ML17296B176
| ML17296B176 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 01/08/1981 |
| From: | Van Brunt E ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE CO. (FORMERLY ARIZONA NUCLEAR |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| ANPP-17033, NUDOCS 8101130329 | |
| Download: ML17296B176 (6) | |
Text
REGULATO INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION STEM (RIDS)
ACCESSION NBR;8101130329 DOC ~ DATE: 81/01/08 NOTARIZED:
NP D
¹ FACIL ~ STN-50 528 Palo Verde Nuclear Station~
Unit ii Ar)zona Publi 0
STN-50-529 Palo Verde Nuclear Stations Unit 2i Arizona Publi
,05000529 STN-50-530 Palo Verde Nuclear Stqtion, Unit 3r Arizona Publi 05000530 AUTH INANE AUTHOR AFFIlIATION VANBRUNTiE~ E.
Arizona Public Service Co.
fp RECIP ~ NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION DENTONiH.R.
office'f Nuclear Reactor Regulationi Director
SUBJECT:
Clarifies technical support ctr manning requirements discussed at 801118 meeting.
DISTRIBUTION CODE:
B001S COPIES RECEIVED:LTR +
ENCL'IZE:"'ITLE:
PSAR/FSAR AMDTS and Related Correspondence NOTES:Standardized Plant
~
Standardized Plant.
Standardized Plant.
0500052$
05000529 05000530 RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME ACTION:
A/D L/CENSNG LEE'gJ.
INTERNAL: ACCID EVAL BR26 CHEM ENG BR 08 CORE PERF BR 10 EMERG PREP 22 GEOSCIENCES 14 HYD/GEO BR 15 II,E 06 LIC QUAL BR MECH ENG BR 18 NRC PDR 02 OP LIC BR PROC/TST REV 20 R
~
BR22 G
F ILE 01.
BR25 COPIES LTTR ENC 1
1 RECIPIENT ID CODE/NPME MIRAGLIAgF, KERRIGAN J ~
04 AUX SYS BR 07 CONT SYS BR 09 EFF TR SYS BR12 EQUIP QUAL 8R13 HUM FACT ENG BR ILC SYS BR 16 lIC GUID BR NATL'NG BR 17 MPA OELD PO~i'JER SYS BR 19 QA BR 21 REAC SYS BR 23 SIT ANAL BR 24 SYS INTERAC BR COPIES LTTR ENCL 1
1 1
1 1
.1 1
1
(
1 1
1 1
1 EXTERNAL: ACRS NSIC 27 05 16 1
1 LPDR 03 1
1 flirt I g natl) 0 TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED:
LTTR 57 ENCL
0 0
II I
p IPXIXUC IBKPEM ClOZBRZWP P. O. BOX 2I666
'HOENIX'RI2ONA85036 January 8, 1981 ANPP-17033 EEVBJr/JMA Dr. H. R. Denton, Director Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555
Subject:
Re:
Dear Dr. Denton:
Cl an ificati on of Techni cal Support Center (TSC) Manning Requirements Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station (PVNGS) Units 1, 2 and 3
Docket Nos. STN-50-528/529/530 f 'yr
~y I 5a On November 18, 1980, a meeting was held with members of your staff, including the PVNGS Project Manager, Janis
- Kerrigan, and Steve
- Ramos, to discuss the proposed PVNGS Technical Support Center (TSC) and the associated manning requireme'nts.
You have been provided copies of drawings for the main TSC and mini-TSC for your information.
The PVNGS design has a single TSC which will serve all three PVNGS uni ts with a "mi'ni-TSC" located 'in the contr'ol room vicinity of each unit for face-'to-face contact with the control room.
The question posed to NRCwas "Does the proposed APS Technical Support Center meet the present NRC criteria?"'f importance was where would the APS person in charge be located during the event.
NRC indicated that they thought this person would be in the mini-TSC, but were not particu-larly concerned because the mini-TSC is considered part of the total TSC complex.
The NRC indicated that it would probably have five of their representatives at the TSC, probably two in the mini-TSC and the remainder in the main facility.
NRC further clarified that the total TSC must be manned and that APS should set up procedures of who is in control during an event, where they are located, and proper justification for this pro-cedure.
NRC wants to be close to the control room because it gives them a better feel for the status of the plant.
It was indicated that offices normally in use could be adapted and used by NRC during an accident for this purpose.
It was suggested as a possibility that the shift technical advisor might be in the mini-TSC and that the plant manager could be in either place.
- Finally, NRC indicated that a talker or. electronic communi-cation was not acceptable.
I 4
l
Dr. H.
R. Denton, Director January 8,
1981 ANPP-17033 '- EEVBJr/JMA Page 2
Regarding the Emergency Operating Facility (EOF), the NRC indicated that the EOF status is still uncertai,n. It was indicated that the
'osition paper is at the Commission for'review and there will'probably be a grandfather clause for the plants with EOF construct'ion'in progress at time of approval.
It was indicated that the'supplement for NUREG-0737 will probably be available by December 1S; 1980 and that the conceptual design of EOF should be submitted to NRC by February 15, 1981 for their review and approval.
As of this date, we have not received any further information regarding the EOF, however',
we understand that an EOF onsite will be acceptable, providing proper habitability requirements are
'rovided.
Based on this meeting, we believe that our proposed design is acceptable to NRC in concept and are proceeding.
We will provide a more detailed design for your review once it is available.
Yery truly yours mx n~
E.
E.
Van Brunt, Jr.
APS Yice President, Nuclear Projects ANPP Project Director EEVBJr/JMA/av cc:
J. Kerrigan