ML12174A087
| ML12174A087 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 12/20/2011 |
| From: | NRC Region 1 |
| To: | |
| References | |
| FOIA/PA-2012-0119 | |
| Download: ML12174A087 (11) | |
Text
u*
W2X3 -co:ý PVz
,//
44,?
Seabrook Concrete Degradation REGION I Seabrook Concrete Degradation & Implications to Part 50 and 54 December 20, 2011 200pm Conference Call Logistics: Dial in number: 888-790-8833 Passcod
))(.
Objectives (Purpose):
- 1. To communicate on efforts to date in a summary way on the alkali-silica reaction problem at Seabrook.
- 2. Provide next steps in January 2012 in order to elevate regulatory footprint on the issue,
- 3. Also update on the developments in other areas that need to be kept in mind.
Success Criteria (Potential Outcomes):
- 1. Enhanced understanding of the topics discussed (communications is the key).
- 2. All input and views obtained in order to get the issues addressed with final decisions reflected in the action plan.
- 3. Achieve alignment on next steps for January 2012.
Agenda (Process 45 min):
(5 min)
Conte Overview (roll call, check alignment, summary of main points)
(10 min)
Burritt (Conte) Summary of Actions To Date (5 min)
Conte Developments in Other Areas (Hearing, Public, Safety Review, License Renewal, Commission)
(10 min)
Conte (Burritt) Next Steps
- S" (5 min)
Conte/All Immediate Safety/Longer Term (Time Left)
All Summary/Critique
=_ See Att mndees Decision and Actions at the end of the Talking Points A
fI
~~1 (b)(5)
If
Seabrook Concrete Degradation
.PRPrFfISIONA I ATION TALKING POINTS (5 min) Overview Roll call of attendees Are there any questions related to purpose, success and process (agenda) of this conference and what we hope to get out of it?
Main Messages:
(b)(5)
. There have been a number of findings of very low safety signiticance, TOr now, which We will summarize (attachment 1 details). To some extent, those findings reflect the licensee's uncertainty.
In addition to organizational quality control, the need for comprehensive plan should give the agency the direction that licensee is heading. After all this time, we should be able to say whether their direction will produce reasonable results (DLR has been asking for this plan since October 2010).
The details of the plan should reflect what activities they will be doing (lab testing, insitu monitoring, or other inspections and evaluations). This is key to knowing that the planned Engineering Evaluation will be well founded to produce a timely final operability dt'rnin.fl over a year old issue). (b)(5) right now the focus is on operability.
We were¶(()(5)
Luring a standalone inspection that started 9/28/11 (our commitmnt from the last executive brief in September 2011) to find, that while a contractor recommended tensile strength testing on concrete cores, they only performed compressive strength testing in order to address a discrepancy in data found earlier in the year - evidence of poor quality control. However a Region II inspector reported a well control process for the data obtained.
In either case (Eno. Eval. Potentially acceptable or not) (b)(5)
(b)(5)l
'n review for immediate safety issues is continuous.
The steps in January 2012 will begin the process of establishing that clearer and elevated regulatory footprint. We look for your alignment on this effort.
2
Seabrook Concrete Degradation PREDECiSIONAL ""-"-E"
" "" ON (10 min)
Burritt Summary of Actions To Date Refer to Attachment 1 Refer to Attachment 2 for what the licensee is doing. Based on status call of 11/30: NextEra agrees key parameters need to be addressed are listed below (the key questions are how and when):
Compressive Strength, Modulus of Elasticity, Shear Strength (not clear how it will be addressed without tensile strength testing)
Poison Ratio (5 min)
Conte Developments in Other Areas (Hearing, Public, Safety Review, License Renewal, Commission)
Nothing on Hearings - no new motions related to ASR.
C-10 Inquiry on ASR issue continues and with intensity - Region I Com Tech handling.
Certain members of the public are looking for an open forum on the ASR issue (they called it a bhip~rinn".-at the DEIS meeting in September 201 1(b)(5)
DLR safety staff continued to support standalone inspection and other various conference calls to date - SER with open items tied by 7/12/11 letter from NRC to an acceptable Eng. Evaluation in March 2012.
Region I EDO coordinator briefed December 7, 2011 - he will be moving on in January 2012 to be relieved by another, which means another briefing - Kathyrn Brock is the continuum and she will need to be briefed at that time.
3
Seabrook Concrete Degradation P-REDECI, O,,.,A,-, INFORMATION (10 min)
Conte/Burritt Next Steps NRC Actions Going Forward to Address Degraded Concrete at Seabrook Dec 29 Draft TIA response is expected (continuously review for immediate safety concerns)
Week 1/3/12 Review and digest TIA response, conference at the branch chief level, PM 1/5/12 Week of 1/9/12 Wed Jan 11 Week Jan 17 (Tue)
Week 1/23/12 Inspection preparation/actual review This week and/or next, inspection to evaluate the open operability determinations using the criteria established in the draft TIA Need George Thomas and Suresh Chaudhary Status call with NextEra, verbally communicate open issues to be discussed next week.
Conduct final inspection and exit for standalone inspection 2011-010 Day 1 Might be opportunity to review latest plans and position paper Management Meeting (branch level and/or Sr. Executive Strategist Day2 Morning, Final Exit and key messages Issue Report with key messages and needed requests depending on inspection results wrt operabilty Eg: Response in 30 days or management meeting in order to address:
Details of Comprehensive Plan for ASR Position on whether tensile strength testing or other noted NDE tests will be done Other issues, feasibility of Eng. Eval in March 2012 in light of stated questions and concerns to support operability 4
Seabrook Concrete Degradation RREDEIISIONAL 4
- NIFOfV l*,A*lt (5 min)
Conte/AlI Immediate SafetylLonger Term No immediate safety concern:
(From Commission briefings) Based on staff's review of licensee's current operability determination, the staff found that the degradation from the ASR has no apparent immediate safety concern because:
Although there was degradation, there is still significant margin between the strength available and strength needed Consistent with existing non-nuclear operating experience with ASR, the degradation at Seabrook appears to be occurring slowly The licensee's schedule for developing and implementing corrective actions would address the issue well in advance of the degradation reaching unacceptable levels PODs revised in October 2011 address additional design issues based on information known at the time.
