ML16054A445
| ML16054A445 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Monticello  |
| Issue date: | 01/26/2016 |
| From: | Northern States Power Co, Xcel Energy |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML16054A376 | List:
|
| References | |
| L-MT-16-004 | |
| Download: ML16054A445 (31) | |
Text
Revision 22USAR APPENDIX DMONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 1 of 3APPENDIX DPRE-OPERATIONAL AND STARTUP TESTSI/mabTABLE OF CONTENTSSectionPageD.1Test Program Summary Description1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.1.1Construction Testing1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.1.2General Conduct of the Pre-Operational and Startup Testing2. . . D.1.2.1The Pre-Operational Testing3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.1.2.2Startup Testing3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.2Test Program Considerations1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.3Construction Tests1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.3.1General Scope1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.3.2Documentation of Test Results2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.3.2.1Electrical Construction Tests2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.3.2.2Mechanical Construction Test2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4Summary Of Pre-Operational Test Content1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1General Electrical APED Prepared Procedures1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.1Reactor Vessel Components1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.2Main Steam Safety and Relief Valves1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.3Control Rod Drive System1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.4Recirculation System and M-G Sets2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.5RHR System2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.6Reactor Water Cleanup System2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.7Standby Liquid Control System2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.8Core Spray System3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.9RCIC System3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.10Fuel Handling Equipment4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.11HPCI System5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.12Feedwater Control System5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2General Electric NID Prepared Procedures6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.1Reactor Protection System (RPS)6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.2TIP System6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.3Neutron Monitoring System Test6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.4Off-Gas7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.5Stack Monitoring7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FOR ADMINISTRATIVE USE ONLYResp Supv:CNSTPAssoc Ref:SR:2yrsNFreq:USAR-MANARMS:USAR-D.TOCDoc Type:Admin Initials:Date:9703 Revision 22USAR APPENDIX DMONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 2 of 3I/mabSectionPageD.4.2.6Environs Monitoring7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.7Area Rad Monitoring7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.8Rod Worth Minimizer (RWM)7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.9Liquid Process8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.10Steam Line8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.11Ventilation Exhaust Monitoring8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.12Rod Position Indication System (RPIS)8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3Bechtel Corp. Prepared Procedures9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.1Service Water Systems9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.2Fire Protection System9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.3Compressed Air System9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.4Make-up Demineralizer System9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.5Condensate and Demineralized Water Storage and TransferSystem10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.6Condensate Demineralizer System10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.7Condensate System and Hotwell Control10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.8Reactor Feedwater System11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.9Extraction and Feedwater Heater Control11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.10Reactor Building Cooling Water System11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.11Fuel Pool Cooling System11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.12Fuel Pool Filter/Demin System12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.13Traveling Screens and Screen Wash System12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.14Condenser Circulating Water-Cooling Tower System12. . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.15Condenser Vacuum and Off-Gas System12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.16Liquid and Solid Radioactive Waste13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.17Turbine and Auxiliary Systems14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.18Standby Diesel Generator System15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.19Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning System15. . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.20Primary Containment Atmospheric Control System16. . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.21Diesel Oil System16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.22Reactor Building Crane16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.5Startup And Power Test Program1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.5.1General Requirements1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.5.2General Procedures1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Revision 22USAR APPENDIX DMONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 3 of 3I/mabSectionPageD.5.3Fuel Loading and Tests at Atmospheric Pressure1. . . . . . . . . . . . . D.5.4Heatup From Ambient to Rated Temperature and Pressure3. . . . D.5.5From Rated Temperature to 1670 MWt Power4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Revision 26USAR D.1MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 1 of 4APPENDIX DPRE-OPERATIONAL AND STARTUP TESTSI/kabD.1Test Program Summary DescriptionThe Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (MNGP) is owned by Northern States PowerCompany, a Minnesota corporation (NSPM). NSP is a wholly owned utility operatingsubsidiary of Xcel Energy Corporation (Xcel Energy). Operating authority was transferred to Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation (NSPM) and approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in License Amendment 156.The prime contractor, General Electric was responsible for the design, engineering,furnishing, installation, testing, and placing into operation the machinery, apparatus,and equipment necessary for the complete nuclear powered steam turbo-generator plant. General Electric also had the contract responsibility which included the design, engineering, and construction of the necessary buildings and structures.The General Electric Company directed the pre-operational test program performedby General Electric, Northern States Power, and subcontractor (Bechtel) personnel.The startup test program was a joint effort by General Electric and Northern StatesPower. The responsibility for licensed operation during the program was assumed by Northern States Power under the technical direction of the General Electric Company.The following paragraphs describe the testing program activities and represents ageneral scope of the testing of the Monticello Plant.D.1.1Construction TestingConstruction testing covered a wide range of checks to determine that allcomponents were properly installed and adjusted according to the applicable manufacturers instructions, manufacturers drawings, AE drawings, control drawings(P and IDs and electrical installation drawings) and that the appropriate systemcleanliness had been established. These tests were performed by Bechtel personnel, subcontractors, or vendors under Bechtel direction. General Electric, as well as Northern States Power, had the opportunity to be present at all tests.
Construction tests results were made available to NSP and GE, and wereprerequisite to further testing.01197746 Revision 26USAR D.1MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 2 of 4I/kabD.1.2General Conduct of the Pre-Operational and Startup TestingPre-operational tests were intended to prove by as built test conditions that systemdesign criteria were satisfied. The test procedures were prepared by GeneralElectric or Bechtel Corporation depending upon system design responsibility. Theseprocedures were specific regarding intent, method, and operating requirements.
Summary descriptions of planned tests were supplied in Section 4 and Section 5 of this appendix.The contents of the procedures for this program generally included the following:1.The purpose and scope of the test.2.Prerequisites.3.The detailed procedures followed and a brief summary of the test method.
4.Clearly defined limitations for areas pertaining to reactivity and/or safety ofoperation.5.Cautions observed stating any difficulties peculiar to the tests which wereexpected.6.Remedial action to be taken if deviations from expected conditions occur.
7.Expected results and appropriate test limits.
8.Acceptance criteria (normally contained throughout the body of theprocedure).9.Identify special instrumentation required.
10.Any testing requiring the simulation of a plant parameter had the method tobe used detailed in the procedure.All General Electric and Bechtel approved procedures were submitted to the NSPOperations Committee for review. No pre-operational tests were run without approved procedures.Approved procedures were released to the personnel conducting the test. Ifchanges to the procedures were necessary, which were beyond the scope of thetest personnel, the test procedure was considered as unapproved and further review was necessary. Changes to the original procedure then required formal approval.Tests which could not be successfully completed because of improper equipment orinstrumentation, or malfunction of equipment or instrumentation were suspendeduntil satisfactory resolution of the shortcoming was completed. If these items cannot be resolved, additional Operations Committee review was necessary.
Revision 26USAR D.1MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 3 of 4I/kabAdditional testing, if required, was recommended by Bechtel, General Electric orNorthern States Power and was performed when formal approval was obtained.D.1.2.1The Pre-Operational TestingPre-operational test procedures were submitted to NSP for review by the Operations Committee. All questions relating to the procedures or the condition of the plant systems were resolved prior to performance of the test. The pre-operational test program was periodically reviewed with the Safety Audit Committee. If any member of the Safety Audit Committee or OperationsCommittee believed that any test procedure needed formal review by the SafetyAudit Committee, the review was conducted and the committee made appropriate recommendations.Pre-operational testing was performed by NSP operations personnel under thedirection of GE or Bechtel personnel. Procedure change policies were specified by the Operations Committee.Formal review by the Operations Committee of the test results and reports wasrequired before each test was considered complete. If sufficient cause was shown, any previously accepted plant system could have been considered as unacceptable and require further pre-operational type testing. All plant systems had to be operationally acceptable when the plant is transferred to NSP controlafter the power capability performance test.Certain pre-operational tests were completed after the initiation of the startuptesting; however, the complete pre-operational test program was reviewed by NSPOperations Committee and Safety Audit Committee as to completeness and statusprior to the initiation of any startup testing.D.1.2.2Startup TestingThe Monticello startup test program is defined and summarized in the Startup Test Specification document (22A2190) prepared and released by General Electric.
This document was reviewed by the Operations Committee and the NSP SafetyAudit Committee to determine if the scope of the startup testing met therequirements to safely startup the plant, gradually increased to full power operation. Additional testing could be recommended by NSP.The detailed test procedures were prepared in a General Electric Topical Report,22A2192, "Monticello Nuclear Plant Startup Test Procedures." Copies of this document was available at the Monticello Site approximately three months before fuel loading.The Startup Test Procedures were reviewed by the Operations Committee andSafety Audit Committee prior to initiation of the tests.
Revision 26USAR D.1MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 4 of 4I/kabThe startup tests were performed by NSP personnel under the technical directionof GE startup personnel. Significant deviations from expected test results requireda suspension of testing until the deviation was understood. Testing was notresumed until the Operations Committee had reviewed these deviations.The results of the startup testing program were continually evaluated to determineif additional testing was required to prove the safety of the reactor and plant operations. The results of all testing was formally reviewed by the OperationsCommittee and Safety Audit Committee before the tests were consideredcomplete. The startup tests were conducted at several power levels during the escalation of full power. Power level increases for testing up to 1469 MWt occurred prior to the Safety Audit Committee review of previous testing. However, Operations Committee review of previous test results was required beforeescalation to the higher power level. Operations at power levels between 1469MWt and 1670 were not performed until the Safety Audit Committee and the Operations Committee had reviewed the results of all testing up to and including the 1469 MWt power level.
