ML19242A609
| ML19242A609 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/28/1979 |
| From: | Vollmer R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Stello V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| REF-GTECI-0000, REF-GTECI-AC NUDOCS 7908030217 | |
| Download: ML19242A609 (3) | |
Text
.
[I ;
l f
UNITED STATES NUCLIAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y's
,4 5if) }
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
'sh ' /j/
APR 2 81979 s, v MEMORANDUM FOR:
V. Stello, Director,, Division of Operating Reactors FROM:
R. Vollmer, Assistant Director for Systems and Projects, Division of Operating Reactors
SUBJECT:
FIRE PROTECTION IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULES I have recently reviewed the status of the implementation schedules for fire protection modification. Some implementation dates may slip ceyond our October 1980 goal for the completion of this program.
I recommend that we send the enclosed letter to all licensees as a means of encouraging them to meet the desired goal.
Each Project Manager would select the statements in the parenthesis as appropriate for his plants.
If you agree, I will have the Project Managers get the letters out within the next two weeks.
Y c~
R. Voll..er, Assistant Director for Systems and Projects Division of Operating Reactors
Contact:
R. Ferguson X-27173
Enclosure:
As stated cc:
B. Grimes G. Lainas R. Ferguson T. Wambach
[} bli bl)b) 79 08 030M 7 7t72
8 %
UNITED STATES cfi NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j [(.g j
- A'Mv((f\\...
8 W ASHINGToN, 0. C. 20555 o
SAMPL E L ETi ER Licensee:
Gentl emen:
In May 1976, we issued guidelines reflecting the NRC's policy regarding the implementation of General Design Criterion 3 - Fire P ro tec tio n. Since that time, you have performed a fire hazards analysis for your facility and have compared its fire protection program with the NRC guidelines. This analysis has resul ted in proposed modifications to your facility and the identification of concerns which require further analysis. These further analyses may result in additional proposed modifications.
In late 1976, we set October 1980 as the date for completing the implementation of all modifications associated with this program.
This implementation schedule recognized that such modifications should be completed as soon as practical, with due consideration of the nature of the modifications. For example, minor modifications, adoption of administrative controls and additional portable equip-ment would be completed within six months; however, major modification would require a year or more to comolete and some modifications would be coordinated with refueling outages.
By their Memorandum and Order in the matter of the Union of Concerned Scientists' Petition for Emergency and Remedial Action, dated April 13, 1978, the Commission directed the staff to use their best efforts to maintain this schedule, and also directed that the Commission be advised if any slippage is anticipated, along with suggested corrective actions.
We recently reviewed the implementation schedule for all operating reactors. We have found that your implementation schedule is (not) sa ti s fa c to ry.
Information is (no') being submitted on schedule. (Provide information associated with SER items
_ by
.)
Analyses are (no$ ceing performed in time to complete proposed modi-fication, i f any, by October 1980. (The resul ts of all analyses should be submitted by
.) (No corrective action is (hd bb a
-2 required.
Notify us of all modifications you expect to be completed later than October 1980 and justify the implementation date. Describe any correc-tive action that could be taken to improve that date.
Be advised that if any modification, not completed by October 1980, is not justified to the Comission's satisfaction, the Commission may require corrective action, such as Technical Specifications which will require interim measures to compensate for the uncompleted modification.
V. Stello, Jr., Director Division of Operating Reactors Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
/) [j /l P ]
W