05000259/FIN-2009002-02
From kanterella
Revision as of 19:37, 28 October 2017 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Finding | |
|---|---|
| Title | Inadequate Surveillance Procedure Causes Loss of Unit 1 RHR System Safety Function (Section 1R22) |
| Description | A self-revealing non-cited violation of Technical Specification 5.4.1, Procedures, was identified for an incorrect Unit 1 surveillance procedure that instructed technicians to install a jumper in the wrong location which resulted in the inadvertent lockout of the Loop II residual heat removal (RHR) pumps automatic start feature while the Loop I RHR pumps were removed from service for testing. The improperly installed jumper resulted in the RHR system being unable to perform its safety function. The immediate corrective actions for this event included removal of the jumper to restore the automatic start feature of the RHR Loop II pumps, revision to the surveillance procedure to reflect the correct location for the jumper, and completion of the surveillance. This finding was entered into the licensees corrective action program as Problem Evaluation Report 166487. The finding was determined to be more than minor because it was associated with the Mitigating Systems Cornerstone attribute of Procedure Quality and adversely affected the associated cornerstone objective to ensure the availability, reliability, and capability of systems that respond to initiating events to prevent undesirable consequences. A Phase 2 analysis was performed because the event represented a loss of the RHR system safety function. The Phase 2 analysis using Appendix A, Technical Basis for At- Power Significance Determination Process, of IMC 0609 determined that the finding was of very low safety significance (Green). The cause of this finding was directly related to the cross cutting area of Problem Identification and Resolution and the aspect of thorough evaluation of identified problems because a prior licensee-identified procedural discrepancy regarding the location of this jumper was not adequately evaluated and resolved to ensure the jumper would be installed in the correct circuit (P.1(c)). (Section 1R22) |
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000259/2009002 Section 1R22 |
| Date counted | Mar 31, 2009 (2009Q1) |
| Type: | NCV: Green |
| cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
| Identified by: | Self-revealing |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 71111.22 |
| Inspectors (proximate) | C Stancil E Guthrie J Baptist K Korth P Higgins T Ross |
| CCA | P.2, Evaluation |
| INPO aspect | PI.2 |
| ' | |
Finding - Browns Ferry - IR 05000259/2009002 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Finding List (Browns Ferry) @ 2009Q1
Self-Identified List (Browns Ferry)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||