ML20044B383

LER 90-007-00:on 900614,discovered That Numerous Fire Detection Instruments Exceeded Max Allowable Interval for 6-month Operability Test.Caused by Personnel Error. Procedures for Surveillance Tests changed.W/900712 Ltr

ML20044B383
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	07/12/1990
From:	Cervenka P, Fitzpatrick E GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
LER-90-007, LER-90-7, NUDOCS 9007190113
Download: ML20044B383 (4)

Text

- -

i, .is

% x..

• a\.

I, y,

OPU Nuolent Carpereuen Post Office Box 388 Route 9 South Forked River, New Jersey 087310388 609 971 4000 Wntor's Direct Dial Number:

Y July 12,1990 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Dear Sir Subjects Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Docket No. 50-219 Licensee Evene Report This letter forwards one (1) copy of Licensee Event Report (LER) No.90-007.

4 i Very truly yours, r%

v.&

P. E Fitzpatrick - -

V esident & Director Oyster Creek i l

EEF BDe (1er/Cov1trasje)

Enclosure cca Mr. Thomas Martin, Administrator Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

• 475 Allendale Road '

King of Prussia, PA 19406 l Mr. Alexander W. Dromerick I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 '

NRC Resident Inspector Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Forked River, NJ 08731 p

I 9007190113 900712 gDR ADOCK0500g9 GPU Nuclear Corporation is a subsidaary of General Pubhc Utikties Corporation  !

l was . a.s '

u a souctta. .sou6 atomy osammenso. ,

4888 tov 4D one Is0. Stu-4th I

• '""*"'** l

. LK:ENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) eamun=== o. o.o.., u o.. , _ g, f Oyst er Creek. Unit 1 o is lo to lol2l1 l9 t lorl0 1 3

"'d'** Individual Componento Exceed Icchnical Specification Maximum Test Interval Due to Personnel Error iv.=1 un = u . =u . i., .. , a n ,,, 01, . , .C,v,, ,,,voty.o .,

"N,(Qn'4 oocklf Nues.t.it, hoot,YM oav vtA. vta. ,",8,M M D's 7 M oav vla. C'4't v haues o Is io l o l o l 2:1 l9 1

~ ~

0l 6 1l 4 90 9l0 0l0 I7 0 l0 ol7 1l 2 9 l0 0l51010,0 1 1 I l o,,,,,,,,,, i ...on . .u=neo .va.u.., to v.s ..ou .. .n o, i. c. t <c c , n u mese ei ,,,,,, ,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,n, , s ,, ,,

. M S teH1HO W.N6eHil 00.?94sH8Het 78 71188 n., i i . . in n.,

W anteH1Hilal g..,3eeigns)

. ..l. ..H .

gg ,.cottgH,mHA)

_ y.,; pm o

Jfed;

_ _ l s M MieHiltml 90 PSteH3HIH te.?D6sH8Hvembel N Wiell1Het t. 79enH3Hiell 78teH3Het Lectal.GI CoedT ACT po. Tues tem 113)

NAMS f t 60.*4048 Nuhl.G.

A.6&CDDS Paul Cervenka 6 l0,9 91 7l1 r 1 4 18 p l4 co a n . u. . .. . .e. so . , . ..t u.. o..c. ... . .. .. , n ., .

"A "

C&Ulf Sv8?tM CoM ohtNT $0' "$'o Rf CAvSE Sv8Tlw Cow.ohtNT $0'

"$ AffE w., .

l l l'l l l l l t l l l l l 5 47 l l 1 I i i I l l l l l l l m *

.u a==,at u.on n seno n.. uowv car vp.

su.. .o

""'l vie r,< ,

.=v..C, ,u, . me sratene re >wmoe urri

....,,.,.~.n..

] no l l l on June 14, 1990 during the performance of an Internal Quality Assurance Audit it was discovered that numerous fire detection instruments were exceeding their maximum allowable interval for the six month operability test as required by Plant Technical Specifications.

