ML20129E590
| ML20129E590 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 10/24/1996 |
| From: | Williams J NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9610280107 | |
| Download: ML20129E590 (22) | |
Text
-
gw/ae/o%
f,,,
a.
e g,
4 UNITED STATES y
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20606-0001 k.....,o/
October 24, 1996 LICENSEE: Tennessee Valley Authority FACILITY:
Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2, and 3
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
- OCTOBER 16, 1996 MEETING WITH TVA On October 16, 1996, representatives of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) met with the NRC staff in Rockville, Maryland. The NRR Project Manager for Browns Ferry had requested this meeting to discuss recent TVA efforts to validate information in the Browns Ferry Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) prior to submittal of the pariodic update planned for October 22, 1996. A list of attendees is given in Enclosure 1.
A copy of the handouts provided by TVA are given in Enclosure 2.
TVA previously met with the staff on July 10, 1996, and discussed its efforts t review the UFSAR for the Browns Ferry, Sequoyah, and Watts Bar sites. At
' time, TVA stated that it planned an extensive UFSAR review program ing about 18 months.
TVA believed this schedule was appropriate, given t.
'here was no indication of major problems, such as unreviewed safety questions, in the existing document.
Recently, TVA management decided to expedite portions of the review so that a large segment could be completed prior to submittal of the periodic update on i
October 22, 1996. Originally a line-by-line review of the UFSAR was planned i
on a level-of-effort basis, for completion over a 3-month span.
Dedichted personnel conducted the review over a shorter span of weeks.
The scope of review included a word-by-word check by operations personnel to determine whether plant operations are consistent with the UFSAR text.
Additional reviews were conducted by engineering and other personnel to determine information accuracy. This review did not include complete verification of plant configuration, vendor information, or drawings, and did not address information characterized as historical.
These items will be addressed as part of future efforts.
TVA is currently dispositioning discrepancies.
Thus far, the review has not identified any unreviewed safety questions, impacts on system operability, or required modification of plant equipment.
While many items will be resolved by the October 22 update, a number of items cannot be addressed by that time.
Furthermore, additional review efforts are continuing.
TVA is planning a supplemental update 3 months later to resolve additional items. TVA is also contemplating yet another submittal 3 months I
t 9610280107 961024
~
PDR ADOCK 05000259 P
a
, after the supplement to resolve remaining items. A root cause evaluation of discrepancies will also be performed.
The meeting participants also discussed handling of overall plant configuration issues.
Typically, modifications are not performed simultaneously on each of the three reactors at the site.
Furthermore, the extensive modifications required to return Unit 1 to operations have not been performed.
TVA was advised to make the UFSAR as descriptive as possible of the plant configuration as of the date of the updated submittal.
For example, if a modification has been completed on Unit 3, but not Unit 2, the update should provide an appropriate description for each unit.
At the conclusion of the meeting, TVA personnel stated that they are very sensitive to issues of UFSAR accuracy, and emphasized their interest in resolving any problems.
Original signed by Joseph F. Williams, Project Manager Project Directorate II-3 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-259, 50-260, and 50-296
Enclosures:
1.
Attendance List 2.
TVA Handbook cc w/ enclosures:
See next page DISTRIBUTION Hard Cooy w/ enclosure 1 and 2 Docket File PUBLIC BFN Rdg.
0GC (w/ encl. 1)
ACRS(w/ encl. 1)
J. Johnr.on, RII E-Mail w/ enclosure 1 F. Miraglia/AThadani (FJM) (ACT)
R. Zimmerman (RPZ)
S. Varga (SAV)
J. Zwolinski (JAZ)
E. Jordan (JKR)
G, Tracy DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\BFN\\FSARMTG. SUM is receive a copy of this h==nt, Indicate in the box:
"C" = Copy without attachment / enclosure "E" = Copy with cttachment/ enclosure ar = No copy l 0F FICE PDII 3/PM
///f /
l4 PDil-3/LA l l PDil-3/D,
lM l
l NAME Nil 1iams
[F"'
BCtsyton
'MLW FHebdon L!L lDATE 10/M/% /r 10/g A/96 10/2 4 /96 10/ /96 l
s BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT cc:
Mr. Oliver D. Kingsley, Jr.
Mr. Pedro Salas President, TVA Nuclear and Site Licensing Manager Chief Nuclear Officer Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Tennessee Valley Authority Tennessee Valley Authority 6A Lookout Place P.O. Box 2000 1101 Market Street Decatur, AL 35609 Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402-2801 TVA Representative Mr. O. J. Zeringue, Sr. Vice President Tennessee Valley Authority Nuclear Operations One Massachusetts Avenue, Suite 300 Tennessee Valley Authority Washington, DC 20001 6A Lookout Place 1101 Market Street Regional Administrator Chattanooga, TN 37402-2801 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II Mr. Mark 0. Medford, Vice President 101 Marietta Street, NW., Suite 2900 Technical Services Atlanta, GA 30323 Tennessee Valley Authority 6A Lookout Place Mr. Leonard D. Wert 1101 Market Street Senior Resident Inspector Chattanooga, TN 37402-2801 Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. R. D. Machon, Site Vice President 10833 Shaw Road Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Athens, AL 35611 Tennessee Valley Authority P.O. Box 2000 Chairman Decatur, AL 35609 Limestone County Commission 310 West Washington Street General Counsel Athens, AL 35611 Tennessee Valley Authority ET 10H State Health Officer 400 West Summit Hill Drive Alabama Department cf Public Health Knoxville, TN 37902 434 Monroe Street Montgomery, AL 36130-1701 Mr. Raul R. Baron, General Manager Nuclear Licensing Tennessee Valley Authority 4G Blue Ridge 1101 Market Street Chattanooga, TN 37402-2801
d I
ATTENDEES NRC/TVA MEETING ON OCTOBER 16, 1996 Hamt Affiliation Joe Williams NRC/NRR/DRPE/PD II-3 Raul Baron TVA Tim Shriver TVA Lee Williams TVA Steve Kane TVA ENCLOSURE 1
l.
t i~
1
{
-?-
after the supplement to resolve remaining items. A root cause evaluation of discrepancies will also be performed.
The meeting participants also discussed handling of overall plant configuration issues. Typically, modifications are not perfo med j
simultaneously on each of the three reactors at the site.
Furthermore, the extensive modifications required to return Unit I to operations have not been i
performed. TVA was advised to make the UFSAR as descriptive as possible of j
the plant configuration as of the date of the updated submittal.
For example, 1
if a modification has been completed on Unit 3, but not Unit 2, the update '
should provide an appropriate description for each unit.
1 l-At the conclusion of the meeting, TVA personnel stated that they are very sensitive to i suts of UFSAR accuracy, and emphasized their interest in J
resolving any problems.
i
'**^'
s,
, Joseph F. Williams, Project Manager Project Directorate II-3 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos, 50-259, 50-260, and 50-296
Enclosures:
1.
Attendance List 2.
TVA Handbook cc w/ enclosures:
See next page
t I
t Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) i l
(
Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN) i i
FSAR Status I
l i
l 1
i i
i t
,w E
i 4
.- A%
.. e,,i
-w= = mn,.. f p
y*-
.., a,.
- p. v'.s x.-
.s
,,e,., w
- uW 7 '
p 6
,1 l
g
-
- m e..
. f
.e w,u, n&f
>..' y & 3 a'a*~~
yun:z.p... n..m x
.,nw-1 s,u'yo
.n~-e b A..
a
.. ;;. w YlT&~~4
I.'%
- fR.Y.* ',-
- d0 <G,c;u
- .g.
- yf, #,
- p 3 ex
- ,g %..,,,
- x. s.
m
.~
-[m+.
40214:-#
l e16
._#yya.
i Q^
- r.
,p
?L
% s' f
4 p
l P
^
2.4 I
l
..A r
l 1
. '..11
-o-october 1, 1996 R. D. Mechen, SAB 1r,-arw rsAR vzR:rICA:rzcH SCCFE Based on telephone discussions on september 27, 1996 and septester 30, j
1996, the items listed below should be included in the Browns Terry Nuclear (BFN) Plant updated r3AR (UFSAR) verification process to support the UFSAR amendment subraittal scheduled for october 22, 1996. The time period to be covered is from the end point of the 1991 FsAR certification (January 22, 1990) to six months prior to the current update (April 12, 1996). In addition, any changes currently incorporated in the living TSAR, even if submitted af ter April 22, 1996, should also bs verified.
Tne BFN F MR verification should includes 1.
Verification of consistency between the TSAR and technical i
specifications, including the technical specification bases.
2.
Deview of swdifiestions to verify that the r$AR sdequately reflects requirements of relevant BA/3Es.
3.
Review of operations procedures for consistency with the FSAR.
4.
Review of rsAR change requests for proper incorporation, and that all affected FSAR sections were enanged.
5.
Review of the F8AR by knowledgeable personnel to identify obvious errors, with particular emphasis on critical areas such as abandoned equipment and system lineup and operation.
6.
Responsible managers, as defined in 3s9-4.2, 'Menagement of the Final safety Analysis Report (TSAR)," certify, to the best of their knowledge, the accuracy and cenpleteness of each section, f
in addition to normal certification criteria.
7 Quality Assurance will evaluate the verification process to ensure adequacy.
Please note that this effort is intended to further enhance the accuracy of the upcoming amenement 13 submittal and will be used to compliment the detailed TSAR validation effort planned for 1991/98.
Pleas contact us if you have questions.
t M
ul saron R. L.
orge General Manager-chief Engineer Nuelaar Assurbes and Licensing 3R SC-C BR 43-C JDR RHK ces see page 2
- QP?ii'1,
- e e
sem 6*a pg ENCLOSURE 2
AGENDA i
1.0 Introduction / Meeting Objectives R. Baron i
2.0 FSAR Review Chronology T. Shriver 3.0 Current FSAR Review and Results T. Shriver H. Williams 4.0 Current Licensing Basis Review and Results T. Shriver 5.0 Remaining FSAR issues and Reviews T. Shriver 6.0 Summary and Open Discussion R. Baron i
i i
- [
1.0 INTRODUCTION
S AND MEETING OBJECTIVES Previous FSAR Review Meetings e
e Current FSAR Review and Results i
Discuss Ouistading FSAR issues e
i
?
1 i
t i
l I
l R. Baron 1
l l
t
2.0 FSAR REVIEW CHRONOLOGY History of BFN FSAR Reviews e
FSAR Verification Completed During Unit 2 Restart Program (1988 - 1990)
TVA Re-visited issue to Address Industry Events (Millstone and Maine Yankee)
Immediate Response to Millstone Refueling Event Instituted Multiple Levels of Review FSAR Included in QA Audits and Assessments Vertical Slice Reviews Safety Evaluation (10 CFR 50.59) Process Met With the Staff on July 10,1996 in Rockville to Review TVA's loitiatives e
Briefed the Region on August 12,1996 to Discuss These initiatives and Review e
identified Discrepancies. Discrepancies Did Not Result in a USQ, impact to System Operability, or Result in a Modification to Plant Equipment.
