Semantic search
| Start date | Title | Description | Topic | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ENS 54320 | 10 October 2019 04:40:00 | EN Revision Imported Date : 3/19/2020 POTENTIALLY CONTAMINATED INDIVIDUAL TRANSPORTED TO AN OFFSITE MEDICAL FACILITY At 2340 CDT, on October 09, 2019, a site contractor was transported offsite for treatment at an offsite medical facility. Due to the nature of the medical emergency, the individual was not thoroughly surveyed prior to being transported offsite. This is an eight-hour notification, non-emergency for the transportation of a contaminated person offsite. This event is reportable in accordance with 10 CFR 50.72(b)(3)(xii). Following the individual being transported offsite, but prior to the individual arriving at the offsite medical facility, the individual was confirmed to not be contaminated. This occurred at approximately 2350 CDT, on October 09, 2019. The NRC Resident Inspector has been notified.
Farley Nuclear Plant is retracting this notification based on the information available at the time of the notification: Health Physics personnel had completed surveys that determined that the contract worker, ambulance, and responders were free of contamination prior to reaching the hospital. The initial report was made to alert the NRC based on the individual being potentially contaminated due to radioactive surveying being deferred to support prompt medical attention. Based on the subsequent determination that the individual was not contaminated the reporting requirements of 10CFR50.72(b)(3)(xii) are not met and this event report is being retracted. The NRC Resident Inspector has been notified. Notified R2DO (Miller). | ||
| ENS 53159 | 9 January 2018 23:59:00 | Unanalyzed Condition Identified During National Fire Protection Association 805 Implementation | On January 9, 2018, at 1759 CST, during review of NFPA 805 requirements and circuit analysis, it was determined that the NFPA 805 analysis and Fire Safe Shutdown Modeling did not consider all fire-induced failures. As such, a condition could possibly exist during a postulated fire where both safety related electrical trains could be impacted. This notification is to report a condition involving the fire safe shutdown analysis. The condition could result in an adverse impact on the ability of operators to respond to a postulated fire in these areas. Therefore, this notification is being made pursuant to 10 CFR 50.72(b)(3)(ii)(B), any event or condition that results in the nuclear power plant being in an unanalyzed condition that significantly degrades plant safety. Compensatory fire watches have been established in the affected areas. The licensee notified the NRC Resident Inspector.
Following additional refinements to the NFPA 805 Fire PRA Model, the circuits which initiated the initial report of an unanalyzed condition have now been evaluated and have proven that no significant degradation to plant safety existed. Therefore, EN 53159 is being retracted. The NRC Resident Inspector has been notified. Notified R2DO (Michel). | Safe Shutdown Unanalyzed Condition |
| ENS 52785 | 2 June 2017 14:20:00 | Penetration Room Filtration Boundary Inoperable | This notification is being made as required by 10 CFR 50.72(b)(3)(v) due to both trains of Penetration Room Filtration (PRF) being inoperable due to an inoperable PRF Boundary. At 0920 (CDT) on 6/2/2017, a gap was discovered between an electrical penetration room ceiling and the containment wall where seismic gap material was noted to be missing. The gap was subsequently closed and PRF testing completed sat. The condition was exited at 1345 (CDT). The licensee notified the NRC Resident Inspector.
On 6/2/17 at 1707 CDT Farley Nuclear Plant notified the NRC Operations Center of an entry into Technical Specification 3.7.12 Condition B for Unit 1 loss of two trains of Penetration Room Filtration (PRF). At 0920 (CDT) on 6/2/2017, a gap had been discovered between an electrical penetration and containment where seismic gap material was noted to be missing. The report was made pursuant to 10 CFR 50.72(b)(3)(v) under Event Notification 52785. Upon further engineering review and satisfactory testing to support operability, Farley has determined that the configuration did not meet the criteria for a condition that could have prevented fulfillment of a safety function, and is retracting the notification. The NRC Resident Inspector has been notified. Notified R2DO (Blamey). | |
| ENS 48935 | 17 April 2013 03:47:00 | Potentially Contaminated Individual Transported to Offsite Medical Facility | Contract worker suffered a non-occupational medical emergency while working inside the Unit 2 Containment Building (105' elevation). The worker was working in a contaminated area when the event occurred. He was transported to Southeast Alabama Medical Center via ambulance. The worker is potentially contaminated. Health Physics provided escort in the ambulance. Farley Nuclear Plant (was) notified by Health Physics on 4/17/13 at 0028 (CDT) that (the) individual was surveyed and no contamination was found. The licensee has notified the NRC Resident Inspector.
