ML20058A234
| ML20058A234 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Westinghouse |
| Issue date: | 10/18/1993 |
| From: | Kasnicki D, Mcalpine E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20058A227 | List: |
| References | |
| 70-1151-93-07, 70-1151-93-7, NUDOCS 9311300177 | |
| Download: ML20058A234 (5) | |
Text
,
. #gb ner;b UNITED STATES WUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION io
-[ * '
-*t REGloN H S
101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W., SUITE 2900 ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323-0199
\\
lp Report No.:
70-1151/93-07 Licensee: Westinghouse Electric Corporation Commercial Nuclear Fuel Division Columbia, SC 29250 Docket No.:
70-1151 (Fuel Division)
License No.:
SNM-1107 Facility Name:
Columbia Nuclear Fuel Plant Inspection Conducted:~Se tember 27 - O t16er1,1993 Inspector:
A x.
coQd l
D D. Kasnichie Fa gesProjectInspector Date Signed Approved by:
h jp[t/f3 E. FFcAlpine,' Chief.
Ddte' Signed RadiationSafetyPro/jectsSection Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards Branch Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards
SUMMARY
Scope:
This routine, announced inspection was conducted in the area of Fire Protection. The inspection focused on the programmatic aspects and implementation of Commercial Nuclear Fuel Division's Fire Protection program.
Results:
In the areas inspected, violations or deviations were not identified.
Currently, Commercial Nuclear Fuel Division has no license conditions which address Fire Protection or are otherwise related to the NRC's Branch Technical Position on Fire Protection with the exception of one that defines the industrial safety function to be responsible for Fire Protection.
Commercial Nuclear Fuel Division's Fire Protection program appeared to include essential programmatic elements and be adequately implemented.
One issue from the Operational Safety Assessment conducted in August, 1992, was addressed and remains open pending Commercial Nuclear Fuel Division's resolution of the issue (Paragraph 3).
)
9311300177 931018 DR ADOCK 0700
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees oJ. Fici, Plant Manager
- W. Goodwin, Manager, Regulatory Affairs
- J. Hooper, Regulatory Engineer (Industrial Safety)
- S. Mcdonald, Manager, Technical Services
- G. LaBruyere, Manager, Conversion Services (Acting for Manager, Manufacturing)
- E. Reitler, Manager, Regulatory Engineering
- R. Williams, Technical Coordinator, Regulatory Affairs
- D. Young, Supervisor, Maintenance Other licensee employees contacted during this inspection included engineers, technicians, operators, security personnel, and office personnel.
- Attended exit interview on October 1, 1993 2.
Fire Protection (88055) a.
For a detailed facility description from a Fire Protection perspective, reference is made to the following NRC reports from the recent past:
- 1) Trip Report dated September 7, 1990 under Docket No. 70-1151 and 2) NRC Inspection Report No. 70-1151/92-04 dated November 25,.1992.
b.
Section 3.1.2.4 of the license application states, "The Safety Component shall be that organizational component of the licensed activity with the designated responsibility for providing authoritative professional advice and counsel to line management on matters related to industrial safety, industrial hygiene, and fire protection.
It shall, to the extent practicable, be administratively independent of process supervision. The Safety Component shall be responsible for ensuring that all applicable industrial safety related requirements have been evaluated, communicated to line management and incorporated into manufacturing equipment and procedures prior to their use in processing licensed-material.
It shall also be responsible for the establishment, conduct and continuing evaluation of all industrial safety related programs to ensure the protection of the employees and the environs at the licensed facility. The safety program shall include as-a minimum:
the evaluation of potential physical, chemical and fire hazards; the development and implementation of safety programs and procedures designed to minimize accidents and injuries to employees; the purchase and maintenance of industrial safety protection and i
2 monitoring equipment; and the maintenance of the appropriate records and reports associated therewith."
c.
The designated manager responsible for Commercial Nuclear Fuel Division's (CNFD) Fire Protection program is the Regulatory Engineering Manager. The Regulatory Engineering Manager reports to the Regulatory Affairs Manager who, in turn, reports to the Plant Manager. The individual responsible for implementing the Fire Protection program is the CNFD Regulatory Engineer whose designated responsibility is Industrial Safety, Industrial Hygiene, and Fire Protection. The Regulatory Compliance Committee, as CNFD's safety-review committee, functionally also serves as CNFD's fire safety review committee.
No violations or deviations were identified.
d.
The formalization of CNFD's Fire Protection program is evidenced by pertinent Safety Manual procedures and Maintenance Department procedures. The industrial safety function also maintains current copies of all NFPA Codes. A CNFD representative stated their intention to, in the future, programmatically better connect these aspects of the Fire Protection program, perhaps in a " Fire Protection Manual."
(This was currently being done to the chemical safety program.) The following are the Safety Manual procedures which address Fire Protection and were reviewed by the inspector:
Procedure no. SY-300, Housekeeping, Rev. 1, dated November 30, 1990; Procedure no. SY-301, Handling and Storage of Zirconium and its Alloys, Rev. 1, dated June 30, 1988; Procedure no. SY-302, Fire Hose Inspection 'and Maintenance (this procedure was deleted as the performance of this function had been turned over to a local fire equipment contractor); Procedure No. SY-303, Fire Extinguisher Inspection and Maintenance, Rev. 2, dated May. 22, 1989; Procedure No. SY-304, Emergency Vehicle Equipment, Rev. O, dated July 18, 1988; Procedure No. SY-305, Fire Watch Safety, Rev. O, dated June 30, 1988; and Procedure No. SY-306, Fire System Impairment Reporting, Rev. 1, dated May 11, 1992.
Several Maintenance Department procedures address the maintenance and periodic testing of the following Fire Protection related items:
Sprinkler systems, emergency generator fuel tank, fire water pumps, tower pumps, fire water trailer, fire alarm system, hydrogen pipe leak test, natural gas line leak test, fire alarm pull stations, riser water alarm test, emergency generators, emergency fuel oil lines, and sintering furnaces. CNFD employs a local fin e equipment contractor to do maintenance on fire extinguishers and fire hoses. The inspector reviewed maintenance and testing records for a random supling of the above listed equipment and no deficiencies were observed.
No violations or deviations were identified.
e.
The industrial safety function also created.and maintains CNFD's pre-fire plan entitled, " Pre-Emergency Plans.' The inspector reviewed the pre-fire plan with a CNFD representative and it T
7
3 appeared to be a complete and comprehensive Fire Protection tool.
The pre-fire plan provides area by area information on the number of people in an area on each shift, possible areas of entrapped occupants, disabled persons needing assistance, protection methods, utilities information, construction information, occupancy (i.e.
fire load) information, scheduling information, hazardous materials.
basic information, emergency contacts, materials in area, strategy considerations, special circumstances, and any additional comments.
No violations or deviations were identified.
f.
The inspector discussed Emergency Brigade fire training with a CNFD representative, and reviewed training records and related documentation with no deficiencies observed.
During the week of this inspection, several members of the Emergency Brigade were attending a four day training session at the South Carolina. Fire Academy. A CNFD representative stated that the other members of the brigade would also attend future sessions of this particular training.
No violations or deviations were identified.
g.
Industrial Safety audits, which include Fire Protection, are performed by Regulatory Engineering monthly. The inspector reviewed audit reports for March through August, 1993.
Findings appeared to be corrected in a timely manner, often "on the spot" before the auditor left the area of the finding. The inspector also= reviewed the fire insurer's audit report dated August 20, 1992. This audit included fire pump tests, valve functional tests, and. flow capacity tests. Any deficiencies noted in the audit report appeared to have been adequately corrected.
No violations or deviations were identified, h.
The inspector toured, with a CNFD representative, the path of the fire water loop, the two fire water pumps and associated water -
supply tanks, and selected in-door plant areas.. Housekeeping in the in-door areas toured appeared good and no other deficiencies were observed. On a back shift, during the week of this inspection, CNFD experienced an event in which moisture was introduced into a sintering furnace, causing an overpressurization which was relieved by furnace doors designed for that purpose. The inspector toured-the furnace area where this event occurred and could not observe anything indicating that the event had occurred. Discussions with CNFD representatives regarding their response to the event also indicated that it was handled correctly, quickly and efficiently.
No violations or deviations were identified.
4 3.
Action on Previous Inspection Findings (92701)
IFI 92-04-41:
Follow up on CNFD plans regarding fire barrier between incinerator and solvent extraction.
A CNFD representative stated that this is still an 'open item as the final design for this barrier was not yet complete and, accordingly, the cost versus benefit has not been evaluated. The CNFD representative stated that their fire insurer is also interested in CNFD's evaluation of this barrier.
The solvent used in the solvent extraction process is combustible as opposed to flammable, and the maximum amount of it in the area is 120 gallons, and the area has sprinklers. Accordingly, CNFD had judged that the fire hazard associated with the lack of this barrier was not great. As such, they had designed a partial fire wall that would not extend to the ceiling and provide that degree of total isolation. Their insurer did not judge that this partial barrier was acceptable. CNFD is now obtaining a design for a total barrier for evaluation.
Discussion with a CNFD representative indicated that the total barrier would probably be quite expensive to construct due to the necessity of building a footing in a contamination area (the partial barrier would not require a footing), the need to install and maintain numerous fire rated penetrations, etc.
IFI 92-04-41 remains open pending CNFD's resolution of this issue.
4.
Exit Interview t
The inspection scope and findings were summarized on October 1, 1993, with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1.
The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection results. _Although reviewed during this inspection, proprietary information is not contained in this report.
Dissenting comments were not received from the licensee.