IR 05000309/1986012
| ML20214T256 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Maine Yankee |
| Issue date: | 09/16/1986 |
| From: | Anderson C, Krasopoulos A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20214T247 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-309-86-12, NUDOCS 8609300242 | |
| Download: ML20214T256 (8) | |
Text
..
.
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION I'
Report No.
50-309/86-12 Docket No.
50-309 License No.
DPR-36 Priority
-
Category C Licensee: Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company 83 Edison Drive Augusta, Maine 04336 Facility Name: Maine Yankee Inspection At: Wiscasset Inspection Conducted: August 4 - 7, 1986 Inspectors:
4 f/ 4 ~f N.' G./ Kr a p ulos, Reactor Engineer d te
'
Approved by: 0 9 /G J'fo Av4m C.
. Anderson, Chief date Plant Systems Section Inspection Summary:
Inspection on August 4 - 7, 1986 (Report No. 50-309/
86-12]
Areas, Inspected:
Routine unannounced inspection of the Fire Protection /
Prevention Program including: program administration and organization; adminis-trative control of combustibles; administrative control of ignition sources; other administrative controls; equipment maintenance, inspection and tests; fire brigade training; periodic inspections and quality assurance audits; and facility tour.
Results: Of the eight areas inspected, no violations were identified.
,
8609300242 860924 PDR ADOCK 05000309 G
.-
-
l
.
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted 1.1 Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company (MYAPCO)
- J. Garrity, Plant Manager
- S. Brown, Fire Protection Coordinator
- G. D. Whittier, Manager, Nuclear Engineering and Licensing
- S. D. Evans, Licensing Engineer
- C. D. Frizzle, Vice President / Manager of Operations
- W. J. Paine, Facilities Section Head
- E. A. Sayer, Manager, Engineering Services J. McCumber, Licensing 1.2 Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
- C. Holden, Senior Resident Inspector
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Followup of Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item (50-309/84-11-05) Non-UL Listed Electric Fire Pump Controller This item addressed the NRC concern that the electric fire pump controller does not have a UL listing for fire service and therefore does not conform with the BTP-APCSB 9.5-1 guidance. The licensee explained that when the plant was built, electric pump controllers with UL listing did not exist.
In addition, the licensee has records furnished by the American Nuclear Insurers (ANI), the licensee's insurance carrier, indicating that the installed controller is equal to controllers with UL listing. This item is resolved.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (50-309/84-15-04) Hose Station Piping Sizing Calculations The NRC identified the concern that the water supply lines to certain hose stations were not adequately sized to provide the water quantities required by N.F.P.A.
The licensee walked down the piping to these hose stations and determined that the piping involved was only connected to the hose stations. Based on pressure-gage indications the pipe sizes installed are adequate for the water demand. The inspector reviewed and
~
confirmed the licensee conclusions.
This item is resolved.
!
l l
.
-
-
_ _,.
,
.
3-
,
3.
Fire Protection / Prevention Program The inspector reviewed several documents in the following areas of the program to verify that the licensee had developed and implemented adequate procedures consistent with the Fire Hazard Analysis.(FHA), Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR), and Technical Specifications (TS). The documents reviewed, the scope of review, and the inspection findings for each area of the program are described in the following sections.
3.1 Program Administration and Organization The inspector reviewed the following licensee documents:
Technical Specifications, Section 5, Administrative Controls; Fire Protection Plan, Revision 7.
The scope of review was to ascertain that:
a.
Personnel were designated for implementing the program at site; and b.
Qualifications were delineated for personnel designated to implement the program.
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
3.2 Administrative Control of Combustibles The inspector reviewed the following licensee document:
Procedure 19.28, Revision 1 and Inspection Logs of the weekly inspection for the control of transient combustibles and flammables in safety related areas, Form MY-FP-8-84, Revision 2.
The scope of review was to verify that the licensee had developed administrative controls which included:
Special authorization for the use of combustible, flammable of explosive hazardous material in safety-related areas;
Prohibition on the stc rage of combustible, flammable or explosive hazardous material in safety-related areas; The removal of all waste, debris, rags, oil spills or other combustible materials ~ resulting from the work activity or at the end of each work shift, whichever is sooner;
,
-
-
,
- _,.
.,-
.
.
..
All wood used in safety-related areas to be treated with flame retardant;
Periodic inspection for accumulation of combustibles;
Transient combustibles to be restricted and controlled in safety-related areas; and Housekeeping to be properly maintained in areas containing safety-related equipment and components.
'
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
3.3 Administrative Control of Ignition Sources The inspector reviewed the following licensee document:
Procedure 19.7, Welding and Cutting Safety Procedure, Revision 3 The scope of review was to verify that the licensee had developed administrative controls which included:
a.
Requirements for special authorization (work permit) for activities involving welding, cutting, grinding, open flame or other ignition sources and_that they are properly safeguarded in areas containing safety-related equipment and components; and b.
Prohibition on smoking in safety related areas, except where
" smoking permitted" areas had been specifically designated by plant management.
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
3.4 Other Administrative Controls The inspector reviewed the following licensee documents:
Technical Specifications, Section 5, Administrative Controls; Fire Emergency Procedure 19.1, Revision 5;
Fire Training Procedure 19.6, Revision 6;
,
Discrepancy Reporting Procbdure 0-07-3, Revision 3.
The scope of review was to verify that the licensee had developed administrative controls which require that:
I
.
-
.
.
a.
Work authorization, construction permit or similar arrangement-is provided for review and approval of modification, construction and maintenance activities which could adversely affect the safety of the facility; b.
Fire brigade organization and qualifications of brigade members are delineated; c.
Fire reporting instructions for general plant personnel are developed; d.
Periodic audits are to be conducted on the entire fire protection' program; and e.
Fire' protection / prevention program is included in the licensee's QA Program.
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
,
3.5 Equipment Maintenance, Inspection and Tests The inspector reviewed the following randomly selected documents to determine whether the licensee had developed adequate procedures which established maintenance, inspection, and testing requirements
,
for plant fire protection equipment:
- Smoke Detector Testing Procedure No. 3.19.3, Revision 8;
- Fire Pump Capacity Test Procedure 3.19.5, Revision 3;
'
- The Hydrostatic Test Procedure 3.19.2.2, Revision 1;
- CO2 System Testing Procedure 3.19.1, Revision 6;
- Hose House Monthly Inspection, Procedure 3.19.7, Revision 0.
In addition to reviewing the above documents, the inspector reviewed the maintenance / inspection / test records of the items identified by an asterisk (*) to verify compliance with Technical Specifications and established procedures.
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
3.6 Fire Brigade Training 3.6.1 Procedure Review The inspector reviewed the following licensee procedures:
. _, -.. -,.
-
-
._
. _ _ _
.
.
..
Fire Fighting Procedure 19.6, Revision 6; Hands On Lesson Plans 1, 2 and 3 and Miscellaneous Quizzes.
The scope of reyf ew was to verify that the licensee had developed administrative procedures which included:
a.
Requirements for announced and unannounced drills; b.
Requirements for fire brigade training and retraining at prescribed frequencies; c.
Requirements for at least one drill per year to be performed on a "back shift" for each brigade; d.
Requirements for local fire department coordination and training; and e.
Requirements for maintenance of training records.
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
3.6.2 Records Revi'ew'
The inspector reviewed training records of fire brigade members for calendar. years 1985 and 1986 to ascertain that they had successfully completed the required quarterly training / meeting, semiannual drill, and yearly hands-on fire extinguishment practice.
l The inspector also observed a fire drill to evaluate the brigade's response actions and the follow-up critique.
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
3.7 Periodic Inspections and Quality Assurance Audits 3.7.1 Annual Audit
.
The inspector reviewed reports of the following annual audit, MY-86-01.
The scope of review was to ascertain that audits are conducted to satisfy the Technical Specification requirements and audit findings are being resolved in a timely and satisfactory manner.
._
_
_ _.
_. _
- - _ _.
,__
_
_ _ _
.
.
.
The inspector.did not review biannual or triannual audits because these audits were reviewed previously. The licensee however, explained to the inspector that the scope of the annual audit is expanded to meet the requirements of the biannual audits as contained in Generic Letter 82-21 and subject " Technical Specification Audits for Nuclear Power Plants".
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
3.8 Facility Tour The inspector examined fire protection water systems, including fire pumps, fire water piping and distribution systems, post indicator valves, hydrants and contents of hose houses. The inspector toured accessible vital and nonvital plant areas and examined fire detection and alarm systems, automatic and manual fixed suppression systems,. interior hose stations, fire barrier penetration seals, and fire doors. The inspector observed general plant housekeeping conditions and randomly checked portable extinguishers for evidence of periodic inspections. No deterioration of equipment was noted.
The inspector observed that fire extinguishers do not have inspection tags to indicate that monthly inspections are performed.
The licensee has a sign off sheet that the person performing the surveillance, signs, to indicate completion of the surveillance. The inspector verified that these surveillances are completed but explained to the licensee that this method of inspection can have pitfalls.
i The licensee stated that they plan to provide inspection tags on each extinguisher.
The inspector also observed that the bulk CO2 (cardox system) used for fire suppression is not provided with a scenting agent for personnel protection. The licensee agreed to investigate the possibility of adding an odor to the CO2 during the next cardox system inspection.
The inspcetor also observed that compressed air cylinders used throughout the plant were not chained down or adequately braced.
The licensee committed to properly restrain the compressed air bottles.
The inspector also observed that the fire seal in the wall gap between the personnel hatch area and the valve house was leaking.
(Air movement was felt on one side.) The licensee posted a fire watch and proceeded to reseal the entire gap from the other side of the wall.
T No unacceptable conditions were identifie >
.
.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, violations or deviations.
No unresolved items were identified during the inspection.
5.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee management representatives (see Section 1.0 for attendees) at the conclusion of the inspection on August 7, 1986. The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection at that time.
The inspector also confirmed with the licensee that the report will not contain any proprietary information. The licensee agreed that the inspection report may be placed in the Public Document Room without prior licensee review for proprietary information.
(10 CFR 2.790).
,
At no time during this inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspector.
-.
.
_
_ _ _ _ - - _ _..
-- _
_ -. _
___
_ _. _ - _ _
.
. -
-