ML19242C520
| ML19242C520 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 07/12/1979 |
| From: | Gilinsky V, Hendrie J, Kennedy R NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19242C521 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 7908100524 | |
| Download: ML19242C520 (37) | |
Text
-
/<-
l(} (_i V!- Q ]
L.
4 y.
i.
ff_ H
\\
Q,
(-
y NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION
(
IN THE MATTER OF:
PUBLIC MEETING DISCUSSION OF LICENSING SCHEDULES AND STAFF IMPACT
(
Place -
Washington, D.
C.
Thursday, 12 July 1972 Pages 1 - 31 Date -
T.i. phone:
(202)347 3700 ACE -FEDERAL REPORTERS,INC.
,.s,,......
- ~
' ~
OfficialReponers 444 North Ccoitel Street 790 8100(N Washington, D.C. 20001 NATIONWIDE COVERAGE. DAILY
1
(
DISCLAIMER This is an unofficial transcript of a meeting of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission held on Thursday, July 12, 1979 in the Commissions 's of fices at 1717 H Street, N. W.,
Washington, D.
C.
The.
meeting was open to public attendance and observation.
This transcript has not been reviewed, corrected, or edited, and it may contain inaccuracies.
The transcript is intended solely for general informational purposes.
As provided by 10 CFR 9.103, it is not part of the formal or informal record of decision of the matters discussed.
Expressions of opinion in this transcript do not necessarily reflect final determinations or beliefs.
No pleading or other paper may be filed with the Commission in any proceeding as the result of or add'ressed to any statement or argument contained herein, except as the Commission may authorize.
.. f '
u_m-.
l 2
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 1
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
3 DISCUSSION OF LICENSING SCHEDULES AND STAFF IMPACT 4
5 PUBLIC MEETING 6!
7 Room 1130 1717 H Street, N.W.
8 Washington, D.
C.
9 Thursday, 12 July 1979 10,
The Commission Meeting was convened, pursuant to notice, 11 at 9:50 a.m.
1 i
I 12 ;
{
I PRESENT:
,13 DR. JOSEPH M.
HENDRIE, Chairman 14 VICTOR GILINSKY, Commissioner RICHARD T.
KENNEDY, Commissioner 15 l PETER A.
B RADFORD, Commissioner i
JOHN F. AHEARNE, Commissioner i
16 l l
l ALSO PRESENT:
17 !
j Messrs. Lazo, Gossick, Vassallo, Knight, Hoyle, Bickwit, 18 l
and Cunningham.
19,
i 20 t 21 I
22 l l
23 24 co Federet Reporters, Inc.
25
.- e n c,,.
l L,
- ~
3 MELTZER/mm1 1
P_ g Q g { { g I_ E Q S, 2
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
If we could come to order, 3
please.
4 The Commission meets this morning for a discussion 5
of licensing schedules and staff impacts associated with those 6
efforts.
7 I am glad to see the assembled staff. Please go 8
ahead, Lee.
9 MR. GOSSICK:
Let me ask if Harold has anything 10 that he would introduce inthe briefing.
l II MR. DENTON: We have a two-part presentation this 12 morning.
The first part will be given by Dom Vassallo
(
13 talking about the schedule we foresee for the near term.
14 These are schedules that we can meet largely with existing 15 resources.
16 The second part will bring you up to date on our 17 efforts to regain the sche <1ules by gaining assistance from 18 other agencies in our internal reprogramming.
19 I would like to mentioned two of the "Lassons i
l 20 l Learned reports.
A draft is being circulated this week within 21 NRR staff. We hope to have a report back from the press 22 next week to the Commission for them to see.
j 23 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes. We have scheduled a continuaJ 1
24 tion for this discussion to pick up on that, for next week, l
co-Federal Reporters. Inc.
25 Thursday afternoon.
c o r e < n, u.
s.-
l
4 mm2 1
MR. DENTON: We briefed the ACRS Subcommittee 2
yesterday on the results of the data in the " Lessons Learned" 3
group.
f 4
So, Dom, why don't you discuss the near-term 5
discussion.
6 MR. VASSALLO:
Yes.
7 If I can have the near-term OL slide.
8 (Slide) 9 If you recall, the last time we had indicated these i
10 were the so-called near-term projected OLs, and since the Il last time, we have gotten our resources together; those that l
12 are remaining in the review branches, we haw identified 13 for at least thefirst five applications what the remaining 14 Outstanding issues are not counting TMI-related issues.
i 15 And we have established a schedule for cleaning l
16 up these issues and have the branches committed to do this.
17 And what you see is what we feel we can accomplish in making 18 a complete licensing effort by the dates shown.
I 19 One of the problems is this only accounts for these :
20 normal -- results of normal review and tnose outstanding 21 l issues that have resulted from it.
Superimposed ca this you 22 will have to take into account the TMI-related issues; that 23 is the " Lessons Learned" coming from that effort, and also the results of Denny Ross's efforts on Bulletins and Orders.
24 Aa-FMwat Reporters,1N:.
l 25 Salem No. 2 as you can see, is complete.
In other C ana o =
l buv
~
j
5 1
words it is ready for fuel loading.
