ML20077B600
| ML20077B600 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Kewaunee  |
| Issue date: | 07/15/1983 |
| From: | Giesler C WISCONSIN PUBLIC SERVICE CORP. |
| To: | Varga S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| CON-NRC-83-137 NUDOCS 8307250340 | |
| Download: ML20077B600 (41) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:.. , ,
?
J \ r 1 DOCKET 50-350 t KEWAUNEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT CYCLE 9 STARTUP REPORT JUNE 1983 4 i l r
.\ (#! ,_
,, Wisconsin Public Service Corporation Green Bay, Wisconsin
; Date 7/15/83 J '
,si 8307250340 830715 PDR ADOCK 05000305 R PDR
W 8 .. . TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Introduction, Summary, and Conclusion . .. . . . . . . .1 1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 1.2 Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 1.3 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 2.0 RCCA Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .6 2.1 RCCA Drop Time Measurements. . . . . . . . . . . . .6 2.2 RCCA Bank Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 2.2.1 Rod Swap Results . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .6 2.3 Shutdown Margin Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 3.0 Boron Endpoints and Boron Worth Measurements. . . . . . 14 3.1 Boron Endpoints. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 3.2 Differential Boron Worth . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 3.3 Boron Letdown. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 4.0 Isothermal Temperature Coefficient. . . . . . . . . . . 19 5.0 Power Distribution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 5.1 Summary of Power Distribution Criteria . . . . . . 21 5.2 Power Distribution Measurements. . . . . . . . . . 22 6.0 Reactor Startup Calibrations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 6.1 Rod Position Calibration . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 6.2 Nuclear Instrumentation Calibration. . . . . . . . 34 7.0 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 35 i o
LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1 Chronology of Tests Page 4 fable 2.1 RCCA Drop Time Measurements Page 9 Table 2.2 RCCA Bank Worth Summary Page 10 Table 2.3 Shutdown Margin Analysis Page 13 Table 3.1 RCCA Bank Endpoint Measurements Page 16 Table 3.2 Differential Boron Worth Page 17 Table 4.1 Isoth(rmal Temperature Coefficient Page 20 Table 5.1 Flux Map Chronology and Reactor Characteristics Page 24 Table 5.2 Verification of Acceptance Criteria Page 25 Table 5.3 Verification of Review Criteria Page 26 r
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1 Core Loading Map Page 5 Figure 2.1 RCCA Bank A Integral Worth Page 11 Figure 2.2 RCCA Bank A Differential Worth Page 12 Figure 3.1 Boron Concentration vs. Burnup Page 18 Figure 5.1 Measured / Predicted RRI Flux Map 902 Page 27 Figure 5.2 Power Distribution for Flux Map 902 Page 28 Figure 5.3 Power Distribution for Flux Map 903 Page 29 Figure 5.4 Power Distribution for Flux Map 904 Page 30 Figure 5.5 Power Distribution for Flux Map 905 Page 31 Figure 5.6 Power Distribution for Flux Map 911 Page 32 i I O 9
-lii-
1.0 INTRODUCTION
SUMMARY
, AND CONCLUSION 1.1 Introduction This report presents the results of the physics tests performed for Kewaunee Cycle 9. The core design and reload safety evaluation were performed by Wisconsin Public Service Corporation (1) using methods previously described in WPS topical reports (2,3). The results of the physics tests were compared to WPS analytical results to confirm calculated safety margins. The tests performed and reported herein satisfy the requirements of the Reactor Test Program (4). During cycle 8-9 refueling, 36 of the 121 fuel assemblies in the core were replaced with fresh assemblies of Exxon Design (5), enriched to 3.4 w/o U235. The Cycle 9 core consists of the following regions of fuel: Number of Initial Previous Number of Region Vendor U235 W/O Duty Cycles Assemblies 1 W 2.2 1 1 2 W 3.0 1 4 4 W 3.3 3 4 6 W 3.1 3 4 8 ENC 3.2 2 8 8 ENC 3.2 2 4 8 ENC 3.2 3 8 9 ENC 3.2 2 16 10 ENC 3.2 1 36 11 ENC 3.4 0 36(FEED) l The core loading pattern, burnup per assembly, and previ-ous core position are shown in Figure 1.1.
On May 11, 1983 at 2030 hours, initial criticality was achieved on the Cycle 9 core. The schedule of physics tests and measurements is outlined in Table 1.1. 1.2 Summary RCCA measurements are shown in Section 2. All RCCA drop time measurements were within Technical Specification limits. RCCA bank worths were measured using the rod swap reactivity comparison technique previously described (4,6). The reactivity comparison was made to the refer-ence bank, Bank A, which was measured using the boration/ dilution technique. All results were within the established acceptance criteria (4), and thereby demons-trated adequate shutdown margin. Section 3 presents the boron endpoint and boron worth measurements. The endpoint measurements for ARO, Bank A in, and Bank C in core configurations were within the acceptance criteria (4). The available boron letdown data covering the first month of reactor operation is also shown. The agreement between measurements and predictions meets the review and acceptance criteria (4). Section 4 shows the results of the isothermal temperature coefficient measurements. The differences between measurements and predictions were within the acceptance criteria (4).
Power distributions were measured via flux maps using the Incore code for beginning of cycle (BOC) core conditions covering HZP, no xenon through power escalation to 100% full power equilibrium xenon. The results indicate compliance with Technical Specification limits (7) and are presented in Section 5. Section 6 discusses the various calibrations performed during the startup of Cycle 9. 1.3 Conclusion The startup testing of Kewaunee's Cycle 9 core verified that the reactor core has been properly loaded and the core characteristics satisfy the Technical Specifications (7) and are consistent with the parameters used in the design and safety analysis (1). 6
,- n, - --.--,- . . . . . _ _ .- - -. , e
TABLE 1.1 KEWAUNEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT BOL CYCLE 9 PHYSICS TEST Date Time Plant Test Completed Completed Conditions Control Rod Operability Test 5/05/83 1600 Cold SD Hot Rod Drops 5/09/83 0024 HZP RPI Calibrations 5/11/83 1100 HZP Initial Criticality 5/11/83 2030 HZP Low Power Flux Map 902 5/12/83 0422 HZP Reactivity Computer Checkout 5/12/83 2028 HZP ARO Endpoint 5/12/83 2255 HZP Bank C Worth (Dilution) 5/12/83 2330 HZP Bank C In-ORO Endpoint 5/13/83 0306 HZP Jank A In-ORO Endpoint 5/13/83 0600 HZP Bank A Worth (Boration) 5/13/83 2015 HZP ARO Endpoint 5/13/83 2030 HZP ITC Determination 5/13/83 2212 HZP Power Ascension Flux Map 903 5/14/83 1720 25% Power Ascension Flux Map 904 5/16/8J 0839 40% Incore/Excore Calibration Flux Map 905 5/19/83 1529 75% Incore/Excore Calibration Flux Map 906 5/20/83 0821 75% Incore/Excore Calibration Flux Map 907 5/20/83 1328 75% Incore/Excore Calibration Flux Map 908 5/20/83 1614 75% Incore/Excore Calibration l Flux Map 909 5/21/83 0833 75% Power Ascension Flux Map 910 5/23/83 0855 87% Power Ascension Flux Map 911 5/24/83 0845 100% Power Ascension Flux Map 912 6/02/83 1415 100% l i
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 t C6 C8 8 22 8 A 26 92 0.00 26.96 K10 L8 M7 L6 K4 2o 22 2o 2o 8 L8SP S 11.98 0 00 2 11 62 2 7 02 11 65 22 0 00 11 95 ' LOOP R IS E8 07 E6 15 4 11 8 11 9 11 8 11 4 { 29.43 0.00 24.12 19 60 0 00 24 19 0.00 0 00 29 37 J11 F7 L4 110 L10 08 J3 28 2 8 22 8 2 8 22 8 22 28 D 11.94 0.00 24.44 0 00 18.24 13 03 18 16 0.00 24 37 0.00 11.96 HS L7 85 E7 89 02 M9 22 8 22 2 2 8 2o 2 22 8 22 E 0 00 24 56 28 63 24 12 0.00 10 04 10 04 24 50 0 00 24.03 0.00 F3 H12 012 E2 C3 E10 C11 E12 02 H2 F11 8 10 11 9 10 9 10 9 10 9 11 10 8 f 26.96 0.00 10.04 20 59 20 57 11 60 18 18 13.05 10 05 18.16 0.00 11.61 26.96 013 G4 09 G5 05 Gil J9 G9 J5 G10 G1 g 11 10 9 10 6' 10 1 10 6 10 9 10 11 0 0 00 7 06 19.65 13.05 28 53 13 08 18 17 13.03 28.51 13.06 19.72 7.04 0.00 H3 F12 J12 12 K3 14 K11 112 JE F2 H11 8 2o 22 8 2 8 2 8 2" 8 22 2 8 H 26 96 11 57 0.00 18 16 10 01 20 67 13 03 20.60 10.08 18.24 0.00 11.65 26.96 F5 012 L5 17 LS 87 F9 11 8 11 2 10 6 10 2 11 8 11
} 0 00 24 12 0 00 24.49 10 07 28.56 9.99 24.54 0 00 24.06 0 00 011 08 84 E4 810 H7 03 J 'o 22 8 22 8 2 8 22 8 22 2 11 95 0 00 24.40 0.00 18.22 13.07 18.19 0 00 24.39 0.00 11 95 E9 18 J7 IS E5 K
LOOP S / 4 29 28 22 0 00 24 11 8 22 0 00 8 19 60 22 0 00 8 24 16 22 0.00 29.26 N LOOP R I C10 88 A7 86 C4 10 11 10 10 10 11 10 [ 11 95 0.00 11 82 7.08 11 61 0 00 11.98 K6 KS 8 22 8 M 26 95 0.00 26.95 W PREVIOUS LOCATION 4--- REGION W BURNUPim!000MWO/MTU) l L KEWRUNEE CYCLE 9 CORE LORDING MAP FIGURE 1.1
2.0 RCCA MEASUREMENTS 2.1 RCCA Drop Time Measurements RCCA drop times to dashpot and rod bottom were measured at hot zero power core conditions. The results of the hot zero power measurements are presented in Table 2.1. The acceptance criterion (4) of 1.8 seconds is adequately met for all fuel. 2.2 RCCA Bank Measurements During Cycle 9 startup the reactivity of the reference bank (Bank A) was measured using the boration/ dilution technique and the reactivity worth of the remaining banks was inferred using rod swap reactivity comparisons to the reference bank. 2.2.1 Rod Swap Results The Cycle 9 reference bank was determined by measurement to be control Bank A. Although the reference bank was predicted to be Bank C, they differed in calculated worth by only 5%. This calculational difference plus the measured to calculated difference resulted in the 10% review criteria on the reference bank to be exceeded by 0.2%. As required by the startup test program (4) and by WPS design verification procedures, a documented review was pe rfo rmed . The measurements and calculations were examined in light of the startup test results.
. The power distribution measurements exhibited a small radial in-out disagreement from calculations, as can be seen by clone examination of figure 5.1. The measured power distribution indicates slightly more power is produced on the core periphery than was predicted, which would influence control rod worths. The calculated reference bank was shifted from control Bank C to control Bank A, by adjusting the calculated radial power distribu-tion to eliminate the measured to predicted in-out differ-ences. The re-analysis values are presented in Table 2.2 along with the originally predicted values. The re-analysis resulted in meeting the review criteria for the reference bank with no impact on the total inferred rod worth. The acceptance criteria was met before and after re-analysis. The results of this review were presented to the plant operations and review committee (PORC) along with all other Cycle 9 startup physics test results during meeting
#83-57, item 83-366.
2.3 Shutdown Margin Evaluation Prior to power escalation a shutdown margin evaluation was made to verify the existence of core shutdown capability. The minimum shutdown margins at beginning and end of cycle are presented in Table 2.3. A 10% margin is allowed in
- the calculation of rod worth in these shutdown margin analyses. Since the measured rod worths resulted in less than a 10% difference from predicted values, the analysis in Table 2.3 is conservative and no additional evaluations were required.
TABLE 2.1 KEWAUNEE CYCLE 9 RCCA DROP TIME MEASUREMENTS HOT ZERO POWER All Westinghouse Exxon Fuel Fuel Fuel Average Dashpot Delta T (Sec) 1.283 1.350 1.281 Standard Deviation 0.025 0.000 0.022 Average Rod Bottom Delta T (Sec) 1.806 1.783 1.807 Standard Deviation 0.038 0.000 0.038 1 l l l i
TABLE 2.2 KEWAUNEE CYCLE 9 RCCA BANK WORTH
SUMMARY
Rod Swap Measured WPS Method Worth Predicted Difference Percent RCCA Bank (PCM) Worth (PCM) (PCM) Difference D 897.0 865.0 +32.0 +3.7 C 891.0 931.0* -40.3 -4.3 B 726.3 761.0 -34.7 -4.6 A 974.5 884.0 +90.5 +10. 2 SA 621.3 585.0 +36.3 +6.2 SB 629.2 585.0 +44.2 +7.6 Total 4739.3 4611.0 +128.3 +2.8 Rod Swap Measured WPS Method Worth Re-analysis Difference Percent RCCA Bank (PCM) Worth (PCM) (PCM) _ Difference D 897.0 882.0 +15.0 +1.7 C 891.0 904.0 -13.0 -1.4 B 726.3 753.0 -27.0 -3.6 A 974.5 913.0* +61.0 +6.7 SA 621.3 579.0 +42.0 +7.2 SB 629.2 579.0 +50.0 +8.6 Total 4739.3 4610.0 +128.0 +2.8
- Calculated Reference Bank
, l
FIG. 2.1
; ' i l .;
- iI l i
i I I ! y I I. I
'l ' ! , I. L I L : i ..
..[. . .
. . . ._ . i . . i I, . (
. . . _ .! .. _! .. ._i ,
. - . . 4._ [ . [. . _[. _ . _.._ _u. ..
. .i.; .g _ ;. ... 1 . , . CONTROL BANK A l i i i
'i -1 i l' '
; INTEGRAL ROD WORTH .
.._n. . _..
.. }. .
.7. _.. _. .u2,. ._
... MEASURED """ v v v i-1200
. ' .j!
, PRED ICTED 1 a t
. _ ._A . .
m .. ..e. e e u -e.ee . e.- . g.g ..e.g, e. . g m. . , .e. . .. -q . . .
? 1000 -
. l.. .
.+.5. . !
!4. ' '
v e . . . _ . ..=- - . .. = ..4 4, . .., . . .. . . . ._. .. . i . i %w. . . . . m m : ; 4 7. .
--i- %
I- !!
..p.. d li?
I p .
~
=.22. . . %. -.. -', . , . .- -
.. L. .
...). ,
7 2:C3 O
. . e. .1_ _ . .
_r_. .i _.h4J's l \- g% i
.1 _ . ._.
' l 4 ,
3 ; g .
. ,r , , ; ,
_....a_..... ._ ._. _ ..
._ _ . _ . . . . . . . . - . ...a. . . _ .
. b. . .. .. .. . . .
g 600 ma .3 w . .; a
. .i .
i n
.I'
.u W I i t 1 t-p %. r 2:
m --=
'ii- . . . . .
--{~
- ik . . .
-t-I I
t .
\[ r--y::',
~
n*. . ' 400 'y m s . y.1
._.p_ ..1. . . .
200 4 ' 5
=%
r
= e-m; g% _:
s 3.,= . 4 . . - i i
... p u
.gi. .j._ {
e7i - i. x, .,_
- v t_. -
I_.. !
._p . . _ . . . . ..7
%. % i
. 2. .
0 20 11 0 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 __200 220 l STEPS WITHDRAWN
FIG. 2,2 __ ,. ,,___.._,_c 7 , .
- p. ..' ;. ..p ' ' ' ' ,'
{ . {.. .j. .. q. .
' i i i . . .
,! ! , i
- KEWAUNEE CYCLE 9
._t.. . . . . . . .
_.j .. 4 . . ;, .
... . {._ ; _ . . .
_.4. CONTR0L BANK A 7
- i
' ' ' I } _. . .'
_. 4.. l ; j._ _ i _j. .. .
! DIFFERENTIAL R0D WORTH 7
. [. . i.
7.
.* i MEASURED v v v
. .. m.. _ _. .. .. _. ._..= .= = .. # . . . ..
.=
PREDICTED
-t-e rNa a -. .. ._ . .
. . . . . .=_. .a _. . _ ..g %
. ... .u _J .. y T; w
r f .<: N L. ; 1
. i J._
.l..
..j..
1 [b f aL {.. t , . .
% i _L_ .-
g
#e
$ . _= +.
.. ._.{...
. . . . . . . __= . . .. . . ..
...,. .. ._... .y ; . . _
4..ge .. . j .J l s . c E _.
. .m.. .. ' I.:_ . . _ ,
-/ % ].. j I-
[.7 ! m _ ___. ! i l _ _. . .. m._ . . . q._
' x il j .
j i . i- _7 .. . .,_ . . ._ .- _ = u .__. _ . . _.. . .u.... j ... i
..p i
. _. _)..
.. 4..
p [ ,_ _ ._
.=._;s +_ . . ;. _
s 11. . j ..\
._{.= .._q.
7_. 3 e -t i-y __.
+ . ._
4._ ..+ 4 , _. ._. .._ .=. m.. ... u#_ . . .z ._ _. .. .._ _. y _ !. _.o.p w ~ t
% 1
.l.
, i P l 2 4l .._.
. ... . . . . _.L . . __; .. . . .. .._ . . . _ . _. . i m i l. i ! - ._ f.
- ? . i
. i ., . ,
r> -- 1 A '~ i i j i . _}_ p 4: _ :=..
.g.
.. . . _ ._ . A .. ; ..
- l. . .
..} .. 7
;.. .. y .
; l j "T
. t._ .
. i_ __. . _ . . g . .;.w2_= u .t- - -b" - - -
- - - * - - -i---~ ;
1-
'f.
.. .l., _i, - ', . p. i -
y .
. ; }
m
+=
-f _p yI k y f k h 5
^
^
f- -t- l
,~T
~
fp_ .L. ._ _ __ . _ . _ _.j__:. 4 . _ . . _ . .. 0 20 40 60 11 103 12J 143 160 180 200 220 STEPS WITHDRAWN
1 TABLE 2.3 KEWAUNEE CYCLE 9 MINIMUM SHUTDOWN MARGIN ANALYSIS BOC EOC RCCA Bank Worths (PCM) __ N 6228 6909 N-1 5400 6158 Less 10 Percent 540 616 Sub Total 4860 5542 Total Requirements (Including Uncertainties) 2360 3172 Shutdown Margin 2500 2370 Required Shutdown Margin 1000 2000
,3_ . O BORON ENDPOINTS AND BORON WORTH MEASUREMENTS 3.1 Baron Endpoints During rod movements to measure control rod worth and
, differential boron worth, the-dilution was stopped near the fully inserted position of control Bank A to obtain a boron endpoint measurement. The boron concentration was allowed to stabilize and the just critical boron concen-tration was determined for the configuration desired. Table 3.1 lists the measured and WPS predicted boron endpoints for the RCCA bank configurations shown. The results indicate a -43 PPM difference for the measured all
- rods out endpoint, a -41 PPM difference under the " Bank A In" configuration, and a -42 PPM difference under the
" Bank C In" configuration. The acceptance criteria on the all rods out boron endpoint is + 100 PPM, thus, the boron
[ endpoint comparisons are considered acceptable. 3.2 Differential Boron Worth t j The differential boron worth was calculated by dividing the worth of control Bank A by the difference in boron endpoint measurement of the corresponding bank out and l j bank in configuration. Table 3.2 presents a comparison 1 between measured and predicted boron concentration change and differential boron worth. The boron concentration , change shows good agreement. The differential boron worth
- shows poor agreement due to the difference between
measured and predicted reference bank worth discussed in section 2.2.1. No acceptance criteria is applied to these comparisons. 3.3 Boron Letdown The measured boron concentration data for the first few days of power operation is corrected to nominal core conditions and presented versus cycle burnup in Figure 3.1. The predicted boron letdown curve is included for comparison. J t 4 _ _ _ . _ . _ , . .~ ...__. . ___ - _ . _ . . . _ - _ _ _ _ _ . __ _ . . - _ - . . . - -
i l TABLE 3.1 KEWAUNEE CYCLE 9 RCCA BANK ENDPOINT MEASUREMENTS RCCA Bank Measured WPS Predicted Difference Configuration Endpoint (PPM) Endpoint (PPM) (PPM ) All Rods Out 1214 1257 -43 Bank A In 1112 1153 -41 Bank C In 1103 1145 -42
TABLE 3.2 KEWAUNEE CYCLE 9 DIFFERENTIAL BORON WORTH RCCA CB CB Bank Change Change Percent Configuration Measured Predicted Difference (PPM) (PPM) ARO to A Bank In 102 104 -1.9 RCCA Measured Predicted Percent Bank Boron Boron Difference Configuration Worth Worth (PCM/ PPM) (PCM/ PPM) ARO/A Bank In -9.6 -8.5 +12. 9 b
5-11-83 THROUGH 6-14-83~ DEPLETION OF CHEM. SHIM a CYCLE 9 g KEWAUNEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT E a 0
- o ,s ce O
C o
.* a
\
~h [
n w E is M h "o9 D
'"MN 28 N
N s N, o 9 N N m N x A
,E N N
5 ' N N-E I N i .00 10.00 2'O.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 90.00, 100.00 110.00 120.00 130.00 140.00 150.00 CYCLE BURNUP (MWD /MTU) m10
4.0 ISOTHERMAL TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENT The measurement of the isothermal temperature coefficient was accomplished by monitoring reactivity while cooling down and heating up the reactor by manual control of the steam dump valves. The temperature and reactivity changes were plotted on an X-Y recorder and the temperature coefficient was obtained from the slope of this curve. Core conditions at the time of the measurement were Bank A slightly in, all other RCCA banks full out, with a boron concentration of 1209 PPM for both the heatup and cool-down. These conditions approximate the HZP, all rods out core condition which yields the least conservative (least negative) isothermal temperature coefficient measurement. Table 4.1 presents the heatup and cooldown core conditions and compares the measured and predicted values for the isothermal temperature coefficient. The review criterion (4) of i:3 PCM/ Degrees F was met.
TABLE 4.1 KEWAUNEE CYCLE 9 ISOTHERMAL TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENT Cooldown , Tave Start 546.6 Degrees F Tave End 532.0 Degrees F Bank A 192 Steps Boron Concentration 1209 PPM Measured WPS Predicted ITC ITC Difference (PCM/Deg F) (PCM/Deg F) (PCM/Deg F)
-8.9 -6.6 -2.3 Heat Up Tave Start 532.0 Degrees F Tave End 537.4 Degrees F Bank A 206 Steps Boron Concentration 1209 PPM Measured WPS Predicted ITC ITC Difference (PCM/Deg F) (PCM/Deg F) (PCM/Deg F)
-7.6 -6.0 -1.6
5,.O POWER DISTRIBUTION 5.1 Summary of Power Distribution Criteria Power distribution predicticns are verified through data recorded using the incore detector system and processed through the INCORE computer code. The computer code calculates FON and FDHN which are limited by technical , specifications. These parameters are defined as the acceptance criteria on a flux map (except for low power) (4). The review criterion for measurement is that the percent difference of the normalized reaction rate integrals of symmetric thimbles do not exceed 10% at low power physics test conditions and 6% at equilibrium conditions (4). The review criterion for the prediction is that the standard deviation of the percent differences between i measured and predicted reaction rate integrals does not exceed 5%. l The review criteria for the INCORE calculated quadrant power are that the quadrant tilt is less than 4% at low power physics test conditions and less than 2% at equili-l I brium conditions (4). I l l
5.2 Power Distribution Measurements Table 5.1 identifies the reactor conditions for each flux map recorded at the beginning of Cycle 9. Flux map 901 conditions were zero power, but not included in the table. Only 22 thimbles were recorded and mapping was terminated because of a brief opening of a steam generator safety valve. Flux map 902 was recorded as the hot zero power flux map. Table 5.2 identifies flux map peak FDHN and minimum margin FON. This table addresses acceptance criteria by verify-ing that technical specifications limits are not exceeded. The Cycle 9 flux maps met all acceptance criteria. Table 5.3 addresses the established review criteria for the flux maps. All review criteria were met except the l review criterion of ' standard deviation of the percent difference between measured and predicted reaction rate f integrals' for flux map 902. The failure to meet this l review criterion was reviewed by PORC (meeting 83-57, item l l 83-366). l It was concluded that exceeding the review criterion was j not caused by a model or core loading anomaly. The reason the review criterion was not met is due to small absolute ! differences on the core periphery (H-1 & A-8) which are
x .. _
, s M n calculated as large-percenti differences between measured and predicted. These_large percent differences are heavily weighted in the. .standard-deviation calculation. -
.= -
Figure 5.1 shows the measured and' predicted reaction rate integrals for the 35 ' measured core locations and the percent differences between measured and predicted. The graphic displays of power distributions measured for representative flux maps are exhibited in' Figures 5.2 through 5.6. r
\
/
I 4
~+
s W. s f 4
=
- - - , , ., . . ~ , , - .-_, - , . , - . . . , _ . . , . ,..n.,.,.w, - ,--n-- --4 ,- - --n- .
, e !
1, i
- t , .g, x
, '7
~
, TABLE 5.1 FLUX'MA? CNRONOLOGY AND REACTOR CHARACTERISTICS Percent Boron D Rods Exposure
~'
Mag Date-Time, Power Xenon PPM Steps MWD /MTU 902 '5/12/83-0422 0 0 1205 194 0
* - 903 5/14/83-1720 25 0 1196 195 0 904 5/16/83-0838 40 63% EQ. 956 182 0
~
. . 905 - 5/19/83-1529 75 EQ. 797 221 95 906 5/20/83-0821 75 EO. 791 211 95 907 5/20/83-1328 75 EQ. 791 198 95 1 908 5/20/83 1614 75 EQ. 791 187 95 909 5/21/83-0833 75 EQ. 791 163 95 910 5/23/83-0855 87 EQ. 765 216 193 911 5/24/83-0845 100 EQ. 736 228 229 d I
/
t
/
I , 5 OO 4
- 4 /
f p, _ .-. , - , , , - , - ..- - - - ,
TABLE 5.2 VERIFICATION OF ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA 1 Flux Core Map Location FQN Limit l 6 902 K-10ED,19 2 . 6'5 4.28 1 , 903 D-llDJ,20 2.38 4.29 904 D-llDJ,24 2.25 4.34 905 K-04JD,23 2.06 2.89 906 C-10EK,33 2.08 2.95 907 K-0 4JD, 36 2.15 2.87 908 K-0 4JD, 3 7 2.20 2.8R 909 C-10EK,36 2.27 2.87-910 K-0 4JD, 24 2.03 2.49 911 K-04J D,34 2.04 2. Flux Core Map Location FDHN Limit 902 K-lOED 1.56 1.70 903 D-llDJ 1.55 1.70 904 C-10EK 1.54 1.70 905 K-04JD 1.50 1.63 906 K-0 4JD 1.50 1.63 907 K-04JD 1.51 1.62
. ' 908 K-0 4JD 1.52 1.62
/ 909 K-04JD 1.52 1.62 910 K-04JD 1.50 1.59 4 911 K-04JD 1.49 1.55 f
FON and EDHN include appropriate uncertainties and penalties.
<s ,
Limit on FQN is a function of Core' Power, Axial Location, and Fuel-Rod Exposure.
. Limit on FDHN is a function of Core Power and Assembly Burnup.
i
! r g i .
I TABLE 5.3 VERIFICATION OF REVIEW CRITERIA Flux (a) Maximum (b) Standard (c) Maximum Map Percent Deviation Quadrant Difference Tilt 902 4.9 5.5 (d) 2.0 903 4.7 3.1 1.6 904 3.9 3.1 1.2 905 4.3 2.9 , 1.0 906 4.0 2.8 0.9 907 4.0 2.8 0.9 908 3.8 2.8 0.9 909 3.8 2.9 0.9 910 2.5 2.8 0.8 911 5.1 2.8 0.7 (a) Maximum Percent Difference between symmetric thimbles for measured reaction rate integrals. Review criteria is 10% at low power. Review criteria is 6% at equilibrium power. (b) Standard Deviation of the percent difference between measured and predicted reaction rate integrals. Review criteria is 5%. i (c) Percent Maximum Quadrant Tilt from normalized calculated quadrant powers. Review criteria is 4% at low power, 2% at equilibrium power. l (d) Review criterion exceeded. l l
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 0.447~ Q 0.371 . 20.49 0.976 1 S2' B LOOP B 5.63 LOOP R, 0 444 1 115 1.039 0 499 0.479 1 080 1 040 0.504 { -7 31 3.24 -0 10 -0 99 1 050 1 268 D t cS2 2 28
-3.76 0 03 0 834 1 270 1 104 o 837 2 28 2 87 E
-0.36 -0.86 1 56 1 261 1 256 1 005 f 1.280 1.265 0.953
-1 48 -0.71 5.46 1 045 1 237 1.251 1 136 1 179 0 682 g 1.070 1.260 1.275 1 157 1 152 0.643 0
-2 34 -1 83 -1.80 -1 82 2-34 6.07 0 429 1 060 1 254 1 242 H '72 2 o8o 1 28t 2 232 15.63 -1.05 -0.56 0.81 1.098 1 139 1 018 1 151 1 157 1 042
{ -4.60 -1.56 -2 30 1.027 1.233 1 050 0.000 2 SS 232 1 72 o-J -6.30 0.08 -1.21 0.00 o 1.037 1 159 K LOOP B / 1 cst
-4 95 1 182 0.61 N LOOP A 0.551 0 917 0 519 0.890
{ 6.17 3 03 0.679 0 643 3 5.60 0 CALCULATED R.R.I 4--- PREDICTED R.R.! O PERCENT DIFFERENCE F.M. 902 CALC./PRED. REACTION RATE INTEG. 6 . L FIGURE 5.1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 t 0 361 0.768 0 412 0.342 0 679 0 342 [] 5.47 13.16 20.43 0 489 0 994 1 021 1 257 1.045 1 014 0.525 528 S8' 2 2 S88 S 528 B LOOP 8 -7 34 5 47 5 47 9.58 7.89 7.63 -0.62 / LOOP A
\ 0 448 1 130 0 974 1 130 1 169 1 135 0.980 1 198 0.478 0 483 1 206 0.967 1 121 1 135 1 121 0 967 1.206 0 483
[ 0 70 0.78 2.97 1 24 g
-7.34 -5 62 1.39 -0 63 -1 12 l 0 508 1.158 0 962 1.097 1 198 1 328 1 229 1 141 1 019 1 200 0.522 g 0 528 1 206 1 018 1 125 1.215 1 317 1 215 1 125 1 018 1 206 0.528
-3.77 -3.95 -5 53 -2 00 -1 42 0.85 1 17 1 45 0 10 0 14 -1 12 0 939 0.963 1 094 1 088 1 286 1.097 1 302 1.114 1 142 0.999 0 993 0.943 0.967 1 125 1.110 1.305 1.102 1 305 1,110 1.125 0.967 0.943
{ -0 39 -0 39 -2 72 -2 13 -1.46 -0.43 -0 20 0.35 1 47 3 37 5.36 0 337 0 955 1.104 1 193 1 284 1 219 1 297 1.221 1 299 1 222 1 156 1 013 0 361 f 0 342 0 969 1 122 1 215 1 305 1 237 1.313 1 237 1 305 1.215 1 122 0 969 0 342
-1 43 -1 45 -1.51 -1 79 -1 61 -1 50 -1 22 -1.33 -0.48 0.62 3 08 4.54 5.61 0.723 1.185 1.111 1.292 1.083 1.290 1.050 1.298 1.095 1.322 1 166 1.198 0.717 0.679 1 147 1 135 1 317 1 103 1.313 1.062 1 313 1.103 1.317 1.135 1 147 0.679 0
{} 8.54 3.32 -2 15 -1.87 -1.83 -1 78 -1 14 -1 13 -0 73 0.35 2.74 4.49 5 63 0.367 1.005 1 098 1.180 1.267 1.203 1 295 1.220 1 297 1 212 1 124 0 987 0 362 [j 0 342 0.S69 1.122 1 215 1 305 1 237 1 313 1 237 1 305 1.215 1.122 0.969 0.342 7.33 3.69 -2.14 -2.86 -2.89 -2.73 -1 39 -1.36 -0.61 -0.29 0 18 1 91 5.84 0 965 0 926 1 076 1 058 1 264 1.093 1.295 1 106 1 114 0 956 0 920 0 943 0 967 1 125 1 110 1 305 1 102 1 305 1 110 1 125 0.967 0.943 { 2.34 -4.22 -4.38 -4.69 -3.16 -0 82 -0 77 -0.32 -1 00 -1 09 -2.38 0.494 1 136 0 963 1 070 1 192 1.312 1 211 1 117 1 000 1 184 0.516 0 528 1.206 1 018 1 125 1 215 1.317 1 215 1 125 1 018 1.206 0.528 J -6 43 -5.78 -5 38 -4.85 -1 93 -0.38 -0 36 -0 68 -1 00 -1 85 -2.38 0.474 1 184 0 971 1 127 1 138 1 134 0 972 1 215 0 477 o 488 2 285 2 2o8 K LOOP 8 / __-1.86 228
-1 79 887 0.47 2 222 0.52 0 26 2 222 1 12 887 0.57 0.75 8 48'
-1 32 N LOOP A 0.533 0 950 0 998 1 182 0 997 0 970 0 544 0 528 0 943 0.968 1 147 0.968 0.943 0.528
[ 0 95 0.74 3.02 3.02 2 98 2 93 2.93 0.361 0.716 0.357
2 878 '2 M 5.50 5.50 4.24 l
l +--- MEASURED F0HN
+--- PREDICTED F0HN l +--- PERCENT 01FFERENCE
, FLUX MAP 902 1
-- O FIGURE 5.2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 0.369 0.744 0 394 0.359 0 699 0 359 Q 2.73 6 36 9.81 0.520 0 974 1 006 1 216 1 030 0 996 0 543 o 538 o S'8 " S' 2 25' 8 S8o 0 S*8 o 538 8 LOOP 8 -3.56 2.72 2 72 5.36 5.13 5.03 1 56 ' LOOF A 0 475 1 189 0.S92 1 126 1 156 1 140 0 998 1 212 0 499 0 493 1 194 0 972 1 125 1 140 1.125 0 972 1 194 0.493 { _
-3 57 -2 12 1 01 0.05 1.42 1 30 2.68 1 55 1 30 0.536 1 185 0 997 1 112 1 189 1 300 1 220 1 153 1 036 1 215 0 546 8 588 2 2S' 2o* 2 224 228 2.302 1 206 1.i24 1 018 1 194 0 539 0 -0 63 -0.78 -2.04 -1.08 -1 43 -0 12 1 14 2 59 1 82 1 80 1 30 0.969 0 993 1 109 1 090 1.267 1 082 1.273 1 119 1 150 0 998 0 977
" S*' o 872 28' 2- 8 2 287 2 SS 2 287 2 2o' 2 22' o 872 8 S*'
E 2 15 2 15 -1 33 -1.42 -1.59 -1 28 -1 06 1 14 2 33 2 67 3 03 0 358 0 978 1 109 1 170 1 253 1 190 1.258 1 206 1 287 1 206 1 145 1 006 0 374 0.359 0 980 1 125 1.205 1 287 1.219 1.290 1.219 1.287 1 205 1 125 0 980 0 359 f -0 25 -0.24 -2.40 -2 86 -2 67 -2.37 -1 70 -1 03 -0 01 0 07 1 74 2 82 4.25 0.707 1.163 1 104 1.264 1.063 1.254 1.039 1.280 1.093 1.297 1.154 1.186 0.730 g 0 699 1.154 1 140 1 302 1 097 1.290 1.052 1 290 1 097 1 302 1 140 1 154 0 699 0 1 09 0 77 -3 16 -2.93 -3 06 -2 85 -1 26 -0 78 -0 40 -0 39 1.24 2.00 4.35 0 364 0 991 1 090 1 164 1.243 1 190 1 272- 1 208 1 282 1 201 1 127 0 996 0.379 I 0.359 0.980 1 125 1 205 1 287 1.219 1 290 1 219 1 287 1 205 1 125 0 980 0 359 H 1.39 1 09 -3 16 -3.37 -3.39 -2.40 -1 38 -0.92 -0.39 -0.35 0.14 1 62 5.46 0 962 0 954 1.096 1 072 1 263 1 096 1 287 1 101 1 113 0.963 0 944 0 948 0 972 1 124 1.106 1.287 1 096 1 287 1 106 1 124 0 972 0 948 { 1.45 -1 85 -2.46 -3.05 -1.85 -0 03 0 02 -0 46 -1 01 -0 98 -0 50 0.529 1.178 0 999 1 103 1 186 1.298 1.203 1.108 0.396 1 170 0.537 j 0 539 1 194 1 018 1 124 1 206 1 302 1 206 1 124 1 018 1 194 0 539
-1.85 -1 31 -1 84 -1 89 -1 63 -0 33 -0.27 -1 38 -2.16 -2.03 -0.50 0.490 1 186 0.971 1 112 1 137 1 140 0 979 1 199 0 475
.972 1.izS 1.140 1.125 0.972 1.194 0 493 K
LOOP 8 /
*S'
-0 71 2 28'
-0.68 -0.13 -1.16 -0 25 1.36 0 67 0 39 -3 57 3 LOOP R 0 539 0 947 0.994 1 171 1.005 0 991 0 564 0.539 0 948 0 980 1 154 0 980 0.948 0.539
{ -0.09 -0 11 1 51 1 51 2.55 4.52 4 52 0.374 0 728 0.374 8 '8S 8 888 '5S M 4 15 4 16 4.35
+-- MEASURED F0HN 4-- PREDICTED F0HN 4--- PERLENT O!FFERENCE FLUX MAP 903
. 6: .L FIGURE 5.3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 0 377 0.749 0 397 g , 0 365 0 706 0.365 3 15 6.02 8.76 0 523 0 986 1 010 1 200 1 026 1 000 0 550 o 5'S o 858 878 2 248 o S7S o 858 o 54S B LOOP 8 -4.70 3 14 3.15 5.39 4 81 4e69 0 22 LOOP A 0.478 1 183 0 985 1 111 1 137 1 128 1 003 1.203 0.498 0.502 1 200 0.977 1 109 1 114 1 109 0 977 1 200 0 502 { -4.70 -3 07 0.83 0 17 2.03 1 55 2 67 0.22 -0 72 0.544 1.187 0.994 1.106 1 184 1.295 1 216 1 147 1 033 1.207 0.545 g- 0.549 1 200 1.025 1 119 1 199 1.288 1 199 1.119 1.025 1 200 0 549
-0.93 -1.11 -2 98 -1.15 -1.22 0 57 1 38 2 48 0.82 0.58 -0 71 0.981 1 003 1 103 1 096 1 269 1 087 1 267 1 114 1.141 0 995 0 974 0.956 0 977 1.119 1 119 1.285 1.100 1.285 1 110 1 119 0 977 0.956
{ 2 66 2.65 -1 41 -1.24 -1 26 -1 23 -1 59 0 32 1.95 1.92 1.90 0.367 0 983 1 101 1 172 1.258 1 200 1 269 1.206 1 281 1.199 1.121 1 004 0.380 0 365 0.979 1.109 1 199 1 285 1.223 1 293 1 223 1.285 1 199 1 109 0 979 0.365 f 0.41 0.41 -0 72 -2 22 -2.11 -1 88 -1 82 -1 41 -0.33 -0.01 1 06 2 52 4.13 0.716 1.160 1.101 1.274 1 073 1.262 1.047 1.276 1.092 1 282 1 120 1.175 0.737 1.146 0 706 0, g 0 706 1 146 1.114 1 288 1.101 1 293 1 067
-1.89 1 293
-1 29 1.101
-0.84 1 288
-0 48 1 114 0 56 2 56 4.33 1 42 1 23 -1 12 -1 12 -2.54 -2 41 0.371 0.993 1 098 1 180 1.244 1 192 1 270 1 208 1 277 1.191 1.104 0 993 0.388
'85 o S'S 2 2oS 2 288 2 285 2 22' 2 29 1.223 1.2e5 1 199 1 109 0.979 0 365 H 1 70 1.42 -0 97 -1.62 -3.18 -2.56 -1.75 -1 19 -0.62 -0.67 -0 50 1 43 6.35 0 972 0 979 1 108 1.073 1.256 1 092 1.277 1 100 1 103 0 963 0 942 0 956 0.977 1 119 1.110 1 285 1 100 1 285 1.110 1 119 0 977 0.956
{ 1.72 0.27 -1.00 -3.38 -2.23 -0 68 -0.65 -0 94 -1 44 -1 44 -1 46 0.544 1.193 1 010 1.099 1 175 1.278 1.190 1 101 0.999 1 170 0.541 0 549 1 200 1 025 1 119 1 199 1 288 1 199 1 119 1 025 1 200 0.549 J -0.89 -0.55 -1 44 -1.81 -1.96 -0 78 -0 73 -1.65 -t 35 -2.45 -1 46 0 504 1 205 0 987 1 093 1.106 1 116 0 977 1 198 0 485 0.977 0 502 K
/
o So2 0.40 2 200 0 43 0.977 1.05 i.109
