05000456/FIN-2013003-07: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| identified by = NRC | | identified by = NRC | ||
| Inspection procedure = | | Inspection procedure = | ||
| Inspector = M Learn, M Perry, N Feliz, | | Inspector = M Learn, M Perry, N Feliz Adorno, R Edwards, R Ng, T Daun, T Go, V Meghani, A Dahbur, A Dunlop, A Garmoe, A Sallman, E Duncan, J Benjamin, J Neurauter, J Robbins | ||
| CCA = P.2 | | CCA = P.2 | ||
| INPO aspect = PI.2 | | INPO aspect = PI.2 | ||
| description = The inspectors identified a finding of very low safety significance and an associated non-cited violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion III, Design Control, when licensee personnel failed to maintain the procedural requirement to commence a reactor coolant system (RCS) cooldown within 2 hours following a design basis seismic event that included a reactor trip, failure of all nonsafety-related equipment, and limiting single active failure. The licensee entered this issue into their CAP as IR 1496506, NRC Identified PZR [Pressurizer] PORV [Power-Operated Relief Valve] Natural Circulation Cooldown Analysis. Corrective actions included development of a revised instruction in the Emergency Operating Procedures (EOPs). The inspectors determined that the failure to adequately revise an EOP was a performance deficiency. Specifically, the licensee removed a procedural requirement to commence an RCS natural circulation cooldown if instrument air was lost to containment, which inadvertently could adversely affect a safety-related PZR PORV function. The inspectors determined that the performance deficiency was more than minor because it was associated with the Procedural Quality attribute of the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone and adversely affected the cornerstone objective of ensuring the availability, reliability, and capability of systems that respond to initiating events to prevent undesirable consequences (i.e, core damage.) The inspectors evaluated this finding using IMC 0609, Appendix A, The Significance Determination Process (SDP) for Findings At-Power, and determined that this finding was of very low safety significance because the issue was determined to not be a confirmed loss of operability or functionality. This finding had a cross-cutting aspect in the Corrective Action Program component of the PI&R cross-cutting area because licensee personnel failed to thoroughly evaluate a problem and ensure that the resolution adequately addressed the cause and extent of condition, as necessary. Specifically, the licensee failed to adequately evaluate a prior NRC finding such that the corrective actions adequately addressed the problem. | | description = The inspectors identified a finding of very low safety significance and an associated non-cited violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion III, Design Control, when licensee personnel failed to maintain the procedural requirement to commence a reactor coolant system (RCS) cooldown within 2 hours following a design basis seismic event that included a reactor trip, failure of all nonsafety-related equipment, and limiting single active failure. The licensee entered this issue into their CAP as IR 1496506, NRC Identified PZR [Pressurizer] PORV [Power-Operated Relief Valve] Natural Circulation Cooldown Analysis. Corrective actions included development of a revised instruction in the Emergency Operating Procedures (EOPs). The inspectors determined that the failure to adequately revise an EOP was a performance deficiency. Specifically, the licensee removed a procedural requirement to commence an RCS natural circulation cooldown if instrument air was lost to containment, which inadvertently could adversely affect a safety-related PZR PORV function. The inspectors determined that the performance deficiency was more than minor because it was associated with the Procedural Quality attribute of the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone and adversely affected the cornerstone objective of ensuring the availability, reliability, and capability of systems that respond to initiating events to prevent undesirable consequences (i.e, core damage.) The inspectors evaluated this finding using IMC 0609, Appendix A, The Significance Determination Process (SDP) for Findings At-Power, and determined that this finding was of very low safety significance because the issue was determined to not be a confirmed loss of operability or functionality. This finding had a cross-cutting aspect in the Corrective Action Program component of the PI&R cross-cutting area because licensee personnel failed to thoroughly evaluate a problem and ensure that the resolution adequately addressed the cause and extent of condition, as necessary. Specifically, the licensee failed to adequately evaluate a prior NRC finding such that the corrective actions adequately addressed the problem. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 19:48, 20 February 2018
| Site: | Braidwood  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000456/2013003 Section 4OA5 |
| Date counted | Jun 30, 2013 (2013Q2) |
| Type: | Finding: Green |
| cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
| Identified by: | NRC identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | |
| Inspectors (proximate) | M Learn M Perry N Feliz Adorno R Edwards R Ng T Daun T Go V Meghani A Dahbur A Dunlop A Garmoe A Sallman E Duncan J Benjamin J Neurauter J Robbins |
| CCA | P.2, Evaluation |
| INPO aspect | PI.2 |
| ' | |