NRC-90-0087, LER 90-002-01:on 900202,determined That Area Radiation Surveillance Procedure 44.080.301 Listed Incorrect Values for Alarm Setpoints.Caused by Unavailable Setpoint Calculations.Procedure revised.W/900608 Ltr

LER 90-002-01:on 900202,determined That Area Radiation Surveillance Procedure 44.080.301 Listed Incorrect Values for Alarm Setpoints.Caused by Unavailable Setpoint Calculations.Procedure revised.W/900608 Ltr

ML20043E666
Person / Time
Site:	Fermi
Issue date:	06/08/1990
From:	Orser W, Pendergast J DETROIT EDISON CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
CON-NRC-90-0087, CON-NRC-90-87 LER-90-002, LER-90-2, NUDOCS 9006130261
Download: ML20043E666 (5)

Text

. . . . . . . . , , .- -

.l 1

P e dent

' . f4uclear Opershons l Fermi 2 ECiSon !! ire 6PM W 'm:,6 10CFR50.73 4

l l

June 8, 1990 -

!GC-90-0087 4

U.- S. Ibclear Regulatory Ccanission Attentions Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555 -

References:

1)- Fetini 2

-NIC Docket No. 50-341 Facility Operating License No.14'F-43 l

2) Detroit Edison Letter to NIC, NIC-90-0044, i dated March 5, 1990 Subjects Limisee Event Dannrt (TRR) No. 90-002-01 1

Please find' enclosed LER No. 90-002-01, dated June 8, 1990, for a

. reportable event that occurred on February 2,1990. . A copy of this LER is also being sent to the Regional Administrator, USNIC Region III.

If you have any questions, please contact Joseph Perdergast, Ccapliance Engineer, at (313) 586-1682..

l Sincerely, W. S. Orser Senior Vice President Enclosure NIC Forns 366, 366A cc: A. B. Davis-J. R.'~Eckert R. W. Defayette/W. L. Axelson W. G. Rogers J. F. Stang Wayne County Emergency Managenent Division Dg61 261 900608 S OCK 05000341 eDc .

g

.. NRCe . see. U.s. NUCLE AR at $ ult.To Y consues ON APPRovt0 04A8 NO 31e60104 LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) 5 "a8 8 8 "

l t

n n. \

S ACILITY N4488 (11 - DOCEST88USSER(21 raer (31 Fermi 2 0 is 0101013 1 4 1 1 ilodo #4 n* Area Radiation Monitor Surve111ance Procedure 44 ut.U. 5U1

-Listed Incorrect Values for Alarm Setpoints tVENT DATE ($1 t t R N Uheet R 461 REPORT DATE (71 OTHER F Af geT;eg gggyO(ygg lg)

• • Q &aciLITv Nauts MONTH DAY YEAR YEAR  % n "*jM MONTM DAY YtAR DOCKE T NUMetRts.

0l6l010l0l l l 0[ 2 q2 50 9l0 0l 0l 2 0 l1 0 l6 0l8 9l 0 o,,,o,o,o, , ,

O*tRATING TMil REP 0h? 18 $USMITTED PURSUANT TO TMt REQUIREMENTS Of 10 CPR I (Cn.r. eae er .e of 84 fe***p8 Hit 20 402lbl to.Th.H2Hel

_ 44006 m _

20 4081 5 73.71M y0 01 j l0 lQ n o. .in u N eutteH11M u ni.ini un H2H.i mu.i 00.381.H26 to.734.H2 Hem ME a Aa M 4641 10 HW

{ SO 734.H2H4 90.734.H2HomHA) J56AA N 4064.H1HN) 90.736.H2Hl0 00.734.It2HviNH3)

M 4041 10 Hel 90.731.H2H661) 90.734 42H.I LICENSit CONT ACT POR TMit Lim (121 NAME YtLtPHONE NUMcER AR4a CODS Joseph Pendergast, Compliance Engineer 3,1,3 5,8,6 7 ,1,6,8 i COMPLETE ONS LINI FOR B ACM C04dPONENT F AILURE OSSCRISED IN THit REPORT 113.

CAvst SYSTEM COMoM ENT Y$("C- "h'oO g",I,"[I' Caust sysTIM COM*0NENT m oomtA e ,

[N{ AC. g pp I I l1 1 1 I i i i i l i i l l I l- I l l l l l l l l l

$UP9(IMENT AL REPORT EXPECTIO flei MONTM DAY Y E A81

$UDMISSION itS lif v.s. tememt. tKPLCTiO SUts,IS$lON 04 Til NO l l t=1 R AC T <o, , ,a a.. e,.. ., . ,, ,,, . u n .>

l On January 27, 1990, while performing corrective maintenance on l the Area Radiation Monitors (AINs) it was determined that data ,

tables liste3 in the surveillance procedure 44.080.301, " Area Radiation Monitoring System, Functional Test", were not in agreement with Technical Specification Table 3.3.7.1-1.2a and b for alarm setpoints. On Decenber 15, 1989, an AIM was left outside of the '14chnical Specification setpoint allowable value.

The Technical Specification Table value is less than or equal to 0.5 mr/hr. We Control Roan Direct Ra31ation Monitor alarm setpoint was left at 0.55 mr/hr. Se as-found reading of the AIM alarm setpoint during the next test on January 12, was 0.5 mr/hr.

Surveillance procedure 44.080.301, was revised so that all alarm setpoints are conservative with respect to the 'Itchnical Specification. This was already in progress at the tine of the event. Corrective maintenance was coupleted ard the revised surveillance 44.080.301 was performed.

g,. .

i;. L[

e 4

tsIIC P.n. ageA' 4 U S. NUCLE AR f;EEULATORY COe4MISS804 LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) TEXT CONTINUATION ,moveo ove No siso oic4 ,

EXPIRE 8. Of31/N ,

9ACILITY ME (1) DOCOLET NUedBER (23 LIR NUMSER ($) PA05 (3) {

p'rmif2 e

"" " E "" M o- 151010 l o l 3l 4l 1 9l 0 -

0l 0l 2 -

0l1 0l2 or 0 'l4 text in

. ,,,,,,, . e w ,,,,,, m, ,,,,

i Initial Plant conditionar Operational Conditions. 1 (Power Operation)

Reactor Power: 100 Percent Reactor Pressure: 1013 psig 3

. Reactor %speratures . 525 degrees Fahrenheit naarrintion of the Eventi <

On January 27, 1990, while performing corptve maintenance on the Area Radiation Monitors (AINs) it was A,termined that data tables listed in the surveillance procedure 44.080.301, " Area Radiation Monitoring System, Functional hat", were not in agrement with hchnical Specification Table 3.3.7.1-1.2a and b I

for alarm setpoints. The procedure was placed in suspense pending resolution. .

A review of past performances of this surveillance was performed to determine if these monitors were ever left outside of their l Technical Specification required alarm setpoints. l On January 27, the three monitors listed in the procedure were q within their hchnical Specification Allowable Values for alarm i setpoints. However, on Decenber 15, 1989, an AIN was left outside -!

of the Technical Specification setpoint allowable value. Se i Technical Specification Table value is less than or equal to 0.5 )

mr/hr. Se Control Rom Direct Radiation Monitor alam setpoint :I was left at 0.55 mr/hr. Se as-found reading of the AIM. alarm. i setpoint during the next test on January 12, was 0.5 mr/hr. It. l was left at this reading which is in accordance with the Technical .

I Specification Allowable Value. On February 2, this was determined .

to be a reportable occurrence.

ru m of the Events The cause of the event has been determined to have several contributing factors:

1. Because Setpoint Calculations were not available, the setpoint in the procedure originally came from the I&C Specification sheets. Rese specification sheets treated the setpoints given in Technical Specification Table 3.3.7.1-1.2 as nminal not absolute.