-1.42 1.114
-0.69 1 109 0.65 0.07 i.200
-0 14 -3.45 3 LOOP A LOOP 8 0.555 0.966 1 003 1 174 1 006 0.987 0 567 0 549 0.956 0.979 1 146 0.979 0 956 0 549
[ 1 17 1.12 2.42 2.43 2.73 3.32 3.32 0 388 0 750 0.383 385 'S 55 M 6 22 6 23 4.82 6 MEASURED F0HN 4--- PRE 0!CTED F0HN i4- PERCENT DIFFERENCE FLUX MAP 904 6 .L FIGURE 5.4 _ . _ _ _ _ _ m_ _~ _ _ __ _ __m. _ _ _ - . _ _ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 0.392 0 768 0 413 [] 0 380 0.724 0 380 3 03 5.96 8 73 0 530 0 977 1 020 1 228 1 032 0 987 0 548 B o 5d8 S'8 8 SSo 27 8 SSo o S'8 o 548 LOOP 8 -3 30 3 04 3.03 4 92 4.18 4 08 0.07 y LOOP R-
\ 0 483 1 138 0 981 1.122 1 199 1 130 0 991 1 186 0 497
[] 0.500 1 165 0.974 1 121 1 182 1.121 0.974 1 185 0 500
-3.30 -2.34 0 79 0 07 1.47 0.82 1 77 0 06 -0 46 0 547 1 182 0.987 1.089 1 180 1.297 1 205 1 122 1 015 1 169 0 545
[] 0.548 1 185 1.010 1 104 1 197 1 298 1 197 1 104 1.010 1.185 0.548
-0 07 -0.24 -2.29 -1.37 -1 45 -0.08 0 69 1 62 0.47 0.36 -0.46 0 976 1 003 1 088 1 089 1.252 1 089 1 253 1 106 1 118 0 989 0 967
{ 0.948 0 974 1 104 1.105 1 271 1 104 1.271 1 105 1 104 0 974 0.948 2 97 2.98 -1 47 -1.44 -1 49 -1.39 -1 38 0 07 1 22 1 60 1 99 0 382 0.995 1 126 1 178 1.246 1 189 1 254 1 199 1 271 1 199 1-129 1 011 0.394 [T 0.380 0 991 1.121 1.197 1.271 1.213 1.278 1 213 1 271 1 197 1 121 0 991 0.380 0 42 0.41 0.41 -1 60 -2 00 -2 02 -1 85 -1 14 0 02 0.15 0.74 2 05 3.55 0 73E 1.179 1.175 1.293 1.079 1.248 1.052 1.267 1.101 1.296 1 188 1.194 0.751 0.725 1 170 1 182 1 298 1 105 1 279 1.070 1 279 1 105 1.298 1 182 1.170 0 725 b) ' {} 1 04 0 79 -0.63 -0 37 -2.33 -2 39 -1 66 -0.94 -0 39 -0 13 0 48 2 06 3.70 0 385 1 000 1 115 1 178 1 225 1 170 1 254 1 204 1.271 1 191 1 115 1 000 0.400 [j 0 380 0 991 1 121 1 197 1 271 1.213 1.278 1 213 1 271 1 197 1.121 0.991 0 380 1.32 0.97 -0.51 -1 58 -3 60 -3.57 -1.86 -0.73 -0.02 -0.47 -0.54 0.94 5.13 0 964 0 978 1 091 1 060 1.219 1.102 1.269 1 095 1 087 0 959 0 935 0 948 0 974 1 104 1 105 1 271 1 104 1 271 1 105 1.104 0 974 0.948 { 1 69 0 43 -1.14 -4 11 -4.11 -0 19 -0.19 -0 90 -1 52 -1 51 -1 34 0 548 1 171 1 000 1 086 1.167 1.294 1 194 1 084 0 982 1.134 0 541 J- 0 548 1 165 1 010 1.104 1 197 1 298 1 197 1 104 1.010 1 165 0 548 0 02 0 49 -0.96 -1 59 -2 51 -0 29 -0.23 -1 78 -2.73 -2.62 -1.33 0 505 1.179 0 990 1 111 1 178 1 131 0 974 1 161 0 480 [( 0.500 1 165 0 974 1 121 1 182 1 121 0 974 1 165 0.500 LOOP 8 / 1.12 1.16 0.557 1.69 0 964
-0.93 1 010
-0.35 1 193 0.93 1 015 0 03 0 981
-0.30 0 567
-3.90 LOOP A
[ 0 548 0 948 0.990 1 170 0 990 0 948 0 548 1 75 1 72 1.99 2.00 2.50 3.47 3 47 0.399 0.760 0 396 fj - 0 380 0.724 0 380 4 89 4.90 4 21 i MEASURED F0HN
+--- PREDICTED FDHN 4--- PERCENT O!FFERENCE FLUX MRP 905 6_n[a c-<>r D FIGURE 5.5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 0 400 0 775 0 420 p 0.387 0.730 0.387 3 49 6 12 8 63 1 0 537 0 981 1.025 1.222 1.030 0 985 0 550 B o 55' " S*' 8 88 8' SS S48 55' LOOP 8 -2 87 3 48 3.48 4.97 4.03 3 91 -0 52 LOOP A O.490 1.129 0 983 1 122 1 197 1 130 0.992 1 151 0 498
[ 0.505 1.157 0.977 1 121 1.178 1.121 0 977 1.157 0 505 , -2 89 -2.43 0.69 0 10 1 63 0.78 1.60 -0 52 -1.48 0 556 1.161 0.988 1 090 1 177 1 292 1.202 1 122 1.012 1 154 0.545 D o 553 2 257 2 o22 2 2o8 2 S' 2 2So 2 18' 2 2o8 2 o22 2 257 o 558 0 49 0.32 -2 40 -1 46 -1.40 0 12 0 66 1.41 -0 01 -0.29 -1 48 0 983 1 013 1.091 1 095 1 251 1.097 1 255 1.111 1 116 0 987 0 959 { 0.948 0 977 1 106 1 109 1 267 1 107 1.267 1 109 1 106 0 977 0 948 i 3.68 3.68 -1.39 -1 22 -1 24 -0 94 -0 96 0.22 0 95 1.01 1 09 4 0 391 1.002 1 119 1.172 1 246 1 195 1 258 1.195 1 259 1.185 1 126 1 005 0 399 f 0 387 0 991 1.121 1 193 1.267 1.211 1.274 1.211 1 267 1 193 1 121 0.991 0 387 1 1.09 1.08 -0 17 -1 74 -1.62 -1 33 -1 22 -1 35 -0.66 -0.65 0.44 1 75 3 02 4 0.737 1.172 1 164 1 277 1.087 1.253 1.063 1.260 1 100 1.281 1.182 1 185 0.753 g 0 730 1 164 1 178 1 290 1.108 1.274 1 075 1.274 1.108 1 290 1 178 1 164 0.730 0 0 92 0.70 -1 16 -1 04 -1.92 -1 62 -1 10 -1 08 -0 69 -0.71 0 34 1.80 3.19 0 391 0 999 1 109 1 170 1 230 1.180 1 255 1 194 1 259 1.183 1 116 1 000 0.406 y 0.387 0 991 1 121 1.193 1 267 1 211 1.274 1.211 1 267 1.193 1.121 0 991 0 387 1 14 0.84 -1 05 -1 89 -2 91 -2.58 -1.47 -1.41 -0.62 -0.85 -0.48 0.91 4.96 0 960 0 978 1 092 1.067 1 232 1 101 1.260 1.102 1 090 0 963 0 933 { 0 948 0 977 1 106 1 109 1 267 1.107 1.267 1 109 1.106 0 977 0 948 1.19 0 12 -1 22 -3.75 -2 75 -0.59 -0 51 -0.60 -1 40 -1 40 -1 56 0 551 1.162 1.003 1 093 1 168 1 280 1.186 1 090 0 986 1 128 0 544 j 0.553 1 157 1 012 1 106 1.194 1 290 1 194 1 106 1 012 1 157 0 553
-0 42 0.45 -0.85 -1.20 -2 19 -0.74 -0.66 -1.41 -2.57 -2.49 -1.55 0.511 1 171 0 996 1 109 1.174 1 133 0 980 1.158 0.488
" 5"5 2 257 877 2 222 2 178 2 222 2 57 "55 K
LOOP S / 1 15 1 20 1.95 -1.11 -0.31 1 06 877 0 39 0 10 -3.43 N LOOP A' O.564 0 967 1.009 1 186 1 015 0 984 0.574 L 8 558 S'8 8 SS 28' o SSo o 848 8 558 1.99 1.96 1 87 1 86 2.52 3.79 3.78 0.405 0.765 0.404 M 0 387 0.730 0 387 4 81 4.81 4.32 W MEASURED F0HN 4 PREDICTED F0HN 4---- PERCENT 01FFERENCE FLUX MAP 911 6__ - O FIGLTE 5.6
l 6_. 0_ REACTOR STARTUP CALIBRATIONS 6.1 Rod Position Calibration The rod position indicators are calibrated each refueling in accordance with an approved surveillance procedure. The calibration includes the followings a) The position signal output is checked at 20, 200 and 228 steps for all rods. b) The rod bottom lamps are checked to assure that they light at the proper rod height. c) The control room rod position indicators are calibrated to read correctly at 20 and 200 steps. d) The pulse-to-analog convertor alignment is checked. e) The rod bottom bypass bistable trip setpoint is checked. The' calibration was performed satisfactorily during the Cycle 9 startup; no problems or abnormalities were encoun-tered and site procedure acceptance criteria were met. At full power an adjustment was made to selected RPI channels to compensate for the temperature increase associated with power ascension. 6.2 Nuclear Instrumentation Calibration The nuclear instrumentation (NI) calibration was performed in accordance with the Kewaunee Reactor Test Program during the Cycle 9 startup (4). Several flux maps were performed over a range of axial offsets at approximately 75% power. The incore axial offset to excore axial offset ratio was generated for each detector from the data collected during the mappings. These ratios agreed well with previous results. The NI's were then calibrated with a conservative incore axial offset-to-excore axial offset ratio of 1.7. I l I t I a I
7.0 REFERENCES
(1) " Reload Safety Evaluation Kewaunee Cycle IX," Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, February, 1983. (2) " Qualification of Reactor Physics Methods for Application to Kewaunee," Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, October, 1978. (3) " Reload Safety Evaluation Methods for Application to Kewaunee," Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, February, 1979. (4) " Reactor Test Program, Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant," Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, May, 1979. (Revised April 14, 1980) (5) " Generic Mechanical and Thermal Hydraulic Design for Exxon Nuclear 14 X 14 Reload Assemblies with Zircaloy Guide Tubes for Westinghouse 2-Loop Pressurized Water Reactors," Exxon Nuclear Corporation, November, 1978. (6) " Rod Exchange Technique for Rod Worth Measurement" and " Rod Worth Verification Tests Utilizing RCC Bank Interchange," Westinghouse Corporation, May 12, 1978. (7) "Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant Technical Specifications," Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Docket 50-305. g
. .o
. .. NRC-83-137 WISCONSIN P U B LIC S ERVICE CORPORATION RO. Box 1200, Green Bay, Wisconsin 54305 July 15, 1983 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention: Mr. S. A. Varga, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 1 Division of Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555
Dear Mr. Varga:
Docket 50-305 Operating License DPR-43 Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant Cycle 9 Startup Report In accordance with our practice of reporting the results of physics tests, we hereby submit 40 copies of the Kewaunee Nuclear Plant Cycle 9 Startup Report. Very truly yours, C. W. Giesler Vice President - Nuclear Power js cc - Mr. Robert Nelson, US NRC i US NRC, c/o Document Management Branch l Washington, D.C. 20555 l Enc. I ff9' u(e}}