Text

Summary of ACRS 330th Meeting on 871008-10 in Washington,Dc
	ML20148G867
Person / Time
Issue date:	01/22/1988
From:	; Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
To:	; Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
References
	ACRS-2530, NUDOCS 8801270052
	Download: ML20148G867 (58)
	v • d • e

.

ffS o7630 Y*

"r~

g I

g y...

s q

rj gg):

}

h TABLE OF CONTENTS OCTOBER 8-10, 1987 fD/j ggf MINUTES OF THE 330TH ACRS MEETING WASHINGTON, D.C.

I.

C h a i ma n ' s R e p o r t ( 0 pe n )....................................

1 II. NRCBackfitRule(0 pen)............................................

2 III. Integrated Safety Assessment Program (0 pen)........................

3 IV. South Texas Nuclear S;ation, Units 1 and 2 (0 pen)..................

4

~

V.

Zion Station Full Fiel d Exerci se (0 pen)............................

5 VI.

Ieplications of Chernobyl (0 pen)...................................

6 VII. Sei smi c Qual i fi cation of Equipment (0 pen)..........................

7 VIII.NuclearPowerPlantOperatingExperience(0 pen)...................

10 IX.

Emergency Planning (0 pen)..........................................

15 X.

ExecutiveSessions(0 pen / Closed)...................................

15 A. Subcomi ttee Reports (0 pen / Closed).................................

15 1.

Auxiliary Feedwater System Reliability (0 pen).................

15 2.

AuxiliarySystems(0 pen)......................................

16 3.

NewMembers(0 pen)............................................

21 1

4 Pl anni ng Subcomi ttee (0 pen ).................................. 21 5,

Ad Hoc Planning Comittee on Nuclear Waste Matters (Closed)...

22 6.

Regul atory Policies and Practices (0 pen)...................... 23 7.

Safety Philosophy, Technology and Criteria (0 pen)............

24 8.

SeismicDesignMargins(0 pen).................................

25 9.

AdvancedLWRDesigns(0 pen)...................................

27

10. ThermalHydraulicPhenomena(0 pen)............................

27

11. Decay Heat Removal (0 pen).....................................

28 8801270052 SSN I)ESIONATZD ORIGIIAL PDR ACRS PDR 2530 (T - #

Certified M I

e f

i s

t 330TH ACRS MEETIN'G

. 11 l

B. Reports, Letters and Memoranda (0 pen)...............................

28 1.

ACRS Comments on the Proposed Resolution of Generic Issue 124, "Auxilir.ry Feedwater System Reliability".......................

28 2.

ACRS Comments on Nuclear Power Plant Air Cooling Systems.......

28 3.

ACRS Action on Proposed Final Regulatory Guide (Task EE 404-4), "Environmental Qualification of Connection Assemblies

_1 for Nuclear Power Plants"......................................

28 C. Other Commi ttee Concl usions (0 pen)..................................

28 1.

H. R. 3285, Nuclear Agency Reorgani zation Act...................

28 i

2.

Vari ability of Natural Background Radiation....................

29 3.

Response to Mr. Robert R. Loux, State of Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects...............................................

29 4.

Report to Congress on NRC Safety Research Program.............. 29 D. Futu re Acti vi ti es (0 pe n)...........................................

29

\\

1.

Cal l away Nucl ear Pla nt Powe r I ncrease..........................

29 2.

Meeting Dates for Calendar Year 1988...........................

29 3.

Future Agenda..................................................

30 4.

Future Subcommittee Activities.................................

30 e

l i

e 1

o.= n-g q

, pp q p-m e weis p-

+ + ~em=+_wg.==,-o.. mea- = > + +asy,, %, - e.,

.w-e

-4. epm

=r===+-ww

.a

+---ene.

g -- ee me

-e-,,,+g,

t l

%^

i ii.

APPENDICES 330TH ACRS MEETING OCTOBER 8-10, 1987 WASHINGTON, D.C.

I.

Attendees II. Meeting Dates for Calendar Year 1988 III. Future Agenda IV. ' Subcomittee Activities V.

Subject:

and discussion of recent operating

).

n

,ge,a d ACRS Comments on the NRC Staff events at nuclear power plants.

this meting may belimited to selected Proposal for the Resolution of USI A.44, portions of this session may be closed hrtions of the meeting as determined "Station Blackout." and related as appropriate to discuss Proprietary man. Infonnadon ngadng activities of NUMARC regarding this Information applicable to the facility the time to be set aside for this purpose subject.

being discussed or security pkns

[,ay 3

10.M o.m.-11DO o.m.: Integrated applicable to the safeguarding ofrelated lI t the Ex tv re o

'L Safety Assessment Pmgram (open)-

nuclear facilities and materials.

I

"* th* ""'ing' in vi'"

of th'I'* 'YO"lity that the schedule for P

Discuss proposed NRC Staff's plan for 1:30-3:00p.m.:Probabilistic Risk e posubi implementation ofISAP taking into Assessment (Open)-Briefing and ACRS meetings may be adjusted by the discussion with tepresentatives of the Chaiman as mecasaWe@ ate de account ACRS's comments in its report NRC Staff regarding ACRS comments on c nduct

.of July 15.1987.

g. w aana 11:00 a.m.-11:30 a.m.: Future ACRS the use of NUREG-1150, Reactor Risk plaming to attend should deck with the Activities (Open)-Discuss saticipated Reference Document.

ACRS Executive Directorifsuch subcommutee activities and items 3:15 p.m415 p.m.:Advancedf.ight..

ruchedu WolerReactorDesign (Open -Review

.inema% would resuh in major

=

proposed for consideration by the full lence.

of EpRI proposed requiremen}ts for the J Ihave determmedinaccordance with i

Committee.

f 11:30 a.m.-12:30p m.: and 1:30p.m.-

design of advanced LWRs.

subs ection 10(d) Pub. L 92-463 tha t it 4a 5:15 p.m.-6:30 2:15p.m.: Management Allocation of Plannitg (Open)p.m.: Emergency necessary to close srtioas of this -

Resources (Closed)-Discuss NRC

-Discuss proposed meeting as noted a ve to discuss internal allocation of tesources, ACRS comments regarding use of information related to the internal.

b including personnel, to provide technical instrumentation etc to monitorand Perenel rules and practices of the -

1 advice regarding nuclear waste predict the anticipated course of twclear agency is U.S.C. 552b(c)(2))aaieguards 4

management and disposal.

power plant accidents.

information applicable to se nuclear b:

This session will be closed to discuss Saturday',W C987

. facilities and materials being considered.

inforrnation the relesse of which would

[5 U.S.C. ss2b(c)(3)l, Proprietary represent an enwarranted invaalon of s:30 a.m.-11.00 a.m.: A CAS Report:10 information applicable to the feches NRC(Open/ Closed)-Discusa proposed - being discussed 15 U.S.C.552b(c)(4.

i personal privacy and information that ACRS reports to NRC regardingitems.

i9 involves the internal personnel rules and practices of NRC. considered during this meeting and the - and informaEon the edaana of wtdch - !-C 2:30p.m.-4:00p.m.:Nonagement NRC Safety Research Program. would represent a clearly unwarranted [ ' . A//ocolion ofRescaroes (Closed)- Portions of thi session will beclosed.. invasion ef personal privacy [5 U.S.C. - 3 Meeting with NRC Comsnissioners Io as necessary to discuse inforrnation. '55tb(cyt11 FurtherisJormanoneegardingtopics - related to the internaf personnel. ' to be discossed, whotierde meeting 3 i -m*

3hid80 . (. t Fcderal Register f Vol. 52 No.185 / Thursday, Septernber 24, 1987 / hotices has been cancelled or rescheduled. the 2282 and to CFR 2.205,it is Hereby to OMB for review and approval, and to' Chairman's ruling on request for the ' Ordered that: publish a noticela the Federal Register ; opportally to present oral statements The Ucensee pay a civil penalty in the-notifying the public that the Agency has - and the time allotted can be obtained by - amount of Twenty.Five nousand made such a submission.ne proposed l a prepaid telephone call to the ACRS Dollars ($25,000) within 30 days of the Executive Director. Mr. Raymond F. date of this Order, by check, draft, or form under review is summarized belo.w. Fraley (telephone 202/634-3265).' money order, payable to the Treasurer oats: Comments must be received between 8:15 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. of the United States and mailed to the within 14 calendar days of this noticellf you anticipate commenting on the form Date September 21.1987. - Director. Office of Enforcement U.S. . but find that time to prepare will prevent W C. H@ Nuclear Regulatory Commission. A'ITNb Advisory Committec Management Officer. Document Control Desk, Washington. you from submitting comments (FR Doc. 87-220eo Flied 9-23-87: 8.45 am)DC 20555. l promptly, you should advise the OMB mmo coot tsees ne Ucensee may request a hearing Reviewer and the Agency Submitting, Off cet of within 30 days of the date of this Order. possible.. your intent as early as A request for a hearing shall be clearly (Docket No. 54-409; Ucense No. DPft-45 AooRess: Copies of the subject form and EA 87-021-Enfo rnent eatin 'and hall be - the request for review submitted to addressed to the Director. Office of. OMB may be obtained from the Agency Order imposing Civil Monetary Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regula tory Submitti Officer. Comments on the Penalty; Dairyland Power Cooperative Commission, ATTN: Document Control form sho d be submitted to the Agency - (Lacrosse Bolling Water Reactor) Desk, Washington, DC 20555 with a. Submitting Officer and the OMB copy to the Re8 onal Administrator, Reviewer' f I. Region 111. FoR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dairyland Power Cooperative if a hearing is requested, the OP/CAgency Submitting Officer (Ucensee)is the holder of Operating f,o s ,t g the e and p a f the I, Jacqueline Brent Office of I te el hga b" d by hearing. lf the Ucensee fails to request a Personnel and Administration. Overseas on (Commission or NRC) on Jul 3.1967' hearing within 30 days of the date of this Private Investment Corporation. Suite The Ucense authorizes the L censee to Order, the provisions of this Order shall 461,1615 M Street NW., Washington, DC operate the Lacrosse Boiling Water be effective without further proceedings.; 20527; Telephone (202) 457-7151. Reactor in accordance with the if payment has not been made by that conditions specified therein* time, the matter may be referred to the gyg g,yj,,,7 U... Attorney General for collection. Francine Picoult. Office ofInformation In the event the Ucensee requests a and Regulatory Affairs, Office of A routine physical security inspection - hearing as provided above, the issues to Management and Budget. New of the Ucensee's activities was be considered at such hearing shall be: Executive Office Building, Washington.. conducted during the period November -(a) Wiiether the Ucensee was in DC 20503; Telephone (202) 395-7340, 17-24,1986.De results of the inspection violation of the Commission's Indicated that the Ucensee had not requirements as set forth in the Notice Summary ofform UnderRev/eW - conducted its activities in full of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Type o/ Request: Extension ~ compliance with NRC requirements. A Civil Penalty referenced in Section 11 Tit /e: Investment Missions Application written Notice of Violation and above,and Form Proposed imposition of Civil Penalty (b) Whether, on the basis of sucli was served upon the Ucensee by letter. violations, this Order should be Form Numberr OPIC-78 dated February 24.1987. The Notice sustained. Fmquency of Use Other-once per states the nature of the violations the investor per project provisions of the NRC's requirements For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Type ofRespondent Business or other that the Ucensee had violated, and the lames M. Taylor, institutions (except farms) amount of the civil penalty proposed for ' Deputy E.x ecutive Directorfor Regional Standard industrial Classification operations. Codes All Description of Affected o a$on an o th otice oposed orIpN,$,$$ hd b " 7.nalty by letter (FR Doc. 87-22o82 Fiied 9-23-87:8:45 afn}' NumberofResponses:120 per yeat. Ul. su.Lmocootrse m s Reporting Houtst.5 hour per application After' consideration of the Ucensee's FederalCost:$3.600.00 response and the statements of fact. OVERSEAS PRIVATE INVESTMENT Authorityforinformation Collection: explanation, and argument for CORPORATION Section 234(d) of the Foreign-Assistance Act of1961, as amended. E e utiv tor for Reg DM M D M8 #d Operations, has determined as set forth ~ ActNCv: Overseas Private Investment In the Appendix to this Order that the Corporation. The Investment Missions Application Form is completed by U.S. companies violations occurred as stated.- ACT,0*c Request for comments. - interested in participating in an OPIC gy*.- sponsored investmen't mission. The form 'Irfview of the foregoing and pursuant sOMMARW Under the provisions of the provides the necessary information for Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.. Internal evaluation of a U.S. firm's to section 234 of the Atomic Energy Act Chapter 35), agencies are required to capability and resources'to undertake cf 1954, as ameeded (Act),42 U.S.C;

submit information collection requests an overseas project.

e- - - - = m. -w., w. ,e

kRKtGy UNITED STATES o l'

