ML20148B599

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Summary of 438th Meeting of ACRS on 970206-08 in Rockville, MD Re Approppriate Actions Taken on Items Listed in Encl Agenda.W/Frn,Meeting Schedule & Outline,Attendees,Future Agenda & Subcommittee Activities & List of Documents
ML20148B599
Person / Time
Issue date: 03/18/1997
From:
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
To:
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
References
ACRS-3048, NUDOCS 9705130162
Download: ML20148B599 (36)
v • d • e


Text

Dato Is i 4 Phrch 18,1997 7,m i 9 rn Certified by:

j';' L, ( I TABLE OF CONTENTS Robert L. Seale on K

gp pjj, p, 1997 ES OF THE 438TH ACRS MEETING Jh W k ygh FEBRUARY 6-8, 1997 h d.

2A92 I. chairman's Reoort (Open) . . . . . . . ...... 1 1

II. Subcommittee Reoort -

Westinchouse AP600 Test I and Analvmis Procram (Open) . . . . . . ...... 1 III. Subcomm1ttee Reoort - National Academy of Sciepggg/_

National Research Council Phase 2 Study RecorL (Open) 3 IV. Shutdown Ooerations Risk (Open) . . . . . . . . . . 4 V. Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Reculation and l Related Matters (Open) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 VI. AEOD Scent Fuel Pool Study (Open) . . . . . . . . . 8  !

VII. Executive Session (Open) . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 A. Reports, Letters, and Memoranda REPORTS e Human Performance Procram Plan (Report to Shirley 1 Ann Jackson, Chairman, NRC, from R. L. Seale, Chairman, ACRS, dated February 13, 1997) e Nuclear Safety Research and Reculatorv Reform (Report to The Honorable Newt Gingrich, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, and to Albert Gore, Jr., President of the United States Senate, from R. L. Seale, Chairman, ACRS, dated February 21, 1997)

MEMORANDA

, e Draft AEOD Recort en Grid Performance Factors (Memorandum to Hugh L. Thompson, Jr. , Acting Execu-tive Director for Opert .lons, from John T. Larkins, j

Executive Director, ACRS, dated February 11, 1997) e Rulemakina Plan to Amend Financial Protection Recuirements for Permanently Shutdown Nuclear Power POI Reactors -- 10 CFR 50. 54 (w) and 10 CFR 140.11 l (Memorandum to Hugh L. Thompson, Jr. , Acting Execu- Dl l tive Director for Operations, from John T. Larkins, '

Executive Director, ACRS, dated February 12, 1997) 0 13 162 970318 'N' b PDR ACRS 3048 PDR ' M CP I G M LI;

"*~,<y [fg II.14Willlllkyylp

~}

-. . - -. - -. ~ - _ . . ... .. - . - - . . - - - _ - . . . . -

)

.- l

. u l l

e Procosed Revision 3 to Reculatorv Guide 1.134; '

+ s '

" Medical Evaluation of Licensed Personnel at Nucle- I ar Power Plants" (Memorandum to Hugh L. Thompson, i Jr. , Acting Executive Director for Operations, from ,

John T. Larkins, Executive Director, ACRS, dated l February 12, 1997) )

l Pronosed sunolement to Generic Letter 95-06. "Chan-O i

ces in the Ooerator Licensina Procram" (Memorandum  ;

to Hugh L. Thompson, Jr. , Acting Executive Director .

for Operations, from John T. Larkins, Executive Director, ACRS, dated February 12, 1997) .

I e Pronomed Final Generic Letter. " Revised Contents of j

. }ignthlv Ooeratina Reoort" (Memorandum to Hugh L. '

Thompson, Jr. , Acting Executive Director for Opera- i tiens, from John T. Larkins, Executive Director, '

ACRS, dated February 12, 1997)  !

  1. Prooosed Rulemakina for Amendments to 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, 50, 70. and 72--Self-Guarantee for Non-Profit and Non-Bond Issuina Licensees (Memorandum

. to Leonard J. Callan, Executive Director for Opera- i

tions, from John T. Larkins, Executive Director, f ACRS, dated February 20, 1997)

B. Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recommen- )

dations l l

C. Report on the Meeting of the Planning and Proce-dures Subcommittee Held on February 5, 1997 (Open)

D. Future Meeting Agenda l

ii

APPENDICES g a f '

I. Federal Register Notice II. Meeting Schedule and Outline III. Attendees IV. Future Agenda and Subermmittee Activities V. List of Documents Provided to the Committee 9

I s n-

-MINUTES OF THE FOUR HUNDRED THIRTY-EIGHTH MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS O D,YEf 1 P':3 Q FEBRUARY 6-8, 1997 b) F f ROCKVILLE,-MARYLAND

H3]1 f Sh Mth eet of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards was held at Conference Room 2B3, Two White Flint North Building, Rockville, Maryland, on February 6-8, 1997. The purpose of this meeting was to discuss and take appropriate actica on the items listed in the attached agenda. The meeting was open to public attendance. There was one request for time to make an oral state-  ;

ment from the Nuclear Energy Ihatitute. -

A transcript of selected portions of the meeting was kept and is available in the NRC Public Document Room at the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. [ Copies of the transcript  ;

are available for purchase from Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc., 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005.] )

ATTENDEES

'ACRS Members: Dr. Robert L. Seale (Chairman), Dr. Dana A. Powers (Vice-Chairman), Dr. George Apostolakis fabsent half of Thursday  ;

A.M.), Mr. John Barton, Dr. Ivan Catton, Dr. Mario H. Fontana, Dr.

Thomas S. Kress, Dr. Don W. Miller, and Dr. William J. Shack. [For >

a list of other attendees, see Appendix III.)

I. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT (Open) '

[ Note: Dr. John T. Larkins was the Designated Federal Official for

, this portion of the meeting.)

Dr. Robert L. Seale, Committee Chairman, convened the meeting at 8:30 a.m. and reviewed the schedule for the meeting. He announced that several candidates for appointment to the ACRS were present and that a schedule for Members to interview these candidates had been distributed. He also highlighted several items of interest for the Members to consider.

II. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT -

WESTINGHOUSE AP600 TEST AND ANALYSIS PROGRAM (Open)

(Note: Mr. P. Boehnert was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.)

Dr. Catton, Chairman of the Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena Subcommit-tee, provided a report on the status of the Subcommittee's review of the Westinghouse AP600 Test and Analysis Program (TAP) prior to his departure from the Committee later in February. He noted the following key points:

e j

I 438th ACRS M2eting 2

, February 6-8, 1997 ,

e Based on an initial investigation of the AP600 thermal-

  • hydraulic characteristics, it was clear that testing would be  !

required to address the unique aspects of this design. In particular, it was clear that the phenomena of thermal strati-fication, condensation, and small differences'in buoyancy and drag forces would be important and would pose a challenge to 3

code simulations. i e The Subcommittee told Westinghouse that it expected its test i data to be presented in ' a scrutable manner; i.e., by the construction of a Phenomena Identification and Ranking Table i (PIRT) and both a top-down and bottom-up scaling analysis. At the December 18-19, 1996 Subcommittee Meeting, Westinghouse '

attempted to provide these items, but fe11'short of Subcommit-tee expectations.- The principal problem was a lack of .

adequate documentation. Dr. Catton expressed the opinion that, with a few exceptions (see below), Westinghouse has an adequate test data set to support certification. ,

o Westinghouse is using the COBRA / TRAC code to model large-break, loss-of-coolant accidents (LOCAs), and the NOTRUMP code i for small-break LOCA modeling. Further, for modeling long-term cooling, Westinghouse is again using COBRA / TRAC. Use of COBRA / TRAC for long-term cooling modeling, in his opinion, is l a mistake. j e Referring to an NRR report documenting recommendations for improving the staff's review process (" Report of the Maine Yankee Lessons Learned Task Group"), Westinghouse should: I adhere to staff guidance for documentation of emergency core cooling system methodologies, document licensee / vendor responses to staff questions in associated topical reports, and submit sample applications of codes and methodologics for staff approval, o Westinghouse has drafted a revised Table of Contents for its PIRT/ Scaling Report that was reviewed during the December 18-19, 1996 Subcommittee M,=eting. After reviewing this draft, Dr. Catton recommended that Westinghouse make reference to its

, responses to staff questions.

Conclusion The Subcommittee plans to meet with Westinghouse in the near future to discuss its efforts to model the AP600 long-term cooling scenar-ios, while it proceeds in parallel to monitor the resolution of the outstanding issues pertaining to the AP600 PIRT and Scaling Report.

' - - -e - _ _ _ _ _ -_ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ .

. c 438th ACRS Meeting 3

' February 6-8, 1997 III. SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT - NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES PHASE 2 STUDY REPORT (Open)

[ Note: Mr. M. Markley was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.)

Dr. Don W. Miller, Chairman of the ACRS Subcommittee on Instrumen-tation and Control Systems and Computers, provided a brief report to the Committee regarding his preliminary review of the National

~

Academy of Sciences / National Research Council (NAS/NRC) Phase 2 study report. Dr. Miller noted that he and Dr. Powers had met with the NRC staff on January 29, 1917, regarding the schedule and content of future meetings to ret aw the proposed final Standard Review Plan (SRP) and associated guidance for digital instrumenta-tion and control (I&C) systems, including the planned integration of insights from the Phase 2 study. Dr. Miller summarized the following points regarding the NAS study and future ACRS reviews:

e Many of the recommendations made in the Phase ~2 study are addressed in Branch Technical Position (BTP) 14.

