ML20237K782

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Summary of ACRS 870707 Isap Meeting in Washington,Dc. Supporting Documentation Encl
ML20237K782
Person / Time
Issue date: 07/09/1987
From:
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
To:
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
References
ACRS-2513, NUDOCS 8708270292
Download: ML20237K782 (15)
v • d • e


Text

_ - - -

7

" OdRS -M/S 1

PDK $WEf y[ihn 1

k XJw DATE ISSUED: 7/9/87 7/t/g 7 ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES OF THE l INTEGRATED SAFETY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM (ISAP)

JULY 7, 1987 l WASHINGTON, D.C.

)

The ACRS Subcommittee on ISAP met on July 7, 1987 at 1717 H Street, i N.W., Washington, D.C. The purpose of this meeting was to review the effectiveness of the ISAP process and to use the Millstone 1 and Haddam {

Neck ISAPs to understand how the process functions. ACRS action is l scheouled for the July 9-11, 1987 ACRS meeting. The objective of these ]

discussions will be to develop at least interim comments on the ISAP j process and the usefulness of extending this process to other plants.

The Subcommittee met with representatives of the NRC Staff and represen-tatives of Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (NNECO). The Subcommittee discussions began at 9:00 a.m. and were concluded at about 5:30 p.m.

All of the discussions were held in open session.

The principal attendees at this meeting were:

ACRS D. Ward, Subcommittee Chairman J. Ebersole, Member C. P. Siess, Member l P. Davis, Consultant R. Savio, ACRS Staff NRC C. Thomas, NRR/ISAP M. Boyle, NRR/ISAP A. Wang, NRR/ISAP B. Alefi, SAIC l

D. Gallagher, SAIC 0708270292 870709 2 13 PDR OEMN Certified By_

ISAP Meeting Minutes July'7, 1987 I

NNECO l E. Mroczka R. Factora R. Kacich J. Quinn P. Blasioli J. Bici;e1 M. Lederman Highlights

1. The NRC Staff discussed the history of the development of the ISAP program. The ISAP concept evolved from the Systematic Evaluation l Program (SEP) and the Interim Reliability Evaluation Program. The l SEP was started in 1977 to review operating plants against regu-latory requirements that had evolved since the particular reactor had been licensed. An initial program involving 10 plants and  !

l comparing these plants against the SRP was completed. The concept of IREP was developed from the TMI Action Plan and was intended to involve the performance of a relatively simple PRA which was to be l used to identify risk outliers. The experience with these two programs indicated the resolution safety issues would be more l

effectively achieved if they were addressed in an integrated, risk-based, and plant-specific review. The ISAP program was initiated in late 1984 as a method for integrating ongoing plant safety improvements and licensing actions. The intent was to develop a procedure for combining, scheduling, and doing a risk-based evaluation of changes in plant procedures and equipment.. A plant-specific PRA and a review of plant operating experiment were to be part of the ISAP. The ISAP procedures involved an initial screening to sort out those topics which could be reasonably included in an ISAP-type procedure. The sources of. topics for the ISAP were general licensing actions, USI/ Generic Issues, licensee-initiated plant improvements projects and topics which arose from a-

ISAP Meeting Minutes July 7, 1987 rrview of the plant-specific PRA and a general review of plant operating experience. The November 15, 1984 Comission Policy Statement on ISAP which describes this procedure is included as Attachment A. A pilot program involving NNEC0's, Millstone 1 and Haddam Neck plants. NNEC0 has completed the ISAP evaluation for these two plants. The NRC Staff has issued their draft evaluation (ISAR) on Millstone 1 and expects to issue their draft evaluation for Haddam Neck in August 1987. A list of the ISAP pilot program milestones is given on pages 1-3 of Attachment B. The NNECO and NRC work resulted in the discovery of new safety issues (derived from the PRA insights) and a ranking of all the safety issues. The NNECO and NRC rankings are displayed on pages 4-7 of Attachment B.

2. The NRC Staff is preparing a SECY paper describing the lessons-learned in the pilot ISAP and giving recommendations for the future use of ISAF. A draft paper has been prepared and is currently undergoing management review. It is very likely that the NRC Staff will recommend that ISAP be made available in the future to Licens ces who wish to participate.
3. There was some discussion as to how the Millstone 1 and Haddam Neck j ISAPs could be compared to the use of the Integrated Living Sched-l ule (ILS), and the use of the SEP process. The SEP-type comparison of operating plants is included in the ISAP process (Millstone 1 and Haddam Neck had already been through the SEP process). The ILS allows a prioritization of safety issues but not the combining of, or dropping of safety issues.
4. The Millstone 1 and Haddam Neck ISAPs were Level 1 PRAs with a limited treatment of external events and without any consideration of seismic risk. There was discussion of the adequacy of this approach. It was suggested that the consideration of seismic l

i k

ISAP Meeting Minutes July 7, 1987.

events, a better treatment of external events, and upgrading the PRA's to a Level 3 (i.e., consideration of both core melt frequency and containment performance) were necessary for a complete evaluation.of the ISAP issues, j

5. NNEC0 discussed their experience with the ISAP process. NNEC0 plans to extend the program to Millstone 3 and Millstone 2. They believe that the process provides an effective method for resolving.

safety issues in a cost-effective fashion. 1

6. NNECO discussed the scope, limitations, and principle insights of the Millstone 1 PRA. The analysis was a Level 1 PRA (i.e.,

consideration of core melt) with plant specific data being used for l component reliability and transient frequency to the extent that I such information is available. Fires and internal floods were included in the models. The estimated core melt frequency in the original estimates (1985) was 8x10~4/ year (mean value). With the l implementation of some plant modifications, the current core melt frequency is estimated to be 5x10~'/ year (mean value). Loss of )

long term decay heat removal and loss of AC power were the dominant )

contributors (64%and12%,respectively,inthe1985estimatesand 42% and 19% in the 1987 estimates).

