05000305/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 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{finding | {{finding | ||
| title = Failure | | title = Failure to Utilize Work Order for Temporary Weld Repair on ASME Code, Class 2 Piping | ||
| docket = 05000305 | | docket = 05000305 | ||
| inspection report = IR 05000305/2012003 | | inspection report = IR 05000305/2012003 | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| identified by = Self-Revealing | | identified by = Self-Revealing | ||
| Inspection procedure = IP 71111.18 | | Inspection procedure = IP 71111.18 | ||
| Inspector = N Shah, K Riemer, J Jandovitz, J Cassidy, D Szwarc, T Bilik, R Krsek, K Barclay, L Jones, J Beavers, N Feliz | | Inspector = N Shah, K Riemer, J Jandovitz, J Cassidy, D Szwarc, T Bilik, R Krsek, K Barclay, L Jones, J Beavers, N Feliz-Adorno | ||
| CCA = H.2 | | CCA = H.2 | ||
| INPO aspect = LA.2 | | INPO aspect = LA.2 | ||
| description = A finding of very low safety significance and associated NCV of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, Instructions, Procedures, and Drawings, was self-revealed for the failure to accomplish Temporary Modification (TMOD) 2012-11 in accordance with Work Order (WO) KW100894696 and the associated weld data sheet and map. Specifically, licensee personnel failed to utilize the WO instructions, weld data sheet and weld map when welding a temporary NRC-approved clamp on American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code Class 2 residual heat removal (RHR) piping. The failure to use the required documentation to perform the work resulted in the worker creating a second through wall leak on the ASME Code, Class 2 RHR piping upstream of valve RHR-600. The licensee entered the issue into its corrective action program (CAP) as condition report (CR) 472915 and permanently corrected both through wall leaks on the RHR system piping following the approval of a second proposed alternative, without incident on May 5, 2012. At the end of the inspection period, the licensee continued to perform an apparent cause evaluation (ACE) to determine the causes for the organizational failures that occurred. The finding was determined to be more than minor in accordance with IMC 0612, Power Reactor Inspection Reports, Appendix B, Issue Screening, dated December 24, 2009, because the finding was associated with the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone attribute of human error (pre-event) and adversely affected the cornerstone objective to ensure the reliability, and capability of systems that respond to initiating events to prevent undesirable consequences (i.e., core damage). The inspectors determined that the finding could be evaluated in accordance with IMC 0609, Appendix G, Shut-down Operations SDP, dated February 28, 2005. The inspectors used Checklist 1, PWR Hot Shutdown Operation: Time to Core Boiling <2 Hours, contained in Attachment 1 and determined that the finding affected core heat removal guidelines I.B(1), Procedures, and I.C(2), Equipment. The inspectors screened the finding as very low safety significance (Green) because it did not degrade the licensees ability to establish an alternate core cooling path if decay heat removal could not be re-established and, therefore, did not require a phase 2 or phase 3 analysis. This finding has a cross-cutting aspect in the area of human performance, resources, because the licensee did not ensure supervisory and management oversight of work activities, including contractors, such that nuclear safety was supported. Specifically, the inspectors identified that the pre-job brief conducted by supervision and management for this work did not include a review of the WO, weld sheet, or weld map and did not convey accurate information regarding the significance of the activity, the type of weld to be performed and the system conditions where the weld was performed. | | description = A finding of very low safety significance and associated NCV of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, Instructions, Procedures, and Drawings, was self-revealed for the failure to accomplish Temporary Modification (TMOD) 2012-11 in accordance with Work Order (WO) KW100894696 and the associated weld data sheet and map. Specifically, licensee personnel failed to utilize the WO instructions, weld data sheet and weld map when welding a temporary NRC-approved clamp on American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code Class 2 residual heat removal (RHR) piping. The failure to use the required documentation to perform the work resulted in the worker creating a second through wall leak on the ASME Code, Class 2 RHR piping upstream of valve RHR-600. The licensee entered the issue into its corrective action program (CAP) as condition report (CR) 472915 and permanently corrected both through wall leaks on the RHR system piping following the approval of a second proposed alternative, without incident on May 5, 2012. At the end of the inspection period, the licensee continued to perform an apparent cause evaluation (ACE) to determine the causes for the organizational failures that occurred. The finding was determined to be more than minor in accordance with IMC 0612, Power Reactor Inspection Reports, Appendix B, Issue Screening, dated December 24, 2009, because the finding was associated with the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone attribute of human error (pre-event) and adversely affected the cornerstone objective to ensure the reliability, and capability of systems that respond to initiating events to prevent undesirable consequences (i.e., core damage). The inspectors determined that the finding could be evaluated in accordance with IMC 0609, Appendix G, Shut-down Operations SDP, dated February 28, 2005. The inspectors used Checklist 1, PWR Hot Shutdown Operation: Time to Core Boiling <2 Hours, contained in Attachment 1 and determined that the finding affected core heat removal guidelines I.B(1), Procedures, and I.C(2), Equipment. The inspectors screened the finding as very low safety significance (Green) because it did not degrade the licensees ability to establish an alternate core cooling path if decay heat removal could not be re-established and, therefore, did not require a phase 2 or phase 3 analysis. This finding has a cross-cutting aspect in the area of human performance, resources, because the licensee did not ensure supervisory and management oversight of work activities, including contractors, such that nuclear safety was supported. Specifically, the inspectors identified that the pre-job brief conducted by supervision and management for this work did not include a review of the WO, weld sheet, or weld map and did not convey accurate information regarding the significance of the activity, the type of weld to be performed and the system conditions where the weld was performed. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 20:45, 20 February 2018
| Site: | Kewaunee  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000305/2012003 Section 1R18 |
| Date counted | Jun 30, 2012 (2012Q2) |
| Type: | NCV: Green |
| cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
| Identified by: | Self-revealing |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 71111.18 |
| Inspectors (proximate) | N Shah K Riemer J Jandovitz J Cassidy D Szwarc T Bilik R Krsek K Barclay L Jones J Beavers N Feliz-Adorno |
| CCA | H.2, Field Presence |
| INPO aspect | LA.2 |
| ' | |