ML19327B810

Evaluation of Fire Brigade Responses Resulting from Insp. Licensee Proposal Sufficient

ML19327B810
Person / Time
Site:	LaSalle
Issue date:	11/06/1989
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML19327B809	List: ML19327B808 ML19327B810
References
NUDOCS 8911130366
Download: ML19327B810 (2)

Text

TF l f"*e%

S, UNITS 0 STATES

~t NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y

}

uswmoTow, p. c. rosss Eul e k.....

/

EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION PLANT SYSTEMS BRANCH l

FIRE BRIGADE RESPONSES LASALLE COUNTY STATION DOCKET N05. 50-373 AND 50-374

1.0 INTRODUCTION

During a 1987 inspection at the LaSalle County Station, Region III staff identified a deviation from the licensee's comitment to confom with NRC fire protection guidelines prtaining to the plant fire brigade. Specifically, the licensee does not dispatch the fire brigade upon receipt of a fire alarm in the control room. By letters dated April 28 and July 11, 1989, the licensee proposed a course of action to resolve this issue, 2.0 DISCUSSION The-licensee has identified all " fire zones" containing safe shutdown related cables and components and has proposed to dispatch the fire brigade upon receipt of a fire alarm in the. control room for any zone or sub zone which is considered " vulnerable." Vulnerability is defined as a geriod of time when the' alternate safe shutdown method which is " independent of that location is unavailable. The state of vulnerability does not include such occasions when the alternate shutdown systems are unavaiWeTo'r " planned maintenance and surveillance testing."

3.0 EVALUATION The staff's principal concern with the licensee's approach to this issue is 1

I that there exists areas of the plant which contain cables and components l'

of the crimary and alternate means of post-fire safe shutdown which are potentially vulnerable to fire damage due to prolonged fire brigade response.

The licensee's proposals, as contained in the July 11, 1989 letter, represent a distinct improvement over past practice in that areas defined as being J

vulnerable (due to unexpectedly inoperable systems) will receive imediate brigade response.

Staff criteria related to this issue is delineated in a June 20, 1977 i

memorandum entitled:

" Nuclear Plant Fire Protection Functional Responsibilities, 1

Administrative Controls and Quality Assurance." It stipulates that fire brigades should be dispatched immediately upon receipt of a fire alarm in the control room. Historically, however, the staff has tacitly accepted sending an operator to an area to confirm the presence of a fire before the fire brigade is sent. To take a different position at this time would represent a t

ba ckfit. Nevertheless, the staff intends to revisit this issue in conjunction with the Individual Plant Examinations conducted in conjunction with NRC's Severe Accident Policy.

$1 Sohn b 73 PNV e

p l

s..

i lJ. 1,.

s 1

4 2

+

3.0' CONCLUSION t

the staff. considers.the licensee's proposals Based on the above evaluation,fficient. Therefore, this issue should be to resolve this issue to be su considered closed.

i:

i 3

5520 NAME: LaSalle TACs 73786/7 i

i e

t r

'E i'

I 5

1 L

l.

November 6, 1969

}-

l Occhet Hos. 50 373 and 50-374 i

I r. Thor.as J. Kovrch "t

liuclear Licer. sing renager

' Correnkt.61th Edison Corpany 1

p Post Office Ecx 767

)

Chicego, 111nois 60690 j

7

Dear l',

r. Kovech:.

I

SUBJECT:

SAFETY EVALUATION FOR FIRE BR]GADE RESPONSE ISSUE - LASALLE UNITS 1and2(TACNOS.73786and73787)

L This letter is to forward the enclosed Safety Evaluation associated with your

.ptcpesol to resc1ve. an issue concernirg~ fire brigade resperises that resulted i

fron a Region III inspection et LaSalle. This Safety Evaluation relates to your letter detec July 11 1988.

As requested by Region III, he have revitwed this it fctr.ation ar.d conclude that althcugh your propost.1 d(es not corapletely.

corforr: with our guidelines, your response is edequate to close this issue.

if yet t.sve questions c<r corrents, pleist contact tie at (301) tM-1381.

y Sincerely, i

% rh

c Jchr. C. Dradfute, Prcject !!ansg r Project Directcrcit-111 2 Divisict. cf Reactor Projects. III, IV, V and Special Projects Enclosun :

Distribution Dccket TITi~

!TC & Local PDF,s cc: w/e ric1. :

S(c riext page PD111-2 r/f G. Bo16han i

L. Luther J. Bradfute 000 E. Jordan E. Grimes ACRS(10)

P. Shemarsti

7. uu s. RG4 It DTC" DD~ ll T-F " '3D[' llT-Y ~ ~ ': PD' 11

,f,..p y..:......

/...:............:............:............:.........

NAME':L. Luth r

J. Bradfute :P. Shemanski j

, s..:............:............:.....

DATE :11/ A/ES

11/Is/89

11/6/89 OFFICIAL F:ECORD COPY Docur.er,t i:we:

K0VACil.1 l

l gcu r,M2LA__ 2pr> -

in n

n

?:

i. !;.

,s 3

Mr. Thomas J. Kovach LaSalle County Nuclear Power $tation i

Cosmonwealth Edison Company Units 1 & 2

?

l e

cc:

Ph1111p'P. Steptoe, Esquire John W. McCaffrey

$1dley and Austin Chief. Public Utilities Division.

One First National Plaza 501C p

Chicago. Illinois 60603 100 West Randolph Street

'i Chicago, Illinois 60601 Assistant Attorney General 100 West Randolph Street' Suite 12 Chicago, Illinois 60601 l

l.'

Resident Inspector /LaSalle, NPS l

'U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cosnission Rural Route No. 1 P. 0. Box 224 Marseilles, Illinois 61341 Chairman LaSalle County Board of Supervisors LaSalle County Courthouse Ottawa, Illinois 61350 Attorney General 600 South 2nd Street Springfield, Illinois 62701 Chairman Illinois Cosmerce Coenission Leland Building 527 East Capitol Avenue Springfield, Illinois 62706 Mr. Michael C. Parker, Chief Division of Engineering I

Illinois Department of Nuclear safety 1035 Outer Park Drive. 5th Floor Springfield, Illinois 62704 Regional. Administrator, Region III U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Cosmission 799 Roosevelt Road, B1dg. f4 Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 L

o 1

k

%y meeg.

p A

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3,.

e

. p' f wAswwovoN o.C.70665 Ed m

\\*....

~/L EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION PLANT SYSTEMS BRANCH FIRE BRIGADE RESPONSES LASALLE COUNTY STATION DOCKET N05. 50-373 AND 50-374 l

1.0 INTRODUCTION

During a 1987 inspection at the LaSalle County Station, Region III staff identified a deviation frcm the licensee's cosmitment to confom with NRC fire

'licenseedoesnotdispatchthe'gtotheplantfirebrigade. ire brigade upon receipt of a fire a protection guidelines pertainin Specifically, the l

the control room. By letters dated April 28 and July ll, 1989, the licensee 1

. proposed a course of action to resolve this issue.

2.0 DISCUSSION The licensee has identified all " fire zones" containing safe shutdown related i

cables and components and has proposed to dispatch the fire brigade upon receipt of a fire alarm in the control room for any zone or sub rone which is considered " vulnerable." Vulnerabilityisdefinedasageriodoftimewhen the alternate safe shutdown method which is " independent of that location is unavailable. The state of vulnerability does not include such occasions when the alternate shutdown systems are unavaiTaTTe" Tor " planned maintenance and surveillance testing."

3.0 EVALUATION

'The staff's principal concern with the licensee's approach to this issue is that there exists areas of the plant which contain cables and components of the primary and alternate means of post-fire safe shutdown which are potentially vulnerable to fire damage due to prolonged fire brigade response..

-The licensee's proposals, as contained in the July 11, 1989 letter, represent a distinct improvement over past practice in that areas defined as being vulnerable (due to unexpectedly inopereble systems) will receive innediate brigade-response.

Staff criteria related to this issue is delineated in a June 20, 1977 memorandum entitled: " Nuclear Plant Fire Protection Functional Responsibilities, Administrative Controls and Quality Assurance." It stipulates that fire brigades should be dispatched immediately upon receipt of a fire alarm in the control room. Historically, however, the staff has tacitly accepted sending an operator to an area to confirm the presence of a fire before the fire brigade is sent. To take a different position at this time would represent a backfit. Nevertheless, the staff intends to revisit this issue in conjunction with the Individual Plant Examinations conducted in conjunction with NRC's Severe Accident Policy.

1. wd% g.

.s,

t.. -

- - t.:

'g 2

3.0 CONCLUSION

Based on the above evaluation, the staff considers the licensee's proposals to resolve this issue to be sufficient. Therefore, this issue should be

' considered closed.

5520 NAME: LaSalle TACs 73786/7 I

L'

- - - - _ _ _ - - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _