ML20234E924

Startup Test Rept,Vermont Yankee Cycle 13

ML20234E924
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee
Issue date:	01/04/1988
From:	Capstick R VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER CORP.
To:	Russell W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
References
FVY-1-88, NUDOCS 8801110248
Download: ML20234E924 (14)

Text

STARTUP TEST REPORT VERMONT YANKEE CYCLE 13

Introduction:

1 Vermont Yankee Cycle 13 initial startup commenced on October 1, 1987 following a 7 1/2 week outage for annual refueling, maintenance related activities and fuel sipping.

The core loading for Cycle 13 consisted of:

8 P8x8R P8DPB289 Reinserts from Cycle 10 104 P8x8R P8DPB289 Reinserts from Cycle 11.

120 P8x8R P8DPB289 Reinserts from Cycle 12 136 P8x8R BP8DRB299 non irradiated assemblies An as loaded Cycle 13 core map is included as Figure I. Details of the Cycle 13 core loading are contained in the Yankee Atomic Electric Company document YAEC-1600, " Vermont Yankee Cycle 13 Core Performance Analysis, May, 1987".

An in-sequence critical was performed satisfactorily on Aug. 27,1987.

The shutdown margin was verified to be satisfactory based on the data' collected i from the in-sequence critical. Startup commenced October 1,1987 and steady j state full power conditions were reached October 20,1987.

Control rod coupling verification was performed satisfactorily for all 89 control rods on Aug. 26 and 27, 1987. Control rod scram testing was per- 3 formed satisfactorily prior to reaching 30% power per Tech. Specs. for all 89 control rods on Sept. 24 and Oct. 3,1987.

The final as loaded core loading was verified correct by vermont Yankee and Yankee Atomic Electric personnel on Aug. 25,1987.

Core Verification:

The final core loading was verified correct on Aug. 25,1987. Three separate criteria were checked:

1. Proper bundle orientation was verified by checking channel fastenor 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 I.

11 2 BB e

5t

l I

\

Process Computer Data Checks: j l

l Process computer data shuffling checks were completed Sept. 27,1987. 1 These 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. l

)

In-Sequence Critical:

Sequence 13-A-2 was used to perform the in-sequence critical test.

! 1 On Aug. 27, 1987 control rods were withdrawn in-sequence until criticality was attained. Criticality was achieved on the 5th rod in group 2 (34-23) at notch position 12. The moderator temperature was 86.8 F.

The actual critical rod pattern and the YAEC prediction agreed within

+/- 1% 6K/K. Figure III shows the actual, predicted and the +/- 1% 6K/K

)

critical rod patterns.

Shutdown Margin Testing The shutdown margin calculation was performed using data collected during the in-sequence critical and information provided in the Core Management Report. The required shutdown margin to be demonstrated was 0.32 %AK/K. The actual shutdown margin was shown to be 1.253% A K/K.

Rod Scram Testing: l All 89 control rods were scram tested satisfactorily on Sept. 24 and Oct.3,1987. All insertion times were within the limits defined in the Vermont Yankee Technical Specifications. Results of the testing are presented in Table 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 times 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.

Thermal 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 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. I i

The results of the Backup Core Limits Evaluation (BUCLE) program were l compared 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 twenty (20) times using the TIP system during the ascent to full power. The results of these updates are presented in Table III.

The LPRMs were calibrated once in conjunction with TIP set 1085. The initial checkout of LPRM high and low trip alarm setpoints was done at 0%

power on Sept. 21,1987. The TIPS and the LPRMs were both functionally tested and found to operate satisfactorily.

The process computer power distribution update was performed on Oct.21,1987. TIP 1103 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 Oct. 21,1987 the SIMULATE core average axial power distribution was compared to that calculated by the plant process computer; comparisons are shown in Table IV. A comparison was also performed between SIMULATE and the 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 on Oct. 7,1987. All three TIP system traces were reproducible to within 4.3%.

The A-2 sequence used as the initial control rod sequence varied slightly from an eignth 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 1103, but with the control rod at core location 22-35 set to position 48. These synthetic traces were pointwise adjusted by SIMULATE using the ratio of the actual TIP 1103 traces to the synthetic SIMULATE TIP 1103 traces. By using the pointwise adjustment ratics 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.

• Figure 1 Cycle 13 Cora Map VERMONT YANKEE

~

44 LY l LY LYILY LY ILY 698516971 701317014 6978'6986 g T iLYC, LYC LYJ jLYJ LYCsLYCaLY 694 2091 157 001 t002 15812101694:

! LY LYCI5.

