ML20134C545

Discusses 960916 Meeting W/Util in Atlanta,Ga Re Licensee Proposal for Reviewing & Revising UFSAR

ML20134C545
Person / Time
Site:	Surry, North Anna
Issue date:	09/19/1996
From:	Belisle G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	Ohanlon J VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.)
References
NUDOCS 9609270280
Download: ML20134C545 (23)

Text

.

Septonber 19, 1996 Virginia Electric and Power Company ATTN: Mr. J. P. O'Hanlon Senior Vice President - Nuclear Innsbrook Technical Center 5000 Dominion Boulevard Glen Allen. VA 23060

SUBJECT:

MEETING

SUMMARY

- VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT (UFSAR) REVIEW FOR SURRY AND NORTH ANNA DOCKET NOS. 50-280. 50-281. 50-338. AND 50-339

Dear Mr. O'Hanlon:

This refers to the meeting conducted at your request at the NRC Region II Office in Atlanta Georgia on September 16. 1996. The meeting's purpose was to discuss Virginia Electric and Power Company's proposal for reviewing and revising the UFSAR.

It is our opinion that this meeting was beneficial in that it provided us with a better understanding of your UFSAR review. Specific topics discussed included management's expectations, background and current initiative.

A list of attendees and a copy of your handout is enclosed.

In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice." Part 2.

Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations a co]y of this letter and its enclosures will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.

. Should you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact us.

Sincerely.

Original signed by George A. Belisle George A. Belisle. Chief Reactor Projects Branch 5 Division of Reactor Projects Docket Nos. 50-280. 50-281. 50-338, and 50-339 License Nos. DPR-32. DPR-37. NPF-4, and NPF-7

Enclosures:

1.

2.

List of Attendees The Updated Final Safety Analysis

/

Report (UFSAR) September 16, 1996 l

/

cc w/encls: See page 2 9609270200 960919 s PDR ADOCK 05000280

[b

l VEPC0 2 cc w/encis:

l M. L. Bowling. Manager Attorney General i Nuclear Licensing and Operations Supreme Court Building

, Support 900 East Main Street ,

1 Virginia Electric & Power Company Richmond, VA 23219 .

l Innsbrook Technical Center i

! 5000 Dominion Boulevard Robert B. Strobe. M.D. M.P.H. '

l l Glen Allen. VA 23060 State Health Commissioner Office of the Commissioner W. R. Matthews. Manager Virginia Department of Health North Anna Power Station P. O. Box 2448 P. O. Box 402 Richmond. VA 23218 Mineral. VA 23117 D. A. Christian. Manager Surry Power Station Virginia Electric & Power Company 5570 Hog Island Road Surry. VA 23883 Executive Vice President Old Dominion Electric Cooperative 4201 Dominion Boulevard Glen Allen. VA 23060 Dr. W. T. Lough  !

Virginia Cor) oration Commission l Division of Energy Regulation P. O. Box 1197 Richmond. VA 23209 Ray D. Peace. Chairman Surry County Board of  :'

Supervisors P. O. Box 130 Dendron. VA 23839  :

William C. Porter. Jr.

County Administrator Louisa County P. O. Box 160 Louisa VA 23093 Michael W. Maupin. Esq.

Hunton and Williams Riverfront Plaza. East Tower 951 E. Byrd Street Richmond. VA 23219 l

l VEPC0 3 Distribution w/encls:

B. Buckley. NRR G. Edison, NRR

l. R. Gibbs .RII l

P. Fillion, RII E. Testa, RII l W. Stansberry. RII C. Payne, RII G. Hallstrom. RII PUBLIC NRC Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1024 Haley Drive Mineral. VA 23117 NRC Resident Inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l Surry Nuclear Power Station 1 5850 Hog Island Road Surry VA 23883 i

I i

OrffCF 2ff OPD l I  ? '& ,

SIGNATURE N.

DATE

'd09 /

u

/ 96

<c.A 0

f

/\ / 96 09 / / 96 09 / / 96 09 / / 96 09 / / 96 l

COPY? kE) NO YES ' ' NO YES NO YES NO YE$ NO YES NO OffillAL Kt.LDkD CDPf DOCUMLNi NAME; 6: WEPLUMiu.5UM

[ l i

_ _ ~ . _ ._ _ _. _ _ .

LIST OF ATTENDEES ,

NRC Attendees:

S. D Ebneter, Regional Administrator, Region II (RII)

J. R. Johnson, Acting Director Division of Reactor Projects (DRP), RII A. F.-Gibson, Director. Division of Reactor Safety (DRS) RII G. A, Belisle. Chief, Reactor Projects Branch 5. DRP. RII .

C. A. Casto Chief. Engineering Branch, DRS  :

D. C. Payne, Senior Licensing Examiner. DRS P. C. Hopkins. Project Engineer. DRP, RII Licensee Attendees:

M. L.~ Bowling, Manager, Nuclear Licensing and Operations Support J. D. Hegner, Project Manager M. W. Henig. Senior Staff Engineer l

i i

l l

l ENCLOSURE 1 l.

l l

4 l

l l

i

~

i i

l The Cpdated Final Safety l Analysis Report (LFSAR) t I

i 1

XRC Region II ,

September 16,1996 l

. VIRGINEA POWER

ENCIDSURE. 2

-,- - - ~ ,,,-,--,,,,,__ ..,..-,,,.....,... _ ,, _ .. ,. --

_ . . , _ , . _ _ _v.,-.-,,.--,-.-

i i

. Agenda 4 ,

i 1

l l

Management's Expectations

! Background 1

! Current Initiative i.

2 i

i  ;

'j i

)

j .. w- -

Virginia Power Management Expectations M tO m Surry and North Anna are to be designed and operated consistent with the information contained in their UFSARs m The UFSARs are to be consultedin day-to-day  !

activities affecting the nuclear stations t

a Changes to the UFSARs are to be accurate, timely, and made in accordance with approved administrative  !

controls to ensure that regulatory requirements are met '

..O WRGINIA POWER

9 9 f

Background

~

EE O

! m Surry Power Station

- Operating licenses issued in 1972 and 1973

- FSAR initially updated in 1982 l - Original updatec. FSAR was/is eight volumes .

i m North Anna Power Station '

- Operating licenses issued in 1978 and 1980 l - FSAR initially updated in 1982 I - Original updated FSAR was/is sixteen volumes O

wn-n-i

4 UFSAR Maintenance

+ - ~

gg m Changes to the UFSARs occur as a result of individual change drivers and various programmatic initiatives

e Individual change drivers include

'

- Design changes ,

l - Procedure changes i

j - Engineering analyses  :

- Licensing bases changes l - Discovery of errors

.O -

.._ __.._ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . , . _ _ _ _ _ , . . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . , _ _ _ - - , ~ . . - , - - - , _ , . . , _ _ _ _ , . _ ,

I Programmatic Initiatives I:O m Several programmatic initiatives have already been

undertaken by Virginia Power to examine UFSAR l content from various perspectives:

- EngineeringValidation(1989-90)

- Electrical Chapters Review (1991-NAPS) - -

- OperationsReview(1992) <

- Environmental & Stagnant Chapters Review (1994) -

- PeriodicReviews(1995-Present) m Those initiatives were considered cost-effective  :

methods for achieving UFSAR improvements u Over 400 UFSAR change packages were processed

.O

• V!RGINIA POWER

..,+www+w,e, - . . . _ __._c~,%., - - - - , ,_ -mws-- mw-www,..ww.ww.,-=%,.. _ _--.w w w - we,-w,ww-ewr--, ,e w-w w- W + 9-w w , , n..-- ,=-,v-,---

Recent Events E0 l m Events at Millstone reemphasized the importance of l the document j m Similarly, information made known to Virginia

Power management reemphasized the need for .

l continued concern with UFSAR quality: ,

i l - NRC reviews and inspections (

) - Corporate Nuclear Safety Change Assessment -

i  ;

- Nuclear Oversight Audit Findings -

- Station Deviation Reports l - Integrated Trend Reports l

. O VIRGINIA POWER

l l UFSAR Project Task Team EE O l

l m A Virginia Power project team was l established in May 1996 in response to l growing concerns regarding L FSAR quality t 1 l m The project team was composed of .

j individuals with operations, engineering, ,

! and licensing expertise...and who were familiar with the EFSARs i

i VIRGINIA POWER

9 UFSAR Team Findings EE:O m Based on extensive programmatic reviews and audits by various internal groups, no immediate safety concerns exist m However, problems continue to exist with  ;

process, usage, and content  :

l VIRGINIA POWER

_ .m--,mww-w =wn as = = eve- _.--mwmew-w,-,w-----wwww .w----.u--=- . .

___.mrwe,ws,=-23_ _ _

._,-ywmm,w=**e=*% ='7v-'N'y v* Mw,-, ,s w* ,y w w--

Project Team Recommendations

! un a l u Focus on process improvements to achieve a durable

] increase in UFSAR quality j u The UFSAR Improvement Action Plan consists of two basic components: ,

l 4

1. Improving processes and usage ,

{ 2. Assessing operations and content '

l m Once the action plan is implemented, the project l l team will validate process and usage improvements, i

4 and make appropriate recommendations for further

! action O

VIRGINIA POWER

-r,- - - , m . = - e - w w .-, w w ww w w w. www-.- m,..m.,....,.....,,w.,,......,- . , - -.mm..,-,--.w--wem..-.-.. ,,.--3, .. ~ , . . ,om.-mw. . - - , , , -w..,,-,--ww-- ***~,ew.ws---, - - - - , , - - -,--..

l 1

l Process and Usage Improvements l mus:a

! m Achieve a higher level of accountability u Simplify administrative controls t

j u Develop an EFSAR Writers Guide

) m Improve integration with other programs l

m Implement electronic versions of C FSARs m Conduct EFSAR awareness training l

l 9

,' VIRGINIA POWER

l .

l-l l Operations & Content Assessments IO j o Industry initiative to conduct CFSAR assessments l approved by licensee executives on July 23,1996 l  : Presented to XRC August 2,1996 .

! . i l C NRC feedback on August 14,1996: ,

i

>> Resolution of three pre-conditions not required  :

, More SSFI-like review appears appropriate j E Industry executives to discuss Sept. 24,1996 O

VIRGINIA POWER I

Implementing the Assessments t uu:0 l m Utilize assessment teams with operations, design engmeermg, system engineering, and licens.ing expertise l

! m Employ NEI methodology i

j u Be sensitive to NRC SSFI methodology l m Conduct assessments over three week period  :

j m Evaluate results and make recommendations to l management to address remaining UFSAR sections I

a Summarize and forward results to NEI j '.

O WRGIN!A POWER

9 #

1 l XEI Methodology

! EO i

n UFSAR accuracy (Four system sample) l Plant design and operation v. UFSAR content i

) m Programmatic change sampling l n e.g. DCPs, TS Changes, Bulletins m Non-programmatic change sampling e.g., Standing Orders, Abandoned equipment 1 1

m Evaluation

>> Appropriately disposition all findings y,ga,u,, goagg i

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

SSFI Methodology E~0 m Risk- and safety-based method for selecting systems for review l m Ensure that problem identification and corrective action is representative and consistent l

m In-depth review: ,

l Engineering design and configuration control ,

i Verification of as-built and as-modified conditions ,

) Translation of design bases requirements into operating procedures, i l maintenance and testing Verification ofsystem performr,ce

! Corrective actions for design deficiencies Modifications made since original system e

--,%-----. -.-.--..w.-. ...,-~-.-..wmmm.,,_._...~,_ ,m,..~.... . . ..,........., .. ....- . _ _ . ... ..., . _ . . , . . - , , , . . . , ..,,.w_.., w # fr-w-,-- g-w-e.,-~r...,,, , . - - . , , - , , , - .

Systems Assessed mu:0 m Surry a North Anna

- Safety Injection - Safety Injection

- Auxiliary Feedwater - Auxiliary Feedwater

- Circulating Water -Instrument Air

- Component Cooling - Component Cooling Systems assessed include safety-related and nonsafety-related. The i four listed above are risk significant. A fifth system will be included. l The basis for its selection will be to assess UFSAR adequacy for a low risk / low priority system O

VIRGINIA POWER

l Assessment Teams l .

M:0 l

m Separate assessment teams have been j assembled at each station with operations,

! system engineering, design engineering, and I

licensing expertise l

m Surry assessment: Sept. 23-Oct.11,1996 >

3 m North Anna assessment: Oct. 7-25,1996 i

(

! OVIRGINIA POWER

]_ _ - - - - - _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ - - - - - - _ _ - _ . . , _ . _ . . . _ _ . _ _ _ . . _ _

! Follow-up Actions EO l

m Based on initial assessment efforts, l

establish the scope, schedule, priority, l

i resource requirements, and methodology for

! conducting reviews of the remaining ,

l portions of the Surry and North Anna ,

LFSARs i r

m Make recommendations to management

,i . ----

' ~

u _ . _. . . _ . . _ ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _

I Overall Schedule

~

! EE10

m Sept. 30,1996 Complete Process Enhancements m Oct.11,1996 Complete Surry Assessment l

m Oct. 23,1996 Complete North Anna Assessment u Xov. 30,1996 Load UFSARs on MIXD System [

l u Nov. 30,1996 Validate Process Enhancements ,

t l m Dec.15,1996 Follow-up Action Recommendations m ~ June 1997 Industry Initiative Target Completion

) . _9 I .

,. _---..__,.-.._____.s.,..,__..-_.__,____,._

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