ML20140H412

Summary of 961107-09 436th ACRS Meeting in Rockville,Md Re Appropriate Action on Items Listed in Attached Agenda. W/Fr Notice,Meeting Schedule & Outline,List of Attendees, Future Agenda & List of Documents Provided to Committee

ML20140H412
Person / Time
Issue date:	01/28/1997
From:	Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
To:	Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
References
ACRS-3038, NUDOCS 9705130122
Download: ML20140H412 (34)

Text

._ _- _ . _ _ . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

g .

Date Issued: 1/28/97 pL:p! -- --

i A

,q H $g.3 -8638

!- !7.

J , . TABLE OF CONTENTS

^ ' l

• j ES OF THE 436TH ACRS MEETING pg7 i NOVEMBER 7-9, 1996 I i '

P. nan l I. Chairman's Renort (Open) . . . . . ........ 1 1

II. Ironesed Rule on Steam Generator Intearity (Open) . 1

} III. Risk-Based Analysis of Reactor Oneratina Ernerience  !

1 (Open) ...................... 3 1

j IV. Revised Source Term for Ooeratina Reactors (Open) . 6  ;

1 j V. Emeroency Plannina for Advanced Raactors (Open) . . 8 4

5 VI. Nitrocen Bubble in the Reactor Coolant System at the

{

Haddam Neck Nuclear Power Plant (Open) ...... 11 t

j VII. Executive Session (Open/ Closed) . . . . ...... 13 A. Reports, Letters and Memoranda '

Plant-Seecific Aeolication of Safety Goals (Report to l

{ Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman, NRC, from T. S. Kress, j

! Chairman, ACRS, dated November 18, 1996) d j

Position on Direction Settina Issue 22 -- Future Role of

' NRC Research (Report to Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman,  !

NRC, from T. S. Kress, Chairman, ACRS, dated November 19, j 1996)

Procesed Rule on Steam Generator Intecrity (Letter to l James M. Taylor, Executive Director for Operations, NRC, i

from T.S. Kress, Chairman, ACRS, dated November 20, 1996) ,

NRC Procrams for Risk-Based Analysis of Reactor Ooeratina Exnerience (Letter to James M. Taylor, Executive jl Director for Operations, NRC, from T. S. Kress, Chairman ~,

i ACRS, dated November 22, 1996)

I Pronosed Final Reculatorv Guide Pertainina to the l Precaration of Petitions for Rulemakina under 10 CFR

, 2.802 (Memorandum to James M. Taylor, Executive Director

for Operations, NRC, from John T. Larkins, Exee.stive i(

Director, ACRS, dated November 18, 1996) -

Consistent with the Committee's. decision, Dr. Larkins informed Mr. F Taylor that the Committee decided not to review the subject regulatory guide. kj Draft Reoorts Related to the Keowee Hydro Station I Emeroency Electrical System Sueolv to the Oconee Nuclear 1200bL  !

9705130122 970128 PDR 3030 ACRS PDR ,,

hg NIQ hD

-ll~if~ - --

__ Ofj .

c.,,11,,e4 3, -

J

- - _ - . . . - _ _ _ _ . . - _ . . - . - . ~ - . . . . - . . . - . . . - . - - - .. . . - -.

s =

{

Station (Mcmgrcndum to Jcmac M. Tcylor, Exscutiva j

Dircctor for Oparations, NRC, from John T. Larkins, Executive Director, ACRS, dated November 18, 1996) -

j Consistent with the Committee's decision, Dr. Larkins informed Mr. Taylor that the Committee decided not to review the subject reports at this time. The Committee,

however, may hear a briefing after the licensee has completed the proposed modifications identified in the 2

subject reports.

I 4

5 APPENDICES i

I. Federal Register. Notice

, II. Meeting Schedule and outline

, III. Attendees 3

IV. Future Agenda and Subcommittee Activities  !

a V. List of Documents Provided to the Committee  !

4 4

?

1 i

i l

4 4

11

,s <s i - MINUTES OF THE FOUS HUNDRED THinTY-SIXTH MEETING OF THE

~

-

• ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS s

NOVEMBER 7-D, 1996 4

ROCKVILLE, UARYLAND I

The 436th meeting of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards was held at Conference Room 2B3, Two White Flint North Lailding, Rockville, Maryland, on Noverber 7-9, 1996. The purpose of this meeting was to discuss and take appropriate action on the items i listed in the attached agenda. A portion of the meeting was closed to discuss information of a personal nature, the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal

privacy. The rest of the meeting was open to public attendance.

There were no written statements nor requests for time to make oral i

statements from members of the public regarding the meeting.

j A transcript of selected portions of the meeting was kept and is  !

l available in the NRC Public Document Room at the Gelman Building, I i 2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. [ Copies of the transcript are available for purchase from Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc., 1323 l

!s Rhode Island Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005.] l l ATTENDEES l

! ACRS Members: Dr. Thomas S. Kress (Chairman), Dr. Robert L. Seale 4

(Vice-Chairman), Dr. George Apostolakis, Mr. John Barton, Dr. Ivan '

] Catton, Dr. Mario H. Fontana. Dr. Don W. Miller, Dr. Dana A.

Powers, and Dr. William J. Shack. [For a list of other attendees, i see Appendix III.]

l l '\

i

] I. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT (Open) l (Note: Dr. John T. Larkins was the Designated Federal Official for i j- this portion of the meeting.) i 4

j Dr. Thomas S. Kress, Committee Chairman, convened the meeting at '

8:30 a.m. and reviewed the schedule for the meeting. He announced  ;

i some minor changes to the timing of certain items on the agenda and i drew the attention of the Members to the speeches vecently given by l Chairman Jackson. [

u i

f i II. PROPOSED RULE ON STEAM GENERATOR INTEGRITY (Ope.n) i i (Note: Mr. N. Dudley was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.)

i Introduction Dr. Robert Seale, Acting Chairman of the Joint Materials &

j Metallurgy and severe Accidents subcommittee, introduced the l l session by noting the scope of the proposed risk-informed,  !

l i

d

s a l

436th ACRS Maathg 2 November 7-9, 1996 j performance-based r;.lemaking and identified the questions that were i expected to be ar:<,wered by the staff and industry. Dr. Seale introduced Dr. Jetam Hopenfeld, who had filed a differing profes-i' sional opinion regarding the voltage-based alternate repair criteria.

j Professional Differina Ooinion Dr. Hopenfeld stated that the assumed induced core melt frequency l with containment bypass should be 10" events per year instead of

the 104 events per year used by the staff. He stated that during j severe accidents steam generator tubes with flaws will fail before

the pressurizer surge line. He stated that uncertainties associat-

! ed with characterizing steam generator tube defects and severe

!- accident phenomena are not sufficiently understood to properly j model tube rupture events. His examples included crack networking

i. of flaws not being adequately determined by nondestructive

examinations, increased heat transfer caused ' by flow through

! multiple tube cracks not. zing included in thermal hydraulic l calculations, and steam jets from tube cracks not being evaluated

as a possible failure mechanism for adjacent tubes.

Dr. Hopenfeld and the Committee Members discussed the technical analyses that supported his conclusions and technical details related to his examples. Dr. Hopenfeld concluded that the staff should document the assumptions and models used to study hidden uncertainties.

NRC Staff Presentation Mr. Jack Strosnider, NRR, presented the objectives of and schedule for the proposed rule and regulatory guide related to steam generator tube integrity. He explained the policy issues related to the flexibility provided by the performance-based approach and i the use of severe accident risk within the regulatory framework.

Mr. Strosnider summarized the attributes and detailed the require-ments of the proposed rule. He explained the deterministic and probabilistic structural integrity performance criteria, and the operational and accident leakage performance criteria. Mr.

Strosnider and the Committee Members discussed whether licensee meth >dologies for determining compliance with the performance criteria should be approved by the staff. They also discussed the risk worth of the proposed rule, calculating fission product deposition in the secondary system, and the effect of human error on calculating core damage frequency caused by steam generator tube ruptures.

Mr. Joseph Donoghue, NRR, presented the basis for the rule and noted that the fundamental objective of the rule is to maintain defense-in-depth with respect to the containment function of the a

436th ACRS Mastigig 3 November 7-9, 1996 tubes. Mr. Donoghue explained that the results of an example analysis indicate a containment bypass frequency above the subsidiary safety goal. He summarized the following different components of the example analysis:

o representative flaw distribution, e event tree quantification, e

e reactor coolant pressure boundary weak points, thermal-hydraulic results, and e tube performance model.

Mr. Donoghue identified the key issues and limitations related to the different components. He explained that if a licensee could not demonstrate that a plant met the initiating event criterion or the conditional tube failure probability criterion, then plant risk would need to be reduced by a combination of plant and procedural modifications. The staff and the Committee Members discussed the effect of enhanced heat transfer due to increased tube leakage, and the possible use of risk limits instead of frequency limits as performance criteria.

Industry Presentation Mr. Richard Pearson, Northern States Power Company, explained that the industry would like a relaxation in the repair limits related to steam generator tubing, but noted that industry considers the proposed regulatory requirements to be onerous. The industry, nevertheless, is cooperating with the staff in an effort to reduce the number of details contained in the proposed rule and regulatory guide. The industry would like the staff to define requirements and let the industry develop procedures for implementing them. The industry would like to address severe accidents in severe accident space and not as part of a regulatory requirement. Mr. Pearson and the Committee Members discussed leaving cracked tubes in service in order to measure crack growth rates, and the staff review of licensee-developed methodologies and alternate repair criteria correlations.

CONCLUSION The Committee issued a letter to the Eu cutive Director for Operations, dated November 20, 1996, on this matter.

III. RISK-BASED ANALYSIS OF REACTOR OPERATING EXPERIENCE

[ Note: Mr. M. Markley was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.)

Dr. Robert Seale, Acting Chairman of the Plant Operations Subcom-mittee, introduced the topic to the Committee. He noted that joint

i a

]

l 436th ACRS Macting 4

. Novambar 7*9, 1996

\ -

i meetings of the Subcommittees on Probabilistic Risk Assessment j

(PRA) and Plant Operations were held on July 17 and October 30, 1996, regarding these matters. He summarized the deliberations of the Subcommittees and introduced Mr. Patrick Baranowsky, Chief, Reliability and Risk Assessment Branch (RRAB), Office for Analysis j and Evaluation of Operational Data (AEOD).

AEOD Presentation l Mr. Patrick Baranowsky led the discussion for the NRC staff.

Messrs. Edward Jordan, Director, AEOD, and Steven Mays, Chief,

! Reactor Risk Assessment Section, RRAB, AEOD, provided supporting i discussion. Mr. Baranowsky gave an overview of the AEOD/RRAB mission and programs, including a discussion of system reliability studies, risk-based performance indicators (PIs) , accident sequence precursor (ASP) studies, and common-cause failures (CCFs). He summarized the background materials provided to the ACRS for

' review, AEOD's role in the NRC PRA Implementation Plan, planned program accomplishments, and expectation for future meetings with the ACRS. ~ Le stated that AEOD was requesting feedback from the i Committee regarding the overall approach and direction of these programs. Significant points made during the presentation include:

e The plan for risk-based analysis of reactor operating experi-ence is based on the practical ability to collect and analyze data, accepted state-of-the-art methods to perform analyses, and rational decomposition of risk. .

i e Current PIs include: automatic scrams while critical, safety system actuations and failures, significant events, the forced outage rate, the equipment forced outage rate per 1,000 critical hours, collective radiation exposure, and cause codes,  !

i l

e The staff has contracted with the accounting firm of Arthur Andersen, Inc. to perform an independent analysis of the NRC Senior Management Meeting (SMM) process to evaluate the development of indicators that can provide a basis for judging l whether a plant should be placed on or dsleted from the "wat chlist" of problem facilities. The scatf noted that the Comnission also requested that this study consider methods to  !

make the SMM process more scrutable.

e candi.iates for risk-based PIs include: initiating event frequency, risk-important system reliability, ASP-type analysis of significant events, and integrated core damage frequency (CDF).

• Objectives of the ASP program include: identifying and ranking risk significance of operational events, determining generic

i ,

436th ACRS Knoting 5 ]

i November 7-9, 1996 i implications of operational events, providing supplemental l i

i snformation on plant-specific performance, providing event

omparisons with PRAs, and providing empirical indications of i (ndustry risk and associated trent'.a.

i e 'rht purpose of the system relirY aity studies is to evaluate j

reliability and provide engine. :.ing insights for risk-impor-i tant systems based on operating experience. Objectives .I i include: using actual demands, failures, and unavailabilities j i to estimate reliability; . analyzing trends in reliability; j quantifying uncertainties; comparing findings with published ,

' probabilistic risk assessment / individual plant examination {

(PRA/IPE) values; identifying plant-specific differences; and I l providing engineering insights.

i e The CCF database includes characterization of systems, component types, and f ailure modes. CCF records were screened

! and classified per NUREG/CR-4780, " Procedures for Treating

} Common-Cause Failures in Safety and Reliability Studies," and j were analyzed using alpha factor and Greek Letter methods.

{ Dr. Seale questioned the difference between risk-based and risk-

! informed PIs. The staff stated that'the initiative for risk-based j

PIs was in place before the NRC approach became risk-informed. Mr.

i Barton questioned how "on-line maintenance" was addressed. The l staff stated that PIs were based on operating events and that there

! was not a specific indicator for on-line maintenance. Drs. Kress and Powers offered the view that core damage frequency (CDF) or an integrated CDF indicator might make a good PI.  :

j Mr. Barton questioned whether the maintenance backlog might serve j as.a good indicator. The staff stated that all licensees do not j count backlog in the same way and added that it does not include consideration of risk. The staff also stated that response time is

! important for any indicator and that they hope to get some 2

additional insights from the study being completed by Arthur

! Andersen, Inc. The Committee requested a briefing on the results of this study when available.

Mr. Barton questioned how the staff handles a licensee event report (LER) that may not have been done well. The staff stated that '

their system reliability studies _ evaluate LERs to examine actual demands and failures and compares those results to the experience i estimated in PRA/IPEs. They also stated that the ASP program looks '

- at determining quantitative representations of risk but noted that i sensitivity studies are used for events that are not modeled well or are not modeled at all.

Drs. Seale and Powers questioned the evolutionary nature of the CCF database and associated methodology. In particular, they ques-

. =

l 436th ACRS Macting 6 November 7-4, 1996 tioned whether a more progressive step forward could be made rather

than modifying the existing program. They also questioned the proprietary nature of the information provided by the Institute for Nuclear Fower Operations (INPO) via the Nuclear Power Reliability

. Data System (NPRDS). The staff stated that the CCF database has evolved with incremental gains through access to NPRDS and added that there is m' legal question with regard to the availability of that data for other purposes. The staff also noted that they were i

discussing enhanced data sharing with INPO in lieu of.a possible i reliability data rule. f:everal ACRS Members expressed the view

}

that any information used by the NRC for determining generic CCFs should also be available publicly and that this information could

] be used in plant-specific applications.

I i

At the conclusion of the meeting, the staff requested an ACns letter commenting on AEOD's programs. Dr. Seale summarized his underet.anding of the context of ACRS comments and concerns. He stated that he believed the overall approach and direction was

. appropriate. He also emphasized that any set of indicators should have a risk focus and that the development of the CCF database represented a positive statement with regard to the benefits of NRC '

and industry data sharing.

Conclusion The Committe:e issued a letter the Executive Director for Operations '

i dated November 22, 1996, on these matters.

l  !

. i IV. _REV': SED SOURCE TERM FOR OPERATING REACTORS t

I (Note: Mr. A. Singh was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.]

Introduction The Chairman of the Severe Accidents Subcommittee, Dr. Fontana,

provided the Committee with the following summary of the presenta-l tions made by representatives of the NRC staff, Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), and Entergy Operations, Inc., during the Subcom-i mittee meeting on November 6, 1996. The purpose of the Subcommit-tee meeting was to gather information on the proposed Commission paper concerning the use of NUREG-1465, " Accident Source Terms for Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants," and the approval of license applications using revised source terms at operating reactors.

! Staff Presentation 1

} During the 413th ACRS meeting, September 8-10, 1996, the Committee j discussed the proposed final version of NUREG-1465 and issued a 4

i j

1

, 436th ACRS.Maeting 7

No'vember 7-9, 1996 2

i report to NRC Chairman Selin. The report " urged that the risk i

implications be evaluated and consideration be given to allowing

{ current licensees the option of using the timing assumptions in a l proposed source term without performing a complete source term

! reanalysis." The report also stated that the Committee believed i that using realistic scarce terms could reduce operational plant risk.

{

4

! On November 15, 1995, NEI submitted EPRI report TR-105909, " Generic 1

Framework for Application of Revised Accident Source Term for j Operating Plants" to the NRC for review. ,

j submitted licensing amendment requests, Four licensees have which the staff is

reviewing as part of a pilot program.

J l

In a Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) of July 2,1996, the staff j was requested to return to the Commission for guidance as it i proceeded, and not to proceed down a path of de-facto exemptione if  ;

rule changes were necessary. In response to the SRM, the staff j

prepared a proposed Commission Paper that responded to the NEI

, Generic Framework Document. The NRC stated that the proposed plant l changes were classified into four groups: allowable leak rate changes, isolation valve timing changes, filtration unit simplifi-l cation, and mitigation system actuation timing.

1 The staff focused its review on the following four fundamental i principles described in the NEI Generic Framework Document:

1 l e Continued use of the existing licensing basis is acceptable j for operating plants.

)

l 'e The complete implementation of a new source term as a substi-l tute for the existing licensing-basis is acceptable.

1

e The selective implementation of the revised source term is j acceptable for timing applications only.

, e The dose calculations using the limits in 10 CFR Part 100 and l current licensing-basis methods are acceptable for revised i source term applications.

j e The staff determined that a mandatory backfit of the revised source term at operating plants is not required.

e The staff believes that the integrated impact on a plant as a result of implementing the revised source term needs to be

assessed.

', The views of the staff and the industry have converged since the early draf t of the proposed Commission paper. The staff now agrees j that rulemaking may not be necessary.

l j

l j

i

f.

a i 436th ACRS Jiasting 8

, November 7-9,-1996 i . .

)

l Ms. Sheri Mahoney, Entergy Operations, Inc., commented on the

! proposed Commission paper and requested that the ACRS endorse early 1

implementation of the revised source term through 10 CFR 50.59.

i Mr. Kurt Cozens, NEI, presented NEI's position on implementing the revised source term. The NEI approach would be to perfonn parallel

calculations for Part 100 using a new source term, but following j Part 100 requirements.

i i

i Conclusion j This Subcommittee Chairman's Summary was for information only.

j i V. EMERGENCY PLANNING FOR ADVANCED REACTORS t

[ Note: Dr. M. El-Zeftawy was the Designated Federal Official for j this portion of the meeting.)

Dr. Seale stated that the purpose of this session was to hear a briefing by the NRC staff and NEI representatives regarding a simplified approach to emergency planning for advanced reactors.

NRC Staff Presentation Mr. J. O'Brien, NRR, stated that in an SRM dated July 30, 1993, the Commission requested the staff to " remain open to suggestions to simplify the emergency planning requirements for reactors that are designed with greater safety margins. To that end, the staff should submit to the commission recommendations for proposed technical criteria and methods to use to jur'1fy simplification of existing emergency planning requirements." .To respond to the commission's request, the staff prepared a working paper that summarizes the staff's evaluation of technical criteria and methods, which could be used to justify the simplification of emergency preparedness for reactors with greater safety margins.

The staff, however, informed the Commission that because design certification of advanced reactors (PRISM, MHTGR, PIUS, and CANDU) was not being pursued and adequate design and risk assessment information was not available, the staff had changed its focus to concentrate on the passive and evolutionary designs. The staff's recommendations were as follows:

e Emergency planning (EP) should be maintained as an essential element in NRC's defense-in-depth philosophy.

e The rationale for EP requirements for advanced plants should be the same sa for current plants and the technical criteria derived from that rationale should be the same; i.e.,

1

)

e. "*

I -

436th ACRS,Manting 9 i

November 7-9, 1996 the emergency planning zone (EPZ) should encompass those areas where the projected dose from design basis acci-l dents could exceed the protective action guidelines (PAGs);

the EPZ should encompass those areas where consequences of less severe core melt accidents could exceed EPA /PAGs; the EPZ should be of sufficient size to provide for i

substantial reduction in early severe health effects in j the event of the more severe core melt accidents; i

detailed planning within the EPZ was expected to provide

) a substantial base for an ad hoc expansion of response

, efforts in the event that this was necessary.

, o Probability considerations can be used to set reasonable

bounds on the planning effort. Simplification of EP require-5 ments for advanced reactors may be warranted due to the j increased safety margins for these designs. One potential

change that may be appropriate is implementation of a graded emergency response, where the notification requirements for the population beyond a certain distance (e.g. 2 or 5 miles )

are relaxed due to the decrease in risk.

e Elimination of accident types from consideration based upon risk analysis is not recommended for the new designs (e.g. the ABWR) because of the uncertainty associated with such evalua-tions.

e Probability considerations are useful in setting reasonable bounds on the planning effort, but are not to be used to define specific bounds to the EPZ size.

Mr. O'Brien responded to some previous ACRS questions, as follows:

e Q. What level of risk is being " accepted" for currently operating LWRs with their existing EPZs? A. The size of the EPZ is not based upon a defined risk level but rather on the potential consequences of an accident if one were to occur.

The impact of emergency response actions on estimates of risk was evaluated in NUREG-1150.

e Q. Is this level of " accepted" risk appropriate? If not, what should it be? A. In its safety Goal policy statement, the Commission established goals that broadly defined an acceptable level of risk of electricity generation via nuclear power, and did not define an acceptable risk level for an

i

, a i .

436th ACRS Nacting 10 I November 7-9, 1996 i

'ndividual plant. Policy issues regarding use of risk information are under consideration.

l e Q. For advanced plant designs, what would be the size of the EPZ based on a level of risk comparable to the " accepted"

value? What are the implications of this reault? A. The (

emergency planning requirements, including the size of the '

i" EPZs, are based not on risk of an accident but rather on the potential consequences of an accident (philosophy of defenna-in-depth). In addition, the implications of a low calculated risk of severe accidents for future plants are being consid-ered in developing the new 10 CFR Part 100 siting criteria.

Mr. Ron Simard, NEI,. briefed the Committee regarding the industry's views of the basis of emergency response planning appropriate to advnnced reactor designs. 'He stated that emergency planning prcvides defense-in-depth (i.e. , accident prevention, mitigation to minimize releases, and planning to limit the consequences of a l release). The EPZ is the area for which prompt and effective action can be taken to protect the public. The PAGs define how much of a potential exposure warrants proteccive action (one rem for the actual or projected duration of the release).

The bases for determining the size of the EPZ are as follows: .

I e 10 miles for current LWRs, less for smaller reactors and gas {

cooled designs. (PAGs would not be exceeded outside the zone l for design-basis accidents and for most core melt sequences);

e less than 10 miles for advanced reactors because the size of the potential release (source term) is reduced, the probabili-ty of a release is reduced, and the delay time before release is increased; and e current ALWR designs based on the Utility Requirements Guideline is dose at 0.5 miles less than one Rem for 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.

There are three areas in the emergency planning concept: the Reactor area, the Response area, and tha Awareness area. The Response area is that area close to the plant within which there should be provisions for prompt notification and protective actions. The size is determined by dose at the boundary and the capability for rapid response. The response area will have a complete set of planning actions similar to existing emergency response plans. The licensee is responsible for planning, prompt notification, radiological analysis, etc. The awareness area is that area, beyond the Response area, within which the radiological effects (if any) would be small and would take place over a longer time frame. The size and shape of this area would be based on f actors other than dose (site characteristics, capability of local

f 4

436th ACRS baeting 11 November 7-9, 1996 governments to respond to industrial emergencies) . The planning addresses actions over a longer time frame (e.g. a day or longer) .

The offsite agencies are responsible for planning, implementation with support from the licensee (e.g., dose assessment, field menitoring, radiological training) .

1 CONCLUSION j This briefing was for information only.

VI.

NITROGEN BUBBLE IN THE REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM AT THE HAD M ECK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT i [ Note: Mr. P. Boehnert was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.]

Subcommittee Chairman's Comments 4

Mr. John Barton, Chairman of the Plant Operations Subcommittee, introduced this topic to the Committee. He noted that the purpose of this discussion was for the ACRS to be briefed on the results of the NRC Augmented Investigation Team (AIT) investigation of the August 28, 1996 event at the Haddam Neck Nuclear Power Plant. As a result of this event, a large nitrogen bubble formed in the head l of the reactor vessel.

In describing the event, Mr. Barton stated that the safety signifi-

cance of the nitrogen intrusion into the RCS was the potential for

, loss of deccy heat removal via the residual heat removel (RHR) 2 system. Further, the event could have complicated the restoration of decay heat removal via the steam generators as well. He also stated that NRR has drafted an NRC Information Notice to address j the generic implications of this event.

4 l Finally, Mr. Barton said the NRC staff would provide the details of the event and discuss its generic implications. He also noted the presence of two representatives of the Haddam Neck licensee and said that they were welcome to comment as they deemed necessary, and could respond to any questions from the Committee.

l NRC Presentation Mr. Jim Trapp, Region I, briefed the Committee on the results of i the AIT investigation of the Haddam Neck plant event and related incidents that resulted in challenges to decay heat removal. Key points of his brief included:

• The AIT investigated three major aspects of the event: the undetected accumulation of nitrogen gas in the vessel head,

j .

• 1

! 436th ACRS.Macting 12 J

November 7-9, 1996 I l l two inadvertent diversions of reactor coolant system invento- 1 ry, and, equipment failures in the decay heat removal system.  !

e Regarding the gas intrusion: due to an inadvertent opening of

a valve, nitr> gen gas began leaking into the RCS (the valve did not fully resent upon its closure). The gas leakage continued over the next four days, resulting in the formation

{ of a bubble in the vessel head that depressed the water level

.about 3.5 feet bel ~w o the vessel flange. .Due to a combination of a lack of available instrumentation for direct measurement l

! of the vessel level (the RVLIS and core thermocouples were  ;

j disconnected for refueling), and an inadequate backup level '

indicator (which resulted in only the pressurizer level being

' available), the operators did not detect the bubble growth in a timely manner. The event was terminated as a result of an t

investigation to determine the source of excessive nitrogen use.

} e Regarding the other two major aspects investigated: (1) as a result of plant operator errors, water (500 and 300 gallons) was diverted from the RCS on two separate occasions; (2) subsequent to the discovery of a leaking valve in the "A-train" RHR heat exchanger, the "B-train" RHR pump was found to

! be seized.

e The above sequence of events, if not halted in time, could 5 i have resulted in loss of the RHR pump (via cavitation). '

Complications arising from the existence of the gas bubble may  ;

i j

have prevented timely restoration of decay beat removal capability.

e The licensee was slow to both effect timely recovery from the j

above sequence of events and to realize the associated safety 4

implications.

i e A number of contributing causes cited by the AIT included:

i lack of a questioning attitude, poor decision-making, poor

! equipment condition / lack of adequate instrumentation, poor procedures, inadequate training, and inappropriate planning l and scheduling.

1 i e The NRC issued an Information Notice regarding this event, and j

additional generic action is under consideration.

i Mr. P. L'Heureux (Yankee Atomic Electric), who led the licensee's incident response team, made some comments in response to the staff i presentation. He noted that while nitrogen use was logged every

! eight hours, no trending was done. Also, several other activities

} which made use of nitrogen were underway, thus masking the leakage.

The valve that leaked nitrogen had not been used in the history of 9

I i

l s e l

I i

436th ACRS.Masting 13

~

November 7-9, 1996

}

l the plant (28 years) , so its failure to fully close was seen, in retrospect, as quite likely.

during the event.

Containment integrity was intact Finally, the operators had noticed an upward

' trend in the pressurizer water level and were investigating this 4

anomaly _when the gas leakag into the RCS was discovered.

4 Committee Discussion 1

l Dr. Kress asked if this event has been factored into the Accident Sequence Precursor program. NRR said it will be so evaluated.

l Mr. Barton noted, in summary, that this event contained no i surprises; rather, it points to the need for licensees to exercise increased awareness of plant conditions during shutdown operations.

This will become more of a challenge, as most licensees plan to l

i extend fuel cycles out to 24 months in response to utility deregulation.

i Dr. Powers indicated that the issue of shutdown operation events cries out for use of PRA, which he said is not being applied here.

i He also stated that he intends to ask the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee to investigate this matter. Dr. Miller indicated that the unambiguous measurement of the reactor vessel water level 4

should be considered a critical parameter to be continuously i monitored at all times, similar to the monitoring activities

associated with the core neutron flux.

1 VII. EXECUTIVE SESSION (Open) 1 [ Note: Dr. John T. Larkins was the Designated Federal Official for this portion of the meeting.]

4 A. Reports, Letters, and Memoranda

.i Plant-Soecific Aeolication of Safety Goals (Report to j Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman, NRC, from T. S. Kress,

Chairman, ACRS, dated November 18, 1996)

! Position on Direction Settina Issue 22 - Puture Role of NRC Research (Report to Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman, NRC, from T. S. Kress, Chairman, ACRS, dated November 19, j 1996)

Prooosed Rule on Steam Generator Intecrity (Letter to James M. Taylor, Executive Director for Operations, NRC, from T.S. Kress, Chairman, ACRS, dated November 20, 1996) i.

a' NRC Procrams for Risk-Based Analysis of Reactor Operatina

Exoerience (Letter to James M. Taylor, Executive 3

i

(. . . . - . - . - - . - . . . -

s a 436th ACRS.Masting 14 l

a November 7-9, 1996 t ,

i a

Director for Operations, NRC, from T. S. Kress, Chairman, j ACRS, dated November 22, 1996) i

. Pronosed Final Reculatory Guide Pertainina to- the l Prenaration of Petitions for Rulemakina under 10 CFR )

2.802 (Memorandum to James M. Taylor, Executive Director l for Operations, NRC, from John T. Larkins, Executive

, Director, ACRS, dated November 18, 1996) -

Consistent with the committee's decision, Dr. Larkins informed Mr.

Taylor that the committee decided not to review the 4

' l mubject regulatory guide. I i l

! Draft Renorts Related to the Keowee Hydro Station Emeraency Electrical System Sunolv to the Oconee Nuclear l Station (Memorandum to James M. Taylor, Executive Director for Operations, NRC, from John T. Larkins, Executive Director, ACRS, dated McVember 18, 1996) -

i Consistent with the committee's decision, Dr. Larkins l

informed Mr. Taylor that the Committee decided not to

, review the subject reports at this time. The Committee, i however, may hear a briefing after the licensee has

! completed the proposed modifications identified in the  !

j subject reports.

i

B. Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recommendations

{

i

[ Note: Mr. Sam Duraiswamy was the Designated Federal Official  !

for this portion of the meeting.]

l 7

The Committee discussed the response from the NRC Executive Director for Operations to ACRS comments and recommendations

included in a recent ACRS report

1

EDO letter dated November 1,1996, responding to the ACRS i letter dated October 23, 1996, concerning the Draft i

Update of Standard Review Plan, Chapter 7, "Instrumenta-tion and Controls.".

l The Committee decided that it was satisfied with the EDO response.

s- C. Report on the Meeting of the Planning and Procedures j Subcommittee Held on November 5, 1996 (Open/ Closed)

. The Committee heard a report from Dr. Kress on the Plan-

, ning and Procedures Subcommittee meeting held on November j 5, 1996. The following items were discussed:

i i

l l

.- . ~_. . . . .

i 436th ACRS Masting 15 Novembgr 7-9, 1996

1. ELECTION OF ACRS OFFICERS (Open)

According to the ACRS Bylaws, Members not wishing to hold office for CY 1997 should notify the ACRS Executive Director in writing at least two weeks prior to the election. Since the election is expected to be held on December 6, 1996, the Mem-bers should notify the Executive Director by Novem-ber 22, 1996.

RECOMMENDATION The subcommittee recommended that Members notify the Executive Director in writing if they do not i

wish to hold office for CY 1997.

l

2. COMMENTS ON DIRECTION-SETTING ISSUES (DSIs) BY ACRS l MEMBERS (Open)

ACRS Members who are planning to provide comments on the Commission's Direction Setting Issues (DSI) should provide copies to Dr. El-Zeftawy by Friday, November 8, 1996, so other Members een decide if they want to endorse any of these comments. Com-ments provided by certain Members were distributed to the Members on Thursday, November 7, 1996.

RECOMMENDATION The Subcommittee recommended that any Member who had comments on a DSI give them to Dr. El-Zeftawy immediately.

3. FRN AND PRESS RELEASE TO SOLICIT NEW ACRS MEMBERS (Open)

A Press Release and a Federal Register Notice (pp.

1-4) were issued to solicit candidates for member-ship on the AC9S, with a background in plant opera-tions/ risk and thermal-hydraulics / computational fluid dynamics. The closing date is December 31, 1996.

4. FOLLOW-UP FROM ACRS RETREAT (Open)

R. Savio has drafted a list of conclusions and action items from the ACRS Retreat in Cambridge, MA, during October 17-19, 1996. R. Seale will summarize these at this meeting.

s i t

~'-

436th ACRS.Masting 16 November 7-9, 1996 RECOMMENDATION The Subcommittee recommended that a more detailed report on the Retreat be prepared for the December ACRS meeting.

5. INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES (Open) 1 The Quadripartite Meeting is tentatively scheduled '

for October 20-24, 1997, in the vicinity of Tokyo.

A brief report will be given by R. Summers on her ,

i meeting with Dr. Sumita in Japan.  :

3 RECOMMENDATION the Subcommittee recommended that no action be j taken on the Quadripartite Meeting until a written

proposal was received from Dr. Sumita.

4

6. MEMBERS' ISSUES (Open)

)  !

Dr. George Apostolakis requested approval for travel to Kobe, Japan, on March 3-6, 1997.

d, RECOMMENDATION The Subcommittee recommended that the trip be approved.

7. STATUS OF ACRS APPOINTMENTS (Open/ Closed)

The status of appointments of potential ACRS Mem-bers was discussed.

D. Future Meetina Acenda Appendix IV summarizes the proposed items endorsed by the Committee for the 437th ACRS Meeting, December 5-7, 1996.

The 436th ACRS meeting was adjourned at 2:00 p.m. on Saturday, November 9, 1996.

Y.fM.V M@~" [QQQy.\ s

~;.

I

~

Fahret madeur / viksi no 3s /Tilder ocishetzadinar9ewed su l 'annarised in NASA's meet ler mianism and to develop a set of criteria header,Novem=h== 7, tees i Bos of i'-- ^and under which the performana of the

..AW epproesl. #

• NSRRC could be evaluated in the f ature; 8 am. W Opening Remaats j ron puntNER BWWWIA11EN (2) to discuse the roles of the NSRRC l Bessie B. Berry. NASA . and the Advisory Commdttee for Raar.hw (Open)--h AQts matren== will i

(202) 356-1368. Saloguards (ACRS) to determine the make opening remarks regarding

! a"./ ' conduct of the meeting and comuneet Repeats areas of ===r= intemet of the two emmittees; and (3) to diar == potential ihms of cent l T/fle: NASA S,tfety Asparting System overlap of on1 stag activities of the interen. eis session, se

! (NSRS). ACRS andNSRRC ra==ittee and

'"""i u*8 08Cu88 Prk ide for

OMB t&mber

2700-0063. coordinah theos activities to ensure that PNPandon d ACRS mpets.

1 ofMew3v'=== ion. anos of joint interest are supportive and 4:45 a.m.-20:45 am.: Proposed Rule on and Uree: Forms willbe used by ocephmenkry and ad JWMs Shess: Generefor M P and contractor stase peronits, a di===ia= will be l (Openbh Comunittee wiH bear i con 8 den report to an independent inidated on es som Malal puentations by and hold discuesias egent any mnemens or hazards e W mainMby se with mpmenemim of the NRC staff.

} E *s N d M maE NihEmergyInstitute(NEI) and pertaining to any NASA program or project. Participants in parte of the di==da. Electric Power Research Instituse (EPRI)

} Affected Ptabuc Individuals or willinclude senior NRC staff and other regarding the proposed rule on steam

,_ households, Bushia== or other im.pmat. RES *=ehalent staff as ====== y gesetorintegrity and anwated l Fedem! Government. Ma-l=== of the public may Ble i 73-sad-.a wma-orR-P-d- : weten -a._.. reg.rdag ., ma r ,a,,,c,,e,s. ae a,,,g*u i

• to be discussed a b moedag. Membere

? Reeponnen PerRespondent:- 1.

"""'ad Annual Responeer:19. of the public may also make requests to 11 Man ~12:15PA

• Risk. Based

! speak a the meeting, but permi==la= to Analysis ofReactor Opemtfng

Estimahd Hours Per Request

.25. Experiosos Estimated AnnualBurden Hours:19.

speak wiH be douradnedby se

re==uviim chairpene b & - (Opubh revilhD W i with proemdune established by the c. ^"- by,and hold discussions

{ Deend + a w 1a,tosa, en==ittee. A verbatim L=- W with repr====*= elves of the NRC staff InsesII 5. IIce, will be made of the NSRRC meding and % the staf ectivities associated j Diesesar UtM D M eios. a copy of the transcript will be pleoed , with risk. based amaipis of reactor j 't Doc. marsee md 10-24-es; a:45 am! fa the NRC's Public Document Roomsin OPereting --- : " -- arr4d=nt sequena -

Asm ones vowei-as Washington, DC. frogress, f risk.

l 1 Any inquiries regarding this nodes or ,g,[,,,,,,,,, *

! NUCLEAR REGULATORY 88d of 588ti88 887 industry will participate, as appropriate.

} .

COtAA8800N made to the Designated Federal OfBeer,

• Dr. Jose 1.uis M. Cortes (W'= =. 301 2:25 pm.-J:25 pm.: Revised Source Nucieer W M h 415-6598), between 8:15 am and 5:00 TomsfwW Reactore Comtd#se pm. (Open)-N Committee will hear AotDecy: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Desed at m Maryland h 2th Pmeentations by and hold discussions

of October,1 sea. with spresentatim dthe NRC staH, i Acnoes

Notice of meeting NEI. and Entergy , Inc.,

%% r.,,,,m regarding the use o revised source term N Nuclear Safety Research Review Andrew !. 5eese, for operating plants and the NRC staff's Committee (NSRRC) will hold its next rederal Adrfoory Commitese Managenwnt approach for mviewing meeting on November 14-15,1996. & Oscar a one for license amendments.

location of the meetigwiB be in Room (FR Doc. 96-27412 Fund 10-24-96; 8:45 em] ' interested partien will T-10A1 Two White Fnas es,g, case ,,,,,,,.o participate, as appropriate.

(TWFN) Building,115 Pike, gacyygy,' yp ag ,gg 3:30 pm.-4:30 p.m.:Emensency 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. and Committee on Reactor PlanidngfwAdmandReston from 9:30 a.m. to 5:30 .en the 15th- Safeguards; hose 6ng Notice (Open)-b em==ittee will hear The meeting will be la pressatetions by and hold discussions accordance with the requir===nta of the In ecmrdanm with the purposes of with representatives of the NRC staff Federal Advisory Committee Act Sections 29 and 182b. of b Atomic regarding a simpli8ed approach to (FACA) and wm be to public Energy Act (42 U.S.C. 2039,2232b), the emergency planning for advanmd attendance. N N rovides advic* Advisory Committee on Rasctor reactors.

to the Director of the a of Nuclear Safeguards will hold a meeting on Repmentatim of the neleer Regulatory Research (RES) on matters of Novocaber 7-9.1996,in Conference industry will participate, as appropriate.

qverall nicna ment importana in the Room T-2B3,11545 Rockville Pike, 4:30 p.m.-7:00 pm.:Prepomtion of irocuon of a program d Rockville Maryland. b date of this ACRS Reporte sclear m meeting was previously published in (OpenHN Comadttee MH discuss sv e the value and contributions of ee FM Wer donday* proposed ACRS reports on matters ths NSRRC in carrying out the NRC's homnk 27. M5 (60 m 58393). considered during this meeting as well

y

y ..

j 55328 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 308 / Friday, October 35, 1996 / Notices

as a proposed wport au plant-spec 18c 2mpm 7

00pm:Preparution of clearly unwarranted invasion of

• PPlicatim M Safety Coals. ACRS Reports personal privacy per 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(6).

(OpenHb rammittee wiu mutinue Further information regarding topia l a Friday, Nevennbar 8, teos 4

its discussion of b proposed ACRS to be diama==i whether the meetin 82 m.-8J5 am: Opening Remarks to ris on matters considered during has been cancelled or reacheduled, t e ,

]

by the ACRS Cho ruman th as won as a proposed Chairman's ruling on requests for the (Open)--he ACRS Chairman will report on t-sped 6c appucation of Opportunity to pmeent oral statements make opening remarks regarding Safety ,

and the time allotted thmfor can be i condu-t of the meeting otsalnad by contacting Mr. Sam

Saturday, Nomsber e, toes Durmiswamy Chief. Nuclear Reactort

1. "" #"" Branch (telephone 301/415-7364),

3 830 a.m.-1200 pa:Prwparation of ACRS Reports between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. EDT.

(Openkb Cammittee wtB discuss (Open)--ne e nmminee win outinue AGS meadng notims, meeting recommendations of b Planning and ,and letter reports am now Procedures Suhmmmittee regarding discussion d posed ACRS mpats on aval en orld from the "NRC matters mesi during & meeting MAIN Did h items proposed for consideration by the ** **U ' Patm -

j full Committee during future meetings. number to d is (600) 303-9672

,p , p d or Ap.fedwald. bee documents and 9:00 a m.-#:15 cm.: Reconcillation of I## P*~1M PM.: Strategic Plannity the meeting agenda are also avnilable for ACRS Comments and Recommendations (Open)- no anmittee r will continue downloading or reviewing on the m d The Canmittee will a-g, CRS rebaselining of the rammittee acdvities Dated: October 22, tees.

i Director for Opmedes (EDO) m for FY 97.

• Andrew 1. Besse, commants and recommendations urm fw the caduct d and included in roosht ACRS & disory Comaurs= Manosement Officer.

o A3S mesdags (FR Doc. es-27413 Filed 1o-24-96: a 45 aml i EDOroe are be p

.Provid in writing to the ACRS prior * * * * " ' "

October 1,1996 (61 FR 51310). In moedng. errardance with these procedums, oral 9:25 am #:45 ca: Report of the or written statements may be presented N Planning andPmeedures Subcommittee by membes of the public, electronic

. (Open/Cloemd)- h c.-minna wilj remrdings will be permitted only hear a report of the Planning and during the open partions of the meeting, (ReL No.lC-atatt; Stt-10ttS)

,, gg o the m i Net W h het and

<=4 = a*- ; and sta5. Persons desiring leke Securtees LP4 Notice of business, and organisational and N personnel matters relating to ACRS. 2 make mal stataments should notify A portion of this session may be Mr. Sam Duraiswamy. Odef. Nuclear October 21, toes.

closed to discuss organizational and Reactors Branch, at least 8ve days AGENCY: Securities and Exchange personnel matters that relate solely to before the meeting,if possible, so that enmmianian ("SEC"). l b internal personnel rubas and appropriate arrangenents can be made to aHow the nammaa7 time during the Acmoet: Notice of APPl ication for

practims of this Adviacry Committee *X8mPdon under the invmtment and matters the mieses of whidt wouId muting for such statements. Use of still, Company Act of 1940 (the Act,,).

constitute a clearly unwarrented motion pictum, and television amores invasion of personal privacy. during this meeting may be limited to APPucANTs* Fint Tmst Specid ao seting as Situations Trust and Nike Securities 20:00 am-!2:00 ca.: Nitrogen Dub 6de [etermined by "

in the Raoctor Coolant System at the Informatica regarding b time to be at asLEVAart ACT sIKmoses: Order requested Naddam Neck NuclearPbeerPfant aside for this be obtained "" C" (Open)-b rammin ee wiu heni by contacting the Chiebthe Nuclear "g,,,*I*

, d) li) d prewntations by and hold discussions Reactors Banch prior to the meeting. In the Act' with representatives of the NRC stag view of the possibility that b schedule regarding the Sadings and for ACRS meetings may be adjusted byS, , suemeAny 0F APPucA110se: Applicants recommendations of the Augmented the Chairman as nammaary to fedlitau ' ' request an order that would permit ewies d the Tmst (mch a "Seras" w inspection Team which investigated b the moduct of the meeting, perscas ,'T st 3 wies L 2 o5e units m the August 28,1996 event at the Haddam Pl anning to attend should check with Neck Nuclear Power Plant that involved the Chief of the Nuclear Ranctors Branch 1.5% sales loedPublic with limitation a sales load that of section creation of a nitrogen bubble in b if such reacheduling would result in major inconvenience. 12(d)(1)(F)(il)of the Act.

ructor coolant system.

Representatives of the licenseew' ill In accordance with Snbartion 10(d) PIUNG DATE:The appIlcation was $ led participats, as appropriate. P.1,92-463, I have determined that it is a June 24,1996 and amended on normanary to close portions of this September ).1996.

{  !!:00 a.m.-22Jo pm: Annual ACRS meeting noted above to discuss matters teAmese en nDTIFlcATION OF HEAmm0: An Repat to Congmes that relate eolely to the internal order the application will be (Open)--%e Committwo will discuss personnel rules and practices of this ise un$ses b SEC orders a bearing.

l ,

the format and content of b annual Advisory Comndttu pw 5 U.S.C. Interested persons may request a ACRS toport to Congress on the NRC 552b(c)(2), and to discuss matters the hearing by writing to the SEC's Safety Research Program release of which would constitute a Secretary and serving applicants with a x

i s '* .

APPENDIX 11 l

1

1. o UNITED STATES 8 ,g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMlmslON e 5 ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS WASHlHCTON, D. C. 20666 Y

%,*****4 October 21, 1996 SCHEDULE AND OUTLINE FOR DISCUSSION 436th ACRS MEETING NOVEMBER 7-9, 1996 l

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1996. CONFERENCE ROOM 2B3, 'I1tO WHITE FLINT NORTH, I ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND l

./ 1

1) 8:30 -

8:45 A.M. Openino Remarks by the ACRS Chairman (Open) 1.1) Opening Statement (TSK/SD) 1.2) Items of current interest (TSK/JTL/SD) l 1.3) Priorities for preparation of ACRS  ;

reports (TSK/SD) 1 T

2) 8:45 - 10:45 A.M. Procosed Rule on Steam Generator Intecrity (Open) (RLS/NFD) i 2.1) Remarks by the Acting Subcommittee Chairman 2.2) Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff, Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI),

and Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) regarding the proposed rule l on steam generator integrity and an associated regulatory guide.

Other interested parties will participate, as appropriate. l i3 l 10: 5- 11:94 A.M. BREAK l l

13 /

3) 11:00 - 12:JS M P.M. Risk-Based Analysis of Reactor Operatino Excerience (Open) (GA/MTM) 3.1) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman 3.2) Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff regarding the staff activities associated with risk-based analysis of reactor operating e::perience, accident sequence precursor program, development of risk-based performance indicators, and related matters.  !

Representatives of the nuclear industry will participate, as appropriate.

h T w 'x ti m / M n " " '

' * * N

.. _._.___._ _ _ _ _ . . . _ . . _ . _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _._._--.__._..m__;

i ..

i

] - e  :

2

> 25 30 t

12:M - 1:35 P.M. LUNCH Jo 2: 03 / '

, 4) 1:13 - 3TTE P.M. Revised Source Term for Ooeratino Reactors (Open) (MHF/AS) i, 4.1) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman

i. 4.2) Briefing by and discussions with

representatives of the NRC staff, i NEI, and Entergy Operations Inc., '

i regarding the use of revised source j term for operating plants and the NRC i staff's proposed approach for review- ,

, ing applications for license amend-ments.

l

. Other interested parties will participate, 1, ,as appropriate,

! .L : 03 . 3 o o P. h . AcRS Re po c+c I 3:15 - 3 : 34 P .M . BREAK oo 2v i /

5) 3:$8- 4:30 P.M. Emercency Planninc for Advanced Reactors i j (Open) (RLS/MME)

]' 5.1) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman ,

5.2) Briefing by and discussions with  !

I representatives of the NRC staff I

regarding a simplified approach to

emergency planning for advanced i

!. reactors.

Representatives of the nuclear industry will sparticipate, as appropriate.

1.

j W Jo - 4 ;SD P M. r3Ren 4

6). 4:16 -

50 2:00 P . M ., Precaration of ACRS Recorts (Open) 4 6:v0 Discussion of proposed ACRS reports on:

6.1) Proposed Rule on Steam Generator i Integrity and an associated Regulatory Guide (RLS/NFD) 6.2) Risk-Based Analysis of Reactor Operating Experience (GA/MTM) 6.3) Revised Source Term for Operating i Reactors (MHF/AS).

6.4) Plant-Specific Application of Safety Goals (TSK/NFD) j

--- . . - . - .- - . - . --~ .__.= . .- . .-

g 6-i

% 9' 3

FRIDAY, NO g ;5R 8, 1996, CONFERENCE ROOM 2B3, TWO WHITE FLINT NORTH, ROCKVILLE, MQtYLAND

7) 8:30 - 8:35 A.M. Openino Remarks by the ACRS Chairman (open) 4 (TSK/SD)

8) 8:35 - 9:00 A.M. Future ACRS Activities (Open) (TSK/SD)

Discussion of the recommendations of the .

Planning and Procedures Subcommittee regarding items proposed for consideration by the full Committee during future meetings.

01

9) 9:00 - 9:FE A.M. Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and j Recommendations (Open) (TSK, et.al./

SD, et.al.)

Discussion of the responses from the NRC l Executive Director for Operations to l comments and recommendations included in i recent ACRS reports. I c2 5o

10) 9 : )E - 9:45 A.M. Report of the Plannino and Procedures Subcommittee (Open/ Closed) (TSK/JTL)

Report of the Planning and Procedures Subcommittee on matters related to .

the conduct of ACRS business, and I organizational and personnel matters relating to the ACRS.

(Note: A portion of this session may  ;

be closed to discuss organizational and personnel matters that relate solely to the internal personnel rules and practices of this Advisory Committee, and matters the release of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.]

50 5~

9:45 - 10:09 A.M. BREAK

11) 10:0h-11:0 A.M. Nitrocen Bubble in the Reactor Coolant System at the Haddam Neck Nuclear Power Plant (Open) (JJB/PAB) 11.1) Remarks by the Subcommittee Chairman h

2 r .

4 i

11.2) Briefing by and discussions with representatives of the NRC staff

' regarding the findings and recommen-dations of the Augmented Inspection Team which investigated the August ,

28, 1996 event at the Haddam Neck '

l Nuclear Power Plant that involved creation of a nitrogen bubble in the

reactor coolant system.

3

Representatives of the licensees will'

j. participate, as appropriate. 1 i 3 cs .

1:2) 11 : 0A - 12 : 30 P . M . Annual ACRS Recort to Concress (Open) '

(RLS/MME)

Discussion of the format and content of the

annual ACRS report to Congress on the NRC  !

l Safety Research Program.

OS 2L 12 : M - 1:30 P.M. LUNCH

l. 12 6:30

!. 13) 1:30 - 7 @C P.M. Precaration of ACRS Recorts (Open) {

(3 : 30-3 : 46 BREAK) Discussion of proposed ACRS reports on:

'C AD 13.1) Proposed Rule on Steam Generator 4 Integrity and an associated )

Regulatory Guide (RLS/NFD) l 13.2) Risk-Based Analysis of Reactor Operating Experience (GA/MTM) 13.3) Revised Source. Term for Operating Reactors (MHF/AS)  ;

i 13.4) Plant-Specific Application of Safety )

4 Goals (TSK/NFD) ,

i i

. SATURDAY, NOvassiER 9, 1996, CGhramENCE-ROOM 2B3, TWO WHITE FLINT NORTH, ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND f

5 4

14) 8:30 - 12:30 P.M. Precaration of ACRS ReDorts (Open)

Continue discussion of proposed ACRS reports  ;

listed under Item 13.

Io: /5- JM30 f H, BREAK

15) 12:30 - 15$b P.M. Stratecic Plannino (Open) (TSK/JTL)

Discussion of items of significant importance to NRC, including rebaselining of the Committee activities for FY 97

o- 'o l

5 NOTE: o Presentation time should not exceed 50 percent of the total l time allocated for a specific item. J The remaining 50 percent i of the time is reserved for discussion. i a Number of copies of the presentation materials to be provided to the ACRS - 35.

l l

I I

I

- - . . . . _ - . .. -.. ~ . ~ . ~ . . - . - . - - . - . . _ - . . . ~ . - - . . . - - - . . . - . ~ . . - . - .

4

4 9a'

... , APPENDIX III: MEETING ATTENDEES i

436TH ACRS MEETING i

NOVEMBER.7-9, 1996

-NRC STAFF. ,

C', Ader RES i- E. Benner NRR 4

R. Borchardt NRR 3

A. Chaffee NRR i T. Collins ~ NRR

S. Dembele NRR K. Desai" NRR c J. Donoghue NRR ,

R. Emch

- NRR l T. Essig NRR l 3 J. Flack NRR E. Goodwin OECB/NRR J. Hayes NRR

!- M. Hart NRR 1: R. Herman NRR )

W. Hodges. RES l

J.-Hopkins NRR l

- A. Huffert NRR

{ J. Hyslop NRR C. Jackson NRR l

! R. Jones NRR I

i. F. Kantor NRR I I A. Levin NRR I l S. Long NRR )

j W. Lyon NRR i T. Martin NRR 4

C. Miller NRR l- J. Mitchell OEDO

! J. Morrison RES

-J. Munroe NRR J. Muscara RES

! J.'O'Brien NRR i K. Parczewski NRR

{ B. Palla NRR

. T. Quay NRR D. Rasmuson AEOD '

T. Reed ~ NRR i J. Ridgely RES '

i C. Rossi AEOD J. Schaperow RES L. Shao NRR

J. Wilson NRR j J. Wilson NRR 4

1 E

-,,,,3- w-- --- m. . -. ,.

4* >a 4

Append 1x III 2 436th ACRS Meeting ATTENDEES FROM OTHER AGENCIES AND GENERAL PUBLIC M. Beaumont Westinghouse C. Callaway NEI T. Cleary Co.1necticut Yankee - Haddam Neck K. Cozens NEI K. Green Scientech

, C. Inelty EPRI

, T. Kevortian FENA P. L'Heureux Connecticut Yankee - Haddam Neck D. Leaver Polestar J. Metcalf Polestar A. Nelson NEI i

R. Pearson NSP  ;

F. Quinn NUS Information Services I R. Simard NEI l C. Smith BGE l T. Zana TEPCO l

1 l

l

. - - - . . .. - - - - .. .-. - .. - - ~ . . . -. .. _. - .

s s is. j

, 1 1

] ,

APPENDIX IV: FUTURE AGENDA ]

The Committee agreed to consider th:. following during the 437th 3 ACRS Meeting, December 5-7, 1996:

1 1) 12:00 -

12:05 P.M. ELECTION OF ACRS OFFICERS (Open) (JTL) 1 A list of members who have withdrawn j their names from being considered as l candidates for ACRS officers is attached 1 (p. 1) . Elections will be held during this meeting.

2) 12:05 -

12:10 P.M. Conflict-of-Interest Procedures (Open)  ;

(SD)

Procedures have been drafted to ensure that members have a consistent policy covering conflict-of-interest requirements during meetings (pp. 2-4).

These procedures have been sent to OCC for review. Members are invited to comment.

3) 12:10 - 12:15 P.M. FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE AND PRESS RELEASE IQ SOLICIT CANDIDATES FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE ACRS (Open) (JTL)

The closing date for applications for appointment to the ACRS has been postponed from December 31, 1996 to January 31, 1997.

4) 12:15 - 12:25 P.M. COMMITTEE ROLE IN REVIEWING GENERIC LETTERS (Open) (SD)

Certain safety-significant generic letters have been approved on an exigent basis without ACRS review (pp. 5-7). The Committee should determine its role in reviewing such letters. The MOU states that any deviation from the MOU should be mutually agreed to by the EDO and the ACRS Executive Director.

5) 12:25 - 12:35 P.M. INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES (Open) (RS)

An email message has been received from Mr. Yamada, of the Science and Technology Agency of Japan (pp. 8-10). The Committee should review the suggested dates, topics for discussion, and sites for a trip visit and indicate a

i} c

_; A)pendix IV 2 418th ACRS Meeting ,

preference for transmittal to Mr. Yamada.

6) 12:35 -' 12:45 P.M. MEETING WITH CHAIRMAN JACKSON AND-ANNOUNCEMENTS (Open) (JTL)

The Executive Director met with Chairman Jackson alone twice and together with Dr.

Apostolakis once since the last 'ACRS '

meeting. He will brief the Committee on these discussions as well as on recent announcements by Chairman. Jackson t regarding the direction of the agency.

7) 12:45 -

12:50 P.M. TIMING OF RESPONSE TO SRM ACTION ITEMS (Open) (SD)  :

A review has been made of Staff Requirements Memoranda over the past 36 months and it has been determined that t the ACRS was not late in responding to '

these action items.

f I' 8) 12:50 - 12:55 P.M. EBITEK! TO EVALUATE ACRS CANDIDATES ,

(Open) (JTL)

i. - The ACRS staff has been asked to draf t  ;

" criteria to determine the eligibility of candidates (principally ex-utility '

officials) for ACRS membership. Mr. Jay Carroll'has been asked to assist in this i effort, which will also be coordinated l with OGC.

