ML20153G364: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot change)
(StriderTol Bot change)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Adams
#REDIRECT [[IR 05000346/1983016]]
| number = ML20153G364
| issue date = 08/31/1988
| title = Corrected Ltr Forwarding Insp Rept 50-346/83-16 on 830711-29 & Notice of Violation.Violation Noted:Alternate Shutdown Capability for Fire in Control Room or Cable Spreading Room Did Not Meet App R Requirements
| author name = Davis A
| author affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
| addressee name = Shelton D
| addressee affiliation = TOLEDO EDISON CO.
| docket = 05000346
| license number =
| contact person =
| document report number = EA-83-124, NUDOCS 8809080128
| package number = ML20153G329
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, NRC TO UTILITY, OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE
| page count = 4
}}
See also: [[see also::IR 05000346/1983016]]
 
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:'
    .
      *
  =
                9,                                UNITE 3 STATES
      /j6,* "84 Ig                    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMI$slON
      d
      5
                    j
                    g
                                                    REolON 111
                                                799 ROOSEVELT ROAD
                    /                      OLEN ELLYN ILUNOIS 401 H
'
          *"**                                            AU6 31198S
            Docket No. 50-346
l          License No. NPF-3
            EA 83-124
            Toledo Edison Company
            ATTN: Mr. Donald Shelton
,                    Vice President
l                    Nuclear
            Edison Plaza
'
,
            300 Madison Avenue
l          Toledo, OH 43652
            Gentlemen:
            SUBJECT: NOTICE OF VIOLATION (NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 50-346/83-16).
t
!          This refers to a special inspection conducted on July 11-13 and 25-29, 1983
l          and a followup inspection conducted on September 7-9 and 22, 1983 and
;          January 9, 1984, at the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, of
l          activities authorized by NRC Operating License No. NPF-3. The inspection was
            conducted to review steps taken by you to ensure compliance with 10 CFR 50.48
            and, in particular, Sections III.G, J, and 0 of Appendix R to 10 CFR Part 50,
l          and of your overall fire protection program implementation. During the            ,
l          inspection, violations of these requirements were identified. A copy of the
            inspection report was forwarded to you on August 30, 1984. The results of
l
            the initial inspection were discussed with you and NRR on August 16, 1983 in
l
            Bethesda, Maryland.      The results of this inspection and our conclusions were
            also discussed on December 1, 1983, during an enforcement conference held at
            the NRC Region III office between Mr. W. A. Johnson and other members of your
            staff and Mr. James G. Keppler and other members of the NRC staff.
            You provided additional responses to our concerns in letters dated December 16
            and 29, 1983. These letters described two audits that had been performed by
l
            consultants to determine the degree of compliance with Appendix R requirements,
i          However, the audit reports said little about the detailed requirements of
            Section III.G of Appendix R, and no mention was made of the 4equirements
'
            of Sections III.J., III.L. and 111.0. The root cause of your failure to
            comply with Section III.G, J, L and 0 appeared to be inadequate control of
l          engineering activities, including:        (1) an inadequate reassessment of plant
            conditions regarding the applicable Appendix R requirements and (2) lack of
            supervisory reviews to assure technical adequacy of the reassessments. This
            reflected a significant breakdown in the management controls used to ensure
l          compliance with fire protection requirements. NRC Generic Letter 81-12, dated
I
            February 20, 1981, specifically emphasized the need for management to reassess
            fire protection features at your facility to ensure compliance with the new
            NRC requirements in this area.                                                    j
                                                                                              l
                                                                                              l
                                                                                                1
                      eso9080128 080831                                                      ;
                      gDR  ADOCK0500g6
 
