ML20128Q051

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Review of PRA for Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant, Monthly Highlights for Feb 1985.Related Info Encl
ML20128Q051
Person / Time
Site: Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date: 02/28/1985
From: Kato W
BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY
To: Thadani A
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20127A367 List:
References
CON-FIN-A-3758, FOIA-85-199 NUDOCS 8507130360
Download: ML20128Q051 (9)
v • d • e


Text

,

. ,. , am.

!)@l0 BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL l.ABORATORY

{l {l l ASSOCIATED UNIVERSITIES, INC.

Upton. Long Island, New York 11973 (516) 282s 2444 Department of Nuctect Energy FTS 666/

March 19, 1985 Dr. A. C. Thadani, Chief Reliability and Risk Assessment Branch Division of Safety Technology Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Mail Stop P-216 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555

Dear Dr. Thadani:

Enclosed is the February monthly report for the activities sponsored by your Branch. Also included are the coeputericed budget summaries and the fee recovery cost status for each program re, quiring it. I would suggest that you and your staff review the reports to determine whether there are any discrep-ancies. If there are, please notify the princip:1 invectig:ter.

Note that the funds allocated for FIN A-3758 have been. spent and those for FIN A-3740 are nearly spent. The NRC program office was informed of this March 12, 1985 as required by revised Manual Chapter 1102, dated May 31, 1984.

Please send the balance of, expected funds so that the level of effort may con-tinue without interruption.

The total amoun't of unbilled costs through February for FIN A-3758 is

$51,419, which will be billed to NRC when the expected funds arrive.

We hope this meets with your approval. If there are any questions re-garding format, distribution, or budget reporting, please contact Mr. A. J.

Weiss, Administrative Technical Assistant, FTS 666-4473.

incerely yours, fp / -

WYK/jw Walter Y' Kato Enclosures Deput / airman -

ec: R. A. Bari, BNL F. Co f fman, NRC 8507130360 850426 R. Frahm, NRC PDR FOIA J. Halvorsen, NRC DELAIR85-199 PDR M. Kaltman, NRC F. Rowsome, NRC A. J. Weiss, BNL NRCTechnicalMonitors% THIS COPY FOR BNL Technical Monitor

. ~ .c..n h.. . _ =. w:.

MONTHLY HIGHLIGHTS FOR FEBRUARY 1985

" Review of the Probabilistic Risk Assessment for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant" (FIN A-3740)

BNL Principal Investigator: R. Youngblood (FTS 666-2363)

NRC Program Manager: A. Thadani (FTS 492-4705) RRAB NRC Technical Monitor: Ed Chow (FTS 492-4727)RRAB - - - -

THIS copy gag j

1. Scope / Purpose The purpose of this project is to review those aspects of the Shoreham PRA leading to the estimates of the frequencies of the accident sequences re-sulting in a " core vulnerable" state and to detennine the accuracy of these estimates.
2. Schedule / Milestones A letter of the findings will be submitted to NRC at the completion of each task according to the following schedule.

Task 1: Draft Report 11/15/84 Task 2: Questions to the Applicant 11/30/83 Task 3: Final Report Two months after receiving final comments by NRC and licensee.

3. Progress to Date

~

The work on LOCA outside containment was performed. The draft report was sent to NRC.

4. Problems and Delays None.
5. Next Reporting Period The Staff and licensee comments will be addressed and incorporated, as appropriate, in the final report.

O

. . . - . .a . 2.' , :2.a:&:2 %l, _ a a: l 2 L.%3h3ddix .

, s 4

F 1N ANCIAL 6T A TUS FEBRUARY 1985 ACCOUNT TITLE NRC FIN 004197 SHOREHAri PR A REVIEW A-3740 SUPERVISOR RB PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR YOUNGBLOOD R, TERMINATION DATE i 12/31/85 i.

i i' CURRENT YEAR TO DATE j nONTH I DIRECT STAFF EFFORT :

(SAP Sts.ff Montns) 1.00 6.20 j

II DIRECT SALARIES : 4,725. 30,135.

MATERIAL & SERVICES 0. 9.

ADP SUPPORT 338. 877.

SUBCONTRACTS : 0. 0.

TRAVEL EXPENSES  : D. ,

402.

INDIRECT EXPENSES t 2,100, 12,395.

GENERAL & ADMIN. : 3,143. 1 9 ,.0 1 8 .

TOTAL COSTS 10,306. 62,836.

  • i

'l PERCENTAGE OF AVAIL FUNDS SPENT s' 99%

(FY 84 Carrvover + FY BS Funos Received t o ' Da t.e )

.) III FUNDING STATUS

,I FY 1984 FY 1985 PROJECTED FY 1985 FUNDS FY 1985 FUNDING CANRYOVER FUNDING LEVEL REC'D TO DATE BAL. NEEDED

]~ ($ K) (5 K) ($ K) ($ K)

,)

.J 53. 30. 10. 20.

i l

)

i t

6 O

..____._-_.__-._____--_& *  :'-__--__--_.--___.-._.-_-.--._ - _ . . . . . _ . . . _ _ - - - _ _ -^ : -- - x:__. --__l

r; - -

.~~,a -. ~ :. . ;. .; . ,d., . - , . . . _ . . _ _ . l.u ; ' _;ls; j, ,

, e

- EC RECOVERY COST STATUS t- I r4 i A-3'/ 4 0 T I l tt~ : SHOR EM Ai1 PRA REVIEW PERIUD. FEDRUARY 1985 5 5 FYOS TASK / PLANT PERIOD CUnUL AT :1

-A Snorenan Doexet 50-322 10.308. 62,837.

. TOTALS : 10,308. 62,837.

i 9

9 d

.,_' , s,, u s . - . . ~i . a

c 5

Table 1 Major Milestones for Completion and Publication of NUREG-0956 Report of APS Study Group to Commission February 21, 1985 Completionof,DraftNUREG-0956(including April 9, 1985 incorporation of comments and amendments asaresultofAPSreport)

Transmittal to ACRS for review April 15, 1985 Comission Paper prepared May 3, 1985

- Comission Neeting, on or about May 15, 1985

. Publication of Draft NUREG-0956 for May 24, 1985 Public Coment 60-Day Coment Period Complete July 23, 1985 Incorporation of Coments and Ready August 1985 for Final Publication O

i 0 f 1

r f .

~

fl  ! ,

--$l- Y

'~

^

' :~

fS D' ' ' ~. ^ c " . .{; : :.C .Q ^

~

~

REGUIATIONS FOCUSING ON SOURCE TERM -

CONSIDERATIONS AND REIATED AREAS Presented ar' e the results of a limited survey of 10CFR50 and 10CFR100. regulations and related Division i regulatory guides for requirements which could be impacted by recent knowledge'concerning severe accidents.

In particular, this survey focuses on regulations and -

guides which could be affected by a significant reduc- *

' tion in the fissi'on product source term given an accident and by our latest understanding of containment '

phenomena. Once the regulations and guides.were identi-fled, discussions with a utility's personnel were held to identify those requirements which, if relaxed accord-ingly, could have the greatest economic advantage to the utility's operations without significantly affecting public health risk based on recent severe accident findings.

This sue.ary represents a quick review of the require-ments . indicated above and contains the opinions of one utility. A more thorough evaluation is indicated including the input of more nuclear utilities before final conclusions are reached. ,

B 9

0 9 L

r-

, i SIGNIFICANCE

  • AFFECTED AREA ' '

of REGUIATIONS <- IDW - -

MODERATE @ 11 I 0 11 y General X -

liydrogen-related X Emergency y planning Containment X -

leak testing -

Radiological X inventories N 1

Accident y instrumentatior Equipment y _

qualification

  • A measure of th's advantages to be gained if regulation requirements in the. area indicated were to be relaxed.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ ___________________.__________m

r ,

. s ,

9 REGULATIONS / REQUIREMENTS UTILITY AREA COMMENTS

, 1

- REG. GUIDES Evaluation of designs & -Ton vague ,

General 50 34 performance of equipment for preventing & mitigat-ing accidents Hydrogen 50.44 Inertig ,recombiners, -Usefulness of recom-combustible gas control biners is very limited related -Could do more inspections without inerting i

-Costs of inerting can be significant

-Fines incurred due to periods of operation without an inert atmosphere EPZ determinations drill -Based on lower lodine quanti- l Emergency 50.47,50 54, planning 50-App.E, & test frequencies,' plans... ties, a shift could be made from evacuation to sheltering.

'd RG-1.101 thereby reducing costs  !

-Costs in this area are signi-ficant

-Public reaction could be

~

negative Containment 50-APP.A(50), Leak requirements tied -Costs associated with valve.

leak tests 50-App.J . to tech. specs, tests, testing in particular can be test frequencies,... significant (often have to RG-1.96 relap valves to past tests) -

-Integrated tests, tests of air locks are not as much a problem Radiological 100.11, Dose limits, use- of -Significant costs associated TID 14844, iodine & with filtration requirements inventories RGs-1 3,1.4, -Elimination of charcoal filters 1.7,1 52, noble gas quantities, 1.140 filtration equipment... and reductions in test /mainten-ance requirement would be

- beneficial

,N,t AREA REGULATIONS / ' REQUIREMENTS UTILITY - -

REG. GUIDES COMMENTS #

  1. Accident RG-1 97 -

Instrumentation req'ts.

-Elimination of hydrogen .

monitors if possible since

. gy, pbi rfinstrument y their operability is doubtibl.

O suffer from calibration drift, qualification problems ...

Equipment 50-App.B. Qualification of -Still have to qualify to some qualification RGs-1 73, equipment level 1.89,1.131 .-If more plateout occurs in an accident than previously thought, radiation doses to equipment could be even higher Other Utility Camments: The utility personnel interviewed, provided -

y other remarks about the possibility. of " relaxing" regulatory c constraints. They did support the idea of seeking justifiable I regulatory reform and indicated that the utility would probably participate in any such movement. While some advantages appear worthy of further investigation, they were concerned that the opening of rulemaking to obtain regulatory reform may allow for tightening of requirements in other areas and may ;-wie M

~

public relations problems which would have to be overcome.

Utilities may be more or less enthusiastic over seeking such reforms depending on their individual circumstances (e.g. soon

~

to be licensed plants may be in jeopardy of having their license delayed pending the outcome of rulemaking hearings). 0verall, their response was positive for beginning such an effort.

O c.9 N

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20128Q051&oldid=2891658"