ML18026A303

Comments on 800714-16 Meeting W/Nrc in Bethesda,Md to Resolve Issues & Answer Questions on FSAR Sections 3.6-10. Open Issues Were Resolved & Meeting Was Productive.Licensing Managers Should Have Input in Selecting Meeting Location

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 (BIDS)

FLEM 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. 05000387 Send ILE 3 copies FSAR 3 all amends, 05000388 REC IPIENT COPIES RECIPIENT COPIES

,ID CODE/NAME I.TTR ENCL ID CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL ACTION: A/D LICENSNG YOUNGBLOODFB RUSHBROOKFM ~ SERVICE F M ~

STARKER, 05 INTERNAL: ACCID EVAL BR 1 AUX SYS BR 18 CHEM ENG BR 1 CONT SYS BR CORE PERF BR 17 1 DIRF HUM FAC SFY DIR g SFTY TECH 1 EFF TR SYS BR EMERG PREP 22 1 EQUIP QUAL BR GEOSCIENCES 1 HYD/GEO BR 11 ILC SYS BR 20 1 IEE 06 NATL ENG BR 1 MECH ENG BR MPA 1 NRC PDR 02 OELD 1 PONER SYS BR PROC/TST REV BR 1 QA BR 10 S BR12 1 REAC SYS BR G FILE 01 1 SIT ANAL BR 27 G BR EXTERNAL: ACRS 16 16 LPDR 03 NSIC 00 1 1 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 efforts on issues known to be of concern to NRC.

it helped us to focus our 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.

PENNSYLVANIA POWER 8, LIGHT COMPANY

{)Ar, 800'TSE0S2P

U I

A

Nr. Darrell G. Eisenhut 0 Page 2 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 flexibility of 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

UNITED STATES 0

O NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, O. C. 20555 oT

+~

++*++

~O 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, re . 1senhut, irector Division o Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

As Stated ccs w/encl:

Service List

f r ENCLOSURE 1 TABLE 1 TARGET DATES OF LICOISlttG STEPS FOR PLANTS SEEKING OPERATIttG LICENSES IN TIIE NEXT TIIREE YEARS Plant F SAR tenders~scented Tendered ER Oocketed SER ~

I.

~llenrin " ~Const Con,

• ASIB OL SER ACRS ~Su ) OES FESi Start ~Conti. ~A.kst. RRC Est . De~onion Issued EAST CENTRAL AREA RELIABILITY COOROINATION AGREEHENT 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 6/81E 8/BIE 6/BIE 11/BIE 11/BIE li/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)

Htdl and 1 8/77 Il/77 3/78 4/78 10/82E 11/82E 1/83E 6/SOE I/SOE 2/83E 8/83E 1 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)

ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL OF TEXAS Cninanehe 3/78 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 HIO-ATLAttTIC AREA COUttCIL Sal eEE> 2 8/71 8/71 7/7I 7/71 10/71 2/79 4/BOE(LP) 10/72 4/73 None ReqBd 2/80 4/BOE IIA 4/BOE (Ll')

10/BOE(FP) 10/BOE (I'I')

Sus ue- 4/78 7/78 5/78 6/78 2/SIE 3/8IE 5/BIE 6/79 11/BOE 6/8 IE 8/8 IE 4/BI 10/BIE 10/BIE 10/BIE anna 12/BOC I/8 1 E 3/SIE Sus ue- 4/78 7/78 5/78 6/78 2/BIE 3/81E 5/BIE 6/79 11/BOE 6/Bl E 8/8 I E 4/82E 4/83E 10/8 I E 4/8 3E hanna I2/BOE I /81 E 3/81 E

r 2 FSIUt LR Sl tt ~ ~lta>>rla ' Cei~>LL. Ca ASLudi t)L I'laol tumtcred ltucholcd Tcndercdt Uuckctcd SEll AC)IS Sw 1 >I. I)L 5 fCSi Start ~C)>tu ). ~ll iLsl. tlllC LsL IlrclsIa I I SSI)cd lltl)-AICEIIICA IIITI'It)'t)l)L I)ET)tt)III'.

I a)alla I 9/76 5/ll 10/16 5/1I 9/UOE lo(OUE 12/uuL'/lu ll/70 ttone Rc) I')I 6/I)I) E 12/UUC I?/Uut La\ ~ lla 2 9/76 5(ll 10/76 5/1 7 9/one I(1/ot)c 12/oof 3/7u 1)/lu )lone ltc)1' 6/OIL 2/02L'IA 2/l)ZL

~lt rust I 6/70 11/70 6(78 11/10 10/OIE 11/l)lf l(t)2f 2/Ol f. 7/Ulf 2/U2C 4/tl2L'/UUC 4/02f. 7/OZE 6/UZL I/uZl IU/I)IL 12/ttlL

~ll I'IIII 2 6/1 tl 11/18 6/10 11/78 10/Ul f. ) I/Ol f. I/t)2f 2(01C 7/Ul f 2/02L 4/UZL 4/03E 1/03E 6/s)ZL 6/Ulf 10/IIIC 12/0IE 1/03L'ra Ianna I dHood I ri/10 11(18 6/10 11/10 10/Ol f 1 I/O I C I /02E I/03E 6/83E 2/tl2E 4/t)2C 5/03C 6/04E 6/OZI. I Iu4C 7/t)3E 10/U3E I Z/03f.

~ ratduoud 2 6/18 '>>/70 6/70 11/ZU 10/0 I E ) 1/Ol f. I/t)2C '/03E -

1>/03E 2/t)2C 4/t)ZC 4/t)4C 6/USE 6/UZE 1/u3f 10103C 12/031. 6/t)SL'C>>l I 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 12/02E 12/02I.

Clmsaa 1 12/79 lt)/80E 12/19 3/Ol f 9/82E 10/02E I 1/02E 10/U1 f 3/OZE 12/02E I/t)3C 4/UZE 3/03E 3/03L 3/03L t)URTIIEAST P0))fit COO)toit)ATIIIG COUttCIL Shureliau 9/15 I/16 9/15 I/7() 9/Uuf 10/UOE l2/UUC 3/ll 10/1 7 I/UlC 0/ul f 1 I/uuf lu/8 I f 'lo/OIL'u/ul SOUTIICASTERN ELECT)I IC REL IAUILITY CUUttCIL t'tnrtu Illy 4(73>>lyr>

'/74 Anna 2 5/13 5/13 5(70 6(70 e(76 4/Ott (LV) 12/12 ti/71 4/UO 4/UO II(71 4/ut) (I I ) ~

10/1)t)C(1'P) 9/75 II/15 12/15 lt)/)00. (I I')

~Se co ah I >2>2) 1/14 (3) (3) 3I79 5/19 2/uo (LI') 10/11 1/74 ttnnc I)cd)'4 2/00 2/80 IIA 2/llu (I I')

9/OUC(l'P] II14 2/15 9/IIIII (I I')

~L'iuu ah 2 >2/2) 1/14 (3) (3) 3/19 5/79 5/Ol E 10/1) 7/74 ttonc Itc)t. d U/Ot)E 5/UI E IIA 5/II II 1/14 7/14 2/15

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 RELIABILITY COUNCIL COH'T HcGuire 1 4/74 5/74 4/74 5/74 3/78 4/78 7/GOE 10/75 4/76 8/78 8/IG 5/BOE 11/BOE 4/79 ll/GOE (4) 3/ll 4/77 HcGuire 2 4/14 5/74 4/74 5/74 3/18 4/78 7/GOE 10/75 4/76 8/78 8/78 1/82E 2/82E 4/19 2/82E (4) 3/77 4/77 Matts Dar 1 6/76 10/76 (5) (5) 1/81E 2/Blf 4/GIE 6/78 12/18 Hone Req'd 9/BOE 5/81E NA 5/81E 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 NA 3/82E Sruner 2 12/26 2/77 I2/76 2/71 8/BOE 9/BOE 11/BOE 6/79 9/BOE 12/BOE 2/81E 12/BOE 12/BOE 4/81E 4/81E 10/BOE 12/BOE 2/81E