7. NNEC0 ranking of safety issues was done using their Analytical Ranking Methodology (ARM). This procedure involves a consideration 1 of the impact of public safety, personnel safety, economics, and personnel productivity.
8. Program costs for the ISAP were in NNECO's-opinion reasonable. The  ;

PRAs (which are used for purposes other than ISAP) cost $580K for Millstone 1 and $1.4M for Haddam Neck. ISAP costs were about $500K per plant. NNEC0 believes that the ISAP process is an efficient method for interacting with the NRC.

i

. ISAP Meeting Minutes July 7, 1987 4

I

9. There was some discussion of the scope of the PRA and possible l sources of modeling inadequacies. The issues discussed were:

I

  • complex systems interactions where, were not induced in the models.

" modeling of human error, the performance of fire dampers and the potential for the '

propagation of high temperature environments from area to area via the HVAC ducting.

I 4

valve performance under accident loads and accident con-ditions, performance of the SDV system in Millstone 1.

I

10. The use of PRA in NNECO operations was discussed. PRA is used to facilitate the resolution of safety issues and as input into j ongoing design activities. PRA is also being used to prioritize  !

l l l QA/QC inspections. PRA insights into the effectiveness of the NRC 1 l QA/QC requirements (Appendix B) was discussed. The limited work done by NNEC0 has not shown safety performance differences between i Appendix B and non-Appendix B hardware.

NOTE: Additional meeting details can be obtained from a transcript of this meeting available in the NRC Public Document. Room, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., or.can be purchased from ACE-Federal Reporters, 444 North Capitol Street, Wash-ington, D.C. 20001,(202)347-3700.

l L_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ __

g/ f ~ n 45122 Fadsrel Rsgister / Vol. 49. No. 222 Thursday. Nevernber 15, 1984 / Ruhs and Regulations NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMM&SSION

- 10 CFR Part 50 Commission Policy Statement on the Systematic Safety Evaluation of Operating Nuclear Power Reactors aoency:Nocieer Replatory Commission.

Acnoic Notice of Commission Policy Statement.

aussasaare:This Policy Stateinent describes a p!!ct program for which the '

Commission has developed the regulatory po5cies and practices to conduct integrated assessments for operating nuclear power reactors. This program is called the Integrated Safety Assessment Program (ISAP) and will address signf5 cant regulatory requirements which have evolved since  :

the plant was ocisinally licaneed and i

pending licansas actions which have i evolved from a varary af aher sources. l An integrated assessment will be conducted on a plant specahe basis as part of a trialprogram to evaluate all

.licensms issues on a rieen facility and ' 1 to establish schedules for any necessary  ;

plant i,..y.m. Ants. In addition. 1 procedures have been established to J allow for a priodic updating of the resulting implementation schedules for newlicensinglasues that Arise in the j future. 1 Post puerfmem -ahoes comTact:  !

Deards M.Critich6 eld. Assistant i Director for Safety Assessment. Division of !Jeens ing. U.S. Nuclea r Reguls tory Commission. Washingtem. D.C. 2055L Telephone (301) 492-7492, aumeerraev sowomeattosc In 1sr77 the Nuclear Reptstery Commission 1 initiated the Systemstic Ers!nstion Program (SEP). Phoee I of SEP defieed a specinc set of safety feeves ftopies) to be reviewed for opeestingmrclear power plants. Phase II of SEP wasi prlet

~

revvew of those topics for eleven of the oldest domestic operating Mectors.

Results have eeobred frem SEP ever the lest two yests and ident5ed sipificent ewpetience relative to the safefy arrd evetustion technigdes for operating plants.

In 1.s80. Congress enacted Pub. L 96-2S5 (the NRC Authorizaten bid for Fiscal Year'1990) Section no of Pub.1.96-295 required that the NRC develop a program for the systernstic esfety I ewelustions of opers t:ng reac:crs. The program proposal would have extended SEP to a n erslastice which required  ;

licensees to cere: pere thr p!st:t design so the acceptance eteria in the

, A-1 a _.

S

l l. .-

Fedara! Rey,istee / Vol. 49. No. 222 / Thursday, November 15. 1984 / Rules and Regulations 45113 ndard Review Plan (NUREG-0800).* Historically, licensing issues have The only exceptions will be issues for

't program was not implemented for been evaluated generically, and which the NRC Staff explicitly

.ra ting reactors: the Commission guidelines for any necessary corrective deter =ines that prompt aedon is determined. and the Congress agned. actions have been applied uruform' to required to protect the heald and safety that the scope of the program was too all plants. While dus approach has of the public. Such actions include the broad to efficiently evaluate the safety provided an effective c:eans to ensure short term response to buUetins issued of operating reactors, Congress resolution of these !ssues, the generic by the OC5ce of Inspection and subsequently specified in later implementation has not given sufficient Enforcement.

