ML20046D383

Cycle 9 Startup Rept

ML20046D383
Person / Time
Site:	McGuire
Issue date:	08/03/1993
From:	DUKE POWER CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20046D382	List: ML20046D381 ML20046D383
References
NUDOCS 9308190075
Download: ML20046D383 (29)

Text

i l

i t

-l DUKE POWER COMPANY McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION UNIT 1 CYCLE 9 STARTUP REPORT t

August 3,1993 i

i i

i i

JDR308190075 930805 i

ADOCK 05000367 lii i

p PDR } {

t

.Y

.i Table of Contents l

r Paae List of Tables ii f

List of Figures lii 1.0 Introduction 1

1.1 Prestart NIS Realignment Following Refueling -

1

'i PT/0/A/4600/78

'l 1

s 2.0 Criticality Following a Change in Core Nuclear Characteristics -

4 PT/0/A/4150/28 3.0 Zero Power Physics Testing 5

-s 3.1 Boron Endpoint Measurement - PT/0/A/4150/10 9

l 3.2 Isothermal Temperature Coefficient Measurement-10 PT/0/A/4150/12 3.3 Control Rod Worth Measurement - PT/0/A/4150/11 13 i

i 3.4 Control Rod Worth Measurement: Rod Swap -

13-i PT/0/A/4150/11A 4.0 Power Escalation Testing 16-4.1 Thermal Power Output Measurement - PT/0/A/4150/03 20 4.2 Reactivity Anomalies Calculation - PT/0/A/4150/04 21 4.3 Core Power Distribution and incore/NIS Correlation Check -

21 PT/0/A/4150/02A 4.4 incore and Nuclear instrumentation Systems Recalibration -

24 PT/0/A/4600/02G i

i List of Tables I

Paae i

-1.

Ovedap Data 6

2.

Nuclear Heat 7

3.

Reactivity Computer Checkout 8

4.

Control Rod Worth Measurement: Rod Swap 15 5.

Core Power Distribution Results ~30% Full Power 17 6.

One Point incore/Excore Calibration Results 18 i

7.

Core Power Distribution Results - 78% Full Power 19 i

8.

Thermal Power Output Measurement Results 20 i

9.

Core Power Distribution Results - 100% Full Power 22 10.

Core Power Distribution Results - 100% Full Power 23 i

11.

Incore and NIS Recalibration Results 25.

j l.

I f

i-i i

11

d 4

List of Figures j

Paae

1..

Unit 1 Cycle 9 Core Loading Pattem 2

l 2.

Assemblies to Use for Calculating IR and PR Calibration 3

i 3.

ITC Cooldown 11 4.

ITC Heatup 12 e

i 5.

Contrcl Bank C Differential and integral Rod Worths 14

-l f

f 1

I' i

+

i h

4 I

i I

111 1

4

'l

i e

r 1

I 1.0

. Introduction Core loading for McGuire Unit 1 Cycle 9 was started on May 8,1993, and was

'{

completed May 12. The core for McGuire 1 Cycle 9 consists of 57 Westinghouse optimized fuel assemblies and 136 Babcock & Wilcox Mark-BW fuel assemblies. To I

control power peaking and maximize cycle length, 56 Bumable Absorber inserts are i

used. Figure 1 gives the Unit 1 Cycle 9 core loading pattem.

[

r Criticality, Zero Power Physics Testing (ZPPT) and Power Escalation Testing (PET) began June 11,1993 using PT/0/A/4150/21, Post Refueling Controlling Procedure for Criticality, Zero Power Physics, and Power Escalation Testing. The unit reached 100%

power on June 18,1993. However, due to various equipment problems resulting in load reductions, Unit i did not reach 100% equilibrium conditions for the completion of PET until June 26,1993.

i i

1.1 Prestartup NIS Realignment Following Refueling - PT/0/AI4600/78

[

This procedure was started on May 19,1993 and completed on June 3.. This

.i test was used to calculate preliminary calibration data for the intermediate range (IR) and power range (PR) detectors following refuehng.

The set of Cycle 9 preliminary calibration data was determined by taking the End of Cycle 8 (EOC8) calibration data and adjusting it by a weighted average of the ratio of the sum of the predicted assembly powers for the Cycle 9 loading to the sum of the measured assembly powers from the last Cycle 8 incore/Excore calibration. The core locations used to calculate the ratio of the predicted Beginning of Cycle 9 (BOC9) assembly powers to the measured EOC8 values are shown in Figure 2.

The average predicted BOC9-to-EOC81R ratio was 0.920; the average i

predicted BOC9-to-EOC8 PR ratio was 1.002. Based on these results, the IR and PR currents were adjusted prior to Cycle 9 initial Criticality.

i 1

l Figure 1 Core Loading Pattern j

UcGuire \\uc ear Srion QUADRANT Un.

