ML19331B389
| ML19331B389 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/03/1980 |
| From: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19331B390 | List: |
| References | |
| FRN-44FR75167, RULE-PR-50 ACRS-1751, NUDOCS 8008120013 | |
| Download: ML19331B389 (26) | |
Text
'u A.i'f3
/'/$/
p %7., -. ~ -
U p ';
ISSUE DATE:
o-4-eu y,
[/ Q s.
. s.
}
6-3-80 MINUTES OF THE ACRS JOINT SITE EVALUATION AND REACTOR RADIOLOGICAL EFFECTS SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING l
May 21-22, 1980 Washington, D. C.
The Subcommittees met jointly on May 21-22, 1980 at 1717 H St., N.W. Washington, D. C.
The main purposes of the meeting were to review the revised proposed Emergency Planning Rule (10 CFR 50), and pertinent portions of the proposed 1982 safety research budget.
Notice of the meeting was published in the Federal Register on May 6,1980. Copies of the notice, meeting attendees list, and meeting schedule are included as Attachments 1, 2, and 3, respectively. No written statement and no request for time to make oral coments were received from members of the public.
Executive Session Mr. D. Moeller, Subcommittee Chairman, convened the meeting at 8:30 A.M. and in-troduced the ACRS members and consultants (Attachment 2) who were present. The meeting was conducted in accordance with the Federal Advisory Comittee Act and the Government in the Sunshine Act. Mr. Peter Tam was the Designated Federal Employee.
Mr. Moeller indicated, in his opening statement, that the Subcomittee would review the proposed rule and document its findings in a draft ACRS letter.
Prior to the meeting, consultant Mr. R. Wilson had submitted written comments on the proposed rule and copies were distributed in the meeting. Members and con-sultants made no additional comments at this point and the meeting proceeded as scheduled.
H S DOCU E Discussion With the NRC Staff:
1982 Safety Research Budcet D PAGES Site Safety Research - (Mr. J. Harbour)
~
Mr. Harbour is Chief of the Site Safety Research Branch.
He briefed the Sub-comittee on research efforts on hydrological interdictive measures. Other areas 8008120$I3
(
., that his branch works on, such as evaluation of external, natural events, were j
not considered areas to be covered by these Subcommittees or at this meeting.
The Chairman a_sked Mr. Ha.-bour to provide a brief description of Staff actions on the nine recommendations made by the Siting Policy Task Force.
(Pages from NUREG-0625, " Report of the Siting Policy Task Force", were distributed). Mr.
Harbour said that only Recommendation 3 falls under the charter of his branch.
This is to " revise Part k00 by requiring a reasonable assurance that inter-dictive measures are possible to limit groundwater contamination resulting from Class 9 accidents within the immediate vicinity of the site." For land-based plants, significant quantities of radioactivity could be introduced into the groundwater beneath the reactor following a core-melt accident with a simultaneous melting through of the bottom of the containment.
For typical site characteristics, slow groundwater movement and ion exchange of the radioactive materials with the soil are expected to result in very slow transport of groundwater contamination.
Sufficient time is expected to exist to assure that interdictive measures could be taken to isolate the contaminated groundwater in the immediate vicinity of the plant. Two interdictive measures are being considered: dewatering of the site by pumping, and formation of a freeze curtain in the ground around the site.
Both techniques are feasible. The Subcomittee suggested that the Staff should consider which l
nuclides are more important in terms of potential contamination of ground water and associated public health effects; by eliminating consideration of other nuclides, l
the scope of this work could be narrowed.
The Subcommittee noted that the ACRS has consistently urged the Staff to develop hydrological criteria for siting. Mr. Harbour said the research staff is still waiting for a user request for such criteria.
The Staff (Mr. Knighton and Mr. CleveW reported that a proposed rule on siting will be published by September of this year. The rule will make use of all nine recomendations in NUREG-0625, but will deemphasize natural hazards.
, Mr.GrendoncomEentedontheapparentStaffreadinesstoassignresponsibilities to the Probabilistic Analysis Staff. Mr. Knighton said that the PAS was set up to provide such service, and that the newly reorganized NRR has a small risk analysis group whose function is to determine how PAS efforts can be used in licensing.
NRR Technical Assistance Projects Other than research projects managed by RES, there are technical assistance (TA) projects managed by NRR.
The difference between research and TA is not well-defined.
Messrs. W. Kreger,' R. Houston and R. Bangart described the TA projects.
(Mr.
Kreger said that written documents on these projects may be submitted, but the Subcommittee did not make such a request).
Many of these projects were stimu-lated by the TMI-2 accident.
Projects mentioned were:
Control room habitability (radiation and chemical hazards) - This involves direct input by the contractor into safety evaluation reports on this subject.
A well protected control room not only enables operators to function safely, but also psychologically assures the operators that it is all right to stay inside.
Benchmarking and improvement of CRAC code.
~
Monitoring of PWR steam dump valve effluents.
~
Radioactive effluent monitoring equipment (including feasibility of iodine monitoring) - to be started.
