ML19263A875
| ML19263A875 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 12/20/1978 |
| From: | Joshua Wilson Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7901030178 | |
| Download: ML19263A875 (13) | |
Text
'
t MEETING SlMMRY DI5iRIBlTTION DEC 2 01978 p_,
- r;3.
G RC PDR' 3 wwi run i
TIC NRR Reading thR #4 File E. Case R. Boyd D. Vassallo W. Gammill J. Stol:
R. Baer
- 0. Parr S. Varga C. Heltemes L. Crocker D. Crutchfield F. Williams R. Mattson R. DeYoung Project Manager:
J. Wilson Attorney, ELD M. Service IE (3)
ACRS (16)
L. Dreher L. Rubenstein R. Denise
Participants:
H. Denton T. Engelhardt R. Tedesco 790103 OI28' p
ls s
a.
/
- r, UNITED STATES I.
4 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION k1 WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 t '* 'l Q' /
f
~
DEC 2 0 M8 Docket No:
50-322 APPLICANT: Long Island Lighting Company (LILCO)
FACILITY:
Shoreham Nuclear Pcwer Station
SUBJECT:
SGMRY OF MEETING HELD ON DECBBER 1,1978 A meeting was held in Bethesda, Maryland with reprasentatives of LILCO to discuss the schedule for issuance of the Shoreham Safety Evaluation Report (SER). A list of attendees is shown in Enclosure 1.
He applicant cc=plained about the delay in issuance of the Shoreham SER.
hey stated that the staff had scheduled the issuance of the SER several times, including Deceder 1,1978, and the SER had still not been published, n e applicant explained that, in order to insure that the operating license hearings would be ccmpleted prior to completion of constructicn at Shoreham the SER should be issued right away.
We explained that a draft of the Shoreham SER had been prepared and a list of outstanding issues was compiled. H is list is provided as.
We stated that because the cutstanding issue list was so extensive, the SER was not ready for publication. LILCO discussed their analysis of the outstanding issue list including their schedule for providing additicnal infomation. Rey also suggested possible scenarios for issuance of the SER. The LILCO presentation is shown in.
We stated that the staff would hold an internal ::nnagement meeting to evaluate the Shoreham outstanding issues. We proposed a subsequent meeting with LIIE dur2ng the week of December 11, 1978 to discuss these issues in detail. We also told the applicant that an internal meeting would be held with the Office of the Executive Legal Director to discuss their concerns with the Shoreham SER. Following these meetings we will advise
)
~
. DEC 2 01978 the applicant whether the SER will be issued in the near future or if it will be delayed until April - May,1979.
O
~
i
./ - (
-c : 'a,.... u 7 Jerry'N. Wilson,ProjectManagement
/ ' tight Water Reactors Branch No. 4
(,JivisionofProjectManagement
Enclosures:
As stated cc: See next page
Long Island Lighting Company DEC 2 01978 ccs:
Edward M. Barrett, Esq.
General Counsel Long Island Lighting Company 250 Old Country Road Stineola, New York 11501 Edward J. Walsh, Esq.
General Attorney Long Island Lighting Company 250 Old Country Road htineola, New York 11501 J. P. Novarro Project Shnager Shoreham Nuclear Power Station P. O. Box 618 Wading River, New York 11792 Jeffrey Cohen, Esq.
Deputy Comissioner and Counsel New York State Energy Office Agency Building 2 Empire State Pla::a Albany, New York 12223 Hcward L. Blau Blau and Cohn, P. C.
380 North Broadway Jericho, New York 11753 Irving Like, Esq.
Reilly, Like and Schnieder 200 West Shin Street Bab.long, New York 11702
ENCLOSURE 1 DEC 20 E78 ATTENDANCE LIST NRC R. Boyd H. Denton R. DeYoung T. Engelhardt R. Tedesco S. Varga D. Vassallo J. Wilson LILCO C. Daverio C. Grochmal W. Museler W. Reveley A. Wofford
'er 4
Novemoer 21, 1978 DEC 2 0 ISM i
SHOREHAM OUTSTANDING ISSUES 1.
Wave runup in intake canal (2.4.5) & (3.4) 2.
Excavation near intake canal (2.5.5) 3.
Internally generated missiles ( 3. 5. 2) 4.
Pipe break analyses (3.6)
~
5.
Pool dynamic loads (3.8.1), (3.8.2), (6.2.1.4), (v.2.1.7) 6.
Seismic Qualification of Mechanical Equipment (3.9.1.2)
LOCALc;[hdings (3. 9.1. 4 ) & (5. 2.1) 7.
8.
Design Basis for Seismic Category I components supplied by Stone & Webster (3.9.2.1) 9.
Pipe Support Base Plates (3. 9. 2.1) & (5.2.1) 10.
Operability of Active Pumps and Valves (3.9. 2. 2) & ( 5. 2.1)
Electrical Phktective Relays (3.10) 11.
12.
Seismic Qualification of Category I Instrumentation and
~
Electrical Equipment (3.10 ) (7. 5 )
13.
Reovaluate GE%L correlation (4.4) 14.
Evaluation of Peach Bottom turbine trip tests (4.4) (15.1) ( 5. 2. 4 )
15.
Recalculate minimum critical power ratio (4.4) 16.
Loose parts monitoring system (4.4) 17.
Feedwater nozzle (5. 2.1) 18.
MSIV Control System (3.11) 19.
NEDM-10672 (3.11) 20.
Environmental Qualification of Electrical Equipment (8.4.8) (8.4.3) (3.11) e eeM e mim *
-m 4-e eMeem mm+-
=
wee n,e e m
- e-a mam 4e e
. 23.
Target-Rock Safety / relief valves (5.2.4) ( 6. 3.1) 22.
Inservice Inspection Program (5.2.6)
- 23.. Leakage through Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary (5 2.7) 24.
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix G ( 5. 3.1) 25.
10 CFR Part 50, Appendix H ( 5. 3.1) 26.
Reactor Core Isola. tion Cooling System (5.4.1) ( 7. 4.1) 27!
Residual Heat Removal System (7.4.2) (5.4.2) ( 6. 3.1) 28.
Subcompartment Pressure Analysis - Sacrificial Shield Region ( 6. 2.1. 5 )
i 29.
Steam Bypass (6.2.1.6) (7.3.6) i 30.
Bulk Pool Temperature Limit (6.2.1.7.5) ( 6. 2. 2) 31.
Containment Isolation (6.2.4) ( 6. 3.1) 32.
Containment Leakage Testing (6.2.6)
ComponentCoolingWaterfRecirculationPumpSeals (6.3.1) 33.
34.
Passive Failures - Post LOCA (6.3.1) l ADS 35.
Manual Ade3(6.3.2) 36.
MSIV Leakage Control System (15.3.3) (6.6) (7.6.8) (8.4.7)
A 37.
Mass & Energy Release 3tes (6.2.1.5) 38.
Reactor Trip System Power Supply (7.3.5) 39.
Remote Shutdown System (7.4.3) 1 40.
Refueling Interlocks System (7.6.1) 41.
Leakage Detection System (7.6.2) 4 42.
Rod Block Monitor (7.6.g)
-43.
Red Sequence Control System (7.6.5) (15.1) 44.
"Startrek" System (7.6.6)
- 45.
Non-Safety Grade Equipment (7.6.11) (15.1) 46.
Reactor Manual Control System (7.7) 47.
Diesel Generator Test ( 8. 3.1) 48.
Fire Protection (9.5.1)
V 49.
Ind{strial Security (13.7) 50.
RPS response time tests (14.0) 51.
Control Rod Drive Pump Trip (4.6) 52.
CRD System Return Line Reroute (4.6) 53.
Financial Qualifications (20.0) i l
l e
CEO 0 01978 Shoreham Ocen Item Analvsis I.
Categories of Open Items II.
Schedule for Additional Information from LILCO III.
Possible SER Issuance Scenarios IV.
Status of Open Items and Document References Oland-written copy to J. Wilson only)
I.
CATEGORIES OF OPEN ITC4S 1.
NRC REVIEW ETCOMPLETE 22 (1) 2.
ADDITIONAL LILCO ETFORMATION NEEDED 17 (2) 3.
GEiERIC ISSUES 11 4.
GEiUETE OPEN ITEMS (LILCO/NRC DISAGREEENT) 2 TOTAL 53 NOTES:
Agreement has been reached on ten (~10) of these issues, 1.
some as long as three conths a50-2.
Five of these items certain to SQRT; two are Mark II; and ISI and Financial Qualifications are not properly Open Items.
Therefore, this number is only M.
II.
SCHEDtJLE FOR ADDITIONAL INFOR'#ATION FROM LILCO ITEM DATE NRC REF.
- 1) Pipe Break Report 12/27/78 4
- 2) Mark II Closure Report 12/18/78 5,7,30
- 3) SQRT Forms 3/15/79 6,8,10,11,12
- 4) Containment Isolation 12/15/78 31,32 Valves & Testing (meeting)
- 6) Mass / Energy Release 12/15/78 37 Races
- 7) Fire Protection 12/8/78 48 Questions (Maj ority)
- 8) Manual ADS System 12/27/78 35
- 9) ISI Plan 6 mo. crior 17,22 to Fuel Load
.0) Financial Qualifications NRC Questions 53 not received O
III.
POSSIBLE SER ISSUANCE SCENARIOS The NRC Staff agreed in August, September, and again in October to issue the Shoreha= SER with the Mark II issues and a nu=ber of "other" open items showing as incocolete by various dates with December 1, 1076, being the latest date.
LILCO uas specifically ashe'd by the NRC NOT to attempt to resolve the non-lisrk II Open Items in September of this year in order that the Staff could prepare the SER includine the remaininz Coen Items and, with the exception of Reactor Systems Branen =eetings requested by the NRC, LILCO cor:elied with this request and has not been attemot-ing to resolve Ocen Items for the past three =anchs.
In light of the NRC's revised colicy regarding the issuance of the Shorehan SER with a mini =uia of open issues, there are three notential scenarios which can lead at this point to the issuance of the Sho eham SER:
SER With Goen Itecs as "Laters" (Not scecifically a.
identified) b.
SER Without Mark II, SQPJ, and With a " Mini =um" Open Item List SER With All Major Open Items Closed Out c.
1.
SER WITH OPEN ITEMS AS "LATERS" (NOT SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED)
Since the primary concern relative to issuing the Shoreham SER with a large nu=ber of open items is that the intervenors may generate a large number of discovery requests on these open items alone, and therefore a large additional work load on the Staff, it would seem to be reasonable to issue the SER withour the secticus having open items, i.e.
Leave blanks with "laters."
It would then be nossible to issue a supplement to the SER containing the S'eaff's coc-oleted review of these "laters" without spacifically calling
' attention to each item.
The current SER draft would have to be edited in order to accomolish this, but the effort would be just that; i.e..
an editorial one.
Esti=ated SER issue date for Scenario 1:
12/22/78.
2.
SER WITHOUT MARK II. SORT A'!D MIDIMUM OPEN ITEM LIST This scenario essentially calls for the resolution of the majority of the onen items on the NRC's list via comolecion of the NRC's review on 22 of the open items and intensive NRC/LILCO meetings to resolve the bulk of the remaining Open Items by January 1, 1979.
Under this scenario the onen items remaining upon issuance of the SER would be as follows:
a.
Mark II (two items) b.
Seismic Qualification of Mechanical and Electrical Equipment (five items)
Generic Issues (nine items) c.
d.
MSIV Leakage Control Systems Confir= story Review (two items)
Fire Protection (one significant outstanding question) e NOTE:
Inservice Insoection (ISI) and financial Qualifications "Open Items", while not resolved by 1/1/79, sre not
~
ligitimate items since NRC policy calls for questions and review of these areas approximately six months prior to fuel load.
SER issue date for Scenario No. 2:
1/15/79.
3.
SER WITH ALL MAJOR OPEN ITEMS CLOSED OUT The controlling open items in this scenario are the Mark II issues and the SQRT ecuipment evaluations and NRC site visit, both of which will probably be comoleted in March or April of 1979.
All other significanc Open Items other than generic issues will be closed out by that time (given ap-orocriate NRC =ancower oriorities) and an additional four to siiweeks would probably be required to incorporate the reso-lutions of Mark II and SQRT into the SER.
Therefore, the Scenario No. 3 SER issuance date is:
5/15/79.
Our (LILCO's) understanding of the Staff's current position is that it is most consistent with Scenario No. 2.
However, the achievement of this substantial reduction in the number of coen items is dependent uoon the NRC's assignment of sufficient r'eviewer
- nanpower to close out these issues.
For our part, the schedule for
- me
t s
submittal of the additional infor=ation by LILCO (See Section II) shows that all infor=ation reouired to accomolish Scenario No. 2 will be sub=itted by =id Dece=ber.
Much of 'this infor=ation is just the " final piece in the purtle", but a few, notably the Pipe Break Outside Containment report, will require a larger com=it=ent of NRC =anhours.
LILCO is prepared to engage in essentially continuous meetings with the Staff to resolve all open ite=s required to accomplish Scenario No. 2, and we believe that this can be done in a rela-tively short period of tice if the staff reviewers and LILCO/
S&W engineers involved can be brought " face-to-face" ft: the requisite a=ount of time.
.