ML20247E349

Forwards Exhibit a Consisting of Proposed App to Updated Fsar,Reflecting Agreements Reached Between Commonwealth of PA & Util & Info Agreement Between Parties Permitting State Access to Plant Info

ML20247E349
Person / Time
Site:	Peach Bottom
Issue date:	02/27/1989
From:	Davis A, Corbin McNeil PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC, PENNSYLVANIA, COMMONWEALTH OF
To:	Russell W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
Shared Package
ML20247E348	List: ML20247E343 ML20247E349
References
NUDOCS 8904030036
Download: ML20247E349 (61)

Text

G ,

~- . .. - -. - -

, E dgf/eb 21:45 WC RI DOCKE1 ROOM to.411 P002

' 'Y f '

);)l1 cc:

.pe M 9se11

w. Ka,,," &g a MM

7. Martin

/ * M i: lA"i"., W W February i:Wnilm:

T. Johnson 27th M. Miller 1989 K. Abraham (t)

$271: Bob Martin. NRR was provided a copy to'ay d and should make appropriate HQ distribution.

JMG - f/27/89 William T. Russell, Regional Administrator United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I 475 Allendale Road King of Prusaia, Pennsylvania 19406 Re: Peach Botton Atomic Power Statinn

Dear Mr. Russell:

As you and your staff have been advised, the Phila-delphia Electric Company ("PEco"), the licensee of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power 8tation (" Peach Bottom"), and representa-tives of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania (the " Commonwealth")

have been engaged in discussions concerning issues related to the proposed restart of Peach Bottom. Those discussions have now concluded with PEco indicating its willingness to make various commitments concerning the operation of Peach Bottom following restart. These commitments serve as the basis for resolving several Peach Bottom-related restart issues raised by the commonwealth as well as Peach Botton-related litigation which has been initiated by the commonwealth. As requested in your letter dated August 22, 1938, documents reflecting the understandings the parties have reached are hereby submitted for your approval.

The first docurent (Exhibit A) is a proposed Appen-dix to the Peach Botton Updated Final Safety Analysis Report

("UFSAR"). It reflects those matters upon which PRCo and the commonwealth have reached an understanding which are exclu-sively within the regulatory and enforcement authority of the United States Nuclear Reguir. tory Consission ("NRC"). The second document (Exhibit B) is an Information Agreement between the parties under which PEco will allow representa-tives of the commonwealth access to certain information for 8904o30o36 890329 PUR ADOCK 0500o277 s P PDC '

IDO-- 00 4301

.gi ' 'r Page 2 - Mr. William T. Russell = 2/27/89 the purpose of keeping the Commonwealth advised about opera-tions at Peach Bottom.

By executing this letter and intending to be legally the Commonwealth and PEco promise and agree bound that uponthereby,iving rece your approval of the enclosed documents, (1) PEco will immediately take all necessary steps to make effective the UFsAR Appendix (Exhibit A), and (2) the Common-wealth will immediately execute and submit to the Atomic safety and Licensing Board the attached " Notice of Withdrawal and Motion to Terminate Proceeding" in the satter captioned In re Philadalehim timetrie r'a===nv (Peach Botton Atonio Power station, Unita 2 and 3), Docket Nos. 50-277 & 50-278, ASLBF No. 88-569-06-OIA (Exhibit C) and take all necessary steps to terminate that proceeding promptly. In the event that you decline to approve any aspect of Exhibit A or 3, the parties agree to negotiate in good faith, with the assistance of NRC personnel, to revise those exhibits to the extent necessary to obtain your approval. Upon receiving the Regional Admin-istrator's approval of the revised Exhibits A and B, the parties will immediately proceed to fulfill obligations (1) i and (2) as outlined above. j In presenting Exhibits A and 5 for your approval, PEco and the Commonwealth express their belief that the commitments they contain are not inconsistent with any current i federal requirements applicable to Peach Bottom and that '

observance of the proposed commitments will not affect PEco's ability to mest applicable federal requirements at Peach Bottom. Further, it should be noted that to the extent that Exhibit A calls for PEco to submit to the NRC applications to amend the Technical Specifications contained in the facility operating licenses for Peach Bottoa, those amendments will not ,

become effective until the NRC has approved those proposed '

amendments through its normal procedures. Finally, the parties believe that the commitments contained in the enclosed exhibits are consistent with the NRC policy concerning inde=

pendent state inspection of licensee activities regulated by the NRC. Having made those representations and h wing previ-ously modified the enclosed exhibits on the basis of oon-structive reviews by NRC representatives, both the Common-wealth and PECo respectf"11y urge that you approve Exhibita A and B as submitted so as to avoid the need for adding to what has already been a lengthy and meticulous negotiation process.

Because the parties wish promptly to terminate pending litigation and to make the enclosed documents effec =

tive, both PEco and the commonwealth would greatly appreciate J

'53Nires 21:45 fftC RI DOCKET ROOM NO.411 P004 z' ' :e a'

Page 3 - Mr. William T. Russell - 2/27/89 your response to this request for approval as soon as possi-bla. Further, as outlined in Sections 16.1 and 16.2 of the enclosed proposed UFSAR Appendix, the parties respectfully request your specific written acknowledgments (a) that the provisions of the Appendix are the product of an agreement between PRCo and the Commonwealth that forms part of the basis for a litigation settlements (b) that to the extent permitted by NRC policy and by safety considerations, the Region I Administrator intends to honor the terms of the Appendix and to examine requests for modification or release of obligations under the standards set forth in the Appendix; and (c) that except in emergency circ'austances, the Region I Administrator does not intend to grant any request by PEco under Sections 15.1 or 15.5 to modify or release its obligations under the Appendix or any request by PEco for a concurrence under sections 15.2, 15.3, or 15.4 of the Appendix unless PEco advises that it has notified the Commonwealth,of the request and the commonwealth is given a reasonable oppor-tunity to provide the NRC Region I Administrator with comments concerning the request.

We stand ready to respond to any questions that you or your staff may have regarding these materials.

Respectfully submitted, j nsL d. W Afthu~r A. Davi's secretary of Environmental Resources Ccenionwealth of Pennsylvania e- ,

C.A. McNeill, Jr. 1 2xecr.ative vice Presiden - r )

Philadelphia Electric Company {

Enclosures (3)

)

• ,' r^ . 'o b

PBAPS APPENDIY O PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY-COMMONWEAUfN OF PENNSYLVANIA DIECOSSIONS g.1 INTRODUCTION 1.1. The Philadelphia Electric Company (#PEco#), the licenset of the Peach Botton Atomic Power 8tation (" Peach l Bottom"), and representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsyl-vania (the " Commonwealth") have engaged in discussions con-carning issues related to the proposed restart of Peach Bottom. Those discussions have concluded with PBCo indicating its willingness to make various commitments concerning the operation of Peach Bottom following restart. The parties recognise, however, that many of the matters upon which P5co and the Commonwealth hsve reached an understanding are exclu-sively within the regulatory and enforcement authority of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (#NRC#). Those matters are therefore memorialized in this Appendix to the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report for Peach Bottom. PRCo understands that the provisions of this Appendix will be enforceable by the NRC in accordance with NRC policies and procedures.

a-t i

' o i

Q.2 PERSONNEL TRANS{1tRS 3.1. PEco acknowledges that the diversion of quali- f I

find personnel from Peach Bottom to the Limerick Generating Station ("Limeriok") could affoot the quality of operations at Peach Bottoa. PECo's senior managazent therefore shall I

monitor transfers from Peach Bottom to Limerick to ensure that the quality of operations et Peach Bottom is maintained.

2.2. PEco shall not transfer any person in the upper levels of Peach Bottom management ( M ., Site Vice Presidenti Manager, Projects Manager, Plants Manager, Support; Superin-tendent, Training; superintendent, Outages; Superintendent, Modifications; Superintendent, Planning, Scheduling and Reportingt Superintendent, Operations; Superintendent, Main-tenance, Instrumentation and controls Superintendent, Tech-nicall Superintendent, Plant Services; Superintendent, Admin-istration; and Superintendent, Materials) to Limerick during or for one year following the start-up of Unit 2 at Limerick without replacing that person at Peach Botton with a person of comparable experience and training.

Q.3 ANSI STpIDARDS

)

3.1. On or before February 27, 1990, PSCo will submit to the NRC an hyplication to amend the Technical Q-2

Gr, .