    -
  *                                                                                          \  r
.
      Toledo Edison company                    2                              AU6 311988
                                                                                              .
      During the August 16, 1983 mee'ing between your staff and the NRC staff in            !
      Bethesda, Maryland, we stated the seriousness with which we viewed the
      findings of the July 11-13 and 25-29, 1983 inspection. Toledo Edison
      committed to develop short and long term programs addressing these problems          f
      prior to restarting the plant. Mr. Eisenhut's letter, dated August 19, 1983,          '
                                                                                              .
      documented that meeting and the commitments made by Toledo Edison.    Your
      letters to the NRC, dated August 26, 31 and September 13, 1983, submitted your
      plans for short (prior to plant restart) and long-term corrective action as
      well as your evaluation of our inspection findings. We inspected your
      short-term corrective actions prior to plant restart. Mr. Eisenhut, in a            '
      letter to Toledo Edison, dated September 23, 1983, stated that NRC concluded        !
      that the actions required to permit plant restart had been satisfactorily
      completed.
      The staff recognizes that a significant amount of time has elapsed since the        !
      referenced inspection report was issued. This is because the NRC has been          .
      developing the enforcement guidance for Appendix R based on NRC inspections          I
      and comments from the industry regarding the basis upon which compliance with
      Appendix R would be evaluated as well as considering conducting an investigation
      into the circumstances surrounding the violations. It has now been decided given    :
      the age of the matter not to conduct an investigation. Therefore, the NRC is
      proceeding with enforcement based on the results of the referenced inspection
      report.
      In accordance with the "General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC
      Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C (1988), the violations in the
      enclosed Notice have been evaluated in the aggregate as a Severity Level III
      problem. /. civil penalty is considered for a Severity Level III violation or
                                                                                          ,
      problem. However, after consultation with the Deputy Executive Director for
      Regional Operatior.s and the Director of the Office of Enforcement, I have been
      authorized to issue the enclosed Notice without a civil penalty. A civil
      penalty is not being proposed because of the significant time that has elapsed
      since the inspection occurred, the corrective actions you have taken or have
      scheduled to take, and the apparent lack of clarity which existed regarding fire
      protection requirements at the time. Given these factors, a civil penalty is
      not considered warranted.
      You are required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions
      specified in the enclosed Notice when preparing your response. In your
      response, you should document the specific actions taken and any additional
      actions you plan to prevent recurrence. We recognize that since the
      inspection was completed you have taken actions or have scheduled actions to
      correct the deficiencies and may have described these corrective actions in
      previous correspondence with the NRC. For that reason, you may reference
      previous submittals regarding your corrective actions when responding to this
      le+ter. After reviewing your response to this Notice, including your proposed
      c    rective actions and the results of future inspections, the NRC will determine
      wucther further NRC enforcement actions is necessary to ensure compliance with
      NRC regulatory requirements.
                                          .-
 
                                                                _                          _ _ _ , _
      '
  .
    *
-
                .
        .
        Toledo Edison Company                    3                              AU6 31 1988
        In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," Part 2,
        Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and its enclosure
        will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.
        The responses directed by this letter and the enclosed Notice are not subject
        to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required
        by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, Pub.  L.,  No. 96-511.
                                                Sincerely,
                                                            . 4L[
                                                A. Bert David
                                                Regional Administrator
        Enclosures:
        1.  Notice of Violation
        2.    Inspection Report
                No. 60-346/83-16(DE)
        cc w/ enclosures:
        L. Storz, Plant Manager
        Resident Inspector, RIII
        Harold W. Kohn, Ohio EPA
        James W. Harris, State of Ohio
        Robert M. Quillin, Ohio
          Department of Health
        State of Ohio, Public
          Utilities Commission
        See Attached Distribution
 
              -                            .              ._.
        *
    .
      *
  *
                .
          .
          Toledo Edison Co,i.pany        4
                                              AU6 31 1988-
          Distribution
l        DCD/DCB(RIDS)                                        ,
          Licensing Fee Management Branch                      '
          SECY
          CA
          OGPA
          J. M. Taylor, DEDRO
          J. Lieberman, OE
l        L. Chandler, OGC
          T. Murley, NRR
'
          RAO:RIII
          PAO:RIII                                              ,
          SLO:RIII
          M. Stahulak, RIII
          Enforcement Coordinators,
            RI, RII, RIV, and RV
j        A. Datta, NL/S, RES/EME
l        C. McCracken, NRR/ECEB
!        A. Krasopoulos, RI/DRS                                (
'
          G. Wiseman, RII/DRS
          A. Singh, RIV/DRS                                    1
          C. Ramsey, RV, DRS
          OE File                                              -
          EA File
          JLuehman, OE
                                                                ,
'
                                                                l
                                                                :
l
                                                                l
                                                                '
                                                                l
                                                                l
\
                                                                \
L
 
                                                                                      .
        '
    .
      '
                    .
            .
                                                NOTICE OF VIOLATION
                                                                                                  '
            Toledo Edison Company                                            Docket No. 50-346
            Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station                                  License No. NPF-3
            Unit 1                                                            EA 83-124
            A special fire protection inspection conducted at the Davis-Besse Nuclear
            , Power Station during the period of July 11-13 and 25-29,1983, and a followup        .
,          inspecti " conducted on September 7-9 and 22, 1983, and January 9, 1984,            !
            identi' s violations of NRC requirements. In accordance with the "General
  1
            Polic c ad Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C
            (1988), the violations are set forth below:
                                                                                                  .
                                                                                                  '
1
                                                                                                  !
  ,          10 CFR 50.48(b) requires that all nuclear power plants licensed to operate
i
            prior to January 1, 1979, satisfy the applicable requirements of Appendix R          l
            to 10 CFR Part 50, including, specifically, the requirements of Sections III.G,      !
            Fire Protection of Safe Shutdown Capability, III.J. Emergency Lighting, III.L,
            Alternative and Dedicated Shutdown Capability and III.0, Oil Collection System      f
  4          for Reactor Coolant Pump.                                                            ;
                                                                                                  ;
  -
            A.    10 CFR 50, Appendix R, Section III.G.1 requires that fire protection          I
                  features shall be provided for structures, systems, and components            '
                  important to safe shutdown.      These features shall be capable of            r
  >
                  limiting fire damage so that: (a) one train of systems necessary
                  to achieve and maintain hot shutdown conditions from either the                ;
  l                control room or emergency control station is free of fire damage.              1
                  10 CFR 50, Appendix R, Section III.G.2 requires that where redundant
                  trains of systems necessary to achieve and maintain hot shutdown
                                                                                                  ,
                                                                                                  '
'
                  conditions are located in the same fire area outside of primary
                  containment, one of the following means of ensuring that one of
                  the redundant trains is free from fire damage be provided:                    ,
  ;                1.    Separation of cables and equipment and associated non-safety
  j
                          circuits of redundant trains by a fire barrier having a 3-hour
                          rating. Structural steel forming a part of or supporting such            !
                          fire barriers shall be protected to provide fire resistance
                          equivalent to that required of the barrier;
                  2.      Separation of cables and equipment and associated non-safety
                          circuits of redundant trains by a horizontal distance of more
.                        than 20 feet with no intervening combustible or fire hazards.
.
                          In addition, fire detectors and an automatic fire suppression
f                        system shalt be installed in the fire area; or
1
.                3.    Enclosure of cable and equipment and associated non-safety circuits
i                        of one redundant train in a fire barrier having a 1-hour rating.
1
                          In addition, fire detectors and an automatic ;* ire rappression
l                        system shall be installed in the fire area.
  )
i
                                            /
                        ,n            ,  / <**
          j            h. i C ,hg      v  -
 
