05000219/LER-1982-045, Forwards LER 82-045/03L-0.Detailed Event Analysis Encl

Forwards LER 82-045/03L-0.Detailed Event Analysis Encl

ML20066K524
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	11/11/1982
From:	Fiedler P GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
To:	Haynes R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
Shared Package
ML20066K527	List: 05000219/LER-1982-045, Forwards LER 82-045/03L-0.Detailed Event Analysis Encl
References
NUDOCS 8211290575
Download: ML20066K524 (4)

LER-2082-045, Forwards LER 82-045/03L-0.Detailed Event Analysis Encl

Event date:
Report date:
2192082045R00 - NRC Website

text

GPU Nuclear h

' gg gf P.O. Box 388 Forked River, New Jersey 08731 609-693-6000 Writer's Direct Dial Number:

November 11, 1982 Mr. Ronald C. Haynes, Administrator Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 631 Park Avenue  !

King of Prussia, PA 19406

Dear Mr. Haynes:

Subj ect: Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Docket No. 50-219 Licensee Event Report Reportable Occurrence No. 50-219/82-45/03L This letter forwards three copies of a Licensee Event Report (LER) to report Reportable Occurrence No. 50-219/82-45/03L in compliance with paragraph 6.9.2.b.2 of the Technical Specifications. We recognize that the time limitation specified in the Technical Specifications, paragraph 6.9.2.b, for tne submittal of this LER, has been exceeded. The reason for the delay is as follows:

A deviation ruport is the administrative mechanism which initiates management review for corrective action and the determination of reportability of an event. Deviation Report No.82-201 was prepared for Emergency Service Water (ESW) pump 52A af ter it had failed an inservice test on September 9, 1982. The discharge pressure gauge on ESW pump 52A was checked and calibrated, the pump retested satisfactorily and was then declared operable. This was noted on the deviation report. Upon management review of the deviation report, it was determined that the event, which occorred on September 9,1982, was not reportable due to the fact that the gauge was calibra ted, the pump retested satisfactorily and was never removed f rom service, i.e. , breakers and switches were not tagged out.

On the following day, September 10, 1982, the test was again performed on ESW pump 52A and it failed. The pump was subsequently declared inoperable, and was removed from service on September 11, 1982, to perform corrective ma i ntena nc e. It appears that a deviation report was not written for the failure of the pump to pass the test on September 10, probably because the preparation of an additional report seemed redundant.

8211290575 821111 PDR ADOCK 05000219 S PDR GPU Nuclear is a part of the General Pubhc Utihties System gW L {

. . 1 l

I Mr. Ronald C. Haynes Page 2 November 11, 1982 l It was not until October 12, 1982, that it was realized that the event which occurred on September 10, constituted a reportable occurrence, when the Plant Operations Review Committee, during a review of the September Monthly Operating Report, noted the discrepancy. As a result , reportability of the event was not determined until a month af ter its occurrence.

Very truly yours, PeteF B. Tiedler Vice President and Director Oyster Creek PBF:PFC:Ise Enclosure s cc: Director (40 copies)

Of fice of Inspection and Enforcement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Was hington, D.C. 20555 Director (3 copies)

Of fice of Management Information and Program Control U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 NRC Resident Inspector Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Forked River, NJ 08731

s .

l l

OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION Forked River, New Jersey 08731 Licensee Event Report Reportable Occurrence No. 50-219/82-45/03L Report Date November 11, 1982 Occurrence Date September 10, 1982 Identification of Occurrence It was discovered on October 12, 1982, that Emergency Service Water pump 52A had been declared inoperable on September 10, 1982, and subsequently removed from service for maintenance on September 11, 1982. This constitutes operation in a degraded mode, permitted by a limiting condition for operation, as specified in the Technical Specifications, paragraph 3.4.C.4.

This event is considered to be a reportable occurrence as defined in the Technical Specifications, paragraph 6.9.2.b.2.

Conditions Prior to Occurrence The plant was operating at steady state power.

Major Plant Parameters:

Reactor Power - 1280 MWt Generator Load - 414 MWe Description of Occurrence During performance of the Containment Spray and Emergency Service Water (ESW) inservice test on September 9,1982, ESW pump 52A was found to have a discharge pressure below the acceptable limit. The pump was declared inoperable and the redundant ESW pump (52B) tested satisfactorily.

The discharge pressure gauge for ESW pump 52A was checked and calibrated, and the pump was retested. During the retest, discharge pressure was above the acceptable limit, and ESW pump 52A was declared operable.

On September 10, 1982, the test on ESW pump 52A was performed again at the

request of operations management. The pump discharge pressure was again below the acceptable limit, and the pump was subsequently declared inoperable. The

! following day, ESW pimp 52A was removed from service and rendered inoperable in

order to perform maintecance. The pump suction was cleaned and impeller j clearance was adjusted. The pump was retested and was returned to service on l September 13, 1982. During this time, the redundant ESW pump (52B) was demonstrated operable on a daily basis as required by the Technical

, S pecifications .

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

Licensee Event Report Page 2 Reportable Occurrence No. 50-219/82-45/03L Apparent Cause of Occurrence The cause of the occurrence was attributed to improper impeller clearance adjustment af ter previous maintenance work on the pump. The procedure steps for impeller clearance adjustments were ambiguous.

Analysis of Occurrence The Containment Spray and Emergency Service Water Systems are engineered safety systems designed to remove fission product decay heat from the primary containment in the event of a loss of coolant accident. There are two independent systems used to accomplish this, with each system having redundant pumps, each capable of performing the safety function. The systems are designed so that a single containment spray pump and a single emergency service water pump can provide the necessary cooling.

In this case, the safety significarce is minimal, due to the fact that the redundant ESW pump in the system (52B) was operable. Based on this, the system would have performed its design function in the event of a LOCA.

Corrective Action As required by the Technical Specifications, the redundant pump was demonstrated to be operable on a daily basis. The pump suction on ESW pump 52A was cleaned, the impeller clearance was adjusted, and the pump was tested satisfactorily and returned to service. In addition, the remaining three (3)

ESW pumps will have their impeller clearances checked and adjusted, if required. Procedure 708.1.002 was revised to more clearly detail how to adjust impeller clearance.