ML20141G447
| ML20141G447 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Calvert Cliffs  |
| Issue date: | 06/16/1997 |
| From: | Katz P BALTIMORE GAS & ELECTRIC CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9707080005 | |
| Download: ML20141G447 (10) | |
Text
.
G i
PETER E. Kxrz Baltimore Gas and Electric Company Plant General Manager Calven Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Calven Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 1650 Calvert Cliffs Parkway Lusby, Maryland 20657 410 495-4101 June 26,1997 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 ATTENTION:
Document Control Desk
SUBJECT:
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Unit No. 2; Docket No. 50-318 IJnit 2. Cvele 12. Startuo Renort u
REFERENCE:
(a)
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Technical Specification 6.9.1.1 In accordance with Reference (a), attached is the Calvert Cliffs Unit 2, Cycle 12, Startup Report. This report must be submitted within 90 days of completion of the testing or resumption of commercial power operation, whichever comes first. Unit 2 resumed commercial power operation on May 20,1997.
Should you have questions regarding this matter, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.
Very truly yours, A AL
/
PEK/DWM/bjd Attachment cc:
R. S. Fleishman, Esquire H. J. Miller, NRC J. E. Silberg, Esquire Resident Inspector, NRC A. W. Dromerick, NRC R. I. McLean, DNR Director, Project Directorate I-1, NRC J. H. Walter, PSC 9707090005 970626 PDR ADOCK 05000318-p PDR f k lf l 070055 y
BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY CALVERT CLIFFS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT UNIT 2 Docket Number 50-318 License Number DPR-69 Unit 2 Cycle 12 Summary of Startup Testing 4
~
CCNPP Unit 2 Cycle 12 Startup Testing Feport Page 2 of 9 INTRODUCTION The Unit 2 Cycle 12 core is designed for Full Power Operation Burnup of 20924 MWD /MTU.
The core loading is listed in Table 1, and the core loading pattern is shown in Figure 1. The initial startup of Cycle 12 began with Reactor Coolant System Flow Measurement and Control Element Drive Mechanism Testing (CEDM) on May 18, 1997. Initial Criticality was declared at 12:30 on May 20,1997. Startup testing concluded on June 4,1997 after the 100% RTP power distribution comparison.
The startup testing evolution was controlled under four Post Startup Test Procedures (PSTP). Each is listed below with a description of the tests contained in the procedure.
PSTP-2, Initial Approach to Criticality and Low Power Physics Testing:
Dual CEA Symmetry Check Critical Boron Concentration (CBC) Measurements e
Isothermal Temperature Coefficient (ITC) Measurement e
CEA Group Worth Measurements PSTP-13, CEDM Performance Testing:
CEA Drop Time Testing PSTP-3, Power Escalation Testing Radial Power Distribution Comparisons at 30,60,85, and 100% Rated Thermal Power (RTP).
Core Symmetry Power Distribution Measurements at 30,60,85, and 100% RTP.
ITC and Power Coefficient (PC) Measurement at 92.5% RTP PSTP-301, RCS Flow Measurement:
- RCS Flow Measurement Core Differential Pressure Comparison
CCNPP Unit 2 Cycle 12 Startup Testing Report Page 3 of 9 TEST CRITERIA j
The following review and acceptance criteria were applied to the individual tests during the startup i
evolution Parameter Review Criteria Accentance Criteria RCS Flow
- 0% RTP 391,095 - 398,995 gpm 384,980 - 410,270 gpm
- 85% RTP 388,885 - 396,785 gpm 382,430 - 410,270 gpm Core AP 12.71 - 14.21 psid s 16.6 psid CEA Drop Time s 2.75 seconds s 2.95 seconds (90% inserted)
CEA Symmetry Less than 10% tilt None CBC i 50 ppm of predicted i 100 ppm of predicted CEA Worth Individual Group Greater ofi 15% or Greater ofi 15% or t 0.1% Ap of predicted 10.1% Ap of predicted
- Total i 10% of predicted i 10% of predicted -
ITC i0.3 x 10" Ap of predicted Per the MTC Technical (0% and 92.5% RTP)
Specification (TS) 4 PC (92.5% RTP) i 0.2 x 10" Ap/% RTP i 0.3 x 10 Ap/% RTP Power Distributions T
T 30% RTP (Interior / Peripheral) i 15% / 20% of predicted Fxy and Fr within e
TS Limits 60,85, and 100% RTP i 10% /15% of predicted Fxy, Fr', and Tq T
e (Interior / Peripheral) within TS Limits Core Symmetry e Box Powers Same as Power Distribution Same as Power Distribution
- Tilt
- a. 30% RTP s5%
None
- b. 60,85, and 100% RTP s2%
s3%
Symmetric ICI Box powers i 10 %-
None
9 CCNPP Unit 2 Cycle 12 Startup Testing Report Page 4 of 9 TEST RESULTS Table 2 summarizes the test results, individual tests are discussed below CEA and CEDM Testing CEA and CEDM testing was performed prior to initial Unit 2 Cycle 12 criticality with all four Reactor Coolant Pumps running and the RCS temperature at nominal Hot Zero Power (HZP) conditions (532 F). The operability of the CEDMs was verified by checking the associated annunciator and interlock operations for each CEDM. This was accomplished with only a few minor problems noted. These minor problems were corrected and each CEDM was subsequently re-verified to be operable.
The CEA drop times were measured frem the full out position to 90% and 100% insertion. All CEAs met both the Review and Acceptance Criteria.
Dual CEA Symmetry Checks The Partial Symmetry Check was performed by individually inserting each dual CEA in Shutdown Group C. For each insertion, the reactivity change was calculated. For each symmetric set, the i
magnitude of the reactivity change for each dual CEA was consistent. In addition, tilt was calculated using the measured reactivity changes. All Tilt calculations met the Review Criteria.
RCS Flow The RCS Flow was measured at Hot Standby conditions with four RCPs running. The measured flow met the Review and Acceptance criteria. The core differential pressure was consistent with previous cycles, and it met the Review and Acceptance Criteria.
Critical Boron Concentration (CBC), HZP, All Rods Out (ARO)
The CBC was determined by obtaining from Chemistry the results of a RCS boron grab sample taken at conditions near ARO and adjusting it to an ARO condition. The ARO CBC met both Review and Acceptance Criteria.
Isothermal Temperature Coefficient The ITC was detennined by alternately decreasing and increasing RCS temperature while rneasuring the associated reactivity change. The measured reactivity was divided by the temperature change to arrive at a value for the ITC. The measured ITC met both Review and Acceptance Criteria.
CEA Group Worth Measurement The worth of each Regulating CEA was determined using the dilution method. Each individual measured group worth met the Review and Acceptance Criteria, as did the total measured group worth for all the Regulating CEAs.
CCNPP Unit 2 Cycle 12 Startup Testing Report Page 5 of 9 Radial Power Distribution Comparison The Radial Power Distribution comparisons were performed at 30,60,85, and 100% RTP. The power distribution calculated by CECOR was compared to the ROCS gredicted values for each T
power level. At each power plateau, the peaking factors (Fr and Fxy ) and the azimuthal tilt (Tq)
T T
were compared to their TS limits. In all cases, the Fr, Fxy, and Tg were within their respective TS limits. In addition, all comparisons of box powers, both interior and peripheral, to predicted values from ROCS were within Review and Acceptance Criteria.
Core Symmetry Power Distribution Measurements The Core Symmetry Evaluation for the Box Powers met both Review and Acceptance Criteria as described above for the Radial Power Distribution Comparisons. The evaluation of core tilt at each power level indicated that the Review and Acceptance Criteria were met.
)
The final evaluation of 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 ofi 10% was met.
ITC and Power Coefficient (PC) Measurement The ITC and PC were measured at 92.5% RTP with the Regulating Group 5 CEAs at approximately 111 inches withdrawn. These parameters were determined by adjusting either moderator temperature or reactor power while adjusting turbine load to maintain the unaffected parameter approximately constant. The measured values for the ITC and the PC met both Review and Acceptance Criteria REFERENCES l
1.
L E. Baum (ABB) to W. J. Lippold (BGE), "Calvert Cliffs Unit 2 Cycle 12 - Reload Design Report Revised Pages," B-97-021, dated January 31,1997.
2.
