ML19224C459
| ML19224C459 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/22/1979 |
| From: | Ross D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| FOIA-79-98 NUDOCS 7907020414 | |
| Download: ML19224C459 (2) | |
Text
7 1<#
7, j.acog*
UNITED STATES g
f y
o$
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION pd j
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 5
~ e
'I....'
MAY 2 21979 MEMORANDUM FOR:
. Denton, Director, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation II &
C6**
FROM:
D. F. Ross, Jr., Deputy Director, Division of Project Management
SUBJECT:
RESPONSES T BULLETINS-9_A It has now been over a month since we issued the first round of bulletins.
Our bulletin aiew group has completed its initial appraisal and in many instances has prepared a draft SER. Some policy matters nead to be settled first, however, based on the following:
1.
Most BWR responses are in, but there are some incompletes (see Tables 1 and 2).
2.
Most CE responses are in (see Tables 3, 4, 5) but more work is needed.
3.
Considerable detail is available on W plants (see Appendix A, in draft fonn), which contains many " unsatisfactory", or " inadequate" judgments.
4.
The ACRS was told May 10 that many plants were not in c~npliance with the bulletins.
5.
The utilities do not necessarily pass through to us the NSSS advice.
(The W advice on item 7 of IEB 79-06A is enclosed as Appendix B) 6.
NSSS advice is prescriptive on resetting HPI, and somewhat evasive (for W) for keeping RCP running (see Appendix B).
7.
Utilities have indicated an interest in negotiating directly with us on terms of the bulletin. NSSS are somewhat apprehensive about comitting utilities.
3.
We have agreed to eexamine the FPI subcooling and RCP running, to the extent that contrSuting to an accident is to be avoided.
9.
We don't have time, and NSSS probably doesn't either, to meet with us on each operating plant to discuss the same matter.
The major conclusions are these:
a.
many plants are not in confonnance with bulletins; b.
some technical points need a timely reexamination; and, c.
we don't have time to have inoividual meetings.
79070209l4 Aots m AAl g-92
H. Denton MAY 2 2 E79 From this it is seen that only an ad hoc owner's group will work.
T. Anderson of W thought such a group worthwhile, but did not believe utilities would agree not to be represented.
In order to relieve this impasse', what I propose to do is:
1.
send letter to each utility, summarizing the major deficiencies of the whole class of plant (e.g., all W plants get the same letter).
2.
dule a meeting with them collectively on May 30 to go over the matters; g
3.
strongly urge an owners' group to function the rest of CY 1979 on bulletins and the generic reports to be issued.
We will need a united front from classes of utilities in view of the direction the W and CE generic reports are going, in order to conserve time (ours and theirs).
The goals of these collective meetings (one W, one CE) are to bring all plants into reasonable compliance with IEB 79-06A and B, and to describe the work expected to result from the generic reports.
Letters along this line are being prepared; a draft is enclosed.
6g
Enclosures:
D. F.
oss, Jr., Deputy Director As stated Division of Project Management cc:
A. Schwencer R. Reid J. Heltemes D. Ziemann T. Novak A. Thadani R. Mattson V. Stello E. Case R. Boyd 271 30
DRAFT Kane:ms
'1 C'l 5/22/79
[,3 g,I L
tiame, Title Utility Street Address City, State Zip Code Dear Mr.
SUBJECT:
STATUS OF '2TAFF REVIEW OF RESP 0tiSES TO I&E BULLETItiS 79-06 AtlD 79-06/.
We have complated a preliminary review of the responses to I&E Bulletins 79-06,79-06A, and amendment 1 to 79-06A. The purpose of this letter is twofold, i.e. to advise you of the results of that review, with particular emphasis on potential problem areas, and to identify related concerns which we believe require further examination.
In this regard we have scheduled a meeting with all owners of operating plants with Westinghouse nuclear steam supply systems. This meeting will be held on May 30, 1979, at our Phillips Building office in Bethesda, Maryland.
You will be expected to discuss in dei. ail at that meeting those matters identified below along with a rehedule for providing the infor-mation requested:
1)
Our preliminary review of the bulletin responses indicates that a number of the bulletin items are not yet resolved. pro-vides a summary of our current assessment of the responses to the bulletins issued on Westinghouse plants.
2)
In certain instances the Westinghouse recomendations for individual bulletin items differ from one or mm utility responses. We expect to resolve each such exception prior to cur approval. A copy of the Westinghouse recomendations is provided as Enclosure 2 to this letter.
271 302
' 3)
We are finalizing a generic report on all Westinghouse operating s
plants. Although this report is not yet complete, we expect that it will recomend further analyses of transients and smsll breaks, the development of appropriate guidance to operators which is indi-cated by these analyses, and training of operators on plant simulators in the use of these new procedures.
4)
In certain instances, utilities are utilizing fuel and relying on safety analyses, neither of which are provided by Westinghouse. As a result it is not clear to us what the respective roles of the utilities, Westinghouse, the fuel suppliers, and/or other parties would be in implementing those requirements described in item (3) above. We need a clear and concise definition of their respective roles in all such cases.
5)
NUREG-0560 contains a number of recomendations that apply to Westinghouse pl ants. We need a clear and concise position from all utilities with respect to each of these recommendations.
6)
The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) has issued five letters to the Comission asfresult of their examination of the TMI-2 accident. We need a clear and concise position from all utilities with respect to each of the recommendations contained in these letters.
A summary of the ACRS recommendations is included in Enclosure 3 to this letter.
7)
Individual utilities have indicated an interest in negotiating directly with t'ie staff regarding the bulletin items. The staff dces not have time to meet with each utility to resolve these items.
271 303
o
_3 we 8)
The Westinghous.e advi.ce is presurptive on resetting of the high pressure injection system and incomplete as to the need for keeping the reactor coolant pumps running.
It is clear to us at this point that there are a significant number of technical issues yet to resolve for a large number of Westinghouse operating plants. There are limited resources available within the staff to perform the necessary work. This situation is exacerbated by the need to conduct similar and concurrent activities with those owners of B&W, CE, and GE operating plants. At the same time there is a need to resolve these matters promptly.
In order to resolve the issues described above in a prompt and expeditious manner we believe there is a compelling need for the development of an owner's group for Westinghouse operating plants. We expect that such a group would be needed for the remai: der of calendar year 1979. Owner's groups
~
have worked effectively in the past in alleviating staff aad industry resources on the resolution of other generic problems. We strongly urge you te meet with the other owners of Westinghouse operating plants to consider the formation of such a group prior to our meeting on May 30. We would expect this to be one of the principal agenda items at that meeting.
If you require any clarification of the matters discussed in this letter please contact Patrict D. O'Reilly, the staff's assigned project manager for these activities on Westinghouse plants. Mr. O'Reilly may be reached on (301) 492-7745.
Sincerely, D. F. Ross 271 304
_