Information Notice 2002-10, Manual Reactor Trip and Steam Generator Water Level Setpoint Uncertainties: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) Created page by program invented by StriderTol |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) StriderTol Bot change |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:UNITED STATES | {{#Wiki_filter:UNITED STATES | ||
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION | ===NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION=== | ||
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION | |||
WASHINGTON, DC 20555-0001 | |||
===June 28, 2002=== | |||
NRC INFORMATION NOTICE 2002-10, SUPPLEMENT 1: | |||
===DIABLO CANYON MANUAL=== | |||
REACTOR TRIP AND STEAM | REACTOR TRIP AND STEAM | ||
GENERATOR WATER LEVEL | ===GENERATOR WATER LEVEL=== | ||
SETPOINT UNCERTAINTIES | SETPOINT UNCERTAINTIES | ||
| Line 43: | Line 45: | ||
failure of the main feedwater regulating valve, non-conservative steam generator setpoints and | failure of the main feedwater regulating valve, non-conservative steam generator setpoints and | ||
contributing causes, and other licensee actions relating to these events. This supplement | contributing causes, and other licensee actions relating to these events. This supplement | ||
provides information that became available after the issuance of the original information notice | provides information that became available after the issuance of the original information notice | ||
(IN). The NRC expects that recipients will review the information for applicability to their | (IN). The NRC expects that recipients will review the information for applicability to their | ||
facilities and consider taking actions, as appropriate. However, this supplement does not | facilities and consider taking actions, as appropriate. However, this supplement does not | ||
contain any NRC requirements and does not require any specific action or written response. | contain any NRC requirements and does not require any specific action or written response. | ||
| Line 62: | Line 64: | ||
automatic reactor trip and emergency feedwater actuation on low-low water level in the steam | automatic reactor trip and emergency feedwater actuation on low-low water level in the steam | ||
generator (LER 1-2002-001-00). The NRC issued IN 2002-10 on March 7, 2002, to inform | generator (LER 1-2002-001-00). The NRC issued IN 2002-10 on March 7, 2002, to inform | ||
licensees of this event. Following the issuance of the original IN, the NRC staff conducted a | licensees of this event. Following the issuance of the original IN, the NRC staff conducted a | ||
Special Inspection at Diablo Canyon, as well as a public meeting with Westinghouse. In | Special Inspection at Diablo Canyon, as well as a public meeting with Westinghouse. In | ||
addition, Diablo Canyon has completed its Licensee Event Reports (LERs), Westinghouse has | addition, Diablo Canyon has completed its Licensee Event Reports (LERs), Westinghouse has | ||
| Line 85: | Line 87: | ||
ML021820008 | ML021820008 | ||
IN 2002-10 Sup 1 level of Steam Generator 2-4. The indicated narrow-range water level decreased to 7.5 percent | IN 2002-10 Sup 1 level of Steam Generator 2-4. The indicated narrow-range water level decreased to 7.5 percent | ||
and leveled out. Operators tripped the Unit 2 reactor within approximately 1 minute after the | and leveled out. Operators tripped the Unit 2 reactor within approximately 1 minute after the | ||
main feedwater regulating valve closed. On February 14, 2002, after the Unit 2 restart but while | main feedwater regulating valve closed. On February 14, 2002, after the Unit 2 restart but while | ||
still investigating the event, the licensee identified a potentially unanalyzed condition involving | still investigating the event, the licensee identified a potentially unanalyzed condition involving | ||
the narrow-range steam generator water level instrumentation. The licensee determined that | the narrow-range steam generator water level instrumentation. The licensee determined that | ||
during the plant transient, the actual water level in steam generator 2-4 fell below the 7.2- percent narrow-range trip setpoint for engineered safety feature and reactor trip actuations | during the plant transient, the actual water level in steam generator 2-4 fell below the 7.2- percent narrow-range trip setpoint for engineered safety feature and reactor trip actuations | ||
before operators manually tripped the reactor. The steam generator vendor attributed this | before operators manually tripped the reactor. The steam generator vendor attributed this | ||
water-level discrepancy to a previously unaccounted for differential pressure created by steam | water-level discrepancy to a previously unaccounted for differential pressure created by steam | ||
flow past the mid-deck plate in the moisture separator section of the steam generator. This | flow past the mid-deck plate in the moisture separator section of the steam generator. This | ||
differential pressure phenomenon caused the steam generator narrow-range instruments to | differential pressure phenomenon caused the steam generator narrow-range instruments to | ||
indicate a higher-than-actual water level. Thus, the steam generator narrow-range water level | indicate a higher-than-actual water level. Thus, the steam generator narrow-range water level | ||
low-low setpoint was non-conservative during the loss of normal feedwater transient. | low-low setpoint was non-conservative during the loss of normal feedwater transient. | ||
===Physical Phenomenon and System Description=== | ===Physical Phenomenon and System Description=== | ||
Steam generators designed by Westinghouse incorporate two-stage moisture separation. The | Steam generators designed by Westinghouse incorporate two-stage moisture separation. The | ||
first stage uses centrifugal separators, and the second stage uses chevron-type separators. A | first stage uses centrifugal separators, and the second stage uses chevron-type separators. A | ||
mid-deck divider plate separates the two stages. The steam generator water level | mid-deck divider plate separates the two stages. The steam generator water level | ||
instrumentation uses differential pressure instruments with two ranges, a wide-range non- safety-related instrument and three or four (depending on plant) narrow-range safety-related | instrumentation uses differential pressure instruments with two ranges, a wide-range non- safety-related instrument and three or four (depending on plant) narrow-range safety-related | ||
instruments. The wide-range instrument spans essentially the entire length of the downcomer | instruments. The wide-range instrument spans essentially the entire length of the downcomer | ||
region, while the narrow-range instruments span only the upper 25 percent of the wide-range to | region, while the narrow-range instruments span only the upper 25 percent of the wide-range to | ||
cover the normal operating band. The upper taps for all four instruments are located above the | cover the normal operating band. The upper taps for all four instruments are located above the | ||
mid-deck plate, while the lower taps are all located below this plate. | mid-deck plate, while the lower taps are all located below this plate. | ||
| Line 132: | Line 134: | ||
as orifices which restricted steam flow and allowed pressure differences with water levels | as orifices which restricted steam flow and allowed pressure differences with water levels | ||
below the mid-deck region. At higher steam flow rates with a decreasing steam generator | below the mid-deck region. At higher steam flow rates with a decreasing steam generator | ||
water level, steam exiting the first stage separators along with the moisture being separated | water level, steam exiting the first stage separators along with the moisture being separated | ||
was enough to build up pressure below the plate that was not acting above the plate. Since the | was enough to build up pressure below the plate that was not acting above the plate. Since the | ||
upper steam generator water level instrument taps were connected above the plate, a pressure | upper steam generator water level instrument taps were connected above the plate, a pressure | ||
| Line 142: | Line 144: | ||
difference acted on the four instruments and provided a bias that caused the instruments to | difference acted on the four instruments and provided a bias that caused the instruments to | ||
indicate a higher-than-actual level. For the limiting safety setting of the low-low steam | indicate a higher-than-actual level. For the limiting safety setting of the low-low steam | ||
