View source for AECM-87-0067, Forwards Summary of Startup Physical Tests Completed on 870116,per 860714 Submittal in Support of Util 860714 Request for Amend,As post-Refueling Outage-1 Startup Test Rept

{{Adams
| number = ML20206C543
| issue date = 04/06/1987
| title = Forwards Summary of Startup Physical Tests Completed on 870116,per 860714 Submittal in Support of Util 860714 Request for Amend,As post-Refueling Outage-1 Startup Test Rept
| author name = Kingsley O
| author affiliation = SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.
| addressee name = 
| addressee affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
| docket = 05000416
| license number = 
| contact person = 
| document report number = AECM-87-0067, AECM-87-67, NUDOCS 8704130080
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, INCOMING CORRESPONDENCE, UTILITY TO NRC
| page count = 8
}}

=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:*
sysTEMENEDNiiY REEDU9CEE, INC.
Otra D. KtGSLfY.JR vce nsaene                       April 6, 1987 ne oceecns U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Attention:     Document Control Desk Gentlemen:

==SUBJECT:==
Grand Gulf kuclear Station Unit 1 Docket No. 50-416 License No. NPF-29 Post RF01 Startup Test Report AECM-87/0067 System Energy Resources, Inc. (SERI) is transmitting, with this letter, the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station (GGNS) Unit 1 Post Refueling Outage-1 (RF01)
Startup Test Report. This report is sent in compliance with the requirements of Grand Gulf Technical Specifications 6.9.1.1(3),6.9.1.2,and6.9.1.3(1).
By {{letter dated|date=July 14, 1986|text=letter dated July 14, 1986}} (AECM-86/0214), SERI requested an amendment to the GGNS Unit 1 Facility Operating License. The proposed changes would allow GGNS Unit 1 to operate during Cycle 2 with a reload of Exxon manufactured fuel assemblies. Enclosed with the July 14, 1986 submittal were the proposed startup physics tests to be conducted following the refueling.
The NRC issued the requested license amendment in a {{letter dated|date=October 24, 1986|text=letter dated October 24, 1986}} (MAEC-86/0345).
The startup physics testing was completed on January 16, 1987. The attached report provides a summary of each test and the results where applicable.
If further information is required, please contact this office.
Yours t ly, s
ODK:bms Attachment cc:    (See Next Page) 8704130080 870406 PDR      ADOCK 05000416 PDR P
e o Boarn l sows vssssmrmrm l een9easen                 l J16AECM87031701 - 1

e  '. 4 ':
AECM-87/0067 Page 2-cc: Mr. T. _ H. Cloninger (w/a)
Mr. R. B. McGehee (w/a)
Mr. N. S. Reynolds (w/a)
Mr. H. L. Thomas (w/o)-
Mr.' R. C. Butcher (w/a)
Dr.~ J. Nelson Grace, Regional Administrator (w/a)
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marietta St.', N.1W., Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia- 30323 l
J16AECM87031701 - 2

Attachment to AECM-87/0067 Grand Gulf-Nuclear Station Unit 1 Cycle 2 Startup Physics Test Summary The Grand Gulf Nuclear Station (GGNS) Unit 1 Cycle 2 reload introduced 264 Exxon Nuclear Corporation (ENC) 8X8 fuel assemblies into the core. The following: physics-tests were performed following the refueling:
: 1. Core Loading Verification
         !-         '2. Control Rod Functional-Testing
                             ~
: 3. Subcritical Shutdown Margin Demonstration
: 4. Shutdown Margin Determination
: 5. TIP Asymmetry The following pages summarize each test and the results where applicable, f-r l
i J16AECM87031701 - 4 i

