ML19323G721

State of or Proposed Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law Re Design Mods for Facility.If Proposed Findings Are Included by ASLB in Initial Decision,State of or Will Concur W/Proposed Licensee Findings & Conclusions

ML19323G721
Person / Time
Site:	Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png
Issue date:	05/19/1980
From:	Ostrander F OREGON, STATE OF
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Shared Package
ML19323G717	List: ML19323G716 ML19323G721 ML19323G724
References
TAC-11299, TAC-13152, NUDOCS 8006060539
Download: ML19323G721 (7)

Text

'

g5 m

,gs

-x 9

O f

c %w c

U%c

.E

~f k ' '.' f,? 1980, {

d.$.k'~',

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

\\n fe i

BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD i*

In the Matter of

)

)

PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC

)

Docket No. 50-344 COMPANY, et al.

)

(Control Building Proceeding)

)

(Trojan Nuclear Plant)

)

)

STATE OF OREGON'S PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW CONCERNING DESIGN MODIFICATIONS FOR THE TROJAN CONTROL BUILDING I

INTRODUCTION The State of Oregon proposes the following as addi-tions and supplements to the proposed Findings of Fact and conclusions of Law submitted by the Licensee on May 7, 1980.

If the following additions and supplements are in-cluded by the Board in its initial decision, based on the information developed during this proceeding the State of Oregon concurs with and has no objection to the proposed findings and conclusions of the Licensee.

The following findings are proposed as Addition "K"

to the Licensee's findings at page 155 after Licensee's finding No. 287.

The following' license conditions are proposed as additions to Licensee's proposed conditions (1) and (1)(q).

///

///

///

///

1 - PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 8006060 537

II K.

Reporting Requirements Relating to Changes in the Modifications as Proposed By the Licensee and reviewed By the Board 288.

In the expert testimony submitted by the Licensee, the Staff and the State of Oregon and in response to ques-tions by the Board and the parties, there was an uncontro-verted consensus that the proposed modifications and the engineering calculations and design safety questions related thereto are complex and difficult and represent the " state of the art" in seismic capability analysis.

This is made particularly so by the lack of building code or other ac-cepted data which are specifically and completely applicable to the construction of the Trojan complex.

It was necessary, therefore, to rely on a testing progran and to perform a detailed and complex analysis unique to the Trojan complex (Licensee Exh. 28 pp. 11, 23a, 25, 33, 48, 59: Staff Exh.

17a pp. 42, 53; Tr. 3274, Tr. 3278, Tr. 3280, Tr. 3283, Tr.

3333 (Herring), Tr. 3608, Tr. 4356; Tr. 4420 (Bressler) ).

289.

Because of the complexity and unique nature (as described in F 288, supra) of the engineering design safety questions that had to be resolved during the two-year course of this proceeding, differences in engineering judgment necessarily arose between the staff and licensee (Staff Exh.

17a pp. 11 - 17, 20 - 22, 26, 28, 37 - 40, 54; Licensee Exh.

28 pp. 46, 66, 68, 73, 77; Tr. 3903, Tr. 4402 -4403, Tr.

I 4628).

These engineering judgment differences between the 2 - PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW i

staff and the licensee have finally been resolved.

However, certain analyses, including review of the seismic qualifi-cation of safety related equipment due to the widened response spectra as well as aspects of the " block wall problem", will not be performed until subsequent to this proceeding and prior to the modification work itself.

In addition, certain details of construction plans and the modification design are not finalized and may be subject to changes.

(Licensee Exh. 28 p 64; Staff Exh. 15a pp 25 - 27; Tr. 3727, Tr. 4373, Tr. 4647, Tr. 4622 - 4627, Tr. 4750 - 4753, Tr. 4789).

Licensee's proposed License Condition 2A, (which references the Trojan Operating License, appendix A, paragraph 5.7.2.2) as modified by this decision and 10 CFR 50.59 limit further changes to the proposed modifications as reviewed by the Board provided the Licensee concludes their effect is not significant.

However, the Board believes that because of the complexity and uniqueness of the engineering design safety questions relating to this proceeding and the differences in engineering judgment which have occurred, continued monitoring must be performed by the appropriate Staff experts in the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation of all remaining engineering design safety analyses per-formed by the Licensee (Tr. 3318).

290.

Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59(h), accelerated reporting to the Staff of changes and deviations from the modifications as 3 - PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

proposed and of further analyses of safety related equipment should be made in accordance with conditions (1) and (1)(q) in the Board's order.

III

~

(1)

Add the following statements to Licensee's proposed license condition (1) after the sentence "Any deviations or changes from the foregoing documents shall be accomplished Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59:

" Reports required by 10 CRF 50.59(b) shall be made to the NRC for information in accordance with the following schedule:

(a)

Any deviations or changes which require or cause the Licensee to perform calculations to ensure compliance with the criteria of Trojan Operating License, Appendix A, Paragraph 5.7.2.2 (per Licensee's proposed conditions 2(a)) shall be reported prior to commencement of the deviations or changes.

(b)

All other deviations or changes shall be reported within fourteen (14) days after the Licensee initially decides to implement them.

(c)

A copy of all reports submitted to the NRC pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59 shall be sent to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

(2) Add the following statements to Licensee's proposed license condition (1)(q) after the sentence "Any changes to piping systems necessary to ensure that the condition is met shall be performed before the structural modifications are made.":

///

///

///

4 - PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

"The evaluations to determine whether such changes are required shall be submitted to the NRC Office of Nuclear Reactor RecJulation for information p2.ior to implementation."

Respectfully Submitted,

..$I d 0 A )

r FRANK W.'OSTRANDER, WR.

Assistant Attorney General Of Attorneys for the Oregon Department of Energy o

5 - PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 4

'I

n B

u; CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Frank W. Ostrander, Jr. hereby certify that on this s

19th day of May, 1980, I served the within " State of Oregon's Pregosed Findings of Fact an'd Conclusions of Law Concerning Des.gn Modificacions for the Trojan Control Building" upon the foll) wing parties of record by then depositing in the United Stats s mail at Portland, Oregon, full, true, and correct

?

copie s thereof, addressed to the said parties of record at the

~

follow!.ng addresses listed below, and prepaying the postage thereon:

Marshall E. Miller, Esq., Chair.

Mr. David B. McCoy Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 348 Hussey Lane U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n Grants Pass, OR 97256 Washington, DC 20555 Ms. C. Gail Parson Dr. Kenneth A. McCollom, Dean 800 S.W. Green #6 Division of Engineering, Portland, OR 97205 3

5 Architecture & Technology Oklahoma State University Ronald W. Johnson, Esq.

Stillwater, OK 74074 Corporate Attorney Portland General Electric Dr. Hugh Paxton 121 S.W. Salmon Street 3

1229-41st Street Portland, OR 97204 Los \\lamos, New Mexico 97544 i

William W. Kinsey Mr John A.

Kullberg 1002 N.E. Holladay 15523 S.F. River Forest Dr.

Portland, OR 97232 Portland, OR 97222 Ms. Nina Bell Columbia Environmental Council 632 S.E.

18th i

203 S. First St reet Portland, OR 97214 St. Helens, OR 97051 Mr. Stephen M. Wil?.ingham Maurice Axelrad, Esq.

555 N.' Tomahawk Drive Lowenstein, Newman, Reis, Portland, OR 97217 Axelrad & Toll Suite 1214 Mr. Eugene Rosolie i

1025 Connecticut Avenue NF Coalition for Safe Power Washington, DC 20036 215 S.E. 9th Avenue Portland, OR 97214 1/ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Dr. Reed Johnson Atomic Safety and Licensing Office of the Executive Legal Appeal Board Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm',n Washington DC, 20555 Washington, DC 20555 Joseph R. Gray Docketing and Services Section Counsel for NRC Staff Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n Washington, DC 20555 Washington, DC 20555 Alan S.

Rosenthal, Esq.

Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n Washingon, DC 20555 Washington, DC 20555 Dr. John Buck Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n Washington, DC 20555 0

j F, RANK W.

OSTRANDER, JR.

Assistant Attorney General 2/ CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE