05000424/LER-1990-020-01, :on 900808,personnel Error Led to Tech Spec Violation

:on 900808,personnel Error Led to Tech Spec Violation

ML20197H464
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	11/07/1990
From:	Hairston W, Odom R GEORGIA POWER CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
ELV-02231, ELV-2231, LER-90-020-01, LER-90-20-1, NUDOCS 9011150127
Download: ML20197H464 (4)

LER-1990-020, on 900808,personnel Error Led to Tech Spec Violation

Event date:
Report date:
Reporting criterion:	10 CFR 50.73(a)(2) 10 CFR 50.73(a)(2)(v), Loss of Safety Function 10 CFR 50.73(a)(2)(1) 10 CFR 50.73(a)(2)(x)
4241990020R01 - NRC Website

text

..

GJ(agra Pow Comruiny 333 Piedrnont Avenuo Atlanta. Getngia 30308

.o

, Vephone 404 526 3195 o

Ma,hng Acktrm 40 inntr+n Center Parkway Post Offce Don 1295 H,rminghani Alatrima 35201 Telephore 205 808 %81 I'4! 5(4/NMVD (W Clf(? $ yFft.'II)

W. G. Hairston, all Sen.or Vce Presnient neear orieraxins November 7, 1990 4

Docket No.

50-424 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, D. C.

20555 Gentlemen:

V0GTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT LICENSEE EVENT REPORI PERSONNEL ERROR LEADS TO A TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION VIOLATION In accordance with 10 CFR 50.73, Georgia Power Company hereby submits the enclosed report related to an event which was discovered on October 8,.1990.

Sincerely, w.k.. % 4 x H. G. Hairston, III WGH,III/NJS/gm Enclo::dre:

LER 50-424/1990-020 xc: Egpraia Power Company Mr. C. K. McCoy Mr. W. B. Shiaman Mr. P. D. Rusiton Mr. R. M. Odom NORMS 1

j 1

U. S Nuclear Reaulatory Commission Mr. S. D. Ebneter, Regional Administrator Mr. D. S. Hood, Licensing Project Manager, NRR Mr. B. R. Bonser, Senior Resident Inspector, Vogtle l

l 9011150127 901107

/f m

m oce os000 m S

PliC

/

grm366 U.5. NVGLEAR REGULAIDRV GOMM15510N LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER)

FACILITY H.Mi (1)

DOGLEI huMBER (Z) r,cr (T)

VOCITE ELECIRIC GDERATING PIANT - UNIT 1 05000424 L

e, l 3 IJ1LL (4) pIR50HNEl. ERROR IJJ)S *11) A TECINICAL SPECIF1 CATION VIO1ATION EVEh! DA1E (5)

LER huMBER (6)

ALPORI DATE (7)

OTHER fACILillES lhv0LVED (6)

MON 1H DAY TEAR YEAR SED WUM ALV MON 1H DAV YEAR FACILl1Y NAMES DOCLEI hUMBER($)

05000 08 08 90 90 020 00 11 07 90 05000 I I II I

II "I

I #

OPfRATING MODE (9) 1 20.402(b) 20.405(c) 50.73(a)(2)(lv)

LEVEL 100 20.405(e)(1)(1) 50.36(c)(1) 50.73(a)(2)(v) 73.71(b) 73.71(c)

POWER

~

~

~

20.405(e)(1)(ii) 50.36(c)(2) 50.73(a)(2)(vil)

OTHER (specify in

~

20.405(e)(1)(lii)

T 50.73(a)(2)(1)

[ 50.73(a)(2)(vill)(A)

Abstract below) 20.405(e)(1)(lv) 50.73(a)(2)(ll) 50.73(a)(2)(vill)(B)

~

PD.405(e)(1)(v)

$0.73(a)(2)(Ill)

~

50.73(a)(2)(x)

~

LICEhSEE CONIACI f0R THl$ LER (li)

N AMF.

TELEPH0ht NUMBER AREA CODE R. M. ODG4. NUCIIAR SAFEIY AND COMPLIANCE 404 826 3201 COMPLETE oNE LihE FOR EACH FAILURE DESCRIBED IN THl$ REPORT (13)

NVFAC=

R PORT CAU2E DYSTEM COMPONENT MAwUFAC-R P0Ri

CAUSE

SYSTEM COMPONENT M[Up(g 7UR wppg

$UPPLEMENTAL REPOR1 EXPECIED (14)

MON 1H DAY YEAR EXPECTED l"E] NO SUBMISSION Dt.iE (1$)

~

YES(If yes, complete EXPECTED SUBMIS$10N DATE) l ABt1RACT (16)

On 8 8-90, an electrician was performing monthly preventive maintenance (PM) on battery bank 1CD1B in the 125 volt DC Class 1E electrical system.

Several parameters on each battery cell aere measured and recorded on the " Battery Maintenance Data Sheet" attached to the PM work order.

The PM was completed and signed-off as approved by the electrician's foreman.

l On 10-8-90, the system engineer was reviewing the above mentioned work order and identified that the measured voltage of cell #35 was recorded as 2.12 volts.

Technical Specification (TS) Table 4.8 2 requires the float voltage for each connected cell to be greater than or equal to 2.13 volts.

Therefore, a violation of TS occurred when the voltage parameter had not been verified to be restored in the required time frame and the TS action statement was not implemented. Upon identification by the system engineer, the Shift Supervisor was advised of this condition and was informed that the float voltage of the battery cell involved had been found to be acceptable during two subsequent PM's on 8-29 90 and 10 2-90.

The cause of this event was a personnel error on the part of the electrician and the maintenance foreman. Although the voltage acceptance criteria identified in the TS was not met, the electrician and foremar' erroneously approved the measurements. These individuals have been counseled regarding the importance of attention to detail.

hg[

hpphlY0LXPIR( Yl M IN N0

$1 8/31/88 LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) TEXT CONTINUATION FAClllTY NAMI (1)

DOCKL1 NUMBlR (?)

L(R NUMBER (b)

PAG [ (3) 1[AR 5[Q hbM "V

VOCTLE ELE &iRIC CENERATING PINff UNIT 1 05000424 90 020 00 2

or 3

I T[K1 A.

REQUIREMENT FOR REPOR1 This report is required per 10 CFR 50.73 (a)(2)(1) because the unit operated in a condition outside of Technical Specification (TS) requirements. A Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) actica statement was not completed within the allowable time when a component (a battery cell) was outside of its operability requirements.

B.

UNIT STATUS AT TIME OF EVENT At the time of the occurrence of this event on 8 8 90, Unit I was operating in Mode 1 (Power Operation) at 100% of rated thermal power.

Other than that described herein, there was no inoperabic equipment which contributed to the occurrence of this event.

C.

DESCRIPTION OF EVENT

On 8 8 90, an ciectrician was performing monthly preventive maintenance (PH) on battery bank 1CD1B in the 125 volt DC Class 1E electrical system per procedure 27915 C, "Ceneral Battery Haintenance".

Several parameters on each battery cell were measured and recorded on the " Battery Maintenance Data Sheet" attached to ths PM work order.

The PM was completed and signed off as approved by the electrician and foreman.

On 10 8-90, the system engineer was reviewing the above mentioned work order and identified that the measured voltage of cell #35 was recorded as 2.12 volts. Table 4.8-2 of the TS requires the float volta &c for each connected cell to be greater than or equal to 2.13 volts. This table also allows float voltages betwoon 2.10 volts and 2.13 volts provided ths.t this parameter is restored to its 2.13 volt lower limit in 7 days. Otherwise, the TS 3.8.2.1 action statement applies as follows:

"With less than the above minimum required D. C. electrical sources OPERABLE restore the inoperable D. C electrical sources to OPERABLE stacus within 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> or be in at least il0T STANDBY within the next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> and in COLD SilUTDOWN within the following 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br />."

Therefore, a violation of TS occurred on 8-15 90 when the voltage parameter I

had not been verified to be restored within 7 days and the TS 3,8.2,1 action statement was not impicmented. Upon identification by the system engineer on 10-8 90, the Shift Supervisor was advised of this condition and was informed that the float voltage of the battery cell involved had been found

.to be acceptable during two subsequent PM's on 8 29-90 and 10 2 90.

D.

CAUSE OF EVENT

The cause of th;d event was a cognitive personnel error on the part of the cicctrician and maintenance foreman. Although the voltage acceptance criteria identified in the TS and in the PM procedure was not met, they erroneously approved the measurements. This error was not the result of-any unusual characteristics of the work location.

[8W,*#***

$$5ROL 50$15 I 58 8/31/88 LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) TEXT CONTINUATION FACILITY NAME (1)

DOCKET huMBER (2)

LER NUMBER (5)

PAGE (3)

)[AR SEQ hum EEV VX.TLE EIICIRIC CINERATINC PIAVT UNIT 1 05000424 90 020 00 3

or 3

TEXI E.

ANALYSIS OF EVENT

Hessurements taken, both prior to the 8-8 90 event and again on 8-29-90 and 10 2-90, indicated acceptable cell voltage values.

Furthermore, due to the amount of data which must be transcribed during these monthly surveillances, we believe that the unaccepts.ble float voltage recorded on 8 8 90 was the result of a transcription error and not a real problem with float voltage.

Finally, the other three battery banks in the system remained operable during the period of time involved.

Based on these considerations, there was no adverse effect on plant safety or public health and safety as a result of this event.

F.

CORRECTIVE ACTIONS

1.

The Georgia Power Company electrician and foreman involved have been counseled regarding the importance of attention to detail, 2.

A memo has been sent to other appropriate personnel describing this event and the need for adequate reviews.

3 ~. Battery cell #35 has been designated a pilot cell, which requires more L

frequent (weekly) testing. This will allow future problems with cell

1. 35 to be identified sooner.

4.

A review of the various surveillances and PMs which are required for the batteries is in progress in an effort to eliminate duplication and simplify data recording. This review will be completed and incorporated into procedures by 1-31-91.

C.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

1.

Failed Components:

None 1

2.

Previous Similar Events

LER 50 424/1989-019, dated 1-2 90.

Corrective actions from this LER included personnel counseling and procedure enhancement.

3.

Energy Industry Identification System Code:

125 volt DC Class 1E Electrical System - EJ