ML19317H524
| ML19317H524 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 04/29/1980 |
| From: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| References | |
| ACRS-1730, NUDOCS 8006130181 | |
| Download: ML19317H524 (22) | |
Text
,
- \\ F~ - ^
E":,
2:
i M,"l i H~3 Lf n ;,b -
{a AveJ-MJd i
I.1
./
ISSUE DATE: 4/29/80 W
MINUTES OF THE ACRS AD HOC SUBCOM:11TTEE fiEETING ON THREE MILE ISLAND 2 ACCIDENT IMPLICATIONS WASHINGTON, DC APRIL 9,1980 The ACRS Ad Hoc Subcommittee on the Three Mile Island 2 Accident Implications Regarding Nuclear Power' Plant Design held an open meeting on April 9,1980 in Room 1167, 1717 H St., NW, Washington, D.C.
The purpose of this meeting was to discuss the implications of the March 28, 1979 accident at the Three Mile Island, Unit 2 station as they relate to construction permit applications.
Notice of this meeting was publi-shed in the Federal Register on March 25, 1980.
A copy of this notice is included as Attachment A.
A list of attendees for this meeting is included as Attachment B, and a schedule for this meeting is included as Attachment C.
Selected portions of the meeting handouts are included as Attachment D.
A complete set of handouts has been included in the ACRS Files. There were no written statements or requests for time to make oral statements received from members of the public. The Designated Federal Employee for this meeting was Mr. Richard Major.
CHAIRMAN'S OPENING REMARKS - D. Okrent Dr. Okrent noted the purpose of this meeting was to hear presentations from members of the NRC Staff pertaining to the implications of the TMI-2 accident as they relate to construction permit applications. Specifically, the Staff explained how NRC Action Plan items will be applied to plants which have yet to receive a construction permit (CP). This is a group of six plants (eleven units in all) which comprise the near-term construction permit (NTCP) applicants.
Dr. Okrent observed that Nhen the Action Plan was developed, the major emphasis was on operating plants ar3 then NT0Ls.
Items which are applicable to plants at the CP stage might not have been automatically included in the Action Plan.
He was concerned that a list of items derived from the Action Plan may rep-resent a necessary list but not necessarily a sufficient list of items re-quired of cps as a result of TMI.
THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS P0OR QUAUTY PAGES
TMI-2 Accident Implications 4/9/80 INTRODUCTION BY NRC STAFF - W. Kane Mr. Kane said the Staff's purpose in having the meeting was to inform the ACRS of the Staff program to establish the extent to which NTCP applicants must demonstrate conformance to TMI Action Plan requirements. He noted that some of the action plans are going to have to be supplemented to a certain extent to be able to address the CP applicants. The Staff did not go beyond those requirements that are identified in the Action Plan for requirements applicable to CP applicants.
Mr. Kane explained that he leads a task force within the Staff. The Task Force was charged with the job of examining the Action Plan and determining the extent to which requirements in the Plan are to apply to NTCPs. At the same time, the Task Force is trying to obtain the views of the entire Staff on whether the course taken is the correct approach.
Dr. Okrent commented that it is conceivable that there are changes in design that would be desirable to do on all plants but which are really very hard to do on operating plants or even on NTOLs. However, such changes might be more practical for CP applicants.
Mr. Kane said that the ACRS will be requested to review the Staff's recommenda-tions and provide its advice to the Commission. The Staff, after consideration of the ACRS advice, will prepare for Commission approval, a final set of recommendations which reflect ACRS comments on how the Action Plan is to be applied to CP applications.
Following Commission approval, requirements will be directed to licens,,ees.
The Staff hopes to be able to meet with the full Committee during the May meeting. If a letter could be received from the Committee by mid-May, a Commission paper from the Staff could be expected in early June.
TMI-2 Accident implications 4/9/80 Those plants which comprise the NTCP Applicants Group are:
APPLICANT PROPOSED PLANT NAME Boston Edison Company Pilgrim 2 Duke Power Company Perkins 1-3 Houston Lighting & Power Company Allens Creek 1 Portland General Electr,1c Company Pebole Springs 1 & 2 Public Service Company of Oklahoma Black Fox 1 & 2 Puget Sound Power & Light Company Skagit 1 & 2 Dr. Okrent requested these plants be listed in the order the Staff expects to issue a CP on them. !!r. Kane suspected that the plants closest to an action from a licensing board are Black Fox and Pilgrim 2.
Slice 1 (attached) gives a brief description of each plant, NSSS vendor, architect-engineer, NSSS type, containment type, etc.
Each of these plants has received at least one ACRS CP letter.
'Mr. Kane explained that in going through the Action Plan for NTCP requirements, the Staff has categorized the requirements as to the extent of information that would be required in order to review the plants and provide a safety evaluation to the licensing board. There are presently five categories of requirements, which are:
l Category 1 - Not applicable Category 2 - Comitment required to implement requirement prior to an operating license.
Category 3 - Commitment required to complete certain studies prior to a specified date in advance of the FSAR and to im-plement any requirements resulting from those studies prior to an operating license.
Category 4 - Commitment required to implement requirements prior to an operating license and a general explanation of how the commitment will be met.
Category 5 - Detailed explanation of how requirement will be im-plemented is required frior to issuance of a CP.
