ML19332C758

LER 89-017-00:on 891022,discovered That 6-month Functional Test Procedure Qos 500-3 Re Functional Test for Reactor Protection Sys Electrical Assemblies Not Completed in Required Time.Caused by Mgt deficiency.W/891120 Ltr

ML19332C758
Person / Time
Site:	Quad Cities
Issue date:	11/20/1989
From:	Bax R, Dolecheck D COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
LER-89-017-03, LER-89-17-3, RLB-89-258, NUDOCS 8911280515
Download: ML19332C758 (5)

Text

,. g ---

,ie S ; _ , __ . , .j Q: . myl& ylqi h 22710 o@und Cities Nuctar Pow e' J!atson

^

b i . .E -([

T: ~j 206 Avenue North -

. J.E

.((/ . Telephone Cordova, Illinois 61242-9740 309/654 2241 ?

g RLB-89-258 l

c November 20,-1989 U.S'.' Nuclear Regulatory. Commission .

. Document Control: Desk '

Washington, DC 20555-1

Reference:

' Quad- C1 ties Nuclear Pwer- Station Docket Number 50-254, DPR-29, Unit One

, Enclosed ~is Licensee Event Report:(LER)89-017, Revision 00, for Quad Cities.;

L. Nuclear Power. Station. .

This report is submitted in accordance-with the requirements of the Code of

Federal Regulations,-Title 10,.Part 50.73(a)(2)(1)(B); which states that the L -licensee shalll report any operation or condition prohibited by the plant's l . Technical' Specification.

Respectfully, COMMONNEALTH' EDISON COMPANY

. . QUAD CITIES NUCLEAR' POWER STATION L a J. 7 C M8

'R.%.iBax.

L

' Station-Manager U RLB/MJB/eb

~ Enclosure l.

I" cc: R. Stols l R. Higgins l- INPO Records Center NRC Region III I

(. >

,2371H/0697Z 6911260313 691120 PDR .ADOCK 05000234 >

S PDC

LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) 7 ,,,

f acilit'y Name (1) Docket Number (2) Pane f3)

• a p Citiet unit one GI El of 01 01 21 El 4 1 !of!0!4 Title (4) Reactor Protection system Electrical Protections Assemblies Functional Test hot Canulated on Time Due to Mana- ,1 Deficiency Event Date (E) LER "

• er (6) Renart Data (7) Other Fac111tian Involved fa)

Month Day Year Year / sequential /// Revision Month Day Year Facility Namet Docket Numberft)

/,p/,/

// " d er /// Number 01 51 01 01 01 I i

~~ ~~~

11 0 21 2 al 9 al 9 0 l 1 l7 010 1l1 210 al 9 01 El 01 01 01 l l OPERATING (Check one or more of the followine) (II) 2 20.402(b) _ 20.405(c) 50.73(a)(2)(iv) 73.71(b)

POWER. _ 20.405(a)(1)(1) 50.36(c)(1) _ 50.73(a)(2)(v) _ 73.71(c)

LEVEL 20.405(a)(1)(ii) 50.36(c)(2) 50.73(a)(2)(vii) .__._ Other (specify (101 0 0!O _ 20.405(a)(1)(iii) K_ 50.73(a)(2)(1) __ 50.73(a)(2)(viii)(A) in Abstract

////////////////////////// __,. 20.405(a)(1)(iv) , 50.73(a)(2)(ii) 50.73(a)(2)(viit)(B) below and in

/////// ////////////////// 20.405(a)(1)(v) _ 50.73(a)(2)(111) _ 50.73(a)(2)(x) Text)

LICENSEE CONTACT FOR THIS LER f12)

Name TELEPHONE NUMBER AREA CODE Dennit Delacheck. Teennical Staff Enoineer. Ext. 2190 31019 61 El 41 -l 21 21 41 COMPLETE ONE LINE FOR EACH COM NT FAILURE DESCRIBED IN THIS REPORT f13)

CAUsE SYSTEM COMPONENT MANUFAC- REPORTABLE / CAUsE SYSTEM COMPONENT MANUFAC- REPORTABLE j

TURER 70 NPRDS / TURER TO NPRDS I l l l l l [ / l l l i I l l I i 1 I I I I l l 1 I I I I SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT EXPECTED (14) Expected Month 1 Day l Year submission lYet fif vet. comolate EXPECTED SUBMI1SION DATE) X l No I i l ABSTRACT (Limit to 1400 spaces. i.e. approximately fifteen single-space typewritten lines) (16)

