ML16341C266

Summary of 841105-06 Meetings W/Region V in Walnut Creek,Ca Re Status of Documenting Allegations.List of Attendees Encl

ML16341C266
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	12/13/1984
From:	Ley M Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8501070212
Download: ML16341C266 (20)

Text

g~ RECI

~o

~

o>

oQ g

+0

&0

++*++

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 gEc~3 J984 Docket Nos.:

50-275/323 APPLICANT:

Pacific Gas and Electric FACILITY:

Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units I and 2

SUMMARY

OF MEETING WITH REGION V TO DISCUSS ALLEGATIONS On November 5 and 6, 1984, representatives from the Division of Licensing met with members of the Region V Office in Walnut Creek, California, to discuss the status of documenting the Diablo Canyon allegations.

The purpose of the meeting was to identify what actions need to be taken to review, resolve and publicly document the resolution of the outstanding allegations, along with establishing a schedule for completing these actions.

A list of meeting attendees is included as Enclosure l.

The Region representatives described a method of resolving allegations where they first solicit by letter an assessment from the licensee, review the licensee's response and then conduct an Allegations Board Meeting to determine the acceptability of the response and whether or not an allegation is resolved.

I Regional management has approved of the generic write-up method where a single but detailed assessment encompasses more than one allegation.

This approach is in contrast to providing an individual summary sheet for each allegation as was previously planned, and is based on the large amount of manpower that would be necessary to provide individual summary sheets.

The overall status of allegations was also discussed.

Some of the allegations have been resolved, but not yet reported in an SSER.

It was agreed that the highest priority action is to issue an SSER updating the status of all allegations and providing additional documentation on the 76 allegations which were received after issuance of SSER 26, but addressed at the August Commission meeting.

The necessary actions of both the Region and NRR to proceed with the documentation of the allegations were discussed, and are presented below.

Re<cion V

o Place in the PDR and LPDR any previous correspondence or documents that are not sensitive and were used to resolve the Region's allegations.

o Update the computerized data base to include all PGSE response letters and indicate in which SSER each allegations has been reported as resolved.

850i070212 84i2i3 PDR ADOCK 05000275 P

.. PDR,

t.

K E

h q

0

DEC 13 1984 o

Provide for the next SSER a justification as to why the procedure involving a PG&E response and an Allegation Review Board meeting fulfills the DCAMP procedures.

o Provide for the next SSER summaries of the Allegation Board Meetings, appropriate inspection reports and any additional summary sheets.

o Determine the applicability of Unit 1 allegations to Unit 2 for all allegations that are the Region's responsibility.

o Provide a description of the nomenclature used in the computerized printout for inclusion in the SSER.

o Review the October 30, 1984, submittal from PG&E and take appropriate Allegation Review Board action.

NRR o

Place in the PDR and LPDR any previous correspondence

'or documents that are not sensitive and were used to resolve NRR's allegations.

Provide to the Region any updated information that needs to be incorporated in the computerized data base, including information that will allow the printout to also serve as a cross reference for allegations'that are discussed by a generic write-up.

Provide for the next SSER a discussion of why 'the generic write-up approach is appropriate.

Provide input to the next SSER stating that those allegations subsequent to SSER 26 and up to October 31,

1984, have been reviewed against the criteria presented in SSER 22 and have no safety impact on full power operation.

(Reference 10/31/84 memo from Martin to Denton and ll/1/84 memo from Vollmer to Eisenhut) o Inform the Region of any changes/additions needed for the printout.

o Provide assessment summary sheets for the NRR outstanding allegations.

o Determine the applicability of Unit 1 allegations to unit 2 for all allegations that are NRR responsibility.

o Continue to resolve the NRR allegations.

Enclosure 2 is a proposed outline for the SSER.

Mhile it was discussed, no decision was made concerning the inclusion of allegation applicability to Unit 2 in the next SSER.

NRR will be responsible for assembling the

A t'

d i

l, 6 ~ fg",4 I $

I' lA C+

P A II "I f(

1 pl f

~*<

P,1A gi g<<r>

g qr P

V Ql'(

4 y

ly l"

P II f

g t

ll "

II f

II p

~

~

I

~k DEC 19 1984 and issuing the'SER.

The Region indicated that they will provide their input to NRR by, December 14, 1984.

The expected issuance date is January,

1985, prior to any license decision for Unit 2.

Enclosure:

As stated cc:

See next page Marilyn Ley, Project Manager Licensing Branch No.

3 Division of Licensing MLey:pob 1++/84 G

n

/84 5

DL:LB&'3 HS hierling

/ g/84 l>

Vegi80(

KDirsch Pf/iz/84 i2

S Ih k'

Mr. J.

D. Shiffer, Vice President Nuclear Power Generation c/o Nuclear Power Generation, Licensing Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street, Room 1451 San Francisco, California 94106 Philip A. Crane, Jr.,

Esq.

Pacific Gas 5 Electric Company Post Office Box 7442 San Francisco, California 94120 Mr. Malcolm H. Furbush Vice President - General Counsel Pacific Gas 5 Electric Company Post Office Box 7442 San Francisco, California 94120 Janice E. Kerr, Esq.

California Public Utilities Commission 350 McAllister Street San Francisco, California 94102 Mr. Frederick Eissler, President Scenic Shoreline Preservation Conference, Inc.

4623 More Mesa Drive Santa Barbara, California 93105 Ms. Elizabeth Apfe1 berg 1415 Cozadero San Luis Obispo, California 93401 Mr. Gordon A. Silver Ms. Sandra A. Silver 1760 Alisal Street San Luis Obispo, California 93401 Harry M. Willis, Esq.

Seymour 8 Willis 601 California Street, Suite 2100 San Francisco, California 94108 Mr. Richard Hubbard MHB Technical Associates Suite K

1725 Hamilton Avenue San Jose, California 95125 Mr. John Marrs, Managing Editor San Luis Obis o County Tele ram Tribune o nson venue P. 0.

Box 112 San Luis Obispo, California 93406 Diablo Canyon Resident Inspector/Diablo Canyon NPS c/o US Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. 0.

Box 369 Avila Beach, California 93424 Ms.

Raye Fleming 1920 Mattie Road Shell Beach, California 93440 Joel

Reynolds, Esq.

John R. Phillips, Esq.

Center for Law in the Public Interest 10951 West Pico Boulevard Third Floor Los Angeles, Califoj'nia 90064 Mr. Dick Blankenburg Editor 5 Co-Publisher South County Publishing Company P. 0.

Box 460 Arroyo Grande, California 93420 Bruce Norton, Esq.

Norton, Burke, Berry 5 French, P.C.

'02 E. Osborn Road P. 0.

Box 10569 Phoenix, Arizona 85064 Mr. W.

C. Gangloff Westinghouse Electric Corporation P. 0.

Box 355 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 David F. Fleischaker, Esq.

P. 0.

Box 1178 Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73101

~

h 1

1III HI 1

1

., 5'll It

~

~ hfig I,

HII I I

I 1'

I ~

"~

~

~

rs I

It 1$

~

'Ih th) 111

>>'I* IH 1 ~

~I"ll

,- ~ fit ILn

~

f I',(

I

~

1 I'HHI' fflf'II f'

h 1 ~

1

~ 1 I

1, 5

II fi H.H HHH*

Ht 0 1

A " Htjt5jj 1

/5

\\

~ 1',

I fitI I'1 1

~ I'"H5h 1 ~

HW hlfi

~

~

I lt K

Y '

~ Hh

'I IIh

~

'P

~ 11 1 Hf I

~ 1'1 I

hfi5 1 fihfi

, n I

'I 1

~

I

~

'Hll' I I I

tt" '

'n>>

I I j

I' j

~

>> I Hh

Arthur C. Gehr, Esq.

Snell 5 Wilmer 3100 Valley Center Phoenix, Arizona 85073 Mr. Lee M. Gustafson, Director Federal Agency Relations Pacific Gas 5 Electric Company 1050 17th Street, N.W.

Suite 1180 Washington, DC 20036 Regional Administrator - Region Y

US Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1450 Maria Lane Suite 210 Walnut Creek, California 94596 Mr. Thomas Devine Government Accountability Project Institute fo'r Policy Studies 1901 gue Street, NW Washington, DC 20009 Michael J. Strumwasser, Esq.

