NRC-95-0018, Annual Operating Rept Jan-Dec 1994 for Fermi 2
| ML20080P743 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi  |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1994 |
| From: | Gipson D DETROIT EDISON CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| CON-NRC-95-0018, CON-NRC-95-18 NUDOCS 9503080111 | |
| Download: ML20080P743 (8) | |
Text
,
DouglIs R. Gipson Sensor Vice President Nuclear Generahon -
MDd Fermi 2 6
Technical Specification'
]
Edison ;400NonhDineHighway;=r -
6.9.i.4 1
j February 28,'1995 NRC-95-0018 i
I i
U.,S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, D. C. 20555 t
Reference:
Fermi 2
-NRC Docket No. 50-341 NRC License No. NPF-43
Subject:
1994-Annual Operating Report for Fermi 2 5
In accordance with Feral 2 Technical Specification 6.9.1.4, 4.7 3 and NRC Regulatory Guide 1.16, the Detroit Edison Company.is submitting the Annual Operating Report for the Fermi 2 Nuclear Power Plant for the period of January 1,.1994 through December 31, 1994 (see Enclosure 1).
The 1994 Annual Operating Report for Fermi 2 satisfies-the reporting requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.16, (Personnel Monitoring Report),
Technical Specification 6.9.1.5.a (Annual Exposure Report by Function),
Technical Specification 6.9.1.5.b (Safety / Relief Valve Challenges),
Technical Specification 6.9.1.5.c (Emergency Core Cooling System Outages), and Technical Specification 6.9.1.5.d (Specific Activity Analysis of the Primary Coolant). The 1994 Annual Operating Report also includes a section on service life of the main steam-bypass line.
This satisfies the commitment stated in Detroit Edison letter VP-86-0154 to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission dated November 7, 1986.
If you have any questions or comments regarding this report, please contact Mr. Joseph Pendergast, Compliance Engineer, at (313) 586-1682.
Sincerely, Enclosure cc:
T. G. Colburn J. B. Martin M. P. Phillips A.
Vegel 95030B0111 941231 PDR ADOCK 05000341
/
R PDR l[l
t i
l 1
Enclosura to NRC-95-0018 Page 1 i
l l
l FERMI 2' ANNUAL OPERATING REPORT JANUARY 1 - DECEMBER 31, 1994 l
DETROIT EDISON COMPANY l
NRC DOCKET NO. 50-341 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-43 i
f l
l i
l i
J
I Enclosura to-NRC-95-0018 Page 2 Table of Contents Page i
i 1.0 Introduction........................................
3 2.0 Summary of Operations...............................
3 2.1 Summary of Operating Experience................
3 2.2 Summary of Outages and Forced Reductions Greater than 20 Percent of Full Power........
3 2 3 Fuel. Performance...............................
3 2.4 Shore Barrier Survey...........................
4 2 5 Safety Relief Valve Challenges.................
'4 2.6 Personnel Monitoring and Exposure..............
4 t
2 7 Service Life of Main Steam Bypass Line.........
6 2.8 Specific Activity Analysis of the
~ Primary Coolant..............................
6 2.9 ECCS Outages...................................
6
j l
Enclosure to NRC-95-0018 i
Page 3 1.0 Introduction The Feral 2 Nuclear Power Plant site is located on the western shore of Lake Erie in Frenchtown Township,1Nonroe County, Michigan.. The-Nuclear Steam Supply System is a General Electric BWR 4,.with a Mark I j
pressure-suppression containment. The plant is fully owned by the j
Detroit Edison Company.
1 2.0 Summary of Operations 2.1 Summary of Operating Experience Fermi 2 automatically shutdown on December 25, 1993 and entered a-turbine generator.and' refueling outage.
i 2.2 Summary of Outages and Forced Reductions Greater than 20 Percent of Full Power Fermi 2 automatically shutdown on December 25, 1993 and entered a.
turbine generator and refueling outage. Outage work included approximately 8,000 individual work packages and about.250 plant 3
modifications or-laprovements. There were several major changes.
{
A new solid-state static exciter was installed. The seventh and eight stage low pressure turbine blades were removed, until-the new
)
low pressure turbine rotors are installed in 1996. An-improvement was made to the reactor water level monitoring systen.-
2 3 Fuel Performance In 1994, Fermi 2 generated 0.14 Full Power Days (FPD) due to the fact that'the plant was in an-outage for the year. The reactor was made critical for the first time in Cycle 5 on December 19,.1994 for the purpose of performing low power physics testing.. After l
completion of the testing, the reactor was immediately shutdown.
