ML20148S090

Order That Parties in Prefiled Written Testimony Identify Factors Which Determine New Values for Pressure Capability, Explain Changes Acceptability & Explain Engineering Reliability in Each Valve & in Overall Results

ML20148S090
Person / Time
Site:	McGuire, Mcguire
Issue date:	01/27/1981
From:	Lazo R Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:	DUKE POWER CO., NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD)
Shared Package
ML20148S087	List: ML20148S090
References
ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8102030020
Download: ML20148S090 (2)

Text

a .

Tr\\\41 N

?c:c---

Q I6-1 V C 'Y 2 71009 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION k M W :f3, d yfff

-~w u,4 m 8'8 " o 9/

ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD Before Administrative Judges: !MI Robert M Lazo, Esquire, Chairman #p4 Emmeth A. Luebke, Ph.D.

Cadet H. Hand, Jr., Ph.D.

4427 In the Matter of: g DUKE POWER COMPANY Docket Nos. 50-369-OL 50-370-OL (William B. McGuire Nuclear Station, f Units 1 and 2--reopened operating )

license proceeding) January 27, 1981

)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The original design of the McGuire reactor containment buildings as described by Applicant in its PSAR and FSAR had a value for pressure capability that was analyzed and determined to reflect, we presume, the best professional engineering judgment at the time of s those reports. This design and the determination of the pressure capability was reviewed and accepted by the NRC Staff. In view of the contentions which have been admitted relating to the issue of hydrogen-generation and controT, it-is expected that the testimony at the reopened evidentiary hearing in this proceeding will include a redetermination of the pressure capability of the reactor contain-ment building.

ORDER For the foregoirg reason, it is this 27th day of January,1981 ORDERED That the parties in prefiled written testimony:

l 6 ] c e o g;D.20 l

1

. . . _ . . . , . _ - _ _ . . _ _ _ . _ . . . _ . . l 1

NCCLZAR. .N.1'" CHI CCMMISSICN

( .

[Si

""@;9 y C // l J

.. s h tism. m af: BRIs AsG FOR COMMISSIONER GILAasu.

ON MCwin OPERATING LINSE .

i

(, m January 21,. 1981 pm 1 - 35

--r ' ~ w--w ny ws,. a. c. ~

. .m r

ps e O C00::r:- \1 us l z JAN g71361> 1 i

offin er e. %

. W autSardu

..s 2 2 3 WdL 8 W M w a.,

.ummmr

/ --as.

EW r n% C.

,n 0

400 ET.=La Ave , S.*E. ~42** *?~::, C

.a Tala;w= : (2001 554-2245 s

atopo>ony

• , 1 AR l

1 UNITED STATES OF A! ERICA  !

D i 2i NUCIS,AR REGULATORY CO!O!ISSION 9

3 4'

g 5, Briefing for Commissioner Gilinsky on !icGuire 3 Operating License g 6

~

n . .

{ 7 .

~

n ,

n 8!

J 6- 9 z'

10 Wednesday, January 21, 1931 t

=

= Room 1130,

• II

< 1717 E Street NM, 5 i I I2 ,

Washington, 3.C.

e

= .

2 13

( E Commissioner Gilinsky met with the NRC Staff at j

+

14 5 15 3:30, pursuant to notice.

Z <

l .- 16 Present: .

\ n

d l

g VICTOR GILD 1 SKY, CO::missioner .

. 17 E

1 E 18 Present f or the 'iRC S taf f :

=_

}9 D. Eisenhut E. Christenberry R. Tedesco 20]j R. 7ollzier ,

21 ! 5. Hanauer

• T. Ocna:

22 ; T. Xevern l

' s. - i 23 Present for -he OGC:

24 L. Bickwit 25 l

1

< , 1 4

.  : 2 1

I '. P R 0_ C_ E_ E_ _D _I N_ G_ S_

em .

2' COMMISSIONER GILINSK'?: I hesitate to use the gavel 3i because this isn't a Commission meeting, it's just an informal 4 briefing for me on the subject of the 'McGuire Plant which has s 5' been approved by the' Board for fuel load, criticality, and testi:

E j 6 Under our rules, the Commission has to. approve that-license, anc

~

7 j

the briefing today is to help me think' abo.ut the subject.

A i i

s 8 ', There is still some questions and controversy, L

I understand hydrogen generation and control,

~

~. 9' about this.

z, o -

4 g 10 enere might be some others I don': know about. .

$ II 3ecause we may be breaking some illegal ground here, m

5 12 as one of the members of the General Counsel's office says g 13 ' they do not --

(- 2 5

2 14 ,

(Laughter . )

1 j

=

15 -- I think I'd better le General Counsel say a few

! d I0 words about what we are up to, and waat scme of the constraints W .

?

II are. But I do cant to stress it is an informal briefing which

, a l E y 18 I would just hold privately, were it not a contested proceeding r

a 19 and my own inclination is if there are any other parties presen 5 i

• 0

' - -he General Counsel can think about this -- if -hey have 21 i some brief remarks they'd like to make along the way/ that's ok i

12 i ,

vien me, too.

1 I

I m

How does that sound?

l 24 . MR. 3ICKWIT: That's fine. I don't think there's a l

25 requirement along those lines, but I think that's perfectly

! 1

3 t.

I, permissible if that's the way you want to prove.9d.

r 2' I think I should. say a word' about constraints ,

i 3i This is a public briefing, and it is arguable that because 4l our rule uses the teen "off the record" in deciding and determi g 5 what is and what is not an 3. 1parte communication, .the. mere fac n  :

M 3 6 that this is a public briefing would satisfy the ex parte rule.

" 7' We haven't interpreted the rule that way in the pas:

M j 8 but it's e, aivable that it could'be. Assuming we don't here, t

9 the procac.are that our office recommends he' followed 'is one z

e" 10 that we have used in the pas: with respec .co unconces ed z .

!3 Il matters, where f actual matters which 'are at issue before the i

i 12 Cc= mission, in which such factual matters may be discussed.

I,

=.

13 In those circumstances., we have allowed discussion 3

m I

i 5 I4 between the Staff and the Commission on the uncontested matter, u t N

j 15 and this is uncontested, I should add, because no exceptions s

g 16 have been filed to the decision of the Licensing Board with a

w N I7 respect to the zero ecwer license.

=

n

~

18 We have allowed discussions between the Commission 8 Where facts at m

I9 and the Staff on these uncontested matters.

w .

20 ' issue in a contested proceeding cefore the Commission, are i

i l 2l ' raised in connection wi:h an unconces ed matter -- and they 1

22 ! might be here -- we have provided the parties to the contested ss t the transcrip:

23 proceeding with the ::anscript o f this matter,  ;

• 4j of this meeting, and we have allowed the parties an opecrtun :;

25 to co= ment on anything that is being said by the 5taff

- -. _. ~ . . _ - -

. ~. . . - -

t 4

I; prior to any Commission action in the contested matter.

n 2' In this case, the contested matter is the' proceeding 3' on low power and full power which is still in a contested' state I

em

' 4' so that would be what I would recommend be the procedure- here.

s 5 If-you want to modify that procedure, by actually R

2 6 having the parties a:cpress themselves at ' this point, I think n' ~

R 7'l that's perfectly fine. But the understanding would be that M

a 8' the Commission would not act in anything that invoir , aca M

~.

9 until there was an opportunity for the parties who art c: tere z

a.

t 10 at this table to express themselves in response to the party z a

=

II who is here at this table.

3

" Len, if I could add, I don't 12 MR. CHRISTI:QERRY:

i I

~

E 13 think it's inconsistent with what you're saying, but just by

- a n-2-

14 way of further claridication.

9 c

15 Commissioner, as you pointed out, the three things

=

j 16 .

that the License Board had before, it were initial criticality,

• 1

• 17 fuel lead, and zero power testing, and that is what i: autho ri:

, jj w

a license on, and that's what the Staff will certainly address.

I8 5-5 19 j

The twc issues that are still remaining in concenti:

n i

20 4 ,, ,ull power are the hydrtgen generation problem and emergenc

l

'l

~ l planning.

12 ' The Intervenor's contention on emergency planning is i .

ss '

me

~4

cuite clear. It seems to be that if you have a hydrogen

• 4 I ,

generation problem, you also have an emergency planning 25 ! problem. But I think for conservative purposes, we wou n say

-.__.._.L . _ . _ . . _ . _ . . , _ , . _ . - , _.- -,

5.

i II' there are basically two contested. contentions. One is hydrogen

-~

2 generation, and-the other is emergency planning. _

3i Thirdly,. the Intervenor has sought to raise a third ,

4' contentic.a relating to Class 9 accidents. The Staff-has filed ,

s 5; -their response in this regard, and the License scard has not R .

5 0 ruled on that contention.

R t b I' MR..BICKWIT: New I would'say that if you want to ,

n .

i 8' 6 get into those contested matters, because you regard them .as  :

4 9 relevanu, on the issue of whecher a no-power license:should be i,

, =

to issued, you may do so, but. subject to the constraints that I.

'j

=

!t II

'have outlined.

i 12 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Well, actually on those H

.fx" - r

, j 13 points , I wouldn' t : expect to get . into them in terms. of evaluati. (

3 2 14 the effectiveness of measures and so on; but I would like to N

3 h

15 ' knew the status of both hydrogen control measures and emergency ,

=

16 I-don't see any difficulty in that.

i planning.

m

• 17 There's certainly no difficulty with 3

MR. SICKWIT:

18 that. As I said, if, for scme reason, in the course of this -

i 19 discussion you regard those issues as relevant to the decision ,

n 0 thau is new pending 'before the Commission on the ne'-power i

21 I' -**se, you can discuss these matters, sub ect :o the s

22 ! procedures.I have outlined. -

I .

Darrel, with :nat, let's

• 3f COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

y, get to the informal part.

5, MR. EISENHUT: C4ay. 'Certainly L we 'll - :ry to follow f'- -- .: . - . . . . _ . _ _ _ __ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _, _

6' i

l I

1; that guidance.

2: First, I guess just as a wa; 'on, the-3 ! McGuire Unit i licen.e that's proposed fourth t

4 lant Cuke has coming on line. The otaar ..e occace 1, 2z e 5 3 units, and they have several others comit sw the line.

g 3

• 6' The presentation that wa are going .c give you R

R 7< toddy -- and I believe we have given the copies of the view-e -

i 8' n graphs we will be using -- is somewhat of an overview of the

,q c 9 same kinds of issues that have been some major issues that we j

' 10 ,' on the lic'enses. The most;recent, have discussed in the pas "s

=

5 11 t of course, was the Salem full pcwer license. .

3 i d 12 z

=

You will notice that seme of these issues are the

= 13 E.

very same kinds of issues.

=

=

W a

14 We will be able to give you sort of a summary of 9 15 where we are on the hydrogen review on McGuire, sort of status 2

=

3 7 16 in the sense that you mentioned.

a

• 17 We don't have our detail people on the hydrogen issu 3

=

G 18 here with us today, since they are of f right now working on

+

- 19 1 another clane, s -

n I, 20 1 What we will also be doing as we go through, you 21 i' will be seeing us identify a couple of the issues that are stil t

22 i

blem issues, so to speak, in the sense that they are issues t

23 ' that are being resolved and we will be working to resolve af te:

i or prior t:

1 i ,

24 the :ero power license; that is, prior to 5 percen 25 ' 130 percent.

i

^~* -e d.. . , , _

J 7

i I~ If you remember our process, we broke down certain 2 issues that had to be resolved before zero power; others 3 before 5 percent power; and others before full power.

4 One other note I should point out is the safety s- 5 evaluation that I believe we sentidowntown with -- accompanying N

j- 6 the license, was a safety evaluation we had written for fuel

$ 7l loading, initial criticality , zero power testing, up to 50 perc 3 i j 8' power. So the safety evaluation actually encompasses more

~

~.

9 than-is necessary for :ero power. license. That's:just the'way ,

z_

l @ 10 we have written it. It was much easier issuing the final a

II document.

3 1 m

.s E

3 ,- With that as a simple introduction, I'll turn the

=

j 13 4-mediate discussion over to Bob Tedesco.

=

m E

I4 First, however, I would like to identify Tom Donat, b_

j

~-

15 i

who is s itting at the end of the table, the resident . inspector .

!I 16 frem Isz, who is here with us also today. And I think you-a '

a I7 knot' everyone else who would be speaking; Dick Vollmer and' h=

}: 18 StLve Hanauer addressing their respective areas.

19 MR. TEDESCO: Okay, we can begin now. Can I have E

M i 20 l the first slide, please.

I 21 Ii (Slide.)

22 This is an outline o f wna we would like to share 23 l . wi:h ycu this af ternoon, c:=missioner . We begin with a general

'4 I descripcion, talking abcut the status of the TMI and non-TMl 25 , we teams. The last one would be an idencificacion of what v m -on > ,~ +- ' -ww e m - w ~ ~ ev.w - - -- ~e-- -- g

t 8-

? I

. i

)

i 1

I consider.to be outstanding issues that we would deal with for a

'I 2l fuel load license 3l The next slide. .

4, (Slide.)

= 5, Again we have a description.of the plant, very much a i 3 6) along the lines of the Salem, Sequoyah, North Anna plants.

g A. ~7 Westinghouse plant, four loop and so on. There is an ice I

M j 8; condenser containment.

J The difference that I would note here for clarificat.

= 9, i .

E 10 is that the design pressure went a little higher than the z .

=

11 , Sequoyah Plant, 12 vs. 15 psig.

5.e 3 I i 12 ~CCS is pretty =uch the same, =~' "e L~dI system E

= .

= 13 - with it, along with the other. accumulators and the low head 5

j injection pumps.

14 l h: 1

?, 15 i The next slide is -- *

=

? 16 i (Slide.)

3 w

y 17 -- just an overview of the location of the plant.

m

=

5 18 This is near Charlotte, and gives you a kind of a good cerception of the plant's location and the areas around it.

0= 19 -

7-i 20 ,

Charlotte being the population center. Based on the 1970 census, we ' re talking about maybe 240,000 people : so, of that 21 ,

l i

22 i general'na ure.

1 23 l The next slide --

1 24'! a (511de.)

i 25 , '

starts'to deal with our non-TMI issues, and as a  ;

l

- - , , 1 v-, m--.., ,- ,_. .- , . , -

l

. g l

1 1*j , result of the review that we set forth in our SER -- as 2

Carrel says, up to a low- power condition -- we haven't found 3 '

any unusual features about the design configuration. t 4

Equipment qualifications are following pretty well.

o g

5 ' We are set to go forward into our February 1st SER which is 3

61 consistent with the Commission's May 23rd memorandum and order.

R R 7 'I We are doing an

~

The Staff has been.to the site.

M i 3 8'

" audit, and things are coming along pretty well.

J 9

COMMISSICNER GILINSKY: How would you characteri:e i

E 5

10 the various degree of qual;fications and categories of equip-

~

5 11 j i ment?

-d 12 Well, we have -- do you want to'say 3^

MR. TEDESCO:

m

13 5 something, Dick? ,

E d

14 MR. VOLLMER: Why don' t we go to the other slide?

=

9 15 ,

2 3

(Slide.) - }

16 We have performed for the McGuire plant, .or we are j l* j 17 d performing a more detailed review than we were able to for une z

=

18 ' other NTOL plants because of the timing. We have done a full s

19 C

4 audit of the itams for environmental qualification which means-20 COMM~SS2CNER GILINSKY: When you say full audit, dos 21 tha: mean 20 percent of audit or -- l MR. VOLLMER: That's basically the 20 percent audit, 22 i j 23 't

! and we had no major deficiencies identified there, which would 1

24 i l be -- say a major defi:iency would be one found in a piece of 25 ;

equipment that was unqualified and would threaten the-i n<, ' , - e ---,.-m s , . . . ,---.e +--.e-.. ,m_p., ,-w.._ .-.+g.9.- - , e.--w., . . - - - < --7p.. y -- w.----- --m---

1 10 )

I i

I functionability of a safety-related systam. The same type of a 2l deficiency that would at an operating plant require the issuance 1

3' of an LER and going to the tech specs and declaring inoperabili:-

4' until replacement or semething like that.

5 This does not mean that all of the safety .: elate,d N

~

a 6 equipment did not have -- or much of it.did not have some one i 7 ' or more deficiencies in.accordance with the NUREG or the guide-

, i

• 8i!

M lines.

.g

~.

9 CCMMISSICNER GILINSKY: You don't have a breakdown z

. 10' of the sort you've had before, so many categories of equipment, a 11

< so many are qualified --

a 12 We weren't able. te do that, but w6 are z MR. VOLLMER:

_=

13 CCMMISSIONER GILINSKY: I guess the next stage of 2

E 14 ' licensing wculd be --

d- t

=

r sa 15 ,

MR. VOLLMER: As a matter of fact, on February lat,

~

16 we expect to have our ccmplace 5ER which will break down all s

a

• 17 d of it, a much nore detailed breakdown than we've had before 5 18

- on any plant.

+

i 19 MR. EI5ENHUT: I guess one other :,oint -- and Dick

=

20 can correct me -- I think cur Staff is coming down saying that i

I 9] I it looks like this is perhaps one of the cleanes

~ plants we i

i have seen with respect to enviren= ental qualification reviews

- i 23 'i .

up to this point in time.

i 44

~

l so I took that even without having a detailed e,

be i

breakdewn. Their point was that there were no major m

1

-- -,s . , - . _ _ . _ - , - . . . _

. . = - . - - - . . . -

J 11 l 1

l I deficiencies identified and, in fact, we are ' going through W.

2 the detailed review right now, and putting.all the final 3i documents together, but they had completed the audit, and it [

4' looked like one of the cleaner plants we have'seen, 5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Well, that' sounds good.

g i n -

I 4

E 0 i MR. EISENEUT: Of course, we will giving you that n

d 7l detailed itami ed list. t 2  ! '

j 8l MR. TEDESCO: The other item here that we will talk ' -

.q 9 =cre about later deals with fire precection, and that has a

?

10 E =oved along well, too. ,

~

II CCMMISSIONER GILINSKY: What is the status of that? i 3 -i

" 12 i ,

Do vou want co talk about that later?

g 13 .MR. TEDESCO: We have a slide on it. We can do them a

n ;g ! .

(

E in any order.,

E

= 15 Well, it's up there now.

h ,

MR. VOLLMER:

j 16 ' (Slide.)

• 17 okay. As f ar as the -- well, we start off by saying 3

.$ II that the McGuire Station is unique in that they have proposed i 2

19 a dedicated shutdown system which none of the NTOLs have n

20 proposed, very few plants have proposed. .And': hat's currently 21 under view by the Staff. In terms of the ' dedicated shutdown 4

12 t system, we are in the process of establishing what sort of i

23 i c ::eria sucn a snutscwn system neecs no have in order to mee:

i 94 ~ 1 the requirements for fire protection, and I must stress that.

- t 25 ' this dedicated shutdcwn system is not' intended.co meet all of :

\

> i b -

i 4 4 I

4 \

12 l

I' requirements that one might think a dedicated shutdown system l could be used -- in other words, to get around nonfunctioning 2

3 of a lot of equipment, nonfunctioning in the event c2 seismic a I so on.

[-

5 This system is proposed to be able to assure e n I

+

g 6 i

functionability in the event of a fire, so it is limited in R

R 7  !

scoce, and we have yet to on the Staff really'develco full -

.f e

n i i

A 8l criteria for that in a generic sense, but it will, if things work out as we think they will, will assure us that we have f.

b safe shutdown capability and continual supply of fairly low -

z

!3 II l quantities, with a continuous supply of coolant mak'eup in_che t i

I f= event of a fire by a systert that would be completely independe: >

= 13 i '

have its own power supply valves and coolant supply. l

_i -

f 3

I 14 So it trulv would be a dedicated system.

i c I

=

II 15 ,<

i COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: What is it that makes that l 5

16 system able to cope with fires, but not other events?

n

• 17 Well, it would be independent, l d MR. VOLLMER:

i: i h

n 18 l basically indecendent in all regards to those systems t at wou. I

- 6 i

19 normally be required for this service, and independently loca '

n g and independent power and so on, so id you constrict the fire l i

to a reasonacle nagnitude, you can ,esign and bui_..c nt.s car.ng  :

,1 m

i 22! such that any reasonable fire can't wipe both of them out.

_. i 23 i I

MR. I I S a rd C T : As you point out, the Oconee, as I l'

"4 recall, Cconcee 1, 2, 3 units were the first units that came 25 ' in with a dedicated system. Sack a couple of years ago wnen w ;

.--v-,v.r.~.,..--w,,m.1,,,-,,,,..-,-._,.,-.~. ..~..m.-._..,--.--. -

i

.13 l

/ I 1, were having discussions, there are two things here I .think' that

)

r i

-l 2 are missing.

3 The first.one is the McGuire fire protection program  !

/~ ,

4 as laid out meets our requirements for fire protection evaluati 1 e

g 5 '! except for those areas that were grandfathered, so to speak, Nd 6'

in time by Appendix"R. That is they were given so much time 1 N

8 7< to ecme up with a dedicated' system and so much time for the 7

.; 1 n \

E M 8l three other areas that'you recall we backfit.

e g

9 The way I look at this is'actually a little b'it l E 10 simpler; and that is that rather than go through your plant and ,

i 5 et cetera, it's probably fix up area A, system 3, part C, j 11l j

! 12 more beneficial and in everybody's best interes:-if instead of ,

c  ;

3 13 '

j upgrading every one of those little bits and pieces, you-improv . ; .

.E 8

14 the overall reliability by putting in a ecmpletely separate new system. Go out, tap off a new water supply or reliable 9

s 15 l

~

g 16 water supply, andeactually-have a separate new dedicated shutdc r

d-17

, system. And that's basically the concept of a. dedicated syster 5,- 18 as opposed ec where you normally see on other plants an alterna ,

=.

j 19 '

shutdown system capability.

liR. VOLI.MER: What dat does basically is take care 21 of one Of the more important features, che separation feature ,

on

~

that we have talked about so much, the fire barriers and 23 hat.

secarations and things like

^

94l As I understand it, they will odify those things axcept in that-that are needed, upgrade'to meet Appendix R, 25 l .

. ,f _ _ " * ' ==--"-=m-+-w, ..,,,m,,, ,p _ ,,

I 3

i

! 14.

i 1

particular area, the separation criteria and so on, would'be a i

(

2 met by a dedicated shutdown system. _

f 3

COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Gcod enough.

4 Okay. We can nove on to criteria 51, MR. "'EDESCO:

= 5 that we'are looking into, that we'-

g and this is tae situation .

3 6 have discussed with you on Salem; namely the boundary of the R

.4 7.

... i. containment -- .

N n 8' 8 (Slide.)

d y

9 -- in dealing with situations with the mater-ial 6 10 i

properties to ensure they're 'act in.an embrittled state for a

j 11 '

the didferent conditions,.and we have found nothing unusual 3 12 E with McGuire, and.now we are just pursuing-what we did on n ]3 i -

5  :

Salem, to go through the piping and the fitttings --

m

=

N 14 '

COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: What did you do, go back to r 15 '

i the r.ecords?

t .

16 - We went back to the fabricator and I MR. TEDESCO:

- ?a t

F d

17 tried to get the heat treatman data and what data were avail- l

=

I

$ 18 'l to demonstrate the adequacy of fracture tcughness. It's <

able, ~

1 =.

19 C

a matter of just going through a lot of records and even

,i A

1 20 i It's a rather

]

trying to track a pedigree right down the line.

21 !' edious process, but at the present :ine it's the best way we '-

I I

22 ii found to handle it. We narrow it down here to the poin i tha:

23 ' > we were on Salem, namely icoking 2: the steam and feedwater 24 ,

lines up in the first isolation valve, everything else has been checked out. pretty well.

I l

I

' 15 I COMMISSIONER GILEISKY: And you were able, in fact, 2 to obtain the records you needed?

3 MR. TEDESCO: Well, they went right to the heat 4 treatment place and even talked to the foreman of the process .

e 5l plant and got records out, to the extent that they were able to N

j 6 MR. EISENEUT: Not without tremendous difficulty.

~

n

"=

Let me put this in sort of the negative.

n i j 8! COMMISSIONER GILOTSKY: Lucky they were still there.  ;

t d

9 (Laughter.).

z n  :

. y 10 MR. EISENHUT: That's right. As I point out, there-z ,

I 11 was only one person left that was there during that time, as I 4 ,

it i

" 12 5

recall. . ;I M

5 13 The point here, that the Applicant needs to' supply

=

n 5 I4 data for the steam and feedwater system materials, that is an t_

j

=

15- open problem area. We don't feel that it's necessary for zero' l l

a[

16 power, but it is something that we will be working on trying 1

} :d

• 17 2 to resolve.

I E

! I8 ; In the past, we have taken the position that that ,

s 19 would be resolved for full power, and there will have to be one i i

n 20 of several options undertaken to be able to show us. hat there ,

1 l

<l 2I ! is not a problem with these small pieces of pipe.

U COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: So that's a relatively

-. l i

23 ; recent interpretation cf cur requirement, is. i: not?

24 33, g ScrdUT: That is-=crrect.

25 ' MR. TEDESCO: It's raally updating is, using a nere r e

f

_ , ~ _ - . _ _...L__..._,___.m.._...__.-,.~,._ . , _ . , - _ ......._,...,,4 ., m ,_,.~,4... ., . . .1

l

• l'6 j I J I. current code requirement, .versus a' time when the plant was

.. I 2 built with the existing code at that7 time, where such data were 3' not required. It's that type of approach that'we are dealing 4 with, g 5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: We basically restricted it g n n

earlier to the containment.

I lll 6

R

"., 7 MR. TIDESCO: Yeah.

M

$ 0' MR. VOLLMER: The containment materials itself.

.g

^

9 MR. EISE:rdUT: I guess strictly speaking, if you use i.,

y z

10 the applicable ccde, literally following the regulations, you 5

II would say that you need not evaluate this on this plant, becaus-3 .

f,- 12 an earlier code, probably the ' 68 version, was the (typlicable .

( g 13 miece. -But since we now believe that the later code was,in fac 7

= -

=

a I4 ' more appropriately addressed to this area, we are sort of in I3 essence backfitting this requirement en all these plants.

=

g 16 MR. VOLI.MER: We're going to the scre basic ' require:

1 2 of the criteria, rather than using the code as a criteria of 1

I N I7

s

=

u We are really going back and iccking at the l

l 18 acceptability.

3

?

2 19 =aterial acceptacility and using the GCC-57 criteria as a M

20 l definition of containment boundary, such as we did on Sequoyah.

l I

nl i MR. TEDESCO: Okay, let's take this slide en 22 l masenry walls. 1 23 ( S l;.de . ) '

i I 24I This is anecher non-T:C item. 'Again it's not unique 25 g=,s something that we are doing generically. The sicuation er ,

- a_ _ - - - . _ _

17 t

l 1

McGuire is that Duke Power is doing a reevaluation, and based 4

2l upon the criteria that they would use, they would ' make modifica-3' tions as necessary. ' he Staff is in parallel reviewing this.

4! ~4cwever, we d.nd that ::=pletion is not a raquirement from a e

5

, ero power configuration. It's scmething that we will be doing n

3 6 in the.way of full power, as we did on-Salem.

n

• R 7 Dick, do you want to add something?

n

! 8 MR. VOLLMIR: Well, I'd point .out that on the . mason:-

."4

=

i 9 wall issue, we did find today that there are of the order of a -

i- 10 i'

couple hundred masonry walls, none of these being in the conca:..

5 We hav<

j 11 i

ment building, but all being in the auxiliary building.

d 12 E not identified how many o f those we could call of safety

=

, s 13 significance; that is whether or not they have safety-related 3 ,

I .,,

I = 14 attachec to them .4n some way or penetrating them, or a

equipment

=

2 15 ,

j y ,

they 're close enough so a ' failure of the wall itself would impa But if we judge fr0m what we have I 16 l on safety-related equipment.

M 17 seen in other plants, 50 or 60 percent of those might.be a 5

% 18

= fairly good guess.

0" 19 For those, we will require that strengthening, such n

20

)

tha: they would have seismi: capability, if -- -

21l CIoC55IONZR GI* INEX'?: We are Cunning en the :::.12.

.4 22 ;

o identify the walls? Io we --

23!' MR. VOL* ER: We have been taking a part in that, ye 24.1 Any inspect:ons on ths ?  :

' C0fCESSIONER G~~.INSK'?:

25 :! asst =e the :esident inspector examines the walls.

v,,-n,,,,mn..,-w-v,~.mu--. --,b,-,--w-w .----+,--,.,.r,---,.--,- w-w -- , - - . , , =,~,-m e,-,,-. --m~- >-,-,,-,,-m~ ,r n

, 18 I

As of this time, I haven't heard.anythin I. MR. DONAT:

n I can certainly-2' through the regional office in this regard.

t 3l follow up on it.

l 4 MR. EISENHUT: I think it's fair to say that this is e 5 an area that's been growing over the last few months, auld at n

n  : ..

3 6 the same time, in a lot of people's minds, it's an area that R

j

" 7, may not be really that urgently important from a safety stand-n l

j 8l po int , because I think it's our best technical judgment of the I J i

9 engineers working this, that in all likelihood this is not a 5 10 big problem. But still you have to go trough, check the walls, z

~

!3 1

i II check the loads.

l We nave cra:t criteria for acceptantasty in-house.

' 12 l 5 5 13 It's sort of our spinout of the Trojan review and the Trojan

=

m 5 I4 shutdown of seme time aco. -

However, while that's being developed over the next

[s.

15 g 16. i few months, we are asking the utilities to reanalyze and reveri s

2 a

17 to their own criteria.

' ' I think it's also fair to say that this is an item

=

.- i "s 19 that before a plant would go forth to full power, it is an iter n

20 that we would be asking ISE to verify, for example, that the 21 fixes have been put in place. So I&E would be doing an audi:

12 evaluation. They're just not at this stage in the process yet,

~< 1 I

but we would be asking them later.

'3 l 1

'4

' ' COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Fine.

J t

25 ; MR. VOLI.:ER: Questions on structures on --

i

'l

.I

l I

.  ; 19 i

! i l 5 I

I think we can go on to the COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

'l 2' ,

next item. I 3

MR. TEDESCO: The next slide --

,-~ )

4*

(Slide.)

a 5 -- will be dealing with some of the aspects of TMI g

3 6 items, review in the control : cm. This was done by the Staff n

3 N

7l and it was -- the control recm review had been done by the j

i s ai We added some new 3 Staff. Staff found no major deficiencies.

i 9

• information here for you to deal with the in-core- thermocouples, ,

h 10 5 where we do have a gced capability.

3 11 That really should be.not CTR, but CRT. It's the j

d 12 E cathode ray tube display.

4 -

It displays the --

COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

5 13 l E 14 ' MR. TEDESCOi The camperatures.

s -

E r 15 - the core, or you can call COMMISSIONER GILINSKYi i @ ~ f 16 l then up one at a time?

a 17 MR. TEDESCO:- You can get a printout, a printout of :

z 5'i 18 l

= core, if you want.

b* 19 ' A display or a print 0ut. I don't guess n

MR. EANAUER:

It's easily changed and they -

20 '

I knew the format at the moment.

21 are still messing wita it.

22 i MR. TEDESCO: But tney nave the capability for high ,

,s  ;

23 '

4.

temperature readings.

24 i AR. EISENHUT: I think the key is we have been requ :

e- ,

25 } '-

all plants 1 post-IMI and certain of the- new OLs, that it's just'

---we-e--e++1%r=s m-w w-are- * ~me - re- rw=5 w - e-sw---r ew es-r w-, . me . w w ,, ,+-+ w,e e, r ew-n -ne w e--e w r eew s we-e rn-e c c e e.-e,s -,v - v e e g

l s

20' ss i

1' not acceptable to have the package as it was before, where you 2 >

throw the little switch, get down 12 inches off the ground, 3

and watch the little dial and read a neasurement.

4 We do want to get core-mapping capability, to get a 5 the temperatures and up to the highese levels. Ne have been g .

3 6 requiring that across the board.

n R 7 COMMISSIONER GI1!NSKY: Please proceed.

n P

A 8' MR. TEDESCO: The next slide --

d

= 9 1 g '

(Slide.)

' c 10

' --- deals with the s:sffing and, Steve, I guess 70u 5_

a g

11 ought to say something here before starting off.

a ;n^ Did you have anything more E

COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

=

h 13 <

E to say on the control room?

m

= 14 It's different in an interesting way.

d MR. EANAUER:

9 2

15 i It's going to be interesting just to- find out how it goes.

I 3

16 It ' s sna11, and there are several other small control rooms a

d 17 around, but it's small in that the Uni

1 and Uni: 2 parts of i l

=

Of course, are close together, and we are kind of watching it.

t w

=-

l n j

1 j at the moment, they have one unit about to go into operation.

20] >

When Unit 2 comes into cperation,. we are going to i,

21 i' have to icok pre:ty carefully := see if there's any interferen:

D, l

because it's a narrew U-shape with Uni: 1 on one side of the

.I 23 U and Unit 2 on the other.

24 i 4 I have some pictures, if you are interested.

I CCMMISSIONER GILINSKY: One room?

l' ,

- ' ~ > ~ - -.s, ..b....,,,.

, _ , __ ~~ - " ' - + - 4 . ., ..m. ._.,

= = = _ = = = _ = _ __

_ - . = - . _ _ _ . --.

h

• 1

. . 21 l i

N ,

1 l

I' MR. HANAUER: One room. And it's by far the

. I 2 closest proximity ed Units 1 and 2 we have seen. The two i

3i units are unfortunately in a mirror image, but the panels, when- ,

4 you get inside the panels, they are the same, rather than g 5' mirror images of each other.

N 2 6' That is to say, the layout panel'by panel, the

~

n l il 7 i layout of the panels with respect to each other is a mirror M

j t

8' image, but the two panels of any one kind, Units 1 and 2, J

9 are the same.

f S 10 MR. EISENHUT: Co you follow? Because a real mirror-z_

=

4 II .

image would mean if one dials clockwise, he's increasing - -

3 d

i_

12 che image would be countercicckwise. a "5

13 MR. HANAUER: 'That's right, 'and there are plants

- 1 3 14 '

2 like that.

c=

II COMMISSIONER G~LDISKY: There are?

6 z

![ IO MR. HANAUER: Yes. This one is a somewhat less e

t 3

17 obnoxious kind of mirrc image.

t

• II COMMISSIONER GILD 75KY: I guess that surprises me.

r-i 19 MR. EISENEU": Well, that's one thing when'you go

.5 20 to the plant and lock at the mirror images, what it really is, 1

21! f -- :o pick a simple case, if it's a 3-sectica panel, the three sections, A, 3, and C, are in reverse Order, but within

(

23 ;

each panel, everything is identical.

M

.) COMMISS~CNER GILINSKY: Su: the control rocm mimics

(

25; the plant, because the plant is --

>- u mee 8 muswux-usumo tuamm_masm moununam+mu emu _

l 22i  !

l MR. HANAUER: I don't know if this plant is: mirror o I'

2 not. Scmeone would have to tell me. Some plants are mirror an 3' some plants are not.

4 COMMISSIONER GILINSrt: I guess I was asking a e 5 question and net making a statement.

A 3 6 MR. EANAUER: I don't know.

a R ,

I'11 be going down there and 3, 7l COMMISSIONER GILINSrl:

I j

99 8' take a look. I guess I'll discover that.

.a

9 Why don't you go on.

L slide --

E 10 XR. TEDESCO: The nex i.

3 11 , (Slide.)

s >

I 12 ' Steve, do you want to --

=

4 I  : 13 MR. HANAUER: We have a little more information on i

n 5 14 staffing. I'm sorry, I'm groping for a piece of paper.

t

?,, 15-since we wrote the SER, there have been scme w ,

z y 16 examinations given. They did a little better on reactor a

'd 17 operators and not quite as well on seniors as they expected.

a

=

5 18 I have also managed to lose my list that I had here.

=

W

- l9 Here we are.

5 n

20 COMMISSIONER GILINSr?: Can you say something abcut 4-21 the experience level of the crew?

22 1 MR. HANAGER: Yes. Ihey are using some pecple I

so they know-what ?MRs are. The crew :.s -- I l

23 from Cconee, 24 e3n e ;3ci e i i  := you, cut they are overall very experienced.

t i

25 i COMMISSIGNER GILINSrl: Okay.

.i"

________---_______ _ _-____-_ _ - _____ -____---____ -_-______.__-________-._____ - - - - - m_ .. . . ..

_______,=_r.nw n m n_w_ w wrwrw m ne mnw.mn_ _

. 23 1 MR. EANAUER: I can give you some up-to-date numbers e

2 At this moment there are 15 licensed senior operators, plus 3' seven or eight who are license.d, but who are intended for the 4 management staff, and are not regularly assigned shift duties, e

g 5 They have a total of 23 licansed SRos, and 14 licensed operater

~

2 6 So these are slightly different from the numbers ,

~

n which we predicted when we did the SIR. We then predicted 17

"- 7 N

seniors and nine operators. This, ccmpared with the requiremen 5 8 A

.q j~

9, is -- the best view of the.. requirements is in the SIR, page 0 10 22-8. The rec.uirements for each shift they need.:wo SROs z

~,

2 11

< and two Ros .

3 d

z 12 They plan to start with four eight-hour' shifts. . -

(  :

m 13 The ideal is five, but- thuv. 're a little short en the five.