Authorization Bills that funds abodd W attention to plant specific Scope of Evaluation be spent to implement that pregram. characteriseca which have a direct However, those activities were usefulin bearing on the appropriateness of the The scope ofISAP is intended to be as that they focused attention on the need.s corrective action and the relative comprehensive as practcal and ddficulties associated with the importance of the issue in reistion to an Consequently,It will consist of systematic safety evaluation of overall plan for any necessary plant deterministic. probabillsde, and operating reactors as they relate to a improvements. In some cases, operating expenence evaluations, which constantly changing technology and consideration of plant specific , wii! serve to identify speci5c issues to increasing scope of regulatory characteristics have identi5ed be addressed in an integrated requirements. alternative corrective :.ctions which usesa=ent.

provide an equivalent or greeter The deter =inistic review anos, or Following the Th0-g accident, the TGC developed the TMI Acton Plan measure of safety, often at less cost in ISAP topics.yll be derived o,n a plant-(NURECA660)* from the safety lessons the licensee. speciEc basas cunng a screerung review g learned.Two aspecta of the TMI Acton Consequently, the NRC had devebped with the licensee at the besinning of the j Plan are particularly significant to the the regulatory procedures and attendant . pmgra=. The issus to be considered an (1) a set of SEP Tepics fer which the evaluation of the safety of operating policies to conduct integrated NRC StaH has found significant plants: (1) it idennSed a large number rf aneuments for eperatir4 power diffmces between cunent hcensing correcove actions to be implemented by reactors. itis approach is called the Integrated Safety Assessecent Program enteria and typical design enteria in operating plants and (2)it ir.itiated the existence when operating plants were Interirn Reuability Evalustion Program (ISAP). In order to ensure the effectiveness of this program. it will be launsed Q) all pending bcensing (UtEF)in which plant epeedic actions for the plant. Including multf.

probabilistic risk aueosment (FRA) started on a trial basis and the plants to dies were to be perfermed by the be reviewed beve been selected by the PI '"! sedan Th0 Acue Man rn;uan= cts and plant speciEc ff for several operating reactors to NRC Staff from these licensees who pplement the risk reliability indicated an interest to voluntarJy Hunsing accu W de usew

.esperience from the Resetor Safety panicipste in such a program.

game ,

tuun for,wMeh roc!uulnd m oc a Sh;dy (WASH-1400). The licerain6 panW ua e mec:ed.

Based on the teruits of this trial d actions resulting from TM1 have program, the NRC will decide in about a $ "4) increased de scope of outstanding

" plar.t imprevet ents pr ;csed by year, wbether or how this progrnm ne Cenin. Sakty

Qal M.ey ficensing issues for all operstng pluts. thould be extended to cther ope sting Sirnilady, the expedence thus far from published on March 14.1983. (44 FR reactors. 10 7:). mdicates thet the quantitative IREP indicates that there are plant.

specific strergths and weaknesses. from Implementation Schedules goals and design objecoves will not be e rehability point of view, thet warrant used in the licensing process dunng the

    • " "' "aluaden penod. nor mil de policy be further consideration. beyond the caduct ISAP. de Commissin has interpreted as requiri::g that licensees or deter:rinistically based issues. authertred the staff to suspend speed, ic

, applicants perform a probabilistic One of the most signiScant existing implementation schedule analysis: however de Co:nmission j conclusions drawn from SEP and IREP ts requirements for the plants to be contmGes to believe that probabilistic that issues related to safety of operatin8 reviewed. Each affected licensee will be analyses provide a valuable adjunct to nuclear power plants can be more expected to propose and justdy deferral the deterministic regulatory effectively and efficiently implemented for spec 15e implementation requirements and enhance mgineering n an integrated. plant-specific review. requirements that warrant further judg=ents. if they are propedy n addition. the experience from SEP has evalcadon.The associated performed and appbed. Consequently, served to focus on the set of current implementation requirements and other the Cort =ission believes that a plant-icensing enteria which should be safety luas will be svalated specific prebsbilistic safety assessment era usted for operating plants and couecbvely in an integrated assessment (PSA) should be perfor=ed in e erience from IREP has served to The staffis only authorized to defer conjunction with ISAP. The plant.

n the methods to conduct a plant' substantive regulatory and other speciSc PSA will provide a basis for ecjic pro abilistic safety analysis sorequirements to the extens allowed by cost /beneSt evaluations for the

t. p ble nsults the Commission's procedural deterministicaUy based is:aes and will co[be tat'ned which would ertbanca regulations.Thua. the staff will use the also identdy potental strengths and egrate plant safety assessment. provisions in to CFR 50.12 to pant any weaknesses in tb = plant design and Corm mr be pah d by une rm) en. ****N E'. ration which a culd be considered in

(

J w b, =mirg eo ** P@uuone Semcee "*' . any new tmp!ementatien an in addition ciegrated as. ssment.

9 Dms.on of Teowul Lafomauen uwt requirements which evolve late in the An operating expenence evaluation

[eam Coamt (*1 Nwj.n g's*'*7 course of or fouowing ! SAP will be will be conducted m earaUel wid me

"* topic evaluabcas &

,e , [, deferred for the plants involved and s plant specific g 14%at .1 cuw ,5:33 p,, g,g g ( incorporated m en implementation PSA.This evaluation will be used to r

5 m e*W.VA cin. schedule update, as descnbed below. Identify issues related to sig:uficant A-2 h

45114 Federal Rey,Ister / Vol. 49, No. 22.2 / Thnesday November 15,1984/ Ruhs and Rayaltthns  !

trends, event precunors, p!A.st appropsatanese of conectrie actions r,anagemerJ and cperatos. ar.d proposed by the Lcansee for each of the c.aintenance prictees. b adicoc. the identSad !saues in a draft report. The operat.r.3 exper.enca evaluac:: *dl draft re; .: wiu be inued for puhte previde a 6 verse penpecen for the cen.=e.st .ad peer nview. Should the i:terated a564sameet.The evaluatie: NRC Sta!!and Ucannes disagree on the mu censist of am analysa: ar.d corrective action foe any issue, that categen=acen of re;ccable events and matter wiU be resolved in accorda=ce forced pia:t shutdowns acd an d 6 Comm isdon's procedums fer eval auce of overaU la -e g g g,,

E' ** FoUoveng sesolution of any con:ments j

Evaluation Pr- ce the desft report, the NRC Staff will sequest that the licensee establish and )

The ISAF Topic evaluations and l plast.specfic PSA wiu be cenducted in justify impleeerttation ocbedules for  !

parnDel. The lice =see wtD imeeUy each of the conective actions and any I perfer s detet-ej:2sme enalv,es for the ongeing aestyses that may be neccesary plant spec:.fic set ef ISAP Topics by to estabush appropriate correcttve coe:,,ar=3 the so-buih des 4m ef the actions. The NRC Staff wiu bdge the facihty to the current Scarwng entena, adequacy of the preposed I ich*c7 codes and standan:is, er other imple=entation schedules besed on the '

apprepnate acceptance critena and also tech Jealentuation of theissues pror. 4 ruk pmWm for esch issue py,,,.M in th d a't repoM and beue based es the PSA.The etaf will review  ;,,,,,g, ej,n 7j,3 g fg,j ,,p,g, the Lcensee's analysee and issue safety j evalua:iss reperts wnich ide .tly Licensing Actaos and Schedule Updates speciEc diffesete.s f=m the acer;tenc* De bal npeWH sene as the buis entens and a=y artandant safary issues which shou!d be cceside ed in the ud dmWen for a Ucanu amend =ect beerporating and intepafed assess =sst. Schedules for the Leecsee's ama.}yses ud staff evaluaton for=ah:ing de impIecer;,ta cca w.!! be estabbshed 6.:rt:ut the scree:itng schddes. The beense amecd=ent wiU review to enha:ca u e.ffier.ct use of also establish procedures to periodically resour es. update the i=ple=entati:n Schedule.

. A PSA weuld be cec 62:ted by the Any new i=ple=entatica Lee.s e is accordazu with e NRC require =ests that.adse during or Procedures Gaide (NUPIC/CR-:315). following an ISAP review will be The Precedures Guide dev=bes deferred, e.xcept for those issues for apprepnate and consisteet metheds for which1he NRC Staff detertr.ines that (1) trucater defirutren. ( ) e ppJication of prompt ac:fon is required to ensure the data. (3) success / failure entena. (4) health and safety or ecm=on defense analyna. (5) quality control and (61 and security of the public.

docu=entation and presectaton of resdia. In adition. de NRC Staf wiU D ' d'I" d d '* '"I" requiremec:s wiu be evainted ide:Lify methods by which the PSA should adbrse unreeolved gecem couecenly as part of an issues: 1.e., a. ale ry (Soues for wh:ch i=plemactatian echdde updata. The acceptacca entena do not yet enst. update evainatiens would be eeeducted Dunes the screerdag review. milesteces Periodically, but not more than at fnm-will be estabushed to monitor the yearctenals.Th evalastion would p:crusa of the PSA and to ensure follow the same general course as an apprepnate interscuan between the. ISAP review and wculd consider a NRC Staif and the Ucansee.The Ucer.see revbed PSA, which has been updated to ml! be expected to une the PSA to reflec1 corrective setens and plant ide:tify sie-iha contnhuren to rbk improvements.as they are completed.

that should be speci5cally consider-d in The revised i=ple=entation schedule the integated seeesome.nt. For the tria) will similarly be incorporated and propa=. the e.xtent and nature of plast- formali:ed by a new license specific probabilistic analyses wiu be anwnd:nent, established on a case-by can basis.

The issues raisedin its 15AP Tcpic Dated at Wa bayen. D.C. thie eth der of

( evaluatiet.s and the PSA, a:d the Novenber tsa(

( operat=g expe.nene.a evaluation wiU be For the Sclear Rer.:4to y Cc=.=isa;oa.

censidered cel'ectvely is an interated assessmer.t. Decisicca ca correctve samel ). C;Cn.

sctions wiu be based oc quabtauve see.wwy ef u'ec.micusset assessments of the valus and i= pact of each acuoa. The NRC Staff will present traom w - emi its conclusions regating the need for or sawa oma,e tssww.

A-3

i ISAP PILOT PROGRAM MILESTONES March 23, 1984 SECY 84-133 described a four plant ISAP 'ilot program in lieu-of SEP Phase III and the National Reliability Evaluation Program.

1 November 15, 1984 ISAP policy statement was published in the Federal' Register-(49 FR 45112).

May 6, 1985 SECY 85-160 described a revised ISAP pilot program for two plants: Millstone' Unit I and Haddam Neck.

May 17, 1985 . Northeast Utilities (NU) submitted a proposed set of " topics" for both plants; the proposed scope was a revision and update to two previous proposals (June and December 1983).

June 1985 Meetings held with NU to discuss scope of topics, pending licensing actions, generic issues, and plant improvements.

July 10, 1985 Millstone 1 Probabilistic Safety Analysis (PSA) submitted; immediate corrective action (long-term cooling) and topic-related issues were defined in the forwarding letter.

