05000313/FIN-2010003-08
From kanterella
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Finding | |
|---|---|
| Title | Licensee-Identified Violation |
| Description | Technical Specification 6.4.1(a) requires written procedures be established, implemented, and maintained covering the applicable procedures recommended in Appendix A of Regulatory Guide 1.33, Quality Assurance Program Requirements (Operation), Revision 2, February 1978. Section 9(a), Procedures for Performing Maintenance, of Appendix A to Regulatory Guide 1.33 lists procedures for maintenance that can affect the performance of safety-related equipment and such activity should be properly preplanned and performed in accordance with written procedures. Procedure EN-WM-105, Planning, provides instructions to ensure that work is planned in a manner consistent with its importance to plant safety and potential to impact unit availability and applies to all work planned in the work management system. Section 5.2[1] of this procedure states that the planner and supervisor should consider a field walkdown of the task and determine interferences requiring removal before performing the work. Section 5.2[1](f)(6) of this procedure states that planning shall include scaffolding, insulation, paint removal and/or application. Contrary to the above, there are two examples in which radiation work permit packages (RWP 2009-2420, Scaffolding Activities and RWP 2009-2460, EC-7041 Regenerative Heat Exchanger Permanent Shield Rack) were not properly planned during Refueling Outage 20 for Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2, resulting in additional dose. The failure to properly plan these maintenance activities is a performance deficiency. After reviewing all activities associated with the dose contributors to these tasks, it was determined that the actual dose exceeded the more than minor threshold resulting in greater than 5 person-rem and greater than 50 percent above the original dose estimate. Using the Occupational Radiation Safety Significance Determination Process from Manual Chapter 0609, Appendix C, the inspectors determined this finding to be of very low safety significance because it involved ALARA planning and controls and the licensees latest rolling three-year average does not exceed 135 person rem per unit. Since the failure to properly plan these activities was addressed in the licensees Unit 2 Refueling Outage 20 lessons learned review in detail, this violation is being treated as a licensee-identified noncited violation. This issue was entered into the licensee\'s corrective action program as Condition Report CR-ANO-2-2009-3454. |
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
|---|---|
| Report | IR 05000313/2010003 Section 4OA7 |
| Date counted | Jun 30, 2010 (2010Q2) |
| Type: | NCV: Green |
| cornerstone | Mitigating Systems |
| Identified by: | Licensee-identified |
| Inspection Procedure: | |
| Inspectors (proximate) | J Josey J Rotton N Greene A Sanchez D Stearns E Uribe G George J Clark |
| INPO aspect | |
| ' | |
Finding - Arkansas Nuclear - IR 05000313/2010003 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Finding List (Arkansas Nuclear) @ 2010Q2
Self-Identified List (Arkansas Nuclear)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||