Mitigation Performance Update Task 3€¦ · 03-06-2016 · Monticello benchmark planned for...
Transcript of Mitigation Performance Update Task 3€¦ · 03-06-2016 · Monticello benchmark planned for...
© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Jeremie Varnam
Finetech, Inc.
BWRVIP Mitigation Committee Meeting
San Antonio, TX – June 15-16, 2016
Mitigation
Performance UpdateTask 3.1
2© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Contents
Revised Mitigation Performance Indicator (MPI)
Implementation
MPI Update
– Status of MPI data
– MPI Results
– HWC Availability Results
– Inspection Relief Criteria
3© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Implementation of New MPI
Cycles that ended in 2014 and some cycles that ended in
early 2015 used the old MPI.
Other plants/cycles are handled on a case by case basis.
Options:
Back fit data to revised MPI
Use both current/revised MPI
– No plants in the database file are using a combined
MPI format
Templates using the revised MPI were provided for cycles
that started in late 2014 and beyond.
–37 of 44 plants have been transitioned in the CMA
database; expect full transition after overdue data are
received
4© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Individual PIs by Chemistry Regime
HWC-M NMCA + HWC OLNC + HWC
HWC Availability HWC Availability HWC Availability
ECP ECP ECP
Availability of 2
Secondary Parameters
Availability of 2
Secondary Parameters
Availability of 2
Secondary Parameters
Catalyst Loading OLNC Catalyst Injected
MMS Availability MMS Availability
OLNC Application
Frequency
5© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
June 2016 MPI Update
6© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Status of Plant Data Submittal
U.S. BWRs Non-U.S. BWRs
# complete 4Q15 32 of 34 8 of 10
% complete 4Q15 94 80
# complete 1Q16 32 of 34 3 of 10
% complete 1Q16 94 30
• 24 U.S. BWRs send data monthly or quarterly.
• One has not provided data since October 2014.
• One has not provided data since October 2015.
• Two Non-U.S. units have not provided data since March 2015
and five since October 2015
• Issues identified and corrected regarding to emails being
sequestered. Expect close during next update
7© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
MPI for Last Complete Cycle – 34 U.S. BWRs
OLNC: One plant was Yellow due
to low HWC availability.
HWC-M: Two plants were yellow
due to low HWC availability.
HWC-M NMCA OLNC
Green 1 2 27
White 0 0 1
Yellow 2 0 1
% Green or
White33 100 97
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
HWC NMCA OLNC
Nu
mb
er
of B
WR
s
8© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
MPI for Last Complete Cycle – 10 Non-U.S. BWRs
HWC-M:
– Three plants are Yellow or Red
due to low HWC availability.
One plant had a short cycle (10
months).
Two plants had low availability
due to system trips.
NMCA: No Non-U.S. BWRs are
currently utilizing this regime.
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
HWC NMCA OLNC
Nu
mb
er
of B
WR
s
9© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
MPI for Last Complete Cycle – 44 BWRs
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
HWC NMCA OLNC
Nu
mb
er
of B
WR
s
OLNC: 97% Green
NMCA: 100% Green or White
HWC-M: 44% Green or White
10© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
HWC Availability for Last Complete Cycle
34 U.S. BWRs 10 Non-U.S. BWRs
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
HWC NMCA OLNC
Nu
mb
er
of B
WR
s
91% Green or White
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
HWC NMCA OLNC
Num
ber
of B
WR
s
70% Green or White
Green = 98% for NMCA; 95% for HWC-M and OLNC.
11© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
HWC Availability for Last Complete Cycle – 44 BWRs
Green = 98% for NMCA; 95% for HWC-M and OLNC.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
HWC NMCA OLNC
Nu
mb
er
of
BW
Rs
OLNC: 97% Green or White
NMCA: 100% Green or White
HWC-M: 38% Green or White
12© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
HWC Availability for Last Complete Cycle – 44 BWRs
75
80
85
90
95
100R
IN1
SU
S2
SU
S1
CH
I1K
UO
1C
HI2
GG
NS
KU
O2
DU
AC
OF
FIT
NM
P2
BR
U2
PIL
EN
F2
CL
IB
RU
1H
CN
SK
KL
DR
E2
LA
G2
LA
S2
LA
G1
BR
F1
OY
CK
KM
CG
SH
AT
2B
RF
3C
NS
HA
T1
MO
NS
MG
DR
E3
LIM
1P
ER
BR
F2
LIM
2R
IBP
B2
PB
3L
AS
1N
MP
1Q
UA
1Q
UA
2
Cyc
le A
vg
. H
WC
Ava
il.
(%)
Rank (Low to High)
HWC NMCA OLNC
Non-U.S. Goal (HWC, OLNC) Goal (NMCA)
13© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
U.S. BWR HWC Availability Trends (All Regimes)
Average has been >90% since 2000 and >95% since 2004.
75
80
85
90
95
100
2000(12)
2001(12)
2002(14)
2003(15)
2004(12)
2005(16)
2006(17)
2007(20)
2008(18)
2009(20)
2010(18)
2011(18)
2012(18)
2013(17)
2014(8)
H2
Ava
ila
bil
ity (
%)
Year of Cycle Start (# of BWRs)
All BWRs
Range Average
14© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
U.S. BWR HWC Availability Trends (HWC-M)
75
80
85
90
95
100
2000(3)
2001(6)
2002(3)
2003(7)
2004(3)
2005(4)
2006(4)
2007(5)
2008(4)
2009(5)
2010(2)
2011(3)
2012(2)
2013(2)
2014(1)
H2
Ava
ila
bil
ity (
%)
Year of Cycle Start (# of BWRs)
Range Average
15© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
U.S. BWR HWC Availability Trends (NMCA)
90
92
94
96
98
100
2000 (9) 2001 (6) 2002 (11) 2003 (8) 2004 (9) 2005 (12)2006 (13)2007 (12)2008 (13) 2009 (9) 2010 (7) 2011 (5) 2012 (1) 2013 (2)
H2 A
vailab
ilit
y (
%)
Year of Cycle Start (# of BWRs)
Range Average
16© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
U.S. BWR HWC Availability Trends (OLNC)
90
92
94
96
98
100
2007 (3) 2008 (1) 2009 (6) 2010 (9) 2011 (10) 2012 (15) 2013 (13) 2014 (7)
H2
Ava
ila
bil
ity (
%)
Year of Cycle Start (# of BWRs)
Range Average
17© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Hydrogen Injection Start by Power Percentage (44 BWRs)
≤10%, 29, 66%
11 - 25%, 4, 9%
26 - 50%, 6, 14%
51 - 75%, 1, 2%
>75%, 4, 9%
66% of BWRs inject H2 at ≤ 10% power.
18© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Cycle HWC Availability vs. Power when HWC I/S
(Data from Last Complete Cycle)
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Cyc
le A
ve
rag
e H
WC
Ava
ila
bil
ity (
%)
Power at which HWC placed in Service (%)
19© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Performance Summary
% of BWRs with Green or White PI
Last Complete Cycle Current Cycle to Date
Overall HWC Avail. Overall HWC Avail.
HWC 38 38 100 100
NMCA 100 100 100 100
OLNC 97 97 100 100
% of U.S. BWRs with Green or White PI
Last Complete Cycle Current Cycle to Date
Overall HWC Avail. Overall HWC Avail.
HWC 33 33 100 100
NMCA 100 100 100 100
OLNC 97 97 100 100
20© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Inspection Relief Criteria – Last Complete Cycle
% of U.S. BWRs with
HWC Availability
meeting Inspection
Relief Criterion
% of All* BWRs with
HWC Availability
meeting Inspection
Relief Criterion
HWC 100 89
NMCA 100 100
OLNC 100 100
Overall 100 98
HWC Availability Required for Inspection Relief
HWC: 80%
NMCA: 90%
OLNC: 90% (BWRVIP-62 Revision 1)
*For information only.
21© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Observations related to MPI
Challenges to HWC availability included:
– Hydrogen supply availability in northeast U.S. in 2014
– Multiple trips due to flow control valve failure
– Mid-cycle outages
– Short cycle lengths
ECP Electrodes
– 38 of 45 plants have provided a status of working electrodes
Primarily located in MMS Skid
Hydrogen water chemistry benchmark tests
– 37 of 44 plants provided a status of their last benchmark test
Perry and Peach Bottom 2 recently performed benchmarks
Monticello benchmark planned for September 2016
Valid benchmark kept monthly MPI status “Green” at Susquehanna 1 after ECP probes failed
Most benchmarks have been performed within the last 5 years
22© 2016 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Together…Shaping the Future of Electricity