Revision 22USAR D.2MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 1 of 1APPENDIX DPRE-OPERATIONAL AND STARTUP TESTSI/mabD.2Test Program ConsiderationsThe following key points were considered in developing the sequence of tests.1.Systems were sequenced for early testing and placed in routine operation toprovide necessary auxiliary services for other systems. Examples are plantelectrical systems, instrument air and make up water supply systems.2.Pre-operational testing was coordinated with construction to permit fuelloading as early as possible, without compromising nuclear safety or impeding construction work.3.Stringent controls of plant operation and maintenance work were requiredfollowing fuel loading. To minimize possible contamination problems, pre-operational testing was performed before fuel loading on all systems which could consequently be exposed to radioactive contamination.4.Pre-operational tests provided an important phase of the reactor plantoperators training program and were scheduled on key systems to permit maximum participation by all operators prior to NRC licensing examinations.5.Temporary construction power could be required for initial tests at thebeginning of the pre-operational test program. However, the use of temporary power and improvised set-ups was minimized.6.Electrical jumpers were used to facilitate pre-operational testing in someinstances, but their use was minimized and controlled by proper identificationof such jumpers by log book records. All jumpers were removed before fuelloading.7.Immediately prior to bringing fuel into the reactor building, the plant accesscontrol procedures for the reactor building before were enforced by the Plant Superintendent. No construction work was performed in the reactor building without the permission of the GE Operations Manager and the knowledgeand concurrence of the Radiation Protection Engineer. These controlscomplied with the NRC regulations pertaining to radiation safety. In addition, strict control was enforced on access to the control room, cable spreading room, and radioactive waste building. Other areas to be controlled were determined by the Operations Committee.FOR ADMINISTRATIVE USE ONLYResp Supv:CNSTPAssoc Ref:SR:2yrsNFreq:USAR-MANARMS:USAR-D.2Doc Type:Admin Initials:Date:9703 Revision 22USAR D.3MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 1 of 2APPENDIX DPRE-OPERATIONAL AND STARTUP TESTSI/mabD.3Construction TestsD.3.1General ScopeCertain testing requirements preceded pre-operational testing and were categorizedas construction tests. These tests were performed by Bechtel or GE with occasionalNSP support. Generally, a formal test was prepared. Reporting was in the form of quality control documentation and construction test results forms prepared by Bechtel. The Reactor Pressure Vessel Hydrostatic Test, and the Containment LeakTests, had reports following completion of the test.Construction testing included but was not limited to the following examples:a.Containment final leak rate testing.
b.System hydrostatic tests.
c.Chemical cleaning and flushing.
d.Wiring continuity checks.
e.Megger tests.
f.Electrical system tests to and including energizing e.g., checking grounding,relay checks, checking circuit breaker operation and control, continuitychecks, megger tests, phasing check, and energizing of buses.g.Initial adjustment and bumping of motors.h.Checked control and interlock functions of instruments, relays, and controldevices.i.Calibrated instruments and checked or set initial trip set points.
j.Pneumatic tests of instrument and service air system and blow out of lines.
k.Adjustments such as alignment, greasing, and tightening of bolts.FOR ADMINISTRATIVE USE ONLYResp Supv:CNSTPAssoc Ref:SR:2yrsNFreq:USAR-MANARMS:USAR-D.3Doc Type:Admin Initials:Date:9703 Revision 22USAR D.3MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 2 of 2I/mabl.Surveillance of proper equipment operation during pre-operational tests, asrequired. The primary intent of this item was to cover those instances wheremeasurements such as the above were required to ensure proper operation,but were not obtainable until the entire system was operated during pre-operational test. Examples included measuring motor current and voltage; bearing, lubricating oil, cooling water and seal temperatures; vibration; torque; rpm; etc. These measurements are primarily of importancefor protection of equipment, troubleshooting, or supplementing installedinstrumentation.m.Verified relief and safety valve settings.n.Complete tests of motor operated valves including adjustment of motoroperator switches and limit switches, checked all interlocks and controls,measured motor current and operating speed, and checked leak-tightness ofstem packing and valve seat during hydrotests.o.Completed tests of air operated valves including checking all interlock andcontrols; adjusted limit switches, measured operating speed, checked leak-tightness of pneumatic operators, and checked for proper operation ofcontrollers, pilot solenoids, etc.D.3.2Documentation of Test ResultsD.3.2.1Electrical Construction TestsTest ET-1 specified that basic electrical test requirements for the distributionsystem up to and including the individual component breakers, megger tests,bumping of motors, stroking of valves and adjusting limit switches. Data sheetsET-2, ET-3, ET-4 provided the basic documentation for the electrical tests. Logic control circuits for each system were functionally checked and recorded on a red lined elementary diagram.D.3.2.2Mechanical Construction TestMechanical checks consisted of alignment, coupling, installation, lubrication, system hydrostatic or pressure tests, cleaning and flushing. Documentation of the above checks was available for review prior to the conduct of the applicable pre-operational test.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 1 of 16APPENDIX DPRE-OPERATIONAL AND STARTUP TESTSI/mabD.4Summary Of Pre-Operational Test ContentD.4.1General Electrical APED Prepared ProceduresD.4.1.1Reactor Vessel Componentsa.Verified calibration and tested reactor vessel flange leak detectioninstrumentation.b.Set reactor vessel stabilizers.c.Checked all reactor vessel thermocouples.d.Checked stud tensioner operation.D.4.1.2Main Steam Safety and Relief Valvesa.Safety and Relief valves were installed as received from the factory,where set points were adjusted, verified, and indicated on the valve.b.Verified proper operation of the remotely operated relief valves bothmanually and as part of the Automatic Pressure Relief System.c.Checked operation of vacuum breaker valves on the relief outlet lines.
d.Checked operation of all main steam isolation valves, checked both forproper isolation action and test operation.D.4.1.3Control Rod Drive Systema.Verified instrument calibration.b.Functional checkout of Reactor Manual Control System circuits.
c.Set and verified proper operation of rod control timing circuits.d.Verified alarm and inputs to RWM.e.Filled and vented CRD Hydraulic Systems.
f.Placed the system in operation and obtained pump performance data.g.Set systems pressures and flows.h.Stroked each drive and verified rod position indication.FOR ADMINISTRATIVE USE ONLYResp Supv:CNSTPAssoc Ref:SR:2yrsNFreq:USAR-MANARMS:USAR-D.4Doc Type:Admin Initials:Date:9703 Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 2 of 16I/mabi.Obtained friction data and measure rod scram time.j.Rod drift alarm circuit tests performed.D.4.1.4Recirculation System and M-G Setsa.Operated and verified leak tightness of all recirculation loop valves.
b.Verified control circuits and interlocks.
c.Verified instrument calibration and checked for proper response.d.Operated recirculation pumps within the limitations of cold waterconditions.D.4.1.5RHR Systema.Verified instrument calibration and checked set points.b.Checked operation of all motor operated valves.c.Checked interlocks in valve and pump control circuits.d.Measured system pressures where possible and determined flow ratesfrom pump characteristic curve for various modes of operation; i.e.,shutdown cooling, LPCI, test, vessel head cooling, and fuel pool backup.e.Measured closing time of isolation valves.D.4.1.6Reactor Water Cleanup Systema.Verified instrument calibration.b.Verified operation of valves and interlocks.c.Verified operation of demineralizer controls and charged demineralizerswith resins.d.Checked operation of cleanup recirculation pumps.e.Verified system flows and checked water quality and demineralizer exit.D.4.1.7Standby Liquid Control Systema.Verified instrument calibration setpoints.b.Filled the neutron absorber tank with demineralized water and operatedthe injection pumps, recirculating to the neutron absorber tank.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 3 of 16I/mabc.Checked the set point of the pump discharge relief valves.d.Checked the control circuits for neutron absorber injection valvesthoroughly before connecting to the valves. (Used a dummy resistance tosimulate the valve.)e.Fired the injection valves and measured pumping rates into the reactor.Replaced the firing cartridge and valve internals.f.Checked interlocks with the cleanup filter-demineralizer system thatensure isolation when the standby liquid control system is actuated.g.Checked operation of neutron absorber tank temperature controls airsparger.h.Filled test tank with demineralized water and operated the neutronabsorber injection pumps in simulated test mode, recirculating to the test tank.i.After the system had been demonstrated by foregoing tests, added therequired amount of neutron absorber material to the neutron absorptiontank. Mixed and sampled. This was done very shortly before fuelloading.D.4.1.8Core Spray Systema.Verified instrument calibration.b.Checked alarms, controls and interlocks including complete verification ofautomatic system starting controls.c.Operated pumps by recirculating to the torus in the test mode. Verifiedpump and system performance from manufacturers head-flow curves andmeasured system pressures.d.Checked operation of all motor operated valves.D.4.1.9RCIC Systema.Verified instrument calibration.b.Verified proper operation of controls interlocks.
c.Operated the turbine driven pump using heating steam.NOTE:System operation under design conditions wasdemonstrated during the Startup Testing.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 4 of 16I/mabD.4.1.10Fuel Handling EquipmentEquipment in this category was tested with dummy fuel or blade guideassemblies through dry run simulations of the required operations. This wasnot one coordinated test of a system, but consisted of many separate operations using different pieces of equipment. The equipment was tested on the operating floor, in the fuel storage pool, and both over and in the reactor vessel.a.Tests in the storage pool1.Installed fuel pool gates and filled pool with water.2.Checked fuel penetration machine with dummy fuel assembly. Thisalso checked auxiliary tools such as channel handling tool andchannel bolt wrench.3.Set up inspection equipment and checked with dummy fuelassembly.4.Checked fixed lights and movable underwater lights to assureadequate visibility for fuel and blade handling and transfer operations.5.Checked underwater vacuum cleaners.6.Operated refueling platform over storage pool. Checked allequipment on the refueling platform. Transferred fuel assembliesand control blades between storage racks with the grapple.
Checked all grapple controls and interlocks.7.Used jib crane to transport dummy fuel assemblies from storageracks with the grapple. Checked all grapple controls and interlocks.b.Tests Over Reactor Vessel1.Set service platform assembly on vessel flange. Mounted jib craneon service platform and used for installing, removing or shufflingdummy fuel assemblies, control blades and poison curtains.2.Raised water level in reactor well and checked leak-tightness ofvessel to drywell seal and drywell to pool seal. Lowered water leveland checked ability of fuel pool cooling system to drain these seals or associated low points.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 5 of 16I/mab3.Established best procedural methods and tools for:a)Removal and replacement of steam dryer.b)Removal and replacement of steam separator head.c)Removal of control curtains.d)Removal and replacement of fuel supports castings and controlrod blades.e)Removal and replacement of incore flux monitor strings.f)Removal and replacement of jet pump nozzles and risers(under water).All of the above tests recognized the shielding requirements of doing the jobhot and should attempt to simulate normal operating conditions.4.Transferred dummy fuel assemblies and control blades between thestorage pool and the reactor vessel, simulating a refueling operation.5.Obtained representative values of time required to do all operationsnormally in the critical path of a refueling outage.D.4.1.11HPCI Systema.Verified instrument calibration.b.Verified proper operation of controls interlocks.
c.Operated turbine driven pumps using heating system.NOTE:System operation under design conditions wasdemonstrated during Startup Testing.D.4.1.12Feedwater Control Systema.Verified instrument calibration.b.Simulated inputs of flow, level, and pressure to the control system todemonstrate proper control system response, including feedwater controlvalve motion.c.Checked steam leak detection system setpoints and operation.d.Demonstrated proper operation of failure modes.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 6 of 16I/mabD.4.2General Electric NID Prepared ProceduresD.4.2.1Reactor Protection System (RPS)Demonstrated that all components of the RPS operated correctly and theintegrated system functioned as specified. All system relays were checked by simulating inputs to their associated sensors and/or actually operated associated valves to trip position switches.D.4.2.2TIP Systema.Set core top and bottom limits, for each tube, into the correct DriveControl Unit Channel.b.Loaded TIP cables into the Drive Mechanism.c.Set flux amplifier sensitivities.d.Set recorder X-axis nulls into the Drive Control Units.
e.Demonstrated proper operation of each TIP System and associatedsubsystem, i.e., Drive Control Units, X-Y Recorders, Valve ControlMonitors, In-Core Monitors, Drive Mechanisms, Chamber Shields, BallValves and Indexers.f.Verified that Shear Valve squibs were intact.D.4.2.3Neutron Monitoring System TestThe following functions were verified:a.All neutron monitoring instruments were operable and in calibration.b.Integrity of all signal and high voltage cables.
c.All instruments had correct trip settings.
d.All interlocks and bypass functioned correctly.e.Trip annunciation was correct.f.Scram relay in the protection system panels, that operated as a functionof the neutron monitoring system, were operating correctly.g.Rod withdrawal permissive interlocks, that were a function of the neutronmonitoring system, operated correctly.h.Source and Intermediate Range retract drives functioned correctly.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 7 of 16I/mabi.LPRM, APRM, and RBM systems functioned correctly.D.4.2.4Off-Gasa.Verified that Off-Gas Monitors were operable, in calibration, had correcttrip settings and performed specified annunciators functions.b.Demonstrated that the Off-Gas hold-up system activated after a timedelay under the following conditions:1.Two Upscale Trips.2.Two Downscale Trips.3.One Upscale and one Downscale trip.c.Bugged the detector with a 10 mr/hr or larger gamma source.Determined LRM sensitivity from known source strength and geometry.D.4.2.5Stack Monitoringa.Verified that both Stack Gas Monitors were operable, in calibration, hadcorrect trip settings and performed specified annunciator functions Up orDownscale trips.b.Verified that Stack Gas Panel operated correctly including alarms.c.Verified that Purge Control and Source check network functionedcorrectly.d.Verified that the Process Radiation Sampler operated correctly.D.4.2.6Environs MonitoringDemonstrated or verified that all Environs Monitoring (Fixed Stations on Site)Stations were operable, in calibration, had correct trip settings and performedspecified annunciator functions (if any) on high or low trip.D.4.2.7Area Rad MonitoringDemonstrated or verified that all Sensor Converters, Trip and Indicator units, were operable, in calibration, had correct trip settings and performed specifiedannunciator functions on high or low trip.D.4.2.8Rod Worth Minimizer (RWM)a.Simulated rod position inputs into Rod Position Indication System (RPIS)and verified that the RWM received correct rod identification and position data.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 8 of 16I/mabb.Verified that the RWM Display Panel functioned correctly.c.Verified that the RWM initiated a rod block under the following conditions:1.Withdrawal error;2.Insert error.D.4.2.9Liquid ProcessVerified that Liquid Process Monitors and associated recorders were operable,in calibration, had correct settings and performed specified annunciator functions on Upscale or Downscale trips.D.4.2.10Steam Linea.Verified that all Steam Line Radiation Monitors were operable, incalibration, had corrected trip settings, performed specified annunciator functions on Upscale and Downscale trips, and operated correct scram relays in panel 9-15 and 9-17.b.Bugged the detector with a 10 mr/hr or larger gamma source.Determined LRM sensitivity from geometry and know source strength.D.4.2.11Ventilation Exhaust Monitoringa.Demonstrated that all ventilation exhaust monitors were operable incalibration, had correct trip settings and performed specified annunciator functions on Upscale and Downscale trips.b.Verified that Standby Gas Treatment and closure of the Reactor BuildingMain Vent System was initiated under the following conditions:Upscale trip on either channel.Two Downscale trips (one per channel).D.4.2.12Rod Position Indication System (RPIS)a.Simulated inputs to the RPIS.b.Verified that the full core display was correct for each rod and rod position.c.Verified that the correct 4-rod group was displayed when any rod wasselected.d.Verified rod digit alarm operation for each rod at least once.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 9 of 16I/mabD.4.3Bechtel Corp. Prepared ProceduresD.4.3.1Service Water SystemsThe test included the Service Water System, the RHR Service Water System,the Emergency Service Water System, and the Chlorination System.a.Verified instrument calibration.
b.Checked all alarms, interlocks, and valve operations.c.Demonstrated all system performance.D.4.3.2Fire Protection Systema.Operated diesel and electric driven fire pumps and checked performance.
b.Operated fire system jockey pump and screen wash pump backup andchecked performance.c.Checked all interlocks, remote controls, and automatic start features.D.4.3.3Compressed Air SystemThis system included the instrument and service air compressors, theinstrument air dryer, the distribution piping and service air blower.a.Checked set points for compressor control; manual, off, auto mechanicalunloading, and annunciator alarms.b.Measured capacity of each compressor and service air blower.
c.Checked dryer performance.d.Demonstrated system isolation interlocks.D.4.3.4Make-up Demineralizer SystemThe make-up system was placed inservice to provide demineralized water forcleaning, flushing, hydrotesting, and initial filling of plant systems.In testing the system, all pumps, valves, controls and instruments werechecked individually. The system was operated under simulated normalconditions before charging resins and using chemicals. This reduced the riskof damaging or depleting the resins or using chemicals excessively before the system was in proper adjustment.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 10 of 16I/mabD.4.3.5Condensate and Demineralized Water Storage and Transfer SystemThe tests consisted of demonstration of the ability to transfer water from theDemineralized Water Storage tank to the Condensate Storage tanks and thetransfer of water from these tanks to various service water requirements throughout the plant.D.4.3.6Condensate Demineralizer SystemThe test included the demineralizers, precoat and body feed equipment, andholding pump and associated controls. Piping had to be completed from themain inlet to the main outlet valves.a.Checked calibration for all instruments.
b.Checked operation of all valves.
c.Checked all controls for both automatic and remote control.d.Verified proper operation of system pump.e.Demonstrated precoat slurry and powder resin transfer fromdemineralizer to regeneration system.f.Demonstrated all phases of regeneration with actual water and air flow.
g.Demonstrated backwash of resins from demineralizers.D.4.3.7Condensate System and Hotwell ControlThis system consisted of the condensate pumps, the condenser hotwell, thelow pressure heaters and drain coolers.a.Verified instrument calibration.
b.Checked all controls, alarms, and interlocks.c.Operated all remote operated valves.d.Checked performance of condensate pumps recirculating to the hotwellthrough the make-up, reject, and recirculation lines.e.Checked hotwell high level reject and low level make-up controls andvalves.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 11 of 16I/mabD.4.3.8Reactor Feedwater SystemThis system consisted of the feedwater pumps and the high pressure heaters.a.Verified instrument calibration.
b.Checked all alarms, controls, and interlocks.c.Checked performance of the feedwater pumps recirculating to the hotwellthrough the 8 inch connection downstream from the high pressurefeedwater heaters.D.4.3.9Extraction and Feedwater Heater Controla.Verified instrument calibration.b.Checked all alarms, controls, and interlocks.c.Checked proper operation of valves from level and trip signals.D.4.3.10Reactor Building Cooling Water Systema.Following hydrotest and cleaning, filled the system with inhibited water.b.Verified instrument calibration.c.Operated pumps to verify pump performance.d.Checked operation of surge tank level controls and alarms.e.Checked all interlocks, alarms, controls and remote indicating devices.D.4.3.11Fuel Pool Cooling SystemThis system consisted of the fuel pool water pumps, heat exchangers, surgetanks, storage pool, reactor well, and dryer-separator storage pool.a.Verified instrument calibration.b.Checked alarms, controls, and interlocks.c.Filled pools with demineralized water.d.Recirculated through the heat exchangers; checked pump performance.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 12 of 16I/mabD.4.3.12Fuel Pool Filter/Demin SystemThis system consisted of the Filter-Demineralizer Tanks, the holding pumps,and the associated controls.a.Verified instrument calibration.
b.Checked alarms, controls, and interlocks.
c.Checked operation of filter/demineralizer valves and precoat pumps.
d.Demonstrated resin precoat operation and spent resin transfer toradwaste system.e.Demonstrated satisfactory operation of filter/demin while recirculatingthrough the fuel pool cooling system.D.4.3.13Traveling Screens and Screen Wash SystemThis system consisted of the traveling screens and the screen wash pump andthe trash rake.a.Checked level alarms and controls.
b.Demonstrated proper system performance.D.4.3.14Condenser Circulating Water-Cooling Tower SystemThis system consisted of the Circulating water pumps, Cooling Tower pumps,the cooling towers water scavenge pumps and the valves and gates used invarious modes of operation.a.Verified instrument calibration.
b.Checked alarms, controls and interlocks.
c.Demonstrated satisfactory performance of pumps and demonstratedvarious modes of operation (i.e., closed cycle, open cycle and partialcycle).D.4.3.15Condenser Vacuum and Off-Gas SystemThis system consisted of the steam jet air ejectors, gland steam exhausters, mechanical vacuum pump, and off-gas piping, the standby gas treatment system, and the off-gas stack.a.Verified instrument calibration.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 13 of 16I/mabb.Checked all alarms, controls, and interlocks.c.Checked proper operation of mechanical vacuum pump.d.Checked proper operation of mechanical equipment in off-gas system andstack.e.Checked proper operation of Standby Gas Treatment System.D.4.3.16Liquid and Solid Radioactive Wastea.Verified instrument calibration.b.Checked all controls and interlocks.c.Checked all air-operated valves.d.Pumps and tanks1.Cleaned tanks mechanically.
2.Filled with demineralized water.3.Checked pump operation in recirculation, wherever possible.4.Demonstrated operations associated with the particular tank, suchas draining or filling, recirculating, sampling, and processing to afilter, demineralizer, another tank, or discharge to river.e.Demineralizers, Radwaste1.Transferred fluids from waste collector to waste sample tank throughthe demineralizer.2.Checked operation of all components including bypass circuit.3.Checked instrument and level gage indications.f.Spent resin system1.Stimulated transfer of sludge and resins from the fuel pool, waste,condensate, and cleanup demineralizers to the waste sludge tankand cleanup phase separator tank.2.Verified cleanup and condensate sludge resin transfer capability byactual transfer of materials (performed near end of test program with little or no radioactivity present or devised means for catching and reclaiming resins).
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 14 of 16I/mab3.Verified capability to pump spent resin mixture to centrifuge.g.Sumps, (Drywell, Reactor, Turbine, and Radwaste Buildings)1.Filled sumps with water.2.Checked operation of sump pumps and proper functioning of levelcontrols, including isolation valves on containment.3.Verified discharge to proper collection tank in radwaste with nobackflow or leakage enroute.h.Solid Waste Handling, storage and disposal.1.Checked loading operations from centrifuge hopper.
