05000250/FIN-2014005-03
From kanterella
Revision as of 07:58, 25 September 2017 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by Mark Hawes)
Finding | |
|---|---|
| Title | Failure to Perform an Adequate Design Verification |
| Description | A self-revealing finding was identified for the licensees failure to ensure an adequate design change was implemented during Unit 3 and Unit 4 instrument air compressor system upgrade modifications completed in 2013. Specifically, plant modifications EC 246991 and EC 246990 were accepted and placed in service by the licensee without verifying the control logic configuration would function properly and load under all conditions. As a result, the diesel-driven compressors would not load and pressurize the instrument air header in the event of a loss of instrument air pressure while in the standby mode of operation. Corrective actions included an immediate modification to the standby compressor loading control circuit to ensure the machine loaded automatically and revising general procedural guidance for compressor operation. The licensee entered this performance deficiency in their corrective action program as AR 01983607. The performance deficiency was more than minor because it was associated with the design control attribute of the initiating events cornerstone and adversely affected the cornerstone objective to limit the likelihood of events that upset plant stability and challenge critical safety functions during power operations. Specifically, the failure to have an adequate design for controlling the operation of the standby instrument air compressor resulted in a reactor trip due to the loss of instrument air pressure. The inspectors screened the issue under the initiating events cornerstone using Attachment 4 (June 19, 2012) and Exhibit 1 (June 19, 2012) of Appendix A to Inspection Manual Chapter (IMC) 0609, Significance Determination Process (June 2, 2011). The inspectors concluded that a detailed risk evaluation would be required because the finding was associated with the loss of a support system that resulted in a reactor trip and affected equipment that could be used by plant operators to mitigate the resulting plant transient. A senior reactor analyst (SRA) performed a detailed risk evaluation of this issue. The NRC model for Turkey Point was adjusted by: 1) increasing the initiating event frequency for a loss of instrument air (LOIA) event by one order-of-magnitude, and 2) the failure-to-run probability of the backup air compressors was set equal to 1.0. The change in core damage frequency results were below the 1E-6 threshold and the issue was determined to be of very low risk significance (Green). The finding was associated with a cross-cutting aspect in the resources component of the human performance area because the licensee failed to ensure instrument air system equipment was available and adequate to support nuclear safety (H.1). |
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000250/2014005 Section 4OA3 |
| Date counted | Dec 31, 2014 (2014Q4) |
| Type: | Finding: Green |
| cornerstone | Initiating Events |
| Identified by: | Self-revealing |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 71153 |
| Inspectors (proximate) | A Butcavage A Nielsen A Vargas D Mas -Penaranda J Rivera M Coursey M Endress P Capehart R Pursley S Sandal T Hoe |
| CCA | H.1, Resources |
| INPO aspect | LA.1 |
| ' | |
Finding - Turkey Point - IR 05000250/2014005 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Finding List (Turkey Point) @ 2014Q4
Self-Identified List (Turkey Point)
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||