ML20031C355
| ML20031C355 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 03/06/1978 |
| From: | Ziemann D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Bixel D CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20031C356 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8110070080 | |
| Download: ML20031C355 (4) | |
Text
'
OCEN3E AUTHORITY FILE CC,ty
/g n,%
UNITED STATEt Q' h 4
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS$10N V
f.
j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20065 30 NOIilEMOVi March 6,1978 o
Docket No. 50-155 c-/7 vUPW 4 Consumers Power Company h(TN:
Mr. David Bixel Nuclear Licensing Administrator 212 West Michigan Avenue Jack.M n, Michigan 49201 Gentlemen:
The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No.17 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-6 for the Big Rock Point Plant. This amendment revises the Technical Specifications to incorporate i
elements of your existing fire protection systems and administra-i tive controls and is in response to your application dated October 28, 1977.
l By letter dated Novc.coer 25, 1977, we sent you proposed Technical Specifications on fire protection for the Big Rock Point Plant. We asked that you respond within 20 days as to whether there are any specific requirements to which you object.
You responded by letter dated December 15, 1977, and objected to five portions of the Technical Specifications and revised two Bases (3/4.7.11 and 3/4.7.12).
Your ob,p::tions and our evaluation of each are as follows:
1.
You proposed that Action c.1 to Specification 3.7.11.1 be modified to require _ initiating procedures for a backup Fire Suppression System within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> if both fire pumps (electric and diesel) or piping systems become inoperable.
i Our proposed Technical Specifications required that the b6ckup Fire Suppression System be in place within 24-hours or the plant must be shutdown. Your existing Technical Specification (11.3.1.4.0) allows reactor operation only when both fire pumps are operable based on ECCS considerations. Our proposed specification would have allowed one fire punp to be inoperable for' as long as seven days based on fire protection considerations alone. Thus, 1
I the existir.g Big Rock Point Technical Specifications for the fire punps are more restrictive and your proposed change to the fire protection Technical Specification is acceptable.
8110070080 780306~
PDR ADOCK 05000155 p
PDR-
. -.. ~
~.
Consumers Power Company March 6,1978 2.
You proposed that action for Specification 3.7.11.5 require placing a new hose at an operable hose station rather than routing a hose to the inoperable hose station.
You stated certain advantages to the proposal:
a.
Placing a additional hose at the operable hose station would preclude hose damage, and b.
Passages would remain clear and unobstructed.
Following discussion with your staff, the proposal was modified to designate the new hose and the operable hose station to be used as safety related. This designation will assure proper controls and added assurance that your proposal would meet the NRC staff's intent. You also noted the inadvertent omission of a hose station for the Screen House from the list of safety related hose stations. We have added this station.
Your proposal, as modified, provides assurance that fire hoses will be available to protect safety related equipment when required and is acceptable.
3.
You proposed deletion of the words "non-supervised" from the circuitry description in Specification 4.3.3.8.1.b since only supervised circuits (but not NFPA code 72D type) are installed. Our intent is to describe the existing design.
Thus your proposal is acceptable.
and Halon from the Basis for 4.
You proposed deleting C07 Specification 3/4.7.11 since such system? are not installed at Big Rock Point. This is acceptable.
5.
In order to achieve expeditious implementation of the fire protection Technical Specifications, Specification 6.2.2.f is being issued at this time with the minimum number of on-site fire brigade members specified as three (3) as you proposed. This number is less than the minimum number of five (5) given in the generic staff position, Minimum Fire Brigade Shif t Size, which was an attachment to the Safety Evaluation Report issued with our letter to you dated November 25, 1977.
You also proposed that either the SAS and CAS operator may be used as a fire brigade member.
We have not accepted this part of your proposal; however, some guard personnel may be authorized to serve on the fire brigade af ter completion of our review. We are presently evaluating your justification for this smaller brigade size. When our evaluation is complete, the minimum
Consumers Power Company March 6,1978 number will be increased if we do not agree with your position.
6.
You proposed action for Specification 3.7.12 to establish a fire inspection tour rather than a continuous fire watch when penetration fire barriers are non-functioncl. We have modified our position to require a fire watch patrol at one (1) hour intervals if the area is also protected by operable fire detectors..We continue to require a continuous fire watch for areas with inoperable pern tra-tion fire barricrs and no operable fire detectors.
The licensee acquiesced and we have incorporated our modified position into the interim Technical Specifications and into Bases 3/4.7.12.
We have modified our requirements relating tc training of the fire brigade.
In our November 25, 1977 Specifi:ation 6.4.2, we required that the training program meet or exceed t1e intent of NFPA Code-1975 Section 27. This imposes a requirement that training be conducted monthly. However, our letter of August 12, 1977, forwarded a copy of " Nuclear Plant Fire Protection Functional Responsibilities, Admini-strative Controls and Quality Assurance", which indicated that fire brigade training (drills) shall be conducted at least each three (3) months. We have therefore modified this specification to require training (drills) at quarterly intervals.
This change has been discussed wi th your staff.
In order to provide a period of time to modify procedures to conform with the details of the enclosed interim Technical Specifications and to complete required personnel training where necessary, the amendment becomes effective 30 days after the date issuance.
Copies of the Safety Evaluation supporting this amendment were enclosed with our letter of November 25, 1977.
A copy of the Notice of Issuance is enclosed.
Sincerely, AO T
G v w ~.-
Dennis L. Ziemann,'hief Operatino Reactors Branch #2 Division of Operating Reactors
Enclosures:
1.
Amendment No.17 to DPR-6 2.
Notice cc w/ enclosures:
See next page
Consumers Power Company March 6,1978 cc w/ enclosures:
Mr. Paul A. Perry, Secretary Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 Judd L. Bacon, Esquire Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 George C. Freeman, Jr., Esquire Hunton, Williams, Gay and Gibson 700 East Main Street Richmond, Virginia 23212 Peter W. Steketee, Esquire 505 Peoples Building Grand Rapids, Michigan 49503 s
Charlevoix Public Library 107 Clinton Street i
Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 Mr. William P.. Rustem (2) (w/cy of 12/15/77 CPCofiling)
Office of the Governor Roca 1 - Capitol Building Lansing, Michigan 48913 Chairman County Board of Supervisors Charlevoix County Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 Chief, Energy Systems Analyses Branch ( AW-459)
Of fice of Radiation Prograns U. S. Environnental Protection Agency Roon 645, East Tower 401 M Street, S. U.
Wa shing ton, D. C.
204o4 U. S. Environnental Protection Agency Federal Actiyities Branch Region V Of fice ATIN:
EIS COORDINATOR 230 South Dearborn Street Chicago, Illinois 60604
'