ML20072P864
| ML20072P864 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 11/19/1990 |
| From: | Shelton D CENTERIOR ENERGY |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| 1874, NUDOCS 9011290089 | |
| Download: ML20072P864 (2) | |
Text
'
F '
i l
CNEAFFEftP0ift ENERGY' M C. Mon 300 Ma$ son Avenue Vce President Nuclear Teleco, OH 436520001 Du h (419)249 2300 Docket N',ber 50 346 i
License Number NPF-3 1
Serial Number-1874 November 19. 1990 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Vashington, D. C.
20555 t
Subj ect :
Summary of October 25, 1990 Heeting Regarding Fire Hazards Analysis Report Revision 12 i
Gentlement Toledo Edison and Nuclear Regulatory Commission-(NRC) on October.25, 1990, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRC/NRR) Staff personnel met in the NRC's ihite Flint offices.in Rockvi)le, Maryland. The purpose of this meeting was to discuss the submittal of.the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station (DBNPS) Fire Hazards Analysis Report (FHAR) Revision 12 to the NRC and the impact;of'this submittal _on the NRC's Fire Protection Safety l
i Evaluation Report (SER) currcntly under preparation.
This letter provides a summary of the meeting and. conclusions.
Toledo Edison discussed in detail the differences between FHAR Revision 12 and-the docisments previously submitted to the NRC (the Fire Area Toledo Edison Optimization Report (FAOR) Revision 1 and FHAR Revision 11).
noted that FAOR Revision 1 had superseded portions of FHAR Revision 11, and l
created some conflict between the two documents.
FHAR Revision 12 integrated these two' documents into a single document, eliminated the
. conflicts, and provided an improved _ description of the fire protection compliar.ce program at the Davis-Beste Nuclear Power Station (DBNPS).
In tL;s meeting, Toledo Edison'noted that it planned to submit the'FHAR Revision.12 at this time to allow the Fire Protection SER to reflect the current fire hazards analysis and program at the DBNPS. -This vould simplify L
Toledo' Edison's submittal, and the NRC's review, of a future license l
amendment.requestito relocate the Fire Protection' Technical Specifications-to'the' Updated Safety Analysis Report in accordance with Generic Letters 86-10 and 88-12.
Toledo Edison stated that FHAR Revision 12 did not invalidate-thefresults of the April to May'1990 NRC Appendix R inspection as 22, 1990-documented-in NRC Inspection Report 90007 (DRS) dated August 90112900sup pojjjp E*DR ADOCK C5000346
'p PDC j0 h operating companies Cleveland Electnc tilum1 noting -
L-
.m v
-)*
foledo Edison
Dockot Numbar 50-346.
Lic:nsa Numbar NPF-3 S2 riel Nunb3r 1874 s
~*
Page 2 (Toledo Edison letter Log Number 1-2345) and that FHAR Revision 12 did not t
alter the fire hazards analysis that was revleved during that innpection.
Toledo Edison characterized the changes as largely administrative and.
editorial, and provided numerous examples to support this statement. Toledo Edison agreed to include several of these examples in the cover letter to the NRC submitting FHAR Revision 12.
The NRC Staf f questione<' Toledo Edison regarding the technical nature of these dif ferences between FliAR Revision 12 and both FAOR Revision 1 and FHAR Revision 11 and concluded that the differences were not substantive or technical in nature. The NRC Staff contacted NRC Region III by telephone and summarized the conclusions of the discussion for NRC Region III.
NRC Region III concurred with NRC/NRR that the changes as presented by Toledo Edison vere not substantive or technical in nature and that they did not invalidate the April and May 1990 Appendix R inspection.
NRC Region III suggested that the NRC's Fire Protection contractor review the clarifying changes to the non-nuclear instrumentation power supplies, but since these power supplies were on drawings and in procedures during the Appendix R inspection, there should be no effect on *he Inspection Report 90007 (DRS).
Accordingly, the NRC staf f stated that filar Revi= ion 12 vould be incorporated into the Fire Protection SER.
The NRC Staff stated that the SER is currently projected to be issued in.
late November 1990 and would reference filar Revision 12. However, it was noted that issuance of the SER was dependent on NRC management's priorities.
l Toledo Edison indicated that FHAR Revision 12 would be submitted with an i
explanation of the differences between FHAR Revision 12 and both FHAR Revision 11 and FAOR Revision 1 vithin approximately two veeks.
f Toledo Edison informed the NRC staff that the FHAR vould be revised to support the relocation of the Fire Protection Technical Specifications and to incorporate the Appendix R radio communications study.
Any other major FHAR. revisions vould be performed under the provisions of the new license i
condition, assuming a Toledo Edison. submittal in late 1990 and NRC approval in early 1991 of a Generic Letter 86-10 license amendment request. Toledo Edison also stated it was their intention to improve the Technical Specifications during the relocation process as these improvements vill enhance the requirements of the previous Technical Specifications.
4 Should you have any questions or require additional information, p1 ase contact Mr.
R.' V. Schrauder, Manager - Nuclear Licensing, at (419) 249-2366.
Very t ul yours,
. QJ
~
LEV /KBR/mmb cci F. H. Byron, DB-1 NRC Senior Resident Inspector A. B. Davis, Regional Administrator, NRC Region III l
H. D. Lynch,. DB-1 NRC Senior Project Manager J
I Utility Radiological Safety Board l
t i
.