ML19345G461
| ML19345G461 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/02/1981 |
| From: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | |
| References | |
| ACRS-T-0840, NUDOCS 8104070289 | |
| Download: ML19345G461 (20) | |
Text
..
_y(v
+
NCC'J.AR RENTORY COM2CSSION P00R Oft 0 NE d.-
P e
I:1 tta Mam of:
)Nr/ie D'
J.,' ;
s f
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS j
,r/
Subcommittee Meeting on Advanced Reactors A?RO's;cg,[
,g L wa, p**M e,as
,, o,,g
,s
. ll. /_,
/y 7 s /:W ii s.,,.
CATE: Acril 2, 1981
. PAm:
1-thru 18 g:
Des Plaines, Illinois
,(
'/
t I
l 1
/ '
REPGITLTG
.U.DE3L%Yf. Q
\\
40 0 Virginia Ave., S.W. Wa gn d ng
=1, D.
C.
200:4 Ta '.achece : (202) 554-23J5 4
t ga 1
810407oam
1 JFRICHARD i i
k r&t I
f If UNITED STATES OF AMERICA I
2i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
3l i
4!
SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING ON ADVANCED REACTORS i
i e
5:
i H
t 3
6l Sir Galahad Room Royal Court Inn j
g 6
7, 1753 S. Elmhurst Road i
l s
Des Plaines, Illinois
'j.
8,f y
Thursday, April 2, 1981 t
=
9l l
The meeting of the Subcomnittee was convened, pursuant h
10 !
to notice, at 9:10 a.m.
j 11 PRESENT:
S 6
12,
z E
I M. CARBON, Chairman s
13 I l
~
C.
P.
ZALESKI
,[
j J. C. MARK g
14 R. AVERY J. HARTUNG E
15 !
W. LIPINSKI w
i S. SIEGEL
=
E I6 l E.-IGNE-d P. WOOD i
17 x
=
l 18 E
_=
E 5
19l 20I i
21 l t
i 22
- 1 1
23 j1' -
1 24l:
1 25-
- ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
i
[
i 2
ii eR2 Casa 1a2S
}
2d MR. CARBON:
In formalese, the n eeting will come to 3j order.
I guess I need to read this even though it will be a 4l closed meeting.
s 5-This is a meeting of the Advisory Committee on Reactor A
j 6[
Safegt2ards, Subcommittee on Advanced Reactors.
My name is Carbon.
R 7!
I am the Subcommittee Chairman.
The~other member present is D
I y,
8l J. C. Mark.
Presumably Mike Bender and Paul Shewmon will be here d
E, 9l although I can't say for certain.
d 10 l We have present ACRS Consultants Robert Avery, Jim 3
)
II l Hartung, Walt Lipinski and Sid Siegel.
Gerry Golden is not here 3
i N
12 l yet.
Our main speaker will be Mr. Zaleski.
l
=
i 3
13 '
The purpose of the meeting is to discuss matters relat t
l 5
5 I4 l ing to the development of LMWBR safety design criteria.
The z
b_
i.
j 15 l.meeting is being conducted in accordance with the provisions of
=
j 16 l the Federal Advisory Committer. Act and the Government in the N
I7 Sunshine Act.
N I
i
{
18 i In order to protect foreign proprietary information, l
c s
i g
I9 l it is necessary to close the first part of the meeting to discuss;
=
4 20 !
information relating t'o foreign LMFBR safety design criteria.
2I The meeting is closed in accordance with Sunshine Act Execption s
22j No.
4.
If time permits prior to 6:00 p.m.,
the meeting will be k-23 returned to open session and the subcommittee will discuss plans j
4 24 h for subsequent meetings and procedures.
1 25j Mr.
E. Igne is the designated federal employee for this l
- l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
4 3
1
)
fj) meeting.
The rules for participation in the meeting have been 2
announced as part of the notice of the meeting previously publishec 3,
in the Federal Register on March 18 and April 1, 1381.
4 A transcript of the meeting is being kept, and I sure e
5
~
a i
8 6! urge everyone to speak clearly so that our recorder can get the e
R 7
questions that we are asking.
~
j 8j Anytime you have any question about perhaps understand-n J
n 9i ing what we are saying or Dr. Zaleski, stop us becauae I really 10 l want to get the material on your transcript.
E
=
i 2
11 i We have not received any written statements or requests l
3 i
'i 12 !
for time to make orsl statements from any members of the public.
E
=
4 s '1? i (Whereupon, the subcommittee meeting went into closed
=
l i
14 lI session. )
i
=
i 2
15 i x
i
=
l j. 16 i s
d 17 5
18.
9 C
19 -
i 5
I 20 I 21l 1
22 ?
23 24l i
25,:
qY s
3 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
a I
1 OPEN SESSION 24 (4:30 p.m.)
3 MR. CARBON:
Let's go ahead with a discussion of the 4!
agenda for the April 21 and 22 meeting.
Let me give you one word i
I s
5:
of background.
I would assume from everything that is said in A
I j
6j Washington these days, from the President and so on, that probably; R
l R
7i NRC is going to get involved again in licensing or reviewing the l
l j
8!
licensing of CRBR, involved in it some way.
P u *. I would suppose J
d 9!
that our philosophy for our Advanced Reactor Subcommittee group 5
10 here would be that we plan to continue with the plans that have
{
z=
j 11l been outlined, particularly in my letter of January 15 which I 3
I
-g.
12 j think everyone has a copy of.
I 5
I 13 l In effect I am saying that we will continue witn the g
14 ' plans that have been laid out for our activities until such time m
l
,f l
2 15 j as CRBR starts taking so much time, if that ever happens, that I
y 16 we cannot carry on both things.
Some of you are not involved
^
d 17 of course in CRBR but the committee members will be, and I guess N
i 5
18 :
the time restraints would come up on the committee members' I
?
Q 19 ll activities.
But that is not a problem at the moment so we will M
I 20!
continue right along here.
l r
1 21 !
With regard to the April 21-22 meeting, it will be aimed I
22 Il $t a discu.9sion of the CDS, the Conceptual Design Study, rather l
5 23 ) than what we had planned for the ' February 12-13 meeting.
So as 4
24 ) we had originally aimed, our next step will be on CDS.
Actually ?
25 i Pierre's _ contribution today would have come way down the road
~
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
2 L
^
l 5
t I
i 1i somewhere except he happened to be in the United States and this i
2i was an opportunity to take advantage of his presence.
I 3l Earlier some of us had made out a proposed agenda for 4l a two-day meeting which would have gone something like the follow--
l' l
e 5,
ing.
I would like to tell you what it was and tell you also what n
f j
6 l kind of thinking Frank Gavigan has been going through and then G
l 5
7l get your thoughts on these things.
I plan to be talking with l
1 j
8 Gavigan tomorrow morning to make out a final agenda.
4
\\
9l One that we had made out, Dick Savio and I had done i
i j
h 10 l this in fact.
We had laid out a plan calling for an executive z
=
j 11 session among members and consultants with no DOE involvement k
i j
12 l for say, 8:30 to 11:00 on the first day.
It was aimed at discuss-
=
\\
5 13 i ing how we ought to go at this whole thihg, what our approach
=
~
14 '
ought to be, how can we carry out a year-long study and end up z
g
=
r 15 with something worthwhile.
x
=
j 16 l The aim again as that January 15 letter indicates is to A
17 try to come up with at least a first cut of some design criteria f
t
(
5 18 j for a large size, thousand megawatt and up LMFBR and to do this g.- 19 l within a year, that we would end up with tentative preliminary g
l n
20 sorts of things, but to tryland set up some kind of goal, time i
2Il goal there, not to just-let it run on indefinitely.
And as I 22 say it will be aimed at the commercial plant.
23 Then af ter that executive session, for an hour or so, 24j 11:00_to 12:00 let's say, we ask Gavigan to talk about DOE's 1
general approach, their goals, their philosophy for the Conceptual 25 '
1
- i ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY.-INC.
