ML20043D808
| ML20043D808 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry, Pilgrim  |
| Issue date: | 09/08/1988 |
| From: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| References | |
| REF-GTECI-099, REF-GTECI-NI, TASK-099, TASK-99, TASK-OR ACRS-2603, NUDOCS 9006110196 | |
| Download: ML20043D808 (52) | |
Text
s l A [:*.
g g3-dt4dS pty' n/wNo s
lap
,[8)),.
a
]
r TABLE OF CONTENTS d'
N MINUTES OF THE 341ST ACRS MEETING SEPTEMBER 8-10, 1988 fag 1.
Cha i rma n 's Peport (0 pen).....................................
1
- 11. Decay Heat Removal - Resolution of Generic issue 99,
- Reliability of RHP Capability in PWRs" (0 pen)...............
I 111. Proposed P.ulemaking on Maintenance (0 pen)....................
A IV. ReviewofPilgrimPlantRestartEffort(0 pen)................
8 V.
NPCOuantitativeSafetyGoals(0 pen).........................
13 VI. ACRSPreceduresandPractices(0 pen).........................
13 V11. TVA Ma na gement/Les sons Learned (0 pen)........................
14 Vill. Restart of the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (0 pen)............
15 IX.
Hydrogen Control Requi rements (0 pen)........................
16 X.
InternationalOperatingExperience(0 pen)...................
17 XI.
SevereAccidentManagement(0 pen)...........................
19 X11. Eauipment Reliability / Valve Testing (0 pen)..................
20 X111. ACRS/ACNW Responsibility (0 pen).............................
21 XIV. Executive Sessions (0 pen / Closed)............................
21 A. Subcommi ttee Report s (0 pen)..............................
21
- 1. Operating incident at Savannah River Nuclear Plant (0 pen) 21
- 2. Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena (MIST and OTGS Programs)
(Postponed)...........................................
22 3.
IAEA International Conference on the Use of OperatingExperience(0 pen).............................
22 B.
Reports, Letters and Memoranda (0 pen)....................... 22 1.
Proposed Restart of the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station... 22 2.
Proposed Rulemaking Related to Maintenance of Nuclear Power P1 ants............................................
23 3.
Proposed Resolution of Unresolved Safety Issue A-45,
" Shutdown Decay Heat Removal Requi rements".............. 23 4.
Proposed Resolution of Generic Issue 99. " Improved Reliability of PHR Capability in PWRs"..................
24 b
5.
NRC Staff's TVA Lessons Learned Effort..................
2A S
9006110196 680908 DESIGNATED ORIGINAL i
2603 PDC uertified By_ ( Y [ @
m.---
.a
.i.
2
-m mil
cf a
6 i
11 C. Other Conclusions..........................................
24
- 1. ACR$ Nominating Contittee...............................
24
- 2. Plans for Future Actions on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Licensing Renewal................
24
- 3. Schedule for Peview of the Staff's Recommendations for BWR Mark 1 Containments.................................
24
- 4. Receipt of Rep. L. Alexander. House Chairman, Massa-chusetts Joint Committee on Energy Letter Regarding Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station...........................
25
- 5. Receipt of Sen. B. Mikulski (D.-Md.) Letter Forwarding County Council. Harford County, Marylard Letter Regarding Peach Bottom Nuclear P1 ant...............................
25 D. Future Activities..........................................
25
- 1. Future Agenda...........................................
25
- 2. Future Subcommittee Activities..........................
25 Supplement (Official Use Only) XIV C.1 Figure 1 - p. 3a Figure 2 - p. 15a Figure 3 - p. 20a i
'l'i a
.ma in
- 1 o
o i ii APPENDICES 341ST ACR$ MEETING SEPTEMBER 8-10, 1988 1.
Attendees 11.
Future ACRS Agenda
- 111, Future ACRS Subcommittee Activities IV.
Other Docunents Received
s y'T 4-MA$
e Q/%a i
163 Federal Register / Vol. 53. h 171/ Friday. Sepletnber 1.1 records schedule contains additional Operation 6f Safety Experience from Nuc.
- Plants.
the Urdted States Schedules alsoinformation about the neerth ed theirpp. > r:s of this senion will be closed authorise spricies after a specif;ed disposition. Further information about t
the dispostion process will be furnished a,, #wd to potect informahon period to dispose of records lackinged,wintstretive,lessi. rneaech, or other to each requester, source and to discusa clns&cd pta. ded b oonfidmc@ a lordgn salue. Nohte is pebbehed for records Schdules Pechg inforrngatkm g gg g schedules thet (1) propose the destruction of records rd p'eviously
- 1. Department of the Army (N1-7746-g antborized for d.spos al. or (2) reduce the 2) Raw data of the Corps of Engineers participationin ACRS meetings were retration penod for records already New England Division pe.taining to the pu%shed in me Federal RegW on
.In authonted for disposal. N ARA invites passernaquoddy tidal power prokck.
October 1.1987 (61 F1t 37241)dern, ont pubhc comments on each schedules as
- 2. Department of the Army (N1-AU.
acewdence wMi &m proce 1412) Civil Works project and
""'*"'uwmente may be p@ resented regnated 'ty 44 USC 3303(a).
oam pgests for copien must be operabons furt of the OInce of the Chie( by mmbus of he pMe.reco ngs "I"'d "0F
'""8 #N d.
mee ed m wntang on or before October of FAgir eers. (Significant corresponding "O P"f the anecting when a 17,*das Once the appraisalof the field offica records att designed for poruons o pt. and questions re.mrds la completed. N ARA orill send a permanent retention )
transertpt is being may be asked only merr.bers of the eopy of the schedule.The requester will3. Defense Intelligence Agency (N1 be grven 30 days to submit comments.
3'34&3). Routine and facibtauve Committee,fis etman ents, and Staff.
Address requests for single communicaUona records of the Defense Persons deshing to make oral Intelligtnre Agency.
statmmis soufd neuff the ACRS Ascaess:
copies of schedules 6 den!Med in this nouce to the Records Appretsal and
- 4. Cen< rol Accounting Office. Central F.secutive Director es for in edrance as I
Disposition Dwisicm (NIR). N ational Srfrict' and Controller (N1411-66-1).preeticabk so that a to AU w the 4
ArcNyes and Re(ords Admtmstration.
Record s telating to the enertt selection arrangmaata can be necessary time during the meeting for Washirigton. DC 204NL Requesters must proce s.
ctie the control number assigned to eoch 5 Trepartmentof justtee.U1 Parole such statements.Use of still. motion achedule wben requestes a copy.The Corr Antulon (N14W4A-1). Case fues plclure and taleyfaion cameras during l
control number appears tn parentheses e mmate and parolee perticipants in this meeting may be limited to selected pwups of ee anhg as determined immediately after the name of the tb federal witness accurity program.
requestmg agency, Dead e i a ma the time to be set aside for tNs {urpose sums: tNtasy mowatio*c tech Ctsud;ne 1 ether, d*K ^
'ird' */ 8^' Ua/"d sfor,,
e ba ad n
bear U S Coveminent agencies create acoe Fhd 6-1 aa e4s em}
illions of records on paper, fIm (nt Doc Raymond F. Fraley, prior to the meeting.
magnetic tspe, end other media in order on.umo rsisms In view of the poesiburty that the to control this accumulatiort agency recorde managers prepare records schedole for ACRS meetings may be achedules specifying when the agde ey Lt.AR REGULATORY adjusted by et Chairaean as secepary to f acihtete 4e conduct of the rmaeting.
nolonger needs the records and et MMtS$10N pusons plannmg to suend shouM check happens to the records after this period.
ddson Commmaa On Reactor with the ACRS NMve Dactor L!
Scrae achedules are comprehensive and cover all the records of an agency or one &ataguards; Revised Maeting Agende
'"E 8
of its major subdivisions. These jn accordance with the purposes of lhave detershed in actwdance alth Incon comprehenshe schedules provide for sechon 29 and 182b. of the Atmnic the eventual transfer to the National Energy Art (42 U.S C. 20R 2mb), the subsecticm 10ld) PabL 1. 82463 that it,s i
necusary to close pwow cms Art. hives tai histoncally 5 aluable records Adnsory Commtnee on Reactor September 10.1968 eneettag, as noted and authorize the disposalof al!other Safeguards will hold a meeting en records. Most schedules, how ever, cover Sepsember 10.1988, in Room P-118. 7920 above, to protect ir fo records of only one office or program or Norfolk Avenue.Betheada.Md Notice in confidence by a foreign source @
a few series of records, and man) are of this meeting ws: published in the U.S C. FM(c){4)J. and to sitscusa updates of previously approved Federal Reghter on August 26,190C.The classified information (5 USC.
achedules $sch schedules also may agenda for September 10 is revised as SMble)l4 include records that are designated for follows to tnclode a decussion of Further informauon regardmg toples Destruction of records requires the claulfied inlormataan, to be discuued.whether me meeting permanent retention, has been cancelled or rescheduled, the approvalof the Archivist of the United Saturday. September tc.10ss Chairman's ruling on requests for the States This op ros alis granted after a A.to AM-722 Noon and 1m r.M.
opportunity to present oral statesne thorough stud of theiscords that takes EmML-preparationof ACRSreporte into account t eir administrative use by on matters considered durmg this a prepaid telephone call to the ACRS the agrney of origin, the rights and meenna and proposed resolution of A.
Executive Director.Mr. Raymtmd F'.
intereats of the Government and of45. Decay liset cosmosel and the High Farley (telephana 301/492-4M61, private persons directly affected by the Temperature Cao Cooled Reector between 8.15 A.M. and 6 00 P.M.
Government's acttvtric A and historical considered during the Moth mechng of Dem Auguemuna.
or other value.
the Committee.
This ubite notice identifie: the MDMf 400 P.M s ACAS Andra t. Sates Federsfagenetes and their subdwfeiensSubcommitice andMem6ee ActivnicoAdvisory Comm/tese Monotement Mie requesth3g dispesttien authority.
(Open/ Closed)--Report and diectasion Int Dec.ab-soo:5 filed >+ae. tes em!
includes the ecmtrol number assigned k>
of recent meetings en Therrraf.
asasso coas vso m each schedule, and briefly describes the flydraullephericmena em! Feedback of recarda preposed for chsposal.The
~
t Federal Regleter ol. $3. No.166 / Friday, August 26, tees / Notices 1
of public bealth and pfety could riot be this international e mpostum le:
Comaluton, Weakington, DC so666, ruolyed.
" Understanding ng-A Key to Phone: 301-492-8428 Alsernotive Use of Aesources!nis Ensuring Safety; ans ng Aging--A Deted et Rh Marylud, prd.
I action does not snvolve the u6e of Necepity to Ens afety.
day of August test resources not predously considered in The symposium is ing organlaed bF Foe the Nuclear Repletory Comaneston.
connecuon with the Commission's Final NRCin cooperation with the American g%,g p, g, gnytronmental Statement (NUREG-Nudeer Society, the American Society 1171) deled Augu6t 19e6 related to this of Ctvil Engineers,the American Society M, A*"*'
f Amend ndhisons Contacted. The In ti e o F ec cIl ectronice M Doc 04-1000 rued 6-am te as)
Co $cies o.s.taf!,teewed the e.ene esion En,n,e,e.
opplicants' request of April 6,19e8, and ne keynote address on the first day did not consult other egencies or of the sympoalum willbe deliveted by edeery Coenmmee en Reec%e persons.
NRC Commlulonet Kenneth C. Rogers.
Defoguards;Moeteng A3ende 1)ndons of No Sisnificant impact: The ne keynote spenher et e dinner Comminion has prepared an reception during the 1mposium wiu be In accordance with the purposes of Environmental Anessment related to Dr.Thome: P. Rone, uty Director, sections 29 and th2b.of the Atomic -
the luvance of SpecialNuclear Material White House Office of lence and Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 3039,1232b), the 1
1.lcense No. $NM-1983. On the besis of Technology. During the symposium, Addeory Conranittu on Reactor I
this enessment, the Comrnission has principal addrenes to the more than 600. Safeguards will bold a meeting on i
concluded that envirc nmental impacts nuclear experts wiu be made by Dr.
September 610,10e6,in Room P-114, created by the proposed licensing acuan Hideo Uchide, Chairman, Nuclear 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, Md.
would not be significant and do not Safety Comsn!ssion Japen on August 31, Notice of this meeting was published in warrant the pre atation of an and MichelIJverle Chef du Service the Todaral Regletet on July at,1908.
Environmental mpact Statement.
Central de Surete des Installations unday, September 8,19e8 Accordingly,it has been determined that Nudentrn France on September 1.%e a Fir'dans of No Significant Irnpact is symposium will condude with a panel 8.M ca.445 a.m.:Commente by appmpnate.
discussion led by Dr. LV, Konstantinov, ACRS Choirrnon (Open)-%e ACRS The Envitortmental Assessment and Deputy Director General, International Chairman will report briefly regarding the April 6,1068 application retsted to Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, items of current interest.
this proposed action are evallable for Among othsrs who have confirmed a es m -Jadso m.: Decay Neot pubhc inspection and copying at the Atmoval(Open)-Review and report on Commission e Public Document Room, harticipation are John Taylor Vice Proposed NRC Staff resolution of sident. EpRl; Byron 14e, Chief 1717 H Street NW., Wes 1on. DC.
Executive Officer, NUMARC:lsek Generic losue 99,Imu of RHR Copies of the Environmenta Ferguson. Chief Execuuve Officer, Capability During Plant Shutdown Assessment may be obtained by calling Virginia Powen WaUsoe Behnke, Vice Conditions.
(301 492-3358 or by writing to the Fuel Chairman, Commonwealth Edison:
2240 c.M-12Mpa.!Molaienaam of Cyc e Safety Branch, Division of ames Moore, Vice President.
Nuclear Power Plants (Open)-Review Industrial and Medical Nudear Safety'
'esunshouse: Delbert Bunch, Prinetpal and comment on proposed NRC rule
,f, ""d' Commlulon' 8to"'
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Nuclear regarding maintenarce of nuclear power Energ U.S. Department of Ene ':
plants.
Deted at Rochtue. Maryland this 12nd day Rune i Drew, President, IEEE; bert J:Mps.-SMp.atPi rim Nuclear of August 1948.
Grant. President. ASCE; Ronald Stinson, Power Stodon (Open)- eview and f or the Nuclear Repletory Commission, President. ANS; L Chockle, Vice report on preposed restort of the Pilgrim d
taland C Rouse, President. ASME; Klaus Gast, Director, Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1.
Chief. Tuel Cycle Sofe ry Bmnch. Dis ision of Office lot Safety of Nudear 345 p.n-6 45 pn. Quantitouve Indus triolond Mc dico/ Nucieor Sofery, Installations. BMU, Federal Republic of Sofety Cools (Open)-Discuss and NMSS.
Germany; EG. Gomea, Vice President, comment regarding propond NRC Staff
[nt Doc. es-194:s nled 6-25-ea 445 am)
Consejo de Seguridad Nuclear, Spain.
Implementation Plan for the NRC aussa ocos name.es The symposium wiu entau Quantitative Safety Goals.
presentations of technical papero, and a Acd5p.m4M pa.! ACRS Procedans panel discussion on a wide spectrum of and Pmetices (Open/ Closed)-Discuss I
international Nuclear Power Plant plant aging issues, arriving at an quellfications of new membere proposed l
Aging Sympoalum; Weeting improvement of understanding nudear for oppointment and current membere plant aging phenomena and its proposed for reappointment to the 9
actNev:Nucleat Regulatory manageroent on an internadonallevel.
ACRS. Appoint Nominating Panel for 0
- I"I'"-
Date & Time: August 30,31 and ACRS Officere for CY-1989 and select l
Busessant,he atudy of nudeer power September 1,1988; 8$0 a.m. to 8 00 meeting dates for CY-1989.
plant e ing is part of the NRC's current p.m. dauy Pordone of thle senlon willbe dosed I
resear program to improve the oafety Addnss: Hyatt Regency Hotel, One se required to discuss information the g
of nuclear power plants. The advancing age of nuclear power plants plays an Bethesda Metro Center, Bethesda' release of which would represent a eser increas role in the decision.
Mar >. land 20814 clearly unwarranted invasion of i
nd p h cy, making relat to the continued safe Admission: Registration le required.
operation of these plants. Progress has Pon runtwen psPonesanose coseract:
Friday, September 8,1088 I
alteady been mede in understending Mr. Satish Asparwal, General Chairman, R M o.a -Jacoom. 7VA and managing aging phenomena, but Intemational Nuclear Power Plant Aging Monosement/ lessons learnedReview more remains to be done.The theme of Sy nposium, U.S. Nudear Regulatory (Open)-Discuss and comment on
>4 h
)
{
e o_s -.w.
,eee_e -,_ m m_g.m o__
y -,_
. n de~for permite and licenses.
I problems and recent changen kt staffias - portione of the moeues when e appliceuono and organlaation, transcsipt le beins kept, and questione Regaletary Guide 1.165 *Statien I
20JS am4f t ss esa Aestorf of may be eeked ordy br membere of the Blackout"le being reiwwd to cornet Amwns perryNuclear power Most Consnittee, its comeultanto, and Stal!.
Tablee 1. 5. and eL This guide wee l
t (Open)-8rteftrg regarding proposed
. Pereens desiring to make oral ori&^neDy leeued in June toes es part of i
ne' art of the Browns Ferry Neclear statermente ahodd motify the ACRS the resolution of Unmolved Safety Power Plant..
Executive Director es for is advance se luce A-44. " Station Blackout." The J1:18cm.-IlifPEJ# dN#'8 Practicable so that le guide ductibes methode acceptable to 1
Control Anguiremonar (Open)-Review arrangemente een be ma to ellow the the NRC staff foe complying with the and report on NRC Staff proposed necessary time during the meeting for Commiselon regulation that requires resoluuon of US! A 44. Hydrogen such statements. Use of still, mouos nuclear power plants to be capable of l
Control Meuures and Effects of picture and teleeleon camares durlag coping with a station blackout for a Hydrogen Burns on Safety Equipment.
thle meeting may be hmited to wiected spectried duration.
1:ts p.m-t es p ma Mrtury ACAS rtions of the meeting as determined Commente and suggutions in Activities (Open)-Discuse enticipated h Chairman. Inform. tion regarding connectiori with [1) items for inclusion ACRS subcommittee activities and items e time to be set aalde for thle purpose in guides currenUy being developed or l
proposed for consideration by the full mer be obittned by a prepaid telephone (2) improvements in all published guides Committee.
colho the ACRS F ecutive Director. Mr.
are encouraged at enbmitted to the time. Written i
J:($ p.m. 315p,ma /niernational Raymond F. Fraley, prior to the meeting.
commente may be su Operating Eeperience (Open)-Discuse la view of the possibility that the Rules and Proceduree Branch. Division and comment on implications of schedule for ACRS meetings may be of Rules and Records. Office of j
Chemobyl accident and review of the adjuted by the Chelrena es necenary Administration and Resources Staff's program et BNI. to address to facilitate the sonduct of the meeting Management. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory I
eevere rescurity transiente.
to atiend should check Commlulon. Wuhington. DC 20555.
persons planni7.meoutive Director Lf
&#p.m.-4 Np.ms Setere Accid,nf with the ACRS Regulatory guides are avalleble for Monocement (Open)-Briefing by such reacheduling would result in mejor inspection at the Commission's Public representetives of the NRC Ste!!
inconvenience.
Document Room.1717 H Street NW regarding the e;stus of work on I have deNrmleed in accordance with Washington. DC. Copies of issued d'
FY
'$.IE pmc subsection it4d) Pob.1.92-463 that it la ideo may be purchesed from the
.#p Aeliabfl y/Vohv Testing (Open)--
""'Y I' 'I'" M0"' O
- '" * "U 8 M N theeting as noted above to discuss current GPO price."Infortretion on I
l Review and report on ed chan a in requiremente for in itu tYeting of trdonneu n b nleau of which would curnet CPO prices may be obtained by motor opersted vehrves (GI-!! E.6.11 represent a clotriy umwarranted contracting the Superintendent of
&#p.m-d #pma ACAS.ACAw Invasion of penonal pdvoey (5 U.SsC.
Documents. U.S. Government Printing 6)),and to protect informatice Office. Poet Office Boa 37062.
552b(c)(d in confidence by a foreign Responsibilities (Open)-Discuse provide Washington. DC 20D15-7062 talephone proposed beam and mechardem foe sosignroemt of operAc activities source (5 U.S.C. 552b[c)(4)).
(202) 275-2000 or (302) 375-2171. lseued between the ACRS and the ACNW in Forther informouon regarding topics addes may eleo be purchased from the 1
areas which may peerlep/interfas.
Io be dancassed, whother the meetm' q Hetional Technical informe tion Service bas been aancelled or reacheduled, the on a etending order bests. Details on Saturday, September te,taas Chairman's ruling on requeste for the thle service may Le obtelned by writing
&# am-Ja#Nuen and J 00part.-
Opportunity to prwent oral statemente NTIS. 5265 Port Royal Roed. Springfield.
200p.a-Preparatica of ACRS reports and the time allotted can be obtelned by VA 22161, on mettere coseidered during thke a prepaid tenephon call to the ACRS (5 U.S C. 652(el) eneeting and proposed resolution of A.
Executive Director. Mr. Raymond F.
Dated et Rectville. Maryland tlus teth day
- 45. Decoy Heat Removal, and b IDgh Freley (telephorn 20:/s34-32es)-
v Amet test Ternpersture Ces Cooled Reactoe between 8615 a m. eed 5.00 p im For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission considered dutirg the 340th meeting of Date: Aeguar an, test g ic 5. Bed)wd.
b Coturninee.
Aeam g, ses,,,
! Irector. Office ofNuclear Regulatory topAn a#;uruACAS AMaryCsammisese Moneyement ofNer i neard, p., "C
)-R (l'R Doc. e6 letti Pued F354k HS em) l 'R Doc. es 19432 Filed 6 25-ee. 645aml recent awetings on Werne-Hydraulic Phenomaan and Feedback of Operational Sefey hperience from Reguistory Geddes leauence, Regulatory Guido;lasuance, Nuclear Planto.
Availability Availability Portione of thle seenlon will be closed se required to protect information ne Nuclear Regulatory Commlulon The Nuclear Regulatory Commlulon provided La ccafidence by a foreip bas reissued e_gulde in its Regulatory has luued a revision to e guide in ite l
eource.
Culde Series. This series has beeo Regulatory Calde Series. Die series hee Proceduru toe b oceduct of and developed to denrfbe and make been developed to dwcribe and make a
participetion in ACRS meetinge wet evellable to the public such trdormetion avallable to the public each information published in the Federal Register on as methode steeptable to the NRC staff as methode scceptable to the NRC staff October 2.1967 (51 FR 37241). In -
for implementing cific perte of the for ireplementing specific parts of the accordance with these procedures eral Comedesion's 65cas, techniques Commlulon's regulatione, techniques or written stalemaals may be prwented used by the ete ff la evatnettog speciSc used by the ete!! to evalueung specific by membese of the public, socordinge -
probleme er poeteleted accidente, and problerne se pwtulated accidents, and J
i e
n t;
e'
,\\L-----
---_,.-_n.s--
---s--wea w
c I
- g UNITED 8TATES i
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS$10N
{
{
Advisory COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS i
s
= mom. o. c.
l Revised: September 2, 1988 l
SCHEDULE AND OUTL!iE FOR O!SCUSSION 1
341ST ACRS MEETING SEPTEMBER 8-10, 1988 i
BETHESDA, MARYLAND Thursday, September 8, 1988 Room P-118, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, Md Chairman'sComments(0p(WK) en)
- 1) b:30 8:45 A.M.
1.1) Opening remarks 1.2) Items of current interest (WK/RFF) 8:45 - 10:45 A.M.
DecayHeatRenioval(0 pen) 2.1) Subcomittee report regarding GI-99, TAB 2-- ---
Loss of RHR Capability During Plant Shutdown Conditions (DAW /PAB) 2.2) Meeting with representatives of the NRC Staff and industry, 6s appro-priate g
10:45 - 11:00 A.M.
BREAK 3)11:00- 12:30 P.M.
MaintenanceofNuclearPowerPlants(0 pen) 3.1) Review and coment rega7 ding TAB 3------
proposed NRC rule on nuclear powerplantmaintenance(CM/HA) 3.2) Meeting with representatives of NRC Staff, as appropriate - %
12:30 -
1:30 P.M.
LUNCH
- 4) 1:30 -
4:15 P.M.
Pilgrim Nuclear Plant (0 pen)
Subcomittee report refWK/PA!) proposed ardin (3:00-3:15-BREAK) 4.1) restart of this plant TAB 4------
4.2) Meeting with representatives of the NRC Staff and the licensee - M 4:15 -
4:45 P.M.
NRCQuantitativeSafetyGoals(0 pen) 5.1) Subcomittee report regarding proposed NRC Staff Plan for implementation of TAB 5------
the safety goals (DAW /MDH)
W O A !
4.h
- r. w p w' s M-5:15 P.M.
ACRSProceduresandPractices(0 pen)
O.1) Appcintr.ent of Nominating Panel 9
[
for ACRS 1989 Officers (WK/RFF) J T AB -------------- 6. 2 ) ACRS meeting dates for CY-1989 (WK/RFF)
- 1..
c'
r, 341st ACR$ Meeting Agenda
-2
/
,r g#
) 5:15 -
tree-P.M.
7.1 bcommittee Reoorts (0 pen / Closed)
TAB.................
. 4) Report regarding operating incident at Savannah Riv NuclearPlant(DAW /
(Closed)
TAB................... 7.1 2) Subcomittee report o Themal. Hydraulic (MI 0T56)) programs (DAW /PAB)
(0 pen
.13) 1AEA International Conference onuseofOp(eratingCM/HA) Closed experience f
(Note: Portions of this session will be W
closed as necessary to discuss information provided in confidence by a foreign source andclassifiedinformation.)
Friday. September 9. 1988. Room p.118, 7920 Norfolk Avenue. Bethesda. Md.
) 8:30 M.CC A.M.
TVA Management / Lessons
. earned (0 pen)
(f,
/0,VO 8.1) Report of ACR5 su >com ttee regarding TAB 8.......
recent reduction and reorganization of s
TVA nuclear organization and NRC lessons learned from TVA management problems (CJW/MDH) 8.2) Meeting with representatives of the NftC Staff, as appropriate 10:00 10:15 A.M.
BitEAK 11:15 A.M.
Restart of the Browns Ferry Nuclear 10 P ant (open)
TAB 9.......
DT~ Briefing by representatives of the NRC staff regarding the recovery program ft,Pthisnuclearpowerplant(CJW/MDH) 60 11: # - 12:15 P.M.
Hydrogen Conte 01 Reovirements (0 pen) 10.1) Briefing by representatives of the TAB 10......
NRC staff regarding proposed resolution of USI A.48. Hydro 3en Control Measures and Effects of Hydrogen Burns on Safety Equipment (WK/M0H) 12:15 1:15 P.M.
LUNCH J k
_n t-O O
341st ACRS Meeting Agenda.*
11)1:15-1:45 P.M.
FutureACRSActivities(0 pen)
TAB ------------11.1)
Anticipated subcosuittee activity (MWL/RFF)
TAB------------11.2)
Items proposed for consideration by f
the full Connittee (WK/RFF) 3
) 1 #-
3:15 P.M.
Enternational Operatine
- xperience (0 pen) mZ.1) Report of ACR5 su >connittee regarding TAB 12-----
implications of the Chernobyl accident and review of the NRC staff's program to address severe reactivity transients (DAW /MDH) 12.2) Meeting with representatives of NRC Staff 3:15 -
3:30 P.M.
BREAK 3:30 -
4:30 P.M.
SevereAccidentManacement(0 pen) 13.1) Briefing by representatives of the TAB 13------
NRC Staff regarding the status of work on management of severe accidents (WK/MDH)
)4:30 5:30 P.M.
