ML20202B331
| ML20202B331 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Perry, Byron, Braidwood, Clinton, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 07/02/1986 |
| From: | Norelius C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Funches J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8607100276 | |
| Download: ML20202B331 (19) | |
Text
(
. ~
ons
(
4 JU( O'21986 MEMORANDUM FOR: Jesse L. Funches, Director, Planning and Program Analysis Staff, NRR FROM: Charles E. Norelius, Director, Division of Reactor Projects, RIII
SUBJECT:
NT0L PLANT LICENSING STATUS - REGION III Enclosed is the updated plant licensing status for Perry 1, Clinton.1, Braidwood 1, and Byron 2. This information is current as of June 27, 1986.
Should you or your staff have any further qu.estions, please contact R. C. Knop for Perry and Clinton, W. S. Little for Braidwood, and W. L. Forney for Byron 2.
N c y . : '.i : . '
- Charles E. Norelius, Director
} Division of Reactor Projects
Enclosure:
Updated'P1 ant Licensing -
6tatus .
cc w/ enclosure:.
J. G. Keppler, RIII -
J.'A. Hind, RIII ..
C. J. Paperiello,,RIII '
SRI, Perry '
SRI, Byron
~
8607100276 860702
{DR ADOCK 05000440 PDR N
RIII RIII RIII RI LO W Forney/jp K l '
W l1 ttle RF(f)
'Warnick Norel i
d
[~
1 4lt> &/3f6 e
k
,"4 REGION III Plants Included:
Perry 1 Clinton 1 Braidwood 1 Byron 2 69 O
O e
r LICENSING STATUS FOR PERRY 1 Perry 1 is a BWR/6, Mark III containment plant. The Clevelarid Electric Illuminating Company (CEI) was issued a low power operating license (NPF-45) on March 18, 1986 authorizing fuel loading and plant operation up to 5% of rated thermal power. A Commission briefing and a license authorizing Perry 1 operation at power levels above 5% of rated thermal are scheduled for July 1986.
In addit, ion, Region III issued a SALP report for Perry on June 27, 1986.
There are several license conditions and confirmatory items which must be satis-factorily completed by CEI before Perry 1 is permitted to operate above 5% of rated thermal, power. These conditions are specified in Section 2.C of the low power operating li. cense (NPF-45), and documented in SER Supplement Nos. 8 and -
9, (SER Supplement No. 9 exclusively documents the staff's re-review of the plant's seismic design and the plant site's seismology / geology as a result of the earthquake which occurred near the plant site on January 31, 1986. In a letter to the Chairman, dated March 17, 1986,. the ACRS agreed with the staff's earthquake-related confirmatory action program.
~
In a letter to H. R. Denton, dated March 10, 1986, CEI certified that the plant's Technical Specifications conform with the as-built plant.
Hearinks The ASLB hearings wdre initiated in May 1983,.during which time the QA Construc-tion issue vas litigated. A favorable Partial Initial Decision was issued on December 2, 1983, and was appealed by the intervenor (Sunflower Alliance).
The Licensing Board't'QA decision was' affirmed by the Appeal Board (ALAB-802). .
Hearings were coinoleted on the emergency plans dnd TDI diesel generator relia-bility issues on April 12, 1985. Hearings on the remaining' issue (hydrogen control for degraded core accidents) were concluded on May 3, 1985. The ASLB is~ sued a concluding Partial Initial Decision (PID) on emergency planning, hydrogen l control and diesel generators on Se'ptember 3, 1985. This decision specifies several issues to be resolved by the applicant: emergency planning - 4 items;
, TDI diesels - 1 item; and hydrogen control - 2 items. The four emergency plan l items were satisfactorily resolved and were reported as such by the FEMA. Both-
'intervenors (Ohio Citizens for Responsible Energy and Sunflower Alliance) have appealed the ASLB PID as well as several other prior decisions. A~ motion for a -
stay of the PID was denied by the Appeal Board on October 24, 1985. A. motion to reopen the record and admit six new contentions involving fire protection require- .
ments'and single loop operation was filed by Intervenor 0CRE on December 12, 1985, and denied by the Appeal Board on February 27,' 1986. A motion to admit a new contention relative to the earthquake impact on the Perry seismic design j was also filed by OCRE on February 3, 1986. The Appeal Board ordered that a preliminary hearing be held the week of May 15, 1986 to determine if OCRE's allegations on the earthquake should be admitted as a new issue for litigation. .
The Commission vacated the Appeal Board Order and denied the motion to reopen on April 18, 1986 (CLI-86-07). Appeals of the PID issues are still pending .
before the Appeal Board.
t 9
LICENSING STATUS'FOR PERRY 1 .
2.206 Petition _
A Petition was, filed by Susan H1'att of the Ohio Citizens for Responsible Energy (OCRE) on February 3,1986. Thi's Petition requests tha. the NRC not permit fuel loading or any facility operation pending inspection and testing of the facility, an examination of site seismicity, and hearings on OCRE's
- seismic design contention (if it is admitted by the Appeal Board).
By letter dated February 4,1986, to the Comission, Donald L. Schlemer, on behalf of the Western Reserve Alliance, requested that'imediate iction be . . s .-
taken with regard to the Perry plant, Units 1 and 2. Specifically; Mr. Schlemer requested that the Commission: (1) suspend the construction of the Perry plants, (2) require an independent design and construction verifica- .
tion program to assess the integrity and implementation of'the Perry quality assurance (QA) programs, and (3) review and require an audit of an application by Centerior Energy Corporation (CEC) seeking the approval of the~ Securities .-
dnd Exchange Commission (SEC) to acquire all outstanding shares of Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company (CEI) and Toledo Edison and of mergers by which this will be effectuated. -
Both Petitions were denied on March 18, 1986. (DD-86-04)
Region III Inspections .
- There are.about e.leven matters requiring resolution,by-the appl,icant' prior to the~ licensee. exceeding W power. These include: open items, v.iolations,
' ~
responses'to bulletins 'and 10 CFR Part 21 reports. .
- 1. Preoperational-and-Startup Testing .
, .All Preoperational Tests required before fuel load ~are complete. . Perry l' was issued a low power operating license on March 18, 1986, and the licensee comenced fuel load on March 21,1986. On April 24, 1986 the licensee completed' loading the 748 fuel assemblies into the vessel.
- Some delays were experienced due to malfunctions in the fuel handling equipment and du'e to spurious signals experienced in the, neutron monitoring system (aLERhasbeenfiledbythelicenseeontheneutronmonitor,ing ,
, system problems). Initial criticality occurred on June 6, 1986. The i
licensee is currently preparing.for Non-Nuclear Heatup (NNHU) and will proceed from there to Nuclear Heatup. .
- 2. Emergency Preparedness , ,
l An Emergency. Preparedness Implementation Appraisal (EPI'A) was conducteb in
- l March 1985, and follow-up inspections were conducted in July, September, November 1985, and January 1986. All, appraisal items have been closed.
l
. - , n.. . - - .. - , ,,+ ,--- .
t-LICENSING STATUS FOR PERRY 1 .
One bulletin item, related to audibility problems in high noise areas, remains to be resolved. . The licensee has agreed to identify the high "
noise areas during the next six months, and to take the nece'ssary, permanent corrective action (s-) at the. first refueling outage. In addition, a plant first aid facility must be completed before removing the con-
, struction crews' medical off1ce.,
A full participation exercise was conducted on April 15, 1986, satisfying emergency preparedness licensing requirements. A summary report of the exercise (50-440/86-09 and 50-441/86-03) identifying exercise weaknesses needing corrective action, was issued by the regional inspection staff .
on April 30, 1986.
- 3. Security The last security inspection was conducted the week of May 5, 1986. This inspection was for the startup phase. One violation was identified and immediately corrected by the licensee. This violation is considered closed.
There are no known security issues which would preclude issuance of a full power operating license.
- 4. Fire Protection
. In December 1985, Region III completed its pre-licensing inspecti8n activities. All pre-Jicensing issues have been. resolved. A few minor hardware items a~re beinyprocessed by ttleclicensee on an acceptab'le. . ,
Schedule. The licensee hastbeen requested to evaluate the need to wrap -
i safety r, elated cable tray supiqr,ts prio.r to exceeding 5% power. .
, s .
,, 5. 1986 Ohio Earthquake Revitw '
~~
An earthquake occurred onJ 'anuary 31, 1986, with an epicenter-1 . miles
. south of the Perry site. The earthquake had a magnitude of approximately five on the Richter scale. -An Augmented Inspection Team (AIT-) was .
dispatched to the site tn Februa'ry 1,1986, to gather facts and'to make a general assessment of t_he damage. This effort was subsequently -
supplemented with a team of Regional specialists during the week of '
February 3, 1986. These team inspections identified no significant damage to the plant as a. result of the earthquake. ,
t tn February 12, 1986, ~CEI provid.ed a rep' ort of its assessment of the earth. -
quake and it's impact on the plant. Supplements to that report were submitted
~
on February 28, March 3 and. March 11, 1986. That report and its supplements
, concluded that the impact of the earthquake would not alter any.of the design or licensing basis. CEI's repdrt on earthquake related confirmatory work, identified in Perry SER Supplement No. 9, is to be submitted in early July 1986 (was initially scheduled for mid-June 1986). NRR's evaluation of these reports must be satisfactorily completed before Perry Unit 1 will be licensed to operate beyond 5%-df rated thermal power. The delay in receip't j of this report could prevent is. suing a full p'ower operating license in '
l July 1986. ~
[ ,
w
LICENSING STATUS FOR PERRY 1 .
- 6. Perry Offgas Chancoal Fire On June 20, 1986, thelicenseedec1'aredanunusualeventbaseduh6n a determination that a-fire existed in the off-gas treatment system charcoal adsorbers. The fire is believed to have been started as a . -
result of positioning space heaters in close proximity to the charcoal adsorber tanks during testing. The licensee initiated a nitrogen purge on the adsorber tanks shortly after discovering the contained fire and established continued monitoring of the internal temperatures of the affected tanks. After temperature profiles indicated that the fire was out the licensee terminated the unusual event on June 23, 1986.
A Confirmatory Action Letter (CAL) was prepared to review and approve the licensee's recovery plan. In addition, a Region III inspection team was dispatched to th~e site to review the event. .
Allegations There are no allegation files on Perry being pursued by the s,taff. However, several allegation files remain open pending the issuance of reports of the inspections completed by the regional inspection staff. No significant problems have been identified on the basis of inspections / reviews performed by the regional inspection staff to date.
01 Investigations s . .
The Qffice of Investigatiqps 'has three investigations underway. regarding Perry.
These items are being pursued and are not expected to impact the full power
' licensing decision. -
- o ,
. 4 E
6 0 4
4 W O
~O a , ,
. ~
y e 'h ,
, e Ot *
- b'
+
- a LICENSING STATUS FOR GLINTON 1 -
Clinton Power Station ~(CPS) Unit 1 is a 8WR/6 plant with a Mark III containment and is in th'e final stages of the licensing review ptoces.s. The plant is jointly owned 'by Illinois Power Company-(.IP), Soyland Power Cooperative, Inc.
and Western Illinois Po.wer Company (WIPC0). IP has a majority ownership and
'is responsible for plant construction, licensing and operation. Major milestones
, associated with CPS are as follows: ,
Application f'or OL tendered . December 1, 1979
. FES issued (NUREG-0854) April 1982 SERissued(NUREG-0853) '
February 1982
.LastSERSupplement(SSER-5). January 1986 ,
IP fuel load (licensing) date Early July 1986 '
Clinton was approximately.99% complete on Ja'nuary 31, 1986. Themajorityof .a
,- -bulk commodities constfuction is gpmplete; al.1 systems have been turned over to IP. There are approximately 7,800 open items on IP's master punch list; about 2,800 of these.are fuel load items. The applicant predicts that they will be ready, for fuel load by July.15,1986. Region III believes that late August is an optimistic time frame for fuel loading. Control room ventilation, fuel . handling equipment, plant fire protection, and instrument air are the critical, path items. Preop t'est activity remains behind schedule.
FSAR Review .
The staff's FSAR review is,nearly complete. Five outstanding and two confirma- '.
tory issues remain to be resolved. However, IP is submitting an additional FSAR amendment (38) which has to be reviewed by the staff prior to issuance of a license. In addition, IP has submitted its proposal to defer certain preoper-ational tests, which is currently under review by the staff (Region III and NRR). ,.
Hearings ,
As a result of'th*e resolution of.all. conte t!<r ., hearings on the Clinton application have been terminated. ,
Emergency Preparedness-(Onsite Plans) ~
'The staff has completed its review of the applic' ant's onsite emergency response plans (through Revision 5, dated November 20,1984) for Clinton and finds an adequate planning basis for an acceptable state of emergency preparedness.
9 I
l l .
9 v -
- i
.e .
LICENSING STATUS FOR CLINTON 1 .
Emergency Preparedness (Offsite Plans)
.The Clinton site specific Annex (Local Plan) to the Illinois Plan for Radiological
. Accidents (State Plan) was submitted to FEMA for review on August 6, 1985. FEMA completed a review of the Sta'te of Illinois emergency plan in connection with other operating nuclear power plants..in Illinois, and determined that it is adequate. Interim findings on the adequacy of the local plan were provided by FEMA on December 13, 1985. Additional revisions were submitte.d and FEMA provided supplemental findings on April 4,1986. that the offsite plans are adequate. .
Construction Appraisal Team (CAT) Inspection For background on this issue, please refer to the October 8,1985, report.
Physical Security All Clinton Security Plans have been reviewed.and approved. Security for onsite Special Nuclear Material (SNM) was considered adequate. Additional inspections are scheduled monthly. Complete lock-down and implementation of the security program was initiated on June 16, 1986 and continues.
Independent Design Review (IDR)
For b'ackground o'n this issue, please refer to the October 8, 1985 report. An ypdated status of the open items -is to be provided in an SER supplement in 4-March 1986.
' Audits The'SQRT and PVORT audits were performed August 20-23, 1985. Based on the results of these audits, a PV0RT reaudit was required. Staff meetings were held in Bethesda on September 26 and October 21 with the applicant to discuss a'PV0RT
. recovery program. The PV0RT reaudit was perfonned November 18-21, 1985. Based ,*
on the SQRT and PVORT audits an issue related to the use of test versus analysis for the qualification of the cperability of valves surfaced. The staff performed an additional audit on January 28 and 29, 1986 at the Sargent and Lundy offices in Chicago, Ill and following this audit requested the applicant t6 provide additional information to resolve this issue for both SQRT and PV0RT. The appli-cant has pro.vided the additional information requested. Based on the staff's review another problem related to.the completeness of the SQRT packages has surfaced. The staff and applicant are. wcrking towards resolution.
Detailed Control Room Design Review (DCRDR) '
The Clinton DCRDR Summary Report was docketed on. September 20, 1985. A pre-implementation audit to review DCRDR results and planned control room improve-ments was performed October 28-November 1, 1985. The staff's safety evaluation e
, - , , - - - - - , - , , - - . - - - ~ , -
8 LICENSING STATUS ~FOR CLINTON 1 determined that the requirements of NUREG-0737 have been satisfied ~ subject to completion of certain actions by the applicant as identified in the safety evaluation.
NRC Inspections:
Anum'berofnormalinspectionitemsremaintobecompleted. T'hese are listed below with the appropriate percentage completion as of May 1986. The staff believes adequate resource.s can be made available t'o complete them without -
adverse impact on the fuel' load and plant startup schedule.
Operation QA Review (90%)
(90%)
PreopTestWitnessing(60%)
Fuel Load Procedures Emerge ~ncy Procedures (0%)
Evaluate Test Results (60%)
Verify Test Results Reviewed by Applicant (50%)
Fire Protection (85%)
Testing Pipe Supports & Restraints (50%)
Liquid & Solid Waste (95%)
Chemistry and Radiochemistry (85%)
Security (75%)
There are also a number of other open items. These are discussed below.
- 1. Construction and Preoperational Testing ,
There are several matters requiring resolution including violations, unresolved items, and open items. Regional effort is being expended to resolve these matters prior to licensing. ,
Approximately- 80% of acceptance / pre-operational tests have been completed.
Drywell and containment structural integrity tests and containment inte-grated leak rate testing were satisfactorily completed January 2, 1986.
Subsequent to this time, a hole was discovered in the containment liner whict. raised questions concerning the test results and control of work on the containment liner. This issue is being pursued with the applicant by Region III.
Based on current information, it appears that a Type A Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test may have to be performed again after construction on the containment is completed. Additionally, the validity of the preoperational tests results of the safety related batteries is under review because of their current physical condition.
, - - - - , , ,-. - .-- - -.._ ,,,,-,,, .m- , - _,-
4 LICENSIN'G STATUS FOR CLINTON 1 '
- 2. Fire Protection ,
e A joint audit by NRR and Region III was conducted September 9-13, 1985.
There were one violation and twenty-three open items. A reinspection was completed in January -1986s' Additional inspections are scheduled; the Appendix C inspection was performed the week of April 28, 1986. ,
3.. Radiation Protection & Radwaste
- The most recent inspections were conducted Mhy. 20-23, 1986. Areas requiring further licensee attention include: preoperational testing, radiation mon-itor calibrations, radwaste solidification system installation, certain TMI 2
action plan items compliance ~ docume.ntatio'n (NUREG-0737 Items II~. B.3 and -
II.F.1, Attachments 1, 2, and 3},'and-ANSI N510 acceptance test c.ompliance -
documentation.
