NUREG-0117, Transcript of 800903 Meeting Re Low Power OL in Washington Dc.Pp 1-58

Transcript of 800903 Meeting Re Low Power OL in Washington Dc.Pp 1-58

ML19336A259
Person / Time
Site:	Farley
Issue date:	09/03/1980
From:	NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
To:
Shared Package
ML19336A260	List: ML19336A268 NUREG-0117, Transcript of 800903 Meeting Re Low Power OL in Washington Dc.Pp 1-58
References
REF-10CFR9.7, RTR-NUREG-0117, RTR-NUREG-117 NUDOCS 8010220274
Download: ML19336A259 (60)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:_ \\ g,.. g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION d'/ COMMISSION MEETING i i 1 In the Mat ar of: DISCUSSION AND VOTE ON FARLEY LOW POWER j OPERATING LICENSE 1 s i I DA=I: Sentember 3, 1980 PAGES: 1 - 58 j AT: Washington, D. C. l i 4 i - i ALI)ERSON REPORT 1XG. S 400 Virginia Ave., S.W. Washing en, D..C. 20024 j Telechene: (202) 554-2345 J .w

Hance;1/r&t 1-1. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA a I -2 NUCLEAR-REGULATORY COMMISSION ~ 3 4 DISCUSSION AND VOTE ON.FARLEY LOW POWER OPERATING LICENSE g 5 g 3 6l E-Nuclear Regulatory Commission E, 7 Room 1130 A '1717 H Street, N.W. l 8, Washington, D.C. d .I d 9 z, Wednesday, September 3, 1980 Ch 10 E= g 11 The Commission met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m. 3 d 12 i BEFORE: z i 3 y 13 l JOHN F. AHEARNE, Chairman of the Commission = E 14 JOSEPH HENDRIE, Commissioner

s

-D 2 15 VICTOR GILINSKY, Commissioner E g 16 PETER BRADFORD, Commissioner us y 17 5 -m 18 5" 19 + 2 1, g 20- -21 22 23 ; 1 f 24 '! I I l 25, ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

2 I NRC' STAFF PRESENT: 2 LEONARD BICKWITT, General Counsel 3 JOHN HOYLE,. Acting Secretary 4 MR. CHRISTENBERRY g 5l MR. H y n 6 'l HAROLD DENTON 7l' E WILLIAM BRADLEY LESTERKfNTNER j 8 d d 9 FRANK PAGANO si 10 l DARREN EISENHUT E 11 RICHARD VOLLMER S y 12 STEVE HANAUER E i j 13 BOB MARTIN = . "J) I4 FAUST ROSA 5 s g 15 D. F. ROSS = g 16

ri g

17 ! i 5' 18 ' l = 19 = 20. 21 .22 23 -l 24 l 25 ; j f

(

ALDERSON REPORTING COMP ANY. INC.

1 F ]D D W" o o Ju 9 fL _ S _ X fru a e 't. DISCLLW. IR This is an unofficial ::a= script of a =eeting of the Uni:ad States Nuclear Regulatory Co-dssion held on son *omber 3. 1990 in the Co= mission's offices a: 1717 E Street, N. W., Washington, 2 D. C. The =eeting was open :o public a::endance 'and observation. This transcript has so: been reviewed, cor ec:ac, or editad, and it =ay contain inaccuracies. ) The transcript is intended solely for gn=eral infor=a:1onal i purposes. As provided by 10 C7R 9.102, i: is not par. of the i formal or informal record of decision of the nat:ars discussed. 2 Izpressions of opi= ion in this ::anse:17: da no: necessarily j reflect final, deter-d-*:1ons or beliefs. No pleaddag or other paper =ay be filed vi-J1 the Co ission is any proceedi g as the resul: of or addressed :o a=y stata=ent or argn=e : contained herais, except as the - Co==ission =ay authorf:e. i I I, J t } i j 't 1 s O 1 e 0

3-1 _P._R O C E _E _D..I N _G _S j ~t 2 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: The major reason for-this morning's i 3 meetinc. ! to hear from the director of NRR regarding a proposal j 4 to give a..aw power license for the Joseph Farley Nuclear Plant I s 5 in Alabama. Harold? 6l MR. DENTON: With me this morning is the project manager R 7 for the Farley 2 ' Plant, Les Kentner on my right, and the senior j 8 resident-inspector, Bill Bradley, on my left, d 9 Les will make the presentation covering the staff's I i C 10 view of this application. E j 11 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Before we start, Bill, are you coverinj g 12 both 1 and 2? 5 y 13 MR.DENTON: Yes, sir. = 'J)g 14 MR. KENTNER: I will describe the NRC staff's review of 2 15 the Alabama Power Company's application for license to load fuel

s=

g 16 and operate Farley Unit 2' for low power tests, operating at less us y 17 l than five percent power. 5 l -5 18 My presentation will be in three parts : The plant 3 19 description, staff review, and then the staff conclusion. 5 20 The Joseph M. Farley plant is located in the southeastern ~ 21 ~ corner of Alabama near Dothan. Farley Unit 2 is similar in designl '22 to Farley Unit 1. 23 The plant has a Westinghouse nuclear steam supply system 24 with three reactor cooling loops. Rated thermo. power output is 25,.2,650. megawatts and net electrical power output is 829 megawatts. i l l l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

4 'l CHAIRMAN'AHEARNE: Les, when you say it i s similar to 2: No.1, do you mean there are significant differences or no signi-3- ficant differences but minor differences and so therefore it is not ~ 4 a replica'and is only similar to it? g 5 MR. KENTNER: It is a replica more than being similar to 6 it. For example, the design of Farley Unit 2 and Farley rin't 1 werdg 2 7-reviewed together for a construction permit and for an operating A 8 license in 1975. dd 9 The final safety analysis report has been updated for z, i o a 10 Farley Units 1 and 2, to this present date. z 11 The containment is prestressed concrete with a thin metal-3 I 12 liner for a containment of water and steam in the event of a loss o$f = 13 reactor coolant accident, a steam line break, or a feed-water line = l

n 4

g 14 break. During normal operation the containment area is at 5 9 15~ atmospheric pressure. = j 16 The emergency core cooling system uses the charging pumps us $,['17' for injection of water when the reactor water pressure is high; = t 3 18 uses tne residual heat removal pumps when,the reactor water pressurcq P - l } 19 is low. Heat is removed from the recirculated emergency core n 20 cooling system water by means of the residual heat remu/er heat } 21 exchangers.. All pumps and heat exchangers used for the emergency h 22 core - cooling system are outside of containment. 23, CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: This, I assume, is a standard large 24 containment? ' f L25_j 1

ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

5 ~ 'I MR.'KENTNER: _Yes, 2 ~ atillion cubic feet containment. 2-COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: And the design pressure -would be? 3 MR. KENTNER: The design pressure is 54 pounds per square

4. inch gauge.

S. 5 'R. DENTONi I would like to mention. that Jim Morale (?) an M 6 I gave this plant a final tour about a month ago and met with the R 7~ local officials. During that whole trip I called Mr. Bradford l 8 Mr. Bradley, and 'I find it did it again this morning. So, I d:i 9 apologize. 2o 10 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: That is one of the few names I = 5 11 can remember. 3 y 12 (Laughter. ) =} 13 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE: Spelling and all? mg 14 (Laughter. ) d' 15 g CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Part of the campaign. Les? ~ g 16 MR. KENTNER:. The next slide shows the general location of A y' 17 she Farley. plant in the Southeastern United States. It is on the N -[ 18 hhattahoochee River, which is a boundary between Alabama and E I h 19 ! Georgia. It is 15 miles north of the Alabama-Florida border. Dothar. n 20 Alabama, is about 16.5 miles west of the plant and has a population 2I between 50,000 and 60,000. Ashford, about 8 miles southwest has a-22 population of about 2,500. The total estimated population within i 23 l ten miles of the Farley plant is about 10,000. i -24 f CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Is there an Army base there? ~ - 25 l MR. KENTNER: Fort Rucker is west of Dothan. l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.

6 ~1 . CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Does it use the river for cooling, or 2-does -it have a cooling tower? J 3 MR.--KENTNERs. It has closed cycle' mechanical draft cooling 4 towers. e 5 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE : Where does it obtain the make-up N 6I water? R 7 ~ .MR. KENTNER: It obtains the make-up water from the A l_ 8-Chattahoochee River and returns blow-down from the. cooling towers 'd( 9 to.the river. zo 10 Go to Slide 5. This slide shows some of the main featurec z _.j' 11 of the plant,.the plant structures..The containment auxiliary B j 12 building,-the turbine building, diesel generator building, and the-5 y 13 switch yard = are about 4,000 feet from-the river. I 14 I The plant grade elevation is 75 to 80 feet above the 2 15 normal river level. 1 a i 2-g 16 We talked about the cooling water for the plant.when it i d i d 17-is running. The emergency cooling water is obtained from an on-g 1 5 18 siteservice-watercoolingpondyoucanseebelowtheplantbuildintj 'A { 19 there. This pond has a 30-day water supply for both shut-down 5 20 units. Alternatively, emergency cooling water can be taken from 21' the'Chattahoochee River. 22' -CHAIRMAN-AHEARNE: Where is the emergency operations .23 facility located? ~ -24~- MR.' KENTNER: The emergency operations facility,.the 25_, interim-emergency operations' facility, is.on'the site; it is in - I ~I .- ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANYJ INC. g -m y

• .s

? l I I the construction trailers right now, the interim facility. It is 2 outside the plant security fence. '3 CHAIRMAN'AHEARNE: You say that is the interim. hher'e is l 4 the. permanent? 5 g MR. KENTNER: The permanent will be in approximately the - 9 6 l! same location,- it will be on the plant proper. .Eg 7-MR. DENTON: - It is under construction, how far from.the-A j 5 plant? d n; 9 MR. KENTNER: It is within the exclusion zone, I believe, zog 10 within 4,000 feet. I do not know specifically. E h 11 MR. DENTON: We offer in our clarification letter for the n [ 12 licensee to either make it habitable or move it further out. Ea 13 5 MR. KENTNER: The plants. all have the ventilation system - a m 14 with the charcoal filters on it, and arranged so that it would be I w l g' 15 = habitable in case of an accident. m g 16 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I am afraid my attention strayed i M g ' 17 l ior a moment. I gather you are tulking about the emergency facilitaf I 2w 18 Could you just repeat where it is? ,c i s 19 l g <MR. KENTNER: It is located presently, the interim n 20 facility is located on site, but outside of the security fence. 21 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: What sort of distance?' 22 MR. KENTNER: I would estimate, just based on having been i 23 ; there several times, I would say that-it is within half a mile of 1 24 l, the plant..

25. f COMMISSIONER:GILINSKY:

And what are the plans for the i t. - ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

![: 8 1 future, concerning that facility? 2 IMR. KENTNER: They are planning and are-presently buildin% 3 and plan.to have completed by-January of next year, a permanent ~ 4' facility. It would have room for 60 people, state and local. g 5~ ' COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Where would that be? .O .6 MR. KENTNER:: This would-be on-the site. R l' 7 COMMIS'SIONER.GILINSKY : At that same location?, A j 8 MR. KENTNER:- In aoproximately the same location, yes. d t l d 9 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Well, how does that comport with

io i

y '10 our conclusions of some weeks ago about the locations of these 3 l1 facilities? it t l g 12 MR. DENTON: They will have to comply with your require-5 .2 13 ments, like everyone else-In other words, they had started - 5 = [ 14 building that facility based on the original guidance to build it { 15 close in, within a mile. = l' [ 16 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I understand the difficulty, but j v5 . ti 17 :i will they stop and build it elsewhere, or will this become one of -

s=

l l - E 18 these fortified bunkers? = 19 MR. 'DENTON : We will send them the requirements and they g 5 20 can.make their choice. They can either make it a fortified bunker i l 21 or construct-another facility. I do not know which they will do. ~22 -CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Darrell,'did you want to S k.something' 23 I MR. EISENHUT: I was just going to comment. If you 24 - recall. because. of L t.his very consideration our position on that is-i- 25 i sup for comment. Following the' comment period, we are going to.have h L -i fAf DERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. m +e v

9 1-to ' face : that question. This is the observation that we have made 2 '. before, that a number of utilities in -operating plants and' other 2 3 facilities are following the previous guidance. That new position 4 that is out on the street is a chance in guidance and we have to a 5 recognize-that, as will the utilities. N. 6! The comment period is not up yet and we have - to sit down i g n 7 and finalize your position on that question. With our present. M l 8 requirements on the street we require Farley 1 to be building this d c 9 building. l io 10 In fact, you will recall the latest Commission guidance E _jj 11 is to have this built and operating by 1 of ' 81. i y 12 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Wait a minute. We are requiring E j 13 them to be building the facility that they are building when we = l 14 are thinking about where to put it? w E r 15 I mean, I realize the utility may in a sense get penalizej e= g 16 for taking the initiative and get their facility built early. A d 17 i MR. EISENHUT: In fact, this is a common problem, if you l 18 l remember, with several of the 1181 requirements. You will recall C~ M = U 19 late last year when we met on the short-term lessons learned, we g n 20 talked about - things like Texaport Center (?), EOFs, and we had a set 21 o f ' requirements. So, the utility who is.very ambitious in ful-- 22 filling _ that on schedule, who is really trying to make the schedule 23! that was. laid on them last year,is now going to be the one that i i 24 finds itself actually in the worst situation. That is an obser-25, vation' I have made~ before, you will recall, that this -is something i i I . ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. 1

10 -l. we will havekto -factor into our decision on EOF, Texiport Center, 21 and a number of those' facilities. 3 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:- I am not sure I.still understand 4 the' situation ~- at least I hope I' don't. I'am afraid to. e 5 MR. DENTON: This is one.where the views have changed. A ei j 6 The original view was to push them all to be fairly close in for a R 7 ease of communication, and so - forth, s.j 8 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: What concerns me is not uhat we d 9 had a different view earlier, and we thought about it and decided z O 10 that view ought to change. But what I seem to -be hearing is that 5 j lI we are urging the-utility to do what we no longer think is the 3 ( 12 right thing to be doing in order to meet a previous deadline. s 1 j 13 MR. DENTON : The previous deadline applied to Unit 1. 5 14 l g COMMISSIONER HENDRIE: So far as I know, the deat.:.ane has 2 15 not been officially rescinded, has it?

s=

g 16 l MR. DENTON: That is correct. us I d 17 ! COMMISSIONER HENDRIE: So, it still stands, at least as a f 18 nominal, deadline coming up the 1st of next year. People are out P 3 19 there. who are -licensed, that are striving desperately to meet that M 20' requirement,:you know,~and continue to charge in what we in our 21 infinite wisdom now may consider to be the wrong directian. 22, i ~(Laughter.) 1 23 ; MR. DENTON:- No, I prefer to.think'that they will have I !24 additional 1 building' space. 25. ; - (Laughter. ) j. - ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

I 11' q l . MR.' DENTON:- The letter that they received in the. spring 2 or the. fall of last year was on Unit 1. So, that is what the 3 facility was driving a'. We have not rescinded that.on Unit 1. 4 Now, obviously -we all recognize the new direction we are g5 going and the paper work has not caught up with it yet. 9 h 0 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:- Harold, if a utility were to come in R

• S 7

to you and say, "Do we -have a 1181 requirement from this other A') 8 letter,. guidance, directive?. However, given the fact that the d d 9 2. Commission apparently is - rethinking its position, we would like to ~ o h 10 be relieved of that, have that put in abeyance. " What is NRR's = 'I position? 3 Y I2 MR. DENTON: I think that would be good cause shown for =3 13 a new date. 5= m 5 I4 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE : You have to come to the Ccmmission w E g 15 for-relief on any of those dates? = E 10 MR. DENTON: I would plan to, yes. ^ l I7 l COMMISSIONER HENDRIE : As I' recall it, we were very stern { 18 l that there would not be any slacking off by allowing the staff to cw I9 g permit people off the hook, but only the mighty intelligences here n 20 at this table could afford that kind of relief. 2I (I,aughter. ) 22' COMMISSIONER HENDRIE : I commented at the time that we 23 ere ibuilding straitjackets that we would subsequently spend a year w i 24! un-doing, one by one. That is the reason I make these comments. 1 25f -CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Have you had any such requests? l I ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

12-

)

MR. EISENHUT: - Remember, we f are going to be sending you ~2 a. clarification letter sometime, hopefully this week, that is-going 3~ to address a number ~of these _ issues, and in fact the 1181 require-4 ments. This-item is-not unique. e 5 - As I said before, - this-utility finds itself in a situatiosi 3n~ .jj 6 probably like another 15 or 20 other operating facilities today R' 8 7' where they are building a facility maybe within the-first. mile. A { 8-The. comment period on our report begins, I believe, latar in d =- 9 September, S'eptember. 23rd, or so. iog 10 It will still be a few weeks, or a short period of time, t 3 h 11 'for the staff.to come back to the Commission; the Commission S f 12 deliberates on it and comes out with a new requirement. It is .5 j 13 going to be very, very close. m l 14 So, therefore the only practical approach that we can 5 2 15 i see coming down the road.is in fact to change the 1181 requirement. a= ] j - 16 So, in this area we will likely be proposing this change. -A y 17 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Have you, though, had any request from N 18 any utility specifically on this? E 17 101. EISENHUT: Yes, we have-had a number of discussions n 20 with' utilities.on this very issue, probably over the last three or-h 121 four months. l A' number of utilitier have. in fact come in and 22 spec _fically appealed _our position. 23, ' CHAIRMAN AHEARNE : What have you donc with those appeals? '24 l MR..EISENHUT:. We went out for comment on our' new position l -{ - 25 l That~isithe approach, it is being held in abeyance. We have not' l L. ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

1 13 1 encouraged nor 39.scouraged them. 2 . CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Then, you will get that to us this weel 3 MR. EISENHUT: We will get all the other items except 4 the EOF because on the - EOF we have to wait for the comment period. l y 5 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: _But the basic concept?- 0j 6 -MR. EISENHUT: The basic concept you should get this week; R 7 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE : Why shoald that not include the issue nl 8, of at least sliding the EOF date? d I 9 9 MR. EISENHUT: It probably will in concept. In fact, 4 z Og 10 we will certainly address all of the 1181. So, in concept we E I h 11 will be facing this. E N I2 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Well, why not make it explicit? 5 y 13-MR. DENTON: We can do that. You will get it this week. m 14 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE: In the meantime there is a trailer 2-15 operation that covers it, which is located within half a mile; 5 g 16' correct? M d 17 MR. KENTNER: Yes. I think if you look on the slide N \\ w g 18 there, there is ' a plot for the information center. I believe it- =8 19 g-is in that general area, maybe a little less than half a mile away. n l 20 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE : So that for wherever we eventually 21 settle down, and whether or not what is currently under con-22 struction ends up being used as an emergency operations. facility, 23 there is in fact an emergency facility sort of continuously i 24~ available. 25, .MR. KENTNER: Yes, that is true. i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. .L

i 14 1., The-next slide shows the chronology of the staff's reviewj. 2 The application to construct and operate Units 1 and 2 of the Farlef 3 plant was filed on October 15, 1969. After review by the staff and 4 a public hearing in Dothan and a construction permit, two con-g 5 struction permits were issued in August of 1972 - one for Unit 1 0 6 and one for Unit 2. R 7 The final safety analysis report was docketed in August A j 8 uaf 73 and the staff safety evaluation report was issued in May of dd 9 1975. io 10 Unit 1 was completed and an operating license issued in II June o f 19 77. E y 12 Three supplements to the staff's safety evaluation report 5 j 13-had been is sued at the time Unit 1 was licensed. The staff's a m5 'l4 current review of the Alabama Power Company's application to operate 15 Farley Unit 2 covers issues which have been raised since Supplement ~. t 16 INo. 3 to the safety evaluation report was completed. iw g - 17 ! Several major reviews, such as fire protection re-N I h 18 ! evaluation, were completed for both Units 1 and 2 during this time P ] "g 19 ' interval. The' staff's active review of outstanding issues in n 20 !Farley 2's-operating license application began in January of this 1 2I year. i l 22 The non-Three Mile Island issues and non-TMI issues -- I 23 [ CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Let me see if I understand what you 24 {have. just said. You actually started the review of the operating. - 25 license application in January of this year? 1 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

15 h j 10R~. KENTNER: Yes, a review of the outstanding iss'ues on a 2 Farley Unit - 2,- yes, in January of this year. 3 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE : You would, though,. class the actual 4 docketing of the ' operating license request as back in 1973? ~ 5 MR. KENTNER: Yes, when the final safety analysis report ) e.gn t d 6 was filed. e N.' 8 7. The bulk of the operating license review for Farley ( 3 8 8 Unit 2 was completed along with Farley Unit 1 in 1975. n-d d 9 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD : - I am assuming, Harold,.for 3 I 10 purposes of my own understandi..g of this, that this is really a verf 3 5 11 sim'lar review' pattern to North Anna, that We run into the same d 12 sorts of relationships between the Unit i review and the Unit 2. z 13 MR. DENTON : That is correct, and I think similar also 1 E E 14 to Salem.. The review was.done for both units at essentially the w b! 15 same time. Our practice was to issue an operating license when s 7 16 construction was-complete. I think it is entirely analogous to 3d North Anna. In fact, it may be a little older application than the { 17 = 18 North Anna application. P P 19 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD :' If in fact it is older, does that 5 20 make any significant difference in the relationship between the 21 standard review plan and: the review that was done? 12, MR. DENTON: I have asked Lester to go back and check, I 23! to see how good our documentation was -in meeting Commission i 24 regulations. MR. ' KENTNER: Yes, I have reviewed it. Of course, I I 25l I r l i t l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

161 \\ 1 have been 'the -project : manager on Farley Units 1 and 2 since they 2 came in for a construction permit, except for a period from 1976 3 to last year. I 4 Yes, -I have' reviewed the compliance, particularly with e 5l design criteria and other Commission regulations. I found that-0 6 the application of Alabama Power Company has responded and complied ( F 7 with these regulations and I believe that it meets them. Al 8 MR. DENTON: Talking about the degree of documentation, d {- 9 Les, I think it is comportable to the North Anna if we look at our 2c. g 10 SER and look to see specific findings of compliance wuth GECs and 3 h 11 other regulations, that it is an analogous situation. It did not 3 f 12 look a lot different to me in terms of the specific findings on =, E 13 RCRs. ~= h 14 MR. EISENHUT: Just an observation. The North Anna 2 15 situation, I think, is very, very close to this. North Anna, I 5 ,T 16 ibelieve, was also docketed in 1973, which means they are essentially w b^ 17 identical, the same approach was used. You would not run into any Sc g 18 istep function in the approach. I think the same thing will hold. l c h 19, MR. KENTNER: In our safety evaluation report issued in M l 20 11975 for Units 1 and 2, in a bibliography you see listed those 21 sections. of standard review plan which were specifically addressed 22 in the review at that time. As many as had been completed were l 23 'done. 24 Also, in reviewing the documentation, beginning the 1st 25 ' of this year, on the Farley Unit 2 review I' found that many o f the ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. A

Rl] 17 J 1 : issues'that had arisen since Supplement No. 3'was issued.in 1977 2 when' Unit'l was licensed, many of.these~ issues have been~ addressed 3: and resolved on the Unit 1 application for both Units 1 and 2. 4. Alabama Power Company has supplied the documentation for ~ g. 5 both Units 11and_2 by updating the final safety analysis report and-S h - @ ' c 6. lamendments. In' major-review areas like fire protection, over-R' eS 7 pressurization,_we have reviewed these things on Units 1 and 2 8 8 together. d i i 9 2, So, I feel the documentation of the review is good. og 10 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: When you say that the standard i5: ) 4 11 review plan-sections that were completed as of ' 75 were applied, - is j f 12 as I have-come to understand the application of the standard reviewg f 13 plan, that does not mean that everything in those sections was m E I4 looked at. { 15 MR. KENTNER: That's right. =: 3[ 162 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Now, when you say you, yourself, d j 17 reviewed the applications against the Commission regulations, that E .3 18 ~ does not mean that you-or people under you have read every P-19 g regulation'and read the application against every regulation, does n 20 it? What you are really saying is that in those areas which you I 2l checked-there have not been problems. ~ 22 ~ MR. _ KENTNER: Yes. It is more an audit than a complete-123 j reading of all, of-the L regulations. i 24' -CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: That is - a standard audit approach. 25 ? COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: 'Right. ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. t

~ 18 g 1-MR. KENTNER:. The staff in Alabama Power Company have ~ 2! received and ' studied the documents related -to the Three Miles 3 Island accident, for example, NUREGi 0660 '. the TMI-2. action. 4 Plan, and when the requirements were identified for a new operating 3 5i license, Alabama Power Company prepared its responses in a report N 6 dated' June 20, 1980. R 7 The staff has reviewed Alabama Power Company's June 20 A y 8 responses against the NRC requirements set forth :in NUREG 0694, d:i 9 TMI-related requirements for new operating licenses. i Oy 10 Additional information was obtained during the review _Z) 11 and the staff met with Alabama Power Company at the plant and in its B y 12 corporate offices in Birmingham, and in the NRC staff's office in E 13 Bethesda. E. l 14 Farley Unit 2, as you can see from the schedule there, E 15 Farley Unit 2 can be-completed and ready for fuel loading by late 2 g-16,September, and can be ready for escalation to full power during the d I i 17 ilast two weeks of December. 18 MR. DENTON: We are emphasizing here this is a "first", = l 19 l jand that the staff's review was completed before the plant ii 20 lconstruction is completed. 21 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE: A milestone. 22 CHAIPJ1AN AHEARNE: Now, when you say it is a "first," do 23 I' You mean it is not'n..'rmally? 4 24 MR. DENTON: Since TMI. i .25l CHAIRMAN AHEARNE : In the past that was not so.. l l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

k 19 i i I MR. DENTON: Yes, it was. We tried to complete it a 2 month or so ' ahead of time. We would not actually issue any 3 license, even if you approved it, until they met all of the complet{ 4 requirements. e 5 MR. KENTNER: The next slide shows the scope of review 0-( 6, of non-TMI issues. The scope of review covers the usual issues for R \\ eE 7 the time interval between mid-1977 and today. Farley Unit 2 is [ Ml 8 similar to Farley Unit 1.. Changes made to Unit 1 have also been d q 9 made to' Unit 2. As I mentioned, staff has revie..ed both units I 10 concurrently on several major issues. f z 2 I 11 Nuclear steam supply is a Westinghouse three-loop unit Q3 g '12 with no novel features. 5 13 I Two of the major issues for Farley 2 are our confirma-m 5 I4 tory review of environmental qualification and electrical 5] 15 equipment, and 're-evaluation of the Farley plant fire protection = g 16 program. \\ A d 17 l The staff has begun a review of the environmental 5 u* 18 qualification of safety-related equipment in accord with the _c8 I9 s Commissioners' memorandum and order dated May 23, 1980. 5 20 Staff-requested Alabama Power Company to provide the 1 2I ' results of'its review of environmental qualification documentation 22 for_all saf ~.v-related electrical equipment by September 15, 1980. 23 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: What is it we will have by 24 l September 15?: I 25l MR. KENTNER: This is the results of their review in - ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.

) .I l 20 I accordance with NUREG -058 (a). 2 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: This is what we would otherwise : 3 be. requiring on November 1st? 4 MR. KENTNER: Yes. The reason is that we wanted to have e 5 a preliminary review of this information before full power opera-N 6{ tion. E l 7 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: And what is our understanding of M j 8 the. situation now? d:! 9 MR. KENTNER: We understand that the equipment is t i O 10 environmentally qualified. 3 h 1I COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: But there were some items which 3 g 12 apparently had to be replaced, and I would like to know why.

That, Ej 13 presumably, is the result of the utility's own review?

h 14 MR. EISENHUT: The only item identified in the safety 5 2 15 evaluation is in fact the Barton transmitter. ' The utility has in' N j 16 this case submitted to a Sept; ember 15 date, or attempting to make us 6 17 I the September-15 date. It may well turn out, as you go through the E=

n 18 final turnings of the paper that the only item we have right now

_c 19 is the Barton transmitter.- M 20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: So, aside from those transmitters 21 we do not really know at this point, and will not know until 22 September 15. or -whenever the utility makes its submittal, what 23 the status is on environmental qualification of equipment. 24 MR. KENTNER: Well, this is a confirmatory review. We 25 j may: find some things, I expect.we will, that will want modifying. I ~j l i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. l

21 l . COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:- I am'just trying to understand .2 how much we know right ~ now about the status of the environmental 3 qualification of the equipment. 4 MR. KENTNER: LWell, the environmental qualification has j 5 j been reviewed in 1975 in our safety evaluation report, We have e.* i j. 6'l reviewed-the environment qualification against the-standards and R

• E 7

requirements th at-were in place at that time. s j 8 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I understand that. But in going d y 9 back to plant after plant we are discovering that that review really zo h 10 was not as rigorous as it might have been. = 1 Il MR. EISENHUT: Our standard approach is that as a full Y 12 power requirement - that is before they go to full power - we would 5 13 require that we - the staff - has done a review of the documentation m 5 14 to in fact verify ~ that the qualification is there. .} 15-In fact this plant, it turns out, from a practial stand- = d 16 point will be a little bit better off than the other plants in the -w f I7 ' past, and that is because we will have the November 1 submittal E* 18 prior to the full power decision. P" 19 g j So, we in fact expect to be a lot farther along in the n 20 jaudit review, even though February 1 is our operative date. Ne 21 are going to see what we can do with these plants to sort of get 1 22 caught up with the transition. 23 l But as to the low power license, it is up to five percent 24lbecause of much lower risk, we are relying on the utility's-program

25 in its past qualification.

i - ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.

22' I COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Thank you. 2 MR. F2NTNER: All right, moving on to the fire protection 3 re-evaluation. This re-evaluation and' the procedures at the Farley ) 4 plant, for the Farley plant, were submitted by Alabama Power Companf i 5 g on September' 15, 1977. Subsequently, four amendments _were sub-9 i 6 mitted to bring the program and equipment into conformance with R

• E 7

our branch technical position ASB-925-1, guidelines for fire j 8 protection'in nuclear; plants. I l l d ~. 9l Our-fire protection safety s,aluation report for Farley E h 10 g its 1 and 2 was issued in April, .279. In our safety evaluation n = II report, the fire protection safety evaluation report, we required t I I2 several changes to be made in the Farley plant fire protection 5" I3 5 program. These include improving the fire resistance capability m 14 l for fire doors, dampers, fire barriers, and barrier penetration u seals; installation of additional sprinklers ar.d smoke detectors; f l 15 = g 16 an4 7rovision of equipment and procedures to bring the plants to a A h_17 safe cold shut-down in the event of a damaging fire in either = i { 18 the cable-spreading room or the main control room. P" 19 g All.the changes required by the staff will be completed n 20 prior to fuel loading, except one, some smoke detectors in the 21 auxiliary building, Imainly in the hallways, which could not be ~ 22-properly located.until cable design was completed and installed. 23 l L'I addition of a separate water header to supp y hose - -Two, i 24 l stations in cable tunnels betwe,en the diesel generator building i 25 ; and the auxiliary building. i i. ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, I ~ t l

l 4 h 23 1 The fire protection code requires a separate header for 2 hose stations and sprinklers, and this must be corrected. 3 Both these modifications will be completed prior to 4 November 1st of 1980 in accord with the Commission's memorandum and e 5 order of May 23, 1980. 9 d 6! COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Let's see, the SER itself says e R 7 they will be completed before initial criticality. A 8 8 MR. KENTNER: Yes, it is about the same date. But the N d d 9 required date is November 1, 1980. i -o 10 MR. ' DENTON : How do you reconclile the two? If the E 5 11 ' licensee is committed to a schedule which completes them before d 12 initial criticality? Ecd 13 MR. KENTNER: I believe, too, we would like to have it o= E 14 completed before initial criticality and before they go up for the x 5 2 15 low power test because I would like to have all the fire protection 5 g 16 equipment in place. A y' 17 It so happens that November 1 is about the same as

5 5

18 initial criticality, and certainly before the low power testing. 5 0 19 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD : So, in fact it would be completed A 20 before initial. criticality. 21 MR. KENTNER: Yes. 22' MR. EISENHUT: Yes, from a practical-standpoint. You 23, recall, this is a license condition that is required to be done; 24 it is a-good-point. We ea5Lly could say, November 1st, Lor initial 25l criticality, whichever is earlier. From a-practical standpoint it ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

24 1 is the same. 2 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Can I take you back to the 3 environmental qualification safety-related equipment for a moment? 4 There is a statement in the SCR supplement on page 30 ; which states e 5-that, "We believe that this additional review will confirm our Evj-6 earlier conclusion regarding the adequacy of the environmental R I 7 qualification documentation and therefore that it need not be s j 8 completed prior to licensing this unit for low power operation." d =} 9 I can understand the fact that we have set a schedule zoy 10 which requires the utility to do certain things by November and 2 j 11 we make a judgment in February, and we decided not to offer that a p '12 l sch'edule. =l 13 But you seem to be going beyond that, saying that you = = g 14 have reason to believe that in fact everything is all right. I u '= 2 15 wonder what the basis for reaching that conclusion is, particularly 5 g' 16 since' we have discovered in the case of the transmitters that they 4 w p 17 had to be replaced. 5cy 18 MR. KENTNER: This refers back to the 1975 safety 5 19 g evaluation, our review at that time. This statement refers back 5 20 when it says, "Our conclusions, we believe, are the same. " It 21 refers back to the,1975 safety evaluation. 22 ' When we looked at the documentation, it was not as 23 ; thorough a review as we are going through now, but we did look in 24-l the documentation and ' at that time, based on our review and audit, i 25 i we. found that - the environmental. qualification was satisfactory, i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

'l 25 I except for the' Barton transmitters. That was an outstanding issue 2 in the safety evaluation report in '75 in Supplements 1, 2 and 3, 3 and is.just now resolved in Supplerant 4 for Unit 2 by the replace-4 ment of the' Barton transmitters with modified transmitters, and I I e 5 test results to show that. O I j 6l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Thank you. \\ R 7 'MR. VOLLMER:. Just to amplify a little bit on what Les aj 8 said. The review at that time was more limited, it was not based do 9 on 588 or newer guidelines. Y 10 It was the type of a review where some of these plants 3_ j 11 were already operating. Over the full power requirement we have 3 y 12 the same type of review that has been condu cted on North Anna and 5 13 Sequoyah to assure ourselves that all of this equipment does indeed 14 meet the requirements of the similar guidelines and will also _b 2 15 perform an audit at the plant site with some more detail on some g 16 of the specific areas to see that they are backed up by reports w d 17 and specific documentation, and/or adequate analyses if these 5 5 18 reports are not available. ? 19 i So, prior to full power we will have had the type of M 20 information that was required previously for license plans, and l '21 we will be in a position to ' issue an SER on that by February. 22 MR. DENTON: I guess in conclusion, I do n6t know of 23 any reason why.they are in any better shmpe than dae last few 24 plants _that you.have reviewed, except for the passage of time. So, t 25 I would expect that when we complete the review we might find the i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.

1 26 l I same kind of thing that we found in other plants. 2 COMM7 ;SIONER GILINSKY: Well, I think we all certainly 3 hope when we review the results our finding and everything is okay. 4 But it seems to me when we have gone back and looked at these items e 5, more carefully in quite a number of plants it turned out that there A9 3 6 were pieces of equipment that had to be changed, retested, or R 7 whatever. I wonder if.you are not getting ahead a little bit of A j 8 the facts here. d 9 MR. DENTON: I would like to note, in that cane we should io g 10 not be referencing back to the old reviews, I think we should just E j 11 say what we are going to do and require. k y 12 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Yes, we set ourselves a certain 5 d 13 schedule and we are proceeding on that basis. = l 14 MR. KENTNER: On the next slide the scope of review of 5 2 15 TMI-related issues is that provided in new Reg. 0694. The require-5 g 16 ments considered were those for fuel loading and low power testing. W d 17 .Of these requirements six have been selected for pre-5 18 sentation. = C 19 g With regard to emergency planning, Alabama Power Company n 20 has submitted a plan -on February 23, 1977 for Farley Units 1 and 2, 21 which we 'have reviewed and found acceptable because it meets 22 Appendix E~to 450, and the regulatory. position statements or 23, regulatory guide 1.101. 24 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Can you tell'me something about 25 ; the population surrounding the plant? I f i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

1 1 27 ~ 1 MR. KENTNER: Yes. Within ten miles the population is 2 around 10,000 people. 3 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Thank you. 4 MR. KENTNER: - The Federal Emergency Management Agency e 5 has reviewed Alabama and Georgia emergency plans and concluded, M f e 6 based on its knowledge of the emergency plans of the State of R { 7 Alabama and of Early(?) County, Georgia, that the NRC staff's Al 8 recommendation for licensing to permit low power testing appears d d 9 reasonable, ig 10 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Could you say a few words about the-2 l 11 status of the review of those because, as I read the FEMA letter, l j 12 it seemed to me what they were saying was that insofar as low 5 y 13 ! power testing is concerned they have no problems, they interpose = l l 14 no objection. But that they have not really completed a review g 2 15 which would be required for full power. Y y 16 So, I am interested in what is the status of that. M d 17 MR. PAGANO: The FEMA review was done against State { 18 plans that were not.deyeloped in accordance with our current =. 3 19 guidance. However, they worked diligently with Alabama and the i n 20l State of Georgia and now have plans designed where they are just I 21I about to submit 1 them formally to FEMA for their formal review, on l 22 or about the middle of-this month. -23 CHAIRMAN' AHEARNEi. Will there..be a requirement for a i 24l drill before the full power? l 25 ; MR. PAGANO: Yes, sir. That has not evolved yet, that f . ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. a

28 I scenario has not been developed. 2 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: But that is similar to the North Anna 3 caso? 4-MR. PAGANO: Exactly. g 5 MR. DENTON: One aspect that might be unique here, Frank, E 3 6 is the fact that it is across the river from another State, as R 7 compared to North Anna, which was sort of in the center of the Al 8 State. This does involve more cooperation between two parties. d q '9 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Some of the planning, at least, also $g 10 looks like it -- does it come down into Florida? 1 j 11 MR. PAGANO: Yes, sir, if you go 50 miles you are in 3 y 12 Florida. = 13 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Well, even the ten miles, does it 14 just barely miss it? 2 15 MR. PAGANO: No, it does not, not to my knowledge. E g 16 MR. KENTNER: It is 15 miles from the Florida border, w d 17 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: I guess that does end up meaning 2 5 18 there has to be some coordination. -? A 19 g hm. PAGANO: There has to be some coordination with a 20 Florida and communication, but. the major players will be in the 21 States of. Alabama and Georgia. We are developing the same kinds of 22 problems - as with the Sequoyah plant. 23!! MR. KENTNER: With regard to low power testing,' Alabama 2<4 Power-Company has.committedLto perform special low power tests 25 ;similar to those conducted at North Anna II and Sequoyah. Instead i f ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

29 1 of performing Test 8, which is the establishment of natural 2l circulation from stagnant conditions, Alabama Power Company will 3 train operators on a simulator that has been modified to incorporatC 4 system responses found during the same test at Sequoyah. 5 The staff finds Alabama Power Company's proposal accept-e U f 6! able. R d 7 COMMISSIONER.GILINSKY : Why is that choice preferable froE Nl 8 the utility's point of view? I d 0 9 MR. DENTON: I think this is identical to the North Anna 8 5 g 10 where it was only in that first case that we wanted the test done. E g 11 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Apparently there is some value 8 i l g 12 in the utility staff going through this, if they will perform this 4 13 test on a simulator. h 14 MR. KENTNER: I think that there is less risk of equipmend 5 g 15 damage. You are talking about starting natural circulation from x y 16 stagnant conditions.- There may be some risks they would rather i-d l j d 17 I not put their own' equipment to. E l a j w 18 MR. HANAUER: Steve Hanauer. There are two reasons for =H l } 19,doina this. One is that to do it right it takes special instrumen-M L 20 l tation which we had rigged at Sequoyah and do not have at these l 21 other plants. 22 The other is that there is a certain risk that we would 1 23 { rather not incur, and we are willing to take the somewhat lower i 24lIorder of training on this simulator as a result. It is better in 25 ltheplant, but we think in balance it-is okay on the simulator for i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.~

