05000335/LER-1992-001, :on 920117,fuel Handling Bldg Ventilation Stack Radiation Monitor Not in Svc During Routine Check.Caused by Personnel Oversight.Event Reviewed W/Chemistry Personnel.W/
| ML17227A297 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 02/18/1992 |
| From: | Sager D, Snyder M FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| L-92-37, LER-92-001, LER-92-1, NUDOCS 9202240396 | |
| Download: ML17227A297 (6) | |
| Event date: | |
|---|---|
| Report date: | |
| Reporting criterion: | 10 CFR 50.73(a)(2)(i) 10 CFR 50.73(a)(2)(ii) 10 CFR 50.73(a)(2)(iv), System Actuation 10 CFR 50.73(a)(2)(v), Loss of Safety Function 10 CFR 50.73(a)(2)(vii), Common Cause Inoperability 10 CFR 50.73(a)(2)(viii)(A) 10 CFR 50.73(a)(2)(viii)(B) 10 CFR 50.73(a)(2)(iii) 10 CFR 50.73(a)(2)(x) |
| 3351992001R00 - NRC Website | |
text
ACCELERATED DISTRIBUTION DEMONS RATION SYSTEM REGULA Y INFORMATION DISTRIBUTIO SYSTEM (RIDS)
ACCESSION NBR:9202240396 DOC.DATE: 92/02/18 NOTARIZED:
NO FACIL:50-335 St. Lucie Plant, Unit 1, Florida Power
& Light Co.
AUTH.NAME AUTHOR AFFILIATION SNYDERgM.J.
Florida Power &.Light Co.
, SAGER,D.A.
Florida Power S Light Co.
RECIP.NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION DOCKET 05000335
SUBJECT:
LER 92-001-00:on 920117,fuel handling bldg ventillation stack radiation monotor was not in svc during routine. check.
Caused by personnel oversight. Event was reviwed. w/chemistry pe r son ne1. W/9 20218 1 tr.
DISTRIBUTION CODE:
IE22T COPIES RECEIVED:LTR i
ENCL I'SIZE:
5 TITLE: 50.73/50.9 Licensee Event Report (LER), Incident Rpt, etc.
NOTES:
RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME PD2-2 LA NORRISIJ INTERNAL: ACNW AEOD/DOA AEOD/ROAB/DSP NRR/DET/EMEB 7E NRR/DLPQ/LPEB10 NRR/DREP/PRPB11 NRR/DST/SICB8H3 NRR/DST/SRXB 8E RES/DS IR/EIB EXTERNAL: EG6G BRYCE,J.H NRC PDR NSIC POORE,W.
COPIES LTTR ENCL 1
1 1
1 2
2 1
1 2
2 1
1 1
1 2
2 1
1 1
1 1
1 3
3 1
1 1
1 RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME PD2-2 PD ACRS AEOD/DSP/TPAB NRR/DET/ECMB 9H NRR/DLPQ/LHFB10 NRR/DOEA/OEAB NRR/DST/SELB 8D NRR/DS3'PLB8D1 E
02 FILE Ol L ST LOBBY NARD NSIC MURPHYiG.A NUDOCS FULL TXT COPIES LTTR ENCL 1
1
,2 2
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
NOTE TO ALL"RIDS" RECIPIENTS:
PLEASE HELP US TO REDUCE WASTE! CONTACT THE DOCUMENT CONTROL DESK, ROOM P 1-37 (EXT. 20079) TO ELIMINATEYOUR NAME FROM DISTRIBUTION LISTS FOR DOCUMENTS YOU DON'T NEED!
FULL TEXT CONVERSION REQUIRED TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED:
LTTR 33 ENCL 33
r PAL P.O. Box 128, Ft. Pierce, FL 34954.0128 February 18, 1992 L-92-37 10 CFR 50.73 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn:
Document Control Desk Washington, D.
C.
20555 Gentlemen:
Re:
St. Lucie Unit 1 Docket No. 50-335 Reportable Event:
92-01 Date of Event:
January 16, 1992 Fuel Handling Building Ventilation Radiation Monitor Out of Service Due to Personnel Error The attached Licensee Event Report is being submitted pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.73 to provide notification of the subject event.
Very truly yours, D.
A ager Vice P esident St.
cie Plant DAS/JJB/kw Attachment cc: Stewart D. Ebneter, Regional Administrator, USNRC Region II Senior Resident Inspector, USNRC, St. Lucie Plant DAS/PSL N621-92
~202240396 920218 PDR ADOCK 05000335 PDR P 4 Q Q ] ]
an FpL Group companY
FPL FXOSITTIIS oI NRC Form 366 (S 89j U.S. NUCLEARREGULATORYCOMMISSION LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER)
Appfxxrmolsl Ho. $1$ISIFI XXPXXS.A000t TST XAAIT0 TAFXXH PfR FXRXTHMToOIMKTWITHTIFS PPORHATION CCUXCTIOH IXIXXST:000 IRS foRWAINOOISXIRS FXCAFTXHSTXXTXHTSOHATCTOTIE FXOFXIS FFXI FXFORTS ACXAXÃfTFIFFICHIP0$PAIIS IAFCIXFRfXOXATORT
~ WAS'KITOH. OC tOHS AtollTO THC PAPXRWCRX IXOUCTIOH PFXXXCT
$ 1 00010lX CffICX OF W4kbflCMXIXIIXXXXT,WARIHCT0!0OC $000$
FACILITYNAME(1)
St. Lucie Unit 1 DOCKET NUMBER (2)
PAGE 3 050003351 0
4 (4) Fuel Handling Building ventilation radiation monitor out of service results in a condition prohibited by Technical Specifications due to a personnel error.
EVENT DATE(5)
LER NUMBER (6)
REPORT DATE (7)
OTHER FACILITIESINVOLVED(8) 0' DAY YEAR YEAR 169 2
9 2
S IALI 0
0 1
0 0
0 2
DAY 1
8 YEAR 9
2 FACILITYNAMES N/A N/A, DOCKET NUMBER(S) 05 00 05000 OPERATING MODE (9)
POWER LEVEL (10) 1 0
0 20.402(b) 20.405(a)(1)(i) 20.405(a)(1)(li) 20.405(a) (1 )(iII) 20.405(a)(1)(iv) 20.405(c) 50.36(c)(1) 50.36(c)(2) 50.73(a) (2)(i) 50.73(a)(2)(ii) 50.73(a)(2)(iv) 50.73(a)(2)(v) 50.73(a)(2)(vii) 50.73(a)(2)(viii)(A) 50.73(a)(2)(viii)(B)
THIS REPORT IS SUBMITTEDPURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF 10 CFR Check one or more ofthe folio+in (11) 73.71(b) 73.71(c)
OTHER (Specify in Abstract beIOFI/andin Text20.405(a)(1)(v) 50.73(a)(2)(iii) 50.73(a)(2)(x)
LICENSEE CONTACTFOR THIS LER 12 Michael J. Snyder, Shift Technical Advisor TELEP ONE NUMBER AREA CODE 4
0 7 465 -3550 COMPLETE ONE LINE FOR EACH COMPONENT FAILUREDESCRIBED IN THIS REPORT 13
CAUSE
SYSTEM COMPONENT MANUFAC-TURER REPORTABLE TO NPRDS
CAUSE
SYSTEM COMPONENT MANUFAC-REPORTABLE TURER TO NPRDS SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT EXPECTED 14 YES (Ifyes, complete EXPECTED SUBMISSION DATE)
X NO I
I I
EXPECTED MONTH DAY YEAR SUBMISSION DATE (15)
ABSTRACT (Limitto 1400 spaces.i.e.
approximately fifteen single-space typeFFriften lines) (16)
On 17 January, 1992 at 0730, a plant Chemistry supervisor noted that the Unit 1 Fuel Handling Building (FHB) ventilation stack radiation monitor was not in service during a routine check of that system's operability.
This FHB monitor is required to be in service by plant Technical Specifications, or else to have in place alternate means of sampling and monitoring the FHB ventilation effluent.
A review of this event indicated that the radiation monitor was probably placed out of service during routine grab sampling of the FHB effluent at 0830 on 16 January.
By procedure, the radiation monitor's sample pump is secured during grab sampling and should be restarted following sampling completion.
The root cause of this event is attributed to an oversight by Chemistry personnel for not restarting the FHB stack radiation monitor sample pump. A contributing factor to this event is that the sample pump's low flow alarm was improperly overridden during the grab sample surveillance.
Another contributing factor is that Operations personnel who found the sample pump secured during the midnight shift equipment checks on January 17th did not contact Chemistry personnel and improperly restarted the monitor.
During the 23 hour2.662037e-4 days <br />0.00639 hours <br />3.80291e-5 weeks <br />8.7515e-6 months <br /> period that the monitor was out of service, there were no work activities taking, place in the FHB, and subsequently no unplanned effluent releases through the FHB ventilation stack were made.
Corrective actions for this event: Properly restored the FHB stack radiation monitor to service, Chemistry supervision has reviewed this event with all Chemistry personnel to discuss the importance of following procedures and not adjusting alarm setpoints'unless procedurally addressed, Operations supervision has emphasized the need for notifying Chemistry when problems occur with effluent radiation monitors, Training will evaluate this event for use in plant personnel training.
FPL Facsimile of NRC Form 366 (6-89)
FPL Fffcslmle DI I'RC Form 366 (S 89)
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORYCOMMISSION LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER)
TEXT CONTINUATlON IPPROYEOOAO ICl$1$0010$
0NATES, $000 I E010IATED NPNRN PEIl~ TODIANEYWlTH $10$ IN'CIDIAITCNCOIIECOON INOINCll$00 $00$ fORWAITTCIRNNNT0INCARDNOIAPDEN ECllNATETOTINIECOOS AN)INPCRT ~ IIANACEINNT DRANCNrPEW$ 1$0 IIIClEARREOIAATORY~
WANNATION,DC 00$0$ II0$TOTIN0PERWWOIYIEOVCllCNPRON CT $$1 $00 I01$ CfACE CP NAKIINIRAICIIAEICETWA&NICTON, DC $00rfk FACILITYNAME (1)
DOCKET NUMBER (2)
LER NUMBER (6)
PAGE (3)
't. Lucie Unit 1 YEAR I EQUENTIAL REVISION NUMBER
. NUMBER 0 500 0335 TEXT (Ifmore spaceis required, use additional NRC Form 366A's)
(17) 9 2
0 0
1 0
0 0,2 0
4 On 16 January, 1992, St. Lucie Unit 1 was in Mode 1 at 100% power. At 0830, a Technical Specification required grab sample was drawn from the Fuel Handling Building (FHB) ventilation stack radiation monitor (EIIS:IL)by a utilityChemistry technician.
Per an approved plant procedure, the radiation monitor's sample pump is secured during this surveillance.
Before the sample was taken, the technician overrode the radiation monitor's low flow alarm in order to avoid spurious alarms in the control room.
Override of the alarm is not an approved practice.
On 17 January, during midshift while making his required equipment checks, a non-licensed operator noted that the FHB stack monitor sample pump was secured.
The monitor flow indicated zero flow and the sample pump was off, but power was still available to the monitor skid. He notified the control room of this condition, and with the concurrence of licensed operators he restarted the sample pump. Nominal sample flowthrough the monitor was noted, no abnormal alarms were noted in the control room, and operators assumed that the monitor was back in service.
At 0730, a routine system check of the FHB monitor by a Chemistry supervisor reviewing the printout history of effluent monitors revealed that the FHB vent radiation monitor had been in the
'urge'ode since 0134 hrs on the 17th, and was therefore inoperable.
Operators in the control room were notified, and the system was restored to service at 0805.
The root cause of the FHB vent radiation monitor being found secured is attributed to the Chemistry technician inadvertantiy failing to restart the, sample pump after taking the weekly grab sample on the 16th. Procedurally, the sample pump is to be secured while drawing the grab sample, and then restarted upon completion of the surveillance.
The cause of the monitor being put in the purge condition at 0134 on the 17th is most likely due to improperly restarting the monitor by Operations personnel.
Functional equipment checks by Operations and Chemistry personnel after this event did not reveal any mechanical or electrical faults which may have caused the system to inadvertantly run in the purge mode of operation.
There were several contributing factors to this event. One contributing factor was that the sample pump's low flow alarm was overridden during the surveillance, and was not restored after the grab sample was drawn due to an oversight. This is not an approved practice. The Iow flow alarm annunciates in the control room, and would have alerted operators of low radiation monitor sample flow.
A second contributing factor to this event was that Operations personnel did not notify the on shift Chemistry technician that the FHB vent radiation monitor was found to be out of service.
This action may have shortened the time the monitor was out of service. Athird contributing factor to this event is that the shiftly data taken on this process monitor showed normal trends, and did not identify any trends or problems with the FHB vent radiation monitor. This condition is expected because the FHB is normally at background radiation levels, and background radiation levels are also recorded when the monitor's sample pump is secured or in the purge mode of operation.
There were no unusual work characteristics or adverse environmental conditions which contributed to this event.
FPL Facsimile of NRC Form 366 (6-89)
FPL Facalrfila ol NRC Form SG6 (I'F8@
U.S. NUCLEARREGUlATORYCOMMISSION LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER)
TEXT CONTINUATION AFFROITOOIIINIA01S0010l ftrftfan4000I TSTSAATTOIAFIOTHFTR IHSFISRCToCOIHATFATNnfs NFarSAANOHOCIATCNOH INCISE Sn 000 Itta fORWARS COINJEHT0 IHOARCtHOTIATXN0SNHATC To TtC IH CCATS HO IHFORT0 NHHIHIHNTSRANCSI TF-SSIAIAS IAHITARIHIHAATCRF~
wARNHRCH.OO ISIHtHASTonH FlfcRHcffttottcTMNFRrtacTR1HHI10FAcfftcc OF NANAOIIHHTAHlIKOOCT,WAHINCTON, OC IIICL FACILITYNAME (1)
St. Lucie Unit 1 DOCKET NUMBER (2)
YEAR LER NUMBER (6)
EQUENTIAL NUMBER REVISION NUMBER PAGE (3) 0 5
0 0 03 35 TEXT (Ifmore spaceis required, use additional NRC Form 366A's)
(1/)
9 2
0 0
1 0
0 0
3 0 0
4 This event is reportable under 10 CFR 50.73.a.2.i. as "any operation or condition prohibited by the plant Technical Specifications.", As per Technical Specification 3.3.3.10, the required action to be taken with the FHB vent radiation monitor inoperable is to immediately suspend the release of effluents monitoredby the instrument or else estimate effluent release rate and take grab samples every 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> and provide for continuous sampling with auxiliary sample equipment.
The function of the effluent radiation monitor is to provide indication of radiation levels during normal and accident conditions.
4 In this event, the FHB vent radiation monitor was out of service for approximately 23 hours2.662037e-4 days <br />0.00639 hours <br />3.80291e-5 weeks <br />8.7515e-6 months <br />.
During that period, the FHB exhaust fan was in operation, but no work was being performed in the FHB.
Therefore, there was no unplanned release from the FHB during that time period.
In the unlikely event that an unplanned release from the FHB vent had occurred during the time period that the effluent radiation monitor was out of service, operators would have been alerted to this condition by an increasing trend in shiftly logs readings of the FHB area radiation monitors. These independent area monitors also have alarms which sound in the control room. Therefore, the health and safety of the public was not affected by this event.
1.
Operations and Chemistry personnel restored the FHB vent radiation monitor back to service 2.
Functional testing of the FHB vent monitor done by Operations and Chemistry personnel did not reveal any mechanical or electricai faults which may have caused the system to inadvertantly run in the 'purge'ode.
- 3. Chemistry supervision has reviewed this event with all Chemistry personnel to discuss the generic importance of procedural compliance and the importance of step by step execution of a procedure for an evolution.
- 4. Chemistry supervision has reviewed this event with all Chemistry personnel to discuss the generic importance of not adjusting alarm setpoints unless procedurally addressed.
5.
Chemistry willrevise the applicable procedure to caution against defeating alarm setpoints when this practice is not specfically called for.
6.
Operations supervision has emphasized the need to notify Chemistry when problems occur with effluent radiation monitors.
7.
Training willevaluate this event for use in plant staff training.
FPL Facsimile of NRC Form 366 (6-89)
FPL Facalmlo ol NRC Form 39S (6 89)
U.S. NUCLEARREGULATORYCOMMISSCN LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER)
TEXT CONTINUATlON AAYROVIOTHAIHtl0I0041 Il CTTHRa lOOI0 TSTYIATTO TATHITNffa IKSffHOCTO COIHT.YWITHIlla04OIWATlONM00CYIDrl IRCXHCT!000 ITI0 IORWARTCIHHRIR4IRCARCAIO800HN TCTTHATCTO RR IHCCfO0 NO IHACRT0HAHAIXla HTCRAHCH TA IXL4a IAJClTANIHCIAATORY~
WAN THCTOH
. OC HTHAAN)TOTIN 0JYYRWORIIROOCTCN PROH CTITII04IOOCfRCC Of~ AWTARRY,WA%IHCTON,OCHHCk FACILITYNAME(1)
DOCKET NUMBER (2)
LER NUMBER (6)
PAGE (3)
St. Lucie Unit 1 0 500 0335 YEAR 9
2 EQUENTIAL NUMBER 0
0 1
REVISION NUMBER 0
0 0
4 0
4 TEXT (lfmore space is'required, use addifl'onal NRC Form 366A's)
(17)
None A prevous similar event is described in LER 335-89-006, when a Technical Specification effluent monitor was inoperable due to an I8C personnel error during maintenance.
FPL Facsimile of NRC Form 366 (6-89)