In summary, Mr. Kane noted that the Action Plan contains 279 action items, the NTCP task group concluded 144 action items should be addressed by CP applicants and reviewed by the Staff prior to issuance of a CP. There
TMI-2 Accident Implications 4/9/80 are 134 Category 1 items, 67 Category 2 items, 24 Category 3 items, 46 Category 4 items, and 8 Category 5 items. Mr. Kane said that a substantial number of the action items must be supplemented to describe CP requirements.
OPERATIONS - J. Snell, NRC Staff The operations iteme. deal with Sections I and II.J.3 of the Action Plan. The areas selected for discussion during the Subcommittee meeting (because the Staff felt these items would be of interest to the Subcommittee) were manage-ment operations, control room operations, industry e.5perience, and quality assurance.
Item II.J.3, Management for Design and Construction, is a Category 5 item.
l This item was a result of recommendations from the President's Commission and the NRC Special Inquiry Group. Draft criteria to be used for NTOLs will be expanded to include details for construction management. The Staff will review the applicant's organization, staffing, qualifications, and training similar to that which is being done for NTOLs. The Stcff review will be j
based on an ANS Standard 3.1, which is now being circulated for comments.
Dr. Okre.nt asked if the Staff has some minimum size a utility would have to be in order to construct and operate a nuclear power plant. Mr. Snell said at the present time, the Staff is not judging a utility on sheer numbers of people. When asked if there was some minimum of overall resources required by a utility to operate a nuclear plant, Mr. Snell thought there was but a specific number value was not written down in the Action Plan.
Item I.A.4.2, "Long-Term Simulator Upgrading," is a Category 4 item. This item was a result of the President's Commission Report, SECY-79-330E and others. The Staff believes the plan provides sufficient guidelines appli-cable to NTCP control room simulators. The Staff would like to see the design and construction of the plant's control room factored into a simu-lator to be used for NTCP.
TMI-2 Accident Implications 4/9/80 Item I.D.1, " Control Room Design," is a Category 4 item. This item was a result of recommendations f am the President's Commission and the NRC Special Inquiry Group. The Staff feels the Plan is directly applicable to CP plants. IEEE 566 and 567 will be available in the fall of 1980 to be used as guidelines. The Staff will require information as to how the NTCP control room, design will satisfy the Action Plan. The NRC Staff nroup which will be dealing with human factors will specifically be looking at this area.
In response to a question by Dr. Okrent regarding upgrading control room equipment to safety grade that is used to show plant status, Mr. McHugh of Boston Edison, a member of the IEEE Control Room Study Group, said the idea was under study. The current position is if an indicator will be used to cope with an operational event it should be safety grade. Instruments to follow the course of an event will be recommended to be an intermediate i
safety class. Instruments used to verify proper operation would be non-safety grade.
Item I.C.5, " Feedback of Operating Experience," is a Category 4 item. This item is a result of recommendations from NUREG-0585, the President's Commis-sion, and the NRC Special Inquiry Group. Although this task was written with operating plants in mind, the principle of the task is applicable to NTCPs. The Staff will want to examine the details of an organization to factor industry experience into the design and construction of the plant.
Item I.F, " Quality Assurance" is a Category 4 item. This item was a recommendation in the President's Commission Technical Staff Report. The Staff expects applicants to propose how QA coverage could be expanded. The Staff will issue a paper op expanded QA coverage in late 1981.
TMI-C Accident Implications 4/9/80 ACTION ITEMS DEALING WITH BWR PLANTS AND SELECTED PLANT DESIGN MATTERS - C. Thomas, NRC Staff Item II.B.7 " Degraded or Melted Cores - Containment Inerting," is a Category 4 item. The Action Plan itself requires inerting of Mark I and Mark II Contain-ments and notes plans for an interim rule and rulemaking. The plants represented by the NTCP group do' not have any Mark I or Mark II Containment plants. The groupdoeshavethreeBhRswhichwilluseMarkIIIContainments,sothatthe inerting item as written does not apply specifically. NTCP applicants should address the feasibility of implementing possible measures to control large amounts of hydrogen. This group of plants must provide information sufficient to assure that implementation of possible hydrogen control measures will not be precluded.
Dr. Okrent mentioned a research effort underway by the NRC which is addressing filtered-vented containments and measures to mitigate hydrogen ~ buildup. However, he noted the effort is limited to large, dry, PWR containments. He urged the Staff to support the consideration of other containment designs in this effort.
Item II.B.8 is entitled, " Degraded or Melted Cores - Rulemaking on Degraded Core Accidents." This action plan describes plans for an interim rule and rulemaking dealing'with degraded or melted core accidents. The NTCP appli-cants should address the proposed interim rule. This is a Category 5 item which requires information to assure compliance with the proposed interim rule be provided. The interim rule will address several matters including high point reactor cooling system and reactor head vents, additional shielding, and post-accident sampling.
Item II.D.3 is entitled, UReactor Coolant System Relief and Safety Valves -
~
Position Indication.'" The action alan requires installation of direct indi-cation of relief and safety valve position in the control room. Both operating reactors and NTOL plants are required to provide direct indication of relief ard safety valve position in the control room. The task force believes this requirement should be applied to NTCP plants. This is a Category 4 require-ment and the Staff will require information sufficient to assure that the j
requirement will be met.
~
l l
\\
l TMI-2 Accident Implications 4/9/80
" Containment Design - Dedicated Penetrations," is item II.E.4.1.
This action plan requires plants with external hydrogen recombiners to be prmrided with redundant dedicated containment penetrations. This plan will app., to NTCPs.
It is a Category 5 requirement and information is presently available to allow applicants to address this issue completely.
