ML13308A184
| ML13308A184 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 09/17/1982 |
| From: | Novak T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8210050492 | |
| Download: ML13308A184 (2) | |
Text
SEP 17 1982 Docket No.: 50-362 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Darrell Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensing FROM:
Thomas Novak, Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing
SUBJECT:
PLAN OF ACTION -
ISSUANCE OF OPERATING LICENSE FOR SAN ONOFRE UNIT 3 The San Onofre applicant, Southern California Edison Company, has indicated that Uhit 3 will be ready to load fuel on October 15, 1982. To support this date, we are now preparing the Technical Specifications and a draft operating license. We propose to make the license a full power license, conditioned to limit power to 5% pending Commission approval. This is the same approach used in the recently issued Summer and Susquehannah OLs.
A meeting with the Commission will be scheduled a few weeks before the plant is ready to exceed 5% power, which is scheduled to occur in early 1983.
Prior to issuance of some of the recent OLs, the staff has held a management level meeting at the plant site, in which NRR management toured the plant and discussed key issues with the applicant's management. Two such meetings were held within the past year, prior to issuance of the San Onofre Unit 2 OL. Because of this, and because San Onofre Unit 3 is essentially identical to Unit 2, we propose deleting this requirement for San Onofre 3.
There are two major licensing areas which could potentially impact the fuel load date. These are operator licensing and Technical Specification preparation. SCE has requested that we waive the NRC operator licensing exams for all unit 2 ROs and SROs and license them for Unit 3.based on their Unit 2 experience plus an SCE administered exam on the differences between Units 2 and 3. The staff is considering requiring that Unit 3 RO and SRO candidates pass a staff-administrated written exam (a requalification-type exam that includes differences between the units).
The staff proposal might impact the October 15 fuel load date if the tests co,.i1d not be given in time or if there is a high failure rate.
The technical specifications will be discussed at a meeting on September 14 and 15, and if all the required information is not provided by SCE, this could delay fuel loading.
8210050492 820917 PDR ADOCK 05000362 A
PDR OFFICE}
1 1
J SURNAME)
DATE)
_I****--__-**__
NRC FORM 318 (10-80) NRCMO0240 OFI LRC R
OYUSGPO:1981-335-960
D. SEP 17 1982 In addition, staff review,is needed in several areas to determine whether or not license conditions are required for Unit 3. The areas where we believe such review is needed are:
- 1. Environmental Qualification (EQB)
- 2. Reg. Guide 1.97 (ICSB)
- 3. Special Low Power Testing, I.G.1 (RSB, PTRB)
- 4. RCS Vents, II.B.1 (RSB)
- 5. Safety Valve Test Requirements, II.D.I (MEB)
- 6. RCS Voiding, II.K.2.17 (RSB)
- 7. Small Break LOCA model, II.K.3.31 (RSB)
Original signed by.
Thomas M. Novak Thomas M. Novak, Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing cc: H. Denton E. Case NRR Division Directors DISTRIBUTION L-gc4~~emet Control NRC PDR PRC System LB#3 Reading J. Lee H. Rood J. Kerrigan T. Novak I&E OELD OFFICE)
SURNAME NR F.O 1)
RM 318
.10-80 NR O
OFFC. I L.RECORDCO.PY.
SGPO. 1981.
NRC FORM 318 (1-80) NRCMO0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY USGPO: 1981-335-960