generator water level setpoint, this bias acts in the non-conservative direction. The magnitude | generator water level setpoint, this bias acts in the non-conservative direction. The magnitude | ||
of the bias drops as the steam flow decreases. | of the bias drops as the steam flow decreases. | ||
| Line 151: | Line 153: | ||
Following this event, the NRC completed an onsite special team inspection at Diablo Canyon | Following this event, the NRC completed an onsite special team inspection at Diablo Canyon | ||
Nuclear Power Plant. The inspection examined the events surrounding the Unit 2 reactor trip | Nuclear Power Plant. The inspection examined the events surrounding the Unit 2 reactor trip | ||
on February 9, 2002, as they relate to safety and compliance with the Commissions rules and | on February 9, 2002, as they relate to safety and compliance with the Commissions rules and | ||
regulations and the conditions of the Diablo Canyon license. The inspection consisted of | regulations and the conditions of the Diablo Canyon license. The inspection consisted of | ||
examining procedures and records, and interviewing station personnel and staff members, as | examining procedures and records, and interviewing station personnel and staff members, as | ||
well as the reactor plant contractor. The NRCs Special Inspection Team also developed a | well as the reactor plant contractor. The NRCs Special Inspection Team also developed a | ||
detailed sequence of events and organizational response time line which is summarized in the | detailed sequence of events and organizational response time line which is summarized in the | ||
| Line 167: | Line 169: | ||
IN 2002-10 Sup 1 This event provided an unusual challenge to the licensee in that it involved an unrecognized | IN 2002-10 Sup 1 This event provided an unusual challenge to the licensee in that it involved an unrecognized | ||
phenomenon. Many plant events involve equipment behaving in an unexpected manner, but | phenomenon. Many plant events involve equipment behaving in an unexpected manner, but | ||
the failure mechanisms are usually well-understood. However, a well-structured corrective | the failure mechanisms are usually well-understood. However, a well-structured corrective | ||
action process should still be effective under these circumstances by being sufficiently rigorous | action process should still be effective under these circumstances by being sufficiently rigorous | ||
| Line 175: | Line 177: | ||
to recognize conditions that are adverse to quality and then treating them according to their | to recognize conditions that are adverse to quality and then treating them according to their | ||
safety significance. From a review of the post trip review, the NRCs Special Inspection Team | safety significance. From a review of the post trip review, the NRCs Special Inspection Team | ||
concluded that the licensees process was narrowly focused on finding, understanding, and | concluded that the licensees process was narrowly focused on finding, understanding, and | ||
correcting the cause of the trip. While the stations post-trip analysis procedure contained steps | correcting the cause of the trip. While the stations post-trip analysis procedure contained steps | ||
to review plant behavior before, during, and after the event, this was effectively not performed. | to review plant behavior before, during, and after the event, this was effectively not performed. | ||
| Line 189: | Line 191: | ||
behavior expected under those conditions, the licensee failed to recognize that an automatic | behavior expected under those conditions, the licensee failed to recognize that an automatic | ||
plant trip and ESF actuation of auxiliary feedwater did not occur when required. Had this been | plant trip and ESF actuation of auxiliary feedwater did not occur when required. Had this been | ||
recognized, the licensee would probably have delayed restarting the plant until after the cause | recognized, the licensee would probably have delayed restarting the plant until after the cause | ||
| Line 199: | Line 201: | ||
wide-range indication did not track with narrow-range indication, which was thought to have | wide-range indication did not track with narrow-range indication, which was thought to have | ||
indicated accurately. The NRCs Special Inspection Team concluded that the licensees theory | indicated accurately. The NRCs Special Inspection Team concluded that the licensees theory | ||
and supporting data were not compared with other available but conflicting indications. The | and supporting data were not compared with other available but conflicting indications. The | ||
licensee calculated that the event would have resulted in loss of approximately 75 percent of | licensee calculated that the event would have resulted in loss of approximately 75 percent of | ||
| Line 207: | Line 209: | ||
the initial water mass in the affected steam generator, and should have caused the wide-range | the initial water mass in the affected steam generator, and should have caused the wide-range | ||
level to be 20 percent of the actual level. The licensee did not note that the bottom of the | level to be 20 percent of the actual level. The licensee did not note that the bottom of the | ||
narrow-range corresponds to approximately 75 percent wide-range level, so the narrow-range | narrow-range corresponds to approximately 75 percent wide-range level, so the narrow-range | ||
instruments should have been expected to be reading off scale low. Also, when auxiliary | instruments should have been expected to be reading off scale low. Also, when auxiliary | ||
feedwater actuated, narrow-range level instruments did not show increasing level until after | feedwater actuated, narrow-range level instruments did not show increasing level until after | ||
| Line 219: | Line 221: | ||
In addressing the wide-range instrument question, it was clear that the licensee was not fully | In addressing the wide-range instrument question, it was clear that the licensee was not fully | ||
satisfied that the issue was well-understood. However, rather than clarify the issue | satisfied that the issue was well-understood. However, rather than clarify the issue | ||
immediately, the licensee used a station administrative process that required resolution of the | immediately, the licensee used a station administrative process that required resolution of the | ||
| Line 225: | Line 227: | ||
issue within 30 days, and declared the problem to be an issue needing validation to determine | issue within 30 days, and declared the problem to be an issue needing validation to determine | ||
impact on operability. The NRCs Special Inspection Team concluded that this process was not | impact on operability. The NRCs Special Inspection Team concluded that this process was not | ||
integrated with the stations operability determination process, and could permit an issue that | integrated with the stations operability determination process, and could permit an issue that | ||
| Line 244: | Line 246: | ||
for the uncertainties associated with the differential pressure created by the steam flow past the | for the uncertainties associated with the differential pressure created by the steam flow past the | ||
mid-deck plate in the moisture separator section of the steam generator. A plant power | mid-deck plate in the moisture separator section of the steam generator. A plant power | ||
reduction was commenced at 4:58 p.m. on February 28, 2002, to decrease reactor power to | reduction was commenced at 4:58 p.m. on February 28, 2002, to decrease reactor power to | ||
| Line 264: | Line 266: | ||
differential pressure created by the steam flow past the mid-deck plate in the moisture | differential pressure created by the steam flow past the mid-deck plate in the moisture | ||
separator section of the steam generator. As a conservative measure, after Westinghouse | separator section of the steam generator. As a conservative measure, after Westinghouse | ||
identified this issue via NSAL 02-3, Sequoyah actuated the environmental allowance monitor | identified this issue via NSAL 02-3, Sequoyah actuated the environmental allowance monitor | ||
(EAM) on Friday, February 15, 2002. This feature changed the steam generator low-low level | (EAM) on Friday, February 15, 2002. This feature changed the steam generator low-low level | ||
reactor trip setpoint from 10.7 percent to 15 percent. Since the known steam generator channel | reactor trip setpoint from 10.7 percent to 15 percent. Since the known steam generator channel | ||
uncertainty was 8.3 percent with a narrow-range span uncertainty of 5.3 percent, Sequoyah | uncertainty was 8.3 percent with a narrow-range span uncertainty of 5.3 percent, Sequoyah | ||
| Line 280: | Line 282: | ||
Callaway, Salem, and Sequoyah have since recalibrated the low-low water level setpoints for | Callaway, Salem, and Sequoyah have since recalibrated the low-low water level setpoints for | ||
the steam generator with the additional margin to account for this newly identified error. The | the steam generator with the additional margin to account for this newly identified error. The | ||
licensees completed this instrument recalibration before increasing the plants power level to full | licensees completed this instrument recalibration before increasing the plants power level to full | ||
| Line 290: | Line 292: | ||
The event described in this IN highlights the potential impact of steam generator water level | The event described in this IN highlights the potential impact of steam generator water level | ||
setpoint errors. These errors could delay the expected automatic reactor trip and emergency | setpoint errors. These errors could delay the expected automatic reactor trip and emergency | ||
feedwater actuation. The IN identifies additional accident analyses and systems associated | feedwater actuation. The IN identifies additional accident analyses and systems associated | ||
with the mid-deck plate phenomenon and highlights the importance of a thorough post-trip | with the mid-deck plate phenomenon and highlights the importance of a thorough post-trip | ||
analysis prior to restart. The IN also provides some of the corrective actions taken because of | analysis prior to restart. The IN also provides some of the corrective actions taken because of | ||
this event and provides information sources for further investigation. | this event and provides information sources for further investigation. | ||
IN 2002-10 Sup 1 This information notice does not require any specific action or written response. If you have | IN 2002-10 Sup 1 This information notice does not require any specific action or written response. If you have | ||
any questions about the information in this notice, please contact any of the technical contacts | any questions about the information in this notice, please contact any of the technical contacts | ||
| Line 309: | Line 311: | ||
/RA/ | /RA/ | ||
===William D. Beckner, Program Director=== | |||
Operating Reactor Improvements Program | Operating Reactor Improvements Program | ||
Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs | ===Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs=== | ||
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation | |||
Technical contacts: | |||
===Jerry Dozier, NRR=== | |||
Neil OKeefe, Region IV | |||
(301) 415-1014 | (301) 415-1014 | ||
(361) 972-2507 Email: jxd@nrc.gov | |||
Email: nfo@nrc.gov | |||
(301) 415-2929 Email: hcg@nrc.gov | ===Hukam Garg, NRR=== | ||
(301) 415-2929 Email: hcg@nrc.gov | |||
Attachments: | Attachments: | ||
1. List of References | 1. List of References | ||
2. Overview and Sequence of Events | 2. Overview and Sequence of Events | ||
3. List of Recently Issued NRC Information Notices | 3. List of Recently Issued NRC Information Notices | ||
IN 2002-10 Sup 1 This information notice does not require any specific action or written response. If you have | IN 2002-10 Sup 1 This information notice does not require any specific action or written response. If you have | ||
any questions about the information in this notice, please contact any of the technical contacts | any questions about the information in this notice, please contact any of the technical contacts | ||
| Line 341: | Line 347: | ||
/RA/ | /RA/ | ||
===William D. Beckner, Program Director=== | |||
Operating Reactor Improvements Program | Operating Reactor Improvements Program | ||
Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs | ===Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs=== | ||
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation | |||
Technical contacts: | |||
===Jerry Dozier, NRR=== | |||
Neil OKeefe, Region IV | |||
(301) 415-1014 | (301) 415-1014 | ||
(361) 972-2507 Email: jxd@nrc.gov | |||
Email: nfo@nrc.gov | |||
(301) 415-2929 Email: hcg@nrc.gov | ===Hukam Garg, NRR=== | ||
(301) 415-2929 Email: hcg@nrc.gov | |||
Attachments: | Attachments: | ||
1. List of References | 1. List of References | ||
2. Overview and Sequence of Events | 2. Overview and Sequence of Events | ||
3. List of Recently Issued NRC Information Notices | 3. List of Recently Issued NRC Information Notices | ||
DISTRIBUTION: | DISTRIBUTION: | ||
| Line 369: | Line 379: | ||
IN File | IN File | ||
ADAMS ACCESSION #: | ADAMS ACCESSION #: | ||
*See previous concurrence | |||
DOCUMENT NAME: G:RORP\OES\Dozier\in2002-10s1shortversion.wpd | DOCUMENT NAME: G:RORP\\OES\\Dozier\\in2002-10s1shortversion.wpd | ||
OFFICE RSE:RORP:DRIP TECH EDITOR | OFFICE RSE:RORP:DRIP TECH EDITOR | ||
RSE:RIII | |||
RSE:DE:EEIB | |||
NAME | |||
Attachment 1 IN 2002-10 Sup 1 REFERENCES | IJDozier | ||
NOKeefe* | |||
HGarg* | |||
DATE | |||
06 /03/2002 | |||
06/03/2002 | |||
06/03/2002 | |||
06/25/2002 OFFICE BC:DE:EEIB | |||
SC:OES:RORP:DRIP | |||
PD:RORP:DRIP | |||
NAME | |||
JCalvo* | |||
TReis | |||
WDBeckner | |||
DATE | |||
06/25/2002 | |||
06/27/2002 | |||
06/28/2002 | |||
===OFFICIAL RECORD COPY=== | |||
===Attachment 1=== | |||
IN 2002-10 Sup 1 REFERENCES | |||
LER 1-2002-001-00, Technical Specification Violation Due to Non-Conservative Steam | LER 1-2002-001-00, Technical Specification Violation Due to Non-Conservative Steam | ||
| Line 441: | Line 482: | ||
2002. | 2002. | ||
Attachment 2 IN 2002-10 Sup 1 Overview and Sequence of Events | ===Attachment 2=== | ||
IN 2002-10 Sup 1 Overview and Sequence of Events | |||
This section discusses applicable events and actions before, during, and following the failure of | This section discusses applicable events and actions before, during, and following the failure of | ||
| Line 449: | Line 491: | ||
In 1989, Diablo Canyon revised the steam generator narrow-range low-low level trip setpoint in | In 1989, Diablo Canyon revised the steam generator narrow-range low-low level trip setpoint in | ||
accordance with License Amendment 34 for Unit 1 and Amendment 33 for Unit 2. The nuclear | accordance with License Amendment 34 for Unit 1 and Amendment 33 for Unit 2. The nuclear | ||
steam supply system (NSSS) vendor (Westinghouse) provided the analysis to reduce the low- low trip setpoint in topical report, WCAP-11784, Calculation of Steam Generator Level Low and | steam supply system (NSSS) vendor (Westinghouse) provided the analysis to reduce the low- low trip setpoint in topical report, WCAP-11784, Calculation of Steam Generator Level Low and | ||
Low-Low Trip Setpoints With Use of a Rosemount 1154 Transmitter. The licensee reduced | Low-Low Trip Setpoints With Use of a Rosemount 1154 Transmitter. The licensee reduced | ||
the setpoint from 15 to 7.2 percent narrow-range on May 10, 1989, for Unit 1, and on April 12, | the setpoint from 15 to 7.2 percent narrow-range on May 10, 1989, for Unit 1, and on April 12, | ||
1989, for Unit 2. However, the licensee did not factor the mid-deck plate differential pressure | 1989, for Unit 2. However, the licensee did not factor the mid-deck plate differential pressure | ||
into the narrow-range low-low level trip setpoint at this time because the mid-deck phenomenon | into the narrow-range low-low level trip setpoint at this time because the mid-deck phenomenon | ||
| Line 466: | Line 508: | ||
new (replacement) steam generators using computer modeling tools that were not available | new (replacement) steam generators using computer modeling tools that were not available | ||
during the design review for the original steam generators. Westinghouse began accounting | during the design review for the original steam generators. Westinghouse began accounting | ||
for this bias in the setpoint calculation during design work for replacement steam generators. | for this bias in the setpoint calculation during design work for replacement steam generators. | ||
| Line 472: | Line 514: | ||
Westinghouse began assessing the potential impact of the mid-deck plate for original model | Westinghouse began assessing the potential impact of the mid-deck plate for original model | ||
steam generators in late 1999. Westinghouse was planning to issue Nuclear Safety Advisory | steam generators in late 1999. Westinghouse was planning to issue Nuclear Safety Advisory | ||
Letters about the mid-deck phenomenon at about the time of the Diablo Canyon manual reactor | Letters about the mid-deck phenomenon at about the time of the Diablo Canyon manual reactor | ||
| Line 478: | Line 520: | ||
trip. | trip. | ||
On February 9, 2002, the Main Feed Regulating Valve (MFRV) FW-2-FCV-540 failed closed, stopping the feedwater flow to steam generator 2-4. After a failed attempt to reopen the MFRV, | On February 9, 2002, the Main Feed Regulating Valve (MFRV) FW-2-FCV-540 failed closed, stopping the feedwater flow to steam generator 2-4. After a failed attempt to reopen the MFRV, | ||
operators initiated a manual reactor trip. The cause of the MFRV failure was excess current in | operators initiated a manual reactor trip. The cause of the MFRV failure was excess current in | ||
the coil of an Asco model L206-381-6F solenoid valve (SV), which in turn caused the failure of a | the coil of an Asco model L206-381-6F solenoid valve (SV), which in turn caused the failure of a | ||
| Line 489: | Line 531: | ||
shift supervision expressed skepticism that the steam generator level dropped as low as | shift supervision expressed skepticism that the steam generator level dropped as low as | ||
observed by the steam generator wide-range instrument during the trip. The shift technical | observed by the steam generator wide-range instrument during the trip. The shift technical | ||
advisor confirmed that the wide-range level indication reached 10 percent. Diablo Canyons | advisor confirmed that the wide-range level indication reached 10 percent. Diablo Canyons | ||
Engineering Services reported that steam generator structural integrity was not affected by low | Engineering Services reported that steam generator structural integrity was not affected by low | ||
wide-range level. Engineering Services preliminarily concluded that dynamic processes | wide-range level. Engineering Services preliminarily concluded that dynamic processes | ||
contributed to inaccurate wide-range level indication. Later that night, during a conference call | contributed to inaccurate wide-range level indication. Later that night, during a conference call | ||
with the NRC staff to discuss the licensees plans for the restart of Unit 2, the licensee reviewed | with the NRC staff to discuss the licensees plans for the restart of Unit 2, the licensee reviewed | ||
its corrective actions for the feedwater regulating valve and other failed components. The NRC | its corrective actions for the feedwater regulating valve and other failed components. The NRC | ||
staff expressed concern that wide-range indicated level was abnormally low for this transient. | staff expressed concern that wide-range indicated level was abnormally low for this transient. | ||
| Line 513: | Line 555: | ||
the wide-range level indication was overly conservative but did not impact operator response to | the wide-range level indication was overly conservative but did not impact operator response to | ||
such an indication. The NRC decided to conduct follow up activities on level anomalies. The | such an indication. The NRC decided to conduct follow up activities on level anomalies. The | ||
Plant Staff Review Committee reviewed the results of the trip event response team investigation | Plant Staff Review Committee reviewed the results of the trip event response team investigation | ||
and readiness for restart. The steam generator wide-range water level anomaly issue was | and readiness for restart. The steam generator wide-range water level anomaly issue was | ||
Attachment 2 IN 2002-10 Sup 1 discussed and determined not to be a restart issue. The issue was classified as an issue | ===Attachment 2=== | ||
IN 2002-10 Sup 1 discussed and determined not to be a restart issue. The issue was classified as an issue | |||
needing validation to determine impact on operability (INVDIO). The Station Director granted | needing validation to determine impact on operability (INVDIO). The Station Director granted | ||
permission to restart the plant. | permission to restart the plant. | ||
Unit 2 was restarted the next day (February 10, 2002). The licensee continued its investigation | Unit 2 was restarted the next day (February 10, 2002). The licensee continued its investigation | ||
of the Unit 2 steam generator response during the transient. Diablo Canyon personnel sent | of the Unit 2 steam generator response during the transient. Diablo Canyon personnel sent | ||
plant trip data to Westinghouse for review. The licensee began to focus on steam generator | plant trip data to Westinghouse for review. The licensee began to focus on steam generator | ||
narrow-range indication as a potential concern. During a conference call between the licensee | narrow-range indication as a potential concern. During a conference call between the licensee | ||
and Westinghouse on February 14, 2002, Westinghouse informed the licensee about a new | and Westinghouse on February 14, 2002, Westinghouse informed the licensee about a new | ||
| Line 537: | Line 580: | ||
process measurement error term related to mid-deck plate differential pressure that had not | process measurement error term related to mid-deck plate differential pressure that had not | ||
been included in the existing setpoint analysis. Operators in both units declared all channels of | been included in the existing setpoint analysis. Operators in both units declared all channels of | ||
narrow-range level instrumentation inoperable and entered Technical Specification 3.0.3. | narrow-range level instrumentation inoperable and entered Technical Specification 3.0.3. | ||
Operations issued a shift order to manually trip the reactor on loss of feedwater flow. Operators | Operations issued a shift order to manually trip the reactor on loss of feedwater flow. Operators | ||
in both units began reducing power to less than 60-percent thermal power to restore the | in both units began reducing power to less than 60-percent thermal power to restore the | ||
narrow-range instruments to an operable condition and exit Technical Specification 3.0.3. On | narrow-range instruments to an operable condition and exit Technical Specification 3.0.3. On | ||
the basis of information received from Westinghouse, the licensee promptly completed an | the basis of information received from Westinghouse, the licensee promptly completed an | ||
operability assessment which concluded that the existing trip setpoint at a 7.2 percent narrow- range level remained operable at or below 60-percent reactor power. Operators stopped power | operability assessment which concluded that the existing trip setpoint at a 7.2 percent narrow- range level remained operable at or below 60-percent reactor power. Operators stopped power | ||
reductions at 60-percent power. This action had to be taken because the failure to correct this | reductions at 60-percent power. This action had to be taken because the failure to correct this | ||
condition prior to restart resulted in Unit 2 changing Modes (Mode 3 to 2 to 1) with the reactor | condition prior to restart resulted in Unit 2 changing Modes (Mode 3 to 2 to 1) with the reactor | ||
| Line 559: | Line 602: | ||
inoperable and subsequent operation of Units 1 and 2 (Mode 1) in a condition prohibited by | inoperable and subsequent operation of Units 1 and 2 (Mode 1) in a condition prohibited by | ||
Technical Specification 3.3.1. This Technical Specification requires that the reactor trip system | Technical Specification 3.3.1. This Technical Specification requires that the reactor trip system | ||
instrumentation for steam generator level low-low be operable for Modes 1 and 2 and the | instrumentation for steam generator level low-low be operable for Modes 1 and 2 and the | ||
| Line 569: | Line 612: | ||
On February 15, 2002, the licensee implemented setpoint changes on both units to raise the | On February 15, 2002, the licensee implemented setpoint changes on both units to raise the | ||
steam generator low-low setpoint to 15 percent. After implementation, operators increased | steam generator low-low setpoint to 15 percent. After implementation, operators increased | ||
power to 100 percent in both units. Westinghouse issued NSAL 02-3, Steam Generator Mid- Deck Plate Pressure Loss Issue on February 19, 2002. That NSAL warned plants with | power to 100 percent in both units. Westinghouse issued NSAL 02-3, Steam Generator Mid- Deck Plate Pressure Loss Issue on February 19, 2002. That NSAL warned plants with | ||
Westinghouse-designed steam generators that the error source has not been accounted for | Westinghouse-designed steam generators that the error source has not been accounted for | ||
| Line 577: | Line 620: | ||
