ML17241A274
| ML17241A274 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 08/29/2017 |
| From: | Distel D Niagara Mohawk Power Corp |
| To: | Lauren Gibson Japan Lessons-Learned Division |
| Gibson L, NRR/JLD, 415-1056 | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17241A270 | List: |
| References | |
| CAC MF7946, CAC MF7947 | |
| Download: ML17241A274 (1) | |
Text
From:
Distel, David J:(GenCo-Nuc)
To:
Gibson, Lauren Cc:
Uribe, Juan; Aggarwal, Vinod K:(GenCo-Nuc); Joe Bellini; Corcoran, Robert W:(GenCo-Nuc); Lanka, Bradley Franklin F:(GenCo-Nuc)
Subject:
[External_Sender] RE: Nine Mile Point MSA and FE RAI Date:
Tuesday, August 29, 2017 1:51:04 PM Attachments:
NMP MSA August 2017 RAI Response.pdf Lauren - Attached is the Exelon response to the NRC audit review RAI regarding the Nine Mile Point Flood Hazard MSA and FE.
Please let me know if any additional information is needed.
Thanks.
Dave Distel
From: Gibson, Lauren [1]
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 3:22 PM To: Distel, David J:(GenCo-Nuc)
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Nine Mile Point MSA and FE RAI
- David, Please see the RAI below. I understand that you will submit the response as an e-mail and I will add it to ADAMS. Give me a call if you have any questions.
Thank you, Lauren
Lauren K. Gibson Project Manager Hazard Managemenr Branch Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (301) 415-1056
Request for Additional Information Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 Mitigating Strategies Assessment and Focused Evaluation NTTF Recommendation 2.1Flooding As discussed in the audit call on August 15, 32017, the NRC notes that there are
differences in the way that the warning time is addressed between the Mitigating Strategies Assessment (ML16349A029; dated December 14, 2016) and the Focused Evaluation (ML17069A005, dated March 10, 2017) for Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station. In particular, the FE contains commitments to further evaluate the consequential rainfall estimate and meteorological assessments in order to determine if the monitoring threshold should be adjusted or if the flood protection strategies should be modified. Please explain the evolution of the approach and how it impacts the Mitigating Strategies Assessment. Given that the FE mentions the possibility of warning times that may be less than the 6.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> previously determined for installing the flood barriers, please provide a justification for the plant being protected during such time as the analyses and related commitments are being completed.
This Email message and any attachment may contain information that is proprietary, legally privileged, confidential and/or subject to copyright belonging to Exelon Corporation or its affiliates ("Exelon"). This Email is intended solely for the use of the person(s) to which it is addressed. If you are not an intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this Email to the intended recipient(s), you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this Email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete this Email and any copies. Exelon policies expressly prohibit employees from making defamatory or offensive statements and infringing any copyright or any other legal right by Email communication. Exelon will not accept any liability in respect of such communications.-
EXCIP