ML20133H144
| ML20133H144 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/16/1985 |
| From: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| References | |
| ACRS-2322, NUDOCS 8508090207 | |
| Download: ML20133H144 (21) | |
Text
AcRs- asna
}b/'Ofdi/K
- nymm 2 '
] 'h DATE ISSUED: 6/16/85 L I yg/g5
SUMMARY
/ MINUTES ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING ON THE SAFETY RESEARCH PROGRAM -
JUNE 5, 1985 WASHINGTON, DC INTRODUCTION The ACRS Subcommittee on the Safety Research Program held a meeting D.C.,
on Wednesday, June 5, 1985 at 1717 H Street, N.W., Washingtor to continue its discussion on the FY 1987 NRC Safety Research Program and Budget. The entire meeting was open to public attendance.
Mr. Sam Duraiswamy was the cognizant ACRS Staff engineer for the meeting. A list of documents submitted t% tne Subcomittee is included in Attachment A.
ATTENDEES ACRS: C. P. Siess (Subcommittee Chairman), W. Kerr, C. Michelson, D. Okrent, F. J. Remick, J. C. Mark, D. W. Hoeller, and C. J. Wylie S. Duraiswamy (Cognizant ACRS Staff engineer)
Principal NRC Speakers: D. Ross, G. Marcus, M. Hayes, and Z. Rosztoczy EXECUTIVE SESSION Dr. Siess, the Subcommittee Chairman, convened the meeting at 8:30 a.m.,
and stated that the purpose of the meeting was to discuss the current status of the NRC Safety Research Program and Budget for FY 1987 and gather information for use by the ACRS in its preparation of the annual report to the Commission on the related matter. He said that the Subcommittee had received neither written coments nor requests for time to make oral statements from members of the public, t
BUDGET-REVIEW CYCLE SCHEDULE - DR. ROSS l Dr. Ross, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES), stated that the Budget Review Group (BRG) has already met with RES to discuss the proposed research budget. Based on its discussion, the BRG has provided DE3IGNATED ORIGINAL r500090207 850616 PDR ACRS 2322 N Certifiec. Dy M -
r.
T June 5, 1985
,' Research Meeting Minutes its preliminary mark which includes a total of $128.5 million for the FY 1987 NRC research. He reviewed briefly the schedule associated with the ,
budget-review cycle:
BRG final mark June 12, 1985 Budget submittal to the EDO June 20, 1985 ED0 recconendations to the NRC Chaiman End of June 1985 Chairman's mark July 12, 1985 Chairman Budget reconrendations to the Comission July 22, 1985 Commission's tudget mark July 29, 1985 CHANGES TO THE NRC SAFETY RESEARCH PROGRAM AND BUDGET SINCE THE MAY 8, 1985 SAFETY RESEARCH PROGRAM SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING - DR. ROSS Dr. Ross stated that in May 1985 RES proposed a total funding of $143.7 million for the FY 1987 research which was about $14 million more than the EDO guidance. Since the May 8,1985 ACRS Subcomittee meeting on the Safety Research Program, several changes have been made as shown below (Attachment 8, page 1):
- Total Funding: Total research funding has been reduced by $15.1 million, from $143.7 million to $128.6 million.
- Decision Unit 1 - Reactor Engineering: The total funding for this Decision Unit has been reduced by $3 million from $47.6 million to
$44.6 million.
- This reduction has been achieved by reducing the funding for the Plant Aging program by $3 million, from $10.8 million to ,
$7.8 million.
. Research Meeting Minutes June 5, 1985
- Decision Unit 2 - Thermal-Hydraulic Transients: The total funding has been reduced oy $3.2 million, from $26.6 million to $23.4 .
million.
3 This $3.2 million reduction is distributed as shown below.
- Funding for the ROSA IV Program has been reduced by $0.4 million, from $2 million to $1.6 million - $0.4 million
- Separate Effects Program has been reduced by $0.8 million, from $4.0 million to $3.2 million - $0.8 million
- Transient Models and Codes Program has been reduced by
$2 million, from $7.8 million to $5.8 million - $2.0 million Total reduction - $3.2 million
' Dectsion Unit 3 - Accident Evaluation: The total funding for this Decision Unit has been reduced by $4.8 million, from $32.2 million to $27.4 million. This reduction has been achieved as shown below:
- Severe Accident Analysis has been reduced by $2.2 million, from $4.2 million to $2 million.
- Damaged Fuel has been reduced by $2 million, from $8.3 million to $6.3 million.
- Containment Loading Program has been reduced by $0.6 million, from $7.2 million to $6.6 million.
- Decision Unit 4 - Reactor Operations and Risk: The Total funding l
for this Decision Unit has been reduced by $3.4 million, from
\
l i
$ June 5, 1985
- Research Meeting Minutes 4
$19.0 million to $15.6 million. This reduction is distributed as shown below:
- Data and Uncertainties Program has been reduced by $1.6 million, from $2.7 million to $1.1 million.
- Severe Accident Risk has been reduced by $1.8 million, from $5.2 million to $3.4 million.
- Decision Unit 5 - Waste Management, Earth Sciences, and Health:
The total funding for this Decision Unit has been reduced by $0.7 million, from $18.3 million to $17.6 million. This reduction is achieved by zeroing out the funding for the Meteorology and Hydrology Program proposed to be conducted under the Subelement on Earth Sciences. .
Dr. Ross discussed briefly the coments provided by the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) and the responses provided by RES to
! those coments (Attachment C, pages 1-14). He said that RES plans to meet with NRR during the next few days and try to resolve the differences between them.
Dr. Siess asked whether the NRC Staff will be able to stretch out certain programs if the research funding is reduced by the Congress.
Dr. Ross responded that they have already informed the Congress that any funding reduction will result in the termination of certain research program, and they will not be able to stretch out programs any more.
I Mr. Michelson comented that, in his opinion, the term " Plant Aging" does not accurately characterize the research program. It seems that
~
the scope of this program is that of an " operational readiness" program. ,
He suggested that the name of the Plant Aging Program be changed to l accurately reflect the research planned.
4
Research Meeting Minutes June 5, 1985 Dr. Okrent expressed concern about the lack of research to obtain infomation for use in developing containment performance criteria. He .
recomended that necessary research on this issue be supported in the FY 1987 research budget.
1 Dr. Okrent coimented that although problems associtted with steam generator tubes have been decided to be of low-risk, the Staff still plans to spend several million dollars for research in this area. He does not understand why they do not plan to do any research to determine the risk associated with external flood.
Dr. Moeller expressed concern about the RES plans to cancel all research related to occupational radiation protection.
The Subcommittee felt that RES should perform research on human factors in FY 1987.
ACRS REPORT TO THE COMMISSION ON THE FJ 1987 NRC SAFETY RESEARCH PROGRAM Dr. Siess suggested that cognizant Subcomittee Chaimen provide input as soon as possible to prepare Draft 1 of the ACRS report to the Comission. He said that Draft I will be discussed by the full Comittee during the June 6-8, 1985 ACRS treeting.
Dr. Siess thanked all participants and adjourned the meeting at 12:15 p.m.
NOTE: Additional meeting details can be obtained from a transcript of this meeting available in the NRC Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., or can be purchased from Ann Riley & Associates, Ltd., 1625 I Street, N.W.,
Suite 921, Washington, D.C. 20006, (202) 293-3950.
LIST OF DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE JUNE 5, 1985 - SAFETY RESEARCH PROGRAM MEETING I
- 1. Table A related to the FY 1986 and 1987 research budget.
- 2. Tables 1 and 2 related to Assignments for Review of the NRC Safety Research Program and Budget, dated April 5, 1985.
- 3. ACRS Report to the Commission on the NRC Safety Research Program and Budget for FY 1986 and 1987, dated June 20, 1984.
- 4. Current information on the FY 1987 NRC Safety Research Program and Budget, dated May 17, 1985.
- 5. RES responses to ACRS recommendations in NUREG-1105.
i 6. Information previously submitted to the Subcommittee during the May 8, 1985 Safety Research Program meeting.