Over the course of the next two days, the reactor was made critical t
three additional times for operator training purposes due to~the extended duration of the outage. Each time, the reactor was l
shutdown before achieving the point of adding heat. The-fifth-reactor startup of Cycle 5 occurred on December. 22,=1994. The1 reactor was pressurized to approximately 120 psig in order to permit startup testing to be performed on various plant systems.
The reactor was shutdown on the evening of December 24,.1994 and
).
h then restarted on the evening of December 25 1994 and continued to operate in mode 2 through the end of 1994 as,startup testing l
progressed.
During the fourth refuel outage, a complete core offload / reload was.
once'again performed. 228 new GE11-type fuel bundles were loaded into the core. 40 once burned GE11-type fuel bundles, which were originally scheduled.to remain.In the core for Cycle 5, had to be discharged due to the premature end of Cycle 4 on December 25, 1993 These 40 fuel bundles are planned for reinsertion in Cycle
- 6._ Fuel sipping was performed on 454 bundles (including all 444 bundles returning to the core for Cycle 5) to identify the leaking i
Encloruro to L
NRC-95-0018 Page 4 i
fuel' bundle that was first observed during Cycle 4 operation'in-August of 1993 The sipping activity also_ served a secondary purpose of providing a flush of the fuel bundles to' remove any crud that might have been deposited on the bundles as a result of the circulating water intrusion into the reactor vessel following the turbine failure event. Early-in the sipping campaign, the_ leaking fuel bundle was confirmed to be LYS488, a.GE8-type fuel bundle in its third cycle of operation, as predicted previously-via power suppression testing and _ analysis of offgas and chemistry dataL A visual inspection of this fuel. bundle was performed and the most likely_cause of the leak was determined to be debris, induced fretting of the fuel cladding.
j
.j 2.4 Shore Barrier Survey A survey of the Fermi 2 shore barrier was completed as required by-
~
Technical-Specification 4.7 3 The results of the survey indicated no damage, significant movement, or deterioration of the barrier.
All forty-seven survey point elevations were within the tolerance specified in Technical Specification Table 3 7 3-1.
Civil 1
Engineering Drawings 60721-44.through 49 were revised to l
j incorporate the survey data. :No_ unusual incidents occurred in 1994 that.would have required additional surveillance.
2.5 Safety Relief Valve Challenges There were no safety relief valve challenges during 1994.
2.6 Personnel Monitoring and Exposure
{
Table'2.6-1 provides a breakdown of. radiation exposure by_ work and' job function as required by Technical Specification 6.9.1.5(a).
The thermoluminescent dosleeter (TLD) dose is direct reading dosimeter (DRD) dose adjusted with'a TLD adjustment factor (multiplier) for Total. Effective Dose Equivalent (TEDE).
Regulatory G:Ide 1.16 Annual Dose Report - Adjusted for TLD Dose 01/01/94 Through 12/31194 Numberof Personnel TEDE hienrom Station Utility Contract Station Utility Contract EE$
E.g. _, __
S~
Workers E;
~,
Workers
$ 9 f, Reactor Operations & Survedlance
- e-awe Personnel 98 9
119 9 298 0.088 14.781
,g$@
Operating Personnel 78 2
44 10.839 0.000 13.695 e C Health Physics Personnel 26 0
23 '
3.091 0.000 1.612 82 Strwrvisory Personnel 121 28
.192 3.351 0.190 8.739 gy Engmeering Personnel 106 to 14 2.828 0.011 0.454 o
Reactor Maintenance
" ' e.we Personnel 17
.1 8
4.754 0.087 2.081 Operatmg Personnel 1
0 0
0 042
- 0.000 0.000 Health Physes Personnel 0
0 0
0.000 0.000 0.000 Supervisory Personnel 1
5 19 0.139 0234 4.796 Engmeeting Personnel 1
0 0
' O.043
.0.000 0.000 Special Maintenance
"..._i Personnel Si 3
260 9.348 -
0.054 43.474 Operating Personnel 32 0
15 -
4.097 0.000 4.574 Health Physics Personnel 17 0
11 3.030 0.000 2.527 Supervisory Personnel 24 10 217' 3.019 0.211 34.848 Engineering Personnel 23 1
8' 1.064 0.000 0.919 Weste Processing Maintenance Personnel 1
0 3
0 000 0.0t'3 0.374 Operating Personnel 11 0
-18 0.178 0.000 0.725 Health Physics Personnel 4
0 1
0.289 0.000 0 002 Supervisory Personnel 0
0 9
0.000
' O.000 0.278 Engineenng Personnel 1
0 0
0 000 0.000 0.000 I
Refueling
"_ e.we Personnel 3
0; 20 0.431 -
0.000 3.771 Operaling Personnel 6
0 19 0.873 0.000 4.991 Health Physics Personnel 3
0 4
' O.414 0.000 0.526 Supervisory Personnel 7
2 77 0.322 0.001 6.718
(.
