ML17053C119
| ML17053C119 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 11/24/1980 |
| From: | Grier B NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | Lempges T NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORP. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8012050578 | |
| Download: ML17053C119 (8) | |
Text
~p,8 IlEgII (4
P
~ i i'y+
0 A
I
+w*w+
Docket No. 50-220 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION I 631 PARK AVENUE KING OF PRUSSIA, PENNSYLVANIA19406 November 24, 1980 Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation ATTN:
Mr. T.
E.
Lempges Vice President Nuclear Generation 300 Erie Boulevard West
- Syracuse, New York 13202 Gentlemen:
The enclosed IE Information Notice 'No. 80-42, "Effect of Radiation on Hydraulic Snubber Fluid," is forwarded to you for information.
No written response is required.
If you desire additional information regarding this matter, please contact this office.
5 incerely, B
ce H. Grier Director ED tQ LaJ CA CD Cem
~
CD~lu~
lO r.w~
I l.l CD Ill
'al Lu
",'Enclos's:
- =.1.
I@Information Notice No. 80-42 2.
L1st of Recently Issued IE Information Notices CONTACT:
0.
L. Caphton (215"337-5266) cc w/encls:
T. J.
- Perkins, General Superintendent, Nuclear Generation T.
Roman, Station Superintendent R. Abbott, Operations Supervisor E.
B. Thomas, Jr.,
Esquire so iao Eo5F~
r~
N
t SSINS No.:
6835 Accession No.:
8008220261
'N 80"42 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT WASHINGTON,D. C.
20555 November 24, 1980 IE Information Notice No. 80-42:
EFFECT OF RADIATION ON HYDRAULIC SNUBBER FLUID Descri tion of Circumstances:
On August 7, 1980, Florida Power Corporation (FPC) filed a report in accordance with 10 CFR Part 21 that identified an upper service limit of 10 Mrad (megarad) of radiation on the General Electric Versilube F-50 fluid that was provided in Anker-Holth shock suppressors mounted on the reactor coolant pumps.
This upper limit was obtained from the results of a study performed for FPC by Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI).
These results contained two items of prime importance to the operation of the suppressors.
The first result was a significant increase of the viscosity of the fluid to the extent that incipient gelation of the fluid occurred at exposures of approximately 50 Mrad.
The viscosity increased, linearly for exposures up to 20 Mrad and then increased exponentially for exposures greater than 20 Mrad.
The second result showed that hydrochloric acid (HCl) was formed in significant quantities when the fluid was subjected to radiation.
The following table lists the dose irradiation time and HCl formed.
Dose (Mrad)
Irradiation Time HCl Formed (ppm) 0 1.2 5.8 5.8
- 18. 5 50 ~ 3 1 minute 5 minutes 10 hours1.157407e-4 days <br />0.00278 hours <br />1.653439e-5 weeks <br />3.805e-6 months <br /> 11.2 minutes 15.2 minutes
- 2. 78
- 70. 3 329.
335.
555 1592 One of the recommendations by the RPI personnel was that the fluid be replaced before a limit of approximately 6 Mrads was reached.
FPC reported that the fluid in service at Crystal River No.
3 plant had absorbed doses ranging from 2.3 to 3.6 Mrads,these values were determined by comparing the viscosity of the fluid in service to that of the test samples at RPI.
The Technical Instruction Manual that is provided by the vendor for these suppressors contains a recommendation that 12.5 Mrads should be the maximum service life for Versilube F-50.
This IE Information Notice is provided as an early notification of a possibly significant matter that is still under review by the NRC staff.
Recipients should review the information for possible applicability to their facilities.
No specific action or response is requested at this time.
If NRC evaluations so indicate, further licensee actions may be requested or required.
IE Information Notice No. 80-42 November 24, 1980 RECENTLY ISSUED IE INFORMATION NOTICES Enclosure 2
Information Notice No.
80"41 Subject'ate Issued Failure of Swing Check 11/10/80 Valve in the Decay Heat Removal System at Davis-Besse Unit No.
Issued to All holders of a power reactor OL or CP 80-40 80-38 80-37 80-36 Excessive Nitrogen Supply Pressure Activates Safety-Relief Valve Operation to Cause Reactor Depressurization Cracking in Charging.
Pump Casing Cladding Containment Cool er Leaks and Reactor Cavity F'1ooding at Indian Point Unit 2 Failure of Steam Generator Support Bolting 11/6/80 10/30/80 10/24/80 10/10/80 All holders of a power reactor OL or CP All holders of a
PWR power reactor OL or CP All holders of a power reactor OL or CP All holders of a power reactor OL or CP 80-35 Leaking and Disl odged 10/10/80 Iodine-125 Implant Seeds All holders of a Category G or Gl
'edical License 80-34 Boron Dilution of Reactor Coolant During Steam Generator Decontamination 9/26/80 All holders of a PWR Power Reactor OL 80-33 80-32 Determination of Teletherapy Timer Accuracy Clari-fication of Certain Requirements for Exclusive-use Shipments of Radioactive Materials 9/15/80 9/12/80 All holders of a teletherapy license All holders of an NRC or Agreement State L'icense
v
~
N
'I W
ggl hEQy~
~o C
O I
L'l O~
YJ 0
IP
++*++
UMITEG SYAYES MUCILEAR BEGUN.ATORY COMMISS(OM Office of Public Affaims Mfashington, D.C. 20666 No.80-219 Tel."
301/492-7715 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE (Wednesday, November 26,'980)
~V -g~
NRC STAFF ISSUES ORDER TO NIAGARA MOHAWK
$225,000 FINE IS PROPOSED The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Office of Inspection and Enforcement has ordeied Niagara Mohawk Power. Corporation of Syracuse, NY, effective immediptely~ to prohibit a former site, superintendent at its Nine Mile Point. Nuclear Power Plant near
- Oswego, NY, from any involvement in nuclear matters, in the company.
.'The NRC staff also is proposing to fine Niagara Mohawk
$225,000 for allegedly making a material false statement to the-NRC and continuing to operate the plant in alleged violation of NRC requirements."
The NRC staff also is ordering the company to show cause why its Executive Vice President should not also be removed from involvem'ent in nuclear matters.
In addition, the'RC, staff ordered the company to submit information on how it plans to ensure that responsible managers at all levels of. its organization provide" full, accurate and timely reports to high company management and to NRC.
These actions stem from an "NRC investigation, which disclosed that the then site superintendent, Mr. T. J.
- Perkins, was aware that actions were required by NRC to provide by January 31,
- 1980, a method to measure higlj level releases of radioactivity in the event of an accident at Nine Mile Point.
The investigation determined that these modifications were not complete when Mr. Perkins concurred in the information contained in a January 22, 1980 response to NRC, signed by Mr. James Bartlett, Executive Vice President, which said the equipment had been installed.
The equipment.
was not installed until October 1980, after NRC inspectors went to examine the equipment and saw it was not there.
l
.l In the order issued today by Victor Stello, NRC Director of Inspection and Enforcement, he said that following the March 28, 1979 acc'denIt at the Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Plant in Pennsylvania, the NRC required prompt implemen-tation of a number of improvements at all operating nuclear power plants.
One of those improvements was to provide by January 31, 1980 an interim method to measure high level releases of radio"ctivity.. In its January 22, 1980,answer to an NRC order, Niagara Mohawk stated that it had met his requirement.
Earlier, the company had said it would install an additional portable radiation survey instrument to monitor radioactivity going up the stack.
The company also said that the new instrument would be shielded from background radiation by means of a lead cave arcund the detector.
III Today's NRC order said "...at least one responsible manage-in the licensee's organization, the (then) site.
superintendent, knew that the January 22,
- 1980, sworr. state-ment submitted in response to the January 2,
1980, order was false.
This statelL'ent.'..was "not only false but also material since operation of Nine Mile Point Unit 1 was permitted to continue beyond January 31, 1980 in the belief that the requirements of the Commission's order dated January 2,
1980 were satisfied..."
Meeting the requirement vwas necessary
" to mitigate the consequences of postulated accidents by providing reliable information on which to base decisions concerning~rotective actions, including evacuation.
The company is required to file an answer to,the show cause order by January 5,
1981, and may request a public.
hearing.-
Any person who has an interest affected by this order also may request a hearing.
With respect to the proposed
$ 225,000 fine,'he company also has 25 days to protest it in full or in part.
OZ0I C
V V V O7 V II 0 4
OCH 7 7Z VVO II"V g U H 7 0
O 20 Vl ch y IA OO Ih Q N Z "'
)
LI I
O 0 <O
>a.
III+ I 4 I7 I OQ Zg 44 z
OI7Z 4>.
O I-Z II ill O7 LA LA LA ON Eh O
h4 U
LL LA l/)W Ovv Z OCZ 0 0 Q~
l o u LAVWZ Z lALZ.LZQ X
Kc[ALYl MDctcaoX