4. 7/[g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g

,-g",a ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS % vQ [ o, WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 f Revised: October 7, 1987 SCHEDULE AND OUTLINE FOR DISCUSSION 330TH ACRS MEETING OCTOBER 8-10, 1987 WASHINGTON, D.C. Thursday, October 8, 1987, Room 1046, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washinaton, D.C. 1) 8:30 - 8:45 A.M. Chairman's Report (0 pen) 1.1) Opening remarks (WK) 1.2) Items of current interest (WK/RFF) W 2) 8:45 - 9: E A.M. Revised Backfit Rule (10 CFR 50.109) (0 pen) TAB 2 --------- 2.1) Comments by Dr. D. Okrent regarding pro-posed NRC revision of the CFR rule on Backfitting (10 CFR Pirt 50.109) (D0/MDH) 2.2) Briefing by representatives of NRC Staff 9 45 10:00 A.M. BREAK 10[::00-11:00A.M. ,, c - 3) Intearated Safety Assessment Proaram (0 pen) 3.1) Coments by Mr. D. A. Ward regarding TAB 3 --------- NRC Staff proposed implementation of ISAP (DAW /FDH) 3.2) Briefing by representatives of NRC Staff e-1y 4) 11:00 - 11:35,A.M. FutureActivities(0 pen) TAB ----------- 4.1) 11:00-11:05: Discuss anticipated ACRS subcommitteeactivities(MWL/RFF) TAB ----------- 4.2) 11:05-11:35 A.M.: Discuss proposed topics for consideration by the full Con.nittee (WK/RFF) 11:35-12:k,P.M. 5) SouthTexasNuclearStation, Unit 1(0 pen) 5.1) Coninents by ACR5 Subcommittee Chairman regarding resolution of various TAB 5 ---------- outstanding issues prior to full power operation (JCM/MME) 5.2) Report by representatives of the NRC Staff 12:30 - 1:30 P.M. LUNCH I

%*w*-

. w9= -ww w._ _ _e- ,..e+%. ,.,.,,,y,,,,,,,_

l 330th ACRS Meeting Agenda 2-6) 1: '2:15 P.M. Executive Session (Closed) 6.1) Discuss ACRS recommendations regarding advice to the NRC on Nuclear Waste matters (DWM/ CPS /SJSP) (Note: This session will be closed to discuss internal personnel rules and practices of the agency and infomation of a personal nature the release of which would represent a clearl unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.)y / Jn 7) 2:15 - 3:li P.M. Zion Station Full Field Exercise (0 pen) TA_B 7 -------- 7.1) Briefing by NRC Staff (DWM/EGI) ?. 4 3:15,- 3 :'30. P. M. BREAK 8) 3:3ke-- 4:00 P.M. ImplicatiorsofChernobyl(0 pen) 8.1) Discuss proposed staff resolution of TAB 8 -------- ACRS recommendations regarding nuclear transients (NUREG-1251) (DAW /PAB) N N 9) 4:00 - 4:45 P.M. Planning Subcommittee Meeting Agenda f (0 pen) 9.1) Discuss proposed agenda for the Planning Subcomittee meetin 22-24, 1987 (WK/TGM)g, October ~ 9.2) Discuss scheduling of ACRS reviews (DAW /MWL) y 10) 4:45 - 6:00 P.M. ACRS Subcommittee Activities (0 pen / Closed) TAB ----------- 10.1) 4:45-5:00: Auxiliary Feedwater System / Reliability (UGI-124)(DAW /PAB) L = - M. TAB ----------- 10.2) 5:00-5:30: Auxiliary Systems - Report ~ N / of subcomittee meeting on Oc,t.1,1987 (CYM/SD) 10.3) 5:30-6:00: Appointment of New ACRS Members (p) ing Comittee for new Report.c7 Nominat ACRS~, members (tentative) (HWL/NSL) f(Note: This portion of the meeting will / be closed to discuss infomation the release of which would represent a / I clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.) G Q. \\T e 4 w%, __ _ way wpme -ge w em*,6**_ - * - * '"*"D*"*' I

I 330th ACRS Meeting Agenda

Friday, October 9, 1987, Room 1046, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washinoton, D.C.

11) 8:

- 10:30 A.M. SeismicQualification(0 pen) 11.1) Coments by ACRS Subete chairman re-TAB 11 -------- garding seismic qualification of equip-ment in nuclear power plants (CJW/RKM) 11.?) Briefing by NRC Staff and SQUG regarding. 10:30 - 10:45 A.M. BREAK

12) 10:45 - 12:30 P.M.

Operating Events and Incidents (0 pen) 12.1) Comments by ACR5 Subcomittee Chainnan (JCE/HA) 12.2) Briefing and discussion of recent events and incidents at nuclear facilities 12:30 - 1:30 ).M. LUNCH 2 n 13) 1:30 - W CQ P.M. Emercency Planning (0 pen) 13.1). Discuss oropesed ACRS letter regarding TAB 13 -------- instrumentation, etc., to monitor and predict the course of an accident (00/EGI) '.r . is 4t00~4:-15 P.M. BREAK 14) 3: 5 - 3:45 P.M. Advanced LWR Design (0 pen) 14.1) Status report by ACRS Subcomittee .[ Chairman regarding EPRI Requirements for g Advanced LWP Designs (Chapter 1) + 1 (CJW/HA) I 35) 3: 45 - 5:30 P.M. Subcormittee Reports (0 pen) 15.1) 3:45-4: 15: NRC Policies / Practices - 'c3 Oct. 7,1987 subcomittee meeting re-M garding the role played by the Comis-sion in the assurance of nuclear safety (HWL/GRQ) g^s15.2) 4:15-5:00: Safety Philosophy, Tech-nology & Criteria - Oct. 7, 1987 Sub-comittee meeting regarding NRC Safety Goal Implementation Plan (00/M0H) TAB --------~-- 15.3) 5:00-5:30: Seismic Design Margins ~ (CPS /RP5) 20) 5:30 - 6:00 P.M. ACRS Activities (0 pen) SEE HANDOUT---- 20.1) Discuss proposed ACRS position regarding H.R. 3285, Nuclear Agency Reorganization Act of 1987 l

w 330th ACRS Mee.ing Agenda o 4-Saturday, October 10, 1987, Room 1046, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C_.,

16) 8:30 - 11:00 A.M.

PreparationofACRSReportstoNRC(0 pen) 16.1) Advice to the Commission on Waste Management (DWM/SJSP) 16.2) Auxiliary Feedwater System Reliability (DAW /PAB) ~ 6.3 Emerg cy Planningi D0/EGI) N ~ 1. Integra Safety As ssmentP% ram tentative DAW /MDH) s 16.5) mic Qual ication of ipment ' s (ten ive) (CJDR)(M) 16.'5}.Implica ns of Chernobyl (ten tivel I (DAW /PAB L___

17) 11:00 - 12:00 Noon Subcommittee Reports (0 pen)

T/.B ----------- 17.1) 11:00-11:45: Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena Activities (DAW /PAB) Water Hammer Stea.mGeneratorOverfill(GI-135) Resolution Effort New LOCA Scenario TAB ----------- 17.2) 11:45-12:00: Decay Heat Removal System Subcommittee Activities - Status of GI-23: Reactor Coolant Pump Seal Failure (DAW /PAB) 12:00 - 1:00 P.M. LUNCH 18) 1:00 - 1:15 P.M. Subcannittee Activities (0 pen) TAB ----------- 18.1) Regulatory Guide EE 404-4, Environmental Qualification of Connection Assemblies for Nuclear Power Plants (CYM/RKM) 19) 1:15 - 2:45 P.M. Miscellaneous (0 pen / Closed) 19.1) Complete discussion of items considered during this meeting (Note: Portions of this session will be closed - as appropriate for the reasons noted above.) 19.2) Discuss proposed ACRS comments regarding J. C. Mark paper on Variability of Natural Background Radiation (DAW /EGI) G (7 4 s-w,

7. -

s e-n - ~, w w.e e r ~.~~~~ ~.. ---we -~*- -e -~~+m-e r,---.,7.- _---<_-m--.or_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _

CER11 FIB MINUTES OF THE 330TH ACRS MEETING OCTOBER 8-10, 1987 WASHINGTON, D.C. The 330th meeting of the Advisory Comittee on Reactor Safeguards, held at 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., was convened by Chaiman W. Kerr at 8:30 a.m., Thursday, October 8,1987. [ Note: Foralistofattendees,seeAppendixI.] The Chairman said that the agenda for the meeting had been published. ~ He identified the items to be discussed on Thursday. He stated that the meeting was being held in conformance with the Federal Advisory Comit-tee Act and the Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Laws 92-463 and 94-409, respectively. He also noted that a transcript of some of the public portions of the meeting was being taken, and would be available in the NRC Public Document Room at 1717 11 Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. [ Note: Copies of the transcript taken at this meeting are also avail-able for purchase from the Heritage Reporting Corporation, 1220 L Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005.] I. Chairman's Report (0 pen) [ Note: R. F. Fraley was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] The Chairman announced that the NRC Staff would brief the Comittee during the Friday session on Operating Events and Incidents on the effects of the recent California earthquake centered near Whittier. Dr. Kerr said that there were several Congressional bills that the ACR'S would be interested in. H.R. 3285, "Nuclear Energy Reorganization Act," has been introduced by Congressman Udall. This bill calls for.a single administrator, an inspector general and an NTSB-like safety board. The ACRS would be abolished. S. 1085, the Department of Energy Nuclear Safety Board Oversight Act of 1987, has cleared the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs. S.1085 would increase the size of the ACRS by five members and by an increase as appropriate in the supporting staff. [An Ad Hoc Working Grou is to develop ACRS infomation for later Comittee consideration.] p Dr. Kerr reminded the Comittee that a farewell dinner for Dr. Okrent was planned for the evening of October 8, 1987. Dr. Kerr announced that Mr. Libarkin had been awarded a bonus for his performance during the year. 4 ...e w. ,6 w. e., .w a. .--w.-, e--. ,,,,g...e,.ww., ~-e r...w. .,., +..

a 330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 2 II. NRC Backfit Rule (0 pen) [ Note: M. D. Houston was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] Mr. S. Newberry (NRC/E00) discussed the proposed Backfit Rule that was issued for coment on September 10, 1987. He described the events in the courts that led to the previous rule being vacated. The basic change ir. the proposed rule eliminates the consideration of economic ~ costs fer the purpose of establisning the statutory standard of adequate protection for safety. Mr. Newberry also addressed the impact of the proposed rule on NRC activities and indicated that very little impa C is expected. Dr. Lewis questioned the legal status of NRC Manual Chapters and how, if no legal status existed, the court ruling could vacate it. Mr. S. Crockett (0GC) indicated that Manual Chapters were considered to be without legal significance but that the court ruling suggests that there may be some legal significance. Dr. Lewis also discussed the aspect of "redefining the level of protection" as stated in the proposed rule and asked whether plants had to meet the current regulations or the regula-tions in effect when the plar.t was licensed. Mr. Crockett indicated that backfit considerations for redefined levels would be judged on whether the plant still pro /ided adequate protection. Dr. Okrent requested a definition of the tenn "substantial" as used in the phrase: "..that there is a substantial increase in the overall protection of the public health and safety...". Mr. Newberry could not provide the definition. Dr. Okrent also questioned whether NRC prac-tices had truly been in accordance with the proposed rule and gave, as an example, the Station Blackout considerations and deficiencies at the St. Lucie plant. Dr. Kerr questione'd whether the court decision was mostly due to ambigu-ity in the previous rule. Mr. Newberry indicated that he thought it was. Mr. Crockett indicated that the court did not address the ambigui-ties associated with ' terms like adequate protection or substantial increase. Mr. Michelson and Dr. Siess discussed how th'e proposed rule applied 'in the context of the resolution of generic issues. In closing, Dr. Okrent recommended that the Committee not provide its comments on the proposed Rule unless specifically requested to do so. He did propose that the appropriate ACRS subcomittee be interactive with the NRC Staff in its development and promulgation of the Rule. 9, e r

+ = m ee eg N gere t' re ' g
d
- e**ung a

t -*e,-g%*o*~* = - =% w e -**funy_ _m ed a ---*+-+m-wo---+e4-*-*+-- =.,,-

330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 3 III. Integrated Safety Assessnent Program (0 pen) [ Note: M. D. Houston was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] In his opening remarks, Mr. Ward, Chainnan of the ACRS Subcomittee on the Integrated Safety Assessment Program (ISAP), indicated that a proposed Staff paper (SECY-87-219,) had been developed since the last review of this matter by the Committee on July 11, 1987. In SECY 219, the Staff recommended that the ISAP approach be extended to all 7 licensees' as an element of the implementation program for the Severe Accidert Policy Statement, that is, to combine the features of the ISAP pilot program and the systematic plant examination provision of the-Policy Statement (most comonly referred to as the Individual Plant Examination (IPE). Mr. Ward expressed some concerns that the strengths of the ISAP process will not be carried through on the IPEs. He was also concerned about the Unresolved and Generic Safety Issues (USIs and GSIs) and where the resolution of these issues, as well as evolving regulations, would be factored into the IPE process. Mr. M. Boyle (NRC/NRR) discussed the background and findings of the ISA Program and the context of the proposed Staff paper with its recommenda- ) tions. Most of the details on background and findings had been present-ed to the Comittee in July 1987 and were based on the Staff's review of PSAs conducted at the Haddam Neck and Millstone 1 plants (both plants operated by Northeast Utilities and the only two plants to volunteer for the study). Considerable discussion took place between the Comittee and Mr. Boyle about the details of the two plant PSAs. Mr. Boyle indicated that the PSAs were useful in a number of ways: (1) the licensee used it as a basis for eliminating actions of low significance, (2) the Region used it to prioritize inspectioiis of risk-based areas, and (3) the licensee and NRC Staff used it to estimate resources for future requirements. The Staff had not. as yet addressed for further consideration the three points contained in the Comittee's letter of July 15, 1987, other than recommend a future course of action to extend the program through IPEs. While NRR had met with RES to discuss the coupling of ISAP with IPEs, Mr. Boyle could not offer any specific details in this respect. He indicated that future action on this matter was awaiting the Comission's approval to proceed w'ith the recomenda-tions. Dr. Okrent recomended that some means be worked out for accomplishing the equivalent of a Level 2 PRA (including external events) with broad participation by the licensee's operating and technical personnel. This would be a big step toward building management and operational quality. Mr. Reed expressed a concern about diversion of plant personnel from their normal duties to perfonn the IPE/PRA. He also asked how numerous other studies could be factored in (SEP, IPE, IDI, OST1, and RERI, as examples). u...-._.-..

330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 4 In closing, Mr. Ward suggested that the Staff provide some tramework or matrix for doing the IPE and other things from the ISAP process. He also indicated that he would prepare a draft letter on the matter for consideration at the November Committee meeting. IV. South Texas Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 (0 pen) [ Note: M. M. El-Zeftawy was the Cognizant ACRS Staff Engineer for this portion of the meeting.] The NRC Staff briefed the ACRS on the Staff's efforts to resolve the original three items that were raised in the Committee's letter of June 10, 1986, namely: l 1) environmental qualification of the residual heat removal pump for operation inside containment, 2) resolution of Construction Appraisal Team (CAT) inspection find-ings, and 3) testing and appropriate corrective measures to assure prevention of failures in the fuel oil piping and tubing by induced vibration resulting from extended operation of the diesel generators. In addition, the NRC Staff addressed four more concerns that were raised by the ACRS members during the 329th meeting of September 10-12, 1987. These concerns are: In view of the location of the RHR pumps inside containment, and in view of recent loss of. shutdown cooling events, the Staff should verify the capability of the South Texas plant to avoid air binding of the RHR pumps lack of diversity in the control rod scram holding circuits. For the time interval Post LOCA, it appears that W designs are permitted to allow a 10-minute pump stoppage during transfer from the refueling water tank to the sump in the containment. This reduced flow might cause core damage. Fire hazar.ds associated with the transfer and storage of fuel oil in the room irrmedi'ately above each diesel-generator compartment. Following the NRC Staff's presentation and discussion, the ACRS members agreed that it was neither necessary for the Committee to write a letter confirming its satisfaction with the resolution of the above-mentioned items nor to hold up 1.icensing efforts. However, Mr. Reed requested that the NRC Staff provide him with information concerning the venting of the RHR pumps. Also, Mr. Michelson requested that Staff provide him information concerning the basis for evaluation of the seals installed to contain diesel fuel and the proof that they could withstand the hydrostatic pressure. =ee-,e-r e eny e ywismo.. -a w g y gw w e-9. - %.c 93 ->+-~s==g e-ws- -e. m me=.a w-m =e.s+ .a s e =me4..--

330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES S V. Zion Full Field Exercise (0 pen) [ Note: E. G. Igne was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] Hr. K. Perkins, NRC Staff, presented lessons learned from the second Federal full, field exercise held at the Zion plant site in June 1987. The first field exercise was held at St. Lucie in 1984. Mr. Perkins was one of the management group members involved in planning the field ~ exercise. The goal was to test the procedures for providing timely and effective support to State and local authorities, and also for the NRC to provide support to the licensee. Approximately 1000 people were involved in the Federal field exercise, including the licensee, the States of Illinois and Wisconsin, two counties and 12 Federal agencies. In addition, 200 people were responsible for the conduct of the exer-

cise, i.e.,

controllers, evaluators, and the people who guided the visitors during the exercise. There were about 175 visitors, most of whom were from foreign countries. The exercise lasted about three days. It was assumed that the accident plume moved essentially northwest from the plant, then shifted due west, and it then rained. Mr. Perkins then discussed.the facilities involved in the exercise and its functions. There are two primary decision-makers with respect to radiologic emergencies at a licensed plant. The first is the licensee. He has the ultimate and continuing responsibility for mitigating the consequences of the accident; that means the in-plant actions and j recommendations to the offsite authorities. The other decision-maker is the State (Governor or his, delegate). The Governor has the responsibil-ity for deciding whether and how to implement any action to protect the public. Some of the major lessons learned from the exercise: The Federal plan did work. There were substantial Federal and State capabilities that can be applied to radiological emergencies. The States and the utility developed a better appreciation of the Federal capabilities and structure. The Federal agencies should participate more in routine, radiologi-cal emergency preparedness exercises. [ Note: The Federal Govern-ment participates in these exercises only once every three years.) Addressing of recovery and reentry issues needs to be in more detail. NRC needs to clarify NUREG-0654, Protective Action Guidance, to better describe the agency's intent. Mr. T. McKenna, NRC Staff, briefly discussed NRC's philosophy regarding its protective action' reconnendations or what is appropriate for the -se e w - ehe e -9 e e. er ec,ym -~,ew.,-.-.,. ..,,,y , wg!--*=.***w-wee-g- ~- e re-eeem.~w.-e-. . ~.._....

g E o .a 330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 6 public to do in response to a severe nuclear power plant accident (involving core damage). He stated that their position has not changed since NUREG-0654 has been published. Firstly, action, if at all possi-ble, should be taken before a severe accident release. Secondly, with impending or imminent core damage, persoas near the plant in all direc-tions should be evacuated and everyone else should be sheltered. Finally, following monitoring, persons in "hot spots" should be relocat-ed. In response to a question, Mr. McKenna stated that the above action plan is NRC's guidance to State and local governments for the develop-ment of their plans. [ Note: In part, this NRC action plan was a result ~ of J. Martin's analysis, using the CRAC computer code applied to the Indian Point plant.] VI. Implications of Chernobyl (0 pen) [ Note: P. A. Boehnert was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] Mr. Ward noted concern with a lack of NRC Staff response to the January 15, 1987 ACRS letter on the implications of the Chernobyl accident. He noted that Mr. Stello's April 20,1987. reply, appeared to be pro-forma in nature. Mr. Ward said that he had recently examined portions of NUREG-1251, "Implications of the Accident at Chernobyl for Safety Regulation of Comercial Nuclear Power Plants in the United States," and .l his concerns are somewhat, but not entirely, relieved. He wanted to share his concerns with the Committee. Mr. War.d cited points in our letter that reactivity transients in U.S. LWRs are theoretically possible and that there should be a systematic reevaluation to ascertain the actual levels of defense we count on for such accidents. LWR vulnerability may be more in the inadequacy of administrative controls and human actions. In NUREG-1251, NRC states: "The nuclear design of U.S. reactors provides assurance against a Chernobyl-type superprompt critical excursion." He said he questions the validity of that statement. Mr. Ward said our defense against reactivity accidents is two-pronged: 1.e., design constraints plus administra.tive controls. T,here was discussion of the state of current plant reactivity controls, i.e., moderate temperature coefficient (MTC). Mr. Ward said that bizarre administrative (human) actions, more than the flawed physical design, resulted in the Chernobyl accident..He is not sure that such bizarre behavior couldn't result in similar problems in U.S. plants. Dr. Okrent said that damaging core pressure pulses from reactivity events are possible. He also said'that one should not take comfort from MTC values of zero or slightly negative, as cool water excursions are possible. Dr. Kerr cited the uncertainty associated with calculation of MTC values. Dr. Okrent said that control rod expulsion is more of a i, _ _ _____ _.__ E.-.___

330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 7 concern for BWRs than PWRs., He indicated that sloppy maintenance, etc., could result in a significant reactivity event in a BWR. Mr. Ebersole indicated that the BWR ATWS can result in extremely severe reactivity events. Mr. Reed noted that PWRs (W in particular) always run with a negative power coefficient which throttles a significant power excursion. Dr. Kerr noted that the more positive MTCs that plants are now seeing have not been evaluated for the consequences of an ATWS. Mr. Michelson said that the return-to-power issue i s not routinely ~ evaluated by the Staff. He recomended that the Comittee explore the issue of the potential for return to power given a severe cooldown event, e.g., steam line/ steam generator tube rupture, etc. Dr. Kerr asked if the Committee has any advice for action on this item. Dr. Siess suggested that the vendors could provide information on the l levels of defense available to prevent reactivity events. Dr. Kerr suggested that the ACRS make its concerns clear. Dr. Shewmon seconded the idea of a meeting with the Staff and Vendors to explore this ques-tion. Dr. Lewis moved that the ACRS provide a brief letter to the Comission complaining of the lack of progress by the Staff on this issue. Further-discussion indicated that a review of NUREG-1251 seemed to be in order. l Mr. G. Sege, NRC Staff, noted that the Staff 'is negotiating a contract with BNL to study the issue of reactivity accident potential for U.S. plants in support of NUREG-1251 recomendations. He suggested that the 4 ACRS review this effort early en to ensure that ACRS concerns are addressed. Mr. Ward said that we should review NUREG-1251, including the items discu'ssed today (i.e., the BNL study, the issue expressed by himself, and the return-to-power concern). Dr. Kerr agreed and said that the review will be assigned to the appropriate subcommittee. Dr. Lewis complained of the lack of an expeditious resolution to this issue. The BNL effort will take about one year. He is concerned that the pace of effort indicated that we are not taking the issue seriously enough., VII. Seismic Qualification of Equipment (0 pen) [ Note: R. K. Major was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] Mr. Wylie, Chairman of the ACRS Reliability Assurance Subcomittee, introduced this topic. It was explained that this session was for information only--no ACRS action had been requested. The purpose of the session was to be briefed by the Staff and industry on the results of the Zion plant seismic walkdown. This walkdown was done as part of the ' implementation of USI A-46, Seismic Qualification of Equipment in

- -..-ea---

we. s-- e e-. ., =. .-v.% .+e-+w~ ....g.6 9==.*4-e>.~ .. = + + - -.. .-e ...i,

.j 330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 8 Operating Nuclear Plants." Lessons learned from this experience were presented. Mr. T. Y. Chang, NRC Staff (Task Manager for A-46), presented the current status of unresolved safety issue A-46. He explained the final resolution of this issue is documented in Generic Letter 87-02, issued in February 1987. He noted that licensees for 69 plants will do seismic adequacy reviews. Only five plants are required to do reviews, but are not Seismic Qualification Utility Group (SQUG) members. These five plants will be reviewed by the Staff on a case-by-case basis. The remainder of the plants.will use the generic implementation procedures developed by the SQUG. The experience from the trial walkdown of Zion (PWR), as well as' the experience gained when Nine Mile Point-1 (BWR) is reviewed this coming ) January, will be factored into the generic implementation procedures. Individual plant walkdown schedules are still being negotiated. Dr. Okrent suggested that an independent group should be formed by the Staff to monitor this effort. This group should concentrate on discovering any flaws in the process. He also felt that, in connection with this effort, an examination of the quantitative seismic risk at these plants would be worthwhile. The Staff felt the Senior Seismic Review and Advisory Pan'el (SSRAP) was providing sufficient independent review of the process. In addition, groups of Staff experts are overseeing the implementation of A-46. Mr. Chang noted that the ACRS raised concerns in the following areas: seismically induced fires, seismic systems interaction due to flooding, ) inadvertent actuation of fire protection systems, multiple events, and seismically induced failure of high/ moderate energy small bore piping. However, these items are beyond the current scope of A-46. The Staff will address these ACRS concerns separately, outside the scope of A-46. Mr. Michelson coninented that the ACRS concerns could be addressed during a thorough plant walkdown and questioned setting them aside. Mr. Chang noted that, ginerally, the Staff considered the Zion walkdown a success. One of the main goals of the Zion walkdown was to test the Generic Implementation Procedures. Aside from the need for some fine tuning, the procedures worked well. It was also learned that planning, logistics, and support are very critical. It is important to have qualified individuals on the review teams. A good training program can get qualified individuals ready rapidly. Many potential areas of seismic concern were identified, but most were quickly resolved as

330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 9 non-problems. A few needed further study, and a small number required modifications to the plant. Mr. Chang noted that the cost of the Zion review was close to the Staff's estimate. Mr. Neil Smith of Conmonwealth Edison and Chainnan of SQUG, covered the results of the Zion trial PWR plant walkdown. He noted that SQUG was initiated in 1982 by a small group of utilities to detennine the fea- ~ sibility of using actual earthquake experience in industrial facilities to demonstrate the seismic ruggedness of conventional power plant equipment used in nuclear plants. This effort evolved over the years into the predominant method of addressing and resolving USI A-46. Mr. Smith explained that there were two primary objectives for the Zion plant walkdown. The first was to test the generic implementation procedures developed to address USI A-46. The second purpose was to verify the seismic adequacy of equipment reviewed for the pilot plant. Two other goals of the. Zion plant walkdown were to transfer the tech-nology for assessing the adequacy of equipment to SQUG and to obtain review and acceptance of methodology and data by SSRAP and NRC. Mr. Smith noted that to date the work at Zion has been aimed at produc-ing generic A-46 guidance. Once the methodology has been approved, a Zion specific submittal will be made to the NRC that will include any areas that were not covered by the original walkdown. The overall contents of the Generic Implementation Procedure were described. The main elements include: the selection of the seismic review teams, the identification of essential safe shutdown equipment, screening evaluation and walkdown, outlier evaluation and resolution, and documentation and certification. Mr. Smith noted that the scope of the Zion 2 walkdown included. safe shutdown: Electrical equipment, Mechanical equipment, and Heat exchangers and tank anctorages. Cable trays are being evaluated separately and were not included in the walkdown. Criteria for cable trays are presently under development. NSSS equipment is being addressed separately by the NRC. The evaluation of relays was performed previously and was not included in this walk-down. In general, the scope of the relay evaluation was to include all devices that have contacts. At Zion three seismic walkdown teams were used. Each team included engineers with seismic capability experience, systems engineers, and a e.e . 8..ewemeew - -*es.

. n =

-ee p um =e -,-w *

we-e+
w

-~=a -*+*..ew ,--a,.7*--,e7 -e .--,*..e ,.-*~~e4~

-6 o 330TH ACRS MEETING t11NUTES 10 ) plant specialist. In addition, there was an observer team that had i senior SQUG members, and NRC and contractor representatives. During the walkdown,159 pieces of equipment were reviewed. Forty-one pieces of equipment needed further analysis. Of the 41 pieces of questionable equipment, 21 were resolved without modification by addi-tional examination, information, or calculations. Sixteen pieces were resolved by repairs, mainly anchorages. Four items remain open; calculations and reviews are in pre,ress to resolve their seismic adequacy. 1 The overall observations and lessons learned are that Zion, Unit 2 is in good seismic condition. The only areas wh.ich will require detailed evaluations and possible improvements involve anchorages and seismic interactions. The SQUG generic procedures work well and need only minor modifications. The seismic review teams with diverse backgrounds performed well. The effort required for the walkdown was about 3900 j man-hours. Mr. Schmidt of MPR Associates briefly reviewed the program status. He noted that the final integrated generic implementation procedures would be completed by the end of 1988 and would include the lessons learned j from the PWR and BWR trial plant walkdowns. 1 Mr. Schmidt explained the overall conclusions from the pilot plant relay reviews. It was noted that many relays can be screened out because relay chatter is acceptable. He estimated that less than half the relays evaluated are required to be functional during an earthquake. Most of the essential relays at Zion and Nine Mile Point 1 are seis-mically rugged. A small number (tens rather than hundreds) of relays may require corrective action. l Cable tray / conduit evaluation procedures were discussed by Mr. Schmidt. These procedures resulted from a field and test experience data base, j To date, only a single type of cable tray has been examined. Following acceptance of evaluation criteria by the NRC Staff and the Senior Seismic Review and Advisory Panel for this single type of cable tray, other parallel criteria will be developed for different cable tray configurations. VIII. Nuclear Power Plant Operating Experience (0 pen) j Diote: H. Alderman was the Designated Federal Official fcr this portion of the meeting.] loss of Component Cooling Water, Byron, Braidwood, and Zion Mr. Roger Woodruff, NRC Staff, noted that, in the space of six months, there were three events involving the loss of. component cooling water (CCW), one at each of the above plants. The units were shut down during

330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 11 these events. There was loss of Residual Heat' Removal (RRR) but the loss of RHR was 15 minutes or less in each case. The loss in one case was caused by the litting of a relief valve on an excess letdown heat exchanger inside containment. There had been a modest pressure tran-sient, the valve had lifted and failed to reseat. In the other two events, maintenance was involved in a drain valve and a RHR heat ex-changer was partially open. The physical layout of CCW is similar in Byron, Braidwood, and Zion. The Byron and Braidwood CCW systems do not serve safeguard 3 equipment. CCW at Zion provides cooling to safety injection pumps and to centrifu-gal charging pumps. The surge tank has a vertical baffle dividing the tank into two separate tanks. A leak in a header valve will drain both sides of the surge tank. Cor.Mnued operation with a leak has the potential to cause loss of all CCW for both units. The licensee intends to add automatic CCW makeup to rectify this prob-lem. The Plant Systems Branch will again review the CCW system for these plants. Loss of Shutdown Cooling, Peach Bottom-2 and -3, Nine Mile Point-2, Sequoyah Mr. P. Baranowsky, NRC Staff, said that the Staff has been monitoring shutdown cooling problems. Loss of decay heat removal capability can lead to inadequate core cooling with potential for fuel damage and radioactive material release. In the case of BWRs there have been many momentary loss of shutdown cooling events: Peach Bottom-2 and 13' events since March 1987 Nine Mile Point 4 events in August / September 1987 All BWRs - 2.4 events per week based upon August / September data Technical specifications do not. require single failure protection during shutdown cooling. There are alternate makeup and shutdown cooling methods for BWRs with the reactor temperature less than 200*F: Steaming to condenser with booster pump feed Low pressure coolant injection with pool cooling RWCU heat exchanger cooling with head on or off Control rod drive water makeup 0 $ w eye e p-=pe **paeoe eme, m.e e ~ ><*p.av =.. -. p .a e, ,,,,,,,,,,g,,m ,,,]

330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 12 In the case of PWRs, cavitation of RHR pumps during low-level operations has been addressed by NRC: Beaver Valley event, March 1981 - Information Notice 81-09 32 events from 1976 through 1984 - Case study C503 4 events in 1985/1986 - Infonnation Notice 86-101 Diablo Canyon event, December 1986 - Infonnation Notice 87-23

== Conclusions:== The NRR Staff is following 50.72 and 50.73 event reports of loss of shutdown cooling Improved operation to avoid RHR pump cavitation would appear to take i care of most PWR cooling problems due to a low liquid level in the reactor vessel. San Onofre 2 - Unisolable Leak from Reactor Coolant System Mr. W. Jensen, NRC Staff, reported that this event occurred at San Onofre on August 29, 1987. The reactor was going down for refueling, the reactor coolant was at 125 F, and the pressure was at 350 psig. The Technical. Specifications require that when the plant is brought cold an additional RHR path be opened up. An operator opened a 10-inch valve in a redundant line. The 10-inch valve stuck closed. The motor opera-tor overheated and failed. Operators went into containment to attempt to open the valve with a wrench. When they tried to open the valve, the bolts holding the packing hold down plate broke off and the packing was ejected. On inspection the bolts were found to be corroded by boric acid that had been leaking through the valve packing during the previous cycle. There was no leakage at the start of the cycle so the leak had developed sometime within the cycle. There was some boric acid buildup on the - outside of the valve. The operators continued with the cooldown to reduce the system pressure. The reactor coolant pump was stopped. Auxiliary spray into the pressurizer was initiated from the charging system. All three charging pumps were put into operation. The charging flow was directed intermittently into the normal charging path and into the pressurizer to try to maintain a hundred degree per hour cooldown in the pressurizer. The pressurizer bubble was collapsed in about two hours and the pressure was brought down to about.75 psi. s-e m,ew o w -+e gme- ---e -+-- -w m*s- _cc - e y - e m~ s > e e w ,e , y ew s+ s e--,w.ms-e u,- o4 s

i l i 330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 13 - 1 The licensee attempted to ' add additionel packing to stop the leak but j the efforts were not successful. The cooldown operations continued through the night. Dr. Okrent asked, if the corrosion had gone on further, could the bolts have broken under some other force? Mr. Jensen replied that they could possibly have failed. Mr. Jensen noted that the licensee is changing the bolts to a different composition. 7 Dr. Okrent asked, how well do we know that there are not valves using carbon steel bolts that could be corroded by boric acid given some kind of leak where. failure might occur spontaneously, let's say because it is under pressure, and where it would lead to an accident difficult to control? Mr. Jensen responded that the Staff is working on a bulletin and an information notice to be sent out to alert the plants to this problem. Dr. Okrent stated "...it bothers me that we don't know whether it is a, it might be a significant source of serious difficulty." Dr. Shewmon asked if all the studs would have. to fail before leakage occurred. Mr. Jensen responded that he didn't know. Chairman Kerr noted "I am saying I think we need to do something about this, at least get more information." Davis-Besse Trip with Multiple Eouipment Failures Mr. W. Guldemond, NRC Staff (Region III), discussed the reactor trip of Davis-Besse which occurred on September 6, 1987 and the resultant equipment, failures. Mr. Guldemond pointed out that a trip was initiated as a result of feedwater transient instrumentation which was induced, causing a power excursion. The excursion was exacerbated by an operator who attempted to drive rods in but, instead of driving a controlling bank, drove a flux-shaping bank causing a reactor power increase. There was'an automated reactor trip on high flux. The main steam safety valves lifted. The failure of auto transfer from the auxiliary trans-former to the startup transformer caused the loss of one side of the electrical distribution system, including one safeguards bus. Emergency diesel generator number one started and reenergized the safeguards bus. One main steam safety valve failed to fully reseat and continued to pass 5 percent of its rated steam flow. ..,.eeew,..e~~ %=,w-. es )-.-,-y.e* -w. ,y.* e e.,e

e-e. e

.a g g. a. ,*-o e.- e .e. ar i

330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 14 Service water pump 1-1 failed to automatically restart and haa to be manually restarted. A reactor operator inadvertently tripped reactor coolant puap 2-1 while restoring the electrical distribution system to normal. A motor driven feedwater pump was started and used to control stet.m generator level through the startup feedwater control valves. Due to problems with leak-through with the startup, feedwater control n valves were isolated and the flow was controlled with a mini-feed valve. The turbine bypass valve SP13A3 failed to open causing steam generator l'evels to drop. The auxiliary feedwater system autostarted, restoring steam generator levels. l At this point, the DHR system was initiated. The pressurizer level dropped 16 inches. The system was vented and placed in service success-fully. The plant was now in cold shutdown. ~ The operator attempted to initiate service waterflow through CCW heat exchanger number 2. The CCW heat exchange service water butlet valve would not open. Subsequent investigation revealed that the valve would not open against a differential pressure. Follow-up Action The licensee conducted a thorough investigation of this event. There was extensive management involvement They specified adequate short-term corrective actions for the equipment. Longer term actions are still forthcoming. Mr. Wylie pointed out that an electric system designed to use a genera-tor circuit breaker would have eliminated the need for operator trans-fer, taking the burden off the operator having to restore power. California Earthquake R. Hernan, NRC Staff, stated that the nearest plant to the epicenter of the earthquake was San Onofre. At the time of the earthquake Units 1 and 3 were at full pow'er. Unit 2 was shut down in a refueling mode. The operating basis earthquake at San Onofre is approximately 0.34G. The intensities measured by the instruments at San Onofre registered about 0.03G, about one-tenth of the 0 B.E. -.- + w % mer.< . g e.e = = y y e e,.,.++yg 6..

s. m pe

,%==-g e-=-shr,e-e+---'-.*

-e 7e aq u p = = = e r-A - mm* - h, *

~=eeg-* w* em9~ ~ +- ' y et e-* ~ e--

w~~

=

330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 15 Plant walkdowns were performed; there was no obvious damage. There were no perturbations in plant operations. The next closest plant is Diablo Canyon. The earthquake was not felt nor did it trigger any instrumentation at Diablo Canyon. One complication was that the Southern California Edison office building in Rosemead, Calif. was not seismically designed and had to be evacu-ated. IX. Emergency Planning (0 pen) [E. G. Igne was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] [ Background information. This issue originated during the 329th meeting of the ACRS, when the matter of sheltering versus evacuation was dis-cussed with Dr. Rowson, Mr. Specter, Dr. Ritchie, and the NRC Staff. An ACRS letter on this matter was written with proposed additicnal coments by Dr. Okrent concerning a real-time integration of monitors to predict the release of radioactive materials with weather data in order to more accurately plan for the extent and magnitude of huclear emergen-cies, e.g., sheltering versus evacuation. Dr. Okrent agreed to strike his additional coments from the proposed letter and his coments would be reconsidered during the 330th ACRS meeting.] During the 330th meeting, Dr. Okrent further discussed his concerns about accurate measurements of radioactive releases and their use in better emergency planning. Some Comittee members questioned the need for such a system when compared to the present system at nuclear power i plants. Dr. Moeller stated that the Occupational and Environmental Protection Systems Subcommittee will seek answers to the outstanding questions.

The Comittee also discussed accident source tems, containment perfor-mance and venting. Dr. Kerr stated that an appropriate ACRS subcomit-tee should meet with the NRC Staff to discuss the Staff's efforts to consider containment venting and to assess foreign venting systems. The Mark I and other susceptible containment systems will also be discussed.

