ML16343A468
| ML16343A468 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek, Diablo Canyon, Callaway, Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 01/15/1997 |
| From: | Polich T NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9701220337 | |
| Download: ML16343A468 (22) | |
Text
(4gyes RE00 0
Cy ClO IlA O
Cy
+~
~O
+W*k+
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 205554001 January 15, 1997 LICENSEE: Texas Utilities Electric Company FACILITY: Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units I and 2
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF MEETING WITH TEXAS UTILITIES ELECTRIC COMPANY (TUE),
UNION ELECTRIC COMPANY (UE),
WOLF CREEK NUCLEAR OPERATION CORPORATION (WCNOC),
AND PACIFIC GAS
& ELECTRIC COMPANY (PG&E)
ON THE JOINT TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION CONVERSION PROCESS AND SCHEDULE Schedule
- TUE, UE,
- WCNOC, and PG&E (the utilities) presented the revised schedule for submittal of their Improved Technical Specifications (ITS).
Four and a half of the six packages were essentially through the review and approval process although some comments still needed to be resolved.
Of the one and a half remaining packages, all sections have been prepared and joint review meetings have been held.
These sections (which include 3/4.3 and 3/4.7) were scheduled to be through the onsite safety committee reviews before the end of 1996.
Each utility may send their submittals to the NRC on different dates between the end of January and the end of February 1997.
The staff found no problems with this schedule.
The staff will perform an acceptance review when ITS submittals are made.
However, the staff stated that no formal technical review would begin before the last submittal is received.
Submittal The utilities asked how many hard copies of the submittal were required.
The NRC stated that copies were needed for each of the following:
the document control desk, the plant project manager, the lead project manager for the conversion, the TSs branch, the NRC's contractor and probably one for the state liaison for a total of six copies.
The hard copy submittal should contain a clean copy of the ITS, both the specifications and the bases.
The electronic version of the submittal should be in WordPerfect
- 5. 1 (WP 5. 1) as previously discussed and should include the wee<<<<<>>"
,970%220337 970ii5
~'. ~~>)PDR;., ADGCK 05000275 P
'I PDR On November 14,
- 1996, members of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff met with representatives of Texas Utilities Electric Company (TUE), Union Electric Company (UE), Wolf Creek Nuclear Operation Corporation (WCNOC),
and Pacific Gas 8 Electric Company (PG&E) at the NRC Office to discuss the joint technical specification (TS) conversion status and schedule.
The utilities'resented their revised schedule and discussed location of moved and relocated information; renumbering of limiting conditions for operations (LCOs),
- actions, and surveillances; out-of-scope,
- pending, or planned changes; the NRC review process; billing costs for common review efforts; and the impact of submittal schedule on Generic Letter (GL) 96-01.
Attachment I is the list of meeting attendees.
1
change descriptions, the no significant hazards consideration (NSHC) evaluations, the justifications for deviations from the ITS, and the clean copy of the ITS (specifications and bases).
The utilities asked if the electronic version could be submitted on CD RON.
The NRC recognized the potential advantages of such a submittal,
- however, the reviewers do not have CD RON capable computers available at this time.
This item will be discussed further as the submittal dates approach.
d
'strat ve etter L
96-0 icient Ado tio o
m roved Standard echnical S
cifications" The utilities acknowledged receipt of the AL and confirmed that their conversion efforts are consistent with the letter.
Topics of interest and worthy of further discussion are described below.
ocation of Relocated a d oved M terial The NRC stated that including that information in the comparison tables was acceptable.
- However, as the NRC noted at the last meeting, in those cases where the submittal uses a general location (e.g.,
a licensee controlled
'document),
the specific location can be identified during the NRC's review.
The utilities asked if it was necessary to actually identify the specific document or if they could just note that it was a document that meets the criteria above.
The NRC stated that they would need to know the specific document (although not the exact location in that document) before they issue their safety evaluation report (SER).
Renumberin of LCOs Conditions Re uired Actions and Surveillances In order to achieve as much consistency in the license requirements as
- possible, the utilities have adopted the following policy with respect to renumbering LCOs, Conditions, Required Actions or Surveillances:
In general, LCOs will not be renumbered if an LCO is deleted.
The utilities may choose to renumber specifications if a traveler is approved by the NRC which does so.
In Conditions and Required Actions, the steps will be renumbered.
Surveillance Requirements (SRs) will not be renumbered.
The numbers for deleted surveillances will be retained and labeled "Not Used" in the specification.
If the SR is the last one in the specification, it will be deleted entirely.
The NRC acknowledged the proposed approach sounded reasonable.
Out-of-Sco e
n es As discussed at the last meeting, the utilities intend to attach a table to the submittal cover letter which lists the Out-of-Scope changes in the conversion request.
endin r
1 ed Ch n es For those License Amendment Requests (LARs) which are pending at the time of the submittal of the conversion application, the conversion application will either contain proposed specifications with and without the pending LAR incorporated or contain only the version which has the pending LAR incorporated.
The latter option will only be, used if the licensee has discussed the change with its Project Manager (PM) and has concluded that the specific LAR should not impact the timely completion of the conversion amendment.
LARs which are submitted after the conversion application will either be submitted in the converted format only or be submitted in both the current TS format and the converted format.
The former method will be used when the LAR will not impact the conversion application either because it is easily incorporated (utilities will work with PMs to confirm) or because approval of the LAR is not expected until after the conversion is implemented.
The NRC requested that the utilities identify in the "cover letter material" all the pending changes and known projected changes that could occur during the conversion application review.
The NRC acknowledged the utilities concern that potential emergent conditions that could require the submittal of an LAR that had not been listed.
NRC Review Process A general discussion was held on the NRC review process.
The utilities were interested in several aspects of the review including:
assuring that the NRC performed common reviews to the extent possible; understanding what assistance the utilities could provide (and when) to enhance and accelerate the review process; the projected review schedule; etc.
The NRC noted that a Lead Conversion PM will be appointed to coordinate the NRC's reviews of the conversion applications.
The lead PM has not been identified yet, but that should occur when the submittals are made.
The TS branch is currently using a team approach to conversion in lieu of a single reviewer.
The NRC noted that the submittals will undergo an acceptance review to confirm that the submittal is of sufficient quality to warrant continued review.
Although the NRC goal to complete a review is 6 months past experience has shown reviews to take closer to 9 months.
Implementation plans are important to the NRC in setting the review schedules.
The NRC acknowledged that with
'four plants and six units, the implementation plans will vary; however, the NRC requested that the utilities be able to discuss implementation plans at a
post submittal meeting.
In general, the NRC intends to maximize the common review approach.
The main review will not begin until all four submittals are received.
It is possible that the NRC may perform acceptance reviews when the individual submittals are received.
The NRC projected that the review will involve a series of conference calls to resolve questions and obtain clarifications.
The NRC will only rely on docketed material to approve the applications and to write the SERs.
As a
- result, the utilities will probably need to submit two or three supplements to the original application.
Somewhere near the end of the review (within a couple months of approval), it will probably be appropriate to have an issues resolution meeting to settle all differences that arose during the review and could not be resolved in the conference calls.
The NRC stated that one of the most common problems that delays the reviews is a lack of justifications for the changes to the current TS.
The final, certified versions of the ITS are needed within about a month of the final approval by the NRC'.
The utilities will need to provide this version in WP 5.1.
Billin review costs for common review efforts The utilities opened a discussion as to how the licenses would be billed to allow, to the extent possible, each member to pay its fair share.
The NRC stated that, most likely, the common review efforts would be divided among the utilities and plant-specific review items would be billed to the affected plant.
The utilities agreed with the approach and decided to discuss this issue further at the next utility meeting and to provide some recommendations prior to the submittal of the conversion applications.
Im act of the ITS submittal schedule on Generic Letter 96-01 The utilities were asked to discuss the impact of the conversion application schedule on the responses to GL 96-01.
The previous responses to the GL had indicated spring 1998 completions based on submitting the conversion applications in late 1996.
The utilities reported that, based on the conversion application schedule discussed
- above, the utilities intend to meet their present commitments with regard to completing GL 96-01.
The NRC found this proposal acceptable but the NRC did request that TUE,
- PGFE, and WCNOC submit letters which note the slippage in the submittal of the conversion applications but confirm that the original completion dates for the GL 96-01 actions will be met.
UE does not need to submit such a letter
- because, with their outage
- schedule, they did not need to request approval of a completion date beyond the schedule proposed by the GL.
F tu e Meet s
In conclusion, the staff characterized the meeting as informative and constructive.
Additional interactions between the staff and four utilities will be held before the submittals are received only if a schedule change occurs.
The next planned meeting is targeted for after the receipt of the four submittals.
Timothy J. Polich, Project Manager Project Directorate IV-I Division of Reactor Projects III/IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-275, 50-323, 50-445, 50-446, 50-482, and 50-483 Attachments:
Meeting Attendees cc w/att:
See next page
~
~
Future Meetin s
In conclusion, the staff characterized the meeting as informative and constructive.
Additional interactions between the staff and four utilities will be held before the submittals are received only if a schedule change occurs.
The next planned meeting is targeted for after the receipt of the four submittals.
DISTRIBUTION:
Docket Fi 1 e ~
PUBLIC PD4-1 r/f ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:
Timothy J. Polich,.Project Manager Project Directorat'e IV-1 Division of Reactor Projects III/IV Office ofNuclear Reactor Regulation I
Docket Nos. 50-275, 50-323, 50-445,- 50-'446, 50-482, and 50-483 Attachments:
Meeting Attendees cc w/att:
See next page h'
OGC ACRS OFC PH PD4-1 A LA PD4-1 NAME TPol ich cf CHawes E-Mail FHiraglia/AThadani (FJH)/(ACT)
WBeckner (WDB)
EJordan (JKR)
- JDyer, RIV (JED2)
EAdensam (EGAl)
RZimmerman (RPZ)
Document Name:
CP111496.HTS TPol i ch,.(TJP1)
JHitchell".(JAH)
SBloom (SDB1)
JStone (JCS3)
KThomas (KMT)
TSB 5R CGrimes JRoe (JWR)
CHawes (CMH2)
JCalvo (JAC7)
NGilles (NVG)
J.
Wermiel (JSWl)
DATE 01 l> 97 COPY YES NO 01 /'0 97 YES NO 01 9
E NO OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
C S
f' II 0
f l
4, I
~-" -)I I
TU Electric Company CC:
Senior Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. 0.
Box 1029
- Granbury, TX 76048 Regional Administrator, Region IV U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400 Arlington, TX 76011 Mrs. Juanita Ellis, President Citizens Association for Sound Energy 1426 South Polk
- Dallas, TX 75224 Mr. Roger D. Walker TU Electric Regulatory Affairs Manager P. 0.
Box 1002 Glen Rose, TX 76043 Texas Utilities Electri c Company c/o Bethesda Licensing 3 Metro Center, Suite 610
- Bethesda, MD 20814 George L. Edgar, Esq.
- Morgan, Lewis E Bockius 1800 M Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20036-5869 Comanche
- Peak, Units 1 and 2
Honorable Dale McPherson County Judge P. 0.
Box 851 Glen Rose, TX 76043 Office of the Governor ATTN:
Susan Rieff, Director Environmental Policy P. 0.
Box 12428
- Austin, TX 78711 Arthur C. Tate, Director Division of Compliance L Inspection Bureau of Radiation Control Texas Department of Health 1100 West 49th Street
- Austin, TX 78756-3189 Mr. C.
Lance Terry TU Electric Group Vice President Nuclear Attn:
Regulatory Affairs Department P. 0.
Box 1002 Glen Rose, TX 76043
Pacific Gas and Electric Company CC:
NRC Resident Inspector Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. 0.
Box 369 Avila Beach, California 93424 Dr. Richard Ferguson, Energy Chair Sierra Club California 1100 11th Street, Suite 311 Sacramento, California 95814 Hs. Nancy Culver San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace P. 0.
Box 164 Pismo Beach, California 93448 Chairman San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors Room 370 County Government Center San Luis Obispo, California 93408 Hr. Truman Burns Hr. Robert Kinosian California Public Utilities Commission 505 Van Ness, Room 4102 San Francisco, California 94102 Mr. Steve Hsu Radiologic Health Branch State Department of Health Services Post Office Box 942732 Sacramento, California 94232 Diablo Canyon Independent Safety Committee ATTN:
Robert R. Wellington, Esq.
Legal Counsel 857 Cass Street, Suite D
Monterey, California 93940 Regional Administrator, Region IV U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Harris Tower E Pavillion 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400 Arlington, Texas 76011-8064 Christopher J. Warner, Esq.
Pacific Gas 5 Electric Company Post Office Box 7442 San Francisco, California 94120 Mr. Robert P.
Powers Vice President and Plant Manager Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant P. 0.
Box 56 Avila Beach, California 93424 Telegram-Tribune ATTN:
Managing Editor 1321 Johnson Avenue P.O.
Box 112 San Luis Obispo, California 93406 Mr. Gregory H. Rueger Pacific Gas and Electric Company NPG - Hail Code A10D P.O.
Box 770000 San Francisco, California 94177
C
Union Electric Company CC:
Professional Nuclear Consulting, Inc.
19041 Raines Drive Derwood, Haryland 20855 Gerald Charnoff, Esq.
Thomas A. Baxter, Esq.
- Shaw, Pittman, Potts 5 Trowbridge 2300 N. Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20037 Mr. M. D. Bono Supervising
- Engineer, Site Licensing Union Electric Company Post Office Box 620 Fulton, Missouri 65251 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Resident Inspector Office 8201 NRC Road
- Steedman, Missouri 65077-1302 Mr. G. L. Randolph, Vice President Nuclear Operations Union Electric Company P.O.
Box 620 Fulton, Missouri 65251 Manager - Electric Department Missouri Public Service Commission 301 W. High Post Office Box 360 Jefferson City, Missouri 65102 Regional Administrator, Region IV U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Harris Tower 5 Pavilion 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400 Arlington, Texas 76011-8064 Mr. Ronald A. Kucera, Deputy Director Department of Natural Resources P.O.
Box 176 Jefferson City, Missouri 65102 Mr. Neil S. Cams President and Chief Executive Officer Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation P.O.
Box 411 Burlington, Kansas 66839 Mr. Dan I. Bolef, President Kay Drey, Representative Board of Directors Coalition for the Environment 6267 Delmar Boulevard University City, Missouri 63130 Mr. Lee Fritz Presiding Commissioner Callaway County Court House 10 East Fifth Street Ful ton, Missouri 65151 Mr. Alan C. Passwater, Manager Licensing and Fuels Union Electric Company Post Office Box 149 St. Louis, Hissouri 63166 Mr. J.
V. Laux, Manager guality Assurance Union Electric Company Post Office Box 620 Fulton, Missouri 65251 Mr. Donald F. Schnell Senior Vice President - Nuclear Union Electric Company Post Office Box 149 St. Louis, Missouri 63166
I
Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation CC:
Jay Silberg, Esq.
- Shaw, Pittman, Potts 8 Trowbridge 2300 N Street, NM Mashington, D.C.
20037 Regional Administrator, Region IV U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Arlington, Texas 76011 Senior Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.
O.
Box 311 Burlington, Kansas 66839 Chief Engineer Utilities Division Kansas Corporation Commission 1500 SM Arrowhead Road
- Topeka, Kansas 66612 Attorney General Judicial Center 301 S.W.
10th 2nd Floor
- Topeka, Kansas 66612 County Clerk Coffey County Courthouse Burlington, Kansas 66839 Public Health Physicist Bureau of Air & Radiation Division of Environment Kansas Department of Health and Environment Forbes Field Building 283
- Topeka, Kansas 66620 Vice President Plant Operations Molf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation P. 0.
Box 411 Burlington, Kansas 66839 Supervisor Licensing Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation P.O.
Box 411 Burlington, Kansas 66839 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Resident Inspectors Office 8201 NRC Road
- Steedman, Missouri 65077-1032 Supervisor Regulatory Compliance Molf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation P.O.
Box 411 Burlington, Kansas 66839 Mr. Neil S.
Cams President and Chief Executive Officer Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation Post Office Box 411 Burlington, Kansas 66839
E TING ATTENDEES T. Polich S.
Bloom J.
Stone K. Thomas N. Gilles J.Mermiel Utilities D. Moodlan P. Nugent S.
Mideman D. Shafer B. Dacko T. Grebel Public D. Chung NRC/NRR/PD 4-1 NRC/NRR/PD 4-2 NRC/NRR/PD 4-2 NRC/NRR/PD 4-2 NRC/TSB NRC/ORCH/HICB Qo~e 301-415-1038 0-13-H-3 301-415-1313 0-13-E-16 301-415-3063 0-13-E-16 301-415-1362 0-13-E-16 301-415-1180 0-13-H-15 301-415-2821 0-08-H-3 TU Electric 817-897-6887 MCNOC Union Electric TU Electric 316-364-4037 314-554-3104 817-897-0122 Pacific Gas
& Electric 805-545-4720 Scientech 301-468-6425 Pacific Gas
& Electric 805-545-4872 ATTACHMENT 1
0 J
1