ML20236S387

Summary of 980626 Telcon W/Representatives of Nuclear Energy Institute Re Progress on Development of Industry Guidance on Shutdown Eal.Telcon Was Follow Up to 980612 Meeting W/Nrc & Nuclear Energy Institute Task Force Re Same Subj

ML20236S387
Person / Time
Issue date:	07/20/1998
From:	Stewart Magruder NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Essig T NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
References
PROJECT-689 NUDOCS 9807240298
Download: ML20236S387 (13)

Text

__ _ -___-_-_

Werg y

UNITED STATES

5 j

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1

2 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20066 4 001 l

,g#

July 20, 1998 i

MEMORANDUM TO: Thomas H. Essig, Acting Chief Generic issues and Environmental Projects Branch Division of Reactor Program Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation FROM:

Stewart L. Magruder, Project Manager 3'.- h n M b Generic Issues and Environmental Projects Branch Division of Reactor Program Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUMMARY

OF JUNE 28,1998, CONFERENCE CALL WITH THE NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE (NEI) REGARDING SHUTDOWN EMERGENCY ACTION LEVELS On June 26,1998, a telecon was held between representatives of the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to discuss progress on the development of industry guidance on shutdown emergency action levels (EALs). Attachment 1 provides a list of meeting attendees.

This telecon was a follow up to the June 12,1998, meeting between NRC and the NEl task force on the same subject. The purpose of the telecon was to disct.ss subsequent changes to

]

the EALs that had been proposed during the June 12,1998, meeting. NEl representatives l

provided a draft EAL scheme for users of the NESP-007, ' Methodology fo,' Development of 1

Emergency Action Levels," guidance document (Attachment 2) for review during the telecon.

' provides a synopsis of discussions on these EALs. In addition to discussion on proposed guidance for shutdown EAls, the status of proposed changes to NESP-007, to incorporate lessons-learned from use of this document in the development and review of site-specific EALs, was discussed. NEl representatives stated that, although work in this area was anticipated, the focus was on the development of shutdown EALs. In addition, NEl stated that the industry was developing shutdown EAL guidance to be compatible with those based on NUREG-0654 guidance.

NEl proposed the following timetable for this project:

/

NEl working group to perform a verification and validation review for the proposed EALs on August 3 and 4,1998

[SO NEl working group to finalize the EALs on August 24,1998 (subsequently retargeted to

+

l September 14,1998 due to other commitments)

NEl working group.to meet with NRC and present draft EALs on September 15,1998 9807240298 980720 PDR REVGP ERONUMRC Jg f{p s oe, NN)

N gj y E

L

. T. Essig

-2 July 20, 1998 f

F Revise EALs in accordance with NRC review comments, provide to the industry for comment, finalize and formally submit to NRC in October,1998.

Subsequent to the telecon, NEl faxed changes made to shutdown EALs to address issues l

raised during the telecon (Attachment 4). The NRC stated it would continue to evaluate of the proposed EALs and would support the industry timetabte for the review of the proposed shutdown EALs.

Project No. 689 Attachments: As stated cc w/att: See next page i

h-l t

l l

T. Essig 2

July 20, 1998 Revise EALs in accordance with NRC review comments, provide to the industry for

=

comment, finalize and formally submit to NRC in October,1998.

Subsequent to the telecon, NEl faxed changes made to shutdown EALs to address issues raised during the telecon (Attachment 4) The NRC stated it would continue to evaluate of the proposed EALs and would support the industry timetable for the review of the propot,ed shutdown EALs.

Project No. 689 Attachments: As stated cc w/att: See next page DISTRIBUTION: See attached page

• See Previous Conc rence Document Name:\\g\\simi\\msum0626.98 Sf OFFICE PM:PGEB PERB*

1

[sYuiewicz NAME SMagruder?si RSullivan 7h/98 DATE 7/p/98 7/16/98 OFFICIAL OFFICE COPY i

)

1 l

h I

~

i NRC/NEl TELECON ON SHUTDOWN EALs List of Participants June 26,1998 Name Organization l

Alan Nelson NEl Dave Stobaugh Commonwealth Edison Walt Lee Southern Nuclear Kevin Morris Detroit Edison Marty Haag Southern California Edison John Costello Virginia Electric Power Randy Sullivan NRC/NRR

' Warren Lyon NRC/NRR Jim O'Brien NRC/NRR Stewart Magruder NRC/NRR i

l l

I l

I

i

,FRon8 coned REe. SERU!cES FAX Ho.:

6306636517 e&-26-9e se815 P.e2 j

TABLE 5-C-1 2

Recognition C:teg:ry C 3

Cold Shutdown / Refueling Function Degradation 4

INITIATING CONDITION MATRIX 5

see Table 5 C 2 for SWR Example EALs 6

See Table 5-C-3 for PWR Example EALs 7

8 UNUSUAL EVENT ALERT SITE AREA GENERAL EMERGENCY EMERGENCY cui Potential Loss of CA1 Loss of the CS1 Loss of BOTH of CG1 Loss of ALLof the

{

ANY ONE of the EITHER of the the following:

following:

following:

following:

RCS e

RCS inventory RCS Integnty

. RCS inventory e

Core Cooling j

e RCS Inventory integrity e

Core e

Containment J

Core Cooling RCE Cooling e

a Inventory Op Modes: Cold Op Modes: CoM Op Modes: Cold 09 Modes: Co60 Shutdown, Refuehng

Shutdown, Shutdown.

Shutdown, Refuehng Rer hng Refuehng ue 9

- 10 NOTES:

11 12 1.

The riumoer of eveliable Systems, structures and Components (SSC), their design equipment qualification, or their 13 technical specification operability status is irrelevant to this determination.

14 15 2.

Protection of each of the barriers above is provicea for in the piant cesign by particular redundant and diverse SsCs. It 16 is important to note that classifications in this recognition category are to be based on determ.ning that the barner i

17 (function) can no longer be performed by the available SSCs.

18 19 3.

The applicable operating modes for this recognition category are Cold Shutdown and Refueling. The applicable mode is l

20 the mode that the plant was in at the time of recognition of the event, even if the condition causel the plant to enter e l

21 higher operating mode initiating conditions having specified mode applicability of Hot Shutdown or higher are NOT 22 applicable. Those initiating conditions having mode applicabildy of 'ALL are applicable. In particular, Recognition 23 Category F, Fission Product Barrier Matrix should not be used for events that started in Refueling o* Cold Shutdown.

24 25 4.

These initiating conditions are not applicabie to defueled reactor conditions.

26-l l

l l

l 5-C-1

.m.

FROM c0MED REG. SERUIcE5 FAM N0.8 63e6636517 e6-26-90 00:16 P.e3 4

TABLE 5-C-2

~'

DWR Emergency Action Lowl Cold Shutdown / Refueling Function Degradation"

• Determine which combinations of the functions are lost or have e potentialloss and use the following key provided on the metrix table to classify the event.

I UNUSUAL EVENT ALERT SITE AREA EMERGENCY GEp.8ERAL EMERGENCY Potentiel Loss of ANY ONE Loss of the EITHER of the Loss of BOTH of the Loss wl ALL of the i

of the following:

following:

following:

following:

RCS Integrity RCS Integrtty e

RCS leventory e

RCS Inventory e

a RCS Irwentory RCS Inventory e

Core Cooling e

Core Cooling e

e l

Core Cooling e Containment I

l THRESROL.DS FOR LOSS OR POTENTIAL LOSS OF SARRIERS CONTAINMENT Esemole EALe LOS$

POTENTIAL LOSS Pnmary Containment NOT Met.

Not Appliceb6e l

j AND EITHER

1) Secondary Containment NOT Met OR

2) ANY Secondary containment (Site Specific)

Maximum Safe Radiation Level Exceeded I

RCS INTEGRITY Esemple EALs LOSS POTENTIAL LOSS sPV Level Connot Be Restored AND Maintained 2 The (site specmc} and. cation of Leekage160 GPM.

(Site Specific) Low-Low ECCS Actuation Setpoint.

OR

{ Site Specific) Indication that the RPV is Breached RCS INVENTORY Eremote EAle LOSS POTENTIAL LOSS j

RPV Level Connot Be Restored AND Maintained 3 (Sito UNPLANNED Event Resulting in RPV Level Decrease j

Specmc) TOAF Levelin 5 30 minutes.

Below The RPV Flenge For115 minutes.

OR RPV Level Connot Be Determined CORE COOLING Exemple EALe LOSS POTENTIAL LOSS UNPLANNED Event Resulting in UNPLANNED Event Resulting in:

1) (She Specific) RCS Temperature Exceeding 200*F

1) (Site Spee#fic) RCS Temperature Eoceedang OR 200*F l

2) Exceeding the Calculated Time To Bolt When ($lte OR Specihe} RCS Temperature Indication Unevelleble

2) Exceeding the Calculated Time To Boll When AND (Site Specific) RCS Temperature indication (Site Specific) Indication that the RPV is Breeched l

l 5-C-2

FR orj s COMED RES. SERU1CES FAN N0.3 6386636517 86-26-98 08:17 P.84 TABLE 5-C-3 PWR Emergency Action Level Cold Shutdown i Refuelirg Function Degradation *

• Determine which combinations of the fanctions are lost or have a potentialloss and use the following key provided on the metrix table to classify the event.

UNUSUAL EVENT ALERT SITE AREA EMERGENCY GENERAL EMERGENCY Potential Loss of ANY ONE Loss Of the EITHER of the Loss of BOTH of the Loss of ALL of the of the following:

following:

following:

following:

RCS Integrity e-RCS Integrity RCS Inventory e

RCS inventory

}

RCS Inventory e

RCS inventory e

Core Cooling Core Cooling Core Cooling e

Containment 1

THRESHOLDS FOR LOSS OR POTENTIAL LOSS OF BARRIERS CONTAINMENT Example EALs LOSS POTENTIAL LOSS Containment Closure NOT Estabbshed Not Apphcable RCS INTEGRITY Example EALs LOSS POTENTIAL LOSS RCS Level Cannot be Restored and Maintained 3 the (Sr.e Specific) Bottom (ID) of the RCS toop.

(site specific) indication of Leakage t 50 gpm.

OR

{$ite sDecific} Indication That the Vesselis Breached RCS INVENTORY Esemple EALs LOSS POTENTIAL LOSS Reactor Vessel Level cannot Se Restored AND UNPLANNED Event Resulting RCS Level Decrease Maintained 3 (Site Specific) TOAF Level in 5 30 minutes below the Reactor Vessel Flange for 31S minutes.

OR Vessellevel Cannot Be Determined.

CORE COOLING Example EALs LOSS POTENTIAL LOSS UNPLANNED Event Resutting in:

UNPLANNED Event Resulting in:

1) (Site Specific) RCS Temperature Exceeding 200*F

1) (Site Specific) RCS Temperature Exceeding OR 200*F 2)

Exceeding the Calculated Time To Boil When OR (Sne Specme) RCS Temperature Indication

2) Exceeding the Calculated Time To Boll When Unsveilable AND (Sne Specific) RCS Temperature indication Unavailable (See Specif.c} andicagon Tnat the Vessel as Bresched 5-C-3

l SYNOPSIS OF 6/26/98 DISCUSSION ON SHUTDOWN EAL GUIDANCE The following is a synopsis of the discussion held on the EALs shown in Attachment 2 of this telecon summary. The discussion focused on the technical adequacy of the EALs to classify.

potential shutdown events and not on the use of a matrix format to contain the EALs.

1.

Indication of Vessel Breach Discussion fccused on the following three issues:

a.

Whether inclusion of the EAL " Site Specific Indication that the RPV is Breach" was appropriate under the loss of core cooling.

b, What was the definition of RPB breached, e.g., head removed or breach below core.

c.

What indications may be used for this condition.

d.

Whether the condition of RPV breach was needed for the plant to be in a condition where a General Emergency classification was appropriate.

2.

Adequacy of instrumentation Discussion focused on whether indications for RPV level and RCS temperature would be cvailable and whether the EALs were adequate to classify events where these indications may be lost.

3.

Need for RCS Integrity EALS and RCS Inventory EALs Discussion focused on whether separate categories of EAL for RCS integrity and RCS inventory were needed considering that the EALs under both of these categories were based upon RCS level. The industry representative stated that both were needed because only the RCS inventory category included an EAL for the loss of RPV indication.

4.

RCS Leakage EAL Discussion focused on whether it may be appropriate to relate RCS integrity to the actual makeup capacity that exists during the shutdown condition rather than the 50 g.p.m. indicated j

in the draft EALs provided.

?

