ML20237D494
Text
. - -
7 7w ,
.,y
,}
,e -
< , j ,5 l,, ' ,"'
i 5
v J UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0mISSIO6
. { ,
e i TESTIMONY OF JAMES M. TAYLOR A
BEFORE THE
- s
/
' SUBCCvHITTEp0N ENERGY AND THE ENVIROKENT .- .o
, - r 1
~
CO**"UEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS
~
')
UNITED STAIES HOUSE OF F,EPRESENT/.TIVES v
i e
CONCERNINGH.R.Si92.
( a .' r THE NOCLEAR POWER EMERGENCY RESPONSE 1-DATASYSTE5'ACTOF1986,
- \
J
. e, e
/ SUBL 4ITTED: At' GUST 11, 1986- , ;
,r ,.
i~^ .l
- , .' y >l
+
s-J'8712230298 rPDR FOIA 871210' f-i r:
, 1 i
SHDLLYB7-737 PDR a. - ,
-I
.a i .
1 r, y.
d? a
Mr. Chairman, I as James Taylor, the Director of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
, Commission's Office of Inspection and Enforcement. One of my responsibilities is to assure that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is prepared to and capable of responding to a radiological emergency at a licensed nuclear facility. I appear before you today at your request to discuss HR 5192 titled "The Nuclear Power Emergency Response Data System Act of 1986."
NRC's Role First, let me tell you what NRC's role is during an emergency. The Commission has determined that NRC's primary role in an emergency is to monitor and advise. Our monitoring role is in two areas.
- We monitor the licensee to assure that appropriate recommendations are made with respect to offsite actions.
We also monitor the licensee to assure they are taking the appropriate on-site action to mitigate consequences of the incident.
Another aspect of our role is advisory.
- We support both the licensee and the onsite NRC response team with technical analyses, advice and logistical support.
We also support offsite authorities including confirming licensee's recommendations to offsite authorities.
.g.
Agency advice or recommendation will be made by the NRC's Chairman (or his designee) to a licensee manager or the appropriate state or local decisionmaker.
In addition to the above, NRC is the single federal focal point for keeping other Federal agencies and entities and the medic informed on the status of the incident.
The effectiveness of the NRC in performing its role is dependent on the quality and timeliness of the event information the agency receives. The types of information the agency needs for emergency response are: reactor systems conditions, containment building conditions, radioactivity release rates, and the plant's meteorological data. It may also be appropriate to provide state and local authorities with the meteorological and radiological data as this data is useful given their role and expertise.
Currently, the data is transmitted to the NRC from the licensee by standard voice telephone communications. Two primary phone links are used. One is dedicated for reactor data; the other is primarily for radiological and meteorological data. Our experience with voice-only emergency communications-- , starting with TMI and reinforced numerous time since then-- , is that it is too slow and error prone. Information is misunderstood, frequently creating false issues which at best divert experts from the real problems. Even worse incorrect data can cause NRC to respond to the licensee or offsite officials with inaccurate or outdated advice or recommendations.
3-
.The NRC Emergency Response Data System NRC's thinking on how to respond to these problems hasastevolved over the l several years from a rather extensive complex approach to data collection to what we now believe is an effective and appropriate approach to collect the information pertinent to fulfilling our role in an emergency .
NRC is now proposing to implement a data transmission system called the Emergency Respo Data System or " EROS."
The ERDS concept is a direct electronic transmission of selected parameters available from existing electronic data systems located in the licensee's own emergency response facilities.
The EROS would be for use only during emergencies at the facilities.
It will be activated by the licensees during declared emergencies to begin transmission e of the selected s of parameters to the NRC Operations Center.
I NRC currently plans to implement the system on a voluntary basis while we continue tomsevaluate the syste 4 implementation.
Further we plan to accept the data in the format and at the update frequency that the current licensee systes can provide .
The ERDS would be supplemented with voice transmission of essential data not available on the licensee's system rather than require a modification tom. the existing syste Minimal backfitting on plant systems would be required in that licensees would only have to provide one additional output port on their Safety Parameter Display System or other Emergency Response FacilityNodata . personnel system would be required for acquisition, transmission, or receipt of data on EROS .
A primary advantage of ERDS is accuracy and reliability nobecause there are human interfaces, and many systems (such as the Safety Parameter Display System) will incorporate automatic data validation from the utilities data
-5 implementation of the ERDS on the schedule described in the bill will require expediting plant equipment upgrades.
The requirements analysis will be complete in early 1987 with actual site implementation starting later in the calendar year. Implementation at all sites is phased through the next several years in recognition of when certain site Safety Parameter Display System upgrades will be available. ,
I ERDS Costs <
Under our current approach ERDS implementation costs to NRC at each unit are expected to average about $50 thousand. There will be significant variation between sites depending on the site Safety Parameter Display System and data )
i transmission configuration. Licensee costs are expected to be about half the NRC site costs. Although the requirements analysis will more accurately determine the cost of implementation, total cost to NRC is expected to be about I
$6 million.
Differences Between ERDS and HR 5192 After giving you an overview of the ERDS, I would like to mention three significant differences we see between the NRC course with ERDS and HR 5192.
First, at this time the NRC plan is to seek voluntary participation by licensees. While we expect the majority of licensees will see the benefits of
/
the system and will participate, there is no guarantee. HR 5192 would make implementation mandatory for all licensees.
Second, HR 5192 proposes complete implementation within three years of passage.
The NRC implementation plan is phased over a longer period to accommodate current licensee schedules for implementation of their Safety Parameter Display System upgrades. Passage of HR 5192 will require some licensees to accelerate their current schedules.
Lastly, HR 5192 provides for full reimbursement of ERDS cost by licensees via ,
the Emergency Response Data System Fund.
l 1
1 Importance of Emergency Response and Conclusion I would like to conclude by saying that the NRC takes its emergency response 1
role very seriously. The NRC recognized through its post-Three Mile Island Lessons Learned the importance of being able to support and provide recommenda-tions to the licensee managers and offsite decisionmakers. As evidence of the importance we attach to this role, I want to point out that we exercise our
- emergency response organization on a bimonthly basis. We have recognized that there is a probles in performing that role using the current voice-only I emergency communication system. We are committed to correcting the problem and i have considered a range of alternative solutions. We have determined that the most appropriate, cost-effective solution is the Emergency Response Data System. We are pursuing ERDS with the intent to begin implementation in late 1987.
\
_7 1
While the Commission has not provided written comments on H.R. 5192, the Commission has endorsed for further evaluation and study an emergency response ;
data system which is similar in concept to that which your bill would authorize.
To the extent your bill would assure all plants were on the system and would expedite implementation of the system, I wholeheartedly endorse the bill. I as pleased to have the opportunity to meet with you today to discuss the NRC's i emergency response data communication needs.
l i
1 l
r \.
t I
(
997a CONGRESS 2D SE88IoM , ,
To establish an emergency response program within the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Jtar 17,1986 c. ,
s.
Mr. Hucuar (for himself, Mr. UoALL, Mr. SsInsaLINo, Mr. WEArza, Mr.
Costao, Mr. Muarsi, Mr. :EumasoN, . Mrs. .BrBoN, Mr. TAUZIN, Mr.
Riuirt. Mr. McCAIN, Mr. LrvIsosTow, and Mr. Romura) introduced the following bill; which wsA referred to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs
' or, uia <
i
>C A BILL .
a -
To establish an emergency response program within the Nuclear .
Regulatory Commission.
1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-2 tives of the United States of AmerEa in Congress' assembled, 3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE'
.m , ,,
4 This Act'ma'y'be cit d as thE " Nuclear Power Etner-
.n . . . . , .
5 gency Response Data System Act 6f 1986'.'.
6 SEC. 2: EMERGENCY RESPONSE PRdGRAM.
i .. q '
7 (a) EsTI,srassuzkr. :-There is ' established' within the 8 Nuclea'r#ResfiialSh ' doer $$ ion, fan S$NheEcf 'Respon'se
-a o , visamvM< 'vn G. .s:1,t v.
9 Program.e :sise.;.,.:
mrmwm. . 6 c m ot w.h.dl n, . . c.
m ::a a
.M- ....
'[i i k !- ..
D. '-
2
(
1 (b) LOCATION.-The Program Office shall be located in z
1 2 close proximity tol the ' Nuclear Regulatory Commission's
)
3 Headquarters Operations Center.
4 SEC. 3. FUNCTIONS.
5 (a) SysTEu DEVELOPMENT.-The Program Staff, in 6 addition to prompt screening of operating events and other 7 res* possibilities that'Inay be determined by the Commission, . )
8 shall establish a single data transmission system for providing ;
, a- . 4 9 to the Nuclear Regtilatory Commission (or any, other entity -
- i. y. ,
10 which may so require) the data needed to perform the Nucle-1 11 ar Regulatory Commission's incident response role described 12 in subsection (c). The system shall include automatic elec-4 13 tronic dr.ta transmis a for use in the event of an emergency l g.s 14 at a commercial nuclear power reactor in accordance with ~'*"
- or '
15 subsections (b) and (c}.,,
16 (b) DATA TRANSMISSION.-The operator of each com-m 17 mercial nuclear power reactor licensed under section 103 or
,a r 18 104 b. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2133 19,nor 213,4,(b)): .shall, upon declaration of an Emergency Class of I on> .a 20 Alert, Site Area Emeggency, or General Emergency as spec-21 ified.in the licensee's p.approved Emergency Plan, or upon re- .
221 quest
- v. by, mmo them.s NucleIr p"~:.% Regulatory'd-Commission,0perations
- -a '
23 Center, mmeaen .;wertransmitf_
- a. -
ate w:n @by na .- automatic electronic means, to the
- m. .n u . u. .
24 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Operations Center.to. assist
-9 .It ,
25 Nuclear Regulatory C6mmission in determining-
.c ,
d Jp .
e, s.
3.
1 (1) the severity of the abnormal condition of such 2 reactor; 3
-~
(2) the actions necessary to mitigate _ any offsite 4 consequences of the event; and i
1 5 (3) ' whether appropriate.. recommendations are 6 being made with respect to offsite radiological protec- ,4
- J 7 tive actions. ,
j 8 (c) INCIDENT RESP,ONSE.-The Program staff. shall. :
9 ensure the capability of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 10 to carry out the incident respong role.,de, scribed in para-11 graphs (1) and (2). , g, 12 (1) MONITORINo.-The Nuclear Regulatory Com-13 mission response personnel shall, in an emergency de-
,,_ 14 scribed in subsection, (b), con,temporaneously and con-
+
15 tinuously monitor the data transmitted by operators of
. a 16 commercial nuclear power reactors described in subsec-17 tion (b). ,
k ;
18 (2) ASSESSMENT s AND BUPPORT.-;
a 19 (A) IN GENERAL.-The Nuclear Regulatory I
20 Commission response personnel shall, in an emer-
. ,t 21 . gency as described in subsection (b)-
a 22 (i) assess the abnormal operating m a condi - .q
.. ;.3 , n.
23 tions in :suc.h reactors; e "> . ,. .v, s : :"
.n.n; m .
uy .
.6 4
[ u .m a . -
, a . t
4 1
1 (ii) assess the appropriate recommended 2
protective action to minimize any offsite con.
3 sequences of the event; and 4
(iii) support the licensee by providing 5
suggestions and recommendations relating to 6
a the assessments made under clauses (i) and 7 (ii).
8 I (B) ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDA-9 i TIONS.-The Nuclear Regulatory Commission 10' personnel shall-1 11 (i) maintain sufficient knowledge of acci-12 dent status to assess the adequacy of licensee I 13 actions to mitigate consequences; and
'~~a myr~u 14 dii) recommend protective actions. "
15 (C) I! IMITATION.-Program staff shall have 16 no authority to relieve the operator of the com-17 mct'eial nuclear power reactor of responsibility to 18 maintain hiIreactor in a safe operating condition. ,
19 (d) PLANT SPECIFIC INFORMATION.-The operator of 20 any commercial nucle #ar power reactor described in subsec-
~
j 21 tion (b)'shall' provide to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission i
22 such information as is'riduired to evaluate the data transmit- I 4...
23 ted in accordance with such subsection..
f ut use a ^
-_-_-____-_-a
.-.t.
5 i
i SEC. 4. PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS.
2 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission response person-3 nel sharhave the training and expertise necessary to perform 4 the functions described in section 3.
5 SEC. 5. FUNDING.
6 (a) NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION.-Except as 7 providedin subsection (b), and to the' extent provided in ap-8 propriation Acts, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission shall 9 pay all costs associated with the data transmission functions 10 described in section 3. ei 11 (b) EMEEGENCY RESPONSE DATA SYBTEM FUND.-
12 (1) ESTABLIBIIMENT.-There is established in the 13 Treasury a special fund to be kiown as the Emergency
,_ 14 Response Data System Fund 3(in this subsection re- ..
i 15 ferred to as the " Fund"). Thd fund shall be available 16 to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission without fiscal 17 year limitation and in such amounts as may be speci-18 fied in appropriation Acts for the purpose of compen-19 sating the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for costs in-20 curred in the installation or operation, or both, of the 21 data transmission system described in section 3 at com-22 mercial nuclear power reactor sites.
23 (2) PAYMENTS BY LICENBEE8.-Each commercial 24 nuclear power licensee of the Nuclear Regulatory 25 Commission under sections 103 and 104 b. of the 26 Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2133 or
~
s
i 6
1 1 2134(b)) shall pay into the Fund each fiscal year an 2 amount determined by the Nuclear Regulatory Com-3- mission to be attributable to the cost of th'e installation 4 or operation, or both, of such data transmission system 5 at a commercial nuclear power reactor facility of such 6 licensee in such fiscal year.
7 SEC. 6. DEFINITIONS.
8 As used in this Act-9 (1) " commercial nuclear power reactor" means 10 any commercial nuclear power reactor licensed by the
- 11. Nuclear Regulatory Commission under section 103 or 12 104 b. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
13 . 2133 or 2134(b)); and 14 (2) " program" means the Emergency Response . m, 15 Program established under section 2.
16 SEC. 7. COMMENCEMENT OF OPERATION.
17 The data transmission capability described in section 3 18 shall be operational not later than three years after the date )
19 of the enactment of this Act.
O 4
d 'i l e .h
, : ., t .
.t t iii.
t; . <1 .n.
mas ,,,,,. ,
4
1013
/
[9-16-86] ,
AMENDMENT TO H.R. 5192 0FFERED BY MR. HUCKABY Page 2, line 8, strike single.
Page 2, line 15, add after the period the following new sentence: The system shall be the exclusive such system'in.
the United States..
Explanation This amendment clarifies the intent of'Section 3(a) that no other entity-shall supersede the the Federal covernment in providing an emergency data response system.
5 a
)
l
__ I l
I 1014
< j J l (9-16-86) 1 AMENDMENT TO H.R. 5192 0FFERED BY HR. HUCKABY 1 .. .. .. ..
Page 4, line 17, insert authority or after of .
i i _
Explanation i
Section 3 (c) (2) (C) makes clear that the NRC program staff !
does not have the authority to relieve the operator of the responsibility to maintain his reactor in a safe operatina condition. This amendment clarifies also that the procram staff does-not have the authority to intervene in plant !
operations.
l k
1016
[9-16-86) 1 AMENDMENT TO H.R. 5192
~ '
OFFERED BY MR. HUCKABY i
Page 5, line 11,. strike (b) and all that follows through the period on page 6, line 6, and insert the following:
1 (b) EMERGENCY RESPONSE DATA SYSTEM FUND.--There is j 2 established in the Treasury a special fund to be known as the 3 Emergency Response Data System Fund. The Fund shall be 4 available to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission without fiscal 5 year limitation and in such amounts as may be specified in 6 appropriation Acts for the purpose of compensating the 7 Nuclear Regulatory Commission for costs incurred in the 8 installation or operation, or both, of the data transmission 9 system described in section 3 at commercial nuclear power 10 reactor sites.
Explanation This amendment ef fectively deletes Section 5(b) (2) which requires licensees to contribute funds for NRC activities related to the establishment and operation of emergency response data systems. It retains Section 5 (b) (1) recuiring that such activities be funded through existing NRC appropriation channels.
I
Document Name:
HUCKABY QUESTIONS I I '
Requestor's ID:
RAINES Author's Name:
JOHN HICKMAN Document Comments:
CONGRESSIONAL QUESTIONS FOR HUCKABY i
i
___._______________m._.-_._-
puestion 1. What is the NRC role in an emergency?
Answer.
l The NRC role is one of supporting organizations which have primary responsibility for responding to emergencies at nuclear power facilities; i.e., the licensee and state or local government.
Specifically:
Monitor the licensee to assure appropriate protec-tive action recommendations are made offsite.
Support offsite authorities, including confirming the licensee's recommendation to offsite authorities.
Support the licensee (technical analysis and logis-tic support).
Keep other federal agencies and entities informed of the status of the incident.
Huckaby/IE 8/6/86
--..---~----__.--__-___--n_-___.~__._ _ _ _ - - _ - . - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ . _ _ . . - - - - _ . - _ _ -
guestion 1. (Continued) ;
Keep the media informed of the NRC's knowledge of the status of the incident, including coordination with other public affairs groups.
I Huckaby/IE 8/6/86
i guestion_2. What is the appropriate information that the NRC j needs to fulfill its emergency response role?
Answer. l To fulfill the NRC's role, the NRC requires accurate timely data on four types of parameters: (1) core and coolant system condi- 1 tions must be known well enough to assess the eydent or likelihood of core damage; (2) conditions inside the containment building must be known well enough to assess the likelihood of its failure; (3) radioactivity release rates must be available promptly to assess the immediacy and degree of public danger; and (4) the data from the plant's meteorological tower is necessary to assess the distribution of potential or actual impact on the public.
I 1
l Huckaby/IE 8/6/86
I guestion 3. How is the required data currently being acquired and what is the effectiveness of the current system?
Answer.
Currently, the data is transmitted to the NRC from the licensee by standard voice telephone communications. Two primary phone links are used. One is the Emergency Notification System (ENS) which is a dedicated leased line used primarily for the reactor data. The other is the Health Physics Network (HPN) used primarily for the radiological and meteorological data.
