IR 05000333/2012002: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 68: | Line 68: | ||
{{a|1R04}} | {{a|1R04}} | ||
==1R04 Equipment Alignment | ==1R04 Equipment Alignment | ||
===.1 Partial System Walkdowns=== | ===.1 Partial System Walkdowns=== | ||
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.04Q|count=4}} | {{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.04Q|count=4}}== | ||
====a. Inspection Scope==== | ====a. Inspection Scope==== | ||
| Line 92: | Line 92: | ||
No findings were identified. | No findings were identified. | ||
{{a|1R05}} | {{a|1R05}} | ||
==1R05 Fire Protection | ==1R05 Fire Protection | ||
===.1 Resident Inspector Quarterly Walkdowns=== | ===.1 Resident Inspector Quarterly Walkdowns=== | ||
{{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.05Q|count=5}} | {{IP sample|IP=IP 71111.05Q|count== | ||
=5}} | |||
====a. Inspection Scope==== | ====a. Inspection Scope==== | ||
Revision as of 19:09, 17 November 2019
| ML12115A040 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick |
| Issue date: | 04/24/2012 |
| From: | Mel Gray Reactor Projects Branch 2 |
| To: | Michael Colomb Entergy Nuclear Northeast |
| References | |
| IR-12-002 | |
| Download: ML12115A040 (24) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:UNITED STATES ril 24, 2012
SUBJECT:
JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT - NRC INTEGRATED INSPECTION REPORT 05000333/2012002
Dear Mr. Colomb:
On March 31, 2012, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an inspection at your James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (FitzPatrick). The enclosed inspection report documents the inspection results which were discussed on April 23, 2012, with you and other members of your staff.
The inspection examined activities conducted under your license as they relate to safety and compliance with the Commissions rules and regulations and with the conditions of your license.
The inspectors reviewed selected procedures and records, observed activities, and interviewed personnel.
The report documents one NRC-identified Severity Level IV non-cited violation (NCV). This finding was determined to involve a violation of NRC requirements. However, because of the very low safety significance, and because it is entered into your corrective action program, the NRC is treating this finding as an NCV, consistent with Section 2.3.2 of the NRC Enforcement Policy. If you contest the NCV in this report, you should provide a response within 30 days of the date of the inspection report, with the basis for your denial, to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN.: Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555-0001; with copies to the Regional Administrator, Region I; the Director, Office of Enforcement, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001; and the NRC Senior Resident Inspector at FitzPatrick.
In accordance with 10 CFR Part 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, its enclosure, and your response (if any) will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of the NRCs document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC website at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
Sincerely, /RA/ Mel Gray, Chief Reactor Projects Branch 2 Division of Reactor Projects Docket No.: 50-333 License No.: DPR-59
Enclosure:
Inspection Report 05000333/2012002 w/Attachment: Supplementary Information
REGION I== Docket No.: 50-333 License No.: DPR-59 Report No.: 05000333/2012002 Licensee: Entergy Nuclear Northeast (Entergy) Facility: James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Location: Scriba, New York Dates: January 1 through March 31, 2012 Inspectors: E. Knutson, Senior Resident Inspector B. Sienel, Resident Inspector T. Burns, Reactor Inspector Approved by: Mel Gray, Chief Reactor Projects Branch 2 Division of Reactor Projects Enclosure
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
IR 05000333/2012002; 01/01/2012 - 03/31/2012; James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (FitzPatrick); Follow-up of Events.
The report covered a three-month period of inspection by resident inspectors and an announced inspection performed by regional inspectors. Inspectors identified one Severity Level (SL) IV finding, which was a non-cited violation (NCV). The significance of most findings is indicated by their color (Green, White, Yellow, Red) using Inspection Manual Chapter (IMC) 0609, Significance Determination Process (SDP). The cross-cutting aspects for the findings were determined using IMC 0310, Components Within Cross-Cutting Areas. Findings for which the SDP does not apply may be Green, or be assigned a severity level after NRC management review. The NRC's program for overseeing the safe operation of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-1649, Reactor Oversight Process, Revision 4, dated December 2006.
Cornerstone: Mitigating Systems
- Severity Level IV. The inspectors identified a Severity Level (SL) IV non-cited violation (NCV) of 10 CFR Part 50.73, Licensee Event Report [LER] System, because a violation of Technical Specification (TS) 3.5.1.G for the condition of the high pressure coolant injection (HPCI) and reactor core isolation cooling (RCIC) systems being simultaneously inoperable was not reported to the NRC within 60 days of discovery. After this was identified by the inspectors, the issue was entered into Entergys corrective action program (CAP) as CR-JAF-2011-04779. Entergy subsequently submitted Revision 1 to LERs 05000333/2010-005-00 and 05000333/2011-001-00.
