ML20206S256
| ML20206S256 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/17/1998 |
| From: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-CR-6523 ACRS-3106, NUDOCS 9905210081 | |
| Download: ML20206S256 (39) | |
Text
Date Issued: 6/17/98
}
Date Signed:
7/7/98
() d s - 3 lb6 al TABLE OF CONTENTS MINUTES OF THE 452ND ACRS MEETING APRIL 30 - MAY 2,1998 Page 1.
C HAI R MAN'S R E P O RT.......................................
1 II.
HUMAN PERFORMANCE PLAN..................................
1 111.
ELEVATION OF THE CORE DAMAGE FREQUENCY (CDF) TO A FUNDAMENTAL SAFETY GOAL AND PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE SAFETY GOAL POLICY STATEMENT......................
2 IV.
HASSAL ATMOSPHERIC DISPERSION DOSE ASSESSMENT COMPUTER CODE............................................
5 V.
NUREG/CR-6523. PROBABILISTIC ACCIDENT CONSEQUENCE U NC E RTAINT V AN ALYSIS......................................
6 VI.
SEVERE ACCIDENT MITIGATION DESIGN ALTERNATIVES............. I Vll.
PROPOSED FINAL STANDARD REVIEW PLAN (SRP) SECTION AND REGULATORY GUIDE FOR RISK-INFORMED INSERVICE INSPECTION (ISI)B Vill.
USE OF DYNAMIC BENCHMARKING FOR PRESERVING THERMAL-HYDRAULIC CODE TEST DATA.............
10 IX.
PROPOSED FINAL AMENDMENT TO 10 CFR PART 55. "lNITIAL LICENSED OPERATOR E)(AMINATION REQUIREMENTS"............
11 X.
EXEC UTIVE S E S SION.........................................
12 A.
Reports, Letters, and Memoranda REPORT Elevation of CDF to a Fundamental Safetv Goal and Possible Revision of the Commission's Safetv Goal Poliev Statement (Report to Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman, NRC, from R. L.
Seale, Chairman, ACRS, dated May 11,1998.)
D i
Q-Q\\
-4 @ '1 9905210001 980617 ICIc!ra g3;g73 ay PDR ACRS pLp' 3106 PDR j
ct ncg
LETTER Prooosed Final Amendment to 10 CFR Part 55. " Initial Li-consed Onerator Framination Raouirements" (Letter to L.
Joseph Callan, Executive Director for Operations, NFC, from R. L. Seale, Chairman, ACRS, dated May 8,1998)
MEMORANDA Prooosed Generic Letter. " Modification of the NRC Staff's Recommendations for the Post-Accident Samoling System" (Memorandum to L. Joseph Callan, Executive Director for Operations, NRC, from John T. Larkins, Executive Director, ACRS, dated May 8,1998)
Pronosed Human Performance Plan and Pronosed Final Standard Review Plan Section and Reaulatory Guide for Risk-Informed Inservice insoection of Pining (Memorandum to L. e Joseph Callan, Executive Director for Operations, NRC, from John T. Larkins, Executive Director, ACRS, dated May 12, 1998)
B.
Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recommendations C.
Report on the Meeting of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee Held on April 29,1998 (Open)
D.
Future Meeting Agenda 11 l
l
s-l
[,
APPENDICES l
- l.. Federal Register Notice l
11.
Meeting Schedule and Outline Ill.
Attendees IV.
Future Agenda and Subcommittee Activities V.
List of Documents Provided to the Committee 1
i i
I l
l I
i
THIIHtli MINUTES OF THE FOUR HUNDRED FIFTY-SECOND MEETING OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS APRIL 30 - MAY 2,1998 ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND The 452nd meeting of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards was held at Conference Room 283, Two White Flint North Building, Rockville, Maryland, on April 30-May 2,1998. The purpose of this meeting was to discuss and take appropriate action on the items listed in the attached agenda. The meeting was open to public attendance.
There were no written statements nor requests for time to make oral statements from members of the public regarding the meeting.
A transcript of selected portions of the meeting was kept and is available in the NRC Public Document Room at the Gelman Building,21201 (Eye) Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.
[ Copies of the transcript are available for purchase from Ann Riley & Associates, Ltd.,1250 l Street, N.W., Suite 300, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005.]
ATTENDEES ACRS Members: Dr. Robert L. Seale (Chairman), Dr. Dana A. Powers (Vice-Chairman),
Dr. George Apostolakis, Mr. John Barton, Dr. Mario H. Fontana, Dr. Thomas S. Kress, Dr.
Don W. Miller, Dr. William J. Shack, Dr. Robert E. Uhrig and Dr. Graham Wallis. [For a list of other attendees, see Appendix Ill.)
1.
CHAIRMAN'S REPORT (Open)
[ Note: Dr. John T. Larkins was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.)
Dr. Robert L. Seale, Committee Chairman, convened the meeting at 8:30 a.m. and reviewed the schedule for the meeting. He noted that a trip report had been received from Dr. Powers on the RASPLAV Project. He stated that members had been given a schedule for interviewing candidates for ACRS membership. He suggested that members read the speeches by NRC Commissioners at the Regulatory Information Conference and by Chairman Jackson at a Fire Protection conference in India.
II.
HUMAN PERFOR.MANCE PLAN (Open)
[ Note: Mr. Noel F. Dudley was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.)
Dr. George Apo:tolakis, Chairman of the Human Factors Subcommittee, noted that the ACRS was first briefed on the Human Performance Plan over two years ago and
452nd ACRS Meeting 2
April 30 - May 2,1998 that the ACRS Human Factors Subcommittee had reviewed revisions of the plan on j
three different occasions.
Dr. Jay Persensky, RES, presented the vision statement, mission statement, and scope of the Plan. He explained the operational framework and content of the activity descriptions. Dr. Persensky described the prioritization process including the criteria, weighting factors, algorithm, and cost-benefit matrix.
The ACRS Members and the staff discussed the following:
what issue the Plan is trying to resolve, quantification of human performance in order to compare activities, use of the words predict" and " detect" in the mission statement, e
how activities lead to identified actions, the reason NMSS did not participate in developing the Plan, j
skills and tools that are needed to solve identified problems, using the Plan to communicate the planning process, e
Ieveloping a way to identify risk-significant activities, and modified Delphi and expert elicitation prioritization processes.
a Conclusion Due to the late receipt of the Plan, the Committee decided to defer itsi comments until the June 1998 ACRS meeting.
Ill.
Fl FVATION OF THE CORE DAMAGE FREQUENCY (CDF) TO A FUNDAMENTAL SAFETY GOAL AND PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE SAFETY GOAL POLICY STATEMENT (Open)
(Note: Mr. Michael T. Markley was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.)
1 Dr. George Apostolakis, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Reliability and Probabilistic Risk Assessment (RPRA), introduced the topic to the Committee. The Committee previously discussed issues related to elevation of CDF to a fundamen-tal Safety Goal and possible revision to the Commission's Safety Goal Policy Statement during its March 2-4 and April 2-4, 1998 meetings.
The RPRA Subcommittee met on February 20 and April 16,1998, to discuss these issues.
r
452nd ACRS Meeting 3
April 30 - May 2,1998 NRC Staff Presentation l
. Messrs. Thomas King and Mark Cunningham, RES, and Gary Holahan, NRR, led the discussion for the NRC staff. The staff discussed its plan and approach for evaluating.whether or not to recommend revision to the Policy Statement.
i Significant points raised during its discussion include:
l l
Possible changes to the current policy include:
i Elevating CDF to a fundamental safety goal, Defining a quantitative societal risk goal, i
Establishing a goal with respect to potential land contamination or other environmentalimpacts, and Establishing a goal on risks during temporary plant configurations.
Clarifications on the role of Safety Goals include:
Definition of goals on "how safe is safe enough,"
Relationship between Safety Goals and recent risk-informed regulatory activities, Use of Safety Goals to define " adequate protection,"
l Relationship between Safety Goals, PRA, and defense-in.lepth, and l
Discussion of Regulatory Analysis Guideline metrics for assessing issues.
Possible changes to make the Policy Statement consistent with current practice include:
Plant-specific application of safety goals, Inclusion of a containment' performance guideline derived from the quantitative health objectives; e.g., defined in terms of large, early release frequency (LERF),
Treatment of uncertainties, and Removal of the general plant performance guideline (1x104 per reactor year for a large release of radioactive material.
4 Staff conclusions include:
An immediate update of the Policy Statement is not needed to i-address current safety issues.
The impact related to materials licensees needs further study.
i.
452nd ACRS Meeting 4
April 30 - May 2,1998 Staff resources needed to update the Policy Statement may be better allocated to other activities such as risk-informed pilot reviews, Modification to the Policy Statement should be deferred one year.
The staff requested a Committee report regarding the subject draft Commis-sion paper and staff's proposal to defer revising the Policy Statement for about a year.
Drs. Wallis and Kress questioned the implementation of the Policy Statement. In particular, they questioned whether the Policy Statement would be implemented as regulatory requirements. Mr. Barton stated that it is a " policy" that would require a backfit analysis per 10 CFR 50.109 to be considered a requirement. The staff stated that it could define the level of safety that the NRC expects of the industry.
They added that it would enable the staff to update lessons learned since the policy was issued in 1986.
Dr. Apostolakis questioned the possible use of a three-region approach where immediate action would be taken for risk levels above the upper limit, where evaluating methods to reduce risk should be taken for risk levels above the goal and below the upper limit, and where no action is required for risk levels below the goal.
The staff agreed to consider this approach during the one-year evaluation period.
The staff added that there are legal implications and potential unintended consequences that need to be fully evaluated before proposing a position to the 1
Commission.
Dr. Fontana questioned whether the staff plans to perform a systematic evaluation of the regulations to decide where efficiencies and improvements can be realized.
The staff stated that much is being learned through the risk-informed pilot applications. The staff noted that the current pilots were selected by the industry and added that licensees are better positioned to identify the benefits of future changes and associated savings and efficiencies.
Conclusion The Committee issued a report to Chairman Jackson, dated May 11,1998, on these matters.
t
i 452nd ACRS Meeting 5
April 30 - May 2,1998 l,
IV.
tBSSAL_AIMQSPEERIC DISPERSION DOSE ASSESSMENT COMPUTER CODE (Open) i
[ Note: Mr. Paul A. Boehnert was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.)
Introduction Dr. Kress, cognizant ACRS Member for this issue, introduced this topic to the Committee. He noted that the Committee has evidenced a continuing interest in atmospheric transport and dose assessment. In the past, the ACRS has been critical of the lack of adequate modeling capabilities for the codes that model the phenomena of atmospheric transport of radionuclides. He suggested that such capability existed in the defense establishment and he introduced representatives of Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) to brief the Committee on such a code, I
HASSAL.
ORNL Presentation Messrs. B. Worley, and I. Sykes discussed the capabilities of the (Hazard Assessment System for Consequence Analysis) HASSAL code, demonstrated the software, and discussed the details of the atmospheric transport " PUFF" model used in the code. HASSAL can be used to perform dose assessments, for a given i
release of radionuclides to the atmosphere. It is based on the RASCAL code, but includes the addition of an atmospheric dispersion model.
A demonstration of the code showed that it contains a library which includes relevant data on all the world's nuclear power reactors and most of the research reactors. Such variables as weather conditions can be inserted, based on historical, current or forecast conditions. Data on local terrain is available via digital terrain elevation data on a one-kilometer scale, world-wide. The ORNL representative demonstrated radioactive release scenarios for the Calvert Cliffs plant and the two reactors located in Cuba.
Details of the SCIPUFF (Second-order Closure Integrated PUFF) atmospheric dose dispersion model used in HASSAL were discussed. Capabilities of the model cited by ORNL included: use of multiple sources and materials, an advanced turbulence closure scheme, accurate treatment of wind shear, inclusion of terrain effects, and a graphical user interface. Dr. Sykes noted that this model has had extensive validation. In response to Dr. Powers, Dr. Sykes said that SCIPUFF cannot model phase transition of radionuclides; e.g., migration from particles to gas. In response
8 452nd ACRS Meeting 6
April 30 - May 2,1998 to Dr. Wallis, Mr. Worley said that the capability to model close-in effects (building wakes, etc.) is being added to the code at the behest of the Department of Defense. Dr. Powers indicated that a focus on modeling of prompt fatalities may distoit recovery actions to minimize fatalities resulting from long-term effects.
Conclusion This briefing was for information only. No Committee action was required.
V.
NUREG/CR-6523. PROBABILISTIC ACCIDENT CONSEQUENCE UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS (Open)
[Mr Amarjit Singh was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.)
Dr. George A. Apostolakis, Chairman of the Reliability and Probabilistic Risk Assessment Subcommittee, introduced the topic to the Committee. The Committee heard presentations from the representatives of the NRC and its contractor regarding NUREG/CR-6523 "Probabilistic Accident Consequence Uncertainty Analysis - Food Chain Uncertainty Assessment." The NRC and the European Commission (EC) cosponsored an uncertainty analysis of their respective codes.
The representative of the NRC contractor presented the objective and summarized the results of the study. The ultimate objective of the NRC/EC joint effort was to systematically develop credible and traceable uncertainty distributions for the respective code input variables using a formal expert judgment elicitation process.
The results of the study will allow the distribution representing uncertainty in food chain parameters to be determined in a manner consistent with the NUREG-1150 methodology that relies on Latin hypercube sampling (LHS) techniques. The food chain distributions are available in a form compatible with LHS and other sampling techniques. The distributions obtained will, in principle, allow the uncertainty analyst to perform consequence uncertainty studies on any food chain _ model available.
However, different processing techniques may be required to modify the elicited distributions into distributions that are compatible with different models.
Conclusion This briefing was for information only. No Committee action was required.
452nd ACRS Meeting 7
)
April 30 - May 2,1998 VI.
SEVERE ACCIDENT MITIGATION DESIGN ALTERNATIVES (Open.)
(Note: Dr. Medhat El-Zeftawy was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.]
The NRC staff briefed the Committee regarding the environmental aspects of postulated accidents involving radioactive materials and the radiological impacts of normal operation. In 1979, NRR developed NUREG-0555, " Environmental Standard Review Plans for the Environmental Review of Construction Permit Applications for Nuclear Power Plants." The original Environmental Standard Review Plan (ESRP) was intended to document the staff practice of conducting environmental reviews of new nuclear power plant applications.
Much of the regulatory information contained in NUREG-0555 was outdated, and there was a little interest in updating the information. In the late 1980s, with the promulgation of 10 CFR Part 52, "Early Site Fermits, Standard Design Certifica-l tions, and Combined Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants," there was an expression of interest by the Department of Energy (DOE) and the industry in testing the early site permit (ESP) process. Shodly thereafter, the NRC staff determined that the ESRP and other regulatory guidance needed to be updated. The update resulted in a wholesale retooling of environmental protection guidance rather than a revision to the existing ESRP.
Mr. Barry Zalcman, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR), indicated that during the period of updating the ESRP for new site applications, the license renewal rulemaking ( 10 CFR Part 54 ) was being developed. Consequently, the staff expanded the scope of the ESRP to include environmental protection issues for license renewal applications as well. Recently, a revision to 10 CFR Part 51 was promulgated to support 10 CFR Part 54 license renewal applications. It appears more likely that the first use of the updated ESRP will be for license renewal rather than for new site / plant applications.
The Commission instructed the staff to develop a plan and schedule for the development of regulatory guidance for implementation of the environmental protection rule for license renewal. The current schedule for the ESRP is August 1998. The ESRP guides the staff in conducting its environmental reviews for those actions that lead to the development of an environmental impact statement (EIS).
Recently, the NRC undertook a self-examination to determine whether it was prepared to review an early site permit (ESP) application. The ESP has three components (only the first two are safety issues) : site safety review, emergency preparedness review, and environmental protection review. It is useful to note that
r l
452nd ACRS Meeting 8
April 30 - May 2,1998 the primary focus of the majority of public comments regarding the draft ESRP was the use of the ESRP for license renewal. The staff indicated, however, that the l
l ESRP covers a wider range of issues; e.g., Construction Permits, ESP, Operating l
License and Combined License. The ESRP contains guidance on describing the l
site vicirnty for numerous environmental technologies, land use, water use, water quality, hydrology, geology, meteorology, air quality, terrestrial ecology, demogra-phy, and archaeology. The analyzed topics are segregated into those issues that have impacts due to construction or, in the case of license renewal, refurbishment, l
or operation (including decommissioning funding assurance) as well as those measures and controls to limit adverse impacts.
l The staff indicated that monitoring programs may be undertaken by the applicant or may exist as a result of a State or other agency initiative to establish a baseline l
and to continually monitor the environment to assure that there is no adverse impact due to the proposed actions. Consequently, NRC environmental reviews, unlike the health and safety reviews, both by statute and practical necessity, require the i
involvement of numerous Federal, State, local, and Native American agencies and l
departments.
An emerging issue identified when the draft ESRP was provided concems Severe Accident Mitigation Design Alternatives (SAMDA). The staff presented certain l
aspects of SAMDA. The steps in the SAMDA evaluation are to identify leading contributors to core damage frequency and risk, and through a systematic process, identify a set of design enhancements that can reduce risk contributors. The staff indicated that SAMDA reviews are part of NRC's National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews and are not provided to ACRS for review.
Conclusion This briefing was for information only. However, the Committee requested a follow-up from the staff on this matter and possibly another briefing after the staff i
completes its evaluation.
Vll.
PROPOSED FINAL STANDARD REVIEW PLAN (SRP) SECTION AND REGULA-TORY GUIDE FOR RISK-INFORMED INSERVICE INSPECTION (ISI)(Open)
[ Note: Mr. Michael T. Markley was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.]
Dr. George Apostolakis, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Reliability and Probabilistic Risk Assessment (RPRA), introduced the topic to the Committee. The i
I l
452nd ACRS Meeting 9
l April 30 - May 2,1998 l
?
ACRS previously reviewed the proposed final version of Standard Review Plan l
Section 3.9.8 and Regulatory Guide 1.178 (formerly DG-1063) for risk-informed inservice inspection (ISI) of piping during its April 2-4,1998 meeting.
I NRC Staff Presentation Mr. Thomas King, RES, and Gary Holahan, NRR, led the discussions for the NRC i
staff. Messrs. Jack Guttrnan, RES, and Jack Strosnider, NRR, provided supporting discussion. Messrs. Goutam Bagchi, Syed Ali, and Stephen Dinsmore, NRR, also participated. The staff discussed the following points during its presentation:
The staff requested a Committee report supporting issuance of these documents for " trial"use by the industry and staff.
The Appendices to DG-1063 will be incorporated into a draft NUREG for use during the trial period. Following tnal use, the staff will decide whether to keep them in a NUREG or incorporate them into a regulatory guide.
The staff is scheduled to complete its review of the pilot applications for Surry, Vermont Yankee, and Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 by December 31, 1998.
Industry PresentahQB Messrs. Dennis Weakland of Duquesne Light Company and Alex McNeill of Virginia Power Company led the discussions for the industry. Mr. Ken Balkey and Ms. Nancy Closky of the Westinghouse Owners' Group (WOG) provided supporting discussion. Significant points raised during the discussion included:
The proposed final SRP Section and Regulatory Guide 1.178 for ISI should be issued as final instead of for trial use.
Issuance of the SRP Section and Regulatory Guide for trial use sends a negative message to the U.S. industry and international community regarding NRC's potential unwillingness to move forward on this application which has the largest benefits and offers the best opportunity to enhance current safety practices.
WOG has supported the development of risk-informed ISI application for l
more than five years.
l l
452nd ACRS Meeting 10 April 30 - May 2,1998 WOG embarked on an 18-month benchmarking effort with NRC, National Laboratories, and the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) research to verify and validate the WOG methodology.
1 Dr. Apostolakis questioned why the staff now proposes to issue the subject documents for " trial" use. The staff stated that the pilot applications had not progressed far enough to " finalize" the guidance. The staff added that the industry i
had been slow in responding to staff requests for additional information (RAls).
{
Industry representatives stated that their submittals had been timely and that the staff had not commented on their RAI responses.
Dr. Apostolakis questioned whether the staff found problems with the technical accuracy or the method of the pilot application (WOG). The staff stated that problems were evident in the technical accuracy. WOG representatives stated that their approach was consistent with Regulatory Guide 1.174 (General Guidance) and requested expedient approval of the Topical Report for the Surry Pilot application.
Dr. Apostolakis questioned the progress of the staff's review of the WOG Topical Report for Surry. The staff stated that the development of SRP Section 3.9.8 and Regulatory Guide 1.178 has taken priority over the application reviews. The staff added that progress had been slowed, in part, due to disagreement over licensing fees for the Surry application.
At the conclusion of the April 30-May 2,1998 meeting, Dr. Apostolakis recom-mended and the Committee agreed to prepare a report to the Commission during the June 3-5, 1998 ACRS meeting, since the Committee did not receive the documents in time for sufficient review at this meeting.
Conclusion The ACRS Executive Director informed the NRC Executive Director for Operations
' of the Committee's decision in a memorandum dated May 12,1998.
Vill.
USE OF DYNAMIC BENCHMARKING FOR PRESERVING THERMAL-HYDRAU-LIC CODE TEST DATA (Open)
]
[ Note: Mr. Paul A. Boehnert was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.] ~
The Committee heard a presentation from Dr. R. Henry, representing the Thermal Hydraulics Division of the American Nuclear Society, on the use of dynamic
452nd ACRS Meeting 11 April 30 - May 2,1998 benchmarking to ensure the preservation of integral-and separate-effects test data.
1 By use of dynamic benchmarking, key test data would be documented in the particular code of interest to be used as a continual benchmark as the code is updated, modified, etc.. This would be accomplished by the use of information subroutiner, that would be integrated into the existing codes. Dr. Henry requested ACRS endorsement of this s' proach for use by the ANS in preparation of a draft p
guideline.
Ms. J. Uhle, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, provided a brief presentation on the NRC Thermal-Hydraulic Data Bank. RES sees Dr. Henry's efforts on j
dynamic benchmarking as complementary to the Data Bank program. The Data Bank includes both poprietary and nonproprietary test data; access is appropriately controlled to protect he proprietary information. Access to the Data Bank is available via a Web G/.e.
Conclusion This briefing was for information only. The Committee took Dr. Henry's request for ACRS action on this matter under advisement.
IX.
PROPOSED FINAL AMENDMENT TO 10 CFR PART 55. " INITIAL LICENSED OPERATOR EXAMINATION REQUIREMENTS"(Open)
(Mr. Amarjit Singh was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.)
Mr. John J. Barton, Chairman of the Plant Operations Subcommittee, introduced the topic to the Committee. He stated that the purpose of this briefing was to provide information regarding the proposed final amendment to 10 CFR Part 55 regarding initial licensed operator examination requirements.
NRC Staff Presentation Mr. Robert Gallo, NRR, provided the background ar.d the summary of the proposed final amendment. The staff stated that the proposed amendment to the rule will require all nuclear power facility licensees to prepare, proctor, and grade the written examinations and prepare the operating tests that NRC uses to evaluate the competence of individuals applying for operator licenses at those plants. The amendment requires facility licensees to submit, upon approval by an authorized representative of the facility licensee, each examination and test to NRC for review and approval. The amendment preserves NRC authority to prepare examinations
452nd ACRS Meeting 12 April 30 - May 2,1998 and tests, as necessary, if NRC has reason to question the facility licensee's ability to prepare them acceptably. In addition, NRC will periodically invoke this authority in order to maintain the proficiency of its own examiners. To impress upon licensees, applicants, and facility licensees the importance that the Commission places on examination integrity, the regulation also includes a definition of what it means to " compromise" an examination pursuant to 10 CFR Part 55.49.
Nuclear Enerav Presentation (NEI)
The representative of NEl stated that the industry supports the proposed final
(
rulemaking amendment.
j Conclusion The Committee issued a letter to the Executive Director for Operations, dated May 8,1998, on this matter.
~
X.
EXECUTIVE SESSION (Open)
[ Note: Dr. John T. Larkins was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.)
A.
Reports, Letters and Memoranda REPORT Elevation of CDF to a Fundamental Safety Goal and Possible Revision of the Commission's Safety Goal Poliev Statement (Report to Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman, NRC, from R. L. Seale, Chairman, ACRS, dated May 11,1998.)
LETTER Proposed Final Amendment to 10 CFR Part 55. " initial Licensed Ooerator Examination Reauirements" (Letter to L. Joseph Callan, Executive Director for Operations, NRC, from R. L. Seale, Chairman, ACRS, dated May 8,1998)
MEMORANDA
p 452nd ACRS Meeting 13 April 30 - May 2,1998 Prooosed Generic Letter. " Modification of the NRC Staff's Recommendations for the Post-Accident Samolina Svstem" (Memo-randum to L. Joseph Callan, Executive Director for Operations, NRC,
!l from John T. Larkins, Executive Director, ACRS, dated May 8,1998) i Prooosed Human Performance Plan and Proposed Final Standard Review Plan Section and Reaulatorv Guide for Risk-Informed l
Inservice insoection of Pioina (Memorandum to L. Joseph Callan, Executive Director for Operations, NRC, from John T. Larkins, l
Executive Director, ACRS, dated May 12,1998)
B.
Reconciliation of ACRS Commer.ts and Recommendations
[ Note: Mr. Sam Duraiswamy was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.]
The Committee discussed the response from the NRC Executive Director for l
Oparations (EDO) to ACRS comments and recommendations included in a recent ACRS report:
i The Committee discussed the response from the NRC Executive Director for Operations dated April 23, 1998, responding to ACRS comments and recommendations included in the ACRS report dated March 12, 1998, l
conceming the proposed final Standard Review Plan sections and regulatory guides tor risk-informed, performance-based regulation for inservice testing, graded quality assurance, and technical specifications.
)
The Committee decided that it was satisfied with the EDO's response.
C.
Report on the Meeting of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee (Open)
The Committee heard a report from Dr. Seale and the Executive Director, ACRS, on the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee meeSng held on April 29,1998. The following items were discussed:
1.
ACRS REVIEW OF PREDECISIONAL DOCUMENTS i
On April 24,1998, the ACRS Executive Director, John T. Larkins, the Acting Deputy Executive Director, Gail H. Marcus, and representatives from the Office of the General Counsel met with L.
Joseph Callan, EDO, and m
1 452nd ACRS Meeting 14 April 30 - May 2,1998 I
representatives of his staff to discuss the NRC staffs recent practice of not providing predecisional information to the ACRS and ACNW. Recent examples of predecisional documents not provided to both Committees and the resulting adverse impact on the ability of both Committees being able to provide timely advice to the Commission were discussed. The EDO agreed that this was a reasonable concern and that it would be addressed in meetings with his staff and NRC Office Directors.
Mr. Callan also suggested that Dr. Larkins contact him directly if a Committee has difficulty in getting necessary documents for review.
1
{
Hecommendation The Subcommittee recommended that Dr. Larkins bring to the attention of the Executive Director for Operations any problems encountered in obtaining predecisional documents or inforrnation.
2.
ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE STRUCTURE On April 16,1998, a revised ACRS Subcommittee Structure was forwarded to all Committee members for review and comment (pp.1-21). The revised structure incorporates recommendations made by members, with two exceptions.
Suggestions to change the name of the Plant Systems Subcommittee and to retain the Subcommittee on Technical Training Program were not adopted.
Recommendation The Subcommittee recommended that the Chairman of the Plant Systems Subcommittee provide the reasons for changing the name of this Subcom-mittee.
3.
SRM ON RECENT ACRS MEETING VATH NRC COMMISSIONERS On April 20,1998, the ACRS Executive Director, John T. Larkins, received j
a Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) in which the Commission recommends that the remaining topics from the agenda of the April 2 meeting with the Commission be considered for the next periodic meeting between the Committee and the Commission. The Commission also requests the ACRS to identify cases where PRA results and insights have improved the existing regulatory system and the Committee's views on l
452nd ACRS Meeting 15 April 30 - May 2,1998 specific areas in which PRA can have a positive impact on the regulatory system. The ACRS response is due on September 30,1998.
Recommendation The Subcommittee recommended that, subject to the agreement of Dr.
Apostolakis, an ad hoc subcommittee, chaired by Dr. Fontana, be formed to prepare a draft response to the SRM, and that this ad hoc subcommittee consist of Dm. Apostolakis and Shack as members. This recommendation was based on current Member workload and the use of ad hoc subcommit-tees to balance task distribution.
4.
QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSION MEETING WITH ACRS During the April 2,1998 ACRS meeting with the Commission, several commitments were made by the Committee members. A list has been made of commitments that the ACRS staff noted from the transcript of the meeting.
The Committee should address these commitments in its future reports.
Also, the Committee should establish a mechanism to respond to individual Commissioners' questions that were not included in the SRM and that were not responded to during the meeting.
Recommendation The Subcommittee recommended that commitments made by the Members during the meeting be tracked and brought to closure in a timely manner.
With regard to responding to individual Commissioner's questions, the Subcommittee agreed that it would be difficult to determine whether the Commissioner who raised the question is satisfied with the response.
Unless the Commissioner seeks additional information and/or clarification subsequent to the meeting, the Committee should not pursue the issue.
In preparation for future meetings with the Commission, the Subcommittee recommended that the Members meet on the day before the scheduled ACRS meeting and spend about half a day discussing in detail the items scheduled for the meeting with the Commission, including a discussion of anticipated questions from the Commissioners. Such preparation should improve the performance of the Committee in summarizing key points and responding to questions during the meeting.
f l
l 452nd ACRS Meeting 16 l
I April 30 - May 2,1998 5.
LETTER OF COOPERATION BETWEEN THE ACRS AND THE ACNW l
A copy of the revised letter of cooperation between the ACRS and the ACNW was given to the Members. The ACNW has made minor changes to l
the original version reviewed and discussed at the last full ACRS meeting.
l The Committee should decide whether or not to approve this final draft.
Recommendation The Subcommittee recommended that the letter be approved with a slight modification of language suggested by Dr. Seale.
6.
ACRS MEMBER CANDIDATES During this 452nd meeting, four potential candidates for membership on the ACRS will be interviewed by the Screening Panel and individual Committee members. Members' views on the candidates should be provided to the ACRS Executive Director prior to the end of the meeting.
l Recommendation The Subcommittee recommended that Members provide their views on the candidates before the end of the 452nd Meeting.
I 7.
FOREIGN MEETINGS Quadricartite Meetina_
Dr. Birkhofer, head of the German RSK Committee, informed the ACRS staff last week that the $400-$500 registration fee for the Quadripartite Meeting will cover the hotel accommodations and breakfast but will not cover dinners or the trip to the ABWR. The German Committee has not yet decided which members will attend this meeting. Gail Marcus, Acting Deputy Executive i
j Director, has attempted to call Japan and get more information about the Quadripartite Meeting. She plans to continue this effort and keep the Committee informed of new developments.
l
I I
l 452nd ACRS Meeting 17 April 30 - May 2,1998 l
Meetina with the U.K. Committee i
The following information was obtained during discussions held recently with Mr. Lawrence Williams of the U.K. Advisory Committee on Nuclear Installa-tions (NUSAC):
NUSAC has three meetings a year. The next meeting of NUSAC will take place in' November 1998, at the same time as the scheduled ACRS November 1998 meeting. Meeting dates for 1999 have not yet been set.
Meetings are usually one day plus a one-day visit to a nuclear facility.
Therefore, ACRS may ask NUSAC to schedule an extra day during the meeting in the spring of 1999 to meet with ACRS members. ACRS may suggest that such a meeting be held in the third week of the month to ensure that it does not conflict with ACRS meetings.
Recommendation I
The Subcommittee recommended that Members be kept informed of the plans for both of these meetings.
8.
MEETING NOTEBOOKS 1
Each month the ACRS staff spends considerable time and effort preparing i
notebooks containing background materials for each of the items scheduled for the meeting. The purpose of this effort is to provide background information so that Members can prepare for the meeting. Preparation prior i
to the meeting should result in efficient and effective use of the Commit-tee /NRC staff time during the meetings. The materials are also intended to be used as a reference at the meeting. Occasionally, the late receipt of documentation from NRC staff prevents advance distribution. However, even when the background materials are distributed in advance, it has been apparent during the discussion at the meeting that some of the Members are unfamiliar with the material being reviewed.
The Committee, therefore, needs to evaluate whether continued preparation of the notebooks is an effective use of staff resources, and, if so, whether the content or the process should be modified to make the notebooks more useful to Members.
L l
q n
J 452nd ACRS Meeting 18 April 30 - May 2,1998
\\
Recommendation The Subcommittee recognized that the ACRS staff engineers, despite their heavy workload, provide outstanding support to the Committee. The status reports, as well as the meeting notebooks, have been very useful. The 4
Subcommittee recommended that the staff continue to prepare the notebooks and that Members make every effort to review the information in
' them before the meeting.
9.
ACRS MEMBER TRAVEL REQUESTS 1)
The NRC staff has requested that Dr. George Apostolakis make a keynote presentation on the use of PRA in the regulatory process during an OECD meeting in Ankara, Turkey, June 29-July 1,1998.
Dr. Apostolakis has tentatively agreed to make the presentation. The travel request needs Committee approval.
~
2)
Dr. Seale and Dr. Fontana have requested approval to attend the ANS meeting in Nashville TN on June 7-10,1998.
Recommendation The Subcommittee recommended that these travel requests be approved.
{
D.
Future Meetina Aaenda Appendix IV summarizes the proposed items endorsed by the Committee for the 453rd ACRS Meeting, June 3-5,1998.
l The 452nd ACRS meeting was adjourned at 3:00 p.m. on Saturday, May 2,1998.
i
E-APPENDIX I Federal Register /Vol. 63, No. 72 / Wednesday, April 15,1998 / Notices 18461 ammission Public Document Room.
Assessment Corn ter Code (Open)-
willbearpresentationsby and hold i
2120 L Street NW., Washington, D.C.-
The Committee hear tations discussions with n tativwof the 20037.The.NRC document acoeuton by and hold discussions th NRC staff regardin a proposed final rumberis 9803040224.
re ntatives of the Oak Rid e amendment to to Part 55 p
For more information, contact Mr.
N anallaboratory regarding e.
3:45 PM-3:25 PM: Future ACRS lauls L. Wheeler, Senior Project HASCAL Atmospheric Dispersion Does Activities (Open)-The Committw will Manger,Non. Power Reactors and Assusment uter Code, including a. discuss the recommendations of the Decommining
}ect Diredarste, demonstratien o e software using a Plannin and Procedums Subcommittee Division of Rosetor test of simulated conditions.
reg items for l
Management.OfBce of uclear Reector 3:25 PM-4:45 PM:NUREG/CR-consid on fullCommittee
)
Regulation, U.S. Nuclear letory 8523, Probabilistic Accident durin future meetin.: Reconciliation Comminnlon.W on 20555-Co vences UncertaintyAnalysis 3:2 PM-3:30 0001, telephone num (301)41!s-(Open e Committee will bear ofACRS Comments and 1444' Presentations by and hold discussions Recommendations (Open)'-b Dated at Rockville. Maryland tids 9th day with repmsentativw of the NRC staff Committee will discuss responses from ofA 1998.
and its contractors regarding the the NRC Executive Director for i
F the Nuclear Reguletory Commis :$on.
Probabilistic Accident Crmnaquences Operations (IDO) to mmments and Marvin M.Ma-Uncertain Anal sis.
recommendations includedin recent Acting Director.Non PowerReactors and 5:00
~7:00
.:Pnrporation of ACRSn ris.The EDO responses are '
Decornmissioning Directomte, ACRSReports(Open)-The thmfttee or to the muting.
Division ofReactor MoraogemenL will discuss d ACRS reports on
- 45
.-7:00 PM:
on of Office ofNuclearRoccrarRegulation.
matters con d durin this meeting. ACRSReports(Open)-Th Committee IFR Doc. 96-9993 Filed 4-14-98; a:45 aml Durin this meeting,th thmitt#
will continue its discussion of d
will als discuss a posed ACRS
. ACRS mports on matters consi d
aume ecos sesse e nport on the NRC Research during this meeting Program and a white paper on ACRS Saturday, May 2,1998 NUCLEAR REGULATORY views regarding fire protection issues.
MISS60N g:30 AM P:00 AM:
ofthe
- M*I Planning andProcedures S bcomminee Advisoiy Committee on Reactor 3:30 AM-a:35 AM:
(Open/ Closed).The Committa will
\\ Safeguartia; Meettrig Notloo Remarks the ACRS Ch rman hear a report of the Planning and In accordance with the (Open e ACRS Chairman willmake Procedures Subcommittu on matters 5
Sections 29 and 182b. of15w,c,ws of o ning remarks agarding conduct of related to the conduct of ACRS e Atomic 8
business, and organizational and Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 2039. 2232b), the 8:35 A -20:25 AM: Severe personnel matters relating to the ACRS.
Advisory Committee on Reactor Accident Midgadon Design Alternadves (Note: A portion of this session may be Safeguards will hold a meeting on April (Open)-The Committee will hear closed to discuss organizational and 30-May 2.1998, in Conference Room T Presentations by and hold discussions el matters that relate solely to the 2B3,11545 Rockville Pike Rockville.
with re resentatives of the NRC staff ernal personnelrules and etices of this a
Maryland.The date of this meetin was feSard g Section 7 2," Severe Accident. Advisory committu. and in armation the
~
reviously ublished in the Fed Mitigation Design Alternatives " of the release of which would constitute a clearly!
egister on ursday, November 20' draft N1555," Standard Review unwarranted invasion of nal privacy.
1997 (62 FR 62079)'
Plans for Environmental Reviews of P:00 AM-3:30
.(22:00 -22:45 Thursday, April 30,1998 Nuclear Power Plants."
PMIanch): Preparation ofACRS
' 20:30 AM-22:25 AM: Proposed Reports (Open)-The Committes will B:30 AM-8:45 AM: Opening FinalStandardReviewPlan(SRP) '
continue its discussion of proposed Remarks the ACRS Chairman (Open e ACRS Chairman willmake Section and Regulatory Guide for Risk.
ACRS nports on matters considered ening remarks regarding conduct of infortned inservice inspection (ISI) durin thismeeting.
(Open)-The Committee will hear 3:3 PM--4:00PM: Miscellaneous e meetin.
8:45 A -20:45 AM: Human presentations by and hold discussions (Open)-The Committee will discuu Performance andReliabili Plan with representatives of the NRC staff matters related to the conduct of (Open}-The Committee Ihear
' ngarding changes made to the SRP Committee activities and matters and presentations by and hold discussions Section and associated Regulatory ciSc issues that were not completed with re resentatives of the NRC staff Guide for risk-informed ISI of piping et ng previous meetings, as time and to g the revised Human nuclear anta.
availability ofinformation pcmit.
P tmance and Reliabili Plan.
22:25 M-22:25 PR:Use of Procedures for the conduct of and 22.90 AM-12:30 PM:
of Dynamic Benchmarkin Preserving parti stiontr> ACRSmeetingswon the Core Dam ePre uen (CDP) to a Thermal-Hydraulic Test Data publis d in t'se Federal Register on ed (Open)-The Committee will hear
. September 4,20*? (e2 FR 46782).In Fundamental d
-ey presentations by and hold discussions accordance with these procedures, oral.
Modifications to e SafetyGoal
.or written views may ruented by Statement (Open)--The Committee wul with Dr. Robert Henry Fauske at hear presentations by and hold Associates. Inc., regarding use of the members of the publi cluding discussions with re resentatives of the ~ Dynamic Benchmarking concept to representatives of the nuclear industry.
NRC staff regardin levation of CDF to preserve thermal hydraulic code test -
Electronic recordings will be permitted only durin the open portions of the.
a fundamental ha y Goal and proposed data, modi $ cations to the Safety Goal Policy 2:25 PM-2:45 PM: Proposed Final. meeting an questions may be asked Amendment to 20 CFR Part 55," Initial only members of the Committee. its Statement.
IJcensed OperatorExamination cons tants, and staff. Persons desiring 2:30 PM-3.90 PM:HASCAL,,
i Attnospheric Dispersion Dose Requirements"(Open)-The Committee to m4e oral statements should notify -
(
APPENDIX II ney y
'o,f, UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION II ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS WASHWGTON, D. C. 20556 April s, 1998 1
(
l SCHEDULE AND OUTLINE FOR DISCUSSION 452nd ACRS MEETING APRIL 30 - MAY 2.
1998 l
TEURSDAY. APRIL 30. 1998. COhr--W4CE ROOK 2B3. TWO wailTx FLIN NORTH.
l MOCKVILLE, MARYLAND T
l 3
/
1) 8:30 -
8:45 A.M.
Ooenine Remarks by the ACRS Chairman (Open) l 1.1) Opening Statement (RLS/JTL/SD) l 1.2) Items of current interest (RLS/NFD/SD) 1.3) Priorities for preparation of ACRS reports (RLS/JTL/SD) 3 i
2) 8:45 - 10:45 A.M.
Human Performance and Reliability Plan (Open) (GA/NFD) 2.1) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman.
j 2.2) Briefing by and discussions with
{
representatives of the NRC staff regarding the revised Human Performance g
and Reliability Plan.
l l
10:45 - 11:00 A.M.
- BREAK ***
es e'
l 3) 11:00 - 12:30 P.M.
Elevation of the Core Damace Frecuency (CDF)
I to a Fundamental Safetv Goal and Pronosed Modifications to the Safety Goal Poliev Statement (Open) (GA/M7N) l 3.1) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairtnan.
3.2) Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff l
regarding elevation of CDP to a fundamental Safety Goal and proposed modifications to the Safety Goal Policy Statement.
Representatives of the nuclear industry will provide their views, as appropriate.
off T
12:30 -
1:30 P.M.
- LUNCE***
l (f
b 0
r 3
/
8.2) Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff i
regarding Section 7.2,
" Severe Accident Mitigation Design Alternatives" of the l
draft NUREG-1555, " Standard Review Plans for Environmental Reviews for Nuclear Power Plants."
Representatives of the nuclear industry will provide their views, as appropriate.
33 se s
l 10r3 - 10:30 A.M.
- BREAK ***
9) 10:hb-Shh6A.M.
Pronosed Final Standard Review Plan (SRP)
Section and Reculaterv Guide for Risk-Informed Inservice Inanection (ISI) (Open)
(GA/MTM) 9.1) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman.
9.2) Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding changes made to the SRP l
Section and the Regulatory Guide associated with the risk-informed ISI of piping at nuclear plants.
Representatives of the nuclear industry will provide their views, as appropriate.
l
- 10) M - 3e!!ES P. M.
Use of Dynamic Benchmarkine for Preservine Thermal-Hydraulic Code Test Data (Open)
(TSK/PAB) 10.1) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman.
10.2) Briefing by and discussions with Dr. Robert Henry, Fauske & Associates, Inc., regarding use of the Dynamic Benchmarking concept to preserve thermal-hydraulic code test data.
Representatives of the NRC staff will provide their views, as appropriate.
12:M -
1:35 P.M.
- LUNCE***
g,, m -
2,3c 9 H.
j&RCAK 11) 1964 -
1sd6 P.M.
Pronosed Final Amendment to 10 CFR Part 55, A
- 3r 4t00
" Initial Licensed Onerator Examination Recuirements" (Open) (JJB/AS) 11.1)
Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman.
11.2)
Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding proposed final amendment to 10 CFR Part 55.
Representatives of the nuclear industry will provide their views, as appropriate.
l l
I i
5 7:'30 lo l
16) 9 12:00 Noon Precaration of ACRS ReDorts (Open)
Continue discussion of proposed ACRS reports listed under Item 14.
9:yo 9: to A. H b rc~L
^
'12:00 - 12:15 ?.M.
- LUNCE***
- e eo l
l
- 17) 1Ert5 -
3:79 P.M.
Prenaration of ACRS Retorts (Qpen)
Continue discussion of proposed ACRS reports listed under Item 14.
4 18) 3:30 -
4.00 P.M.
Miscillaneous (Ope (RLS/JTL/SD)
Discus on of matte related the conduct of Comm ee activiti and matt s and specific i ues that we not comp eted during previ s meetings, s time and l
availability of information permit.
HQIR:
o Presentation time should not exceed 50 percent of the total time allocated for a specific item.
The remaining 50 percent of the time is reserved for discussion.
Number of copies of the presentation materials to be provided to e
I the ACRS - 35.
l l
r I
I l
l l
I
APPENDIX lil: MEETING ATTENDEES I
452ND ACRS MEETING April 30 - May 2,1998 NRC STAFF (April 30,1998)
J. Mitchell, OEDO J. Kramer, RES J. Wachtel, RES P. Lewis, RES
- 1. Schoenfeld, RES J. Persensky, RES J. Calvert, RES A. Rubin, RES H. Vandermolen, RES J. Schaperow, RES J. Randall, RES S. Moore, NMSS D. Serig, NMSS J. Schiffgens, NRR L. Spessard, NRR G. Parry, NRR J. Rosenthal, AEOD J. Quissell, AEOD A. Mohseni, NRR ATTENDEES FROM OTHER AGENCIES AND GENERAL PUBLIC P. Fulford, NUS Information Services J. Gregory, SNLA H. Stern, SNLA F. Harper, SNLA M. Neal, NUS Information Services
p Appendix lli 2
452nd ACRS Meeting NRC Staff (May 1,1998)
J. Mitchell, OEDO B. Palla, NRR C. Craig, NRR R. Jolly, NRR R. Anand, NRR M. Malloy, NRR G. Parry. NRR S. Dinsmore, NRR S. Ali, NRR G. Bagchi, NRR P. Patnaik, NRR B. Zalcman, NRR M. Rubin, NRR F. Guenther, NRR R. Gallo, NRR J. Munro, NRR G. Usova, NRR L. Spessard, NRR R. Eckenrode, NRR J. Guttman, RES J. ' Uhle, RES F. Eltawala, RES M. Schwartz, OGC ATTENDEES FROM OTHER AGENCIES AND GENERAL PUBLIC T. Quinn, MDM T. Sutter, Bechtel N. Haggerty, BGE R. Graybeal, Enertech R. Henry, ANS A. McNeili, VA Power D. Weakland, WOG/Duquesne Light N. Closky, Westinghouse K. Balley, Westinghouse J. Mitman, EPRI
. K. Fleming, EPRI A. Cottingham, Winston & Strawn M. Neil, NUS P. Fulford, Scientech-NUS B. Bradley, NEl J. Davis, NEl
APPENDIX IV: FUTURE AGENDA The Committee agreed to consider the following during the 453rd ACRS Meeting, June 3-5,1998:
1 x
/gfnero o,'
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION L
M ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS "o
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20655 May 11, 1998 SCHEDULE AND OUTLINE FOR DISCUSSION 453rd ACRS MEETING JUNE 3-5, 1998 WEDNESDAY. JUNE 3, 1998. CONFERENCE ROOM 2B3 TWO WHITE FLINT. NORTH, KOCKVILLE. MARYLAND 1) 8:30 -
8:45 A.M.
