ML12157A272
| ML12157A272 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde, Columbia, Diablo Canyon, San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 06/11/2012 |
| From: | Joseph Sebrosky Plant Licensing Branch IV |
| To: | Plant Licensing Branch IV |
| Sebrosky J | |
| References | |
| Download: ML12157A272 (11) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555*0001 June 11, 2012 MEMORANDUM TO: FILE FROM:
Joseph M. Sebrosky, Senior Project Manager
....--t-....f.."11>o1 Plant Licensing Branch IV Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
DIABLO CANYON POWER PLANT, UNIT OS. 1 AND 2. SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNITS 2 AND 3, PALO VERDE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNITS 1,2, AND 3, AND COLUMBIA GENERATING STATION -
SUMMARY
OF TELEPHONE CONFERENCE RE: NEAR TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.1 SEISMIC REEVALUATIONS This memorandum summarizes a telephone discussion on May 31,2012, between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff and representatives of Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), Southern California Edison (SCE), and Arizona Public Service (APS)
(licensees). The purpose of the call was to discuss the process found in the March 12,2012, request for information associated with Near Term Task Force Recommendation 2.1 Seismic Reevaluations. The March 12,2012, request for information was sent to operating reactors pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), paragraph 50.54(f) and can be found in Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML12053A340. A list of attendees is provided in Enclosure 1. The handouts that were provided by the licensees are provided in Enclosure 2.
The licensees discussed their plans for addressing the March 12,2012, request for information associated with the expectation that plants in the Western United States (WUS) develop seismic source and ground motion models to characterize their regional and site-specific seismic hazards. Consistent with current practice for 10 CFR Part 52, new reactor licensing, the March 12, 2012, request for information states that the WUS plants should perform a Senior Seismic Hazard Analysis Committee (SSHAC) Level 3 study to develop a probabilistic seismic hazard analysis.
The licensees indicated that they have formed a Southwestern WUS (SWUS) group to coordinate activities in this area. The licensees indicated that there would be four to six separate SSHACs needed to develop the information to respond to the March 12, 2012, letter.
The number range is based on three SSHACs (one for each site) being needed to develop the seismic source models. There is expected to be little overlap for these three SSHACs because the source models are driven by seismic features that are within approximately 40 miles of each site. There are expected to be one to three SSHACs needed to develop the ground motion models. It is anticipated that there will be some overlap for the ground motion model SSHACs so a SSHAC for each site may not be necessary.
- 2 The licensees stated that they intend to meet the March 11, 2015, completion date for providing a seismic hazard evaluation consistent with the schedule provided in the March 12, 2012, request for information; however, an alternate plan may be necessary because of limited personnel with seismic expertise. If it becomes apparent during the process that the licensees cannot meet this date, the licensees proposed to meet with the NRC to develop a mutually agreeable schedule. The licensees indicated that they would document the potential impediments to meeting the March 12, 2012, request for information schedule for a seismic hazard evaluation in a letter to the NRC. The letter will also document the licensee's proposal that if it becomes apparent that the schedule cannot be met, a meeting be arranged with the staff to determine a mutually agreeable schedule.
Enclosures:
- 1. List of Attendees
- 2. Licensees' Handouts Docket Nos. 50-275, 50-323, 50-528, 50-529, 50-530, 50-397, 50-361, and 50-362
LIST OF ATTENDEES MAY 31, 2012, TELECONFERENCE MEETING WITH TO DISCUSS SEISMIC REEVALUATIONS DOCKET NOS. 50-275, 50-323, 50-528, 50-529, 50-530,50-397,50-361! AND 50-362 NAME Larry Parker Terry Grebel Norm Abrahamson Mike Powell Linda Conklin Caroline McAndrews Kimberly Keithline Nilesh Chokshi John Ake Annie Kammerer Mike Markley Rob Taylor Randy Hall Chris Gratton Joe Sebrosky Balwant Singal ORGANIZATION Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) and STARS Regulatory Affairs PG&E PG&E Arizona Public Service Southern California Edison (SCE)
SCE Nuclear Energy Institute U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
Office of New Reactors NRC Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES)
NRC/RES NRC Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR)
NRC/NRR NRC/NRR NRC/NRR NRC/NRR NRC/NRR
N Q)
So
- s III o
u C
L.L.J
~
ro e
S Q)
~
Ll- <<
I-ro >
I- 0 Z
0 I
(J)
V')
OJ
~
m
~
V)
-0 Q)
~.e e
s-Q)
~
V)
~
-0 S-m N m
- r::
u E
V')
Q)
Vl s-a.e Q)
Vl
u <<
'+
0 Q) til
- s c:
0 u
E Q)
U')
Q)
Q)
U til U
Q)
Q) c:
Q)
V')
S ro Q) a:::
..£:.
