ML19331C821

Forwards LER 80-035/03X-1

ML19331C821
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Saint Vrain
Issue date:	08/12/1980
From:	Warembourg D PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF COLORADO
To:	Seyfrit K NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
Shared Package
ML19331C822	List: ML19331C821 ML19331C825
References
P-80265, NUDOCS 8008190597
Download: ML19331C821 (6)

Text

_

public service company e escardo 16805 ROAD 19%

PLATTEVILLE, COLORADO 80651 hg August 12, 1980 9 Fort St. Vrain Unit No.1 g P-80265 Mr. Karl V. Seyfrit, Director Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region IV Office of Inspection and Enforce =ent 611 Ryan Plaza Drive Suite 1000 Arlington, Texas 76012

Reference:

Facility Operating License No. DPR-34 Docket No. 50-267

Dear Mr. Seyfrit:

Enclosed please find a copy of Reportable Occurrence Report No. 50-267/

80-35, Revised Final, submitted per the requirements of Technical Speci-fication AC 7.5.2(b)2.

Also, please find enclosed one copy of the Licensee Event Report for Reportable Occurrence Report No. 50-267/80-35.

Very truly yours, W. tat Don Wareebourg Manager, Nuclear Production DW/cis Enclosure ec: Director, MIPC Y '

N '7.,i 80081908%

3 - -. . .. _ .. -

o REPORT DATE: August 12, 1980 REPORTABLE OCCURRENCE 80-35 ISSUE 1 OCCURRENCE DATE: June 25, 1980 Pa ge 1 o f 3 FORT ST GAIN NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION PU3LIC SERVICE COMPA'iY OF COLORADO 16805 WELD COUNTY ROAD 19 1/2 PLATTEVILLE, COLORADO 80651

/

REPORT NO. 50-267/30-35/03-X-1 Revised Final

.;ENTIFICATION OF CCCURRENCE:

During the regeneration of a batch of condensate polisher resin, waste water was discharged to the plant liquid effluent system instead of the waste neutralizing tank. This resulted in a degraded mode of LCO NR 1.1, and is reportable per Fort St. Vrain Technical Specification AC 7.3.2(b)2.

EVENT DESCRIPTION:

On June 25, 1980, at approxi=ately 1100 hours0.0127 days <br />0.306 hours <br />0.00182 weeks <br />4.1855e-4 months <br />, the valves, D-12 and D-13 (See Figure 1), which control the discharge path of waste water from the con-densate polisher resin regeneration system did not automatically line up properly and discharged the waste acid and caustic used in resin regener-ation to the turbine building sump instead of the waste neutralization tank.

This resulted in the waste water being discharged to the yard drain and then to the Goosequill Ditch.

Fort at. Vrain Technical Specification LC0 NR 1.1 requires that the regener-ation effluent be stored in lined evaporation ponds, and establishes li=its for various chemicals in the ef fluent. The discharge of the regeneration vaste water to the Goosequill Ditch was not in accordance with the Technical Specification. Three of the chemical limits of LCO NR 1.1 were exceeded as noted below.

Ma:ci=us Concentration ie :ual C,11; tituent Or Value C plue Cu 1 ppm 1.3 ppm Zn 5 ppm 9.2 pps pH 6.0 - 9.0 1.9 - 9.8

REPORTA3LE OCCURRENCE 80-35 ISSUE 1 Page 2 of 5 EVENT DESCRIPTION: (Cont'd)

The remaining require =ents of the LCO were satisfied as the liquid effluent did follow the prescribed discharge paths.

tihen the abnormal Goosequill chemistry was observed, the possible sources were investigated and the problem with the condensate polisher resin regen-eration system was discovered. I:=ediate action was taken to terminate the release of regeneration chemicals by manually overriding the discharge path selector and putting all the waste water to the neutralizing tank. Corrective action returned chemical constituents to acceptable concentrations uithin the 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> required.

4

, Due to the high pH water being discharged to the Goosequill Ditch, the pH

of the farm ponds rose to higher than normal values, as follows

9 f

pH j Date Time (Farn pond) i j 6-26 1500 Hours 10.3 i

g 6-27 Not Tagged 9.45 6-27 Not Tagged 9.95 6-23 No t Ta gged 9.12 l 6-29 1215 Hours 8.97

! The high pH values from June 25 to June 29, 1980, were the restit of the

! June 25 discharge from the plant and the delay time involved in this water l passing through the farm ponds. This can be seen from the pH of the Goose-l quill over the sa:e period.

l t pH l Date Time (Goosecuill) 6-25 1110 Hours 1.92 l

i

! 6-25 1315 Hours 9.30 l ,

6-25 1930 Hours 3.6 l  !

6-26 0035 Hours 3.9 4

6-26 1210 Hours 3.35 I

6-26 1930 Hours 3.4 l

4 REPORTABLE OCCURRENCE 80-35 ISSUE 1 Page 3 of 5 EVENT DESCRIPTION: (Cont ' d) pH Date Time (Goosequill) 6-27 lat Shift 8.5 6-27 2nd Shift 8.45 6-27 3rd Shift 8.25 6-2S lst Shift S.4 I j 6-23 2nd Shif t 8.4 I

l 6-23 3rd Shif t 8.4 6-29 1st Shif t 8.5 6-29 2nd Shift S.9 6-29 3rd Shif t 8.7 8

The chemical concentrations of the Goosequill water were all within limits l

. by the 1930 hour0.0223 days <br />0.536 hours <br />0.00319 weeks <br />7.34365e-4 months <br /> sample on June 25, 1980, approxi=ately 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> after the problem s tarted.

{

i CAUSE DESCRIPTION:

The inadvertent discharge of the regeneration waste water was due to a failed conductivity cell in the vaste water line which prevented proper auto =atic valve line up. This equipment failure could not have been avoided or the dischar3e prevented by = ore frequent process sampling or testing of the in-strument.

I CORRECTIVE ACTION:

Immediate action consisted of manually directing regeneration vaste water to the neutralizing tank.

Followup actions were to continue the sampling until chemical concentrations were within LCO lTR 1.1 limits. The conductivity element was replaced, and discharge valve operability was verified.

No further corrective action is anticipated or required.

g9 - _r,9,,-,-,.p--

• y - u --

p-ye-y9 4-n-pe-. y y-- - -

9-, w c- M-

REPCRTA3LE OCCL*RRD*CE 30-35 ISSG 1 Page 4 of 3 1

3eck=an Solubridge Waste Water '

From Regener-3_13 6 l ation Skid C 4 '

D I l

8D-12 l 2 n .......o o-I

,3 -nigh con- i Cr- i lductivity Alar::

7 Turbine Wasts Neutrali:2:icn Tank 3uilding Susp i

l t

1 l

l

. Ob.b .

I l

I i

1 i

l l

i

't 1

REPORTABLE OCCURRENCE 80-35 ISSUE 1 Page 5 of 5 i

1 Prepared By: 44 4 Asa 3. Reed Technical Services Technician i

i Reviewed By:

J. W. Gahm Technical Services Supervisor Reviewed By: U [V

• Frank Of. !athie Operations ".anager i

l j1 ,9 Approved Sy: /Li, Mue~#W j Don h'arembourg Manager,NuclearProduc/ cion I

l l

B r

i i

1

..n- , --m r - , ...n. -, , ,.-.-, . , . , , - , . . , - , . s n. -,

- . - .--.v-., ,w.n,- e- ,,.4 ..,m,.vn_....,.,,-~ ~ .-

m