,(' ,*

specifications contained in Appendix A to facility operating license DPR-44 and DPR-56 for Peach Bottom oommitting PEco to meet at Peach Bottom the standards set forth in ANSI /MS-3.1-1981, entitled #8 election, Qualification and Training of Personnel for Nuclear Power Plants." The proposed Technical specificaticus amendment any spooify, however, that to the extent that the standards set forth in M 81/ANS-3.1-1981 apply to individual job positions at peach Bottom, those standards shall not apply to PEco employees holding those positions as of February 27, 1989, so long as those individu-als continue to hold those positions.

3.2. On or before February 27, 1990, PSCo shall administratively impose at Peach Bottom the standards set forth in Section 4.7, section 6.6, and Table 1 of ANSI /AN8-3.1-1987.

3.3. Dn or "efore o Pobruary 27, 1990, PEco shall make, in accordance with 10 C.F.R. I 50.54(p), a Peach mottom security Plan revision committing PEco to meet the standards set forth in Sections 5.1 and 5.4.5 of ANSI /ANs-3.3-1983, entitled " Security for Nuclear Power Plants."

3.4, on or before February 17, 1980, PEco will f complete an analysis of the standards set forth in MMI/ASME NQA-1 " 86, entitled " Quality Msurance Program Req [uirements J

Q-3 i

. - . . . _ _ _ _ l

7-

' 03>01/89 21345 tRC R1 DOCKET ROOM NO.411 P008 for Nuclear Facilities," and establish a plan for implementa-tion which will include a reasonabis schedule for submittals to the NRC (pursuant to 10 C.F.R. $ 50.4(b)(7)) revising the Peach Botton Quality Assurance Program to incorporate those additional standards set forth in ANSI /ASME NQA-1-1986 which would enhance the Quality Assurance Program at Peach Bottom.

The standards of ANSI /ABMI NQA-1-1986 will be adopted, except to the extent that PEco reasonably concludes that the adoption of any of those standards would not constitute an improvement over currently applicable standards.

Q.4 INDEPENDENT fpAFETY ENGINEERING GRQ H 4.1. On or before February 27, 1990, PECO will submit to the 1:RC an appliottion to amend the Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A to facility operating licenses DPR-44 and DPR-56 for Peach Bottom. That proposed amendment shall concern the Independent Safety Engineering Group ("ISEG") for Peach Bottom, and at minimum, it shall provida: .

(a) that the Peach Bottom ISEG shall obnsist of (1) an ISEG Supervisor, who shall have a bachelor's degree in engineering or related science and at least six years of full-time commercial nuclear experience, and (2) at least four other dedicated, full-time engineers, who each shall have a Q-4

• ~

bachelor's degree in engineering or relate 6 poience and at least two years of full-time commercial nuclear experience, and who collectively shall have at least sixteen years of full-time commercial nuclear experience, with not more than one of those engineers having less than three years full-time commercial nuclear experiences (b) that collectively, the Peach Botton 1830 shall have the broad range of knowledge and experience necessary to review the wide range of safety-related issues contemplated by the functions enumerated in section 4.1(f) *

(c) that the Peach Botton ISEG shall operate at the plant level and shall report to PEco's head of Quality Assur-anoe at the corporate level; (d) that if any significant nuclear quality concern identified by ISEG at Peach Bottom is not adequately resolved at lower levels of PEco manager.ent, the PEco head of Quality Assurance shall have the duty to notify PEco's Nuclear Review Board ("NRB"), PEco's Executive Vice President-Nuclear, FECo's President, or the Nuclear cosaittee of PEco's Board of Diree-tors of that concerns (e) that if the Peach Botton 1830 is not satisfied with the resolution of any sigtsificant nuclear quality concern Q-5 e

)

by PECo's head of Quality Assurance, the 1850 shall have the authority and the duty to notify the NRB of that concern; and a (f) that the Peach Botton ISSG shall be responsible for (i) responsively and proactively examining plant opera-tions to identify opportunities for improving safety, (ii) making detailed ' recommendations for revising procedures,  :

for modifying equipment, and for improving safety aspects of maintenance and operation activities, and (iii) for maintain-ing surveillance of uM t activities in order to provide independent verification that such activities are performed correctly.

Q.5 REACTOR DPERATORS 5.1. on or before september so, 1990, PEco shall add a fourth reactor operator to each control room shift at Peach Bottom. Prior to that date, PECo shall maintain a minimum of three reactor operators on each control room shift at Peach Bottom and shall utilise on control room shifts each reactor operator newly becoming licensed for Peach Bottom until all shifts have a fourth reactor operator. Effective July 1, t

1990, in the event that PEco has a number of reactor operators in excess of eighteen (not counting those on Senior Meacter Operator training), PEco shall utilise those operators not ,

Q-6

)

- -- --- _ - ____ a

g. ' ,,,

assigned to normal shift work to fill in for shift vacancies wherever practicable.

5.2. Effective October 1, 1990, if there is a reactor operator vacancy on a shift at Peach Bottom, pEco shall fill that vacancy from among the other reactor operators scheduled for that shiftr provided, however, that if there is more than one reactor operator vacancy on a shift at Peach Botton, PEco siay fill those vacancies with other personnel to the extent necessary to satisfy applicable operating require-monts.

5.3. Effective October 1, 1990, PEco will not au-thorise planned absences by two er more reactor operators on the same shift unless arrangements are made in advance for other operators to fill the vacancies on those shifts on a non-overtime basis.

5.4. On September 7, 1988, PEco submitted for NRC approval an application to amend the Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A to facility operating licenses DPR-44 and DPR-55 for Peach Bottom. The proposed amendment would add a section 5.20 to the Peach Bottos Technical Specifications, and that section would, intar Alit, establish restrictions en the uns of fyvertime for plant personnel who perints safety-related functions. If the NRC has not approved or otherwise j Q-7

• • • ! r z l i

acted upon that proposed amendment as of the Effective Date of this Appendix, the provisions of the proposed Section 5.30 will be administrative 1y imposed at Peach Bottom as of that date until the NRC has acted upon the proposed amendment.

l 5.8. PBCo states that it intends to hava its li-consed control roos personnel at Peach Bottom work eight (8) t hours per day and forty (40) hours per pay period, exclusive of shift turnover time. PEco further states that it intends to use licensed control room personnel who are on overtime statue only under the following conditions: (1) when safety or precautionary considerations warrant the continuation or undertaking of a task by personnel after the conclusion of their normal shift periods (2) when safety or precautionary considerations otherwise warrant the use of such personnel at times other than their normal shift periodt or (3) during periods of extended refueling shutdowns or periods of major maintenance / modification (up to twenty overtime hours per person per pay period and with each person having the oppor-tunity for one day off per pay period). In each such in-stance, overtime work may be required on a temporary basis.

i Q.6 EMERGENCT TRAIMING I

{

6.1. PEco will include in its on-sits emergency j respons4. personnel training program at Peao) Bottom t.n Q-8

.(

opportunity for representatives of the Pennsylvania amargency Management Agency to explain its role in the emergency re-sponse process at Peach Bottom.

Q.7 DRUG AND AILOMOL PROGRAMS g/ -

7.1. .P5Co shall maintain for Peach Botten Fitness for Duty Program for alcohol ' Abuse which became wV1 f

offootive on Datober 15, 1988 or a comparable program. If the NRC adopts regulations on fitness-for-duty alcohol programs, the PEco program may be amended to comply with those regula-tions. ,

7.2. PEco shall maintain for Peach Bottom the Drug Policy and Program it announced on July 1, 1988 or a compara-ble program. If the NRC adopts regulations on fitness-for-duty drug programs, the PECo program may be amended to comply with those regulations.

Q.8 NUCLEAR QUALITY COMMUNICATIDMA 4.1. PFCo shall maintain its Nuclear Quality Aenur=

unce Notline, providing a means through Which peach Botten employess may identify nuclear quality concerns in the event of employee reluctance to take such conctitus openly to super-visors or management.

Q-9 l

• E a' als47 IRC R1 DOCKET ROOM to.488 P014 8.2. If the Peach Botton Site Vice President is advised of allegations that a PBCo employee assigned to Peach Lottom or a PEco contractor employee assigned to Peach Bottom has been discouraged from raising a nuclear quality issue concerning Peach Bottaa or has been discriminated against by PECO or by a contractor for raising a nuclear quality issue concerning Peach Botton, the Site Vice President shall per-sonally review any evidence of which he is advised regarding those allegations and shall note his reaction in the fils on that matter.

8.3. In any new contract for work at the Peach Bottom site which PEco executes with a contractor after the Effective Date of this Appendix (as specified in Section -

14.1), PEco shall include provisions which would allow PEco to terminate said contract in the event that PEco reasonably determines that in the course of performing work under that contract, the contractor discouraged any of its employees at the Pesch Bottom site from raising a nuclear quality issue concerning Peach Bottom or had discriminated against any of its employees at the Peach Bottom site for raising a nualmar quality issue concerning Peach Botton, Purther, in any such new contract, PEco shall includa provisions which provide for l l

automatic termine. tion of said contract if, purs2 ant to 29 )

I C.F.R. 9 E4.6(b), the U.S. Department of Labor issues a final order determining that the contractor has violated the Energy Q-10

. 8.' .

I 8 Reorganization Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. I 5851, with respect to an employee at the Peach Bottom site trhile employed at the Peach Bottom site. Any automatio termination provision, however, shall specify that such termination will not oosur until the contractor has been provided an opi stunity to exhaust its rights under the judicial review provisions of 42 v.s.c. s ass 1(c) . Further, any automatio termination provi-sion shall also spoolfy that any contractor terminated pursu-ant thereto for which a replacement contractor is not reasen-ably available may be reinstated after the contractor has taken either appropriate disciplinary action against the manager (s) whose actions were responsible for the violation determination or, if no manager is appropriately subject to discipline, other appropriate corrective action.

4.4. Within ninety (90) days after the Effective Date of this Appendix (as defined in section 14.1), FBCo shall make revisions to its existing Employees' suggestion system to include nuclear quality concerns, thereby providing a system of financial rewards for those PEco employees at Peach Bottom raising nuolaar quality concerns. The revisions shall provide that if an employos assigned to peach mottos first raises a nuclear qsiality concern with his/her employing officer and the officer fa.ils to take appropriate sotion within a reasonable time, the employee may thereafter also raise the concern through the Emplores suggestion tiystem and, ouhjeet to the 0-11 ,

8 8S ee A.

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

i *

- conditions of the system, shall be rewarded if the raising of the concern through the system leads to amelioration of a nuclear quality problem at Peae Sottom. the revisions to the system shall provide standards on which the enount of the financial reward shall be based. t i

s.s. Psco may alternatively satisfy the requirements of section s.4 by establishing a.ocuparable system (separate from the Employees' suggestion system) for providing financial rewards to P5co employees raisir.g nuclear quality concerns.

Q.9 coMMInuntT TRAcKIMg 9.1. PRCo shall maintain for Peach Bottom the commitmerit tracking program described in NSAP-002.X (issued by PEco on ;'uly 1,1988) or a comparable program.

Q.10 3 Elf 1 EAR REVIEW.20ARD 10.1. PECo shall maintain a Nuclear Review Board

("NRB") which shall consist of at least five (5) internal PBoo members and at least two (2) outside membero possessing the Walifications set forth in Paragraph 6.5.3.3 of the current Prach motton Technical specifications. The NRS aball meet et least four (4) times per year. PEco stipulates that the general responsibilities enumerated in Parag;sphs 6.5.2.1 and l Q-12

,e ,

• i

' 4.5.2.7 of the current Peach Botton Technical Specifications make the NRS responsible for reviewing the Werk of the Petah motton Independent Safety Engineering aroup and the operating Experience Assessment Program for Pomah Bottoa.

10.2. Prior to each meeting of the NRB, each NRS member will be provided copies of the following materials (to the extent that any such materials were not previously pro-vided to the members):

-- weekly items of interest concerning Peach hottoer

-- special NRC bulletins identifying significant deficiencies or problems potentially relevant to Peach Bottomt

-- audit summaries and highlights by Nuclear Quality l Assurance concerning Peach Bottomt

-- licensee gvent reports concerning Peach Bottour

-- proposed changes to procedures, equipment or symh l

and tests at Peach Bottom which involve an unreviewed safety question;

-- all NRC inspection reports concerning Peach Bottoer Q-3.3

- - - ~ ~ _ _ _

,[7

.; - w.

- -- Peach Bottom-related reports of the Operating

~

~

Experience Assessment Programs and i

-- quarterly repcrts on progress of the censitaant Tracking Program for Peach Bottom.

8 Collectively, the NRS shall be responsible for reviewing the foregoing materials.

10.3. On or before February 27, 1990, FEco shall submit to the NRC an application to amend the Technical specifications contained in Appendix A to facility operating licenses DPR-44 and.DPR-56 for Peach Bottom. That amendment will specify the composition of the NRS and the frequency of its meetings as set forth in Section 10.1.

Q.11 MUCIZAR COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTQRE 11.1. PEco shall maintain a Nuclear Committee of the Board of Directors ('*HC8"). The NCB shall advise and assist the PEco Soard of Directors on matters concerning FBCo's nuclear operations. The NCB will reviews (1) the safety, reliability, and quality of nuclear operationst (3) the effectiveness of the management of nuclear operations; and (3) the effectiveness of management systems for self-identi- ,

fication of problems and potentini problems and for proept and 1

0-14

o

a. .

complete corrective actions. The MC5 will aset et least four (4) times per year.

11.2. The McB shall have at least two outside advi-sors with considerable experience in nuoloar power plant I operations. After Pobruary 27, 1993, however, one of the two advisors may also be a member of the NCB, so long as that person does not otherwise serve a.s an employee of PEco. f l

i

)

11.3. Prior to each meeting of the NCE, each member -

of the NCB will be provided copies of the following materials (to the extent that any such materials were not previously  ;

provided to the members):

-- monthly senior management reports concerning Peach Bottoni

-- quarterly' summary letters and trending reports.of nuclear quality assurance concerning Peach Bottomt 1

-- NRB summary reports concerning Peach Bottom;

-- SALP evaluations on Peach Bottom and PRCo responses theretor Q-15

l- .

I 23:50 E RI DOCKET ROOM NO.488 P020 8341(89 .

3

-- IMPo evaluation reports on Peach mottom and P5co retiwnees theretor I

-- NRC inspection reports which contain notices of violation concerning Peach Bottaa and p3Co responses l theretor and

' -- Nuolear Quality Assurance Peach Bottom audits with significarrt safety findings.

11.4. The outside advisors to the NCB will zooelve and shall be generally responsible for reviewing the documents listed in sections 10.2 and 11.3.

Q.12 DPERATING EXPER11NCE MSEBHMENT PROGRAM 12.1. PEco shall maintain an operating Experianos Assessment Program ("0EAP") for Peach Bottom. The ORAF program shall be in conformance with the description in NGS-0XX.Y (issued by PEco on June 15, 1988) or with another .

administrative procedure which is as specific and effective as NGS-0XX.Y.

Q-16

21:50 PRC RI DOCKET ROOM NO.481 FS28 0305@P .

g. . . .

'. d.13 VEwcom neurwENT TamTm TMFem'r'reat r *w 13.1. Prior to the restart of Peach Bottom, 75C0 shall establish and thereafter shall maintain an effective Vendor Equipment Technical Information Program ('TETIP") for Peach Bottom in conformance seith the " Existing Program" description in the March 1984 Nuclear Utility Task notion Committee report on NRC Generic 14tter 83-25 (the #NUTAC Report"). This Paragraph, however, does not apply to the OSAP element of the VETIP program, which is covered by Section 12.1.

13.2. On or before Pobruary 27, 1990, P5co will develop a Nuclear Group Administrative Procedure ("NGAP")

describing the implementation of its VETIP program for Peach Bottom. Thereafter, PECo shall follow that NGAP at Peach Bottom, except that PEco m&y modify the NGAP so long as it continues to conform with the NUTAC Report referenced in section 13.1.

Q.14 EFFECTIVE DATE 14.1. The provisions of this Appendix shall become effective five (5) business days aftier the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has entered an order dis-missing the Petition for Review filed by the Commonwenith in Q-17

~

3 the proceeding captioned cenmaanwamith et pannavivania v.

United States Nuclear Reaulatery t' - imaien, No. 88=3582. No provision of this Appendix shall become effective prior to that Effective Date.

Q.15 noDIrIcATION QR RELEASE 15.1. PEco may request or obtain a modification or release of the substanti'e obligations set forth in Sections 2.1, 2.2, 3.2, 6.1, 7.1, 1.2, 8.1, 8.2, 4 3, 5.4, 8.8, 9.1, 10.1, 10.2, 11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 11.4, 13.1, 13.1, or 13.2 of this Appendix only under the following circumstances (a) Through February 27, 1993, PEco may not modify or release any obligations unless it first notifies the

\

commonwealth of the proposed modification or release and provides in writing the relevant showing described in section ,

i 15.1(a) (1) or 15.1(a) (2) . It within twenty (20) business days after the commonwealth receives such notios, PEco receives from the commonwealth written notice that it believes that the showing provided is inadequate and a statement of the grounds therefor, PEco must proceed as follows before making the proposed modification or releases (1) At any time, PEco may request modification or release of obligations by the NRC Region I Administrator (or Q-18

n l .

.g * >> e

~

his designate) upon a showing of emergency or exceptionally changed circumstances, including, but not limited to, a showing that the changes are necessary to bring Peach Botten into conformance with new or changed NRC regulations or policies or with new or changed policies issued by the Insti-tute of Nuclear Power Operations ("INPC') or the Nuclear Utility Management and Resources committee (*NUMARC").

(2)

• After February 27, 1991 and through February 6, 1993, PEco may request modification or release of obligations by the NRC magion I Administrator (or his designate) upon (1) a showing of changed industry practices, (ii) a showing that the modification or release is supported by new research, or (iii) a showing that the modified and/or remaining obligations under the relevant section will comparably satisfy the intent of the obligations in that section, or if the s otion has been modified previously, the intent of that section as modified.

The intent of an obligation shall be determined by reference to the function that the obligation plays in furthering the safe operation of Peach Bottom and not only to the specifies of the obligation itseif.

(b) After February 27, 1993, PEco may modify or release its obligations upon any of the grounds stated in Sections 15.1(a)(1) or 15(a)(2) without prior NItC approval, so long as PEco reports such action to the NRC by revising this Q-19

Appendix pursuant to the procedures set forth in 10 C.F.R.

E5 50.4(b)(4) and 50.71(e) (1988) and contemporaneously provides a copy of any such revisions to the commonwealth.

15.2. To the extent that any proposed Technical specifications amendment described in Sections 3.1, 4 1, or 10.3 of this Appendix is approved by the Mtc and becomes offactive, PEco will not seek the NRC's approval to alter the p;ovisions contained in said ameridsent at any time prior to February 27, 1993, except under the following cirouastancess (a) Prior to seeking FRC approval to alter the provisions contained in said amendment, PEco aust notify the commonweal.th of the proposed alteration and provide in writing the relevant showing described in Sections 15.2(a)(1) or

15. 2 (a) (2) . If within twenty (20) business day 6 after the consonwealth receives such notice, PEco receives from the commonwealth written notice that it believes the showing provided is inadequate and a statement of the grounds there-for, PEco must proceed as follows before seeking NRC approval of the proposed alterations (1) PEco any at any time seek NRC approval to alter the provisions contained in said amendment, so long as PBco first obtains the concurrence of the NRC Region 1 Administra-tor (or his designate) upon a showing of emergency or Q-20

' ~ ~ ' - ~ ~ ~ '

E'__^ i~__.___^*Z'Z___________'T_T_'__________.__

,~3

.g . ..

exceptionally changed circumstances, including, but not limited to, a showing that the alterations are necessary to bring the Peach Botton Technical Specifications into confor-mance with new or changed NRC regulations er policies or with new or changed policies issued by INP0 or NUMARC.

(2) After said amendment has been effective for two (2) years or after February 27, 1993, whichever is earlier, PEco may seek NRC approval to altar the provisions contained I

in said amendment, so long as PEco i'irst obtains the concur-rence of the NRC Region I Administrator (or his designate) upon (i) a showing of changed industry practices, (ii) a showing that the alterations are support W by new research, or (iii) a showing that the provisions of said amendment, as 4 altered, will comparably satisfy the intent of said amendment.

The intent of said amendment shall be determined by reference to the function that the amendment plays in furthering the safe operation of Peach Bottom and not only to the spealflos of the amendment itself.

15.3. PEco will not alter the provisions of the 8ecurity Plan revision described in 8sotion 3.3 at any time prior to February 27, 1993, except under the following cir-ouestancess P21

.. g

~~ Prior to altering the provisions of the Seou-(a) rity Plan revision, PECo must first notify the Commonwealth of the proposed alteration and provide in writing the relevant showing described in section 15.3(a)(1) or 15.3(a)(2) . If within twenty (20) business days after the Commonwealth receives such notice, PEco receives from the Cossoonwealth written notice that it believes the showing provided is inadequate and a statement of the grounds therefor, PEco must proceed as follows before making the proposed alteration 1

(1) PEco say at any time alter the provisions of f said security Plan revision, so long as PEco first obtains the concurrence of the NRC Region I Administrator (or his desig-nate) upon a showing of emergency or exceptionally changed circumstances, including, but not limited to, a showing that the alternations are necesstry to bring the Peach Botton Security Plan into conformance with new or changed NRC regu-lations or policies or with new or changed policies issued by INPO or NUMARC.

(b) After said security Plan revision has been effective for two (2) years or after Pobruary 27, 1992, which-ever is earlier, PEco say alter the provisions of said Secu-rity Plan revision, so long as PZCo first obtains the concur-rence of the NRC Region I Administrator (or his designate) upon (i) a showing of changed industry practices, (ii) a I

Q-22 l

y,

. showing that the modification or release is supported by new research,.or (iii) a showing that the previsions of said i i

security Plan revision, as altered, will comparably satisfy I l the intent of said revision. The intent of said security Plan revision a.sall be determined by reference to the function that the revision plays in furthering the safe operatiert of Peach 4 Botton and not only to the specifios of the revision itself.

i 15.4. To the extent that pursuant to section 3.4, PEco submits and the NRC accepts revisions to the Peach Botton Quality Assurance Program, PEco will not seek to alter the provisions of said Quality Assurance Program revisions at any time prior to February 27, 1993, exospt under the following circumstances:

(a) Prior to seeking to alter the provisions of said Quality Assurance Program revisions, PEco aust first notify the Commonwealth est the proposed alteration and provide in writing the relevant showing described in section 15.4 (a) (1) or 15.4 (a) (2) . If within twenty (20) business days after the commonwealth receives such notice, PEco roosives from the commonwealth written notice that it believes the showing provided is inadequate and a statement of the grounds therefor, PEco must proceed as follows before making the proposed alteration 0-23 I

ee>

b

(1) PECo may at any time seek NRC acceptance of alterations to the provisions of said Quality Assurance Program revisions, so long as PEco first obtains the concur-rence of the NRC Region I Administrator (or his designate) l upon a showing of emergency or exceptionally changed circum-stances, including, but not limited to, a showing that the alterations are necessary to bring the Peach Botton Quality i

Assurance Program into conformance with new or abanged NRC regulations or policies or with new or changed policies issued by INPO or NUMARC.

(2) After said Quality Assurance Program revisions have been accepted by the NRC for two (2) years or after February 27, 1992, whichever is earlier, PRCo may seek NRC ,

acceptance of alterations to the provisions of said Quality Assurance Program revisions, so long as PEco first obtains the concurrence of the NRC Region I Administrator (or his desig-nate) upon (i) a showing of changed industry practices, (ii) a showing that the alterations are supported by new research, or (iii) a showing that the provisions of said revisions, as altered, will comparably satisfy the intent of said revisions.

The intent of said Quality Assurance Program revisions shall be determined by reference to the function that the revisions Play in furthering the safe operation of Peach Bottom and not only to the specifics of the revisions themselves.

Q-24

,0h1(B9 21:53 titC RI DOCKET ROOM NO.411 P029

j. ,

~

15.5. PEco may request or obtain a modification or termination of the obligations set forth in sections 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, and 5.4 only in the following ciromastencess (e) Through February 27, 1993, PEco say not modify or release any obligations unless it first notifies the commonwealth of the proposed modification or release and provides in writing the relevant showing described in Sections 15.5(e) (1) or '15.5(a) (2) below. If within twenty (30) busi-nessdaysaftertheCommonwealthreceivessuchnotich,P200 receives from the Commonwealth written notice that it believes that the showing provided is inadequate and a statement of the grounds therefor, PEco must proceed as follows before imple-menting the proposed modification or releases (1) At any time, PEco may request modification or release of okiigations by the NRC Region I Administrator (or his designate) upon a showing of emergency or exceptionally changed circumstances, including, but not limited to, a showing that the changes are necessary to bring Peach Bottom into conformance with new or changed NRC regulations or policies or with new or changed policies issued by INPC or NUNARC.

(2) After an obligation under Sections 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, or 5.4 has been observed for two (2) years or after Q-25 I

~

october 1, 1992, whichever is earlier, and through Febru-ary 27, 1993, PEco say request modification or release of that obligation by the NRC Region I Administrator (or his desig=

nate) upon (i) a showing of changed industry practices, (ii) a showing that the modification or termination is supported by new research, or (iii) a showing that the modified'and/or remaining obligations under the relevant Section will compa-rably satisfy the intent of the obligatichs in the section or, if the section has been modified previously, the intent of the  ;

1 section as modified. The intent of an obligation shall be determined by reference to the function that the obligation plays in furthering the safe operation of Peach Bottom and not

,only to the specifics of the obligation itself.

(b) After February 27, 1993, PEco say modify or terminate its obligations upon any of the grounds stated in section 15.1(a)(1) or 15.1(a)(2) without prior NRC approval, so long as PECo reports such action to ths NRC by revising this Appendix pursuant to the procedures set forth in 10 C.F.R. 55 50.4(b) (6) and 50.71(e) (1988) and contemporaneously provides a copy of any such revisions to the ccssonwealth.

15.6. Notice provided to the Commonwealth under li 15.1(a), 15.2(a), 15.3 (a),15.4 (a) , or 15.5(a) shall be sent by certified mail to the Chief of the Division of Nuclear safety of the Commonwealth's Bureau of Radiation Protection 0-26

I

~

with a copy sent to the office of the chief Counsel in the Bureau of Regulatory Counsel for the Department of Environ-mental Resources. In both instances, the envelope containing the notice shall be marked "Importants changes Proposed in Negotiated Obligation in Peach Battaa (TFSAR." Notice to PEco under the aforementioned sections shall be sent to the signa-tory of the 75Co notice to which the Commonwealth is respond-l l ing. l

\

15.7. All restrictions on modification or release set forth in sections 15.1 and 15.5 shall terminate on February  ;

27, 1997. Like the other provisions of this Appendix, the provisions of Sections 15.1(b) and 15.5(b) shall be enforce-able by the NRC in accordance with its enforcement policies and regulations. All restrictions on alterations set forth in Sections 15.2, 15.3, and 15.4 shall terminate on February 27, 1993.

Q.16 NRC MOpTTICATIQH5 16.1. The NRC Region I Administrator (or his desig-nate) has the full authority to modify or release any or all provisions of this Appendix at any time. It is noted, howev-er, that the provisions of this Appendix are the product of an agreement between PEco and the Ccanonwealth that forms part of the basis for a litigation settlement. On that basis, the Q-27

Region I Administrator has indicated that to the extent permitted by WRC policy and by safety considerations, he intends to honor the terms of this Appendix and to examine requests for modification or release of obligations under the standards set forth in this Appendix.

16.2. The NRC Region 2 Administrator has indicated that except in energency circumstances, he does not intend to grant any request by PEco under Sections 15.1 or 15.5 to modify or release its obligations under this Appendix or any request by PEco for a concurrence under Sections 15.2, 15.3, or 15.4 unless PEco advises that it has notified the Common-wealth of said request and the commonwealth is given a rea-sonable opportunity to provide the NRC Region I Administrator >

with comments concerning the request.

1 Q-2s

• \

. , , - l ,' ,

.. . 1 M

AmtztumfT THIS AGREEMENT, made this 27lIL day of February 1989, by and between the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (" Con- j monwealth") and the Philadelphia Electric company ("PEco");

I WITNE55ETH:

WHEREAS, PEco operaties the Peach Botton Atonio Power Station (" Peach Botton") which is located in York County, Pennsylvania WHEREAB, representatives of the Commonwealth and of PEco have reached agreement regarding various issues involved in the restart plan for Peach Botton; NOW THEREFORE, the Commonwealth and PECo, in oon-  ;

sideration of the promises and agreements hereinafter set i forth, and intending to be legally bound thereby, hereby promise and agree as follows:

1. vindrawal of petition for naview. Within three (3) business days after receipt of notification that the

l . ;.

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ("ASLB") of the United i States Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC") has entered an order terminating the proceeding captioned Yn the Mattar af Philadelphia Electric company (Peach Botton Atomic Power station, Units 2 and 3), Docket Nos. 50-277 4 50-278, ASLBP No. 88-569-06-CLA, the Commonwealth shall file before the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit all documentation necess'ary to effect the dismissal of the Peti-tion for Review filed by the Commonwealth in the proceeding captioned commonwealth of Pennavivania v. United atm&==

Muelear Raoulateri comminaien, No. 88-3582.

2. The commonwealth and PEco shall cooperate fully and do all things necessary to obtain as soon as possible the dismissal of the Petition for Review referenced in Para-graph 1.

3. Personnel Tranafarm. Before transferring any persons in the upper levels of Peach Botton management (la.m.,

site vice presidents manager, projects manager, plant; manag-er, supports superintendent, training; superintendent, outag-est superintendent, modifications; superintendent, planning, scheduling and reporting; superintendent, operations; super-intendent, maintenance, instrumentation and controlst super-intendent, technical; superintendent, plant services; 2

een , , m -v. .-w . e.,...,-. -.,m < - -

' 03/01/89* 21 55 mC R1 DOCKET ROOM NO.411 P035

/.' '.

~

superintendent, administrations and superintendent, materials) to the Limerick Generating Station (" Limerick"), PEco shall provide the Division of Nucinar Safety of the commonwealth's Bureau of Radiation Protection (the " Division") with written f notice of the transfer and of the identity of the transferee's replacement and shall provide a comparison of the transferee's and his or her replacement's relative qualifications. l

4. The provisions of Paragraph 3 shall be effec-tive only during the start-up of Unit 2 at Limerick and for one (1) year thereafter, and they shall in any event expire on February 27, 1993.

5. AMBI Etandards. Pursuant to an Appendix Q to the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report for Peach Bottom which PEco is expected to submit to the NRC (hereinafter

" Appendix Q"), it is anticipated that PEco will conduct an analysis of the standards set forth in ANSI /ASME NQA-1-1985, entitled

• Quality Assurance Program Requirements for Wuolear Facilities," and establish a plan for implementation which will include a schedule for submittals to the NRC (pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 5 50.4(b)(7)) revising the Peach Bottos Quality Assurance Program to incorporate those additional standards set forth in ANSI /ASME NQA-1-1986 which would enhance the Quality Assurance Program at Peach Bottom.

3

. . l

, , . ...' l 6, Upon establishment of the plan for implementa-tion referenced in Paragraph 8, PEco shall provide the Divi-sion with a report on PEco's comparative analysis of the l

standards set forth in ANSI /ABME NQA-1-1986 as referenced in I

Paragraph 5 and a copy of the plan for implementation as referenced in Paragraph 5. PEco shall provide said materials to the Division prior to making any submittals to the NRC revising the Peach Botton Quality Assurance Program pursuant to the plan for implementation referenced in Paragraph S.

7. Within a reasonable period after receipt of a written request by the Division, PEco shall make available for review by the Division the following information regarding each PEco employee who is assigned to Peach Bottom and who is subject to ANSI /AN8-3.4-1983, ANSI /ANS-3.1-1981, ANSI /ANS-3.1-1987, ANSI /AN8-3.3-1982 and ANSI /ASME NQA-1-1986 (to the extent that any of those standards are then applicable to Peach Bottom): (a) a list of said employees who are subject to each standard, (b) documents stating whether the listed employees meet the applicable standards, and (c) information permitting assessment of each employee's compli-ance with those standards. The Division may review such information one time during each calendar year.

4

,_ - - ~ _ . -

l -

1

e. pram and aienhal Praer===. Within a reasonable period after receipt of a written request from the Division, PEco shall make available for review by the Division a written summary of all Peach Bottom drug incidents and dispositions for the prior twelve (12) month period. This summary shall not include the names of any employees. The Division may review such information once during each calendar year.

9. Rameter operators. Within a reasonable period after receipt of a written request by the Division, PEco shall sake available to the Division information in an easily readable form sufficient to permit the Division to evaluate each day of overtime worked by any Peach Bottom reactor operator during the previous twelve (12) month period. The Division may request to review such information one time during each quarter of the calendar year. However, the Division may make a written request that the foregoing infor-nation be made available for review by the Division on +

monthly basis for each of the following two months and 6 4) state the reasons for any such request. PEco will not unrea-sonably withhold the granting of such requests for monthly review.

10. Numinar Quality communications. Within a realiq@le period after receipt of a written request from the 5

_ _ . - ~ - - . _

Division, PEco shall make available for review by the Division a list of those instances during the prior twelve (12) month period in which the Peach Bottom site Vios President has been advised of allegations that a PEco employee assigned to Peach Bottom or a PEco contractor employee assigned to Peach Bottom has been discouraged from raising a nuclear quality issue concerning Peach Bottom or has been discriminated against by PEco or a PEco contractor for raising a nuclear quality issue concerning Peach Bottom. The Division may review such infor-nation one time during each calendar year.

11. Pursuant to Appendix Q, it is anticipated that PEco will maintain a Nuclear Quality Assurance Hotline, providing a means through which employees may identify nuclear quality concerns in the event of employee reluotence to take such concerns openly to supervisors or management.

12. To the extent that the Nuclear Quality Assur-anoe Hotline referenced in Paragraph 11 is maintained, FEco shall maintain records showing (a) each concern regarding Peach Bottom raised by an individual contacting the Nuclear Quality Assurance Hotline and (b) the disposition of each such concern. Within a reasonable period after receipt of a written request from the Division, PEco shall make available for review by Division representatives the aforementioned 4

. .*s l

records for the prior twelve (13) month period. The Division may review such infotwation one time during each calendar year.

13. Any review of records conducted by the Division pursuant to Paragraph 12 shall be subject to the following conditions:

(a) Any review of any records referenced in Para-graph 12 shall be made in PEco's offices. The Division's i representatives will not request copies of any such records, but they may take notes while reviewing the records.

(b) Any notes taken by Division representatives during a review of any records referenced in Paragraph 12 may be viewed solely by personnel in the commonwealth's Department of Environmental Resources (the " Department"), the Common-wealth's Bureau of Radiation Protection, or by counsel for the

' Department, and such notes shall at all times remain in the physical custody, protection, and control of the Division.

(c) Neither the Division, the Division representa-tives who have reviewed any records referenced in para-graph 12, nor any of the personnel referenced in Para-graph 13(b) may disclose to any persons (other than those 7

, ELV08f99 22:57 tRC R1 DOCKET ROOM to.411 PO40

,e. ','

personnel referenced in Paragraph 13(h)) or otherwise publi-eine any information obtained from any review of the records referenced in Paragraph 12. The Division, however, may make comments to the NRC which reflect information obtained from a review of the records referenced in Paragraph 12, may dissen-inate copies of any official written comments made to the NRC, and may publicly provide information necessary to explain those official written oossents.

(d) Notwithstanding any provisions in Paragraph 13(c), neither the Division, the Division representatives who have reviewed any records referenced in Paragraph 12, nor any of the personnel referenced in Paragraph 13(b) may disclose to any persons, other than those listed in Paragraph 13(b) or to the NRC, the names of any persons contained in the records referenced in Paragraph 12. In the event that any comments made to the NRC pursuant to Paragraph 13(c) include the names of any persons contained in the records referenced in Para-graph 12 or any information from which identification of such persons could reasonably be made, the Division (i) shall request in advance that the NRC keep such names or information in its investigation files and that such names or information be subject to any restrictions on disclosure app 11oable to those files and (ii) shall not release any copies of its a

...a

i b

official written comments without first excising those names or such information from the comments.

(e) Before any representative of the Division any review any records referenced in Paragraph 12 pursuant to that j Paragraph or view any notes taken pursuant to paragraph 13(a),

he or she shall first advise PEco in writing that he has read and understands Paragraphs 12 and 13 of this Agreement and all subparts thereof.

. . j

14. Pursuant to Appendix Q, it is anticipated that PEco will make revisions to its existing Employees' Suggestion System to include nuclear quality concerns, thereby providing a system of financial rewarde fcr those PEco employees raising ,

i nuclear quality concerns. Alternatively, it is anticipated that PEco may establish a comparable system (separate from the Employees' Suggestion System) for providing financial rewards l I

to PEco employees raising nuclear quality concerns.

15. Upon completion of the revisions to the exist-ing Employees' Suggestion System or the establishment of a comparable system as referenced in Paragraph 14, PEco shall provide the Division with a written description of the revised l Employees' Suggestion System or the alternate comparable l

system.

9

. . T; ,

16. PEco shall post on the Peach Bottom promises notices to be provided by the Division, which invite employees to make their quality conoarns known to Division employees.

These notices shall contain phone numbers and promises of anonymity and shall be placed so that they are cocessible to all Peach Bottom employees. The parties intend that neither the size, number, nor content of the notices required under this Paragraph shall interfere with NRC notices. To further this intent, the Commonwealth shall consult and coordinate its notices with the NRC.

17. commitment Trackina. Pursuant to Apperdix Q, it is anticipated that PEco will maintain the commitaant tracking program described in NGAP-003.X (issued by PEco on July 1, 1988) or a comparable program.

18. To the extent that P5co maintains the commit-ment tracking program or a comparable program as described in Paragraph 17, PEco shall, within a reasonable period after receipt of a written request, provide z.he Division a copy of l l

its commitment tracking list for open Peach Bottom issues.

The Division may obtain such a list one time during each calendar year, i

10

.. e .. ..

19. Any list provided to the Division pursuant to Paragraph 18 shall be viewed only by personnel in the Depart-ment, the Commonwealth's Bureau of Radiation Protection, or by counsel for the Department and shall at all times remain in the physical custody, protection, and control of the Division.

20. To the extent that PEco maintains the commit-ment tracking program or comparable program referenood in Paragraph 17, FEco shall, within a reasonable period after  ;

receipt of a written request, make available for review by the Division PEco's commitment tracking list for closed Peach Bottom items. The Division may review such information one time during each calendar year. ]

l

21. Muelaar naview maard and Muelanc e - ittaa of the seard of Directors. Pursuant to Appendix Q, it is antica ipated that PEco will maintain a Nuclear Review Board (#NRB")

and a Nuclear Committee of the Esard of Directors ("NCS").

22. To the extent that PEco maintains the NRS referenced in Paragraph 21, an esployee of the Division shall be allowed to attend meetings of the NRB.

23. To the extent that PEco maintains the NCB referenced in Paragraph 21, PEco shall, within a reasonable l

l 11

-_~

I EWO3/89 21:50 tRC RI DOCKET ROOM NO.481 PO44

,e- *ei time after receipt of a written request, make available for review by the Division minutes of meetings of the NCE for the prior twelve (12) month period, to the extent that said minutes relate to nucIear power plant operational issues. The Division may review such information one time during each i l calendar year.

24. onara' tina twnerience Assassment PreMrran.

Pursuant to Appendix Q, it is anticipated that PEco will maintain an Operating Experience Assessment Program ("OEAP")

for Peach Bottom which shall be in conformance with the description in NG8-0XX.Y (issued by PEco on June 15, 1984) or with another administrative procedure which is as specific and effective as Nos-oxx.Y.

25. To the extent that PEco maintains the OEAP referenced in Paragraph 24, PEco shall inform the Division in writing of any modification in the administrative presedure

'for its orAF within one month of issuanoe of the modification and shall provide a written explanation of how the modified ORAP is both as effective and specific as the then-existing OEAP.

26. To the extent that P3co maintains an OEAp as discussed in Paragraph 24, PEco shall, within a reasonable 12

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

time after receipt of a written request, make available for review by the Division its computer lists and files showing each report received and each evaluation made as part of the OEAP during the prior twelve (12) month period. To the extent that such materials are normally maintained at the Peach Bottom site, they shall be made available for review at the Peach Bottom site. The Division may request copies of se-1ected documents from among these materials, and the granting of such requests shall not be unreasonably withheld by Paco, t The Division may review such materials one time during each calendar year.

27. Vander Ecruiement Taakstinal Ynferunation h._ am. .

l Pursuant to Appendix Q, it is anticipated that PEco will {

establish and maintain a Vendor Equipment Technical Informa-tion Program ("VETIP") for Peach Bottom in conformance with l I

the " Existing Program" description in the March 1984 Nuolmar j Utility Task Action committee Report on NRC Generio Letter 83-2s (the "NUTAC Report") (except for.the OEAP elenant thereof).

28. To the extent that PEco maintains the VETIP referenced in Paragraph 27, PEco shall, within a reasonable time after receipt of a written request, make available for review by the Division information, including files and 13

\

i f*.

computer lists, sufficient to permit the Division reasonably l

to assess compliance with PEco's VETIP commitments to the NRC.

To the extent that such materials are normally maintained at the Peach Botton site, they shall be made available for review at the Peach Bottom site. The Division may review such materials one' time during each calendar year.

29. Pursuant to Appendix 0, it is anticipated that PEco will develop a Nuclear Croup Administrative Procedure

. ("NGAP") describing the implementation of its VETIP program for Peach Bottom.

30. Within a reasonable time after completion of the NGAP referenced in Paragraph 29, PECo shall provide the Division witn a copy af the NGAP. Thereafter, PEco shall provide the Division with a copy of any modification PIco makes to the NGAP within one month after the modification is made.

31. INPo_nocuments. It is anticipated that the Institute of Nuclear Power operations ("INP0") will periodi-cally make overall evaluations of operations at the Peach Bottom site and that INPO will give PEco a oopy of any written final reports that it may issue concerning such site evalua-tions ("INPO Final Site Evaluation Reports"). Further, it is 14

.-~..w-- ---a _

j ,. .',.'

anticipated that INPO will periodically make overall evalua=

tions of corporate support for PEco nuclear operations and that INPO will give PEco a copy of any written final .teports that it may issue concerning such corporate support evalua-tions ("INPO Final Corporate support Evaluation Reports").

33. Within a reasonable tias after receipt of a ,

written request from the Division, PEco shall make available for review by Division representatives copies of any of the INPO Final site Evaluation Reporte or INPO Final Corporate Support Evaluation Reports referenced in Paragraph 31 which were given to PEco by INPO during the prior twelve (12) month period. The Division may review such reports one time during each calender year. PEco may excise from the INFO Final Corporate support Evaluation Reports any references to Limer-ick.

33. Any review of INPO Final Site Evaluation Reports or INPO Final Corporate support Evaluation Reports conducted by the Division pursuant to Paragraph 33 shall be subject to the following conditions:

(a) Any review of an'INPO Final Site Evaluation Report or an INPO Final Corporate Support Evaluation Report shall be made in PEco's offices in the presence of PEco 15- ,

1/89 22:00 iftC RI DOCKET RDOM NO.411 PO48 g ,* . ,

representatives. The Division's representatives will not request copies of any or all of a Report, but they may take notes while reviewing a Report.

(b) Any notes taken by Division representatives during a review of an INPO Final Site Evaluation Report or an INPO Corporate Support Evaluation Report may be viewed polely by personnel in the commonwealth's Department of Environmental Resources (the " Department"), the Commonwealth's Bureau of Radiation Protection, or by ocunsel for the Department and shall at all times remain in the physical custody, protection, and control of the Division.

(c) Neither the Division, the Division representa-tives who reviewed any INFO Final Site Evaluation Report or INFO Final Corporate support Evaluation Report, nor any of the personnel referenced in Paragraph 33(b) may disclose to any persons (other than those personnel referenced in paragraph 33(b)) or otherwise publicise any information obtained from any raview of an INPO Final Site Evaluation Report or an INPO Final Corporate Support Evaluation Report. The Division, however, may make comments to the NRC which include factual information obtained from the review of an INPO Final Site >

Evaluation Report or an INPO Final Corporate Support Evalua-tion Report, may disseminate copies of any official written 16 L______--______--__--

comments made to the NRC, and may publicly provide information necessary to explain those offiolal written ocessents. The Division shall not, however, make statements paraphrasing general conclusions in any INPO Final Site Evaluation Report or INPO Final Corporate Support Evaluation Report.

(d) Notwithstanding any provisions in Paragraph 33(c), neither the D'ivision, the Division representatives who have reviewed any INPO Final Site Evaluation Reports or any INPO Final Corporate Support Evaluation Reports, nor any of the personnel referenced in Paragraph 33(b) may disclose to any persons, other than those listed in Paragraph 33(b) or to the NRC, the names of any persons contained in an INPO Final Site Evaluation Report or an INPO Final Corporate Support Evaluation Report or any information from which identification of such persons could reasonably be made. In the event that any comments made to the NRC pursuant to Paragraph 33(c) include the names of any persons contained in an INPC Final

' site Evaluation Report or INPO corporate Support Evaluation Report or any information from which identification of such s persons could reasonably be made, the Division (i) shall request in advance that the NRC keep such names or information in its investigation files and that such names or information be subject to any restrictions on disclosure applicable to those files and (ii) shall not release any copies of its 17

. , , . , - .' . /*

official written ocaments without excising those names or such information from the comments.

1 (e) Before any representative of the Divisten may review an INPO Final site Evaluation Report or an INPO Final corporate support Evaluation Report pursuant to Paragraph 32 or view any notes taken pursuant to Paragraph 33(a), he shall first advise PEco in writing that he has read and understands Paragraphs 32 and 33 of this Agreement and all subparts thereof.

34. Updated Final safety Analvais manart aradifica-tiens. Pursuant to Appendix g, it is anticipated that after February 27, 1993, PEco may on occasion report to the NRC that it has terminated, released, or modified certain of its obligations under Appendix Q by revising the Updated Final safety Analysis Report for Peach Bottom pursuant to the procedures set forth in 10 C.F.R. El 50.4(b)(6) and 50.71(a)

(1988) and contemporaneously provida a copy of any such revisions to the Commonwealth.

35. To the extent that PEco reports to the NRC and provides a copy of revisions to the commonwealth pursuant to I

the procedures described in Paragraph 34, PECo shall, within a l reasonable time after receipt of a written request, provide '

18 e-___=_==_==___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

, _ = - = _ - - -

e3reies 22:e1 teC RI DOCXET ROOM NO.411 PeSi y,:.

I the Division with a written statement containing PEco's views as to whether its termination, release, or modification of obligations under Appendix e can be supported by (a) a showing of emergency or exceptionally changed circumstances, includ-ing, but not limited to, a showing that the changes are necessary to b.-ing Peach Bottom into conformance with new or changed NRC regulations or with new or changed policies issued by INPo or the Nuclear Utility Management and Resources committee, -(b) a showing of changed industry practices, (c) a showing of new research, or (d) a showing that the modified and/or remaining obligations under the relevant Sections of Appendix Q will comparably satisfy the general intent of the obligations in those sections, or if those sections have been modified previously, the intent of those sections as modified.

36. Effnetive Period. Except as otherwise noted, the provisions of this Agreement shall be effective immedi-ately upon execution by the commonwealth and by PEco. Howev-or, the provisions of Paragraphs 2, 6,.7, 8, 9, 10, 12, if, 16, 1s, 20, 22, 22, 25, 26, 28, 30 and 32 shall beoose effee-tive only upon the issuance of a final order by the United states Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit dismissing the Petition for Review filed by the Commonwealth in the proceed-ing referenced in Paragraph 1. The provisions of Para-graphs 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 15, 16, 18, 20, 22, 22, 25, 26, 28, 19

, ECA1B1/Sc) 22:01 tRC RI DOCKET ROOM NO.415 P052 30 and 32 and any obligations thereunder shall expire on February 27, 1993. The provisions of Paragraph 35-and any obligations thereunder shall expire on February 27, 1997. In the event of any material violation of Paragraphs 13, 19, or 33, PECO may immediately terminate any or all of its obliga=

tions under ttiis Agreement.

37. Information Referaneas. The provisions of Paragraphs 5, 11, 14, 17, 21, 24, 27, 32, and 34 are included in this Agreement solely for reference and informational purposes. None of the provisions of those Paragraphs shall be enforceable in any manner under this Agreement.

38. Raview of Materials. To the extent that Paragraphs 7, 8, 9, 10, it, 13, 20, and 23 provide that PEco shall "make available for review' certain specified materials, PEco may elect to make such materials available for such )

review either at its main offices at 2301 Market Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, or at the Peach Botton site.  !

Except as otherwise noted, neither the Division nor the Commonwealth shall have a right under this Agreement to obtain copies of materials which are made available for review pursuant to this Agreement. However, notes may be taken on the materials reviewed.

20

.03/04/89 22:01 WC RI DOCKET ROOM NO.411 P053 l

t. ,'

l M a

39. Ann 11cability of Anraement. To the extent that any information is provided to or made available for review by the Division pursuant to this Agreement, the Division shall abide by the restrictions stated herein on the uses and handling of such information. Any information referred to in this Agreement which is provided to or made available for review by the Division shall be deemed to have been provided pursuant to this Agreement, unless PEco is notified to the contrary in advance of providing or making available for review said information. The restrictions stated herein on the uses and handling of information shall not apply, however, to any information provided to or made available for review by the Division which is also obtained by the Division without such restrictions from a source other than PEco, its employ-ees, or its agents, or which is also obtained by the Division without such restrictions under the provisions of this Agree-ment. The Division may attempt to obtain or access informa-tion on the basis of any claim of statutory authority without being subject to restriction, so long as the Division first disclaims any reliance on this Agreement for that purpose. In such event, notwithstanding any provisions of this Agreement, PEco may resist such production by challenging such claim of statutory authority or otherwise asserting any defenses.

l 21 l

s. .

J *'

( . , . .'

? .

40. Soverning Iaw. This Agreement shall be gov-erned by and construed in accordance with the laws of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania applicable to agreements made and to be performed in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

41. Enforeertent. The Parties stipulate that they may seek to enforce this Agreement by requesting specific performance or other' appropriate relief in a Pennsylvania court of competent jurisdiction to the extent authorised by law. solely for purposes of this Agreement, and for no other purpose, PEco further stipulates that any information it is obliged to make available under this Agreement lies within the statutory authority of the commonwealth to compel by insti-tuting legal proceedings in a Pennsylvania court of competent jurisdiction.

