ML20134D935

Comments on Ofc of Policy Evaluation (Ope) Audit. Appropriate Sections of NRC Manual Will Be Revised & Formal Operating Procedures Will Be Prepared to Carry Out Ope Functions Based on Any New Commission Guidance

ML20134D935
Person / Time
Issue date:	08/15/1983
From:	Zerbe J NRC
To:	Gilinsky, Palladino, Roberts NRC COMMISSION (OCM)
Shared Package
ML20134D918	List: ML20134D914 ML20134D924 ML20134D935
References
NUDOCS 8508190470
Download: ML20134D935 (1)

Text

_ _ _ _ .. _ __ - __ _ _______ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

js l 4f aekyjeg UNITED STATES .

c 3 g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[

Ti pj '

WA SHINGTO N. D. C. 20555

%,[o.c?4}

7j August 15, 1983 MEMORANDUM FOR: Chairman Palladino Comissioner Gilinsky Comissioner Roberts Comissioner Asselstine Ce ss'ener Bernthal FROM: hn

SUBJECT:

~ COMMENTS ON THE AUDIT OF THE OFFICE OF POLICY EVALUATION The-Office of Inspector and Auditor made six recomendations to me concerning

~

the operations of the office. With respect to the first, I am prepared to revise the appropriate sections of the NRC manual and prepare formal operating procedures to carry out OPE's functions based on any new guidance the Comission may give us on our role and functions. I should point out that in the past few months our priorities have been changing as work related to the safety goal and the waste confidence proceeding has been winding down.

~

The office now has more resources to allocate to the review of Comission papers and we are doing so. Moreover, we will continue to respond to Comissioner requests in a timely manner. ,

With' respect to the reccmendation that we prepare an annual operating plan for Comission approval, I am prepared to do this if the Comission so desires and institute a formal record keeping system to accumulate the amount of time spent on the various categories of work as recomended by the auditors. I wonder, however, if such an approach would be of much utility.

We work on those issues which the Ccamission is interested in and our priorities change as the Comission's change. We are aware of the major items of interest in the agency since we assist in the preparation of the

.Comission's annual policy and planning guidance to the staff.

' We are currently improving our filing system and intend to consult with the l Division of Technical Information and Document Control to obtain their advice they mayhave as to what additional records and files OPE should maintain.

As to the recomendation that OPE update its position descriptions, we have already reviewed the non-managerial professional positions with the Division of Organization and Personnel and they are in the process of formally revising them. As to the final recomendation, we will adopt the appropriate work hours policy to be in compliance with Manual Chapter 4136.

cc: J. Cumings, OIA 8508190470 850416 PDR CDMMS NRCC CORRESPONDENCE.PDR

S (

, . N0lflCA110N NO./10 GRANT NO NRt.;G-04-81-001 .

BETWEEN THE AMERICAN NUCLEAR SOCIETY (ANS)

AND l l

THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY CORMISSION 1 A. The purpose of this Modification is to change the grant period in . _ _

Block No. 3 to reflect a six-month no-cost extension.

B. Specifically, of this Grant No. NRC-G-04-81-001: '

l. Block No. 3, Grant Period, is extended by six (6) months from December 31, 1984 through June 30, 1985. . -

C. All other terms and conditions under this Grant remain the same.

D. In witness whereof, the parties have executed this document.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:

Date fA

_2lI f}. By dbG or .

Kdllogg V. liorton, Chief Technical Contracts Eranch Division of Contracts Office of Administration GRANTEE:

J - /

Date February 15, 1985 By 4<,

Title Execut Director American Nuclear Society 3d bh

}D 09 .

PROBABILISTIC ( -

RISK ASSESSMENT  : .'

PROCEDURES GUIDE

_ j A Joi t NRC industry Ef fort 12 Prepare co;4ennes ro' There is no ANS letter dated July 22, 1982 D,$',*/ j " as was noted in Modification No. Four (4).

This was a typographical error. The correct July 15, 1982 date of the letter regarding Modification No. Four (4) is '.21y 15,1902.

Mr. Levi D. Baisden, Contracting Officer Division of Contracts U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Co==ission Washington, D.C. 20555 RE: Grant No. NRC-C-04-81-110

Dear Mr. Baisden:

You vill find enclosed the description of a no-cost extension and c:odification to the above designated grant. The description details two functions to be undertaken:

terms. (1) a PRA review function and (2) a document on radioactive source This extension is for a two year period starting January 1, 1983. Note that we have a previous request on record, dated May 27, 1982, to extend the grant to December 31, 1982.

Cost estimates for the two functions are included. It s'hould be noted that the figure for ANS staff support to itec 2 does not include esticates for editing, typing, copying, collating and distributing draf ts of the docu=ent or tasks re-lated thereto; it is i=possible to estimate the magnitude of this portion of the work at this time.

We look forward to your prompt acceptance of this c:odification.

_ _ . S.incerely, _ l t .

&f/S.'.<fl/l..u././ C Mrs.MarilfnD. Weber ,

Program Administrator MDW:kp cc: O. J. Du Te=ple J. R. Heelan L. M. Muntzing W. R. Stratton

} l : ~ ^ v <. oi . .- : .: a l f i u- t i cr. a s' p ;3 . . : :y ,

ANS' letter dated July 22, 1982.

S.  !;,ecifically, of tnis Grant fio. liRC-G-04-Sl-001: .

1. Block fio. 3, Grar t Period, is e> t<; ded by wo (2) ycars from 7,+cc Ler 31, 19e' ti.r ujt. Dect !.er 31, 1934.

2. Slocl. fio. 9 shall include the wsrk sco;;e c.odificaticr. as proposed by ANS' letter dated July 22, 1982.

-. . e.

C. All o'!er ter.:s hnd conditions under this Gri:nt rer.ain the sh .e. ,

D. Ir. reitr et i v.h-aec,f, the i.h r ties ha.e c-xecu' ed thi s doc., ent.

e:.i:EL t . AHS OF A".' FICA: _

\: '-

z. '. r' , J {' - -

~

,. ,i[:

- - ' ' '(. -. EY;E-- 1 ..

. , Y (l- 7*

7 . .. . s I:t !c;g V. $ ".on, G ar.'.s Of ficer

.~ . '- 3 : c h f r. . r e . t s E " r.; h

[.i vi si",,n Of C0r:t e be ts bfficG G f *. . . **i f *. f r *. '. " ' .

,. . . _e - - - -

. . . . W

. . .F L t. :

f

-ATE:

. 0ctober.19, 1982 SY: ,, , , , , ,

g[_

3 lE J3ecPtive. Director . ...

.A;perican Nuclear Society _

~

r'eM*m- +=*-e e m . & e w-ww e. m e e,=.

M ,-e -

--emu-p- 6upp we g4+ em ass.

yrr# y e

_m -

k (

GRANT MODIFICATION. . . _ . . . _ _

,' The American Nuclear Society hereby applies for a no-cost extension and

'modificatich to Grant No. NRC-G-04-81-110. This proposed modification

_ would provide support to accomplish two functions:

1. Perform periodic reviews of the PRA Procedures Guide (NUREG/CR-2300) to detemine if modifications are needed 'and appropriate: (a)tobringit into better conformance with state of the art techniques in risk assessment -

or (b) to provide descriptions of methods that are more suitable for then-current applications of risk assessment technology. If such changes or -

additions are needed, detemine how and when to develop them.

2. Develop a white paper on the determination and use of ac'cident-related radiological source tems. This paper would serve.as a supplement to

_ ~ Chapter 7, Physical Processes of Reactor-Meltdown Accidents, of the PRA '

Procedures Guide. Source tems developed in the document or by methods presented in the document would be used for analyses of the type suggested in Chapter 7 of the Guide. This function is described in greater detail

~

~ below. .

This proposed extension would be for a period of two years: from January 1, 1983 to December 31, 1984.

ANS proposes to select an individual to act as the project director to accomplish these two functions; this person would possess a detailed knowledge of the PRA Procedures Guide and knowledge of the history and status of the regulatory use of radiological source terms. Furthemore ,

the person would be capable of and willing to exercise the management of the above two functions.

A. PRA Review Function It is expected that the project director will convene a meeting of a few selected individuals (probably from the PRA Steering Comittee)

Grant Modification , ( page .2 l l

who have expertise in risk assessment and knowledge of the FRA Pro-cedures Guide to critically review the use and usefulness of the Guide every six to nine months. This review comittee would include

. . , an appropriate representative of the NRC staff. The results of any review will be documented in a letter to the grant' officer as desig-nat*ed by the NRC. Any work required to develop modifications or additions to the Guide will be financed by separate arrangements and is not covered under the provisions of this grant modification.

.B ., White paper on Radioactive Source Terms ~~

- . , It is anticipated that the project director will work with a steering comittee of about twelve individuals to manage the development of the white paper on radioactive source tenns. The responsibility of this comittee would be to set the scope of the effort, provide overall review of proposed drafts, and select individuals to develop the text

.of the document. The comittee will detemine an appropriate schedule for completion of the project along with appropriate intermediate

. mil.estones and interface tasks to best take advantage of other work on source terms, consistent with the completion date. --

The project director and the steering comittee will work together

.. ,to select a set of peer reviewers. These reviewers will be selected from a broad spectrum of organizations and interests, but will all have expertise in the area for which they will perform the review.

Every attempt will be made to gain consensus on each portion of  ;

the document. l l

C.- Administrative Support Administrative support required to fulfill the two functions will be provided by members of ANS Staff. This support will include meeting arrangements, preparation of meeting minutes, preparation and distribution of draft documents, managing and disbursing funds provided under the grant, maintaining records of all significant ,

r l

j

Grant Modification' -( Page -

activities that take place to fulfill the grant, and ot.b: '41ated work. that is reasonable to support the accomplishment of the two

- functions.

. D.. Cost Estimate -

1. PRA Review Function --

Costs for the review function will include administrative support as indicated in Paragraph C above and travel expenses for the project director, one representative of ANS Staff, and any com-mittee member requiring this support (none is anticipate.d). No payment will be made for time spent by a committee memb'er. The following estimate covers the period from October 1, 1982 through Decer.ber 31, 1984:

2. Document on Radioactive Source Terms Costs for developing a white paper on radioactive source terms will be shared by other organizations, including the Electric Power Research Institute. U.S. Department of Energy, 'and organi-zations who will agree to support their representatives. Costs for accomplishing this function will include all administrative support as indicated in Paragraph C above; reasonable consulta-tion fees for the project director to provide management for the

N- Grant Modification ,

Page , ,

,, function; and travel for the project director, representatives of ANS Staff as needed, and any individual involved in developing the document who cannot be supported by his organization. Pay-ment from these grant funds will be made for ties spent by any other individual only if not covered by other contributions.

The following estimate covers the period from July 1, 1982 through December 31, 1983, but excludes payment for engineering time.

• This figure does not include estimates for editing, typing, collating, f

. . c_opying, and distributing drafts of the document or related tasks. I

~

l o

Grant Modification Page . _.. .. . -

3. Priority Expenditures

~ '

1~ -

Funds remaining under this grant will be used according to the 2-following priority:

' ~~ ' '

a. Support to complete publication of the PRA Procedures Guide.

~' ~

b. Funds will be set aside to cover the full estimated cost of performing the review function (D.1 above).

c. Support for development of the wh.ite paper on radioactive source terms, to the extent possible with remaining funds.

If additional funding is required to complete this part of the project, a subsequent request for modification will be made.

, e4 = Ce .

m

M001FICAT10fi NO. 3 TO GRANT NO. NRC-G-04-81-001 BETWEEN AMERICAft HUCLEAR SOCIETY AND THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS510N

~ .

'A. The purpose of this modification is to change the grant period in block No. 3 of the Notice of Grant Award.

~

B.'

~ .

Specifically, block No. 3, Grant Period, of this Grant No. liRC-G .04_.81,001 is extended from July 31, 1982 to December 31, 1982.

C. All other terms and conditions under this grant remain the same, ,_

D. .In witness whereof, the parties have executed this docur:.ent. -

- ~

'J;!iED STA'E5 Of A'CRICA Date: _f/ />/_&

/

By: n- .Gd Ke ogg V. I'orton t., _c.s . v --

G ants Officer Research Contracts Eranch Division of Contracts Office of Administration U. 5. Nuclear Regulatory Cor-ission ,

GRA.'iT E E ,

e ican Nuclear Society Date: 23 July 1982 By: C A- + M V

Executive Director (Title) '

-32^ L ~i h' E

I MODITICATION NO. 2 TO GRANT NRC-6-04-81-001 BETWEEN AMERICAN NUCLEAR SOCIETY AND THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION A. The purpose of this modification is to change the dollar amount in block No.15 of the Notice of Grant Award.

• B. Specifically, block No.15, funding Sources, of this grant No.

NRC-G-04-81-001 is increased by 545,000 f rom 5260,194.03 to $305.194.03. .

C. All other terms and conditions under this grant remain the same.

D. In witness whereof, the parties have executed this document.

United States of America 1

Date: IC " ! T ' By y, I '$r r s' -

Rona'id D. Inompson, Chief Operations Support Branch Division of Contracts Office of Administration U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Date; b ]h/ IG$V I

~

(/

W W

(/

(Title) Execut've Director American Nuclear Society l

l

~

e-em er W

--6mem

-b

s e

MODIFICATION NO.1 TO GRANT NRC-G-04-81-001 BETWEEN AMERICAN NUCLEAR SOCIETY AND THE U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION A. The purpose of this Modification is to change the dollar amount in block no.15 of the Notice of Grant Award.

B. Specifically, block no.15, Fundino Sources, of this grant no. NRC-G-04-81-001 is increased by 532,494.03 from $227,700.00 to $260,194.03.

C. All other terms and conditions under this grant remain the same.

~ ~ ~ D. ~ In w'itries's whereof, the parties have executed this docu .ent.

United States of America

~

Date: TG flj  !

By [/w!.$hA I.'. d-

- - - 7 I Ror.ald D. Thompson, Acting Chief

. ../ Operations Support Branch _ __

- Division of Contracts Office of Administration U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Grantee Date: July 28, 1981 By @ M

/ (Title)

() ~ f/

Executive Director American Nuclear Society ge g 1{

@O

f

' . NUCLEAR REGULATCRY CC.";GSSIC('

NOTICE OF GRANT A"ARD

1. GRANT NUMBER

2. M00!FICATION NL718ER NRC-G-04-81-001 ----

3. GRANT PERIOD FROM: 1/21/81 TO: 7/31

4. AUTHORITY

5. TYPE OF AWARD Sections 31a. & 141b. of Grant 6. GRANTEE TYPE Atomic Energy Act of 1954, Professional Societj u .-..,s s No t - fo r - Pro f i t

9. GRANTEE NME AND ADDRESS 8. PROJECT TITLE A .erican Nuclear Society 555 North r,ensington Avenue Support of the Nuclear Reliability LaGrange Park, IL 60525 Evaluation Program

9. PROJECT WILL BE CONDUCTED PER GRANTEE'S PROPOSAL (S) , Entitled " Support of 10. TECHNICAL REPORTS ARE REQUIRED the Nuclear Reliability Evaluation Program" y PROGRESS AND FINAL DATED October 31, 1980 and FINAL ONLY APPENDIX A - PROJECT GRANT PROVISIONS ~

OTHER I. PRIfiCIPAL INVESTIGATOR (S) NAME AND ADDRESS 12. NRC PROGRAF 4 0FFICE (Name and Address)

Marilyn Weber Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Wa shington, DC 20555 555 North Kensington Avenue Louis Rib -

_ taGrance Park . IL 60525 312/352-6611 TELEPHONE NO. 301/427-4320

l. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA 14. METHOD OF PAYMENT BLRA: 6G190310 FIN 8: G1004 ADVANCE BY TREASURY CHECX -

APPN#: 31XO200.601 RElitSURSEMENT BY TREASURY CHIC::

x LETTER OF CREDIT OTHER (specify)

. FUNDING SOURCES SOURCE AMOUNT hRC:

THISGRAllt 5227,700.00 PREVIOUSLY

~~

OisLIGATED S GPMTEE SHARE:

. THIS GHANT S PRIOR GRANT S --

TOTAL FUHUING $ 227.700.00 I. MOUNT OBLIGATED BY THIS GRANT ACTION: 5 227,700.00 t

( (

l 7. r;&; M ' ' .' '.:2 (# f itE (f.:re anc i.:;ress1

~~ ~

~~ ~~ - -- --

CTrfycrof Administrat-ion Division of Contracts Washington, DC 20555 . . _ _ . . .._ _,

d. Cr.A LEE' 19. " C GW,i 0F F ICER

~

W M /f(Date)M If b vu.2d I ibf0*O'T 3hMh (51pa turY) 9 nature) (Date)

'NAME(typed) Octave J. DuTemple NA'iE(typed) Ronald D. Thompson ActiEg Chiif---

TITLE Executive Director . . - ... TITLE.. , Special Projects Staff _

lELEPH0kE- NO. 312/352-6611  : TELEPHONE NO. 301/427-4383 20.-GRA!T PAYMENT INFORMATION _ _ _ _

The grantee shall receive payments under this grant by letter of credit drawn in amounts necessary.to meet current needs pursuant to OME Circular A-110, Attachment I, unless the grantee has failed to comply with the ;eogra objectives, grant award conditions or Federal reporting requirements.

21'. Atta ed is a copy of the "NP.C Project Grant Provisions for institutions of Higher

-Education and Other Nonprofit Organizations." Acceptance of t*.ese terms and

~

_;. conditions is, acknowledged when federal funds are used on this grant project.

Amm m a

• **MMHam, , ,

m .e- e Ws e e-O Whm .

m 6 m6H* * &

.eh- . e en

CUESTION 23, (B) DOES THE NRC CONSIDER ANS TO BE AN

__LUDERENDENT SCIENTIFIC ORGANIZATION -WHOSE -SOLE GOAL - - - - -

_IS PURE SCIENTIFIC AND ENGINEERING RESEARCH?

ANSWER. -- .---

THE AME.RICAN NUCLEAR SOCIETY IS A PROFESSIONAL SOCIETY AND IS SO RECOGNIZED BY THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE. BY ITS OWN CHARTER, SOME OF THE MAJOR OBJECTIVES OF THE SOCIETY ARE:

0 TO PROMOTE THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING RELATING TO THE ATOMIC NUCLEUS, AND OF ALLIED SCIENCES AND

- ~ ~~

ARTS, 0 TO AID IN THE INTEGRATION OF THE SEVERAL DISCIPLINES CONSTITUTING NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING.

O IO ENCOURAGE RESEARCH IN NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY AND IN ALLIED FIELDS, O TO HOLD MEETINGS FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISSEMINATION OF THE RESULTS OF RESEARCH IN NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY.

O TO PREPARE AND DISSEMINATE INFORMATION APPROPRIATE FOR THE PROFESSION OF NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, IN LINE WITH THIS CHARACTERIZATION, NRC CONSIDERS THE ANS AN ORGANIZATION APPROPRIATE AS A FORUM OF SCIENTIFIC DIALOGUE AND INDEPENDENT SCIENTIFIC REVIEW OF RESEARCH INFORMATION,

QUESTION 23(B) (CONTIWUED) -

COMMISSIONER ASSELSTINE BELIEVES THAT THE G0ALS OF THE ANS ARE NOT i

LIMITED:TO PURE SCIENTIFIC AND ENGINEERING RESEARCH, COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL ADDS:

INDUSTRY PEOPLE FORM A LARGE COMPONENT OF ANS MEMBERSHIP, AND THEREFORE, RIGHTLY OR WRONGLY, ANS IS VIEWED BY SOME AS A VEHICLE TO REPRESENT INDUSTRY VIEWS. COMMISSIONER BERNTHAL DOES NOT BELIEVE- THAT NRC SHOULD PORTRAY ANS AS A BODY THAT NRC MIGHT RELY ON FOR " INDEPENDENT SCIENTIFIC REVIEW."

e "I

a I

QUESTION 23. (C) DID ANY NRC EMPLOYEES PARTICIPATE IN THE RESEARCH OR WRITING OF THE ANS REPORT, AND IF i

SO, PLEASE EXPLAIN THE REASON WHY AND WHETHER l

THEY RECEIVED ANY COMPENSATION, ANSWER.

THE ANS REPORT WAS BASED ON EXISTING SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE AND -

DOCUMENTATION. DR. WALTER PASEDAG, THEN AN NRC EMPLOYEE, WAS THE NRC DELEGATE TO THE ANS COMMITTEE. THIS ALLOWED NRC TO KEEP INFORMED ON THE PROGRESS AND OBJECTIVITY OF THE WORK. DR.

PASEDAG'S SALARY AND TRAVEL EXPENSES WERE PAID BY THE NRC WHILE HE WAS ON THE COMMITTEE. THIS WAS NOT HIS FULL TIME OCCUPATION WHILE

! HE SERVED ON THE COMMITTEE. IN ADDITION, DR. C. N. KELBER WAS GIVEN A DRAFT OF THE ANS REPORT TO REVIEW PRIOR TO PUBLICATION.

HIS COMMENTS WERE GIVEN TO ANS AND SOME OF THEM WERE INCORPORATED INTO THE REPORT. DR. KELBER IS AN NRC EMPLOYEE AND HIS SALARY WAS 4

PAID BY THE NRC WHILE HE DID THIS WORK. PEER REVIEW OF TECHNICAL DRAFTS IS CONSIDERED TO BE A NORMAL PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITY IN THE

] EXECUTION OF DR KELBER'S DUTIES.

NRC CONTRACTOR EMPLOYEES ALSO MADE SOME CONTRIBUTICNS. THEY ARE LISTED ON PAGE AC-3 0F THE REPORT. THESE CONTRACTOR EMPLOYEES RECEIVED NO NRC COMPENSATION OTHER THAN THE NRC SUPPORT OF THE.

CONTRACT.

J

J GUESTION 23. (D) DOES THE COMMISSION HAVE A POLICY REGARDING

~

GRANTS AND CONTRACTS WITH ORGANIZATICNS THAT

~

EITHER COULD BENEFIT, OR WHOSE MEMBERS COULD BENEFIT, FROM THE OUTCOME?

ANSWER. .

i

- ~ 0NE OF THE USES WHICH THE OFFICE OF RESEARCH MAKES OF ITS GRANT

! AUTHORITY IS TO ASSIST IN FUNDING EFFORTS OF PROFESSIONAL

~

SOCIETIES TO PROVIDE A FORUM FOR SCIENTIFIC DIALOGUE AND EFFEC-TIVE PEER REVIEW OF COMPLEX TECHNICAL OUESTIONS. SUCH SOCIETIES j TYPICALLY HA9E SOME MEMBERS WHO ARE EMPLOYED IN THE INDUSTRY.

i SCIENTIFIC DIALOGUE AND OBJECTIVE PEER REVIEW ARE CONSIDERED TO HAV$' GREAT VALUE IN ASSURING THAT REGULATORY DECISIONS RELYING ON THE APPLICATION OF RESEARCH RESULTS ARE BASED ON GOOD SCIENCE.

~

PROFESSf00 L SOCIETIES ALSO PLAY AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN THE

~ CONSENSOS STANDARDS PROCESS.

4

. o +

O e

O t

GUESTION 23. (E) DOES THE COMMISSION BELIEVE THIS GRANT PCSES

~ ' ~

ANY CONFLICT OF INTEREST QUESTIONS?

ANSWER.

THE COMMISSION DID NOT REVIEW THIS GRANT BECAUSE THE AMOUNT WAS BELOW THE THRESHOLD FOR COMMISSION REVIEW. HOWEVER, QUESTIONS OF ANY CONFLICT OF INTEREST ARE ALWAYS CONSIDERED BEFORE A GRANT IS MADE. IN THIS CASE, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THERE WOULD BE NO CONFLICT-OF INTEREST IN MAKING THE GRANT. IT SHOULD ALSO BE NOTED THAT THE RESULTS WERE PUBLISHED AND PRESENTED IN THE PUBLIC ARENA THEREBY SUBJECTING THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE STUDY TO REVIEW FROM OTHER INTERESTED PROFESSIONAL EXPERTS.

o S

, e 9

l c OUESTION 23. (F) WAS THIS GRANT NECESSARY IN LIGHT '0F OTHER NRC FUNDED EFFORTS?

ANSWER.

~

IN THE LATE SPRING OF 1982 THERE WERE DISCUSSIONS OF THE POSSIBILITY OF ANS CONVENING A DIVERSE GROUP 0F EXPERTS TO PREPARE A WHITE PAPER ON ACCIDENT-RELATED SOURCE TERM ISSUES. -AT THE TIME IT APPEARED APPROPRI ATE FOR NRC TO SUPPORT SUCH AN EFFORT TO EXPLORE VIEWS AND POTENTIALLY REACH A CONSENSUS WITHIN THE SOCIETY REGARDING THE CURRENT UNDERSTANDING OF TECHNICAL PHENOMENA IMPORTANT IN THE BEHAVIOR OF FISSION PRODUCTS UNDER .

ACCIDENT CONDITIONS. THE ANS REQUEST FOR A GRANT EXTENSION TO PREPARE A WHITE PAPER ON ACCIDENT-RELATED SOURCE TERMS WAS RECEIVED IN JULY, 1982. THIS ANS WHITE PAPE'R " REPORT OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON SOURCE TERMS," WAS PUBLISHED IN SEPTEMBER, 1984. THE ANS REPORT TO THE COMMISSION PRESENTED VIEWS ON THE j TECHNICAL PHENOMENA RELATED TO ACCIDENT SOURCE TERMS AS WELL AS THEIR REGULATORY IMPLICATIONS. THE ASSESSMENT OF REGULATORY IMPLICATIONS WAS PREMATURE, IN THE STAFF'S VIEW.

THE REQUEST TO THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY (APS), ON THE OTHER HAND, WAS FOR AN INDEPENDENT, BROAD-BASED ASSESSMENT OF THE NEW SOURCE TERM METHODOLOGY AND THE SUPPORTING DATA BASE WITH 1

l

• i

QUESTION 23(F) (CONTINUED) EMPHASIS ON INFORMATION DEVELOPED BY THE ONGOING NRC RESEARCH PROGRAM. THE STAFF FELT THAT SUCH A REVIEW WAS AN ESSENTIAL PREREQUISITE BEFORE BEGINNING TO ASSESS REGULATORY APPLICATIONS.

THE APS REVIEW WAS REQUESTED IN THE FALL OF 1983. A GRANT WAS

' ISSUED TO THE APS ON SEPTEMBER 9, 1983. THE REPORT ON THE APS -

REVIEW WAS PUBLISHED IN MARCH, 1985.

6

QUESTION 23. (G) WHAT OTHER NRC SOURCE TERM EFFORTS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED OR ARE UNDERWAY? WHAT IS THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF FUNDS ALLOCATED FOR SOUFCE TERM WORK SINCE 1983?

ANSWEP, SOURCE TERM EFFORTS ARE PART OF THE SEVERE ACCIDENT RESEARCH PROGRAM. THE FOLLOWING TABLE REFLECTS FUNDING LEVELS FROM FY 83 TO PRESENT.

SEVERE ACCIDENT RESEARCH PROGRAM l (DOLLARS IN MILLIONS) REQUEST EY 83 FY 84 FY 85 FY 86 ACCIDENT EVALUATION $48.4 $47.1 $38.0 $30.7 SEVERE ACCIDENT ANALYSIS 4.8 7.1 5.3 3.5 DAMAGED FUEL 22.9 20.4 12.2 9.1 CONTAINMENT LOADING 10.5 9.0 8.8 6.6 FISSION PRODUCT SOURCE TERM 10.2 10.6 11.7 11.5 CONTAINMENT INTEGRITY E.4 6.0 5.8 7.2 SEVERE ACCIDENT RISK 8.1 7.8 5.8 5.2 TOTAL $61.9 $60.9 $49.6 $43.1 DETAILS OF THIS PROGRAM CAN EE FOUND IN THE ATTACHED REPORT, NUREG-0900 (JANUARY 1983).

m NUREG-0900 l\ ucear Power Plant:

Severe Accicent Researc, ? en

(

)

.U.S. Nuclear Regulatory iCommission  !

. Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research

,J. T. Larkins, M. A. Cunningham

.,,Y..j,

. . . . . -