ML20003D436
| ML20003D436 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/09/1981 |
| From: | Pasedag W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Ross D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20003D415 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-81-16 NUDOCS 8103270128 | |
| Download: ML20003D436 (3) | |
Text
.
p.
. g' 5'4 tit.'ITE D sTM Es
[ fg,
.p
'g NUCLEAR REGUL ATORY COMMISSION
'V e
v.t 5HINcl oN. D. C. 20555
,,te.g'%f f e.
d
%</
JAf; E 1931
- w.+
MEMORANDUI FOR:
Denwood F. Ross, Jr., Director, Division of Systems integration FROM:
Walter F. Pasedag, Radiol?gical Analysis Section, 1
Accident Evaluation Branch, DSI i
l
SUBJECT:
REPORT ON IMPACT OF ACCIDENT SOURCE TERM ASSUMPTIOiS In accordance with the DecemberJ/,1980 memorandum from Guy Arlotto to William Dircks (Attachment 1) an ad hoc group for the development of a report on the impact of fission product source term alternatives on licen-sing has been formed. The group, as designated by the Degraded Core Cooling Steering Group representatives of fiRR, SD, and RES consists of Michael Jankowski (SD), Roger Blond (RES), and myself.
l The group met on January 7,1981, to establish scope, schedules, and assign-I ments of the planned report. The group defined the purpose of the report as foll,0ws:
An assessment of the impact of fission product source term l
alternatives on:
1.
Licensing practice, particularly as related to l
Engineered Safety Feature design and evaluation.
2.
Proposed rulemakings (Emergency Preparedness, Sitir.g.
Degraded Core, flinimum Engineered Safety Features).
3.
Environmental / risk considerations.
A preliminary outline of the report, including task assignments, is attached l
(Attachment 2). The group developed a schedule (Attachment 3) for the report consistent with'a parallel issuance with the " State of the Tech'nology Report I
in preparation by RES. Nevertheless, it is recognized on Iodins" (SOTRI) 's to rely on the 50TRI results for the. technical descrip-t, hat the group need tion of alternative fission product source terms for the various accidents to be considered.
Since the definition of these source terms is a pre-requisite for this report, substantive work for this report must await at least the first 50TRI draft, which is scheduled for January 19, 1981.
In order to complete the report, therefore, a two-week concentrated effort, which would preclude other responsibilities, will be required from the group members beginning on Ft.brua.y 2,1981.
It is anticipated that Dr. A. K. Postma, consultant to the Accident Evaluation Branch, will assist the group with technical sections of the report. The need for occasional assistance from other staff members from each of the represented offices may arise and will be arranged by the group members, as necessary.
1
'..by ?. 4, &< ;-
)
Walter F. Pasedag,cleEer M082'2 0 II Radiological Analysis Section Accident Evaluation Branch
i Q.
.A l
' f** %
g; k
U*. lit D ST ATEs y
gyg NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION tg
.r v.eamcion. o e mu.
y*****j DEC 2 21980 MEMORAiDU!i FOR: William J. Dircks, Executive Director for Operations TR0!i:
Guy A. Arlotto, Chairman, Degraded Cooling Steering Group
SUBJECT:
C0! GENTS ON PPC?0 SED RES PROGRAM " STATE OF TECH!!01.0GY REPORT ON RELEASE OF FISSION PRODUCT IODINE" At in November 26, 1980, meeting, the degraded Cooling Steering Group considered an RES-prepared draft outline for a proposed contractor-prepared*
state of technology report on release of fission-product iodine. The Steeri.ng Group endorses this effort, subject to the provisions noted below.
The Steering Group believes that an in-house report of the impact of fission-product icdine and fission-product acrosols on past licensing practice, present regulations, and possible future licensing application (in particular for core-melt accidents) should be prepared in parallel with the proposed n contracted state of technology report.
The in-house report is necessary so that the contracted state of technology report conclusions, in particular possible changes in our technical understar. ding, can be quickly evaluated in their licensing context. An example of why we believe that this pai:llel in-house report is important is the following:
To some extent, emphasis has been placed on iodine in accident analys.is as --.
a surrogate for the whole collection of solid fission products. This has provided an allowance for our ignorance of the behavior of many of the other fission products. The shortcoming of this procedure is that it has led to the development of engineered safety features specifically tailored to iodine attenuation when perhaps our view of all the other fission prodbcts should have been more balanced.
In any case, we are obliged to take a l
l closer look at the balance of the fission products and at their attenuation by engineered safety features whenever a substantial reduction in the iodine source tenn is contemplated, such as is the case today.
The Steering Group recommendation is, therefore, made with the goal of keeping the licensing impact in perspective as iodine and aerosol attenuation factors are developed. We wish to assure that a balanced viewpoint on all forms of iodine and all other related major fission products is maintained. To assure completion of this effort.i a timely schedule, I plan to take the following action unless you object:
Assign Denny Ross an action item as member of the Steering Group to set up an ad hoc in-house group to develop a report as discussed above on a schedule consistent with the Research
\\
Ly 4g70 t A
DEC 2 2 GEO William J. Dircks,
report on the state r./ technology of iodine.
Providing the needed personnel to staff the ad hoc group will be accomplished thro. ugh the office representatives on the Steering Group (i.e.,
Ross for NRR, Bernero for RES, and Arlotto for 50).
I have spoken with Ross, and he agreed o take o his act'on item.
(
g Guy A A.ric.to, Chairman
. D.egra ed Cooling Steering Group cc: Steering Group Members
~
R. M. Bernero, RES G. H. Cunningham, ELD B. K. Grimes, IE C. N. Kelber, RES M. S. Medeiros, Jr., SD D. R. Muller, NRR I. C. Roberts, SD F. Ross, NRR
. R. Denton, NRR R. B. Minogue, RES R.13. Smith, SD O
e e
l 1
e v
l
~
l ATTACHMENT 2 i
OUTLINE i
IMPACT OF ACCIDENT FISSION PRODUCT RELEASE iSSUMPTIONS ON REACTOR SAFETY Assignments WP I.
IllTR000CTION 1.
Summary of current questions concerning accident source terms.
2.
Purpose of the report RB II. ACCIDEtiT SEQUENCES OF IriTEREST l.
Design Basis Accidents 2.
TMI-2 3.
Risk-dominant Accidents WP/AP III. PAST AND STATE-0F-TECHNOLOGY SOURCE TERMS FOR THE ACCIDENTS OF IflTEREST IV.
IMPACT OF SOURCE TERM (IODINE & AER050LS) ALTER!iATIVES.0N:
WP 1.
Engineered Safety Feature Design / Evaluation MJ/RB 2.
Rulemaking Assumptions RB 3.
Environmental / Risk Considerations V.
RESULTS AND REC 0WINDATIONS WP 1.
ESF Design / Evaluation HJ/RB 2.
Rulemaking Assumptions RB 3.
Environm./ Risk Considerations All VI CONCLUSIONS (including recommendations for future research) e
t ATTACHMENT 3 SCHEDULE for Report on the IMPACT OF ACCIDENT FISSION PRODUCT RELEASE ASSUMPTIONS ON PEACTOR SAFETY Final Outline and Introduction Jan. 19, 1981 Working Drafts for Assigned Sections Combined Working Session Feb. 2-13, 1981 First Draft Complete for Internal Comments Feb. 17, 1981 Final Draft for Office Concurrence Feb. 27, 1981 Transmittal to Commission Mar. 24, 1981 O
e
+
w y
w n
w-w
+ - ~
w w=