ML19318A716
| ML19318A716 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Calvert Cliffs  |
| Issue date: | 05/23/1980 |
| From: | Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Lundvall A BALTIMORE GAS & ELECTRIC CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8006240063 | |
| Download: ML19318A716 (5) | |
Text
ppm
,....,(o UNITED STATES 4
g y
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ay WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 g
,/
May 23, 1980 Dockets Nos. 50-317/318 Mr. A. E. Lundvall, Jr.
Vice President - Supply Baltimore Gas & Electric Company P. O. Box 1475 Baltimore, Maryland 21203
Dear Mr. Lundvall:
SUBJECT:
INTERIM RELIABILITY EVALUATION PROGRAM The numerous studies of the licensing process that have been perforr=d in the aftemath of the TMI-2 accident have made strong recommendati cs to employ probabilistic techniques as an adjunct to the safety evaluation process, because they afford a systematic procedure for examining a plant and a means for identifying the more important contributors to safety that deserve our attention.
As a result, the TMI Action Plan (NUREG-0660, to be published), developed by the NRC, includes a Reliability Engineering and Risk Assessment task that culminates in the evaluation of all operating reactors. The initial phase of this task is the Interim Reliability Evaluation Program (IREP) performed by NRC to develop standardized procedures that can be used to evaluate all plants. The first step in the program was the evaluation of Crystal River Unit 3, which is nearing completion. The second step is the evaluation of six operating plants simultaneously to further refine procedures. These six plants are Indian Point 3, Zion 1, Calvert Cliffs 1, Browns Ferry 1, Millstone 1, and Arkansas 1.
Your facility was selected to participate in this next round of study because it is part of a cross-section of operating plants and the experience you gain from this inter-action would be beneficial for eJaluating the remainder of your nuclear plants in the final phase of this program.
The IREP studies will help to identify those accident sequences which dominate tiie contribution to public health and safety risks which originate from core damage accidents.
These studies should provide insights from a risk assessment perspective regarding vulnerabilities which may exist in procedures, testing schemes, and basic plant design. While these insights are important to NRC to properly perform our functions, we regard 0 0062 40 Dfo 3 f
l' o
Mr. A. E. Lundvall them as equally important to plant owners.
If operational problems which could occur are recognized to be potential precursors of serious accidents (e.g., an additional fault, either human or hardware caused, that could lead to significant core damage), corrective action may be taken to reduce the likelihood of plant damage or of substantial offsite radiological releases. Similarly, if single point vulnerabilities or a high likelihood of common mode failures are identified, the utility can evaluate and take action to minimize their significance.
In this step of the program the six nuclear power plants will be analyzed, in parallel, by six teams of analysts composed of six to eight analysts per team. Analysts will be drawn from the Probabilistic Analysis Staff of the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, the Office of Nuclear Re:.ctor Regulation, National Laboratories, and consulting engineering firms acting as subcontractors to the National Laboratories. We estimate appreimately six months will be required to prepare draft final reports on these analyses.
One of the lessons learned from the Crystal River study is that the owner-utility should be intimately involved throughout the effort to:
(1) facilitate the acquisition of plant design and operational data by analysts, and (2) understand the details of the analysis and communicate progress and results to the utility management on a routine basis.
For this reason, we invite you to assign an engineer, knowladgeable about operational details of the plant, to participate as an active member of the team of analysts studying your facility. We anticipate that three of the analytical teams will be located in Bethesda, Maryland, two in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and one in Idaho Falls, Idaho. We estimate that this will require a six-month full-time assignment with the analytical team during which this analyst will serve as liaison between the team of analysts and the utility, as well as participate in the risk assessment analyses being performed.
Incidently, Nuclear Safety Analysis Center (NSAC) is performing a pilot reliability study on the Oconee plants and up to three Duke Power personnel will participate full time in that effort.
We request that the team of analysts be pennitted to spend approximately five days at the plant, observing equipment, examining plant documentation, and discussing plant operation and maintenance with operators, maintenance technicians, and engineers. Various plant information, outlined in the enclosed list, will also be necessary at the outset as well as periodic contacts to verify our understanding of details of plant operation or design. We estimate this may require an additional one to two man-months of utility effort at your engineering headquarters and at the site.
