ML20101C722
| ML20101C722 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, 05000470, 05000601 |
| Issue date: | 01/04/1983 |
| From: | Boyd S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Ogeka G ENERGY, DEPT. OF |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20101C698 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-FIN-A-3705, FOIA-84-335 NUDOCS 8412210171 | |
| Download: ML20101C722 (11) | |
Text
.
2 JAN 0 4 c
I;r. Gregory J. Ogoka, Chief Administrative Branch Brookhaven Aree Office U. S. Department of Energy Upton, New York 11973
Dear Mr. Ogeka:
SUBJECT:
BNL TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO THE DIVISI0tl 0F SYSTEf!S II;TEGRATION, !!RR, IIRC, SAFETY EVALUATION OF CORE-MELT ACCIDEf!TS:
CESSAR-FDA; UESTINGHOUSE STA!!DARD PLANT-FDA" (FINA3705)
The purpose of this letter is to request a proposal from Bill to provide technical assistance to the Division of Systems Integration,1:RC throuch FY-85. The enclosed Statenant of Work (Enclosure 1) details the required work cnd should be used as the basis for preparing a proposal for submittal to this office.
Standard Terns and conditions for I;RC work, as provided in the DOE /NRC Hemorandum of Understanding of February 24, 1978, and described in URC Manual Chapter 1102, should be used as the basis for oreparing a propos al.
If a portion of this~ work is to be subcontracted, it is recuired that DNL have a professional assigned to the contract who is qualified to defend the results. Also, print approval by ne in uritir.~g is required before initiction of any subcontractor effort.
Please submit a proposal containing, cs a mininua, the information set forth in, Proposal Content, in the format of the Statenant of Work uithin 60 days to:
!!rs. Sybil 11. Boyd, Progran Assistant Division of Systems Ir.tegration P-1102 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D. C.
20555 l
l l
koj2pgp71840621 l
l SHOLLYB4-335 pyg FP9 I
i W
l
..(.........
7
..l.
.......L
'.!r.'G. J. Ogeka.
Som work under this tasi: is anticipated to be proprietary.
If you hcve inv questiens about this authoriz6 tion, please contact l*rs.
S. ii. Scyd on FTS 492-7685.
Thank you for your assistance.
Sincer=lv, Or!si..als gned 5; r
Rcr).Ma %
Roger J.11attson, Director.
Division of Systens Integration Office of Huclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
1.
S0W(FINA-3705) 2.
Proposal Content cc:
R. %ri, BHL T. P,cmano, Bf'l W. Kato, BNL U. T. Pratt, BNL DISTRIBUTION H. Grahn, BUL NRR Project File (BGrenier)
R. Bauer, DDE-CH RSB S/F: TA R. Barber, DOE-HQ JMeyer R/F RPattson TSpeis BSheron RSB R/F EMarinos NLaub en SBoyd JMeyer DDandois DCorley ZRosztoczy VZeoli 7
PPA {.yFER.
(4 pe i
, bi LJ
/
8Z l
y,,, I..DS I '-[S (..d...
...........................J t h
............... Q... ~/.y
....D S A D : RS )
DSI:RSB*iB s
DS DS%
............p..g. /7....... DS
[
I R DSI:R J.\\....... Peyer:g NLauben Bjt Elbri'no's '
Spel SBofd R Pa,..tts
....s.
4
. T6p"yer"""urg"782" ""fr}p)ur" ""r272 pet" "TYi2Eler" "Tfi"51si" '")ti' " lug'
ENCLOSURE 1 STATEMENT OF WORK
Title:
Safety Evaluation of Core-Melt Accidents:
CESSAR-FDA, Westinghouse Standard Plant-FDA FIN NO.:
A-3705 B&R NO.:
20-19-40-41-3 Project Manager:
J. Meyer (FTS 492-4752)
Technical Monitor:
J. Meyer (FTS 492-4752)
Backoround and Objective Consideration of severe accidents beyond the traditional design basis, h
including full core melt accidents, is an important part of NRC's overall safety assessment and_therefore is becoming an important ingredient in specific licensing actions and in generic rulemaking proceedings. Also the consideration of features to mitigate the consequences of core melt accidents for nuclear facilities continues to be a major specific licensing activity.
It is very important that the large amount of technical information available and being developed b',
y for example, RES in this area be appropriately assimilated, codified and evaluated in a way that-is directly applicable 'to licensing needs.
+
These needs are in three major. areas.
First, there is a need to better understand the progression or core melt accident sequences up to and including associated core melt related phenomenology and the implementation of these processes (and their uncertainties) into an overall assessment of containment loading and failure modes.
The impact of mitigation strategies on containment loading and failure modes must also be factored into the assessment.
)
Second, based on the containment loading histories, there is a need to i
determine-the radiological source term suspended in the containment, the j
effects on engineered safety features (E.S.Fs) and mitigation features of this source term and finally the release characteristics of this source term following containment failure.
i Third, there is a need for an overall capability to assess the l
radiologi. cal consequences as-a function of the assumptions regarding accident sequences, phenomenology and mitigation hardware. These radiological consequences must be further analyzed in a licensing context with a full appreciation of its regulatory implications.
i The objec-tive of the activities described in this Statement of Work is to neet the above needs.
The scope of this work will be limited to addressing immediate.NRR licensing concerns using the-state-of-the-art' codes and the analyses and
~
experimental data developed from NRC/RES and other R&D programs. The scope'also includes review and evaluation of licensee subnittals and 4
other pertinent information dealing with the subjects described below.
,4-
,g.,,
.4
,,---e,--
,.4.,
l The analyses provided under this contract will form the basis for the portion)g decisions required on CESSAR-Systen 80 FDA review (PRA, and the We licensin respect to severe accident considerations.
'The extensive analysis and assessment to be performed, code capability to be developed and experience to be gained under A-3711 has been taken into account in developing the RFP.
Work Requirements The Work Requirements ~ Arei Task I:
Severe-Accident Procression Analysis:
Reactor _
Systems / Containment Systens Loadina and Failure Modes.
Estimated Level of Effort in FY83:
7 R4 Completion Date: 8/31/85 Estimated Level of Effort in FY84:_ 10 im 9 MM Estimated Level of Effort in Ff85:
Subtask 1.A - Data Acquisition:
Phenomenology Programs Coordinate phenomenological input from FIN No.B8634.
Provide cognizance of phenomenological studies of RES, IDCOR, and foreign programs.
Relate the information gathered to MARCH predictions.
This subtask supports directly the efforts in Subtask "I.D."
Starting March 15, 1983, a letter report summarizing subtask status shall be provided every three months until the end of the contract.
(Note:
Subtask 1.A of FIN No.A3711 provides the overal.1 evaluation in this area; the subtask above is limited to specific W and/or CESSAR items.
This recuired letter report input can be combined with tiie letter report required in FIN No.A3711.)
... Completion Date: 8/31/85 Subtask I.B - Date Acquisition:
Engineering Programs Coordinate engineering mitigation feature input from FIN No.B8625.
Provide Cognizance of engineering studies on containment and mitigation features of RES, IDCOR, DOE and foreign programs.
Relate the information gathered to !! ARCH predictions.
This subtask supports directly the efforts in subtask "I.D."
Starting March 15, 1983, a letter report summarizing subtask status shall be provided every three months until the end of the contract.
(Note:
Subtask I.B of FIN No.A3711 provides the overall evaluation in this area; the subtask above is l
limited to specific l{ and/or CESSAR items.
This required letter report input can.be conbined with l
the letter report required in FIN No.A3711)
...Conpletion Date: 8/31/85
Subtask I.C - MARCH /l1ELCOR Code ilaintenance and Development:
Closely follow RES's MARCH-2 and MELCOR development program. Follow the development of similar accident analysis codes e.g., INCORE, foreign and domestic and speciality codes, e.g., CORCON, CONTAIN.
Maintain current f1 ARCH code capability with modifications as appropriate to the reactor type under consideration and the containment modifications (mitigation features) being addressed.
This subtask supports directly the efforts in subtesk "I.D".
Starting March 15, 1983, a-letter report sunmarizing subtask status shall be provided every three months until the end of contract.
(Note: Subtask I.C of FIN No.A3711 provides the overall evaluation in this area; the subtask above is limited to specific W and/or CESSAR items. This required letter report Tnput can be combined with the letter report required in FIN No.A3711).
... Completion Date: 8/31/85 Subtask I.D - Accident Analysis:
W/CESSAR For each reactor type under consideration, analyze the accident progressions up to and including containment failure characterizations based on accident sequences and containment modifications (if any) supplied by the staff (Pay particular attention to those containment failure parameters which are input to consequence analysis (CRAC code).)
... Completion Dates:
I.D.1 CESSAR Preliminary.. 8/31/84 I.D.2 CESSAR Final........ 8/31/85 I.D.3 W Preliminary.......
7/31/84 I.D. 4 }[ Final.............
7/31/85 Subtask I.E - Accident Assessment: W/CESSAR Review PRA subnittals for these reactors within the scope of Task I as prepared by utilities / vendors.
Generate cuestions to the utilities / vendors as needed.
Provide write-ups of relevant areas within the scope of Task I for inclusion in staff assessments and testimony.
... Completion Dates:
I.E.1 CESSAR Q1's..
9/30/83 I.E.2 CESSAR Q2's..
9/30/84 I.E.3 W Q1's.......
8/31/83 I.E.4 E 02's.......
8/31/84 Task II - Radionuclide Release Assessment Estimated Level of Effort in FY83:
4 MM Completion Date: 8/31/85 Estimateo Level of Effort in FYS4:
4 MM Estimated Level of Eff ort in FY8Ti ' 5 t'Ji i
~
Subtask II.A - Data Acquisition:
Source Term Provide cognizance of this activity and proper coupling wfth CORRAL / MATADOR so that AED positions on source tems are properly translated into the CORRAL /l!ATADOR analyses of releases at containment-failure.
(The AEB branch of NRR/DSI is responsible for providing state-of-technology data on source terms for use in the CORRAL /ftATADOR codes.)
Provide physical processes data to AEB in~ order to aid them in their source term evaluation (particle densities and particle sizes for determination of agglomeration rates in containment volumes).
This subtask supports directly the efforts in subtask "II.C."
Starting March 15, 1983, a letter report summarizing subtask status shall be provided every three months until the end of the project.
(Note:
Subtask II.A of FIN No.A3711 provides the overall evaluation in this area; the subtask above is limited to specific W and/or CESSAR items.
This required letter report Input can be combined with the letter report required in FIN No.A3711).
... Completion Date: 8/31/85 Subtask II.B - Data Acquisition:
Code Development Maintain close contact with RES development of MATADOR, NAVA CONTAIN and MELCOR.
Provide assessments of progress to date and recomendations for the course of further development.
And follow EPRI, IDCOR and foreign activities in this area.
This subtask supports directly the efforts in subtask "II.C."
Starting March 15, 1983, a letter report summarizing subtask status shall be provided every three months until the end of the project.
(Note:
Subtask II.B of FIN No.A3711 provides the overall evaluation in this area; the subtask.above is limited to specific W and/or:CESSAR items. This required letter report Input can be combined with the letter report required in FIN No.A3711).
... Completion Date: 8/31/85 Subtask II.C - Accident Analysis: W and CESSAR For each reactor type under consideration, perform analyses of the release fractions and other containment failure parameters important in the rubsequent consequence analysis.
This effort is closely coupled to Subtask I.D and should be performed concurrent with Subtask I.D.
... Completion Dates:
II.C.1 CESSAR preliminary..
8/31/84 II.C.2 CESSAR final........
8/31/85 II.C.3 1! preliminary.......
7/31/84 II.C.4 E final.............
7/31/85 l
m 5-Subtask II.D - Accident Assessment: W and CESSAR Review PRA submittels In the areas within the scope of Task II by utilities / vendors.
Generate questions to the utilities / vendors based on this review.
Participate in meeting with the utilities / vendors as updated.
Provide write-ups of relevant area within the scope.of. Task II scheduled for inclusion in staff assessments and testimony, and conform to.
schedules provided by staff below:
... Completion Dates:"
II.D.1 CESSAR Q1's...
9/30/83.
II. D.2 CESSAR Q2's...
9/30/84 II.D.3 W 01's.........,8/31/83 II.D 4 E Q2's........
8/31/84 Task III - Consequence Analysis-Estimated Level of Effort in FY83:
? MM Completion Date: 8/31/85 Estimated Level of Effort in FY87T 2 MM I _
Estimated Level of Effort in FY85:
2 41 (Note: The AEB of NRR/DSI is responsible for all NRR consequences-analyses.
As such, Task III will be limited to the following activities related to consequences analysis:
(1) CRAC analyses in order to determine the impact on risk of variations in the Task I & II analyses based on phenomenological uncertainties, engineering uncertainties-and the incorporation of mitigation features (2)
CRAC analyses determining risk values at the request of l
AEB through RSB-(as a supplement to AEB's own analyses).)
Subtask III.A-Data Acquisition:
CRAC Code Keep abreast of the stete of technology in the area of cunsequence analyses including working knowledge of CRAC-II and other related codes (e.g., CRAC -
IT).
Maintain a CRAC. code capability and data files for the sites used in this study. This suhtask supports directly the efforts in subtask "III.B."
Starting March 15, 1983, e letter report summarizing i
subtask status shall be provided every three nonths until end of contract.
(Note:
Subtask III.A of FIN No.A3711 provides the overal1~ evaluation in this area; the subtask'above is limited to specific W and/or CESSAR items. This required letter report input can be combined with the letter report required in FIN No.A3711).
... Completion Date: 8/31/85 Subtask III.B-Accident Analysis Perform CRAC analyses consistent with the
)
MARCH / CORRAL analyses perforced in Subtask ID and i
IIC.
Determine changes in risk based on inclusion ofmitigation(orprevention)featuresandon t
I
- ~, - - -,
+
variations due to accident progression uncertainties.
(Note Milestone in II.C)
... Comp 1.etion Date: 8/31/85
-Task IV - Risk Assessment Summary (Integration of Tasks I, II, and III)
Estimated Level of Effort in FY83: 5 MM Completion Date: 8/31/85 Estimated Level of Effort in FY84: 6 MM Estimated Level of Effort in FY85:
7 Ri Subtask IV.A - Integration:
Containment Matrix For the reactor being considered in this project, generate a containment matrix which shows the relationship of damage states (provided by the staff) to release categories, and defend each element of the matrix based on analyses and assessment provided in Task I & II.
Determine estimates of uncertainties for each containment matrixelement.(tobeusedinSubtaskIVC).
Compare this matrix to that developed by the utility / vendor, if appropriate.
... Completion Date:
IV.A.1 Preliminary: CESSAR.. 8/31/84 IV. A.2 Preliminary: W......
7/31/84 IV.A.3 Final: CESSART......
8/31/35 IV.A.4 Final: W............
7/31/85 Subtask IV.B - Integration:
Impact on Risk Present results of analyses and assessment in Task I, II and III in terms of risk values (incl. CCDFs) and changes in risk values due to changes in containmentdesigns(Mitigationfeatures)orchanges in damage state probabilities.
IV.B.I CESSAR: Letter Report review of IPPSS.....
9/31/84 IV.B.2 W: Letter Report review of Zion...... 8/31/84 IV.B.3 CESSAR Final Report (NUREG/CR)...
8/31/85 IV.B.4 W Final Report Il1UREG/CR).........
7/31/85 Subtask IV.C - Integration: Uncertainty Analysis Develop a methodology for translating containment matrix element uncertainties and other uncertainties (e.g., in damage states and CRAC analyses) into final uncertainties in final risk and risk reducticn values making use of the RES and industry programs in this area.
i
...Ccmpletion Dates:. Quarterly Reports
~
7-g Level of Effort and Period of Performance
~ The level of effort is estimated at 63 man-conths over a 33-month period.
Technical Repcrting Recuirements:
i-Ali products which are required from this contract (including NUREG/CR reports, and miscellanecus letter reports for input to SERs) have been identified specifically under each subtask in the Work Recuirements
. Section.
BNL shall subnit six copies of draft NUREG/CR reports to the I;RC Project 11anager, for staff review and approval.
For NUREG/CR reports, within sixty dcys of receipt of the staff's comments on these L
reports, the contractor shall submit one (1) reproducible and six (6) reproduced copies of the final reports in accordance with NRC Manual Chapter 3202, " Publication of Unclassified Regulatory and Technical i
Reports Prepared by NRC Contractors.
Business Letter Reports th A monthly business letter. report will be submitted by the 15 of the month to the Project fianager with copies provided to the Director,
[
Division of Systems Integration, ATTN: S. Boyd, T. Speis, B. Sheron, DSI, and Mr. B. L. Grenier, NRR. These reports will identify the title l
of the project, the FIN, the Principal Investigator, the period of j
performance, and the reporting period will contain 2 sections as follows:
i Project Status Section For cach task under this program, provide the following information:
1.
A list of the efforts completed during the period; milestones reached, or if missed, an explanation provided.
2.
Any problems cr delays encountered or anticipated and.
recomendation for resolution. If 5
3.
A summary of progress to date (this may be expressed in terms of percentage cetpletion for each task).
L l
4.
Plans for the next reporting period.
j Financial Status Section 1.
Provide the total cost (value) of the project as reflected in the
. proposal and the total amount of funds obligated to date, i
-1/ if the recommendeo resolution involves a contract modification, i.e.,
changes work requirements, level of effort (costs), or period of i
performance, a separate letter should be prepared and submitted to the Director, Division of Systems Integration, ATTN: S. Bcyd, E.
!!.arinos, DSI, and a copy provided to the Project fianager and B. L.
Grenier, NRR.
s i
4 y
e
.e.,-,-.,
-a-.-_.-
.,_.m.,,.
m.-, -
-,.n,,,
,e,,
e-m
.,._,-,....m.
-,.,c7
.-q--<---r-
-n r a
2.
Provide the total amount of funds expended (costed) during the period and total cumulative to date as follows:
Period Cumulative a.
Laber-related costs b.
Computer services c.
Travel d.
Subcontracts e.
Equipment
(~%)2/
3.
See attached format Meetino and Travel 1.
One one-day meeting each quarter in Bethesda to discuss performance and work progress should be planned and budgeted.
2.
Two topical professional meetings on relevant topics should be plannedandbudgeted(oneattendee).
3.
One one-day meeting each quarter in Bethesda or at licensee / applicant headquarters with licensee / applicant and NRC staff.
NRC Furnished Materials The NRC will provide any documentation relevant to the above tasks including that which is submitted by licensees / applicants during the course of this project. NRC will furnish copies of the latest relevant codes together with appropriate Users Manuale and description of subroutines.
27 Provide percentage against total funds oblicated to date.
t
,,t' '
e 8
f 9
3.
Fee Recovery Cost Status Section Pursuant to the provisions' of HRC. Regulations,10 CFR 170, provide the total amount of funds expended (costed).during the period and cumulative to date
~
~
-for each task in_ the following format:
FIN:
B3705 TITLE:
Safety Evaluation of Core-Melt Accidents: CESSAR-FDA; Westinghouse Standard Plant-FDA Period:
Task I:
Severe-Accident Progression Analysis: Reactor Systems / Containment Systems Loadings and Failure Modes Facility Docket #
Period Cumulative CESSAR-80 50-470 Westinghouse 50-668 Advanced Design Task II:
Radionuclide Release Assessment Facili ty Docket #
Period Cumulative CESSAt-80 50-470 Westinghouse 50-668 l
Advanced Design Task III: Consequence Analysis Facility Docket #
Period Cumulative 1
CESSAR-80 50-470 Westinghouse 50-668 Advanced Design Task IV:
Risk Assessment Summary i
Facility Docket #
Period Cumulative 4
CESSAR-80 50-470 Westinghouse 50-668 Advanced Design i
Hote:
If there is any effort under any of these tasks that is generic in nature such that the effort is reoufred in order to perform the evaluation of any submittal, the cost for the generic effort should be ororated to each facility to which it applies.
I I
~ - -. --,
_4 r.-
_.. _.,,, ~ - _, - - - +