IR 05000219/1986011

Insp Rept 50-219/86-11 on 860414-18.Violation Noted:Failure to Take Prompt Corrective Action on Audit Finding Re Crack in Fire Barrier Wall

ML20210U609
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	05/14/1986
From:	Anderson C, Krasopoulos A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20210U596	List: IR 05000219/1986011 ML20210U591 ML20210U599
References
50-219-86-11, NUDOCS 8606030032
Download: ML20210U609 (8)

Text

,-

.

'

m

.

.

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

^

REGION I

.

Report No.

86-11 Docket No.

50-219 License No.

DPF-16 Priority -

Category C

-

Licensee: GPU Nuclear Corporation Fact'11ty Name: Oyster Creek

Inspection At:

Forked River, New Jersey

.

Inspection Conducted: April 14 - 18, 1986 Inspectors:

A48

.I f-[6 MF. A. Krasopoulos, RKctor Engineer date /

'

Approved by:

.

C. J./ Anderson, Chief Plant Systems Section date Inspection Summary Inspection on April 14 - 18,1986 (Report No. 50-219/86-11)

Areas Inspected:

Routine unannounced. inspection of the Fire Protection / Preven-tion Program including: program administration and organization; administrative control of combustibles; administrative control of ignition sources; other admin-istrative controls; equipment maintenance, inspection and tests; fire brigade training; periodic inspections and quality assurance audits; and facility tour.

Results: Of the eight areas inspected,1 violation was identified, (Failure ta take prompt corrective action to an audit finding) and two items remained unresolved.

.

t

G

,

u

[

,

,,

\\

g

.

%

DETAILS

- 1.0 Persons Contacted 1.1 General Public Utilities Nuclear Corp.(GPUN)

• P.

Fiedler, Director J. Barton, Deputy Director of Operations

• J. Kowalski, Licensing Manager l

A. Mills, Industrial' Safety and Health Manager

~~'

J. MaConey, Manager Plant Material

J. DeBlasio, Manager Support Engineering

• G., Busch, Licensing

• G. Schuyler, MCF

• G. Simonetti, QA Audit Manager

• R. Fenton, Manager Plant Training

'*A. Rone, Manager Operations Engineering

• R. Weltman, Mechanical Materiel Manager

"K. Zimmermann, Plant Engineering

'*J. Sullivan Jr., Plant Operations Director

• T.

Prosser, Fire Protection Instructor

• W.'Radvansky, Manager Tech Functions 1.2-Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

• W. Bateman, SRI J. Wechelberger, RI U. Baunack, Reactor Engineer

• Der.otes those present at the exit interview.

2.0 FoHowup of Previous Inspection Findings

_

,

{C3cssd) Unresolved Item 50-219/82-07-01 Spray Shield Installation Seseral inadvertant actuations of deluge spinkler systems prompted the licensee to install protective spray shields over safety related electrical equipment, for equipment protection against water damage.

The inspector reviewed several randomly selected spray shield instal-1ations and did not identify any unacceptable conditions.

This item is resolved.

(Closed) Unresolved Item 50-219/85-23-08 Water Damage to Equipment from Deluge System Actuation.

The licensee declared an Unusual Event after an inadvertent actuation of the deluge system was thought to have rendered inoperable, the safety related

. electrical equipment in the vicinity.

The licensee inspected the affected equipment and ran operability tests to determine if any damage had occur and if the equipment was functional. The licensee tests determined that the equipment was operable and the spray shields performed as designed.

--

....

.

.

.

The inspector reviewed the spray shield installations and did not identify any unacceptable conditions. This item is resolved.

3.0 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 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 6, Administrative Controls

--Procedure Number 101.2, Revision 7 Fire Protection Organization, Responsibilities and Controls.

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 Number 120.5, Revision 1 - Control of Combustibles.

The scope of review was to verify that the licensee had developed administrative controls which included:

a.

Special authorization for the use.of combustible, flammable or explosive hazardous material in safety-related areas; b.

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

,

c.

The removal of all wastes, debris, rags, oil spills or other com-bustible materials resulting from the work activity or at the end of

'

each work shift, whichever is sooner;

,

w

}

. - -

d.

All wood used in safety-related areas to be treated with flame retardant; e.

Periodic inspection for accumulation of combustibles; f.

Transient combustibles to be restricted and controlled in safety *

related areas; and

.

g.

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 Number 120.1, Revision 8, Welding, Burning and Grind-

---

ing Administrative Procedure.

The scope of review was to verify that the licensee had deve-loped administrative centrols 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 safe-guarded in areas containing safety-related equipment and components; and

,

b.

Prohibition on smoking in safety-related areas, except where " smoking permitted" areas has 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 6 Administrative Controls

--

Procedure 101.2, Revision 7, Fire Protection Organization Res-

--

ponsibilities and Controls.

.

The scope of review was to verify that the licensee had developed administrative controls which require that:

'

a.

Work authorization, construction permit or similar arrangement is provided for review and approval of modification, construc-l tion and maintenance activities which could adversely affect the safety of the facility;

"

. -.

.

.

__

_

- _ _. _...,,,. _. _

... -

.-

.

, _, _

_

.

..

.

~

b.

Fire h igade 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 prctection program; and

--

Fire protection /preventicn program is included in the e.

licensee's QA Program.

No unacceptable conditions were identified, 3.5 Equipment Maintenance, Inspection and Tests Tne inspector reviewed the followfog randenly selected documents to determine whether the licensee had developed adequate procedures which established maintenance, inspection, and testing requirements for the plant fire protection equipment:

--

Procedure Number 645.6.013, Revision 4, Fire Suppression System Functional Test.

Procedure Number 645.6,017, Revision 2, Fire Barrier Penetration

--

Surveillance

--

Procedure Number 645.6.006, Revision 2, Fire Hose Hydrostatic Testing Procedure Number 645.4.018, Revision 11, Fire Pump In-Service

--

Test

--

Frocedure Number 645.6.010, Revision 5, Fire Suppression Auto-matic Va'Ive Functional Test In addition to reviewing the above documents, the inspector reviewed the inspection test records of the items, to verify compliance with Tec'nnical 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 procedure:

Procedure Number 101.2, Revision 7, Fire Protection Organ-

--

ization

c

-

,

<

-

The scope of review was to verify that the licensee had developed administrative procedures which included:

a.

Requirements for unannounced drills; b.

Requirements for fire brigade training and retraining at prescribed frequencies; c.

Requirements for maintenance of training records.

No unacceptable conditions were identified.

3.6.2 Records Review The inspector reviewed training records of fire brigade members for calendar years 1985 and 1986 to ascertain that they had attended the required training and participated in an unannounced drill, and received the required hands-on fire extinguishment practice.

No unacceptable conditions were identified, except as follows:

Insufficient Fire Drill Participation A review of the fire brigade members training records identified that 3 of the 5 firemen on the brigade roster for April 16, 1986 had not participated in plant fire drills for at least the last 2 years.

The Fire Protection Safety Evaluation Report (SER) Supplement 3, states that "

All Personnel' assigned responsibility to respond to a fire have been appropriately trained and participate in periodic fire drills".

This SER statement is based on an evaluation of a licensee sub-mittal to NRR of a comparison between the guidance contained in the document:

" Nuclear Plant Fire Protection Functional Responsibilities, Administrative Controls and Quality Assurance".

In this comparison the licensee states that each operating shift is required to perform in a drill once per year. This wording fostered the impression that as long as a drill had been performed for a particular shift not every member of the brigade is required to participate in drills. This is in conflict witn the above quoted SER statement that all members participate in periodic drills. The licensee plant management agreed with the inspector that this is an area of concern and committed to review this concern and provide a resolution. This is an unresolved item

'

pending evaluation of the licensee's actions (50-219/86-11-01).

I

,

-. ~ -

-. -, - _..

-.w.

--,

-

,., _.., -

,m

.

,

, ~.,,. _..

,

n.

.

- -._ _

}

.

3.7 Periodic Inspections and Quality Assurance Audits 3.7.1 Annual Audit The inspector reviewed the reports of the following annual audit:

--S-0C-84-19, Fire Protection performed during September 7, 1984 -

October 15, 1984.

The scope of review was to ascertain that the audit was conducted in accordance with the Technical Specification 6.5.3.2a and audit findings were being resolved in a timely and satisfactory manner.

No unacceptable conditions were identified, except as follows:

Corrective Actions To TS Audit Findings Not Prompt The inspector reviewed Fire Protection Audit S-0C-84-19 to ascertain conformance with T.S.6.5.3.2a.

This audit identified a 5 foot long crack in a fire barrier wall on October 12, 1984. As of April 18, 1986 this deficiency had not been corrected and other interim compensatory measures were not established.

The licensee, via letter dated April 7, 1978 committed to establish a Fire Protection QA Program in accordance with the requirements set forth in Appendix B to 10 CFR 50.

Section XVI of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50 requires that deficiencies deviations and nonconformances are promptly identified and corrected.

The amount of time taken to correct this deficiency does not constitute a prompt corrective action and it is therefore a violation of the above quoted requirement.

(50-219/86-11-02)

3.7.2 Biennial Audit The inspector reviewed reports of the following biennial audit:

--S-0C-85-09, Fire Protection Program Audit, performed during June 14, 1985 - July 19, 1985.

The scope of review was to ascertain that the audit was conducted in accordance with T.S.6.5.3.lf and audit findings were being resolved in a timely and satisfactory manner.

No unacceptable conditions were identified.

3.7.3 Triennial Audit The licensee stated that the T.S. were recently revised to include the requirement for Triennial audits.

The first of these audits will be performed by the end of the 1986 calendir year. This schedule is acceptabl F t

.

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 storage of compressed gas cylinders for accumulation of transient combustibles 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 performed.

No unacceptable conditions were identified except as follows:

Compressed Gas Cylinaer Storage The inspector noted that two Nitrogen-0xygen cylinders on the Reactor

!

Building Elevation 75'0" were not within the seismic brackets provided for the purpose of securing these cylinders seismically.

The cylinders instead were chained in place in a manner that may not provide adequate support. The inspector also observed that other compressed gas cylin-ders used for outage related activities were not properly secured.

The licensee recognized the concern and committed to provide proper substantial support for all compressed gas cylinders used in safety related areas. This is an unresolved item pending an evaluation of the actions taken by the licensee.

(50-210/86-11-03)

4.0 Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, violations or deviations.

Unresolved items disclosed during the inspection are discussed in Sections 3.6 and 3.8.

5.0 Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee management representatives (see Section 1.0 for attendees) at the conclusion of the inspection on April 18, 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 maybe placed in the Public j

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.

,.