Special Counsel to the Attorney General State of California 3580 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 800 Los Angeles, California 90010 Mr. Tom Harris Sacremanto Bee 21st and 0 Streets Sacramento, California 95814 Mr. H. Daniel Nix California Energy Commission 1516 9th Street, MS 18 Sacramento, California 95814 Lewis Shollenberger, Esq.

US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region V

1450 Maria Lane Suite 210 Walnut Creek, California 94596

A F

K K

• K K K

FF 1

K

Enclosure 1

Diablo Canyon Allegations Status Meeting Dennis Kirsch John Martin Lou Shollenberger Robert Dodds Lori Daly George Knighton Marilyn Ley Region V

Region V

Region V

Region V

Region V

NRR NRR

7

@gal II,

~

jt l t

~g -,igr,

~

3 P~

4 ll' Il'

<3ff "'

'Vv,,w, l'

Enclosure 2

Diablo Canyon SSER 28 Contents Introduction IF This should present the purpose of the document and a brief accomplishment description.

Diablo Canyon Allegation Management Program This should refer to previous SSER s containing the details of the program.

It should clearly discuss the appropriateness of the staff's use of the licensee s assessment of allegations, corrective actions resulting from

,the staff's review and the Allegation Review Board approvalprocess.

In

addition, a discussion is needed addressing the appropriateness of generic write-ups encompassing a large number of allegations.

Examples that could be used are the Anchor Bolt Assessment discussed in SSER 26 and the Small Bore and Large Bore Piping discussed in SSER 25.

It should be clear that such an approach is necessary to efficiently and adequately resolve related allegations.

Status Summary of Staff Evaluation of Allegations This section should present the status of all allegations through full power licensing of Diablo Canyon Unit 1.

This would probably have a cut-off date of approximately October 31, 1984.

Document the current status of the 1404 allegations reported to the Commission in the August Diablo Canyon Licensing Meeting.

Discuss the 76 allegations received subsequent to SSER 26 and up to the October 31 cut-off date.

Summary and Conclusions References Attachment 1:

List of Allegations This should include a description of the new allegation spreadsheet,

fields, abbreviations and terms.

It should be clear that the spreadsheet provides the complete record of the DCAMP process from birth to resolution of the allegations.

Indicate that the spreadsheet serves as a cross reference for locating an allegation summary sheet catalogued under the number of a related allegation.

Attachment 2:

Individual Assessment Summaries This would include individual summary sheets and summary, sheets resolving multiple allegations that had not previously been resolved.

~

~

H'

',J F'

at(

t l,

~ Jl lt r

~

II HH

~

g I

tt

~ l

~ HMH' I

Jl P

a t M,

.I

~I I a

PI H

I'

'ale,,

ft I

"q

~ 7 I

~ /

Enclosure 2

Page 2

Attachment 3:

Review Board Resolution An introduction to this section should contain the more detailed discussion of the appropriateness of the Review Board process of resolving allegations using licensee assessments in fulfilling the DCAMP responsibilities.

The procedure used should be presented here.

Provide minutes of the meetings where licensee assessments have been accepted or rejected by the Board.

A printout of the specific allegations discussed by the Board should be included. :

Region V Inspection Reports Include Inspection Reports used to resolve allegations if not already in the Public Document Room or Local Public Document Room.

'" ll I

f Iff 1 U

N II r

t A

Meet'in Summar Distribution Docket Fil NR R

Local PDR PRC System NSIC LB¹3 Reading

Attorney, OELD GKnighton MLey HSchierling JLee NRC Partici ants Dennis Kirsch, Region V

John Martin, Region V

Lou Shollenberger, Region V

Robert Dodds, Region V

Lori Daly, Region V

George Knighton, NRR Marilyn Ley, NRR

J l

1'

+ < SRE00

~4 0

UNITEDSTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 December 13, 1984 50-275/323 Diablo Canyon MEMORANDUM FOR:

Chief, Document Management

Branch, TIDC FROM:

SUBJECT:

Director, Division of Rules and Records, AOM REVIEW OF UTILITY EMERGENCY PLAN DOCUMENTATION The Division of Rules and Records has reviewed the attached document and has determined that it may now be m de publicl available.

Attachment:

As stated M. 'Felton, Director ivision of Rules and Recor Office of Administration