Robust systems of reinforced concrete; additional information on compressive strength value not that much different from as left construction conditions (NextEra still evaluating all results).
NextEra will be prepared to address why one contractor's CS numbers were initially high - low aspect ratio with correction factors and older technology used Final TIA for Control Building, as an example of what to look for in assessing ASR problem, to be issued January 2012 - need to continue to assess any immediate safety concerns.
NextEra doing remodeling of Containment Enclosure Bull
, finite element analysis since it has worst degradation on modulus of elasticity (but operable) and seismic response may be different from other structures such as the control building.
Assistance in reviewing the final OD for the Control Building based on the criteria established in the current TIA.
Does the agency need to do independent core sample testing??????
5
Seabrook Concrete Degradation PREDECtISIONAL fI FeRIMATIQ)N (Time Left)
All SummarylCritique Revisit Purpose and Success Alignment for Proceeding DORL DE LR Projects LR Technical DRP DRS - Lead Strategists 6
Seabrook Concrete Degradation PRED
,E.ONAttNfORMATION C/Vf1 7
Seabrook Concrete Degradation PFDN1ECiSIONX7RL4 NRC Inspection Timeline for Degraded Concrete at Seabrook Third Quarter 2010
- NextEra identifies reduced compressive strength and modulus of elasticity in the Control Building
- 1 operability sample, no findings identified (report 2010004)
Fourth Quarter 2010 1 Maintenance Rule sample, no findings identified (report 2010005) 1 I finding was considered but the initial approach was explicitly prohibited by the Enforcement Manual License Renewal Audit verbally communicated to NextEra the need for a comprehensive plan to address ASR First Quarter 2011 1 Maintenance Rule sample
- Identified 2 Maintenance Rule findings as a result of further follow up from previous period (2011002).
o failure to re-evaluate the Control Building A2 status following the discovery of ASR o inadequate scoping of buildings that support the circ water and service water systems Second Quarter 2011 NextEra identifies reduced modulus of elasticity in additional buildings (CE, EFW, EV, EDG)
- 2 operability samples
- Identified 2 URIs o
Inadequate 50.59 screening that incorporated the reduce modulus of elasticity into the design of the plant (use as is) o Inadequate operability determination (did not address all aspects impacted)
- Identified 1 finding for an untimely OD to address reduced modulus in the Control Enclosure (report 2011003)
- License Renewal inspection completed, concluded that inspection results support a conclusion of reasonable assurance to monitor the effects of aging except for the structures monitoring program with respect to the ASR issue.
- Tensile stress testing identified to NextEra as a key parameter needed to assess operability 8
Seabrook Concrete Degradation
.FlRkEDECI*5'IUNAL iiNFORMyATIONq Third Quarter 2011
- Started follow-up inspection to address URIs Issued a TIA to address additional potential operability issues Fourth Quarter 2011
" Identified 2 findings (report 2011011 draft) o Inadequate 50.59 screening, the related URI will be closed o Inadequate operability determination. Specifically, did not address 1) pipe and cable support anchors, 2) changes in natural frequency, 3) global seismic response of buildings. The related URI will be update and remains open
" Annual PI&R sample to address the Maintenance Rule scoping finding 9
Seabrook Concrete Degradation PRDEDCTTUINAL ifIFORMATiON Summary of Licensee projects from their implementation schedule.
NextEra ASR Project Implementation Schedule Start Finish Sub dates Sub dates Activity - Subactivity 11/18/11 12/16/11 01 - Identify MR Structures affected by ASR (Phase I)
[Phase I for areas that have already exposed concrete]
12/12(11 12116/11 One end product is to identify additional testing needed from summary report 11101/11 01/31/12 02 - Identify MR Structures affected by ASR (Phase II)
[Phase II for areas that need coating removal]
01/16/12 01/20/12 One end product is to identify additional testing needed from summary report 12/09/11 01/09/12 03 - Perform confirmatory compression test of concrete in "B" Elect, Tnl.
CS testing done in Nov. 2011 ????
12/12111 12/16/11 CE revise EC to remove tensile testing (if required) 11/17/11 05/20/14 05 - Long term lab monitoring for residual concrete expansion and aggregate reactivity 03/02/12 04/30/12 Remove and ship 30 cores to lab.
01/16/12 02/24/12 06 - Insitu Monitoring for Concrete Expansion (installed mapping pins) 10
Start 01/16/12 Finish 02J24/12 Seabrook Concrete Degradation Sub dates Sub dates Activity - Subactivity 07 - Structural Re-analysis of Containment Enclosure Building (CEB) 11/29/11 12/09/11 Installing mapping pins in CEVA Area No. 1 12/14/11 12/16/11 Installing mapping pins in CEVA Area No. 2 08 - Structural Assessment of ASR Affected Structures 09 - Dev. Eng. Eval. To address requests for RAI B.2.1.31-1 03/16/12 04/23/12 Update appropriate Eng. Prog. Based on results of Eng. Eval.
10 - Embedments Testing Petrography of cores from girders - damage index rating and visual assessment 11/07/11 11/21/11 02/16/12 03115/12 11/17/11 03/12/12 II