AEP-NRC-2011-37, Cycle 23 End of Life Moderator Temperature Coefficient Limit Report

Cycle 23 End of Life Moderator Temperature Coefficient Limit Report

ML11270A095
Person / Time
Site:	Cook
Issue date:	09/14/2011
From:	Carlson M Indiana Michigan Power Co
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
AEP-NRC-2011-37
Download: ML11270A095 (20)

Text

INDIANA MICHIGAN POWERO A unit of American Electric Power September 14, 2011 Indiana Michigan Power Cook Nuclear Plant One Cook Place Bridgman, MI 49106 AEP.com AEP-NRC-2011-37 10 CFR 50.4 Docket No.:

50-315 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, D. C. 20555-0001 Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant Unit 1 UNIT 1 CYCLE 23 END OF LIFE MODERATOR TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENT LIMIT REPORT

Reference:

Letter from J. N. Jensen, Indiana Michigan Power Company, to U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk, "Supplement to License Amendment Request on the Conditional Exemption from Measurement of End of Life Moderator Temperature Coefficient," AEP:NRC:5132-01, dated June 2, 2005.

Indiana Michigan Power Company (I&M), the licensee for Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant (CNP),

made a commitment in the referenced letter to submit the following information for the first three uses of the WCAP-13749-P-A methodology for each unit at CNP as a condition for approval of the conditional exemption of the most negative end of life moderator temperature coefficient measurement technical specification change:

1. A summary of the plant data used to confirm that the Benchmark Criteria of Table 3-2 of WCAP-13749-P-A, "Safety Evaluation Supporting the Conditional Exemption of the Most Negative EOL Moderator Temperature Coefficient Measurement," have been met; and,

2. The Most Negative Moderator Temperature Coefficient Limit Report (as found in Appendix D of WCAP-13749-P-A).

The required information is included as Enclosures 1 and 2 to this submittal. Subsequent to the preparation of Enclosure 1 to this submittal, the fuel vendor identified a core modeling issue affecting the physics testing results reported in Enclosure 1, Table 5. The vendor has estimated the effect of the modeling error and stated that the preliminary result remains compliant with the acceptance criterion. The vendor will provide a formal notification of the result for Unit 1 Cycle 23, as well as any effects on testing results for previous cycles, when their analysis is complete.

Following receipt of the formal notification from the vendor, I&M will update the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) with the results of those analyses.

I&M expects to provide that update by September 30, 2012. If the schedule for this update changes, I&M will coordinate this change with the NRC Project Manager.

,*(c.c

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission AEP-NRC-2011-37 Page 2 This transmittal is the final of the three submittals for Unit 1. Note that Unit 1 Cycle 22 did not achieve the end-of-life conditions requiring the test, and the test was not performed; therefore, there was no Unit 1 Cycle 22 submittal. provides I&M's commitment in tabular format. Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. Michael K. Scarpello, Regulatory Affairs Manager, at (269) 466-2649.

Sincerely, Michael H. Carlson Site Support Services Vice President JEN/jmr

Enclosures:

1.

Plant Data Used to Confirm Benchmark Requirements

2.

Most Negative End of Life Moderator Temperature Coefficient Limit Report for Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant - Unit 1, Cycle 23

3.

Regulatory Commitment c:

J. T. King, MPSC S. M. Krawec, AEP Ft. Wayne, w/o enclosures MDEQ - WHMD/RPS NRC Resident Inspector M. A. Satorius, NRC Region III P. S. Tam, NRC Washington, DC to AEP-NRC-2011-37 PLANT DATA USED TO CONFIRM BENCHMARK REQUIREMENTS to AEP-NRC-2011-37 Page 1 Plant Data Used to Confirm Benchmark Requirements To facilitate the review of this information, a list of abbreviations used in this enclosure is provided.

OF degrees fahrenheit percent BOL beginning of life CNP Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant EOL end of life HZP hot zero power ITC isothermal temperature coefficient M

measured MTC moderator temperature coefficient MTU metric tons of uranium MWD megawatt-day NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission pcm percent-millirho P

predicted This enclosure presents a comparison of the CNP Unit 1 Cycle 23 core characteristics with the requirements for use of the Conditional Exemption of the Most Negative EOL MTC Measurement methodology and presents plant data demonstrating that the Benchmark Criteria presented in WCAP-1 3749-P-A are met.

Subsequent to the preparation of this enclosure, the fuel vendor identified a core modeling issue affecting the physics testing results reported in Table 5. The vendor has corrected the modeling error and stated that the preliminary result remains compliant with the acceptance criterion. The vendor will provide a formal notification of the result for Unit 1 Cycle 23, as well as any effects on testing results for previous cycles, when their analysis is complete.

The Conditional Exemption of the Most Negative EOL MTC Measurement methodology is described in WCAP-13749-P-A. This report was approved by the NRC with two requirements:

only PHOENIX/ANC calculation methods are used for the individual plant analyses relevant to determinations for the EOL MTC plant methodology, and

" the predictive correction is re-examined if changes in core fuel designs or continued MTC calculation/measurement data show significant effect on the predictive correction.

The PHOENIX/ANC calculation methods were used for the CNP Unit 1 Cycle 23 core design and relevant analyses.

Also, the Unit 1 Cycle 23 core design does not represent a major change in core fuel design, and the MTC calculation-to-measurement physics database shows no significant effect on the predictive correction.

Therefore, the predictive correction of

-3 pcm/°F remains valid for this cycle. The Unit 1 Cycle 23 core meets both of the above requirements.

to AEP-NRC-2011-37 Page 2 The following references are applicable to this enclosure:

1. WCAP-1 3749-P-A, "Safety Evaluation Supporting the Conditional Exemption of the Most Negative EOL Moderator Temperature Coefficient Measurement," dated March 1997.

2. Letter from J. D. Peralta, NRC, to J. A. Gresham, Westinghouse Electric Company, "NRC Staff Interpretation of WCAP-1 6260-P-A with Respect to Two Previously Approved Topical Reports WCAP-8846-A, WCAP-13749-P-A and Their Associated Safety Evaluations," dated May 23, 2006 (ML061420313).

The following data tables are provided in support of the benchmark criteria:

Table 1 - Benchmark Criteria for Application of the 300 ppm MTC Conditional Exemption Methodology (per WCAP-1 3749-P-A)

Table 2 - Flux Map Data: Assembly Powers Table 3 - Flux Map Data: Core Tilt Criteria Table 4 - Core Reactivity Balance Data Table 5 - Low Power Physics Test Data (BOL, HZP): ITC Table 6 - Low Power Physics Test Data (BOL, HZP): Total Control Bank Worth to AEP-NRC-2011-37 Page 3 Table I Benchmark Criteria for Application of the 300 ppm MTC Conditional Exemption Methodoloav (per WCAP-1 3749-P-A)

Parameter Criteria Assembly Power (Measured Normal Reaction Rate)

Measured Incore Quadrant Power Tilt (Low Power)

Measured Incore Quadrant Power Tilt (Full Power)

Core Reactivity Difference

+/- 0.1 or 10 %

+/-4%

+/-2%

+ 1000 pcm

+ 2 pcm/°F BOL HZP ITC Individual Control Bank Worth Total Control Bank Worth NA*

+/- 10%

Not required when "The Spatially Corrected Inverse Count Rate (SCICR) Method for Subcritical Reactivity Measurement" has been performed; see letter from J. D. St. John, Westinghouse Electric Company, to M. L. Bellville, American Electric Power Nuclear Generation Group, "NRC Staff Interpretation of WCAP-16260-P-A," NF-AE-06-72, dated May 30, 2006.

to AEP-NRC-2011-37 Page 4 Table 2 Flux Map Data:Assembly Powers Assembly Power (Measured Normalized Reaction Rate)

