ML19338F474

Assesses Util Capability to Implement near-term NRC Action Plan Requirements (NUREG 0660) & Proposed Schedule.Plan Items Re Implementation Status,Proposed Implementation Plan & Current Shift Technical Advisor Training Program Encl

ML19338F474
Person / Time
Site:	Peach Bottom
Issue date:	10/15/1980
From:	Daltroff S PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC
To:	Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
RTR-NUREG-0660, RTR-NUREG-660, TASK-1.A.1.1, TASK-TM NUDOCS 8010200406
Download: ML19338F474 (18)

Text

,_:

-~

f..e,

i. :

PHILADELPHI A ELECTRIC COMPANY -

' 2301 M ARKET STREET

' P.O. BOX 8699 PHILADELPHIA. PA.19101 SHIELDS L.DALTROFF '

sos"c'rEic"/$$$o ~

October 15, 1980 Re: Docket'Nos. 50-277' 50-278 Mr. Darrell G.

Eisenhut, Acting Director Division of Operating Reactors U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington,;DC 20555

SUBJECT:

Implementation of NRC Action Plan Requirements

Reference:

(1) NUREG 0578, IMI-2 Lessons Learned Task

-Force Status. Report and'Short-Term

. Recommendations

-(2) Correspondance: dated May 7,

1980, D.

G.

Eisenhut, NRC, to All Operating Reactor Licensees (3)~Correspondance dated September 5,

1980, D.

G.

Eisenhut to All Licensees of Operating Plants.

Dear Mr. Eisenhut:

This letter presentsz an assessment of our capabilities to' implement near term NRC Action ~ Plan requirements (NUREG 0660),

and a proposed schedule for implementation.

Attachment A to this

' letter describes the status of Philadelphia Electric Company's effortsito implement lthese requirements.

The requirements were originally identified-in references 1 and 2.

The September 5,-

1980 letter from D..G.

Eisertut~ (reference 3) provided new. design criteria'for many-ofthe-requirements in references 1 and 2,'and

~

proposedia.new' implementation.. schedule.

The implementation

-schedule we propose in attachment A is consistent with most of the. implementation' dates: proposed by the NRC in reference 3.

(

Several additional. changes-i~n the-schedule are proposed specifically;for the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station.

The g

-~80!0200 yog

?!Y g

w

.Mr.:Dorr$1'l GA Eisenhut ~

(Page'2

~

laddit'ional changes 1are; primarily' ;a result [of the inability of,

< s o m e.~ v e n d o r s i t o - m e e t requested delivery schedules, and an1 effort ito minimizerthe number.ofoplantutransientsLand economic > impact'

^resulting1from; plant 1 outages,:and would; permit iaplementation in

.a?more effective,: orderly fashion.. A summary of the. proposed 5 schedule for-~the. Peach-Bottom Units-is: presented.in attachment B.

We. propose the followingioutage. schedule for-implementation ?ofi near term Action Plan modifications.-

1). January'1, 1981:

A' Unit 2 outage commencing'on'this date to rimplement;those Action. Plan modifications not limited by.

equipment: unavailability.

12 )

OnEor'before March-15,~1981:

A Unit 13 outage'to-accommodate refueling and'to complete 1most near_ term Action Plan modifications' requiring an-outage.

Equipment unavailability may preclude fulltimplementation of the following items:

II.F.l(3)LHigh' Range-Containment Radiation Monitors,

-II.F.l(4) Containment Pressure Monitors, and II.F.l(5)

Containment Water Level Monitors.

W 3)

'On or_before January 1,-

1982:

A' Unit 2 outage to complete-4 modifications for.which' equipment; procurement' problems precluded their-implementation during the January 1980 outage.

Duration of outages to accommodate the near term modifications is estimated to be two and three weeks for Peach Bottom; Unit 2 and Unit 3f r a4 p e c t i v e ly. - Current estimates of the-

-replacement energy charges to area customers. associated with-the three week Unit 3. outage is $23 million.-

In. view of the fact that Peach Bottom Unit'.3 is. scheduled'for an extended refueling / modification outage starting in early March 1981, we propose a relaxation of the Peach Bottom Unit 3 implementation =

date--for Action Plan requirements'so"that the modifications can

~belaccommodated duricg the-_ scheduled refueling outage..

-I n i

addition,nourJfuel vendordhas advised us that in order to meet:

the. design shutdown margin' criteria in~the next Peach Bottom Unit 3-fuelicicle, UnitJ3 mustrattain:a shutdown exposure.of at-least.

'7700. MWD / TON.

. Obtaining;this exposure will be d i f f i c u l t' i f 'a

three week outage-must.be'taken' prior"toothe~ scheduled _ refueling

~

Eshutdown.

