ML20245A580
| ML20245A580 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/07/1987 |
| From: | Bernthal F NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Asselstine, Carr, Roberts, Zech NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20235N989 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-87-300 COMFB-87-2, COMLZ-87-18, NUDOCS 8704150246 | |
| Download: ML20245A580 (20) | |
Text
"C ut UNITED sT ATEs
,g
/ '; NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y
waseincrow. o c. 20t% l
> a l April 7, 1987 l
)
\ *e.,* f 1.a CFF6cE OF THE COMMISSIONER R MEMORANDUM FOR: Chaiman Zech Commissioner Roberts Commissioner Asselstine Commissioner Carr FROM: Frederick Bernthal COML7-87-18; COMFB-87-2: COMMISSION GUIDANCE ON STAFF
SUBJECT:
l REVIEW OF NAS REPORT " REVITALIZING NUCLEAR SAFETY l'
RESEARCH" (SECY-87-53) 4 I
The Chairman has, in COML2-87-18, asked for Commissioners' views on the specific recommendations contained in the Academy Report. I agree with the vast majority of the Academy recommendations in general ar.d in particular.
With the exceptions noted belcw, I believe the Comission should ask Staff ,
1 to carry out each and every Academy recommendation, and report back to the Comission if Staff believes that, for any reason, elements of the Academy {
l recommendations cannot or should not be carried out. .
Further, while many of the recommendations in COMFB-87-2 are consistent with the recommendations of the National Academy Panel, I still ask that ;
l SECY complete the tracking of Comission response to the points raised in l that COMFB. i I have then only a few specific dissenting comments on the Academy recommendations:
Executive Sumary: :
l Recommendation 2. "Nevertheless, an increased proportion of the research should be funded and conducted by the industry (utilities, suppliers and vendors) than is now the case."
l I agree, but the NRC cannot, of course, pemit such research to l supplant the necessary independent confirmatory capability of NRC research.
Recommendation 4. "The Department of Energy (00E) and the NRC should l
encourage more research funded cooperatively with industry or with international partners."
I agree, but strong managerial oversite must be maintained in international activities, especially in bilaterals, so that they remain effective means to achieve the end of a free and timely l exchange of useful research infomation.
.~ l 4 -? l ty. g y f - p 4
Chapter 4 Recommendation 2. "The NPC should ccasider separating the functions of standards development and research."
I disagree. Such a step would be untimely, in view of the recent reorganization.
I Recommendation 19. "The NRC should request that Congress expand NRC's l grant authority and then NRC should award more money to universities as grants, rather than as contracts."
l I agree that the research base of the NRC should be substantially expanded. Whether that requires the award of more " grants", rather than contracts, is unclear to me; a number of DOE " contracts" bear striking similarity, in practice, to research " grants". It may be sufficient for research simply to set aside a greater portion of its budget for supporting unsolicited prooosals, and to insure that national laboratory facilities are made available for outside users to cceduct research.
Recommendation 22. "The NRC should assign a sta'f member the task of overseeing university research funding."
As noted above, while I strongly support the concept of a greater diversity in NRC research investigators I am not entirely convinced ht that that "byuniversity research" implementing needs the many special other oversig'ons. Isuch recomendati would oversight hope would prove unnecessary. But I could be proved wrong. 1 Recommendation 23. "The Department of Energy should ensure that a portion I of its budget for university-based nuclear R&D goes to support safety i research of relevance to current reactors." >
l l
No cortrnent.
Finally, I cannot agree with the Academy Panel's implied view that NRC ,
snagement is so flawed because of the Comission system that there e.an '
be little hope for any meaningful reform of our research programs. There is, of course, one very good way to disprove that Panel asi,ertion.
<h s.
l l
.I.t G - f j
- 49JWyK 4 x3 A s Mr m. f n
~ .A
[
g,,p"._ m - _
f -.
am., ? %t P g //) p -
I JC Mj _ 7;
~
4.",..; -- . p- -
- = ~ '. .;ll - _su4QD.J c.
u.
3',,-Wd .ed W Dd , ,
M /^e:) .R I' u.rn.. -
Y '
c".. _# r J". 0;y4'no.E'I6L W[a- ; ;_. s n ;
y, -- p% y;
... :.s
- .n.:: s. . .
l
,v, -
/ ',
f D* r. ...L. .
(..;&
, rL 1,.
. % & w ,. . . y :. P '" m? - m, .,
run + ... ;-_
i
@#r-
,/
fr 4L e... . v:,
.. ;# h P _* ^ ' e- *U 3. . e -
, . 41 $
- f. . ,,.
- y Q ' -
s L :UWll.h,,t v, a
x p, s C
3%, . ' -
, .. g ,
dL *c> ,.an . ,
i
- I
'1. Ast.o. -
- l f 'W # t e ' '- e
( ^ '
p : : _ ._: _Q l % SP 7 M r'-,4pe--- y* '9 l g..P'
_ J p. ~
1
. ; .. .. . q 50> ~ q '. j -- j
=
l
.P @ j
(
l
- w .s4 '/ 'd5 M%
. i
^
es 4-e.d T o g 2; M d f an c . r
- +W f~- ;W- - ka f :-
%_ n n,
a _~ w - .n - ~ ~
4.sA_ m cp as p.spzo m yL v a -~pa
-, , e w ,/
\
po, __ / -
]
1 m 'y v.
J g o
2' $s y'w
/
1 l .
f
'd l k -
- w& -
Q% ....nv = s.. 4 2gp l
4 ' ~J2 dea..--wr u.p + U
% 1 wLgL- Acs L %D mf C
9f h ecfw w.c ,%t, g o . . . -
w- 9 _
+ -
- &g A g A m-- Q t LCCP sn J ~. e9 ~ ~ '. , ye csu h J - ~T%
,C chQC) t w L fl k
~/w Mir a L m = n ~ cL ' ^ '
_~
f ,i aA
.= a. 2, a n a qq -
-m) .
0 sLs
( - se ., .=
xD,4 -m .a -
en
. &m ~ - /
- s. ~
V ' - =B '9~
J1 . EL~
~
l
~vs:m W5 u.-
xnmy [w #&,
c.s. L uz- .
~
mj>.w. [' w s2 _
~
m & Je m
~
R 4.),: _ w r OD ds L co f3,a '
~
\ -
n i .
.~ . % _ _ ~ J ' ~
~ ,% . . QQ v u G 3 ;,r.
Wc._.. & % PM %~ yh, afe y rMC f --
rQ IV A : ' L L . e.o.aLu. e A 'O / W MM A b - s ev_, z M4 b Le - a L w '
z.' _ ;
,3 - A %
k A.- Me A
_ M a:> - ud s (' ~#% -
O- '
E ;--- E
<. e s % ]~ m" ,,
A-
)
}%
.A, , ,a er s a
..y g -%
- 8* %
v .-
~
f a: -
SAP 5 - / W lX d ;
1
~
SJ o rhr n -- , T e l (l % .
- c-v- # c3- .l
@ $ a- - - Q 3 e_-_L lL
~
y --gA Q j'
-a .
m&- - .
q
% -_ /NI -L .,
w/ c--K- -
&.* . .v. n>z_
._- (~ -i T r1L I y r- . I
-3 --_
<M's lgw a% w $ D.-
% wrS. m o ,
l <. g r,- a 3' & w M. '
a L. ;
. . v . -e c ;
k O n.,E d u c ,.
- iw , -
pas J g '
LTe&r-.r<e c t-' i'&_ &r4 Q .w c=2d.,.--- In ,.4 w c 4- 65
.,q cm - - -
p- .
g J
ars 5%a, -
r i gQ4 -
W
- y. ,Aw$s .
'A p_ck -- _ --t , % 7 u, :
- 6. 'n ,
l no_ren
% w a.' Am r-a sD . c&.k4*A
+-
A. -
~-
a .9 n -
P T5 'M 4 1 '
21,~,.~. nL A D<> * ' '
e Le .
w .' i ~4 x 5. e. .
pts- J.
.YlL
~ ~.x ,5&s . S; ,.
r)~?r L .
Re &
- <-. 1 c.a m a f wEJun' jyP 9"%$ _
u M .
IL '
s 4 sg #r -
na sm , '
O .. M s. <.
. { l
-gr ~n - sem1,7
._ . _g- . . .k pL -x= - '
l t=r _ A %e/- .;
- & &.A., J* >~
h L Dh, ' A h 5
< T~~
Pz
- a s , 2:d_a na ~s<wscue r+ J _
-= - - - -
.]
g i
1
- /2asC. : , :p /
_ .G
-r-
.x5 ,
J( a v,a_ x L p>- %y ad yr....- ... ~. .
WK-1 s 7 /
/
G) Res % ;
i 5 & _7t~..._z!<#~
'ch lM- i C _v #
L.. & M L' - M &_ .
cvt h 6-z p
~
g+cgeL c@ eer - Mr M
f -. d ___. .t ,
g .
,f-Y & a a.-
- /* &R I_* r '/ 1 coe p T ef - i 1
'l ff L .:... cA :--. --
- a A e _. - 's A pm :
-f ye _ . 1 .
Y' ,
rcer-c/JWy $ 'A n a y& s>z>w Sn l
i c 4 Kf 53#,- - !
q: p-y --
- g j c[*
':=i.
u ,
- x-*
[. *d - O . ~J %
r l
a, !
.? -
l 1 l
'Y ~/ , O d t d I.
~
l j
l - . .
. . - - A- q , - --- - -
I
.. . n en Mue p...(. g-T~
a w f' l 1.. ; --f3 4 ,
3- %._ P l
- . 9-. -m- 1 wolt add X C. .
J
~ 3ogepyr+
a -
1 J
dq oxA,jaWW '
/
33ly_-g s g 1 g
s n(p. e . ,- yg g:
e . MDQ-r:%
d ,V,y T & & m f_ ,6 as ; aC Ar j B a dL. a3Tet g/ 6 . M d' < L. JL.a -
7
&~ K.-
y_:: Q (_
l ~
~
, z 1
-f'o- _ _,_LJJ e. ,
/
EHk l
\
- M. f
, M..
cz)
A_+ -
.. # _-j W: wym 1
~~
% & dt M C__,(M !
x de ~t s ; h. ss ps v
- c V.
t JLv av ,
f 4x u _m.. _L . fY, T 4~
.~
S
' \
i
~ ~
r1 -
3 J- !
J? :-- 4Aw l l d
e-
-nD
-9 --
/ 1 , j l
LP- A -
6Ks P-_- -
M - vA Jyn-w ,,_
s u n ch m A p
"~ 7 ".', #M a r..vu6.
T A c
/
wm .
k n m Tve+.lh' e MMl v/ m _
C ._
- un G :n 5MWw i .
) ..
- CD J M'"
2.wyR ~ser 9 p..
- :, wp An . ,
4, J < w &L n 4 MM.
= v D .bY m ,ga n 1 F43 'u 1
s l
~
l , i t i M,a. . - . . . M %=-
i
~
L a?- K---- s '- h m. . A9 ch -
_ . , . kb $ - ,.
[ T I
- h*A. [W- l
! TdFt s. * .
AMXh
. _ _ . ! ce.At -
R_A L . . v. .
. ,p.pp &M.
& as --
j
-i
- M e l'e-a rc s(/. s .{ .. ._.D - -
tr A ~+ . s G u ss -
/L.=S r,;. c_ . . _ _ .
- 4 1 queuitw u h =- A . A M, l l
l '
M , e -.. \
~
- L<r m na M M.
3 y .
}~ W -
~ D
- w. . . ._
aexs ,4
-a e a.
e-
~ u A x/ w y cuyt J
nu.
GJ7 "
-s sa e~ ~
c- 2 ; ,A ui , ..vm
~_m_ ~ ,
wem e--J
, em --
L % nA_.s.x-A - s. A-fut 62 eJoL
- i. K' h m.A
.D. R :
1 I
j M 'if i p
.e
/'r V w e mew a>
ffq A c, 9 f 4 t--
p, l}e.gf' n =44W m__
-2/
M.k me /
YW no
-t 1
I i
e Rt w &_fz# w Ad #
/' . .
3L cA.-2-' f d~P .
O A Js a J R. f . gW . - w e_ j
~4 _
'97< _4 Ym W W . 1
?D34;? ~ m e~Iqa ...
w
. TL u & -c;;,
d# ;
g M 4l ,
~
~ 4c C+ ? fM- rP
, 5J x x M yo n ;
2L LJ '
f w% 9 w r. . ~ #~ ut - f r Y$ $hxY ' '
R~ aA, g >+a. na=.
a -
%6 & v Ls w MS N ' d .) L 6;L A w/_d _. . . e_ n w_ m.0 -du
+4 . a
c mw j
~Q p,C
~
, % gj &
y . - j
-- -e
- t-- A &n <- 1% - l; w- , - -Q: o e- J. Do., W A !
5'n. /b r! -%
SA _exh _ mot l w ., --
1
~-- . ,
%8% ~
l g_ $#cM W _
rr .- - % ti sq ;
.ww.o G !
