05000263/FIN-2011002-02: 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) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| identified by = NRC | | identified by = NRC | ||
| Inspection procedure = IP 71152 | | Inspection procedure = IP 71152 | ||
| Inspector = K Riemer, M Mitchell, S Thomas, J Bozga, P Voss, A Scarbearyn, | | Inspector = K Riemer, M Mitchell, S Thomas, J Bozga, P Voss, A Scarbearyn, Shaha Dahbur, K Riemer, M Phalen, S Thomas, D Jones, P Voss, C Tilton, P Cardona-Morales | ||
| CCA = N/A for ROP | | CCA = N/A for ROP | ||
| INPO aspect = | | INPO aspect = | ||
| description = During this inspection, the inspectors identified a concern regarding the licensees implementation of fatigue rule requirements. Specifically, the inspectors reviewed an apparent cause evaluation (ACE) that the licensee had performed after identifying several violations of NRC fatigue rule requirements. The inspectors noted that one of the corrective actions developed and implemented in October 2010, as a result of this evaluation, involved tripling the period of planned shift turnover time on the front end of schedules of individuals in one department, to account for the turnover period on the back end of the shift. As a result of this action, the scheduled turnover period for personnel in this department was not consistent with NRC guidance on reasonable amounts of time for these activities. In addition, the inspectors noted that this turnover time period was applied to the front end of the schedules of all personnel in this department regardless of the amount of time spent performing actual turnover activities. This may potentially be in conflict with NRC regulations, specifically with respect to 10 CFR 26.205(b)(1), regarding calculation of work hours, 10 CFR 26.205(d) regarding work hour controls, and 10 CFR 26.203(b)(2) regarding implementation of fatigue rule procedures to ensure compliance with 10 CFR 26.205. The NRC inspectors plan to review actual turnover activities and associated records for the site as a whole to examine how the corrective action of concern has been put into practice. Pending NRC review of additional licensee information regarding site-wide practices for exclusion of shift turnover activities, as well as information on how the application of a fixed and potentially artificially long turnover period has affected actual work hours reported for individuals at the site, this issue will be treated as an Unresolved Item (URI) (URI) 5000263/2011002-02; Calculation of Work Hours during Fatigue Rule Implementation). | | description = During this inspection, the inspectors identified a concern regarding the licensees implementation of fatigue rule requirements. Specifically, the inspectors reviewed an apparent cause evaluation (ACE) that the licensee had performed after identifying several violations of NRC fatigue rule requirements. The inspectors noted that one of the corrective actions developed and implemented in October 2010, as a result of this evaluation, involved tripling the period of planned shift turnover time on the front end of schedules of individuals in one department, to account for the turnover period on the back end of the shift. As a result of this action, the scheduled turnover period for personnel in this department was not consistent with NRC guidance on reasonable amounts of time for these activities. In addition, the inspectors noted that this turnover time period was applied to the front end of the schedules of all personnel in this department regardless of the amount of time spent performing actual turnover activities. This may potentially be in conflict with NRC regulations, specifically with respect to 10 CFR 26.205(b)(1), regarding calculation of work hours, 10 CFR 26.205(d) regarding work hour controls, and 10 CFR 26.203(b)(2) regarding implementation of fatigue rule procedures to ensure compliance with 10 CFR 26.205. The NRC inspectors plan to review actual turnover activities and associated records for the site as a whole to examine how the corrective action of concern has been put into practice. Pending NRC review of additional licensee information regarding site-wide practices for exclusion of shift turnover activities, as well as information on how the application of a fixed and potentially artificially long turnover period has affected actual work hours reported for individuals at the site, this issue will be treated as an Unresolved Item (URI) (URI) 5000263/2011002-02; Calculation of Work Hours during Fatigue Rule Implementation). | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 20:42, 20 February 2018
| Site: | Monticello  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000263/2011002 Section 4OA2 |
| Date counted | Mar 31, 2011 (2011Q1) |
| Type: | URI: |
| cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
| Identified by: | NRC identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 71152 |
| Inspectors (proximate) | K Riemer M Mitchell S Thomas J Bozga P Voss A Scarbearyn Shaha Dahbur K Riemer M Phalen S Thomas D Jones P Voss C Tilton P Cardona-Morales |
| INPO aspect | |
| ' | |