ML20028C927
| ML20028C927 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 01/12/1983 |
| From: | Hannon J, Rowsome F Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (RES) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20028C925 | List: |
| References | |
| ISSUANCES-SP, NUDOCS 8301140317 | |
| Download: ML20028C927 (9) | |
Text
.
,l
-- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING 1
In the Matter of Docket Nos. 50-247-SP j
50-286-SP CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY 0F NEW YORK (Indian Poin t-F' POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OFOF NEW YORK (Ind DIRECT TESTIMONY OF FRANK R0WSOME A CONCERNING COMISSION QUESTION _2 ility with Mr. Rowsome, state your name, position and general respo
-Q.1 the NRC.
I am Deputy Director of the Division My name is Frank H. Rowsome, III.
h A.1 of Risk Analysis in the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Researc.
i
?
Have you prepared a statement of your professional qual 0.2 Yes, a copy of spy professional qualifications is attached.
A.2 State your name and position with the NRC.
I am Project Manager in the Operating Q.3 My name is John N. Hannon.
f Nuclear A.3 Reactors Branch No. 1 of the Division of Licensing, Office o Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission.
What are your responsibilities in.that position?
Q.4 W
8301140317 830112 P
- i 2--
d I have responsibility for managing the safety and,
A.4 In this capacity ncerning operating nuclear power i
. environmental reviews of actions co dinating-This includes the responsibility for planning and coor d in the reviews.
b plants.
the efforts of other NRR personnel involve 4
ualifications?
l Have you prepared a statement of your professiona q I
~
t hed Yes, a copy of my professional qualifications is at ac Q.5 A.5 to this testimony.
Q.6 What is the purpose of this testimony? ion Question 2 i
The purpose of this testimony is to respond to Com ss A.6 which reads, lt from measures "What improvements in the level of safety will resuto the Licens d
required or referenced in the Director's Or er dated February 11, What is meant by the Director's Order to the Licensee, 11, 1980?"
February Q.7 i
t Units 2 and 3 were 1980?
A number of changes in the operation of Indian PoinC A.7 mandated in the Confirmatory Orders issued to These b
ry 11, 1980.
Power Authority of the State of New York on Fe rua f Nuclear Reactor Orders were issued by the Director of the Office o Hence, they are called the Director's Orders.
Regulation.
11,19807 Q.8 What was the purpose of the Director's Orders February 11, 1980 to A.8 The Director issued the Confinnatory Orders of f these facilities while provide additional assurance of safe operation o i t their safety.
additional studies were under way to invest ga e p.--
a-w-
e--%
ew rw
-w w-y,w,-=,,ym-w
.e, ware.-++er vermee=='9'm
twaw N
v e
eu'w*=ve'im-W
.3-
=
Director's Orders.
Please highlight the content of thefollowing kinds.
Q.9 A.9 The Orders mandate changes of the ting, and maintenance.
Conduct of operations, surveillance tes i nts less frequent, s These orders are intended to make trans eency response 1.
(
safety systems more reliable, and emerg sive and reliable.
h r than one senior reactor Staffing These requirements mandate that two rat e and that the p 2.
t operator be on each shift in each plan,
be expanded.
i consultants available to the util ty teams are required to undergo
,S_taff Training t
Operators and onsite emergency responsefor severe r 3.
expanded and accelerated training as for normal operations.
Engineering Margins ooling system can limit core The margin by which the emergency core cLOCA acc 4.
temperature excursions during large tibility of the plant to Specific Studie_s A variety of special studies of the suscepthat the lice 5.
severe accidents was ordered to assureht be apprised of the ways their plant migfor further risk accidents and to explore options Director's Orders been ac Q.10 Have the risk reduction benefits of th ted?
1 yet or are further improvements expecin response to Co A.10 The risk estimates to be provided designed and operated since the and 5 reflect the plants as they are
~
m 4-We expect that the benefits of the Director's Orders' were implemented.
d Director's Orders will continue, but since the Orders have been im we expect no further improvements from them.
Q.11 Please sumarize your findings on the improvements in the resulting from the Director's Order.
A.11 We believe that the Director's Orders have achieved risk reduc ik we are unable to give a quantitative measure of the difference in r s..
There are two principal reasons we do not have a quantitative me the risk reduction:
Some of the measures contained in the Orders, particularly tho 1.
ing with staffing and staff training, cannot be evaluated by exis The state of the art in PRA is inadequate risk assessment techniques.
to relate the likelihood of operator error under accident conditions to the details of staffing or staff training.
Many other improvements in the design and operation of the plan l
2.
have been implemented during and after the imposition of the Thus, the difference in risk between the plants Director's Orders.
as they are designed and operated today and as they were desig and operated in 1979 or 1980 originates in many other complex changes, not just the Director's Orders.
Q.12 Whai. can be said about the risk-reduction e Orders?
A.12 It is our judgment that the improvements in staffing, staff tra pool of technical experts available to the utilities, and the spec V
5-es to operate the-i studies have improved the capabilities of the l cense The' likelihood that operators might fail 6 diagnose is smaller today than it plants safely.
severe reactor accident promptly and correctly devise a reliable is was three or four years ago, although we cannot 4
f quantitative measure for the change in risk. -
illance tests and The improvements in safety system design and in surve technical specifications has improved the re r system and the safety features, particularly the essential ac poweboundar auxiliary feedwater system, and the pressureThese ch pressure safety injection system.
f all ac power, likelihood of core-melt accidents originating in loss o
~
f oolant loss of feedwater, and some interfacing system loss-o -c hly,a This reduction was estimated in NUREG-0715 to be 1
This estimate is consistent with our updated an accidents.
factor of three.
d 3 for these accident of the risk posed by Indian Point Units 2 an d
However, the Indian Point Probabilistic Safety Stu cident sequences, sequences.
the Staff risk assessment have identified other acfires, an particularly those triggered by earthquakes, Therefore, the fference.
which these changes make little or no dis in safety system h
overall risk reduction attributable to the c ange design is less than a factor of three.
4 i
Question 2?
Q 13 Does this conclude your testimony concerning C f
A.13 Yes.
f y
.---y..
-+--.y
..vye.
w--
.e -c r-
-v
-. -, - _. ~ -,. -
-.,--..,ww-m-.,-w-a-e ee,w w
--*w wcw w w r ew---
';5. ~-:y..s
- i.y: ? %. ::i ' W: JfW i,. J7 c.*..
^
.. - a; ". -
(%
....m,...
)
PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS
' FRANK H. R0WSOME, 3rd U.S. NUCLEAR. REGULATORY ColWISSION I am Frank H. Rowsome 3rd, Deputy Director of the Division o'f Risk Analysis in I have served in that capacity since
. 1 the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research.
The work entails planning, budgeting, managing- -
. joining the NRC in July 1979.
Much of the work' of the Division is devoted.to and staffing the Division.
The remainder entails risk research in reactor accident risk assessment.
itssessment applied to non-reactor aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle and to standards development related to system reliability or risk.
I studied I received a bachelor's degree in physics from Harvard in 1962.
theoretical physics at Cornell, completing all requirements for a Ph.D except From 1965 to 1973, I taught and engaged in research for the dissertation in 1965.
in theoretical physics at several colleges and universities.
My initial In 1973 I joined the Bechtel Power Corporation as a nuclear engineer.
assignment was to perform accident analy.ses for nuclear plant license applicat After six months in that job. I was transferred to' a newly formed group of systems engineers charged with developing for Bechtel a capability to perform risk assess ments and system reliability analyses of the kind the NRC was then developi.ng for In that capacity I performed reliability ana' lyses of the Reactor Safety Study.
nuclear plant safety systems, developed computer programs for system reliability analyses, performed analyses of component reliability data, human reliability analyses, and event tree analyses of accident sequences. I; progressed from nuclear engineer, to senior engineer, to group leader, to Reliability Group In this last position Supervisor before leaving Bechtel to join the NRC in 1979.
at Bechtel, I supervised the application of engineering economics, reliability
Page 2 Frank H. Rowsome. 3rdProfessional Qualifications wer plant availability _ optimization r
engineering, and analysis techniques to po I
~
as well as nuclear safety analysis.
q ofLthe Division of Risk Analysis (and its
)l
. While serving as-Deputy Director Staff). I also served as Acting Director h
i anticedent, the Probabilistic Analys s ch (9 months) and acting chief (7 months), acting chief of the Reactor Risk Bran (4 months).
of the Risk Methodology and Data Branch view as well as'the manager's This experience has given me the practitioner sment entailing t view of those facits of reactor risk-assessi bility analysis, huma reactor accident sequences, system rel aikelihood of severe re I
analysis, and the estimation of the lactit'ioner's experience with have the manager's perspective but not the prent cha l sis, i
.those facits entailing conta nm ts of the nuclear fuel cycle.'
and risk assessment applied to other par hearing has been as coordinator i
My role in the development of testimony for th si k an of the preparation of testimony on r s I dian Point Probabilistic Sa technical critique of the licensee's " n of the Indian Point plants.
i I am not an expert on the design or operat on i
a 6
-,~-g n.--
-.,.-,.wm,,
, - _,,,,,, ~.
.,,,.,,,,,,..e my,w-,
.w.-
O q
List of Publications _
"The Role of System Reliability Prediction in Power Plant Design,"
F.H. Rowsome, III, Power Engineering, February 1977.
h 1.
y "How Finely should Faults be Resolved in Fault 2.
18, 1976.
Nuclear Association Joint Meeting in Toronto, Canada, June "The Role of IREP in NRC Programs" F.H. Rowsome, III. U.S. Nuclea 20555.
3.
Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
" Fault Tree Analysis of an Auxiliary Feedwater System," F.H. R 77 805-5.
Bechtel Power Corp., Gaithersburg Power Division, F 4.
e f
.r.Cr;:...?
^:
PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS OF_
JOHN N. HANNON OPERATING REACTORS BRANCH NO. 1 DIVISION OF LICENSING I am a Project Manager in Operating Reactors Branch No.1 of the Division of Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory In any present position, I have the responsibility, of managing the safety and environmental reviews of actions concerning o Commission.
coordinating the efforts of other NRR personnel involved in the reviews.
nuclear power plants.
I graduated from the United States Naval Acadenny in 1967 an Nuclear Power School in 1968.
of responsibility on board a Fleet Ballistic Missile the Deck Submerged.
From 1972 to 1974 I was employed by Combustion Engineering, Inc. as a Project Engineer responsible for che technical and administrative direct for design, specification,~and procurement of instrumentation, contro electrical systems for assigned projects. nation of planning, engine design for proposal plants.
In 1974 I accepted a position as Reactor Inspector for the Office of Insp In this capacity I was responsible for conducting and Enforcement, Region I.
inspections of facilities in the preoperational testing phase, power as From 1974 to 1977 I performed an average of 30 phase, and operations phase.I have had the opportunity to observe control room operations and plant response under both normal steady-state cond inspections per year.
I have witnessed seif-induced transients under pre-transient conditions.
operational testing conditions, and reviewed procedures governing ope response to anticipated operational events.
Division of Operating Reactors in the Office of Nu i
I received training in the operational technology associated with Boiling Water Reactors (BWRs) and served as a BWR Project Manager until to the Inclian Point Project in August 1981.
I have accumulated over 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br /> of math, computer, mechanical I am nuclear engineering graduate courses at various universities since 1973.
currently enrolled in a Systems Engineering Masters Degree Program the University of Southern California.
4 i
e
_.._...__..._._-_,....._,,__,_,_m.-.-.__.-
- _ _., _.,, _ _ -....,,