ML19319B307

NRC-2018-000831 - Resp 2 - Interim - (Interim 2 Responsive Records) Part 1 of 10

ML19319B307
Person / Time
Issue date:	11/13/2019
From:	NRC/OCIO
To:
Shared Package
ML19319B303	List: ML19319B305 ML19319B306 ML19319B307 ML19319B309 ML19319B310 ML19319B311 ML19319B313 ML19319B314 ML19319B316 ML19319B318 ML19319B319
References
FOIA, NRC-2018-000831
Download: ML19319B307 (166)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:From : To:

Subject:

Date: Ramuhalli Pradeep Purtscher Patrick [External_Sender) RE: [External_Sender) Discuss Report Comments Tuesday, September 26, 2017 10:34:38 AM Yes, but I will have to get off the call before 10 am Pacific (1 ET) as I have another meeting at that t ime. Any chance you are available later today (after 3 pm) or tomorrow (anytime - I am wide open)? I will go ahead and get this moved by an hour just in case. With best regards, Pradeep Ramuhalli, PhD Tel: 509-375-2763 Email: pradeep.ramuhalli@ponl.gov

---

Original Appointment-----

From: Pu rtscher, Patrick [ma ilto: Patrick. Pu rtscher@ore.gov] Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 3:08 AM To: Ramuha lli, Pradeep

Subject:

New Time Proposed: [External_Sender] Discuss Report Comments When: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 8:30 AM-9:30 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Ca nada). Where: Call-in number below I have had another meeting come up that I need to attend. Can we postpone our call for 1 hour?

From: To:

Subject:

Date: Will do. Thanks. Ramuhalli Pradeep Purtscher Patrick; Hiser Matthew [External_Sender) RE: [External_Sender) TLR Discussion Wednesday, September 19, 2018 9:46:02 AM With best regards, Pradeep Ramuhalli, PhD Tel: 509-375-2763 Email: pradeep.ramuhalli@pnnl.gov From: Purtscher, Patrick [1] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2018 3:48 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Ramuhalli, Pradeep <Pradeep.Ramuhalli@pnnl.gov>

Subject:

RE: [Extemal_Sender] TLR Discussion

Pradeep, Can you create a new file with those changes we made that you agree are OK accepted, leaving our changes that you think need further consideration. If we could have that file before the Monday tele-con, it should make our discussion easier.

Pat

---

Original Appointment-----

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2018 8:16 PM To: 'Ramuhalli, Pradeep' Cc: Purtscher, Patrick

Subject:

Tentative: [External_Sender] TLR Discussion When: Monday, September 24, 2018 1:00 PM-2:00 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada). Where: Call info forthcoming Hi Pradeep, I have a meeting directly preceding this time that will probably run late. However, you and Pat can meet and I'll catch up when I can after my prior meeting. Out of curiosity, have you had a chance to review our edits? Generally OK with you or many concerns? Thanks! Matt

From : To: Cc:

Subject:

Date:

Pat, Ramuhalli Pradeep Purtscher Patrick Hiser Matthew

[External_Sender] RE: DMLR Specific Comments on PNNL-27120-pr nrc 9-7-1 S_w-PTP _add-ons.docx Friday, September 07, 2018 5:47:58 PM Thanks. Let me review this next week, and we can talk afterwards. Perhaps towards the end of next week, or early the week after? With best regards, Pradeep Ramuhal li, PhD Tel : 509-375-2763 Email: pradeep ramuha lli@pnnl gov From: Purtscher, Patrick [2] Sent: Friday, September 07, 2018 10:54 AM To: Ramuhalli, Pradeep <Pradeep.Ramuha lli@pnn l.gov> Cc: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

DMLR Specific Comments on PNNL-27120-pr nrc 9-7-18_w-PTP _add-ons.docx Here is a copy of you r report with al l of our comments. We t hink this addresses the NRR comments and we hope it wil l be relatively easy for you to review, accepting those changes that you agree with. Where you don't agree, highlight them for our further discussion. The one main comment I had that is not noted in each case is the rating or ranking t hat is present, mainly in Tables 1 through 4. It should be clearly noted where t hose va lues come from, some were from EMDA and others were from t he author's assessment of t he criteria in each table. Clearly the fi nal assessment at the bottom of each table is TBD by each organization that is considering harvesting, given their own set of priorities. Pat

From: To: Subject : Date:

Patrick, Ramuhalli Pcacteep Purtscher Patrick (External_Sender) RE: RE: draft report from PNNL on Harvesting project Wednesday, December 06, 2017 10:57:29 AM An update. Looks like the internal approvals are moving along. I expect it to be approved for release later today or early tomorrow. I will get out an updated version of the document with the P NNL number as soon as this is approved.

With best regards, Pradeep Ramuhalli, PhD Tel: 509-375-2763 Email: pradeep ramuhalli@pnnl Qv From: Purtscher, Patrick [mai lto:Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov] Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2017 7:21 AM To: Ramuhalli, Pradeep <Pradeep.Ramuhalli@pnnl.gov>

Subject:

RE: RE: draft report from PNN L on Harvesting project Good morning, Thanks for the report. When does this get a PNNL report#? I think it needs that before I can officially get this into the system. Pat From: Ramuhalli, Pradeep [3] Sent: Monday, December 04, 2017 4:22 PM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick Purtscher@nrc QY>

Subject:

[External_Sender] RE: draft report from PNNL on Harvesting project

Patrick, I don't recall if I got this back to you or not. If not, attached is the updated version. In addition to t he editorial changes you suggested, an internal peer review caught a few more editorial changes (format checks, grammatical issues). These are in the attached.

With best regards, Pradeep Ramuhalli, PhD Tel: 509-375-2763 Email: pradeep ramuhalli@pool QY From: Purtscher, Patrick [mailto*Patrick Purtscher@nrc QY] Sent: Friday, November 24, 2017 10:05 AM To: Ramuhalli, Pradeep <Pradeep Ramuhalli@pnnl QY>

Subject:

FW: draft report from PNNL on Harvesting project Good afternoon, Here is the report with some little editorial changes that we would like you to make before we send it through for management approval. Pat

From: To: Subject : Date: Ramuhalli Pcacteep Purtscher Patrick (External_Sender) RE: RE: MDLR comments on PNLL"s Guidelines for Harvesting Materials for SLR Tuesday, April 03, 2018 11 :17:56 AM Would tomorrow afternoon work for you? Say around 3 pm eastern? With best regards, Pradeep Ramuhalli, PhD Tel: 509-375-2763 Email: pradeep ramuhalli@pnnl gov From: Purtscher, Patrick [mai lto:Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov] Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2018 4:30 AM To: Ramuhalli, Pradeep <Pradeep.Ramuhalli@pnnl.gov>

Subject:

RE: RE: MDLR comments on PNLL's Guidelines for Harvesting Materials for SLR

Pradeep, Sorry, I thought I had responded to your last message. I am available today or tomorrow in the afternoon (Eastern time). Pick a time that works for you and I will call you.

Pat From: Ramuhalli, Pradeep [4] Sent: Monday, April 02, 2018 5:23 PM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrjck.Purtscher@nrc gov>

Subject:

[External_Sender] RE: MDLR comments on PNLL's Guidelines for Harvesting Materials for SLR

Patrick, Not sure if I missed an email from you, but are you available later this week to talk? Or early next week?

With best regards, Pradeep Ramuhalli, PhD Tel: 509-375-2763 Email: pradeep ramuhalli@pnnl gov From: Pu rtscher, Patrick [ma i Ito* Patrick Pu rtscher@nrc gov) Sent: Monday, March 26, 2018 11:51 AM To: Ramuhalli, Pradeep <Pradeep Ramuhallj@pnnl gov>

Subject:

FW: MDLR comment s on PNLL's Guidelines for Harvesting Materials for SLR Hi, I asked NRR for comments and never expected 8 people to review this report. After you have read the comments, we should schedule a time to talk. Let me know when you are ready. Pat From: Brady, Bennett Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 5:19 PM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick Purtscher@nrc gov> Cc: Oesterle, Eric <Eric Oesterle@nrc gov>

Subject:

MDLR comments on PNLL's Guidelines for Harvesting Materials for SLR Pat Following your request, I asked eight of our technical review staff to review and provide comments

on PNNL's technical letter report on harvesting materials. Attached are general comments on the report and specific comments that I have compiled in redline/strikeout version of t he report itself. Some of the comments are repetitious of comments made by other reviews. I have tried to group similar comments together. When you have had a chance to review them, please see me if you have any questions. I will t ry to answer your questions or get you to the right reviewer. In spite of the rather negative comments on this report, we continue to believe that the Materials Harvesting Project will be in valuable in the future as the NRC deals with aging plants and needs an organized approach for selecting materials for harvesting withe the increased avai lability of sources. Bennett Bennett M. Brady Senior Project Manager Division of License Renewa l Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 0 11- 08 301-415-2981

From: To: Cc:

Subject:

Date: Rnmuholli Prn<Jccn Hiser Matthew; Punschcr PaJrjck; Knobb.s Katie (External_Sender] RE: RE: RE: RRIM Friday, August 05, 2016 11 :40:09 AM So - I have to be in a program review on the 30th in DC, so I cannot do that day either. I was planning on staying over on the 31st (at least for part of the day). With best regards, Pradeep Ramuhalli, PhD Tel: 509-375-2763 Email: pradeep.ramuhaHi@pnnl.gov From: Hiser, Matthew [5] Sent: Friday, August 05, 2016 8:27 AM To: Ramuhalli, Pradeep <Pradeep.Ramuhalli@pnnl.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Knobbs, Katie <katie.knobbs@pnnl.gov> Cc: Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: RE: RE: RRIM My two cents: I think it would be great if we could meet in-person the week of August 29. (I've been interacting with Pradeep on t his for over a year without actually meeting!) My only limitation that week is I can't do August 30, but otherwise am fairly free... we could also meet somewhere downtown if that's easier for Pradeep. If that won't work, perhaps a call on Aug 18, 19, 25, or 26? (Code is mostly Aug 22-24... ) From: Ramuhalli, Pradeep gov Se nt: Friday, August 05, 2016 11:18 AM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrjck.Purtschcr@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <M atthcw.Hiscr@nrc gov>; Knobbs, Katie <katje knobbs@pool gov> Cc: Hull, Amy <Amy Hull@nrc gov>

Subject:

[External_Sender] RE: RE: RRIM

Pat, Thanks. Would the week of the 22nd work (not sure if Code week is that week, or the week after)?

Also, there is a good possibility I will be in DC the week of the 29th for at least a couple of days. I can always swing by and brief you, Matt, and Amy. With best regards, Pradeep Ramuhalli, PhD Tel: 509-375-2763 Email: pradcep ramuhalli@pnnl gov From: Purtscher, Patrick [maj)to*Patrjck Purtscher@nrc gov] Sent: Friday, August 05, 2016 8:06 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <M atthew.H iser@nrc.gov>; Ramu ha Iii, Pradeep <Pradeep.RamuhaHi@pnnl.gov>; Knobbs, Katie <katie,knobbs@pnnl.gov> Cc: Hull, Amy <Amy HuU@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: RE: RRIM Good morning,

Matt and I have gone through t he document and made some comments. (b )(6~ The timing for our next updat e will depend on a lot of factors. I will be out of the office onf... __ for part of t he next 2 weeks and t hen we have ASM E Code meetings here in DC the last week of August. Matt has! !in early September. Let me know when you think you would be ready for a conference call. (b)(6.) Pat From: Ramuhalli, Pradeep [maiito*Pradeep.Ramuhalli@pnnl.gov] Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 12: 14 PM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrjck,Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew Hiser@nrc.gov>; Knobbs, Katie <katje.knobbs@pnnJ.gov> Cc: Hull, Amy <Amy HuU@nrc.gov>

Subject:

[External_Sender] RE: RRIM Patrick, Matt, Attached is a draft document for discussion later today. With best regards, Pradeep Ramuhalli, PhD Tel: 509-375-2763 Email: pradcep.ramuhalli@pnnl.gov

---

Original Appointment-----

From: Ramuhalli, Pradeep Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2016 7:50 AM To: Ramuhalli, Pradeep; 'Purtscher, Patrick'; Hiser, Matt hew (Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov); Knobbs, Katie Cc: Hull, Amy

Subject:

RRIM When: Thursday, July 21, 2016 10:00 AM-11:00 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada). Where: Skype Meet ing

All, Apologies - I have been incom municado for a couple of weeks. I'd like to set up a conference call to play catch up. Let me know if this t ime works for you.

"7 Join Skype Meeting This is an online meeting for Skype for Business, the professional meetings and communications app formerly known as Lyne. Join by phone Join the meetine and have L yne call you or dial-in (Richland) English (United States) 866-528-1882 or 509-375-4555 (Richland) English (Unit ed States) On-campus PNNL staff dial 5-4555 (Richland) English (United States) f ind a local number Conference ID: I 1 **********. (b}(p} Foreoi your dial-in PlN? I l:k41

From: To:

Subject:

Date:

Patrick, Ramuhalli Pcacteep Purtscher Patrick; Hiser Matthew (External_Sender) RE: RE: TLR Update Thursday, August 30, 2018 12:35:38 PM No problem. I will wait till next week for the updated file.

Wit h best regards, Pradeep Ramuhalli, PhD Tel: 509-375-2763 Email: pradeep ramuhalli@pnnl gov From: Purtscher, Patrick [mai lto:Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov] Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2018 5:50 AM To: Ramuhalli, Pradeep <Pradeep.Ramuhalli@pnnl.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: RE: TLR Update Hi, I made a mistake and t he file I sent on Wednesday did not include all of the comments. We are preparing a comprehensive fi le that should be ready by the end of next week with comments/changes t hat you can more easily review and either accept or reject. Those areas t hat you reject can be the areas where we can focus our discussions to finalize the report.

Thanks, Pat From: Ramuhalli, Pradeep [6]

Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2018 12:51 PM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick Purtscher@nrc gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew Hjser@nrc gov>

Subject:

[External_Sender] RE: TLR Update

Patrick, Thanks. Let me review and we can talk. I am out of the office for most of the rest of this week and next; how about Tuesday Sept 11? In principle, what you suggest below seem to be OK but let me take a look through the document as well.

With best regards, Pradeep Ramuhalli, PhD Tel: 509-375-2763 Email: pradeep ramuhalli@pnnl gov From: Pu rtscher, Patrick [ma i Ito* Patrick Pu rtscher@nrc gov] Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2018 9:43 AM To: Ramuhalli, Pradeep <Pradeep Ramuhallj@pnnl gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew Hjser@nrc gov>

Subject:

RE: TLR Update Hi, Matt and I took turns changing t he report with our recommendations, the attached is a composite of our comments. The biggest changes were to drop the abstract, combine sect ions 1 and 2, make t he examples in section 3.3.2 into a separate sect ion, and drop t he specific harvesting examples in Section 4. We don't need that level of details for historical perspective. The general lessons learned are t he points to be emphasized. These are suggest ions and would like to discuss wit h you after you have some time to review. Let me

know when you have time. We hope to meet with NRR near the end of Sept. to go over the report and how their comments were considered. Pat From: Ramuhal li, Pradeep [7] Sent: Friday, August 17, 2018 2:45 PM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>

Subject:

[External_Sender] TLR Update The update so far is attached. This still needs some cleanup and citations included; I am working on a tech editor on these. With best regards, Pradeep Pradeep Ramuhall i, PhD Senior Research Scientist, Applied Physics Group Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 902 Battelle Blvd. P.O.Box 999, MSIN K5-26 Richland, WA 99352 Tel : 509-375-2763 Email: pradeep ramuhalli@pool gov http://www.pnnl.gov

From: To: Subject : Date: Attachments: l:illlL....&m'. Hiser Matthew abstract size constraints ?: Ditto to Rob [eom] : ACTION: PLiM abstract

• revised Monday, May 22, 2017 3:12:15 PM Abstract for 4th PUM NRG RES SLR.doc)(

From: Moyer, Carol Sent: Monday, May 22, 2017 10:56 AM Note to requester: Attachment to this email is immediately following. To: Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Ditto to Rob [eom]: ACTION: Pl iM abstract - revised Thank you all. I will submit this abstract today. Separately, I believe Matt H. is drafting an abstract on harvesting. I hope that it, too, will be well received. Carol From: Hull, Amy Sent: Monday, May 22, 2017 10:35 AM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc gov>; Moyer, Carol <Carol Moyer@nrc.gov>; Frankl, Istvan <Istvan fraokl@orc gov>

Subject:

Ditto to Rob [eom]: ACTION: Pl iM abstract - revised From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Monday, May 22, 2017 10:08 AM To: Moyer, Carol <CaroLMoyer@nrc.gov>; Frankl, Istvan <Istvan frankl@orc gov> Cc: Hull, Amy <Amy Hull@orc gov>

Subject:

RE: ACTION: PliM abst ract - revised Carol: I'm okay with it. I would just read it through one more time before sending to make sure that there are no grammatical errors in the final product.

Cheers, Rob Robert Tregoning Technical Advisor for Materia Is US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Two White Flint North, M/ 5 T-10 A36 11545 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 ph: 301-415-2324 fax: 301-415-6671 From: Moyer, Carol Sent: Monday, May 22, 2017 9:59 AM To: Frankl, Istvan <Istvan f rankl@orc gov>

Cc: Tregoning, Robert <Robert Tregoning@nrc gov>; Hull, Amy <Amy Hull@nrc gov>

Subject:

RE: ACTION: PliM abst ract - revised

Steve, Thank you for your review. I agree with your recommended changes.

Amy, Rob -Still OK with this?

Thank you, Carol From: Frankl, Istvan Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 5:53 PM To: Moyer, Carol <CaroLMoyer@nrc.gov> Cc: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: ACTION: PliM abstract - revised Thanks, Carol. I would recommend change in title. Please see the attachment for additional revisions. Steve From: Moyer, Carol Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 5:03 PM To: Frankl, Istvan <Istvan frankl@orc gov> Cc: Tregoning, Robert <Robert Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy <Amy Hull@nrc.gov>

Subject:

ACTION: PliM abstract - revised

Steve, The draft abstract for our paper for the Plant Life Management (PLiM) conference is included below, for easy access, and attached, for track-changes use if needed. This version addresses comments from Amy, Mita, and Rob. I have asked Sherry Bernhoft, who is on the organizing committee, to confirm that we can submit the abstract early next week.

I will let you know when I learn her true deadline or any other new info. Comments and suggestions are appreciated. Research Relating to Plant License Renewal and Aging Management C. E. Moyer, M. Sircar, J. Philip, J. E. Pires, D. D. Murdock, T. Koshy, A. B. Hull U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC}, Washington, D.C., USA The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC} issues licenses for commercial power reactors to operate for up to 40 years. These licenses may be renewed by the regulator for multiple 20-year increments. Now that 47 of the 99 operating commercial reactors in the U.S. have entered their first period of extended operation (PEO), several licensees have indicated their intention to apply within the next few years for subsequent license renewal (SLR) for an additional 20-year period. The NRC has revised its key guidance documents to indicate its expectations for aging management of passive, long-lived plant systems, structures, and components. Research is being continued beyond the receipt of initial SLR applications to confirm the adequacy of these guidance documents through the SLR period. Should the research identify concerns related to aging management, the guidance may need to be revised to reflect the new results. Resea rch is ongoing in the following four areas: reactor pressure vessel neutron embrittlement, irradiation assisted stress corrosion cracking of reactor vessel internals, concrete and containment degradation, and electrical cable qualification and condition assessment. This paper will emphasize research related to concrete degradation, including alkali-silica reaction and irradiation damage to concrete, and condition assessment of electrical cables. Carol Moyer Sr. Materials Engineer

RES/DE!CMB carol.mover@nrc.aov 301-415-2153

Proposed Abstract for 4th PLiM C. Moyer (RES/DE/CMB) 5/19/2017 Regulatory Research on the Aging Management of Structures, Systems and Components in Nuclear Power Plants Supporting License Renewal C. E. Moyer, M. Sircar, J. Philip, J. E. Pires, D. D. Murdock, T. Koshy, A. B. Hull U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Washington, D.C., USA The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issues licenses for commercial power reactors to operate for up to 40 years. These licenses may be renewed for multiple 20-year increments. Now that 47 of the 99 operating commercial reactors in the U.S. have entered their first period of extended operation (PEO) to operate for up to 60 years, several licensees have indicated intention to apply within the next few years for subsequent license renewal (SLR} for an additional 20-year period. The NRC has revised its key guidance documents to be ready for the review of SLR applications and to communicate expectations for the aging management of passive, long-lived plant systems, structures, and components (SSCs). Regulatory research on the aging management of SSCs is being conducted now and will continue beyond the receipt of the initial SLR applications to confirm the adequacy of these guidance documents through the SLR period. Should regulatory research identify concerns related to aging management, regulatory guidance may be revised to reflect the new results. Regulatory research is ongoing in the following four areas: reactor pressure vessel neutron embrittlement, irradiation assisted stress corrosion cracking of reactor vessel internals, concrete and containment degradation, and electrical cable qualification and condition assessment. This paper will focus on regulatory research related to concrete degradation, including alkali-silica reaction and irradiation damage to concrete, and condition assessment of electrical cables.

From: To: Subject : Date: Attachments: Frankl Istvan Moyer Carol; Hiser Matthew ACTION: Inputs for EPRI quarterly MOU call Tuesday, October 17, 2017 10:32:28 AM EPRI Quarterlv MOU Status Uodate Oct 2017 cern20171011.xlsx Importance: High

Carol, Note to requester:

Attachment to this email is immediately following. Brian needs additional info on harvesting for the upcoming EPRI quarterly MOU call on 11 /3. Please address the highlighted request below in your reply and update relevant section of the attached spreadsheet. Please complete this action noon tomorrow.

Matt, Please assist Carol with this action.

Thanks, Steve From: Thomas, Brian Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 10:11 AM To: Oberson, Greg <Greg.Oberson@nrc.gov>; Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>; Iyengar, Raj

<Raj.lyengar@nrc.gov>; Koshy, Thomas <Thomas.Koshy@nrc.gov>; Miller, Kenneth A <KennethA.Miller@nrc.gov>; Boyce, Tom <Tom.Boyce@nrc.gov> Cc: Regan, Christopher <Christopher.Regan@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Inputs for EPRI quarterly MOU call

Folks, The status update for the action items for CMB, ICEEB, and RGGIB needs improvement.

For CIB - I am not aware of any deep dive meetings occurring. Specific accomplishments for such meetings should be identified. Neither I nor Chris attended nor were invited to any such meeting. Information stated was already known and does not portray any progress on the action item. For cable harvesting - please state what was done to enable the completion of the harvesting. Also state what other collaborative activities are needed regarding cable research at this time? For RGGIB/Codes and Standards - please state what occurred or was agreed to going forward at the Standards Forum. Thanks... Brian From: Oberson, Greg Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 4:40 PM To: Thomas, Brian <Brian.Thomas@nrc.gov> Cc: Regan, Christopher <Christopher.Regan@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Inputs for EPRI quarterly MOU call

Brian, Attached are the inputs for your consideration. I would like to provide these to Nick by Wednesday if possible.

Greg

Action Item Assianment Status Uodate Challenaes/lssues for Manaaement Attention EPRI and NRC management and staff should be encouraged to continue awareness of decommissioning NPPs in order to identify potential components for future Review the availability of cables that could be harvested from plants in CMB Cables to be harvested for the current harvesting. NRG/RES is undertaking a research project decommissioning to support research on cable aging and performance research project on cable condition to prioritize components for harvesting that will support under realistic conditions. Elevate as needed to EPRI and NRG assessment and cable degradation is aging management studies for SLR, including electrical management to facilitate successful availability. completed. components. EPRI/NRC "deep dives" have been completed. RPVs & Internals: A public workshop on RPVs and internals is planned for Spring 2019. Concrete: A joint (NRC/DOE/EPRI) roadmap meeting on concrete is expected in Q4ofCY2017. Schedule "deep dive* meetings on L TO RPV/ Concrete / Cables research CMB Cables: A joint roadmap meeting on cables EPRI and NRC management and staff should be within the near-term (3-6 months) to assess the status of roadmap is scheduled for 1/8/2018. A public encouraged to continue participation in the joint activities, identify remaining gaps in Research, determine what research workshop on concrete and cables is roadmap process to track completion of confirmatory remains to be completed, and when can we terminate these research planned for Summer 2020. research for L TO, as well as to identify any emerging projects (e.g., concrete irradiation). Additionally, identify options to Based on confirmatory research to date, the opportunities for leveraging or otherwise accelerating complete the research in an efficient manner and that optimizes use of NRG is ready to receive utility submittals in completion of the work. available resources. Assess readiness for potential utility submittals by Dec. 2017. The joint roadmap process is Lessons learned from reviews and implementation of the Dec 2017. Use these updated roadmaps to complete remaining research being used to track completion of remaining lead SLR applications will be fed back into the joint in support of long-term operations. research in support of L TO. roadmap process. After discussions with RES and EPRI staff, it was determined that an SLR workshop in 2017 would not be timely. Near-term applicants are in the peer-review phase, and unlikely to modify applications. CMB Workshops would be more effective after lessons learned from addressing the lead applications. Public workshops on SLR are being planned for Spring 2019 (RPVs and Identify if there are opportunities for an earlier SLR workshop in 2017 in Internals) and Summer 2020 (Concrete and advance of the first SLR aoolication by the end of the year. Cables). Develop technical addendum on advanced reactor materials research which identify planned NRG and EPRI cooperation. Focus on aligning GIB efforts and avoiding unnecessary duplication of activities. Target end of the year. EPRI Quarterly MOU Status Update Oct 2017 _cem.xlsx

Brian Thomas sent an email to Kurt Edsinger on 6/28 inviting EPRI to the NRG Standard Forum, and requesting that EPRI RGGIB make their reports publicly available so they can be used for standards. Kurt replied on Kurt E. suggested that we make use of EPRI reports a 6/30 that EPRI would support the Forum, topic for a quarterly meeting or a face-to-face meeting. Forward to Kurt by the end of June the invite to the September 2017 and would likely make their reports available We could also explore whether EPRI could get vendors Standards Forum meeting, which NRG is hosting. to those interested. to particpate in using the reports and creating standards. Work with legal staff to enable domestic distribution of the xLPR code and facilitate future international distribution. Explore viable and practical GIB approaches, such as distributing the code to international non-aovernmental entities throuah RISSG. EPRI Quarterly MOU Status Update Oct 2017 _cem.xlsx

From: To:

Subject:

Date: Importance:

Pat, Frankl Istvan Purtscher Patrick ACTION: harvesting report Friday, May 25, 2018 11 :04:23 AM High What is the latest status of the PNNL report? Can we prioritize its publication?

Thanks, Steve From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2018 12:09 PM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Audrain, Margaret

<Margaret.Audra in@nrc.gov>; Pu rtscher, Patrick <Patrick. Pu rtscher@nrc.gov> Cc: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: harvesting report I agree it would be good to move the publishing of that report ahead expeditiously to help our coordination with EPRI. Last I heard Pat said PNNL was working on addressing NRR's comments - not sure what the timeline was for doing that though. Thanks! Matt From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2018 8:37 AM To: Audrain, Margaret <Margaret.Audrain@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick Purtscher@nrc gov> Cc: Frankl, Istvan <Istvan Frankl@orc gov>

Subject:

harvesting report All: Yesterday, during Steve's presentation, EPRI (Dyle and Demma) expressed interest in getting the PNNL report once it's published. We're also planning to have some discussions with EPRI next week during the NRC/EPRI materials meeting to promote future collaboration on harvesting opportunities. Therefore, I think we should make publishing that report a higher priority and we can possibly use it in part to help frame our discussions with EPRI moving forward. Thoughts? Rob

Robert Tregoning Technica l Advisor for Materials US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Two White Flint North, M/S T-10 A36 11545 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 ph: 301-415-2324 fax: 301-415-6671

From: To: Subject : Date: l:illlL....&m'. Tregoning Robert; Hiser Matthew ADAMS address to obtain other presentations?: source doc for DOE slide: Harvesting Efforts June NRG-Industry materials mtg 5-28-15 mah.abh.pptx Monday, June 01, 2015 12:07:35 PM Thanks. I am working at home. How do I access other presentations? From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Monday, JuneOJ,20151 1:12AM To: Hiser, Matthew Cc: Hull, Amy

Subject:

RE: source doc for DOE slide: Harvesting Efforts June NRC-Industry materials mtg 5-28-15 mah.abh.pptx Got you; I didn't read the entire thread to really grasp the issue... Robert Tregoning Technical Advisor for Materials US Nuclear Regulatory Commission 21 Church Street, MIS CS-5A24 Rockville, MD 20850 ph: 301-251-7662 Blackberry:..... ! -- .....1.(P)(~.) fax: 301-251-7425 From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, June 01, 2015 11:11 AM To: Tregoning, Robert Cc: Hull, Amy

Subject:

RE: source doc for DOE slide: Harvesting Efforts June NRC-Industry materials mtg 5-28-15 mah.abh.pptx Hi Rob, What you have is the final version. There was a comment from Kathy about cleaning up Slide 15, but the slide was a screenshot from a DOE presentation that Amy has only in PDF form, so it's not possible to fix the formauing (nor desirable really given that it is someone else's slide... ). Thanks! Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Division of Engineering Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 301-251-7601 From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Monday, June 01, 2015 11 :08 AM To: Hiser, Matthew Cc: Hull, Amy

Subject:

RE: source doc for DOE slide: Harvesting Efforts June NRC-Industry materials mtg 5-28-15 mah.abh.pptx Matt/Amy:

Here's the powerpoint that I have if you need it. Please send me any changes that you make to this so that I can make sure the latest version is available for presenting. RT Robert Tregoning Technical Advisor for Materials US Nuclear Regulatory Commission 21 Church Street, M/S CS-5A24 Rockville, MD 20850 ph: 301-251-7662 Blackberry:,..! -- .... j(b)(§) fax: 301-251-7425 From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, June 01,2015 I0:39AM To: Frankl, Istvan Cc: I-lull, Amy; Tregoning, Robert

Subject:

FW: source doc for DOE slide: Harvesting Efforts June NRC-Industry materials mtg 5-28-15 mah.abh.pptx FYI Steve - it appears Amy has the source slide only in pdf form, so it is not possible to make these changes. I think it works fine as is to convey the necessary information for our purposes... From: Hull, Amy Sent: Monday, June 01, 2015 7:35 AM To: Hiser, Matthew

Subject:

source doc for DOE slide: Harvesting Efforts June NRC-lndustry materials mtg 5-28-15 mah.abh.pptx Matt, I 'snipped' slide L3 of the attached pdf. I could not figure out how to clean it up. Are you able to? From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 9:39 AM To: Hull, Amy; Frankl, Istvan Cc: Tregoning, Robert.

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Efforts June NRC-Industry materials mtg 5-28-15 mah.abh.pptx Hi Rob, Steve, Arny, I have made the changes in accordance with Kathy's comments as relayed by Steve in the attached PP. One final tweak Arny and I will try to make on Monday is to Slide 15 - if we can clean up the source slide from DOE, just so the information comes through clearly. Thanks! Mau From: Hull, Amy Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2015 10:03 AM To: Frankl, Istvan Cc: Tregoning, Robert; Hiser, Matthew

Subject:

Harvesting Efforts June NRC-Industry materials mtg 5-28-15 mah.abh.pptx We have made changes suggested. I will drop the 390 form off for you now.

From : ~ To: Moyer carol; Burke John; Herrity Thomas; Hiser Matthew; Audrain Margaret; Purtscher Patrick; Tregoning .fu!.Qe.r:t; Harris Brian Cc: Frankl Istvan Subject : Date: Analysis of reception of our RIC posters, thanks for your participation, Friday, March 16, 2018 8:58:55 AM RIC poster outreach metrics parameter

1. of poster handouts taken to exhibit
2. of poster handouts remaining on 3/16/2018
3. posters picked up by visitors
4. people noted on contact/interest/signin form
5. of business cards completed, left at exhibit completed detailed interest form Amy B. Hull, PhD Senior Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission

• Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering
• Corrosion & Metallurgy Branch (RESIDE/CMS (office T10-D49))

11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852 Ph.: (301) 415-2435

• FAX: 301-415-~671 Alt e-mail:!

r ceiil._ __......., _ _, (b )(6) (b )(6)_ AM 75 1 74 20 13 7 Harvesting 120 47 73 27 16 5

From: To:

Subject:

Date: Audrain Margaret Hjser Matthew; Purtscher Patrjck ANL Harvesting Trip Thursday, November 16, 201 7 2:05:56 PM First attempt at ANL letter. Edit away! Bodgan et all, A few of us at the NRG (Matt Hiser, Pat Purtscher, Rob Tregoning, and me), are setting up a database of materials for a harvesting program. We'd like to schedule a visit to ANL to be our "guinea pig" site to get rolling with the effort. We have four main material areas of interest: RPV, RVI, cables, & concrete and are interested in what ANL has from past programs with the NRG, DOE and others. We hope to assemble an inventory of available materials to consider for a harvesting program like, or in coordination with, that in the INL NSUF Nuclear Fuels and Materials Library (NFML). Our emphasis is in the four areas outlined earlier, but not necessarily limited to those four. Materials of interest don't have to be material from plants with extensive service history. Would you all be available and have the resources to meet with us to go over the materials ANL has in inventory? We hope that all of you, with the assistance of Omesh Chopra and Bill Shack, will be able to identify materials of interest before we make the trip. This would be some preliminary work on your part and then roughly a half day in person. We are thinking about planning the trip mid-Dec. Would this give you enough time to compile material of potential interest? We can have a phone call in advance to better describe what we're looking for if that would help.

Thanks, Meg, Matt, Pat and Rob

From: To:

Subject:

Date:

Pat, Brady Bennett Purtscher Patrick Comments on PNNL Report Wednesday, March 07, 2018 11 :20:18 AM I just got some more comments from Allen Hiser. I am incorporating them in the redline/strikeout version and in the general comments. You may want to delay your review of the comments I sent yesterday until I have them all. I will try to get them to you by the end of the week.