Design of systems to contain highly radioactive materials - to be started. ~
In-place testing of HEPA filters.
Atmospheric release advisory capability (ARAC) - Lawrence Livemore is evaluating problems associated with utilizing the ARAC system.
(The Subcommittee has been briefed on ARAC in previous meetings).
ARAC facilities, and additional meteorological towers, are being installed at Indian Point and are tentatively planned for Zion.
It is anticipated that eventually meteorological data can be pro-vided directly to ti.e NRC incidence Response Center and other ARAC users.
Definition of levels of activity in wastes - The purpose of this project is to define concentrations of radionuclides in wastes below which they can be sent to ordinary municipal disposal dumps.
If more wastes can go to the dumps, total rad waste volume would decrease. Mr. Moeller in-dicated that incineration is also an important method to reduce waste volumes.
Iodine pathway analysis - near TMI, more iodine appeared in milk than anticipated. The Staff has been accused of under-predicting iodine release (a Japanese report making such an accusation was distri-buted). This project attempts to better understand iodine release pathways.
(At 12:45 P.M. the meeting was recessed, to be reconvened at 2:45 P.M.)
Discussion With the Staff: Revised Proposed Emeroency Planning Rule
- (M. Jamgochian, B. Grimes)
The,roposed rule, published on December 19, 1979 was reviewed by the Site Evaluation Subcomittee in its previous meeting. An ACRS letter was written on May 6.
Based on coments contained in this letter and other comments, the Staff has revised the rule and re-submitted it for review.
Mr. Jamogchian stated t":t the present version of the rule contains four major elements:
NRC would have the option to shut down plants with unacceptable emergency plar.s.
- Emergency planning considerations would be extended to " emergency plannina zones".
Detailed implementation procedures would be submitted to NRC for review.
Requirements in 10 CFR 50, Appendix E would be upgraded.
The final rule will be published in June.
Subsequent to its publication, REG.. Guide 1.101,
" Emergency Planning for Nuclear Power Plants", will be immediately revised.
During revision of the Reg. Guide, NUREG-0654 will be used in its place.
The Subcommittee noted that most of the ACRS comments contained in its May 6 letter have been responded to.
The comments and resoonses are as follows (parentheses indicate direct quotes from the l etter):
1.
"The Proposed Rule includes two altarnative approaches for implementing the proposed changes. On the basis of clarifications provided by the NRC Staff', the ACRS would endorse Alternative A.
In case of problems with State and local government emergency response plans, this Alternative would require action by the NRC to shut down a plant, instead of auto-matically requiring shutdown under the regulations."
Alternative A has been adopted.
2.
The Committee stated that " siting, design, and emergency planning, as well as responsible operation, are separate but interrelated considerations that constitute the overall safety package.
It is not clear that the NRC policy of elevating emergency planning to the same level as engineered safety features is wise or necessary. The role of emergency planning should be defined as supplemental to the decisions to allow operation of a plant."
The Subcommittee noted that acceptable changes have been made in the rule.-
3.
The ACRS stated that " Insistence on strict compliance with detailed criteria could prevent proper coordination of nuclear power plant emergency planning with other emergency preparedness activities of
,y
. State and local agencies, and could also delay the modification of specifications for key factors, such as evacuation times and distances, as better information is developed through ongoing emergency planning."
~
The Subcommittee noted that not many changes have been made to relax requirements.
4.
Instead of requiring the licensee to have the capability to notify within fifteen minutes the public within the plume exposure EPZ, the ACRS recom-mended "a graded scale of timing tied into distance, coupled with on-the-spot evaluations of local weather and other conditions."
This recommendation was not adopted. The Staff explained that the specifi-cation of' particular times as design objectives for notification of off-site authorities and the public are a means of ass.tring that a system will be in place with the capability to notify the public to see further infor-mation by listening to predesignated radio or television stations.
The reductinn of notification times from the several hours required in street-by-street notification to minutes will significantly increase the options available as protective actions in severe accident conditions.
These actions could include staying indoors for a release which has already occurred or conducting a precautionary evacuation for a potential release thought to be a few hours away. Accidents which do not result in core melt may also cause relatively quick releases for which protective actions for the public, at least, in the immediate plant vicinity, are desirable. The Subcommittee indicated that such intent does not come through by reading the present
~
version of the proposed rule.
, 5.
The proposed rule specifies how to do things rather than provides goals. -
The revised version has mostly taken care of this coment.
6.
The Comittee objected to the requirement of yearly dissemination of certain information to the public.
The revised version has accommodated this comment.
~
7.
The ACRS recomended that the emergency plan be exercised once every three years.
The revised rule requires a joint exercise involv:ng Federal, State and
^
local government every five years, and a yearly exercise involving only the local government.
8.
The ACRS said that the rule should make it clear that protection of health and safety is more important than protection of property.
The revision has accomodated this comment.
9.
As written, the Proposed Rule will require in-depth discussion and subse-quent concurrence in the emergency preparedness program by the applicant and the NRC, as well as by. State and local governmental authorities. The ACRS was concerned that this could constitute a third-part veto of the operation of a nuclear power plant.
The revised version gives NRC the final say, even though strong consideration will be given to FEMA's opinion.
- 10. The FEMA role was not clearly defined.
The revised version takes care of this coment. The Staff also pointed out that the Comission ha:, drafted legislation for Congress regarding NRC-FEMA roles.
(Copies of the letter, Ahearne to Simpson, April 30,
1980 were provided).
The proposed legislation would give FEMA sole responsi-bility for reviewing offsite emergency plans; FEMA would not be subject to NRC review. The Subcommittee noted that the newly defined FEMA-NRC relation-ship could enable FEMA to have a controlling influence on licensing nuclear power plants since, if it did not approve the emergency plan of the related state / local government, it could essentially deny the NRC the necessary approval to grant an applicant a license. The Subcommittee reconnended that this matter be closely examined.
The Subcomittee noted that the rule has been greatly improved. Written concents by consultants Grendon and Wilson, were given to the Staff for reference.
The Subcom-mittee also made detailed editorial comments on the rule. A further revised version of the rule will be pr'ovided to the full ACRS for review at its June meeting.
Based on these interactions and subsequent discussion, the Subcommittee prepared a draft report for the consideration of the ACRS.
The Chairman invited the Staff to the June ACRS meeting to discuss the rule.
(Meeting recessed at 6:15 P.M. to be reconvened on the following day).
Discussion With the Steff:
Proposed 1982 Research Budget Reactor Radiological Effects Research - (F. Arsenault)
Mr. Arsenault described, item by item, research projects in this area.
Such description is also contained in his handout and viewgraphs.
(Attachments 4 and 5).
There are three categories of research projects and Subcomittee comments are:
1.
Occupational Radiation Exposure Development of improved techniques for neutron dosimetry is important.
Determination of the relative biological effectiveness of low dose neutrons -
using mice - it is not clear results obtained with mice can be accurately extrapolated to represent humans.
.g-2.
Routine Radiological Effluents The ACRS has stated in NUREG-0657 that efforts on this category should be reduced.
The ACRS has also stated specifically that efforts on meteorology for routine releases should be reduced.
3.
Accidental Radiological Releases Atmospheric Dispersion Research - (R. Abbey)
The program was started by the AEC in 1972 and involved short-term, short-distance type of problems.
Subsequently, it was expanded to involve longer times and dis-tances and more complex topography. The objective of the overall program is the verification of current and proposed models used to predict the behavior of radio-active airborne effluents. There are three categories of projects and Mr. Abbey gave an item-by-item description of these.
Such description is also documented in his handout material (Attachment 6).
The Subcommittee asked Mr. Abbey's opinion about ARAC (discussed in previous Sub-committee meetings and earlier in this meeting). He indicated that because it is based on a large computer at Lawrence-Livermore, individual terminals at nuclear plants cannot comunicate with aach other except through the central computer.
The Staff prefers ondite mini-computer capability. Also the dispersion codes need further evaluation by independent experts before confidence in results can be increased.
At 12:20 p.m., the open session was recessed, to be reconvend at 2:00 p.m. as an executive session).
Closed Session - (Not transcribed, 12:20 p.m. - 1:00 p.m.)
Mr. Abbey said that he is the only meteorologist in RES, and that more staff is needed to handled meteorological research.
Mr. Arsenault provided budgets for each of his projects fo FY 80 and 81. He also indicated that he will follow through by sending to the ACRS a c sputer printout of the FY 79, 80 and 81 budgets for each project. The FY 82 proposed budget is arrived at by "best judgment and intuition." The Chairman indicated that the computer printout was already in the possession of the ACRS staff.
J
10 r-I Open Executive Session - (Not transcribed) 3 4
Mr. Grendon said that NRC should suspend any ARAC activities 9mtil it has been reviewed thoroughly.
[3 The Subcommittee suggested that the Staff should do some innovative research.
The Subcommittee noted that distinction between research and TA is not clear.
The Subcommittee has drafted a letter for the ACRS on the revised proposed Emergency Planning Rule.
Members and consultants provided comments on the research dbdget and the Chairman indicatedthesewillbeusedinhisdraftofappropriatec5aptersintheACRS report.
(Whereupon, at 3:30 P.M., the meeting was adjourned).
A complete transcript of the meeting is on file at the NRC kublic Document Room at 1717 H St., N.W., Washington, D.C. or can be obtained from Alderson Reporters, 300 7th St., S.W., Washington, D. C. (202-554-234S$!-
S 6
N
=
"?
3
.4 y,.
DOCUMENTS RECEIVED BEFORE OR DURING THE MEETING
- 1.
Revised proposed Emergency Planning Rule (Sent.to members and consultants on May 14) 2.
Viewgraphs used by M. Jamgochian.
3.
Letter, Ahearne to A. K. Simpson, April 30, 1980.
- 4.
Office of Nuclear. Regulatory Research, Draft Long-range Research Plan.
- 5.
Listing of Research projects, SAFER.
6.
Viewgraphs used by F. Arsenault.
- 7.