L i

r

-~--~~~

l l

FRoos coned REG. SERulcES FAX No.

6306636517 07-03 98 07:01 P.03 1

l 1

l TABLE 5-C-1 l

2 Recognition Categery C 3

Cold Shutdown / Refuehng Function Degradation i

4 INITIATING CONDITION MA1RIX 5

6 see Table 5-C.2 for swr Exemple EALs 7

See Table 5 C 3 for PWR Example EALs 8

j i

UNUSUAL EVENT ALERT SITE AREA GENERAL EMERGENCif 1

j EMERGENCY l

CU1 Potential Luss of CA1 Loss of EITHER CS1 Loss of BOTH of CG1 Loss of ALL of tt'e ANY ONE of the of the following-the following:

following:

{

following:

RCS RCS

=

RCS Integrity Integrity inventory RCS Inventory e

e RCS Inventory Core Cooling e

e e

RCS

= Core Containment Core Cochng inventory Coohng e

Op Modes: Cold Op Modes: Cold Op Modes' Cold 09 Modes: Cold Shutdown, Refue6ng

shutdown, Shutdown,

Shutdown, Refuebng Refasling Refuehng 9

10 11 NOTES:

12 1

Tne number of available Systems. Structures and Components (SSC). their design equipment q 13 techn. cal specification operabety status is irrelevent to this determination.

14 15 2.

Protection of each of the barriars above is provided for in the plant design by particular redunda 16 is important to note that cisisir. cations in this recognition category are to be based on determining 17 (function) can no longer te performed by the available SSCs.

IS 19 2.

The applicable operet:ng moces forinis reccanition category are Cold shutdown and Refueling The 20 the mode that the plant was in at the time of recognition of the event, even if the condition causes the 21 higher operstmg mode.

Initiating conditions having speelfied mode applicabihty of Hot Shutdown or higher are NOT 22 applicable.

Category F, Fassion Product Barrier Matrix should not be used for ev 23 24 25 4.

These initiating conditions are not apphcable to defueled reactor conditions.

26 e

f' l

5-C-1

.FROMs COMED RES.'5ERulcES FAX HO.s 6306636517 89-88-98 87 01 P.83 l

~

TABLE 5-C 2 BWR Emergency Action Level Cold Shutdown i Refueling Function Degradation

• l

' Determine which combinations of the functions are lost or have a potentialloss and use the following key provided on the matnx table to classify the event.

IJNUSUAL EVENT ALERT SITE AREA EMERGENCY GENERAL EMERGENCY Potential Loss of ANY ONE Loss of EITHER of tne Loss of SOTH of the Loss of ALL of the of the following:

following:

following:

following:

RCS integrity l

RCS Integrity RCS inventory RCS inventory e

e RCS inventory RCS Inventory e

Core Cooling Core Cooling e

e Core Cooling e

e Containment THRESHOLDS FOR LOSS OR POTENTIAL LOSS OF FUNCTIONS CONTAINMENT Example EALs LOSS POTENTIAL LOSS Primary Containment NOT Met.

Not Applicable AND EITHER

1) Secondary Contelnment NOT Met OR

2) ANY Secondary Containment (Site Specific)

Maximum Safe Radiation Level Exceeded RCS INTEGRITY Exemple EALs

]

LOSS POTENTIAL LOSS RPV Level 5 (Site Specific) Low-Low ECCS Actuation (Sate specafic) Indication of Leakage 2 (Site specific)

Setpoint.

Normal Makeup Capability.

OR (Site Specific) Indication tnet the RPV is breeched RCS (Vesset) INVENTORY Example EALs LOSS POTENTIAL LOSS RPV Level $(S te Specific) TOAF for > 30 minutes.

UNPLANNED Event Resulting an RPV Level Decrease OR Below The RPV Flange For 215 minutes.

RPV Level Cannot Be Determined AND (Site specific) indi:stion of Leakage 2 (Site specific) Normal Makeup Capability.