Map Date Power (Maximum Magnitude of Relative Error)

(%)

Measured Predicted IPredicted 10% of Acceptable Power Power Predicted MeasuredI 123-01 04/09/2010 28.13 0.287 0.269 0.018 0.027 YES 123-02 04/10/2010 46.71 0.289 0.273 0.016 0.027 YES 123-03 04/11/2010 89.66 0.297 0.280 0.017 0.028 YES 123-04 04/13/2010 99.68 0.299 0.279 0.020 0.028 YES 123-05 04/19/2010 99.63 0.298 0.278 0.020 0.028 YES 123-06 05/17/2010 99.74 0.292 0.274 0.018 0.027 YES 123-07 06/14/2010 99.77 0.290 0.271 0.019 0.027 YES 123-08 07/19/2010 99.72 0.288 0.268 0.020 0.027 YES 123-09 08/16/2010 99.65 0.288 0.268 0.020 0.027 YES 123-10 09/13/2010 99.78 0.291 0.268 0.023 0.027 YES 123-11 10/18/2010 99.81 0.297 0.271 0.026 0.027 YES 123-12 11/15/2010 99.69 0.301 0.274 0.027 0.027 YES 123-13 12/13/2010 99.77 0.306 0.278 0.028 0.028 YES 123-14 01/17/2011 99.77 0.316 0.284 0.032 0.028 YES 123-15 02/14/2011 99.86 0.326 0.291 0.035 0.029 YES 123-16 03/11/2011 99.78 0.335 0.298 0.037 0.030 YES 123-17 04/18/2011 99.93 0.347 0.307 0.040 0.031 YES 123-18 05/16/2011 99.84 0.359 0.317 0.042 0.032 YES 123-19 06/13/2011 99.84 0.370 0.327 0.043 0.033 YES Acceptance Criterion: +/- 0.1 or 10%.

to AEP-NRC-2011-37 Page 5 Table 3 Flux Map Data: Core Tilt Criteria Top Half Incore Quadrant Power Tilt Map #

Power(%)

Maximum Tilt Minimum Tilt Acceptable 123-01 28.13 1.00587 0.99125 Yes 123-02 46.71 1.00367 0.99349 Yes 123-03 89.66 1.00497 0.99610 Yes 123-04 99.68 1.00461 0.99523 Yes 123-05 99.63 1.00476 0.99506 Yes 123-06 99.74 1.00886 0.99444 Yes 123-07 99.77 1.00619 0.99629 Yes 123-08 99.72 1.00645 0.99614 Yes 123-09 99.65 1.00518 0.99556 Yes 123-10 99.78 1.00421 0.99595 Yes 123-11 99.81 1.00206 0.99696 Yes 123-12 99.69 1.00271 0.99776 Yes 123-13 99.77 1.00296 0.99856 Yes 123-14 99.77 1.00416 0.99776 Yes 123-15 99.86 1.00411 0.99732 Yes 123-16 99.78 1.00490 0.99792 Yes 123-17 99.93 1.00548 0.99697 Yes 123-18 99.84 1.00499 0.99737 Yes 123-19 99.84 1.00692 0.99631 Yes Acceptance Criteria:

High power maps - maximum power tilt: 1.02; minimum power tilt: 0.98 Low power maps - maximum power tilt: 1.04; minimum power tilt: 0.96 to AEP-NRC-2011-37 Page 6 Table 3 (continued)

Flux Map Data: Core Tilt Criteria Bottom Half Incore Quadrant Power Tilt Map #

Power(%)