Listing of atmospheric dispersion research projects.
8.
S. Takeshi, "NRC's Gross Underestimation of the Radioactive Releases and Population Doses During the TMI-2 Accident."
- 9.
Comments by R. Wilson, on the revised proposed Emergency Planning Rule, May 19, 1980.
10.
P. Tam to Subcommittees, " Status Report", May 13, 1980.
(Items marked with an "*" are not available to the public due to their preliminary nature. A copy of each document listed has been filed in the ACRS office.)
r
.-v__.-
ATTACHMENT 1 299 ~
Fed:r:1 Registsr / Vcl. 45. No. 89 / Tuesday. May 6.1980 / Notices and at the Waterford Public1.ibrary.
Commission. Weshington. D.C. 2c555.
held in public sessions. In addition, it
- Rope Farry Roa d. Route 156. Waterford.
Attention: Publications Sales Manager.
rnay be necessary for the Subcommittees to hold one or more Connecticut. A copy ofitems (2) and (3)
(5 MC. 552411 closed sessions for the purpose of may be obtained upon request -
Deted at Rockville Maryf and this 29th day explonng matters invohing proprietary
- addressed to the U.S. Nucleat of Apn!19eo.
information.I have determined.
Regulatory Commission. Wash 1 Ton.
For the Nuclear Refulstery Com:rassion.
therefore. in aeccrdance with D.C. 20555. Attention: Director. Lhvision I
8 Subsection 10(d) of the Federal
,', he de hqq.
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L 9.,-
cf Op2 rating Reactors.
p Dated at Bethesda. Maryland, this :sth day IN
****"I 463), that. should such sessions be required. it is nt;essary to close cf ApnL196o
{ortions oms muung to pmentstration of the abo For ne Nuclest Regu! story Co:r.::Ussion.
Morton B.Fairtile.
Adytacey Committee on Rasctor the ACRS statutory tesponsibilities and Actes Chief Opem: ins Reactors Brcnch No.
Safeguarda Subcommittees on Site to pmtect proprietary information. Su 5 Divisson of Operereg Reactors.
gra om an. ness rw s.S se ass a j
!lvalustjon and Reactor Radiological E E E W W @ a.M m W M Etfecta; Meeting Further informatic n regardeg tcpics mwmo coes riso.es.es -
The ACRS Subcommittees on Site to be discussed.whether the meeting Evaluation and Reactor Radiological has been canceUed or restheduled, the RegutItsry Gulde; issuance and Effects will hold a joint meeting on Chairman's ruling on requests for the Actsty May 21 and 2/ 1980 in room 1046.1717 opportunity to present oral statements The Nuclear Regulatory Commission H. St. NW. Washingten. DC 20555 to and the time allotted therefor can be h:s issued a new guide in its Regulatory review pertinent portions of the NRC obtained by a prepaid telephone caU to Guide Series. This series has been research program for the ACRS annual the cognizant Designated Federal dtveloped to desenbe and make reports to NRC and Cong ess. Notice of E=ployee. Mr. Peter Tam (telephone available to the public methods this meeting was published April 25, 202/634-1413] between 8.15 a.m. and cceeptable to the NRC staff of 1980-5:00 p.m, EDT.
Implementing specific parts of the In accordance with the procedures Dated: Apr0 29.19a0.
Commission's regulations and.In some outlined in the Federal Register on John C. Hoyle.
casIs.13 delineate techniques used by October 1.1979. (44 FR 56408). oral or Advisory Commit:ee Afanagement Oficer.
the staff in evaluating specific problems written statements may be presented by or postulated accidents and to provide members of the public, recordirigs will tm o.s. en isess noe s.o.ee ass an) guidance to applicants concerning be permitted only during those portions cf the meeting when a transenpt is being certain of the information needed by the ~ kept. and questiens may be asked only '
FFICE OF PERSONNEL staffin its review of applications for permits and licenses.
by members of the Subcommittee.its ANAGEMENT Regulatory Cuide 5.60. " Standard consultants, and Staff. Persons desiring Format and Content of a IJeensee to make oral statements should notify rivacy Act of 1974; Amendments to Physical Protection Plan for Strategic the Designated Federal employee as far n Exlating System of Records Sp;cial Nucle ar Material in Transit."
in advance as practicable so that CE"cyt Office of Personnel identifies the information that is needed appropriate arrangements can be made Management.
in the licensee physical protection plan to allow the necessary time during the acTHpc Notice: revisions to an existing f;r strategic special nuclear materialin meeting for such statements.
tr:nsit. desenbes the detail that is The agenda for subject meeting shall system of records.
ucessary for the NRC staffs evaluation be as follows: Wednesdcy cad suuuaw.The P"'iose of this notice is I ei the plan. and suggests a unifarm Thursday. May 21 and22.1963--8.M make e a g
nge f f:rmat far presentmg the information.
c_m. until the conclusion of business to 1)88f7 ggge,,
p Comments and suggestions in each dcy.
sections of this system:(2) change one of conns'ction with (1) items for inclusion De Subcommittees may meet in the routine itses (f.) to clarify intent and in guidzs currently being developed or Executive Session, with any of their r
e text tha (2) improvements in all published guides consultants who may be present, to
[g]t an e are encouraged at any time. Comments explore and exchange their preliminary printed; (3) separate routine use (k.) into should be sent to the Secretary of the epinions regarding matters which should dree new rouune ms.nne changes Commission. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory be considered during the meeting.
result from con.=ents received and At the conclusion of the Executive
~
g of Commission. Wa shingt on. D.C. 20555.
