ML17338B070

Requests Addl Info Re Containment Purge Sys & Containment Venting Sys

ML17338B070
Person / Time
Site:	Turkey Point
Issue date:	08/28/1979
From:	Schwencer A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Robert E. Uhrig FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO.
References
NUDOCS 7909200013
Download: ML17338B070 (5)

Text

hi k

I Docket Nos. 50-25 and 5 - 51 Florida Power 8 Light Company ATTN:

Robert E. Uhirg Vice President Advanced Systems 8 Technology P. 0.

Box 529100 tatami, Florida 33152

Dear Nr. Uhirg:

pUg 3 8 1S79 Distribution Docket Local Pdr ORB//1 rdg.

NRR Rdg.

D. Eisenhut B. Grimes H. Gammill T. J. Carter

'll. Russell

Attorney, OELD 0$5E (3)

A. Schwencer C. Parrish J.'.

Buchanan E.

Reeves V. Noonan I')

G. Lainaa<

jjL. Nichols AI-" C>$

By letters dated January 5, 1979, February 1. 1979.

and June 8, 1979, you responded to our letter dated November 28, 1978, which requested infor-mation regarding containment purging during normal operation at the Turkey Point facility.

tie have reviewed your response and find that in order to complete our review, we need the information identified in the enclosure of this letter.

Me request that you respond to this letter within 45 days of the date of this letter.

Sincerely, Qg~li.najsji;net Bg Enclosure cc:

See next page A. Schwencer, Chief Operating Reactors Branch Ol Division of Operating Reactors 8

c'DO@

6'Mb OFFICS~

SURNAME~

OATS~

.OQII-'l.:.0 R--.---

..86ra tenbu.i.s.:.

08/d'$79...,,

1

~

...GR It'..1-8-

bASchw.

n, r.......

,..08/

...,.7.9..

NRC PORhf 318 (9-76) NRCM 0240 4 UI So 4OVKRNMSNT FRINTIN4 OFFICE IOTS dg~dd

EgR 4Ecy 0

~+a UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 August 28, 1979 Docket Nos., 50-250 and 50-251 Florida Power 8 Light Company ATTN:

Robert E. Uhirg Vice President Advanced Systems In Te"hnology P.. 0.

Box 529100 Niami, Florida 33152

Dear ttr. Uhirg:

By letters dated January 5, 1979, Februar'y 1, 1979, and June 8, 1979, you responded to our letter dated November 28, 1978, which requested infor-mation regarding containment purging during normal operation at the Turkey Point facility.

We have reviewed your response and find that in order to complete our review, we need the information identified in the enclosure of this letter.

We request that you respond to this letter within 45 days of the date of this letter.

Sincerely, Enclosure cc:

See next page W(~

A. Schwencer, Chief Operating Reactors Branch 81 Division of Operating Reactors

ENCLOSURE RE UEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR CONTAINMENT PURGE SYSTEM A

I S

S FOR'URKEY POINT PLANT UNITS '3 AND 4 0<<5~0/

51 1,

With regard to the containment purge and venting system, provide the following information.

a.

Discuss the provisions made to ensure that isolation valve closure will not be pi evented by debris which could potentially become entrained in the escaping air and steam.

b.

Provide an analysis to demonstrate the acceptability of the provisions made to protect structures and safety-related equipment, e.g.,

fans, filters, and ductwork, located beyond the purge system isolation valves against loss of function from the environment created by the escaping air and steam.

c.

Specify the allowable leak rates of the purge and vent isolation valves for the spectrum of design basis pressures and flows against which the valves must close.

d.

Propose an addition to your Technical Specifications which will limit the time required for the purge and vent isolation valves to close.

This addition should specify the action to to be taken if a valve fails to close in the specified time during normal operability tests.

Using this maximum proposed closure time, specify the amount of containment atmosphere released through the purge and vent isolation valves for a spectrum of break sizes.

Robert E. Uhrig Florida Power and Light Company cc:

Hr. Robert Lowenstein, Fsquire Lowenstein, Newman, Reis and Axelrad 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.

Suite 1214 Washington, 0.

C.

20036 Environmental and Urban Affairs Library Florida International University Miami, Florida 33199 Hr. Norman A. Coll, Esquire

, Steel, Hector and Oavis 1400 Southeast First National Bank Building

'1iami, Florida 33131 t<r. Henry Yaeger, Plant Hanager Turkey Point Plant Florida Power.and Light Company P.

0.

Box 013100 Hi ami, Florida 33101 t<r. Jack Shreve Office of the Public Counsel Room 4, Holland Builaing Tallahassee, Florida 32304

I 1

Docket Nos.

50-25 and 50-251 Dr. Robert E. Uhrig, Vice President Advance Systems and Technology Florida Power and Light Company Post Office Box 529100 Miami, Florida 33152

SUBJECT:

MINIMUM FIRE BRIGADE SNIFT SIZE By letter dated November 25, 1977, you were sent sample Technical Specifications and our position regarding-the minimum size of the fire brigade for each operating shift at the Turkey Point Nuclear Plant.

Our position was that a minimum of five members, fully trained for fire fighting, is necessary.

You res'ponded by letter dated December 22,

197Pj, and proposed a smaller brigade of three members and provided a justification therefor, After reviewing fire protection at your facilities and other operating facilities, we have concluded, based on the possible demands.that may be placed on the brigade and the conse-quent actions that may be required of the brigade to fight fires, that 'five members constitute the minimum acceptable fire brigade size.

Our generic evaluation is enclosed to this letter as Enclosure 1 and addresses the major points you raisedto justify a smaller brigade size.

By letter 'dated June 5, 1978, we sent you a document entitled, Manpower Requirements for Operating Reactors."

That document peovided the bases for allowing the sharing of duties to meet minimum staffing r equirements for fire brigades at nuclear power plants.

In performing our, evaluations of the use of personnel who ave not members of the operations staff, an issue was raised as to the amount of training to be given these personnel.

You responded by letter dated June 23, 1978, in which you agreed to furnish

%two additional individuals to assist the fire brigade.

t<e believe tAt the additional two individuals do not result in a fire brigade of adequate capability.

Me are, therefo>e, enclosing for your guidance our position on,m'inimum fire brigade training-(Enclosure

2) which modifies, for up to two members of the brigade, the previous guidance given in "Nuclear Plant Fire Protection Functional Responsibilities, Administra'tive Controls and guality Assurance.,"

June 14, 1977.

Of the seventy plants presently license'd to operate, all but eighteen have a

requirement in their Technical Specifications for a minimum 'fire brigade shift size of five persons.

Discussions held with licensees of those tttP~

eighteen plants have resulted in a commitment by the licensee to propose /~3 such a Technical S ecification exce t for six utilities who are the O.icensees orrics~

', 4UllMANIW 18 (9.76) NRCM 0240 Q UA, OOVCRNMCHT rlllNTINOOrr1CC'HO j0$

1 ~ 0