and has potentially adverse effects on steam generator level low-low uncertainty calculations as | and has potentially adverse effects on steam generator level low-low uncertainty calculations as | ||
a bias in the indicated high direction. Westinghouse further warned that for plants for which | a bias in the indicated high direction. Westinghouse further warned that for plants for which | ||
Westinghouse maintains the calculation of record, this pressure drop effect may require a | Westinghouse maintains the calculation of record, this pressure drop effect may require a | ||
maximum decrease of approximately 9 percent (in percent narrow-range span) in the safety | maximum decrease of approximately 9 percent (in percent narrow-range span) in the safety | ||
analysis limit (SAL) for establishing the low-low steam generator water level reactor trip for the | analysis limit (SAL) for establishing the low-low steam generator water level reactor trip for the | ||
| Line 587: | Line 630: | ||
loss of normal feedwater (LONF) transient or the loss of offsite power (LOOP) transient to | loss of normal feedwater (LONF) transient or the loss of offsite power (LOOP) transient to | ||
compensate for this bias. NSAL 02-3 added additional transients to consider, such as the | compensate for this bias. NSAL 02-3 added additional transients to consider, such as the | ||
steamline break mass and energy release, and for plants with feed line check valves inside | steamline break mass and energy release, and for plants with feed line check valves inside | ||
containment, the feedline break transient, to compensate for this described bias. Revision 1 to | containment, the feedline break transient, to compensate for this described bias. Revision 1 to | ||
the NSAL 02-3 also provided updated information regarding the steam generator water level | the NSAL 02-3 also provided updated information regarding the steam generator water level | ||
mid-deck plate pressure loss issue. Specifically, Westinghouse revised the NSAL to address | mid-deck plate pressure loss issue. Specifically, Westinghouse revised the NSAL to address | ||
the impact of this issue on the feedwater line break analysis (when feedwater check valves | the impact of this issue on the feedwater line break analysis (when feedwater check valves | ||
| Line 601: | Line 644: | ||
were located inside containment), the ATWS mitigation system actuation circuitry system, and | were located inside containment), the ATWS mitigation system actuation circuitry system, and | ||
steamline break mass and energy release calculations. Westinghouse subsequently issued | steamline break mass and energy release calculations. Westinghouse subsequently issued | ||
NSAL 02-4, Maximum Reliable Indicated Steam Generator Water Level, and NSAL 02-5, Steam Generator Water Level Control System Uncertainty Issue on February 19, 2002. | NSAL 02-4, Maximum Reliable Indicated Steam Generator Water Level, and NSAL 02-5, Steam Generator Water Level Control System Uncertainty Issue on February 19, 2002. | ||
| Line 607: | Line 650: | ||
Revision 1 to NSAL 02-5 was written to clarify the need to calculate the steam generator water | Revision 1 to NSAL 02-5 was written to clarify the need to calculate the steam generator water | ||
Attachment 2 IN 2002-10 Sup 1 level uncertainties at normal operating level, including the impact, if any, of the mid-deck plate | ===Attachment 2=== | ||
IN 2002-10 Sup 1 level uncertainties at normal operating level, including the impact, if any, of the mid-deck plate | |||
pressure differential and to compare the uncertainties used in the initial condition of the safety | pressure differential and to compare the uncertainties used in the initial condition of the safety | ||
analyses to determine if they remain bounding. NSAL 02-5, Rev. 1, also discusses the | analyses to determine if they remain bounding. NSAL 02-5, Rev. 1, also discusses the | ||
potential impact on safety analyses performed at reactor power levels other than 100 percent | potential impact on safety analyses performed at reactor power levels other than 100 percent | ||
| Line 621: | Line 665: | ||
Advisory Letter 02-3 and the void content of the two phase mixture above the mid-deck plate | Advisory Letter 02-3 and the void content of the two phase mixture above the mid-deck plate | ||
(NSAL 02-4). Westinghouse also held a workshop with industry representatives on | (NSAL 02-4). Westinghouse also held a workshop with industry representatives on | ||
February 28, 2002 and a public meeting with the NRC staff on March 20, 2002. | February 28, 2002 and a public meeting with the NRC staff on March 20, 2002. | ||
| Line 631: | Line 675: | ||
generator narrow-range low-low level protection setpoints. | generator narrow-range low-low level protection setpoints. | ||
______________________________________________________________________________________ | |||
OL = Operating License | |||
CP = Construction Permit | |||
===Attachment 3=== | |||
IN 2002-10 Sup 1 LIST OF RECENTLY ISSUED | |||
===NRC INFORMATION NOTICES=== | |||
_____________________________________________________________________________________ | _____________________________________________________________________________________ | ||
Information | Information | ||
Notice No. | Date of | ||
Notice No. | |||
Subject | |||
Issuance | |||
Issued to | |||
_____________________________________________________________________________________ | _____________________________________________________________________________________ | ||
2002-22 | 2002-22 | ||
===Degraded Bearing Surfaces in=== | |||
GM/EMD Emergency Diesel | |||
Generators | |||
06/28/2002 | |||
===All holders of operating licenses=== | |||
for pressurized- or boiling-water | |||
nuclear power reactors, including | |||
those that have ceased | those that have ceased | ||
| Line 651: | Line 716: | ||
operations but have fuel on site. | operations but have fuel on site. | ||
2002-21 | 2002-21 Axial Outside-Diameter | ||
Cracking Affecting Thermally | ===Cracking Affecting Thermally=== | ||
Treated Alloy 600 Steam | |||
===Generator Tubing=== | |||
06/25/2002 | |||
===All holders of operating licenses=== | |||
for pressurized-water reactors | |||
(PWRs), except those who have | |||
permanently ceased operations | |||
and have certified that fuel has | and have certified that fuel has | ||
| Line 665: | Line 737: | ||
the reactor. | the reactor. | ||
2002-19 | 2002-19 | ||
===Medical Misadministrations=== | |||
Caused By Failure to Properly | |||
===Perform Tests on Dose=== | |||
Calibrators for Beta-and Low- Energy Photon-Emitting | |||
===Radionuclides=== | |||
06/14/2002 | |||
===All nuclear pharmacies and=== | |||
medical licensees. | |||
2002-18 | |||
===Effect of Adding Gas Into=== | |||
Water Storage Tanks on the | |||
===Net Positive Suction Head For=== | |||
Pumps | |||
06/06/2002 | |||
===All holders of operating licenses=== | |||
for nuclear power reactors, except those who have | |||
permanently ceased operations | |||
and have certified that fuel has | and have certified that fuel has | ||
| Line 687: | Line 772: | ||
the reactor. | the reactor. | ||
2002-17 | 2002-17 Medical Use of Strontium-90 | ||
Eye Applicators: New | |||
===Requirements for Calibration=== | |||
and Decay Correction | |||
05/30/2002 | |||
===All U.S. Nuclear Regulatory=== | |||
Commission medical licensees | |||
that use strontium-90 (Sr-90) eye | |||
applicators. | |||
Note: | Note: | ||
NRC generic communications may be received in electronic format shortly after they are | |||
issued by subscribing to the NRC listserver as follows: | issued by subscribing to the NRC listserver as follows: | ||
To subscribe send an e-mail to <listproc@nrc.gov >, no subject, and the following | |||
command in the message portion: | command in the message portion: | ||
subscribe gc-nrr firstname lastname}} | |||
{{Information notice-Nav}} | {{Information notice-Nav}} | ||
Latest revision as of 17:51, 16 January 2025
| ML021820008 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon |
| Issue date: | 06/28/2002 |
| From: | Beckner W NRC/NRR/DRIP/RORP |
| To: | |
| Dozier J, NRR/RLSB 415-1014 | |
| References | |
| TAC M4812 IN-02-010, Suppl 1 | |
| Download: ML021820008 (15) | |
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION
WASHINGTON, DC 20555-0001
June 28, 2002
NRC INFORMATION NOTICE 2002-10, SUPPLEMENT 1:
DIABLO CANYON MANUAL
REACTOR TRIP AND STEAM
GENERATOR WATER LEVEL
SETPOINT UNCERTAINTIES
ADDRESSEES
All holders of operating licenses for nuclear power reactors, except those who have
permanently ceased operations and have certified that fuel has been permanently removed
from the reactor.
PURPOSE
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing this supplement to give addressees
further information about the manual reactor trip of Diablo Canyon Unit 2 which resulted from a
failure of the main feedwater regulating valve, non-conservative steam generator setpoints and
contributing causes, and other licensee actions relating to these events. This supplement
provides information that became available after the issuance of the original information notice
(IN). The NRC expects that recipients will review the information for applicability to their
facilities and consider taking actions, as appropriate. However, this supplement does not
contain any NRC requirements and does not require any specific action or written response.
BACKGROUND
Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant reported a manual reactor trip of Unit 2 which resulted from
a loss of main feedwater to a steam generator (LER 2-2002-002-00) and that the narrow-range
steam generator water level instrumentation did not respond as expected to initiate an
automatic reactor trip and emergency feedwater actuation on low-low water level in the steam
generator (LER 1-2002-001-00). The NRC issued IN 2002-10 on March 7, 2002, to inform
licensees of this event. Following the issuance of the original IN, the NRC staff conducted a
Special Inspection at Diablo Canyon, as well as a public meeting with Westinghouse. In
addition, Diablo Canyon has completed its Licensee Event Reports (LERs), Westinghouse has
issued five Nuclear Safety Advisory Letters (NSALs) relating to this phenomenon or the
presence of the void content of the two phase mixture above the mid-deck plate, and other
facilities have generated reports under Title 10, Section 50.72, of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR 50.72).
DESCRIPTION OF CIRCUMSTANCES
On February 9, 2002, with Unit 2 at full power, main feedwater regulating valve
(MFRV) FW-2-FCV-540 failed in the closed position, resulting in a rapid decrease in the water
IN 2002-10 Sup 1 level of Steam Generator 2-4. The indicated narrow-range water level decreased to 7.5 percent
and leveled out. Operators tripped the Unit 2 reactor within approximately 1 minute after the
main feedwater regulating valve closed. On February 14, 2002, after the Unit 2 restart but while
still investigating the event, the licensee identified a potentially unanalyzed condition involving
the narrow-range steam generator water level instrumentation. The licensee determined that
during the plant transient, the actual water level in steam generator 2-4 fell below the 7.2- percent narrow-range trip setpoint for engineered safety feature and reactor trip actuations
before operators manually tripped the reactor. The steam generator vendor attributed this
water-level discrepancy to a previously unaccounted for differential pressure created by steam
flow past the mid-deck plate in the moisture separator section of the steam generator. This
differential pressure phenomenon caused the steam generator narrow-range instruments to
indicate a higher-than-actual water level. Thus, the steam generator narrow-range water level
low-low setpoint was non-conservative during the loss of normal feedwater transient.
Physical Phenomenon and System Description
Steam generators designed by Westinghouse incorporate two-stage moisture separation. The
first stage uses centrifugal separators, and the second stage uses chevron-type separators. A
mid-deck divider plate separates the two stages. The steam generator water level
instrumentation uses differential pressure instruments with two ranges, a wide-range non- safety-related instrument and three or four (depending on plant) narrow-range safety-related
instruments. The wide-range instrument spans essentially the entire length of the downcomer
region, while the narrow-range instruments span only the upper 25 percent of the wide-range to
cover the normal operating band. The upper taps for all four instruments are located above the
mid-deck plate, while the lower taps are all located below this plate.
In the event at Diablo Canyon, the holes in the mid-deck, which were designed to allow
moisture removed from the second-stage separators to flow back into the downcomers, acted
as orifices which restricted steam flow and allowed pressure differences with water levels
below the mid-deck region. At higher steam flow rates with a decreasing steam generator
water level, steam exiting the first stage separators along with the moisture being separated
was enough to build up pressure below the plate that was not acting above the plate. Since the
upper steam generator water level instrument taps were connected above the plate, a pressure
difference acted on the four instruments and provided a bias that caused the instruments to
indicate a higher-than-actual level. For the limiting safety setting of the low-low steam
generator water level setpoint, this bias acts in the non-conservative direction. The magnitude
of the bias drops as the steam flow decreases.
Post Trip Analysis
Following this event, the NRC completed an onsite special team inspection at Diablo Canyon
Nuclear Power Plant. The inspection examined the events surrounding the Unit 2 reactor trip
on February 9, 2002, as they relate to safety and compliance with the Commissions rules and
regulations and the conditions of the Diablo Canyon license. The inspection consisted of
examining procedures and records, and interviewing station personnel and staff members, as
well as the reactor plant contractor. The NRCs Special Inspection Team also developed a
detailed sequence of events and organizational response time line which is summarized in the
Overview and Sequence of Events Attachment 2 to this IN.
IN 2002-10 Sup 1 This event provided an unusual challenge to the licensee in that it involved an unrecognized
phenomenon. Many plant events involve equipment behaving in an unexpected manner, but
the failure mechanisms are usually well-understood. However, a well-structured corrective
action process should still be effective under these circumstances by being sufficiently rigorous
to recognize conditions that are adverse to quality and then treating them according to their
safety significance. From a review of the post trip review, the NRCs Special Inspection Team
concluded that the licensees process was narrowly focused on finding, understanding, and
correcting the cause of the trip. While the stations post-trip analysis procedure contained steps
to review plant behavior before, during, and after the event, this was effectively not performed.
The cause of the event was readily apparent without the need to analyze plant parameters.
However, by not performing a methodical review of the plants behavior and comparing it to the
behavior expected under those conditions, the licensee failed to recognize that an automatic
plant trip and ESF actuation of auxiliary feedwater did not occur when required. Had this been
recognized, the licensee would probably have delayed restarting the plant until after the cause
and implications were understood.
The licensees review of the anomalous steam generator water level attempted to explain why
wide-range indication did not track with narrow-range indication, which was thought to have
indicated accurately. The NRCs Special Inspection Team concluded that the licensees theory
and supporting data were not compared with other available but conflicting indications. The
licensee calculated that the event would have resulted in loss of approximately 75 percent of
the initial water mass in the affected steam generator, and should have caused the wide-range
level to be 20 percent of the actual level. The licensee did not note that the bottom of the
narrow-range corresponds to approximately 75 percent wide-range level, so the narrow-range
instruments should have been expected to be reading off scale low. Also, when auxiliary
feedwater actuated, narrow-range level instruments did not show increasing level until after
some delay, confirming that actual level was well below the narrow-range.
In addressing the wide-range instrument question, it was clear that the licensee was not fully
satisfied that the issue was well-understood. However, rather than clarify the issue
immediately, the licensee used a station administrative process that required resolution of the
issue within 30 days, and declared the problem to be an issue needing validation to determine
impact on operability. The NRCs Special Inspection Team concluded that this process was not
integrated with the stations operability determination process, and could permit an issue that
was thought to relate to an operability question to be studied for 30 days before addressing the
operability question. Although this issue was resolved in 4 days, this approach was considered
to be contrary to Generic Letter 91-18, which provided guidance on the need to perform prompt
The following paragraphs present examples of corrective actions from other licensees:
Callaway
Callaway reported (EN 38740) that based on an assessment of its steam generator narrow- range low-low level trip setpoints, the existing low-low level trip at 14.8 percent did not account
for the uncertainties associated with the differential pressure created by the steam flow past the
mid-deck plate in the moisture separator section of the steam generator. A plant power
reduction was commenced at 4:58 p.m. on February 28, 2002, to decrease reactor power to
below 30 percent where engineering calculations indicate that the steam generator mid-deck
plate differential pressure condition will no longer result in a non-conservative setpoint.
IN 2002-10 Sup 1 Salem
Similar to Callaway, the low-low level trip at 9 percent did not account for the uncertainties and
Salem reduced power to 38 percent.
Sequoyah
Sequoyah personnel also performed an assessment and determined that the existing 10.7 percent low-low level trip setpoint did not account for the uncertainties associated with the
differential pressure created by the steam flow past the mid-deck plate in the moisture
separator section of the steam generator. As a conservative measure, after Westinghouse
identified this issue via NSAL 02-3, Sequoyah actuated the environmental allowance monitor
(EAM) on Friday, February 15, 2002. This feature changed the steam generator low-low level
reactor trip setpoint from 10.7 percent to 15 percent. Since the known steam generator channel
uncertainty was 8.3 percent with a narrow-range span uncertainty of 5.3 percent, Sequoyah
determined that operating with the EAMs continuously actuated would allow continued
operation.
Callaway, Salem, and Sequoyah have since recalibrated the low-low water level setpoints for
the steam generator with the additional margin to account for this newly identified error. The
licensees completed this instrument recalibration before increasing the plants power level to full
reactor power.
Conclusion
The event described in this IN highlights the potential impact of steam generator water level
setpoint errors. These errors could delay the expected automatic reactor trip and emergency
feedwater actuation. The IN identifies additional accident analyses and systems associated
with the mid-deck plate phenomenon and highlights the importance of a thorough post-trip
analysis prior to restart. The IN also provides some of the corrective actions taken because of
this event and provides information sources for further investigation.
IN 2002-10 Sup 1 This information notice does not require any specific action or written response. If you have
any questions about the information in this notice, please contact any of the technical contacts
listed below or the appropriate project manager from the NRCs Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation (NRR).
/RA/
William D. Beckner, Program Director
Operating Reactor Improvements Program
Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Technical contacts:
Jerry Dozier, NRR
Neil OKeefe, Region IV
(301) 415-1014
(361) 972-2507 Email: jxd@nrc.gov
Email: nfo@nrc.gov
Hukam Garg, NRR
(301) 415-2929 Email: hcg@nrc.gov
Attachments:
1. List of References
2. Overview and Sequence of Events
3. List of Recently Issued NRC Information Notices
IN 2002-10 Sup 1 This information notice does not require any specific action or written response. If you have
any questions about the information in this notice, please contact any of the technical contacts
listed below or the appropriate project manager from the NRCs Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation (NRR).
/RA/
William D. Beckner, Program Director
Operating Reactor Improvements Program
Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Technical contacts:
Jerry Dozier, NRR
Neil OKeefe, Region IV
(301) 415-1014
(361) 972-2507 Email: jxd@nrc.gov
Email: nfo@nrc.gov
Hukam Garg, NRR
(301) 415-2929 Email: hcg@nrc.gov
Attachments:
1. List of References
2. Overview and Sequence of Events
3. List of Recently Issued NRC Information Notices
DISTRIBUTION:
IN File
ADAMS ACCESSION #:
- See previous concurrence
DOCUMENT NAME: G:RORP\\OES\\Dozier\\in2002-10s1shortversion.wpd
OFFICE RSE:RORP:DRIP TECH EDITOR
RSE:RIII
RSE:DE:EEIB
NAME
IJDozier
NOKeefe*
HGarg*
DATE
06 /03/2002
06/03/2002
06/03/2002
06/25/2002 OFFICE BC:DE:EEIB
SC:OES:RORP:DRIP
PD:RORP:DRIP
NAME
JCalvo*
TReis
WDBeckner
DATE
06/25/2002
06/27/2002
06/28/2002
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
Attachment 1
IN 2002-10 Sup 1 REFERENCES
LER 1-2002-001-00, Technical Specification Violation Due to Non-Conservative Steam
Generator Narrow-Range Water Level Instrumentation, Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, April 15, 2002.
LER 2-2002-002-00, Unit 2 Manual Reactor Trip Due to Loss of Main Feedwater to a Steam
Generator, Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, April 10, 2002.
NRC Special Team Inspection Reports 50-275/02-07 and 50-323/02-07 for Diablo Canyon
Nuclear Power Plant, April 8, 2002.
NRC Information Notice 2002-10, Non-Conservative Water Level Setpoints on Steam
Generators, March 7, 2002.
Westinghouse Nuclear Safety Advisory Letter NSAL-02-3, Steam Generator Mid-Deck Plate
Pressure Loss Issue, February 15, 2002.
Westinghouse Nuclear Safety Advisory Letter NSAL-02-3, Rev. 1, Steam Generator Mid-Deck
Plate Pressure Loss Issue, April 8, 2002.
Westinghouse Nuclear Safety Advisory Letter NSAL-02-4, Maximum Reliable Indicated Steam
Generator Water Level, February 19, 2002.
Westinghouse Nuclear Safety Advisory Letter NSAL-02-5, Steam Generator Water Level
Control Uncertainty Issue, February 19, 2002.
Westinghouse Steam Generator Water Level Uncertainty Issues Handout from NRC Public
Meeting in Rockville, Maryland, March 20, 2002.
Event Report 38697, Technical Specification Required Shutdown of Both Units Because
Steam Generator Water Level Instrument Channels are Inoperable Due to a Non-Conservative
Water Level Low-Low Setpoint, Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, February 14, 2002.
Event Report 38713, Safe Shutdown Capability Impacted by Non-Conservative SG NR
Setpoint, Sequoyah Nuclear Power Plant, February 20, 2002.
Event Report 38740, Safe Shutdown Capability Impacted by Non-Conservative SG NR
Setpoint, Callaway Nuclear Power Plant, February 28, 2002.
Event Report 38702, Discovery of a Non-Conservative Low-Low Level Trip Setpoint Due to a
Differential Pressure Phenomenon that Causes Steam Generator Narrow-Range Level
Channels to Read Higher Than Actual Water Level at High Steam Flows, Salem, February 15,
2002.
Attachment 2
IN 2002-10 Sup 1 Overview and Sequence of Events
This section discusses applicable events and actions before, during, and following the failure of
steam generator feedwater regulating valve number 4.
In 1989, Diablo Canyon revised the steam generator narrow-range low-low level trip setpoint in
accordance with License Amendment 34 for Unit 1 and Amendment 33 for Unit 2. The nuclear
steam supply system (NSSS) vendor (Westinghouse) provided the analysis to reduce the low- low trip setpoint in topical report, WCAP-11784, Calculation of Steam Generator Level Low and
Low-Low Trip Setpoints With Use of a Rosemount 1154 Transmitter. The licensee reduced
the setpoint from 15 to 7.2 percent narrow-range on May 10, 1989, for Unit 1, and on April 12,
1989, for Unit 2. However, the licensee did not factor the mid-deck plate differential pressure
into the narrow-range low-low level trip setpoint at this time because the mid-deck phenomenon
was unknown.
In 1998, Westinghouse recognized the mid-deck phenomenon while evaluating the design of
new (replacement) steam generators using computer modeling tools that were not available
during the design review for the original steam generators. Westinghouse began accounting
for this bias in the setpoint calculation during design work for replacement steam generators.
Westinghouse began assessing the potential impact of the mid-deck plate for original model
steam generators in late 1999. Westinghouse was planning to issue Nuclear Safety Advisory
Letters about the mid-deck phenomenon at about the time of the Diablo Canyon manual reactor
trip.
On February 9, 2002, the Main Feed Regulating Valve (MFRV) FW-2-FCV-540 failed closed, stopping the feedwater flow to steam generator 2-4. After a failed attempt to reopen the MFRV,
operators initiated a manual reactor trip. The cause of the MFRV failure was excess current in
the coil of an Asco model L206-381-6F solenoid valve (SV), which in turn caused the failure of a
power fuse and forced the MFRV to close.
