ML20039G468
| ML20039G468 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 01/12/1982 |
| From: | Norelius C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Tedesco R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20039G469 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8201180281 | |
| Download: ML20039G468 (5) | |
Text
-
o
~
v A
JAN 1 2 1992 6
RECiEIVED B
g.
JAN151982 > s a sem eu %
2 M sagen n O
Docket No. 50-483 y
Robert L. Tedesco, Assistant Director for Licens k, &
MEMORANDUM FOR:
Division of Licensing, NRR FROM:
C. E. Norelius, Director, Division of Engineering and Technical Inspection, Region III
SUBJECT:
RIII INPUT FOR CALLAWAY UNIT 1 SSER PLANT NAME:
Callaway Plant, Unit 1 LICENSING STAGE: OL DOCKET NUMBER:
50-483^
RESPONSIBLE BRANCH AND PROJECT MANAGER:
LB 1, G. E. Edison REVIEW STATUS:
Completed RIII has completed its review of the applicants December 15, 1981 letter responding to the report of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards for the Callaway Plant, Unit 1.
Attached, for areas of concern noted by the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, is the RIII input for the Callaway Unit 1 SSER.
The response concerning Shift Technical Advisor training is being evaluated as a generic issue and LQB will provide the SSER input. Attached, for your information, is a Union Electric letter addressing Shift Technical Advisor training and education.
8201180281 820112 PDR ADOCK 05000483
}lf E
PDR Ilkt
Robert L. Tedesco JMI 12 '32 This review was conducted by J. M. Peschel, Acting Chief, Management Programs Section.
IMrigin:1 Oicned ly C.I". I,'dr:IIO:"
C. E. Norelius, Director Division of Engineering and Technical Inspection
Enclosures:
1.
RIII Input for Callaway Unit 1 SSER 2.
Union Electric letter cc w/encls:
D. Vassallo, LQB G. Edison, LB 1 J. Sniezek, IE E. Pedersen, LQB B. Youngblood, LB 1 J. Konklin, RIII cc w/o encls:
J. Keppler, RIII R. Spessard, RIII l
l l
RI I RIII RIII i 1r ec. nJ
/pt P schel/jp williams NTrelig; Ift 1/8/82 l
i
~
4 4
- ITEM 1.
4 The Committee noted, that in conducting their review of the applicant's management organization, experience, and' training program, they were favorably impressed by the general competence and attitude of the appli-4
. cant's personnel, but believed their commerciel nuclear experience to be
.less than desirable. As a result of their concern, the Committee has
~
recommended that the plant staff be supplemented with a highly competent senior individual, who has considerable professional commercial PWR experience, to be an advisor to the Plant Superintendent through at least the first year of full power operation. This recommendation was further i
E expanded, by one Committee Member, to have this individual possess a Bachelor of Science degree in engineering or a related discipline.
4 1-
RESPONSE
In a letter dated December 15, 1981, the applicant has committed to supplement the plant staff with a senior individual, who has commercial' PWR experience, and an educational background which qualifies him.to serve' in this capacity, to assist and advise the Plant Superintendent from fuel load and for a period of at least one year following commercial operation.
l We believe that this additional commitment enhances the plant staff and i
- is responsive to the ACRS comment.
i ITEM 2 i
The Committee recommended that the operating organization establish a list of technological matters which may have to be faced in future opera-tion of the nuclear plant and identify sources of skilled personnel and expertise that ought to be available to address these matters when needed.
1 i
RESPONSE
i In a letter dated. December 15, 1981, the applicant stated that it has considered and will continue to evaluate potential requirements for skilled personnel and technical expertise which-may be necessary.to support operation of Callaway Unit 1, and the experience considered necessary has been or will be employed within the Callaway and SNUPPS organizations. The applicant also stated that the services of Bechtel, Westinghouse and other appropriate consultants will be available, under contract, to provide specific technical expertise when such is not avail-able within the organizations.
The applicant has committed, in a letter dat'ed August 14, 1981 to sign contracts for additional outside technical support. These contracts i.
will be signed before fuel load, and will be with Westinghouse, Bechtel, and Nuclear Projects Incorporated (SNUPPS).
[
Based upon our discussions-with the applicant, we believe the applicant intends to sign contracts that will adequately supplement its technical l
l
.- -~. _ _._ _ _ _.. _. _ - - - _ -, _.. _. _.. _ _. _.. _. -. _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _, -, _. -,, _ _. -. _. _ _.., _
4
=
capabilities, and this commitment to supplement the technical staff will assure adequate resources to provide technical support for the operation of the facility under both normal and off-normal conditions.
Region III intends to review these contracts and monitor this area during our normal inspection program, and will take appropriate action if technical resources appear inadequate for either normal or off-normal conditions.
ITEM 3 The committee endorsed our positon requiring the applicant to augment its organization with on-shift personnel having experience with large commercial PWR operation until suitable experience has been developed by the operating staff, but they recommended that attainment of 100% rated power should not be the only consideration in demonstrating operational proficiency. One member of the committee recommended that a licensed Senior Reactor Operator (SRO), who has been previously licensed as an SR0 on another Westinghouse
~
PWR, be availalle on each shift in an advisory capacity through the first year of full power operation.
RESPONSE
In a letter dated-August 14, 1981, the applicant has committed to provide, on each operating shift crew, at least one individual with a minimum of one year on-shift licensed operations experience in a commercial nuclear plant similar to Callaway.
!c a letter dated January 6,1982, this commitment was made for the period of one year from initial criticality to include the attainment of a nominal 100% power.
The applicant stated in the December 15, 1981 letter that they hope to retain individuals who have Westinghouse experience, but they point out that it must be recognized that this additional qualification may not be attainable given the limited number of individuals having such experience and the industry wide demand for their services.
We believe that the experience to be gained by on-shift personnel during the period from fuel load through the achievement of a nominal 100% power at the completion of startup testing will be far greater than that to be gained during an equal period of time with the plant operating at its design level, and this experience will be adequate for the Callaway staff to safely operate the plant. While we highly recommend that the applicant acquire the most capable and experienced personnel available we do not require that they have possessed an SR0 license on a Westinghouse plant.
We believe that the above commitments are acceptable and are responsive to the ACRS comment.
The NRC staff will condition the applicant's license to require an experi-enced formerly licensed PWR operator on shift for an appropriate time period which includes the attainment of a nominal 100% power.
4 i
i
,,.,,n
. - -...+
.n.,
4 ITEM 4 The-Committee has recommended that the Onsite Review Committee, the Nuclear Safety Review Board, and the Independent Safety Engineering Group include personnel from outside the operating organization who are experi-enced in the operational management of large PWR's and related technology as well as other independent advisors with mature judgement about public safety matters.
RESPONSE
4 In a letter dated December 15, 1981, the applicant has committed to sup-plement the Onsite Review Committee with the advisor to the Plant Super-i intendent, and to supplement the Nuclear Safety Review Board with persons from outside the operating organization. The applicant has stated that agreements are in effect with Kansas Gas and Electric Company, and Rochester Gas and Electric Company to provide experienced senior personnel. These personnel were identified in the December 15, 1981 letter.
The applicant has committed, in letters dated August 14, and August 19, 1981, to establish an Independent Safety Engineering group consistent with the guidelines of NUREG-0737.
We believe.that the additional commitments will enhance the capabilities 4
.of the Safety Review Committees and are responsive to ACRS comments. We do not have any additional requirements for the Independent Safety Engineering Group,1ecause the ISEG is a full-time group of engineers, located onsite but reporting offsite, who deal with day to day problems.
We see no benefit from attempting to employ non-applicant personnel on this group. Such persons, if used as group members, would effectively become full-time employees of the applicant.
ITEM 5 The Committee noted that Shift Technical Advisor training in the areas of Plant Systems and especially Transient / Accident Analysis appeared marginal and they recommended that the NRC Staff evaluate this matter and apply the results to those nuclear plants where they are generically applicable.
RESPONSE
To be provided by LQB.
i f
1
. _.. -. _ _.. _. _. ~.. _. _.... _ _ _.., _ -. _. _.. _.
_. _... -, _ _