X. ExecutiveSessions(0 pen / Closed) A. Subcomittee Reports (0 pen / Closed) 1. _ Auxiliary Feedwater Systein Reliability (0 pen) [P. A. Boehnert was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] 8 -*Wa*wape p w % =ps eeme=**ume pg= e Mv# 9*M *-W ge w= "*9 % =*, * ' 4 egy g 4 =9-

- .=*==-****,*'*-w9e
+ + -
- 9
***j *=
^ = - *

--*u+- A -= s.-,-

i 330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 16 Mr. Ward reminded the Committee of the NRR presentation on GI-124 at the September (329th) ACRS meeting. He called the members' attention to a draft letter on the Staff's resolution approach to this Issue. He said his key concern is a differ-ence in regulatory philosophy between himself and the Staff. i Mr. Ward noted that in a recent subcommittee meeting senior NRC personages discussed this issue of differing regulatory philosophy, indicating to him, at least, that others may share his concern. The Committee prepared its coments on this matter in a letter to Chairman Zech. 2. Auxiliary Systems (0 pen) [ Note: S. Duraiswamy was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] Mr. Michelson, the Subcomittee Chainnan, stated that the ACRS Subcomittee on Auxiliary Systems held a meeting on October 1, 1987. The main items discussed at this meeting were as follows: Regulatory requirements and/or guidance for Heating, Ventilating, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) and Instrument Air Systems design. Recent incidents associated with the HVAC system malfunc-tions and/or design deficiency and their interaction on Safety Systems (for example, the December 24, 1986 incident at Brunswick Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2). Diesel generator cooling. Problems experienced with the Instrument! Air Systems and their interaction on Safety Systems. Office for Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (AE0D) findings concerning Instrument Air System malfunc-tions,and its recomendations to alleviate this problem. HVAC Systems Mr. Michelson stated that regulatory requirements and/or guidance for HVAC System design are contained in several sections of the Standard Review Plan (SRP), several General Design Criteria (GDC) of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50, and several Reaulatory Guides. Based on the discussion, the Subcommittee felt that adequate regulatory requirements and/or guidance exist for HVAC Systems design. l 7 .,.... _, _ _.., _ -. ~.

330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 17 Between 1975 and August 1987, there have been 1423 events associated with HVAC Systems reported under the Licensee Event Reporting (LER) system. About 35 percent of these events are due to component failure, and about 21 percent are due to personnel error. He believes that significant improvement of the HVAC System may be possible if component failures and personnel errors are reduced. Diesel Generator Cooling Mr. Michelson stated that some plants use service water and some use air to cool diesel generators. To his knowledge, there are three plants that use air-cooled radiators to cool diesel engines; under this arrangement, a continuous supply of air is important to cool the diesel engines. One of the concerns with this arrangement is that if there is an inadver, tent actuation of the CO system, which is used for fire suppression in the diesel, rooms, the ventilation dampers will close resulting in the interruption of air supply which, in turn, will result in the overheating of diesel engines. He said that the Fire Risk, Scoping Study being perfonned by the Sandia National Laboratories will look at this issue. Instrument Air Systems Mr. Michelson stated that regulatory requirements and/or guidance for Instrument Air Systems design appear. to be adequate. However, it. should be noted that older plants licensed before May 24, 1982 are not required to meet any of the NRC requirements or guidelines on Instrument Air Systems. Mr. Michelson said that Dr. Ornstein of AE0D performed a study on Instrument Air Systems problems. This study evaluated 29 operational events at U.S.* nuclear plants in which a safety-related system failed because of degradation or failure of air systems or air-operated equipment. The results of the AE00 study are contained in a report AE00/C701 entitled "Air Systems Problems at U.S. Light Water Reactors," dated March 1987. Based on its study AE0D has concluded.that the follow-ing deficiencies contributed to the degradat' ion or malfunctioning of Instrument Air Systems: Mismatched equipment - The air quality capability of the Instrument Air System filters and dryers does not always match the design requirements of the equipment us.ing the air. Maintenance of the instrument Air System is not always performed in accordance with manufacturers' recommenda-tions. ~ 4 e e ' k-s - =~ee esh-mmwy *e Amee - JPa *g g espo * *. gemmegw= *9 m***p~~W ,e e we +6-

'm g & e *-

++**-+==*-W+%
=>-wW
s-=***Or+=+=e-*
m e w hg*-ew-

--m+-me +*

330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 18 Air quality is not usually monitored periodically. Plant personnel frequently do not understand the poten-tial consequences of degraded Air Systems. Operators are not well trained to respond to losses of instrument air, and the emergency operating procedures for such events are frequently inadequate. At many plants, the response of key equipment to a loss of instrument air has not been verified to be consistent with the FSAR. Safety-related accumulators do not necessarily undergo surveillance testing or monitoring to confirm their readiness. The size and seismic capability of safety-related backup accumulators at several plants have been found to be inadequate. Some of the recomendations made by AE00 to minimize or alleviate the Air Systems problems are as follows: Ensure that Air System quality meets the requirements specified by the manufacturers of the air-operated equipment. Ensure adequate operator response by formulating and implementing anticipated transient and system recovery procedures for loss-of-air events. Improve training to ensure that plant operators and-maintenance person.nel are sensitized to the importance of air systems and the vulnerability to comon-mode failures of safety-related equipment served by the air systems. Confirm the adequacy and reliability of safety-related backup accumulators. Verify the equipment response to gradual losses of. air to ensure that such losses do not result in events which fall outside FSAR analyses. Subcommittee Observations Mr. Michelson stated that, based on the discussion, the Subcomittee observed the following: 9 - - -.., - -... ~., .q- ..r- ._..g .. +,.....

330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 19 Regulatory requirements and/or guidance for HVAC and Instrument Air Systems appear to be adequate. The Subcomittee was concerned about the Air Systems problems at nuclear power plants. However, it did not decide to write a letter on this matter at this time. The Subcommittee did not have any problem with the Information Notice 87-28, "Air Systems Problems at U.S. Light Water Reactors," issued by NRR to make the licens-ees aware of the potential problems associated with Air Systems. The Subcomittee plans to monitor the Air Systems prob-lems and the Staff's efforts to reduce them and keep the full Comittee informed of any further developments. Some members of the Subcomittee felt that the evaluation performed by Dr. Ornstein of AE00 is excellent, and that the associated report AE0D/C701 is well-organized. Mr'..Michelson solicited coments from other Subcomittee 1 members who were present at the October 1, 1987 Auxiliary Systems meeting. 1 Mr. Reed provided the following comments: Air System problems should have been segregated into j diffe' rent categories in the AE0D' report. The 29 opera-tional events evaluated by the AE0D should have been classified into the following categories: Design deficiency Operational problems Maintenance problems. j Also root causes of these events are not clearly speci-fied in the report. ~ Events associated with design and operational problems seem to reflect inadequate regulatory requirements. l It seems that Air Systems in certain plants were designed poorly, and also they did not receive proper regulatory review. Air Systems by their nature cannot be made safety grade. However, certain portions (such as PORVs) may have to be. 4 Me y*+yw,,, o pw g *= g, ee, -ew-+6 a w a r,-- -e-g.u ,g ,..,.g.,y,g,,. .g..,. ,,n., ,,mm,.,

330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 20 In operating plants, the licensees should review the adequacy of these systems to ensure that they are de-signed properly, and that during operation and accident situations the loss of instrument air or its degradation would not jeopardize the functioning of a safety system. Mr. Ebersole comented that he does not believe that adequate response has been received to the AE0D recomendations on the Air Systems problems. Dr. Moeller comented that Dr. Ornstein of AE00 has done a gcod job in evaluating the Air Systems problems ~. However, he also believes that the root cause of several events should have been identified in the AE0D report. Regarding HVAC systems, Dr. Moeller stated that during a joint meeting of the ACRS Subcomittees on Occupational and Environ-mental Protection Systems and Auxiliary Systems held on June 27, 1986, some members of the Staff said that failures of air cooling systems for areas housing key components in certain plants contribute significantly to estimated core-melt fre, quencies. Because corrective measures are often taken once potential cooli.ng system failures are identified, the impact of these potential failures on the proper functioning of these systems has not been reflected in the final PRAs issued for those plants. As a result, some licensees whose plants may have similar deficiencies may not be aware of these problems. Dr. Moeller suggested that the ACRS write a letter. on this issue. Mr. Reed suggested that the ACRS write a letter on the Air Systems problems. After discussion, the full Committee voted to in favor of writing a letter on matters raised by Dr. Moeller and Mr. Ree'd. Accordingly, two reports, one on Air Cooling Systems, prepared by Dr. Moeller, and another on Instrument Air Systems problems, prepared by Messrs. Reed and Ebersole, were dis-cussed by the full Committee during the meeting. The letter prepared by Dr. Moeller was approved with certain modifica-tions. The full Comittee suggested that the letter on Instrument Air Systems be revised and resubmitted to the full Committee for consideration-during the November ACRS meeting, and Mr. Reed agreed to do so. 4 e 9 %w e.s,=emespen.pn gnp gew-' $ "'"9** **7- ' ~ * * ' * " " * * * " * * -

- - - e****
M9"
+*'- '
4**
-N**

f*

=**w-m

=

330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 21 3. NewMembers(0 pen) [ Note: N. S. Lockard was the Cogni: ant ACRS Staff Member for thisportionofthemeeting.] Dr. Lewis opened the discussion by stating that a memorandum has been sent to the Chairman, NRC, nominating two candidates for Comission selection for the current ACRS vacancy and that ACRS staff members have been advised by a staff member from the NRC Chairman's office that the Comission will not act on nominations for ACRS membership until the issue of radwaste advice to the Comission is settled. Dr. Lewis then renewed the request to all members to provide the ACRS staff with names of individuals whom they wish to have considered as potential members. Dr. Mark asked to be reminded of the names of the nominees now before the Comission. This was done. He then moved that the Comittee send the Commission a nomination of Dr. David Okrent to succeed himself upon expiration of his term, l accompanied by a request to the Commission to waive its length of service rule for ACRS inembers. Dr. Mark stated that he believes that such action would be in the best interests of the Comittee, the Comission, and the nation. The motion was seconded by more than one member. Considerable discussion ensued. Mr. Reed spoke in favor of member emeritus status for former members. Dr. Lewis then moved that the previous motion be tabled, and this motion was seconded by Dr. Remick. A vote was taken and the motion to table was carried. 4. Planning Subcomittee (0 pen) [T. G. McCreless was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the ineeting.] Dr Kerr asked the Comittee for input concerning discussion topics and the number of topics that should be discussed during the October 22-24, 1987 meeting of the Planning Subcom-mittee. Dr. Okrent suggested that the ACRS should consider why the NRC Staff is more worried going before the CRGR than before the ACRS. He also said that the ACRS should consider why the

330TH ACRS MEETING HINUTES 22 Congress is thinking about eliminating the ACRS instead of strengthening it. Dr. Shewmon said that he believed the ACRS should develop its position on advice on nuclear waste matters. Dr. Lewis said the ACRS should reconsider the recomendations of the Effectiveness Panel. Mr. Ward said that he believes the ACRS should be spending more of its resources on "bold initiatives" such as sponsoring an international workshop on quality, development of criteria on containment design based on available severe accident research information, and a systematic relook at regulations based on PRA and the safety goal. Mr. Reed said that he believes the ACRS should decide on how to examine operating experience and how to decide on lessons to be learned. Dr. Kerr agreed to identify some four.or five top'ics and to present them to the Subcomittee for approval at the start of the meeting. 5. Ad Hoc Planning Committee on Nuclear Waste Matters (Closed) [S.J.S. Parry was the Cognizant ACRS Staff Member for this portion of the meeting.] The Committee discussed some options concerning advice to the Comissioners on nuclear waste matters. The Committee agreed that the most desirable means for the Comission to obtain advice would be the statutory establishment of a separate Advisory Comittee similar to the ACRS. In the interim, the ACRS, with some redirection and with some increase in re-sources, could provide the NRC with advice on nuclear waste matters. The Committee agreed that the ACRS could not func-tion as a bifurcated comittee with. one group working on reactor safety and the other on nuclear waste. The Comittee agreed that, during the interim, new ACRS members (as vacan-cies occur) should be sought who have knowledge, expertise and interests appropriate to both nuclear power plant safety and waste management. A final position was not reached by the Comittee. Discussions are expected to continue during the meeting of the Planning Subcomittee on October 22-24, 1987

330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 23 6. Regulatory Policies and Practices (0 pen) [ Note: G. R. Quittschreiber was the Designated Federal Employee for this portion of the meeting.] Dr. Lewis, Chairman, and other subcomittee members that attended the October 7,1987 Regulatory Policies and Practices Subcomittee meeting reported on the discussions that took place at the meeting. This was an exploratory meeting of the Subcomittee on the general question of "how the NRC orga-nization fits into the grand scheme of things on ensuring nuclear safety in nuclear power plants." Dr. Lewis noted that the invited participants, who included four present Comis-sioners, one past Comissioner, two past Directors of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, and the present Executive Director for Operations, had extremely varied opinions on the role the NRC should play in the regulatory process. Dr. Lewis noted three significant opinions which several of the participants expressed at the meeting. These included: 1. A large fraction of the risk from nuclear plants comes from work performance of the operators and maintenance personnel. A discussion of how the NRC could give more attention to plants which are weak perfonners without. punishing the better performer's was discussed. 2. People problems are very important. Designs have been challenged by people doing dumb things and the plants have normally come through satisfactorily. 3. None of the invited participants said the NRC has the competence to tell good management from bad management. It was noted that most of the participants were only concerned about the present plants with the belief that they were the only ones we will have in this country for the foreseeable future. Dr. Kerr said that he was impressed with the universal feeling of the participants that the people problems were very impor-tant and that more attention needed to be paid to these problems. Dr. Siess said it is now most popular to blame management for all of the problems. Dr. Lewis felt that the machines should be built to be more lenient of mistakes made by people. Mr. Ward noted that several of the participants felt that a single administrator would be a good way to go, but this feeling was not universal. He added that two speakers had a m.._ -.,.,... _ _.... ~..... .._m._,,__ ~. _

~ .l l = 330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 24 contrasting ideas on the style of desired management, i.e., bottom up versus top down. Some felt the criticism of the NRC l for coziness with licensees is "a bum wrap." l Dr. Remick noted that some of the participants stressed the importance of maintenance with regard to nuclear safety and stressed the differences between the U.S. and foreign coun-tries in this area. ~ Mr. Wylie noted that at least three of the participants discussed picking out the weaker performers and taking drastic actions with regard to these and not the better performers. Dr. Lewis suggested that the Planning Subcommittee, at its next meeting, discuss the direction the Regulatory Policies and Practices Subcommittee should take with regard to continu-ing its review of the role the NRC does and should play in the regulatory process for ensuring public health and safety of nuclear power plants. 1 7. Safety Philosophy, Technology'and Criteria (0 pen) [ Note: M. D. Houston was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] Dr. Okrent, Chairman of the Safety Philosophy, Technology and Criteria Subcomittee, reported on its October 7,1987 meet-ing. He.noted that the Subcomittee discussed two separate topics: (1) certain aspects of the proposed Backfit Rule and (2) the Staff's proposed implementation plan for the Safety. Goal Policy Statement. Two members of NRC/0GC addressed the legal definition of adequate protection for safety, a term applied in the Backfit Rule in making a determination of whether cost benefit analysis need be considered. A modifica-tion needed to bring a plant up' to the level of adequate protection could be required without cost benefit considera-tions, while a modification that enhanced or supplemented the adequate protect. ion level wuold need to be subjected to cost considerations. The OGC members had indicated that no defini-tion of adequate protection existed either in the law or in regulations. The meaning of adequate protection has been established by case law on Staff judgment, is not the same for all plants, and meanders from time to time. On the second topic, a member of NRC/RES presented their initial response to the Committee's letter of May 13, 1987 regarding comments on the Safety Goal Implementation Plan. RES discussed surrogate targets for each of the five hierarchical levels--these targets as goals rather than requirements. Other discussion at the Subcommittee meeting served to clarify the Committee's letter, for example, an independent expression of defense-in-depth. Dr. Okrent indicated that the Staff's Implementa-tion Plan would be developed over the next few months and that ..-.-m%, -m._ ,..--q-4 ,,...__w g

330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 25. the Subcomittee would review the Plan at an appropriate time. He could not predict which way the Plan would go, but did indicate that the matrix concept proposed in the past by NRC/ED0 looked dead. Dr. Remick and Mr. Ward expressed their opinions about the Staff not understanding the Comittee's letter on the Safety Goal and that the Subcomittee meeting was useful to explain the letter to the Staff. Mr. Ward also stated that the population of plants generally met the Safety Goal and ques- ~ tioned if the reasons for this were well-enough understood. For example, is it by coincidence, or because the plants are designed to certain regulations, or because the pla.nts are designed by traditional industry methods, or because the Safety Goal was defined with the existing population of plants in mind? 8. SeismicDesignMargins(0 pen) [ Note: R. P. Savio was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] Dr. Siess reported on the activities of the Extreme External Phenomena Subcomittee during its September 29, 1987 meeting. The Subcomittee discussed the methodology developed in the NRC's Seismic Design Margins program, the application of this methodology to Maine Yankee, and EPRI's seismic margins methodology. The NRC Seismic Design Margins program appears to be well managed and to be producing useful results. Modifications were made to Maine Yankee as a result of the NRC analysis and the utility operating Maine Yankee believes that the application'was a success. Seismic design margins method-ology will be discussed again when the ACRS considers method-ologies for evaluating seismic risk in the Severe Accident Implementation Plan. 9. AdvancedLightWaterReactorDesigns(0 pen) [ Note: H. Alderman was the Designated Federal Official for thisportionofthemeeting.] Mr. C. Wylie, Chainnan, Future LWR Designs Subcomittee, said that the Subcomittee met on October 6, 1987 to review Chapter 1 of the EPRI ALWR Requirements Document. He noted that other ACRS members in attendance were Carlyle Michelson, l Chester Siess, and Glenn Reed. He noted the principal speak-ers were Mr. Paul Leech for the NRC Staff and Mr. Jack Devine for EPRI. Highlights of Mr. Wylie's report were:

330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 26 Program Goals Establish leadership and effect positive progress toward a revitalized nuclear power system in the United States. Formulate a practical and credible foundation for the design of advanced light water reactors for the next decade. Program Structure ~ EPRI Effort - This is a $20 million, five-year program. The program consists of three separate but related major elements: Regulatory Stabilization - Cooperative effort with NRC to identify and research outstanding issues of nuclear plant safety Utility Requirements Docuaent - Development of a comprehensive set of design requirements for the ALWR Small Plant Design Developnent - Investigation and development of small (less than 600 MWe) nuclear plant options Participants Utility Steering Committee This is comprised of nuclear utility executives with Staff support EPRI Staff Contractor Teams CE/ Duke Power GE/Bechtel Westinghouse / Stone and Webster / Commonwealth Edison Stone & Webster / Yankee Atomic Foreign Participants Taiwan Power Korea Electric Power Company Kansai Power Company Requirements Document - Chapter 1 The NRC Staff plans to write a draft SER on each chapter of the requirements document as it 13 issued. One overall SER will be written on the total program ..ew. s g ..g- -e ++-+m ep-e ge3+-= a =- p. =

e 330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 27 Changes to the individual chapters will be made when the program is complete Chapters 1-4 of the Requirements Document are on hand. The review concentrated on Chapter 1. The Staff review used the Standard Review Plan as guid-ance. The Staff assumed all regulatory requirements will be-met by users except where noted. The program is hampered by lack of resources within EPRI and the Staff. There is about a one-year slippage. The Comittee discussed whether or not the EPRI effort would stabilize the licensing program. No definite conclusion was reached. The Comittee noted that not much effort was shown in advances in the state of the art or in regulatory requirements. Mr. Wylie noted the NRC Staff's conclusions: The Staff is in general agreement with the objectives and overall requirements in Chapter 1. EPRI's resolution of Generic Safety Issues and regulatory optimization proposals need further review by the Staff. Appendix B of the Requirements Document needs substantial revisions. EPRI also comitted to making changes in various requirements. Subject to resolution of the above items, a favorable detennination can be made relative to Chapter 1. The Comittee requested a briefing on Chapter 1 by EPRI during the November 1987 Comittee meeting. Some of the senior EPRI staff are unable to make the November ACRS meeting, so it has been rescheduled for December 1987.

10. Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena (0 pen)

[ Note: P. A. Boehnert was the Designated Federal Offic_ial for this portion of the meeting.] Mr. Ward noted the topics discussed at the last meeting of the Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena Subcomittee (i.e., GI-135, "Steam Generator and Steam Line Overfill. Issues)". water hanner a the potential unanalyzed LB LOCA scenario He referred the \\ ._._...._7_

) { O 330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 28 Comittee trembers to tne reference material in the Meeting Notebook. 11. DecayHeatRemoval(0 pen) [ Note: P. A. Boehnert was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] Mr. Ward, Chairman of the Decay Heat Removal (DHE) Systems ~ Subcomittee, referred the Comittee members to the write-up in the Meeting Folders for information on the status of the NRC resolution effort for Generic Issue 23: "Reactor Coolant Pump Seal Leakage." This Issue was discussed at the August 5, 1987 DHRS Subcomittee meeting. B. Reports, Letters and Memoranda (0 pen) 1. ACRS Coments on the Proposed Resolution of Generic Issue 124 "Auxiliary Feedwater System Reliability" The Comittee objected to the NRC Staff approach to. resolve concerns for the reliability of auxiliary feedwater systems in seven particular plants. The NRC Staff was urged to abandon its current resolution effort and develop a resolution that is truly generic and has long-tenn utility. 2. ACRS Coments on Nuclear Power Plant Air Cooling Systems The Comittee recommended that the NRC Staff. examine the generic nature of failures of air cooling systems in certain nuclear power plants. 3. ACRS Action on Proposed Final Regulatory Guide (Task EE 404-4), "Environmental Qualification of Connection Assemblies for Nuclear Power Plants" The Comittee concurred in the regulatory position as stated in the proposed regulatory guide. C. Other Committee Conclusions (0 pen) 1. H.R. 3285, Nuclear Energy Reorganization Act of 1987 The Comittee agreed that an ad hoc working group be estab-lished to develop for ACRS consideration a Committee position concerning H. R. 3285, the recent bill introduced by Congress-man Udall entitled "Nuclear Energy Reorganization Act of 1987." It was also suggested that S. 1085, "Nuclear Pro-tections and Safety Act of 1987" (the Glenn bill), be given further thought. [The Working Group is to be chaired by Dr. ,-y,7.,~.-.

\\ I 330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 29 Remick with Drs. Kerr and Lewis and Mr. Ward as members. The Working Group plans to meet during the forthcoming meeting of the Planning Comittee.] 2. Variability of Natural Background Radiation [ Note: E. G. Igne was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] It was decided that Dr. Mark's paper on Variability of Natural Background Radiation should be released as a NUREG. Dr. Mark plans to rewrite some portions of the report. An ACRS staff member (E. Igne) has been assigned to work with Dr. Mark until the report'is released. 3. Response to Mr. Robert R. Loux. State of Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects The Committee agreed to send to the NRC Office of Governmental and Public Affairs a proposed response. for Chairman Zech's signature to the complaint regarding ACRS activities from Mr. Robert R. Loux, State of Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects. 4. Report to Congress on NRC Safety Research Program The Committee discussed several alternates prepared by OGC concerning the statutory requirements for ACRS to annually report to Congress' on the NRC Safety Research Program. Alternate B, that would require reports to Congress only when the Comittee believes them appropriate, seEmed to be the preferred choice. It is expected that this matter will be discussed further during the Planning Subcomittee meeting of October 22-24, 1987. D. FutureActivities(0 pen) 1. Callaway Nuclear Plant Power Increase. Mr. Ebersole, as Chainnan of the Reactor Operations Subcomittee, agreed to review the SER on the stretch power application for Callaway and to make recomendations to the ACRS as to future ACRS reviews. 2. Meeting Dates for CY 1988 The Comittee agreed on meetin'g dates for CY 1988. (See Appendix II.) ...--..-,---r. 4 ..py,,,,,w-.. ....,..g ,,,.g,,

I 330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 30 3. Future Agenda The Comittee agreed to the tentative future agenda as_ shown in Appendix III, 4. Future Subcomittee Activities f A schedule of future subcomittee activities was distributed to members (Appendix IV). The 330th ACRS Meeting was adjourned at 1:07 p.m., Saturday, October 10, 1987 i 4 N ? +-aw g e -. - p, s.- , ~. - _ ~

4 i k' APPENDICES 330TH ACRS MEETING OCTOBER 8-10, 1987 WASHINGTON, D.C. I. Attendees II. Meeting Dates for Calendar Year 1988 III. Future Agenda i IV. Subcomittee Activities V. Other Documents Received l

9 t 329 331 332 333 3 34 335 336 337 338 ACRS MEETING DATE b b 6 - (c)(.T f l ATTENDEES Thursday Friday Saturday Dr. William Kerr, Chairman 6 '" L-7 Dr. Forrest J. Remick, Vice Chairman L 7 y Mr. Jesse C. Ebersole v e 7 Dr. Harold W. Lewis v' r 7 Dr. Carson Mark 4-t- 7 Mr. Carlyle Michelson L 6-4- Dr. Dade W. Moeller V 7 / Dr. David Okrent V 6. 7 1 Mr. Glenn A. Reed

t. -

v Dr. Paul G. Shewmon / / / / / Dr. Chester P. Siess L-Dr. Martin J. Steindler V~ V' / Mr. David A. Ward V 7' / Mr. Charles J. Wylie / [ [ j \\ APPENDIX I o-

