ML15041A797

LRA - FW: Please Send to Fermi....: Clarification on SAMA Request

ML15041A797
Person / Time
Site:	Fermi
Issue date:	09/05/2014
From:	- No Known Affiliation
To:	Division of License Renewal
References
Download: ML15041A797 (3)

Text

Fermi2LRANPEm Resource From: Lynne S Goodman [goodmanl@dteenergy.com]

Sent: Friday, September 05, 2014 3:29 PM To: James, Lois Cc: Perkins, Leslie

Subject:

Re: FW: Please send to Fermi....: Clarification on SAMA Request Lois, thank you very much for the quick turnaround on these clarifications. I think this answers our questions. I have forwarded them to our Subject Matter Experts and will let you know if any further clarification is needed.

Lynne

---

"James, Lois" <Lois.James@nrc.gov> wrote: -----

To: "goodmanl@dteenergy.com" <goodmanl@dteenergy.com>

From: "James, Lois" <Lois.James@nrc.gov>

Date: 09/05/2014 12:21PM Cc: "Perkins, Leslie" <Leslie.Perkins@nrc.gov>

Subject:

FW: Please send to Fermi....: Clarification on SAMA Request

Lynne, Below in bold, italic are our responses to your clarification. Let me know if you need more Lois M. James, Senior Environmental Project Manager Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulations lois.james@nrc.gov (preferred method of communication) 301-415-3306 From: Lynne S Goodman [1]

Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2014 6:47 PM To: James, Lois Cc: Perkins, Leslie

Subject:

Clarification on SAMA Request 1

Lois, I'd appreciate if you would send the following request for clarification to the Fermi SAMA reviewers.

I would be happy to discuss this in a telecom.

1. Regarding documentation request #4, please clarify what other reviews of Fermi 2 Level 1 ,2 and 3 PRAs you want documentation on. Is it all the different group reviews of the current PRA version? Is it reviews of all versions of the PRA? Is it the peer reviews of the versions we had peer reviews on?

The documentation requested is for reviews of the version of the Fermi 2 PRA used for the SAMA analysis (FermiV9). The response to question 1.g, might for example, refer to other quality reviews (other than the 2012 BWROG Peer review) of the SAMA PRA. Documentation of a comprehensive sample of these reviews is desired.

2. Regarding question 1.c.h, on discussing the relevance of the resolution of the peer review findings on internal flooding to the FermiV9 model when the Fermi V9 model flooding upgrades are significant, we would appreciate some clarification. Our group interpretted the question two different ways. Are you interested in the timing - e.g. that the peer review was on a draft that included extensive flooding re-evaluation? Are you interested in the significance of the peer review comments that addressed internal flooding because the model had included significant changes for internal flooding? or ??

As indicated in question 1.g, the 2012 BWROG peer review was apparently on a prior version of the Fermi PRA than that used for the SAMA. Since the internal flooding model used for the SAMA PRA was an extensive re-evaluation of the prior model, the applicability of the peer review findings and there resolution to the present application is not clear. If the peer review was on a draft of FermiV9, then this should be made clear and the information requested in question 1.g should be provided.

Lynne Goodman Fermi 2 License Renewal Project Manager 734-586-1205 2

Hearing Identifier: Fermi2_LR_NonPublic Email Number: 127 Mail Envelope Properties (OF21A108FC.BD21112E-ON85257D4A.006AFE1D-85257D4A.006AFE1E)

Subject:

Re: FW: Please send to Fermi....: Clarification on SAMA Request Sent Date: 9/5/2014 3:28:38 PM Received Date: 9/5/2014 3:28:43 PM From: Lynne S Goodman Created By: goodmanl@dteenergy.com Recipients:

"Perkins, Leslie" <Leslie.Perkins@nrc.gov>

Tracking Status: None "James, Lois" <Lois.James@nrc.gov>

Tracking Status: None Post Office: dteenergy.com Files Size Date & Time MESSAGE 3135 9/5/2014 3:28:43 PM Options Priority: Standard Return Notification: No Reply Requested: No Sensitivity: Normal Expiration Date:

Recipients Received: