ML20141N668
| ML20141N668 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 02/20/1986 |
| From: | Asselstine J NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20141N666 | List: |
| References | |
| GL-83-33, NUDOCS 8603170478 | |
| Download: ML20141N668 (4) | |
Text
- -
- g UNITE'J STATES
-8 NUCLEAR REZULATORY COMMISSION
(
WASHINGTON. D.C. 20506 February 20, 1986 OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER MEMORANDUM FOR:
Victor Stello, Jr.
Acting Executive Director for Operations FROM:
James K. Asselstine
SUBJECT:
SECY-85-306 - STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE IMPLEMEllTATI0rt OF APPENDIX R TO 10 CFR 50 In the attached vnte sheet, Comissioner Zech states that he has been told that many licensees have taken advantage of the new interpretations contained in SECY-05-306 and that they have used them tc develop their fire protection orograms.
I would appreciate learning which Itcensees are already using the "new interpretations."
I would also ifke to know how any such use of the new interpretations will affect the compliance schedules contained in the E00 tremorandum to the Comission dated Decenber 26, 1985 regarding the status of implenentation of Appendix R.
Finally, I would like to know how such use is constatent with repeated assurances by the staff that all fire protection SERs, including those for plants licensed after January 1,1979, have been based on Generic Letter 83-33 or the existing Branch Technical Position.
cc:
Chairnan Palladino Rec'd off, too Comissioner Roberts ble... R.-- a 4 -f (o, Comissioner Bernthal Comissioner Zech Tiare.... 77" * "--~A OPE OGC SECY 060317047s e60 206 PDR ADOCK O PDR F
goo --- 0016 3
[
- i"'
N 0 T A T I O N' V0TE RESPONSE SHEET SAMUEL
. CHILK, SECRETARY OF THE COMMISSION J
T0:
FROM:
COMMISSIONER ZECH
SUBJECT:
SECY-85-306 - STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF APPENDIX R TO 10 CFR 50 APPROVED X (w/coments)
DISAPPROVED ABSTAIN NOT PARTICIPATING REQUEST DISCUSSION COMMENTS:
See attached comments.
W
~
510ilAlph (f
2 -/g -K Entered on "AS" Q
/
/
gggg SECRETARIAT NOTE:
PLEASE ALSO RESPOND TO AND/OR COMMENT ON OGC/0PE MEMORANDUM IF ONE HAS BEEN ISSUED ON THIS PAPER.
NRC-SECY FORM DEC. 80 u _-
3
.y -
..l r
Commissioner Zech's comments on SECY 85-306 It is clear from the history associated with Appendix R that there has
'been considerable confusion in the industry, and to some extent the staff, on the exact meaning of all the fire protection requirements.
Generic letters have been issuedt task forces, workshops, and training sessions have been conductedt inspections have been completed; and, differing professional opinions have been submitted and resolved.
Many of these past actions became part of a cooperative
- effort between the staff and industry to resolve'the outstanding
' Appendix R issues.
The result of this effort is the Generic Letter, interpretations, and question and answer documents proposed by the staff in SECY-85-306.
I believe these documents will help clarify and expedite final implementation of the fire protection requirements.
Consequently, subject to the recommendations for improvement made by OGC.in its october 24, 1985 meno, I approve publication of the generic letter.
I'do not agree with several of the points raised by Commissioner Asselstine in COK7A-86-4.
I do not believe that the staff's approach
- will, in the end, make it more difficult for a fire protection inspector to conduct.his job.
Eventually, all fire protection program requirements should be contained in the plant's FSAR which will provide a solid starting point to determine a plant's compliance with Appendix R.
The proposed Generic Letter clearly states the documentation that will be required and expected by the NRC concerning licensee evaluations.
In addition, this documentation is required to be readily retrievable.
I also believe that across the board, the nuclear industry, when compared to other industries, is required to install and implement one of the most rigorous and demanding fire protection programs in the country.
Although there may be a few individual definitions or interpraations that can be debated as to whether or not they meet generally accepted industry codes, the overall program.that the NRC requires is clearly above average.
The proposed Generic Letter may allow a licensee to make some changes to its fire protection program via the 50.59 process, but it also states that any changes made to the fire protection program that may adversely affect the plant's ability to achieve and maintain safe shutdown in the event of a fire would still need prior NRC approval.
Consequently, we maintain control of major changes and continue to fulfill our responsibility to protect the public health and safety.
As a separate matter, I do not share my colleague's concern over the technical adequacy of the proposed documents.
The staff has spent censiderable time conducting analyses and developing these documents for the precise purpose of providing guidance on acceptable technical cnd procedural responses.
Although some DPos were submitted, I an informed that the concerned individuals are not appealing the agency resolution of those DPCs.
With regard to the " analysis" provided by the EDO to Commissioner Asselstine on November 18, 1985, it is my impression that the EDO did not intend this to be a backfit analysis.
It is my understanding that staff determined that these interpretations which, if a licensee so
...boosentoimplementthem,cro1003rOctristivothncurrent
".-requirement 3, cnd thcrOfcra a backfit cnalycio 10 nst rcquired.
~
However, the EDO did discuss some of the backfit considerations in order to provide the Commission information.
I would certainly agree
.with Commissioner Asselstine that if this analysis was supposed to suffice as a backfit analysis, it would require significant improvement.
I agree that the proposed fire protection enforcement policy needs some improvement..It does not seen appropriate that the NRC should be restricted to only a severity III, IV or V violation unless there was an actual fire.
After reviewing the reactor operation requirements in our enforcement policy, it seems that existing enforcement policy guidance for a severity level one violation would require an actual concurrent fire, but not for a severity level two violation.
The proposed fire protection regulations require an actual concurrent fire before either a severity level I or II violation can be imposed.
I do not see why the fire protection regulations need to be more restrictive in this regard than the general enforcement policy.
Consequently, for purposes of the fire protection enforcement policy, I recommend that the staff propose additional and/or different guidance on when a severity level two violation is appropriate.
Lastly, I believe that the information contained in SECY-85-306 is, for the most part, already widely known throughout the industry as a result of the training sessions, workshops, and other staff interactions.
Consequently, I as told that many licensees have taken advantage of this information and used it to develop their fire protection programs.
As a result, this information will be applied by and benefit more than just those few plants who have not yet fully implemented Appendix R.
0
AJAC T)DK UNITED STATES y
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/'j y
WAS*HNGTON. D. C. 20066
\\ ***#
MAR 11 N MEMORANDtM FOR: Comissioner Asselstine FROM:
Victor Stello, Jr.
Acting Eyrcutive Director for One ations SECY 85-336 - STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE S!!BJECT:
IMPLEMENTATION OF APPENDIX R TO 10 CFR 50 By memorandum dated February 20, 1986, you requested the following informatio.1 recarding SECY 85-306:
Which licensees are using the "new interpretations"?
1.
How will any such use of the new interpretations affect the 2.
compliance schedules contained in the EDO memorandum to the Comission dated December 26, 19857 How is such use of the new interpretations consistent with repeated 3.
assurances by the staff that all fire protection SERs, including those for plants licensed after January 1, 1979, have been based on Generic Letter 83-33 or the existing Rranch Technical Position?
Throuch regional workshops and in Generic Letter (GL) 85-01 industry was In both the informed of the "new interpretations" concerning Appendix R.
G regional workshops and in CL 85-01 the industry was informed that the infomation concerning the new interpretations was draft and would not i
The following is a list of plants j
become final until Comission approval.
which have requested staff evaluation of their fire protection program I
based on the interpretations contained in SECY 85-306:
t 1.
Indian Point IJnit 3 2.-
Maine Yankee 3.
Oyster Creek 4.
Tro.ian 5.
San Onofre Units 1, 2 and 3 6.
Susquehanna Units 1 and 2 With the exception of Maine Yankee, the staff is holding the SER$ on the 1
above plants in abeyance until the Comission's final vote on SECY 85-306.
CONTACT:
John Stang, NRR yhOt40Tip v x28484
g' Comissioner Asselstine To the best of the staff's knowledge, the use of the new interpretations has not affected compliance schedules. However, compliance schedules for plant modifications have changed slightly since the EDO memorandum to the 26, 1985. The fire protection modification Commission dated December schedule has improved by three additional plants beina completed in 1986 rather than 1987. Three plants have pushed back their completion schedule for alternative shutdown systems from 1986 to 1987. Enclosures 1 through 7
.contain graphs and tables showing updated completion schedules for all plants licensed prior to January 1,1979 as of March 1,1986.
Finally, as indicated above the staff is holding all SERs concerning evaluations of the new interpretations contained in SECY 85-306 until Comission approval of SECY 85-306. To date with the exception of Maine
. Yankee all exemptions issued concernino issues covered in GL 83-33 have been based on GL 83-33 and not the new interpretations contained in SECY 85-306.
In the case of Maine Yankee, should the Commission decide that the new interpretations are not to be used but rather the guidance of GL 83-33 the For all plants
, staff.will reprocess the affected issues as exemptions.
licensed after January 1, 1979 fire orotection SERs are based on the SRP and all deviations from the SRP are reviewed ard justified in the SER.
Original signed by Vi N T e N,Jr.
6 Acting Executive Director 4
for Ope ations
Enclosures:
1.
Footnotes f
Fire Protection Status for Plants Licensed Prior to January 1, 1979 i
2.
3.
Plants with all Appendix R Modifications Complete l
Completion Status of Alternate Shutdown Systems 4.
1 5.
Completion Status of Fire Protection Modifications 6.
Bar Chart of Completion Status for Alternate Shutdown Systems l
7.
Bar Chart of Completion Status for Fire Protection Modifications cc: Chairman Palladino DISTRIBUTION Comissioner Roberts Central File OCA (3)
Comissioner Bernthal NRC PDR w/cy of incoming SECY (3)
Comissioner Zech Local PDR w/cy of incoming VStello SECY EDO #001453 PPAS (ED0#001453)
.j OPE EDO Reading w/cy of incoming OGC H. Denton/D. Eisenhut R. Bernero PD#1 Reading JStang w/cy of incoming (w/cy of incoming)
CJamerson OELD FMiraglia PD#1 Green Ticket File TNovak
- SEE PREVIOUS PAGE FOR CONCURRENCE D8L:PDf1*
DBL:PD#1*
DBL:PD#1*
DBL:DD*
DBL:DIR*
CJamerson JStang:jg JZwolinski RHouston RBernero 03/04/86 03/04/86 03/04/86 03/04/86 03/04/86 NRR:DD NRR:DIR EDO:A/DIR DEisenhut HDenton VStello 1; - - - _______/__/86
/ /86
/ /86
r FOOTNOTES The footnotes below will aid you in reviewing the following charts and graphs:
- 1 50.48 Schedular Extensions Exemption Granted
- 2 50.48 Schedular Extension Exemption Requested and Under Review by NRR
- 6 Plants Following the 50.48 Schedule for Completion of F.P. Mods and Alt. 50 SYS
- 7 Plants Operating in Noncompliance of the 50.48 Schedule with Approved Compensatory Measures
- 9 Plants in Outage Will Not Restart Until Modifications Complete
.6 APPE.N.~ DIX R ALTERNATE SHUTDOWN SYSTEMS COMPLETION STATUS FOR PLANTS LICENSED PRIOR TO JANUARY 1,
1979.
