ML20195G893

Forwards CRGR Summary & Issue Identification for CRGR Meeting 127 on 871223 Proposed Generic Ltr on Resolution of Generic Safety Issue 93, Steam Binding of Auxiliary Feedwater Pumps

ML20195G893
Person / Time
Issue date:	12/18/1987
From:	Sakenas C Committee To Review Generic Requirements
To:	Bernero R, Jordan E, Sniezek J NRC
Shared Package
ML20154D839	List: ML20154D836 ML20154D854 ML20154D915 ML20154E263 ML20154E299 ML20195G680 ML20195G709 ML20195G716 ML20195G723 ML20195G877 ML20195G893 ML20196B146
References
REF-GTECI-093, REF-GTECI-NI, TASK-093, TASK-93, TASK-OR IEB-85-001, IEB-85-1, NUDOCS 8712230246
Download: ML20195G893 (10)

Text

_

December 18, 1987 MEMORANDUM FOR: Edward L. Jordan Robert M. Bernero James H. Sniezek Denvo6d F. Ross T. T. Martin Joseph Scinto THRU: C. J. Heltemes, Jr.

1 Deputy Ofrector, AE00 t

FROM: Cheryl A. Sakenas t i

Senior Program Manager, CRGR Staff SU8 JECT:

SUMMARY

AND ISSUE IDENTIFICATION FOR l CkGR MEETING NO.127 i  ;

Enclosed for your information and use is the CRGR staff summary associated with the proposed Generic Letter, Resolution of Generic Safety Israe 93, "Steam Cinding of Auxiliary Feedwater Pumps."

\

This matter is scheduled for CRGR review at Meeting No. 127 on Wednesday, December 23, 1987 in Room G507 MNBB.

W Sigand W:

t Cheryl A. Sakenas a

Senior Program Manager, CRGR Staff j

Enclosure:

1 As stated ,

Distribution-Cer, tral File '

i CRGR (F

CRGR SF  ?

J J. Heltemes

CJ. Conran"

{ C. Sakenas l

l '

I

? o ]'g/k  !

~;> 77;;;) ;

/

~

I DFC : AF.00:C  : A .  :  :  :  :  : i

{ .........................:.........................:........... ,

j NAME :CSan g: C .es :  :  :  :  : -

, Q , , ,

12//f/87 :

j DATE : 12//f/87  :  :  : -

: L 1

t

! 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY -

1 I

._ , ---, _,_ ~ _. - _..,.. .. ., __.. .._. __ _

Summary and Issue Identification  ;

for CRGR Review Itee CRGR Meeting No. 127 ,

IDENTIFICATION 1 1

Proposed Generic Letter entitled, "Resolution of Generic Safety Issue 93,

' Steam Binding of Auxiliary Feedwat' r Pumps' (Generic Letter 87-XX)."

DESCRIPTION [

a The staff plans to issue a Generic Letter to close out Generic Issue 93 addressed initially in Bulletin 85-01 (presented at CRGR Meeting No. 81 - see Attachment 1). A cpy of Bulletin 85-01 is included as Attachment 2. The staff found in thete regulatory analysis that the monitoring requirements of r the bulletin must be continued to keep the risk low.  ;

I BACKGROUND L i See memorandum dated November 2,1987 from T. Murley to E. Jordan indicating that a formal review from CRGR did not seem to be required. This request was

denied by telephone from the CRGR Chairman to E. Rossi. The memorandum l j transmitted the following

l 1 1

1. Proposed Generic letter 87-XX (

i  ;

2. Memorandum from T. Murley to E. Beckjord dated August 14, 1987 q 3. Memorandum f rom E. Beckjord to T. Murley dated June 26, 1987

4. Memorandum fro 1 T. Murley to E. Beckjord dated June 10, 1987 1

f j 5. Memorandum from E. Beckjord to T. Murley dated May 1, 1987 (contains [

] Regulatory Analysis) t i  :

ISSUE l CRGR may wish to explore the use of a Generic letter in the manner proposed.

2 Since the purpose for issuing a Generic letter is to inform applicants and i

licensees of regulatory requirements, clarify NRC policy, and request or i i transmit infonnation, it does not seem appropriate to instruct licensees to -

l continue to follow an expired bulletin, j i t I

i I

i i l

s. . _

t 4

Enclosure 5 to the Minutes of CRGR Meeting No. 81 CRGR Review of Proposed IE Bulletin, "5 team 5inding of Auxiliary Feedwater Puttps I

D. Allison (IE) presented for CRGR review, the subject proposed bulletin.

Issuance of the bulletin was proposed by IE in response to a num6er of incidents over the last several ycars at operating reactors in which steam '

binding of AFW pumps occurred as a result of leakage of hot water or steam past isolation val us. Actions specified in the proposed bulletin, intended to prevent or minimize recurrence of similar problems in the future, incl 1ded eevelopment of procedures by licensees (and training of operating personnel regarding implementation of those procedures) for detecting and interpreting conditions of steam binding (or conditions that could lead to steam binding) .

and for correcting such conditions when detected.

The proposed bulletin package was transmitted to CRGR by memo dated September 6,1985, J. M. Taylor to V. Stello, Jr.; that memo included the following enclosures:  ;

1. Proposed IE Bulletin 85-XX, dated August 1985. "Steam Binding of Auxiliary '

Feedwater Pumps."

2. Memo, dated July 7,1985, E. L. Jordan to J. M. Taylor, "Steam Binding of Auxiliary Feedwater Pumps."

3. Enclosure, undated, entitled "Information for CRGR Review on Proposed IE

• Bulletin 85-XX..." (Submitted in accordance with the provisions of CRGR Charter Section IV.B).

4 IE Infomation Notice 84-06, dated January 25, 1985. "Steam Binding of

Auxiliary Feedwater Pumps." }

j 5. INPO Significant Event Report 5-84, "Back 1.eakage Disabled Auxiliary i i Feedwater Pump."  ;

6. INPO Significant Operating Experience Report No. 84-3, dated April 17,  !

1984, "Auxiliary Feedwater Pumps Disabled by Backleakage." l

7. AE00 Report C404, dated July 1984, "Steam Binding of Auxiliary Feedwater Pumps."

8. Memo, dated November 21, 1983, C. J. Heltemes to R. C. DeYoung, "Vapor Binding of Auxiliary Feedwater Pumps." ]

9. Memo, dated June 25, 1985, R. M. Bernero to Knight /Speis, etal, "Generic j !ssue No. 93. Steam Binding of Auxiliary Feedwater Pumps."

Copies of the briefing slides used by IE for presentation to the CRGR at this neeting are a*tached (see Attachment 1 to Enclosure 5).

f

- - ,-..,-.-n. , , , , - - , , - - , - -,---n--~ . . . -

,c. , , . - - - - .. _ , . ,.-- .-. .., - , - - -. _ - - . , _ , , . . - , .,,------,--r.-. , , , . . , , n,,,, - . . . , ,,

2  ;

I

. The proposed Bulletin was aimed principally at licensecs/permittees who have failed to respond effectively to previous notifications of steam binding ,

events, and the need for action to prevent their oc,:urrence in the future,  ;

including specifically analyses and recorsnendations by INPO. (See listing of I

i affected licensees /permittees in Attachment 1 to this Enclosure). The main  ;

! objective of the bulletin was to cause licensees /pemiti,ees who heve not yet '

i done so to develop and implement procedures for monitoring and interpreting i

! plant condition: conducive to or symptomatic of steem binding. A collateral  :

objective was to cause licensees /pemittees who have not yet done so to  !

l formalize the procedures they have deve!oped, and to provide training to plant d

personnel, to ensure continued consistency in the perfonnance of those procedures (regarded as "interim" meacures by the NRC staff, until a long ten 7n l I

fix for this problem can be identified and implemented in the context of I

) GenericIssueNo.93). j The staff estimated that the benefit to be obtained from implementing the proposed bulletin was in the range of 30-96K person-rem. NRC estimates of the ,

! cotts involved wer,e $1100K (total industiy cost) and $100K (total NRC cost). l f

j The principal points of discus: ion at this meeting in connection with the 1 proposed bulletin were as follom:

1. The staff had indicated in the proposed bulietin that monitoring of AFW piping terperature by simply touching with the hand was an acceptable i, nethod of monitoring for conditions of steam binding, or for conditions 1 that could lead to steam binding, of AFW pumps. The Comittee noted that

leakage past isolation or check valves into AFW piping could produce  ;

i temperatures well above ambient, but still not so uncomfortable to the  :

1 touch as to unarrbiguously indicate the need for corrective action to plant

) eperators, if some acceptance criteria were not specified in this regard.

The Comittee suggested, therefore, (and the staff a) reed) that wording ,

J should be added to the bulletin to specify that plant personnel monitoring ,

j AFW pipirg temperature should assure that the temperature remain close to  !

4 ambient.  !

2. The staf f emphasi7ed in the package provided for CRGR review and in I gresentations at this meeting, that the bulletin was directed principally i et those licensees who had failed to respond adequately to earlier

) evaluations ano recomendations by INPO regarding the steam binding problem. The Comittee acknowledged that such followup by the staff was i appropriate, but suggested that the emphasis in the bulletin itself be

]l focused on the potantial safety problem involved, end the need for action i

1 based purely on the safety concern involved, not on licensees' failure to i l respond to INPO recomendations. The staff agreed to reexamine the  ;

specific wording of the bulletin to assure that the proper emphasis was  ;

reflected in the bulletin finally issued. ,

i l j 3. The Comittee noted that "t.imited Distribution" !NPO documents had been

provided by IE as part of the package submitted for CRGF, review, and that

! t, the nomal course of events all CRGR review package material was i

1 l

• l 4

3 l

released to the POR after final action was taken by the agency on any item reviewed by the CRGR. The staf f was requested to inqJire specifically, therefore, (if they had not already done so explicitly) whether INPO had any objections to public release of their documents in this case to assure that some provision of the INP0/NRC agreement was not inadvertently violated by handling the review package material in the usual way. The staff agreed to do so, and to inform CRGR of INP0's position on this matter in timely fashion before the projected release date for the CRGR package relating to this meeting.

As a result of discussions at this meeting of the proposed bulletin, the .

! Comittee recomended issuance of the bulletin with wording revised in accordance with the preceding. IE will coordinate revisions to the bulletin j wording with the ROGR staff prior to final issuance of the bulletin.

l s

i  :

I i

d I

! l I

l l 1

i l l

a l

ATTACHMENT 1 TO ENCLG3URE 5 AtL'chment i IN 84-06 Janusry 23, 1984 -

Page 1 of 1 e

49 Mann Feed **est Q;',

4 g ,

r s s

, s

, Foodneter typoes l -

l ' '

,G',',',',',',',',',',',',',',\,,,,,,,

Steam Generator 1

. Driven -- - --- ---

Moy l I Auu35Y

/i r, --

Feedwatet II #

Au uiliary Feed

• ster 5 y i J L  ;

' W/ __ _ h 8 Pumo

...m.. ..

]

I 1 Condenss to Storage g g i T3nk V Steam V Onwee - J 4

Pump A

Flow Designetors:

$ Normal Not

. Operating, AFW Shutdown ,

h Post Trip-Not Shutdown, AFW ,

Ope m Figure 1. Simplified Schematic of Feedwater and Auxiliary Feedwater Systems l

l

RISK ANALYSIS l

ITEM AEOD NRR l

OPTIMISTIC CONSERVATIVE METHOD RS$ MAP P.SS RSS PLANT SEQUOYAH SURRY SURRY DOMINANT SEQUENCE TML TMLB' TMLS' ATW UNAVAILABILITY.

. PER DEMAND WITHOUT STEAM BINDING 0.4 X 10' l.5 X 10-4 1.5 X 10-4 j WITH STEAM BINDING 1.9 X 10 2.9 X 10'4 6.1 X 10-4 CORE MELT PROBABILITY.

PER REACTOR YEAR

! DOMINANT SEQUENCE WITHOUT 3 STEAM BINDING 2.8 X 10-6 3 X 10~0 3 X 10-6 DOMINANT SEQUENCE WITH STEAM BINDING 11 X 10-6 5.8 X 10-6 19 X 10-6 4

j INCREASED POPULATION RISK

$PECIFIC, MAN-EM REACTOR YEAR 45 12

. 37 TOTAL, MAN-MM 60,000 30,000  % ,000

___m---- - - . - - -,.--.o + - , -- w .--- ,_ --, , - y .-- - w ,, y ,- --- , , . , - ,

TABLE 1 TABULAR

SUMMARY

Ft.AN T ACTION PROCEDURES FOR TRAINING FOR (JUSTIFY / IDENTIFICATION / IDENTIFICATION /

MONITOR) CORRECTION CORRECTION o* JUSTIFY SALEN 1 JUST!FY BO iH BOTH SALEN 2 JUSTIFY BO TH BOTH OCONEE 1 JUSTIFY BOTH BOTH OCONEE 2 JUSTIFY BOTH BOTH OCONEE 3 JUSTIFY BOTH '

BOTH CALVERT CLIFFS 1 JUSTIFY BOTH NEITHER CALVERT CLIFFS 2 JU3TIFY BOTH NEITHE.*

YANKEE-ROWE JUSTIFY CORRECT CORRECT

, BYRON 1 JUSTIFY CORRECT NEITHER l CRYSTAL RIVER 3 JUSTIFY NEITHER BOTH INDIM POINT 3 JUSTIFY NEITHER NEITHER MILLSTONE 2 JUSTIFY NEITHER NEIT}ER TURKEY POINT 3 JUSTIFY NEITHER NEITHER TURKEY POINT 4 JUSTIFY NEITHER NEITHER PALISADES JUSTIFY NEITHER NEITHER DAVIS-BESSE JUSTIFY NEITHER NEITHER WATERFORD 3 JUSTIFY NEITHER NEITHER i

l o+ MONITOR DEAVER VALLEY 1 MONITOR BOTH BOTH INDIAN POINT 2 MONITOR BOlH BOTH CATAMBA 1 MONITOR BOTH BOTH FARLEY 1 MONITOR BOTH BOTH J

FARLEY 2 MONITOR BOTH BOTH NCGUIRC 1 MONITOR BOTH BOTH i NCGUIRE 2 NONITOR BOTH BOTH j ROBINSON 2 NONITOR BOTH BOTH

SEQUOYAH 1 MONITOR BOTH BOTH SEQUOYAH 2 MONITOR BOTH BOTH

-l SURRY 1 NONITOR BOTH BOTH SURRY 2 NONITOR BOTH BOTH ZION 1 MONITOR BOTH BOTH l ZION 2 MONITOR BOTH BOTH FT CALHOUN MON! TOR BOTH ECTH ANO 1 MONITOR BOTH BOTH

, ANO 2 MONITOR BOTH BOTH SAN ONOFRE 2 MONITOR BOTH BOTH SAN ONOFRE 3 MONITOR BOTH BOTH PALO VERDE 1 MONITOR BOTH BOTH i

TABLE 1 i

TABULAR SUNNARY PLANT ACTION PROCEDURES FOR TRAINING FOR (JUSTIFY / IDENTIFICATION / IDENTIFICATION / i NONITOR) CORRECTION CORRECTION l

HADOAN EC'N MONITOR BOTH EI THER D C COOK 1 MONITOR 901N EITER

D C COOK 2 PONITOR B0TH EITER NORTH ANNA 1 NONITOR IDENTIFY IDENTIFY NORTH ANNA 2 NONITOR IDENTIFY IDENTIFY SAN ONOFRE 1 MONITOR IDENTIFY IDENTIFY ST LUCIE 3 MONITOR NEITER BOTH ST LUCIE 2 MON! TOR NEITER BOTH SLDMER MONITOR NEITHER BOTH 1 DI ABLO CANYON 1 NONITOR NEITER BOTH J

PRAIRIE ISLAND 1 NONITOR NEITHER IDENTIFY

N IRIE ISLAND 2 ' NONITOR NEITHER IDENTIFY i

KEWAUEE MONITOR NEITHER IDENTIFY POINT BEACH 1 NONITOR NEITHER IDENTIFY POINT ECACH 2 MONITOR NEITER IDENTIFY j GINNA MONITOR NEITHER E1THER

! MAINE YANKEE MONITOR NEITHER NEITHER 4

WOLF CRtIK 1 MONITOR NEITER EITER

} RANCHO SECO MONITOR NEIT M EITER

) o+ NEITHER j TNI 1 NEITHER EITER NEITHER j TROJAN NEITHER NEITER NEITHER l

l t j

1 i

l I

i I

i I

1

i i

t I

i i

ESTIMATED COSTS i; !e i ,

i t i ItRC COST $100,000 l I i i i INITIAL INDUSTRY COST $800,000  !

l  !

] CONTINUING INDUSTRY COST $300,000 PER YEAR I i t

! TOTAL PRESENT VALUE $6,500,000 [

4 l 1

OR $110 PER MAN REM  ;

i l i  !

I i

I i

i  !

> i

)  !

1 ,

l; 4

OMB No.: 3150-0011 Expiration Date: 9/30/86 j IEB 85-01 '

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0m!SS10N OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 October 29, 1985 IE BULLETIN 85-01: STEAM BINDING OF AUXILIARY FEE 0 WATER PUMPS Addressees:

For Action - Those nuclear power reactor facility licensees and construction permit (CP) holders listed in Attachment 1.

For Infonnation - All other nuclear power reactor facilities.

Purpose:

The purpose of this bulletin is to infonn licensees and CP holders of a poten-tially serious safety problem that has occurred at certain operating facilities involving the inoperability of auxiliary feedwater (AFW) pumps as a result of steam binding. Certain PWel licensees and all PWR CP holders are requested to take further action to prevent similar events from occurring at their facili-ties and to documnt those actions taken or planned.

Description of Circumstances:

Numerous events have been reported where hot water has leaked into AFW systems ~

and flashed to steam, disabling the AFW pumps. Events at Robinson 2 in 1981 i througn 1983, Crystal River 3 in 1982 and 1983, and D. C. Cook 2 in 1981 were sumarized in IE Infontation Notice (!N) 84-06, issued in January 1984. Also '

4 in January 1984, the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) issued Significant Event Report (SER) 5-84 detailing events at Robinson 2 and Farley.  ;

j In April 1984, INPO issued Significant Operating Experience Report (SOER) 84-3 that discussed another event at Surry 2 in 1983.

The NRC's Of fice for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (AE00) issued a case study report entitled "Steam Binding of Auxiliary Feedwater Pumps" in i July 1984. This study identified 22 events since 1981; 13 of these occurring ,

in 1983. Based on operating experience, it appears that backlcakage into AFW could occur in any PWR, In a number of plants, the two motor-driven pumps feed i into a single pipe which feeds into the steam generatort therefore, a leaking

valve in that pipe increases the probability of steam binding in both trains of AFW. Also, multiple AFW pumps of ten take suction from a comon manifold; therefore, if one pump becomes steam bound because of leaking check valves, the steam can heat the contr.on suction and cause other purrps to become steam bound. t 1

l -

l

IEB 85-01 October 29, 1985 Page 2 of 4 i

i AFW capability is needed for normal shutdown and transient conditions as well as for accident mitigation. The AE00 case study examined the effects of steam binding on a sequence in which there was a loss of the power conversion (steam generation) system after a transient other than loss-of-offsite power. A probabilistic risk analysis had previously shown this sequence to be a dominant contributor to the core melt risk for a sample plant (Sequoyah). The case '

study indicated that unavailability of the AFW system as a result of steam i

binding contributes significantly to the risk of core melt in PWRs. Monitoring i AFW to detect backleakage and to promptly correct the situation if backleakage '

occurs would reduce the probability of steam binding. '

Since the AEOD study was issued, a series of events involving backflow of >ct rater into the AFW system occurred at McGuire 2 over a period of 7 days in August 1984, before offective corrective action was taken.

One of these events

! involved overpressurization of the suction line and damage to instruments. In i l Movember in fumes from1984. Catawba insulation 1 experienced and blistering of paint. backflow of hot water into AFW result i

i In December 1984, the NRC s '

i Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) determined that steam bindin tas a generic issue and assigned it a high priority (Generic Issue 93. g of AFW Steam j Binding of Auxiliary Feedwater Pumps"). j h

i To determine the extent of the safety issue and the need for short-tern correc-tive 1985.actions, the NRC's regicnal offices conducteo a survey in April and May of AFW piping at least once per shift.Of the 58 operating reactors surveyed. 39 had te 3' Of the remaining 19, 17 had normally

closed gate or globe volves in the pump discharge path in addition to check valves, or some unique feature such as complete separation of trains that made i scrious safety problems unitkely.  !

j decided to monitor AFW piping temperature.The remaining 2 licensees have subsequently  !

i Although some degree of action has been taken at all units, nany have not incorporated these actions into procedures to detect or correct steam binding, l Without continue.these provisions, there is little assurance that effective actions will i

i actions: Fce this reason, the addressees are requested to take the following '

4 t

) Action for Addressees Listed in Attachment 1

]

i 1.

l Develop procedures for monitoring fluid conditions within the AFW system i

on a regular basis during times when the system is required to be operable.

i i This monitoring should ensure that fluid temperature at the AFW )

j pump discharge is maintained at about ambient temperature. Monitoring of  !

fluid conditions, if used as the primary basis for precluding steam  ;

j binding, is recomended each shif t,  ;

i

i This item is not intended to require elaborate instrumentation. A simple j means of monitoring teeperature, such as touching the p;pe, is a satisfac-tory approach. t' 2.

Develop procedures for recognizing steam binding and for restoring the Arw system to operable status, should steam binding occur.

1 J

i

IE8 85-01 October 29. 1985 Page 3 of 4

3. Procedural controls should remain in effect until completion of hardware modification to substantially reduce'the likelihood of steam binding or until superseded by action implemented as a result of resolution of i Generic issue 93.

Schedule: For operating plants.. develop and implemeht procedures within 90 days of the date of this b~ulletin. For plants under construction, develop and  ;

implement procedures within 90 days after receiving an operating license or provide an appropriate response and commitment within 1 year of the date of

, this bulletin, whichever comes first.

]

l Reporting Requirements: Prepare and submit a report describing the methods i used to accomplish these actions. Include the date(s) that procedures and i training were implemented or scheduled to be implemented. State the frequency af monitoring of the temperature. For operating plants, submit this report l within 120 days of the date of this bulletin. For plants under construction. '

i

• ubmit the report within 120 days af ter receiving an operating license or '

within 1 year of the date of this bulletin, whichever comes first. It is not necessary to sutait the procedures for review.

~

The written report, requested above, shall be submitted to the appropriate  !

Regional Administrator under oath or affirmation under provisions of Section 182a Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. In addition, the original copy of the cover letter and a copy of the attached report should be transmitted to the

} U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Document Control Desk, Washington OC i 20555 for reproduction and distribution.

i

! This request for information was approved by the Office of Management and Budget under blanket clearance number 3150 0011. Comment on burden and dupli-i j

cation should be directed to the Office of Management and Budget. Reports Management Room 3208, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503.

I i i

Although no specific request or requirement is intended, the following infoma- {

1 tion would be helpful to the NRC in evaluating the cost of this bulletin:

1. staff time to perfom requested review and testing I 2. staff time to prepare requested documentation

, t i  !

I i

t i (

)  !

l

IE8 85-01 t October 29, 1985 Page 4 of 4 If there are any questions regarding this matter, please contact the Regional '

Administrator of the appropriate NRC regional office or this office.

[sh mes M. Taylor, Frector Office of Inspection and Enforcement Technical Contacts: '

Mary)5. Wegner, IE (301 492-4511 C. Vernon Hodge, IE (301)492-7275 Attachments:

1. Addressees for Action

2. List of Recently Issued IE Bulletins I

l 1

t I

i

]

) ,

I I

E I l ,

J l

l i

I 1

-- -___ -_ .