I w

14 3ecause their shift technical adviser is also SRO-licensed, 9

C-15 this is a plus. This means that their shift technical enviser 3

? 16 is well-versed in the plant and its operation and the procedurs

n d

17 in a way that is not true in many plants, where the shift

=

si 18 technical adviser is not licensed.

E 19 8 However, they pay for this in a situation where A

20 they are a little short of senior reactor operators by depleti:

"1

^

i che number available for shif: Operatien. They have therefore h 6 asked and we have accepted a situatien where the shif: technic

- a i'

23 : adviser =ay for short perieds relieve the senic: reacter rpora-i "4

^

l, in the centrol room, since he's licensed and cche: .iise entirel* .

But we have placed limits on this in Order ::

25 i available.

x _

_ _ = , , ~;==;p; n =n  ; aa w = .=

a 24~ l

.l l

l l

3 t

control it, and we are going- to review it.

~.

2 There are a substantial numbe'r of'different arrangem 3 in how the different companies use the shift technical adviser.

COMMISSIONERbILINSKY: Cces'the shift technical

=

5 adviser requirement apply in the zero power stage?.

N ~

6 Yes, sir.

I MR. EANAUER:

~

n 4

j 7,

• MR. EISENHUT: We took the position that any license n

if you have a license and you are above moden -- ~

J

= 9,

- MR. HANAUER: 5 and 6.

z E 10 MR. EISENHUT: Yeah, I know. I was trying-to'rememb i

5 11 i What it really mean's is the plant is operating and'not shut dow-g ,

c' 12 in cold shutdown, you need.to have an STA. That's the positicn E

13 ' we are taking. And Steve-said, we are seeing all kinds of i

E 14 k 5" tradeoffs.

r j 15 Here, theoretically, if you count the numbers, they i

T 16 can make it with 15 SRCs going to five shifts. However, there 3

a Y

d 17 is no flexibility at all for anyone even to take off, .or no

=

$ 18 1 flexibility for requalification, because you need the one STA,

=

19 t

j the one control rocm, you need the one SRO, control recm, .SRO,

'0 plus .he STA. So you really need three pecple in this plant.

21 1 ,

And they are one of the better plants in the sense of 1 22 .i qualified STA in that sense. There are not that many coming i

i 23 !  ! in that as of today can say they han --

24 . Let's see, did ycu say all COMMISSIONER GILINS*EI:

25 the STAS are --

.-__-__._-___J--------.-_. ____._----_.--__ --__-____ -.__.- - _----_.- _ -_-.- _.__-_.-_- - - - -- - _ -

1 -. . . - - - -- -

7

• e l

-l 4

, 25 t

1 Yes,-sir.

i MR. EISENHUT: i 2! - .are qualified SROs?

', CCMMISSIONER GILINSr?:

3' ,

All the STAS have senior licenses.

MR. HANAUER:

)

4 That is very_ nice.

COMMISSIONER GILINSr?:

= 5 MR. HANAUER: Yes, chat's good ~, and you-pay for this y i 3' 6 in a smaller complement of SRos available fer the shift work n

R 7,

! l and in the concession we' have made allcwing the STA who has a n

j,,

8 '! ~

i license and is legal for this purpose'to relieve'the centrol roi

9 z

SRO for brief periods.

l 5 10 >

-COMMISSIONER GILINSr?: Let's see.  ::ces that' about I

=

- 2 11 i ,

do it?

d 12 Yes, sir.

Z MR. EANAUER: .

=

d 13 Thank you.

E , COMMISSIONER GILINSr?:-

I 14 !

d (Slide.)

L .

this is a highly-experienced ecmpany.

c 15 en sanagement, -

j .

~

14 They have d i They've been running the Ocenee Station' for years.

d 17 a McGuire and Catawba under construction, and have construction 5 18  ;

5 permit for another plant they are --

l 19

- COMMISSIONER GILIUSrf:

Are nuclear-plants handled--

A 20 separately within the mmpany,_cr dcas that fall under seme 21

', general --

22 i They have not cencentrated.che, nuclear MR. HANAGER:

23 i che vice presiden:

l plants under a single corporate official at

- 24 j(; level., They have an operations ~ supervisor and an engineering 25 ,

j supervisor, both of whcm supervise: both nuclear . and non-nuclea:

-_ L -- - - - --_- ---- -

x . .ma - _;u;;u;; w= . =.

26 1

i 1

1 plancs. It's a very large corporation, and each of these 2 officir.ls has a nuclear assistant-who has substancial resources 3' at his ccmmand. And it works very well at Oconee. We have 4 therefore chosen not to impose some paper pattern upon them.

5 CCMMISSIONER G LINSKY: Okay.

R 4

a MR. TEDESCO: The next slide -

n d 7 (Slide.)

n 9

A 8 - deals with emergency planning, and here we are J

c 9 focusing on the issuea for the zero gewer license to establish e ,

=. ,

l t: 10 ene rec.uirements tha: they had to meet in the existine recula: .

55 11

< before November 3rd.

m 25 12 They have established a technical supper: facility,

13

.. g a=ergency operatiens facility. We have ---

~

n

= 14 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Where is the emergency d -

^ .

15 g operations facility?

~ 1 16 It's an intterim facility right ncw.

3 MR. TEDESCO:

a

-  ; ~#

XR. KIVERN: Ccm=issioner, :'m Tem Kavern --

d

=

5 18 COMMISS!CNER GIL*NSKY: Why don't you just sit down.

f 19

MR. KIVIEN: I'm Tem Kevern, Division of Emergency 20 }1 Precaredness.

21 i The EOF is a.a i-*='- # $cility -hey have presently 22 desi:nated which is a shcr distance frem site -- a shcre

' - distance f cm the plant itself, apprcxima:ely 1200 yards. It's m

"4 an adjacent set of buildings hcusing the si=cla:cr and 4: The technical suppe:

~

training . f acilities and the IOF f acility.

i --

' 27 l

1 1

1 center is just adjacent to the control room.

2 COMMISSIONER GILIMSKY: And you say that's an interi-3 center?

4 MR. KEVERN: As of new, yes, sir.

e-5 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Are there plants for a more. 1 9  !

. 1 e

=

6- permanent center?

n F.

'- 7l MR. KFIERN: They will meet whatever our requirement

- t M

i

' i 8 are in accordance with NUREG 0696, when it is published.

d 9

CCMMI55IONER GILINSKY: Ckay.

z E

j 10 Let's see. *dhere is the status of the state plan?

= 11 it Co vcu know?

'i z 12 MR. KF/I2N: The state plan is under review by FEMA.

=

= Most recently the i

13 They have reviewed.several iterations of it.

E 5

14 review was brcught to a head by the exercise that was held-9

!:I 15 the early part of December. We are presently awaiting a report

=

Y 16 frcm FEMA, and our c.reliminarv. findir.gs were chat it was a

3 17 a favorable exercise, and they will'okay the plan.

s G

18 ' CCMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Do you knew when they are

?

r-19 M

= likelv to act on it?

=

20 14R. Kr/IRN: I expect the report in by the end of l y^

l this =cnth.

i 22 i,

w AM _ co--m.--_ ai r..s v...

.ca... .. 7e _, _, , .... . ., k S, t...

m 23lI t M2. EISEN*iUT: The last slide --

24 I 1 (5lide.)

i.

25 *

-- is just a brief su= mary. It's sc=e of the kinds

r.  ;;;;; ;; .4;.;;;;;;; ;;;;;;;;;; ;; -;;;;;; ;; ;;;;; . .;;;;;u,  ;;;a;;;;;;

e' * ,

,I 28 l.

.)

' of things we are working on. Obviously there is a whole list r

2 of'thinga we are still working on'.

Scme of the non-TMI things, 'f

)

3' '

are seme of the ones we mentioned already. The I&E' inspection i

~l 4'

of a number of areas. I&E bulletin 79-02, which is base plates o 5 79-14 is the as-built --

H a

6,'

CCMMISSIONER GILINSE: Can yo'u tell me something

^

n 3

~~

7  ; about the containment leaktight integrity? '

n  !

S M

8' MR. TEDESCO: Yeah, that's a license submission.

d

9 COMMISSIONE3 GILINSE: What is that about? I E-E 10

i notice n.a: --

~- -

5 11 It modifies around the airlock, so

< ' MR. TEDESCO:

is 3n

• they run a test, run a leak test. It's not a modification tha:

. = 13 -

E has to be made.

E W

14 ! MR. EISENEUT: This is a generic problem on most of a

u F 15 the plants, including the operating plants. In order to make 16 Part 50, we have taken l*' the plants be able to meet Appendix J, 17 d the position that you have to be able to run local leak-rate

=

$ 18 tests, and then as an overall containment integrated leak-rata

=

a 19 j test. And quite often there are scme =cdifications - required 20 ,

i to be able to actually even run the test, anc then they actuall

'l

~

3 have to ran the test to show the leaktightness, so in this 22 case the airlock is the key.

j, 23

I It's a senndard issue chan's generic across the 24 'i board, and it's just one issue that's still being wrapped ap 25 to be.able to shew that they have made the =cdifications to be

- - _-___- _ _ i_-____ - ________ - _ _ _ _ -- - - - _ - _ _ - -

q 1 29 )>

i l 1 4

I. able to run this test..

2' CCMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Fine.- Why don't we just go (

3 MR. EISENEUT: Sure. The I&E inspection, a number 4 of areas, the generic ~ general one to say that.the plant is

~

S 'l ready to go. ,

9 I 3 6 02, 79-02, is one on base plates. .

~

n b 7 i 79-14 is one on the as-built conditions of thelplant n'

j 8 I

COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Are these inspections d '

9

~

". =erfer=ed bv vou?

z, S 10 MR. CCNAT: Right. In the case of the first ene, E

!a II there we are waiting again, Like we are waiting for that

. "_ 12 i mcdificatien to be' completed, they are waiting for the seals to

~

5 I3 arrive, and then they will be doing the leak tests.

3 s 14 ' In the case of 79-02 and 79-14, we're gettingLtogeth c

= ,

15 > there with the construction people, The Licenseds work.cn.the h, ,

d base plates, which is 79-02, is supposed to completa diis week.

5 3

17 We should be reviewing that next week.

!: I8 The next item, which is fire protection, there the i

19 items have been identified by specialist inspector, and when w

20 the Licensee indicates that the modifications are complete, we I will get together with the specialist inspec c: and the License 22 l and verify the ccepletien of the work.

L

• i 23 ' CCMMISSIONER GILINSKY: And the TMI inens?

i.

24 ' MR. EISENECT: The TMI items is just a listing,.

28 this is just a handful of the whole listing of the standard

- ..___L_-_-_-_-_--_---___ .

30' l

1 TMI issues that you have seen before. We will require the low 2a pcwer testing program to be gone through.similar to other-3 plants since TMI. And .we will be going down. the entire lis: of 4 the TMI' issues that we normally'do, that you'll expect.to see, e 5 a l'isting, actually, in theilicense itself. .

R 3 6 CCMHISSIONER GILINSKY: LCould-you tell me what scrt

^

n 7 of tests are conducted at-:ero pcwer?_ What ---

"h n

j 8' MR. TEDESCO: They're basic'cr'iticality. tests. They J"

9 run redscrth, check ou the instrumentatica, and do seme --

~.

-  ?

L-10 CIMMISSIONER GILIMSKY: They have to predi z

= '

Il criticality, don't they?

l

• i 12 MR. TEDESCO: Oh, y.es, yes. Sure. ,,

=

g 13 CCMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Ecw close have plants been

=

3 14 5 coming to that?

C 15

• MR. TEDESCO: I think very good by now.

h z

y 16 MR. DCNAT: I think the best explanation for it is e

3 17 to say that you always should be ready for criticality at any s

They usually predict it fairly closely. They de 1 over

~

18 3 time.

2 19 picts of the source range indication, and by doing that, then n ,

20 they can pretty well estimate the boren cencontration when

• 1 they'll actually go critical.

en

• • 8 CCMMISSIONEP GILINSKY:

~4 hat are the safeguards 23 i f or ensuring that you don't go above :ero pcwer?

24 i

,i MR. TEDESCO: We define :ere pcwer as ' a conditica I

25 where you are within ene decade of the point that you star:

s . ,

• 1 31 i i having heat to your primary coolant. So you-estaclish a power  ;

j i 1

2 level and you start puccing energy into che coolanc, aid you i 3,

monitor the temperature rise. You find out where that minimum

-4 point is, and then we say within one decade of that level is l

= 5 caro power.

A You are not at a point where you are able to do'a ,

3

. 6 .i k7> heat balance on the whole point, because you're just not puttin'

~

r 3 \

So it's-just a very, very low amount of j 8 i out that much energy.

d fission energy that goes into the system.

= 9 i

5 10 You can't run a real goed calibration, so you have l E

to stay way below that level.

h 11 3

COMMISSIONER GILniSKY: The plant.is set up to. trip d 12 .

_z .

13 that point?

s a There are reactor protectic MR. TEDESCO: Oh, yeah.

l: 14 '

1 li 15 systems in effect. - j 2

i z And what is that pcwer level-16 COMMISSIONER GILDTSKY:

3 17 roughly?

d a

2 MR. TEDESCO: Right now, che best estimate we have,

$ 18 It really'is t 19 we are talking about a few tenchs of a percent.

=

M 20 very Icw level.versus, you-know, the 5 percent chat we were 21 dealing wi-h before.

l MR. IISEMEUT: Yeah, I.was crying cc icck. There as 22 23 : actually --

t 24j MR. TE0ESCO: It's en the license.

- 1 Yeah, I knew it's.in here. just M?.. EISE1 HUT:

25 l I l

_____________.____.._m_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ __ __.__m.m__.__ __ .

I

i l

l 32 l

? l 1

couldn't find it. There's an actual license condition where we' 2 defined what we meant by it, so that anything above. that would 3'

c,e a --

4 Wall, let's see. A percent i CCMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

e g

5 6

would be scmething like 30 meganatts?

~

6 MR. TEDESCO: That would be roughly 1 percent.

^

n a 7i COMMISSIONER GILD 75KY: So you are talking about 20 n

j 8 t

or 30 megawatts or something like that?

J

9 No, no.

MR. TEDESCO:

f Ch, you're.saying tenths.

5 10 i CC12iISSIONER GILIMSKY:

G 11 MR. TEDESCO: Tenths of 1 percent, yeah.

3 i 12 So several =egawatts.

z COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

f

\ --

13 MR. EISENHUT: In fact, maybe certainly less than a 5 ,

E 14 megawatt. In fact, we said in the license :ero pcwer should be S

r 15 G

=

considered to be one decade as ceasured en the' intermediate 16 l range nuclear instrumentation, above the point at which sensibi heat is added to the reacecr coolant. So they can actually mak 17 d

=

5 18 a determination as to where they would be and make setpoints

=

C 19 j accordingly.

20 COMMISSIONER GILINSKY: .Okay. I've gc a few i -

21I randem questions left over.

i Oces the license seem to have a whole let abcut

{!,

23 >'

antitrust in that? Why is that in there at zero pcuer?

