ML13302B822

Forwards SER & Final SAIC-91/1251, Station Blackout Evaluation, Ter.Contigent Upon Satisfactory Resolution of Recommendations Presented in Se,Design of Plant Conforms W/ Station Blackout Rule

ML13302B822
Person / Time
Site:	San Onofre
Issue date:	02/06/1992
From:	Kalman G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Cotton G, Ray H San Diego Gas & Electric Co, Southern California Edison Co
Shared Package
ML13302B823	List: ML13302B822 ML20094D248
References
REF-GTECI-A-44, REF-GTECI-EL, RTR-REGGD-01.155, RTR-REGGD-1.155, TAC-M68599, TAC-M68600, TASK-A-44, TASK-OR NUDOCS 9202130144
Download: ML13302B822 (4)

Text

p~ REG~j UNITED STATES 0

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 February 6, 1992 Docket Nos. 50-361 and 50-362 Mr. Harold B. Ray Mr. Gray D. Cotton Senior Vice President Senior Vice President Southern California Edison Company Engineering and Operations Irvine Operations Center San Diego Gas & Electric Co.

23 Parker Street 101 Ash Street Irvine, California 92718 San Diego, California 92212

SUBJECT:

SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNITS 2 AND 3 STATION BLACKOUT ANALYSIS (TAC NOS. M68599/68600)

The Station Blackout (SBO) Rule requires licensees to submit information as defined in 10 CFR 50.63 and provide a plan and schedule for conformance to the SBO Rule. The Southern California Edison Company provided responses to the SBO Rule for the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and 3, by letters from M. 0. Medford, F. R. Nandy and R. M. Rosenblum dated April 17, 1989, May 1, 1990, and September 12, 1991, respectively.

The responses were reviewed by the NRC staff and by Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) under contract to the NRC. The results of the review are documented in the attached safety evaluation (SE) (Enclosure 1) and the SAIC Technical Evaluation Report (TER) SAIC-91/1251 "San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and 3, Station Blackout Evaluation," of December 13, 1991 (Attachment 1 of Enclosure 1).

Based on our review of the responses and contingent upon the satisfactory resolution of the recommendations presented in this SE, we find that the design of San Onofre conforms with the SB0 Rule, the guidance of Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.155, Nuclear Management and Resources Council (NUMARC) 87-00, and NUMARC 87-00 Supplemental Questions/Answers and Major Assumptions dated December 27, 1989 (issued to the industry by NUMARC on January 4, 1990).

There are seven recommendations included in the enclosed SE. If you concur with the recommendations, please provide a schedule for their implementation in accordance with 10 CFR 50.63(c)(4). If the recommendations are not acceptable, please respond with your comments. In any case your response is required within 30 days following receipt of this letter.

9202130144 920206 PDR ADOCK 05000361 FO P

PDR

Messrs. Ray and Cotton 2

In addition to our review of the SBO responses, some areas may require follow up inspection by the NRC to verify implementation. The staff is developing guidance for this inspection to verify the following:

a. Hardware and procedural modifications,

b. SBO procedures in accordance with RG 1.155, Position 3.4, and NUMARC 87-00,.Section 4,

c. Operator staffing and training to follow the identified actions in the procedures,

d. EDG reliability program meets, as a minimum, the guidelines of RG 1.155,

e. Equipment and components required to cope with an SBO are incorporated in a QA program that meets the guidance of RG 1.155, Appendix A, and

f. Actions taken pertaining to the specific recommendations noted in the SE.

The guidance provided on Technical Specifications (TS) for SBO states that the TS should be consistent with the Interim Commission Policy Statement on Technical Specifications. The staff has taken the position that TS are required for SBO response equipment. However, the question of how specifi cations for the SBO equipment will be applied is currently being considered generically by the NRC in the context of the Technical Specification Improvement Program and remains an open item at this time. In the interim, the staff expects plant procedures to reflect the appropriate testing and surveillance requirements to ensure the operability of the necessary SBO equipment. If the staff later determines that TS regarding the SBO equipment are warranted, licensees will be notified of the implementation requirements.

Sincerely, GeorgeKalman, Project Manager Project Directorate V Division of Reactor Projects III/IV/V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

Safety Evaluation DISTRIBUTION:

cc w/enclosures:

Docket File PDV r/f NRC/Local PDRs See next page BBoger MVirgilio TQuay DFoster JBradfute GKalman ACRS (10)

RZimmerman, RV OGC OFC:

LA:PDV:D PW E:PDV@ PW PM:D ':DRPW D:PDV:DRPW NAME:

DFoster ra u almahpm TQuay DATE:

/

2

/Fr6/92

/ /92

/'/92 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY Document Name:

SESO.LTR

Messrs. Ray and Cotton

- 2 In addition to our review of the SBO responses, some areas may require follow up inspection by the NRC to verify implementation. The staff is developing guidance for this inspection to verify the following:

a. Hardware and procedural modifications,

b. SBO procedures in accordance with RG 1.155, Position 3.4, and NUMARC 87-00, Section 4,

c. Operator staffing and training to follow the identified actions in the procedures,

d. EDG reliability program meets, as a minimum, the guidelines of RG 1.155,

e. Equipment and components required to cope with an SBO are incorporated in a QA program that meets the guidance of RG 1.155, Appendix A, and

f. Actions taken pertaining to the specific recommendations noted in the SE.

The guidance provided on Technical Specifications (TS) for SBO states that the TS should be consistent with the Interim Commission Policy Statement on Technical Specifications. The staff has taken the position that TS are required for SBO response equipment. However, the question of how specifi cations for the SBO equipment will be applied is currently being considered generically by the NRC in the context of the Technical Specification Improvement Program and remains an open item at this time. In the interim, the staff expects plant procedures to reflect the appropriate testing and surveillance requirements to ensure the operability of the necessary SBO equipment. If the staff later determines that TS regarding the SBO equipment are warranted, licensees will be notified of the implementation requirements.

Sincerely, George Kalman, Project Manager Project Directorate V Division of Reactor Projects III/IV/V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

Safety Evaluation cc w/enclosures:

See next page

Messrs. Ray and.Cotton San Onofre Nuclear Generating Southern California Edison Company Station, Unit.Nos. 2 and 3 cc:

James A. Beoletto, Esq.

Mr. Richard J. Kosiba, Project Manager Southern California Edison Company Bechtel Power Corporation Irvine Operations Center 12440 E. Imperial Highway 23 Parker Street Norwalk, California 90650 Irvine, California 92718 Mr. Robert G. Lacy Chairman, Board of Supervisors Manager, Nuclear Department County of San Diego San Diego Gas & Electric Company 1600 Pacific Highway, Room 335 P. 0. Box 1831 San Diego, California 92101 San Diego, California 92112 Alan R. Watts, Esq.

Mr. John Hickman Rourke & Woodruff Senior Health Physicist 701

1.

Parker St. No. 7000 Environmental Radioactive Mgmt. Unit Orange, California 92668-4702 Environmental Management Branch State Department of Health Services Mr. Sherwin Harris 714 P Street, Room 616 Resource Project Manager Sacramento, California 95814 Public Utilities Department City of Riverside Resident Inspector/San Onofre NPS 3900 Main Street d/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Riverside, California 92522 Post Office Box 4329 San Clemente, California 92674 Mr. Charles B. Brinkman, Manager Washington Nuclear Operations ABB Combustion Engineering Nuclear Power Mayor 12300 Twinbrook Parkway, Suite 330 City of San Clemente Rockville, Maryland 20852 100 Avenida Presidio San Clemente, California 92672 Mr. Phil Johnson Regional Administrator, Region V U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region V 1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 Walnut Creek, California 94596 Walnut Creek, California 94596 Mr. Don J. Womeldorf Chief, Environmental Management Branch California Department of Health Services 7714 P Street, Room 616 Sacramento, CaliforniaC 95814