Session, the Subcommittees will hear i ded o er an e ers an Attention: Docketing and Service presentations by and hold discussions this system's function and the intent of Branch.
Regulatory guides are available for with representatives of the NRC Staff.
these routine ma.
inspsetion at the Commission's Public their consultants, and other interested couusut caTE:Any interested party Washington.D.C. Copies of activ'e The ACRS is required by Section 5 of
=ay submit comments regarding the Document Room.1717 H Street NW.,
persons.
rewording of routine use f. and the guides may be purchased at the current the 1978 NRC Authorization Act to separation of routine use k. Into three Government Printing Office price. A review the NRC research prog am and routine uses.To be considered.
subscription service for future guides in budget and to report the results of the comments must be received on or before sp2cific divisions is available through review to Congress. In order to perform th: Covernment Printing Office.
this review. the ACRS must be able to June 5.1980.
Information on the subscription service engsge in frank discussions with acontss: Address comments to: Deputy cnd current prices may be obtained b'y members of the NRC Staff and such Assistant Director for Work Force writing to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory discussions would not be possible if Information. Agency Compliance and
,_..,.-_.,.,_.n-.
r ATTACHMENT 2 ACRS JOINT SITE EVALUATION AND REACTOR RADIOLOGICAL EFFECTS SUBCCMMITTEE MEETING May 21-22, 1983 Washington, D.C.
l f **E*:0E E S:
NR STAFF ACES J. Harb:ur D. '<:e!' e*,
Chai r a-G. Enig5::n J. Ebe st'e
- 4. Kreger J. Ray R. W. Houston U. ".a.5is R. Bangart R. Fester, ACRS Cons titant M. Jangochian A. Grend:c, A;RS C:es;1 tant B. Grimes P. Tam, Designate Fede-31 E 1:yee J. Martin
.. Abbey, Jr.
Cat:0:r. '..'!L::i.
R. Sherry P. Cota R. 6:-su '
R. Cleveland S. Yaniv J. Foulke t'C D. Solberg P. Reed R. Scy:
F. Arsenault D. Knuth EDISON ELECTRIC INST.
0323 3 MJ;*2!'43 S. Harris P..
Ross ATOMIC INDUSTRIAL FORU't DEBEV0:SE & LIBERMA's P. Higgins D. Hollar ALDERSON REPORTING CO., INC._
Mc3 RAW-HILL S. Babineau J. Dann L
ATTACHMENT 3 REVISED 5/20/80 ACRS SITE EVALUATION AND REACTOR RADIOLOGICAL EFFECTS JOINT SUBCOMMITTEES MEETING MAY 21 & 22, 1980 WASHINGTON, DC SCHEDULE PURPCSE OF MEETING:
(1) To review pertinent portions of the 1982 NRC Research Budget; and (2) To review the final Emergency Planning Rule, 10 CFR 50.
MAY 21, 1980 APPROXIMATE TI:.it EXECUTIVE SESSION 8:30 a.m. - 8:45 a.m.
o Chairman's Opening Statement o Discuss Schedule Changes o Comments by the Subcommittee DISCUSSION WITH THE NRC STAFF (may meet in closed session) 8:45 a.m. - 10:45 a.m.
Site Safety Research*
J. Harbour, RES (Indicated formal, uninterrupted presentation time - 30 minutes)
SPECIAL STUDY SESSION AND LUNCH 10:45 p.m. - 2:45 p.m.
(This session is scheduled for individual study of the final Emergency Planning Rule, and drafting of an ACRS letter on the rule)
DISCUSSION WITH NRC STAFF 2:45 p.m. - 5:00 p.m.
The final Emergency Planning Rule M. Jamgochian, et al (Indicated formal, uninterrupted presentation time - 30 minutes)
TENTATIVE SCHEDULE (Cont'd)
May 22, 1980 APPROXIMATETIMk EXECUTIVE SESSION S:30 a.m. - 8:45 a.m.
DISCUSSION '.41TH NRC STAFF (may meet in closed session) i Reactor Radiologica'l Effects Research*
8:45 a.m. - 11:45 a.m.
R. Abbey, RES; F. Arsenault, RES (Indicated formal, uninterrupted presentation time - 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />)
....***.....**,.... LUNCH *******************
11:45 a.m. - 12:45 p.m.
EXECUTIVE SESSION (may meet in closed session) 12:45 p.m. - 3:00 p.m.
Final Emergency Planning Rule - draft ACRS letter o
o Reactor Radiological Effects Researen o Site Safety Research The PAS Staff (R. Cernero) indicated that risk assessment aspects of these issues will be-presented in the Reliability and Probabilistic Assessment Subcommittee Meeting.
f e
-Vf
}~
sO
-m ta
- 2l:
2 Cn O
Q><
L&J 2"
O
<c::
J r:
O.
c.
CUUC e
e e
OCCUPATIONAL RADIATION EXPOSURE SOURCE TERiis Aflu, ALARA FIN #
CONTRACTOR TITLE DESCRIPTION FY 1982.
Undesigna ted In-Plant Measurement of Systen will be developed to make neasurement at fixed location 600K Crud Duildup and in operating LWRs to establish dose and radionuclide buildup Removal From and removal.
Data collection will be initiated at operating 3
Operating LWRs plants, particularly those pianning decontamination at some near future date.
Data will also be collected on the coolant parameters, e.g., solids, radionuclide concentrations, chenistry, etc. All data will be correlated with plant operations and designs later in the project.
Undesigna ted Decontamination Contaminated equipment or canponents from operating plants 300K E f fectiveness will be obtained to evaluate the effectiveness of decontamina-tion methods on radioactive deposits and their effect on the t
component itself.
Simulated deposits will also be used.
I Undesignated Post-Accident it is assumed that NRC will have some research needs following 300K Decontaniination of the interagency studies on TMI-2 contamination and decontamina-Plant Sites
- tion, lhese studies are nat defined at this time, but funds are being prograumed to permit follow on research.
l I
i t
4 t
I 8
K K
K K
K K
2 9
0 5
0 0
0 5
a 9
2 7
0
'l 1
4 1
0 1
1 2
Y s
e o
s n
i s
ie n
t F
,nii
- t l
a soau e
r o
os dirrs d
o r
ie m
p o
t f
t y
th a
u Dit gtti mmt c
d ct xe cr Tl erne ai d - e oci es co Lecosr n
eop bid g o
on ft pi m cru a
C e
e ig t rs gen l p n
l s ti or ap eori Rndeyr ii a
l No ceu ore l
n l l ps i
u3 o oo u
wd d
i invs bpp e
s.
nt oara a
d c - r ht n
i airue t rt e l mt wa
.e se isz n
i eenp auu msd er oyy t p ral it usis ml eo cie oera l n th em c
t ra ddas eaisie uml t
es u
n r d a (n t
f pt e ee u
a ia oit v bll s df ee r
eaa s
i t
is p r yt l rie a
eoml so ni a i t.
n e s
so t ae t cnd l
s i
eiir n
o l
,d oesl t ca nab
'D e t l d eAce ise psol iai og l
i i
l Lvaaao m
b wrt x udi cf m T erurt p
e ea e
ow r
e sel Dt q o
.sl st u el el k sri uw c
i es l sol rel sh b,
f au i
i l pt r endi ema gt a
ft e f i g aoao vo w
ti v o
si inl g
ok cl rt eid ese d
v am de eon n
i n
e md rti i
s r ebc dt ee mo r
l isk nne u
n aoovie abg id u oft u ioc pd e i
nwt el p erra s
t h eo on s ne ru it i
c
.Das tdsf d ol soil sid
- oar, at ibo rl eco evi t
o cn Pe r
ini sh ic i
n i
p f
t
.t nsa hti ogesa0 oi n
cuw dl - g de dl s n
u n
ee-oeo t e uld i
,Dh1 echi ens ti ne t ro sve t
crsT y
u tt r
swe soi oef Lt ei t
pli ER nor sb nc c
tl e s cs f ca x
l ii sn cet f i S
N nl i isid tf eu ann ooit oii ee U
at ede gc td rd i
nare nitf rnu d
i t oe ea eun i i i
0 0
r n
os oca t oo n
sa n
a o n 's o u X
f f r hst u cema sc oal f.
l p
l i
of s i e o
p r
ct a pi d r l i l sts nel ld net t go l pn l - sa apa aau n
a t
l xo I
ei nrn i
n S
st uuat wj e
osos l
rmei ur iei N
H poeeoo s
rmbi iee n
mt o nes w
t i
0 C
i c
a i
l aiap ih l
eau i
i l
E sasrl a ahk d air l
l -
tt a A
D eiot t
k ca e
t e ti m ert nd d
nes rid i
l t
s sd psrnS rrit soo oacif n oh u ion l
D saxnoeH oohn A
Areif mN Wf wi Aupn Cgaoe C wl Hl I
l i
i R
e A
n c
- t s L
r eco fi i
D o
o d
N f
en e
t R cD f
s vo t
e A
cn y
or as nd eI w I
et p
n s
rs rt R r eni hEo T
n t
L C
rei cos pu
- - o Gao u
t i
l u
an e t
i me s et f st f af C
urt ui iN osc C oa ora oco t tsa f r Dl eis i
O sui i
ge Aai ol oo c
eddi n ou ssl cras
(
i ec Du f
i f n
- n. o R e ill g
t roo
.s n
t oa yM a t
f ne ns t
i e
aiV s
. i iR eey ent t
e ii s
g l
i n n oa i f l e l nur sn
)
l aie sr pqt i ir f
od l
l u
ut s da oie st o nean neso nn oat inie nver L
(J e
hl ehi d ni omk eint an oe l
onr en eu t t eu i
t c vcs ii n l
n nc eave a
u i
Sd c l
ai eu eeo I
i iNRL NN DTD ifA II A1 Dl iN l
i IC C
I C
S L
s s
N i
l A
i R
i R
N S
v v
O I
a a
l C
D D
i f
0 r
C C
l I
U I
0 l
Y I
1 1
H A
I il I
0 S
T 9
3 S
L 2
3
- l N
9 1
L 5
D A
0 0
i t
I i
4 S
N 2
E 3
3 r
4
/
0 t
H i
l l
1 I
1 t
ISF I
1 i
I j;
!ll!'
