ML062780449

Joseph M. Farley, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 - Request for Additional Information for Generic Letter 2006-03, Potentially Nonconforming Hemyc and Mt Fire Barrier Configurations (TAC Nos. MD1578 and MD1579)

ML062780449
Person / Time
Site:	Farley
Issue date:	10/13/2006
From:	Martin R E NRC/NRR/ADRO/DORL/LPLII-1
To:	Sumner H L Southern Nuclear Operating Co
Martin R E, NRR/DORL, 415-1493
References
TAC MD1578, TAC MD1579
Download: ML062780449 (4)

Text

October 13, 2006Mr. H. L. Sumner, Jr. Vice President - Farley Project Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

Post Office Box 1295 Birmingham, AL 35201-1295

SUBJECT:

JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 REQUESTFOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR GENERIC LETTER 2006-03, "POTENTIALLY NONCONFORMING HEMYC AND MT FIRE BARRIER CONFIGURATIONS" (TAC NOS. MD1578 AND MD1579)

Dear Mr. Sumner:

By letter dated June 9, 2006, Southern Nuclear Company (SNC) provided a response toNuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Generic Letter 2006-03, "Potentially Nonconforming Hemyc and MT Fire Barrier Configurations," for the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (FNP). The NRC staff has reviewed that response and has identified a need for additional information as stated in the enclosure. This issue was discussed with the SNC staff for the FNP on July 27, 2006. We request that a response to these issues be provided within 45 days of the date of this letter. Sincerely,/RA/Robert E. Martin, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch II-1Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor RegulationDocket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364

Enclosure:

Request for Additional Informationcc w/encl: See next page October 13, 2006Mr. H. L. Sumner, Jr.

Vice President - Farley Project Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

Post Office Box 1295 Birmingham, AL 35201-1295

SUBJECT:

JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 REQUESTFOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR GENERIC LETTER 2006-03, "POTENTIALLY NONCONFORMING HEMYC AND MT FIRE BARRIER CONFIGURATIONS" (TAC NOS. MD1578 AND MD1579)

Dear Mr. Sumner:

By letter dated June 9, 2006, Southern Nuclear Company (SNC) provided a response toNuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Generic Letter 2006-03, "Potentially Nonconforming Hemyc and MT Fire Barrier Configurations," for the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (FNP). The NRC staff has reviewed that response and has identified a need for additional information as stated in the enclosure. This issue was discussed with the SNC staff for the FNP on July 27, 2006. We request that a response to these issues be provided within 45 days of the date of this letter. Sincerely,/RA/Robert E. Martin, Senior Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch II-1Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor RegulationDocket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364

Enclosure:

Request for Additional Informationcc w/encl: See next page DISTRIBUTION:

PublicRidsAcrsAcnwMailCenter RidsNrrPMRJervey LPL2-1 R/FRidsNrrDorlLpl2-1(EMarinos)RidsNrrPMRMartin(hard copy)

RidsOgcRpRidsRgn2MailCenter(SShaeffer)

RidsNrrLARSola(hard copy)RidsNrrDraAfpbAccession No.: ML062780449OFFICENRR/LPL2-1/PMNRR/LPL2-1/LANRR/AFPB/BCNRR/LPL2-1/BCNAMERMartinRSolaSWeerakkodyEMarinos DATE10/11/0610/6/0609/07/0610/13/06OFFICIAL RECORD COPY EnclosureREQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONGENERIC LETTER 2006-03POTENTIALLY NONCONFORMING HEYMC AND MT FIRE BARRIER CONFIGURATIONSJOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2FOR RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-2, DOCKET NO. 50-348AND RENEWED FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. NPF-8 DOCKET NO. 50-364For the Farley Nuclear Plant (FNP), the Promat H board is described as a fire barrier thatseparates redundant trains within the same fire area (for example, cable tray enclosures). The response states that Promat H board is tested in accordance with Underwriter Laboratories document UL 263, American Society for Testing and Materials document ASTM E119, and the National Fire Protection Association document NFPA 251. Use of these tests and standards identifies fire testing for building members and assemblies, but does not specifically address 1 and 3-hour fire barrier systems protecting electrical raceways.This issue was discussed during a phone call with the FNP staff on July 27, 2006. Thefollowing are follow-up questions from that phone call to confirm the Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff's understanding of the FNP Promat configuration. 1.How was the Promat tested? Confirm that, per the phone call, the ASTM E119 timetemperature, full scale fire testing was used.2.What acceptance criteria were used? Confirm that, per the phone call, the 325 degreesFarenheit temperature criterion was used.3.How were installed configurations that were different from tested configurationsevaluated? Confirm 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.

Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 & 2 cc:

Mr. J. R. JohnsonGeneral Manager Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

P.O. Box 470 Ashford, AL 36312Mr. B. D. McKinney, Licensing ManagerSouthern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

P.O. Box 1295 Birmingham, AL 35201-1295Mr. M. Stanford BlantonBalch and Bingham Law Firm P.O. Box 306 1710 Sixth Avenue North Birmingham, AL 35201Mr. J. GasserExecutive Vice President Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

P.O. Box 1295 Birmingham, AL 35201State Health OfficerAlabama Department of Public Health 434 Monroe St.

Montgomery, AL 36130-1701Chairman Houston County Commission P.O. Box 6406 Dothan, AL 36302Resident InspectorU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7388 N. State Highway 95 Columbia, AL 36319