ML20059C794
| ML20059C794 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 07/20/1993 |
| From: | Wilkins J Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| References | |
| ACRS-2876, NUDOCS 9311020016 | |
| Download: ML20059C794 (64) | |
Text
.
Ow-n74 Certified Bv:
te Issued: 06/23/93 J.
Ernest Wilkins, Jr.
07/20/93 TABLE OF CONTENTS MINUTES OF THE 396TH ACRS MEETING April 15-17, 1993 I.
Chairman's Report.................................
1 II.
Current License Renewal Issues....................
1 III. Resolution of SECY-90-016 Follow-On Issues........
5 IV.
Safety Goals /Large Release........................
8 V.
SALP Program......................................
8 VI.
Report of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee Meeting on April 14, 1993............
13 VII. Regulatory Guides for Implementation of 10 CFR Part 20.....................................
13 VIII.
Meeting with the Director of the Office of Policy Planning...............................
14 IX.
Maintenance Guidance Documents.....................
16 X.
Generic Issue 152, " Design Basis for Valves that Might be Subjected to Significant
{
Blowdown Loads"....................................
18 1
l XI.
Reactor Operating Experience.......................
18 j
XII. Organizational Factors Research....................
19 XIII. Future ACRS Activities............................
19 XIV. Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recommendations....................................
21 XV.
ACRS Subcommittee Activities ACRS Regional Programs Subcommittee e
Meeting on March 23, 1993.....................
21 Report of NRC/BWR Owners Group Meeting -
Resolution of ATWS with Core Power Instabilities on March 16, 1993...............
22 i
.gcygD ORIGIFAL "N N +, ~ [,f/ Y
~
b\\
a...
9311020016 930720 PDR ACRS 267b PDR
3 s
11 Severe Accident Issues Related to the GE ABWR.......................................
23 i
e ABB/CE System 80+ Control Room Mockup........
23 XVI.
Appointment of New Members.......................
24 i
XVII.
Summary / List of Follow-up Matters...............
24 XVIII. Executive Session Reports.................................
26 e
Letter..................................
27 Supplement - Official Use Only
[ SUPPLEMENT REMOVED - FOIA EX(b) (6)]
f P
l k
iii APPENDICES MINUTES OF THE 396TH ACRS' MEETING APRIL 15-17, 1993 4
i I.
Attendees II.
Future Agenda
}
III. Future Subcommittee Activities 4
. i IV.
List of Documents Provided to the Committee i
i r
i
,.r or
17434 Federal Register i Vol. 58, No. 62 / Friday, April 2,1993, Notices ggg 4'
Foundation,1800 G Street, NW.. Was
,f conversations used as evidence in be held on April 20-21,1993 from 9 Place: Room 1133, Nationai Science
/atergate trials. The second opening, a.m.-5:30 p.m. in room M-14 at the an June 4,1991, included 4W Nancy Hanks Center,1100 Pennsylvania DC additional hours of conversat2ons Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20506.
gg"(F
~
^
Rm ete nomi ats ds obtained by the Watergate Special This meeting will be open to the Program Prosecution Force but not used in court. public on a space available basis. The Conroct Persons:Drs. Stephen Traugott and The National Archives p,oposed to topics willinclude opening remarks, M.C Roco. Pmgram Directors. Division of open Watergate-related segments from policy discussion and guidelines Cbemical and Thermal Systems, (202) 357-N Nixon White House tapes far May and review.
June 1972. The National Archives will Any interested person may observe
&te and Time: May 11-12,1993; 8:30 propose additional abuse of power meetings, or pottions thereof, which are P " ' 5Q segments for ublic eccess on a periodic open to the public, and may be F
ton.18
's Eashington.
basis in mont 11y groupings as Snal permitted to participate in the oc review and procsasing is completed.
discussions at the discretion of the Agendo: Review and evaluate nnminations There are no transcripts for these meeting clairman and with the for the NSF Research Equipment Grants tapes. Tape logs, prepared by the approval of the full-time Federal Program.
National Archives, are offered for public employee in attendance.
Contact Persons:Dn. Stephen Tnugott and access as a finding aid to the tape if you need special accommodations M.C Roca, Pmgram Dinctms. Division of Chemical and Thermal Systems (202-357-segments and a guide for the listener.
due to a disability, please contact the
",,fy,,dngr closed.
nere is a separate tape log en for Office of Special Constituencies, 7yp each segment of conversation re eased.
National Endowment for the Arts,1100 Reason for cosfag: The naminations being Each tape log entry includes the names Pennsylvania Avenue,NW.,
reviewed include infamation of a of participants; date, time, and location Washington, DC 20506,202/682-5532, proprietary or confidential nature. including of the conversation; and an outline of TTY 202/682/5496, at least seven (7) technical Information; financial data, such as the content of the conversation.
days prior to the meeting.
salaries: and pemnalinfamation
""*"I88 "d*"*I* *** *i*d * **
I he sound recordings will be mede Further information with reference to available to the general public in the this meeting can be obtained from Ms.
- "*"*"""*[*
" ~ " ' M n[*d*" A research room at 845 S. Pickett Street.
Yvonne M. Sabine Advisory Committee c Alexandria, Virginia, Monday through Management OfHcer, National.
U***d; M*'Ch 80' *3' Friday between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.
Endowment for the Arts, Washington, M
Listening stations will be avallable for DC 20506, or call (202) 882-6439.
mblic use on a first come, first served committeewrt ofpcer.
2 asis.The National Archives reserves Dated: March 30,1993.
[FR Dac. 93-7682 Filed 4-1-43; 8.45 sml the right to limit listening time in Y' anna M 5""'-
sus.o coes e response to heavy demand. In Dinefor,hnelOperadons.Notiomt accordancs with current regulations, no Endowmentfor ras Arts.
copies of the sound recordings will be IFR Doc. 93-7676 Filed 4-1-93; 8:45 am)
Nyc(gag gggg(A70gy sold or otherwise provided. No sound sus o coos is set-u COMMISSION recording devices will be allowed in the listening ama. Researchers may take Advisory Committee on Reactor
'i notes. Copies of the tape log entries will Safeguarda; Meeting Agenda NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION l
be available for Purchase.
in accordance with the urposes of Public access to some of the items in Special Emphasis Panelin Chemical sections 29 and 182h. of e Atomic the textual file se ents and some and Thermal Systems; Notice of Energy Act (42 U.S.C 2039,2232b), the Amendments Advisory Committee on Reactnr res et out 3
Safeguards will hold a meeting on April 1275.50 or 1275.52 (PRMPA
%e following three announcements 15-17,1993, in room P-110,7920 Regulations),
are being amended to reflect changes in Norfolk Avenus, Bethesda, Maryland.
Dated: March 30,1993.
tneeting dates and locations. De notice Notice of this meeting was published in Trudy Th.skamp Peterson, for these meetings originally appeared the Federal Register on March 25,1993.
Aedng Archivist of the tituted Scares.
In the March 25,1993 issue of the
[FR Doc. 93-7733 Filed 4-1-93; 8:45 aml Federal Register Vol. 58, No. 56, pp.
Thursday, April 15,1993 16209-16210.
8:30 a.m.-8:45 0.m.: Opening Name:Special Emphasis Panelin Remath h ACRS Chairman (OpenH Chemical and Thennal Systems.
The ACRS C2altman will meka opening azie and me: Apru 14-15 m3; a;30 nd agareng omduct oMe NATIONAL FOUNDATION ON THE a m. to 5 p.m.
meeting and comment brie 0y regarding ARTS AND THE HUMANITIES Place: Room 1133, National Science items of current interest. During this Ioundauon,1800 G Suvet NW, WuMnpon-session,the Commlues wul escuss Presenting and Commlasioning nc priwitles for preparation of ACRS Advlaory Panel; Meeting Agenda: Review and evaluate nominations Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the im be NSMoung Inmugatw Awards 4
.m.-10:30 a.m.r Current Federal Advisory Committee Act (Public ConD Persons: Drs. Stephen Traugott and License RenewalIssues (6penbThe Law 92-463), as amended, notice is M.C Roco. Program Dtrectas. Division of Committee will hear a briefing by and hereby given that a meeting of the Chemical and Thennal Systems,(202) 357-hold discussions with representatives of Presenting and Commissioning 960s.
the NRC staff and the industry on the Advisory Panel (Presenting and Date and Time April 29-30.1993;8:30 status of current license renewalissues, Commissioning Overview Section) will a m. to 5 p.m.
and how the Maintenance Rule might ba H
FedersJ Register i vot 58, No. 62 / Friday, Apnl 2. IW3
. Jotices IN35 est d as a meens to addoss the activit2es 7 3c p m -3 pm: Reactor Operatmg Committee, its consultants, and staff.
w;uted of the limnsees by the Li&nse nper,ence (Open}-The Comminee Persons desiring to make oral statements knewal Rule.
w411 boar e bnefing regarding the effect s :hould notify the ACRS Executive 20 45 a.m.-21.15 pm: Resolution of of1:urncano Andrew on the Turkey Director, Dr. John T. Larkins, as far m SEcrapars follow-On Issues Pomt Nuclear Plant. Representstive s of ads ance as practicable so that (O;+n}4e Committr.e will review tne NRC staff and the industry will appropriate errengements con be made ed ccmNmt on the NRC staff's participate.
to allow the necessary time during the proposod resolutions for the SECY l'15 pm-4 P m.: Future ACRS meting for suda statements. Use of still, 016 follow.on issues. Represer'tatives of Actinties (Open)-b Committee will metion picture, and television cameras the NRC staff and the industry will discuss the report of the Planning and dunng this meeting rnay be limited to participate, es appropr:ste.
Procedures Subcommittee agarding selected portions of the meeting as 1:15 p.m -2:25 pm: Safety Cools /
items proposed for consideration by the determined by the Chai.rman.
i I"li hmitta.
Information regarding the time to be set Large Release (Open}-b Committee wiu review and comment on a revised 4PA-5PR APPm ntment of New aside for this purpose may be obtained A
IOpen/Cloead)-b by a papared telephone call to the Commission Paper on the definition of rmmina.i wiH escuss 6e a large release within the context of the ACRS Executive Director prior to the im lementation of the NRC Sefety Goal qualifications of candidates proposed meeting. In view of the possibility that Po cy. Representatives of the NRC staff f r appomtment to the comm, rte *-
the schedule for ACRS meetings may be Portions of this session wulbe closed will participate.
adjusted by the Chairman as necessary to huu infonnation 6e release d to fadhtate the conduct af the meetmg.
2:25 pm--5:15 pm:SAIPPmgram which would represent a charly persons planning to attend should check (Openbh Committee will discuss
'"***T*^1*dI"'*"I"8 OI
- ""8 with the ACRS Executive Ducator if P
the overau SAlf pmcess and the chan made or pmpmed since the F ].-6pm.:PreparctmaofACRS such MMuhnpd muk in @
p incouvenience.
Re ory Impact Survey.
RepotMOpenkb h=% MH I have determined in as:cordance wa,th Re vos of the NRC staff and the in wul participate, djscmro subsection 10(d) Public Law 92-463 that g,,
g g co dag thh it is nernaamry to close portions of this 5:25 pm.-6 pm:Rerearch on meeting' Orpmwianalfactors (Open)-b 6 p.m.-6:25 p.m.:Remnciliation of meeting noted above to discuss infonnada es release d wMch wouM Committee wdl diarms a pmposed ACBS he and ACRS report m the NRC+ponsored Recommandations(Open)-h r8Present a clearly unwarranted research on argentr=tinnal factors-Committee will diarnna NRC staff invasion dpersaal privacy par 5 Represetatives of the NRC staff will responses to rennmendations made in U.S.C. 552b(c)(6).
Further information re6arding topics partidpate, as appropriata.
ACRS reporta.
to be discunod, whether the meeting Friday, Apd!16,1993 Saturday, April 27,1993 has been canceDed or ruchsdulod.the 8:30 am-# c.at.:Rqgulatory Calde 8 30 am-10 cm.:ACRS Chainnan's ruling on requests for the for the implementation of the r,evised Subcommittee Activities (Open)-%
oppmtunity to present aral statements 10 CFR part 20(Opan)-b remittee Committan wiu discum the status of and the time allotted can be obtained by will review and commant on the ACRS M~=mistee assignments, e prepaid telep't.one call to the ACRS proposed final regulatory guide DG-including (e) activities of the NRC Executive Director. Dr. John T. Larkins 8006, ** Control of Acrass to High and Reglen D n% (b) severe accident (telephone 301-492-4510), between a Very High Radiation Areas in Nuclear issues related to the GE ABWR,(c) the e u. and d:30 p.m. est.
Power Plants." Representatives of the ABB/CE80+ controlroom mock-up (d)
Dated Ma2ch 29,11P93.
NRC staff willparticipate, as use of advanomd graphics in nuclear John C. Hoyls, apprepr!ste.
power plant design pmcess, and (e) the mswy Cemh e Manyment Oga r.
9: am-10 cm: Meeting with the conduct and planning of ACRS
[FR Doc. M-7663 Pbd +-1-63: 845 aml Director of the Office of Policy Planning business.
