IR 05000423/1989013

Insp Rept 50-423/89-13 on 890724-28.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Fire Protection Prevention Program

ML20246E859
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	08/21/1989
From:	Anderson C, Paolino R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20246E849	List: IR 05000423/1989013 ML20246E847
References
50-423-89-13, NUDOCS 8908300045
Download: ML20246E859 (8)

Text

,r , ,, ..z- - ------- - -- - -

,

'

):Nj

'

, ,

-

6 ,7, j

.-9 '

-

p ,

. 1 ,

-

!

-i U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATOR COMMISSION REGION I- i i Report No. . 50-423/89-13

-

Docke't No. 50-423.: i

• LLicense N NPF-49 Category C

]

Licensee: Northeast Nuclear Energy' Company j P.0 Box 270- i EUord, Connecticut: 06141 l Facility Name: ' Millstone un'it 3' ~

i

" Inspection'At: Waterford, Connecticut j i

. Inspection Conducte'd: July 24-28, 1989 )

. Inspectors':

. Senior Reactor Engineer 2<2I"33 R. J./faolino l date i

'

PSS7EB'

b) ,

Approved by: . C. J. Anderson, Chief Plant Systems Section date Tr # I

,

EB/DRS-  ;

Inspection Summary:- Inspection on July 24-28, 1989 (Report No. 50-423/89-13)

Areas Inspected: Routine. unannounced inspection of the Fire Protection- i Prevention Program' including: program administration and organization; administrative-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 i

Results: Of the 9 areas inspected no violations were identifie l

..

i l

l

^

890830004D 690622 PDR-Q ADOCK 05000423 PDC l

~_ - -- a

m- - , ,

-

s. -

>

.

.1 ,

.

~

I

'

DETAILS 1.0' Persons Contacted'

1.1 Northeast Nuclear Energy Com'pany

'R. Bates, MP-2 Engineering P. Freeman, MP-3 Engineering J. Harris,- MP-3 Engineering -

G. Kelliher, MP-3 Station Engineer

• J. LaWare, Senior Engineer Technologist -

• L; Lara,' Senior Instructor

• C. Libby, Supervisor. Assessment Services

.

• H. Mahdaby, Electrical Engineer MP-2

• J. Maher, Supervisor General Nuclear Training B. Smith,. Qualification Engineering' Technician J. Stetz, Station Superintendent MP-1

.'

J. Summer, Assistant-Engineering Supervisor MP-1 T..Thull, Engineer MP-1

. Vogel, Engineer MP-1 1.2- Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

P. Habighorst, Resident Inspector

• Denotes those not present at the exit meeting of July 28, 1989 2.0 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 detector 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 tags of portable extinguishers for evidence of periodic inspections. No deterioration of equipment was noted. The inspection tags attached to extinguishers indicated that monthly inspections were performe No unacceptable conditions were identifie .0 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 I 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 section I j ' i .

py- p

.. .;

L . c. -

,.

-

'

'3  ;

t-

-3 li' Program Administration and Organizatio ;Thel inspector-reviewed the following licensee documents:

• Technica1' Specifications, Section 6,' Administrative Controls

! .

Policy No.11, revision 1 " Fire Protection. Program" dated ' i March 10, 1982

.* NE&O 2.14,. revision 3

• ACP-QA-2.05, revision 24 " Fire. Protection Program" effective date L March 14, 1989

ACP-QA-3.15 revision 2 " Performance of Fire Protection Reviews (NE&O 5.12)", effective date November 20, 1987

• NE&O 5.12, revision 2 " Performance of Fire Protection Reviews" effective date. July 10, 1987 The scope of review was to ascertain that: -

Personnel were designated for implementing the program at site; .an ' Qualifications were delineated for personnel designated to implement

.the progra '

No unacceptable conditions were identifie ,

3.2 Administrative Control of Combustibles The inspector reviewed the following licensee documents:

• ACP-2.05B, revision 14 " Control of Combustible Materials, Flammable ,

Liquids, Compressed Gases and Ignition Sources", effective date '

December 16, 1986 i,

• .ACP-QA-4.01, revision 15, " Plant Housekeeping effective date October 6, 1987  ;

• ACP-QA-4.01A, revision 3 " System and Component Housekeeping" j effective date April 4, 1987 1

• ACP-6.09A, revision 1 "011 Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures Plan", effective date November 28, 1988 The scope of review was to verify that the licensee had developed administrative controls which included: pecial authorization for the use of combustible, flammable or 1 explosive hazardous material in safety-related arcas;

_ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ . . . . _ .

_ _ _ _ _ _ _

<

.

,

,g i d g

.

.

~ Prohibition on the storage of' combustible, flammable or explosive hazardous material in safety-related. areas;

'

c. : The removal of all wastes, debris,. rags, oil roills 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 component No unacceptable conditions were identifie .3' Administrative Control of Ignition Sources The inspector reviewed the following licensee documents:

• ACP-2.05B, revision 14. " Control of Combustibles Materials, Flammable Liquids, Compressed Gasses and Ignition Sources", effective date December 16, 1986

• ACP-QA-4.01, revision 15 " Plant Housekeeping" effective date October 6, 1987 The scope of this review was to verify that the licensee had developed administrative controls which included:

L Requirements for special authorization (work permit) for activities ,

involving welding, cutting, grinding, open flame or other' ignition j

. sources and that they are properly safeguarded in areas containing i safety-related equipment and components; and L Prohibition on smoking in safety-related areas, except where

" smoking permitted" areas had been specifically designated by plant management.

l No unacceptable conditions were identifie .4 Other Administrative Controls The inspector reviewed the following licensee documents:

• Technical Specifications, Section 6, Administrative Controls i

,

_ _ _ _ - _ - _ ,

+..

4 -

.

a , '

<

.. LACP-6.09,~ revision 7 " Chemical Hazardous waste and' Toxic Substance

~

Control", effective date January 11, 1987

• ACP-QA-4.07, revision 12 " Control of Weld Materials", effective date November 4, 1987

ACP-6.05, revision 6 " Respiratory Protection / Breathing Air Program",

effective date March 8, 1989

ACP-QA-1.10, revision 9 " Fire Protection Quality Assurance Program Boundary", effective date November 4.1987

OP-332A, revision 15 " Fire Protection System" dated April 28, 1989 The scope of review was to verify that the licensee had developed administrative controls which require that: 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; Fire brigade organization and qualifications of brigade members are delineated; Fire reporting instructions for general plant personnel are developed; Periodic audits are to be conducted on the entire fire protection program; and Fire protection / prevention program is included in the licensee's QA I Progra No unacceptable conditions were identifie .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 the

'

plant fire protection equipment:

• SP2641A.1 revision 1, " Valve Lineup Check of the Fire Protection Water System", effective date December 01, 1986

• SP3641A.4 revision 2, " Fire Protection Water System Functional Test and Deluge Spray Nozzle Operability", effective date March 9, 1989 i

l - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _

. I

.

. -

-

• SP3641A.6 revision 0, " Hose Station and Gasket Inspection" effective date September 26, 1986 i

. SP3641C.1 revision 0, " Valve Lineup Check of the Fire Protection CO2 i System", effective date November 21, 1985

• SP3641C.2 revision 0, Functional check of the CO2 Fire Protection System", effective date August 21, 1987

• SP3641D.3 revision 4, " Fire Detection and Control System Operability 1 Check" effective date April 6, 1989

• BC-S-E-6 revision 5, " Installation of Fire Stops & Seals"

• • BSP-1501/21501/31501, " Fire Extinguisher Monthly and Semi-Annual Inspection and Maintenance"

• • BSP-1502/21402/31502, " Hose Station Monthly Inspection and Maintenance"

• GSP-1501/21901/31901, " Inspection of Emergeacy Portable Lighting"

• GSP-1905/21905/31905, " Fire Door Inspection"

• IC 2439A, " Fire Suppression System Test"

• MP 27340, " Fire Penetration Seal Inspection" In addition, the inspector reviewed the maintenance / inspection / test records of the items, identified with an asterisk, to verify compliance with Technical Specifications and established procedure No unacceptable conditions were identifie .6 Fire Brigade Training 3. Procedure Review The inspector reviewed the following licensee procedures:

• Nuclear Training Manual No. NTM-3.205 dated April 11, 1989 The scope of review was to verify that the licensee had developed administrative procedures which included: Requirements for announced and unannounced drills; Requirements for fire brigade training and retraining at prescribed frequencies;

. _ - - -_ - _

_ _ - _ - - _ _ . _ - _ .

- _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - -

+

- *'

-

$ _. 4

'

-

• Requirements for at least one drill per year to be performed'on a "back shift" for each brigade; Requirements for maintenance of training record No unacceptable conditions were identifie . Records Review

~

LThe inspector reviewed training recordslof fire brigade members-for calendar years 1988 and-1989 to ascertain-that they had attended the required quarterly training and participated in a quarterly drill,.

and received the annual hands-on fire extinguishment practic No unacceptable conditions were identifie .7 Periodic Inspections and Quality Assurance Audits 3. Annual ~ Audit-The inspector reviewed the reports of the following annual audit:

• Millstone Plant SNRB audit No. A-2a014 TheLscopelof review was to ascertain that the audits were conducted l

in accordance with'the Technical Section 6.5.4.7(d) and that audi findings were being-resolved in a timely and s,itisfactory manner.

l No unacceptable conditions were identified.

l'

'

3. Biennial Audit l

l The inspector reviewed reports of the following biennial audit:

l

Millstone Plant Audit No.A-60491

. The scope of review was to ascertain that the audit was conducted in accordance with TS Section 7.6.5.7.E and audit' findings were being resolved in a timely and satisfactory manne No unacceptable conditions were identified.

l-

l'

l

_ - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - - _ _ - - _ . _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ . _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - _ _ _

.

-

,

, .-

-

8 1

)

4.0 Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee management representatives (see Section 4 1.0 for attendees) at the conclusion of ti.e inspection on July 28, 198 '

The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection at that time. The licensee did not indicate that the inspection involved any proprietary information. At no time during ?!.is inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspector.

l

- _ _ _ __-_-_-_-___ - ___ __ ___ ___-________ _ -_ -___-____ - ___ - - - _ - _____-_ - ___ - __ - _ ___________ _