ML20006F559

Summary of ACRS Subcommittee for Severe Accidents 890920 Meeting in Bethesda,Md

ML20006F559
Person / Time
Issue date:	10/13/1989
From:	Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
To:	Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
References
ACRS-2665, NUDOCS 9002280163
Download: ML20006F559 (47)

Text

_ _.

ddfS-445 E,4 DBtTiRE DATE ISSUED:

10/13/89 l

00$ hh8 ACRS Subcommittee Meeting Suninary/ Minutes i

for Severe Accidents September 20, 1989 i

Bethesda, Maryland Purpose i

The ACRS Subcorriittee on Severe Accidents held a meeting on September l

20, 1989 in Dethesda, Maryland. The purpose of the meeting was to j

discuss three topics in the accident management area:

(1)aproposed Generic Letter by NRR on accident management strategies to be considered f

inIPEs,(?)theRESaccidentmanagementresearch'programplan,and(3) the guicelines for ev61uation of eccident management capabilities developed by EPRI for NUMARC, A copy of the meeting agenda and selected I

slices from the presentation are attached. The meeting began at 8:30 a.n., and adjourned at 3:30 p.m. and was held entirely in open session.

The prircip1 attendees were as follows:

1 Attendees ACRS NRC/ Consultants

[

W. Kerr, Chairman R. Palla NRR.

j

1. Catton, Member L. Shotkin, RES F. Renick, Member

11. Lauben, RES-C. Siess, Member T. Lee, RES C. Wylie, Member J. Han, RES P. Davis, Consultant W. Luckas, BHL~

J. Lee, Ccnsultant D. Houston, Staff NUMARC/EPRI i

l' R. Ng D. Modeen

- l R. Oehlberg G. Boyd 6

- LESIONATED ORIGI21L

?BR Re n s ev m s n

gg

,\\\\

e 2665 Certified BT PDC a.

w --

y

g.

i

)

i..

l t

Severe Accidents litt,' Minutes September 20, 1989 i

Review Document The following Jecuments had been provided for review at this meeting:

(1) Draf t of Supplanent I to Generic Letter 88-20. " Accident Management l

Strategies for Consideration in the IPE Process," August 30, 1989 i

(Predecisional),

f (2) Draft liUREG/CR-XX, " Assessment of Candidate Accident Management f

Strategies," W. J. Luckas, et. al. (BNL), August 1989.

'l f

(3) Draft Accident lianagement Research Plan, September 6,1989 (Pre-decisional).

(4) Draft EPRI Report " Guidelines for Evaluating Accident-Management Capabilities," prepared by G. Boyd (SAROS). August 1989.

Actior:s, Agreements and Comitments The Subcomittee agreed to have a presentation for the Full Comittee at the November 10-18, 1989 meeting in regard to the NRC Staff activities in the accident managerrent areas. The topics to be discussed will be l

the proposed Generic Letter and the research plan.

i Discussion The ACRS previously discussed early draft documents in January 1989 that presented the Staff's plans for accident management regulation and i

research. At today's meeting, later drafts of these documents plus a.

NUPARC/EPRI document were the. bases for discussion.

l R. Palla (NRR) and L. Shotkin (RES) presented an overview and update of l

the NRC_ accident management (A/M) program.

The driving force behind this program is Generic Letter 88-20 " Individual Plant Examinations (IPEs)," in_which all licensees must comit to develop a framework for accidentmanagement(A/M)attheirplants.

The NRC program is intended f

8

Severe Accidents Mto Minutes September 20, 1989 i

l l

t to provide guidance for the A/M fremework and strategies. The research program is focused on an essessment of A/M strategies.

I i

R. P611a (NRR), T. Lee (RES) and W. Luckas (BNL) discussed the proposed j

supp1&ent to the Generic Letter and the assessment of candidate A/M i

strategies.

R. Falla indicated that 21 strategies had been identified and could be grouped into three global categories:

(1)conservingor replenishing limited resources, (2) using existing systems for l

innovative applications, and (3) defeating interlocks or overriding f

trips in emergency situations (e.g., reopening MSIV's in ATWS). He indicated that a revised draft of the proposed supplement would be ready about mid-Octcber with the intent to have it reviewed and issued l

in pecember 1989.

T. Lee discussed the elements and logic structure of

[

the strategies. His logic was more diagnostic than symptomatic which j

seemed to be in conflict with the rest of the Staff's. approach which emphasired the symptomatic.

W. Luckas presented a listing of the 21 i

strategies and briefly discussed their relationship to current require-I ments and prectices as well as possible adverse effects. The assessment

[

of these A/M strategics will be issued as a NUREG/CR report tentatively i

(

scheduled for December 1989.

H. Leuben (RES) discussed the goals and activities of the'A/M research program plan. As presented, the program plan was lacking in detail, only a general overview of what the plan hoped'to accomplish was given, r

R. Ng (NUMARC) and R. Oehlberg (EPRI) discussed the A/M activities supported by NUMARC that ere intended to assist the licensees in the performance of their IPEs.

R. Ng discussed the NUMARC Severe Accident Working Group (C. Reed, Chairman), its mission and personnel membership.

R. Oehlberg discussed the guidelines developed by SAROSlfor evaluation 4

of accident-management capabilities. The guidelines are best charac--

terized as flow charts (generalized pathways) for accidents. and accident-management (withsuccesspaths)andanoutlineforevaluating.

i i

c.

a g

O Severe 1ccidents htg Minutes September 20, 1989 accident management capabilities. The input to the process will come mostly from the IF'E, and the erstiers to the bevy of questions associated with information en accident-n.anagement capabilities. These questions are to be asked at each phtse of the postulated accident and are intended to be complete.

NUMARC has distributed the guidelines to the utilities and requested comments by October 15, 1989. The guidelines will then be revised and trial applications will be carried out at four volunteer plants (presumably by vendor type) during the first six months of 1990. Workshops with the utilities are anticipated. Tentatively, final ruidelines are expected by the end of summary 1990.

