ML19322C224
| ML19322C224 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 08/17/1979 |
| From: | Minogue R NRC OFFICE OF STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| REF-GTECI-A-34, REF-GTECI-IP, RTR-REGGD-01.097, RTR-REGGD-1.097, TASK-A-34, TASK-OR, TASK-TF, TASK-TMR NUDOCS 8001160648 | |
| Download: ML19322C224 (3) | |
Text
r-
]
f 7e g,'
Of f7 7 f ('
AUG 171979 I:El:0RN:D'J". FOR:
lbrold R. Denton, Director Office of iluclear Reactor Regulat'on FRO.'1:
Robert B. Itinogue, Director Office of Standrds D2Velop. rent i
SUBJECT:
IliSTRU::E!!TATI0il TO FOLLOU Tile COURSE OF N1 ACCIDENT In a ce israndum to you fro:n Commissioner Ahearne dated August 10, 1979, Co.aaissioner Ahearne asked several questicas regarding the icplementation of Regulatory Guide 1.97 and the revision of Task A-34.
I have prepared a short infomation sheet on the bachground of Regulatory Guide 1.97 and the current accelerated effort to davelop a revision to the guide uhich I think is important to provide to Comiesioner Ahearne, either included in or appended to your response.
O.~icimi sit;wlby:
R2ET 3. '.:II.'02, Robert B. itinogue, Director Office of Standards Development bcc:
R. B. Minogue G. A. Arlotto W. M. Morrison E. C. Uenzinger A. S. Hintze DISTRIBUTION CENTRAL flLE SD ALPHA SD READ RSSB SUBJ 6097
._mqM h RSSB RD
.Q
/,c fi
%gM RSSB WR DWG S001160 Task No: R. S. 917-4 I r,.
8-17-[Lct RSSB RNB kDi' S. _
DIR fH Af _. GE#.
if m-A.gntze E. Uenzinger W. M rrison G.qArlotto R.p nogue p
ei
,, /g / 79
$/[/79 8/Q79,_, _
8[/7/79 e
8/l^/ 79 8
t occ.
s
Background
Development of Regulatory Guide 1.97, " Instrumentation for Light-Water-Cooled tiuclear Power Plants to Assess Plant Conditions During and Following an Accident" was begun in July, 1973.
The preliminary development was based on the final re-port (BMI-X-647) from a staff sponsored study at Battelle-Columbus Laboratories.
The initial draft of the guide (reviewed by the ACRS Regulatory Activities Subcom-mittee in closed session on Ap.ril 10, 1974 and open session on May 8,1974) contai--
an extensive list of parameters to be' considered for post accident monitoring instru-mentation. There were strong objections by those attending the open sessions (which was supported by the ACRS Regulatory Activities Subcommittee) to the speci-ficity which the draft guide contained.
Upon considerations of these objections, the guide was rewritten to provide general. guidelines for the selection of post accident monitoring instrumentation, leaving the actual selection of the instru-mentation to the applicant.
After appropriate staff reviews, the guide was re-sub-mitted to the ACRS and was reviewed on December 3, 1974.
It was subsequently issued for public comment in December 1975.
There were a large number of public comments received.
The resolution of t'hese comments required abcut 20 months and 5 ACRS open session meetings.
The main problens centered around what was called the " openendedness" of the objectives for post accident monitoring and so called " ambiguity" of the requirement.
The open-endedness was claimed because no limit was put on the number of accidents for which an analysis should be made.
It was the' staff's contention that accident monitoring e
r..
a should be prepared for any eventuality.
After several modifications, the guide was finally issued in August 1977 with one additional position (Position C.3, pertaining to the measurement of 4 high-level parameters) which resulted from addressing a specific concern.of the ACRS outlined in their letter of 8/17/76.
After Regulatory Guide 1.97 was issued, the applicants were reluctant to implement the guide because they felt more definitive guidance was needed to de-fine acceptable means of compliance.
Ilence, Task Action Plan A-34 was initiated.
The applicants also objected very strongly to the requirement for the high-level measurements.
Current Effort to Revise the Guide On July 12, 1979, an effort was initiated to revise Regulatory Guide 1.97 which is to include a basic list of parameters to be monitored.
The task group has obtained assistance from ANS 4.5 standards task force.
An initial meeting was hel'd July 30th through August 2nd at which time a draft of an accidedt monitoring standard was generated. The draft inc1uded.a 1.ist of' about 40 parameters that.should be pro-vided with inssrumentation to assess plant conditions during an accident and to follow the course of the accident. The list took into account the' recommendations of _the TMI-2 Lessons L' earned Task Force and some recommendations of other staff members, the ACRS, and representatives of the nuclear industry and the public.
The next meeting with the ANS 4.5 standards task force is scheduled to begin August 20th and should result in i
a more complete draft post accident monitoring standard that can be used as a basis for revising Regulatory Guide 1.97.
It is a goal to have a draft revision of Regulatory Guide 1.97 completed by the end of September 1979.
e