05000387/FIN-2012009-01
From kanterella
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Finding | |
|---|---|
| Title | Inadequate Compensatory Actions for Inadequate MOV Grease Analysis Procedures |
| Description | The inspectors identified an NCV of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI, Corrective Actions, because PPL did not take appropriate action to promptly correct an identified condition adverse to quality associated with PPLs motor-operated valve (MOV) lubrication program. PPL did not adhere to the corrective action timeliness standards specified in its corrective action process procedure NDAP-QA-0702, Action Request and Condition Report Process, Revision 36. Section 7.56.1 states, in part, that compensatory action will be provided if permanent action will not be performed in a timely fashion. Specifically, while evaluating permanent revisions to the program to address the deficiencies, PPL did not take compensatory actions to address MOV grease analysis procedure and engineer qualification program deficiencies before sixty MOV grease analyses were completed in refueling outage 15. PPL entered this performance deficiency into their CAP under CR 1562326. The inspectors determined that the performance deficiency was more than minor because it was associated with the equipment performance 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, failure to implement compensatory actions to analyze grease samples in MOVs affects the reliability of these valves. An MOV lubrication program is an integral part of the stations Generic Letter 89-10 program for safety-related MOVs. PPL uses the results of the MOV grease analysis to determine the need for a valve actuator overhaul. The inspectors screened this issue to Green via Inspection Manual Chapter 0609, Attachment 4 and Appendix A, because the finding does not represent a loss of system and/or function, does not represent an actual loss of function of at least a single train for greater than its technical specification allowed outage time or two separate safety systems out-of-service for greater than its technical specification allowed outage time, and does not represent an actual loss of function of one or more non-technical specification trains of equipment designated as high safety-significant in accordance with the licensees Maintenance Rule program for greater than 24 hrs. The inspectors determined that this issue had a cross-cutting aspect in the area of human performance, work practices, because PPL personnel did not follow PPL corrective action program procedure requirements regarding compensatory actions |
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000387/2012009 Section 4OA2 |
| Date counted | Sep 30, 2012 (2012Q3) |
| Type: | NCV: Green |
| cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
| Identified by: | NRC identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 71152 |
| Inspectors (proximate) | E Dipaolo C Bickett P Krohn J Greives |
| CCA | H.8, Procedure Adherence |
| INPO aspect | WP.4 |
| ' | |
Finding - Susquehanna - IR 05000387/2012009 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Finding List (Susquehanna) @ 2012Q3
Self-Identified List (Susquehanna)
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||