6 l
1 Design plan, what were their safety philosophy / policy goals.
Then 3
af ter lunch, say from 1:00 to 6:00, ve would have a discussion of 2
- the CDS with first s' ort of the underlying philosophy for the 3
4l speci ic safety criteria themselves, what the problems were.
Then we woc.id move into a discussion of the detailed design criteria, o
5 M
n N
6!
safety design criteria.
j 7
Then we would move into a discussion of the design 8!
itself and have an overview on how the design fitted the safety i
d criteria or how the safety criteria handled the design.
We would 9
Y l
E 10 l then move into the risk assessment studies which DOE and some of E
i s
j.;
you have been involved in, which surely would take the remainder B
j 12 l of the day up until 6:00 in the evening and starting the next 3=
d 13 l morning and spending the whole morning on a continuation of that. ;
E E
14 We would then move into some consideration of what is w
2 15 yet missing and what kind of current development work is under 5
16 ;
way, what kind of safety programs are under way to fill in missing 3e i
6 17 information from the CDS design, or perhaps saying the CDS, the u
=
i 18 l Conceptual Design Study arrived at some answer insofar as each
?
E 19 of the criteria, safety. criteria are concerned but perhaps it 5
4 20 l wasn't a very good answer so someome is continuing more develop-i 21 I ment and safety work aimed at some of these criteria and for DOE 22 h to present what work they are doing in this area, which again in h
1 23 ) some cases is being carried out under our direction.
24j We would continue this second day up until perhaps
'i 25 { 2:00 -in the afternoon and then maybe have a couple of hour
.,1 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
7 4
1 i subcommittee discussion on what we have heard from the DOE, the i
2!
significz.nce of it, what we think is good, what we think is bad.
3 l Then we would follow up with a brief dl scussion with DOE to get i
4 their input on what we have said and to lay some plans for the 5!
subsequent meeting.
s I
g-j 6,
Gavigan had not heard that aad is proposing scmething A
7 ;;
like hhe following.
DOE would present a one-hour discussion on
.!8 the CDS having to do with the design safety documentation and a an 9
summary of the design and safety considerations and see if there i:
h 10 ;
are some similarities in there.
His next two hours in his agenda 8
j 11l would have then gotten into the general design criteria and the 3
y 12 j CDS positions on design choices which were made.
Then would come E
1 13 i a couple of hours on the systems that have the key safety features.
=
i 5
14 such as a shutdown system, the heat removal systems, containment m
_b.
i j
15 system and things tied in to them, and then an. hour or so on E
j 16 f safety system reliability including their approaches to this, A
d 17 a half hour on CDA design considerations, a half hour on risk Y
I N
18 assessment, followed up with some general discussion.
E h
19 l That adds up to something like a day of DOE presentation M
20 )
there.
21 I would welcome your thoughts on these two possible i
22 l approaches, your thoughts aimed specifically at how can we get k
23 1 the _ most out of two days of discussion, April 21 and 22.
Insofar 1
I 24 f. as t6e conceptual design discussion is concerned, if there is i
25j inadequate time in two days to cover the kinds of things that -
E i
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
1 j we ought to cover there and also carry on the kind of subcommittee 2l discussions that we should have, we just won't cover it all in 3ltwodays,wewilltakemoretime.
4 The question is basically now how should we best i
e 5!
organize those two days?
I open the floor.
g j
6, MR. LIPINSKI:
Mr. Chairman, when I was in Washington si t
2, 7
last week I carried my copy of the CDS safety report that had s.j 8f been issued by Westinghouse in January, and Dick Savio has it and a
d 9i it has not come back as of today.
But I think it would be of i
c I
y 10 benefit for the subcommittee to have a copy of that document and IE i
11 l read it before we meet with DOE.
j E
i j
12 !
MR. CARBON:
What document is it?
5 I
5 13 l MR. HARTUNG:
The CDS Safe ty Desigri Assessment Report.
l
[
14 l MR. LIPINSKI:
It is about an inch thick printed on i
b j
i
=
i i
15 one s2.de.
g i
g 16 MR. CARBON:
I have not seen that.
And I agree with yo p
17 i MR. LIPINSKI.
If I had that here I could look at the y
i 5
18 l outline and talk more definitive.~.y.
But if DOE is going to talk
=
4
+
l 19 !
to the CDS safety, the outline of that report might help in terms a
i 20 of an agenda as to how we might want to block some time out to 21 cover that report in detail, because it summarizes the safety 22 h approach for CDS.
23 Have you read the report?
24 j
.MR.
SIEGEL:
We are going to meet here, is that right?
l 25
.4R.. CARBON :
Yes, we are going to meet here.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
o 1
~
9
?
I l
MR. LIPINSKI:
I haven't read the report.
) )
I MR. HARTUNG:
I was going to make that same suggestion 2f 3l that it might be useful to get that in advance.
There are two 4l ther reports one might consider getting in advance.
One is the verall plant description report which describes in summary o
5 4
H 6l fashion the whole plant.
It is called the CDS Plant Description 1
e 1
Report.
And the third report that this group might consider j
7 I
f8 getting is a report on reliability for the CDS plant.
i J
Those reports plus many other reports were supposed to n
9i i
l 10 ( be submitted to Congress in the March timeframe.
My recommenda-f tion would be to check with Frank Gavigan and with him decide 5
11 l
a d
12 l which if any of these reports are appropriate for this group to E
=
i look at in advance.
s.
13 l 3
E 14 MR. CARBON:
I would think that surely all three would 4
d i,
w g
15 be important.
E MR. MARK:
Are the two you mentioned also a full inch E.
16 A
M' 17 thick?
G x
I 18 '
MR. HARTUNG:
Yes.
I think that is the only drawback 2:
+
19 on. supplying these.
They are each an inch thick.
There are 5
1 20 I some extra ones that were published and maybe there is enough I
21f
.that Frank could get them.
Maybe he wants to go through the 22 i effort of duplicating them.
j 23 MR. SIEGEL:
Max, I agree with.your proposal to be in 24 j executive session at the beginning of the meeting to sort of 23 clarify for ourselves what our purpose is and the framework and i
l.
ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
. ;1
l 10
)
1 guiding philosophy might be before we plunge into the ki tds of j
things, general as they might be, that Gavigan can provide and 2
s certainly the detail that we will get into when we look at CDS and 3
4j the points of view.
Just as f ar as logistics are concerned, it I
might be desirable if we could work it out so the DOE people are e.
5 5
3 6;
here only one day.
I don't know what you think of a notion of e
7 our meeting say one afternoon, then th9y meet with us the follow 1
8j ing day, try to squeeze in our concluding executive session at the-n dg 9
end of their portion or maybe even the following morning.
i h
10 l That is a minor concern just to minimize their having 3
i j
jj-to stay over.
l
<3
.j 32 !
MR. CARBON:
I will keep that in mind.
z
=
f 5
13 l MR. SIEGEL:
I don't see much difference from Gavigan's.
E i
! 'j4 proposal and what you had as coming from them except a slight d
i 15 l difference in organization.
a r
16 MR. CARBON:
I don't think there is, if I understand 3^
\\
p 17 1 what lua has said.
l M
i 18 l MR. SIEGEL:
My preference personally would be to make E
sure we have separate time in organizing our own and certainly I
A 19 l 20l your second' executive session where you compare thoughts af terward.
i 21 But then leave their presentation to them as long as it is clear 22 l what our purposes are.
23,
MR. CARBON:
Carson, do you have a comment?
l 24 3 MR. MARK:
It crossed my mind to wonder if there was a
- i 25j a'way of arranging it.
It sounds as if what Gavigan had proposed h1-1 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
)-
11 1 l was essentially a day and we should keep it to one day because it ij 2
is an imposition to come perhaps.
3!
MR. CARBON:
I don't think he would come.
4i MR. MARK:
Who would in fact come?
Gavigan is a DOE g
5; program manager or something I suppose.
+ '.
i j
6l MR. CARBON:
- Yes, 3
s 7
MR. MARK:
But who does the work?
s i
j 8l MR. CARBON: I think actually part of this probably n;
9 !
would be presented by you, will it not, Jim?
E 10 l MR. HARTUNG:- The meeting that was going to describe j
z i
@ IIl the DOE base program, which is the one that was delayed, was l
s I
12 i going to have presentations by Gavigan and by safety TMC people 5
I g
13 !
and then there were going to be workers f2.om throughout the j
14 l country who are working as' DOE contractors.
E 15 l I don't know if that is what Frank Gavigan would do l
j E
ID !
for this one, but my guess is that he would choose some people I
h I7 '
who have worked on various aspects of the design and ask them e
18 3
to present portions of that.
P" 19 l MR. LIPINSKI:
Westinghouse is the safety contractor, a
M 20l aren't they, because they were the author of the one report?
i
\\
2Il MR. HARTUNG:
Westinghouse is the lead contractor for safety for the CDS design.
Other contractors are involved.
2 MR. SIEGEL:
I personally would want to hear from 23 24 Westinghouse people how the thought was developed.
1 MR. CARBON:
I am quite sure that Gavigan has in mind 25 1j b
d ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
12 1
^
i having people come in from different contractors.
I don't know j
whether they have people in your shop or not.
But other people 2i l
3l w uld be coming.
4f MR, AVERY:
We have been involved somewhat peripherally.
We have been major participants in the other meet 3.ng that was e
5
~
i planned en the base program.
We had some involvement in the CDA 6
e
,E 7l analysia.
But I think what has been said here is correct.
I think a large fraction of the presentation would be by Westing-8 i
N 9l house and some by G.E.
i 5
10 f MR. LIPINSKI:
On that schedule that Gavigan proposed, i
i 11 !
starting out with this one-hour discussion on CDS safety, I think l
3 12 f a half hour or something to orient us with respect to what that dz=
1 5
13 i plant looks like would be helpful.
If it is Clinch River scale-6p i
that is all right, but if there basic differences between Clinch ;
14 ll E
N 15 River and CDS, I would like to know what it is to orient our i
16 thinking.
S A
- J j7_;
MR. CARBON:
I am under the belief that the only two a
18 !
people present who really know much of anything about CDS are you E
19 !
two fellows.
Is that correct?
A I
You have not been involved in CDS?
20 21 !
MR. LIPINSKI:
lio.
}
22j-MR. CARBON:
You have some?
i 23 MR. AVERY:
Some, but I am generally familiar with the 24 { major features of the plant.
25 i MR. HARTUNG:
I am generally f amiliar with the major 3
0 d
'ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
I 13 I
features of the plant also.
2 MR. CARBON:
Will Len Coke (phonetic) be here in April?
I3!
MR. IGNE:
Yes.
i 4l!
MR. CARBON:
So there is not really too much overlap g
5 if they tell us about CDS.
R j
6 Are there any other comments to make on the possibility, R
7 the differences of the two in comparison, any differences between sj 8
what he has proposed and what I had tentatively put down or not a"
9
~.
for the meeting?
?
C 10 MR. SIEGEL:
I will withdraw my suggestion.
That sounds.
t*=
1 II like it would end up being a three-day meeting rather than a two-a 12 day meeting.
i MR. MARK:
I was going to as'2 how important you thought g
13
=
3 14 E
it to be, Sid, that we have our executive session before this ej 15 presentation.
Wouldn't it be possible to start the presentation,
=
g 16 l then collect thoughts on the basis of the data one had?
A h
I7 MR. SIEGEL:
Yes.
Devote the first day to DOE input 1,
w 18 and then we use the second day for our own business?
C" 19 '
2 MR. MARK:
For the various phases of things that Max n
t 20 l mentioned.
21 MR. SIEGEL: 'Certainly.
12 $
MR. CARBON:
The problem I have with that is that I am 23 anticipating that by the time we end up, it is going to take DOE 24 ') a day and a half and if we then leave our discussicn --
25 :
If we take a half day, they take a day and MR. MARK:
d ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
i
14 and a half, and we need some more time, and it is three days.
y MR. SIEGEL:
They are just welcome here one day.
l MR. CARBON:
If we leave our discussion until late the 3l l
4j second afternoon, say, everybody is anxious to leave.
5l MR. SIEGEL:
That is not a good idea.
That puts the e
R N
most important subject in among the dregs.
6 e
I was deliberately putting some subcommit-MR. CARBON:
j 7l h8 f tee discussion the first thing.
Presumably everybody is going a
I
- J 9l to be charged up and ready to do some thinking.
I i
E 10l MR. MARK:
I guess I don't feel entirely persuaded N
I because we would be starting with rather noticeable lack of input, ji ji 1
d 12 l not having heard anything about what is going on.
z
~
C.
i 13
'MR.
SIEGEL:
I have no concern with your suggestion.
i Jut I really e ty goodbye to DOE at the end of the first day even E
14,
l'i i
15 if it would be 9:00 at night, and that is it.
5 16 l MR. CARBON:
I wouldn't either if we did that, because in
'A i
then we would have subcommittee discussion the next morning.
i 17 la2 We would also have items in mind, which is
=
l 5
18 l MR. MARK:
F
! also a better starting point for that discussion than just having i
0 19 !
5 l
20 had breakfast here.
21 i MR. CARBON:
The thing I am trying to avoid is having subcommittee discussion the second afternoon when everybody is 22
[
23 anxious to jump on a plane and go.
24 -
MR. MARK:
I fully agree with that.
I think if this a
presentation of theirs could be packaged so that a full day would 25 h
d ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
i 15 1
and I don't think you should bring too many people but f,coverit, 1
24 the people who know what is known about reliability and the 3[ Westinghouse people who know about safety and start off perhaps 4
with a clear outline of the differences between this and CRSR, f
3 5
that would be fine.
R j
64 But this design we don't need to work through in all R
7 conceivable respects.
i j
8 MR. CARBON:
No, but we have to appreciate it enough J
2 9<
and have the safety criteria fit in with what it means.
?,
10 Mr SIEGEL:
One thing we want to try to avoid is if E
h 11 '
we 'have the boss telling us what was done and then somebody else a
I 12 I gets up and tells what was really done.
The first presentation
=
h 13 is usually a waste of time.
It just gives the boss an opportunit*/
=
?
2 5
14 to stand up at the podium.
So if you can persuade whoever is the f b
E 15 boss to be brief, the rest of it can be valuable.
E g'
16 MR. HARTUNG:
I believe it is reasonable to get pretty 2
y 17-much what this kind of a group would want from the CDS people in x
- ?
{
18 one day.
And I think you could. talk with Gavigan to see what his t
19_;
feelings are, but I think it would he reasonable to ask them to M
?
20 ;
condense it to a point where that is the information.that seems j
2I h about the level of detail which this group wound be interested i
22j in getting, in my opinion.
A 23 ~
MR. CARBON:
And if we couldn't finish-up by 5:00 or 24 j something, could we just continue on until 8:00 ro 9:00 or some-h 15 f thing?
i Ii ALDERSON REPCRTING COMPANY. INC.
i i
16 i
1 MR. MARK:
What else is there to do out here in Des 1
2, Plaines?
MR. AVERY:
If we schedule it as a one-day meeting, it 3
4l is going to be a one-day meeting if our schedules are coordinated.
l i
5l My guess is t. hat we make it a one-day meeting and a large number e:
i y
,8 6l of people will want to catch planes and get back.
There may be R
?
5 7l limits as to how much you can elongate the meeting.
A i
5 8
MR. CARBON:
I would schedule for a two-day meeting for n
i
~
4 n
9!
us.
l i
i i
h 10 MR. AVERY:
I am talking about DOE.
z=
1 j
11 MR. MARK:
They would probably have hotel space and 3
y 12,
plane reservations to make.
5 I
j 13l MR. LIPINSKI:
Ten o' clock is the last plane into
=
3 14 l Washington and two hours prior to that is the last plane out of M
b I
i is !
O' Hare.
They would have to have travel time from here to O' Hare w=
g' 16 if they want to return the same day, so it would be 6:00 at the j
w i
17 !
1atest.
z
=
18 !
E MR. CARBON:
If two or three or one or two people want 7
19,
to stay over, that wouldn' t be bad.
g l
9 l
20f MR. LIPINSKI:
If.tiEQf do, you Would have them for the i
2I I following day.
22 l MR. CARBON:
Yes, the one or two.
23 Let me talk with Frank and go in the direction of tryinc 24
- to_have the first day devoted to DOE and generally sort of talk 25 about ending up by maybe 6:00 or 6:30 in the evening of the first 1
'a ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY. INC.
i I
17 l
i 1
MR. MARK:
See if ta thinks he can do that.
There are i
i 2i things he is in touch with which have less meaning for discussion I
3 !
here than others.
3 4i MR. CARBON:
Also some of the people will go to Washington I
e 5
and some will go to California at the end of the first day.
So i
+
ge 6! it might be that some of the DOE people will stay until 7:00 or A
g 7
8:00.
We could stay as late the first day as profitable, then we l j
8 can meet fresh the next morning with maybe Gavigan.
i 4
3, 9j MR. MARK:
I would try that out on him and see i# he O
i i
10 l thinks it can be held in a frame like that.
E l
MR. CARBON:
Then we can continue our discussion for as h
II l 3
i I
i 12,
long as we wish, and I am sure it won't go until evening.
13li j
5 Does that sound reasonable?
E
=
2 i
5 14 l Fine.
J:
I j
15 MR. MARK:
Dces that meet the points?
=
1 MR. SIEGEL:
That sounds fine to me if I can get my f
16 N
I7 doctor's permission to participate at all.
E c
18 :
y:
j MR. MARK:
Does the nature of the program make any 8
I9 difference in that that is more important than anything we have g
1 20 I been saying?
a f
2I l W1. SIEGEL:
I will see if I can twist.his arm.
h MR. CARBON:
And all of you can come on the 21st and 22 j 1
23 22nd and Len can, you said, and if you can talk your doctor into 1
24 it --
3 MR. MARK:
Bring him with you.
Can you get him a 25f j
i
- l ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY,INC.
18 i
j ticket, Max?
j I
MR. SIEGEL:
He knows I am on a trip now but not where.
2 l
3f What happened to Gerry Golden?
4l MR. IGNE:
I don't know.
He was going to make it.
i 5l MR. CARBON:
When did you hear?
=
E 1
n N
6l MR. IGNE:
Last week.
e M
5 7
MR. CARBON:
If there is nothing else to bring up, I am !
8 going to ban.g the gavel and we will go home.
d i
Thank you for coming.
d 9
i 10 i (Thereupon, ' at 4:45 p.m.,
the subcommittee adjourned.)
i i
i 11 !
<3 d
12 i z
i E
d 13 i i
5 i
s 14 :
e i
g
=
1
.,r 15 j 2
16 3
l A
R 17 C
E 18 ;i l
- n i
C 4
I 19 !
A 20 I l
21 22 23 '
l 3
-24 i -
i 25]
3 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
This is Oc certify that the attached preceedings before the ACRS Subcommittee on Advanced Reactors - Open Session in the matter of:
- Date o f ?roceeding :
April 2, 1981
'ccket Number:
U 31 3 c a
- e..#
3.a m. e. a a. d.d.a. *.
non p i n,. nne. r113 nm n were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcrip:
therecf for the file Of the Cccci331cn.
Judith F.
Richard Official Reporter (Typed)
~. 8 7. 2 l
h'!
D
' L. -:{wL
-l Cffi'cial Repcrter (Sigr.ature) 3 4
w w.
-