ML20093E411

Proposes Establishment of Roving Fire Watch to Pass Through Listed Sections of Control & Reactor Bldgs as Compensatory Measures to Support Schedular Extension of App R Mods

ML20093E411
Person / Time
Site:	Hatch
Issue date:	10/02/1984
From:	Beckham J GEORGIA POWER CO.
To:	Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NED-84-518, TAC-43754, TAC-43755, TAC-47143, TAC-48071, TAC-48072, TAC-48748, TAC-48749, TAC-57415, TAC-57416, NUDOCS 8410120096
Download: ML20093E411 (2)

Text

p.-

i*

g G3orgia Power Company..

- 333 Piedmont Avenue Atlanta. Georgia 30308 Tefephone 404 526-7020

'Mading Address-Post Offce Box 4545 Atlanta. Georgra 30302 Georgia Power the southem electrc sys'em

.J. T. Beckham, J,.

Vce Presidert and G%eral Marager Nuctor Generation NED-84-518 October 2, 1984 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention: Mr. John F. Stolz, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 4 Division of Licensing U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Cmanission

-Washington, D. C.

20555 i

NRC DOCIGTS 50-321, 50-366 OPERATING LICENSES DPR-57, NPF-5 ENIN I. HA'IGI NUCLEAR PIANT UNITS 1, 2 INTERIM CMPDEATION FOR SCHEDbTER EXTENSION FOR NON-OUTAGE REIATED APPENDIX R MODIFICATIONS Gentleen:

In a letter dated Septaber 4,1984 (NED-84-444), Georgia Power Cmpany our request for (GPC) proposed specific cmpensatory measures to support scha3uler relief from the requirments of 10 CFR 50.48 for non-outage related 10 CFR 50 Appendix R modifications.

'Ibe NRC staff stated in telephone conversations with representatives of GEC on Septaber 19, 1984 and Septenber 24, 1984 that the proposed mitigation was insufficient to support the rquested relief in four areas.

Those~ areas as referenced in to our September 4, 1984 letter were:

Unit 1 Reactor Building North of Colmn Line R7 - Paragraph 4.1.5 o

Unit 2 Control Building Health Physics Area - Paragraph 4.2.2-o Unit 2 Reactor Building North of Colmn Line R19 - Paragraph 4.2.6 o

Control Building Cmunon Corridor - Paragraph 4.3.2 o

In the referenced telephone conversations, the NRC staff indicated that a roving fire watch in conjunction with other elenents of miti<3ation cited in our Septenber 4,1984 letter would likely provide adequate empensation 0h 8410120096 841002 0

l-PDR ADOCK 05000321 i

8 8 F

PDR l

Georgia Power d Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention: Mr. John F. Stolz, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 4 October 2, 1984 Page 'IWo and allow approval of the rquested schedule extension.

Pursuant to the resolution of our outstanding request prior to October 15, 1984, GC hereby proposes the establishment of a roving fire watch whose patrol path will pass through the four areas in question at least once every thirty minutes.

%is frequency must be considered with recognition of other points of mitigation of fire hazards noted in our Leptember 4,

1984 letter and

. described in our " Response to 10 CFR ' 50.48 and Appendix R"

as mended through December 20, 1983.

Cited therein are factors such as routine security patrols through the areas at a frequency of once every two hours, Plant RIu.ipnent Operators' tours at a minimun frquency of once Der shift as well as their passing through the areas in conjunction with their duties, installed fire detection systens on the 130' level of both reactor buildings as well as the health physics area and the canon corridor, moderate. to low combustible fire loadings, and the relatively low risk of fire. To increase the inspection frquency significantly (to a period of fifteen minutes for exmple) beyond that proposed herein would result in doubling the resource expenditure and the man-rem exposure.

GC makes this proposal while maintaining both our belief that existing

- fire protection measures are adequate and our conce in regarding unnecessary radiation exposure to personnel.

We, therefore, reserve an option to present alternate proposals of mitigation for your consideration at a future date.

Time constraints of 10 CFR 50.48 prevent further discussion of this point.

Your earliest response to this proposal and our rquest for scheduler exeption is requested in light of the October 15, 1984 constraint imposed by 10 CFR 50.48.

hank you for your ongoing consideration of our requests concerning 10 CFR 50 Appendix R and its implenentation.

I Yours very truly, J. T. Beckh m, Jr.

l WEB /nb l

xc:

L. T. Gucwa H. C. Nix, Jr.

J. P. O'Reilly (NRC-Region II)

Senior Resident Inspector l

l w

w