05000285/FIN-2013008-25: 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 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{finding | {{finding | ||
| title = Deficient Evaluation | | title = Deficient Evaluation for Known Degraded Conditions: Safety-Related Air Operated Valve Elastomers Not Qualified for Helb/Loca Temeratures | ||
| docket = 05000285 | | docket = 05000285 | ||
| inspection report = IR 05000285/2013008 | | inspection report = IR 05000285/2013008 | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| CCA = P.2 | | CCA = P.2 | ||
| INPO aspect = PI.2 | | INPO aspect = PI.2 | ||
| description = The team identified a non-cited violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI, Corrective Action, associated with the licensee's failure to properly evaluate a known degraded condition regarding safety-related air operated valve elastomers that were not qualified for high energy line break or loss of coolant accident temperatures. Specifically, from January 11 through January 18, 2013, due to a an improper application of the single failure criteria, the licensee failed to properly evaluate and correct a known degraded condition associated with safety-related air operated valve elastomers that were not qualified for high energy line break or loss of coolant accident temperatures. This issue has been entered into the corrective action program as Condition Reports CR 2013-01396 and CR 2013-02611. This performance deficiency is more than minor, and therefore a finding, because if left uncorrected, the failure to correct the degraded condition had the potential to lead to a more significant safety concern. Specifically, the affected air operated valves would have been in a condition where they would not have been qualified to perform their intended safety function. This issue was associated with the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone. Using Inspection Manual Chapter 0609, Appendix A, The Significance Determination Process for Findings At-Power, the finding is determined to have very low safety significance (Green) because it: (1) was not a deficiency affecting the design or qualification of a mitigating structure, system, or component, and did not result in a loss of operability or functionality; (2) did not represent a loss of system and/or function; (3) did not represent an actual loss of function of at least a single train for longer than its technical specification allowed outage time, or two separate safety systems out-of-service for longer than their technical specification allowed outage time; (4) did not represent an actual loss of function of one or more nontechnical specification trains of equipment designated as high safety-significance in accordance with the licensees maintenance rule program; and (5) did not involve the loss or degradation of equipment or function specifically designed to mitigate a seismic, flooding or severe weather event. This finding has a cross-cutting aspect in the area of problem identification and resolution associated with the corrective action program component because the licensee failed to thoroughly evaluate problems such that the resolutions address the causes | | description = The team identified a non-cited violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI, Corrective Action, associated with the licensee\'s failure to properly evaluate a known degraded condition regarding safety-related air operated valve elastomers that were not qualified for high energy line break or loss of coolant accident temperatures. Specifically, from January 11 through January 18, 2013, due to a an improper application of the single failure criteria, the licensee failed to properly evaluate and correct a known degraded condition associated with safety-related air operated valve elastomers that were not qualified for high energy line break or loss of coolant accident temperatures. This issue has been entered into the corrective action program as Condition Reports CR 2013-01396 and CR 2013-02611. This performance deficiency is more than minor, and therefore a finding, because if left uncorrected, the failure to correct the degraded condition had the potential to lead to a more significant safety concern. Specifically, the affected air operated valves would have been in a condition where they would not have been qualified to perform their intended safety function. This issue was associated with the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone. Using Inspection Manual Chapter 0609, Appendix A, The Significance Determination Process for Findings At-Power, the finding is determined to have very low safety significance (Green) because it: (1) was not a deficiency affecting the design or qualification of a mitigating structure, system, or component, and did not result in a loss of operability or functionality; (2) did not represent a loss of system and/or function; (3) did not represent an actual loss of function of at least a single train for longer than its technical specification allowed outage time, or two separate safety systems out-of-service for longer than their technical specification allowed outage time; (4) did not represent an actual loss of function of one or more nontechnical specification trains of equipment designated as high safety-significance in accordance with the licensees maintenance rule program; and (5) did not involve the loss or degradation of equipment or function specifically designed to mitigate a seismic, flooding or severe weather event. This finding has a cross-cutting aspect in the area of problem identification and resolution associated with the corrective action program component because the licensee failed to thoroughly evaluate problems such that the resolutions address the causes | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 20:00, 20 February 2018
| Site: | Fort Calhoun  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000285/2013008 Section 4OA2 |
| Date counted | Jun 30, 2013 (2013Q2) |
| Type: | NCV: Green |
| cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
| Identified by: | NRC identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 71152 |
| Inspectors (proximate) | A Klett C Smith M Davis J Josey C Bickett G Warnick M Hay J Brand J Groom M Keefe R Latta W Schaup J Watkins B Hagar A Allen J Wingebach K Martin L Wilkins S Morrow R Deese F Ramirez |
| Violation of: | 10 CFR 50 Appendix B Criterion XVI Technical Specification |
| CCA | P.2, Evaluation |
| INPO aspect | PI.2 |
| ' | |