ML20076C409

ECCS Repts (F-47) TMI Action Plan Requirements,Cook Nuclear Plant,Units 1 & 2, Technical Evaluation Rept

ML20076C409
Person / Time
Site:	Cook
Issue date:	01/27/1983
From:	Ludington B, Overbeck G, Vosbury F FRANKLIN INSTITUTE
To:	Chow E NRC
Shared Package
ML17320A666	List: ML20076C409
References
CON-NRC-03-80-130, CON-NRC-3-80-130, RTR-NUREG-0737, RTR-NUREG-737, TASK-2.K.3.17, TASK-TM TER-C5506-270-2, TER-C5506-270-271, NUDOCS 8302020252
Download: ML20076C409 (15)

Text

_-

l TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT ECCS REPORTS (F-47)

~

TMI ACTION PLAN REQUIREMENTS INDIANA AND MICHIGAN ELECTRIC COMPANY COOK NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1 AND 2 NRC DOCKET NO. 50-315, 50-316 FRC PROJECT C5506 FRC ASSIGNMENT 7 j NRC CONTRACT NO. NRC-03-81 130 FRC TASKS 270, 271 Prepared by a, y, ayezygey Franklin Research Center Author: ,F. W. Vosbury 23tn and Race Streets B. W. Ludington Philadelphia, PA 19103 FRC Group Leader: G. J. Overbeck Prepared for '

Nuclear Regulatory Comrnission Lead NRC Engineer: E. Chow Washington, D.C. 20555 January 27, 1983 This recort was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, or any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for any third party's use, or the results of sach use, of any informa' ion, appa-ratus, proouct or process disclosed in this report, or represents that its use by such third party would not infringe privately owned nghts.

Prepared by: Reviewed by: Approved by:

/

TI W, ) . .h_ km 0h&b- - . . -- --

_.-- Principal Adthor / Group 1.edder Department Dirdctor Date: ' ! '7 / v ' Date-

' #' ' U Date: i- -

3 --

. XA Copy Hgs Been Sent_toJDR . . . .

Franklin Research Center

_- .4 i

A Division of The Franklin Institute

- The Ben.amm Frandn Parkway. Phda . Pa. 19103 (2:5 448 1000 potozgp XA

TER-C5506-270/271 CONTENTS Section Title Pace 1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.1 Purpose of Review . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 Generic Background. . ., . . . . . . . . 1 1.3 Plant-Specific Background . . . . . . . . . 2 2 REVIDi CRITERIA. . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3 TECENICAL 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. . . . . . . . . 4 3.3 Review of Proposed Changes to Improve the Availability of ECC Equipment . . . . . . . . 9 4 CO NCLUSIO NS. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 10 5 REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 iii

.a.; FrankJin Research Center .

4 Daana of The F sam mecame

• TER-C5506-270/271 FORSiORD This Technical Evaluation Report was prepared by Franklin Research Center under a contract with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cor;nission (Of fice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Division of Operating Reactors) for technical assistance in support of NRC operating reacror 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 through a subcontract with NESTEC Services, Inc.

C L

i I

l 4_

...t Franklin Research Center

, ao a.tn.r - am u.

1 .

s s ,

TER-C5506-270/271 ,

1. INTRODUCTION '

1.1 PURIOSE OF REVIEW _

This technical evaluation report (TER) documents an independent' review of the outages of the ' emergency core cooling (ECC) systems at. Indiana and Michigan Electric Company's (IMEC) D. C. Cook Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2. The purpose of this evaluation is to determine if the Licensee h'as ' submitted a report that ~

is complete and satisfies the requirements of SiI Isction Item II.K.3.17,

" Report on Outages of Energency Core-Cooling Systems Licensee Report and Proposed Technical Specification Changes."

1.2 GENERIC BACKGROUND Tollowing the ':hree Mile Island ~0 nit:2 accident, the, Bulletins and orders Task Force reviewed nuclear steam supply system (NSSS) vendors' small break loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) analyses to ensure that an adequate basis existed for developing guidelines for small break LOCA emergency procedures.

During these reviews, a concern developed about the assumption of the worst '

single failure. ?fpically, the small break LOCA analysis for boiling water reactors (BWRs) assumed a loss of the high pressure coclant injection (HPCI) system as the worst single failure. However, the tecnnical specifications permitted plant operation for substantial periods' with 'the H2CI 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 consistent with the actual plant response, the Bulletin anJ Ordert. Task Force recommended in NUREG-0626 [1] , " Generic Evaluation of 'Feedwater Transientis and Small Break Ioss-of-Coolant Iccidents in GE-Designed operating Plants and

.Near '1%:m Operating License Applications," that licensees of General Electric (GE)-designed NSSSs do the following:

" Submit a report detailing outage dates .and lengths of the oatages for

, all ECC systems. The report should also. iriclude the cause of. the outage (e.g. , controller f ailure or spurious isolation) . The outage . data for ECC components should include all outages for the last five years of-

.... Franklin Research Center m namevemenm ue -

, - - - = - - - , _ _ ~ . . .-- , - . . - , , - - , -.- - - - - , .

= :. -

/,J . ,

s .s

_4.s .s n' ,

w_

-.v. '

"' c s, i

,., e TER-C5506-270/271

,, s

( optaration'; . The end result should be the quantification of historical

' s

t , unreliabil'ity due' to test'and maintenance outages. .Thi s will establish I

ir a' nied exists for cumulativ'e outage requirements in technical s.e:ifications." ,

m *

s. .

r. .

'Later, the recchendation was incorporated into NUREG-0660 (2), "NRC Action Plan Developed [as' a 'Res01_t of ' the TMI-2 Accident," for all GE-designed plants a s TMI 'Ac tion Item'fI.K.3.17. In NUREG-0737 [3], "C17rification of TMI N- ,

Action ?lan Require.mn,ts," the NRC staf f expanded the Action Item to include -

1

- ~. 'all PWRs and adddd a requirement that licensees propose changes that will

,. improve and control avai' lability of ECC systems and components. In addition, the contents of the, reporcs to be submitted by the licensees were further clarified as folicwsi

' ~c k- "The report should contain (1) outage dates and duration of outages; (2) cause of the outage; ~(3) 2CC s.ystems or components involved in

, ,7the outage; and (4) corrective action taken."

< r

(

l.3 PLANT,-3PECIFIC BACKGROUND On January d, 1981 04), IMEC submitted a report in response to J

NUREG-0737, Item II.K.3.17, " Report on Cutages of Emergency Core-Cooling Systems Licensee Repo-tsand j Proposed Technical Specification Changes." The

~

, report submitted by. $ti2C covered the period from January 18, 1975 to April 30, 1980 for Cook Unit 1, and from March 10, 1978 to April 30, 1980 for Unit 2.

IMEC stated the belief that current technical Specifications were sufficiently

~

restrictive to control the unavailability of ECC systems and th'erefore.would propose no further -restrictions.

.s l

t 3

i 9

4 .

- dJ FrankHn Research Center 4 on. aa 5 Th. Frvuu,n . u.

! l

,y

\

TER-C5506-270/271 y 2. REVIEW CRITERIA Q 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 (5)

I outlining Tentative Work Assignment F. Provided as review criteria in Reference 5, the NRC stiated that the IJcensee'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 components due to test and maintenance outages.

i

3. Proposed changes to improve the availability of 5CC systems, if 3

r.eces sa ry.

The type of information required to satisfy the review criteria was clarified by the NRC on August 12, 1981 [6]. Auxiliary systems such as component cooling 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 continueus 5-year period of recent operation.

4 s

j s , s On July 26, 1982 [7], the NRC further clarified that the purpose of the review was to identify those licensees that have experienced higher ECC system

! -cutages than other licensees with similar NSSSs. The need for improved reliability of diesel generators is under review' by the NRC. A Diesel

, Generator Interim Program has been proposed to effect improved' performance at operating plants. As a consequence, a comparison of diesel generator outage

^

' ~ ~

t <

information within this review is not required. - - - -

.(' . ,

~% .

• y Q ,

A -3, -

.... Franklin Research Center - '

w .o ne r m.,u. w .

. s ew , e e . . , . - - , , + - , - - , - , - * - - , e . _ . , , , , - ---,.-.,,s, ., - r - . - ~+,.,,w-., .,,-...-,---,,e.-,-,--, .,,,n y,,.,m4-+-g m, 9 . - - - ee-yw y , -.-e--

I

)

TER-C5506-270/271

3. TECHNICAL EVALUATION 3.1 REVIEW OF COMPLETENESS OF THE LICENSEE'S REPORT The ECC systems at IMEC's Cook Nuclear Plant Units 1. and 2 consist of the following five separate systems:

o accumulators .

o centrifugal charging (CC) o safety injection system (SIS) o residual heat removal (RHR) o refueling water storage tank (RWST).

.In Be,.erence 4, IMEC also ,ir.cluded the con *hent spray system. The purpose of containment spray is to spray water through th'e containment atmosphere following a IDCA to reduce temperature, reduce pressure, and remove fission products. While this is an engineerpd safety features system (ESFS),

it is not considered a primary ECC system for this review.

