ML20128A454
| ML20128A454 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 05/22/1985 |
| From: | PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC |
| To: | Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-0737, RTR-NUREG-737 NUDOCS 8505240228 | |
| Download: ML20128A454 (3) | |
Text
-
m
~-L PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY h
2301 MARKET STREET y
P.O. BOX 8699 PHILADELPHIA, PA.19101 (2151 e41-soot
. suistos t. oatino,,
. nElf,EUU' "
May 22, 1985 Docket Nos. 50-277 50-278 4
'Mr. John F. Stolz, Chief
-. Operating'. Reactors Branch #4 Division of Licensing
--U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555-
SUBJECT:
-Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 & 3 Schedule Relief for, Control Room Design Review Summary Report (NUREG-0737, Supplement 1).
7
Dear Mr. Stolz:
This letter requests an extension.in the schedule for
~ submitting a summary report proposing control room improvements
. required by NUREG-0737, Supplement 1, " Requirements for Emergency Response Capability".
In a letter dated January 7, 1985 (S. L.
.Daltroff,.PECo, to D.
G.- Eisenhut, NRC), a date of June 30, 1985
. was proposed'for the~ summary report submittal.
On February ll, t
1985, the NRC issued a modification of Commission Order _ dated June 14,-_1984 that approved the June 30, 1985 submittal date.
By this letter, we are now requesting an extension to February 28, 1986 that is based on the availability of operationally.
experienced Peach Bottom personnel essential to the quality of
.the control room design review.'
A Philadelphia Electric Company review team, representing:a. variety of disciplines, has been active in assessing human. engineering discrepancies and developing
'enhancementsifor the control room panels.
The review process includes the use of a full' scale control panel mockup.- Later in W
the program,.the review team will perform a task analysis and a
' validation of. proposed enhancements based on-the Emergency Operating Procedures.
The participants on the review team le include'an engineer from PECo's Electrical Engineering
- Department, human factors engineering consultants, and four
' members of the Peach Bottom operating staff.
The Peach Bottom personnel;are the Operations Engineer (SLO), a' Shift Technical esosa4oans esosas g
PDR ADOCK 0s000277 i
p PM t y
^
~
~
L
v
- ?
Mr.JJohn F.~Stolz:
May 22, 1985 Page 2-
' ' Advisor, ar licensed control room operator, and _ the. chief electrician (former licensed _ supervisor) representing a' combined total of more-than 50-years of operating; experience at the' Peach Bottom facility. :Their expertise has been invaluable to the
- quality'of the CRDR task.
. ; Peach-Bottom personnel participation in the review team started in September, 1984 at-an average of 2 man-days per week.
~ During' January and February 1985, support by station personnel had been averaging a total of six man-days per week on this 1 project..-In March, it was necessary'to discontinue temporarily their involvement in the CRDR task to permit their. support of
. Unit'2.startup activities.since the unit is being readied'to return to service following an extensive refueling and pipe l replacement ~ outage.
The plant operating personnel partially-
- resumed their participation in the CRDR task in early May.
That participation is son a -three-day-per-month basis rather than the originally planned twice:periweek; schedule.
The reduced level-of
-support was; necessitated by the following restraints:
m 1.-
The-recent unexpected-departure of two1 senior licensed operators ~to another company, and the approximately 33%
increase _in requalification training time for licensed
- operators infresponse to the higher qualification standards associated with new NRC regulations, has eroded' the availability of these personnel -for support.
I of special projects.-
d2..
The Peach Bottom Unit 2 outage is expected to continue into June, 1985 to be immediately followed by a Unit 3 refueling outage of uncertain duration.
The work load for-the plant staff peaks during outages'due'to the extensive number of modifications and testing
- requirements. _For'this reason, their support of. design oriented evaluations is limited during that period.
The activities of the review team are now projected to Lbe completed.by December, 1985.
An additional two calendar months will.be-needed to prepare the summary report and
= accommodate a-thorough management review.
Based on these projections, the report should be submitted by February 28, 1986.
Hoo ver, it will be our objective to submit the report at the earliest practicable date.
The requested schedule change recognizes the importance Lof factoring operational l experience into the review process to avoid adverse disruption'to the-control capabilitier of an existing operating facility, and would provide plant staff availability which is essential to effective and safe operations.
,~. _.
1
m ge-Mr. John F. Stolz May 22, 1985 Page 3
.~Further, this schedule change is not expected to extend
.the completion date for control panel enhancements._ The earliest
'the enhancement ~ process can commence would be the refueling
~
outage.of Unit 2 scheduled for late _1986.
A Summary Report submittal delay beyond June 30, 1985 to early.1986 would not inhibit-our' ability.to start the enhancement process during-that outage.
Accordingly,.we request a revision to the NRC order, dated. June 14, 1984,.'to extend the schedule to February. 28, 1986 for-submitting the Control Room Design Review Summary Report.
Should you have any questions regarding this request, please do.not hesitate to contact us.
Very truly yours, r
s hN
[
cc:
T. P. Johnson, Resident Site Inspector
.