ML20053D407
| ML20053D407 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 05/25/1982 |
| From: | Mauck J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20053D405 | List: |
| References | |
| RTR-REGGD-01.097, RTR-REGGD-1.097 ISSUANCES-OL, NUDOCS 8206040394 | |
| Download: ML20053D407 (8) | |
Text
F 7
t UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
{
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY Docket NO. 50-322
)
(0L)
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station,
)
Unit 1)
)
NRC STAFF TESTIMONY OF JERRY L. MAUCK ON INSTRUMENTATION FOR POST-ACCIDENT MONITORING SC Contention 27 SOC Contention 3
"[gyr -
mzsIcMTED ORIGIRI3 hifiedBy e
8206040394 820525 PDR ADOCK 05000322 T
PDR J
l 5
i OUTLINE OF TESTIMONY This testimony addressed Suffolk County Contention 27 and Shoreham Opponents Coalition Contention 3 on post-accident monitoring instrumentation and Shoreham's compliance with Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 2.
Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 2 provides guidance for establishing the criteria for design and qualification categories for post-accident monitoring instrumentation. To date the Regulatory Guide has not yet been implemented and, accordingly, licensees and applicants have not been required to address it. The Applicant will be expected to comply with the Regulatory Guide when it is implemented. This means that all the recommended instruments of the Guide will be required in the design unless the Applicant otherwise shows that the design meets NRC technical requirements, l
l 1
l l
P
~
7 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY Docket NO. 50-322
)
(0L)
(Shoreham Nuclear Power Station,
)
Unit 1)
)
NRC STAFF TESTIMONY OF' JERRY L. MAUCK ON SC CONTENTION 27 AND S0C CONTENTION 3 Q.
Please state your name and position with the NRC.
A.
My name is Jerry L. Mauck.
I am employed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission as a Reactor Engineer in the Instrumentation and Control Systems Branch of the Division of Systems Integration. A copy of my professional qualifications is attached.
Q.
What is the purpose of your testimony?
A.
The purpose of this testimony is to respond to Suffolk County (SC) Contention 27 and Shoreham Opponents Coalition (SOC) Contention 3, which state:
The recent Revision 2 of Regulatory Guide 1.97,
" Instrumentation for Light-Water Cooled Nuclear Power Plants to Assess Plant Environs Conditions l
During and Following an Accident" details needed devices and qualifications of instruments.
Shoreham is deficient in the following areas:
(a) Radiation Exposure Rate Monitoring (Item 18, Table 1; Items 20 and 41, Table 2);
(b)
Radioactivity Concentration or Radiation Level in Circulating Primary Coolant (Item 11, Table 1; Item 14, Table 2);
s (c) Continuous On-Line Monitoring of Halogen in
)
Effluent (Item 39, Table 1; Item 43 Table 2);
d) Secondary Containment Area Radiation Monitor Item 36, Table 1; Item 17, Table 2);
(e) Reactor Coolant System Soluble Boron Concentration (Item 3, Table 1; Item 4 Table 2);
(f) Analysis of Primary Coolant (Gamma Spectrum)
(Item 12 Table 1; Item 15, Table 2);
(g) Drywell Spray Flow and Suppression Chamber Soray Flow (Items 21 and 24, Table 1; Items 23 and i
23A, Table 2);
I l
(h) Standby Liquid Control System Flow (Item 28, Table 1; Item 37, Table 2);
(i)
Plant and Environment Radiation Monitoring l
(Item 40, Table 1; Item 45 Table 2);
l (j)
Post-Accident Sampling Capability (Item 42, Table 1; Item 47, Table.2); and (k) BWR Core Thermocouples (Item 5; Table 1; Item 13, Table 2).
Q.
What is the purpose of Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 2?
A.
Regulatory Guide 1.97, " Instrumentation for Light-Water Cooled Nuclear Power Plants to Assess Plant and Environs Conditions During and Following an Accident" was published during December 1980. This guide describes a method acceptable to the NRC Staff for complying with the Commission's regulations to provide instrumentation to monitor plant variables and systems during and following an accident in a light-water cooled nuclear power plant. The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards has been consulted concerning this guide and has concurred in.the regulatory position.
Q.
What are the requirements specified in Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 27
7 A.
Regulatory Guides, by definition, comprise guidance rather than requirements. Reg. Guides present prudent criteria for methods that are acceptable to the NRC Staff for complying with the Conunission's regulations. Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 2, provides guidance for design and qualification criteria for the instrumentation used to measure the various variables listed in this Regulatory Guide. These criteria are separated into three groups or categories that provide a graded approach to qualification of instrumentation depending on the importance to safety of the measurement of a specific variable. Category 1 provides the most stringent criteria and is intended for key variables.
Category 2 provides less stringent criteria and generally applies to instrumentation designated for indicating system operating status.
Category 3 is intended to provide criteria that will ensure that high commercial grade quality is obtained and applies to background diagnostic instrumentation.
Q.
To date, have licensees and applicants been required by the Staff to address Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 2?
A.
Licensees and applicants have not, to date, been required to address this Regulatory Guide. The Staff is currently reviewing the schedule for implementing Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 2, for all plants -- both operating plants and plants to be licensed in the near future. The applicant will be required to meet this schedule when it is defined.
Q.
What is the status of the Shoreham plant concerning Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 27 i
=
l
I l
Ni o
N,
A.
The Shoreham Applicant has not fomally submitted design information with regard to Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 2.
Therefore, the Staff has not reviewed the degree to which Shoreham will comply with Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 2.
The Applicant's expected compliance with Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 2, is discussed in the SER related to the operation of Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Unit No.1 (NUREG-0420, Section 7.5) dated April 1981.
It is our position that either all the recommended instruments of the Guide should be included in the design or that a technical justification should be provided for any instrument not included. A Staff evaluation of the Applicant's instruments and technical justifications will be issued upon submittal of an acceptable design.
Q.
What is your conclusion?
A.
SC Contention 27 and SOC Contention 3 are inappropriate at this time.
Regulatory Guide 1.97, Revision 2 has not yet been implemented. When the Reg. Guide is implemented, the Shoreham plant I
will be required to meet it, or show how it otherwise meets NRC technical requirements in this area.
l
I 0
JERRY L. MAUCK DIVISION OF SYSTEMS INTEGRATION U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~
PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS I have been with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission since September 1980.
I am a Reactor Engineer (Instrumentation) in the Instrumentation and Control Systems Branch, Division of Systems Integration, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
I serve as a reviewer in the area of nuclear power plant instrumentation and control systems in performing and coordinating reviews and evaluations of those portions of the applications for Contruction Permits and Operating Licenses and submittals regarding proposed modifications in licensed nuclear power plants for which the branch has responsibility to assure public health and safety and pro-tection of the environment.
I serve as project leader and coordinator of other reviewers for the resolution of highly complex technical issues and licensing problems and provide technical assistance and authoritative advice in the areas relating to the safety aspects of reactor plant instrumentation and control sys-tems and components.
I received a Bachelor of Science degree in Electrical Engineering from Virginia Tech University in 1967. Additional graduate studies were subsequently performed at George Washington University where I received a Masters of Science degree in Engineering Administration. Other educational background includes:
CFC Instru-mentation School,1968; Interdata Computer School,1972; Hewlett Packard Computer School,1978; Boiling Water Reactor Technology - NRC sponsored - 1980; Boiling Water Reactor Simulator School - NRC sponsored - 1981; Pressurized Water Reactor Simulator Technology - NRC sponsored - 1982.
(
~!
" ' from 1967 to 1980 I was Jcmployed by the Naval Ship' Research and Development Cen-ter (David W. Taylor Model Basin) as an Electronic Engineer with such duties as specifying, processing, and operating highly sophisticated instrumentatic.n sys-tems for use during naval ship trials (conventional and nuclear pcwered).
i f
t
(
Y O
t f
r