+ All Categories
Home > Documents > NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

Date post: 13-Apr-2022
Category:
Upload: others
View: 2 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
64
V-J UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 MAY 5 1981 L LICENSEES-OF OPERATING PLANTS AND HOLDERS OF CONSTRUCTION PERMITS ;lemen: : ENGINEERING EVALUATION OF THE H. SYSTEM LEAK ON JANUARY 29, 1981 B. ROBINSON REACTOR COOLANT GENERIC LETTER NO. 81-22) Enclosed is our Engineering Evaluation Report for the Robinson Event. The primary reason for our evaluation.was the loss of approximately 6,000 gallons of reactor coolant water from two separate leaks in the letdown train of the Chemical and Volume Control Letdown System (CVCS). The evaluation is being forwarded for your information and.training purposes. The evaluation of the event did not identify any safety concerns or any required immediate actions. There are four areas, however, which are under consideration for further action: 1. Whether a requirement should be placed upon.operating plants to establish a procedure for identification and recovery from a spurious safety injection actuation (if such a procedure is not already in place). 2. Whether criteria for terminating SI should include provisions for isolating charging since charging flow could be considered high pressure safety injection for very small breaks. 3. Whether there is a need for a direct reactor trip on a safety injection actuation at other Westinghouse plants which do not have a direct trip. 4. Whether operation of the isolation valves in the is causing the system to be 'operated in a manner to its design bases. If you have any questions regarding this evaluation, Project Manager. CVCS at Robinson, which is contrary please contact your Enclosure: ccw/encl: Service List 2/O6 ) 3 o 3 %t( .
Transcript
Page 1: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

V-J

UNITED STATESNUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

MAY 5 1981

L LICENSEES-OF OPERATING PLANTS AND HOLDERS OF CONSTRUCTION PERMITS

;lemen:

: ENGINEERING EVALUATION OF THE H.SYSTEM LEAK ON JANUARY 29, 1981

B. ROBINSON REACTOR COOLANTGENERIC LETTER NO. 81-22)

Enclosed is our Engineering Evaluation Report for the Robinson Event. The

primary reason for our evaluation.was the loss of approximately 6,000

gallons of reactor coolant water from two separate leaks in the letdown

train of the Chemical and Volume Control Letdown System (CVCS).

The evaluation is being forwarded for your information and.training purposes.

The evaluation of the event did not identify any safety concerns or any

required immediate actions. There are four areas, however, which are under

consideration for further action:

1. Whether a requirement should be placed upon.operating plants toestablish a procedure for identification and recovery from a

spurious safety injection actuation (if such a procedure is not

already in place).

2. Whether criteria for terminating SI should include provisions for

isolating charging since charging flow could be considered high

pressure safety injection for very small breaks.

3. Whether there is a need for a direct reactor trip on a safety

injection actuation at other Westinghouse plants which do nothave a direct trip.

4. Whether operation of the isolation valves in theis causing the system to be 'operated in a mannerto its design bases.

If you have any questions regarding this evaluation,Project Manager.

CVCS at Robinson,which is contrary

please contact your

Enclosure:

ccw/encl: Service List

2/O6 ) 3 o 3 %t(.

Page 2: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

�6'4 ." , 1.V� I - CeA44. FajesALL POWER REACTOR LICENSEES

Docket No. 50-348Farley Unit 1

Docket No. 50-313Arkansas Unit 1

Docket No. 50-368Arkansas Unit 2

Docket No. 50-317Calvert Cliffs Unit 1

Docket No. 50-318Calvert Cliffs Unit 2

Docket No. 50-293Pilgrim Unit 1

Docket No. 50-325Brunswick Unit 1

Docket No. 50-324Brunswick Unit 2

Docket No. 50-261H. B. Robinson Unit 2

Docket No. 50-10Dresden Unit 1

Docket No. 50-237Dresden Unit 2

Docket No. 50-249Dresden Unit 3

Docket No. 50-254Quad-Cities Unit 1

Docket No. 50-265Quad-Cities Unit 2

Docket No. 50-295Zion Unit 1

Docket No. 50-304Zion Unit 2

Docket No. 50-3Indian Point Unit 1

Docket No. 50-247Indian Point Unit 2

Docket 50-286Indian Point Unit 3

Docket No. 50-155Big Rock Point

Docket No. 50-255Palisades

Docket No. 50-409Lacrosse

Docket No. 50-269Oconee Unit 1

Docket No. 50-270Oconee Unit 2

Docket No. 50-287Oconee Unit 3

Docket No. 50-334Beaver Valley Unit 1

Docket No. 50-302Crystal River 3

Docket No. 50-335St. Lucie Unit 1

Docket No. 50-250Turkey Point Unit 3

DocketTurkey

No. 50-251Point Unit 4

Docket No. 50-321Edwin I. Hatch Unit 1

Docket No. 50-366Edwin I. Hatch Unit 2

Docket No. 50-315D. C. Cook Unit 1

6Docket No. 50-213Connecticut Yankee (Haddam Neck)

*2068 X& zS-,*-1 -_ k 1.,

. . .. . .5 . %. I I t U

Page 3: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

DISTRIBUliON OF GENERIC LETTER 81-22, DTi, .,'5/81

BraidwoodBeaver Valley 2BaillyBellefontcByron

CallawayCnmanche PeakCherokeeCatawbaClinton ;Diablo CanyonFarley 2Fermi 2

Grand GulfHartsvilleHope CreekHarrisIaSallelimerickMarble HillsMillstone 3McnuireMidland

50-416/41750-518/519/520/52150-354/35550-400/401/402/40350-373/37450-352/35350-546/54750-42350-369/37050-329/330

Nine Mile Pdht 2Phipps BendPalo VerdePerryRiver Bend

50-41050-553',55450-528/529/53050-440/44150-458/459

SummerSusquehannaShorehamSan Qnofre 2/3Salem 2St. Iucie 2SeabrookSouth TexasSequoyah

VogUeWolf CreekWaterfordWNP-2WNP 3&5Watts BarWNP 1& 4

50-39550-387/38850-32250-361/36250-31150-389 ,50-443/44450-498/49950-327/328

50-424/42550-48250-38250-39750-508/50950-390/39150-460/513

Yellow CreekZimmer

50-566/56750-358

Page 4: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

ENGIItEERING EVALWUTN OF THE H. 9. ROBINSON

REACTOR COL T SYSTDI LEAK ON JAIUARY 29, l9Rl

by the

Office for AMlySis and Evaluationof Operat1onal Data

march 23, 19R1

M

Prepared by: Wayne D. LanningLead Reactor Syste

Engi neer

NOTE: Tis rort documets results of studies completed to

ate by the Office for Analysis and Evaluation of

Operatiobal Data with regard to a particular operating

event. The findinlQ and recoendat10ofs contained in

this report are provided In support of other onoo1na UC

activities concerniQ this event. Since the studieS are

ongoing, the report is not necessarily final, and th

f~inings and recomendations do not represent the

position or requirents of the responsible promra office

of the Nuclear Requtatoty ColSSion.

I

Page 5: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

TABL OF CONTENTS

page

11. EVENT DESMUPTIOli . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .

2. EVALUATI OF THE EVENT .T.......... 3.. . * * * S

2.12.22.32.42.52.62.72.82.9

Operaor Actions .............Charwtng Flow Terminatlon. . . . . . . .SafeV Injection Actuation .......

Pressurizer Spray. . .... .. . . ..Relief Valve Bellow Fa1iluW. . . . ..

LetUi Isolation Valves ... ....

LedLage Inside Contalimeft . . . . .

Drain Valve and Pipe Cap . . . . . .

Failure of Fire Protectio Isolation Valve

* 0 � 0 5 � S

0 0 * � S � 0

* S * 0 5 5 *

. S 0 6 � 0 �

S *�. * * 0 5

* . . . S * S

* 0 S * S 5 6

* 0 � * S * �

* . . S � 0 0

* . . . - S S

34S77

101011

3. CONCLUSIOS .S. .... .... 0 . .. .0 S * S 0 .

134. REFERM. .. ... . ... . . . . . . . . . . . .

Table

Number

1 Sequere of Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

APPENDIX A - Iformation Provided by Licensee at Meetinq onFebruary 20, 9Rgl

1.Z.3.4.

5.6.

Draft Plant Operatina Experience ReportOperator's LogShift Foreman LogStrip ChartsFigure 1 - CVCS Diearam (excerpt)Figure 2 - Contaiuent SOW Volume

) I

Page 6: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

1. EVENT DESCRIPTION

A sequence of events is contained in Table l. problems with both oil PUMPS

in the turbine etectro-hydraulic (E-H) system forced the plant to initiate

a plant shwtdown. During the promess a safety injection signal was gererated

by a high steam flow coincident with low MCS average t~erature. The nigh

steam flow signal was generated by the governor valves spiking open, believed

to be caused by the erratic operation of the turbine E£H system. The low

average tperature was the result of overcooling the RCS by excessive injection

of boric acid solution. The safety injection (Sl) signal tripped the reactor.

'he reactor power had been reduced from lOOt to approximately 6% at the time

of trip. The duration of the high steam flowflow average temperature signal

v's apparently not of sufficient duration to latch the 0^" train nor close

the main steam line isolation valves. Both were manually actuated. A containnm

fire alarm was received shortly after the St.

After having determined that a spurious SI had occurred, the operators initiated

actions (e.g.. reset SI, feedwater isolation, restore letdown) to :ontinue

to hot standby condition. During the automatic isolation of the CYCS letdown

line due to the spurious SI, it Is believed that the outermost isolation

valves (see Figure 1. valves 20UMB) closed faster than the two open orifice

isolation valves (CYC-200B and C), or that leakage past the orifice Isolation

valves resulted In the opening of the relief valve and the rupturing of the

bellows on the relief valve (CYC-RY-203). In addition, a pressure surge

due to the isolation valves closing caused a drain cap to be blown off.