1, 1l ll
,.j
O e
G
&Z t LJ
=
J L
L U.J J<
U O
J Q
LLJ Z
3O M
e e
R00flNE RADIOLOGICAL EFFLUENTS SOURCE 1LRHS
. FIN #
CONTRACIOR' TillE DESCRIPTION FY 1982 A6075 EG&G Source Tenn Measurements Assemble data ori the operating parameters in liquid, gaseous and 600K solid systems of pWRs arid on the performance of ef fluent treatment systems as a Sr.d'un of plant design and operation and to canpare these data with predicted results from the pWR-GALE nudel and other available analysis models.
The results of this comparison will be used to improve existing models.
!B2281 pNL Decontamiriat. ion E ffects Deterpiirie the reipairements for radwaste systems needed to handle 60K on Radwaste Systems post-accident decontaniinatfori wastes.
Review plans for post-accid it Clean-up operations at 1MI-2 and discuss these plans with artl-2 personnel, their contractors and NRC staff as needed.
Assess the adequacy of proposed aicasurements at IMI-2 related to der <.,ntamination ef fectiveness and decontamination waste treatment.
Forumilate reconsnendations and a pl.an for additional research on radwaste system requirements for post-accident decontamination l
dnd Waste handling.
Undesignated improved pWR Effluent The data obtained fran project A6075 will be reviewed and compared 100K Analysis Model with the approach and assunptions used in the pWR-GALE code.
If improvements to this code have potential to provide NRC with a nore realistic, flexible riiodel for effluent assessment, the basis and fann of this development will be defined in FY 1982.
Undesignated Advanced Effluent Conduct a literature search for effluent treatment concepts not 100K Treatuent Systems currently used in LWRs and assess their applicability to LWRs.
for concepts of fering potential inprovements canpared to systems currently used in LWRs, develop a plan and cost estimate for necessary developnent and demonstration and justify these expenditures as appropriate.
I e
ROUTINE RADIOLOGICAL EFFLUENTS SOURCE TERHS FY 1982 FIN #
CONTRACTOR' TITLE DESCRIPTION A6075 EG&G Source Tenn Measurenents Assemble data on the operating parameters in ?.iquid, gaseous and 600K j
solid sistems of WRs and on the perforence of effluent treatment systems as a function of plant design and operation and to compare these data with predicted results from the pWR-GALE model and other available analysis models.
The results of this con.parison will be used to improve existing models.
1 B2281 PNL
!)econteminat. ton Effects Detennine the requirements for radwaste systens needed to handle 60K on Radwaste Systems post-accident decontamination wastes. Review plans for post-accident clean-up operations at THI-2 and discuss these plans with TMI-2 personnel, their contractors and NRC staff as needed.
Assess the adequacy of proposed measurements at THI-2 related to decontamination effectiveness and decontamination waste treatment.
4 Fornulate reconenendations and a plan for additional research on
. dwaste system requirenents for post-accident decontamination anc waste handling.
Un-,ignated Improved PWR Effluent The data obtained from project A6075 will be reviewed and compared 100K Analysis Model with the approach and assumptions used in the pWR-gal.E code.
If improvement s to this code have potential to provide NRC with a more reallitic, flexible model for effluent assessment, the basis and fann of this development will be defined in FY 1982.
I undesigna ted Advanced Effluent Conduct a literature search for effluent treatment concepts not M a .
Treatment Systems currently used in (WRs and assess their applicability to LWRs.
For concepts offering potential inprovements conpared to systems currently used in LWRs, develop a plan and cost estimate for i
necessary development and demonstration an; justify these expenditures as appropriate.
4 6
j i
ROUTINE RADIOLOGICAL EFFLUENTS PATilWAYS TO MAN '
,- l i
i FIN #
CONTRACTOR TITLE DESCRIPTION FY 1982 1
AIRBORNE A6288 INEL Iodine Pathway Study Determine behavior of I-131 and other radionuclides in en-vironnent following releases from nuclear facilities l
LIQUID B7260 CU Detennining Radio-Detennine the seasonal radionuclide distributtons in Sus.
120K nuclides in Susquehanna quehanna River and Chesapeake Bay suspended and bed sedi-i River and Chesapeake ments and establish mechanisms for environnental transport Sediments of radionuclides in these aquatic systems.
B2271 PNL Mathematical Sinulation Continue with development and validation of radionuclide 180K of Sediments and Radio-transport models in lakes, oceans and estuarines to include nuclide Transport in effects due to adsorption / desorption of radionuclides on i
Surface Waters sedinents, resuspension and sedinent deposition.
i B2275 PNL Sedinent and Radio-Collect field data for purposes of validating sediment /
120K nuclide Transport in radionuclide transport models.
i Rivers U2294 PNL Sediment and Radio-Validate sediment and radionuclide transport in rivers using 120K nuclide Transport in already collected field data.
Rivers-Computer Sine-lations B5749 UW Distribution Coeffici-Detennine distribution coefficients for radionuclides in lakes 120K ents for Radionuclides and estuarine systems.
Detennine water quality parameters in Aquatic Environ-affecting sorption of radionuclides on sediments. Continue i
uents with detennining distribution coefficients in Susquehanna River-1 Chesapeake Bay System.
IIEAllit Eff ECTS i
A2059 ANL Projection Models for Advanced dose-response functions will be incorporated into the 150K llealth E f fects Assess-DEMPAK model dich will take into account dose-rate effects ments in Populations and non-linear responses for tonizing radiation. Better models i
Exposed to Radioactive for exposure to air pollutants will be developed.
i and Non-Radioactive
" #" S Continue to Next Page
Pdf)G 2
~
ROUTINE RADIOLOGICAL EFFLUENTS IIEALTil Erl'ECTS (Continued) 80188 ORNL Dosimetry and Biotrans-Global models for environmental transport of selected radio-175K port Models to inqile-nuclides will be developed.
Population doses resulting from ment ALARA multiple exposure pathways will be calculated.
(
l*
8 i
ROUTINE RADIOLOGICAL EFFLUENTS ECOMMISSIONING IIN #
CONTRACTOR TITLE DESCRIPTION FY 1982 100K 12296 PNL Long-Lived Activation Determine the long-lived radionuclides which are produced in Products in Reactor significant quantities in reactor construction materials and 2
Materials which will be of major concern in decommissioning in light water reactors.
The project will detennine the lipes of radionuclides produced, their location, chemical form and the non-radioactive isotopes from which they were generated.
The project will also make recommendations of alternate construction materials to minimize decommissioning problems.
12299 PNL Characterization of Aid HRC in formulating policies and strategies for decommission-250K Radionuclide ing of nuclear power plants by detennining the nature, distri-Contamination bution and inventory of residual radionuclide contamination in Throughout Light and around commercial light water nuclear power stations as a Water Reactor function of design and operating parameters.
i 1
Power Stations 1
R303 PNL Decontamination as a Aid NRC in formulating policies and strategies for decommis-200K
^
Precursor to sioning of nuclear power plants by determining how effective Decommissioning decontamination methods are in reducing dose rates and waste volumes associated with LWR plant decommissioning.
Ilneles igna ted in-Plant The plans for actual LWR decommissionings will be reviewed 400K
}
Decommissioning (especially Shippingport) and recommendations and plans 1
Study prepared for an NRC-associated program.
Funds will include i
additional NRC data needs, either performed by the organization i
decommissioning the site or by a separate NRC contractor.
i i
3 8
ACCIDENTAL RADIOLOGICAL RELEASES EMERGENCY RESPONSE
(
ACCIDENTAL RADIOLOGICAL RELEASES s
HEAsTH EFFECIS:
FY 1982 FIN d CONTRACTOR TITLE DESCRIPTION l
82268 PNL Early Effects of Inhaled Continuation of studies initiated in FY 1981: Effects of 200K Radionuclides. Phase II inhaled alpha emitting radionuclides combined with external irradiation and effects of inhalation of mixtures of alpha and beta emitting radionuclides.
A1203 LVLCE Early Morbidity and Continuation of studies initiated in FY 1981:
(1) mortality 200K Mortality Estimates and morbidity of rats exposed to aerosols of mixture of beta i
i for Different Nuclear emitters having different effective half-lives in the lung, Accidents, Phase II (2) effects in rats of inhalation of alpha emitters having different specific activities and (3) effects in rats of inhaled beta enitters combined with external irradiation.
l Additional study will be initiated to examine the combined effect on early mortality of beta irradiation of the bone j
marrow and inhalation of a beta emitter, t
EMERGENCY RESPONSE t
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING: -
FIN #
CONTRACTOR TITLE DESCRIPTION FY 1982 180K A6286 INEL Air Sampler and Test and evaluate performance of emergency radiological Emergency Radio-instrumentation for (a) environmental response to i
logical Instruments radioiodines and other radionuclides, (b) varying environmental conditions, (c) particulates and radio-lodines in milk, food and water pathways, and (d) use 4
in recovery and decontamination operations.
i i.
A6287 INEL lodine Adsorber Complete evaluation of adsorber characteristics of filter 70K Evaluation cartridge used in portable air sanplers and determine j
anion resin capability for concentrating 1-131 from milk samples under emergency field conditions.
i 1