40 YCILYJ LY f L LYJILYC LYb LYC LY ' LY l 4821lLY 7001 185!005 1531009 696116962 0101154 006 3 186 700214822 LY LYC ILYJ I 3g LYJiLYC LYJ 'LYC LYJ i LYJ LYC LYJ LYCl LYJ LYJILYCl LY l 693 1691 013 0171205 021 1177 1 025 10263 l78 022 206 I01 1

14 3 170 6J U 36 LY t LY YC1LYJ LYC t LYJ LYlLYJ LYC1LYC LYJe LY LYJILYC YJlLYC LYCl LY 47931 181 2171029 1731033 69571037 229l230 03816958 034 1174 0301218 18214794 34 LY g LYJ LYJl LYC LYJtLYC LYJ 1LYC LY LY LYCaLYJ LYCiLYJ LYCiLYJ LYJi LY 69971 04 0451 129 0491225 Ul233 6929169 2341054 2261050 1301046 04286998 32 LYCl LYJTYClLYJ LY l LYJ LY lLYJ LY l LY LYJILY LYJILY YJlLYC LYJILYC 1971 057 2378061 7011065 69531069 698116982 07016954 066 17018 0621238 0580198 30 LI I LTJ i LYC LYJ LYC LYJ I LYC LYJ LYJ lLYJ LYClLYJ LYCILYJ LYC i LYJ LYCILYJ lLY 70211 0731 141 077 ! 213 0811189 085lLYC 161 089I090 162l086 1901082 2141078 1421074 17022 28 LY LYC LYC; LYAY 093 i tYJ tY itrJ tY iLYJ tYC itY#tYJitY tYJiLY tYJ i tY tYJ,tYC tYCi tY 69731201 1931 699) 097 7009 101 6945l105 149 l150 10616946 10217010 098 16994 0948194 20216974 26 LY ILYC LYJl LYC LYJ i LYC LYJ,LYC LYJILY LY l LY LY ILYJ LYCI LYJ LYCiLYJ LYClLYJ LYCa LY 70251221 109I 137 113 l 145 117l133 121l7646 69651696 6471122 134 1118 146 1 114 1381110 22217026 LY ILYJ LY LY LY LY YC LY LY l LY LY ILYC LYJiLY Y l LY LYJiLY YJi LY 24 69891125 6969l 129 LYPLY 764 7005 694 133 165l6933692516926 6934l166 13416950 70067643 13016970 12686990 22 LT 'LYJ LT I LYJ LY j LY LY gLYJ LYCILY LY I LY LY LYC LYJILY LY I LY LYJILY LYJi LY 69911127 69716 131 7644q 7007J951l 135 16716935 692716928 6936 168 136'6952 700117645 13216972 12816992 20 LY ' LYC LYJg LYC LYJl LYC' LYJ g tYC LYJILY LY LY LY ILYJ LYCILYJ YCjLYJ LYCILYJ LYCl LY 70271223 til l 139 115: 147 119l135 12317648 696716968 76491124 136l120 1481 116 14vl112 22417028 18 LY ILYC LYCl LYJ LY I LYJ LY lLYJ LY ILYJ LYClLYC LYJiLY LYJfLY LYJ'LY LYJfLYC LYCl LY 69751203 151 3 1 0961196 4j6976 195109p995 099 70111103g947l107 15g10816948104 701g00 6996 16 LY I LYJI LYC1YJ l LYC LYJ1LYC LYJlLYC LYJ l LYJ LYCILYJ LYCILYJ LYC3 LYJ LYCl1YJ LY 1023 0751 143 0798 215 0831191 0871163 091l092 1641088 192 1084 216 I 080 1441076 s7024 14 LYCl LYJ LYC \ LYJ LY lLYJ LY iLYJ LY : LY LYJILY LYJ 8LY LYJl LYC LYJILYC l 1991 05 07216956 068 h020g64 I240' 060 1200 39i06370191067f9J51071 698316964 12 L7 i LY LYJl LYC ' LYJ#LYC LYJiLYC LY I LY LYClLYJ LYC LYC 8 LYJ i

69991 043 047l 131 0511227 0551235 J28,lLYJ LYqLY 693116932 2361056 052_ 1_3),) 048 044,7000 10 LY I LYC LYCi LYJ LYClLYJ LY ILYJ LYCI LYC LYJlLY LYJILYC LYJ ' LYC LYCILY 4795fj8, 2191 031 1751035g95W O39 231 1 23go4016960036'176g32 220'j8,414796 8

08 LY YCILYJ LYJILYC LYJ ILYC LYJI LYJ LYCILYJ LYCILYJ LYJI LYCl LY 69 39 e 1711015 0191207 02311'9 027I 028 1801024 208 1020 016 I 17216940 06 LY LY LYCsLYJ LYCILYJ LY l LY LYJsLYC LYJ8LYC LY l LY 482317003 187 007 1551011 696316964 0121156 0081188 700/4 4824 04 LY ,LYCILYC LYJl LYJ LYCILYCi LY 69431 2111159 0031 004 1601212 16944 02 LY lLY LY LY LY ILY 6987 16979 7015,I7016 6980 16988 01 03 05 07 09 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 g LPRM LOCATION (COWtON LOCATION FOR ALL TYP MACHINES) 43 Q LPRM LOCATION (LETTElt INDICATES 39 TIP MACHINE)

$ IRM LOCATION 31 A sam NOR 27 23 19 15 11 7

3 2 6 10 14 18 22 26 30 14 u 4,

FIGURE II CORE CELL LOADING. CONFIGURA TION r q

!(

m 1[ih 4e  : .

l A

'+.