J i
i
) ,
i ATTACHMENT A i-i- l
, 1 l
r I 1
l
- - .-. .- - . ._ __.I
NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH 6/4/85 FY 1987 BUDGET (DOLLARS IN MILLIONS)
FY 1987 AES &#-
f' .
e/3 A ma t ny FY 1986 REQUEST TARGET NRR BRG s 4Qd $ 47.6 s 44.6 8 42.d $ 44.6 REACTOR ENGINEERING MECH / STRUCTURAL ENGR ' )).,d lb,Q jld led lid .
4.4 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.6 CONTAIN INT 6.3 7.6 7.6 7.1 7.6 -
SEISMIC MARGINS 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 MECH Eo QUALIFICATION M jld }Zd, lE,d PRIMARY SYSTEM INTEGRITY M 8.9 8.4 8.9 8.9 8.3 REACTCR VESSELS 6.5 5.8 5.8 5.8 5.8 PIPING-STEAM 6EN 2.3 3.8 3.8 3.4 3.8 hrE Ecu!F CPER & INTEGRITY [d jid 1111 lQ,d M 5.6 10.8 7.8 7.3 7.8 PLANT AGING 3.6 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 ELECT EC CuAL 0 0 0 0 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING 0.4 ZL,Z 2[J jld 2],d 22d THERP"'t HYD TR'NSIENTS INTEGRAL FACILIT;ES 12.8 31d lQ.d 14,3.d 4.5 4.5 3.5 4f MIST 3.4 4.5 3.2 3.6 3.6 3.6 3.6 2D/3D 1.7 2.0 2.0 1.6 1.6 ROSA-IV 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 FIST 3.4 4.5 0.5 4.5 4.5 INTEGRAL TESTING SEPAPATE EFFECT0 L.2 4.d L.Z 2.d }22 TRANS MCCELS 8 CCOES 6d Ed Ed 6.d Ed
=
ACCirENT EVALU.T!CN IQu_ 7 12. 2 IQJ Z4d ZB.d 0.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 PEF- SURVEILLANCE 3.5 4.2 3.5 2.0 2.0 SEVERE ACCIDENT ANALYSIS 6.3 9.1 8.3 8.3 5.3 7.3 DAMAGED FUEL 6.6 7.2 6.6 5.3 6.3 4. 6 CCNTAINMENT LCADING 11.0 10.5 10.5 9.5 10.5 FISSICN PRCD SCuaCE TEFM 16.d lb.Q 32,d 31 2 lid PEACTOR OPER AND RISK 4.0 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 REL & RISK METHCOCLCGY 2.1 2.7 1.1 2.7 1.1 DATA AND UNCERTAINTIES 6.9 7.9 7.9 7.9 7.9 REG & INSPECT!CN APPLS 3.5 5.2 4.9 1.9 3.4 SEVERE ACCIEENT RISK WASTE MGMT, EARTH SCIENCES
& HEALTH lid lj,d jZ.d 1[26 32.d 4.5 6.2 5.5 6.2 5.5 EARTH SCIENCES 2. 2.
