Surry is trying to answer a question this morning regarding power level indications and uncertainties.
We are stating that within a certain confidence level, that the calorimetric calculation will produce a reactor power output (at RTP) from 98.8 to 101.2% with the rightly calibrated process instrumentation in the calorimetric program (App K). Half the time the operating power will be above 100%, half the time it will be below 100%. The opposing opinion is that if we have a 1.2% RTP uncertainty that we operate at or below 98.8% so as to not exceed RTP. The uncertainties in question relate to the plant computer-none of the redundant indications indicate higher than RTP (most notably delta Ts). It is also noted that we were told that no other site operates the way we are with regard to uncertainties.
Can you please tell us how your site operates with regard to uncertainties and your RTP?
Thank you in advance.
Adina LaFrance
The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them. -Albert Einstein
Nuclear Analysis & Fuel Reactor Engineer Surry Power Station Email: Adina.K.LaFrance@Dom.commailto:Adina.K.LaFrance@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.
D. C. Cook response:
Uncertainties are accounted for in the accident analysis. We should operate the plant at a nominal 100% power. However...
Our Ops procedure for at-power operation states that the one-hour average thermal power must not exceed 100%. It further states that if thermal power exceeds 100%, then a number of actions must take place, including initiating a condition report per our CAP. The management expectation concerning this second requirement is that it is triggered if the ten-minute average exceeds 100%. The pain incumbent with such a condition report has motivated our operators to drive the plant such that the ten-minute average remains below 100%. This is exacerbated by our feedwater control systems that tend to oscillate more than they did in years past. The end result is that we operate near 99.7%.
David Goff Reactor Engineer Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant 269-465-5901 x1465
Adina K Lafrance adina.k.lafrance@dom.com Sent by: pwrrm@retaqs.com 01/21/2010 08:42 AM Please respond to PWR Reactivity Management pwrrm@retaqs.com
To "RETAQS (pwrrm@retaqs.com)" pwrrm@retaqs.com cc
Subject [Pwrrm] Measured power and uncertanties
Surry is trying to answer a question this morning regarding power level indications and uncertainties.
We are stating that within a certain confidence level, that the calorimetric calculation will produce a reactor power output (at RTP) from 98.8 to 101.2% with the rightly calibrated process instrumentation in the calorimetric program (App K). Half the time the operating power will be above 100%, half the time it will be below 100%. The opposing opinion is that if we have a 1.2% RTP uncertainty that we operate at or below 98.8% so as to not exceed RTP. The uncertainties in question relate to the plant computer-none of the redundant indications indicate higher than RTP (most notably delta Ts). It is also noted that we were told that no other site operates the way we are with regard to uncertainties.
Can you please tell us how your site operates with regard to uncertainties and your RTP?
Thank you in advance.
Adina LaFrance
The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them. -Albert Einstein
Nuclear Analysis & Fuel Reactor Engineer Surry Power Station Email: Adina.K.LaFrance@Dom.com Phone: 757-365-2658 Pager #: 4290
---------------------------------------------------------------- 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.
Oconee Nuclear Station operates at 100%FP as indicated. The uncertainty in power is accounted for in the safety analysis assumptions. The license condition for 2568 MWTh is interpreted as being the as-indicated condition (which I believe is consistent with standard T.S., too ... that the value in the T.S. is the as-indicated condition and the appropriate analyses take into account uncertainties when ensuring the as-indicated value is safe.)
Carl
Carl D. Fago Reactor Engineering Supervisor Oconee Nuclear Station Duke Energy Carolinas Phone: (864) 873-3047 Fax: (864) 873-3374 Email: Carl.fago@duke-energy.commailto:Carl.fago@duke-energy.com
From: pwrrm@retaqs.com [mailto:pwrrm@retaqs.com] On Behalf Of Adina K Lafrance Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 8:43 AM To: RETAQS (pwrrm@retaqs.com) Subject: [Pwrrm] Measured power and uncertanties
Surry is trying to answer a question this morning regarding power level indications and uncertainties.
We are stating that within a certain confidence level, that the calorimetric calculation will produce a reactor power output (at RTP) from 98.8 to 101.2% with the rightly calibrated process instrumentation in the calorimetric program (App K). Half the time the operating power will be above 100%, half the time it will be below 100%. The opposing opinion is that if we have a 1.2% RTP uncertainty that we operate at or below 98.8% so as to not exceed RTP. The uncertainties in question relate to the plant computer-none of the redundant indications indicate higher than RTP (most notably delta Ts). It is also noted that we were told that no other site operates the way we are with regard to uncertainties.
Can you please tell us how your site operates with regard to uncertainties and your RTP?
Thank you in advance.
Adina LaFrance
The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them. -Albert Einstein
Nuclear Analysis & Fuel Reactor Engineer Surry Power Station Email: Adina.K.LaFrance@Dom.commailto:Adina.K.LaFrance@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.
At V.C. Summer our RTP is 2900 MWT. We have a feedwater flow rate based calorimetric computer program that operates continuously on the plant process computer. We operate with the goal of maintaining shift average power at or slightly below RTP based on this program. All of our accident analyses are based on an approximately ±2% reactor power uncertainty which is the overall uncertainty of the calorimetric computer program. This means that actual reactor power could be as high as 2958 or as low as 2842 MWT when the calorimetric program is indicating 2900 MWT.
Appendix K uncertainties are not intended to be used as penalties applied to a plant's licensed thermal power limit.
Bill Bell Reactor Engineering 803-345-4389
From: pwrrm@retaqs.com [mailto:pwrrm@retaqs.com] On Behalf Of Adina K Lafrance Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 8:43 AM To: RETAQS (pwrrm@retaqs.com) Subject: [Pwrrm] Measured power and uncertanties
Surry is trying to answer a question this morning regarding power level indications and uncertainties.
We are stating that within a certain confidence level, that the calorimetric calculation will produce a reactor power output (at RTP) from 98.8 to 101.2% with the rightly calibrated process instrumentation in the calorimetric program (App K). Half the time the operating power will be above 100%, half the time it will be below 100%. The opposing opinion is that if we have a 1.2% RTP uncertainty that we operate at or below 98.8% so as to not exceed RTP. The uncertainties in question relate to the plant computer-none of the redundant indications indicate higher than RTP (most notably delta Ts). It is also noted that we were told that no other site operates the way we are with regard to uncertainties.
Can you please tell us how your site operates with regard to uncertainties and your RTP?
Thank you in advance.
Adina LaFrance
The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them. -Albert Einstein
Nuclear Analysis & Fuel Reactor Engineer Surry Power Station Email: Adina.K.LaFrance@Dom.commailto:Adina.K.LaFrance@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.
Beaver Valley Response:
At Beaver Valley our Rated Thermal Power is 2900 MWT. We use a Leading Edge Flow Meter (LEFM) based feedwater flow calorimetric which is continuously calculated by our plant computer. Below are the operator guidelines for maintaining 100% power, the License Power Limit (LPL). As you can see we are allowed to run as close to the 100% power limit as long as item c, d, and e are satisfied.
1. License Power Limit (LPL), which is the RATED THERMAL POWER or the RATED THERMAL POWER adjusted for venturi, Guidelines: a. The term “steady state” implies that temperatures, pressures, and flows are stable such that the nominal value of reactor power remains stable, subject to statistical uncertainties and normal fluctuations. (e.g. feedwater oscillations)
b. No actions are permitted that would intentionally raise THERMAL POWER above the LPL for any period of time. Small, short-term fluctuations in power that are not under the direct control of a license reactor operator are not considered intentional. (e.g. fluctuations caused by feedwater control valve oscillations)
c. THERMAL POWER shall be closely monitored during steady state power operation, with the goal of maintaining the 2 hour THERMAL POWER average at or below the LPL.
d. If the THERMAL POWER average for a 2 hour period is found to exceed the LPL, timely action shall be taken to ensure that THERMAL POWER is less than or equal to LPL.
e. The THERMAL POWER power average for a shift shall not to exceed the LPL. (a shift can be no longer than 12 hours)
f. When the LEFM System data is used to calculate the calorimetric, the LPL is 2900 MWt (100.0% of RATED THERMAL POWER).
g. When the Venturi Flow System data is used to calculate the calorimetric, the LPL is 2859 MWt (98.6% of RATED THERMAL POWER).
h. The Operator should use the indicated power from the IPC Calorimetric Program to maintain THERMAL POWER within the LPL guidelines.
i. If a pre-planned evolution is expected to cause a transient rise in THERMAL POWER that could exceed the LPL value, prudent action based on prior performance or evaluations should be taken to reduce THERMAL POWER prior to performing the evolution.
Anthony (A.R.) Burger Supervisor, Reactor Engineering FENOC - Beaver Valley Power Station Phone: (724) 682-4108 Cell: (724) 601-3224 FAX: (724) 682-4250 Email: aburger@firstenergycorp.com
Adina K Lafrance <adina.k.lafrance @dom.com> To Sent by: "RETAQS (pwrrm@retaqs.com)" pwrrm@retaqs.com pwrrm@retaqs.com cc
01/21/2010 08:43 Subject AM [Pwrrm] Measured power and uncertanties
Please respond to PWR Reactivity Management <pwrrm@retaqs.com >
Surry is trying to answer a question this morning regarding power level indications and uncertainties.
We are stating that within a certain confidence level, that the calorimetric calculation will produce a reactor power output (at RTP) from 98.8 to 101.2% with the rightly calibrated process instrumentation in the calorimetric program (App K). Half the time the operating power will be above 100%, half the time it will be below 100%. The opposing opinion is that if we have a 1.2% RTP uncertainty that we operate at or below 98.8% so as to not exceed RTP. The uncertainties in question relate to the plant computer-none of the redundant indications indicate higher than RTP (most notably delta Ts). It is also noted that we were told that no other site operates the way we are with regard to uncertainties.
Can you please tell us how your site operates with regard to uncertainties and your RTP?
Thank you in advance.
Adina LaFrance
The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them. -Albert Einstein
Nuclear Analysis & Fuel Reactor Engineer Surry Power Station Email: Adina.K.LaFrance@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._______________________________________________ PWRRM mailing list PWRRM@retaqs.com http://www.keffective.com/mailman/listinfo/pwrrm
-
aburger＠firstenergycorp.com -
Adina K Lafrance -
BELL, WILLIAM H -
ddgoff＠aep.com -
Fago, Carl D