Experience with the voice-only emergency communications link, currently utilized for data transmission, has demonstrated that excessive amounts of time are needed for the routine transmission of data and verification or correction of data that appear ques-tionable. Error rates have been excessive; initiations have been slow; frequency of updates have been unreliable. In addition, the current system created an excessive drain on the time of valuable experts at both ends of the telephone line. When errors occur, they frequently create false issues which, at best, divert experts from the real problems for seriously long periods of time. At )
I worst, incorrect data may cause the NRC to respond to offsite Huckaby/IE 8/6/86 1
_ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ __ ____._____________..__._________._____J
II I
J l
gues_ tion 3. (Continued) officials with inaccurate or outdated advice that results in the 1
implementation of inappropriate protective actions.
l The current data transmission system with its recognized problems provides at best a tenuous basis for the NRC to fulfill its incident response role.
l l
l l
' Huckaby/IE 8/6/86
l
)
i l
i guestion 4 What is the appropriate data system fcr the NRC emergency role?
fnsger. )
To answer this question the NRC examined the function we were expected to perform and found that this was very similar to the i
function being performed by the licensees in their emergency response facilities. We monitor the actions taken by'the licensee l
to mitigate the accident and the recommendations made to offsite authorities to assure that appropriate actions are taken to -i minimize any consequences to the public. The licensees perform these very functions in their emergency response facilities. We i then recognized that the data system we would need is very similar to the systems licensees are providing for their own facilities.
The system concept we determined to be most appropriate for the NRC emergency response role was the Emergency Response Data System (ERDS). The Emergency Response Data System is a direct electronic transmission of selected parameters from existing electronic data. I systems, which have been provided by the licensees for their own emergency response facilities (ERF). The ERDS would be for use only during emergencies at the facilities and would be activated-Huckaby/IE 8/6/86
guestion_4 (Continued) by the licensees during declared emergencies (Alert or above) to begin transmission to the NRC Operations Center. This aspect is consistent with the current practice of licensees reporting events by voice over the Emergency Notification System and of maintaining the open voice line for an Alert or above class event. NRC would accept the data in the format and at the update frequency that the current licensee system can provide. The ERDS would be supple-mented with voice transmission of essential data not available on licensees' systems rather than require a modification to the existing system.
Huckaby/IE 8/6/86
guestion 5. How difficult would an ERDS system be to implement and how much would it cost?
Answer. j i
1
(
We currently have a contract to visit the plant sites, examine the f data systems in use at those sites, and produce a conceptual design and cost estimate for a system to receive data from the sites. Pending the results of that effort our current estimate of
]
the difficulty of implementation is as follows:
)
Minimal backfitting on plant systems would be l J
required in that most licensees would only have to provide one additional output on the Safety Parame-ter Display System (SPDS) or other Emergency Re-sponse Facilitiy (ERF) data systems. Some software would be required for assembly of the data to be transmitted. No personnel are required for acquisi-tion, transmission, or receipt of data on ERF data systems.
Cost is relatively low because n.ost licensees are already installing systems to transmit data among their own ERFs, but there will be substantial Huckaby/IE 8/6/86
i l
Question 5. (Continued) 1
)
hardware and software interface requirements at the NRC to receive the diverse signals and formats.
The current estimated total cost of the ERDS concept is $5 to $6 million broken down-as follows:
l Site Costs: (Based on 114 units) Total Hardware 9 $6.5 K/ unit 5 740 K Software @ $21.8 K/ unit $2,486 K Design @ $3.2 K/ unit $ 367 K Implementation @ $10.1 K/ unit $1,155 K l
i Headquarters Costs:
l Hardware $- 58 K Software $ 270 K Design and Implementation 5 395 K Total $5,471 K 1
Huckaby/IE 1 .
8/6/86
a
' What are the advantages of an ERDS system?
Question 6.
(specifically: accuracy and reliability)
Ansger.
Accuracyandreliabilityareexcellentbecausethere'areno) human ;
interfaces, and many systems [such as the Safety Parameter Display System (SPDS)] will incorporate automatic data validation. In addition to data quality indicators which can be tray.smitted by most licensee systems, error checking routines are .c standard for data handling and modem transmission systems. Timeliness is excellent because the system is immediately available and capable of rapid transmission with frequent updating. Promptness of initiation may vary depending upon licensees' system configurations.
In some cases, activation may not occur until the licensee mans its Technical Support Center. Completeness is expected to be generally excellent because the primary objective of the SPDS or ERF data system requirement is to provide the licensee with a tool for quickly assessing the overall health of the plant, i.e., the same need that the NRC faces. Voice communications would be di.rected toward plant conditions and plant response rather than individual instrument readings. g l
nJ Huckaby/IE i
8/6/86 j
i
--_____ .2__ _ .. _
4 1
h l, ,
't 1 c !
