ML19322C206

Confirms,For PA Public Util Commission,Util Assessment of Major Problems That Determine Projected 781101 Date for Commercial Svc.Expects Inservice Date of Late Oct 1978

ML19322C206
Person / Time
Site:	Crane
Issue date:	07/19/1978
From:	Dieckamp H GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
To:	Carter L PENNSYLVANIA, COMMONWEALTH OF
References
TASK-TF, TASK-TMR NUDOCS 8001160598
Download: ML19322C206 (9)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:&L&\\ t -a Herman Diecksm3 Psexent 260 cherry H:r!.= 2a , c-. - GENERAL Parsipoany New Msey C] 17-,.! l: 2012Gusca l 5.c PUBLIC f - E UTILITIES a CORPORATION July 19, 1978 iM

• U Penns lvania Public Utility Commission Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 104 North Office Building Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120 i

Carter, Chairman Honorable Louis J. Attention: TMI-2 Start-up and Test Status

Subject:

Dear F 'rman Carter: I reviewed the status of the During the Met-Ed review on June 23rd,TMI-2 start-up progr l service. The assessment of t'g purpose of this letter is to confirm our current i date of maior__pr@less that_ control the projected ccmmercial serv ce ~ about November 1, 1978. Start-up Procram ( d for A formal start-up testing program was planned and organize 2 similar to the Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station Unit l d Nuclear one that was conducted very successfully on Three Mile Is anThe ~ Generating Station Unit 1. The first event in the test _nr.ogyg,m, as outlined on Attachment 1.was comoleteJ_in Octaher 1977, time. The in time to hot functional testinc.1978 in-service date scheduled at that l t ecuic=ent support tne May 31, test program is planned to fully exercise all of the p an any under carefully controlled and monitored conditio d the[clantdifford.sspic ~ that objective of the test program is to verify in full conformance_witf all ocerating and licensin i the While it is anticipated that some problems will occur dur test program, v no explicit provision for delays. "15-40 per By April 23rd, the test program had progressed to theIn so doing t f shou cent power escalation" phase. full temperature and pressure at a 4000 Mwhrs. is a list of i en durina the 200 Mw and has produced about some of the more significant problems which have ar s2 are particular The last three items on Attachment testing program. m ' WI4 \\ worthy of discussion. w' W a y ,ge (c ' 8001160 ~~ ( \\ @<'- b

July 19, 1978 E I Control Assembly d with either In the TMI-2 reactor core each fuel assembly is fitted assembly a moveable control rod, or a fixed burnable poison roThe mechanism which (ORA ). ther (BPRA), or a fixed orifice rod assenbly B&W installations. Consequently it was necessa ove the tor internals to reactor head and disassemble a portion of the reacThat effort was com ~ f ty valve correct this problem. current with corrective action on the main steam sa e -r problems. Emergency Cooling _ fety analysis h In March 1978 B&W notified us of an oversight in t e sa tion in the event they had performed to verify adequate plant protecl break in the reactor , of a loss of coolant accident caused by a smal The permanent solution to this problem in-vide greater coolant system piping. volves the addition of piping 'and check valves to p ling. These changes may not be accomplished until the first re bout 93 per There is a possibility that THI-2 will be limited.to aecessary modifi-h cent of full power pending the completion of t e ninterim administratively l Met-Ed and GPUSC are pursuing an i tion which has been controlled solution to remove the power restr caccept cation. i i that it will be A t accepted for TMI-2. r i Main Steam Relief Valves _ ting at 28 per f the reactor tripped while opera am., This type i On April 23, 1978, cent power during the conduct of the start-up progr both the reactor of transient leads to an increase in pressure inThe pressure increase l plant. l s open as a lieve this / main steam safety valtas. The main steam safety va ve plant and the stear result of the increase in main steam pressure and rehowever, the m l l range. pressure to the atmosphere; did not reclose when the pressure returned to its normappropriately As a result of the safety valves failing to close aystem, cooling down excessive heat was removed frem the main steam ctor coolant system lant pressure, to cool down excessively. system, and the associated decrease in reactor c anner similar ident. to that expected during a loss of coolant acc it was noted that liners fromthe main ste During the course of this event, expansion joints in the discharge piping from through the main i valves had failed and were ejected into the a r steam safety valve discharge stacks. %f!? Y ('

• ~

.i-July 19, 1978 to Met-Ed and GPU Service Corporation established t and \\ d ch an occur-to recommend specific action to be taken to preclu e su.It was w d rence in the future.others that the main steam safety valves blew down exce while cobrective action was necessary, blem. The major thrust of the initi.a1 action uas to corre the defi-d such correc-ciencies in the discharge piping expansion joints, anConcurrent with tive action was completed about the middle of May. l t was the repairs to the safety valve discharge piping, the p an h actor coolant cooled down for cleanup of the chemicals added to t e reling water and system in conjunction with injection of emergency coo h test program. correction of other minor problems identified by t eature and pressure Upon return of the plant to normal operating temper i was initiated without nuclear power, main' steam safety valve test ng he reclosure with the expectation of adjusting td It became pressure of the valves to correct the excessive blow own. on May 18, 1978, ere not apparent about May 20th that the allowable ad'justments,w afety valves. correcting the reclosure problem with the main steam s a meeting was held with engineering executives of f the safety On May 23, 1978, the Lonergan Company (designers and manuf acturers oa of i action that would be taken to correct the defic en valves), uld result The Lonergan Company stated that two specific changes woOne chan ii back pressure caused by the design of the valve discharge p p in acceptable valve performance. the valve. and the second involved internal modifications toesumed on These changes were made on two valves and testing was r and on May 31,1973c 1978, with the modified discharge piping, May 26, with the modified valves. d Roe Concurrent with the joint effort w'ith Lonergan, Burns anwas directed (the Architect-Engineer for TMI-2) ld be necessary work to design modifications to the plant which uouGPUSC personnel beg if the Lonerpan valves had.to be replaced.aa canvass valve lity immediately of replacement valves. a testing facility in Huntsville, Alabaks i of the In the first part of June,became available for modification to per dified and un-valves, and arrangements were made to test both mo testing at the f acility. In the meantime, (51) valve tests that modified valves at plant continued through the 4th of June. Fif ty-one through June 4, sixteen sere accomplished in the period from May 18of which l (111) 22, 1978. None of tests were conducted at Huntsville thrnuch Junehite resulted in acceptab (16) the tests at Huntsville or at the plant ( valve performance. esqat

l- .~.. July 19, 1978 During the period of evaluation and testing from mid-May through June 23, many alternatives were considered for resolution of the problem. The search made throughout the United States for available replacement valves resulted in no valves being found that were available immediately that would fit the TMI-2 steam line con-The Forked River Nuclear Generating Station is being figuration. supplied valves of the same size as the Lonergan valves but which those valves will not are made by another valve manufacturer but He were able to locate - be available until the end of November 197 8. smaller valves that were available inmediately and similar to the valves used for TMI-1. it was apparent that the valve testing at Hunts-

• On June 22, 1978, ville was non-productive and that further testing of the Lonergan It was decided, valves would not achieve satisfactory results. smaller valves of the TMI-1 therefore, to purchase twenty (20)

(12) Lonergan valves which did not per-design to replace the twelveBy that time, the necessary modifications to the form adequately. main steam lines had been identified and the necessary material to accomplish these modifications had been locatpd, and procurement had commenced. main The steam line modifications involve welding into the four (4)new no les. Welding the no :les steam leads, a total of twenty (20)into place requires cutting holes fit up of the new nonsles with the holes and completion of the welding process which nust include in-process and post-weld inspec-In addition, the safety valve tions and post-weld heat treatment. discharge piping inside the building has to be removed and replaced configuration. All of this with different piping with a different p work must be accomplished in an elevated and congested area of t.e plant. .he The question of why the plant.was into start-up testing before safety valve deficiency was identified deserves some comment. Probably the major contributor to that development was the excellent industry experience with steam safety valve performance. The situa-One of the tion is further complicated by the size of the valves. valves will pass an amount of steam equivalent to that needed to generate 100 Mw of electricity and testing facilities for valves of that type are not generally available. The Huntsville facility did not become available until late 1976 and it is only marginally %. The Lonergan valves were procured j capable of testing these valves. competitively and were 'ne first of this size built by the company of the design of a smaller valve with proven perf This situation is not unusual as through the years th c not be tested under operating conditions until completicn of the plant construction. o M-,.,3Mm 7,,9 " q. -6A ( u u-go

i July 19, 1978 23,1978, Schedule s initiated June Cenoletion of_the i The main steam safety valve modificat on wa id-Aucust. in mid-Augus_t will oermi.t_a and is expected to be complete about m September and an_in-gelvice dale _fpx_the main steam safety valve. modification months. dniay_Qf four L4) return to [powgx_e.grlyj n = "n11f ty valve recovery o. 1Q72 nn Unit at the end of octinar Attachments 3 and 4 show the main steam sa e from start of testing dl schedule and the resulting overall sche u efurther problems. ~t to commercial operation assuming no p and test program t We will keep you informed of the THI-2 star -uIf you o information, please status. "uly you s, call on us. Very \\ / H. Dieckanp Ida attachments Honorable Robert K. Bloom Henorable H. Wilson Goode L cc: Honorable liichael Johnson Honorable Helen B. O' Bannon Messrs. A. W. Johnson R. L. Packard [ ~ M. Seidel i M. P. Widoff e k \\ s-3' \\ i \\ l[;g $ a ! _.au;O M ' ( we

I w. e 4 e e e s = E011Yi1Jo "IYtml&O3 -g. s 6( SC ll SC -{- st - .s it (C IC at .u. P Of l 48 4 '1 st LZ ( sr _.,s 1 (! O e il i 1 tr a l .cw 12 l' as) Me LM e .- O., _ g, - s 5o I

) H 61

{ m Od at 1 3.,3 - 21 11 g (

O gI J to

,m.4 %I .g >== LaJ II ,9. cc (M

n LaJ t-=

gi l d 11 Ci .g s l 3 'm L M W,-g ymnR w1 , f, R, j \\\\\\ aps ws,- m 5 . m.. %-u w> 's L "' { g[Q ( i. l a g <n g 9 W En

• 4
• taJ J

J 1,

• t 4.J M

t== H (#1 $n O sn st) J M 6.- W

• • t/1 ::"

Q L.aJ s sJ. 7 et LaJ O = p $== t-p= cc = W

p. -

Gn t >= W W LJ W 9 W

• C LAJ

.T laJ &&l En

• C U

t== W W >== W .'. C LJ J

• C V.J (A=

u.J 1 44.== g.aJ tt A = < v La.J M M (Y" EM L-i8 En V1 4/5 V1 t/1 n. ei 4M tJ e== 43 O O e'3 >= lei

• "***J W

nJ *==

• C C

J 4/3 W &#1 .M taJ C J W

• C J >==

t== rd uJ n". J ;4 8.aJ t== og.'_"*= .M J 4.7 e.J O A 's.aJ W taJ

== FC p 0 ct, $1 a.4 af 6'c ce A ia x .2 ud 25 J (U O s .aJ A s.3 u.c q 44 a J c fe c us eu J J c b w> z.a.J t'J .* ~> a A at 8 J e 4 i c a t v.- o A .: * ;3 o J a e 0=4 ..e >= 8.4 tb t3 A .A A a a ( .3 W -3 uJ ta. J

e. -

6.-- O tri J* N w U n.:2 W a; t be 9

) -""

O O J'% .A .') C4 W s/1 J s)1 V1 .,n".

• • 4 e

.A O .aJ 8

• A

=9 J J N N m =3 W I

• Z

.':p C

== A N * ~2 .'= C'3

1. ~

e-= w

g M

Att:1chmen@ K r ]. PROBLElis ENCouliTERED DURIiiG TEST PROGRAM ~ CRITICAL PATH ~~ ' ' DELAY TIME 3 DAYS FUEL TRANSFER MECHANISMS 8 DAYS STEAM GEi1ERATOR INSTRUMEllTATION'PEl1ETRATI0iis REACTOR COOLANT PUMP MOTOR REVERSE ROTAT _ DAYS PROJECTION 3 10 DAYS C . VITAL POWER INVERTER TRIP / SAFETY IHJECTION 5 DAYS ikOI' WORTH MEASUREMEiiTS N0i1E BURilABLE POISoli ROD ASSEMBLIE.S ~ H0iiE SMALL BREAK'LOCA AliALYSIS EST.4 MONTHS MAIN. STEAM SAFETY. VALVE PERFORMANCE e e \\ y\\ t e 6 +" 9

s i. O i 1 MAlli STEAM SAFETY VALVE RECOVERY SCliEDULE l senuur' s.wr

r.,

J n 2s 4 sus E\\,EH,a or sf is or sz a r a or a s is or u o e s.e. pa I f F.EACTOR TP.lP AT 2*o'. FO'JER R.C.SYS.CLEA:. P/ SAFETY VLV Lil;ER EEPAIR I l 1 T o r.vtiUATE TRA;iSIEi;is CAUSliiG TRIP q EVALUATE flies FOR LO'iERGMi VALVES rj' "~" EislG1 f.CDS FOR REPLACEF.Elil VALVES' 8 I 2 li3T TEST - CED RCD DROPS /4 RCP's i f.S S;fETY V;tVE TESill;G , _ 2; FLAiii C0CE0',:n - Elf.0VE REACTOR llE/D m ! 13COEE r.035 (EPRVORA) ,cc:=; ' ihSiftL ELACTOR HEA3 ] R.C. SYSTEn FILLAEni n E3 FEhC?.K F,5 StJETY VALVERIPlitG R.C.SYSiun I!EATUP 10 1504 a L VACUGi til sic 0J0;RY FthiT FELL *4ATER CEE?!STRY/ FILL STE;;i GEiiEFATORS C c=2 h5 SYSTEn itY0h0 (EETEST) HEAluP 10 5324 ti:D RETEST CORE PARif.ETERS cc:3 cm ..SFEllEF9ALVETESTihG PEEChlTICAL IJD SURVElll>RCE TESTlHG i j j g CRiilCAtliY (S-9/1/78) g: g e l I 1' { b-L 6 _, v.,,, j 1,. g e

I r { ~~

• TEST PROGRM AND MAIN STEM SAFETY VALVE kEC0VERY SC 1977 1978 Aug Sep Oct How Dec Jan Feb Har Apr May Jun Jul Aus Sep Cet, Nov EVEllT i

i 1. !iOT FCiCil0.lAL TEST ? m 2. EC PUMP ELVORK/RE/SINESS FOR STRUCTURAL INT. TEST a

3. SAFETY FEATURES ACTUAT10:1 SYSTEli II ti. STRUCTUPAL litTEGRITY TEST Q

5. I:iTEGEATED LEAK RATE TEST, - s=a 6. LICEiSidS PEEEECulSITES m 7. LOAS FUEL /lliSTALL REACTOR llEAD 0:s d. POST FUEL LO*D PEE-CRITICAL TEST (COLD) ( s=> , HOT) 9. P0iT FULL LOA!) PEE-CRITICAL TF' 23

10. iEi.0 PCWER PliYSICS/lillTIAL CRITICAllTY (3/28/78) m

11. 0-l'sY PCKER TEST /SYiiC GRID ESCALATE TO 30%

i

12. A'/23/18 PEACTOR TRIP AT 28%

15. 75 SAFETY VALVE E00/RETURrl CRITICAL I

14. 2EP0 FC,LR Pi!YSICS TESTil;G I

15. 15I PU'dR PLATEAU

16. 15 '. 'I PCWER D

17. 40I PCWER PLATEAU c(,

IB. 40-75% POWER ca

19. 75I POWiR PLATEAU a

20, 75-100Z POWER c g

21. ICC: PGWER PLATEAU E

E 2 '. L;i!T ACCtPIA: ICE TEST 7

25. CC:TihCIAL OFEPAll0:1 (S-10/20/78)

P, = e e ,.?, ^ 9- \\ 1 <x .}}