. s.
- 4. Security The security computer' system's capability to meet the security plan commit-
.ments cannot be adequately d.etermined until the security access control / alarm monitoring program .is fully implemented by the applicant. ,
- 5. Emergency Planning .
An Emergency Preparedness Implementation Appraisal (EPIA) was conducted November 12-21, 1985, and a number of items were -identified which will require. correction prior to license issuance. Most of.those items are related to equipment not yet installed, training of onsite response personnel, and final revision bf procedures. A follow-up inspection to the EPIA was conducted in March 1986. A full-scale exercise was held December 4, 1985. No violations of NRC requirements were identified during the exercise. 'A total offrix items must be resol;_a prior to fuel load, three prior to.. criticality, one prior to exceeding.five percent power, and four will be examined during'the October 1986 exercise. _ _
- 6. Chemistry, Radiochemistry,,and Confirmatory Measurements The applicant has completed confirmatory measurements compari. sons necessary for license issuance. Analyses for Strontium 89'and Strontium 90 should be completed by five percent power. The applicant.has completed all items
- required to be resolved in the chemistry and rad.iochemistry areas prior to fuel load.
a N 9 m
4 Ya W
l 1
l
~ -
, l 1
4 .
~
LICENSING STATUS ~FOR CLINTON 1 ;
7.: 0verinspection .
On April 3,1986, the appl.icant notified Region III that the Overinspection Program has been concluded. Region III closeout of
. the Overinspection Program is being prepared.
- 8. Allegations There are 11 allegation files that remain open and assigned.to the staff.
Most of.the allegations have been reviewed in some detail, but. additional inspections are required to close them out. These issues are expected to be resolved prior to fuel load.
, .y
- 9. 01 Investigations ,.
There are six outstanding investigations.
- 10. Operator Licensing Licenses for operators were issued in July 1985(17 licenses: 14.SR's and
~
3 R0s),. December 1985(22 licenses: 14 SR0s and 8 R0s), February 1986
-(10 licenses: 3 SR0s and 7 R0s), and April 1986 (7 licenses: 5 SR0s und 2 R0s). The Commission policy on experience levels-for SR0s, R0s and
- STAS is expected to be satisfied. 3 f
~ '
e 0
s
.s m
h e
s .
PLANT'- CLINTON '
PM - BYRON %IEGEL (X29474) -
I .',- -
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS: 4 PROOF AND REVIEW: Comple'te ,
FI'NAL: MAY 1986 *
, g
. ~
ESAR 6 SSER SCHEDULE OPEN ISSUES
- RESPONSIBLE ORG. CATEGORY INPUT ISSUED'- COMMENTS i . '
- 1. Equipment Qualifica' tion EB/ DBL' 2 .,06/15/86 06/30/86 All EQ audits have bgsn com-completed. Environmental Issue resolved. Based on staff's i review of' applicant's sub '
i, mittal another problem j
- related to completeness of%ithe SQRT p.ackages has surfaced. .
i -
The staff and-applicant are Q e
working towards resolution.
2'. Suppression Pool Hydro- PS8/ DBL- 3. 06/15/86 06/30/86 Awaiting SER from reviewer. ' (
dynamic Loads *
- 3. Hu'mphrey Containment . Issues PSB/ DBL 3 06/15/86
- 06/30/86 Awaiting SER.from reviewer.
- 4. Control , Systems Failures - EICS/ DBL, From'HELB 3 06/15/86 . 06/30/86 ~
Staff reviewing issue.
'5 . Offsite Emerg'ency EPB/IE Preparedness Program,s
} 06/15/86 06/30/66 Awaiting SER from EPB '
~
- 6. Meteorological Measur,e- EPB/IE '3 06/15/86 ments Program
+
06/30/86- Awaiting SER from EPB
- 7. Fire Protection PSB/ DBL 2 06/16/86 06/30/86
~
Awaiting SER from reviewer g
.. , e' * - -
- q .
= , t g
n
n .-
~
4 . . 3
. LICENSING-STATUS OF BRAIDWOOD 1
- n m; w. .
Braidwood 1 is approximately 96% compTete and the applicant's current fuel load date is S~eptember 30, 1986. The FES was -issued in June 1984. The_SER was -
issued in. November 1983. The letter from. the ACRS supporting issuance of an Otawas issued on February 11, 1985. The ASLB hearings commenced on October .
