ML20030C966
| ML20030C966 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 07/28/1981 |
| From: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| References | |
| ACRS-1865, NUDOCS 8108280500 | |
| Download: ML20030C966 (4) | |
Text
[ *.,
/06E3 /8b5 Proposed Minutes of the ACRS Subcommittee f5 Reliability and Probabilistic Assessment
~
g'V q;
4 f
June 3, 1981
(
/~.., {.
g Washington, D. C.
(
g f
.;' b)>
( $$$
The ACRS Subcommittee on Reliability and ?robabilistic Assessment held k'Qo u[
'eeting on June 3,1981 at 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D. C.
J. M.
Griesmeyer was cognizant engineer'and G. R. Quittschreiber was Designated Federal Employee for the meeting. A list of documents submitted to the Subcommittee is included as Attachment A.
PRINCIPAL ATTENDEES:
D. Okrent, Subcommittee Chairman W. Kerr, Subcommittee rember C. Mark, Subcommittee member P. Shewmon, Subcommittee member C. Siess, Subcommittee member R. Bernero, NRC/RES C. Johr.ser, NRC/RES G. Tomlin, NRC/RES J. Malaro, NRC/RES W. Yesely, NRC/RES F. Rowsoae, NRC/RES OVERVIEW OF DIVISION OF RISK ANALYSIS R. Bernero gave an overview of the organintion of the Division of Risk Analysis and summarized its budget and the crossover from Systems and Relia-bility Decision Unit. He pointed out the risk analysis program trends.
i RISK METHODS AND DATA EVALUATION R. Vesely, PAS, discussed the RM&DA budget for FY 1981 and plans for FY 1982 through FY 1984. About a 20% increase is planned (for FY 1982) mostly in the areas of standards and technical assistance. Mr. Yesely expressed some concern that agency-wide applications have been outstripped by methods which i
have been developed in the research program, but which are not being used.
I n10e280500 010728 PDR ACRS 1865 PDR g
m,,mi-awanwammennernameser.--""
- a m m w,, _ _ --
I O
RPA Mtg 3 June 1981 TRANSPORTATION AND MATERIALS RISK J. Malaro discussed the Transportation and Materials Risk line item of the FY 1983 budget which includes the following work: fuel cycle risk analysis excluding the reactor (this effort is just beginning), safety research in the areas of fuel cycles, transportation and materials, some standards, develop-ment for transportation and materials, and the training function for all of the probabilistic risk assessment training.
There is to be a slight increase in most of the areas.
In fuel cycles and materials it will be significant becasue there was no research prior to FY 1982. Waste management, training and transportation are fairly constant and begin to fall off in FY 1984.
The waste management work was al ternately characterized as duplicative, parallel or independent of DOE efforts to estimate the associated risks. The questien arose but was not resolved as to whether review of DOE efforts might not be a better role for NRC. Then at least the analysis that is finally used would have been reviewed - with two separate efforts this may not be assured.
REACTOR RISK AND RELIABILITY ANALYSIS G. Tomlin stated that the Regulatory Analysis Branch is just being formed and l
is intended to be a coordinating branch for some of the upcoming rulemakings.
F. Rowsome discussed the Reactor Risk and Reliability Analysis line -item:
Accident Sequence analysis, rulemaking research, IREP/NREP and consequence analysis.
RPA Mtg June 3, 1981 Accident Sequence reanalysis was to exemine event tree analysis and reference reactor PRAs to develop more widely applicaale catalogue of Accident Se-quences. ORA Reactor / Safety Rulemaking research was to support the Degraded Core Cooling rulemaking, minimum engineering safety features to ovprcome limitations of single failure criteria and to suppo, t regulatory analysis and long range regulatory reform.
The IREP/NREP program is intended to develop specifications for license-performed reactor PRA, quality control and review plans.
It was mentioned that the IREP/NREP results and manuals to be used in licensee performance of PRAs will contain the main fruits from the methodology and data branch work because applications within NRC are limited by manpower shortages and a lack of an overall plan to use PRA within the rest of NRC.
F. Rowsome discussed some options above EDO guidelines and pointed out how some of the issues raised in the last ACRS letter to Congress were addressed in the FY 1983 proposed budget.
D. Okrent mentioned that at least one recom-mendation was not addressed: a critical evaluation of the merits of LWR regulatory requirements in other countries which differ significantly from those of the NRC.
wwmm _ _mmm -
l
__.___._m 3g 5
LIST OF DOCUMENTS t
1.
Overview of Division of Risk Analysis - 3 slides 2.
Risk Methods and Data Evaluation - 6 slides 3.
Transt.ortation and Materials Risk - 6 slides 4.
Regulatory Analysis Branch - 1 slide 5.
Reactor Risk and Reif ability Analysis - 14 slides l
t ATTACHl1ENT A l
l l
.. _ _. _ _ _ _ _ =.. =w -
== ~ ~ " --
$