Document: NUREG-0800
Document ID: 05a851a6-07ff-41b4-8528-a032ba433e04
Document Type: srp
Title: FIRE PROTECTION PROGRAM
Source: NUREG-0800
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0327/ML032740044.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 9
Section ID: 9.5.1
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
ensure that the additional burden placed on the operations personnel is small and the time period to perform the manual actions is not critical to plant safety. The substitution of repairs in lieu of installed fire protection systems and features for systems and components required to achieve and maintain cold shutdown would be acceptable provided the time to repair the cold shutdown capability did not exceed the limits prescribed in Appendix R. An assessment of the risk impact may or may not be necessary for satisfying the provisions under item (2) depending upon the nature of the change and the analysis used to justify the change. Revision 4 - October 2003 9.5.1-10 It is the responsibility of the licensee to demonstrate that the change has not resulted in an adverse effect or a non-compliance with the applicable NRC requirements. In order to demonstrate that the change is acceptable, some sort of analysis is required. Failure to conduct the appropriate analysis by the licensee is a failure to meet the plant’s fire protection license condition. The depth and scope of the analysis is dependent upon the nature of the change, and the type of analytical tool relied upon to justify the subject change. A change that does not maintain a sufficient margin of safety is a failure to meet the plant’s license condition. b. Fire Protection Deviations Plants licensed after January 1, 1979, that have adopted the standard fire protection license condition, do not need to request exemptions for alternative configurations. However, deviations from the applicable fire protection requirements or guidance should be identified and justified in the FSAR or FHA. The deviation may require a license amendment to change the license condition. Deviations submitted to the NRC for review and approval should include a technical justification for the proposed alternative approach. The technical justification should address the criteria described in Regulatory Guide 1.189, Positions 1.8.1 and