The inspectors determined that the failure to revise LER 05000333/2010-005-00 within 60 days to include the violation of TS 3.5.1.G in accordance with 10 CFR Part 50.73 was a performance deficiency that was reasonably within Entergys ability to foresee and correct, and should have been prevented. Because the issue impacted the regulatory process, in that a violation of site Technical Specifications was not reported to the NRC within the required timeframe, thereby delaying the NRCs opportunity to review the matter, the inspectors evaluated this performance deficiency in accordance with the traditional enforcement process. Using example 6.9.d.9 from the NRC Enforcement Policy, the inspectors determined the violation was a SL IV (more than minor concern that resulted in no or relatively inappreciable potential safety or security consequence) violation, because Entergy personnel did not make a report required by 10 CFR Part 50.73. In accordance with Inspection Manual Chapter (IMC) 0612, Appendix B, traditional enforcement issues are not assigned cross-cutting aspects. (Section 4OA3)
REPORT DETAILS
Summary of Plant Status
The James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (FitzPatrick) began the inspection period at 100 percent power. On January 15, 2012, operators reduced power to 50 percent to identify and plug leaking main condenser tubes. Operators returned the unit to 100 percent power the following day. On January 17, operators reduced power to 65 percent due to loss of flow from the C condensate booster pump (CBP). Operators increased power to 81 percent later that day, based on reaching the electric current limit for the remaining two CBPs, and to 93 percent on January 21, based on a revised CBP motor current limit. After repairs to the C CBP were completed, operators reduced power to 75 percent to return the pump to service, then returned the unit to 100 percent power on January 23. On January 25, operators reduced power to 50 percent to identify and plug leaking main condenser tubes. Operators returned the unit to 100 percent power on January 27. On January 28, operators reduced power to 65 percent for a control rod pattern adjustment and returned the unit to 100 percent power later that day. On March 29, operators reduced power to 65 percent for a control rod sequence exchange, single control rod scram time testing, control rod blade interference testing, and turbine valve testing.
Operators returned the unit to 100 percent power later that day, and remained at 100 percent power for the remainder of the inspection period.
REACTOR SAFETY
Cornerstones: Initiating Events, Mitigating Systems, and Barrier Integrity
==1R04 Equipment Alignment
.1 Partial System Walkdowns
==
a. Inspection Scope
The inspectors performed partial walkdowns of the following systems:
* 'A' and 'C' emergency diesel generators (EDGs) during 'D' EDG maintenance on January 19, 2012
- B standby liquid control (SLC) system during A SLC system maintenance on February 9, 2012
- A standby gas treatment (SBGT) system during B SBGT system maintenance on February 14, 2012
- B residual heat removal (RHR) system during A RHR system maintenance on February 28, 2012 The inspectors selected these systems based on their risk-significance relative to the reactor safety cornerstones at the time they were inspected. The inspectors reviewed applicable operating procedures, system diagrams, the updated final safety analysis report (UFSAR), TSs, and condition reports (CRs), and the impact of ongoing work activities on redundant trains of equipment in order to identify conditions that could have impacted system performance of their intended safety functions. The inspectors performed field walkdowns of accessible portions of the systems to verify system components and support equipment were aligned correctly and were operable. The inspectors examined the material condition of the components and observed operating parameters of equipment to verify that there were no deficiencies. The inspectors also reviewed whether Entergy staff had properly identified equipment issues and entered them into the corrective action program (CAP) for resolution with the appropriate significance characterization. Documents reviewed for each section of this inspection report are listed in the Attachment.
b. Findings
No findings were identified.
.2 Full System Walkdown
a. Inspection Scope
During the week of March 5, the inspectors performed a complete system walkdown of accessible portions of the A RHR system to verify the existing equipment lineup was correct. The inspectors reviewed operating procedures, surveillance tests, drawings, equipment line-up check-off lists, and the UFSAR to verify the system was aligned to perform its required safety functions. The inspectors also reviewed electrical power availability, component lubrication and equipment cooling, hangar and support functionality, and operability of support systems. The inspectors performed field walkdowns of accessible portions of the systems to verify system components and support equipment were aligned correctly and operable. The inspectors examined the material condition of the components and observed operating parameters of equipment to verify that there were no deficiencies. Additionally, the inspectors reviewed a sample of related CRs reports to ensure Entergy staff appropriately evaluated and resolved any deficiencies.
b. Findings
No findings were identified. ==1R05 Fire Protection