PWRRM February 2006

pwrrm@retaqs.com

9 participants
13 discussions

RE: [Pwrrm] Oconee Survey on Rod Worth Measurement
by ALDAY, CLINT L 19 Feb '06

19 Feb '06

Carl, Here you go. I cc'd two of my experts so that they could fill in the "I don't know" responses. Clint Alday -----Original Message----- From: pwrrm-bounces(a)retaqs.com [mailto:pwrrm-bounces@retaqs.com] On Behalf Of Carl D Fago Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 12:31 PM To: pwrrm(a)keffective.com Subject: [Pwrrm] Oconee Survey on Rod Worth Measurement Oconee has experienced a continuing trend on rod worth measurements during ZPPT where we measure heavy relative to predicted. We had an extension to the outage as we measured additional rod groups per our physics test program and managed to meet acceptance criteria in the end. But the trend through multiple cycles on all three units indicates we could continue to challenge the acceptance criteria. The root cause team has developed a survey to obtain benchmarking information. Your indulgence in filling out the survey to the best of your ability is appreciated and responses are requested by the end of next week. We'll send out an anonymous summary. Thanks for your help!! Carl Carl D. Fago, Supervisor Oconee Reactor Systems Engineering Phone: 864-885-3047 cdfago(a)duke-energy.com (See attached file: rxengr_survey.doc)

1 0

RE: [Pwrrm] FW: Power Ascension Flux Mapping for Westinghouse PWRs
by kevin.elam＠exeloncorp.com 14 Feb '06

14 Feb '06

Byron and Braidwood have combined the 30% and 50% flux maps. Actually, we have several conditional statepoints, but we typically only perform a flux map at ~41% and ~100%. If we had BEACON inoperable and performed the first flux map < 40%, we would perform another flux map < 80% (rare). We don't stabilize at all because BEACON handles the Xenon build-in and provides the "reference" values for the conditions that exist. Kevin S. Elam Reactor Engineer Byron Station Work Phone: (815)406-2247 Home Phone: (815)965-6065 -----Original Message----- From: pwrrm-bounces(a)retaqs.com [mailto:pwrrm-bounces@retaqs.com] Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 12:32 PM To: pwrrm(a)retaqs.com Subject: [Pwrrm] FW: Power Ascension Flux Mapping for Westinghouse PWRs From: Bojduj, William [mailto:WXB2@pge.com] Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 1:26 PM To: peter.moravek(a)exeloncorp.com; pwrrm-bounces(a)retaqs.com Subject: Power Ascension Flux Mapping for Westinghouse PWRs RE folks: I would greatly appreciate it if you could answer the following three questions for your Westinghouse PWRs: (1) Do you perform a flux map at ~30% RTP and ~50% RTP? (2) How long do you stabilize before collecting MIDS data at these plateaus? (3) What is the basis for the stabilization times? Best Regards, Bill Bojduj ☺ Diablo Canyon Power Plant Senior Advisory Engineer Reactor Engineering P.O. Box 56 Mail Stop 104/4/4B Avila Beach, CA 93424 805-545-3177 (Fax: 805-545-6992) ************************************************************************ This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain Exelon Corporation proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to the Exelon Corporation family of Companies. This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout. Thank You. ************************************************************************

1 0

FW: Power Ascension Flux Mapping for Westinghouse PWRs
by Tom Tomlinson 10 Feb '06

10 Feb '06

From: Bojduj, William [mailto:WXB2@pge.com] Sent: Friday, February 10, 2006 1:26 PM To: peter.moravek(a)exeloncorp.com; pwrrm-bounces(a)retaqs.com Subject: Power Ascension Flux Mapping for Westinghouse PWRs RE folks: I would greatly appreciate it if you could answer the following three questions for your Westinghouse PWRs: (1) Do you perform a flux map at ~30% RTP and ~50% RTP? (2) How long do you stabilize before collecting MIDS data at these plateaus? (3) What is the basis for the stabilization times? Best Regards, Bill Bojduj ☺ Diablo Canyon Power Plant Senior Advisory Engineer Reactor Engineering P.O. Box 56 Mail Stop 104/4/4B Avila Beach, CA 93424 805-545-3177 (Fax: 805-545-6992)

1 0

RE: [Pwrrm] Ramp Rate restrictions
by Kargol, Kenneth 06 Feb '06

06 Feb '06

At Diablo Canyon, we would consider implementing ramp rate restrictions based on the specifics of the situation. Fortunately, we don't have fuel rod failures in the current cycles. Ken Kargol Reactor Engineer Diablo Canyon (805) 545-4075 -----Original Message----- From: pwrrm-bounces(a)retaqs.com [mailto:pwrrm-bounces@retaqs.com] On Behalf Of wvferguson(a)aep.com Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 9:56 AM To: pwrrm(a)keffective.com Subject: [Pwrrm] Ramp Rate restrictions I was just wondering if any of you folks impose reactor power ramp rate restrictions on operations if you have fuel defects present. William Ferguson DC Cook Nuclear Plant Reactor Engineering (269) 465-5901 ext. 1598 ---------------------------------------------------------------- This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it from the Nuclear Generation Group of American Electric Power are for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. _______________________________________________ PWRRM mailing list PWRRM(a)retaqs.com http://www.keffective.com/mailman/listinfo/pwrrm

1 0

RE: [Pwrrm] Oconee Survey on Rod Worth Measurement
by Kargol, Kenneth 06 Feb '06

06 Feb '06

Attached is Diablo Canyon's response to the Oconee survey on rod worth measurement. Ken Kargol Reactor Engineer Diablo Canyon (805) 545-4075 -----Original Message----- From: pwrrm-bounces(a)retaqs.com [mailto:pwrrm-bounces@retaqs.com] On Behalf Of Carl D Fago Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 10:31 AM To: pwrrm(a)keffective.com Subject: [Pwrrm] Oconee Survey on Rod Worth Measurement Oconee has experienced a continuing trend on rod worth measurements during ZPPT where we measure heavy relative to predicted. We had an extension to the outage as we measured additional rod groups per our physics test program and managed to meet acceptance criteria in the end. But the trend through multiple cycles on all three units indicates we could continue to challenge the acceptance criteria. The root cause team has developed a survey to obtain benchmarking information. Your indulgence in filling out the survey to the best of your ability is appreciated and responses are requested by the end of next week. We'll send out an anonymous summary. Thanks for your help!! Carl Carl D. Fago, Supervisor Oconee Reactor Systems Engineering Phone: 864-885-3047 cdfago(a)duke-energy.com (See attached file: rxengr_survey.doc)

1 0

CIPS / AO Help
by Michael_Fanguy＠dom.com 03 Feb '06

03 Feb '06

Hi everyone, We recently did our quarterly rod testing on Unit 1 and had some issue. First of all, we insert each bank 12 steps, then withdraw to 235 steps, reset the group demand counters to 230, then insert to our full out position. Following this test, delta flux trended up and peaked about 0.6-07% higher than the start. Tavg also was about .2 deg higher as well. The delta flux response was seen fairly equally on all the NIs and a flux map confirmed incore AO was close to excore. We are not used to seeing this at Surry. I am postulating that a group of rods was partially (~ 2 steps) inserted or that this may possibly be CIPS? Has anyone experience this? Any feedback would be appreciated. Michael J. Fanguy Nuclear Analysis & Fuel Lead Reactor Engineer Surry Power Station Email: Michael_Fanguy(a)Dom.com Phone: 757-365-2155 Pager #: 3453 ----------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic message contains information which may be legally confidential and/or privileged and does not in any case represent a firm ENERGY COMMODITY bid or offer relating thereto which binds the sender without an additional express written confirmation to that effect. The information is intended solely for the individual or entity named above and access by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you.

1 0

Re: [Pwrrm] Nuclear Material Accountability Procedures for ISFSIs
by Matthew_W_Streibich＠dom.com 03 Feb '06

03 Feb '06

Dominion went a different way. Dominion does not consider movement of fuel to the ISFSI as a transfer of fuel between different entities since it is still on the same site property. We made the ISFSI PADs another Item Control Area (ICA) on the site and tracked it with Shuffleworks as part of normal internal fuel movement. As a result, no transfer of fuel occurred, just movement within a given site with the use of existing fuel tracking procedures. I don't have any insight on the second question since it has not come up. I would assume that since the only source of fuel to Surry's ISFSI can only come from Surry's reactor that issue does not apply. Matthew W. Streibich Reactor Engineer Kewaunee Power Station Email: Matthew Streibich(a)Dom.com Phone: 920-388-8624 Pager #: 920-305-0363 ----------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic message contains information which may be legally confidential and/or privileged and does not in any case represent a firm ENERGY COMMODITY bid or offer relating thereto which binds the sender without an additional express written confirmation to that effect. The information is intended solely for the individual or entity named above and access by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please reply immediately to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete it. Thank you.

1 0

Nuclear Material Accountability Procedures for ISFSIs
by WILLETT, JOSEPH E 03 Feb '06

03 Feb '06

Content was missing To all, Hello folks, I'm the RE at FCS responsible for SNM (NMA) tracking. I'm looking to get some procedure information on how you have implemented reporting for your ISFSI, as well as Material Balance Areas. Additionally, there is an existing question we need to have answered regarding 72.78, which reads as follows: § 72.78 Nuclear material transfer reports. (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, whenever the licensee transfers or receives special nuclear material, the licensee shall complete in computer-readable format a Nuclear Material Transaction Report in accordance with instructions (NUREG/BR-0006 and NMMSS Report D-24, "Personal Computer Data Input for NRC Licensees"). Copies of these instructions may be obtained either by writing the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Division of Nuclear Security, Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response, Washington, DC 20555-0001, by e-mail to RidsNsirDns(a)nrc.gov, or by calling (301) 415-7298. Each ISFSI licensee who receives spent fuel from a foreign source shall complete both the supplier's and receiver's portion of the Nuclear Material Transaction Report, verify the identity of the spent fuel, and indicate the results on the receiver's portion of the form. These prescribed computer-readable forms replace the DOE/NRC Form 741 which has been previously submitted in paper form. Did you address bolded text in your procedures? If not, why? Can you send me an example of how your ISFSI is set up administratively, your controlling procedures? J. E. Willett "Only those who will risk going too far can possibly find out how far one can go." T.S. Eliot (1888-1965) ---------------------------------------------------- Joseph E. Willett, P.E. Principal Reactor Engineer, Nuclear Operations E-mail: jwillett(a)oppd.com OR Joseph_Willett(a)hotmail.com Omaha Public Power District Phone: (402) 533-7213 P.O. Box 399 Pager: (402) 561-3899 Ft. Calhoun, NE 68023-0390 FAX: (402) 533-6747 Mail Station: FC-1-1 Plant This e-mail contains Omaha Public Power District's confidential and proprietary information and is for use only by the intended recipient. Unless explicitly stated otherwise, this e-mail is not a contract offer, amendment, nor acceptance. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

1 0

Nuclear Material Accountability Procedures for ISFSIs
by WILLETT, JOSEPH E 03 Feb '06

03 Feb '06

To all, Hello folks, I'm the RE at FCS responsible for SNM (NMA) tracking. I'm looking to get some procedure information on how you have implemented reporting for your ISFSI, as well as Material Balance Areas. Additionally, there is an existing question we need to have answered regarding 72.78, which reads as follows: § 72.78 Nuclear material transfer reports. (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, whenever the licensee transfers or receives special nuclear material, the licensee shall complete in computer-readable format a Nuclear Material Transaction Report in accordance with instructions (NUREG/BR-0006 and NMMSS Report D-24, "Personal Computer Data Input for NRC Licensees"). Copies of these instructions may be obtained either by writing the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Division of Nuclear Security, Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response, Washington, DC 20555-0001, by e-mail to RidsNsirDns(a)nrc.gov, or by calling (301) 415-7298. Each ISFSI licensee who receives spent fuel from a foreign source shall complete both the supplier's and receiver's portion of the Nuclear Material Transaction Report, verify the identity of the spent fuel, and indicate the results on the receiver's portion of the form. These prescribed computer-readable forms replace the DOE/NRC Form 741 which has been previously submitted in paper form. Did you address bolded text in your procedures? If not, why? Can you send me an example of how your ISFSI is set up administratively, your controlling procedures? J. E. Willett "Only those who will risk going too far can possibly find out how far one can go." T.S. Eliot (1888-1965) ---------------------------------------------------- Joseph E. Willett, P.E. Principal Reactor Engineer, Nuclear Operations E-mail: jwillett(a)oppd.com <mailto:jwillett@oppd.com%20> OR Joseph_Willett(a)hotmail.com <mailto:jwillett@uswest.net%20> Omaha Public Power District Phone: (402) 533-7213 P.O. Box 399 Pager: (402) 561-3899 Ft. Calhoun, NE 68023-0390 FAX: (402) 533-6747 Mail Station: FC-1-1 Plant This e-mail contains Omaha Public Power District's confidential and proprietary information and is for use only by the intended recipient. Unless explicitly stated otherwise, this e-mail is not a contract offer, amendment, nor acceptance. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited.

2 1

RE: [Pwrrm] Oconee Survey on Rod Worth Measurement
by kevin.elam＠exeloncorp.com 03 Feb '06

03 Feb '06

Kevin S. Elam Reactor Engineer Byron Station Work Phone: (815)406-2247 Home Phone: (815)965-6065 > -----Original Message----- From: pwrrm-bounces(a)retaqs.com [mailto:pwrrm-bounces@retaqs.com] Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 12:31 PM To: pwrrm(a)keffective.com Subject: [Pwrrm] Oconee Survey on Rod Worth Measurement Oconee has experienced a continuing trend on rod worth measurements during ZPPT where we measure heavy relative to predicted. We had an extension to the outage as we measured additional rod groups per our physics test program and managed to meet acceptance criteria in the end. But the trend through multiple cycles on all three units indicates we could continue to challenge the acceptance criteria. The root cause team has developed a survey to obtain benchmarking information. Your indulgence in filling out the survey to the best of your ability is appreciated and responses are requested by the end of next week. We'll send out an anonymous summary. Thanks for your help!! Carl Carl D. Fago, Supervisor Oconee Reactor Systems Engineering Phone: 864-885-3047 cdfago(a)duke-energy.com (See attached file: rxengr_survey.doc) ************************************************************************ This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain Exelon Corporation proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to the Exelon Corporation family of Companies. This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout. Thank You. ************************************************************************

1 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

PWRRM February 2006