July 31, 1985 Staff evaluation identified 80 topics for Millstone 1 and 70 topics for Haddam Neck, as well as projects that were to be completed independent of ISA?. Documentation requirements were defined for deterministic, probabilistic and plant improvement sumaries.

August 13, 1985 to NU submitted individual topic safety analyses for Millstone 1 February 4, 1986 together with applicable topic probabilistic summaries.

August 19, 1985 NRC issues draft Millstone 1 operating experience report for comment.

September 23, 1985 Draft SAIC PSA evaluation report for Millstone 1 issued

'to NU for factual corrections and coments.

October 3, 1985 NU submitted comments on ISAP operating experience review analysis.

l October 21, 1985 NU submitted comments on draft SAIC Millstone 1 PSA evaluation report.

November 20, 1985 Commission Memorandum and Order issued granting a schedular extension to 10 CFR 50.49 for the environmental qualification 1 of eleven valve operators to be resolved under ISAP for Millstone 1 but not later than August 30 1987.

January 3, 1986 Final SAIC PSA evaluation report issued to NU for use in the Millstone 1 integrated assessment.

1 February 14, 1986 NU submitted a proposed ISAP schedule for Haddam Neck. l l

February 19, 1986 Comission briefing on ISAP status. J March 3, 1986 Safety evaluation for Millstone 1 issued which describes the  !

results of the topic reviews: (1)specificissuestobe addressed in the integrated assessment, (2) resolved topics, and (3) three new topics and the related issues resulting from the PSA and operating experience review.

March 26, 1986 NU submitted the supplemental fire analysis for the Millstone 1 PSA.

March 31, 1986 Haddam Neck PSA submitted by NU; imediate corrective actions (small break LOCA) and topic related issues were defined in the forwarding letter.

April 22, 1986 SECY 86-121 presented first annual ISAP progress report.

June 13, 1986 to NU submitted individual topic safety analyses for Haddam Neck j November 18, 1986 together with applicable topic probabilistic sumaries. {

l July 3, 1986 Draft Haddam Neck operating experience report issued to NU l

. for comment. ]

July 31, 1986 NU submitted their proposed resolution of the Millstone 1 integrated assessment issues together with a priority i ranking for each issue. ]

August 19, 1986 NU submitted coments on draft Haddam Neck operating experience report. J September 30, 1986 Staff issued final Haddam Neck operating experience l report. i November 16, 1986 Draft SAIC PSA evaluation report for Haddam Neck issued to NU for factual corrections and coment.

December 12, 1986 NU submitted their proposed resolution of the Haddam Neck integrated assessment issues together with a priority  ;

ranking for each issue.

January 14, 1987 NU submits coments on draft SAIC Haddam Neck PSA evaluation '

report.

April 14, 1987 Staff issued draft Millstone 1 Integrated Safety Assessment Report (NUREG-1184) for coment.

May 27, 1987 Final SAIC PSA evaluation report issued to NU for use in the Haddam Neck integrated assessment.

. ,e ,

May 26, 1987 Comments on Millstone 1 draft ISAP received from peer _

review group. Comments from NU due at end of month.

May 1987 Staff issues second ISAP progress report and recommendations for future ISAP Actions.

  • July 1987 Staff to present ISAP experience and recommendations to 1 ACRS; ACRS to issue letter report.
  • July 14, 1987 Staff to issue draft Haddam Neck ISAR to NU and peer review group.
  • July 30, 1987 Staff to issue final Millstone 1 ISAR and start process for j Millstone 1 license amendment to incorporate integrated i schedule plan. l l
  • August 14, 1987 Comments on Haddam Neck draft ISAR due.
  • September 1987 Staff to present Haddam Neck ISAP to ACRS.
  • 0ctober 1987 Staff to issue final Haddam Neck ISAR and start process for Haddam Neck license amendment to incorporate integrated schedule plan.

1 '

  • Current completion schedule.

i i

k l

~

<., 4 -

+

D k e

  • e

~ C n 4 0 8 1 3 2 534 7 4 7 9 6 2 9 05 3 0 4 E a 1 1 2 1 1 2 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 M R N

+

+

k e e s e s s s s s e e e e e e e e e e e s e s h h h h h h h h hh h h h h h h u v u n u u u u u n v n n u v v v n v v u v u C n g g ig ig g g ig g g g g ig i gi g R a i i i i i ig d gi d did i d di did id di did id i d dii d di d ld id di did i i i i ii WR H H H H HH H H HH H i ii i H H H HH e MMe MeM eM Me M eM e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e M M M MMM M M M M M MM M M -

+

_ + +

e 6 6 25 8 0 2 1 3 3 6 5 3 6 9 1 6 M r 6 51 0 1 5 06 5 0 0 0 1 59 0 _

_ R o  !. _

_ A c S

7 1 21 0 1 4 80 20' 0 0 1 0 0 0 _

+ .

+ ._

_ d _

e 0 0 0 O 0 _

t e _

a u 2 o3 7 6 8 2 3 4 2 00 o o o o 2 4 8 3 8 9 C 7 CCC CCCC 0 _

r l 9 t 4 1 0 5 1 3 0 9 6 7 t t t t 6 8 1 4 3 8 N 9 N N N N N N N 7 _

g a 8 0 0 5 6 3 4 8 4 8 2 5 0 3 - 8 eV 3 4 2 1 9 2 23 1 4 4 4 4 2 _

t n

I + _

+ _

l -

e n . -

nd 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 05 0 0 0 0 s r 0

5 0 b. 0 0 0 00 0 I 1 0 0 2 1 0 1 2 r P e 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

- - - - - - - =

- P +

O C

E +

N l -

N e n y n t 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o

sf e 0 02 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 6 00 00 0 0 0 r a 0 0 0 0 00 3 00 0 0 2 0 003 0 0 0 _

eS -

P

+

e+

c c n

iec m a 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 0 n r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 00 0 5 1 0 00 0 0 0 5 o o cf 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 00 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 E r 1 -

_ e -

_ P +

_ + - _

_ c y

_ i t 0 5 0 0 5 0 0 00 5 0 0 0 0 50 0 5 0 l e 0 2 6 2 1 0 4 20 7 0 5 5 0 2 0 0 2 0 b f

- u a 0 5 2 1 0 0360 3 1 0 1 0 5 0 1 0 1

+

- P S

+

1 1 1 2 22 2 4

n o 5 9 1 6 6 6 7 0 5 60 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 7 78 1 23 4 66 89 1 3 4 5 1 0 1 2 5 R i 2 22 2 23 28 99991 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 22 2 4 55 5 5 A t 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 33 1 1 1 1 1 4 3 3 3 3 333 3 3 3 33 3 3 3 33333 3 3 3 S c I

Se- 3 3 3 333 3 333 4 4 4 4 4 3 33 3 3 33 3 3 33 33 33 33333 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 33

+

1 P c 5 1 7 8 2 348 21 A i S p 5 9 6 6 6 7 8 3 4 8 2 8 9 9 9 9 1 23 4 6 6 89 1 3 4 5 1 0 1 2 3 I o 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 2 22 0 0 0 0 001 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 24 55 5 0 T

+ 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 222 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 2 4

k n s o a i C t

. i s

n o r v s o

s .

e t n i p P r f o t e u l i al e l r t r v n i B a o r a

_ i c s pi e sA l

V a i t

o sF o

t n

f l

v na g n a l p i i

a r n o t f e r o d n st e e p o V T i e i e s e t t st M / h e t r e p s r a a n e m

d st eh a t

s e a o u m u n s i s uB M eS l

a o t t e y rl t r y d

e y p /n de /at u oi t P o cl a a r nS taIso ny n s i l s cb u o r t i F sr R B o l et a e o t C u n r s e e y n n i y e r .M t I s v a n r r s r l e t y et p ed o o t a v e i ni c A u Pt a ni c c a t sO g n d ni i cl e n pt nl l o ri d nt i a a e rp s y a a s u ot t epL e m n ei eiD f l e eeS aFl l yS r r et i c c t s l e e gb vt i a c gm M p E S S o o e eS nt t ct t n c u gj e oi rFT C o a e ad d rD e r

u o

r at r e e rt L c oo t r e e vR sl d n o oS i s g nF n n P t nl yd i iR M t P lo ap sn rl rl e ol M v y nt u i i r a ol r yb rf c o a r e e cl a l rSi uF gt e eW r e aH a eil n u s n rV m et V e l wi aH f o e ooS r ok yi e l e o o yt H n r s l t t sm Ht d o e r r o e od s t i eV s yi t a o rt t ei wd C n ef u e o r c s P eo c a t nt s sP e r l r n eW M t s n y Sf t oi oR e p l C B at ot ,wC a r ni s s aR l B P e s s aP rf C i m t Bl o nl t o l p e e y i r d ol J oS de na r B o ol o i a - uR e e nP eB sV DS M aP - - - - i R e C a y nt eC T er 7 2 a m u e

/ V l eF e ee nl l t y n o r g 7 7 7 7 cl si g e c s x n t r p cd go R c aT e n e ni e/ s A 9 1 o c ut T ol l n rid y9 99

9. A rV o ni edo n g r S ed it r y s i e r at r i i e e e af at gt g ad a ut e p

o I 1 tl t l C

nt s gt s e v ef n e1 1 1 1 t t i b n p e sf n a yt ei a r f el rS el d r s nR p od ut ui e g o oif o

- ol l e c T N 6 n a o e p nf ot r e r rt o aS8S6 o oU p o yT n a r s el s a a r

& F R UCCR S I OLS t M P PS T SR R R R P C B A C H AI F B E B FiF S P

l1 c  ;

" t<

J j

  • + -

O k C n E a M R B 7 9 I 1 1 8

3 6 4

0 2 4 4 -

254 4 t i 3 3 o s 6 0 6 5 2 1 8 3 2 B 1 3 3 2 3 23 3 2 e

N

+ -

C n k

+

s e m s s s e s e s s s e s e iu iv iu iui ui ui ni ui n i u i iiu uiiv wu wnw w w w w w w w w s w w w w w w w w wu w w -

R a d d d d d d d d d d d d d d d o o o o o o o o o o o o oo o o o o o o o o o o N R e e e e e e e e e e e e e e ELL t L L t L L LLL LLLL L L L LLLLLL M M M M M M M M P M M M M M M

+

+ +

e 3 4 1 1 1 3 0 0 0 2 3 0 6 2 7 01 9 M r 2 4 2 0 0 7 0 0 0 5 0 00 0 1 000 R e A t 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 0 S - - 2

+

+

d e 0 0 -

t e a u r l C 2 1 9 C 9 9 C 6 6 N 1 7 0 N 3 N - -

3 0 4

4 5 o o9 9 0 0 6 504 9 0 C C C C C CC 2 3 t t 8 9 7 4 5 N N N N N N N g a 9 1 5 5 1 3 8 _

eV 3 6 1 4 4 _

t - - _

n I +

+ _

l _

e _

n .

nd 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 05 0 5 0 s r r P 5 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 20 0 2 02 0 1 0 0 0 0 e - - - - - -

P -

+ _

O _

C _

E + _

M l _

N e n y _

n t 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _

o e 5 4 0 0 0 M. 5 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 550 0 2 0 _

sf _

r eS a 3 4 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 00 00 00 0 0 0 .

