ML20076B638
| ML20076B638 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 09/27/1982 |
| From: | Ludington B, Overbeck G, Vosbury F FRANKLIN INSTITUTE |
| To: | NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20076B642 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-NRC-03-81-130, CON-NRC-3-81-130, RTR-NUREG-0737, RTR-NUREG-737 TER-C5506-215, NUDOCS 8209290079 | |
| Download: ML20076B638 (17) | |
Text
n. x '. mi M n. g..,.p,,2. O w m y.%.n. s :i. n Q.:. w. %. 9..- Q.
.+.
,w:w;.;, ? ' :u.m. :,,.,e f..,M :-Q
=.
- n...
~
., 1, mqy TC.v.,.
. s..,.
- q. s..:.
.p y
. w. c m.
x.y -...A
. 5 c'.V,&.+pf,.:% Em.. c:..x '-yje. V. W,y :.. u.: ~. a :x..a,3.
..n ~
/
g pf w :,.s m.'~.a mn.,.
.:.; n...
1
+
.. @.V.v.s.
TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT
,. 7. m ;., ~.a....
..t w
M DC:
E C CS R E P O RTS. ~(F-47)a. :,x.2.:;c. : n ~ T M.m.q* E.
D. J.-
S
[.g V,.:@.. ;.
.p - 3
.; o
..w <.w.v..,,
., :. n.
TMI ACTION,c~.LAN.. REQ UIR, E. MEN. T.S....,'..l. ' M. 7
. y W..~'t" P
e
..,.....,r..
' COMMONWEAL..TH:EDIS.ON'COMPA.
. ~,.
.w-
. ~.,
.. m,n n.
p..
,J ' :.. M r-
-w
.. NY WFM M+~ O W J y mwa v r
N
- 9..E.
R s-
- . r s.g..,
,a.
.y NRC DOCKET NO. 50-254, 50-265 FRC PROJECT C5506 g,'
.,n 4
6
.'i...7 ;... -/"
- FRC ASSIGNMENT 7 t
NRC CONTRACT NO. NRC-03-81 130 FRC TASKS 215, 216
...al 4
.'y
. ; ;.. ~.. >
,L 1
8 s
.cg t.;t: gy !. ' ";q r, y. c+.,.,; -b,. 4'.
j-s 2
_ Mk.
' : u-v.-
t i.ea. &..,.. m r-
:L h
,... u
.-w N*A*j.W,;3.hfhhk',hh h
.),_u Voebury.
?f' h
,..:.s
. c.&
~;v7.. Prare hh Cath i@t '%' N 4 f ".T T.4'. W G J. Overbecke,... :,j c
,y s
.e-
. y
N.J.,T f.f(.
e
>p me. u...
20th and RaceSt sets <.;
w..
.B
. }l:.M..
,FhHadelphia{Pg19103 ; gig /4.g.ggp,$g,g,py.glE.%.s"S
- "W* L.udiyt " 9.;?f'fA 7 g
.g.f.,L,e gcyfRC Group Leeder:.,G.gJ.Overbeck m. y,,s
..x
. nrpaned for- ~"y'.' ga ;g. m.w.y; y'k + e* *.
.. % '.2s* * *V s.
. v..
~
3 P
.. u,,,. s *.7 +r% m n.."W' ~
.y
...'.~ v J 1Nuc!aar Regulatory Commission. _. A;&f.W..
?
,,t.. eg E
p..e.,w.g&. N$c,,j$..g.9th;%Laod NRC En Chow
.,,'J.:;.S, g y$,.
i n
g, LWashington, D.C.(20555
. :4 f
MM.'.,' M ';,,'/.
$, 7.'.4.' 'I h
- ;,.p,5.M,1'.
,,..,. <,, w.. c..'7* f r;.
.,..y.
c v
W w
,,.'x,.;;w. ~ m.,w I, a. b 4c.
. %.,.;?n+ d +0.4wQw%;& 499%,~.n n...w.:~ q&;..,.., s.:
tm. p,i, ~e.y. wy.nM,.;+. o ?.t,.. m. L.. ? ;..
c.
- y y ' &f,,?Q,.f.y &a......:?.g.4,,.v.:.M e. %m.%.3
.q x -
g v.,,.c n
.ns.
x.- aw.
[&
bQ,:N
.a y;,-:r. :
hj:.lc;.[..h.
' l[:/hN N'.k5h.Q 8,.:M
' /..':d.b..kkh,'h.h..,?5'p;g %ptemb'er 27W 1982.. v
- 3
. l'.
dhhd'2 N:
s a
{ y 7,'.;ri;Q.,. 7 ? ',Q ys:. -
% g. f- *L,s. :.:. %..+.
- 1..
Se
~
B'
- ' c: W T
..... y. y.
" " 'b;".-~
?,
sa.s a. ;d70 d.W.....a.:::,. -& uts?./ "*q..,'
^;
'"?
!.,; ?
p*
- e. q %, w.
- ds w a r
- a La
e<
^>;"
, m g.7.c :+lt;3 %..m p Vv.h:y'
,, z
....,P.
y a..
c:
r..-
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States
,,.8
' d.w..
Government. Neither the 1.Inited States Governrnent nor any agency thereofc or any of their *. p*tj8,"~
, E :.p.t c
, W,(1 responsibility for any' third party's use, or the resulte,of such use, of an y
n y
r%:
.pc, X. '
g 4 ' f ",, -
D
- ' ratus, product or procoes disclosed In this report, or represents that its use by such third '
t d.MN'$$MMM'r' $$yownedrights;?-$$iFEg%p&
L f partywould notinfringe privatel
,c id..:3fM N Q yg g M.Mbp'% %.sp@4.
iO I
s!.
Me%
'h$l,K%$[&;c$rcMrWSQ$.
6 7 %'di C M M d MdWww
&$$ygR-
- n..&$
C Dw..
XA Copy Has Been Sent 15 PDR Nb< 57 ' ON M
..,g : s.w.m. p.w%w_p.,r_..
r w,.,..a.n.m.. -
e n "7 -
- .e G;
wwww..e w v.m.e.ww c
<u:. 4 J
i.
i,.h&Qnn%w;-..G.*t WY
.R
" ;M W
- f. ; -
-V
.:ns. q' y.T.
p%..
r-
.R
' y ye w.wW g.m iddh;k.yy:G fMW franklin Research Center
> :.%m ;
r, Mis
.y.w. x.
' a. -r -
.. n -
y.m
,s I d. \\ i-M~
W.
..n1
. @f-;'.S.?
My ".3 nm q...The n=rwercia Fr resa permer. PMe Pa..I91
- 9.. A Division of The Franklin Institute
.M,. x d
- . W
- ...&MkN...;x. d
\\3
..-.L' W S.
GWW5 % g?W h M. n...N :.5..nym..&. e'-?..w. Wn. ^.$:.w-
.~ e hW5%
5 w %r y,n..,.a.. a a..
v 1..
.. s. o.&.l.. y'.....
.i. ~~
f.'
.I, a 1S ?_dd.. ' -
_,..z m,...
i "i@id'.
f
TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT ECCS REPORTS (F-47)
TMI ACTION PLAN REQUIREMENTS COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY QUAD CITIES NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 NRC DOCKET NO. 50-254, 50-265 FRC PROJECT C5506 FRC ASSIGNMENT 7 NRC CONTRACT NO. NRCG-81 130 FRC TASKS 215, 216
,\\
}
Preparedby
- 7. W. Vosbury
\\
Franklin Research Center Author:
G. J. Overbeck 20th and Race Streets B. W. Ludingtonri Philadelphia, PA 19103 FRC Group Leader:
G. J. Overbeck Prepared for Nuclear Regulatory Commission Lead NRC Engineer:
E. Chow Washington, D.C. 20555 September 27, 1982 This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor cny agency thereof, or any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or impiled, or assumes any legal liability or responsiblilty for any third party's use, or the results of such use, of any information, appa-ratus, product or process disclosed in this report, or represents that its use by such third party would not infrir.ge privately owned rights.
Prepa ed by:
Reviewed by:
Approved by:
b M~ N W
Principal Author Department D[ector)
Dater Y ~0$
Y * ~ S #'
bZ b t2 Date-Date:
^00 F ranklin Research Center A Division of The Franklin Institute The Ben,emm Franken Partneey. Ptwie.. Pa. 19103(21S)448 4000
TER-C5506-215 CONTENTS r
Section Title II Page 1
INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Purpose of Review.