Ibr each ECC system outage event, IMEC 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 shutdown condition in which the affected ECC system was not required to be operational. The results of IMEC's review were provided for the period from January 18, 1975 to April 30, 1980 for Cook Unit 1 and from March 10, 19 78 to April 30,1980 for Cook Unit 2.

i.

Based on the preceding discussion, it has been established that IMEC has submitted a report which fulfills the requirements of review criterion 1 without exception.

~

3.2 COMPARISON OF ECC SYSTIM OUTAGES WITH THOSE OF OTHER PLANTS The outages of ECC systems can be categorned as (1) unplanned outages due to equipment failure or (2) planned outages,due to. surveillance testing or i

l a .

Abnklin ao, Research Center n.r N r a

TER-C550 6-270/2 71 preventive maintenance. Unplanned outages are reportable as Licensee Event Reports (LERs) under the tedinical 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 censistent 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-l'400 [8] , is the probability of a system being in a failed state when required. However, for this review, a detailed unavailability analys,is was not required. Instead, a preliminary estimate of the un'ava11 ability 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. To sLnplify 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 diat a plant is starting up, shutting down, and cooling down is 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 msy cause.

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 that appear to compromise system performance when, in fact, partial or full

, . function of the system would be expected. Full function of an ECC -system. ---

would 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 JJJ4Franklin oa a .s N r Resear.ch

. == m.= Center -

M

TER-C5506-270/271 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 fcnction 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 cc=ponents 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 analysis is beyond the intended scope of this report.

The planned and unplanned (forced) outage ti:nes for the five ECC systems (accumulators, CC, SIS, RER, and KNST) and the standby dies ~el generators were identified from the outage information in Reference 4 and are shown in number of days and as percentage of plant operating time per year in Tables 1 and 2 for Cook Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2, respectively. Additional information obtai;.ed from the Licensee concerning outages of water sources is also included in the table: (9]. Outages that occurred during nonoperational periods were eliminated as were those caused by failures or test and maintenance of support systems. Da ta on plant operating conditions were ootained from the annual reports, " Nuclear Power Plant Operating Erperience"

[10-13), and from monthly reports, " Licensed Operating Reactors Status Summary Reports" (14]. The remaining outages were segregat2d into- planned and -

i unplanned outages based on IMEC's description of the causes. The outage periods for each category were calculated by summing the individual outage durations.

Observed outage times of various ECC systems at Cook Nuclear Plant Units

. -- -1 and 2 were compared with those of other PWRs. Based on this comparison,' it. r . -

~ was concluded diat the historical unavailability of the accumulators, CC, SIS,-

RER, and RNST systems has been consistent with the performance of those systems

~

- diroughout the industry. The observed availability was less than the y

4

.dd Franklin Research Center so. aw n. %=emau.

C

. . e i .. .

S. e.

Y in t3

$,N

• :r Table 1. Planned and Unplanned (Furced) Outage Times for D. C. Cook Unit 1

• O k*

• $* Accumulators CVCS SIS RilR Diesel Generators Days of Plant outaga in Days Outage in Days optage in Days Outage in Days Outage in Days Year Operation Forced Planned Forced Planned Forced Planned Forced Planned Forced Planned i

1976 304.3 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 (0.14) 1977 277.6 0.0 0.0 6.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.8 1.5 a, (2.3%) (0.5%)

I (0.3%) (0.5%)

1978 268.4 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.5 0.0 0.5 0.9 (0.1% ) (0.1%) . (0.1%) (0.2%) (0.2%) (0.3%)

1979 236.2 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.7 0.0 1.5 0.5 0.3 1.1 4.8 (0.6%) (0.3%) (0.2%) (0.6%) (0.1%) (0.5%) (2.0%)

i 1980 103.7 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.1 1.3 (1.3%) (0.5%) (0.2%) (0.14) (0.1%) (1.3%)

Total 1190.2 0.0 0.0 9.8 1.5 . 't . 0 1.9

' 0.0 2.0 2.5 8.5 *

(0.8%) (0.1%) (0.14) (0.2%) (0.2%) (0.2%) (0.7%) I,!

o A

u.

