Waterford (CE NSSS) has the alarms set same as COLR limits, and if the
COLR changes we change the alarm.
Clint Alday
-----Original Message-----
From: pwrrm-bounces(a)retaqs.com [mailto:pwrrm-bounces@retaqs.com] On
Behalf Of BRYSON, DAMON V
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2007 4:23 PM
To: PWR Reactivity Management
Subject: [Pwrrm] Rod Insertion Limits vs. Shutdown Margin
This question is for the Westinghouse crowd. We at VC Summer have
recently found some inconsistencies between our Rod Insertion Limit
(RIL) Lo-Lo alarm and our RIL in the Core Operating Limits Report
(COLR). For all control banks besides the lead bank, the installed RIL
alarm setpoint is at 213 steps, while our COLR limit is 230 steps. The
COLR limit is consistent with our reload shutdown margin analysis, which
assumes all rods except the lead bank at 230 steps (the all rods out
position).
As far as we can tell, our alarm has always been set to 213 for all
previous cycles. In previous cycles the COLR only listed the lead bank
limit, but no limits for other banks. We placed that limit in the COLR
based on our analysis assumptions.
Do other plants use similar setpoints? I know many plants have
repositioning strategies that require rod motion during the cycle, but
our plant does not. I also haven't found any mention of the RIL alarm
in the Westinghouse reload design process checklists. My control room
operators want some justification for this discrepancy, since I just
taught them in our last requal session that the purpose of the RIL alarm
is to verify you have shutdown margin. Thanks for any help you can
give...
Damon Bryson
dbryson(a)scana.com
803-345-4814