SOER 07-01 recommendation 3 stated that "plans for significant reactivity changes are reviewed and approved by appropriate station and shift operations management..." and "If plant conditions delay power changes, the reactivity plan is revised to meet the new plant conditions and approved by management".
Does anyone have specific thresholds for:
1) the level of review a plan requires (such as <10% requires shift supervision, >10% requires shift management, >50% requires station management)
or
2) when a reactivity plan must be revised (such as > 1 hour delay, rods > 10 steps from the predicted value, current power level step >2% from predicted)
Additional question
How do other stations incorporate any ramp rate restrictions that may apply? (Ramp rate alarm, operator training, ramp plan)
Thank you.
Adina LaFrance
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.
At Duke / Oconee - level of review is with the shift supervisors (Control Room SRO) with no thresholds for higher levels of review. Also, we haven't defined to any great detail when the plan should be revised; typically, the plan is revised when the narrative of the plan doesn't reflect reality. We do differentiate between the "plan" and the "prediction" and will update the prediction with actual boron, times for power changes and other minor variations within the plan (in the broad sense).
Ramp rate limits are in the technical procedure for conducting a maneuver. Operators are trained on them. We haven't been able to get the plant computer changed to incorporate the ramp rates for an alarm or constrain the control system to not allow power changes greater than the ramp rate restrictions (yet).
Carl
Carl D. Fago
Reactor Engineering Supervisor
Oconee Nuclear Station
Duke Energy
864-885-3047
cdfago@duke-energy.com
________________________________
From: pwrrm@retaqs.com [mailto:pwrrm@retaqs.com] On Behalf Of Adina.K.Lafrance@dom.com Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 9:20 AM To: pwrrm@retaqs.com Subject: [Pwrrm] Reactivity plan approval and revisions/ramp rate alarm
SOER 07-01 recommendation 3 stated that "plans for significant reactivity changes are reviewed and approved by appropriate station and shift operations management..." and "If plant conditions delay power changes, the reactivity plan is revised to meet the new plant conditions and approved by management".
Does anyone have specific thresholds for:
1) the level of review a plan requires (such as <10% requires shift supervision, >10% requires shift management, >50% requires station management)
or
2) when a reactivity plan must be revised (such as > 1 hour delay, rods
10 steps from the predicted value, current power level step >2% from
predicted)
Additional question
How do other stations incorporate any ramp rate restrictions that may apply? (Ramp rate alarm, operator training, ramp plan)
Thank you.
Adina LaFrance
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.
For Beaver Valley (FirstEnergy), We are currently finalizing a fleet procedure on developing Reactivity Plans (Beaver Valley, Davis-Besse, and Perry). Based on the latest draft, here are my responses:
1. Evolution-specific reactivity plans (pre-planned power changes >10%) require review by an RE, a peer/executive challenge call, and Operations Manager approval. Authorization for Use is provided by the Command SRO. Periodic reactivity plans (steady-state and rapid power reductions when REs are not available) require the same reviews and approvals except a peer/executive challenge call is not required.
2. All Evolution-specific reactivity plans require termination criteria and re-evaluation criteria. Typically, for the PWRs, the termination criteria are based on approaching Rod Insertion Limits or Axial Offset Limits. Re-evaluation criteria are typically based on the actual rod position being so many steps off from the predicted (10 steps), axial offset off from predicted (>3%), final power level differs from planned by x% (3%), or time of power changes differences by x hours from predicted (2 hours). Re-evaluation criteria require a review by Operations and REs for issuance of an up-dated plan to incorporate/adjust for actual plant conditions. The RE on-shift for the maneuver will up-date the plan, another RE or the Command SRO will review the up-date and the Command SRO will authorize the plan for use.
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@ dom.com Sent by: To pwrrm@retaqs.com pwrrm@retaqs.com cc
06/30/2008 09:21 Subject AM [Pwrrm] Reactivity plan approval and revisions/ramp rate alarm
Please respond to PWR Reactivity Management <pwrrm@retaqs.com >
SOER 07-01 recommendation 3 stated that "plans for significant reactivity changes are reviewed and approved by appropriate station and shift operations management..." and "If plant conditions delay power changes, the reactivity plan is revised to meet the new plant conditions and approved by management".
Does anyone have specific thresholds for:
1) the level of review a plan requires (such as <10% requires shift supervision, >10% requires shift management, >50% requires station management)
or
2) when a reactivity plan must be revised (such as > 1 hour delay, rods > 10 steps from the predicted value, current power level step >2% from predicted)
Additional question
How do other stations incorporate any ramp rate restrictions that may apply? (Ramp rate alarm, operator training, ramp plan)
Thank you.
Adina LaFrance
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
----------------------------------------- The information contained in this message is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately, and delete the original message.
-
aburger＠firstenergycorp.com -
Adina.K.Lafrance＠dom.com -
Fago, Carl D