ATTENDEES 330TH ACRS MEETING OCTOBER 8-10, 1987 WASHINGTON, D.C. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 8,1987 NRC Attendees R. Hernan, NRR Thomas Cox, NRR Scott Newberry, OEDO Cecil Thomas, NRR M. Boyle, NRR C. Grimes, OSP N. P. Kadambi, NRR W. Cy. Lyon, NRR Jose A. Calvo. NRR Vernon Hodge, NRR Thomas McKenna, AE00 Ray Priebe, AEOD Public Attendees Kathy Boyd, Heritage Peporting Corp. L. Connor, DSA Eve fotopoulos, SERCH Licensing Bechtel Nick Suttora, NUS Emily Gray, U.S. House of Representatives R. E. Schaffstal, KMC D. Stenger, BCP&R P. F. Riellof, KMC R. M. Vacich, NU L. Neal, GE J. Kyros, Doubs & Muntzing J. H. Parr, ell, Gannett/TV Max Page, Gannett George Davis, BCP&R Mark Beaumont, Westinghouse Byron Ezell, Washington Independent News Jack Bailey, Houston Ltg. & Power Co. Mark Wisenburg Houston Ltg. & Power Co. Len Schlazer, Houston Ltg. & Power Co. Robert E. Sweeney, EBASCO Juan R. Palum, Houston PCS Susan Schultz, Washington Independent News Andrea Shepherd, GannetT News Service John Peroburn, Houston Chronicle John MacEvoy, Self Donna Cook, HRC P. F. Collins, KMC Karl R. Goller, Goller Assocs. Johnathan E. Carter, BCP&R I-2

f ATTENDEES 330TH ACRS MEETING OCTOBER 8-10, 1987 WASHINGTON, D.C. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1987 NRC Attendees Ron Hernan, NRR Don Kosloff, R III L. B. Mayh, NRR W. G. Guldemond, R III P. W. Baranowsky, NRR L. Zerr, NRR W. L. Jensen, NRR R. W. Woodruff, NRR Bill LeFave, NRR Public Attendees Kathy Boyd, Heritage Reporting Corp. Kelley Baker, MPR Associates (SQUG) W. R. Schmidt, MPR Associates J. E. Thomas, Duke Power Neil P. Smith, Commonwealth Edison H. J. Eckert, NUS Corp. R. E. Schaffstall, KMC D. H. Bjorkbom, SERCH Licensing-Bechtel Bill Bnass, SERCH Licensing, Bechtel Jess Betiack, MPR Mark Phillis, Bishop Cook, etal. Alex Marion, Baltimore Gas & Electric Co. L. Neal, GE D. Cook, HRC j

0. Luznieuski, GRS L. Connon, DSA H. M. Fontecilla, Va. Power B. Borsum, B&W B. Jordan, McGraw Hill C. Chester, ERCI/IEAL Geoff. Kaiser, NUS I-3 P

'o UNITED STATES ~,, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g 3 ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS [ W ASHINGT ON, D. C. 30653 o October 13, 1987 MEMORANDUM FOR: Addressees ijg,'e/ Bel FROM: R. F. Fra e,7, x N ive ector, ACRS SUEJECT: ACPS MEETING DATES FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1988 ACRS meeting dates for CY 1988 have been scheduled, as noted: MEETING DATE OF MEETING 333 January 7-9, 1988 334 February 11-13, 1988 335 Varch 10-12, 1988 336 April 7-9, 1988 337 May 5-7, 1988 338 June 2-4, 1988 339 July 14-16, 1988 340 August 11-13, 1988 341 September 8-10, 1988 3a2 October 6-8, 1988 343 November 17-19, 1988 344 December 15-17, 1988 List of Addressees: V. Stello, EDO T. Rehm, EDO S. Chilk, SECY J. Hoyle, ACM0 R. Hernan, NRR NRC Office Directors NRC Division Directors Regional Administrators ACRS Members ACRS Staff / Fellows APPENDIX II i 4

l APPENDIX III FUTURE AGENDA November 5-7, 1987 J Nuclear Power Plant Technical Specifications (CYM/EGI) Estimated j time = 1 hour - Consider proposed NFC policy statement regarding the scope, etc., of Technical Specifications. StandardizationofNuclearPlants(CJW/HA) Estimated time = 3 hours - Discuss proposed EPRI requirements for advanced LWRs. TVANuclearPowerPlantOperations(CJW/RPS) Estimated time = 2 ~ hours - Consider proposed TVA Corporate Management Plan and the proposed restart of the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant Internal Management of NRC Activities (DWM/SJSP) Estimated time = li hour - Discuss with the NRC Commissiuders the allocation of NRC resources and manpower to provide advice regarding nuclear waste. StationBlackout(CJW/tHE) Estimated time = 1 hour - Discuss the proposed resolution of USI A-44, Station Blackout, and discuss related NUMARC activities. Nomination of ACRS Officers for CY 1988 (DAW /NSL) Estimated time = 4 hour - Nominate a Chaiman and Vice-Chaiman for CY-88 and nominate and elect a Member At Large to serve on the Planning Committee. Future ACRS Activities (WK/RFF/HWL) Estimated time = 1 hr. - Discuss anticipated ACRS subcomittee activities and items for consideration by the full Comittee. Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal (CJW/RKM) Estimated time = 11 hours. Briefing and discussion of proposed NRC policy regarding renewal of nuclear power plant operating licenses. HeetingwithDirector,HRCOfficeofResearch(WK/RFF) Estimated time = 1 hour - Discuss items of mutual interest. AppointmentofNewACRSMembers(HWL/NSL) Estimated time = 1 hour - Discuss qualifications of candidates for appointment to fill the vacancies of the Comittee. Safety Implications of Control Systems (JCE/MME) Estimated time = l{ hours - Consider proposed resolution of USI A-47, "Safety Implications of Control Systems," and cocinents from Mr. D. Basdekas, NRC, that relate to this matter. Maintenance of Nuclear Facilities (GAR /HA) Estimated time = i hour - Discuss proposed NRC policy statement regarding maintenance practices at nuclear facilities. r

4 330TH ACRS MEETING 2 BabcockandWilcoxLWRDesignAssessment(CJW/RKM) Estimated time = 1 hour - 5tatus report regarding the B&W/NRC design reassessment of the long-term safety of B&W LWRs. Analysis and Evaluation of Operational Data (HWL/RKM) Estimated time = 3/4 hour - Briefing and discussion regarding AEOD's evalua-tion of nuclear power plant operating experience. Diagnostic Evaluation Proc ram (JCE/HA) Estimated time = 1 hour - Briefing regarding NRC's c.1 agnostic evaluation program, including the evaluation of the Dresden Nuclear Power Station. ACRS Subcomittee Activities (WK/TGM) Estimated time = 1 hour - Briefing regarding the status of assigned ACRS subcommittee activ-

ities, Nuclear Radwaste Safety Research (DWM/OSM) Estimated time = 3/4 hour - Discuss proposed ACR5 reconirendations regarding NRC nuclear radwaste research.

NuclearRadwasteManagement(DWM/OSM) Estimated time = 1 hour - Report of ACR5 subcomittee activities regarding NRC's high-level i and low-level radwaste program. Decay Heat Removal (DAW /PAB) Estimated time = i hour - Briefing by NRC 5taff regarding the status of resolution of USI A-45. Integrated Safety Assessment Program (DAW /PAB) Estimated time = li hours - Discuss proposed ACRS coments regarding proposed NRC Staff implementation of the ISAP. UseofPRA(WK/ DAW /HDH) Estimated time = li hours - Briefing and discussion regarding resolution of ACRS coments on NUREG-1150 and the proposed implementation plan for the NRC Quantitative Safety Goals (tentative) Nuclear Radwaste Advice (DWM/SJSP) Estimated time = 3 hours - Discuss proposed ACR5 report on a setup to provide technical advice to the NRC on radwaste. Meet tvith the Commissioners to discuss 1 this matter. PendingLegislation(FJR/TGM) Report of ACRS Working Group regard-ing the Energy Reorganization Act of 1987 (H.R. 3285) Control Air Systens (JCE/ GAR /SD) Estimated time = 3/4 hour - Discuss proposed ACRS report regarding control air systems in nuclear plants 111-2 \\ l l

330TH ACRS MEETING 3 December 3-5, 1987 Reorganization of Nuclear Industry Activities (FJR/RFF) Advanced (DOE)ReactorReview(DAW /MME) US! A-17, Systems Interactions ( /HDH) USI-83, Control Room Habitability (DWM/EGI) Future RegulatoryGuide1.99,RadiationEmbrittlement(PGS/EGI) DesignforMaximumProbablePrecipitation(GI-[01){ /RPS) O III-3

ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS Waste Management, October 15 and 16, 1987, 1717 H Street, NW, Washinc ton, DC (Merrill), 8: 30 A.M., Room 1046. The Subcommittee will review anc 'dTscussthefollowinglow-levelwaste(LLW) topics: (1) NRC's Low-Level Waste Fonn Program, (2) EPA's LLW standards, including the "below regulato-ry concern" (BRC) and ground water standards, and (3) logical framework for the protection of the public from radiation. The Subcomittee will also review and discuss the following high-level waste topics: (1) definition of HLW, (2) "Q-List" Generic Technical Position and Readiness Reviews, (3) NNWS1 Project Seismic / Tectonic Site Characterization Plan Strategies, cnd (4) NRC's Quality Assurance (QA) Program for computer codes and models. Attendance by the following is enticipated, and reservations have been made at the hotels indicated for the nights of October 14 and 15: Dr. Moeller LOMBARDY Dr. Steindler NONE Dr. Mark LOMBARDY Dr. Krauskopf NONE Dr. Remick NONE Dr. Parker NONE Dr. Shewmon NONE Dr. Trifunac NONE Planning Comittee, October 22-24, 1987, Sheraton International Conference Center, Reston, VA. The Comittee will discuss the future role of ACRS and membership needs. Attendees will be announced later. Joint Scram Systems Reliability and Core Performance, October 28, 1987, 1717 H Street, hW, Washington, DC (Boehnert/ Houston), 8:30 A.M., Room 1046. The Subcommittees will review the current status of LWR plant operations (core reload designs, eti: ) as they impact on core reactivity centrol operational limits (e.g. moderator temperature coefficients in general, and ATWS analyses in particular). Lodging will be annourced later. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Dr. Kerr Mr. Reed Mr. Ebersole Dr. Shewmon Dr.. Lewis Mr. Ward Dr. Mark Dr. Lee Instrumentation and Control Systems, October 29, 1987, 1717 H Street, NW, Wasnington, DC (El-Zeftawy), 8:30 A.M., Room 1046. The Subcomittee will discuss the NRC's proposed final resolution of USI A-47, "Safety Implica-tions of Control Systems." In addition, the Subcomittee will discuss and consider the coments by Mr. Basdekas regarding the resolution of this USI. Lodging will be announced later. Attendance by the following is antici-pated: Mr. Ebersole Mr. Reed Dr. Lewis Mr. Wylie Mr. Michelson f$ /

Systematic Assessment of Operating Experience, November 3, 1987, 1717 H 5treet, NW, Washinnton, DC (Major), 1:00 P.M., Room 1046. The Subcomittee will discuss AEOD's role in helping the NRC learn from operating experi-ence. Lodging will be announced later. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Dr. Lewis Mr. Michelson Mr. Ebersole Mr. Ward i TVA Organizational Issues, November 4, 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC (Savio), 8:30 A.M., Room 1167. The Subcommittee will review the safety issues associated with TVA management reorganization and the Sequoyah restart. Lodging will be announced later. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Mr. Wylie Dr. Remick Mr. Ebersole Mr. Ward Mr. Michelson Mr. Barton Mr. Reed Dr. Hagedorn 331st ACRS Meeting, November 5-7,'1987, Washington, DC, Room 1046. Maintenance Practices and Procedures, November 12, 1987, 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC (Alderman), 1:30 P.M., Room 1046. The Subcommittee will be briefed and will discuss the proposed Policy Statement on Maintenance of Nuclear Pcwer Plants. Lodging will be announced later. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Mr. Reed Mr. Michelson Mr. Ebersole Mr. Wylie Quality and Quality Assurance in Desicn and Construction, November 24, 1987, 1717 H 5treet, NW, Washington, DC (Igne), 8:30 A.M., Room 1046. The Subcomittee will review QA Experience in Readiness Reviews as applied to nuclear power plants, with a view toward poss'ible application to HLW geologic repositories and monitored retrievable storage (MRS) facilities. Lodging will be announced later. Attendance by the following is antici-pated: Mr. Reed Dr. Siess 0. Moeller Mr. Wylie Dr. Remick ( ~g-g k

Safety Research Program (Closed) (Tentative), December 2, 1987, 1717 H 5treet, NW, Washington, DC (Duraiswamy), 8:30 A.M., Room 1046. The Subcom-mittee will discuss the proposed NRC Safety Research Program and budget for FY 1989, and possibly the OMB mark on the NRC budget, so as to have a clear perspective of the overall NRC Safety Research Program. Also, to gather infomation for use by the ACRS in the event it needs to write a report to the Congress. Lodging will be announced later. Attendance by the follow-ing is anticipated: Dr. Siess Dr. Remick Dr. Kerr Dr. Shewmon Dr. Mark Mr. Ward Mr. Michelson Mr. Wylie Dr. Moeller 332nd ACRS Meetino, December 3-5, 1987, Washington, DC, Room 1046. Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena, Date to be detennined (October), Washington, DC (Boehnert). The Subcomittee will review: (1) the final version of ' revised ECCS Rule, and (2) the status of the R[S themal hydraulic research program. Attendance by the following is anticip,ated: Mr. Michelson Dr. Catton Mr. Ebersole Dr. Schreck Dr. Kerr Mr. Sullivan Mr.' Ward Dr. Tien Mr. Wylie Decay Heat Removal Systems, Date to be determined (October), Washington, DC ') (Boehrert). The Subcomittee will continue its review of the NRR Resolu-tion Position for USI A-45. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Mr. Ward Mr. Wylie Mr. Ebersole Dr. Catton' Mr. Michelson Mr. Davis Mr. Reed Severe Accidents, Date to be determined (October / November) (tentative), Washington,DC(Houston). The Subcomittee will review the final version of the hRC Staff's proposed generic letter on Individual Plant Examinations (IPEs). Attendance by the following is anticipated: Dr. Xerr Dr. Siess Dr. Mark Mr. Ward Dr. Shewmon ( d

Containment Requirements, Date to be detemined (October / November), Washington, DC (Houston). The Subcommittee will review the hydrogen controlmeasuresforBWRsandIceCondenserPWRs(USIA-48). May also involve EPGs for BWRs. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Dr. Mark Dr. Siess Mr. Ebersole Mr. Wylie Dr. Kerr Advanced Reactor Designs, Date to be determined (Nnvember), Washington, DC, * (El-Zeftawy). The Subcommittee will review and coment on the draft Comission paper that will be prepared by the NRC Staff regarding the severe accidents and containment issues for the DOE-sponsored advanced reactor designs. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Mr. Ward Mr. Michelson Mr. Ebersole Dr. Okrent Dr. Kerr Dr. Siess Dr. Mark Mr. Wylie Generic Item's, Date to be detemined (November), Washington, DC IDuraiswamy). The Subcomittee will discuss with selected licensees the contribution to plant safety resulting from the implementation of resolved generic issues and USIs. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Dr. Siess Dr. Moeller Mr. Ebersole Dr. Remick Mr. Michelson Mr. Wylie Containment Requirements. Date to be determined (November / December), Washington, DC (Houston). The Subcommittee will review the proposed Containment Perfomance/Inprovement Program Plan. The Plan is in three parts: (1) Improved plant operations including E0Ps, (2) Severe accident vulnerabilities via IPEs and (3) Containment perfomance in the event of a severe accident. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Dr. Mark Dr. Siess Mr. Ebersole Mr. Wylie Dr. Kerr Metal Components, Date to be detemined (November / December), Charlotte, NC (Igne). The Subcomittee will review the status of the NDE of cast stain-less steel piping and other topics related to Subcomittee activities. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Dr. Shewmon Mr. Ward Dr. Lewis Mr. Rodabaugh Mr. Michelson Dr. B. Thompson 4

CombustionErgineeringReactorPlants,Datetobedetermined(November / December), Washington, DC (Houston). The Subcomittee will initiate its review of CESSAR-Plus (CE's Advanced LWR for the 1990's). Attendance by the following is anticipated: Dr. Remick Mr. Reed (tent.) Dr. Lewis Mr. Wylie Mr. Michelson Safety Philosophy, Technology, and Criteria, Date to be detemined '(November / December), Washington, DC (Houston). The Subcomittee will meet with the NRC Staff and discuss their proposed plans for implementation of the Safety Goal Policy. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Chairmin (to be determined) Dr. Remick Dr. Kerr Mr. Ward Dr. Lewis Mr. Wylie Mr. Michelson Babcock & Wilcox Reactor Plants, Date to be detemined (November / December), Washington, DC (Major). Ttye Subcomittee will continue its review of the long-tem safety review of B&W reactors. This effort was begun during the sumer of 1986; initial Comittee coments offered on July 16, 1986 in a-letter to V. Stello, EDO, Attendance by the following is anticipated: Mr. Wylie Mr. Reed Mr. Ebersole Mr. Ward Dr. Kerr Mr. Etherington Dr. Lewis Mr. Davis (tentative) Mr. Michelson i Diablo Canyon, Date to be detemined (late November /early December), Eccation tote detemined (Igne). The Subcomittee will review the status 1 of the Diablo Canyon Long-Tem Seismic Program. Attendance by the follow-ing is anticipated: Dr. Siess Mr. Davis'(tentative) Mr. Ebersole Dr. Page Dr. Kerr Dr. Maxwell Dr. Lewis Dr. G. Thompson Dr. Moeller Dr. Trifunac Dr. Scavuzzo i Structural Engineering, Date to be detemined (late November or January 1988), Albuquerque,NM(Igne). The Subcommittee will review the results of the model concrete containment test. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Dr. Siess' Mr. Bender Mr. Ebersole Dr. Pickel Dr. Shewmon Mr. Rodabaugh ~~ f

s Westinghouse Reactor Plants, Date to be determined (December / January 1988), Washington, DC (El-Zeftawy). The Subcommittee will discuss and hear presentations from Westinghouse representatives regarding the important design features and objectivv's of WAPWR (RESAR SP/90) and the AP 600 designs. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Mr. Ward Mr. Reed (tent.) Mr. Ebersole Dr. Shewmon Dr. Kerr Mr. Wylie Mr. Michelson Auxiliary Systems, Date to be determined (January,(tentative), Washington, DC (Duraiswamy). The Subcommittee will discuss:

1) criteria being used ByutilitiestodesignChilledWaterSystem,(2)regulatoryrequirements for Chilled Water System Design, and (3) criteria being used by the NRC Staff to review the Chilled Water System design. To facilitate this discussion, some members of the Subcommittee will tour the Shearon Harris plant to look at the Chilled Water System design at that plant. Attendance by the following is anticipated:

Mr. Michelson Dr. Moeller Mr. Ebersole Mr. Wylie i Auxiliary Systems, Date to be determined (February 1988), Washington, DC (Duraiswamy). The Subconnittee will discuss the final feport on the Fire Risk Scoping Study being performed by Sandia National Laboratories for the NRC. Attendance by the followina is anticipated: Mr. Michelson Dr. Moeller Mr. Ebersole Mr. Wylie Containment Reouirements, Date to be determined (April 1988), Washington, DC (Housten). The Subcommittee will review the NRC Staff's document on containment performance and improvements (all containment types). ~ Attendance by the following is anticipated: Dr. Mark (tent.) Dr. Siess l Mr. Ebersole Mr. Wylie Dr. Kerr f

APPENDIX Y 330TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES OCTOBER 8-10, 1987 OTHER DOCUMENTS RECEIVED 1. Status Report - Revised Backfit Rule (Proposed) 2. Memo for H. Lewis and D. Okrent from G. Quittschreiber, Subj: Proposed Backfit Rule Clarification, dated 9/29/37 3. 50 FR 34223-34225 Sept. 10, 1987, NRC Proposed Rule 10 CFR Part 50.109, Revision of Backfitting Process for Power Reactors 4. Status Report - Integrated Safety Assessment Program 5. SECY-87-219, Integrated Safety Assessment Program, dated 8/31/87 6. Draft Generic i.etter, Subj: Individual P1snt Examinations for Severe Accident Vulnerabilities, dated 5/15/87 7. Executive Sumary of Hi11 stone ISAP dated April 1987 8. Project Status Report - South Texas Units 1 and 2 9. Memo for Dennis Crutchfield from R. Fraley, Subj.: ACRS Items on South Texas Project Units 1 and 2 dated 9/18/87 10. Status Report - NRC Presentation of Zion Station Full Field Exercise (FFE)

11. FFE-2 Lessons Learned (Sumary, 5 pp.)

12. Status Report - Implications of Chernobyl

13. Memo to W. Kerr from D. Ward regarding NRC Staff response to ACRS letter dated 1/15/87, "ACRS Connents on the Implication of the Accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Station Unit 4", dated 9/25/87 14 Memo for R. Fraley from V. Stello,

Subject:

321st ACRS Meeting (January 8-10,1987) Follow-Up Items, dated 4/20/87

15. Status Report - GI-124, "Auxiliary Feedwater System Reliability"

16. Memo to ACRS Comittee Members from J. Ebersole Subj: Auxiliary Feedwater System Reliability-Generic Issue 124, dated 9/11/87

17. Memo for ACRS Members and ACRS Technical Staff from S. Duraiswany, Subj.: Status Report - Report of the Auxiliary Systems Subcomittee Chairman - 330th ACRS Meeting, October 8-10, 1987, dated 9/24/87

18. Status Report - Seismic Qualification of Equipment P'

330TH ACRS MEETING 2

19. Memo for C. Wylie from R. Major, Subj.: USI A-46, Trial Plant Walkdown at Zion Nuclear Power Plant 2 - Trip Report, May 18 and 19, 1987, dated 5/28/87

20. Memo for C. Wylie from R. Major, Subj.: June 25, 1987 Meeting with the Seismic Oualification Utility Grcup to Review Results of A-46 Trial Plant Review of the Zion Plant, dated 7/1/87 21.

Status Report - Development (Sheltering) on Emergency Planning

22. Memo for D. Okrent from A. Tabatabai, Subj.:

Report on Licensees Decision-Making Process in the Event of a Nuclear Emergency, dated 9/23/87 23. Report, "Some Insights into the Emergency Response Decision-Making Process in the U.S. Nuclear Power Plants," by Ali S. Tabatabai and Gilbert M. Brown, ACRS, dated September 1987 24 Reg. Guide 1.97, Rev. 3. Instrumentation for Light-Water Cooled Nuclear Power Plants to Assess Plant and Environs Conditions During and Following an Accident," dated May 1983 25. Status Report for the October 9, 1987 Discussion on Seismic Design Margins

26. Memo for C. Siess, H. Lewis, D. Moeller, C. Wylie from R. Savio, Subj.:

September 29, 1987 Meeting of the Extreme External Phenomena Subcomittee, dated 9/2/87 27. Status Report - Thennal Hydraulic Phenomena (T/H) Subcomittee Activities

28. Certified Minutes of the T/H Phenomena Subcomittee August 4,1987 Meeting, dated 9/1/87

29. Memo for D. Ward from P. Boehnert, Subj.:

NRR Actions - Followup on Postulated LOCA Scenario and Potentially Unanalyzed Accident, dated 8/20/87

30. Memo for P. Boehnert from I. Catton, Subj.: T/H Phenomena Subcomittee August 4, 1987, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., dated 9/16/87

31. Memo to D. Ward from V. Schrock, Coments on subjects covered at August 4 Thenral Hydraulics Subcomittee Meeting, dated 8/13/87 Letter to D. Ward from L. Sullivan, Subj(.: August 4,1987), dated Consultant Connents of 32.

Thermal Hydraulics Subcomittee Meeting 8/20/87 V-2

330TH ACRS MEETING 3 e

33. Letter to P. Boehnert from C. Tien, Subj.: ACRS Thennal-Hydraulic Phenomena Subcomittee Meeting, August 4,1987, dated 9/14/87 34 Status Report - GI-23, "RCP Seal Leakage"

35. Excerpt from Minutes of Decay Heat Removal Systems Subcomittee Meeting of August 5, 1987, pp. 10-13

36. Memo to P. Boehnert from 1. Catton,

Subject:

Decay Heat Removal Subcommittee Meeting, 5 August 1987, 1717 H Street, Washington, D.C., dated 8/29/87

37. Status Report - Discussion re Final ACRS Approval of Reg. Guide EE 404-4, "Environmental Qualification of Connection Assemblies for Nuclear Power Plants" l

38. Memo for C. Wylie from R. Major, Subj:

Final ACRS Approval for Issuance of Regulatory Guide EE 404-4, "Environmental Qualification of Connection Assemblies for Nuclear Power Plants," dated 9/28/87

39. Memo for R. Fraley from G. Arlotto, Subj.:

Regulatory Guide EE 404-4, "Environmental Qualification of Connection Assemblies for Nuclear Power Plants, dated 9/21/87 1

40. Draft Regulatory Guide and Value Impact Statement, Task EE 404-4, Environmental Qualification of Connection Assemblies for Nuclear Power Plants, May 1987

41. ANSI /IEEE Std. 572-1985, IEEE Standard for Qualification of Class 1E Connection Assemblies for Nuclear Power Generating Stations, dated September 9, 1985 Presentations NRC Staff presentation on Backfitting NRC Staff presentation on Integrated Safety Assessment Program NRC Staff presentation on South Texas Project NRC Staff presentation on FFE-2 (at Zion) + Pilot Program NRC Staff presentation on Seismic Qualification of Equipment SQUG/A-46 Program Stttus and Schedule NRC Staff presentation on USI A-46 NRC Staff presentation on Operating Experience y-3

330TH ACRS MEET 1HG 4 Handouts

1 Status Report - Nuclear Power Plant Operating Experience
2 Status Report - Subcommittee on Safety Philosophy, Technology and Criteria Meeting of October 7, 1987
3 Mero for ACRS from M. W. Libarkin, Subj.: Scheduling ACRS Activities, dated 10/6/87
5 H.R. 3285
6 S. 1065
7 Future Activities
8 Memo for Bill Kerr from R. F. Fraley, Subj.: Subcommittee Assignments /New Members, dated 10/8/87
10 Letter to John Tolan from Robert Alexander, dated 8/3/87 V-4 1

._}}

ML20148G867

Contents

Text

Subject:

. n =

-e 7e aq u p = = = e r-A - mm* - h, *

'm g & e *-

Subject:

Subject:

Navigation menu

ML20148G867

Text

Subject:

. n =

-e 7e aq u p = = = e r-A - mm* - h, *

'm g & e *-

Subject:

Subject:

Navigation menu

Search