ML20059A583
| ML20059A583 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 08/04/1990 |
| From: | William Cahill TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC CO. (TU ELECTRIC) |
| To: | Martin R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| References | |
| TXX-90283, NUDOCS 9008230119 | |
| Download: ML20059A583 (16) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:, . myo: ++ ' mu~ maoc tmvn aaac wiwcnoano r m u c . w u c. ;l s" ,,.
}' :,
. "5 Log 8 TXX-90283
'::. .lll: File # 10010
.- r nlEl.ECTRIC ,
August 4, 1990 a Weise J. Cats, Jr. s n= = a.ne. Mr. R. D. Martin. t U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission , Region IV-
.611 Ryan Plaza Dr., Suite 1000 -
' Arlington, Texas 76011
SUBJECT:
COMANCHEPEAKSTEAMELECTRICSTATION(CPSES) DOCKET No. S0-445 l o RESPONSE TO INFORMATION REQUEST MADE DURING THE AUGUST 2, 1990 PUBLIC MEETING
Dear Mr. Martin:
On Aagust 2 1990 the imt cuaducted a Public Meetf 1 at CPSES to discuss the l inadvertent safety injection events which occurrec on July 26 and. July 30, 1990, and the results of'100% power platsau. testing. As a result of the discussions of the safety injection events, NRC representatives requested that. 1 TU Electric submit in-writing the results of its ongoing assessments of three , specific topics .at least 24. hours prior to entering Mode 3. . The three topics. were: 1) the adequacy of installed emergency lighting with respect to regulatory and design requirements and.any actions necessary to establish complianr:e with those requirements; 2) the operability and reliability.of. Steam Generator Atmospheric Relief Valves (ARVs) and short term and/or long term , actions that will-be taken to address lany findings in this' area; and 3) t n pott.ntial personnel safety. hazards identified during the events including
- capability to evacuate personnel from containment and observed steam blowback during ART actuation.
L T .TU Electric has completed its assessments of each-of these topics with the-l, following results, i L'
-1. F"*rnancy Lichtine Adecuacy The lighting system at CPSES cotisists of three subsystems; normal ,
h, > . l lighting, which is powered from power supplies which are shed on a safety
*" tinjection er loss of offsite power; essential lighting, powered from yttal buses.which are automatically restored following a safety injection or loss of offsite power; and DC emergency lighting, which is powered from dedicated battery packs. Sufficient essential lighting is provided to assure that upon loss of normal lighting operators can perform essential
, functions as required. The emergency lighting in each area serviced .
' senses power availability to the essential lighting and comes on when 1
, power is not available to essential lighting in the serviced area. L
'9008230119 900804 !
q j R ADOCK0500gj5
' P O. Son f002 Gert Rees. Texas W).1002 y,w
- t. - -
L; m w ;, , M: _.;=+ Page 2 of 4 L Our review of the _ design and installation of. these lighting subsystems 1 demonstrated that O,ey conform to existing regulatory and design , l ,- requirementt 'and TU Electric commitments. , s During tho' safety injection events of July 26 and 30, it was noted that 1 certain essential! lights were not energized and that the associated DC p '~ emergency lights did-not come on. Investigation of.this condition: ' reveeld that power was available to;the essential'11ghts, but that the ; lights had been turned off via local switenes. Becaus. m er.was .; i_ - available to the essential lights, the emergency lights did not come on. ' To address' this situation.in the longer ters, a design modification ~1s-being processed to remove the local switches for the essential. lights as-appropriate. Until. such time that this modification is fully implemented, , plant operators.have been instructed to assure that essential lighting is ! left on. ' 2, ARV Ocarability and Reliabilit/ ' Review of the circunstances surrounding the malfunction of the ARV on the- ' Mo. 3 Storm Ge.terate,r on July 30, 1990 determined that the most probable ' cause was water ace,umulation on the upstream side of
- valve. This determinatior:has received preliminary concurrence ' the valve vendor.
The bases for this: determination include the follo.
-a. The ARV stcoked acceptably during the p n ascension test program,
- b. Th m were no outstanding-work requests at the time of the-malfva.: tion which documented conditions which could have contributed to the obierved behavior.
- c. There had been no work performed on the valve subsequent to its last successful stroke that could have contributed to its observed behavior,
- d. The Main Steam Isolation Valve (MSIV), the ARV, and the steam line drains on the No. 3 Steam Generator had been closed for at least 15 hours prior to the event. This allowed significant condensate to -
collect in the steam line. 1
- a. When the ARV actuated, a significant quantity of water was observed coming out of the valve vent stack inlet as well as its outlet.
+ f. The observed. valve behavior was consistent with an accumulation of I water on.the upstream side of the valve. With water pressent on the I
. upstream side of the valve, initial opening of the internal pilot l valve would have allowed only e small quantity of fluid ~ to be passed 1
1 1 fue 3yt -a a p,
i gi , g gg31
,1
-Page 3 of 4 l
through the valve. This would not result in.any.si "
. decrease in differential pressure across the valve.gnificant: . Since the ,
differential pressure across the valve opposes valve opening force, ; valve opening.would-have been delayed. This, in turn,-caused the
~
valve actuator.to app .an increasing opening force on the valve-
, disk. As additional; uid passed through the valve and flashed to- :
. steam in the valve discharge,:a backpressure developed,' reducing the -
difforential pressure across.the valve and resulting in a greater not valve opening force. Eventually,,the force imbalance resulted : in sudden valve opening and rapid reduction in steam line pressure. l
- g. Subsequent to the event, the valve was successfully stroked.without indication of erratic behaviar, i
- h. Subsequent to the event, the valve and actuator were disassembled in :
the presence of the valve vendor. No evidence of valve damage or . wear was observed which would have contributed to the behavior l observed during the event. Proper stroking of the valve will be l Verified prior to Mode 2 during plant restart. , To prevent recurrence of the conditions leading to this event, plant. procedures are being revised to require periodic draining of the steam-lines under similar plant conditions. In addition, a review'of operations in Modes'3 and 4 is being conducted to detemine if other longer term actions are appropriate.
- 3. potential personnel Safety concerns The review of personnel safety concerns related to perscanal evacuation- !
from containment has determined that personnel could have been evacuated ' within 20 minutes through either the Normal or Emergency Air Locks, o Testing on. August 3,1990 verified:that containment lighting following a safety injection;(SI) is adequate for personnel egress. P1 ant -Operations made a conscious decision, in comunication and agreement with:those individuals'inside containment, not to evacuate since they knew what 1 caused the'SI and expected the event:to be concluded quickly with normal power restored. The personnel in containment were not-in any cistress and they had no immediate concerns regarding their safety. ; Our assessment' of the conditions associated with the. events did identify; that at least one individual in containment did understand how to operate the Emergency-Air Lock. However, a number of individuals did not fully. understand this operation. As a result, job aids on how to use,the Normal and. Emergency Air Locks.are being developed 'o place near the Additionally, we are continuing to evaluate whether vital powe? locks. r should be j provided to the hydraulic operating system on the Normal Air Lock. Prior to startup the-Emergency Operating Procedures will be revised to provide l additional direction:on the' expeditious removal of personnel from i containment ' 1 E
' };
u , t r }h , h
', k. _
mxw
F.I l c TXX.90283
# g.q *' page 4.of 4 The blowback from the ARY ventLwas a steam and water mixture. The vent is . ,
' designed to pass' steam and normally would not contain water.~ .The presence?
of. water restricted flow through the vent, contributing:to the blowback. : This is confirmed by the absence of: blowback during previous valve operations.. The actions described above to. reduce the accumulation of-condensate in the steam lines will minimize the potential for future 3 blowback. Blowback would.not nonaally represent a personnel safety; hazard, as during plant operation,- the area is not occupied and the only: personnel in this ' area would be watch standers making periodic rounds. It was recognized some time.ago that manual' closure of an ARY would expose the~individuali As a' result, th. operating the valve to adverse environmental- conditions. e ARV block valves are located outside the ARY room. : Plant procedures en being modified to reinforce the'use of the block valve. instead of trying to close' the ARV at the ARV itself.
?
. Based on the results of our assessments and the actions.taken as described above, we have concluded that these-issues have been addressed sufficiently.
.g, such that-plant startup may proceed safely. If you have any questions on- these matters, pleast contact me. Sincerely,
/1 William-J. Cahill, 'Jr.
,f.
L' l WGG/dai c Mr. T. P. Gwynn, Region IV Mr.-L. J. Callan, Region IV Mr.: D.: D. Chamberlaim, Region IV Mr. C. I. Grimes, NRR L Mr.LJ. H. Wilson, NRR -
- Resident! Inspectors,CPSES(3)
-Document Control Desk l + .
1
/
l
- I y
4 W. .. Oy +
- l. 9 ?)- ,j. ,
- . i l 0 ;. , , ; , , , ,, ~-
;y - ' >
n-- y, O; l9:
';.; w y _
se:; , ;9 t - . p$:q ,'y .J g " .
*? .
.4
~ >
) i
([ z Y k JULY 26 SAFETY ~ INJECTION EVENTL 1; r .; 4 . .
, , > :1 -
1 7
, INITIAL CONDITIONS-1; i
- o' MODE.3,.SHORT MAINTENANCE OUTAGE l' ' ;6
, o= RCS TEMPERATURE - 558 F-
-. s PRESSURE-- 2250 PSI ?!
o PRESSURIZER LEVEL -'25%
.t
. o. STEAli GENERATOR PRESSURE- 1120 PSI. ,
1 o'- .RCP'S RUNNING-
-o' MSIV'S CLOSED l
i ..
' INITIATING EVENT h 1
. i.
l-
, .o CLEARANCES BEING HUNG FOR' MAINTENANCE w :o -I'SIV'S-TAGGED CIDSED FOR SECONDARY' WORK K
p' o 'SdQUENCE'OF TAGGING IMPROPER t.' . o MSIV #4 AND #2 OPENED I i ,* , -i lN
, 4 I ,
j, a (h C J;. t , ,.',k I f 2 6
;5 4 f
/ - , _ - . . . . . . . ... J . . . - -. . , ,
i'd'. M . J 4 > -,
)
h f ?i ej
,ch
~l
-)
j J l 1 PLANT RESPONSE I o DECREASING STEAM GENERATOR PRESSURE RATE' INITIATED SIAS (1416) 7. o OPERATORS RESPONDED PER EOP'S 1 o 'MSIV'S MANUALLY CLOSED LOCALLY Bi OPERATOR (1429) o SYSTEM RESPONSE i
~
p - RCS TEMPERATURE' DECREASE TO 542 F L
- RCS PRESSURE DECREAS E TO 2170 PSI / j INCREASE TO 2330 PSC ,
l L ! - PRESSURIZER LEVEL DECREASE TO 18%/ INCREASE TO 87%
- STEAM GENERATOR:#4 PREESGRE. DECREASE
..TO 8501 PSI (182'IN 56 SECONDS) l o NOTIFICATION OF UNUSUAL"FVENT DECLARED (1420)
L M PLANT RECOVERY I i. o . OPERATOR RECOVERED PLANT-PER-EOP'S o SAFETY INJECTION' SIGNAL RESET (1432)- i o SAFETY INJECTION FLOW SECURED (1435) o EQUIPMENT' RESTORED.TO NORMAL MODE 3 ' l u > ALIGNMENTS E o NOTIFICATION OF UNUSUAL EVENT $ TERMINATED (1740) i 19 l l .' r l in
, O-p j-' y.
! ilk ' i, ,- ' Sib ;, -
e . , y, ,. . : j i._ . l l
-INITIAL MANAGEMENT RESPONSE
- m. ,
o . SUSPEND ALL UNNECESSARY TAGGING I o : FORM TWO INVESTIGATION TEAMS - s REVIEW EVENT FOR PROPER PLANT, -> EQUIPMENT,.AND PERSONNEL RESPONSE
, CONTINUE TO REVIEW CLEARANCE PROCESS I
o REMAIN IN MODE 3 .,. e R' ROOT CAUSE OF IVENT i l:
~
t- ' SEQUENCE OF TIGGING MSIV'S WAS IMPROPER i t i.. o- REVIEW OF CLEARANCE NOT ADEQUATE g, s Li 'o- RESPONSIBILITIES FOR SEQUENCE REVIEW. ., 4 >
.NOT CLEAR _,
m h o. FAULTY PROCEDURE INTERPRETATION; .i p .4 lv i ,. , ps L l? , MSIV DESIGN ' [' ; c ~
+ I ,
j hiF f
'h
[g
' l
.7 i I
, , ,8 .
7;r -
,; c _... , , . ,
l
.. as i .j ' . . f J
V ROOT CAUSE CORRECTIVE' ACTIONS 1 o o REVIEW OF CLEARANCES NOT ADEQUATE
- CLAP.IFY SHIFT ORDER(COMPLETE)
- RESOLVE CLEARANCE DISCREPANCIES
' (COMPLETE)'
- REVISE ROTATION OF OPERATORS'IN SWCC
- DEVELOP ROUTINE CLEARANCES FOR. COMPLEX ACTIVITIES.
- ENHANCE' FLOW-DIAGRAM.
o RESPONSIBILITY ~FOR SEQUENCING NOT CLEAR
- CLARIFY RESPONSIBILITY FOR SEQUENCING DEVEIDPMENT = (COMPLETE)
- CLARIFY RESPONSIBILITY-FOR SEQUENCE
- REVIEW-(COMPLRTE)'
- ENHANCE COMPLEX CONTROL CIRCUIT LOGICS o FAULTY' PROCEDURE: INTERPRETATION ti
't
- PROVIDE JOINT TRAINING ON? PROCEDURE .I CLARIFICATION (COMPLETE):
TAGGING PERMITTED-AFTER IDENTIFIED-CORRECTIVE ACTIONS WERE COMPLETED-i
,6j-s
\
1 : ,) , ] .
, _' :o l.
i
'5 I
e . ki
} UM 9;n ,s
- s :, l'-l- #
e r
a
;, L ' y ,. .; h ;
.: .c
'p.3
;ge. l
-i OTHER FINDINGS o EQUIPMENT RESPONDED PER DESIGN g
- MONITOR LIGHT BOX MALFUNCTIONED:
[ - LIGHTING IN MSIV-AREA INADEQUATE ,
- LETDOWN / SEAL RETURN RELIEF LIFTED
- - CONTAINMENT PERSONNEL HATCPDISABLED t 9
o EMERGENCY PLAN RESPONSE WAS' APPROPRIATE 2E o OPERATOR RESPONSE PER EOP'S.WAS 9 -APPROPRIATE
' --DECISION ON CONTAINMENT EVACUATION-
- ENHANCEMENT IN EOP'S FOR RESTORING'SIAS .
- IMPROVED ~ ABILITY:To LOCALLY CLOSE MSIV'S. '[.
o PLANT, RESPONSE BOUNDED-BY FSAR' a RCS. COMPONENT TRANSIENT' BOUNDED
.BY'THE INADVERTENT SAFETY INJECTION '
ACTUATION TRANSIENT j I CORRECTIVE ACTIONS PRIOR TO STARTUP
- h. o' . REQUIRED CLEARANCE ENHANCEMENT COMPLETE h- o . FINAL RCS WALKDOWN AFTER RETURN TO
. NORMAL. OPERATING TEMPERATURE / PRESSURE. .
o CONFIRM MONITOR: LIGHT BOX PROBLEM I e i p
't\
t #, .- .,. m ,.. . ....-.. .+ -.. .
\ 1g . ! .g l
i. i4
>=
JULY.26 JULY 30-SAFETY' INJECTION SAFETY INJECTION EVENT- EVENT o:1. STEAM GENERATOR 270 PSI DECREASE
-PRESSURE 320 PSI' DECREASE RATE -182 PSI IN 56. SECONDS 20 PSI ONE~SECOND
' PRESS"",IZER 18%'TO 87%.
E LEVFL 55%TO74% PRESSURIZER '2170 TO 2330-PRESSURE-2220-TO 2282
.i Tc ' LOOPS
, l', 2, 3) 17 F DECREASE 20 F DECREASE' -1 i
. h-
- Tc (LOOP 4 ) . 17 F DECREASE 2?F DECREASE I r
e e
-4 4
.)
1 9 r,
'I i
6
g - ,
- n.
' ~
3 ,;
.~
- CPSES UNIT 1
-s ' , ,
+
~ '
.lNITIAL STARTUP SEQUENCE -
; 100% REACTOR POWER (ISU-280A) i 1 :
em me anae , 100 HOUR WimRRANTY RUN { 100% '
- y y i
N OFM gyg _ MS OfM FULL LOAD REJECTION '
. ANDPW'BWGWIBRAYeDat
!: 90E N gyg - MOMitOnesG Ort > Wye -. 7 SWWW8G ' 4 aas gm- 100% POWER 1ESTS " 83.50
-@ . SECONOM4YCALonedETRIC
@ e0% - . FLtR RAAPPed 3 AND ANALYSIS
/
b . AEMUST NUCLEAR WeSTRURENTATION 5 s0% - I 50%iOAD x - N-30 SvSTEM AruuSTwNr - REKCHON
. CONTROLSYSTERE AEMUSTRENT 40% - . CONTAgdhENT rYans nos 0F13998 j
- Get35
. RADIATI0ttSUfWEYS
, 30% - . SYSTEMTESTSr "
-Per u mu2ER j- ' ~~ M 2Erm - -LOOSE PARTS as0NITOft ENDOF
-TuRaoEJGEDIERATOR \ ESU
.gop PROGAMA 10% ~ .c - _.-
-RCS FLOUW REASUREasENT
~
. CORE PHYSICS TESTW8G 0 -
4 2 L 4 ' 4 4-( T 07/13M10 07/tFfE0 L I 07/2390 - 07/24t50 07/24 idle - 07/30P50
;;DATE '*38
,as
. - ~ .
'.., ,~.~~. _ -
, __ _ _ . ., _ . . _ _ - _ ,___-e_ _ _ _ _ _ . _
__._,__u... ___._...h
4'
% ..,e 1 ,:. .
V , . q i
'- n
.SIGNIFICANT RESULTS O
N16 System Performance O RCS Flow Measurements - 0-132-HRS at'95 1007. Power
~
' 1 0 4 Transient Response O' ,
, Plant Performance 1
,l l
I 1 l c.- 1 I u
'1 I
j~ s f, l'I"
'N,, 'l
>+ .
l l
.h
- r. f . . . t !
;;,W: ,
l 1 j', l ?' , 1 , ,d ': ;t . j]
- i. % 'I h'
y
- r g 1..
l 1 f = '
-: i i
, j j ..- D' S
l -- i* 1: ' . , ,- ,d [ ' ,').r .' ;' ,, I,' , \ V . ,
' i g :a . z. , f' .
0 g tg . 3 .>, -- 3 a n
.oj, , , . , . ,
\ a .: l? , :q l t' OPEN ITEMS -
)
1 0 PROCESS RADIATION MONITORS ! o e O SPLIT-FLOW BYPASS
.I l." O STEAM / FEED FLOW RECALIBRATION O
FEEDW TER CONTROL VALVE POSITION 0 T REFERENCE RECAllBRATION
=!
F
~
v 2 r Y l'
. 8 i}y, 1 l .
. . -#>}I\ g l ( j .5 '. f u.p. l m l
.,E.. -
1 4
-{j
'j ; - .l r$)! N', 7 it j
cQl7 e;g '
.w+
li
m.m
... _; 3. - -
. 1: ,
+ .
.s v.
I INITIAL STARTUP PROGRAM
SUMMARY
.I 1
THE INITIAL STARTUP FROGRAM ASSuREo: 1 1 0
-DEFERREo PRE 0P TESTS WERE PERFORMED; f
i FUEL LOAo WAS CONDUCTED IH A SAFE MANNER;- = 0 1 PLANT WAS-SAFELY BROUGHT TO RATED CAPACITY; f 0 PLANT PERFORMANCE IS SATISFACTORY IN TERMS-0F.. DESIGN.-CRITERIA)'AND "
- s. ;. l
. O 1 PLANT IS CAPABLE OF-WITNSTANDING AND l RESPONDING-TO ANTICIPATED TRANSIENTS. l l l
-1
- l '.
7 L , , l .S,.' l @![.b.! $lY! j !ip ? ' Y ,) } } ~~ .I t - ' 1 ( ', e r
)
t u, 1 a :
' /. I klL m n:. 1 1 ,lh '
e , ;x' ' p . a @j.: '
-g IlJif,i i' \ p;) lit ' . ;_ . .
, 3, i
g e i i I li l 5 iIY w i _8_ i 4 D I o inI w - I i l 0 l I t
- 0) :
O i ! O I E , Ia-0 9 8 i Il_8 _ k li g l 1 I I l l 9 l igI t II l 4 gig m a 4 a a h R l5 $ 9 BBMOd WOJ.OyB8 % / BOOIN l l 1
q, _,.
. ; #, . ji O , ?.I . -
~, . ;
'TU Electric' >
.w Honorable George Crump- !
County Judge Glen Rose, Texas 76043 :
-Texas Radiation Contro1LProgram Director '
l 1100 West 49th Street
-Austin, Texas 78756 ,
bectbDMB.(IE45). bec distrib. by RIV:- .
.R.' D. Martin- Resident Inspector (2)
DRP DRS
-SectionChief(DRP/B)~ Project Engineer (DRP/B)'
DRSS-FRPS Lisa Shea, RM/ALF MIS System- RSTS Operator RIV' Files
'l 5%l l
l a k
< i k
000S$ u.
. m. .
V pl. - ^
5
.f: _
c.
- a. iIn Reply Refer.To:'
Dockets: 50-445' )
- 50-446- i y
TV Electric ATTN: W. J. Cahill, Jr., Executive Vice President, Nuclear i Skyway Tower 400 North Olive Street, L.B. 81 j Dallas. Texas 75201 l Gentlemen: This' refers to the technical maeting conducted at Region IV's request at the . CNnanche Peak Steam Electric Station (CPSES) engineering building on August 2, I 1090. This meeting, which was open to put ic observation, related to activities. R authorized by NRC License No. NPF-87 for CPSES, Unit 1, and was attended by those'on the enclosed: Attendance List.
, The subjects discussed at this meeting are' described in the enclosed Meeting Sumary. As noted in that sumary, your letter of August 4,1990, which described actions completed or planned prior to restart of Unit 1, was reviewed by representatives of NRC Region IV and the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation-(NRR). As discussed with Mr. W. G. Guldemond of your staff on n August 4,1990, actions described in that letter were viewed as appropriate for J restart of the unit.
1 It is our opinion that this meeting ~was beneficial and has provided a better j understanding of the. events and issues presented.. In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of ~ , l Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room. L Should you have any. questions concerning this matter, we will be pleased to L discuss them with you. Sincerely. 1 l OddnalSigned By-Thomas P.Gwynn i I L L Samuel J. Collins, Director ; l' Division of Reactor Projects L
Enclosures:
As stated gl (7- 0 " \ y eflg/B D:DRS b 4 :DRP RIV:DR B .C:DRP l CEJohnson;df DDChamberlain LJCallan y SJCollins fq L
-8/10/90 8//0/90 8/ p90 8/&/90 h, p.
~
~
1-TV Electric . 4 f cc W/ enclosures:~ 4
. TV Electric-
~ ATTN:; Roger D. Walker, Manager, s
Nuclear Licensing i
- Skyway. Tower t
- 400 North Olive Street, L.B. 81 Dallas,. Texas.-75201.
o Juanita Ellis
'" - President - CASE 1426 South Polk- Street ,
- Da11a's, Texas. 75224 GDS Associates, Inc; '
Suite 720 1850-Parkway Place' Marietta, Georgia: 30067-8237 ,
- Billie.Pirner Garde. Esq. -
Robinson, Robinson, et. al.
~
103 East College Avenue
' Appleton Wisconsin 54911 l TV Electric-Bethesda Licensing . I 3 Metro Center. Suite 610. I Bethesda, Maryland 20814-
' Heron, Burchette, Ruckert, & Rothwell ATTN: William A. Burchette, Esq .
y Counsel for-Tex-La Electric Cooperative of Texas 1025~ Thomas Jefferson St., N.W. Weshington,.D.C. 20007 - 1 E. F. Ottney- _/) P.O.. Box 1777 3 Glen Rose, Texas 76043 f
- Newman'&.Holtzinger, P.C.
1
. ATTN: _ Jack-R. Newman,1sq. i
- 1615.LaStreet,'N.W.
- Suite 1000 Washington, D.C. 20036 1
Texas Department of Labor'& Standards
~ ATTN:- G." R. Bynog, Program Manager /
- Chief Inspector
. Boiler Division
; P.O. Box 12157, Capitol. Station-
"r 1 Austin, Texas 78711 ]
4 1
'f- v'
-fi
~,. -- 9, a 4- 4 - .}. .
'I
% i 5j r; :.,- ,
.a. .
p' k ,
.ij 3TU Electric 'i y
1 1 l Honorable George Crump -1 County Judge. y \ s = Glen Rose, Tehas= 76043 ;i . Texas Radiation Control Program Director a 'l 1100 West ~49th Street '
' Austin, Texas 78756
, l
-bectoDMB(IE45) bec distrib. by RIV: s I ={"
Resident. Inspector (2) R. D. Martin DRP . DRS .
.SectiorJChief(DRP/P) Project Engineer (DRP/8). ,' N DRSS-FRPS: Lisa Shea.: RM/ALF i
.. . ' MIS System. RSTS Operator ,
J, RIV Files , i t'
.{
o-a s
) i ,
i-
. N ,,
e Il
.\ ^ \j
~
' l\
i & ,=
. ,} $ . [l. l $'f?
qu
\ < ;!
-h- ,
k , 4 lg
- 5. J .;
s _i+ 3 p k ij' , l :: r l l 1 ; i l t A- I \ ' l_ - _ _ . _.
, 1, _, , , , , ._; 3 , ,
m..w p q g.n .- .. .. e w ,3. J .'i -,. -- -
,1
' 1 '
m* } ; I,; M. r% ,3.y; - Uk Y h Enclosure 1 l 1- ; i ATTENDANCE LIST 6 e' 0 8 N{ " Nttendance at the-technical meeting between TU Electric ana NRC 'on August 2 1990, .at Comanche Peak ' Steam' Electric Stat. ion: Qi . -34( s . .n , g '
,TU Ele,ctric d G.-Stein Administrative and Technical Assistant
- 0. Goodwir,'J. Unit Supervisor .
a? 1
'J.; Donahue', Manager, Operations I,0PS)i 1
& a P. 2,'Stevens. Manager, OPS Support 1:ogineering
. i J. J. - Kelley, Plant Manager h4 b'A 8,' R. Blevins, Manager of Nuclear; Operations Support '
l 0 ., , S.: L. E1' sis,~ Performance &' Test Manager ! M' 1 A. 3. Scott, Vice President.- Nuclear:0PS : W. 'J. Cahill.; Exec 0tiveiVice President l D. M. McAfeel Manager. Quality 'Assbrance dTh': H C. L. Terry, ' Director. Quality Assurance i
. A. Husain Direct 4r, Reactor Engineering - q
, yi l f J. Muffett,-Manager of Project Engineering ! $' R..D. Walker . Manager of. Nuclear Licensing
!W., G, thldemand, Manager, Site Licensing
%' 'l
'J. F. Streeter, Executive' Assistant M.;Manrog, Public.Information Supervisor.' ,
.7 c w .
'l ,
I
, NRC ;. a
y N Pl Gkmh! Deputy Direc~or, Division of Reactor Projects (DRP). J
,l.;LJ.; CaRen, Director, Division of Reactor Safety t(DRS) ,
R (J. Db Chs e lain,' Chief,; Project Section B,0RP* C. E. ;Johwx.,l. Project Engineer, DRP ' N W ' 9. i s'W. ' D.sJohnson, Senior Resider,t Inspector, DRP ' u M . 3. .D dlitter,' Resident 2nspector. .DRP t t D i V A. :T. Howell, Resident inspector DRP !
,j' '
' n* mF1 D; > N iGraver.,~ Resident ilnspector, DRP L * > M. ; Fi kunyatG Rta': tor- Engineer,1D'RS - D M.- LJXT. Gilliland, Public Effair.s Officer. 3' q q w q -: y$ [0theri '. , v i: ;
~0E 0. Tharo, Co sultant, CASE . i !
'@ E. F.' Ottney; Fmject Manager,i CASE l . .
l1 4 H. S. Phillips, CASE Consultant, Phil.tec Services. -'Inc. g t y M. Axelrad,' Attorney, Newman *& Holtaniper 9
' S. Jones,' Fort Wirth Star Telegrau a b
@F k;
/ R. Richardson, Ritporter, Associated Pres EB. Rosei; Dallas lies Herald -
2
- i 7 i, T.liong,\KIRA Radio '
4 4 F.ETrejof Dillas Horning News ~ 1 L f 3,
/
0 5 x - - . - d[4l%gqk-19
~
;{[ s e
is : _ _ . : a. t .
.m
.o i
n u y . l [' g.. . ..
..- a
'n 1
- Enclosure 2q
;l MEETING
SUMMARY
Licensee: TV Electric-n L Facility:: CPSES, Unit 1
')
License No.: NPF-87 . [ Docket No.: 50-445 ,
.?
Subject:
Technical Meeting Open to Public Observation
.On August 2,1990, representatives of TV Electric Corporation presented to RIV '
T T' '
. personnel at the site, technical. issues pertaining to safety injection events
-which occurred on July 26 and 30, 1990, and the results of the 100 percent' / -l
- power. plateau startup testing. This meeting also included discussionscof ~E f i
_ personnel and equipment response to the events MSIY design-features,'. and ' '[ ' corrective. action for clearance tag-out problems. . s' The-license'e stated that they were still evaluating emergenr.y lighting design'
, adequacy, the atmospheric relief valves (ARV) failure m:!chanism, and other: tO 1 ? aspects of the July 30 event. At the conclusion of the meeting, the'11censee committed to submit a letter concerning three specific topics to the NRCl l'
- 24 hours before entering Mode 3.: The letter was'to address the results of the 4 , R
, review and planned corrective actions, if required, concerning matters related ;
to emergency lighting operations-of the ARV,,and personnel safety , considerations for t ' containment air' lock and ARV vent stack, , , , ,j 1
;0n1 August 4, represen 4tives of Region ~ IV and NRR reviewed the< letter (copy attached): submitted by the: licensee pertaining to ther actions taken prior:to ,
1- restart of the plant.- The actions described were viewed as appropritite for- j W restart of CPSES, Unit 1.- - a km A copy lof the ifcensm's presentation material is t:nclosed. s P : Attachments-(NRC distribution only)* .
- 1. Licensee Presentation !. .
s~. SL
- 2. AugustL4,1990, Letter (TXX-90283) j l
, ,gr , f- .,. .~ lh[ ' ,. , , ,
I.
,e.'1
. - [
$/ '
y , Il ts.9-jg ' W , f J. x . ,
, i
, y
.~ .: t ,
1 l l; ; ; ' ., ,
!i sq,
(' b Qy iihka%[ t- 1
, , u , ;
w . i
.. x x- . .
_; ,}}