Cyc e 9 r

1 2

INS #

4 3

~

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 A

K52 K20 K51 G34 K29 K15 K27 A

251KT 319KT 330KT 336KT 314KT 338KT 233hT j

B K66 K35 AA43 K32 AA49 K08 AA10 K37 AA09 K13 K53 8

f 298KT R23 240KT R26 B7CA R25 B7AW R41 238KT R40 287KT C

K50 K63 AA29 H60 AA50 J68 K74-J12 AA15 H40 AA04 K11 K05 C

'47KT 257KT 2SOKT B79V R42 B7AD R33 241KT R39 B7AS R36 B79Z 237KT 2

D K69 AA12 H58 AA51 J62 AA28 H23 AA19 J73 AA25 H74 AA58 K46 D

I R57 B79Y R28 B7CO 2BBKT B7AK R24 B7C4 32CKT B7AG R43 B79W R49 E

K54 AA46 H25 AA26 J36 AA38 J18 AA63 J01 AA31 J42 AA18 H36 AA40 K49 E

l 325KT 305KT R47 B7AU 264KT B7CD 274KT B7A7 321KT B7CJ 297KT B7C1 RS6 292KT 249KT F

K43 K21 AA59 J66 AA53 K75 K65 J74 K67 K40g AA16 J53 AA61 K03 K55 F

281KT R02 B7A3 311KT B7CH R34 3T7KT R17 291KT R16 B7CE 258KT B7AR R08 294KT G

K25 AA30 J71 AA37 J03 Kid J17 AAS4 J07 -

K19 J05 AA57 J61 AA21 K36 G

272KT B7C7 R03 B7AJ 295KT 275KT 277KT B7C9 290KT 276KT 293KT B7AC R31 B7CS 310KT H

G44 K02 K58 H52 AA14 J25 AA11 G15 AA07

- J06 AA34 H04 K31 K62 G50 H

236KT R21 SS5 R18 B7AA R58 B7A2 R20 B7A9 R14 B7AV R156 SS6 RS3 279KT J

K70 AA27 J13 AA35 J48 K60 J37 AA52 J32 K09 J34 AA44 J43 AA22 K06 J

282KT B7AY R32 B7AN 335KT 276KT 316KT B7AP 317KT 239KT 333KT B7C8 RSS B7AX 231KT K

Kd2 K34 AA03 J47 AA24 K59 K39 J38 K56 K16 AA66 J10 AA23 K57 K71 K

262KT R22 B7AF 284KT B7CC R48 273KT R19 332KT RS2 B7CK 329KT B7AL RS1 235KT L

K30 AA05 H70 AA41 J55 AA42 J26 AA33 J50 AA32 J70 AA17 H06 AA60 K72 L

255KT 323KT R44 B7C3 245KT B7CG 2GBKT B7AE 259KT B7CF 234KT B7A4 R05 271KT 244KT M

K45 AA48 H38 AA45 J15 AA55 HOB AA62 J02 AA36 H31 A'A02 K28 M

R35 B79U R50 B7A6 248KT B7AT R10 B7AZ 256KT B7AH R01 B7A0 RD4 N

K48 K22 AA39 H59 AA64 J29 K38 J51 AA20 H19 AA08 K44 Kt8 N

253KT 261KT B7A1 RS4 B7CB RDS 306KT R11 B7A8 RD7 B79X 327KT 243KT P

K47 K61 AA01 K07 AA13 K23 AA06 K17 AA47 K41 K10 P

307KT R27 296KT R59 B7AM R40 B7C2 R38 242KT R15 2GDKT R

K64 K73 K12 G49 K68 K76 K04 R

252KT 65 304K7 232KT 2G5KT 267KT 324KT 1

2 3

• . 5 6

7 8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 l

2 i

i

I 1

j Figure 2 l

Assemblies to Use for Calculating 1R and PR Calibration Setpoints j

1 N35 R

P N

M L

K J

H G

F E

D C

B A

O O O Quadd N

N /' Quadt 2

N41

^x 0

^

n43

\\,/ N

\\_' N, /

3

/\\

,/,

['s /N 4

5 6

7 8

9 10 11 12 i

N

,e s,'

N/

'hg'/

13 L

'f V

v'

/ 'N / \\

/ 'N / 'N Quad 3 'x

'N / Quad 2 14 N44 /x O

,'x w42 O O O N36 1

N/

Core locations used for

/ 'N PR calibrations Core locations used for O

ia ceiiurations 3

i 1

i

i i

I i

2.0 Criticality Following a Change in Core Nuclear Characteristics - PT/0/A/4150/28 On June 11,1993, boron samples were taken in preparation for the approach to j

criticality. These samples indicated reactor coolant boron on be 2030 ppm. Since it i

was desired to achieve criticality with either (a)

~500 pcm of Control Bank D inserted, OR 1

(b) the lowest allowable boron conce trati a while maintaining 1.3%

Shutdown Margin, a target value of 1601 ppm was chosen for reactor coolant boron concentration. This represented part (a) above. Calculations using the unit Data Book (OP/1/A/6100/22)

[

indicated a volume of 14492 gallons of demineralized water should be added to the system to dilute from 2030 ppm to 1601 ppm. On are 11,1993, this dilution of the

[

Reactor Coolant System was started. The dilution was secured after 14492 gallons of demineralized water had been added to the system. After adequate system mixing, -

l Chemistry samples indicated Reactor Coolant System boron was 1611 ppm.

i On June 11,1993, rod withdrawal commenced starting with Shutdown Bank A.' As rods were withdrawn, both source range detectors were observed and rod motion was i

stopped each time either flux level doubled or any control rod bank was fully withdrawn.

At these points a set of counts was taken on each source range detector and inverse Count Rate Ratio (ICRR) was plotted to monitor the approach to criticality. While l

withdrawing Control Bank B, an " improper bank sequence" alarm was received.

Control Bank B motion was stopped. Rod overlap indicated 112 steps instead of the

[

required 116 steps. Instrumentation and Electronics (IAE) personnel were contacted to investigate. At 02:45 on June 12,1993, a manual reactor trip was initiated due to no i

position indication for rod L-13 in Shutdown Bank C. The reactor was not critical at the i

time of this event.

