ML19345B024
| ML19345B024 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 11/14/1980 |
| From: | Benaroya V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Bryan S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8011250712 | |
| Download: ML19345B024 (2) | |
Text
4 I-g
. - C.
- n I, hm$
g
. 4,. m w
7, F
g(u c.
NOV i 41990 m
m
.o I
-s '
g
.-. a M
e r -
n@:=
' MEMORANDUM FOR: Samuel E. Bryan, Assistant Director 9g h n
'2h for Field Coordination
=
DivisicaofRr.actorOperationsInspecNon c
Si 5
Office of Inspection & Enforcement 0?
s.
FROM:
Victor Benaroya, Chief Chemical Engineering Branch Division of Engineering
SUBJECT:
GUIDANCE Off UNRESOLVED FIRE PROTECTION ITEMS; FARLEY - DOCKET fiOS. 50-348/364 We have reviewed the concern ex' pressed in a memo from C. E f!urphy to S. E. Bryan of August 23, 1980. The open inspection items-are stated as they appear in the memo dated August 28.-
The first item pertains to the containment fire hose system, wherein, fire hose is not provided at each containrent hose station, but is located in a storage cabinet adjacent to the personnel entrance hatch.
Although this arrangement does not strictly conform to Sections C.3(a) and D.l.(b) of Apoendix A to the BTP ASB 9.5-1, it was approved during our fire protectt
- eview. The licensee did agree, however, to install additional hose connections inside each containment.
The second 1. tem dealt with the reactor coolant pump oil collection system requirement for the maximum flow rate of oil that the collection system should handle. We do not have a quantitative guideline for this question.
However, we expect the RCP oil collection systems to handle any oil flow rate that could develop as a result of a pipe break. Since RCPs have a limited quantity'of oil, the licensee's proposal of handling a leakage flow rate of 100 gpm is reasonable..
The. third item states that the need for fire detectors in the vicinity of
~
the RCPs is not addressed in our fire protection SER.
In section IV.C of our fire protection SER, it was the intent of our mentioning of fire l
detectors along-with the discussion of RCP fire protection to indicate that fire detectors are required in the area of the RCPs. Therefore, to meet the requirements of section D.l.(a) of Appendix A to BTP ASB 9.5-1, fire detectors should be installed in the general area of the RCPs.
Finally, the tourth iten addresses an issue with fire brigade merber qualification requirements. The issue is that the licensee has stated that they did not coccit to our fiRC guidelines entitled " Nuclear Plant Fire
. ~. *
- =. = = * '
..n
- Nac romm sis 49 76> uncu o24o
- ..z.....--......-..................
80112508A f
=
r Y
9 7
7
,7 m
-Y 4
g.,
NOV 141980 l
Samuel E. Bryan '
Protection Functional Responsibilities, Administrative Contro'ls and i
Quality Assurance." In Section V of our fire protection SER we state j.
that the licensee has agreed to revise his administrative controls and l
. training procedures to completely comply with our guidelines stated i
above. Therefore, we would expect that their administrative procedures.
l would be inspectable with and comply to our guidelines.
i Origtn.: stanea sy'I
},:
Victor Cenaroya, Chief Chemical Engineering Branch Division of Engineering s
Ccntact:
G. Harrison X27877 cc.
R. Vollmer V. Noonan V. Benaroya R. Ferguson L. Kintner C. Reeves-C. E. Murphy, IE Reg II 1
W. H. Miller, IE Reg II J. C. Steve T. Wambach i
I i
d 4
/ \\
. %....h...d.. # CB7:E '
C j
o,,.,
=vaaa== *
...GHar.r.i s,on...
..RE guson..
r.o 4..
...l.l.ff/go....
..l.1/k/80..
..l.1/th80..
~
.are
'I
- o.................
mac mam ne me uncx oue
~ - _ _ _ _, - -, _ _,. -. -,
.