The cause of this occurrence is attributed to personnel 0rror due to a procedure deficiency. The procedure that specifies ne methods of scheduling failed to recognize that the time it takes to complete the entire surveillance (four to six weeks) could cause individual components to exceed the maximum test interval required by Technical Specifications.

The procedure that specifies the method of scheduling surveillance tests will be changed to ensure all test interval requirements are met and appropriate schedules will be modified.

l l

l

.g,, . .

l l

l

. + ,

ans ana ue aucaan neemaioav c- .

Y -

UCENSEE EVENT MEPORT (LERI TEXT CONTINUATION **aoveo ome =o me-eim  !

.......m \

ensautv mass. m l essaet muumea un ua e.uussa is ****te i

......o.. ... i

.... i Oyster Creek, Unit 1 l 018101010 l 2l119 9l 0 -

O!O f7 -

Q0 Q2 0F 0 13 l von. . maca an.wim l DATE OF DISCOVERY f

The condition being reported was discovered on June 14, 1990 at {

approximately 1500 hours0.0174 days <br />0.417 hours <br />0.00248 weeks <br />5.7075e-4 months <br />. The condition has existed for an extended  ;

period of time. j IDENTIFICATION OF OCCURRENCE Individual fire detection instruments (EZIS-IC) on several occasions exceeded the maximum specified test interval as required by Technical specification 4.12. A.1 and 4.12.A.2. This condition is reportable in i accordance with 10CTR$0.73.A.2.1.B.

CONDITIONS PRIOR TO OCCURRENCE The Reactor.was in the run mode and operating at approximately 100% power.

An Internal Quality Assurance Audit was in progress on the Fire Protection Program.

i DESCRIPTION OF OCCURREEG On June 14, 1990 during the performance of an Internal Quality Assurance Audit it was discovered that numerous fire detection instruments were exceeding their maximum allowable interval for the six month operability test as required by Plant Technical specifications.

l- APPARENT CAUSE OF OCCURRENG The test was on a schedule to be executed every six months with a maximum test interval of 1.25 times six inonths. This maximum test intarval is I permitted by Technical specifications if plant conditions are not suitable for conducting the surveillance duo to transients or maintenance activities. However, the schedule did not account for the fact that this particular surveillance takes, on average, four to six weeks to complete and no specific instrument order is required by the procedure.

The cause of this occurrence is attributed to personnel error due to a procedure deficiency. The procedure that specifies the method of scheduling failed to consider the time it takes to complete the entire survelliance which can cause individual cornponents to exceed the maximum test interval required by Technical Specifications.

.g,,s.. -

. +. .

=e , man i us wetsaa noeu m on,commass e, i

?*

• LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) TEXT CONTINUATION a=ioveoow ao sino o*  !

• iasi soise

.= nv = .. .. . e, ,,. . , . . i.

l

~ca= " n' ." r c:1: l Oyster Creek, Unit 1 0151010 lo 1211 l 9 9 ?O 0 l0 l 7 -

01 0 01 3 0' O l3 van n -. .====. mee a men,im ANALYSIS OF OCCURR r i

Fire Detection systems are normally inactive and require periodic examination and testing to assure their readiness to respond to a fire situation. The Technical Specifications require inspections and tests  :

which will demonstrate this equipnent is capable of performing its i intended function. All required testing was performed to demonstrate the  !

equipment was capable of performing its intended function. However son.e of the individual detectors did exceed the maximum test interval required ,

by Technical specifications. The maximum time any one individual detector  !

could have exceeded the required test interval was six weeks.

It should be noted that scheduled surveillance tests over the past two years did not reveal any, inoperable detectors and only identified minor  ;

discrepancies associated with alarm functions.

• Based - upon the above the safety significance of this occurrence is '

considered minimal.

• l CORRECTIVE ACTIONS Other surveillance' procedures that test numerous components or that take more than a few days to complete will be reviewed to ensure all Technical i specification Requirements have been satisfied.

The procedure that specifies the method of scheduling surveillance tests will be changed to ensure all test interval requirements are met and L appropriate schedules will be modified.

i l jiljitLAR EVENTS .

None.

l ecau amea l

l