,4 p o, l~ i 4  !

D (t

/. - .2) s-L 'Loj

.. 5"'1/

Fastener N s Cy " 3D c4 I

+ .

Y, ,T Q

Lifting , $ M i Saii

• i

/ l .

)

!i l

O!Il Y h & ,

J

l ,2 ,

._ s. -..

CRITICAL , ION C W ARISCN BEGINNING OF CYCLE 13 43 k8 39 kb h8 h8 3$

__ h8 31 kS k$

27 ,

49 48 23 48 48  % 48 19

/0 15 k8 h8 11

, k8 07 3b k8 k8 k8 l

03

-12 MA Predicted Critical Pattern 02 06 10 1c 18 22 26 30 34 38 42 02 06 10 14 18 22 26 30 34 38 42 43 48 h8 48 48 39 48 48 k8 48

.. 35 ,

h8 k2 kb 31 __h h k8 27 42 48 48 48 42 48 23 48 48 48 12. 42 19 hh h8 '

kb 15 N8 h$

11 kb '

h8 48 h$ 07 h8 S8 k8 kb 03 _ _ , ,

+1% MA Actual Critical Pattern Position 00

1 1 I

A TABLE IA CONTROL ROD SCRAM TESTING RESULTS VERMONT YANKEE BEGINNING OF CYCLE 13 1 i

• Scram #132' September 25,1987 j i

- Mean Time;for % Insertion 4.51% 25.34% 46.18% 87 84% l Measured time-(sec)- 0.339 0.879 1.431 2.591 Tech. Spec.1 Limit (sec) 0.358 0.912 1.468 2.686 Maximum 87.84% insertion time (sec) = 2.879 .

Tech. Spec. limit.for slowest 87.84% insertion time (sec) = 7.000

- Slowest 2x2 Array for % Insertion 4.51% 46.18% 87.84%

_________________________________ _____ 25.'_34%

Measured time (sec) 0.362 0.929 '1.519 2.710 Tech. Spec. Limit ~(sec) 0.379 0.967 1.556 2.848

• Includes scram times collected during single lod scram testing for all control-rod' drives except 06-35. The time for 06-35 was obtained during full scram #133.

1 l

l 1

1_______________________________________n____________________. _ _ . _ __ ____________._._____________________._____m___u._2._a

TABLE IB CONTROL ROD SCRAM TESTING RESULTS VERMONT YANKEE CYCLE 12-Scram #129 (Full Scram) October 4,1986 Mean Time for % Insertion 4.51% 25.34% 46.18% 87.84%

Measured time (sec) 0.317 0.829 1.391 2.563 Tech. Spec. Limit (sec) 0.358 0.912 1.468 2.686 Maximum 87.84% insertion time (sec) = 2.872 Tech. Spec. limit for clowest 87.84% insertion time (sec) = 7.000 Slowest 2x2 Array for % Insertion 4.51% 25.34% 46.18% 87.84% '

Measured time (sec) 0.326 0.856 1.454 2.688 Toch. Spec. Limit (sec) 0.379 0.967 1.556 2.848 Scram #130 (Single rod scrams at power) May 9,1987 Mean Time for % Insertion 4.51% 25.34% 46.18% 87.84%

Measured time (sec) 0.309 0.822 1.383 2.563 Tech. Spec. Limit (sec) 0.358 0.912 1.468 2.686 Maximum 87.84% insertion time (soc) = 2.944 Tech. Spec. limit for slowest 87.84% insertion time (sec) = 7.000 Slowest 2x2 Array for % Insertion 4.51% 25.34% 46.18% 87.84% l Measured time (sec) 0.322 0.862 1.454 2.688 Tech. Spec. Limit (sec) 0.379 0.967 1.556 2.848 Scram #131 (Full Scram) August 7, 1987 Mean Time for % Insertion 4.51% 25.34% 46.18% 87.84% l

______---__--___-___-_--_ _____ ___-__ _--___ ______ l Measured time (sec) 0.279 0.782 1.296 2.399 l

Tech. Spec. Limit (sec) 0.358 0.912 1.468 2.686 Maximum 87.84% insertion time (sec) = 3.012 Tech. Spec. limit for slowest 87.84% insertion time (sec) = 7.000 Slowest 2x2 Array for % Insertion 4.51% 25.34% 46.18% 87.84%