Presented the FSAR Validation Program Plan Summary to the &W at the August 23,1996 Plant Status Meeting (Attached) 2 T. Shriver
FSAR PROGRAM PLAN
SUMMARY
A A
A A
Tl19f99 Meeting unth NRR to descree TVA actmhes to ensure corryllena weh FSAR af39f98 3f21196 aft 2f96 M
Ltcensing mornorandum to OA Licensang memandum to OA eequests Meeting wth Region ll to desenbe Vertical Slice Assessment of yyg,c,,,,,, g,,,,,,, _,.,
requests FSAR commaments tw sesessme,1 plan be developed to Mein Steam and EHC weh FSAR verined during senseements address currenth-Mdied Minstone Trif96 3f14f98 tevel B PER toeved by 3f22f98 To Tf22f98 Senior Mgmt review of FSAR 19f22f96 Enymeering to trodt and OA Assessment of status Decioson mode to Submetal of FSAR Reneen 13 reso8ve FSAR h. _,,,
conformance weh FSAR vahdale BFN FSAR to NRC
- FSAR Validation Prorram; (Separate Waterfall Schedule) 2/98 5/98 I/97 l'Y 97 rniect I.ist ( AITected FSAR Sections validated) 24 Month Cycle (Chapter 14)
Digital Fculwater (Section 7.I0)
Submittal CW"iO"
- Appendin J/ Primary Containment (Section 5.2) ofFSAR l'ilot ge,,
^
e scatw, n or rilot Sections other iSAR Sections Validetion Project Verification Program to NRC (Inities 1 systems Independent Assessments are St C, RisRSw and 250 V DC) 2/97 8/97 Vertical Vertical
^ " ' "
- Slice Slice
1 2.0 FSAR REVIEW CHRONOLOGY (CONT.)
t Developed a Waterfall Schedule for FSAR Sections to be Validated (Attached) e i
i i
l' i
i i
i i
4 T. Shriver
_= __
FSAR Validation O&M OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY Ma 15 10/2 BULK VALIDATION I
$M&MT RW & h MME PILOT PROGRAM Resciution VAll)ATION FSAR FSAR Rev13 Rev 14 7
?
SLC 3 8 l
Secondary Contaenmmt 5 3 I
i 2
86
[
CO l
~ Fuels 3 6/3 7 h
k l. _ --.. L - -. _ __.l.
l.
i Accendix M Pee Failure I
/#/
l Sian ch* 2 0 R==~-mm l
l i
. I _._._1_. _
__1_
. i _ _ _ _ _. i. _._
).
_._1
.__.i._.__
, Chapter 2 i
[_
i i
I
._ l.
l.. _ i
__.i__ _ I i _._
i
__L__
I__L c san-+-w 4,. /
I l
l--
RV inaams E'3 3- ~ ~ ~
TFui@ DpsdnT2'I I
h n 4 Sw~5 nary 10 @l 6
I gg f,i./
gp
/
R N N 12.3 ll I'L nmarr 121 1 Appender F Shared Sys l L
Mb= Rm[9.5 i
/.=,w=/
8 iaaM Rad S2~ - ~ ~ l mammara 914 l w pD
--g3- - - l N-= Rh== Ann E I
l l
-~4Q H
~
l
/*"Ph"[
I Pd -8 thaITaal PM 13 9/13 10 TI C
13 I f
TurtdGAAralor 112^~
Turtdne Bvoass' 115 1
/*'+**/
d n5 Feed & Storane 11.8I119/1D-)
'm-a==n[11_0I l
o
~-
I I Ciniusanna ;
../.Cond it 3/11 sitT4 h l
S50810 I Generation 8 2N
~ Indecence Critona 8 9'
.I
/.=,w=/
f I
Stanew AC' 8 $
b M Power 8 4 T20V dC 8 7 Imammarv B 1 I
-~
~
~,..
- -T8 3 11'AmuTwv DC 8 8 h l
T t
i I
I
. (1 Do SAISE, CRLD to delete histoncal sections (1.11,9 4 Appendix A. D, G 1. J. K, L - Remaring Appendixs to be relettered.
' t LIC, OA, Site Support have some sechons in Chapter 1.
'344t.rnan Resources. Site Support NA&L have some sechons in Chapter 13.
l
.. _ l. _ _.._ t I-~
T-r~
~1 '
]
I I
I I
I L
_ _ l __ _...
i August 20,1996 WATERFALXLS
FSAR Validation i
OCT NOV DEC JAN l FEB l MAR C PASSl3217
~APR l MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY TOOLS 10 4 '
l l
EEdNT 10 1
R CW 10 6 ~~
~
l l
ATWS fi'9~f M M ~77 l
__..I__._-
.L._
.L___.
Core Stan@y Cooling 7.4 l
i i
i i
ERACoolma/ Raw Service Wateifd 7IiO 8-- I
_ i.
1 l
Scent Fuel 10 3 I
-..New Fml10 2 I 1_.
a
.-_..L l RefuelIntefiocks 7 6.-. l Neutron Monitonna 7 5 I
L_. -. l.
Pressure /Trubine Bypass 7.11 l
_._ -. 6 1._ _.... _ _ i I_i
. I
_ i _. __ _
I R nactor Vessel 4 2 I
. i-__._._.._i._
NS Leakane 410 I..MS Feed & Drains 4.11_.
1 l
RWCO49
'l~
Reactor Recirc il 3 - - "
I i
MS-T5 MS 6eTs44~~ l l,
L _ __ _A
' Chaptei4 Summary.[l ISI 412 1
i l
Readw Marul Control 7 7
_ i
_. I I
f
_ i __ _ l
_ Rad Monitors 713/14115/7.12..
l 1
['*Ne[
[
g,j,g l -
-~ Backuo controi 71s - i i
7 7
I i
1 i - -- ~
j j
i i
pear v====a hit 7 a l
PL ar Flow Cont 7 9 I
Nef 7 d
1 1
i ~
t i
summarv C ~~ CMTAIir 10.14 ~
Pot Water 1015 '
I I __ l- __L l
.I _ _. _
l.
Fire Prnaarhan Snanma 10.11 1
[
-~ t
^ 10 19 - ' Ptarit 0 E*'m 10.18 I
k
__.l I
. l.
I A"% Radar 10 20 Prae=== Ramnhno 10.17 i
Chapter 10 l
l l.
l l
j Demin Water 10.13 l
Equipment / Floor Dram 10.16 l
l
_j 2 m I
Aurnitst 20 1996
... - ~....-
- 1
- I 5
4 Y1 fg1 A
ve 6
Ma pR 9
M 9
1 R
0, P
2 A EN s
t T O u
I E T g
R P A A
L u
D A
MI M
OL A
C V B
E F
l N
A J
C 7
E 1
D 7
v t
d b
N I
V a
t O
sn TCO l
l PE S
l I
I GU A
1 5
I 3/
L 4
5 U
3 0
2 J
D lo o
1 1
RC io t
2 P
m N
5 le e
U n
t t
u s
/~
F y
J e
S m
[
E l
C n
e G
.c A
(
~
Y n
V t
H A
o 9 /
C
^-
M 4
y 8
V 1
a
/
r m
A 4
R n
4 1
1
/
P
~
~6 P
H 4
A t
)
6 f
r d
N s
tn R
a
(
h A
C M
S
'r CC in E
B s
E I
A F
T N M A M l
-l J
g l
M C
A 9
E R
0 D G 1
O R
W S
L P
S X.
V R
L T
H A
O O R
N L
F IP R
E 6e T
9 3
T/)R1 A
C2 A
W v
2 S e O&
FR 1
l 3.0 CURRENT FSAR REVIEW AND RESULTS Previously identified FSAR Discrepancies Justified the Schedule of the FSAR e
Validation Program Plan Summary (1.E., Identification, Resolution and incorporation of Correction into next Amendment [May '98])
I i
President TVA Nuclear and Chief Nuclear Officer Requested an Expedited Review be e
Performed Prior to Submittal of Current Amendment (October 22,1996) i i
I l
i l
l i
T. Shriver 8
- I 3.0 CURRENT FSAR REVIEW AND RESULTS (CONT.)
l t
e This Review Has Been Extensive Word by Word Review of Text by Operations Personnel to Ensure Plant le Operated Consistent With FSAR Descriptions. Other identified issues Documented and Referred to Responsible Organization for Resolutiort.
