ML20039G775

Comments on Documents Re Water Level Indicator Issue.Merits of ASLB Decision Re Addl Instrumentation to Detect Inadequate Core Cooling Should Be Left to Appellate Process or Generic Resolution.W/Certificate of Svc

ML20039G775
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	01/13/1982
From:	Baxter T METROPOLITAN EDISON CO.
To:
References
NUDOCS 8201190118
Download: ML20039G775 (11)

Text

..__..__..__.____.. . . - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ ..

LIC 1/13/82 I

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 7, !. : g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION .  ;'--

BEFORE THE COMMISSION 'c2 R! 15 P5 05 8

In the Matter of ) .

)

METROPOLITAN EDISON ColiPANY ) Docket No.,50-289

) (Restart)

(Three Mile Island Nuclear ) o G, f Station, Unit No. 1) ) K d./D' . .'.--m. .: -n LICENSEE'S COMMENTS ON DOCUMENTS --;

RELATIMG TO THE WATER LEVEL dC4 JAM 13 bb h '

INDICATOR ISSUE -A n"T :C. .i".T~

u 2..-9.2 i- x i M CO /s G A By memorandum to the TMI-l restart parti > /c .,ed.M., .x December 23, 1981, the Secretary of the Commission trans-mitted, among other things, docu=ents which relate- to the water level indicator issue. The Secretary's memorandum advises that while these documents are not currently part of the record of the proceeding, the Co= mission may take the information contained in these documents into account in making its decision whether to =ake the Licensing Board's decision on restart i= mediately effective. The memorandum further advises that any party who wishes to coment on the documents should sub=it co=ments to the Cominsion no- later than January 13, 1982, and should-serve the co==ents on the other parties.

The following constitutes Licensee's comments b3 1

on the water level indicator documents transmitted by the 1/ )y Co= mission on December 23, 1981.-

If On January 8, 1982, the Co= mission held a public meeting to discuss, on a generic basis, the status of development of reactor vessel water level inc*.rumentation. Co= mission counsel, -

8201190118 820113 (Footnote continued) e PDR ADOCK 05000289 Q PDR

. . - . _ . . . . .. . . . . _ _ . . 1 I. Issues and Parties Involved l In order to assers the relevance and potential ~ import of the documents for the Cc= mission's immediate effectiveness decision, it is important first to identify the issues decided by the Board and the parties involved. -

The relevant section- of the Licensing Board's Partial Initial Decision of December 14, 1981, is II.B., entitled,

" Detection of Inadequate Core Cooling (ICC)." I . D .,, 11 630-705.

There the Licensing Board explains that the issues arose'in ,

two ways: as a mandatory hearing issue under NUREG-0578, .

section 2.1.3.b (Instrumentation for Detection of Inadequate' Core Cooling in PWRS and BWRs), and as a result of contentions by three intervenors.

Since the thrust of che intervenor contentions was that installation of reactor vessel level (or inventory) instru- ,

mentation should be required prior to the restart of TMI-1, a major objective of the testimony presented by Licensee and by the NRC Staff was to convince the Licensing Board that implementation of the short-term recommendations of section 2.1.3.b of NUREG-0578 was sufficient'for restart, without

.1/ (Footno te cont' d. ) *

• at the meeting, announced that because the Commission may want .

to consider the information garnered at the meeting in its

~

immediate effectiveness decision, the transcript of the meeting and attendant papers would be served on the TMI-1 restart par- .

ties with an invitation to submit comments. Because the matters discussed do bear upon the issues in the hearing, ,

and because.no licensees were heard from, Licensee intends to fil.e,'in addition to these comments, comments on the January 8, 1982 meeting.

\

b

__ ~-- - t

, _3 reactor vessel level instru=entation. Licensee and the Staff succeeded on this score. The Licensing Board found that the short-term measures will be adequate to protect the health and safety of the public in the short term. I.D., 1 642.

This finding by the Board is fully supported by the record, and none of the documents transmitted for comment contain information which could call into question the appropriateness of a decision in favor of t= mediate effectiveness as to this p' art of the decision.

In fact, the Licensee and Staff positions on the adequacy of the short-term requirements were not challenged at the hearings before the Licensing Board. Intervenors UCS and Sho11y withdrew their contentions before trial, and intervenor ANGR'1 did not participate in the litigation of its contention in any way. Ai the Licensing Board states, the only parties participating in the adjudication of issues associated with instrumentation to detect inadequate core cooling were Licensee, the NRC Staff, and the Co2monwealth -

of Pennsylvania. I.D., 1 632.

The controversy before the Licensing Board was the disagreement between Licensee and the Staff on whether the long-term recommendations of section 2.1. 3.b warrant a conclusion now that reactor vessel level instrumentation is .necessary for the long-term operation of TMI-l and, if so, whether Licensee has demonstrated reasonable progress toward the satisfactory completion of the requirement. The Licensing Board found in favor of the Staff as to the long-term requirement, and

in Licensee's favor as to the demonstration of reasonable progress, Our co=ments below address the transmitted docu-ments as they migh't relate to each of these two key conclu- .

sions reached by the Licensing Board.

II. Reasonable Progress Determination .

The Licensing Board received substantial evidence on the efforts Licensee has undertaken in response to the i

long-term recommendations of UUREG-0578 section 2.I.3.b, the status of development of additional instrumentation by other licensees and applicants, and the status of Staff review -

efforts and decision-making. This record is well documented in the Licensing Board's Partial Initial Decision. See I.D., i1 666-672. On the basis of that evidence, the Licensing Board concluded that "[f}:om a regulatory point of view, and in view of the state of the art, License'e has demonstrated reasonable progress in. meeting position 2 of Recommendation 2.1.3.b." I.D., 1 672.

[ The documenti transmitted by.the Commission on December 23, 19e1, generally.contain information which was ,

be. fore the Licensing Board when it,cade its decision on ,

l .reasonab'le progress. One important exception, reflected'

~

in SECY-81-582 (October 7,1981) , is the Staff recommendation

~

i to extend the installation schedule for level measurement

-systems to "startup following the first refueling after ,

l .

January 1, 1983." Staff testimony before the Licensing G

e

Board had identified January 1, 1982, as the 'cheduled s instal-lation date. This change underscores the validity of the Licensing Board's findin,g of reasonable progress by this licensee.

The documents transmitted by the commission on December ~23, 1981, do not, however, include information on the significant progress made by Licensee since the evidentiary record below closed on this issue.

In a letter to the Staff dated August 26, 1981 (LIL 246), Licensee documented its program to further evaluate additional instrumentation to detect inadequate core cooling, including an evaluation of each of the major vendor systems and an independent study of existing and potential options.

On September 14, 1981 (LIL 261, letter from Licensee to the Staff), Licensee reported that it had completed its preliminary evalutions of available instrumentation and informed the S'taff of Licensee's intent to install additional

~

delta P type instrumentation. Additional information on -

j Licensee's proposed Hot Leg Level Instrument System (ELLIS) l was provided to the Staff on November 13, 1981 (IJUs 324),

with a schedule to install the system during the Cycle 6 _

i refueling outage. Licensee was preparing to order this system by April, 1982, if~it had received timely Staff ,

approval.

Caly last week the Staff advised Licensee,. in a letter dated January 6, 1982, that the proposed ELLIS is not acceptable to the Staff. New criteria for an acceptable I delta P monitoring system for ni!-l were set forth in this l .

. - . -. . ***~. 7

.n- ,

letter. The Staff states, in its letter, that the ELLIS probably satisfies one of the Staff's two criteria, and suggests a meeting to resolve the matter.

These post-hearing developments underscore, in our view, the appropriateness of making L= mediately effective ths Licensing Board's reasonable progress determination. It is

~

clear that Licensee is making progress which is reasonable in view of the evolving Staff criteria and review.

III. Lonc-Term Requirement The Commission provided in its August 9, 1979 Order -

and Notice of Hearing, as modified by its March 23, 1981 Order, that if the Licensing Board should issue a decisien authorizing, resumption of operation upon completion of certain short-term actions by Licensee and a finding that in its judgment Lteensee is making reasonable progress toward completion of certain -

long-tems actions, the Cc= mission will issue an order, within 35 days after issuance of the Licensing Board decision, deciding whether the shutdown order shall remain immediately effective.

CLT-79-8, 10 N.R.C. 141, 149 (1979)'; CLI-81-3, 13 N.R.C. 291, 29.5 (1981). _

With respect to .the detection of inadequate core cooling, the Licensing Board has made the findings, as dis-cussed above, which clear the way for the Commission to decide

. to lift its' suspension order. Licensee submits that nothir.g in the documents distributed by the Commission on December 23, e

e w. -

e

_7_

I 1981, bear upon the appropriateness of making the Licensing 2/

Board's decision immediately effective.~

In making the Licensing Board's decision immediately effective, the co= mission does not foreclose further considera-tion of the Licensing Board's findings as to the necessity and sufficiency of, among other things, the long-term requirements.

As to the issue of detection of inadequate core cooling, the Licensing Board found that ". . . a meter capable of measuring reactor coolant inventory frcm 100 percent to =ero would be a useful and valuable operating adjunct and is needed in the long term," I.D., 1 665, and that "[a] meter to measure water level in the core or its equivalent'is required in the long term." I.D., f 673. The Licensing Board took care, however, not to set a time frame for the installation of a reactor coolant level meter at TMI-1, and stated that "[w] e leave it to the Staff and the Commission to require the instal-lation at TMI-1 consistent w3.th the treatment of other similar reactors." I.D., 1 673., -

The merits of the. Licensing Board's decision on the lo'ng-term requirements to meet the Staff's objectives for additional instrumentation to detect inadequate core cooling.

should be left either to the appellate process established 2/ In any case, while feasibility and practicality certainly were elements in the litigation of this issue before the, Licensing Board, the main focus was upon the asserted need and potential uses for additional instrumentation to detect inadequate core cooling (e.g., reactor vessel water level instrumentation). The documents transmitted by the commission on December 23, 1981, for the most part assume the need, ignore the question of usage, and concentrate on development. ,

o 8

. . . . . . . . , , . . . - . . . . . . . .- --.~i "T'*i

3/

by the Commission or for generic resolution by the Co==ission 4/

~

with respect to all B&W reactors. While this result flows naturally from the review process esrablished by the Commissi n in this proceeding, it is also consistent with the deliberate and careful approach to decision-making on this subject which has been reco= mended by the additional cc==ents in the ACRS letters on Palo Verde (December 15, 1981) and St. Lucie-2 (November 21, 1981), which are included in the documents distributed by the Commission on December 23, 1981.'

Respectfully submitted, ,

SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE L A.Li; ~~

George F. Trowbridge ~

Tnomas A. Baxter Counsel for Licensee ,

1800 M Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 822-1000

' Dated:

January 13, 1982 3/ Exceptions may be necessary, id for no other reas6h than to reverse the unwarranted proscription that the system should be designed to measure reactor coolant inventory from 100 .

percent .to zero, or to measure water level in the core.

. I.D., 11 665, 673.

4/ Licensee's comments on the January 8, 1982 Commission meeting will address the Staff's proposal to the Commi'ssion for such a resolution -- i.e., SECY-81-582A (December 29,198I) .

J

'f

L1C 1/14/u4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COIOi!SSION 7 ;,:-~

In the Matter of '

) '82 JA!! 15 P5 :35

)

METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-289

) (Red,Nrt) .; _ 'ir -

(Three Mile Island Nuclear ) is;.;'

Station, Unit No. 1) )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of " Licensee's Coments on Documents Relating to the Water Level Indicator Issue" were served this 13th day of January, 1982 by hand delivery upon the parties identified by an asterisk and by deposit in the U.S. mail, first class, postage prepaid, to the other parties on the attached Service List.

e- _ . '. .,

n

• Thomas A. Baxter i

w. . . . = . ;: - ..._. .. - . . . '. - - - - - - --

4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

~~

In the Matter of )

1. ) '

METROPOLITAN' EDISON COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-289

) ('Res tart)

(Three Mile Island Nuclear' )

Station, Unit No. 1) ). .

SERVICE LIST

• Cba4 man Nunzio J. Palladino Dr. Reginald L. Gct.dy U.S. Nuclear Regulatorf Ccmission Atomic Safety ard I.icensing Apeeal Boari Panel Washingtcn, D.C. 20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccr:=4"4em

• h !"irner Victor Gilinsky W==h4 W , D.C. 20555 U.S. Nuclear Pegulaterf e-4asicn .

Washingten, D.C. Ivan W. Smith, F. squire 20555 '

i Chai ran '

~

• Ccmnissioner Peter A. Bradfc d Atcmic Safety ard Licensing Board

. U.S. ! W 1 e Regulatcry M a icn U.S. NT. lear Regulatory N"iem ,

Washingtca, D.C. 20555 Washingtcn, D.C. 20555

• Ccmnissicner Jchn F. Ahea:ne Dr. Walter H. Jordan -

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory N i<sion At:ric Safety and Licensing Board

• Washingten, D.C. 20555 . Panel ,

881 West Outer Drive .

• c-4"icner ?.cr.as M. Ecberts cak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 U.S. Nuclear Regulatorf C.M.sion Washingten, D.C. 20555 Dr.. Linda W. Iittle Atenic Safety ard Licensing Board

• Ebcketing and Service Sec' den . Panel

. Office of the Secretary 5000 M tage Drive U.S. Nuclear Regulatory C a.issicn Paleigh, North Carolina 27612

. . Washingt=n, D.C. 20555 .

James M. Cutchin, IV, Esquire Gary J. Edles, Esquire . Office of the Executive Iegal Directer C: air an U.S. Nuclear. Regulatcry Ccmnissicn

Atomic Safety and Licensing A= peal Washingten, D.C. 20555

• Board U.S. Nuclear Pegulatcry Ccmnission Jchn A. I.evin, Esquire

. Washingten, D.C. 20555 Assistant Counsel Pennsylvania Public U'llty Ccrrissicn Dr. Jchn H. Buck P.O. Scx 3265 Atcmic Safety and Licensing A~.:eal Earrisburg, Pennsylvania' 17120-Board Panel

• U.S. N*.2rlear Pegulatory C-a.dssicn Pcbert Adler, Esquire i

Washin:; ten, D.C. 20555 Assistant Attorney General 505 Executive Ecuse P.O. Scx 2357 Harrisht=g, Pennsylvarda 17120 8

e. -- . _ - . _ _ - . . _ p .

Jchn E. PJ.rdch W41'4=m S. Jordan, III, Esquire

, C.ai_-. nan, Dauphin County Scard Ha.:cn & We.iss of C i. .dssioners 1725 Zye Street, N.W., Suite 506 Dauphin Coe.ry Ccurthouse Washingten, D.C. 20006 Front and Perhet Streets '

Harrisburg, Pents/1vania 17101 acbert Q. Polla-d 609 }bntpelier Street Walter W. C ien, Esquire ~

3al'4re, Maryland 21218 Office of Consuner Advoca+a 1425 Strawberry Square Chaunce/ Kepford F2"+t=g, Persflvania 17127 ' Judith H. Jchnsrud

.b vi. w .tal Coaliticn en Nw-lam- Power Jordan D. Cr.ringham, Esquire 433 or'=

• Avenue .

2320 North Second Street Stata 03Hege, Penrsfivania 16801 Ma H + urg, Persf 1vania 17EO -

Marvin I. Iewis Ms. Icuise AnA#mrd 6504 3:adford 9 _m MI ALERT Ph41=A*1ph4=, Pen:.sylvania 19149 4 lon Green Street Ilarrisburg, Persflvania 17102 Marjorie M. Aamodt

. R. D. 5 Ellyn R. Weiss, Esquire Cbatesvt.le, Persf1vania 19320

• Eaz=cn & Weiss -

1725 Eye Street, N.W., Suita 506 2x:rras J. Mr.e, Esquire

. Washingt=n, D.C. 20006 Deputy Attorney Ganam1 --

Division of Law - Rxm 316 Steven C. Shony H00 Ref:end Sculevard Dr% of h-M Scientists Newa'4.c, New Jersey 07102 1725 .W. e Street, N.W. , Suite 601 ,

Washington, D.C. 20006 Gail B. Phelps NGW 245 West Pb41='alphia St. w York, Penrsflvania 17404 ,

1 i

1

! - ._