ML20032C900

Requests Answer to Question 6,re IE Activities by 811106,in Response to ASLB 811020 Order

ML20032C900
Person / Time
Site:	Humboldt Bay
Issue date:	10/29/1981
From:	Ippolito T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Jordan E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
References
NUDOCS 8111120308
Download: ML20032C900 (1)

Text

l f, ;,". r l

m

'g.

r ; T itu ',"

/

OCT 2 9193; j\\ "OCT3 01981 s-

-i

~ cap Division of Resident and Regional Reactor InspecMk N[

Ed Jordan, Director

?

IIEMORANDUM FOR:

Office of Inspection and Enforcement

~

FROM:

Thomas A. Ippolito, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #2 Division of Licensing, NRR

SUBJECT:

HUMBOLDT BAY BOARD QUESTIONS As Vernon Rooney has discussed with Mike Wilber from your division on 10/28/81, the ASLB has ordered that we answer the enclosed questions.

So that we may respond within the 30 days pemitted, please provide me with your answer to question 6, which pertains to I&E activitics, by November 6, 1981.

Please call Vernon Rooney on 492-8286 if he can help in answering further questions.

onginal Signed by T. A. Ippoltto Thomas A. Ippolito, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #2 Division of Licensing, NRR

Enclosure:

Board Memorandum and Order cc: w/ enclosure T. Novak D. Eisenhut J. Sniezek DISTRIBUTION:

Docket Fil ORB #2 Reading File NRC PDR Local PDR S. Norris V. Rooney Oh[glffg9 Phk Orvtce >

. 0RBR2...

.DRB14. W

..vR=ney:est TIppo itv 107381 107jy781'.

. l..

amy sac renu ata oo#n nncu om OFFiClAL RECORD COPY usom m-us a

y

i.,.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COW 4ISSION DOCKETED USHRC ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Administrative Judges:

11 (CT 21 P1:19 Robert M. Lazo, Chairf.ah

~

Gustave A. Linenberaer-0FFICE OF SECRETAy

David R. 3 chink DDEygAkt G

SERVED 0Ci 211981

~

)

In the Matter of Docket No. 50-133-OLA-

\\1* /

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY 4

to

~

. N '%

nT un f 'L (Humboldt Bay Power Plant October 20,J'!Slilg'lJLjupA' 1

Id Unit No. 3 - Amendment te Facility

)

Operating License)

)

!a] 00T2 2 Ic8% :e

)

q u.s.

\\

's

.s MEMORANDUM AND ORDER i

qf\\.

In an order entered on July 14, 1981, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (Scard) directed Pacific Gas and Electric Company (Licensee) to su5mit a written statement setting forth its intentions regarding plant modifications necessey to bring Humboldt Bay Power Plant, Unit 3, into compliance with current NRC requirements and, if it wished to retain the operating authority provided in Facility Operating Li. cense No. DPR-7, a proposed schedule for ccmpleting such plant nodifications.

In response theretc. en August 13, 1981, t

Licensee filed an affidavit executed by its Senior Vice President for Facilities Development.

According to Licensee, additional studies are necessary to evaluate various alternatives for the plant. These studies include updating Licensee's analysis of those actions which must be taken in order to resume power operation as well as various decommissioning options. Licensee has already embarked upon such a program which should be completed by December 15, 1981.

h *h 9110220403 811020

\\

PDR ADOCK 05000133 O

PDR

\\

-.- --- : r -- "" - -

,r UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DOCKETED USHRC ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Administrative Judges:

.gj' 06T 21 Pi'i9 Robert M. Lazo, Chairman

~ ' -

- - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~-

0FFICE OF SECRETA Y Gustave A. Linenbercer-David R. tchink' D A U ggg g f SERVED 0Ci 211981

~

)

In.the Matter of Docket No. 50-133-OLA -

I'm / o PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY 4

t

'N t (Humboldt Bay Power Plant October 20,/slhb fT

' 1 I!

