ML20101E208

Slide Presentation Entitled, Gessar PRA Review, Presented at 831205 Meeting in Bethesda,Md

ML20101E208
Person / Time
Site:	05000447
Issue date:	10/25/1983
From:	GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20101E143	List: ML20101E189 ML20101E196 ML20101E208
References
FOIA-84-175 NUDOCS 8412260173
Download: ML20101E208 (12)

Text

_ --... ...

~# ,s ..

2d Y

GE-NRC MANAGEMENT MEETING GESSAR PRA REVIEW

~

\

l 1

~

l BETHESDA, MD OCTOBER 25, 1983 I

l I

JM2lg?j73e4o73o SHOLLys4-175 ppR

~

GE-NRC MANAGEMENT MEETING GESSAR PRA REVIEW AGENDA o INTRODUCTION o SPECIFIC GE CONCERNS - FRONT END REVIEW

. Diesel Generator Common Mode Failure

. Transient Initiator Frequency

. ADS Reliability r

. Feedwater System Recovery 4

. ATWS and SORV After ATWS

. Loss of DC Power 1

~

o GENERAL CONCERNS - BACK END REVIEW o BASIS FOR APPLICATION OF SEISMIC ANALYSIS

e ru a e

0 0

. - 1 O

O men SPECIFIC GE CONCERNS PRA FRONT END REVIEW s-e

)'

I I

i

l ISSUE

. DIESEL GENERATOR COMMON MODE FAILURE PROBABILITY BACKGROUND o STRONG INFLUENCE ON OVERALL CORE DAMAGE PROBABILITY a' $90% CORE DAMAGE FROM STATION BLACK 0UT SEQUENCE DATE GE VALUE BNL'VALUE GESSAR PRA 6 x 10 "

5/5/83 '6 x 10~"

8/15/83 GE-BNL <1 x 10 4 Meeting 10/1/83 4.2 x 10 4 10/15/83 <1 x 10~"

With Basis CONCLUSION GE STUDY NOT CONSIDERED IN BNL REVIEW f

n - - - - - , , . - , -

. I l

ISSUE -

TRANSIENT INITIATOR FREQUENCY s BACKGROUND o SIGNIFICANT QUANTITY OF INFORMATION SUPPLIED BY GE SUPPORTING INITIATOR FREQUENCY VALUE DATE" GE VALUE BNL VALUE GESSAR PRA 6.16/yr 5/5/83 13.06/yr 8/15/83 6.16/yr 10/1/83 12.88/yr CONCLUSION BNL NOT GIVING CREDIT FOR WEIGHTING OF DATA BASE BY EARLY PLANT OPERATION

~

l o

ISSUE ADS RELIABILITY BACKGROUND DATE GE VALUE BNL VALUE GESSAR PRA 1 x 10 5 5/5/83 5 x 10 5 8/15/83 1.1 x 10 5 10/1/83 2.5 x 10 5 o GE CONCEDED AN ERROR ON ORIGINAL FAULT TREES o GE ERROR DID NOT APPRECIABLY AFFECT RESULTS o NOT CLEAR HOW BNL ARRIVED AT THEIR NEW VALUE CONCLUSION BNL NEW BASIS UNCLEAR M

7 .

0 0

ISSUE FEEDWATER SYSTEtl REC 0VERY BACKGROUND

! DATE GE VALUE BNL VALUE

~

GESSAR.PRA 0.17 5/5/83 0.6 .', ,

8/15/83 0.17 10/1/83 0.6 o BNL APPARENTLY IGNORED GE RESPONSE TO ROUND 2 QUESTION #5 i

CONCLUSION I

BASIS FOR BNL VALUE UNCLEAR GE PROVIDED ADDITIONAL SUPPORTING INF0RMATION l

~ ~

l ISSUE ATWS AND STUCK OPEN RELIEF VALVE AFTER ATWS BACK5ROUND _

o BNL DID NOT REVIEW ATWS IN MAY a BNL 10/1/83 REPORT INDICATES SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO ATWS EVENT TREES WHICH WILL IMPACT OFFSITE CONSEQUENCES DUE T0..ATWS o SORV AFTER ATWS DATE GE VALUE BNL VALUE GESSAR PRA 3 x 10 3 -1 Valve 3 x 10 " >2 Valves 5/5/83 Not Reviewed 10/1/83 0.12 -1 Valve 5 x 10 3 -2 Valves a JUSTIFICATION FOR GE VALUES PROVIDED IN RESPONSES TO ROUND 2 QUESTIONS CONCLUSION BNL BASIS IN LIGH1 0F GE INFORMATION UNCLEAR l

a*

=

i ISSUE .

LOSS OF DC POWER

-BACKGROUND o NEW EVENT ADDED BY BNL 10/1/83 o GE CONCLUDED EVENT BELOW CREDIBLE CUT-OFF. POINT ON PROBABILITY o EVENT CONSIDERED 2nd OR 3rd MOST IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTOR TO CORE DAMAGE BY BNL o APPEARS BNL THINKS FAILING DC DIVISIONS 1 8 2 LEADS TO CORE DAMAGE  :.

a APPEARS BNL NOT AWARE OF MULTIPLE GESSAR POWER DIVISIONS (4 DIVISIONS)

CONCLUSION

^

BASIS FOR BNL CONCLUSIONS UNCLEAR l

I

..:= - _

^~ .

GENERAL GE CONCERNS PRA BACK END REVIEW 4

ar*

, . .m 6

ISSUE ANALYSIS OF POOL SCRUBBING EFFECTIVENESS BACKGROUND _

o P0OL SCRUBBING DF's DETERMINE OFFSITE CONSEQUENCES o DRAFT NRC SOURCE TERM DOCUMENT BASIS FOR ASTP0/NRR INPUTS

.- Use of SPARC Code os Bos?s

. Current Version of SPARC-Incorrect Models-

. Initial Volues - No Credit For Pool For Smoll Aerosol Porticles a GE CURRENTLY WORKING WITH ASTP0 TO RESOLVE SPARC ISSUES o FURTHER ISSUE -- CODES TO BE USED IN SOURCE TERM EVALUATIONS

. Version of MARCH 7

. Reevoluotion of Sequences?

CONCLUSION MUST DEFINE APPROPRIATE BASIS FOR SOURCE TERM EVALUATIONS t

a BASIS FOR APPLICATION OF SEISMIC ANALYSIS l

. CONC'ERN _

NO APPARENT UNIVERSAL STAFF POSITION ON APPLICATION OF STANDARD PLANT SEISMIC ANALYSIS GE APPROACli o GESSAR II SEISMIC EVENT ANALYSIS SUBMITTED, REVIEWED AND APPROVED ON GESSAR II DOCKET o APPLICANT PROVIDES SITE SPECIFIC HAZARD ANALYSIS a SITE SPECIFIC HAZARD ANALYSIS COMPARED AGAINST GESSAR II TO DETERMINE ANY REQUIRED SITE SPECIFIC ANALYSES a APPROACH CONSISTENT WITH TREATMENT OF OTHER SITE UNIQUE PARAMETERS CONCLUSION ,

i MUST DEFINE UTILIZATION OF SEISNIC ANALYSIS (AND OTHER EXTERNAL EVENT ANALYSES) FOR STANDARD PLANT APPLICATION

r UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS im C.._,i . m...e. s.w. . s. noi . w..si.,,... oC 2.o3e . <2 23 2, 5.oo 13 March 1984 Mr. J. H. Felton, Director fftEEDOM OF INFORMATION Division of Rules and Records ACT REOUEST office of Administration p ,, g _ y U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 [At. N d*/NY RE: Freedom of Information Act Request for the GESSAR-II Probabilistic Risk Assessment and Associated NRC and NRC-contractor Reviews of that Report (Sholly FOIA Request Number 84-07)

Dear Mr. Felton:

Pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, please make available at the Commission's Public Document Room at 1717 11 Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., copies of documents in the following categories:

A. A copy of the General Electric Probabilistic Risk Assessment for the GESSAR-II standard plant design (BWR/6 Mark III) , and all updates, amendments, appendices, addenda, supplements, and all other changes thereto.

B. Copics of all NRC staff reviews of tne documents described above in "A".

C. Copies of all NRC contractor reviews of the documents described above in "A".

D. For any review identified under "C" above, provide the name of the reviewing organization, the lead investigators, all other investigators, the NRC Contract and FIN numbers assigned to the review project, the funding provided for the review project, and the WRC Form 189 for each such project.

If there are any questions regarding this request, please contact me at 296-5600. It is my understanding that. a proprietary claim has been made with respect to some or all of the documents identified in "A" above. This request specifically includes a request to review the bases for the priprietary claim and release all of the documents discussed in "A" above. i d \

Main Office: 26 Church Street . Cambridge, Meseschusetis 02238 . (617) 547 5552

r I can see no basis for a proprietary claim on a probabilistic risk assessment study. Further, I am aware of no other such claim with respect to the dozens of other such studies which have been per formed to date.

Your prompt attention to this request will be appreciated.

Sinceredly, C

Steven C. Sholly Technical Research Associate e