ML20203N957
| ML20203N957 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee  |
| Issue date: | 10/06/1986 |
| From: | Capstick R VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER CORP. |
| To: | Murley T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| References | |
| FVY-86-92, NUDOCS 8610200144 | |
| Download: ML20203N957 (14) | |
Text
.
STARTUP TEST REPORT VERMONT YANKEE CYCLE 12
Introduction:
Vermont Yankee Cycle 12 initial startup commenced on June 30, 1986 following a 40 week outage for annual refueling, recirc pipe replacement, and maintenance related activities. No fuel sipping was required.
The core loading for Cycle 12 consisted of:
36 P8x8R P8DPB289 Reinserts from Cycle 9 108 P8x8R P8DPB289 Reinserts from Cycle 10 104 P8x8R P8DPB289 Reinserts from Cycle 11 120 P8x8R P8DPB289 Non irradiated assemblies An as loaded Cycle 12 core map is included as Figure I. Details of the Cycle 12 core loading are contained in the Yankee Atomic Electric Company document YAEC-1507, " Vermont Yankee Cycle 12 Core Performance Analysis, November, 1985" Shutdown margin testing was performed satisfactorily on June 4, 1986.
An in-sequence critical was performed satisfactorily June 5, 1986. Startup commanced June 30, 1986 and steady state full power conditions were reached July 12, 1986.
Control rod coupling verification was performed satisfactorily for all 89 control rods on June 13 and 14, 1986. Control rod scram testing was per-form 9d satisfactorily prior to reaching 30% power per Tech. Specs. for all 89 control rods on July 5 and 6, 1986. ,
~
The final as loaded core loading was verified correct by Vermont Yankee and Yankee Atomic Electric personnel on May 27, 1986.
Core Verification:
The final core loading was verified correct on May 27, 1986. Three separate criteria were checked:
- 1. Proper bundle orientation was verified by checking channel fastener orientation and assuring that fastener orientation agreed with that shown in Figure II.
- 2. Proper bundle seating was verified by following Vermont Yankee Procedure VYOP 1411.
- 3. Proper core loading was verified by checking the serial number of each bundle through the use of a video camera. This verification was recorded on video tape and was later independently reviewed and reverified to agree with the licensed core loading of Figure 1.
P 861006 h05000g7 h PDR
-g-Procoss Computer Data Checks:
Process computer data shuffling checks were completed July 15, 1986.
Thoco checks included various manual and computer checks of the new data constants. A check for consistency of the data was also performed by Yankee Atomic Electric Company and found to be satisfactory.
Shutdown Margin Testing:
=== ------------- --
A suberitical shutdown margin test was performed on June 4, 1986 by withdrawing the analytically determined strongest rod to the full out position and then withdrawing a diagonally adjacent margin rod for which a rod worth curve has been calculated. A shutdown marginHof at least
. 76% AK/K was demonstrated. The reactor remained subcritical through the toot, thereby satisfying the Tech. Spec. requirement to demonstrate a shutdown acrgin of 0. 32% AK/K for cycle 12.
In-Saquence Critical:
== ---------------
Sequence 12-A-2 was used to perform the in-sequence critical test.
On June 5, 1986 control rods were withdrawn in-sequence until criticality was attained. Criticality was achieved on the 7th rod in group 2 (26-31) at notch position 22. The moderator temperature was 83*F.
The actual critical rod pattern and the YAEC prediction agreed within t1% AK/K. Figure III.shows the actual, predicted and 11% AK/K critical rod patterns.
Rod Scram Testing:
=-__----=_---____---n--
All 89 control rods were scram tested satisfactorily on July 5 and 6, 1986. All insertion times were within the limits defined in the Vermont Yankoe Technical Specifications. Results of the testing are presented in Tablo IA.
In accordance with Technical Specifications Section 4.3.C.2, scram time
, information available for scrams occurring since the transmittal of the previous startup test report is also included in Table IB. All insertion timon were within the limits defined in the Vermont Yankee Technical
- Specifications.
All scram time information was evaluated to ensure that proper drive performance is being maintained. No degradation of drive performance is noticeable.
l
Thormal Hydraulic Limits and Power Distribution:
____________=_- _ = = _ = = _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ = - - - -- __
l Core Maximum Fraction of Critical Power (CMFCP), Core Maximum Fraction of Limiting Power Density (CMFLPD), Maximum Average Planar Linear Heat i 4
~ Generation Rate ratio to its limit (MAPRAT) and the ratio of CMFLPD to the Fraction of Rated power (CMFLPD/FRP) were all checked daily during the startup using the process computer. All checks of core thermal limits were within the limits specified in Technical Specifications.
The results.of the Backup Core Limits Evaluation (BUCLE) program were compered to results of the process computer for the same core conditions.
The results were identical as can be seen in Table II.
The process computer power distribution was updated thirteen (13) times using the TIP system during the ascent to full power. The result of these updates are presented in Table III.
4 The LPRM's were calibrated two (2) times in conjunction with TIP sets 983 and 998. The initial checkout of LPRM high and low trip alarm setpoints won done at 0% power on 06/23/86. The TIP 's and LPRM's were both functionally tested and found to operate satisfactorily.
The process computer power distribution update performed July 15, 1986 (TIP 995) was used as a basis for comparison with an offline calculation performed using the Yankee Atomic Electric Company nodal code SIMULATE. For the power distribution of July 15, 1986 the SIMULATE core average axial I power distribution was compared to that calculated by the plant protess computers comparisons are shown in Table IV. A comparison was also performed between SIMULATE and process computer peak radial power; comparisons are- shown in Table V.
TIP Reproducibility and TIP Symmetry:
TIP system reproducibility was checked in conjunction with the power
, distribution update performed July 8, 1986. All three TIP system traces were reproducible to within 4.7%.
The A-2 sequence used as the initial control rod sequence varied slightly from an eighth core symmetric pattern with octant symmetric rod locations at notch 46 and 48. Due to this lack of eighth core symmetry, calculation of a total TIP. certainty was performed using synthetic traces from a SIMULATE case at the same conditions as calibration 995, but with the control rod at core location 26-31 as well as its symmetric counterparts set l to position 48. These synthetic traces were pointwise adjusted by SIMULATE using the ratio of the actual TIP 995 traces to the synthetic SIMULATE TIP l 995 traces. By using the pointwise adjustment ratios it is possible to estimate what the actual TIP traces would be for a symmetric rod pattern.
The resulting total TIP uncertainty for this case was 1.52 percent.
The results of the TIP uncertainty test as shown in Table VI are well below the 8.7% acceptance criteria.
_ - - - . _ __ -~ . _. . . _ . . _ _ - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
l Figure 1 4
Cycle 12 Core Loading VERMONT YANKEE 44 UZ l M LY l LY LY l UZ 061 14753 4793 4794 47541062
~
42 UZ lL 1 LY" LY l L[ ~LEI LY'I WI 105 16953 i6961 7642,764 696216954s 106 UZ lLY LY , L f LY t LYC LY g LY YC1 LY L Y iLY LY e WZ 40 926 g4749 47847646 47611129 484914850 130i4762 764714782 47501927 UZl LYILYC LY LYClb 5[CILYC LY I L[C L[lbC bClL[IUZ 38 922 9491133 b[!6937 137 14116945 145l146 69461 142 69381138 13416950l 923 UZ l LY LY ILYC LYg LY LY ILYC LY lLY YCs LY LYC iLY YCl LY LY~lWZ 36 15014766 69821078 077 l6981 4763 149 47731153 69731157 4789 14790 15816974 154 14774 LY LYC LYCl LY LYC1 LY LY ILY LYCILYC LY e LY LY ILY ILYC LYC l LY 34 169 l6977 485316925173 1174 692614 854 69781 17 4 166 16214814 4813]l16116516997 LY l LY LY gLYC LY gLYC LY l UZ LY l LY Zl LY LYC lLY LYCl LY LYC i LY 32 4801;177 48171181 48371 185 6929)069 693316934 070 16930 186 14838 18214818 17814802 30 UZ lLYC iLY LYCl LY LYCl LY LYC 1LY LY I LY LY lLYC LY l LYC LY ILYC LYI LYCl U Z 0731189 16993 19317025 19714757 201 l7001 480514806 70022024758119g0261194 6994l 190107_4_
UZ' LY LY lLYC LY ILY LYI LYC LY IUC LY I LY YCl LT 'LYC 1 LY LY 'LY LYCe LY LY I U Z '
28 I I4798 210h006 4826 I6986 20614830 7010 I 0_ M 089 7009 48291205 698514825 7005 l 209 47971213 694116942 214 LY LY LYQ LY LYCi LY UZe LY LYC ILY LY I M LYI LYC LY LY ILYC LY l LYC LY ILY 26 4845l6969 2171695 22117017 08117013 25 5989 48331483 901226 7014l 082UZ 018 222 59581218 97014846 M 8 LYC LY LYC LY lLYC LY ; LY Y l LY LY ILY Y I LY LY tLY LYCILY LYCl LY YC 1LY 24 4777;1 4 841 702114785 480914810 4786]7022 484216966 238 14770 23414778 230 14822 1
4821 229, 233 47691237 69651 LY l LY LY ILY LYCl LY LYC I LY LYC lLY 22 LY LY ILYC LYlLYC LY l LY LY l LY LY ILY 4823l LYC23147791235 47711239 49671484gQ234707 1 48114812 4844' 696g40 478d7024 4772 2)$ 1478Q 2}2148T 20 LY 8 LY LYC g LY LYC i LY'bZ g LY LYQ LY LY ILY LY I LYC LY IUZ LY lLYC LY LYC 697214848 LY l M 484716971 219;6955 223 17019 083 g7015 227 16991 483514836 69921228 70161 084 7020;224 6960) 220 18 UZI LY LY lLYC LY I LY LY ILYC LYl U C LY IU UC 1 LY LYC iLY LY ' LY LYCI LY LY l U Z 981 4827 70071211 799 215 69431694 216:4800 212 8700 82816 988 2081483 1_21092 091170,1,1 48311207 16 U Z ILYCI LY LYCl LY LYCl LY LYCl LY LY ILY LYlM C LY l LYC LY 'LYC LY l LYCl UZ l
E.Zbl,9J 1915 19]l702] J9914159 2pd700), 4_80ZI 4808 Igo411q4_42 60_l 2_00 7028 196 69961 192:076 14 LY LYC LY lLYC LY ILYC LYl W Z LY l LY UZ I LY LYC LY LYC 8 LY LY LYCl4804 4803l179g8191183 48391 87 g9311071 6935l693g 072f 6932 1 188 l484g18414820 180 12 LY 8LYC LYCl LY LYCl LY LY I LY LYC ILYC LY1 LY LY LY ILYC LYCjLY 4J1jl J)}, j6]l6J99 J7116979 48}J It,927 1711176 6928 485.j 6980l 172LYC 7000'168 164 4816 1
U ZlLY LY ILYC LY ILYC LY l LYC LY ILY LYCl LY LYCl LY LYC 8LY LY I UZ 10 52'4768 69841 080 6 4791479 1 16016976 156 477 07919g761151 4775l155g9751159 08 UZt LY MC LYCl LY Ud M UClUC U 3 MC LY 31 UC MCj 69521925 LY I U Z 924i6951 135 139 16939 141 6947 147 148 69481 144 6940 140 136 l LY LY I U Z 06 UZI LY LY l LY LY l LYC LY ILY LYC LY 'I LY I
928l 475147831Z)4,8 4763113148514852 1 132 4764*7,6494784 47521929 04 UZi LY l LY LY I LY LYI LY U Z
' 1
_12Z10)).16161 2344 7.14J 964f gi,)'108 UZ l U Ul LT LT IUZ 02 063 e4755 479514796 4756l064 I
01 03 05 07 09 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 g LPltM IDCATION (ColGON LOCATION FOR ALL YYP MACHUTES) 43 Q LPRM LOCAYION (LETYR INDICATES 39 TIP MACNINE) 35
@ IRM 14CAYION 31 A SRM LOCAYION 23 19 i
i 15 11 7
3 2 6 10 14 18 22 26 30 34 38 42 l
l
\
FIGURE II CORE CELL LOADING. CONFIGURATION
^
f % f
'i
)
1[,l -
l 4 i:
- A '
, J.
4' , 4,p '+ .
ll i; ,
/* i ll ~
@ ! l' l 1
C
! ON I'l So..
% m
^
/ O ]/x m
m N_ Jj Control. U Chane 1 Fastanar \ . O, L
+
\ / c
, s' !!I y
u
+, .T' k.
Q
! [
Lifting , \'
t
{i ' 1
,1 Sail i
. I Cp E I y
i -
L
", Figure III CRITICAL ROO CONFIGURATICN COW 4RISOM Vermont Yankee Beginning of Cycle 12 43 48 12 39 48 48 48 48 35 48 48 31 48 48 27 48 48 23 48 48 48 48 48 19
~
48 48 15 48 48 11 48 07 48 48 48 48 03
-15 MA Predicted Critical Pattern 02 06 10 14 18 22 26 30 34 38 42 02 06 10 14 18 22 26 30 34 38 42 43 48 48 48 48 39 48 48 48 48 35 48 48 48 48 31 48 22 48 l
27 48 48 48 48 48 48 23 48 48 48 48 48 48 19 48 48 02 48 15 48 48 11 48 48 48 48 07 48 48 48 48 03
+1% gA Actual Critical Pattern
= Position 00
0 l
TABLE IA CONTROL ROD SCRAM TESTING RESULTS VERMONT YANKEE BEGINNING OF CYCLE 12 Scrca #128 July 6, 1986 Macn Time for % Insertion 4.51% 25.34% 46.18% 87.84%
Maomured time (sec) 0.354 0.871 1.397 2.515 Yo c h . Sp e c. Limit (sec) 0.358 0.912 1.468 2.686 Msricum 87.84% insertion time =
2.050 sec.
Tc c h. Spec. limit for slowest 87.84%
fncortion timo = 7 sec.
Slowast 2x2 Arr.ry for % Insertion 4.51% 25.34% 46.18% 87.84%
M2coured tfee'(sec) 0.374 0.915 1.463 2.601 Toch. Spec. limit (sec) 0.379 0.967 1.556 2.848 4
'k l
TABLE IB CONTROL ROD SCRAM TESTING RESULTS VERMONT YANKEE CYCLE 11 Scrca #126 February 6, 1985 Macn Time for % Insertion 4.51% 25.34% 46.18% 87.84%
Maccured time (sec) 0.339 0.858 1.398 2.530 Toch. Spec. Limit (sec) 0.358 0.912 1.468 2.686 Maximum 87.84% insertion time =
2.920 sec.
Toch. Spec. limit for slowest 87.84%
incortion time = 7 sec.
Slowast 2x2 Array for % Insertion 4.51% 25.34% 46.18% B7.84%
Maccured Time (sec) 0.363 0.915 1.487 2.697
' Toch. Spec. Limit (sec) 0.379 0.967 1.556_ 2.848 Screa #127. March 2, 1985 Maan Time for % Insertion 4.51% 25.34% 46.18% 87.84%
, M2asured Time (sec) 0.339 0.853 1.385 2.505 i Toch. Spec. Limit (sec) 0.358 0.912 1.468 2.686
, Maximum 87.84% insertion time =
2.C83 sec.
' Toch. Spec. Limit for slowest 87.84%
l incortion time = 7 sec.
S1cwast 2x2 Array for X Insertion 4.51% 25.34% 46.18% B7.84%
l Moccured Time (sec) 0.371 0.912 1.452 2.609 l
Toch. Spec. Limit (sec) 0.379 0.967 1.556 2.848
\
i l
i
l
/ .
l TABLE II Comparison of BUCLE and Process Computer Thermal Limits Calculation Parameter BUCLE Process Computer CMFCP* O.570 0.570 Location 15-18 15-18 l
CMFLPD* O.464 0.464 Location 19-18-5 19-18-5 MAPRAT* O.441 0.441 Location 25-18-6 25-18-6
- Tech. Spec. Limit = 1.000 b
I
1
. o l
TABLE III Power Distribution Measurements - Cycle 12 Start-Up June 30, 1986 - July 12, 1986 Date Power % Core Flow % CMFLPD* CMFCP* MAPRAT*
7/3/86 22.2 33.0 .302 .349 .288 7/6/86 23.9 32.9 .301 .367- .284 7/7/86 23.7 33.3 .301 .362 .287 7/7/86 43.5 42.1 .464 .570- .441 7/8/86 54.2 50.6 .472 .629 .449 7/8/86 66.1 50.4 .629 .773 .620 7/8/86 60.3- 46.0 .640 .726 .638 7/9/86 66.5 47.8 .691 .800 .689 7/9/86 77.4~ 60.6 .736 .814 .734 7/10/86 93.8 94.6 .822 .820 .819 7/10/86 50.7 36.7 .537 .719 .529 7/10/86 73.6 58.0 .711 .819 .703 7/13/86 99.7 96.9- .903 .886 .897
- Tech. Spec. Limit = 1.000 4
e
+
i I
c
4 Table IV i
Cosearison of Direct-From-Traces and SIMULATE Core Averate Axial Distributions Direct Node From Traces SIMULATE 24 .4000 .2995 23 .5798 .4936 22 .7185 .6529 21 .8037 .7774 20 .8857 .8718 19 .9661 .9417 18 .9917 .9907 -
17 1.0029 1.0303 16 1.0652 1.0624 15 1.0836 1.0863 14 1.0629 1.1008 13 1.0858 1.1022 l
12 1.0785 1.0839 l 11 1.0617 1.0805
.10 1.0644 1.0921 9 1.1218 1.1160 8 1.1583 1.1512 7 1.1709 1.1952 6 1.2422 1.2442 5 1.2852 1.2881 4 1.2654 1.2983 3 1.1735 1.2341 2 1.0205 1.0883 1 .7116 .7181
J TABLE V Comparison of 10 Highest Relative Radial Powers Location SIMULATE. Plant 33-26 1.360 1.319 31-28 1.363 1.345 29-28 1.329 1.346 29-26 1.378 1.318 27-32 1.356- 1.340-27-30 1.322 1.334 25-30 1.369 1.332 25-28 1.350 1.324 25-26 1.374 1.332 23-28 1.365 1.333 F
i-e i
i i
1
p 8, . .
1 TABLE VI Total TIP Uncertainty Case Rod Pattern Power (%) Core Flow (%) Uncertainty (%)
SYM995 24 42 99.72 96.04 1.52 12 24 l
e
- VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER CORPORATION
. RD 5, Box 169. Ferry Road, Brattleboro, VT 05301 ,,,Ly ,o N
y ENGINEERING OFFICE 1671 WORCESTER ROAD
- FRAMINGHAM, MASS ACHUSETTS 01701 TELEPHONE 617-872-8100 FVY 86-92 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 Attention: Dr. Thomas E. Murley Regional Administrator
References:
(a) License No. DPR-28 (Docket No. 50-271)
(b) Vermont Yankee Technical Specification Section 6.7A.1
Subject:
Cycle 12 Start-up Test Report
Dear Sir:
Enclosed please find the Cycle 12 Start-up Test Report for Vermont Yankee which is submitted to you in accordance with the requirements of Reference (b).
We trust that you will find this information satisfactory; however, should you desire additional information, please contact us.
Very truly yours, VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER CORPORATION Robert W. Capstick Licensing Engineer RWC/jlc cc: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Inspection & Enforcement Washington, D.C. 20555 Attn: Document Control Desk (36 copies enclosed) 0 0
dC I '