05000298/FIN-2013009-01
From kanterella
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Finding | |
|---|---|
| Title | Failure to Maintain Seismic Qualification of Standby Liquid Control System |
| Description | The team identified a Green violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion III, Design Control, for the licensees failure to assure that design basis requirements associated with the standby liquid control (SLC) system test tank were correctly translated into procedures. As a result, the licensee failed to maintain the tank empty as required to meet seismic design requirements. The violation is cited because the licensee failed to restore compliance in a reasonable time following documentation of the issue as a non-cited violation in NRC Inspection Report 05000298/2012002, issued May 10, 2012 (ML12131A674). The licensee entered these issues into its corrective action program for resolution as Condition Report CR-CNS-2013-01962, CR-CNS-2013-02027, and CR-CNS-2013-02328. The failure to maintain design control of the standby liquid control system was a performance deficiency. This performance deficiency was of more than minor safety significance because it was associated with the design control attribute of the mitigating systems cornerstone and it adversely affected cornerstone objective to ensure the availability, reliability, and capability of systems that respond to initiating events to prevent undesirable consequences. Specifically, the licensees failure to implement procedures to ensure the SLC test tank remained in a seismically qualified condition resulted in an inability to provide reasonable assurance of operability following a seismic event. Using Inspection Manual Chapter 0609, Appendix A, Exhibit 2, the team determined that the finding was of very low safety significance (Green) because it was a design deficiency that did not result in the loss of functionality. This finding had a cross-cutting aspect in the area of human performance associated with the decision-making component because the licensee failed to adopt a requirement to demonstrate that a proposed action was safe in order to proceed rather than a requirement to demonstrate it was unsafe in order to disapprove the action. |
| Site: | Cooper  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000298/2013009 Section 4OA2 |
| Date counted | Mar 31, 2013 (2013Q1) |
| Type: | Violation: Green |
| cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
| Identified by: | NRC identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 71152 |
| Inspectors (proximate) | R Kellar J Braisted C Henderson C Speerc Hendersonc Steely D Allen D Strickland J Josey J Laughlin S Garchow |
| Violation of: | 10 CFR 50 Appendix B Criterion III, Design Control |
| CCA | H.14, Conservative Bias |
| INPO aspect | DM.2 |
| ' | |
Finding - Cooper - IR 05000298/2013009 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Finding List (Cooper) @ 2013Q1
Self-Identified List (Cooper)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||