IR 05000272/1991007
| ML18095A922 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 04/09/1991 |
| From: | Paolino R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18095A921 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-272-91-07, 50-272-91-7, 50-311-91-07, 50-311-91-7, NUDOCS 9105210043 | |
| Download: ML18095A922 (7) | |
Text
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report N Docket N /91-07 50-311/91-07 50-272 50-311 License No. DPR-70 DPR-75 Licensee:
Public Service Electric & Gas Company P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 Facility Name:
Salem Generating Station - Units 1 & 2 Inspection At:
Lower Alloways Township, New Jersey Inspection Conducted:
February 20-22, 1991 Inspectors:
Approved by:
Engineer, c
C. J Anderson, Chief, Electrical Section, Engineering Branch, DRS Inspection Summary:
Inspection on February 20-22, 1991 (Combined Inspection Report Nos. 50-272/91-07 and 50-311/91-07)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, ~nannounced inspection of the Fire Prevention/
Protection Program and its implementation in the areas of Administrative Controls, Surveillance, Maintenance, Modifications, Training, and Audit Results:
No violations involving safety related areas or equipment wer identifie Based on the results of this inspection, it was determined that the licensee fire protection/prevention program was satisfactorily implemented except for deficiencies noted in the implementation of administrative procedures for the control of combustibles.
9105210043 6~888~72 PDR ADDCK PDR Q
- Details 1.0 Persons Contacted 1.1 Public Service Electric & Gas Company
.R. Bashall, Systems Analysis Supervisor
- R. Beckwith, Senior Licensing Engineer
- P. Benini, Principal Engineer R. Braddick, Systems Analysis Engineer-FP T. Cellmer, Radiation Protection/Chemistry Manager L. Curran, Operating Engineer
J. Gebrly, Safety & Fire Protection Training Supervisor
- J. Hoffman, Nuclear Fire Protection Engineer J. Kerin, Senior Nuclear Fire Protection Supervisor S. LaBruna, Vice President, Nuclear Operations M. Maradeo, Senior Staff Engineer/Lead Auditor P. Moeller,* Manager, Site Protection J. Quather, Fire Protection Staff Engineer E. Villar, Licensing Engineer K. Wolf, Fire Protection Staff Engineer 1.2 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission S. Barr, Resident Inspector
- Denotes personnel not participating in the exit meeting of January 22, 1991 Fire Protection Program (64704) Introduction An inspection was performed to evaluate and assess the adequacy of the licensee fire protection program and associated implementing procedure The inspection included the verification of procedure implementation, technical adequacy of procedures and programs, inspection of plant facilities, fire brigade training and qualification and review of previous licensee audit finding Surveillance, routine tests, administrative and other procedures related to fire protection were revi~wed with respect to administrative requirements for an effective fire protection progra A sample of completed surveillance documentation was reviewed to verify that fire protection surveillance procedures are being properly implemente Overall, the Salem Units 1 & 2, Fire Protection Program is being satisfactorily implemented with the exception noted in Section 2.2.
- 2.2 Plant Tour During the inspection period, the inspectors-walked down accessible vital and non-vital areas in Salem Units 1 & The inspector visually inspected the fire protection water systems, fire pumps, fire water piping and distribution systems, post indicator valves, hydrants and contents of fire house The examination included area fire detection and alarm systems, automatic and manual fixed suppression systems, interior hose stations, fire barriers, penetration seals and fire door The inspector observed general housekeeping conditions and randomly checked inspection tags on portable fire extinquishers to verify that the required monthly surveillance inspections were performe No deterioration of equipment was note Tank gauges registered ful All extinquishers noted appeared to be of the correct type, capacity, carried current inspection tags and were provided in the correct locatio *
During the facility tour, the inspector noted several potential fire hazards in non-safety related areas consisting of untreated wood skids (11) spread out across the Units 1 & 2 turbine dec In addition, large untreated wood dunning blocks (16 x 16 x 24) were being used to support condenser piping work in progress on the Unit 2 turbine deck (Unit 2 is in an outage).
Inside the Unit 2 turbine building at elevation 100 1, the inspector identified a large number of empty plastic water bottles (150-200).
Storage of the bottles was evenly divided along opposite walls *of the turbine buildin One of the walls used to store the bottles is an outside wall of the turbine buildi~ Both of these examples are indications of licensee failure to implement existing procedures as follows:
Procedure No. AP-25,-revision 5, section 4.3.1 states, in part, that:
11 Permanent interior storage of combustible materials is prohibited except in areas where suppression systems have been installed 11 *
The turbine building, elevation 100 1, used for storage of empty plastic water bottles, does not have a suppression syste *
Procedure No. A-25, rev1s1on 5, section 4.3.3 states, in part, that:
11All wood used in or during temporary construction or for maintenance purposes shall be fire retardant wood unless authorized by the Senior Fire Protection Supervisor.
Section 4.3.6 of this procedure states, in part, that:
11 ***
temporary structures of combustible construction will be permitted on the turbine deck... only with an approved Fire Protection Impairment Perrnit.
There was no evidence that an impairment permit had been issued or approved on the use of untreated wood dunning blocks on the Unit 2 turbine dec There was no evidence that the Senior Fire Protection Supervisor had authorized the use.or storage of untreated wood skids and untreated 3/4 inch plywood found on the Units 1 & 2 turbine dec The observed potential fire hazards are an indication that the proposed corrective action resulting from a similar observation in safety related areas and reported as a violation by the NRC resident inspector on March 15, 1990 is inadequat *
In the licensee's response to that violation, the licensee indicated that ongoing revisions to AP-25 included long range corrective measures for control of transient combustibles and specific documentation pf use/storage of transient combustibles to determine impairmen To date, corrective measures have not been timely as evidenced in the NRC observatio AP-25, Revision 5, has not been revise However, the licensee has indicated that a procedure [NC.NA-AP.ZZ-0025(Q)] to control transient combustibles is being dev~loped for Hope Cree This procedure will be ready for SORC review in three week Once approved, it will be incorporated for use at the Salem sit The observed potential fire hazards is unresolved pending NRC review of licensee evaluation and impact of combustibles on safety related fire zones and safety related cables in the turbine building (50-272/91-07-01, 50-311/91-07-01). Procedural Review The inspector reviewed applicable fire protection program procedures consisting of Corporate Policy, Site Administrative and Departmental Procedure The Departmental Procedures include site protection, fire department pre-fire plans, surveillance testing, training and alarm response The Nuclear Safety Manual and the Programmatic Standard currently in use at the Salem facilities were also reviewe The policy and procedure documents reviewed appear to be well thought out, technically sound and properly implemente No deficiencies were identifie.0 Fire Brigade Training Fire Department Training Procedures and attendance records for brigade members were reviewe General observations indicate the records are complete and accurat Training records are maintained for each brigade membe The records provide a complete history of traini*ng, medical fitness, participation in fire drills and shift assignment Certificates for specific courses in specialized subjects are kept in each fire brigade members fil *
Discussions with fire brigade members during the facility inspection indicates the fire brigade members are coghizant_of thei~ responsibilities and that the training provided is berieficial in maintaining an awareness of current developments in fire protection and improving fire fighting technique The site protection department responsibilities includes not only fire fighting, response to hazardous material incidents and emergency medical situations, but also plant inspections, maintenance of fire protective measures, surveillance/testing, impairment tracking, ignition and combustible material control and the fire watch progra Operating personnel are assigned to each crew as needed to provide technical support and knowledge of plant system No deficiencies were identifie.0 Control of Combustibles Except for the examples noted in section 2.2, control of combustible materials throughout the facilities inspected wis considered to be goo Ignition source control at both pl~nts appears to be handled properl There was no observed hotwork in progress at either facilit Adequate fire watchers were observed and no deficient barriers were note Good housekeeping was note No accumulation of trash was noted and cleanliness appeared to be stressed in all areas as evidenced in the number of cleaning personnel encountered during the facility tou Weekly management walks through the facility are another factor with positive affects on housekeep-ing managemen.0 Unannounced Drill During this inspection, there was an unannounced drill involving a facility B phase insulator on a 240V transformer installed outside, behind the south penetration area, elevation 100 1 *
There was no visible fire, however, there was a small explosion resulting from the breakup of the insulato The site protection department responded immediately following the alarm which came in at 11:5 Seven brigade members responded in full uniform arr1v1ng on location by 11:5 The site protection fire truck was on location at 11:5 Radiation protection and operations personnel were on location at 11:57 to identify the transformer and secure the are At 12:16 operations personnel secured the transformer making sure affected units/components were back on lin The incident was terminated at 12:18 with all units returning to the statio The drill demonstrated that command and control of the site protection department was adequat Brigade members responded immediately, in full dress, to perform in a professional manner.* Actions taken were timely and decisive.
,I
7.0 Audits The inspector reviewed the annual and triennial audits of the station fire protection progra Triennial Audit No.89-032 dated December 12, 1989 covers the audit period November 7 through November 17, 198 Annual Audit No.90-032 dated October 26, 1990 covers the audit period September 17 through September 28, 199 The audits cover fire protection programs at the Salem Generating Station, Units 1 & 2 and the Hope Creek Generating Statio The audits included walkdowns of Salem Uniis 1 & 2, Salem gas turbine, outbuildings (hose houses), work in-process, organizational controls for training, document control, procurement, material control, operating status, and control of measuring and test equipmen Observations were summarized and recommendations were made where applicabl The site protection department has issued work requests to repair/correct discrepan-cies note The Audit Assessment SQA-91-003 of January 3, 1991, by Fire Protection Consultants and Technical Specialists have been that overall
. the Fire Protection Program is satisfactor The report also recognizes the effectiveness of the NFPD organization and the staff performanc.0 Surveillance Test (ST) Review The inspector reviewed the following surveillance tests to determine if associated technical specification requirements were being prtiperly implemented:
MlO-SST-006 MlO-SST-009-1 MlO-SST-022-1 MlO-SST-027-1 SP-[0]4.3.3. MlO-SST-048-1 MlO-SST-022-2 Yearly Fire Pump Capacity Test Bi-Weekly Operability Test of No. 1 Fire Pump Monthly Inspection of Technical Specification Fire Hose Station 18 Month Inspection of Technical Specification Fire Doors Bi-Annual Functional Test of Smoke and Thermal Detector Yearly Functional Test and Inspection of Halon 1301 System Monthly Inspection of Technical Specification Fire Hose Station
- All of the STs reviewed were performed within the-required frequency and were satisfactorily and properly dispositione The surveillance test information has been incorporated into a computer progra The information
is ~eadily available on deman The program provides a description of the test, the test procedure, the test frequency, due date, date completed and the previous completion date for each component teste No deficiencies were identifie.0 Unresolved Item(s)
Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptible items or violation Unresolved item(s) are discussed in Details, Paragraph.0 Exit Meeting The inspector met with licensee personnel (denoted in Details, Paragraph 1.0) at the conclusion of the inspection, on February 22, 1991, at the Salem Generating Station sit The inspector summarized the scope of the inspection and the.inspection findings at that time.