ML17261A169

From kanterella
Revision as of 19:24, 3 May 2018 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Discusses Util Fire Protection Review Items 3.2.6 & 3.2.9. Recommends Accepting Backflow Protection Proposal Pending Submittal of Prints of Drain Sys & Problem Drain Location. Five-man Fire Brigade Size Acceptable
ML17261A169
Person / Time
Site: Ginna Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 01/23/1980
From: HALL R E
BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY
To: FERGUSON R L
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8001300465
Download: ML17261A169 (2)


Text

Ua3'8GK.DeportmentofNuclearEnergyJgpgoPg,ccIim<~BROOKHAVENNATIONALLABORATORYASSOCIATEDUNIVERSITIES,INC.Upton,NewYork11973(514)5-2I44January23,1980Mr.RobertL.FergusonPlantSystemsBranchU.S.NuclearRegulatoryCommissionWashington,D.C.20555RE:GinnaNuclearPowerPlantFireProtectionReviewItems3.2.6and3.2.9

DearBob:

Item3.2.6BackflowProtectionTheSafetyEvaluationReport(SER)statedthatthelicenseewillreviewtheplant'sdrainsystemsandprovidebackflowprotection,topreventthespreadofapossibleliquidfireviathedrainsystems,wheredrainsfrcmsafety-relatedareastieintodrainsfromotherareaswhichcontainalargequantityofflammableliquidandwhichcouldaffectthesafety-relatedarea.AreportofthisreviewwasgivenbythelicenseeinaletterdatedSeptember28,1979.Theyconfirmedthattheyfoundpotentialdrainproblemsinthecontairment,theauxiliarybuildingbasement,intermediatebuildingbasementandtheBdieselgeneratorroom.Thelicenseefurtherstatedthatthesedrainswillbemodifiedtoensurethatccmbustibleorflammableliquidswillnotbeallowedtoflowviathedrainsystemtoaseparatesafetyrelatedarea.IInordertofullyevaluatethelicensee's.proposalwerequestthatthelicensee'ssubmit:printsofthedrainsystem,locationoftheproblemdrains,methodofanalysisandmethodofsolution.Wereccmmendthatthelicensee'sproposalonthisitembeacceptedsubject-toreviewofthedocumentslistedabove.Item3.2.9FireBriadeSizeTheSERstatesthatthelicenseehasproposedathreemanfirebrigadeandfurtherstatesthatthestaffisnotconvincedthatthreemenprovidesuffi-cientmargin'foradverseconditionsthatmayoccurintheeventofasignifi-cantfire.Thisitemis,therefore,unresolvedatthistime.4/

To:R.LFerguson-2-January18,1980Ontheplantsite'visit,June27-30,1978thelicenseehadstatedthattheirthreemanfirebrigade>cassufficient.Wetookapositionstatedinourcc'ultant'sreportofJuly10,1978thatthebrigadesizewasinadequateandthatitshouldbeincreasedtofivemen.Thelicensee,intheirletterofMay25,1979agreedtohavingafive-manfirebrigade.Merecaamendthatthispositionbeaccepted.Respectfullyyours,~pP~p~~RobertE.Hall,GroupLeader'eactorEngineeringAnalysisREH:EAN:sdcc.:R.CerboneW.KatoW.LeeE.HacDougallY.Panciera