Plant 44 Audit Reports - Wright-Patterson Air Force Base

More documents

Recommendations

Info

For Official Use Onlysprinkler coverage for area below the door. We recommend adding sprinklers under theraised door or changing the slide-up door to a roll-up door.3.3 FACO Bldg 852 had several fire exit signs that were not working. This makesemergency lighting suspect as well. Recommend electric shop corrections as necessary.4. FACILITY REVIEW OBSERVATIONSThe following items were noted during the walk through ofthe plant:4.1 B-852 south side exit doors. The doors have draft socks along the floor to preventdrafts, dirt and rain from blowing in under the doors. These "socks" may becometripping hazards in an emergency exit situation. This is not an acceptable buildingmaterial or practice and we recommend removing these socks and installing effectivedoor sweeps/thresholds and/or exterior wind blocks as necessary.4.2. Anechoic chamber sprinkler heads. I noticed many heads buried in the coneswhich is OK if these are the telescoping heads that pop-out or extend below the cones inthe event of a fire and provide proper spray patterns. The inspectors indicated these arenot telescoping heads and ifso, I recommend replacing them with telescoping heads.4.3. B-809 Clean Room sprinkler head locations. Sprinkler heads were located in theceiling mounted return air grates at suspended ceiling level with another approx 3 ft ofreturn air plenum space above suspended ceiling level. In a fire event, smoke should shutthe air handler down but I question ifthe sprinkler heads will provide timely activationwith approx 3 ft ofopen space above the heads. Recommend a design review ofsprinkler head location/situation and provide feedback of the situation and includepossible corrective actions if applicable.4.4. Additional fire protection study recommended in B-801. 8-801 has been"rearranged" over the years to meet changing missions and there are a few activities suchas paint/chemical mixing rooms and milling operations that may require a higher level offire protection/separation then what has been provided to date. The roof construction issuspect with excess rooftar build-up and no tire breaks per the insurance companysurvey. The Fire Department questions internal exit corridor integrity and lack of hosestations both internally and externally on the roof. I recommend a NFPA 101 Life SafetyCode study of the facility be accomplished by a reputable engineering firm. Provide anexecutive overview and evaluation with prioritized recommended fixes and optionsincluding cost estimates.5. GENERAL COMMENTSLAUDATORY - Missing ceiling tiles leave a "hole" in the ceiling plane that allows heatfrom a fire to escape delaying sprinkler head activation. Missing ceiling tiles have beencommon enough to note in the past but for the second year in a row, Raytheon has donean outstanding job of keeping ceiling tiles in place. Keep up the good work.Attachment 4
For Official Use OnlyLAUDATORY - Kudos to Raytheon for stepping up and initiating an emergency lightinglocation and marking contractor task which will also bring as-built dwgs up-to-date. Thisshould be a tremendous help with ensuring emergency lighting is working properly thruoutthe plant.6. RECOMMMENDATIONRecommend Raytheon take the necessary steps to correct the observations identified inparagraphs 2, 3 and 4.7. SUMMARYFire protection in general looks good and the Raytheon fire inspectors are to becommended for continuing to do a good job with records management and overallmanaging ofthe fire protection program in their respective areas. Raytheonhousekeeping and facility appearance overall is looking good and we appreciate thediligence of all involved.DAVE DICKSONFire Protection EngineerAttachment 4
Page 1 and 2:
RECORD REPRODUCTION COVER SHEETThe
Page 3 and 4:
TRIP REPORT1. PERSONS MAKING THIS T
Page 5 and 6:
ATTACHMENTS:I. Normal Maintenance R
Page 7 and 8:
d. Building 811 A walk-through of t
Page 9 and 10:
ii. Exterior wall is damaged and bi
Page 11 and 12:
Photo 3Building 833 Damaged WallPho
Page 13 and 14:
4. FACILITY REVIEW OBSERVATIONSThe
Page 15 and 16:
4.4.2. Building 80 I, room G 1315.
Page 17 and 18:
Air Force Plant 44 Facilities Revie
Page 19 and 20:
3.17 Finding 04-17. Bldg 830. Cinci
Page 21 and 22:
The audit followed an audit protoco
Page 23 and 24:
AFP 44 ANNUAL FACILITIES REVIEW8 -
Page 25 and 26:
local standards and procedures and
Page 27 and 28:
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDistribution a
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
•FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDistributio
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72: FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDistribution a
Page 89 and 90: •FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDistributio
Page 106 and 107: FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYTRIP REPORT1.
Page 108 and 109: FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY8. IMPACT ON A
Page 110 and 111: FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYc. Building 81
Page 112 and 113: FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYbb. Building 8
Page 114 and 115: FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYThe review fol
Page 116 and 117: FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY3.0. Structura
Page 118 and 119: -_._-----~-,FOR F Ie N3.1. I I. Acc
Page 120 and 121: FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY4.0 Any questi
Page 124 and 125: ,TRIP REPORTl. PERSONS MAKING THIS
Page 126: g. Equipment Issues1) The Raytheon
show all

Plant 44 Audit Reports - Wright-Patterson Air Force Base

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?