c:
LL 0
Q) l-Q) e 0..
- s LU I-Q) x 0
U Z
V') UJ V') V') <<
- Within requestedt?
hazard eVqlU If an addressee response within90 course of action that it.IJ'uuu alternative course of acti Addressees of plants located and San Onofre) should Any new or updated seismictl(,;)z<lf'?-I'!l:C'c methods in the evaluation of 5 Consistent with Regulatory Gui Site-Specific Earthquake GroundM Analysis Committee (SSHAC) study, aSgescFI Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis: Gu Consistent with current practice, as described Guidelines for SSHAC Level 3 and 4 Hazard Studies,.1;;I~!I.f!(
- Seismic development of
- The CEUS Seismic fI *** consider all relevant
- Develop project plan
- Select and contract with project participants
- Develop project database
- Review of hazard-significant issues and available data
- Alternative interpretations
- Feedback
- Develop preliminary model{s} and Hazard Input Document
- Perform preliminary hazard calculations and sensitivity analyses
- Finalize models in light of feedback
- Perform final hazard calculations and sensitivity analyses
- Develop final project report
- Perform participatory peer review of entire process
- Planning*
- Obtaining 50.54(f)**Lette r PPRPTeam TI Team Proponent experts
- Scheduling 4 to 6 SSHACs established
- Executing the Plans
- If committed resources completion, WUS licensE new completiond~t~
- If resource constraints WUS Licensee propose.to mutually agreeable schedule Next Step
-2 The licensees stated that they intend to meet the March 11, 2015, completion date for providing a seismic hazard evaluation consistent with the schedule provided in the March 12, 2012, request for information; however, an alternate plan may be necessary because of limited personnel with seismic expertise. If it becomes apparent during the process that the licensees cannot meet this date, the licensees proposed to meet with the NRC to develop a mutually agreeable schedule. The licensees indicated that they would document the potential impediments to meeting the March 12, 2012, request for information schedule for a seismic hazard evaluation in a letter to the NRC. The letter will also document the licensee's proposal that if it becomes apparent that the schedule cannot be met, a meeting be arranged with the staff to determine a mutually agreeable schedule.
Enclosures:
- 1. List of Attendees
- 2. Licensees' Handouts Docket Nos. 50-275, 50-323, 50-528, 50-529, 50-530, 50-397, 50-361, and 50-362 DISTRI BUTION:
PUBLIC LPLIV Reading RidsNrrDorlLpl4 Resource RidsNrrDprPspb Resource RidsNrrDssSbpb Resource RidsNrrLAJBurkhardt Resource RidsNrrPMDiabloCanyon Resource RidsNrrPMSanOnofre Resource RidsNrrPMColumbia Resource RidsNrrPMPaloVerde Resource RidsRgn4MailCenter Resource CGratton, NRRlJLD CMunson, NRR/JLD RTaylor, NRR/JLD NChokshi, NRO Jake, RES AKammerer, RES L4/PM NRR/LPL4/LA NRR/JLD/PM NRR/LPL4/BC NRR/LPL4/PM ky JBurkhardt CGratton MMarkley JSebrosky 6/6/12 617112 6/11112 6111112 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY