ML19253C581
| ML19253C581 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png |
| Issue date: | 11/30/1979 |
| From: | Goodwin C PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. |
| To: | Schwencer A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7912060496 | |
| Download: ML19253C581 (3) | |
Text
a
?,'
=
--.,-,, m y = m[:: Pcrt!crd Gerem! E!echicCctrrany j
"==> 1*l 1
x au 3 27;m
_;7 November 30, 1979 Trojan Nuclear Plant Docket 50-344 License NPF-1
/
Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ATTN:
Mr. A Schwencer, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #1 Division of Operating Reac' ors c
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555
Dear Sir:
Portland General Electric Company (PGE) previously submitted and imple-mented Revisions 4 (implemented all but Chapter 8), 4a and 5 to the Trojan Nuclear Plant Security Plan on the basis that they did not degrade the effectiveness of the level of security protection specified in the pre-vious NRC-approved Revision 3.
Attachment I describes the purposes of Revisions 2 through 5, including 4a.
The NRC directed PGE to withdraw the implementation of Revisions 4a and 5 until an NRC evaluation of these changes could be completed by R. H. Engeiken letter to J.
u.
"'iliams, dated September 14, 1979. PGE committed not only to withdraw the imple-mentation of Revisions 4a and 5, but also the part of Revision 4 that had baen implemented in C. Goodwin, Jr. letter to R. H. Engelken, dated September 24, 1979. Such withdrawal of implementation will revert the Trojan Nuclear Plant Security Plan back to the NRC-approved Revision 3, dated January 1979. The documentation necessary to achieve this reversion is currently being prepared, with completion scheduled for December 3, 1979. Following the necessary training of security personnel, the withdrawal will be effective by December 14, 1979.
In that Revisions 4, 4a and 5 are still under review by both the NRC and the Oregon Department of Energy (ODOE), and that Revisions 4a and 5 are closely related, PGE elects not to respond to the specific NRC comments on Revision 5 nor to implement those portions of Revision 5 exempted by your letter at this time, but rather to wait until all comments have been received from both the NRC and ODOE on all three proposed revisions (4, 4a and 5).
Once such comments from both agencies have been received, PGE will work with both agencies to achieve a mutual resolution of the r
\\
7 912 0 6 0 $/9/e>
1506 234
Pcn'ard G ~rmi Eectdc Ccm;rre/
Mr. A. Schwencer November 30, 1979 Page 2 comments. To this end, it is requested that you provide a schedule for when your comments on Revisions 4 and 4a, as well as any others on Revi-sion 5, will be received by PGE.
Using this schedule, PGE will request the ODOE to provide their comments within this same time frame. Following PGE's evaluation of all comments, it is suggested that a meeting con-sisting of NRC, ODOE and PGE representatives be held for the purpose of mutually resolving the comments.
PGE feels the above described approach will be tne most effective in resolving everyone's concerns on these three revisions. We feel that independent and segmented resolution of the NRC and ODOE's comments on these three revisions would cause two undesirable situations, namely:
(1) resolution of one agency's comments could be counterproductive to the previous resolution of the other agency's comments, and (2) possible confusion of security personnel as one implements the resolved comments through several segmented training sessions and changes to implementing procedures as opposed to accommodating the implementation via a aingle integrated change.
Your response is requested within 30 days of your receipt of this letter.
Please contact G. A. Zimmerman or M. C. Street if you have any questions concerning this request.
Sincerely, C. Goodwin, Jr.
Assistant Vice President Thermal Plant Operation and Maintenance CG/CAZ/4sa7Al Attachment c:
Mr. Lynn Frank, Director State of Oregon Department of Energy Mr. George McCorkle, Chief Physical Security '.icensing Branch Division of Safeguards NMSS Mr. R. H. Engelken, Director U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region V
7-.
s ATTACHMENT 1 TROJAN NUCLEAR PLANT SECURITY PLAN -
Purpose of Revisions Revision No.
Date Purpose 2
August 1979 Implement 10 CFR 73.55.
Not approved by NRC.
3 January 1979 Incorporate NRC's comments on Revision 2.
Revision 3 was approved by the NRC on February 27, 1979.
Implementation commenced upon date of approval.
4 March 1979 a.
Provide safeguards contingency plan, for NRC approval, in form of complete replacement for Chapter 8.
This part of Revision 4 has not been implemented, b.
Modify other sections of the Plan as needed to correct editorial errors and provide clarification resulting from implementing Revision 3.
These changes were felt not to degrade security and have been implemented. This implementation will be withdrawn by December 14, 1979.
4a May 1979 Meet Oregon Department of Energy's and Energy Facility Siting Council's conditions of approval on Revision 2.
These change were felt not to degrade security and have been implemented.
This implementation will be withdrawn by December 14, 1979.
5 July 1979 Correct editorial errors and clarify some requirements based upon more experience in implementing the Plan.
These changes were felt not to degrade security and have been implemented. This implementation will be withdrawn by December 14, 1979.
1506 236