1 1.2 Generic Background.
1 1.3 Plant-Specific Background.
2 2
REVIEN CRITERTA-3 3
TECHNICAL EVALUATION 4
3.1 Review of Completeness of the Licensee's Report 4
3.2 Comparison of ECC System Outages with Those of Other Plants 5
3.3 Review of Proposed Changes to Improve the Availability of ECC Equipment.
9 4
CONCLUSIONS.
10 5
REFERENCES.
11 iii ranidin Research Cente
~ ~---. r
TE"R-C5506-215 FORENORD This 14chnical Evaluation Report was prepared by Franklin Research Center under a contract with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Connaission (Office of l
Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Division of Operating Reactors) for technical assistance in support of NRC operating reactor licensing actions. The technical evaluation was conducted in accordance with criteria established by the NRC.
Mr. G. J. Overbeck, Mr. F. W. Vosbury, and Mr. B. W. Ludington contributed to the technical preparation of this report throygh a subcontract with WESTEC Services, Inc.
f
(
l t
A%
l bp u Franidin Research Cen*
A Osumen er The humen humane
t TER-<550 6-215 1.
INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE OF REVIEW This technical evaluation report (TER) documents an independent review of the outages of the emergency core cooling (ECC) systems at e-nwealth Edison Company's (CECO) Quad Cities Station Units 1 and 2.
The purpose of this evaluation is to determine if the Licensee has submitted a report that is complete and satisfies the requirements of 1MI Action Item II.K.3.17, " Report on Outages of Baergency Core-Cooling Systems Licensee Report and Proposed Technical Specification Changes."
i 1.2 GENERIC BACKGROUND l
l Pb11owing the Three Mile Island Unit 2 accident, the Bulletins and Orders Task Force reviewed nuclear steam supply system (NSSS) vendocs' small break loss-of-coolant accident (IDCA) analyses to ensure that an adequate basis existed for developing guidelines for small break IOCA emergency procedures.
During thesa reviews, a concern developed about the assumption of the worst single failure. Typically, the small break IDCA analysis for boiling water coactors (BWRs) assumed a loss of the high pressure coolant injection (HPCI) system as the worst single failure. However, the technical spec'ifications permitted plant operation for substancial periods with the HPCI system out of service with no limit on the accumulated outage time. There is concern not only about the HPCI system, but also about all ECC systems for which substantial outages might occur within the limits of the present technical specification. Therefore, to ensure that the small break LOCA analyses are l
consistent with the actual plant response, the Bulletin and Orders Task Force recommended in NUREG-0626 [1], " Generic Evaluation of Feedwater Transients and t\\
l Small Break Ioss-of-Coolant Accidents in GE-Designed Operating Plants and i \\.
Near-Thra Operating License Applications," that licensees of General Electric (GE)4esigned NSSSs do the following:
" Submit a report detailing outage
- dates and lengths of the outages for all ECC systems. The report should also include the cause of the outage (e.g., controller failure or spurious isolation). The outage data for i
ranklin Research Center A Osumen of The Preseen buense i
_____-m._,
... -....... ~.
_ =. _.
TER-C5506-215 8
BCC components should include all outages for the last five years of operation. The end result should be the quantification of historical unreliability due to test and maintenance outages. This will establish if a need exists for cumulative outage requirements in technical specifications."
l Later, the recommendation was incorporated into NUREG-0660 [2], "NBC Action Plan Developed as a Result of the TMI-2 Accident," for all light water reactor plants as TMI Action Item II.K.3.17.
In NUREG-0737 [3], "Clarifi-cation of TMI Action Plan Requirements," the NRC staff added a requirement that licensees propose changes that will improve and control availability of ECC systems and components.
In addition, the contents of the reports to be j
submitted by the licensees were further clarified as follows:
"The report should contain (1) outage dates and duration of outages:
1 (2) cause of the outages (3) ECC systans or components involved in ths outages and (4) corrective action taken."
l.3 PLANT-SPECIFIC BACKGROUND On December 31, 1980 [4], CECO submitted a report in response to NUREG-0737, Item II.K.3.17, " Report on Outages of Bnergency Core-Cooling Systemn Licensee Report and Proposed Technical Specification Changes." The Licensee provided additional information required to complete this review on May 20,1982 [5]. The report submitted by CECO covered the period from January 1, 1975 to November 30, 1980 for Quad Cities Units 1 and 2.
I l
_ranidin Resear_ch Ce_nter
1 l
TER-C5506-215 2.
REVIEW CRITERIA The Licensee's response to NUREG-0737, Item II.K.3.17, was evaluated against criteria provided by the NRC in a letter dated July 21, 1981 (6) outlining Tentative Work Assignment F.
Provided as review criteria in Reference 6, the NRC stated that the Licensee's response should contain the following information:
1.
A report detailing outage dates, causes of outages, and lengths of outages for all ECC systems for the last 5 years of operation. This report was to include the ECC systems or components involved and corrective actions taken. Test and maintenance outages were to be included.
)
2.
A quantification of the historical unavailability of the ECC systems and en=pnnents due to test and maintenance outages.
3.
Proposed changes to improve the availability of ECC systema., if necessary.
The type of information required to satisfy the review criteria was clarified by the NRC on August 12, 1981 (7).
Auxiliary systems such as component coolir.g water and plant service water systems were not to be considered in determining the unavailability of ECC systems. Only the outages of the diesel generators were to be included along with the primary ECC system outages. Finally, the "last five years of operation" was to be loosely interpreted as a continuous 5-year period of recent operation.
On July 26, 1982 [8), the NRC further clarified that the purpose of the review was to identify those licensees that have experienced higher ECC system outages than other licensees with similar NSSSs. The neod for improved reliability of diesel generators is under review by the NBC.
A Diesel Generator Interim Reliability Program has been proposed to effect improved performance at operating plants. As a c:nsequence, a comparison of diesel generator outage information within this radiew is not required.
s
l t
TER-C5506-215 3.
TECHNICAL EVALUATION 3.1 REVIEW OF COMPLETENESS OF THE LICENSEE'S REPORT The ECC systems at CECO's Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station Units 1 and 2 consist of the following four separate systems:
o high pressure coolants injection (HPCI) system o
automatic depressurization system (ADS) o core spray (CS) system o
low pressure coolant injection (LPCI) system.
In References 4 and 5, CECO also included systems and components that support the ECC systems in carrying out their design functions under various aceiriant ennAi tions. n e support systems ares o
residual heat removal system o
residual heat removal system service water o
battery.
In addition to outage data on four ECC systems and the support systems, CECO also included data on the reactor coolant isolation cooling (RCIC) system. The RCIC system is a non-safety-related high pressure system available for high pressure injection. Although the RCIC system mitigates the consequences of a loss of normal feedwater, this system is not required to prevent core damage and therefore is not considered to be an ECC system.
In establishing the type of events that constitute an ECC system outage, CECO considered an outage to be any event that rendered an ECC system unable to respond during plant conditions for which technical specifications required ECC system operability.
Pbr each ECC system outage event, CECO provided the outage dates, the duration, and the cause, plus sufficient description to discern the corrective action taken. Maintenance and surveillance testing activities were included in the ECC system outage data, unless these activities were performed during a
_nidin Rese_ arch._ Center
~
TER-C5506-215 shutdown condition in wtaich the affected ECC system was not required to be operational. The results of CECO's review were provided for the period from j
January 1, 1975 to November 30, 1980 for the Quad Cities Station Units 1 and 2.
Based on the preceding discussion, it has been established that CECO has submitted a report which fulfills the requirements of review criterion 1 without exception.
i 3.2 COMPARISON OF ECC SYSTDt OUTAGES WITH THOSE OF OTHER PLANTS The outages of ECC systems can be categorized as (1) unplanned outages due to equipment failure tor (2) planned outages due to surveillance testing or preventive maintenance. Unplanned outages are reportable as Licensee Event
/
Reports (LERs) under the technical specifications. Planned outages for
\\
periodic maintenance 'and testing are not reportable as LERs. The technical specifications identify the type and quantity of ECC equipment required as well as the maximum allowable outage times. If an outage exceeds the maximum allowable time, then the plant operating mode is altered to a lower status consis' tent with the available ECC system components still operational.
The purpose of the technical specification maximum allowable outage times is to prevent extended plant operation without sufficient ECC system protection.
The maximum allowable outage time, specified per event, tends to limit the unavailability of an ECC system. However, there is no cumulative outage time limitation to prevent repeated planned and unplanned outages from accumulating extensive ECC system downtime.
Unavailability, as defined in general terms in WASH-1400 [9), is the probability of a system being in a failed state when required. However, for this review, a detailed unavailability analysis was not required.
Instead, a preliminary estimate of the unavailability of an ECC system was made by calculating the ratio of the ECC system downtime to the number of days that the plant was in operation during the last 5 years. Tc simplify the tabulation of operating time, only the period when the plant was in operational Mode 1 was considered. This' simplifying assumption is reasonable given that the.
period of time that a plant is starting up, shutting down, and cooling down is i
i p I, UUUU Franklin Research Center A Chaumn af The husen humane i'
l TER-C5506-215 small compared to the time it is operating at power.
In addition, an ECC system was considered down whenever an ECC system component was unavailable due to any cause.
i It should be noted that the ratio calculated in this manner is not a true measure of the ECC system unavailability, since outage events are included t appear to compromise system performance when, in fact, partial or full function of the system would be expected.
Full function of an ECC system wouJd be expected if the design capability of'the system exceeded the capacity required for the system to fulfill its safety function. For example, if an ECC system consisting of two loops with multiple pumps in each loop is designed so that only one pump in each loop is required to satisfy core cooling requirements, then an outage of a single pump would not prevent the
(
system from performing its safety function. In addition, the actual ECC system unavailability is a function of planned and unplanned outages of essential support systems as well as of planned and unplanned outages of primary ECC system components. In accordance with the clarification discussed in Section 2, only the effects of outages associated with primary ECC system i
components and emergency diesel generators are considered in this review. The inclusion of all outage events assumed to be true ECC. system outages tends to overestimate the unavailability, while the exclusion of support system outages tends to underestimate the unavailability, of ECC systems and components.
Only a detailed analysis of each ECC system for each plant could improve the confidence in the calculated result. Such an analynis is beyond the intended scope of this report.
The planned and unplanned (forced) outaga times for the four.ECC systems (HPCI, ADS, CS, and LPCI) and the emergency diesel generators were identified I
from the outage information in References 4 and 5 and are shown in number of days and as percentage of plant operating time per year in Tables 1 and 2 for the Quad Cities Units 1 and 2, respectively. Outages that occurred during j
nonoperational periods were eliminated as were as those caused by failures or test and maintsnance of support systems. Data on plant operating conditions were obtained from the annual reports, " Nuclear Power Plant Operating l
4
-s-l dt,IUU Franklin Research Center A Ommen of The Fremen twemme i
p
.s
.-----*t--+gi->+
a"
-r-ere<
r 3
n-=--*-=w--
- w---oew- - -
---e y-
- - - +
r--w-aw-+-w
1 TER-C5506-215 to
.O. e t
om m
we
.s
.~
ee
.c
- o. c.
- m..
- o. m.
- m. e.
I m
e es e ee n re e ne e
8.a.
e.
3 3
3 3
3 1
e we
- r. n 3
e.
- e. ~.
- m. n.
we e
u o.
. n.
~. ~.
w Q36 o
e me se ee se me 3
3 3
e es e ro e.
m e.
e.
- o. e.
e.
.e. o.
d 2
e re e.
e m e.
re o.
O.C. a.
u.
m.
.=
m e
g e
e me e.
e
- c. M we
- e..e O. @.
m u.
- e. P.
e.
- e. M.
r* M m
e e
o e re e
ee ee
-e
=
a o.
$ g, e
E s
Qt e.
e.
e.
e.
e.
e.
E
~
e o
e e
e o
W 8
.e S. e.
t.
e.
.=
m
.e e
e e
U 6
e e
e.e u
- e. m.
o.
e.
.e..
- e. m.
a w
e.
d 2 o ee e
e ee me e.*
e.*
C Q6
e=
.e
- W y
O g
.=
=
=*
e e
- 3. h C e
W g
l
.Q..C e.
o.
e.
e.
- e. e.
- e. m.
. O es e
e o
e a.
e c.e ee ea
==
es O
.=
m
.. 9 e
e e
- a. S
. =e e
, p.
O.
e.
- e. re.
e.
e.
- e. re.
- o. e.
a t
W d 2 e.
ee e
e
.e e
.e e
.C u
1
'I.
u e.
e.
e.
e.
g 8
O O
O O
e e
.a.s 1
.e 8
m 1
ne
- e. r.
- o. m.
- e. m.
- e. m.
e.
- e. n.
a u
jj
- S
- O "E
- S 8
1 I
e e.
e e
8 a.
e e
e e
e e
e e
e e
e
~
9 8,.
e.
e.
e.
- e. m.
- e. n.
e.
.U.
o e
e e
-e so
.e e 8 m, 1
a 4
"5 3
.8 e.
~.
m e
e S
.e e.
~
m e
a es.
e O e.
M re a
n n
m a.
>=
8 l
i a.
e e
e.
~
e e
e
>o l
=
g l
If 00J Frankun Research Center A Che.en of The Frauen bugh.e
e o
e e
TERK:5506-215 to0 9
m am
=
m
=
ee a e e
e e
e e
e eh C
OM ee ee ce e oe e ce to 9 C owe MO==
MSe
- We Oe
- M S
==
MO e
e M r*
Ge eQ 4
e e
e o e e e MO MO OO
(,) r a
as w
=
w ese ese w
.m en m
- O 9 e
e e
e e
e ee e
w==
OO eo me M P=
pm e e e, Q
OO ee
- M e=e um 4
- e a# e ee as e e e e e e e e e e e o e=
0 OO se O OO
==e m
=# O
- O Q
h w
em om as w w
me w m
am q
e e
e O Po e
O O
OM O
O ON a
e e
e e
o e
e e
d.e O
O
- =e O
O wO en w
UC A
m a
a a
e n e
e e
e m e ce e Oe o em
> a h u O.
e e
o e
O w *e N N eN Oe e
e e
e y
w e
2 0
O O O, MS O
OO M O gb e
w one se e
l N
m
=
e
=
g e
e e
e e
e e e Se en e Oe e es
- m j
h C
O OM MOe em me se e e se p
.C9 O
== 0
==
e e
e o e
o e e o e e c
4 se g g,
==
OO OO OO
- O
==
me w
me
==
en e
g me em ee e
.=
an em O 9 e
m **
e e
e e
U T e en e Oe O*
m e==
ee W &
MS O
- Om O9 WM 9ee e 9
ee ne o e e O e e e
. e o
e en 8
2 O
OO Ov
- e
= *
- OO Pe O C
I Q b
==
w me **
me =*
e U
me to b
O e"
e.e h
es I
h4 C
O.
O O
O O
O Q
8 eQg e
o e
e en w
O O
Oe O
O O
Qe 2 en me 9"
Q am em
=
m ee g
e e
e e
e g
we e
O
~O OO ne e
o.
o
..t mm O
E 2 O OO NO OO Oe Oe en n e,
U **
e.
. e e o e e e e y
O not O C
G gb w
w w
w e
I*
1 w
m
=
to e
,e e
u o
, em h
9 mO e
g 8
e O.
O.
O.
a.t en.
O O
O O
.mO e O e
e w
eC 5
~
1 m
==
mm m
am am e
e e
e e
EO 9
9e
- e Oe e
- =t M e
=e e e O
g j,3 e
eN eM MO OO O se en g
U o e e o e o e e e
e
- s
- s as as as g
e 1
8 e
e O
O O
e G e O
O Oe O
O Oe 4e 1'
9 C
e o
e o
O O
O e
De E 6 e
se edh me g
ame g
e e
e 9g O
O 8'n o
O s
9
-8 4
ee es e
en In ee O
O. N u
e e
e e e
5 0
e se Oe e
=
=* O O
O me g
O he g
w w
g
.e
- e e
e a
-I, M
5e g
m m
e
,g \\
- Q W
Pe f'*
o8t W
Oe A
i Se==
e e
o e
se
\\
e a
e em e
a
.\\
we S
s e
n m
e 0m N
N n
M n
o u
[
8e
.O em a
as to to P*
e e
O 4
4 P*
rm e
ee S
S S
S O
M M
M m
n e
A e.8 -e 3branklin,m_ arch Center Rese
~.
l TER-C5506-215 Experience" [10-13], and from monthly reports, " Licensed Operating Reactors Status Susmary Reports" [14]. The remaining outages were segregated into planned and unplanned outages based on an interpretation of CECO's description of the causes. The outage periods for each category were calculated by summing the individual outage durations. Included for informational purposes are the RCIC system outage data.
