ML19327A385
| ML19327A385 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 07/28/1980 |
| From: | Shepard R NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (RES) |
| To: | Gramann R, Sanders K, Taylor B NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS), NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (RES) |
| References | |
| CON-FIN-A-0115, CON-FIN-A-115 NUDOCS 8008060123 | |
| Download: ML19327A385 (8) | |
Text
~
UNITED STATES
[ma nacg##o, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMisslON
! 'y 3, (g waSwiscTou, o. c. 2osss Yfo UUL 2 81980 MEMORANDUM FOR: Those on Attached List FROM:
Robert L. Shepard Safeguards Research Branch Division of Safeguards, Fuel Cycle and Environmental Research
SUBJECT:
MINUTES OF THE EFFECTIVENESS EVALUATION FOR MC&A RESEARCH REVIEW GROUP MEETING A meeting of the subject group was held in the lith floor conference room of the Willste Building on June 3,1980.
The purpose of the meeting was to review the FY 1980 SAFER sponsored MC&A project at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) and discuss propos2d MC&A research for FY 1981 and beyond.
The lists of attendees for the morning and afternoon sessions are enclosed (Encl. 1).
Program Review The meeting agenda is enclosed (Encl. 2). Following introductions, R. Shepard, Chairman of the Effectiveness Evaluation MC&A Research Review Group (RRG),
summarized the MC&A program and outlined the strategy for the RRG meeting.
The program review included a current status overview, by individual task, and MC&A goals and plans beyond FY 1980.
A. Poggio, LLNL Project Leader, followed with a review of the application and further development of the automated safeguards assessment tools. The specific j
areas discussed were:
l e
Licensee Submittal Document (LSD)/ Standard Format and Content (SFC)
Guide comparison, e
LLNL technology transfer, using the NFS-Erwin assessment, and e
Structured Assessment Approach (SAA)/ Safeguard Vulnerability Analysis Program (SVAP) upgrades, j
The input data requirement differences between the LSD and SFC and the potential impact these differences will have on an SAA analysis were highlighted. The comparison revealed that the SFC guide contained the sufficient type and amount of information for a partial analysis to be performed at each SAA level. A rough estimation of the percentage of analysis output results for each SAA level is shown in Table I (Encl. 3).
8008060%$
) The technology transfer in which LLNL provided assistance to E. McAlpine and R. Shepard on the procedure for gathering and fonnating the data for the NFS-Erwin analysis was described. The SAA analysis for levels 1-3 was presented and all assumptions used in the analysis were identified.
In particular, the data used to describe the performance reliability of equipment was based on how equipment was assumed to operate at a facility as opposed to actually collecting performance data on equipment in its operating environment. The tampering analysis (level 4) remains to be completed. A report is being prepared which describes the complete SAA analysis.
Much of the SAA upgrades are directed toward restructuring the data gathering handbook (LSD) and developing data input capability on the Tektronix 4054.
Several questions were a ded in reference to the development of both SAA and Dr. Poggio indicated that SAA and SVAP are being brought together via SVAP.
the data gathering handbook.
Indications are that the ultimate tool used for assessing licensees' compliance may depend upon the kind and amount of input information obtained, i.e., utilizing SVAP when limited facility input information i
is available and SAA when extensive facility data is available for a full comprehensive assessment.
R. Al-Ayat followed with a brief review of the work being done in support of the Regulatory Improvement Branch (SGRI) on development of the Material Control and Accounting Upgrade Rule. The data base established for the " representative" MC&A system utilizing data from two operating licensed facilities--Vallecitos Nuclear Center and Babcock and Willcox Fuel Fabrication Plant at Lynchburg, Viringia--was described. Analysis of the " representative" base case system indicated that:
the system will detect diversions of large quantities o
or discrete items.
alarm and alarm resolution is much poorer for small e
quantity diversions than for large ones (e.g., one week resolution for large quantity diversions, scrap recovery resolution time is often shorter), and detection occurs quickly in the manufacturing area e
but requires approximately sixty days to detect in other areas of the plant.
Results of the value-impact analysis describing the benefits from potential upgrade rule recomendations were presented. Results indicated that, for example, the use of process monitoring data for safeguards purposes has the potential of stopping the repeating adversary (multiple attempts at diverting material), generating more timely diversion alarms, and improving the resolution of alarms relative to the base case.
It was pointed out that cost impacts to the plant for these proposed upgrades will be determined in a July working session with plant personnel.
. The morning briefing was concluded with a short review on guidance capabilities for MC&A systems and the role of.an SNM accounting system for NRC safeguards by D. Dunn.
Proposed MC&A Research for FY 1981 and Beyond As LLNL's major goals and objectives for the MC&A research were presented.
stated by LLNL, the major prog *am objective in the outyears is to bring the technical content of the MC&A program toward a more suitable mix of R&D and applications studies.
In the area of vulnerability assessment, it was proposed that research devoted to automation, application of assessment tools to NRC regulation, tool expansion and upgrade, and adaptation of assessment tools to minicomputers be continued thrggh FY 1981, with complete transfer of the automated assessment technology to NRC staff in FY 1982. Other research initiatives proposed under the vulnerability assessment area were code validation studies, vulnerability grading, (i.e., ranking event sets based on timing and sequencing of individuals),
design application studies, and research to build the data base for alternate fuel cycles.
Selected issues in the Aggregated System Modeling (ASM) area were identified.
The selected issues were presented.as tasks which could be categorized as either model usage or model refinement and extension. Under model usage, value-impact analysis for evaluating proposed MC&A upgrade alternatives was tabbed as a proposed activity to be continued in FY 1981 and expanded to include safeguard economic analyses in FY 1982. Under model refinements and extension, risk and consequences were cited as major additions to the current technique which could be used to evaluate various safeguard thresholds. The afternoon session concluded with some discussion on new research in the areas of system analysis and process monitoring. The estimated time and cost for the proposed research initiatives for FY 1981 and beyond was presented.
In summary, I believe the meeting was very constructive and I welcome additional comments concerning the meeting which review group members believe should be i
documented.
Robert L. Shepard Safeguards'Research Branch Division of Safeguards, Fuel Cycle and Environmental Research
Enclosures:
l.
List of Attendees 2.
Meeting Agenda 3.
Table I j
l j
tr
-,.--,---,---m-p
,-r---'*e-
Minutes of the Effectiveness Evaluation for MC&A Research Review Group Meeting M II E Addressees - Memorandum dated J. Kent, SD J. Telford, SD H. Tovmassian, NMSS D. Joy, NMSS H. Smith, NMSS K. Sanders, NMSS R. Gramann, NMSS J. Partlow, NMSS E. McAlpine, NMSS B. Altman NMSS R. Brightsen, NMSS B. Mendelsohn, NMSS R. Dube, NMSS M. Killinger, NMSS C. Ong, OPE J. Blaylock, IE J. Durst, RES B. Taylor, RES E. Richard, RES A. Poggio, LLNL D. Dunn, LLNL R. Al-Ayah, LLNL 4
- inciosure 1 REVIEW OF FY 1980 MC&A RESEARCH PROGRAM - FIN NO. A0115 l
NRC Office - Silver Spring, MD June 3, 1980 10:00 A.M.
-~-
List of Attendees:
gorning Name Organization Telephone No.
Andy Poggio LLNL FTS 422-8557 Don Dunn LLNL FTS 532-7178 Rokaya Al Ayah LLNL FTS 422-8467 B. Taylor NRC/ SAFER 42-74375 R. Gramann NRC/NMSS 42-74024 Ken Sanders NRC/NMSS 42-74004 J. Blaylock IE 44-35890 Don Joy NRC/NMSS 42-74043 Hiroko Smith NRC/NMSS 42-74181 Eugene W. Richard NRC/RES 42-74387 Gerry Tomlin NRC/RES 42-74375 Jackie Kent NRC/SD 44-35904 Harry Tovmassian NRC/NMSS 42-74181 r
J. Partlow NRC/NMSS 42-74043 E. J. McAlpine NRC/NMSS 42,74043 Cookie Ong NRC/0PE 63-41427 Bill Altman NRC/NMSS 42-74181 John Telford NRC/SD 44-35903 3
I R.
L.~ Shepard NRC/RES 42-74375 Ron Brightsen NRC/NMSS 42-74043 Jay B. Durst NRC/RES 42-74353 B. T. Mendelsohn NRC/NMSS 42-74181 R. J. Dube NRC/NMSS 42-74181
- M. Killinger NRC/NMSS, 42-74181 y
REVIEW OF FY 1980 MC&A RESEARCH PROGRAM - FIN NO. A0ll5 NRC Office - Silver Spring, MD June 3, 1980 1:30 P.M.
Afternoon List of Attendees:
Name Organization Telephone No.
Andy Poggio LLNL FTS 422-8557 Don Dunn LLNL FTS 532-7178 Rokaya Al Ayah LLNL FTS 422-8467 Gerry Tomlin NRC/RES 42-74375 Lynn Cleland LLNL FTS 422-4949 E. J. McAlpkne NRC/NMSS 42-74043 Cookie Ong NRC/0PE 63-41427 Bill Altman NRC/NMSS 42-74181 R. L. Shepard NRC/RES 42-74375 R. J. Dube NRC/NMSS 42-7418i e
4 8
4 0
g 4
- ~
Review of FY 1980 MC&A Research Program AGENDA 10:00 - 12:00 I.
Intro du c ti o n...............................................R. L. Shep ard II. Current Status of FY 1980 MC&A Program - An Overview Acoroximate Time Task 1 - Application and Further Development of Automated Safeguards Assessment T001s...........................Andy Poggio........
30 min.
Task 2 - Development of Value-Impact Method-ology...........................R. Al-Ayat
........ 30 min.
Task 3 - Analysis of Specific Regulatory Altern ati ves....................R. Al-Ayat Task 4 - Develop Improved Guuidance Capabilities for Material Control and Accounting i
Systems.........................D. Denn j
....... 30 min.
Task 5 - Analysis of the Role of an Inter-Facility SNM Accounting System for NRC Safeguards Assurance.......................D.
Dunn III. Discussions IV. Lunch 1:30 - 2:30 V.
0p e n i n g.................................................... A. P o g g i o VI. Proposed MC&A Research For FY 1981 and beyond
}
Table 1: Esti::ato of Portion of Information which reay be Elicized by the SFC Guide
[
and an Estimate of Assessment Output Impact.
SAA Levels Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 FORSFCGUIbE LSD INFORMATION' CATEGORIES h
Facility Layout and Locations Piping System Lilements O
Material Transfer Procedures h.
ControiandTamperMonitors
'O O
O O
j Utility System Components b
b b
Signal Transmission System Components h
h h
Facility Personnel Access sad Control Accounting System Components h
Facility Operational Modes b
b b
h Component Probabilistic Data h
S/G Interconnect 1vity Information Is an analysis possible?
Yes Yes Yes Yes l
Estimate of amount of output given partial absence of input information
..h:./00TO
. D =75'fo
&;No. W5'fo 0=bN
...