05000461/FIN-2016002-09: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by Mark Hawes) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| identified by = NRC | | identified by = NRC | ||
| Inspection procedure = | | Inspection procedure = | ||
| Inspector = C Phillips, E Sanchez | | Inspector = C Phillips, E Sanchez-Santiago, G Edwards, J Wojewoda, K Stoedter, L Smith, S Bell, S Mischke, T Bilik, W Schaup | ||
| CCA = N/A for ROP | | CCA = N/A for ROP | ||
| INPO aspect = | | INPO aspect = | ||
| description = The inspectors identified a Severity Level IV NCV of Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 50.71(e), Periodic Update of the FSAR, for the licensees failure to update the FSAR after implementation of license amendment 149, for extended power uprate. Specifically, the licensee did not update USAR Section 10.4.7.1.2 Performance Requirements, for the condensate and feedwater system with the design requirements for a reactor thermal power rating of 3473 MWt. The licensee entered the issue into their CAP as AR 02656128 and is preparing a technical change package to update the USAR. The inspectors determined that the failure to update the USAR in accordance with 10 CFR 50.71(e), Periodic Update of the FSAR, with the design requirements for the condensate and feedwater system for a reactor thermal power rating of 3473 MWt was a performance deficiency. The performance deficiency was determined to be minor in accordance with IMC 0612, Power Reactor Inspection Reports, Appendix B, Issue Screening, dated September 7, 2012; however, the reactor oversite programs significance determination process does not specifically consider the regulatory process impact in its assessment of licensee performance, therefore, it was necessary to address this violation which impeded the NRCs ability to regulate using traditional enforcement to adequately deter non-compliance. The inspectors reviewed this issue in accordance with NRC IMC 0612 and the NRC Enforcement Policy. Violations of 10 CFR 50.71(e) are dispositioned using the traditional enforcement process because they are considered to be violations that potentially impede or impact the regulatory process. The inspectors reviewed Section 6.1.d.3 of the NRC Enforcement Policy and determined this violation was Severity Level IV because the licensees failure to update the USAR as required by 10 CFR 50.71(e) had not yet resulted in any unacceptable change to the facility or procedures. No cross cutting aspect was assigned because traditional enforcement violations are not assessed for cross cutting aspects. | | description = The inspectors identified a Severity Level IV NCV of Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 50.71(e), Periodic Update of the FSAR, for the licensees failure to update the FSAR after implementation of license amendment 149, for extended power uprate. Specifically, the licensee did not update USAR Section 10.4.7.1.2 Performance Requirements, for the condensate and feedwater system with the design requirements for a reactor thermal power rating of 3473 MWt. The licensee entered the issue into their CAP as AR 02656128 and is preparing a technical change package to update the USAR. The inspectors determined that the failure to update the USAR in accordance with 10 CFR 50.71(e), Periodic Update of the FSAR, with the design requirements for the condensate and feedwater system for a reactor thermal power rating of 3473 MWt was a performance deficiency. The performance deficiency was determined to be minor in accordance with IMC 0612, Power Reactor Inspection Reports, Appendix B, Issue Screening, dated September 7, 2012; however, the reactor oversite programs significance determination process does not specifically consider the regulatory process impact in its assessment of licensee performance, therefore, it was necessary to address this violation which impeded the NRCs ability to regulate using traditional enforcement to adequately deter non-compliance. The inspectors reviewed this issue in accordance with NRC IMC 0612 and the NRC Enforcement Policy. Violations of 10 CFR 50.71(e) are dispositioned using the traditional enforcement process because they are considered to be violations that potentially impede or impact the regulatory process. The inspectors reviewed Section 6.1.d.3 of the NRC Enforcement Policy and determined this violation was Severity Level IV because the licensees failure to update the USAR as required by 10 CFR 50.71(e) had not yet resulted in any unacceptable change to the facility or procedures. No cross cutting aspect was assigned because traditional enforcement violations are not assessed for cross cutting aspects. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 20:55, 20 February 2018
| Site: | Clinton  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000461/2016002 Section 4OA5 |
| Date counted | Jun 30, 2016 (2016Q2) |
| Type: | TEV: Severity level IV |
| cornerstone | Miscellaneous |
| Identified by: | NRC identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | |
| Inspectors (proximate) | C Phillips E Sanchez-Santiago G Edwards J Wojewoda K Stoedter L Smith S Bell S Mischke T Bilik W Schaup |
| Violation of: | 10 CFR 50.71(e) |
| INPO aspect | |
| ' | |