(Open>% Committee wiD meet with to an.-t 2:30 pa.: Preparation of the Diredor of the Of5ce of Policy ACRS JLports (Open)-N Committee Plening and discuss matters of mutuel wiD discuss pmposed ACRS reports interest.
regard 4ng items ennatAared dunng this
@**k8' h M 1015 am-11M5 a.m.: Maintenance M En W % bc=*
Guldence Documerrts (Open)-%e 12.3 P.m. -2 pm.:MhceCaneous g,,g pg Committee wiB review und comment on (Open)-b c-mittee will discuss Documw moom
--- guidance matters ennalAmed but not mmpleted the NRC staffs 5mh' mentation of during previous meetings as time and The Nuclear Raguktory Commin=on documents fort e the Maintenanre Rule. Repmeentatives avallahdity s,f M*= permit.
(NRC) has estahihbed a local public 1 of the NRC staff and the industry will Procedures for the condud of and document room (IEDRJIar the uranium participate.
participation in ACRS seestings were fuel facility of hbstion Engtnoering.
IIM5 ex-f 2:30 p.m.:Generieissue publishedin the Federal Register on Inc., located tu Heenatita, Missouri. ~
152 " Design Basis for Vafres that Myht October 16,1992 (57 FR 47494). In Members of the pubile may now be Subjected to Significunt Blowdown accordance with these pmcodures, oral inspect sad copy documents and e
Loads"(OpenbThe Committee will or written statements may be presented correspondmion related to the Hematite discuss a proposed ACRS report on the by members of the public, romrdings facdity of Combustion eering Inc.,
NRC stafra proposed priority ranking of will be permitted only during those at the Jefferson CoUege Li 1000 this generic issue. Representatives of the open portions of the meeting when a Viking Drive. Hillsboro, Missouri 63050.
NRC staff will participate, as transcript is being kept, and quest 2cas ne library is open on the following approprista.
may be asked only by members of the schedule: Monday thmugh Thursday i
9 8
[>R *tO L
o UNITED STATES
~
!~
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
3 ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 o
% **.../
Revised April 15, 1993 r
SCHEDULE AND OUTLINE FOR DISCUSSION 396TH ACRS MEETING APRIL 15-17, 1993 ROOM P-110, 7920 NORFOLK AVENUE BETHESDA, MARYLAND Presentation time should not exceed 50 percent of the total NOTE:
o time allocated for a specific item.
The remaining 50 percent of the time is reserved for questions by ACRS members / consul-tants and answers by the presenters / consultants.
Number of copies of the presentation materials to be provided to the ACRS - 35.
THUR8 DAY, APRIL 15, 1993 1) 8:30 - 8:45 A.M.
ODenina Remarks by ACRS Chairman (Open) 1.1)
Opening statement (PGS/SD) 1.2)
Items of Current Interest (PGS/JTL) 1.3)
Priorities for preparation of ACRS reports (PGS/SD) 2)
8:45 - 10:30 A.M.
Current License Renewal Issues (Open)
(JCC/WJL/EGI) 2.1)
Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman 2.2)
Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff and the industry regarding the status of j
current license renewal issues, and J
how the Maintenance Rule might be used as a means to address the activ-1 ities required of the licensees by the License Renewal Rule 10:30 - 10:45 A.M.
- BREAK * **
3) 10:45 - 12:30 P.M.
Resolution of SECY-90-016 Follow-on Igsues (Open) (CJW/JCC/EGI/SD) 3.1)
Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman
~k' s
P 2
3.2)
Briefing by and discussions with representatives.of the NRC staff on the staff's proposed resolution of selected SECY-90-016 follow-on,is-sues.
Participation by representa-tives of the industry, as appropriateL 12:30 - 1:30 P.M.
- *
- LUNCH * *
- 4) 1:30 - 2:30 P.M.
Safety Goals /Larce Release (Open) ~ (TSK/MDH) 4.1)
Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman 4.2)
Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff on a revised Commission paper on the defi-nition of a large release within the-
'I context of the implementation:of the j
NRC Safety Goal Policy 5) 2:30 - 5:30 P.M.
SALP Procram (Open) (JCC/PAB)
(4:00-4:15 P.M. BREAK) 5.1)
Remarks by the Subcot:ittee Chairman 5.2)
Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff and l
industry regarding the overall SALP process and the changes made or' pro-posed since the Regulatory Impact Survey 6) 5:30 - 6:15 P.M.
Report of the Planninc and Procedures Subcommittee (Open/ Closed) (PGS/JTL) 6.1)
Discussion of the activities of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee
[ Note:
Portions of thisLsession.will be closed to discuss information the release of which would represent a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.)
i 6:15 P.M.
- *
- RECESS * * *-
i f
)
-)
1
3 FRIDAY, APRIL 16, 1993 7) 8:30 - 8:35 A.M.
Openino Statchent by ACRS Chairman (open) 8)
8:35 - 9:00 A.M.
Reaulatory Guides for Imolementation of 10 CFR Part 26 (Open) (JEW /EGI/SD) 8.1)
Report by the Subcommittee Chairman on the proposed final versions of the regulatory guides for implementing the revised 10 CFR Part'20, "Stan-dards for Protection Against Radia-tion" 8.2)
Participation by representatives of the NRC staff, as appropriate 9) 9:00 - 10:00 A.M.
Meetina with'the Director of the Office of Policy Plannina (Open) (PGS/GRQ) 9.1)
Remarks by the'ACRS Chairman 9.2)
Briefing by and discussions with Richard Vollmer, Director of the Office of Policy Planning, on items of mutual interest 10:00 - 10:15 A.M.
- *
- SBRAK * * *
- 10) 10:15 - 11:45 A.M.
Maintenance Guidance Documents (Open)
(JCC/HA) 10.1)
Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman 10.2)
Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff and industry regarding the proposed guid-ance documents for implementation of the Maintenance Rule
- 11) 11:45 - 12:30 P.M.
Generic Issue 152. "Desian Basis for Valves that Micht be Subiected to Sionificant Blowdown Loads" (Open) (CM/EGI) 11.1)
Discussion of proposed ACRS report on the NRC staff's proposed priority ranking of Generic Issue 152 Participation by representatives of the NRC staff, as appropriate
4 12:30 - 1:30 P.M.
- *
- LUNCH * *
- 12) 1:30 - 3:00 P.M.
Reactor Operatina Experience (Open)
(JCC/MDH) 12.1)
Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman 12.2)
Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff, licensee, and industry regarding the effects of Hurricane Andrew on the Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant 3:00 - 3:15 P.M.
- *
- BREAK * *
- 13) 3:15 - 4:00 P.M.
Orcanizational Factors Research (open)
(JCC/HA) 13.1)
Discussion of the proposed ACRS re-port on the NRC-sponsored Organiza-tional Factors Research Program Participation by representatives of the NRC staff, as appropriate 14) 4:00 - 4:45 P.M.
Future ACRS Activities (Open) (PGS/RPS) 13.1)
Discussion of the recommendations of the Planning and Procedures Subcom-mittee regarding items proposed for consideration by the full Committee during future meetings 15) 4:45 - 6:00 P.M.
Preoaration of ACRS ReDorts (Open) 15.1)
Discussion of the proposed ACRS re-ports on matters considered during this meeting.
16) 6:00 - 6:15 P.M.
Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recom-mendations (Open) (PGS, et al./SD) 16.1)
Discussion of the responses from the NRC Executive Director for Operations to comments and recommendations made in ACRS reports 6:15 P.M.
- *
- RECESS * **
5 SATURDAY, APRIL 17, 1993 17) 8:30 - 12:00 NOON EreDaration of ACRS ReDorts (Open/ Closed)
Discussion of proposed ACRS reports regard-ing:
17.1)
Current License Renewal Issues (JCC/WJL/EGI) 17.2)
Maintenance Guidance Documents (JCC/HA) 17.3)
Safety Goals /Large Release (TSK/MDH) 17.4)
SALP Program (JCC/PAB) 17.5)
SECY-90-016 Follow-on Issues (CJW/JCC/EGI/SD) 17.6)
Organizational Factors Research Pro-gram (JCC/HA) 17.7)
Generic Issue 152 (CM/EGI/SD) 17.8) 10 CFR Part 20 Regulatory Guides (JEW /EGI/SD) 17.9)
Appointment of New ACRS Members (PGS/JTL/MFL) (Closed)
- 18) 12:00 - 1:00 P.M.
ACRS Subcommittee Activities (Open)
Discussion of the activities of the ACP.S Subcommittees in the assigned areas, ir.i !.u f ~ '
ing:
(Time permitting; otherwise these reports will be deferred to the May 1993 ACRS meeting) 18.1)
Activities of the NRC Region II Of-fice (PGS/PAB) 18.2)
Severe accident issues related to the GE ABWR (TSK/MDH) 18.3)
ABB/CE System 80+ control room mock-up (PRD/EGI) 18.4)
March 16, 1993 NRC staff /BWR Owners Group meeting - Resolution of ATWS issue with core power instabilities (IC/PAB) l
L 6
19) 1:00 - 1:30 P.M.
Miscellaneous (Open) 19.1)
Discussion of matters considered during this meeting and matters con-sidered but not completed at previous-meetings as time and availability of information permit 1:30 P.M.
- *
- ADJOURN * *
- l 1
A
.i b} P!D P '
i f
i 4
MINUTES OF l
(g 396TH ACRS MEETING APRIL 15-17, 1993 The 396th meeting of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards was held at Room P-110, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, Md.,
on April 15-17, 1993.
The purpose of this meeting was to discuss and take appropriate action on the items listed in the attached agenda.
The entire meeting was open to public attendance, with the exception of a portion that dealt with the selection of new Committee members and other matters of a personal nature.
There were no written statements nor requests for time to make oral statements from members of the public regarding the meeting.
A transcript of selected portions of the meeting was kept and is available in the NRC Public Document Room.
(Copies of the transcript are available for purchase from Ann Riley &
Associates, Ltd., 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Washington, DC 20006.)
ATTENDEES ACRS Members:
P.
Shewmon (Chairman),
J.
E.
Wilkins, (Vice Chairman),
J.
Carroll (Member at Large),
I.
- Catton, P.
- Davis, H.
- Lewis, W.
- Lindblad, C.
Michelson, T.
- Kress, R.
Scale, and C.
J.
Wylie.
I.
Chairman's Report (Open)
Note:
Dr.
J.
Larkins was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting, l
Dr. Shewmon, ACRS Chairman, opened the meeting at 8:30 a.m.
and mentioned the following matters:
agenda for this meeting e
l invitation to the regulatory information conference e
e noted that two interns would be leaving the ACRS staff and going back to school II.
Current License Renewal Issues (Open)
Note:
Mr.
E.
G.
Igne was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.
Introduction Mr. Lindblad, Chairman of the Plant License Renewal Subcommittee, noted that this was a continuation of the Committee's March discussion on current license renewal
396th ACRS Minutes 2
issues.
At that time NUMARC was not prepared to comment on SECY-93-049, Implementation of 10 CFR Part 54, " Requirements for Renewal of Operating Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants "
NRC Staff Presentation Mr. William Travers, Deputy Director of the Division of Advanced Reactors and Special Projects in the Office of I
Nuclear Reactor Regulation, said that since the March ACRS meeting the staff has met with NUMARC in a public meeting to discuss the staff's proposals for implementing the provisions of 10 CFR Part 54.
The staff has briefed the Commission on SECY-93-049 and, as a result of that briefing,.
is preparing additional information in order to clarify some of the staffs proposals delineated in SECY-93-049.
This information should be ready for Commission consideration by i
the end of April 1993.
The staff is awaiting a staff requirements document from the Commission on SECY-93-049.
In response to questions from Mr. Carroll concerning ambiguity of the existing license renewal rule and its statement of consideration discussed during the March 15, 1993 briefing by the staff to the Commission regarding SECY-93-049, Mr. Travers stated that the OGC has determined that the statements of consideration are legal within the context of the existing license renewal rule; however, there are some concerns about the clarifying information that is presented in the statements of consideration in the existing license renewal rule and the staff's proposals of implementing the rule.
The OGC has put-forth a number of options for consideration, including interpretive rule-making that would establish on the record either a clarification or an augmentation of the information that is presently presented in the statements of consideration.
Mr.
Travers stated that no decision has been made at this time by the Commission on whether interpretive rulemaking or other forms of rulemaking should be pursued.
Interpretive rulemaking would elaborate on the Commission's view of how the conditions in Part 54 could be met while not changing the specific language of the current license renewal rule.
If interpretive rulemaking is performed, the Commission could conceivably accept the implementation proposals in SECY-93-049.
In response to a question from Dr. Lewis on the significance of a terminology change from license extension to license renewal, Mr. Travers stated that the terminology change occurred as a result of a decision to renew rather than to-amend operating licenses.
v
I 396th ACRS Minutes 3
NUMARC Press.ntation Mr. Rasin, NUMARC, stated that industry feels that license i
renewal is a very important part of the regulatory scene and that a reasonable stable license renewal process is needed so that operating plants can proceed in the near future to renew their licenses about midway through plant life.
He felt that the decision to seek extended plant operations should be a business decision and not a regulatory decision.
In reply to questions from Mr. Carroll concerning the time required for a utility to obtain,a renewal license, Mr.
Rasin stated that a definite answer at this time is premature, but that during the proposed license renewal discussion period it was estimated to be about two years from the submittal of a utility application to staff approval.
With issuance of the final rule the staff believes that a three year review pericd is more likely.
In response to questions from members, Mr. Rasin-noted that the date for the first application for License renewal should be about 1996.
The first presently-operating plant license expiration date is about 2007.
Mr. Rasin stated that the economics of license renewal has yet to be demonstrated.
Mr. Rasin addressed Dr. Lewis' remark concerning the difference between license extension.or amendment versus license renewal, noting that it is a legal argument.
The license renewal rule and its statements of consideration clarified this matter as not being a brand new, start from scratch, license.
He mentioned that the industry and staff agree that there are no technical steps that should be pursued by a plant just because its a new license.
Mr. Rasin addressed a legal problem with regard to the j
license renewal rule, i.e.,
if the rule and statements of consideration are not quite compatible, such that-a utility with a renewal license could be challenged in court because of incompatible definitions in the license renewal rule and the statements of. consideration, with no regard to technical matters.
Formal Commission action is needed in the form of a rule change or interpretive rule to address this industry.
concern.
In reply to a question by Mr. Carroll, Mr. Rasin stated that industry is now willing to spend the time to support i
interpretive rulemaking in order to clarify the existing license renewal rule before a utility submits an application t
396th ACRS Minutes 4
for license renewal.
(The interpretive rulemaking should take less time than a rule change).
In reply to a question by Dr. Shewmon, Mr. Rasin stated that with respect to technical issues on fatigue and equipment qualification, it is industry's position that the plant's current licensing basis should continue throughout the. plant extension period unless it is demonstrated that because of age-related degradation that new requirements are needed.
In response to a question by Mr. Carroll, Mr. Rasin stated that a license renewal rule is needed even with the existence of the maintenance rule because of legal reasons, e.g.,
the Atomic Energy Act.
Mr. Rasin noted that with respect to reactor pressure vessel integrity, applicants must show that plants can operate with the given existing rules and regulations; therefore this matter is not a license renewal issue.
He mentioned that several plants (about six to eight) must show by further analysis that they are within the regulations just to-operate to 40 years.
He mentioned that about 14-16 plants do need further analysis and/or modifications in order to operate up to 60 years.
Mr. Rasin said that he was encouraged that the Commission and staff understand industry's concerns regarding the unnecessary expansion of the regulatory process for no safety purpose except for legal implementation.
The staff is preparing further documentation for the Commission to clarify the license renewal rule.
Industry will study this documentation with the hope that its concerns-have been adequately dealt with and no rule change is needed.
On the other hand, if their concern regarding a viable and reasonable licensing process is not met, they are prepared to continue to pursue the need for a rule change.
In response to a question by Mr. Carroll, Mr. Rasin stated that given a clean sheet of paper he would propose something similar to the proposed license renewal rule, and not needing a maintenance rule.
Given the situation today, and having to deal with both issues, perhaps the industry would be satisfied with today's maintenance rule along with a proposed license renewal rule.
Conclusions The Committee prepared a report on this matter to Chairman 3
Selin, as noted in Section XVIII.
~ =
n e-r 4
,g-
<-r w
+
w
396th ACRS Minutes 5
III. Resolution of SECY-90-016 Follow-on Issues (Open)
Note:
Mr.
E.
G.
Igne was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.
Introductory Comments Mr. Wylie, Chairman of the Improved Light Water Reactors Subcommittee, commented that the proposed staff _ resolution of SECY-90-016 follow-on issues is delineated in SECY '
087, dated April 12, 1993.
In that SECY paper, the staff presented the Commission with proposed final positions pertaining to evolutionary and passive LWR design certification policy issues.
The staff has taken positions on 20 of these issues.
They have also determined that 9 issues are not policy issues and the staff does not anticipate any future interactions with the Commission on these issues.
On the remaining 13 issues, the staff will discuss its final position in future Commission papers.
NRC Staff Introductory Comments Mr. Dennis Crutchfield, Director of the Division of Advanced Reactors and Special Projects of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, briefly discussed the background of the policy issues.
He said the issue on source term will be addressed in the May/ April 1993 time frame, when'the staff has completed its work.
Also included in that issue will be a discussion on containment bypass, control room habitability and radionuclide attenuation.
He mentioned that significant ACRS, industry and vendor comments from the previous two draft Commission papers on ALWR issues were accounted for in the staff's proposed final positions.
Discussion of ACRS Concerns Mr. Richard Barrett, NRR, discussed the issues of Hydrogen Control, Core Debris Coolability, and Containment Performance, as requested by the Committee.
He noted that in reviewing past correspondence between the
- staff, Commission, and ACRS, there has been some miscommunication causing confusion.
Some of the confusion stems from the fact that the staff's positions have been evolving as information becomes available.
Hydrocen Control Mr. Barrett stated that the current licensing position is delineated in 10 CFR 50.34 (f), which states that the design must accommodate 100% fuel-clad metal water reaction.
In addition, the design should provide inerting or hydrogen
j l
396th ACRS Minutes 6
1 control to preclude 10% concentration given a 100% fuel-clad metal water reaction.
Mr. Barrett stated that when the rule was promulgated in the early 1980s the general feeling was that if one assumed 100% metal water reaction, a 10% uniform hydrogen concentration, and the presence of steam, then a certain amount of margin occurred that was thought to offset local concentrations higher than 10%.
Mr. Barrett stated that in the evolutionary and passive designs under consideration, hydrogen control is accomplished either by inerting or by ignitors, which is.an-engineering solution rather than an analytical solution.
Dr. Catton stated that a passive containment is a hydrogen concentrator and the ignitors in this case become detonators.
Mr. Barrett said that plant specific scenarios must be accounted for in the design of hydrogen control systems.
Dr. Catton.was concerned with the staff's claim that there is a sufficient database available to go forward with licensing criteria.
Dr. Catton would like the staff to describe the database and how the database has been determined to be sufficient.
Mr. Barrett will provide the documentation that provides the basis for the staff's licensing criteria.
Core Debris Coolability Dr. Catton stated his concern of this issue.
He said the staff appears to be backing away from the position taken in SECY-090-016 by not requiring that the core debris be quenched.
Further, the staff on its position on I.A.
"Use of a Physically Based Source Term," mentioned that the containment not be breached in an uncontrolled manner.
This statement suggests that the staff has decided on a filtered vented containment design rather than quenching.
Mr. Barrett stated that the staff's criteria on this issue has been evolving and that Dr. Catton's interpretation of the staff's position is correct.
The MACE test being done at ANL has, according to the staff, provided uncertain results in demonstrating core debris quenchability.
Accordingly, the staff is formulating a new set of criteria aimed at assisting the cooling process rather than quenching the core debris.
Since core-concrete interactions may become significant, new criteria must address the protection of the liner or steel containment due to pressurization and melt-through effects.
Containment Performance Dr. Catton said that he is satisfied with the staff's criteria that the containment should maintain its role as a
396th ACRS Minutes 7
reliable leak-tight barrier for about 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> following a severe accident scenario, and that following this period,..
the containment should continue to provide a barrier against the uncontrolled release of fission products.
Dr. Catton questioned whether a design that satisfies this requirement would also satisfy the other criteria.
Mr. Barrett stated
+
that other design criteria relating to hydrogen control, core debris coolability, direct heating containment, etc.,
must also be met.
Meeting the uncontrolled release criteria-does not, by itself, satisfy the other criteria related to core melt scenarios.
The following highlights of ACRS concerns and staff's responses to SECY-09-016 follow-on issues were discussed:
I.N.
Inservice-Testing of Pumps and Valves:
Mr.
Michelson is concerned that the MOVs are not tested at maximum differential pressure.
Ms.
Campbell stated that the MOVs are tested at the maximum differential pressure and that pumps are tested at full flow.
This section will be clarified.
I.L.
Equipment Survivability:
Mr. Michelson is concerned that the equipment needed to mitigate a severe accident is not designed for the severe accident environment.
Mr. Barrett stated that this section will reflect Mr. Michelson's concern.
II.N.
Site-Specific PRA and Analysis of External Events:
i Mr. Michelson's concern is with the terminology of the fire margins method.
Mr. Beckner stated that j
fire margins method will be changed to the simplified method.
l II.Q.
Defense Against Common Mode Failures in Digital Instrumentation and Control Systems:
Mr.
Michelson is concerned that Chapter 15 accident "j
analyses do not include all common mode environments needed to qualify components.
He suggested that all postulated events in the SAR, such as fire, flood, etc., be considered instead of only Chapter 15 events. Mr. Crutchfield stated that they will assess whether to incorporate Mr.
Michelson's concerns.
II.R.
Steam Generator Tube Ruptures:
Mr. Catton asked why five tube ruptures are assumed and not seven, which is the number of tubes surrounding a given tube array.
The staff stated that at this time
396th ACRS Minutes 8
i there is no correct or appropriate number of ruptured tubes one can assume.
II.T.
Control Room Annunciator (Alarm) Reliability:
Mr.
Carroll's concern is the IE requirements for the alarms that are provided for manually controlled actions.
Mr. Wermiel stated that_for the specific situation where a manual action is required lar the operator to compensate for a non-available I
automatic action, IE requirements for the power i
supply applies.
Follow-up The staff will provide the Committee a list of documents that provide the basis for the staff's position on core debris coolability.
Conclusions The Committee prepared a report on this matter to Chairman Selin, as noted in Section XVIII.
IV.
Safety Goals /Laroe Release (Open)
Note:
Mr.
M.
D.
Houston was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.
Mr. Charles Ader, Office of Nuclear Reactor Research, discussed the staff's efforts to develop the definition of a large release for consideration in the implementation plan for the Commission's Safety Goal Policy.
He noted-that conservatisms were introduced when trying to apply a large 4
release definition.
In his conclusions, he indicated that no single large release definition provided an acceptable benchmark and that the need for a precise definition had diminished.
Therefore, the staff was requesting that efforts on this matter be terminated.
Conclusions The Committee prepared a report on this matter to Chairman Selin, as noted.in Section XVIII.
V.
SALP Procram (Open)
Note:
Mr. Boehnert was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.
P
396th ACRS Minutes 9
Introductory Comments Mr. Carroll, Chairman of the Plant Operations Subcommittee, introduced this topic to the Committee.
He noted that the NRC staff is proposing a final set of changes to the SALP-program pursuant to the direction of the Commission.
This is an issue that has been of keen interest to the Committee, and that the ACRS has for some time been urging the Commission to revise the SALP program.
Mr. Carroll noted the presence of Dr. Kerr, acting as consultant to the ACRS on this matter.
NRC Staff Presentation Mr. W.
Russell, Associate Director of Inspection and Technical Assessment of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, noted the following:
The SALP program began after the TMI-2 accident.
The l
program goals are to: draw conclusions on licensee performance, discuss this performance-with the 1
licensee, and, use SALP as a tool to apportion l
inspection resources.
In August 1992, the staff proposed a set of changes to e
SALP (SECY-92-290).
Public comment was sought on these changes, an NRC workshop was conducted and meetings were held with CEOs of licensed utilities.
At the January, 1993 NRC Senior Management Conference there was further discussion of changes to the program and whether SALP was meeting the objectives of the Agency.
l The staff believes that the SALP process is a key tool' e
for use by senior management for review of plant operations and as such is essential for the NRC to discharge its public health and safety responsibilities.
The following problems with the SALP program were noted; they are expected to be addressed by the proposed changes:
1 a)
A lot of power was concentrated in the hands of a few (e.g. resident inspector). Both NRC and some licensees are abusing the SALP process.
b)
Discrepancies were noted in the safety significance of some issues vs inspection resources committed to same.
3 396th ACRS Minutes 10 c)
SALP reports are too long and wordy, d)
Regional Administrators were too detached from the SALP process, e)
Post-SALP meetings with licensees were too formal, thus inhibiting candid communications.
f)
Plants rated Category 1 were not seeing a reduction in NRC inspections, g)
An inordinate amount of NRC resources was being put into SALP.
Dr. Kerr questioned the rationale behind the SALP " Category 3" rating, for which NRC defines plant performance as
" acceptable," yet the Agency does all it can to have the licensee eliminate a "3"
rating.
Mr. Russell, in reply, indicated that the NRC believes a Category.3 rating is
" minimally acceptable," and gives indication of weakness in operation that if left uncorrected for a long period of time can result in unsafe operation.
Mr. Russell detailed the proposed changes to the SALP program.
These changes were grouped under four major headings:
Manacement Control SALP boards will consist of four NRC management members, with three of the members being from the region offices.
Board ratings will be advisory to the cognizant regional administrator (RA).
The RA will be the final rating determinant.
SALP Reoort The report length will be reduced to about six pages.
Ratings will focus on plant operation during the last six months of the assessment period.
Four Functional Areas will be used (down from seven), which are operations, maintenance, engineering, and plant support.
Clear definitions of the Category ratings will be provided (e.g. the " improving" and " declining" trends assigned to ratings will be eliminated).
Public Meetina The public meeting will focus on significant issues n SALP reports.
Meetings will be held within 60 days of the end of 1
-d
. a I
396th ACRS Minutes 11 an assessment period.
The regional administrator or deputy will preside at all meetings to ensure continuity Allocation of Resources Exceptions will be granted to the "N+1" resident inspector policy for top performers.
Licensee self-audits will be allowed in certain areas in lieu of NRC. area-of-emphasis inspections.
Inspection resources will be allocated based on licensee performance.
In response to questions from Mr. Carroll, Mr. Russell indicated that there will be Headquarter oversight of the regional administrators in order to prevent any ratings abuse.
Mr. Russell also indicated that use of either an INPO ratings approach (one overall grade) or rating by text only were rejected as being inimicable to the needs of the Agency.
During an additional " question and answer" discussion, the following was noted:
Mr. Carroll asked if the agency has a formal appeal process for licensee's SALP ratings.
Mr. Russell indicated that the staff's intent is that the licensee raise any appeals during the post-SALP public meeting.
Dr. Seale asked if NRC tries to stop misuse of the SALP 1
ratings by others (e.g. Wall Street, PUCs).
Russell said that the NRC can't really stop such misuse, but the Commission has issued announcements in an attempt to discourage such activity.
Messrs. Kerr and Carroll commented on the letter from-the NRC OGC in response to a letter from the Winston and Strawn law firm that argued that SALP is illegal.
Both Kerr and Carroll indicated that the OGC response was poorly done.
Noting that NRC had met with the Commission on this matter earlier in the day, Mr. Russell was asked to note any issues of concern cited by Commission members.
The following items were noted.
i a)
Staff should cite language to the effect that the Commission discourages abuse of SALP scores.
The staff was told not to make changes to SALP merely to satisfy concerns over abuse by others of the scoring system.
396th ACRS Minutes 12 b)
Public meetings should be common occurrences; it should be a rare occasion when one is not held.
c)
Concern was expressed by some Commissioners over the use of SALP scores.
The staff was urged to articulate, in the cover letter of the SALP report, the NRC's concerns that resulted in assigning any "3"
ratings.
d)
In response to Dr. Kerr, Mr. Russell indicated that the nuclear industry's position vis-a-vis the SALP program is that they'd like to see SALP abolished or, failing that, want NRC to drop the grading system.
NUMARC Presentation Mr.
W. Rasin, NUMARC, made some brief remarks concerning the SALP program.
His key points included the following:
The SECY document delineating the abo've changes to SALP was just made publicly available today.
As such, NUMARC has not had time to evaluate these changes.
A detailed evaluation of these proposals will be provided in the near future.
Believes SALP program is fatally flawed.
The above e
changes will not resolve the problems with SALP; however, these changes are a step in the.right direction.
NRC believes SALP is a necessary program, yet a e
" Problem Plant" list already exists.
The only clear use of SALP would be as a basis to adjust inspection resources; to date, this has yet to occur.
The key concern of NUMARC is what it sees as NRC's e
interference in the licensees' plant management prerogatives.
SALP is the major tool used by the NRC l
to this end.
Licensee commitments are extracted by the staff through the vehicle of SALP, thus bypassing the normal regulatory process, The most promising change noted by Mr. Russell is the e
use of SES managers to comprise the SALP boards.
NUMARC has long argued for more direct involvement in the SALP process by the Agency's senior management.
In response to questions from the Committee, Mr. Rasin said that SALP can be useful for identification of problems and
396th ACRS Minutgg 13 that it provides feedback to NRC Headquarters on the operating status of plants.
He believes the NRC's " worry I
threshold" has dropped to a too-low level in recent years.
In response to Mr. Davis, Mr. Rasin agreed that industry has abused the SALP process, but CEOs are realizing that relying on SALP as an excuse to spend more money on their plants is a dead-end approach, Finally, NUMARC noted that INPO's insistence that licensees continually lower radiation exposure is causing problems.
Conclusions The Committee prepared a report on this matter to Chairman-Selin as noted in Section XVIII.
VI.
Report of the Plannina and Procedures Subcommittee Meetina-on April 14, 1993 (Open/ Closed)
Note:
Mr.
G.
Quittschreiber was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.
The draft minutes of the April 14, 1993 Planning and Procedures Subcommittee meeting were discussed.
There was.
general agreement with the minutes of that meeting.
Specific Comments regarding new members are discussed in a special " Internal Use Only Supplement."
ACRS Fellows Steven Mays, Stuart Long, and Mark Stella discussed their present feeling with regard to the ACRS fellowship program with regard to NRC's hiring practices for the program.
The members agreed that the program should be continued and will set up a group of members to look at steps to take with regard to the selection of fellows and the future of the program.
VII. Reculatory Guides for Imolementation of 10 CFR Part 20 (Open)
Note:
Mr.
E.
Igne was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.
Dr. Wilkins, Chairman of the ACRS Subcommittee on Occupational and Environmental Protection System, reported the results of a joint subcommittee meeting held with the ACNW working group represented by Dr.
D.
Moeller on March 26, 1993.
The joint subcommittee working group reviewed the three final regulatory guides that implemented 10 CFR Part 20, " Standards for Protection Against Radiation."
The three guides reviewed are listed as follows:
396th ACRS Minutes 14 R.G.8.N.10, " Control of Access to High and Very High e
Radiation Areas in Nuclear Power Plants" e
R.G.8.9.,
Rev.
1,
" Acceptable Concepts, Models, Equations and Assumptions for a Bioassay P;< gram" R.G.8.37, "ALARA Radiation Programs for Effluents From Materials Facilities" The ACRS is responsible for the review of the first regulatory guide listed above, while the ACNW is responsible for reviewing the other two.
Dr. Wilkins summarized the results of the joint meeting by saying that the members and consultants present at the joint meeting had several minor comments that the staff committed to consider for changing the document.
Dr. Wilkins mentioned that since the ACUW's next meeting is in late May 1993, Dr. Moeller proposed that the ACRS issue one letter that covered all three regulatory guides.
The reason for this one letter is because of the urgency on the part of the staff to close this matter by April 1993.
Conclusions The Committee prepared a report on this matter to Mr.
Taylor, as noted in Section XVIII.
VIII. Meetina with the Director of the Office of Policy Plannina (Open)
Note:
Mr.
G.
Quittschreiber was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.
Richard Vollmer, Director of the Office of Policy Planning (OPP), briefed the Committee on the Charter and the accomplishments of the OPP since it was set up in July 1992.
It contains himself along with three professionals and a secretary.
The purpose of the Office will be to examine longer range policy issues of relevance to the NRC, with broader analyses than the regulator's perspective, including both industry and the public interest group viewpoints.
Current Licensina Basis Mr. Vollmer discussed the study done by OPP in response to COMIS-92-019 requesting OPT to systematically review and analyze the issues raised by SECY-92-314 focusing on current licensing basis (CLB) issues and an analysis of their significance for operating reactors and license renewal.
OPP has provided its definition of CLB, which excludes these
~~
o 396th ACRS Minutes 15 things that a licensee can change on his own initiative.
The OPP definition differs from that in 10 CFR 54.3, which basically says the CLB is everything that is there. OPP believes that the requirements for license renewal should logically flow from the CLB established for operating reactors.
License Renewal Mr. Vollmer discussed OPPs most recent report, License Renewal: The Utility Decision making Perspective.
This report contains a discussion concerning the decision process that a utility would go through during its consideration'of license renewal.
He said that the uppermost need for NRC activities was the need for clarity and predictability of the license renewal rule.
Unknown cost is the most uncertain element with regard to nuclear relicensing in comparison with fossil electrical generation.
In discussions with outside activities it was found that the major issues affecting license renewal are the following:
economics advantage e
high and low level waste e
diversity of fuel e
predictability in the process e
Use of SALP The OPP has performed a study on the assessment of the reactor inspection program.
The study was an effort that combined a review of relevant program and implementation documents with focused interviews of many executives, e.g.,
INPO, and NRC regional mangers and headquarters managers.
In response to questions from the Committee, Mr. Vollmer noted that it has been his feedback from utilities with regard to SALP that if a problem is found at a plant, the question is asked "why didn't the inspection program find it earlier?"
Mr. Vollmer discussed many OPP findings and recommendations with regard to the NRC's inspection program.
The overall conclusion reached is that the inspection program is healthy and a positive impact on the safety performance of utilities.
The OPP has made specific recommendations for making improvements in the program that are cost effective j
and would reduce the regulatory burden, i
l
i i
i l
396th ACRS Minutes 16 1
Conclusions This was a briefing only.
No ACRS action was taken at this meeting as a result of this briefing.
IX.
Maintenance Guidance Documents (Open)
Note:
Mr. H. Alderman was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.
Introduction Mr. Carroll, Chairman of the Maintenance Practices and Procedures Subcommittee, noted that the staff and NUMARC would discuss the implementation guidance for the Maintenance Rule, the verification and validation program, and the decision to recommend that the diesel generator reliability issue be dealt with through the maintenance rule.
NRC-RES Presentations Mr.
R.
Baer, Chief of the Engineering Issues Branch in the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, made the following points:
The implementation guidelines now incorporate guidance e
on emergency diesel generator testing to resolve Generic Issue B-56.
The frequency of testing is controlled by the technical specifications.
There is a plan by the staff to put out a generic letter that would allow relaxation of the technical specifications.
The guidelines incorporate resolution of the public e
- comments, The guidelines incorporate the results of the NUMARC e
verification and validation program Mr.
O.
Rothberg, RES, discussed some major issues of the implementation guidance. He noted that the concerns of the ACRS and others were summarized in questions that were sent out for public comment. The first concerned the relationship of the maintenance rule to the license renewal rule.
The question was, "can the maintenance rule be used to implement the provision of the license renewal rule?" The decision was made that whatever is needed to be done for license renewal should be provided in the guidance for license renewal.
Mr. Rothberg discussed the matter of inherent reliability.
In the NUMARC guidance, goals don't have to be established 4
1
i 396th ACRS Minutes 17 for SSCs that are inherently reliable.
An inherently reliable SSC is one that does not need any maintenance to be considered reliable. The staff doesn't think this concept can be applied in plants.
Mr. Rothberg said that in response to ACRS comments the staff had included a passage in the regulatory _ guide to' bring the off-site power distribution system into the scope of the maintenance rule.
NUMARC PRESENTATION Mr. W.
Smith, NUMARC, discussed changes in the implementation guidance for the maintenance rule.
He noted that it has been recommended that the annual-review requirements in ( A) (3) be changed to a review based on a refueling cycle, but no greater than 24 months.
Mr. Smith said that he believes the diesel generators could be handled under the maintenance rule. He noted that NUMARC doesn't subscribe to determining a statist.ical relation for the trigger values specified in the emergency diesel testing.
Mr. Smith said that the V&V program helped determine the extent to which non-safety related SSCs used in the emergency operating procedures should be excluded.
Mr. Smith listed some NUMARC accomplishments during the V&V process:
Identified and evaluated the use of PRA and other methodologies in identifying risk significance and plant level performance criteria.
I Verified that the use of a guideline will result in e
similar but not necessarily identical results among utilities.
Identified lessons learned that facilitate the rule implementation among all utilities.
Identified the cost to implement the rule.
Conclusions The Committee prepared a report on this matter to Mr. Taylor as noted in Section XVIII.
I 396th ACRS Minutes 18 i
X.
Generic Issue 152. "Desian Basis for Valves that Micht be Subiected to Sionificant Blowdown Loads" (Open)
Note:
Mr.
E.
Igne was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.
Mr. Michelson discussed a proposed letter on the prioritization of GI-152.
He noted that this matter was prompted by the Committee's concerns delineated in letters on MOVs on May 9, 1989 and on November 20, 1989, on HPCI and other MOVs that may be required to close against a high differential pressure and/or high flows associated with large pipe breaks.
He noted that the Committee pointed out i
in its November letter that the existing design basis for some valves in operating plants may not specify the " type of heavy duty" that is of concern.
If true, such unusual loading conditions might not be considered in GL 89-10, and the deficiencies mentioned in GI-87 would not be remedied.
Mr. Michelson stated that since there has been a long standing regulatory requirement to protect against postulated pipe failures in fluid systems outside the containment, it is likely that by now that the staff has included the Committee's concern in the GL 89-10 program.
If so, the Committee should recommend that GI-152 be withdrawn.
If not, the Committee should be informed.
Conclusions The Committee prepared a report on this matter to Mr.
Taylor, as noted in Section XVIII.
XI.
Reactor Operatina Experience (Open)
Note:
Mr.
P.
Boehnert was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.
Mr. Fred Hebdon, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulations, and Mr. Tom Plunkett, Vice-President of Florida Power and Light, discussed the effects of Hurricane Andrew on the Turkey Point Nuclear Power Plant.
Hurricane Andrew passed directly l
over the plant site on August 24, 1992, with sustained wind speeds of 145 mph and gusts of at least 175 mph.
Mr. Hebdon discussed the findings of a joint NRC/INPO team inspection in regard to (1) the damage caused by the hurricane an (2) the lessons learned that might benefit other nuclear plants.
Mr. Plunkett presented photographic slides that showed the damage to the plant site and surrounding areas.
He
~
396th ACRS Minutes 19 discussed the preparations that were taken prior to the storm and the recovery effort that followed the event.
No damage was done to Class I structures.
The most notable damage was the loss of all offsite power and the collapse of some Class III structures (tower, water tank, fire protection piping and the fossil plant chimneys).
He discussed the utilities efforts in regard to housing plant personnel and their families and noted that a high turnover of personnel has occurred since the storm.
conclusions This was a briefing only.
No ACRS action was taken at this meeting as a result of this briefing.
XII. Oraanizational Factors Research (Open)
Note:
Mr.
P.
Boehnert was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.
Conclusions The Committee prepared a report on this matter to Chairman Selin, as noted in Section XVIII.
XIII. Future ACRS Activities (Open)
Note:
Dr.
R.
Savio was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.
1' The following activities were scheduled for the 397th ACRS Meeting, May 13-15, 1993, Bethesda, MD:
Proposed Resolution of Generic Issue 105. "Interfacina Systems LOCA in LWRs" - Review and comment on the NRC staff's proposed resolution of Generic Issue 105.
Representatives of the NRC staff and the industry will participate, as appropriate.
e PRA Workino Group Activities - Review and comment on a draft report on the proposed application of PRA prepared by the PRA Working Group.
Representatives of the NRC staff and the industry will participate, as appropriate.
Proposed NRC Staff Plan for Comparina Safety Goals with Reculations - Review and comment on a proposed NRC Staff Plan for using the Safety Goal Policy to judge the effectiveness of the NRC regulations.
Representatives of the NRC staff and the industry will participate, as appropriate.
P 396th ACRS Minutes 20 Boilina Water Reactor Core Power Stability - Review and comment on the NRC staff's review of the approaches proposed by the BWR Owners Group for resolving the issue of BWR core power stability.
Representatives of the NRC staff and the industry will participate, as appropriate.
SECY-93-067. Final Policy Statement on Technical Specifications Imorovements - Review and comment on the staff's proposed final policy statement on technical specifications improvements.
Representatives of the NRC staff and the industry will participate, as appropriate.
Advanced Reactor Schedules - Hear a briefing by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff on the schedules for the NRC review of advanced reactor designs.
Form and Content of Combined Operatina License - Hear a briefing by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding requirements for preparation and submittal of documents with regard to a Combined-Operating License.
Representatives of the industry will participate, as appropriate.
Need for Amendina the Backfit Rule (Tentative)
Discuss the need for the NRC to amend the Backfit Rule.
Representatives of the NRC staff and the industry will participate, as appropriate.
Meetina with the NRC Commissioners - Meet with the NRC Commissioners to discuss items of mutual interest.
Meetina with the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Reculation - Meet with the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation to discuss items of mutual interest.
i Future ACRS Activities - Discuss topics proposed for e
consideration by the full Committee.
Resolution of ACRS Recommendations - Discuss responses from the NRC Executive Director for Operations to recent ACRS comments and recommendations.
ACRS Subcommittee Activities - Hear reports and hold discussions regarding the status of ACRS subcommittee activities, including status of issues associated with the BWR vessel water level instrumentation and use of
A 396th ACRS Minutes 21 advanced computer graphics in nuclear power plant design process.
Appointment of ACRS Members - Discuss qualifications of candidates proposed for appointment as ACRS members.
Portions of this session will be closed to discuss information the release of which would represent a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Biscellaneous - Discuss miscellaneous matters related e
to the conduct of Committee activitiec and complete discussion of topics that were not completed during previous meetings as time and availability of information permit.
XIV. Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recommendations (Open)
Note:
Mr.
S.
Duraiswamy was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.
The Executive Director for Operations' (EDO's) responses to previous ACRS reports were discussed as follows:
EDO letter, dated April 7, 1993, responding to the ACRS report dated March 18, 1993, concerning " Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) Review Schedule."
The EDO letter did address the Committee's comments.
EDO letter, dated March 31, 1993, responding to the e
ACRS report dated January 13, 1993, concerning SECY.
413, " Incident Investigation Options Reporting to the Commission."
The EDO letter did address the Committee's comments.
EDO letter, dated March 24, 1993, responding to the e
ACRS report dated February 19, 1993, concerning " Issues Pertaining to the Advanced Reactor (PRISM, MHTGR, and PIUS) and CANDU 3 Designs and their Relationship to Current Regulatory Requirements."
The EDO letter did address the Committee's comments.
XV.
ACRS Subcommittee Activities (Open)
ACRS Recional Procrams Subcommittee Meetino on March 23, 1993 Note:
Mr. Boehnert was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.
.,7 -
's 396th ACRS Minutes 22 Dr. Shewmon made a brief report on the visit of the-Regional.
Programs Subcommittee to the Region II Office.
The Subcommittee met at Region II in Atlanta on. March 23, 1993.
He indicated that the meeting was informative.
Mr. Davis noted that this was his first visit to a region office us a:
Member of the ACRS.
He said that he was impressed with the
~
l competence of the Region II personnel.
Following additional discussion, the Committee requested that the Executive Director author a letter of appreciation to the cognizant Regional Administrator (S. Ebneter) for hosting the Subcommittee's visit.
Report of NRC/BWR Owners Grouc Meetina - Resolution of'ATWS with Core Power Instabilities, March 16. 1993 Note:
Mr. Boehnert was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.
Dr. Catton reported to the Committee on the results-of the subject meeting held on March 16, 1993 at the campus of the University of California, Santa Barbara.
.The purpose of the meeting was to attempt to obtain closure to the issue of core power instabilities, given an ATWS event.
Dr. Catton noted that it is now understood.that core power oscillations in a BWR are caused by-flow oscillations of the subcooled feedwater entering the vessel.
The solution to terminating the power oscillations'is to drop the vessel water level at least to a point below the feedwater spargers.
The central point of discussion at the March 16th meeting i
was how far the vessel water level should be lowered in conjunction with use of liquid poison (boron) injection to mitigate an ATWS.
The BWR Owners Group argued for lowering the level into the core to a point known as the " minimum steam cooling water level," and then raising the-level subsequent to completion of boron injection, which is the current strategy dictated in the BWR Owners Group. emergency procedure guidelines for ATFS.
Others, notably Dr.
Theofanous (wao spoke at t s meeting) believe the level should only be lowered to a point below the feedring spargers.
The debate concerning these two strategies was over how quickly the core will be shutdown following boron injection.
For the lower-level case, it is expected that the mixing will stop, then upon raising the level mixing resumes and the boron will be swept into the core.
The higher-level case is based on the premise that the mixing will be
~.
- -f'"
396th ACRS Minutes 23 continuous, thus carrying boron into the core and effecting shutdown.
Dr. Catton indicated that the central questions to be addressed include the details of the boron mixing phenomena and how much energy is dumped into the suppression pool.
He said that a joint meeting of the Core Performance and Thermal Hydraulics Phenomena subcommittees will be held on May 12 to discuss this matter.
This issue will be brought to the ACRS for review during the May Meeting, pending'the results of the Subcommittees' review.
Severe Accident Issues Related to the GE ABWB Note:
Mr. M.
D. Houston was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.
Dr. Kress reported on the Severe Accidents Subcommittee meeting held on March 18, 1993.
At that meeting, representatives of the NRC staff and GE discussed the outstanding and resolved severe accident and PRA issues in regard to the Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Certification Review.
He indicated that for the evolutionary concepts for severe accidents, they have done about as good a job as one-could expect. He went on to discuss several things that GE was proposing to satisfy the severe accident concerns.
The I
evolutionary ABWR concept PRA shows a core melt probability significantly lower than present plants.
Mr. Carroll suggested that one area that needs further investigation is for that period of time during the startup of the reactor when the technical specifications will not require that the containment be inerted.
This should be looked at in more detail.
I Dr. Kress will make a list of remaining ACRS concerns with regard to GE ABWR severe accident issues and PRA issues for e
Committee consideration at the May 1993 ACRS meeting.
ABB/CE System 80+ Control Room Mockup Note:
Mr.
P.
Boehnert was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.
Mr. Wylie and Mr. Davis briefed the Committee on their visit to the dynamic mock up of the ABB-CE Nuplex 80+ Advanced Control Room design.
The main emphasis in the System 80+
instrumentation and control (I&C) is to provide reliable, up-to-date, simple systems.
The I&C design has been affected by rapidly developing technology and by social, industrial and regulatory pressures to improve safety,
~.
t
.+
396th ACRS Minutes 24 availability and cost effectiveness.
This drive for I&C modernization han been balanced by the need to avoid the unproven technologies or hardware that could hinder licensing,-training, operations and maintenance.
The Nuplex 80+ advanced control room used a combination of commercial I&C technologies and incorporates lessons _from previous control rooms to make an orderly, natural transition to an all-digital computer based control room.
Despite its digital technology, it has a high. degree of conservatism in its design approach and addresses all the NRC design requirements.
The design is simplified by using:
programmable logic controllers, super minicomputers, fiber optic communication, touch-sensitive cathode ray tube, plasma and electrolytic incandescent displays, and advanced i
signal validation techniques.
Licensed reactor operators are an integral part of a multi-disciplinary design team.
The design improves both operations and cost effectiveness..
There are about 70% fewer indicators.
About 70% of the conventional cabling is eliminated and there are 60% fewer alarms for the operator to handle.
A digital plant protection system uses automatic on-line functional testing to eliminate most periodic surveillance tests.
A large plant overview screen, visible from anywhere in the control room, shows' integrated plant status at a glance, including key variables, high pritrity alarms and critical functions.
Mr. Davis stated that Koreans are interested in incorporating the Nuplex 80+ Design to evolutionary nuclear power plants in Korea and is interested in the views of the ACRS on this matter.
XVI. Accointment of New Members (Closed)
Note:
Dr.
J.
Larkins was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.
This portion of the meeting is reported in a special closed meeting supplement, which is attached.
XVII.
Summarv/ List of Follow-up Matters A Copy of a paper given by Z.
Pate on the SALP program e
at a recent INPO/CEO meeting should be passed out to the Committee members.
(Mr. Boehnert has the follow-up
~
on this matter.)
The ACRS chairman should set up a group of members to look into the future of the ACRS Fellowship program.
Information/ handouts should be available for the May 1993 meeting on t s program requirements and l
~.
h*
-i 396th ACRS Minutes 25 suggestions where the program should be headed. (Dr.
Savio has the fcllow-up on this matter.)
e Members of the Committee should send Dr. Wilkins suggestions on topics and authors of papers to be given at the October 11-15, 1993 Quadripartite meeting in France.
Dr. Wilkins will prepare a list of recommendations for discussion at the May meeting so the Committee can determine the topics and members that i
should attend the meeting.
(Mr. Quittschreiber has the i
follow-up on this matter.)
The Committee should send the NRC's Region II Office a e
thank you letter expressing the Committee's appreciation for the hospitality and information they provided to the Regional Programs Subcommittee members at the March 23, 1993 meeting in Atlanta, GA. (Mr.
Boehnert has the follow-up on this matter.)
e Dr. Kress will make a list of remaining ACRS concerns with regard to GE ABWR severe accident issues.
This' will be prepared for Committee consideration at the May 1993 ACRS meeting.
(Mr. Houston has the follow-up on this matter.)
e The ACRS staff should check with the German RSK representatives to find out whether the recent RSK/GPR letter that indicates the October 11-15, Quadripartite meeting agenda is for pressurized water reactors was intentional.
It was noted that the Japanese are likely to be interested largely in BWRs.
(Mr. Quittschreiber has the follow-up on this matter.)
Note:
A discussion with Dr. Candeli, RSK staff, indicated that the Germans / French advisory committees are interested almost exclusively in future PWRs at this time.
A final determination from Dr. Birkhofer as to whether they would like to limit discussion to PWRs is expected shortly, The job announcement for a permanent ACRS staff e
engineer should be sent out as soon as possible.
(Ms.
Lee has the follow-up on this matter.)
The ACRS staff should get details on the matter of e
Committee members being able to get paid for writing reports, giving speeches and other nuclear related matters outside the agency, in view of a recent Supreme Court decision on this matter. (Dr. Larkins has the follow-up on this matter)
i a
396th ACRS Minutes 26 The ACRS staff should provide Dr. Wilkins information i
e that can be used in'a June 3, 1993 training session.
i for'some Russian GAN specialists.
In addition, the ACRS staff should find out what lunch arrangements might be appropriate for that session. (Mr.
Quittschreiber has the follow-up on this matter.)
i The Committee members decided that a Committee retreat e
would be appropriate in calendar year 1993.
Dr.
Wilkins will make some suggestions to the Committee on' topics, dates, and locations. (Dr. Larkins has the follow-up on this matter.)
The ACRS office should set up a short Guidance Book on e
administrative matters for new members on the Committee.
In addition, an office. staff briefing of procedural / legal matters (an hour or two) of new members would be appropriate. (Dr. Larkins has the follow-up on this matter.)
The ACRS staff should take a poll of members to find e
out all the problems / questions with the present BBS so that these matters can be resolved on the.new AUTOS system, when installed in a few months.
The SYSOP should prepare a list of BBS users concerns and common l
questions asked and associated answers on the use of the system.
(Mr. Schofer has the follow-up on this matter.)
XVIII. Executive Session (Open)
Note:
Dr. Larkins was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.
During its 396th meeting, April 15-17, 1993, the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) discussed several matters and completed the following reports and letter,-as noted.
Reports e
SECY-93-049. Implementation of 10 CFR Part 54. Reauirements t
for Renewal of Operatina Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants, (Report to the Honorable Ivan Selin, NRC Chairman, from Paul Shewmon, ACRS Chairman, dated April 23, 1993) e SECY-93-087, " Policy. Technical, and Licensina Issues Pertainina to Evolutionary and Advanced Licht-Water Reactor (ALWR) Desians," (Report to the Honorable Ivan Selin, NRC Chairman, from Paul Shewmon, ACRS Chairman, dated April 26, 1993)
4 396th ACRS Minutes 27 Definition of a Larce Release for Use with Safety Goal e
Policy,- (Report to the Honorable Ivan Selin, NRC. Chairman, from Paul Shewmon, ACRS Chairman, dated April 22, 1993)
Staff Initiatives to Revise the Systematic Assessment of e
Licensee Performance Procram, (Report to the Honorable Ivan Selin, NRC Chairman, from Paul Shewmon;, ACRS Chairman, dated April 30, 1993) e Proposed Final Versions of Reculatorv' Guides for Implementino Revised 10 CFR Part 20. " Standards for Protection Acainst Radiation," (Report to Mr. James M.
Taylor, Executive Director for Operations, from Paul Shewmon, ACRS Chairman, dated April 23, 1993)
Imolementation Guidance for the Maintenance Rule, (Report to e
Mr. James M.
Taylor, Executive Director for Operations, from Paul Shewmon;, ACRS Chairman, dated April 26, 1993)
Prioritization of Generic Issue 152, "Desian Basis for Valves that micht be Subiected to Sionificant Blowdown Loads,"
(Report to Mr. James M. Taylor, Executive Director for Operations, from Paul Shewmon, ACRS Chairman, dated April 23, 1993) e Review of Orcanizational Factors Research Procram, (Report to the Honorable Ivan Selin, NRC Chairman, from Paul Shewmon, ACRS Chairman, dated April 27, 1993)
Letter Letter to Chairman Adolph Birkhofer, German RSK, and e
Chairman Francois Cogne, French GPR, dated April 23. 1993, commenting on the list of papers to be provided and the proposed topics for the October 1993 meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 1:45 p.m.
on April 17, 1993.
i
I APPENDICES MINUTES OF THE 396TH ACRS MEETING APRIL 15-17, 1993 I.
Atte11 dees II.
Future Agenda III.
Future Subcommittee Activities IV.
List of Documents Provided to the Committee 4
APPENDIX I MINUTES OF THE 396TH ACRS MEETING APRIL 15-17, 1993 APRIL 15, 1993 Public Attendees NRC Attendees Bill Rasin, NUMARC Rex Brown, NRR Y.
S.
Kim, NUS Scott Newberry, NRR John Trotter, EPRI Jeff Sharkey, NRR Doug Walters, NUMARC Bill Travers, NRR Ray Ng, NUMARC C.
Petrone, NRR Warren Hall, NUMARC H.
Pastis, NRR Walt Smith, NUMARC M.
Taylor, EDO Dan Rains, NUMARC J. Guttmann, OCM Tricia Herouy, EPRI D.
Crutchfield, NRR Brian McIntyre, Westinghouse R.
Borchardt, NRR Vojin Jonsimonick, APG M.
Case, NRR Jim Raleigh, S.T.S.,
Inc F.
Eltavila, RES Phyllis Rich, NUMARC Jerry Wilson, NRR David Modeen, NUMARC P.
Campbell, NRR Eve Fotopoulos, Serch Licensing C.
McCracken, NRR John Menning, NRR Tom Essig, NRR Jack Kudrick, NRR Richard Barrett, NRR M.
Snodderly, NRR M.
Chiramal, NRR J.
Wermiel, NRR Mark Rubin, NRR Alan Levin, NRR W.
Beckner, NRR Jay Lee, NRR Rich Emch, NRR Len Soffer, RES Charles Ader, RES Brian Richter, RES C.
Holden, NRR Steven Vias, R.II John Ridgely, RES John Boardman, AEOD Gary Zech, NRR W.
T.
Russell, NRR L.
R.
Plisco, EDO W.
H.
Swenson, NRR G.
Scarfo, AEOD R.
Erickson, NRR F.
Coffman, RES
Minutes of 396th ACRS Meeting, Appendix I Attendees APRIL 16, 1993 Public Attendees NRC Attendees Y.
S.
Kim, NUS D.
Cool, RES J.
Sikorski, Serch-Bechtel C.
Raddatz, RES L.
Connon, NUMARC R.
H. Vollmer, OPP W.
Smith, NUMARC Owen Rothberg, RES Jim Eaton, NUMARC Jack Heltemos, RES Dan Rains, NUMARC Robert Baer, RES Warren Hall, NUMARC M.
Taylor, EDO Doug Walters, NUMARC B.
Doolittle, OCM Jim Raleigh, STS Inc.
R.
Correia, NRR Mike Haydin, INPO C.
Petrone, NRR Bill Kindley, INPO J. kennedy, OCM C.
Johnson, RES Rex Brown, NRR T.
Scarbrough, NRR Ronald Emrit, RES F.
Liebdon, NRR E.
F.
Goodwin, NRR Roger Kenneally, RES Joe Giitter, AEOD Joe Sebrosky, AEOD
APPENDIX II MINUTES OF THE 396TH ACRS MEETING APRIL 15-17, 1993 FUTURE AGENDA J97th ACRS Meeting, May 13-15, 1993, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda MD, Room P-110.
During this meeting, the Committee plans to consider 2
the following:
A.
Proposed Resolution of Generic Issue 105, " Interfacing Systems LOCA in LWRs" - Review and comment on the NRC staff's proposed resolution of Generic Issue 105.
Representatives of the NRC staff and the industry will participate, as appropriate.
B.
PRA Workina Group Activities - Review and comment on a draft report on the proposed application of PRA prepared by the PRA Working Group.
Representatives of the NRC staff and the industry will participate, as appropriate.
C.
Proposed NRC Staff Plan for Comnarina Safety Goals with Regulations - Review and comment on a proposed NRC Staff Plan for using the Safety. Goal Policy to judge the effectiveness of the NRC regulations.
Representatives of the NRC staff and the industry will participate, as appropriate.
D.
Boilina Water Reactor Core Power Stability - Review and comment on the NRC staff's review of the approaches proposed by the BWR Owners Group for resolving the issue of BWR core power stability.
Representctives of the NRC staff and the industry will participate, as appropriate.
E.
SECY-93-067. Final Policy Statement on Techqical Specifications Improvements - Review and comment on the staff's proposed final policy statcment on technical specifications improvements.
Representatives of the NRC staff and the industry will participate, as appropriate.
[ Note:
This item has been deferred to the June 1993 ACRS meeting].
F.
Need for Amendino the Backfit Rule - Review and comment on the staff proposals in SECY-93-086, "Backfit Considerationr.."
Representatives of the NRC staff and the industry will participate, as appropriate.
G.
Advanced Reactor Schedules - Hear a briefing by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff on the schedules for the NRC review of advanced reactor designs.
H.
Form and Content of Combined License - Hear a briefing by and hold discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding requirements for preparation and submittal of documents with regard to a Combined License.
Representatives of the industry will participate, as appropriate.
I.
Meeting with the NRC Commissioners - Meet with the NRC Commissioners to discuss items of mutual interest.
J.
Meeting with the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Reaulation - Meet with the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation to discuss items of mutual interest.
K.
Future ACRS Activities - Discuss topics proposed for consid-eration by the full Committee.
L.
Resolution of ACRS Recommendations - Discuss responses from the NRC Executive Director for Operations to recent ACRS comments and recommendations.
2 M.
ACRS Subcommittee Activities - Hear reports and hold discussions regarding the status of ACRS subcommittee activities, including status of issues associated with the BWR vessel water level instrumentation and use of advanced computer graphics in nuclear power plant design process.
- N.
Appointment of ACRS Members - Discuss qualifications of candi-dates proposed for appointment as ACRS members.
Portions of this session will be closed to discuss information the release of which would represent a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
O.
Miscellaneous - Discuss miscellaneous matters related to the conduct of Committee activities and complete discussion of topics that were not completed during previous meetings as time and availability of information permit.
APPENDIX II i
APPENDIX III MINUTES OF THE 396TH ACRS MEETING APRIL 15-17, 1993 FUTURE SUBCOMMITTEE ACTIVITIES Probabilistic Risk Assessment, May 11, 1993, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, MD (Houston), 8:30 a.m., Room P-110.
The Subcommittee will discuss the report of the PRA Working Group that summarizes activities of this Group and provides guidance for the staff regarding the application of PRA.
Attendance by the following is anticipated, and reservations have been made at the hotels as indicated for the night of Hay 10:
Lewis HYATT Wilkins HYATT Davis HYATT Wylie HYATT Kress HYATT Kerr HYATT Michelson HYATT Okrent HOLIDAY INN Seale HYATT Ward HYATT Joint Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena / Core Performance, May 12, 1993, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, MD (Boehnert), 8:30 a.m., Room P-110.
The Subcommittees will continue their review of the issues pertaining to BWR core power stability.
Also, they will discuss the status of issues associated with BWR vessel water level instrumentation.
Attendance by the following is anticipated, and reservations have been made at the hotels as indicated for the night of Hay 11:
Catton HYATT Wylie HYATT Wilkins HYATT Dhir NONE Carroll HOLIDAY INN Kerr HYATT Davis HYATT Lee NONE Kress HYATT Lipinski NONE Michelson HYATT Zuber NONE Seale HYATT Shewmon HONE Planninc and Procedures, May 12, 1993, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, MD (Larkins), 3:00 p.m.
- 5:30 p.m., Room P-422.
The Subcommittee will discuss proposed ACRS activities and related matters.
Qualifications of candidates nominated for appointment to the ACRS will also be discussed.
Portions of this meeting will be closed to discuss information the release of which would represent a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
is anticipated, Attendance by the following indicated for the night of May 11:and reservations have been made at the hotels as Shewmon NONE Carroll HOLIDAY INN Wilkins HYATT
n-l jg. -
s 2
Plannina and Procedures, June 9, 1993, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, HQ (Larkins), 3:00 p.m. - 5:30 p.m., Room P-422.
The Subcommittee will discuss proposed ACRS activities and related matters.
Qualifications of candidates ziominated for appointment to the ACRS will also be discussed.
Portions of this meeting will be closed to discuss information the release of which would represent a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
is anticipated, and reservations have been made at the hotels asAttendance by the f indicated for the night of June 8:
Wilkins HOLIDAY INN Carroll HOLIDAY INN Member-at-Large 398th ACRS Meeting, June 10-12, 1993, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, MD, Room P-110.
Advanced Boilina Water Reactors, June 15-16, 1993, San Jose, CA (El-Zeftawy/Igne).
The Subcommittee will visit the General Electric Nuclear Energy (GE) facility and gather information associated with the review of the GE Standard Safety Analysis Report and related matters.
Attendance by the following is anticipated, and reserva-tions have been made at the Holiday Inn Park Central Plaza (telephone: 408/998-0400), 282 Almaden Blvd, San Jose, CA for the nights of June 14 and 15:
Michelson Kress Carroll Lindblad i
Catton Seale Davis Wylie i
l I
{
3 Advanced Boilina Water Reactors, June 17, 1993, Holiday Inn Park Central Plaza (telephone: 408/998-0400), 282 Almaden Blvd., San Jose, 4
California (El-Zeftawy/Igne), 8:30 a.m.
The Subcommittee will review matters related to the General Electric Nuclear Energy Standard Safety Analysis Report related to the ABWR design.
Attendance by the following is anticipated, and reservations have been made at the Holiday Inn Park Central Plaza for the night of June 16:
Michelson Kress Carroll Lindblad Catton Seale Davis Wylie Reculatory Policies and Practices, July 7, 1993, 7920 Norfolk Avenue,.
Bethesda, MD (Houston), 1:00 p.m.
- 5:00 p.m.,
Room-110.
The Subcommittee will discuss the report of the NRC Regulatory Review Group.
Lodging will be announced later.
Attendance by the following is anticipated.
Lewis Wylie Davis Kerr Michelson Ward Plannina and Procedures, July 7, 1993, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, MQ (Larkins), 3:00 p.m.
- 5:30 p.m.,
Room P-422.
The Subcommittee will discuss proposed ACRS activities and related matters.
Quali-fications of candidates nominated for appointment to the ACRS will also be discussed.
Portions of this meeting will be closed to discuss information the release of which would represent a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Lodging will be announced later.
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Wilkins Carroll Member-at-Large 399th ACRS Meetina, July 8-10, 1993, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Sethggda.
MD, Room P-110.
4 4
Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena, July 22-23, 1993, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, MD (Boehnert), 8:30 a.m.,
Room P-110.
The Subcommittee will begin its review of both the Westinghouse analytical and separate effects programs being conducted in support of the AP600 design' certification effort.
Lodging will be announced later.
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Catton Dhir Davis Schrock Kress Ward Seale Wulff Wilkins Zuber 400th ACRS Meeting, August 5-7, 1993, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, MD, Room P-110.
401st ACRS Meetina, September 9-11, 1993, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, MD, Room P-110.
402nd ACRS Meetina, October 7-9, 1993, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Hethesda, MD, Room P-110.
Advanced Boilina Water Reactors, October 26 (Room P-110) and 27 (Room P-422), 1993, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, MD (El-Zeftawy), 8:30
)
a.m.
The Subcommittee will continue its review of the GE ABWR Standard Safety Analysis Report and the associated NRC staff's Final Safety Evaluation Report.
Lodging will be announced later.
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Michelson Kress Carroll Wylie i
Catton 403rd ACRS Meetina, November 4-6, 1993, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda1 MD, Room P-110.
1 e
5 I
5 Advanced Boilina Water Reactors, November 16-17, 1993, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, MD (El-Zeftawy), 8:30 a.m.,
Room P-110.
The Subcommittee will continue its review of the GE ABWR Standard Safety Analysis Report and the associated NRC staff's Final Safety Evaluation Report.
Lodging will be announced later.
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Michelson Kress Carroll Wylie Catton 404th ACRS Meeting, December 9-11, 1993, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, MD, Room P-110.
Probabilistic Risk Assessment (tentative), Date to be determined (June / July), Bethesda, MD (Houston).
The Subcommittee will discuss a proposed regulatory guide on the use of PRA in design certification and other applications of PRA in the regulatory process.
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Lewis Seale Davis Wilkins Kress Consultants - TBD Michelson Joint Severe Accidents / Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena, Date to be determined (June / July), Bethesda, MD (Houston).
The Subcommittees will begin their review of the staff's proposed technical positions on severe accident issues for future plant designs.
The topics of fuel-coolant interactions and hydrogen will also be discussed.
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Kress Dhir Catton Kerr Davis Lee Lindblad Ward Michelson Seale
6 31qint Individual Plant Examinations / Severe Accidents (tentative), Dato to be determined (July / August), Bethesda. MD (Houston).
The Subcom-mittees will discuss the status and insights gained in regard to the Individual Plant Examination Program and Accident Management Guidelines.
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Davis Michelson Kress Scale Catton Kerr Lindblad Ward Decay Heat Removal Systems, Date to be determined, Bethesda, MQ (Boehnert).
The Subcommittee will continue its review of the NRC staff's proposed final resolution of Generic Safety Issue 23,_" Reactor Coolant Pump Seal Failures."
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Catton Michelson Davis Wylie Lindblad Ward Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena, Date to be determined, Orecon State University (OSU). Corvallis. OR (Boehnert).
The Subcommittee will continue its review of the Westinghouse and NRC integral systems and separate effects test programs supporting the AP600 design certification effort.
The meeting discussion will focus on the OSU integral systems test facility.
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Catton Dhir Davis Kerr Kress Schrock Lindblad Ward Seale Wulff Wilkins Zuber Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena, Date to be determined (2-day meeting),
San Jose. CA (Boehnert).
The Subcommittee will continue its review of both the GE analytical program (TRACG code) and the experimental program supporting the certification effort for the Simplified Boiling Water Reactor design.
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Catton Dhir Davis Kerr Kress Ward Seale Wulff Wilkins Zuber
7 Joint Severe Accidents / Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena, Date to be determined (Fall), Bethesda, MD (Houston).
The Subcommittees will continue their review of the staff's proposed technical positions on severe accident issues for future plant designs.
The topics of basemat penetration and direct containment heating will also be discussed.
Attendance by the following is anticipated:
Kress Dhir Catton Kerr Davis Lee Lindblad Ward Michelson Seale j
z, APPENDIX IV' MINUTES OF THE 396TH ACRS MEETING.
APRIL 15-17, 1993 LIST OF DOCUMENTS PROVIDED TO THE COMMITTEE INote: Some of the materials listed may have been Drovided for ACRS Internal Use Only or may contain Proprietary Information1 MEETING NOTEBOOK AGENDA ITEM NO.
2 Current License Renewal Issues 1.
Status Report 2.
SECY-93-049, Implementation of.10 CFR.Part 54, Requirements for Renewal of Operating Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants, dated March 1, 1993 3.
Memorandum for James Taylor, from Samuel Chilk, dated March 24, 1993, re: Staff Requirements - Briefing on License Renewal Issues (SECY-93-049) 4.
Memorandum for Paul Shewmon from Samuel Chilk, dated December 24, 1992, re: Staff Requirements Periodic Meeting with ACRS on December 11, 1992 5.
Memorandum for James Taylor from Samuel Chilk, December 21, 1992, re: Staff Requirement - Briefing on License.
Renewal Rulemaking Issues, on December'7, 1992 Briefing on License Renewal Regulatory Guidance Issues, on December 8, 1992 and Briefing on License Renewal Industry Initiatives and Resources on December 18, 1992 6.
Memorandum for James Taylor, William Parler from James 1
Curtiss, dated November 19, 1992, re: License Renewal 3
Resolution of SECY-90-016 Follow-On Issues 7.
Status Report i
8.
Table 1.
SECY-090-Status of Follow-On Issues, with ACRS Member (s) Assignments and Status of Resolution of these Issues 9.
SECY-93-087 for the Commissioners from James. Taylor, I
EDO, re: Policy Technical and Licensing Issues i
Pertaining to Evolutionary and Advanced Light-Water Reactor Designs,. dated April 2, 1993 10.
Letter for Chairman Selin from Paul Shewmon, dated March 18, 1993, re: Computers in Nuclear Power Plant Operations 11.
Letter for James Taylor from David Ward, dated September 16, 1992, re: Draft Commission Paper, " Design Certification and Licensing Policy Issues Pertaining to Passive and-Evolutionary Advanced Light Water Reactor Designs" 12.
Letter for Chairman Selin from David Ward, dated September 16, 1992, re: Digital Instrumentation and Control System Reliability 13.
Letter for James Taylor from David Ward, dated August 17, 1992, re: Issues Pertaining to Evolutionary and Passive Light Water Reactors and Their Relationship to
~
4 j
Current Regulatory Requirements 14.
Letter.for James Taylor from David Ward, dated May 13,.
1992, re: Issues Pertaining to Evolutionary and Passive Light Water Reactors and their Relationship to Current i
Regulatory Requirements 15.
Letter for Chairman Carr from Carlyle Michelson, dated April 26, 1990, re: Evolutionary Light Water Reactor Certification Issues and their Relationship to Current Regulatory Requirements 16.
Memorandum for Ivan Cattnn from Sam Duraiswamy, dated March 28, 1993, re: SECY-90-016 and Beyond 4
Safety Goals /Larae Release 17.
Status Report 18.
Memorandum for John T.
Larkins from Warren Minners, dated March 11, 1993, re: ACRS Review of Draft Commission Paper on Large Release Determination (Draft Copy for Internal Use only) 19.
Draft for the Commissioners from James Taylor re:
Recommendation on Large Release Definition [ Prepared for Internal Committee Use) 20.
Memorandum for James Taylor from Forrest Remick, dated March 2, 1993, re: Large Release Guidelines at Part of Safety Goals [ Prepared for Internal Committee Use]
21.
Letter for Chairman Selin from David Ward, dated May 13, 1993 re: Definition of a Large Release for Use with the Safety Goal Policy 22.
Letter for Chairman Zech from Forrest Remick, dated February 16, 1989, re: Further ACRS Comments on Implementation of the Safety Goal Policy 23.
Letter for Chairman Zech from W.
Kerr, dated April 12, 1988, re: Program to Implement the Safety Goal Policy -
ACRS Comments 5
SALP Procram 24.
Status Report 25.
Letter for Chairman Carr from Carlyle Michelson, dated December 21, 1989, re: Coherence in the Regulatory Process 26.
Letter for Chairman Carr from Carlyle Michelson, dated September 12, 1990, re: Reevaluation of the SALP Program 27.
Letter for Harold Lewis from Joe Colvin, dated September 4, 1990, re: SALP Process 28.
Letter for Chairman Carr from Zack Pate, dated December 11, 1990, re: Regulatory Impact 29.
Letter for Chairman Selin from David Ward, dated September 10, 1991, re: The Staff's Recommendations on the Regulatory Impact Survey Report 30.
Excerpt, ACRS 389th Meeting Minutes, J. Colvin, CEO, NUMARC, addressing the subject of the impact of the NRC Regulatory Process, September 10-12, 1992 31.
Letter for David Meyer from Nicholas Reynolds, dated October 9, 1992, re: SALP Program 32.
Letter for Chairman Selin from' Joe Colvin, dated October 20, 1992, re: SALP
33.
Letter for Joe Colvin from Ivan Selin, dated December 18, 1992, re: SALP 34.
SECY-92-290: SALP. Program, dated August 19, 1992
[ Internal Committee Use Only]
35.
SALP Direceive 8.6,
[ Draft]
8 Reculatory Guides for Imolementation of 10 CFR Part 20 36.
Status Report 37.
Memorandum for Raymond Fraley-from Bill Morris, dated November 6, 1992, re: ACRS Review of Final Reg Guide 8.N.10, Control of Access to High and Very High Radiation Areas in Nuclear Power Plants [with enclosures]
38.
Letter for James Taylor from David Ward, dated October 17, 1991, re: Regulatory Guides being Developed in Support of the Revised 10 CFR Part 20 39.
Letter for James Taylor from Dade Moeller, dated October 23, 1991, re: Regulatory Guides being Developed in Support of the Revised 10-CFR Part 20, " Standards for Protection Against Radiation" 40.
Proposed ACRS/ACNW letters, draft #2, dated 4/8/93,
[predecisional]
10 Maintenance Guidance Documents 41.
Status Report 42.
Letter for James Taylor from David Ward, dated October 15, 1992, re: Proposed Guidance for Implementation of the Maintenance Rule 10 CFR 50.65 43.
Analysis of Public Comments regarding Regulatory Guidance for the Maintenance Rule, 10 CFR 50.65 44.
NUMARC 93-01 Revision 2A, July 9, 1992, Draft Revision-January 15, 1993, " Industry Guideline for Monitoring the Effectiveness of Maintenance at Nuclear Power-Plants."
11 Generic Issue 152. "Desian Basis for Valves that Might be Subiected to Sionificant Blowdown Loads 45.
Status Report 46.
Memorandum for Warren Minners from Eric Beckjord, dated January 22, 1993, re: Generic Issue 152, " Design Basis for Valves that Might be Subjected to Significant Blowdown Loads" [with enclosures]
47.
Letter for Chairman Zech from Forrest Remick, dated May 9,
1989, re: Generic Letter on Safety Related Motor-Operated Valve Testing and Surveillance 48.
Letter for Chairman Carr from Forrest Remick, dated November 20, 1989, re: Proposed Resolution of Generic Issue-87, "HPCI Steam Line Break Without Isolation" 12 Reactor Operatina Experience: Turkey Point 49.
Status Report 50.
Memorandum for ACRS Members from D. Coe, dated March 23, 1993, re: Status Report - Report on the Effect of Hurricane Andrew on the Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Station from August 20-30, 1992 [with enclosures].
ACRB MEETING HANDOUTS AGENDA ITEM NO.
4 Comments on Larao Release Definition 1.
Memorandum to Tom Kress from Dave Ward, dated April 10, 1993, re: Comments on March 11 Paper, Minners to Larkins, " ACRS Review of Draft Commission Paper'on Large Release Determination" 5.1 SALP Procram 2.
Memorandum for ACRS Members from P.
Boehnert, dated April 13, 1993, re: SECY-93-090 - SALP Program 3.
SECY-93-090: SALP Program [Predecisional document until April 15, 1993]
6.1 Multilateral Meetina Letters 4.
Letter for Chairman Selin from M.
Hohlefelder, dated March 11, 1993, re: France Multilateral Meeting, faxed copy to G. Quittschreiber 5.
Letter for Paul Shevmon from Adolf Birkhofer, dated March 24, 1993, re: Invitation to Quadripartite Meeting, October 11-15, 1993 6.
Letter dated March 25, 1993, from J. Hulst, Head of Intrnational Relations 7.
Memorandum dated March 29, 1993, from J.
Larkins, re:
ACRS Participation in Multilateral Meeting in France 8.
Letter dated June 29,-1992, from Dave Ward, to Francis Cogne, re: RSK on May 26, 1992 9.1 Office of Policy Plannina 9.
OPP Charter 10.
OPP Assessment of the Reactor Inspection Program, November 16, 1992 11.
OPP Current Licensing Basis for Operating Plants, dated November 30, 1992 12.
OPP Licensing Renewal: The Utility Decisionmaking Perspective, dated February 19, 1993 14.1 Future ACRS Activities - 397th ACRS Meetina May 13-15. 1993 13.
Memorandum for ACRS Members from R. Savio, dated April 15, 1993, re: Future ACRS Activities 14.
Memorandum for R.
Fraley from James Blaha, dated April 12, 1993, re: Proposed Agenda Items for ACRS/ACNW 15.
Letter for Paul Shewmon from James Taylor, dated April 9,
1993, re: Comments on Staff's Proposed Resolution for Generic Safety Issues 16.
Memorandum for James Taylor from Samuel Chilk, dated March 25, 1993, re: SECY-93-044 - Resolution of Generic Safety Issue B-56, Diesel Generator Reliability" 17.
Memorandum for ACRS Members from D.
Coe, dated March 19, 1993, re: Staff's Proposed Resolution of Generic Safety Issue B-56, " Diesel Generator Reliability" ~ [with enclosures]
18.
Policy Issue, SECY-93-086, dated April 1,
1993, re:
Backfit Considerations
1 16.1 Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recommendations 19.
Letter for Paul Shewmon from James Taylor, dated April 7,
1993, re: Staff's revised estimate of the schedule, proposed in SECY-93-041, ABWR Review Schedule 20.
Letter for Chairman Selin from Paul Shewmon, dated March 18, 1993, re: ABWR Review Schedule 21.
Letter for Paul Shewmon from James Taylor, dated March 31, 1993, re: SECY-92-413, " Incident Investigation Options Reporting to the Commission" [with enclosures) 22.
Letter for Paul Shewmon from James Taylor, dated March 24, 1993, re: response to February 19, 1993, Issue pertaining to the advanced reactor (PRISM, MHTGR, and PIUS) and CANDU 3 designs 23.
Letter for Chairman Selin from Paul Shewmon, dated February 19, 1993, re: Issue pertaining to the Advanced Reactor (PRISM, MHTGR, and PIUS) and CANDU 3 designs and their Relationship to Current Regulatory Requirements 24.
Letter for Paul Shewmon from James Taylor, dated March 12, 1993, re: proposed resolution of Generic Issue 142,
" Leakage Through Electrical Isolators in Instrumentation Circuits"[with enclosures) 17.6 Core Power Stability 25.
Memorandum for ACRS Members from Ivan Catton, dated April 7, 1993, re: NRC/BWR Owners Group Meeting on Post-ATWS Water Level and Boron Mixing Issues, March 16, 1993-Santa Barbara [ Internal ACRS Use Only) 1 l
']
4
-APPENDIX IV
.i MINUTES OF THE 396TH ACRS. MEETING
-APRIL 15-17, 1993
' LIST OF DOCUMENTS PROVIDED TO THE COMMITTEEJ INote: Some of the materials listed may have been provided for ACRS Internal Use Oniv or may contain ProDrietary Information1 l
MEETING NOTEBOOK AGENDA ITEM EOz 2
Current License Renewal Issues 1.
Status Report 2.
SECY-93-049, Implementation of 10 CFR Part 54, Requirements for Renewal of Operating Licenses for i
Nuclear Power Plants, dated March 1, 1993 3.
Memorandum for James Taylor, from Samuel Chilk', dated March 24, 1993, re:. Staff Requirements Briefing on License Renewal' Issues (SECY-93-049) 4.
Memorandum for Paul Shewmon from Samuel Chilk, dated-1 December.24, 1992, re: Staff Requirements Periodic Meeting with ACRS on December 11, 1992 5.
Memorandum for James Taylor from Samuel Chilk, December 21, 1992, re: Staff Requirement - Briefing on License-Renewal Rulemaking Issues,~on December 7, 1992 Briefing'
.l on License Renewal Regulatory Guidance Issues,'on l
December 8, 1992 and_ Briefing on License Renewal' Industry Initiatives and Resources on December 18, 1992 6.
Memorandum for James Taylor, William Parler from. James 1
Curtiss, dated November 19, 1992, re: License Renewal 3
Resolution of SECY-90-016 Follow-On Issues 7.
Status Report 8.
Table 1.
SECY-090-Status of Follow-On Issues, with ACRS-Member (s) Assignments-and Status of Resolution of these
-l Issues
.i 9.
SECY-93-087 for the Commiss'ioners from James' Taylor,
.)
EDO, re: Policy Technical and Licensing Issues Pertaining to Evolutionary and Advanced Light-Water Reactor Designs, dated April 2, 1993 10.
Letter for Chairman Selin from Paul.Showmon, dattad
- j March 18, 1993, re
- Computers in Nuclear Power' Plant Operations 11.
Letter for James Taylor from David Ward, dated September 16, 1992, re: Draft Commission Paper, " Design Certification and Licensing Policy Issues Pertaining to Passive and Evolutionary Advanced Light Water Reactor Designs" 12.
Letter for Chairman Selin from David Ward, dated September 16, 1992, re:' Digital Instrumentation and Control System Reliability 13.
Letter for James Taylor from David Ward, dated' August 17, 1992, re: Issues Pertaining to Evolutionary and Passive Light Water Reactors and Their Relationship to
)
~
. _.., _ _. ~
, ~,
)
Current Regulatory Requirements 14.
Letter for James Taylor from David Ward, dated May 13, 1992, re: Issues Pertaining.to Evolutionary and Passive Light Water Reactors and their Relationship to Current Regulatory Requirements 15.
Letter for Chairman Carr'from Carlyle Michelson, dated April 26, 1990, re: Evolutionary Light Water' Reactor Certification Issues and their Relationship to Current Regulatory Requirements 16.
Memorandum for Ivan Catton from Sam Duraiswamy, dated March 28, 1993, re: SECY-90-016 and Beyond 4
Safety Goals /Larce Release 17.
Status Report 18.
Memorandum for John T. Larkins from Warren Minners, dated March 11, 1993, re: ACRS Review of Draft Commission Paper on Large Release Determination [ Draft copy for Internal Use Only]
19.
Draft for the Commissioners from James Taylor re:
Recommendation on Large Release Definition [ Prepared for Internal Committee Use]
20.
Memorandum for James Taylor from Forrest Remick, dated March 2, 1993, re: Large Release Guidelines at Part of Safety Goals [ Prepared for Internal Committee Use].
21.
Letter for Chairman Selin from David Ward, dated May 13, 1993 re: Definition of a Large Release for Use with j
the Safety Goal Policy i
22.
Letter for Chairman Zech from Forrest Remick, dated i
February 16, 1989, re: Further ACRS Comments on Implementation of the Safety Goal Policy 23.
Letter for Chairman Zech from W. Kerr, dated April 12, 1988, re: Program to Implement the Safety Goal Policy -
ACRS Comments 5
SALP Procram 24.
Status Report 25.
Letter for Chairman Carr from Carlyle Michelson, dated December 21, 1989, re: Coherence in the Regulatory Process 26.
Letter for Chairman Carr from Carlyle Michelson, dated September 12, 1990, re: Reevaluation of the SALP Program 27.
Letter for Harold Lewis from Joe Colvin, dated September 4, 1990, re: SALP Process 28.
Letter for Chairman Carr from Zack Pate, dated December 11, 1990, re: Regulatory Impact 29.
Letter for Chairman Selin from David Ward, dated September 10, 1991, re: The Staff's Recommendations on the Regulatory Impact Survey Report 30.
Excerpt, ACRS 389th Meeting Minutes, J.
Colvin, CEO, NUMARC, addressing the subject of the impact of the NRC Regulatory Process, Scptember 10-12, 1992 31.
Letter for David Meyer from Nicholas Reynolds, dated October 9, 1992, re: SALP Program 32.
Letter for Chairman Selin from Joe Colvin, dated October 20, 1992, re: SALP
33.
Letter for Joe Colvin from Ivan Selin, dated December 18, 1992, re: SALP 34.
SECY-92-290: SALP Program, dated August 19, 1992
[ Internal Committee Use Only]
35.
SALP Directive 8.6, [ Draft) 8 Regulatory Guides for Implementation of 10 CFR Part 20 36.
Status Report 37.
Memorandum for Raymond Fraley from Bill Morris, dated November 6, 1992, re: ACRS Review of Final Reg Guide 8.N.10, Control of Access to High and Very High Radiation Areas in Nuclear Power Plants [with enclosures]
38.
Letter for James Taylor from David Ward, dated October 17, 1991, re: Regulatory Guides being Developed in Support of the Revised 10 CFR Part 20 39.
Letter for James Taylor from Dade Moeller, dated October 23, 1991, re: Regulatory Guides being Developed in Support of the Revised 10 CFR Part 20, " Standards for Protection Against Radiation" 40.
Proposed ACRS/ACNW letters, draft #2, dated 4/8/93,
[predecisional]
10 Maintenance Guidance Documents 41.
Status Report 42.
Letter for James Taylor from David Ward, dated October 15, 1992,-re: Proposed Guidance for Implementation of the Maintenance Rule 10 CFR 50.65 43.
Analysis of Public Comments regarding Regulatory Guidance for the Maintenance Rule, 10 CFR 50.65 44.
NUMARC 93-01 Revision 2A, July 9, 1992, Draft Revision January 15, 1993, " Industry Guideline for Monitoring the Effectiveness of Maintenance at Nuclear Power Plants."
11 Generic Issue 152, "Desian Basis for Valves that Micht be Subiected to Sicnificant Blowdown Loads 45.
Status Report 46.
Memorandum for Warren Minners from Eric Beckjord, dated January 22, 1993, re: Generic Issue 152, " Design Basis for Valves that Might be Subjected to Significant Blowdown Loads" [with enclosures]
47.
Letter for Chairman Zech from Forrest Remick, dated May 9,
1989, re: Generic Letter on Safety Related Motor-Operated Valve Testing and Surveillance 48.
Letter for Chairman Carr from Forrest Remick, dated November 20, 1989, re: Proposed Resolution of Generic Issue-87, "HPCI Steam Line Break Without Isolation" 12 Reactor Operatina Experience: Turkey Point 49.
Status Report 50.
Memorandum for ACRS Members from D. Coe, dated March 23, 1993, re: Status Report - Report on the Effect of Hurricane Andrew on the Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Station from August 20-30, 1992 [with enclosures].
ACRS MEETING KANDOUIS i
j AGENDA ITEM NO.
4 Comments on Laroe Release Definition 1.
Memorandum to Tom Kress from Dave Ward, dated April 10, 1993, re: Comments on March 11 Paper, Minners to Larkins, " ACRS Review of Draft Commission Paper on Large Release Determination" 5.1 SALP Procram 2.
Memorandum for ACRS Members from P.
Boehnert, dated April 13, 1993, re: SECY-93-090 - SALP Program 3.
SECY-93-090: SALP Program [Predecisional document until April 15, 1993) 6.1 Multilateral Meetina Letters 4.
Letter for Chairman Selin from M. Hohlefelder, dated March 11, 1993, re: France Multilateral Meeting, faxed copy to G. Quittschreiber 5.
Letter for Paul Shewmon from Adolf Birkhofer, dated March 24, 1993, re: Invitation to Quadripartite Meeting, October 11-15, 1993 6.
Letter dated March 25, 1993, from J.
Hulst, Head of Intrnational Relations 7.
Memorandum dated March 29, 1993, from J.
Larkins, re:
ACRS Participation in Multilateral Meeting in France 8.
Letter dated June 29, 1992, from Dave Ward, to Francis Cogne, re: RSK on May 26, 1992 9.1 Office of Policy Plannina 9.
OPP Charter 10.
OPP Assessment of the Reactor Inspection Program, November 16, 1992 11.
OPP Current Licensing Basis for Operating Plants, dated November 30, 1992 12.
OPP Licensing Renewal: The Utility Decisionmaking Perspective, dated February 19, 1993 14.1 Future ACRS Activities - 397th ACRS Meetina May 13-15, 1993 13.
Memorandum for ACRS Members from R.
Savio, dated April 15, 1993, re: Future ACRS Activities 14.
Memorandum for R.
Fraley from James Blaha, dated April 12, 1993, re: Proposed Agenda Items for ACRS/ACNW 15.
Letter for Paul Showmon from James Taylor, dated April 9,
1993, re: Comments on Staff's Proposed Resolution for Generic Safety Issues 16.
Memorandum for James Taylor from Samuel Chilk, dated March 25, 1993, re: SECY-93-044 - Resolution of Generic Safety Issue B-56, " Diesel Generator Reliability" 17.
Memorandum for ACRS Members from D.
Coe, dated March 19, 1993, re: Staff's Proposed Resolution of Generic Safety Issue B-56, " Diesel Generator Reliability" (with enclosures) 18.
Policy Issue, SECY-93-086, dated April 1, 1993, re:
Backfit Considerations j
i
?
16.1 Feconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recommendations 19.
Letter for Paul Shewmon from James Taylor, dated April 7,
1993, re: Staff's revised estimate of the schedule, proposed in SECY-93-041, ABWR Review Schedule 20.
Letter for Chairman Selin from Paul Shewmon, dated March 18, 1993, re: ABWR Review Schedule 21.
Letter for Paul Shewmon from James Taylor, dated March 31, 1993, re: SECY-92-413, " Incident Investigation Options Reporting to the Commission" [with enclosures]
22.
Letter for Paul Shewmon from James Taylor, dated March 24, 1993, re: response to February 19, 1993, Issue pertaining to the advanced reactor (PRISM, MHTGR, and PIUS) and CANDU 3 designs 23.
Letter for Chairman Selin from Paul Shewmon, dated February 19, 1993, re: Issue pertaining to the Advanced Reactor (PRISM, MHTGR, and PIUS) and CANDU 3 designs and their Relationship to Current Regulatory Requirements 24.
Letter for Paul Shewmon from James Taylor, dated March 12, 1993, re: proposed resolution of Generic Issue 142,
" Leakage Through Electrical Isolators in Instrumentation Circuits"[with enclosures]
17.6 Core Power Stability 25.
Memorandum for ACRS Members from Ivan Catton, dated April 7, 1993, re: NRC/BWR Owners Group Meeting on Post-ATWS Water Level and Boron Mixing Issues, March 16, 1993-Santa Barbara [ Internal ACRS Use Only]
-