Engmeeting Personnel 15 0
8 0.387 0.000 0.405 Inservice Inspedian Maintenance Personnel 2
0 3
0.298 0.000 0.956 Operating Personnel 1
0 0
0.000 0.000 0.000 Health Physics Personnel 0
0 0
0 000 0.000 0.000
%;+---/c, Personnel 0
0 10 0.000 0.000 2.845 l
Engineering Personnel 1
0 0
0.018 0.000 0.000 Totals Memtenance Personnel 172 13 413 24.139.
0.229 65A37 Operatmg Personnel 129 2
96 18.030 0.000 23.986 Heakh Physics Personnel 50
.0 39 6.824 0.000 4.667 Supervisory Personnel 153.
43
.524 6.831 -
-0.636 58.223 Engineenng Personnel 147 11 30 4.340 0.011-1.778 Total 461 89 1102 88.163
.0.875 154.092 Grand Totals N- - - --
1822 TEDE Manrem 213.131
Enclo::ura to NRC-95-0018 Page 6 2.7 Service Life of Main Steam Bypass Line In accordance with Detroit Edison letter VP-86-0154. dated November 7,.1986, the. cumulative time the main steam bypass lines are R
operated with the bypass valves between 30 percent and 45 percent opened will be reported annually. A cumulative value of.100 days is not to be exceeded without prior NRC notification.
Evaluations performed by Stone and Webster and by Hopper and Associates concluded that the bypass lines are acceptable for safe operation when operated within the 100 day constraint. Based on these. evaluations, the new main steam bypass piping that was installed in 1985 has a service life which will allow it to function for the life of the plant under anticipated operating conditions. The main steam bypass lines usage was 32.25 days as of-December. 31, 1994.
j 2.8 Specific Activity' Analysis of the Primary Coolant Exceeding the l
Limits of Technical Specification'3.4.5-During 1994, the specific activity of the primary coolant did not I
exceed the limits of Technical Specification 3 4.5.
2 9 ECCS Outages Pursuant to Fermi 2 Technical Specification 6.9.1.5.c, a summary of the ECCS system outages which occurred between January 1, 1994 and December 31 1994 is provided. The tabulation of ECCS outage hours (Table 2.9-1) includes both forced and planned outages for the Low Pressure Coolant Injection.(LPCI), Core Spray, High Pressure Coolant Injection (HPCI), and Automatic Depressurization Systems (ADS). An outage was considered to be whenever one of the ECCS systems was out-of-service at a time it was required to be operable per Technical Specifications.
l l
l l
l
- Enclosurs to 1
NRC-95-0018 Page 7, ECCS Outages Table 2.9-1 ECCS Outage Hours January 1, 1994 to December 31, 1994 ECCS System Forced Hours Planned Hours LPCI Division I 0.0 0.0 LPCI Division II 29.13 0.0 i
Core Spray Division I 0.0 2 37 Core Spray Division II 0.0 0.0 l
l i
DIVISION II thN PRESSURE C00(JWT INJECTION 1
l o ECCS System Outage: Division II Low Pressure Coolant Injection l
Out of Service from 1907 12/10/94 to 0015 12/12/94 Duration:
29.13 hours1.50463e-4 days <br />0.00361 hours <br />2.149471e-5 weeks <br />4.9465e-6 months <br /> Forced Outage l
Outage Summary:
l The division II LPCI system was removed from service to perform various CM and PM activities. Following completion of the activities and required surveillances, the division 2 LPCI system was returned to service.
1 DIVISION I CORE SPRAY o ECCS System Outage: Division I Core Spray Out of Service from 2038 12/12/94 to 2300 12/12/94 Duration:
2 37 hours4.282407e-4 days <br />0.0103 hours <br />6.117725e-5 weeks <br />1.40785e-5 months <br /> Planned Outage Outage Summary:
The division I core spray system was removed from service to perform various PM activities. Following completion of the activities and required surveillances, the division I core spray system was returned to service.
.