05000397/FIN-2012003-01
From kanterella
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Finding | |
---|---|
Title | Failure to Evaluate Operability Associated with Residual Heat Removal Pump B |
Description | The inspectors identified a non-cited violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, Instructions, Procedures and Drawings, for the failure of the licensee to perform a required operability determination for a degraded condition associated with residual heat removal pump B. On March 25, 2012, the licensee performed Procedure OSP-RHR/IST-Q703, RHR Loop B Operability Test, Revision 34, and recorded a pump discharge pressure that exceeded the acceptance criteria by 0.03 psig. The operating crew determined that no immediate operability determination was required by Procedure PPM 1.3.66, Operability and Functionality Evaluation, Revision 20, since pump performance was stable and satisfactory. Subsequent review by the inspectors revealed that the assumption that pump performance was stable and satisfactory was not correct and an operability determination was required. Specifically, pump discharge pressure dropped below the technical specification surveillance requirement acceptance criteria at several points after the licensee had recorded their data and the pump had exhibited a declining trend in performance since its last surveillance. This issue was entered into the licensees corrective action program as Action Request AR 266371. This performance deficiency was more than minor because it affected the equipment performance attribute of the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone objective of ensuring the reliability of systems that respond to initiating events. The inspectors performed an initial screening of the finding in accordance with IMC 0609.04, Phase 1 - Initial Screening and Characterization of Findings. The inspectors determined this finding to be of very low safety significance (Green) because it did not result in the loss of a system safety function, did not represent the loss of safety function of a single train for greater than its allowed outage time, did not result in the loss of safety function of any non-technical specification equipment, and did not screen as potentially risk significant due to seismic, flooding, or severe weather initiating events. The inspectors determined that this finding had a cross-cutting aspect in the area of human performance associated with the decision making component because the licensee failed to use conservative assumptions when evaluating Action Request AR 260478 that documented low margin for residual heat removal pump B. Specifically, the shift manager failed to challenge the non-conservative assumption that pump flow was stable and satisfactory. |
Site: | Columbia ![]() |
---|---|
Report | IR 05000397/2012003 Section 1R15 |
Date counted | Jun 30, 2012 (2012Q2) |
Type: | NCV: Green |
cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
Identified by: | NRC identified |
Inspection Procedure: | IP 71111.15 |
Inspectors (proximate) | L Carson W Walker W Sifre J Groom M Hayes W Schaup C Alldredge J Dykert |
CCA | H.14, Conservative Bias |
INPO aspect | DM.2 |
' | |
Finding - Columbia - IR 05000397/2012003 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Finding List (Columbia) @ 2012Q2
Self-Identified List (Columbia)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||