!La f

Unit No. 3 - Amendment to Facility

! 3 00T2 219815 Ta Operating License) 2 y

9 v.s. em;wy

\\

S E[f(h MEMORANDUM AND ORDER In an order entered on July 14, 1981, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (Board) directed Pacific Gas and Electric Company (Licensee) to submit a written statement setting forth its intentions regarding plant modifications necessvy to bring Humboldt Bay Power Plant, Unit 3, into compliance with I

current NRC requirements and, if it wished to retain the o: 2 rating authority provided in Facility Operating Li, cense No. DPR-7, a proposed schedule for ccmpleting such plant modifications.

In response thereto., on August 13, 1981, Licensee filed an affidavit executed by its Senior Vice President for l

Facilities Development.

According to Licensee, additional studies are necessary to evaluate i

various alternatives for the plant. These studies include updating Licensee's analysis of those actions which must be taken in order to resume power operation as well as various decommissioning options. Licensee has already embarked upon such a program which should be completed by Decerrber 15, 1981.

9110220403 811020 h

PDR ADOCK 05000133 h0\\

O PDR

\\

However, an additional six months will be ;-equire.d, to reassess the costs associated with various alternatives being eval'uated, after the Commission determines backfit requirements for older plants such as Humboldt and i.ssues guidance on those requirements.

Licensee's response concludes with the statement that it is extremely reluctant to abandon a proven source of generation located in a relatively isolated area within its system and with the assertion that:

'"Since the unit, it its present cold shutdown condition, presents no risk to the health and safety of the public, PGandE believes that there is no compelling reason for' this Board to issue an Order to Show Cause why the operating authority for Humboldt Bay Unit No. 3 should be revoked. -

We are convinced that it is beneficial to maintain the plant in an operational status pending a decision on NRC backfit requirements and an assessment of their effect on the economics of returning the Unit to operation."

Before taking further action in this proceeding, the Board would like

. to have the views of the NRC Staff on Licensee's assertion that the Humboldt Bay nuclear plan-in its present cold shutdown condition, presents no risk to the health and safety of the public. Specifically, the Staff is directed to provide answers to the following Board questions:

1.

What regulatory requirements apply to a plant in cold shutdown mode.

2s Are applicable regulatory requirements currently being met by

' Licensee?

3.

Has the Staff given consideration to the question of whether the exceptionally long shutdown of Humboldt Bay Unit No. 3 might give rise to the potential fpr significant safety problems? What unusual problems might arise?

4.

Has there been any evidence whatsoever of seismic effects within the exclusion area?

If so, please describe.

e

~

t.

+.

~ 5.

$lhat physical s'ecurity measures are currently in force?

What wts date and-nature of last change to physical security procedures?

What changes are planned between now and end of CY 1982? (Assume no change in' operational status).

..s 6.

What surveillance'is b'eing routinely perfomed by IAE? What was

-date andmature of-hst ctTange-in routine surveillance?-What

~

~

changes are planned between now and end of CY 198U. :What non-routine surveillance has been performed?- What were the results

~

of surveillance efforts in 1980, 19817 (Assume nd change in operational status)-

. nat is status of facility, including components anE systems that

7.

Ware routinely operated; and including location and condit. ions of

~ torage af'all new, partially used, and spent fuel? What is

s. currently being.done to maintain. fuel integrity and assure its u

safety with respect to security, criticality and thermal stability?

~

8. - Describe physical and preventive maintenance being 5erfomed to assure continued integrity of safety related components. What is size, makeup (by discipline) and duty cycle nf standby crew?-

What will be required to return facility to operatienal readiness?

Is there known deterioration of any components such that replacement is contemplated in order to retain adequate standby conditions -

in order to achieve operational readiness? Has state of technology advanced to such an extent that any significant components on instrumentation and control systems will nu d to be modified to achieve _ operational readiness?

ORDER It is this 20th day of October 1981 GRDERED That within thirty (30) days of the date of urvice of this Order, the I

NRC staff shall file written responses to the Board's questic s set forth above. Other parties may file their comments re; arcing the questions or-the Staff's responses thereto within fifteen (15 days) after service of tne

~

Staff's responses.

FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Robert M. Lazo, Chairman ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE

,