Onenino Remarks by the ACRS Chairman (Open) 1.1) Opening Statement (RLS/JTL/SD) 1.2) Items of current interest (RLS/NFD/SD) 1.3) Priorities for preparation of ACRS reports (RLS/JTI/SD) 2)
8:45 - 11:15 A.M.
AP600 Desien (Open) (JJB/TSK/NFD/PAB)
(10:15-10:30 A.M. BREAK) 2.1) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman.
2.2) Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the Westinghouse Electric Company and the NRC staff regarding Chapters 3, 6,
14, 16 and 17 of the AP600 Standard Safety Analysis Report, as well as the PRA, regulatory treatment of the non-safety systems, Test and Analysis Program performed by Westinghouse in support of the AP600 design and associated NRC staff's evaluation.
3) 11:15 - 12:00 Noon Human Performance Plan (Open) (GA/NFD) 3.1) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman.
3.2) Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding issues / concerns raised by the ACRS members on the revised Human Performance Plan.
Representatives of the nuclear industry will provide their views, as appropriate.
12:00 -
1:00 P.M.
- LUNCE***
4) 1:00 -
2:30 P.M.
Core Research Canabilitien at NRC (Open) l (REU/DAP/MME) 4.1) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman.
I 4.2) Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding core research capabilities at NRC.
j
i 2
2:30 - 2:45 P.M.
- BREAK ***
- 5) 2:45 - 4:45 P.M.
BWR Extended Power Unrate Aeolication (Open/ Closed) (TSK/PAB) 5.1) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman.
5.2) Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the General Electric Company (GE), Monticello Nuclear Station licensee, and the NRC staff regarding the GE extended power uprate plan for operating BWRs, and the application from the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant for a power level increase of 6.3 percent.
[ Note: A portion of this session may be closed to discuss General Electric Company Proprietary information.]
4:45 - 5:00 P.M.
- BREAK ***
- 6) 5:00 - 7:00 P.M.
Precaration of ACRS Reeorts (Open)
Discussion of proposed ACRS Reports on:
6.1) NRC Safety Research Program (DAP/MME) 6.2) AP600 Design Certification Application (JJB/TSK/NFD/PAB) 6.3) Human Performance Plan (GA/NFD) 6.4) Core Research Capabilities (REU/DAP/MME)
THURSDAY. JUNE 4, 1998, CONFERENCE ROOM 2B3, TWO WHITE FLINT NORTH.
j l
ROCKVILLE. MARYLAND 7) 8:30 -
8:35 A.M.
Ocenine Remarks _bv the ACRS Chai-man (Open)
(RLS/SD) 8)
8:35 -
9:45 A.M.
Acency-Wide Plan for Hich-Burnuo Puel (Open)
(DAP/MME) 8.1) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman.
8.2) Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding the Agency-wide plan for high-burnup fuel.
Representatives of the nuclear industry will provide their views, as appropriate.
9:45 - 10:00 A.M.
- BREAK ***
l
b 3
i 9) 10:00 - 11:00 A.M.
Doeratina Plan for the NRC Technical Trainina Programs (Open) (DWM/PAB) 9.1) Remarks by the cognizant ACRS member.
9.2) Briefing by and discussions with the representatives of the NRC staff regarding the Operating Plan for the NRC technical training programs and related matters.
i
- 10) 11:00 - 12:30 P.M.
Procosed Modifications to 10 CFR 50.59, chances. Tests, and Erneriments (Open)
(JJB/AS) 10.1) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman.
10.2) Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding the status of staff activities associated with the proposed modifications to 10 CFR 50.59.
Representatives of the nuclear industry will provide their views, as appropriate.
12:30 -
1:30 P.M.
- LUNCE***
11) 1:30 -
2:45 P.M.
Pronosed Final Standard Review Plan (SRP)
Section and Reculatorv Guide for Risk-Informed Inservice Insoection of Pinina (Open) (GA/AS) 11.1) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman.
11.2) Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding the proposed final SRP Section and Regulatory Guide for risk-informed inservice inspection of piping at nuclear power plants as well as the issues and concerns raised previously by the ACRS members on this matter.
Representatives of the nuclear industry will provide their views, as appropriate.
- 12) 2:45 - 3:15 P.M.,
Future ACRS Activities (Open) (RLS/JTL/SD)
Discussion of the recommendations of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee 1
regarding items proposed for consideration by the full Committee during future meetings.
1 i
4
- 13) 3:15 - 3:30 P.M.
Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recommendations (Open) (RLS, et al./ GEM /SD, et al.)
Discussion of the responses from the NRC Executive Director for Operations to comments and recommendations included in recent ACRS reports.
l i
i j
3:30 - 3:45 P.M.
- BREAK ***
- 14) 3:45 - 7:00 P.M.
Prenaration of ACRS Renorts (Open)
Discussion of proposed ACRS reports on:
14.1) NRC Safety Research Program (DAP/MME) l 14.2) AP600 Design Certification Application l
(JJB/TSK/NFD/PAB) 14.3) Human Performance Plan (GA/NFD) 14.4) Core Research Capabilities (REU/DAP/MME) l 14.5) Proposed Modifications to 10 CFR 50.59 (JJB/AS) 14.6) Agency-Wide Plan for High-Burnup Fuel (DAP/MME) 14.7) BWR Extended Power Uprate Application (TSK/PAB) 14.8) Proposed Final SRP Section and Regulatory Guide for ISI of Piping at Nuclear Power Plants (GA/AS)
FRIDAY, JintE 5, 1998. CONFE N CE ROON 233, TWO WHITE FLINT NORTH, ROCKVILLE, NARYLAND 15) 8:30 - 9:00 A.M.
Renort of the Plannine and Procedures Subcommittee (Open/ Closed) (RLS/JTL)
Report of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee on matters related to the conduct of ACRS business, and organizational and personnel matters relating to the ACRS.
[ Note:
A portion of this session may be closed to discuss organizational and personnel matters that relate solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of this Advisory Committee, qualification of candidates for ACRS membership, and information the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion ef personal priva:y.)
- 16) 9:00 -
3:30 P.M.
Preparation of ACRS Reoorts (Open)
(12:00-1 00 P.M. LUNCE)
Continue discussion of proposed ACRS reports listed under Item 14.
l l
E l
5 l,
- 17),3:30, -
4:00 P.M.
Miscellaneous (Open) (RLS/JTL/SD)
Diocussion of matters related to the conduct of Committee activities and matters and specific issues that were not completed during previous meetings, as time and availability of information permit.
)[QIE:
o Presentation time should not exceed 50 percent of the total time allocated for a specific item.
The remaining 50 percent of the time is reserved for discussion.
l e
Number of copies of the presentation materials to be provided to the ACRS - 35.
i
l l'
APPENDIX V LIST OF DOCUMENTS PROVIDED TO THE COMMITTEE
[ Note: Some documents listed below may have been provided or prepared for Committee use only. These documents must be reviewed prior to release to the public.)
1 MEETING HANDOUTS l
i AGENDA DOCUMENTS
[ TEM NO.
1 Ooenina Remarks by the ACRS Chairman 1.
Items of Interest, dated April 30 - May 2,1998 l
2 Human Performance and Reliability Plan 1
2.
Memorandum from Thomas L. King, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, to John T. Larkins, Executive Director, ACRS, dated April 23,1998: NRC's Human Performance Plan [ Handout #2.1) 3.
Human Performance Plan, dated April 30, 1998, presented by J.
J.
Persensky (Viewgraphs) l 3
Elevation of the Core Damaae Freauencv (CDF) to a Fundamental Safetv Goal and i
Prooosed Modifications to the Safetv Goal Poliev Statement 4.
Plan for Assessing Potential Modifications to the Safety Goal. Policy Statement, dated April 30,1998, presented by Gary M. Holahan, NRR
[Viewgraphs) 4 HASCAL Atmosoberic Disnersion Dose Assessment Comouter Code 5.
SCIPUFF comparison with Model Data Archive (MDA) and with ANATEX data and SCIPUFF Bouyant Rise Calculation (Viewgraphs) 5 NUREG/CR-6523. Probabilistic Accident Consecuence Uncertaintv Analysis l
l 6.
US/ CEC Program, undated, presented by Dr. Frederick Harper, Sandia National Laboratories (Viewgraphs) 8 Severe Accident Mitiaation Desian Altematives
E l
Appendix V 2
452nd ACRS Meeting 7.
Environmental Standard Review Plan: NUREG-1555, dated May 1,1998, presented by Barry Zalcman, Robert Palla, and Dino Scaletti [Viewgraphs) l 9
Proposed Final Standard Review Plan (SRP) Section and Reaulatorv Guide for Risk-Informed inservice insoection (ISI) l 8.
Risk-informed Inservice Inspection Programs for Piping, dated May 1,1998, l
presented by Tom King, RES, and Gary Holahan and Jack Strosnider (NRR)
[Viewgraphs) 9.
WOG Views of Risk-informed Inservice inspection RG/SRP Development, l
dated May 1,1998, presented by Dennis Weakland, Duquesne Light /WOG Materials Subcommittee; Alex McNeill, Virginia Power; and Ken Balkey and Nancy Closky, Westinghouse l
10 Use of Dynamic Benchmarkino for Preservina Thermal-Hvdraulic Code Test Data 10.
Dynamic Benchmarking: A Method for Preserving important Experimental Data, dated May 1,1998, presented by Robert E.
Henry, Chair, ANS Thermal Hydraulics Division [Viewgraphs) 11.
NRC T-H Developmental Assessment Program, dated April 30, 1998, presented by Jennifer Uhle [Viewgraphs) 11 Prooosed Final Amendment to 10 CFR Part 55. " Initial Licensed Ooerator Examination Reauirements" 12.
Final Rule - Requirements for initial Operator Licensing Examinations, dated May 1,1998, presented by Robert M. Gallo [Viewgraphs) 12 Future ACRS Activities 13.
Future ACRS Activities - 453rd ACRS Meeting, June 3-5,1998 [ Handout l
- 12.1]
13 Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recommendations 14.
Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recommendations (Handout #13.1) 15 Reoort of the Plannina and Procedures Subcommittee l
l
1 1
Appendix V 3
452nd ACRS Meeting 15.
Final Draft Minutes of Planning and Procedures Subcommittee Meeting -
April 29,1998 [ Handout #15.1) i I
i l
l I
l 1
c.
t,
Appendix V 4
452nd ACRS Meeting MEETING NOTEBOOK CONTENTS IAS DOCUMENTS Model 2
Human Performance and Reliability Plan 1.
Table of Contents l
2.
Proposed Agenda / Schedule 3.
Project Status Report 4.
Report from R.
L.
Seale, Chairman, ACRS, to Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman, NRC, dated February 13,1997: Human Performance Program Plan.
5.
Letter from R. L. Seale, Chairman, ACRS, to L. Joseph Callan, Executive l
Director for Operations (EDO), dated October 8,1997: Human Performande and Reliability implementation Plan 3
Elevation of the Core Damane Freaueriev (CDF) to a Fundamental Safety Goal and Eronosed Modifications to the Safety Goal Poliev Statement 6.
Table of Contents 7.
Proposed Agenda / Schedule 8.
Project Status Report 9.
Note from T. Kress to G. Apostolakis, dated April 16,1998 10.
Note from R. Seale to G. Apostolakis, dated April 16,1998 11.
Note from M. Fontana to G. Apostolakis, dated April 16,1998 12.
List of issues for RPRA Subcommittee, dated April 16,1998 13.
Note from D. Powers to G. Apostolakis, dated April 7,1998 14.
Note from D. Miller to G. Apostolakis, dated April 13,1998 15.
Draft Commission paper from L.
Joseph Callan, EDO, to the Commissioners, dated March 26,1998: Modifications to the Safety Goal Policy Statement. [ Note: this document should not be released without prior authorization.)
16.
Commission's Safety Goal Policy Statement 4
HASCAL Atmosoberic Discersion Dose Assessment Comouter Code 17.
Table of Contents 18.
Proposed Agenda / Schedule 19.
Project Status Report 20.
Defense Special Weapons Agency Report: "HPAC, Hazard Prediction and l
Assessment Capability, Version 3.0" l
l
7 l
Appendix V 5
452nd ACR,S Meeting '
- 21. -
Titan Corporation, Technical Report, "PC-SCIPUFF, Version 1.0 Technical Documentation," R. Ian Sykes et al., dated 1997 L
5 NUREG/CR-8523. Probabilistic Accident Conaanuance Uncertaintv Analvsis -
f (Open) 22.
Table of Contents 23.
Proposed Agenda / Schedule 24.
Project Status Report i
25.
NUREG/CR-6523, "Probabilistic Accident Consequence Uncertainty i
Analysis, " Volume 1 Main Report dated June 1997 (Executive Summary only) j 8
Severe Accident Mitiaation ksian Alternatives (Open) r 26.
Table of Contents i
27.
Proposed Agenda / Schedule 28.
Project Status Report 29.
NUREG-1555: ESRP/ Chapter 5.4, Sections 5.4.1,5.4.2,5.4.3, and 5.4.4 30.
NUREG-1555, ESRP/ Chapter 7, Section 7.1,7.2, and 7.3 31.
Letter from M.S. Tuckman, Duke Power Co., dated January 29,1998: Duke Energy Comments on Updated Environmental Standard Review Plan, NUREG-1555 (Draft) August 1997
-9 Proposed Final Standard Review Plan (SRP) Section and Raoulatorv Guide for Risk-Informed inservice Inspection (ISI) (Open) 32.-
Table of Contents 33.
Proposed Agenda / Schedule 34.
Project Status Report 35.
Report from R.
L.
Seale, Chairman, ACRS, to Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman, NRC, dated July 14, 1997: Proposed Regulatory Guide and Standard Review Plan Chapter for Risk-Informed inservice Inspection 36.
Letter from L. Joseph Callan, EDO, to R. L. Seale, Chairman, ACRS, dated August 6,1997:
Proposed Standard Review Plan Section 3.9.8 and J
Regulatory Guide DG-1063 for Risk-Informed inservice inspection l
10 Use of Dynamic Benchmar'kina for Preservina Thermal-Hydraulic Code Test Data (Open) 37.
Table of Contents 38.
Proposed Agends/ Schedule
r L
Appendix V' 6
452nd ACRS Meeting 1
39.
Project Status Report-40.
Letter from Robert E. Henry, Fauske & Associates, Inc., to Paul Boehnert, l
ACRS Senior Staff Engineer, dated February 25,1998.
11 Prooosed Final Amendment to 10 CFR Part 55. " Initial Licensed Ooetgigt Examination Requirements"(Open) i l
41.
Table of Contents 42.
Proposed Agenda / Schedule 43.
Project Status Report' 44.
Memorandum from Jack W.
Roe, Acting Director, Division of Reactor Program Management, to R. L. Seale, Chairman, ACRS, dated April 20, 1998: Transmittal of Advanced Copy of the Final Rule on Requirements for initial Operator Licensing Examinations (10 CFR Part 55) l I
l I
l l
_.