2.Checked drum handling, loading, capping and transfer to storage.Used sand, drying material and filter aid material to represent solidwastes.3.Checked drum removal for off-site shipment.4.Checked baler.D.4.3.17Turbine and Auxiliary SystemsThe turbine-generator system included:
a.Turbine oil system.
b.Lube oil purification.
c.Steam seal.d.Hydrogen and carbon dioxide.e.Gland Exhaust.
f.Stator cooling.
g.Turbine control system including control valves.h.Generator seal oil system.i.Exciter.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 15 of 16I/mabThe preoperational procedure included the following:a.Verified instrument calibration.
b.Checked alarms, controls, and interlocks.c.Checked performance of all pumps.d.Verified satisfactory purge out of generator, filled generator with H2.e.Verified satisfactory performance of stator cooling demineralizer.
f.Verified steam seal and gland exhaust utilizing auxiliary heating boilersteam.D.4.3.18Standby Diesel Generator Systema.Verified instrument calibration.
b.Checked all controls, alarms and interlocks.c.Checked operation of diesel-generator auxiliaries including fuel pumpsand cooling water systems.d.Checked automatic start of diesel generator, closing of breaker and loadpickup.e.Operated the diesel generator at full rated load for 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> to demonstrateload carrying capability. Operated for two hours at 10% overload. (110%of rated).f.An integrated systems check of the ECCS was performed simulating asimultaneous loss of off-site power.D.4.3.19Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning SystemThis system consisted of the heating boiler, fans, dampers, and ventilating units that are installed in the reactor building, turbine building, and radwaste building.a.Verified instrument calibration.b.Verified balance of ventilation air flowsc.Verified satisfactory performance of ventilating units.
d.Demonstrated safe operation of the plant heating boiler.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 16 of 16I/mabD.4.3.20Primary Containment Atmospheric Control SystemThis system consisted of the drywell coolers, and the primary containmentvacuum breakers.a.Verified instrument calibration.
b.Checked all alarms, controls and interlocks.
c.Demonstrated operation of drywell coolers d.Functionally checked vacuum breakers.D.4.3.21Diesel Oil SystemThis system consisted of the Diesel Oil Storage tank, transfer pump, servicepump, and associated day tanks.a.Verified instrument calibration.
b.Checked all alarms and controls.c.Demonstrated system performance by transfer of oil to various day tanks.D.4.3.22Reactor Building Cranea.Checked all controls and interlocks.b.Demonstrated crane performance.
Revision 22USAR D.5MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 1 of 5APPENDIX DPRE-OPERATIONAL AND STARTUP TESTSI/mabD.5Startup And Power Test ProgramD.5.1General RequirementsThe startup and power test program was performed to assure that the plant iscapable of operating safely and satisfactorily. Systems and components, which could not be fully checked out in preoperational test phase were tested at power during this phase of the unit startup to confirm reactor parameters and characteristics determined by an extensive program of analysis and testsexecuted prior to initial fuel loading. The nuclear characteristics of fuel, controlrod and control curtains were calculated with methods which were continuously compared with results of experiments in the Vallecitos Atomic Laboratorys critical facilities, including measurements of similar or identical components. In addition, startup tests and operating data from other boiling water reactors incommercial operation and other measurements throughout the nuclear industrywere used to confirm the applicability of the analytical methods.Several restrictions were necessary during the initial startup program. Alloperations and tests complied with the safety and warranty limitations specified by the General Electric Co. as well as safety limitations and limiting conditions specified by licensing authorities. Additional restrictions were minimizedbecause the prime objective of the startup program was to demonstrate the plantcapability and safety up to full power. A two hour net heat rate demonstration was performed at an electrical output corresponding to 1469 MWt. At one hundred hour test was run at 1469 MWt.D.5.2General ProceduresThe startup procedures were, with individual detailed subsections.D.5.3Fuel Loading and Tests at Atmospheric PressureThe initial fuel loading and critical testing were performed at near-zero power,and at atmospheric pressure, with the reactor pressure vessel open. Thefollowing tests were performed during this phase of the startup program:a.Chemical and Radiochemical tests were conducted to establish water conditions prior to initial operation and to maintain these throughout the test program. Chemical and radiochemical checks were made at primary coolant, off-gas exhaust, waste and auxiliary system sample locations.Base or background radioactivity levels were determined at this time foruse in fuel assembly failure detection and long range activity buildup studies.FOR ADMINISTRATIVE USE ONLYResp Supv:CNSTPAssoc Ref:SR:2yrsNFreq:USAR-MANARMS:USAR-D.5Doc Type:Admin Initials:Date:9703 Revision 22USAR D.5MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 2 of 5I/mabb.Control Rod Drive System tests were performed on all drives prior tofuel loading to assure proper operability and to measure and adjustoperating speeds. Drive line friction and scram times were determined forall drives at zero reactor pressure. Functional testing of each drive was performed with dummy fuel just prior to and then following the fuel loading in each cell.c.Radiation Measurements were made prior to nuclear operation to establish base levels in the plant and the nearby environs.d.Fuel Loading was, according to detailed, step-by-step writtenprocedures. The core assembled, with control curtains in place, to the full-sized core.e.Shutdown Margin It was demonstrated periodically during fuel loadingthat the reactor was subcritical by more than a specified amount with thestrongest single control rod withdrawn. The shutdown marginrequirement was a limitation on the amount of radioactivity which can be loaded into the core. The magnitude of the margin was chosen with consideration for credible reactivity changes after the test, and for the accuracy of measurement. The test had three parts: (a) The analyticaldetermination of the strongest control rod, (b) the calibration of anadjacent control rod, experimentally or analytically, and (c) the demonstration of subcritcality with strongest rod fully withdrawn and the second at the position equal to the margin. This demonstration was made for the fully loaded core, and with selected smaller core loadings.f.The specified Control Rod Sequences were evaluated to verify that thestated criteria of safety, simplicity, and operating requirements were metduring routine cold startups. The reactor made critical by withdrawingcontrol rods in a specified sequence and reactivity addition rates were measured near critical. The preselected sequence could be modified if necessary to meet criteria. A small number of non-standard arrays were utilized to check out the operation of the rod worth minimizer.g.Source Range Monitor (SRM) Performance The performance of thesource range monitors were evaluated based on data taken with theinstalled source range monitoring instrumentation and installed operational sources. The SRM System was calibrated to reactor power and its performance was compared to stated criteria on noise, signal-to-noise ratio and response to change in core reactivity.h.Intermediate Range Monitor (IRM) Calibration Calibration of theintermediate range monitors was performed to provide level calibration forthe intermediate range monitors adequate for this phase of the testprogram.i.Process Computer As plant process variable signals become availableto the computer, verifications were made of these signals and of the computerized systems performance calculations.
Revision 22USAR D.5MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 3 of 5I/mabD.5.4Heatup From Ambient to Rated Temperature and PressureFollowing satisfactory completion of the core loading and low power testprogram, the core components were visually verified for proper installation, andthe additional in-vessel hardware was installed. This included special monitoring instrumentation, and steam separator and dryer assemblies.The reactor head was installed, followed by a hydrostatic test to assuresatisfactory sealing of the vessel head. The drywell head was installed andshield plugs placed over it. A sequence of tests was performed to confirm a number of the nuclear steam supply system characteristics as the temperature and pressure were increased. Sufficient tests were performed at each incremental step increase in power or change in pressure, and the tests andoperating procedures were evaluated, to assure that the succeeding change inoperating conditions could be made safely. The following tests were conducted during this phase of the startup.a.IRM Calibration was improved by using data obtained from heatup ratesobserved during nuclear testing.b.SRM Performance was determined in the power overlap region with theIRM System. The SRM System was recalibrated by comparison to the IRM System readings in the region.c.Reactor Vessel Temperatures were monitored during heatup cooldownto determine that temperature differences were not excessive.d.System Expansion checks were made during heatup to verify to verify freedom of major equipment and piping to move.e.Control Rod Drive systems test were made by measuring scram timeson a selected number of drives at two intermediate pressures, scramtimes and drive line friction tests on a representative set of drives at rated reactor pressure and on a selected number of drives without accumulators at rated reactor pressures.f.Control Rod Sequence to be used during heatup was checkedperiodically for satisfactory performance.g.Radiation Measurements were made periodically during nuclear heating and a complete survey was made at rated temperatures.h.Chemical and Radiochemical checks were be made during the heatup.i.Core Performance Evaluations were made near or at rated temperatureand pressure. This included a reactor heat balance at rated temperature.
Revision 22USAR D.5MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 4 of 5I/mabD.5.5From Rated Temperature to 1670 MWt PowerReactor power was increased to 1670 MWt in increments of approximately 10%with major testing at 15, 25, 50, 75, 88 (1469 MWt) and 100% power. Theturbine was placed in service and tested during this phase. The test programincluded the following, but not necessarily at each increment of power. All were performed during the 1670 MWt tests.a.Chemical and Radiochemical tests were continued.b.Radiation Measurements of limited extent were made at 25% of rated power and complete surveys were made at 50 and 100% power.c.System Expansion tests were continued on a limited basis as reactor power was increased.d.Main Steam Isolation Valve functional and operational tests were madeas reactor power was increased.e.RCIC System tests were made to demonstrate proper performance inregard to flow rate and leak tightness were made at a low power level.f.HPCI System tests were made to demonstrate proper performance of thesystem including the steam turbine driven pumping system.g.Recirculating Pump Trips and their effects on the jet pumps and thereactor were tested periodically during power increase.h.Flow Control capabilities were determined at specified power levels.i.Turbine Trip tests were made to determine the effects of turbine trips onthe reactor and the auxiliaries of the unit.j.Generator Trip tests were performed to determine speed and reactorresponse.k.Pressure Regulator tests were made to determine the response of thereactor and the turbine governor system. Regulator settings wereoptimized using data from this test.l.Bypass Valves measurements were performed by opening a turbinebypass valve and recording the resulting reactor transients. Finaladjustments to the bypass valves were made.m.Feedwater Pumps were used to change reactor subcooling and theresulting transients were measured to determine system response.
Revision 22USAR D.5MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 5 of 5I/mabn.Flux Response to rods was determined in both equilibrium and transientconditions. Steady-state noise was measured as was flux response tocontrol rod motion. Power-void loop stability was verified from this data.o.LPRM Calibrations including use of the TIP system, were made at 15,25, 50, and 100% of rated power. Each local power range monitor was calibrated to read in terms of local fuel rod surface heat flux.p.APRM Calibrations were performed after making significant power levelchanges. Reactor heat balances formed the basis of these calibrations ofthe average power range monitor.q.Core Performance Evaluations were made periodically to assure thatthe core operated within allowable limits on maximum local surface heat flux and Minimum Critical Heat Flux Ratio. This test included reactor heatbalance determinations.r.Calibration of Rods were performed to obtain reference relationshipsbetween control rod motion and reactor power and steam flow in thespecified control rod sequence.s.Axial Power Distribution measurements were made with the traversingin-core probe system after significant changes in power, control rod, pattern, or flow rate. The TIP system supplied data for core performance evaluations and LPRM calibrations.t.Rod Pattern Exchanges were demonstrated from one specified sequence to the other at the highest practical reactor power.u.Loss of Auxiliary Power Test was performed to demonstrate properresponse of the reactor and the plant electrical equipment and systems.v.Process Computer functions were verified as sensed variables come intorange during the ascension to and at rated power.
