05000416/FIN-2011007-01
From kanterella
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Finding | |
|---|---|
| Title | Failure To Provide An Adequate Alternative Shutdown Procedure |
| Description | The team identified a noncited violation of License Condition 2.C(41), Fire Protection Program, for failing to ensure that the postfire safe shutdown procedure for fires requiring control room evacuation could be performed within the critical times required by the approved fire protection program. Specifically, two crews of operators simulating performance of Procedure 05-1-02-II-1, Shutdown from the Remote Shutdown Panel, Revision 036, did not give priority to the required safe shutdown components which are protected against fire damage and did not complete the equipment alignments within the times required by the thermal-hydraulic analysis. The team confirmed at the end of each walkdown that the operators involved did not know what the credited shutdown equipment was for a postfire safe shutdown or the critical time limits to be met. The team also confirmed that the licensee had not performed timed walkdowns to validate that the procedure would complete the required actions for postfire safe shutdown within the times required by the thermal-hydraulic analysis. The licensee entered this into their corrective action program as CR-GGN-2011-02721, implemented compensatory measures to focus the operators priority on the required safe shutdown components and implemented a procedure revision. The failure to provide an adequate procedure to implement the requirements of the approved fire protection program for a fire in the control room is a performance deficiency. The performance deficiency was more than minor because it was associated with the reactor safety mitigating systems cornerstone attribute for protection against external events (fire), and adversely affected the cornerstone objective to ensure the availability, reliability, and capability of systems that respond to initiating events to prevent undesirable consequences. Because the finding involved control room evacuation, a Phase 3 SDP risk assessment was performed by a senior reactor analyst. The scenario impacted operators being ready to emergency depressurize the reactor and reflood using a residual heat removal pump. Because a bounding change to core damage frequency was 4.13 x 10-7, and the finding was not significant with respect to large, early release frequency, this finding is of very low safety significance (Green). The finding did not have a crosscutting aspect since the primary cause did not fit any crosscutting aspects. |
| Site: | Grand Gulf  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000416/2011007 Section 1R05 |
| Date counted | Sep 30, 2011 (2011Q3) |
| Type: | NCV: Green |
| cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
| Identified by: | NRC identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 71111.05 |
| Inspectors (proximate) | N O'Keefe J Mateychick E Uribe B Correll N Okonkwo |
| INPO aspect | |
| ' | |
Finding - Grand Gulf - IR 05000416/2011007 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Finding List (Grand Gulf) @ 2011Q3
Self-Identified List (Grand Gulf)
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||