Dr. Oln ent asked if there was any intent to ask the NTCP applicants to do a probabilistic assessmen't of their plant designed to look for weak points or potential improvements. Mr. Kane said that presently there are no such plans. Mr. Zech of the Staff noted the current thinking regarding IREP (integrated reliability evaluation program) was to perform the first six studies on operating plants then decide how to proceed on the rest of the operating plants, the NTOLs, and the cps. Dr. Okrent commented that the best time to do an IREP-type study was during the plants' design stage, before structures and equipment are in place. Dr. Okrent also thought the industry should be given a chance to participate in such studies.
ACTION ITEMS DEALING WITH PWR PLANTS AND SELECTED PLANT DESIGN MATTERS - P. O'Reilly, NRC Staff Mr. O'Reilly began by describing requirements NTCPs must meet for action plan I.C.1, "Short-Term Accident Analysis and Procedure Revision." This item is essentially that of NUREG-0578, Section 2.1.9 (TMI-2 Lessons Learned Task Force: Status Report and Short-Term Recommendations). The Staff believes the NTCP applicants should perform the following analyses:
(a) Small Break LOCAs (b) Symptoms of Inadequate Core Cooling and Required Actions to Restore Core Cooling (c) Transient and Accident Scenarios, Including Operator Actions Not Previously Analyzed This is a Category 4 item that the Staff believes has well-defined criteria.
Results of analyses are not needed before CP issuance. However, before CP issuance, the applicants should provide a description of the approach to be used in the analyses performed in response to the analyses listed above.
TMZ-2 Accident Implications 4/9/80 Item II.E.1, " Auxiliary Feedwater System Evaluation," is a Category 3 item.
The task force feels NTCP applicants should:
1.
Eva.luate AFWS Reliability (Appendix III to NUREG-0611 and -0635) 2.
Provide a Deterministic AFWS Evaluation (SRP Section 10.4.9) 3.
Provide AFW Flow Design Basis Information for NRR Review (Annex 1 to Appendix X of NUREG-0611 and -0635)
The Staff feels the criteria are well-defined; all that is needed prior to CP issuance (in addition to the information about AFWS normally provided in the PSAR to meeting the requirements of the standard format for SARs) is a commitment to meet the requirement. The reliability evaluation may be per-formed during the post-CP stage of review and the results submi.tted on a schedule to be developed by NRC.
Item II.E.3.1 is entitled, " Natural Circulation." This item is an extension of Section 2.1.1 of NUREG-0578. NTCP applicants should upgrade the pressurizer heater power supply and a:sociated motive and control power interfaces for the maintenance of pressure control for the reactor coolant system during the natural circulation made of operation when offsite power is not available.
This is considered a Category 4 item. The Staff believes the criteria are wel l -defi ned. Before a CP is issued, an applicant should describe the i
general approach to be used to meet the requirement. Details of imple-mentation can be left until the OL stage of review.
Dr. Okrent made a brief comment on the reliability of the AWFS. He explained that a plant which could, for instance, use a feed and bleed form of cooling might not need as reliable an AFWS as a plant which cannot use a feed and bleed form of cooling. Such considerations deserve attention at the CP stage in plant licensing.
l Item II.E.5 deals with, " Design Sensitivity of B&W Reactors." This item is an extension of show-cause orders issued on October 15, 1979 to all CP holders. On this basis, NTCP applicants would be required to:
(a) identify the most severe overcooling events that could occur at the facility, (b) show
TMI-2 Accident Implications 4/9/80 that in view of the arrival rate of these events, the design criterion for the number of actuation cycles for the ECCS and RPS is adequate, and (c) rec-onmend changes to systems or procedures that would reduce primary system sensitivity. These requirements may change when NUREG-0667 recommendations are incorporated in Draft 4 of the TMI-2 Action Plan. These requirements may be extended to re.flect the results of the Staff review of the Crystal River event. This is a. Category 4 item, a commitment alone is not sufficient to provide the Staff reasonable assurance that the above requirements will be implemented properly before the OL stage of review. Consequently, a general discussion of how the requirements will be met is needed.
Item II.F.2 is, " Instrumentation and Controls - Inadequate Core Cooling."
This item grew out of NUREG-0578 Section 2.1.3.B.
NTCP applicants should incorporate the following instrumentation in their preliminary designs:
(a} Primary coolant subcooling meter; (b) An instrument to detect condi-cions with a potential that may lead to inadequate core cooling. The task force considers this a Category 4 item, it is felt criteria are well-defined. Design details are not needed before CP issuance. However, before CP issuance, applicants should provide a description of the approach to be used to meet the above requirements.
Mr. Mathis asked if the concept of a dedicated heat removal system was being addressed in various sections of the Action Plan. Dr. Okrent requested the Staff be prepared to address how NTCP should address this item. An asso-ciated question is whether there is a reason to look at an operating pres-sure heat removal system.
SITING, ACCIDENT MONITORING INSTRUMENTATION, EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS, AND RADIATION PROTECTION - J.,Qonran, NRC Staff Item II.A deals with Siting. The item is broken into two parts -- siting policy rulemaking and site evaluation. This item has its origins in the NRC Siting Policy Task Force reports, Kemeny Commission Report, and Rogovin Study. The purpose of the plan is to establish improved siting criteria for new plants. The Staff will also develop a strategy for reconsideration of past siting decisions in the light of new criteria that will be developed
TMI-2 Accident Implications 4/9/80 in the context of the siting policy rulemaking effort. The new rule as written would only be applicable to holders of cps filed after adoption of the rule and would not apply to the NTCP group. No licensee or CP holder action is required prior to start of Staff Review of Post-Siting decisions. Additional Staff action is required to make siting related requirements applicab.le to CP applicants. Siting Policy Rulemaking is considered a category IB item which deals with rulemaking and is not the responsibility of the applicant, but rather the Staff. The new rule will not be applicable to CP applicants now in the pipeline. Site evalua-tion is a Cagetary 5 item. CP applicants must provide detailed description /
discussion of site characteristics vs. criteria expressed in the draft rule.
In response to questions from Dr. Okrent, the Staff stated that they felt the earliest a CP would be issued is the end of this year.
Mr. Conran next discussed Action Plan III.A.1, " Improved Licensee Emergency Preparedness (Short-Term)." This item has two parts which are upgrading emergency preparedness and upgrading support facilities. The goal of this plan is to immediately upgrade the overall state of emergency preparedness for nuclear power plant accidents including:
- improve onsite (licensee) plans for response to emergency /
accident conditions improve offsite (state / local) plans for response to emergency /
accident conditions improve onsite/offsite coordination NRC emergency preparedness review team review of the proposed plan vs. interim criteria provided to all licensees /0L applicants (incTudes opportunity for expression of concerns by public througtr an open meeting) assess / improve evacuation times
TMI-2 Accident Implications 4/9/80 The Staff will also establish / upgrade dedicated areas for command and control, and support and coordination of onsite and offsite functions during accident conditions (Technical Support Center, Operational Support Cent'r, Near-site Emergency Cperations Center, Data Link, etc.).
e The upgrading of emergency preparedness is a Category 5 item, detailed interim criteria for upgrading exists and can be applied to CP applicants.
Upgrading of support facilities is rated a Category 4 item. Requirements as stated apply to CP applicants, but some aspects (e.g. data link) are still evolving.
Item III.A.2 is " Improving Licensing Emergency Preparedness (Long-Term)."
This item has two parts, one deals with a rule change, the other deals with issuance of guidance and criteria. This action plan requires the Staff to develop changes to the existing rule requiring:
NRC Concurrence in State / Local Emergency Response. Plans Extending Emergency Planning to EPZs Submittal of Detailed Emergency Plan Implementing Pro-cedures by Licensees Improved Support for Local Emergency Response Personnel and Provisions for Notifying Public of Accident Conditions A Commission paper is expected to be completed by June 30, 1980. NRC and FEMA have jointly published, for interim use, detailed criteria and guidance for preparing and evaluating emergency response plans and emergency preparedness.
The item dealing with the rule change has been rated a Category 5 item.
CP applicants will be required to address explicitly, in detail, the require-ments stated in the new rule. The item' dealing with guidance and criteria is also a Category 5 item! NRC/ FEMA guidance and criteria are provided in great detail in NUREG-0654, and the licensee will be required to address them explicitly.
l l
TMI-2 Accident Implications 4/9/80 Item II.F.3 deals with, " Instruments for Monitoring Accident Conditions, (Regulatory Guide 1.97)."
The purpose of this plan is to provide appro-priate instrumentation for accident monitoring including:
expanded ranges; source term that considers a damaged core; and capability of surviving accident environment for the length of time i,ts function is required.
The draft Regulatory Guide was issued for coment on December 4,1979. The Regulatory Guide is expected to be issued in effective fom in August of 1980. When the Regulatory Guide is issued, it will contain requirements for plants under construction and for plants pending CP issuance. This item is rated a Category 4 item. The high level commitment requirement is being imposed due to the history of controversy on this item.
Item III.D.1 is entitled, " Radiation Source Control." This item includes and extends the Lessons Learned Task Force recommendations which were directed to identifying and providing design features and leakage reduction and detection measures that will reduce the potential for exposure to workers at nuclear power plants and to offsite populations following an l
accident. This is a Category 4 item. CP applicants will be required to review their designs (to the extent they exist) and their design approach to leakage reduction and detection.
Detailed, specific criteria in this regard do not yet exist -- so the level of detail /infomation required prior to CP issuance is at level 4.
Dr. Okrent was unsure whether or not the Subcomittee could recomend action on this issue at the May ACRS meeting. Prior to a Subcommittee recommenda-tion for a full ACRS consideration of this item, additional clarification and documentation of the Staff approach toward NTCP plants was requested. -
The Staff informed the Subcomittee that additional Staff coments were being received on the NTCP items, and that further clacification of items in the NTCP list would be made.
Dr. Okrent offered some coments on measures that he felt should be examined by those plants which have yet to receive a CP. These items included:
TMI-2 Accident Implications 4/9/80 a.
The ability of a plant to cope with the loss of all AC power.
b.
The reliability of DC power supplies.
Is there a dif-ference among plant designs to cope with the loss of DC power even though all designs meet the single failure criter. ion?
c.
The complex problem of separation between safety re-lated and non-safety related systems should receive some attention.
d.
The adequacy of the single failure criterion should be addressed.
The topic of systems interaction studies for plants e.
still.to be built should be addressed, as well as, who should make the studies (Staff vs. Applicant).
f.
A topic which may deserve rethinking is seismic effects on non-safety systems which may lead to (Such a study is under-additional complications..For plants at the CP stage, way for Diablo Canyon.)
it is still possible to design around suspected problem areas, rather than requiring extensive analysis to prove acceptability.
g.
An item which may deserve attention is the choice of concrete for the containment basemat. The be-havior of different concretes vary assuming there is molten core material in contact with them. The behavior of the containment given various basemat concretes may deserve attention.
h.