CORE COOLING Example EALs LOSS POTENTIAL LOSS UNPLANNED Event Resumng in:

UNPLANNED Event Resulting in:

1) (Site Specific) RCS Temperature Escoeding 200*F

1) (Site Specific) RCS Temperature Exceeding OR 200*F

2) Exceeding the Calculated Time To Boil When (Site OR Specific) RCS Temperature Indication Unavailable

2) Exceeding the Calculated Time To Soll When AND (Site Specific) RCS Temperature Indication (Site Specific) Indication that the RPV is Breached wo

FROMs COME9 REO. SERu1CES FAX N0.8 63966365t7 07-03-98 07:03 P.04 TABLE $-C 3 PWR Emergency Action Level Cold Shutdown / Refueling Function Degradation' provided on the matrix tabis to classify the event.*Deterrnme v.tiich combinations of\\

o,0 wing key

}

UNUSUAL EVENT ALERT SITE AREA EMERGENCY GENERAL EMERGENCY Potential Less of ANY ONE Loss of EITHER of the Loss of BOTH of tne

' Loss of ALL of the of the followit'g.

followmg:

following.

following; RCS Integrity e

RCS Integnty RCS Inventory RCS Inventory RCS Inventory e

RCS Inventory Core Coohng Core Cooling e

Core Coolmg e

Containment THRESHOLDS FOR LDSS OR POTENTIAL LOSS OF FUNCTIONS CONTAINMENT Enemple EALs LOSS contamment Closure NOT Established POTENTIAL LOSS Not Applicable RCS (Vessel) INTEGRITY Example EALs LOSS RCS Level! (Sete Specific) Bottom (ID) of the RCS POTENTIAL LOSS loop.

(site specshc} indication of RCS Leakage ? (Site OR specinc) Normal Makeup Capabihty.

(Site specific) indication That the Vessel is Bresched.

RCS INVENTORY Example EALs LOSS Reactor vessel Level g(Site Specthc) TOAF Level for E POTENTIAL LOSS i

UNPLANNED Event Resurting RCS Level Decrease 30 mmutes OR below the Reactor Vessel Flange for 215 minutes.

Vessel level Cannot Be Determined AND (stte specific) indication of RCS Leakage 2 (Site specific) Normal Makeup Capability, CORE COOLING Example EALs LOSS UNPLANNED Event Resulting (n-POTENTIAL LOSS

1) (Site Specific) RCS Temperature Exceed.ng UNPLANNED Event Resulting in:

1) (Site Specific) RCS Temperature Exceedmg 200'F 200*F OR OR

2) Exceeding the Calculated Time To Boil when (Site Specific) RCS Temperature Indication

2) Exceeding the Calculated Time To Boil When Unavailable (Site Specific) RCS Temperature indication AND Unavailable (site speelhe) Indication That the Vesselis Breeched I

{

s.c-3 o

)

e

' Nuclear Energy Institute Project No. 689 cc:

Mr. Ralph Beedle Ms. Lynnette Hendricks, Director L

Senior Vice President Plant Support l

and Chief Nuclear Officer Nuclear Energy Institute j

Nuclear Energy Institute Suite 400 Suite 400 1776 I Street, NW 1776 I Street, NW.

Washington, DC 20006-3708 Washington, DC 20006-3708 l

l Mr. Alex Marion, Director.

Programs Nuclear Energy Institute l

Suite 400

.1776 i Street, NW-

- Washington, DC 20006-3708 i

- Mr. David Modeen, Director Engineering L

Nuclear Energy Institute Suite 400 1776 i Street, NW Washington, DC 20006-3708 i*

Mr Anthony Pietrangelo, Director.

Licensing

' Nuclear Energy Institute Suite 400 i

1776 l Street, NW l

Washington; DC 20006-3708 Mr. Nicholas J. Liparulo, Manager Nuclear Safety and Regulatory Activities i

. Nuclear and Advanced Technology Division Westinghouse Electric Corporation P.O. Box 355 I

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230

. Mr. Jim Davis, Director.:

Operations Nuclear Energy Institute Suite 400.

1776 i Street, NW L

Washington, DC 20006-3708 1

.(

Distribution: Mtg. Summary w/ NEl Re Shutdown EALs DatedJu]L20,1998

- Hard. Copy..

. Docket File.

PUBLIC E

- PGEB R/F OGC ACRS~

SMagruder RSullivan EMail SCollins/FMiraglia B5 heron BBoger

.JRoe

- DMatthews TEssig CMiller BZaleman '

- JO'Brien RSullivan WLyon.

SMagruder

.;GTracy, EDO 1

s n

L r'

L. '

I L

p.

4 l