Unaware of these two failures, letdown now was reestabllshed. Subsequently.

containment pressure and dew point increased. The coatafinent pressure

and humidity increases attached additional significance to the already decreasi

I

Page 7: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

e 2 -

RCS pressure. Letdown was secrad (valves closw and sequeftC W*nOl) about

15 minutes after letdown was reestablished. A contaInlflt tJ was mad.

A le* was identified in the letdown system wea but no fire isted. The

heat sensitive fire alarm detected the steam from the leak in tie let

syst, which implies that this leak occurred In the CYCS durio the first

SI. Approximately 3,0oo qallons was estfmated to be In the com i St sUP

based on level indication in the control row.

After the letdown was thought ti be Isolated, the pressurizer pressure cont11med

to decrease and the level to increaSe. A seond safety injection occurred

on low pressurizer pressure. Both trains of safeguards equipfnt actuated.

The level Increase was the result of continued charging flow aid heatup of

the primary system (the 14SIYs Wad been closed to recover aver" teprttre

earlier). The cause for the deressurizatiOm could not be identified positiWely.

Four hours after the first en, a second containment entry was made aad

the leak was identified to be from a drain line which was still leaki*g.

The drain line Is located uastream of the orifice isolation valves (see

Figre 1. The cap on the *ratn pipe was missin' and valve (CVC-?OO) was

manully closed. water in the contaimnent sup had now Incresed to

avoroxziatelr 4,500-6,nnn qallans. Evidently, the two level control valves

(CV-4LCV-46OA&B) were leakinq at five to se gallons per inimte becen

053 and 1120. After the AraiR valve was closed durisng the second cantairmeat

ewrty, the qCS Pressure conutimsed to decrease.

*Wry steps were taken to 4eternine the cause of the aecreasinc RCS pressure

after letdown had been isolate; e.Q.. isotatinQ charging line auxiltawy

spray, checkina pressurizer relief and safety valve leakaqe. and increasina

pressurizer heater output. Te cause was identified when the operators

IM �831� 11 I I I 11111 I � : 11 I ; 1: 11111 I Hill 11111111 11.4. I MI MINE q I Hills I - 11,11

Page 8: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

stopped tw of the thre reactor coolant p05" in *e loeps with th pressurfuw

spray scoops and the pressume bqan to Increos. Omt of the two pressurizer

spray valves was not fully closd. Positive 01Mtlicat" of swu valve

RC-455B as te leking valve was made later. The s"y valve position is

Indicated by demand, not stem position. whiic delayed Adentificatiof of the

cause for depressurization-

During this event. steam qenerator samples tilcatat a pr y-tosecodry

leak of apprvxiiately n.5 gpo based on activity of TO aCll. Stem

generator *I' was isolated on t1e secondary side. Subsequent samles

indicated decreasing activity ad no leak. The licsee has concluded

that the Increased activity was the result of cvw beWoo agiUted during

isolation of the steam generators during the evest-

Repairs were made to the spray valve and the relief valve bellows. The cap

was replaced an the drain line and all draiN valwes were verified closed.

The unit ws back online on Febrary 1, 1981.

2. EVALUATION OF THE EVENfT

2.1 Operator Actions

Operators responded to the evects In a systemtic wrf timly fashion. Data

entered In1 the logs were detriled and accurate. Afte- the plant was stahilized,

the I iceuse contacted Westinghouse to ensure that their diaonoses were correct

avd no other unforeseen problems existed.

One shortcmIng Identified was the lack of a procedure for recovery froa a

spurious safety injection actuation. Guidelines Vw1ld be available to the

operators to differentiate betbeen a real amd s~uotzzs St actuation. The

licensee Indicated that a procedure will be writtei for recovery from a spurious

SI (identification criteria not included). For tts event, resettinq the SI

I =21 I I I I . t 11 W, 11, I . 0 0 I MCMIM11

Page 9: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

. 4.

-%- oiaeover, prtssurizer preussar. " .- .O A4w ue erttu re

*Is '! %* tc:resslf Clor to the SI ard had Starl'!eA'14 tr *nly efout

t d r.st~e :,reow-e reset-.inq SI. In etrospect t, ce -41 sil; a S -

I C4.ta *. ol4rft teak nd the spray valve was Ooen, nowever, S: mad neetf

1.-rldc-CJ ^.jfn 3wou"Is Inttcative of a steam line b"ea a.1 sisce secondary

systo condi tiors wre stable and the govnor valve posi tion recorder indicated

spuitows valve IWeq. the operators correctly diagnosed the St slwll as

sfu-!s for tWS event.

M J 9-es f i-Orovemert ul'i have been to test the safety injection actuation

I -. , eam!4u'' tsolat'on slqnals since one tain of SI failed to latct

Vt Vow -tiIs faled. to close. Both were manually actuated. Althou0" both

il Cra'.s actuatec on tte second safety injectior signal, this was not adequate

.titi~tn of omerabi'ity on high steam fiaowl¢. averaae tafperature actuation

t'cfire returnine *a power. These tests could have heloed substantiatte that

. soaw'at was Pm of saf'lcient Duration to latC~h the SI relay antl close

Z !>arging Flew Tewuutiofon

a; -.osrn S' actwuai1 occurred twice, no boric ac4d was Injected into the

'a- tSiej on sWvpes of the boric acid injectlon tUnlc. This war because

t:nc ;CS s;Stem presssur exceeded the shutoff head SCl,50 psig) of the SI

s: Icre cte of actuation. Hence, the cria1to snms aere xakvino uo

, - .-'-. *rJfsaG the event.

_. - U.c AEt"teS to identify the Cause for toe .jepressurizitiof and recoanizinqf

- -eiia--lzef oray coull cause the dePressurIzation, the cnaraivc flow

* iJ! tet1 il:seA vilve CYC-1CV-1211 to terminate a possible leak fro

:-. ig.1lrary sorsy vave (Ficure 1). This operator action did not 'terminate

Page 10: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

all makeup flow to the RCS. The flow path was maimutned to the RCP seals

which would provide makeu flow (appwiOnaltelY 60 Mm. RCS corndIzns

(approximately) at this time were: Pressurt a 16i1 psiq; Tavq * 5cWFa

pressurizer level a 56 and iumcreasing; normal steam geerator leve' for

the condition; and margin to saturation was approximately sn ss'.

The charqing line was isolated from 0126 to sometime after 1932 (shift foreman's

log). No consequences resulted from isolating the notsal charging now for

this event althouqh SI now was not available due to the pump head limits.

However, it is suggested that URR *etermine whether isolating the c9-arginq

flow is advisable for small loss-of-coolant accidents or when the system

pressure is above the shutoff head cyf the SI pumps. Westinghouse has Indicated

that no credit was taken for charqimg flew for the ECCS analyses. The emerqency

procedure for depressurization (El-11 does not include criteria for terminating

charging flow. The charging pumps are a part of the CVCS and not considered

a part of the safety injection syste at Robinson. However, the clarqIng

pumps provide high pressure makeup flow %Aen the RtS pressure exceeds the

shutoff head of the SI pumps. Enswrina that charging flow is not interrupted

for the systems employinq low/iediwum heat SI pumps may be desirable to enhance

safety.

2.3 Safety Injection Actuation

The first safety injection actuation occurred on a "high steam line flow/low

Tavg' sigral. 'he licensee's review of the event indicated that the momentary

spike-opening of the turbine Qovermor valves caused the steam flow, in at

least two steam lines, to exceed tke steam flow set point for a period of

about 25 -sec. The combination of high steam flow in 2/3 steam lines and

the existing low average temperature of the reactor coolant generated a main

steam isolation valve ORSIV) closure sional and a SI actuation siqnal.

Page 11: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

- 6 _

onwevet. only train a of safeguards Mdi i"moir. r*espo0 ed - tne other

train *-, ;sfeouards eqipCent and 11 tne "VS did not actuate. Licensee's

CnServations are that the MSIVs require 4 sICn1 duration of one Weeond

to close an that the SI actuation relays. Including SI logic train latching

relay, require a siGM1 duration greater than 25 usec to actuate. Since

the SI sinal was of less than 25 sac duration, only the train B latChinq

relay actuated. Rextor trip, inrgency diesel start, feedwater isolation

and other safequards equipment actuations for train B occurred as a consequeace

of SI train B actuation.

Reviewino the logic diagram of Robinson's Safequard Actuation Signals (3q

CP 300-5379-2759 sb A* rev 5) It is seen that the reactor trip siq.al is

initiated on SI actmation along with emerqercy diesel start, feedwater isolation

and safequards sequece actuation. A review of a later Westinghouse locic

diagram (typicalI s1ows that the reactor trip signal is derived separat ly

fron the SI actuation signal; i.e., the reactor trip signal Is taken of

supstream" of the St actuation signal, similar to the MSIV closure s1iqal

on Robinson. This could mean that on certain spurious SI actuation events

of short slal duration, SI, feedwater isolation and auxiliary feedwater

system actuations wy occur with no simultaneous reactor trip occurring.

The comparison of logic diagrams also shows that the P-4 interlock (reactor

'rip breaker position) in the the Reset/Block feature of SI logic of later

desitino"use units is not provided in the Rotinson design. Add1itlondl mie

woul4 he needed to ascertain the significance of different reactor triz 1--

for Aestinghouse pt ants. The nW to provide a direct reactor tr4o on spu -

safety injection actuation Is referred to ORR for review.

) 1

Page 12: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

- 7 -

2.4 pressurizer Spray

The Ope spray valve could not be identified due to lack of spray flow indicati"n

or atual spray valve position. The failure of the valve to close evidently

did omt affect the capability of the valve to open as evidened by subsequent

testing. The Licensee is evaluatinq the possibility of relocating and replacing

the spray valves during the next refueling outage. Previous problems have

been exaerienced with the spray valves and their location im contain ent

reduces their accessibility for maintenance.

2.S Relief Valve Bellows Failure

The licensee has experienced previous failures of this Crosby rel

4ef valve

(number JB-36, Type B. shop drawing number H51380). Basic imfornation about

the valve and the discharge piping configuration were obtained from CP&L

and Crosby Valve Company and are as follows:

Relief Valve

- 2- diameter inlet, 3- diameter outlet

- Set pressure. I00 psig

- System pressure, 300 psiq (approximate)

- Dynamic backpressure, 25 psig (specified)

- Bellows tested to lSfl psig

Piping

- A horizontal run exits from the relief valve before turning

vertically up for at least 12 feet to the pressurizer relief tank.

Page 13: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

. R

CV. %nGicateo that the bellows falls every time the relief valve lifts.

St'ce tie bellows has been tet*te to 150 psi,. It woul4 apper that the %yitem

-: m..4*Iwi differently from the anticipated mode. Me 4ynaaic

-*ssssrt probably eiceeds 15n psig (isx times the spect led 2S ps';I.

I *e-C'.s t fsa that could cause the high pressure might be stalate water from

v-!o steW Condensation or valve leakagt fit the line from tft relief valve

U --e preswrizer relief tank. Boric acid crystal formations na also be

* a5sbtl1ti. when the valve opens, water or other debris in this I In

zcia U restrict steam flow and csuse a h1qh ytnamic backpressure until the

1,.c is cleared. Also. if Ute line is filled with staq'nat borvid water.

te ze'lows say be susceptible to corrosion attack, but coarson has not

beawr. 11eft1fe1d from previous failures and relacements. Frw in operational

vIwIDint, the failure mode for the bellows should be identliied and changes

Nessary U prevent ad1'tioeal failures should be imolemefud. The operation

' -e CitS Isolation valves may be a major contributor to tne bellows failures

mll is dIsussed in Sectijn 2.6.

2?S Let " Isolation Valves

Te 4solation valves played a dominant role in the :quence of events at

X=ci'son. The failure of tP* bellows on the relief valve *as attributed

- 'te clostiq of the out board valves KCVC-204A&B) before "c Clos4ng of

vw orifice isolation valves fCYC 200BU) upstream of the relief valve.

,2sewue'tly. the set point '600 psig) of the relief talve was reached since

s ar. if the CvCS was pressurized by the reactor coolant system

T-:' .as tt aporoximatelj I.AOO psi. 'he Cesign pressure downstream of

-r eS' IEC-20O ser1es: ts T00 pSTq. The sequential =e'ation of the

-sxa'ton *alves is evidently causing this part of the C'ICS to be pressurized

c a: least tte setonint of the relief valve. as evtdenced ty the ovening

r ve rel'ef salve whenever the CVCS is isolated.

Page 14: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

U 9 -

In addition to the Isolation valueS. wal"v tCW A and R (FigWre 11 were

closed In an attept to isolate ti le ig b*', valvefpipe. Both of these

valves leaked %ich pefritted a" aMItina' 3LOW gallons (approulately)

to leak Into the containment after tV letft-0 yst was thougt to be Isolated.

The licensee did not perform any saiiia on thse valves to ensure their

operation before returning to ptr Once thls we not contaii't isolatin

valves. These valves are part of the reactor oomlant pressure boundary and

are designed to close on low ,resste' level to conserve RCS inventory.

The design and operation of this part of te CWCS raises two concerns:

first, the potential for overpressurltzina the system to 2,?2n ps1la assu"Il

the dowmstre' Isolation valves MCCIA) we closed; and secondly. the

capability to Isolate a potential br*A ibtrew of valves LCV-46nA&S.

The licensee has indicated that the relief valve is designed to vrevent

overpressurization of the CYCS. The failvre af the bellows does not apoear

to affect the pressure relievisg furnrtiO of tVe relief valve. In addition,

the flow control valves (CVC-LCV-460&9) have been designed to isolate a

break downstream of these valves for re mwiimw sire break and ACS conditions.

The functional and testing reqrvllts For tv flow control valives are

not clear. These valves should be A99 Class 1 since there are no valves

upstrem and the valves downstream are classified as ASME Class 2. However,

these flow control valves are mot iodteifed In the Robinson Inservice

Inspection and Testing Program (Reference 4). Since these valves are on the

RCS pressure boundary and are desigmet tc Isolate the RCS on low pressurizer

level. It Is not clear why .aimtenance om the valves was not required after

they were known to lea and bore rewrmifg to power.

Page 15: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

- to -

goth of these concerns could lead to a s11al loss..f.coolant *"v"t Iside

containment. This postul ' event ill wthin the scoop of an SIR .n11S small

break loss-0f.Conlant acci~ent and mit a row safety conce". 'IO"vt'. wfrom

an operational consiieIt1i". o0 oW'esWsu551UiZ the CMC could he 9Tpolvotoo,

provided the orifice Isolation valv" were close before tVe outbcaM f solation

valves. Correctlnf the valve closiw sequence for Isolation woult also reduce

the challenoe to the relief valve.

2.7 Leakage Inside Containment

The licensee has acknowle4"e that the quantity of water that lelef fato

containment can only hp aproxivutef. The estimatoda 6.nn0 qallnIs 1coerospondino

to 4pPrnfin^ately 1; In the sump) ts a sMll fraction nf the raw f IndicatiOn

in a 65,000-gallon capacit sup tSee FViure 2). A mass balance was zt

possible since neither charaing fln nor volume coetrol tank level are recorded.

The major leak was after letdown flc had been restablished bee 635

and O050. This could account for m¢poximately one half of the 3.rrf uallons

indicated at MP5n. The 4-ain valve Could have also been letkikn at wr unknown

reduced rate from the init4al S'- umt1l letdown was restored (&oppotRately

ten minutes). The ruptured bellows on the relief valve also conT ut el

so'e amour' to the inventmry I1n the Sump. These sources in cOWiftaition with

tne inaccuracy of the su'o iearsuwents can lead to the concluston that all

the leak sources had heen 14ent@flfel.

.al nlrin Volvo and Dir'p' Sp

'he leakitnn valve was Cwf-?nOEF :.ee clqurp 1) not CIC-7ndC as rrvrfoo' 4 hy

IF (Reforence 1). This helps to jxWl¶taod the leak r4tes an ontoV if

water reported in the _E° 'Referece t2) and the tE evaluation.

The licensee's explanation for the .tssinQ cap on the pipe was ta She

Page 16: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

- II

tte Drfice Isolation valves clos. a pressure pulse Was applied to the

valve an cap. Since tte valve ws partially oe and ti cap not tiqhtly

sacugrd, the cap was blown off. The lice*g" believed that vibration in

the CCS (induced by the charging pumps) caused movent of the valve and

cap. Th valve positioi was last verified on October 11, 1180 during a refueling

outage. Since the drain pipe is located close to the pressure reducina orifices.

the now Instabilities at these orifices could also Induce vibration in the

CMCS.

All drain pipes with valves have been verified closed. Most valves have

been chained and locked.

2.9 Failure of Fire Protection Isolation Valve

When a Phase A isolation signal was generated by the safety Injection actuation,

one (FP-248) of the four containment isolation valves failed to close due

to a tripped breaker. Since the other isolation valve in the line closed,

containment Isolation was achieved. This failure had no bearing on the leak

and was a separate reportable event.

3. CONCLUSIONS

The event at H. B. Robinson involved four separate, somewhat unrelated failures:

(1) pump failures in the turbine E(C system; (2) two separate leaks in the

CYCS (related failures); (3) an undetected open pressurizer spray valve;

and (4) leaking valves in the CYCS. The event did not appear to Include

any safety concerns.

The following areas of review concering this event are referred to NRR for

consideration:

Page 17: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

* It a

S. ethr a requireent should be placed VpoW _fttfg4 Pnfts to Ostblish

* procedur* for Identificatilon Gnd recovery frw a sw" 1 W afety

injection actuation (if 5ilh a procedure Is "alrAe, is prlae).

b. Mether criteria for teinitlfig St should IRleft ~ Sion fCW

Isolating charging since charging flow Coult a coomiti 1hicht oressure

safety Injection for very s&ll Iress.

C. Uhether there is a ne for a direct e*act trip o a Sda'oMs safety

Injection actuation at other uestlnghouse IPuT& Wch lt NC* t NM*ea

direct trip.

d. whether operation of the isolation valvet in VW tS at RMI"tOf

Is Causing the system to be operated In A wMne Whitt I S CO"XFrY

to Its design bases. The closing sequence f thV IS61@iI0 vlves

appears to cause part of the CVCS to be pressiwrize ta e SetVoCnt

of the relief valve and may be contributifn = thW fatllwt of the

relief valve bellows wh"never the system Is tsolateC.

AEO0 did not find any basis for a need to study tts, evemt ftrtel'. A foral

respone from NPR Is not requested.

Th1s event and the operator' s response provide a 7=d txale Can oaPerating

oxoet"mence which should be disseminated to other Ttoees favr tInoation and

ttra1 frf puposes.

!

Page 18: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

_ 13 -

4. REFERCES

(1) tMorandum, H. Woods to F. Jordan. Svbjct: H.S. Robinson Event on

January 29, 1081. dated Fehbruey 12, l9"l.

(2) Licensee Event Report 81-nffS. 91.8. Robhwson Steam Electric Plant, Unit

2, Docket 5f26l1, dated Febhwry' 12. 16R1.

(31 "eetinq with Carolina Power wd Ligt CMpany In RethelA on

Fthruary 2n. lORi.

14) Letter, E. E. 'Itley. CP&L to S. VWMga. Subject: H. R. Rohinson Steam

Electric Plant Unit No. 2, Inservice tmspectlon and Testing Program, dated

-arch 10, 19A1.