                                                                                                                                                                                      _ _ _ _ _ _
                *
            .
              '
          -
                  .
                                              .
                    Notice of Violation                                                              2
                                                                                                                                                '
                                                                                                                                                                                                  l
                                            Contrary to the above, at the time of the inspection a fire in the
                                            auxiliary shutdown panel room could have resulted in the loss of control
                                          and indications for both auxiliary feedwater pumps at both the auxiliary
                                            shutdown panel room and the control room because features were not provided
                                            to ensure that one train of the auxiliary feedwater system which is needed
                                            to maintain hot shutdown was free of fire damage in that they were not
                                            separated by a fire barrier having a 3-hour rating; were not separated by
                                          a horizontal distance of more than 20 feet with no intervening combustible
                                            fire hazards; or were not provided with 1-hour fire barriers.                        In addition,
                                          numerous lengths of conduit and junction boxes in the Component Cooling
                                        Water heat exchanger and pump room were not separated by a fire barrier
                                          having a 3-hour rating; were not separated by a horizontal distance of
                                        more than 20 feet with no intervening combustible fire hazards; or were
                                          not provided with 1-hour fire barrier.
                  B.                      10 CFR 50, Appendix R, Section III.G.3 and III.G.3(a) require that
                                          alternative or dedicated shutdown capability and its associated circuits,
                                          independent of cables, systems or components in the area, room or zone
'
                                        under consideration, be provided where the protection of systems whose
                                          function is required for hot shutdown does not satisfy the requirement
,
                                        of Paragraph G.2 of this section. 10 CFR 50, Appendix R, Section III.L
                                        provides the requirements for alternative or dedicated shutdown
                                        capability specifying:
                                          1.                          Section III.L.1 requires that alternative or dedicated shutdown
                                                                      capability provided for a specific fire area be able to achieve
                                                                      cold shutdown conditions within 72 hours.
                                        2.                            Section III.L.2 requires that process monitoring function for
                                                                      alternative or dedicated shutdown capability shall be capable
i                                                                    of providing direct readings of reactivity and reactor coolant
                                                                      system heat removal funct. ions.
                                        3.                            Section III.L.3 requires that procedures be in effect to implement
                                                                      the alternative shutdown capability, be independent of the specific
                                                                      fire area (s) and accommodate postfire conditions where offsite power
                                                                      is available and where offsite power is not available for 72 hours.
                                      4.                            Section III.L.7 requires that safe shutdown equipment and systems
                                                                      for each fire area shall be known to be isolated from associated                                                            '
                                                                      non-safety circuits in the fire area so that hot shorts, open
                                                                      circuits, or shorts to ground in the associated circuits will
                                                                      not prevent operation of the safe shutdown equipment.
                                      Contrary to the above, at the time of the inspection, alternative
                                        shutdown capability for a fire in the control room or cable spreading
!
                                      room did not meet the above requirements in that:
                                                                                                                                                                                                  l
l
i
                                                                                                                                                                                                  i
  _ _ . .            . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ . - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _            - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ .                                  _ _ _ - _ _ _ . -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ -
 
    '
  .
.
      ,    .
      Notice of Violation                      3                              AUG 31 1988
          1.    The capability to achieve cold shutdown within 72 hours was not
                provided.
          2.    Alternative or dedicated shutdown system process monitoring
                instrumentation was not installed outside the control room and
                the cable spreading room to provide direct readings of reactivity
                and the cold leg reactor coolant system temperature. In addition,
                the instrument used to measure the hot leg reactor coolant system
                temperature was not of adequate range.
          3.    Procedures were not in effect to implement the alternative shutdown
                capability assuming a fire in each area, with and without offsite
                power available for 72 hours.
          4.    The effect of a fire in each of these areas was not considered
                including the possible effects of interaction between associated
                circuits.
      C.  10 CFR 50, Appendix R, Section III.G.3 requires that alternative or
          dedicated shutdown capability be provided and a fixed fire suppression
          system be installed in the area, room, or zone under consideration.
          Contrary to the above, at the time of the inspection, a fixed fire
          suppression system was not provided in the auxiliary shutdown area.
      D.  10 CFR 50, Appendix R, Section III.J requires that emergency lighting
          units with at least an 8-hour battery power supply shall be provided in
          all areas needed for operation of safe shutdown equipment and in access
          and egress routes thereto.
          Contrary to the above, eme gency lighting was not provided for access and      I
                                                                                          i
          egress routes to the auxiliary feed pump room, condensate storage tank          l
          1evel indicator area, and valves ICS 11A and 11B, which are needed for        '
          operation of safe shutdown equipment. In addition, for areas where
          emergency lighting was provided, two out of six units tested failed the        l
          eight hour discharge test.                                                      l
                                                                                          l
      E.  10 CFR 50. Appendix R, Section 111.0 requires that the reactor coolant        '
          pump be equipped with an oil collection system. Leakage shall be
          collected and drained to a vented closed container that can hold the
          entire lube oil system inventory.
          Contrary to the above, at the time of the inspection, the reactor coolant
          pump oil collection system was inadequate in that two reactor coolant
          pumps, each with a lube oil capacity of approximately 225 gallons, were
          connected to drain into a single 250 gallon container.
 
