05000483/FIN-2008005-02
From kanterella
Revision as of 19:36, 20 February 2018 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Finding | |
|---|---|
| Title | Failure to Ensure the Suitability of the Design of the Residual Heat Removal Train A Pump Room Cooler |
| Description | The inspectors identified a self-revealing noncited violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, Criterion III, Design Control, after a trip of the residual heat removal Train A room cooler fan revealed that AmerenUE had not adequately selected and reviewed the suitability of the newly installed fan motor thermal overloads. Additionally, the inspectors identified that the postmaintenance testing prescribed for the modified fan motor breaker did not allow sufficient time to challenge the thermal overload settings. On October 8, 2008, residual heat removal Train A room cooler fan shut down after only 22 minutes of run time. The breaker replacement modification used a calculation originally performed for the initial design of the old breaker which did not account for the cooler fan motor being a 20 horsepower motor name-plated down to a 10 horsepower rating. This finding is greater than minor because it is similar to Manual Chapter 0612 \"Examples of Minor Issues,\" Example 3j, in that the engineering calculation error resulted in a condition where there was a reasonable doubt on the operability of the component and a significant programmatic deficiency associated with postmaintenance test requirements was identified that could lead to worse errors if uncorrected. The inspectors determined that the finding impacted the Mitigating Systems cornerstone. Using Manual Chapter 0609.04, \"Phase 1 Initial Screening and Characterization of Findings,\" the issue screened as very low safety significance because it was not a design or qualification deficiency that resulted in a loss of operability or functionality, did not create a loss of system safety function of a single train for greater than Technical Specification allowed outage time and did not affect seismic, flooding, or severe weather initiating events. This issue was entered into the licensee\'s corrective action program as Callaway Action Request 200810223. The inspectors determined that this finding had a crosscutting aspect in the area of problem identification and resolution associated with the corrective action component because the AmerenUE modification for certain motor control center breakers failed to have a low enough threshold to identify fan motor rating and thermal overload setting errors P.1(a) (Section 1R19) |
| Site: | Callaway  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000483/2008005 Section 1R19 |
| Date counted | Dec 31, 2008 (2008Q4) |
| Type: | NCV: Green |
| cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
| Identified by: | Self-revealing |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 71111.19 |
| Inspectors (proximate) | L Ricketson D Dumbacher R Kopriva D Stearns J Adams V Gaddy J Groom |
| CCA | P.1, Identification |
| INPO aspect | PI.1 |
| ' | |
Finding - Callaway - IR 05000483/2008005 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Finding List (Callaway) @ 2008Q4
Self-Identified List (Callaway)
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||