Observed outage times of various ECC systems at Quad Cities Units 1 and 2 were compared with those of other BWRs. Based on this comparison, it was concluded tnat the historical unavailability of the ADS, HPCI, LPCI, and core spray systems has been consistent with the performance of those systema throughout the industry. The observed unavailability was less than the industrial mean for Units 1 and 2 ADS, HPCI, and core spray and less than about one st.andard deviation above the industrial meen for Units 1 and 2 LPCI, assuming that the underlying unavailability is distributed lognormally. The outage times were also consistent with existing technical specifications. The outages of the emergency diesel generators and RCIC system were not included in thiis comparison.
3.3 REVIEN OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO IMPROVE THE AVAILABILITY OF ECC EQUIPMENT In References 4 and 5, CECO did not propose any changes to improve the availability of ECC systems and components.
p$ld Frankun Research Center A Osumen of The Frumen insamme
i 1
~
TER-C5506-215 4.
CONCLUSIONS Commonwealth Edison Company (CECO) has submitted a report for Quad Cities Station Units 1 and 2 that contains (1) outage dates and durations (2) causes of the outages, (3) ECC systems or components involved in the outages, and (4) corrective actions taken. It is concluded that CECO has fulfilled the requirements of NUREG-0737, Item II.K.3.17.
In addition, the historical unavailability of the ADS, HPCI, LPCI, and core spray systems has been consistent with the performance of those systems throughout the industry. The observed unavailability was less than the industrial mean for Units 1 and 2 ADS, HPCI, and core spray and less than about one standard deviation above the industrial mean for Units 1 and 2 LPCI. The outage times were also consistent with existing t=ehaie=1 specifications.
S S
e 1
i ranklin Research Cente
~ ~ -.-.r
l TER-C5506-215 5.
REFERENCES 1.
" Generic Evaluation of Feedwater Transients and Small Break Ioas-of-Coolant Accidents in GE-Designed Operating Plants and Near-Term Operating License Applications" NRC, January 1980 2.
NUREG-0660 "NRC Action Plan Developed as a Result of the TMI-2 Accident" NRC, March 1980 3.
" Clarification of TMI Action Plan Requirements" NRC, October 1980 I
4.
J. S. Abel (CECO)
IAtter to D. G. Eisenhut (NRn)
Subject Response to NUREG-0737 December 31, 1980
\\
5.
E. D. Swartz (CECO)
Letter to D. G. Eisenhut (NRR)
Subject:
NUREG-0737 Item II.K.3.17 Additional Information May 20, 1982 6.
J. N. Donohew, Jr. (NRC)
Letter to Dr. S. P. Carfagno (FBC).
Subject:
Contract No.
NBC-0 3-81-13 0, Tentative Assignment F July 21, 1981 7.
NI1C Meeting between NBC and FBC.
Subject:
C5506 Tentative Work Assignment F, Operating Re' actor PORV and ECCS Outage Reports August 12, 1981 8.
NBC Meeting between NBC and FBC.
Subject:
Resolution of Review Criteria and Scope of Work July 26, 1982 9
WASH-1400
" Reactor Safety Study" NRC, October 1975 10.
NUREG-0366 "Wclear Power Plant Operating Experience 1976" NRC, December 1977 bd Franklin Research Center A h of The Frermen ansamme
4 TER-C5506-215
- 11. NUREG-0483 "W clear Power Plant Operating Experience 1977*
NBC, February,1979 12.
" Nuclear Power Plant Operating Experience 1978" NRC, December 1979 13.
"mclear Power Plant Operating Experience 1979*
p NRC, May 1981 14.
" Licensed Operating Reactors Status Summary Report" Volume 4, tbs. 1 through 12, and volume 5, :b, 1 NRC, Decelebier 1980 through January 1981 4
T" 6
e
. - ~ - -
,,