PSTP-2, Initial Approach to Criticality and Low Power Physics Testing, Revision 17.
e 3.
PSTP-13, CEDM Performance Testing, Revision 6.
4.
PSTP-3, Escalation to Power Test Procedure, Revision 19 5.
PSTP-301, RCS Flow Measurement, Revision 1.
6.
PSTP-4, Variable Tavg Testing, Revision 32.
6.
NEOP-23, Unit 2 Technical Dat?. Book, Revision 7 Written by: I hJf b Date:
2 7
Reviewed by:
/
Date: 5 /d 7
CCNPP Unit 2 Cycle 12 Startup Testing Report Page 6 of 9 Table 1: Unit 2 Cycle 12 Core Loading Batch Numher of Shim Rods Number of Assernhllac Enrichment 2PO O
24 4.48 W/o 2P1 20 8
4.48 W/o 2P2 44 60 4.48 W/o 2N0 0
12 4.48 W/o 2N2 20 8
4.48 U/o 2N4 44 16 4.48 W/o 2N6 60 48 4.48 W/o 2NT 44 4
4.00 W/o 2M 0
12 4.01 W/o 2M1 4'
16 4.00 W/o INO O
4 4.21 W/o 1Mi 12' 4
4.07 W/o 1K1 0
1 3.40 W/o 0 ) except for ' which refers to B C bearing shim rods.
Noic Shim rods refers to Erbium (Er2 3
4
v~
CCNPP Unit 2 Cycle 12 Startup Testing Report Page 7 of 9 I
a e
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant
/
N Figure 1 Unit 2 Cycle 12 Core Load ng g
H E
M P
A B
C D
E F
G J
L N
R S
T V
W X
Y UPCORE l
2M105 2More tM134 2M111 1
4 2MitS 2P801 2N011 2PdO6 2P101 2Pd23 2N000 2Pb19 2Mit0 a
2M002 2PdO9 2N208 2Ph01 2Ne28 2NkT 2N400 2Pd19 2N203 2Pd18 2M012 o
o u
o e
o o
e o
o o
2 3
4 CEA4v Cm CEA Pe CEALc CEAce i 2M003 2PkOS 2N414 2f'306 2N612 2Pd21 1N001 2Pd39 2NG13 2PI16 2N402 2Pf07 2M001 u
o e
o e
e o
e o
e o
o a
g CEA.N1 CEAH3 CEM7 CEALP CEAOf CEA44E i
2M112 2Ph13 2N401 2P209 2N646 2Pd26 2N644 2P24%
2N637 2PI36 2N428 2P211 2N412 2Pb11 2M106 5
CeA4P CEAo CEA-Nu CEAu 2Pdt7 2N207 2Pd13 2N623 2P229 2N630 2P246 2NT3 2P2S6 2N83S 2P231 2N814 2Ph0F 2N2G4 2b e
o e
o e
e o
e o
o o
e o
e o
g g
CEAAP CEAM CEAOfl CEAM 2N007 2Pd17 2Ne27 2PIJ3 2NS40 2NbOS 2N606 2Pfe9 2N643 2Nh02 2NO31 2Ph27 2N642 2PdO3 2N001 c
e o
o e
o o
e o
e a
u o
o a
y CW 2M1te CEA4M CEAM>
CE A-2 CEA4s
- CEAM, CEA4#
i 2M101 2P321 sN.02 -2eJ37 2N.02 2P263 2N.4 2P167 2N4i1 2P1 2N.24 2P247 2N.4, 2P123 2Ne20 2Peor o
e o
o e
e o
o e
e o
o o
o e
g CEAW' CEAMfI CEA44ri CEAME CEA44C.
CEA4E my 1M102 2P104 d tN012 2P244 2NTl 2P 62 2N400 SKYl7 2N413 2PdS1 2NT2 2P243 SN003 2N b 2P103 11 CEA4Vl CEA HAI CEA4A CEAD CEA-NJ tM14e 2M006 2Phoe 2NS15 2Pk24 2N639 2P244 2Ne26 2Pd60 2N404 2Phee 2N403 2P264 2NGOS 2P}30 2NG18 2Pb22 d
o e
o o
u o
e o
o e
o e
c o
o 13 CEA41 CEA-M8, CEAM CEA4A CEAMi CEA44d2M102 IM103 a
2N003 2PIO4 2N634 2P328 2N826 2NbOS 2N617 2P$S0 2N632 2Nb04 2N901 2Pk34 2N638 2Pd18 2N006 o
a 15 CEA46i CEA40 CEA44C CEA44I CEA44fI CEA M CEA NL i
I 2PdO4 2N202 2PdOS 2N64S 2P232 2NG29 2P256 Ltd4 2P248 2N636 2P230 2Nati 2Pdte 2N206 2Phit o
e o
o e
o e
o e
o e
o e
o o
.i
}g CEA48 CEA N1 CEA-La CEA MII 2M114 2Ph12 2N4t5 2P212 2Ne04 2Pd36 2Neto 2P242 2Ne18 2Pd26 2N647 2P210 2N410 2Pd14 2M107 17 CsAM CEA w, CEANJ CEAAs.
2M004 2PYO6 2N408 2Ph18 2N619 2Pd40 SN002 2Pd22 2N833 2 Phos 2N414 2PiO8 2M006 18 CEA LC CEA4F CEA-OL CEA4AJ CEA4*l CEAaa
}
2M011 2Pd10 2N201 2Pd20 2N622 b 2N000 2PdO2 2N208 2P810 2M010 19 CEA4r1 CEA NL' CEA4M CEA40 CEA4L 2M100 2P32a 2Not2 2P624 2PiO2 2P40s 2N010 2PdO2 2Mii3 e
o o
o o
o e
o o
gn CEA4.2 CEA4V CEA-O<>
CEA.aAV 2Ml08 1M125 2M000 2M104 21
CCNPP Unit 2 Cycle 12 Startup Testing Report Page 3 of 9 TABLE 2:
SUMMARY
OF UNIT 2 CYCLE 12 TEST RESULTS Page 1 of 2 Test Description Predicted Measurfd RCS Flow 0% RTP 395,045 gpm 395,977 gpm a
85% RTP 392.835 gpm 394,037 gpm Core AP (0% RTP) 13.46 psid 13.76 psid CEA Drop Time None 2.43 seconds (Slowest to 90% inserted)
CEA # 56 CEA Symmetry None 7.9 %
Critical Boron Concentration
- ARO 2121 ppm 2118 ppm All Regulating Groups inserted 1711 ppm 1710 ppm e
CEA Worth Group 1 0.509 %Ap 0.521 %Ap Group 2 1.045 %Ap 1.021 %Ap e
Group 3 0.799 %Ap 0.806 %Ap e
Group 4 0.613 %Ap 0.611 %Ap e
Group 5 0.270 %Ap 0.280 %Ap e
Total 3.236 %Ap 3.239 %Ap e
Isothermal Temperature Coefficient HZP, Group 5 @ EARO 0.365 x 10" ApFF 0.463 x 10" ApFF e
92.5%, Group 5 @ l11" withdrawn
-0.2802 x 10 ApFF
-0.2285 x 10" ApFF 4
e Power Coefficient
-0.95 x 10" ApFA RTP
-1.069 x 10" Ap/% RTP (92.5%, Group 5 @ l11" withdrawn)
r - -- - - - --
~
CCNPP Unit 2 Cycle 12 Startup Testing Report Page 9 of 9 TABLE 2:
SUMMARY
OF UNIT 2 CYCLE 12 TEST RESULTS Page 2 of 2 Power Distributforu l
Peaking Factors 30% RTP 60% RTP 85% RTE 97% RTP
.100% RTP T
Fxy 1.5865 1.5808 1.5720 1.5673 Fr?
1.5253 1.5132 1.5042 1.4958 Tg 0.0075 0.0075 0.0077
.0067 0.0060 Box Powers 30% RTP 60% RTP 85% RTP 100% RTP Interior 7.06 %
3.66 %
3.34 %
-2.73 %
Peripheral 11.53 %
6.12 %
4.35 %
5.41 %
Core Symmetry 30% RTP 60% RTP 85% RTP 97% RTP 100% RTP Tilt 0.75 %
0.75 %
0.77 %
0.67 %
0.60 %
j Symmetric Box Powers 4.52 %
3.80 %
3.79 %
2.96 %
_