Finally, Dr. Okrent commented that a general state-ment of policy on the NRC's approach to safety would be helpful to the NTCP owners.
PRESENTATIONBYREPRESENTkTIVESOFTHENTCPAPPLICANTS-Mr.GeorgeQprea, Executive Vice President for Houston Lighting and Power Company and Mr. Vaughn Conrad, Public Service of Oklahoma Attached to these minutes is the text of each man's statement.
In general, these representatives of the NTCP owners made comments on the Staff's approach to their applications. The critical item to the owners of the six NTCP plants is the policy question of whether and how construction
TMI-2 Accident Implications 4/9/80 permit applications will be processed in the near term. The six policy issues the NTCP applicants thought to be in most urgent need of resolution were:
1.
Siting 2.
Degraded Core. Conditions 4.
Control Room Design 5.
Management for Design and Construction 6.
Reliability and Risk Assessment CLOSING REMARKS Dr. Okrent urged the Staff, at the next meeting with the Committee on this topic, to explain the alternatives the Staff will present to the Commission concerning NTCPs. Dr. Ross had no problem with this approach provided it was understood th'e Staff position could be modified by Committee advice.
Dr. Ross explained that by the end of the next week, internal review of the NTCP list should be completed. By the next week, Action Plans which needed to be modified to express action toward cps would be identified, and the paragraph description completed the following week. He noted again, the Staff effort was only to deal with a derivative set of items from the Action Plan and not to introduce other issues.
Dr. Okrent commented again that limiting consideration to items just in the Action Plan may not be appropriate for CP applicants.
The meeting was adjourned at 1:00 p.m.
NOTE:
For additional details, a complete transcript of the meeting is available in the NRC Public Document Room, 1717 H St., NW, Washington, DC 20555 or from International Verbatim Reporters, Inc., 422 South Capitol Street, SW, Suite 107, Washington, DC '20002, (202) 484-3550.
Federal Register / Vcl 45. Nr. 59 / Tuesday. March 25, 1980 / N:tices
- 19410 IBI '"i e
- :perience, polides, and approaches has been cancelled or rescheduled. the accord.
Open Meeting to alcohol fuels development.
Chairman's ruEng on requests for the Federa opportunity to present oral statements Law,-
Agency: National AlcoholFuela Jesses M. Chldress, and the time allotted for the be W Commission.
g,,cygfn pir,eson presentations can be obtained by a Date: April 11.1980.
Mar M9.19so.
prepaid telephone can to the cognizant Tim :9:30 a.m.-4 p.m. MST.
pow,menm.m umme-i Designated Federal Employee. Mr. Gary Furtl Plac:: Holiday Inn. Aberdeen. S. Dak.
saAma caosease. m a Quittschreiber (telephone 202/634-3287) to be d Type cf meeting Open.
between 8:15 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. EST.
hu b Contact person: Doug Durante. Public Chalh NUCt. EAR REGULATORY Deted: March ao.teso-Informstion Officer. 202/4264490.
opport COMMISSION Jeha C. Hoyle.
Written statements: National Alcohol pry comunisteeManesemms officen and th Fu:Is Commission.412 First Strut Advisory Committee on Reactor obtain P'8" *'*"*
- d H 'enee.
SF Washington.D.C.20003.
Safeguards.Subcommittes on Power ee et saama caos nos w Purpots of commission:De National and Electrical Systems; Meeting I pl Ale:hol Fuels Commission was An ACRS Subcommittee on Power established under Section 170 of the and Electrical Systems will hold a Advisory Committee on Reactor es.a Surface Transportation Assistance meeting on April 9.1980 in Room 1046.
Safeguards. Ad Hoc Subcommittee on
' Bac Act cf1978 (Pub.L 9M99) to make a 1717 H Strat NW., Wash D.C.to Dree Mile faland. Unit 2 Accident items full and complete Investigation and discuss the nuclear dat NDL).
Implications; Meeting can be availe study of the long-and short. term presently being conside NRC as An ACRS Ad Hoc Subcommittee on NRC1 potential for alcohol fuels from part of the TMI-2 Acddent Action the %ree Mile Island. Unit 2 Accident Street Plans. Notice of this meeting was meeting the nation's energy needs.
published March 19.1980.
- Implications w 11 hold a meeting on at es blom:ss and coal to contribute to April 9.1980 in Room 1167.1717 H St.,
e s
NW Washington.DC 20555 to discuss Sdt Tentative agenda:Take testimony from h
R implications of theTMI-2 Accident as W aln et individuals, government agencies.
October 1.,1979 (44 FR 56408), oral or Bey rdate to construcdon pennit D* t, corporatfons and interest groups in written statements may be presented by ap ti ns.
tice of this meeting was the grographic region on research, members of the public, recordings wiH Pu experience policies, and approaches be permitted only during those portions I"
to alcohol fuels development of de meeting when a transcript is being
,, dined in de dR James M. childe.ne, kept, and questions may be asked caly Octoba 14979 @4 FR 56408h oral or e
by members of the Subcommittee,its written statements may be presented by Erecutive Daveson consultanta, and Staff. Persons desiring members of the public recordings will March 1s.tasa to make oral statements should noufy be permitted only during those portions Adyt:
in on.
me ru.4 wwm me =1 the Designated Federal Employee as far of the meeting when a transcript is being Safe
- acaos Safe in advance as practicable so that kept, and questions may be asked only appropriate arrangements can be made by members of the Subcommittee.its Th Open Meeting to allow the necessary time during the consultants, and Staff. Persons desiring Safe g
to make oral statements should notify meet Ag:ncy: National Alcohol Fuels
""gp,g]g $,*m g,,
shallbe the Designated Federal Employee as far 1717 Commission.
as follows: Wednesday. April 9.1980,2 In advance as practicable so that
_revie Date: April 12.1980.
p.m. until the conclusion eiheinna.
appropriate arrangements can be made Regt Tims 1 p.m.--4 p.m MST.
