ML20125D687

Testimony of HR Denton Before House of Representatives Subcommittee on Energy & Environ on 840614 Re Plant Licensing Concerns

ML20125D687
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	06/14/1984
From:	Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20125D664	List: ML20125D660 ML20125D687 ML20125D703 ML20125D742 ML20125D756 ML20125D790 ML20125D811 ML20125D863 ML20125D881 ML20125D909 ML20125D924 ML20125D943 ML20127B734 ML20127B742 ML20127B746
References
FOIA-84-740 NUDOCS 8506120440
Download: ML20125D687 (8)

Text

[ ..,

(_ .

i TESTIMONY OF HAROLD R. DENTON, DIRECTOR OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS

{ UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON DIABLO CANYON LICENSING CONCERNS JUNE 14, 1984

=

1,

.*[

.g6agneso201  :

DEVllnO4-74o PDR

> (~ CHAIRMAN PALLADINO HAS ASKED ME TO REPORT BRIEFLY ON WHAT STEPS REMAIN BEFORE A DECISION ON A FULL POWER OPERATION COULD BE MADE WITH RESPECT TO THE DIABLO CANYON NUCLEAR POWER STATION.

l REMAINING ACTIVITIES INCLUDE THE TECHNICAL ISSUES RELATING TO l l

i. PIPING AND SUPPORTS, PROGRAMMATIC QUALITY CONTROL CONCERNS, SE!SMIC REEVALUATION PROGRAM, A FEW OUTSTANDING ISSUES FROM THE

! ' INDEPENDENT DESIGN VERIFICATION PROGRAM (IDVP), AND FOLLOW-UP TO

A NUMBER OF OTHER MATTERS INCLUDING PETITIONS AND ALLEGATIONS.

PGaE HAS BEEN REQUESTED TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON A NUMBER OF THESE MATTERS.

l l

THE STAFF, THEREFORE, HAS NOT REACHED RESOLUTION ON THESE ISSUES AT THIS TIME. LET ME ASSURE YOU THAT PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF ANY SUBSEQUENT LICENSING ACTIVITIES, THE STAFF WILL THOROUGHLY  ;,

EVALUATE ALL APPROPRIATE MATTERS.

l

U

e

. .. I WOULD NOW LIKE TO SUMMAR.IZE THE MORE PRINCIPAL OF THESE ISSUES.

THE CONCERNS RAISED BY MR.' YIN FALL INTO TWO BROAD CATEGORIES:

(1) PROGRAMMATIC DESIGN CONTROL AND (2) TECHNICAL DESIGN ISSUES IN THE AREA 0F PIPING SUPPORT 3. THE SPECIALLY ASSIGNED NRC STAFF REVIEW GROUP AND THE ACRS HAVE BOTH EVALUATED THESE CONCERNS.

THAT EVALUATION INCLUDED MEETINGS WITH THE LICENSEE TO DISCUSS THE CONCERNS AND TO RECEIVE THEIR EVALUATION AND COMMENTS.

IN ADDITION, THE REVIEW GROUP DISCUSSED CERTAIN MATTERS WITH THE

('

IDVP FERSONNEL AND CONDUCTED WALKDOWNS OF THE DIABLO CANYON' PLANT WITH REGARD TO SOME OF THE SPECIFIC TECHNICAL CONCERNS, SUCH AS

-SNUBBER AND RESTRAINT LOCATION AND REDUNDANCY. WHILE THEY CONCLUDED THAT NONE OF THESE CONCERNS WERE OF SUCH SAFETY

$!GNIFICANCE AS TO FURTHER DELAY THE REINSTATEMENT OF THE LOW-POWER LICENSE, THEY ALSO CONCLUDED THAT CERTAIN ACTIONS BY THE LICENSEE AND BY THE NRC SHOULD BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO A DECISION  ;

REGARDING ISSUANCE OF A FULL-POWER LICENSE. THE ACRS CONCURRED (tlWHAT ACTIONS ARE./THEY?)

WITH THIS CONCLUSION.

Q w_ _ . _ _ . _ .

. THE COMMISSION REINSTATED.THE LOW-POWER LICENSE AT A PUBLIC

(

MEETING ON APRIL 13, 1984,' WITH THE REINSTATEMENT BECOMING EFFECTIVE ON APRIL 19. THE ACTIONS PROPOSED BY THE REVIEW GROUP

')

WERE ISSUED ON APRIL 18 AS SEVEN SPECIFIC LICENSE CONDITIONS IN AN

[4 ORDER MODIFYING THE DIABLO CANYON UNIT 1 LICENSE THAT MUST BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO FULL-POWER. THE STAFF HAS EXPANDED THIS REVIEW GROUP TO SEVERAL TASK TEAMS FOR THE REVIEW, EVALUATION, AUDIT AND INSPECTION OF THE LICENSEE'S EFFORTS. THE TASK TEAMS CONSIST OF 15 SENIOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS INCLUDING BOTH NRC STAFF AND

('

EXPERT CONSULTANTS. MR. YIN IS PARTICIPATING IN MANY OF THE TEAM ACTIVITIES. THE STAFF WILL ISSUE THE RESULTS OF ITS EFFORTS AS A SAFETY EVALUATION WHICH WILL SERVE AS ONE.0F THE BASES FOR OUR FULL.-POWER DECISION. WE EXPECT THAT THIS EFFORT WILL BE COMPLETED WITHIN ABOUT A MONTH.

ANOTHER MATTER THAT IS RECEIVING CONSIDERABLE ATTENTION IS ,,

GEOLOGICAL INFORMATION THAT RECENTLY BECAME AVAILABLE. IN MARCH 1984, THE LICENSEE PROVIDED US WITH A PREPRINT OF A SCIENTIFIC

e PAPER REGARDING NEW INFORMATION AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA REGARDING THE HOSGRI FAULT NEAR THE DIABLO CANYON SITE. WE HAVE REQUESTED THE ACRS TO EVALUATE THE INFORMATION AND ADVISE US OF ITS IMPACT REGARDING A FULL-POWER DECISION. THE FULL ACRS COMMITTEE AND ITS CONSULTANTS ARE MEETING TODAY WITH THE LICENSEE, STAFF AND DR. CROUCH, THE PRINCIPAL AUTHOR OF THE PAPER.

IN ADDITION, THE STAFF IS CURRENTLY FORMULATING SPECIFIC DETAILS FOR A LONGER TERM REVALIDATION PROGRAM FOR THE SEISMIC DESIGN BASES OF THE DIABLO CANYON PLANT. THE NEED FOR SUCH PROGRAM WAS INITIALLY DISCUSSED BY THE ACRS IN 1978 AND IS NOW A CONDITION IN THE LOW-POWER LICENSE. THE PROGRAM MUST BE ESTABLISHED BY JANUARY OF NEXT YEAR AND BE COMPLETED BY 1988.

THE LAST SUBJECT I WANT TO MENTION IS THE MATTER OF ALLEGATIONS.

THE STAFF HAS DEVOTED EXTENSIVE EFFORTS OVER THE PAST MONTHS TO i, EVALUATE ALLEGATIONS. SINCE EARLY NOVEMBER 1983, WE HAVE EXPENDED IN EXCESS OF 18,000 STAFF HOURS. OUR FUNDAMENTAL APPROACH IS TO FOCUS ON TWO BASIC QUESTIONS:

- *FIRST, DOES THE ALLEGATION PRESENT A TECHNICAL PROBLEM

()

WHICH COULD AFFECT THE SAFETY OF THE PLANT?

• SECOND, DOES THE ALLEGATION REVEAL ANY SIGNIFICANT DEFECTS IN THE LICENSEE'S OR HIS CONTRACTORS MANAGEMENT ON QUALITY SYSTEMS 7 THE STAFF EVALUATED LMOST ALL OF THE FIRST APPROXIMATELY 200

( MORE RECENTLY, SEVERAL ALLEGATIONS TO ADDRESS THESE QUESTIONS.

HUNDRED ADDITIONAL ALLEGATIONS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED FROM A VARIETY OF SOURCES. AS THIS PICTURE EVOLVED THE STAFF DEVELOPED SCREENING CRITERIA TO DETERMINE WHICH ALLEGATIONS MUST BE COMPLETELY RESOLVED PRIOR TO EITHER LOW-POWER OR FULL-POWER OPERATION. AS A MINIMUM, EACH ALLEGATION IS BEING EVALUATED AGAINST THE CRITERIA.

THESE CRITERIA ARE CONTAINED IN OUR SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT ;_j SUPPLEMENT 22, b

USING THESE CRITERIA THE STAFF HAS IDENTIFIED ALLEGATIONS IN

(' SEVERAL AREAS THAT REMAIN TO BE RESOLVED PRIOR TO FULL-POWER. ONE i 0F THESE AREAS IS PIPING AND SUPPORTS WHICH IS ALSO INCLUDED IN l THE STAFF REVIEW TEAM EFFORT I DISCUSSED EAPLIER. THE STAFF IS j CONTINUING ITS ALLEGATION EVALUATION EFFORT AND WILL REPORT TO THE COMMISSION PRIOR TO A FULL-POWER DECISION ON DIABLO CANYON.

IN CLOSING, TWO OTHER ACTIONS SHOULD BE NOTED. THE FIRST IS THE j DECISIONBYTHEAPPEALBOARDINMARCHREGARDINGMATTERSOFDhSI '

/ QUALITY ASSURANCE. THAT DECISION WAS FAVORABLE TO THE LICENSEE.

THE SECOND ITEM IS A NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND PROPOSED IMPOSITION I

0F A CIVIL PENALTY FOR $50,000 RESULTING FROM THE FACILITY STAFF [

t NOT.RECOGN! ZING FOR A PERIOD IN EXCESS OF 15 HOURS THE IN0PERABLE f i

STATUS OF THE EMERGENCY CORE COOLING SYSTEM.

MR. CHAIRMAN, THIS CONCLUDES MY REMARKS. ,

I L

i

r OPENING REMARKS OF NUNZIO J. PALLADIN0 CHAIRMAN U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE

' ~ '

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT

( COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSllLAR AFFAIRS UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON DIABLO CANYON LICENSING CONCERNS JUNE 14, 1984 l

.  : p l

K >