2 We have approximately 20 or so outstanding issues 3
which we feel we can clean up and be ready for making a 4
decision on those matters by September.
The question there is 5
whether we will be ready to havethe TMI-related matters factored 6
in, and the appropriate actions taken by the utility by this 7
time.
8 MR. DENTON:
I might mention what my thought is 9i on the TMI-related issues.
i I
l 10 We have had several meetings with the Salem l
11 l Applicant on the TMI-related issues.
I will probably have the I
12
" Lessons Learned" task force do the review of the Salem's l
t 13 instrumentation of the " Lessons Learned" items in order to set 14 the pattern. Once we have gotten several reviews done by that i
15 organization, we will probably fold the " lessons Learned" back '
16 into the normal staff review.
l I
17 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: You are implying here, Harold,!
18 if I am reading you correctly, that as lessons are in fact 19 !
being learned, the concerns spelled out, they are being conveyed l
20 j to the Applicants rather than waiting until there is a report?
21 MR. DENTON: Yes, sir.
22 We met with Salem at least once and maybe more 23 between them and the " Lessons Learned" task force so that they I
1 24 know what is coming out. And we have now gotten at least two l
Aa FMust Rmorurs, lm.
f 25 reports from Applicants on what they intend to do as a 593162
6 mm4 1
result of the TMI accident on their own initiative.
2 The PUblic Service for Salem has submitted what 3
they believe they are doing as r. result of TMI-Lessons Learned 4
on their own.
5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: When you say licensing effort 6l complete, does that involve any Board action?
7 MR. VASSALLO: No.
In Salem 2 there isn't any 8
Board, so th a'e is no --
9 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Whatabout the others?
10 MR. VASSALLO:
All right.
11 l Diablo Canyon, there is a Board involved.
Let i
i 12 '
me go down the line.
North Anna 2, there isn't any Board. On l
13 Diablo Canyon, there is. The hearing was closed, but there were 14 several motions made to reopen the hearings or stay the I
i 15,
hearings -- I'll let Bob Lazo speak on that one, l
1 16 MR. LAZO:
That's correct. The record is closed.
17 All of the filings are in.
18 There has been a motion to reopen based on TMI, 19 and the Board has deferred ruling on that motion while they i
20 are awaiting a Staff report on TMI.
21 MR. CUNNINGHAM:
I might add at that point, if I 22 may, the Staff has generally taken the position in every 23 case where there has been a motion to reopen on the basis of i
l 24 TMI, that it is appropriate to defer ruling on that motion AceJederal Reponers. Inc.
25 '
ur til we have a eport from the " Lessons Learned" group.
[3O[hbb5b f
4 i
I l
il
7 mm5 I
MR. VASSALLO:
On Sequoyah there isn't any Board.
2l On McGuire there was a hearing. Again that record was closed.
3 MR. LAZO: Well I will add tothat that in April the 4
Licensing Board at McGuire did issue an initial decision, but 5
they stayed the decision at that time, awaiting the Staff's 6
generic unresolved safety issues report.
7 So the record is closed, but it very well might be 8l reopened.
9!
MR. VASSALLO:
On Zimmer there is a hearing and 10 it is in progress, or will be in July.
11 MR. IAZO: They have had severalsessions.
The i
12 ne >t session is scheduled to begin on August 7 and it is I3 anticipated by that Board that all of the non-TMI-related 14 issues will be completed at that time.
The Board will then await the Staff's evaluation of 16 TMI.
7 Those are the only three of OLs. Diablo Canyon, 18 McGuire and as Dom has said, Zimmer, where there have been 19 l Boards. The others were uncontested, or dismissed early on.
l 0l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: At this stage is it then --
l 21 let's take North Anna 2, for example. No Board?
2 MR. LAZO:
No Board.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Is there a possibility 24 I
someone may come in and ask for a hearing based upon TMI?
j g,ggm, n,,m, %,
25 MR. LAZO:
There is always that possibility, yes, 533184 i
8 mm6 1
sir, that would be a possibility in any of these proceedings.
2 MR. VASSALLO:
Just to round out, you can concentrate 3
on Salem 2, what we would hope is that by August we would be 4
able to send to the utility our positions on " Lessons Learned,"
5 and the issues that arise from the Bulletins and Orders.
And 6
then it would depend on how quickly the Applicant will be able 7
to respond and for us to review that so we can make a final 8
decision on an OL.
9 So the September date is a little bit optimistic, 10 but we are working towards that.
11 We had geared up the Staff on all the non-TMI I
12 issues to try to meet this date.
And we are making every 13 effort to do so.
14 And the same goes for North Anna. There are less l
15 outstanding issues there.
j l
16 The reason for the estimated completion date of 17 August to October, is due to the Applicant's considerations.
i 18 They have a design deficiency in an overload system, an electrical i
19 overload on some transformers. And in order to correct it on 20 unit 2, which they have corrected on unit 1 already, they i
21 would have to shut down unit 1.
So, of course they don't l
22 want to do that right now, so that is why they have this date 23 of August 15 to October.
i 24 If it should be shut down for some other reason, l
Am.FMwal Roonen, W.
25 they would go ahead and make that correction.
S.C'Nbb i
I
9 mm7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Otherwise they will wait for 1
Labor Day and a little cooler weather, maybe in turning off 2
some air conditioning, I assume.
MR. VASSALLO: But that is the reason for that 4
spread in there.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Yes.
6 MR. VASSALLO:
And I think the others are relatively self-explanatory.
g McGuire, of course, is almost completed but they 9
have some problems with snubbers, and they have indicated 10 ;
they may not be ready until December or maybe even later.
jj Unless there are any other questions on this, I g
would like to just turn --
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: On LaSalle there is no Board, i
you said?
15 MR. VASSALLO:
No, there isn ' t.
g COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: And, Bob, you said there is always a possibility that someone might file a request?
I 18 i
I guess I didn't finish the question.
j9 l
If the possibility exists, they might file it --
20 I
gl if they file it, then what would happen?
I MR. LAZO:
In a case like LaSalle, for example, g
where a notice for opportunity for hearing was published,the 23 Board was not established because no petitions were filed. So 24 Aa-FMeal Rmorters, lm.
l no Board for the operating license proceeding has ever been l
25 5331Eb
10 mm8 in existence.
j 2
If now at this time a request came in, it would be 3
treated as a show-cause petition by the Staff.
If they 4
offered a hearing on it, then we would establish a Board.
5 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I see.
6 So it would really be up to -- who would the person 7
be making that determination?
8I MR. LAZO:
9 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: All right.
10 And you have received none so far?
11 i MR. DENTON: No.
i 12 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
As to Salem and North Anna, 13 I would like to be sure that before an OL was issued we had 14 a session in which the Commission was told how it was issued, 15 how the " Lessons Learned" -- how the TMI-related issues have 16 been dealt with as to those plants.
17 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I totally agree, Peter.
These i
18 will be the first post-TMI,and I think it certainly is important 19 that we be briefed on the way the Staff is dealing with those 20 things.
21 i I am sure there will be a variety of things, some 22 of which are important to do, youknow, before fuel loading, 23 and some before you go past some low power level in the startup, 24 and others completed on down the line as appropriate.
A&FMmI Rnomrs, lm.
25 I think we certainly are interested in those and dS3.1.M i
11 mm9 1
will want to hear about them.
2 MR. BICKWIT: Mr. Chairman, I just want to say at 3
this point that the Commission has asked our of fice for a paper 4
recommending a procedure for Commission action with respect to 5
the licenses.
6 That paper will be up shortly.
7 MR. DENTON:
There are so many ongoing issues.
We 8'
are giving a lot of thought to sorting out what is really 9
required for Salem 2 versus what can be deferred.
10 There was a plan by states, for example, thoughts 11 for operator training, a lot of new issues coming. And our 12 main effort, what we are putting out in September, one of the I
13 things that must be done as condition for startup, and what 14 would be deferred, and we would be happy to work with the i
15 Commission on that.
16 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: I think it is quite clear that 17 presuming we do eventually come for a license for Salem 2 with !
18 appropriate conditions, that that in no way is going to 19 l relieve them from things which are likely to be done across l
l 20 l the board as a result of TMI.
So there are several succeeding i
21 waves or layers of these things to be implemented in the 22 appropriate timeframes.
23 MR. VASSALLO:
I would just like to add that the 24 ACRS has also indicated that they would like to be briefed on Ace-Federal Reporters, Inc.
25 how we intend to implement TMI Lessons Learned before we t;ow Oq m',ke a decision on issuing the OLs.
W I
l
12 CR5875.02 RMG 1 1
MR. VASSALLO:
So we have to factor this as well 2
into this, and as Harold said, there are a number of layers 3
here that we have to go through, so we all have to work very 4
hard to make these dates.
But we try to establish this 5
schedule and hope that we can at least work toward achieving i
6 it.
l 7
May I have the next chart, please, on the cps.
8 (Slide.0 9
On this one we have listed all of those cps which i
l 10 are in a hearing status and are close to completion, and the Il estimated receipt of construction permit.
i 12 The asterisk indicates that the Board has made some I i
13 request of the Staff to notify them how we intend to take l
l 14 into account the TMI lessons learned.
That's on Perkins, 15 on Allen's Creek, and on Black Fox.
16 Maybe Bob might go over those particular cases.
17 MR. LAZO:
Well, in Perkins, the record has been I
i 18 j closed.
A decision is in preparation, but of course the 19 release status is uncertain.
The Intervenor moved to reopen 20 and defer issuing the initial decision.
21 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Based on TMI?
22 MR. LAZO:
Based on TMI.
And on June 26, the 23 Staff also asked the Board to defer issuing the initial decision 24 until the TMI technical information had been reviewed.
That's Ace Federal Reporters, Inc.
25 where that one stands.
500169
13 j
RMG 2 1
dhat was the next one you mentioned?
2 MR. VASSALLO:
Allen's Creek.
l 3
MR. LAZO:
That's another case where the record has l l
4 been closed.
The State of Oklahoma filed a motion --
5 MR. VASSALLO:
One moment-,
6 MR. LAZO:
Oh, Allen's Creek.
7 The Board granted a petition by the State and five 8
others, and has issued a supplemental notice of intervention 9'
procedures.
That case is still really in the early stages, i
l 10 as all of the parties have not been identified as yet.
I i
II l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
The March '80 date on Allen's 12 Creek, what does that mean?
13 MR. LAZO:
Well, that is when NRR is estimating Id SCP to be issued?
15 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
That 's NRR's estimate?
j 16 MR. VASSALLO:
Well, it is an estimate taking into i
17 account the contentions and the hearing sessions that have to 18 be held, and the time for the Board to make their initial l9 decision and so on.
20 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
But is that with or without l
21 l TMI?
I 22 MR. VASSALLO:
I don't think TMI would really 23 impact that, because it is further down the line.
24 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I was just wondering if in Ace Feders Reporters, Inc.
25 your calculation you had folded in --
533130
14 RMG 3 1
MR. VASSALLO:
Well, one thing we envision at this 2
point is that for cps, I think taking into account the TMI 3
lessons, could be handled mostly by commitments, and they 4
would be somewhat easier than you would have with operating l
5 licenses, especially those that are in the near term.
6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
We had some discussion along 7
this line, you may remembor, at an earlier time, talking about 8
cps and LWAs and it seems to me somebody, I think it was 9
probably -- I think, I remember it was you, Peter, noted that 10 one of the things clearly that one.ziuld want to know about a j
i Il new site was whether the Staff could make a reasonable judgment i
12 that the sorts of improved emergency planning measures that 13 are likely to be required --
14 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Thank you for reminding me, i
l 15 because the last time we had a meeting --
l 16 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
-- to be carried out.
i 17 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
I requested a list of the 18 sites, the densities around them.
And that was for that reason '--
19 MR. VASSALLO:
On the others, Palo Verde, that is l
20 l another where I guess there is a request fo r a TMI.
Do you 21 have anything to say on that, Bob?
22 MR. LAZO:
No, I don't think we have had a request 23 for TMI impact on that.
24 What happened was was that the ACRS just last week, Ace Federal Reporters, Inc.
25 I think -- July 5th -- wrote a letter --
530181 I
15 l
RMG 4 1
MR. VASSALLO:
Oh, that's right.
2 MR. LAZO:
-- wrote a letter to the Commission 3
indicating they were going to defer their review unitl they 4
received information from the Staff regarding possible design 5
changes.
6 So I would think that the Palo Verde schedule would 7
he stretched out somewhat because of the ACRS action.
8 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Is that the only one that the 9
ACRS has --
l 10 MR. VASSALLO:
Well, Sequoia also.
They have not f
II written a letter either on Sequoia, because they want to know 12 about the TMI impacts.
13 On the others, Pebble Springs -- I guess the j
Id hearing is mostly complete, and that the only thing we have i
15 outstanding there is the generic issues.
TheBoardisalsoawaitingaStaffreportf 16 MR. LAZO:
17 l on alternative sites, as well as the generic issues.
18 So those would be the subjects of the next session l9 of the hearing.
20 MR. VASSALLO:
And on Skagit, the hearing has been 21 ongoing.
The main point there is -- the main issue is the 22 geology seismology.
We are awaiting a report from the USGS 23 which we expect around September.
I 24 So the session -- the hearing session will go on Ac.Jederei neoon n inc.
25 with environmental matters and the nongeology matters.
But then 592132
16 RMG 5 1
we will have to pick up af ter we get the USGS report and the 2
Staff makes its own findings, and then go into hearine with 3
that.
4 So that is what the estimated CP is for listed thered i
5 However, the applicant is seeking an LWA, or would 6
like one, I understand, before the end of the year.
7 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
My recollection is that there l
8 is some arrangement there with regard to covenants on the I
i 9
purchase of the property --
10 MR. VASSALLO:
Yes.
11 l CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
-- that require at least a nominal 12 !
start of construction by the first of January.
13 And it would seem to me that if the substantive I
14 matters can be dealt with in a timely way to meet that date, 15 it would be desirable to let that case stand or fall on the 16 merits, rather than on having by procedural stretchout, just 17 run past some deadline unassociated with the intrinsic matters 18 that we regulate.
19 l So I encourage reasonable efforts to deal with the 20 l substance there in a timely way.
MR. DENTON:
It is going to be very tight, but we 21 l 22 hav e assigned that case on high priority, and we will try to I
end #2 23 l complete the review to be considered this year.
24
%.. n..n.,..
m.
25 '
fi33103 I
17 T3 mm1 1
IIR. VASSALLO:
Let's see.
Allen's Creek is in the 2
early stages of hearing, and FNP we have down -- this is 3
floating nuclear plent.
We had a subcommittee meeting 4
with the ACRS concerning the core ladle, ad at this session 5
of the ACRS -- I guess it is tomorrow or Friday --
6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Let's see, the terminology is 7
now " ladle"?
8 I guess the rest of the Commissioners will not 9
recall the great days of Indian Point 2 and the core-catcher 10 which came and went at various stages of that design review.
II,
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
" Ladle" is a new term for i
12
" core-catcher"?
13 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Well, I think the Staff wisely 14 looked for rome different shorthand nomenclature to use.
It I
15 is a rather different thing.
16 MR. DENTON:
It is a core-catcher under the 17 li environmental framework,without having to be single failure-i i8 proof.
19 l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Ladle normally is something l
20 used to take something from one place te another.
i 21 This is something that ladles it into something?
22 MR. DENTON:
It is the terminology in the steel l
23 mills.
I guess they call the sort of stack of bricks,a ladle. I l
24 MR. KNIGHT: But, in fact, when the Staff turned to Am4Mwal Reporurs, lnc.
25 take a very hard look at this matter, they found that much of l
590104 i
i
18 mm2 the technology necessary was there in the steel industry in the design of ladies.
So it was appropriate.
I MR. VASSALLO:
In any case, we are trying to 4
wrap this up, and the Subcommittee will recommend -- or the Subcommittee Chairman plans to recommend to the full Committee in this session to hear this aspect of the FNP.
That is whether --
8 CHAIRMAN HEND1 7: When would they hope to do that?
9 MR. VASSALLO:
In August, if the full Committee
- agrees, f
jj The issue really is somewhat narrow, and that is whether -- or what impact this core ladle would have on the safety aspect of the plant as designed.
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Do you have a large amot.
of staff devoted to this?
18 MR. VASSALLO: Not at this point.
gl COMMISSIONER saADPORD: what was wrong with the y
phrase " core-catcher"?
l l
MR. VASSALLO: Well, I think core-catcher --
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: It became a cropper, j
The problem was Indian Point 2 was one of the first g
big machines to come along. Indian Point 2 and the Dresden 2,3 g
5331S5 I
19 mm3 1
application it seemed to me were sort of frontrunners in terms 2
of what I would call modern treatment.
Core-catcher, I guess, 3
was thrown into the breach by the applicant to overcome what 4
seemed to be flagging enthusiasm on the regulatory side at 5
one point in the CP review.
And it stayed nominally in the 6
design for a while.
7 The more they looked at it, and the more the 8
Staff looked at it, the more it became clear, as I recall it, 9
that it was going to be very hard to demonstrate satisfactorily that the thing would have all of the requirements of a safety l
10 II system that you could estab lish, that it would operate as 12 designed with conservatisms, you know, that single failures 13 couldn' t happen and so on.
Id As I recall it, eventually -- I don't know.
Ed, l
15 it seems to me that both sides sort of ran down eventually, i
16 and they finally came in for the OL without it in the design.
I7 People hadn't been keeping up said,"That's f r.i n y, isn't there 18 another page here?"
"No, no, we took that out."
l I
I 20 As I recall, the Committee bought off on its 21 removal on a series of long meetings and discussions.
22 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
It was the phrase that was l
23 intriguing me more than the technology.
24 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
It is a somewhat more apt phrase, Ace Federal Reporters, Inc.
25 but it has an unfortunate history, I think is the reason.
5D01SG i
i I
20 I
,,4 MR. DENTON:
In this application we don't think 2
it will hold the core forever. We think it will provide substan-3 tial delay in penetration of the bottom of the part, and 4
that's why it is being required, being recommended.
5 Eo it is not a catcher in the sense that it will be 6
permanent.
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: What I am really after is this:
8 We do, from time to time, sort of seem to hedge the 9
1 language a bit. Accidents become incidents, catchers become 10 ladles. And I don't think that by and large we do ourselves i
l 11 l much of a favor that way.
The public tends very quickly to 12 see that an energetic disassembly %3s, in fcct, an explosion 13 and it just seems to add a notion that these changes in 14 language are an effort to paper over a problem.
15 '
l And by and large I think that the most directly 16 l descriptive terminology tends to be the best.
I i
17 f I
(Commissione: Gilinsky arrived at 10:20 a.m.)
18 MR. VASSALLO:
I think in this particular case, t
19 '
as Mr. Denton said, it is not really intended to hold or j
20 4
retain the melt if it did occur.
It was really just a delay.
l 21 '
MR. DENTON:
I guess we thought we were ch anging 22 i j
it to a more descriptive term.
23 I
COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:
Ladles don't really work i
l 24 Y*
Aa-FMwel Rumnen, Inc.
25.
j MR. DENTON: We understand the point. We were trying l O.kb7 i
l 21 mm5 1
to improve our terminology here.
2 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
I'm sorry I brought the whole 3
thing up, actually.
4 (Laughter.)
5 MR. VASSALLO:
I don't think I have anything more 6
to say on cps, unless there are any other questions.
I 7'
MR. DENTON:
Let me turn to the next slide.
8 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: May I ask Bob a question.
9 Black Fox -- the record is closed?
I 10 i MR. DENTON:
Black Fox.
Yes,the record was closed i
II -
in February.
l 12 l COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: That's another one where 13 there was this delay?
14 MR. LAZO: Yes.
I 15 MR. DENTON:
Black Fox I anticipate would be the first 16 CP which we incorporate the " Lessons Learned."
They have been j
l 17 very active and following TMI's development have sent out a f
18 report of their own, changes they are making in the plant 19 design and operations.
We have had several meetings ;ith them.
20 So I expect them to be the leading CP --
21 ;
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: Do they have an outstanding 22 petition to reopen?
23 MR. LAZO:
Oh, yes. The Board has deferred ruling 1
I 24 on that.
f Aa-FWeral Reporars, lm, I
I 25 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
How many of those petitions i
l O
s
.s
!i i
22 mm6 now exist in which Boards have deferred ruling?
MR. LAZO:
As far as the cps we are talking about, 2
I think it is Black Fo x and Perkins.
3 l
l COMMISSIONER KENNEDY: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HENDRIE: Okay, Harold.
5 1
MR. DENTON: Let me return now to our efforts to beef up our completed staff in the casework area.
a:
The first slide brings you up to coeed to the l
9ll fact that OMB did write letters to the other agencies.
(Slide) 10 !
i 11 l The first letters did not include the Secretary i
g; of Navy. We went back and subsequently had OMB includetheNavyj l
I because we wanted to get some help from the Navy ship develop-g ment area, the vibration ship qualifications, these sorts of i
15 ;
things at the Carderock area.
l l
DOE could not be more cooperative. We have had f
g i
I several meetings with their representatives.
We have had letters that went from George to all the program officers.
They sent resumes of people, individual laboratories have j9 Come in and talked to our staffs, and I will go into the gl type of help we anticipate getting on that side in a little more detail.
g I anticipate we are going to get excellent help 23 fr m the Corps of Engineers, foundation engineers. There is 24 Ace-Federet Reporters, x. lno doubt of their capabilities and their willingness to assign l 25 GDD10D i
i
23 mm7 1
priorities.
2 The Survey has put an awful lot of people into 3
the critical reviews, and I think they are doing what they can 4
to respond.
5 We hav e not actually f armed any work out to 6!
DOE yet.
The status is shown somewhat on the next slide.
l 7
(Slide) l 8
We have identified the laboratories that have the 9l most potential for helping in the various areas. We have l
10 l given some of the laboratories standard review plans, or have t
i ll i active meetings going on this week with them to try to I
l 12 i decide where it would make the most sense to get certain l
13 reviews done.
14 What we intend to do ie to establish sort of a 15 !
center of excellence. For example, at Oak Ridge for instrumenta-16 tion and control, and that would be sort of a section or a i
I 17l branch. We are trying to get a sufficient staf f that we can i
18 return to the schedules that we had in March, pre-TMI.
l 19 So we are not just staffing up to where we will 20 i take a 6-month delay in all the plants. We are trying to put l
21 i enough staff in these areas so that we can pick up plants that i
22 would otherwise be delayed, to get back on their original 23 schedules e the extent we can.
24,
COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
But that always has that i
Aa FWwet Rmorters, lm. f l
25 '
asterisk?
533200
mm8 I
MR. DENTON: Well, we would --
2 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE: You can get on to the schedule, 3
but there is that asterisk of "pending resolution of TMI issues"?
end T3 5l MR. DENTON: Yes, sir.
l 6;
7 8
i i
9I i
10 t l
11 '
i l
12 '
13 l 14 15 l 16 I
l I
17 !
i 18 l
i 19 '
I I
21 22 23 24 co-Federal Reporters, Inc.
25 BOO 2@.1 I
25 CR5875.04 RMG1 1 MR. DENTON:
I think we have not been able to 2
ascertain the exact impacts of the TMI lesson, but surely it 3
is going to be a 10 to 20 percent increase in near-term effort 4
on some plants.
5 Mr. Chairman, I can go into more detail on some i
6 of these areas, if you like, but I thought I would just show 7
you the laboratories that we have kind of identified as the 8
most likely ones to pick up in the various parts of the reviews.
9 I have asked that we complete this effort within l
10 a month, and I have established that if we can within a month Il from now, active working groups that we intend to get to assign i
I 12 !
these areas that these labs --
13 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
What kind of supervision 14 would you be giving one of these centers of excellence?
15 MR. DENTON:
Me would assign someone from the 16 branch that ordinarily does the review to be out there with f
17 them, possibly full time or part time, to be sure it is done 18 in the way it would be done if it were done here.
i 19 l I think in a few instances -- there may be people 20 I coming in at the Headquarters fairly frequently to assist also.
21 We found after the '73 experience in which we brought 22 a lot of people in, everyone felt like it would be better to 23 keep a center out in the lab.
We could get more people, betterl l
24 people, and they could call on the resources that they normally l Aa-FWest Rmorurs,1N.
25 have available in the infrastructure for calculations and that 593202
26 RMG 2 1
sort of thing.
2 COMMISSIONER KENNEDY:
That gets to my question.
3 How many people are we talking about?
a 4
MR. DENTON:
On the order of 75 people that we are 5
able to get everyone.
6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Good.
7 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
My concern would be to l
8 assure that we do have some super -- direct supervision l
1 1
9 from your people to carry at least the line of responsibility.
l l
10 MR. DENTON:
Yes.
l II CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Yes.
Because the work oroducts --
12 the agency, in effect, assumes responsibility for the validity l I
13 of those work products in the use in a licensing process --
l 14 as is always the case in technical assistance work by the IS I contractors, while you have that as an ever-present condition.
16 MR. DENTON:
We have had the experience of the i
17 l environmental reviews being done in the labs under our super-l 18 '
vision, and in fact some of these areas, the labs are presently l
19 working right now -- I have forgotten which areas, but there 20 l are a few labs which are doing sone work.
