ML20129E541

NPDES Noncompliance Notification:On 960812,discharge Observed from Unit 2 Cooling Tower Overflow to Outfall 021. Caused by Personnel Error in Performing Required Analysis of Cooling Tower Overflow Sample.Individual Counseled

ML20129E541
Person / Time
Site:	Limerick
Issue date:	09/26/1996
From:	Boyce R PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC
To:	Oneil S PENNSYLVANIA, COMMONWEALTH OF
References
NUDOCS 9610030193
Download: ML20129E541 (3)

Text

.- - _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ m _ _. _ _ _ . .

Robert W.B:ym

• Piont Manaaer Lmencx Generating Station l.

. .V i

PECO NUCLEAR esco rne,2v cemoen, Limenck Generating Station A Unit of PECO Energy Po Box 230o Sanatoga, PA 19464-o92o 61o 718 200o l

I r i September 26,1996 l

Steven J. O'Neil Chief, Operations Section Department of Environmental Resources Bureau of Water Quality Management Suite 6010, Lee Park 555 North Lane Conshohocken, PA 19428

SUBJECT:

Limerick Generating Station, Unit I and 2 Non-Compliance of NPDES Permit No PA-0051926

Dear Mr. O'Neil:

Descriotion of the Non-Comoliance: ,

On August 12,1996, a discharge was observed from the Unit 2 cooling tower overflow to Outfall 021. In accordance with the NPDES Permit a sample of the overflow discharge was obtained at 1450 hours0.0168 days <br />0.403 hours <br />0.0024 weeks <br />5.51725e-4 months <br /> on August 13,1996. All analyses of the discharge sample were found to be within their limits except for the total residual chlorine. The total residual chlorine was omitted during this sample and was not discovered until after the condition causing the cooling tower overflow discharge was corrected.

Cause of the Non-Comoliance:

The cause of the non-compliance is personnel error in performing the required analysis of the cooling tower overflow discharge sample. Although the individual was knowledgeable of the NPDES Permit requirements to sample and analyze, the individual failed to o recognize that the sample was collected during a cooling tower chlorine injection cycle,  ;

and required a total residual chlorine analysis. 4 { "f'f

/

~' ,  !

b 9610030193 960926 PDR ADOCK 05000353 v S PDR ,

. - t 1_

i .

4

. . i September 26,1996 Page Two i

Actions to Prevent Recurrence:

The responsible individual was counseled on the need to self check and to ensure tiet samples collected during the chlorine injection cycle are analyzed for total residual chlorine in accordance with the NPDES Permit requirements. In addition, this event was discussed at a Chemistry Group All Hands Meeting to emphasize the need to self check and more specifically to be cognizant of the cooling tower chlorine injection cycle.

Assessment of this event is ongoing, and any significant findings or programmatic issues will be addressed as necessary.

If there are any questions please do not hesitate to contact Mr. James L. Kantner at (610) 718 3400.

I Sincerely, )

1 N

1 I

l l

I, I

i i

O

September 26,1996

- Page Three cc: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Docket Nos. 50-352/352 Washington, D.C. 20555 i

H. J. Miller Administrator, Region I, USNRC Docket Nos. 50-352-353 N. S. Perry USNRC Senior Resident Inspector, LGS Docket Nos. 50-352/353 Program Management Section (3WM52) l Permits Enforcement Branch EnvironmentalProtection Agency Water Management Division i

EnvironmentalProtection Agency Water Permits Section Region III 841 Chestnut Building .

Philadelphia, PA 19107

. i I

d 1 +- ..

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