Ut O

(h 9

M 4

O sg-N q

Y

, r e s i. t

• I t t 4 4

l-U :'

• n IG E3

$N Table 2. Planned and Unplanned (f$tced) Outage Times for D. C. Cook Unit 2 3

W lng Days of Plant Accumulators Outage in Days CVCS SIS RilR Diesel Carneratoras

{ Outage in Days Outage in Days Outage in Days Outage in Daya year Operation Forced Planned Forced Planned Forced Planned. Forced Planned , Forced Planned Commewelal operation July 1, 1978 4

1978 142.5 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.9 4.8

(<0.14) (0.4%) (0.64) (3.44) 1 0 7 1979 240.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.8 1.5 1.2

, (0.3 % )

(0.84) (0.6 % ) (0.5%)

1980 101.6 0.1 0.0 3.0 1.0 0.7 0.0 0.5 1.6 0.0 0.0

(<0.14) (3.0 4 ) (1.08) (0.7 4 ) (0.5%) (1.6%)

f Tot'al 484.7 0.l 0.0 3.0 1.6 0.7 0.0 1.0 3.4 2.4 6.0 j (<0.1%) (0.6 % ) (0. 3 %) (0.1%) (0.25) (0.74) (0.5 % ) (1.2%)

H to N

. b u.

US O

On i 8

. M

,, 4 O

N N

4 i

e >+

t

TER-C5506-270/271 industrial mean for all ECC systems except the Unit 2 CC system, vnich was

~

less than about one standard deviation above the industrial mean, assuming tha t the underlying unavailability is distributed lognormally. The outage times were also consistent with existing technical specifications. The outages of the standby diesel generators were not included in this comparison.

3.3 REVIEW OF PROPOSED CHANGES TO IMPROVE THE AVAILABILITY OF ECC EQUIPMENT In Reference 4, IMEC did not propose any changes to improve the availability of ECC systems and components, stating that current Technical ,

Specifications were sufficient to control ECC system unavailability.

Md Franklin Research Center a w a ne remeu.

• TER-C5506-270/271

4. CONCLUSIONS Indiana and Michigan Electric Company (IMEC) has submitted a report for Cook Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2 that contains (1) cutage 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 IMIC has fulfilled the requirements of NUREG-0737, Item II.K.3.17. In addition, the historical unavailability of the accumulators, centrifugal charging, safety injection, residual heat removal, and refueling water storage tank systems has been consistent with the performance of those systems throughout the industry.

The observed unavailability was less than the industrial mean for all ECC systems except the Unit 2 centrifugal charging which was less than about one scandard deviation above the industrial mean, ne outage Hman were also consistent with existing technical specifications.

b

/."J Franklin Research Center a om or N rr.a.s. m

TER-C550 6-270/2 71

5. REFERENCES

1. N"3EG-0 6 26

" Generic Evaluation of Feedwater Transients and Small Break Lesswf-Coolant Accidents in GE-Designed Operating Plants and Near-Terr. Operating License Applications" NRC, January 1980

2. NCREG-0660 "NRC Action Plan Developed as a Result of the TI-2 Accident" NRC, Marcn 1980

3. NCREG-073 7 "Clarificaticn of mI Action Plan Requirements" NRC, October 1980

4. R. S. Hunter (IMEC)

Letter to H. R. Denton (Director of Nuclear Reactor Regu.lation, NRC)

Scsj ect: Submittal of Information Required by NUREG-073 7 IMEC, January 8,19 81

5. J. N. Donchew, Jr. (NRC)

Letter to Dr. S. P. Carfagno (FRC)w

Subject:

Contract No.

NRC-0 3-81-13 0, Tentative Assignment F NRC, July 21, 19 81

6. N r.

Meeting between NRC and FRC.

Subject:

C5506 Tentative Work Assignment F, Cperating Reactor PORV and ECCS Cutage Reports August 12, 1981

7. NRC Meeting between NRC and FRC. Sabject: Resolution of Review Criteria ar.d Scope of Work July 26,19 82 -

8 WASH-1400

" Reactor Safety Study" NRC, October 1975

9. R. S. Hunter (IMEC)

Le tter to H. R. Denton (Director of Nuclaar Reactor Regulation, NRC) '

Scsjec t: ECCS Outages, II.K.3.17 ~

-~

IMIC, January 10, 1983 -

10. NCREG-0366 "melear Power Plant Operating Experience 1976" NRC, December 1977 id) Fra-4in Research Center s w ne rwn wwwe .

TER-C530 6-270/271

11. NUREG-04 83

"!bclear Power Plant Operating Experience 1977"-

NRC, February 1979

12. NUEG-0 618

" Nuclear Power Plant Operating Experience 1978" NRC, December 1979

13. NUREG/CR-1496

" Nuclear Power Plant Operating Experience 1979" NRC, May 1981

14. NUREG-002 0

" Licensed Operating Reactors Status Su:mnary Paport" Volume 4, Nos.1 through 12, and Volume 5, No.1 NRC, cecember 1980 through January 1981 J' .dd Franklin Research Center 4 ca. aa# n.Fr aw am.

, - - , -- , - , , , . - - - . . . - -, - - . , - - -