Page 19: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

. 14 a

Table IvrniirMcU os rvEwTs

jaflUay 701. Lq~ )MPlant at 100'Orloary to secoMary 1.k of Irn^1ItE'l I,. .

500 O A ENC oil pump seal leak. OF ENC wump alrealy out of service dut to vtibrtioA.

0s41 Started lead reucto10n.

0S42 *ided boric acid to RCS.

0543 Started *C chaNrtng puop. "3d charninc pump runninq, OA charging pup

Inoperable.Opened CVC-2'1O0 oriflce isolation valve. CVC-Ve0C already open.

"49-130n Continued to add boric Acid.

'WI1 ftn1p#A '0' ..dwftitr W.IMp And Cn"AeQ'tAtP pUmp 00 tgI OratIc FWP ht-havifr.

MMn Tavq reached low 'avn setpoint (K4AVFV alarm.

WI62 Generator Output hreakr opened.Turbine governor valves Spike open.St siqnal and 4S!V c'osure signal on high steam flow/low Tavo.

St train '8 automatically started.Phase A isolation; safequard B emergency equipment started.

Reactor trio nn S' slqnal.Tavq a 53?"F.Pzr pressure * 721- psln.Pzr leve' * 1r-.

0625 Fire alarm in contaisoent.Pressurizer relief tank level alarm due to noemina of CTCAV-203 relief valve.

Bellows ornhahly ruptured and drain cap was blown off.

MS Ys clospo lanually.

Sl train 'A" starteA manually. Started "A4 tI, AFWP, RH. manually.

Letdown valves CCV-AFAA&B manually ClOSed (should have automatically closed

on PZR level of 11.).

067 Reset St and feodwater Isolation.

nA34 Atte-oteW to restore letdown flnw %ut CYC.?nnA would not oaen (instrument

a'r tysrsm lolwte4 on Phase A Isolation).RestoreA let4wftn flow after resetting Isolation sionals.

Pve55urlie- or*ssur& started iecrlas'inq sharoly (-2000 9sig).

Containment new point and pressur0 started lncreasina.

0637 Received condensate :ollection alarm from the coolers.

01esel aenerators A ant B stooped manually.

Page 20: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

a 6

- 15 .

064O Isolated letd flow. (Isolation valves closed from control room.)

Contalmnt d" point and pressure decreased.Pressurizer pressure still decreasir'o ( i;n psi').Tavg [email protected] pressure increaslnc.Notified NRC by ENS.

0650 Containmmnt sun level ind1cated approximately 3000 aillons.

0700 First contauinmt entry to check for leak and fire.

O070 Second SI actuation on low pressurizer pressure.Both trains rW all equipment started.Pressurizer pressure a 17I5 psiq.Pressurizer level * r01.

0705-0727 Operators attept1na to dtermine cause of depressurization.

0722 Steam dumps opened manually to control pressurizer level.

0727 Reactor coolant pumps B amd C stopped and charqinc lineIsolated to eliminate possibility of leaklnq auxiliary spray valves.

Increased pressaiizer beater output to maximum.Pressurizer pressure started 1 icreasinq.

0729 Continued cooldwn uslna steam dwups.

0735 Pressurizer pressure increasing (1 172n).Tavq cofstant a S40.Pressurizer level * SoM.

073R Stopped diesel aenerators A&B.

0741 Stopped 80 lWI pup.

0744 Opened breakprs on containment sump punos.

OR25 Secured St pivs.

1000 Continued plant cooldovn.Sample on 'R steam aenerator indicated O.; ape primary to secordary

leak. Isolated B steam aenerator.Second sawle showed decreased leakage 0n.25 gpm).

1120 Second containmelt entry. Found ClC-200E open and cap m1ss1na.

Found bellows on relief valve CYC-213 ruptured.

Contacted Westinqhouse.

Page 21: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

- 1.0 .

IFIm &ock.4 10f 9?sWsr St.

1230 Clow M00.solte0" letdo by closing CVC-3090.

CoKOMt sup level was #,SOO4.0 tallons.

1"S Ol 0e9lg VW out of ServiCe du to leaking relief va1lv

lA3M AlIqgd A' charginm p for operatlO! after COMlet1ift surveillance tists.

(latentry) TaitSd prtssurizer spray valves.

1013 Started .'S RCP.

IQt% Start" "CO RCP.

(Latr) #l*M c' OP0164n1 lite &nd CTCS leton i servict. fttFv excelS

lIt lipe from survice.

2315 Spray valve RCS-49% Identifies as leaking spray valveSo aditit1on 1 primary to secondary leak Identified.

Jaawyr 30. 191 at IMO plant on-line

Page 22: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

WPONh A

twomIgtroN PA* oEt Iv LICOM . AMWt ON FEBRtUARY to, IMi

Contents:

1. Draft Plant Operatim EaPIMl bPOrt

2. Operators Lop

3. Shift Forema Loq _

4. Strip Charts

q. fire I - CCS Da (sexcerpt)

6. fle 2 - Contal Sa Volga

I

Page 23: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

?1AWr W2tA11 1o vMMI 12CV 1w0nuT

R. k0t I1t

Janary 29, 1981

2. Identification of Occulrncl

A) JA spuriousaiety Injection signal initiated by & -High Ste ine

now/Low Tsv" signal.

5) Reactor Coolant Systm 1ek through letdown line draln valve CC-200E.

C) Primary plant depressurilation leading to a second *safet injection

signal initiates by a -Low Pressurizer Pressure' signal-

3. Conditioms Prior to Occurrence

A plant shutdown to hot standby vas in progress to repair a secondary

plant problem. The unit had been operating at 100: reactor power (72! We)

with normal Reactor Coclant System pressure and temperature.

4. Description of OccurreacC (All Times Are Approxil~te)

A) At 062L hours on January 29. 1981, a safety inject1on signal Lnitiated

"r train of safeguards. 'A" train equipment was manually started at

0625 hours.

h) At 0635 hours on January 29. 1951, the che ical and volume control

letdow systm was restored and system pressure bega= decreasing vith

an increasing containment pressure and dew point. Letdown was secured

at 065S hours.

C) At 0705 hours on January 29. 1981. a safety injection signal initiated

both trains of safeguards.

-DRAFT-

1

Page 24: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

5. hjiE tiOS of Aisereft Cause of occurrence

#A appz1*Itelt 0400 hours, "A" M DOS electro hy4dulic (1-H) oil Pump

developed a sea look. "fr &- ouS Pp md ben t l out of serwice

earUer due to hih vibrations. Az 0541 Murs, the decision was md to

sbut doWn to hot standby before receivin a trip signal due to the 10

of t-l oil. Attacbent to. 1 contains .dditional Infouatice on tbS

failure of the 4 Oil Systm.

AJ 062 hours. towdiately follovimg opening the generator output br"kersa.

the reactor tripped and a safety Zzjectiot was ix:tiated b! * "ig4t Stem.

Line flov/Lw/v T "uignal. Only 'r tr:aIn of the safeguards was activate.

"A" trait equipmet was manually started at 0625 hours. t: was Deterulned

that the erratic operation of the E1- Oil System and :he fact that the

operators re switching from "A" EAI oil pump to "8" -B OL pm 4a d

the governor valves to spike open. The resul:ant steat lo'w s:ie was

hIgh enough to cause a "igh Stem .ine Tlowlow T. " sign. bu t: t wits

insufficient duration to fully Latc' the "C safeguards train seal-Irt

relay. The seal-in relays in the saf eguad trains are latching -e avs

that requirs a finite period of ti5 In the energized mode co mechanica.1.'

latch them into the losed positin. Attactent o. ' contains additinual

information on the partial safety injectio.

The stem line isolation signal th wa generated frc the Higth Steami tg

flow/LAW T " signal was of infficielnt duration to allow the _ain st

isolation walves co go shut. The orven @f 412 was reinstatC so quICkly

-DAFr-

- 2

Page 25: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

-DLAT-

S. D"imton of Arcent Cause of Occur cce (coalnued)

after the IsolAtion signal that the valves were unble to t3MVel far enoush

to Isolate the *tem f lw. The Maiu steam isolatin Valves Were slanually

abut to rduce the secondary stam dmaad follwin the reactor trip, thereby

pioting the return of Ton to the no load s.tpoint.

At 0627 bours it vws determined that safety Injection cwditons did not

exist and that the initiation was spurious. The safety injection and

feedvtcr isolation signals were reset. The checal vlum control

letdown Systt was restored at 0635 hours. The Reactor Coclszt Syst

pressure had been slowly decreasing, but whan letdown was returned to

service, the containment pressure and dew point began Sincrsinig. Another

indication of abnormal containment conditions was a fire &Zarn from the

area of the contaimrent operating deck which was received at approximarely

0624. Letdown was secured at 0650 hours with leator Coolant Systez

pressure at 1850 psg. The initial containment entry rade at 0700 hours

to Investigate the abnormal conditions confirmed that te RCS leakage wa

fro the letdown line and that no fire existed. A subsequet containment

entry at 1120 hours further identified the source of the l2Ak as valve

CVC-200E, a drain valve on the letdown llie. which was found open and the

pipe cap missing. The leak that resulted from the opes drain valve was

approximately S to 7 gtp with the letdown air operated valves closed a-.d

approximately 100 gpm with letdown flow established Tbe leak was coe-

pletely stopped by shutting valve CVC-200E. The ltdow= flow was not

restored until after the condition was fo-jnd ad repaired- Additional

information resarding the RCS leak and contalit fire alarm can be found

in Attachmnt No. 3.