  • The recommendation that "the NRC should require that the relative influence of software failure on system reliability be included in probabilistic risk assessments (PRAs) for systems that include digital components," is a potentially controversial issue.
  • The NAS/NRC Committee did not have the benefit of reviewing the proposed SRP and associated guidance including the BTPs.

They did, however, have the benefit of briefings by the staff regarding these matters.

  • For the proposed final SRP Chapter 7 review, the staff agreed to forward a document identifying the points of agreement and disagreement with the conclusions and recommendations in the Phase 2 study as well as the staff's proposed resolution and recommended actions, e A Subcommittee meeting has been proposed for April 17-18, 1

1997, to review proposed final SRP sections, BTPs, and f regulatory guides. Full ACRS review of the proposed final documents is scheduled for May 1997.

For the Committee review of the NAS/NRC Phase 2 study, Dr. Miller proposed the following assignments to facilitate the efficient and effective review of this study during the March 1997 ACRS meeting:

1s Introduction - Barton

2. Key Issues - Miller
3. System Aspects of Digital I&C Technology - Apostolakis

. .=

438th ACRS Meeting 4

. February 6-8,-1997 4

4. Software Quality Assurance - Fontana
5. Common-Mode Software Failure Potential - Kress
6. Safety and Reliability Assessment Methods - Powers
7. Human Factors and Human-Machine Interfaces - Seale
8. Dedication of Commercial Off-the-Shelf Software - Miller 4 9. Case-by-Case Licensing Process - Barton-
10. Adequacy of Technical Infrastructure - Shack
11. Overview and Summary - Miller Dr. Miller requested each Member to perform a detailed review of his assigned sections and to highlight points of concern for the briefing as well as recommended actions for ACRS letter-writing

, deliberations. He requested ACRS Members to provide their written comments on the Phase 2 study by February 21, 1997.

Conclusion The Committee plans to continue its review of these matters during ,

future meetings. l l

IV. SHUTDOWN OPERATIONS RISK (Open)

[ Note: Mr. N. Dudley was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] )

Dr. Dana Powers opened the session by explaining that the Committee had discussed the issue of shutdown risk over the last year and that a Committee report had been drafted regarding the need for a research program to analyze and quantify low power and shutdown l risk. He stated that during his discussion with the staff on j January 29, 1997, the staff hact expressed the concern that the

, proposed ACRS report would delay the issuance of the shutdown rule.

Dr. Powers noted that the staff had indicated there was an immediate need to proceed with the proposed rule, which is based on exploratory risk studies, and had requested an opportunity to brief the Committee.

Staff Presentation Dr. Mark Cunningham, RES, presented the history and background of the staff's low power and shutdown risk analysis. He explained that the risk analysis involved a course screening phare and a  !

phase of analyzing in detail two operational states. Mr. Martin l Virgilio, NRR, summarized the comments and recommendations contained in the June 4, 1996, ACRS letter to the Executive Director for Operations concerning the development of a shutdown rule. He explained the staff's response to the letter and provided the status of the rulemaking effort. Mr. Virgilio presented ,

examples of low power and shutdown events, summarized the regulato- l i

438th ACRS Macting 5 February 6-8, 1997 ry approach used in the proposed rule, and explained that the rule was needed to enhance safety and to codify voluntary improvements.

Mr. Cunningham identified the following research activities that support the proposed rulemaking: human reliability analysis, impact of performing maintenance during power operations versus shutdown conditions, and low power and shutdown models for events analysis. He presented different options for analyzing low power and shutdown risk besides the approach r. sed in developing NUREG-1150, " Severe Accident Risk: An Asses '. tent of Five U.S. Nuclear Power Plants." Mr. Cunningham noted tl 4t risk analyses related to low power and shutdown risk are being ,onducted by U.S and foreign utilities. He concluded that complet; ig the NUREG-1150 matrix is not technically justified.

The Committee members and the staff discussed the following items:

e peer review and validation of the staff risk analysis, e use of industry PRAs, e extrapolating shutdown risk insights to low power operations, e the utility of performing low power and shutdown PRAs, e plans to review the risk related to different shutdown modes, e dif ferent methods for evaluating low power and shutdown risk, e using a structured approach for setting research priorities,

  • the ptgcticality of performing expert elicitation, e the pocential for risk assessment initiatives by utility, and
  • additional requirements for risk studies imposed by the proposed rule.

Committee Discussi2D The Committee discussed the draft ACRS report, including the urgency for competing risk assessments, the structure and detail required for an effective risk analysis, the applicability of the Safety Goals to low power and shutdown conditions, and the need to understand the root causes of low power and shutdown events.

Conclusion The Committee plans to complete a report on this issue during the April 3-5, 1997 ACRS meeting.

V. RISK-INFORMED. PERFORMANCE-BASED REGULATION AND RELATED MATTERS (Open)

(Note: Mr. M. Markley was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.]

438th ACRS Meeting 6

  • Fsbruaimf 6-8, 1997 Dr. George Apostolakis, Chairman of the ACRS Subcommittee on Probabilistic Risk Assessment introduced the topic to the Commit-tee. He noted that the PRA Subcommittee had met with the NRC staff and industry representatives on October 31 and November 1, 21, and 22, 1996, and January 28, 1997. He introduced Mr. Gary Holahan, Director, Division of Safety Systems and Analysis (DSSA), NRR, to discuss issues from the last Subcommittee meeting regarding proposed Standard Review Plan (SRP) sections and associated Regulatory Guides. He also noted that representatives of the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) had requested time to make a presentation regarding these matters.

NRC Staff Presentation Mr. Gary Holahan led the discussions for the NRC staff. Drs.

Thomas King, Deputy Director, Division of Systems Technology (DST) ,

RES; Mark Cunningham, Chief, Probabilistic Risk Analysis Branch, DST /RES; and Mr. Robert Jones, Chief, Probabilistic Safety Assessment Branch, DSSA/NRR, provided supporting discussion. Mr.

Holahan provided an overview of changes to the SRP and Regulatory Guides. He also addressed the following points requested by the Subcommittee on January 28, 1996:

. e The staff definition of large, early release frequency (LERF) and how it applies on a plant-specific basis; e Guidelines on the use of defense-in-depth; e The staff definition of adequate safety margin and how to maintain sufficient margin; e How the staff plans to address temporary changes; and e The use of judgment in licensee expert panels and NRC peer reviews. '

Dr. Apostolakis questioned how the staff defined a small increase in risk. The staff stated that it is defined as CDF<1E-5/RY and LERF<1E-6/RY. Dr. Apostolakis also questioned the distinction i between small and insignificant increases in risk. The staff stated that insignificant risk is captured within the definition of small.

Dr. Apostolakis questioned whether the " guidelines" for defense-in-depth were actually " elements" of defense-in-depth. The staff agreed that they could be viewed in that way. Dr. Apostolakis reiterated his earlier concern that the risk approach may be constrained if used as guideline.

l I

438th ACRS Meeting 7

. February 6-8, 1997 Dr. Catton questioned how acceptance criteria for safety margins were considered. The staff stated that margins and uncertainties are addressed in the engineering analysis but noted that margin analysis does not fit well with risk analysis. The staff added that both need to be considered.

Dr. Kress questioned the bases for the plant-specific LERF. In particular, he questioned whether larger CDF could be tolerated if LERF is met. Dr. Seale questioned the need for Level 3 PRA and if a submittal could be based on the quantitative health objectives (QHOs) only. The staff stated that they would consider these points if provided in a submittal; however, they expressed doubt that the guidance would include provisions specifically for this or for all possible combinations of risk arguments.

Drs. Kress and Powers questioned how the guidance provides for temporary changes, what rates of change are acceptable, and how the time interval could be partitioned for an acceptable change. Dr.

Powers questioned if there was any spike in risk which is so high  !

that it would be unacceptable. The staff stated that they could  ;

establish a value; however, they emphasized that you cannot get j there if the other criteria are met. Dr. Apostolakis suggested the staff look at the initiators to assess how you get into trouble.

The ACRS and staff discussed the legal implications of this proposed guidance. The staff stated that the Commission had l requested review by the Office of the General Counsel regarding the j allowance for increases in risk in some situations and the legal l considerations (i.e., backfit) for plants that do not meet the i guidelines.

Nuclear Enerav Institute Presentation Mr. Tony Pietrangelo led the discussions for the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI). During his presentation, he highlighted the following points:

e The subject documents are not yet publicly available.

Therefore, NEI comments are based largely on the discussions at the ACRS.

  • There are no risk-informed regulations. Probabilistic Safety Assessment (PSA) is an input to the decision-making process.

All other processes remain the same, e The purpose of PSA is to focus resources and attention to better manage safety at the plants. He stated that the benefits must outweigh the burden or no one will use it. He also stated that there is too much emphasis on developing PSA (i.e. , numbers) rather than using it to make better decisions.

e .

438th ACRS M;Oting 8 j

, February 6-8, 1997 {

l 1

e Licensees can make changes to the current licensing basis I (CLB) using PSA without submittals to the NRC. He stated that, as long as 10 CFR 50.59 is reasonable, changes will be made without licensing submittals.

e NEI contends that using PSA, as currently proposed, will be more burdensome than not using it. He indicated that the actual licensing review will take longer and cost more. He added that nothing has been given up in the regulatory process to justify this added expense.

- e He stated that the industry does not want to be regulated by PSA numbers and that NRC was not asked to endorse the EPRI PSA Applications Guide. He expressed concern that the Regulatory Guides may become enforced as rules.

Dr. Apostolakis questioned whether the SRP/RG was headed in the wrong direction. NEI reiterated that there had been too much emphasis on numbers and that the results of PSA are an input to the decision rather than decision criteria.

Dr. Apostolakis questioned whether there was a fundamental problem ,

with the definition of " insight. " NEI stated that the industry was  !

looking for evolutionary or incremental change rather than a huge I step as appears to exist in the SRP/RGs.

Because of the generally negative tone of the NEI presentation, Mr.

Barton and Dr. Apostolakis requested industry representatives to provide the ACRS with a letter clarifying their objections to the proposed SRP/RGs. Mr. Pietrangelo stated that NEI plans to respond when the documents are publicly available.

At the conclusion of the meeting, Dr. Apostolakis requested each Member to review all the documents for the February 20-21 Subcom-mittee meeting. He stated that value will be added through detailed reviews and summarized previously agreed upon assignments for the individual applications. He noted the following assign-ments: Drs. Miller and Powers - graded quality assurance; Mr.

Barton and Dr. Shack - Technical Specifications; Drs. Seale and Kress - inservice testing; and general guidance - all Members. He requested that Members provide comments to him by February 17, 1997, so that he can prepare a list of questions for the staff to consider in preparing for the meeting.

Conclusion The Committee plans to continue its review of these matters at future meetings.

_ .. . _ _ . _ ,~

i i -..

l 438th ACRS Meeting 9

  • Febr0ary 6-8, 1997  ;

i  !

VI. AEOD SPENT FUEL POOL STUDY (Open) l l [ Note: 'Mr. A. Singh was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.)  ;

i j Introduction i a  !

i _ Dr. Thomas Kress, Chairman of the Onsite Fuel Storage and Decommis- -

sioning Subcommittee, summarized the issues and noted that the '

2

~

Committee had previously heard presentations on this subject. Dr.

Kress stated that the Executive Director for Operations (EDO) asked the Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (AEOD) to perform an independent study of the likelihood and consequences

! of an extended loss of spent fuel pool (SFP) cooling. He further  !

4 stated that this briefing was for information only and no Committee  :

. report was required.  :

) AEOD Presentation Mr. Jose Ibarra, AEOD, presented the results of its independent l study of the likelihood and consequences of an extended loss of

, spent fuel pool (SFP) cooling. This study was performed at the i

{ request of the EDO. The study evaluated the SFP issues in a

- generic way which consisted of six major tasks: (1) assessment of SFP configuration, (2) review of operating experience, (3)

, observations from site visits and interviews, (4) review of regulatory requirements and guidance, (5) performance of engineer-

~

ing assessments, and (6) assessment of risk.

The findings and conclusions of the study are as follows:

e A review of more than 12 years of operating experience deter-mined that loss of SFP coolant inventory greater than 1 foot ,

has occurred at a rate of about 1 per 100 reactor years.

l e A loss of SFP cooling with a temperature increase greater than i 20*F has occurred at a rate of approximately 3 times per 1000 reactor years.

  • The primary cause of events involving SFP cooling has been attributed to human error.

i e The relative risk of fuel damage due to loss of SFP coo? Ang is

low in comparison with the risk of other reactor events not involving ~SFP. '

e The likelihood and consequences of events involving loss of SFP cooling are highly dependent on human performance and ,

individual plant design features.

J 1

h 1

4 l l

438th ACRS Meeting 10

, February 6-8, 1997 l i

l As a result of this study, the staff is in the process of convert-ing this study into a NUREG and will also issue an information notice to the industry.

Conclusion This briefing was for information only. No Committee action was required.

VII. EXECUTIVE SESSION (Open)

[ Note: Dr. John T. Larkins was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.]

A. Reports, Letters and Memoranda REPORTS e Human Performance Procram Plan (Report to Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman, NRC, from R. L. Seale, Chairman, ACRS,  ;

, dated February 13, 1997)

Nuclear Safety Research and Reculatorv Reform (Report to i

e The Honorable Newt Gingrich, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, and to Albert Gore, Jr.,

President of the United States Senate, from R. L. Seale, Chairman, ACRS, dated February 21, 1997)

! MEMORANDA e Draf t AEOD Recort on Grid Performance Factors (Memorandum to Hugh L. Thompson, Jr., Acting Executive Director for Operations, from John T. Larkins, Executive Director, ACRS, dated February 11, 1997) i e Rulemakino Plan to Amend Financial Protection Recuire-ments for Permanently Shutdown Nuclear Power Reactors --

10 CFR 50. 54 (w) and 10 CFR 14 0.11 (Memorandum to Hugh L.

Thompson, Jr., Acting Executive Director for Operations, from John T. Larkins, Executive Director, ACRS, dated February 12, 1997) e Pronosed Revision 3 to Reculatorv Guide 1.134. " Medical Evaluation of Licensed Personnel at Nuclear Power Plants" (Memorandum to Hugh L. Thompson, Jr., Acting Executive Director for Operations, from John T. Larkins, Executive Director, ACRS, dated February 12, 1997)

j 438th ACRS Meeting 11

. February 6-8, 1997 e Proposed Sucolement to Generic Letter 95-06, " Chances in the Ooerator Licensina Procram" (Memorandum to Hugh L.

Thompson, Jr. , Acting Executive Director for Operations, from John T. Larkins, Executive Director, ACRS, dated February 12, 1997) e Procosed Final Generic Letter, " Revised Contents of Monthlv Ooeratina Recort" (Memorandum to Hugh L. Thomp-son, Jr., Acting Executive Director for Operations, from John T. Larkins, Executive Director, ACRS, dated February 12, 1997) -

e Proposed Rulemakina for Amendments to 10 CFR Parts 30.

40, 50, 70, and 72--Self-Guarantee for Non-Profit and Non-Bond Issuina Licensees (Memorandum to Leonard J.

Callan, Executive Director for Operations, from John T.

Larkins, Executive Director, ACRS, dated February 20, 1997)

B. Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recommendations (Note: Mr. Sam Duraiswamy was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.]

e The Committee discussed the response from the EDO dated February 4, 1997, responding to ACRS comments and recommendations included in the ACRS letter dated December 30, 1996, concerning the Human Performance Program Plan.

The Committee noted that the EDO response did not address a formal process for developing a long-term, top-down strategic plan that would identify and set priorities for agency needs in the area of human factors research. The Committee issued a report dated February 13, 1997, that provided additional comments and recommendations regard-ing the Human Performance Program Plan. The Committee decided to continue,its discussion of this issue during future meetings.

e The Committee discussed the response from the EDO dated January 2, 1997, responding to ACRS comments and recom-mendations included in the ACRS letter dated November 20,

, 1996, concerning the proposed rule on steam generator integrity.

The ACRS Subcommittees on Materials and Metallurgy and on Severe Accidents met with the staff on January 9, 1997, to discuss the EDO response, the status of development of the proposed Steam Generator Rule, and an associated

438th ACRS Meeting 12

. February 6-8, 1997 regulatory guide, and issues related to risk-informed, performance-based regulation. The information the staff provided during the meeting was insufficient for the Members to clearly understand the technical bases for the proposed rule. As directed by the Committee, the Executive Director, ACRS, sent a memoranoum to the Acting reputy Director, NRR, on January 31, 1997, requesting that, at the next Subcommittee meeting, the staff respond to the ACRS comments included in the November 20, 1996 letter and also address comments provided by several members that were transmitted along with the memorandum.

The Committee plans to continue its review of this issue at a joint meeting of the Subcommittees on Materials and Metallurgy and on Severe Accidents scheduled for March 4-5, 1997.

e The Committee discussed the response from the EDO dated December 26, 1996, responding to the ACRS comments and recommendations included in the ACRS report dated November 18, 1996, concerning the plant-specific applica-tion of safety goals.

The Committee decided that it was satisfied with the EDO response.

1

  • The Committee discussed the response from the EDO dated December 19, 1996, responding to the ACRS comments and recommendations in the ACRS letter dated November 22, 1996, concerning the NRC programs for risk-based analy6is i of reactor operating experience.

The Committee decided to continue its discussion of this matter at future meetings.

C. Report on the Meeting of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee (Open)

The Committee heard a report from Dr. Seale on the Plan-ning and Procedures Subcommittee meeting held on February 5, 1997. The following items were discussed:

1) REPORTING OF FOREIGN GIFTS Agencies are now required to compile a list of statements filed during the year by employees who receive gifts given by foreign governments costing more than $245 retail value at time of acceptance.

This includes travel taking place entirely outside the United States, under certain circumstances.

s

  • 438th ACRS Meeting 13 F6brbary 6-8, 1997 RECOMMENDATION The Subcommittee recommended that all Members read the attached announcement.
2) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY A sunplement to the broad umbrella Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between NRC and the Department of Energy (DOE) has been issued. It provides the basis for DOE and NRC to cooperate on significant projects and activities of mutual interest. It specifically mentions the ACRS in Item D.4.

RECOMMENDATION The Subcommittee recommended that a meeting with the EDO be arranged at an appropriate time to discuss Items B.1 and D.4 of this MOU. Dr. Powers will work with the ACRS staff in arranging this meeting.

3) CANDIDATES FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE ACRS A schedule has been created for Members to inter-view four candidates for appointment to the ACRS during the February meeting. This schedule, along with each candidate's resum6, was made available to the Members at the beginning of the meeting.

RECOMMENDATION The Subcommittee recommended that after interview-ing the candidates, the Members provide their views on each candidate.

4) STAFF REOUIREMENTS MEMORANDUM FROM THE COMMISSION The Commission issued a Staff Requirements Memoran-dum that requests ACRS views on the relationship between the concept of " adequate protection" and the NRC safety goals, from the standpoint of levels of risk. The schedule for completing the ACRS response on this matter is July 31, 1997.

RECOMMENDATION The Subcommittee recommended that Dr. Kress take the lead in developing an ACRS response, with an

-. - -- . ~ . , . _ . . - . - . - . . . . . - . - _ ~ - . - . . . . - . - . . - . _ _ _ . -

k

, s. .

.i 438th ACRS Meeting 14  !

4

. February 6-8,.1997 ~!

- l outline to be distributed at the' March meeting and a first draft to be distributed at the' April meet" 1; ing.
5) IFTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES l

i An email message was transmitted to Mr. Yamada j identifying ACRS preferences for the next-Quadri-  !

. partite-Meeting. No further information has been i received-concerning this meeting. [

7'

6) MEMORANDUM ON THE STEAM GENERATOR INTEGRITY RULE-MAKING l

3 As instructed by Dr. Seale, ACRS Chairman, Dr.

. Larkins issued a memorandum to Ashok Thadani on

, January 31, 1997 requesting that, at the next joint j meeting of the Subcommittees on Materials & Metal-  !

l lurgy and . Severe Accidents, the staff respond to i the ACRS comnants and recommendations included in l the November 20, 1996 letter to the EDO regarding  !

the Steam Genesator Integrity Rule, as well as the  !

comments raised by individual Members.  ;

i ,

7) ASSESSMENT OF ACRS TECHNICAL EXPERTISE -l In response to a request from Chairman Jackson, a j review has been made of the types of technical  !

expertise that should be represented on the ACRS.  !

5 8) OUESTIONS FOR PRESCREENING ACRS CANDIDATES E i The ACRS staff and the Office of the General Coun- }

sel have drafted a number of questions for pre-  !

, screening the eligibility of candidates for ACRS  !

membership (principally ex-utility officials) . l RECOMMENDATION  !

. i Members were requested to provide comments by i Saturday, February 8, 1997.  ;

i 9) QUESTIONS AND KEOUESTED ACTIONS ON INSTRUMENTATION i AND CONTROL SYSTEMS l Dr. Miller, Chairman of the ACRS Subcommittee on Instrumentation and Control (IEC) Systems and

. Computers provided a list of issues to the NRC staff requesting that the staff address these '

issues when the ACRS reviews the propo. sed final SRP j i

438th ACRS Meeting 15 Febrbary 6-8, 1997 sections, BTP,- and Regulatory Guides associated with digital I&C systems.

10) BRIEFING TO THE ACRS ON THE NAS PHASE 2 STUDY REPORT Two email messages have been received from Tracy Wilson, National Academy of Sciences (NAS), regard-ing the availability of NAS Committee members to

, participate in the ACRS meeting on March 7, 1997 to discuss the NAS Phase 2 Study report on digital I&C systems. Dr. Chapin will be available to brief the Committee, but Nancy Leveson will not be available.

11) CHANGES TO TRAVEL REGULATIONS Travel Regulations have recently been revised. For example, under the new regulations, receipts are not required for individual travel expenses under

$75.

RECOMMENDATION The Subcommittee recommended that Members read the attached NRC Announcement.

12) POSSIBLE LOSS OF UNESCORTED ACCESS FOR MEMBERS Recently, a member of the NSRRC who works for a utility used his NRC badge to attend a meeting with the NRC Chairman at One White Flint North concern-ing utility business. This incident prompted the Chairman to reconsider the NRC practice of provid-ing advisory committee members with unescorted access to headquarters buildings. The ACRS staff provided information to the Chairman's office in support of the need for ACRS and ACNW Members to retain their unescorted access.
13) SITE VISIT It has been suggested that a visit to a nuclear power plant be arranged for interested ACRS Members within the next 3-4 months.

RECOMMENDATION The Subcommittee recommended that Dr. Powers and Mr. Barton recommend a site.

a f

438th ACRS Meeting 16

. February 6-8, 1997

14) ACRS/NSRRC COORDINATION A summary of the November 14-15, 1996, NSRRC meet- .

ing has been provided to the Members. NSRRC views on the role of the NSRRC, the ACRS, and coordina-tion between the two committees are included.

15) &CBS SUBCOMMITTEE ON REGULATORY POLICIES AND PRAC-  :

.TICES  :

The draft meeting summary from the ACRS Subcommit- '

tee on Regulatory Policies and Practices, held on October 17-19, 1996, has been provided to the Members. ,

16) MEMBER ISSUES 8 A memorandum from Dr. Powers suggests that the ACRS review the plan for NRC to assume respon-sibility for the safety oversight of DOE nuclear f acilities and its potential impact on the ACRS workload and its report to Congress. ,

i 8 Dr. Powers suggested that ACRS consider the l need for NRC to reexamine regulations that are l overly specific to the point that they do not l provide adequate protection of the public when )

new or innovative nuclear activi_ies are i undertaken. In his memorandum, Dr. Powers I provides several potential examples.

D. Future Meetino Acenda Appendix IV summarizes the proposed items endorsed by the Committee for the 439th ACRS Meeting, March 6-8, 1997.

1 The 438th ACRS meeting was adjourned at 11:45 a.m. on Saturday,  !

February 8, 1997. J l

1

.c - - - - - . - - - _ . - - - . . - . . _ __._ ---- -

APPENDIX I

i l'

{>- Federal Register / Vcl. 62. No.15 / Thursday, January 23, 1997 / Notices 3539 4-denned,in 10 CFR Part 20. It does not Per'be Nuclear Regulosory rhion. of the Westinghouse AP600 Test and efEd:t non-rediologim! plant offluents S. Singh selwa, and has no other environmentalim Analysis Program.

herefore, the Commission conclu

- m,orsar,propsetareessmeeJ-2, em om.4m om.: Subcommittee

that there is no signincent non. e(neector.v_ yn.Officeof Report (Open)-The Committee will NucaserAsocieranguletJen radiological environmentalimpact hear a report by the Chainnan of the (FR Doc. 97-1610 Filed 1 23-07,8
45 em! lastrumentation and Control Systems esenciated with the proposed esempdon. enaass sans mes.u and Computers Suhemmmittee regarding V the AGS review of the Nauonal ,

. Ahernethes so the Propowd Action Amdemy of Sciences /Nedonal Research

/eteory Ad Commlues en Reestor CouncilPhase 2 study on digital Sinos tb Comunission bs duded 8 'Gologuards; 80sedng 00 egos imetrumentation and control systems.

est eenis no newumMe .

9:30 a.m -10:15 a.m.: Future ACRS environenentalamociated whh the ks ecoordance with the of Activities (0 pen)-The Committee will PmPond scuen,any aherneuves with Sections 29 and 182b. of ic d

  • lual or er environmentalimpacts Enessy Act (42 U.S.C. 3039,2232b), the discuss the recomunendations of the end Procedums Subcommittee '

need not evaluated. As an alterneuve Advisory Cosamittee on Reactor

"- items proposed for ta the acdon, the staff Febr.l will hold a meeting on oensi on by the fullCommittee coast md dentalof the propowd uary 54,1997,in Conference

, during future meetinas.

ection. Denial of the applicedon would Room T-283,11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. som om.-22m Noon: Shutdown resuh in no cimagein current N 2 Aisk (Open)-N environmentalimpacts. N Wednesday, February 5.1997 Comunittas will beer presentadons by  !

j environmentalimpacts of the proposed Impm.-2:25 pm.: Opening W hold diMons we scuos and the ehwnstive action are representatives of the NRC staff stadler. Nemarks by the ACRS Chairmen regarding issuee ==aaelated with (Open)-N AutS Chairman will make ebuidown operations risk.

Ahernative Use ofAesources opening remarks regarding conduct of Representatives of the nuclear the meoung and cesnment briefly industry will perucipate, as appropriate.

His ecuan does notinvolve the use regarding items of current intesest.

of resources not previously considered During this session, the th=ittee will ACRS 28Casninents PA.-/N P.m.:Neconcihotion and of in the Final Environmental Statement discuss priorities for properation of Recommendations (Open)-The Related to b Operation ofIndian Point ACRS repons. Committee will dancues responms from Nuclear Genereung Plant Unit No. 3, deced February 1975.

2:25 pm.4:ds pm.: Design Noses the NRC Executive Dimetor for Verification (Open)-N th=f ttee Operations (EDO) to comments and Agencies and7ersons Consulted will hear presentations by and hold recommendations included in recent discussions with tauves of the AOLS reports, including the December a Doce , ff ce used y the alac i i o mber 22, consuhed with the New York State staffin "*'

of5cial, Held! Voelk,of the New York ng the edesguacy of the information provided [A,},y ,]c,,r State Energy Research and Development Authority regarding the environmental im of the proposed action. N etate October we6.

