Information Notice 1992-74, Power Oscillations at Washington Nuclear Power Unit 2

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Power Oscillations at Washington Nuclear Power Unit 2
ML031190763
Person / Time
Site: Beaver Valley, Millstone, Hatch, Monticello, Calvert Cliffs, Dresden, Davis Besse, Peach Bottom, Browns Ferry, Salem, Oconee, Mcguire, Nine Mile Point, Palisades, Palo Verde, Perry, Indian Point, Fermi, Kewaunee, Catawba, Harris, Wolf Creek, Saint Lucie, Point Beach, Oyster Creek, Watts Bar, Hope Creek, Grand Gulf, Cooper, Sequoyah, Byron, Pilgrim, Arkansas Nuclear, Braidwood, Susquehanna, Summer, Prairie Island, Columbia, Seabrook, Brunswick, Surry, Limerick, North Anna, Turkey Point, River Bend, Vermont Yankee, Crystal River, Haddam Neck, Ginna, Diablo Canyon, Callaway, Vogtle, Waterford, Duane Arnold, Farley, Robinson, Clinton, South Texas, San Onofre, Cook, Comanche Peak, Yankee Rowe, Maine Yankee, Quad Cities, Humboldt Bay, La Crosse, Big Rock Point, Rancho Seco, Zion, Midland, Bellefonte, Fort Calhoun, FitzPatrick, McGuire, LaSalle, Fort Saint Vrain, Shoreham, Satsop, Trojan, Atlantic Nuclear Power Plant, Crane  Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 11/10/1992
From: Grimes B
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
References
BL-88-007, Bl-88-007, Suppl 1, IN-88-039 IN-92-074, NUDOCS 9211040206
Download: ML031190763 (12)


KJ

UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION

WASHINGTON, D.C.

20555

November 10, 1992

NRC INFORMATION NOTICE 92-74:

POWER OSCILLATIONS AT WASHINGTON NUCLEAR POWER

UNIT 2

Addressees

All holders of operating licenses or construction permits for boiling-water

reactors (BWRs).

Purpose

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing this information

notice to alert addressees to a recent event involving power oscillations in

an operating region where instability had not been specifically predicted.

It

is expected that recipients will review the information for applicability to

their facilities and consider actions, as appropriate, to avoid similar

problems. However, suggestions contained in this information notice are not

NRC requirements; therefore, no specific action or written response is

required.

Background

On March 9, 1988, a thermal hydraulic instability event occurred at LaSalle

Unit 2. The NRC discussed this event in Information Notice 88-39, "LaSalle

Unit 2 Loss of Recirculation Pumps with Power Oscillation Event," and

Bulletins 88-07 and 88-07, Supplement 1, "Power Oscillations in Boiling Water

Reactors."

In the first bulletin, the NRC requested licensees to establish

procedures and give training to reactor operators to enable them to recognize

oscillations and to take appropriate actions. In the supplement, the NRC

requested licensees to implement the General Electric (GE) Interim

Recommendations for Stability Actions, designated the Interim Corrective

Actions (ICA).

GE defined the exclusion regions on the power/flow map in

which, with varying probability, instability might be expected. Three regions

were defined in which operation was to be avoided (immediate exit if entered)

or limited (e.g., when required during startup).

These regions were based on

operating or test experience for reactors with GE fuel.

The exclusion regions

for new fuel designs were to be reevaluated and justified based on any

applicable operating experience, calculated changes in core decay ratio using

NRC-approved methodology, and/or core decay ratio measurements.

Since the

LaSalle event in 1988, the NRC and the BWR Owners' Group (BWROG) have

conducted extensive analyses and reviews of various aspects of stability while

developing long-term solutions to augment or replace the ICA.

On

March 18, 1992, the BWROG sent a letter (BWROG-92030) to BWROG members

9211040206 Z ' a

ITE

IN 92-74 November 10, 1992 transmitting "Implementation Guidance for Stability Interim Corrective

Actions."

In this letter, the BWROG emphasized the need for caution when

operating near the exclusion regions.

The BWROG also recommended reexamining

procedures and training to reflect uncertainties in the definition of

exclusion region boundaries.

Description of Circumstances

On August 15, 1992, Washington Nuclear Power Unit 2 (WNP-2) experienced power

oscillations during startup.

The event occurred early in cycle 8 operation.

During cycle 8, the licensee had two previous startups without incident.

The

reactor core consisted primarily of Siemens fuel, with about 74 percent of

this fuel in 8x8 fuel assemblies and about 25 percent in 9x9 fuel assemblies, and with the remainder of the core consisting of various lead test assemblies.

The 9x9 fuel assembly used in WNP-2, designated 9x9-9x, has a higher flow

resistance than the 8x8 fuel assembly with a difference of about 10 percent in

pressure drop.

These 9x9 fuel assemblies were loaded during cycles 7 and 8.

About 33 hours3.819444e-4 days <br />0.00917 hours <br />5.456349e-5 weeks <br />1.25565e-5 months <br /> before the event, the licensee commenced a controlled power

reduction from full power to 5-percent power to repair a valve packing leak in

the drywell. After completing the repairs, the licensee began a return to

full power.

The licensee increased reactor power to about 34 percent and then

held it at that level for 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> to perform turbine bypass valve tests and

control rod drive system timing tests. The recirculation system was operated

with flow control valves (FCVs) full open and pumps at slow speed.

After completing the tests, the operators continued the restart up the

(approximately) 30-percent flow line to about 36-percent power (Figure 1).

This is at a power above the recirculation pump cavitation region.

The

operators then began closing one of the two FCVs in preparation for shifting

the associated recirculation pump to fast speed.

During this change, in which

power and flow decreased along the 76-percent rod line to a power/flow of

about 34/27 percent, the operators observed power oscillations first on the

average power range monitors (APRMs) and then by local power range monitors

(LPRMs) downscale indications.

Upon recognizing the power oscillations, the

plant operators manually initiated a reactor scram.

Post-event review

indicated that the 2-second-period oscillations were in-phase (core-wide) and

had grown to a peak-to-peak amplitude of about 25 percent of rated power.

Most of the oscillation amplitude increase occurred in an interval of about

1 minute with the oscillations continuing at the limiting (maximum) amplitude

for an additional minute before scram.

The oscillations occurred while the

reactor was operating at a power about 4 percent of rated power below the

lower exclusion region boundary line (the nominal 80-percent rod line).

During later review, the licensee found no indication that fuel had failed

because of the event.

_j

IN 92-74 November 10, 1992 The NRC sent an Augmented Inspection Team (AIT) to the site to determine the

possible causes and relevant facts of this event. The AIT concluded that the

primary cause of the oscillations was very skewed radial and bottom peaked

axial power distributions in the reactor (1.92 radial peaking factor and

1.62 core average axial peaking factor).

These power distributions resulted

from (1) the control rod pattern that the shift technical advisor selected for

increasing the power and shifting the recirculation pump speed, and (2) the

relationship of this control rod pattern to the specific WNP-2 cycle 8 core

fuel loading configuration.

These rod patterns were primarily directed

towards achieving the target full power configuration and did not consider

stability concerns.

The AIT also found, by analyses using the LAPUR code, that a contributor to

the oscillations was the core loading, consisting of a mixed core with

unbalanced flow characteristics between the new 9x9-9x fuel and the old

8x8 fuel.

The analyses indicated that a full core of the 9x9-9x fuel would be

significantly less stable than the old 8x8 fuel, and that the mixed core was

less stable than a fully loaded core of either fuel type.

The analyses also

indicated that while the oscillations would be in-phase (core-wide), as

observed in the event, the out-of-phase (regional) instability boundary would

be very close to the in-phase boundary (Figure 1).

The AIT found that small

changes in operating conditions could have resulted in out-of-phase

oscillations, which would have been more difficult for the APRM system to

detect.

WNP-2 has a Siemens Advanced Neutron Noise Analysis (ANNA) monitor, a

stability monitor required by technical specifications only if the licensee

intends to enter the lower exclusion region.

Since the licensee did not

intend to enter the exclusion region during this startup, the ANNA monitor was

not put into the observation mode, although it was gathering data which was

used later to confirm stability calculations performed after the event.

The licensee successfully restarted the unit after implementing the following

restrictions for maintaining the limits on rod withdrawal patterns and power

distribution in the low flow regions of concern.

The licensee analyzed the control rod patterns for stability before

startup, and the operator could not change these patterns without

analysis and review.

'O

The calculated maximum total peaking factor-was less than 3.4.

I IU

IN 92-74 November 10, 1992 *

The calculated core average axial peaking factor was less than 1.45.

The Minimum Critical Power Ratio was greater than 2.2.

The licensee analyzed the conditions at FCV closure and found a decay

ratio of less than 0.5.

The recirculation pump was shifted to fast

speed with the reactor power less than 33 percent and the feedwater

temperature greater than 146.1 0C (295 OF).

The licensee continuously used the ANNA monitor when the reactor was

operating above 25 percent power and below 50 percent flow.

Further detailed description of the event can be found in the AIT Inspection

Report No. 50-397/92-30.

Discussion

The WNP-2 power oscillation event indicates that the boundaries of the ICA

regions, or modifications approved for various reactor technical

specifications, do not necessarily encompass all stability limits.

Instability may occur beyond these boundaries if the reactor is operated with

configurations outside those used to define the boundaries.

This event

presented direct evidence that the following factors can be significant

contributors to the possibility of unstable operation.

Power distributions involving extremely skewed radial and axial peaking

factors can induce unstable operation even in regions or with operating

conditions not otherwise considered susceptible to oscillations.

Core loading patterns involving a mixture of fuel types with differing

flow resistances can contribute to instability.

Reactors with two-speed recirculation pumps and FCVs can hinder stability

because of the narrow range of operation between pump cavitation regions

and possible instability regions.

The event also indicates the value of operating a stability monitor.

The ANNA

monitor could have given the operators information that instability was

imminent, prompting them to alter operations to avoid the oscillations.

v.)

IN 92-74 November 10, 1992 This information notice requires no specific action or written response. If

you have any questions about the information in this notice, please contact

one of the technical contacts listed below or the appropriate Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) project manager.

Brian K. Grimes, Director

Division of Operating Reactors Support

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Technical contacts: Howard Richings, NRR

(301) 504-2888

Peter C. Wen, NRR

(301) 504-2832 Attachments:

1. Figure 1. Best-Estimate Lines of Constant

Decay Ratio=1.0 for Actual Conditions of

WNP-2 8/15/1992 Event, Assuming Constant

Power Distribution

2. List of Recently Issued NRC Information Notices

ill

Attachment 1

IN 92-74 November 10, 1992 WNP-2 8/15 STARTUP CONDITIONS

75 LAPUR-estimated I ihe of

ronczt;*rt ^is+f~hn

L

n-

-

I"

-

70

65

60

55

' *

.

-

.

-

Lbe U

I I

IP t

UM

I

_

_~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.

- -

-

_._....-

- -.-...-

-......

....__

__

......

a)

_P

0

0

't

P

a)

.

... .......

..

.

..

.....

. ...........

_.

........

_

......

....--

.

___,,,,,,,..

__.

. . ..... ............. . . .. ...

_

.

7....... ..... .. .

,. ,,, ........ ,

100% rod line

..

_.._..........

. .

... ... ... ....... .... . ........ ...................... ............. ......... .. ........

....

.

.... ....

/

80%:rod line

.. ...

..

.......-

.....--.--... . -......

.tAPUR-st-irma-te.-

4 j... ne-vaf --

constant in-phase DR=i1

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

2(

I............

_I

76% rod

..

....

ine

.................... . .. -8/--'15-Gtzrtup. Pzt t .

.. _._._.

I

I

I

I

25

30

35

40

45

50

55 so

Core Flow ( % of Rated )

Figure 1 Best-estimate lines of constant decay ratio=1.O for actual

conditions of 8/15 event, assuming constant power distribution

K-/

Attachment 2

IN 92-74

November 10, 1992 LIST OF RECENTLY ISSUED

NRC INFORMATION NOTICES

Information

Date of

Notice No.

Subject

Issuance

Issued to

92-61, Supp.

1

92-73

92-59, Rev. 1

92-72

91-64, Supp.

1

Loss of High Head

Safety Injection

Removal of A Fuel

Element from A Re- search Reactor Core

While Critical

Horizontally-Installed

Motor-Operated Gate

Valves

Employee Training and

Shipper Registration

Requirements for Trans- porting Radioactive

Materials

Site Area Emergency

Resulting from A Loss

of Non-Class 1E

Uninterruptible Power

Supplies

11/06/92

11-04/92

11/04/92

10/28/92

10/07/92

All holders of OLs or CPs

for nuclear power reactors.

All holders of OLs or CPs

for nuclear power reactors.

All holders of OLs or CPs

for nuclear power reactors.

All U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission Licensees.

All holders of OLs or CPs

for nuclear power reactors.

92-71

Partial Plugging of

Suppression Pool

Strainers At A

Foreign BWR

09/30/92 All holders

for nuclear

of OLs or CPs

power reactors.

92-70

Westinghouse Motor-Operated

Valve Performance Data

Supplied to Nuclear Power

Plant Licensees

09/25/92

All holders of OLs or CPs

for nuclear power reactors.

92-69

91-29, Supp. 1

Water Leakage from Yard

Area Through Conduits

Into Buildings

Deficiencies Identified

During Electrical Dis- tribution System Func- tional Inspections

09/22/92

09/14/92

All holders of OLs or CPs

for nuclear power reactors.

All holders of OLs or CPs

for nuclear power reactors.

OL = Operating License

CP = Construction Permit

~' IN 92-74 November 10, 1992 This information notice requires no specific action or written response.

If

you have any questions about the information in this notice, please contact

one of the technical contacts listed below or the appropriate Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) project manager.

Original signed by

Brian K.

Grimes

Brian K. Grimes, Director

Division of Operating Reactors Support

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Technical contacts:

Howard Richings, NRR

(301) 504-2888 Peter

(301)

C. Wen, NRR

504-2832 Attachments:

1. Figure 1. Best-Estimate Lines of Constant

Decay Ratio=1.0 for Actual Conditions of

WNP-2 8/15/1992 Event, Assuming Constant

Power Distribution

2.

List of Recently Issued NRC Information Notices

  • SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCES
  • C:OGCB:DORS:NR

GHMarcus

10/22/92

  • OGCB:DORS:NRR

PCWen:mkm

10/08/92 tR *DD:DSSA:NRR

GMHolahan

10/26/92

  • SRXB:DSSA:NRR

HRichings

10/08/92 r s

11/. r/92

  • SC:'SRXB:DSSA:NRR

LEPhillips

10/14/92

  • TechEd
  • C:SRXB:DSSA:NRR

RCJones

10/09/92

10/19/92 DOCUMENT NAME: 92-74.IN

v)

IN 92- October

, 1992 one of the technical contacts listed below or the appropriate Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) project manager.

Brian K. Grimes, Director

Division of Operating Reactors Support

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Technical Contacts: Howard Richings, NRR

(301) 504-2888 Peter C. Wen, NRR

(301) 504-2832 Attachments:

1. Figure 1. Best-Estimate Lin(

Conditions of WNP-

Distribution

2.

List of Recently Issued NRC

  • SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCES

Document Name: WNPPOWER.WP

es of Constant Decay Ratio=1.O for Actual

-2 8/15/1992 Event, Assuming Constant Power

Information Notices

  • DD:DSSA:NRR

GMHolahan

10/26/92

  • OGCB:DORS:NRR

PCWen:mkm

10/08/92

  • SRXB:DSSA:NRR

HRichings

10/08/92

  • S0

lLEI

  • C:OGCB:DORS:NRR

GHMarcus

10/22/92 C:SRXB:DSSA:NRR

  • TechEd

Phillips

114/92

10/09/92 D:DORS:NRR

BKGrimes y-

10/

/92

  • C:SRXB:DSSA:NRR

RCJones

10/19/92

K)

IN 92- October

, 1992 one of the technical contacts listed below or the appropriate Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) project manager.

Brian K. Grimes, Director

Division of Operating Reactors Support

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Technical Contacts: Howard Richings, NRR

(301) 504-2888

Peter C. Wen, NRR

(301) 504-2832 Attachments:

1. Figure 1. Best-Estimate

Conditions of

Distribution

2. List of Recently Issued

  • SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENC

Document Name: WNPPOWEF

Lines of Constant Decay Ratio=1.0 for Actual

WNP-2 8/15/1992 Event, Assuming Constant Power

NRC Information Notices

'ES

t.

C:OGCB:DORS:4iRR

'WP

GMarcusjJf

10/,22./92 a

A

  • SC:SRXB:DSSA:NRR
  • TechEd

LEPhillips

10/14/92

10/09/92 D:DORS:NRR

BKGrimesA

10/

/9)9

  • C:SRXB:DSSA:NRR

RCJones

10/19/92

  • OGCB:DORS:NRR

PCWen:mkm

10/08/92

  • SRXB:DSSA:NRR

HRichings

10/08/92

IN 92- October

, 1992 one of the technical contacts listed below or the appropriate Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) project manager.

Brian K. Grimes, Director

Division of Operating Reactors Support

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Technical Contacts: Howard Richings, NRR

(301) 504-2888

Peter C. Wen, NRR

(301) 504-2832 Attachments:

1.

Figure 1. Best-Estimate Lit

Conditions of WNI

Distribution

2. List of Recently Issued NR(

  • SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCES

ies of Constant Decay Ratio=1.0 for Actual

'-2 8/15/1992 Event, Assuming Constant Power

C Information Notices

Document t

  • OGCB:DORS:NRR

PCWen:mkm

10/08/92 C:OGCB:DORS:NRR

Name:

WNPPOWER.WP

GHMarcus

10/ /92

  • SRXB:DSSA:NR
DSSA:NRR
  • TechEd

HRichings

fi lips

10/08/92

1 10/14/92

10/09/9 D:DORS:NRR

BKGrimes

10/

/92 -1 C:SRXB:D

E % iRR

RCJones

/

12 O/7/92

v)

IN 92- October

, 1992 Further detailed description of the event can be found in the AIT Inspection

Report No. 50-397/92-30.

Discussion

The WNP-2 power oscillation event indicates that the boundaries of the ICA, or

modifications approved for various reactor technical specifications, do not

necessarily encompass all stability limits.

Investigation has indicated that

instability may extend beyond these boundaries if the reactor is operated with

parameters beyond those used to define boundaries. This event presented

direct evidence that the following factors can be significant contributors to

the possibility of unstable operation.

o

Power distributions involving extremely skewed radial and axial peaking

factors can induce unstable operation even in regions or with operating

conditions not otherwise considered susceptible to oscillations.

o

Core loading patterns involving a mixture of fuel types with differing

flow resistances can contribute to instability.

o

Reactors with two-speed recirculation pumps and FCVs can hinder stability

because of the narrow range of operation between pump limitation regions

and possible instability regions.

The event also indicates the value of operating a stability monitor.

The

ANNA monitor could have given the operators information that instability was

imminent, prompting them to alter operations to avoid the oscillations.

This information notice requires no specific action or written response. If

you have any questions about the information in this notice, please contact

one of the technical contacts listed below or the appropriate Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) project manager.

I

Brian K. Grimes, Director

Division of Operating Reactors Support

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Technical Contacts:

see page 5 C:OGCB:DORS:NRR

D:DORS:NRR

Document Name: WNPPOWER.WP

GHMarcus

BKGrimes

imJ

/ilk

10/

/92

10/ /92 OGCB:DORS:NRR SRXB:DSSA:NRR SC:SRXB:DSSA:NRR

IechEd

C:SRXB:DSSA:NRR

PCWen:mkm

HRichings

LEPhillips

JM ay V) RCJones

10/ g/92

10/ k/92

10/ /92

10/1 /92

10/ /92