ML20234B073

Summary of 870821 Meeting W/Util in Bethesda,Md Re Issue of High Temp in Reactor Containment Bldg.Vendor Branch Questions & Attendance List Encl

ML20234B073
Person / Time
Site:	Arkansas Nuclear
Issue date:	08/28/1987
From:	Craig Harbuck Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8709180254
Download: ML20234B073 (7)

Text

, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ ._ _ _

, & n. ou

- og UNITED STATES 30M I

![ - n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION W ASHINGT ON, D. C. 20555

{ $

August 28, 1987 l ,#

Docket No. 50-313 LICENSEE: Arkansas Power and Light Company (AP&L)

FACILITY: Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1 (ANO-1)

SUMMARY

OF AUGUST 21, 1987 MEETING BETWEEN AP&L AND THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION AND THE NRC STAFF REGARDING THE ISSUE OF HIGH TEMPERATURE IN THE ANO-1 REACTOR CONTAINMENT BUILDING INTRODUCTION At the request of AP&L, a meeting was held on August 21, 1987 at the NRC office in Bethesda, Maryland to appeal the NRC staff's decision to seek an immediate shutdown of ANO-1 until the problem of the reactor building high temperature was resolved. The FSAR stated that 110 F was the design containment temperature during normal operation. Actual temperatures ranged from 103'F to 183 F. This issue was first raised by the senior resident inspector on August 3, 1987. On August 7, 1987, a conference call between Region IV (RIV), NRR, and the licensee was held to discuss this issue. Subsequent to the call a justification for continued operation (JCO) was requested by RIV. This JC0 was issued on August 13, 1987. RIV determined that the JC0 was inadequate, and with NRR concurrence sent an Augmented Inspection Team (AIT) to ANO on August 17, 1987 to review the licensee's supporting documentation and to determine whether any specific technical safety issues existed, primarily in the equipment qualification area.

Along with the onsite inspection effort, questions solicited from the technical ,

review branches at NRR were also given to the licensee. After much discussion between the AIT, AP&L, and the NRC staff, a decision was reached by the staff on August 20, 1987 to seek an immediate shutdown of ANO-1 until all of the concerns pertaining to the containment high temperature were resolved. AP&L was informed of this decision on August 20, 1987 during a conference call. RIV concurred with this decision. Subsequent to that conference call, in the evening of August 20, 1987, AP&L requested a meeting with the Director of NRR to appeal this decision. The request was granted.

SUMMARY

The meeting consisted of two parts. Part one was between the Director of HRR along with the staff and senior AP&L management. The staff pointed out that AP&L did not appear to have done an adequate investigation into the implications of the containment high temperature condition which had existed since plant startup in 1974. There appeared to be too many questions for which AP&L had no ready answer.. Therefore, the staff concluded that in the interest of safety and because of the possibility of the existence of technical safety issues, the plant should be placed in a safe condition until all concerns were identified 8709180254 070028 3 DR ADDCK 050

a and resolved. AP&L admitted that they had not previously recognized the significance of the containment high temperature, but claimed _that since the issue was raised, that they had performed a safety evaluation sufficient to convince themselves that no short term safety issues existed which would necessitate shutdown of the plant. The major areas of technical concern were the-(1) effect on the plant safety analyses (2) the impact on EQ equipment and non EQ equipment important to plant operation; and (3) the effect on containment structure including concrete and the post tensioning system. However, at the time of _the meeting no specific technical safety problem had been identified either by the AIT or the licensee. The licensee was told that plant operation would be allowed to continue until August 28, 1987 at which time they would have to submit a comprehensive justification for continued operation (JCO) addressing all pertinent issues. Pending staff review of the JC0, a decision would then be made concerning continued plant operation.

Part two of the meeting was between licensee technical personnel and NRC technical reviewers. The purpose of this meeting was to ensure that all of )

the' issues raised by_the staff were provided to and understood by the licensee. The licensee's basic program for addressing the temperature issue was also discussed. A copy of the specific questions provided to the licensee by the staff (Enclosure 1) and a list of attendees (Enclosure 2) are enclosed. ,

lbl C. Craig Harbuck, Acting Project Manager Project Directorate - IV Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, V and Special Projects

Enclosures:

As stated cc w/ enclosures:

See next page ,

Docket File NRC PDR Local PDR PD4 Reading T. Murley/J. Sniezek -F. Miraglia F. Schroeder D. Crutchfield P. Noonan C. Harbuck OGC-Beth W. Lanning E. Jordan J. Partlow Receptionist (Phillips)

NRC Participants ACRS (10) GPA/PA V. Wilson B. Kolostyak j

'LTR NAME: MEETING

SUMMARY

FOR AN01 i

• See previous concurrences:

PD4/LA* PD4/APM* PD4/D*

PNoonan CHarbuck JCalvo 8/25/87 8/28/87 8/28/87 l

1

i I

and resolved. AP&L admitted that they had not previously recognized the significance of the containment high temperature, but claimed that since the issue was raised, that they had performed a safety evaluation sufficient to convince themselves that no short term safety issues existed which would necessitate shutdown of the plant. The major areas of technical concern were the (1) effect on the plant safety analyses (2) the impact on EQ equipment and non EQ equipment important to plant operation; and (3) the effect on containment structure including concrete and the post tensioning system. However, at the time of the meeting no specific technical safety problem had been identified either by the AIT or the licensee. The licensee was told that plant operation would be allowed to continue until August 28, 1987 at wh'ch time they would have to submit a comprehensive justification for continued operation (JCO) addressing all pertinent issues. Pending staff review of the JCO, a decision would then be made concerning continued plant operation.

