ML20028A882

LER 82-060/03L-0:on 821019,station Battery I-IV Failed 18- Month Discharge Surveillance Test.Caused by Natural End of Life.Battery Replaced

ML20028A882
Person / Time
Site:	North Anna
Issue date:	11/16/1982
From:	Cartwright W VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.)
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
Shared Package
ML20028A880	List: ML20028A879 ML20028A882
References
LER-82-060-03L-02, LER-82-60-3L-2, NUDOCS 8211290168
Download: ML20028A882 (3)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ _

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION LICENSEE EVENT REPORT CONTROL BLOCK / / / / / / / (1) (PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE ALL REQUIRED INFORMATION)

/0/1/ /V/A/N/A/S/1/ (2) /0/0/-/0/0/0/0/0/-/0/0/ (3) /4/1/1/1/1/ (4) / / / (5)

LICENSEE CODE LICENSE NUMBER LICENSE TYPE CAT

/0/1/ R

/L/ (6) /0/5/0/0/0/3/3/8/ (7) /1/0/'./9 /8/2/ (8) /1/1/1/6/8/2/ (9) 0R EVENT DATE REPORT DATE DOCKET NUMBER EVENT DESCRIPTION AND PROBABLE CONSEQUENCES (10)

/0/2/ / On October 19, 1982, with Unit 1 in Mode 6, Station Battery I-IV failed an 18 /

/0/3/ / month Discharge Surveillance Test. Since 480V Emergency Bus 1J was available to /

/0/4/ / feed 120V AC Vital Bus I-IV, the health and safety of the public were not af fect-/

/0/5/ / ed. This event is reportable pursuant to T.S. 6.9.1.9.b. /

/0/6/_ / /

/0/7/ / /

/0/8/ / /

SYSTEM CAUSE CAUSE COMP. VALVE CODE CODE SUBCODE COMPONENT CODE SUBCODE SUBCODE

/0/9/ /E/C/ (11) /E/ (12) /F/ (13) /B/A/T/T/R/Y/ (14) /Z/ (15) /Z/ (16)

SEQUENTIAL OCCURRENCE REPORT REVISION LER/R0 EVENT YEAR REPORT NO. CODE TYPE NO.

(17) REPORT NUMBER /8/2/ /-/ /0/6/0/ /ss/ /0/3/ /L/ /-/ /0/

ACTION FUTURE EFFECT SHUTDOWN ATTACHMENT NPRD-4 PRIME COMP. COMPONENT TAKEN ACTION ON PLANT METHOD HOURS SUBMITTED FORM SUB. SUPPLIER MANUFACTURER

/C/ (18) /Z/ (19) /Z/ (20) /Z/ (21) /0/0/0/0/ (22) /Y/ (23) /N/ (24) /A/ (25) /C/1/7/3/

(26)

CAUSE DESCRIPTION AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS (27)

/1/0/ / Battery I-IV failed because it had reached its natural end of life. Aging of /

/1/1/ / the battery may have been accelerated by imposing discharge rates on the battery /

/1/2/ / required by the 18 month discharge test. Corrective action was to replace the /

/1/3/ / battery. /

/1/4/ / /

FACILITY METHOD OF STATUS  % POWER OTHER STATUS DISCOVERY DISCOVERY DESCRIPTION (32)

/1/5/ /H/ (28) /0/0/0/ (29) / NA / /B/ (31) / Surveillance Test //

ACTIVITY CONTENT RELEASED OF RELEASE AMOUNT OF ACTIVITY (35) LOCATION OF RELEASE (36)

/1/6/ /Z/ (33) /Z/ (34) / NA / / NA /

PERSONNEL EXPOSURES NUMBER TYPE DESCRIPTION (39)

/1/7/ /0/0/0/ (37) /Z/ (38) / NA /

PERSONNEL INJURIES NUMBER DESCRIPTION (41)

./1/8/ /0/0/0/ (40) / NA /

LOSS TYPE OF OR DAMAGE TO FACILITY (43)

DESCRIPTION

/1/9/ /Z/ (42) / NA /

PUBLICITY ISSUED DESCRIPTION (45) NRC USE ONLY

/2/0/ /N/ (44) / NA /////////////

NAME OF PREPARER W. R. CARTWRICHT PHONE (703) 894-5151 8211290160 821116 PDR ADOCK 05000330 2 PDR  ;

,t ..

Virginia Electric and Power Company North Anna Power Station, Unit No. 1.

Attachment:

- Page.1 of 2 Docket No. 50-338 Report No. LER 82-060/03L-0 Description'of' Event On October 19, 1982, with Unit 'l in Mode 6. Station Battery I-IV failed 1-PT-87, an 18 month discharge surveillance test. Battery I-IV is the backup power' supply to 125 V D.C. Distribution Cabinet I-IV and 120 V A.C. Vital Bus I-IV.

Probable Consequences of Occurrence Battery.I-IV provides a backup power supply to 120 V A.C. Vital Bus I-IV which provides power to safety related Protection Instrumentation, channel IV. Since the normal power supply, 480V Emergency Bus 1J was available to feed 120 V A.C. Vital Bus I-IV the health and safety of the public were not affected. In addition Battery I-IV would have been able to provide power to the vital bus, but not for the duration assumed in the Final Safety Analysis Report.

Cause of Event Station Battery I-IV failed its 18 month Discharge Surveillance Test (Design Discharge) because the battery was at its natural end of life. Although the battery had not experienced its design life of 20 years, aging may have been accelerated by the battery being imposed to a discharge test of 17 amp hours under the battery design rating of 900AH.

Test discharge rate is determined by worst case calculated applied load on the Battery I-IV.

Immediate Corrective Action Since Battery I-IV is not required in the Mode (Mode 6) which failure was discovered, no immediate action was taken.

Subsequent Corrective Action Battery I-IV was replaced by Design Change 82-S34. The three other station batteries were checked to determine if worst case calculated load was close to battery design rating so as to determine whether to suspect accelerated aging. A minimum of 19% difference existed between battery rating and applied load on the remaining three batteries so accelerated aging is not' suspected.

Attachment:

Page 2 of 2 Scheduled Corrective Action None Actions Taken to Prevent Recurrence No further actions are required.

Generic Implications No generic implications exist for this event.

i i

i f

I i

i i

1, .: ..._, . .- . . - - - _ . . , _ - - - , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . - , . . . _ , _ , _ _ _ , _ - _ - - ... ~ .-__ ,,. .. .. _ ._.. _ _ -.. - _ _ ..-. _ - - .- -. _ --