{in in Operating Em ACRS J:30 m.Mrience[:paporation 0 p.m (Open)-b Committee of I had no comments.  : will con ue its discussion of proposed gm Acts reports on matters considend Finding ofen Significant Impact will discum this ng h wi ACRS reports on o

" ,, g Based upon the environmental assessment, the Commission concludes g";[3 " "8 ACRS NPomo Congrus onbC Sakty that the proposed action will not have NPort to Consmes on Salety Research Program, as well a proposed a significant effect on the quality of the Reneerch m,anda pond reports on Risk Based Regulatory human environment. Accordingly,the Aczeptance Criteria for Site Specific Commieston has determined not to Q" "" E C r

,g3,,is,,yforg ,,j,, to-Specific APPhcation of Safety Goals, and Human papers an environmentalimpact 3ppy Perfonnance Pmgram Plan.

i etatement for the proposed action. nursday, February 8,1997 y,g ,y*p g y' g ,7 for further details with roepect to the 0:30 cm.4:3s e.m.: Opening proposed action, ese the liceness's letter 8:30am.4:ss on.:OpeninE Aemerksb the ACR$Chairmon

, dated October 1,1996, es supplemented Demorts by the ACRS Choirman (Open)-Tb ACRS Chairman will make

, by letter dated December 5.1996, which (Open)-The ActsChairmen willseeks opening remarks regarding conduct of opening emnerks mgarding conduct of ere ovellable for public inspection et the the enesting. es muung.

l Coeunission's Public Document Room.

i 8:35 om.4m om.:Subcommitsee 3:35 em.-20:30 a.m.: Risk informed.

The Gelman Building _. 2120 L Street. Pierformance Based Aerulation ond NW Washington, oc,and at the local Deport (Open)-h Coenmhtm will Aelated Adorkrs(OpenbThe j public document room located at the har a repon by the Chairman of the hermal Hydraulic Phenomena Committee will host presentations by ~

White Plains Public Library.100 and hold discussions with Martine Avenue, White Plains. New Subcommittee regarding saatters representatives of the NRC staff Yak 10601. discussed during the December 18H19, 1996 Subcommittee meeting, and mgerding the proposed Standard i 1 Review Plan Sections and Reguistory Desed et machille. heer1 end, this 16th day comments on the future scope and ofpenverytoer, Guides for risk informed, performance-direction of the Subcoanmittm's review based regulation, and rolsted metters.

k m

--w+we - r e 1 w nv.ai w me av- --e. r- m -- e- -- w,-m- w-en--- - + - - --- - - - - - --- --- -

4 *

~

  • 3540 Federal Register / Vcl. 62. N2.15 / Thursday, January 23, 1997 / Notic:s t

10:f5 o {n -22:25 p.m.: AEOD Spent significant importance to NRC, has been cancelled or rescheduled, the ilelPool Study (OpenF The including robaselining of the Committee Chairman's ruling on requests for the Committee will hear pruentations by activities for FY 1997. opportunity to present oral staternents and hold discussions with [Neee: The meeting could terminate earlier and the time allotted thmfor can be 1 representatives of the Office for than scheduled,if the work of the Committee obtained by contacting Mr. Sam I Analysis and Evaluation of Operational is completed.1 Data (AEOD) regarding the results of the Duraiswamy, Chief Nuclear Reactors study performed by AEOD on the Procedures for th conduct of and Branch (telephone 301/415-7364),

partici tion in ACRS meetings were between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. est.

at o e uo lis ed in the Federal Register on ACRS moeung notices, meeting industry will pardcipate, as appropriate. ober 1,1996 (61 FR 51310). In transcripts, and letter reports are now ,

1:25 p.m.-7:00 p.m. Proporot on of .accordance with thwe procedurve, oral available on FedWorld from the "NRC l ACRS Reports (Open)--The Committee or written statomnts may be pmeented Main Menu." Direct Dial Acx:ess number will continue its discussion of proposed by me,mbers of th public; electronic to FedWorld is (800) 303-9672 or ACRS reports on mattern considered recoruings will be permitted only during this meeting. It will also discuss during tb open pordona of the muting, ftp.fedworld. Nse documents and the muting agenda are also available for and a proposed ACRS report to Congress on mem{estions may be asked only bydownloading or reviewir.g on the rs of the Committee,its the NRC Safety Research Program, as intemet at http://www.nrc.govl well as proposed reports on Risk. Based mosultants, and staff. Persons desiring Regulatory Acceptance Criteria for Site, to make oral statements should notify ACRSACW-Specific App!!cadon of Safety Goals. Mr. Sam Duraiswamy, Chief. Nuclear The ACRS meetin dates for Calendar and Human Performance Program Plan. Reactors Branch,at letst five days Year 1997 are provi ed below:

before the moeung, if possible, so that Saturday, February 8,1997 appropriate arrangements can be made 1997 ACRS rnesting ACRS mecang No.

8:30 a.m.-9:00 a.m.: Report of the to allow the necesasry time during the dates Planning and Procedures Subcommittee muting for such statements. Use of still, 439 M 6-4,1997.

(Open/ Closed)-The Committee will motion picture, and television cameros 40 Aprd3-6,1997.

hear a report of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee on matters during this meeting may be limited to u,- , y,y ,_3, igg 7, selected portions of the meeting as 42 June H-13,1997.

related to the conduct of ACRS determined by the Chairman.

business, and organizational and 43 July 9-11,1997.

Informadon regarding the time to be set personnel matters misung to the ACRS. aside for this purpose may be obtained No Au9ust m du September 3-6, A portion of this seulon may be by contacting the Chief of the Nuclear iggy, closed to discuss organizational and Rwetors Branch prior to the meeting. In 445 Oaober 2-4,1997.

personnel matters that relate solely to view of the possibility that the schedule 446 _ Novemtser 6-4,1997.

the intemal personnel rules and for ACRS muungs may be adjusted by 447 - December 4-6,1997.

practices of this Advisory Comrnittee, the Chairman as necessary to facilitate and matters the release of which would the conduct of the meeting, persons Deted: January 16.1997.

constitute a clearly unwarranted planning to attend should check with Andrew 1. Bates, invasion of personal privacy. the Chief of the Nuclear Reactors Branch 9:00 a.in.-2 :30 p.m.:Proporation of if such reacheduling would result in A% Canmadanogement Wr.

ACRS Reports (Open)-The Committee major inconvenienm. (FR Doc. 97-1605 Filed 1 97; 8 45 aml will contlnue its discusalon of proposed In accordana with Subsection 10(d) s u m s cose vess4i.e l ACRS reports on matters considered P.L 92-463,I have determined that it la 1 during this muting It will also necessary to close pordons of this l continue to discuss a proposed report to meeting noted above to dJacuss matters l Congress on the NRC Safety Research that relate solely to the intamal SECURff1ES AND EXCHANGE I Program, as well as proposed reports on personnel rules and practices of this ""**'^N Risk. Based Regulatory Acceptance Advisory Committee per 5 U.S.C.

Criteria for Site. Specific Application of 552b(c)(2), and to discuss mattars the Request for Public Comment; Upon Safety Goals, and Human Performanos release of which would constitute a Written Request, Copies Aveliable Program Plan. clearly unwarranted invs31on of From: Securities and Eachange 2:JO p.m.-220 p.m.: Strategic personal privacy per 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(6). Commisalon, Office of Filings and Planning (Open)-The Committee will Further informadan rega.tiing topics informet6on Services, Washington, DC continue its discussion ofitems of to be discussed, whether the meeting 20649 Extension:

Rule 15g-3 . . . . . SEC File No. 270-346 ..

.... . OMB Control No. 3235-0392 Rule 15g-4 . --..... SEC File No. 270-347 ... .

. . OMB Control No. 3235-0393 Rule 15g-5 ...~.. . . . . SEC File No. 270-348 .. OMB Control No. 3235-0394 Rule 15g-6 ._.. .. , -

SEC File No. 270-349 ~ ... . .

OMB Control No. 3235-0395 Rule 15g-7(a) . .. .... _ _ _ _ _ _

.... SEC File No. 270-350 . .. OMB Control No. 3235-0396 Rule 17Ac2-1 and Form TA-1. SEC File No. 270-95 . --

. . . OMB Control No. 3235-0064

, Notice is hereby given that pursuant (" Commission")is publishing the Rule Eg-3 requires that brokers and to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 following summaries of collecdons for dealers disclose to customers current (44 U.S C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities public comment. quotation prices or similar market and Exchange Commission information in connection with

---r

. 4340 Federal Register / Vcl. 62. No.19 / Wednesday, January 29, 1997 / Notices Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30 a.m. to Board up to 15 days prior to the Arst the Secretary of the Commission U.S.

  • 4:15 p.rh. Federal workdays. Copies of prehearing conference scheduled in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, written comments received may be proceeding, but such an amended Washington, DC 20555-4001 Attention:

examined at the NRC Public Document petition must satisfy the specifidty Room,the Gelman Building. 2120 L Docketing and Services Branch, or may rogu,irements described above. be delivered to the Cranmission's Public Street, NW., Washington, DC. Not later than 15 days m Sling of requests for hearing and or to the Hist Document Room, the Gelman Building, prehearing conference uled in the 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, by petitions for lesve to intervene is proceeding, a petitioner shall Ele a discussed below. the above date. Where petitions are Aled supplement to the petition to intervene durin6 the last to days of the notice By February 28,1997 the licensee which must includs a list of b period, it is requested that the petitioner .

may Ale a request for a heezing with contentions which are so t to be respec. to issuance of the amendments promptly so inform the Cornmission by litigated in the matter. contention a toll-free telephone call to Watern to the subject facility operating licenses must consist of a specinc statement of and any person whose interest may be Union at 1-(800) 248-5100 (in Missourt b issue oflaw or fact to be raised or 1-(800) 342-6700). The Western Union effected by this proceeding and who wishes to partidpete as e in the controverted. In addition, the petitioner operator should be given Datagram shall provide a brief explanation of the Identl8 cation Number N1023 and the proceeding must Ble a tien request bases of b contention and a concise followin for a hearing and a pedtion for leave to statement of the alleged facts or expert Hannon:g messagename addressed to John N.

intervene. Requests for a hearing and a petitioner's and opinion which support the contention telephone number, date tion was petition for leave to intervene shall be and on which the petitioner latends to kled in accordance with the mailed, plant name, and ublication rely in proving the contention at the date and page number of s Federal Commission's " Rules of Practice for hearing. The petitioner must also '

Domestic Ucensing Proceedings"in to provide references to those specinc Register notico. A copy of the petition CFR Part 2. Intemsted persons should should also be sent to the OfBcs of the souross and documents of which the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear consult a current copy of to CFR 2.714 petitioneris aware and on which the which is available at b Commission's Regulatory Commission, Washington, petitioner intends to rely to estabilah DC 20555-0001, and to Jay Silberg, Esq.,

Public Document Room, the Gelman those facts or Building,2120 L Street, NW., rt opinion. Petitioner Shaw, Pittman, Potts, and Trowbridge, must provide cient informadon to 2300 N Street, NW, Washington, DC Washington. DC, and at the local public show that a genuine dispute exists with 20037, attorney for the licensee.

document room located at the the applicant on a material 19 sue oflaw Nontimely 511ags of petitions for Minneapolis Public Ubrary, Technology or fact. Contentions shall te limited to leave to latervene, amended petitions, and Science Department 300 Nicollet matters within the = ope of the supplementalpetitions and/or uests Mall, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401. lf amendments under consideration. The for hearing wlU not be entertain a request for a hearing or tion for matendon must be one which,if absent a determination by the leave to intervene is Sled the above proven, would entitle the petitioner to date, b Commission or an Atomic f'ammission, the presiding offimr or the relief. A petitioner who falls to file such presiding Atomic Safety and ucensing Safety and ucensing Board, designated a supplement which antisfies these Board that the petition and/or request by the Commiselon or by the Chairman reluirements with respect to at least one should be granted based upon a of the Atomic Safety and ucansing contendon will not be permitted to belancing of the factors speci5ed in to Board Panel, will rule on the request participate as a party.

and/or petition; and the Secretary or the CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)-(v) and 2.714(d).

Rose permitted to intervene bomme For further details with respect to this designated Atomic Safety and ucensing parues to b prama*ag subject to any action, see the applicadon for Board willissue a nodcs of hearing or limitations in the order granting leave to amendments dated November 6,1996, an appropriate order. Intervene, and have the opportunity to As required by to CFR 2.714, a which is available for public inspection participate fully in the conduct of the at the Commission's Public Document petition for leave to intervene shall set bearing, includm' g the opportunity to Room, the Gelman Building,2120 L forth with particularity the interest of present evidence and crosemine the petitioner in the pr~==*ng and Street, NW , Washington, DC, and at the witnesses. local public document room located at how that interest may be affected by the if a hearing is requested, the b Minnespolis Public Ubrary, results of the proceeding. The petiuon Commission will mde a Saal should spec 15cally explain the reasons Technolo6y and Science Deparwnt, determination on the issue of no 300 Nicouet Mall, Minneapolis, why intervention should be permitted signincent hazards consideration. ne with particular reference to the Minnesota 55401.

Anal determination will serve to decide l following factors:(1) The nature of the when b hearing is held. .Deted et Rockville, MD., this 23rd day of l peutioner's right under b Act to be january 1997.

If the final determination is that the made party to the promeding:(2) the amendment requests involve no For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

nature and extent of the petitioner's signl8 cant hazards consideration, the Both A. Weemt, '

l property, financial, or other internet in the proceeding; and (3) the possible effect of any order which may be Commission may issue the amendments $,7d##l,

and make them immediately effective, Nuclear ReactorRegulethn.

p h q notwithstanding the request for a entered in the proceeding on b hearing. Any hearing held would take IFR Mb2ts4 Fded 1-28-0t se am) petitioner's interest. He petition should place after issuance of the amendments. ** * * **** "

also identify the specille aspect (s) of the if the final determination is that the subject matter of the proceeding as to amendment requests involve a which peutioner wishes to intervene. Advisory Committee on Fleector signi!! cant hazards consideration, any Any person who has filed a petition for hearing held would take place before p. Plevloed leave to intervene or who has been b issuance of any amendmenta.

admitted as a party may amend b The 438th meeting of the Advisory A mquest for a hearing or a petition Committee on Reactor Se ards petition without requesting leave of the for lesve to intervene must be Sled with scheduled to be held on Fe 5-8, e

l

_ _ _ _ _ ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____- - O

I Federal Regleter / V[1. 62 No.19 / Wednesday, January29, 1997 / Notices 4341

.. s 1997, in Conference Room T-2B3 Notice o(Coesideration ofIssuance of examined ct the NRC Public Document 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Aame=Jmmts To Facility Operating

{ Maryland,1)as been mcheduled for Room, the Gelman Building. 2120 L Licenses, Proposed No Significant Street, NW., Washington, DC. The filing February 6-8,1997. The meetin Hazards Considerados Determination, begin at 8:20 a.m. on Thursday,g will of requests for a hearing and peutions and OpportualtyJer a Hearing for lesve to internne is discussed February 6,1997,instead of 1:00 p.m. e below.

on Wednesday, February 5,1997. ne He nmmission has made a

& F W 28, W , b b e discusalon of the item on " Des!gn-bases howinposed determination that the may Ble a request for a hearing with Verification" scheduled for Wednesday- no signibamendment requestsr**involve t hazards consideration Ped 2 ismana o% amendment to February 5,1997, has been puspe d to *  !

a future meeting as requested by th* Under the Commission's regulations in i 10 CFR 50.92, this means that o tico ""[ed*Pmen wb intmW may NRC staff. A'.I other items pertaining to this meting remain the sa.ie as of the facility in accordance wit c - ** "8 '"d *b Panicfp* ate as a pan ster on [nvolve a signiacant increase in thereposed [,*" I"8 "'amendmentII* would not (1) i * [**"y in theo f"'

1 gblished in the Federal Es6 ursday, January 23,1997 (62 FR 3539)- probability or musequenas of an acddent previously evaluated; or (2) in Esquests a h ia ng a d a Punher information regarding topics creets the possibility of a new or tion for leave to intervene shall be '

to be discussed, whethw the meeting di5erent klnd of acddent from any in accordance with b has been cancelled or reacheduled. the acx:Ident previously evaluated: or (3) enmmission's " Rules of Procuce for Chairman's ruling on requests for the involve a signi5 cant reduction in a Domouc Ucansbg Promedbgs"in 10 opportunity to present oral statements margin of safety.The basis for this CPR Pan 2. Interested persons should and the time allotted therefor can be Proposed dwermination for each consult a current copy of to CFR 2.714 obtained by conwing Mr. Sam amendrent sequest is shown below. which is available at the commission's Duraiswamy, Chief, Nuclear Rasctors Public Document Room, the Gelman =

The uommission is seeking public Branch (telephone 301/415-7384), manects on this proposed Building,2120 L Street, NW.,

between 7:30 A14. and 4:15 P.M. EST. de'errdsstion. Any comments remived Washington, DC and at the local public othin 30 days aner the date of domment room for the panicular pod lanuary 23,1per. incility involved. If a request for a Amanw I. Bates, yublication of this notim will be considered in rnaking any final or tition for leave to intervene Advisory Cbmminee Manageaient Officer. determination. is Al by t e above date, the

[FR Doc. 97-2165 Filed 1-28-97; 8:45 am) Normally, the enmmission will not rommission or an Atomic Safety and sa m e cose - Issue the amendment until the n=na gnBoard, designated by the expiration of the 30-day nouco period- en==wlon or by b Chairman of the .! '

However, should drcumstances change Atomic Safety and ucensing Board '

Shresidy Notloe during the notice period such that Panel, will rule on the request and/or failure to act in a timely way would petition; and the Secretary or the Applications and Amendments to r*sult, for example, in desting or designated Atomic Safety and Ucensing Faculty Operating Ucenses invoMng shutdown of b facility, the Board willissue a notice of a hearing or No S8gnifloent Hazards Considerations rammissim may issue the licam an appropriate order.

As required by 10 CFR 2.714, a amendment before the expiation of the L Bachrwend ' 30-day notice period, provided that its tion for leave to intervene shall set ,

with panicularity the interest of I Pursuant to Public Law 97-415, the final determination is that the b peutioner in b promeding, and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commisalon amendment involves no signiScant how that interest may be affected by the (b Conuntasion w NRC staH)is hazards consideration.%e final results of b b The peution publishing this regular biweekly notics, determination will consider all public abould e Niin the reasons Public Law 97 415 revised section 189 and State comments reoelved before of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as oction is taken. Should the Commlaston wh intervention abo ld be permitted -

l wit particular referencs to the amended (the Act), to require the take this action,it will publish in the following factors:(1) the nature of the Commission to publish notice of any Federal Register a notice ofissuana pedtioner's right under the Act to be l

l amendments issued, or proposed to be and provide for opportunity for a made a party to b proceeding:(2) the lasued, under a new proyision of section ehearing after issuance. %e Commision natum and extent of the petitioner's 189 of the Act. nis provision grants the that the need to take this action property, Snancial, or other interest in Commission the authority to issue and occur very infrequently. the proceeding; and (3) the possible nske immediately effective any Written comments may be submitted .

by mailto the Chief, Rules Review and effect of any order which may be l amendment to an operating license Directives Branch, Division of Freedom entered in the proceeding on the rpon a determination by the petitioner's interest. The petition should Commission that such amendment ofInformation and Publications also identify the specific aspect (s) of the '

involves no signiScant hazards Servions, OfBa of Administratloa U.S.

subhet matter of the proceeding as to consideration, notwithstanding the Nuclear Regulato7y Commissiod, which petitioner wishes to intervene.

pendency before the enmmist. ion of a Washington, DC 20555 0001, ar d Any person who has filed a petition for request for a hearing from any person.

abould cite the publication dr e and leave to intervene or who has been

. page number of this Federal Aegister . admitted as a party may amend the his biweekly notim includes all notice. Written comments anay also be

. notices of amendments issued, or tition without requesting lesve of the delivered to Room 6D22. Tao White up to 15 days prior to the first proposed to be issued from January 4 Flint North,11545 Rockville Pike. prehearing conference scheduled in the 1997, through }anuary 18,1997. The last Rockville, Maryland from 7:30 a.m. to proceeding, but such an amended hiweekly notics was publiabed on 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. Copies of

%nuary 15,1997 (62 FR 2185). petition must satisfy the specificity written comments remived may be requirements described above.

4 i

a APPENDX II

.. + #"ja ts vy'o

~g UNITED STATES l 8 n NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION  !

,E ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS j Q, # W ASHINGTON. D. C. 20556 1 j

4**"*l January 27, 1997 l I

SCHEDULE AND OUTLINE FOR DISCUSSION 438th ACRS MEETING FEBRUARY 6-8, 1997 l

l

\

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1997, CONFERENCE ROOM 2B3, TWO WHITE FLINT NORTH, l ROCKVILLE,. MARYLAND 35 /

1) 8:30 - 8 :M A.M. Openina Remarks by the ACRS Chairman (Open) 1.1) Opening Statement (RLS/SD) 1.2) Items of current interest (RLS/JTL/SD) 1.3) Priorities for preparation of ACRS reports (RLS/SD) 3s S:5r
2) 8:45 - 9TtTO A . M . Subcommittee Reoort (Open) (IC/PAB) ,

Report by the Chairman of the Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena Subcommittee regarding matters discussed during the December 18-19, ,

1996 Subcommittee meeting, and comments on  !

the future scope and direction of the ,

Subcommittee's review of the Westinghouse AP600 Test and Analysis Program.

7:55 Jo '

3) $m. >0 - 9 : 3:0 A . M . Subcommittee Reoort (Open) (DWM/MTM)

Report by the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Instrumentation and Control Systems and Computers regarding the ACRS review of the ,

National. Academy of Sciences / National '

Research Council Phase 2 study report on digital instrumentation and control systems.

9: 30 9. H  %

q ,. go . Rec,acos,are ser rran s

4) h&O - le s A.M. Future ACRS Activities (Open) (RLS/SD)

J ot 'r so:3o Discussion of the recommendations of the i Planning and Procedures Subcommittee regarding items proposed for consideration by the full Committee during future meetings 10:00 -

10:*5 0 H- R< port sy T. ss a rku ou n e c u a r c o n nass,a u q ; 3o oo " ' rt' os gea**ws Anur waven a sr 14tif - 10:30 A.M. BREAK s

( Tenosce.on Pe e r,oos o r rus a cer,w. )

.r ..

11 : 47 #

5) 10:30 - b>e90 Noon Shutdown Operations Risk (Open)

(DAP/JJB/NFD) 5.1) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman '

5.2) Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding issues associated with  :

shutdown operations risk.

Representatives of the nuclear industry will ,

s participate, as appropriate. .

it:y . i 2 : s s P. H- 6t es 9rws  !

12: Me - lihk P.M. LUNCH

, : s:r -  ; ; ys P. H . Forva r Ac r ve ra ts (cwn)

6) bhb6 - bN[5P.M. Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and m us, ser #4Gr 1. Recommendations (Open) (RLS, et.al./ ,

- SD, et.al.)

Discussion of the responses from t,he NRC Executive Director for Operations to comments and recommendations included in recent ACRS reports ,

I l

7) 1: b - 5:30 P.M. Precaration of ACRS Reports (Open)

(3:36-3:46 P.M. BREAK) Discussion of proposed ACRS reports on:

  • d' 7.1) Human Performance Program Plan (GA/NFD) 7.2) Annual ACRS Report to Congress on the NRC Safety Research Program (RLS/DAP/MME) 7.3) Shutdown Operations Risk (DAP/JJB/NFD) 7.4) Risk-Based Regulatory Acceptance Criteria for site-specific Applica- i tion of Safety Goals (TSK/RRS/NFD)

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 7. 1997, CONFERENCE ROON 2B3, TWO WHITE FLINT NORTH, ROCKVILLL_._ MARYLAND

8) 8:30 - 8:35 A.M. I cenina O Remarks by the ACRS Chairman (Open)

,(RLS/SD) l

-=. ,

.~ - . . . . - - . . .- . -.- . - - - - . _ . . - - . - . _ - _ .

c .

l 3  !

/  ?

.9) 8:35 - 10:30 A.M. Risk-Informed. Performance-B sed Reculation i and Related Matters (Open) (CA/MTM) 9.1) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman '

9.2) Briefing by and discussions with representatives'of the NRC staff regarding the proposed Standard

Review Plan Sections and Regulatory -

Guides for risk-anformed, perfor-mance-based regulation.

t Representatives of the nuclear industry will participate, as appropriate.

m  :

10:30-- 10:45 A.M. BREAK 0: 39 i

20) 10
45 - 12 T3 P.M. AEOD Scent Fuel Pool Study (Open) (TSK/AS) >

10.1) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman 10.2) Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the Office for Analysis and Evaluation of

. Operational Data (AEOD) regarding I the results of the study performed  !

by AEOD on the adequacy of the spent j fuel pool designs. I l

Representatives of the nuclear industry will  ;

participate, as appropriate. i s 1 2:oo j 12:15 - 3 m P.M. LUNCH

]

2. oo L:30 l
11) 1:26 - %TCe P.M. Precaration of ACRS Reoorts (Open) l (3:30-3:45 P.M. BREAK) Discussion of proposed ACRS reports on-11.1) Annual ACRS Report to Congress on  ?

the NRC Safety Research Program ,

(RLS/DAP/MME) 11.2) Human Performance Program Plan (GA/NFD) ,

11.3) Risk-Based Regulatory Acceptance i criteria for Site-specific Application of Safety Goals (TSK/RRS/NFD) 11.4) Shutdown Operations Risk (DAP/JJB/NFD) l I

i.,

I l

. ~ . _ .

4 SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 1997. CONFERENCE ROOM 2B3, TWO WHITE FLINT NORTH, i ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND

12) 8:$8 - 9: hA.M. Reoort of the Plannino and Procedures Subcommittee (Open/ Closed) (RLS/JTL) ,

Report of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee on matters related to the conduct of ACRS business, and organizational and personnel matters relating.to the ACRS

[ Note: A portion of this session may be closed to discuss organizational and personnel matters that relate solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of this Advisory Committee, and matters the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy..]

$7 18 :.2 0

13) 9:M - 19500 Noon Preparation of ACRS Reports (Open)

(10:30 - 10:45 A.M. BREAK) Discussion of proposed ACRS r7 ports identified under Item 11.

gi:no \\:45 R.H.

14) 12T00 - STOV P.M. Stratecic Plannina (Open) (RLS/JTL) '

Discussion of items of significant importance to NRC, including rebaselining of the Committee activities for FY 1997.

NOTE:

  • Presentation time should not exceed 50 percent of the total time allocated for a specific item. The remaining 50 percent of the time is reserved for discussion.

o Number of copies of the presentation materials to be provided to the ACRS - 35.

4

1 APPENDIX'III: MEETING ATTENDEES 43BTH ACRS MEETING-FEBRUARY 6-8, 1997

,  ?

NRC STAFF l THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1997 S. Arndt AEOD ,

J. Calvert RES M. Chiramal- NRR F. Coffman RES-

T., Collins NRR K.-Desai NRR R.'Eckenrode NRR J. Gallagner NRR W. Hodges RES G. Hubbard NRR S. Jones NRR

'R. Latta NRR A.. Levin NRR W. Lyon NRR J. Mitchell OEDO J. Monninger NRR J. Persensky RES M. Pohida NRR J. Stewart NRR D.~ Taylor NRR H, Vandermolen RES M. Virgilio NRR NRR J. Wermiel FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 1997 P. Ambros AEOD T. Collins NRR L. Constable OCM D. Fischer NRR ,

J.' Flack NRR C. Gratton NRR W. Hodges RES L. Higgins OIG T. Hsia OCM

~

G. Hubbard NRR J. Ibark AEOD B.-Jones .AEOD R.' Jones SPSB '

S. Jones NRR J.-Kaffman AEOD J Kramer RES

.T. King RES i

~G. Lanik. AEOD 3

I

4 .

