ML18065A478: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 287: | Line 287: | ||
The Palisades PRA Group provided plant knowledge, while the consultants provided general direction and methodology guidance. The Palisades PRA Group created and quantified the fault and event tree models for both the front-end and back-end analyses. In addition, the PRA Group was involved in the identification of failure data, the development and evaluation of human error models, and the identification of system dependencies. [p. 4.0-1 of submittal] | The Palisades PRA Group provided plant knowledge, while the consultants provided general direction and methodology guidance. The Palisades PRA Group created and quantified the fault and event tree models for both the front-end and back-end analyses. In addition, the PRA Group was involved in the identification of failure data, the development and evaluation of human error models, and the identification of system dependencies. [p. 4.0-1 of submittal] | ||
The PRA study was reviewed by several experienced utility staff in addition to a formal independent review team. The independent review team for the front-end review was led by plant safety engineering group at Palisades. Reportedly, this | The PRA study was reviewed by several experienced utility staff in addition to a formal independent review team. The independent review team for the front-end review was led by plant safety engineering group at Palisades. Reportedly, this | ||
* group of individuals has considerable expertise in the review and approval of | * group of individuals has considerable expertise in the review and approval of 10CFR50.59 issues. The review included an evaluation of event trees and system success criteria. In addition, consultants were used to independently review the IPE methodology to ensure that it is consistent with accepted PRA methodologies and techniques. Apparently, the IPE was also reviewed by several other experienced utility staff for consistency and accuracy. [pp. 4.0-1, 4.0-2 of submittal] | ||
Important findings from the review process were provided by the licensee. In particular, the review process identified the lack of an operator action to initiate feed and bleed cooling in the event all secondary cooling is lost. | Important findings from the review process were provided by the licensee. In particular, the review process identified the lack of an operator action to initiate feed and bleed cooling in the event all secondary cooling is lost. | ||
* The cutsets were subsequently modified to account for an operator error related to feed and bleed. | * The cutsets were subsequently modified to account for an operator error related to feed and bleed. | ||
Revision as of 19:52, 7 November 2019
| ML18065A478 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 06/27/1995 |
| From: | Clark R, Darby J, Rao D SCIENCE & ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC. |
| To: | NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18065A476 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-NRC-04-91-066, CON-NRC-4-91-66 SEA-95-553-015, SEA-95-553-015-A:4, SEA-95-553-15, SEA-95-553-15-A:4, NUDOCS 9602120371 | |
| Download: ML18065A478 (38) | |