29, 1985. -Integrated hot functional testing began March 9,' 1986 and was
^ '
completed on April 21, 1986. .
- a.
FSAR Rev.iew The application for the Byron *and Braidwood- Stations was submitted and accepted for review under the Consnission's standardization policy statement of !4erc),'5, 1973. This application was for two duplicate units at each of two sites; '
.therefore, the staff's review of-the duplicate design. portions of these four ~
.. . units was conducted simultaneously and documented in the Byron SER. The staff's review of the Braidwood site-specific portion of'the Byron /Braidwood FSAR is essentially complete. There are ni'ne outstanding and six confirmatory .
items still under review. ,
= Hearings
/ s.
The Braidwood. application is contested; the OL hearing is divided into three' , ,
sessions coninencing on October 29,"1985,1 arch 11,.1986, and'May 6., 1986,
-respectively. Initial hearings on the emergency preparedness contention were _.
conducte.d on October 29, 1985; hearings were completed for this. contention on ^ j ..
March 12, 1986. T.he ASLB's decision on the emergency preparedness contention
,.~
had not been issued'as of June 23,-1986. In its. June 21, 1985 Order,-the ASLB ,
admittgd a complex contention- al.leging inadequate QA/QC during the construction ef Braidwood Station. Directed Certification to the Appeal Board of this Order was requested by the applicant and supported by the NRC staff in its %
July 23, 1985 filing. . On September 6, 1985, the Appeal Board denied the grant "of directed . certification by a 2 to 1 majority. The applicant has filed a .
r quest to waive the regulations prohibiting an appeal to the Commission' of
~, , the Appeal Board ' denial of the grant of directed certification. This request
_ was. supported by the staff, opposed by the intervenor. On Apri) -23,1986, the Commission dismissed the quality assurance contention. An . additional, issue was' accepted retaliation andbyother the ASLB on July 23,1985-}concerning discrimination. harassment, Hia ings on this issue were held intimidation, May 6-9' 1986 in Kankakee, Illinois .and Maf2Lthrough June.41986, in Markham,Illfn>ois. The hearing was.. moved to Jo'liet, IL~on June 10, 1986,
'* e -
where it will continue until completion,.which is now predicted to te the first wegk.of A'ugust'1986.
Constructio'n Appraisal Team (CAT) Inspection. .
~
~ ~ CAT Inspection was conducted by the Office of Inspection and' Enforcement'
.. during'Dechmber 10-20, 1984 and January 7-18, 1985. The^ Inspection Report 3 (50-456/84-44;.50-457/84-40) was issued February 20, 1985. Although construc- s tion was generally found to he in acco'rdance withiequirements, the team '
identified a' number of hardware deficiencies and program weaknesses as potential enforcement actio'n items". These included vendor tanks.and heat
, exchangers with deficient weldsg vendor radiographs no,t meeting required weld or film quality requirements, failure.t.o identify the required weld sizes for
~
.. pipe supports and restraints, installation of unqualified switchboard wire and M
~
~
, g ,c,, -
A .
. ?n. ., ,,
. LICENSING STATUS OF BRAIDWOOD '
~ 3 bolts of indeterminate material, failure to identify deficient seismic pipe -
t support and restraint installations, and failurp to provide adequate- '-
electrical sep'aration criteria in quality control procedures. The potential '
, enforcement actions' were issued as violations by the Region in April 1985. '
The resolution.of all deficiencies is being followed up by the Region.
Independent Design Review (IDR) 0n April 24, 198.5, the applicant submitted its plans for ensuring that all applicable correctiTe~ actions resulting from the Byron 1 IDI and IDR, and the ,
Clinton 1 IDR are incorp61ated into the Braidwood design. The NRC review'of this information has been completed; an NRC inspecti,on was conducted on November 18-22,a1985 to verify the proper implementation of.these corrective actions. The inspection repdrt was issued in March,1986.
. Region III Inspections .
Th'e' r e-are approximately-188 matters which require resolution by the applicant prior to fuel logd. Theseincludeopen. items, violations,10CFR50.55(e')
reportable deficiencies, allegations, unresolved items, generic letters, IE Circulars, IE Bulletins,.and 10'CFR 21' reports. There are also a number of
~
normal inspection modules that remain to.be. completed prior to fuel lo.ad in the following areas (percent. completion for each area is included): -
~".hechanical Components.(93%) .
Instrumentation (89%) .
Preop QA Program (80%)' ~ . , ,
.0perations QA Program (0%) * '
' Operatjion Staffing Inspection (10%) .
' Comparison of As-Built. Plant to FSAR Description-(50%)
Safety Committee Inspection (0%) . .,
Inspection of Operating Staff Training (0%) -
Operati.ng Procedures (40%) ~
Maintenance Procedures (0%) .
.~ Emergency Procedures-(80%) ,'
', Fire Protection (10%)
- Preop Test Program Records (0%) "
Preop Test Program Implementation (65%)
Preop Test Procedure Review (60%) ,
5 Preop Test Witnessing (85%) .
Preop Test Results Re. view (25% '
Technical Specifications Revie/) (10%)
Radiological Environmental'* Monitoring (80%) . ,
Security (25%) '
Radiation Protecti'on (90%) . .
.. Radwaste (10%) .
SERReviewandfollowup('%)
0 .
a -
Fa' g *g.
.t. " . .
. LICE.N. SING STATUS'0F BRAIDWOOD ~ Radiological and ' Chemical Confirmatory Measurements (20%)
Material Control.and Accounting'(0%) --
Emergency Pteparedness (80%)
' !Startup and I'nitial Fttel Loading Procdure Reviews (0%)
OL Appljcant TMI Inspection Requirements (0%)
S'ecurity and Safeguards -
IThe most recent security preoperational inspection was codducted on June 9-13, 1986. Three of twenty three open items were closed. All security related bulletins and circulars were closed. Security plan implementation is scheduled to begin on August 1, 1986. The next inspection in this area is scheduled for the week of August 25, 1986. ,
Radiation Protection and Radwaste '
) ~ The most recenLinspection Was conducted May 19-22, 1986. There are presently
. 24 open items. It is too'early to determine whether significant problems
- exist which may impact on fuel load. The next inspection in this area is scheduled for AupYt 1986.
Operator Licens.ing
, e Confirmation that the senior reactor operators have obtained the requisite experience on shift is required. The first group of operator examinations was
~
pompleted in. April 1986. Sixteen of seventeen Senior Reactor Operators, and six of six Reactor.0perators passed. The second group is scheduled for July .
r
. ~1986.
s Allegations ,
There are fifteen open allegation files which require Region III action. These issues are expected to be resolved prior to fuel load. .
01 Investigations .
!' The Office of Investigations 'has'six open investigation files. These items .
- l. will be pursued
- and should not affe'ct fuel load.
~ ~ ,
i Fire Protection l The NRR Site Audit and the Region III Appendix R Team inspection are scheduled l to be conducted by August 1986. One special inspection was conducted to assess
! the applicant's conformance to fire protection reguirements for receipt and l storage,of -new fuel onsite. .
Braidwood Construction Assessmen't Program (BCAP) ,
For background information on this issue, please refer to the November 15,5985' report. The final presentation to the NRC.concerning BCAP kas conducted on October 15, 1.985; the final BCAA report was issued on November 14,*1985, by
- Commonwealth Edison Company for NRC review.
~
The NRC.. review of the final BCAP
- - ' report is documented in Inspection Repor*. Nos.' 456/86003; 457/86003 dated i
June 9, 1986. -
- s. .
~
k a
. . .. .~
LICENSI'NG STATUS OF BRAIDWOOD ..
Emergenc4Preparedness Implementation ' Appraisal was conducted on May 29 --
The June Eme'rgency 13, 1986. ThePreparednesy associa ,ted report, in draft stage as of June. 24, contained approximat'ely 36 Open. Items, the majority of which had Fuel Load as the due date.for' completion of- corrective actions. Items related to: completion of severa1 emergency facilit.ies; readiness of equipment utilized by emergency
. response personnel; a'nd comp.letion of initial and remedial training by various types of emergency response personnel-(including SEs, SF, and SCREs). Multiple followup inspections are ' anticipated in order to.close these items.
The SER supplement whic'h covers Chapter 13.3 (Emergency Planning) was issued'
- in March 1986. On April 30, 1986, FEMA issued an interim finding that offsite emergency planning for the Braidwood Station provided "rdasonable assurance that .the. health. and safety qf the public can be protected." A supplemental ~
- FEMA finding should.be provided to the NRC in August 1986.
The applicant succes's. fully conducted an exer'cise of its emergency plan on
, . Novembet 6, 1985. The FEMA evaluation of State and local offsite plan .
implementation, issued April 3,1986, was prepared separately from the staff's evaluation of the applicant's. performance. No deficiencies were identified by FEMA.
5
~ '
. as O S-e O
t-4 %
4 s . p ,
. e
&n "
- ~
s
- e
,1 i .
LICENSING STATUS OF BYRON 2 Byron 2 is approximately 90% complete and the applicant's current fuel load date is October 15, 1986; however, this may be optimistic since licensee projections are late November, 1986. Byron 2 is essentially identical to Byron 1 which received its full-power license on February 14, 1985. The FES, issued April 1982, and the SER, issued February 1982, apply to both units. ~ *1 FSAR Review The FSAR review that was completed to support licensing of Byron 1 applies to Byron 2. Only very few unil-specific items, such as staffing and pre-serv. ice
, inspection,'need to be completed.
Hearings "
The hearings that were completed prior to licensing of Byron 1 applied to Byron
- 2. There are no further hearings anticipated prior to licensing Byron 2.
~
. 9 Review and evaluation of emergency plans are complete. All outstanding emergency preparedness related SER items have been resolved.
Construction Appraisal Team (CAT) Inspection An IE CAT inspection was performed from August 19 to September 20, 1985. The inspection report was issued on November 13, 1985. No pervasive breakdown in meeting construction requirements was identified. A Notice of Violation containing thrbe items was issued to the applicant on December 12, 1985. The responses received on January 24, 1986 and April 9, 1986 have been reviewed by the Region and IE, and the Region is monitoring the applicant's corrective
- actions. '
Independent Construction Verification A R-I NDE van inspection was conducted October 28 to November 8, 1985, providing independent verification of construction activities and materials through records review.and nondestructive examinations. The inspection report was issued December 18, 1985; 00 major concerns in the NDE area were identified. ,
Indepen' dent Design Review On April 24, 1985, the applicant submitted its plans for ensuring that all applicable corrective actions resulting from the Byron 1 IDI, Byron 1 IDR, and the Clinton 1 IDR are incorporated into the Byron 2 design. The NRC has completed its review of this information. An inspection of the implementation of corrective actions was completed the week of November 18, 1985'. The inspection report was issued on April 2, 1986.and concluded that corrective actions were being implemented although three items still required follow-up of completion. -
e y.
2 .
LICENSING STATUS OF BYRON 2 Region III Inspections There are approximately 100 matters which require resolution by the applicant prior to fuel load. These include open items, violations, 10 CFR 50.55(e) reportable deficiencies, allegations,. unresolved items,.IE Bulletins and 10 CFR 21 reports.
There are also a number of normal inspection modules thai remain to be completed 1.n the-following areas (percent completion for each area is included):
. Review of as-builts (90)
. HVAC(80)
. Electrical components and cable (74) .
. Instrumentation (71)
. Structural integrity test (0)
. Preop QA program (70) -
. Comparison of as-built plant to FSAR (90)
. Preop test program records (0)
. Plant procedures (50)
. Operating procedures (50)
. .Mairitenance procedures (30)
. ' Emergency procedures (0)
. Fuel receipt and storage (100)
. Fire protection (20)
. Preop test program implementation (50)
. Preop test witnessing (75)
. Preop test results review (5)
. Technical Specifications review (20)
. Radiological Environmental monitoring (30)
. Security (10)
. Radia' tion protection (40)
. Radwaste(35)
. Radiological-and chemical confirmatory measurements (70)
. SER review ~and followup (70)
Operator Licensing The first group of operation examinations is currently scheduled for July 1986.
Preoperational Testing ,
As a result of the applicant's Byron 1 Lessons Learned Program and an NRC inspection conducted in early December of the applicant's Preoperational Testing Program, Region III plans no further inspection of the Preop Test Program. The inspection basis for this decision is documented in Inspection Report 455/85045. Region III will conduct normal inspections of preoperational tests and test results. Preoperational testing of the Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) at full flow was completed February 25, 1986. Hot functional testing is complete. Integrated Leak Rate Testing is scheduled to commence .
. July 11, 1986.
~
[-
~
t LICENSING STATUS OF BYRON 2 Security A security preoperational inspection was conducted on June 24-26, 1986. There are 14 open items which must be closed prior to fuel load. No significant concerns were identified. Security lockdown is scheduled for August 15, 1986, sixty days prior to the targeted fuel load date.
AYlegations .
~
There are five allegations open at Byron.' They are expected to be closed in the next few months. There are no issues which would impact fuel load.
O O
O e
(
' f e
.e t 4
$ e e
6 g '.
D y,
4 9
4 e.
. f 0