IR 05000219/1982007
| ML20053E278 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 05/13/1982 |
| From: | Ebneter S, Finkel A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20053E255 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-219-82-07, 50-219-82-7, NUDOCS 8206070759 | |
| Download: ML20053E278 (2) | |
Text
..
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No. 5_0-219/82-07 Docket No. 50-219 License No. DPR-16 Priority
--
Category C
Licensee: GPU Nuclear Corporation Madison Avenue at Punch Bowl Road Morristown, New Jersey 07960 Facility Name: Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Inspection at:
Forked River, New Jersey Inspection conducted: March 29-April 2, 1982 Inspectors:
o hA A 3 I b
A.M.'Hnkel,_ Reactor \\ Engineering date signed
%
Ins e r
-
Approved by.
h 3 6 Bh
<
S. TY.'Ebneter, Acting Chipf, Plant date Digned Systems Section, DE&TP i Inspection Summary:
Inspection on March 29-April 2, 1982 (Report No. 50-219/82-07)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of the plant Fire Protection /
Prevention Program, including:
implementation of administrative procedures, fire brigade training, observation of ignition source and combustible material control, review and observation of plant modifications and observation of critical plant fire areas.
The inspection involved 38 hours4.398148e-4 days <br />0.0106 hours <br />6.283069e-5 weeks <br />1.4459e-5 months <br /> on site by one NRC regional based inspector.
Results:
No items of noncompliance were identified.
8206070759 PDR ADOCK 05000219 G
..
. _,.
_-.
. _ _
- - _ _
-
,
.
OETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted General Public Utilities Nuclear B. Alatary, Project Engineering
- J.
Carroll, Jr., Director Station Operations
- M. Chanda, Training Analyst
- K. Eichenlaub, Fire Protection Manager
- P.
Fiedler, Director
- K. Kickerssen, Plant Engineering Director
- R. Markowski, Site Audit Manager
- W. Michael, Licensing Supervisor U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- J. Thomas, Resident Inspector
- Denotes those present at exit interview.
2.
Facility Tour During a facility tour the inspector examined the fire protection system which included the fire protection water systems, yard fire protection equipment including yard indicator valves, hydrants, and contents of hose houses. The inspector toured all accessible vital and non vital plant areas and exami.ied fire detection and alarm systems, automatic and manual fixed suppressicn systems, interior hose stations fire barrier penetration seals, fire docrs, and fire dampers.
In addition to the above, the inspector examined the control room, electrical cabinets in the control room, switchgear room, and the cable spreading room.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Fire Protection / Prevention Program
!
a.
Administrative Controls l
The inspector reviewed the licensee Fire Protection Plan and the
'
following listed Fire Protection Procedures.
--
Procedure 101.2 Fire Protection Organization and Responsibility.
This procedure was undergoing a revision to the maintenance and
,
l fire protection organization during this inspection period.
Procedure 119.1 Fire Protection Inspection,
--
--
Procedure 119.2 Housekeeping Inspections Revision 0, dated December 5, 1980, I
f i
!
l
,
.
.
Procedure 119.3 Control of Combustibles.
This procedure is
--
undergoing a revision ard will be reviewed by the NRC Resident Inspector when issued.
Procedure 120 Fire Hazards Revision 10, dated April 24, 1981,
--
These administrative control procedures, series 100, address the requirements for a complete fire program including the following; Control over the storage and handling of-flammable material in
--
fire areas, Prohibition on smoking in safety related areas except where
--
" smoking permitted" areas have been specifically designated, and Special authorization for activities involving welding and
--
other open flame operations.
b.
Operating Procedures The inspector verifted that operating procedures have been written to comply with the fire program and the administrative procedures listed in 3a above. The fire operating procedures are defined in the series 526, 645.4 and 645.6 documents.
Inspection of portable.
fire extinguishers is defined in series 745 procedures and fire drills are defined in the 905 series of procedures. The inspector reviewed these procedures and verified that the requirements of the
,
administrative procedures-and the Technical Specifications requirements of paragraph 4.12 have been identified and listed in the documents.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
4.
Fire Brigade Training and Drills The inspector reviewed the licensee's fire brigade training and drill records for the last quarter of 1981 and the first quarter of 1982. The i
review included the following documentation; l
--
Fire Brigade quarterly training records, 1981 and 1982, l
--
Fire Brigade training records at the Fort Monmouth, New Jersey i
training center for 1980 and 1981 and the 1982 schedule, and Fire Drill records for 1981 and 1982
--
In addition to the above the inspector verified that a list of the qualified fire brigade personnel was posted in the control room and it was updated i
on a monthly basis. This list is issued by the training operation with concurrence of the fire protection manager.
i i
f
-,-- _
- -. - - -.
..,,.
-..., _ -,
_
-
,. _. _. -,
, _ ~, _ - - - -
,-....m,.. - _., _ - - - -. _ _
. -.. - _,.., -
.
.
.
No items of noncompiiance were identified.
5.
Fire Protection Modifications Required by Change Request No. 87 to OPR-16 The inspector verified that the requirements of change request No. 87 to DPR-16 have been completed, tested, and are being maintained as defined in Technical Specification sections 3.12 and 4.12.
The review of this licensee's " Fire Protection Status of Operating Reactors" plan is scheduled by the NRC for approximately June 1982. The results of this NRC review will be inspected during the next scheduled fire inspection.
No items of noncompliance were identified-6.
Safe Shutdown System The safe shutdown system per 10 CFR 50, Appendix R, Section III, is under review by the NRC.
Portions of the system have been designed, built and tested by the licensee. The inspector verified that this portion of the system did comply with the documentation.
The complete design will be reviewed by the NRC and verified by inspection when final system approval is completed.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
7.
Fire Inspection Audit and Fire Protection Inspection The inspector reviewed the fire audit performed by the licensee during August,1981 and the fire protection manager's inspection of March 30, 1982.
a.
Fire Audit S-0C-81-11 The fire audit of August 1981 was an evaluation of the Fire Protection Program at the Oyster Creek site. The inspector verified that many of the items identified in this audit report have been corrected and or are in the process of correction.
This is discussed in paracraph 3 of this report. The organization changes and the procedure changes that are being made should strengthen tne Fire Protection Program.
b.
Fire Protection Inspections The fire protection department performs fire protection inspections as defined in procedure 119.1, " Fire Protection Inspection". The inspector using the March 30, 1982 inspection verified that the items identified in *he report had been corrected or have been identified in a wo*& request form.
- -.- -.-.
n
~
.
.
The items identified by the inspector during his plant tour were identified by the licensee in either the audit report S-0C-81-11 or the Fire Protection Inspection report of March 30, 1982.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
8.
Licensee Event Report 50-219/82-10/01T On Saturday, January 9, 1982, the Fire Protection deluge system for Reactor Building Elevation 51' south side actuated due to an overheated bearing in the Clean-up System auxiliary pump motor.
The south cable tray deluge system was activated resulting in the wetting of cable trays and other equipment in the area.
Shorts in the electrical equipment indicated that this type of occurrence was not considered during the safety evaluation for the equipment in this area.
The original safety evaluation assumed that existing electrical sealing techniques on most of the plants equipment was adequate when in fact it was not.
The range of spray from the deluge system was also underestimated because instrument racks judged not to be affected in the original evaluation were wetted during this occurrence.
The licensee is preparing a report on the equipment that is required to be protected and the type of protection that will be used. The licensee is proposing that drip shields and equipment sealing methods be used to prevent this condition in the future.
The inspector verified that electrical equipment did have drip shields in place, but since the rer vt has not been completed during this inspection period, the inspector could not verify that the total effort has been performed by the licensee.
This item is considered unresolved until verification of the completed work against the report can be verified by the NRC.
(219/82-07-01)
9.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance, or deviations. An unresolved item disclosed during the inspection'is discussed in paragraph 8.
10.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives denoted in Details (paragraph 1) at the site on April 2, 1982, and summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection findings.
t
. - -.
.
_-. _ -
_
-.