Maximum Tilt Minimum Tilt Acceptable 123-01 28.13 1.00672 0.99272 Yes 123-02 46.71 1.00240 0.99496 Yes 123-03 89.66 1.00294 0.99504 Yes 123-04 99.68 1.00295 0.99474 Yes 123-05 99.63 1.00221 0.99569 Yes 123-06 99.74 1.00498 0.99447 Yes 123-07 99.77 1.00459 0.99458 Yes 123-08 99.72 1.00582 0.99335 Yes 123-09 99.65 1.00533 0.99483 Yes 123-10 99.78 1.00584 0.99502 Yes 123-11 99.81 1.00639 0.99509 Yes 123-12 99.69 1.00578 0.99529 Yes 123-13 99.77 1.00540 0.99539 Yes 123-14 99.77 1.00591 0.99482 Yes 123-15 99.86 1.00650 0.99599 Yes 123-16 99.78 1.00707 0.99456 Yes 123-17 99.93 1.00610 0.99464 Yes 123-18 99.84 1.00755 0.99504 Yes 123-19 99.84 1.00468 0.99646 Yes Acceptance Criteria:

High power maps - maximum power tilt: 1.02; minimum power tilt: 0.98 Low power maps - maximum power tilt: 1.04; minimum power tilt: 0.96 to AEP-NRC-2011-37 Page 7 Table 4 Core Reactivity Balance Data Unit I Cycle 23 Boron Letdown Curve Date Burnup Delta Acceptable (MWD/MTU)

Reactivity (pcm)

April 23, 2010 483.83

-117.2 Yes April 27, 2010 634.27

-47.8 Yes May 1, 2010 784.26

-42.4 Yes May 18, 2010 1,205.93 60.8 Yes May 29, 2010 1,618.70 39.3 Yes June 3, 2010 1,810.86 29.3 Yes June 8, 2010 1,999.83 70.2 Yes June 15, 2010 2,264.09 66.4 Yes July 20, 2010 3,586.68 95.5 Yes August 17, 2010 4,643.02 187.8 Yes September 14, 2010 5,704.25 163.7 Yes October 19, 2010 7,022.30 226.9 Yes November 16, 2010 8,065.88 126.0 Yes December 12, 2010 9,042.07 86.5 Yes January 11,2011 10,153.1 14.3 Yes February 15, 2011 11,475.0

-6.8 Yes March 10, 2011 12,320.9

-9.5 Yes April 19, 2011 13,580.0 4.4 Yes May 15, 2011 14,560.8 24.3 Yes June 14, 2011 15,700.4 5.5 Yes Acceptance Criterion: +/- 1000 pcm to AEP-NRC-2011-37 Page 8 Table 5 Low Power Physics Test Data (BOL, HZP): ITC Measured ITC Predicted ITC ITC Error (M-P)

Acceptable (pcm/°F)

(pcm/lF)

(pcml°F)

-1.62

-1.49

-0.13 Yes Acceptance Criterion: ITC error within +/- 2 pcml°F Table 6 Low Power Physics Test Data (BOL. HZP): Total Control Bank Worth Measured Predicted Delta Worth Worth %Error Worth Worth (M-P)

(M-P)x100%

Acceptable (pcm)

(pcm)

(pcm)

P Total Measured 6709 6927

-218

-3.15%

Yes Worth Acceptance Criterion: Total Measured Worth % error within +/-10%

to AEP-NRC-2011-37 MOST NEGATIVE END OF LIFE MODERATOR TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENT LIMIT REPORT FOR DONALD C. COOK NUCLEAR PLANT UNIT 1, CYCLE 23 to AEP-NRC-2011-37 Page 1 Most Negative End of Life Moderator Temperature Coefficient Limit Report for Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant Unit 1, Cycle 23 To facilitate the review of this information, a list of abbreviations used in this attachment is provided.

OF degrees fahrenheit A

delta percent AFD axial flux difference ARO all rods out BOL beginning of life CB Reactor Coolant System boron concentration CNP Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant COLR Core Operating Limits Report EOL end of life HFP hot full power HZP hot zero power ITC isothermal temperature coefficient M

measured MTC moderator temperature coefficient MTU metric tons of uranium MWD megawatt-day pcm percent-millirho ppm parts per million P

predicted RCS Reactor Coolant System RTP reactor thermal power PURPOSE:

The purpose of this enclosure is to present cycle-specific best estimate data for use in confirming the most negative EOL MTC limit in CNP Technical Specification 3.1.3. This enclosure also summarizes the methodology used for determining if a HFP 300 ppm MTC measurement is required.

