Information Notice 1990-05, Inter-System Discharge of Reactor Coolant

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Inter-System Discharge of Reactor Coolant
ML031130342
Person / Time
Site: Beaver Valley, Millstone, Hatch, Monticello, Calvert Cliffs, Dresden, Davis Besse, Peach Bottom, Browns Ferry, Salem, Oconee, Mcguire, Nine Mile Point, Palisades, Palo Verde, Perry, Indian Point, Fermi, Kewaunee, Catawba, Harris, Wolf Creek, Saint Lucie, Point Beach, Oyster Creek, Watts Bar, Hope Creek, Grand Gulf, Cooper, Sequoyah, Byron, Pilgrim, Arkansas Nuclear, Braidwood, Susquehanna, Summer, Prairie Island, Columbia, Seabrook, Brunswick, Surry, Limerick, North Anna, Turkey Point, River Bend, Vermont Yankee, Crystal River, Haddam Neck, Ginna, Diablo Canyon, Callaway, Vogtle, Waterford, Duane Arnold, Farley, Robinson, Clinton, South Texas, San Onofre, Cook, Comanche Peak, Yankee Rowe, Maine Yankee, Quad Cities, Humboldt Bay, La Crosse, Big Rock Point, Rancho Seco, Zion, Midland, Bellefonte, Fort Calhoun, FitzPatrick, McGuire, LaSalle, 05000000, Fort Saint Vrain, Shoreham, Satsop, Trojan, Atlantic Nuclear Power Plant, Crane
Issue date: 01/29/1990
From: Rossi C
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
References
IN-90-005, NUDOCS 9001230126
Download: ML031130342 (8)


UK

UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555

January 29, 1990

NRC INFORMATION NOTICE NO. 90-05:

INTER-SYSTEM DISCHARGE OF REACTOR COOLANT

Addressees

All holders of operating licenses or construction permits for nuclear power

reactors.

Purpose

This information notice is intended to. alert addressees to a potentially

significant problem in identifying and terminating reactor coolant system

leakage in operating modes 4 and 5. It is expected that licensees will

review the information for applicability to their facilities and consider

actions, as appropriate, to avoid similar problems. However, suggestions

contained in this information notice do not constitute NRC requirements;

therefore, no specific action or written response is required.

Description of Circumstances

On December 1, 1989, Braidwood Unit 1 experienced the unplanned inter-system

discharge of approximately 68,000 gallons of water. The discharge was caused

by the inadvertent opening of a residual heat removal (RHR) system suction

relief valve. The valve failed to reclose, allowing an open flow path from

the reactor vessel, through the RHR system, into the unit's two recycle hold-up

tanks (HUTs).

The unit, which had been in a refueling outage since September 2, 1989, was

heating up in operational mode 5, preparing to enter operational mode 4. The

plant was solid and in the process of drawing a bubble in the pressurizer. The

RHR train "A" pump was in operation and, although the "BO pump was not running, the "B" train was unisolated and available. The reactor coolant system (RCS)

was at a pressure of 350 psig .and a temperature of 1750F. Charging flow to the

vessel was being provided by the "A" charging pump. Pressurizer heaters were

on. The "B" charging pump was Isolated and tagged out of service.

(Technical

Specifications governing cold overpressure protection require that only one

charging pump be available. The other charging pump and the safety injection

pumps are required to be tagged out of service, with power supplies removed).

To protect against a pressure switch failure and the subsequent automatic

isolation of the RHR system, the train "A" RHR suction isolation valve was

open and tagged out of service.

90130126 Z #

IN 90-05 January 29, 1990 At 1:42 a.m., operators throttled the charging flow and maximized the letdown

flow in preparation for drawing a bubble in the pressurizer. The RCS pressure

was 404 psig and the pressurizer level was off scale, high. At 1:44 a.m., a

rapid reduction in the pressurizer level occurred, with the pressurizer level

off scale, low, at 1:52 a.m. Approximately 14,000 gallons of water drained

from the pressurizer and the pressurizer surge line; however, the reactor vessel

level instrumentation system indicated that the vessel level remained at 100

percent.

At 1:49 a.m., the charging flow was increased and the charging pump

suction was switched from the volume control tank to the refueling water storage

tank (RWST).

About 30 to 50 gallons of water were observed on the floor of the auxiliary

building in proximity to the RHR train "AN suction relief valve, leading plant

personnel to believe that this valve had lifted.

At 1:53 a.m., the letdown

flow was reduced to minimum and charging was maximized.

The RHR trains were

switched from "A" to EB", the "A" pump was stopped, and the isolation of the

"A" train was initiated. At 1:59 a.m., one of the two running reactor coolant

pumps (RCPs) was stopped because of low RCS pressure.

A second charging pump, NBN, was started following completion of the formal pro- cedure for tagout removal.

At 2:35 a.m., the "A RHR suction isolation valve

was returned to service and closed, completing the isolation of the "A" train

of the RHR system. The pressurizer level began to recover and the RCS pressure

increased slightly, giving operators the impression that the discharge had been

isolated.

The *B" charging pump was therefore secured at 2:45 a.m.

The pres- surizer level, however, did not recover. At 2:54 a.m., the ABN charging pump

was restarted. At 3:49 a.m., the inter-system discharge was terminated when

the RHR train WA" pump was started, the "B pump shut down, and the "8' train

was isolated. The level indication for the HUTs stabilized and the pressurizer

level began to recover at 3:52 a.m.

By 5:06 a.m., the pressurizer level had fully recovered and the unit was sta- bilized at 360 psi and 1750F. Approximately 68,000 gallons of water had been

discharged from the reactor vessel to the HUTs.

(The total amount of water

was composed of 14,000 gallons of initial pressurizer inventory and 54,000

gallons of makeup water).

Following the event, it was determined that the RHR MB" train suction relief

valve had lifted at 411 psi.

The lift setpoint for the valve should have been

450 psi. The valve should have reclosed on reducing pressure but failed to do

so.

The premature opening of the valve was attributed to the presence of foreign

material lodged between the valve spindle and the spindle guide. This foreign

material either prohibited the correct adjustment of the valve or affected the

valve's lift setpoint. The valve's failure to reclose was attributed to im- proper nozzle ring adjustment.

The reset pressure is strongly influenced by

the dynamic forces created by the nozzle ring.

If the ring is located too high

on the nozzle, it may result in an inadequate ventilation area just above the

nozzle.

Undesirable forces will develop which may cause a much lower reseat

pressure.

The water found near the RHR train "A" suction relief valve had leaked from

a weep hole on a relief valve in a radwaste evaporator line connected to the

IN 90-05 January 29, 1990 common discharge header of the train "A" and "B" suction relief valves.

Con- trary to original assumptions, there was no evidence that the OA" train suction

relief valve had lifted.

The root cause of the problem with the relief valve

on the evaporation line is under investigation but is thought to be unrelated

to the failure of the 'BM suction relief valve.

Hampering operators' efforts throughout this event was the lack of an appro- priate emergency operating procedure (EOP) to detect coolant leaks while in

operating modes 4 and 5. However, the operators were able to combine two

related abnormal operating procedures for guidance during this event. One

of the procedures is designed to locate system leaks while in modes 3 and 4.

The other provides guidance for the restoration of the RHR system following

its loss during conditions in which the reactor vessel inventory is at a

reduced level.

Discussion:

The event at Braidwood 1 is significant because it underscores the need to

have EOPs available for use in other than 'at power" operating modes. The

fact that over 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> were required to locate the stuck-open valve, to

terminate the discharge, and to begin refilling the pressurizer highlights

the need to provide personnel with adequate tools to perform their tasks.

Relying on ad hoc procedures during significant events places an unnecessary

burden on operating personnel.

The lack of adequate EOPs could handicap the

most competent operators in their efforts to address significant operational

problems.

Also illustrated by this event Is the need for procedures to assure that

adequate RCS makeup capability and cooling options are available in a timely

fashion during shutdown.

The discharge through the stuck-open relief valve

exceeded the capability of a single charging pump.

Starting a second charging

pump required that formal procedures for tag removal be conducted.

This effort

necessitated a considerable amount of time, which may not be available should a

similar event occur while the RCS is at a higher temperature.

The severity of this event could have been increased if greater decay heat were

present in the reactor vessel or if a gross failure of the relief valve discharge

header had occurred. Greater decay heat would have increased the potential for

voiding in the core. Also, because the header discharges to the HUTs which are

located outside containment, a piping failure could have resulted in all or a

portion of the RCS water being discharged to the building floor. This event

would have necessitated a major cleanup effort and increased the potential for

personnel contamination.

If this event had occurred at one of the nuclear plants that has a single

suction line from the RCS to the RHR system, all shutdown cooling would

have been lost as a result of isolating the failed suction relief valve.

An alternate heat sink would likely have been required; however, in mode 5, an alternate heat sink may not be readily available.

IN 90-05 January 29, 1990 This information notice requires no specific action or written response.

If

you have any questions about the information in this notice, please contact

one of the technical contacts listed below or the appropriate NRR project manager.

arl

E. ss, Director

Division of Operational Events Assessment

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Technical Contacts: Nick Fields, NRR

(301) 492-1173

Julian Hinds, RIII

(315) 388-5575 Attachment: List of Recently Issued NRC Information Notices

Attachment

IN 90-05

January 29, 1990 LIST OF RECENTLY ISSUED

NRC INFORMATION NOTICES

Information

Date of

Notice-No..

Subject

-

Issuance

Issued to- el

90-04 Cracking of the Upper Shell- to-Transition Cone Girth

Welds in Steam Generators

1/26/90

All holders of OLs

or CPs for Westinghouse- designed and Combustion

Engineering-designed

nuclear power reactors.

90-03

90-02

90-01

89-90

89-89

89-88

89-87

89-45, Supp. 2

89-86 Malfunction of Borg-Warner

Bolted Bonnet Check Valves

Caused by Failure of the

Swing Arm

Potential Degradation of

Secondary Containment

Importance of Proper

Response to Self-Identified

Violations by Licensees

Pressurizer Safety Valve

Lift Setpoint Shift

Event Notification

Worksheets

Recent NRC-Sponsored

Testing of Motor-Operated

Valves

Disabling of Emergency

Diesel Generators. by

Their Neutral Ground-Fault

Protection Circuitry

Metalclad, Low-Voltage

Power Circuit Breakers

Refurbished with

Substandard Parts

Type HK Circuit Breakers

Missing Close Latch Anti- Shock Springs.

1/23/90

1/22/90

1/12/90

12/28/89

12/26/89

12/26/89

12/19/89

12/15/89

12/15/89

All holders of OLs

or CPs for nuclear

power reactors.

All holders of OLs

or CPs for BWRs.

All holders of NRC

materials licenses.

All holders of OLs

or CPs for PWRs.

All holders of OLs

or CPs for nuclear

power reactors.

All holders of OLs

or CPs for nuclear

power reactors.

All holders of OLs

or CPs for nuclear

power reactors.

All holders of OLs

or CPs for nuclear

power reactors.

All holders of OLs

or CPs for nuclear

power reactors.

OL = Operating License

CP = Construction Permit

IN 90-05 January 29, 1990 This information notice requires no specific action or written response.

If

you have any questions about the information in this notice, please contact

one of the technical contacts listed below or the appropriate NRR project manager.

Charles E. Rossi, Director

Division of Operational Events Assessment

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Technical Contacts:

Nick Fields, NRR

(301) 492-1173

Julian Hinds, RIII

(315) 388-5575 Attachment:

List of Recently Issued NRC Information Notices

  • SEE PREVIOUS PAGE FOR CONCURRENCE
  • EAB:NRR

NFields:db

1/12/90

  • TECH:EDITOR *EAB:NRR

DCFischer

1/14/90

1/16/90

  • C:EAB:NRR

CJHaughney

1/18/90

  • C:OGCB:NRR

CHBerlinger

1/22 /90

Ross

11/.AY9O

.

-

IN 90-

January , 1990 No specific action or written response is required by this information

notice. If you have any questions about this matter, please contact one of

the technical contacts listed below or the Regional Administrator of the

appropriate regional office.

Charles E. Rossi, Director

Division of Operational Events Assessment

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Technical Contacts:

Nick Fields, NRR

(301) 492-1173

Julian Hinds,RIII

(315) 388-5575 Attachment:

List of Recently Issued Information Notices

JJV

I'Ins

m

ofi w

EAB:NRR

TECH:EDITOR EAB:NRR

NFields:db

DCFischer

/ /,1-90

1 /*t/90

1/ i190

C: EB:NRR

CJHaughney

I As/90

coY

C:OGCB:NRR

CHBerlinger

I/.090

D:DOEA:NRR

CERossi

/

/90