05000483/FIN-2015003-01
From kanterella
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Finding | |
---|---|
Title | Failure to Conduct Simulator Testing and Maintenance In Accordance with ANSI/ANS-3.5-2009 |
Description | The inspectors identified a finding with four examples for failing to conduct and evaluate simulator performance testing in accordance with the standards of ANSI/ANS-3.5-2009. Specifically, the licensee failed to do the following: set the instantaneous main turbine load reduction to 50 percent as supported by design basis data in the 2014 performance of Transient (11), Maximum Design Load Rejection include the evaluation of parameter pressurizer temperature in the 30 percent, 50 percent, and 80 percent power Steady-State Performance Test as specified in accordance with the standard, Appendix B, Section B.3.1 include the evaluation of parameter secondary heat balance data in the 30 percent, 50 percent, and 80 percent power Steady-State Performance Test as specified in accordance with the standard, Appendix B, Section B.3.1 replicate the dynamic functioning of annunciators on the simulator panels used during normal, abnormal, off-normal, and emergency evolutions, or to identify and correct noticeable differences in accordance with the standard, Sections 4.2.1.2 and 4.2.1.4 The licensee initiated corrective action documented in Callaway Action Requests 201504760, 201504759, 201504418, and 201504355. The licensees failure to conduct and evaluate performance testing in accordance with the ANSI/ANS-3.5-2009 standard as endorsed by Regulatory Guide 1.149, Revision 4, was the performance deficiency. The performance deficiency is more than minor because it adversely impacted the human performance attribute of the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone objective of ensuring the availability, reliability, and capability of systems that respond to initiating events to prevent undesirable consequences. Additionally, if left uncorrected, the performance deficiency could have become more significant in that not correcting noticeable differences between the simulator and the reference plant can both leave the potential for negative training of licensed operators and call into question the ability to conduct valid licensing examinations with the simulator. Using Manual Chapter 0609, Significance Determination Process, Attachment 4, Tables 1, 2, and 3 worksheets; and the corresponding Appendix I, Licensed Operator Requalification Significance Determination Process (SDP), Flowchart Block #14, the finding was determined to have very low safety significance (Green) because it dealt with deficiencies associated with simulator testing, modification, and maintenance and there was no evidence that the plant-referenced simulator does not demonstrate the expected plant response or have uncorrected modeling and hardware deficiencies related to the examples. The examples supporting this finding involved actions taken with the simulator testing and maintenance program before the present performance period. Therefore, no cross-cutting aspect is assigned to the finding. |
Site: | Callaway |
---|---|
Report | IR 05000483/2015003 Section 1R11 |
Date counted | Sep 30, 2015 (2015Q3) |
Type: | Finding: Green |
cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
Identified by: | NRC identified |
Inspection Procedure: | IP 71111.11 |
Inspectors (proximate) | C Cowdrey J O'Donnell L Carson M Kennard M Langelier M Phalen N Greene N Taylor P Hernandez S Hedger T Hartman J Tice |
INPO aspect | |
' | |
Finding - Callaway - IR 05000483/2015003 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Finding List (Callaway) @ 2015Q3
Self-Identified List (Callaway)
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||