05000312/LER-1981-030, Forwards LER 81-030/04T-0.Detailed Event Analysis Submitted

Forwards LER 81-030/04T-0.Detailed Event Analysis Submitted

ML20005A564
Person / Time
Site:	Rancho Seco
Issue date:	06/22/1981
From:	Mattimoe J SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
To:	Engelken R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
Shared Package
ML20005A565	List: 05000312/LER-1981-030, Forwards LER 81-030/04T-0.Detailed Event Analysis Submitted 05000312/LER-1981-030-04, /04T-0:on 810602,plant Effluent Ph Exceeded Limit. Caused by Fluctuating Ph of Water Supply.Negotiations Underway to Set Ph Limits Based on Max Observed Canal Ph in Previous 30 Days
References
NUDOCS 8106300458
Download: ML20005A564 (1)

LER-1981-030, Forwards LER 81-030/04T-0.Detailed Event Analysis Submitted

Event date:
Report date:
3121981030R00 - NRC Website

text

p s

,S U

SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY C,lSTRICT C 6201 S Street. Box 15830. Sacramento. Cahfornia 95813; (916) 452 3211 June 22, 1981 R H ENGELKEN, DIRECTOR y

s REGION V 0FFICE OF INSPECTION t, ENFORCEMENT

/

k( f, ['

.{gf, U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISS10N Qy J,

1990 N CALIFORNIA BLVD WALNUT CREEK PLAZA SulTE 202 6.

JUN 2 01981 w WALNUT CREEK CA 94596

.4 p.s.unna uramon comeusm h,

f.[.

OPERATING LICENSE DPR-54 DOCKET NO. 50-312 x Q,wwQ.;,

? f '" f REPORTABLE OCCURRENCE 81-30 in accordance with Technical Specification Appendix B, Section 5.6.2.c and Appendix 8. Section 2.4, the Sacramento Municipal Utility District hereby submits a ten-day report of Reportable Occurrence 81-30.

Mr.

H. Canter, Resident NRC Inspector, was notified verbally of the occurrence by R. Colombo.

On June 2, I? l, a grab sample of the plant effluent had a pH of 3.65 A pH of 8.5 can be exceeded only when, and only to the extent, that the water supply from the Folsom South Canal also exceeds a pH of S.5 The pH of the Folsom South Canal was measured at 8.4 an hour later.

On June 10, a review of the effluent records for May revealed that the effluent had a pH of 6.6 for three hours on May 22, when the canal measured 8.k.

No alarm was received because the alarm had been set to 8.8 following a prior measurement of the canal pH at 3.8.

After this occurrence Plant Management decided that although the Adminis-trative procedure had been violated, the spirit of the Water Quality Control Board rule had not, insofar as the pH of the canal water had been fluctuating between 8.6 and 0.8, it was unrealistic to expect the instantaneous effluent pH to always be less than the canal pH.

Accordingly, nego tiat ions wi th the water board are in orogress to sample che canal every week, and set the pH alarm no higher than the maximum measured pH of the canal in the previous month.

This would allow for daily fluctu-ations in the canal pH and for a reasonable, constant limit on effluent pH.

Since the actual occurrences would have been allcwed under this revised policy, no further corrective action was taken.

No plait transients or power reductions were associated with these events.

m u.,,,,,, # e. um

- ; j

' j.;..r.,,I L..m we w m

';. t..

~

trat q w

' John'J. Mattimoe Assistant General Manager P ' and Chief Engineer sloonooysa s

u. -.