Measured time (sec) 0.308 0.833 1.370 2.530 Tech. Spec. Limit (sec) 0.379 0.967 1.556 2.848 j l

TABLE II Comparison of BUCLE and' Process Computer Thermal Limits Calculation Parameter BUCLE Process Computer CMFCP* 0.352 0.352 Location 25-26 25-26 CMFLPD* 0.269 0.269 Location 25-26-20 25-26-20 MAPRAT* 0.252 0.252 Location 25-26-20 25-26-20

• Tech. Spec. Limit - 1.000 1

l

TABLE III Power Distribution Measurements - Cycle 13 Start-Up October 1,1987 _ October 21,1987 l

Date Power % Core Flow % CMFLPD* CMFCP* MAPRAT*

1987 10/4 17.92 '48.21 0.269 0.352 0.252 10/5 23.45 31.88 0.259 '0.411 0.248 10/5 23.49 - 31.75 0.259 0.408 0.247 10/6 34.34 32.75 0.361 0.554 0.360 10/7 54.51 48.00 0.579 0.675 0.560 10/7 59.37 46.83 0.608 0.761~ 0.614 10/7 59.06 46.73 0.557 0.749 0.559 10/7 63.53 46.65 0.578 0.855 0.579 10/8 '78.83 66.58- 0.710 0.864 0.713 10/9 87.13 84.40 0.767 0.852 0.773 10/9 45.57 34.35 0.461 0.805 0'.463 10/9 48.78 30.56 0.526 0.906 0.519 10/10 65.35 41.81 0.679 0.999 0.681 10/10 71.13 47.15 0.721 0.995 0.724 10/13 98.53 97.46 0.901 0.917 0.902 10/14 97.75 97.31 0.898 0.907 0.898 10/16 97.40 99.33 0.895 -0.898 0.896

( 10/17 49.19 36.10 0.505 0.781 0.511 10/17 69.96 60.44 0.643 0.809 0.651  !

10/21 99.91 99.08 0.871 0.918 0.882 I

• Tech. Spec. Limit = 1.000 I

i 1  ;

l l

l i

t l

l l

Q.--_--_._____-.___._____._.-__--_____.__-.-_-___....-.___._----_._-_-_---_-______1-_ a _-. - _ ---.._____J

b Table IV Comparison of Direct-From-Traces and-SIMULATE Core Average Axial Distributions PROCESS SIMULATE NODE COMPUTER PARTB 24 .3978 .2729 23 .5710 .4582 22 .7089 .6185 21 .7994 .7507 20 .8937 .8563 19 .9797 .9382 18 1.0123 .9994 17 1.0249 1.0413 16 1.0760 1.0638 15 1.0645 1.0625 14 1.0404 . 1.0724 13 1.0833 1.0938 12 1.1253 1.1237 11 1.1350 1.1598 10 1.1647 1.2002 9 1.2304 1.2407 8 1.2587 1.2748 7 1.2302 1.2892 6 1.2714 1.3103 5 1.2832 1.3212 4 1.2222 1.2879 3 1.0868 1.1733 2 .8479 .9560 1 .4925 .4351 l

l TABLE V' Comparison of 10 Highest Relative Radial Powers

Location' SIMULATE Plant 28 1.365 1.380 25-26 1.440 1.498-25-28 1.370 1.293-25-30 1.294 1.376'

~27-24 1.366 1.391 27-26 l'.370 1.299-29-26 1.294' l'.382 29-30 1.209 1.299 33-26 1.244 1.292 35-24 1.272 1.315 l

l l

TABLE VI Total TIP Uncertainty Case Rod Pattern Power (%) Core Flow (%) Uncertainty (%)

SYM 1103 18 34 99.91 99.08 1.52 42 18

VI2RMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER CORPORATION RD 5 Box 169, Ferry Road. Brattleboro, VT 05301 ,,,L y ,g. .,

y January 4, 1988 ENGINEERING OFFICE 1671 WORCESTER ROAD -

f FR AMINGHAM, MASS ACHUSETTS 01701 pyy y_gg

• TELEPHONE 617-872-6100 .

l United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 Attention: Mr. William T. Russell Regional Administrator

References:

(a) License No. DPR-28 (Docket No. 50-271)

(b) Vermont Yankee Technical Specification, Section 6.7.A.1

Subject:

Cycle 13 Start-Up Test Report

Dear Sir:

Enclosed please find the Cycle 13 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. Ca stick Licensing Engineer RWC/16.265 Enclosure cc: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 NRC Resident Inspector di

- - - - _ __