ML20033B431
| ML20033B431 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 11/27/1981 |
| From: | Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Counsil W NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY CO. |
| References | |
| LSO5-81-11-074, LSO5-81-11-74, NUDOCS 8112010404 | |
| Download: ML20033B431 (7) | |
Text
l November 27, 1 981 Docket No. 50-245 f[27 LS05-81 11 -074
/
~
N Mr. W. G. Counsil Vice President NCl IS8Js 7 Nuclear Engineering and Operations k wumw w% JO Northeast Nuclear Energy Company W
N'* W Post Office Box 270
.,O Hartford, Connecticut 06101 9
g
/
Dear Mr. Counsil:
~
SU3 JECT: SEP REDIRECTION AND TOPIC COMPLETION SCHEDULES -
MILLSTONE UNIT 1 On November 3,1930 a meeting' was held between representatives of the SEP Owners Group and Dairyland Power and NRC senior management, including the Executive Director for Operations. At that meeting. _the owners proposed to assume more of the SEP topic review responsibility which would result in completing their review of 60% of the SEP Topics by June 30, 1981. On January 14, 1981 the staff approved the owners group " lead topic" approach for a 90 day trial period after which the staff would evaluate the quality and progress of the licensee's topic reviews. Due to the limited number of topic assessments received by the staff during the 90 day period, the staff decided to extend the trial period until June 30,1981.
Our letter dated July 7,1981, indicated a concern for the success of the redirected SEP program. Our concern was based on the quantity of licensee topic assessments received versus that which was promised by June 30,1981, and the quality of those topic assessments.
In that letter we stated that only one half of the assessments received by June 15, 1981 were useful due to their poor quality and that an insufficient number of topic assessments had been received to judge the overall success of SEP redirection. Therefore, we requested a meeting with licensee management to assure' that the owners were providing sufficient resources to support SEP redirection and to assure that licensee topic safety analysis reports (SARs) would be completed according to proposed schedules. At the meeting the staff requested that each licensee provide their schedules, if different from the staff's proposed schedules, for the completion and submittal 'of the remaining SEP topic SARs for their facilities.
gggf ffhb D. fv$'b 8112010404 811127 Ss[t PDR ADOCK 05000245 P
PDR pSd aSZ M 1) e,,,,
sunume >
omy unc ronu as co oop4acu ano OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usam ini-ms-u
1
. Your letter dated July 29, 1981, provided your schedules. However, as of November 13, 1981, we have received only 7 of the 12 SARs scheduled. is a graph (from NUREG-0485, SEP Status Summary Report) of your actual sutmittals by month and your scheduled submittals. Enclosure 2 is the similar graph for all SEP licensees. As shown by these enclosures, significant delays are occurring and a substantial effort on your part is required to minimize further delay. Based on your aerfomance in meeting schedules, we cannot assumeethat the remaining topic SARs will be completed and submitted as promised.
Therefore, we are requesting that your senior management attend a meeting with other SEP licensee senior management and NRC senior management planned for December 17, 1981, at which the performance, program schedules and major milestones to completion of the Integrated Plant Safety Assessment for each of the SE.* plants will be discussed.
Sincerely, Darrell G. Eisenhut Director Division of Licensing 1
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/ enclosure:
See next page See previous concurrence sheet A
. /
ornca m...g 26...
l sua-o
-r >
Nac ronu sia oo-sci sacu c24a OFFIClAL RECORD COPY usam au-me
Docket Po. 50-?45 L505 Mr. W. G. Counsil, Vice President
!!uclear Engineerinq and Operations Hortheast Fuclear Energy Coc'pany Post Office Fox 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06101
Dear !!r. Counsil:
SUBJECT:
SEP REDIPICTIGH AND TOPIC COMPLETION SCHEDULES -
MILLSTOME U!!!T 1 P,y letter dated July 7,19R1, the staff ind [ated a concern regarding the success of the redirected SEP program. Our conce was based on the quantity of licensee topic assessments received versus that s ich was promised by June 30, 1991, and tha quality of those topic assessments In that letter we requested a necting with licensee -anagceent to assure tp t the owners are providino sufficient resourcas to support SEP redirectioji and to assure that licensee topic safety analysis reports (SAP.s) would be 6mpleted accordina to proposed schedules. At that neeting the staff requasted that each licensee provide their schedules, if different from the staff's pron, sed schedules, for the ctrpletion and subnittal of the re,aining SEP topic SA for their facilities.
Your lettar dated July 29, 1091, provided your schedules. However, as of Hovember 13, 1091, we have received only 7 of the 12 SARs scheduled. Enclosure 1 is a graph (from !!HREG-04SS, SEP Status Sumary Peport) of your actual submittals by conth and your scheduled submittals. Enclosure 2 is the similar graph for all SEP licenseos. As shown by these enclosures, significant delays are occurrinq and a substantial effort on your part is required to nininize further delay. Based on your performance in necting schedules, we cannot assure that the remaining topic StRs will be completad and subnitted as promised.
Therefore, we are requesting that your senior canacenent attend a neeting with other SEP licensee sonfor management ann f:n.C senior nananenent planned for Docenher 17,19R1, at which the performance, prograa schedules and rajor nile-stones to corpletion of the Integrated Plant Safety Assessment for each of the SEP plants will be discussed.
Sincerelv e
See previous ye w for additional concur ences.,
g ORB #5:BC A
@:DL D:DL S DCrutchfield GL ifas DEisenhut j
11/2 0/81 11/10/81 11/ /81 Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensiner SEPB:DL SEPB:DL SEPB:DL ORB #5:PM OUICE)
..E.Q.C l.04&r.0 ;.
..A G..G t.'. ta d....
....o..
cii.;/"n"[ Wig": ""g";;"""d"gg"g"" "
T171W81" ' ' ' "1T7f#761"'."..
if/f#7si". ".. '..'ii7.1's7.Ei'.'".
am>
nac ronu m oo-am nacu ona OFFICIAL RECORD COPY uso m nu-m vo
r v-Docket Flo. 50-245 v
LSO E '
Mr.11. G. Counsil, Vice President 1:uclear Engineering and Operations l'ortheast !!uclear Energy Conpany Post Office Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06101
Dear Itr. Counsfl:
m SUpJECT:
SEP I!EDIRECTION A!!D TOPIC COMPLETI0H SCilEDULES -
_ 1 '..
MILLSTONE UtilT 1 1
tx x s
By letter dated July 7,1981 the staff indicated a concern regar1Irg the Mucces's of the redirected SEP progran. Our concern was based or, the. quantity cf licensee topic assessnents receited versus that which was promised by Juned0,1W1 and the quality of those topic assessnents. In that letter wr. requested apeting with licensee nanagenent to assure that the evners are providin'g hffident resources to support SEP redirection and to assure that licensee topic'sofety analysis reports (SARs) would be conpleted according to prcposed_ schedules.- At that neeting the staff requested that each licensee provide tFeir schedules, if N
different from the staff's proposed schedules, for the conpletion and subr~itta1T of the renaining SEP topic SARs for their facilitics.
Your letter dated July 29, 1981 provided your schedules. Hosever, as of ?!ovencer 13, 1981 we have received only 7 of the 12 SARs scheduled. Enclosure 1:is a graph (from HUREG-0485, SEP Status Sunnary Report) of your actual submittals by nonth and your scheduled subnittals. Enclosure 2 is the similar graph for all SEP licensees. As shown by these enclosures, significant delays are occurrint. and
~
V a substantial effort on your part is required to nininize further delay. 11ased on your perfon ance in necting schedules, we cannot assume that the renaining
, '3 -
topic SARs will be completed and subnitted as pronised.
3 Therefore, we are requesting that your senior nanagement attend a neeting with other SEP licensee senior managenent and NRC senior nanagenent planned for December 17, 1981 to discuss your performance, program schedules and najor milestones to completion of Millstone Integrated Plant Safety Assessment.
Si ncerely, ORB #5:BC AD:SA:DL D:DL DCrutchfield GLainas DEisenhutDarrell G. Eisenhut, Director 11/ / 81 11/ / 81 11/ /81 Division of Licensing Ad W
Enclosure:
As stated SEPB:TAPM SEP :Dp;"
SEPB:DL ORB #5:PM OFFICE >
dk,,p, /: a* lina DPersinko:
WRussell
- JShea, SUINA:.*E ).C.C..V[0.OC.).Os.l (Q....h.C.S. 0@M.M.3.SC...
.ll/l@/8I..
..l.1/d/8.1..
..l.1/.h /Sl..
.l.1/M/.8 o4rt y nne ronu ats oO% NRCM 0N0 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usamm-m ua
'- Mr. W., G. Counsilf
~
.. s l
' [ n zf 3 i
', silliam H. Cuddy, Esquire Connecticut Energy Agency -
ry ' ' :: Day, Berry & Howard ATTN: Assistant Director Counselors at Liu Research and Policy One Constitutioi',01aza Development Partford, _ Connecthcut 06103 Department of Planning and Energy Policy Natural Resources Defense Council 20 Grand Street 917s 15th' Street, J.,W.
Hartford, Connecticut 06106 Washington, D. C.
20005
' Northeast Nuclear Energr Company
' ATTN: Superinterdent:
x-
~
Millstenc Plant.t N \\
P. G. Bo'r1284 -
Waterford, ' Co5ne'cticut' 06385 '
s s
t i-
- Mr. Richard T. Laudanat
- Manag6ri Generation' Fad 11 ties Licensing Hortheast Utilities Setvice Company.
=
P. D.' Box'270 s.1 Hirtford,3 onnecticut C5101 C
, " Rdf#ceht Inspector - ;
m'
's,
c/o?U. S. : N8C -
P
- 0. Box Drawer K<.
, Mantic,'l Connecticut 06357 sx Waterford Public Library' s i ~ Rope Fer ry Road, Route'156 7' Waterford, Connecticut 06285 p.
e
'Fjrst Selectman of the T&n
~;'of daterford y
Hall of Records l
200' Boston Post Road Waterford, Connecticut 06385 John F. Opeka l
Systems Superintendent Northeast Utilities Service Company P. O. Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06101 U. S. Environmentd1 Protection Agency l
l Region 1 Office l
ATTN: EIS COORDINATOR JFK Federal Building
/
Boston, Massachusetts 02203
~
e ee
~
.o.
~
~
>I
=
2 o
o 3
N o
__]
b.
~
La N
o M
5 1~
E
~
m N
~D g g
o m-M wm w
2 m
'Z g
UJ o
0 u
N N
\\
m x
o o
3<
W W
m I
=
4 o
o o
o M
l l
l l
l l
l I
k g
a a
a e
m g
i g
i d
M N
E m
Z G
Ea g
l 33 g
1 3
U O
,e e-
~
- w 4
e F
LICENSEE TOPIC SUBMITTALS mama EJk!7As 2N TAE ET g-175L
/#
i=j
/
cm T
/
= - -
1
/
}
/
'"[
f nl
/
\\
=
7 se i s
l
/
1T
/
I 5 '
2 ALC IEP (ET eCV EC JAM FIB eWt Amt mAY M
m3ms 8
4 0
0 1
0 PER MONTH Actual 2
21 5
37 Target 2
33 98 124 144 171 175 gg3 gg7 ^
1g7 gg.
ggg gg, CUMULATIVE Actual 2
' 23 28 65
~
4