IR 05000289/1977029
| ML19256D237 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 10/19/1977 |
| From: | Buzy J, Ebneter S, Gage L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19256D227 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-289-77-29, NUDOCS 7910170745 | |
| Download: ML19256D237 (7) | |
Text
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT O
aegion I Report No.
77-29 Docket No.
50-289 License No.
DPR-50 Priority Category C
--
,
Licensee:
Matroenlitan Edison comoany P. O. Rox 542 Readina. Pennsylvania 19603 Facility Name:
Three Mile Island 1
-
i In.spection at:
Middletown, Pennsylvania Inspection conducted:
Septe r 21-25, 1977 Inspectors:
I-
/0 - / O-7'/
L. W. Gage, ITeadtor p'nspector date sigrfed Other Accompanying 3_
3_
q,,,,,, ypp P-rsonnel:
-
R.)
date signed
,
I date signed Approved by: h.
d A1,hq/yr S. D. Ebneter, Chief, Engineering
' date signed Support Section No. 2, RC&ES Branch Insoection Summary:
Inspection on September 21-23, 1977 (Report No. 50-289/77-29)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of the fire prevention /protec-tion program including work control procedures, quality assurance surveillance, design change controls, fire training and drills, emergency shutdown procedures, fire inspection reports, and facility inspection.
The inspection involved 17
,
inspection hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
'
Results: Of the seven areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified in six areas; two apparent items of noncompliance (Infraction - failure to maintain operability of ventilating fan in battery room - Paragraph 9; and Infraction - smoking in "No Smoking" posted cable spreading room - Paragraph 10) were identified in one area.
1450 053 I
/
.
Region I Fonn 12 ggf{
(Rev. April 77)
P/910170 /I 1. _ __
.
_
_
_
_.
. _.
.
.
,
i
-
r l
L)
!
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
,
Principal 4.icensee Employees
~
f
- Mr. W. W. Cotter, Supervisor - Quality Control
'
- Mr. E. Gee, Safety Supervisor Mr. F. W. Grice, Supervisor, Generation Safety
- Mr. J. O'Hanlon, Unit 1 Superintendent Mr. W. J. Sawyer, Engineer III - Nuclear Mr. R. Zechman, Group Supervisor, Technical Training a
- denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Work. Control Procedures
-
i The inspector verified that there is a work control procedure which defines requirt.ments for operations personnel approval and control of modification activities.
It is Station Administrative Procedure Q
1016
"Implementi. tion and Control of Station Maintenance and Modifications," Revision 10.
Work requests that affect nuclear safety or are required to mini-mize radiation exposure are P0RC reviewed, and the work procedure m n t have the Unit Superintendent's approval.
The inspector also verified that the " Safety Policies and Procedures Manual" contained a section titled " Welding and Cutting Procedure (Fire Safety)" dated June 26, 1975 that describes the special authorization (permit) that is required for activities involving welding and open-flame sources.
The inspector also verified that
+
this procedure required the assignment of a responsible person to function as a " fire watch."
3.
Quality Assurance Surveillance
,
!
!
a.
Procedures The inspector verified that there are quality assurance pro-cedures that require periodic surveillance and audit of authorized modification ar.d maintenance activities to verity compliance with established controls.
1450 054
-
.
-
...
...
-.-
--
..-
.
.
.
L)
the procedures include:
,
i GP 4012. " Surveillance Program, Nonconfomance Reports, I
-.
and Step Work Orders," Revision 3 (October 9, 1976)
'
GP 4016, "OQA Audit Program," Revision 3, Change 2 i
--
(August 30,1977)
GP 1008, " Systems Subject to QA," Revision 1 (October 18,
--
1976)
b.
Records l
The inspector asked the licensee if any safety related cable seal modifications were made during 1977.
The licensee stated that there were none.
Howev2r, the inspector verified that quality assurance surveillance is periodically performed during modification and maintenance activities to assure that
they are author' zed and that they conform with established plant controls.
He reviewed the list of QA surveillances performed in 1977 and selected two sets of records for further Q
inspection. The records included:
Surveillance 77-127 (April 6,1977), re. rerouting ES
-
--
cables in the fuel handling building Surveillance 77-192 (July 12-22, 1977), re. potential
--
fire hazards in the control room, relay room, and fuel handling building c.
NCRs The inspector noted that surveillance 77-127 had a NCR (non-conform:nce report) associated with it.
He iequested the status of plant NCRs.
The licensee provided the September 1977 (most recent) issue of " Status of Open Nonconformance Reports."
It indicated that 82% of the open NCRs were overdue for closecut.
Overdue NCR closecuts are considered to be an unresolved item,
,'
pending the review of the status of open NCRs by an NRC in-spector during a subsequent inspection.
(77-29-01)
.
'J 1450 055
'
f
-
.
-
-
-...
....
.
.
!
f p,
~..
4.
Design Change Controls The inspector verified that an administrative procedure had been prepared which specifies the type of cable penetration sealing material to preclude the use of flamable materials in th? event seal modification is necessary.
It is " Installation / Repair of
'
i Cable Tray and Conduit Fire Barriers,1420-FB-1," Revision 1 (February 7,1977).
It specifies that fire bar:-iers will be restored to original design specification requirements.
It references three drawings for typical seal arrangements:
E214-011, Revision 12
--
S201-121, Revision 0
--
,
C201-129, Revision 1
--
The inspector noted, during his inspection of the plant, that the cable penetration seals in the control room cabinets (through the floor of the control room) are not in accordance with the typ! cal floor seal illustrated in drawing C201-129.
The drawing shows a p
marinite board - Kaowool - marinite board sandwich; the actual seal J
in only Kaowool.
The licensee stated that he is presently review-ing a proposal to reseal all safety related cable penetrations with a foamed-in-place Dow Corning silicone.
He expects to schedule
-
this effort in tiovember, 1977.
This item is considered to be unresolved, pending review by an f1RC inspector of the new procedure, drawings, and resealing during a subsequent inspection.
(77-29-02)
5.
Fire Fighting Procedure, Training and Drills a.
Procedures The inspector verified that the following. procedures were established for fire control and the inspection / maintenance of fire related equipment.
Emergency Procedure AP-1004, " Fire Emergency Plan" Revision
--
3 (June 20, 1977)
Emergency Procedure 1202-31, " Fire Emergency Procedure"
--
Revision 5 (aeptember 20, 1977)
3 60 056
-
-
-
.
-
-
._
-. -..
___
__
_
_.
_.
-
.
.
,
.
'
O Operating Procedure 1104-45, " Fire Protection" Revision
--
16 (August 26,1977)
i b.
" Hands-On" Training The inspector witnessed a " hands-on" fire-fighting training session, in which plant personnel were given instruction in fighting gasoline and trash fires, using portable chemical extinguishers and water hoses.
c.
Training Records The licensee stated that all members of the fire brigade
,
received fire prevention / protection training.
However, an over-all record showing what training each member of the brigade had received was not available.
The licensee stated that a computer printout, titled " Staff Training Status," will i
be available October 1, 1977.
This item is considered to be unresolved, pending a review of the " Staff Training Status" and individual personnel fire O
prevention / protection training records, by an NRC inspector during a subsequent inspection.
(77-29-03)
j d.
Drills The inspector reviewed fire drill documentation, which verified that station fire drills were conducted once per month since the oeginning of the year.
i 6.
Fire Inspection Report
,
The inspector reviewed the most recent fire inspection report of the Nuclear Energy Liability-Property Insurance Association (the licensee's fire insurer), Report No. N-155, dated March 21-25, 1977.
The report contained four new recomendations.
The licensee stated that he is evaluating or has taken action on each of them.
7.
Emergency Shutdown Procedures
!
The inspector verified that there are plant procedures that provide alternate methods for accomplishing an orderly plant shutdown and cooldown in case of loss of normal coolant-supply systems, and that the latest revisions of these procedures are available in the
,
Control Room.
J 1450 057
-
.
-
_
.
_
_ _ _ _
_
._
hb The procedures include:
i 1102-13. " Decay Heat Removal by OTSG," Revision 4 (May 16,
--
l 1977)
1106-6, " Emergency Feed," Revision 10 (March 21,1977)
--
1202-2, " Station Blackout and Station Blackout with Loss of
--
both Diesel Generators," Revision 7 (May 16,1977)
1202-6, " Loss of Reactor Coolant /RCS Pressure," Revision 4
--
l December 8,1976)
1202-14, " Loss of Reactor Flow /RC Pump Trip," Revision 3
--
(August 18,1975)
1202-26A, " Loss of Steam Generator Feed to o OTSGs,"
--
Revision 3 (October 26, 1976)
1202-268, " Loss of Steam Generator Feed to One OTSG," Revision 3
--
(June 17,1975)
.j 1202-35, " Loss of Decay Heat Removal System," Revision 2
--
(August 27,1974)
1203-15. " Loss of RC Makeup," Revision 3 (July 8, 1975)
--
8.
Facility Inspection The inspector conducted an inspection of the Control Room, Cable
,
Spreading Room, Battery Rooms, Diesel Generator Rooms, Auxiliary Building, Fire Water Pumping Station, and Outside Hose Houses.
Items examined included the fire alarming system, control room cabinet interiors, fixed and portable fire fighting equipment, and the records of the licensee's inspections of the fire fighting equipment.
I f
1450 058
'
!
-
.
.
_-.
. - _. _.
.
-
t i
O
- '
9.
Inoperative Ventilating Fan In Battery Rooms During his facility tour, the inspector observed that the ventila-tion fan for the battery rooms was not operating.
The licensee infonned the control room operator, who switched from fan B to redundant fan A.
The, redundant fan was operative.
When the operator switched back to fan B, it at first was inoperative again, but the next time the switching was made, fan B was operative.
The licensee stated that the malfunction could be in the fan relay, and that it would be investigated.
I The inspector considered this contrary to the licensee's Final Safety Analysis Report, Appendix 1 A, Paragraph 20, which states:
"... nonconformances such as equipment malfunction...at the station are identified and resolved." He therefore cited the licensee for an Infraction to Criterion XVI of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B (which the licensee subscribed to in the same FSAR paragraph), which states:
'
" Measures shall be established to. assure that conditions adverse to quality, such as... malfunctions...are promptly identified and corrected."
(77-29-04)
,
10.
Smoking 1. Posted "No Smoking" Area
{
g j
During his facility inspection, the inspector observed numerous cigarette butts on the floor of the cable spreading room.
The door to this room is posted with a "No Smoking" sign.
The inspector considered this contrary to the licensee's Final Safety Analysis Report, Appendix 1 A, Paragraph 10, which states:
"... instructions... associated with the administration...of struc-
,
i tures...are... implemented...."
'
He therefore cited the licensee for an infraction to Criterion V of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B (which the licensee subscribed to in the same FSAR paragraph), which states: " Activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by documented instructions...and shall be accomp-lished in accordance with these instructions...." (77-29-05)
11.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance, or deviations.
Unresolved items disclosed during the inspection are discussed in Paragraphs 3.c, 4, and 5.c.
,
!
1450 059
.
.
-.
__
_
. - -