ML20136E282

Forwards Supplemental SER Re Fire Protection Program Deviations.Review of licensee-requested Deviations W/ Commitments Made in Util Indicates Plan Acceptable

ML20136E282
Person / Time
Site:	San Onofre
Issue date:	08/31/1982
From:	Johnston W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Novak T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20136D968	List: ML20136D963 ML20136D969 ML20136E072 ML20136E078 ML20136E282 ML20136G965 ML20136G994 ML20136H076 ML20136H093 ML20136H112
References
FOIA-85-425 NUDOCS 8209230114
Download: ML20136E282 (2)

Text

- - ... . - . .- - . . - .- -. . . - . . . - - - .-

jWengA, (

, 4 UNITED STATES y , g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

g( , y WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 0 $

AUG 31 1982 MEMORANDUM FOR: Thomas Novak, Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing William V. Johnston, Assistant Director '

FROM:

Materials & Qualifications Engineering Division of Engineering

> f. - - - - -

SUBJECT:

SUPPLEMENTAL SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT FOR SAN ONOFRE UNITS 2 AND 3 FIRE PROTECTION PROGRAM DE7IATIONS FROM BTP CMEB 9.5-1 1

In the SER we stated that based on the applicant's commitments to

, modify the facility, we believed that the San Onofre 2 and 3 fire protection program will meet the requirements of Appendix R to 10 CFR 50 when the committed modifications had been completed. However, since Appendix R did not apply to San Onofre 2 and 3 at the time our fire protection review was conducted, we did not require the applicant to specifically evaluate all aspects of the fire protection program i

for compliance with Appendix R. Since that time, our fire protection criteria have been delineated in NUREG-0800 (the Standard Review Plan),

Section 9.5-1, which also includes Appendix R. We therefore conditioned the San Onofre 2 operating license to require the applicant to submit an evaluation of the plant against the criteria of Section. 9.5.1_of . __

NUREG-0800 prior to exceeding 5 percent power. In the interim, plant operation was considered acceptable because the staff's audit review l

described in the SER indicated compliance with Appendix R or an equivalent level of protection.

By letter dated July 22, 1982, the applicant committed to meet the ~~

technical requirements of Section III.G, " Fire Protection of Safe Shutdown Capability," III.J " Emergency Lighting," and III.0 " Oil -

Collection System for Reactor Coolant Pump" of Appendix R to 10 CFR

50. The applicant also provided a comparison of the plant fire protection program against our criteria of Section 9.5-1 of NUREG '

0800 (July 1981) delineating the deviations from our guidelines.

In addition, the applicant identified inconsistencies in our Safety Evaluation Report relating to fire protection.

l

)

.[

f w g u m m y' n z s l

^ ~ ~ ~ " -

'.1__ .

. . \

~

'.5' j,,; p.* Thomas Novak ,2

/

,i

", By letter dated July 27, 1982 the applicant proposed modification to comply with our guidelines. Our evaluation of the identified i

deviations from BTP 9.5-1 and apparent inconsistencies in the SER is attached. _ .

Based on our evaluation, we find that the requested deviations with the commitments made in the July 27, 1982 letter are acceptable.

%fAL& Y -

William V. Johnston, Assistant Director Materials & Qualifications Engineering Division of Engineerint- - -

~

j

Enclosure:

As stated cc: R. Vollmer D. Eisenhut V. Benaroya l F. Miraglia R. Ferguson H. Rood T. Sullivan

5. Pawlicki

0. Parr

J. Taylor R. Eberly AE00 S. Ebneter, Region I . . _.

T. Conlon, Region II . _

C. Norelius, Region III G. Madsen, Region IV P. Sternberg, Region V -

l

)

l l

I i l i

1 1 / '

, . , - - - - - , - - , , - , - - - . - n,.n.- ,,- , ,. , ..-., , . ._- - -- ,