ALTERtaTE SHUTDOWN SYSTEMS STATUS SCHEDULAR EXEMPTION GRANTED 3 SCilEDU!AR ss-E X E?. PTION U N D ER R EVIE'.'!
/ -
IN OUTAGE: RESTART AFTER MODS. COMPLETE 2
3o.
OPERATING UNDER NON-COMPLIANCE A.C.M.*
~
L4 g..
,qtd COMPLYING WITH 50.48 SCHEDULE Q.
20-b m
! 15-2:
E to- -
ro M
a f
l
[$4j 5- -
!N
/ "
17 El MARCH 1986 A.C.M. - APPROVED COMPENSATORY MEASURES
__=
1 APPENDIX R
STATUS OF FIRE PROTECTION MODIFICATIONS FOR PLANTS LICENSED PRIOR TO JANUARY 1,
1979.
RRE PROTECTION STATUS SCHEDULAR EXEMPTION GRANTED l
ss-N SCHEDULAR EXEMPTION UNDER REVIEW i
COMPLYING WITH 50.48 SCHEDULE 30- -
OPERATING UNDER NON-COMPLIANCE A.C.M.*
i$;
25-COMPLETE U
IN OUTAGE: RESTART AFTER MODS. COMPLETE l
-i lv:
10-
?k 52 2
10-en i
f.
3
=
Eb h{"
') 55
~
D-
=
~
Vs
.%N
~
=
fr 55M
=
/, = =
o MARCH 1986
. APPROVED COMPENSATORY MEASURES
p.
P' g? No.
'l 03/04/26 APPEtJDIX R STATUS FOR FLANTS LICENSED PPIGH TO J4N.
1, 1979 50.40 FACILITY DATE ALT.
DATE ALT.
DATE 59.40 DATE FIRE NAME. #
SHUTDONr1 SHUTDOWN TECHNICAL FROTECTIOri SYSTEM SYSTEt1 S/D EVEtiPTION MODS AFF60VED COMPLE1E ISSUED COMPLETE ARi:ANE A5 1 05/01/03 COMPLETE 03/01/03 COMPLETE ARKAULAS 2 05/01/P3 CO?tFLETE 03/01/03 COMILETE LEAVER VALLEY 1 01/01/U3 COriPLE T E 03/01/03 COMPLETE 03/01/04 DIG ROCK FOINT 01/01/03 CCMPLETE 04/01/82 cot!PLE T E 03/01/33 03/01/04 03/0t/85 EROWN3 FERRY 1 10/01/03 12/20/09 02/01/8?
12/20/D9 to 49 EROWNS FERRY 2 10/01/03 12/20/80 02/01/03
' 12/20/00 42 12
}
b BROWtJS FERRY 3 10/01/83 12/20/07 02/01/03 12/20/07
$9
??
BRUNSWICK 1 UNDEP REVIEW 12/31/09 UNDER REVIEH 12/31/89
- 6 46 DRUN5WICM 2 Ut4 DER REVIEW 06/70/90 UNDER REVIEW W: / 30 / 90
$6 lb CALVERT CLIFFS 1 09/01/02 COMPLETE 00/01/02 COtirLETE 03/01/04 CALVERT CLIFFS 2 09/01/02 COMPLETE 00/01/02 COMPLETC 03/01/04 l
COOPER STATION 04/01/04 03/31/07 07/01/87 11/31/06 47 46 0
CRYSTAL RIVER 3 01/01/03 COMFLETE tiO REQUEST 03/31/06 81 D.C.
COOK 1 09/01/03 COMPLETE NO REOUCGT COMPLETE D.C.
COOK 2 09/01/03 COMPLETE NO REOUECT COMPLCTE DAVIS-DESSL 06/01/02 12/31/09 11/01/02 12/31/09
- 7 00/01/94 47 DRESDEN 2 01/01/03 06/30/07 02/01/03 06/30/07 42
- 2
w Png No.
2 03/04/06 1C 79 AFPENEIX R STATUS FOR FLANTS LICENSED PRIOR TO JAN.
2.
r 50.48 FACILITY DATE ALT.
DATE ALT.
DATE 50.40 DATE FIFE (JAME 49 SHUTDOWN SHUTDOWil TECHNICAL PROTECTION SYSTEM SYSTEM S/D EXEMFT10N MODS APPROVED COMPLETE ISSUED COMPLETE DREEDEN 3 01/01/03 06/30/87 02/01/03 06/30/07 42 42 DUMJE ARNOLD 01/01/GJ cot 1F LCTE 09/01/03 COfrLETE FARLEY 1 08/01/B3 10/01/95 12/01/93 COMFLETE 41 FIT 2 P AT R I C!'.
04/01/84 04/30'07 02/01/84 1o/3 '06 40
- 1 e
FORT CALHOUN 08/v1/82 COMPLETE NO FEOUEGT COMPLCTE FORT FT VRAIf 4 NOffE SUBMITT 08/31/07 fl0 REOUEST OD/31/D7 47
$7
,0 I
GINNA 02/01/E5 04/30/G6 NO REDUEST 04/30/06 41 41 f
H D ROBIfl50N 2 08/01/84 COf'F L E T E.
11/01/02 COM8'LET C 11/01/83 HADDAM f1ECK 11/01/04 04/30/96 11/01/04 04/30/f36 40
- 6 I
HATCH 1 02/01/03 COMPLETE 04/01/04 11/31/06 61 f
HATCH 2 02/01/53 COMPLETE 04/01/04 11/31/06 91 INDIAN POIllT 2 10/01/04 03/31/86 10/01/04 CONFLETE
$6 INDIAN POIflT 3 04/01/04 COMFLETE O2/01/04 COMPLETC NEWAUNCE O2/01/04 06/30/07 02/01/04 06/30/07
- 1 t1 LACROSSE 04/01/04 COf1PLETE 03/01/02 COMPLETE 07/01/03 l
MAINE YANMEE O2/01/03 COMFLETE 09/01/02 COMPLETC 02/01/03 11/01/03 MILLSTONE 1 11/01/05 12/31/07 11/01/05 12/31/07
- 6
$6
(~
I
)
Page No.
3 03/04/e5 1,
1979 AFFEllDIX R STATUS FOR PLANTS LICEN3ED PRIOR TO JAN.
50.40 FACILITY DATE ALT.
.DATE ALT.
DATE 50.4G DATE FIRE NAME 41 GHUTDOWN SHUTDOWN TECHNICAL PROTCCTION SYSTEM SYSTEM S/B EXEMPTION MODS Af' PROVED COMPLETE ISSUED COMPLETE MILLSTONE 2 UNDER REVIEW 12/31/D7 UNDER REVIEW 12/31/07 16 46 MONTICELLO 12/01/03 COMFLETE 06/01/03 COMFLETE TJ11JC MILE PT 1 O!/01/03 COMFLETE 03/01/03 COMPLETE
' NORTH ANNA 1 11/01/02 COMPLETE NO RPOUCCT COMPLETE NORTH ANNA 2 11/01/G2 06/30/96 NO REQUEST 06/30/06 57 47 OCONEE 1 04/01/63 COMFLETE 12/01/84 COMPLETE OCONCE 2 04/01/03 CONFLETE 12/01/04 COMFLETE OCONEE 3 04/01/63 COMFLETE 12/01/94 COMFLETC 9
11/10/92 10'31/06 12/17/02 10/01/06 h
OYSTER CREEE 81 41 o
PALISADES 05/01/03 CONFLETC 02/01/83 COMPLETE
(
PEACH EDTTOh 2 05/01/84 02/01/07 01/01/03 CONFLCIE
$2 FEACH LOTTOM 3 05/01/84 COMPLETE 01/01/03 CCMFLETE l
PILGRIM
!!/01/G3 11/01/86 11/01/81 11/31/06 46 12/01/04 86 l
07/03/85 POINT DEACH 1 07/03/05 12/31/86 07/03/05 12/31/06
- S 46 POINT BEACH 2 07/03/03 12/31/06 07/03/05 12/31/06 86 46 PRAIRIE ISLAND 1 f10NE SUDMIT.
COMPLETE 05/01/03 COMPLETE 01/01/04 07/01/04 PRAIRIE ISLAND 2 NONC SUDri!T.
COMFLETE 05/01/03 COMPLETE 01/01/04 07/01/G4 OUAD CITIES 1 12/30/02 04/01/06 06/01/03 06/!O/06 82
$2
~~
)
Pega No.
4 f
07/04/06 APPENDIX R STATUS FOR PLANTS LICENSED PRIOR TO JAN.
1, 1977
/
50.48
' FACILITY DATE ALT.
DATE ALT.
DATE 50.40 DATE FIRE NAME 44 SHUTDOWN SNUTDOWN TECHNICAL PROTECTION SYSTEM CYSTEM S/D EXEMPTION MODS APFROVED COMPLETE ISSUED COMPLETE OUAD CITIEC 2 12/20/92 04/30/06 06/01/03 06/00/07 42 82 RANCHO SECO flGNE SUDMIT.
COMFLETE 06/01/83 COMPLETE SALEM 1 05/01/03 COMPLETE 09/01/G2 COMFLETE 06/01/03 SAN ONOFRE 1 UNDER REVIEW 06/01/06 03/01/03 06/01/06 41 11 GT LUCIE 1 09/01/04 COMPLETE O2/01/05 COMFLC1E SURRY 1 11/01/82 07/01/86 11/01/02 07/31/86
$7 87 SURRY 2 11/01/G2 12/31/06 11/01/02 12/31/06 el t7 THI 1 06/01/04 Co/30/06 Oc> /01/ 04 06/30/86 46 86 TROJAN NONE SUDMIT.
12/31/07 12/01/02 12/31/06 47 07/10/83 67 4
I TURMEY POINT 3 04/01/84 12/31/06 03/01/84 12/31/06 l'
42 42 i
u TURMCY POINT 4 04/01/94 12/31/06 03/01/04 12/31/06 42 62 VEAMONT YANKEE 01/01/83 COMPLETE 05/01/02 COMPLETE i
YANKEE ROWE UNDER REVIEW COMPLETE OG/01/02 COMFLETE
' ZION 1 03/17/03 COMPLETE 03/07/03 10/30/06 07 ZION 2 03/17/03 cot 1FLETE 03/07/03 10/30/06
$7 l
m 3
Page tJo.
1 03/04/06 R STATUS FOR PLANTS LICEN3ED FRIOR TO JAtl.
1.
1979 AFFENDIX WHO HAVE COMFLETED DOTH FIRC PROTECTION MODIFICATIONS 9
)-
AND ALTERtJATIVE SAFE SHUTDOut4 SYSTC113 FACILITY ALT. SAFE FIRC F60TEC1.
SHUTDOWN MOD IFICA T IOf J NAME 18 GTATUS IS STATU3 ID CO'1PLETE COMFLETC ARKANSA51 1 COMPLEIC COMPLETC ARNANSA3 2 COMFLCTC COMPLETE ECAVLR VALLEY 1 COMPLETC COhi'L E T E I"!O I;OCI: POItJT COMF LETE COMPLCTE S
CALVCRT CLIFFG 1 cot 1PLFT L CGT1F LC1E h'
CALVERT CLIFFS 2 COMPLETE COMF 'LE I C D.C.
COOE 1 COMF LETE COf tl LETE 0
f D.C.
COOK 2 cot 1PLETE CCttrLCTC 3
DUANE ARNOLO COMPLETE COtif'LC TE i
FORT C6LHOUN COMPLETE COrif LCTC H B RODINSOf4 2 COMPLETE COMPLETC INDIAN FOINT 3 cot 1PLCTC COMFLETC l
LACROSSE COM"LEiC COMTLiTC Malt 1E YAFFEC COMPLCTC COMPLETC MotJT ICCLLO COf1PLETC CONTLEIC NINC MILE PT 1 cot 1PLE TC COMPLETC NORTH ANtJA 1 CUMf-LCTC cot 1F LCT C DCOtJEE 1 COMF LCTC cot 1rLC TC OCOtiCC 2 CUMPLETE COMPLCIC OCOtJEE O COMPLETE COtirLETE FALISADES COMFLETE Curif LCTC PEfCH DDTTOM 3 COMPLCTC COMTLCiC PRAIR!C ISLAND 1 COMPLETC COlil>LE I C t
ve g
~
+
,o
)
Paget No.
.2 03/04/G6 APFENDIX R STf4TU3 FOR PLANTS LICENSED PRIOR TO 2AN.
1, 1979 WHO HAVE cot 1FLETED DOTH FInt PROTECT ION 110DIFICATIONS AND ALTERrtATIVE SAFE SHUTDOWN SYGTEt15 FACILITY ALT. SAFE F I f,E Ff 40 T ECT.
3HUTDOWN MODIFICAT10t4 NAriE #
GTATUG IS STATUS 13 cot 1PLET C COMPLETC FR/4If?IC ISLAND 2 COrdFLE.T E COhrLCTC F:ANCHO SECD cot 1PL ETE COMPLEIC CONFLETE CUf17 'L E TC CALE!1 1 ST LUCIE 1 cot 1PLCTE COMPLETE VEF NONT
't' A' S 51F CO!1F 'LET E COf tf I C1C YAhhf!E PUNE COMPLETE COMFtf?it 8
av F
Pace f4a.
1 03/04/l!6 APPCflDIX R DTATU3 FOR PLANTG LICENSCD F RIOT < TO J AN.
1, l'?77
)
COMrLCTION STATU3 OF ALTERf4 ATE GNUT00Wil OYSTCt1C 4
FACILITY DATC ALT.
IF M3T NANC tt CHUT DCWf 4 CONFLCTC.
SYGTEM S/14 FOOTf10TC COf tPLCit ARVANGAL 1 COfffLCiC
}
AGt:AttI A3 2 CCMFLCTC h
1CAVEh VALLCY 1 CC"1F LCT C Blu PCCt: l'OI!1T COrif LC TI:
CALVCET CLIrr._ 1 COMFLCfC CALVCPT CLIfTG 2 CUf 1H.01 C CR f C TAL F I'Kf. 7 CONit t il D.C.
COG) 1 CUMr I.CT F i
D.C.
CODE 2 COMPLETE l
t CUANC,Er10LD CDMT LI:11.'
I FORT CALHOUf1 COMPLCTC i
I H D FDDINCGN 7 Cf]I1F LC I C f
HATCH 1 cot 1rLC T C i
HATCH C CurIPLctC IflDI AN f Of f4T 3 LOMTLCTC LAci<OG3C COllrLCTC f
f1AlllC Yarn.CC COMPLCfC MOrf f !CCLLO CortiLCTC filric N TL C r T !
COMrLCTC fiOrsTH ArtfJA 1 COMFLCTC OC0f4CC 1 COrif LIJIC OCOf4LC 2 COfir LC TL OCOritC 3 COMrLCTC
Faga tio.
2 1979
- Y AFPLNDIX h OTATU3 FOR PLAtJTG LICCtJGED FRIOR TO J Atl.
1, COMFLCTIOff STATUS OF ALTCRf1 ATE SHUTDOWt1 SYGTCtH FACILITY DATE ALT.
IF NOT NAtlC ff CHuiDOWT4 COMFLCTC.
GYSTCM S/D FOO Tf40TC cot:PLETE FALISADCC COf1PLETC FCACH COTTott 3 COM)LCTE F T' A f fs I E l'1LAf1D 1 COMPLETE FRA!RIL IEt.A::D 2 COMfLCTC RAfJCHO ECCO COMPLCTC DALC r1 1 cot 1FLETE GT LUCIL 2 COMPLCfL VCr MCtJT Yard CIl cot 1PLCTC YANICC FOUC CO*1PLCIC Z IUtl 1 Col tFLC IC ZIOll 2 COtif LE T E 6
l G j i Jt J,1 04/30/06 t1 GAf4 Of4'Xht 1 06/01/06
- 1 FARLCY t 10/01/06 41 h
i OYSTCA CCCCF 10/01/06 81 F1TEFAf ff!CK 04/06/07 81 FCWAUf JL C 96/90/07 41 UUAD CITICG 1 04/01/06 82 CUAD CITACG 2 04/30/06 82 TURI CY POf fli 0 12/01/06 8:
TUfft:CY PO! fit 4 12/21/U6 82 FCACH DOTTOM 2 02/01/07 82 Di CGDtti 2 06/30/07 82 DACLDCtl 3 06/30/07 92
e-
=
i Page IJo.
3 03/04/06 AIPEf4 DIX R CTATUS F0F: I LAtlTS LICCICCD FRIOR TO JAtl.
1, 1977 CDNF 1 CT JON STATUS OF AL TEPr! ATE SHUTDOWri SYSTCMS FACILITY DATE ALT.
IF NOT t!A M C tt CHUTLOWT1
- COMPLETE, SYSTCtl S/D FOOT f10T C COr1FLCT C Er3WrJG FChRY Z 12/27/00
$2 IllDIAN FOIt:T 2 01/01/06 46 FADDAT1 t{CL v4/50/US
$6 TNI 1 06/30/06 46
/
F ILONIt1 11/31/05 96 POltlT ECACH 1 12/31/06 46 FOlt1T DEACH 2 12/31/06 s ta 1
CCOT Efi CTATIOt1 03/31/117 46 i
MILLOTONC 1 12/',1/07 (6
t 111LLSTOf1C 2 10/71/07 e6 i
l
[J<tJN ~ W I CI: 1 12/01/07 46 I FFJtlGWICl; 2 06/36/90 46 t
ft]rTil ANNA 2 06/M /06 87 LURRY !
o'7/01/06 87
{
4 TUtiRY 2 12/31'06 87 FORT GT VRA!il OO/01 e 07 87 TPUJAtJ 12/31/37 t
i DAV!G-0ESCC 12/31/I'?
47 LROWfC FEPRV 3 12/20/E 7 89 DROWil!3 FERRY 1 12/20/08
- 9
pmw v
r
)
Pcgo tio.
1 0:/04/0h APPCt!Di t R GTATUG FOR PLA14TG LICENCED PRIOR TO JAN.
1, 1777 COMPLETION STATUS OF FIRC PROTECTION MODIFICATIONG
}
FACILITY DATE FIRC IF tlOT NAt1C n PROTCCTION
- COMPLETE, MODIFICATIOt1 FOOTriOTC S/D COf1PLETE
\\
AV AN3AG 1 COMPLETC A$.t.AftSA9 COMFLCTU LEAVCR VALLCY 1 COriPLCTC 1110 TsOll' POINT COMILCTC CALVCRT CL!rrS 1 COMPLCTC CALVEPT CLIFFS 2 CGhrLETC D.C.
COO) 2 CCftPLCTC D.C.
CO(9. 2 cot 1T LCI C CU/.NE AT;iJOLD COMTLCTC FAfiLEY 1 CD;1PLCTC
)
FOR7 C(LHOUN COMt'LC1E r
i 54 11 f 0 D I N'.iO P1 2 COMiLCTC ItJDI Afl F 0114T 2 COMrLC1C i
l Itin! AU F Ollif 3 COtitLC1C l
COMI'LETC LAch03CE MAltlE YANFCC COMF'LC TC MOtiTICCLLO COMFLCTC t
N!flE MILE PT 1 cot 1PLE T C I
tJORTH AtatJA 1 cot 1PLC f C OCONCC 1 COMILCTC OCOtlCC C COMt'LCTC OCOfJCC 3 COMPLETC PAL!GADCG COMrLETC
i y
Pago Na, 2
h GI ATUS FOR PLAtJTS LICENSED FRIOR TO JAN.
1, 1977 03/04/B6
.AFPCNDIX COMPLE FIOt1 STATUS OF FIRE PROTEC~ !ON MODIFICATIOt4S 0
DATE FIRE 15 Ji FACILITV PRJTECTION CON-LETE.
NAMC M f10DIF IC AT IOt1 FOOT f JOTC
$/D COMPLETE FEACH dol' TOM 2 CO!1PLETE FEACH bt' T T O!1 3 COttPLETE F R Alfi!E I HL hf 40 1 CONFLETC PRA1RIC IL' LAND 2 C0f1PLETE hANCH3 SECD COtTLElE COMF LE TC 2
ftLEh 1 5T LUCIE 1 COMFtETE a
VERT 10NT YANF EE cot 1Ft ET E h
YANhEE ROUE CCtPLE T E 41
[
CRYGTAL RIVER 3 03/31/b6 I
04/70/06
- 1 CINNA 11 f
UhN CliorFF 1 00<01/0$
$1 OYSTER CFEEK IG/31/06 s1 e
11/31/95 HATCH 1 t
81 11/01/06 HATCH 2 2
tEWAUNEC Ot;/50/e7 OUAD CITIEG 1 06/30/06 42
- 2 TUHFCY Politi 3 12/31/06 82 TURl'EY PO!!1T 4 12/01/06 02 DHLSDCN 2 0L/30/07 92 06/00/07 DREGDCfi 3 82 OUAD CITICG 2 06/30/07 82 PROWNC FCFinY 2 12/20/00 86 HADDAM tlCCM 04/30/06 t
t Page No.
