ML15261A211
| ML15261A211 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 11/17/1998 |
| From: | Labarge D NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9811200015 | |
| Download: ML15261A211 (19) | |
Text
November 17, 1998
. LICENSEE:
D nergy Corporation FACILITY:
Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF THE NOVEMBER 2,1998, MANAGEMENT INTERFACE MEETING On November 2, 1998, the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation management met with representatives of the Duke Energy Corporation (DEC) management at NRC Headquarters in Rockville, Maryland, to discuss various management items. Enclosure 1 is a list of individuals who attended the meeting and Enclosure 2 is the handout material that was supplied by DEC.
The topics discussed included an overview of the Oconee Nuclear Station (Oconee), Units 1, 2, and 3 design basis review program, status of the Oconee license renewal program, risk-informed regulation program, various examples of recent design basis issues including control room ventilation system, emergency feedwater system, safety-related designation clarification program, control room ventilation system improvements, reactor building spray pump net positive suction head concerns, high pressure injection system licensing issues, staff emergency power review, Improved Technical Specification review, and dry cask storage capability.
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:
David E. LaBarge, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate 11-2 Division of Reactor Projects - 1/Il Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270 and 50-287
Enclosures:
- 1. Attendance List
- 2. DEC Handout cc w/encls: See next page Distribution (e-mail) w/encl.1 only Distribution with encs. 1 and 2 SCollins/FMiraglia Docket File BBoger PUBLIC JZwolinski PD 11-2 Rdg.
HBerkow DLaBarge TMartin OGC MTschiltz, EDO ACRS LPlisco, RII COgle, RII 9811200015 98 1117 PDR ADOCK 05000269 C RL-!6 C Ta.
P PDR To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without attachmentlenclosure "E",=Copy with a chmentlenclosure "N" = No copy OFFICE PM:PD_
LA:PDII-D:P NAME DLaB e n LBerry
.HBrkH DATE
\\\\/o / 8 II /X/98 I
/1 /bl98
/ /98
/98
/97 DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\OCONEE\\MTG1102.SUM OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 November 17, 1998 LICENSEE:
Duke Energy Corporation FACILITY:
Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF THE NOVEMBER 2,1998, MANAGEMENT INTERFACE MEETING On November 2, 1998, the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation management met with representatives of the Duke Energy Corporation (DEC) management at NRC Headquarters in Rockville, Maryland, to discuss various management items. Enclosure 1 is a list of individuals who attended the meeting and Enclosure 2 is the handout material that was supplied by DEC.
The topics discussed included an overview of the Oconee Nuclear Station (Oconee), Units 1, 2, and 3 design basis review program, status of the Oconee license renewal program, risk-informed regulation program, various examples of recent design basis issues including control room ventilation system, emergency feedwater system, safety-related designation clarification program, control room ventilation system improvements, reactor building spray pump net positive suction head concerns, high pressure injection system licensing issues, staff emergency power review, Improved Technical Specification review, and dry cask storage capability.
avidE. LaBarge, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate 11-2 Division of Reactor Projects - 1/11 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287
Enclosures:
- 1. Attendance List
- 2. DEC Handout cc w/encls: See next page
Oconee Nuclear Station cc:
Mr. Paul R. Newton Mr. J. E. Burchfield Legal Department (PBO5E)
Compliance Manager Duke Energy Corporation Duke Energy Corporation 422 South Church Street Oconee Nuclear Site Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1006 P. 0. Box 1439 Seneca, South Carolina 29679 J. Michael McGarry, Ill, Esquire Winston and Strawn Ms. Karen E. Long 1400 L Street, NW.
Assistant Attorney General Washington, DC 20005 North Carolina Department of Justice Mr. Rick N. Edwards P. 0. Box 629 Framatome Technologies Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Suite 525 1700 Rockville Pike L. A. Keller Rockville, Maryland 20852-1631 Manager - Nuclear Regulatory Licensing Manager, LIS "Duke Energy Corporation*
NUS Corporation 526 South Church Street 2650 McCormick Drive, 3rd Floor Charlotte, North Carolina 28201-1006 Clearwater, Florida 34619-1035 Mr. Richard M. Fry, Director Senior Resident Inspector Division of Radiation Protection U. S. Nuclear Regulatory North Carolina Department of Commission Environment, Health, and 7812B Rochester Highway Natural Resources Seneca, South Carolina 29672 3825 Barrett Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27609-7721 Regional Administrator, Region II U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. Steven P. Shaver Atlanta Federal Center Senior Sales Engineer 61 Forsyth Street, S.W., Suite 23T85 Westinghouse Electric Company Atlanta, Georgia 30303 5929 Carnegie Blvd.
Suite 500 Virgil R. Autry, Director Charlotte, North Carolina 28209 Division of Radioactive Waste Management Bureau of Land and Waste Management Mr. W. R. McCollum, Jr.
Department of Health and Environmental Vice President, Oconee Site Control Duke Energy Corporation 2600 Bull Street P. 0. Box 1439 Columbia, South Carolina 29201-1708 Seneca, SC 29679 County Supervisor of Oconee County Walhalla, South Carolina 29621
MEETING WITH DUKE ENERGY CORPORATON AND NRR MANAGEMENT NOVEMBER 2,1998 Attendees Affiliation Bruce Boger NRC/NRR John Zwolinski NRC/NRR Herbert Berkow NRC/NRR David LaBarge NRC/NRR William McCollum Duke Energy Corporation William Foster Duke Energy Corporation
NRR Interface Meeting ee Nude November 2, 1998 ENCLOSURE 2
Design Basis and System Reviews
- Ongoing efforts to review design basis of Oconee Completed
- Emergency Power
- UFSAR Project
- Oconee Safety Related Designation Clarification (OSRDC)
-Next:
- Standby Shutdown Facility (SSF)
- DC Systems
- Rx Protective System
Design Basis and System Reviews
- Why
- Gain better / clearer understanding of our design basis
- Clear up old issues Improve our documentation for use through license renewal / new generation of employees Improve safety
- Outcomes:
Will continue to uncover issues Will generate needs to interact with NRR
Design Basis and System Reviews
- Direction Will review issues from a risk-informed perspective Will address quickly those issues with safety significance Where appropriate, will change license basis
- Will require NRR support Where low safety significance, may choose to maintain existing license basis "understanding" Will assure documentation for the future
Recent Design Basis Issues
- Control Room Ventilation System (CRVS)
Significant improvements implemented to reduce in-leakage Recognize new source term should be resolved within about a year per NRC action plan Certain non-conforming conditions to resolve:
source term
- containment leak rate
- PRVS filtration Design study is currently underway to address potential changes in the system Reg. Guide 1.174 risk-informed approach may be helpful in resolving issues
Recent Design Basis Issues
- EFW Issues from EFW Safety System Engineering Inspection (SSEI)
- EFW pump run out
- Single failure questions
Need UFSAR statement change HELB, original license analysis still valid
- Plan to review old analysis
- Plan to assure coping strategies still appropriate
- Not designed to General Design Criteria (GDC), already installed when GDC completed
Recent Design Basis Issues
- OSRDC
- Clarified original QA 1 SSC's
- Developing QA5 program for SSC's non-QA used to mitigate accident
- Test and maintenance enhancements
- Not intended to redesign plant or apply QAl design criteria
- Issue not clear to reviewers in NRC
- ONS design basis creates challenges continually
Recent Design Basis Issues
- Injection
- Pre-throttling NPSH deficit
- Dedicated operator in control room
- Throttling / pre-positioning discharge valve
- Evaluating longer-term mods
- Recirculation
- Credit for small amount of overpressure during recirculation
- USQ submitted and currently under review
Recent Design Basis Issues
- HPI Tech Spec Long open issues / complicated issue / good communication with staff TSI currently provides administrative controls Three pumps required > 350 degrees Withdrew TS submittal at NRC request Proposal developed for new TS
- Two HPI pumps for 75% operation for LCO of 30 days
- RI Regulation TS application (Reg. Guide 1.174)
Allows for pump work without shutting down TS change and tie to ITS
Recent Design Basis Issues
- Emergency Power Expected completion date of Emergency Power Report?
.Completed CTS approval
- Supports completion of ITS 3.8
- Emergency power test for delayed voltage and frequency loading scheduled November 14.
- This effort has been ongoing since 1993
- Example of a complicated issue - hard to close in licensing space
- What does closure look like?
Other Issues
- ITS
- Received draft SER October 19, 1998 (less 3.8)
- Expect final SER December 1998 Implementation early March 1999 Good support for review - went well, good communication
- Near monthly meetings effective
- Did good job with handling beyond scope items
Other Issues
- Submitted July, 1998
- Environmental Public / Scoping Meetings,
.October 19-22
- B&WOG Topical Reports Review Interest in ongoing support of review process Interest in inspection scope and schedule Intervener issue
Other Issues
- Dry Cask Storage
- Cask approval complete
- Module weld questions under review
- Part 72.212 review to be complete early December
- Expect to load casks January, 1999
Regulatory Reform Issues
- Risk Informed Regulation Expect to use with:
- HPI Tech Spec
- CRVS review
- Other Applications Helps focus on proper issues (most risk / safety significant)
- Helps with balance in review of older plants
- Not clear yet on how NRC or we will apply
Review Process Improvements Extent and depth of review keyed to risk significance Process should be risk informed Review process should be historically and technically informed Reviewers need to be familiar with NSSS design RAI process needs streamlining