PRECAUTIONS AND LIMITATIONS:

The EOL MTC exemption data presented in this enclosure apply to CNP Unit 1 Cycle 23 only and may not be used for other operating cycles.

The following references are applicable to this enclosure:

1. WCAP-13749-P-A, "Safety Evaluation Supporting the Conditional Exemption of the most Negative EOL Moderator Temperature Coefficient Measurement," dated March 1997.

to AEP-NRC-2011-37 Page 2

2. Letter from J. D. Peralta, NRC, to J. A. Gresham, Westinghouse Electric Company, "NRC Staff Interpretation of WCAP-16260-P-A with Respect to Two Previously Approved Topical Reports WCAP-8846-A, WCAP-13749-P-A and Their Associated Safety Evaluations," dated May 23, 2006 (ML061420313).

PROCEDURE:

All core performance benchmark criteria listed in Table 1 must be met for the current operating cycle. These criteria are confirmed from startup physics test results and routine HFP CB and incore flux map surveillances performed during the cycle.

If all core performance benchmark criteria are met, then the Revised Predicted MTC may be calculated per the algorithm given in Table 2. The required cycle-specific data are provided in Tables 3 and 4, and Figure 1. This methodology is also described in the referenced document.

If all core performance benchmark criteria are met and the Revised Predicted MTC is less negative than COLR Limit 2.2.2.b, then a measurement is not required.

to AEP-NRC-2011-37 Page 3 Table I Benchmark Criteria for Application of the 300 ppm MTC Conditional Exemption Methodology Parameter Criteria Assembly Power (Measured Normal Reaction Rate)

Measured Incore Quadrant Power Tilt (Low Power)

Measured Incore Quadrant Power Tilt (Full Power)

Core Reactivity Difference

+ 0.1 or 10 %

+/-4%

+/-2%

+/- 1000 pcm

+/- 2 pcm/OF BOL HZP ITC Individual Control Bank Worth Total Control Bank Worth NA*

+/- 10%

Not required when "The Spatially Corrected Inverse Count Rate (SCICR) Method for Subcritical Reactivity Measurement" has been performed; see letter from J. D. St. John, Westinghouse Electric Company, to M. L. Bellville, American Electric Power Nuclear Generation Group, "NRC Staff Interpretation of WCAP-16260-P-A," NF-AE-06-72, dated May 30, 2006 to AEP-NRC-2011-37 Page 4 Table 2 Algorithm for Determining the Revised Predicted Near-EOL 300 ppm MTC The Revised Predicted MTC = Predicted MTC + AFD Correction - 3 pcm/0F Where:

Predicted MTC is calculated from Figure 1 at the burnup corresponding to the measurement of 300 ppm at RTP conditions, AFD Correction is the more negative value of the following:

0 pcm/°F or (AAFD

• AFD Sensitivity)

AAFD is the measured AFD minus the predicted AFD from an incore flux map taken at or near the burnup corresponding to 300 ppm.

AFD Sensitivity = 0.05 pcm / OF / %AAFD Predictive Correction is -3 pcm/°F, as included in the equation for the Revised Predicted MTC.

to AEP-NRC-2011-37 Table 3 Worksheet for Calculating the Revised Predicted Near-EOL 300 ppm MTC Page 5 Unit:

1, Cycle 23 Date:

7/14/2011 Time:

4:01 Reference for Cycle-Specific MTC Data:

CNP, Unit 1 Cycle 23, COLR Part A. Predicted MTC A. 1 Cycle Average Burnup corresponding to the HFP ARO equilibrium xenon CB of 300 ppm.

A.2 Predicted HFP ARO MTC corresponding to burnup (A.1)

Part B. AFD Correction B. 1 Burnup of most recent HFP, equilibrium conditions incore flux map B.2 Measured HFP AFD at burnup (B.1)

Reference incore flux map:

Map#

123-19 Date:

6/13/2011 B.3 Predicted HFP AFD at burnup (B.1)

B.4 MTC Sensitivity to AFD B.5 AFD Correction, more negative of the following:

0 pcm/OF or [B.4 *(B.2 - B.3)]

Part C. Revised Prediction C.1 Revised Prediction (A.2 + B.5 - 3 pcm/°F)

C.2 Surveillance Limit (COLR 2.2.2.b) 16824.6 MWD/MTU

-21.007 pcm/°F 15662.4 MWD/MTU

-0.392

% AFD

-0.76 % AFD 0.05 pcm/OF/%AAFD 0

pcm/°F

-24.007 pcm/°F

-38.4 pcm/°F If C.1 is less negative than C.2, then the HFP 300 ppm MTC measurement is not required per Technical Specification Surveillance Requirement 3.1.3.2.

to AEP-NRC-2011-37 Page 6 Table 4 Data Collection and Calculations Required to Complete the Table 3 Worksheet of the Most Negative Moderator Temperature Coefficient Limit Report Data at the 300 ppm Boron Point:

RCS Boron at 300 ppm at 4:01 on 07/14/2011 Burnup at 300 ppm: 16824.6 MWD/MTU (A.1)

Predicted MTC: -21.007 pcm/°F (A.2)

Data from Last Flux Map:

Flux Map Number: 123-19 (B.2) 0 Reactor Power (RP): 99.84% RTP 0

Burnup: 15662.4 MWD/MTU (B.1) 0 Measured HFP Axial Flux Difference (MAFD): -0.392% (B.2) 0 Predicted HFP Axial Flux Difference (PAFD): -0.76% (B.3)

A AFD = (MAFD-PAFD)

= (-0.392% - -0.76%)

= 0.368%

Determination of the Revised Predicted MTC AFD Sensitivity: 0.05 pcm/°F/ %AAFD (B.4)

AFD Correction: 0 pcm/°F (B.5) where: AFD Correction is the more negative of the following:

0 pcm/°F or (AAFD

• AFD Sensitivity) 0 pcm/°F or (0.368%

• 0.05 pcm/°F/ %AAFD) 0 pcm/°F or 0.018 pcm/°F

.-. 0 pcm/°F Revised Predicted MTC = Predicted MTC + AFD Correction -3 pcm/°F

-- 21.007 pcm/°F + 0 pcm/°F -3 pcm/°F

= -24.007 pcm/°F (C.1) to AEP-NRC-2011-37 Page 7 Figure 1 Unit I Cycle 23 Predicted HFP ARO 300 ppm MTC Versus Burnup

-2.04E-04

-2.06E-04 t~-2. 08E-04 Z-2.IOE-D4 IL-Z2t2E04 5-2-A4E-D4

-116EE-04

-2.18E-04 4-15000 16000 17000 18000 Cycle Burnup (MWDIMTU) 190D0 Bumup MTC MTC (MWDIMTU)

(pcm/OF)

(Ak/K/°F) 15,000

-20.470

-2.0470E-04 16,000

-20.770

-2.0770E-04 17,000

-21.058

-2.1058E-04 18.000

-21.347

-2.1347E-04 19.000

-21.633

-2.1633E-04

ENCLOSURE 3 TO AEP-NRC-2011-37 REGULATORY COMMITMENT The following table identifies those actions committed to by Indiana Michigan Power Company (I&M) in this document. Any other actions discussed in this submittal represent intended or planned actions by I&M. They are described to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for the NRC's information and are not regulatory commitments.

Commitment Date Following receipt of the formal notification of the effect of the modeling error on physics testing results from the fuel vendor, I&M will update September 30, 2012 the Nuclear Regulatory Commission with the results of those analyses.