3' 03/04'G6 1,
1979 APPENDIX R GTATUS FOR PLAT 4TS LICENSED.FRIOR TO JAN.
COMPLCTION STATU3 OF FIRE FROTECTION MODIFICATI0tJS f*ACILITY DATE FIRE IF NO1 PROTECTION CDt1PLET E.
NAME #
MODIFICATION FOOTHOT E S/D COMPLETE 86 TMI 1 06/30/86 PILGRIM 11/31/86
- 6 POINT SCACH 1 12/31/H6
$6 POINT DEACH 2 12/31/06 86 MILLSTOriE I 12/31/G7
- 6 MILLSTONE 2 12/31/07 86 DRUtJ3 WICK 1 12/31/0?
th DRUNSWICK 2 06/30/90 lb fJORTH ANNA 2 06/30/06 47
(
- ?
SURRY 1 07/31/06 g
y 10/30/06
- ?
ZION 1
$7 10/30/06 ZIOtJ 2 COOPLH STAItOtl 11/31/06
$7 I
97 SURRY 2 12/31/06 TROJAN 12/31/06 97 FORT ST VRAIN 00/31/07 97 97 DAVIS-PEGSE 12/31/09 s
40 F1TZPATRICK 10/31/06 8?
Dh0WN3 FERRY 3 1;/20/07 49 DROWNS FERRY 1 12/20/0?
n
, =
~
.=a 1
_, e.,
1 COMPLETION SCHEDULE FOR ALTERNATE SHUTDOWN SYSTEMS (FOR PLANTS LICENSED PRIOR TO JANUARY 1, 1979.)
=
67 66 N ',:
my I>...
ev<,6 x -:'
COMPLETE v
v-s3
$.::.5, l.x $X, C. s, s2 m.:.
v,<
y
.-h s.
s..,.,
- y...,
s.:..
NOT COMPLE TE se- -
v..s,
'$$v-:'
($:S Ms.(
...,v.
v 4..
N.4 y
'N..v,;
- t..v
..v.
sy-X.
v> '
s..-
v,:
v.m s
51 v+
v.-
v $.
5:8
?:S.
s.
5 M+>-
- $.$.v ee-
.sv ss..
vv sv.-
+.v
..v<
.s h svi
.s-lvg':
- $.$y 34 s +-
y.
U1 Xy:,,
.gv.
- v..,.y v.
s,v.
s
.::.v s.
v xy s.,.,+.
.sv s., s.v v..->
. x-4.
.s
-s.v v
v.+
g.sv v
..v g.:.
v.v v.v.-
s.s.,
m.
s +<-
xx.
v.-
,v.v
- s..,
g ss
- 5..x. l s.-
i q
- s. cN.-
{+.v X,v s.v I
v
.v ve lg I
O
.,i, v+\\,.
v.,.
s...>.e..
x l
..v.j,
- v..;c.
- v. +++-
g.
(
v,v,/
v.e.
v.N
.f.
gg-
<sv,
.v
.X.;v.
.y
,N s =,*
v.,s,N,-
s=.#..I
.f N 4..m g.,
y s.
%y y
.,,g
., pg s.s
'E s'N.N c,
.N v.+<-
v.v.,.
v..v s.v v*v.
.N g fp
.Q
.y
.,o
~. y+f.
.f+g
.vg D
=.y gj.
Ox.
.N v.
vy X-<
Z
'N.:eN..,.;
v.v.-
v,.v..
,s..,
v ss-c
.sv.
. v,*
, pp;
..s:.
v c.s
- s.,N v.x. -
..v,;
v v..
3.
.s s N
.s-s
.N
,..s%
y.y.
x.NNN 16
. +,
.ss
-u.
.fs
.v
..s,
.vh
.-.s
- v.. '
..-X
. h.
.v$.s Nsv.
.-u
.v.s c...
- c. :,
Nv:s;.s.
..v.
.ve
" N.s.
.ve.
1
.v.s vy
- e...
N.-
.y:...
..v.
.vc.,.
X.s.
L.s..
.s..
..s
.v e.-h e.v.
l gg..
s E..s%
.sv.
,.N;Q
.s y
.vN k..
e.-
S.
.v.
.n :-- v.
-s
.s 2..
.eN:s.
4
.,sc,
..9.,
up,
- q. s.
v c.,
,....e.. -
..s
.w i
v sg
.v.
.-<.s l
.u'.N.
- u..
.sss
- c.N
.s;.s O
.*N.*
.-c4
.N
- am
._%_.*1.
.s
- g m*#
g m
e 1988 1987 1988 1989 1990 YEARS 1
,n M
.. e.
1 I
COMPLETION SCHEDULE FOR APPENDIX R FIRE PROTECTION MODIFICATIONS (FOR PLANTS LICENSED PRIOR TO JANUARY 1, 1979.)
1.
67 66 l
m.<,.s
.v.v. -
- +X$-l 63
- O$
0-
- S+:
<-X-A COMPLETE 62
+:?
w-e.-
S.$.s$
US.;$
.s.
.y..-
. ~.s. -
NOT COMPLETE og-
.s.
./,..
0.. :..-
(S...o
+: +-
+ + -
., y:.
5,4
.. y
,s.-
.s,.-
.s...
.s,.,.
..:s,
.s
..s.<
...y-s.,.-.. y.
as-
- s. ;
.:../
....+
s..-
+. -
s -<
1 s..+..,
s r,,
y.,.-
s.,,.4..
F,,..../..
.~.
.s.
t.
,,s..
s..
.., +
... s.
..,s......
<.s-
.~,
/.<.-
,.~n<
s,..s
~. - e.
,..y, u.<. -.,.e r.q. -
.. s.
s:.-
.es.
- s. y..ss..-
y,.y,
+,:
l.- s:
- s. s..,
- s. s.:..
s.,-c
.. y s....
+...s,.,.
s.
sy..
./ -
... s.:.
s...-
.s
%+.:
.~
s..-
..s -
....y.
- p..e s.
-.r.s..-
.s....
g3 3e.
3E
- N'$.-
6.::.35
.<S.
ss -
s.-
0:S
- .:8 3
- 35
- ':3 5.:,5, O..S.$
z
.c.3.:-
s..s-
.s
.s I....,.../.,...
.s.,...
so.
..s s,.,
.s
. s....
~.
, s.
,2 s.-
..s-ye s..<..-
s..s.:~.-
~.y.
..s.s
~
.. ~.
.....s
- s.....
... s.
,9 s.,.......,
+...
. s..
.,.s. -
+;
,,. ;. S
..,.y O.
.s.
.r-
.,..e,
.s.
+..+
.s.
sy-
,.s.,,
- s..
....- o
..s,
..s. ~
c a
198s 1987 1988 1989 1990 YEARS
p.
._..........T.,...
~ ~~' ~
s
/
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASH 6NGTON, D. C. 30005 EDO PRINCIPAL CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL l
FROM:
DUE: 03/07/C6 EDO CONTROL: 001453 DOC DT: 07/20/86 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE j
FINAL. RFPLY:
TZ:
STELLO h
FOR SIGNATURE OF:
- PRIORITY **
SECY NO:
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR v
DESC:
ROUTINO:
P STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTATION STELLO OF APPEND 1X R TO 10 CFR 50 (SECY-85-306)
ROE REHM DATE: 02/24/06 SNIEZEK ASS 10NED TO: NRR CONTACTt DFNTnN MINOGUE TAYLOR OCUNNINOHAM SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKG:
A6 NRR RECEIVED:
2/24/86 ACTION:
]W"-
I NRR ROUTING:
DENTON/ElSENHUT PPAS t
M0558URG x
L o
y(
t q,,
's ap
)
8 5
r 7
4 4
{y.
~
UNITED STATES
/
NUCl. EAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
WA5MINGTON. D.C. 30006 February 70, 1986 omes or Tus commiss'owan MEMORANDUM FOR:
Victor Stello, Jr.
Acting Executive Director for Operations FRON:
James K. Asselstine m
SUBJECT:
SECY-85-3C6 - STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE IMPLFFFf:TATI0li 0F APPENDIX R TO 10 CFR 50 in the attached vote sheet, Comissioner Zech states that he hes been told that many licensees have taken advantage of the new interpretations contained in SECY-85-306 and that they have used them to develop their fire protection programs.
I would appreciate learning which licensees are
.already using the "new interpretations." I would also like to know how any such use of the new interpretations will affect the compliance schedules contained in the E00 remorandum to the Comissier dated Decerter 26, 1985 regarding the status of implementation of Appendix R.
Finally, I would like to know how such use is consistent with repeater assurerces by the staff that all fire protection SERs, including those for plants licensed after January 1,1979, have been based on Generic Letter 83-33 or the existing Branch Technical Position.
cc: Chairnan Palladino Comissioner Roberts RM'd off. tpo Time.....?. N.- f 6 8838...&.-.M Comissioner Bernthal
,,1,,,,
Comissioner Zech OPE OGC SECY
(,f 0Njd A
E DO --- 001 # S 3
NOTATION VOTE RESPONSE SHEET T0:
SAMuE4 J. CHILK, SECRETARY OF THE COMMISSION FROM:
COMMISSIONER ZECH
SUBJECT:
SECY-85-306 - STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF APPENDIX R TO 10 CFR 50 APPROVED X (w/co='at5)
DISAPPROVED ABSTAIN NOT PARTICIPATING.
REQUEST DISCUSSION COMMENTS:
See attached coments.
k w..?ed h.
siuna, v l
YES NO l'/$<f
~
Entered on "A
- Q
/
/
gggg SECRETARIAT NOTE:
PLEASE ALSO RESPOND TO AND/OR COMMENT ON OGC/0PE MEMORANDUM IF ONE HAS BEEN ISSUED ON THIS PAPER.
NRC-SECY FORM DEc. 80 l
Commissioner Each's comments on SECY 85-306 It is clear from the history associated with Appendix R that there has been considerable confusion in the industry, and to some extent the ctaff, on the exact meaning of all the fire protection requirements.
Generic letters have been issued; task forces, workshops, and training sessions have been conducted; inspections have been completed; and, differing professional opinions have been submitted cnd resolved.
Many of these past actions became part of a cooperative cffort between the staff and industry to resolve the outstanding Appendix R issues.
The result of this effort is the Generic Letter, interpretations, and question and answer documents proposed by the ctaff in SECY-85-306.
I believe these documents will help clarify and expedite final implementation of the fire protection requirements.
Consequently, subject to the recommendations for improvement made by OGC in its october 24, 1985 meno, I approve publication of the generic letter.
I do not agree with several of the points raised by Commissioner Asselstine in COMJA-86-4.
I do not believe that the staff's approach' will, in the end, make it more difficult for a fire protection inspector to conduct his job.
Eventually, all fire protection program requirements should be contained in the plant's FSAR which will provide a solid starting point to determine a plant's compliance with Appendix R.
The proposed Ceneric Letter clearly states the documentation that will be required and expected by the NRC concerning licensee evaluations.
In addition, this documentation is required to be readily retrievable.
I also believe that across the board, the nuclear industry, when compared to other industries, is required to install and implement one cf the most rigorous and demanding fire protection programs in the country.
Although there may be a few individual definitions or interpraations that can be debated as to whether or not they meet generally accepted industry codes, the overall program that the NRC requires is clearly above average.
The proposed Generic Letter may allow a licensee to make some changes to its fire protection program
'via the 50.59 process, but it also states that any changes made to the fire protection program that may adversely affect the plant's ability to achieve and maintain safe shutdown in the event of a fire would ctill need prior NRC approval.
Consequently, we maintain control of major changes and continue to fulfill our responsibility to protect the public health and safety.
As a separate matter, I do not share my colleague's concern over the technical adequacy of the proposed documents.
The staff has spent considerable time conducting analyses and developing these documents for the precise purpose of providing guidance on acceptable technical cnd procedural responses.
Although some DPos were submitted, I an informed that the concerned individuals are not appealing the agency resolution of those DFOs.
131th regard to the "analysisa provided by the EDO to Commissioner Asselstine on November 18, 1985, it is my impression that the EDO did not intend this to be a backfit analysis.
It is my understanding that Ctaff determined that these interpretations which, if a licensee so
F l
ch'oose3 to implement thca, cre 1000 restrictivo th n curr:nt
- ~..
requirement 3, and thcraf:ro o backfit Cnaly310 10 n:t r quired.
However, the EDO did discuss some of the backfit considerations in order to provide the Commission information.
I would certainly agree with Commissioner Asseletine that if this analysis was supposed to I
suffice as a backfit analysis, it would require significant improvement.
I agree that the proposed fire protection enforcement policy needs some improvement. -It does not seen appropriate that the NRC should be restricted to only a severity III, IV or V violation unless there was an actual fire.
After reviewing the reactor operation requirements in our enforcement policy, it seems that existing enforcement policy guidance for a severity level one violation would require an actual concurrent fire, but not for a severity level two violation.
The proposed fire protection regulations require an actual concurrent fire before either a severity level I or II violation can be imposed.
I do not see why the fire protection regulations need to be more restrictive in this regard than the general enforcement policy.
Consequently, for purposes of the fire protection enforcement policy, I recommend that the staff propose additional and/or different guidance on when a severity level two violation is appropriate.
Lastly, I believe that the information contained in SECY-85-306 is,.
for the most part, already widely known throughout the industry as a result of the training sessions, workshops, and other staff interactions.
Consequently, I as told that many licensees have taken advantage of this information and used it to develop their fire protection programs.
As a result, this information will be applied by and benefit more than just those few plants who have not yet fully implemented Appendix R.
(.
.a u.
UNITED STATES
.[
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION a
i l
was6HNGTON, O. C. 20666 5
gy MEMORANDIN FOR: Comissioner Asselstine tw FROM:
Victor Stello, Jr.
Acting Executive Director for Operations SECY 85-306 - STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE
SUBJECT:
IMPLEMENTATION OF APPENDIX R TO 10 CFR 50 By memorandum dated February 20, 1986, you requested the following information reoarding SECY 85-306:
Which licensees are using the "new interpretations"?
1.
How will any such use of the new interpretations affect the 2.
compliance schedules contained in the E00 memorandum to the Commission dated December 26, 19857 How is such use of the new interpretations consistent with repeated l
3.
assurances by the staff that all fire protection SERs, includinq those for plants Ifeensed after January 1,1979, have been based on Generic Letter 83-33 or the existing Rranch Technical Position?
Throuch regional workshops and in Generic Letter (GL) 85-01 industry was In both the informed of the "new interpretations" concerning Appendix R.
f regional workshops and in GL 85-01 the industry was informed that the information concerning the new interpretations was draft and would not The following is a list of plants become final until Comission approval.
which have requested staff evaluation of their fire protection program based on the interpretations contained in SECY 85-306:
F 1.
Indian Point Unit 3 2.
Maine Yankee i
3.
Oyster Creek 4.
Tro.ian l
5.
San Onofre Units 1, 2 and 3 6.
Susquehanna Units 1 and 2 p
With the exception of Maine Yankee, the staff is holding the SERs on the above plants in abeyance until the Comission't final vote on SECY 85-306.
CONTACT:
John Stang, NRR l
x28484
t
)
Commissioner Asselstine !
To the best of the staff's knowledge, the use of the new interpretations has not affected compliance schedules. However, compliance schedules for l
plant modifications have chanced slightly since the EDO memorandum to the Comission dated December 26, 1985. The fire protection modification schedule has improved by three additional plants beino completed in 1986 I
rather than 1987. Three plants have pushed back their completion schedule for alternative shutdown systems from 1986 to 1987. Enclosures 1 through 7 contain graphs and tables showing updated completion schedules for all plants licensed prior to January 1,1979 as of March 1,1986.
h Finally, as indicated above the staff is holding all SERs concerning evaluations of the new interpretations :ontained in SECY 85-306 until Comission approval of SECY 85-306. To date with the exceotion of Maine Yankee all exemptions issued concerning issues covered in GL 83-33 have been based on GL 83-33 and not the new interpretations contained in SECY 85-306.
In the case of Maine Yankee, should the Comission decide that the new interpretations are not to be used but rather the guidance of GL 83-33 the staff will reprocess the affected issues as exemptions. For all plants
-licensed after January 1,1979 fire orotection SERs are based on the SRP and all deviations from the SRP are revie g ng jus i i d in the SER.
Victor Stello Victor Stello, Jr.
1 Acting Executive Director for Operations 1
i
Enclosures:
1.
Footnotes 2.
Fire Protection Status for Plants Licensed Prior to January 1, 1979 3.
Plants with all Appendix R Modifications Complete 4
Completion Status of Alternate Shutdown Systems 5.
Completion Status of Fire Protection Modifications Bar Chart of Completion Status for Alternate Shutdown Systems 6.
7.
Bar Chart of Completion Status for Fire Protection Modifications cc: Chairman Palladino DISTRIRUTION Comissioner Roberts Central File OCA (3)
Comissioner Bernthal NRC PDR w/cy of incoming SECY(3)
Commissioner Zech Local PDR w/cy of incoming VStello SECY EDO #001453 PPAS (ED0#001453)
OPE EDO Reading w/cy of incoming OGC H. Denton/0. Eisenhut R. Bernero PD#1 Peading JStang w/cy of incoming (w/cy of incoming)
CJamerson OELD FMiraglia PD#1 Green Ticket File TNovak
- SEE PREVIOUS PAGE FOR CONCURRENCE DBL:PDf1*
DRL:PD#1*
DBL:PD#1*
DRL:DD*
DRL:DIR*
CJamerson JStang:jg JZwolinski RHouston RBernero 03/04/86 03/04/86 03/04/86 03/04/86 03/04/86 NRP.:DD NRR:DIR EDO:A/DIR DEisenhut HDenton VStello 1 J 86
/
/86
/ / 86
FOOTNOTES The footnotes below will aid you in reviewing the following charts and graphs:
- 1 50.48 Schedular Extensions Exemption Granted
- 2 50.48 Schedular Extension, Exemption Requested and Under Review by NRR
- 6 Plants Following the 50.48 Schedule for Completion of F.P. Mods and Alt. SD SYS
- 7 Plants Operating in Ncncompliance of the 50.40 Schedule with Approved Compensatory Measures
- 9 Plants in Outage Will Not Restart Until Modifications Complete
~
s
- .g
- 4 e
s.
' s
\\
'\\
\\
\\
\\
s g_
\\
.. _.. _ _ _.. _. ~. _ _.. _.... _ _ _. - _ _, _ _ _. _ _,,,,.. _ _
__A-..,._...,
~
,- y n--
.cu..=m.m -
~..-....
.. y y.g. - -
... 7:
2 I :"
- i% * '
e :_.-4; -
'..L..
c.
APPE.KDIX R A.LTERNATE' ' SHUTDOWN SYSTEMS COMPLETION STATUS FDR PLANTS LICENSED PRIOR TO JANUARY 1,
1979.
ALTERMTE SHUTDOWN SYSTEMS STATUS SCHEDULAR EXEMPTION GRANTED X
ss-SCHEDULAR EXEMPTION UNDER REVIEW N5b IN OUTAGE: RESTART AFTER MODS. COMPLETE so.
OPERATING UNDER NOM-COMPLIANCE A.C.M..
I 2s-COMPLETE 0
COMPLYING WITH 50.48 SCHEDULE 4O 20-x h 1s--
z 10-m e
m 3,
s --
)
~
n
- l J
i MARCH 1986 l
- A.C.M. - APPROVED COMPENSATORY MEASURES
4 Enclostre 2 i
APPENDIX R
L STATUS OF FIRE PROTECTION MODIFICATIONS r
FOR PLANTS LICENSED PRIOR TO JANUARY 1,
1979.
L
' FIRE PROTECTION STATUS SCHEDULAR EXEMPTION GRANTED 35- -
r j
N SCHEDULAR EXEMPTION UNDER REVIEW COMPLYING WITH 50.48 SCHEDULE 30-i OPERATING UNDER NON-COMPUANCE A.C.M.*
f COMPLETE g,,
IN OUTAGE: RESTART AFTER MODS. COMPLETE f
1 10-i l
o io--
. = =
h 5
f O*
=
55
/ = =
- E i
=
O l
MARCH 1986
- APPROVED COMPENSATORY MEASURES
fW"
~
??
. Enclosure 2
)
P No.
1 03/04/86 APPENDIX R STATUS FOR PLANTS LICENSED PRIOR TO JAN.
1, 1979 50.48 FACILITY DATE ALT..
DATE ALT.
DATE 50.48 DATE FIRE NAME #
SHUTDOWN SHUTDOWN TECHNICAL PROTECTION SYSTEM SYSTEM S/D EXEMPTION MODS APPROVED COMPLETE ISSUED COMPLETE ARKANSAS 1 05/01/83 COMPLETE 03/01/f COMPLETE
' ARKANSAS 2 05/01/93
-COMPLETE 03/01/83 COMPLETE BEAVER VALLEY 1 01/01/83 COMPLETE 03/01/03 COMPLETE 08/01/84 BIG ROCK POINT 01/01/83 CCMPLETE 04/01/82 COMPLETE 03/01/83 03/01/04 03/01/S5 EROWNS FERRY 1 10/01/83 12/20/89 02/01/83 12/20/89 49
$9 h
BROWNS FERRY 2 10/01/83 12/20/88 02/01/83
'12/20/88 42 12 l
f LROWNS FERRY 3 10/01/93 12/20/87 02/01/03 12/20/87 49 19 1
h BRUNSlJICK 1 UNDER REVIEW 12/31/89 UNDER REVIEW 12/31/89 46 16 BRUNS 4ICK 2 UNDER REVIEW 06/30/90 UNDER REVIEW 06/30/90
$6
$6 l
CALVERT CLIFFS 1 09/01/82 COMPLETE 08/01/02 COMPLETE 03/01/84 CALVERT CLIFFS 2 09/01/82 COMPLETE 08/01/82 COMPLETE 03/01/94 COOPER STATION 04/01/84 03/31/87 07/01/83 11/31/86
- 7
$6
. CRYSTAL RIVER 3 01/01/83 COMPLETE NO REQUEST 03/31/86
- 1 D.C.
COOK 1 09/01/83 COMPLETE NO REOUEST COMPLETE D.C.
COOK 2 09/01/83 COMPLETE NO REQUEST COMPLETE DAVIS-DESSE 06/01/82 12/31/89 11/01/82 12/31/89
- 7 08/01/84
- 7 DRESCEN 2 01/01/83 06/30/87 02/01/83 06/30/87 42
- 2
,y y
_s_m-..
k e g-no.
2 03/04/66 ' AFPET; DIX R ST ATUS FOR PLANTS LICENSED PRIOR TO J AN.
1, 1979 50.48 FACILITY DATE ALT.
DATE ALT.
DATE 50.48 DATE FIRE.
NAME #
SHUTDOWN SHUTDOWN TECHNICAL PROTECTION SYSTEM SYSTEM S/B EXEMPTION MODS APPROVED COMPLETE ISSUED COMPLETE
.DRESDEN 3 01/01/83 06/30/87 02/01/03 06/30/07
$2 42 DUANE ARNOLD 01/01/83 cot 1FLETE 09/01/83 COMFLETE
~
FARLEY.1 08/01/83 10/01/96 12/01/63 COMPLETE 61 p.
FIT 2 PATRICK 04/01/84 04/30/87 02/01/84 10/31/86
$O 41 FORT CALHOUN 08/01/82 COMPLETE NO REQUEST COMPLETE FORT ST VRAIN NONE SUBMITT 08/31/87 NO REOUEST 08/31/07 9'
)
GINNA 02/01/e5 04/30/86 NO REQUEST 04/30/86
- 1
.H B ROBINSON 2 08/01/84 COMPLETE 11/01/82 COMFLETE 9
11/01/83 i
k HADDAM NECK 11/01/84 04/30/86 11/01/84 04/30/86 46 46 I
HATCH 1 02/01/93 COMPLETE 04/01/84 11/01/06 41 l
i HATCH 2 02/01/83 COMPLETE 04/01/84 11/31/86 11 I
INDIAN POINT 2 10/01/84 03/31/86 10/01/84 COMPLETE 46 INDIAN POINT 3 04/01/84 COMPLETE O2/01/84 COMPLETE KEWAUNEE O2/01/84 06/30/87 02/01/04 06/30/87
- 1
- 1 LACROSSE 04/01/84 cot 1PLETC 03/01/82 COMPLETE 07/01/83 MAINE YANMEE O2/01/83 COMPLETE 08/01/82 COMPLETE O2/01/03 11/01/03 MILLSTONE 1 11/01/85 12/31/87 11/01/85 12/31/87 l
96
- 6
1 P1ge Nr.
v 03/04/86 1.
1979 AFFEMDIX R STATUS FOR PLANTS LICENSED PRIOR TO JAN.
50.48 FACILITY DATE ALT.
DATE ALT.
DATE 50.48 DATE FIRE w
NAME 4t SHUTDOWN SHUTDOWN T ECHillC AL PROTECTION SYSTEM SYSTEM S/B EXEMPTION MODS APPROVED COMPLETE ISSUED COMPLETE MILLSTOME 2 UNDER REVIEW 12/31/87 UNDER REVIEW 12/31/07 46
- 6 MONTICELLO 12/01/83 COMFLETE 06/01/d3 COMPLETE NINE MILE PT 1 03/01/83 COMPLETE 03/01/83 COMPLETE NORTH ANNA 1-11/01/02 COMPLETE NO REQUEST COMPLETE i
NORTH' ANNA 2 11/01/82
'06/30/86 NO REQUEST 06/30/06
- 7
- 7 g
?
OCONEE 1 04/01/83 CCMPLETE 12/01/84 COMPLETE OCCNEE 2 04/01/93 COMFLETE 12/01/84 COMPLETC OCONEE 3 04/01/93 cot 1PLETE 12/01/94 COMPLETE OYSTER CREEK 11/18/82 10/31/86 12/17/82 10/31/86
- 1 41
'?
PALISADES 05/01/83 COMFLETE O2/01/83 COMPL ETE i
PEACH BOTTOM 2 05/01/84 02/01/87 01/01/03 COMPLETE r
- 2 f
PEACH BOTTOM 3 05/01/84 COMPLETE 01/01/83 COMPLETE l
PILGRIM 11/01/83 11/31/86 11/01/81 11/31/86
- 6 12/01/84 36
}
07/03/85 POIt1T BEACH 1 07/03/85 12/31/86 07/03/85 12/31/86
- 6 36 POIt1T BEACH 2 07/03/85 12/01/86 07/03/85 12/31/86
- 6
- 6 PRAIRIE ISLAND 1 NONE SUBMIT.
COMPLETE 05/01/83 COMPLETE 01/01/84 07/01/84 FRAIRIE ISLAND 2
.NONE SUBMIT.
COMPLETE 05/01/83 COttPLETE 01/01/94 07/01/84 QUAD CITIES 1 12/30/82 04/01/86 06/01/93 06/30/96
- 2
$2
l
}-
.P-..g No.
4 APPENDIX R STATUS FOR PLANTS LICENSED FRIOR TO JAN.
1, 1977
'03/04/86 50.48 FACILITY DATE ALT.
DATE ALT.
DATE 50.48 DATE FIRE SHUTDOWN SHUTDOWtl TECHNICAL-PEOTECTION NAME 4 SYSTEM S/B EXEMPTION MODS SYSTEM-COMPLETE APFROVED COMPLETE ISSUED QUAD CITIES 2 12/30/82 04/30/86 06/01/03 06/30/87
- 2
)
- 2 RANCHO SECO NONE SUBMIT.
COMFLETE 06/01/83 COMPLETE 4
SALEM 1 05/01/83 COf1PLETE 09/01/82 cot 1FLETE 06/01/83
[
SAN ONOFRE 1 UtIDER REVIEW 06/01/86 03/01/03 06/01/86 41
- 1
[
ST LUCIE 1 09/01/84 COMPLETE O2/01/85 COMPLETE C
SURRY 1 11/01/82 07/01/86 11/01/02 07/31/86 e
- 7
$7 b'
i 11/01/82 12/31/86 11/01/82 12/31/86 SURRY 2 47 47 i
I 06/01/84 06/30/86 06/01/84 06/30/86
- 6 TMI 1
- 6 NONE SUDMIT.
12/31/87 12/01/82 12/31/86 t7 07/10/83 47 TROJAN i
TURKEY FOINT 3 04/01/84 12/3 /06 03/01/84 12/31/86
'i TURKEY POINT 4 04/01/84 12/31/86 03/01/84 12/31/86 42
- 2 VERMONT YANKEE 01/01/83 COMPLETE 05/01/82 COMPLETE YANKEE ROWE UNDER REVIEW COMPLETE 08/01/82 COMPLETE 03/17/83 COMPLETE 03/07/03 10/30/86
$7 ZION 1 ZION 2 03/17/83 COMPLETE 03/07/83 10/30/96
- 7 3
6
- [
f.
Pace No.
1 03/04/86 1.
1979 APFENDIX R STATUS FOR FLANTS LICENSED FRIOR TO JAN.
WHO HAVE COMPLETED BOTH FIRE PROTECTION MODIFICATIONS 1
AND ALTERNATIVE SAFE SHUTDOWN SYSTEMS ALT. SAFE FIRE PROTECT.
FACILITY MODIFICATION SHUTDOWN NAME tt STATUS IS STATUS IS COMPLETE COMPLETE COMPLETE COMPLETE ARKAN2AS 1 COMPLETE COMPLETE ARRAN5HS 2 BEAVER VALLEY 1 COMPLETE COMPLETE PIG ROCK POINT COMPLETE COMPLETE CALVERT CLIFFS 1 COMPLETE CONFLETE CALVERT CLIFFS 2 COMPLETE COMPLElE COMPLETE COMPLETE D.C.
COOK 1 9
i D.C.
COOK 2 COMPLETE COMPLETE e
COMPLETE COMPLETE
[
DUANE ARNOLD COMPLETE COMPLETE i
FORT CALHOUN COMPLETE COMPLETE H B F:OBINSON 2 INDIAN FOINT 3 COMPLETE COMPLETE COMPLETE COMFLETE LACRO3SE COMPLETE COMPLETE MAINE YANKEE COMPLETE COMPLETE MONTICELLO NINE MILE PT 1 COMPLETE COMPLETE i
NORTH ANNA 1 COMPLETE COMPLETE COMPLETE COMPLETE OCONEE 1 COMPLETE COMFLETE OCONEE 2 COMPLETE COMPLETE OCONEE 3 COMFLETE COMPLETE PALISADES PEACH BOTTOM 3 COMPLETE COMPLETE PRAIRIE ISLAND 1 COMPLETE COMPLETE
jgy.
s Page Na.
C 03/04/86 I
APPEND 1X R STATUS FOR PLANTS LICENSED FRIOR TO JAN.
1,-
1979 WHO HAVE COMPLETED BOTH FIRE PROTECTION MODIFICATIONS AND
)
ALTERNATIVE SAFE SHUTDOWN SYSTEMS FACILITY ALT. SAFE FIRE PROTECT.
NAME #
SHUTDOWN MODIFICATION STATUS IS STATUS IS COMFLCTE COMPLETE
' FPAIRIE ISLAND C COMPLETE COMPLETE RANCHO SECO COMPLETE COMPLET E COMPLETE COMPLETE f.
SALEM 1 ST'LUCIE 1 COMPLETE COMPLETE 9
VERMONT YANKEE COMPLETE COMPLETC YANKEE RONE COMPLETE COMPLCTE 1
I it t
J.
.e t
e e.
Enclosura 4 Page (40.
1 s
f.
03/04/86 APPENDIX R STATUS FOR PLANTG LICENSED PRIOR TO JAN.
1, 1979 g
COMPLETION STATUS OF ALTERNATE SHUTDOWN SYSTEMS FACILITY DATE ALT.
IF NOT NAME #
SHUTDOWN COMPLETE.
SYSTEM S/B FOOTNOTE cot 1PLETE ARKANSAS 1 COMPLETE ARKANSAS 2 COMFLETE BEAVER VALLEY 1 COMPLETE BIG ROCK POIf1T COMPLETE CALVERT CLIFFS.
COMPLETE CALVERT CLIFFS 2 COMPLETE CRYSTAL RIVER 3 COMPLETE D.C.
COOK-1 COMPLETE D.C.
COOK 2 COMPLETE D
DUA!4E ARNCLD COMPLETE FORT CALHOUN COMPLETE H B ROBIN 3DN COMPLETE COMPLETE
,f HATCH 1 I
HATCH 2 COMPLETE INDIAN POINT 3 COMPLETE L
LACROSSE COMPLETE t
F.
MAINE YANUEE COMPLETE MONTICELLO COMPLETE r
NINE MILE PT 1 COMPLETE NORTH ANNA 1 COMPLETE OCONEE 1 COMPLETE OCONEE 2 COMPLETE OCONEE 3 COMPLETE
m P.
Page No.
2 g
} -'
03/04/06APPENDIX R STATUS FOR PLANTS LICENSED PRIOR TO JAN.
1, 1979 COMPLETION STATUS OF ALTERNATE SHUTDOWil SYSTEME FACILITY DATE ALT.
IF NOT SHUTDOWN
- COMPLETE, NAME #
SYSTEM S/B FOO1 NOTE COMPLETE PALISADEE-COMPLETE PEACH DOTTOi1 3 COMPLETE PRAIRIE ISLAIJD 1 COMPLETE
}
O PRAIRIE ISLAND 2 COMPLETC D
RANCHO SECO.
COMPLETE COMPLETE SALEM 1 ST LUCIE 1 COMPLETE VEFMONT YANKEE COMPLETE
.c YANKEE FCt!E COMPLETC COMPLETE j
ZION 1 COMPLETE ZIOtt 2 04/30/96
- 1 GINNA GAN ONOFRE 1 06/01/86
- 1 f
FARLEY 1 10/01/86
- 1 f
10/31/86
- 1 t
OYSTER CREEK 1;
FITZPATRICK 04/30/87
- 1 KEWAUtJEE 06/30/87
- 1 i
DUAD CITIES 1 04/01/86
- 2 t
OUAD CITIES 2 04/30/86
- 2
- 2 TURKEY POINT 3 12/31/06 42 TURKEY POINT 4 12/31/G6 PEACH BOTTOM 2 02/01/87
- 2 DRESDEN 2 06/30/87
- 2
- DRCSDEN 3 06/30/07
- 2
v_
e.
Page No.-
3 03/04/86 APPENDIX R STATUS FOR PLAf4TS LICENSED FRIOR TO JAtl.
1, 1979 COMPLETION STATUS OF ALTERNATE SHUTDOWN SY3TEMS FACILITY DATE ALT.
IF NOT
'EHUTDOWN
- COMPLETE, NAME #
SYSTEM S/D FOOTtJOTE COMPLETE EROWNS FERRY 2 12/20/80
$2 I!!DI AN POINT 2 03/31/G6 86 HADDAt1 NECK 04/30/06
- 6 06/30/86 86 TM1 1 PILGRIM 11/31/G6 t6 FOINT BEACH 1 12/31/06 46 FOINT BEACH 2 12/31/86
- 6 COOPER STATIOf f 03/31/07
- 6 MILLSTONE 1 12/31/07 16 7
NILLSTONE 2 12/31/87
- 6 BRUNSWICK 1 12/31/89
$6 BRUNSWICK 2 06/30/90 86 0
NORTH ANNA 2 06/30/06 87 l
- 7 07/01/86 1
SURRY 1 I
47 I
SURRY 2 12/31/06 f
l-FORT ST VRAlt4 08/31/87
- 7 12/31/07 47 TROJAN DAVIS-BESSE 12/31/89
- 7
- 9 BROWNS FERRY 3 12/20/07
- 9
.BROWrJS FERRY 1 12/20/09
psu-wpma w
Page No.
1 C3/04/06 APPENDIX R GTATUS FOR FLANTS LICENCED PRIOR TO JAN.
1, 1979 y
COMPLETION STATUS OF FIRE PROTECTION MODIFICATIOriS p
FACILITY DATE FIRE IF NOT PROTECTION
- COMPLETE, tiAME #
MODIFICATION FOOTtJOTE S/B cot 1PLETE ARKANSAS 1 COMPLETC ARKANSAS 2 COMPLETE
)
BEAVER VALLEY I COMPLCTE BIG ROCK POINT COMPLETE
)
CALVERT CLIFFS 1 COMPLETE CALVERT CLIFFS 2 COMFLETE D.C.
COOK 1 COMPLETE F
D.C.
COOK 2 COMFLETc DUANE ARNOL.D COMPLETE I
FARLEY 1 COMPLETE FORT CALHout1 COMPLETE H B FOBINSON 2 COMPLETE ii INDIAN POff4T 2 COMPLETE h
I INDIAfl POINT 3 COMPLETE LACROSSE COMPLETE MAINE YANKEE COMPLETC MONTICELLO COMPLETE s
NINE MILE PT 1 COMPLETE NORTH ANNA 1 COMPLETE OCONEE 1 COMPLETE OCONEE 2 COMPLETE OCONEE 3 COMPLETE PALISADES COMPLETE
P
- y..
Page No.
2 1,
1979 03/04/86 APPENDIX H STATUS FOR PLANTS LICENSED PRIOR TO JAtl.
COMPLETIOtJ STATUS OF FIRE PROTECTIOtl MODIFICATIONS DATE FIRE IF NOT FACILITY PROTECTION
- COMPLETE, NAME #
t10DIF IC AT IOf 4 FOOT f10TE S/B COMPLETE PEACH DOT 70;1 2 COMPLETE PEACH BCTTOM 3 cot 1PLETE h~
FRAIRIE ISLAND 1 COMPLETE FRAIRIE ISLAIJD 2 CO!1PLETE i
RAtJCHO SECO COtPLETE COfiFLETE SALEM 1 I
ST LUCIE 1 COMFLETE VERiiONT 'tANMEE COMPLETE f
YANt<EE ROWE cot 1PLETE CRYSTAL RIVER 3 03/31/86
- 1
- 1 f
04/00/96 l
G If jNA
- 1 EAtl ONOFFE 1 06/01/86 i
- 1 OYSTER CREEK
-10/01/86 i
l 51 HATCH 1 11/31/06
- 1 HATCH 2 11/31/86 i
KEWAUNEE 06/30/27 81 OUAD CITIES 1 06/30/86 42
- 2 TURVEY POINT 3 12/31/06
- 2 TURKEY POINT 4 12/31/06
- 2 DRESDEN 2 06/30/07
- 2 DRESDEtt 3 06/30/07 42 OUAD CITIES 2 06/30/07 BROWrJS FERRY 2 12/20/08
- 2 86 HADDAM NECK 04/00/06
Pagt tio.
3 03/04/85 TG JAN, 1,
1979 AFPENDIX R STATUC FOR PLANTS LICEt45ED FRIOR COMPLETIOt4 STATUC OF FIRE PROTECTIOt] MODIFICATIO!45 i
FACILITY DATE FIRE IF NOT NAt1E t!
PROTECTION COliPLETE.
MOD IF I C AT 10!4 FOOTNOTE S/B COMPLETE TN! 1 06/30/36 26 PILORIM 11/31'86 46 FOiliT EUf,CH I 12/31
$6 POINT IhEACH 2 12/31/G6
$6 3
3 MILL 5 TONE 1 12/31/87 86 11ILL dTONE 2 12/31/G7
- 6 ERUN2WICE 1 12/31/G9
$6 ERUTCUICK 2 06/30/90
- 6 g
f40RTH At;NA 2 06/30/06 87 SURRY I 07/31/06 47 IlON 1 10/30/96
- 7 ZIOtj 2 10/30/06 47
}
COOPER STATIOtl 11/51/96
- 7 I
i SURRY 2 12/31/06
- 7 i
i TROJAtt 12/31/06
- 7 FORT ST v'R A l t!
08/01/87
$7 DAVIS-EESSE 12/31/09 V'
FIT 7PATRICE 10/31/06 40 DROWiJS FERRY 3 12/20/07 49 89 PROWNS FERRY 1 12/20/09
yw
-.=
.. e-
.a Encl:sure 6 COMPLETION SCHEDULE FOR ALTERNATE SHUTDOWN SYSTEMS 1979.)
(FOR PLANTS LICENSED PRIOR TO JANUARY 1, 7.
67 66
_X +
+O
Tx<-L COMPLETE XO N
' s' '
3+'g3i 63 s
62 m
w ms
.:.m gn
.w y-v.v NOT COMPLETE
.w sw; ss $.
so-v.s v.v S :>
%:$.v$
w
.x v s.
w:s w %.:
g.-:
...s i
.Q+
g,.3
- i:':i:
- !:'.:v.'$'
.q
+w.,
.w, 5?
s.
W.:
.~.ye
.v.y s
s.w...
go.
k.:v y
m s.
,y$$. $..
i;x.+< '
.y g>$"y$
- $Q:
vc sw
. 0+-
m ff s
e y...,.
w s.v.
y s...
N.s.
- e. "s.
h..
h-s o:ss.
.N$>.
s e.
.v -
F..X,.
+s, x
+
.v..v.
e -A r.s,.
s v
40 i.sys.
.s y.
A-.
> y+
&, ~w.v.:-> l
.s g.
,s c>.
s.s;
+>t, s+
-X. v=.
- v...v v "-
sw
>AN hv=>,
- >v.
v..
%"+ -
- +s>
+X*
r*+>
<+w> '
.w I
. +;
. w<.
v..
.s,v.-
(3:
- v. ;
we v, -
v..
v..
W-w.
.w.
+e-LaJ g.
. f+
CD
- 4. N.A.
..s.
we, w:.
v.
4x.
s.
a..
.:h
+y+
.x,.<s.
4.,:v..
- v....
y h, '.s.
+;..yw+
O
+n g.:.
.s,.
x+;
w.-
w g'h;g
'2:
w.-
F.w w,
- v. v..
..y w,
s *>
.v.f.
s y -s y..
.v.+.
e.:..
v..
- e...
e.ys.
.v.
e s e..
s
.es 20
.s+.
.w.
h c.v 4,. X
.yre.
.~..a e.v, f.ss
.. ss
.%s 16
. p+.
.:.:+
.e.:+
l:4;v+,
+.v
..y.
c-
+-
....v, xX-r.,"v..,-
..v..
s
.sX-v
.w v..
s.x.
we v.v
.v v..v.
v v.
v v..
- v...v..
NQ 10-
.s.
<M
.vQ
- v. %".s;
..s.
>:c. '.
s s
y;+
we A,s..
3..
_4
.s y..,-
. :.v v.:v v.
- s...,
+..
g
- s..<
%w. v; w.e m._..
w.m. o f
.s., s..
e..
m.-
4 m-,
u- -
.u O
1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 YEARS
y.vu-w.~- - -
-m
-. ~ -
~.
_. '. ~
Encl:sure 7 COMPLETION SCHEDULE FOR APPENDIX R FIRE PROTECTION MODIFICATIONS (FOR PLANTS LICENSED PRIOR TO JANUARY 1, 1979.)
7o 67 66 m
. wg ~.-
>b 535)yi5 h5 5""
COMPLETE h:
62
- h sx
- <p
eo. -
.m.v-
- v.
4,-
s..
,6)y.:S NOT COMPLETE
+,
4,3 mn X:"5 F5:4
- [
- y."
54
,4h..
34, 0:8 4:4 a
yv v.y
- 4,:-:
x.o:
- p;v.X
..y.
m.
>:v<
(.y.
4s ss
- x..8~-
.ix,..s.
2.-:
J2;:
so-
.v.
8.,58; h...!b v
ik!8,
,Ih
.y<
UU.
,;.y-y,
.y
.y v
v.v v.y-v.,
,.v
.+-
- s. v.s.;
v.,,
- s.,.
+s.-
v.
+.
+.y,
.s y-v.v v".^y v,h v.
v
."M
> X,:
y n
m..
y#Ay's X.,"4,
,X:".
vs<
X,4,
-y.+.
--s
.,s.
.-;4.,
- s...
A. ',v.)'f^.
La
- +;.
+;+
..h o
v,,,
v...,~,.-
s<y
~
sy y,>
- v. <,
p+v s
s.
v.v s.,s s..y,
.,v.
v,,a.,.
, y.
y sy.-
y,,s
.v.
.,y m g.
.y,
< :p-
<< h,
</..,
s
- s..X.
'I
- s. v 4..
p
,4.^".<
,m.y;.
z
- ,s,
..s; v.,.
v,.,
s
~...
<o,,,
- 8. s,.y:3,
- 3..:,S, x:5
.,y
- '4
- 23
+,y, so--
4
. s y.
.y,
..,... v,
,..v.
ss,-,
<v,
. s,,.
.~
v,
..<v..,
v..v..
.s. v.
+.v..
y+s-
..i.h
. $.i:
33 S, <
<:32,.
- 0.,.:-$.
...s s,.
- v..
- < s
+:+
- +:.
-:,: s
..v-.v.
.v s
sv.
, s to s
...s
+
34,.-.
s p, s.
s
- s. v v.v 4
v.v vh y.-
X ;
"+X v$X hX
- +X 4"p, sv. _._.-
...s-sv...- 1
- +
-MO
+:+
v.... O s
m..,
m A
o 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 YEARS
=
/
UNITED STATES E
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
g j
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20066 FDO PRINCIPAL CORRESPONDENCE CONTROL l
FROM:
DUE: 03/07/86 EDO CONTROL: 001453 DOC DT: 0?/20/86 COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE FINAL. RFPLY:
TO:
STELLO
/
FOR SIGNATURE OF:
- PRIORITY **
SECY NO:
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DESC:
ROUTINQ:
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTATION STELLO OF APPENDIX R TO 10 CFR 50 (SECY-85-306)
ROE REHM DATE: (2/24/86 d
SNIEZEK A'iSIGNED TO: NRR CONTACTt DFNTftN P
MINOGUE TAYLOR GCUNNINGHAM 3
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS:
p p
NRR RECElVED:
2/24/86 ACTION:
J85LWRNElIO ye NRR ROUTING:
DENTON/EISENHUT PPAS h
MOSSBURG h
b a
, y e
{.*[-
g.
(h k'
Pb P=
r
/
- g UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
{
WASHINGTON, D.C. 2000s February 20, 1986
..s. s commissioNan MEMORANDUM FOR:
Victor Stello, Jr.
Acting Executive Director for Operations FROM:
James K. Asselstine -
SUBJECT:
SECV-85-306 - STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE IMPLFFFMTATI0ft OF APPENDIX R TO 10 CFR 50 In the attached vote sheet, Comissioner Zech states that he bes been told that many licensees have taken advantage of the new interpretations contained in SECY-85-306 and that they have used them to develcp their fire protection programs.
I would appreciate learning which licensees are already using the "new interpretations." I would also like to know how any such use of the new interpretations will affect the compliance schedules contained in the EDO memorandum to the Commission dated Decerter 26, 1985 regarding the status of implementation of Appendix R.
Finally, I would like to know how such use is consistent with repeated assurarccs by the staff that all fire protection SERs, including those for plants licensed after January 1,1979, have been based on Generic Letter 83-33 or the existing Branch Technical Position.
1 cc: Chairnan Palladino Comissioner Roberts Rec'd off. roo Comissioner Bernthal Date... ?.-- A 9 -f 6 ~
issioner Zech Time....,g g{]
OGC SECY
- [
EDO - - 0016 3
. ~...--
~
NOTATION V0TE RESPONSE SHEET T0:
SAMUEL J. CHILK, SECRETARY OF THE COMMISSION FROM:
COMMISSIONER ZECH
SUBJECT:
SECY-85-306 - STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF APPENDIX R TO 10 CFR 50 APPROVED X (w/coments).
DISAPPROVED ABSTAIN NOT PARTICIPATING REQUEST DISCUSSION COMMENTS:
See attached coments.
W uwnaw u
YES NO Entered on "AS" M
/
/
SECRETARIAT NOTE:
PLEASE ALSO RESPOND TO AND/OR COMMENT ON OGC/0PE MEMORANDUM IF ONE HAS BEEN ISSUED ON THIS PAPER.
NRC-SECY FORM DEc. 80
i l
Commissioner Zech's comments on SECY 85-306 It is clear from the history associated with Appendix R that there has been considerable confusion in the industry, and to some extent the ctaff, on the exact meaning of all the fire protection requirements.
i Generic letters have been issued; task forces, workshops, and i
training sessions have been conducted; inspections have been completed; and, differing professional opinions have been submitted i
cnd resolved.
Many of these past actions became part of a cooperative offort between the staff and industry to resolve the outstanding Appendix R issues.
The result of this effort is the Generic Letter, interpretations, and question and answer documents proposed by the ctaff in SECY-85-306.
I believe these documents will help clarify and cxpedite. final implementation of the fire pror.ection requirements.
Consequently, subject to the recommendations for improvement made by l
OGC in its October 24, 1985 memo, I approve publication of the generic letter.
j t
I do not agree with several of the points raised by Commissioner 1
Asselstine in C0K7A-86-4.
I do not believe that the staff's approach, l
will, in the sad, make it more difficult for a fire protection inspector to conduct his job.
Eventually, all fire protection program l
requirements should be contained in the plant's FSAR which will i
provide a solid starting point to determine a. plant's compliance with Appendix R.
The proposed Generic Letter clearly states the documentation that will be required and expected by the NRC concerning licensee evaluations.
In addition, this documentation is required to be readily retrievable.
I also believe that across the board, the nuclear industry, when compared to other industries, is required to install and implement one of the most rigorous and demanding fire protection programs in the country.
Although there may be a few individual definitions or l
interpraations that can be debated as to whether or not they meet i
l generally accepted industry codes, the overall program that the NRC requires is clearly above average.
The proposed Generic Letter may f
allow a licenses to make some changes to its fire protection program i
via the 50.59 process, but it also states that any changes made to the l
fire protection program that may adversely affect the plant's ability to achieve and maintain safe shutdown in the event of a fire would I
otill need prior NRC approval.
Consequently, we maintain control of major changes and continue to fulfill our responsibility to protect the public health and safety.
As a separate matter, I do not share my colleague's concern over the i
technical adequacy of the proposed documents.
The staff has spent considerable time conducting analyses and developing these documents for the precise purpose of providing guidance on acceptable technical 1
cnd procedural responses.
Although some DPOs were submitted, I an informed that the concerned individuals are not appealing the agency resolution of those DPOs.
l With regard to the " analysis" provided by the EDO to Commissioner l
Asselstine on November 18, 1985, it is my impression that the EDO did not intend this to be a backfit analysis.
It is my understanding that i
ctaff determined that these interpretations which, if a licensee so
-'wea-c-wew wom e m
pc
c r.
?-
[: oo:00 to 1 plement th00, cro 1cco rOctrictivo then current requirements, and therefore a backfit analysis is not required.
However, the EDO did discuss some of the backfit considerations in order to provide the Commission information.
I would certainly agree with Commissioner Asselstine that if this analysis was supposed to suffice as a backfit analysis, it would require significant improvement.
I agree that the proposed fire protection enforcement policy needs come improvement.
It does not seen appropriate that the NRC should be restricted to only a severity III, IV or V violation unless there was en actual fire.
After reviewing the reactor operation requirements in cur enforcement policy, it seems that existing enforcement policy guidance for a severity level one violation would require an actual concurrent fire, but not for a severity level two violation.
The proposed fire protection regulations require an actual concurrent fire before either a severity level I or II violation can be imposed.
I do not see why the fire protection regulations need to be more restrictive in this regard than the general enforcement policy.
Consequently, for purposes of the fire protection enforcement policy, I recommend that the staff propose additional and/or different guidance on when a severity level two violation is appropriate.
Lastly, I believe that the information contained in SECY-85-306 is, for.the most part, already widely known throughout the industry as a result of the training sessions, workshops, and other staff interactions.
Consequently, I am told that many licensees have taken cdvantage of this information and used it to develop their fire protection programs.
As a result, this information will be' applied by and benefit more than just those few plants who have not yet fully implemented Appendix R.
.