Page 26: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

*pgurr- -

S. DsUnstin of Auotwrlt Cause of Occurract (CotiouU)

owever, evn with the Letdom contro: vS1Wv clo*0d, the pr.ssurizSr

pressure continued to dweres, l U g to the secod safety injection

1nit atloI at 07S hours from a Lw Pressurizer Pre"aue . Both trais

of the satesuards equipuw't functioned as 4asfgne. At 0727 hours.

charging was isolated (except reactor O4OInt pump sel injection) to

SllinatO auxilary spray and "'" and C' reactor coolant pups were

secured to prevant the pressuriZer spray valves from circulSting cooler

vater from the Reactor Coolant Syste lnte the 7ressuriser through the

spray valves, dtcresing the pressure. It was subsequently discovered

that the pressurlztr spray valve from reactor coolant loop had prob-

ably opened and not fully ressated. The ;resurx15r pressure imedistcely

started co increase. Tc h reactor coolant gyStCi mas stabillred at

approxiately '205C psig and 5350T vwth 7ressura coctrolled by the pras-

suriter heaters and teaperature concrol:-ed by te secondary sctam dump.

Attachcent Se. ; contains addition&. infornitiot cc the reactor coolant

systcs pressure transient caused by the s;ray valv malfunction.

Coincidental with the decreasing pressurizer pressure. pressurizter level

was increasing. This was caused by to fa-ctors. 1) The charging flow

from two charging pups was .aintainxi g ar Increasisg the systen vcluse,

including the sst*2 losss through CC-Z0. Te slightly open

pressurizSe spray valve was causing the pressure to decrease. 2) The

density changes in the reaccor coolant c" to rb. s*ovly increasing RCS

tmperatures and thC heat wp of the ralattvolr cold watsr added Sv the

charging Syste :aused the systm to enpend. '.ase factors combined to

cause an Increasing pressurizer level. The arrin to subcooling remained

t- _ _

Page 27: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

*. DsuIton of Apiet CauS of 9CCurrenCe (Continued)

greeter than S$Or throuShout the antire trrasien The iniaum subcooline

Mrgin occurred at 0120 hours, vith reactor coolant system pressure at

1620 psig and tmperature at S510.

The relief valve on the letdown line, CVC-tV-203, lifted following the

tist safety injection initiatiOU. This was apparently due to the sols-

tion valves, CVC-204A and CVC-2041. closing slightly faster than the

orifice isolations, CVC-200A. CVC-2001 and CVC-200C. or leakage past one

or mort of the orifIce isolation valves. This caused the pressure between

the valves to increase above the set pressure for CVC-lV-203 (600 pelg).

The valve rcset after the letdovn isolations closed, but the belloas had

ruptured. Attachent No. 3 also contains additional information regardiqg

valve CVC-RV-203.

6. Analysis of Occurrence

Beveral problems with the turbine E-H Oil System had occurred within approxi-

Mately one week preceedilng the reactor trlp and safety injectlio on

January 29. 1981 which could have contributed to the Initiation of the

ev t. These problems are *simrised as follows:

1) The X-R oil had become contaminated with water due to a ruptured £E-

oil cooler approiimately one week prior to this vent. However, the

"- oil had been purified (replaced) end restored to spe%.'ficaticn

prior to this vent. It is not felt that this contributed to the

following problems.

1) On January 28, 1981 "S" E-H pump unloader developed a fatigue crack

In its discharge nipple. While replacing this nipple, air was

introduced into the "3" E-9 oil pump portion of the systsm. When

-DIkFT-C

Page 28: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

0. "Anlzelf Of zourfrenc (CMUntl"

"a" g24 oal pwwp wes retearted. it caused esxe@S1vs vibTraitU5

th Mhout the L-aM Oil Syst§0- -Al £4 ai. tPU was Mctrted and

05" T-14 oil pUM was secuzd after a brief perisd of OPeration.

3) The seal leak which developed on "A!$ E-I oi- V oI Januar 29

1951 which necessitated t turbine shutcdOn is felt Co hzve been

caused by either age or CMe Secessivi-SySC vibiratiocn

4) As the sel leak on 'A E- ell puap becae laqrer during the re-

asining samnts of the tcttze shutdown, 0he operators decided :o

run "B" £-H oi. pump des;::- the vibration prcb; * in order to

allow the leak to be iso:Ated so a nomrl %urblze shutdown could be

completed. Ccinc;-eta.'-" -2" E-H *LI pumo vas started as tbe

generator output breakers were opened. 'ten -ba generator output

breakers are opened the zts±ne witches froa Load control to smeed

control.

One, or some conbination. of the above probab!7 caused the srbine governor

valves to spike opez. 7e exac: cause cannot be tccrmiLeCd. Ths caused

the first safety injection in.tted on a low rse~tc coclant sys:en

average teperature coincident vr :h high stean line flow. The high s:eam

flow was of a very short duratiac. thus only "**5" safeguarts train was

activated and the main steas sz:Ation valves rcma. td open.

Letdown lnc drain va-ve CVC-2WCE had vibrated open since it had las: been

verified shut os October U, :.SC It is postalatec chat the pressure

transient caused by cne .ecdowu :.zne Isolation caused %he ;ipe -ap to blow

off. 7hus, * Reac:or Coolant S-stsm leak existed.

) )

Page 29: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

6. AlSIS of Oc ccu @ (Cotuitifkud)

The contimld decrease in pressurizer PresSure was caused by :re failure

of the pressuritar spray valve from "C" reacter coolant srste! .oc'p

(RCS-4553) to fully shut after opening during thc transient. The event

identification was complicated by the letdwfn relief line lifting to the

pressurizer relief tank- vhich indicated that there were two separate leaks.

The Usactor Coolant Syste_ pressure decrose was stopped when "B" and "C"

reactor coolant pumps were secured and the charging line was isolated to

elniziate auxiliary spray. With the pressure decrease stopped, operator

control of the Reactor Coolant Systm was re-established and normal hot

shutdown conditions were established.

TollowinS the first safety injection at 062' bours, the trc vrotcctilon

contairelmt Isolation valve FP-248 did not shu: autoaticaC.1 and had to

be manually closed. Attachment 'o. 5 contains additional inlorrazion on

the performance of the fire protection contaiment iscla:icn valve.

A s*uary of the PZSO computer output for this event is prc:,ded as

Attachbent No. 6.

7. Corrective Action

A) The £-H oil was completely replaced with now oil.

B) "A" E-H oil pump and unloader were replaced.

C) he unloader and discharge nipple on "B" E-H ol: pt.p were replaced.

D) The valve stes on RCS-455B was lubricat"e, stroked and vaive p0s1-

tioner was adjusted to ensure the valve will fully close. RCS-455A

was also checked for proper operatios.

-DLAFT-

Page 30: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

-PAfrr-

7 .eeStvL ACUM (COetimUid)

Z) CVC-200t vs lockd closed Md CM pi"e CAP Was rlAced. SIMIar

valve La the letdown ad cbsrg le & Were also locked close

or otbrvi verified to be serd.

7) The breakr o current trip saints an tbs four tire Protectios

fttsi costarmt isolation ualves 'm be adjusted and checked

to Lasure proper valvc performwc*.

C) The eent was fully analyzed bw the plant staff and Vestizghousa,

and the results discussed vith the IaC, esion Sl. to ensure that

all safety concerns wure idencif ed ad rewolvod prior to retcrnuhr

the ut to operation.

.mg _

UaitZ Operating s0iFTJv'r

II

_ / a-a / naT34 I 4A el ltvdl

. ., / /

. -2 ."I-

Crexa Hanager

-DRAFT-

Page 31: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

r-DSAIT

SIQUMNCE OF EVENTS

0S41 Unit *hutdown vas initistod due to E-H SYstem trouble.

0620 Tavg reached the low Tavg setpoiat (5430F) during

plant shutdomm.

062; Generator output breaker is opened removing unit from system.

Load on unit is Ah.

Turbine governor valve(s) spike open (see Attachment No. 1)-

High Steam Flow/Low Tavg signal generated.

4SIVts closure signal (see Attacnment No. 2).

SI signal, train B" actuates (see Attachnent No. ).

C' isolation valve FP-248 fails to close (see Attachment No. 5).

Minimun Tavg n S32°F (based on incore thermocouple).

PZR pressure * 2100 psig.

ZR level a M.

0625 Fire alarm at Ct' operating deck (see Attachment No. 3).

Pressurizer relief tank level alarms from C'VC-203 discharge

(see Attachment No. 3).

Page 32: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

0625 (Concd.) Prtmary pre*surr bales to decre"e (#" A ttCesC No. 4).

"SVs mayay closed.

SI trfl "Ar equipamt m1maly started.

Lerdown yalves LA & 5 sMAfly shut.-

0627 Manuafy reset SI.

C635 Restnred letdown.

Cont:ignmnt -low pc.rnt and 9ressure begin to Lucrease.

Isolated letdown (suspected leak in letdown system).0650

'56 .avg reaches maxim= vat ae of 55:TF and olds steadY .

P R pressure I' . nC Psia.

PZR level a 50.

Cantaimeflt entry to check for leak anc !ire (see t&:C:ent tNCo 3).070C

0705 Second Si signal due to ow PZR pressure. 1715 psV.G.

Both "A" and e.tavns atvse.

o7c5-;:'72 Operators attempt to deter2Ln* ;ause of depressurzzstC0n. The

foilowing equipWe.t vas cmecked:

Page 33: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

-ISA?-

O7CS-0f27(CorAtd.)

a)

b)

C)

d)

f)

PZ safety Valves flow 1Infcitors.

PZt P0V discharge line tG.rstur8.

PZR block valve positioc.

P2B relief tank level.

PZR relief tank pressure.

PZR spray valve poItLo (the valves indicated closed

but since this 1udic*tiCU La dea indicDtioU the

valve controllers were again Ma ly closed).

072' The RCS temperature wa lovered slightly using the secondary

stean dumps to help control the increasing pressurizer level.

Tavg - 5490F.

PZR pressure a 1620 psig.

PZR level a 62.

0727

0'35

Thc charging line was isolated to el-imnate tke possibility

of auxiliary spray causing the depreenurtZAti~n. RCP "B"

and "C" wera stopped to eliminate the pissibaLIty of main

spray flow causing the depressurization.

Pressurizer pressure begins to rise.

Tavg a 543PT.

PZR pressure * 1715 psig.

P7i: WVvuI - '0L~..

Page 34: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

)SIO pZR presmawe stabilize.

RUvs * 535OF.

PZR prossurO a 2050 SOpl.

PZR level * 452.

Made toad cgcntim5t entry -a isolated CVC-ZOOE at 1230 bour.1120

1o c0 '-'9-81)

to San ;:-L8. Review atnd analynLx of tranaient wLth 4istinglhOUsR. OUicuaiLOU

ut trannfisn't Wit! !RC ello&C It.

231! t;.-29-81) aCS-653 Positively identlfiLd " 1"lem2 sPray valve.

.7, C i:-I-B1) Plan: on-L.ne.

-DlAF:-

I

Page 35: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

CDM=r go. I

SYS si TAILWX

Thn - System bad wM rzecwe sq*ralr probLems prizr ta the trlanSt c

1-29-81. During the prewicrl week the E-v nad W becese coote5luld with

vater. (This contasinstcc ws restored to within spe ficati) On Wseds-

day mnoring. 1-2-81U, a smain: steel nIpVl on Efe 1£4 9;Sven UnIO&Ver on

"B" pump cracked. This caused a loss of approxiwtall- X eaocws of £49 flvid.

The fluild and nipple were rep:aeed and "I" pup restartec. gcwever. the pump

was imediately stopped fte tc scise and vibcatio- Svera. atecPCS were made

to troubleshoot the prob:= hot so def nite canse sas fo*co. :Ee system vas

lef: cperating satisfact'r'-y with one pUC; . C: A= -9-n1 the

second E-H pump, "A". deweioped a sea leak which caamef £-E ':aid leak owt

of the system. ^t 0541 =be operators begaz to t~aU che c= off ir to reto tar

tt.e E- Systet. At 062-_ wti* the unl: was being ea.-a:ec frw tani Vrste0,

the E-U System generated a pressure surge cc the weamnc es vho--' resulted

in the valves mozentaril- ape-ing. Three factors r-L.d %-v rantri'rt:ed cc thf

pressure surge. The turftie conro: was switchizg :- speec :o . he cre-

tors wre trying to star$ '5 E1- oil pump cz sup;;.w T- 5 ;: ting z.lw final.

soments of the turbine s;dcn. The E-9 Srstem t beec :cc iza-d by water

during the previous weeLk- TIs caused a -- n;ary g sreas !loi- t- be sensed

on at least 2 steam lines. T%. spike shows up oc s. tbrei sate f charts.

The effect of this flow ipska Is described in Atta It % :-

The failure of "A" pump *seal on tVc E-11 Syscem was .u to ag e *d t-areferre

vibration from "see pump. -is equent to these pui fe.±xres. :he uc:oader c'

pump Op" has been replaced ad pump "A" was replarad 5n iCs entiretr. .The

copl-tce system was resczred to service mnd is opcr=eimg awc:sf actor' 7.

1

I Ism o -I 11 1 1 INICOM I 1311011 'I 51111P E I I ; 0505010"NOWMW in 1XIMM 3 I

Page 36: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

?tim-, St A? 0624 NMMS

on Jwouay 2g. 198: at 054- a vuit absatdwn was 0o~esmcod to do repair work

on the tuzbl.m 14 S~atm. At ",proimzate 1 7 0620 hours Tavg dropped below the

low TOV .etpotint of 5401r Cut to at Snadverunft overshoot duzring plant sbutdwnf.

At 06..*t v~ct the vaic Fe4 pwer the generster output breakers were opemed

discomc:WC the acit fr= th m~tam. At this tiae the turtbLoc E-F control

Sstem switched te "ef onT a Idut cc gme55ure instabLttlItte is the E-Hr

conr-: osyte tz txti-iCw Sovernar ?ralves .;citd t'i"n. A revicu ofb cte' event

lndlz.es that thc sz,..;e ca*J'Cd o? tzdlcatet etex !,ow ini at least two ate&'

lines to exceed Chu~ *tozz set:cimt for a time* 7erted ees ~than 2s vze

7his d~icated t4gh sitom .. w to '3 eteag inee continedd vW tm he low Tavg

setle'M0- .arl'ler ;~efo:tat a ea=L stoam Iscaticf vavG-. closu~re sp.jA. at.. a

St st4!a.. The 4ira.?aLt ce! :woes~avad1 te tte same as tV.e Ste~az fecw

opike- It &as bees abserro! duriz( "redi~c t1s05 tI tht the NSO.s requ,-.te a

signm,. Suraizo-, of sr .~y sec. to ct-use a-W. so none of the ?S~

Closed, or the mczeg*T fL'low low lava *Itnal. ('.be KS'Vs Were Menus ::

closed £indiately by tte 0erator in order. to steb~ltZC US temperaturt.)

The S7 sips 1 is givldeC altz : trains 'A' and 'I'. Eoch of these traits cpe

tAILS &seseral telavs Inc-wI~d3 a "Czr.tanica: :atcming cola? tWee inthosse -C

WA6) uhic1h is used uo lock ft the 5S train unri manually reset. A s£gr1.8

dura10o greater. tb=1 ! mee. is reguired to Lnsure that al relays tdose '6nd

the archimg relays loce is. Usne* the ST Signal was 'Iess thr 25 *sc o:

the :Atch~flI rel~ay for tCm=i got fia:y engaged. "A op~erators waied:Ate~y

rsotized that trai0 ~A" o WCt engaged and so they. -Paniaay started the :Vain

'A' equipment. CauessmaL t ssolation Phase A was LnI1tL~td by trsaln "P*." 6

St woer was a je-med late theosyste since RCS pressure was ftzlO0 -PSIC and the

CM1

I I== EJ Mm sit I . , .I I - --- - ---- -- - --- - -

Page 37: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

EU.?-

smm off bead ofthe 5!POM* URO 61' 1 e glva u&aly rmetOat06

*Loce the SI £uin±LuLL gm WSSdUb5led Qpurtbul.

Ounc train "Ar was smagaa Li1±um the tl 5iqtm perfacrvid as expected, vIth

the uceptLon of CV IsdIstZ= w,'.N FL-1&S (O05 Attacbmftt SO. 5). The actI3-

tiara of the SI Syatm 4d4 t efl the cphysical course of evets durtq the

trausleft. boveve? it 4LU mbcure :e cauS. of the KMS depresaurtzatLon (stuck

pressuaazer spray valve). St rep.?s to the St logic or componerats are

comSidete aecassury.

ta

U- � - -

Page 38: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

mDRAFr-

ATLUtME ND. 3

LzW LUE XU

At 0624 an St signal latched in the "B" train relaey vutcl gestrated a Phase A

containment isolation. As part of the Phase A _ontzint iSolatioC five letdwn

valves closed (CVC-200A, B, C and CVC-204A. 5). Drir this time the relief

valve on the letdown line, CVC-RV-203; lifted. This us apparently ide to

the Isolation valves, CVC-204A and CVC-2045. closinl s&LLbtly fa"ter than the

orifice isolations, CVC-200A, CVC-200B and CrC-200C. c 2eakMe past one or

more of the orifice isolatior. valves. This then case he rressurier relLef

tank level to increase from approximately '0: (noraL: level) to ,5.= full.

The pressure transient while causing relief r&:: -- 2' to lift also

caused the relief valve bellows tc rupture. A :his sae tinie, whet the

CVC-200A, a & C valves closed, a pressure su.rge was a:-::ed to C'C-200E. This

valve is normally closed but had apparentl- r' te ;atay' y cen dzrfle

plant operations. The valve position was las: ver-'1 on cm Sl8. One

possible cause for the vibratior at CVC-ZE-_s ..s he ;ttve dispa:tnt

charging p=ps. These pumps have a histor of vibraLtc: in'tuced protem5 f'or

which solutions are currently under develcren;t. CT-=DOE is also caped bu:

the cap apparently was cot tightly securee as eviden by the stripped threads

on the end of the pipe. When the pressure s&ge ws *rlied to the CLC-200E

cap the cap was blown off, causing a primary le"a estimated at aproxintely

100 1pm. This estimate was based on the pipe dl.im.en amd qwntlty of water

discharged to the C: sup. This leak was qui_ . e tc 5- M wher.

valves 460A * B were shut by the operators. Appirez:T some leakage occurred

past these air operated control valves. The ;00 = leak ws restarted when

letdown was re-established at 0635 causing consitae de poin: and pressure

to rise (.2.5 psi). At 0650 letdown was isolated azd the leak rate again dropped

to 5-7 pm. lased on the sup level indication cess tan 6000 galloas of primary

coolant was discharged into the contaiment sz::. Ve the lOC pr leak occurred

Page 39: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

MUMM M. 3 (Contim")

at 0(?4 it apparently coneed hat #4AIdIY LTG detector Ca tof LX

contaimmt. the detector was locaed abmov te draft "LTe tM oN " atC4

deck. Since the opezators had indicatLOn of IS lInkae end * tIt" In ts

countijnt* &a Individa using espiratory protection _a _nt Into the

coottaimt to LavostLsate. This Udivldual nftmed the Loags and

Lsnat£ed the ource as the bstdown Lin but Was 1able CO UIntIft the exct

Leak point because bLs air supply wed low. DurLM cbs Laspet@U s evldemce

of fire vwa found.

To prevent future occurrencs the CYC-2O0E pipe thrds vore dresed and a

nev ed zap installed. CVC-200 ard several other valvelpLp cap errangeents

which could be eooed to the sam condition were inspecced and physically

locked or verified secured in the closed position.

