ML17177A338
| ML17177A338 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 03/31/1992 |
| From: | Siegel B Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Kovach T COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| References | |
| TAC-M81873, TAC-M81874, NUDOCS 9204060140 | |
| Download: ML17177A338 (3) | |
See also: IR 05000237/1988010
Text
. * \\* f .
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
March 31, 1992
Docket Nos. 50-237
50-249
Mr. Thomas J. Kovach
Nuclear Licensing Manager
Commonwealth Edison Company - Suite 300
OPUS West III
1400 OPUS Place
Downers Grove, Illinois 60515
Dear Mr. Kovach:
SUBJECT:
DRESDEN NUCLEAR POWER STATION FIRE HAZARDS ANALYSIS OF UNIT 1
FIRE EXPOSURE TO UNITS 2 AND 3 (TAC NOS. M81873 AND M81874)
During a regular fire protection inspection (Inspection No. 50-237/88-10) the
Region Ill fire protection inspector raised questions concerning Dresden,
Unit 1, fire exposure to Dresden, Units 2 and 3. Specifically, Unit 1 is
being decommissioned and the inspector was concerned about a fire originating
in Unit 1 presenting an unacceptable fire exposure to Units 2 and 3 via
several locations common to both Unit 1 and Units 2 and 3, particularly the
control rooms.
In response to this concern, Commonwealth Edison Company
(CECo) commissioned Professional Loss Control, Inc. (PLC) to perform a Fire
Hazards Analysis of the Unit 1 fire exposure to Units 2 and 3.
By letter dated May 31, 1991, you submitted the PLC Fire Hazards Analysis
dated May 14, 1991, to the NRC.
PLC evaluated such items as plant barriers,
fixed fire hazards, transient combustibles, fire protection features,
administrative controls and ignition sources, and the impact of a Unit 1 fire
on Units 2 and 3 safe shutdown capability in their analysis.
In conclusion, PLC stated in part:
"A fire originating in Unit 1 and spreading through the Unit 1
West Auxiliary Bay will not prevent safe shutdown of operating
Units 2 and 3.
In a worst case scenario if such a fire
propagated from Unit 1 into the adjacent Unit 2 fire zones, an
alternate shutdown path is available. This would be no different
that a fire starting in Unit 2/3 Fire Zone Groups identified in
the Safe shutdown Report dated January, 1986."
The PLC Fire Hazards Analysis report contained specific recommendations
concerning:
(l} fire protection systems; (2} barriers; (3} administrative
controls; (4} pre-plans; and (5} manual fire fighting equipment.
_.;-=:::L-----::-::-;:9~2~0~3~3;1i~*-----:--*~;---')
r
'9204060140 05000010
_,J
I
ADOCK
-
------~
- ,-
-
G30P15
,.
'>f'
Mr. Thomas J. Kovach
-2-
March 31, 1992
Your letter of May 31, 1991, also contained CECo's responses to these five PLC
recommendations and stated that compliance with all of the recommendations
would be achieved by December 31, 1991.
On February 12, 1992, you confirmed
that compliance with the five PLC recommendations by December 31, 1991, was
achieved.
Based on the review of the PLC Fire Hazards Analysis and recommendations, and
CECo's response to those recommendations, the staff has concluded that:
1.
the PLC Fire Hazards Analysis was comprehensive and did a thorough
evaluation of the risk of fire exposure from Unit 1, *which is in the
process of decommissioning, to operating Units 2 and. 3,
2.
consistent wtth PLC findings, potential-fires originating in the areas
in question in Units .2 and 3 have been evaluated and* that adequately
protected mean~ for safely shutting down the reactors are provided for
such fires.
The staff also agrees with the PL~ conclusions that.a fire
originating in Unit 1 would not present any.,ha~ards to safe shutdown of
Units 2 and 3 in addition to those already.e~aluated as originating in
Units 2 .and _3,
-.
3..
th.e validity of the five r~commendations proposed by PLC are reason.able
precautions *for CECo to take .to preve11t -'unnecessary fire damage" exposure
to Units*2 and 3 from a fire odginati_ng in_~nit I';,__
.
.
~
~I'..
. 4.
CECo' s response. to the .PLC .r.ecommendat ions; was appropri a~~ and ti me l y .
~ ... *:* - .
'
.
~- * ... ,.
' .
t
- 1~
.
.*
. '.t
'
'
' ' 'i ' )
On the basis of the above, _the .NRC staff has *1conClud~d *that *CECo . .has
adequately responded to and:resolyed ,the'concerns
1
rai~ed by,-Regfon III in.
Inspection No. so..:237/88-10 'concerning.unacceptable* fire exposure from UniLl
to Units .2 and 3.
.
- . -
. * * -.
,
DI STR IBUTI ON :
Docket File
B. Boger
R. Barrett
B. Siegel
B. Clayton, Riii
PDIII-2 r/f
ACRS(lO)
cc:
See next page
,
(
.....
\\
- Sincer~ly,
NRC & L?cal:'PDRs-.. Origi.nal *signed by:*,:;*
J. Zwolins~l* .,
Byro~ L. Siegel
- *
C. Moore o
- *
C. McCracken
PDIII-:2 Plant
OGC .
File*
Byron L. Siegel, Project Manager
Project Directorate III-2
Division of Reactor Projects IIIJIV/V
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
D* 1£1
~Il-2
3~/92'
PM:P~
BSieg ~~
. 311r1 r.
R~
3/71 /92 .
Mr. Thomas J. Kovach
Commonwealth Edison Company
cc:
Michael I. Miller, Esquire
Sidley and Austin
One First National Plaza
Chicago, Illinois 60690
Mr. C. Schroeder
Plant Manager
Dresden Nuclear Power Station
Rural Route #1
Morris, Illinois 60450
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Resident Inspectors Office
Dresden Station
Rural Route #1
Morris, Illinois 60450
Chairman
Board of Supervisors of
Grundy County
Grundy County Courthouse
Morris, Illinois 60450
Regional Administrator
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region Ill
799 Roosevelt Road, Bldg. #4
Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137
Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety
Office of Nuclear Facility Safety
1035 Outer Park Drive
Springfield, Illinois 62704
Robert Neumann
Office of Public Counsel
State of Illinois Center
lOO'W. Randolph
Suite 11-300
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Dresden Nuclear Power Station
Unit Nos. 2 and 3