1 21 i Me would intend to pay these people whatever it 22 costs us to get the dollars, and I am not sure where this money:
23 comes from in the budget, but actually people are fairly 24 inexpensive, and I think we estimate less than $5 million Aa FMetal Rgonen, inc.
l 25 to fund this kind of thing.
U33200 i
27 RMG3 1
But it would have to come out of our '80 budget, 2
and we didn't anticipate this effort into somehow.
We have to 3
find some way to pay for it.
(
4 CHAIIGUUT HENDRIE:
Well, once we -- the Congress, 5
I hope, is not all that far from completing the appropriations 6
1 actions.
The Senate Appropriations -- the House is complete, 7
of course -- the Senate Full Appropriations Committee, I l
8' believe, marked up the bill, which includes us along with an 9.
assortment of other things in the last couple of days.
And 10 ;
hopefully that bill will get onto the floor.
j i
Il !
And once we see what the appropriated fiscal '80 i
12 levels are, we can then begin to work on how to set an 13 expenditure rate which allows these forces to go to work, and i
14 '
in turn what that means in terms of what is almost inevitably 15 going to be a supplemental request for fiscal year '80 that we i
i 16 l will process here, be processing pretty soon, in fact, in l
I 17 '
in connection with the '81 budget review, and go through the l
18 l process.
I9 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Do you have any difficulty 1
20 :
in getting funds to cover the end of '79?
21 !
MR. GOSSICK:
We can handle that.
i 22 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Yes. Remember the previous 23 discussion.
Just because there was so little to '79 left, i
by the time these forces come into being, you are left with, 24 ACS-Federal Reporters, Inc.
25 '
I don't know, a mean three weeks.
09dNOd
28 RMG 4 1
Jim, before we leave this slide, I wanted to ask 2
Dan on the geotechnical review versus geology and seismology, 3
you have got the Corps foundation, engineering, and the 1
4 Geological Survey.
on the earthquake and so on?
5 Is it the Corps, then, that is dealing with 6
establishing the response ;sp,ectra. for the plant?
7 MR. KNIGHT:
No.
The work done by the Corps of 8
Engineers for the great part, what those of us who came a 9
little bit early would call soil effects; soils, foundation, 10 settlement, this type of thing.
l 11 (
The establishment of the spectra per se would i
12 still be in Reg Guide 160 spectra.
The work done by USGS I
13 would be to help us determine through examining the geology 14 of the area what would be the appropriate --
i 15 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
What would be the appropriate 16 normalization for the Reg Guide 160 spectra.
17 MR. DENTON:
We have assigned a geology branch i
18 to Jim so we would have some closer coverage between its l
19 '
structual and geological areas.
20 l MR. KNIGHT:
If I may --
I 21 CRAIRMAN HENDRIE:
If we ever completely redo that, i i
27 why, I am going to recommend that we hire no foundation 23 structural engineers who don't have geology credentials, l
24 and no seismologists who don't have degrees in structural j
Am-FMwal Reporters, Inc.
1 25 engineering.
50d2G5 l
1 i
29 l
RMG 5 1
COfHISSIONER AHEARNE:
Is that an attempt to keep 2
the Staff size down?
3 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
No, it deals with another
(
4 problem.
5 MR. KNIGHT:
What we call interfaces.
6 CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
An interface problem.
l 7l MR. DENTON:
It is an unusual professional 8
technical meeting to attend.
9 COMMISSIONER AHEARNE:
Yes, I read those.
10 (Laughter.)
11 i MR. KNIGHT:
If I may, for a moment, Commissioner l
I 12 Ahearne, your comment on the management operation.
l i
13 It is a real management problem.
From our look to I
14,
date we can foresee -- we are starting with a depleted branch 15 in the first place, in many of these areas.
16 Ne will really have to change the modus operandi 17 on the branch of the individual reviewer.
It really can't be 18 a matter of his doing the review and getting a little help from I
i 19 j a large number of sources to cover that.
He has really got to t
20 i start to be a technical manager of these resources.
21 That is the only way that I can see that you are 22 going to have this centralization of technical problems, which i
23 you have got to have so that the endproducts are consistent 1
24 l from plant to plant.
Aa FMeral Rmorters, lm
{
25 Ne have got our first step in the power systems area.
03O[bb
30 RMG 6 1
where we are able to readily idsatify groups.
There is a 2
group -- in other words, there are people at Argonne as of 3
yesterday -- that's a fact in the matter.
The people exist t
4 and are qualified to receive individual resumes.
They are 5,
not just a group of people.
6, And transmitted to them a work statement which l
7 lists plants, specific plants.
8 There is a burden now as to cheer volume of paper I
l 9j that has to be transmitted -- new plants and reg guides, and l
10 l we are on the way to doing that.
II l So it is a very real start in this process.
i i
12 MR. DENTON:
The next slide indicates the status 13 of internal reallocation of manpower the Commission approved 14 some time ago.
The Conmission approved reassignment of 13 i
15 l individuals from Standards.
10 are now working -- at least i
l 16 i 10 have been working for 2 or 3 weeks.
l l
17l We were trying to obtain three specialists in the 18 electrical area.
All three of these were doing fairly important 19 !
tasks somewhat related to the lessons learned.
