05000298/FIN-2017001-04
From kanterella
Revision as of 08:57, 25 September 2017 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by Mark Hawes)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Finding | |
---|---|
Title | Failure to Address Nonconforming Pipe Thinning in Accordance with the ASME Code |
Description | The inspectors identified a non-cited violation of 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(4) for the licensees failure to use an approved method to disposition an American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code nonconforming condition in the residual heat removal service water system. Specifically, the licensee identified multiple locations with localized pipe thinning below the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code B31.1 design minimum pipe-wall thickness during an ultrasonic examination but failed to use an approved method to calculate a new acceptable pipe-wall thickness. As a corrective action to restore compliance, the licensee replaced this section of piping on November 1, 2016, during Refueling Outage 29. The licensee entered this issue into the corrective action program as Condition Reports CR-CNS-2016-05558 and CR-CNS-2016-05963. The licensees failure to use an approved method to calculate a new minimum allowable pipe-wall thickness, in violation of 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(4), was a performance deficiency. The performance deficiency was more than minor, and therefore a finding, because it was associated with the design control attribute of the Mitigating System Cornerstone and adversely affected the cornerstone objective of ensuring the availability, reliability, and capability of systems that respond to initiating events to prevent undesirable consequences. Specifically, calculating an allowable minimum pipe-wall thickness value that is below the American Society of Mechanical Engineers code design minimum value reduces the pipings structural integrity, potentially leading to the failure of the piping. Using Inspection Manual Chapter 0609, Appendix A, The Significance Determination Process (SDP) for Findings AtPower, dated June 19, 2012, inspectors determined the finding screened as having very low safety significance (Green) because it: was not a design deficiency; did not represent a loss of system and/or function; did not represent an actual loss of function of at least a single train for longer than its technical specification allowed outage time; and did not result in the loss of a high safety-significant nontechnical specification train. This finding had a cross-cutting aspect in the area of human performance associated with design margins because the licensee failed to operate and maintain the residual heat removal service water system within the American Society of Mechanical Engineers code minimum pipe-wall thickness. Specifically, having identified that the affected pipe location was below the allowable pipe-wall thickness, the licensee opted to calculate and accept a new minimum pipe-wall thickness value that was not consistent with code requirements instead of repairing the affected piping at the time of discovery [H.6]. |
Site: | Cooper ![]() |
---|---|
Report | IR 05000298/2017001 Section 4OA2 |
Date counted | Mar 31, 2017 (2017Q1) |
Type: | NCV: Green |
cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
Identified by: | NRC identified |
Inspection Procedure: | IP 71152 |
Inspectors (proximate) | C Henderson E Uribe G Warnick I Anchondo J Watkins P Elkmann P Voss R Deese |
Violation of: | 10 CFR 50.55a Technical Specification |
CCA | H.6, Design Margins |
INPO aspect | WP.2 |
' | |
Finding - Cooper - IR 05000298/2017001 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Finding List (Cooper) @ 2017Q1
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||