De Subcommittee ma.f meet in to allow the necessary time during the reco P!:ce: Auditorium. Montana Power Co Executive Session with any ofits meeung for such statements.
rm Colstrip. Montana.
consultants who may be present, to nds for subject meeting shall bu Type of meeting Open.
explore and exchange their preliminary
,'g[,w -
e i
Contact person: Doug Durante. Pub!!c opinions regarding matters which should N0' Information Officer. 202/42H490, be considered during the meeting.
Wednesday, Apdls.19ee At the conclusion of the Executive
,,3,,,, y,,jj,3, g,,,fy,f,,,f Written statements: National Alcohol Session.the Subcommittee will hear g,,,
out!
Fuels Commission. 412 First Street presentations by and hold discussions SE Washington.D.C.20003.
with representatives of the NRC Staff, De Subcommittee may meet in Oc,t Purpose of commission:%e National their consultants, and other interested Executive Session, with any ofits mer consultants who may be present to bei Alcohol Fuels Commission was
- persons, sstablished under Section 170 of the in addition. It may be necessary for explore and exchange their preliminary l
{[Y Sarface Transportation Assistance the Subcommittee to hold one or more opinions r'=garding matters which should Act of 1978 (Pub. L 95-599) to make a closed sessions for the purpose of be considered during the meeting.
iull and complete investigation and exploring matters involving proprietary At the conclusion of the Executive CT information.I have determined,in Session, the Subcommittee will hear study of the long-and short. term accordance with Subsection 10(d) of the presentations by and hold discussions
['
potIntial for alcohol fuels from Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub.
with representatives of the NRC Staff.
g biomass and coal to contribute to L 92-463),that should such sessions be their consultanta, and other interested yi mesting the nation's energy needs.
required. It is necessary to close these Persons.
to Tentative agenda: Take testimony from sessions to protect proprietary In addition.it may be necessary for individuals government agencies.
Information. See 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4).
the Subcommittee to hold one or more corporations and interest groups in.
Further information regarding topics closed sessions for the purpose of
,a the geographic region on research.
to be discussed, whether the meeting exploring matters involving proprietary Card,M A4 aAmt A
F=*=al beinfar f Vd. 45. N2. 59 / Tuesday M rch 25, 1980 / Nstices 19e12 will hold discussi:ns with this group information.Ihav) det:rmined. In Wedneedsy. April e.1980 pertin:nt to the ts!!owing:
acccrdance with Subsection 10(d) of the gP,g g gy,,.g (1) Regulatory Guide 1.58. Revision 1 Fed: al Advisory Committee Act(Public gy,###
" Qualifications ofInspection.
Law 92-483), that, should such sessions ne Subcommittee may meetin Examination, and Testing Personnel for l
1 be required,it is necessary to c!ose Executive Session. with any ofits Nuclear Power Planta." (Post Comment) thIse sessions to protect proprietary consultants who may be present, to (2) Regulatory Guide 1.XXX.
information. See 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4).
explore and exchange their preliminary
" Qualification of Quality Assurance Further information regarding topics opinions regarding matters which should Program Audit Personnel for Nuc! ear ts be discussed. whether the meeting be considered during the meeting. -
Power Plants." (Post Comment) hrs been cancelled or rescheduled, the At the conclusion of the Executive (3) Proposed Regulatory Guide 1.139.
Chairman's ruling or requests for the Session. the Subcommittee will hear.
Revision 1. "Guid=nm for Residual Heat opportunity to present oral statements presentations by and hold discussions Removal to Achieve and Maintain Cold
~
and the time allotted therefor can be with representatives of the NRC staff.
Shutdown"(Pro Comment) obtained by a prepaid telephone call to their consultants, and other interested Other matters which may be of a the cognizant Designated Federal predecisionalnature relevant to reactor Employee. Mr. Richard K. Mafor Persons.-
Further information regarding topics operation or licensing activities may be (telephone 202/634-1414) between 8:15 to be discussed. whether the meeting discussed following this session.
a.m. and 520 p.m EST.
has been cancelled or rescheduled, the Persons wishing to submit written Background information concerning Chairman's ruling on requests for the statements regarding Regulatory Guides items to be discussed at this meeting opportunity to present oral statements 1.58. Revision 1. and 1.XXX may do so can be found in documents on file and and the time allotted for the by providing a readily reproducible' copy evailable for public inspection at the presentation can be obtained by a to the Subcommittee at the beginning of i
NRC Public Document Room.1717 H prepaid telephone call to the co;;nizant the meeting. However. *.o insure that Street. N.W., Washington. DC 20555 and Designated Federal Employee. Dr.
adequate time Is available for full at the Government Publications Section.
Thomas G.McCreless (telephone 202/
consideration of these comments at the I
State Library of Pennsylvania.
634-3267) between 8:15 a.m. and 520 meedng,it is desirable to send a readily Education Building Commonwealth and Walnut Street. Harrisburg. PA 17126.
p.m. EST.
reproducible copy of the comments as far in advance of the meeting sa Dated: March 20.1980.