During the discussion, the Subcomittte Members and Consultants ex-pressedvariouscommentsandconcernsasfollows(randomorder):

(1)

W. Kerr indicated that the research program plan lacked definition which made it difficult to assess. He also noted that the Staff intended to make a finding that the licensees A/M capabilities met an acceptable standard and asked the Staff to define the standard.

RES did not have a specific standard but felt this was stated more in terms of a goal.

(2)

W. Kerr questicned why these A/M strategies were being developed by.

the Staff since the development of emergency operating procedures (EOPs) were being handled, with the Staff's endorsemnt, by the various NSSS owner's groups. During this discussions it became clear that some E0Ps extend into the accident management area.

(3)

C. Siess expressed a concern that by the implementation _of A/M strategies, a licensee would be operating in violation of their license and susceptible for a citation and large monetary fine. He asked if the Staff will provide relief from the license conditions and how will this be documented. Apparently, thir, issue is still I

under review.

i

I,,'

t 0

I fevere Accidents Mtg Itinutes September 20, 1989 (t)

1. Catton commented, in regard to the Staff's recommendations to defeat interlocks, that they shculd look at the regulations and determine how their proposed strategies fit in.

i (L)

P. Davis questioned NUKARC on whether they had developed criteria which would indicate when a licensee had done enough A/M planning.

i He indicated that there would alweys be a residual risk. NUMARC is studyir.g this aspect.

4 (6)

J. Lee expressed concerns that the event-based approach is bcing completely replaced by the symptom-based approach.

He recalled that the symptom-based approach was to be_used as e last resort after efforts with an event-based assessment had' failed.

NOTE:

Additional meeting details can be obtained from a transcript i

of this meeting available in the NRC Public Decument Room.

2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006,(202)634-3273, or can be purchased from Heritage Reporting Corporation, 1220 L Street, N.W., Suite 600, Washington, D.C. 20005,(202) 628-4888.

I F

f ACRS Severe Accidents Subconmittee Meeting September 20, 1989 Bethesda, Maryland

- Tentative Agenda -

Accident tianagement Topics l

A.

Sutectraittee Chairman Remarts W. Kerr, ACRS 8:30 am B.

NRCAccider.tManagement(A/M)

R. Barrett (NRR)/

8:45 am kegulatory ard Research L. Shotkins (EES) i Program:

Update C.

A/E Generic Letter Supplement R.Palle(NRR) 9:30 am 88-20 and Schedule

• • • Break ***

10:00-10:15 am D.

Assessment of Candidate Aill T. Lee (RES)/

10:15 am Stratroies J. Lehner (BNL)

E.

A/t! Research Program Plan N. Lauben (RES) 11:15 em j

• • • Lunch ***

12:15-1:15 pm F.

Guidelines for Evaluating R. Ng (NUMARC)/.

1:15 pm A/M Capabilities R.Oehlberg(EPRI)

• • • Break ***

3:15-3:30 pm G.

Subcomittee Discussion W. Kerr 3:30 pm-ar.d Plans for Full Comittee Presentation H.

Adjourn 4:00 pr.

L I

i J

NRC ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT REGULATORY AND RESEARCH PROGRAMS:

UPDATE I

-)

i O

R. BARRETT,.NRR j

L. SHOTKIN, RES i

l l.

l ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING SEPTEMBER 20,1989 j

i l

l l

.I l

i

~

l

f i

FUNDAMENTAL OBJECTIVE l

]

OF ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM i

i i

TO HAVE EACH NRC LICENSEE IMPLEMENT AN ACCIDENT M^NAGEMENT_.

y PLAN WHICH PROVIDES A FRAMEWORK FOR:

1

'l i

EVALUATING INFORMATION ON SEVERE ACCIDENTS i

I PREPARING AND IMPLEMENTING SEVERE ACCIDENT OPERATING PROCEDURES AND GUIDANCE i

TRAINING OPERATORS, TECHNICAL SUPPORT STAFF, s

AND MANAGERS IN THE PROCEDURES / GUIDANCE i

r s

l i

j

.i I

i l

s b

9 f.

I I

i

?

t l

I I

e

..c,....

..~4,,-----,-.,-..-,.,.-,v..

.,,.,y, m

---%m.

l 1.

ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK.

l i

e PRINCIPAL MILESTONES DEFINE FRAMEWORK CONCEPT AND ELEMENTS SECY-89-012 REVIEW NUMARC/EPRI GUIDELINES FOR A/M IN PROGRESS l

DEMONSTRATE GUIDELINES (INDUSTRY) 1989-1990 l

PRESENT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN TO l

COMMISSION SUMMER 1990 ISSUE GENERIC LETTER ON ACCIDENT

' MANAGEMENT F ALL'.1990 i

i

• ASSOCIATED ACTIVITIES RES PROJECT ON FRAMEWORK (INEL)

FURTHER DEFINITION OF ATTRIBUTES GUIDANCE ON IMPLEMENTATION j

OBSERVATION OF INDUSTRY PROGRAMS a

I NORTHEAST UTILITIES CORPORATE SUPPORT INPO CASUALTY CONTROL DRILLS i

i EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS EXERCISES l

l 1

l.

l t

l i

l I

i l

b L

l 1

---

.a-

-- a m..

-- e+e w.

pe a-i:w

+i-c.-w

-s-p-

-.-.q y

c

.y-y w

p.re

-m-

,. app-s-

a 2.

ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES l

i l

l

?

I IDENTIFY AND EVALUATE ' LESSONS LEARNED" FALL 1989 ISSUE SUPPLEMENT TO IPE GL 88-20 FALL 1989 l

EVALUATE ADVANCED STRATEGIES (RES)

ONGOING t

ISSUE ADDITIONAL STRATEGY-GUIDANCE AS NEEDED i

I 1

i E

i l

l l

1 I

l 4

i

~

+

RESEARCH ACTIVITIESL 1

REPORT BY BNL/PNL ON " ASSESSMENT OF CANDIDATE ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT-STRATEGIES"-

(~

(DRAFT NUREG/CR DOCUMENT)-

ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT RESEARCH PLAN (DRAFT NUREG DOCUMENT)

INTERNATIONAL COORDINATION GERMAN /US YEARLY MEETING CSNI PWG-2 IAEA COORDINATED RESEARCH PROGRAM-

• UPDATE ON SPECIFIC PROJECTSL DEPRESSlJRIZATION-REACTIVITY ACCIDENTS INFORMATION NEEDS A/M PROGRAM FRAMEWORK e

r v

q NRR STAFF PRESENTATION TO THE a

ACRS 1

j 1

J

SUBJECT:

Generic Letter supplement on Accident Managenent Strategies DATE:-

Septer.be r 20, 1939 l

PRESENTER:

Robert L. Palla, Jr.

t I

l-PRESENTER'S TITLE / BRANCH /DIV:

Senior Reliability & Risk Analyst.-

t Risk Applications Branch a

Division of Radiation Protection-i and Emergency Preparedness j

Office. of Nuclear Reactor Regulation PRESENTER'S NRC TEL. NO.:

1 492-1076 u

SUBCOMMITTEE:

Severe Accidents a

l' j

l l-l

(

-i

-l

\\

p..

l ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES 21 STRATEGIES FOR FURTHER ENHANCING EMERGENCY OPERATING PROCEDURES ARE IDENTIF IED IN SECY-89-012 STRATEGIES FALL INTO 3 GLOBAL CATEGORIES 1.

CONSERVING OR REPLENISHING LIMITED RESOURCES 2.

USING EXISTING SYSTEMS FOR INNOVATIVE' APPLICATIONS 3.

DEFEATING INTERLOCKS OR OVERRIDING TRIPS. IN EMERGENCY SITUATIONS (E.G., REOPENING MSIV'S IN ATWS).

THESE STRATEGIES ARE BEING FURTHER EVALUATED FOR POTENTI AL "DOWNSIDES" ANDFORFEASIBILITY(RES)

EVALUATION WILL BE PUBLISHED AS A NUREG/CR GENERIC LETTER SUPPLEMENT WILL PROVIDE STRATEGIES AND NUREG/CR TO j

UTILITIES FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION DURING THE PERIOD WHEN THE=IPE IS BEING PERFORMED d

I p

?

4 4

s e

n 4

v..,, ',,'

GENERIC LETTER-SUPPLEMENT THIS LETTER DOES:.-

TRANSMIT PRA INSIGHTS WITH AN EVALUATION OF THEIR BENEFITS AND POTENTIAL ADVERSE-EFFECTS (NUREG/CR)

REQUEST THAT LICENSEES EVALUATE A/M STRATEGIES IN CONJUNCTION' WITH THEIR IPE

.THIS LETTER DOES NOT:

REQUEST ANY INFORMATION ABOUT CURRENT OR PROPOSED ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES (BEYOND~ WHAT GENERIC LETTER'88-20' REQUESTS) l IMPLY A REQUIREMENT TO IMPLEMENT ANY OF THE:STRATEGIESL l.

1 x

e-i

)

ie

September 5, 1989 ACCILTliT MANAGEMEl'T GENERIC LETTER SUPPLEMENT SCHEDULE-First r.ieeting with contrcctors regardirig A/M strategies 4/21 Rec;uest. to brief CRGR into concurrence 6/15 Draf t strategy evaluations to key reviewers 6/19 6/26529-Meeting with contractors and key reviewers Revised evaluations f or initial strategies 7/21 Revised evaluations for remaining strategies 6/14 Draf t t<bREG/CR to PRA Review Committee B/28 TTC staff review meeting

-9/7 PRA Review Committee fleeting 9/11 ACRS Subcommittee Meeting 9/2C Revised package to ACRS anc CRGR 10/16 Package into concurrence (Generic Letter and Draf t NUREG/CR) 10/16 Complete concurrence 10/31 y

ACRS meeting

,1 11/3 11/13.- CRGR meeting 11/20 Camera-ready copy Publish NUREG/CR 12/4

'12/4 Issue Generic Letter

. )

1 2

1 4

CANDIDATE ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES r

1 4

i

)

i T. LEE,!NRC/RES W. LUCKAS, BNL -

i I

i I

)

l l'

i l

t i

a n..

s.

___..___...;__.mn, _ _._

ELEMENTS C'F A/M STRATEGIES MAXIMUM USE OF EXISTING FACILITIES.

PREVENTION AS WELL AS MITIGATION.

MAY GO AGAINST CONVENTIONAL PRACTICES;.

CAREFUL STUDIES AND PREPLANNING NEEDED.

WILL REQUIRE ADDITIONAL PROCEDURES AND TRAINING;e ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR OPERATING STAFF.

SAFETY. OBJECTIVES OF INDIVIDUAL STRATEGIES ARE BETTER ILLUSTRATED IN THE ATTACHED : LOGIC: DIAGRAM.

m.,.

s

-m

.o...

-__.2..

u_..

m

._. _ _. =.. -

I

~-

10GIC STRUCIURE OF A/M STRATEGl[5

^

Safety Maintain Lore rConfaTriiiinf of]

Reactivity Functions In.lection and Coolinq

,Radioactivit,t_j Control l

(future)

I I

I I

Challenges Regular Injection Coolant Power Heat Sink Reactor Fails i

System Unavailable Insufficient Lust Lost to Shutdown i

Strategies Use alternate systems

-Conserve

-Conserve

.Re-establish

. Manual rod insertion-(Examples)

-Fire water system

-Throttle CS

-Shedding non-

-Reopen MSIV and

-CRD pumps, charging

-Isolation of ISL essenttal loads IBV Boration

-Initiate SLCS pumps

-Resupply Alternate

-Assure abundant

-Improve or prolong

-Resupply

-Portable battery '

-Condensate system.

boron supply for FW injection

-Alternate means availability of the

.-Refill RWST or CST charger.

-Crosstie of service of boroning system

-Ensure recirc.

-Replenish or

~ water to RHR

-Raise or defeat switch-over portable air / gas pump trips supply.

-Fire water to SG

-Maintain ECCS suction to CST Alternate sources Alternate sources

-Fire water

-crosstie to-available I

-Crosstie.

AC power sources

-Connection ~to

-Diesel fire pump rivers, reservoirs,

-Portable generator or municipal water

-Improve availability of power sources-

-Defeat trips of D-G i

.l i

4 6

i-a 4.em.m waua s..

-hs~

=.m-w-

IA m.s.e--

-~u..-

f ASSESSMENT OF CANDIDATE-ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES PRESENTED TO ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE ON SEVERE ACCIDENTS SEPTEMBER 20,-1989 i

BETHESDA,MD PRESENTED BY:

W.J. LUCKAS. (BNL) l l

[

CONTRIBUTORS:

J.R. LEHNER-AND J.J. VANDENKIEBOOM (BNL)

~R. TOKARZ AND W.B. SCOTT. (PNL) 9

-r

,c_..-

U

)

u i

1 REACTOR COOLANT INVENTORY i

MAINTENANCE REFILL-RWST 'NITH BORATED WATER,-OR CST WITH CONDENSATE.

J a

REDUCE CONTAINMENT SPRAY FLOW RATE TO-CONSERVE WATER FOR' CORE. INJECTION.

1 ASSURE APPROPRIATE RECIRCULATION SWITCH-OVER AND MANUAL INTERVENTION UPON FAILURE.

OF AUTOMATIC SWITCHOVER.

ENABLE EARLY-DETECTION, ISOLATION, OR OTHERWISE MITIGATE THE EFFECTS OF AN-INTERFACING SYSTEMS LOCA.

EXTEND ECCS AVAILABILITY BY SWITCHING L

PUMP SUCTION.

L l

USE OF CRD PUMPS (BWR) OR CHARGING-PUMPS (PWR) FOR CORE INJECTION.

USE OF ALTERNATE INJECTION (e.g., HYDRO TEST PUMP) WHEN RCP SEAL COOLING IS LOST.

1 o

a

't.

i.

DECAY lEAT REMOVAL-USE OF CONDENSATE, OR;STARTUP FEEDWATER-PUMPS FOR STEAM GENERATOR INJECTION.

'l REOPEN MSIVs. AND TURBINE BYPASS VALVES' TO REGAIN THE CONDENSER AS A.IlEAT SINK.

1 l

USE OF DIESEL-DRIVEN FIRE-WATER PUMP FOR l

CONTAINMENT SPRAYS, BWR CORE INJECTION, OR PWR STEAM GENERATOR INJECTION.

EXTEND RCIC AVAILABILITY BY TRIP l UNCTION I

CHANGE OR OVERRIDE.

t F

i ENABLE EMERGENCY CONNECTION-OF! RIVERS, l

RESERVOIRS OR MUNICIPAL 1 WATER. SYSTEMS TO~

4 l

SERVICE WATER OR FEEDWATER SYSTEMS.

[

ENABLE (EMERGENCY) CROSSTIE..OF SERVICE-WATER TO THE RHR SYSTEM-(BWR).OR FEED--

l WATER (PWR).

1 i

j 4

ir j'

1 i

._....O_.-..;..

.. - - -.- i

+

1 s

REACTIVITY CONTR_QL i

ENSURE ABUNDANT SUPPLYTOF BORATED 4

MAKE-UP.FOR LONG-TERM ACCIDENT CONTROL.

e INITIATE SLCS;lN CASE OF POTENTIAL CORE DAMAGE AND GUARD: AGAINST BORON DILUTION WHEN! CORE INJECTION IS RESTORED.

j l

l i

=

w,

.~g y

4y,s

,... + - ---

,wie

SUPPORT SYSTEMS RELATED:

ELECTRIC POWER. AIR / NITROGEN I

CONSERVE BATTERY CAPACITY BY SHEDDING NON-ESSENTIAL LOADS.

USE OF PORTABLE BATTERY CHARGERS OR OTHER POWER SOURCES TO RECHARGE STATION BATTERIES.

USE OF DIESEL GENERATOR OR GAS TURBINE a

GENERATOR TO DRIVE CRD PUMPS FOR CORE INJECTION.

ENABLE EMERGENCY CROSSTIE OF AC POWER BETWEEN TWO UNITS OR TO ONSITE GAS TUR-BINE GENERATOR.

ENABLE EMERGENCY BYPASS OF PROTECTIVE R

TRIPS FOR DIESEL GENERATORS AND INJEC-i TION PUMPS.

ENABLE EMERGENCY REPLENISHMENT OF AIR SUPPLY, FOR SAFETY RELATED AIR OPERATED COMPONENTS.

a

D '

USE OF CONDENSATE OR STARTUP FEEDWATER PUMPS-FOR STEAM GENERATOR INJECTION (PWR)

~

MAY BE ACCOMPLISHED BY REDUCING STEAM GENERATOR

-PRESSURE, ' OPENING FEEDWATER ISOLATION VALVES, AND ACTIVATING: CONDENSATE OR STARTUP PUMPS MAY HELP IN SITUATIONS WHERE MAIN AND AUXILIARY FEEDWATER PUMPS ARE UNAVAILABLE, BUT NORMAL AC POWER IS STILL AVAILABLE

• THESE ARE LOW HEAD ~AND, IN THE CASE OF THE STARTUP i

PUMPS, LOW VOLUME PUMPS MOST OF THE PLANT EOPs EXAMINED CONTAINED STEPS FOR SG INJECTION VIA-fCONDENSATE PUMPS

• - CONCERNS: -REESTABLISHING FEEDWATER TO A HOT, DRYL SGLCAN RESULT IN EXCESSIVE THERMAL. STRESSES

1.