I 20 l I think we have agreed on one more, so that now we 21 have agreement on 11 of those individuals.
Two of the electricals 22 probably are needed in Standards to work with the Standards 23 group to make the changes that we foresee.
t 24 l There is still two of our individuals to be settled.,
1 a Feersi Remners, Inc. i 25 With regard to Research, we have assigned Research i
5907.,U7 l
31 RMG 7 1
three of the unresolved safety additions that were being 2,
worked inside NRR, and this permitted four people to return to 3
casework who were experienced in this area.
4 We have had a number of discussions, a number of 5
people have been interviewed.
We are still attempting to close 6
the remaining five people in that area.
7 We do heve two people from MPA that have been 8
assigned to casework related effort.
So we have about 16 or 9
18 of the 24 individua.s identified working, and hope to close end #4 10 on the others fairly soon.
Il i CHAIRMAN HENDRIE:
Good.
l l
t 12 !
MR. DENTON:
That completes our review.
13 CHAIRMAM HENDRIE:
Very good.
14 And as I noted, we have scheduled in effect a 15 continuation of this discussion next Thursday when you will 16 have some more things, presumably, to report?
i 17 You can let the secretary know if for some reason i
18 it looks like it would not be a useful and productive discussion.
r 19 It seems to me that it may be on the other matters t
20 l that you want to talk about, that it would be useful to keep 21 f it on the schedule.
22 Thank you very much.
23 (Whe reupon, at 10:35 a.m.,
the hearing was adjourned.)
l 24 j
Am FMetal Rmorters, inc.
l 25 590208 l
1:
,i NEAR TERM 0.L.
PLANT EST. COMP. CONST.
LIC. EFFORT COMPLETE
- SALEM-2 COMPLETE SEPT.
NORTH ANNA-2 AUG 15
.0CT.
SEPT.
DIABLO CANYON-1 AUG.
OCT.
SEQUOYAH-1 OCT.
OCT.
MCGUIRE-1 DEC.
NOV.
ZIMMER DEC.
NOV.
LASALLE-l JUN. 80 JAN. 80 NON-TMI RELATED ISSUES.
c C'.-
CO re
f1 EAR TERi1 CP PLA'lT EST, C2 PERKlflS 1-3 BOARD
- PEBBLE SPRIf!GS 1 8 2 JAll. 80 SKAGIT 1 8 2 MAY 80 PILGRIM 2 JAtl. 80 A!.LEllS CREEK 1 MAR. 80*
BLACK FOX 1 & 2 BOARD
- PALO VERDE 4 8 5 ACRS* (DEC 79)
Ff1P f40V 79 REQUEST FOR TMI IMPACT c,
Uo
~
ACTI0f1S TO OBTAIN HElf FR0f1 OTER AGB1CIES
.. ~
OMB LEFIERS TO SECRETARY OF B4ERGY SECRETARY OF ARR(
SECRETARY OF INTERIOR SECRETARY OF fMW DOE M TO DOE FIEl.D OFFICES FDD - DEUTCH TO DOE ASSIST SECRETARIES NO FRJOR PRaJECT OFFICES PRELIMIllARY DISCUSSIONS W/0Rf1L, IfEL, NL SRL NO RICHlRO RESl1ES FRG1 BfM, ti1C, VITRO NO Nil lit - INCREASED DDR ASSISTNICE TO FREE DSS CASE REVIEW PERS0ffEL IfffERIOR If1 CREASED EFFORT FR W USGS ARIt/
INCREASED EFORT FRW CORPS OF B4G.
NAW PRELIMIflARYTAl.KWITHNAVALSHIPC&fWO (EQUIREIT GUALIFICATI0iD c.n t,:
CO
}r
nd IDBRIFIED SOURCES
-~'
REACTOR SYSTD E REVIEW
- INEL SRL #1L INSTRlfDEATION AND CONTROL REVIEW - ORNL*, #1L SRL POWER SYST&E REVIEW
- #1L*, SRL ORNL*
C0fRffERCODEVERIFICATION
- BNL #1L EQUIRBE SEISMIC QUALIFICATION
- #1L NSC REVIEW GE01E0iNICALREVIEW
- CORPS ENG.
GE0 LOGY,SEISMDLOGY
- USGS
- WORKING GROUP ESTABLISHED AND FIRST INRRMATION PACKAGES TRANSMITTED, CR Iln
A4 STATUS OF ATIDFTS TO OBTAlf1 ADDITI0fML IW1 POWER FOR CASE REVIEWS 7/12/79 ItHERfML REPROGRAFlilflG DSD 10 ENGIfEERS DETAILED TO DSS AND DDR S TO DOR, 4 TO DSS,1 TO LLTF 3 ELECTRICTLS [0UESTED - NO AGREEIOff YET, BES ASSIGriBIT OF 3 Lf1 RESOLVED SAFETY ISSUES TO ES, RESULTING Ifl EQUIVALBfT OF 4 K0PLE RETURfED TO CASE WORK. - E!RR PRIORITIES BEI!!G REVIEi1ED FOR FURTiiER DETAIL OF PEOPLE LPA 1 DETAILED TO DDR 1 DETAllfD TO DPM - OPERATOR LICB1 SING
(;
.bs Y
<