ML20137L283

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Matrix That Summarizes Status of Penetration Seal Insps Before & After Issuance of in 88-04, Inadequate Qualification & Documentation of Fire Barrier Seals, & in 88-56, Potential Problems W/Silicone Foam Fire..
ML20137L283
Person / Time
Issue date: 11/17/1994
From: Casto C
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To: Gibson A
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
Shared Package
ML17354B293 List:
References
FOIA-46-485, FOIA-96-485 EIN-88-4, EIN-88-56, IEIN-88-004, IEIN-88-056, IEIN-88-4, IEIN-88-56, NUDOCS 9704070189
Download: ML20137L283 (3)


Text

-

~.. bea7

.1-r

~

M

~

/g Etog%

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Qg',

h' o-

/

REGloN Il 101 MARiETTA STREET. N.W.. sulTE 2900 Pt4 h I/ W 0 O) M E

j ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323-0199

)

7 c\\

s a

i j'

sS.

\\

November 17, 1994 MEMORANDUM TO:

Albert F. Gibson, Director Division of Reactor Safety THRU:

Richard V. Crlenjak, Chief Engineering Branch Charles A. Casto, Section Chief Lb b FROM:

/

6 Test Programs Section j

Division of Reactor Safety

}

SUBJECT:

EVALUATION OF PENETRATION SEAL INSPECTIONS i

Per your request, Test Programs has conducted an evaluation of fire barrier penetration seal inspections at Region II sites.

Enclosed is a matrix that summarizes the status of penetration seal inspections both before and after issuance of Information Notices 88-04, " Inadequate Qualification and 1

Documentation of Fire Barrier Penetration Seals," and 88-56, " Potential i

Problems with' Silicone Foam Fire Barrier Penetration Seals." Our review concludes that penetration seals were reviewed at most Region II plants either i

3 j

during routine inspections or during the Appendix R inspections.

Some of the j

inspections were accomplished before issuance of the IN's and therefore may not have addressed those specific concerns.

Followup inspections were limited

^

to those sites who required extensive corrective actions.

s A Fire Protection Task Action Plan (FP-TAP), issued by NRR, addresses the i

recommendations made in the " Reassessment of the NRC Fire Protection Program,"

as of February 27, 1993.

Planned actions of the staff include: Recommendation 1-6, to reassess the adequacy of fire barrier elements and Recommendation 2-3, i

to reassess the fire barrier surveillance requirements. Our review indicates l

-that there act some sites that need further inspection in this area.

Those sites are ind'eated in the enclosed matrix.

Additionally, I will ensure that this information is provided to the senior resident for those sites.

Should you have further questions, a complete description of each inspection conducted to form this assessment is available.

Attacnment: RG h tire tsarrier

'enetration Seals 9

9704070189 970325 PDR FOIA BINDER 96-485 PDR

~.

l ATTACHMENT RG II FIRE BARRIER PENETRATION SEALS (IN 88-04 AND 88-56) STATUS SITE' INSP FOR IN'S INSP REMARKS SATISFACTORY?

BROWNS FERRY YES YES LATEST 1992 BRUNSWICK YES YES LATEST 1993 CATAWBA NO NO INFO t

AVAILABLE CRYSTAL RIVER NO PENE SEALS WERE INSPECTED IN 1985 FARLEY YES YES AN URI WAS ISSUED, PROGRAM WAS FOUND SAT GRAND GULF N0 TESTING WAS REVIEWED IN 1985

)

HARRIS NO INSP WERE DONE IN 93 & 94 BUT NOT SPECIFIC TO PENE SEALS HATCH YES NO LACK OF X-REF BETWEEN SEAL &

TEST DATA-NO FOLLOWUP WAS CONDUCTED MCGUIRE YES YES LATEST INSP 1993 NORTH ANNA YES NO LICENSEE COMPLETING PROGRAM IN '94 NEEDS FOLLOWUP OCONEE YES N0 TEST DOCUMENTS WERE INADEQ REPAIRS NEEDED -

SCHEDULED TO BE COMPLETE IN '88 NO FOLLOWUP DONE ROBINSON.

YES YES FINAL REPAIRS WERE NOT l

INSPECTED ST LUCIE YES NO TESTED CONFIG 0F PENE WERE NOT REVIEWED

~

1 2

)

SEQUOYAH YES NO PROGRAM TO BE COMPLETED 12/94 i

NO FOLLOW DONE SUMMER YES NO IN '87 & '88 INSP 0F A SAMPLING OF SEALS SURRY NO LICENSEE WALKDOWNS FOUND SOME PROBLEMS NRC HAS INSP(4)

TURKEY POINT YES YES LATEST INSP 1992 V0GTLE YES YES 1993 VERIFIED CORRECTIVE ACTIONS i

i

,