygenation or the addition of hydrogen peroxide, neither dropout nor the high radiation fields associa:ed with dropout would be expected to occur.

12.

No major i= pact of peroxide injection on corrosion of primary system

=aterials, that would not have occurred during a refueling outage, could be identified.

In su-mary, hydrogen peroxide injection resulce in an accelerated release of activated corrosion products which would occur cor= ally when the primary system is vented to the atmosphere. The technique can be of significant value in eliminacing the occurrence of significant releases when purifi-cation to reduce refueling platform manpower exposures would impact on the refueling outage schedule.

S-2 i

s

I MEETIf6

SUMMARY

DISTRIBUTION ORB #4 Ir. A. E. Lundvall, Jr.

Vice President - Supply i

1 Baltimore Gas & Eler.t. u. ;smpari; P. O. Box 1475 Baltimore, Maryland 21203 l

I Docket File R. Reid NRC PDR V. Noonan L PDR P. Check ORB #4 Rdg G. Lainas NRR Rdg G. Knighton H. Denton Project Manager E. G. Case OELD OI&E (3)

D. Eisenhut R. Ingram R. Vollmer R. Fraley, ACRS (16)

W. Russell Program Support Branch B. Grimes

'-TERA-T. J. Carter J. R. Buchanan A. Schwencer Meeting Summary File D. Ziemann NRC Participants T. Ippolito E. L. Conner W. Gammill D. Fieno L. Shao R. E. Architlel, Reg. I l

t J. Miller F. Almeter M. Dunnenfeld AE00 S. Weiss S. Diab M. Chatterton J. Rosenthal H. Richings E. Blaci.vood F. Witt Sq g

nuuno

..n