05000395/FIN-2009002-01
From kanterella
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Finding | |
|---|---|
| Title | Failure to Effectively Monitor the Performance of the Control Room Normal and Emergency Air Handling System Per the Maintenance Rule |
| Description | The inspectors identified an NCV of 10 CFR 50.65 (Maintenance Rule) with two examples for failing to demonstrate that the performance of the control room normal and emergency air handling (control room ventilation) system was being effectively controlled through the performance of appropriate preventive maintenance. Specifically, the licensee failed to: 1) properly categorize a control room ventilation system pressure boundary breach due to maintenance activities as a maintenance preventable function failure (MPFF) against the B train, and 2) properly consider the unavailability time incurred by the functional failure against the A train. These failures to adequately assess the Maintenance Rule (MR) implications of a control room ventilation system functional failure resulted in the system not being placed under the goal setting monitoring requirements of 10 CFR 50.65(a)(1). The licensee entered these issues into their corrective action program as CR-08-00944, CR-09- 00107, and CR-09-01056, and placed the control room ventilation system in MR (a)(1) goal setting status. This finding is more than minor because it is similar to the non-minor maintenance rule example 7.b. provided in Manual Chapter 0612, Appendix E, Examples of Minor Issues, which states that violations of Paragraph 10 CFR 50.65(a)(2), failure to demonstrate effective control of performance or condition and not putting the affected structures, systems, and components (SSCs) in (a)(1), are not minor because they necessarily involve degraded SSC performance or condition. This finding was determined to be of very low safety significance (Green) because the incorrect functional failure and unavailability hour assessments did not, by themselves, result in an actual degradation of the barrier function provided for the control room or additional operability or functionality concerns. The finding directly involved the crosscutting area of Human Performance, component of Resources, and aspect of Personnel Training and Qualifications, in that, the licensee engineering staff did not fully understand MR evaluation requirements for systems with common components or the counting of unavailability hours for systems that are out of service for reasons other than a formal tag-out program (H.2.b). (Section 4OA5.2 |
| Site: | Summer  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000395/2009002 Section 4OA5 |
| Date counted | Mar 31, 2009 (2009Q1) |
| Type: | NCV: Green |
| cornerstone | Barrier Integrity |
| Identified by: | NRC identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | |
| Inspectors (proximate) | J Polickoski J Zeiler G Mccoy |
| CCA | H.9, Training |
| INPO aspect | CL.4 |
| ' | |
Finding - Summer - IR 05000395/2009002 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Finding List (Summer) @ 2009Q1
Self-Identified List (Summer)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||