ML20097H188
| ML20097H188 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Mcguire |
| Issue date: | 05/28/1992 |
| From: | DUKE POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20097H187 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9206240308 | |
| Download: ML20097H188 (32) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:- _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . g t
>JKE POWER COMPANY McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION UNIT 2 CYCLE 8 STARTUP REPORT -
Revision Datn Original issue May 28, 1992 N h 9206240308 920615 PDR ADOCK 05000370 p PDR
.; i i
Table of' Contents- [ t i g <
- List'of Tables 11 e
i List of~ Figures lii 1.0 Introduction ll 1.1 Prestartup NIS Realignment-Following Refueling - 3 ; PT/0/A/4600/78 j J 2.0 Criticality- 5 s 3.0 Zero Power Physics Testing 6
.3.1_ Boron' Endpoint Measurement - PT/0/A/4150/10 10 ;
3.2 Isothermal _ Temperature Coefficient Measurement - 11' PT/0/A/4150/12 3.3 1 Control' Rod Worth Measurement - PT/0/A/4150/11 14 I 1 3.4 Control-Rod Worth Measurement: Rod Swap - 16
.PT/0/A/4150/11A
' 4;0 Power Escalation Testing 18 4.1 Thermal Power Output Measurement - PT/0/A/4150/03 - 23 ,
4.2 Reactivity Anomalies Calculation - PT/0/A/4150/04 25
-4.3- CoreLPower Distribution and Incore/NIS Correlation 26-Check-- PT/0/A/4150/02A
-4.4 Incore and Nuclear Instrumentation Systems _ 28 Recalibration - PT/0/A/4600/02G l-6 E
2' t L
- . - - . .,. <- ,c . . - . , - ,
k List of Tables-
?"E&
- 1. Overlap Data 7
- 2. Nuclear Heat 8
- 3. Reactivity-Computer Checkout 9 4 Control Rod Worth Measurement: Rod Swap 17
- 5. M2C8 Core Power Distribution Results - 38%'Fu11 Power- 19
- 6. M2C8 Incore and NIS Interim Reca11bration Results 20 7.- -M2C8 Core Power Distribution Results - 78% Full Power 21
- 8. M2C8 Incore and NIS Interim Recalibration Results- 22-
- 9. Thermal Power Output' Measurement Results 24
- 10. H2C8 Core Power Distribution Results - 100% Full Power 27
- 11. M2C8 Incore'and NIS Recalibration Results 29 i.
t 11 l o l' l< l t
- _ . . . ~ . ~ . -
4
~
List of Figures Page li- Unit 2 Cycle 8 Core Loading Pattern 2 2 . -- Assemblies to Use for Calculating IR and PR Calibration 4 3.- ITC Heatup and Cooldown Datar Cooldown 12
.. 4. ITC Hestup and Cooldown Data: Heatup 13
- 5. Shutdown Bank B Rod Vorth 15 -
111
- 1.0 Introduction-
. Core loading for McGuire Unit 2 Cycle a was started on February 19 1992, and was completed February 22. The core for McGuire 2 Cycle 8 consists of 121 Westinghouse-optimized fuel assemblies and 72 Babcock & Wilcox Mark-BW fuel assemblies. To control power peaking and maximize cycle length, 64 Burnable Absorber inserts are used. Figure 1 gives the Unit 2 Cycle 8 core loading pattern.
Criticality, Zero Power Physics Testing (ZPPT) and Power Escalation
-Testing (PET) began. March 15, 1992. The unit reached 100% power on March 25. 1992. >
P 0
+
5 1
,- _--___ _ i _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ .
4 Figure 1 VcGuire \uc ear S o ion Unit 2 Cycle 8 Core Loading Pattern Ins # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 A U69 V63 U30 V75 U72 V09 U46 A 201ET 124 119 56 22CFT 45 11'- B U53 U39 V50 U75 V71 UO8 V42 U44 V04 U37 U15 8 229ET R134 B6NY R115 B6P1 9154 S6RI R151 36P0 R153 21eRT C U43 U6S V52 U10 V14 009 U74 U32 V10 U12 V25 U11 U55 C 94 71 96P6 R146 B6PR Rice 105 R148 56Du R155 B6P4 96 55 D IJ21 V48 T03 V59 T10 V62 T24 V54 T14 V20 TOS V34 U03 0 - R163 B6P4 R 1.17 9699 315KT BtRc Rill 36RI 60 96R3 R103 B6PA Rin6
~
U35 V03 U62 V01 T37 UO6 T68 V22 T01 U70 T38 V68 U20 V41 U13 E E 334FT 103 81 96PM 49 31 127 B6RL R144 36P2 228FT 63 96NW R14) 96D7 V30 UO1 V46 T27 U19 T57 V60 T35 V16 T28 U59 T65 V43 U24 V21 F F R141 36 Pit 160 B6FR R124 59 75 36DW R107 53 tos R1'2 B6RN 176 201KT G U27 VSS ,U48 V32 T13 V57 T64 V08 T72 V28 T25 V66 U18 V53 U51 G P17 BER6 122 96PE 205KT 36PL 45 86PU 206KT 96 RJt _R162 3623 133 50 96PX _ V73 UO4 U58 T46 V61 T06 V38 T19 V36 T21 V65 T47 U31 U52 V76 H H 96PC R114 B6P: R159 86FP R116 96PV R120 OSS9 R63 44 120 R123 csst 'R111 J U68 V53 U50' V29 T40 V45 T09 V70 T63 V17 T43 V69 U05 V05 U64 J 9595 331KT D670 14?KT B6PK 57 56PT 222RT B6 R.7 R139 96R2 71 215RT B6PW ' Riet K V06 U33 V13 T6! U40 T45 V56 T41 V37 T17 U60 T04 V47 U26 V33 K 56BN 84 95 R108 56PP R124 96PM R135 80 208FT B69V R110 211RT 114 Ritt L U61 V35 U76 V44 736 U36 T26 V07 T44 U25 T60 V26 U02 V18 U41 L 3105 B6R4 54 91 226KT 96PJ 46 139 312KT 3CO R121 96P1 219ET 210KT B6NV V67 T55 V15 T39 V31 T48 V23 T49 V51 T18 V24 0 57 M M U34 R136 86P3 R131 B6R8 72 96RA R142 968:) 313ET B6RP R125 36Pt R150 N U42 U22 V40 U29 V419 U17 U38 U14 V39 U66 V02 USS U71 N R134 $6RP R129 227KT R126 B6RT all? 56P7 221FT 60 216FT 125 36P5_ U73 U07' V27 U63 V12 U23 V11 U16 V19 U67 U47 P P 121 R140 SENY RIC2 B6?Y R61 56R0 R128 B6N2 R152 204rf R U45 V72 U49 V64 U28 R U54) V74 52 225ET 212XT } 100 80 67 l209KT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 2
T-i 1.1 Prestartup NIS Realigninent. Following Refueling - PT/0/A/4600/78 P i This procedure was performed:on March 2-4, 1992. This test was used to calculate preliminary calibration data for the intermediate range (IR) and power range (PR) detectors following' refueling. -t
~
The sat of Cycle 8 preliminary calibration data was- determined by -
. taking the- End of Cycle 7 (EOC7) calibration data and adjusting it.
by a weighted average of the ratio of the sum of the predicted . assembly powers for the Cycle 8 loading to the sum of the measured assembly powers from the last Cycle 7 Incore/Excore~ calibration. The' core locations used to calculate the ratio of the predicted Beginning of Cycle 8 (BOC8) assembiv powers to the measured EOC7 l values -are shown in Figure 2. l g The average predicted BOC5-to-EOC7 1R ratio was -1.05; the average , -predicted BOC8-to-EOC7 PR ratio was -0.91. Based on these results, the IR'and PR currents were adjusted prior to Cycle 8 i Initial Criticality. t 1; I-i ~i
.~>
l 3 5 i . 4 1 E : I 3 i.); ; i' j e a . - - . - n . --- n -e.. e -v = r , n
')
Figure 2 Assemblies to Uee for Calculattng IR and PR Calibration Setpoints n e ooo 1
@ R~ o ~X. @
a XX , _ X:X 3
\
5 6 i
! 7 l --
8 9 10 11 12 XX
~
23 XX
@X o X@ " -
15 0 0 0 M L K J H G F E D C 8 A R P N A D l Core lecations used for PR calibration i Core locations used for IR calibration i . a
2.0 Critien11t.y Following a Change in Core Nucicar Characteristics - PT/0/A/4150/28 On March 15, 1992, boron samples were taken n preparation for the approach to criticality. These samples indicated reactor coolant boron to be 1911 ppm. Since it was desired to achieve criticality with either: , (a) -500 pcm of Control Bank D inserted. OR } (b) the lowest allowable boron concentration while maintaining _ 1.0% Shutdown Margin. , a target value of 1646 ppm was chosen for reactor coolant boron cancentration. This was based upon a predicted HZP, ARO, no Xenon, equilibrium samarium critical boron concentration at BOC of 1696 ppm minus 50 ppm. This met the requirements of (b) above, which was 1640 ppm (it shutdown margin at 557 F plus 100 ppm conservatism). Calculations using the unit Data Book (OP/2/A/6100/22) indicat ed a volume of 9112 Eallons of demineralized water should be added to the systen to dilute from 1911 ppm to 1646 ppm. On March 15, 1992, this dilution of the Reactor Coolant System was started. The dilution was secured after 9112 gallons of demineralized water had been added to the system. After adequate system mixing, Chemistry samples indicated Reactor Coolant System boron was 1622 ppm. On March 15, 1992, rod withdrawal rommenced starting the Shutdown Bank A. As rods were withdrawn, both source range detectors wnre observed . and rod motion was stopped each time either flux level doubled or any conttal 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 criticulity. The unit achieved criticality at 1615 hours on March 15, 1992, with Control Bank D at 61 steps withdrawn. The predicted critical position per OP/0/A/6100/06 Reactivity Balance Calculation was 71 steps withdrawn on Con. col Bank D. This represented a reactivity difference of 63 pcm based on the predicted HZP. No Xenon Integral Rod Worths. 5
f 3.0 Zero Power Physics Testing - (ZPPT) y Zero Power Physics Testing for McGuire 2 Cycle S started March 15, 1992, and was completed March 17, 1992. The output of Power Range Detector N42 was used as input to the reactivity computer for Zero Power Physics Testing. All acceptance criteria for ZPPT were met. A minimum of one decade of overlap between the source range and the intermediate range detectors was verified on March 15, 1992, via the Control Board indication, the NIS panel, and the Operator Aid Computer (OAC). The results shown on table 1 reflect the data from the OAC. The point of adding nuclear heat was determined March 15, 1992. This was done by establishing a slow positive startup rate and observing a change in plant parameters such as an increase in the reactivity trace and an increase in pressurizer level. The test was performed twice to establish repeatability of the data. Table 2 gives the results of the two trials which were used to determine an average nuclear heat reading. Nuc1 car heat was determined to be at an average flux level of 4.10 x 10 amps on the reactivity computer picoammeter (N42) and 2.606 x 10-' amps on Intermediate Range Detector N35 and 3.032 x 10~7 amps on Intermediate Range Detector N?6. From these results tha test band for ZPPT was determined to be 10 4 to 10-' amps on the reactivity computer. On March 15, 1992, an on line checkout of the reactivity computer was perfo rmed. This was 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 indicatioa. The test was repeated fer 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 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. An electronics only negative reactivity insertion test was also completed
, satisfactorily as part of PT/0/B/4600/55, Reactivity Computer Periodic Test.
6
_.. . . . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , , _ - ___-_.-__-_.._____.m. R TABLE 1 Overlap Data on Harth 15. 1992 via the OAC Source Range Intermediate Range, cps amps t N31 N32 N35 N36 , When Is,on scales 700 700 1.1 x 10'" 1.2 x 10-" c After 1 decade increase on IR: 15000 15000 1.1 x 10'1' 1.5 x 10'18 When SR blocked: 16000 16000 1.6 x 10*88 1.6 x 10'1' 4 b [ i f t k 7
.?
__ _...-,__1_,._-..,__a._,._,__._.-.......,_., . . , _ _ . . . , . . - - _ _ , . . . . . . , _ - - . - . . - - . . . - _ . _ - _ , . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ - , _ , . . . - _ . , , _ . ~ . ,
TAB 12 2 Nuclear lleat Reactivity Computer Intermediatn Range N42 ?M 1136 Trial 1 2.60 x 10 1.697 x 10 1. 967 x 10 Trial 2 5.60 x 10 3. 514 x 10:' 4.097 x 10 Average 4.10 x 10 amps 2. 606 x 10 amps 3.032 x 10 imps Test Band: 10 to 10*' amps on N42 4 8
TABLE 3 Results on March 15, 199? Reactivity Computer Checkout Reactivity from + Doubling or Reactivity Coc:puter (Ap) DT or Irr (Ay,) Ap $ Initial Flux Level n.6) Period Halving Time
- Error (pcm) (pcm)
Reactivity Ccmpu - (Seconds) (Seconds) _ 33.46 34.16 2.05 3.6 x 10-* 189.53 131.3
~1.36 52.21 1.62 4.5 x 10 113.89 78.93 >
-33.85 -32.68 3.58 3.99 x 10 ~270.30 187.32
-28.44 -27.68 2.76 4.00 x 10 -311.79 216.07 l
,lAP - Ape l 100 hPc l
l
3.1 Boron Endpoint Heat urement - PT/0/A/4150/10 This test was-performed March 16, 1992. Three sets of data were j obtained. In the first set. Control Bank D_was initially at l
- 212 steps withdrawn, the Reactor Coolant System boron l concentration was 1695 ppm and the Pressurizer boron concentration j as 1730 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 Differential Boron Worth, control Bank D was then reinserted to the just critical condition and the test was performed two more times. , The results of these reactivity changes were each added to the initial Reactor Coolant System boron concentration to give the ARO Boron Endpoint. The values were averaged to give the final result of 1696 ppm. This value met the acceptance criterion of the flot Zero Power (HZP) ARO Critical Boron concentration of 1696 +50 ppm. ! i i 1 l
~
I l L. r l t i 10 t
+
v...-e. ,*a.i er e w wi ,- ie--,..- ..-v.-,.y- c,w,, ,-,.w, , o.., .,.--.,,.wmew,.,.. ,,, . , ,,-,-,.,,pw-% -,.r,m..gr,-_ve-v+Ne b 'r
- v " r W W-e y - --
3.2 1sothermal Temperature Coefficient Measurement - PT/0/A/4150/12 This test was performed on. March 16, 1992. The test measures Isothermal Temperature Coefficient (1TC) by plotting Reactivity versus Average Reactor Coolant System Temperature. The Moderator Temperature Coefficient (MTC) is found using the following relacionships MTC (pcm/ F) = ITC - Doppler Temperature Coefficient ) _ The acceptance criterion on '.he ARO ITC was 1.03 12.0 pcm/ F. The predicted Doppler Temperature Coefficient was -1.44 pcm/ F. The Reactor Coolant System boron concentration was 1695 ppm at the start of the test. A heatup/cooldown was performed while keeping rod position and boron concentration constant to determine reactivity change versus temperature. The heatup/cooldown was performed a second time because equipment problems rendered the data from the first cooldown/heatup invalid. The results are show in Figures 3 and 4. The average ARO ITC was found to be - 0.1 pcm/ F. This fell within the acceptance criterion band. This gave an ARO MTC of +1.34 pcm/ F .:hich was witnin acceptable Technical Specification limits. Following the cot 1pletion of this test, PT/0/A/4150/31 Determination of Rod Withdrawal Limits to Ensure Moderator Temperature coefficient Within Limits of Technical Specifications - was performed. The results of this test indicated there were no rod withdrawal limits needed for Unit 2 Cycle 8. 11
4
,k riguro 3
~
^
ITC Cooldown Data . I
.l 8
o ,
,_ -- .a t-.-- - . ~ . _ - .
4 k --- - I T l t- !
- l 1
- l
}' !
- J
]
4
~
).
i . . . - , I o - . . . =. . o* j l egZ0 <. a 3 _ . . . , - -- , ._e_..__ _ . - _a [ 3 g( e Oi e i t i G. t I i n -- _e 1 i ( CS - 6 i s < 9-O g - S .. _ ... . . - k y - L_ 4_ ' O ' a1
, g( - - . .- . . -
. .- . ~
p.
, 4 .. .
3
$h
- yeo* xE qa , -
- .. w
_ .p_.. y -
} - , . v~ . c . - _ . , . , . . .
g . ; .. q.%./ . ,. . . - - . M9g0 . . . f l
.,_ m _ ._
}
2 BM % , .L__ - . . .. -- - - - . gg $4 yp g l ,.
.f 9, . .. r
- 4. y.
j
.e -U i 4.. y 9 g .m.i i y ye .i Me4 4.-B.-..e kNN .,,. < =. . . _.h -- _ - 4
.h ,. - m 4-.
..--_r... '
i m _4--.. w -. - p ; _-... , 8 Q _-
-{ . .
- ,p .._
g . . .. g .
,. , +_ _ _ ,
_ p__ -
, _ _ = , . .
u) J. .-. u. t . i _ _ . _ _ i _ : . . L ._ . . - .- -._ ,_ . f . ... . .. . @ ,_
,.+4-.
g, .
}__
_4-...
. : p Z, m-g q- .
+
. , , . . . , ._ i. .e... . ee wg _ j...
w _.
. __. _ep, _ . . . . . . . _ _ . .
p
- m. ...g .....e.w . iim t . -. . , .. . .. - -- _. . . _ -
y...
+ - =,
( I a e. e . . - . , . . _ . e..-.. .e w.e = . 6 e .p=. g j - . - _.._.,%..,_... , . _
. . . _ . _ .. .p .
g . .. __ , 4_ . - . y _, ., g.. I j
,t.A >
__p. . . _ ymuusi - . - _. h. 4. e . j -..-<.
. w
_ _ u --
.- . . - p.
3
~
[_ l
._ . i .p - . ~ . . . . ., ._ .;- ,. 1
_4 . . o f 1.i ,. _
.f .-
__._+. _ l
-, . ~ %e_
. ._.7._-. _. .+ . . . . - . - - . - . _ -
_ _ , . _ . ~ . _ __.__ , _ . . . ._ .
@ . __ , - . . .? _
p..
,L..
. __ . . _ ._ . p. .. __.._.
. _ . . ... _ . . , .- , . , . . , ._.f.,._ j
- i
_.fu..,..
..-., ~ . _
. . .. , ,~ . .
k . .. . .. - . - e-' - . - - I _f y. . _4. - . ( .- .
. A .
-4.~..~ r f..~._.
*f*~"*"
_r __
-q g a .. . .
_.._r._ _ . _ _. . . _ , _. - , . _ _ . . . . . +-4.__ _e_.._ gg . . .. -
+r . w+ + . . --
.ggg DM eitvMe6 i
'**wa *w.aw. m-.-p.,-.-. ...a._4.- - A ,
m ~ , . . ,...e.. ,,, .. . . -.
-....=.u-_L_- _..- .-~ .._ ,, - . . . ..._ _ _ - - - . -
. . .w - . _ . - -
Q . .
. !. .. . ., m . . _ - .
LA . s _ l- . ._ . _ , _ . ~ - .. __. . 4 Y T l
?
~ }} m e
- u - t.
i_- .,. . . . . . , . . . _ . . , . _.....-._..._~,-.~,.-.m.,.... .
, ~. .._.,mm-,..-.,r_.... , - _ , , , . . m..-_-,,.-
h hGi Figure 4 to j ~ ~ ITC Heatup Data . .
. _ _ _ . , _ . . . _ - . - - - . . _ _ _ _ , __y 7.- . _. _ . . .
8 4
, . __ - _ _ ___s .
4
-- . j
&
- 4 i-.e,. .e- . s --
a (
. . *m . ,
, l
;as __ , . . . _ . . .
.-. -3 ._
.}. ,
7{a3 . 9 . _ . . _ .,. . _ . . __ _-- ,_. _._ - __.... _ _ 4 , g _ - . _ .
-, 7 i ; i ,
e . . . .. dol . h - I 4
\n .
i
~
g . .i .
}
Ch . _ . . - - 7 y
,O . s-
.} , j .
.-j_s _ __
o . . _ ,
, g,%~ -
Q, j . .
-9 .
J __ . v . . .. - -. -. .._. . _ -
. _ ._ . ,__. _. _ . __7.._
ggy .. _ j (. _ _ _. . _ g . I, . . . . _ _ _ _.., _ . . ..
.%-3, ._. . . .q _ _ . _ . _
_~.--4-. _ . _ _ . __
.3_ _ __. j
{ _ _ ___ _.. p . _ _ .. g ., $f, %g, . _ __.
. 1 . ...;.-,___-.___4 _ . _ . _
l c_.
% l ~
kN
.{,.
. _.4
~ . . . .- . _ . . _ . - _ . , _ _ ,
y _ _ f_ . _ e, _ . _ . ,
. - _.~ . . . . _ . . -_. . .. ,_ _ - . . _ . _ .
. }. - - - -
_ q Q
... ..- - . . ., .. . ., _ *'-~- -
o , _ . . . .. ._ . _.. _..4..._._ _ _. t;
..._p......_-.,
._ 7 .__ . _ . _ . . _
I __
.L -- __.
E p ... ._._ .. .. .. . _
%.~ . -
g.. _. . , . . _ . p _.n .,...
.}.-. .y_ 1
=== .j W { _.. . . _ . _._.____4._.__.
=
..e 9._. _ - . .
-en-e..
..-..n_
w.>.
.._4._
.-wu..d. 4. _.
a.e dw-m.e- w. .n Ow +i. . as.e e.a. 4al Mv.e e-k ..e e. .y. e .B
-_... g -- h ;. .4 I
1 -_
,f.____. , . ,_._ _.. _ _
.ee e 1 .wh 4 Ne -.
._e.id.m e_ p . , , ee..w.. =c. . . 4.h.ga-.
'._..l..-*-..- .*-&*.. ._*'m._ M N NF=- h
. q..MW gg p F -
. __ L -
..__.y .-
- j. -w _ . . - - .+ -4 -.-_
_._~_;...._._.__.__7
. ._[ 7 s.
. -5 1 ;
g _.f i@n . . . , . _ ._._. . _ . - ___.4 ._ _, f ., l
. . , ._ . .. n _... . . _ _ . . . . . , . ._ - .
L-_-..- y L.-
. [_ .
1
~ ,
+ %...,.
- 7 . . _ .
u_--,
.......m.
. ~ - -
_ + .
- 6+
-.-v_.-
... ~.
j f .
. _ , ._4..... , . . _ . _ _ . ._
_ . .=_ .s,. ,
- _ . _ . _ .-: .b_.~.._<
+
- p. _.
. )~. _ - __ ,
9__.. n-.y~.--.__ _ - . _ _ . -- - . - . $- ._ w
-.t__,_,. _ __ __ __ _ - _ _ .
_._~
.l. _.
...-.a.__.. ._.___p_ _ _ _ .
, -_ - _-. . . _ . . . -- . w-.+
t ! -- 2
,-_ +-.-- -- --- -
g
._._m.__.__.______.._._ _..._ ____ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
4 I 1 I I i
- 3.3 Control Rod Worth Heasurement - PT/0/A/4150/11 on March 16, 1992, shutdown Bank B rod worth was measured using !
the established buration/dllution method. There were no other l rods in v.he core at the time. Shutdown Bank B was predicted to be the highest worth bank and was measured using this method so as to i serve as the reference bank for Control Rod Worth Measurements by { Rod Swap. l f The measured worth of Shutdown Bank B was 846 pcm. The predicted worth was 882 pcm with an allowable band of 1132 pcm. This repreeented an error of 4.1% and was within the acceptance { criterion of 115%. Figure 5 shows the measured integral and ! differential rod worths for Shutdown Bank D. h 6 l r
)
P i a [ P 14 i
...,:_..-.. -. . . , _ . . , , . . . - . , _ . - . . , , , . - - . _ , , - . - , . , , . , . . , _ . , . , . . . . . . _ , ..,,,._,,......,n,.,-,..,-.,._ , , , . , , , . . - _
. . - - . . - - - . . - - - - - . - . _ - . - - . . . - . . - .- - . - .=- - .. -. - . - - __.- . . -
b
, F10uro 5 McGuire Unit 2 Cycle 8 r Shutdown Bank B Worth Differential and integral Worths Ditferential Worth (pcm/ step) Integral Worth (pcm) 9 - --
- 900
. .'x ..
8 -- - x- =
= 800
. . t ..
gt 7 -- -- - - - - =
= 700 N ::
6 ---
- 600 k . .
\ t 5= = - " p * ' "(w - - - - =
= 500
. . f .y .
/,/ e - e -- a s'es, e-e
- 4 --
N, p-9 --
- 400 il ..
, s ,
3- -
. I' s
-- 300
~ ~
e k o
] t
. . Nw \ w -
\
2- - = - --
- 200 1
C-- h --
- 100 h . .
i
~~
Is
~ ~
0 .
. y ,.
i i e ii
, ,e i
, , , 0 j 0 34.5 49 60.! 74 00.5 109 129 148 165 184 202 214 225 RCC Bank (RCCA) Position (Steps Withdrawn) l -G- Integrat Worth -*- Differential Worth l l
r 15
- ' , - ~ < - . . - - . - , , . . ~ ,,,-,.,,,--,.-,,---..--..v.,--e,,,,,,-y ,,,,---y~. y.ry---,%.,,--,y . , ,y-,,
- y- - - - , ,.-w-----, y .ri,+-.,
___ . - _ . . . . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . . _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . _ . . ~ . - I 3.4 Control Rod Worth Heasurement: Rod Swap - PT/0/A/4150/11A On March 16/17, 1992, the rod swap method of control rod worth i measurement was begun. Shutdown Bank B was used as the reference i bank and its worth was measured by the boration/ dilution method l (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 i exchange. The integral worth of the bank being measured (i.e., the test bank) was determined from the'dsfference in the critical rod position of the reference bank with and without the test bank in the core. < The measured bank worths were compared with predicted worths and ! all banks were within the acceptance criteria of 130% or 1200 pcm l whichever was greater. The measured total rod worth was >90% of t the predicted worth which met the acceptance criteria. In # addition, all review criteria were met. i t The results of the-rod exchange test are given on Table 4 t 1 i t j t c 16
TADt.E 4 Control Rod Worth Heasurement: Rod Swap
)
Predicted Heasured Bank Worth Worth Percent + l Identification pcm pcm ++ Difference Control Bank C 882 846
- 4.3 (predicted reference -
bank) Control Bank A 330 335 -1.5 Control-Bank B 693 644 7.6 ! Control Bank C 842 817 3.1 Control Bank D 503 496 1.4 Shutdown Bank'A 292 278 5.0 Shutdown Bank C 411 386 6.5 Shutdown Bank D 411 381 7.9 Shutdown Bank E 426 406 4.9 Total Rod Worth 4790 4589 4.4
- Heasured by boration / dilution method !
+ l Predicted , 3l , gnn MeasureT
++ Rounded to nearest pcm 17
_ _. -- . , . _ , . , .- _ - . _ _ . , . _ . - . ,~, - , _ . . . --_. - - - - _ _ - _
--.-- _- _.-_ --_._- .-.-._~.--_ _ _.-._-_-__._
i i 4.0 Power Escalation Testing L
- IcGuire Unit 2 Cycle 8 Power Escalation testing started ;
Harch 17, 1992, at the conclusion of ZPPT and was completed March 28, 1992. The unit went on line March 17 at 1243 hours. The unit experienced some holds during power escalation which were scheduled to allow testing per i PT/0/A/41?0/21 Post Refueling Controlling Procedure for Criticality, ; Zero Power Physics, and Power Escalation Testing, and to allow Chemistry : testing. l At -38% power on March 20 1992, PT/0/A/4150/02A, Coro Power ' Distribution and Incore/NIS Correlation Check, was performed. Table 5 l ohows the full core flux map results based on PT/0/A/4150/02A. The ' results_from_the full core _ flux map taken were used to project _a !
" limiting" power at which F, or Fh Tech Spec peaking factor margin l would be maintained. This projection indicated that the F, Tech Spec peaking factor margin would be maintained to 91.1% power.
PT/0/A/4600/02F, Incore and Nuclear Instrumentation Systems Interim Recalibration, was also performed at -38% power. The results of this test were used as calibration data for the Power Range excore detectors. : Table 6 shows the test results. f At -78% power on March 23, 1992 PT/0A/4150/02A, Core Power Distribution ' and Incore/NIS Correlation Check, was performed. The test results are given in Table 7. The results of the NIS correlation check indicated a difference.between incore and excore AFD to be 2.041% for Quadrant 1. PT/0/A/4600/02F. Incore and Nuclear Instrumentation Systems Interim Recalibration, was therefore completed at -78% power.- The results of : this test were used as calibration data for the Power _ Range excore ' detectors. Table 8 shows the test results. The results from the full core flux map taken were used to project a " limiting" power at which F, l or F 3, Tech Spec peaking factor margin would be maintained. This , projection-indicated that both the F Tech Spec peaking factor margin u and the F, Tech Spec peaking factor margin would be maintained for power , levels up to 100% power. l Power escalation then resumed at a rate of -2.5%/hr. Upon achieving
-90%. PT/0/A/4150/03 Thermal Power output-Heasurement, was performed (see Section 4.1).- The remaining tests designated for llot full Power r Equilibrium Conditions were performed on March 27-28, 1992. The tests i and their results are described in Sections 4.2 - 4.4. ,
l l 18
I" - Tall!I. 5 H2C8 Core Power Distribution Results 38% Full Power HOTE: Axial location 1 is the bottom of the core. Axial location 61 is the top of the core. Unit 2 Cycle 8 Hap H2C8F001 Date/ Time Hap Taken 3/20/92 0400 hours Power Level 37.822 Cycle Burnup 0.5 EFPD 20.2 MWD /HTU Boron Concentration 1489 ppm Control Rod-Position Control Bank D at 178 steps withdrawn Maximum FT SUB Q 1.8637 at Axial Loc. 40, lloriz. Loc. E-14 Maximum pin F" SUB All 1.4594 at HorJz. Loc. L-14 Haximum Reaction Rate error
-(from predicted) 7.98% st lloriz. Loc. B-06 Minimum F-SUB-Q-OP Margin 24.7427% Location H-11 Hinimum F-SUB-Q-RPS Hargin 11.0820% Location J-10 Minimum F-DELTA-H Hargin 38.1236% Location H-11 Total Incore Axini Offset 7.407%
Incore Tilts:- Upper Core Lower Core Quadrant 1: -2.184% Quadrant 11- -1.681% Quadrant 2' 1.417% Quadrant 2 0.654% Quadrant 3: 1.750% Quadrant 3: 1.138% Quadrant 41 -0.983% Quadrant 4 -0.111%
__ ..m__ m ._ __.- -. - _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ . . . . _ , _ . .m____ . . _ - _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ m, _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . - _ - - . Table 6 CP/ 2/ A/ 6100/ 22 ENCLOSURE 4.3 TA,9tt 2.3 l tacere Cuttente and Voltages 1
^
Correlates to 2004 Full Pcarer at Yarlows Antal offsete Vhit 2 Cycle 4 Ft".L t%TR CE7TCTOR Ct'RAINTS (MICROAMPS) CC (P15KWD!N3 70 VADIDVS INCORS AX1AL Off8tTO 1NCORS DETECTOR N*41 DtTEC'ICR N 42 Dt710702 N 43 CCTSC70R W-44 AKIAL crfet? ? B T 5 7 8 7 8 30.0 262.9 201.8 337.4 249.2 294.2 223.7 309.6 216.1 247.8 {
-.20.0 219.6 310.3 273.0 277.6 243.0 273.3 233.8 1 10.0 232.7 237.$ 299.1 292.4 261.0 362.4 257.1 111.5 l 0.0 217.6 21$.3 280.0 314.0 244.3 281.1 240.0 269.2 10.0 202.$ 273.1 260.9 331.4 227.7 301.1 224.$ 207.0 !
20.0 147.4 291.0 241.7 317.2 2:1.1 120.4 200.3 J04.7 30.0 - 172.3 300.0 222.6 170.0 194 1 339.e 192.0 322.4 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.00c0 1.0000 1.0000 NORMAL!!ID DETECTOR VCLTAOta-(VCLT$) AT VARIOUS AK2 AL GFf ttTS ' 9 IOcoRK CETECTOR W-41 CETECTOR N-42 DETECTOR h*4) DETECTOR N 44 I MIAL ort 6tf T & TS T 3 T-5 T B T+8 T B T-B f 30.0 10.064 6.l84 3.480 10.036 6.611 3.427 10.029 6.614 3.416 10.016 6.684 3.332 20.0 9.486 7.166 - 2. 12 0 9.464 - 7.104 - 2.204 9.463 7.106 2.377 9.485 7.234 2.222 10.0 8.900 7.746 1.160 9.999 7.757 1.142 0.096 7.798 1 139 4.893 7.782 1.111 0.0 9.330 0.330 0.000 '4.330 8.330 0.000 0.330 8.330 0.000 8.330 0.330 0.000
*10.0 7.792 8.912 *1.160 7.761 0. 603 1.142 7.764 0.902 *1.139 7.747 8.878 1.111 20.0 7 174 9.494 2.320 7.192 9.476 2.204 7.197 9.474 2.277 7.205 9.426 +2.222 30.0 6.196 10.076 -3.480 6.622 10.049 3.427 6.431 . 10.044 3.416 S.642 9.974 3.332 i
( ATD INCORJ/EKOCRE RATIOS FOR QUACRArt$ 1 4 WAD 4 QUAD 2 QUAD 1 QUAD 3 , N 4% 8*42 N.43 N 44 M* 1.436 ~ Me 1.489 M
- 1.463 M = 1.500
, PPIPAPID B7__b/ ~ CATR
/ .
71 I i l l 1-v.- - ,,, - - . - - - , . ~. . . . . , . . . , _ . - _ , . ~ - , . . . _ ~ _ _ . . _ , . . - , - .- . . . . _ _ _ . - . . _
6 TABLE 7 H2C8 Core Power Distribution Results 78% Full Power NOTE: Axial location 1 is the bottom of the core. I Axlai location 61 is the top of the coro. I i Unit 2 Cycle 8 Mar M2C8F002 l Date/ Time Map Taken 3/23/92 0050 hours l Power Level 77% Cycle Burnup 1.63 EFPD 66 MWD /MTU Boron Concentration 1410 ppm i Control Rod Position Control Bank D at 199/198 steps withdrawn T 1.6981 at Axial Loc. 35, Haximum F SUB Q , lloriz. Loc. J-10 Maxinnm pin F" SUB All 1.4520 at lioriz. Loc. J-10 Maximum Reaction Rate error (from predicted) 5.11% at floriz. Loc. B-08 Minimum F-SUB-Q-OP Margin 6.7815% Location F-09 Minimum F-SUB-Q-RPS Margin 11.2082% Location J-10 Minimum F-DELTA-!! Margin .0615% Location G-12 Total Incore Axial Offset 1.146% Incore Tilts: L Upper Coru Lower Core Quadrant 13 -1.382%- Quadrant 1: -0.707% Quadrant 2: 0.899% Quadrant 2: 0.373% Quadrant 3: 1.295% Quadrant 3: 0.515% Quadrant 41 -0.813% Quadrant 4: -0.182% i ( l '
.. . _ ~ _ - _
. - . - - . . . .- - . = - . . - . - - . _ - _ . - - - - - - . ~ . - . . . . - . - - - . . - - . - - -...u.
Table 3 1 i l et/2/A/61CC/22 ; ENCt0$JE 4.3 TABLE 2.2 facore C4:sente end voltages correlates to IM h11 FNet l l at Vas toao A4&on Of f set s tinat 2 Cycis 8 I i WLL PCvtp CETECD CUPMNTS iMICPCAMPS) CC9518PCNDIN0 ?) VUl10CS 1FCCM Ax!AL CTFSETS CITECTOR 042 OCTICTM N-43 CITEC% R N 44 INCCM DETSCTC9 W 41 AX!AL 3 T 3 7 8 7 6 01788T T i 3$4.4 253.9 312.? 231.0 302.3 216.7
-30.0 27s.O 206.0 334.5 275.9 291.0 249.9 299.3 236.6 20.0 260.9 224.2 297.9 217.4 269.8 268.3 214.6 10.0 245.0 242.4 314.4 211.3 272.5 l 260.6 294.3 319.9 219.1 289.6 0.0 229.1 274.2 342.0 242.1 309.$ 234.4 290.4
*10.0 213.2 270.9 .
.364.0 224.4 329.4 217.4 309.4 20.0 197.3 297.1 254.1 f.'6.0 206.e 349.3 200.4 326.3
*3040 181.4 315.3 234.0 1.0000 1.0000 1 0000 1.0000 1.P000 t' '1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 NCPMALIZED CE*TC'*CN VOLTA 0$$ (VOLT 9) AT VARIOUS A11AL OriggT3
............................................................. j CITECE R N 43 CETECE R N.44 DETECTCR N-41 .OETECTOR N 42 INCOM Ax!AL T 3 T+3 ,
3 T-3 7 3 T3 1 CrFSET T S T-5 T 6.515 3.414 10.019 6.68$ 3.333 3.401 10.037 6.610 3.426 10.028 30.0 10.064 6.183 2.222 9.462 7.186 2 276 9.456 7.234 7.166 2.321 9.468 7.104 2.264 20.0 9.486 7.782 1.111 7.757 1.142 4.996 7.758 1.13e 8.893 10.0 0.908 f.744 1.360 8.499 8.330 0.000 8.330 8.~ 33 0 0.000 0.330 0.000 0.330 8.330 0.000 0.330 ' 0.0 8.330 8.874 -1.111 7.761 8.903 -1.142 7.764 0.902 -1.138 7.7 67
+10.0 7.712 4.p12 1.160 7.194 9.474 2.276 7.204 9.426 -2.222 9.494 2.321 7.192 9.476 2.244
+20.0 7.17 4 9.975 -3.333
+3.426 6.632 10.04% a3.414 6.641 6.596 10.077 +3.481 6.633 10.0$0 30.0 AFD INCOR2/EXCopI PAT 1os ton QUADRAirTs 1 4 QUAD 2 QUAD 1 QUA3 3 QUAD 4 1 N 42 N-43 N.44 N-41 Me 1.459 M = 1.464 Me 1.499 M = 1.436 PREFAREDBY[flV[4 DATE k b
/
6 4.1 Thermal Power output Heasurement - PT/0/A/4150/03 This test was used tc *.'erify that the primary and secondary heat balances on the plant :omputer were consistent with primary and secondary heat balances on a benchmarked offline computer. The test was run on March 23/24, 1992, at 90% F.P. The results are shown in Table 9. The acceptance criterion of 1% dif ference between the of fline computer and the plant computer was met. I 9 N
_ - _ . . , .- -. .. --. .. . - -_=-. -. -- .-. ~. - _.- -.- . . . . - - . .. ( [ I 1 TABl.E 9 Thermal Power output Heasurement Results 4 i P Plant Computer Of f-Line Computer i'
% W, % W, Primary lleat Balance 90.776 3096.391 90.97 3103.0 Secondary IIcat Balance 90.398 3083.516 90.39 3083.203 L
t b b t r I
- , . - , . - ,- -,.,,r- . . . , -- -.
i i 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, Xenon and Samatlum worths, rod positions and power level and adjusting these to the ARO, llot Full Power (liFP). equilibrium Xenon and Samarium condition. Theoretical and actual Reactor Coolant System baron concentration for these conditions were then compared. The test, performed at -100% on March 27, 1992, indicated that the ' actual ARO. IlFP, equilibrium Xenon and Samarium condition boron concentration was 1188.9 ppm. This compares to a predicted value of 1202.8 ppm. The 13.9 ppm difference translated into a 109.5 pcm error between actual and predicted reactivit.y worths. - This was within the acceptance criterion for the test of ,
+1000 pcm.
I i [ i 4 I s I i 4 k h
?
_. - ~ _ . _ - _ - - , _ _ . . . . , , - _ _ _ . _ . _ __ _ _ . . _ _ _ . . . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . ~ _ . -
l l
. l 4.3 Core Power Distribution and Ircore/NIS Correlat.lon Check -
PT/0/A/4150/02A on March 27 1992. PT/0/A/4150/02A Coro Power Distribution and i and Incore/N13 Correlation Check, was performed at -100% Full ' Power and equilibirum conditions. The indicated incore axial flux difference _(AFD) from flux map H2C8F004 was -2.035%. The results of this test indicated at the maximum absoluto difference between the AFD from any Power Range excore detector channel and the indicated incore AFD from the full core flux map was <35. The results of the test are summarized in Table 10. L
_ _ _ _ . _ _ ______m.__..______._.__..__.._ _ .. _ _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ __.__ _ ____ _ TABLE 10 ! L . l M2C8 Core Power Distribution Results
-100% Full Power NOTE: Axial location 1 is the bottom of th- 'oro.
Axial location 61 is the top of the core. Unit 2 Cycle 8 Map M2C8F004 Date/ Time Map Taken 3/27/92 1000 hours Power Level -100% Cycle Burnup 5.79 EFPD 234 MVD/HTU Boron Concentration 1198 ppm l Control Rod Position Control Bank D at 211 steps withdrawn , Maximum FT SUB Q 1.6585 at Axial Loc. 34 Horiz. Loc. G-10 i Maximum pin F" SUB AH 1.4337 at Horiz. Loc. G-10 ( Maximum Reaction Rate error ; (from predicted) 5.16% at Horia. Loc. B-06 Minimum F-SUB-Q-OP Margin 3.5437% Location H-07 - t Minimum F-SUB-Q-RPS Margin 11.3242% Location L-14 Minimum F-DELTA-H Margin 4.2350% Location G-12 , i Total Incore Axial Offset -2.035% Incore Tilts: ; Upper Core Lower Core j Quadrant 1: -1.561% Quadrant 1 -0.603% Quadrant 2: 1.493% Quadrant 2 0.497% Quadrant 3: 1.002% Quadrant 3: 0.329 i Quadrant 4 -0.934% Quadrant 4: -0.223% t
. . - .~ .,---,,.,,.n..,... e-,.., - , .,.,.-,_.a~.n-...~,.-...n,. an., , , . . ..,._._,_.,,,..n,..,,...-,-..-_ -
,--,--,..-,,,..,,,.n.. .,,,e-.
i ! l I + l l 4.5 incore and Nuclear InsttTunentation Syst Las Recalibration - i PT/1/A/4600/02c
- f This test was perf ormed on Harch 27-23, 1992, to obtain l l reca11 brat.fon data for the excora detectors based on the incore l axial offsets. The NIS amplifier gains, the f(A1) reset function i l'
for the over-power dif f erential terrporature protective setpoint s. l and the OAC excore power distribution monitor were all calibrated '! j on March 31, 1992. The results of the test are given in Table 11. i 4 . I 1 4 ! I ! I i 4 I t
}
! I I I f i f I I i i I b i I I I ! l i i f t ! l i i t
'.m.... . - - . - - . . . - - - - . - -+ - - , . . . - ....,-...--.,w. ...,E.-w...-.-----%.~ww..*m._ . _ _ _ v ..,wm,, .-,mw ,+w w..e. -w ,.mw
/ Table 11
, ') ti:A sl n il l
' [h:L;iLM 6.3
*alti 2.2 i, tere hrtenti l'8 .t.t Mit
- etrelates to int Fdi 8;.er at w iths Astoi Of4 fit !
.;r s
- 2 : n t 3 8;tt :".g4 -[t[ *3 (gu[ gig agggastg, ;>,ygg;;c3 '; attkg ggg agt:( gnggig l
!OE ".('IC*M 4 61 *!'[C?? N 62
. ltil !P % 3 tit [CICR N ee ,
Atlat '
*fFitt
. t g t g ; g 1 ) .
H.) 2H.! !)3.8 1").3 !!4.1 lis.3 !!8.6 3!2.3 216.6 L.0 2'3.7 !!!.5 350.3 130.2 Di.) 2!2.) 2?5.6 238.0
- s.< 257.3 !.7.1 319.3 K5.4 199.3 275.4 2*9.0 251.3 M !.0.1 bl.7 3M.3 33).7 272.5 298.8 262.4 290.6 l l 1.c 224.! 290.. Ill.8 3t!.9 2:5.3 322.1 245.7 302.0
- <.3 11.4 312 4 ha.3 331.1 233.1 3*t.6 229.1 323.3
- 3) 91.1 133.7 247.B 6%.6 !?).8 36 U !!!.4 344,1 r' 4.oM7 0.9968 0 H91 0.9M6 L9171 0.1960 0.9970 0.9964 NOF."tLI:() Oti[CTOR V0ti!6IS (VOLill AT '.';A10c5 All AL OFFStil ICE ;E7ftfCE h *1 tiittf0R N 42 ttittiOR N-43 DtitCIOR N 44 At:aL "JFiii i 6 T-3 7 8 T8 i 8 i8 i 8 T8 iM 10.43 n.313 3.715 3.986 6.622 3.564 9.911 6.37% 3.537 9.916 6.430 3.486 i( 0 8.465 6.#!8 i.471 9.634 7.058 2.376 9.394 7.026 2.358 9.387 7.063 2.324 IM 3J18 7.659 1.138 8.892 7.696 1.188 8.957 7.678 1.179 8.859 7.697 1.162 M ! .11', 1.3 30 0.&:-0 9.330 8.330 0.000 9.330 8.330 0.000 8.330 8.330 0.000 19.'; 7.'t2 M )! -1.239 7.778 8.966 -1.168 7.803 8.982 -1.17V 7.801 8.943 1.162
!M 7.195 8.e72 -2.477 7.226 9.602 +2.376 7.276 9.634 +2.358 7.273 9.597 2.324
- 30A s.627 10.32 3.715 6.6it 10.238 -3.564 6.749 10.286 +3.537 6.744 10.230 -3.686 AFD INCOPfletCORE RA110$ FCR 0#DRANTS 1
- 4 9
N 61 N 42 N 43 N-44 m i 1.F.5 M = 1.602 m = 1 *13 A a 1.434 U EFAP!D By
.,/ga ...... ATE.8.[..[.[f-l .
~ , .. , - , . ., - - . _ . - - --
g l
, Duke 1%e um,wn; Machona Center PO flat Hei Charkt;e % C .W ol H W DUKE POWER June 16, 1992 Mr. Rex Gleascn Regional Manager Water Quality Section Department of Environinental, Hoalth and Natural Resources 919 North Main Street .
Mooresville, N. C. 28115
Subject:
Marshall Steam Station NPDES Permit NC0004987 Release of Domestic Wastewater File: Ms-704.01, MS-704.21 Certified: P067 125 0850 Dear Mr. Gleason Pursuant to Part II, Section D (6)(C) of Marshall Steam Station's NPDES permit (NC0004 987 ) , this is a follow-up written report to the North Carolina Departinent of Environment, llealth and Natural Resources (NCDEHNR) of recent noncompliances associated with l Marshall's sanitary treatment system. Telephone notifications were made to Mr. Mike Parker of the Mooresville Regional office on June 3 and 5, 1992, by Ms. Norma Atherton of Duke Power Company. EVENTS On June 2, 1992, due to maintenance 2 tnsing activities, water f rom l a fire hose inadvertently entered the domestic westewater package l plant through a manhole cover. The manhole cover, which was located in a paved traffic area, in solid except for several one-inch holes. 'a The package plant was unable to process this surge of water and, as l a result, the facilit.y overflowed for approximately three and one half hours via an overflow line. The overflow discharged to Lake Norman at the Marshall intake canal. On June 4, 1992, a rainfall event that produced 1.7 inches of rain within 2 hours caused rainwater to enter the sanitary system through the manhole cover referenced above. Tne sanitary treatment system overflowed to the intake canal for approximately 1 hour via the overflow line, a\ i [;
"J.3
,b(U !
n 4 1 CORRECTIVE ACTIONS A review was made of all existing sanitary system manhole covers. Two manhole covers wore replaced with solid manhole covers, including,the manhole cover in question, and scaled in place with a scalant. No additional covers were identified that would allow surface water infiltration. The overflow line f rom the sanitary treatment f acility was " capped" by removing the elbow connection from the chlorination chamber and inserting a - blank flange. For long term corrective action, a design study is being initiated to evaluate the possible upgrade of the sanitary treatment system. Recommendations from the design ' study and time tables wjl1 be provided as this information becomes
- available to us.
Operations personnel have been reminded to che'A .,oth tho number , . two sump and the - sanitary system levels if a civil alarm is received in the control room. This alarm is a si.ored alarm between the two locations. Should you have any questions, please contact Norma Atherton at (704)382-2116. ; Sincerely,- ;
} &s%G I Norma G. Atherton, Production Specialist II Generation Services Department Environmental Division NGA/jfw i
cc: ' NCDEHNR - Raleigh l
's I
r t k b B ey w,.ea-,
-t F-v 1 T+-" *1'*'t-98 WF-* --rt- vvvr*M 1 'er vt - ='vv vw rw v e**v*' m e- P* e = r a m -= me- a+ w -,~e <*=new-,st,ar-e-fe'v--r-%.wrs n es e* sr-+wwr--ar--w,.-ywwmm--*-- rm w-w-1%v--rw--t-"e*ee*
r ,
. g 6 f
. 1 l
i l bct G. S. Rice J. R. llendricks ' J. S. Carter l D. L.-Burro 11 j B. E. Davis i Contral Hocords NRC Document Control Desk t i e n P y I }i P I-t t I T 6 8
. - _ _ . _ . _ - _ - . . . . . . _ _ _ . . . - . . . _ . . _ _ . . . _ . _ . , . . . . . . . _ , . . . . . _ , . . _ , _ . , , ,}}