Farley Nuclear Plant is retracting this notification based on the following additional information not available at the time of the notification: Health Physics personnel have completed surveys that determined that the contract worker, ambulance, and hospital are free of contamination. The initial report was made based on the individual being potentially contaminated due to radioactive surveying being deferred to allow prompt medical attention. Based on the subsequent determination that the individual was not contaminated the reporting requirements of 10CFR50.72(b)(3)(xii) are not met and this event report is being retracted. The licensee will notify the NRC Resident Inspector. Notified R2DO (Vias). | |
| ENS 46661 | 7 March 2011 07:40:00 | Inadvertant Auto-Start Signal to the 1B Diesel Generator During Testing | Farley Unit One was conducting FNP-1-STP-80.8, (test procedure for) 1B DG (Diesel Generator) 1000 KW load rejection. After successfully completing the load rejection portion of the procedure, the control room staff was restoring the 1B diesel to a normal auto start alignment. With the 1B diesel running, the plant operator was required to reset the 1B DG loading sequencer. He incorrectly pressed the Emergency Start reset push-button instead of the Sequencer reset push-button. As a result, the Emergency Diesel generator stop light illuminated for a brief few seconds and then extinguished. Subsequently due to the test configuration, the 1B diesel received an auto-start signal and returned to the running condition prior to the Emergency Start reset. Although further investigation is continuing, this report is being made due to an apparent valid actuation of ESF equipment. This event had no impact on other equipment or the plant electrical alignment. The Sequencer reset push-button and the Emergency Start reset push-button are not in close proximity to each other. The plant operator was assessed for fatigue and it was determined that fatigue was not a factor. The plant operator was removed from duties pending remedial training and assessment. The licensee has notified the NRC Resident Inspector.
The 8-hour non-emergency report (EN #46661) per 10CFR50.72(b)(3)(iv)(A) was conservatively reported based on the potential for a valid actuation of an Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) during a 1000 KW load rejection surveillance test. During the restoration phase of the load rejection test to align the 1B EDG to a normal shutdown configuration, a plant operator incorrectly pressed the Emergency Start Reset (ESR) push-button instead of the Sequencer Reset push-button. As a result, the 1B EDG stop light illuminated momentarily and then extinguished. The 1B EDG received a momentary shutdown signal, but remained in a running condition. Upon completion of the 1B EDG circuit analysis, It was determined that the 1B EDG did not receive a valid actuation of the EDG safety function. Depressing the ESR push-button caused the emergency start relays to deenergize and remain de-energized. The emergency start relays energize on receipt of valid signals in response to actual plant conditions or parameters satisfying the requirements for the initiation of the safety function of the EDG. Therefore per section 3.2.6 of NUREG-1022, the 1B EDG did not receive a valid actuation signal. The NRC Resident Inspector has been notified. Notified R2DO(Musser) | |
| ENS 45812 | 4 April 2010 17:45:00 | Both Trains of Residual Heat Removal (Rhr) Inoperable | On 4/4/10 at 1245 (CDT), three RHR system snubbers were declared inoperable due to visual inspection identifying empty reservoirs for the snubbers. The inoperability of the snubbers rendered both trains of RHR cooling inoperable. On 4/4/10 at 1545, ultrasonic testing identified voided piping on the common RWST (Refueling Water Storage Tank) suction line to the RHR pumps. This condition also resulted in inoperability of both trains of RHR for the ECCS (Emergency Core Cooling System) mode of operation. At the time of these discoveries, Unit 2 was in mode 4, proceeding to mode 5 for a refueling outage. The inoperability of both trains of RHR represents a condition that could have prevented the fulfillment of the safety function of structures or systems that are needed to remove residual heat and mitigate the consequences of an accident. Replacement of the snubbers is in progress. Following completion of snubber replacement, Unit 2 will proceed to mode 5 at which point ECCS capability is not required. Resolution of the voided piping will be accomplished following mode 5 entry. The snubbers are in containment and were last checked during the previous refueling outage. The voiding in the RHR suction line only affects suction from the RWST and not when suction is aligned to the Reactor Coolant System. The licensee will notify the NRC Resident Inspector.
An eight hour report (EN #45812) per 10CFR50.72(b)(3)(v)(B) and 10CFR50.72(b)(3)(v)(D) was conservatively reported because both trains of Residual Heat Removal (RHR) system were thought to be inoperable based on the initial visual inspection of three hydraulic snubbers. In addition, initial ultrasonic testing at the RHR suction line to the refueling water storage tank (RWST) identified what was thought to be voided piping. Subsequent visual inspections and testing demonstrated that all three snubbers had adequate oil to ensure that the snubbers would perform their intended function. In addition, the ultrasonic testing was reviewed and determined that the technique for the coupling gel application between the ultrasonic detector and piping was not adequate for an accurate test. The ultrasonic inspection was performed again using the correct detector to piping coupling technique and it was determined that the RHR piping had adequate water level. Therefore, based on more accurate subsequent results of snubber and ultrasonic testing, the RHR system was never inoperable. The three snubbers thought to be inoperable were removed and replaced with snubbers previously verified to be operable. After removal, the snubbers were visually inspected and tested. Two of the three hydraulic snubbers share a common oil reservoir. This common reservoir was found to be completely full of clear oil which made it difficult to determine reservoir oil level while installed in the plant. The third snubber oil reservoir was one-third full. The removed snubbers have been tested to confirm they would have operated as designed. The ultrasonic testing of RHR piping was started as a result of SNC's response to NRC Generic Letter 2008-01. This testing requires a coupling gel to be used between the ultrasonic detector and the RHR piping to ensure accurate water level results. Based on the initial ultrasonic test results it was thought that the RHR piping had voids. However, when the coupling process was reexamined, it was determined that additional coupling gel was needed for accurate results. When the ultrasonic test was performed again with the proper coupling process, it was determined that the RHR piping had adequate water and that voiding did not exist. The second ultrasonic inspection technique was reviewed and confirmed the coupling process utilized was correct. In summary, a loss of safety function on both trains of RHR did not exist and the 50.72(b)(3)(v)(B) and 50.72(b)(3)(D) report (EN # 45812) is retracted. The licensee notified the NRC Resident Inspector. Notified R2DO (Moorman). | |
| ENS 43106 | 18 January 2007 22:00:00 | Battery Charger Room Cooler Inoperable | Entered a condition which required TS 3.0.3 entry and an 8 hour report. While the 2B RHR equipment outage was in progress, it was discovered that the 2A Battery Charger room cooler was not operating. The condition was investigated and it was found that the thermal overloads were tripped on the supply breaker. They were reset and the fan was restarted. The shift observed the fan operation for 10 minutes and then decided to check the breaker every 30 minutes until a plan could be implemented to swap trains of battery chargers. During the first 30 minute check, the breaker overloads were found tripped again. See time line below. This put us in a condition where an LOSF existed on both trains of RHR due to the requirement to evaluate supported systems when opposite train LCO's are entered. 02:00 2B RHR tagged out for equipment outage, entered LCO for RHR. 16:00 2A Battery Charger room cooler found not running. Entered LCO for DC sources. 16:35 Overloads reset on 2A Battery Charger room cooler supply breaker and fan restarted. LCO initially cleared, but now will conservatively be reinstated since the overloads tripped again later. 17:02 2A Battery Charger room cooler breaker thermal overloads found tripped again. 17:26 2B RHR tagged in and made available, but not yet operable (still need to perform surveillance), 17:37 Swing Battery Charger (2C) placed in service for 2A. Exited LCO for DC sources. LCO 3.0.3 was applicable from 16:00 until 17:37. Condition is reportable under 10CFR50.72(b)(3)(v) 'Event or condition that at the time of discovery could have prevented the fulfillment of the safety function of structures or systems that are needed to remove residual heat.' The licensee notified the NRC Resident Inspector.
The eight hour report (EN #43106) per 10 CFR 50.72(b)(3)(v)(b) was conservatively reported based on inconsistent operation of non-TS (Technical Specification) attendant equipment (the room cooler supplying cooling to the A-Train Battery charger) leading to the declaration of the battery charger as inoperable. However, no actual loss of safety function existed for the Unit 2 RHR Subsystem. Therefore, the eight hour report is retracted for the following reasons: The A-train DC battery was operable, and the A-train DC Battery Charger and DC bus were available. Procedures and training are in place for the door between the battery charger rooms to be opened to ensure sufficient cooling to the A train DC switchgear room. The time for room temperature heat-up allows for operator actions and the rooms and entry/exit pathways are accessible for operators to perform these actions during normal operations and design basis events. The battery charger room temperature was 86F upon discovery which is well within the equipment capability. Therefore, the battery charger room cooler system was available to provide cooling for the long term design basis accident. Technical specification 3.5.2, Condition A was entered due to the Unit 2 B-Train RHR pump scheduled equipment outage. During the entire time that the Unit 2 B-Train RHR pump was inoperable and out of service, the Unit 2 A-Train RHR pump would have performed its required function to supply sufficient flow during an accident (it was declared inoperable due to an inoperable DC support system, but remained available). Condition A allows one or more ECCS trains to be inoperable provided that 'at least 100% of the ECCS flow equivalent to a single OPERABLE ECCS train' is available. Even with the battery charger room cooler non-functional, the A-Train RHR pump would have performed its safety function and combined with the A-Train charging pump, would have delivered 100% of the ECCS flow equivalent to a single OPERABLE ECCS train. In summary, a loss of safety function on both trains of RHR did not exist and the 50.72(b)(3)(v)(b) report (EN # 43106) is retracted. Notified R2DO (HAAG). The licensee notified the NRC Resident Inspector. | Time of Discovery |