Independent Review of FSAR Text by Responsible Site Organizations as Defined in BFN Procedure for FSAR Control (1.E., Engineering [ Design / Systems],
i Licensing, Training, Quality Assurance, Chemistry)
[
Verification of Consistency Between the FSAR and Technical Specification Amendments l
l Review of Modifications to Verify That the FSAR Reflects Requirements of Safety l
Assessments I Safety Evaluations 1
Review of FSAR Change Requests for Proper incorporation and All Affected l
FSAR Sections Were Changed l
Quality Assurance Evaluating the Reviews 1
H. Williams 9
3.0 CURRENT FSAR REVIEW AND RESULTS (CONT.)
)
Reviews Are Nearly Completed e
Reviews Have Not Resulted in USQ's, impacts to System Operability, or Required Modifications to Plant Equipment Discrepancies Have Been identified. Discrepancies Range from TypographicalI Editorial to Obsolete I Abandoned Equipment and Errors in System Operational Descriptions.
i xamples include:
~
FSAR States BFN Has Equipment to Automatically Respond to Load l
Changes. This Equipment Was Never Operated.
FSAR States There Are Six Stages of Feedwater Heaters. There Are Five Stages of Feedwater Heaters and One Drain Cooler.
j FSAR States Charcoal in Purge System is 99 Percent Efficient. Analyses Assume 90 Percent.
t i
Improper Specification of Numerical Values or Setpoints j
Initial Review of Sections Complete. Resolution of identified issues and Evaluation of FSAR Changes in Progress.
j i
1 i
10 i
H. Williams
a a
s t
4.0 CURRENT LICENSING BASIS REVIEW AND RESULTS i
Current Licensing Basis Assessment Approximately 60 Percent Complete e
i i'
Tailored to Evaluate the BFN Programs in Place That identify and Control e
Commitments That Effect the Current Licensing Basis as Defined in 10 CFR 54.3 s
Assessment Followed the Guidelines of NEl 96-05, Guidelines for Assessing l
e Programs for Maintaining the Licensing Basis f
Sample Areas include Orders, License Conditions, Exemptions, Regulatory j
e Requirements, Technical Specifications, Bulletins, Generic Letters, Enforcement Actions, Licensee Event Reports, and NRC Safety Evaluations l
e No New Deficiencies identified j
Based on Previous Assessment Findings, Deficiencies Exist in Preparation of e
SAISEs to Support the 10 CFR 50.59 Process. Corrective Action and Training Have Been Initiated to Address This issue.
l l
i l
i T. Shriver 11 l
f
i 5.0 REMAINING FSAR ISSUES AND REVIEWS Remaining Review Effort e
i Engineering Will Continually Review Each FSAR Section Affected By Ongoing Design Activities Primary Focus Will Center on QA Audits and Assessments Remaining Review Composed of Mini-Vertical Slices, Focused Assessments, and incorporation of FSAR Reviews into Assessment instructions. Reviews Will Be Prioritized Using Risk and Safety Based Criteria. Reviews Willinclude:
Original and Current Design Basis Requirements and Controls Proper Reflection in the FSAR and Technical Specifications inclusion of Vendor information incorporation into Operating, Maintenance and Testing Procedures, including Supporting Records l
Field Verification of As-Built and As-Modified Conditions l
i Review of Problem identification and Use of Corrective Action Program
(
i Schedule Being Developed to Complete Review Over the Next 18 Months Root Cause of FSAR Discrepancies Will Be Determined By Late November i
e T. Shriver 12 l
5.0 REMAINING FSAR ISSUES AND REVIEWS (CONT.)
e Schedule for Future FSAR Amendments Applicability of FSAR Descriptions to Unit 1 e
Addressing Unit 2 / Unit 3 Differences e
Drawings e
l 13 T. Shriver l
6.0
SUMMARY
AND OPEN DISCUSSION t,
i
)
l 2
i t
[
t l
I I
i, l
P I
i t
1 h
r t
R. Baron 14 t
t t