05000482/FIN-2013004-01: 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 71111.05 | | Inspection procedure = IP 71111.05 | ||
| Inspector = N O,' | | Inspector = N O, 'Keefej Laughlin, C Peabody, M Williams, C Hunt, R Stroble | ||
| CCA = H.5 | | CCA = H.5 | ||
| INPO aspect = WP.1 | | INPO aspect = WP.1 | ||
| description = The inspectors identified a non-cited violation of Technical Specification 5.4.1.d, Fire Protection Program Procedures, for the failure to analyze scaffolding for fire protection impairments and transient combustible loading. The cause of the finding was a procedure change that allowed for a grace period of one working day to complete a fire protection review of newly erected scaffolding. As a result, there was no longer a direct interface with the scaffold builders and fire protection engineers, which complicated scoping and tracking the required inspections. This violation was entered into the corrective action program as Condition Report 71910. Failure to analyze scaffolding for fire impairment and transient combustible loading is a performance deficiency. The performance deficiency is more than minor because it affects the protection against external factors attribute of the Initiating Events Cornerstone objective to limit the likelihood of events that upset plant stability and challenge critical safety functions during shutdown as well as power operations. The inspectors evaluated the finding using Inspection Manual Chapter 0609, Appendix A, Significance Determination for Findings at Power, which required screening using MC 0609, Appendix F, Fire Protection Significance Determination Process. Using screening question 1.3.1 of this Appendix, the inspectors determined that the finding was of very low safety significance (Green) because the finding did not affect the ability to achieve and maintain safe shutdown. The inspectors determined that this finding had a crosscutting aspect in the human performance area of work control because the licensee failed to appropriately coordinate work activities by incorporating the need for planned compensatory actions. Specifically, Wolf Creek did not ensure that a fire protection assessment of scaffold 13-S100 and 13-S134 was performed in a timely manner which resulted in compensatory measures for the impaired sprinkler heads and transient combustible material not being established. | | description = The inspectors identified a non-cited violation of Technical Specification 5.4.1.d, Fire Protection Program Procedures, for the failure to analyze scaffolding for fire protection impairments and transient combustible loading. The cause of the finding was a procedure change that allowed for a grace period of one working day to complete a fire protection review of newly erected scaffolding. As a result, there was no longer a direct interface with the scaffold builders and fire protection engineers, which complicated scoping and tracking the required inspections. This violation was entered into the corrective action program as Condition Report 71910. Failure to analyze scaffolding for fire impairment and transient combustible loading is a performance deficiency. The performance deficiency is more than minor because it affects the protection against external factors attribute of the Initiating Events Cornerstone objective to limit the likelihood of events that upset plant stability and challenge critical safety functions during shutdown as well as power operations. The inspectors evaluated the finding using Inspection Manual Chapter 0609, Appendix A, Significance Determination for Findings at Power, which required screening using MC 0609, Appendix F, Fire Protection Significance Determination Process. Using screening question 1.3.1 of this Appendix, the inspectors determined that the finding was of very low safety significance (Green) because the finding did not affect the ability to achieve and maintain safe shutdown. The inspectors determined that this finding had a crosscutting aspect in the human performance area of work control because the licensee failed to appropriately coordinate work activities by incorporating the need for planned compensatory actions. Specifically, Wolf Creek did not ensure that a fire protection assessment of scaffold 13-S100 and 13-S134 was performed in a timely manner which resulted in compensatory measures for the impaired sprinkler heads and transient combustible material not being established. | ||
}} | }} |
Revision as of 20:48, 20 February 2018
Site: | Wolf Creek ![]() |
---|---|
Report | IR 05000482/2013004 Section 1R05 |
Date counted | Sep 30, 2013 (2013Q3) |
Type: | NCV: Green |
cornerstone | Initiating Events |
Identified by: | NRC identified |
Inspection Procedure: | IP 71111.05 |
Inspectors (proximate) | N O 'Keefej Laughlin C Peabody M Williams C Hunt R Stroble |
Violation of: | Technical Specification - Procedures Technical Specification |
CCA | H.5, Work Management |
INPO aspect | WP.1 |
' | |