05000313/FIN-2016007-06: 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) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| identified by = NRC | | identified by = NRC | ||
| Inspection procedure = IP 95003 | | Inspection procedure = IP 95003 | ||
| Inspector = B Correll, C Osterholtz, D Betancourt, D Lackey, D Willis, E Duncan, G Hansen, J Brand, J Dixon, J Mateychick, L Mckown, M Holmberg, M Keefe, M Phalen, N O | | Inspector = B Correll, C Osterholtz, D Betancourt, D Lackey, D Willis, E Duncan, G Hansen, J Brand, J Dixon, J Mateychick, L Mckown, M Holmberg, M Keefe, M Phalen, N O'Keefe, P Mckenna, R Alexander, R Deese, R Kopriva, R Kumana, S Graves, S Morrow, S Rich, S Smith, T Hartman, W Sifre, Z Hollcraft | ||
| CCA = H.6 | | CCA = H.6 | ||
| INPO aspect = WP.2 | | INPO aspect = WP.2 | ||
| description = The team identified two examples of a Green finding and an associated non-cited violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI, Corrective Action, for the licensees failure to correct conditions adverse to quality. Specifically, the licensee failed to correct long term degraded service water flow to the Unit 2 safety-related train B emergency diesel generator heat exchangers since 2008, and degraded Unit 1 reactor containment building coatings since 2009. The licensees corrective actions included performing an operability determination and determining that the service water system and the Unit 1 containment sump were operable and documenting the issue in the corrective action program as condition reports CR-ANO-C-2016-00946, and CR-ANO-1-2015-00200. The failure to correct conditions adverse to quality associated with Unit 2 service water flow to the B emergency diesel generator heat exchangers and the Unit 1 reactor containment building coatings was a performance deficiency. The performance deficiency was determined to be more than minor because it was associated with the equipment performance attribute of the Mitigating Systems cornerstone and adversely affected the cornerstone objective to ensure the availability, reliability, and capability of systems that respond to initiating events to prevent undesirable consequences. Specifically, the failure to correct long term degraded: 1) service water flow beyond the action limit in accordance with procedure EN-DC-159, Component and System Monitoring, to the B emergency diesel generator heat exchangers, which challenged the capability of emergency diesel generator response to design basis events; and 2) containment coatings which challenged the Unit 1 emergency core cooling system capacity. The finding was evaluated using Inspector Manual Chapter 0609, Significance Determination Process, Attachment 0609.04, Initial Characterization of Findings, and Appendix A, The Significance Determination Process (SDP) for Findings At-Power, Exhibit 2, Mitigating Systems Screening Questions, dated June 19, 2012. The team determined the finding was of very low safety significance (Green) because the finding was a deficiency affecting the design or qualification of mitigating system, structure or component, but the system, structure or component maintained operability. This finding had a human performance cross-cutting aspect of Design Margins because the licensee failed to place special attention on maintaining margins in safety related equipment. Specifically the licensee has repeatedly: 1) throttled service water flow away from the safety-related shutdown cooling heat exchangers, reducing the shutdown cooling design margins to maintain minimally acceptable flow to the emergency diesel generator heat exchangers since 2008; and 2) reduced the available containment sump margin rather than correct containment coating deficiencies [H.6]. | | description = The team identified two examples of a Green finding and an associated non-cited violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI, Corrective Action, for the licensees failure to correct conditions adverse to quality. Specifically, the licensee failed to correct long term degraded service water flow to the Unit 2 safety-related train B emergency diesel generator heat exchangers since 2008, and degraded Unit 1 reactor containment building coatings since 2009. The licensees corrective actions included performing an operability determination and determining that the service water system and the Unit 1 containment sump were operable and documenting the issue in the corrective action program as condition reports CR-ANO-C-2016-00946, and CR-ANO-1-2015-00200. The failure to correct conditions adverse to quality associated with Unit 2 service water flow to the B emergency diesel generator heat exchangers and the Unit 1 reactor containment building coatings was a performance deficiency. The performance deficiency was determined to be more than minor because it was associated with the equipment performance attribute of the Mitigating Systems cornerstone and adversely affected the cornerstone objective to ensure the availability, reliability, and capability of systems that respond to initiating events to prevent undesirable consequences. Specifically, the failure to correct long term degraded: 1) service water flow beyond the action limit in accordance with procedure EN-DC-159, Component and System Monitoring, to the B emergency diesel generator heat exchangers, which challenged the capability of emergency diesel generator response to design basis events; and 2) containment coatings which challenged the Unit 1 emergency core cooling system capacity. The finding was evaluated using Inspector Manual Chapter 0609, Significance Determination Process, Attachment 0609.04, Initial Characterization of Findings, and Appendix A, The Significance Determination Process (SDP) for Findings At-Power, Exhibit 2, Mitigating Systems Screening Questions, dated June 19, 2012. The team determined the finding was of very low safety significance (Green) because the finding was a deficiency affecting the design or qualification of mitigating system, structure or component, but the system, structure or component maintained operability. This finding had a human performance cross-cutting aspect of Design Margins because the licensee failed to place special attention on maintaining margins in safety related equipment. Specifically the licensee has repeatedly: 1) throttled service water flow away from the safety-related shutdown cooling heat exchangers, reducing the shutdown cooling design margins to maintain minimally acceptable flow to the emergency diesel generator heat exchangers since 2008; and 2) reduced the available containment sump margin rather than correct containment coating deficiencies [H.6]. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 23:24, 21 February 2018
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000313/2016007 Section 4OA4 |
| Date counted | Mar 31, 2016 (2016Q1) |
| Type: | NCV: Green |
| cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
| Identified by: | NRC identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 95003 |
| Inspectors (proximate) | B Correll C Osterholtz D Betancourt D Lackey D Willis E Duncan G Hansen J Brand J Dixon J Mateychick L Mckown M Holmberg M Keefe M Phalen N O'Keefe P Mckenna R Alexander R Deese R Kopriva R Kumana S Graves S Morrow S Rich S Smith T Hartman W Sifre Z Hollcraft |
| Violation of: | 10 CFR 50 Appendix B Criterion XVI |
| CCA | H.6, Design Margins |
| INPO aspect | WP.2 |
| ' | |