ML20147D544

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Ack Receipt of 780904 Memo W/Preliminary Staff Rept of 780929 Fire Test at Underwriters Lab.Further Info Is Needed; Staff Should Review Matl Re Ucs 780831 & 780706 Contentions & State Current Plans of Action
ML20147D544
Person / Time
Issue date: 10/06/1978
From: Snyder B
NRC OFFICE OF POLICY EVALUATIONS (OPE)
To: Tedesco R
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 7810140107
Download: ML20147D544 (1)


Text

a a:g*o UNITE D STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISslON g-g W

s, c WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 g.* g g

October 6,1978 MEMORANDUM FOR:

Robert Tedesco, Assistant Director for Plant Systems Division of System Safety, NRR 7

FROM:

Bernard J. Snyder, Assistant Director for Policy Review, Office of Policy Evaluation

SUBJECT:

NRC FIRE PROTECTION RESEARCH TEST -- RELATIONSHIP TO UCS PETITION The Commission has received your September 4,1978 memorandum which gave a preliminary staff report of the September. 2'9 fire test at Underwirters' Laboratory. As noted in your memorandum, the staff does not know of any operating plants which have the configuration used in this test.

It is also my understanding-that certain separate components used in the test are found in some currently operating plants and in addition configura-tions similar to that tested have been proposed for installation in nuclear plants which are currently under review.

In addition, the staff pointed out that the mineral wool fire blanket was installed in accordance with current industry specifications and the sprinkler and detector arrange-ment meet the NFPA Code.

Since damage to electrical cable did occur in four of the five trays (with two electrical shorts') and a preliminary analysis by the staff indicates some features of this configuration would not be considered acceptable in nuclear power plants, it appears that further information is needed.

In particular, the staff should review the August 31 and July 6 submissions to the Commission which addressed the contentions of Union of Concerned Scientists as given in their petition of May 2.

This review should be made to determine, if, in the staff's judgment, any further information relative to the UCS contentions should be provided to the Commission, in light of the September 15 test, As a minimum, review should be made of the staff's earlier responses to questions 1, 8,18 (Enclosure 1); 1, 2 (Enclosure 2); and 7, 9,10 (Enclosure 3) of the Commission's June 21 memorandum.

Any additional analysis of the test which is relevant to the UCS petition should also be provided.

Finally, the staff should outline its current plans for any further actions, such as notification of licensees, additional testing, and any modification of criteria for future staff fire protection reviews.

Your response would be appreciated as soon as possible, cc; Chairman Hendrie Lee V. Gossick, EDO Commissioner Gilinsky Harold Denton, NRR J

Connissioner Kennedy John Davis, IE Commissioner Bradford Saul Levine, RES Commissioner Ahearne James Kelley, OGC PDR uCS 7 0 b/ 4 ol r7

.