ML18010A322
| ML18010A322 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinch River |
| Issue date: | 01/16/2018 |
| From: | Office of New Reactors |
| To: | |
| References | |
| Download: ML18010A322 (2) | |
Text
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Public Meeting Summary
Title:
Meeting between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) to Discuss Topics Associated with TVA's Early Site Permit Application for the Clinch River Nuclear Site [References Cited in the Environmental Report and Site Safety Hydrology Audit]
Meeting Identifier: Agencywide Document Access Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML17265A386 supporting documents (Topics for Discussion) ADAMS Accession No. ML17311B294 Date of Meeting: November 13, 2017 Location: Two White Flint North (TWFN) and via teleconference Type of Meeting: Category 1 Docket: 52-047 Purpose of the Meeting:
The purpose of the public meeting was to discuss topics associated with Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) early site permit (ESP) application for the Clinch River Nuclear (CRN) site that required clarification and/or technical interactions. Specific topics related to the staffs ongoing environmental review were outlined in an attachment to the meeting notice within the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Public Meeting Notification System (ADAMS Accession No. ML17331B380). Additional topics related to the staffs safety review were also discussed. The prepared environmental topic concerned draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) inclusion of particular references which were cited in TVAs environmental report (ER). The additional safety topics for discussion were related to the safety hydrology audit of TVAs Site Safety Analysis Report (SSAR).
Summary of Meeting The meeting started with introductions, identification of the callers, and an overview of the meeting purpose with a brief presentation of background information.
For discussions related to Topic 1, the NRC staff referred TVA to the publicly available list of selected ER references as identified under Purpose of Meeting section above (ADAMS Accession No. ML17331B380). The staff informed TVA of its intention to cite 23 of these references from the ER and requested that TVA review these reports for sensitive information and submit to the CRN docket if no sensitive information was identified. The references in the above mentioned list were listed by report title together with a simple unique identifier beginning with RD. The identifiers for the 22 reports that the NRC staff requested that TVA review for sensitive information are as follows:
RD-001, RD-002, RD-003, RD-007, RD-011, RD-012, RD-013, RD-014, RD-016, RD-018, RD-023, RD-027, RD-028, RD-029, RD-035, RD-036, RD-043, RD-056, RD-069, RD-071, RD-077 and RD-084.
It was discussed that one ER reference the staff wished to cite in the DEIS was already on the NRC docket from a separate review (RD-031) and was not in the request list. The NRC staff indicated that if any of these documents contained sensitive information such that redaction would
be necessary in order to release as publicly available, the staff would look to see if another source was available with the relevant information as an appropriate substitution.
For discussions under Topic 2 concerning the safety hydrology audit of TVAs SSAR, TVA recognized that the incorrect unit hydrograph of Sub-basin 27 (Melton Hill local) was adversely added on the Figure 2.4.3-17. The correct one is shown in the computation package CDQ000020080066. The Figure 2.4.3-17 will be revised accordingly. The revision of Figure 2.4.3-17 has no impact on the computed probable maximum flood elevation shown in the SSAR. The NRC staff requested that TVA correct an editorial error on Page A3-1 of the SSAR supplement (ADAMS Accession No. ML17157B212). The error is that the HMR 47 needs to be replaced by the HMR 51 in the third paragraph of the Page A3-1. TVA will review the paragraph and correct the error. The NRC staff noted in its review that Figure 2.4.3-17, the peak flow of the synthetic unit hydrograph of Sub-basin 34 (Poplar Creek at mouth) is unreasonably lower than the other peak flows of the adjacent sub-basins, including Sub-basins 25, 33, 36, and 37. The NRC staff requested that the TVA provide the computational detail of developing the unit hydrograph for the Sub-basin 34. TVA will add the detail in the TVAs electronic reading room for NRC staffs review. After the review, the NRC staff may have some follow-up questions about the peak flow and the peak time of the unit hydrograph of Sub-basin 34.
Action Items/Next Steps:
TVA stated that it plans to provide the information as stated above.
NRC/PNNL
Participants:
Tamsen Dozier, Mallecia Sutton, Bruce McDowell, Yuan Cheng, Joseph Giacinto TVA (and its contractors)
Participants:
Raymond Schiele; Kevin Casey; Dennis Lundy Public
Participants:
None