P -

+ ._

e4

t -

t n -

e a -

c e - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n r 5 6 5 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 00 5 00000 0 o c _

ci 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 00 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 .

E r e ._

P + -

+

t y --

i t 5 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 050 00 0 0 1 4 0 l e 2 7 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0

- b f u a 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 00 0 0 0

+

- P S

+

1 2 2

+ 1 1 1 3 n 7 8 0 2 7 9 2 2 4 5 05 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 26 1 4 6B 9 0 o 5 5 6 6 6 6 7 0 0 8 222 1 4 1 3 5 6 7 9 91 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 233 3 3 34 R i A t S c 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 33 1 1 1 4 4 3 3 3 3 33 33 33 33 33 3 33 3 3 3 3 3 33 I e 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 33 4 4 4 3 3 3 33 3 33 3 33 333 33 3 33 33 3 3333 S

+ 3 3 3

+

0 2 P c 1 6 3 4 56 91 1 A i S p o

5 6 9 0 5 7 0 0 2 3 l 3 5 6 7 9 9 0 56 6 6 6 6 6 6 2 6 1 4 6 2233 9 9 0 3 3 3 4 I 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 i 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 T t.

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

+ 2 22 2 2 22 2 2 2

+

s . .

t

. n s o n g

n n r r e e o i o i p

o t t n n r t i i I I g P at i t n

c a P a n

o n o i c f i d t

n r ri e ot i i if e e d d s t t d i t m n n e od a u e eT kc i d u n e

M o M

l e

l et r VV

/ / e s r e t s c R v s s n n e V t R s n eiA e n o ot O s y o e g y LI s n i i s e

y M i t S i s o x t r e o t t y r

d D n S t t L i s e r s e r i a aS u

u r i k W c i d nf e e t u t c c t ot o y c T e t n a a t i a s s n a i i p l S nf n p c a e at nB A j n t r eF S w n a p e at W i W no l o o c i i f f i i i r si n a y t nl e e - gi s et pt f i l ei c t f s sT aF r g s oP S u p g n iV S A s o v ei ct n ci s s l t n yi q e n i g s - u e ed c i a sE ed a a r6 P r s ip S t c n e ui r n yd r n a nR r i a v rl t o l l e3 o i ad b rP t uil n o oh o uSF rt al oM nCC t - n s i n u V i F s D l a at i n i n s e e e e r o t 3 o n e P ol 5 t t e o n at E t g sl e S nS e P git t a8 i o h i a2 at eT e oA e r a ai el s e t nt n n e t i C eet v1 l s e t sC g el e c s r e n t P d S t i a e eR L ct e a b a aE o e n e u n sr n o ri eP h o u ol a s n/ i t l uh o p p3 e m - 6 t t d r u el & sT it o o e n u e s uf D S p y s o a et t i h I a ak p r i PGI t i V s h l n s c g sii e t eS t cV et R c s o g a eC rt et u a oR I R ei w p a eiL t l ePC e t e si r riI u u4 bi r qr q2 L P g l aR nt 0 s r n e t V n ei9 e u ot l R a n n n r v o t w y st iC l EE d i r oV w4 t sC aB yM ei et O R - - y a r a r r y a - - 5 eA nD T n ei e st l S ,s yl o yL ne o n t r c n r n eb eS t l 7 7 n p w cd nDR u rS c c1 aD ni

,C B A e r22 2

4 e rO o i g c g n cl eV S C r ot el i ui el o9 9 eU o y vd t n i o e a e ut aW i a g e aT at e r g d f s r / gt s on ai p rd r n q6 l l V mC t r r st t a st 1 1 rR l i b e eV r c e s eC ait e e e e e pd l o d nt y r C I i C a e ei n s nt l y o x r o 1 U S r9 t p n eo a o n e o66 nS o o e aiS nl t t i S s a o n eA od r t r I T

+ M C E DT 4 R M PR S OE SC GCI S C R R E F C M C D F M E EI I l T ER B

.s ..

4 O k a s

. C n 0 1 3 7 ? 67 8 i 1 i I E a 23 2 3 2 3 g N R M  %

+

+

1c _

k K

l C n w u w w u w u e w w r w w w u w u R a N R o o o o o c o e L L L l L L LLt L L L L w o o e o o o o o o L L L L L

+ < _

+ + 9 e 9 2 5 8 50 4 2 2 M r 1 0 0 21 0 0 0 R o 2 _

A c 0 0 0 1 30 0 0 4 _

S _

+ _

+ _

d e _

t e a u C C9 2 8 9 9 50 6 1 2 C C rl M M 3 3 8 4 05 6 3 M N _

- g a 2 0 2 9 _

eV 1 t

I n

+ __

+ _

l e

n .

nd 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 5 0 0 0 50 0 0 5 s r r P 1 0 0 2 1 00 1 0 0 e - - -

P

- +

D C

E +

N l N e n y n t 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 o

sf e 0 5 0 2 I.