                                .
      *
  .
    '
*
        .      .
          Notice of Violation                        4                            AU6 31 1989
          F.  Amendment No. 18 of Plant Operating License No. NPF-3 in Paragraph 2.C(4)
                requires the licensee to ccmplete those modifications identified in
                Section 1 of the Safety Evaluation (SE) dated July 26, 1979, including          l
                those modifications specified in Table 1 of the SE. Section B.14 of
              Table 1 of the SE requires that the fire protection administrative              ,
              controls be revised to follow the NRC document, "Nuclear Plant Fire              '
              Protection Functional Responsibilities, Administrative Controls and
              Quality Assurance."
                                                                                                i
              As specified below the specific paragraphs of the attachments to Nuclear
              Plant Fire Protection Functional Responsib111 ties, Administrative Controls
              and Quality Assurance state the following:
              1.    Paragraph 1.0 of Attachment No. I states in part, "The organizational
                    responsibilities and lines of communication pertaining to fire
                    protection should be defined b? tween the various positions through        '
                    the use of organizational charts and functional descriptions of each      I
                    positions responsibilities . . . .      2.0 Qualifications for a Fire
                    Protection Engineer . . ..        These requirpents are the eligibility
                    requirements as a Member in the Society of Fire Protection Engineers."
              2.    Paragraph 1.0.c of Attachment No. 6 states in part that, ".      ..
                    plant modifications, including fire protection systems, are reviewed
                    by qualified personnel to assure inclusion of appropriate fire
                    protection requirements.
              3.    Paragraph 1.0.d of Attachment No. 6 states in part that, "A
                    review . . . of the adequacy of fire protection requirements . . .
                    is performed and documented by qualified personnel. This review
                    should determine tid fire protection requirements and quality
                    requirements are correctly stated . . . and . . . are adequate
                    acceptance and rejection criteria . . . ."
              4.    Paragraph 2.0.b of Attachment No. 6 states in part that, "Activities
                    such as . . . test .    . . of fire protection systems are prescribed
                    and accomplished in accordance with documented . . . procedures
                    . . . ." Paragraph 1.0.6 of Attachment No. 6 states in part that,
                    "Quality standards are specified f n the design documents such as          ;
                    appropriate fire protection codes and standards . . . .
                    (c) . . . designs . . . including fire protection systems, are
                    reviewed . . . to assure inclusion of appropriate fire protection
                    requirements."
                                                                                                i
                    Specifically for item (d) below, Paragraph 2.0.b of Attachment              i
                    No. I states in part that, "the fire brigade members qualifications        I
                    should include satisfactory completion of a physical examination            i
                    for performing strenuous activity . . . ."                                  i
                                                                                                )
 
        '
    .
      -                                                                                        r
  .
          ,
                  ,
          Notice of Violation                        5                              AU6 311988
                    Specifically for item (e) below, Paragraph ' c.0.b(3) of Attachment        i
                    No. 4 states in part that, "a fire watch trained and equipped to            '
                    prevent and combat fires is present throughout any operations in
                    which there is potential
                                          "
                                                  for fire that might damage safety related
                    equipment ,    ...
                                                                                                :
                    Section 9.5.1.1 of the Davis-Besse Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR)
                    references a number of the applicable design documents for the fire
                    protection system stating that, "The fire protection systems are
                    designed, installed and tested to satisfy the intent of the National
,                    Fire Protection Association (NFPA) codes . . . ."
                    (a) Chapter 2-7.2.1 of NFPA 13A (1978) states, "Test alarms by
                          opening the inspector's test connection and/or the by pass test
                          connection, in conjunction with making a water-flow test when
                          facilities and conditions permit."
                    (b) Chapter 12-1.2 of NFPA 20 states that, "The field acceptance
                          test results shall be as good as the manufacturer's certified
,
                          shop test characteristic curve for the pump being tested."
!
i
'                    (c) Chapter 3.1 of NFPA 26 (1976) states that, "A systematic weekly        ,
                          inspection (or monthly in the case of locked-open valves) of
                          each valve should be made and a report form used to record the
                          condition of each valve."
                    (d) Chapter 33 of NFPA 77 (1975) states in part that, "minimum
                          physical requirements should be established . . . ."                  ,
                    (e) Chapter 431 of NFPA 518 (1977) states in part, "Fire watchers
,
                          shall have firt extinguishing equipment readily available and
I
                          be trained in its use, including practice on test fires . . . .        ,
I
                          434. A fire watch shall be maintained for at least a half hour
                          af ter completion of cutting and welding operations . . . ."          )
:
                    (f) Chapter 8-1.1 of NFPA 72E (1978) states in part that, "Each
                          automatic detector shall be :ontinuously maintained in reliable
                          operating condition at all times, and such periodic inspections
i                        and testb shall be made as are necessary to assure proper
;                          maintenance as specified." Chapter 8-4.1 of NFPA 72E states
                          in part that, ". . . photoelectric smoke detectors may require
1
j                          periodic cleaning to remove dust or dirt which has accumulated
                          . . . for each detector, the cleaning, checking, operation
                          and sensitivity adjustment, shall be attempted only after
3
                          consulting the manufacturer's instructions."
                5.  Attachment No. 5 states in part that, "Firefighting procedures
                    should be established to cover such items as . . . coordination
                    of firefighting activities with offsite fire departments.      The
                                                                                                  l
i                                                                                              j
4
 