After completing a reactor trip investigation via PT/0/A/4700/45 and investigating problems with position indication of rod L-13, the unit achieved criticality at 0108 hours0.00125 days <br />0.03 hours <br />1.785714e-4 weeks <br />4.1094e-5 months <br /> on June 13,1993, with Control bank D at 94 steps withdrawn and a Reactor Coolant System boron concentration of 1623 ppm. The predicted critical position per OP/0/A/6100/06, Reactivity Balance Calculation, was 154 steps withdrawn on Control Bank D.

4 l

9 3.0 Zero Power Physics Testing -(ZPPT)

Zero Power Physics Testing for McGuire 1 Cycle 9 started June 13,1993, and was

{

completed June 14. The output of Power Range Detector N44 was used as input to the

[

reactivity computer for Zero Power Physics Testing. All acceptance criteria for.ZPPT were j

met.

t A minimum of one decade of overlap between the source range and the intermediate f

range detectors was verified on June 13,1993, via the Control Board indication, the NIS l

panel, and the Operator Aid Computer (OAC). The results shown on Table 1 reflect the '

data from the OAC.

i The point of adding nuclear heat was determined June 13,1993. This was done by establishing a slow positive startup rate and observing a change in olant parameters such l

as an increase in the reactivity trace and an increase in press anzer le, M. The test was I

performed twice to establish repeatability of the data. Table a gives the results of the two trials which were used to determine an average nuclear heat res.M From these results.

the test band for ZPPT was determined to be 1 x 10-8 o 8.85 x 10-8 amps on the reactivity f

t s

computer.

On June 13,1993, an on-line checkout of the reactivity computer was performed. This was l

done by withdrawing Control Bank D until a positive reactivity insertion of ~+25 pcm was indicated on the reactivity computer. The time for the flux level to double was measured and from this doubling time (DT), the reactor period was calculated (period = DT/0.693).

Using the reactor period, the amount of reactivity was determined using the predicted data.

This reactivity was compared to the reactivity computer indication. The test was repeated for a reactivity insertion of ~+40 pcm. An on-line negative reactivity checkout on the reactivity computer was also performed. This was done by inserting Control Bank D until a negative reactivity change.of -40 pcm was indicated on the reactivity computer. The time j

for the flux level to halve was measured and from this halving time (HT), the reactor period

]

was calculated (period = HT/0.693). Using the reactor period, the amount of reactivity was determined using predicted data. This reactivity was compared to the reactivity computer indication. The test as repeated for a reactivity change of -25 pcm. The final results met all acceptance criteria and are given in Table 3.

1 An electronics only negative reactivity insertion test was also completed satisfactorily as part of PT/0/B/4600/55, Reactivity Computer Periodic Test.

5

TABLE 1 Overlap Data on June 13,1993 via the OAC Source Range Channels intermediate Range Channels (cps)

(amps)

N31 N32 N35 N36 When IR on scale:

670 720 1.158 x 10-11 1.028 x 10-11 After 1 decade increase on IR:

11005 15038 1.049 x 10-10 1.028 x 10 When SR blocked:

11291 15550 1.098 x 10-10 1.060 x 10-10 6

I 9

i TABLE 2 Nuclear Heat i-

'?

Reactivity Computer Intermediate Range Channels N44 N35-N36 Trial 1 3.0 x 10-7 3.563 x 10-7 3.338 x 10-7 Trial 2 2.6 x 10-7 2.659 x 10-7 2.516 x 10-7 AVERAGE 2.8 x 10-7 amps 3.111 x 10-7 amps 2.927 x 10-7 amps I

1 x 10-8 o 8.85 x 10-8 amps on N44 Test Band:

t i

t i

i L

b i

l l

7 1

TABLE 3 Reactivity Computer Checkout Results on June 13,1993 Doubling or Reactivity Reactivity from

+

Initial Flux Level (Amps)

Period Halving Time Computer ( A c )

DT or HT ( Ap )

op P

Reactivity Computer (Seconds)

(Seconds)

(pcm)

(pcm)

% Error 1.35 x 10-8 246.65 170.93 25.94 20.67 2.74 3 x 10-8 142.83 98.98 42.09 42.72 1.47' 4 x 10-8

-213.35 147.85

-43.46

-42.80 1.54 6 x 10-8

-352.38 244.20

-23.51

-23.66 0.63 lAP-A c l P

x 100%

l AP l

8

,_ - ~. _. _ _.. _. _ _ _.. _. _

^l l

g-i l

l i

3.1 Boron Endpoint Measurement - PT/0/A/4150/10 This test was performed June 13,1993. Three sets of data were obtained. In the first set, Control Bank D was initially at 212 steps withdrawn, the Reactor Coolant System boron concentnaion was 1671 ppm and the Pressurizer boron concentration was 1660 ppm.

Control Bank D was pulled to the All Rods Out (ARO) Configuration and the.

resulting reactivity change was converted to equivalent boron using the predicted Dtfferential Boron Worth. Control Bank D was then reinserted to the just critical condition and the test was performed two more times.

i The results of these reactivity changes were each added to the initial Reactor Coolant System boron concentration to give the ARO Boron indpoint. The -

values were averaged to give the

• al result of 1673 ppm. This value met the j

acceptance criterion of the Hot Zerc Power (HZP) ARO Critical Boron l

concentration of 1651150 pr m, t

t I

i t

a 5

4 f

r l

i f

a 9

1

}

l 3.2 Isothermal Temperature Coefficient Measurement - PT/0/Af4150/12 i

This test was perfonned on June 13,1993. The test measures isothermal Temperature Coefficient (lTC) by plotting Reactivity versus Average Reactor Coolant System Temperature. The Moderator Temperature Coefficient (MTC) is found using the relationship as follows-1 i

MTC (pcm/*F) = ITC - Doppler Temperature Coefficient

.i t

The acceptance criterion on the ARO ITC was -0.0712.0 pcm/*F. The l

predicted Doppler Temperature Coefficient was -1.46 pcm/*F.

I The Reactor Coolant System boron concentration was 1673 ppm at the start of i

the test. A heatup/cooldown was performed while keeping rod position and Doron constant to detemiine reactivity change versus temperature. The j

heatup/cooldown was performed a second time to establish repeatability of the data. The results are shown in Figures 3 and 4. The average ARO ITC was found to be -0.965 pcm/*F. This fell within the acceptance criterion band. This f

indicated an ARO MTC of +0.495 pcm/*F which was within acceptable Technical

-l Specification limits.

e l

Following the completion of this test, PT/0/A/4150/31, Determination of Rod i

Withdrawal Limits to Ensure Moderator Temperature Coefficient Within Limits of-

[

Technical Specifications, was performed. The results of this trtst indicated there were no rod withdrawal limits needed for Unit 1 Cycle 9.

r e

s b

i

{

i 10 l

2

.L

.l l'

4,L. jj

_ 7

_,q.[ f i

4 xxxx_

c-7

u

. xxxxxxxx:xq:.2

_ :pg q

a

. x q..

7_.

..y.

_.A/ d3 l.

C 7

4;

. 4 gy e

,y n

. }..

.}

_ _r._

7.., _

_p,4,[k

.j q.

.m 7

.y

_.{

_}...

p4 _bj,

q

_y

,p

,i

.y.

.4

.pf

,l

{

. }. p l-

~

l t1 j

7

i. 7. fA, 7

n 3 7

...;y O

t' 1

_ p_.....

. _ _9_1..

_ 3, -

o m t-

}

.{g

[

.4 e-n m

g-

._. 7

_g

,o p

y

. p

.,_ -_,g q

,4 t.

g y

t{_7..._7 g

u

.I.

7._

..q...

j j_ [ O'i d

n

..,i e.

i i

3.,. q

.j

... 7 7

__ _._7.._

y

_ __7

,( _7

..p.

.._p.__ g _7 q.

j

_-r__.

..q _--

- _{.

.[~} ;

.. __._7-

}T---

q_

_E_ -

7 r

r-o-1[--lit

- }p{

_h xll;63f_h 1Tfl

' xx 1 1~1

_ ]i ~~.

~

_~Z_ QT[E ]$5

_^ ~

~ x.

__,1

~

T.~ J((. 4y i

7

.p

+

. _.2

_ 4.,_+. p _..

p _

_ _p. g,

_f_.

. +- 4,-

y,,

4 m

_.q___

q

d...,: e>+I.

Wt rF 1-

_I_b_

- +y

__ + _ _

t

- - -. _ - -_T,_

-r

- -.4_.

4 1-r tt i M b-Trr--T-

- r M

ni<

.f..__.4...]+i 7,T.

._ b. t _-'j -

.pp' M..,. - '---

' - ~ ' - +

l

. 2

...p

.. _y. -..7_

p_. _ -_.{

g7.._.

.._ ~ f_

.l 7

i 7

c 7-.

g y...

_,4-_

q..

4..

lT__.-

^ ' ~ T.

i

' t p.

,7

..- 7

__g-7 7,

,7 7,

j

. r,p y

. _7

,r

.y_.

j!tf----p 4.p [drey

_L,bp

. _p

_Lp l

.._ p.

r hg./.. p5

-.M-

..p_ W_

. M 5g?_p_

inp ig9y, ;

da g _P rpgn $pF g-,-@g4pp g

i>

4 57

]- Eh 45 -

BS

_4__6.....

. T_. _._p_p.

7 p.

.. g3%;4V

.tppbg:_

n m

1. _r

..Mp r

~ _

1 mp :

r He

-FF24-1

- m r r.q g

..__,r i rr

i 1

ii

_.7

-r....[.. ~.. - -

._g...7 -. _- -

..7 i..

.yp._.

ri

_r i-

--. _ p..

p..q.} 4 -

,r.. 7 3.. ~

g

.7.

F 1 e

.-[..~~br b d3

. _ r_

-_-.e. _- _.. ~y

. _ _ -.._v'm. n(.p" +pFr r--

y

._p 3

y. m r 14 --

T rt

~~~r TiJ r r-- tr th cr-ttfTT rt -

t t

- w.Ttr b

e

, #en

4 q,,

y q,,,,

g

,::p

"'p

.i-

.i.

g

_y

.p.. p _.._.7

_ }

4 j

p pc q,;

7 y

_{

_u 4

4 4

.Jp

__.._m.

_7 L-,j

.u_.

_ __4

. q.

. _. _{.__p_

[

. _h_._.

_. [._..

.h__]

}i, i

.-_g__.__..

-.w. a

_.y.

p-

. _y_

3

_-_q... 7

.p

__-_7_

y

., _.p

.3

~

qxp ng g} gyp r:x4

- 4 n

x x_nu ux

. xx x=

rx: xxur

- u q;

7

. p.

.3

p 2.

_ _# p q;

gnpzx p

x:-

T xm 1

m

~rz:

x :xx :: xx Tr g

7.,

--7_

--p

. 4

..g

+

q c,

q.

....p_

7

..t

.r..! q

.p q _p 3

rFr-

- -r&rr

_I-_

--.g 7j j

i u =

-tr--

Ivt7 Sy

.W

-H i>

g

_p._

_r.

4. q.p

.4_....

7 -_-_

. N..r i-m

~- -_-

--F

.~mg

.{yy

_t m.

e 7

7_,r y,

g 4

l 3,.

i rr

~

t-r

-7

+

t; g

.~1g&fX'W }~

~

^ [}f l

' } Q'2{&N

_7:.

~

L.

TL7

~

l

~

".' (

~

g&

~

3 7

p:p gpp.4_

_..Q.

. pt

_ q.

4 11q p :q "

.q a.

z)

_1-.

. ltpran n :

- nr 4

--b

~

h -~~

TT r"

TI--

. n r 77 7 :; zn

_ xx

-cx :: z 7 gp q

gl; 7

g..

_g

- -p.7.{. r+- t

- d...-

I 1 !

g]'

9_. _.

.___ p 4

u

4...q,_p__

q_,

1q

- _bp hq 4

cx

.r.

,r Y

l-x : uz

. y

x ggp p

p :phw-y :

i

-s~, -

p__

q-

. p._..

+

y

q. _--

+F_ x

~~ -'+ 7 E E xZ

Z i z:

Z - Z TZ Z-~~ TZ

~-

Z g.

~

.l i !-

.r.-

ha--

~--

- 1m M

44p.

__L _

-t-M !

4-l

..q.._.

a g

h l _._.

_r.

.. _._4

.u 4-_{.

q_

g M--W.

+.y u_.

. +p #, +g.

...p

_9 p

c

~r-

~P

- -H-__

_d_ _m _ ^} -

i{,l r-r r-tr

_.. _p y_

_7m; g + g.y

g. _%g J.

.1 p, g

g 5_

s 4.m. V.u. s.

9. 9_._

m_. _

y

.-s_g.

p Q.._p q.

c n

a,

.r 477, -y m

.[

4

.. 77 49

,7

,7 i

r

_t

-+

i i

p r r_

q ri

,,i 7

_ _7 p..

.y yy-

- 7 7

r.7

7..

77

_ g._

.y. -

7.

{.__

^

7 p

...9-_

et,

r 11{f 77 m-rrr - -d.-r rr

- Ttt t 1t +r

_p _-,

...7p

_ t r f, H+ n

. 97

.7(

. 3 p;

_4 n-T t -F +H-mT-r r+

-t+-rtr r-+-rrre t'

T, i t i

b

=

T m-

2 e

3.3 Control Rod Worth Measurement - PT/0/N4150/11 On June 13,1993, Control Bank C rod wodh was measured using the established boration/ dilution method. There were no other rods in the core at the time. Control Bank C was predicted to be the highest worth bank and was -

1 measured using this method so as to serve as the reference bank for Control Rod Worth Measurements by Rod Swap.

The measured worth of Control Bank C was 824.5 pcm. The predicted worth I

was 879 pcm with an allowable band of 747 to 1011 pcm. This represented an error of -6.2% and was within the acceptance criterion of 115%. Figure 5 shows the measured integral and differential rod worths for Control Bank C.

3.4 Control Rod Worth Measurement: Rod Swap - PT/0/N4150/11 A On June 13,1993, the rod swap method of control rod worth measurement was begun. Control Bank C was used as the reference bank and its worth was measured by the boraticn/ dilution method (see Section 3.3).

With the reference bank essentially all the way in and the reactor just critical, each control and shutdown bank was measured via rod exchange. The integral I

worth of the bank being measured (i.e., the test bank) was determined from the 4

difference in the critical rod position of the reference bank with and without the test bank in the core.

}

i The measured bank worths were compared with predicted worths and all banks were within the acceptance criteria of 130% or1200 pcm whichever was greater. The measured total rod worth was >90% of the predicted worth which l

met the acceptance criteria. In addition, all review criteria were met.

j The results of the rod swap test are given on Table 4.

t i

13 i

I

(

%m Figure 5 Control Bank C Differential and Integral Rod Worths 1000.0 --

-- 10.0 900.0 --

-- 9.0 v.

800.0 --

- 8.0 h

700.0 -1

{- 7.0

~

5 e

E I-6.0 g o 600.0 3

e 3

,_. ='.

as.

y g

cc 500.0 --

a-N

-- 5.0 g

a 400.0 --

/.'"

s.\\

-- 4.0

[;

5 N

i 5

=~

42

\\

-}

300.0 --

N

- 3.0 j/

N

\\'

f 200.0 ~-

a

- 2.0

/

100.0 --

/

1.0 i-N N'

0.0 l

l l

l O.0 0

50 100 150 200 250 Bank Position Integral Rod Worth

-*- Differential Rod Worth i.. -

A w

+r-+-w

~

• 7

-w

1 2

TABLE 4 Control Rod Worth Measurement: Rod Swap Predicted Measured j

Bank Worth Worth Percent +

identification pcm pcm ++

Difference Control Bank C 879 824.5 *

-6.2 (predicted reference -

bank)

Control Bank A 282 297.6 5.5 Control Bank B

^87 685.1

-0.3 Control Bank D 471 469.3

-0.4 Shutdown Bank A 289 285.0

-1.4 Shutdown Bank B 791 814.9 3.0 1

Shutdown Bank C 358 355.6

-0.7 Shutdown Bank D 358 360.5 0.7 j

Shutdown Bank E 410 424.9 3.6 Total Rod Worth 4525 4517.4

-0.2 i

I

• Measured by boration / dilution method

+ [(Measured / Predicted) - 1 ] x 100%

P

++ Rounded to nearest pcm 15

J 4.0 Power Escalation Testing t

McGuire Unit 1 Cycle 9 Power Escalation testing started June 14,1993 at the

)

conclusion of ZPPT and was completed June 29,1993. The unit went on line June 14 at 1726 hours0.02 days <br />0.479 hours <br />0.00285 weeks <br />6.56743e-4 months <br />.' The unit experienced some holds during power escalation which were scheduled to ahow testing per PT/0/A/4150/21, Post Refueling Controlling Procedure for Criticality, Zero Power Physics, and Power Escalation Testing, and to allow Chemistry testing.

At ~30% power on June 15/16,1993, PT/0/A/4150/02A, Core Power Distribution and Incore/NIS Correlation Check, was performed. The results from the full core flux map taken were used to project a " limiting" power at which Fo or FAH Tech Spec peaking factor margin would be maintained. This projection indicated that the Fo Tech Spec peaking factor margin would be maintained to 86.1% power. Table 5 shows the test results. PT/0/A/4600/02F, One Point incore/Excore Calibration, was also performed at

~30% power. The results of this test were used as calibration data for the Power Range excore detectors. Table 6 shows the test results.

i At ~78% power on June 17,1993, PT/0/A/4150/02A, Core Power Distribution and j

incore/NIS Correlation Check, was performed. The test results are given in Table 7. All test acceptance criteria were met. The results from the full core flux map taken were AH ech Spec peaking factor margin j

used to project a " limiting" power at which Fo or F T

AH ech Spec peaking would be maintained. This projection indicated that both the F T

factor margin and the Fo Tech Spec peaking factor margin would be maintained for power levels up to 100% power. The results of the correlation check in this test indicated that the maximum absolute difference between the axial flux difference (AFD) from any Power Range excore detector channel and the indicated incore AFD from the full core flux map was <2%. Based on the guidance given in PT/0/A/4150/21, no further calibration of the excore detectors was needed until achieving 100% equilibrium l

conditions.

l l

i Power escalation then resumed at a rate of ~2.5%/hr. Upon achieving ~90%,'

l PT/0/A/4150/03, Thermal Power Output Measurement, was performed (see Section' 4.1) AND as a part of PT/0/A/4150/21, a Reactor Coolant System Loop Delta-T evaluation was performed. This evaluation indicated that no significant changes were required for 100% Delta-T gain values in the Reactor Protection System. The remaining tests designated for Hot full Power Equilibrium Conditions were performed

[

on June 24-29,1993. The tests and their results are described in Sections 4.2 - 4.4.

f 16

e TABLE 5 l

Core Power Distribution Results

-30% Full Power NOTE: Axial location 1 is the bottom of the core; axial location 61 is the top of the core.

1 Unit 1 Cycle 9 Map ID: m1c9f001 Date/ Time Map Taken 6/15/93 2303 hours0.0267 days <br />0.64 hours <br />0.00381 weeks <br />8.762915e-4 months <br /> Power Level 29.73 %

Cycle Bumup 0.2 EFPD 9.8 MWD /MTU Boron Concentration 1541 ppm Control Rod Position Control Bank D at 206 steps withdrawn T

Maximum F o 1.8589 at Axial Loc. 42, Horiz. Loc E-02 Maximum pin FN 1.4439 at Horiz. Loc. F-13 AH f

Minimum F-SUB-O-OP Margin 30.46 %

Location G-04 i

Minimum F-SUB-O-RPS Margin 15.07 %

Location E-14 Minimum F-DELTA-H Surveillance Margin 36.75%

Location G-12 Totalincore Axial Offset 12.216 %

i Incore Tilts (Normalized):

(

Upper Core Lower Core

+

Quadrant 1: 1.203 %

Quadrant 1: ' O.309%

.i Quadrant 2: -0.094 %

Quadrant 2: 0.445 %

i Quadrant 3: -0.563%

Quadrant 3: -0.062%

i Quadrant 4: -0.546%

Quadrant 4: -0.692 %

17

1 e.

I TABLE 6 One Point Incore/Excore Calibration Results Excore Currents and Voltages Correlated to 100% Full Power at Various Axial Offsets Unit i

Cycle 9

Full Power Detector Currents (MicroAmos) Correspondina To Various incore Axial Offsets f

Detector N41 Detector N42 Detector N43 Detector N44 incore Axial Offset T

B T

B T

B T

B 30 264.4 185.5 274.9 196.4 270.9 199.0 265.1 194.9 20 248.9 203.7 258.7 214.8 255.9 218.6 249.5 214.6 i

10 233.4 221.8 242.6 233.2 240.8 2383 233.9 234.2 0

217.9 240.0 226.4 251.7 225.8 257.9 218.4 253.9

-10 202.4 258.2 210.2 270.1 210.8 277.5 202.8 273.5

-20 186.9 2763 194.1 288.5 195.7 297.2 187.2 293.2

-30 171.4 294.5 177.9 306.9 180.7 316.8 171.6 312.8

~!

Correlation Coef. =

1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Normalized Detector Voltaaes (Volts) At Various Axial Offsets Detector N41 Detector N42 Detector N43 Detector N44 incore Axial f

Offset T

B T-B T

B T-B T

B T-B T

B T-B 30 10.108 6.438 3.670 10.114 6.501 3.613 9.994 6.428 3.566 10.114 6396 3.718 20 9.515 7.069 2.446 9.520 7.111 2.409 9.439 7.062 '2377 9.519 7.040 2.479 10 8.923 7.699 1.224 8.925 7.720 1.205 8.885 7.696 1.189 8.925 7.685 1.240 0

8330 8330 0.000 8330 8330 0.000 8330 8330 0.000 8330 8330 0.000

-10 7.737 8.961

-1.224 7.735 8.940 -1.205 7.775 8.964 -1.189 7.735 8.975 -1.240

-20 7.145 9.591

-2.446 7.140 9.549

-2.409 7.221 9.598 -2377 7.141 9.620 -2.479

-30 6.552 10.222 -3.670 6.546 10.159 -3.613 6.666 10.232 -3.566 6.546 10.264 -3.718 I

AFD incore/Excore Ratios For Quadrants 1 -4 Quad 4 Quad 2 Quad 1 Quad 3 N41-N42 N43 N44 I

M=

1362 1382 1.402 1.344 I

i j

18 j

i

._:ii! !

TABLE 7-Core Power Distribution Results

~78% Full Power NOTE: Axiallocation 1 is the bottom of the core; axiallocation 61 is the top of the core.

Unit 1 Cycle 9 Map ID: mic9f002 Date/ Time Map Taken 6/17/93 1405 hours0.0163 days <br />0.39 hours <br />0.00232 weeks <br />5.346025e-4 months <br /> l

Power Level 78.14 %

Cycle Bumup 1.0 EFPD 43.11 MWD /MTU Boron Concentration 1408 ppm t

Control Rod Position Control Bank D at 202 steps withdrawn Maximum FT 1.7069 at Axial Loc. 34, Horiz. Loc. E-04 O

N Maximum pin F AH 1.4073 at Horiz. Loc. G-12 Minimum F-SUB-Q-OP Margin 14.90 %

Location F-13 Minimum F-SUB-Q-RPS Margin 17.51 %

Location E-14 l

Minimum F-DELTA-H Surveillance Margin 17.35 %

Location G-12 TotalIncore Axial Offset 2.320 %

incore Tilts (Normalized):

i Upper Core Lower Core i

Quadrant 1: 0.881 %

Quadrant 1: -0.093 %

1 Quadrant 2: -0.614%

Quadrant 2: 0.798%

Quadrant 3: 0.134 %

Quadrant 3: -0.280%

Ouadrant 4: -0.401%

Quadrant 4: -0.425 %

19

o.

4.1 Thermal Power Output Measurement - PT/0/A/4150/03 i

This test was used to verify that the primary and secondary heat balances on

)

the plant computer were consistent with primary and secondary heat balances on a benchmarked offline computer. The test was run on June 18,1993, at

~90% F.P. The results are shown in Table 8 below.

The acceptance criterion of 1% difference between the offline computer and the plant computer was met.

TABLE 8 Thermal Power Output Measurement Results Plant Computer Off-Line Computer MWt MWt t

Primary Heat Balance 89.71 3060.12 89.90 3066.49 Secondary Heat Balance 89.03 3036.99 89.31 3046.36 I

'r s

20 f

e 0 -

4.2 Reactivity Anomalies Calculation - PT/0/A/4150/04 This test compared the actual core reactivity to the predicted core reactivity by taking into account the actual Reactor Coolant System boron concentration and average temperature, Xenon and Samarium worths, rod positions r id power level and adjusting these to the ARO, Hot Full Power (HFP), equilibrium Xenor.

and Samarium condition. Theoretical and actual Reactor Coolant System boron concentration for these conditions were then compared.

The test, performed at ~100% on June 24,1993, indicated that the actual ARO, HFP, equilibrium Xenon and Samarium condition boron concentration was 1116.1 ppm. This compares to a predicted value of 1131.4 ppm. The 15.3 ppm difference translated into a -122.4 pcm error between actual and predicted reactivity worths. This was within the acceptance criterion for the test of 11000 pcm.

t 4.3 Core Power Distribution and Incore/NIS Correlation Check -

PT/0/A/4150102A On June 24,1993, PT/0/A/4150/02A was performed to verify the Core Power Distribution Technical Specification Limits for operation would not be violated, The reactor was at ~100% Full Power and equilibrium conditions. The results l

are shown on Table 9.

The other part of this test was used to compare the incore nial flux difference as indicated by the full core flux map to the axial flux difference indicated on the plant computer by the excore detectors. The indicated incore axial flux difference (AFD) from flux map ID m1c9f004 was 0.042%. (Other results of the flux map are shown in Table 9). The results of this test indicated that the maximum absolute difference between the AFD from any Power Range excore detector channel and the indicatd incore AFD from the full core flux map was

>3% for Quadrants 2 and 3. PT/0/A/4600/02G, incore and Nuclear Instrumentation Systems Recalibration, was then planned due to the failure of the correlation check criterion. However, due to a potential fire on the Unit 1 turbine deck, load was reduced to ~55% prior to test execution. Therefore, another full core flux map was taken on June 26,1993 and PT/0/A/4600/02G was executed appropriately (see Section 4.4). The results of this second flux map at ~100% are shown in Table 10.

1 i

21

l 1

TABLE 9 Core Power Distribution Results l

~100% Full Power NOTE: Axial location 1 is the bottom of the core; axial location 61 is the top of the core.

Unit 1 Cycle 9 Map ID: mic9f004 Date/ Time Map Taken 6/24/93 1739 hours0.0201 days <br />0.483 hours <br />0.00288 weeks <br />6.616895e-4 months <br /> Power Level

~100%

Cycle Bumup 6.4 EFPD 251.6 MWD /MTU Boron Concentration 1138 ppm Control Rod Position Control Bank D at 217 steps withdrawn T

Maximum F o 1.6749 at Axial Loc. 31, Horiz. Loc. B-11 N

1.4007 at Horiz. Loc. B-11 Maximum pin F AH Minimum F-SUB-Q-OP Margin 2.94 %

Location F-13 Minimum F-SUB-O-RPS Margin 17.12 %

Location B-11 Minimum F-DELTA-H Surveillance Margin 4.20%

Location G-12 i

TotalIncore Axial Offset 0.042 %

I incore Tilts (Normalized):

?

t Upper Core Lower Core Quadrant 1: 0.842 %

Quadrant 1: -0.005%

l' Quadrant 2: -0.127%

Quadrant 2: 1.116 %

1 Quadrant 3: 0.200%

Quadrant 3: -0.540%

Quadrant 4: -0.915%

Quadrant 4: -0.571 %

22

t TABLE 10 Core Power Distribution Results

~100% Full Power NOTE: Axial location 1 is the bottom of the core; axial location 61 is the top of the core.

Unit 1 Cycle 9 Map ID: m1c9f005 Date/ Time Map Taken 6/26/93 0700 hours0.0081 days <br />0.194 hours <br />0.00116 weeks <br />2.6635e-4 months <br /> Power Level

~100%

Cycle Burnup 7.8 EFPD 309.9 MWD /MTU Boron Concentration 1167 ppm h

Control Rod Position Control Bank D at 219/218 steps withdrawn I

T Maximum F o 1.6524 at Axial Loc. 32, Horiz. Loc. B-11 N

1.403 at Horiz. Loc. E-04 Maximum pin F AH Minimum F-SUB-Q-OP Margin 4.96 %

Location E-14 l

Minimum F-SUB-O-RPS Margin 15.77%

Location B-11 Minimum F-DELTA-H Surveillance Margin 5.22%

Location G-12 Total incore Axial Offset 1.169 %

I incore Tilts (Normalized):

i t

Upper Core Lower Core Quadrant 1: 0.744 %

Quadrant 1: 0.025 %

s Quadrant 2: -0.158%

Quadrant 2: 0.834 %

Quadrant 3: 0.152 %

Quadrant 3: -0.295%

Quadrant 4: -0.738%

Quadrant 4: -0.565 %

23

r o.

4.4 incore and Nuclear Instrumentation Systems Recalibration -

PT/0/A14600/02G This test was performed on June 26 - 29,1993, to obtain recalibration data for 1

the excore detectors based on the incore axial offsets. The NIS amplifier gains, l

the f(AI) reset function for the over-power differential temperature protective j

setpoints, and the OAC excore power distribution monitor were all calibrated on i

June 28/29,1993. The results of this test are given in Table 11.

I t

L

.i

?

+

24 I

I s

TABLE 11 Incore and NIS Recalibration Results Excore Currents and Voltages Correlated to 100% Full Power at Various Axial Offsets Unit 1

Cycle 9

Full Power Detector Currents (MicroAmps) Corresponding To Various Incore Axial Offsets Detector N41 Detector N42 Detector N43 Detector N44 Incore Axial Offset T

B T

B T

B T

B 30 285.6 202.2 303.0 217.1 295.0 216.2 291.1 212.8 20 268.2 218.0 284.9 233.2 277.7 233.5 273.0 229.9 10 250.8 233.8 266.7 249.3 260.3 250.7 255.0 247.1 0

233.4 249.6 248.6 265.4 243.0 268.0 236.9 264.2

-10 215.9 265.5 230.5 281.5 225.7 285.2 218.9 281.3

-20 198.5 281.3 212.4 297.6 208.4 302.5 200.8 298.4

-30 181.1 297.1 194.3 313.7 191.0 319.8 182.8 315.6 Correlation Coef. = 0.9986 0.9878 0.9953 0.9823 0.9969 0.9859 0.9972 0.9868 Normalized Detector Voltaces (Volts) At Various Axial Offsets Detector N41 Detector N42 Detector N43 Detector N44 incore Axial Offset T

B T-B T

B T-B T

B T-B T

B T-B 30 10.196 6.748 3.448 10.150 6.814 3.336 10.112 6.720 3.392 10.234 6.710 3.524 i

20 9.574 7.275 2.299 9.543 7.319 2.224 9.518 7.257 2.261 9.599 7.250 2.349 10 8.952 7.803 1.149 8.937 7.825 1.112 8.924 7.793 1.131 8.965 7.790 1.175 0

8.330 8.330 0.000 8.330 8.330 0.000 8.330 8.330 0.000 8.330 8.330 0.000

-10 7.708 8.857 -1.149 7.723 8.835

-1.112 7.736 8.867

-1.131 7.695 8.870 -1.175

-20 7.086 9.385 -2.299 7.117 9.341

-2.224 7.142 9.403

-2.261 7.061 9.410 -2.349

-30 6.464 9.912

-3.448 6.510 9.846

-3.336 6.548 9.940

-3.392 6.426, 9.950

-3.524 AFD incore/Excore Ratios For Quadrants 1 - 4 Quad 4 Quad 2 Quad 1 Quad 3 N41 N42 N43 N44 M=

1.449 1.498 1.474 1.418 I

I 25