ML20059N767

Cycle 12 Startup Test Rept

ML20059N767
Person / Time
Site:	Maine Yankee
Issue date:	10/01/1990
From:	Heather Jones, Nichols S, Solan G Maine Yankee
To:	Martin T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
References
MN-90-100, SEN-90-280, NUDOCS 9010170264
Download: ML20059N767 (13)

Text

.

I MaineYankee 4-nmy;;mW:Kqwmy ED: SON ORivE

• AUGUSTA MAINE 04336 e (207) 622-4868 i

October 4, 1990 l

MN-90-100 SEN-90-280 Region I i

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l

475 Allendale Road j

King of Prussia, PA 19406 i

Attention:.

Mr. Thomas T. Martin, Regional Administrator

References:

(a)

License No. DPR-36 (Docket No. 50-309) t

Subject:

Maine Yankee Cycle 12 Startup Test Report

.)

Gentlemen:

In accordance with the provisions of Maine Yankee Technical Specification 5.9.1.1, please find enclosed the Startup Test Report for Maine Yankee Cycle 12 Core, l

We trust this information is satisfactory.

Please contact us should you have questions.

Very truly yours, (fkhr S. E. Nichols Licensing Section Head RCC:WSD Enclosure c:

Mr. E. H. Trottier Mr. Charles S. Marschall L

(Document: Control; Desk?

SEN90280.LTR 901017d214 901001 DR ADOCK 0500 309 i

gg

'//.

i 0

O..

i.

MAINE YANKEE CYCLE 12

.t STARTUP TEST REPORT t

1 l

l k

Prepared by:

, 3?t-

^

y.M.Sblan,PrincipalEngineer Date Nuclear Engineering Department Yankee Atomic Electric Company i

Reviewed by:

/4 90 l

H'.

F. J4t5es, #E.

Date Principal Nuclear Engineer Maine Yankee Approved by:

b.$.

I8/l/9 e D. B. Boynto'n, Section Head Date Nuclear Engineering Maine Yankee l

l

e l

l MAINE YANKEE CYCLE 12 STARTUP TEST REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION IIIJE 1

Critical Boron Concentration 2

CEA Bank Worths 3

Isothernal Temperature Coefficient at HZP 4

Moderator Temperature Coefficient at HZP 5

CEA Drop Times 6

-Core Radial Tilt Monitoring 7

Power Distribution Measurements 8

Conclusions IMinIn2.

1 Startup Test Acceptance Criteria 2

Startup Test Measurements and Predictions FIGURES 1

Power Divtribution Measured vs. Predicted near 50% Power 2

Power Distribution Measured vs. Predicted near 100% Power

.____-_____-__---_______.____?____

it i

e 1

)

i MAINE YANKEE CYCLE 12 STARTUP TEST REPORT l

Maine Yankee initiated system heatup for Cycle 12 in June 1990 after reloading the core in accordance with the loading pattern documented in YAEC-1713 (Reference 1).

The startup tests were performed from June '28 to July 4, 1990, the latter date being the completion date for 50% power testing.

The startup tests performed were subject to the acceptance criteria in Reference 1, presented here in ' table 1.

Each of the following tests is detailed below, with the results compared to those predicted in Table 2.

In these comparisons, the nominal measured value is compared to the calculated value, the latter corrected for any difference between the measurement and calculational conditions.

1.

Critical Boron Concentration The approach to criticality began on June 28, 1990 by withdrawal of all CEA's except Bank 5.

A dilution was initiated with Bank 5 a

u l

partially inserted until the reactor was critical.

A final ARO j

l critical boron concentration of 1549 ppm was established, compared to l

the predicted value of 1601 ppm.

The deviation of 52 ppm was within l'

the acceptance criteria of i 1% delta rho (approximately i 110 ppm).

A rodded critical condition was established near Banks 5 through 1 (the regulating banks) inse rted.

A final critical boron concentration of 1152 ppm was achieved, compared to a predicted value of 1166 ppm.

The deviation for the rodded case between measurement and prediction was 14 ppm.,

r

6 I

2.

CEA Bank Worths I

The CEA worth of all the regulating Banks 5 through 1 in the non-overlap condition was measured via the analog reactivity computer.

The individual bank worths are given in Table 2.

The total of the individual worths of Banks 5-1 was measured as 4.059% delta rho, compared to a predicted worth of 3.989% delta rho.

The difference from the predicted, which is +1.8% of the total predicted worth, is within the acceptance criteria of 110.0% of the total predicted worth.

The CEA worth of the regulating banks was also measured in the overlap condition as 3.972% delta rho, which is a difference of -0.4% from the total predicted worth.

3.

Isothermal Temeerature Coefficient at HZP The ITC was measured at the ARO and Banks 5-1 inserted conditions at zero power.

As given in Table 2, a measured ARO ITC of

+0.37 (10" delta rho /T) was obtained, compared to a predicted value of +0.09 (10" delta rho /T).

The difference of +0.28 (10" delta rho /T) was within the acceptance criteria of 10.50 (10" delta

[

rho /T) for the ARO case.

A measured Banks 5-1 ITC of -0.91 (10" delta rho /T) was obtained, compared to a predicted value of -1.01 (10" delta rno/T), which is a dif ference of +0.10 (10" delta rho /T).

4.

Moderator Temeerature Coefficient at HZP Based on the ITC measurement at the ARO condition at zero power, a measured MTC of +0.54 (10" delta rho /T) is obtained.

This value is less than the maximum allowable zero power MTC of +0.60 (10" delta rho /T) given in Figure 4.8 of YAEC-1713 (Reference 1), as specified in Table 1.

4 i

e 5.

CEA Droe Times The measured drop times to 904 insertion for each individual CEA was j

performed from the hot sero power condition.

The values were compared to the Technical Specification limit of 2.70 seconds.

All CEA's 1

achieved 90% insertion within 2.25 seconds.

The average CEA drop time i

was 2.11 seconds, with a standard deviation of 0.07 seconds.

6.

Core Radial Tilt Monitorina Core radial tilt was monitored at least each 5% in core power during power escalation up tc 50% power using both ex-core and in-core detectors through the INCA program.

The ex-core tilt at 5.2% power was 5.9% and decreased with power escalation, as detailed in Table 2 for selected power levels.

The ex-core tilt near 50% power was 1.0%,

well within the acceptance criteria of 3.0%.

7.

Power Distribution Measurements Power distribution measurements via INCA were performed during power escalation.

The equilibrium power distribution measured near 50%

power is compared to the predicted power distribution in Figure 1.

The comparison shows good agreement, within the acceptance criteria of 110% for each individual assembly.

The absolute average assembly deviation is 1.7%.

The maximum deviation which occurs is 6.8%

(Location 21) in a low-power core peripheral assembly.

There is a deviation of 3.3% in the maximum 1-pin assembly (Location 11).

i l

A near full power comparison of power distributions near 500 mwd /Mt is presented in Figure 2.

Good agreement is again shown, with an absolute average deviation of 2.3%, a maximum deviation of 6.6%

(Location 21) cad a deviation of 0.3% in the maximum 1-pin assembly (Location 30).

1 1

1.-

W

I.~

4-e 8.

Conclusions Each of the startup test criteria in Table 1 were met by the startup i

test measurements.

The conclusion is that the core characteristics are demonstrated to conform to those assumed in the safety analysi6, as discussed in Section 6.3 of YAEC-1713 (Reference 1).

REFERENCES 1.

YAEC-1713, Maine Yankee Cvele 12 Core Performance Analysis, December j

1989.

i L

l l

. l~

l A

m

8 i

TABLE 1 Maine Yankee Cvele 12 Startuo Test Acceetance Criteria Measurement Conditions Criteria

1. Critical Boron Hot zero power, near Measurement within 11%

Concentration cil-rods-out delta rho of predicted value

2. CEA Bank Worths-Hot zero power, CEA Total worth within 110%

Regulating Banks 1+2+3+4+5 in the of the predicted value non-overlap condition

3. CEA Bank Worths-Hot zero power, CEA This measurement is not Shutdown Banks B+C+1+2+3+4+5 required if the criteria in the non-overlap in Measurement (2) is met.

condition If the criteria in Measurenent (2) is not met, the total worth of all CEA banks measured must be within 110% of the predicted value

4. Isothermal Hot zero power, near ITC measurement within Temperature all-rods-out 10.5 x 10" delta rho /T Coefficient of predicted value and the at HZP the MTC is within the acceptable region specified in Figure 4.6 of YAEC-1713 (Reference 1)

5. Isothermal At or slightly below This measurement is not l

Temperature 50% power, near required if both criteria l

Coefficient all-rods-out in Measurement (4) are at 50% Power met. If either criterion-L in Measurement (4) are not met, the MTC must be within the acceptable l

region specified in Figure 4.8 of YAEC-1713 l

(Reference 1) l l

6. Control Rod operating temperature Drop times to 90%

Drop Times insertion no greater than 2.70 seconds l

I

s

'a TABLE 1 (continued)

Maine Yankee Cvele 12 St artuo Test Acceotance Criteria Measurement Conditions criteria

7. Radial Power At or slightly below E.tch assembly average Distribution 50% power, near power within 110% of all-rods-out predicted value

8. Tilt 5-48% rated power, Tilt trends to less Monitoring for near all-rods-out, than 3.0% for greater symmetry tilt is monitored than 50% power operation, Verification at 5% power intervals as indicated by the relative changes in excore detector readings or incore detectors 6

~

~

TABLE 2 Maine Yankee Cycle 12 Startup Test Measurements and Predictions Item Units Measurement Prediction Deviation Criteria 1.

Critical Boron Concentration ppe ARO 1549 1601

-52*

11% delta rho (1110 ppm)

Banks 5-1 1152 1166

-14 2.

CEA Bank Worths 4 delta Non-Overlap rho 5

1.343 1.327

+0.016*

4 0.376 0.369

+0.007 3

0.723 0.732

-0.009 2

0.567 0.545

+0.022 1

1.050 1.016

+0.034 Total 5-1 4.059 3.989

+ 1. 8 4 *

• ilot Overlap Total 5-1 3.972 3.989

-0. 44 *

• 3.

Isotheriaal Temperature 10" delta Coefficient at HZP rho /T ARO

+0.37

+0.09

+0.28*

10.50 Banks 5-1

-0.91

-1.01

+0.10 4.

Moderator Temperature 10" delta

+0.54 MTC less Coefficient at HZP, ARO rho /*F positive than

+0.60

• Deviation - Measurement - Prediction

• • 4 Deviation = 100 x (Measurement - Prediction) / Prediction

..m,

. +. -

s TABIE 2 (Continued)

Maine Yankee Cycle 12 Startup Test Measurements and Predictions Item Units Measurement Prediction Deviation Criteria 5.

CEA Drop Times seconds 2.11 average less than 2.25 worst 2.70 seconds 6.

Tilt Monitoring vs.

% Rated 4 Ex-core Percent Rated Power Power Tilt 5.2 5.9 10.5 4.2 15.7 4.0 21.2 3.7 25.8 3.6 33.0 3.4

-35.4 3.4 12.3 3.0 l

23.0 2.7 26.3 2.7 29.9 1.4 35.8 1.0 40.0 1.0 44.7 0.9 less than 3.0 49.7 1.0 at 50% power

7. Power Distribution Near 50% Power Average:

1.7%*

Norst:

6.8%

110%

Near 100% Power Average:

2.3%

Worst:

6.6%

% Deviation = 100 x (Measurement-Prediction) / Prediction

FIGURE 1

)

MAINE YANKEE CYCLE 12 i

RSSEMBLY RELRTIVE POWER DENSITIES INCR VS PREDICTED

]

BOC, ARO EQUILIBRIUM CONDITIONS NEAR 50% POWER RSSCMBLY TYPC RNO INCR LOCRTION *

• P-0 8

P-8 21 INCR RSSE 2LY RCLRTIVE POWCR RT 48% POWER 0.340 0.391 PREDICTCO RSSCMSLY RCLRTIVE POWER RT 50% POWER '

0.331 0.366 PCRCCNT 0iFFCRCNCC 2.7 6.8 i

P-0 15 R-0 31 R-0'll R-0 25 0-0 4

0.400 0.937 1.196=

1.200

't.023 0.398 0.953 1.158 1.207 0.997 0.5

-1.7 3.3

-0.6 2.6 P-8 16 R-0 33 0-0 13 0-4 28 P-4 7

R-4 20 m MAXIMUM l-PIN 0.436 1.113 1.159 1.102 0.941 1.297 0.424 1.155 1.163 1.082 0.916 1.288 OCTANT LOCATION 11 30 2.8

-3.6

-0.3 1.8 2.7 0.7 MCASURCO 1.566= 1.532 R-0 34 0-4 14 R-8 30 P-8 10 R-8 24 P-0 3

l PRCOICTCO 1.510 1.559m 1.120 1.162 1.295 0.901 1.212 0.898

% OlfrCRENCC 3.7

-1.7 1.157 1.163 1.299u 0.888 1.206 0.884 1

-3.2

-0.1

-0.3 1.5 0.5 1.4 0-0 32 P-0 12 R-4 27 0-8 6

0-4 19 1.172 0.959 1.288 1.115 1.077 i

1.183 0.962 1.312 1.120 1.076

-0.9

-0.3

-1.8

-0.4 0.1 FUCL RCLRTIVE POWER PERCCNT II!E ltCS PREDICTED DIFFERENCE 29 9

23 2

M-8 0.794 0.746 6.4 1.311 0.900 1.161 1.176 P-0 0.613 0.609 0.7 2.8

-2.0

-1*4 0.4 P-4 0.904 0.897 0.8 P-8

- 0.576 0.559 3.0 0-0 26 0-0 5

0-4 18 0 1.143 1.150

-0.6 1.112 1.188 1.139 0-4 1.135 1.134 0.1 1.144 1.200 1.143 R:8 i:ll!

1:l!!

M

-2.8

-i.0

-0.3 R-4 1.287-1.306

-1.5 p.4 22 R-8 1

R-8 1.233 1.231 0.2 0.873 1.152 R850LUTC RVCRRGE 1.71 0.851 1.147 STRNDRRO OCVIRTION 2.25 2.6 0.4-M-8 17 0.794 0.746 6.4 INCR -

COICTCO PCRCENT DirrCRCNCE :

X 100 t

. r-

---w-

~

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

t, FIGURE 2 MRINE YANKEE CYCLE 12 RSSEMBLY RELATIVE POWER DENSITIES INCR VS PREDICTED ARO EQUILIBRIUM CONDITIONS NEAR FULL POWER CYCLE EXPOSURE 484 MWD /MT MERSURED l

S00 MWD /MT CRLCULRTED RSSEMBLY TYPC RNO INCR LOCRTION P-0 8

P-8 21 INCR RSSCMBLY RELRTIVE POWER RT 99% POER 0.341 0.387 PRCOICTCO RSSEMBLY RELRTivC POWCR RT 100% POWER 0.322 0.363 PCRCCNT OlfrCRCNCC 5.9 6.6 P-0 15 R-0 31 R-0 11 R-0 25 0-0 4

0.397 0.907 1.131 1.173 0.994 0.383 0.896 1.091 1.148 0.961 3.7 1.2 3.7 2.2 3.4 h

P-8 16 R-0 33 0-0 13 0-4 28 P-4 7

R-4 20 m MXIMUM l-PIN 0.434 1.092 1.115 1.075 0.935 1.291 l

0.415 1.094 1.110 1.056 0.908 1.262 l

OCTRNT LOCRTION 30 27 4.6

-0.2 0.5 1.8 3.0

_2.3 l

NCRSURCO 1.502= 1.484 R-0 34 0-4 14 R-8 30 P-8 10 R-8 24 P-0 3

PRCOICTCO 1.493 1.518=

1.103 1.130 1.278=

0.904 1.230 0.918

% OlffCRENCC 0.6

-2.2 1.104 1.125 1.274 0.902 1.221 0.905

-0.1 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.7 1.2 0-0 32 P-0 12 R-4 27 0-8 6

0-4 19 1.153 0.958 1.310 1.151 1.108 1.164 0.970 1.335m 1.166 1.126

-0.9

-1.2

-1.9

-1.3

-1,6 rUCL RCLRTIVE POWER PCRCENT IIEC iMB PREDICTED OlFFERENCE R-4 29 P-4 9

0-4 23 0-4 2

1.293 0.908 1.181 1.216 M-8 0.833 0.820 1.6 1.333 0.945 1.220 1.241 l

P-0 0.615 0.608 1.2 3'0

-3.9

-3'2

-2.0 P-4 0.919 0.925

-0.6 l

[w0 8

0.575 0.560 2.7 0-0 26 0-0 5

0-4 18 1.140 1.153 1.1 1.146 1.227 1.179 0-4 1.142 1.154

-1.0 1 '.4, 4 199 1*264 1*213 0-8 1.151 1.166

-1.3 2.9 2*8 R-0 1.079 1.062 1.6 R-4 1.301 1.316

-1.1 P-4 22 R-8 1

R-8 1.245 1.244 0.1 0.909 1.207 f950LUTC RVERAGE 2.28 0.919 1.229 o

STANDARD DEVIRTION 2.80

~l.1

~l.8 M-8 17 0.833 0.820 1.6 INCR PERCENT 01ffCRCNCE :

X 100 n t.u i t.u l-'-.-. -.-

-