' I
, o-guestion 7. The original's,vstem proposed was the Nuclear Data Link. Why is,the Emergency Res onse Data System now
, beiga preposed in pbce of ethe pJL?
, '4 (% s ;
j i kis s Answer, ,s j, I ,\ \
t The NRC Nuclear Data Link (NDL) cdncept described in,NUREG-0730
, provided for the transmi,ssion and automatic display at the Opera-y /
tions Center of approximately 120 data parameters from each operating reactor. Long-term retention ofxdats received by the NRC OperaMi ns Center began on receipt of an automatic alarm or when instituted by the Operations Center (in case a subtle situa-tio'n should fail to trigger an alarm). Selected parameters would be designated to automatically initiate alarms on detection of
' abnormal vitues to initiate data storage and to alert Operations l s
' ; ', Center personnel.
t' j
/
Backfitting requirements would have been extensive on licensees i
for equipment at plants and the lead time required for implementa-tion would have been significant.
/ ,
i' ,
E' Thr NDL type of system presents a substantially higher initial s:ost, and higher cost of mai Gaining a syytert that is more i s #
\. 3 i b i s,
X 1 s Huckaby/IE i 8/6/86
.~
% \
, i s l
( .
t A
.\ /- _ _ __
l-p- - -
u.7 l ,
. ; l' l I
,, , guestiorl7. (Continued) - ?- L ~
1
, s.
ataplex to manage. The estimated total system cost, for all facilities, of the original Sancia National' Laboratories NDL ct-ncept was $25 to $26 million in 1981.
e Nat importantly, the NDL type of system would provid'e more data
., bar:' appropriate for the WC rale. The relatively continuous
(
ava'\ lability of the data ar.d the larger data set provided informa-i tidn' which viay have caused the user to believe he had an adequate l
N'Ais (or making be:gemerits regarding plant operat';one t rather than e rry g e nt *;f re s pr e s e . ,
l I
l c
c
\
l 3
s ;
y ,
l 1
4 i
Huckaby/IE !
i 1
, 8/6/86 I , !
l l
V
/ x
_ _ . _ _ _ _ .k______.__.._______1..__._
l l
l i
guestion 8.
What are the differences between ERDs and NDL?
i Answer.
l l l NDL vs ERDS I
NDL ERDS
- Automatic activation based on
- Licensee activated.
plant parameters. Probably at Alert level.
Potential regulatory tool.
- Data continuously recorded at
- Data provided under emer-f Operations Center. gency conditions only.
- Some connections direct to plant *No direct connection.
sensors, potentially degrading instrumentation, i
- Initial data list about 400
- Data list about 60 vari-variables, later reduced to 125. ables, comparable to SPDS set.
i Huckaby/IE i !
8/6/86 l l
l i
l l
_ Question 8. (Continued) *High cost due to requirement *Relatively low cost due for a totally new system. to usage of existing systems.
- Extensive backfit, requiring
- Minimal backfit, software dedicated onsite computer. for data assembly and modem for transmission.
- Increased data may encourage
- Limited data list necess-NRC to direct plant operation. ary to assess plant safety.
- Accuracy and reliability are
- Accuracy and reliability excellent. are excellent.
- Timeliness is excellent.
- Timeliness is expected to be excellent. Initiation will depend on system con- j figuration.
Huckaby/IE 8/6/86
I guestion 8. (Continued)
- Completeness is potentially
- Data list is limited but excellent due to parameter should be adequate for most availability. events. Site surveys have indicated good parameter coincidence.
- Reduces data gathering and
- Reduces data gathering and transmission burden on licensees. transmission burden on licensees. Supplemental voice transmissions have been reduced.
l l
l 1
l 1
i Huckaby/IE 4
8/6/86
1 puestion 9. What experience do you have with an ERDS type of system?
SEShef-The NRC successfully conducted a test of data transmission on July 19, 1984 from the Duke Power Company system at the McGuire facility. The data set was limited to a list of 69 specific data points to test the appropriateness of the NRC's parameter list. ,
The system has been maintained and continues to allow NRC access to all Duke facilities during events and exercises.
The NRC successfully conducted a test of data transmission on August 13, 1985 from the Commonwealth Edison computer system at the LaSalle facility to the computer in the NRC Operations Center.
This transmission required that we translate the data from an incoming ASCII character string to text. The data set consisted l of 60 specific data points. The system is expected to be main-tained at both f acilities for possible future use.
In both tests, improvements in NRC response were noted. The ENS voice traffic was reduced and consisted of higher quality Huckaby/IE 8/6/86 l
L--______-____- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - - _ _ _ _
i
_Questfon 9. (Continued) i f
discussions. Assessments were of higher quality and more prompt.
The data provided an adequate basis for confirming the licensee's protective measures recommendations.
Huckaby/IE 4
8/6/86
1 l
i I
guestion 10.
Would the NRC make this system or the data in it available to the states or other local authorities?
)
Answer. .
That is an issue that to some extent will be negotiated between an individual utility and state. We would expect that it may be appropriate to provide state and local authorities with the meteorological and radiological data as this data is useful given their role and expertise. Regarding plant operational data however, the Atomic Energy Act clearly gives NRC sole authority on issues of Nuclear Safety. The NRC role does not presently call for us to provide parameters related to the plant operation to the state or local organizations but instead to provide the NRC's assessment based on those parameters and whatever other informa-tion NRC may have available. We do not believe that having an ERDS alters this role.
Huckaby/IE I
8/6/86
~
I guestion 11. How will you assure that NRC personnel will r.ot make operational decisions from Bethesda based on this data?
Answer.
The limited data set and the intended operational criteria (licensee initiation) of the ERDS system are oriented toward an emergency response system rather than an operational system. The similarity of the ERDS concept and the systems for licensees ERFs-supports the functional intent of the system.
Extensive training of NRC response personnel has been oriented toward the response role of the NRC and has resulted in the personnel recognizing the limitations in our ability to provide operational support to the licensee. Limited knowledge of the specific plant's design and operational characteristics, as well as limited knowledge of the event (even with the ERDS system) restrict the ability of NRC personnel to provide operational support except in a monitoring role.
Huckaby/IE 8/6/86
\ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ -
i guesti_on 11. (Continued) i The NRC emergency response plan and procedures establish a single agency spokesman which includes making recommendations to a licensee, or to offsite authorities. In initial activation the single agency spokesman is the Chairman. Once the responsible Regional Administrator and his site team arrives on site and is brought up-to-speed by the senior licensee manager and resident inspector, the Chairman may delegate the single agency spokesman role to him. In either case, the_ single NRC spokesman communicate _s_
any NRC recommendations to the senior licensgg_ manager in chargg_
of_ responding _to that event or to the_ appropriate offsite decisionmaker_{g.g. the governor or his dgsignated rggresentativgl.
Huckaby/IE i
8/6/86
( Ouestion_12. How does this legislation affect the implementation of an ERDS system?
Answer.
The NRC considers the implementation of an ERDS to present the potential for a major improvement in incident response capability at a reasonable cost. Since the current study has not identified major technical problems, the NRC intends ':0 implement an ERDS on a voluntary basis.
The passage of the proposed legislation would clearly indicate the concern Congress has for the safe operation of the nuclear power industry in general and the importance of the safety benefit of an ERDS. In addition, although most licensees are expected to cooperate with voluntary ERDS implementation, we do expect that for various reasons, including limitations of existing licensee computer equipment or its configuration, some will be reluctant.
The legislation, with its associated deadline for implementation, would facilitate the equipment modification or addition necessary I to support an ERDS. I l
I i
Huckaby/IE 8/6/86
s :-/- L 99thCONGRESS 8'" '"***' 'I
- i
.2nd Sr.ssioN e e... ,
g... . . ...[...., .. , , ,,,, ,
I sxurt titi, her3 IF To establish an emergency response program within the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
l IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES July 17 gg 86 Insert
- sponsor's names Dy Mr. ITUCKABY (for himself, Mr. UDALL, Mr. SEIBERLING, Mr.
WEAVER, Mr. COEllLO, Mr. MURPilY, Mr. EMERSON, Mrs. BYRON, Mr. TAUZIN, Mr. RAllALL, Mr. McCAIN, Mr. LIVINGSTON, and Mr. ROEMER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on i
l l
l l
l l
l A BILL 1 Bc it enacted by the Senate and lionse of Representatives of the United 2 States of America in Congress assembled,
.-i
- - - - - -_-----------------__A
BUCKAB029 2
1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
2 This Act may be cited as the Nuclear Power Emergency 3 Response Data System Act of 1986.
4 SEC. 2. EMERGENCY RESPONSE PROGRAM.
5 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.--There is established within the 6 Nuclear Regulatory Commission, an Emergency Response Program.
7 (b) LOCATION.--The Program Office shall be located in 8 close proximity to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's 9 Headquarters Operations Center.
10 SEC. 3. FUNCTIONS.
Al (a) SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT.--The Program Staff, in addition 12 to prompt screening of operating events and other 13 responsibilities that may be determined by the Commission, 14 shall establish a single data transmission systr:n for 15 providing to the' Nuclear Regulatory Commission (or any other 16 entity which may so require) the data needed to perform the 17 Nuclear Regulatory Commission's incident response role 18 described in subsection (c). The system shall include 19 automatic electronic data transmission for use in the event 20 of an emergency at a commercial nuclear power reactor in 21 accordance with subsections (b) and (c).
22 (b) DATA TRANSMISSION.--The operator of each commercial 23 nuclear power reactor licensed under section 103 or 104 b. of 24 the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2133 or 2134(b))
25 shall, upon declaration of an Emergency Class of Alert, Site 9
]!
- EUCKAB029 3
(
l Area Emergency, or General Emergency as specified in the 2 licensee's approved Emergency Plan, or upon request by the 3 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Operations Center, transmit 4 data, by automatic electronic means, to the Nuclear 5 Regulatory Commiss' ion Operations Center to assist Nuclear 6 Regulatory Commission in determinin'g--
7 (1) the severity of the abnormal condition of such 8 reactor; 9 (2) the actions'necessary to mitigatefany offsite 10 consequences of the event; and il (3) whether appropriate recommendations are being 12 made with respect to offsite radiological protective 13 actions.
14' (c) INCIDENT RESPONSE.--The Progrsm staff shall ensure 15 the capability of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to 16 . carryout the incident response role described in paragraphs 17 (1) and (2).
18 (1) MONITORING.--The Nuclear Regulatory Commission 19 response personnel shall, in an emergencyLdescribed in 20 subsection (b), contemporaneous 1y and continuously 21 monitor the data transmitted by operators of commercial 22 nuclear power reactors described in subsection (b).
23 (2) ASSESSMENT AND SUPPORT.--
24 (A) IN GENERAL.--The Nuclear Regulatory 25 Commission response personnel shall, in an emergency i
4 HUCKAB029 4
6 1 as described in subsection'(b)--
2 (i) assess the abnormal operating conditions 3 in such reactors; 4 (ii) assess the appropriate recommended 5 protective action to' minimize any offsite 6 consequences of the event; and 7 (iii) support the licensee by providing 8 suggestions and recommendations relating to.the 9 assessments made under clauses (i) and-(11).
10 (B) ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATIONS.--The Nuclear il Regulatory Commission personnel shall--
12 (i) maintain sufficient knowledge of accident 13 status td assess the adequacy of licensee actions 14 to mitigate consequences; and 15 (iii)' recommend protective actions.
16 (C) LIMITATION.--Program staff shall have no 17 authority to relieve the operator of the'cc=mercial 18 nuclear power reactor of responsibility to maintain 19 his reactor in a safe operating condition.
20 (d) PLANT SPECIFIC INFORMATION.--The operator of any 21 commercial nuclear power reactor described in subsection (b) 22 shall provide to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission such 23 information as is required to evaluate the data transmitted 24 in accordance with such subsection.
25 SEC. 4. PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS.
HUCKAB029 5
(-
'l The Nuclear Regulatory Commission response personnel 2 .shall have the training and expertise necessary to perform 3 the functions described in section 3.
4 SEC. 5. FUNDING.
5 (a) NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION.--Except as provided in 6 subsection (b), and to the extent provided in appropriation 7 Acts, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission shall pay all costs 8 associated with the data transmission functions described.in 9 section 3.
10 (b) EMERGENCY RESPONSE DATA SYSTEM FUND.--
11 (1) ESTABLISHMENT.--There'is established in the-12 Treasury a special fund to be known as the Emergency 13 Response Data System Fund (in this subsection referred to 14 as the Fund). The fund shall be available to the 15 NuclearRegu[atoryCommissionwithoutfiscal' year l 16 limitation and in such amounts as may be specified in 17 appropriation Acts for the purpose of compensating the 18 Nuclear Regulatory Commission for costs incurred in the 19 installation or operation, or both, of the data
'20 transmission system described in section 3 at commercial 21 nuclear power reactor sites.
22 (2) PAYMENTS BY LICENSEES.--Each commercial nuclear 23 power licensee of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission under 24 sections 103 and 104 b. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 r 25 (42 U.S.C. 2133 or 2134(b)) shall pay into the Fund each t
I
- HUCKAB029 6
l 1 fiscal year an amount determined by the Nuclear 2 Regulatory Commission to the attributable to the cost of 3 the installation or operation, or both, of such data 4 transmission system at a commercial nuclear power reactor-5 facility of such-licensee in such fiscal year.
6 SEC. 6. DEFINITIONS.
7 As used in this Act--
8 (1) commercial nuclear power reactor means any 9 commercial nuclear power reactor licensed by the Nuclear 10 Regulatory Commission under section 103 or 104 b. of the 1.L Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2133 or 2134(b));
12 and 13 (2) program means the Emergency Response Program 14 established under section 2.
s 15 SEC. 7. COMMENCEMENT OF OPERATION.
16 The data transmission capability described in section 3-17 shall be operational not later than three years after the 18 date of the enactment of this Act.
i I