05000311/FIN-2014002-03
From kanterella
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Finding | |
|---|---|
| Title | Inadequate Risk Assessment and Risk Management Actions for UV Testing |
| Description | Inspectors identified a Green NCV of 10 CFR 50.65(a)(4) when PSEG did not properly assess Unit 2 risk and implement RMAs in accordance with station procedures. PSEG conducted undervoltage (UV) surveillance testing on a 4 kilovolt (kV) vital bus without considering plant conditions to include operations without a redundant offsite power source and work in the vicinity of protected equipment. PSEG entered this in their CAP and completed a crew clock reset. The issue was more than minor since it was associated with the Equipment Performance attribute of the Initiating Events cornerstone and adversely affected its objective to limit the likelihood of events that upset plant stability and challenge critical safety functions during shutdown as well as power operations. Specifically, UV testing of a vital bus when powered by a single offsite power source had the potential to result in a loss of vital bus power or a LOOP. Additionally, the issue was more than minor based on similarity to IMC 0612, Appendix E, examples 7.e and 7.f. Specifically, the overall elevated plant risk placed the plant into a higher licensee-established risk category and required, under plant procedures, RMAs that were not implemented. The inspectors evaluated the finding using IMC 0612, Appendix K, Maintenance Risk Assessment and Risk Management Significance Determination Process. A senior reactor analyst considered the base condition of an increased probability of a LOOP and the lack of RMAs as two order of magnitude increases. Since the incremental core damage probability deficit was less than 1 E-6 and the incremental large early release probability deficit was not applicable for this issue, this finding was determined to be of very low safety significance (Green). The finding was determined to have a cross-cutting aspect in the area of Human Performance, Conservative Bias, in that individuals use decision making-practices that emphasize prudent choices over those that are simply allowable. Specifically, PSEG did not implement procedurally driven decision-making that would have emphasized prudent choices regarding UV testing under different plant conditions. |
| Site: | Salem  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000311/2014002 Section 1R13 |
| Date counted | Mar 31, 2014 (2014Q1) |
| Type: | NCV: Green |
| cornerstone | Initiating Events |
| Identified by: | NRC identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 71111.13 |
| Inspectors (proximate) | A Ziedonis E Burket G Dentel J Schoppy P Finney R Barkley R Nimitz |
| Violation of: | 10 CFR 50.65(a)(4) 10 CFR 50.65 |
| CCA | H.14, Conservative Bias |
| INPO aspect | DM.2 |
| ' | |
Finding - Salem - IR 05000311/2014002 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Finding List (Salem) @ 2014Q1
Self-Identified List (Salem)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||