ML20046D408

Cycle 10 Summary of Startup Testing.

ML20046D408
Person / Time
Site:	Calvert Cliffs
Issue date:	08/13/1993
From:	BALTIMORE GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20046D407	List: ML20046D406 ML20046D408
References
NUDOCS 9308190200
Download: ML20046D408 (10)

Text

- _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

~

BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY CALVERT CLIFFS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT UNIT 2 Docket No. 50-318 License No. DPR-69 UNIT 2 CYCLE 10

SUMMARY

OF STARTUP TESTING I

i 9308190200 930813 3 PDR ADOCK 05000318 ff P PDR h.

1 I ,

UNIT 2 CYCLE 10

SUMMARY

OF STARTUP TESTING  :

PAGE 2 0F 10 Introduction The Unit 2 Cycle 10 core is designed for a Full Power Operation Burnup of $

18,900 to 21,300 MWD /MTU. The core loading is detailed in Table 1. and the core loading pattern is shown in Figure 1. The initial startup for Cycle 10 began with Control Element Assembly (CEA) and Control Element Drive Mechanism '

(CEDM) testing on June 7, 1993. Initial criticality for Cycle 10 was declared i at 03:10 on June 11, 1993. Startup testing was concluded with the variable  :

Tavg test to determine Moderator Temperature Coefficient (HTC) on  !

June 21, 1993. '

i The overall startup testing evolution was conducted in two phases. The first ,

l phase was controlled by Post Startup Test Procedure 2 (PSTP-2), Initial Approach to Criticality and Low Power Physics Testing Procedure. The second phase of testing was controlled by PSTP-3, Escalation to Power Test Procedure.

Tests performed under PSTP-2 included: I CEA and CEDM Testing Reactor Coolant System (RCS) Flow Verification Partial CEA Symmetry Check i Critical Baron Concentration (CBC) Measurements Isothermal Temperature Coefficient (ITC) Measurement I

- CEA Group Worth Measurements Tests performed under PSTP-3 included:

Radial Power Distribution Comparisons at 30, 60, 85, and 97% Rated Thermal Power (RTP)

Core Symmetry Power Distribution Measurements at 30, 60, 85, and 97% RTP  ;

ITC and Power Coefficient (PC) Measurement at 97% RTP (Variable Tavg Test) l CBC Measurement at 100% RTP j 1 i i

a

' t

, UNIT 2 CYCLE 10

SUMMARY

OF STARTUP TESTING PAGE 3 0F 10 Test Criteria  !

For the individual tests in the startup evolution, the following Acceptance I and Review Criteria were applied:  ;

PARAMETER ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA REVIEW CRITERIA CEA Drop Time less than 2.95 seconds to less than 2.75 seconds  !

90% insertion to 90% insertion _!

CEA Symmetry Check None less than 10% Tilt i RCS Flow Verification  !

1) Core dP 6.0 - 18.2 psi 6.8 - 17.0 psi

2) Projected 389,925 - 407,850 gpm 398,618 - 409,459 gpm HFP Flow CBC 100 ppm of predicted 50 ppm of predicted CEA Worth

1) Group Greater of 15% or Greater of 15% or-0.1% delta rho of 0.1% delta rho of i predicted predicted

2) Total 10% of predicted 10% of predicted ITC, at 0% and 97% Within limits of MTC 0.3 x 10-4 Technical Specification delta rho / F of predicted PC, at 97% 0.3 x 10-4 0.2 x 10-4 j

, delta rho /% delta rho /%

of predicted of predicted Power Distributions Box Powers (Interior / ,

Peripheral) '

1) 30% RTP Fx T, and FrT within 15% / 20% -

Te hnical Specification of predicted (Tech. Spec.) limits

2) 60, 85, and Fx T. Fr , and T within T

10% / 15%  !

97% RTP Teh. Spec.limiEs of predicted j i

4 l

4

'O 4 UNIT 2 CYCLE 10

SUMMARY

OF STARTUP TESTING l

PAGE 4 0F 10 l PARAMETER ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA REVIEW CRITERIA Core Symmetry Evaluation i

1) Box Powers Same as Power Same as Power  !

Distribution Distribution  !

l

2) Tilt l

'I a) 30% RTP None i 5%  ;

b) 60, 85, and 3% 2% 'l 97% RTP j i

3) Symmetric ICI None 10%  !

Box Powers Test Results Table 2 summarizes startup test results, while individual tests are discussed l below. j i

CEA and CEDM Testing CEA and CEDM Testing was performed prior to initial Cycle 10 criticality with all four Reactor Coolant Pumps (RCPs) running and RCS temperature at nominal Hot Zero Power (HZP) conditions (532 F). The operability of the CEDMs was )

verified by checking the associated light operations for each CEDM. This was i accomplished with only a few minor problems noted. These minor problems were -!'

corrected with subsequent re-verification of the operability of the affected CEDM. One major problem was identified during the evolution. Group 1 CEA 62 did not move at all. Subsequent testing of the reed switch system found that the CEA housing was tilted. Following repair of the housing, the CEA tested properly and was re-verified to be operable.

The CEA drop times were measured from the full-out position to 90% and 100%  !

insertion. All CEAs met both the listed Acceptance and Review Criteria. The i slowest CEA to 90% insertion was Group 5 CEA # 34 and Group 1 CEA # 56, with a  !

90% insertion time of 2.48 seconds. ]

The Partial Symmetry Check was performed by inserting each dual CEA in Shutdcwn Group C individually. For each insertion, the reactivity change was .,

calculated. The magnitude of the reactivity change was calculated for each '

dual CEA, and a tilt was calculated based on these reactivity changes. For each symmetric set, the magnitude of reactivity change for each dual CEA was consistent. In addition, the largest tilt calculated was 0.069 (6.9%),

which was within the Review Criteria of 10%.

4

i

. I UNIT 2 CYCLE 10 [

SUMMARY

OF STARTUP TESTING PAGE 5 0F 10 RCS Flow Verification l The RCS Flow was verified at Hot Standby conditions with all four RCPs ,

running. This was done by comparing RCP delta pressures (dPs) and Core dP to i values from past cycle operation. In addition, a projected Hot Full Power -

(HFP) value for RCS Flow was determined. The values for RCP dPs compared well with past cycles. The core dP was 13.8 psi, compared to 13.78 psi for the previous cycle. This value was well within Acceptance and Review Criteria.

The projected HFP RCS Flow was 402,335 gpm, based on total RCP dP. This value met both Acceptance and Review Criteria.

Critical Boron Concentration (CBC), HZP, All Rods Out (ARG) l The CBC was determined by obtaining from Chemistry the results of a RCS boron i grab sample taken at conditions near ARD and adjusting it to an ARO condition. ,

The ARO CBC was determined to be 1763 ppm, compared to a predicted value of 1738 ppm. This value was within both Acceptance and Review Criteria. ,

Isothermal Temperature Coefficient (ITC), HZP ARD The ITC was determined by decreasing and increasing RCS temperature while measuring the associated reactivity change. The measured reactivity was i divided by the temperature change to arrive at a value for the ITC. The 1 calculated ITC with Group 5 at approximately 105 inches withdrawn was +0.301 x 10 delta rho /

• F. The predicted value was +0.282 x 10 delta rho / F. The predict.:on, when corrected for actual test conditions, was +0.310 x 10-' delta l rho /*F. The measured value met both Acceptance Criteria and Review Criteria. j CEA Group Worth Measurement The worth of each Regulating CEA was determined using the boration/ dilution method. Each individual measured group worth met the Acceptance and Review Criteria, as did the total meastrced group worth for all Regulating CEAs.

Radial Power Distribution Cor.parisons The Radial Power Distribution Comparisons were performed at 30, 60, 85, and 97% RTP testing plateaus. The power distribution calculated by CECOR at a givenpowerplateauwascomparedtotheROCSpredictedpowerdistyibution{or that power level. At each power plateau, the peaking factors, Fr and Fxy ,

and Tq were compared to their Technical Specifications limits. In all cases,

, the peaking factors and Tq were within their respective limits. In addition, the comparison of Box Powers, both interior and peripheral, to predicted values from ROCS fell within both Acceptance and Review Criteria. At 30% RTP, the maximum difference between actual and predicted Box Power was 10.49%

(peripheral). At 60% RTP, the maximum difference was 8.85% (interior). The maximum difference at 85% RTP was 9.02% (interior), and the maximum difference was 9.288% (interior) at 97% RTP.  !

1

. l

• 1 UNIT 2 CYCLE 10

SUMMARY

OF STARTUP TESTING PAGE 6 0F 10 l

Core Symmetry Power Distribution Measurements '

The Core Symmetry Evaluation for Box Powers met both the Acceptance and Review Criteria as described above for the Radial Power Distribution Comparisons. ,

The evaluation of core tilt at each power level plateau indicated that-the '

applicable Acceptance and Review Criteria were met. The maximum tilt at 30%  !

RTP cas .0059. At 60% RTP, the maximum tilt was 0.0084. At 85% RTP, the maxitum tilt was 0.0076, and the maximum tilt at 97% RTP was 0.0091. e The final evaluation for Core Symmetry involved comparison of symmetric Incore Instrumentation (ICI) Box Powers. This evaluation was performed by comparing symmetric ICI Box Powers, summed over all axial detector levels, to~ predicted values as well as determining a tilt based on only that set of symmetric ,

detectors. In all cases, the Review Criteria of 10% was aet. t ITC and Power Coefficient (PC) Heasurement The ITC and PC were measured at 97% RTP with Regulating Group 5 CEAs et approximately 105 inches withdrawn. These parameters were determine <' by i adjusting either moderator temperature or core power while adjusting turbine i load to maintain the unaffected parameter a The final !

measuredvaluefortheITCwas-0.370x10'pproximatelyconstant.

delta rho /

• F. This value met -

Acceptance and Review Criteria when compared to a predicted value of -0.341 x  !

10 del ta rho /

• F. The measured value for the PC was -0.880 x 10 delta rho /%. This value, when compared to a predicted value of -0.900 x 10 delta  !

rho /%, met Acceptance and Review Criteria.

CBC Heasurement at 100% RTP  !

1 The CBC was determined by a Chemistry analysis of a RCS boron grab sample at l 100% RTP. The resulting CBC was 1309 ppm, which was 20 ppm higher than the j predicted CBC of 1289 ppm. This result met both Acceptance and Review 2 Criteria.

Prepared by c/6-c~@(

y, ~x Date 7/22473

/ /

Reviewed by Y t( Date 7/ 7 3

/ / /

/

/l/

l l

h

~

UNIT 2 CYCLE 10

SUMMARY

OF STARTUP TESTING E

PAGE 7 0F 10 N1 5 Figure 1 f

y Unit 2 Cycle 10 Core Loading Pattern 1-- - -- ------

2013 2X011 2K015 2X104 2------------ 2K014 2WZ4 2 LOC 22W113 N205 N109 2tD16 2WD05 2K005 3----------- 2K115 2W1032LD05 2V339 2U01 2U09 2019 2W332 2LD11 2W105 2K129

=

4 -- - - - -

2K125 2WX$ 2Dri 2W311 2026 2V212 240$ 2W213 2L320 2W31E 2022 2WD06 2044 5 -- 2K001 2W102 2t323 2W22.' 2L213 2W313 2L205 2W325 2L211 2W317 2L217 2W215 2001 2W103 IK007 6 ---- 2WO12 2LD09 2W321 2L220 2013 2012 2W33! 2L213 2W32S 2L305 2L115 2L202 2W330 2LD07 2WD02 7 2LD14 IV315 2015 2W307 2007 2U05 2L221 IW302 2015 2007 2009 2W308 2025 2W315 2LD04 8 IK105 2X137 9 2W107 2017 2W207 2L209 N327 2013 2V202 2U1 2W203 2L223 2W303 2L207 N211 2003 N114 10 2K003 2K006 11 2W216 2L112 2J114 IVIS 2L216 2W305 2LT4 2H108 2LT3 2W33! 2!215 2W323 2417 2011 2W215 12 2K012 2X013 ,

13 2W10! 2L104 2W205 2L20S 2W334 2L224:2W205 202 2W204 2t314 2W324 2L210 2W214 2018 N112 14 2K111 2K139 15 . 2LD03 2W333 2027 IW337 2010 20 05 2015 2W325 2L222 2005 2008 2W314 2017 2W310 2tD13 .

16 -- f - 2WO10 2LD05 IW312 2L201 2L116 2L%5 2W32! 2t214 2W335 2011 2U14 2L219 2W304 2!D10 N211  ! l I i 17 -- f - 2K010 2W11E 2002 2W217 2L218 2W320 2L212 N301 2L206 2W322 2L204 2V219 2024 2W101 2KDC2 i 18 -- -- f- 2K133 IWX7 2021 2W315 2019 2W209 2J120 2W210 2t325 2W331 2L303 2WD05 2K119 l

l l . . I i l 19 - t - - f- -f- 2K121 2W111 2!D12 2WIS 2020 2L110 2L102 N340 2LD05 2W105 2K132 i j j j i i i . . i i i ')

20-t i --j---t - 2K015 2VZ3 2LC15 2W110 N201 2W115 2LD01 2WD01 2K006 i j j j j 21 - -- -- - - --

-, 2K141 2KZ$ 2K004 2K110 -

A B C D E F G H J K L M NpR S T V Y X Y 4

I UNIT 2 CVCLE 10 1

SUMMARY

OF STARTUP TESTING PAGE 8 0F 10 Table 1 j Unit 2 Cycle 10 Core Loading  ;

NUMBER OF NUMBER OF BATCH SHIM RODS ASSEMBLIES ENRICHMENT ,

H 0 1 3.40 w/o  ?

l K 0 16 4.08 w/o '!

l l K/ 8 16 4.08 w/o L 0 16 4.28 w/o Lx 4 20 4.28 w/o l l L/ 8 24 4.28 w/o L* 12 28 4.28 w/o LT 44 1 4 4.28 w/o '

l M 0 12 4.005 w/o M1 4 16 3.998 w/o  ;

l M2 8 20 3.992 w/o M3 12 40 3.988 w/o ,

1 J* 0 4 3.40 w/o  !

I Erbium test assemblies.

l I

UNIT 2 CVCLE 10

SUMMARY

OF STARTUP TESTING PAGE 9 0F 10 Table 2 Unit 2 Cycle 10 Startup Testing Results i

Page 1 of 2 '

TEST DESCRIPTION UNITS PREDICTED MEASURED !

l CEA 90% INSERTION Slowest CEA to 90% insertion CEA # ----

34, 56 seconds ----

2.48 INITIAL CRITICALITY l Boron Concentration ppm ----

1737 Group 5 Position inches ----

70.5 I

CRITICAL BORON CONCENTRATION ARO ppm 1738 1763 Groups 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1 in ppm 1368 1390 HFP, ARO ppm 1289 1309 l

ISOTHERMAL TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENT HZP, Group 5 @ 105" w/d x10j~ delta rho /* F +0.282 +0.301 l HZP, Corrected for Test x 10 delta rho /*F +0.310 ----

Conditions  !

97%, Group 5 0 105" w/d x 10-4 delta rho /*F -0.341 -0.370 l 4

POWER COEFFICIENT 97%, Group 5 @ 105" w/d x 10-4 delta rho /% -0.900 -0.880 CEA GROUP WORTHS Group 5  % delta rho 0.35 0.345 Group 4  % delta rho 0.67 0.656 Group 3  % delta rho 0.79 0.758 ,

Group 2  % delta rho 0.90 0.860 Group 1  % delta rho 0.58 0.559 l

Total  % delta rho 3.29 3.178 l

l

~

UNIT 2 CYCLE 10

SUMMARY

OF STARTUP TESTING PAGE 10 0F 10 Table 2 Unit 2 Cycle 10 Startup Testing Results Page 2 of 2 POWER DISTRIBUTION MEASUREMENTS PEAKING FACTORS 30% RTP 60% RTP 85% RTP 97%RTP T

Fxy 1.6580 1.6426 1.6300 1.6372 T

Fr 1.5995 1.5900 1.5792 1.6047 Tq 0.0059 0.0084 0.0076 0.0091 B0X POWERS 30% RTP 60% RTP 85% RTP 97%RTP Interior -9.235% -8.851% -9.021%' +9.288% 1 l

Peripheral +10.488% +7.986% +8.054% +8.661%

1 CORE SYMMETRY  :

30% RTP 60% RTP 85% RTP 97%RTP Tilt 0.59% 0.84% 0.76% 0.91%

Symmetric -7.59% -7.7429% -7.849% -7.824%

Box Powers

• i