Revision 22USAR APPENDIX DMONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 1 of 3APPENDIX DPRE-OPERATIONAL AND STARTUP TESTSI/mabTABLE OF CONTENTSSectionPageD.1Test Program Summary Description1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.1.1Construction Testing1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.1.2General Conduct of the Pre-Operational and Startup Testing2. . . D.1.2.1The Pre-Operational Testing3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.1.2.2Startup Testing3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.2Test Program Considerations1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.3Construction Tests1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.3.1General Scope1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.3.2Documentation of Test Results2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.3.2.1Electrical Construction Tests2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.3.2.2Mechanical Construction Test2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4Summary Of Pre-Operational Test Content1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1General Electrical APED Prepared Procedures1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.1Reactor Vessel Components1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.2Main Steam Safety and Relief Valves1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.3Control Rod Drive System1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.4Recirculation System and M-G Sets2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.5RHR System2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.6Reactor Water Cleanup System2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.7Standby Liquid Control System2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.8Core Spray System3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.9RCIC System3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.10Fuel Handling Equipment4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.11HPCI System5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.1.12Feedwater Control System5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2General Electric NID Prepared Procedures6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.1Reactor Protection System (RPS)6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.2TIP System6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.3Neutron Monitoring System Test6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.4Off-Gas7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.5Stack Monitoring7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FOR ADMINISTRATIVE USE ONLYResp Supv:CNSTPAssoc Ref:SR:2yrsNFreq:USAR-MANARMS:USAR-D.TOCDoc Type:Admin Initials:Date:9703 Revision 22USAR APPENDIX DMONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 2 of 3I/mabSectionPageD.4.2.6Environs Monitoring7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.7Area Rad Monitoring7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.8Rod Worth Minimizer (RWM)7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.9Liquid Process8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.10Steam Line8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.11Ventilation Exhaust Monitoring8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.2.12Rod Position Indication System (RPIS)8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3Bechtel Corp. Prepared Procedures9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.1Service Water Systems9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.2Fire Protection System9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.3Compressed Air System9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.4Make-up Demineralizer System9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.5Condensate and Demineralized Water Storage and TransferSystem10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.6Condensate Demineralizer System10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.7Condensate System and Hotwell Control10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.8Reactor Feedwater System11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.9Extraction and Feedwater Heater Control11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.10Reactor Building Cooling Water System11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.11Fuel Pool Cooling System11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.12Fuel Pool Filter/Demin System12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.13Traveling Screens and Screen Wash System12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.14Condenser Circulating Water-Cooling Tower System12. . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.15Condenser Vacuum and Off-Gas System12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.16Liquid and Solid Radioactive Waste13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.17Turbine and Auxiliary Systems14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.18Standby Diesel Generator System15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.19Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning System15. . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.20Primary Containment Atmospheric Control System16. . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.21Diesel Oil System16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.4.3.22Reactor Building Crane16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.5Startup And Power Test Program1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.5.1General Requirements1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D.5.2General Procedures1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Revision 22USAR APPENDIX DMONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 3 of 3I/mabSectionPageD.5.3Fuel Loading and Tests at Atmospheric Pressure1. . . . . . . . . . . . . D.5.4Heatup From Ambient to Rated Temperature and Pressure3. . . . D.5.5From Rated Temperature to 1670 MWt Power4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Revision 26USAR D.1MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 1 of 4APPENDIX DPRE-OPERATIONAL AND STARTUP TESTSI/kabD.1Test Program Summary DescriptionThe Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant (MNGP) is owned by Northern States PowerCompany, a Minnesota corporation (NSPM). NSP is a wholly owned utility operatingsubsidiary of Xcel Energy Corporation (Xcel Energy). Operating authority was transferred to Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation (NSPM) and approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in License Amendment 156.The prime contractor, General Electric was responsible for the design, engineering,furnishing, installation, testing, and placing into operation the machinery, apparatus,and equipment necessary for the complete nuclear powered steam turbo-generator plant. General Electric also had the contract responsibility which included the design, engineering, and construction of the necessary buildings and structures.The General Electric Company directed the pre-operational test program performedby General Electric, Northern States Power, and subcontractor (Bechtel) personnel.The startup test program was a joint effort by General Electric and Northern StatesPower. The responsibility for licensed operation during the program was assumed by Northern States Power under the technical direction of the General Electric Company.The following paragraphs describe the testing program activities and represents ageneral scope of the testing of the Monticello Plant.D.1.1Construction TestingConstruction testing covered a wide range of checks to determine that allcomponents were properly installed and adjusted according to the applicable manufacturers instructions, manufacturers drawings, AE drawings, control drawings(P and IDs and electrical installation drawings) and that the appropriate systemcleanliness had been established. These tests were performed by Bechtel personnel, subcontractors, or vendors under Bechtel direction. General Electric, as well as Northern States Power, had the opportunity to be present at all tests.
Construction tests results were made available to NSP and GE, and wereprerequisite to further testing.01197746 Revision 26USAR D.1MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 2 of 4I/kabD.1.2General Conduct of the Pre-Operational and Startup TestingPre-operational tests were intended to prove by as built test conditions that systemdesign criteria were satisfied. The test procedures were prepared by GeneralElectric or Bechtel Corporation depending upon system design responsibility. Theseprocedures were specific regarding intent, method, and operating requirements.
Summary descriptions of planned tests were supplied in Section 4 and Section 5 of this appendix.The contents of the procedures for this program generally included the following:1.The purpose and scope of the test.2.Prerequisites.3.The detailed procedures followed and a brief summary of the test method.
4.Clearly defined limitations for areas pertaining to reactivity and/or safety ofoperation.5.Cautions observed stating any difficulties peculiar to the tests which wereexpected.6.Remedial action to be taken if deviations from expected conditions occur.
7.Expected results and appropriate test limits.
8.Acceptance criteria (normally contained throughout the body of theprocedure).9.Identify special instrumentation required.
10.Any testing requiring the simulation of a plant parameter had the method tobe used detailed in the procedure.All General Electric and Bechtel approved procedures were submitted to the NSPOperations Committee for review. No pre-operational tests were run without approved procedures.Approved procedures were released to the personnel conducting the test. Ifchanges to the procedures were necessary, which were beyond the scope of thetest personnel, the test procedure was considered as unapproved and further review was necessary. Changes to the original procedure then required formal approval.Tests which could not be successfully completed because of improper equipment orinstrumentation, or malfunction of equipment or instrumentation were suspendeduntil satisfactory resolution of the shortcoming was completed. If these items cannot be resolved, additional Operations Committee review was necessary.
Revision 26USAR D.1MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 3 of 4I/kabAdditional testing, if required, was recommended by Bechtel, General Electric orNorthern States Power and was performed when formal approval was obtained.D.1.2.1The Pre-Operational TestingPre-operational test procedures were submitted to NSP for review by the Operations Committee. All questions relating to the procedures or the condition of the plant systems were resolved prior to performance of the test. The pre-operational test program was periodically reviewed with the Safety Audit Committee. If any member of the Safety Audit Committee or OperationsCommittee believed that any test procedure needed formal review by the SafetyAudit Committee, the review was conducted and the committee made appropriate recommendations.Pre-operational testing was performed by NSP operations personnel under thedirection of GE or Bechtel personnel. Procedure change policies were specified by the Operations Committee.Formal review by the Operations Committee of the test results and reports wasrequired before each test was considered complete. If sufficient cause was shown, any previously accepted plant system could have been considered as unacceptable and require further pre-operational type testing. All plant systems had to be operationally acceptable when the plant is transferred to NSP controlafter the power capability performance test.Certain pre-operational tests were completed after the initiation of the startuptesting; however, the complete pre-operational test program was reviewed by NSPOperations Committee and Safety Audit Committee as to completeness and statusprior to the initiation of any startup testing.D.1.2.2Startup TestingThe Monticello startup test program is defined and summarized in the Startup Test Specification document (22A2190) prepared and released by General Electric.
This document was reviewed by the Operations Committee and the NSP SafetyAudit Committee to determine if the scope of the startup testing met therequirements to safely startup the plant, gradually increased to full power operation. Additional testing could be recommended by NSP.The detailed test procedures were prepared in a General Electric Topical Report,22A2192, "Monticello Nuclear Plant Startup Test Procedures." Copies of this document was available at the Monticello Site approximately three months before fuel loading.The Startup Test Procedures were reviewed by the Operations Committee andSafety Audit Committee prior to initiation of the tests.
Revision 26USAR D.1MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 4 of 4I/kabThe startup tests were performed by NSP personnel under the technical directionof GE startup personnel. Significant deviations from expected test results requireda suspension of testing until the deviation was understood. Testing was notresumed until the Operations Committee had reviewed these deviations.The results of the startup testing program were continually evaluated to determineif additional testing was required to prove the safety of the reactor and plant operations. The results of all testing was formally reviewed by the OperationsCommittee and Safety Audit Committee before the tests were consideredcomplete. The startup tests were conducted at several power levels during the escalation of full power. Power level increases for testing up to 1469 MWt occurred prior to the Safety Audit Committee review of previous testing. However, Operations Committee review of previous test results was required beforeescalation to the higher power level. Operations at power levels between 1469MWt and 1670 were not performed until the Safety Audit Committee and the Operations Committee had reviewed the results of all testing up to and including the 1469 MWt power level.
Revision 22USAR D.2MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 1 of 1APPENDIX DPRE-OPERATIONAL AND STARTUP TESTSI/mabD.2Test Program ConsiderationsThe following key points were considered in developing the sequence of tests.1.Systems were sequenced for early testing and placed in routine operation toprovide necessary auxiliary services for other systems. Examples are plantelectrical systems, instrument air and make up water supply systems.2.Pre-operational testing was coordinated with construction to permit fuelloading as early as possible, without compromising nuclear safety or impeding construction work.3.Stringent controls of plant operation and maintenance work were requiredfollowing fuel loading. To minimize possible contamination problems, pre-operational testing was performed before fuel loading on all systems which could consequently be exposed to radioactive contamination.4.Pre-operational tests provided an important phase of the reactor plantoperators training program and were scheduled on key systems to permit maximum participation by all operators prior to NRC licensing examinations.5.Temporary construction power could be required for initial tests at thebeginning of the pre-operational test program. However, the use of temporary power and improvised set-ups was minimized.6.Electrical jumpers were used to facilitate pre-operational testing in someinstances, but their use was minimized and controlled by proper identificationof such jumpers by log book records. All jumpers were removed before fuelloading.7.Immediately prior to bringing fuel into the reactor building, the plant accesscontrol procedures for the reactor building before were enforced by the Plant Superintendent. No construction work was performed in the reactor building without the permission of the GE Operations Manager and the knowledgeand concurrence of the Radiation Protection Engineer. These controlscomplied with the NRC regulations pertaining to radiation safety. In addition, strict control was enforced on access to the control room, cable spreading room, and radioactive waste building. Other areas to be controlled were determined by the Operations Committee.FOR ADMINISTRATIVE USE ONLYResp Supv:CNSTPAssoc Ref:SR:2yrsNFreq:USAR-MANARMS:USAR-D.2Doc Type:Admin Initials:Date:9703 Revision 22USAR D.3MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 1 of 2APPENDIX DPRE-OPERATIONAL AND STARTUP TESTSI/mabD.3Construction TestsD.3.1General ScopeCertain testing requirements preceded pre-operational testing and were categorizedas construction tests. These tests were performed by Bechtel or GE with occasionalNSP support. Generally, a formal test was prepared. Reporting was in the form of quality control documentation and construction test results forms prepared by Bechtel. The Reactor Pressure Vessel Hydrostatic Test, and the Containment LeakTests, had reports following completion of the test.Construction testing included but was not limited to the following examples:a.Containment final leak rate testing.
b.System hydrostatic tests.
c.Chemical cleaning and flushing.
d.Wiring continuity checks.
e.Megger tests.
f.Electrical system tests to and including energizing e.g., checking grounding,relay checks, checking circuit breaker operation and control, continuitychecks, megger tests, phasing check, and energizing of buses.g.Initial adjustment and bumping of motors.h.Checked control and interlock functions of instruments, relays, and controldevices.i.Calibrated instruments and checked or set initial trip set points.
j.Pneumatic tests of instrument and service air system and blow out of lines.
k.Adjustments such as alignment, greasing, and tightening of bolts.FOR ADMINISTRATIVE USE ONLYResp Supv:CNSTPAssoc Ref:SR:2yrsNFreq:USAR-MANARMS:USAR-D.3Doc Type:Admin Initials:Date:9703 Revision 22USAR D.3MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 2 of 2I/mabl.Surveillance of proper equipment operation during pre-operational tests, asrequired. The primary intent of this item was to cover those instances wheremeasurements such as the above were required to ensure proper operation,but were not obtainable until the entire system was operated during pre-operational test. Examples included measuring motor current and voltage; bearing, lubricating oil, cooling water and seal temperatures; vibration; torque; rpm; etc. These measurements are primarily of importancefor protection of equipment, troubleshooting, or supplementing installedinstrumentation.m.Verified relief and safety valve settings.n.Complete tests of motor operated valves including adjustment of motoroperator switches and limit switches, checked all interlocks and controls,measured motor current and operating speed, and checked leak-tightness ofstem packing and valve seat during hydrotests.o.Completed tests of air operated valves including checking all interlock andcontrols; adjusted limit switches, measured operating speed, checked leak-tightness of pneumatic operators, and checked for proper operation ofcontrollers, pilot solenoids, etc.D.3.2Documentation of Test ResultsD.3.2.1Electrical Construction TestsTest ET-1 specified that basic electrical test requirements for the distributionsystem up to and including the individual component breakers, megger tests,bumping of motors, stroking of valves and adjusting limit switches. Data sheetsET-2, ET-3, ET-4 provided the basic documentation for the electrical tests. Logic control circuits for each system were functionally checked and recorded on a red lined elementary diagram.D.3.2.2Mechanical Construction TestMechanical checks consisted of alignment, coupling, installation, lubrication, system hydrostatic or pressure tests, cleaning and flushing. Documentation of the above checks was available for review prior to the conduct of the applicable pre-operational test.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 1 of 16APPENDIX DPRE-OPERATIONAL AND STARTUP TESTSI/mabD.4Summary Of Pre-Operational Test ContentD.4.1General Electrical APED Prepared ProceduresD.4.1.1Reactor Vessel Componentsa.Verified calibration and tested reactor vessel flange leak detectioninstrumentation.b.Set reactor vessel stabilizers.c.Checked all reactor vessel thermocouples.d.Checked stud tensioner operation.D.4.1.2Main Steam Safety and Relief Valvesa.Safety and Relief valves were installed as received from the factory,where set points were adjusted, verified, and indicated on the valve.b.Verified proper operation of the remotely operated relief valves bothmanually and as part of the Automatic Pressure Relief System.c.Checked operation of vacuum breaker valves on the relief outlet lines.
d.Checked operation of all main steam isolation valves, checked both forproper isolation action and test operation.D.4.1.3Control Rod Drive Systema.Verified instrument calibration.b.Functional checkout of Reactor Manual Control System circuits.
c.Set and verified proper operation of rod control timing circuits.d.Verified alarm and inputs to RWM.e.Filled and vented CRD Hydraulic Systems.
f.Placed the system in operation and obtained pump performance data.g.Set systems pressures and flows.h.Stroked each drive and verified rod position indication.FOR ADMINISTRATIVE USE ONLYResp Supv:CNSTPAssoc Ref:SR:2yrsNFreq:USAR-MANARMS:USAR-D.4Doc Type:Admin Initials:Date:9703 Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 2 of 16I/mabi.Obtained friction data and measure rod scram time.j.Rod drift alarm circuit tests performed.D.4.1.4Recirculation System and M-G Setsa.Operated and verified leak tightness of all recirculation loop valves.
b.Verified control circuits and interlocks.
c.Verified instrument calibration and checked for proper response.d.Operated recirculation pumps within the limitations of cold waterconditions.D.4.1.5RHR Systema.Verified instrument calibration and checked set points.b.Checked operation of all motor operated valves.c.Checked interlocks in valve and pump control circuits.d.Measured system pressures where possible and determined flow ratesfrom pump characteristic curve for various modes of operation; i.e.,shutdown cooling, LPCI, test, vessel head cooling, and fuel pool backup.e.Measured closing time of isolation valves.D.4.1.6Reactor Water Cleanup Systema.Verified instrument calibration.b.Verified operation of valves and interlocks.c.Verified operation of demineralizer controls and charged demineralizerswith resins.d.Checked operation of cleanup recirculation pumps.e.Verified system flows and checked water quality and demineralizer exit.D.4.1.7Standby Liquid Control Systema.Verified instrument calibration setpoints.b.Filled the neutron absorber tank with demineralized water and operatedthe injection pumps, recirculating to the neutron absorber tank.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 3 of 16I/mabc.Checked the set point of the pump discharge relief valves.d.Checked the control circuits for neutron absorber injection valvesthoroughly before connecting to the valves. (Used a dummy resistance tosimulate the valve.)e.Fired the injection valves and measured pumping rates into the reactor.Replaced the firing cartridge and valve internals.f.Checked interlocks with the cleanup filter-demineralizer system thatensure isolation when the standby liquid control system is actuated.g.Checked operation of neutron absorber tank temperature controls airsparger.h.Filled test tank with demineralized water and operated the neutronabsorber injection pumps in simulated test mode, recirculating to the test tank.i.After the system had been demonstrated by foregoing tests, added therequired amount of neutron absorber material to the neutron absorptiontank. Mixed and sampled. This was done very shortly before fuelloading.D.4.1.8Core Spray Systema.Verified instrument calibration.b.Checked alarms, controls and interlocks including complete verification ofautomatic system starting controls.c.Operated pumps by recirculating to the torus in the test mode. Verifiedpump and system performance from manufacturers head-flow curves andmeasured system pressures.d.Checked operation of all motor operated valves.D.4.1.9RCIC Systema.Verified instrument calibration.b.Verified proper operation of controls interlocks.
c.Operated the turbine driven pump using heating steam.NOTE:System operation under design conditions wasdemonstrated during the Startup Testing.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 4 of 16I/mabD.4.1.10Fuel Handling EquipmentEquipment in this category was tested with dummy fuel or blade guideassemblies through dry run simulations of the required operations. This wasnot one coordinated test of a system, but consisted of many separate operations using different pieces of equipment. The equipment was tested on the operating floor, in the fuel storage pool, and both over and in the reactor vessel.a.Tests in the storage pool1.Installed fuel pool gates and filled pool with water.2.Checked fuel penetration machine with dummy fuel assembly. Thisalso checked auxiliary tools such as channel handling tool andchannel bolt wrench.3.Set up inspection equipment and checked with dummy fuelassembly.4.Checked fixed lights and movable underwater lights to assureadequate visibility for fuel and blade handling and transfer operations.5.Checked underwater vacuum cleaners.6.Operated refueling platform over storage pool. Checked allequipment on the refueling platform. Transferred fuel assembliesand control blades between storage racks with the grapple.
Checked all grapple controls and interlocks.7.Used jib crane to transport dummy fuel assemblies from storageracks with the grapple. Checked all grapple controls and interlocks.b.Tests Over Reactor Vessel1.Set service platform assembly on vessel flange. Mounted jib craneon service platform and used for installing, removing or shufflingdummy fuel assemblies, control blades and poison curtains.2.Raised water level in reactor well and checked leak-tightness ofvessel to drywell seal and drywell to pool seal. Lowered water leveland checked ability of fuel pool cooling system to drain these seals or associated low points.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 5 of 16I/mab3.Established best procedural methods and tools for:a)Removal and replacement of steam dryer.b)Removal and replacement of steam separator head.c)Removal of control curtains.d)Removal and replacement of fuel supports castings and controlrod blades.e)Removal and replacement of incore flux monitor strings.f)Removal and replacement of jet pump nozzles and risers(under water).All of the above tests recognized the shielding requirements of doing the jobhot and should attempt to simulate normal operating conditions.4.Transferred dummy fuel assemblies and control blades between thestorage pool and the reactor vessel, simulating a refueling operation.5.Obtained representative values of time required to do all operationsnormally in the critical path of a refueling outage.D.4.1.11HPCI Systema.Verified instrument calibration.b.Verified proper operation of controls interlocks.
c.Operated turbine driven pumps using heating system.NOTE:System operation under design conditions wasdemonstrated during Startup Testing.D.4.1.12Feedwater Control Systema.Verified instrument calibration.b.Simulated inputs of flow, level, and pressure to the control system todemonstrate proper control system response, including feedwater controlvalve motion.c.Checked steam leak detection system setpoints and operation.d.Demonstrated proper operation of failure modes.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 6 of 16I/mabD.4.2General Electric NID Prepared ProceduresD.4.2.1Reactor Protection System (RPS)Demonstrated that all components of the RPS operated correctly and theintegrated system functioned as specified. All system relays were checked by simulating inputs to their associated sensors and/or actually operated associated valves to trip position switches.D.4.2.2TIP Systema.Set core top and bottom limits, for each tube, into the correct DriveControl Unit Channel.b.Loaded TIP cables into the Drive Mechanism.c.Set flux amplifier sensitivities.d.Set recorder X-axis nulls into the Drive Control Units.
e.Demonstrated proper operation of each TIP System and associatedsubsystem, i.e., Drive Control Units, X-Y Recorders, Valve ControlMonitors, In-Core Monitors, Drive Mechanisms, Chamber Shields, BallValves and Indexers.f.Verified that Shear Valve squibs were intact.D.4.2.3Neutron Monitoring System TestThe following functions were verified:a.All neutron monitoring instruments were operable and in calibration.b.Integrity of all signal and high voltage cables.
