05000255/FIN-2010005-06: 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 12: | Line 12: | ||
| identified by = NRC | | identified by = NRC | ||
| Inspection procedure = IP 71152 | | Inspection procedure = IP 71152 | ||
| Inspector = M Holmberg, B Jose, J Cassidy, M Mitchell, J Ellegood, T Taylor, J Corujo | | Inspector = M Holmberg, B Jose, J Cassidy, M Mitchell, J Ellegood, T Taylor, J Corujo-Sandin, G Hansen | ||
| CCA = H.13 | | CCA = H.13 | ||
| INPO aspect = DM.1 | | INPO aspect = DM.1 | ||
| description = Inspectors identified an NCV of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion X, Inspection, for the failure to ensure that Quality Control (QC) verification inspections were consistently included and correctly specified in quality-affecting procedures and work instructions for construction-like work activities as required by the Quality Assurance Program. The licensee performed extensive reviews, and inspectors performed independent reviews of the licensees conclusions as well as independent sampling, to confirm that improper or missed inspections did not actually affect the operability of plant equipment. Entergy initiated prompt fleet-wide corrective actions to ensure proper work order evaluation and proper inclusion of QC verification inspections. This issue was entered into the corrective action program under CRs CR-HQN 2009- 01184 and CR-HQN-2010-0013. The failure to ensure that adequate Quality Control verification inspections were included in quality-affecting procedures and work instructions as required by the Quality Assurance Program was a performance deficiency. This programmatic deficiency was more than minor because, if left uncorrected, it could lead to a more significant safety 4 Enclosure concern in that the failure to check quality attributes could involve an actual impact to plant equipment. This issue affected the Design Control attribute of the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone because missed or improper quality control inspections during plant modifications could impact the availability, reliability, and capability of systems needed to respond to initiating events. This performance deficiency was determined to have very low safety significance in Phase 1 of the SDP, since it was confirmed to involve a qualification deficiency that did not result in a loss of operability or functionality. The inspectors determined that this performance deficiency involved a cross-cutting aspect related to the human performance in decision-making because the licensee did not have an effective systematic process for obtaining interdisciplinary reviews of proposed work instructions to determine whether QC verification inspections were appropriate. (H.1(a)) (Section 4OA2.1.b.1) | | description = Inspectors identified an NCV of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion X, Inspection, for the failure to ensure that Quality Control (QC) verification inspections were consistently included and correctly specified in quality-affecting procedures and work instructions for construction-like work activities as required by the Quality Assurance Program. The licensee performed extensive reviews, and inspectors performed independent reviews of the licensees conclusions as well as independent sampling, to confirm that improper or missed inspections did not actually affect the operability of plant equipment. Entergy initiated prompt fleet-wide corrective actions to ensure proper work order evaluation and proper inclusion of QC verification inspections. This issue was entered into the corrective action program under CRs CR-HQN 2009- 01184 and CR-HQN-2010-0013. The failure to ensure that adequate Quality Control verification inspections were included in quality-affecting procedures and work instructions as required by the Quality Assurance Program was a performance deficiency. This programmatic deficiency was more than minor because, if left uncorrected, it could lead to a more significant safety 4 Enclosure concern in that the failure to check quality attributes could involve an actual impact to plant equipment. This issue affected the Design Control attribute of the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone because missed or improper quality control inspections during plant modifications could impact the availability, reliability, and capability of systems needed to respond to initiating events. This performance deficiency was determined to have very low safety significance in Phase 1 of the SDP, since it was confirmed to involve a qualification deficiency that did not result in a loss of operability or functionality. The inspectors determined that this performance deficiency involved a cross-cutting aspect related to the human performance in decision-making because the licensee did not have an effective systematic process for obtaining interdisciplinary reviews of proposed work instructions to determine whether QC verification inspections were appropriate. (H.1(a)) (Section 4OA2.1.b.1) | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 19:40, 20 February 2018
| Site: | Palisades  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000255/2010005 Section 4OA2 |
| Date counted | Dec 31, 2010 (2010Q4) |
| Type: | NCV: Green |
| cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
| Identified by: | NRC identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 71152 |
| Inspectors (proximate) | M Holmberg B Jose J Cassidy M Mitchell J Ellegood T Taylor J Corujo-Sandin G Hansen |
| CCA | H.13, Consistent Process |
| INPO aspect | DM.1 |
| ' | |