ML063330230: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Adams
#REDIRECT [[NL-06-2567, NRC Generic Letter 2006-03 Request for Additional Information Response]]
| number = ML063330230
| issue date = 11/28/2006
| title = Joseph M. Farley, NRC Generic Letter 2006-03 Request for Additional Information Response
| author name = Sumner H L
| author affiliation = Southern Nuclear Operating Co, Inc
| addressee name =
| addressee affiliation = NRC/Document Control Desk, NRC/NRR
| docket = 05000348, 05000364
| license number =
| contact person =
| case reference number = GL-06-003, NL-06-2567
| document type = Letter
| page count = 4
}}
 
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:H. L Sumner. Jr. Vice President Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. 40 lnverness Center Parkway Post Office Box 1295 Birmingham. Alabama 352111 Tel 205.992.7279 Fax 205.992.0341 November 28, 2006 Docket Nos.: 50-348 50-364 SOUTHERN COMPANY Energy to Serve Your World' NL-06-2567 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, D. C. 20555-0001 Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant NRC Generic Letter 2006-03 Request for Additional Information Response Ladies and Gentlemen:
By letter dated October 13,2006, Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC), the licensed operator for the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, received a request for additional information for Generic Letter 2006-03: Potentially Nonconforming Hemyc and MT Fire Barrier Configurations.
In accordance with 10 CFR 50.54(f), SNC hereby submits its response. This letter contains no NRC commitments.
If you have any questions, please advise.
Sincerelv.
H. L. Sumner, Jr. . . -. - -. A. ;-. . . a'i~/: 5 .;,p, .* -+bk, i ;,-, .. ( ,! * .<, . - =- 9 -.' '-, .. '. 5 './, 'a 4 '4, . .-. . . . . . . . -.' &$TJLSldaj
** *,,* -, c.,- - . :.<, , ,;:, ;c i- i>,Q ', JP,t<<r;.. .
 
==Enclosure:==
 
NRC Generic Letter 2006-03 Request for Additional Information Response U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NL-06-2567 Page 2 cc: Southern Nuclear Ouerating Com~anv Mr. J. T. Gasser, Executive Vice President Mr. J. R. Johnson, General Manager - Plant Farley RTYPE: CFA04.054; LC# 14508 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Dr. W. D. Travers, Regional Administrator Ms. K. R. Cotton, NRR Project Manager - Farley Mr. C. A. Patterson, Senior Resident Inspector - Farley Alabama Department of Public Health Dr. D. E. Williamson, State Health Officer Enclosure Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant NRC Generic Letter 2006-03 Request for Additional Information Response Enclosure Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant NRC Generic Letter 2006-03 Request for Additional Information Response Farley Nuclear Plant utilizes Promat-H board as described in Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC) response dated June 9,2006 to Generic Letter 2006-03. This letter stated that Promat-H is tested in accordance with Underwriter Laboratories UL Standard 263, which references the American Society for Testing and Materials document ASTM El 19 and the National Fire Protection Association document NFPA 25 1. By NRC letter dated October 13, 2006, the NRC asked for additional information regarding the SNC response.
The following items are the NRC requests and the SNC responses.
Request for Additional Information - Item 1 How was the Promat tested? Confirm that, per the phone call, the ASTM El 19 time- temperature, full scale fire testing was used. SNC Response:
The Promat was tested and qualified to ASTM El 19-88 by Performance Contracting Inc. under Omega Point Project No. 8806-90254 (Promat Report SR90-005). This testing included ASTM El 19 time-temperature, full scale fire testing for the wall assembly and a small scale fire testing of the ceiling assembly.
The test details are documented in Promat Report SR90-005.
Request for Additional Information - Item 2 What acceptance criteria were used? Confirm that, per the phone call, the 325 degrees Fahrenheit temperature criterion was used. SNC Response:
The test acceptance criteria were that of ASTM El 19-88 Section 16 "Conditions of Acceptance," which meets the acceptance criteria of GL 86-10, Supplement
: 1. The 325 degrees Fahrenheit temperature criterion was used, which assumes a maximum temperature rise of 250 degrees Fahrenheit above an ambient temperature of 75 degrees Fahrenheit. Request for Additional Information - Item 3 How were installed configurations that were different fiom tested configurations evaluated?
Confmn that, per the phone call, the field installation deviations from the tested configurations were evaluated in accordance with the Generic Letter 86-10, Section 3.2.2 criteria.
SNC Response:
An analysis and acceptance for plant specific deviations from the tested configurations is included in Performance Contracting Inc. Fire Protection Technical Evaluation (FPTE)
FPTE 2006-001 Revision 0. This evaluation received a documented review and approval by a qualified fire protection engineer within Southern Nuclear and found to be consistent with the GL 86-10, Section 3.2.2 criteria.}}

Latest revision as of 08:25, 13 July 2019

Redirect to:

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML063330230&oldid=1833546"