ML18030A905

Proposed Tech Spec Changes Deleting Requirement to Check Smoke Detector Sensitivity in Accordance W/Mfg Instructions. Description & Justification & Determination of NSHC Encl

ML18030A905
Person / Time
Site:	Browns Ferry
Issue date:	11/20/1985
From:	TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
To:
Shared Package
ML18030A904	List: ML18030A903 ML18030A905
References
NUDOCS 8512020535
Download: ML18030A905 (17)

Text

ENCLOSURE 1 PROPOSED TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION REVISIONS BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT UNITS 1, 2, AND 3 (TVA BFNP TS 215)/agggPP0535 8 pgp>QOCK 050@gal t 0'

PROPOSED CHANGES UNIT 1 1J LIMITING CONDITIONS FOR OPERATION F 11 FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENT 4.11 FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS 3.The class A sunervised detector alarm circuits will be tested once earth two months at the local panels.4.The circuits between the local panels in 4.1I.C.'3,and the main control room will be tested monthly.5.Smoke detector sensitivity will be checked annually.D.ROVING FIRE HATCH D ROVING FIRE 1'1ATCB A roving fire watch will tour each area in which automatic fire supnression systems are to be installed (as described in,the"Plan for Evaluation, Repair, and Return to Service of Hrowns Ferry Units 1 and 2,"Section X)at intervals no greater than 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.A keycloclc recording type system shall be used to monitor the routes of the roving fire watch.The patrol will be discontinued as the automatic suppression systems are installed and made"operable for, each specified area.A monthlv walk-through bv the Safety Engineer will.'e made to visually inspect the plant fire protection system for signs of damage, deterioration, or abnormal conditions which could'jeopardize proper, operation of, the system.321 e

PROPOSED CHANGES UNIT 2

LIMITING CONDITIONS FOR OPERATION SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENT 3.11 FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS 4.11 FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS 3.The class A sunervised detector alarm circuits will be tested on'e.each two months at the local panels.4.The circuits between the local panels in, 4.11.C.3 and the.main control room will be tested monthly.5.Smoke detector sensitivity mill be checked annually.D.ROVING FIRE HATCH'D,~ROVING FIRE NATCH A'roving fire watch will tour each area in which automatic fire supnression systems are to be installed (as described in the"Plan for Evaluation, Repair, and Return to Service.of Browns Ferry Units 1 and 2,"Section X)at intervals no greater than'2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.A lceyclock recording type system shall be ,used to.monitor the routes of the roving fire watch.The patrol will be discontinued as the automatic suppression

'systems are installed and made'operable for.each snecified area.A monthly walk-through by.the Safety Engineer will be made to visually inspect the plant fire protection system for signs of damage, deterioration, or abnormal conditions which could"jeopardize nroper.operation of the svstem.321 PROPOSED CHANGES UNIT 3 h li LIMITING CONDITIONS FOR OPERATION SURVEILLANCE REQUIREMENT 3.11 FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS 4.11 I FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS'.The class A sunervised detector alarm circuits will be tested once each two months at the local panels.4.The circuits betwee'n the local panels in 4.11';C.3 and the main control room will be tested monthly.5.Smoke detector sen'sitivity vill be checlced annually.D.'OVING FIRE HATCH 1 A roving fire watch vill tour each area in which automatic fire supnression systems are to be installed (as described in the"Plan for Evaluation, Repair, and Return to Service of Browns Ferry Units 1 and 2,"Section X)at intervals no greater than 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.A Iceyclock recording type system shall be used to monitor the routes of the roving fire watch.The patrol vill be discontinued as the automatic suppression systems are installed and made operable for.each sn ec if ied area.'DE ROVING FIRE NATCH A monthly walk-through by.the Safety Engineer vill.'e made to, visually inspect the plant Are protection system for signs of damage, deterioration, or-abnormal conditions vhich could"jeopardize nrooer-operation of the system.353 1 Description and Justification (TVA BFNP TS 215)Delete the por tion of Technical Specifioation (T.S.)Surveillance 4.11.C.5 which requires annual sensitivity check of smoke detectors in accordance with manufacturer instruction for units 1, 2 and 3.Some types of smoke detectors used at Browns Ferry lack current vendor information and test equipment for checking sensitivity because the type of detector is no longer being produced.This situation prevents.strict, application of T.S.4.11.C.5 to this type of detector and resulted in'a violation (Office of Inspection and Enforcement Inspection Report number 50-260/85-28)

~The proposed T.S.amendment will not eliminate or modify any protective functions nor permit any new operational conditions since it only deletes an inappropriate restriction on the surveillance requirement; It does not'reate the possibility of a new kind of acoident or significantly increasethe probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated since no equipment modifications, instruction changes or oper ational changes are made.Furthermore, this change does not result in the significant reduction of any safety margin since it is administrative in natur'e and does not alter the intent of the surveillance requirement.

Therefore, the'mendment will not adversely effect plant safety.

Il)

Fnclosure 3 Determination of No Significant Hazards Consideration=.(TVA BFNP TS 215)The proposed amendment would delete from the technical specifications (T.S.)of the operating license, the phrase,"in accordance with manufacturer~s-instruction" from the requirement to annually check smoke=detector sensitivity.

This is not possible in all cases due to the fact that some smoke detector models are no longer in production and there is an unavailability of vendor supplied test equipment.

The proposed T.S.amendment will not eliminate or modify any protective funotions nor permit any new operational conditions since it only deletes an inappropriate restriction on the surveillance requirement.

Zt does not create the possibility of a new kind of accident or significantly increase the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated since no equipment modifications, instruction changes or operational changes are made.Furthermore, this change does not result in the significant reduction of any safety margin since it is administrative in nature and does'ot alter the intent of the surveillance requirement.

Therefore, TVA proposes to determine that the requested amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration.