05000275/FIN-2008003-02
From kanterella
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Finding | |
|---|---|
| Title | Failure to Follow Operability Procedure |
| Description | The inspectors identified a noncited violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, Instructions, Procedures, and Drawings, after the licensee failed to adhere to several requirements in Administrative Procedure OM7.ID12, Operability Determination, Revision 11. Specifically, the licensee identified that it did not perform a prompt operability assessment for acondition adverse to quality until approximately 1 year after the immediate operability determination was performed. Also, the inspectors identified that when the prompt operability assessment was performed, it relied inappropriately on engineering judgment, for a complex issue, without an adequately documented basis for that judgment. The adverse condition was an identified nonconformance related to the design basis because both units were operating at a full power average temperature less than the design value. The licensee has entered this into their corrective action program as Action Request A0723331 which details their planned correction actions. The inspectors determined that the finding was more than minor because it is similar to Inspection Manual Chapter 0612, Appendix E, Minor Example 3(j) in that operability was questioned and both the licensee and the vendor had to perform significant work and analysis in order to fully address the operability impact of a low average temperature on operating Unit 1. In accordance with Inspection Manual Chapter 0609, Significance Determination Process, Attachment 4, Phase 1 - Initial Screening and Characterization of Findings, the inspectors concluded the finding was of very low safety significance (Green) because it did not screen as potentially risk significant due to a seismic, flooding, or severe weather initiating event. This finding has a crosscutting aspect in the area of human performance associated with the decision making component because the licensee did not use conservative assumptions when it decided that engineering judgment alone was a sufficient basis for operability without a supporting plant specific analysis H.1(b) |
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000275/2008003 Section 1R15 |
| Date counted | Jun 30, 2008 (2008Q2) |
| Type: | NCV: Green |
| cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
| Identified by: | NRC identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 71111.15 |
| Inspectors (proximate) | M Brown M Peck P Elkmann J Melfi J Nadel V Gaddy |
| CCA | H.14, Conservative Bias |
| INPO aspect | DM.2 |
| ' | |
Finding - Diablo Canyon - IR 05000275/2008003 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Finding List (Diablo Canyon) @ 2008Q2
Self-Identified List (Diablo Canyon)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||