LouipmentReliability/ValveTestina(0 pen)
IT.1) Report of ACR5 subconnittee chairinan regarding proposed changes in require-I ments for in situ testing of motor l
operatedvalves(GI-IIE.6.1) l (CJW/RKM) 14.2) Meeting with representatives of NRC Staff b
5:30 -
6:30 P.M.
ACRS-ACNWResponsibi11 ties-(0 pen) 15.1) Discuss proposed mechanism for assign-ment of specific activities between the ACRS and ACNW in areas which may l
overlap / interface (FJR/RFF)
\\ Saturday. September 10, 1988. Room P-118, 7920 Norfolk Avenue Bethesda. Md.
y 8:30 -
9:00 A.M.
Appointment of ACR5 Members (Closed)
ReappointmentofD. Ward (FJR/NSL))
16.1)
AppointmentofNewMembers(FJR/NSL 16.2)
(Note: Portions of this session will be closed as required to discuss information the release of which would represent a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.)
I i
i
~
341st AC'.S Meeting Agenda 4
17)9:00- 12:00 and Preparntion of ACRS reoortu on:
,GJW/MDH) [
1:00 -
3:00 P.M.
17.1
'TA Lessons Learned H.2 A45.DecayHeatRemoval(DAW /PA8)g-17.3 61-99. Loss of RHR Cooling During,g i
ShutdownConditions(DAW /PA8)
[
17.4 HTGR(DAW /PME) y Pilgrim Nuclear Plant - propo, sed T}/
Proposed Maintenance Rule (CM/HA) 17.5 17.6 restart (WK/ PAR)
M browns Ferry Recovery Plan (Tentative)$a (CJW/MDH) 17.8) Chernobyl Lessons Learned (OAW/MOH) Y 17.9) H l Requirene ts
)
17.10)(ydrogenContro tentative)(WK/MDH)
InsitutestingofMOVs(CJW/RKM) 12:00 - 1:00 P.M.
LUNCH 1:00 - 3:00 P.M.
Continue Preparation of ACR$ reports l
d // sop 6
\\
i 7
b e
0 l
I h
f
?
i l-y I '3 i
s
\\:
n
]
MINUTES OF THE 341ST ACRS MEETING SEPTEMBER 6-10, 1988 The Advisory Comittee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) met on September 8-10, 1988 at 7920 Norfolk Ave., Bethesda, Md.
The purpose of this meeting was to conduct the discussions and take the actions described in the attached agenda. The meeting was chaired by Dr. William Kerr. All of the discussions were held in open session except for brief dis-cussions regarding the appointment of ACRS members.
A transcript of selected portions of the meeting was kept and is available in the NRC Public Document Room.
[ Copies of the transcript are also available for purchase from the Heritage Reporting Corporation 1220 L Street, N.W.,
Washington, D.C.
20005.]
1.
Chairman'sReport(0 pen) portion of the meeting.]y was the Designated Federal ')fficial for this
[ Note:
Mr. R. F. Frale Dr. Kerr began the meeting with a brief sumary of the planned agenda and the precedures under which the meeting discussions were being conducted.
Dr. Kerr stated that Mr. Wylie had been reappointed to the ACRS for a second four-year term by the Comission and expressed the Comittee's pleasure that this had occurred.
Dr. Kerr noted that the congressional legislation dealing with the reorganization of the NRC had not yet been acted on before the adjournment of the current session of the Congress. Work on this legislation may not be continued in the next session of the Congress.
Dr. Kerr noted with regret that former ACRS member Jesse Ebersole was very seriously ill.
- 11. Decay Heat Removal - P.esolution of Generic issue 99, " Reliability of RHR CapabHity in PWRs" (0 pen)
[ Note: Mr. P. A. Boehnert was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting. The Comittee reported to Chaiman Zech on this subject in a letter dated September 14, 1988. See Section XIV.B.]
Mr. Ward, Chairman of the Decay Heat Removal Systems Subcommittee, discussed the issues being addressed under Generic Issue 99.
He noted that loss of RHR during shutdown has been a recurring event in PWRs.
The core melt core melt frequency (CHF) associated with this event is now believed by the NRC Staff to be comparable to what is expected from full power operation.
The implications of the April 1987 event at Diablo Canyon where DHP was lost for an extended period oi time prompted the Staff to propose requirements to address this issue. Mr. Ward noted that typical PRAs do not address plant risk during shutdown operations.
BNL conducted a PRA and estimated that the risk of core melt was significant for this class of event.
The Decay Heat Removal Systems Subcomittee met on July 27, 1988 to consider this issue and discuss the NRC plans for resolution.
NRR has
)
I 341ST ACRS MEETING MINUTES 2
l l
subsequently drafted a proposed Generic Letter that describes a et ot requirements that the Staff believes will address this issue.
Mr. W. Lyon, NRR, discussed Generic Issue 99 and the resolution which the Staff intends to issue in a Generic Letter.
Mr. Lyon stated that J
the proposed resolution will, in effect, address the central concern
)
associated with this issue, i.e., the risk associated with loss of DHR l
during shutdown operations with reduced RCS inventory.
In particular, i
NRR is proposing to require plants be able to "close" containment prior j
to occurrence of core damage for this class of events. Closed contain-ment is defined as "a containment condition that provides at least one integral barrier to the release of radioactive material."
It does not imply the same degree of containment integrity which is maintained during full power operation, There were a number of questions regarding the details of the closure reouirement and its implications relative to equipment hatch closure.
Mr. Lynn clarified the requirement by stating that it requires that the o-ring seals for the equipment hatch be in contact with the o-ring hatch flange, but not crushed.
J Mr. Lyon made the following points concerning loss of DHR and a previous Generic Letter (GL-87-12) issued after the Diablo Canyon loss of DHR event.
Incidents continue to occur at an unacceptably high rate, even after the Generic Letter was issued. Two were reported in May 1988 and one was reported in July 1988. NRC and industry discussions of the issue have not led to resolution.
Phenomena have been identified which could lead to severe core damage in shorter times than was previously believed possible.
Other "new" phenomena which could adversely affect the RCS and DHR may exist.
None of the Industry responses to GL-87-12 were fully satisfactory.
Some licensees' responses were unsatisfactory in every one of 12 categories evaluated. Serious lack of understanding of the events i
and inadeouate preparation for shutdown operations were identified.
l_
Some licensees were not taking corrective action of any kind.
l l
Some individual licensees, in their evaluation of the issues L
discussed in GL-87-12, have shown excellent insight into selected areas such as RCS draining. containment closure, instrumentation, i '
DHR system operation, others.
This information, however, has not been effectively shared with other licensees.
Preliminary PRA work indicates that about 90% of the risk from this type of event occurs when RPV inventory is reduced ("mid-loop" operations).
l i:
1 t
4 e 3alST ACRS MEETING MINUTES 3
Dr. Kerr asked if the Westinghouse licensees have acted on ar, advisory letter sent out by Westinghouse after the Diablo event.
Mr. Lyon eid not know what' the licensees' response had been.
Mr. Lyon noted that mechanisms which could lead to loss of DHR which were not addressed heve since been identified.
In response to Dr. Lewis, Mr. Jones, NRR, said the purpose of GL-87-12 was to obtain perspective as to the state of licensees' understanding of the potential risk from these types of events. He indicated that the Westinghouse Owners Group has since taken significant actions which are expected to reduce the frequency of and risk associated with this type of event.
The NRR representative stated that the proposed generie letter recom-mends a number of actions and requests that licensees infom EPC of their actions.
Short-term (to be implemented in the near future) actions and long-tern actions are proposed in the Generic Letter. The Generic Letter requirements are summarized in Figure 1.
Mr. Ward questioned the Staff on the basis for their proposed require-ment en containment closure. Mr. Ward stated that he did not understand why the Staff is not requiring containment isolation when the risk of core melt during shutdown operations is believed to be nearly equivalent to the risk from full power operation.
NRR representatives responded that they believed that the public health and safety is equally protect-ed with this requirement and that, given the energy, decay heat rate, and pressure associated with full power, more stringent requirements for containment intecrity are justified. Dr. Kerr indicated most postulated core melt scenarios progress at a rate comparable to what would be experienced given a core melt at shutdown.
Mr. Lyon stated that the measures being taken are expected to reduce the frequency of core melt from shutdown operations and that changes in future plant designs would eliminate many of the problems with the present designs.
Mr. Lyon estir.ated that complete containment closure would lengthen the time required for plant refueling by about one week.
Dr. Kerr raised concern with the Staff's ust of Lne word " reliable" in describing requirements for instrumentation.
Dr. Kerr asked the Staff to quantify what was meant by " reliable." Farther discussion indicated that the Staff had not developed criteria fot what would be acceptable.
In response to Mr. Wylie, the Staff indica'.ed that if the licensee level / temperature instrumentation had been improved, or if the systems had been recently added, the instrumentation will be considered accept-able. Dr. Kerr took issue with this position in that it did not provide a mechanism for judging the adequacy of the changes or the original design.
The CRGR has reviewed the proposed Generic letter and generally concurs with the content.
A cost-benefit analysis of the actions described in the Generic Letter was requested and has been completed. The results of the analysis indicate that most licensees would not be significantly impacted by the Staff's proposed closure requirements.
l l
1 3a Figure 1 EXPEDITIOUS ACTIONS 1.
DISCUSS DIABLO CANYON IMPLICATIONS AND CONDUCT TRAINING WITH STAFF 2.
REASONABLY ASSURE CONTAINMENT CLOSURE 3.
PROVIDE TWO RCS TEMPERATURES 4.
PROVIDE INDEPENDENT RCS LEVEL 5.
DO NOT. PERTURB RCS 6.
PROVIDE BACKUP EOUlPMENT 7.
INAPPROPRIATE,USE OF NOZZLE DAMS 8.
INAPPROPRIATE USE OF STOP VALVES PROGRAMMED ENHANCEMENTS
'\\
1.
INSTRUMENTATION AND ALARMS (TEMPERATURE, LEVEL. DHR SYSTEM PERFORMANCE) 2.
PROCEDURES FOR NORMAL AND EMERGENCY 3.
EQUIPMENT FOR NORMAL AND MITIGATION ACTIONS 4.
ANALYSES 5.
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS 6.
REFINE RCS PERTURBATION AVOIDANCE s
- e '
I 4
3alST ACRS MEETING MINUTES 4
Dr. Kerr noted that requirements more drastic than those the Staff has proposed may be appropriate if this type of event is a significant contributor to risk. The Staff indicated they did not believe actions beyond those proposed are necessary.
A. Spano, RES, discussed the reg (ulatory analysis which was per-Mr.
The results of the PRA study conducted by Brookhaven National formed.
Laboratory) which examined the risk associated with loss of DHR during with this class of events is estimated to be about 5 x 10'{/RY.
shutdown were summarized.
The core damage frequency (CDF associated About 65% of the risk of core damage is associated with mid-loop operations.
Mr. Spano said the French have estimated the frequency of core damage fnr shutdown operations to be about equal to the frequency for full power operation (for the 1300 MWe plant class).
The urer.rtainties associated with the BNL PRA results were discussed.
RES be'.ieves the CDF estimates tend to be nonconservative in that postulated rapid core uncovery events'are not included in the analysis.
The changes in herdware and procedures proposed by the RES analysis were discussed. These proposed modifications have been incorporated, for the L
most part, in the NRR Generic Letter requirements.
In response to Dr.
Kerr, Mr. Jones said the containment closure requirement was included to achieve defense-in-depth.
Mr. Ward asked for Comittee cwents on the NRC Staff's proposal for l
the Generic letter and on the proposed Committee report.
Mr. Carrell suggested that any Comittee report should caution that plant-specific instrumentation requirements should be taken into account in implement-ing the Generic Letter requirements. Mr. Ward stated that he still had some reservations regarding the adequacy of the Staff's proposed con-tainment closure requirement.
111. ProposedRulemakingonMaintenance(0 pen)
[ Note:
Mr. H. Alderman was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting. The Comittee reported to Chairman Zech on this subject in a letter dated Septe'nber 13, 1988. See Section XIV.B.]
Mr. Michelson stated the discussion concerned the NRC Staff's proposed rulemaking on maintenance. He stated that this topic had been discussed during the August 1988 ACRS meeting and that the purpose of today's q
meeting was to discuss any changes in the status of the NRC Staff's work.
He noted that the Staff had requested an ACRS letter and that HUMARC will present some coments concerning industry views en mainte-nance rulemaking.
He then asked Dr. Moni Dey to give the Staff's presentation on the maintenance rulemaking.
Mr. Dey, RES, noted that the Staff is scheduled to meet with CRGR on September 14, 1988, and the notice of proposed rulemaking is scheduled I
I 1
341ST ACR$ MEETING MINUTES S
to be transmitted to the Commission on October 3. 1988. Publication of the rule is scheduled for about November 1.
Following publication of the rule, there will be a two-month public comment period and the final rule is expected to be resubmitted to the Comission by April 1,1989 after evaluation of the public comments.
The proposed rule, in its current form, would require a licensee to submit, within 90 days of issuance of the rule, the licensee's plan for full implementation of the rule.
The full implementation of the rule would be required to be completed two years after issuance of the final rule. The Staff will issue a regulatory guide to provide guidance for rule implementation.
The Staff plans to solicit coments on the regulatory guide and, following the coment period, to 1: sue a regulato-ry guide that would either endorse an industry standard or provide specific guidance if an adequate standard is not proposed.
Dr. Dey discussed the Staff's conclusions and recommendations.
The Staff originally proposed five rulemaking options. These were submitted to the Comission and discussed at the NRC/ Industry workshop on mainte-nance.
Following comments from the workshop, the Staff has reached the following conclusions:
Prescriptive rulemaking options have minimum flexibility.
Industry is taking many initiatives to improve maintenance.
A prescriptive rulemaking option may impede these initiatives.
The Staff recomends the rule remit the Industry to develop an adequate standard for maintenance programs which the NRC could endorse in a regulatory guide.
The industry standard would need to include provi-sions for performance assessment and feedback of results to improve the program and be comparable in scope and depth to the INPO maintenance guidelines.
The Staff does not recomend reporting of maintenance perfomance indicators at this time.
Dr. Dey said that the purpose of the rule is to improve licensee mainte-nance programs and to establish a satisfactory industrywide level of performance. He noted that the Staff has not developed an exact measure or threshold of effectiveness. He s%ted that maintenance includes many areas, including human factors, aw is "ery broad and interrelated with other aspects of the plant. He believe. thr.c this would make it diffi-cult to develop quantitative stan1ards of adequacy. He added that the rule would set a comprehensive st..ndard w'dch reflects those attributes of programs wur5, from previous exper.erce and judgment, contribute to an effective.wnntenance program.
He noted that the rule is not directe9 solely to today's poor perform-ers.
Perfomance changes over timt and the rule will help insure consistent perfomance and prevent good performance from declining. The
341ST ACRS MEETING MINUTES 6
rule also gives NRC a better legal basis for upgrading licensee mainte-nance programs.
Mr. Stuart Treby, OGC, discussed the legal basis of the rule. Mr. Treby said he was responding to a question raised by the Subcommittee as to the need for a rule on maintenance. The concern was that the Cemis-1 sion's current regulations already covered this subject and that the rule was redundant. Mr. Treby stated that the NRC legal view was that t
the proposed new rule was required.
Mr. Treby stated that Part 50 of the regulations does not explicitly mention any requirements for maintenance.
There are references to maintenance under in-service inspection and ender quality assurance.
These do not provide an adequate basis for upgrading a licensee's maintenance progran.
Mr. Treby noted that the Commission does take actions in this area now but that they are through indirect, not direct, means.
Mr. Treby said that if the NRC wants to take enforcement action against a licensee for not having those attributes of a maintenance program which the Commission thinks are appropriate, a better legal basis must be developed.
There was some discussion on why a rule is needed. Some members pointed out that maintenance has been improving and only a very small number of plants are judged to have poor maintenance programs.
Mr. King, NRR, pointed out that the Comission believes that maintenance is inportant to safe operation of nuclear power plants and he believes that the NRC ought to set forth what its expectations are for mainte-nance programs.
Mr. King noted that a policy statement states the expectations and, putting it into the form of a rule, turns it into a requirement.
He also noted that a rule provides guidance for the Staff as to what the standard is for an acceptable program.
Dr. Dey noted that the meintenance standard is intended to cover those systems, structures, and components the failure of which could impact significantly on public health and safety.
Dr. Dey said that the maintenance standard should reference other standards or guidelines, such as that evolved by ANS and others, includ-ing INP0 and EPRI, where practical, and should provide specific program-matic guidelines for the maintenance of specific equipment when appro-priate.
Dr. Dey noted some guidelines for the standard:
A systems approach should be taken to determine what maintenance activities are necessary and the requirements.
- v..
44 341ST ACRS MEETING MINUTES 7
The standard should consider the benefits of reliability centered maintenance.
The standard should provide guidance on how to select appropriate parameters for monitoring the effectiveness of the programs.
The standerd should provide guidance on the planning, scheduling, and use of overtime.
Guidance should be provided on the use of engineering support in the evaluation of the failure data to determine if and how a g
maintenance program approach should be changed.
The concept of improving or assuring the equipment environment and the motivation of the maintenance personnel should be addressed.
The interface between maintenance and other activities in the plant should be defined.
I The industry standard should consider the insights gained from l
industrywide plant aging experience.
Dr. Dey noted that the proposed notice of rulemaking asks for public comment on three speci'ic questions; (1) Will industry commit to the development of such a maintenance standard?
(2) What level of detail should be included in the industry standard?
(3) 15 two years a reasonable time to develop and implement this rule and standard?
Mr. Joe Colvin, Executive Vice President, NUMARC, discussed the industry views regarding industry initiatives and maintenance rulemaking.
~
He noted that the question as to how risk to the public health and safety will be reduced by the rule is still unanswered.
He said the industry position is, and has been, that the rule is unnecessary.
He believes that the rule would be disruptive to industry initiatives and that the industry has implemented many initiatives which are improving the quality of maintenance programs.
Mr. Colvin noted that the INPO maintenance guidelines are now the industry standard for maintenance.
The maintenance guidelines provide the essential elements for maintenance programs but do not specify the detailed requirements in the same manner as might be done in the pro-posed Regulation Guide.
Mr. Colvin said every utility has completed a self-assessment against the elements of the INPO ouideline and reported the results to INPO.
Mr. Colvin noted that the recent maintenance m
T.
{.
j l
i MdST ACRS MEETING MINUTES C
i inspections have indicated that maintenance programs are generally good ard are improving In summary, he noted that guidance has been provided by the Comission in the policy statement. He stated that the NRC and Industry have not justified the need for a rule and that time is needed to determine if it is needed.
In response to a question regarding the legel need for a rule when it is necessary to take enforcement actions in the area of maintenance, Mr.
l Colvin noted that the HPC has taken regulatory action against utilities in maintenance areas in the past.
He noted that the Technical Specifications currently require operability of the systems, and that this provides a basis for taking regulatory actions when maintenance is poor.
IV. Review of Pilgrim Plant Restart Effort (0 pen)
[ Note: Mr. P. A. Boehnert was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the metting. The Comittee reported to Chairman Zech on this subject in a letter deted september 14, 1900. SeeSectionXIII.E.)
Dr. Kerr, Chairman of the Ad Hoc Subcomittee on the Pilgrim P.estart, reported en the August 26, 1988 Subcomittee meeting and the August 25, 1988 site visit. He discussed the history of the plant shutdown and the subsequent Boston Edison Company (BECO) restart program. Dr. Kerr noted that about half of the Pilgrim management steff has been replaced, and thet a number of changes have been raade in plant hardware, procedures, and training.
He said the plant was clean and orderly and that a state-of-the-art simulator is now used for training. BECO has upgraded some plant systems as part of a Safety Enhancement Program (SEP). These upgrades include a tnird diesel generator, the ability to supply fire-protection water to the RCS, and the installation of a " hardened" torus vent.
Dr. Kerr noted that the issue of offsite emergency planning is a source of major contention between BECO and the Comonwealth of Massachusetts.
Some of the local residents are greatly concerned as to the adequacy of emergency planning.
A number of local government officials and public citi: ens made presentations at the Subcomittee meeting. Their princi-pal concern was the lack of a FEMA-approved emergency plan, br. Kerr stated that written coments have also been received from Mr.
Barry of the Comonwealth of Massachusetts and have been provided to the Comittee members and to the NRC Staff.
Mr. Collins, NRR, discussed the NRC review of the Plymouth restart. Mr.
Collins reviewed the history of concerns with Pilgrim. The SALP results indicated a history of inconsistent performance which generally trended
)
5 4
- mw
y l;,
341ST ACRS HEETINC MINUTES 9
towards poor performance. The factors to which the poor performance was-attributed included:
1 (1) Inadequate staffing, in particular in the number of reactor opera-tor and key mid-level supervisory personnel.
(2) A prevailing view in the organization that the improvements already made have corrected the problems, and a lack of organizational self-criticism.
(3) Reluctance, by management, to objectively evaluate problems identi-fied by the NRC.
(4) Dependence on third parties to identify problems rather than implementing an effective program for self identification of weaknesses.
Immediately prior to the April 1986 shutdown, the plant experienced a series of technical problems which resulted in NRC issuing twn Confima-tory Action Letters (CALs). The plant was then shut down by BECO until
)
certain corrective actions were taken.
The CAls required, along with these corrertive actions, a formal assessment from BECO of the readiness
{
for restart, and the development of e structured restart prograf 9 NRC j
review and approval of BECO actions was also required.
Other issues associated with the shutdown and proposed restart include offsite emergency planning (FEMA had identified six deficiencies as a result of their revier), initiation of a safety enhancement program by J
BECO (complete implementation of this program is not a prerequisite for restart), and the resolution of the issues raised in two Part 2.206 petitions, Mr. Collins discussed the licensee actions which will be underway or i
have been completed prior to restart. The Staff indicated that all the i
major BECO reports describing restart actions have been reviewed and approved.
NRC's assessment of the Pilgrim restart effort was overseen by a Restart Assessment Panel, composed of Region I and Headquarters Staff.
The Panel has been meeting every two weeks. An Augmented Inspection Pro was instituted and an Integrated Assessment Team Inspection (IATI) gram was conducted to evaluate the condition of the plant.
Licensing actions which need to be completed prior to restart include:
l 1.
Resolution of the issues identified in the Part 2.206 petitions 1
2.
CompletionofSafetyEnhancementProgram(SEP) reviews I
l 3.
Resolution of two Technical Specification change licensing actions.
l-L L
0 i'
9 i
i 341ST ACRS MEETING MINUTES 10 j
The latest SALP results were discussed. These sal.P reviews concluded:
1.
The BECO efforts have improved the corporate and site management organizational structure.
2.
The actions taken have been generally successful in correcting l
staffing, organizational, and managerial deficiencies, j
3.
The self-assessment process which was implemented was successful in targeting management attention on potential problems.
4 Per#ormance in some restart areas has suffered because the imple-
- nertation of program and organizational improvements has been given a lower priority than scheduled outage work.
5.
A continued BECO commitment to sustain the overall trend towards improved performance is needed.,
l The details and results of the IATI were discussed. Two observers from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts participated in the IATI.
I i
The schedule and planned future activities for the restart effort were l
discussed. The Staff will meet with the Comission prior to restart.
The Staff steted that the following set of criteria must be satisfied prier tu restart:
l Existence of stable and effective management and staff Resolution of major technical issues Demonstrated improvement in SALP problem areas Maintenance program and work backlog issues must be adequately addressed NRC's concurrence that certain emergency planning improvements have l
been made.
1 l
Pr. Collins indicated that the emergency planning criterion was the only one of the above criteria that had not already been satisfied.
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts and FEMA. in conjunction with the affected 1ccalities, are currentiv assessing the status of emergency planning.
l The NRR Staff has indicated that, as a minimum, two of the six outstar. ding FEMA issues (provision for evacuation of schools and day-care centers and for assured evacuation of handicapped individuals) must be addressed and some limited demonstration of the adequacy of resolution performed.
Dr. Kerr, citing a letter from Mr. C. Barry. Secretary of Public Safety.
Commonwealth of Massachusetts, asked for the Staff's response to Mr.
Barry's coments regarding installation of a direct torus vent.
Mr.
Collins said this modification will be reviewed by NPC under the provi-sions of 10 CFR 50.59.
Use of the vent will be prediceted upon NRC
s I
s 341ST ACRS MEETING MINUTES 11 approval of Revision 4 of the generic Emergency Procedure Guidelines (EFGS). It was noted that the Staff has not yet come to a conclusion as to what is adequate in the way of procedures associated with venting.
Mr. Collins noted that NRC 'has not approved or required a filtered vent to be installed at the Shoreham plant and that Mr. Barry was mistaken in stating that NRC had.
Mr. R. Bird, BECO, summarized the actions taken in conjunction with the shutdown and restart effort. He indicated that BECO is comitted to a continued improvement in their operation of the Pilgrim plant.
The management hrsonnel changes at Pilgrim were discussed.
Many long-term BECO employees have been retained and will assure continuity.
The status of the plant was discussed.
Mr. Bird indicated he believes that Pilgrim is essentially ready for restart.
Details of the SEP were discussed.
The SEP erphasizes prevention of core damage. Elements of the prooram include:
1.
Installation of a third backup diesel generator 2.
Switchyard improvements 3.
Standby liquid control system improvements 4.
Containment spray system modifications S.
Reactor control system improvements -
6.
Instr 11ation of a backup nitrogen supply 7.
Irsta11ation of fire-prevention water supply - RHR tie-in 8.
Ir.sta11ation of a diesel-driven fire-protection water pump 9.
Installation of a " hardened" direct torus vent.
As noted above, BECO is using the inost recent version (Revision 4) of the BWR EPGs.
Mr. Bird noted that the latest SALP appraised four of the five areas previously rated at "3" as now rated at "2."
In response to Mr.
Michelson's question, Mr. Bird stated that the "3" rating received in
" fire protection" was the result of everdependence on compensatory measures (manual fire watches, etc.).
Mr. Bird noted that INP0 has reviewed the BECO restart effort and that their report was quite favor-able.
Steps have been taken to assure BECO self-sufficiency by reducing the use of contract employees and increasing the number of BECO employees.
These measures were discussed.
Mr. R. Anderson, BECO, discussed the BECO actions in the areas of plant naintenance, radiological controls, plant decontamination, and plant operations.
Mr. Anderson noted that about 90% of the plant area' has been decontaminated to the extent that protective clothing is not needed.
BECO's goal is to keep their ALARA doses 20% below the
" allowed" limits.
I
j
- g, F
t t
341ST ACPS PEETING MihUTES 12 The Pilgrim p(lant simulator is an almost exact duplicate of the actual control room including the back panels which allow training for instru-ment surveillance tests) and is being used to upgrade the level of operator training.
The operators have also had fomal comunications training. After restart, there will be a six-shift rotation of operate ing personnel which should facilitate training activities. Mr. Ahderson said that key plant managers have a good mix of nuclear, BWR, and plant operating experience.
Mr. Bird concluded the presentations by stating that BECO has cone a long way since the April 1986 shutdown. BECO believes they are reHy to safely restart and to operate the Pilgrim plant after a careful power ascension program.
Dr. Ferr, citing the NRC 1 ATI Report, asked for BfCD's co@ents on the Staff's recommendation to strengthen the focus, of the o'ntite plant Operations Review Committee (ORC).
Mr. Bird indicated the ORC review ectivities were previously not readily auditable or well structured. He agreed with the Staff's suggestions for improving the ORC's review effort.
Citing the above Barry letter, Dr. Kerr and Mr. Carroll asked Mr. Bird to comment on Mr. Barry's cer' ment that called into e,uestion the need for improving the containment's capability for containing core debris. Mr.
Howard, BECO, indicated that BECO believes the resuRs of recent NPC and industry experimnts and analyses support BECO's position that eodifice-tions to improve containment capability for containing cort debris are not cost-effective actions.
