ML20102B345

Provides Results of Review of NSHC Package Re Fire Protection Sys.Explanation Should Be Given on How Using Tv Monitor Would Affect Fire Protection Availability

ML20102B345
Person / Time
Site:	05000000, Cook
Issue date:	11/02/1983
From:	Scinto J NRC
To:	Wigginton D NRC
Shared Package
ML20102A920	List: ML20102A922 ML20102A925 ML20102A929 ML20102A931 ML20102A933 ML20102A934 ML20102A937 ML20102A939 ML20102A942 ML20102A944 ML20102A946 ML20102A948 ML20102A959 ML20102A961 ML20102A969 ML20102A974 ML20102A981 ML20102A984 ML20102A999 ML20102B001 ML20102B008 ML20102B010 ML20102B032 ML20102B045 ML20102B058 ML20102B060 ML20102B063 ML20102B068 ML20102B080 ML20102B085 ML20102B106 ML20102B112 ML20102B114 ML20102B120 ML20102B122 ML20102B125 ML20102B127 ML20102B139 ML20102B142 ML20102B147 ML20102B156 ML20102B159 ML20102B167 ML20102B177 ML20102B185 ML20102B194 ML20102B196 ML20102B200 ML20102B206 ML20102B211 ... further results
References
FOIA-84-166 NUDOCS 8502090200
Download: ML20102B345 (1)

Text

-

a...

November 2.1983

(

Note to D. Wigginton

SUBJECT:

COOK 1 FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM (DELD#838849)

Dave, this package needs some more work on two points. First, with respect to the " purely administrative changes to the tech specs", give a better "for example" that that or at least tell me a little more about these changes. I looked through them at the place where the change is noted by the bar on the side. These look like the changes could be Since I don't have a copy of the present specs. I can'quite i.

significant.

t tell myself what the nature of the change is from the old one to the new one that you're calling administrative. If it would help you, send the package back to me with today's version of the tech specs for those pages along with the incoming proposal tech spec change pages. Maybe I can see for myself what I'm talking about.

Second, on the TV camera picture story, as I gather, both of these are j.

backups. They have the necessary sprinkler system to comply with Appendix R but when the sprinkler system is inoperable, you are going to let them i

operate for 14 days. As I understand it that's fairly conson but we

~

usually require that for that period while the system is inoperable that i

licensees have a continuous fire watch. You are going to let Cook use a

[t closed circuit TV camera rather than a continuous fire watch. You are 1'

going to let Cook use a closed circuit TV camera rather than a continuous i

fire watch for the reactor coolant pump area. For the part that can't be 4

detected by the TV monitor, an hourly fire watch. You need to do a little more work explaining why this doesn't significantly reduce the safety of the fire protection watch, particularly since the TV requirement does not call for a continuous monitoring by the closed circuit TV but only for periodic monitoring and hourly logging. I would use a different example that the one you used. Rather than the example of changing the limiting condition for operation. I would use the one in which there is a chans that involves, perhaps, some reduction in safety margin but its not s' gni-I-

ficant. I would use that example and then explain what the effect of using TV on the fire protection availability is and why you're saying that its not significant.

p.S.

Another point that has nothing to do with the prenotice but it looks to me like the action statement involved is badly worded. It looks to me like it says they have to restore the system within 14 days or send us a report within the 30 days telling us what they're going to do. So they have a choice of either restoring it in 14 days or not restoring it in 14

(.

days. Sounds like a weird tech spec.

850209b~2OO B40518

[O/

PDR FOIA o

ADAT084-166 PDR l

l -.. -.

........-.--.w.......

X

.-