      .                                                                                      l
  .
    -
.
        Notice of Violation                      6
                                                                                  AU6 31198S
                  firefighting procedures should identify . . . :        g. Actions to
                  be taken that will coordinate firefighting activities with
                  offsite fire departments, including: . . . identification of
                  individual who will direct firefighting activities when aided              '
                  by offsite firefighting assistance; . . . ."
            6.  Paragraph 5.0 of Attachment No. 6 states in part that,
                  ". . . b. Periodic testing      . . . emergency lighting equipment
                  is tested periodically to assure that the equipment will properly
                  function and continue to meet the design criteria." Section III.J
                  of Appendix R to 10 CFR Part 50 requires emergency lighting units
                  with at least an eight hour battery power supply be provided.
            Contrary to the above, the licensee failed to develop and implement              i
            adequate inspection, surveillance test procedures, administrati,ve
            controls and quality assurance in that:
            1.  The implementation of the staffing qualifications for the fire
                  protection program was inadequate in that:      the fire protection
                  coordinator was the only individual who had direct responsibility
                  for the fire protection program; the licensee's Administrative
                  Procedure 1810.00 inadequately described the number of individuals        '
                  involved in implementing the fice protection program; and the
                  licensee's fire protection engineer had not had his qualifications
                  evaluated to determine acceptability to NRC criteria.
            2.  No procedure was in effect to ensure that modifications that may            <
                  change the fire resistive rating of fire doors were reviewed by
                  qualified personnel.
            3.  Test procedure ST 5016.11.1 was inadequate in that this procedure
                  failed to indicate that only one attempt was allowed to close the
                  damper in determining operability. Therefore, the test procedure            ,
                  acceptance criteria for this test procedure was not satisfactory.
                  Additionally, the procedure specified that the damper and ductwork
                  shall be cleaned prior to testing. This could have affected the
                  fire damper test results.
            4.  (a) Surveillance Test Procedure ST 5016.07 (Automatic Sprinkler
                        Systems) was not followed it. 1980, 1981, 1982 and 1983 in            ,
                        that alarms were not tested by opening the inspector's test
                        connection and/or the by pass test connection in conjunction
                        with making a water flow test on the wet pipe sprinkler systems
                        as specified by NFPA 13A.
                                                                                              ,
                  (b) Surveillance Test Procedures ST 5016.03 and ST 5016.12 (Fire
                        Pump Testing) were inadequate in that the diesel fire pump            ,
                        test results for 1980, 1981, 1982, and 1983 were not compared        '
                        to the manufacturer's certified shop test chLracteristic curve        l
                        for the pump being tested, as specified by NFPA 20.
                                                                                              l
 