2.5 2.2 2.2 2.7 2.4 HEALTH EFFECTS 3.0 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 HIGH LEVEL WASTE 1.8 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 LOW LEVEL WASTE TOTAL $121.0 $143.7 $130.0 $124.6 $128.5 A/ .i t.6 A TTAC H u gg ,8
e ncu UNITED ST ATEs . C,
- 5. g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
{ r, ; usmucTew.o. c. rosss .( **v f May 29, 1985 MEMORANDUM FOR: Robert B. Minogue, Director . Ottice of Nuclear Regulatory Research FROM: Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
hRR REVIEW OF RES FY 1987 INTERNAL BUDGET PRESENTATION TO ACRS AND BRG In your May 9,1985, memorandum, you asked me to review the RES FY 1987 Internal Budget Presentation to ACRS and BRG and to suggest budget We reductions to reach the LD0 allocation of $130.0 million for FY 1987. have reviewed the budget, and we sue, gest the following changes to satisfy the EDO allocation in a way that meets NRR needs. Reactor Engineering We support the goals of the seismic margin research program, but the program appears to be very generously funded. We expect that, by controlling the program costs more closely, the program cost can be reduced by $0.5 million in FY 1987. If this much reduction in the budget cannot be achieved in this way, projects can be delayed to achieve the reduction. The research on pressure vessel integrity is important work, but it is confirmatory in nature. For this reason, the timing of the research results is not crucial. We suggest stretching out three projects beyone the schedule implied by the proposed budget:
- B-0119, Heavy Section Steel Technology
- B-8900, Structural Integrity of LWR Boundary Components
- B-5988, Surveillance Dosimetry The project on NDE (nondestructive examination) for life extension will support decisionmaking that will be needed to handle applications expected in the future for license renewals. This research does not have to start as '
early as FY 1987. By stretching out the pressure vessel research as suggested ano delaying the project on NDE for life extension, a budget reduction of $1 million can be achieved. The , A large increase has been proposed for the equipment aging program. l original question we wanted the research to answer was whether equipment ! aging is a safety problem. We would like an answer to that question before we comit to a large program. This program should address only those issues which are genuine safety issues. If this approach is followed, we would expect that the FY 1987 budget can be reduced by $3.5 million, with most of ATTAc.n y g g g C-I -
caDNLM the reduction coming from the project entitled, " Systems Aging and Service Wear Effects", (A-6389). Furthermore, we would like to see by the end of FY 1986 a summary report which presents tne results of this study of whether
- and where equipment aging is a safety problem.
Thermal Hydraulic Transients Advanced Test Facility - The ability to do continuing, independent research in a dedicated test facility generally similar to Semiscale or MIST is a desirable element of the NRC program. Either existing facilities, or modifications to one of the existing facilities, or a new facility could fulfill this goal. RES should evaluate the various options and select the most cost effective option that provides tne flexibility needed for future tests. The Semiscale program should not be terminated until a decision is mace on the dedicated fac1:1ty and financing is assured for this facility. The $4 million allocation in the budget in FY 1987 to support thermal hydraulic testing in addition to the international programs is appropriate for this purpose. We would be concerned, it the annual budget of this program would be significantly higher than currently projected. 20/30 - In order for NRR to support the UPTF portion of 20/3D we strongly urge that the UPI parts originally planned but not included in the present design be reinstated. Also, a suitable number of UPI experiments should be planned and scheduled for UPiF. Upper plenum injection is now perceived as a more severe three-dimensional non-equilibrium problem than conventional bottom flooding. Also, scaling is considered more uncertain in the case of UPI. The amount of UPI data is minuscule compared to bottom flooding data. UPI plants have recently been found not in conformance with Appencix K to 10 CFR 50. Utilities and vendors are therefore developing new mechanistic models using the methodology outlined in SECY 83-472. This method relies heavily on appre--iate experimental data. Although some data exists from CCTF, the originci plan was that larger scale data from UPTF would also be available. IF U.S. design geometries are not included, we cannot justify continued participation and support of this program. ROSA IV - In the interest of conserving funds, we propose that the U.S. assessment of ROSA IV experiments be limited to TRAC studies and the
$0.4 million for assessment using RELAP be cancelled.
Separate Effects - A main purpcse of the separate effects experiments was to support code development. By 1987, the major elements of code development are to be completed. We expect some continued experiments, and the retention of expertise at selected universities. A group of programs is Specific need has not being planned to support research at universities.The total cost of these Deen identified for each of these programs.A reduction of $0.5 million in the programs is estimated to be $2 million. Furthermore, funcing of the university programs appears to be appropriate.This program ($600 K) can we have not identified a need for visual loops. be eliminated frcm the FY 1987 budget. 4 Ct L
L X M f L 2]
- t. ode Assessment and Application - The NRC is entering into an Ininternational excnange for
' thermal-hydraulic coce assessment and applications program.
the use of codes developed for the NRC it is expected that participants will contribute experimental results and the results of assessments of the codes using experimental results. In the interest of budget reduction we request that RES seek support from the participants and reduce the scope of the NRC programs. A $0.5 million reduction in the budget which might include the following FINS should be possible (FINS A-6827, A-7312, and A-7016). Desk Top Analyzer - NRR does not foresee a need for self-contained Desk Top Analyzers. We believe that the current tenninal with aIttieistoour the NPA is an adequate supplement to the ongoing analysis needs. understanding that $0.9 million has been allocated for this purpose as an element of the NPA-NPDS program. NRR does not support this effort. j RELAP Maintenance - We agree from the standpoint of future code development, that only one code (TRAC) should be supported. However, until an orderly transition can be made to one code, we must rely on the continuous availability of both TRAC and RELAP. It is our understanding that the RELAP NRC's costs code will be maintained on a cooperative basis with other users. for maintenance can be reduced by 50.3 million in FY 1987 with the remainder in FIN A-6330 being used to support NRC activities in the user group. Nuclear Plant Data Bank (NPDB) - The NPDB is essential to the effective use of the Plant Analyzer. We are unable to use the Analyzer due to the lack of data in the NPDB. The NPDB snould be filled with plant specific data at a rate of four to six decks per year. If this effort needs additional support, it should be provided. Severe Accident Procram The Severe Accident Program is listed under three divisions as follows: Reactor Engineering Containment Integrity $ 4.6 M Mechanical Equipment Qualification 0.5 Electrical Equipment Qualification 1.2 Accident Evaluation 2.0 PUF-Surveillance 4.2 Severe Accident Analysis Damaged Fuel 8.3
/.2 Containment Loading 10.5 Fission Product Source Term Reactor Operations and Risk 5.2 Severe Accident Risk Total $ 43./ M C-3 e-- ._
l. i . MAY 2 91985 ! ByFY1987tnefirstphaseoftheSevereAccidentResearchProgram(SARP) shculd be completed. Also by that time the Severe Accident Implementation Progran, coordinated by NRR, will be well underway. There willInstead De no need i to continue many of the presently ongoing tasks of the SARP. the program should focus on a few outstanding issues, which have a major i ! influence on regulatory decisions. A reorientation of the program will be ! necessary. In order to facilitate this reorientation we offer the following , f { comments: [
- The Research program in FY 1985 is expected to have completed theThe t development of the Battelle suite of codes in compiled fomat. I FY 1986 and FY 1987 programs indicate completion of the development and i
validation of the MtLCOR code, which could then be available for plant t The FY 1986 and FY 1987 programs ! specific analyses winere needed. [ j contain extensive work on the development and application of more Some of this , j mechanistic severe accident codes such as MELPROG. ! l activity is apparently to develop and validate MELCOR. The magnitude ! l and description of the work on MELPROG, etc., in FY 1987 suggests that l the Research program includes substantial development of these codes beyond the validation of MLLCOR. No justification for this further t l i r development has been presented to us anc we question the need for such ; ] further development of severe accident codes. A total reduction of
- $3 million in FINS A-1198, A-1405, and B-0127 would be consistent with !
NRR's needs. - ! ) Effect on budget: a reduction of $3.0 million. i
- Severe Accident Analysis - Each of the four tasks (A-6354, A-7015, .
8-0452, and A-1258) projected to continue in FY 198/, should instead be i completed in FY 1986. The only work that is likely to be needed in , r j this area in FY 1987 is a limited number of audit calculations for typical PWRs and BWRs. We recommend the allocation of $0.8 million for 4 j i j PWR audit calculations and $1.2 million fur WWR audit calculations, l The specific plants and sequences for which the audit calculations ' 4 l should be done will be identified by the Implementation Program prior i to FY 1987. I Effect on budget: a reduction of $2.2 million (4.2 - 2.0). l i l
- Containment Loading - Three experiswntal programs (Aerosol Release and Transport, Large Core Melt 1ests, and Direct Containment Heating
- Task A-1198 is Experiments) should be completed as projected.the remair.ing six tasks unde discussed above, (A-3024 A-7247, 8-2466, A-1019, A-1246, and B-8209) should be closed '
out at the end of FY 1986. One new task should be initiated to address l outstanding issues identified by the Implementation Program and maintain We i the computer codes developed under the Containment Loading program. l' estimate that approximately 52.0 million will be needed for the new task. l l Effect on budget: a reduction of $0.9 million (7.2 - 1.0 - 1.5 - 0.7 -
-1.1-2.0).
c-9 l t
-_.-,.._,_4. .
