05000254/FIN-2012005-05
From kanterella
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Finding | |
|---|---|
| Title | Licensee-Identified Violation |
| Description | A licensee-identified finding of very low safety significance (Green) and associated NCV of TS 5.4.1.a was identified on May 1, 2012, when the licensee identified that a preventative maintenance (PM) task to adjust/repair/replace door latches was not completed within the specified timeframe. This yearly PM for the Unit 2 HRSS door was last completed in January 2010. The work package documentation was not closed so no subsequent task was scheduled. Failure to properly close the task and reschedule the PM was a finding. When the licensee identified the deficiency, a request was initiated to defer the two missed PMs and re-schedule the next PM for January 2013. While the extension was performed in accordance with the procedure and potential consequences of failure of the door (i.e. maintenance rule functional failure) were included in the evaluation, no evaluation of the material condition of the door or latch was performed before the PM was extended. On September 6, 2012, the worker entering the interlock recognized that the Unit 2 HRSS door opened as he entered the airlock and took action to shut the door and notify the control room. A review of the alarm history determined that the Unit 2 HRSS was open for 8 seconds. The finding was more than minor because it adversely affected the SSC and Barrier Performance attribute of the Barrier Integrity Cornerstone objective to provide assurance that physical design barriers protect the public from radionuclide releases caused by accidents or events. The process for deferring PMs was changed in August 2012. Inspectors verified that the revised process would require an assessment of work history, component performance, and a technical justification when a maintenance rule function failure is identified as a potential consequence because the process would dictate that maintenance rule components have a high consequence failure. Given these changes to the service request program the licensee would have a different classification and prioritization for a similar issue undergoing deferral. Technical Specifications 5.4.1.a requires that written procedures be established, implemented, and maintained covering the applicable procedures recommended in Regulatory Guide 1.33, Quality Assurance Program Requirements (Operation). Regulatory Guide 1.33, Appendix A, Section 9, Procedures for Performing Maintenance, states in part that maintenance that can affect the performance of safety-related equipment should be properly pre-planned and performed in accordance with written procedures, or documented instructions appropriate to the circumstances. Contrary to the above, in January 2010, the licensee failed to implement MA-AA-716-011, Work Execution and Closeout, because a work task was left open which prevented the PM task from being rescheduled. |
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000254/2012005 Section 4OA7 |
| Date counted | Dec 31, 2012 (2012Q4) |
| Type: | NCV: Green |
| cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
| Identified by: | Licensee-identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | |
| Inspectors (proximate) | B Palagi D Passehl J Laughlin J Mcghee B Cushman J Draper C Mathews R Elliott R Orlikowski M Mitchell C Brown |
| INPO aspect | |
| ' | |
Finding - Quad Cities - IR 05000254/2012005 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Finding List (Quad Cities) @ 2012Q4
Self-Identified List (Quad Cities)
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||