ML20062J942
| ML20062J942 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 10/27/1980 |
| From: | Ippolito T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Abel J COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8011170569 | |
| Download: ML20062J942 (6) | |
Text
.
hb! b e as :
f UNITED STATES e
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y;g jj WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
%f..Cff /
October 27, 1980 Docket No. 50-254 and 50-265 Mr. J. S. Abel Director of Nuclear Licensing Comonwealth Edison Company P. O. Box 767 Chicago, Illinois 60690
Dear Mr. Abel:
On May 29, 1980, the Commission published a proposed rule, a new paragraph 50.48 and Appendix R to 10 CFR part 50, concerning fire protection, which sets forth the minimum acceptable fire protection requirenents necessary to resolve contested areas of. concern for nuclear power plants operating prior to January 1,1979.
We have reviewed all the information you have provided to date regarding your fire protection program. Several of the open items indicated in our Safety Evaluation Report issued July 27, 1979 remain unresolved.
- presents our position on modifications that would have to be made at your facility to resolve these open items, in a manner that would meet the requirements of the proposed Appendix R.
Sincerely.
l A-s Q%eab7b Thomas'AE Ippolito, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #2 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
[
As Stated 1
cc w/ enclosure:
See next page
/
gy p -
THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS POOR QUAL.ITY PAGES 8011170 N
Mr. J. S. Abel Connonwealth Edison Company October 27, 1980 cc:
Mr. D. R. Stichnoth President Iowa-Illinois Gas and Electric Company 206 East Second Avenue Davenport, Iowa 52801 Mr. John W. Rowe Isham, Lincoln & Beale Counselors at Law One First National Plaza, 42nd Floor Chicago, Illinois 60603 Mr. Nick Kalivianakas Plant Superintendent Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station 22710 - 206th Avenue - North Cordova, Illinois 61242 Moline Public Library 504 - 17th Street Moline, Illinois 61265 Susan N. Sekuler Assistant Attorney General Environmental Control Divisica t
188 W. Randolph Street Suite 2315 Chicago, Illinois 60601 Mr. N. Chrissotimos, Inspector U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Box 756 Bettendorf, Iowa 52722
'l
. I l
l t
L. O
._-mm.
o
~-9
-y
SUK4ARY OF STAFF REQUIREMENTS TO RESOLVE OPEN ITEMS QUAD CITIES, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 OOCKET NOS. 50-254/50-265
}lat3rSuppressionSystens,3.1.5(d)
In the SER, the concern was that a fire in the Unit 2 cible tunnel could J.
ige redundant safe-shutdown systems. We required tha li:arsee to modify ti e sprinkler systems in the cable tunnels to prevent fire ;rcpa;ation between trays.
Oy letter dated November 5,1979, the licensee provided add'tf ar.11 information, including design drawings. We agree with the licer.see that the.* nit 2 cable tunnel sprinkler system is designed such that the loss :f a s'ngie sprinkler system i.e. from the outside stem and rising valve to the s:-'nk er heads of of service, will not affect the protection for the redu-dan division of cable trays. Mcwever, the water supply for all the sprinkite systems protect-ing the Unit 2' tunnel are fed from a single 6-inch' connacci:n to an ext. sting 10-inch main.
We find that the protection for the Unit 2 cable tunnel is :: afaquate because a break in the 6-inch main or the 10-inch rain will ca;sa the loss of all automatic suppression in the tunnel.-
The licensee should provide adequate separation of the rprir%: r system ic
's for the Unit 2 cable tunnel such that no single i ;1ir u7t.till cause the loss of water to the systems protecting both divisi:ns :f c:ti a trays.
A
1
!!a,ter,Jg2,ression Systems, 3.1.5(k)
In the SER -the concern was that a fire in the oil st raje a ea c' the turbir.e building could damage redundant safe shutdown syst;ms a-d trat a fire in the crib hcuse could dar. age both diesel fire pumps.
Ne req.f red that the licar.see provide sprinkler protection in the oil storaga lontio s in the turbine building and in the crib house.
i By letter dated September 25, 1979, the licensee confirred -hat areas P and T of the turbine building, which are used for the stc ra;e of drurs of oil, are ;rotected by automatic deluge systems designed :c p o.i:2 3 :3r.sity of 0.3 g m/sq. ft. over the entire area.
The licy.s 2 also committce by administrative pec:if.^et 10 l' i.T'nate oil storage in the crib house. Any oil stored in this ;r aa wf.1". t.e '.ir.ited to a tc:al of 25 gallons.
The oil will be stored in E gal:en :1fety car.s and then inside a flan.:able liquid cabinet.
l?e find that the licensee's commitment to provide autorit'c spri-klers over the Oil stcrage area of the turbine build now prov'jcs Iliz.ite fire protection for -ha; area. Mc;over, administrative controls ar2 nc: su#ff :iiat by them-selvss to c:ntrol ccabustibles in the crib house ard tharaf: e t'e protection r
prcvided in the crib house is unacceptable.
To ; :'.f de an acceptable level of protection, the 'ic ar:se n:;l: install an 1.te Stic sprickler system for the oil storage 2 33
. :3 ra h:use in Idef-ica to the system in the turbine building.
t 1
3
. Foam Suppression Systems, 3.1.6(b)
In the Fire Protection SER the concern was that a fire in tra area cf the MG set fluid couplings could damage redundant safe shutdow 2yrtems.
- 2 required that an automatic foam suppression system be providad f:r e:-:h P3 set fl;id coupling and its curbed area.
The foam systems should :s a:tu at:-d by flame or infrared detectors.
The supply feed for the foam sy t:ms shc;1d be independent of the feed for the automatic sprinkler sys tr '.1ich presently protects the MG set fluid couplings.
By letter dated November 5,1979, the licensee submitte:
e!'gn fra'..in;s,
hydraulic calculations and engineering data sheet cn a : :p::ed 'ca: s;ppres-sion system for the MG set area.
i According to calculations, the amount of foam which w:u'd 55 s;pplied in stcrage dcas not meet the reconaendations of NFPA 16.
. l s o, the dra..ings
~
~
indicated that the system control equipment would be lo:atet so that they would be exposed by a fire in the area protected.
- n a:d' t':n, the drawings did not indicate if the feed for the foam suppression system -c;1d be i
independent of the area sprinkler system. Based on the a'::.s, wm fi.d t.at the foam suppression system in unacceptable.
Tha licensee should modify the design of the foam s;pprissi:: syste.Ts to provide 72 gallons of foam in storage for each syst2m a-d t: rel:: ate the system control equipment so that it would not be ex7cse: 1.
1 #i a in the af23 protected.
In addition, the feed for the feam sy s.:
- 11 ba independent of the feed for the sprinkler system protec;f ; -he Ia e area.
i 9
A
S::;'e Detection System Tests, 3.2.1 In the SEP., we indicated our concern that the smoke detectcrs might not ros;cnd to the products of ccmbustion for the types of axpe:ted conbustibles in the area. h'a were also concerned that ventilation air ficw patterns in the area night reduce or prevent detector response. As a result, we recer.r.; ended that the licensee perform an in-situ stoke dete: tor test.
The licansee has not responded to our concern.
The required methodology for an in-situ smoke detector test is beycnd the currant state-of-the-art and, therefore, an in-situ tes ci not be performed at this time.
Tc idia.3tely address our concerns and assure that the fete:tica system will previde ticely detection of any fires, the licensee she;1d :caduct bench tests of the detectors to verify that they will be responsive to the products of certust'on of combustibles, including transient es bustibles, in each area
.here the detectors are installed.
L
.