- , _ , , ~ , _--..-.m, , -.--c , _ _ , - . _ _ _ _ . - _ _ - - _ . _ _ --_--,,.ws,. , , , - _ , - , . - _ . . , , . , , , . , _ , . - - _ - , - - - _ . , - - _ . - , ,
MAY t 9 885
- Severe Accident Risk - The complete risk assessment of tne four reference plants is scheduled to be finished by mid-1986. There is no need for additional work under this task. This program should be closed out in FY S6.
i . Effect on budget: a reduction of $3.3 million.
- ACRR Test Program - Funds for the ACRR program are provided under two FINS: LWR Debris Formation and Relocation (A-1335), and ACRR Source Term Experiments (A-1389). The total amount allocated for these tests is $4.2 million in FY 1987. This is significantly higher than the It is our understanding that at PY 1995 allocation of $1.4 million.
least part of the increase is due to the fact that the program currently receives international support, while the FY 1987 budget assumes U.S. funding only. If the program will not be sponsored by the international group in FY 1987, termination of the program or fewer tests should be considered. A budget projection of $2.2 million for tY 1987 would be appropriate for this program. Effect on budget: a reduction of $2.0 million (4.2 - 2.2). Waste Management, Earth Sciences, and Health l The proposed budget for FY 1987 eliminates all research in occupational radiation protection. We realize that INPO is conducting studies on this l l subject, but the NRC also has 'egitimate research needs in this subject i area. NRC-sponsored work is needed to answer specific regulatory questions which arise. At present, we need at least the following two programs:
- 1. Development of a radiation protection program data base. This data base would be used to treck radiological trends and identify problems and potential problems. INPO is also maintaining a data base, but it i
{ is not structured to answer many regulatory questions. For example,
- r the INPO cata does not show plant-to-plant differences in exposure l history.
- 2. Stuay of the net risk of using respirators, considering the balance of decreased radiation risk and increased non-radiation risk. Respirators
' are being used in ALARA programs at nuclear power plants. The use of these respirators has resulted in injuries and even some fatalities, i The question this research project should answer is whether the radiological benefit of using the respirators outweighs the cost, including the nonradiological risk from their use.
/
The total funding needed for these two projects shculd be about 50.5 million. t J ]
* (:-ji'
MAY 2 9 IIAlb With the changes recommended in this memorandum, the total RES budget shoult! be about $124.6 million in FY 1987, a reduction of $19.1 million from the proposed $143.7 million.
/ m Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation h'.h5#$s' rc c-6 I
T f
#"% UNITED STATES
- r. . It NUCLEAR REGULATC2Y COMMis$lON 1 CASHINGTON O. C. 20656
. p 11
***** MAY 31 1985 MEMORANDUti F0R: Jack W. Roe, Chaiman, BRG FROM: Robert B. Minogue, Director, Office of Nuclear Regulatory -
Research
SUBJECT:
NRR'S COMMENTS ON THE RES BUDGET Consistent wnh RES responsibility to identify research needed to deal with safety infomation needs of the Agency, this Office presented detailed infomation to both the ACRS Subcomittee on Research and the BRG on recomended work for FY 1987. In response to the ED0 mark and prior to receiving final coments from NRR, RES submitted a proposed FY 1987 budget of 513 Cit as well as statements of impact for the programs which were not propcsed to be funded. We have carefully considered the coments received from NRR in tems of clarification of their technical needs for regulation as well as their schedule for applying that technical infomation. On the basis of NRR's
.l coments, we have made selected adjustments in our research plan in order to j improve responsiveness to NRR's stated needs. We have also remained sensitive to the need to maintain certain research activities that suppcrt other agency needs or that maintain our readiness to respond to longer-tem agency require- ,
ments. At the $130M allocation for research, our proposed research plan already incorporated all efficiency measures possible consistent with a viable research program (including program stretchouts and cutbacks, improved manage-ment, etc.), and identifying further efficiencies at this stage of the budget process would be inappropriate. Attached is our modification of the content and proposed funding for each program area based on these considerations. Rober E. Minogue, Direct 'r Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research !
