ML19323G569
| ML19323G569 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/03/1980 |
| From: | Wescott R NRC OFFICE OF STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT |
| To: | Bagchi G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8006040452 | |
| Download: ML19323G569 (1) | |
Text
_ _. - -
ution:
1.f Central du rog SD alpha APR 3 1980
^
SSSB rdg RBMinogue
~
KRGoller
~
ICRoberts LLBeratan MEMORANDUM FOR: Goutam Bagchi, Chief RWescott U
Structural Engineering Research Branch, RES
~
_,,'/
THRU:
. Leon L. Beratan Chief s
t
Site Safety Standards Branch, SD
,FROM:
Rex Wescott
~
w Site Safety Standards Branch, SD SUBdECT:
COMMENTS ON DRAFT SCOPE OF WORK FOR RFP FOR EVALUATION 0F MARGINS AVAILABLE IN FLOOD PROTECTION OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS In response to your request for comeats on the sco RFP from members of the Research Review Group (RRG)pe of work of the subjec on Flood Hazard and s
Flooding Effects, the following coment and suggestion are provided:
1.
The NRR request, as stated in the October 26, 1977 memorandum from E. Case to S. Levine emphasizes the need to assess probabilistic m.
methods for detemining the Design Basis Flood (DBF) and to detemine the residual risk (if any) associated with present flood protection M
requirements. The scope of work, however, appears to place considerable
.~
emphasis on detemining the probability and consequences of failure of protective structures should the DSF be exceeded (implied by Item 4 PartB).
Because of the apparently low probability of exceeding the DBF in comparison with other hazards, the residual risk induced by this scenario can be expected to be insignificant. A greater potential cause of flood risk would be failure of protective structures from non, ~
hydrologic causes (seismic or piping) during water levels below that of the DBF.
2.
I suggest that Part B of the scope be modified to look at non-hydrologic failure of the protective works as the greatest potential contributor
~
of additional risk. The investigation of radiological consequences.
(Part C) should not be undertaken unless the probability of plant site flooding is shown to be of the same order of : gnitude or greater than the probability of other hazards that also have a potential for radiological consequences. Also, I expect that the potential for, and seriousness of radiological consequences,resulting from flooding are very dependent on site design and location. Therefore, the intensive investigation of e
a few plants should not be expected to result in conclusions generally f:
applicable to most nuclear power plants.
i 9
g696040 5%
j3/
fos Aff Rex G. Wescott f't TASK NUMBER:
Rita Kafetv standardt Rranch OFFICE >
SSSB:SD SSSB:SD Office of Staridards Developtrent MW TZd su%wE.
RWescott:cbj.........LLBeratan "
tenc rem aiss$$[Encu o24o
[.[.,
[,,,,,,,,,,,,[.$,,,,[,[,,'
~~
~
~ ~7 ~ ~ '
-~a
-~
-.