c.All instruments had correct trip settings.
d.All interlocks and bypass functioned correctly.e.Trip annunciation was correct.f.Scram relay in the protection system panels, that operated as a functionof the neutron monitoring system, were operating correctly.g.Rod withdrawal permissive interlocks, that were a function of the neutronmonitoring system, operated correctly.h.Source and Intermediate Range retract drives functioned correctly.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 7 of 16I/mabi.LPRM, APRM, and RBM systems functioned correctly.D.4.2.4Off-Gasa.Verified that Off-Gas Monitors were operable, in calibration, had correcttrip settings and performed specified annunciators functions.b.Demonstrated that the Off-Gas hold-up system activated after a timedelay under the following conditions:1.Two Upscale Trips.2.Two Downscale Trips.3.One Upscale and one Downscale trip.c.Bugged the detector with a 10 mr/hr or larger gamma source.Determined LRM sensitivity from known source strength and geometry.D.4.2.5Stack Monitoringa.Verified that both Stack Gas Monitors were operable, in calibration, hadcorrect trip settings and performed specified annunciator functions Up orDownscale trips.b.Verified that Stack Gas Panel operated correctly including alarms.c.Verified that Purge Control and Source check network functionedcorrectly.d.Verified that the Process Radiation Sampler operated correctly.D.4.2.6Environs MonitoringDemonstrated or verified that all Environs Monitoring (Fixed Stations on Site)Stations were operable, in calibration, had correct trip settings and performedspecified annunciator functions (if any) on high or low trip.D.4.2.7Area Rad MonitoringDemonstrated or verified that all Sensor Converters, Trip and Indicator units, were operable, in calibration, had correct trip settings and performed specifiedannunciator functions on high or low trip.D.4.2.8Rod Worth Minimizer (RWM)a.Simulated rod position inputs into Rod Position Indication System (RPIS)and verified that the RWM received correct rod identification and position data.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 8 of 16I/mabb.Verified that the RWM Display Panel functioned correctly.c.Verified that the RWM initiated a rod block under the following conditions:1.Withdrawal error;2.Insert error.D.4.2.9Liquid ProcessVerified that Liquid Process Monitors and associated recorders were operable,in calibration, had correct settings and performed specified annunciator functions on Upscale or Downscale trips.D.4.2.10Steam Linea.Verified that all Steam Line Radiation Monitors were operable, incalibration, had corrected trip settings, performed specified annunciator functions on Upscale and Downscale trips, and operated correct scram relays in panel 9-15 and 9-17.b.Bugged the detector with a 10 mr/hr or larger gamma source.Determined LRM sensitivity from geometry and know source strength.D.4.2.11Ventilation Exhaust Monitoringa.Demonstrated that all ventilation exhaust monitors were operable incalibration, had correct trip settings and performed specified annunciator functions on Upscale and Downscale trips.b.Verified that Standby Gas Treatment and closure of the Reactor BuildingMain Vent System was initiated under the following conditions:Upscale trip on either channel.Two Downscale trips (one per channel).D.4.2.12Rod Position Indication System (RPIS)a.Simulated inputs to the RPIS.b.Verified that the full core display was correct for each rod and rod position.c.Verified that the correct 4-rod group was displayed when any rod wasselected.d.Verified rod digit alarm operation for each rod at least once.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 9 of 16I/mabD.4.3Bechtel Corp. Prepared ProceduresD.4.3.1Service Water SystemsThe test included the Service Water System, the RHR Service Water System,the Emergency Service Water System, and the Chlorination System.a.Verified instrument calibration.
b.Checked all alarms, interlocks, and valve operations.c.Demonstrated all system performance.D.4.3.2Fire Protection Systema.Operated diesel and electric driven fire pumps and checked performance.
b.Operated fire system jockey pump and screen wash pump backup andchecked performance.c.Checked all interlocks, remote controls, and automatic start features.D.4.3.3Compressed Air SystemThis system included the instrument and service air compressors, theinstrument air dryer, the distribution piping and service air blower.a.Checked set points for compressor control; manual, off, auto mechanicalunloading, and annunciator alarms.b.Measured capacity of each compressor and service air blower.
c.Checked dryer performance.d.Demonstrated system isolation interlocks.D.4.3.4Make-up Demineralizer SystemThe make-up system was placed inservice to provide demineralized water forcleaning, flushing, hydrotesting, and initial filling of plant systems.In testing the system, all pumps, valves, controls and instruments werechecked individually. The system was operated under simulated normalconditions before charging resins and using chemicals. This reduced the riskof damaging or depleting the resins or using chemicals excessively before the system was in proper adjustment.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 10 of 16I/mabD.4.3.5Condensate and Demineralized Water Storage and Transfer SystemThe tests consisted of demonstration of the ability to transfer water from theDemineralized Water Storage tank to the Condensate Storage tanks and thetransfer of water from these tanks to various service water requirements throughout the plant.D.4.3.6Condensate Demineralizer SystemThe test included the demineralizers, precoat and body feed equipment, andholding pump and associated controls. Piping had to be completed from themain inlet to the main outlet valves.a.Checked calibration for all instruments.
b.Checked operation of all valves.
c.Checked all controls for both automatic and remote control.d.Verified proper operation of system pump.e.Demonstrated precoat slurry and powder resin transfer fromdemineralizer to regeneration system.f.Demonstrated all phases of regeneration with actual water and air flow.
g.Demonstrated backwash of resins from demineralizers.D.4.3.7Condensate System and Hotwell ControlThis system consisted of the condensate pumps, the condenser hotwell, thelow pressure heaters and drain coolers.a.Verified instrument calibration.
b.Checked all controls, alarms, and interlocks.c.Operated all remote operated valves.d.Checked performance of condensate pumps recirculating to the hotwellthrough the make-up, reject, and recirculation lines.e.Checked hotwell high level reject and low level make-up controls andvalves.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 11 of 16I/mabD.4.3.8Reactor Feedwater SystemThis system consisted of the feedwater pumps and the high pressure heaters.a.Verified instrument calibration.
b.Checked all alarms, controls, and interlocks.c.Checked performance of the feedwater pumps recirculating to the hotwellthrough the 8 inch connection downstream from the high pressurefeedwater heaters.D.4.3.9Extraction and Feedwater Heater Controla.Verified instrument calibration.b.Checked all alarms, controls, and interlocks.c.Checked proper operation of valves from level and trip signals.D.4.3.10Reactor Building Cooling Water Systema.Following hydrotest and cleaning, filled the system with inhibited water.b.Verified instrument calibration.c.Operated pumps to verify pump performance.d.Checked operation of surge tank level controls and alarms.e.Checked all interlocks, alarms, controls and remote indicating devices.D.4.3.11Fuel Pool Cooling SystemThis system consisted of the fuel pool water pumps, heat exchangers, surgetanks, storage pool, reactor well, and dryer-separator storage pool.a.Verified instrument calibration.b.Checked alarms, controls, and interlocks.c.Filled pools with demineralized water.d.Recirculated through the heat exchangers; checked pump performance.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 12 of 16I/mabD.4.3.12Fuel Pool Filter/Demin SystemThis system consisted of the Filter-Demineralizer Tanks, the holding pumps,and the associated controls.a.Verified instrument calibration.
b.Checked alarms, controls, and interlocks.
c.Checked operation of filter/demineralizer valves and precoat pumps.
d.Demonstrated resin precoat operation and spent resin transfer toradwaste system.e.Demonstrated satisfactory operation of filter/demin while recirculatingthrough the fuel pool cooling system.D.4.3.13Traveling Screens and Screen Wash SystemThis system consisted of the traveling screens and the screen wash pump andthe trash rake.a.Checked level alarms and controls.
b.Demonstrated proper system performance.D.4.3.14Condenser Circulating Water-Cooling Tower SystemThis system consisted of the Circulating water pumps, Cooling Tower pumps,the cooling towers water scavenge pumps and the valves and gates used invarious modes of operation.a.Verified instrument calibration.
b.Checked alarms, controls and interlocks.
c.Demonstrated satisfactory performance of pumps and demonstratedvarious modes of operation (i.e., closed cycle, open cycle and partialcycle).D.4.3.15Condenser Vacuum and Off-Gas SystemThis system consisted of the steam jet air ejectors, gland steam exhausters, mechanical vacuum pump, and off-gas piping, the standby gas treatment system, and the off-gas stack.a.Verified instrument calibration.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 13 of 16I/mabb.Checked all alarms, controls, and interlocks.c.Checked proper operation of mechanical vacuum pump.d.Checked proper operation of mechanical equipment in off-gas system andstack.e.Checked proper operation of Standby Gas Treatment System.D.4.3.16Liquid and Solid Radioactive Wastea.Verified instrument calibration.b.Checked all controls and interlocks.c.Checked all air-operated valves.d.Pumps and tanks1.Cleaned tanks mechanically.
2.Filled with demineralized water.3.Checked pump operation in recirculation, wherever possible.4.Demonstrated operations associated with the particular tank, suchas draining or filling, recirculating, sampling, and processing to afilter, demineralizer, another tank, or discharge to river.e.Demineralizers, Radwaste1.Transferred fluids from waste collector to waste sample tank throughthe demineralizer.2.Checked operation of all components including bypass circuit.3.Checked instrument and level gage indications.f.Spent resin system1.Stimulated transfer of sludge and resins from the fuel pool, waste,condensate, and cleanup demineralizers to the waste sludge tankand cleanup phase separator tank.2.Verified cleanup and condensate sludge resin transfer capability byactual transfer of materials (performed near end of test program with little or no radioactivity present or devised means for catching and reclaiming resins).
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 14 of 16I/mab3.Verified capability to pump spent resin mixture to centrifuge.g.Sumps, (Drywell, Reactor, Turbine, and Radwaste Buildings)1.Filled sumps with water.2.Checked operation of sump pumps and proper functioning of levelcontrols, including isolation valves on containment.3.Verified discharge to proper collection tank in radwaste with nobackflow or leakage enroute.h.Solid Waste Handling, storage and disposal.1.Checked loading operations from centrifuge hopper.
2.Checked drum handling, loading, capping and transfer to storage.Used sand, drying material and filter aid material to represent solidwastes.3.Checked drum removal for off-site shipment.4.Checked baler.D.4.3.17Turbine and Auxiliary SystemsThe turbine-generator system included:
a.Turbine oil system.
b.Lube oil purification.
c.Steam seal.d.Hydrogen and carbon dioxide.e.Gland Exhaust.
f.Stator cooling.
g.Turbine control system including control valves.h.Generator seal oil system.i.Exciter.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 15 of 16I/mabThe preoperational procedure included the following:a.Verified instrument calibration.
b.Checked alarms, controls, and interlocks.c.Checked performance of all pumps.d.Verified satisfactory purge out of generator, filled generator with H2.e.Verified satisfactory performance of stator cooling demineralizer.
f.Verified steam seal and gland exhaust utilizing auxiliary heating boilersteam.D.4.3.18Standby Diesel Generator Systema.Verified instrument calibration.
b.Checked all controls, alarms and interlocks.c.Checked operation of diesel-generator auxiliaries including fuel pumpsand cooling water systems.d.Checked automatic start of diesel generator, closing of breaker and loadpickup.e.Operated the diesel generator at full rated load for 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> to demonstrateload carrying capability. Operated for two hours at 10% overload. (110%of rated).f.An integrated systems check of the ECCS was performed simulating asimultaneous loss of off-site power.D.4.3.19Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning SystemThis system consisted of the heating boiler, fans, dampers, and ventilating units that are installed in the reactor building, turbine building, and radwaste building.a.Verified instrument calibration.b.Verified balance of ventilation air flowsc.Verified satisfactory performance of ventilating units.
d.Demonstrated safe operation of the plant heating boiler.
Revision 22USAR D.4MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 16 of 16I/mabD.4.3.20Primary Containment Atmospheric Control SystemThis system consisted of the drywell coolers, and the primary containmentvacuum breakers.a.Verified instrument calibration.
b.Checked all alarms, controls and interlocks.
c.Demonstrated operation of drywell coolers d.Functionally checked vacuum breakers.D.4.3.21Diesel Oil SystemThis system consisted of the Diesel Oil Storage tank, transfer pump, servicepump, and associated day tanks.a.Verified instrument calibration.
b.Checked all alarms and controls.c.Demonstrated system performance by transfer of oil to various day tanks.D.4.3.22Reactor Building Cranea.Checked all controls and interlocks.b.Demonstrated crane performance.
Revision 22USAR D.5MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 1 of 5APPENDIX DPRE-OPERATIONAL AND STARTUP TESTSI/mabD.5Startup And Power Test ProgramD.5.1General RequirementsThe startup and power test program was performed to assure that the plant iscapable of operating safely and satisfactorily. Systems and components, which could not be fully checked out in preoperational test phase were tested at power during this phase of the unit startup to confirm reactor parameters and characteristics determined by an extensive program of analysis and testsexecuted prior to initial fuel loading. The nuclear characteristics of fuel, controlrod and control curtains were calculated with methods which were continuously compared with results of experiments in the Vallecitos Atomic Laboratorys critical facilities, including measurements of similar or identical components. In addition, startup tests and operating data from other boiling water reactors incommercial operation and other measurements throughout the nuclear industrywere used to confirm the applicability of the analytical methods.Several restrictions were necessary during the initial startup program. Alloperations and tests complied with the safety and warranty limitations specified by the General Electric Co. as well as safety limitations and limiting conditions specified by licensing authorities. Additional restrictions were minimizedbecause the prime objective of the startup program was to demonstrate the plantcapability and safety up to full power. A two hour net heat rate demonstration was performed at an electrical output corresponding to 1469 MWt. At one hundred hour test was run at 1469 MWt.D.5.2General ProceduresThe startup procedures were, with individual detailed subsections.D.5.3Fuel Loading and Tests at Atmospheric PressureThe initial fuel loading and critical testing were performed at near-zero power,and at atmospheric pressure, with the reactor pressure vessel open. Thefollowing tests were performed during this phase of the startup program:a.Chemical and Radiochemical tests were conducted to establish water conditions prior to initial operation and to maintain these throughout the test program. Chemical and radiochemical checks were made at primary coolant, off-gas exhaust, waste and auxiliary system sample locations.Base or background radioactivity levels were determined at this time foruse in fuel assembly failure detection and long range activity buildup studies.FOR ADMINISTRATIVE USE ONLYResp Supv:CNSTPAssoc Ref:SR:2yrsNFreq:USAR-MANARMS:USAR-D.5Doc Type:Admin Initials:Date:9703 Revision 22USAR D.5MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 2 of 5I/mabb.Control Rod Drive System tests were performed on all drives prior tofuel loading to assure proper operability and to measure and adjustoperating speeds. Drive line friction and scram times were determined forall drives at zero reactor pressure. Functional testing of each drive was performed with dummy fuel just prior to and then following the fuel loading in each cell.c.Radiation Measurements were made prior to nuclear operation to establish base levels in the plant and the nearby environs.d.Fuel Loading was, according to detailed, step-by-step writtenprocedures. The core assembled, with control curtains in place, to the full-sized core.e.Shutdown Margin It was demonstrated periodically during fuel loadingthat the reactor was subcritical by more than a specified amount with thestrongest single control rod withdrawn. The shutdown marginrequirement was a limitation on the amount of radioactivity which can be loaded into the core. The magnitude of the margin was chosen with consideration for credible reactivity changes after the test, and for the accuracy of measurement. The test had three parts: (a) The analyticaldetermination of the strongest control rod, (b) the calibration of anadjacent control rod, experimentally or analytically, and (c) the demonstration of subcritcality with strongest rod fully withdrawn and the second at the position equal to the margin. This demonstration was made for the fully loaded core, and with selected smaller core loadings.f.The specified Control Rod Sequences were evaluated to verify that thestated criteria of safety, simplicity, and operating requirements were metduring routine cold startups. The reactor made critical by withdrawingcontrol rods in a specified sequence and reactivity addition rates were measured near critical. The preselected sequence could be modified if necessary to meet criteria. A small number of non-standard arrays were utilized to check out the operation of the rod worth minimizer.g.Source Range Monitor (SRM) Performance The performance of thesource range monitors were evaluated based on data taken with theinstalled source range monitoring instrumentation and installed operational sources. The SRM System was calibrated to reactor power and its performance was compared to stated criteria on noise, signal-to-noise ratio and response to change in core reactivity.h.Intermediate Range Monitor (IRM) Calibration Calibration of theintermediate range monitors was performed to provide level calibration forthe intermediate range monitors adequate for this phase of the testprogram.i.Process Computer As plant process variable signals become availableto the computer, verifications were made of these signals and of the computerized systems performance calculations.
Revision 22USAR D.5MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 3 of 5I/mabD.5.4Heatup From Ambient to Rated Temperature and PressureFollowing satisfactory completion of the core loading and low power testprogram, the core components were visually verified for proper installation, andthe additional in-vessel hardware was installed. This included special monitoring instrumentation, and steam separator and dryer assemblies.The reactor head was installed, followed by a hydrostatic test to assuresatisfactory sealing of the vessel head. The drywell head was installed andshield plugs placed over it. A sequence of tests was performed to confirm a number of the nuclear steam supply system characteristics as the temperature and pressure were increased. Sufficient tests were performed at each incremental step increase in power or change in pressure, and the tests andoperating procedures were evaluated, to assure that the succeeding change inoperating conditions could be made safely. The following tests were conducted during this phase of the startup.a.IRM Calibration was improved by using data obtained from heatup ratesobserved during nuclear testing.b.SRM Performance was determined in the power overlap region with theIRM System. The SRM System was recalibrated by comparison to the IRM System readings in the region.c.Reactor Vessel Temperatures were monitored during heatup cooldownto determine that temperature differences were not excessive.d.System Expansion checks were made during heatup to verify to verify freedom of major equipment and piping to move.e.Control Rod Drive systems test were made by measuring scram timeson a selected number of drives at two intermediate pressures, scramtimes and drive line friction tests on a representative set of drives at rated reactor pressure and on a selected number of drives without accumulators at rated reactor pressures.f.Control Rod Sequence to be used during heatup was checkedperiodically for satisfactory performance.g.Radiation Measurements were made periodically during nuclear heating and a complete survey was made at rated temperatures.h.Chemical and Radiochemical checks were be made during the heatup.i.Core Performance Evaluations were made near or at rated temperatureand pressure. This included a reactor heat balance at rated temperature.
Revision 22USAR D.5MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 4 of 5I/mabD.5.5From Rated Temperature to 1670 MWt PowerReactor power was increased to 1670 MWt in increments of approximately 10%with major testing at 15, 25, 50, 75, 88 (1469 MWt) and 100% power. Theturbine was placed in service and tested during this phase. The test programincluded the following, but not necessarily at each increment of power. All were performed during the 1670 MWt tests.a.Chemical and Radiochemical tests were continued.b.Radiation Measurements of limited extent were made at 25% of rated power and complete surveys were made at 50 and 100% power.c.System Expansion tests were continued on a limited basis as reactor power was increased.d.Main Steam Isolation Valve functional and operational tests were madeas reactor power was increased.e.RCIC System tests were made to demonstrate proper performance inregard to flow rate and leak tightness were made at a low power level.f.HPCI System tests were made to demonstrate proper performance of thesystem including the steam turbine driven pumping system.g.Recirculating Pump Trips and their effects on the jet pumps and thereactor were tested periodically during power increase.h.Flow Control capabilities were determined at specified power levels.i.Turbine Trip tests were made to determine the effects of turbine trips onthe reactor and the auxiliaries of the unit.j.Generator Trip tests were performed to determine speed and reactorresponse.k.Pressure Regulator tests were made to determine the response of thereactor and the turbine governor system. Regulator settings wereoptimized using data from this test.l.Bypass Valves measurements were performed by opening a turbinebypass valve and recording the resulting reactor transients. Finaladjustments to the bypass valves were made.m.Feedwater Pumps were used to change reactor subcooling and theresulting transients were measured to determine system response.
Revision 22USAR D.5MONTICELLO UPDATED SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORTPage 5 of 5I/mabn.Flux Response to rods was determined in both equilibrium and transientconditions. Steady-state noise was measured as was flux response tocontrol rod motion. Power-void loop stability was verified from this data.o.LPRM Calibrations including use of the TIP system, were made at 15,25, 50, and 100% of rated power. Each local power range monitor was calibrated to read in terms of local fuel rod surface heat flux.p.APRM Calibrations were performed after making significant power levelchanges. Reactor heat balances formed the basis of these calibrations ofthe average power range monitor.q.Core Performance Evaluations were made periodically to assure thatthe core operated within allowable limits on maximum local surface heat flux and Minimum Critical Heat Flux Ratio. This test included reactor heatbalance determinations.r.Calibration of Rods were performed to obtain reference relationshipsbetween control rod motion and reactor power and steam flow in thespecified control rod sequence.s.Axial Power Distribution measurements were made with the traversingin-core probe system after significant changes in power, control rod, pattern, or flow rate. The TIP system supplied data for core performance evaluations and LPRM calibrations.t.Rod Pattern Exchanges were demonstrated from one specified sequence to the other at the highest practical reactor power.u.Loss of Auxiliary Power Test was performed to demonstrate properresponse of the reactor and the plant electrical equipment and systems.v.Process Computer functions were verified as sensed variables come intorange during the ascension to and at rated power.