- Appendix III 2 438th ACRS Meeting S. Lee NRR J. Mitchell OEDO D. Morrison RES J. Murphy RES H. Ornstlin AEOD G. Parry- NRR E. Roderick. RES J. Rosenthal AEOD E. Rossi AEOD j M. Rubin NRR J. Shackelford RIV ,

J. Smith RES l

3

. - ~ . .. . - . - --. .. . . - _ . . . . . . . -- - -

l L. ,, . l

)

I

~

  • hppEndix III 3

438th ACRS Meeting l

t' ATTENDEES FROM OTHER AGENCIES AND GENERAL PUBLIC THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1997 B. Borsuer FTR B. Bradley NEI D. Chung NUS  !

L. Connor STS

)B. McIntire Westinghouse '

1.. J. Meyer SCIENTECH 1997

~

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 7, B. Bradley NEI l P. Negres. GE T. Pietrangelo NEI Z. Rosztoczy Zeetech B. Youngblood SCIENTECH l T. Zama TEPCO ,

i' i

5 i

t f

. l l

J i

T i

?

I t

e i o

r ~_ . __ _ _ _ . ___ ._ _ _ . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ .

,,.i, ,

- APPENDIX IV: FUTURE AGENDA ,

The Committee-agreed to consider the following during the 439th [

ACRS Meeting, March 6-8, 1997:

THURSDAY, MARCH 6, 1997

1) 8:45 - 10:30 A.M.: Capability of RELAPS/ MOD 3 Code to Assess i the AP600 Desian (Open/ Closed) Briefing by and discussions '

with representatives of the NRC staff regarding the capability of the RELAP5/ MOD 3 code to assess the adequacy of the AP600 .

passive plant design i

2) 10:45 - 12:15 P.M.: AP600 Test Data from ROS,L.3ng___Qrecon State University (OSU) Aoex Test Facilities (Open/ Closed)

Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC i staff and Westinghouse Electric Corporation regarding the issues associated with the release of test data from ROSA and OSU-APEX test facilities to the public.

3) 1:15 - 2:45 P.M.- Arthur Andersen Study on the Adecuacy of the NRC Process for Evaluatina Performance of Ooeratina Plants Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC ,

staff regarding the results of the Arthur Andersen study on i the adequacy of the NRC process for evaluating the performance '

of operating plants.

5) 3 :00 - 4 : 30 P.M. - Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Reculation and Related Matters (Open) Briefing by and discussions with  ;

representatives of the NRC staff regarding the proposed l Standard Review Plan (SRP) Sections, Regulatory Guides, and other matters associated with the risk-informed, performance-based regulation.

FRIDAY, MARCH 7, 1997

4) 8:35 - 9:45 A.M.* Indeoendent Safety Assessment of the Main Yankee Atomic Power Station (Open) Briefing by and

. discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding the results of independent safety assessment of the Main Yankee Atomic Power Station. I i

5) 9:45 -

12:30 P.M.- National Academy of Sciences / National l Research Council (NAS/NRC) Phase 2 Study ReDort (Open)

Briefing by and discussions with the Chairman of the NAS/NRC Committee regarding the results of the NAS/NRC Phase 2 Study on the digital instrumentation and control systems.

! Other Members of the NAS/NRC Committee and representatives of the NRC Staff and nuclear industry will participate, as appropriate.

i.

wo a hkpdnd'ix IV 2 438th ACRS Meeting

6) 1:30 - 2:30 P.M.- Denartment of Enercy Proposal for Tritium Production Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the Department of Energy (DOE) regarding DOE's tritium production program.

l i

l t $< . * .

- APPENDIX V LIST OF DOCUMENTS PROVIDED TO THE COMMITTEE

[ Note: Some documents listed below may have been provided or prepared for Committee use only. These documents must be reviewed prior to release to the public.)

MEETING HANDOUTS AGENDA DOCUMENTS ITEM NO.

1 Ooenino Pf4 marks by the ACRS Chairman

1. It'ams of Interest, dated February 6-8, 1997
4. Future ACRS Activities
2. Future ACRS Activities - 439th ACRS Meeting, March 6-8, 1997 (Handout #4.1) j l
5. Shutdown Ooerations Risk  ;

l

3. Risk Analysis of Accidents Initiated During Low Power and i Shutdoan Conditions, dated February 6,1997, presented by l Mark Cunningham, RES, and Martin Virgilio, NRR

[Viewgraphs]

4. Memorandum dated January 30, 1997, from Dr. D.A. Powers to ACRS Members: Shutdown Regulation versus Risk Assessment (Handout]

I

6. Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recommendations
5. Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recommendations (Handout #6.1) 1
9. Risk-Informed. Performance-Based Reculation and Related '

Matters i

6. Regulatory Guides and Standard Review Plans in Support of l Risk-Informed Regulation, dated February 7, 1997, i Presented by Gary Holahan, NRR, Thomas King, RES, Robert Jones, NRR, and Mark Cunningham, RES [Viewgraphs)
7. Observations on Risk-Informed Regulatory Activities, dated February 7, 1997, presented by Tony Pietrangelo, Nuclear Energy Institute (Viewgraphs]
10. AEOD Soent Fuel Pool Study l

i a

./ 4 1

- l Ap. . spendix V 2 l 438th ACRS Meeting l i

8. Assessment of Spent Fuel Cooling, dated February 7,1997, presented by Jose G. Ibarra, AEOD [Viewgraphs)  !
12. Report of the Plannino and Procedures Subcommittee
9. Final Draft Minutes of Planning and Procedures Subcommittee Meeting - February 5, 1997 [ Handout #12.1) i 1

h

c4 * .

" Yppend'ix V 3 438th ACRS Meeting MEETING NOTEBOOK CONTENTS TAB DOCUMENTS

2. Subcommittee Report - Westinchouse AP600 Test and Analysis Procram
1. Table of Contents
2. Project Status Report, dated February 6, 1997 [ Internal Committee Use Only: Westinchouse Proprietarv Material Attachedl
3. Excerpt from the Minutes of the ACRS Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena Subcommittee Meeting, December 18-19, 1996
5. Shutdown Ooerations Risk
4. Table of Contents
5. Proposed Agenda
6. Status Report, dated February 6, 1997
7. Letter dated June 4, 1996, from T.S. Kress, Chairman, ACRS, to James M. Taylor, Executive Director for Operations (EDO): Proposed Rule on Shutdown Operations ,
8. Memorandum dated January 27, 1997, from Mr. Ashok Thadani, NRR, to Mr. Hugh Thompson, Acting EDO: Status of j the Development of 10 CFR 50.67, " Shutdown and Fuel Storage Pool Operation at Nuclear power Plants"
9. Risk-Informed, Performance-Based Reculation and Related Matt %IE l
9. Table of Contents
10. Proposed Schedule 1
11. Project Status Report, dated February 7, 1997 i
12. Staff Requirements Memorandum, dated January 22, 1997, l SECY-96-218: " Quarterly Status Update for the l Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) Implementation Plan, i Including a Discussion of Four Emerging Policy Issues Associated with Risk-Informed, Performance-Based l Regulation." 1
13. Memorandum dated January 21, 1997, from A. Thadani, NRR, l

to John Larkins, ACRS: " Transmittal of Revised General l Regulatory guide (DG-1061) and Standard Review Plan l (Chapter 19) for Risk-Informed Regulation." l

14. Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1061, dated January 16, 1997, j "An Approach for Using Probabilistic Risk Assessment in '

Risk-Informed Decisions on Plant-Specific Changes to the Current Licensing Basis."

Draf t SRP Chapter 19, Revision J, dated January 19, 1997,

15.  !

"Use of Probabilistic Risk Assessment in Plant-Specific,  !

Risk-Informed Decisionmaking: Guneral Guidance." i l

l 1

.. , ~ _ . . _ . . _. . . . . _ - . . - . . . . _ . . . . _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ . . . _ . . . _ . _ . _ __ . . _ . _ . .

cd 'e e, 1

.4, .m.* i Appendix V 4 438th ACRS Meetirag .!

10. AEOD Scent Fuel Pool Study i
16. -Table of Contents
17. Proposed Schedule )
18. . Status Report,-' dated February 7, 1997 .
19. Memorandum dated October 23, 1996, from Charles E. Rossi, Director, Safety Programs Division, Office for Analysis i and Evaluation of Operational Data, to John Larkins, l ACRS: Assessment of Spent Fuel Pool Cooling.  ;

2 0. - Memorandum dated December 13,.1996, from John C. Hoyle, Secretary, NRC, to James M. Taylor, EDO: Staff.  !

Requirements--Briefing on Spent Fuel Pool Cooling.

.]

l i

j i r

4' l

4 l

i l

I l

1 i

e d

T t

, - - -^ -~ - --

. . . _ - . - + , . - - - -

r. ,. , , , , . .- - ---, ,
Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20148B599&oldid=3362706"