During discussions with the resident inspectors after the event, the operations manager and
shift supervision expressed skepticism that the steam generator level dropped as low as
observed by the steam generator wide-range instrument during the trip. The shift technical
advisor confirmed that the wide-range level indication reached 10 percent. Diablo Canyons
Engineering Services reported that steam generator structural integrity was not affected by low
wide-range level. Engineering Services preliminarily concluded that dynamic processes
contributed to inaccurate wide-range level indication. Later that night, during a conference call
with the NRC staff to discuss the licensees plans for the restart of Unit 2, the licensee reviewed
its corrective actions for the feedwater regulating valve and other failed components. The NRC
staff expressed concern that wide-range indicated level was abnormally low for this transient.
The licensee explained its theory that the actual level was higher because of the difference
between the transient conditions (hot, dynamic) and the calibration conditions (cold, static).
The licensee believed that the steam generator narrow-range level response was normal, and
the wide-range level indication was overly conservative but did not impact operator response to
such an indication. The NRC decided to conduct follow up activities on level anomalies. The
Plant Staff Review Committee reviewed the results of the trip event response team investigation
and readiness for restart. The steam generator wide-range water level anomaly issue was
Attachment 2
IN 2002-10 Sup 1 discussed and determined not to be a restart issue. The issue was classified as an issue
needing validation to determine impact on operability (INVDIO). The Station Director granted
permission to restart the plant.
Unit 2 was restarted the next day (February 10, 2002). The licensee continued its investigation
of the Unit 2 steam generator response during the transient. Diablo Canyon personnel sent
plant trip data to Westinghouse for review. The licensee began to focus on steam generator
narrow-range indication as a potential concern. During a conference call between the licensee
and Westinghouse on February 14, 2002, Westinghouse informed the licensee about a new
process measurement error term related to mid-deck plate differential pressure that had not
been included in the existing setpoint analysis. Operators in both units declared all channels of
narrow-range level instrumentation inoperable and entered Technical Specification 3.0.3.
Operations issued a shift order to manually trip the reactor on loss of feedwater flow. Operators
in both units began reducing power to less than 60-percent thermal power to restore the
narrow-range instruments to an operable condition and exit Technical Specification 3.0.3. On
the basis of information received from Westinghouse, the licensee promptly completed an
operability assessment which concluded that the existing trip setpoint at a 7.2 percent narrow- range level remained operable at or below 60-percent reactor power. Operators stopped power
reductions at 60-percent power. This action had to be taken because the failure to correct this
condition prior to restart resulted in Unit 2 changing Modes (Mode 3 to 2 to 1) with the reactor
trip system and engineered safety system steam generator water level low-low instrumentation
inoperable and subsequent operation of Units 1 and 2 (Mode 1) in a condition prohibited by
Technical Specification 3.3.1. This Technical Specification requires that the reactor trip system
instrumentation for steam generator level low-low be operable for Modes 1 and 2 and the
engineered safety feature actuation instrumentation steam generator water level-low-low be
operable in Modes 1, 2, and 3.
On February 15, 2002, the licensee implemented setpoint changes on both units to raise the
steam generator low-low setpoint to 15 percent. After implementation, operators increased
power to 100 percent in both units. Westinghouse issued NSAL 02-3, Steam Generator Mid- Deck Plate Pressure Loss Issue on February 19, 2002. That NSAL warned plants with
Westinghouse-designed steam generators that the error source has not been accounted for
and has potentially adverse effects on steam generator level low-low uncertainty calculations as
a bias in the indicated high direction. Westinghouse further warned that for plants for which
Westinghouse maintains the calculation of record, this pressure drop effect may require a
maximum decrease of approximately 9 percent (in percent narrow-range span) in the safety
analysis limit (SAL) for establishing the low-low steam generator water level reactor trip for the
loss of normal feedwater (LONF) transient or the loss of offsite power (LOOP) transient to
compensate for this bias. NSAL 02-3 added additional transients to consider, such as the
steamline break mass and energy release, and for plants with feed line check valves inside
containment, the feedline break transient, to compensate for this described bias. Revision 1 to
the NSAL 02-3 also provided updated information regarding the steam generator water level
mid-deck plate pressure loss issue. Specifically, Westinghouse revised the NSAL to address
the impact of this issue on the feedwater line break analysis (when feedwater check valves
were located inside containment), the ATWS mitigation system actuation circuitry system, and
steamline break mass and energy release calculations. Westinghouse subsequently issued
NSAL 02-4, Maximum Reliable Indicated Steam Generator Water Level, and NSAL 02-5, Steam Generator Water Level Control System Uncertainty Issue on February 19, 2002.
Revision 1 to NSAL 02-5 was written to clarify the need to calculate the steam generator water
Attachment 2
IN 2002-10 Sup 1 level uncertainties at normal operating level, including the impact, if any, of the mid-deck plate
pressure differential and to compare the uncertainties used in the initial condition of the safety
analyses to determine if they remain bounding. NSAL 02-5, Rev. 1, also discusses the
potential impact on safety analyses performed at reactor power levels other than 100 percent
and the impact of steam generator water level uncertainty on LOCA mass and energy release.
These letters covered other effects of the same physical phenomenon as Nuclear Safety
Advisory Letter 02-3 and the void content of the two phase mixture above the mid-deck plate
(NSAL 02-4). Westinghouse also held a workshop with industry representatives on
February 28, 2002 and a public meeting with the NRC staff on March 20, 2002.
In its LER, Diablo Canyon indicated that it will submit a license amendment request to revise
the Technical Specifications to account for the mid-deck plate differential pressure in the steam
generator narrow-range low-low level protection setpoints.
______________________________________________________________________________________
OL = Operating License
CP = Construction Permit
Attachment 3
IN 2002-10 Sup 1 LIST OF RECENTLY ISSUED
NRC INFORMATION NOTICES
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Information
Date of
Notice No.
Subject
Issuance
Issued to
_____________________________________________________________________________________
2002-22
Degraded Bearing Surfaces in
GM/EMD Emergency Diesel
Generators
06/28/2002
All holders of operating licenses
for pressurized- or boiling-water
nuclear power reactors, including
those that have ceased
operations but have fuel on site.
2002-21 Axial Outside-Diameter
Cracking Affecting Thermally
Treated Alloy 600 Steam
Generator Tubing
06/25/2002
All holders of operating licenses
for pressurized-water reactors
(PWRs), except those who have
permanently ceased operations
and have certified that fuel has
been permanently removed from
the reactor.
2002-19
Medical Misadministrations
Caused By Failure to Properly
Perform Tests on Dose
Calibrators for Beta-and Low- Energy Photon-Emitting
Radionuclides
06/14/2002
All nuclear pharmacies and
medical licensees.
2002-18
Effect of Adding Gas Into
Water Storage Tanks on the
Net Positive Suction Head For
Pumps
06/06/2002
All holders of operating licenses
for nuclear power reactors, except those who have
permanently ceased operations
and have certified that fuel has
been permanently removed from
the reactor.
2002-17 Medical Use of Strontium-90
Eye Applicators: New
Requirements for Calibration
and Decay Correction
05/30/2002
All U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission medical licensees
that use strontium-90 (Sr-90) eye
applicators.
Note:
NRC generic communications may be received in electronic format shortly after they are
issued by subscribing to the NRC listserver as follows:
To subscribe send an e-mail to <listproc@nrc.gov >, no subject, and the following
command in the message portion:
subscribe gc-nrr firstname lastname