REOPEN MSIVs AND TURBINE BYPASS VALVES TO RE-GAIN MAIN CONDENSER AS-HEAT SINK (BWR AND PWR)

MAY BE ACCOMPLISHED BY MAINTA!NING CONDENSER VACCUUM, EQUALIZING PRESSURE ON BOTH SIDES OF MSIVs IN MSLs, DRAINING AND WARMING MSLs AND CLEARING AND RESET. TING ISOLATION SIGNAL MAY BE-HELPFULTOR THOSE SITUATIONS WHERE THE MAIN

- CONDENSER IS AVAILABLE-(i.e., CIRCULATING WATER AND VACUUM PUMPS ARE AVAILABLE), AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH CAUSED ISOLATION ARE~ CORRECTED OR CAN BE TOL-ERATED SEVERAL:OF THE BWR AND PWR EOPs EXAMINED CONTAINED

- PROCEDURAL STEPS FOR REOPENING MSIVs and.TBVs-CONCERNS:

- MANYl COMPLICATED STEPS INVOLVED.

AUTOMATIC ISOLATION CAPABILITY' LOST DURING-REST OF ACCIDENT-

- POSSIBLE' CONDENSER-FAILURE-O 6b-.,.

m_..-

m 4

.ms.

b,

- - - - - ~ _, -.

E.

sa-

.: - y l

NRC ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT 1

RESEARCH PROGRAM PLAN i

l 1

1 I

i i

i a

l l

i i

I l

l G.N. LAUBEN,. RES i

l l

.l i

i.

ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING-SEPTEMBER 20, l1989 L

k 4

i i

i 1-

~'

GOALS OF -A/M RESEARCH PROGRAM

?

(1) TO ASSURE THAT RESEARCH PROGRAMS RELATED TO ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT PROVIDE INFORMATION ON SEVERE ACCIDENT CHARACTERIZATION ~THAT WILL ENABLE ~ EVALUATION' 'OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A WIDE RANGE OF CREDIBLE ACTIONS i

l (2) TO ESTABLISH THOSE ATTRIBUTES OF: A PLANT SEVERE ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM :WHICH i

I

- ASSURE EFFECTIVE RESPONSE TO CREDIBLE SEVERE ACCIDENTS (FRAMEWORK) l

~

f (3) TO PROVIDE A DETAILED ASSESSMENT OF CANDIDATE l

SEVERE-ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES THAT MAYi BE 'USED. BY LICENSEES l

l-(4) TO PROVIDEJGUIDANCE FOR-NRC ASSESSMENT OF-THE-

< CAPABILITIES OF FUNCTIONAL = PLANT SEVERE j

ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS.

l j-1 i

9 e-l j

l:

~-

NRC SEVERE ACCIDENT PROGRAM IPE Review O

Resolve INDIVIDUAL

. Conduct IPEs Outstanding i Ci sure issues XAM NATION

• Plant Specific _

y j

Modifications p

a a

a i

+-------------

CONTAINMENT

• Mark l Plant l

}

PERFORMANCE Specific Mods IMPROVEMENTS a

l PROGRAM j

Mark I Others.

l 1

i containment l

i Recommendations l

t i

4--g-----------------d-g---------------

y---

ACCIDENT issue IPE Issue A/M Generic

• Develop Ongoing i

MANAGEMENT Generic Letter on l

1 Plant Closure implement Evaluation PROGRAM Letter Framework,'etc.

Specific A/M of U'ility I,

Supplement A/M Plans on A/M i

a A/M Pland Capability Strategies 4-

• NUMARC Guidelines

- - ~

a d

---

~~-------------

~~~

j RESEARCH SARP PRA l

- PROGRAMS.

A/M, F[weign, Continuing Research Human Factors, j.

• Industry Activities

" Industry /NRC Activity 4

.i 8

.i s

..r,,

s.

~

.,__..,e

TABLE.1 A/M RESEARCH PROGRAM PLAN.' FY 90-94 ~

~

o.

90 91-92 93 94

~

I' I DIRECT SUPPORT FOI; REGULATORY ACTIVITIES A.

SUPPLEMENT TO IPE GENERIC LETTER B.

-A/M GENERIC LETTER ON FRAMEWORK C.

AUDIT GUIDANCE t

II.

EVALUATE A/M STRATEGIES 4

A.

-PRIMARY DEPRESSURIZATION B.

ADDING WATER TO DAMAGED CORE C.

IN-VESSEL STRATEGIES' D.

- EX-VESSEL STRATEGIES

'E.

DEPRESSURIZATION STRATEGIES ~

F.

NATURAL CIRCULATION.*

~

b III.-1 EVALUATE UNCERTAINITIES A.

ASSESS STRATEGIES AND UNCERTAINTIES *'

B.

IN-VESSEL UNCERTAINITIES 3

C.

A/M FOLIDW-ON.TO NUREG-1150 * ~

IV. - IMPLEMENTATION AND AUDIT' A.

A/M. PLANT. EXERCISES B.-

FRAMEWORK: EVALUATION

.; C. :. IMPLEMENTATION CRITERIA

• D.

'A/M ANALYSIS AIDS

• Co d aci SeleNion pro cess ~ MN ce p!ede

~

\\

1 4

i U. S. NUCLEAR-INDUSTRY. ACTIVITIES-L FOR

~

DEVELOPMENT OF ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS 1

PRESENTED TO THE ACRS SEVERE ACCIDENTS SUBCOMITTEE

~

BY RAYM0ND N. NG, MANAGER u

TECHNICAL. DIVISION i

l NUCLEAR MANAGEMENT AND RESOURCES COUNCIL-l l

SEPTEMBER 20, 1989 J

i l

}

=

i

_......,.,.....,.. _... _.,..,..... - _. _,. ~. -..

.i

' ' ~ * -

1 H

NUMARC j

SEVERE ACCIDENT WORKING GROUP-1 MISSION STATEMENT j

k TO COORDINATE INDUSTRY ACTIVITIES AND SERVE-AS.THE FOCAL POINT FOR-INDUSTRY /NRCl INTERACTIONS'IN-ATTAINING RESOLUTION AND CLOSURE OF THELSEVERE ACCIDENT ISSUE, INCLUDING:

-i O

INDUSTRYz ' RESPONSE ANDLIMPLEMENTATION'0F THE NRC'S GENERIC LETTER ON: IPES

~

l-L 0

DEFINITION, DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION I

OF SEVERE ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS) i.

0 CONSIDERATION OF1THE.NEED~FOR INDIVIDUAL-

[

PLANT EVALUATIONS OF' EXTERNAL EVENTS;;ANDJ r

l THE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION 0F j'

APPROPRIATE METHODOLOGIES, IF NECESSARY 3-4 i

THE: WORKING GROUP WILL ALSO FOCUS ON INDUSTRY /NRC

[

DIALOGUE ~AND DEVELOP INDUSTRY-POSITIONS, AS NECESSARY,- FOR:

CONTAINMENT PERFORMANCE', SAFETY-

[

. GOAL IMPLEMENTATION, AND SOURCE, TERM RESEARCH.

[

i.

i e

i I

i-

~

SEVERE ACCIDENTLISSUES INDUSTRY ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT APPROACH:

o USE IPE RESULTS AND OTHER INFORMATIONi(E.G.

IDCOR, EPRI, NRC) AND UNDERSTANDINGS AS A GUIDE FOR INTEGRATED DEVELOPHENT OF PLANT-SPECIFIC ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS-o FULLY UTILIZE RESOURCES AVAILABLE1T0; PLANT STAFF, E.G.:

SUPPLEMENTAL-TECHNICAL STAFF-TRAINING II NON-SAFETY RELATED EQUIPMENT.

UTILIZATION j

4 RECOVERY OF FAILED-EQUIPMENT j

1 y

~. y SEVERE ACCIDENT ISSUES-L ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT o

NRC GENERIC ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES TO BE EVALUATED AT THE SAME TIME AS IPE INSIGHTS

~

o SCOPE OF ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT TO INCLUDE ONLY 3

THOSE ACTIONS TAKEN.AND/0R PREPARATIONS TO SUPPORT ACTIONS TAKEN DURING THE COURSE 0F SEVERE ACCIDENTS BY THE PLANT-STAFF L

o GUIDELINES WHICH PROVIDE A METHODOLOGY FOR l

EVALUATION OF A UTILITY'S ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT CAPABILITIES AND IDENTIFICATION OF FURTHER POSSIBLE PROCEDURAL AND/OR HARDWARE ENHANCEMENTS l

t o

EACH UTILITY T0 DEVELOP OWN DECISION CRITERIA-FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT ENHANCEMENTS H

o TECHNICAL GUIDANCE AND/0R METHODOLOGY'FOR HANDLING SPECIFIC ACCIDENT STATES BEING DEVELOPED, AS APPROPRIATE, SEPARATE FROM THE.

NUMARC ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT; GUIDELINES i

o

' IDENTIFY LEAD PROJECTS FOR EARLY IMPLEMENTATION OF ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT

~

PROGRAMS AND OBTAIN NRC COMMITMENT FOR-PROMPT REVIEW

>,_" t

_ y '.

.. ~.

~

i i

NUMARC ACCIDENT' MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT l.

1

(

o

' PREPARATION OF DRAFT NUMARC GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATroN COMPLETED 1

0F ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT CAPABILITIES l

l I

I o

SAWG AND AHAC REVIEW 0F-GUIDELINES

' COMPLETED i

l l

0 ISSUE' GUIDELINES Fon BROAD INDUSTRY'AND STAFF REVIEW COMPLETED

~

o INITIATE PILOT DEMONSTRATIONS'0F GUIDELINES JAN 90 o

ISSUE FINAL NUMARC GUIDELINES.Fon INDUSTnY.USE-AUs'90 4

e 1

,;_,..m..

.,.. ar

EPRl/NPD Guidel~ines for Evaluation of Accident Management Capabilities 1

ACRS Meeting Washington, D.C.

September 20,1989 Richard.Oehlberg EPRI Safety Performance Program j

l Gary Boyd i

l SAROS Safety Technology Dept.

Accident Management Richard Gh i

t.

I l

EPRl/NPD Nature of the Accident Management Program Guidelines u

o Outline minimum content anc general j

steos e

'centify desirable attributes.o" steas i

3rovic'e examples to i ustrate how steps e

s.gy oe imolemented i

Out ine potential pitfalls in imp'ementing e

steos NOT prescriptive o" saecific o

L im o'ementa': ion acaroach i

Safety Technology Dept.

Accident Management Richard h

i F

l 1

'.', 1...

j EPRl/NPD -

Proposed Industry i

Accicent Management j

Approach a

t y,,,m,,m,,,,,,,,,m m,,,,m,, m,mnm,,,mm m,m,-

_mumammummannanmanammaman j

! NUMARC Guidelines for the Evaluation:of a

Accident Management Capabilities; 1

j 2mnmmm ms mm,mmmw_,s__,,m

=, -

numanunnummmmmmmmera f;

$ccide(nh%anag 4

4 Wpmengush:em.

e Ws

1. Utility writes / plans:

$s utility / plant-specific F

g$.$w Evaluation of Accident Management i

h Capabilities:

s e

m

[

g,~e

2. Utility / plant specific Evaluation of Accident Management; 1

[

Capabilities.

(Assessment implemented):

l

=

Accident Management Program (List of Enhancement Options to be implemented)

~,

L j

Safety Technology Dept, q

I n

Accident Management

.}

Richard h

i s

i.

i e

. <

: s 1

4 1

4 11 D

I k !lI 1

.I t

g

+.

k 7

l 1 Agnih[j 1

l' ll i i

j 1*b f~j I #

td i

~

I,

t

%w l

^

k pr l

j

! /

9 II

q l

w l

l l

1 gh<

$5by/IL - %;.,.e

^ ' ^ '

v su 1

' AtM

\\

yg 1

x<

)

,- q j

1

';:':; aw....r m.

W j<< -M.s?R M 13

,l,

1, 3;

-~

x_ay

?. 'g C

k i

I M9 A

.~-

.cid&

m) 23:4

{)

~

/

u 4

emw e

am.uw J%m.~.;.4 c-E I

h.

nw>

t q'3 '4fIOsd

$t f

Ji*

j

M

Q49%3

'$Q mW t

• ?

• )* dQN,Pl A'

l 5

~*

ng

~

g e

-m.,

' p8 3 K

.s :n g

h Y

)

g

%L jj bg s

i 1

t a

ar_--,,+,,,---,,.,

+,-----.--,-w,,,

---...---.>,----.---,n-.

.--n--.

---s.

- ~,-

n.----- ~ ~. - -. ~ - - - ~ ~. - - - - - > - - -. - - -

y

.*a' EPRl/NPD i

i j

Accident Management Capabilities L

l I

e Systems and eInformation j

Equipment Resources 1

oRestoration oProcedures and 1

and Reaair Guidance olnstrumentation oTec1nical Inf rmation oUse of A :erna:ives oProcess Information-e Personnel Resources j

l OTraining l

oOrganization l

oCommunication i

i Safety Technology Dept.

j

=

9 l

I anest i Accadent Management Capabiblies i f I P U

Personnel 8yetems and Irdermoson Rosewees Equipment Rosewees T

r m

Commweesten I f L

J ehesti r

3 orgeNamnen U

L J eheeta r

' TraininD' '

o evanhotrW

_n;mempere:,cwenemme unseresame 4

r wnomem tsr em asonennt le ve iaw W averese prwoed h eurme espresnes?

l r

shouwa+m-as eenhe he erweesregmene es esnare wee st esmans om mipite f

regnestreeweelemewet

p isessesnelvehhemtusenevoserenames opnemsandendemameseWee,eds i.

eewetshambeennennweevemet i

Doeemandeskoveuveedsome s.m-r** man,.hdmecendeme r

hasans emee sore me S, eveasc essess m eedsmem en s hesL Ngh i

redemon messeteassesemne smnesspegesapasarlses, cenerere en nunter ami egerees of evabble paramnol, see.t le owe e espnense meshomem ier teedhetem espetenen som smwhen murasse sulotheretsasevennepregam?

Areeenesoseemesansruserecoveryacesnecan6asseene merchedande r

ensowees hnmesve veuem on eo pet erse apessss ond esur phro peaanst 4

le esangrene enhhegraldsdtr eds we W esenstetrtechniad espatpesennert j

Are vehse sw apreses asse W semenons deems einmassedh reese ter== hem l

pavepserendess amenme. psreswhrey ttadneem aanseenne st emare emo enseget heepairemahishendesmiewisneermadeeremost s

leadsageektigeendamnedmareelse 6eeven>

k ecadent phenomen, andle here e medianism terinebsheh new knadu%pt i.edegesetehmgposedsstre8 -

.. _ j ;;pesanneledhmgedte imessans erinseumenemon ewsmmmermann esom ecadem onademet g

J Emmip!s Qassnon Smsener Relanlag so PanuenslRasosecar l

. < a,s v]

)

Personnet i

neeeween A

A i

= I

=1

-I 9

r 7

Trumrg 1

L J

U r

i Organtastion #

' "2 uenr e,w eeseswe metaseneswyeenedteeeenphensem esmeent? How boeke aseawwnekte been despisted?,

i N

preanner been eessawy end eeneseeney reesse m appemem preamst?

ue esser mMmen made ter bypesang e egoeme eenNereen esweb udies 7

essrieness uner prende swisenu e tueunereemory ergeer Weospmenet Neve ensemes meeswee bees sken = enews evetebbly of peesmalmes partede i

egress?

d i

somsrommng m atery treepewm aher esenwise?

b J

l r

5 f Communleetion

~

m

~

ra mm enenene. wo menno ver emmwussten weni mo pam p mn=n w onew reem wWesementspreers)odeemos a ponds essapireWesseury endrepair estene?

a ymeds testeek reWme inipest of estene?

Are to ties W esmmwdneten beteen to eenreireem and me teePrusalmapet eener ed elspur emagensyrespews and plenrhg tes0tes edeemis ter 9de esenwoo?

he edeems ymelene made ter commmmedenseWi tw generalellee and siy seer.

I i

eashenspetinuene?

g P

nessenry >dermeten est he twenused ed appupues harvatenrossivedwWima sherusten?

L J

Exeriple Question Seaware Relating so Persommel Resowcar (conanned) l

i

• i %

j L

1.

sheet t i

M6L.; u.- +.=.

r&

\\

1 4

1 U

U U

Paramel ersteme and irdrmsten Rosewees Equipment i

meesween 1

t r

3 l

istumentunen l

1f L

J eheet t r

[

n.p.ir.no n tor.u n-

~e,wo -

em,en.,

e.to

-..e.m -

i reper eing tustype eteconene?

l t

u speepenerewee.m ne mwww.sausumine.smotemenesseorys, l

l reper aroomgrytrNo esadernt i

corsper smoons newswy estese ve sasse w te mosesm.tr emnwe e mmes dmeceume esahowour?

t le sea.= eme evenous a meme deerodrees beene en ese beoem memanist L

J h

I Us.of Alternatives 3

are owe seer emeeng sysseme mai eeuw be mene eenmus s teek, emmy eyeisme m reneutdeh eure essangtur mis type of somenet l

Heve me poesnesi speans ter use W egement tem anser wel enste been eenudsed i

endoptmead?

i cadd oemhe symeme be used dnerensy tn esnummern w e hestranmeft l

are ensmate maans tr aneemmetenes W aepen symeme svaasmet.

i l

HesP M M Weem h eyetm be M 9Tsu$l asenN F4WenWW

[

I (e 4, padssun W a speel pines ter eenneseg arour weier pump)?

t Are9tWe MM9tdMbeMMIeMMNWD

{

me see eder sendent sendesne (i.e., tem enemer plant, tre espurgnent, ses.)?

l l

Are cee mdgesve eseene mm ehmed be senmered h eennes metwoulWeehme te eeneemsness of me esaden. tem to wed amese eveugh n em pened enn eenre ese l

demose has essweed(venWit weenr embes, ses.)?

1 1

(

)

Emmnple Question Strucanrefor Syssems and Eqanipment d

I i

l o

$g

?

o l

l MO 1

4 l

o l

=

I

'tll::= 1 1

i

)

r Systemt end

{

t r

r mopet and meaneresen v

J U

r 3

Use of Atemstves L

J l I r

J'(a

, ~, -

. ~,,

InStrumentellen oe ter rurumene neesesry m assen amans w som pose w v. emesse mean n net. sen scher esarg estumens te usesm ede mowerepremonest

J aI he rengue wW imlessons of Durumanusen we to sendiene af to eseht wuhreises I

trytoeenrWesem m R?

I

• byto mennewoosenpesennen e

N M mIW W M % ) M M M i

terumanusensheaseas. eendesne?

I' What if any, smor plwu merumenutwi osuW w h and m5guden estene l

a n,,es

. es no, i.

L 2.

Exmple Quarion saucaerfor sysanna and War (conninued)

...+4'

. o Shed 1 Accidert Managemera Capabiuties If I f 1I Personnel Systems and informellen Resources Equipmert

• " - ptesourses

]

4 I I f

r m,wmg yu -

7 i

Are there aosquets wntten procedures or other gudanos (i.e., alrelegies) for au phases of l

I this type of scenano, from the inkistion of the anoWent twough to esvere core damage and j

l l

the potential for release of redenuchdas from containmentt Are the emergency operating procoeures in the control room edequately esplink regeneng h

necessary accons without toene unduly bureened try e: hor peastie accono unear i

severe-acometa condsons?

k le the point sufflaiency clear et which emergency operating precedures ne longer diresey apply and severe-anonsort guidance trem the technical support conter er other support eleN comes into prawnenes?

?t I

Do the procedures and other guidanos adequetely retteet ounent understanding of l

severe-aandent behaver including the posette plant eenemons foliswing esvere sore t

der age?

}

i Are enamones preassures w athw guidance necessary m inomene une of asemedve systems and equement, or to indisste when to ir plement other emergenor opereelne l

Procteures or severo eenesent guidennes?

l Are the presseures summienty asser such ther they can be irmismented oonocey and rehawy in the time trames of intween sw this type of econertet Are measures in pinos to keep presseures in support tenedes upto esset l

Are precedures and other guidanos adequesey eenned to support ^ ".,n _'.,,

^

2 eesider

" " n and temenstient Y

L re -

l t

r Process intermellen L

J t

anseri 1I l

F 3

Technicoliniermselon C

J aneeta r

i Esample Saucantefor Quation Regarnfing hfornaation Raourcu j

i i

l

4

,. e vl sheera i

j

=.=_

l I

.a' 4

2 m.. Moesuress -

i o

r proneeresand J

y F

D l

Process Information

1. e necesary news ens van 6cenen rdenens evehbe a m spessre W ensh phone wtoesmesm?

7; he mee edesnons u heepenedha posesses end eadmest r

x is ensome wwmenon eveneme w pdp to posse end nessen in,em af endens uken ene,ensh phase.mshdna ter amenose.

.weenrlevets and towrese?

u esmenmen yeen,et.

r hytogen eensentstwo?

s rescur sestameyuemempestaaet e

wmperseses ri me BCS, h esenment endin key uses of to aspethedny i

vet osum tw manced e hearig ionseg severe one esment r

r,- h pism eene rsare, essesstey, m wes as h esenhment

>c j

i 1

l

• e spireensm irmenre mes o perwherwousen Whessmenewun esmesse may to manes en nemef range Wherumem app 6mmanyt Hen enensse usse Wesem

{

J herumwqueen bewi erodred er erMe need alsrc tetablest q

h F

Technicalinformation 7

he techneeltesaroos neeeed try fie apersenne auR and by to espert sWI evehMe h l

aemely manner,maksdrig

1. surige $ e.. phong and herumenenen d. yams, leysul endngs, elessical eW andelsmenenes)?

syssem siseyi vid aparaten doesgewet toehrussimapsident suanded metiedsterimmrsoleddene?

5 Are tesfriissirsomrese needed try to aparatene and appsi stds kept merent, Dessem mapart sun how east essee s key seeeey enehens. hshatig soulem enWysseregensis eenden beheart esinessene % possess negssa sense W partner essent

(

esemuse er esnapunent erungm a sseet h esennhe edeland assenet r

bMh%D9 eph WII@MWoWMU h

i sashphasesfeweesswersee evuestie?

r u

l De adsstaste espebOlee suist er partemhgindlesi selsulidene debe fw condenttur key l

esademphenomenet t

-)

zan,pe sacnaator omniou nonrains 14omsmion nuoww (cominue L

L r

~ _ _ _ _, - _ _ _... _ _. _. _ _ _ _.._,_ __.- -.__,..__._ __,...

,.m _ y,,,., -,., _

-,,_m..,~,...

,.m

4.:'.. -

~

EPRl/NPD l

l e Guidelines issued in DRAFT l

form l

e Feedback from industry at large l

facili':ated l

eTrial applications to provide important 'eedbac< for final guide ines Safety Technology Dept.

gio.niuan.m.ni aiahardog* f l

. -. -. -. -. -.