ABSTRACT:

On October 22, 1989, Unit One was in the REFUEL mode and shut down at zero percent power. _At 1657 hours0.0192 days <br />0.46 hours <br />0.00274 weeks <br />6.304885e-4 months <br />, the Shift Engineer (SE) discovered that the six-month functional test procedure QOS 500-3, Functional Test for Reactor Protection System Electrical Protection Assemblies (EPAs), had not been completed within the Technical Specification allotted time frame for this surveillance. The Shift Engineer notified an Operating Engineer, and they concluded that Technical Specification 4.9.F.1.a had been violated. The Shift Engineer then instructed the Unit One Nuclear Station Operator (NS0) to move the reactor mode switch to the SHUTDOWN mode as required by Technical Specification 3.9.F.1 and to also insert a scram. The Shift Engineer notified the Operational Analysis Department (OAD) to perform the surveillance as soon as possible. The surveillance was completed at 1847 hours0.0214 days <br />0.513 hours <br />0.00305 weeks <br />7.027835e-4 months <br /> on October 22, 1989.

This event occurred due to a misunderstanding concerning the EPA surveillance requirements when the reactor is subcritical, depressurized, and cold. This event will be covered in license retraining.

3371H/06972

LICEttEE EVENT 'REPetf f LEt t TEXT CMTIMilAfim Form Rav'2.0

,, FACILITY NAME (1)-. 00cKET hDSEP (2) LER huMars f6) Pana f31

,L Year / sequential / Revision

/,/j/

//

f ' - - /j/j/

f

// m"r

!- a m citten unit ana o I s I t l_g i o 1 21 El 4 aIe - eIiI7 - oIo 012 or ni4 lt i -TExTg Energy Industry Identification sy stem (E!!s) codes are identified in the text as [xxl PLANT AND SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION: ,

General: Ele'ctric'- Bolling Water Reactor - 2511 MWt rated core thermal power. l EVENT IDENTIFICATION: Reactor Protection System Electrical Protections Assemblies Functional Test Not Completed on Time Due to Management Deficiency ,

-A. CONDITIONS PRIOR TO EVENT:

Unit: One . Event Date: October 22, 1989 Event Time: 1700-i Reactor Mode: 2- Mode Name: REFUEL Power Level: 0%-

p This report.was initiated.by Deviation Report 0-4-1-89-090.

REFUEL Mode-(2) - In this position interlocks are established so that one control L rod only may be withdrawn when flux amplifiers are set at the proper sensitivity L level and the refueling crane is not over the reactor. Also, the trip from the.

l . turbine control valves, turbine stop valves, main steam isolation valves, and 1:

condenser vacuum are bypassed. If the refueling crane is over the reactor, all rods must be fully inserted and none can be withdrawn.

.B. DESCRIPTION OF EVENT:

On October 22, 1989,' Unit One was in the REFUEL mode at zero percent power. At 1657 hours0.0192 days <br />0.46 hours <br />0.00274 weeks <br />6.304885e-4 months <br />, the Shift Engineer-discovered that the six-month functional test procedure QOS 500-3, Functional Test for Reactor Protection System (RPS) Electrical Protection Assemblies (EPAs), had not been completed within the Technical Specification required time frame for this surveillance. The surveillance had

previously been performed on February 28, 1989. The allowed surveillance interval of six months, plus the 25 percent (46 days) additional time allowed by Technical Specification 1.0.00, had-expired on October 16, 1989. The Shift Engineer notified an Operating Engineer, and they concluded that Technical Specification 4.9.F.1.a had been violated. Consequently, the RPS was declared technically inoperable.

1 Technical Specification 3.9.F.1 requires the RPS [JC] to be operable unless the reactor mode switch [33] is in the SHUTDOWN mode. The Shift Engineer instructed the Unit'One Nuclear Station Operator (NS0) to move the reactor mode switch to the SHUTDOWN mode and insert a scram, satisfying Technical Specification 3.9.F.1. The Shift ~ Engineer then instructed the Operational Analysis Department (OAD) to perform the' surveillance as soon as possible. The surveillance was completed on October 22,1989, at 1847 hours0.0214 days <br />0.513 hours <br />0.00305 weeks <br />7.027835e-4 months <br />.

2371H/06972

4 .

LifEMitt EVfuf REPIET (LER) TEKT comTfMt1ATion Forni tav 2.0 ,

,FACIL!TY NAME (1); DOCKET Niseta (2) Lta utsamra ist Paan (2) i Li3 Y;ar s:quential Revision

-7 mr m."---

p numd cities unit one olEl0leIol 21 El 4 al9 - ol 1 17 - 0Io 012 oF 014 TEXT'- Energy Industry Identification system (E!!s) codes are identified in the text as (XX) l C. APPARENT CAUSE OF EVENT:

This report is being submitted to meet the requirements of 10CFR50.73(a)(2)(1)(B).

The root'cause of this event is management deficiency. The Shift Engineer initiated Work Requests 077463 and Q77464 which clearly delineated to OAD that the surveillance-was due on September 1, 1989. 0AD contacted the Operating Department

. prior to September 1, 1989, and it was agreed that in order to avoid unnecessary half scrams while the-unit was operating, the. surveillance could be delayed untti-the upcoming refueling outage. Both Operating and CAD believed that the s surveillance did not need to be performed while the reactor was subcritical, depressurized, and cold.

D. SAFETY ANALYSIS OF EVENT:

'The safety of plant and personnel were not affected by this event. On October 16 - t' 1989, the surveillance frequency exceeded 1.25 times the normal frequency. From

-September 17, 1989, to October 17, 1989, there was no fuel in the vessel. On October 17, 1989, a scram was inserted. Then the mode switch was put in REFUEL _and the core unload was started. The scram was reset for 10 minutes on October 17, 1989, to perform startup range monitor checks, then reinserted. The only time after the fuel load started and prior to completion of the EPA surveillance that _

any control rod was at a position other than 00, was when control rod 38-35 drifted to position 02. It was immediately reinserted to position 00. On October.22, 1989, at 0530, the scram was reset. At 1657, the missed EPA surveillance was discovered and the scram was reinserted. Because a scram was inserted or no fuel-was in the vessel for virtually all of the time between expiration of the- +

l surveillance interval and performance of the surveillance, this event had no safety significance.

.E. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS:

The immediate corrective action was to move the reactor mode switch to the SHUTDOWN mode in order to be in compilance with TS 3.9.F.1. 0AD was instructed to perform the'RPS surveillance which was completed on October 22, 1989. This event will be l covered in license retraining (NTS 2542008909001), and will be reviewed with OAD.

(NTS 2542008909002).

l 2371H/06972 r

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

WJ r'y d

LIrfatfr EVENT REPORT fLtal TEXT comTrantATIoM ' Form Rav 2.0

{ FAc1LTTY NAfE (1)i 00cKET NUPSER (2)- Ltt mussare ts) Pana f31 q L l4 .i . Year U/ sequential U/ Revision 1 L c,r -* /

f/j --

f' ff m.mr j b 'S a==k citian unit one- o I s 1 o I o I e 1 21 El 4 aIe -- al1 17 - 'o I e ole or old

' TEXT; EEnergy Industry Identification system (E!!s) codes are identified in the text as'[XX]

.F,; ' PREVIOUS EVENTS * -

Previously .the following LERs have been submitted due to missed Technical  :

Specification Surveillances.. However, only LER ~ 254/89-13 was due to l misunderstand 1ng:of the Technical Specification requirements. Thus, the ~above J corrective actions are considered sufficient. J LER DESCRIPTION 265/86-02 Monthly: Reactor Vent Sample Not Obtained-265/88-02. Missed RCIC Surveillance.

1254/88-06 Hlssed Meekly Rad. Surveillance ,

254/88-02 -Missed Reactor Level' Surveillance.

254/88-15 Missed Fire Protection ~ Valve Surveillance r

--265/88-29 Missed Post Accident Monitor Surveillance

'265/88-30 Missed Post Accident Monttor Surveillance-254/89-02 Missed 3.25 Internal for MSIV LLRT  :

~254/89-03 Missed Fire Protection Surveillance 254/89-13. Missed 4' Hour Chimney Samples

G. ' COMPONENT FAILURE DATA 1 No_ component failures _were involved with this event.

1 f'

p+

y, t

2371H/06972 f

1' .- . - - . . -. . -. - _ - -. . . _- _ .-_ _