ML20151E895

Monthly Operating Rept for June 1988 for Fort St Vrain

ML20151E895
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Saint Vrain
Issue date:	06/30/1988
From:	Fuller C, Novachek F PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF COLORADO
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM)
References
P-88268, NUDOCS 8807260254
Download: ML20151E895 (15)

Text

I~ _..

~

.*2' PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO FORT ST. VRAIN NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION 4

MONTH d OPERATIONS REPORT l NO. 173 June, 1988 l

4

?

i r j l

t f/ \\

\\

> 8807260254 880630 \

PDR ADOCK 05000267 R PNV ,

l_ _

This report contains the highlights of the Fort St. Vrain, Unit No. 1, activities operated under the provisions of the Nuclear Regulatory Comnission Operating conse No. OPR-34. This report includes the monthly partial scram / maximum temperature reports for control rod drive and orificing assemolies. This report is for the month of June, 1988.

1.0 NARRATIVE

SUMMARY

OF OPERATING EXPERIENCE AND MAJOR SAFETY RELATED MAINTENANCE The reactor remained critical and tne turbine generator remained on line throughout the entire month of June, 1988.

On June 6, 1988, at 1245 hours0.0144 days <br />0.346 hours <br />0.00206 weeks <br />4.737225e-4 months <br />, "C" helium circulator tripped during Plant Protective System surveillance pulse testing. The turbine generator and reactor am smatically ran back to 50% due to the circulator trip, as designed. Reactor power was reduced to 30%, and "C" helium circulator was returned to service at 1725 hours0.02 days <br />0.479 hours <br />0.00285 weeks <br />6.563625e-4 months <br />. The reactor was returned to 80% power on June 7.

On June 21, 1988, higher than expected purified helium leakage was identified from a Loop 2 steam generator penetration interspace. A reduction in reactor power was initiated, and the reactor was operated at 73% power until calculations confirmed that the leakage rate was less than allowed by the Technical Specifications (LC0 4.2.9). The reactor was returned to 80%

power on June 23. Efforts have been successful to reduce purified helium leakage and increase the margin of compliance with the Technical Specifications.

A new net generation record for a single month was set during June, 1988, with a total of 167,699 MWH, and a net capacity factor of 70.6%.

2.0 SINGLE RELEASES OF RADI0 ACTIVITY OR RADIATION EXPOSURE IN EXCESS OF 10% OF THE ALLOWABLE ANNUAL VALUE None 3.0 INDICATION OF FAILED FUEL RESULTING FROM IRRADIATED FUEL EXAMINATIONS None 4.0 MONTHLY OPERATING DATA REPORT

, Attached 5.0 CONTROL ROD DRIVE PARTIAL SCRAM TEST RESULTS AND MAXIMUM DAILY TEMPERATURE REPORT Attached

}

4 OPERATING DATA REPORT DOCKET NO. 50-R67 DATE Jul) 15. 1988 COMPLETED BY F. J. Novachek TELEPHONE (303) 620-1007 OPERATING STATUS NOTES

1. Unit Name: Fort St. Vrain. Unit No. 1

2. . Reporting Period: 880601 throuah 880630

3. Licensed Thermal Power (MWt): 842 4 Nameplate Rating (Gross MWe): 342

5. Design Electrical Rating (Net MWe): 330

6. Maximum Dependable Capatity (Gross MWe): 342

7. Maximum Dependable Capacity (Net MWe): 330 .,

8. If Changes Occur In Capacity Ratings (Items Number 3 Through 7) Since Last Report, Give Reasons:

None

9. Power Level Tu Which Restricted, If Any (Net MWe): 270.6

10. Reasons For Restrictioris. If Any: Reanalvsis of safe shutdown cooling following a 90 minute interruption of forced coolinQ.

This Month Year To Date Cumulative

11. Hours in Reporting Period 720 4.367 7R.912

12. Number Uf Hours Reactor has Critical 720.0 3.678.7 37.125.4

13. Reactor Reserve Shutdown Hours 0.0 0.0 0.0

14. Hours Generator On-Line 720.0 3.374.1 24.4R4.6

15. Unit Reserve Shutdown Hours 0.0 0.0 0.0

16. Gross Thermal Energy Generated (MWH) 45R.143.5 1.RAO.111.3 12.R13.dd7.4

17. Gross Electrical Energy Generated (MWH) 176.254.0 690.063.0 4.232.283.0

18. Net Electrical Energy Generated (MWH) 167.699.0 648.189.0 3.738.455.0

10. Unit Service Factor 100.0 77.3 11.6

20. Unit Availability Factor 100.0 77.3 31.6

21. Unit Capacity Factor (Using MDC Net) 70.6 45.0 14.4

22. Unit Capacity Factor (Using DER Net) 70.6 45.0 14.4

23. Unit Forced Outage Rate 0.0 22.7 61.8

24. Shutdowns Scheduled Over Next 6 Montns (Type. Date, and Duration of Enh): Helium Circulator Rpoairs.

880705. 2.407 hours0.00471 days <br />0.113 hours <br />6.729497e-4 weeks <br />1.548635e-4 months <br /> ,