1 05 0 5 r a 0 1 0 1 3 50 0 0 1 eS P

+ __

. e+ _

c c i n _

. s a e m 0 0 2 0 0 80 0 0 0 n r 0 0 3 0 000 0 0 0 _

o o cf - 0 0 0 0 1 00 0 1 0 E r -

e -

P +

+

t y e e  ? e e e e e e e e e e e e e t t  ! t t t t t t t t t t t d t d t d i t 0 5 5 0 000 0 0 5 e e  ? e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e l e l 0 0 1 0 00 0 0 0 l l l l l l l l l i l l l l pl pl p b f p p p p p p p p p e p p p p p p p p p _

u a P S O s 0 - 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 o o e e mo e o m o o o s o s o e o e e m o mo o o moro om ro om ro

+ + C C C CC C C CC C CC CCD CD CD 22

+ 1 1 n 3 7 83 4 6 1 3 4 8 34 7 9 1 07 89 0 2 3 5 7 24 5 69 9 5 6 1 o 4 4 4 55 5 6 6 66 7 7 7 7 8 2224 2 2 22 3 3 3 33 4 4 4 4 4 5 6 6 7 _

R i _

A t 3 3 3 3 33 3 3 33 3 3 3 3 3 1 4 3 3 333 3 33 3 33 3 3 3 3 33 3 3 S c I.

I e 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 33 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 3333 33 % 5 33 3 3 333 3 3 _

S

+ 3 3 _

+

P c _

A i S p 3 7 8 1 2 4 9 1 26 1 2 5 7 9 4 0 7 8 9 0 2 3 5 7 2 4 5 6 9 7 3 4 9 I o 4 4 4 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 2 23 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 01 1 1 _

T t. _

+ 1 1 1 2 22 2 2 222 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 222 2

+ _

s s n s r sd i e e g

o s e i e g g s e y a n a

t r n n e e

7 k l a a g r a u a i 7 h ed h t t 5 e n p n C r eC s s 0 _

e B

B r A U o q o c e1 S

y s -

L i nS f oS T 3 d E c

n A r n t i T n rT 4 a sE 0 n d e e a t I P l - r o nR a 4 5 o e st z s g g a3 o L m oU m0 -

e i l e a y s i e n d g n n8 t a i N r 1 P t l r T i n ni o c t r t o - L n s a i H S u e t ait i L a l g af f I - o a c F sl e s t st B e e o c e r

e e 1 i e oe r g r s ck e y c c e a s e c( R a r i t r l el e n o nT t eT n nP f n P c e a c et i t i t rC o a aT u3 n y i o i vt a R sDy a r o W oM p l n e c e B eF7 s o D e d i pt l e a a e n l el r . c e c n ot dS f t D e e t n wt n s e s l n eM a e rV mt S t e n n

a p o si p e n ee l F a ut n a e n a ed t d o at t i n i i nt n s a ol s n n ed ri y n et o t i .t S rt sM P y s sh o s e l a e M t v a e s a y e eM t y Pl y o e c et s p SL i S i m T p y d a st e n4 R nS 2 V e t e nP a at d eS e n u p e n r t i 3 t i 7 l n nR v ecl e

g r e rl e sS D a nR r ot yV o u s a - p s a r o w oS rt u p r o p y eo e uiS B e

M s s

oM 1 i oM o0 r oi eid a l Hi r vt t P 8 rP t 5t d t f S r nl w ef O t wi s t ei a at l r4 e - t T - t cs a y o o na w c o oI e n i oP rl ct r rl n o u2 r s2 sL l l d i e r E r yd l ol l F f e ee nD e u e o s - P k n st e p c eP s2 cI P o8 t 2 o eb C l sl P R r n eh r n v B e o s c e a e l et t e e o o soc d a r s e2 s o I.

- o o - - d e t i s ot R t

i e n ct u e i er s e a oH n g svP d R T c e oP ot r1 o ri s n r el

3. t P- l. 2 3 1 e g c nt e p a n t aiI a V yW o e T a eF s e n n a e si t s e 1 e 2,3 2 5 ct r n H i e c

H n i yR l S el t i e r r ol l R s s r d T ooL ol A s o eS n yt 3 s e at si r et t 3 n1 34 f e e e e o e n a s i

p r at e a t t r e e et g I s o s f L e e rt ui u y et eI vh rd ccV t w rI r c nU es p s e s sA nt e cl b l S o t nf C y g g a a a 0 n y aC p a aC V e e s e e e e L y st a d r a T a o aP r i pt ee9 o r pu u eh U O t t tt t t t S S s y e e o u v C

+ W C SLB H U S RR 4 C D S F S R C R MI I R I I I I T M AS D R S T E D

MR + +

+

k t n t

a WR

+

+ +

e M r

. R o A c

.S

~

+

- 'ed

+

_ t e

_ a u r l g a eV t

n I +

+

t -

_ e

- n .

nd o o s r r P .

e -

P

+

O .

C E +

Ml e I

_ n y n t o e s f r a eS P

+

e +

_ ite acn c m n r

_ o o

_ c f

_ E r e

P +

- +

- c y s e t t d

_ - i t e e ep l e l l p p p b f u a o o c r s o P S C C D

_ +

_ +

_ n - 8 3 o 7 8 2

_ R i A t 3 3 4

_ S c

_ i e 3 3 3 S

+

_ +

_ P c A i

_ S p 6 1

_ I o 2 3 T

2 2

_ +

- +

y c

n e

u q

_ e

_ r

_ F t

_ s e

T

_ t

_ n r e e

_ ml p o i o uC q

E l r e yO w i e l

t t o i i eP T l b i uh

- c b L c i a t p i I e T

o

+ - leP t l C r l

L S

" '

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20237K782&oldid=3111997"