        -                                                                                                                                            Attachment-to AECM-87/0067 Startup Physics Test #1
.                                                                   Core Loading. Verification
                        ~
LPurpose:'
1ro verify actual core loading is. identical to the loading assumed in the core design analyses and to verify proper bundle seating.
i Method':
For each core bundle location'the bundle serial number, orientation and seating are verified by at least 2 individuals to be correct through. visual-observation. A video tape. recording of the core loading:is maintained in
                 . plant records.
4 Results:
                          ' The as-loaded core loading was verified to be identical to the assumed
                 . core-loading-in the design analyses.
1 a
4 4
4 1
k
:              .J16AECM87031701 - 5
                      .     . _ . _ _ _ - . _ . _ , ~ - _ , _ -            _ _ _ . . . _ . _ _ . _ _ . .   . . _ _ _ _ _ . . . - . , . _ . . - . - . _ . _ _ . _ . _ - _ ,

Attachment to AECM-87/0067 Startup Physics Test #2 Control Rod Functional Testing

==Purpose:==
To verify operability of each control rod by performing a coupling check and adjusting normal individual control rod insertion and withdrawal times to within design tolerances and to perform friction testing on control rods that require friction testing.
Method:
Following refueling, each control rod was verified operable by performing a coupling check each time the rod was fully withdrawn. Each individual control rod was timed during its withdrawal and insertion stroke. Those rods which had stroke times exceeding the vendor's recommended tolerance had their stroke times adjusted and were retested satisfactorily.
There were 10 control cells disassembled during the refueling. Those 10 control rods underwent a friction test to check for excessive mechanical binding. All 10 rods passed the test.
     ~J16AECM87031701 - 6

9 Attachment to.
AECM-87/0067 Startup Physics Test #3 Subcritical Shutdown Margin Demonstration

==Purpose:==
-To verify that at least the required amount of shutdown margin is maintained'in the core.
Method:
Once.the number of control rods withdrawn exceeds-the reactivity worth corresponding to.the required shutdown margin,'the reactor nuclear instrumentation is observed and subcriticality is verified.
Results:
During the first reactor startup following refueling at the point when the group.1 and group 2 rods were fully withdrawn, the reactor was verified-to be subcritical. The reactivity worth of these two groups of rods exceeded
          . the worth.of the strongest rod out plus the minimum required shutdown margin
          , plus the difference in beginning of cycle shutdown margin and minimum cycle shutdown margin.
J16AECM87031701 - 7

c
         't Attachment'to AECM-87/0067 Startup Physics Test #4
      >'                                Shutdown Margin Determination

==Purpose:==
:To determine 'the amount of shutdown margin based.on critical rod' pattern, reactor coolant temperature, and reactor period and compare to predicted shutdown margin.
Method:
Using vendor supplied calculated rod worths reactivity worth of reactor
            -period, and moderator temperature coefficient of reactivity and =the critical reactor conditions, the actual shutdown margin is calculated and compared to
                                                                                      ~
            . predicted shutdown margin.-
Results:
The actual' shutdown margin was calculated to be 4.06%si K/K. The predicted shutdown margin is 4.09%. -The actual shutdown margin is within 0.03% of the predicted, thus: meeting the + 1% ~ /LK/K-criteria.
            'J16AECM87031701 - 8

Attachment to AECM-87/0067 Startup Physics Test #5 T.I.P.-Asymmetry A' total of four Chi-squared tests were performed. The first consistency.
test examined.the variance in the combined measured and calculated integral TIP data. The second consistency test evaluated variance in the measured.
integral TIP. responses for symmetric; locations. The third and fourth tests-repeated the first.two tests on a planar basis, by renormalizing the nodal TIP distribution to unity within each plane separately fo'r both the measured and calculated TIP distributions.
The results of the tests are as follows:
Test                  Chi-squared             Critical Value           1 1                      10.89                      60.48 2                        1.87                     30.14 3                     254.16                     950.13 4                      30.84                     426.46 All of the Chi-squared values were much less than the Critical Values indicating that no TIP Asymmetry exists.
J16AECM87031701 - 9
    -.                       - . . -..  ..        . - .    - _ . -       --      ..    -.}}