Dated: March 2o.1980.
practicable to Mr. Sam Duraiswamy John C Hoyle, (ACRS). the Designated Federal lohn C Hoyle.
Advisory Committee Mancgement Officer.
Employee for the meeting. In care of Advisory Committee Management Officer.
(mDec.s>a emaa.eames ]
ACRS Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
(n A auxe mo.was mesy emme coca neo.eus Washington. D.C. 20555 or telecopy
== = coon reso ws 1
them to the Designated Federal i
Advisory Committes.m Reacto-Advisory Committee on Reactor Employee (202-634-.3319) as far in Safeguards. Subcommittee on Reactor Safeguards. Subcommittee on advance of the meeting as practicable.
Regulatory Activitses; Meeting Such comments shall be based upon Safety Research; Meeting documents on file and available for The ACRS Subcommittee on Reactor' The ACRS Subcommittee on public inspection at the NRC Public Safety Research wul hold an open Regulatory Activities will hold an open Document Room.1717 H St., N.W.,
meeting on April 9.1980, in Room 1048, Washington. DC 20555.
meeting on April 9.1980 in Room 1048; 1717 H St N.W., Washington. DC 20555.
Further information regarding topics 1717 H St., N.W. Washington. D.C. to Notice of this meeting was pubUshed in to be discussed.whether the meeting review the NRC Office of Nuclear the Federal Register March 19.1980.
has been cancelled or rescheduled, the
' Regulatory Research response to ACRS In accordance with the procedures Chairman's ruling on requests for the '
recommendations to Congress on NRC outlined in the Federal Register on opportunity to present oral statemen's.
research (NUREG-0657); also, the FY-82 October 1.1979 (44 FR 56408) cral or and the time allotted therefor can be budget review and preparation of the written statements may be presented by obtained by a prepaid telephone call to ACRS report to NRC will be discussed.
members of the public. recordings wiD the Designated Federal Employee for Notice of this meeting was pubushed be permitted only during those portions this meeting. Mr. Sam Duraiswamy March 19.1980.
of the meeting when a transcript is being I
In accordance with the procedures kept and questions may be asked only (telephone 202/634-3267). between 8:15 j
October 1.1979 (44 FR 56408), oral or, by members of the Subcommittee. Its a.m. and 5:00 p.m EST.
outlined in the Federal Register on consultants. and Staff. Persons desirin8 Daied: March M 19ek written statements may be presented by to make oral statements should notify bha C Hoyle, members of the public, recordings wiH the Designated Feders! Employee as far g.
g,,4 g.
i g'
be permitted only during those portions in advance as practicable so that 1"D'**".**"'******"I of the meeting when a transcript is being -appropriate arrangements can be made I'
kept, and questions may be asked only to allow the necessary time during the by members of the Subcommittee,its meeting for such statements.
consultants. and Staft Persons desiring -
ne agenda for subject meeting shall
[ Docket Mos. 50.-445 and 4441 to make oral statements should notify be as foHowsc Texas Utlfittes Generating Co, et aL the Designated Federal Employee as far ' Wednesday. April 9.19e0 (Comanche Peak Steam Electric in advance as practicable so that j
appropriate arrangements can be made De Afeefing WillCommence at R45 Station. Units 1 and 2); Order
)
to allow the necessary time during the Scheduling Prehearing Conference j
a.ar.
%e agenda for this meeting shall be The Subcommittee will hear There will be a prehearing conference meeting for such statements.
se follows:
' presentations from the NRC Staff and commencing at 9:30 a.m. (local time) on G
ACRS AD HOC SUBC0n'1ITTEE MEETING ON THREE MILE ISLAND, UNIT 2 ACCIDENT IMPLICATIONS WASHINGTON, DC APRIL 9,1980 ATTENDEE LIST ACRS NRC STAFF D. Okrent, Chairman W. Minners S. Lawroski J. Conran W. Mathis J. Snell R. Major, Designated Federal Employee P. O'Reilly C. Thomas W. Kane COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC.
D. Ross G. Zech C. Brinkman BOSTON EDIS0N CO.
EPRI BOSTON EDISON CO.
R. Leyse G. McHugh, Jr.
W. Hickey D. Stoodley BECHTEL CORP.
E. Howard R. Butler W. House WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORP. - OPS CONSOLIDATED EDISON C0.
P. Haga R. Sheiner HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO.
PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF OKLAHOMA L. Richards V. Conrad G. Oprea, Jr.
B. Reid ISHAM, LINCOLN & BEALE TOKYO ELECTRIC J. Gallo H. Hamada LOWENSTEIN & NEWMAN EBASCO SERVICES, INC.
K. Shea J. Snetwood LNRAT J. Newman AN..Wat 3
PROPOSED
SUMMARY
OF THE APRIL 22 & 23, 1980 MEETING OF THE ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE ON CONCRETE AND CONCRETE STRUCTURES PURPOSE:
The Concrete and Concrete Structures Subcommittee met to discuss the NRC Research programs in the area of structural engineering.
. NRC STAFF ATTENDEES:
(PARTIAL LIST)
C. Siess, Chairman L. Shao P. Shewman K. Harring W. Mathis J. Mantore T. Pickel, ACRS Consultant G. Arundt M. White, ACRS Consultant G. Bagchi Z. Zudans, ACRS Consultant MEETING HIGHLIGHTS, AGREEMENTS, AND REQUESTS:
1.
