PWRRM

pwrrm@retaqs.com

244 discussions

FENOC Fuel Receipt Survey
by Pace, Eric R 17 Feb '09

17 Feb '09

NEW FUEL RECEIPT INDUSTRY SURVEY Plant: Catawba Nuclear Station Contact Information: Name: Eric R. Pace Phone: 803-701-2447 E-Mail: ERPac2(a)duke-energy.com<mailto:ERPac2@duke-energy.com> 1. What is the purpose of your new fuel receipt activities? (indicate all that apply) a. 10CFR50 Appendix B.VII quality inspection? YES b. Inspection for shipping damage and foreign material? YES c. Other (please specify): 2. Which organizations at your plant perform the following functions relative to new fuel receipt? a. Overall new fuel receipt project management. Reactor Engineering b. Ensuring adequate resources from other groups (Security, Radiation Protection, etc.) are aligned for new fuel receipt. Reactor Engineering c. Ensuring appropriate Preventative Maintenance has been performed on new fuel receipt equipment (hoists, bridges, etc.). Reactor Engineering/Fuel Handling Maintenance Crew d. Providing supervision of craft personnel (crane and bridge operators, mechanics, etc.) involved in new fuel receipt. Fuel Handling Maintenance Crew d. Performing actual new fuel receipt inspections. Reactor Engineering e. Interfacing with the fuel vendor. Reactor Engineering f. Generating fuel movement control sheets or checklists. Reactor Engineering g. Tracking Special Nuclear Material (including processing of Material Transaction Reports). Reactor Engineering h. Verifying integrity of shipping vehicle and shipping container accelerometers. Radiation Protection and Shipping Services verify the cleanliness and integrity of the shipping vehicle. Fuel Handling Maintenance Crew and Radiation Protection checks the shipping container accelerometers 3. What qualifications are required for individuals performing inspections of new fuel during new fuel receipt? (indicate all that apply) a. Part of reactor engineering qualifications Unofficially - Not a duke policy to qualify every Reactor Engineer to fuel inspections, more of a group expectation that all members in group know this skill b. Task-specific qualification card No, duke engineers qualify to perform processes, not tasks c. ANSI N45.2.6-1978 YES d. Others (please specify): 4. What role does your site/fleet QA or QC organizations play during new fuel receipt? a. Performs new fuel receipt inspections. NO b. Qualifies new fuel receipt inspectors. YES c. Normal QA/QC oversight of activities. NO d. None. e. Other (please specify): QA/QC Organization trains Reactor Engineer to be a task specific QA/QC Inspector for fuel receipt Thank you, Eric R. Pace Engineer I Reactor Engineering Catawba Nuclear Station 803-701-2447

1 0

Re: [Pwrrm] Reactivity anomaly calculation
by paul_gurney＠fpl.com 22 Jan '09

22 Jan '09

Answers from Seabrook 1) Surry uses IFBA fuel. Core modeling is performed using the CASMO-4/SIMULATE-3 computer codes. In making comparisons between measured and predicted boron concentrations (corrected for B-10, power, xenon, rod position, and RCS temperature), we notice a tendency to for the core models to underpredict the measured critical boron between 2 and 4 GWD/MTU by 10-20 ppm (about 80-160 pcm) more than at other times in life (such as at BOC equilibrium xenon or between MOC and EOC). Have you observed this tendency at your plant? Core design is with ANC and we use IFBA. We always see measured boron above predicted for most of core life. Some attributed to B-10 depletion and some to modeling. 2) For the monthly reactivity anomaly calculation, is a B-10 corrected value used to meet Tech Spec requirements, or is the non-corrected value used? (Surry uses the non-corrected value) We correct for B-10 depletion in the monthly reactivity balance surveillance, shutdown margin curves and ECPs. 3) Does your anomaly procedure have a threshold (such as +/-500 pcm) at which the anomaly would be documented in the corrective action system? No threshold. Although if we saw something out of the ordinary we would propbably address it in CAPS. Paul Gurney 603-773-7776

1 0

PWRRM Request for B-10 Information(in preparation for INPO)
by Charlene.N.Chotalal＠dom.com 22 Jan '09

22 Jan '09

Greetings, INPO will be coming to Surry Power Station in a week and I would like to ask two questions to the group. In your response, you do not need to reply to everyone. I will be gathering the information and putting it into one excel file. If you would like a copy, please let me know. 1) This question has been asked already, but we did not get many responses. Core modeling is performed using the CASMO-4/SIMULATE-3 computer codes. Our most recent Reactivity Anomaly calculation(the comparison between measured and predicted boron concentrations) gave us an uncorrected value of about 750pcm. This is quite close to our tech spec limit of 1000pcm. If we corrected for B-10, the anomaly value would be closer to 300pcm. Currently we use the uncorrected value in our comparison to the predicted model. What is your typical maximum offset between your measured and predicted Reactivity Anomaly? Is this with or without B-10 depletion? Do you use your B-10 depletion value for the tech spec surveillance? 2) This question is regarding Estimated critical conditions/position. What is the pcm delta typically observed at your plant between the predicted critical conditions and the actual conditions? If a delta is observed, does the predicted critical calculation account for B-10 depletion? At what point (i.e. >100 pcm delta) would Operations or Reactor Engineering write a condition report? Charlene Chotalal Lead Reactor Engineer Surry Power Station Work: (757)-365-2819 Did you know..... the East Japan Railway Company (JR-East), as part of research aimed at developing more environmentally friendly train stations, is testing an experimental system that produces electricity as people pass through ticket gates. 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.

3 2

Reactivity anomaly calculation
by Adina.K.Lafrance＠dom.com 22 Jan '09

22 Jan '09

1) Surry uses IFBA fuel. Core modeling is performed using the CASMO-4/SIMULATE-3 computer codes. In making comparisons between measured and predicted boron concentrations (corrected for B-10, power, xenon, rod position, and RCS temperature), we notice a tendency to for the core models to underpredict the measured critical boron between 2 and 4 GWD/MTU by 10-20 ppm (about 80-160 pcm) more than at other times in life (such as at BOC equilibrium xenon or between MOC and EOC). Have you observed this tendency at your plant? 2) For the monthly reactivity anomaly calculation, is a B-10 corrected value used to meet Tech Spec requirements, or is the non-corrected value used? (Surry uses the non-corrected value) 3) Does your anomaly procedure have a threshold (such as +/-500 pcm) at which the anomaly would be documented in the corrective action system? Adina LaFrance It's a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted. -Betrand Russell Nuclear Analysis & Fuel Reactor Engineer Surry Power Station Email: Adina.K.LaFrance(a)Dom.com Phone: 757-365-2658 Pager #: 4290 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.

3 2

FW: [RCRC] PWR Reactor Engineering Working Meeting
by Tom Tomlinson 19 Dec '08

19 Dec '08

_____ From: rcrc(a)retaqs.com [mailto:rcrc@retaqs.com] On Behalf Of edward.mcvey(a)exeloncorp.com Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 1:05 PM To: HawnRS(a)INPO.org; rcadams(a)duke-energy.com; calday(a)entergy.com; aaaustin(a)duke-energy.com; lsbarnes(a)tva.gov; Robert.A.Borchert(a)dom.com; Erik.Flodin(a)aps.com; fred.gershkoff(a)sce.com; Kevin.Graham(a)aps.com; Martin.Grissom(a)aps.com; Johnny.Henderson(a)dom.com; hustonr(a)firstenergycorp.com; lakeller(a)duke-energy.com; Adina.K.Lafrance(a)dom.com; gary.marsh(a)pgnmail.com; jbmcinvale(a)ameren.com; NestelWA(a)INPO.org; kevin_randall(a)fpl.com; William.Stackler(a)pseg.com; William.Stanley(a)exeloncorp.com; mstrickland1(a)scana.com; Norman.Terrel(a)Luminant.com; gordon.verdin(a)constellation.com; jwillett(a)oppd.com; gwilson(a)firstenergycorp.com; ronald.niederer(a)exeloncorp.com; javier.sanchez(a)exeloncorp.com; Howard.Crawford(a)exeloncorp.com Cc: rcrc(a)retaqs.com Subject: Re: [RCRC] PWR Reactor Engineering Working Meeting PWR RE Colleagues: I just wanted you to know that the day after our meeting, I met with some other INPO personnel and found out that INPO has asked all the sites to report out a Reactivity Management PI that basically is the BWROG RCRC PI, which is currently consistent with the PWROG PI. So Lee Keller, I guess your request at the meeting is complete already. INPO Ops people are aware of the initiative of the BWROG RCRC to revise the PI and I will be working with them on that issue, but I think this makes it imperative that the PWROG also do the same. I hope to get approval for our new BWROG PI at the end of January and will then work with the sites and INPO for how they will handle the sudden change in PI values, targeting July 1 (3rd quarter) implementation of the new PI across the BWR fleet. I have already sent information to Fort Calhoun about RCRC meetings as promised at the meeting in Atlanta. As I told Joe Willett, Tom Tomlinson (RETAQS) and I are willing to facilitate this in any way we can to help you succeed. I think you will gain many benefits out of a PWR RCRC and you can probably accomplish it outside of the PWROG, making it probably that much more cost effective. You'll see many benefits from this organization, including helping to train and educate your newer RE's. There are numerous instances of one plant being able to help another as a result of our organization and the unity we have through it. Ed McVey ************************************************** 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

Paul V. Gurney/NAESCO is out of the office.
by paul_gurney＠fpl.com 07 Dec '08

07 Dec '08

I will be out of the office starting 12/05/2008 and will not return until 12/15/2008.

1 0

Axial Power Distribution (APD) Trip
by SCHAWE, BARTON P 07 Dec '08

07 Dec '08

FCS Technical Specifications and Standard Technical Specifications state that the APD shall be enabled when RTP >= 15%. The APD trip is enabled by a bistable from the NIs, which may not be calibrated for several reasons (e.g., following downpower or after a refueling outage) and may be reading lower than actual power. Consequently, if NIs are reading low, the APD may not be enabled when actual RTP is above 15%. However, Technical Specifications also state that the NI calibration is not required for 12 hours after exceeding 20% RTP. How do other plants handle this situation? At FCS: 1) Our startup procedure has a step to adjust all NI and Delta-T power indications to the highest of all readings when the plant is at approximately 10% power. 2) Our bistable is set (reset) between 13.5 and 14.5% NI power. 3) Prior to exceeding 20% power by any indication, we verify that the APD and LOL trips are enabled. My objective is to either remove or modify the procedure step for adjusting to the highest indication (item 1 above) when at 10% power for startups (power ascensions) during the cycle. This is desirable so that NIs don't have to be recalibrated when we return to power. The step was added about 12 years ago, and I'm not sure it was really necessary. Barton P. Schawe, P.E. Principal Reactor Engineer Omaha Public Power District Tel: 402-533-7211 email: bschawe(a)oppd.com<mailto:bschawe@oppd.com> This transmission contains information which may be confidential and which may also be privileged. It is intended for the named addressee only. Unless you are the named addressee, or authorized to receive it on behalf of the addressee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you have received this transmission in error please contact the sender. Thank you for your cooperation. 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

CVCS return to service
by Adina.K.Lafrance＠dom.com 02 Dec '08

02 Dec '08

Following a refueling outage, the return to service operating procedure of the Chemical Volume Control System Blender has Operations and I&C set up the blender to obtain the correct boron concentration. The potentiometers are set and FCVs adjusted to obtain near the set point, best as possible. However, there are no acceptance values in the procedure. It has been a judgement call by the Operations staff. For other sites, what is the criteria and/or process for the return to service of the blender? If there are acceptance values, what are they? Thank you. Adina LaFrance It's a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted. -Betrand Russell Nuclear Analysis & Fuel Reactor Engineer Surry Power Station Email: Adina.K.LaFrance(a)Dom.com Phone: 757-365-2658 Pager #: 4290 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.

2 1

Johnny Henderson/NUC/VANCPOWER is out of the office.
by Johnny.Henderson＠dom.com 24 Nov '08

24 Nov '08

I will be out of the office starting 11/21/2008 and will not return until 12/01/2008. I will respond to your message when I return. 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

William V Ferguson is out of the office.
by wvferguson＠aep.com 24 Nov '08

24 Nov '08

I will be out of the office starting 11/21/2008 and will not return until 12/01/2008. I will respond to your message when I return.

1 0

← Newer
1
...
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
...
25
Older →

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

PWRRM