Given a_three weekJoutage, operation-of-Peach-Bottom Unit 3.*beyond che1 currently' scheduled ~ refueling outage date of early:. March _1981~ ~will be-necessary,; causing.further-funavailabilityloflthe Unit-during the summer of 1931, or falternatively:-the number of. fresh reload assemblies may have to

~

c

-be reducedLwhichfwill degradefthe energy available'from-Peach Bottom Unit-3?during:its next cycle'.

3 L

J

,c._

1,

Mr. Darrell[G.:Eisenhut

'.Page 3 A re-scheduling-of'the Unit 3 near' term Action Plan requirements'untilithefplanned refueling outage:would.(1) enhance

~

'thelimplementation'of the Unit 2 modificationsnby-. avoiding ipotentialidifficulties associated with manpower availabilitys and productivity-which-are? inherent with late December work,_(2)

. increase Unit:3 availability:during the summer of 19 81,' '( 3 )

permit: theJimplementation of Action Plan _ requirements'that would

+

.not.bespossible. earlier-due tolengineering and procurement restraints, and.(4) would s' ave-area customers:approximately $23

~

millionL(equivalent to more thanLone million barrels'of. oil).

This' relaxation of the Unit 3 implementation date would involve only-ten week.s'and does_noticompromise' plant. safety.

-We believe.that?the proposed schedule-provides for impleuentation'of the:NRC_ requirements in a manner which is consistent with-the. intent to appropriately respond to-the Le s sons 1Learne d :f. rom ' TMI-2.

Should you have any questions regarding-this matter, please'do not hesitate to. contact us.

Very truly yours, l

. w sig

' Attachments

j

m. -

h v

ATTACHMENT-A:

-PEACH. BOTTOM ATOMIC'~ POWER STATION

IMP'LEMENTATION' STATUS OF NEAR TERM NRC" ACTION PLAN 1 ITEMS-t 1.~' Requirement

- Sh'if t. Technical ? Advis o r -(I.'A. l.1):.

The Shift'. Technical. Advisor-(STA) shall. receive training in-plant.designjand' layout, including the capabilities of cinstrumentation and-controls ~in the control ' room.

..They shall

~

lalso have received specifientraining in the response and

~

analysis-of4 the plant for transients'and accidents.

This level of training'shall havelbeen attained by January'1, 1981.. A1 description of this training, and the long' term STA program, including qualification, selection criteria,.and-

-training-plans shall.be submitted by January ^1, 1981.

Response

Enclosed.is-a partial response to this request, and a proposal to complete.the' comprehensive STA-training program 1 presently in progress and scheduled ~to run through February 18, 1981.

Six candidates were selected from our engineering staff for the Jearlier this year, and have been attending a full STA position time, twe ty-two week-training course since September 2,'1980.

The train'ing' program, which includes simulator training, closely

. parallels the proposed INPO. training standard for.STA's, and is described'in attachment C.-

The training curriculum exce eds ' the:

- requirements identified in NUREG;0578, Short Term Lessons-Learned.

We:prcpose'that'the assignment of these personnel to replace the.

interin STA's'be deferred until completion of the training discussed above,. expected to.be February 13, 1981.

This would cavoid'di'sruption ofnthe training efforts, therefore maximizing benefits' gained-by the; trainees'from the-program.

Information

'regarding the long term-training and qualification criteria will'

l. -

. be submitted Jan'uary 1, 1981 as requested.

7 l

2.

Requirement:

Plant Shielding (II.B.2)-

Perform a-radiation and-shielding design review of the spaces-

'around systemsLthat Emay,Tas'a result' 'o f an. accident, contain

-highly; radioactive materials;byJJanuary'1, 1980.

Complete modifi' cations, based on the shielding 1 study, to assure

- adequate: access-to vital' areas'following:an accident by January-1,~1981.

H <

1 l

1 g

e.

7 1 Attachment'AI(Cont'd).

Response

'This requirementTparallels the plant' shielding study of NUREG

~0578, itemc2'.l.6b.

The'results_offthe shielding study were presentedrin our submittal _of January 131, 1980, S.

L.~ Daltroff to H.

R.

Denton.

As a result of.this study we proposed for fcompletion by Januarygl,-'1981, the relocation.of_ equipment and facilities.' This_ involves the relocation of the spent fuel makeup. controls to areas outside the reactor building; and'the

~

establishment-of a backup radiochemistry. laboratory at a' distance from thelplant.

The NRC Region-'I meeting, held in Arlington, VA, on September 22,.

1980, provided additional clarification'of the source term-design:

criteria:forJthe-plant shielding study.

A reassessment of the shielding study' based.on this new clarification, indicates that post' accident radiation-conditions will not impact on reactor building accessibility _and1the availability of the present radiochemistryJlaboratory..Therefore, we_ propose that implementation of the1 modifications described above be deferred unti1~such time that their need is. clearly established.

3.

Requirement:. Post Accident-Sar-) ling Station (II.B.3)

Upgrade the. capability to obtain sanples from the reactor coolant system and' containment atmosphere under high radioactivity conditions by January 1, 1981.

Response

To provide for' equipment delivery. and installation in an orderly fashion,'we believe the January-1, 1982 implementation date proposed in theJ[[letter::05000278/LER-1980-019-03, /03L-0:on 800806,while Performing Surveillance Test on RHR Sys W/Unit at power,MO-3-10-25A LPCI Injection Valve Failed to Open.Caused by Multiple Full Penetration Cracks on Drive Sleeve of Type SMB-4 Limitorque Operator|September 5, 1980 letter]] from D.

G.

Eisenhut to be. appropriate for.this requirement.

4.:

Requirement': -Safety-Relief Valve Qualification s

Testing-(II.D.1)

Aiplant specific'submittalifor safety and relief valves is

~

required b'y' July 1981.

Response

The Peach,BottomLtype safety and relief valves are included in the1 scope 1of the prototype qualification testing to be performed of the BWR-Owners Group.

We are providing the under-the1 auspices r

v e

=

-=

w

m-

_ ;.y

.-t m

~

idttachmentJA$(Cont d)l I

<necessarya support-throug$ the Owners' Group ~to-develop an'd-icompleteithertesting program.. The1best' effort tfor the-Owners Group'to complete the., qualification t'estinglis! July 1',;1981.

2AdditionalJtimeCwill' be:necessary to' evaluate the data?and?

~

~

' provide ?ag planti specific-l submittal.

.We' propose.that'the_ schedule spresen'ted:in correspondence dated September-1 7.,-

1 9 8 0,

D.

B.

Waters',-Chairman of'the-BWRlOwnerslGroup, to R._H.

Vollmer, NRC,.

lbe considereaLas=an acceptableischedule:to. satisfy this

~

requirement.-.The proposed schedule.-is as follows:

'Complere1 test facility:: December 31,.1980.

Complete

~

shakedown tests: EFebruary= 15, 1981.

Complete 1 operability tests: July 1, 1981.

Complete test-reports:

D e c e mb e r ; 31, 1981. :

5.-

Requirement:

Safety-Relief. Valve Position Monitors (II.D.3)

Reactor coolantisystem'reliefnand safety.valvesfshall be.

~provided with a. positive indication in the: control room derived.from a reliable valve --position ' de tec tion' de vice by January 1,<1980.

A qualified: installation is required by J anu'a ry: 1,-- 19 81.

Response,

ti reliableidirect position indication. system', utilizing acoustic; sensors,.is presently operati'onal.on'all Peach Bottom safety-relief valves.' 'As-stated in the November.-21, 1979. letter areL n'the process o f-i '

from S.

L.EDaltroff.to H.'R.

Denton, we upgrading this: system to meetJthe safetyDgrade design criteria

' applicable r t o,this.. requirement.-

This task requires an outage on both. units. RWe are1 prepared to implement the improvements by rJanuaryo1,;1981;ghoweveri for the reasons discussed in the cover-letter, w el p r o p o~s e completion of. all' work during a. Unit 2 outage starting January 11,.11981, and a Unit 3 refueling outage starting on or:before March 115, 1981.

I '._ -Requirement:

. Dedicated-Hydrogen Penetrations (II.E.4.1)/

6

. Evaluate 1the.; design-of the; purge system for post accidenti

~

combu'stible:gasLcon' trol of the' containment' atmosphere; an'd

.completeDmodifications,,1f required,.by January 1,~1981.

^

g.

p u

p E'

1. ~'.,

/

• f'.

O f

--p y

w

-g.

e-gya se.

pa <

+. - - - -

~-,

-e ame, Q w

y 3 e

+

- ee

• w~me-

c x

" q-w

.e L

LA'ttachmenttA (Contfd)

~

Response JThe?modificationsito.implementLthis requirement' involve

~

4 1 additional' containment ~-isolation valves on.the Containment

'AtmosphericDDilutionl(CAD) ~ system.- Thisiworkt has;beenicompleted.

Jon Unit?2',SwhilefUniti3-wiIl require?aJscheduled-outage.. F o r f t h e..-

reasons-discussed'innthe coverfletter,>.we. propose' implementation

~

on Unit-3Lduring the refueling: outage starting on-or.before' March.

15, 1931:.. The?Junec30, 1981~implementationLdate' proposed;inLehe;

' September 5,fl980 letterafrom D.

G.'Eisenhut is:therefore-an.

-appropriate schedule.?

- 7.

Requirement:

High' Range Effluent Monitor (II.F.l(l))

Provide high irange, effluent;monitorsufor noble gases-by 1 January-1, 1981-in accordance'with.the design 1 criteria presented.in the October.30, 1979~1etter from'H..R.

Denton regarding-clarification of NUREG 0578, Short Term Lessons Learned.-

Response-This requirement parallels item-2.1.8b of NUREG 0578,.Short Term Lessons Learned.

Three new monitoring systems 1were installed earlier t,his; year to meet the NUREG 0578 requirements.

A' letter from R..U.;Reid, NRC - Division of Licensing.to E.

G.

Bauer,

~

st'ates;that-Philadelphia Electric Company has satisfied the NRC requirements related to-Ites 2.1.8.b of the TMI-2 Short Term L'essons. Learned. requirements and Item III D.2.1 of the TMI Action-Plan s (NUREG-0660).: In light of the revised requirements for this system specifiedlinlsection II.F.l(l) of the September 5, 1980 l e.t '

'com D.-G.

Eisenhut, it is not clear at'this time whether any further action regarding these monitors is. required-by Philadelphia Electric.-Company. -We propose that the modifications previously' implemented,. remain-as an acceptable response to the

~

requirement for; upgrading'the noble gas _ monitors.

However, i f.

-further-modifications'are required to meet the proposed criteria

~

presentednin-section II.F.l(l)-of the-September 5,11980 letter, l

the? time-required to select, order,: receive an'd install the systemsfwould not permit completion-by the NRC proposed j

implementation date of October.1,'1981.

Therefore, we propose a defe'rral offthe. industry-wide implementation date for section

.-I I. F. l ( l ) fr e q u i re men t s until July 1982.

H

- 1

.o i

/-

~

y w.

~

L '

e g,

3

~

w.

Attachmenti15(Contfd)'

s, i86 1 Requirement:

S'ampling;and Analysist o'f;. P lan t Effluents I

.(II.F.l(2))f

' Capability 1for{ effluent' monitoring:of radioiodines for.the Jaccident.conditionfshallche;provided.lwith? sampling conducted by'Jabsorptionion charcoalior other media', followed.by on-site laboratoryc analysisiby Januaryjl',-1981.

-Respdnse

.BasedLon theJresultsfof the shididing study submitted on-January

~

31,.:1980,'s. L.

Daltroff to.H.fR. Denton,'we proposed.the

relocation 1of the~ iodine effluent sampling system from the

. reactor building'to the turbine building by January ~ 1,.1981, to meetLthe_requirementsLof section II.F.~1(2).

.As.a' result.of

~

L

. additional'clarif* cation.of the source. term. criteria provided at the=NRC. Region 111 meeting on September'22, 1980, and discussed in.

item-2 above,. relocation ~of the iodine:monitorsiis no longer deemed'necessary to'meetithis-requirement.

TheL[[letter::05000278/LER-1980-019-03, /03L-0:on 800806,while Performing Surveillance Test on RHR Sys W/Unit at power,MO-3-10-25A LPCI Injection Valve Failed to Open.Caused by Multiple Full Penetration Cracks on Drive Sleeve of Type SMB-4 Limitorque Operator|September 5, 1980 letter]]lfrom E.-G..Eisenhut presents design criteria for the high-r ang e _-. ra d io i o d i ne is am p lin g systei that represents new reouirenents.

The present installation at. Peach. Bottom, which Jeffluent sampling for iodines and provides continuous particulates, would' require.newcequipment to comply with the new

' criteria. -The NRC proposed implementation date of October'1,_

i

'1981-would'not providessufficient time.because of the long lead

'~

times expected _~for procurement of-the new custom equipment aft'er

~

.an_ engineering review. :Therefore, we propose an implementation ~

L date.of July 1, 1982fto implement-the new requirements.for the radioiodine s a'mpling - sys t em.

9.

Reqdirement:

Drywell Radiation Monitors (II.F.1(3))

L

' Install high range radiation monitors.in the drywell by L

[

January 1,.1981.

i-i

Response

Delivery:.of_th'e monitors;is presently-scheduled for. late this L

gyear.(onenhalf 1of'the' monitors-by. November. 1 5,-' 1 9 8 0, and the p

?other'halfLbyDecember. 15, 1980).

ThisLmodification.couldLbe

(=

completed during"an. outage starting January 1, 1981, if the

(

equipment 11s-received on-schedule and-satisfactorily passes

~

= receipt. inspection; however, a' qualified l recorder will not be l

L availablelbyi.this Tdate.. Since the schedule-is very tight and a

. orde rly : ins talla t' ion (is :. de si rable, and qualified recorders will J

we believe that,the October

-not'bedavailably by7 anuary-1,.1981,

--S.

1 n:.

e

)

4 a: y t

1Atta'chment Ap(Cont'd)~

A' 1, 1981fimplementation cdate; proposed in.ths September 15, 1980 letterDfrom'D.JC.LEisenhut1will.be.necessaiy to. effectively

' complete l implementation.- Under this time; schedule,.

~

implementation would-be completed.on Unit'3Jduring the': refueling outage,:andion) Unit.2Rbefore October'1, 1981.--

10. Re'ouirement: -Containment Pressure: Monitor'(II.F.1(4)).

p

~ Install highJrange-containment 1 pressure monitor by January 1,

'1981.

Response ~

i, We have been actively working with the General Electric Company-and the-BWR10wners-Group-for the past' year to_ develop qualified equipment to implement this' requirement.

There is no

~

. manufacturer.of. pressure transmitters that we have found'that:can meet the requirements ofLIEEE: Standard 323-1974.

We have

~ contracted with the1 General-Electric Company to provide us with o

qualified equipment.

liowever, due.co problems with sub-vendor

qualification' programs,.they are not.able at this time to identify a delivery:date for this equipment.

Since there is no existing containment pressure instrumentationscapable of monitoring the range. required bycthe NRC, we have purchased

, pressure ~ transmitters f' rom Rosemount.that are qualified to IEEE l.

Standards-323-1971Jand'344-1975.

Ve are prepared, with NRC f

approval, to install'these Rosemount pressure transmitters during H

the first scheduled ~-outages proposed in the cover letter.

This is the best available' equipment on the market today..Therefore, we propose that'_thic modification be accepted as-the permanent' i.

installation for upgrading-the containmen't pressure

['

instrumentation.

Qualified recorders may not-be available from-

-the GeneralEElectric Company by the first scheduled outages.

~We-propose to install non qualified recorders at this time and replace'them with qualifie'd recorders during the first scheduled outage ~following delivery.

11.-Requirement:

Containment Water Level Monitor (II.F.1(5))

-Install high rang'e-containment level monitor by January 1.-

~1981.

j l

Response-s We are experiencing the'same procurement problems for this

equipment as described for the pressure monitor in item 10.

n

-v

?

(

9..

.t t

s't Attachment ~fA((Cont'dh

?However,'the existinginon-safety related containment; water level instrumentationDis~ capable ~of monitoring theErange required;by

- theiNRC.c?We propose 4 upgrading-~the/ containment _ water' level instrumentation?during theifirstfscheduled outage'following deliveryJofltheLqsalifiediequipment.

. 12.-. Re q ui reme n t :

Containment' Hydrogen Monitor.(II.F.1(6))

~

Econtinuous11ndication'offhydrogen honcentration in the-containment 1 atmosphere shall be provididnin;the control' room.

Response

The original NRC/ design. criteria for'the hydrogen--monitors, presented in-the October 30',.1979 clarification letter on NUREG 0573, required,.byiJanu2ry'1,.1981, a measurement capability over.

' the rangeooff.0-10%' hydrogen concentration for both positive and negative ambient. pressure _conditio'ns, and; compliance with

Regulatory: Guide 1.97, Re' vision.2.

We h' ave reviewed the design s

'of the existing Containment-Atmospheric-Dilution.(CAD) System a'na ly z e r s installed.at PeachLBottom, and-conclude that they

^

comply'with.this criteria. o0n.this basis, modification to the

, hydrogen analyzers.is not~ required.

The September 5,-1980 letterLprovided several new requirements for the hydrogan. analyzers and-proposed-a revised completion date of October.1, 1981.-

The. Peach. Bottom equipment meets the new ~

requirements except;for'th'e revised measurement accuracy.

' requirement.. :We-propose thatfthe accuracy requirement should"be

. dele t'e d -f o r the following reasons:

- a) -Qualified, safety grade, hydrogen analyzers are not commerciallyfavailable with"an cccuracy of +0.1 volume

. percent hydrogen-for;afl0 volume' percent range..

b)- The Peach Bottom containments.are inerted (maintained at less thann4% ' oxygen).

4 n

.c)? PostELOCA combustible gas concentrations are controlled by-

.theiCAD; System.. LThe 'systemfistoperated to add nitrogen and LventJ containment gases in order to? maintain oxygen

~

concentration below-the' combustible limit.

Therefore, the

CAD Systenfoxygenfanalyzers'are;important for proper-

. combust'ibleigas?controlland:the. hydrogen analyzers are used 1

'forJinformationfonly.

(Refer to the' Peach Bottom FSAR,

'Supplementil, response.to? question 14.6 for further

~

!information.=)~

._7 4

~

e

^

j '-'

b J

l h

y, y

7 g

+

.s4.--

+ -

l 4

w

- a.

. Attachment ~A (Contid)L Thelpost accident sampling systemioeing installed 11n; response-a). ~ t o ' I I. B. 3 11 -s:designedm to take containment gas, samples'for gas chromatographieranalysislin--the:on-site' laboratory.

1The information:regarding the-hydrogen analyzers requested by.

October 1,-1981 in the SeptemberJ5, 1980-letter will_be provided

'byLthat date. -Qualification ~of.theioxygen. analyzers is"being

. pursued a~s part ' of: the' response-to'IE Bulletin 79-01B.-

13. Requirement:

Auto' Restart.of RCIC-(II.K.3'.13).

-The RCIC system initiation logic should be.madified.so that, the1RCICfsystem will restart on low water level by-April 1, 1981.

Resnonse.

We-are. planning to.. implement'this modification during the schedu' led outage on Unit'2ito-implement Lessons Learned-requirements, 'and on'.the Unit.3-refueling outage' starting March 15 1981, well before the-implementation' schedule of April 1, 1981.

14. Requ(recent:

HPCI/RCIC Break Detection (II.K.3.15)

-The pipe break detection circuitry should be modified so that pressure spikes resulting from~IIPCI~and RCIC system initiation will not cause inadvertentLsystem isolation.

o

Response

We: are' prepared tolimplement'this modification by January 1,.

.1981.

An outage is'not Hrequired'to' implement the nodifications.

However, if implementedcwithout:an outage, it requires. removing safety related equipment 9from service during installation.

In addition,Eplant availability 1may-be-jeopardized by.this work.-

Therefore'for'this reason, and for reasons statei in the cover letter, we" propose, completion of this task during a Unit 2-outage starting' January 1, 1981, and a Unit 3 refueling outage starting-on or before 2 March 15, l 19 81'.

.T'chnical Support. Center (III.A.I.2)

-15.' Requirement:

e

-Upgradeithe emergency support.fa'ilities in accordanca with-

~

c

~

NUREC 06967by;: April 1,?1982..

~,

.e g

t t

e M'

W W

+

I

..(Cont'd)

' Attachment A

Response

Item 2.2.2b,.NUREG 0578,EShort-Term Lessons Learned,= presented the' requirements.for establishing.a. permanent Technical-Support Center (TSC) by January-1,11981.. Correspondence [ dated January 2,

1980, S.~L'.

Daltroff to'H. R.-Denton,; pre'sented our'commitmant to meet this requirement by January 1, 1981..Section III.A.1.2-of

- the [[letter::05000278/LER-1980-019-03, /03L-0:on 800806,while Performing Surveillance Test on RHR Sys W/Unit at power,MO-3-10-25A LPCI Injection Valve Failed to Open.Caused by Multiple Full Penetration Cracks on Drive Sleeve of Type SMB-4 Limitorque Operator|September 5, 1980 letter]] from E.

G.

Eisenhut,1envokes NUREG-0696.as'the' design criteria"for the TSC and proposes an

. implementation.date of-April 1,.1982.-

We have. submitted comments on NUREG 0696 (draft) in correspondenca dated September 23, 1980,

' V..S.

Boyer:co S.

L.

Ramos, NRC..

It.is our understanding that

- NUREG 0696 will-be issued:later this year.

Additional. time, as proposed-in.the Septembery5,'1980 letter, will be necessary.to: implement the new requirements atticipated

-in NUREG 0696,.and to complete in an orderly fashion.ur previous commitments.- With the exception of data acquisition, we scopose a completion date of_ April'1, 1981, for the TSC.

Philadelphia, Electric Company's _ capability of implementing the data acquisition and other-new requirements will be assessed following issuance'of1the final-draft of NUREG 0696.

16. Requirement:

ContainmentnIsolation Depcndability (II.E.4.2)~

a)

Allinon-essential systems shall be automatically isolated by the containment isolation signal;by July 1, 1981.

b)-

The: containment setpoint pressure that initiates containment isolation for:non-essential penetrations must be reduced.to minimum, compatible with normal-operating conditions'by July 1, 1981.

Response

a)

As' stated =inz the September 5,.1980 letter, additional guidance will be provided by NRR.on the classificat. ion of essentia11vs. non-essential..Upon receipt of this guidance, we_willVinitiate an engineering evaluation to identify modifications,'.if necessary, to the containment isolation.

system.-

The time to; complete the engineering and procure new e quipment ', fand'. t he ' ne ed for a plant outage, may preclude inplenen'tation byTJuly.1,;1931.

We propose-a deferral of the

-o f ficial> implementation schedule.until the NRC has reviewed

~

.theJJanuary 1, 1981-submittal from each-licensee.

-9

(.

k

'g-w

+

-' At t a c hmen tfA q(Cont ' d ).

s

b)) ;I n -l r e s p o n s e~L o ~ theESeptember.5', 1980J1etter, we.have:

t

' initiated studies' of (the f easibility: of lowering-the isolation'setpoint and'. expect-to report'on'this topic by.-

- -m January: 1, 1981.'a s ' reque s t ed.

-If. modifications:areirequired-

- as c a re sulti of..the. s tudle s,: the.-implementa eion schedule of

~

~

-July 1, 1981 mayznot.: provide.suffic'ients. time-to; procure equipment and to accommodatecthe modifications during-plant outages.

We propose;a deferral ~of.~the official.

implementation schedule'until-the NRC-has r'eviewed the

~

~

January 1,-1981' submittal fron':each licensee.

d tt 4.-

1 s

C 10-4 g

' l:

3

~

+

re

+

~.

)

r ATT ActlM E ET 8 PROPOSED IMPLF.MEETAT1UK SClEDULF.-

Fop EEAM TERM KRC ACTinN PLAM ITEMS Proposed NRC Philadelphia Electric Present NRC Implementation Proposed Schedule Implementation Schedule.

Action Plan No.

Title Schedule (9/5/40 Letter)

-Unit 2 Unit 3

1. A.1'.1 Shift Technical Advisor 1/1/81 1/1/81 2/23/81 2/23/S1 11.5.2 Flant Shielding 1/1/81 1/1/81 Note 1

' Note 1 Post Accident Sampling Station.

1/1/81 1/1/82 1/1/82 1/1/b2 11.4.3

~It.D.I Safety-Relief Valve.

qualification Testing 7/1/81 7/1/81.

'1/1/82

'1/1/32 II.D.3 Safety-Relief Valsa e

. Pos".t ion ftoni t or 1/1/81 1/1/81 1/1/81 3/15/st' II.E.4.1 Dedicated !!ydrogen Penetrations 1/1/81 6/30/81 Complete 3/15/m1

'II.k.1(1)

High Rante Effluent. Monitor 1/1/81 10/1/81 Note 2 Note 2 II.F.1(2)

Iodine Monitor 1/1/81 10/1/81.

7/1/82 7/1/82 C"Q}

gg,y,g(3)-

Containment Radiation Monitor 1/1/81 10/1/81 10/1/81-3/15/01

(

}

11.F.1(4)

Containment Pressure Monitor 1/1/81 1/1/81 1/1/81 3/15/81 (Note 3)

~(Note'3) fhhhh II.P.1(5)

Containment Water Level Monitor 1/1/81 1/1/81 Note 4 Note 4 h

II.F.1(6)

Contalement Hydroten Monitor 1/1/81 10/1/81 10/1/a1 10/1/d1 11.E.3.13

' Auto Restart of RCIC 4/1/81 4/1/81 1/1/81' 3/15/81 g___3 h

=2 II.K.3.1%

HPCI/RCIC Break Detection 1/1/81 1/1/31 1/1/81 3/15/e1 t=:=

23E9 P

t 7*..

{

e

.t-o-.

~'-

Present ProposeJ DRC PhilaJelphia Electric

.1 R C.

Implementation:

Proposed. Schedule

-tmplementation.

Schedule e

Action' Plan'No.

~ Title Schedule (9/5/80 Letter)

Unit 2 U n i t _3 s

III.A.I.2' Technical Support Center 1/1/dl 4/1/82 4/1/81 4/1/31-(Note 5)

(Eete 5) i t...a Note-1:

Reassessment based on the NRC clarification of the plant shisiding source terus indicates present plant design.is satisfactory.

. Note 2:~.'Clarkitcation from NRC.necessary.

See kteu 7 of' Attachment A.

Notef31. Installation'.of non qualified recorder.- Unit 2:

1/1/81.' Unit.3:

3/15/81.

Qualifted recorder - first. scheduled outar,*.following_de!!very.

Note 4:

Non qualified instrumentation presently installed.

Qualified instrumentation - first acheduled-outage follouing-delivery.

Note 5: 'Except for data acquisition and other new requirements in ?IUNEC 0696.

IQ G3 ass GE:D neu;q se) u---a D

r

.h w

n 9

.. ~

. et

,3,

._7

/

ATTACHMENT C

~

CURRENT SHIFT' TECHNICAL-ADVISOR TRAINING PROGRAM.

.The~ instruction includes five phases of training over 22 weeks.-iThesa are:

Phase'I - Academic' Training (6' weeks)

Phase II'- Management / Administrative Controls Training (2 weeks).

Plant' Systems Training (8' weeks)

Phase III Phas'e IV;

Accident Analysis Training (3 weeks)

. Phase ~V - Simulator Training (3 weeks)

IV are being-presented at Peach Bottom while Phases I

. Phase V " Simulator Training, will-take place-at the Limerick Training Center.'

Classroom' portions of the program normally run 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> per day-with about'2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> per day allotted for' quizzes, examinations or structured study.

There is at least one examination per class week.

The details of each phase of the program are outlined as follows:

Basic Academic Phase (6 weeks)

Phase I

• This' portion of the program-is a condensed version of the. course-normally presented to candidates for the reactorLoperator's. license.

The overall obje'ctive is to provide the student with a basic understanding of the scientific and engineerir.g principles of reactor plant operation.

Key academic fundamentals normally not included in_a college curriculum are stressed.

Phase II.-

Management / Administrative Controls Phase

.(2 weeks)

This phaseaof the training introduces the duties and responsibilities'of the' Shift Technical Advisor.

The

-objectives,are.co provide prerequisite leadership skills as well es an' orientation on general plant operations

and ^ safety'to ensure that each,STA is familiar with

-plant management and administration.

Phase II topics

< include the.following:

~

-Duties & Responsibilities of the STA

L e a d e r s h i p _.

Interpersonal l Communication Motivation'of Personnel Problem &: Decisional. Analysis ^ J y.

,y y

+

~ _

a:

x J

4 '

^

~

At tachment L C'-

N i Current-Shift':Techn'ical-Advisor Training Program-i-

~

l_.,.

l

~k-l'

> Command Responsibilities & Limits

- Stress..

[.

- Human-Behaviori i.

h Responsibilities;for: Safe Ope' ration

&' Shutdown.

Equipment: Outages-& Clearance Procedures Use of'Proceduresi L'

~ P lant f Mo'dif ica t ion s -

('

y Shift. Relief-Turnover & Manning I

Containment'A'ccess

-Maintaining, Cognizance of Plant Status.

Physica1LSecurity

' Control-Room ' Access

' Radiological Control Instructions Radiol'ogicalE Emergency' Plan

- Code of-FederalcRegulat' ions'(appropriate' sections)

L Phase'III 1-Plant Systems Phase (8 weeks) training' encompasses essential n'uclear

.. Plant Sys'tems

~.

steam. supply',- secondary and emergency systems.- The

~

'.studentEwill learn the general description of the i

system,' instrumentation and controls,. interconnections-with other# systems, operational limits and basic l

operation..-The provisions of-Technical Specifications.

L (including bases) will be stressed.

Integrated plant l

operations will also'beEintroduced A tentative. list of systems: Leo Lbe included in this program is-given below.

l.

The finalelistfofisystems will-be completed after l.

consulcation'with the Peach ~3ot' ton -training. staff.

ExistingEPeach'30ttom training materials will-be used to j

the' extent possible.

l l

Emergency Core Cooling h

. Emergency Cooling 1 Water L-

_ Emergency Electrical Power, AC & DCs I

' Reactor.' Protection L

Reactor Coolant

^

l' Reactor Coolant Inventory &. Chemistry' Control H

Containment. System.

. Closed' Cooling Water.

L Nuclear. Instrumentation

Non-Nuclear Instrumentation Reactor

Controlf

- Containment Hydrogen Monitoring & -Control

'RadioactivelWaste Disposal?(Liquid, Gas, Solid)-

[h

'EmergencylControl' Air Condensate & Main;Feedwater.

e W.

F

.s.J.

a-

'{

^

2

.s.

I g

,3 4-t

M

^

w.:.

~:'

q ~

.t, ;

. ^

g c

s

.,-74 z..

4 te

('y,n' 74

+

+ <

- :t

^ '. ~,.

a y.

~

~

~'AttachmentFC:

..., ~

t:

/ Current" Shift' Technic'al~ Advisor' Training-Program'

^ '

}

.2

' f jAbxiliary; Fee _dAa~ter

-Reactor' Vessel Water' Level Control-

" Main. Steam-E 4.

?

Status,{ Monitoring

. Seismic Monitoring:

?

.R e sid u al - H e a t c. Re mo va l '

1 Radiation: Monitoring >

~

l~

Main (Turbinef& Generator "PhaseLIVc-Accident? Analysis' Phase..(3. weeks) i:

~

.The objective ofithis. portion ofithe~ program is to

prepare'theLSTA to perform the accidentc assessment E

function. ~ The. methodology' of: accident analysisiwill,be presented. -Indications and thejresponseiof.the plant.to' various accidents. described'in' vendor accident analyses and:the: Final; Safety. Analysis 1 Report,will als'o'be discussed.- Transients of moderate frequency and infrequent ~ and limiting faults will'b'e covered.

Co u'r s e -

p;

materials.for this portion of-the program will..be l

_ developed'from plant. specific materials and;provided each:ctudent.-

l t

BWR Simulator Phase' Q weeks) i- -

~ Phase-V

• Boiling'WatersReactor. Simulator Training is_an essential

~

1 supplement;to-thefclassroom instruction and' enhances the studentis knowledge offthe material' covered during all i

,four classroom; phases.

Training on a. full scale boilingewater reactor simulator (isiavailable)from General Physics. corporation utilizing

<the facilities. /The program' includes ~four hours of-classroom instruction.and four. hours of " hands'on"'

!J simulator. training.each day.-

Students will.become

(~

ifamiliarized-with normal plant' operations during Week 1.'

i:

LWeek 2Lfeatures!transientsiof moderate 1 frequency...

~

_:During' Week 3,: inf requent = and limiting faults'will b'e' explained'with0special emphasis on'the lessons learned f;

from Three~ Mile Island. '

Theurecommendedeclass sizeifor the BWR simulator-h', ~

- ti ra in i n g li s m 3-4 personnel.-'As.we' anticipate that 6.

~

j g'.

s t u'd e'n t s hv illM a t t e nd, t h e training will'be given1to i

1

' students 2in twofgroupsfduring'a three-week period,Jeach groupiusing the-~ simulator-four hours per day.

[

.~.

j J

1 N

~. ji n

[

5:

q.

~

._3.~

' 6;"p,

L Q.-

~ ~

~

' 7 A

[

l ^

)

3 L '~' '

g 7

t,

~-

N' i

w t

.i p

l 9

~

~Y f 1. -

l

' +<

s z e <. a ; a r _.,,

,