C. Siess stated that this Subcommittee does not plan ta meet again this year, but some time will be devoted to the matter of structural engineering, its budget, and breakdown during the full research Committee meeting planned in June or July.
2.
The structural engineering review group which reviews the structural research program needs periodic follow-up by the Concrete and Con-crete Structures Subcommittee.
1 3.
This Subcommittee will now assume the work in structural engineering that was previously in the purview of the Extreme External Phenomena,
)
Subcommittee. The mechanical engineering aspects of the Extreme External Phenomena Subcommittee willnow be handled by the Metal Components Subcommittee. Additional consultants in mechanical engineering are being sought.
4.
A question of determining to whom the research contract should be awarded to was discussed. The NRC Staff, at the present time, does not have a policy of whether the contract should be performed by a national laboratory or be left on the basis of competitive bids.
The Subcommittee would like to review two or three requests for proposals and contradtors responses in order to understand the contract process.
5.
The Technical Assistance Program (TAP) in the structural engineering area, its budget, and schedule were discussed. Currently, the Struc-tural Engineering Branch, DSS, the Engineering Branch, D0R, and the Systematic Evaluation Program Branch have TAPS in the structural engineering area.
l
Concrete & Concrete Structures Summary (CONT'D) 4/22 & 23/80 6.
It was stated that the purpose of the research program at NRC was to improve licensing. The Subcommittee stated that its purpose should be to identify and quantify uncertainties in nuclear plants.
7.
A new program for FY 80 on the evaluation of concrete masonary design criteria was discussed.
This program is in response to some plants, i.e., Trojan, that is already constructed where safety related piping supports are attached to masonary walls.
8.
The Standards Development Group have no work in this area yet. They are planning some structural work that concerns (1) the ASME Section III Code, 2; (2) soil structure interactions, buried pipes; and (3) ISI of prestressed tendons.
9.
G. Bagchi discussed the research program and its budget.
He also discussed the procurement processes of awarding contracts. The problems of budget cuts, priorities and redistribution of budget funds was. highlighted.
10.
The SSMRP program structural aspects were reviewed. Uncertainties in the seismic calculations were stated to be in the order of mag-nitude as compared to structural calcualtions which have uncertain-ties of 1.5 - 2.0.
These uncertainties should be taken into con-sideration when formulating a program and budget.
FUTURE MEETINGS:
None planned in the near future.
G
TDfrATIVE SCHEDULE
' ACRS. AD HOC SUBCCMMITTEE MEETING ON THREE MI!2 ISIAND, UNIT 2 ACC1 DENT IMPLIC WASHINGTON, DC APRIL 9, 1980
\\
1 h e meeting will be held in Room 1167, 1717 H St., NW, Washirgton, DC 20555.
We purpose of the meeting will be to discuss the applicability of Action Plan
~
items (from NUREG-0660) to Near Term Construction Permit (NICP) Applicants.
l APPROXIMATE TIME 8:30 an I.
EXECtfrIVE SESSION (0, PEN)
A.
Chairman's Opening Statement (D. Okrent)
B.
Review of Schedule 8:35 am II.
INTRODUCTION BY NRC STAFF - W. Kane A.
Description of Interactions with Utilities B.
Criteria for Selecting Splicable Items C.
Aims - Goals, Staff's Philosophy on NICP List j
D.
Conclusions l
III. PRESENTATION BY NRC PRQ3ECT MANAGERS ON NICP ITEMS 9:30 an REIATED % DIE FOLLOWING BROAD CATEGORIES
- A.
Reactor Operations B.
Reactor Siting C.
Dnergency Preparedness D.
Reactor Design
- Wese categories will be used to group the items that form the NICP list.
Attention will be focused on those NFCP items which require a commitment from applicants and a detailed explanation of how the commitment will be met, and those items where differences have arisen between the Staff's and Applicant's interpretation of an Action Plan item.
AhekJ C
2-APPROXIMATE TIME 11:30 am IV.
PRESDirATION BY NICP OWNERS A.
Reaction to NRC Staf f's Plan V.
CHAIRMAN'S CLOSING RD4 ARKS 12:20 p A.
Appropriate Follow-up Actions, etc.
12:30 p VI.
AIDOURIMENT Prepared presentations should take 'o more than half the allotted time NOTE:
to to allow for questioning by the Subcommittee.
'1 hose making presen-tations are reminded to have about 15 hard copies of visual aids used during presentations.
i I
a.
e i
e
NSSS NSSS CONTAINMENT, ACRS CURRENT VENDOR TYPE TYPE LETTER STATUS PLANT NAME A-E CUSTOM
! f}Ql%
12/74 HEARINGS NOT START U ALLENS CREEK 1 & 2 GE EBASCO 238 MARK III
\\
BLACK STANDARD PRESSURE 7/77 IN HEARINGS GESSAR-238 NSSS SUPPRESSION BLACK FOX 1 & 2 GE VEkTCl;,
BWR/6 MARK Ill "SKAGIT 1 & 2 GE BECHTEL CUSTOM PRESSURE 11///
IN HEARINGS BWR/6 SUPPRESSION (251)
MARK III PERKINS 1 - 3 CE DU(E STANDARD DRY 4/77 IN HEARINGS POWEl CO.
CESSAR SYSTEM 80 CE BECilTEL CUSTOM DRY 11/75 IN llEARINGS PILGRIM 2 10/77 PEBBLE SPRINGS B&W BECllTEL CUSTOM DRY 2/76 IN llEARINGS 1&
2 1/78 N
l