24 :

I MR. CHRISTEMBERRY: Though it is a :ero pcwer licent 25 is nonetheless an operating license which dees require unde:-

l it

--_____E_-_-_______---_----""""""- - - - - - - _ , _ _ _ _ _ _

. . , L I

33 l

1 cur regulations - these are license conditions that were 2- placed en by the. Soard to be carried over into- the full power.

3' license as well.

4 Let's see. Cn the question COMMISSICNER GILINSKY:

r a 5

of operators,-d.es Duke have.a simulator for.McGuire?

n

~

6 XR. TEDESCO: They do?

n R 7' VOICE: Yes.

n

• 8 They do?'

M CCMMISSIONER'GILINSKY:

J

= 9-g MR. TEDESCO: They're shaking : heir head..

^

~

h 10 Well, that 's why they are i CCMMISSICNER GILINSKY:

=

3 11 j

here. It's gced to knew.

d 12 And if authorization was granted by z Let's see.

= .

= 13 the Commission, when would fuel be leaded?

L. E-n

= 14 The license as written could be issued d , MR. TEDESCO:

h 7

15 at any time. New the actual date is shout what, the end of' 16

$ January?

F d

17 MR. OCNAT. The licensee is saying they'd be ready ,

=

5 la sased en the.cutstanding items that they have get

= by the 29th.

a t 19 plus the overall condition of the plant, they could probably j .

20j achieve that date, er by the end Of the senth.

21 Other than these items here, I'd say probably abcu i

the only c:her najor item wculd be pr:bably c'==

'4 12 , ess in I

23 ' sc=e of the areas, and they have crews working on that.

24 -' Okry. That about covers COMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

25 i ' the coints that I wanted to cover.

4

. - . _- .L.

s

.- ~ . .

'1 1

34 ')

i i

I 1 Did you have 'anything that you wanted to add on : the-2 basis of your experience? How long have you been there?

3i '

MR. DONAT: 'I arrived the-1st of_ August.

4 And I'd'say that the' items that-are presently in the

-Like I said,

=

g 5

license pretty well cover the outstanding areas. '

3

• 6' the additional- area of plant cleanliness, which they are :sendin-

~

n ,

R

,~

7 ',

i sizeable crews to work on. And hangars and supports, generally n ,.

2 M

8 the 79-02, has really been the pacing item until now, and ' that d >

o 9, 2-appears to be c= ming around.

- 10 CCMMISSIONER GILINSKY: Yeah, I hope to visit the E

g 11 l

Pl ant before it gets authorization for certainly full power,

= 12 5

~

and I hope well before then.

k

13 Is there anyone here who-- a party,. would like to sa x

= 14 d'

a word or two?

s, j

15 If not, than thank you very much.

l s 3

16 MR. TEDESCO: Could I just indicate to you that --

17 CCMMISSIONER GILINSKY:

You'd like to say scmething E 18  ;

- v ou ' re a p arty , too .

s

- 19 (Laughter.)

A "O

^

MR. TEDESCO: We have been working on the license,

.I 21 I  ! and as we go through it, we see that there are some areas we

~

22 .

want to clarify some of the wording on. So there will be

- t, 23 ' - seme very minor changes to clarify it.

I CCMMISSIONER GILINSKY: On this license?

24

i 25 i

- - - - - . - .i,. _ ,,

~ ,

d 35 i

l i

1 MR. TEDESCO: On this license that we have shown.you 2' yes. - We got together with our lawyers, and we realized that. _

3i i

some words shculd be sharpened up a little bit. But there will

$ be no substantive changes to it, though.

g 5 CC20CSSIONER GILINSKY: Okay. Well, thank you very n

n j 6l much. I appreciate it.

n' 3

"., 7f (Whereupen, at 4:20 p.m., the meeting was n

j i

8' adjourned.)

J t- 9 2,,l E 10 i i 3

< 11 :-

3 '

'd 12 z

%.e (v s 13

=, $

E 14 a.

15 ' .

a E i T 16 3

2

-i 17 G

=

5 18

=

=

CI 19 b a 20l 21) a 23 l i 24 -

i ,

t

-_- _-. s_ . . . - - _ . . . _ .

e IMCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSICN This is Oc certify tha: the at: ached ;receedings 'cefore the NRC Commission in the matter ef:

McGuire OL Oate of ?receeding: ,7 n , 21, 1981 Decket Number:

Place of Proceedi.:g: wou.,,+... . n c.

mme.

• ..b. 4 . *3.

• d. *..s .'. 4 . J. =.

w.

..e 4 a. b.. a. .T .4 I d** '.*. a. .- s..t. .d .a..S a. a. m4

• r e

, p 2 &.

• M. k. 'a.

. . .J .e 4. s *. .h. . .a

. a. . . . . . ,

.. , a.

. .. . e. - - .a 31 <.

ANN RILEY

c. e. .c .a 4. .s .

a

.s. . .,.. c.. . . , /. . .s. ..,

. . ,, 3

. p

/.. . vb4 Official Reporter (Signatu.~e) 1 I

I t I a.

1 l

l i

f:b:=~..

i c:::

- i

- +.

l=.:: .  !

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

'7

EE NVCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSTON '

)'

@h~

In the Matter of 57

) -

fi

) Docket No.'(s) 50-369 Dtrr3 POWER COMPANY

) 50-370' M

. Ei (William B. McGuire Nuclear ) j:jj Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2) ) ,

) ' '

a==

) [:(,-[ : ,

) ,

.=;;. .

55 CERTITICATE OF SERVICE 55 5:5.!

I hereby certify that I have this day served the foregoing document (s)Y ]{

i upon each person desig~nated on the of ficial service list compiled by M the Of fice of the Secretary of the Commission in this proceeding 2- in  %

acccrdance with the requirements of Section 2.712 of 10 CFR Part *

. :s:+'

Rules of Pract!.ce, of the Nuclear Regulatory Cocmission's Rules and  :':::

=

Regulations.

E

.~

?.:

i=

Dated at Nashington, D.C. this '

day of *. 1 198_/ .

=,::: '

'/ ':

g .

Office of.the Sbcretary of the Commission

.e.

..y

, E t

d 4

4

" * ~ c ae e- * = - - .- -- - --*

- . - . . - - , . .~ . . .

v .* e-9 9

. .4

. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In'the' Matter of )' -

)

DUKE POWER COMPANY ) Dock'e t l No . (s) 50-369

) - 50-370 (William B. McGuire Nuclear Station, ' )'

Units l'and 2) )

.) i

) -)

)  :

i

' SERVICE LIST:

Robert M. Lazo, Esq. , Chairman Duke Power Company Atomic Safety and Licensing' Board ATTN: Mr. Wm. 0.' Patker, Jr.

U.S. Nucleat Regulatory Commission Vice President - Steam Production Washington, D.C. . 20555 P.O. Box 2178 Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 Dr. Cadet H. Hand, Jr., Director Bodega Marine Laboratory ' J. Michael McGarry, III, Esq.

University of California Deb evoise . and . Liberman P.O. Box 247 1200 17th Street, N.W.

Bddega Bay, California 94923 Washington, D.C. 20036 Dr. ~ Emmeth A. Luebke ,

' William L. Porter, Esq.

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board W.H. Grigg, Esq.

~

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Duke Power Company ,

i Washington, D.C. 20555 422 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 2E242 Counsel for NRC Staff '

Office of the Executive Legal Director Mr. Jesse L. Riley, President-U.S. Nuclear Regulat.ory Commission The Carolina Environmental Study Group Washington, D.C. 20555 854 Henley Place Charlotte, North Carolina 28207

. Dr. John M. Barry Department of Environmental Health ,

1200~Blythe Boulevard Charlotte, North Carolina 28203

_ , , _ . . - - , _ ,s u. . . , - . ... _. -