25. If Shut Down At End Of Report Period. Estimated Date Of Startup: N/A

26. Units In Test Status (Prior io Commercial Operation): Forecast . Achiend INITIAL CRITICALITY N/A N/A INITIAL ELECTRICITY N/A N/A COMMERCIAL OPERATION N/A N/A

AVERAGE DAXLV UNIT POWER LE"E.L

. Docket No. 50-267 Unit Fort St. Vrain Unit No. 1 Date July 15, 1988 Completed By F. J. Novachek Telephone (303) 620-1007 Month JUNE DAY AVERAGE DAILY POWER LEVEL DAY AVERAGE DAILY POWER LEVEL (MWe-Net) (MWe-Net) 1 250.6 17 _ _ _ _ _ 239.7 2 245.7 18 212.5 3 249.2 19 242.9 4 221.5 20 247.7 5 249.4 21 239.0 6 164.3 22 228.4 7 200.1 23 229.8 8 240.4 24 245.2 9 247.8 25 243.2 10 223.9 26 245.7 11 155.9 27 238.6 12 208.5 28 248.8 13 250.8 29 246.4 14 248.5 30 243.5 15 237.3 31 N/A 16 242.3

• Generator on line ,+ no net generation.

l l

I

{

l

TSP-3 Attachment TSP-3C issue 2 Page 1 o f" 1 U_ NIT SHUIDOWNS AND POWER HEDUCTIONS DOCKET NO. $0-267 UNIT NAME fort St. Vra in tini t No. 1 DAT E Jisly 15. 12g COMPT.ETED fly [.raiLNovachek TELEPHONE {JQ1) 620-100's nEPOur MONTH JUNE. 1980 1 1 l' l l lMi iisif 6fT l l l' ~l i I I I I I SlH;I T I NG l' l I I CAUSE AND CORRECilVE ACTION i i NO. I DAIE I l Y( J. . DURATION I RE ASON IDOWN t. E H # ISYSifMICOMPONENil 10 PREVENT RECURRENCE I I __ I __ l __ ._ I 1 I!!LACIOP_i__ ICODE ICODE I I I I I I I I I I I_ I i 168-101 880606 i f l N/A I G l D I N/A l JC l PDI I Power Reduction f ol lowing C Helitam I i i l i 1 I l l l l Ci rculator T rip D :e-ing Plant Protective  !

I I I I I i l 1 1 I $ ystem Storvei l lark e Testing. I i 1 i l I I l I I I i 188-111 880610 l S f: N/A l B 1 88 i N/A, 1 JC l ZZZZZZ l Power iteduction f or Completion Of Plant i I 1 l ) l l l l l I Protective System Su.Neillance Testing. 1 I I I I I I I I I I I l i I 8 1 1 1 I I I I I I l l I I I I I I i

I I I , 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I i i l i l J l I I I I I I I i I l I I I I I I I I I I I I l i I I I I I i 1 1 I I I i 1 1 I I i 1 1 1 I I I i i 1 1 I I I i 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I i 1 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I i l i I I I I I I I I I i 1 1 1 I I I I I I i 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i 1 1 I I I I i -a i i I i i i i I I i l i I I I I I l l l 1 l I I I I I I I I I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l l I I I I I I I I I I I I I s I I I I I I I I I I I i 1 1 I I I I I i 1 1 I

REFUELING INFORMATION l l l l _1. Name of Facility i Fort St. Vrain Unit No. 1 l I I i l 2. Scheduled date-for next l l l refueling shutdown. l April 5, 1989 l l . I I l 3. Scheduled date for restart i June 11, 1989 l l following refueling.  ! l-l: .-

I l.

l 4. Will refueling or resumption ofl No l l operation thereafter require a-l l l technical ~ specification change l l l or-other license amendment? l l 1 I l l If answer is yes, what, in- l ---------------- l l general, will these be? l l l I l l If answer is no, has the reloadj l l fuel design and core configura-l l-l tion been reviewed by your l l l Plant Safety Review committee l No l l to determine whether any unre- l l l viewed safety questions are l l l associated with the core reload l l l (Reference 10 CFR Section l l l 50.59)? l -l l l l l If no such review has taken l 1988 l l Place, when is it scheduled? I l l 1 l l 5. Scheduled date(s) for submit- l l l ting proposed licensing action l ---------------- l-l and succorting information. l l l  ! l l 6. Io:porwat licensing cor sidera- l l l tions associated with refuel- l l l ing, e.g., new or different l l l fuel design or supplier, unre- l ---------------- l l viewed design or performance l l l analysis methods, significant l l l changes in fuel design, new l l

l ocerating procedures. l l 1 1 I l 7. The number of fuel assemblies l l l (a) in the core and (b) in the l a) 1482 HTGR fuel elements

• l l scent fuel storage pool. I b) O soent fuel elements l l

l 1

REFUELING INFORMATION (CONTINUED)

! I I l 8. The present licensed spent fuell l l pool storage capacity and the- l l l s'ze of any increase in l Capacity is limited in size to l l- licensed storage capacity that l about one-third of core l l has been requested or is l (approximately 500 HTGR elements,.l l planned, in number of fuel l No change is planned. l l assemb?ies. l~ l l l l l 9. -The projected date of the last l 1996 under Agreements AT(04-3)-633l l refueling that can be dis- l and DE-SC07-79ID01370 between l l charged to the spent fuel pool l Public Service Company of I l assuming the present licensed l Colorado, and General Atomic l l caoacity. I Company, &nd DOE.* i

• ' The 1996 estimated date is based on the understanding that spent fuel discharged during the term of the Agreements will be stored by DOE at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant. The storage capacity has evidently been sized to accommodate eight fuel segments. It is estimated that the eighth fuel segment will be discharged in 1996.

)

,~

CONTROL R00 ORIVE PARTIAL SCRAM TEST RESULTS-AND MAXIMUM DAILY  ;

TEMPERATURE REPORT REPORT PERIOD: -

JUNE 1, 1988 - JUNE 30, 1988 s

Prep //f/

" M uane L. Spiker / ,

Senior Technical [

Services Engineering 1 Technician 4

~

Approved by: - <vv t a l Mark A. Joniph '

Reactor Support -

Supervisor i

Public Service Company of Colorado Fort St. Vrain Unit No. 1 1

Page 1

.-  !. ABSTRACT This report summarizes the partial scram test results and the maximum daily temperature of those control rods with motor temperatures above 215 degrees Fahrenheit. It is prepared to satisfy the Fort St. Vrain Interim Technical Specification Surveillance Requirement 4.1.1. A.1.a. The time period covered by this report is June 1,1988, through June 30, 1988.

II. SACKGROUND Because proper operation of the Control Rod Drive Mechanism (CRDM) is critical for safe operation of the reactor, a series of qualification tests were conducted over a one year time span to demonstrate its capability. The motor temperature during these tests varied betveen 200 degrees Fahrenheit and 230 degrees Fahrenheit, and averaged 215 degrees Fahrenheit.

A total of 130,000 jeg cycles plus 1600 scrams was logged during the final design testing, which is many times that expected over the normal life of a CRDM. The operating temperature of the CRDM is limited by the motor's Class H insulation which is de-rated to 272 degrees Fahrenheit to account for motor temperature rise, frictional torque increase, and winding life expectancy.

I t, order to monitor CRDM temperatures, Resistance Temperature Devic e (RTD's) are mounted on the closure plate, orifice valve motor plate, and CRDM motor as shown on Figure 1. All CRDM's installed in the Reactor are equipped with RTD's.

Three recorders located in the control room record each of these temperatures for all 37 CRDM's. CRDM motor temperatures are alarmed at 212 degrees Fahrenheit and 247 degrees 1

Fahrenheit.

CRDM motor temperatures are monitored at least once per 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> to verify that they are less than 250 degrees Fahrenheit, which is a limiting condition for operation. If one or more CRDM motor temperature (s) is found to be greater than 215 degrees Fahrenheit during the daily surveillance, the motor temperature of all CRDMs exceeding 215 degrees Fahrenheit is recorded and a partial scram test is performed on the CRDM with the highest motor temperature once per 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />. These surveillances ensure that CRDM motor temperatures exceeding 215 degrees Fahrenheit do not degrade the CRDM's reliability to perform its design function when required.

III. '.HMARY OF RESULTS Regions 12 and 30 CRDM motor temperatures exceeded 215 degrees Fahrenheit throughout the entire month of June, 1988.