Part two of the meeting was between licensee technical personnel and NRC staff technical reviewers. The purpose of this meeting was to ensure that all of the issues raised by the staff were provided to and understood by the  ;

licensee. The licensee's basic program for addressing the temperature issue was also discussed. A copy of the specific questions provided to the licensee by the staff (Enclosure 1) and a list of attendees (Enclosure 2) are enclosed.

\d C. Craig Harbuck, Acting Project Manager Project Directorate - IV Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, V and Special Projects

Enclosures:

As stated cc w/ enclosures: ,

See next page Docket File NRC PDR Local POR PD4 Reading T. Murley/J. Sniezek F. Miraglia F. Schroeder D. Crutchfield P. Noonan C. Harbuck OGC-Beth W. Lanning E. Jordan J. Partlow Receptionist (Phillips)

NRC Participants ACRS (10) GPA/PA V. Wilson B. Kolostyak l

LTR NAME: MEETING

SUMMARY

FOR AN01 PD4/LAgm ( PD4/APM1 PD4/DJ3N PNoona CHarbuch JCalvo 8d5/87 8/M /87 8/2 J/87 l

N_--_____- __

E ,

I i. Mr.lG. Campbell Arkansas Power & Light Company Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit I cc:

L 'Mr. J. Ted Enos, Manager Nuclear Engineering and Licensing

. Arkansas Power & Light Company P. O. Box 551 Little Rock, Arkansas 72203 Mr. James M. Levine, Director Site Nuclear Operations Arkansas Nuclear One P. O. Box 608-Russellville, Arkansas 72801 Mr. Nicholas S. Reynolds Bishop, Liberman, Cook, Purcell & Reynolds 1200 Seventeenth Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036 Mr. Robert B. Borsum Babcock & Wilcox Nuclear Power Generation Division Suite 220, 7910 Woodmont Avenue Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box 2090

.Russellville, Arkansat 72801 Regional Administrator, Region IV U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Executive Director for Operations 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Ar.lington, Texas 76011 Mr. Frank Wilson, Director Division of Environmental Health Protection Department of Health Arkansas Department of Health 4815 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Honorable William Abernathy County Judge of Pope County  ;

Pope County Courthouse Russellville, Arkansas 72801

i '

ENCLOSURE 1 PAGE.1 4

k 1 f

ANO HIGH CONTAINMENT TEMPERATURE The JC0s submitted to date do not indicate that operability of systems 1.

and components exposed to high containment temperatures have been considered in an integrated fashion. Determine what squipment is operable-to safely cope with operational transients and accidents. This would include both safety and non-safety related 'eouipment identified in the AT0Gs, such as pressurizer level control and indication components, primary coolant high point vents, steam generator level control and indication components, ICS components, parameter monitoring components such as containment radiation, and acoustic monitors.

2. A description of equipment and system components (e.g. cabling, monitors, l relays) wi.th respect to specific elevations and the temperatures postulated at the elevations should be provided.

3. A description of the basis for the temperatures assumed to be present at specific elevations.

4 A description of factors included when evaluating the age of components, such as assured temperature, internal heaters, type of lubricant present and selection of most limiting component.

5. A description of temperature monitoring, including recording, to be implemented.

6. A description of information provided to the operations staff concernfrg this problem and its potential implications.

I I

i l

I l

\

i e . .

ENCLOSURE 1 ,

PAGE 2 VENDOR BRANCH QUESTIONS Has there ever been a significant period of time during the life of the plant in which a portion of the normal reactor building cooling system has been out of service and has resulted in temperatures in the reactor building that are higher than the' temperatures observed these past few weeks? If so, have you _

taken this into account when evaluating the effect upon the aging of environmentally qualified equipment, throughout the reactor building?

Did you identify the EQ components which utilize energized space heaters and include the effect of such heaters in the evaluation of the effect of high temperatures on the calculated qualified life of the EQ components.

ESGB QUESTIONS TO AN0-1 OURING 8/20/87 CONFERENCE CALL (BY JOHN S. MA)

1. Since the temperature inside the ANO-1 containment has been higher than

.its original design temperature for the past 13 years, the loss of prestress in the containment would be higher than its originally predicted, as a result of the additional creep of concrete and relaxation of prestressing tendon resulting from the additional high temperature. Therefore, the capability of the containment to withstand its design loads needs to be reevaluated. l

2. The additional temperature (the temperature over its original design temperature during operation) would put additional compressive stress to the liner which had not been considered in the original design. The additional creep of concrete, as mentioned in question 1, also has shifted additional compressive stress to the liner. Therefore, the integrity of the containment liner needs to be verified.

i L _ ______- _

I r .. ,, ,

[-

l Enclosure 2 l*

PERSONS ATTENDING MEETING BETWEEN NRC STAFF AND ARKANSAS POWER AND LIGHT ON AUGUST 21, 1987 TO DISCUSS ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE UNIT-1 HIGH CONTAINMENT TEMPERATURE PROBLEM PART 1 PART 2 ,

NRC g Thomas E. Murley Jose A. Calvo Dennis M. Crutchfield John W. Craig Jose A. Calvo' Robert C. Jones l Thomas 0. Martin Stephen Alexander "

l' John W. Craig John 5. Ma C. Craig Harbuck Warren C. Lyon F. Schroeder C. Cra!g Harbuck AP&L' AP&L John Griffin Ted Enos T. Gene Campbell Dan Howard James M. Levine Ron Oakley Richard Barnes Hank Green Jim McWilliams Paul Jones Charles Turk Ronnie Howerton David Baxter  !

Howard Stevens i

l l

l