05000275/FIN-2012003-01: 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 71111.01 | | Inspection procedure = IP 71111.01 | ||
| Inspector = L Ricketson, M Peck, L Willoughby, N O, | | Inspector = L Ricketson, M Peck, L Willoughby, N O'Keefe, N Greene, N Makris | ||
| CCA = H.14 | | CCA = H.14 | ||
| INPO aspect = DM.2 | | INPO aspect = DM.2 | ||
| description = The inspectors identified a non-cited violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion III, Design Control, after plant engineers failed to adequately translate regulatory requirements and the design bases into the offsite power interface calculation on May 6, 2011. As a result, the licensee failed to demonstrate that the 230 kilo-Volt preferred offsite power source had adequate capacity and capability to supply the minimum required terminal voltage to plant engineering safety features following a limiting transmission system contingency. The licensee took corrective actions to limit the plant load that would automatically transfer to the preferred power source following a unit trip and entered the condition into the corrective action program as Notification 50492766. The failure to ensure that the 230 kV power system had adequate capability and capability as defined in the current licensing basis requirements was a performance deficiency. This performance deficiency was more than minor because it was associated with the modification design control attribute of the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone and affected the cornerstone objective to ensure the availability, reliability, and capability of systems that respond to initiating events to prevent undesirable consequences. The inspectors concluded this finding was of very low safety significance because the duration of potential losses of a single offsite power source safety function was less than the technical specification allowed outage time, did not represent an actual loss of safety function of risk significant non-technical specification equipment, and did not screen as potentially risk significant due to seismic, flooding, or severe weather initiating events. This finding has a cross-cutting aspect in the area of human performance, associated with the decision making component, because the licensee did not demonstrate that the proposed action was safe in order to proceed while assessing the CLB requirement during decision making. | | description = The inspectors identified a non-cited violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion III, Design Control, after plant engineers failed to adequately translate regulatory requirements and the design bases into the offsite power interface calculation on May 6, 2011. As a result, the licensee failed to demonstrate that the 230 kilo-Volt preferred offsite power source had adequate capacity and capability to supply the minimum required terminal voltage to plant engineering safety features following a limiting transmission system contingency. The licensee took corrective actions to limit the plant load that would automatically transfer to the preferred power source following a unit trip and entered the condition into the corrective action program as Notification 50492766. The failure to ensure that the 230 kV power system had adequate capability and capability as defined in the current licensing basis requirements was a performance deficiency. This performance deficiency was more than minor because it was associated with the modification design control attribute of the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone and affected the cornerstone objective to ensure the availability, reliability, and capability of systems that respond to initiating events to prevent undesirable consequences. The inspectors concluded this finding was of very low safety significance because the duration of potential losses of a single offsite power source safety function was less than the technical specification allowed outage time, did not represent an actual loss of safety function of risk significant non-technical specification equipment, and did not screen as potentially risk significant due to seismic, flooding, or severe weather initiating events. This finding has a cross-cutting aspect in the area of human performance, associated with the decision making component, because the licensee did not demonstrate that the proposed action was safe in order to proceed while assessing the CLB requirement during decision making. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 23:18, 21 February 2018
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000275/2012003 Section 1R01 |
| Date counted | Jun 30, 2012 (2012Q2) |
| Type: | NCV: Green |
| cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
| Identified by: | NRC identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 71111.01 |
| Inspectors (proximate) | L Ricketson M Peck L Willoughby N O'Keefe N Greene N Makris |
| CCA | H.14, Conservative Bias |
| INPO aspect | DM.2 |
| ' | |