ML19208B046
| ML19208B046 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 08/16/1979 |
| From: | Feit R NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (RES) |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (RES) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19208B042 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7909180554 | |
| Download: ML19208B046 (4) | |
Text
P00R ORGEL '
FIRE FR TECTION REGEL GR33F MEETING REPORT Name of Auth:m Ronald Feit Date and Place:
July 12, 1979; Bethesda, Maryland
Purpose:
To discuss plans for response to the User Request Memo calling for replication testing (R. Mattson and V. Stello to S. Levine dated June 11,1979)
Discussion The User Recuest letter fror NRR (Mattson/Stello to Murley) dated June ll,1979, was discussed. The Chairc.an made the following points prior to the discussion.
Because of the complexity of the test it is probably not practical to conduct all tests requested in the User Request memo in parallel.
RES plans to start on a single test initially and start planning for at least one more test as soon as a definite schedule and ccst esticate are developed for the first test. As the Review Group and Contrar. tors gain experience, parallel testing can be rur..
With regard to the first tast, what is needed initially is a clear agreement on the physical model to be tested and the test scope.
During the reeting discussion the following were agreed to.
1.
The Rancho Seco Make-up Pump Room Test will be the first test conducted as suggested in the User Request.
2.
The test objective will be to determine whether or not the cable from one division rerains functional after the design basis fire (DBF). The choice and details of the DBF and the specific test definition for functionability will be defined later.
It was concluded that these decisions would be rade after review of the fire hazards analysis and the actual room layout including fire protection
- equipment.
3.
Two full mockup tests will be conducted as requested in the User Request. The first test would be with the entire system operating and the second test would assume that the automatic sprinklers did not function. The second test will replicate as closely as possible the functioning of the plant fire brigade. The test conditions to simulate the fire brigade were not specified; however, it was suggested that the utility personnel be requested to conduct a mock fire drill (without prior notice) to establish a reasonable delay time to locate the fire, organize the fire brigade, collect the necessary equipment and enter the make-up
' ' (l!
)?\\
7909180 6f I
P00R ORIGR
+
pu : rc The assu : tic-is bein; nade that once a DBF is acreed t; the choice of ic:ation of the fire within the room can
~be race on a worst case basis sc that only one set of tests need be conducted.
4.
The User Regaest memo requested that the test be deteministic with regard to the sprinklers and not leave unanswered the question of whether or not they will activate.
It was agreed that separate effects testing of the sprinklers used in Rancho Seco will be conducted in tne actual test roo under static air conditions identical '.o that which will be used in the test and was requested in the Users Request tema. These separate effects tests will establish the longest expected delay time to activate the sprinklers with the test configuration, type and location of the sprinklers and particular DEF.
This delay time will be used during the actual test to detemine when the sprinklers will be manually initiated.
One issue that was not resolved is whether or not the separate effects testing must include additional fuel represented by the cable.
For example, is it intended that the DEF initiate the sprinklers directly or is it necessary for the fire to consume some of the cable to allow enough time at elevated temperatures for the sprinklers to activate?
Another issue (not discussed during the meeting) is what are the actual test conditions needed to simulate the static condition requested in the Users Request.
5.
In order to expedite the test program, most design decisions concerning the tests will be made by a Test Coordinating Corniittee consisting of R. Feit. E. Sylvesto. G. Harrison, and D. Notley.
All decisions will be documented and sett to RES and NRR management and the remainder of the Fire Protection Research Review Group.
Decisions that are in conflict with the fire hazards analysis for Rancho Seco or which modify conclusions drawn in the analysis will be discussed with either an original member of the plant review team or an appointed replacement.
6.
The choice of the D3F will be based on the fire hazard presented by the pump lube oil system. The amount of oil and the location within the room will be based on a review of the fire hazards analysis !.upplemented by a review of the plant design.
For example, the pressure of the lube oil system, sump location, capacity, and feed line size will be considered.
If the data presented in the fire hazards analysis are either inccmplete or considered to be incorrect after a review of the plant design, then additional fire hazards assumptions will be formulated.
3')
\\>
d) i
7.
The first te t will be condu:ted at UL in Chicago.
Based on past ex; erie :e in cc-i.:ti".; tests at UL (Chicago), tney may not ha e 5.i i: Tent cata reco* ing ca::atility.
An estimate of data load will have to be made and additional caoacity sent from Sandia if ne:essary.
Tnis will require a measurement list at an earlier date than would normally be necessary.
The following action ite s were agreed to during the meeting.
1.
E. Sylvester will distribute drawings and safety evaluation reports to the other members of the Test Coordi7ation Connittee at least two weeks prior to the next meeting.
2.
G. Harrison will attempt to obtain sprinkler delay times by review of existing data and by censultation with experts at the National Bureau of Standards. Although it is not anticipated that this work will negate the need for sprinkler separate effects testing, it could reduce the number and comolexity of this portion of the t( t program.
To be of most value at least a prelir ; nary assessment should be completed prior to the next meeting.
3.
HRR will provide guidance concerning the test conducted to evaluate the vulnerability of the rake-up pump room to fire when it is required to rely on the fire brigade. This includes issues such as organization and delay time.
4.
The next meeting of the Fire Protection Research Review Group to discuss the replication test is planned for August 21, 1979.
5.
E. Sylvesi.er will rake arrangements to infom the Rancho Seco tranagement that we would like to perfom a replication test of their pump rake-up room.
Following the August ?1 meeting a site design review will probably be necessary.
d
\\N e6i
I L
FIRE PR37ECTION RESEAr.:H REVIEW GROJP MEETIN3 July 12, 197_;
i Name Organization Gary L. Bennett NRC/RES Lawren:c Hunter APL/JH'J Greg Harrison NRC/ DSS Ernest Sylvester NRC/ DOR Cal Heit NRC/DDR David P. Notley NRC/SD Leo J. Klamerus Sandia John Boccio BNL Robert Hall BNL Ronald Feit NRC/RES e
e e
==
'l (3 !
9 7