      ,_              _                        _      __      .            m        . _      .
            '
    .                                                                                            .
          -
  .
!
                                                                                                  l
.
,
              Notice of Violation                      7                            AU6 311989  .
                                                                                                  L
                          (c) Surveillance Test Procedure ST 5016.09 (Fire Protection Systems
                              Valve Operability) did not specify verifying fire protection      ,
                              system valve operacility as specified by NFPA 26.                '
'
                          (d) Administrative Procedure AD 1828.20 (Fire Brigade) did not
                              specify minimum physical requirements for fire brigade
                              members as specified by NRC requirements or NFPA 27.
                        (e) Administrative Procedure AD 1810.01 (Fire Protection Program)      .
i                              did not specify that fire watchers be trained on fire            f
'
                              extinguishing equipment and that a fire watch be maintsined
                              for at least a half hour after completion of cutting and
                              welding operations as specified by NRC requirements or by
                              NFPA 518.                                                        t
1                                                                                                ,
4
                        (f) Survo111ance Test procedure ST 5016.06 (Fire Detectors) did not    l
]                              specify measurement of detector sensitivity, periodic cleaning,  i
                              maintenance and adjustment of photoelectric fire detectors as
                              specified by NFPA 72E.
4
                    5.  Administrative Procedures AD 1810.00 and 1828.20 did not specify the
.
                        actions to be taken by offsite fire departments with respect to who
1
                        would direct firefighting activities when the fire brigade was aided    >
                        by off site fire departments.                                          ;
i
;                  6.  Periodic Test Procedure PT 5112.01 (Emergency Lighting) did not        f
j                        specify surveillance of errergency lighting snits to assure an          -
4
                        8-hour battery power supply was provided as required by NRC
j                        requirements.
,
              G.    Technical Specification 3.7.10 requires that with one or more of the
,
                    required penetration fire barr ters nonfunctional, a continuous fire
                    watch on at least one side of the affected penetration be established
                                                                                                ,
s                                                                                                '
                    within one hour,
s
                    Contrary to the above, a continuous fire watch was not established, or        '
                    th9 dampers closed, until July 28, 1983 and September 8,1983 for two          i
                    penetrations that the licensee found to be nonfunctional on May 12 and
4
                  June 7, 1993.
                    Collectively, these violations have been categorized as a Severity            !
3                  Level 111 problem (dupplement I).                                            .
i            Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Davls-Besse is hereby required to        l
1
              submit a written statement or explanation to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory            '
              Commit,sion. ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, D.C. 20555, with a copy      '
,            to the Regional Administrator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 799                :
j            Roosevelt Road, Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137, and a copy to the NRC Resident
i
a
                                                                                                  i
                                                                                                  I
 
                        ___  .  ._            _        _ ___                                    ._
        - . .
    ,                                                                                                  ;
  .
        ..
                      .                                                                    -
;              .
                                                                                                        l
                                                                                                        l
                                                                                          AU6 311989
                  Notice of Viclation                    8                                            t
                                                                                                        !
.
                  Inspector at Davis-Besse within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting
                  this Notice. This reply should be clearly marked as a "Reply to a Notice of          ,
t
                  Violation" and should include for each violation: (1) the reason for the              !
                  m1ation if admitted, (2) the correctiv:: steps that have been taken and the          :
)                ;<sults achieved, (3) the corrective steps that will be taken to avoid 1arther        l
l                violations, and (4) the date when full compliance will be achieved. If an
                  adequate reply is not received within the time specified in this Notice, an
                                                                                                        .
                                                                                                        l
a                order may be issued to show cause why the license should not be modified,            l
                  suspended, or revoked or why such other action as may be proper should not be        i
                  taken. Conside.ation may be given to extending the response time for good
                  cause shown,
7                                                          FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION      I
                                                                        '
$                                                                                A.u
'
                                                    )      A. Bert Davis                                !
                                                          Regional Administrator                      ;
:
*
                  Dated at Glen Ellyn Illinois                                                          .
1                this .3 /  day of August 1988                                                        i
                                                                                                        i
;
;                                                                                                      9
J
                                                                                                        f
!                                                                                                      !
                                                                                                        i
                                                                                                        t
c                                                                                                      ;
                                                                                                        I
I                                                                                                      i
1
l                                                                                                        l
1
I
                                                                                                        1
5
1
1
i
I
                                                                                                          l
i                                                                                                        l
                                                                                                          '
l
:
1
!
)      .      .                        - - -
}}

Revision as of 02:23, 11 December 2024

Redirect to:

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20153G364&oldid=4144566"