~Forte 2 8/13 8/73 8/73 8/73 5/75 6/75 , 7/BOE(LP) 7/74 12/74 None Req'd 6/GOE 7/BOE NA 7/Gof(LP) 12/GOE(FP) )2/GOE(fP)

Del1etonl.e 1 2/78 6/78 2/78 6/78 2/82E 3/BZE 6/82E 2/Blf 7/81E tione Req'd 1/82E 7/82E NA 1/82E Oellefonte 2 2/78 6/78 2/78 6/78 . 2/82E 3/82E 6/82E 2/81E 7/BIE Hone Req'd 6/83E 6/83E tlA 6/03E CataEdba 1 3/'l9 10/BOE 3/79 10/BOE 8/82E 9/82E 10/82E 5/82E 9/82E 12/GZE 2/83E 4/83E 4/83E 4/83E 4/83E SOUTNMEST POMER POOL Grand tluT I 4/78 6/78 4/78 6/78 5/81E 6/81E 8/81E 2/Blf 7/81E tione Req'd 9/GIE 9/81E NA 9/BIE Materford 3 9/78 I2/78 9/78 12/78 5/81E 6/81E 8/81E 3/81E 8/81E 9/BIE 12/81E 10/81E 2/82E 2/BZE 2/GZE Molf Creek 2/80 3/BIE 2/80 10/81E I/83E 2/83E 4/83E 5/82E 10/82E 7/83E 8/83E 10/82E 10/83E 10/83E 10/83L

'MESTERH SYSTEHS COORDINATING COUNCIL Diablo '0/73 10/73 8/71 8/71 10/74 7/78 5/BOE(LP) 12/72 5/73 10/77 8/BOE 5/GOE 5/BOE 10/GOE 10/Gill. (LP)

~Z'an on 2 1/81 (FP) 12/76 I2/76 I/Olf(rV) 8 i al21 o 2~an an 2 10/13 10/73 8/71 8/7 I 10/74 7/78 1/81 (FP) 12/72 5/73 10/'l7 8/GOE 3/8 IE 3/81E 10/BOE 3/8 I E 12/76 12/76

Ik1 ant I Shll fenaore~ocketed 'tendered CO llnckated SC ~ tICIIS Sflt >

~SU 3 II ~ UES fESk llcarl ua'onst~tea Start ~fn . ~A>iEtt. lutC ar Est, ASlll'l Uncle on issued MESTftttt SYSICIIS CUAIIIIIIIATtttOCUUUCIL CUII'T Sdll flnnfre E II/76 3/77 11/76 3(77 0/OAE 9/UAE IZ/00$ ll/lU 10/UUC I/UIC 4/OIC I I/UUE 5/OIC 6/Ul f 6/UIL 10/UUE ll/UUC I/01 C Ssln ano(re 3 I I/76 3/77 11/76 3/7) 8/UOE st/AUE l2/Wg 11/78 IU/OUE I/UIE 4/Ul E I/OlC 5/02E 6/UIC 5/02L IU/UUC 11/UUE I/0lf lt.>stS~Int tnn 3/78 6/70 . 12/76 4/77 3/OZE 4/02C P/UZE I/UIE 6/UIE ttonn Iteq'd 7/02L'/02E 7/UZL tt3st:Indra I3aln Verite I I)/179 l2/8IIE $ 2/79 I g/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) denotes low power (FP) denotes full power Applicant construction schedule slipped from 11/80 to 4/84 due to foundation problems with auxiliary building and financial considerations.

(2) 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.

(4) 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. NRC then issued its own OES and FFS for project.