9) 12:55 - 1:05 P.M. ASSESSMENT OF TFCHFICAL EXPERTISE OF ACRS MEMBERS (Open) (SD)

The staff has been asked to provide a list of the areas of technical expertise of current ACRS members and an assessment ,

of future needs of the Committee, based on current capabilities, future '

vacancies, and most importantly, the projacted workload and topics for review.  ;

L 10)- 1:05 - 1:15 P.M. NSRRC PARTICIPATION IN ACRS MATTERS (Open) (RPS)  ;

It is anticipated hat the NSRRC and ACRS members will be on occasion attending i ACRS or, in the case of t' ACRS, NERRC  !

l o

b s

-__.m,,m - -e

j' O 'O 4

. Ippendlx IV 3 I j 418th ACRS Meeting  ;

meetings. The . procedures described in i the attachment' (pp. 11-27) are proposed -

and.will be sent to Dr. Morrison as a .

proposal after ACRS comment. l

11) 1":15 - 1:25 P.M. MEMBERS ISSUES Dr. Robert Seale has requested. ACRS support for a titp to France to  !

participate in a review of recent Phebus experiments (see p. 28)

11) 1:25 - 1:45 P.M. FUTURE ACTIVITIES (Open) (SD) I

[See separate handout]

.l l

l

\

I

)

l l

i 1

-l

y 1

- O ' V. 1 i

APPENDIX V

' LIST OF DOCUMENTS PROVIDED TO THE COMMITTEE l_ [ Note: Some documents listed below may have been provided or prepared for Committee use only. These documents must be reviewed prior to release to the public.]

MEETING HANDOUTS AGENDA DOCUMENTS ITEM NO.

1 Ooenino Remarks by the ACRS Chairman

1. Introductory Statement of the ACRS Chairman, dated November 7-9, 1996 [ Handout]

2. Items of Interest (Handout]

3. Notice concerning Jocelyn Mitchell (undated) [ Handout]

4. Email message from Center Network Control, dated November 5, 1996: Firm Time for RES Earthquake Seminar [ Handout]

2 ' Proposed Rule on Steam Generator Intecrity

5. Proposed Steam Generator Integrity Rule: Differing Professional Opinion, dated November 7, 1996, presented by Dr. Joe Hopenfeld, Engineer, RES [Viewgraphs a 1

6. Proposed Steam Generator Rule Making, dated November 7, j 1996, presented by Jack Strosneider and Joe Donoghue, NRR .i

[Viewgraphs] i

7. Proposed Steam Generator Rule: Safety Consideration, dated November 7,1996, presented by Joseph Donoghue, NRR

[Viewgraphs]

8. Industry Perspective, dated November 7, 1996, presented j by Richard Pearson [Viewgraphs]  ;

9. Proposed Rule on Steam Generator Integrity (related documents), November 7, 1996 [ Handout #2.1]

10. Memorandum from J. Hopenfeld, RES, to E. Beckjord, Director, RES, dated September 11, 1992: Addendum to March 27, 1992 Memo Regarding Degraded Steam Generator j Tubes '[ Handout #2.2] )

3 Risk-Based Analysis of Reactor Oceratino Excerience i 11. Risk-Based Analysis of Reactor Operating Experience, l

I

-. . _ . . .. ~ ~ - _ - . . . _ . - - - - - - . - - - . - - - - _ . - - - . - - . - _ _ . . _

' g i s.

l l

. Append 1x IV 2

'436th ACRS Meeting dated November 7, 1996, prosented' by Patrick W. l Baranowsky, AEOD [Viewgraphs)

{

5 Emeroency'Plannina for Advanced Reactors

12. ACRS Briefing on NRC's Evaluation of Technical Criteria and Methods Which could Be Used to Justify Simplification of Emergency' Preparedness for Reactors with Greater Safety Margins, presented by James- O'Brien, NRR

[Viewgraphs)

13. Emergency Response Planning Appropriate to Advanced Reactor Designs, dated Novemoer 7, 1996, presented by Ron Simard, Nuclear Energy Institute [Viewgranhs) 6 Precaration of ACRS Reoorts

14. Direction-Setting Issues (DSIs) : ACRS Members' Comments, authors: Dr. Dana Powers, Dr. Mario Fontana, and Mr. John Barton [ Handout # 6.1) 8 Future ACRS Activities

15. Future ACRS Activities - 437th ACRS Meeting, December 5-7, 1996 [ Handout #8-1]

9 Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recommendations

16. Reconciliation of ACRS Comments and Recommendations

[ Handout #9.1]

10 Reoort of the Plannina and Procedures Subcommittee

17. Fj: Draft Minutes of Planning and Procedures l Subcommittee Meeting - November 5, 1996 [ Handout #10.1]

11 Nitrocen Bubble in the Reactor Coolant System at the Haddam Neck Nuclear Power Plant

18. Haddam Neck: Decay Heat Removal System Challenges, dated I August 28, 1996, presented by James Trapp, Region I

[Viewgraphs)

(

i l

O. o s Appendix IV 3 436th ACRS Meeting MEETING NOTEBOOK CONTENTS

.TAH DOCUMENTS 2 fronosed Rule on Steam Generator Intecrity

. Table of Contents

i. Proposed Agenda

3. Status Report

4. Memorandum from N.Dudley, ACRS Staff Engineer, to ACRS Members: Certification of the Minutes of the ACRS Joint Subcommittee Meeting on Materials & Metallurgy and Severe Accidents, dated July 22, 1996.

5. Memorandum from B. Sheron, NRR, to J. Larkins, ACRS Executive Director: ACRS Review of the Proposed Steam Generator Rule, dated October 25, 1996.

3 Risk-Based Analysis of Reactor Operatina Experience

6. Table of Contents

7. Proposed Schedule

8. Project Status Report

9. Memorandum from M. Markley, ACRS Staff Engineer, to P.

Baranowsky, AEOD: Comments and Questions by Individual ACRS Members for Use by AEOD in Preparing for the Next PRA Subcommittee Meeting, dated October 30, 1996.

j

10. Program Guide f rom S. Mays, RRAB, to C. Rossi, SPD: Risk- j Based Analysis of Reactor Operating Experience, dated i December 15, 1995.

4 Revised Source Term for Operatino Reactors

11. Table of Contents

12. Proposed Schedule

13. Status Report

14. Report from W. Lindblad, ACRS Member, to I. Selin, NRC Chairman: Proposed Final Version of NUREG-1465 " Accident Source Terms for Lightwater Nuclear Power Plants", dated September 20, 1994,

15. Memorandum from J. Taylor, Executive Director for Operations, to S. A. Jackson, NRC Chairman: Use of NUREG-1465 Source Term at Operating Reactors, dated August 9, 1996.

16. Memorandum from J. Hoyle, NRC Secretary, to J. Taylor, Executive Director for Operations: Briefing on Part 100 Final Ru3e on Reactor Site Criteria, dated July 2, 1996.

17. Draft SECY from J. Taylor, Executive Director for Operations, to S. A. Jackson, NRC Chairman: Use of NUREG-1465 Source Term at Operating Reactor.

18. Note from J. Williams, Project Manager, to F. Hebdon, Director, Director, Project Directorate II-3, NRR:

)

.gr. **-

t -

• Appendix IV 4 436th ACRS Meeting Application of New source Term Methodology to Support Increased Main Steam Isolation Valve Leakage at Browns Ferry, dated December 29, 1995

19. Report: Revised Radiological Consequences of Accidents for Indian Point Unit 2 Taking into Account Source Term Methodology from NUREG-1465, dated July 1996.

5 Emeroency Plannino for Advanced Reactors

20. Table of Contents

21. Proposed Sechedule

22. Status Report

23. Memorandum from J. Taylor, Executive Director for Operations, to S. Chilk, Secretary: SECY 93-092 - Issues Pertaining to the Advanced Reactor (Prism MHTGR, and 1 Pius) and Candu 3 Designs and Their Relationship to '

Current Regulatory Requirements, dated July 30, 1993.

24. Letter from T.S. Kress, ACRS Chairman, to I. Selin, NRC i Chairman: Emergency Planning Zones, Protective Action '

Guidelines, and the New Source Terms, dated July 13, 1994.

25. Working Paper: Summary of Staf f's Esaluation of Technical Criteria and Methods Which Could Be Used to Justify Simplification of Emergency Preparedness for Reactor with l Greater Safety Margins, dated October 7, 1996. I i

11 Nitrocen Bubble in the Reactor Coolant System at the Haddam Neck Nuclear Power Plant

26. Table of Contents

27. Presentation Schedule

28. Project Status Report

29. NRC Information Notice 94-36, Supplement 1: Undetected Accumulation of Gas in Reactor Coolant System, dated November 1996.

30. Letter from T. Feigenbaum, Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company, from H. Miller, Region I Of fice : Augmented Inspection Team Report Number 50-213/96-80, dated October 30, 1996.