05000219/LER-1982-052, Forwards LER 82-052/01T-0.Detailed Event Analysis Encl

Forwards LER 82-052/01T-0.Detailed Event Analysis Encl

ML20070C424
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	12/02/1982
From:	Fiedler P GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
To:	Haynes R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
Shared Package
ML20070C428	List: 05000219/LER-1982-052, Forwards LER 82-052/01T-0.Detailed Event Analysis Encl
References
NUDOCS 8212140169
Download: ML20070C424 (3)

LER-2082-052, Forwards LER 82-052/01T-0.Detailed Event Analysis Encl

Event date:
Report date:
2192082052R00 - NRC Website

text

. .

GPU Nuclear

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

December 2, 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. 50-219/82-52/01T This letter forwards three copies of a Licensee Event Report to report Reportable Occurrence No. 50-219/82-52/01T in compliance with paragraph 6.9.2.a.2 of the Technical Specifications.

The delay in submittal of this Licensee Event Report is due to the identification of this event as a reportable occurrence during a subsequent document review.

Very truly yours, Peter B. Fiedler Vice President and Director Oyster Creek PBF:lse Enclosure s cc: Dire ctor (40 copies) gQ Of fice of Inspection and Enforcement ocuo U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i

$@ Washington, D.C. 20555

Od o O '

l o Director (3) l $g Of fice of Management Information and i

gg Program Control go U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commiesion Washington, D.C. 20555 7.e

$$ta NRC Resident Inspector Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Forked River, NJ 08731 I GPU Nuclear is a part of the General Public Utilities System pE'

OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION Forked River, New Jersey 08731 Licensee Event Report Reportable Occurrence No. 50-219/82-52/01T Report Date December 2, 1982 Preliminary Report Date November 18, 1982 Occurrence Date Augu st 28, 1982 Identification of Occurrence On August 28, 1982, at a time when the radwaste discharge monitor was out of service, a release to the environment (LRP 67-82) was initiated. During a review of the August radwaste release packages, it was noted that the second sample analysis for Liquid Release Permit No. 67-82 was missing. A subsequent search for the analysis established that a second sample was not taken as required by Technical Specifications. This event constitutes operation when a limiting condition is less conservative than the least conservative aspect of the limiting condition for operation as specified in Technical Specification paragraph 3.6.B.2.

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

Conditions Prior to Occurrence The plant was shutdown in the refuel mode.

Description of Occurrence on August 27,1982 at 1000 hours0.0116 days <br />0.278 hours <br />0.00165 weeks <br />3.805e-4 months <br />, high purity sample tank B (HP-T-2B) was sampled for analysis to establish conditions for release to the environment.

l The release (LRP 67-82) was started on August 28,1982 at 2205 hours0.0255 days <br />0.613 hours <br />0.00365 weeks <br />8.390025e-4 months <br />. Since the radwaste discharge monitor was out of service, a second sample was required to be taken prior to completion of the release. The radwaste operator called the on-duty chemistry technician to take the second sample. A sample was obtained on August 28,1982 at 2330 hours0.027 days <br />0.647 hours <br />0.00385 weeks <br />8.86565e-4 months <br />. Due to a miscommunication between the operator and the technician, the sample was erroneously taken from high purity sample tank A (HP-T-2A) as recorded in the Chemistry Log Book.

Apparent Cause of Occurrence The cause is attributed to personnel error. The chemistry technician erroneously sampled the wrong tank. In addition, although the section of the liquid release package, which verifies that the second sample has been taken, was not signed, the Group Shif t Supervisor inappropriately signed off the sheet as being completed.

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

~.

Licensee Event Report Page 2 Reportable Occurrence No. 50-219/82-52/0lT Analysis of Occurrence The initial sample from HP-T-2B (WS1894-82) showed no identifiable gamma activity, gross bets of 7.97E-7 microCi/ml end no detected alpha activity. The authorized release rate was 15,000 gpm and the tank was released at 181 gpm. A review was made of three other tanks released between August 22, 1982 and August 28, 1982. All had radioactivity concertrations similar to that in WS1894-82. A second sample was taken in each of the three releasca and each was in agreement with the first analysis. Due 2o the demonstrated homogeniety and similarity of the water tested, it is believed that the one sample analyzed f rom HP-T-2B on August 28, 1982, was an accurate analysis of the tank contents.

Corrective Action The personnel involved were informed of their error. In order to insure future miscommunications do not recur with regard to this operation, Procedure 804.5 will be changed to require the chemistry technician to sign the liquid release permit af ter a second sample has been taken.

Further investigation of this event is being conducted and additional corrective actions will be taken depending upon the results obtained.

l l

l i

t I

l l

l l

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