ML12102A241

E-mail from M. Galloway, NRR to R. Conte, Region I; Subject: Predecisional - Official Use Only: Preliminary Draft Responsive for Comment Reg. Alkali-Silica Reaction (ASR) Issue at Seabrook

ML12102A241
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	12/21/2011
From:	Galloway M Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Conte R NRC Region 1
References
FOIA/PA-2012-0119
Download: ML12102A241 (2)

Text

Lehman, Bryce From: Galloway, Melanie Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2011 3:13 PM To: Conte, Richard

Subject:

R*-*-I*cESI - C!AttSE NE': Preliminary Draft Response for Comment reg. Alkali-Silica Reaction (ASR) Issue at Seabrook

Rich, Interms of coordination, I think you are absolutely right. It is so gratifying to see and I know it will continue to pay off as we continue to engage on this issue. Thanks for all you are doing on this.

Melanie From: Conte, Richard Sent: Wednesday, Decem e 21, 2011 3:06 PM To: Galloway, Melanie Cc: Hiland, Patrick; Miller, Chris; Wilson, Peter; Ayres, David; Roberts, Darrell; Burritt, Arthur; Thomas, George; Sheikh, Abdul; Raymond, William; Chaudhary, Suresh; Modes, Michael; Auluck, Rajender; Murphy, Martin

Subject:

F.: Pr-CI3IONAL OFICI.L U3E QINL- : Preliminary Draft Response for Comment reg. Alkali-Silica, Reaction (ASR) Issue at Seabrook This is like drinking out of a technical fire hose but for a draft I am quite pleased. My challenge will be to summarize the technical issues in the inspection report for which we will be requesting their corrective action plan.

Melanie I just want to point out the fruits of our labor in the last year based on the question you'raised in the conference. This draft came in before the conference yesterday. Note pages 7 item (c) and 15 item (d) the strong connection to the ageing management issues. The first part of the comprehensive list of issues for evaluating the final OD is that which is in the RAI from DLR in the letter of June 29, 2011. It is clear evidence to me that George and Abdul have been interfacing with one another as with us. Much appreciate there assistance on site the week of 9/28.

Have no fear we clearly are talking with one voice.

From: Thomas, George Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 12:05 PM To: Sheikh, Abdul; Modes, Michael; Chaudhary, Suresh; Raymond, William; Graves, Herman; Pires, Jose; Lehman, Bryce Cc: Conte, Richard; Auluck, Rajender; Hogan, Rosemary; Murphy, Martin; Manoly, Kamal; Farzam, Farhad; Burritt, Arthur

Subject:

REDeC. NAL:

,.*. OF,.I,^. U'E L". Preliminary Draft Response for Comment reg. Alkali-Silica Reaction (ASR) Issue at Seabrook

Atfached is a Preliminary Draft Response that I put together to the Request for Technical Assistance from Region 1 with regard to the ASR-degradation issue of concrete structures at Seabrook Station. The purpose of this email is to solicit internal brainstorming, input, and comment on the issue and the attached preliminary response. Please note that the attached preliminary document is NOT the NRR/DE position and has not been reviewed and concurred within NRR/DE. Further, we have not yet got a firm comprehensive Action Plan and Test Plan from the licensee, which is very important to taking an NRC position on the issue. Please provide your comments at the earliest but no later than COB January 20, 2012.

Thanks.

George Thomas Structural Engineer NRR/DE/EMCB 301-415-6181 From: Hiland, Patrick Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 7:47 AM To: Miller, Chris Cc: Conte, Richard; Thomas, George

Subject:

FW: Briefing Material for Tomorrow's Call at 200pm on Seabrook ASR Importance: High Chris, my staff discussed the attached briefing notes with me last night. In particular, I was briefed on the TIA which George Thomas of my staff is working on, that has a due date of 12/29. Not sure what the expectations are, but it appears that answering the TIA with firm guidance is not achievable by 12/29. George has put together a number of specific criteria that could be used to compare with licensee's "plan" when delivered. I've advised George Thomas to send out his draft information as a brainstorm effort to solicit input from NRR/DLR, RES, and Region I. I've been told that the NRC doesn't have any specific engineering/technical guidance available regarding ASR and that we are searching out info from other industries. Obviously, the licensee has the responsibility to evaluate under XVI and should do the engineering work to defend their corrective action. Our staff will continue to search out current information, but we do not anticipate providing an accurate list of criteria by 12/29. The purpose of this email is info only.

From: Conte, Richard VU Sent: Monday, December19, 2011 1:30 PM To: Auluck, Rajender; Ayres, David; Bahadur, Sher; Burritt, Arthur; Chaudhary, Suresh; Chernoff, Harold; Clifford, James; Cline, Leonard; Conte, Richard; Cruz, Holly; Delligatti, Mark; Evans, Michele; Ferrer, Nathaniel; Galloway, Melanie; Hiland, Patrick; Howe, Allen; Khanna, Meena; Lamb, John; Lehman, Bryce; Lund, Louise; Manoly, Kamal; Miller, Chris; Miller, Ed; Modes, Michael; Morey, Dennis; Murphy, Martin; Plasse, Richard; Raymond, William; Roberts, Darrell; Sakai, Stacie; Sheikh, Abdul; Thomas, George; Wilson, Peter

Subject:

Briefing Material for Tomorrow's Call at 200pm on Seabrook ASR See attached agenda and talking points along with attachments for more details.

2