)
l Mr. A. E. Lundvall We believe analyses of this type will be valuable in identifying " weak links" in plant safety. The recently completed reliability studies of auxiliary feedwater systems (NUREG-0611 and NUREG-0635) identified several cases where the system was susceptible to a total loss of AC power. As a result of a similar analysis sponsored by Florida Power Corporation, modi-fications to eliminate an AC dependency in the operation of the turbine driven auxiliary feedwater pump were in progress when the Crystal River Study was initiated. We also anticipate that potential procedural modifi-cations and admin:.:trative actions will be identified which may reduce the potential for human errors.
Obviously, the effod involved is large and will require a significant effort both by NRC and the utilities.
However, development of risk per-spectives in these plants will permit a more logical assessment of priorities for safety improvements, if any are to be required, and will enhance the establishment of a standardized analytical approach to future analyses of other plants.
As a first step in this program, we request a meeting with you and your staff and representatives from the other five utilities on Wednesday, June 4,1980, at 10:00 am at our Bethesda office (Room P-500) to discuss the program and its potential impact on your facility and to obtain your active participation in this effort. The NRC Project Manager for your facility will be w point of contact for additional information.
- incerely, Darr'e 1
. 'Etpenhut, D rector Division of L3 censing
Enclosure:
List of Information cc w/ enclosure:
See next page
)
Baltimore Gas and Electric Company cc w/ enclosure (s):
James A. Biddison, Jr.
Mr. Bernard Fowler General Counsel President, Board of County G and E Building Commissioners
' Prince Frederick, Maryland 20768 Charles Center
.r.
Baltimore, Maryland 21203 Director, Technical Assessment George F. Trowbridge, Esquire Division Shaw, Pittman, Potts and,
Office of Radiation Programs Trowbridge (AW-459) 1800 M Street, N.W.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, D. C.
20035 Crystal Mall #2 Arlington, Virginia 20460 Mr. R. C. L. Olson Baltimore Gas and Electric Company U. S. Envirorsnental Protection Agency Room 922 - G and E Building Region III Office l
Post Office Box 1475 ATTN:
EIS COORDINATOR Baltimore, Marylana 21203 Curtis Building (Sixth Floor)
Sixth and Walnut Streets Mr. Leon B. Russell, Chief Enginar Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Baltimore Gas and Electric Company Ralph E. Architzel Lusby, Maryland 20657 Resident Reactor Inspector NRC Inspection and Enforcement l'
Bechtel Power Corporation P. O. Box 437 ATTH: Mr. J. C. Jude Lusby, Maryland 20657 Chief Nuclear Er.gineer 15740 Shady Grove Road Gaithersburg,11aryland 20760 Combustion Engineering, Inc.
Administrator, Power Plant Siting Program ATTN:
Mr. P. W. Kruse, l'.anager Energy and Coastal Zone Administration Engineering Services Department of Natural Resources j
Post Office Box 500 Tawes State Office Building Windsor, Connecticut f.6095 Annapolis, Maryland 21204 Calvert County Library Prince Frederick, !!aryland 20678 Director, Department of State Planning 301 West Preston Street Baltimore, Maryland 21201 Mr. R. M. Douglass, tiarager Quality Assurance Department
-Root 923 Gas & Electric Building P. O. Box 1475 4
Baltimore, Maryland 21203
INFORMATf0N NEEDS FOR fREP STUOY 1.
An up-to-date FSAR 2.
Current Technical Specifications A P&ID index, electric ~ power one-line diagrams, and a complete set of P&ID's 3.
and control circuit drawings for systeias to accanplish the following functions:
a.
Emergency core cooling Containment overpressure protection (e.g., sprays, fan coolers, etc.)
b.
Post-accident radioactivity removal (e.g., NaOH addition, etc.)
c.
d.
Containment heat removal (e.g., component. cooling, service water, etc.)
Reactivity control (e.g., scram system, baron addition, CVCS, etc.)
e.
f.
Secondary heat removal (e.g., condenser, auxiliary feedwater, main feedwater, condensate, main steam, etc.)
Reactor coolant syst. m overpressure protection (e.g., PORVs.. SRVs, etc.)
~
e g.
h.
Supporting systems for the above (e.g., HVAC, instrument air, lubrication, DCpower, cooling,etc.)
~
4.
A plant procedures index, if available, and a complete set cf emergency and operating procedures.
5.
A tabular canpilation of plant-specific LERs.
6.
Proposed modifications to the plants which are in progress or have been committed to by the licensee.
7.
An index of available system descriptions.
8.
Manuals used in operator or senior operator training.
~
9.
An estimate of the minimum ECC and containment ESF systems which can realistically prevent core melting for a range of break sizes or contaimnent failure.
4.
w 4
w
..y
.v.e a.
- --a s
a