BECO believes that it is toore cost-effective to assure a reliable means of removing decay heat and prevent-ing core melt.
Mr. Collins indicated that FEMA found six deficiencies in the Emergency Plan and, given these deficiencies, withdrew their approval of the Emergency Plan.
Dr. Kerr said he believes the Committee should prepare a letter on the Pilgrim restart.
He said the Committee could delay, if necessary, preparing a letter until October, but he believed that it was unlikely any new information would be forthcoming. With regard to the issue of offsite emergency planning Dr. Kerr indicated that options could be considered ranging from not commenting on the issue to recommending that restart not occur until the Emergency Plan has been approved by the NRC.
Messrs. Carroll and Ward said that they endorse restart independent of resolution of the offsite emergency planning issues.
Mr. Carroll expressed some reservations concerning the amount of commercial operat-ing experience of the current management staff at Pilgrim.
There was extensive discussion of the status of the Emergency Plan. Hr.
l Varley, BECO, described the BECO actions underway and/or taken to
- o l
St.1ST ACRS MEETING MINUTES 13 upgrade their offsite Emergency Plan. He said BECO has expended signif-icant resources (millions of dollars) to assure that the localities in the Emergency Planning Zone are fully staffed and equipped, and ready to play their part as needed, Mr. Varley indicated, in response to Dr.
Lewis, that the inadequacies in the Emergency plan identified by FEMA have largely been addressed by BECO. The root cause of the problem was the fact that the "old* Emergency Plan relied to a great extent on ad hoc response to an incident.
FEMA is now insisting on more femalized planning response plans.
Y.
NRCQuantitativeSafetyGoals(0 pen)
[hote:
Mr. D. Houston was the Designated Federal Official for this portionofthemeeting.)
Mr. Ward, Chairman of the Safety, Philosophy, Technology and Criteria Subcommittee, reported on the September 1,1988 meeting of the Subcom-mittee. The purpose of the meeting was to review the Staff's proposed implementation plan for the Safety Goal Policy Statement.
He stated l
that the plan was not as well developed as he had hoped, and that there l
appeared to be a minimal allocation of staff resources to this effort.
It is not clear that the plan, as presently developed, represents the consensus of Staff opinion, in spite of previous recommendations by the l
Comrittee, the Staff's latest plan did not incorporate operational performance criteria or containment performance objectives. He indicat-ed that the Staff expected to have the final draft of the plan available l
by September 30,19P8, and that the Staff would make a presentation to l
the Comittee during the October 6-8, 1988 meeting.
Dr. Lewis emphasized that this implementation plan would be part of the basic framework of the NRC's regulatory structure mud, therefore, should be allocattd the necessary resources.
. Dr. Siess questioned the importance of this implementation plan and reouested more specific examples of how it would be used.
VI. ACPS Procedures and Practices (0 pen) portion of the meeting.)y was the Designated Federal Official for this
[ Note: Mr. R. F. Frale l
1 A nominating panel for the appointment of ACRS officers for 1989 was established. The members were Mr. Carroll, Dr. Kerr, and Mr. Ward. Dr.
Kerr is chairman of this panel.
The Comittee agreed on the following dates for the holding of ACRS meetings in Calendar Year 1989:
9
- ^
i 341ST ACRS MEETING MINUTES 14 1
1 Meeting 1989 Meeting Dates 345 January I?-14,1989 346 February 9-11, 1989 j
347 March 9-11, 1989 i
340 April 6-8, 1989 1
349 May 4 6, 1989 350 June 8 10, 1989 351 July 13-15, 1989 352 August 10-12, 1969 353 September 7-9, 1989 354 October 5-7, 1969 355 November 16-1P., 1989 i
356 December 14-16, 1989 VII. TVA Management / Lessons Learned (0 pen)
[ Note:
Mr. D. Houster. was the Designated Federal Official for this-portion of the meeting.
The Comittee reported to Chairman Zech in a letter dated September 14, 1988. SeeSectionXIV.B.)
Mr. Wylie, Chairman of the TVA Organizational Issues Subcomittee, reported on the Subroamittee meeting of July 22, 1988 and discussed the recent reorganization of the TVA staff and personnel reductions. Many of the personnel reductions involved contract employees and were related to reductions in construction activities. He indicated that the Subcom-mittee review had not found major concerns with either the reorganized structure or the impact of the TVA staff reductions.
The Comittee decided to take no action on this matter.
Mr. E. Goodwin OSP, discussed the Staff's TVA lessons learned.
This included a general overview of the situstion which existed at TVA at the time of plant shutdowns in 1985, the rcot causes that contributed to this situation, and the NPC's role in regard to the problem.
He then discussed the seven specific lessons that had been identified by the Staff during the review and the comments which had been recsived from past NRC and TVA managers in regard to the preliminary lessons learned document (SECY-86-334).
Dr. Lewis questioned the qualifications of the Staff personnel who reportedly evalmted management and leadership attributes at TVA. Mr.
Ward asked why the Staff does not employ more personnel with a manage-ment science background or use qualified consultants on these matters.
Mr. Goodwin responded that there are some Staff members with training in management science who are qualified to deal with these matters.
Dr. Kerr indicated that he believes NRC should monitor performance but not management organization or the management styles and methods used.
Dr. Siess agreed that the Staff should have the capability of recogniz-ing poor performance rather than poor managers.
341ST ACRS MEETING MINUTES IS There was some general discussion of the NRC role in reviewing manage-ment activities. It was agreed that the NPC should,have the capability to evaluate the adequacy of plant perfomance and take appropriate measures before serious events occur. There was not general agreement as to how the NRC could accomplish this.
It was,noted that the NRC Staff had been performing performance-oriented inspections (for example.
SALPs and Diagnostic Evaluation Inspections).
Dr. Kerr and Mr. Ward believe that the NRC needs to develop general operating criteria.
The change in the role of the NFC Pegional Administrator was discussed.
During the problem years at TVA, the Administrator functioned in many respects as the chief inspector for 1&E Headquarters.
in the current organization, the Administrator has more management responsibility and can deal effectively with problems within the Region.
In closing, Mr. Wylie indicated that a Comittee report had been drafted and would be distributed for Comittee review.
l V!11. RestartofthetrownsFerryNuclearPlant(0 pen)
[hote:
Mr. D. Houston was the Designated Federal Official fer this portionofthemeeting.)
Mr. Wylie. Chainnan of the TVA Organization Subcomittee, briefly reviewed the ACRS report on review of TVA restart efforts dated April 7, 1966, and indicated that a cetermination to review each TVA plant prior to restart had not been cade. The Committee decided not to conduct a review of the restart of the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant. The Committee recuested that a memorandum be sent to V. Stello, EDO, informing him of September 27,19BP.)(See R.
F.
Fraley memorandum to V.
Stello dated this discussion.
Messrs. S. Black and G. Gears. OSP, briefed tha Comittee on the status of restart activities at Browns Ferry Unit 2.
TVA has scheduled fuel loading for October 1988 and restart criticality for March April 1989.
l It is not clear that this schedule can be est.
The Staff discussed their review of the TVA Performance Plans.
The Corporate-Nuclear Perfont.ance Plan has been reviewed, and the Staff SER was issued as HUREG-1232. Volume 1. dated July 1987.
The OSP Staff is currently reviewing the Browns Ferry Nuclear Performance Plan.
l The status of the Browns Ferry Unit 2 review issues was discussed.
A sumary is given in Figure 2.
Three specific issues remain in a category of needing additional information for the Staff to review.
These three issues were discussed in more detail and involve seismic issues, electrical issues, and operational readiness.
4 Mr. Michelson asked that the Staff discuss the reconstitution of fuel assemblies within the Browns Ferry units. The Staff indicated that some fuel rods had a layer of copper on the outer surface. The source of the i
s
./
i 15a Figure 2 STATUS OF t$$UES REGARDING BROWN $ F(RRY. UNIT 2 It sue.
A
$1 B),
C Browns Ferry Management Corpnrate Plan X
X Ovality Assurance Design Baseline & Verification X
I Design Calculation Review X
l Seismic issues X
Electrical Issues X'
Fire Protection Environmental Qualification X
Welding X
Technical $pecifications X
Intergrannular Stress Corrosion Cracking X
Procurement Concerns X
Maintenance Improvements X
{
. Restart Test Program X
X Pro $edures Upgrade X
Operational Readiness Operator Training X
Employee Concerns / Allegations X
Risk Assessment X
l A.
NRC and TVA in agreement re handling of problem. NRC review schedule consistent with licensee schedule.
I Bl. NRC and TVA in agreement re handling of problem. Licensee schecule overly optimisitic(e.g.,implementationproblems).
B2. NRC and TVA in agreement re handling of problem. NRC review is behind schedule.
C.
Questions exist regarding handling of problem (e.g., discovery stages)
'. Inspection
4 i
E 73 y
Mr. Michelson inquired about the method of inspection and about the disposition of copper that remained in solution in the primary coolant.
The Staff i
indicated that this matter would be pursued.
The verification and pre-op test programs were discussed with emphasis on issues relating to checking interlocks and overload devices.
The Staff indicated that the program at-Browns Ferry was more comprehensive than the one for Sequoyah..
A recent fire at the Browns Ferry plant, which may have been an act of sabotage, was discussed.
The Staff indicated that a review of this event had been performed and it could not M concluded that sabotage was involved.
The Staff is ;till in the process of reviewing the overall fire protection plan including exemption requests for some Appendix R
' items.
At the conclusion of this briefing, Mr. Wylic asked whether or not the Comnittee wanted to review Browns Ferry 2 t s they had Sequoyah 2.
Dr.
Remick stated that he believed that it was not the best use nf ACRS resources to look at each troubled plant at restart, but only to look at a few to assess the adequacy of the Staff's review. Since TVA reorgan-ization and the restart of Sequoyah 2 had previously been reviewed by the Comnittee, it was decided not to revie.w Browns Ferry. This decision will be communicated to the Staff in an appropriate memorandum.
_l X_. Hydrogen Control Requirements (0 pen) 4 (Note:
Mr. D. Houston was the Designated Federal Official for this portionofthemeeting.)
Mr.
C.
Ferrell, RES, discussed the generic resolution of USI A-48,
" Hydrogen Control Measures and Effects of Hydrogen Burns on Safety Equipment." The objective of USI A-48 was to determine whether addi-tional regulations or requirements were needed to assure that, for ice condenser or BWR containments, containments could cope wiui hydrogen releases.
He discussed the TM1-2 accident and the impact that experi-ence had on the NRC's perspective on hydrogen generation phenomena and the impact on NRC' regulations. He discussed the changes to 10 CFR 50.44 that had occurred as the result of a rulemaking for BWR Mark I and 11 containments (December 1981) and for BWR Mark 11 and PWR ice condenser containments (January 1985).
PWR large-dry containments are not being addressed in USI A-48 and will be addressed in Generic Issue 121.
Hydrogen requirements for severe accidents were not considered in -this USl (only DBAs were considered), but will be considered in the implemen-tation of the Severe Accident Policy. The major requirements imposed by the December 1981 and January 1985 rules were requirements for inert containment atmospheres for Mark I and II BWP.s and hydrogen igniter systens for BWR Mark IIIs and PWR ice condensers.
Mr. Ferrell also discussed an assessment performed by the National Research Council of y
.},
.I 341ST ACP.S MEETING MINUTES 17 the technical issues related to the hydrogen generation rate and control of hydrogen generated during LWR accidents. Their findings were gener-ally consistent with the NRC rules. They did, however, recomend the installation of backup (i.e., operable during station blackout condi-tions) power supplies for igniter systems.
In response to a question by Me. Michelson, W. Minners, RES, stated that the current 10 CFR 50.44 applies to all operating and future nuclear power plants.
Adiscussionensuedregardingtheconsiderationscoveredin50.44(which specified a 75% metal-water-reaction as a design basis) as compared to 50.34(f) (which specified 100% metal-water-reaction as a design basis).
A question was asked as to why EPRI was only considering 75%
retal-water-reaction for their advanced light water reactors. The Staff response, indicated that EPRI should be considering a 100% metal water reaction.
Mr. Carroll esked if the Staff had fairly characterized the National Research Ccuncil's findings in their summarization.
He noted that the Council had e number of findings besides the one that the Staff had discussed. The Staff replied that most of the findings were related to PWR large drys and were outside the scope of USl A-48.
Dr. Siess asked if anyone had calculated the reduction. in risk which would result from providing a backup power supply to an igniter system.
This had been addressed in the GESSAR PRA but the Staff could not recall what results were obtained.
Dr. Siess also asked if Congress had been notified of the resolution of USI A-48.
The Staff indicated that this notification was being processed.
Dr. Kerr asked the Comittee if there were any coments or recommnda-tions to be forwarded to the Staff in a report. The Comittee decided not to coment on the NRC Staff's proposed resolution.
X.
International Operating Experience (0 pen)
[ Note:
Mr. D. Houston was the Designated Federal Official for this portionofthemeeting.]
Mr. Ward, Chairr:an of the Safety Philosophy, Technology and Criteria Subcomittee, reported on the August 4,1988 meeting of the Subcomit-tee. During this meeting, the Subcomittee reviewed the Staff's activi-ties in regard to the implications of the accident at Chernobyl.
Mr.
Ward discussed the highlights of the previous Comittee reviews end reports in regard to this matter.
Mr. G. Sege (RES) discussed two main topics:
(1) the current status of NUREG-1251, " implications of the Accident at Chernobyl for Satety 1
. +[
341ST ACRS MEETING MINUTES 18 Regulation of Comercial Nuclear Power Plants in the United States (2) an
" and the changes to this report as a resul.t of outside coments and overview of the NRC follow-up research plan to address the implications of Chernobyl. The revised NUREG-1051, which incorporates the resolution of public coments, has been draf ted for Commission approval.
Tho significant changes to this report were the addition of a recomendation for study of the U.S. experience with procedure violations and the deletion of a recomendation for a study of the usefulness of high-level-full-time onsite safety managers, in the discussion of the follow-up research plan, Pr. Sege briefly described 26 tasks in 6 issue areas.
Four tasks 'in Operational Controls and in Design have been added since the Committee last discussed this plan.
1 Dr. F. Odar,- RES, discussed the general approach and schedule for the project at BNL to study selected reactivity transients. Mr. D. Diamond, BNL, presented a status report on the project and briefly described the BWR and PWR reactivity events that were being studied.
The intent of the program was to review only those sequences that could involve i
relatively large reactivity insertions.
For PWRs, seven sequences, all with boron dilution, were discussed. For BWRs, seven sequences with no common initiator (three involving control rod positioning) were dis-cussed. The analysis to date has concentrated on PWR boron dilution and BWR overpressurization.
Preliminary results indicated that previous judgment on reactivity accidents was sufficient and that no unanalyzed safety issues will be identified. A report on this program is expected -
to be issued by December 1, 1988.
Mr. Ward questioned whether this study would provide information on the potential risks associated with operating a plant at low power for an extended-time period.
The Staff ' indicated that this aspect was being reviewed.
Dr. Remick asked if the study-would address the La%De power oscilla-tions and the recent experience with startup anomalies 3t -Savannah River. The Staff indicated that the LaSalle event would be incWed.in the study s:hile the startup anomalies would not since they gave ely small power excursions. Dr. Remick also asked whether the existence o' a positive moderator temperature - coefficient in a PWR was a major concern. The Staff indicated that the coefficient was not large enough to be a cause for major concern.
Mr. Michelson asked if the study addressed core disruption that might occur in a BWR if the shroud or steam dryer fell into the core.
It was uncertain as to how this event is reviewed by HRC.
Dr. Kerr and Mr. Carro11 questioned the Staff as to the status of the review of symptom-based energency operating procedures ano indicated an interest in being briefed on the results of the review.
l l
y 341ST ACRS MEETING MINUTES 19 Dr. Kerr asked if the Comittee had any comments which they wished to discuss in a report.
The Comittee found no reason to offer written coments on the matters covered in these discussions.
XI. Severe Accident Management (0 pen)
(Note:
Mr. D. Houston was the Designated Federal Official for this portionofthemeeting.)
Mr. R. Barrett, NRt., and Dr. L. Shotkin, RES, briefed the Comittee on the status of the accident management program which is to be implemented.
as part of the implementation of the Severe Accident Policy (1) actions Statement.
The accident management program was described as addressing to be taken by the plant staff following an initiating event (prevention.
of core damage and mitigation of consequenc?s) and (2) preparatory measures to assure that accidents, if they occur, can be effectively managed.
Closure for this issue would be achieved by each licensee committing to have an accider.t management program framework in place.
The development (including interaction with NUMARC) and implementation phases were expected to be completed within about four years.
Current regulatory practices include review of emergency procedure guidelines (EPGs), emergency operating procedures (EOPs), emergency response procedures (ERPs), and operator training.
The research program for accident management was to include both prevention end mitigation strategies.
Specific issues which.will be treated include early addi-tion of water, depressurization of the RPV, and assuring the reliability of electrical power sources. A Comission paper on the overall accident management program is scheduled for completion by October 17, 1988.
potential for reducing severe accident consequences) gram (in terms of Dr. Kerr asked how the effectiveness of this pro was to be judged.
He also asked if this was not a parallel effort to that being performed for individual plant examinations (IPEs).
Mr. Ward questioned the scope of the accident managemant program and indicated that parts of it appeared to be a duplication of current E0Ps.
The Staff indicated that they would be going beyond the current E0Ps.
Dr. Kerr asked if this program would provide input for the testing of
- technical support and management personnel. The Staff did not plan to do so at this time.
Dr. Lewis questioned the inng t'me interval allocated for the develop-ment and implementation phases (four years) and asked if this indicated that the Staff believes there are no major problems in this area. The Staff stated that they did not believe that there were major problems and believed that schedule was appropriate.
-i
l
,H :
i..--
341ST ACRS MEETING MINUTES 20 Dr. Remick asked if current simulators would be programed to allow operators to be trained in this area. The Staff indicated that a task group had been established to review this matter.
Dr. Kerr asked that, if meeting sumaries were available for a series of meetings between the Staff and Industry (see. Figure 3), copies be provided to ACRS. The Staff agreed to do so.
Mr. Carroll asked about the interface with various NSSS owners groups in the development of EPGs and E0Ps.
The Staff indicated that most of their contact was through NUMARC. Mr. Carroll noted that programs had already been developed by some licensees.
The Committee requested that a briefing on the status of the development of E0Ps be scheduled at an appropriate time in the near future.
XI. Equipment Reliability / Valve Testing (0 pen)
[ Note:
R. Major was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of themeeting.]
The NRC Staff is proposing to issue a generic letter that will expand testing and inspection of motor-operated valves (MOVs).Bulletin 85-03 required verification of switch settings for safety-related motor-operated valves in the high pressure coolant injection / core spray and emergency feedwater (RCIC for EYR) systems. The expansion proposed by the Generic Letter will include all safety-related MOVs and those MOVs in safety-related systems that might become mispositioned (position-changeable). Switch settings and the root cause for a number of degrad--
ed conditions will be addressed in the proposed expanded program. The letter will also outline methods acceptable to the NRC Staff for demon-strating POV operability for those MOVs that cannot be testad under pressure.
These actiors are believed by the NRC Staff to be necessary to reduce the failure rates of safety-related MOVs and thus prevent safety system failures. (The Staff believes it would be difficult to identify another single class of components with a greater potential effect on safety in a nuclear plant.) -Best estimates indicated that failure rate for safety-related MOVs is about 16 to 29 times the rate previously assumed.
These estimates were characterized as being based on a conservative interpretation of the data obtained from licensees in response to the Bulletin 85-03 and from studies of the database of the most utilized signature-analysis service company. A number of root causes for degrad-ed conditions in MOVs (in addition to switch settings) have been iden-tified over the past several years (bent stem, dirt in relays, grease problems,etc.). Any of these conditions can result in failure of a MOV to move, or to move completely, to the desired position under design basis conditions
4 20a Figure 3 COORDINATION WITH OTFER RESEARCil AND REGULA10RY PROGRA!;5 STRATEGlES l MEETING PREVENT 10tl MITICATION PROGRAtt ORGAN 12AT10t; DATE IN-VEESEL EX-VESSEL HbREG-ilSO DSR/PRAB 8/3/88 X
SARP DSR/AEB 7/25/88 X
X ltUt1AN FACT 0k$ RG.
DSR/HFRB 8/15/88 X
'X X
/
QSIR/SAIB 8/17/88 NUREG/CR 4920 BNL
~
X X
X tetPP (CURRENT STATUS)
DSR/RPSB
' NRR REVIEWS OF !!iDUSTRY tlRR/PRAB CONilby005 X
X X
f
' ItiT'L (FRG)
FRG 7/7/88 X
INT'L-(FRG, FRANCE, SWEDEN) 1AEA 8/29/88 X
' EPnt EPRI
!WMARC NUtlARC 10/88
\\
- tpt INDUSTRY
'QTHER INDUSTRY RESULTS lilDUSTRY REACTIVITY ACCIDEtiTS BNL' ONGOING X
I:RR REVIEW OF EPG'S NRR(SRIB) 9/7/88 X
X
.4 341ST ACRS MEETING MINUTES 21 The NRC Staff asked for ACRS concurrence in issuing this Generic Letter.
The bteii ex;1eined that this Generic Lt tter was a part of the resolu-tion for Generic Issue ll.E.6.1.
This teneric issue has four parts of which in situ testing of MOVs is one. Other areas include check valve testing, thermal overload protection for MOVs and reviewing the poten-tial for intersystem LOCAs contributed to by pressure isolation valves.
The Staff's schedule is to issue the Generic Letter in late October. A meeting with the CRGR is scheduled for late September or very early October.
The Staff reviewed the history behind this Generic Letter.
It stems from a November 1985 loss or icedwater event at the Davis-Besse plant.
A contributor to this event was the inability to reposition either of two redundant valves that had been mispositioned earlier in the event.
The cause-of the inability to reposition these valves was improperly set toroue switch bypass settings.
Bulletin 05-03 was issued, requiring diagnostic valve testing on a limited nurber of safety systems.
This experience has been favorable. An unexpectedly large amount of poten-tial valve problems
- have been discovered and corrected. The Staff new wishes to expand the amount of in situ valve testing.
Following a discussion of the uncertainty associated with the magnitude of the valve failure - rate, this item was referred to the Mechanical Components Subcommittee for attention.
Subsequent to the meeting, a Subcommittee session was scheduled for.0ctober 4,.1988 to be held in Bethesda, Md., and time was scheduled' for further discussion of this subject at the October 6-8, 1988 ACRS meeting.
XIll. ACRS/ACNk' Responsibility (0 pen)
[Mr. R. F. Fraley was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meetin0 3 The Committee discussed the areas of responsibility and/or the mechan-isms which might be used to identify the areas of responsibility for the ACRS and ACNW. Dr. Kerr was asked to discuss resolution of this matter with the ACNW.
XIV. Executive Sessions (0 pen / Closed)
A.
Subcommittee Reports 1.
OperatingincidentatSavannahRiverNuclearplant(0 pen)
[ Note: Mr.D.HoustonwastheDesignatedFederalOfficiaifor this portion of the meeting.]
l
~
p y *~
.l 4
l
'l
= 341ST ACRS MEETING MINUTES 22.
Mr. Ward ~ briefly discussed the incident which occurred during startup of the P-Reactor at Savannah River on August 7, 1988.
Difficulties were encountered in predicting and maintainin7 criticality in the core. This problem was due to the noncon-sideration of He-3 buildup from the decay of tritium during the prolonged shutdown of the reactor.
This pert of the incident was noteworthy only on the basis of the large discrepancy between predicted and actual control rod positions and the. fact that the technical staff did not adequately investigate the cause of the problems which they were experi-encing before continuing the restart.
Once the reactor was at power, a short-duration " power spike" was observed.
Mr. Ward provided copies of the instrument printout which showed the magnitude of this " spike," (devia-tion of 0.5-1.0% of power over a 30-second time spen). This power " spike did rot approach the auto scram level, which is--
set at 108% power.
He indicated that the cause of' this fluctuation. may have been due to the operator inadvertently.
moving the control rods in the wrong direction' to compensate for xenon burnout.
Savannah River has instituted procedural changes to resolve the problems associated with.this restart.
C.
Report of the Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena Subcomittee (Postponed)
[ Note: Mr. P. A. Boehnert was the Designated Federal Official-forthisportionofthemeeting.)
The report of the Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena Subcomittee on the MIST and OTSG programs was postponed indefinitely.
3.
IAEA International Conference on the Use of 0perating Experience (0 pen)
[ Note:
Mr. Herman Alderman was the Designated Federal Offi-cial for this portion of the meeting.)
Pr. Michelson stated that he had issued' a written report and distributes this report to the ACRS membus. He noted that he would N pleased to discuss specific issues with the Comit-tee, or individual members, as the need arose.
B.
Reports,_et)ers'andMemoranda(0 pen) 1.
Propcu_1 Restart of the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station The Comittee was favorably impressed with the changes made in plant management, hardware, and opeations.
They concurred with the restart of the plant subject to additional NRC Staff
4 341ST ACRS MEETING MINUTES 23 evaluation of the licensee's compliance with the station blackout rule and the establishment of a clearly defined program for early correction of the deficiencies in the
~
Emergency Plan which were identified in the August 6.1987 FEMA report.
The Committee stated that it would review the concept proposed by the licensee for the use of a harded vent for relieving torus overpressure as_ a generic issue for all Mark I containments.
2.
Proposed-Rulemaking Related to Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants.
(Letter to Chairman Zech dated September 13, 1988).
The Committee did not endorse the proposal to establish a maintenance rule.
They have in their review not seen any evidence that the existence of a rule would reduce risk. The Committee believes industry maintenance practices are improv-ing and that the issuance of a rule may be disruptive to the industry initiatives that have been developed to accomplish-plish this improvement.
Dr. Lewis added additional coments noting that more maintenance does not always reduce risk and that a theory of reliability exists which could and should be used in the analysis of maintenance programs.
3.
Proposed Resolution of Unresolved Safetv Issue A-45, " Shutdown Decay Heat Removal Fequirements."
(Letter to Chairman Zech dated September 14, 1988)
The Committee agreed with the NRC Staff's proposed strategy for incorporating the USI A-45 issue into the 1 pes.
The i
Committee proposed three additional actions to be considered as part of the USI A-45 resolution:
(a) Licensee's claiming specific benefit from feed-and-bleed cooling should be required to certify that their plant has the capability (in hardware, procedures, and train-t ing) to successfully remove decay. heat by this means, Certification would mean documenting the analysis has been done so that it can be demonstrated to the satisfac-tion of the NRC Staff that feed-and-bleed cooling can be relied upon as an emergency means for cooling the core.
(b) INP0 has studied operating experience with decay heat removal systems and has published. recommendations for improvements in herdware and procedures in a number of Significant Operating Event Reports.
The Committee believes that licensees could make use of these recommen-dations in their IPEs.
(c) The Committee noted that the IPE program does not include an evaluation of the risk associated with sabotage. The
-w.--
._a.~
-_--_a_
- ~, - -
,y ll
^
' S 341ST ACRS MEETING MINUTES 24 Comittee recomended that consideration be given to a 1:
continued - study of how sabotage resistance might. be improved in existing plants.
4.
Proposed Resolution of Generic Issue 99, "!mproved Reliability of RHR CapaMlity in FWRs."
(Letter to Chaiman Zech, dated September 14, 1986)
The NPC Staff recomended improvements in procedures and instrumentation which the NRC Staff believes will make it less likely that RHR flow will be interrupted during "mid-loop" operations.
The Comittee agreed with these recommendations.
The NRC Staff also recommends implementing procedures designed to assure that containment could be closed in the event that there is a threat of core damage. The Comittee was concerned
~ " -
that these procedures may not be adequate and recomended additional study by the NRC Staff.
5.
NRC Staff's TVA Lessons Learned Effort.
(Letter to Chairman Zech dated September 13, 1988)
The Cortittee believes that the NRC Staff lessons learned recomendations are well thought out and responsive to the problems which were experienced at TVA. The Committee recom-mended that the NRC Staff observe and monitor the performance of licensees and assess their capability for safe operation of their plant.
The NRC should not dictate the management-organization and style of a utility and should avoid prescrip-tive and detailed regulations or evaluation of utility manage-ment, methods, and structures.
C.
OtherConclusions-(0 pen / Closed) 1.
Nominating Comittee (Closed)
?
See Supplement (Official Use Only).
2.
Plans for Future Actions on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Licensing Renewal (0 pen) t The Comittee discussed its plans for future actions on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Licensing Renewal.
The Comittee decided that they would defer coment on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking until public comments have been received.
3.
Schedule for Review of the Staff's Recomendations for BWR Mark I containments (0 pen)
o 4
1
' f. -
f M1 341ST ACRS PEETING MlhDTES 25
(
The Committee discussed its schedule for review of the Staff's recommendations for BWR Mark I containments.
It was agreed, on the basis of the Staff's ' schedule for developing these recommendations, that the Committee could not review this natter before the December 1988 meeting.
It was requested that Mr. Fraley inform Mr. Stello, EDO, of the Committee's decision.
(See - R.
F. - Fraley memorandum to V. Stello dated September 25,1988.)
4.
Receipt of Letter from Rep.
L.
Alexander, House Chairman, Massachusetts Joint Committee on Energy, Regarding Pilgrim huelear Povier Station (0 pen)
A letter was received from Representative L. Alexander House Chairman, Massachusetts Joint Committee on Energy, after the Comittee's discussions with the NRC Staff ard Boston Edison Company.
Representative Alexander raised some questions pertaining to the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station -and the proposed restart.
The Comittee agreed that this inquiry should be referred to the NRC Staff for a response.
(See R.
F. Fraley memorandun to V. Stello, dated September 20,1988.)
5.
Receipt of - Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D.-Md.) Letter Forwarding County Council, Harford County, Maryland Letter Regarding Peach Botton Nuclear Plant (0 pen)
The Comittee took note of receipt of a letter from Senator Barbara Mikulski, (D-Md.) to Chairman Zech that forwarded a letter from the County Council of Harford County, Maryland.
The County Council's' letter raised concerns associated with the Peach Bottom nuclear plant and requested that the Comit-tee address these concerns as part of the Committee's review of the proposed Peach Bottom restart. The Committee plans to evaluate these concerns in its review.
D.
FutureActivities(0 pen) 1.
Future Agenda The Committee agreed to the tentative future agenda shown in Appendix II.
2.
Future Subcomnittee Activities A schedule of future subcommittee activities was distributed to members (Appendix III).
The 341st ACRS meeting was adjourned at 1:30 p.m., Saturday, September 10, 1988.
>W
s:
ge 1.,
APPENDICES 341ST ACRS MEETING SEPTEMBER 8-10, 1988 1.
Attendees II.
Future ACRS Agenda.
III.
Future ACRS Subcomittee Activities IV.
Other Documents Received 6
e 9
1
339 340 41 342 343 344 345 346 347 ACRS MEETING DATE SEPT. 8-10,'1988 p
ATTENDEES Thursday-Friday Saturg Dr. William Kerr,' Chairman
/
v' Dr. Forrest J. Remick, Vice Chairman Mr. James C. Carroll
/
/
/
i Dr. Harold W. Lewis
[
/
/
L i
Mr. Carlyle Michelson
/
I
~
~
l
.Dr. Paul G. Shewmon Dr. Chester P. Siess
/
/
[
/
/
Mr. David A. War Mr. Charles J. Wylie
/
t/
L 1
l 1
APPENDIX I l
=
k.
I APPENDIX:1 - ATTENDEES N
341ST ACRS MEETING MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 8-10, 1989 w
1 THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1988 w:
Public Attendees NRC Attendees d
Tsong-Lun Chu, Brookhaven Lab.
W. Lyon, NRR-i William A. Cross, STS C. Tramell, NRR John Flude, NUS R. Jones, NRR William Pearce, Self J. Flude, NUS Paul J. Hamilton, Boston Edison Co.
T. Scarborough, ASLAP F. P. Gabriel, The Enterprise H. Balukjian, NRR i
J. E. Howard, Boston Edison Sidney Feld, RES K, Connor DSA J. Lyash, R I k
Peter F. Riehm, KMC G. Mazetis, RES R. E. Enkeboll, NUMARC M. Dey, RES:
i L
John Maffe, USCEA J. Scarborough, OCM/KCR P. Quattro, ABZ, Inc.
B. Richter, RES R. H. Vollmer, TENERA A. DiPalo, RES l
J. A. Basilio, Phila. Electric Co.
D. Persinko, NRR.
Joe Colvin,-NUMARC J. Jankovich, NRR
'A. Chucrie, Battelle Loren P11sco, NRR M. Phillis, Bishop Cook, et al.
Daniel Mcdonald, NRR S. Poltorak, SERCH Bruce Boger, NRR L. S. Gifford, GE Dick Wessman, NRR P. Tate, TVA J. T. Wiggins, R I L. Neal, USCEA C. C. Warren, R I Edward S. Fratto, Com. Massachusetts L. T. Doerflein, R I J. P. Riccio, MRS Nancy L. Rowe, Sandler & Berlow G. Uhle, Newman & Holtzinger Don Silvennan, Newman & Holtzinger t
l George Edgar. Newman & Holtzinger l
Janet Ecker, Newman & Holtzinger FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 1989 Public Attendees NRC Attendees l
John W. Flude NUS Suzanne Black OSP Eve Fotopoulos, SERCH Licensing /Bechtel Gerald Gears, OSP Bill Pearce, Consultant Robert Pierson, OSP D. Diamon, BNL Hukan Garg, OSP Bill Rasin, NUMARC John Fair, OSP L. S. Gifford,-GE D. Persinko, NRR-Charles J. Ruger, BNL T. Scarborough, ASLAP l
Stephen Additon, IT Corp.
Carl Johnson, RES i
Joseph Nadrau, M0 VATS George Sege, RES l
Robert Carr, MOVATS Franklin Coffman, RES Paul Norian, RES Karl Kniel, RES l
F. Odar, RES l
Richard Barrett, NRR l
Owen Rothberg, RES I
R. Palla, NRR F. Congel, NRR D. Cherny, RES R. Baer, RES M. Dey, RES I-2 l
3 o
APPENDIX II ACR$ rVTURE AGENDA October 6-8, 1988 ImportantSafety-RelatedIssues(0 pen)Estimatedtime: Ihr.(CPS /SD)-
Discuss proposed hierarchical structure for important safety-related issues identified by the ACRS members.
Diagnostic Evaluation of Selected LWRs (0 pen) Estimated tinie:
li hrs.
(HW./HA) - Briefing by NRC representatives regarding Diagnostic Evaluations conducted by the NRC Staff for three nuclear power plants.
PRISM Ligilid Metal Cooled Reactor Design (0 pen) Estimated time:
2 hrs.
(DAW /MME) - Review and comment regarding the conceptual design features oftheDOEAdvancedLMR(PRISM).
Centrifugal Enrichment Plant (0 pen / Closed) Estimated time:
1 hr.
(HWL/HA) - Review and comment regarding proposed plant-for centrifugal enrichment of nonradioactive isotopes.
ACRS Subcommittee Activities (0 pen) Estiaiated time: 45 minutes (WK/RFF/MWL) -
Reports and discussion of status of assigned ACRS subcomittee activities, including the planning on the International Workshop on QA/QC.
Misrepresented Equipment in Nuclear Power Plante (0 pen) Estimated time:
I hr.
(HWL/HA)
' Briefing regarding NRC Staff activities related to problems associated with the supply and use of misrepresented equipment in nuclear power plants.
NRC Quantitative Safety Goals (0 pen) Estimated time: 26 hrs.-(DAW /MDH)
- ACR5 review and comment regarding the NRC Staff's proposed implementation plan for the NRC quantitatm safety goals.
Modular High Temarature Gas Cooled Reactor (0 pen) Estimated time:
1-3/4 hrs. (DAW /MME) - Preparation of ACRS report regarding preliminary-design of the DOE High Temperature Gas Cooled Reactor and discussion
.with the NRC Staff as appropriate.
Future ACRS Activities (0 pen) Estimated time: 30 minutes (WK/RFF)-Discuss anticipated ACR5 Subconspittee activities and items proposed for consideration by the full Committee.
In Situ Testing of Safety-Related Motor Operated Valves (0 pen / Closed)
Estimated time: 2 hrs. (CM/EI) - Review a proposed generic letter that will expand periodic in situ testing and surveillance requirements for motor-operated valves.
Appointment of New ACRS Members (0 pen / Closed) Estimated time: 45 minutes (FJR/NSL) - Qualifications of candidates nominated for appointment to the ACRS will be discussed.
l l
L,'
lYev.
3 - to - v f
'i' APPEllDIX III ACRS/ACNW COMMITTEE & SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS Fourth Meeting of the Advisory Committee on We!eer Weste, September 13-14, 1988, Bethesda, MD, Room P-ll4.
Advanced Pressurized-Water Reactors, September 15, 1988, CANCELLED.
Reliability Assurance, September 16, 1988, POSTPONED.
Planning Meeting on the International Workshop on QA/QC, September 21, 1988, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, MD (Igne), 8:30 a.m., Room P-114. This meeting is a continuation of the Planning Session. The Energy Division of the American-Society for Quality Control in cooperation with the ACRS is hold an interna-tional conference on nuclear power plant quality which will be held on May 14-18, 1989. in San Diego, CA.
Lodging will be announced later.
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
i Mr. Ward Dr. Stevenson Dr. Siess Mechanical Components, October 4, 1988, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, MD (Igne), 8:30 a.m., Room P-114.
The Subcommittee will review a proposed generic letter that will expand periodic in situ testing and surveillance-requirements for safety-related, motor-operated valves.
Lodging will be announced later. Attendance by the following is anticipated:
1 Mr. Michelson Dr. Siess Mr. Carroll Mr. Wylie Advanced Reactor Designs, October 5, 1988, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, MD i
(El-Zef tawy), 8:30 a.m., Room P-114.
The Subcommittee will review the draft SER for the liquid metal reactor (LMR) Power Reactor Inherently Safe Module (PRISM) design. Lodging will be announced later. Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Mr. Ward Dr. Siess Dr. Kerr Mr. Wylie Mr. Michelson Dr. Avery Dr. Remick Dr. Lee Dr. Okrent 342nd ACRS Meeting, October 6-8, 1988, Bethesda, MD, Room P-114.
Mechanical Components, October 26-27, 1988, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, MD -
(Igne), 8:30 a.m., Room P-114.
The Subcomittee will dir. cuss recent work related to valve reliability, including:
1solating high enargy line tests at Wyle Labs., compressed air systems and valves, seismic tests on an aged Shippingport valve, etc.
Lodging will be announced later.
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Mr. Michelson Mr. Wylie Mr. Carroll Mr. Wohld Dr. Siess
4 Advisory Comittee on Nuclear Waste meets with NRC Commissioners October 27, 198u,_11:00 a.m., Rockville, MD (White Flint).
Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena, November 3, 1988, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, MD (Boehnert), 8:30 a.m.,
Room P-114.
The Subcommittee will review: (1) the TTnal report of the Technical Program Group)on the Code Scaling, Applicability and Uncertainty (CSAU) Methodology and (2 the status of the joint NRC/B&W OTSG follow-on re3earch program. Lodging will be announced later. Attendance by the following 13 anticipated:
Mr. Ward Dr. Plesset Dr. Kerr Mr. Schrock Mr. Wylie Dr. Sullivan Dr. Catton Dr. Tien Fifth Meeting of the Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste, November 3-4, 1988, Bethesda, MD, Room P-114.
Decay Heat Removal Systems, November 4,1988 (a.m. only), 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, MD (Boehnert), 8:30 a.m. - COB, Room P-422. The Subcomittee will review the proposed resolution of Generic Issue 23 "RCP Seal failures."
Lodging will be announced later. Attendance by the following is anticipated:
- Mr. Ward Dr. Catton Dr. Kerr Mr. Davis Mr. Wylie Planning Meetins on the International Workshop on QA/QC, November 9-10, 1988, San Diego, CA (Jgne), 8:30 a.m.
This meeting is a continuation of the Plan-ning Session at the workshop site in San Diego, CA.
The Energy Division of-the American Society for Quality Control in cooperation with the ACRS -is holding an international conference on nuclear power-plant quality which will be held on May 14-18, 1989, at the Sheraton-on Harbor Island, San Diego.
Attendance by the following is anticipated, and reservations have been made at the Sheraton for the nights of November 8 and 9:
Mr. Ward Dr. Stevenson Dr. Siess Advanced Boiling Water Reactors, November 15-16, 1988, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, MD (Aldennan), 8:30 a.m., Room P-114. The Subcommittee will contin-ue its FDA review of this standard plant.
Detailed ACRS questions will be covered on review module 1.
An overview of the second review module is planned.
Lodging will be announced later.
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Mr. Michelson Mr. Ward Dr. Kerr Mr. Wylie Dr. Remick Dr. Okrent Dr. Shewmon
e l 343rd ACRS Meeting, November 17-19, 1988, Bethesda, MD, Room P-114.
l Babcock & Wilcox Reactor Plants, November 30 - December 1,1988, Sacramento, Trom(Major), 8:30 a.m.
The Subcommittee will meet to study the lessons learned CA the approximately 2-year shutdown of Rancho Seco that occurred following
' the December 16, 1985 overcooling event.
Topics include monitoring extended start-up program as well as plant and organization changes as a result of the j
. restart effort. Lodging will be annourced later. Attendance by the following is anticipated:
I Mr. - Wyli e Mr. Michelson
^
Mr. Carroll Mr. Ward Containment Systems, December 6, 1988, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, MD (Houston), 8:30 a.m.,
Rooir P-114.
The Subcommittee will review the NRC Staff's document on final recommendations for containment performance and improvements-(BWR Mark I only).
Lodging will be announced later.
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Mr. Ward Mr. Wylie Dr. Kerr Dr. Catton Dr. Siess Dr. Corradini 344th ACRS Meeting, December 15-17, 1988, Bethesda, MD, Room P-114.
Occupational and Environmental Protection Systems, Date to be determined i
(September / October), Bethesda, MD (Igne).
The Subcommittee will review:
(1) the " hot particle" problem, (2) monitoring the quality and quantity -(of air-borne radionuclides in/out of containment following an accident,
- 3) the emergency planning rule, (4) the control room habitability report by ANL, and (5)otherrelatedmatters. Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Dr. Remick Dr, Mark (tent.)
Mr. Carroll Dr. Shapiro Mr. Wylie Peach Bottom Restart (Ad Hoc), Date to be determined (October), Bethesda, MD (Boehnert).
The Subcommittee will review the proposed restart plan for the Peach Bottom Plant. Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Dr.-Kerr Mr. Michelson Dr. Lewis Dr. Siess Reliability - Assurance, Date to be determined (mid-October), Bethesda, MD (Major).
The Subcommittee will continue its review of the EQ-Risk Scoping Study with special emphasis on the peer review comments.
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Mr. Wylie Mr. Michelson Mr. Carroll Dr. Siess
e Advanced Pressurized Water Rer.ctors, Date to be determined (October / November),
Bethestia, MD (El-Zef tawy).
The Subcommittee will discuss the comparison of VAPWR (RESAR SP/90) de.='gn with other modern plants (in U.S. and abroad).
Xttendance by the following is anticipated:
Mr. Ward Dr. Remick Dr. Kerr Dr. Shewmon Mr. Michelson Mr. Wylie Joint Core Performance / Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena, Date to be determined (October / November), Bethesda, MD (Houston /Boehnert).
The Subcommittee will review the implications of the core power oscillation event at LaSalle, Unit 2.
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Dr. Kerr Dr. Lee Mr. Ward Dr. Lipinski Mr. Michelson Dr. Plesset L
Dr. Shewmon Mr. Schrock Mr. Wylie Dr. Sullivan Dr. Catton Dr. Tien l
AC/DC Power Systems, Date to be determined (November),
- Bethesda, MD l
(El-Zeftawy).
The Subcommittee will review the proposed resolution for Generic Issue 128, " Electrical Power Reliability." Attendance by the follow-ing is anticipated:
Mr. Wylie Dr. Lewis Mr. Carroll Mr. Davis Dr. Kerr Dr. Lee Instrumentation and Control Systems, Date to be determined (November),
Bethesda, MD (El-Zeftawy).
The Subcommittee will review the proposed resolu-tion for Generic Issue 101, " Break Plus Single Failure -in BWR Water Level Instrumentation." Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Dr. Kerr Mr. Wylie Mr. Carroll Mr. Davis Dr. Lewis Dr. Lipinski Mr. Michelson i
Advanced Reactor Designs, Date to be detennined (November), Bethesda, MD (El-Zeftawy).
The Subcommittee will review the draft SER for the Sodium Advanced Fast Reactor (SAFR) design.
Attendance by the following is antic-ipated:
Mr. Ward Dr. Siess Dr. Kerr Mr. Wylie Mr. Michelson Dr. Avery Dr. Remick Dr. Lee Dr. Okrent
..e
-S-Advanced Pressurized Water Reactors, 06te to be determined (November /
December), Bethesda,-MD (El-Zeftawy).
The Subcommittee will review the licensing review bases document being developed for Combustion Engineering's Standard Safety Analysis Report-Design Certification (CESSAR-DC).
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Mr. Ward Dr. Remick Dr. Kerr Dr. Shewmon Mr. Michelson Mr. Wylie Decay Heat Removal Systems, Date to be determined, Bethesda, MD (Boehnert).
The Subcommittee will explore the issue of the use of bleed and feed for decay heat removal in PWRs. Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Mr. Ward Mr. Wylie Dr. Kerr Dr. Catton Mr. Michelson Mr. Davis l
Thermal Hydraulic Phenomene, Date to be determined. Bethesda, MD (Boehnert).
The Subcommittee will discuss the status of Industry best-estimate ECCS model submittals fcr use with the revised ECC'? Rule.
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Mr. Ward Dr. Catton Dr. Kerr Dr. Plesset Mr. Michelson Mr. Schrock Mr. Wylie Dr. Sullivan Dr. Tien Auxiliary and Secondary Systems, Date to be determined, Bethesda, MD (Duraiswamy).
The Subcommittee will discuss the:
(1) criteria being used Chilled Water Systems design, and (3) ystems, (2) regulatory requirements for by utilities to design Chilled Water S criteria being used by the NRC Staff to review the Chilled Water Systems design.
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
~
. Mr. Michelson Mr. Wylie Mr. Carroll Auxiliary and Secondary Systems, Date to be detennined, Bethesda, MD (Duraiswamy).
The Subcommittee will review the adequacy of the Staff's plans to implement the recommendations resulting from the Fire Risk Scoping Study.
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Mr. Michelson Mr. Wylie Mr. Carroll
s t :i-N
...c '?
~ !
Safety 'Research Program (Closed), Date to he determined, Bethesda, MD
'(Duraiswamy). The Su > committee will discuss ',he = ongoing tnd proposed NRC Safety Research-Program and budget, and the recent RES reorgai'iration.
- Lodging will be announced later.
Attendance by the following is: anticipated:'
Dr. Siess D, Shewmon Dr. Kerr-Fr. Ward Mr. Michelson
>r. Wylie Dr. Remick e
~
l l'
-.=, ~.
o:
.4 I
APPENDIX IV r
MINUTES OF THE 341ST ACRS MEETING SEPTEMBER 8-10, 1988 OTHER DOCUMENTS RECEIVED 341ST ACRS MEETING NOTEBOOK Tab 2
RESOLUTION OF GENERIC ISSUE 99, "INPROVED RELIABILITY OF RHR CAPABILITY IN PWRs 1.
Slides used by the speaker during the presentation 2.
Table of Contents i
3.
Schedule 4.
Status Report - Proposed Resolution of Generic Issue 99,
" Improved Reliability of RHR Capability in PWRs" 5.
Excerpt of Minutes of July 27, 1988 Decay Heat Removal Systems
-SubcommitteeMeeting(pp.10-14) 6.
E. Jordan, AE0D memo to J. Sniezek, NRR, Subj:
Proposed Generic Letter " Loss of Decay Heat Removal" with enclosures 1, l
2, and 3 l
l 3
MAINTENANCE OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS l
1.
Slides used by the speaker during the presentation 2.
Agenda F
3.
Status Report - Briefing on Proposed Rulemaking on Maintenance L
of Nuclear Powr Plants 4.
Tabla nf Contents 4
REVIEW 0F PROPOSED RESTART OF THE PILGRIM PLANT r
1.
Slides used by the speaker during the presentation 2.
Table of Contents 3.
Agenda 4.
Status Report - Review of Proposed Restart of Pilgrim Plant 1
5 QUANTITATIVE SAFETY G0ALS 1.
Table of. Contents 2.
Tentative Agenda 3.
Status Report l
4.
Status Report for September 1,1988 Meeting of Safety Philosophy, Technology, and Criteria Subcommittee l
6 PROPOSED MEETING DATES CALENDAR YEAR 1990 l
l l
. e m
w n.. 4
..I #
O' 34_lst ACRS Iy.2 7.1-1 OPERATING INCIDENT AT SAVANNAH RIVER 1.
Table of Contents 2.
Tentative Agenda 3.
Status Report 4.
Note to ACRS Members from D. Ward, dated August 19, 1988
_5.
Nucleonics Week article of August 25, 1988, "00E Official:
Tritium Need Led Operators to Pull Control Rods 6.
Washington Post article of August 31, 1988, " Math Error Cited in Reactor Failure" 7.
Nucleonics Week article of September 1, 1988, "Du Pont Review-ing Procedures for Savannah River Restart" 7.1 T/H PHENOMENA SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING:
STATUS OF JOINT NRC/B&W/EPRI MIST-Program and Proposed OTSG Follow-On Program 1.
Table of Contents 2.
Status Report 3.
Attachment - PROPRIETARY - Memo from H. Sullivan to D. Ward:
Subject:
Consultant Report for the July 21, 1988 Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena Subcomittee Meeting, dated Aug. 4,1988 4.
Attachment - BBS Nemo Kerr to Ward witn Coments on July 21, 1988 Thermal / Hydraulic (T/H) Phenomena Subcomittee Meeting 5.
Attachment - I. Cattom memo to P. Boehnert:
Comments on the T/H Phenomena Subcomittee Meeting - MIST Status Review 6.
Memo from Shotkin, RES to Hodges, NRR:
Coments on TAG Process to Define B&W Testina Needs 7.
Working Copy of Minutes of ACRS T/H Phenomena Subcommittee Meeting (INTERNAL COMMITTEE USE) 8 TVA NUCLEAR ACTIVITIES 1.
Slides used by the speaker during the presentation 2.
Table of Contents 3.
Tentative Agenda 4.
Status Report 5.
S. Chilk memo to Stello, Kerr, Connelly,
Subject:
- Final Report on TVA Lessons Learned, dated March 2, 1988 9
RESTART OF BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT 1._
Slides used by the speaker during the presentation 2.
Table of Contents 3.
Tentative Agenda 4.
Status Report 5.
ACRS Report on the Tennessee Valley Authority Management Reorganization and Shutdown of TVA's Nuclear Plants, dated August 12, 1986 6.
ACRS Report on the Restart of the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, dated March 15, 1988 11.1 1.
List of future ACRS/ACNW Committee and Subcommittee Meetings 11.2 (empty) l l
m s
( ;-
' :s.
j.' d
- 41st ACRS IV-3 12' INTERNATIONAL OPERATING EXPERIENCE 1.
Slides used by.the speaker during the presentation 2.
Table of Contents 3.
Tentative Agenda 4.
Status' Report 5.
ACRS Report 6.
ACES Report
)
7.
Scmmary/ Minutes for SPT&C Subcommittee Meeting on August 4..
1988 13 SEVERE ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT 1.
Slides used by the speaker during the presentation 2.
Table of Contents 3.
Tentative Agenda 4.
Status Report 5.
Accident Management Section of SECY-88-147, " Integration Plan for Closure of Severe Accident Issues," May 25, 1988 6.
Accident Management Section of SECY-88-205, " Generic Letter for the Implementation of the Severe Accident Policy Statement," July 15,1988(IPEs)(PredecisionalInformation) 14 PROPOSED RESOLUTION TO GENERIC ISSUE II.E.6.1, "IN SITU TESTING 0F VALVES" 1.
Slides used by the speaker during the presentation
p,
.Wa
.g f 3
341ST ACRS IV-4 MEETING
_ HANDOUTS
- g. Tab 1
15.1 Draft 2 of Memorandum for F. Remick, Moeller, Steindler, Smith from R. Fraley,
Subject:
ACRS/ACNW Split of Responsibilities with Attachment A (Draft Predecisional)
I 2
14 F.QUIPMENT RELIABILITY / VALVE TESTING Table of Contents / Schedule / Status Report Memorandum for F. Gillespie, E. Jordan, W. Parler from R. W.
Houston,
Subject:
CRGR Package Regarding Safety-Related Motor j
Operated Valve (MOV) Testing and Surveillance (Generic Issue II.E.6.1), dated August 23, 1988 with Enclosures 1 through 9 3
11.2 Memorandum to ACRS Members from R. Fraley, dated Rev.
September 8, 1988, transmitting ACRS Future Agenda Items for 342nd ACRS Neeting - October 6-8, 2988 j
4 9
Memorandum to Chairman Palladino from D. Ward,
Subject:
ACRS Review of TVA Restart Efforts, Construction Problems, and Management Reorganization, dated April 7, 1986 i
Sunnary, dated August 9,1988,
Subject:
OSP/TVA Meeting on l
Fuel Load Issues and Power Ascension Testing at Browns Ferry Nuclear (BFN) Power Station, Unit 2 July 7, 1988 with l
enclosures 5
4.0 Memorandum to ACRS Members from P. Boehnert,
Subject:
ACRS Review of the Pilgrim Restart - Additional Information, dated September 8, 1988 attaching:
q i
W. Kerr Report on August 26, 1988 Ad Hoc Subcommittee meeting on the Pilgrim restart and visit by Committee Members to the l
plant site on August 25, 1988; i
L Letter to W. Kerr from C. V. Barry, Secy. of Public Safety, Commonwealth of Mass., dated September 6, 1988 Pilgrim Organization Chart Letter to Boston Edison M/C Nuclear from William Kane, NRC, Attn:
J. Lydon,
Subject:
Management Meeting 50-293/86-41, dated December 31, 1986 Letter to Boston Edison Co Attn:
R. G. Bird,
Subject:
Inspection No. 50-293/8811, dated May 17, 1988
7
[ ' F / '"
Q [7*
(
341st ACRS-ly i 6
4.0 Memorandum to-W. Kerr from P. Boehnert,
Subject:
Review of' L
- Pilgrim Restart - Receipt of Additional Information,' dated
-September 9, 1988, with attachment:.
" Supplemental Testimony of Representacive Lawrence R.
Alexander, House Chairman of Pissachusetts' Joint Comittee on Energy, to the Advisory Comittee on Reactor Safeguards, September 7, 1988" with Attachment A:
IE Information Notice No. 87-08, Degraded Motor Leads in Limitorque DC Motor Operators 7
17.4 Memorandum to NRC Comissioners from V. Stello,
Subject:
Commission Action on the Kay Licensing and Standardization issues Associated with the DOE Advanced Reactor Concepts (SECY-88-202 and SECY-88-203), dated August 18, 1988 Letter from D. F. Bunch, DOE to V. Stello informing NRC of selection of PRISM concept with GE as prime contractor...,
dated August 15, 1988 Letter to T. J. Garrish, DOE from V. Stello regarding NRC's review, at DOE's request of three advanced reactor conceptual designs, dated August 17, 1988
^g