05000219/LER-1981-060, Forwards LER 81-060/03L-0.Detailed Event Analysis Encl

Forwards LER 81-060/03L-0.Detailed Event Analysis Encl

ML20039G196
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	12/21/1981
From:	Carroll J JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	Haynes R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
Shared Package
ML20039G197	List: 05000219/LER-1981-060, Forwards LER 81-060/03L-0.Detailed Event Analysis Encl 05000219/LER-1981-060-03, /03L-0:on 811121,MAPLHGR Increased Beyond Tech Specs Limits.Caused by Personnel Error & Procedural Inadequacies.Core Power Reduced W/Flow & Appropriate Rod Groups Inserted One Notch
References
NUDOCS 8201150374
Download: ML20039G196 (3)

LER-1981-060, Forwards LER 81-060/03L-0.Detailed Event Analysis Encl

Event date:
Report date:
2191981060R00 - NRC Website

text

.

NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION GYSTER CREEK mmw

',gf,p l,2 ". ' ' /','

(609) 693-1951 P.O. BOX 388 s FORKED PlVER

• NEW JERSEY

• 08731 s.

.o a.

w Decmber 21, 1981 Mr. Ibnald Hayr.es, Director Office of Inspection and Enforement g

4-Region I Q

pgentvED United States Nuclear Pegulatory Ccrmission 2f

,2 631 Park Avenue 9-J AN 1~31992> 4 King of Prucsia, Pennsylvania 19406 1~ g c p asaan runtmua:s#

I

Dear Mr. Haynes:

4 to SUBJECT: Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Stati w

Docket No. 50-219 Licensee Event Report Reportable Occurrence No. 50-219/81-60/3L This letter forwards three copies of a Licensee Event Report to report Reportable Occurrence No. 50-219/81-60/3L in empliance with paragraph 6.9.2.b(2) of the Technical Specifications.

Very truly yours, f

h!k$

. T. Carroll, Jr.

I Acting Director

. ster Creek l

JIC:r"a j

l Enclosures cc: Director (40 copies)

Office of Inspection and Enforcemnt United States Nuclear Regulatory Cm mission Washington, D.C.

20555 l

Director (3)

Office of Management Information and Program Control United States Nuclear Regulatory Cm mission Washington, D. C. 20555 NRC Resident Inspector (1)

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Forked River, N. J.

8201150374 811221 ff tp PDR ADOCK 05000219 S

PDR g(

C

GYSTER CREEV. NUCLEAR GENERATING STATICN Forked River, New Jersey 08731 Licensee Event Report Reportable Occurrence No. 50-219/81-60/3L Report Date Decciaber 21, 1981 Occurrence Date November 21, 1981 Identification of Occurrence Violaticn of Technical Specification 3.10,A, when the weIIIGR exceeded the Technical Specification limit, provided in Figure 3.10-1 for Type VB fuel, during a load increase observed through routine monitorirg.

'Itus event is considered to be a reportable occurrence as defined in the 'Ibchnical Specifications, paragra;h 6.9.2.b(2).

Conditions Prior to Occurrence Plant at 60% power for condensate pump maintenance. Power increase in progress.

Plant parameters at the time of occurrence were:

Pcwer:

Core Thermal 1731.2 mt Electrical 384.9 se 4

Flow:

Recirculation 14.12 x 10 p Feedwater 6.44 x 106 lb/hr Description of Occurrence Due to a power reduction 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> earlier for condensate ptmp maintenance, a Xenon transient was in progress. At approximately 1400 hours0.0162 days <br />0.389 hours <br />0.00231 weeks <br />5.327e-4 months <br /> a check of AFLHGR indicated a value 95% of the APLHGR limit. At 1454 hours0.0168 days <br />0.404 hours <br />0.0024 weeks <br />5.53247e-4 months <br /> power had increased 1.3% (23 mt) due to the Xenon transient and a check of APLHGR at that time l

indicated a value of 103.2% of the limit.

l Apparent Cause of Occurrence t

The rate of power increase frcm the reduced pow.r level at the existing Xenon conditions accelerated the Xenon ' Burnout" transient and caused a corresponding local power transient and an associated increase in APLHGR. Althoix;h procedural guidance is given for power level increases after a power reduction, its applica-bility to transient Xenon conditions is not explicit.

In addition, the engineer advising the operators as to the rate of power increase, misjudged the magnitude and effect of the Xenon transient. The apparent causes, therefore, are procedural inadcquacies and pomel error.

Reportable Occurrence Page 2 Report No. 50-219/81-60/3L Analysis of Occurrence Technical Specification 3.10,A and the associated basis specify MAPIllGR's for the protection of fuel claMing integrity during a IIX%. The analysis W ich shows a possibility of cladding failure exists is performed at 102% rated core thermal power (1968.6 MWt) and 70% of rated recirculation flow (11.2 x 104 p).

This event occurred at 89.6% of rated core thermal power, and 75% of rated recirculation flow thereby reducing the total heat to be renoved and increasing the available water inventory for cooling. In aMition, there was on going monitoring and corrective action within the hour. The significance of the event is, therefore, considered minh.nl.

Corrective Action

The inmvliate action was to reduce the local and core bulk powers to bring MAPIliGR within limits and to reduce the subsequent rate of power increase. The event has been discussed with the appropriate personnel to ensure additional caution at times of rapid Xenon depletion. In c.ddition, the appropriate procedure will be revised to make its applicability to Xenon transients more explicit.

Failure Data Not applicable.

1