CaZ

Page 40: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

mActM"W U. 4

a TS I) MUSMUATION

The "ain concern dWring the transient of 1-124L wr an uAMxpllifd decr"se

in E pressure. The pressure dropped ften 2O0 psi& to 1620 psug ID Wtopo-

Ustely mae hour. VA" steps were takes diauri the first bour of the transient

to determine wbet v causig the deprseasqaatif. The ToeesuiZer (tsr)

safety valve were chocked by lookiag at the accOustic flow indicators dwn-

stres of the vlves. No flow was indcated. The par rcVs were checked by

looking at the pipe cmperature downstre55 of the valves. Again. oo flow was

Indicated. The tsr block valves vere checked to verify that they were shut.

The Prr relief tank level and pressure were als checked to verify thac they

were not increasing. The main tsr spray valves we then switched to manual

control and Closed by the eperator. The indication on the RTCS shoved the

valve to be cloesed. bevee. mince this Iicatin ie oway of demand position,

the operator tried to insure that the valves had closed by manua-ly cloeing

them. The charging line was then Isolated to ass If the auxiliary spray valve,

CVC-31l. was leaking. Additionally. RO "" and "VC were stopped so that flow

through the main wry valves ASIA & * was not possible. Par pressure began

ncrasiUg. Later that night (231S bous) epray valve 4553 was positively

Uentlfled as the leaking valve.

An inspection of the valve showd that the atm vs binding on the valve park-

L34. One reason the binding problem was not identified earlier is that the

spray valves do not move such during pover operation. RZ pressure control is

accomplished by varying the ?sr heaters with the spray valve partially opered.

The valve was repaired by ubricatlng the stm. The valve was then tested

four times to inswe proper operation. In addition, the electro-echanliCal

poltoner garv setpoLit ma discoverad to be *l htly off and therefore was

reset. -DtroT-

ta 1

Page 41: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

ATuACHNl W. S

cou- umr - I3OLUATIOIE YALY IFAIK Mi- 248)

At 0624 on 1-2981 a SI digal generated a Ph^a A contAiL.Ut LBolntLO . .ss

pert of this Lsolatlon the nSwly imtallh firx protection containt .; 'ation

valve F?-2469 Fl-2'9. 77-256, 7-25 vere sigled to shut. Vi-248 did not

sbut. The valve Wu then Manually sut. The cause of failure Was a tripped

breaker hich Wul, not &llow power to the motor operator. Subsequent reviw

i6dcated that the trip point on the magnetic overload breaker was not set igh.

enouh to Insure proper operation.

The breakers had been tested successfully upon I a lastion, however, the currect

demd of the valve motors can chane wvith tum and so if the trip point is tot

Oet with enough magin the breaker cAn pass A test and yet fail at a later tica.

The setpoints on all four va1ves hve been r"edjusted to ccmpeusate for the

above problm aad tested. This should correct ay future problem vith these

r1 1

Page 42: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

£?Aft~ww No. G

S A W 0? I5O CoIvtru WTMt

0620 Alarm- Low Tavg Iezulasive Set

0620 Alarm - Lov Tavg 541.2 (setpotat La 543.0)

0623 OU - Control 1.4 UA C Usertod (reactor trtp)

0634 Alan - 1.0 ?a 'I' W (Oc0e4 (St esLPa)

0624 Ala - Lov Tavs 532.7 (alanas Tavg)

0625 t= - 1.1 F1 DAltaf TaSk 75.2! (Valve CVC-203 lifts)

0627 UTRX - K hop "3" BXI open (St reset)

0705 I gm -rZ Low I L St (SicW s: I l)

WITS AJ -_* R ?,MP "I" 31KI MOWs

0705 _ . - "A" R. cowd

0 26 Alarm - RCL8 L rlow (4CP 'I" stopped)

C^27 Alarm - =CLC 1 Flow CRC? "C" stopped)

-DRA"-

1

Page 43: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

opera COsTo

*04

.A .

___ _ * --- - --.

- C

- % . j .. 1 I .. .£ ' . Ai .o a C , - .. i e.. .. .... ............... .- -. .

a~----S eA - * . -- - -- --

OAI.L ,$hLJ ~J../ >. AAJW L £ - ________________.¢.,_

avrA .ds ...... 4 w~-

- -- -------- -- - - - -- -

ACc J~f -Vi

____-_-.-° -- - --

-F~s -S --z .? * -s - -. -*- -z-z0 * _

~ .... 4...J - - - - ------ e---

4H'3*- 'C^ { j &'ot cD~It& jI,_L. *

_*~A .C2 C. 6 j6 5cC6-,'S"-

--- - -

.. C'P/6 < P#- ~ 44.'; C.tSif _C. -- -_

pozzf L. e-4 , 4b # cV/ .

eC £iu, S ' /ia 7c /4( .ll

> * $ , X S ^'-'p..fi ) * , , S

Page 44: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

¶4fm 9 :

i

--- I

,.%. - -, W

-C §- 7

-C w. -0 .

- -

3m2 W I

5 I . d I' 4 - -,. - -_ .. -___._._

IL B L ~ z Plat I hnt -0

£ ri' l C on. -- I -ie

D cte -.- pt. , - .....Bonk !os~on (Steps) U

. _|. sssC. ez L M-L __

.Boren C S .2 - - - t--1 eztteO Power LWevl .. ŽL..d.Amps tat - -

I _ _ 2r 2_ > b 4___

- - ~ -. - - - , -IL Aa .- -

A. W.e;# -3-au A =wL

- £ ' 7 ? e d c. e f C _ i c M 4

w. -M. " '7S ' " J d " -* - -- - - - --

m F _ ~ " ui p i -S -oi -^ - -

'8${_s1XVf. C,,Pf vt , t s

-... - - G C ' G,1 Cee c)... ' AV ~ 4v _L e£~

- V .- .A . -, - -

- -< = 8 t/ * _ 5L 1/9 -

- a _ _ . . ._. . _- -_ .

-a .. _ . ._

Page 45: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

*3-

_- .f £'...___c-rw. -. *wf4eR~J, Oa

- -~ -S~ .rc- IC"s Wi s v E q....- -

_4° _e v:"', -r '-":.Ao N or.

U_-lt 'M...Y

_. _. _ _... a~ - # - -# -. s f- -~ -) * 1/z~

_- -_ _-- ._. _~ _ L6~- - -__ ----- -. -

A. S s. j ...&f *Axs _ _ _. - -. .. _

*..o°7vi' w{/,w Y..2 c/ .s~g.o44 '?c, 2X6 -t. ___

* -<< _~¶ ( ,{ - 4t2 , ce(. */~M -______ .,_. .__ ,__ *-- .

_~ 1 ¶i __>p/2~ t .'@;z .r/'-fi# _----- ,, -

ye. _&ss e.oco _

9e- yAb4'S d&ES oAL 41 9hw~ *I k . -. _- . --- 1.7 _ 4ce J/( d '.' /10' - - -

C),4...... ;,,vEtb Z, g~: ................ / . -..... _

-r t * , b m. q -a t . , A, ..

/ # )e.#r (*.b{ j4(sjr /g~ *Z4C AI?. C.

{C* . .,(:. •ti*,~ z

7ou VcArto R. 44' t 7O v

Page 46: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

d.pu.

ZO Av 4e.0.o-* 1 '# 1(4-. 4f -- PrAl 4-v&n A,1 . "{*'t/

y vr(,_ toVA.C,' ,,cme: *A.,. V , ; .Siavre ed e I $se'f' __'~'6 _ gS _ -3 .4 4zJ 4; ~ -r -c -s --Xeo _

o'< J¢s~_. ^eA/e f*iAL ;g:_ Sa.w " 9,

- s _fr3 y . 4 Sr. A -i4 c. A - - . - -

z4a^-S&;440. see fl 7,rr C sL. qy (Z7. .. ge,. - r_ _ ~*~f~f' 1 ~ ~Z

. C sv Zc-kof* _6 2.g tr£ "xs'4/f tt _ __

t.6 - .. i A :.4O C- - -r- , -_ ____-

.i.4 - _ _____C-

_ .,_i,'@. A#4*LJ4* i. AAv4 *,.t^ 3''+ t ,, ^<_C* /6', .Ao"""' Azs Th' .Q 9.& > . . .. ___.. ... . A4 !" ^a rsef II-e l" r a &i .

___ _. -. . dV cc,'Ys A14( ceO _r 4 . 0 C/r, _ S_

- 4 A$I/b' # V.C~ f^ & "h i'*PaIbS

--.- ix . _;e_*:2 4ts,_^ '3.~ .. ~ ... ed .v. wf d AJ .. ~................. j,

a- * . _ p-/*_

T*W8;~. . /-* . / ._- . ',,_ > t

_ z ~_- t,^ 9'.s ,*** f~ , .A Lif E* ........................................ *& j , _ ;

- __ x o J-*t'- '' '.. '.. I.g II#e ~ d

- - / a. -- t -~'s. ,, st ^ _.- f * >.4 *,._**ts_: ^ @,,_ g * J Ss. Rw* * - .

._ .' . ' '- ''' f**a~sO {f0{AA '

)

Page 47: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

.. 'd. /Sc

eave Time

.*. .-. . _..; 73

:~~- a ; - 4 _

,

O_. _

,.N-

...

* .* -. -

-.* *

-

________AAjLsF- Ao VP 04-.

do

- ___ I-

l~d* Id ;,-'=-* -*--" - * --

_A. _ _00* _.

-C- -s -. _ -

- - _ _ K ~a -.. - . . .. _ .

D. ~

_ _ ,* = * - . --

-~ -. -- U

=2* C=..=

- . -. |~

I. j

Page 48: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

w.-. 7~

.. r4

4... . " ......

.. _ -

. , . .

w.

L.,s ..I

M. S. mm g.3 ROIHufl' I N d7632

i r t,- - - .

A ._ (- .-, fi'W

' 6- - ip'

-P 'v _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _A__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

._ - -I

* - . -w - ~ ' e ~t

- £0

I. S .

Wele

.. _ - -

. _A -MSit o ¢S ; ,, ~

_bg

_ XI

5 t . L h Lf tir j ~ t ~

C -_:__..

'p.-_'~~ _- -....

._. =I_ . ._

. A 4 _ ', A a_ _ _

... _

___ __ __ __ __ ___

__ . * .. ;* ;

.$ 4 * .t ~ d f ~ i.7 .

_ _

- _ ¶m. ^ \T aa ,) ~ x. ,~ .. .. . . . -... . _

' _ _ *-._ , ~: -Z

-~0' .1 .L _f ' 4 ;Z w

.-

S -t

S..

j::-E :'

_ ~* .

,;. *1_

- -

Page 49: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

S * *

Alp AO UN"33 1

-. e p.J

, I

'Oft

- 4m

-I- IC

moo to;.

hddm= cuVU

Af C

* 0

AU.% -. *

- W.* 0

^ w - - w

Page 50: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

a *

.7. .1 4;

a.

Ia_-_ -; I-- . , - VX-1

:--I v* .. * V- e-.- -

I4- &- - 4-t. - H

.A-- 4.** 4 .-

* 1

I:1

III

IL

1

-

100

0

-A- -*I

. ;.* - .

. 4

.4

.- t

.

a

T_- I ' ' -. 1' _ .:. ~. I - * I

-'--i * ^ --

. I- . S.-_I . .. 4. ,,.. .0

I . *

- 0* - ., S

-4 0

0__

-i-*

- I..- -. �***�***� -

c�.

�1

* -. 4. -9

I'4 __ �- £

- , .

_i- -

__ F_ A-.

I. to

6

II ..... 9-

. _ .- -a ION

I

-

_

,- 's- -.

.M .

7--',......

. va-

-" -*--�10

I- - 4-A�0

U* a-

--S

-U-. -. --- 0I � -. -. - - -.

- --- Up - -.

-* * -- 4, -U--.

U * *�*f� -

..- 4 �* U-

- 4 -- 9. -�- 9- - -S

* 0

-- 4- . -9 -- . 0-0

-4 a * - . *;. S

* . I'�.- - - -

� I 0

4'

P - I - --- L-

- -- .- . * -

p -4a - M M - S

I-

.. _., . I I-- doft.-�

- I

Page 51: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

ael a

TR - &I Os

lass/ I'deT8 '10

f,

- - - -

- - -

- - .- -- -

ta in':iZ _ VPL I

~tA- a

\f ToI

Page 52: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

* .0

AIR . /S Not. lee' l'*UsJIr......... .. >.. . .

. .. . ,A

I.T*0. i 11 4 ai I 14444444 l4+4IIr. So l4444+; I 4m412 I f43 9W44$44 q 1 tIn ftilt 9j't I fij l t 11II: i1!lIIII I I I ill i I W!III!!H iiilIuI |,,,;:i'+g i 'II S O' I I II Iq i 1 4 AI I.l ' I "'.

-. - .- .

-. - I* . t 1.12I LI -i 4 k lI II Ia I I I I I I ! I II 4 I

,. --- - .- - 4.-.-- -- -r . j

...; :-- -- -- - 1 - -- --- - ...................................... . . - -i

! *- - - - - -

---- ---- * -- -_ ... ._ _Iv* - -, __ ... _j9 '- 4E* I t 1_ -

It ..... L.... el .- _

- 6- - - T - - - . |.~ l -

iI,? ' I;S,IIC1v I J

Wg..- - a --- . - , ' Ii i | -

:l'*- -. t - II

* _=c~ ! ' i ''' i ' -

., __ _ __ _

C _ - - ____*___t t A

I! I I, ,. I L:i'

_. _.-- . - I V - 4i, I - Y I-

- . I 'A I,. I ,, ., I__ i_* . c I_ _

I. I

_________________________________________6.

I-__ _.-

I

... I

.. ...

*. *** .hi .9o I i

. t . - _-.. . . ?- _i

I I j .

.. "- i

- * - '* t- .

- t -. a

i I * .

*. -. . - - � -

- .. . - - -.-. . - - - - -

=1to

^ . - s -- -

i 7l l A. 7 T

4. _

_II

U - I -I

I1i -

U

Page 53: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

6 .

. A

* -.- -.- e

-e . .0- L L- -- -%- - l- .-

- - -4- -. a - - - S.@ - -- .-

-. |t..... '!--.. l. - - @- - - - -.-

hE; ~~~~~~~- - - s _ _-_

0-U..MIS~ -l- - - -- -4 -.

*o 0 -; -s @- - -X - --* - -- . -

a. - -- - - - . - ~-_ _,-

- r_-_*__-_--_

_ - _ _ _~ , . -. . I 'S - -. -- _ _ *- _ _* _ _ _

- - - .-. a _ ._ . . .: I-__. ._ ... _ .

_ __ ____ ____ ,_ .a , . _._ . - - -- _

I * *- a * _ * - e *__--

----------- -t-'---' ~ -- . *- '' - -- - , _

;~ _ ___e _-- --- I - . - - - * . . ,

_.. _c .. . l__. a-. . . .. ....... . .._ -. I _- - . . -- - . - ._ __

_ __ , , _ .___._ ---- - - -~ -~~ '

- . a . ---. _... ;. ; . ._ -S - a S

- + -_. *. _ - - I - - -aS. - _ a

5 a: - - - - . - - - _ a

4aIa-.- --- a

I

- ._ ._

A

.; _

__

-

-iM-I

I .

f_ .

-

,

-______- ~ . 4 .- -- - - -- - -

- a - - - I- . - - - - - - - - *

- -. __-~ - . -

- _. . .-

a--- -

- - - - as - - - -- - - - - - - 0- - - - -

- * .- - -- - - � -- . a - -

- -- -* - - - - -- -

_1- - - -- - -- - --_

-t _ -- F---3- -- - --- - _ _2 -

_ - _ __ - .-* - i - * .; - - -

-. - - 5 - . . . . . .-

Page 54: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

a t *

,~.Av 't%.

S-mt% GLvies-ze A Lew-\

0 �:ttLow-me kt-,fts Anot '�-Lzwmmmmmmmmmw�m gm ft & a a a a a a a a e * a 0 0 0 0 0-9-- - - - - -

-

I I....wuwwwwww~w w w w w~

.NO

tak W*& afimb" 9MWMWftfa

I

Page 55: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

'Pre Si jU.",

M.- W I, :I _.____ -- -:.* . ............I _1 o 3 ~a

I peps.a . - . .

iII _ -.. - _ ... - ._. . ._ _ _I- ,-

___.__ _. __ __

.- W--h. .

* -. .0'- t

11'.- .

i0 - n_~ ._

; a_ _ n.* _

. '_!_.-. .I

___-

__ _ .__- . ~ -_.., ,

- -_ _ _ _

- _ _ -- _ -_ -- _

*lt ~ ~ -~t -~ . a.; -

II -

_ ~ ~ _ . _ _ _ _ -_ _ _ .

I3 : i. t woi.9''e: g * il . .; "~I. 1 .'*.' S

'* * , ; . 1; 7i i.i. 3 0Sm l ' ; P I, ' ' ' 0li;;

*. ,~ *F i: .tiE * .. t, *

;* . -. .w.ui

" = e[ * ai riw EG l

Cl ;;; * t

E .a

iism

* tl'~'t~t A ~ ...*. .'4...

*. S. -

i :;M!V_& e

Ji iliE~il

I.

I I

;�� -- z - -low .

Os" -.. J. ;M*_.Wb 3�ff"a'. e_� wo- - . __ -- '_

Page 56: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

Io*

._+ _ .... ;T -,~ _ .*!--- --

* -a

-= * -ok --- -- - £

' - -Z7ff- _. _, _ _ ,:6x=:.:.: K' - -' K _<

_ _ I_ * £

..t __.... x ...e

___ - -- ----v

- _.._ -i

* * t * * - - L _ .-- i

-f j...-.--.&

* -

Page 57: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

0 4 4

.8.a

L : a * -

.

-lu As CbtZ

iZS&Wt sm~/

E Vtvtt

A-%bVA I _.

k- f114*1lll�' ,

Page 58: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

I

J .- d p

-e- .. - - - - -

- .- Ad --

- 7 - - ~ - I I -- E -.- M

Sir--

- -a-.- - *C. w.w ww"04 soma

)

Page 59: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

* .6

6ouervmo.I iv. (L PosaL*iou'Tur £& 1jr i

e 10 ~

Oi,I.

II

.I1" ...

- --

.I

. I . .~-

IAh t I$, eQ

ilI

t son,

s - . .

I

4AM

L

I i I ia &A

EL ..*1 Al - tL -. . 2~

Page 60: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

. 0. *

- 11

Lec\ A L .':.. .. .%

I

Page 61: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

*1 -

- . I

-- --- !

. . I

Page 62: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

U

(44)

1 -

I

Page 63: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

' *.UR, I ' I

.4

,It

* I low,.I

I C

0

I .6 1,41.RO JOB09 Zlt zP-b f t to

*g( -.'Joor . -% C. ,

1, ?my Il

I 1I # till-, -.- !,'sN

f . I

* I - .I I " I 4itX.

_ -. .

Ir---- i- - A_

Page 64: NRC Generic Letter 1981-022: Engineering Evaluation of the ...

FIGIIltI ? C.04lTAl'ENT %IIMP vOLItJ

,~l C CY

O tN co 'z / t 2 I o

j I.4 ' .-

900_, top of Sump gil

ho 2410i I1R lL rI ')%


Recommended