42. Before initiating any legal proceedings non-carning this Agreement, the party to this Agreement contem-

' plating such action shall notify the other Party of the proposed motion. After providing such notice, the Party contemplating action shall not initiate such action until the other Party is allowed a reasonable opportunity to correct any alleged noncompliance with this Agressent.

22

, 23/01/89 22.02 tRC R1 DOCKET ROOM NO.411 P055 l

\

p, a .. 1

,e .

I

43. entire w emment. This Agreement contains, and is intended as, a complete statement of all the terms of the arrangements between the Parties with respect to the matters provided for in this Agreement.

44. Gopo Faith. The Division and PEco will carry out this Agreement in good faith and in a spirit of coopera-tion.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, representatives of the common- .

wealth and representatives of PEco have signed this Agreement as of the date written above.

[' _

M. --

KrthSt K.~ Davis ~

Secretary of Environmental Resources consonwealth of Pennsylvania

-A M

C.A. NoNeill, Jr. T Executive Vice President-Nuclear Philadelphia Electric Company l

23

.._.__m_....

8P01/89* 22:02 FRC RI DOCKET ROOM NO.411 P056 IEXXInfT CJ UNKTED STATES OF AMERICA ,

NUCLEAR REGULATORY C000tISSION matara na aka=4 e safate mna rA-==4mm ==wt  !

l In the Matter of )

)

PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY ) Docket Nos. 50-377 & 50-278

) l (Pennh Bottom &tamin Pnatar ) &ALMP Mn. AR-MAG =Ol'- OTA Station, Units 2 and 3) )

NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL AND NOTION TO TERMINATE 110cEEDIMG__ _

For the purpose of teratinating this proceeding, petitioner commonwealth of Pennsylvania (# Commonwealth")

hereby withdraws its petition to intervene (dated .7an. 22, 19ss), withdraws its supplement to Petition and Statement of contentions (dated August 24, itss) (including all the Proposed contentions advanced therein), and moves the Atonio safety and Licensing Board (the ' Licensing Board") to enter an order terminating this proceeding.

In support of this motion, the Commonwealth stateu as follows: ,

I

'l

1. on December 23, 1987, the Itualear Regulatory commission (the *NRC" or the acosmission#) published a f

..~.. .

.~ ,6 J,'

Notice of Opportunity for Hearing with respect to its proposed issuance of amendments to licenses held by PEco for operation of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit Nos. 2 and 3 (" Peach Bottos"). Ema 53 Ped. Reg. 48593 (1987). As requested in PEco's application for amendment (dated November 19, 1987), the proposed amendments are to modify the Technical specifications for the facility to reflect a new corporate organizational structure, a revised composition of the Plant Operations RevisW Constittee, and several administrative changes.

2. On January 22, 1988, the commonwealth peti-tiened for leave to intervene and for a hearing in this proceeding. In response, the cossaission referred this matter to the chairman of the Atomic safety and Licensing Board for appointment of a Licensing Board to consider if and on what issues the Commonwealth would be entitled to a hearing. (order (dated April 1, 1988), p. 3.)

3. The Licensing Board activated this proceeding by an order dated April 8, 1988, which required the Common-wealth to file its proposed contentions by April 25, 1988.

4. Through a series of consent actions for extension of time, the Conanonwealth's deadline for filing 3

1

proposed contentions was extended to August 24, 1988. Six proposed contentions were filed on that date.

5. PEco's response to the commonwealth's pro-posed contentions is not due until February 22, 1989 (333 order (dated January 23, 1989)), and at this time, none of the commonwealth's proposed co'sentions have been admitted.

6. By this filing, the commonwealth withdraws its supplement to Petition and Statement of Contentions of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania (dated August 24, 1988)

(including all the proposed contentions advanced therein),

withdraws its petition to intervene, and requests the termination of this proceeding.

7. The commonwealth takes this action because after discussions between the commonwealth and PEco which were previously reported to this Licensing Board, the l parties have entered into settlement agreements and other arrangements under which PEco is committed to take various actions regarding Peach Bottom and to allow representatives of the Commonwealth access to information regarding opera-tions at Peach Bottom.

l 3

,03/01/09 22:03 tRC R1 DOCKET ROOM NO.411 P059

~. 4 .',n 89

8. The commonwealth has been authorised to state that neither counsel for the Philadelphia Electric Company nor counsel for the NRC has any objection to the withdrawal of the Commonwealth's petition to intervene and its proposed contentions or to the termination of this proceeding.

Further, counsel for the NRC has advised that the NRC staff has no objections to the terms of the settlement agreements and arrangements.

9. Given these circumstances, NRC precedents dictate that this proceeding should be dismissed. For example, in Pacifie can and nimatria ca. (Humboldt Bay Power Plant, Unit No. 3), LBP-88-4, 27 N.R.C. 236, 238-39 (1988),

a Licensing Board granted a " motion to dismiss contentions and to terminate a proceeding" concerning a licensing amendment, noting that where . . . contentions are withdrawn, the matter becomes uncontested since there are no longer any matters which the parties wish to resolve in the proceeding and there is no need for further hearings.

In the instant proceeding, the stipulation which provides for the withdrawal of all . . .

contentions, effectively ends (interveners':

and removes all matters 2 status as a party,is controversy, in th adjudicatory proceeding.

Consequently,in tion and here below enters an order dismissingthe Board has approved the s the adjudicatory proceeding and authorizing the staff to issue the requested amendment.

1 4

i 9 . .:

. * <. n .

es Id. (citations omitted).

10. This same principle has been consistently applied in other cases where parties withdrew their peti-tions to intervene or contentions at the pre-hearing stage. .

l 333, Adg. , partland nanaral Elae. ca. (Trojen Nuolaar l Plant), AIAB-796, 21 N.R.C. 4, 5 (1985) (#[T]he only issues l to be decided by a licensing board are those contested by the parties. . .. Once those issues are no longer in dispute, whether before or after the hearing, the proceeding should be dismissed."); nochentar can and riae. Nen . (R.E.

Ginna Nuclear Plant, Unit No.1) , L8P-84-34, 20 N.R.C.149, 770 (1984) ("The withdrawal of the only intervenor removes both the need and the occasion for evidentiary hearings in this proceeding. There are no longer any matters which the parties wish to resolve in this proceeding and, consequent-ly, there is no issue to be heard by the Board.") Behlin serv. riae, and can ca. (Hope Creek Generating Station),

LBP-85-6A, 21 N.R.C. 468 (1985); untranelican udiaan ca.

(7ttree Nile Island Nuclear station, Unit 2), LBP-85-44, 22 N.R.C. 816, 817 (1985).

For all of the foregoing reasons, the Commonwealth respectfully requests that the Board enter an orders l 5

I I

9..t .

> % . '. y e

a. confirming the cosanonwealth's withdrawal of its petition to intervene and its p _,---:: M contentioner and

b. terminating the proceeding.

Respectfully submitted, N m.m.,wgunw.

Deputy General Counsel office of General counsel 17th Floor, Harristown II 333 Market Street Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17101 (717) 783-6563 RICHARD P. MATHER 1 l Assistant Counsel

• Rocca 505 Executive Wouse P.O. Box 2357 Marrisburg, Pennsylvania 17101 (717) 787-7060 counsel for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania DATED: February _ , 1989 1

4 6

[ --- _ _ _ _ - - - /

__ _ ~ _. f

~ ~ -' '

~~ ~~

i il -

____1 . . _ .

w.v.pnaero

! . i-UNITED STATES

]J,y 0,,

Y(* r,,

g j

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20566 a

f EDO Principal Correspondence Contro ji?

FROM: DUE: 03pb, 9 EDO CONTROL: 0004301 7,( DOC DT: 02/27/89 FINAL REPLY:

Arthur A. Davis, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania C. A. McNeill, Jr., Philadelphia Electric Co.

TO:

William Russell, RI FOR SIGNATURE OF: ** GRN ** CRC NO:

Murley or Russell-( DESC: ROUTING:

COMMITMENTS RE RESOLUTION OF PEACH BOTTOM Stello RESTART ISSUE Taylor

' Thompson DATE: 03/02/89 Blaha Russell, RI ASSIGNED TO: CONTACT: Scinto, OGC hr; _

Murley SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS:

EDO SHOULD CONCUR IN PROPOSED RESPONSE.

NRR RECEIVED: MARCH 2, 1989 ACTION: . DRPR:LAINAS NRR ROUTING: MURLEY/SNIEZEK MIRAGLIA VARGA 3 CRUTCHFIELD i GILLESPIE l MOSSBURG i;

ACTION ,

DUE TO NRR DIRECTOR'S OFFICE BY 9%tccd Rl9 79 _

'"'u . . _ . _ . . _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _