05000382/FIN-2016002-02
From kanterella
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Finding | |
---|---|
Title | Failure to Properly Assess and Manage Risk When Performing Dry Cooling Tower Maintenance |
Description | The inspectors identified a non-cited violation of 10 CFR 50.65, Requirements for Monitoring the Effectiveness of Maintenance at Nuclear Power Plants, section (a)(4) because the licensee did not properly assess and manage risk associated with maintenance on the dry cooling tower fans train B. Specifically, the licensee failed to adequately assess risk and take appropriate risk management actions when replacing a logic card associated with the dry cooling tower train B fans. As a result, an electrical transient occurred that caused unexpected valve movements in component cooling water and auxiliary component cooling water train B systems, an unexpected start of the auxiliary component cooling water pump train B, and the unexpected shutdown of essential chiller train AB. The licensee entered this issue into their corrective action program as condition report CR-WF3-2016-04084. Corrective actions included reassessing the risk associated with the maintenance and identifying appropriate risk management actions to use when performing similar maintenance activities in the future. The inspectors determined that the performance deficiency was more than minor because it was associated with the Configuration Control 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. Specifically, the failure to take appropriate risk management actions resulted in unexpected valve movements, an unexpected start of auxiliary component cooling water pump B, and an unplanned entry into Technical Specification 3.7.4, Ultimate Heat Sink. The inspectors used Inspection Manual Chapter 0609, Appendix K, Maintenance Risk Assessment and Risk Management Significance Determination Process, dated May 19, 2005, Flowchart 2, Assessment RMAs, and determined the need to calculate the incremental core damage probability to determine the significance of this issue. The Waterford probabilistic risk assessment model yielded an incremental core damage probability, or actual increase in risk during this work window, of 1.5x10-8. In accordance with Flowchart 2 in Appendix K, because the incremental core damage probability was less than 1x10-6, the finding screened as having very low safety significance (Green). This finding had a Procedure Adherence cross-cutting aspect in the area of Human Performance because individuals did not follow processes, procedures and work instructions. Specifically, the licensee did not assess and manage the risk associated with the maintenance in accordance with EN-WM-104, On Line Risk Assessment [H.8]. |
Site: | Waterford |
---|---|
Report | IR 05000382/2016002 Section 1R13 |
Date counted | Jun 30, 2016 (2016Q2) |
Type: | NCV: Green |
cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
Identified by: | NRC identified |
Inspection Procedure: | IP 71111.13 |
Inspectors (proximate) | C Speer F Ramirez G Miller P Elkmann |
Violation of: | 10 CFR 50.65 |
CCA | H.8, Procedure Adherence |
INPO aspect | WP.4 |
' | |
Finding - Waterford - IR 05000382/2016002 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Finding List (Waterford) @ 2016Q2
Self-Identified List (Waterford)
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||