Page 2

. The partial scram test results and maximum daily tempera %ure of those CRDMs with motor temperatures above 215 degrees Fahrenheit are presented on Table 1. The pertinent parameters are: reactor region involved, control rod position, maximum daily motor temperature, extrapolated scram times (surveillance value and Back EMF calculated value) and starting acceleration. The control rod position is presented because of.its relationship to available starting torque which affects the starting acceleration and extrapolated scram time calculated by surveillance. The surveillance extrapolated scram time is affected by control rod position because it is calculated using distance travelled versus time. Since the acceleration is slower at lower control rod positions, a longer period of time is required to reach steady state speed.

This longer acceleration period results in a decrease in distance travelled over a given period of time, thereby indicating a longer extrapolated scram time. The extrapolated scram time calculated by the Back EMF program applies a correction factor to provide a projected full length scram time. Therefore, the surveillance scram times can only be compared for trends if the control rod position is approximately the same. The Back EMF calculated scram time is more readily trended since the value should be independent of control rod position.

The starting acceleration values presented are calculated by the Back EMF program. These values reflect the CRDM's freedom of rotation to accelerate to steady state speed and therefore are considered to be valuable performance indicators. Two values are presented: The actual acceleration measured dur'ng i a scram from the indicated control rod position ano the projected acceleration if the control rods were at the full out position (greater than 188 inches). If the control rod position is greater than 188 inches, no data is presented for a projected starting acceleration since the actual and projected are the same. As indicated with scram times, the projected starting acceleration is more readily trended since the value should be independent of control rod position.

IV. CONCLUSIONS The performance of CRDMs with motor temperatures in excess of 215 degrees Fahrenheit did not show any significant trends or degradation during this report period. Therefore, it is concluded that CRDM motor temperatures. exceeding 215 degrees Fahrenheit did not degrade the CRDM's capability to perform its design function when required.

Page 3

.  : -A. ii I, n t  :

l 4 , ,

s

's }

,ki

'O iT Q 0 @$

2'-N  ::

s

/ '  ! o i' CLOSURE PLATE (CONTACT UNDERSIDE)

/

." "-'g TEMPERATURE

/

/

\ 3 y

/

SENSOR NO.I CROW WOTOR / I ,

y TEMPERATURE / y SENSOR NO. 3 [

Nj/ -

i l /

/\  ;., ,

k; /

n ' '

.I

/ l l l /

/ / s

_ .d /

/

/

-] l

/

/

g ASSEW8LY CROM BRAME WOTOR

\ l l

/ ' /

l /

/ / ,

/ ,, au V /

/ l /

I

/ , , ,

,- e f

/ ,

/

/ 4

/- 1~ .

(  :

t l"' -

) - ,

ORIFICE VALVE -

- i WOTOR ASSEWOLY

]

ORIFICE VALVE

' i l I / WOTCM PL ATE ll

- m r* /l TEMPERATURE SENSOR NO.2 l

j .

i Figure 1 Control Rod Dr've Mechanism Temperature 'ensor Locations

Page is TABLE 1 Control Rod it.eximum Daily Extrapola ted Scram Starting Acce l e ra t i on Date Huqiong Positiors Motor Tempera ture Time (Sec)** (Had/Sec/Sec) ***

(Inches) (Deg rees f ahrenhei t) Su ry. Back EMF Actual Projected 6-01-88 12 189.1 243.1 149.6 144.0 115.3 -----

30* 239.0 6-02-88 12 See 243.0 See **** ****

30' Note 1 238.5 Note 1 6-03-88 12 189.2 243.0 184 9 . 6 1 484. 0 115.6 -----

30* 238.0 6-08-88 4 12 189.1 232.0 150.8 143.9 115.8 -----

30" 228.0 6-05-88 12 189.1 281.0 4 152.O 14la.0 116,5 -----

30* 239.0 6-06-88 12 189.I 28a 2. 5 152.0 14f.0 4 117.0 -----

30* 239.0 6-01-88 I? 161.1 226.0 152.0 145.3 115.4 118.1 30* 220.0 6-08-88 12 189.1 247.5 150.8 184.1 4 116.8 -----

30* 246.2 6-09-88 12 189.3 2f0.9 4 1849 . 6 144.1 116.4 -----

30* 238.5 6-10-88 12 189.1 240.8 149.6 18448.1 116.5 -----

30* 239.6 6-11-88 12 189.0 215.7 149.6 183.8 4 115.8 -----

.Nte: Region 30 not above 215 Degrees Fahrenheit this date.

6-12-88 12 189.0 226.6 149.6 148.0 4 116.4 -----

30* 225.9

• Orely Hegion with liighest CRDM Motor Temperatisre is Tested

• • l in s ting Condi t ion for Operation: <152 Seconds

• • • Acceptance Cri teria Applied During Preventive Maintenance: >98.83 Rad /Sec/See

• • • • Back IMF Oata Not Ava i lable f'or Da te Indicated

• lo te 1 No Survei l lance data is available for this date.

4 e

Page 5 TABLE 1 Control Rod Maximum Dally Extrapolated Scram Sta rting Accelera tion Date Hegion# Position Motor Temperatesre T ime ( Sec)** ***

(Inches) ( Deg ree s Fa h renhe i t ) Sury.

(Rad /Sec/Sec)

Back (Mr Actual P ro.j ec ted 6-13-88 30 188.0 284 1. 7 180.7 4 135.0 116.4 -----

12* 240.5 6-14-88 30 188.0 284 3. 0 139.7 134.9 117.1 -----

12* 242.0 6-1">-88 30 188.0 242.0 139.7 135.0 116.5 -----

12* 211.0 4

6 *6-88 30 188.0 280.0 4 184 1 . 8 134.9 115.8 -----

12* 239.0 6-1T-88 30 187.9 2f1.0 t 1:42.9 133.7 115.0 -----

12* 2'40.0 6-18-88 12 189.0 230.0 141.3 148.0 4 117.2 -----

30* 229.2 6-19-88 30 188.3 239.9 138.7 133.7 116.4 -----

12* 239.5 6-20-88 30 188.0 280.8 4 180.7 4 135.0 116.2 -----

12* 239.8 6-21-88 30 188.0 284 2. 0 140.I 135.0 115.7 -----

12* 284 1. 0 6-22-88 30 187.9 242.3 141.8 135.0 114.8s 114.6 12* 241.4 6-23-88 30 187.9 242.3 141.8 135.0 114.8 115.0 12* 21:1.4 6-24-88 30 181.T 282.3 4 142.9 135.0 115.2 115.4 12* 241.4

• Only f<eg ion wi th lii g hes t CHDM Motor iems orature is fested L i m i t i ng Cond i t i on l'o r Ope ra t i on: <152 Seconis Acceptance Criteria Applied During Preventive Maintenance: >98.83 Rad /Sec/Sec

• • • • Elac k E M F Da ta No t Ava i l a b l e f o r Da te Indicated l Note 1 No Su rve i l l a nce da ta is avritable for this date.

1 L

a e ~e Page 6 TABLE 1 Control Hod Maximum Daely Extrapolated Scram Sta rting Accelera tion Date Hegion/ Position Moto." Temper;ture Time (Sec)**

[ I nc tie s ) (Degrees Fahrenheit)

(Rad /Sec/Sec) 6**

Surv. Back [MF Actual Proj ec ted 6-25-88 30 181.9 282.3 4 140.7 135.0 11rs .r4 114.6 12* 241.3 6-26-88 30 181.8 239.3 141.8 135.0 115.7 12* 115.9 238.0 6-2T-88 30 187.8 23T.6 12*

li4 3.9 135.0 116.5 116.7 231.1 6-28-88 30 187.7 237.9 184 3. 9 135.0 11 ts . 6 12* 1 184 . 8 236.0 6-29-88 39 188.0 225.1 139.7 135.1 115.2 -----

12* 224.7 6-30-88 30 181.7 239.1 141.8 135.1 12* 113.4 113.7 237.6 4

• On l y Heg i sin w i th H i glie s t CRDM *1o t o r temperature is Tested

• • Limiting Condition for Operat ton:

<152 Seconds Acceptance Criteria Applied During Preventive Maintenance: >98.83 Rad /Sec/Sec Bac k ( MF D s ta Not Ava i l ab l e f'or Da te Indicated Note 1 leo Surveillance data i s a va i la b l e f'o r th i s da te.

q

=;m_

h Public Service ~

-16805 WCR 19 1/2, Platteville, Colorado 80651 July 15, 1988 Fort St. Vrain ,

Unit No. 1 P-88268 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555 Docket No. 50-267

SUBJECT:

JUNE 1988 MONTHLY OPERATIONS REPORT

REFERENCE:

Facility Operating License No. OPR-34

Dear Sir:

Enclosed, please find the Monthly Operations Report for the month of June 1988, submitted per the requirements of Fort St. Vrain Technical Specification AC 7.5.1.

If you have any questions, please contact Mr. M. H. Holmes at (303) 480-6960.

ne ely

, I- C C. H. Fuller Manager, Nuc',aar Production Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station Enclosure 2 cc: Regional Administrator, Roo;on IV i

ATTN: Mr. T. F. Westerman, "hief Projects Section B Mr. Robert Farrell Senior Resident Inspector Fort St. Vrain q I

CHF:djm I l i