05000266/FIN-2004012-02
From kanterella
Revision as of 13:21, 1 October 2017 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by Mark Hawes)
Finding | |
|---|---|
| Title | Failure To Perform A Safety Evaluation As Required By 10 Cfr 50.59, "Changes, Tests And Experiments" |
| Description | The inspectors identified a Severity Level IV Non-Cited Violation of 10 CFR 50.59(d)(1) for the licensee's failure to perform a safety evaluation for changes made to the Final Safety Analysis Report. Specifically, the licensee screened out' a change to the Final Safety Analysis Report which modified operator response times for the Steam Generator Tube Rupture Chapter 14 Accident Analysis contained in the Final Safety Analysis Report. Specifically, a time requirement for equalizing primary and secondary pressure was removed from the Final Safety Analysis Report. In addition, the licensee changed the time in which isolation of the affected Steam Generator could be achieved from 10 minutes to 30 minutes. At the end of the inspection period the licensee initiated a corrective action to perform a safety evaluation in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59 for this Final Safety Analysis Report change.
Because the Significance Determination Process is not designed to assess the significance of violations that potentially impact or impede the regulatory process, this issue was dispositioned using the traditional enforcement process in accordance with Section IV of the NRC Enforcement Policy. However, the results of the violation were assessed using the Significance Determination Process. This finding was determined to be more than minor because the inspectors could not reasonably determine that the change would not ultimately require NRC approval. The inspectors determined that even though the change was not adequately evaluated in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59, this violation was of very low safety significance because the design basis safety-related functions of mitigating systems to respond to this initiating event scenario were not adversely affected. The inspectors evaluated the results of the finding using the Significance Determination Process for the mitigating systems cornerstone. The inspectors determined that the results of the finding were of very low safety significance because the finding was not a design or qualification deficiency that was confirmed to result in a loss of function per Generic Letter 91-18. Therefore, the results of the violation were determined to be of very low safety significance and the violation was classified as a Severity Level IV Non-Cited Violation. |
| Site: | Point Beach  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000266/2004012 Section 1R15 |
| Date counted | Dec 31, 2004 (2004Q4) |
| Type: | TEV: Severity level IV |
| cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
| Identified by: | NRC identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 71111.15 |
| Inspectors (proximate) | D Mcneil A Klett R Alexander M Morris R Krsek J Giessner P Krohn P Louden |
| INPO aspect | |
| ' | |
Finding - Point Beach - IR 05000266/2004012 | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Finding List (Point Beach) @ 2004Q4
| |||||||||