1
" dIb k k n,, T., - &g wh A y a.-
'% % 's cm '~& .__
4M -
W^N 'R' " ^
i y_ m
w., .
l
(($ '
4 4 %
M m n. A_ ~ n' 1 Y c_ M. A 'm- A .ft i
l O M O^^I-A s cA y C A %fbfR i
~1 n t.
AJS 4 #m ~~ u e m .l y ~ 4@ vu -
l A f ' A ' .- l em te .O -v.R m
I hb +;2.
52]t L V & y W '
u - , ,,u w . 6 kk A -
~~ l
\ s . A.- % e s p~ v. ..
- % N [e = -a_ _ --
S= l n n Lw V -
sM R' R f <rf y - I '
uDen W
--Ed~ - aO<*St 67 LDb/
L8_ !- & .. t w :
- A A# ' # -
, e e 1 b
sp P 3 - Gn .
~ y(' $U-A -
ys ,
.) -
L -. '
+4 Maw,20 e n=
c,+w JP o . np%
s -
// U
- w. -
p0> 4 -
W' .
M3. ?
e b
WW DY%CY- A N 4
1 1
1
, k .: - 68'-
MR. BEVILL: Please sumarize the findings and rece:arendations of the-National Academy of Sciences report " Revitalizing 1:uclear Safety Research". - Please supply a copy of this report to the l.
Subeceittee.
CHAIRMAN ZECH:
With your permission, I will provide a summary for the record and a copy of the complete report to the Subcernittee.
(The information followa:)
l
)
l 1
I
- l. l l- !
l l-i J
l 1
l NAS Recoerendations on NRC Rccearch Program i l
l l
The findings and recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences report ]
" Revitalizing Nuclear Safety Research" are sutraarized en page 4 of the repor* I i
as follCws:
l l
"1. The U.S. goverr; ment should continue to fund research on the safety of concercial pcwer reacters.
- 2. Nevertheless, an increased proportion of the research should be funded and conducted by the industry (utilities, supplier, and vendors) than is i now the case.
- 3. Direct NRC funding of rcrearch should continue.
- 4. The Department of Energy (PCE) and the NEC should encourage more research funded cooperatively with industry and with international partners.
- 5. Universities and other contractors with relevant knowledge and skill should be involved in setting the research agenda. i l
- 6. Ecsearch funded by the NRC should be the product cf competition among the DCE national laboratories, private contractors, and university researchers.
7 The U.S. government should maintain programs of long term and exploratory research and maintain effective nuclear engineering programs of the quality and quantity needed by the country at the university level. If private industry is unwilling or unable to sustain the university programs necessary for producing the trained personnel that the government needs to conduct and effective program cf nuclear safety research, then it is sound public policy for government to do so.
- 8. In principle, the committee believes that internalizing the cost of 1esearch in a regulated industry - such as the electrie utility indust.ry ;
- is desirable, and that ways of accomplishing this should, if ressible, be adopted." I i
i l l
-l
l I l 1 i M8. BEVILL: What is the NRC response to the report?
l CHAIRMAN CECH:
1 On February 24, 1987, the staff paper, SECY 6?-53, was sent to the Connission 1
, i l to report the staff views. A copy of SECY-87-53 has been provided to the l
l Subcommittee. On February 25, the Commission met with a number of members cf the Committee. The Commission is now considering this matter. .
3
)
MR. BEVILL: Describe the specific research activities being done in FY
, 1987 and those proposed for FY 1988 in the area of severe 1
i accident analysis.
CHAIRMAN ZECH:
Our response fccuses on severe accident codes and analyses. Related experimental research for this period is described in SECY 80-369. The i research activity in the area of severe accident analyses for fiscal years l
1987 and 1988 includes the implementation of the two-tier code strategy for source term analyses. The two-tier code strategy is based on qualifying both l highly detailed mechanistic codes .ind faster running, simplificd codes. The !
detailed mechanistic codes enbody the best information available on the phenomena relating to fission product release in transport. These codes are suitable for answering detailed technical questions and evaluating aspects cf the uncertainties. One such application is the question of reacter coolant systen temperatures during high pressure scenarios, to be continued into FY 1988. The simplified codes, on the other hand, will have been calibrated to the detailed analyses, but are suitable for analyses of the type usc-d in NUREG-ll50, i
Development of the detailed in-vessel code MELPROG for FWR analyses will be completed in FY 1987 and for EWR analyses in FY 1968. The improvement of the detailed ex-vessel code CCNTAIN will be continued in the area of high prc,*sure
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _