ML17266A474

Responds to Items Discussed in 810608 Meeting Re Dual Licensability of Operators.Operations/Sys Difference Analysis Rept Encl for Official Ruling on Dual Licensability

ML17266A474
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie
Issue date:	06/30/1981
From:	Boissy G, Fincher P, Wethy C FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	Nerses V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML17212A280	List: ML17212A279 ML17266A474
References
229, NUDOCS 8107070325
Download: ML17266A474 (6)

Text

REGULA Y INFORMATION DISTR IBUTIO'STKI>>i, (RIDS)

ACCESSION NBR ! 8107070325 DOC DATE! 81/06/30 NOTARIZED: NO DOCKET i

~

FACILi!50 335 St'e Luc ie'lant Unit 1 ~ F or'i da Power EE Light Co.

1 0 50.<<389 St. Lucie Plant~ Unit 2< Flor ida Power Light Co. 05000389 AUTH'AME" AUTHOR AFFILIATION F INC HER iP e L"e Florida Power L Light Co,"

BOI SSYi G ~ L'e F1 or-ida, Power E Light Co.

NETHYgC ~ MD F or .i da Power E Light Co, 1

REC IP ~ NAME>> RECIPIENT AFFILIATION NERSESr V~ Division of Licensing

~~

SUBJECT:

"'esponds to items discussed in 810608 meeting re dual 1 i censabi i ty of oper ator s.Oper ations/sys di f fer ence.

1 analysis rept encl for>> official ruling on dual

>>>>censab>>1>> ty,. Q~~ f ~~ gy7g g+ r DISTRIBUTION CODE B021S COPIES RECEIVED! lTR t ENCL l,'IZE:

TITLE'! Correspondence>> for Operating, E, Non"Operating Fac71i ty (e~,g,'orth'Ann NOTES!

RECIPIENT COPIES RECIPIENT COPIES IO CODE/NAME( LTTR ENCL ID CODE/NAME, LTTR ENC ACTION; ORB rhr3 BC 04 1 LIC BR rar3 BC 04 1 KRRUTZERgP ~ 1 L'IC BR Ir3 LA NELSONgC ~ 05>> NKRSESgV," 05. 1 INTERNAl'. A/D CORE E ACCID EVAL~ BR28 1 SYS'BR 09 CS'UX 08 1 CHEM ENG BR 1 CottT SYS BR 10. 1 CORE PERF BR 11 1 DIR CHUM FAC S12". 1 D IR g L'I CENSING 1 EFF TR SYS BR13 1 EMRG PRP DKV 1 EMRG PRP LIC EQUIP QUAL BR14 1 FERA. REP DIV GEOSC IEN BR 15 HUI>>1 FACT ENG 16 1 HUM FACT'NG BR 1 HYD/GEO BR 17 1 IEC SYS BR 18 1 IEE>> 07 LX C QUID BR 1 LIC: QUAL BR 1 MATL'NG BR 19 1 CI MECH ENG BR 20 1 MPA 1 NRC PDR 02. OELD 1 OP LIC BR OR ASSESS BR 1 POWER SYS BR 21 PROC/TST REV 22 1 QA BR 23 1 R S BR24 1 REAC SYS BR 25'IT 1 G F ILE- 01 1 ANAL>> BR 26 1 NG BR27 1 EXTERNAL; ACRS 29 1,6 LPDR'TIS 03 NSIC 06 1 0 ~L JUL 09 1981 TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED! LTTR 68 ENCL 61

0 4 1

ll lt A

k n

CI 1i e a f(

1l Jl 1'

POST 'E BOX 128, FT. PIERCE, FLORIDA 33454

/Pkv A%

,'(% II'1 ~ FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY JUL 06 198)t Iha> tera IIMNAmm coMMlss NN Ltr ~ Bk. 229 June 30, 1981 Victor Nerses g( ->$ 5 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission so-Sa Division of Licensing Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Sir:

In response to the items discussed in our meeting of June 8, 1981 concerning dual licensability of Unit 1 and 2 operators, the following information is provided ~

1. Revised Sections 13.1, 13.2 and 13.5 fo the Unit fI2 FSAR. (Enclosure 1)

2. Unit 1/2 Differences Analysis- (Enclosure 2)

The basis for the Differences Analysis was to identify those differences which could affect the Control Room Operators ability to make operating and emergency decisions. Systems with significant safety impact were reviewed.

Systems which in themselves do not have safety significance were not reviewed. Ho~ever, there will be a continuing review program which should ultimately identify differences in systems with no safety impact. The Difference Analysis will be the basis for developing a training program to prepare Unit 81 operators for licensing on Unit P2. All differences subsequently identified will be factored into this training . It is also expected that some of these differences will be eliminated by backfitting on Unit 1. The scope of these backfit items can not be identified at this time.

The analysis identifies the differences by describing the Unit 1 and Unit 2 arrangements, categorizing the significance of the differences as they relate to risk of error, and stating our position as to why the difference is acceptable in terms of the dual licensing concept. Significance categories are defined as follows:

Category 1 High risk of error in Safety-Related activity.

Category 2 Moderate risk of error in Safety-Related activity.

Category 3 - Low risk of error in Safety-Related activity.

Category 4 High risk of error in Non Safety-Related activity.

Category 5 Low risk of error in Non Safety-Related activity-8i0707p325 Bfpg30) gpss V

PDR ADOCK 05000335 PDR PEOPLE... SERVING, PEOPLE

t 1

Victor Nerses Page Two June 29, 1981 After careful review of this analysis it is our position that the granting of dual Unit licenses to PSL operators will not cause undue risk of operational errors. It is also our position that since training on these differences will require review of Unit 1 and Unit 2 information, we will utilize this training to satisfy the Unit Pl Requalification Program requirements.

We therefore request that your staff review the attached data and provide an official ruling as to the acceptability of our position.

Pat L. Pincher Training Supervisor St. Lucie Plant Unit Pl G. J. Boissy Startup Superintendent St. Lucie Plant Unit g2 C. M. Wethy Plant Manager St. Lucie Plant Unit 81 PLF:ls enc

I I 4,4 ~ '

4 4 P4 'I P ll I

I I P P ~

4