ML20211C792

Review of Seabrook PRA, Monthly Mgt Ltr 4 for Aug 1984

ML20211C792
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	09/18/1984
From:	Cummings G, Ariuska Garcia LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LABORATORY
To:	Davis S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML20209C800	List: ML20209C798 ML20209C897 ML20209D266 ML20209D278 ML20209D286 ML20209D327 ML20209D479 ML20209D512 ML20209D547 ML20209D870 ML20209E015 ML20209E274 ML20211C165 ML20211C259 ML20211C363 ML20211C389 ML20211C430 ML20211C484 ML20211C558 ML20211C632 ML20211C641 ML20211C679 ML20211C769 ML20211C792 ML20211C841 ML20211C904 ML20211C920 ML20211C942 ML20211D042 ML20211D068 ML20211D076 ML20211D092 ML20211D109 ML20211D129 ML20211D140 ML20211D169 ML20211D178 ML20211D191 ML20211D198 ML20211D208 ML20211D226
References
CON-FIN-A-0801, CON-FIN-A-801, FOIA-87-6 RARE-84-081, RARE-84-81, NUDOCS 8702200218
Download: ML20211C792 (5)

Text

.

Y T Lawrence Livermore National Laboratoy NUCLEAR SYSTEMS SAFETY PROGRAM RARE 84-031 September 13, 1984 Ms. Sarah M. Davis Reliability and Risk Assessment Branch Division of Safety Technology U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

SUBJECT:

Monthly Management Letter 44 Month of August 1984 NRC FIN-A0801 Review of the Seabrook Probabilistic Risk Assessment

Dear Ms. Davis:

1. Project Description and Objective The Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation is conducting a probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) review program in which PRAs performed and submitted to the NRC by license applicants and licensees receive comprehensive review and evaluation. The program is the responsibility of the Reliability and Risk Assessment Branch (RRAB).

A PRA of the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant (Seabrook PRA) has been submitted to the NRC by Public Service Company of New Hampshire, an operating license (OL) applicant. The review of this document, whose title is "Seabrook Station Probabilistic Safety Assessment," is being performed as one project in the larger NRC program.

The objective of this project is to perform an expeditious and cost effective review of those aspects of the Seabrook PRA leading to the estimates of the frequencies of each plant damage state and the associated uncertainty spread to determine the accuracy of these estimates. The review will cover methodology, assumptions, data, information sources, models, plant understanding, completeness of the analysis and other areas where inconsistencies may arise which could affect the quantitative or qualitative results.

2. Progress for Period

a. Work continued at a steady pace during the month,

b. A two-day project review meeting was held on August 13-14 at LLNL. The meeting was attended by all LLNL subcontractor and consultant personnel involved in the project.

c. A one-day project status meeting was held at NRC-Bethesda on August 28th during which detailed presentations were made by project personnel. ,

8702200218 070211 0g b[Sl <

PDR FOIA 0 SHOLLYB7-6 PDR ,

M EqualCmortsn!yEmp.?r thes tyo'cavame

• PO B3 838 Lienwe cahtma 9455G

• Tere:tw415*4:2s C *7..O ~3W L M :_,,

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____..___J

s RARE 84-081 September 18, 1984

d. A two-day inspection visit of the plant site was made on August 29-30.

3. Work to be Accomplished Next Month Work will continue on the general review of the PRA.

4. List of Subcontractors and Consultants We have established subcontractor and consultant agreements with the subcontractors and consultants listed below. We expect to add one or two additional names to this list -- for relatively small efforts in specialized areas, such as the evaluation of fire events.

a. Subcontractors (1) Applied Risk Technology Corporation (ARTECH); P. J. Amico (2) Jack R. Benjamin and Associates, Inc. (JBA); J. W. Reed, M. W.

McCann, Jr.

b. Consultants (1) P. R. Davis

5. Concerns Although no significant new concerns were identified during this month, the technical concerns related to methodology reported in the monthly program reports for June and July have not been resolved. During the site visit in late August, the applicant proposed a meeting with his PRA contractor (Fickard, Lowe and Garrick) to discuss these concerns, but it does not appear that such a meeting could be arranged prior to mid-December, if at all. The applicant's current financial problems also contribute to the uncertainty regarding a potential meeting with his contractor, so that we believe that our concerns related to the methodology will not be resolved by this avenue in time to be helpful to the completion of our review.

We are therefore currently considering several approaches to resolve these concerns. In essence, it is necessary to define the (minimum) extent of reevaluation /requantification necessary to complete a defensible review of the PRA. We expect to recomend a particular approach to the NRC in the next month.

f

\' September 16, is54 RARE 84-061

6. Other Not Applicable Abel A. Garcia Principal Investigator

/

6artn E. Cumings j ProgramLeader(Acting) '

Naclear Systems Safety Program sr Enclosur2s(2)

Distribution:

NRC D_01 LLNL R. Frahm, DST W. J. Gallagher G. E. Cummings ,,

J. Halvorsen, DST J. M. Johnson s-F. Rowsome, DST C. A. Meier L. Solander, NRR A. C. Thadani, DST r

s

e V

ATTACHMENT A ESTIMATED PROJECT FINANCIAL STATUS: August FY 1984 FIN A0801 Summary COST ANALYSIS ** August Year to Date I Direct Staff Efforts 3.2 FTE-Mo 0.6 FTE-Yr II Direct Labor Costs s 13.7K $ 28.3K Materials & Services 0.2 0.2 ADP Support 0.0 0.0 Subcontracts 9.3 11.7 Travel Expenses 2.1 2.1 Indirect Labor Costs 17.6 31.3 Other (TID) 0.3 0.3 Other ( FY83 Cost C.O. ) 0.0 0.0 General & Administrative 0.0 0.0 Total Costs $ 42.8K $ 74.0K Liens

• 14.0K Total Costs + Liens

• 88.0K Percentage of Available Funds 33.8%

III Funding Status:

Prior Year FY 1984 Projected FY 1984 Funds FY 1984 Funding Carryover Funding Level Rec'd to Date Bal. Needed

$0.0K $260.0K $260.0K $0.0K

• Note: These figures are for cost analysis only, and may differ slightly from final billing figures.

J

)

=.

RARE 84-081 September 18, 1984 ATTACHMENT B FEE RECOVERY COST STATUS FIN: A0801 TITLE: Review of the Probabilistic Risk Assessment for the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant PERIOD: August 1984

(

Docket Costs Facility Name Number Period Cumulative Seabrook 50-443 $42.3K $72K Common Costs 50-900 $ 0.5 2 Total Expenses $TER $W 4

, . . . . . . . . . . .