ML20052A285

Response to Interrogatories & Document Requests on Suffolk County Contentions 16 & 20

ML20052A285
Person / Time
Site:	Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	04/23/1982
From:	Flanagan D HUNTON & WILLIAMS, LONG ISLAND LIGHTING CO.
To:	SUFFOLK COUNTY, NY
References
ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8204280136
Download: ML20052A285 (13)

Text

_

s canerm ,

• 82 TP2 26 Pi :17 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD

)

In the Matter of )

)

LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY ) Docket No. 5 2 (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station,

)

OY sfP ^tTON y,/

) ,

Unit 1) ) _f/ qI \

) / ,Q$0$8 y .;:

< k g2

-s i s' '

RESPONSE OF LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMP Y)x +'.* p,X7 sV .

TO SUFFOLK COUNTY INTERROGATORIES AND DOCU N,T REQUESTS ON SUFFOLK COUNTY CONTENTIONS 16 AND Un l

On April 1, 1982, "Suffolk County Interrogatories and 1

Document Requests on Suffolk County Contentions 16 and 20" were served on LILCO. This document contains LILCO's response to those interrogatories and document production requests.

I. CONTENTION 16 l

l Interrogatory 1: Provide copies of all Shoreham proce-dures developed for or relating to the ATWS event. Also pro-

! vide copies of all analyses or other documents which form the basis for or which relate to the procedure ( s) .

l b50c 3 8204'280 % '/

G

~2-Response: Preliminary information was provided in SNRC-623 (October 1, 1981), which was sent to Suffolk County on March 17, 1982. The most recent SP #29.024.01 became effective on April 22, 1982. The SP and the procedures it references are enclosed. '

Interrogatory 2: Describe in detail the training program developed for training Shoreham operators on the correct actions to be taken in response to ATWS events.

Response: Shoreham Operations personnel are trained to take the correct action in response to ATWS events in the fol-lowing programs:

Cold License Operator Training Program Licensed Operator Requalification Training Program Hot License Operator Training Program Each Program includes the following segments related to ATWS event response training:

l 1. Classroom instruction in ATWS Systems configuration I

and operation. Systems included are: Control Rod Drive System, Reactor Protection System, and Reactor Manual Control Systam. Approximately 16 hours1.851852e-4 days <br />0.00444 hours <br />2.645503e-5 weeks <br />6.088e-6 months <br /> are devoted to this segment.

2. Walk-through at the plant of the ATWS scenario. This segment includes " hands on" use of the Station syste-1 1

i operating procedures and ATWS emergency procedures.

l 1

I

Walk-throughs are conducted using an operating crew concept in order to reinforce understanding of posi-tion responsibilities in the case of this unusual event. Approximately 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> are devoted to this segment.

3. ATWS transient analysis instruction utilizing a dynamic control room simulator. This segment is conducted to allow operating crews to observe plant transient response and to practice required actions in the event of ATNS. Approximately 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> are devoted to this segment using the Limerick Simulator Facility.

Interrogatory 3: Provide a complete description of the Recirculation Pump Trip features incorporated at the Shoreham Plant. Indicate if all modifications have been completed. If work remains to be done, indicate what work and provide the schedule for its implementation.

Response: The Shoreham Recirculation Pump Trip (RPT)

System trips the breakers in the power feed to each of the re-l circulation pump motors. The trip logic is activated upon re-ceipt of either a high reactor pressure or' low reactor water i

l level signal. All components and circuits in the RPT system are redundant and safety grade. All modifications have been completed.

l

- - c -

. Interrogatory 4: With regard to boron injection capa-bility, provide a full description of the system (s) in place at Shoreham, if not already set forth in the FSAR. Identify any changes from the. FSAR description and whether or not such changes have been made. Provide the schedule for implementa-tion of any changes yet to be done.

Response: The general system description is contained in ,

FSAR Section 4.2.3.4.

Interrogatory 5: Provide details'of any CRD system changes made or expected to be made as a result of NRC's report NUREG-0803.

Response: This information was provided in SNRC-659, (January 11, 1982), which was sent to Suffolk County on April 12, 1982.

Interrogatory 6: Has LILCO implemented or does LILCO in-tend to implement any system modifications to provide for auto-mated boron injection? If so, provide full details and the anticipated schedule if not yet completed.

Response: LILCO has not implemented any system modifica-tions to provide for automated boron injection, and at this time none are intended.

~

Interrogatory 7: Has LILCO performed any analyses to de-termine the feasibility of making the standby liquid control system initiate automatically? If so, provide copies of all such analyses.

Response: No.

Interrogatory 8: Provide copies of all documents submit-ted by LILCO to the NRC Staff which relate to LILCO's method (s) for responding to an ATWS event.

Response: See SNRC-623, and also FSAR page 212-105a.

II. CONTENTION 20 Interrogatory 1: Produce all documents, including the Shoreham simulator design specification and accepted equipment supplier proposals, which evidence LILCO's commitment to pro-vide a shoreham-specific simulator for operator training.

Response 1: The documents that most strongly evidence LILCO's intent to purchase a Shoreham-specific simulator are enclosed. These documents are:

a. A memorandum to Mr. M. S. Pollock, Vice President, Nuclear from J. J. Kearney, Jr., noting that the Board approved the purchase of a Shoreham simulator,

b. A memorandum from James W. Dye, Jr., Senior Vice President of Operations, and Thomas H. O'Brien, Senior Vice-President of Finances, to Mr. Wilfred O.

Uhl, President of LILCO, proposing the purchase of a Shoreham simulator.

c. Specification For Simulator Project Management Services, Training Program Development, Simulator Facility Management For Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1.

d. A purchase order issued to General Physics Corp.,

regarding services specified in item c, above,

e. In draft form, " Specification For a Simulator For the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1."

Interrogatory 2: Produce all documents and drawings which describe or depict (a) the Dresden simulator, and/or ( b) the Limerick simulator, including the front panel arrangement of

, and controls used in the operation of the following systems:

l j (i) nuclear steam supply system (i.e., reactor i

l vessel and controls, reactor coolant system, reactor projection systems);

(ii) emergency safeguards systems; (iii) containment systems and containment isolation provisions; I

j (iv) radiation monitoring system; and l

( v) balance of plant systems.

. -7_

Response: LILCO has no current documents in its posses-sion that depict the Limerick or Dresden simulators.

Interrogatory 3: Provide a copy of the classroom training curriculum -for shoreham operators, including those portions pertaining to simulator training.

Response: Syllabuses containing this information for Dresden are enclosed. The syllabus for Limerick will be for-warded under separate cover. In addition two five-volume sets, one each for the Dresden and the shoreham training programs, will be made available for your review.

Interrogatory 4: Set forth in detail LILCO's schedule for (a) implementation of a shoreham-specific simulator for opera-tor training; (b) use of the Limerick simulator; and l

(c) discontinuance of use of the Dresden simulator.

Response: The schedule for implementation of a Shorenam specific simulator is:

a. Revision of Bid Specifications -- May 1982

b. Issue Bids -- June 1982

c. Evaluate Bids -- August 1982

d. Management approval of bids -- September 1982

e. Board approval of bids -- October 1982

f. Contract awarded -- October 1982 1

l

g. Simulator in service -- August 1985 The use of Dresden will be discontinued by October 1982. The Limerick simulator has been used in the past and will be used exclusively after October 1982.

Interrogatory 5: Provide a complete listing and descrip-tion of all transients and accidents which (a) the Dresden sim-ulator is capable of replicating or duplicating; and (b) the Limerick simulator is capable of replicating or duplicating.

Response: This information is included in the syllabuses that are provided in response to Interrogatory 3.

Interrogatory 6: With respect to each transient and acci-dent identified in response to subpart (a) and subpart ( b) of number 5 above, state the dynamic characteristics and operator response times for the referenced simulator, and also state the expected control response capability at Shoreham.

Response: A comparison between Limerick and Shoreham is under way and results will be forwarded upon completion.

! Operators returning from Dresden undergo a Shoreham-specific l

transient analysis training course, so no analysis between Dresden and Shoreham has been done.

l Interrogatory 7: What is the minimum number of people j LILCO intends to have trained on (a) the Dresden simulator, and I

( b) the Limerick simulator, for each of the following positions:

l l

l

_g_

(i) Reactor Operator (RO)

(ii) Senior Reactor Operator (SRO)

(iii) Senior Reactor Operator Limited to Fuel Handling (SRO-R)

(iv) -Auxiliary Operator Response: At a minimum, LILCO intends to have the follow-ing trained at Dresden:

(a) Reactor Operator -- 14 (b) Senior Reactor Operator -- 16 (c) Senior Reactor Operator Limited to Fuel Handling -- 0 (d) Auxiliary Operator - 0 As a practical matter, the numbers will be much higher. For example, presently there are 38 Reactor Operators certified on the Dresden simulator, and 29 people are certified as Senior Reactor Operators. At present, ten equipment (auxiliary) oper-ators are being certified at Dresden.

The Limerick simulator will be used to requalify opera-tors.

Interrogatory 8: How many hours per week of simulator control room exercises will be provided each operator during the 12-week operator training course discussed in FSAR Section 13.2.1.1.3, and how many of such hours will an operator spend at (a) the Dresden simulator, and ( b) the Limerick simu-lator.

_lo_.

Response: Operators will receive 120 hours0.00139 days <br />0.0333 hours <br />1.984127e-4 weeks <br />4.566e-5 months <br /> of simulator training at Dresden. Hours devoted to specific simulator con-trol room exercises are detailed in the documents provided in response to Interrogatory 3. LILCO has not sent anyone to the 12 week cou'rse at Limerick.

Interrogatory 9: Identify and describe all events, tran-sients and accidents studied by Shoreham operators in the simu-lator control room exercises.

Response: See Documents provided in response to Interrogatory 3.

Interrogatory 10: Identify the criteria to be used by LILCO to determine that a particular simulator meets the re-quirements stated in FSAR Section 13.2.1.5. ("a complete and accurate nuclear power plant simulator"), i.e., identify the criteria used by LILCO to determine that a simulator duplicates or replicates the Shoreham control room. Produce all docu,ments which relate to these criteria.

Response: LILCO uses the criteria of 10 CFR Part 55, Appendix A to determine the suitability of other simulators for training purposes.

Interrogatory 11: (a) Identify the general qualifications of LILCO employees, or employees of Stone & Webster, General Electric, or other LILCO subcontractors, who will direct I

L

operations from the EOF or TSC during emergency situations, ( b) for each of the following categories of personnel, describe the nature and extent of the Shoreham-specific training that they will receive:

( i) ' Headquarters Engineering (ii) Headquarters Operations Management Response: The control room personnel report directly to the operations manager who is located in the TSC center during emergency situations. The following personnel may fill the position of operations manager:

Primary - operating engineers Alternate - plant engineers-operators Both of these categories will have received Shoreham Specific Training.

l Interrogatory 12: (a) Identify the qualifications of the LILCO, G.E., Stone & Webster, other consultants and vendors' startup engineer personnel, who will assist newly-licensed Shoreham operators during the retraining period, as set forth in FSAR Section 13.2.1.6.3; and ( b) state how long such person-nel will be available.

Response: The Shoreham Startup Organization has the pri-mary responsibility to test the systems and components in ac-cordance with the regulatory requirements to allow for fueling of the Shoreham reactor. At the time of fuel load, the role of

Startup changes to one of supporting the various systems and components under the direction of the Plant Staff as the plant proceeds into the initial Startup test program and power ascen-sion to full power. During this period, several changes in the Startup Organization occur. These include the following:

A. The G.E. Operations Manager, who re-ports to the Startup Manager up until the time of fuel load, will report to the Shoreham Plant Manager. Along with the G.E. Operations Manager, the G.E. Operations Superintendent and the on Shift Startup Test Engineers will assume their shift responsibilities in providing technical direction relative to the nuclear steam supply system.

B. The remainder of the Startup Organization, including the Startup Manager, S&W Lead Advisory Engineer, and various Test Engineers will sup-port testing on systems that were not i able to have full integrated operation prior to fuel load (due to the lack of steam, inadequate temperature, etc.).

f

! The description and responsibility of the various personnel i

i mentiotied in this letter are included in the Shoreham $tartup I

t

Manual.

i i

Interrogatory 13: In PSAR Section 13.2.2.1.5, LILCO lists l _

j six methods to ensure operators' review of abnormal and emergency operating procedures. Is it LILCO's position that any one of the listed methods is adequate tu ensure an opera-tur 's review? If not, identify what combitiation(s) of such methods LILCO would consider adequate.

Resf otis e: Atiy of the first five methods listed in the FSAR will be used to ensure that att vperator has, in fact, I

reviewed the procedures.

Respectfully Submitted,

LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY l

j i b" $ ., *"

l W. Taylor Reveley, III ~

l

Anthony P. Earley, Jr.

Dattiel 0. Flanagan

! Hunton & Williams P.O. Box 1535 Richmund, Virginia 23212 DATED: April 23, 1982 b

5 i

I i

_ .-