30 I this test. 2 MR. KENTNER: Let's proceed to the < shift manning require-3 ments. 4 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: I would like you to cover that with a e 5 little bit of detail if you could becauce, at least according to h j 6I the document there seems to be an essential weak spot. R b 7 MR. KENTNER: I think if Dr. Hanauer would like to A j 8 cover that one? dy 9 MR. HANAUER: I have some backup material. Since 2 Oy 10 we wrote the' SCR/ we have the results of the examinations, and II' also some additional submittals from the applicant. I have here Y 12 four backup view graphs. I do not know what the procedure is for E" 13 5 getting them around the room. Mr. Hoyle? m z 5 I4 You.see here on this first backup view graph the results 5 15 of the examination. We have ten licensed senior operators and E I6 eleven licensed reactor operators, since four of those who failed w i h 17 the senior examination passed the junior part of the examination. 18 l E 3 l That leaves us in a rather better situation than appeared -= I N 19 i g a week ago. If you will.then look at backup slide No. 2. Here n 20 on the right-hand side is the result of the examination I just told 21 you about. Of the ten licensed seniors, six are available for 22 shift work, and four work.in the plant engineering status. Nine of i 23 : the ' eleven licensed reactor operators are available for shift work. 24 This2is not a sufficient quantity to be in full con-25 { formance with our July 31 ratchet of the shift manning. ALDERSON REPORTING COMP ANY, INC.

31 1 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Steve, I am having difficulty followin% l i l 2 your middle column. You are saying, as I read it, for five shift 3 schedules -- 4 MR. EANAUER: Yes, there is an artifact in there which I i i e 5 will tell you about. A e.' j 6 On the top line for seniors, the requirements which we R 7' laid on on July 31 would require two seniors licensed on Units 1 j

8. and 2, and one licensed on Unit 1.

But, as you see, they do not dd 9 have this, and they have made an alternative proposal. iOh 10 on the reactor operators, we are fulfilling our July 31 E l 5 11 requirements, two licensed on both units and the third one licensed l <3 y 12 on Unit 1 alone. But becduse of the way the shif t turn runs, they. 5j 13 can do five shifts with nine actual people instead of ten. = l l 14 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Also, the way the chart seems to read s 2 15 is that it requires fewer senior reactor operators if both are 5 g 16 licensed than if Unit 1 alone is licensed. A g 17 MR. HANAUER: No, sir, those are cumulative, not either 5 l s 18 or. 5 { 19 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE : In other words, 15 are required if 5 20 one or two are licensed. 7 l 21 MR. HANAUER: Fifteen total are required, that is corrects 22 Let me go. back, it is even more complicated than that. What we ~23 l have required on our July 31 letter is ten seniors, all of them 24 licensed on both~ units. They do not have that, and they therefore ) 25 ; propose an. alternative, using an extra senior on every shift to I i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. l

32 1' make up for the fact that they are-deficient in the number of 2 seniors licensed on both units. 3 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: So, instead.of having one person 4 licensed on both, they would have two people, each licensed on one? g 5 MR. HANAUER: That's correct. The relief would be 0 3 6, licensed only on Unit 1, but he would be the person who roves R 7 through th'e plants, and the plants are esseatially identical. He j 8 has been trained in the significant differences. d d 9 So, this is not, for the seniors, in complete conformance io 10 with our July 31 requirements. Many utilities have been caught 3j 11 short by this. It takes several years to make a senior operator 3 y 12 and the pipelines have in them what they have in them. 5 y 13 ! On operating plants we have allowed a year and-a-half's l [ 14 ' leeway. For :he near-term. operating licenses we require something 2 15 more, and this third senior operator on shift is what they nave w= g 16 proposed. W d 17' MR. DENTON: Let me try to explain it the way I see it.- 18 I find it satisfactory. During operation of both units they will r G 19 have in the control room an SRQ-licensed on Unit 1. and an SRO-A 20 licensed on Unit 2'at all times. These are almost identical 21 control-rooms and almost identical plants. 22 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Wait a minute. 23, MR. HANAUER: Single. control room, different units in 24-the different ends. But those control stations are essentially l 25 ' identical also.

ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.

33 1 - MR..DENTON: They are right to right, they are operated 2 the same way. You recall,.we wanted ~two SROs in a single unit planG 3 so that one SRO could walk the' station and be aware of it. 4~ ~ So,.they will have an SRO available to walk the plant,

g

5. except he will not be licensed on Unit 2, he will be licensed.on 8

6, the sister unit, Unit 1. I think those plants are so identical in. R 7 terms of mechanical hardware, I'do not really have any trouble with A l l 8 making the duty station for the Unit 2 'SRO the control room, in O q 9 6 f fect.- He' will be getting reports from this SRO who is walking z C L g 10 Unit 2, who is licensed on Unit 1, on a regularL basis. E i = l 4 II. CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Now, -these numbers you have here on thd it - y 12 right-hand side, Steve, those are their latest as a result of-l 5 .ag 13 last week's passing? i = l 14 .MR. HANAUER: Yes, sir. b .15 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: So that they are still just right on l j 16 the margin. i ( $[ 17 ! MR '.- HANAUER: They are on the margin, and two additional 5 .i

n -18 view graphs will show this more graphically.

j i p "g 19 l No. 3 shows the situation for reactor operators. As you 20, can'see, they just meet the requirements now, but starting in l i 21 roughly ~next ' spring more people come out of the pipeline and they-L 22 have what we believe to be a satisfactory program. l- - 23 ~, - COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: What was the reason-for the 1 24 iequirement that there be-operators who are licensed on both units? i !25 MR.'HANAUER:.,The: requirement is that there be-operators t -~ ? ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. I .~.

34 I licensed on each unit, and relief operators licensed on each unit. 2 Since it is one control room, we allow them to use an 3 operator licensed on both units as the relief. For practical reasoa 4 they have in fact taken the tests which license them on both units, s 5 and that-is why. it appears that way on the list. j 6l COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Thank you. R 7 MR. HANAUER: The situation on senior operators,. shown M j 8 on view graph 4 is, as you can see, deficient at the present time dQ9 since our requirements simply interpreted would require ten and thef z Og 10 now have only six. We have accepted the extra operator as Mr. El 11 Denton described. 3 y 12 You also see here the projection in the pipeline, which is El 13 not altogether satisfactory. For more than a year the situation is = i g 14 l projected to be marginal and we intend to require the company to 1 A j 2 15 do better in this pipeline as soon as it can be done, given the a= j 16 time lags for the training. I had oral assurance this morning that w d 17 other candidates are in fact available and they do plan to put E I 2 18 more. people in the pipeline than they committed to in the letter [ E i 19 which is being graphically shown here. M i f 20 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Steve, when you have a line, for 21 example on there where you have " requirement." The requirement l 22 has nothing to do - or does it - with such-things as vacation, or 23j percentage'of time. I f 24 MR. HANAUER: The requirement is simply the number of f 25 j people-on shift, multiplied by the number of shif ts. If the l L b 1 I ALDERSON_ REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

1 35 1 situation is marginal, then if people get sick or people go on i 2 vacation, this has to -be compensated for with overtime, or calling 3 in o f shif ts. 4 I point out that this is based on five shifts, which has e 5 some margin in it already since the plante can be run on four N 6 eight-hour shif ts with only a minimal amount of overtime. R 7 The entire proposal from the Applicant and the entire 3] 8 plant is based on eight-hour shifts, which is good, and on five d 9 shifts, which allows for training, essentially, continuously; and z ( cy 10 has an allowance for vacations built into it. E h 11 What we do not have here is any substantial allowance 3 y 12 for people who fit in the pipeline failing tests; for people g 13 l resigning, and the like. These things happen, and therefore the = m 14 situation I would describe for all of 1981 as barely acceptable. 5 5 2 15 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: I assume they have a good health-care w= \\ j 16 program. A d 17 (Laughter. ) w 5 k E 18 MR. HANAUER: I always hope so. E i 19 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Preventive medicine. n 20 MR. DENTON: I think management recognizes their I 21 marginal acceptability. They do plan to purchase a simulator, do 22 they not, Steve? 23 but. HANAUER: Yes, sir. i .24 MR. DENTON: And they have some other unique features, I 25{ such as, I: understand, they intend to pay employees slightly more l J ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. i

1 36 1 I for the same skill level who stay at Dothan than to move to 2 Birmingham, for example, to provide some incentives within the l 3 company to stay at the plant, as opposed to the headquarters. They l 4 have a rather ambitious program to completely staff up, not only h e 5 in operators but across the board in all the other skills they needq t g, j 6 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Thank you. R 7 MR. KENTNER: If we can go back to the slide on TMI i 7.l 8 issues. The next item there that is shown is a control room design l d Ci 9 which was reviewed by staff and its consultant to identify human zc l 10 factor deficiencies. 1 z l = 11 The team of staff reviewers made a five-day audit at 3 l j 12 the Farley 2 plant, including assessment of control and display .j 13 l panel layout, enunciated design, labeling of panel components, and l mg 14 usability of emergency procedures. t t x l g 15 Twelve human factors-related deficiencies were identifiedd l g 16 and all of these will be corrected prior to escalation above five

rs 17 percent power.

iS E 18 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Will you make those same changes in c t-g 19 l n ' the control room of Unit l? 20 MR. DENTON: That has been our practice. Let's ask Steve 21 if he knows the answer. 22 MR. HANAUER: You have caught me short. We always do, 23 1but.I cannot assure _ you that we have said so on Unit 1. 24 - MR. DENTON: Unit 1 is coming down for refueling at about 25. ' the same time frame. i i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. e.

l 37 1 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: It would appear, since you a) have 2 concluded those are changes that ought to be made and, b) you 3 have stressed -- 4 MR. HANAUER: We always do, I just do not have on me a e 5 piece of paper that says so Usually we ask them to do it at N i 6l the next refueling. R l 7 MR. DENTON:. With the next refueling coming up, we will Al 8 make sure the same changes are made. d d 9 MR. HANAUER: Yes, sir, the Alabama people say they will iog 10 do it. E g 11 (Laughter.) 3 l d 12 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Can I take you back to the shift t z l 5 l j 13 manning? I want to ask you about the shift technical adviser. mj 14 l I was not clear whether the requirement here was any I 2 15 l differen~t than elsewhere. I was a little startled to see that i w = l g 16 the mandate may be asleep at some times. I suppose as long as I w i 17 j they get there in some certain period of timc. Is that our basic I M 18 requirement that a shift technical adviser needs to be available l Ff 19, within so many minutes? l 5 j 20 MR. HANAUER: Yes, sir, it is. This is the same require-l 21 ment as everyone else. 22 COMMISSIONER.GILINSKY: And he has to be located on site? 23 ' MR. HANAUER: Yes, sir. 24 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Steve, since we have reverted 25, for'a minute, I _ notice the -license says that the shif t supervisor P i l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

t 1 38 .l. may be'. allowed to be absent provided.that an individual other than 0 2 the shift technical adviser possesses a valid SRO license and 3 assumes control room command. l 4l As I understand it, that was not true for North Anna. l .t e 5 Do you know off-hand why there would be a difference? I 6l MR. HANAUER: Yes, sir, it is true for North Anna also. R 7 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: That is a standard? I N j 8 MR. HANAUER: What you have to have is a licensed senior d d 9 operator in the control room. Because there are two units, if i c 10 there is only one, he has to be licensed on both units. The shift g 1i supervisor may be the one whc is out in the plant if a suitably S ( 12-qualified and licensed person is in the control room. l 5 g 13 MR. DENTON: Did we phrase it differently, or just omit 1 = l E 14 it?

s 2

'15. COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I do not have the North Anna 5 g 16 license with me,-but as I understood it, it does not have the ^ d 17 i same language.

s I

E 18 ; MR.. HANAUER: We intend the requirements to be the i . [ 19 l E [ same. I presume'we are somewhat refining the way we write them. -a j 20 l MR.-DENTON: Let us look into it, there was no intentional 21 departure. 22 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Go ahead. 23 ! MR. KENTNER: 'I mentioned the deficiencies in the control t 24 I room design, these will be corrected. ] 25 A detailed review of control room design will be ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. 1

l -39 I-completed'in 1982. 2 The next item shown is the in-core thermo-coupler readingE 3 as one of the measures of inadequate core cooling. In-core thermo-4 coupler readings are displayed in the control room on the sub-5 l-cooling monitor. All 51 thermo-coupler readings can be printed n 6 out from the process' computer in the control room within 'four R l CS 7 minutes. Ml 8 A high-speed line printer in the room adjacent to the d y 9 control rooid can print all 51 daermo-coupler readings on a core zo g 10 map within.two minutes. z II COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Presumably with no restriction B I I2 on temperature? i E i 13 ! MR. KENTNER: Yes. The temperature, the maximum ,y 14 temperature of the printout on the computer goes to 1,900 degrees ~ _:j 15 Fahrenheit, and the sub-cooling monitor goes up to 2,300 degrees = j 16 I Fahrenheit. A d 17 j COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Can I ask you one more thing? w E 3 18 Can the thermo-couplers be read on any meters, or does the =b I9 l information come solely fro'm the computer? g ? 20 ! MR. HANAUER: They have the usual Westinghouse 700-21 degree meter; it is in' the front instead of the back on this plant. 22 i But the only way you can get the high temperature readings - t 23'l conveniently is through:the computer at the present. time. i 24 - MR. KENTNER: The next slide, Alabama Power Company has 25 submitted the results of its review of compliance of.Farley Unit 2 I ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

40 I with - CRYPTO (? ) regulations in TENCYC?) 420, 50 c.nd 100. 2 Alabama Power Company states that they comply with the 3 applicable regulations. As provided in the regulations, certain 4 exemptions and relief from the regulations have been justified and { t e 5 approved by the-staff. e j 6l l i COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Could you tell us what those are, R 7 are there a great number of them? 3 j 8 MR. KENTNER: Yes, these are mentioned in the license d 9 condition. They are exemptions from Appendix G and Appendix H. z O 10 There are currently two exemptions from Appendix G and one from

• =

{ 11 Appendix H; one from Appendix J, and then there are relief requests a p 12 from in-service testing-of pumps and valves and in-service s y 13 inspection. =- 14 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I know we have granted exemptions i 15 g from those regulations in the past, but could you remind me why = g 16 these exemptions are being granted, H and G? ^ 1 17 l MR. DENTON: Let's see, we have J, G and H authority. 18 I think it goes back, in some cases, to the lack of grandfathering c h 19 in the rule,- and the fact that the plants, the equipment was j n 20 already built and fabricated when the rule was passed requiring 21 certain inspection. 22 MR. KENTNER: I might speak generally to them.- I know the 23l Appendix G requirements on fracture toughness, there are two of 24 them, and. these have to do, I think, with procedures of performing 25.jcertain operations.in accordance with written procedures, which q i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

j l 41-l 1 was not ' done, but based' on other ' records we thought this justified. L i2 -COMMISSIONER GILIHSKY: 14 tat I would like to know is, 3 whether these regulations are in some way not what they ought to l l -4 be and 'if you would like to have them changed; or whether what we L e -5 are doing here is cleaning up some plans that for one reason or 6-l ~$ 6 anotherJcould not conform to these regulations and we have other l

7 l

$7 reas'ons.to think that lack of their conforming does not ' pose any ] 8 form of barrier that future plans will conform to the regulations. d. d 9 MR. KENTNER: 'I think that certainly an example is the L 'i c l 10 exemption in Appendix J, which is. testing the personnel door every El 11 time a person goes in through the personnel. door in the ' containment; 3 .y 12 Appendix J says it must be tested at peak accident pressure which 3 l l 13 is not practical. a 14 Certainly, the two I am familiar with test at half 2 15 pressure, and they test the pressure between the saals. But the g 16 AppendixLJ. states you must' test it at peak accident pressure, w 6 17 j COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Well, should we be changing the N-18. regulations? 5 t E 19 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE: They come both ways. I think 5 20 the Appendix J one on containment door testing is an exemption ~ l lll. practially uniformly done in every plant that comes along. It is 22 clear that.lthe regulation.itself was ill advised' and we ought to ~ D change it. I.think somewhere out in the "aachine" there is a 23 _. I 24 change coming. 25-l Then_, there'are/some othe^rs,.the.other category you ll ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANYJ INC.

l j 42

1. mentioned, which is a regulation that is reasonable for new plants, l

2 but was not adequately grandfathered in the language of the regu-3 lation itself with regard to some plants which had already been buil 4 So, I think you have both kinds here. s 5 MR. DENTON: I think G and H will eventually be met by 6 the newer plants. It was the lack of grandfathering that was ng 7 discovered. M 8 8 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: What does "H" cover? dd 9 MR. KENTNER: It covers the testing of reactor vessel io g ~ 10 materials in the reactor. E j 11 MR. DENTON: The sorts of. samples that were required 3 y 12 were not available in that area, and we had to grant that similar = f i3 exemption for all the other plants this year. = y 14 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Now, you say that the G-H review is b! 15 in the works. Is that being done by standard? i ? 16 MR. DENTON: Yes. The last time we discussed these, Bob l $)h00fth? g 17 Manogst?) and I talked about them, and we identified each one. ) w i I h 18 Some schedule exists for the "J", but obviously it is not a high i 5 19 priority that wouId.have been here by that time. Let me re-look I 8n 20 into'it and report back to you later. J 21 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE: I just do not think that Bob is i 22 putting very much push behind that one just because it is being l i 23 dealt with as the plants come forward by an exemption in the 24-license.. I would point out he has been, a) pretty flat on that d 25j power in recent years; and b) he has sent a lot of folks out to 1 l l l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. I

f I 43 .I work.on the Three Miles Island thing. They are sore points that 2 he needs to work on. 3' CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: And there are other regulations. I 4 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE : Yes. e 5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: But it does not make any sense h h 6 to have regulations that we are granting exemptions to uniformly.' R 7 COMMISSIONER.HENDRIE : That is certainly true. If we n-l 8 end up with a hundred, whatever it eventually is, operating plants d 9 all of whom are exempt from a given regulation, one could reasonabl zo 10 ask what the merit of the regulation was. j 11-MR. DENTON: A question that has arisen is, Appendix E E y 12 does not have any grandfathering in it for low power licenses. So, g rl 13 if the plant construction is not complete by that time it does = l 14 raise the ' question that we have not resolved yet, does Appendix'E $j 15l t requiref that they have fully approved emergency plans for this plana z 16 g CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Well, it does not even speak to low 'd i d 17 i power at all, it just talks about operating license. 3 18 MR. DENTON: .Yes. You could read Appendix E, though, to P -[ 19 be in place for any' license. I had expected this license may be n 20, issued before 'the effective date. I 21 I am getting more and more sensitive to dates, the need 22 to' stagger implementation dates so that we can cope with the work-23 load. 24 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Of course, few if any of our 25 regulations address' low power. I i -1 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

~- 1 i 44 1 MR. DENTON: That's right. 2 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Maybe that just.was not the concept. 3 I'would assume.that we are going to have to decide in the not too 4 distant future whether we continue the low power-full power staging 5 g If so, then :you have to go back and look at a lot of these things, e j 6-just shift back to full power. R 7 MR. DENTON:. I would hope that we would be out of the K j 8 two-stage process shortly. But it did enable us as a vay of movingj d i o; -9 on cases and should not last a lot longer. j i y 10 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: But in the normal course of E h 11 events,_that is without the two-stage process, you would be' issuing S y 12 the full OL at the time you are now issuing the low-power test 5a 5 13 permission, so if anything, it would require it to be completed = m ~ 5 14 before the OL. issue. 9 15 MR. DENTON: Yes, that's right. = j 16 MR. KENTNER: Based on our review of the Applicant's A i 17 l August 25 -letter and our audit of their application, we have N 18 concluded that Farley 2 as designed and built can be operated in P{ 19 conformity with Commission regulatlons. n 20 .The staff has used standard. technical specifications { 21 for Fa51ey Unit 2 and has coordinated or proposed license conditionJ 22 with proposed' technical-specifications. 23 -! ~The administrative section of'the technical specifi-24 cations has ' been modified to L include safety-significant-procedures, 25l.for example, a secondary water chemistry is included there. t ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

in ) l-45 i l_ 1 The license ~ includes TMI-related requirements and.recent l 2-requirements of the Commission,- for example, one of the license 3 conditions is the establishment of a records file for documents - L l 4 used.to show compliance, with environmental' qualification require-j e 5 ments in the Reg. 0588. 3" l h .6' The last, slides say that based on our review.-the NR staff R l 6 7: concludes th'at Farley Unit 2 can be operated with loads up to A l l- '8 five percent ' power in conformity with the provisions of the Act- ~ l d. o; 9 and the rules and regulations of the Commission, and that ther' e is - 2o'g 10 reasonable assurance that the activities that would be authorized 2 l = l { 11 by this license can be conducted without endangering the health and y 12' safety of the public. = h 13 MR.' DENTON: This. concludes our presentation, unless Bill mj 14 would like to add any comments. 9 15 MR. BRADLEY: 'It appears from the resident inspector's 5 l g 16' program that the completion date is achievable. vs i 17, 'As far as the test program itself is concerned, the pre-E .18 jloperational'. program.which is required for fuel loading, to support 5 C l j 19 the fuel loading, islestimated to be 97 percent complete. ~n 20 ~ CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: How long. have you been there as the g j 21 ~ resident?' 22 'MR. BRADLEY:' Since December 3, 1979. I 23-CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Based upon that period of _ time, do you i 24 !ttave.'any, assessment:. as to the quality Lof performance of the - -t _25-licens'ee,lboth the operating' plant'and the plant that'is under .i J ALDERSON REPORTib G COMPAN, INC.

46 I proposal here? 2 MR. BRADLEY: As far as Region 2, assessment of the 3 program, I.would like to call on my supervisor, Mr. Bob Martin, to 4 give that. g 5 As far as my own personal assessment of the licensee, 0 j 6 they appear to be a responsive licensee. They appear to operate the. R d 7 plant in accordance with their technical specifications, and they j 8 appear to do a good job. d d 9 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Bob? 2[ 10 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Could I add to that? What is the E h Il record, the compliance record of the licensee, as you see it? 3 I I2 MR. MARTIN: I thought that might be of interest. In E a 13 g Region 2 Alabama Power's noncompliance rate in terms of noncomplianc

n m

5 14 from inspections is amongst the lowest of any of the facilities in 5 g 15 the region. j 16 Their LAR rate, their licensing and report rate in terms d W !5 17 jfinding' difficulties, either in surveillance or operator errors, 5 a 18 things of that sort, are again for a plant in our region with "g 19 standard. tech specs are amongst the lowest of any of the utilities n 20..in the' region. They fall in the same category, given the same 21 ' general age.of the plant. 22 .y think the other area that may be of interest is that 23 ;their adherence-to their own quality assurance program, based on 1 24 - our inspections in that area, shows better compliance to the 25 irequirements of their own. quality assurance program than most of .I e l i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

f 47 I the other utilities in the region. 2 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Thank you. 3i MR. DENTON: That completes our presentation. I 4 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: One thing about the NTOL require-s- 5 ments. I noticed in here there is a statement that we had committe1 9j 6 ourselves to issuing notice of rule-making before issuing full powed R 7 licenses. Somewhere in this document it says that will happen a j 8 before Farley gets a full power license. d 9 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Of course, all he can do is submit 3 10 it to us, then he has to wait for us to vote. E j 11 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I understand that. Where do we 3 y 12 stand on our equipment to do that. = 13 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: At least the last time I checked not l 14 all of us had voted. Ej 15 MR. BICKWIT: It is scheduled for tomorrow, the Affirmati@ = l y 16 Session. A d 17 COMMISSIONER GILLINSKYi We let that slip on North Anna. 5 18 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Well, as I recall that was on North 5' l { 19 Anna because many of the Commission had not voted. i n 20 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE: I never did understand exactly 21 what' that provision in the NTOL list, what it did precisely for 22 public safety. 23 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: It seemed to be an attempt which, like 24 so many, was not really successful to move us along. 25 : COMMISSIONER HENDRIE: .I had the feeling the staff was i l i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.

l 48 I blackmailing the Board. 2' COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I raised it because a reporter 3 called me about it and ask me, and I did not have a good answer. 4 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Very simple, we all have not voted. s 5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I should have referred him to you. 0 3 6 Let's see, I don't think I have any specific questions. g 8 7 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE : I don't have any questions. s l 8 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Peter? d k 9 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Can you talk a little about the zoy 10 various ways in which we have granted relief from the in-service z= l 11 inspection program with respect to this plant, why that is necessary a y 12 MR. KENTNER: Well, my experience in this area is not very 5 y 13 'aroad, but my impression is that generally all plants have made I z i g 14 ! requests for relief on in-service inspection, pre-service inspection, f g 15 -and in-service testing of pumps and valves. = g 16 COMMISSIONER FARL7.1. Let's start just with the pre-servict M d 17 (he requests for Farley are just in the area of the pumps and E cw 18 valves? E 1 h 19 f MR. KENTNER: No, they are in both. They are in in-servic n s 20 !:esting of pumps and valves, and in pre-service inspection - that is 21 of the pipes, you know, inspection of the pipes and so on, welds. l 22 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: But your impression is that what i 23 ' s being requested in the Farley case is standard? i I i 24 i MR. KENTNER: Is usual, typical, yes. I, 25 i COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I guess I am surprised by that i I i ALDEASON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

49 I just because the SCR says we have determined that the pre-service 2 examination requirements are impractical and would impose hardships 3 and difficulty. Is this another of those areas where we need to 4 have. a blanket exemption? g 5 MR. KENTNER: My impression is, yes; but I do not have 9 6 much experience in that area. R 7 MR. VOLLMER: In this particular case this is a coda A 8 requirement, Section 11(d) -is in the code, and the instruction d y 9 configuration does not provide for all of the in-service inspection zoga 10 that this code.would require. j 11 In those areas where inspection is required we are going 3 y 12 back and looking at ways to establish for all plants an acceptable 5 j 13 level of competence in those areas where it cannot be fully = m 5 14 inspected for Section 11, we will get some sort of a qualification 5 g 15 inspection periodically over the life of the plant that will give = 16 j us equivalent insurance that we will get on the specific code A p 17 inspection. 1 5 18 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I am sorry, are we talking about 3y'19 the pre-service or the in-service now? 5 20-MR. VOLLMER: I am talking about the pre-service. 21 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: You are talking about the pre-22 service, all right. I l 23 l CHAIR N AHEARNE: So, you are really saying.that this 24 is -an inaccessibility issue that is not just unique to this plant. 25 f MR. VOLLMER: That's right. 1 ALDERSON REPOR. TIN.G COMPANY. INC.

50 1 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE : So, it does fall under that category 2l of modifications which really ought to be made to the basic 3 requirement. 4 MR. VOLLMER: That's correct. There should be an 5 g-adequate inspectability of all the components. O j 6-MR. EISENHUT: Remember the regulation in this case. We R 7 are not giving relief from the regulation. The regulation was 8 already built in to acknowledge the fact that in some el these d 9 plants this is just an impracticality. The regulation itselt says,' E g 10 in.those cases where it is impractical' because of access, because j 11 of radiation, because of whatever you give relief from the 3 y 12 requirement. E j 13 So, I do not think the regulation per se has to be = l 14 changed. But every operating plant that I know of has had to have, i 2 15 some kind of relief under that caveat. 5 f g' 16 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Let me just take you to page 9 i W b" 17 l of the license and ask you to explain what the last item on that E f 18 page means. P f 19 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Gas generation? 5 1 20 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Just Item 2. l [ 21 - COMMISSIONER HENDRIE: The last item on page 97 22, COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Yes, where it says... explosive i 23 ) limits, sources of zero in containment. I 24l MR. DENTON: That,is oxygen. It is training for using 25 all'theLplant equipment, safety-related or non safety-related,-how i N 'l i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. 4

51' 1 you would cope with hydrogen generation and sources of oxyger.. 2 So, the intent of that is to make sure the operators are fully 3 trained for degraded core conditions in using the equipmen: that is 4 available. So, this is a training requirement, not a desig.1 g 5 requirement, so they are familiar with the flammability of hydrogen i 8 3 '6 and the sources of oxygen that might be in the containment,in the t 7 cooling system. . So, this is for.the training of the operators. 1 al 8 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: What would be the sources of d( 9 oxygen in the reactor coolant system, are you back to radioa).ysis? !g 10 MR. DENTON: That is one source. I do not recall the 11. origin of this particular requirement'. That is one that comes to a p 12 mind. The other is, these containments are not inerted, so there 13 would be oxygen in the containment. I think it is just meant to m i 14 be in general, whatever sources there are, including radioalysis. 15 The operators would be trained in flammability and j 16 potential as a measure of what to expect. us 17 i COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Maybe I should start by asking !" ~ Ci 18 this of Len and Marty. There is still, I take it, an antitrust 19 aspect of the Farley proceeding that is in litigation. What is a 20 the status of that,'when is it likely to be resolved, and does it 21 have any implications one way or the other for the is.suance of this 22 license? .23 MR. BICKWIT: It is a grandfather plant under 105(c) of 24 the-statute, so that the full antitrust review'does not have to be 25 completed' prior to the issuance of this license. ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

i 52 1 The matter is now before the Appeals Board. As to when 2 they are going to complete their proceeding, I cannot say, maybe Ed 3 can say. But it need not be completed prior to the issuance of 4 this license. e 5 MR. CHRISTENBERRY: The record has been closed and it 9 6 has been before them, I think, for about a year; but that is not E i 8 7 unnatural for antitrust cases. So, it has been there some timc Al 8 but I do not know exactly when it is going to be completed, d c 9 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: But as far as an impediment for the $h 10 license? E h 11 l MR. BICKWIT: It poses none. a p 12 COMMISSIONER HENDRIE : Was there not a note on Farley in 5 13, the monthly report from Alan that just came around? l 14 MR. BICKWIT: No, I don't believe so. I reviewed it to 2 15 see whether there was and I could not find it. g 16 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: In the SCR there is a discussion A 17 j on page 36 of the diesel generator configuration and what had to be 5 18 done to resolve a single failure problem. E ) 19 Then, on page 37 a notation that INE will verify that n 20 the modifications have been made. Has that been done? 21 MR. KENTNER: Well, perhaps I should let INE, do they i 22 want to speak to that? { r 23, MR. BRADLEY: We have not verified this as yet, i Is this a problem.that is unique ] 24 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: I 25 ', to Farley, is it an original design problem? l l l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC. B

