05000247/FIN-2012004-02: 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) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| identified by = NRC | | identified by = NRC | ||
| Inspection procedure = IP 71111.15 | | Inspection procedure = IP 71111.15 | ||
| Inspector = C Crisden, H Gray, J Furia, L Scholl, M Gray, O Ayegbusi, R Montgomery, S Mccarver, T O | | Inspector = C Crisden, H Gray, J Furia, L Scholl, M Gray, O Ayegbusi, R Montgomery, S Mccarver, T O'Hara | ||
| CCA = H.7 | | CCA = H.7 | ||
| INPO aspect = WP.3 | | INPO aspect = WP.3 | ||
| description = The inspectors identified a Green NCV of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion XI, Test Control, because Entergy did not assure that all testing required to demonstrate safety related batteries will perform satisfactorily was identified and performed in accordance with written test procedures. Specifically, temperature compensation for battery discharge testing was performed incorrectly which caused errors in the battery capacity calculations. Entergy staff immediately reviewed historical test results to confirm the batteries remained operable. Entergy entered this issue into the CAP as CR-IP2-2012-5338. This finding is more than minor because it is associated with the procedure quality attribute of the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone and adversely affected the cornerstone objective of ensuring the availability, reliability, and capability of systems that respond to initiating events to prevent undesirable consequences. In addition, it was similar to Example 2c of NRC IMC 0612, Appendix E, Examples of Minor Issues, in that the test control inadequacies affected multiple batteries and the issue was repetitive. Using IMC 0609, Appendix A, The Significance Determination Process for Findings At-Power, the inspectors determined the finding screened as very low safety significance (Green) because it was not a design or qualification deficiency, did not represent a loss of system safety function, and did not screen as potentially risk significant due to a seismic, flooding, or severe weather initiating event. This finding had a cross-cutting aspect in the area of Human Performance, Resources Component, because Entergy did not ensure that complete, accurate, and up-to-date procedures were available and adequate to assure nuclear safety. Specifically, the battery discharge test procedures did not ensure that temperature compensation was correctly applied to provide accurate capacity calculations. | | description = The inspectors identified a Green NCV of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion XI, Test Control, because Entergy did not assure that all testing required to demonstrate safety related batteries will perform satisfactorily was identified and performed in accordance with written test procedures. Specifically, temperature compensation for battery discharge testing was performed incorrectly which caused errors in the battery capacity calculations. Entergy staff immediately reviewed historical test results to confirm the batteries remained operable. Entergy entered this issue into the CAP as CR-IP2-2012-5338. This finding is more than minor because it is associated with the procedure quality attribute of the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone and adversely affected the cornerstone objective of ensuring the availability, reliability, and capability of systems that respond to initiating events to prevent undesirable consequences. In addition, it was similar to Example 2c of NRC IMC 0612, Appendix E, Examples of Minor Issues, in that the test control inadequacies affected multiple batteries and the issue was repetitive. Using IMC 0609, Appendix A, The Significance Determination Process for Findings At-Power, the inspectors determined the finding screened as very low safety significance (Green) because it was not a design or qualification deficiency, did not represent a loss of system safety function, and did not screen as potentially risk significant due to a seismic, flooding, or severe weather initiating event. This finding had a cross-cutting aspect in the area of Human Performance, Resources Component, because Entergy did not ensure that complete, accurate, and up-to-date procedures were available and adequate to assure nuclear safety. Specifically, the battery discharge test procedures did not ensure that temperature compensation was correctly applied to provide accurate capacity calculations. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 00:18, 22 February 2018
| Site: | Indian Point  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000247/2012004 Section 1R15 |
| Date counted | Sep 30, 2012 (2012Q3) |
| Type: | NCV: Green |
| cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
| Identified by: | NRC identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 71111.15 |
| Inspectors (proximate) | C Crisden H Gray J Furia L Scholl M Gray O Ayegbusi R Montgomery S Mccarver T O'Hara |
| CCA | H.7, Documentation |
| INPO aspect | WP.3 |
| ' | |