Enclosure:
As stated C-7
5/31/85
SUMMARY
DATA RES RESPONSE TO NRR 5/29/85 REVIEW (DOLLARS IN MILLIONS) FY 1987 5/30 NRR VS FY 1986 RES* NRR RES RES 30.7 30.9 24.1 30.9 6.8 ACCIDENT EVALUATION 16.5 17.1 15.7 17.1 1.4 REACTOR OPNS & RISK r REACTOR ENGINEERING $ 40.3 $ 44.6 $ 42.6 $ 44.6 $ 2.0 THERMAL HYDRAULIC TRANS 21.7 19.8 23.4 23.4 WASTE MGMT, EARTH SCIENCES
& HEALTH 11.8 17.6 18.8 18.1 -0.7 TOTAL $121.0 $130.0 $124.6 $134.1 $ 9.5 RES REQUEST WITHIN EDO GUIDANCE l
N cS
+
(In Millions) SEVERE ACCIDENT PROGRAM $ 6.8 Severe Accident Codes 3.0 Detailed mechanistic severe accident codes such as MELPROG and CONTAIN provide the scientific basis for the integrated codes such as the Source Term Code Package (STCP, as modified from the BMI-2104 suite) and MELCOR. The detailed mechanistic codes, or the scientific principles within them are utilized in improving and correcting the simplified models in the integrated codes. A large effort on code assessment and validation will still be required in FY 1987 using the large amount of data generated in FY 1986 and FY 1987 from ACRR, NRU, core / concrete and core / coolant interaction, and the containment heating experiments. This will lead to modeling changes which will then have to be addressed in the integrated codes. Reduction and resolution of major uncertainties identified by the APS and other peer reviewers in our source term assessment can only be realized by the use of such mechanistic codes. A reduction of $3.0 million at the point of completion of the validation of the severe accident mechanistic codes would deny NRC the benefits of important experimental data in application to resolving uncertainties needed to imple-ment NRC severe accident policy. !
\
ACRR Test Program 2.0 l The ACRR tests are essential to model validation by obtaining realistic fission product release rates under high temperature melt progression and C-9
e other conditions not attainable in PBF or cut-sf-pile tests. Current estimates of foreign support for ACRR in FY 1987 is about $1.0 million. We If such support is can not confirm this until about 6-9 months from now. forthcoming we would recommend a $1.0 million reduction from the $4.2 million . level for ACRR to compensate for the foreign funds. Without U.S. funding, no . foreign funds can be attracted. Severe Accident Analysis - Containment Loading 1.8 A major cut in these elements would stretch out beyond 1987 efforts to complete deterninistic analysis in support of the Implementation Program. Major results from experimental programs in hydrogen, core / concrete, severe fuel damage and fission product release will be available to permit the evaluation of plant specific differences with new improved codes. These analyses are essential to evaluate the generic applicability of severe accident policy and its implementation. We have already proposed a cut of
$0.7M from our original request. An additional cut of $1.5M would jeopardize this essential work.
REACTOR OPERATIONS AND RISK
$ 1.4 Severe Accidents Risk The budget reduction suggested by NRR of $3.0 million would foreclose any RES option to conduct confirmatory testing of recently developed / completed risk codes or to modify these codes to meet programmatic requirements identified as C-/O
NRR goes forward in implementing the Commissicn's Severe Accident Policy. Unanticipated plant-to-plant variations will inevitably surface as the process of comparing the risks,.of the population of operating reactors with that determined for several surrogate plants goes forward. This will require that detailed deterministic analysis be performed to validate simplified computer , code comparisons and to confirm regulatory decisions based on engineering judgments. For these reasons, the proposed reduction in the Severe Accident Risk Program is not acceptable or prudent in FY 1987. EhGINEERING TECHNOLOGY $ 2.0 Reactor Engineering The NRR memorandum suggests a reduction of $2.0 million beyond the RES reduction of $3.0 million; one of these reductions would be $0.5 million in' seismic margins research through tighter program control or delay of projects. RES/DET staff have worked closely with NRR to finalize a seismic margins research program plan. Our proposed funding level is consistent with that program plan and already represents our best judgment of the minimum costs realistically attainable. Our proposed funding level is consistent with that program plan. Because of the high priority of seismic margins research vis-a-vis other research programs and the uncertainties regarding possible contributions from HDR and Todatsu, we believe that no reduction should be taken at this time. C-I I
+
A reduction of $1.0 million was reconenend:d in the primary system integrity program, to be taken from the efforts on pressure vessel integrity and NDE for life extension. While we recognize NRR's position that they could tolerate a stretchout of this program, we feel that this cut would result in unacceptable scope reductions and delays to programs needed to meet other agency reviews. The HSST program was substantially reduced in FY 1986 to eliminate research, including the PTSE-3 pressurized thermal shock experiment, that would have evaluated the effectiveness of cladding to inhibit pressure vessel failure. At the Chairman's request, we restored some funds for separate effects studies on clad vessels. The surveillance dosimetry program is another task that has been delayed because of earlier budget cuts and which should now be completed. Regarding nondestructive examination for life extension, we conclude that FY 1987 is not too early to start this program. The ASME Code, Section XI, Committee is already setting up a new group to look at inservice inspection standards for relicensing, and the Atomic Industrial Forum is also looking into the issue. If we are to support NRR by providing bases that can be applied to relicensing decisions that may have to be made in the early 1990's, a delay in this work beyond 1987 would be risky. A reduction in the equipment aging program of $3.5 million was also recom-mended. We had proposed a major expansion of this program to allow for in-situ monitoring and testing of systems and equipment at a number of operating plants. We agree that the scale-up of this program can be stretched out and had already proposed a $3.0 million cut. We feel that a greater cut beyond that taken by RES on May 17, 1985, would not be justified at this time. We plan to provide by the end of FY 1986, as requested in your memorandum, a sumary report based on our initial research identifying whether and where equipment aging is a safety problem." C-l b
6-THERMAL HYDRAULIC TRANSIENTS
$ 3.6 Advanced Test Facility 4.0 NRR comment - The ability to do continuing, independent research in a dedicated test facility generally similar to Semiscale or MIST is a desirable element of the NRC program. Either existing facilities, or modifications to one of the existing facilities, or a new facility could fulfill this goal.
The Semiscale program should not be terminated until a decision is made on the dedicated facility and financing is assured for this facility. The $4 million allocation in the budget in FY 1987 to support thernal hydraulic testing in addition to the international programs is appropriate for this purpose. RES agrees with the need to supply capability for continuing integral testing. Because of other research priorities, funding for this should be in addition to the $130M already identified. RES is evaluating various options for FY 1987 and will provide these, for NRR concurrence, by the end of 1985. ROSA IV
-0.4 RES agrees to eliminate RELAP5 analysis of ROSA IV tests and to only use TRAC-PWR for such analyses, resulting in a savings of $0.4M.
O Other Thermal Hydraulic Activities RES agrees with the $2.8 million reduction for the balance of the therwal hydraulic activities. However, the specificity of this reduction will have to be worked out over the next 18 months. In particular, discussions on routine C-13
. 7 acquisitions of data for the Nuclear Plant Data bank and improvements to the plant analyzer for comparative problem analyses on a mainframe vis-a-vis a micro computer.
Additionally, RES would like to note that the 2D/3D connent by NRR has been resolved. WASTE MANAGEMENT, EARTH SCIENCES & HEALTH $ 0.5 RES endorses the NRR request for a radiation protection program data base and a study of the net risk of using respirators. 4 ' C-Iq
- - _ - _ _. --,.n,-}}