ML20199D268
| ML20199D268 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 03/04/1986 |
| From: | Holahan G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Muller D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20197A618 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-86-684 NUDOCS 8603100040 | |
| Download: ML20199D268 (3) | |
Text
)
pennq k
UNITED STATES y
p, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j
r,,
- l WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 4,
MAR 4 1996 MEMORANDuft FOR:
Daniel Muller, Director BWR Project Directorate No. 2 Division of BWR Licensing FROM:
Gary M. Holahan, Director Operating Feactors Assessnent Staff Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
SALP INPUT FOR PEACH BOTTOM UNITS 2 AND 3 Please find enclosed, the input for the Peach Bottoni Units 2 and 3 SALP evaluation requested by the Project Manager. Our input addresses the frequency, reporting, and analysis of reportable events.
Based on our review, we have reconnended a Category 3 rating for this attribute.
8 Gary M. Holahan, Director Operating Reactors Assessn.ent Staff Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Enclosur q s stated cc:
. Gear ;
Fa t A -s G -G: S+
p up9t d A3 2
T SALP INPUT PEACH BOTTOM UNITS 2 AND 3 REPORTING AND ANALYSIS OF REPORTABLE EVENTS REPORT PERIOD - 4/1/85 - 1/30/86 Peach Bottom Unit 2 The unit did not operate for the first 4 months of the report period and shut down for a month in late November for environmental qualification work. During the report period Philadelphia Electric Company (the licensee) reported 38 non-security events per 10 CFR 50.72 to the NRC Operations Center. Licensee Event Reports (LERs) for an additional 11 items were reported per 10 CFR 50.73.
Almost half of the reports are linked to training or maintenance. Between June 22, 1985, and June 29, 1985, while in cold shutdown, five scram signals and PCIS initiations had an identical root cause: back filling of reactor level transmitter sensing lines. This reflects a lack of prompt attention to a recurring problem.
Eight of the 38 reports involved reactor trips which translates into a frequency of 18 trips / year, which is three times larger than the current, national reactor average frequency of 5.9 scrams / plant / year. Over 1/2 of the reactor trips were attributed to operator error or training deficiency which is higher than the national average of about 1/3.
Two events were considered significant: The discovery in November 1985 of residual heat removal pump degradation due to intergranular stress corrosion cracking (IGSCC) of the wear ring. On December 26, 1985, a reactor scram due to operator error and followed by waterhamer in a feedwater line.
Reporting was prompt and accurate with the exception of LER 85-023-00 issued on November 21, 1985, for an event which occurred on January 15, 1985.
Peach Bottom Unit 3 The unit was in power operation for the first 31/2 months of the report period, and then started a refueling outage. The licensee reported 16 non-security reportable events per 10 CFR 50.72 to the NRC Operations Center during the report period.
Licensee Event Reports (LERs) for an additional 18 items were received per 10 CFR 50.73.
As a result of the licensee's determination that RPS actuations occurring when fuel was completely removed from the reactor vessel were not reportable per 10 CFR 50.72, a large amount of scram signals (13) were reported in LERs.
Twelve of these scram signals occurring over a seven month period were due to people bumping the IRM cable in the subpile room. This reflects a lack of prompt attention to a recurring problem.
)
. No reactor trips were reported during the 3 1/2 months of operation in the l
reporting period, which is better than the national average.
Two events reflecting equipment problems were significant. They include the residual heat removal pump degradation, and the cracks in the steam separator hold-down bolts, both discovered in November 1985.
Reporting was prompt and accurate with the exception of LER 85-018-00 issued on December 12, 1985, for an event which occurred on July 11, 1984.
Conclusion The majority of events have been reported promptly and accurately.
It should be noted to the licensee's credit that a year end review uncovered only two events which had gone unreported per 10 CFR 50.73.
Based on our review of the reported events, we find a high frequency of reactor trips at Unit 2, training and maintenance deficiencies, and a lack of prompt corrective action to prevent recurrence of problems at both Units 2 and 3.
Accordingly, we recommend a SALP rating of 3 for the evaluation criterien
" Reporting and Analysis of Reportable Events."
.