ML20046B198
| ML20046B198 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/17/1993 |
| From: | Palla R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Thadani A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9308030282 | |
| Download: ML20046B198 (32) | |
Text
~
J) w
~
- .E~~~
_l ~: :
%.... +.c June 17,1993 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Ashok C. Thadani, Director Division of Systems Safety and Analysis THRU:
William D. Beckner, Chief Probabilistic Safety Assessment Branch Division of Systems Safety and Analysis FROM:
Robert L. Palla, Jr.
Probabilistic Safety Assessment Branch Division of Systems Safety and Analysis
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF JUNE 3, 1993 MEETING WITH NUMARC REGARDING ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT On June 3, 1993, the NRC staff met with representatives of the Nuclea~r Management and Resources Council (NUMARC) regarding accident management.
The purpose of this meeting was to discuss the status of industry accident management activities, and a proposed industry initiative on accident management.
This memorandum summarizes the most significant results of the meeting.
A list of attendees is presented in Enclosure 1.
A copy of the presentation materials is provided as Enclosure 2.
Following introductory remarks, L. Walsh (NAESC/J0G-AMAC) provided an overview of current industry accident management capabilities, and the objectives and focus of the industry effort to enhance these capabilities.
Although the incremental risk reduction offered by accident management was characterized as being relatively small (owing largely to the fact that the focus of the industry effort is on severe accident mitigation rather than prevention),
L. Walsh and W. Rasin (NUMARC) reaffirmed industry's commitment to accident management, and the belief that it is the right thing to do.
The status of completed and ongoing industry activities was briefly summarized, followed by a discussion of industry activities related to training and decisionmaking for accident management.
In response to industry concerns expressed regarding operator examination on severe accident material, W. Russell (NRC) made the following points:
The decision whether to place accident management response actions in the E0Ps (control room) or accident management guidelines (technical support center) should be made on the basis of safety, rather than examination concerns.
Rev. 7 of the examiners standards provides certain management controls which should minimize industry concerns, including provisions for utility review of scenarios in advance, and guidance on time compression
&l6 1
noon E FILE 08KER COPY o
- 3 & " ",, b 9308030282 930617 9> y /d~U a
PDR REVGP ERGNUMRC g
//,
,w Q,,
Ashok C. Thadani g 3
,'u 'h w
w
\\
severe accident program was initiated.
Industry needs to consider and propose how they would evaluate accident management as part of an accident management initiative (e.g., through exercises and training), since this would have a bearing on NRC acceptance of the initiative.
It was agreed that NUMARC will procced to further develop the industry initiative, including a proposal on how utilities would test and evaluate their accident management capabilities, and that another senior management level meeting would be held in the October / November 1993 timeframe.
A briefing of the Commission on this subject was tentatively scheduled for December 1993.
Original signed by:
Robert L. Palla, Jr.
Probabilistic Safety Assessment Branch Division of Systems Safety and Analysis
Enclosures:
As stated DISTRIBUTION:
A/M Distribution List WBeckner AEl-Bassioni RPalla NRC PDR Central Files WRasin (NUMARC)
DModeen (NUMARC)
SPSB r/f
=il 0FC SPSB:DSSA:NRR SC:SPSB:DSSA BC:SPSB:Dg 90,3 NAME RPalla:bw [/ /'
AEL-BASS 10ffl WBECKNER DATE 06// 7/93 06/r)/93 06/l1/93 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY Document Name: JUNE 3 MET
k ACCIDEN'a m
c=nANAGEMENT DISTRIBUTION FOR MEET 9eG NOTICE TMurley,12 G 18 FMiraglia, 12 G 18 WRussell, 12 G 18 FCongel, 10 E 2 BBoger, 10 H 5 FGillespie, 12 G 18 AThadani, 8 E 2 MTaylor, 17 G 21 MDrouin, NLS 324 MSolberg,12 0 22 EJordan, MNBB 3701 JRosenthal, MNBB 9715 RBarrett, 8 H 7 EBeckjord, NLS 007 TSpeis, NLS 007 BSheron, NLS 007 LShotkin, NLN 353 FCoffman, NLN 316 NLauben, NLN 353 DHouston, P 315 JKudrick, 8 D 1 RErickson, 9 H 19 DDesaulniers,10 D 24 MRubin, 8 E 23 RJones, 8 E 23 RGallo,10 D la DMarksberry, MNBB 3206 WPasedag, DOE Alevin, 8 E 23
Ashok C. Thadani severe accident program was initiated.
Industry needs to consider and propose how they would evaluate accident ranagement as part of an accident management initiative (e.g., through exercises and training), since this would have a bearing on NRC acceptance of the initiative.
It was agreed that NUMARC will proceed to further develop the industry initiative, including a proposal on how utilities would test and evaluate their accident management capabilities, and that another senior management level meeting would be held in the October / November 1993 timeframe.
A briefing of the Commission on this subject was tentatively scheduled for December 1993.
Original signed by:
Robert L. Palla, Jr.
Probabilistic Safety Assessment Branch Division of Systems Safety and Analysis
Enclosures:
As stated DISTRIBUTION:
A/M Distribution List WBeckner AEl-Bassioni RPalla NRC PDR Central Files WRasin (NUMARC)
DModeen (NUMARC)
SPSB r/f 0FC SPSB:DSSA:NRR SC:SPSB:DSSA BC:SPSB:Dg NAME RPalla:bw // /'
AEL-BAYSidd WBECKNER DATE 06// 7/93 06/r)/93 06/l1/93 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY Document Name:
JUNE 3 MET
O g
V w
Ashok C. Thadani severe accident program was initiated.
Industry needs to consider and propose how they would evaluate accident management as part of an accident management initiative (e.g., through exercises and training), since this would have a bearing on NRC acceptance of the initiative.
It was agreed that NUMARC will proceed to further develop the industry initiative, including a proposal on how utilities would test and evaluate their accident management capabilities, and that another senior management level meeting would be held in the October / November 1993 timeframe.
A briefing of the Commission on this subject was tentatively scheduled for December 1993.
hhYb k
Robert L. Palla, Jr.
Probabilistic Safety Assessment Branch Division of Systems Safety and Analysis
Enclosures:
As stated
ENCi.0SURE _1 g
,, /, -
,?
w n.
~ /f/L
. ftnivE A f r. :.*ir -
av s aurst &
c hdg;,-
l
- r f
,b'U. ~ ' $
',,.,i
.y.?
h8E47~ k.
HEL4/
6/// /Vore LGAA?
AC/- 3/d, ~ '7/ SS 1 rr) 0ONb&
G//L F WATF4 ])71br17J'-f To(/ ' YcP l ~ 4'/ '/,}' -
SD GME1260tJ Cthi.wA PowiR t uoti-/BwW
$9 946 '?573
. (#3Qh[
$V 83CS/-/
M4CSC.
603 4PI-Q63i A53-f7-s). i.-
c
^
l he M ode e.n av mac-2.o.z - 3 7 :t - fa g o l
me.m T sa.,it t
%W
%~<. edic.
so s,, g _ u,i r i
W b~fAS/l'J Cl5Js'2~r2<c4 Ers?&v 4 z.s - 257-3737 L0.7./w d FAr-/p/ t-fg7-Soi - M -iwW UIWt Am '3F.ckfaEA._
/JRcf NfL4.[5?53 301 - So4 - o47 -
msexy s4na w.jue. toss 11 - sa y -us c, i
kq.;gg pgy;)
i+C Rl Dss A 30/- Sc't W9-
'3Rrw hw us/psg m - +1 t - 3 r a
[W &o
/A%'/0LCN~
30l- - SM - 7.rWB gsf M/.M
/WF/tcsg (w.
sov-icvs WARRGy SWEWSON NRKlkHF8 30.1lCo4.10W i
i l
3 I
e.-
NUMARC SAWG - SENIOR NRC STAFF MEETING ON SEVERE ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT 0
i
-j 3il Rasin, NUMARC Larry Walsh, NAESCo Fred Emerson, CP&L Dave IV oc'een, NUMARC l
i June 3,1993 Roc < vile, Maryland
O O
DISCUSSION TOPICS Veeting Oajectives Current Industry Accic ent Management Ca 3a ailities Status o"Inc ustry Severe Accicent V anagement Guic ance (SAN G)
Develoament Efforts Areas o" Fundamental Agreement Im a.ementation issues Rec uiring Fur: 1er C ari"ication/ Agreement Potential " Industry Position" on Severe Accicent Management
-- entative Sclec ule l
l NUMARC 2
t h
h l
MEETING OBJECTIVES i
i Identify the steps remaining prior.to requesting utilities to assess their existing severe.accic ent-management (SAM) capabilities anc to identify potential enhancements.
j Review areas o"func amental agreement between industry and the NRC staf.
Identify areas of concern and 1
suggest means for resolution.
j Discuss a proposal for an " Industry j
Position" for SAM implementation.
1 Discuss completion schedules and NRC intentions regarding review.
]
NUMARC i
3 A
l o
e CURRENT INDUSTRY ACCIDENT MANAGEMENT CAPABILITIES l
Significant accic ent management capabiities a ready exist
- Training programs
- Upgraded EOPs and Instruments
- Plant-reference simulators
- Safety Parameter Display Systems
- Emergency Response Organizations IP.E insights incicate olants are sa'e
- Best estimate, integrated plant analysis
- Generic EPGs/ ERGS are sound, but some plant-specific issues warrant change For most, core damage prevention insights are being addressed now Severe accident considerations remain to be addressed SAN o=ers some, aut re atively small, incremental risk rec uction 3ene#it.
NUMARC 4
O O
STATUS OF INDUSTRY SAMG DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS OBJECTIVE i
- Cost effectively enhance existing plant capabilities to mitigate severe accidents and minimize off-site releases FOCUS OF INDUSTRY EFFORT
- Utilize existina hardware and personnel resources
- Enhance area between where EOPs typically leave off and Emergency Plan offsite protective action recommendations j
begin
- Flexible enough to deal with event progressions different from those previously described or analyzed
- Provide a level of emphasis in balance with other plant priorities and issues 1
1 NUMARC 5
O o
o STATUS OF INDUSTRY SAMG t
DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS N UM ARC 92-O', A Process "or Evaluating Accicent Management Capabilities, Aaril 92.
- Describes SAM elements and contains an example assessment process E 3RI TR ' 01869, Severe Accident M anagement Guidance ~~echnical Basis Reaort, Dec 92.
- Identifies candidate high level actions (CHLAs) for addressing damaged cores and challenged containments Owners Grou a-S aeci"ic SAMG
- PRIMARY: from core damage through achievement of a stable condition, if possible
- SECONDARY: enhance capabilities to prevent core damage (from IPE insights)
IN'30 Training Guic ance NUMARC 6
i
S S
STATUS OF INDUSTRY SAMG j
DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS APPROACH TO SAM ELEMENTS
- Written Guidance: Major focus of the generic guidance development activity
- Computational Aids: Develop owners-group specific CAs to support usage of SAMG; No plans for sophisticated, analytical software
- Information Needs: Specify those parameters which could be used to make decisions regarding implementation and effectiveness of various strategies; identify alternate means of measuring or inferring the parameters of interest, as necessary
- Trainino: Identify appropriate areas (tasks) l and levels (methods, extent, etc.)
commensurate with the SAM (industry) objectives. Target is to familiarize; not memorize.
- Decision Makina: Develop SAMG for easy integratie.n into the current utility Emergency
+
Response Organization
~
- o.,
F NUMARC 7
S O
TRAINING AND DECISION MAKING 03jectives
- Training: Identify areas (tasks) and levels (methods, extent, etc.) commensurate with the overall industry objective
- Decision Making: Develop SAMG in such a manner as to be useful within current utility Emergency Response Organization (ERO) t 3erspective
- Focus should be on personnel responsible for plant damage condition assessment and SAMG strategy selection and implementation
- Severe accidents do not warrant inclusion in i
Licensed Operator Requal examinations
- Develop generic training guidance utilizing systematic approach NUMARC provices overall direction and coordinates regulatory interface INPO leads c'evelopment of technical training guic ance NUMARC 8
O S
1 TRAINING AND DECISION MAKING INPO convened an inc ustry working group in Dec 1992
- Reviewed initial task list based on EPRI Technical Basis Report CHLAs i
- Defined tasks and knowledge items associated with accident response roles Evaluator l
Decision maker n implementer (tasks are or will be addressed in existing training) j
- Concluded existing interfaces among CR, TSC and OSC are structured to support decision making in response to severe accident conditions
- Concluded evaluators and decision makers I
possess the necessary skills in decision making and teamwork i
n Based on experience and EP drills / exercises n More a matter of sharpening awareness of severe accident considerations NUMARC 9
5
O O
TRAINING AND DECISION MAKING
\\
Revision of INPO guideline (s) in progress to include:
- Overview plant-specific IPE insights and describe the most likely severe accident sequences i
- Given a list of CHLAs Explain what each action is
~
Discuss when it is applicable Discuss the effects of each on plant conditions Fo' low-on effort once c raft Owners Grou 3-S 3ecific SAMG is available
- Gather input from technical representatives l
of owners groups
- Convene industry working group to provide I
technical information for guideline Pro 30 sed com aletion schedule n Reconvene working group: July 93 n Draft for comment: Oct 93 Final product: March 94 NUMARC 10 i
9 STATUS OF OWNERS GROUPS EFFORTS 3WR Owners Groups
- Focus is providing TSC personnel added technical guidance to support the operating crew n Guidance, not procedures Take advantage of ad hoc nature of TSC
- Limited submittals of CEOG and B&WOG SAMG provided to NRC staffin Fall 1992
- Draft CEOG SAMG reviewed by NRC contractor and verbal comments received on April 22,1993
- Comprehensive draft packages available for NRC staffinformation: June 30
- Final documents to be issued to owners group members by end of 1993 NUMARC i
11
O O
.l STATUS OF OWNERS GROUP 3
EFFORTS (continued)
L Boiling $uater reactors
- NRC staff and BWRs have invested considerable resources in Rev 4 EPGs, which go extensively into severe accident prevention 1
I
- BWRs wish to avoid increases to operator burden from severe accident management issues ll l
- Proposed strategy changes and SAMG format have received wide review and are i
considered technically sound, BUT l
i l
l l
NUMARC 12 t
i
i O
O STATUS OF OWNERS GROUP EFFORTS (continued)
)
I BWROG (continued)
- To avoid increasing operator training and requal burden, BWRs must Put new strategy info entirely in SAMG (not EPGs), which may not be i
consistent with Rev 4, i
OR Put new strategy info in appropriate mix I
of EPG changes and SAMG but limit i
operator training /requal exposure to severe accident info
- Owners' ERO structure vary. Management responsibility for severe accident response may be assigned to Control Room, TSC, or both i
i 1
3 STATUS OF OWNERS GROUP EFFORTS (continued)
BWROG (continued)
- Therefore, the BWROG proposes to:
Provide a methodology by which utilities can (within a certain range) flexibly assign BWROG - developed severe accident response actions to EOPs (CR) or SAMG.(TSC) without taking deviations from the BWROG product Provide a methodology by which training and requal exposure to severe accident response actions can be prioritized based on risk and other considerations
- For the former, a draft methodology has been developed and is being tested
- The concept for the latter was discussed with NRC staff on 2/2/93. They agreed, but sought greater detail. Criteria are being developed by a BWROG working group l
i
.O O
STATUS OF OWNERS GROUP EFFORTS (continued)
BWROG (continuec)
- BWRs therefore request from NRC senior management i
Agreement in concept that NRC can L
work with both methodologies for addressing operator burden concerns A second meeting to present more i
detailed information on these two methodologies
- Draft BWR package available for internal review: Sept 30
- BWRs working to develop information
{
package to share with NRC staff: Sept 30 NUMARC 15
O 9
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF IMPACT ON UTILITIES SAN G Develo ament
- Strategies
- Computational Aids
- Information Needs ntegration wit 7 Emergency P an
- Command & control
- CR, TSC and OSC interface Training
- Lesson plan development
- Table top or walk-through drills
- Personnel Operations crew Technical support staff Decision making hierarchy
- Initial vs Periodic Per ormance-basec Evaluation NUMARC 16
9 S
f AREAS OF FUNDAMENTAL AGREEMENT I
1 SAM is aeyonc any license rec uirements.
1 Adhere to basic philosoahy espousec in NRC SECY 89-O'2
- Evaluate information on severe accidents -
- Prepare and implement guidance
- Train personnel appropriately Oaerator burcen must be limited.
Stri<e a balance between scope o' existing anc SAM training.
- Prevention is more important than mitigation of severe accidents
- Dominant risk contributors more important than insignificant events
- Simulators do not need to address severe l
accident regime
- Overall plant performance, not individual technical competency, should be judged l
NUMARC 17 i
O O
AREAS OF FUNDAMENTAL AGREEMENT EP RI ~~BR provides sound aasis "or addressing tec7nical issues.
N ot EOP-grac e im alementation or documentation
- Focus is on guidance, not procedures Performance-based evaluation of licensee ca aa ailities in lieu o" su amittals Utilities need "lexibility in SAVIG implementation; valic reasons for ci=erences among owners grou as; anc " rom alant to alant.
I" SAM is too exaensive, it will not wor <.
NUMARC 18 J
9 O
A IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES REQUIRING FURTHER CLARIFICATION / AGREEMENT 1
Review o' c raft owners grou 3-i s aeci"ic SAMG (after June 30) 1
- Indication of NRC acceptance Review is for information, not approval i
No formal NRC staff Safety Evaluation Report desired (except for BWR EPGs)
Appropriate technical guidance n in order for owners groups to move forward with a " final" product, feedback should be limited to "showstopper" issues Propose Aug 3 mtg to address any concems Propose Sept 10 for written indication of i
acceptability
- Human factors comments should be constrained to " big picture" usefulness of material Extent of plant sta= responsibility for e
severe accic ent know ec ge
- Licensed Operator Requal
- ERO familiarization
+
NUMARC 19
O O
IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES REQUIRING FURTHER CLARIFICATION / AGREEMENT Aaiity to im alement SAMG under 10 CFR 50.59
- Need to provide licensees confidence to move forward with application of SAMG
- Address generically or at least on an owners group-specific basis
- Intend to provide the NRC staff examples of what does or does not constitute an unreviewed safety question, and request concurrence Im a ementation "exiaility anc plant-s aecific c eviations are a 33ro ariate "or eac1 uti ity.
NUMARC 20
O O
IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES REQUIRING FURTHER t
CLARIFICATION / AGREEMENT Achieving uniform persaective t1roughout industry anc a i pertinent civisions and levels o" NRC staff, including regional offices, as to w1at constitutes an a 33roariate utility res3onse to SAM 03jectives
- Conduct joint workshops for utility and regional personnel Plans "or performance-aasec evaluations
- Focus should be process-oriented
- Number and impact should be small
- Difficult topic to provide unambiguous, yet flexible criteria Recognize selection of more than one CHLA may be acceptable Allow utilities to judge performance and subsequently review with the NRC staff NUMARC 21 i
O O
" INDUSTRY POSITION"
- BASIC BUILDING BLOCKS -
Systematic analysis (e.g., IPE, h U V A tC 92-O', others) from w1ic7 utiities can assess and enhance t7eir overal accident management capabilities Generic tec7nica basis for guidance ac dressing core c amage anc containment cla enging events Owners Grou a-Specific SAMG
-- raining guic e ine on ap 3ro ariate severe accicent <now ecge & aaility items NUMARC 22 l
e e
)
" INDUSTRY POSITION"
- EXPECTED LICENSEE ACTION -
1 5
Content o' a formal " Industry Position"
- Integrate insights from IPE and Owners Group-specific SAMG systematically
- Identify target date for completion of-assessment and implementation of any SAM enhancements Structure
- Formal" Industry Position "section n Actual wording that would be voted on by NUMARC Board of Directors
- Background section
- Overall approach and implementing guidance section Location
- Revision to NUMARC Report 91-04,
" Severe Accident issue Closure Guidelines" l
NUMARC 23
a.
m
" INDUSTRY POSITION"
- NEXT STEPS NECESSARY -
,;,1'J'-
I 1
a?
j Come to agreement witl senior NRC staf on w1at constitutes cost-ef ~ective res 3onse to SA V :
- Acceptability ofindustry guidance documents
- Training and performance-based evaluation expectations and constraints 03tain broac er review anc comment on t7e aro30 sal ay t7e h UM ARC ac visory bocies
- Solicit member comments
- Review with issues Management Committee (IMC) 3rie"t' e AC RS (anc Commission, i" l
warrantec') witl t7e \\RC sta'f 03tain a N U V ARC Boarc of Jirectors ' inc'ing vote a
NUMARC 24
9 O
TENTATIVE SCHEDULE June 30: Submit draft PWR Owners Groups SAMG 3ac< age August: N'UVIARC/NRC brief ACRS Se at 10: Receive N RC sta= review comments Se at ' 5: h U VIARC IMC Vtg Se at 30: Submit information Jac< age on BWROG SAMG, contingent on BWROG aparoval N'ov 30: Receive h RC sta= review comments on c ra1 BWROG SAN G December: h UM ARC /\\ RC sta=
brie" Commission M arc 7 3, '994: h UMARC Boarc o" Directors vote July 1997: Utilities com a ete SAM assessment & implementation NUMARC 25