ML19282B490
| ML19282B490 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/31/1978 |
| From: | Joseph Austin NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19282B489 | List: |
| References | |
| RTR-WASH-1400 NUDOCS 7903150058 | |
| Download: ML19282B490 (6) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _
w f,J f
e p
i, d
b Risk Assessment Review Group 1717 H Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
August 29-31, 1978 ELEVENTH MEETING
'[
The Risk Assessment Review Group met at the Matomic Building, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. on August 29-31, 1978, to continue the preparaticn of the Report.
The notice of the meeting appeared in the Federal Register (43 FR_ 34567) on August 4, 1978 (Attachment A).
One written statement with regard to this meting was received from the public (Attachment B).
There were no requests to make oral statements.
The meeting consisted entirely of an Executive Session open to the public.
The Chairman of the meeting was Dr. Harold W. Lewis.
Review Group members also in attendance were: Dr. Robert J. Budnitz, Dr. Walter B. Loewenstein (on August 30), Dr. Herbert J. C. Kouts, Dr. William D. Rowe (except morning of August 30), and Dr. Frank von Hippel.
The designated Federal Representative for this meeting Dr. John H. Austin.
A list of attendees at this meeting is attached (Attachment C).
A list of documents avail-able to the Review Group is attached (Attachnent D).
At the conclusion of the meeting, it was agreed that the Panel would brief the Commission and the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards in September.
No written reports were issued or aoproved by the Review Group at this meeting.
Dr. Lewis opened the meeting at 9:30 a.m. on August 29 and noted that the meeting was being conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
Copies of the Federal Register notice for the meeting were made available to those in attendance.
There was no response to the request for any statement by those in attendance.
Over the three day meeting the Panel members went through in great detail the draft report which had been circulated prior to the meeting.
It was agreed that minority views could be expreesed in the report.
On August 31, the Panel met briefly with Mr. Saul Levine tu discuss:
- 1) whether any new sequences had been it'entified since the RSS analysis (SL indicated there were none with the exception of Browns Ferry fire):
- 2) whether there was a systematic effort to analyze the operating experience that had been gained since RSS was published, e.g., the Epler concerns with regard to batteries, (SL indicated that they have analyzed the Epler concern and others, and found they are a trivial addition to risk; he indicated that there have been unique events occurring or concerns arising, e.g., torus jump and asymmetric loads, and indicated they did not present problems with respect to the RSS; he indicated there is not a rigorous 7903150058
.o..
o
. systematic assessment of new operating experiences; and he indicated that Federal Republic of Germany study of reactor. safety has not to his know-ledge found anything new); 3) the ATWS analysis and scram unreliability; and 4) the failure rates of relief valves.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:00 p.m. of August 31.
Note:
The Review Group met with the Commission and with the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards in separate public sessions on September 7, 1978 for the purpose of presenting the Panel's findings and recommendations to the NRC.
Complete transcripts of those meetings are on file at the NRC Public Document Room at 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. or can be obtained from ACE Federal Reporters, Inc.,
444 North Capitol Street, Washington, D.C. 20001,(202) 347-3700.
The Panel approved the Report on September 7, 1978 and transmitted it to the Commission by letter dated September 8, 1978.
The Report was published as NUREG/CR-0400 and printed copies became available to the Commission and the public on September 15, 1978.
4 775c H & Y 8 NOTIGs "hules of Practice." 10 CFR part 2 34567-file a petition for leave to intervene ments should be limited to areas and request a hearing on the antitrust within the Group's purview. Persons 'eJ1.t. Austin) between 8:15 a.m. and 5 p.m.
aspects of~ the application. Petitions desiring to mail written comments (d) Questions may be asked only by forleave to intervene and requests for. ducible copy thereof in time formay do so by sending a readi memben of the Review Group, hearing shall be filed by September 3. ' sideration at this meeting Comments
-378. either (1) by delivery to the NRC (e) Statements of views or erpres-con.
Docketing and Service Section at 1717 postmarked no later than August 22 sfons of opinion made by members of H Street NW., Washington, D.C or 1978, to Dr. Johrt H. Austin. Office of the Rev.sw Group at open meetings (2) by mail or telegram addressed to Policy Evaluation. NRC. Washington. are not intended to reoresent final de-termtmtions or beliefs.
the Secretary. U.S. Nuclesr Rescula" D.C. 20555 will normsHv be received (f) The use of still action picture.~
tory Commission. Washington. D.C.
in time to be considered at this meet-and television cameras, the physical 20555, ATIN: Docketing and Service Ing* Of course
- comments not received installation and presence of which will Section*
in t me r his meeting wm be circu-not laterfere with the conduct of the For the Nuclear Regulstory Com-lated to the members of the Review meeting, will be permitted both before Group for consideration at a future and after the meeting and during any mission.
Ancu. TdALsTO1f.
meeting. Comments should pertain to recess. The use of such equipment will
. Acting Chief. Antitrust and In-the field of risk assessment method-not, however, be allowed while the demnity Group, O//!ce of Nu-ology or should be based on the final meeting is in session; clear ReactorRegulation.
report of the Reactor Safety Study.
(g) A copy of the mfuutes of the CFR Doc. 78-21781 PUed 8-3-78: 8:45 am!
copies of which are available for meeting will be ava!!abla for Inspec.
public inspection at" tion on or after September 30,1978 at
, the NRC Publ!c Document Room.
- 1. The NRC Pub!!e Document Room.17171717 H Street NW., Washington D
[7390-01]
H Street NW., Washington. D.C. 20555.
Copies may be obtained upon pay,me.C.
- 2. The NRc a five Regional ofnees of In.
nt of appropriate charges.
RISK A33t$3 MINT RIVIEW GROUP,
Meettng Ractow I Dated at Washington, D.C, this 1st day of August,1978.
Pursuant to the Feders! Advisory 63t Park. Avenue. E2ng of Prussia. Pa.
19406 ommittee Act (Pub. L.92-463), notice
[FR Doc. 78-21782 Filed 8-3-7P 8 45 am) hereby given of an open meeting of Rmos H he Risk Assessment Review Group'of Suite 1217, 230 he U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commis-G8 30303 Peachtree Street. Atlanta. [7590-01]
ion (NRC). to be held at 8:30 a.m.,
ugust 29 thrcush 31.1978, in Room nue rg m,gmyg 3pm 167 of the Matomic Building 1717 H m menevelt Road. Olen Enyn. nl. 60137 SAN DfEGO GAS & ELECTRIC CO, CAUFCANfA treet NW., Washington. D.C. The urposes of this meeting are to contin.
Racrom fy DEyAR7 MINT CP WATER RE5OURCIS, CTY CF ANAHttM ET At., QUIS CP LOS ANCE-e the review of the final report of the Suite 1000. 611 Ryan Plaza Drtve. Arling-eactor Safety Study (WASH-1400) ton. Ter.76012 d the peer comments thereon and to Reee;pe of Anemey Generers Advice and Time iscuss subjects that might be includ-Rnorow 7 g
g p,%,, %,, g in the report of the Review Group.
Sulta 202.199o North Califomia Boule-The Risk Assessment Review Group vard. Walnut Creek, cant. 9459a.
The commMion has received, pur-an independent group established Copies of the Mnal Report may be ob.
suant to section 105c of the Atomic the NRC (42 FR 34955) for the pur* tained from: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccm. Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the e of providing advice and inform &-
mission. Office of Nuclear Regulatory Re-following additional advice from the on to the Commission regarding the search. Probabiuatic Analysis Staff. Atten-Attorney General of the United tion: Meles S. Pogle (telephone: 301-492-al report of the Reactor Safety 8377% 7735 Old Georgetown Road, Bethes-States, dated July 2S,1978, with re-udy. WASH-1400.(NUREG-75/014),
da. Md. 20014.
.d the peer comments on the Study.
spect to a construction permit applica-tion for Sundeser*.
vice and recommendations on devel*
(b) Persons desiring to make an oral Units 1 and 2:
Nuclear Plant.
ments in the field of risk assessment statement at the meeting should make ethodology and courses of action a request to do so prior to the meeting, You have requested our further adde dch might be taken on future devel-identifying the topics and desired pres.
pursuant to section 105c of the Atomic ment and use of risk assessment entation time so that appropriate ar-EnerE7 Act of 1954, as ame..ded. in regard thodology. This advice and Infor. rangements can be made The time al-to the above captioned app 11 cation. The De.
partment pneusty undend advice n.
$'Lon will assist the CommMion in lotted for such statements will be at specting this application on May 12. 1978.
blishing policy regarding the use the discretion of the Chairmm The and Septernber 2.1977. We understand that risk assessment in the regulatory Review Group will receive oral state. - Cauf propose to participa the cities of Ios Angeles and Burbank.
ess. It will also clarify the achieve-ments on topics relevant to its purview of San Diego. Anaheim. Olendale. Pasadena.
nts and limitations of the Reactor at an appropriate time chosen by the ety Study. The Review Group will Chairma and Riverside. Cauf., in the Sundesert Nu-clear Plant. Unita 1 and 2. Our review of the mit a report to the Commission on (c) Further information regarding information submitted for the proposed ad-before September 30.1978.
topics to be discussed whether the ditional participants. as wen as other rele-7th respect to public participation meeting has been cance, led or resche-vant informauoo, has disclosed no basts the meeting, the following require. duled, the Chairman's ruling on re. upon which to chanze our previous conclu.
nts shall apply.
sica that no antitrust hearing win be re-
) Persons wishing to submit writ-quests for the opportunity to present statements regarding the agenda oral statements and the time allotted quimd ngarding this nuclear faciuty Any person whose interest ma do so by providing 10 readily re.
therefor can be obtained by a prepaid affected by this proceeding may.y be telephone call on August 23,1978, to dacible copies to the Review Group pur-the Office of Policy Evaluation (tele-suant to 5 2.714 of the Commission's he beginning of the meeting. Com-
" Rules of Practice." 10 CFR Part 2 phone 202-634-3209 Attention: John f!!e a petition for leave to intettene FIDERAL RfC45TER, Vot. 43, NO.151-JRfDAY, AUGUST 4,1978
%~
- 771G9WF*T (
Sox 91 Stockton Sprin~0, :line 04981 13 August 1978 To: U3 :helear Regulatory Co= mission Dr. Joh: H. Austin, Office of Iblicy Evaluation Tashington, D.C.
20555
Dear Dr. Austin:
.In response to the notice in the Federal Register, 4 Aug 1978, I rish to provide comment regardin.; the agenda for the =eeting of the Risk issesscent Review Group.
First, I suggest that the issue of sabotace be re-enanined. The third paragraph of page 7 of TASH - 1400 indicates an urgent need for much more detailed examination.
The statement, "...:n convincing way could be found to estimate the probability of acts of sabotace...," leaves cuch to be desired. The re-examintion of this issue should recognize that the critical components of nuclear power facilities are now co:ron knowledge. A review of just the " Gray 3cok" and the " Federal Register" would indicate that destruction of both off-site power sources, destruction of energency generators, a small break loss of coolant on the discharge side of a reactor coolant pump, and delsyed operator action wouli place a boiling water reactor in a critical = ode. A review of Ia0 documents available in any :EC public document room would provide all of the infomation needed to plaa a successful sabotage effort.
The logistics of such an effort are not difficult.
Second, I suggest the issue of evacuation be re-exa=ined. The Consequence ibdel, Table X14-1, of RSH - 1400 reflects the assumption of successful evacuation.
An examination of all existing evacuation plans should be made to justify this assu=ption and should range from consideration of best weather conditions to torst weather conditions. The scenario of Her Years eve, a severe ice or snow s+or=,
coupled to electrical power and telephone failure should be considered. ( i.e. Ib
~
radio, no TV, and no phone. )
2ased on a re-examination of these tro issues a new Consequence Ibdel should be developed.
Sincerely, Je c.
Qh
. D"W Ibil G. Garrett Lt Col USAR RIT Corps of Er.gr
. Attachment C Attendance at Risk Assessment Review Group Meeting August 29, 1978 L. R. Abramson N. C. Shirley A. G. Adanantiades August 30, 1978 none August 31, 1978 none
.- Attachment D Documents Available to Review Group 1.
Letter to H. W. Lewis from Stephen H. Hanauer dateu May 19, 1978.
2.
Letter to John Austin from Roger H. Moore dated May 25, 1978.
3.
Letter to H. W. Lewis from Clifford V. Smith dated June 2, 1978.
4.
Letter to H. W. Lewis from Robert G. Ryan dated May 30, 1978.
5.
Letter to H. W. Lewis from Lee V. Gossick dated May 19, 1978.
6.
Partial transcript of ACRS meeting on reliability and accident probability, June 8, 1978, pages 87-97.
~7.
" Plan for Research to Improve the Safety of Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants" NUREG-0438, April 12, 1978.
8.
PNO-78-119 and 119A.
9.
Letter to Frank von Hippel from J. L. Sprung dated June 19, 1978 with draft SAND-78-0556.
10.
Letter to Risk Assessment Review Group Members from J. H. Austin dated July 12, 1978 re the AD Sequence.
11.
Letter to J. H. Austin from A. R. Buhl dated August 30, 1978 re the AD Sequence.
12.
Letter to H. W. Lewis from Saul Levine dated June 27, 1978.
13.
E. P. Epler " Potential for the Reduction of Core Melt Probability."
Paper presented at ANS Topical Meeting on Probabilistic Analysis of Nuclear Reactor Safety, May 8-10, 1978, Los Angeles (Newport Beach), California.
14.
Commissioner Action Item, SECY-78-137, " Assessments of Relative Differences in Class 9 Accident Risks in Evaluations of Alternatives to Sites with High Population Densities," March 7, 1978.
15.
Risk Methodology Presentation to Electric Power Research Institute, Nuclear Safety and Analysis Task Force, June 1978.