ML18026A303
| ML18026A303 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 07/18/1980 |
| From: | Curtis N PENNSYLVANIA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8007250529 | |
| Download: ML18026A303 (14) | |
Text
REGULATOR'INFORMATION DIOTRI8UTION FLEM (BIDS)
ACCESSION NBR:8007250529 DOC ~ DATE: 80/07/18 NOTARIZED:
NO DOCKET FACIL:50-387 Susquehanna Steam Electric Station~
Unit 1F Pennsylva 05000387 50-388 Susquehanna Steam Electric StationF Unit 2F Pennsylva 05000388 AUTH INANE AUTHOR AFFILIATION CURTIS F N ~ N ~
Pepnsylvania Power 8 Light Co.
REC IP, NAME
~ECI~IE~~ AFFILIATIO~
EISENHUTFD.G.
DiVision of LiCensing
SUBJECT:
Comments on 800714-16 meeting w/NRC in BethesdagMD to resolve issues 8
answer questions on FSAR Sections 3.6 10, Open issues were resolved 8 meeting was productive. Licensing managers should have input in selecting meet,i.na,location, DISTRIBUTION CODE:
B001S COPIES RECEIVED:LTR ENCL.~.'IZE:
TITLE: PSAR/FSAR AMDTS and Related Correspondence NOTES:Send ISE 3 copies FSAR 8 all amends.
Send ILE 3 copies FSAR 3 all
- amends, 05000387 05000388 ACTION:
REC IPIENT
,ID CODE/NAME A/D LICENSNG RUSHBROOKFM ~
- STARKER, 05 COPIES I.TTR ENCL RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME YOUNGBLOODFB SERVICE F M ~
COPIES LTTR ENCL INTERNAL: ACCID EVAL BR CHEM ENG BR CORE PERF BR 17 DIR g SFTY TECH EMERG PREP 22 GEOSCIENCES ILC SYS BR 20 NATL ENG BR MPA OELD PROC/TST REV BR S
BR12 G FILE 01 G
BR 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
AUX SYS BR 18 CONT SYS BR DIRF HUM FAC SFY EFF TR SYS BR EQUIP QUAL BR HYD/GEO BR 11 IEE 06 MECH ENG BR NRC PDR 02 PONER SYS BR QA BR 10 REAC SYS BR SIT ANAL BR 27 EXTERNAL: ACRS NSIC 00 16 16 1
1 LPDR 03 4VL 28 etju TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED:
LTTR 52 ENCL
a~
fi II l'I I, E$
I
]l
~
g lI
~
II 4
A I'g
IPPIr,lL TWO NORTH NINTH STREET, ALLENTOWN, PA.
18101 PHONEr (215) 821-5'151 July 18, 1980
/
NORMAN W. CURTIS Vice President-Engineering 8 Construction - Nuclear 821-5381 Mr. Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 SUSQUEHANNA SES REVIEW OF FSAR SECTIONS 3.6-10 ER 100450 FILE 841-2 PLA 510
Dear Mr. Eisenhut:
In an NRC staff letter dated April 21,
- 1980, Pennsylvania Power and Light Company was requested to participate in a meeting to directly resolve issues and answer staff questions on FSAR Sections 3.6-10.
The ob-jective was to resolve each open issue so that staff would then be in a position to produce a final draft SER without further iterrations of written questions and answers.
The meeting was held in Bethesda on July 14-16, 1980.
The purpose of this letter is to provide you with our assess-ment of the process used and the results.
This was an, extremely productive session which re-sulted in resolution of all open issues.
All staff questions were either answered during the meeting or will be answered shortly when we submit a small amount of additional informa-tion.
I was particularly impressed by the level and quality of preparation demonstrated by both staff and licensee*per-sonnel.
The preparation in advance of a draft SER was most helpful to us in this regard. for it helped us to focus our efforts on issues known to be of concern to NRC.
While I cannot state at this time that face-to-face joint review of FSAR sections will ultimately result in a re-duction in manpower requirements, it will certainly signifi-cantly reduce the time required to complete the review of our docket and will lead to a result that is of higher quality than is obtained with normal reviews.
{)Ar, 800'TSE0S2P PENNSYLVANIA POWER 8, LIGHT COMPANY
U I
A
Nr. Darrell G. Eisenhut Page 2
0 I am enthusiastic about the results of this trial program and strongly urge NRC to extend its application to other sections of the FSAR.
We are prepared to work with your Licensing Manager to develop a schedule for this purpose.
We..have one suggestion for improvement.
Depending upon the subject under review, our respective licensing managers should have the flexibilityof selecting a location for review meetings which optimizes the availability of technical people and data.
This can improve the exchange of information and reduce review time.
Uery truly yours, N.
W. Curtis
0
'I
~A Rfoy 0
0O oT
+~
~O
++*++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, O. C. 20555 July ll, l980 TO ALL APPLICANTS FOR OPERATING LICENSES AND CONSTRUCTION PERMIT HOLDERS In the process of establishing priorities for the licensing reviews of operating license applications, we rely principally on the best estimates of the construction completion date of utilities.
In most cases, this date will be confirmed or modified by our Caseload Forecast Panel which usually visits a specific plant site no more than once a year.
Because of a number of recent slippages in applicants'onstruction completion schedules, we believe it is appropriate at this time to request up-to-date schedules from all applicants.
Accordingly, we are requesting you to advise us of your present best estimate of the construction completion date for your facility (facilities) and fuel load target date so that we may establish our licensing priorities based on the latest available data.
For your information, I have enclosed a listing provided to the House Appropriations Subcommittee of target schedules for those plants seeking operating licenses in the next three years.
Those applicants not listed in the enclosure should provide the date they plan to tender their Operating License Application (FSAR and ER) to the NRC.
Upon receipt of your response, we anticipate a potential revision to our present licensing review priorities.
Note that the order of our priorities is somewhat influenced by a hearing which is required for some of the OL applications.
Inasmuch as we are still limited in our casework by our manpower resources, we request that your response be as up-to-date as possible.
Please provide your response within thirty days of receipt of this letter.
- incerely,
Enclosure:
As Stated re
- 1senhut, irector Division o Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ccs w/encl:
Service List
f r
ENCLOSURE 1
Plant F SAR tenders~scented TABLE 1 TARGET DATES OF LICOISlttG STEPS FOR PLANTS SEEKING OPERATIttG LICENSES IN TIIE NEXT TIIREE YEARS ER SER
~
~llenrin "
~Su ) I.
OES FESi Start
~Conti.
EAST CENTRAL AREA RELIABILITYCOOROINATION AGREEHENT
~Const
- Con, ASIB
~A.kst.
RRC Est
. De~onion OL Issued llnsser I
5/75 9/75 6/75
'/75 1/79 3/79 10/BOE 10/76 6/77 6/79 12/BOE 8/BOE 2/SIE 2/BIE 2/BIE Fermi 2
10/74 4/75 10/74 4//5 3/BIE 4/BIE 6/Bg 12/BDE 5/BIE 7/lllE 0/BIE 6/BIE 11/BIE 11/BIE li/BIE ~
6/81E 8/BIE Htdland 2
8/77 11/77 3/78 4/78 10/82E 11/82E 1/83E 6/BOE 11/BOE 2/83E 8/83E 4/84E 4/84E 10/83E 4/84E (I)
Htdland 1
8/77 Il/77 3/78 4/78 10/82E 11/82E 1/83E 6/SOE 1 I/SOE 2/83E 8/83E 9/84E 9/84E 10/83E 9/84E (I)
Harble t till 6/79 3/82E 6/19 4/83E I/84E 2/84E 4/84E ll/83E 4/84E 8/84E I/85E 4/82E 4/85E 3/BSE 4/BSE (2)
Cninanehe 3/78 ELECTRIC RELIABILITYCOUNCIL OF TEXAS 5/78 3/78 I/79 3/81 E 4/81 E 6/8 1 E 9/BOE 2/81 E 9/8 I E 12/81E 3/81E 2/82E 2/82E 2/82E South Texas 1
5/78 7/78 5/78 7/78 11/82E 12/82E 3/83f 4/82E 9/82E 4/83E 7/83f 9/83E 9/83E 9/83E 9/83E Sal eEE> 2 Sus ue-anna 8/71 4/78 8/71 7/7I 7/71 10/71 7/78 5/78 6/78 2/SIE HIO-ATLAttTICAREA COUttCIL 2/79 4/BOE(LP) 10/72 4/73 10/BOE(FP)
None ReqBd 2/80 4/BOE IIA 4/BOE (Ll')
10/BOE (I'I')
10/BIE 10/BIE 3/SIE 3/8IE 5/BIE 6/79 11/BOE 6/8 IE 8/8 IE 4/BI 10/BIE 12/BOC I/8 1 E Sus ue-hanna 4/78 7/78 5/78 6/78 2/BIE 3/81E 5/BIE 6/79 11/BOE 6/BlE 8/8 I E 4/82E 4/83E 10/8 I E 4/8 3E I2/BOE I/81 E 3/81 E
FSIUt I'laol tumtcred ltucholcd LR Tcndercdt Uuckctcd r 2 Sl tt ~
SEll AC)IS Sw 1 >I.
I)L5 fCSi lltl)-AICEIIICA IIITI'It)'t)l)L I)ET)tt)III'.
~lta>>rla '
Start
~C)>tu ).
Cei~>LL. Ca
~ll iLsl.
tlllC LsL ASLudi IlrclsIa I t)L I SSI)cd I a)alla I
La\\~lla 2
~lt rust I
~ll I'IIII 2 9/76 5/ll 9/76 5(ll 6/70 11/70 6/1tl 11/18 10/16 5/1I 10/76 5/1 7 9/UOE lo(OUE 12/uuL'/lu ll/70 9/one I(1/ot)c 12/oof 3/7u 1)/lu 6(78 11/10 10/OIE 11/l)lf l(t)2f 2/Ol f.
7/Ulf 6/10 11/78 10/Ul f.
) I/Olf.
I/t)2f 2(01C 7/Ulf 2/U2C 4/tl2L'/UUC IU/I)IL 4/02f.
7/OZE 2/02L 4/UZL 6/Ulf 10/IIIC 4/03E 1/03E ttone Rc)I')I 6/I)I)E 12/UUC
)lone ltc)1' 6/OIL 2/02L'IA 6/UZL 12/ttlL 6/s)ZL 12/0IE I?/Uut 2/l)ZL I/uZl 1/03L'ra IdHood I
~ratduoud 2
ri/10 11(18 6/10 6/18
'>>/70 6/70 11/10 10/Olf 1 I/OI C I/02E I/03E 6/83E 11/ZU 10/0 I E
) 1/Olf.
I/t)2C
'/03E
- 1>/03E 2/tl2E 4/t)2C 7/t)3E 10/U3E 2/t)2C 4/t)ZC 1/u3f 10103C 5/03C 6/04E 4/t)4C 6/USE 6/OZI.
IZ/03f.
6/UZE 12/031.
I Iu4C 6/t)SL'C>>l Ianna I
Clmsaa 1
lu/79 0/UUE
)0/79 IZ/8))f 6/t)2f 1/82E II/U2C 7/Ulf
)2/Olf 9/U2E 10/UZE 10/UZC 12/02E 12/79 lt)/80E 12/19 3/Olf 9/82E 10/02E I 1/02E 10/U1f 3/OZE 12/02E I/t)3C 4/UZE 3/03E 3/03L 3/03L 12/02E 12/02I.
Shureliau t)URTIIEAST P0))fit COO)toit)ATIIIG COUttCIL 9/15 I/16 9/15 I/7()
9/Uuf 10/UOE l2/UUC 3/ll 10/1 7 I/UlC 0/ulf 1 I/uuf lu/8 If
'lo/OIL'u/ul t'tnrtu Anna 2 5/13
~Se co ah I
>2>2)
~L'iuu ah 2
>2/2)
SOUTIICASTERN ELECT)I IC REL IAUILITY CUUttCIL (3) 5/13 5(70 6(70 e(76 Illy 4/Ott (LV) 12/12 4(73>>lyr>
10/1)t)C(1'P) 9/75 1/14 (3) 3I79 5/19 2/uo (LI')
10/11 1/74 ttnnc 9/OUC(l'P]'/74 1/14 (3)
(3) 3/19 5/79 5/Ol E 10/1) 7/74 ttonc 1/14 ti/71 II/15 I)cd)'4 II14 Itc)t. d 7/14 4/UO 4/UO II(71 12/15 2/00 2/80 IIA 2/15 U/Ot)E 5/UI E IIA 2/15 4/ut) (I I
~ )
lt)/)00.(I I')
2/llu (I I')
9/IIIII(I I')
5/IIII
F SAR ER SER" Hearind" Const. Cot~22."'SLD" OL rtaet Tendere~oeaeted Tendered ooeaeted EER AcRE
~~oat.
REE FEE*
start
~on.
~dr
.~~sate.
rtc Est.
Rentsron Issued SOUTIIEASTERN ELECTRIC RELIABILITYCOUNCIL COH'T 8/78 3/ll 8/IG 4/77 5/BOE 11/BOE 4/79 ll/GOE (4) 5/74 3/78 4/78 7/GOE 10/75 4/76 HcGuire 1
4/74 5/74 4/74 5/74 4/74 10/76 (5) 8/78 3/77 1/82E 2/82E 5/74 3/18 4/78 7/GOE 10/75 4/76 8/78 4/77 4/14 HcGuire 2
(5) 1/81E 2/Blf 4/GIE 6/78 12/18 Hone Req'd 9/BOE 5/81E Matts Dar 1
6/76 Matl.s Gar 2 6/76 10/76 (5)
(5) 1/81E 2/BIE 4/81E 6/78 12/78 Hone Req'd 6/81E 3/82E 4/19 2/82E (4)
NA 5/81E NA 3/82E Sruner 2
12/26
~Forte 2
8/13 Del1etonl.e 1
2/78 Oellefonte 2
2/78 CataEdba 1
3/'l9 2/77 I2/76 2/71 8/BOE 9/BOE 11/BOE 6/79 9/BOE 12/BOE 2/81E 12/BOE 12/BOE 10/BOE 12/BOE 8/73 8/73 8/73 5/75 6/75 7/BOE(LP) 7/74 12/74 12/GOE(FP)
None Req'd 6/GOE 7/BOE 6/78 2/78 6/78 2/82E 3/BZE 6/82E 2/Blf 7/81E tione Req'd 1/82E 7/82E 6/78 2/78 6/78 2/82E 3/82E 6/82E 2/81E 7/BIE Hone Req'd 6/83E 6/83E 10/BOE 3/79 10/BOE 8/82E 9/82E 10/82E 5/82E 9/82E 12/GZE 2/83E 4/83E 4/83E 4/81E 4/81E 2/81E NA 7/Gof(LP)
)2/GOE(fP)
NA 1/82E tlA 6/03E 4/83E 4/83E SOUTNMEST POMER POOL Grand tluT I
Materford 3 Molf Creek 4/78 6/78 4/78 6/78 5/81E 6/81E 9/78 I2/78 9/78 12/78 5/81E 6/81E 2/80 3/BIE 2/80 10/81E I/83E 2/83E 8/81E 2/Blf 7/81E tione Req'd 9/GIE 9/81E NA 9/BIE 8/81E 3/81E 8/81E 9/BIE 12/81E 10/81E 2/82E 2/BZE 2/GZE 4/83E 5/82E 10/82E 7/83E 8/83E 10/82E 10/83E 10/83E 10/83L Diablo
~Z'an on 2
8 ial21 o 2~an an 2
'MESTERH SYSTEHS COORDINATING COUNCIL
'0/73 10/73 8/71 8/71 10/74 7/78 5/BOE(LP) 12/72 5/73 1/81 (FP) 10/13 10/73 8/71 8/7 I 10/74 7/78 1/81 (FP) 12/72 5/73 10/77 8/BOE 5/GOE 5/BOE 10/GOE 10/Gill.(LP) 12/76 I2/76 I/Olf(rV) 10/'l7 8/GOE 3/8 IE 3/81E 10/BOE 3/8 I E 12/76 12/76
Ik1ant I Shll fenaore~ocketed CO
'tendered llnckated SC ~
tICIIS Sflt
~SU 3 II ~
llcarl ua'onst~tea ar ASlll'l UES fESk Start
~fn
~A>iEtt.
lutC Est, Uncle on issued Sdll flnnfre E II/76 3/77 MESTftttt SYSICIIS CUAIIIIIIIATtttOCUUUCIL CUII'T 11/76 3(77 0/OAE 9/UAE IZ/00$
ll/lU 10/UUC I/UIC 4/OIC I I/UUE 5/OIC 10/UUE ll/UUC 6/Ulf 6/UIL I/01 C Ssln ano(re 3
lt.>stS~Int tnn tt3st:Indra I I/76 3/77 11/76 3/7) 8/UOE st/AUE l2/Wg 3/78 6/70 12/76 4/77 3/OZE 4/02C P/UZE 11/78 IU/OUE I/UIE 4/Ul E I/OlC 5/02E IU/UUC 11/UUE I/UIE 6/UIE ttonn Iteq'd 7/02L'/02E 6/UIC 5/02L I/0lf 7/UZL I3aln Verite II)/179 l2/8IIE
$2/79 Ig/UIIC P/82$
8/82E 7/A)E 7/OIE 12/01$
8/UZE 10/02$
'I l/UZC 12/02E 12/02E IZ/UZL
ASSUMPTIONS USED FOR PROJECTING TARGET SCHEDULES Coranission decision on full-power NTOL requirements made in June 1980.
Commission decision on treatment of Class 9 accidents in NEPA statements adopts staff recommendation in SECY 80-131 and is made in June 1980.
Projected safety reviews are generally scheduled to start 33 months prior to construction completion dates including time for ACRS review and hearings.
Projected environmental reviews are generally scheduled to start 24 months prior to construction completion dates including time for hearing.
For plants with construction completion dates before the end of 1982 the target schedules for OL review were developed, based on the NRC construction completion dates, on a plant specific basis to minimize delays in OL issuance.
FOOTNOTES fOR TABLE I E
'enotes estimated date hl Oate entered is for last supplement to SER/FES issued.
Mhere two entries are made, first entry concerns radiological safety matters and second concerns environmental matters.
A single entry indicates Hearing and/or ASLB decision considered both radiological and safety matters.
The difference in estimates for construction completion, be-tween the applicant and NRC, is attributable to an independent assessment by the NRC staff of factors affecting construction completion.
GeneraIly, the NRC staff estimates are more con-servative (i.e., later completion dates) and are based upon actual experience in constructing similar plants.
Second unit of a dual unit facility is usually completed about 18 months after first unit.
(LP)
(FP) denotes low power denotes full power (2)
(4)
Applicant construction schedule slipped from 11/80 to 4/84 due to foundation problems with auxiliary building and financial considerations.
Work stoppage order issued by NRC in August 1979 for gA-related problems on safety portions of facility.
NRC estimates about 18 months before full-scale construction will resume.
- Thus, the large difference in construction complete dates.
Environmental reviews for Sequoyah I and 2 were conducted under a lead agency agreement with TYA.
TVA's final environmental statements (FES) incorporated and addressed the AEC's comoents on the respective draft statements.
The FES's were then accepted as t'e NEPA statements for the project.
Schedule shown assumes hearing record will not be reopened for THI-2 issues.
If ASLB reopens record, full power OL issuance may be delayed.
TVA's FES for Matts Bar I and 2 were considered to be the environmental report submitted to NRC.