Ll l-1 53 I I 1 l MR. KENTNER: .Yes, this is unique - to. Farley. I 2. CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: 'The verification was to have been~made l 3 prior to fuel loading, as I read this. 4 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Right. It is not an impediment -e 5 to the license, but it would still have to be done. X-9 6, CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Yes. R 7 MR. DENTON: Farley is unique with regard to the numbers l 3 l l 8 of diesels. I d [ d 9 MR. KENTNER: Yes, there are five diesel generators al-i o ~ g 10 together; three of them al., shared between the two units. They use 5 j 11 diesel' generative power for their river water pumps, they are 2 y 12 pumping it 4,000 feet and up 75 to 80 feet. That is the plant E d 13 grade, I think it may even go higher to the on-site storage pond, i = i l 14 I think up to about 180, 190 feet. l 2 15 So, they have big-river water pumps, and they have diesel x= l g 16 generators for those. And then they have the service water pumps .w y 17 which pump from the pond into the plant. They have diesel generator, w i i l i l 5 18 ' power for those. P { 19 l So, they have five diesel generators, total, for this E 20 purpose.. 21 I might comment that this design problem was discovered 22 f several years ago by Alabama Power Company, and they sent in a 23 ! design change in accordance with' 5055 (e) of the regulations. We r 24 j have. evaluated it and told the Office of Inspection Enforcement 25[ who normally gets these reports,- we advised them that we had. i . ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

i k 54 .1 accepted their design. We are simply reporting here the results of : i 2' that review. 3 I might speculate-a little bit. The design changes are I 4 likely already made, but there still'has to be verifying by e .5 Inspection ~ Enforcement.. - j 6' COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Why is not a problem like this .R . something you would expect to catch'even at the CP review stage? R 7 A j 8 I assume that the diesel generator configuration is checked at that d d 9 time. ioy 10 MR. DENTON: It is checked, but not in the kind of detailj g 11 that you do at the OL stage when you actually have the drawings. E d 12 Let me ask Les about this. 3= d 13 MR. ROSA: Faust Rosa. At the CP stage we were aware = i j 14 that this kind of a problem might arise when the detailed design ~ Ej 15 of the transfer circuitry -- the problem with regard to the shared c j 16 diesels might arise. a p 17 However, at the CP stage and the OL stage for Unit 1 [ w= 5 18 we knew that only one unit was in operation, and for the one unit ~ L -s m this was not a probleg{ j[ 19 in' operation there is no diesel sharing. So, n 20 for Unit 1 at all. I, ~ 21 Now, -when - Unit 2 came up for review this had to be ij 22-looked at in detail, and I think RSCR states what we have done and 23 how it was resolved. I 24 . COMMISSIONER BRADFORD : How many diesels would you ~25 normally; expect for a two-unit station? I i l i ALDERSON' REPORTING COMPANY. INC. J

c -- 55 1 MR.L KENTNER: ~Perhaps three. But this has river water l 2 pumps in' addition to the service water pumps. ~ l 3 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: Three between the two units? 4 MR. KENTNER: Three between the two units, normally. 5_ COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: With regard to the instrumentatioE e. N d 6 to be installed on the reactor vessel itself, the area in which we = A 8 7 had a problem at North Hanna simply because the stuff turns out to l 3 l 8 8 be hard to come by, can we anticipate a similar problem here? n d d 9 MR. DENTON: I think it would be very similar and we i l h 10 would look at that as part of our look for full power. This is l 5 11 with regard to water level monitoring. <3 l d 12 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: My concern is with equipment t z i = E 13 availability. It seems to be turning out that it is not easy to S i E 14 come by, the equipment that needs to be installed. w 2 15 MR. KENTNER: The Alabama Power Company for Farley has 5 16 proposed to use a Boran detector method of measuring the level. It 3 A d 17, has to be developed, it-is under development. Some other utility i9 t a l 5 18, using this, too. i P l [ 19 There is pmaodher method that Westinghouse is developing, i x 5 20 using a pressure difference measurement between the top and the [. 21 bottom of the reactor. Both of these methods require development. 22 So, they are in a similar situation with North Anna. I 23 l They expect - the exact dates are written up under 24 the dated' requirements of the SCR. By January 1 of 1981 we are 25 expecting a rather detailed report from Alabama Power Company on i i l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

c / 56 il-development program,1 schedules for this development. ~ 12 ' -MR. ROSS. D.F. Ross.- We are also concerned that the .3 development phase on the level meters of various kinds may not be-4-proceeding as fast:as we would.like. g 5 To that end, NRR &nd-Research are jointly sponsorir.g .g. [ 6.I 'a workshop - next month in -Idaho Falls. Research is going to .g 7 assemble its various contractors that have had experimental 3 l l 8 expertise and-describe the various Commission-owned facilities, d =i - 9 including facilities at FLEC(?), Oak Ridge, San Jose - the test 2 4 0 -g 10 apparatus. iE h 11 We are going to offer to the regulated.inddstry-some g it i i 12 i benchmarking' service where different types of instruments can be = l l 13 placed in Commission-owned facilities and compared with a m i l 14 Commission benchmark, maybe-a conductivity cell. u- !Eit 15 There fore, throughout 1981, if we do_the various loss 4 .= y 16 of coolant research efforts, every time we go down a loop or a 4

rl l

17 ' reactor we will get indications from reactor vessel water level t; 5 ! ~ 5 18 instruments. i E i-19 g We are making this offer to the industry, we are 5 20 developing the letter and~ are' going to send it out this week or nexR t 21 i We hope to get a positive response. I think this is one area where 3 22 we will have to work with.the regulated industry to get a 23 satisfactory instrument. We are proceeding to that end. . 24 I-should' point out-that Alabama Power, I'think, has made i 25l {a very-positive effort to not only develop a system that no one i 1 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.

l 57 ~ j else is 'really working on very much, the. neutron instrument, 'but 2 they!are' committed.to a backup in case this instrumentLjust does 3 not turn out. 4' CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Other questions? e 5 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD: No. At the end of the license ] Q. 6 there is an' Item H that requires the reporting of violations of e 1 7 requirements contained in various sections, including a Section-G. 8 As nearly as I can tell, there is no Section G. That is just d l d 9 something that can be cleaned out. { i i h.10 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE:- I guess for me, I find no impediment

E l

5 11 to approving the -low power operation. I have a number of questions <B d 12 which I will forward to you, which I would want answered before I_ 3e d 13., would be willing to approve a full power license -- none of which E E 14 rise to items which, however, I would find a problem for the low f 15 Power license. w= y 16 So, for me it is simple for us to go ahead. How do the l w d 17 l rest of the Commissioners feel? l w= 4 5 18 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Well, I am inclined to approve iti 5 } 19 but I would like to defer the actual approval to later this week, j R i 20 to' have a little time to reflect on some of the things discussed 21 here. 22 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Joe? 23, COMMISSIONER _ HENDRIE : I am for it, and I am prepared to i ~ . 24 ' move now and would so vote. 25, CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Peter? l l. -ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC. r

'{. l 58 [ O- ..l -1 COMMISSIONER BRADFORD:- Well,.I don't have any reason to t 2 think I won ' t be for it. I guess I would just as soon issue an 3 actual Commission document approving these and other licenses. It I 4 i can be a very short one. g _5 I guess I am with Victor, I would just as soon draw it 0 3 6,up and vote on it. I still have my personal preferences to use I er 7 the phrase " reasonable assurance," but I understand in the North A j 8 Anna' case you have decided not to do that. d d 9 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: Yes. Well, I guess since we are 8 10 unable to reach a resolution this morning, Harold, you cannot issue z r h 11 it. I trust that my two colleagues who wish an order to be issued B: y - ~ 12 will work _with general counsel to see if they cannot get some ~c l 13, language that would be acceptable to them, and let the other two of m

n l

g 14 us see it. t y i 15 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Sure. if. l j 16 CHAIRMAN AHEARNE: So, we will await such action. Thank I vi i 17 lyou. l lll l 18 ' (Whereupon, at 11:4 5 a.m. the discussion on the Farley-1 = t) ~ 19 l Low Power Operating License was adjourned.) n l 20 i i 21 22 i 23 ' i 24i l 25, l l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

i D D "D 3'}h ooJ o E S_ fru _, NUCIIAR REGULATORY CO.M4ISSION This is te certify. hat the attached pecceedings before the i, i ,/ Commissioners in the matte." of* Discussion and Vote on Farley Low Power Operating License Date Of ?receeding: September 3, 1980 T Docket Number: 3 '.:. c a c# 3 r c c a,. a.d _4 Washington, D.C. 3 1 were held as herein appears, and tha: this is the criginal transcript thereof for the file of the Cc==ission. 1 7 1 4 M. E. Hansen l Official Reper:er (Typed) Official Reporter (Signature) l 4 4 4 4 i f A 0 't t _a I I-l .}}