IR 05000266/1987007
| ML20238A404 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 08/13/1987 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20238A382 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-266-87-07, 50-266-87-7, 50-301-87-07, 50-301-87-7, NUDOCS 8708200477 | |
| Download: ML20238A404 (3) | |
Text
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Wisconsin Electric Power Company
- J. Zach, Plant Manager
+D. Bell, Project Engineer
+M. Crouch, Assistant Maintenance and Construction Superintendent
.
+A. Cuswell, Electrical Maintenance Supervisor
+*F. Flentje Administrative Specialist
+*G. Frieling, Superintendent, Systems Engineer /
+P. Glessner, System Fire Protection Engineer
+D. Ivey, System Security Officer
.
+M. Kaminski, System Fire Protection Engineer
+P. Katers, Senior Project Engineer
- J. Knorr, Regulatory Engineer
+T. Koehler, General Superintendent
+D. Lawler, Manager, Human Resources
+G. Maxfield, Operations Superintendent
+*R. Newton, General Superintendent /
,
,
+T. Colburn, Project Manager, NRR
- R. L. Hague, Senior Resident Inspector
+R. J. Leemon, Resident Inspector
,
+ Denotes those present during February 27, 1987, exit meeting.
- Denotes those present during May 7, 1987, exit _ meeting.
2.
Assessment of Appendix R Compliance On a sample basis, the inspectors examined measures that the licensee took to assure safe shutdown capability and compliance with 10 CFR 50.48,
'
Appendix R.
The inspection consisted of an assessment of the licensee's implementation of Appendix R requirements for physical plant conditions, required operator actions, systems and components, operator training, supplemental procedures, end methodology employed to mitigate resultant adverse equipment operability due to plant exposure to fires. The results of the inspectors' review are as follows:
l l
a.
Systems Required for Safe Shutdown
!
The Appendix R goals required to achieve post-fire safe shutdown are:
Reactivity control capable of achieving and maintaining cold
shutdown reactivity conditions (reactor coolant temperature less than or equal to 200*F).
-
8708200477 B70813 ADOCK 050
gDR
-
]
<
,.
.
1
,
(6) Supporting Functions i
The following support equipment is required for post-fire safe-j shutdown:
4160V AC /
400 V AC
'
"
125 V DC 120 V AC Component Cooling Water
-Service Water System b.
Alternative Safe Shutdown The licensee provides alternate shutdown' capability for three. fire areas at Point Beach that do not meet.the protection criteria of Appendix R,Section III.G.2. These are the Control Room, the Cable Spreading Room ano the Containment Spray Additive Tank Area.
The remote shutdown panels are provided by the licensee fnr safo /
a shutdown in the event of fire in the three fire areas listed above. The team inspected the panel for compliance with the design documentation and found no violations.
)
I c'.
Alternative Safe Shutdown Procedures j
Areas of the plant which de not meet Appendix R, Section Ill.G.2 and for wh'ich alternative safe shutdown.is provided are identified
)
in Section 2.b.
A review was conducted by the team of procedures
required for alternative safe shutdown.. Additionally, operation trainino was reviewed.
'
The licensee provided two procedures for implementation of alternative safe shutdown:
A0P-10A Revision 6, dated February 18, 1987, entitled
.
" Control Room Inaccessibility."
AOP-10B Revision 0, dated February 6,1987, entitled
I
" Safe to Cold Shutdown in Local Cdntrol."
Three operutors, independent of the fire brigade, are required to achieve stable hot shutdown conditions using these procedures.
The procedure identifies these operators as the Duty Shift Superinter. dent, and Control Operators 1 and 2.
The procedure review indicated that there was a sufficient level of detail and that the procedures contained the necessary steps to achieve cold shutdown in a safe and orderly manner.
In the course of implementing the procedure, the operators are required to perform many manual operations at locations remote from the shutdown panel. The manual
.
./
._
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _
,
'
.
.
e.
Fire Dampers Several of the fire dampers loceted in firewalls at the Point Beach Nuclear Power Plant are expected to close under air flow conditions if activated by heat during a fire. The licensee provided the inspector with a fire damper sumary which indicated several parameters yhich included whether the damper was tested under static or air flow conditions. The inspector requested that the licensee provide justification regarding the test methodology utilized to demonstrate that the dampers, expected to close under air flow, will function as required to maintain the integrity of the fire barrier.
The licensee indicated that a technical evaluation regarding the damper test will be developed and corrective action will be taken as found necessary to insure that the damper closes under air flow conditions if activated by an exposing fire. This is considered an
,
open item (266/87007-06; 301/87007-06), pending review of licensee's Technical Evaluation by Region III.
l In addition, the licensee committed to static test approximately 10%
of the fire dampers every 18 months.
As discussed with the /
)
licensee, should a predetermined number of dampers fail, another j
10% of the dampers will be tested until the amount of dampers
'
failed are below the predetermined number.
In addition, an engineering review would be conducted to evaluate the reasons for the damper failure.
4.
Open Items
,
Open items are matters which have been discussed with the licensee, which will be reviewed further by the inspector, and which involve some action on the part of the NRC or licensee or both. Open items are discussed in
.
Paragraphs 2.c, 2.d. 2.e, 2.f, 3.b, and 3.e of this report.
5.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required
,
'
in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, violations, or deviations.
6.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representative at the conclusion of the inspection on February 27 and May 7, 1987, and summarized the scope and findings of the inspection. The inspector discussed the likely
content of this report and the licensee did not indicate that any information discussed during the inspection could be considered
,
J proprietary in nature.
l In addition, on June 26, 1987, a conference call was held with j
Gary Frieling to discuss the results of the in-office review of documents
'
discussed in this report.
s
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ -