ML19345A275
| ML19345A275 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yankee Rowe |
| Issue date: | 10/24/1978 |
| From: | Lainas G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Ziemann D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8011180482 | |
| Download: ML19345A275 (3) | |
Text
.-
.-t...
. -. ~. - +
+-
- + - ~ -
,4.......~.
SD 2.0
- t. =
l
~
.. ~.
OCT 2 41978 y i.;;.;
70.*:-
".?
k5 2
2 Ab MEMORANDUM FOR:
D. Zierrann, Chief, Operating Reactors Branch #2
_=
Division of Operating Reactors
. 2.[
7_
FROM:
G. Lainas, Chief, Plant Systems Branch Division of Operating Reactors
SUBJECT:
YANKEE R0WE FIRE PROTECTION REVIEW
==
p
' =;
The fire protection review team conducted the onsite review of the Yankee Rowe fire protection program on September 25 to 28, 1978.
We
=i-identified a number of concerns and positions which were discussed with
.....Jli the licensee during the exit meeting.
Our immediate concern was that Ti.
the fire protection is inadequate to prevent the loss of shutdown e:C capability should a fire occur.
a.
At the exit meeting, we recommended that steps should be taken at the
[
earliest opportunity to implement those corrective actions which could be reasonably made prior to the scheduled refueling outage on October 20, 1978.
In addition. ve recommended that steps be taken to implement other corrective between now and the time that the plant will
-..2F resume operation ng the refueling outage.
In subsequent telecons
=
with the licensco, the licensee has indicated what action will be taken to implement corrective act'icns during these two' time intervals.
i.....
Attachment A includes summary of the staff positions, the licensee F"
response to these positions, and status of these corrective actions
-["
which will be taken to satisfy the staff's concerns noted above.
The p
licensee should be requested to confirm that we have correctly his F
response on the enclosed summary of staff positions.
Based upon our evaluation to date, we recommend that a dedicated shutdown system should be provided to insure the capability to safely shutdown as an essential part of the long-term solution to the fire protection problem.
The time required to implement a dedicated shutdown system will, no doubt, take a period of years as it would get involved with the SEP program.
However, during this interim period, we should be satisfied that appropriate measures are taken to address both the adequacy of the
[;
fire protection program and the capability to shutdown following a r
potential fire.
t.67 d
At the present time we are satisfied that the licensee is taking appro-
=+W priate action to improve his ability to mitigate the consequences of a fire under existing conditions, except in the area of brigade personnel. T E r h h
H As indicated in Attachment A, item R.1, we recommended that the fire cg3
^l brigade be increased from-its present complement of three trained members required by the Technical Specifications to seven trained members.
The a
~
.j
r
- 1
, OCT 2 41978 e
licensee has responded that as a result of this concern, he has taken
[
action to provide five trained members on the day shifts from 8:00 to 4:00 during weekdays.
In addition, two members of the security force will be available to assist the fire brigade in the case of a fire emergency.
In addition, the licensee will establish an hourly fire watch patrol of safety-related areas for those times for which five fires brigade members are not onsite. These actions will remain in affect until the unit is shutdown for refueling. We find this; action acceptable.
for the short time period before the unit is shutdown due to the low probability of a fire in this interim period.
For the time interval following the resumption of plant operation until l
those long term modifications are implemented for the fire protection program as'noted in the enclosure, we find that the fire brigade should consist of seven trained members. The basis for this position is given in the enclosed draft report, attachment B, from our consultant on manual fire fighting. The licensee's arguments for the existing three man fire brigade as noted in his letters of December 14, 1977 and n
June 26, 1978, have not adequately addressed the following items:
1.
The operations which must be performed to control and 2
extinguish potential fires.
~
3 1
2.
The availability of equipment to control and extinguish potential fires.
i 3.
The adequacy of the training for fire brigade members and i
backup support such as onsite security personnel and offsite 1
assistances.
We request that a meeting be schedel?d with the licensee in Bethesda during the first week in November tu resolve the fire brigade issue.
The licensee should be prepared to respond to the concerns idenfified by our consultant on manual fire fighting as well as to provide the qualifications of those indivihals who have established the size and training of the fire brigade. The licensee should also be prepared to discuss the three above noted items which we do not find adequately addressed in his prior arguments.
The licensee will forward information which describes the additional capability to hhutdown which results from modifications being incorporated t
during the refueling outage.
The licensee has iddicated that his response to the unresolved staff positions, noted in Attachment A, will be provided by December 1,1978.
G. Lainas, Chief Plant Systems Branch Division of Operating Recctors DOR:PSBG[L D0R L/PSB
_0g;.CLESB..
o me.
- IDunning..LL.. REertusca Mt:bcas
~ ~ ~
- 10DJ. /78_
10L% /78_.
.164 Nun 3_
em
- h
.ev~ ch m ~m. omcc. i.7. -.mu cscu: m mo>sto:om
.a..
=.
i g 2 419N W =^
Enclosures:
As stated
?.; '..,
=.
cc w/ enclosures:
D. Eisenhut A. Burger
==
G. Lainas
==
R. Ferguson T. Dunning PDR-S. Hanauer
~~...
Central Filing J-PSB Reading File j
R. Paolino
'" 7.T
=+-
r l
f.?
fi
}
(.,..: ::i:-
~
.};."",5.
- 4 rn s
1
,'7.'..
3 orrie s
- sunau a >
o a v's
- NT.C TOrat'3tS (9 76) NRO! 0240 W va s. oovs==want raihtsho orricca nete -eases 4 2
3
,,,,