ML20213F381

Responds to 850711 & 15 Requests for Suspension of Low Power Testing Program at Facility & Review of Training of Personnel & Condition of Equipment to Determine If Plant Safe to Test at Low Power.Plant Safely Operated by Util

ML20213F381
Person / Time
Site:	05000000, Shoreham
Issue date:	07/30/1985
From:	Murley T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:	Kessel R NEW YORK, STATE OF
Shared Package
ML20213F109	List: ML20213F108 ML20213F120 ML20213F381 ML20213F383 ML20213F387 ML20214P840 ML20214P857 ML20215K537 ML20215K598 ML20215K610 ML20215K615 ML20215K637 ML20215K656 ML20215K674 ML20215K725 ML20215K774 ML20215K795 ML20215K839 ML20215K842 ML20215K853 ML20215K870 ML20215K875 ML20215K908 ML20215K912 ML20215K944 ML20215K956 ML20215K968 ML20215K978 ML20215L037 ML20215L071 ML20215L205 ML20215L213 ML20215L217 ML20215L220 ML20215L224 ML20215L227 ML20215L232 ML20215L235 ML20215L238 ML20215L242 ML20215L249 ML20215L253 ML20215L258 ML20215L262 ML20215L266
References
NUDOCS 8508080761
Download: ML20213F381 (6)

Text

"

-~ ~= .-

~(

- .[

' ,.. 1 ', , - . . ./ M~ . - .6MMtd N mg *

. m

-(UNITED STATES^ w 7h l'

. , jf ki NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSh. .

g 7, REoloN i j

• { 4; u

,, ;1f j 431 PARK AVENUE

, xtse or Paussl A. PENNSYL.VANI A 19404 j

c,i G v m  ;

Mr. Richard M. Kessel ,

9i Executive Director New York Consumer Protection Board :I!),

99 Washington Avenue,10th Floor  ;  !

Albany, New York 12210 1! I

Dear Mr. Kessel:

2 j

This letter is in response to your mailgrams of July 11 and July 15, 1985 to i Dr. Nunzio Palladino, Chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. In those mailgrams you requested the suspension. of the low power testing program l at Shoreham untti the NRC performs a thorough investigation of the July 10 .

l opening - of the 18-inch primary containment purge valves and the air -line i failure that resulted in an automatic reactor shutdown on July 13. You also requested that NRC review LILCo's training of personnel and the condition of l equi'pment at Shoreham to determine if the plant is safe to test at low power'. j In response to your requests and the concerns you expressed, I believe that a v l brief discussion of the particular eveats of interest as well as the purpose -'

and conduct of the start-up test program is warranted.

The purging operation of the containment on July 10 was an evolution that invol- i ved improper opening of two 18-inch containment purge valves, contrary to plant  !

procedures. During the low power testing phase containment purging is a normal: l evolution that is conducted using four 4-inch and two 6-inch containment purge valves. On July 10 the operators erroneously opened the larger valves in.addi-  !

tion to the normal, smaller valves. To understand why this occurred, I believe ]

j some background information is necessary. During normal operation in the low power testing phase, personnel access to the containment is permitted to con-duct repairs or to investigate problems. In order to allow personnel access, '

the containment atmosphere is sampled and appropriately purged with outside -

air. The exhaust from the purge valves is automatically diverted to a filtra-  ;

tion system .if radiation levels in the containment exceed pre-determined set ,

1 points. Furthermore, the exhaust from the filtration' system is also monitored i and if pre-determined set points are reached, the release is automatically-terminated. This practice of purging the containment in this manner is some- 3 what limited to this phase of testing. Under full power operating conditions, 9 I

containment systems such as the one used at Shoreham are normally ir.erted with l nitrogen and access is limited to those times when the reactor is shu'. down.and deinerted. Deinerting the containment is normally accomplished by purging with l the smaller valves approximately 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> prior to shut down. Furthermore, i i

during operation purge valves can also be used to relieve excess containment -

pressure. The larger purge valves are designed for use when the reactor is shut down. Consequently, at Shoreham the unique nature of operation Il i

relative short time interval of reactor cperation at very low power leve.and the ls does ,.

y not result. in a threat to public health and safety in that significant; radia- Jl tion levels within the reactor core have not been reached. Once they . are, a; additional precautions are instituted. Nonetheless, ; opening of. the -larger purge valves was an error and appropriate remedial. actions.are being pursued to .g 'j

.c 's '

assure more stringent administrative controls over the operation of the 18-inch lqs purge valves. l l

L

&& e ma

.(

?

m ^

Richard M. Kessel 2 The air supply.-line failure that led .to an automatic shutdown of the Shoreham reactor on July 13 occurred .in a non-safety related system. Safety related air i supply lines and equipment in the plant are subject to different quality con- #!

3 trol and quality assurance standards for design, construction, and operation.

Therefore, conclusions regarding the condition of safety related equipment must

• be based on the performance and inspection of that specific class of_ equipment.

,. In this event all safety-related equipment functioned correctly and the

-j !

reactor was shut down in an orderly manner. Nonetheless, NRC has emphasized to o LILCO the' importance .'of minimizing failures in non-sefety- related systems. ,j.l s Timely inve,stigation of events such as those discussed above is a normal part of ; NRC's inspection activities. NRC ' inspectors began their investigation .of ,'

the vent. valve opening on the morning of the event and an NRC inspector was in ,'

the. Shoreham control room and observed the performance of operators and systems-c when the automatic shutdown occurred on July 13. Our follow-up on.these events "

included consideration of the incidents that led up to the events, the actual .,

i and potential consequences of_ the events, the personnel and system performance,, ,'

and action taken by. LILCO to avoid such events in the future. The results of-our investigations, which will be reported in our ' inspection report for the' .

J

month of July, identify areas where improvements can be made.but do not indi -

cate the need for suspension of the test program at Shoreham. -

In your July 15 mailgram you- referred to three problems having occurred at Shoreham_ since the start of low power testing. Two of these, which ' you

' specifically identified, were discussed 'above. It was . not clear from y'our . 1 l

mailgram what the third problem _you referred to was. However, it' should be ,

recognized that one of the main purposes of start up test 1 programs at power plants is to ensure that components _ and systems _ operate 1

4 accordance with specified criteria. In this regard, such testing is _ intended in  !

I i

to identi fy system and : equipment problems, and procedures are in place to l handle them when 'they occur. To date, the . number - and types of events ' that ' l i

have occurred at Shoreham in their start-up program e.re not. uncommon. and are, in fact, to be expected during this phase of plant operation.

1 You also requested that NRC review both LILCO's training of -personnel and the condition of equipment at Shoreham. NRC reviews, on a continual basis,- these areas as well as other areas affecting plant' operations such as management in-volvement, . radiological controls, maintenance, surveillance, quality control and quality assurance, fire protection, and security. Our review of personnel l training includes the licensed and non-licensed operator training programs as 4 well as training of other plant. staff. To date_over 24,000 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> of. inspection time have been expended by NRC at Shoreham and the inspection coverage has been intensified since the plant received its low power license. During the . start- '

up test program NRC is focusing its inspection efforts 'on all of t,he above areas in order to evaluate the performance of LILCO and the Shoreham facility 4 during the transition to low power operation. .i i 1 e

j q.3 a ,~

1

.p t I

g.

r' S m '

Richard M. Kessel 3 The results of our investigations of the July 10 and 13 events at Shoreham and I of the extensive routine inspection program conducted at Shoreham have not to 4 date revealed any conditions that give reason to question LILCO's ability to

• safely operate the Shoreham plant. I assure you that should such conditions '

arise in the future, the NRC will take appropriate actions to protect the ' '

health and safety of the public.

~1 i Please contact me if I can be of further assistance.

% l Sincerely, s

.' f

~j )U GLX- '-( 1 " Thomas E. Murley 1 1 Regional Administrator .,

                                                                                                                    ,t s i k

q e i

                                                                                           .                              l
  ,                                                                                                                      l i                                                                                                                        l
                                                                                                  .                       1
                                                                                             .e h

e 4 1 e e l:

                                                                                                       ,      4 ll                                                                                                                i-

.q

          . . -    ,    .;                             '                                                                                     )

ei

                                             ,m.         <
                                                                        ^    , . . -                                                           l t
                       ~ Richard M. Kessel                     4 Distribution                                                             .

W. Dircks .

                     ,J. Roe         .                                                                                   ; .'

+- T. Rehm ' V. Stello H. Denton . J. Taylor

i ~ G. Cunningham 1 T.-Murley . .

EDO 000833 . c1 SECY85-558/ i

                   ., J. Allan
                       'J. Gutierrez                                                                                  '
                                                                                                                         -[
 ,                      R. Starostecki                                                                                            .

H. Thompson >; W. Kane "l F. Miraglia JI-W. Butler - a 1

J'. Kerry -

• 1 . R. Caruso .

E. Conner. R. Fuhrmeister

                                                                                                               .                            l
}                                                                                                                             .

E

     ~

-[ t 4 e x 4-2 1 t j

                                                                                                                        ..e           ,
                                                                                                         ,}

.j .

                                                                                         ,                         '::th
                                                                                                                     , ..e r

s

                                                                                                       +
                                                                                           ' f
                                                       .}}