ML20150C156
| ML20150C156 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 07/01/1988 |
| From: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| References | |
| ACRS-2562, NUDOCS 8807120333 | |
| Download: ML20150C156 (53) | |
Text
--
,/,-
884 c#54A f
D' TABLE OF CONTENTS q
q d
335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES y'
MARCH 10-12, 1988 l
(f)/3 N'dage I.
Chairman's Report (0 pen).............................................
1 II. Human Factors Research (0 pen)........................................
1 III. Operating Events and Incidents (0 pen)................................
4 l
IV. Rancho Seco Nuclear Power Plant Restart (0 pen).......................
7 V.
DOE Advanced Reactor Severe Accident Program (0 pen)..................
10 l
VI. Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (0 pen)........................................
12 l
VII. Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2, "Radiation Embrittlement of Reactor Vessel Mate ri al s" (0 pen)....................,................
13 VIII.
Embri ttl ement of Structural Steel (0 pen).............................
14 IX.
Ex ecu ti ve Ses s i on s (0 pen )............................................
14 A. Subcomi ttee Re ports (0 pen ).......................................
14 1.
Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena...................................
14 2.
Decay Heat Removal Systems..............
15 3.
S t ru c t u ra l E n g i n e e r i n g........................................
16 4
Quantitative Safety Goal......................................
17 5.
Joint Meeting - Scram Systems Reliability / Core Performance....
18 B. Reports, Letters and Memoranda (0 pen).............................
21 1.
ACRS Report on the Restart of the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant......
21 l
2.
ACRS Comments on the Need for Greater Coherence Among New R e g u l a t o ry Po l i c i e s.......................................... 21 3.
ACRS Coments on Embrittlement of Structural Steel............ 22 1
4.
ACRS Coments on Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2, "Radiation Embrittlement of Reactor Vessel Mater!als" Dated March 1988...
22 C. O ther Comi ttee Concl u sions (0 pen)................................
22 1.
Coherence Among New Regulatory Po11cies.......................
22 2.
Important Safety Related Issues...............................
22 3
Power Increase at the Callaway Plant, Unit 1..................
25 4.
Testing of Installed Electric Cables......................... 25 5.
Operating Li cense for timeri ck-2.............................. 25 i
6.
Proposed Change to the ACRS M aws............................
26 i
7.
Dr. Remick's Participation ' INS Meeting.....................
26 l
8.
Meeting with Comissionerr # daintenance Policy Statement.... 26 j
9.
Independent Review of NRC M f Report on TVA Lessons Learned. 20 l
10.
International Orga nization Similar to INP0.................... 26 11.
International Meeting on Quality and Quality Control..........
26
- 12. Saturday Sessions.............................................
27 8807120333 880701
$62 #
PDR Certifica U f$
)
s s
ii Page D. Future Activities (0 pen) 1.
Future Agenda.........,.......................................
27 2.
Futu re Subcomi ttee Activ i ti es................................ 27
s
' 60 g_g
}
1 e
l i
iii I
APPENDICES 335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES l
MARCH 10-12, 1988 1.
Attendees 4
II.
Future Agenda III.
Future Subcomittee Activities i
IV.
Other Documents Received a
I' f
l 1
j J
i
335 4A Fed:ral R:gister / Vol. 53. No. 41/ Wednesday. March 2. 20 i Notices g/ //) /h 6714 held on March 18.1988 from 9 00 a.m.-
&f5 a m.-12:00 Noon: NRC Sofety regarding matters considered during thin 5 00 p m., and on March 19.1988 from Research Program (Open}-Briefing by meeting.
10 00 a m -2 00 p m. in room 714 of the representatives of the National 1:30 p.m.-2:15 p.m.:New ACRS Nancy Hanks Center.1100 Penr.sylvania Academy of Sciences Panelon Human Alembers and Al/ocation of Resources Avenue NW., Washington. DC 20506.
Factors Research Needs in Regulatory (Closed}-Discuss qualification of A portion of this meeting will be open Process.
candidates proposed for appointment to to the public on March 19.1988 from 100 p.m.-2:30 p.m.: Operating Events the Committee and the internal 10 00 a m.-2 00 p.m. for policy issues and and locidents (Open/ Closed)-Briefing management of resources to support guidelines discussion.
and discussion regarding rec at advisory functions.
The remaining sessions of this operating events and incidents at These sessions will be closed to meeting on March 18.1988 from 9 00 nuclear power stations.
discuss information the release of which a m.-5 00 p m. are for the purpose of Portions of this session will be closed would represent a clearly unwarranted Panel review, discussion. evaluation and as necessary to discuss Proprirtary invasion of personal privacy and to recummendation on applications for Information applicable to the project discuss the internal agency allocation of financial assistance under the National being considered or safeguards resources to provide technical advice Foundation on the Arts and the information related to the security regarding nuclear waste management Humanities Act of 1965, as amended, provisions for a specific nuclear station.
and disposal.
including information gnen in 2.30p.m.-4 00p.m.: DOE Advanced 2:15 p m.-3:00p.m.: Aliscellaneous confidence to the agency by grant Reactor Severe Accident Program (Open)-Complete discussion ofissues applicants. In accordance with the (Open)-Briefing by DOE regarding the considered during this meeting.
determination of the Chairman nature, objectives, etc. of the Advanced Procedures for the conduct of and published m the Federal Register of Reactor Severe Accident Program.
participation in ACRS meetings were February 13.1980. these sessions will be 4:15p.m.-4:45p.m. Future Activities published in the Federal Register on closed to the public pursuant to (Open)-Discuss anticipated ACRS October 2.1987 ($1 FR 37241). In subsection (c) (41. (6) a nd (9)(b) of subcommittee meetings and items accordance with these procedures, oral section 552b of Title 5, United States proposed for consideration by the full or written statements may be presented he P" ' '
8$
I ou need special accommodations 44 hop.m.: ACRS
- $',"f,$'
e'd onlyu ins due to a disability. please contact the Subccmmittee Activities (Open)-
"8 I O'
- 8
- h'"
- Office for Special Constituencies.
Reports and discussion of designated ranscript is being kept, and questions National Endowment for the Arts.1100 subcommittee activities including Pennsylvania Avenue. NW..
activities regarding thermal. hydraulic CoI tfee,i s consuftant an aff Wa shington. DC 20506. 202/682-553.,,
phenomena, decay heat removal.
d k
l TTY 202/682-54% at least seven (7) structural engineering. and core ftatem ntsoul n tif the ACRS days prior to the meeting.
performance
- Executive Director as far in advance as Further information with reference to this meeting can be obtained from Ms.
Friday. Afarch 11.1983 practicable so that appropriate Yvonne M. Sabine. Advisory Committee 8.J0 a m.-11:30 a.m.: Tennessee Valley arrangements can be made to allow the Management Officer. National Authority Sequoyah Nuclear Plant necessary time during the meeting for Endowment for the Arts. Washington.
(Open)-Brief.ng and discussion such statements. Use of still, motiop DC 20506, or call 202/682-5433.
regarding proposed resolution of picture and television cameras dunng Yvoce sabine, deficiencies at the TVA Sequoyah this meeting may be limited to selected Actag Detector. Couned ond Ponel Nuclear Station.
porti ns of the meeting as determined Ope *ctions. Nat:0calEndom mentfor the Arts.
11:30 a m.-12:30p.m.:NRC Regulatory by the Chairman. Information regarding February 24.1988.
Cuide (Open)-Review proposed NRC the time to be set aside for this purpose Regulatory Guide 1 may be obtained by a prepaid telephone Damage to Reactor'99 Radiation (FR Doc. 6844:2 Filed 3-t-88. e 45 am)
Pressure Vessel call to the ACRS Executive Director. Mr.
Matenals.
Raymond F. Fraley, prior to the meeting.
suo cooe tsn.ew 1:30p m.-2:45 p.m.: Reactor Vessel in view of the possibility that the NUCt. EAR REGUt ATORY Structura/ Supports (Open)-Briefing schedule for ACRS meetings may be COMMISSION and discussion of proposed NRC plan of adjusted by the Chairman as necessary Advisory Comndttee on Reactoe action to resolve questions regarding to facilitate the conduct of the meeting.
pr re e nel struc utal supp rts.
t th CR ecu i D c rf In accordance with the purposes of 2.45 p.m.-4:15 p.m.:Quantitativ, such rescheduling would result in major sections 29 and 182b. of the Atomic Safety Cools (Open)-E riefing and inconvenience.
Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 2039. 2232b), the discussion of NRC Staff efforts to I have determined in accordance with Advisory Committee on Reactor develop an implementation plan for the Subsection 10(d) Pub. L 92-463 that it is Safeguards will hold a meeting on NRC Quantitative Safety Goals.
necessary to close portions of this March 10-12,1988. in Room 1(M8,1717 H 4:15 p.m.-600 p.m.: Safety Related meeting a: noted above to discus Street. NW., Washington. DC. Notice of
/ssues (Open)-Discuss proposed information related to the internal this meeting was published in the hierarchical structure for important personnel rules and proctices of the Federal Register on February 24.1968, safety related issues.
agency (5 U.S C. 552b(c)(2)), safeguards information related to the security i
Thursday. Afarch 10.198d Saturday, Afarch 12.1968 provisions for a specific nuclear atation l
8:30 a.m.-&45 a.m.: Comments by 8.30 a m.-12:30 p.m.: Preparation of (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(3)). information the ACRS Chairman (Open)-The ACRS ACRS Reports (Open)-The members release of which would represent a Chairman will report briefly regarding will discuss proposed Committee clearly unwarranted invasion of items of current interest.
positions and neports to the NRC personal privacy (5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(6)).
m
a 58 i e g
Federal Regista Vol. 53 No. 41 / Wednesday March 2.1988 / Ma f/15 and Proprietary Inforrnation applicable Board willleaue a neloe of hearing or promptly so inform the C~..-. by a to the matter being discussed (5 U.S.C.
an appropriate order, toe-free telephone car to Western
$$2b(c)(4. As required by 10 CMt 2.714. a Union at lece) 32Hm00 (in Misooert Further information regarding iopics petition for leave to intervene shall set (800) 342-C00t The Westem Union - to be discussed. whether the meeting forth with particularity the interest of has been cancelled or rescheduled the the petitioner in the proceeding and operator should be given Datagree *( Identification Number v57 and the Chairman's ruling on requests for the how that intereet may be affected by the following message addressed to Daniel opportunity to present oral statements results of the proceeding. The petition R. Muller: Petitioner's name and f: and the time allotted can be obtained by should specifically explain the reasons telephone number; date petition was a prepaid telephone call to the ACRS why intenention should be p ermitted mailed; plant name; and publicatloc Executive Director. Mr. Raymond F. witn particular reference to the Fraley (telephone 202/64-3265). following factors: (1) The nature of the date and page number of this Faderal Register notice. A copy of the petition between 815 a m. and 5 00 p.m. petitioner's right under the Act to be should also be sent to the OfIice of the Date Februar> 28,1968~ made a party to the proceeding:(2) the General Counsel-RockvlUe. U.S. John C. Ho>le* nature and extent of the peti 1ioner's Nuclear Pegulatory Commisalon. Adiisory Commettee Mucgement OEcer property. hnencial, or other interest in Washington. DC 20555. and to Michael the proceeding: and D) the possible (FR Doc 8&-4508 Filed We 8 45 am] effect of any order which may be Miller. Esquire. Sidley and Austin. One entered in the proceeding on the First Na tional Plaza. Chicago. Dlinois aus coot raio-cw 60603, attorney for the licensee. petitioner's interest.The petition should Nontimely fding of petitions for leave IDocket Nos.: 50-295 and 50-3041 also identify the specific aspect (s) of the to intervene, amended petitions. subject matter of the proceeding as to Commonwealth Edison Co.t which petitioner wishes to inten ene. supplemental petitions and/or requests for r earing will not be entertaired Cansideration of issuance of Any person who has filed a petition for absent a determination by the Amendment to Facility Operatin9 leave to intenene or who has been Ucense and Opportunity for Hearin9 admitted as a party may amend the Commission, the presiding officer or the petition without requesting leave of the presiding Atomic Safely and Ucensmg The United States Nuclear Regulatory B ard up to fifteen (15) days prior to the Board, that the petition and/or request Commission (the Commission)is first prehearing conference scheduled in should be granted based upon a considering issuance of an amendment h pr ceeding but such an amendment balancing of the factors specified in 10 to Faciht> Operating Ucense Nos. DPR-petition must satisfy the specificity CFR 2.714(a)(1)(iHv) and 2.714(d). 39 and DPR-.t8 issued to Commonwealth requirements described above-For further details with respect to this Edison Company (the licensee), for N t later than fifteen (15] days prior to action, see the application for operation of Zio'n Station. Units 1 and 2 the first prehearing conference amendment dated December 24.1987 located in Waukcgan County,llhnois. scheduled in the proceeding a petitic,ner and supplemented by letter dated The amendment would allow steam shall file a supplement to the petition t February 11.1988. which are available generator tubes to be repaired by intervene which must include a list of for pubbe inspection at the utihzing West nghouse mechanica the contentions which are sought to be Commission's Public Document Room, sleeving methodology. litigated in the matter. and the bases for 1717 H Street. NW Washington. DC: and Waukegan Public Ubrary.128 N. Prior to issuance el the proposed reafo*na le s ecif city. t ntions shall County Street. Waukegan. Ilhnois 60085. license amendment, the Coramission will have made findings required by the be limited to matters within the scope of Dated at Rockvilte. Maryland, this 24th day Atomic Energy Act of1954, or amended the amendment under consideration. A of February 1988 (the Act) and the Commission's petitioner who fails to file such a For the Nuclear Regulatory reg &tions. supplement which satisfies these Commission. B) April 1,1988, the licensee may fde requirements with respect to at least one Danla! R. Muller, a request for a hesnng with respect to contention will not be permitted to Director. Pic/actD&ectomte ll/4 Divishn of issuance of the amendment to the participate as a party. hetorprojects-/14 /v. VandSpecial subject facdity operating license and Those permitted to intervene become Projects. any person whose interest may be parties to the proceeding subject to any affected by th s proceeding and who limitations in the order granting leave to (FR Doc. a6-4435 Fued 3-1-86. a43 am] = = coos resoc.de wishes to participate as a party in the intervene, and have the opportunity to proceeding must ble a written petition participate fully in the conduct of the for leave to intervene. Request for a hearing. lacluding the opportunity to (Docket No. 50 336] hearing and petitions for leave to present evidence and cron-examine witnesses. Northeset Nuclear Energy Co. et al. intervene shall be filed in accordance A request for a hearing oe a petition (Ifpletone Nuc$ ear Power Station Unit with the Commission's -Rules of Practice for Domestic Ucensing for leave to intervene shall be filed with 2); Exemption Proceedings" in 10 CFR Part 2. If a the Secretary of the Commisalon. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, g, request for a hearing or petition for Washington. DC 20553. Attention-The Northeast Nuclear Energy leave to intervene la filed by the above Docketing and Servlee Branch, or may Company, et al. (the liceneee)is the date, the Commiesion or an Atomic be delivered to the Comminion's Public holder of Facility Operating Ucense No. Safety and Ucensing Board, designated Document Room.1717 H Street. NW, DPR-es, which authorizes operation of by the Commission or by the Chairman Washington. DC by the above date. the Millstone Nuclear Power Station, of the Atomic Safety and Ucensing Where petitions are filed during the last Unit 2 (the facility) at eteady state Board Panel, will rule on the request (10) days of the notice period. it le power rea ctor core power levels not in and/ae petit on and the Secretary or the requested that the petitioner or excess of 2700 niegawatto thennal. The destgaated Atomic Safety and Ucensing repaguntative hr the petitionee licem proh umg Whn things,
~ WlWORTER SERVICE NEEDED WHERE MARKED o km Of C 'o UNITED STATES ^, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS W AsHINGToN. D. C, 20655 o, s...++/ Revision 1: March 2, 1988 SCHEDULE AND OUTLINE FOR DIE",USSION 335TP ACRS MEETING MARCH 10-10, 1988 WASHINGTON, D.C. Thursday, March 10, 1988, Roem 1046, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. Chairman's Coments (0 pen)(RJR fyofg% 1) 8:30 - 8: A.M. 1.1) Opening remarks t s). 1.2) Items of current interest nm'R% 2 '. 4 [ s 2) 6%- 12:00 Noon Human Facters Research Needs (0 pen) (10:00-10:15: BREAK) 2.1) Rer: arks by ACRS Subcomittee Chairman (FJR/HA) 2.2) Briefing by representatives of the NAS Panel on Human Factors Research Needs in L-the Regulatory Process I?:00 Noen - 1:00 P.M. LUNCH v oc 3) 1:00 - 2;06 P.M. Operating Events and incidents (0 pen / Closed) 3.1) Remarks by ACRS Subcomittee Chairman (JCE/HA) 3.?) Briefing by representatives of HRC Staff (Note: Portions o' this session will be closed as necessary to discuss Proprietary Information and security provisions related to the facility beingconsidered.) /5
- 4) 2:06-3:0(P.M.
Rancho Seco Nuclear Pcwer Plant (0 pen) 4.1) Rcrarks by ACR5 Subcomittee Chairman (CJW/RKM) 4.2) Briefing by representatives of HRC Staff 3:00 - 3:15 P.M. . BREAK N 40 Soo DOE Advanced Reactor Severe Accident Program )
- 5) 3: % K P.M.
(0 pen) j I 5.1) RemarksbyACRSChairman(WK/ DAW /MME) 5.2) Briefing by rapresentatives of DOE Cor 'A
- 6) Tr45-.- 5:k P.M.
FutureActivities(0 pen) 6.1) Discuss anticipated subcomittee activities (MWL/HSS) 6.2) Discuss proposed items for consideration by the full Comittee (WK/RFF) I J
'e e ,[ 335th ACRS Feeting Agenda 6.3) Discuss request for ACRS input regarding the planned NRC Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding NRC Paintenance Policy (CM/HA)
- 7) 5:
6:3 P.M. ACRS Subcomittee Activities (0 pen) N 7.1) 5:15-5:45: Thernal-Hydraulic Phenomena (DAW /PAB) \\ 7.2) 5:45-6:15: Decay Heat Removal Systems NoNn N.7.3) 56 Model tests of concrete containment ' failure modes / mechanisms (CPS /EGI) Friday, March 11, 1988, Room 1046, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washinoton, D.C. t7
- 8) 8:30 - 12:0Nioon Tennessee Valley Authority - Seoucyah Nuclear (10:15-10 20: BREAK)
Plant (0 pen) 0.1) Report of ACRS Subcomittee Chairman regarding resolution of deficiencies at the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (CJW/RPS) 8.2) Meeting v'ith representatives of the NRC Staff and TVA, as appropriate 12:00 - 1:00 P.M. LUhCH
- 9) 1: h 2:
P.M. "NRC Regulatory Guides (0 pen) 9.1) Report t'y ACR5 Subcomittee Chairman regarding proposed NRC Regulatory Guide 1.99, Rev. 2, Radiation Damage [Mp to Reactor Pressure Vessel Materials (PGS/EGI) 1 9.2) Meeting with representatives of the NRC Staff a C? 10)2:(0-3:39,P.V. Radiation Embrittlerent of Reactor Pressure Vessel Structural Supports (0 pen) 10.1) Report of ACRS Subcomittee Chairinan i regarding NF,C Staff action plan for j resolution of this matter (PGS/EGl) {10.2) Meeting with representatives of the NRC Staff -h30 - 3 : 45 D A BREAK -r to &r 11)3: - 5:M P.M. 0 0uantitative Safety Goals (0 pen) (511.1) Report by ACR5 Subcomittee Chairman 9 and discussion regarding the status of 9 NRC efforts to develop an implementation y plan for the NRC Quantitative Safety A Goals (DAW /MDH) ) +-
e 335tn ACRS Meeting Agenda. 20
- 12) S R - 6:15 P.M.
Safety-Pelated Issues (0 pen) 12.1) Continue discussion of proposed i hierarchical structure for important safety-related issues identified by ALRS members (CPS /SD) Saturday, March 12, 1988, Roon 1046, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. so
- 13) 8:M - 12:00 Nocn Preparation of ACRS Reports (0 pen)
(10:00-10:15: BREAK) 13.1) Discuss proposed ACRS reports regarding: 13.1-1) TVA-Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (CJW/RPS) 12.1-2) Regulatory Guide 1.99, Rev. 2, Radiation Damage to Reactor Pressure Vessel Materials (PGS/EGI) 13.1-3) Embrittlement of Reactor Pressure Vessel Structural Supports (PGS/EGI) 13.1-4) DOE Advanced Reactors Key DesignFeatures(DAW /MME) 12:00 Noon - 1:00 P.M. LilFCH l - 1:30 P.M. ACRS Subcomittee Activities (0 pen) y /p 14.1) Report of Joint Subcomittee meeting 1 h' /J q on Scram Systems Reliability and Core + Performance (WK/PAB) 15)1:f0'-1;50..kM. Appointrent of New ACRS Members and Internal Allocation of Resources (Closed) (Note: These sessions will be closed to discuss information the release of which would represent a clearly unwarranted invasion of 1 personal privacy and to discuss the internal agency allocation of resources to provide management and disposal.)g nuclear waste technical advice regardin
- 16) 1:50 - 2:15 P.M.
ACRS Practices and Procedures (0 pen) TE.1) Proposed change to ACRS Bylaws - Pro-cedures for participation in meeting sponsored by organizations other than the ACRS (HWL/TGM)
- 17) 2:15 - 3:00 P.M.
Miscellaneous (0 pen) 17.1) Complete discussion of topics considered during this meeting ab lR
f 335TH ACRS MEETING MI l l PARCH 10-12, 1988 1 The 335th meeting of the Advisory Comittee on Reactor Safeguards, held at 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., was convened by Acting Chair-man Forrest Remick at 8:30 a.m., Thursday, March 10, 1988. [thte: For a list of attendees, see Appendix I. All ACRS members were present.] The Acting Chaiman 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 Committee Act and the Government in the Subshine 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 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. i [hote: Copies of the transcript taken at this meeting are also avail-able for purchase from the Heritage Reporting Corpcration, 1220 L Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005.] I. Chaiman's Report (0 pen) [ Note: Mr. R. F. Frale portion of the meeting.]y was the Designated Federal Official for this Dr. Remick announced that Dr. Kerr and Dr. Moeller had been selected by NRC to receive the Honerary Meritorious Service Award. He also an-nounced that Dr. McCreless had been selected to receive the NRC Honorary Meritorious Service Award. Dr. Remick relayed to Mr. Wylie the Comittee members' condolences on the passing of his mother. Dr. Remick reported that the latest estimate for tht planned relocation of ACRS offices and staff to r thesda, Md. is expecteri to te the period between the Comittee's May and June meetings. Members will receive in advance of the move a packet containing infonnation on local lodging and transportation. ) i Dr. Remick said that the Planning Subcomittee will consider further the possibility of canceling the September ACRS meating to reduce the FTE during Fiscal Year 1988. II. Human Factors Resear g (0 pen) [ Note: Mr. Herman Alderman was the Designated Federal Official for this ?artion of the meeting.] { Mr. Ward explained the background for the presentation. He said that, as a result of an ACRS recommendation, the NRC had asked the National
,a e 335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 2 Research Council to study the need for research in the human factors area. Mr. Ward introduced Dr. Neville Moray, Chairman of the Panel on Human Factors Research Needs in Nuclear Regulatory Research, National Research Council. Dr. Moray said that the Panel was composed of many disciplines, includ-ing sociologists, economists, nuclear engineers and utility executives. The Panel was assigned the task of identifying study areas where inade-quate attention had been given and where more work was needed. The panel was not charged to do a critical review of HRC's past work, but to say where future research was needed. Dr. Moray pointed out that the Panel deliberately excluded certain topics, largely because of time. These were: Human factors of waste management Human factors of security Anti-terrorist activities Future developments in the next generation of plants. The Panel concentrated on areas involving operation, management and maintenance of current plants. i Dr. Moray said that there are three types of research, namely: specific research, research on generic topics and fundamental research. Specific research is that directed to particular problems in the nuclear indus-try. Research on generic topics and fundamental research, while not being directed imediately to the nuclear industry, relate to problems that are of importance to the nuclear industry simply because they are important to many other industries as well. Two examples of generic research are: the causal model of human error and the question of transferring existing knowledge. Dr. Moray said that two topics are discussed in considerable length in the Panel report. One of these is the nature of human factors, and the other is wh3t is meant by a systems approach. Dr. Moray displayed a slide to illustrate the systems approach. In the center of the slide was the technical / engineering system. Surrounding the techni-cal / engineer system and interfacing with it is the personnel subsystem. Surrounding the personnel subsystem, and interfacing with it, is the organizational / management infrastructure.
- Finally, interfacing and surrounding the organizational / management infrastructure is the environ-ment context.
Included in the environment context are regulatory todies, such as NRC, the PUCs and the public. Dr. Moray mentioned that the bed estimates that he had were that somewhere between 30-80% of industrial incidents and accidents are attributable to human error. He noted that INP0's data su<; gest that, in the nuclear industry, it is about 50%. ~ m _.,-.
~ 335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 3 Dr. Moray suggested that it was possible that the major reason the operators at Peach Bottom were asleep was that they were merely phys-ically tired. He said that, if this were the case, then it was a management problem. He noted there is a wealth of information on the structure of shif t work; some shift patterns are of a design that is known to be likely to produce bad work, fatigued workers, and increased probability of human error. Dr. Moray emphasized that, however good the hardware is in the plant, however well-intentioned, well-trained, and well-motivated the opera-tors, if the management is incorrectly done, it will destroy the overall efticiency of the organization. He emphasized that management can make or break a plant in the way that it makes the workers respond to the demands of management. Dr. Moray noted that managemant and maintenance are the two most impor-tant safety factors that are not yet well under control. Dr. Moray discussed the pressures on management from regulators. For example, regulators determine what goes into the control room. Only certain options are possible in the way of equipment and modes of operation given certain regulations. Innovation may be hindered by regulation.s Dr. Moray pointed out the differences between regulation in the United States and in other countries. He noted that the Americari system regulates In detail from the top down. He contrasted this with the British system of regulation where it is the responsibility of the utilities to make their plants safe. They can do it anyway they like, but they then have to prove to the regulators that what they have done is satisfactory, which gives them a much greater flexibility in how they do it. l Dr. Moray discussed the difficulty of doing experiments on large complex systems. He noted that changes to a large complex system, where thes e are a number of complex subsystems that are tightly coupled, can result in a new system. He stated that a general property of large complex systems is that, if you change one thing, you change everything. Dr. Moray pointed out the need to improve NRC's cataloging system. He noted that the NRC does not have an organized data base from which it can retrieve infonnation. He emphasized the need to coordinate the activities of NRC, 00E, EPRI, and INP0 to produce an improved data base, j Dr. Moray listed the panel reconinendations: The NRC should make a firm public coninitment to research in human factors. Research must be continuous.
~ 335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 4 The human factors program should have a branch head of its own. Human factors research should adopt a. systems-oriented approach. Maintenance should be included in human factors research. The research should be done in universities as well as in national laboratories. The quality of research will be improved oy peer review. There is ' need to improve transfer of knowledge from the data base to industry. An annual review of human factors research should be published. Dissemination of human factors research needs to be improved. Dr. Moray listed some recommended areas of research: Human system interface design Operating procedures Personnel subsystems Qualifications-licenting examinations Screening and selection of staff Human performance - causal mode of human error, reasurements of performance Organizational aspects - impact of regulation on management Operational decisionmaking Research on whether it is possible to improve cooperation between the regulators and the regulated without reducing the rigor of regulations Research on developing an array of performance indicators to trarx plant performance Research on regulatory impact on innovation. III. OperatingEventsandIncidents(0 pen) [ Note: Mr. H.' Alderman was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.]
~ 335TH ACRS HEETINC MINUTES 5 Mr. Ebersole noted the events to be discussed included an overfill of a steam generator and partial filling of the steam lines. ?etting a steam generator go dry for a period of time, and fires that caused loss of annunciation in control rooms. Fires That involved Loss of Annunciation in Control Rooms Mr. Vince Thomas, Instrumentation Control Section, NRR, described the incident that occurred at Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 2, on January 28, 1988. A fire was detected by erratic annunciator behavior. An operator was dispatched to determine the cause, and he saw smoke and flames. A site alert was declared and the technical support center-was augmented. Mr. Thomas noted that flames had been observed coming out of the fan that provides air circulation to an instrument cabinet. The fire protection system had not detected the fire, and the suppression system was not actuated. The fire was extinguished in less than ten minutes. The cause of the fire was overheating of the circuit boards, in the Calvert Cliffs-2 incident, the fire detection and actuation systems watre actuated. The fire was automatically suppressed. When an operator saw smoke coming out of the cabinet, he opened the cabinet to see how much damage had occurred. When the door was opened, the fire reignited and he threw the breakers to eliminate the heat source. The operator extinguished the fire with a portable extinguisher. The Rancho Seco event on February 8,1988 caused the most extensive damage; 112 out of a total of 192 circuit boards were lost. There is an extensive repair and restoration plan underway. Mr. Thomas stated that i Rancho Seco is committed to revising their emergency operating proce-dures to include events of this nature in the future. Beaver Valley and 1 Calvert Cliffs management are considering revision of their emergency operating procedures, l In all three cases, overheating of components was the basic cause of the i fires. Remedies include the installation of better flame retardant material. Some of the resistors draw a lot of current and must dissi-pate much heat. A remedy is to put heat sinks around the resistors to improve heat dissipation. Another remedy is better control of battery voltage as voltage surges can cause excessive heating. Steam Generator Dryout Ms. Marylee Slosson, Project Manager, Indian Point-2, discussed the steam generator dryout at Indian Point-2 during January 2-6, 1988. The plant had been in cold shutdown and was being taken to hot shutdown prior to hydrotest for startup. One motor-driven auxiliary feed pump and two steam generators were available for heat removal-The Indian Point system is designed with two motor-driven auxiliary feed pumps and one turbine-driven auxiliary feed pump. The flow path is designed so that one motor-driven auxiliary feed pump feeds the two generators. ~~.
l \\ ~ 335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 6 Auxiliary feed pump 23 which supplies steam generators 23 and 24 was out of service. The operators were not awarc that the main steam isolation i valve 1-23 was passing steam at about 3000 pounds per hour. On January 2,1988, the operators noticed that the steam generator level was decreasing. The shif t watch supervisor was informed, but was not concerned about the decrease at the time, because he felt that they would get auxiliary feed pump 23 back soon after maintenance, and they would be able to use it. On January 3,1988 at 8:00 a.m., steam generator 23 boiled dry. The shift watch supervisors did not appear to be aware that the steam generators were boiling dry. However, all of the reactor operators were aware that the steam generator had boiled dry. On January 4,1988, when the shift supervisor came on at 7:00 a.m. he became aware that the steam generator was dry. He informed the opera-tors that they should attempt to refill the steam generator, but to do i it slowly. At about 8:00 a.m., the chemistry manager discovered that the steam generator had boiled dry, and he informed the manager of technical support. At about 8:35 a.m., the operators attempted to refill the steam genera-tor using the condensate storage tank. The flow was too high, about 200 gallons per minute, so they ceased the attempt to refill the generator. At about 8:45 a.m., the chief plant technical engineer told the opera-tors not to refill the generator until they could talk to Westinghouse, for recomendations on how to fill a hot, dry generator. Following discussions with Westinghouse, they devised a procedure to sluice from steam generator 21 through a blowdown line. They filled to about 70% level by 7:00 p.m. on January 5, and continued to fill until they reached about a 95% level. This was completed at about 1:00 p.m. on January 6. An NRR Augmented Inspection Team (AIT) was sent to the sita, and a confinnatory action letter issued to the utility requiring approval by a regional administrator before startup from the outage. The AIT conclud-ed that there wasn't any equipment damage. The team reported that operations management and shift supervisors were not adequately aware of plant status, and didn't provide adequate instructions for the opera-tors. Ms. Slosson concluded that, as follow-up to this event, the shift watch supervisor, the SRO, and the STA are required to check the boards three
33STH ACRS MEETING HINUTES 7 times per shift. The operations management have placed increased emphasis on comuncations and operator assertiveness. ( Loss of Feedwater and Overfill of Steam Lines Mr. Ed Wenzinger, Chief, Projects Branch, Region 1, discussed overfill-ing of the reactor vessel at Nine Mile Point, Unit 2, on January 20, 1988 This event started with a reactor trip. The trip was caused by a technician's error in shutting off instrument air. As a result of the instrument air loss, the minimum flow valves for the condensate pumps, the condensate booster pump and the feed pumps failed open. The plant tripped, the level decreased, and HPCS and RCIC automatically l turned on at a level of 110 inches. The water level began to increase. The HPCS and RCIC automatically turned off. Mr. Wenzinger explained that, during this event, the vessel pressure had decreased and, since the condensate and condensate booster pumps were still running, and the condensate booster pump outlet pressure had exceeded the pressure in the vessel, water was being injected through that flow path. The operator, in response to the high level alarms, attempted to shut the flow control valves. The indication on the controller was that the valve was fully closed. However, the valve was actually only partially closed. The operator did not check the valve position to see if it was closed. After about eight minutes the steam lines began to fill. One of the assistant operations superintendents realized what had happened, and ordered valves downstream of the flow control valve to be shut. The water gradually drained out of the steam lines via the reactor water cleanup system and the steam drain lines. The steam line hangers were inspected, and no damage was found. IV. Rancho Seco Nuclear Power Plant Restart (0 pen) [ Note: Mr. R. K. Major was the Designated Federal Official for this portionofthemeeting.] Mr. Charles Wylie, Chairman of the ACRS Subcomittee on B&W Reactor Plants, introduced this session. He explained that the NRC Staff had offered to brief the ACRS on the restart of Rancho Seco. Rancho Seco is a Babcock & Wilcox (B&W) reactor, owned by the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD). Bechtel was the AE. The operating license was issued in 1974 Rancho Seco has been shut down since December 1985, when a loss of PC power to the integrateu control system led to high reactor coolant system pressure and a severe overcooling event. This event, set against a history of problems at Rancho Seco, led the NRC to direct that the
~ 335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 8 unit remain down for both physical and managerial upgrades. Since the shutdown, extensive plant modifications and changes in the plant's management have been made. A restart SER, NUREG-1286, was issued in October 1987; however, it contains significant open items. A supplement tc the SER indicating resolution of the open items has not been issued. Mr. Wylie noted that Commission consideration of restart of Rancho Seco is scheduled for March 22, 1988. The ACRS has not been directly in-volved with shutdown and restart considerations at Rancho Seco. Howev-er, the ACRS has been following the B&W reassessment program. The ACRS Subcomittee on B&W Reactor Plants plans a meeting at the conclusion of the reassessment review. It now appears that Rancho Seco restart considerations by the Staff will precede the conclusion of the Staff's B&W reassessment considerations. The Staff noted that the SMUD Board of Directors is considering perma-nent shutdown of Rancho Seco as one of its options. The eventual outcome of these considerations is still uncertain. Mr. G. Kalman, NRC Staff's Rancho Seco Project Manager, briefed the Committee on the Rancho Seco situation. The plant has remained shut down following a December 1985 confirmatory action letter issued by NRC's Region V Administrator. Currently Rancho Seco is in a position to go critical the week of March 21, if it receives a favorable NRC ruling. The Staff explained that the SMUD Board of Directors was very cost-conscious at Rancho Seco. As a result, staffing was minimal, salaries at the plant were low when compared to the rest of the industry, even miner plant expenditures went to the Board for approval. As a result of the tight operating budget, problems in plant maintenance and in regula-tory compliance began to appear. Plant availability was low. These problems were brought to a head by the December 1985 incident. The Staff stated that the root causes of the problems at Rancho Seco were associated with the management of the plant. Management improvements are the main feature of the performance improvement effort. The Staff reviewed the sequence of events leading to the December 26, 1985 Integrated Control System failure, reactor trip, and severe over-cooling that led to the current shutdown. Following the event, confinnatory action letters from the Region V Administrator required the plant operators to: conduct a root cause investigation Of the reactor trip, justify resumption of power opera-tions, and preserve failed equipment for an NRC Incident Investigation Team (IIT). The NRC-IIT 1.ssued a report, NUREG-1195, on its investiga-tion in February 1986. Part of the IIT cnnelusions was that ICS failures at B&W plants are comon. Other ucilities had incorporated compensating features to deal with these problems. At Rancho Seco, there were no procedures to deal - ~ -
335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 9 with ICS failures. The event in December would have been inconsequen-tial if SMUD had responded to numerous warnings from the NRC. The IIT was critical of both Rancho Seco management, for allowing the plant to degrade to the condition it reached in December 1985, and the NRC Staff, for not checking to ensure that the various warnings issued were heeded. Af ter the IIT report was issued, the NRC insisted on a wider scope for the recovery plan than SMUD originally was willing to accept. After several requests for restart were denied by NRC, the SMUD management was replaced. The SMUD Board hired an outside contractor, MAC, headquar-tered in San Diego, to manage the restart. MAC supplied a plant manag-er, and 20 key operations managers who took over critical operations at Rancho Seco. SMUD submitted an action plan for plant performance improvements in July of 1986. The action plan focuses on management and plant performance improvements. Under the action plan, a nationwide search for managers was initiated. Comprehensive programs were adopted under the action plan to identify deficiencies in: hardware, design, operations, proce-dures, training, and maintenance. Specifics of the action plan for performance improvement include a detailed response to IIT findings; review of past events, and corrective j actions; incorporation of B&W Owners Safety and Performance Inprovement reconinendations; a maintenance plan that has corrective maintenance, 4 preventative maintenance, and a troubleshooting, root-causa program. Both emergency operating procedures and technical specifications were upgraded. Among the hardware improvements was an EFIC installation, The EFIC is the emergency feedwater control. This is a safety-grade backup to the ICS that handles all the secondary emergency components. The Comittee expressed an interest in investigating the management difficulties at Rancho Seco. The NRC Staff had characterized these difficulties as the root cause of the problems at Rancho Seco. The Comittee was interested in knowing if any of the current plant manage-ment had B&W cperating experience and, if so, how much. SMUD believes the plant will be ready for criticality by March 20, 1988. Following criticality, SKJD has proposed a five-month power ascension program. This program will serve to test plant equipment and train operators. A group of consultants, assembled by the SMUD General Manager, recently recommended Rancho Seco be closed, and power purchased from area utili-ties for financial reasons. The SMUD Board of Directors has proposed that a referendum be put on the June 1988 ballot that would allow operation for 18 months, and then allow the voters to decide at the next refueling outage whether to continue operation. There is also an
9 33.M ACRS MEETING MINUTES 10 initiative on the June 1988 ballot that proposes to close and decomis-sion the plant as soon as possible. The initiative is sponsored by a group in Sacramento that opposes nuclear power. A motion that the ACRS Subcomittee on B&W Reactor Plants investigate further the issues of continued Rancho Seco operation was approved. During tne course of the Committee's discussion on this matter, it was suggested that the ACRS explore the Staff policy for restart after a lengthy shutdown. (Subsequent to this session, a meeting of the B&W Reactor Plants Subcom-mittee has been tentatively scheduled for April 6,1988 to discuss the issues involved with the Rancho Seco restart.] V. DOE Advanced Reactor Severe Accident Program (0 pen) [ Note: Mr. M. M. El-Zeftaw for this portion of the meeting.]y was the Designated Federal Official Mr. Ward commented that the Comittee had previously been briefed on the 00E Advanced Reactor Severe Accident Program (ARSAP), but would like to hear more. The Committee needs to decide whether it wants to get involved in the review process. Mr. D. Giessing, DOE, stated that DOE has formed the ARSAP program to support the certification of the large-plant advanced PWRs and BWRs by CE and GE, respectively (in addition to the the mid-sized plant programs). ARSAP assists the industry in implementing the NRC Policy Statement on Severe Accidents. Mr. G. Davis, CE, stated that CE is in the process of upgrading System 80 standard design to reflect the EPRI requirements, and to address the NRC's severe accident policy. A significant part of this effort is the consideration of degraded core issues. CE views ARSAP as an important vehicle for identifying those issues which are considered beyond current NRC regulation and standard review plans (SRPs), and reaching a resolu-tion with the NRC Staff. Mr. P. Haas, International Technology (IT) Corp., reviewed the ARSAP mission, objectives, organization, and structure. The DOE / industry approach to resolving the severe accident issues for the Advanced Light-Water Reactors (ALWR) (does not include HTGR or LMFBR) will be through the development of separate topic papers on those issues that will not be addressed by the EPRI requirements document. These topic papers will be submitted to the NRC Staff for review and approval on the CE advanced system 80+ docket. The resolution will be applicable to most other designs in the ALWR program.
335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 11 The mission of the program is to assist reactor vendors and EPRI in the identification and early resolution of risk-significant severe accident issues to avoid obstacles to the certification of evolutionary LWRs during the 1990s. Dr. Kerr expressed some concern in regard to the definition of "evolu-tionary advanced LWRs." Mr. Giessing responded that these plants do not require a demonstration plant, and are based on the standardized plant designs, but extended and rodified. Mr. Ebersole questioned the lack of consideration of a "core on the floor" case. Mr. Haas stated that the objectives of ARSAP are to support the severe accident assessment analyses and the issue resolu-tions that are being fonnulated by the vendors as a part of the certifi-cation program. Mr. Haas connented that the program addresses the severe accident issues more generically (e.g., basic severe accident phenomenology and PRA methodology). Mr. Haas described the work breakdown structure (WBS) items. WBS-1 is management and organization. WBS-2 is an identification, categorization and prioritization of severe accident issues pertinent to ALWRs. WBS-3 is methodology development to produce a set of integrated severe acci-dent analysis tools, including, but not limited to, computer codes. WBS-4 is to provide guidance and technical support to EPRI, vendors, and utilities for the application of probabilistic methods. Mr. Haas commented that the program has six sets of issues that are generally related. Within each set, the ARSAP proposes to prepare two to six specific topic papers related to that general category issue. This approach will be proposed to the NRC. The program will support CE interaction with the NRC and ACRS to gain concurrence on the approach, and then to support the implementation. WBS-7 is specifically to support GE ABWR certification in specific severe accident analysis and PRA areas. The ARSAP is only monitoring the Westinghcuse program for severe accidents. The NRC and IDCOR staffs have identified 19 severe accident issues and agreed upon resolution of 11 of them. Some of the planned Fiscal Year 1988 major results are as follows: Six sets of severe accident issue topic papers transmitted to NRC Modification and benchmarking of a PWR version of MAAP-DOE complet-ed Upgraded functional PRA models completed Technical reports in support of EPRI requirements document and CE/ARSAP issue resolution, e.g., hydrogen control, debris coolabil-ity
.o 335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 12 Technical reports in support of CE analysis, GE ABWR severe acci-dent, E.G., seismic fragility data, ATWS. Some of the potential initiatives for 1989-1990 are as follows: Support EPRI and vendors in severe accident assessment for passive plant design and certification Technical support for addressing severe accident management in ALWRs. Mr. Haas sumarized his presentation by stating that the DOE /ARSAP is providing its resources and extensive experience in practical assessment of severe accident issues to support ALWR vendors and EPRI in their efforts to obtain early resolution of severe accident issues. This is being accomplished by: Interaction with the NRC via the CE system 80+ certification to identify and resolve issues as generically as possible Direct technical support to EPRI ALWR requirements document and vendor certification efforts. Mr. Ward and Dr. Kerr comended the DOE, IT Corp. representatives, and the NRC Staff on their efforts in developing such a program. The Committee did not decide which ACRS subcomittee should take the lead on this program. VI. SequoyahNuclearPlant.(0 pen) [ Note: Dr. R. P. Savio was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] Mr. Wylie explained the purpose of this session and discussed the proposed agenda. He noted that an ACRS report on the Sequoyah restart would be appropriate at this ACRS meeting. Mr. S. Richardson, OSP, sumarized the NRC Staff's progress on the Sequoyah review since the ACRS' discussions during the February 11-13, 1988 meeting. The NRC Staff has nearly completed its review of matters related to the restart of Unit 2 and expects to make recomendations to the Comission for restart in the near future. A few concerns regarding Appendix R and operational readiness concerns are the only major issues remaining to be resolved. The NRC Staff believes that the diesel generator and cable issues are resolved. TVA has responded to the American Nuclear Insurers (ANI) concerns and ANI has indicated that their concerns have been resolved to the extent that ANI would concur with restart.
j 335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 13 The use of PRA in TVA's safety evaluation process was discussed. TVA has performed a partial PRA for Browns Ferry (contracted through PGL) and has participated % the NRC Staff's PRA work on Sequoyah. TVA is currently evaluating t.ie ISAP process and has some interest in imple-menting ISAP on TVA plants. If this program were implemented it would be at the completion of the current restart efforts and wculd be implemented first on the Browns Ferry plants. Mr. Richardson stated that the NRC Staff would start an inspection of TVA actions on Appendix R concerns on Fetnary 15, 1938, and expects to complete this work by February 18-19. Mr. Michelson suggested that the recent Sandia work on fire risk be considered in this inspection. Mr. Richardson stated that this work would be considered. Mr. E. Marinos, OSP, discussed the NRC Staff's review of the adequacy of the Sequoyah diesel generators. The sequencing of the diesel generator loads has been revised to bring voltages supplied to the various loads into compliance with Technical Specification requirements. Full load sequencing tests have not been performed. Analysis has been used to extrapolate the results of partial load tests to full load conditions. The results of this work have been reviewed by TVA and NRC consultants. Improved voltage regulators are to be installed after restart. The effect of the actuation of the CO, fire suppression system in the diesel generator building on the operation of the diesel generators was discussed. Tests performed at Watts Bar have demonstrated that the diesel generators will perfonn satisfactorily. VII. Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2, "Radiation Embrittlement of Reactor Vessel Materials" (0 pen) [ Note: Mr. E. G. Igne was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.) Mr. N. Randall, NRR, briefed the Committee on Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2, its difference from Revision 1, and its implication for existing PWRs and BWRs. Revision 2 updates Revision 1, which has been used for 10 years. Data for Revision 2 are based on regression analysis obtained from nuclear power plant surveillance test results. Copper and nickel are accounted for in the chemistry factor, and phosphorous has been eliminated in Revision 2. Different chemistry factors are used for welds and for base metal. The impact of Revision 2 on PWRs and BWRs was stated to be significant. The impact on PWRs is with regard to low-temperature overpressure (LTOP) concerns. The impact on BWRs involves higher code pressure tests which require higher test temperatures. The NRC Staff and affected utilities have agreed on possible "fixes" to the problem.
4-1 i l 335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 14 l Revision 2 will also affect the pressurized thermal shock (PTS) screen-ing criteria, both favorably and unfavorably. For example, some nuclear power plants will reach the screening criteria sooner, and others later, than under Revision 1. This will require modifications to the PTS screening criteria. The ACRS Metal Components Subcomnittee will follow the changes. A letter was written concurring in the Regulatory Position of this Guide. VIII. Embrittlement of Structural Steels (0 pen) [ Note: Mr. E. G. Igne was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] Mr. M. Mayfield, NRR, presented a status report. This matter stems from data from HFIR that indicate possible material degradation of reactor vessel supports due to exposure to low flux at low temperature. Prelim-inary studies by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (0RNL) indicate that NDTT shift could be in the 350-450*F range. This is greater than the reactor vessel support operating temperatures. EPRI studies, based on similar data, predicted an NDTT shift of about 200-250*F. Studies on the structural integrity of reactor vessel support structures by ORNL are ongoing. Similar studies by EPRI and Stone & Webster indicate that the stresses in the supports are low, and mostly in compression, and that no problems are anticipated at plant design life. Preliminary studies indicate that, even if the supports should fail, the l piping system should be able to support the pressure vessel, and that I the piping system should maintain its structural integrity. NRC's Office of Research has undertaken a program on this matter that should provide a satisfactory resolution of the issue. Preliminary results of this program should be available by the end of 1988. j A letter was written on this issue. The letter states that the Connit-tee believes that the program the NRC Staff is undertaking to resolve this matter is appropriate and timely. IX. ExecutiveSessions(0 pen) A. Subconnittee Reports (0 pen) 1. Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena (0 pen) [ Note: Mr. P. A. Boehnert was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] Mr. Ward, Chainr.an, Thennal Hydraulic (T/H) Phenomena Subcom-mittee, noted that the T/H Phenomena Subconynittee met on
1, e ~ 335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 15 January 20-21, 1988 to review the TRAC code. The review focused on code scaling, applicability, and uncertainty (CSAU) methodology developed by RES, in support of the proposed revision to the ECCS Rule. He noted that the ACRS has sup-ported a move to a best-estimate (BE), or realistic approach i to modeling of the LB LOCA. _In order to use a BE approach, it is necessary to account for the associated uncertainties. CSAU was created to demonstrate use of the BE analysis by 1 providing a systematic means to estimate the above uncertainties. Another aspect of the Subcomittee meeting l review was to develop a position on the need (or lack thereof) for additional cooe development. In support of the TRAC review, LANL developed a models and correlations QA document which the Subcommittee reviewed at the Los Alamos meeting. l Mr. Ward noted that all T/H Phenomena Subconnittee consul-tants, including Dr. M. Plesset, were present at the Subcom-mittee meeting. He indicated that the consultants' reaction to the TRAC code, in general, and the QA document, in particu-lar, was not kind. The consultants noted that, while the codes in some cases are quite good. the modeling of the thermal hydraulics by TRAC was tenuous at best. Some consul-tants urged that further TRAC development end; they also indicated that one should not expect to believe that the T/H codes can model phenomena on a first principle basis, i.e., while the code is a useful tool, its use is limited. In response to Dr. Steindler, Dr. Kerr indicated that his impres-sion (based on his attendance at the meeting) was that, while the code could be improved, it is not worth the expenditure of additional effort. Mr. Ward said the Subcomittee also plans to review the models and correlations report for the RELAP-5 code in the near future. Mr. Ward noted, in response to Dr. Steindler, that we need to downgrade our original expectation of the ultimate usefulness of TRAC, given its obvious limitations (i.e., it has been "tuned" to rather specific uses, e.g., LB LOCA, SB LOCA, etc). Mr. Michelson noted that his conclusion from the meeting is that the code structure is much more simplistic than he originally believed. 2. Decay Heat Removal Systems (0 pen) [ Note: Mr. P. A. Boehnert was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.]
335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 16 The Decay Heat Removal Systems (DHRS) Subcomittee met on January 28, 1988 to review progress on resolution of USI A-45. Mr. Ward, DHRS Subcomittee Chairman, indicated that the Staff is moving toward incorporating resolution of A-45 into the Individual Plant Evaluation (IPE) process.. He noted, however, that we don't know at this time what the IPE process itself will entail. This approach raises a question in his mind as to how A-45 resolution should be related to integration of all the issues related to the "severe accident" concerns. Mr. Ward also noted the status of resolution for Generic Issue (GI) 124, "AFW System Reliability." The ACRS differed with the Staff approach on this issue. He said that L. Shao, NRR, recently met with Mr. Ward and P. Boehnert; the outcome of the meeting was to "agree to disagree" on the resolution approach. Dr. Kerr indicated that NRR's letter, in response to the ACRS coments on GI-124, seemed to miss the point of our concerns. 3. Structural Engineering (0 pen) [ Note: Mr. E. G. Igne was the Designated Federal Official for thisportionofthemeeting.] Dr. Siess, Chair: nan of the ACRS Subcomittee on Structural Engineering, presented a report on the 1:6 scale reinforced concrete containment model test. Subcomittee members visited the test site prior to the Subcomittee tr.eeting on January 22, 1988. The meeting focused on the results of the static internal pressure tests of the concrete containment model and future efforts in determining containment integrity. The containment was pressurized to about 145 psig at which point the leak rate exceeded the pumping capacity of the pressuring nitrogen gas system. At this point the test was tertninated. The design pressure of the model containment was 46 psig. Post-test inspection inside the containment revealed a tear running in a vertical direction by the entire insert plate edge, about one inch from it. The tear was about 20 inches long. Predicted capacities for the model were performed by ten licensing and research organizations from the United States and Europe and varied from 130-190 psig. The type and loca-tion of the failure mechanism were not predicted by analyses. Meetings of tht: participating organizations, subsequent to the model tests, resulted in the following conclusions: global measures of containment response, ie., displace-ments, free field strain, can be predicted accurately;
~ 335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 17 localized behavior, which may control containment fail-ure, is more difficult to predict; and it is not valid to assume that the liner is perfectly bonded to the concrete. The Subcomittee will meet again soon to discuss matters such as: proposed future options for the model and proposed separate effects test, future work on prestressed containments, completien of work 1 steel containments, and seismic capacity of containments, and results of Sargent & Lundy study on containment capacities. 4. Quantitative Safety Goals (0 pen) (Note: Mr. Dean Houston was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] Mr. Ward, Chairman of the Safety, Philosophy, Technology and Criteria Subcommittee, discussed the previous Subcomittee meetings with the Staff to review their developent of the in'plementation plan for the Safety Goal Policy Statement. The Comittee had provided guidance on this effort in a letter to Chairman Zech on May 13, 1987. The Comission had agreed with i the guidance and instructed the Staff to follow it. Hr. Ward indicated that, while the Staff had assigned tne project to a high-level manager, they had not assigned sufficient resources to expedite its development. Mr. Ward stated that a final implementation plan would not be available for some time, and proposed that the Comittee send interim coments now. He introduced a proposed Comittee letter which provided coments in regard to large releases, core melt, plant performance objectives, cost-benefit analysis and review of regulations. The proposed letter was the basis of further Comittee discussion. Dr. Moeller discussed the concept of a large release and questioned whether it ought to be defined the same as an extraordinary nuclear occurrence. Dr. Lewis indicated that the proposed letter be kept simple and idealistic. He proposed an alternate paragraph for the letter in regard to the definition of a large release.
335TH ACRS HEETING MINUTES 18 Dr. Remick questioned whether the values for core melt fre-quency were compatible with the Quantitative Health Objectives of the Safety Goal. Dr. Siess questioned the applicability of PRA results and discussed the aspect of "loss of assured cooling." The Comittee did not complete its preparation of a letter at this meeting, but indicated that a letter should be sent soon. This matter will be considered again during the 336th ACRS meeting, April 7-9, 1988. 5. Joint Meeting of Subcomittees on Scram Systems Reliabil-jty/ Core Performance (0 pen) [ Note: Mr. P. A. Boehnert was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] Dr. Kerr, Chaiman of the Joint Meeting of ACRS Subcommittees on Scram System Reliability and on Core Performance, reported that a meeting was held on February 19, 1988. He noted that he had received information late last sumer that raised concern about a trend for use of moderator temperature coeffi-cients (HTCs) in PWRs that are less negative than the values in use five to eight years ago. Use of less negative MTCs can increase the peak pressure, given an.A1WS event. The meeting was held to review: (1) the dbove issue, (2) the status of implementation of the ATVS rule requirements, ar.d (3) the recent problems seen with Westinghouse reactor trip breakers. Representatives of all three PWR Owners Groups ano their vendors participated in the meeting. The BWR Owners did not participate. Dr. Kerr sumarized the key points of the meeting, his points keyed to each PWR vendor's plants as noted below: Babcock & Wilcox Owners Group These reactor licensees: l 1) Have comitted to Diverse Scram System (DSS) and to ATWS Mitigating Systems Actuation Circuitry (AMSAC). (The ATWS rule requires that the DSS be separate and indepen-dent from the regular scram system from the output of the sensor to the interruption of the control rod holding current -- i.e., separate and diverse scram breakers are required.) 2) One plant has mcved to a longer period between refuel-ling. J
o 335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 19 l 3) Have two sets of absorbing rods, one for rapid shutdown and one for control of core power. (Both sets are re-l leased on a scram signal.) l 4) Have steam-turbine-driven main feedwater pumps (MFW). This permits some flow control by changing turbine speed. It is feasible, in B&W plants, to operate the MFW pumps to remove decay heat. B&W has chosen to introduce the additional negative reactivity needed for a longer fuel cycle (the additional fissile materi-l al is in the form of higher enrichment of feel) by increasing the amount of boron in the coolant at the beginning of cycle by 200-300 ppm. (Although it is possible, technically, to use fixed burnable poison, it is more economical to introduce the poison as a boron compound in solution in the coolant.) As a l result of the increase in boron in the coolant, the moderator i temperature coefficient has become less negative by about 4 l pcm per degree F. This results in an increase in the peak j pressure calculated in the case of an ATWS event. l l The BWOG concludes that by decreasing the frequency of scrams, l they can compensate for any increase in risk produced by the l change in MTC. They are working on approaches to decreasing scram frequency, and claim to be making significant progress. Dr. Kerr noted, however, that B&W plants have increased the l hazard associated with an ATWS by use of a significantly less negative MTC in their one plant now running a 24-month fuel cycle. Although at colo clean startup (and probably at the beginning of fuel cycles af ter that) the MTC at zero power may be slightly positive, Westinghouse calculates that it will be zero or negative at full power. (This calculation apparently assumes that full power will be reached gradually enough that equilibrium xenon will be present when full power is reached.) The diverse scram system being design 3d for the B&W plants will trip only the control rods (not the safeties) but this is enough to prevent adverse effects. The trip does not make use of the nonnal trip breakers, but involves interrupting a much lower current than is interrupted during normal reactor trip. Mr. Ebersole asked if the PWRs need to install a separate set of trip breakers to satisfy the ATWS rule requirements. Dr. l Kerr said he thought this was required, but asked Mr. Boehnert l to investigate. I l
- D I
335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 20 Ccmbustion Engineering Owners _ Group CE has chosen to introduce the additional negative reactivity required for the longer fuel cycle in the fonn of fixed burnable poison. Thus there has been no change in MTC attrib-utable to increased fuel cycle length. They showed results of measurements and calculations of MTC. Although there is a spread in data and there are some differences in calculated MTC from core to core, there does not appear to be any trend toward an increase in MTC. CE calculates the highest peak-pressure for their system of all the PWRs. Indeed, they claim that the peak pressure will be determined by an opening between the vessel head and the vessel as the head bolts are stretched by the r assure buildup accompanying the postulated ATWS. Calculation. for their earlier plants give credit for open PORVs. System 80 calculations do not give credit for PORVs. Westinghouse Owners Group Thit Group has coniitted to AMSAC, but not to DSS. They argue that the combined relieving capacity of their safeties and PORVs is such that the calculated pressure peak is well within the capacity of the primary pressure boundary, and that an ATWS is not a serious threat to Westinghouse plants. They acknowledge the recent problems with reactor trip break-ers, but conclude that some of them were caused by improper maintenance. The proper maintenance procedures having been put into effect; these problems, they claim, have disappeared. They are unsure, as yet, about the cause of some more recent problems, out are "agcTessively working on them." Several Westinghouse plants now have Tech Specs which pennit them to operate from zero to 70% of full power with an MTC that is as much as +5 pcm. The maximum pennitted MTC is decreased linearly from 70% to full power to pass through zero at full power. Westinghouse claims that they have calculations which demon-strate that an ATWS in a plant operating below 40% of full power has no significant effect. The Westinghouse system requires the actuation of AFW for all scrams. The Westinghouse Owners Group is working to improve the performance of the MFW system (having observed, finally, that many of their scrams are caused by the difficulty of controlling MFW) in an effort to decrease the frequency of scrams. Already a significant decrease has been observed.
, t o 335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 21 They observe an average scram frequency of 0.6/yr due to surveillance and maintenance errors that occur while the plants are in operation. The Westinghouse Owners Group is also sponsoring a program, being developed by Westinghouse, which will permit a licensee to ascertain readily whether any proposed change in operating conditions will have an effect on a plant's ATWS associated risk. Additional Areas for Investigation 1) Heeting with the GE Owners Group to obtain a pregress report on ATWS Rule implementation for BWRs. 2) What is the status of installation of the required changes and of the development and application of new procedures, if required? (For all reactors.) 3) Determine, for all reactors, the trips associated with errors made while doing surveillance and testing during operation. 4) What credit, if any, is taken for operator action in connection with an ATWS? 5) How much thought has been given to actions thet operators might take which could exacerbate the situation during the course of an ATWS? 6) Review of the program, referred to above, when it is completed. Mr. Ebersole said he saw a recent report from Brookhaven National Laboratory indicating that peak ATWS pressures for a i BWR were only about 1200 psig. He said he recalls peak pressures were calculated to be muc' higher (about 4000 psig). He suggested that the Subcomittee investigate this item at a future meeting when item 1) above is discussed. Dr. Kerr indicated the Subcomittee would investigate this item. B. Reports, Letters and Femoranda (0 pen) 1. ACRS Report on the Restart of the Secuoyab Nuclear Plant (Letter to Chaiman Zech dated March 15, ;.988) The Comittee stated that the problems and deficiencies identified at the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant are being addressed adequately, and that it could see no reason to delay the I program for restart. l
4 t l' 335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 22 4 2. ACRS Comments on the Need for Greater Coherence Amona New Regulatory Policies (Letter to Chairman Zech, dated March 15, 1988) The Comittee offered several suggestions for achieving greater coherence among regulatory policies. 3. ACRS Comments on Entrittlerert of Structural Steel (Letter to Chairman Zech, dated March 15, 1988) The Comittee agreed that the NRC Staff's current program is adequate to resolve uncertainties associated with a possible more rapid than expected embrittlement of pressure vessel supports from radiation at low temperatures. 4 ACRS Coments on Reaulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 2, "Radiation Embrittlement of Reactor Vessel Materials" Dated March 1988 (Letter to the Executive Director for Operations, dated March 15,1988) The Comittee concurred in the Regulatory Position of this Guide. C. Other Co
- eeConclusions(0 pen) 1.
p erence Among New Regulatory Policies (0 pen) [ Note: Mr. Dean Houston was the Designated Federal Official i for this portion of the meeting.] Mr. Ward reported that a number of ACRS members have expressed concerns about a lack of coherence in the Staff's efforts regarding recent regulatory policy statements. He indicated that he was pleased to hear that the EDO was also concerned about this matter, and that a meeting was held with Staff management to initiate the development of a Severe Accident Integration Plan. Mr. Ward indicated that this plan was a step in the right direction, but that it might not go far enough. He led a discussion concerning this matter. The Comittee prepared a letter to Chainnan Zech concerning the need for coherenca among new regulatory policies. (See item IX.B.2 above.) i 2. ImportantSafety-RelatedIssues(0 pen) [ Note: Mr. Sam Duraiswamy was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] Dr. Siess stated that this matter was discussed by the Convit-tee during the 333rd ACRS meetir.g, January 7-9, 1988. Items discussed during that meeting are as follows:
0 335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 23 ACRS procedures and practices Follow-up on key issues Hold educational seminars for ACRS members Hold informal brainstorming sessions Congressional liaison Resolution of interinstitutional conflicts Future plants Dr. Siess stated that discussion of one of the subitems, "State of Nuclear Power," listed under ACRS Procedures and Practices was postponed until the Febrt ary 1988 ACRS meeting. However, owing to lack of time, this subject was not discussed during the February meeting. He suggested that the Comittee discuss the State of Nuclear Power issue and decide whether to pursue it fu-ther. Dr. Moeller stated he believes that the ACRS should conduct a detailed study of the current status of nuclear power plant safety in the U.S. Until such a study is done, the ACRS will not be able to define clearly the priority safety items that need major emphasis. He believes that the ACRS should under-take the development of a report on "The State of Nuclear Power in the U.S." Ha mentioned that he has proposed an outline for such a report indicating some of the items that he believes should be addressed. Dr. Lewis stated that attempts made by the ACRS in the past to develop such a report were unsuccessful. Although he believes that it would be worthwhile to develop a report on this issue, he is not sure what approach should be taken to make it successful. Dr. Siess stated that it is not an easy task to perform. He believes that a fair amount of work needs to be done to obtain necessary information for use in preparing such a report. Someone in the ACRS should take the initiative to prepare a draft report on this matter and it should be discussed in a dedicated meeting. Dr. Moeller stated that the new Waste Management Advisory Comittee is going to list all the issues that it believes should be considered, and then it is going to assign priority rankings for these issues. He believes that such an approach could be used in dealing with the issue on the State of Nuclear Power. Dr. Lewis stated that members of the ACRS have different perceptions about what is important. He believes that it will be difficult to come up with a list of important issues.
- o 4
335TH ACRS MEETING HINUTES 24 Dr. Kerr stated that writing a report on the past and project-ed activities of the ACRS could be an alternate to writing a report on the State of Nuclear Power. Dr. Lewis and Mr. Ward suggested that the outgoing ACRS Chairman try to write a report on the activities of the ACRS. Dr. Shewmon stated that the ACRS could try to write a report including the following: What the A",RS has done in the past What it neads to do next year What sort of priority needs to be given to the items that need to be done next year. Dr. Kerr stated that, if the Comittee wants him to write a report on the past and projected activities of the ACRS, he will make an attempt to write such a report. Dr. Siess stated that the ACRS should decide: Are there any important issues, not now receiving ade-quate attentian, that the ACRS should be considering? Are all the issues reviewed by the ACRS in the past 12 months important? Should the /f.P.5 review all Regulatory Guides or only those that it believes are important? Dr. i.ewis stated that, probably, the ACRS should ask itself whether all the items proposed for each meeting are really important. After further discussion, the Committee decided to make another attempt to write a report within the next 12 months on the State of Nuclear Power. NRC Regulatory Practices Review and Revise Design and Acceptance Criteria The Connittee discussed some of the items listed under this category. Re-evaluate NRC Regulations, including GDC l l Dr. Remick stated he 'aelieves that several NRC regula-l tions are outmoded and a detailed re-evaluation of these regulations is necessary. The ACRS should inspire the
o :* ~ 335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 25 NRC Staff to perform such a re-evaluation, or should take some initiatives on its own and perform a re-evaluation of one item. Mr. Ward stated that the ACRS should inspire the Staff to undertake such a task. Redefine the large-Break LOCA Design Basis Mr. Ward stated that the design basis for large-break LOCA should be redefined, based on the current under-standing of fracture mechanics and related fields. He suggested a joint meeting of the Subcommittees on Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena and on Metal Components to review this issue and prepare a report for consideration by the full Comittee. No members raised any objection to this suggestion. Future Action The Comittee decided to continue its discussion of this matter during the April 1988 ACRS meeting. 3. Power increase at the Callaway Plant, Unit 1 (0 pen) The Comittee decided not to review the requested power level increase from 34i ' MWt to 3565 MWt for the Callaway Plant, Unit 1. Comittee menters did take note, however, of the request by Mr. J. C. Ebersole for information regarding steam generator performance at this higher power level in light of experience at the North Anna Power Station. The NRC Staff has agreed to provide this information. 4. Testing of Installed Electrical Cables (0 pen) Mr. Wylie agreed to explore, for possible ACRS consideration during an appropriate subcomittee meeting, (possibly a meeting) of the Subcommittee on Instrumentation and Control Systems the testing of electric cables after they have been installed. 5. Operating License for Limerick-2 (0 pen) The Comittee agreed that the Subcommittee on Limerick-2 should review the application for an operating license but should not do so until the problem at Peach Bottom is re-solved.
e' 335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 26 6. Proposed Change to the ACRS Bylaws (0 pen) The Ccmmittee agreed to postpone until the April meeting the reconsideration of a proposed change to the ACRS Bylaws regarding participation in non-ACRS meetings. 7. Dr. Remick's Participation in ANS Meeting (0 pen) Dr. Remick notified the Comittee that he plans to participate in an ANS topical meeting on lessons learned from TMI-2. His participation will be as a representative from Pennsylvania State University and not as a trember of the ACRS. 8. Meeting with Comissioners on Maintenance Policy Statement (0 pen) The Comittee agreed that a meeting with the Comissioners should be scheduled to discuss the Maintenance Policy State-ment. 9. Independent Revic,. of NRC Staff Report on TVA Lessons Learned (0 pen) The Comittee agreed that the Subcomittee on TVA Organiza-tional Issues should take the lead in the Comittee's indepen-dent review, requested by the Comission, of the NRC Staff's report on TVA lessons learned. 10. International Organization Similar to INP0 (0 pen) The Committee agreed that Mr. S. Anderson, INP0, should be invited to a forthcoming meeting of the ACRS to describe the efforts to establish an international INP0 11. International Conference on Quality and Quality Assurance (0 pen) Dr. Siess described a meeting that he had had with Mr. R. Cerzosimo concerning a possible international meeting on Quality and Quality Assurance, as previously recomended by the ACRS. Mr. Cerzosimo was representing the American Society for Quality Control (ASQC). Dr. Siess explained that Mr. Cerzosimo had said that ASQC would be happy to sponsor such a meeting (i.e., would assume all fiaancial responsibility for the meeting). The conference could be shown as "in coopera-tion with the NRC and ACRS." The ASQC would like NRC/ACRS participation in planning of the mee'.ing, in establishing an agenda, and in identifying internationa' groups that should be notified and/or invited to the meeting.
Y C s 335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES 27 The Committee agreed that fir. R. Cerzosimo should be invited to the April ACRS meeting to describe ASQC views on an inter-national workshop on Quality and Quality Assurance.
- 12. Saturday Sessions (0 pen)
The Committee agreed to star, its Saturday sessions at 8:30 a.m. D. Future Activities (0 pen) 1. Future Agenda The Committee agreed to the tentative future agenda shown in Appendix II. 2. Future Subcommittee Activities A schedule of future subcommittee activities was distributed to members. (Appendix III). The 335th ACRS meeting was adjourned at 1:50 p.m., Saturday, March 12, 1988. l l s i
,);, APPENDICES 335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES . MARCH 10-12, 1988 1. Attendees II. Future Agenda III. Future Subcomittee Activities. IV. Other Docurnents Received 1 I l
1 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 ACRS MEETINf! l ll bad /0--/2. Iff DATE i / 1 1 c ATTENDEES Thursday Friday Saturday Dr. William Kerr, Chairman / v' Dr. Forrest J. Remick, Vice Chairman / / 4 Mr. James C. Ebersole / V v Dr. Harold W. Lewis v v t/ Mr. Carlyle Michelser. / v~ 1
- s..
Dr. Dade W. Moeller V y V' Dr. Paul G. Shewmon / L/ 7" Dr. Chester P. Siess / t/ Dr. Martin J. Steindler V V V~ Mr. David A. Ward V / V Mr. Charles J. Wylie V / / O APPENDIX I
ATTENDEES 335TH ACRS MEETING MARCH 10-12, 1988 i Thursday, March 10, 1988 NRC Attendees Public Attendees Joel Kramer, NRR John W. Flude, NUS Daniel B. Jones, NRR Altheia Wyche, SERCH Licensing. Bechtel F. Coffman, NRR Neville Wyche, U. Illinois /U. Toronto Clare Goodman, RES H. P. Van Cott, Natl. Academy of Sciences Dennis I. Serig, RES Beverley Huey, Natl. Academy of Sciences Alan Rubin, RES L. Connor, DSA Elise Heumann, ARM Kathy Boyd, Heritage S. H. Weiss, NRR Joan Rose, Heritage J. L. Mauch, NRR Bob Woolley, General Atomics V. Thomas, NRR Donald Hill, Niagara Mohawk R. A. Capra, NRR Don Lee, Chronicle M. Haughey, NRR Dave Strong, Chronicle M. Slosson, NRR Mario H. Fontana, IT Corp. Ed Wenzinger, RI Kevin McCullough, Chronicle Broadcasting H. Ornstein, AEOD Paul Quattro, ABZ, Inc. R. Lobel, NRR Stephen Additon, IT Corp. W. Lanning, NRR R. L. Summitt, IT Corp. Melanie Miller, NRR Kirby Dawson, BG/E G. Kalmon, NRR Paul Haas, IT Corp. Gary Holahan, NRR Jug L, IT Corp Dan Giessing, DOE Brian Naklaya, IT Corp. Chsrles Brinkman, CE R. Borsum, B&W Emil Yissy, R. Little, SMUD L. Rubenstein, NRR G. Davis, C-E Claudia Guild, Bishop Cook M. Crump, C-E L. Melloy, McClatchy Newspapers C. E.'inkman W. Pasedag, INEL L I-2 h
ATTENDEES 335TH ACRS MEETING MARCH 10-12, 1988 Friday, March 11, 1988 NRC Attendees Public Attendees B. D. Liaw, OSP Kathy Boyd, Heritage S. D. Richardson, OSP Rebecca Hansen, TVA l M. A. Miller, NRP Joe Ziegler, TVA E. C. Marinos, OSP C. H. Fox, TVA 1 T. A. Ippolito, Contractor R. W. Bass, TVA/ Beta l T. P. Gwynn, OCM/LZ John Hosmer, TVA R. Hermann, OSP D. W. Wilson, TVA I J. O'Brien, RES J. A. Kirkebo, TVA Guy A. Arlotto, RES C. Concordia, TVA A. P. Capuzzi, TVA K. W. Brown, TVA j R. Gridley, TVA l L. Neal, GE W. Raughley, TVA E. Fotopoulos, SERCH Licensing, Bechtel W. Shields, Bishop, Cook i l V. Kapila, NUS Joan Rose, Heritage William Pearce, Salf Stephanie Murphy, NIRS Kevin Ellis, Gannett G. A. Brown, Stone & Webster Dave Airozo, McGraw-Hill Bill Hopkins, Bechtel H. M. Fontecilla, Va. Power J. Zdarek, Czech. Ems. M. Phillis, Bishop, Cook etal. L. Connor, DSA G. L. Rogers, TVA Nuclear 1-3
APPENDIX II FUTURE AGENDA April 7-9, 1988 Pancho Seco Nuclear Power Plant (0 pen) (HWL/RKM) Estimated time: 2 hrs. ' Briefing and discussion regarding proposed restart of the Rancho Seco huclear Power Plant. IAEA General Principles fur Reactor Safety (0 pen) (DWM/TGM) Estimated time: li hrs. - Briefing by Dr. H. J. Kouts regarding proposed IAEA General Princi-ples for Reactor Safety. Generic Issues (0 pen) (CPS /SD) Estimated time: 2 hrs. - Discuss proposed ACRS corarents/ rec'oiivrendation regarding the effectiveness of the NRC Staff process to deal with generic issues and unresolved safety issues. Fitness for Duty (Tentative) (0 pen) (FJR/HA) Estimated time: li hrs. - i Discuss proposed NRC Fitness for Duty Rule directed by the Comission. Subcom-mittee meeting on 3/28/88. Technical Training and Qualification Program for NRC Technical Personnel (0 pen) (FJR/hA) Estimated time: 11 hrs. - Briefing by AEOD/PERS representa-tives regarding proposed changes in NRC training and qualification program for technical personnel. Human Factors Research Program (Tentative) (0 pen) (FJR/HA) Estimated time: I hr. - ACR5 comments requested regarding proposed research program. Proposed program plan expected during March. Subcomittee meeting on 3/28/88. Meetinn with Director, NRR (0 pen) Estimated time: I hr. - Discuss items of j mutual interest. Meeting with NRC Comissioners (Tentative) (0 pen) (WK/CJW/HA) Estimated time. i 1 br. - Meeting to discuss the basis for a proposed NRC rule for maintenance of nuclear power plants. Training and Qualification of Reactor Operators (Tentative) (0 pen) (FJR/HA) Estimated tirre: I hr. - ACRS coments requested on proposed policy statement I regaraing nuclear power plant operators. Proposed statement expected during March. Subcomittee meeting cn 3/28/88 ACRS Subcomittee Activities (0 pen) (MWL/HSS) Estimated time: I hr. - Reports and discussions regarding designated ACRS subcomittee activities including the safety implications of control systams, nuclear radwaste management and disposal, and comittee activities related to radwaste management and dis-posal. ACRS Policies and Procedures (0 pen) (WK/HWL/TGM) Estimated time: i hr. - Discuss ACRS practices regardirg activities of ACRS members. i
335TH ACRS MEETING II-2 Important Safety-Related Issues (0 pen) (CPS /SD) Estimated time: 2 hrs. - Discuss proposed hierarchical structure for important safety-related issues. Advanced Reactors (0 pen) (DAW /MME) Est6 ated time: i hr. - Review proposed key design features for advanced gas-cooled and liquid metal cooled nuclear power plants. Future ACRS Activities (0 pen) (WK/RFF) Estimated time: I hr. - Discuss anticipated subcommittee activities and items proposed for consideration by the full Committee. Appointment of New Members (Closed) (FJR/NSL) Estimated time: i hr. - Discuss qualification of persons proposed for appointment to the Committee and the internal allocation of resources. May 5-7, 1988 Regulatory Guide 1.100, Seismic Qualification of Electrical and Mechanical Equipment (CJW/RKM) - Revised Guide expected late April or May. Subcommittee reeting on 4/21/88. Systems Interactions (DAW /P9H) - Briefing and discussion of proposed final resolution of USl A-17, Systems Interactions. Proposed resolution package expected during April. Subccmmittee meeting to be scheduled. Revised ECCS Rule (DAW /PAB) - ACRS coanents on proposed final rule version. Rule package expacted in April. Subcommittee meeting for 4/21/88. Quality of Fasteners Used in Nuclear Power Plants (SECY-87-296) (PGS/EGI) - Briefing regarding status. ACRS subcommittee will consider during late April or May. Fire Protection (CYM/SD) - ACRS comments requested regarding proposed fire risk scoping study. Draft SNL report received February 8, 1988. Subcommittee meeting on 3/9/88. B&W Design Reassessment (CJW/RKM) - Review and report on BAW-1919, 8&W Owners Group Safety Assessment of B&W Plants. The draft SER (NUREG-1231) was re-ceived on 11/23/87 and the final SER supplement expected in March. Subcom-mittee meeting on 5/3-4/88. Later Regulatory Guide 1.106, Rev. 2, Thermal Overload Protection for Motor Operate'd Valves for Nuclear Plants (CJW/RKM) - Briefing and discussion of proposed Revision of Reg. Guide 1.106 based on public comments received by NRC. Revised Reg. Guide to be provided.
A 335TH ACRS MEETING II-3 Decay Heat Removal (DAW /PAB) - ACRS review and comment requested regardirig proposed resolution of USI A-45. Draft regulatory analysis expected by mid-May. Subcommittee meeting held on 1/28/88; another will be needed. Auxiliary Systems (CYM/S0) - Discuss proposed ACRS comments on the adequacy of the NRC Staff criteria to review chilled water systems designs. NRC Maintenance Policy (0 pen) (CYM/HA) - Work with NRC Staff in development of-a proposed Notice of Rulemaking and monitor NRC Staff workshop to formulate the proposeJ rule by August 1, 1988 (see SRM 880107 dated 2/25/88). Review of TVA Lessons Learned (CJW/RPS) The SECY requirements memo dated March 2, 1988 includes a request that the ACRS perform an independent review of the Staff's TVA lessons learned report (SECY-87-221, Final Report on Lessons Learned) to determine if the Staff's effort was sufficient to assure that all significant issues have been addressed. An action date of September 1, 1988 is proposed. International Meeting on Nuclear Power Plant Quality / Quality Control (CPS /TGM) - Progress report on arrangements for such a meeting. -4 y
APPENDIX III REVISED NOR I 21988 ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS Metal Components, March 15, 1988, EPRI NDE Center, 1300 Harris Blvd., Charlotte. NC (Igne), 8:30 a.m. The Subcomittee will review the status of the NDE of cast stainless steel piping and cther topics related to Sub-comittee activities. Attendance by the following is anticipated, and reser-vations have been made at the Hilton University Park (704/547-7444), 8629 J.M. Keynes Drive for the night of March 14: Dr. Shewmon Mr. Ward Mr. Michelson Waste Manacement, March 17, 1988, 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC (Merrill) B:30 a.m, Room 1046. The Subcomittee will review the following nuclear waste managenent topics: (1) methodology for setting nuclear waste manacement research pricrities, (2) TMI-2 liner event, (3) status of NRC recomendation of resin content limitation in cerent-based LLW, (4) recent developments in LlW licensing and status of state compacts, and (5) "Q-List" Technical Posi-tion on items and activities in the high-level waste geologic repository i program subject to quality assurance requirements. Attendance by the follow-ing is antir.ipated, and reservations have been made at the hotels indicated j for the night of March 16 Dr. Mceller LOMBARDY Dr. Orth LOMBARDY Dr. Shewmon NONE Dr. Till LOMBARDY Dr. Steindler LOMBARDY Mr. Fogarty NONE Occupational and Environrental Protection System.s, March 22-23, 1988, Washington, DC - POSTPONG. Instrumentation and Control Systems, March 24, 1988, 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC (El-Zef tawy), 8:30 a.m., Room 1046. The Subcomittee will review the NRC Staff's analysis and study to limit the scope of USI A-47, "Safety Inplicaticns of Control Systems." Attendance by the following is anticipated, and reservations have been made at the hotels indicated for the night of March 23: Mr. Ebersole DAYS INN (DC) Mr. Michelson DAYSINN(DC) Dr. Kerr LOMBARDY Mr. Wylie ANTHONY Dr. Lewis HYATT Mr. Davis NONE Human Factors, March 28, 1988, 1717 HStreet,NW, Washington,DC(Alderman), 8:30 a.m., Room 1046. The Subcomittee will be briefed and review: (1)the Human Factors Research Program plan, (2) the Fitness for Duty Rule, and (3) Policy Statement on Training and Qualification (tentative). Attendance by the following is anticipated, and reservations have been made at the hotels indicated for the nicht of March 27: Dr. Remick NONE Mr. Ward ANTHONY Dr. Kerr LOMBARDY Mr. Wylie ANTHONY Mr. Michelson DAYSINN(DC) Mr. Gimy NONE
l l l e . Structural Engineering, March 29 (Site Visit) and 30, 1988, Pacifica Hotel, LT61 Certinela Avenue, Culver City, CA (Igne), 8:30 a.m. The Subcomittee will review the Piping and Fitting Dynamic Reliability Program. (Visits to test facilities are planned for March 29,1988.) Attendance by the following is anticipated, and reservations have been made at the Pacifica Hotel (213) 649-1776, for the nights of March 28, 29 and 30: Dr. Siess Dr. Bush Dr. Shewmon Mr. Rodabaugh Mr. Ward Babcock & Wilcox Reactor Plants, March 30-31, 1988 Washington, DC - POSTPONED to May 3-4, 1988. Advanced Pressurized Water Reactors, April 5, 1988, 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC (El-Zeftawy), 8:30 a.m., Room 1046. The Subcomittee will discuss and hear presentations from Westinghouse representatives and the NRC Staff regarding the PRA for WAPWR (RESAR SP/90) design. Attendance by the folicwing is anticipated, and reservations have been made at the hotels indicated for the night of April 4: Mr. Ward ANTHONY Dr. Remick NONE Dr. Kerr LOMBARDY Dr. Shemon NONE Pr. Michelson DAYSINN(DC) Mr. Wylie ANTHONY ACRS Planning Subcommittee (CLOSED) (Tentative), April 6, 1988, 1717 H Streat, NW, Washington, DC (Fraley), 2:00 p.m., Room 1008. The Subcomittee will discuss allocation of ACRS resources during the remeinder of FY-1988 and FY-1989. Attendance by the following is anticipated, and reservations have been trade at the hotels indicated for the night of April 5: Dr. Kerr LOMBARDY(AR:4/6) Dr. Pemick NONE(AR:4/6) Mr. Michelsor DAYS INN (DC) Rancho Seco (B&W Reactor Plants), April 6, 1988, 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC (Major), 8:30 a.m., Room 1046. The Subcommittee will dis-cussion the restart of Rancho Seco following its December 1985 shutdown. Attendance by the follow!ng is anticipated, and reservations have been made at the hotels indicated for the night of April 5: Mr. Wylie ANTHONY Mr. Ward ANTHONY Mr. Michelson DAYS INN (DC) 336th ACRS Meeting, April 7-9, 1988, Washington, DC, Room 1046. III-2 t
. Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena, April 19, 1988 (tentative), Washington, DC (Boehnert), 8:30 a.m., Room 1046. The Subcommittee will review the draft Models and Correlations Document for the RELAP/5 thermal hydraulic code. Lodging will be announced later. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Mr. Ward Dr. Catton Dr. Kerr Dr. Plesset Mr.Michelson(tent.) Mr. Schrock Mr. Wylie Dr. Sullivan Dr. Tien Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena, April 20, 1988, 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC (Boehnert), 8:30 a.m., Room 1046. The Subcomnittee will discuss a proposed report on thermal hydraulic research for consideration by the ACRS. Lodging will be announced later. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Mr. Ward Dr. Cattcn i Dr. Kerr Dr. Plesset Mr. Michelsor (tent.) Mr. Schrock Mr. Wylie Dr. Sullivan Dr. Tien Reliability Assurance, April 21, 1988, 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC TMajor),8:30a.m., Room 1046. The Subcommittee will be briefed on the final outcore of the Equipment Qualification-Risk Scoping Study. The Subcommittee will also review the final version of R.G. 1.100. Lodging will be ennounced later. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Mr. Wylie Dr. Siess Mr. Michelson* Thernal Hydraulic Phenomena, April 21, 1988, 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC (Boehnert) 8:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m., Room 1167. The Subcommittee will review the final version of the proposed ECCS Rule. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Mr. Ward Dr. Catton Dr. Kerr Dr. Plesset Mr. Michelson* Mr. Schrock Mr. Wylie (part-time) Dr. Sull,ivan Dr. Tien
- Conflict to be resolved III-3
. Babcock & Wilcox Reactor Plants, May 3-4, 1988, 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC (Major), 8:30 a.m., Room 1046. The Subcomittee will continue its review of the long-term safety review of B&W reactors. This effort was begun during the summer of 1986; initial Comittee coments offered on July 16, 1986 in a letter to V. Stello, EDO. Lodging will be announced later. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Mr. Wylie Dr. Catton Dr. Kerr Mr. Davis Dr. Lewis Mr. Etherington - Mr. Michelson Mr. Patterson Mr. Ward Mr. Reed. 337th ACRS Meetine, May 5-7, 1988, Washington, DC, Room 1046. Thern al Hydraulic Phenomena, May 18, 1988, 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC (Boehrert), 8:30 a.m., Room 1046. The Subcomittee will review the W revised ECCS Medel for 2-loop Upper Plenum Injection (UPI) plants. Lodging will be announced later. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Mr. Ward Dr. Catton Dr. Kerr Dr. Plesset Mr. Michelson (tent.) Mr. Schrock Mr. Wylie Dr. Sullivan Dr. Tien Regional Programs, May 24, 1988, Atlanta, GA (Boehnert). The Subcomittee will review the activities under the control of the NRC Region 11 Office. Lodging will be announced later. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Dr. Remick Dr. Moeller Mr. Michelson Mr. Ward Improved LWRs, May 25, 1988, 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC (Alderman), 8:30 a.m., Room 1046. The Subcomittee will discuss Chapters 3, 4, and 5 of the EPPI ALWR Requirements document. Lodging will be announced later. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Mr. Wylie Mr. Ward t Mr. Michelson Dr. Siess i Metal Components, May 26, 1988, 1717 HStreet,NW, Washington,DC(Igne), 8:30 a.m., Room 104.6. The Subcomittee will discus's the quality of fasteners in nuclear power plants and review BWR reactor pressure vessel in-service inspections. Lodging will be announced later. Attendance by the following is anticipated: l Dr. Shewmon Mr. Ward l Dr. Lewis Mr. Bender Mr. Michelson Mr. Etherington III-4
. Advanced Boiling Water Reactors, June 1, 1988, 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC (Major), 8:30 a.m., Room 1046. The Subcomittee will begin its review of IEe GE ABWR. This meeting will concentrate on the first review module con-sisting of SAR Chapters 4, 5, 6, and 15-1. Lodging will be announced later. Attendarce by the following is anticipated: Mr. Michelson Dr. Shewmon Dr. Kerr Mr. Wylie Dr. Renick Dr. Okrent 338th ACRS Meetine, June 2-4, 1988, Washington, DC, Room 1046. Waste Management, June 7-8, 1988, 1717 HStreet,NW, Washington,DC(Verrill), 8:30.am., Room 1046. The Subcommittee will review pertinent nuclear waste management topics to be determined conjointly with the NRC. Staff during an agenda planning session on April 15, 1988. Lodging will be announced later. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Dr. Voeller Dr. Shewmon Dr. Kerr Dr. Steindler 1 Dr. Remick Dr. Parker Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena, June 21, 1988 (tentative), location to be de-Ie~rnined (Boehnert). ThT Tubcommittee will review the status of the MIST Phase III and IV Programs and the proposed 0TSG Follow-on Program. Lodging will be anncunced later. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Mr. Werd Dr. Plesset Dr. Kerr Mr. Schreck Mr. Wylie Dr. Sullivan Dr. Catton Dr. Tien Advanced Pressurized Water Reactors, Date to be determined (April /May), Washington, DC (El-Zeftawy). The Subcomittee will review the licensing review bases document being developed for Combustion Engineering's Standard Safety Analysis Report-Design Certification (CESSAR-DC). Attendance by the followino is anticipated: Mr. Ward Dr. Remick Dr. Kerr Dr. Shewmon Mr. Michelson Mr. Wylie III-5
' Safety Philosophy, Technology and Criteria Date to be determined (April /May), Washington, DC (Houston). The Subcomittee will review the status of NUREG-1251 (Implications of Chernobyl) and the NRC Staff's program (at BNL) to address the implications of Chernobyl in regard to severe reactivity tran-sients. The Subcommittee may also review the Staff's final version of a proposed generic letter on USI A-17, "Systems Interactions." Attendance by the following is anticipated: Mr. Ward Dr. Remick Dr. Kerr Mr. Wylie Dr. Lewis Dr. Lee Mr. Michelson Dr. Lipinski Generic Items, Date to be detemined (April /May), Washington, DC (Duraf swamy). The Subcommittee will discuss: (1) ISAP-II Progran and associated Policy Statenent, and (2) Integration of Related Generic Issues. Attendance by the ' folicwing is anticipated: Dr. Siess Dr. Moeller Mr. Fichelson Mr. Ward Dr. Remick Mr. Wylie Decay Heat Removal Systems, Date to be determined (mid-May), Washington, DC (Boehnert). The Subcommittee will continue its review of the NRC Staff's resolution position for USI A-45. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Mr. Hard Mr. Wylie Dr. Kerr Dr. Catton Mr. Michelson Mr. Davis Advanced Pressurized Water Reactors, Date to be detemined (May), Washington, TIC (El-Zeftawy). The Subcomnittee will discuss the comparison of WAPWR (RESAR SP/90) design with other modern plants (in U.S. and abroad). Atteiidance by the follrying is anticipated: Mr. Ward Dr. Shewmon Dr. Kerr Mr. Wylie Mr. Michelson Advanced Pressurized Water Reactors, Date to be determined (May/ June), Washington, DC, (El-Zeftary). The Subcomittee will review the draft SER in regard to the reactor, reactor coolant system, and regulatory confomance for the WAPWR RESAR SP/90 design. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Mr. Ward Dr. Remick Dr. Kerr Dr. Shewmon Mr. Michelson Mr. Wylie III-6
< Containment Requirements, Date to be determined (May/ June), Washington, DC (Housten). The Subcommittee will review the NRC Staff's docilment on interim recomendations for containrent performance and improvements (BWR Mark I only). Attendance by the following is anticipated: J Mr. Ward Mr. Wylie Dr. Kerr Dr. Catton 1 Dr. Siess Dr. Corradini Occupational and Environmental Protection Systems, Date to be detemined THey/ June), Washington, DC (Igne). The Subcomittee will review: (1)the"hot particle" problem, (2) monitoring the quality and quantity of airborne l radionuclides in/out of containment following an accident, (3) the emergency l planning rule, (4) the control room habitability report by ANL, and (5) other related tratters. Atterdance by the following is anticipated: j Dr. Moeller Mr. Wylie Dr. Renick Dr. Mark (tent.) Dr. Steindler Dr. Shapiro i SevereAccidents,Datetobedetermined(May/ June), Washington,DC(Houston). TIIe' S'ubcommittee will review the hydrogen control measures for BWRs (Mark III) and Ice Condenser PWRs (USI A-48)(tentative). The Subcommittee may also review the final version of the NPC Staff's proposed generic letter on Indi-vidual Plant Exarninations (IPEs). Attendance by the following is anticipated: Dr. Kerr Dr. Catton Dr. Shew on Dr. Corradini Dr. Siess Mr. Davis Mr. Ward Dr. Lee Decay Heat Pemoval Systems, Date to be determined (June / July), Washington, DC (Boehnert). The Subcommittee will review the proposed resolution of Generic Issue 23, "RCP Seal Failures," and Generic Issue 99, "Loss of RHR Capability in PWRs." Attendance by the following is anticipated: Mr. Ward Mr. Wylie Dr. Kerr Dr. Catton Mr. Michelson Mr. Davis Decay Heat Removal Systens, Date to be determine'd, Washington, DC (8 hnert). The Subccmmittee will explore the issue of the use of feec and bleed for decay heat removal in PWRs. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Mr. Ward Mr. Wylie Dr. Kerr Dr. Catton Mr. Michelson Mr. Davis III-7
o ' Systematic Assessn.ent of Experience, Date and location to be determined, (Major). The Subcommittee will review the Diagnostic Evaluation Program and other related staff plant review and inspection efforts. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Dr. Lewis Dr. Moeller Mr. Ebersole Mr. Ward Mr. Michelson Mr. Wylie Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena, Date to be determined, Washington, DC (Boehnert). The Subcommittee will discuss the status of Industry best-estimate ECCS Model submittals for use with the revised ECCS Rule. Attendance by the following is anticipated: Mr. Ward Dr. Catton Dr. Kerr Dr. Plesset Mr. Michelson Mr. Schrock Mr. Wylie Dr. Sullivan Dr. Tien Auxiliary Systems, Date to be deternined Washington, DC (Duraiswamy). The 3ubconmittee wiTT discuss the: (1) criteria being used by utilities to design design, and (3)ystems, (2) reculatory requirements for Chilled Water System Chilled Water S criteria being used by the NRC Staff to review the Chilled Water System design. Attendance by the following is anticipated, and reserva-tions have been nade at the hotels indicated for the night of April 5: Mr. Michelson DAYSINN(DC) Mr. Wylie ANTHONY Dr. Moeller LOMBARDY .III-8 -..i
0 APPENDIX IV 335TH ACRS MEETING MINUTES MARCH 10-12, 1988 tebook OTHER DOCUMENTS RECEIVED 2 National Research Council Briefing on Human Factors Research -Status Report -Memo for F. Remick from H. Alderman,
Subject:
Human Factors Research and Nuclear Safety Report of the National Academy of Sciences, dated 2/2/88 3 Operating Events -Status Report 4 Restart of Rancho Seco -Status Report 5 DOE Advanced Reactor Severe Accident Policy -Status Report 7.1 Report by Chaiman of Subcomittee on Themal Hydraulics Phenomena -Status Report 7.2 Report by Chairman of Subcomittee on Decay Heat Removal -Status Report j 7.3 Report by Chairman of Subcomittee on Structural Engineering -Status Report 8. Consideration of Possible Sequoyah Restart -Status Report - Revision 2, Reg. Guide 1.99 and Embrittlement of Structural Steel -Status Report -Revision 2, Reg. Guide 1.99 -Minutes of Meeting of Feb. 18, 1988 of ACRS Subcomittee on Metal Components
- 11. Quantitative Safety Goals
-Status Report
- 12. Hierarchical Structure for the Important Safety-Related Issues
-Status Report -Memo for ACRS Fembers from C. Siess,
Subject:
Hierarchical Satructure for the Important Safety-Related Issues Identified by ACRS Members, dated 12/31/87
- 14. Report by Chaiman of Joint Meeting of Subcomittees on Scram Systems Reliability and on Core Perfomance
-Status Report
- 16. ACRS Bylaws
-Proposed Change to Bylaws
2 .. o Meeting Handouts 1. Integrated Approach to Implementation of Severe Accident Policy Statement a. Status report b. Weekly Information Report Highlights (Feb. 19,1988) Overview and Relationship of Severe Accident Activities c. Memo for D. Ross, et al. from T. Speis,
Subject:
Comission Paper on Integrated Approach to Implementing the Comission's Policy on I Severe Accidents 2. Scram System Reliability and Core Perfonnance a. Memo for ACRS Members from W. Kerr,
Subject:
Meeting (Joint) Report Subcomittees on Scram Systems Reliability and on Core Performance 3 3. Operating Events and Incidents a. Status of Recent Events b. PN0-1-88-3 and -3A, Indian Point-2, Steam Generator Dryouts c. Memo for P. Shewmon, from R. Major,
Subject:
Reactor Scram and Vessel Overfill - AIT Dispatched, 1/25/88 4. Future Activities a. Memo for ACRS Members from R. Fraley.
Subject:
Future Activities - 336th ACRS Meeting - April 7-9, 1988, dated 3/9/88 5. Discussions on Sequoyah a. Memo for ACRS Members from R. Savio,
Subject:
Additional Documents for the March 11 Discussion on Sequoyah, 3/9/88 b. Memo for ACRS Members from R. Fraley,
Subject:
Sequoyah Nuclear Plant c. Memo for ACRS Members from R. Savio,
Subject:
March 4, 1988 Comission Briefing on the Sequoyah Restart, 3/8/88 d. Memo for R. Fraley from G. Brown,
Subject:
Review of Structural Deficiencies Found in Integrated Design Inspection (IDI) for Sequoyah-2, dated 3/4/88 6. TVA - Discussion on Sequoyah a. Letter to C. Wylie from Wang Lau, dated 3/9/88 concerning risk assessment at TVA 7. Policy Statement on Maintenance a. Memo for C. Michelson from H. Alderman,
Subject:
Final Staff Requirements Memorandum, Interim Policy Statement on Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants, 2/26/88 IV-2
3 4 Presentations Topic Organization Person Human Factors Research National Research Dr. Neville Moray ) and Nuclear Safety Council Annunciator Cabinet Fires NRC Staff Rancho Seco Restart NRC Staff (NRR) George Kalman DOE Advanced Reactor Severe DOE Dan Giessing and Accident Program (ARSAP) Paul Haas Sequoyah-2 TVA -Employee Concerns and TVA Issues -Systems Integration for TVA Past Design & Modifications -Safety Reviews -Cables Subnerged During TVA Design Basis Flood Letter to H. Denton et al. from Henry Myers i Rev. 2, Reg. Guide 1.99, Radia-NRC Staff Neil Randall tion Embrittlement of Reactor Vessel Materials low Temperature Low Flux NRC Staff M. Mayfield Embrittlement i IV-3 )}}