05000313/FIN-2013009-03
From kanterella
Revision as of 23:48, 27 September 2017 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Finding | |
|---|---|
| Title | Emergency Lights Satisfied their Maintenance Rule Performance Criteria |
| Description | The team identified a finding for the failure to provide an adequate testing scheme to demonstrate that the Appendix R emergency lights satisfied their maintenance rule performance criteria. The team determined that operators were provided flashlights when they obtained the equipment bags required to perform an alternative shutdown. The licensee entered the issue into the corrective action program. The failure to provide an adequate testing scheme to demonstrate that the Appendix R emergency lights satisfied their maintenance rule performance criteria was a performance deficiency. The performance deficiency was more than minor because if left uncorrected, the performance deficiency would have the potential to lead to a more significant safety concern. The team assigned the finding a low degradation rating since the ability to reach and maintain safe shutdown conditions in the event of a control room fire would be minimally impacted by the potential failure of the emergency lights to function for 8-hours. Specifically, the team determined that the results of the previous annual 8-hour discharge tests provided reasonable assurance that the lights would function for 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> since the licensee had maintained the same battery replacement frequency. Because this finding had a low degradation rating, it screened as having very low safety significance. This finding had a cross-cutting aspect in the decision making component of the human performance area because the licensees decisions failed to demonstrate that nuclear safety is an overriding priority. Specifically, the licensee failed to use conservative assumptions in decision making when changing the testing scheme for the Appendix R emergency lights. The team determined that the licensee failed to use conservative assumptions in decision making because the licensee failed to consider how the revised testing scheme would impact the maintenance rule program or demonstrate compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, Section III.J. |
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000313/2013009 Section 1R05 |
| Date counted | Dec 31, 2013 (2013Q4) |
| Type: | Finding: Green |
| cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
| Identified by: | NRC identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | IP 71111.05 |
| Inspectors (proximate) | G Miller J Mateychick L Willoughby N Okonkwo S Alferink |
| CCA | , |
| INPO aspect | DM.2 |
| ' | |
Finding - Arkansas Nuclear - IR 05000313/2013009 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Finding List (Arkansas Nuclear) @ 2013Q4
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||