ML19317G089
| ML19317G089 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 09/26/1978 |
| From: | Matimoe J SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19317G090 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8002210780 | |
| Download: ML19317G089 (1) | |
Text
,
O
.SMUD lERLECOPY.
SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY OlSTR!CT C 1708 59th Street Box 15830, Sacramento, Cahforrua 95813:(916)452-3211 Septec:ber 26, 1978 a,
5 Director of Regulatory Operations ATTN:
Mr. R. H. Engelken 52 NRC Cperations Office
~
- >l
[~
- s Region V 1990 North Califotnia Boulevard
.: =
b Walnut Creek Plaza, Suite 202
('
j' N
Walnut Creek, California 94596 M
Og
~
R 5
Re: Operating License DPR-54 Docket No. 50-312 Reportable Occurrence 78-10
Dear Mr. Engelken:
f, In accordance with Technical Specifications for Rancho Seco Nuclear ~
Generating Station, Section 6.9.4.lb, and Regulatory Guide 1.16, Revision 4, Section C.2.a(2), the Sacramento Municipal Utility District is hereby submitting a fourteen-day followup report to Reportable Occurrence 78-10, which was (7
initially reported to your office September 22, 1978.
t Contrary to Technical Specifications Section 3.14.5.1, on September 14, 1978, it was discovered that Fire Hose Station No. 3 could not be considered operable due to the hydrant and its associated hose cabinet not being in the immediate vicinity of each other. This particular hose stat. ion was relocated! I as part of the overall modification to the Fire Protection System. During the actual relocation of the fire hydrant, additional hose of equivalent size was' routed to the unprotected area from an operable hose station per the requirek ments of Technical Specifications Section 3.14.5.2.
After relocation of the hydrant, the applicable portion of the system was hydro tested. Upon success-fully passing the hydro test, the systen was lef t pressuri::ed and the hydrant itself considered operable. The afittional hose of equivalent size routed to the unprotected area was then removed. This was done prior to moving the hose
~
cabinet to its new location. Therefore, although Hydrant No. 3 was considered operable, the hose station itself could not be considered operab'.e due to
/;
separation of the hydrant and its associated hose cabinet. Upon discovery of this discrepancy, the hose cabinet was moved to the proper location the same Z
day.
f-A similar recurrence (temporary separation of a fire hydrant and its associated hose cabinet) is highly unlikely since there are no future plans to relocate other fire hydrants.
There was no plant transient or shutdown associat tg gv
)
Respectfully submitted, y-
'j
. 0 Ah Add 3 5
r l
r :.a Mattimoe
/
9 Assistant General Manager JJM:RJR:HH: sal and Chief Engineer Encl. Director, MIPC (3) cs:
n< rar.rn e rr nm