.o

.fRC posen M . U.S 18UCLE12 E8!ULATORY OcasaHW600s l

",**'t -

UCENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) TEXT CONTINUATl3N miovio oue no sino+o4

)

txMRES 4/3119 ,

PAS 8Lf7V 8tAssa m . D00uST 18URSSR tal tan soutAROR toi PASE (3)

. ~ ... . ,... .. ...~

f O ;2 o ls lo lo lo l 31 41 1 90 -

0l0l2 -

0 l1 0l3 or 0 l4 Tuf n . = me, ms mm  ;

2. Schnical Specifications a.. Se hchnical Specification Inprovenent Group '(TSIG) note 5 these setpoint errors in their review. This was -

TSIG consent (139.

b. Se TSIG considered this a nminal setpoint and not an absolute setpoint.

3. Eis change was considered discretionary by the TSIG.

Discretionary changes were to be inplemented during the ,

periodic review process. The change to this procedure was in +

process at the time of the event.

4. ' We cause of this event is considered cognitive, that is, i Technicians (Utility Non-Licensed) and Senior Reactor Operators (Utility Licensed) involved in the TSIG failed to recognize the imediate need for the procedure change.

Analvnis of the Evente he objective of the ATMs is to provide Control Rom and plant personnel with indication of gama radiation levels within the plant. Sese monitors alarm only and serve no safety equipnent control or initiation function.

Sese monitors are functionally tested every thirty-one days. _j Sis specific monitor's-alarm set point had drifted bek to its

Technical Specification Allowable Value within the thirty-one day time frame. This alarm setpoint of 0.55 mr/hr was well below the 10CFR20 definition of a " Radiation Area" which nust be posted at -

2.5 mr/hr per the Code of Federal Regulations for areas with continuous access. Se monitor would have still functioned to alert Control Room Operators and plant personnel to high or increasing radiation levels in the plant.

Corrective Actionst

1. _44.080.301 was revised so that all alarm setpoints are conservative with respect to Technical Specifications. This was already in progress at the time of the event.

2. Corrective maintenance was coupleted and the revised surveillance 44.080.301 was performed.

3. Setpoint evaluations will be performed for the Technical Specification related AIMS and will be conpleted by June 30,

....c,o, n...noa...ovo uze ca.

. osas

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

d was e seen - us. wuctsmarumony comum.o=

Y** LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) TEXT CONTINUATION- ,naovio ove =o. mo.eio.

-. eXP1 tS: S/31C

= m manu m ,.

ooomet nousea m - ua =uusea = **ei m

.p: W ** t'ap,

_ vs.a can ,

~'

F e rmi -- 2 :

mm m olslololol3l411 9l 0 -

)'l0l 2 -

0l 1 0l 4 or O(4

. mes mmawnn 1990. . Ihis will involve evaluating the alarm setpoints to . I ensure they are consistent with our calibration tolerances, I '

personnel exposure limits, and area background radiation. l.

- levels. l History folder specification sheets were revised to reflect 4.

the new setpoints and are in 44.080.301. l In addition, Plant Safety has cemenced a sample review of the l t resolution of.the TSIG concerns as part of the closecut review- l for DER 87-0398, which documented the TSIG program findings. As l-part of this review, a specific check of the TSIG discretionary items for setpoint concern resolutions is being performed.

' As of the date of this Supplemental LER, approximately one-third ,1 i of the setpoint related discretionary items have been reviewed and no additional setpoint related concerns have been identified.

Previous Simnnr Eventst Licensee Event Reports85-018, 85-036,85-037, 85-040,86-004, 86-008,86-010, 86-010,86-022, 86-039,87-029, 87-044 and 87-048

'(which reported the findings of the TSIG) have reported instances I where inadequate or incorrect procedures have caused violations of .

l the Technical Specifications.

l

)

l l

1 l

'oeu assA . -.g,,, g,o, ,, 529 5e9,00078

?