Bennett Bennett M. Brady Senior Project Manager Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 0 11 - 08 301-415-2981

Criteria Title Crilicalness of Technical Gap Addressed Description Harvesling to address critical gaps should be prioritized over less csscn1ial 1echnical gaps Scoring Guidance H = high risk significance/ little to no available data MH = Medium-high risk significance/ limited data available M = Moderate risk significance/ some data available ML= low to moderate risk slgnficance / sufficient data available for regulatory decisions H = High MH = Medium-high M = Medium L = Low risk significance/ large amount ML= Medium-low Importance of Harvested Materials over Laboratory Aging Applicability 10 US Operating Fleet Key considcra1ions arc the case of labornlory rcplica1ion of aging mechanism and unique field aspccls of the aging mechanism. Degradation mechanisms that arc harder 10 replicate with simulalcd aging conditions would be ofl,igher priority for harvesting. For example, simultaneous thermal and irradiation concli1ions arc clifl1cult to replicate outside of the plant environment. Alternatively, accelerated aging may nol be feasible for a mechanism scnsi1ivc to dose rate. These two degradation mechanisms may be best evaluated using harvested mlilerials. For unique field aspects, legacy materials (e.g., fabrication methods, composition) that are no longer available, but may play an iml)onant role in a polcntial degradation mechanism, would have a higher priority than harvesting materials that can be obtained from other sources wi1h representative properties. There is grcnlcr value in developing knowledge lo uddrcss an issue lhat may be applicable to a larger number of plants compared to one that may only affect a relatively small number of plants. of data available L = Low H = Nearly impossible to replicate service enviroment I critically important to use* harvested materials MH = Challenging to replicate service envlroment I important to use harvested materials M = Possible with some limitations to replicate service envlroment I moderately important to use harvested materials ML= Not challenging to replicate service enviroment / less important to use harvested materials L = Very easy to replicate service envlroment I not important to use harvested materials H = All plants MH = AIIPWRs M = Ali BWRs or most PWRs ML= 15 plants L = <5 plants H = No or very limited inspection methods available/ low confidence in AMPS If ma1urc inspcclion melhods cxisl and arc easy 10 apply 10 monilor MH = Limited Inspection methods degradation, harvesting may be less valuable. If inspection methods available/ low-to-moderate confidence Regulatory Considerations Related do not exist, harvesting may be essential 10 ensure confidence in the In AMPs to lnspcclions an.d AMPs assessment of age-rcla1ed degradation in thal panicular M = Some inspection methods available Harvesting cost and complexity Timeliness of results Availability of materials for harvesting component.The less confiden.ce thal NRC staff has in the / moderate confidence In AMPs effectiveness of the reicvanl AMP, the higher priorily for harvesting. ML= Good inspection methods available/ medium-high confidence In AMPs Activities with higher costs and complexity are less attractive than similar activities wi1h lower costs and that arc simpler to execute.. For example, harvesting unirradiated concrete or electrical cables is less expensive and less complex than harvcsling from the RPV intcmals or the RPV. The ability of a potential harvesting program to provide timely results 10 support either a technical or regulatory need is impo11ant. I laving high confidence 1ha1 results will be timely increases the priority. The availability of materials to harvest for a panicuiar data need is clearly essenlial and increases lhe priority. L = Effective, well-accepted inspection H = Highly irradiated (>5 dpa) MH = Lightly irradiated/ contaminated M = Minimal contamination or high effort unirradiated ML= Unirradiated, moderate effort expected L = Unirradiated, low effort expected

Need Oescrtptlon RPV Purpose / Testing Planned Basic Info Tec:hnlcal Knowledge Gained RPV - tigt, ftuence & high shift -..essel with well-eslat>ished urwradiated MeaSlS'a nuenca. loughless. & chemistry as I Through thickness section 10 a funcbon of through-validate iklence & auenuaoon thdme55 position models Ena!* measurement Qf bolh the Charpy transition RPV

• Samples from viftualy I curve and master curve any vttssel transition temperabxe TO Provides data supporting 8Yolutm from the use of oorretaM (Charpy-based) to direct mttasuremen!

(rra<:OKe <oogMesS*based) approaches TKhnical Criteria Criticalness of Technical I lm_portanc:e of Harvested. I A,)plk:a,bllity to US Opcratln Fleet Gap Addn,ssed Materials over Laboratory Aging g Sco,.. ICCll'l'\\l'Mnt Score l Comm*nt Scor* I Com,rient Regulotory Conslderotlons Related to Inspections and !S core Awe,age l Basis fOf' Technkal Priority AM... Score ! Commit11t The attenuauon models fl.we the feast amc;lU'l1 of supportjng infonnation oompared to other aspeds re&atedk>RPV ernblituemanl. ~r. studies IO Gate have vaidatedl,e conservativism of existing atttenuai.on modets used i The attaruatiOn study iS I sightly more imponant to me. juSt because there are fewer ! such studies that have been 1don&. a.,g able to confirm ! expected trends at hi9ier M This WOf1(. has been done belore OOl1'>eod-W(n Should focus oo higer fluences to vedy that he atten.Jatioo trends aJq)eCted are main~- IMH There are ncx many Stu<ies that irradial& 6 ID 9 inches of steel $0, from that standpon., getting specimens from an RPV ars important tor studying atteruatioo M While lhe infom'l.alion Should be genericalty appricable, il for soma reason, 118 rasutts are onty appticabfe 10 *high luence" materials/locations, trus might result in les-s relevance IO lower tluence plants (IOCkJding BWRs). IML in regulalory applic;lbons. IM I l\\.lencs ~ would lhef'efore I be useful. M I believe that enough data has been devek>ped from both test and s<.<Veilooce specmet1s sl..ld'I thoit the link is wel-es~~~*.... 1 :1 lt.t.. The only real.cfYantage tn my rrind for having vessel material for this study is that h:tre are no quesllions repres.entatfflllness or a,ny le~r incldi:jitiQn compared to h actual MH Anymoonationdeveloped ...,... be generical~ -ble l ML

we have as good~

ccnfid&nce in RPV embf"ittlement than wtually 'any other degradation that 'we study The criy reaJ 'issue Is making sure that 'our un~ nding relll<lins 'appltCabl8 at the t.Qhest , M*ML While ifs always usetul to have m<)f"e data, especially on RPV materials. I feel that ow mooe1s seady haYe a good technical basis. Cost I Complexity Project Specific Timelinesr. of AvJlfJbllity of results materials for harvesting Score lco........nt MH MH Ma~l isimliciated The,esuls -I WIIOUld betfflely I they are developed befOl'e 2024 Of' wtueh wm afled al ~ tQ coincide aspeas of specimen WICh the preparatiOn and adci~ Oh&r lhan Zion 1esting Furtler, inlormatk,n m,nerial$, rm lalung specimens at being collected nal aware of several lhrough-from industfy Olher RPVs that lhlckness locations surviellance are avalabfe for wiU increlil$e cost. DrOOJ8ffi$ h.lrvest.lg. The results would betmely iflheyare developed Olhef than Zion Matanal is irradiated I before 2024 or material'S, rm whdl will affect al so to CO!nc:.de not wwa<e al aspects of specimen with the oiher RPVs that preparabOn Md additional are av~ for t~sbng. infnnn,,,,ti,,v,, harve$trlg.

Ba.sic Info Technical Criteria Nffd Oe.llCription PUl'J)OH / THting Planned T.chl'lical Knowledge Gained 1 Crklc,iinea1 ol Techn~1 knpo,tance ol Harveatec:i I Afipkabililyto us Oparating Reel Gap Ad~Wd llaterlals over l.Jlboratoty AOlng RPV I sc... l C-1 Score c....... RPV-Hviftuence&hgh I Thrc>u;ft lhickness section IO /Score C&MHw~ shift vessel wtth well-Measure~. IOugtr'l~S!I. - 1 lhebelline. MH ~in change~Heucside estabilhed unin'.diJ!ed & ctoeml~ as 8 hJn::taon °' Va/kSalea..ieoce&attenuatlon lhroug'I-1tdness poMllon modot. ChanoeloH ofbelthne Enable, Measui-t1i'ler'll d bellh Pn;,yid@,s data &UPl)Orq evollaJn I RPV-~, W'l.t.iallyl lheCN Ira $ition fmm theUMofco~cc~ s rom tPf" n ~ based} IOdirecuneawrement... MH H anyvessef a'ld m:;::: ~Ion (fr.lea-;;,~~~ed) Rttul1to,y Con1klent1on1 Relaled to inspeclionS and AM.. Scon: Com.,... --1 eni:wictle1'!'*11isnoc a'l$pec;teclb" f:<'t'briellef'net'lliSnoc iN,j\\ illSpect<<.llor score AvaageJ BasiS for T*chnical Priority Cfnl I C9mpluky Project Specific Timelinus of ~suits Allanuation lormula has been used tor ye.n. hide tie beltlioe irsaocepleOand behoedoo11Serr.ttNe. and~ i& probaDly lrue. Grwter ~ M$0Ciated VJiih harvested data ouuide ol V..,limited a-c:,13nc dala 11111:ists~e Cl*'haP5 6,:,lants) to O()l'l'lp.ke '> SUl'\\ldlien:::-e data-ThOse c.Wa th~I dOexiSI Ol)l'l'lpare tea$0f'l~bt;o wdl, &lo, MYe e~e ~a,s,o,ns tor disagreement We haVe lilllept,yslcal reason to eapect ~es beerNeen et-pant (ha,Nested) d8&8 and st#W6ence data *- but (B!1 noled)"We haVe flDldlecked In that miMY C8!1.e9. AvailabUyof materiakfor h11rve11,tin,Q

Basic Info TK hnical Criteria I Proiect Specific I Purpose / Tasting I Criticalness of Technical Importance of Harvested RegulJtory ConsldefilltlonS Cost I Complexity I Timelinesr. of I AvJlfJbllity of Need Oescrtptlon Pl __... Tec:hnlcal Knowledge Gained Ga Add d M *-. 1 6.... A,)plk:a,bllrty to US Operating Fleet Related to Inspections 11nd Score Average Basis fOf' Technkal Priority Its materials for an,..n1 p nrssv a... na s over Ld....... ory.._ng AMPs resu harvesting METALS I I Seo,.. CCll'l'\\l'Mnt Score Comm* nt Scor* C~nt Seor* Comm.,.t Score Co........nt I I EPRI p8fforming R&D on Laboratory repication very NOE fof void swet.,g; Likety extenl of void sweling In Fills data gap fof acljeo,,,e fluences with visual teWlg, which cot.id higher ftuences is uncertain, Very Ngh cost tor c:iffiajt to impossible IO MRP-227 u ses prwna,rily I I Significance of void swelting at I Hm fluence ceoclo< ;,t* mals Ip---..,. IASCC I.,,. impocl on a-adtina L I.,...,...., I..., I con<ilion,; MH components ;, mo,t PWRs MH ...., -~at

3. 75 onset ot,ignmco'" dog,adali..J VH I.,....,..,

I I TBD VOid swelling. meehanieaf PWRs dul'ing extended opeta11on extended pla,. representative inadlatJOn APl)lcabl,e to high-fluence detect vOld swell,ng once and inspectiO(ls may detect tli!1'1t1 fl'adsated MRP-227 requir" V1$Ual FlJence levels may be m pection:s. whieh can be achieYed by ~t reactor tonowed by 'o'Olumetric to lrradiabon (e_g_ further size flaws. However. laek lnspectJORS are required, tu SS wield and HAZ materials to ir*>rm Lil1Je IO no data but would be most aeates uncertainty on creates U'!Oertalnty on H.igh cost for CGR and FT properties for irradiated:1 I ,I limtdi8tion of Zoota welds). of data above 2 ~ lack of data above 2 dpa Higher fkJence SS welds (>2 IFracture toughness, I inspedion scope l:Uld inlerval and exist$ on SS welds rep,esenU!tive with ex-anumpliorls for CGR af1d 3ssumptions for CGR ood FT imdclted dl;>a) IASCC. and mic:rostrvca..-el flaw evaluation H above 2 ctpa M I !Uni ma1erials. MH A..nt*ahLP. to most PWRs MH FT ri flaw evalua1o'I. 4 in flaw evaluation H components Would gn,atty irlaease Moderate cost lor Purpose of work woi.*:I be confidenoe in large set of contanwiated, but Fradllre tougtiness data.n real I !Validate I Ito pn:Mde Nlai-wotkl accelerated aging data with not irradiated, Thermally aged UWT~ted 1F~ rure toughness ~ lconcitions to compare to ~ a1ed aging valdation of accelefa:ed MoSI applicable to a subse1 of No ISi method iilVaiable to testing of~ primary stsem CASS mlaostructure act*atod ~ data riiH data H I anlnn in lab t.ainn M PWRs H mt.asll'e IOSS of FT 4.25 mattrlals M I N'll'IVV'll"l,nts May be pos$ible. but ~ to repliica;elor'lg* Hqtco~f-Ot Moderate lluence (1-2 dpa) I Fractute toughness and I Frac:U'e toughMss data near llfflll Confwm regulalory term aging and irradialion Most appl.cable to a subset of No ISi method avMabte to Would lncreas~ con6dence ~ itradated CASS m1crostructure ren1lllrinnfurtherevaluation ML posiion effects M PWRs H meas~elossofFT 3.5 in>n1..latorvpos111on H components Moderate cost tor Determine whether sec mitigabon Purpose d this wed iS to cont.anwiated. but meihods ~e effective a1 ~nialg v~ridale NOE and Purpose ol won woi.Ad be assess inspection and not fflld~ted. Metallic components with I NOE and destructive I $CC. effectiveness of NOE at rl'llbgabOn method to provide l'f:ai-workt mliga_oon method Increase COl"lfldence ln NOE prima,y stsem known Haws exarrination detedion and sizing fiili effecriYeness t.e-1 vaidation of lab testino H

• ~

to al l,:1nts ML effectiveness 3.75 and,ni+i,,,"tion methods M i..................... nts Moderate c:ost lor contan'W'lated. but Pu,pose "'"'°"' WQ'*I ho I I I I Fatigue calculat- """" I I I I not md~lod, Metalhc components with I NOE and destructive I Det8ffl'llne wheller fatigue flaws are I I Validate fatigue ife I I to proYido re...world sampling lf'lspections of Increase CXll"lfidence in fabgUe prima,y stsem li'niting fatiQue life examination present in hiQh usa<:1e locations Plil-t methodolo(Jies t.l.. vaidation cA lab testioa H Appica,ble to all plants Ml llirrutinq fa6Que locations 3.25 life calculations M comPOnents

Need Description ELECTRICAL Low and medlum voltage cables Cables ptOlected wrth fira reaardant coating 1E MOVs from harsh and mild enwonmencs tE Air operated valves; 4160 1£ breakats 1E Molded case breakers 480V, 25lN DC, 125 VDC. 1E Relays from mid environment GE - HFA. Aga:stat timing relays, any from Westinghouse, Potier Brumfiekl, Stuther.i Dunn I etc. Batteries Elecb1cal ,trabons F*e research Interest Electrical endosures Distribution: switchgear, MCCs. LCs I Conltol: Horseshoe. SSCP. AS!=', etc. Purpose / Testing Planned Basic Info Technical Knowledge Gained Criticalness of Technical Gap Addressed Score I Comment Importance of HarvHted Materials over Laboratory Aaino Score I Comment Techni,cal Crimi.a Regulatory Conskferations Applicability to US Operating Fleet I Related to Inspections and AMPs Score I Comment Score I Comment Sc ore Average Basis for Priority Project Specific Cost I Complexity Timeliness of I Avail.ab ility of materials for results harvesting Score ! Comment

Basic Info Technical Criteria Project Specific Purpose / Testing Criticalness of Technical Gap Importance of Harvested Regulatory Considerations Cost/ Complexity Timeliness of Availability of Need Description Planned Technical Knowledge Gained Addressed Materials over Laboratory Applicability to US Operating Fleet Related to Inspections and Score Average Basis for Priority results materials for Aaina AMPs harvestino CONCRETE Score Comment Score Comment Score Comment Score Comment Score Comment Struclures Degradalion of concrete Physical and mechanical H Confirm regulatory H Harvesting is of high M MostPWRs H New aging mechanism 4.5 Very limited data, new aging M Moderate TBD e<posed lo high due lo Irradiation, degradation data under service position. Data available importance because no added for further evaluation mechanism added in SLR* cost for radiation attenuation or radiation environment. Level of lrradaiation from 1970's are not data available from in SLR-GALL and SLR* GALL, SLR-SRP. No moderate through concrete. (neutron, gamma, temperature) representative or light service irradiated SRP. No inspection inspeclion method and OE not level of through the concrete and depth of water reactor (LWR1 concrete, inaccessible method and data available. available because location irradiation on irradiation damage. Aggregate environments. Recent for inspection, limited inaccessable, Safety concrete. expansion, cracking of concrete, limited number of data lab test data, small significance for RPV support differential response of components available from NRAJ are scale lab test structures are critical. or concrete, i.e, aggregate, mortar. representative or LWR specimen. and rebarlsteel embeds and environment. Validate degradation under thermo-hydro* accelerated aging data. radio-mechanical environment due Currently no data to radaition. Conduct NOEs. available from service irradated concrete. Real woMd validation of test data and benchmarto.ing of degradation models. Conduct NDEs. Post-tensioned Degradation of post-ln-~tu internal degraclation, MH Investigate and verify MH Real wortd validation of MH About 37% US NPPs H Concrete internal condition 4.25 Improve confidence on L Un irradiated TSO structures tensioning (PT) system. delamination, adjustment of knowedge related to lab testing, bench containment Is post-tenslOned. is not part of ISi. Limited numerical modelling, potential prestress force and interaction with degradation modes under marking of numerical Also there are a few post-condition monitoring for failure modes, degradations, lnsitu degradation. sustained multi axial modelling, potential tensioned/prestressed SFP. tendon. Oetensioning and and NOEs. Collect critical prestessing force wihoul failure modes, retensioning of tendons of information from failed post, radial rebar, lntemal applicable NOEs. aged containment. tensioned containmnet. degradation, degradation Critical information Effective NOE for PT of prestessing system from failed post* containment structure not including anclhorage, tensioned containmnet. available. NOE methods. Degradation of concrete Ongoing research is providing MH To study in-situ effects of M The knowedge gained H One plant severely affected by M Monitoring for 3.75 Inform adjsutements to aging L Unirradiated An iotemational from Alkali-Silica-Reaction undersanding of the concrete ASR concrete from the current ASR in the US. Because ASR manifestation of ASR is management programs. cooperative (ASR) material damage mechanisms and degradation and research is primarity is a slow evolving chemical part of aging management Enhanced understanding of research program the characterization of that damage comparison with derived from controlled mechanism of the concrete programs for concrete the possibillity of combined is being initiated as well as of its implications to understanding developed laboratory testing itseW and all plants have safety-structures. For structures degradation effects io the f.,ld. under the structural performance. The from laboratory testi'lg. involving controlled related concrete structures. with ASR more complex Assess homgeneity of damage auspices fo the knowledge gained Is primarily To investigate possibility aging environments at monitoring for ASR is part of aging management plans in real structures. CSNI. The derived from laboratory testing of combined aging effects constant environemnts, concrete magement programs would monitor the program will test together with visual observations of such as ASR and homogeneous aging for an concrete structures for progression of ASR, concrete samples field structures. reinforcement corrosion. and single aging iong term oeprations. concrete cracijng. harvested from a mechanism. structural deformations decommissioned and, ff needed, iovotve nuclear power coring and testing of ptant in Canada samples. Study or In-situ extensively conditions would support affected by ASR. Corrosion of implementation of more The NRC plans to effective aging participate in this reinforcing steel, management plans. program. which is tendon, liner, likely to provide embedment

Ex-Plant Materials Harvesting Workshop Location: NRC Headquarters in Rockville, MD, USA Dates: March 7-8, 2017 Motivation: There are increasing opportunities to harvest the safety-critical components from decommissioning plants, both domestic and international. The harvested materials are valuable because they have been exposed to actual in-service plant operating conditions (temperature, irradiation, coolant, etc.), unlike virgin materials tested under simulated conditions in the lab. Data from ex-plant materials should help address technical gaps identified for extended operation of nuclear power plants due to highly relevant aging conditions. Purpose and Objective: For NRC staff and interested stakeholders to have greater awareness and knowledge of the benefits and challenges associated with ex-plant harvesting. Facilitate contacts and communication to enable specific cooperative ex-plant harvesting programs to initiated. Workshop Topics: Harvesting decision-making and prioritization o Technical data needs best addressed by harvesting o Technical information needed in advance of harvesting Sources of materials: o Decommissioning reactors o Operating reactors - replaced components o Previous harvesting programs - "boneyards" o Tracking available materials Harvesting process o Lessons learned from harvesting experience o Perspective of utility-owner and decommissioning contractor on harvesting o Communication and coordination between decommissioning and researchers International collaborative programs on specific components at specific plants be Workshop will consist of solicited presentations followed by discussion periods. If interested in attending or learning more about the workshop, please reach out to the contacts below. Contacts: Robert Tregoning, Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov Matthew Hiser, Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov Patrick Purtscher, Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov

Ex-Plant Materials Harvesting Workshop Agenda Tuesday, March 7 Session Time Organiz.ation Speaker Presentation Title Intro 8:00 NRC Michael Weber Welcome and Introduction to Workshop Robert Tregoning DOIE Rich Reister DOE Perspectives on Material Harvesting EPRI Sherry Bernhoft EPRI Perspective on Harvesting Projects 8:15-8:45 NRC Robert Tregoning NRC Perspective on Motivation for Harvesting 1 GRS Uwe Jendrich Role of GRS in Decommissioning and LTO CRIEPI Taku Arai CRIEPI Motivations for Harvested Material 8:45-9:45 DISCUSSION 9:45-10:00 BREAK 10:00-PNNL (for NRC) Pradeep Ramuhalli Data Needs Best Addressed By Harvesting 10:20 10:20 - NRC Matthew Hiser High-Priority Data Needs for Harvesting 10:30 10:30-DOIE Keith Leonard LWRS Program Perspective on the Technical 10:55 Needs for Harvesting 2 10:55-Review of past RPV sampling t est programs 11:20 SCK-CEN Rachid Chaouadi and perspective for long term operation 11:20 - Westinghouse Arzu Alpan Importance of Harvesting to Evaluate 11:45 Radiation Effects on Concrete Properties 11:45 - DISCUSSION 12:30 12:30-2:00 LUNCH 2:00- 2:10 NRC Matthew Hiser Sources of Materials: Past NRC Harvesting and U.S. Decommissioning Plants 2:10 - 2:35 EPRI Al Ahluwalia Harvesting Plans for Materials Aging Degradation Research in Korea and Sweden 2:35-2:50 DOE/ORNL Tom Rosseel Materials Harvested by the LWRS Program 2:50 - 3:00 DOE/I NL John Jackson NSUF Material Sample Library 3:00 - 3:15 Energy Solutions Gerry van Zion Material Harvesting Program Noordennen 3 Potential Harvesting of Concrete from Mihama 3:15-3:30 Westinghouse Arzu Alpan Unit 1 3:30 - 3:45 BREAK 3:45-4:00 GRS Uwe Jendrich Plants in Decommissioning in Germany Evaluating Structures, Systems & Components 4:00-4:15 CNSC Daniel Tello from Decommissioned/Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities in Canada 4:15 - 5:00 DISCUSSION

Wednesday, March 8 Session Time Organization Speaker Presentation Title 8:00 - 8:30 EPRI Jean Smith Lessons Learned: Harvesting and Shipping of Zorita Materials 8:30 - 9:00 DOE Tom Rosseel LWRS Program: Harvesting Lessons Learned 9:00-9:30 NRC Matthew Hiser NRC Perspective on Harvesting Experience and Lessons Learned 9:30 - 10:00 CRI EPI Taku Arai CRIEPI Research Activities with Harvested 4 Materials 10:00 - 10:15 BREAK 10:15 - 10:45 Energy Gerry van Zion Harvesting Experience and Lessons Learned Solutions Noordennen 10:45 - 11:15 Dominion Bill Zipp Kewaunee Insights on Material Harvesting 11:15 -12:00 DISCUSSION 12:00-1:30 LUNCH 1:30-1:45 PNNL (for Pradeep Ramuhalli Technical Information Needed for Informed NRC) Harvesting Decisions 1:45-2:30 DISCUSSION 5 2:30-3:00 Action Items and Next Steps EPRI Sherry Bernhoft DOE Rich Reister Closing Thoughts 3:00-4:00 NRC Robert Tregoning ALL

Ex-Plant Materials Harvesting Workshop Motivation: There are increasing opportunities to harvest the safety-critical components from decommissioning plants, both domestic and international. The harvested materials are valuable because they have been exposed to actual in-service plant operating conditions (temperature, irradiation, coolant, etc.), unlike virgin materials tested under simulated conditions in the lab. Data from ex-plant materials should help address technical gaps identified for extended operation of nuclear power plants due to highly relevant aging conditions. Purpose and Objective: For NRC staff and interested stakeholders to have greater awareness and knowledge of the benefits and challenges associated with ex-plant harvesting. Facilitate contacts and communication to enable specific cooperative ex-plant harvesting programs to be initiated. Workshop Topics: Harvesting decision-making and prioritization o Technical data needs best addressed by harvesting o Technical information needed in advance of harvesting Sources of materials: o Decommissioning reactors o Operating reactors - replaced components o Previous harvesting programs - "boneyards" o Tracking availlable materials Harvesting process o Lessons learned from harvesting experience o Perspective of utility-owner and decommissioning contractor on harvesting o Communication and coordination between decommissioning and researchers Workshop Approach: Each session will consist of solicited presentations followed by lengthy discussion and Q&A period.

HARVESTING OF AGED MATERIALS FROM OPERA TING AND DECOMMISSIONING NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS M. Hiser, P. Purtscher, A. B. Hull, R. Tregoning U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Washington, DC Email: matthew.hiser@nrc.gov P. Ramuhalli Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Richland, WA, USA Abstract Recent plans 10 shut down a number of nuclear power plants (NPPs) provide opportunities for harvesting components that were exposed to actual light water reactor (L WR) environments. Technical issues associated with extended plant operation, such as reactor pressure vessel (RPV) embrittlement, irradiation-assisted degradation of reactor internals and primary components, concrete structures and containment degradation, and electrical cable aging, may be used to focus harvesting efforts on high-priority issues. Harvesting can provide highly representative aged materials for research and, in some cases, may be the only practical source of representative aged materials to address high-priority issues. Harvesting can be expensive and time-consuming, which makes it essential 10 focus on those technical needs with the highest importance and cooperate with multiple organizations whenever possible 10 optimally leverage resources. NRC is interested in engaging with other organizations 10 prioritize data needs for harvesting, identify areas of common interest, and develop a database for sources of materials for harvesting.

1. BACKGROUND Recent developments in the nuclear industry include stronger interest in extended plant operation and plans to shut down a number of nuclear power plants (NPPs). In the U.S., there is strong interest in extending NPP lifespans through subsequent license renewal (SLR) from 60 to 80 years [ I]. Further research may be required to understand age-related degradation throughout the SLR period to help ensure that aging management programs are adequate.

U.S. utilities and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) are focused on the aging of systems, structures, and components in four key technical areas: reactor pressure vessel (RPV) embrittlement, in-adiation-assisted degradation (IAD) of RPV internals and primary components, concrete structures and containment degradation, and electrical cable aging [2]. In recent years, a number ofNPPs, both in the U.S. and internationally, have shut down or announced plans to shut down. Unlike in the past when there were very few decommissioning plants, these plant shutdowns provide opportunities for harvesting components that were exposed to actual light water reactor (L WR) environments. Additionally, harvesting programs can be costly and complex. Given these constraints, aligning interests and leveraging with other organizations is important to allow maximum benefit and value for future research programs.

2. NRC EXPERJENCE WITH HARVESTING NRC has significant experience with harvesting plant components and performjng research on harvested materials to address technical issues. This experience includes a range of components from plants in various stages of operation both in the U.S. and internationally. Some of the harvesting projects that the NRC has participated in have studied the following materials or components:

RPV materials from the decommissioned Gundremmingen plant to study fluence rate effects on RPV embrittlement [3], Cast austenitic stainless steel (CASS) materials from the decommissioned Shippingport reactor. to study CASS thermal embrittlement [4], RPV materials from the unfirushed or never-operated Shoreham and Midland plants to improve understanding of flaw distributions for RPV embrittlement concerns [5-6], RPV bead control rod drive mechanism penetrations from the operating North Anna and Davis-Besse plants to study primary water stress con-osion cracking (PWSCC) of nickel alloys and the effectiveness of non-destructive evaluation (NOE) methods [8-12), Reactor coolant system (RCS) piping nozzle weld materials from the operating V.C. Summer plant to study PWSCC of nickel alloys [l l-12],

Reactor internals materials from the decommissioned Jose Cabrera (known as Zorita) plant to study high-fluence irradiation effects on stainless steel reactor internals materials [13), Aluminum-based neutron-absorbing materials from the decommissioned Zion plant to study degradation in the spent fuel pool environment [ 14), Electrical cables from the decommissioned Zion and Crystal River plants to investigate cable degradation [ 15), Electrical bus ducts from the decommissioned Zion plant to study high-energy arc faults in electrical enclosures [ 16]. As illustrated by these programs, NRC's experience is that harvesting has contributed significantly to improved understanding of important technical issues for nuclear safety. For RPV materials, harvesting has increased knowledge of embrittlement mechanisms and the underlying flaw distributions in the RPV to allow reduction in unnecessary conservatism. For nickel alloys, harvesting has improved understanding of PWSCC and the development of acceptable inspection intervals, while also increasing confidence in the ability ofNDE methods to detect and characterize flaws. Finally, recent work on electrical enclosures has helped to identify a potential new safety issue associated with high-energy arc faults in electrical components containing aluminum [ 16).

3. NRC PERSPECTIVE AND LESSONS LEARNED FROM HARVESTING ACTIVITIES From NRC's perspective, a principal role of harvesting is to confirm other research results from simulated aging conditions. In many situations, accelerated aging through higher flux test reactor irradiations or e levated temperatures can be used to generate significant data to understand aging effects in a more cost-effective manner.

Limited harvesting efforts of materials from actual service environments can help confirm the adequacy of the knowledge gained from accelerated aging studies, and thus increase the confidence in the broader knowledge base. However, in certain situations, harvesting may be the only practical source of representative aged materials. For example, achieving high tluence levels with representative irradiation conditions through accelerated aging can be very challenging. Additionally, it is essential to gain as much information as possible regarding the materials and environment (temperature, llucncc, irradiation conditions, chemistry, humidity, etc.) in advance before committing to a specific harvesting project so that the implications of the results from evaluating the materials can be properly understood. Pragmatically, harvesting can be expensive, complex, and time-consuming; therefore, focusing on technical needs of high importance will help ensure good value. Likewise, leveraging and cooperation among multiple organizations helps to mitigate cost challenges. It is also quite challenging to transport irradiated materials, particularly internationally, so minimizing or avoiding transportation of irradiated materials is highly recommended.

4. NRC ACTIVITIES ON HARVESTING NRC is potentially interested in harvesting materials to assess age-related degradation in the four technical areas identified previously: RPV embrittlement, lAD of RPV internals and primary components, concrete structures and containment degradation, and electrical cable aging [2). The focus is to understand the impact of extended plant operation on material behavior, including the effects of higher fluences and longer exposures to aging conditions.

NRC has recently undertaken an effort, with the assistance of Pacific No1thwest National Laboratory (PNNL), to develop a strategic approach for harvesting aged materials from NPPs. Past harvesting activities have been narrowly focused on the relatively few oppo1tunities to get materials from decommissioning plants. Given the expected availability of materials from numerous plants and identified research needs to better understand aging out to 80 years of operation, the N RC is developing a more proactive approach to prioritize the data needs best addressed by harvesting and identify the best sources of materials to address high-priority data needs for regulatory research.

5. PRIORITIZATION OF DATA NEEDS BEST ADDRESSED BY HARVESTING The first step in this strategic approach is to prioritize data needs for harvesting. A data need describes a particular degradation scenario (i.e., combination of material and environment) and should be defined with as much detail as appropriate in terms of the material (e.g., alloy, composition) and environment (e.g., temperature, fluence, chemistry).

A number of criteria are being considered for prioritizing the harvesting data needs, including:

Applicability of harvested material for addressing critical gaps Harvesting to address critical gaps shouJd be prioritized over less essential technical gaps Ease of laboratory replication of the degradation scenario Degradation mechanisms that are harder to replicate with simulated aging conditions would be of higher priority for harvesting. For example, simultaneous thermal and irradiation conditions are difficult to replicate outside of the plant environment. Alternatively, accelerated aging may not be feasible for a mechanism sensitive to dose rate. These two degradation mechanisms may be best evaluated using harvested materials. Unique field aspects of degradation For example, legacy materials (e.g., fabrication methods, composition) that are no longer available, but may play an important role in a potential degradation mechanism, would have a higher priority than harvesting materials that can be obtained from other sources. Fleet-wide vs. plant-specific applicability of data There is greater value in developing knowledge to address an issue that may be applicable to a larger number of plants compared to one that may only affect a relatively small number of plants. Harvesting cost and complexity Activities with higher costs and complexity are less attractive than similar activities with lower costs and that are simpler to execute.. For example, harvesting unirradiated concrete or electrical cables is less expensive and less complex than harvesting from the RPY internals or the RPY. Availability of reliable inspection methods for the degradation scenario Jf mature inspection methods exist and are easy to apply to monitor degradation, harvesting may be less valuable. If inspection methods do not exist, harvesting may be essential to ensure confidence in the assessment of age-related degradation in that particular component. Timeliness of the expected research results The ability of a potential harvesting program to provide timely results to support either a technical or regulatory need is important. Having high confidence that results will be timely increases the priority. Availability of materials for harvesting The availability of materials to harvest for a particular data need is clearly essential and increases the priority. The above potential criteria provide a systematic approach for prioritizing harvesting data needs. Different organizations may weigh these criteria differently, but the criteria are intended to be comprehensive. NRC is interested in engaging with other organizations to further refine these criteria, use them to prioritize data needs for harvesting, and ultimately identify areas of common interest that may provide optimal harvesting opportunities.

6. DATABASE OF SOURCES OF MATERIALS FOR HARVESTING NRC is interested in engaging with other organizations to develop a database that identifies sources of materials for harvesting. This database would include both previously harvested materials and those which may be available for future harvesting. This database would be used to align the high-priority harvesting needs to the available materials. As with the harvesting prioritization effort, the level of detail for the sources of materials database should be appropriate for the factors influencing decision-making.

7. CONCLUSIONS NRC's experience is that harvesting can yield highly representative and valuable knowledge about materials aging. However, these efforts may be expensive and challenging. Having a clearly defined objective and early engagement with other stakeholders, including the decommissioning plant where harvesting will take place, arc necessary to ensure project success. As specific harvesting opportw1ities are identified through this strategic approach, the NRC will develop strategies for pursuing these opportunities. The NRC also welcomes collaboration from other interested research organizations both in developing the proactive harvesting strategy and in pursuing harvesting opportunities of mutual interest.

REFERENCES [I] REMER, S. J., "NRC Commissioner Briefing on Subsequent License Renewal," NRC Commission meeting on April 26, 2017, https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/commission/slides/20 I7/20170426/remer-20170426.pdf. [2] U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, "Ongoing Staff Activities to Assess Regulatory Considerations for Power Reactor Subsequent License Renewal," SECY -l 4-0016, 2014, https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML 1405/ML I 40SOA306.pdf. [3] HAWTHORNE, J.R., HISER, A.L., "Experimenta l Assessments ofGundremmingen RPV Archive Material for Fluenee Rate Effects Studies," NUREG/CR-5201 (MEA-2286), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, October 1988. [4] CHOPRA, O.K., SHACK, W.J., "Mechanical Properties of Thermally Aged Cast Stainless Steels from Shippingport Reactor Components," NUREG/CR-6275 (ANL-94/37), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, April 1995. (SJ SCHUSTER., G. J., DOCTOR, S. R., CRAWFORD, S.L., PARDINl, A. F., "Characterization of Flaws in U.S. Reactor Pressure Vessels: Density and Distribution of Flaw Indications in the Shoreham Vessel," NUREG/CR-6471 Volume 3, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, November 1999. [6] SCHUSTER, G. J., DOCTOR, S. R., PARDINI, A.F., CRAWFORD, S.L., "Characterization of Flaws in U.S. Reactor Pressure Vessels: Validation of Flaw Density and Distribution in the Weld Metal of the PVRUF Vessel," NUREG/CR-647 1 Volume 2, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, August 2000. [7] MCCABE, D.E., ET AL., "Evaluation ofWF-70 Weld Metal From the Midland Unit I Reactor Vessel," NUREG/CR-5736 (ORNL/TM-13748), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, November 2000. [8] CUMBLIDGE, S.E., ET AL., "Nondestnictive and Destnictive Examination Studies on Removed-from-Service Control Rod Drive Mechanism Penetrations," NUREG/CR-6996, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, July 2009. [9] CUMBLIDGE, S.E., ET AL., "Evaluation of Ultrasonic Time-of-Flight Diffraction Data for Selected Control Rod Drive Nozzles from Davis Besse Nuclear Power Plant," PNNL-19362, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, April 2011. [ I OJ CRAWFORD, S. L., ET AL., "UltTasonic Phased Array Assessment of the Interference Fit and Leak Path of the North Anna Unit 2 Control Rod Drive Mechanism Nozzle 63 with Destructive Validation," NUREG/CR-7142 (PNNL-2 1547), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, August 2012. [II] ALEXANDREANU, B., CHOPRA, O.K., SHACK, W.J., "Crack Growth Rates in a PWR Environment of Nickel Alloys from the Davis-Besse and V.C. Summer Power Plants," NUREG/CR-6921 (ANL-05/55), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, November 2006. [12] ALEXANDREANU, B., CHOPRA, O.K., SHACK, W.J., "Crack Growth Rates and Metallographic Examinations of Alloy 600 and Alloy 82/ 182 from Field Components and Laboratory Materials Tested in PWR Environments," NUREG/CR-6964 (ANL-07/ 12), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, May 2008. [13] BURKE, J. "Characterization of Irradiation-Assisted Degradation of Reactor Internals Materials," IAEA CRP Coordinated Research Meeting, 2014, Vienna, Austria, https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML 14 l 5/ML 14 l 53A403.pdf. [J 4] U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMlSSJON, "Acquisition and Testing of Zion Spent Fuel Pool Neutron Absorber Materials," Addendum to Memorandum of Understanding between NRC and EPRI, 2014, https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML 1501/ML I 5015A02 I.pdf. [ 15] FIFIELD, L.S., "Status Report and Research Plan for Cables Harvested from Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant," PNNL-25833, September 2016. [ 16] GI ITTER, J. G., Path Forward for Regulatory Treatment of High-Energy Arcing Fault Tests Results that Involve Aluminum," Internal NRC memo, March 2016, https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML 1606/ML I 6064A250.pdf.

'Annual NRC/EPRI MOU Review Meeting-May 30, 2018 Proposed RES/DE Topics

1. Ex-Plant Materials Harvesting

a. NRC and EPRI have cooperated effectively on several materials harvesting programs, including the reactor internals from Zorita. NRC hosted an ex-plant materials harvesting workshop in March 2017 that was attended by EPRI, DOE and international parties, which provided valuable insights and feedback on best practices and lessons learned from past harvesting efforts.

b. NRC is priorit1izing data needs for harvesting and collecting information on available sourrces of materials (including operating and decommissioning plants as well as previously harvested materials that we have previously used in NRC-sponsored research activities) to ensure the best value for research on harvested materials.

c. NRC is interested in engaging with EPRI on their priorities for harvesting and how to achieve the best value in pursuing harvesting opportunities, including leveraging and cooperation.

d. If EPRI and NRC management are aligned, informal coordination and dialogue will be pursued that could be formalized through MOU addenda or cooperative agreements for any specific research activities that result.

ACTION: Work proactively with EPRI to identify harvesting opportunities in metals, concrete and cables to ensure the best resource leveraging. We propose developing an MOU addendum or cooperative agreement to achieve this outcome.

2. Test Reactors and Irradiated Materials Testing (New topic in response to the evolving status of the Halden Reactor)

a. NRC is performing a strategic review of options for test reactor irradiation and irradiated materials testing capabilities, particularly in light of the potential shutdown of the Halden Reactor.

b. NRC and EPRI cooperation on the Zorita materials research has been effective for leveraging resource-intensive testing of highly irradiated reactor internals materials.

c. NRC is interested in further opportunities for leveraging and cooperation with EPRI for test reactor irradiation and irradiated materials testing capabilities, particularly if currently planned efforts at Halden are not able to be completed.

d. If EPRI and NRC management are aligned, informal coordination and dialogue will be pursued that could be formalized through MOU addenda or cooperative agreements for any specific research activities that result.

ACTION: Actively conduct contingency planning with EPRI to identify the most viable option(s) for the structural material testing that is currently planned under the Halden Research Project. A cooperative agreement or MOU addendum may be proposed to implement the most viable option identified during the planning phase.

3. Advanced Manufacturing, including Additive Manufacturing (30 printing)

a. NRC and EPRI are separately investigating advanced manufacturing techniques that may be applied in operating reactors to produce replacement parts, or in new and advanced reactors to produce novel components.

b. NRC hosted a public workshop on additive manufacturing (AM) in November 2017 that was attended by EPRI, DOE, and numerous other organizations. The meeting scope included standardization activities, AM research and applications in nuclear and other industries, AM processes and capabilities, and technical and regulatory challenges.

c. EPRI staff (Dave Gandy) provided NRC with an overview of a DOE-supported demonstration project to produce a 2/3-Scale reactor pressure vessel for a small modular reactor (SMR) using advanced manufacturing with goals of reducing both cost and manufacturing cycle time. The processes employed were powder metallurgy with hot isostatic pressing (PM-HIP), electron beam welding (EBW),

and diode laser cladding (DLC).

d. NRC is interested in engaging with EPRI on addressing technical and regulatory challenges to adoption of advanced manufacturing techniques. If EPRI and NRC management are aligned, informal coordination and dialogue will be pursued that could be formalized through MOU addenda or cooperative agreements for any specific research activities that result.

ACTION: NRC is starting to develop an agency plan (or roadmap) on AM that will identify research needs. If EPRI has plans to develop a similar roadmap, NRC would like to coordinate with EPRI to ensure that the research planned within each organization is aligned and focused on developing a sufficient technical basis to support implementation of AM within the nuclear fleet. This collaboration could be performed informally or through separate agreements or MOU addenda. It is envisioned that, once the roadmaps are developed, there may also be specific research activities that could be jointly pursued by separate agreements or an MOU addenda.

4. Application of Extended Finite Element Method (xFEM)

a. NRC is developing a research project to explore the applicability Extended Finite Element Method (xFEM) to predict PWSCC crack growth in 30 component geometries., The xFEM technique has several advantages over conventional FEM technique, namely:

Mesh-independent analysis of flaws SIF calculation of multiple cracks shapes without major changes to model 30 crack growth without re-meshing

b. NRC is also participating in international effort on benchmarking of xFEM capabilities. (OECD-CSNI)

c. The ACRS FY18 biennial review report of research program recommended RES to further explore the applicability of xFEM.

ACTION: NRC would like to engage EPRI in an effort to benchmark the xFEM application to PWSCC crack growth analyses. 2

From: Sent: To:

Subject:

Attachments: Hi Erick, Moyer, Carol Thursday, May 18, 2017 12:31 PM Martinez Rodriguez, Erick Note to requester: Attachments to this email immediately follow. Draft Talking Points for Brian Thomas for EPRI_R3.docx Draft Talking Points for Brian Thomas for EPRI_R3.docx; RE: Draft Notes for EPRI mtg 6/6 The attached file is a work-in-progress, in which I am collecting high level talking points for Brian Thomas for the 6/6 EPRI meeting. I am hoping to compare notes with you, in case you have received input from others. Does the level of detail seem about right? (See Raj's note, attached.) Steve asked me to provide a draft file to Brian today, so I am working to that. Thank you, Carol

Draft Talking Points for Brian Thomas for EPRI-NRC Meeting (6/6/2017} 9:30 AM - Long Term Operation {L TO) Beyond 60 Years, Subsequent License Renewal The MOU for Long Term Operations Beyond 60 Years extends through Sept., 2021 NRC appreciates EPRl's active participation in the April Commission briefing Biweekly coordination calls (EPRI/NRC/DOE) are successful Progress and readiness for SLR applications As reported at the April 261h Commission briefing, NRC is ready to accept applications. Confirmatory research continues, to reduce uncertainty associated with key technical issues. Public workshop on SLR topics At least two workshops are proposed, to include domestic and international participants. Fall 2018-Focused on reactor pressure vessels, vessel internals, and piping Spring 2020 - Focused on concrete and electrical cable degradation Proposed scope of the workshops: o State of knowledge on the technical issues o Status of on-going research on materials degradation and aging management o New operating experience with implications for LR and SLR Technical reports on continued adequacy of RG 1.99 ... [CIB input] Highlights of harvesting workshop Workshop well-attended by DOE, EPRI, NRC, US industry, and international participants. Participants discussed the motivation for harvesting, data needs best addressed by harvesting, sources of materials for harvesting and future harvesting program planning. o Workshop discussion emphasized the need for a clearly defined objective to justify the level of effort and demonstrate value. o Past harvesting experience shows valuable technical information can be gained, but harvesting efforts are expensive and complex. Workshop summary report will be shared among meeting participants (target: 6/30/17). Future activities from the workshop include cooperative discussion of prioritized data needs for harvesting and potential development of a sources of materials database. Research priorities for 2017-2018 10:45 -Advanced Reactor Safety Research Draft Talking Points for Brian Thomas for EPRI_R3.docx 11/08/19 11 :37

IAP status RES/DSA is supporting IAP-2 o Strategy 2: Acquire/develop sufficient computer codes and tools to perform non-LWR regulatory reviews RES/DE is supporting IAP-2 and IAP-4 o Strategy 2: Acquire/develop sufficient computer codes and tools to perform non-LWR regulatory reviews, Functional Area - Materials and component integrity o Strategy 4: Facilitate industry codes and standards needed to support the non-LWR life cycle (including fuels and materials) Computational codes for non-LWRs ... [DSA iput] Advanced manufacturing Advanced processes, such as additive manufacturing (30 printing), diffusion bonding, friction-stir welding, electron beam (EB) welding, and powder metallurgy (PM/HIP) have been proposed for use in new reactors. Benefits include reduced number of welds/joints, reduced machining waste, reduced time to manufacture, and ability to join metals that are difficult to weld conventionally. Some advanced manufacturing processes may introduce uncertainty. o Material properties need to be confirmed (e.g., PM/HIP vs. forged flanges). o Different inspections (pre-service and in-service) may be needed. o Components may be susceptible to flaw types or degradation mechanisms previously unseen in LWRs. Gen IV materials RES/DE (and NRO) staff are participating in ASME B&PV Code committees working on high temperature materials needed for some advanced reactor designs. o Alloy 617 o Graphite ASME Code is also seeking to expand the temperature range for use of some materials by supplying confirmed materials property data under a broader range of test conditions. NRC is collaborating with DOE-NE to avoid surprises in material selection and the establishment of technical bases for the use of newer materials and processes. 11 :15 - xLPR and Leak-Before-Break (LBB) Analyses Draft Talking Points for Brian Thomas for EPRI_R3.docx 11/08/19 11 :37

... [CIB input] Current status of MOU development 2:00 - Digital Instrumentation & Control Collaboration ... [ICEEB input] Progress during previous year Priorities for 2017-2018 Draft Talking Points for Brian Thomas for EPRI_R3.docx 11/08/19 11 :37

Subsequent License Renewal (SLR} Research Activities Key Messages Research is being conducted by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to confirm safe operation of nuclear power plants as they age particularly beyond the first extended operating period and into subsequent license renewal (SLR). Significant progress has been made in addressing the key technical issues pertinent to the aging management of systems, structures and components in nuclear power plants. The NRC staff continues to cooperate with the industry, Department of Energy (DOE), and Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) to leverage research to ensure that aging effects will be adequately managed during the 60 to 80 year operating period. Facts The NRC staff is performing the necessary confirmatory research to support timely and efficient reviews of future SLR applications, including the assessment of reactor structural components that could deteriorate due to material degradation resulting from extended exposure to elevated temperatures, pressures, neutron irradiation, stress, and corrosive media. NRC research activities will likely continue for at least 5 years in some of the technical areas, with periodic r,eviews to consider whether the available information is adequate to support the development of generic aging management guidance. Near-term confirmatory research efforts will support staff reviews of initial SLR applications. Longer-term confirmatory research will augment the technical basis for updating regulatory guidance in the future, as necessary, and inform staff reviews of future SLR applications. NRC research supports the safety basis of ongoing revisions to the aging management programs (AMPs) to ensure the functionality and safety margins of NPP systems, structures, and components (SSCs) by enhancingi our understanding of the causes and how to control of degradation mechanisms. RES staff is collaborating with EPRl's Long-Term Operations (LTO) program and DOE's Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) staff on SLR-related research topics (reactor pressure vessel (RPV) embrittlement, irradiation-assisted damage in reactor internals, concrete degradation, and cables qualification and condition assessment). RES - SLR One Pager-May 2 2017.docx

NRC Readiness for Advanced Reactors (Non-LWRs) Key Messages The NRC can review and license new non-LWR designs using the existing re,gulatory framework but is working to improve processes to support effective, efficient and predictable regulatory review activities. The NRC is planning and proactively implementing activities in three focus areas to prepare for the effective, efficient and predictable review of non-LWR designs: enhancing technical readiness, optimizing regulatory readiness, and optimizing communications. In the near term (0-5 ye,ars), the NRC is focusing on technology-inclusive activities commensurate with the pace of non-LWR technology development and maturity. Facts Vendors and applicants are responsible for providing sufficient research and documentation to support their safety case, including the identification and resolution of new design issues. Challenges have been faced with new vendors due to limited familiarity with the regulatory process and potential vendor budget constraints. The NRC is addressing these challenges through public meetings with the vendors and various industry groups to provide information on the regulatory process and to gain insights into the challenges the vendor community is encountering or anticipating. The NRC and DOE have developed plans that describe their respective vision and readiness strategies to support the efficient development, licensing, and deployment of non-LWRs. o The NRC's vision and strategy document was issued for public comment in July 2016 and was finalized in December 2016. o To execute the NRCs readiness strategy, draft implementation action plans have been developed for the near-term (0-5 years), mid-term (5-1 0 years) and long-term (>10 years) The NRC is enhancing its existing regulatory framework to address non-LWRs in a technology neutral manner, which include: o Development of advanced, non-LWR design criteria. o Developing a conceptual design review process to give vendors regulatory feedback at an early design phase. o Developing a staged review process to allow vendors to get regulatory review at pace with their funding needs. o Developing prototype guidance. The NRC is working with DOE to implement a process for providing accurate and current information to DOE in support of the Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear (GAIN) initiative under and MOU signed on November 10, 2016. The NRC is pursuing outreach activities to educate new vendors on the regulatory process. The NRC and DOE initiated the Advanced Non-LWR Workshop series to proactively reach out, educate, and interact with as many vendors and stakeholders as possible. A third workshop was held on April 25 and 26, 2017. Adv_Rx_Readiness_3-31-2017.docx

Non-Light Water Reactor (Non-LWR) Regulatory Framework Development Key Messages The NRC can review and license new non-LWR designs using the existing regulatory framework but is working to improve processes to support timely and efficient licensing activities. The NRC and its predecessor agency, the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), have significant historical experience with non-LWR designs. The NRC is enhancing its existing regulatory framework to address non-LWRs in a technology neutral manner as part of its Vision and Strategy for Safely Achieving Effective and Efficient Non-Light Water Reactor Mission Readiness. The NRC is collaborating with international counterparts on regulatory approaches to non-LWRs. Facts The AEC reviewed and licensed designs dating back to the construction and operation of the first experimental breeder reactor in 1951 and the establishment of an experimental reactor program in 1954. The NRC has not licensed a commercial non-LWR for construction or operation, however, the NRC did review a variety of conceptual designs, at varying levels of detail, between 1978 (Hanford Fast Flux Test Reactor) and 2010 (pebble bed modular reactor (PBMR) and General Electric-Hitachi (GEH) PRISM). More recently, in February 2016, the NRC reviewed and approved a construction permit for a new and innovative medical isotope production facility submitted by SHINE Medical Technologies, Inc. (the "SHINE" facility). This project demonstrated the NRC's ability to review new and innovative facility designs. The NRC is enhancing its existing regulatory framework to address non-LWRs in a technology neutral manner as part of its Vision and Strategy for Safely Achieving Effective and Efficient Non-Light Water Reactor Mission Readiness. The NRC has begun hosting a series of public meetings with non-LWR stakeholders to gain feedback on various regulatory framework activities. Examples of the regulatory framework activities discussed include: o Developing a conceptual design review process to give vendors regulatory feedback at an early design phase. o Developing a staged licensing process for innovative designs within the current licensing framework. o Developing guidance on prototype licensing and testing. o In advance of the October meeting, the NRC's draft "Regulatory Review Roadmap for Non-Light Water Reactors" was released to facilitate stakeholder discussion and feedback at the meeting. The staff also actively participates with our international counterparts as chairs of the NEA working group on regulatory approaches to non-LWRs (focusing on sodium-cooled fast reactors) and in the IAEA Gen-IV international forum (GIF) activities. Adv_Rx_Framework_3-31-2017.docx

From: To: Cc: Subject : Date: Iyengar Raj Moyer Carol Frankl Istvan; Martinez Rodriguez Erick RE: Draft Notes for EPRI mtg 6/6 Thursday, May 18, 2017 9:22:09 AM Update from the AM meeting (per Office TA): Talking points at a high-level (only strategy and vision) - Programmatic details could be addressed later through other exchanges. From: Moyer, Carol Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 9:15 AM To: Iyengar, Raj <Raj.lyengar@nrc.gov> Cc: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>; Martinez Rodriguez, Erick <Erick. MartinezRodriguez@nre.gov>

Subject:

RE: Draft Notes for EPRI mtg 6/6 OK, thank you, Raj. From: Iyengar, Raj Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 9:12 AM To: Moyer, Carol <CaroLMoyer@nrc.gov> Cc: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc,goy>; Martinez Rodriguez, Erick <Erick. MartioezRodriguez@ore.gov>

Subject:

RE: Draft Notes for EPRI mtg 6/6

Carol, I have a number of things to do today. I will see what I can do.

CMB can provide its input to Erick. I can add to it later, if needed. GIB staff has already developed one-pagers for RG1.99 and xLPR. The topics on Adv. Man. And Gen IV materials come from EPRI. EPRI will be providing brief to our management on those two topics. I have a meeting with Steve Bajorek on IAP 2. I will ask him what Mike Case wants. As you know that topics on IAPs is led by Mike Case. We can certainly provide Brian some talking points on our efforts. Raj From: Moyer, Carol Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 6:17 PM To: Iyengar, Raj <Raj.lyengar@nrc gov> Cc: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>; Martinez Rodriguez, Erick <Erick MartjnezRodriguez@ore.gov>

Subject:

Draft Notes for EP RI mtg 6/6 Importance: High

Raj, I have been drafting some notes for the EPRI-NRC management meeting on 6/6, but I don't want to duplicate your efforts on this. Can we combine what we have collected so far, and then see what is missing?

There are topics here that clearly fall within CIB's scope, e.g., RPV embrittlement (RG 1.99), and some that belong to Ian's branch. Also, I let Steve Bajorek know that I would draft some notes on Advanced Reactors, but that I would be looking to him to fill in status on the computational codes. Steve let me know that Brian would like to see draft notes by Thursday (tomorrow), so I hope that we can discuss this in the morning.

Thanks, Carol Carol E. Moyer Sr. Materials Engineer U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research MS: T-10A36 Washington, DC 20555-0001 carol. mover@nrc.gov 301-415-2153

From: Sent: To: Cc: Hull, Amy Monday, February 06, 2017 3:40 PM Moyer, Carol Frankl, Istvan (lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov) Note to requester: Attachments to this email immediately follow.

Subject:

Carol: please review & revise, Main Take-Aways: Subsequent License Renewal Research Presentation to Bill Dean Categories: Strategic R&D ex-plant materials Steve suggested I t k to ~o! about this. I will bring over a copy of his markup. tomorrow but must soon today. (b)(6) I can work on this again RES*SLR*Slides*... From: Hull, Amy Sent: Monday, February 06, 2017 8:27 AM To: Frankl, Istvan (lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov) <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov> Cc: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Iyengar, Raj <Raj.lyengar@nrc.gov> Subject : please review & revise, Main Take-Aways: Subsequent license Renewal Research Presentation to Bill Dean Brian Thomas and Raj Iyengar gave an overview of "Subsequent License Renewal Research Activities" coauthored with Amy Hull and Rob Tregoning. Shortly after 1 pm, conference room OWFN-13D20 was full. Attendees included (among others) Bloom. Steve Dean, Bill Evans, Michelle iJ Jan 12 Key TakeAways.docx Frankl, Steve Hull, Amy Iyengar, Raj Thomas, Brian Tregoning, Rob Wilson, George In response to his introduction, Bill Dean asked about what additional insights we had gained from interim AMPs (abh note, I think he was referring to LR-ISGs). In response to the discussion on vessel internals, Bill Dean also had comments about the stat.us of MRP-227 A (which is relevant to PWR internals, AMP XI.M16A) and UT capabilities related to baffle-former bolts. In response to the discussion on concrete degradation, Bill Dean had concern about the expense to NRC of ASR research when Seabrook is the only American NPP experiencing this problem. He wondered if this was 1

an appropriate use of money and wanted to know more about other ASR work, over and beyond that being done by NRC and in the USA (Abh note, I attended several ASR sessions at SMliRT-23 in Manchester, England and can help prepare an answer for Bill Dean). In response to the discussion on cable qualification and condition assessment, George Wilson wanted to have a discussion about the scope of the NRC test plan. This followup discussion was held the week of January 23rd_ In response to the discussion on collaboration, Bill Dean would like to have more specific information and comparison about what various domestic and international collaborations provide to NRC. In response to the final slide "Look Ahead' Bill Dean expressed most interest in the ex-plant materials harvesting workshop and wanted to make sure it also addressed cables. General observations that were made by NRR managers included: They want specific budget requests related to SLR research. What is the schedule of the research? What research is done? What still needs to be done? What research needs to be completed before the first SLR applications? Distinguish better between near-term and long-term research. Bill De*an stressed that industry "must carry the water" and in conclusion asked how DE/RES would characterize the priority for further research in the four areas discussed. Rob verbally gave the following summary explaining priority for additional research in terms of technical and programmatic needs. TOPIC Reactor Pressure Vessel Embrittlement Vessel Internals Concrete Deqradation Cable Qualification and Condition Monitorinq

---

Original Appointment-----

From: Dean, Bill Sent: Friday, December 16, 2016 1:36 PM TECHNICAL PROGRAMMATIC low low low hiah medium Low-medium hiqh hiqh To: Dean, Bill; Frankl, Istvan; Hull, Amy; RES_DE_Cal Resource; Bloom, Steven; Wilson, George; Marshall, Jane; Thomas, Brian; Brock, Kathryn

Subject:

FW: Subsequent License Renewal Research When: Thursday, January 12, 2017 1:00 PM-1:45 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada). Where: NRR-OWFN-13D20-15p

---

Original Appointment-----

From: Dean, Bill Sent: Friday, December 16, 2016 1:31 PM To: Dean, Bill; Bloom, Steven; Wilson, George; Marshall, Jane; Thomas, Brian; Brock, Kathryn

Subject:

Subsequent License Renewal Research When: Thursday, January 12, 2017 1:00 PM-1:45 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada). Where: NRR-OWFN-13D20-1Sp POC: Steve x 2431 2

Prior to Research discussion with Glen Tracy 3

Brian Thomas and Raj Iyengar gave an overview of "Subsequent License Renewal Research Activities" coauthored with Amy Hull and Rob Tregoning. Shortly after 1 pm, conference room OWFN-13D20 was full. Attendees included (among others) Bloom. Steve Dean, Bill Evans, Michelle Frankl, Steve Hull, Amy Iyengar, Raj Thomas, Brian Tregoning, Rob Wilson, George In response to his introduction, Bill Dean asked about what additional insights we had gained from interim AMPs (abh note, I think he was referring to LR-ISGs). In response to the discussion on vessel internals, Bill Dean also had comments about MRP-227A (which is relevant to PWR internals, AMP XI.M16A) and UT capabilities related to baffle-former bolts. In response to the discussion on concrete degradation, Bill Dean had concern about the expense to NRC of ASR research when Seabrook is the only American NPP experiencing this problem. He wondered if this was an appropriate use of money and wanted to know more about other ASR work, over and beyond that being done by NRC and in the USA. (Abh note, I attended several ASR sessions at SMliRT-23 in Manchester, England and can help prepare an answer for Bill Dean). In response to the discussion on cable qualification and condition assessment, George Wilson wanted to have a discussion about the scope of the NRC test plan. This followup discussion was held the week of January 23rd. In response to the discussion on collaboration, Bill Dean would like to have more specific information and comparison about what various domestic and international collaborations provide to NRC. In response to the final slide "Look Ahead" Bill Dean expressed most interest in the ex-plant materials harvesting workshop and wanted to make sure it also addressed cables. General observations that were made by NRR managers included: They want specific budget requests related to SLR research. What is the schedule of the research? What research is done? What still needs to be done? What research needs to be completed before the first SLR applications? Distinguish better between near-term and long-term research. Bill Dean stressed that industry "must carry the water" and in conclusion asked how DE/RES would characterize the priority for further research in the four areas discussed. Rob verbally gave the following summary explaining priority for additional research in terms of technical and programmatic needs. TOPIC TECHNICAL PROGRAMMATIC Reactor Pressure Vessel Embrittlement low low Vessel Internals low hiah Concrete Dearadation medium Low - medium Cable Qualification and Condition Monitorinq hiqh hiqh Commented (HA 1 ]: Please add names of other attendees, l did not document, I think Dennis Morey was there, and maybe other OLR BCs. Commented (HA2): Please confirm and add a couple lines if needed since I did not attend this meeting.

U.S.NRC United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Protecting People and the Environment Subsequent License Renewal Research Activities Briefing for Bill Dean Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation January 12, 2017 Brian Thomas Raj Iyengar Amy Hull Rob Tregoning

Outline

• Key Messages

Background:

U.S.NRC United Stares Nuclear Regulatory Commission Protecting People and the Environment RES is addressing key technical issues and supporting the development of draft SLR Guidance Documents

• Ongoing RES Support
• Collaboration & Outcomes
• Site Visits
• LookAhead 2

ey Messages U.S.NRC United Stares Nuclear Regulatory Commission Protecting People and the Environment The key technical issues for research are as identified in Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) on SECY-14-0016 (August 29, 2014; ADAMS Accession No. ML14241A578)

• reactor pressure vessel neutron embrittlement at high fluence
• Irradiation-assisted stress corrosion cracking of reactor vessel internals
• concrete degradation, and
• electrical cable qualification and condition assessment In response to the SRM, there has been significant progress in addressing the key technical issues:

Accomplished through increased leverage with DOE and EPRI through "deep-dive: meetings (cables aging; concrete degradation; vessel internals; non-destructive examination (NOE) of buried pipes) Extensive collaboration with EPRI and DOE on SLR-related research topics Progress resulted in enhanced aging management programs (AMPs) addressed in the draft SLR guidance documents. 3

ey Messages (Continued) U.S.NRC United Stares Nuclear Regulatory Commission Protecting People and the Environment

• Research objectives focused on FY2018/2019 (expected time period for initial SLR applications)

Continue research recognizing two periods:

• Near-term to support review of initial SLR applications
• Longer-term to augment the technical basis for further updates to SLR guidance Slide Notes for Slides 3 and 4: Key Messages SRM: "The staff should keep the Commission informed in resolving the following technical issues related to SLR reactor pressure vessel neutron embrittlement at high fluence; irradiation assisted stress corrosion cracking of reactor internals and primary system components; concrete and containment degradation, and electrical cable qualification and condition assessment."

The staff should continue to emphasize in communications with industry the need to strive for satisfactory resolution of these issues prior to the NRC beginning a review of any SLR application. 4

=

Background=== U.S.NRC United Stares Nuclear Regulatory Commission Protecting People and the Environment NRR-RES team effort informed the development of draft guidance documents: GALL-SLR, SRP-SLR RES Support to NRR (2008-2016): Extended Material Degradation Assessment (EMDA) - Technical Issues AMP Effectiveness Pilot Audits - Implementation/Lessons Learned Assessment of International Periodic Safety Reviews (PSR) - Lessons Learned Participation in Codes & Standards (ASME, ASTM, ACI, IEEE) to review/revise applicable Code Cases Insights/Results from Previous and Ongoing Research Activities: Irradiation-assisted degradation of stainless steel plate and weld materials in RPV Thermal and Neutron Embrittlement of Cast Austenitic Stainless Steels (CASS) Environmentally-Assisted Fatigue of Stainless steels RPV Embrittlement: Enhancement of surveillance database; Enhancement of l1 T models; ASME Code work on Master Curve Fracture Toughness Containment Liner Corrosion Operational Experience (alkali-silica reaction (ASR), cable condition monitoring, selective leaching of buried pipes, coatings) 5

Background (Continued) U.S.NRC United Stares Nuclear Regulatory Commission Protecting People and the Environment NRR-RES team effort informed the development of draft guidance documents: GALL-SLR, SRP-SLR

• 97 specialized expert panels (EP) comprising of staff from NRR, RES, and the Regions for the 52 AMPs, the seven chapters containing tables of AMR line-items in NUREG-1801, and corresponding sections in NUREG-1800).

37 EPs for mechanical AMPs 9 EPs for structural AMPs 6 EPs for electrical AMPs 10 EPs for time-limited aging analyses (TLAAs) 14 EPs for other SRP-LR sections 18 EPs for other GALL sections and chapters (including 1521 AMR line-items)

• Expert review and comments on draft SLR guidance documents 6

Ongoing RES Support

• Research Topics:
• Reactor Pressure Vessel Embrittlement
• Vessel Internals
• Neutron Fluence Calculations
• Concrete Degradation
• Cable Qualification and Condition Monitoring
• Technical Expertise
• Domestic and International Coordination U.S.NRC United Stares Nuclear Regulatory Commission Protecting People and the Environment 7

Reactor Pressure Vessel Embrittlement U.S.NRC

• A well-established framework of documents provides formulae to predict the evolution of the RPV's mechanical properties into SLR
• Advance evidence from surveillance programs shows that some of these formulae may need updating as irradiation continues, but this is not yet an issue for the operating fleet
• Industry programs are working to collect more data at high SLR fluence in advance of their occurrence in service
• A RES report evaluating the continued adequacy of RG1.99(R2) predictions and procedures will be prepared (ETC: 2017)
• Supports AMP XI.M31: Reactor Vessel Surveillance Capsules United S1a1cs Nuclear Regulatory Commission Protecting People and the Environment U 150...--------1 All International Surveillance Data (1,834)

~ lOO USA Surveillance Data (1,040)

I-... .::. e 50 N a:..... 0 "a;"g CJ?.:; -50 .-t... ~ ~

• 100 nott-eonservative w

(Source: ASTM E900, 2015]

_ -150..,_._._~~--+-'--'-~~...................__._................. "'-+--'--'~

Qj 100% u C 80% Qj ~ 60% 0 40% ..c 20% Qj > 0% 0 100% .Q 80% Qj Qj ~ 60% ~ 40% 0 20% I PWRs I 40years 60years SO years (Source: EPAI MAP-126, 2011] I BWRs ! 40years 60years SO years (Source: NRC RVlD, 2000] ~ 0%+-'-'-~~-+-'-'-~~+-"--'-~~-+-'-'-~ 17 18 19 20 Log10(Fluence) [n/cm2], E > 1 MeV .E 400

• USA Surveillance Data l:; ___

Ill

• Other Nations' Surveillance Data

~ 350 1-============------- ni 111 300 -

~ 2SO 1------

I- -..o-lA-'4>-.,-- -...._.,._ E

S 50 1----

z o---- a, 8

Vessel Internals Irradiation-assisted degradation of stainless steel plate and weld materials NRC initiated collaborative programs with domestic and international partners: International Zorita internals research project (ZIRP): Testing of ex-plant 304 SS plates (ETC: early 2017). NRC-EPRI collaborative program: Testing of weld materials harvested from Zorita plant (up to 2 dpa) (ETC: 2017). Halden Research Program: Further irradiation/testing of Zorita weld materials (8 dpa) (ETC: 2022). Research will support AMP XI.M16A: PWR Vessel Internals Ill 1 2 5 8 10 25 so 65 80 Plate ~- Previous research Ongoing Planning U.S.NRC United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Protecting People and the Environment Weld Heat-Affected Zone Ongoing Ongoing Expected fluence at SO years Beyond expected fluence at years Testing and characterization includes crack growth rate (CGR), fracture toughness (FT), tensile properties, and microstructure (void swelling). Cast austenitic stainless steel (CASS)

• NRC - Further testing of CASS components (3 dpa). (ETC: 2017)
• Research will support AMP XI.M12:

Thermal Aging Embrittlement of CASS 9

eutron Fluence Calculations U.S.NRC United S1a1cs Nuclear Regulatory Commission Protecting People and the Environment Regulatory guide (RG) 1.190 describes acceptable methods for computing neutron flux in the RPV active core height (beltline) region During extended period of operations, components located outside of beltline, such as nozzles and vessel internals, experience higher levels of neutron exposure Research is being conducted to provide analysis of fluence at vessel locations above and below the reactor core (ETC: 2018) Develop technical basis for either revision to RG1.190 or new RG (will support the new AMP X.M2 on Fluence Monitoring in GALL-SLR) DI QQl6VAR 2-S1~CKSH2 IUGW)o.l'M),f!OIIO&.v!t w,, fttJf:io 110 l(X) Q,O QIO Q,O z Slides Notes: This image illustrates a quadrature sensitivity comparison for the baseline PWR model using a level symmetric S16 quadrature and a more accurate QR16 quadrature. There is only minor effect of quadrature on calculated flux within the beltline region (green) but large differences, up to 30%, outside of the beltline region near the nozzles (red). Calculated ratio of neutron flux u*r*MC'D Jl)l'* Ofl. 1111/11*.. **1 ...,.... \\) 1 I. Ul* <<attt i l*Jl.*C,P) !

• wi...,.. I J

.iU&.-otl,t 1.-..... uo tML*-.JIIIJ 2u,.esu2: 1-.*-eJUlJ ~ IQQ 150 2QQ )00 ~Adt,{cn) Neutron flux near the centerline of the PWR inlet and outlet nozzles 10

Concrete Degradation U.S.NRC United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Protecting People and the Environment Develop the technical basis for guidance to evaluate degradation of nuclear power plant concrete structures: Evaluate structural performance and capability to perform intended safety functions under design basis loads and accidents Assess aging management programs to monitor and manage aging and degradation Alkali-Silica Reaction (ASR) NRC - Ongoing efforts at NIST on effects of ASR on concrete structural performance (ETC: early 2019), Northwestern Univ. of service life degradation (2018), and Univ. Colorado on testing/ modeling of ASR beams (ETC: 2018) DOE/LWRS - Ongoing efforts at Univ. Tennessee on ASR development, NOE, and structural testing (ETC: 2019) EPRI - Developing guidelines for ASR-affected structures (early 2018); and repair and mitigation techniques (ETC: 2018) Research insights/results to support the SRP-SLR Further Evaluation on ASR-affected Structures Effects of potential boric acid attack on concrete and steel in PWR spent fuel pool EPRI - Kinetics and the extent of the attack; Role of concrete composition (ETC: 2017) 11

Concrete Degradation (Contd.) U.S.NRC United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Protecting People and the Environment Effects of irradiation on concrete structures NRC:

• Confirmatory review of DOE work on characterization of concrete irradiation damage and of EPRI research on susceptible plant configurations and their structural integrity (ETC: 2018)
• Assessment of neutron fluence and gamma dose on the bio-shield concrete (ETC:

2018)

• Evaluation of benefits and opportunities to harvest irradiated concrete from decommissioned plants for confirmatory testing (ETC: 2020)

EPRI - Conducting research on integrity of concrete based on susceptible plant configuration (ETC: early-2017) DOE/LWRS - Modeling and prediction of damage in ASR structures (ETC: 2020) Research insights/results to support the SRP-SLR Further Evaluation on Irradiation Degradation of Concrete structures Creep and creep-fracture interaction of post-tensioned containment NRC:

• Review of operating experience with post-tensioned containments (loss of prestress, trend analysis of prestress forces, corrosion of prestressing systems and cracking of anchor heads) (ETC: 2019)
• Confirmatory review (EPRI report) of creep effects on pre-stress losses and of potential for creep and fracture interactions (ETC: 2018)

NEA/CSNI - VERCORS (EDF) - Modeling of structural behavior (ETC: 2021 ). {NRC participation} 12

Cable Qualification and Condition Assessment U.S.NRC United Stares Nuclear Regulatory Commission Protecting People and the Environment Evaluation of Condition Monitoring Techniques - Combined Gamma Radiation and Temperature Exposure NRC - Project with NIST & SNL to assess cable aging and evaluate monitoring techniques, such as Tan Delta (ETC: early-2019). DOE/LWRS (PNNL) - Project to evaluate techniques and develop models for estimating remaining useful life (ETC: mid-2019). EPRI - Project to assess new techniques - Dielectric Spectroscopy (ETC: late 2018). Submergence Issues NRC - Reviewing EPRI report on medium voltage (MV) Kerite submergence qualification (ETC: 2017). EPRI - Creating a qualification program for submergence for MV shielded Okonite Okaguard insulations (ETC: 2017). DOE/LWRS - Published a report of potential gaps in knowledge of submerged cable degradation (ETC: 2016). Planning further research into wet cable degradation. EPRI & DOE - Develop lifetime prediction models incorporating uncertainties associated with accelerated aging (ETC: 2019). 13

Collaboration & Outcomes U.S.NRC United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Protecting People and the Env-ironment

• Since July 2015, the NRC, DOE, and EPRI staff have completed a number of productive meetings under the auspices of DOE/LWRS and EPRI/LTO.

Addressed existing gaps, planned research activities, schedule, and expected outcomes through open and candid discussions leading to common understanding

• Deep-dive meetings:

Cables - October & December 2015 Concrete - October 2015 & April 2016 Vessel Internals - October 2015 & May 2016 RPV - October 2015

• Augmentation of DOE and EPRI research activities Cable Aging and Condition Monitoring (DOE/LWRS)

Submergence Issues - Cables (EPRI) Containment Integrity - Degradation due to Neutron Radiation (DOE; EPRI) Non-Destructive Examination: Concrete Structures (DOE; EPRI); Buried Piping ( DOE) 14

Site Visits

• July 2015 - ORNL, Oak Ridge, TN
• April 2016 - Westinghouse Facilities, Cranberry, PA U.S.NRC United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Protecting People and the Env-ironment Focus on RPV embrittlement, vessel internals degradation and inspection
• July 2016 - PNNL, Richland, WA Focus on cables degradation research and NOE techniques
• October 2016 -AREVA Technical Center, Lynchburg, VA Focus on vessel internals degradation and inspection
• April 2017 - TBD Focus on concrete degradation 15

Slide Notes: N RC/industry workshops (2018 & 2020) on status of domestic and Ook Ahead international research activities and operating experience on long-term operations. Will address and evaluate the status of materials degradation issues in, including but not restricted to, metallic and non-metallic components, concrete structures, and cable insulation.

• Continued communication with DOE/LWRS and EPRI:

Bi-weekly phone-calls - staff-level; Periodic management meetings Roadmap/Information-Exchange meetings

• RIC 2017:

U.S.NRC United Stares Nuclear Regulatory Commission Protecting People and the Environment Technical session on Cables Aging and Condition Monitoring (Lead: NRR) Posters on SLR guidance documents (N RR) and SLR Research Activities (RES) Ex-Plant Materials Harvesting Workshop: March 2017 Increase awareness of the challenges and benefits associated with ex-plant harvesting Enable initiation of cooperative ex-plant harvesting programs

• Draft User Need Request with NRR/DLR:

Hold NRC/industry workshops (2018 & 2020) on status of domestic and international research activities and operating experience Ensure documentation on collaborative research activities and progress Develop/implement a long-term strategy for obtaining information on materials degradation (decommissioned NPPs, ex-plant components)

• Contribute to IAEA-iGALL development and Safety Aspects of Long Term Operation of Water Moderated Reactors (SALTO) missions16

Subject:

Location: Debriefing from RIC Harvesting & AM Poster Sessions last week T10- D40, call in# 888-437-3094; passcode: LJ {b){§} Start: End: Show Time As: Recurrence: Meeting Status: Organizer: Thu 03/22/2018 3:30 PM Thu 03/22/2018 4:00 PM Tentative (none) Not yet responded Hull, Amy Note to requester: Attachments to this email immediately follow. Required Attendees: Moyer, Carol; Burke, John; Herrity, Thomas; Hiser, Matthew; Audrain, Margaret; Purtscher, Patrick; Tregoning, Robert; Harris, Brian; Frankl, Istvan This is a followup to the info I sent you last Friday (see below). I think we got fairly good RIC response. rn RIC18 Ad.Mfg. Poster visitor f... 2018 RIC poster draft AM Poster RIC18 Harvesting Schedule.abh c... Feedback 2018... Poster visito... Rob suggested we get together and discuss the time we spent last Harvesting RIC18 Poster Com men... Note to requester: The original email document had the Word file covering the words. week at the RIC po sters. It looks like most of you are free from 3:30-4pm today. (please propose an alternative time for us, if this does not work for you) What insights? How to improve the process for next year? What to do differently? To that end, I also include the MSW version of the forms I prepared. (it would be nice if prototypes were made available to presenters, I invented these) Steve suggested we look at how to follow up on 'actionables.' I have tried to identify and highlight these in the attached pdfs.

Subject:

Analysis of reception of our RIC posters, thanks for your participation, RIC Doster outreach metrics Darameter AM Harvesting

1. of poster handouts taken to exhibit 75 120
2. of poster handouts remainino on 3/16/2018 1

47

1. Dosters picked up by visitors 74 73
2. people noted on contacUinteresUsignin form 20 27
3. of business cards completed, left at exhibit 13 16

I completed detailed interest form 7 5 2

Poster staffing - 2018 RIC - March 13-15, 2018 Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Adv. Mfg. Harvesting Adv. Mfg. Harvesting Adv. Mfg. Harvesting 7:30 AM Carol Amy Amy Carol Rob Amy 8:00 AM Carol Amy Amy Carol Rob Amy 8:30 AM Carol Meg 9:00 AM Carol Meg 9:30AM Amy Meg 10:00 AM John Pat Tom Meg Amy Pat 10:30 AM Brian Pat 11 :00 AM Brian Pat 11 :30 AM Amy Pat 12:00 PM Amy Pat Carol Meg Adv. Mfg. 1/2 hr Harvesting 1/2 volunteer sessions hr sessions 12:30 PM Amy Pat Carol Meg Carol M. 7 3 1:00 PM John Pat Carol Rob AmyH. 10 4 1:30 PM J. Burke 2 2:00 PM Thom Herrity 2 2:30 PM Matt Hiser 3:00 PM Amy Carol Tom Meg Meg Audrain 7 3:30 PM Pat Purtscher 8 4:00 PM R. Tregoning 2 1 4:30 PM B. Harris 2 5:00 PM Amy Amy total 25 23 5:30 PM total 1/2 hr 25 23 sessions

POSTER 15: AM - REACTOR MATERIALS & COMPONENTS VISITOR NAME/ORG: BUSINESS CARD: 0 YES O NO EMAIL: Do you have any personal experience with AM? l s your organization researching AM? Please describe your interest in advanced or additive manufacturing (AM): I. Do you expect to implement AM in your company in the future? How so? When? D Within 5 years D 5-10 years D sometime in future D not likely

2. Please comment on the things that stand out in your mind.

3. What should NRC be doing differently to get ready for AM implementation? Would you like NRC to have another public meeting on AM'! Other suggestions'!

4. Please rate the topics on a scale from 1 to 5 (5 being highest) in terms of interest:

AM standards &qualification Industry activities American AM activity in international context Cyber security Reverse engineering and reactor components Effects of process and design parameters Irradiation testing & effects on AM Nondestructive evaluation of components fabricated using AM Corrosion behavior of AM components Other areas NRC should focus on? Please provide any other comments or feedback that may be important to NRC's review of AM for reactor materials and components. Return to: NRC Staff at Poster 15 by Salon E Name By: March 15, 2018 Date

POSTER 7: HARVESTING OF AGED MATERIALS FROM NPPS VISITOR NAME/ORG: BUSINESS CARD: 0 YES O NO EMAIL: Please describe your interest in harvesting components that were aged in representative light water reactor (LWR) environments in nuclear power plants (NPPs). Is your interest related to subsequent license renewal (SLR) and NPP long-term operation (LTO)'? I. Do you expect to have harvestable components that NRC should be aware of? How so? When? D Within 5 years D 5-10 years D sometime in future D not likely

2. Please comment on the things that stand out in your mind about harvesting components.

3. Would you like NRC to have a public meeting on harvesting NPP components? Other suggestions?

4. Please rate the topics on a scale from 1 to 5 (5 being highest) in terms of interest to you:

Reactor pressure vessel embrittlement Electrical cable qualification and condition assessment Irradiation-assisted degradation of reactor internals Concrete structures and containment degradation Availability of reliable inservice inspection (ISI) techniques Creating a harvesting database More coordination between NRC and industry on harvesting and SLR research Other industry activities Other areas NRC should focus on? Please provide any other comments or feedback that may be important to NRC's work on harvesting of aged materials from NPPs. Return to: NRC Staff at Poster 7 across from Salon D Name By: March l 5, 2018 Date

~WPR www.mpr.com f;\\NRA,Japan ~J Nuolew R111U111tlon AutllOrlty o*eputy Director Kazuko SATO Oversight Planning and Coordination Division 1 9 Roppongi, Mlnato-ku,Tokyo,JAPAN 106-8450 PHONE: +81-3-5114-2122 FAX: +81-3-5114-2142 e-mall:kazuko_satou@nsr.go.jp http//www.nsr:go.jp ~~ /::I,~ IU, 7.J'- ~ CHRISTOPHER CHARLES ~ rv,, 1, Seniar!M#Br ~ I 1201 F Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 Ill/CLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE p; 202.739.8152 M* 7.5717 E: * * @nei.org

• 49>*

T: @NEI Helge Thoresen Mart<etillg Manager Nuclear Technology, Physics and Safety P.O. Box 173, N0-1751 Halden, Norway Phone: (+47) 69 21 22 00 Mobile: ("47) 94818 023 helge.thoreS8fl~fe.no IFe

• ~

[if :.. : *.. www.ife.no UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Carol E. Moyer Senior Materials Engineer Division of Engineering Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Mail Stop: T10-A36 Telephone: Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Fax: E-mail: Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov 301-415-2153 301-415-6671 Beckman & Associates, Inc. Nuclear and Engineering Support Services Donald A. Beckman President 1071 State Route 136 Belle Vernon, PA 15012 Email: Don.Beckman@baa-inc.com Phone: 724*872-9157 724-497-3024 702-278-7312 724-872-6347 Website: www.baa-inc.com Cell: Fax: SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE* 6220 Culebra Road (78238-5166) P.O. Drawer 28510 (78228-0510) San An1onio. Texas Tel: (210) 522*2028 Fax: (210) 684-4822 Cell: (210) 316*59'48 jay.fisher O swri.org JAY L. FISHER, Sc.D. Program Direelor Sensor Systems & NOE Technology Department Mechanical Engineering Division Hag-ki Youm, Ph.D. Electric 11nd Nuclear Power Division K[."iiEP KcttH lnsht*!* ol E111rr, leclul311t1r Eval a i:tn and P1111rt1n1 Teheran-ro 114gil 14, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, Korea 06175 Tel. +82-2-3469-8488 Fax.+82-2-556-1033 Mobile. +82-10-2312-5495 E-mail. hockey@ketep.re.kr LANDREY & COMPANY Bruce Land r ey C: 503.715.7900 F: 503 226. 2522 b ru ce l@l a n d reyco. com PO Box 8787 Portland, Oregon 97207 USA' Strategic Advisory Services Patrick Butler Chief Technical Officer 320 King Street Alexandria, VA 22314 www.NuSourcellc.com (571) 482-7403 (<>), f91 oJ 630-11enm; pbutlerflp.NuSourpeUC.com.

INSTtTUT O! kAOtOP"-OTlCflON ET OE SU*t.rt l'\\IUC~! Safety Evaluation Engineer Non Destructive Testing Nudear Safety Division Equipment and Structure Assessment Department 31 avenue de la Division Leclerc B.P. 17

• 92262 Fontenay-aux-Roses Cedex Franco Ph. n* + 33 (0) I 58 3S'JS 2 I Fax +33 (O)l 4H610 14 lill.ducoussoganjehl@irsn.fr Ravi Jathra Senior Market Segment Manager
• Energy http://www.wlka.com
• Part of your business WlKA Instrument. LP 1000 Wiegand Boulevard Lawrenceville, GA 30043-5868
• Mobile (240) 513-5.101 ravi.jethra@wika.com UNlTEDSTATESNUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Amy B. HuU, PhD Sr. Material Engineer, Corrosion & Metallurgy Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Mail Stop: T-10A36 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: amy.hull@nrc.gov Telephone:

(301) 415-2435 Fax: (301) 415-6671 ' J I

NRC Additive Manufacturing for Reactor Materials & Components (AM-RMC) RIC Poster# 15, March 13-15, 2018 Organizational Current AM-RMC Do you want I Name Affiliation Email Phone Interest to be on p~ 1----~~---------,-------~--------+--------------~-c_o_n_t_a_ct_l_is_t_?~ 1\\ ~1. ~~~~~~~~+-----~ ~ ~~----i~ v ~---l ~ ~ 9 DP~10. ~~~~~~~~~~~~__j ti 11. f-:-12=- . -..L-'c--""'~~~-::::;;,4;-~"---"!/- __ R_A_/2 _ __ +-------1---- --- -----4-----------l

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

NRC Additive Manufacturing for Reactor Materials & Components (AM-RMC) RIC Poster # 15, March 13-15, 2018 Organizational Current AM-RMC Name Email Phone Affiliation Interest

39.

• C I

\\.. / r -;--'\\ I

40.

__)(:_ -:: C:. 0 JU _j__., /__)/--~/

41.

/

42. poh;e-L ~/A ~4,..., /JU7R c~t2-1;,:_,~)

43. a r:-~ ar;;'i i

~ (b)(6) /

44.

(1. ~ /,,,-~J., ~ /U/2/Z ~ /~ /T;f-

45. ~ au;h ~.........,~ r~

46(/ ' ~- v'_.., u A ~ I v//<5/Y) - yJv 1 bi~ ~

47.

fl~o~ --- / ~ ~e,,t}/1~ A I/ i u-lY,.~

48. {VJ'. -

~ ~h:2 hl ~Jl /J-Xl/ fl ~ --c£}/~ ~( ~(.,f/ ,,,...-~

49.

/ _./

50.

51.

52.

53.

54

55.

Do you want to be on contact list? y

POSTER 15: AM - REACTOR MATERIALS & COMPONENTS VISITORNAME/ORG: f V'f-v-f j u(ry.l,/J. J Wu.(!- BUSINESS CARD: ll) YES ONO EMAIL: Do you have any personal experience with AM? Is your organization researching AM? Please describe your interest in advanced or additive manufacturing (AM):

1. Do you expect to implement AM in your company in the future? How so? When?

0 Within 5 years 95-10 years O sometime in future O not likely

2. Please comment on the things that stand out in your mind.

3. What should NRC be doing differently to get ready for AM implementation? Would you like NRC to have another public meeting on AM? Other suggestions?

4. Please rate the topics on a scale from 1 to 5 (5 being highest) i~ terms ofintercst:

• AM standards &qualification

[ ]

• Industry activities

[ )

• American AM activity in international context

[ ]

• Cyber security

[ ]

• Reverse engineering and reactor components

[ ]

• Effects of process and design parameters

[

• Irradiation testing & effects on AM

[ ]

• Nondestructive evaluation of components fabricated using AM

[ ]

• Corrosion behavior of AM components

[

• Other areas NRC should focus on?

Please provide any other comments or feedback that is important to NRC's review of AM for reactor materials and components. Return to: NRC Staff at Poster 15 by Salon E Name By: March 15, 2018 Date

POSTER 15: AM - REACTOR MATERIALS & COMPONENTS VISITOR NAME/ORG: A Lex. Po fo vA /c re L o BUSINESS CARD: JR{ YES ONO EMAIL: Do you have any personal experience with AM? Is your organization researching AM? Please describe your interest in advanced or additive manufacturing (AM):

1. Do you expect to implement AM in your company in the future? How so? When?

g! Within S years D 5~10 years D sometime in future D not likely

2. Please comment on the things that stand out in your m;

\\ -~ c.~),~Vl W-u;)t~ M~\\.l c.)fv\\.°'t o+ ~ ) e~SJ \\"I\\Q\\U...... S1M1-\\\\ e,.r /J e-rc~ u_d COWi ro WM -\\) W { ~~l~, Yr-cl v\\ \\(tae~ V\\ Vl(\\

3. What should NRC be doing differently to get ready for AM implementation? Would.J

. you like N1lC to have another public meeting on AM? ~ther sugge,tions? !' 1 """\\v{~ w{ ~ ~~~v\\ ~~ \\,~ \\l\\=t;e v-) / f vx:,lD5S, \\.A o 11'<<1 fu, """~ ~"'~'

4. Please rate the topics on a see from 1 to S (S being highest) i~ terms of interest:

AM standards &qualification Industry activities American AM activity in international context Cyber security Reverse engineering and reactor components Effects of process and design parameters Irradiation testing & effects on AM Nondestructive evaluation of components fabricated using AM Corrosion behavior of AM components Other areas NRC should focus on? rr1 [ I ] [ l [ l [ 1)J [4 ] [ ] [ } [ i.J Please provide any other comments or feedback that is important to NRC's review of AM for re!lctor materials and components. Return to: NRC Staff at Poster 15 by Salon E Name By: March 15, 2018 Date

POSTER 15: AM - REACTOR MATERIALS & COMPONENTS VISITORNAME/ORG: VJt'>/ r,/51/E /:_ BUSINESS CARD: /:'.JYES O NO EMAIL: J q z': _:)-; sh p,-} SW r,~,07 Do you have any personal experience with AM? Is your organization researching AM? Please describe your interest in advanced or additive manufacturing (AM): vf/,.e.,. a/' .1c (' e.5ea, o 4,,,1-j A 1Y - h @tA,,,-- f vP d tlP ~ i, /J r.e /.d/;;µ /Jot/ls v-pr# v1de' i/7Sf?/_,/r,(}vJ

1. Do you expect to implement AM in your company in the future? How so? When?

~ Within 5 years O 5-10 years O sometime in future D not likely

2. Please comment on the things that stand out in your mind.

M -

3. What should NRC be doing differently to get ready for AM implementation? Would you like NRC to have another public meeting on AM? Other suggestions?

i*~

4. Please rate the topics on a scale from 1 to 5 (5 being highest) i~ terms of interest:

AM standards &qualification Industry activities American AM activity in international context Cyber security Reverse engineering and reactor components Effects of process and design parameters Irradiation testing & effects on AM Nondestructive evaluation of components fabricated using AM Corrosion behavior of AM components Other areas NRC should focus on? R.] [ ] [ ) [ ] [j ] [;, ] [ ] [/] WT Please provide any other comments or feedback that is important to NRC's review of AM for reactor materials and components. Return to: NRC Staff at Poster 15 by Salon E Name By: March 15, 2018 Date

POSTER 15: AM - REACTOR MATERIALS & COMPONENTS VISITOR NAME/ORG: :yiaf(l t'sh 4,/f l fY/q, f W IN 13-A BUSINESS CARD: 0 YES ONO EMAD.,: Do you have any personal experience with AM? Is your organization researching AM? Please describe your interest in advanced or additive manufacturing (AM): I. Do you expect to implement AM in your company in the future? How so? When? D Within 5 years D S-10 years EJ sometime in future D not likely

2. Please comment on the things that stand out in your mind.

3. What should NRC be doing differently to get ready for AM implementation? Would you like NRC to have another public meeting on AM? Other suggestions?

4. Please rate the topics on a scale from I to 5 (S being highest) i~ terms of interest:

AM standards &qualification Industry activities American AM activity in international context Cyber security Reverse engineering and reactor components Effects of process and design parameters Irradiation testing & effects on AM Nondestructive evaluation of components fabricated using AM Corrosion behavior of AM components Other areas NRC should focus on? [ ] [ ] [ ] [ "1 [ ] ] [ ] [v( [ ] Please provide any other comments or feedback that is important to NRC's review of AM for reactor materials and components. Return to: NRC Staff at Poster 15 by Salon E Name By: March 15, 2018 Date

POSTER 15: AM - REACTOR MATERIALS & COMPONENTS VISITOR NAME/ORG: BUSINESS CARD: IX] YES ONO EMAIL: Do you have any personal experience with AM? Is your organization researching AM? Please describe your interest in advanced or additive manufacturing (AM):

1. Do you expect to implement AM in your company in the future? How so? When?

D Within S years D 5-10 years D sometime in future D not likely

2. Please comment on the things that stand out in your mind.

3. What sh<<fuld NRC be doing differently to get ready for AM implementation? Would you like NRC to have another public meeting on AM? Other suggestions?

4. Please rate the topics on a scale from 1 to 5 (5 being highest) i~ terms of interest:

AM standards &qualification Industry activities American AM activity in international context Cyber security Reverse engineering and reactor components Effects of process and design parameters Irradiation testing & effects on AM Nondestructive evaluation of components fabricated using AM Corrosion behavior of AM components Other areas NRC should focus on? [ 6] [ 5 ] [ S] [:,] [ 5] [.f) [ 5] [4] ['5] Please provide any other comments or feedback that is important to NRC's review of AM for reactor materials and components. Return to: NRC Staff at Poster 15 by Salon E Name By: March 151 2018 Date

POSTER 15: AM - REACTOR MATERIALS & COMPONENTS VISITOR NAM;E/ORG: \\<.£ \\.J JL '(-01-JE.641'Ast{1 BUSINESS CARD: ~ YES ONO Do you have any personal experience with AM? Is your organization researching AM? Please describe your interest in advanced or additive manufacturing (AM):

1. Do you expect to implement AM in your company in the future? How so? Whe.n?

0 Within 5 years D 5-10 years g sometime in future D not likely

2. Please comment on the things that stand out in your mind.

3. What should NRC be dong differently to get ready for AM implementation? Would you like.NRC to have another public meeting on AM? Other suggestions?

4. Please rate the topics on a scale from 1 to S (5 being highest) i~ terms of interest:

AM standards &qualification [ )l Industry activities [ 41 American AM activity in international context [ S1 Cyber security Reverse engineering and reactor components Effects of process and design parameters Irradiation testing & effects on AM Nondestructive evaluation of components fabricated using AM Corrosion behavior of AM components Other areas NRC should focus on? [ 3] [ -Z] [4} [ 3J [4 ] [ y.J Please provide any other comments or feedback that is important to NRC's review of AM for reactor materials and components. Return to: NRC Staff at Poster 15 by Salon E Name By: March 15, 2018 Date

POSTER 15: AM - REACTOR MATERIALS & COMPONENTS VISITORNAME/ORG: *)LJ (bC?C<'o..... f.,..f\\10*ye;::: \\--\\\\ BUSINESS CARD: ~ *YES ONO EMAil,: ~~ .. c.crt.tft()o-c~/'"rc)Q~,@J L~rv,.. ££.. Do you have any personal experience with AM? Is your organization researching AM? Please describe your interest in advanced or additive manufacturing (AM):

1. Do you expect to implement AM in your company in the future? How so? When?

D Within S years D 5-10 years D sometime in future D not likely

2. Please comment on the things that stand out in your mind.

I~ n -\\ 'O ~ \\ ,-:..~\\"f..OO..t.! Cc.. 'Nv',o..,,..,~~c.s. <.\\,\\..', \\ '::j d ~ ~~ t...\\.~

3. What should NRC be doing differently to get ready for AM implementation? Would you like NRC to have another public meeting on AM? Other suggestions?

4. Please rate the topics on a scale from 1 to 5 (5 being highest) i~ terms of interest:

AM standards &qualification Industry activities American AM activity in international context Cyber security Reverse engineering and reactor components Effects of process and design parameters Irradiation testing & effects on AM Nondestructive evaluation of components fabricated using AM Corrosion behavior of AM components Other areas NRC should focus on? [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] )>(' [ ] Please provide any other comments or feedback that is important to NRC's review of AM for reactor materials and components. Return to: NRC Staff at Poster 15 by Salon E Name By: March 15. 2018 Date

I VnginiaTech. 3/11"5/2o11 l __ _ l SclenceandTecmok>gystucles Oanlel P. MIiier, M.S. Northern Virginia Center Ph.D. Student 7054 Haycock Road (Gov. Manager-Do0) Falla Church, VA 22043 U.S.A. 703-261-9621 mlllerdp@vt.edu Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University HIDEO TANAKA VICE DlRECTOR INSTmITE OF NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY Institute of Nuclear Safety System, Incorporated 64 Sata, Mihama-cho, Mikata-gun, Fukui 9 l 9-1205, JAPAN Tel : +81*50-7105*0090 (Direct) +81*770*37*9100 (Main) Fax: +81-770-37*2009 URL : http://www.inss.co.jp E-mail : tanaka.hideo@inss.co.jp

• • • Herbert W. Massie, Jr.

A Engineering and Management Consultant 5267 Candy Root Ct. Columbia, MD 21045 office: 410.802.3736 fax: 410.730.5441 email: hmassle625@gmail.com <i}tIB_A~~~c!!?~"" Masa Kojima Chief Researcher Dlvl,lon of Research for Reactor SY9tem Safety Secretariat of Nuclear Regulation Authority Roppongl Flrat BUlkllng, 1-t-* Aoppongl, Mln_.u, Tokyo 106-M50, Japan Tai: +81-3~114-2100 ex.3469 Fax: +11*3-5114-2233 E-fflall: fflUayoahLkoJlm..... r.goJp \\ (IIV~Tech. j National Capital Region -- l Science, Technology, and Society Sonja D. Schmid, Ph.D. Northern Virginia Center Associate ProressOI" 7054 Haycock Road 703-538-8482 Falls Church, VA22043 sschmid@vt.edu www.sts.vt.edu Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University ~ (.W~6>(~ ~C...f.ct-e-Joshua Hogancamp, Ph.D. Po1tdoctorol Appointtt Sandia National Laboratories "-J, d~ 1p PO Box 5800 MS 07~8 Albuquerque, NM 87185 (615) 3111-5284 jhoganc@sandla.gov Hag-ki Youm, Ph.D. Becirk: and Nude¥ Power DMston Op,raltd for th< Unil.*d Stoia ', cJ-4, C/1 Otporlmtnl of Eneray by \\ /\\J l [ " National Ttthnolot, and =-f'2 Eni1ntttin1 5alutiorrs of Sandia, U.C. r~

• K§]EP IIC.ctlf t:tubtfleti'fYTt M-O;y tnllll'ttl" nd P'l1iwng Teheran-ro 114gil 14, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, Korea 06175 Tel +82-2-3469;8488 Fax. +82-2-556-1033 Mobile. +82-10-2312-5495 E-mail. hockey@ketep.re.kr WIiiiam F. Zipp Dec:ommisslonlng Project Monoger Kewaunee Power Slat/on Donlinlo,i E,..rgy Kewaunee, Inc, N490 Slate Highway 42, Kewaunee, Wl 54216 Phone: 920-388-8842 Emoil: williomJ.:zippOdom.com OAK RIDGE N ATIONAL LABORATORY MANAGED BY UT*BATTEll£ FOR THE DEPARTMENT OP ENE\\GY Bruce B. Bevard Senior Program Manager Advanced Reactor Systems Nuclear Science & Technology Division (865) 574-0279 (865) 241-1044 fax (865) 300-3671 cell bevardbb@ornl.gov I

One 8ethel Valley Road P.O. Box 2008, MS-6165 Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6165 Daniel P. MIiier, PMP, PMI-RMP Program Manage( Defense Information Systems Agency (OISA) Joint Service Provider - (JSP) I The Pentagon Architecture, Configuration, Englneerlng and Solutlons Cenl.ar Strategic Programs DMslon I JPS 1 TEL: (703) 571"3320 DSN: 671-3320 danlet.p.miller36.civ@maK.mil daniel.p.mlUer36.civ@maH.smi.mil

A Officefor W, Nuclear Regulation Gareth Hopkin MA PhD CEng ONR Principal Inspector DMG Lead for Engineering Mob: 0791 7 270352 gareth.hopkln@onr.gov.uk Operating Reactors 7<PVl v JP#.1//17A'.! l?/'/l/{'/1 a?, Redgrave Court Merton Road Bootle Merseyside L20 ?HS Susan E. Pepper Chair, Nonprolife.atlon and National Security BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY Building 5108 P.O. Box 5000 Upton, NY 11973-5000 Phone (831) 344.5979 Cell (831) 834-9242 pepper@bnl.gov www.bnl.gov -,,god I<< the U.S. 0epa,tment o1 Et,e,gy by-SclonceAsooclatos, * ~Y toirood by Stony Btook lkll\\On!ty and e.tt* - lnotiMo NISI ~I United States Department of Commerce National Institute of Standards and Technology Oscar H. Wiygul Ill Nuclear Engineering Technologist Senior Reactor Operator NIST Centsr for Neutron Research 100 Bureau Drive Gaithersburg, MD 20899-6101 Tel: (301) 975-6265

• Fax: (301) 975-5199 email: oscar.wlygul@nist.gov CffRISl'OPHER CHARLES Senior~

1201 F Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITVTI! P: 202.739.8152 M: 202.247.5717 -~* E: cic@nei.org T: @NEI Joshua Hogancamp, Ph.D. Sandia National Laboratories Postdoctoral Appointee PO Box 5800 MS 0748 Albuquerque, NM 87185 (615) 318-5284 jhoga nc@sand ia.gov OP<ra1<d for rht United States o,,,.,tm,nt of Ent,iy by National Ttchnology and Enginwing Solulions II/ Sandia, LLC. IRSN INSTITUT 01 -.AOl0'"0TfCTION fT DE sO*crl NUCWIIOI Lili Ducousso*Gilnjehi lngenieur d'analyse de sOrete ContrOle non destructif des materiaux Ptil* sQret6 nucl6alre Service d'expertise des equipements et des structures C, .£.~-ciuc.ousso 90.NJe/w@/r<s,v.T;,-, 31 avenue de la Division Leclerc B.P. 17

• 92262 Fontenay-aux-Roses Cedcx Tel. 01 SB 35 95 21 - Fax 01 47 '46 10 14
• ,. *l':\\*, ** t..

Name

2.

3.

5.

NRC Harvesting of Aged Materials from NPPs

• RIC Poster# 7, March 13-15, 2018 Organizational Affiliation Email Phone Your Interest?

\\ Do you want to be on contact list? '<es r

NRCH f f A d Mt. I f NPP

• RIC P t

1. 7 M h 13 15 2018

~ ~

t}" arves m g o ~ge a eraa s rom s os er arc ,i .. +<I Do you want Organizational Name Email Phone Your Interest? to be on Affiliation contact list?

21. ().sto.{ ~ *,y~vl N C7'J f<.

0 H W@ n:.t+y-v go l ~ 0..75 ~c;,i,s G eV)trtd '\\,

22. ~c~J:. Va,~,

rA-f:d>

1. 7-7ff-;Xt3 (n..;,i~

y /f/ll/W't 't)#,-1-r,,

23. -

'-lvo.. fr:t;it/w /1,{i it"" I L.I; (;,.,,,",-~"'~,c. I J ;:,; ~ f. ~...... c.<?>-1.r> .*Ji.&,.'\\" ') <-~>1.JIQ..., V {/(-J/8-f tl y -i~/ Py-,'.~I' < y

24.

./ ~ ....__ ---~ /'"""I ..._/ 25.3fe. .;;t ~ /v,uil (p -w-e X.,. 0 '?. /

26. 'el(Lt,{.,r rn~t w c.,~MrtJt ttN t\\LtlJ~ M-p,,

&il-~C t..~ ryt~l ~~ off~~l) tf.. 21

• (Jflt1S ~te-5

~ '/ He-r e-i c @uei, 6Y{" ~ z._....'~-i CJ.. g', 's-i-

28.

7

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36 37

38.

39.

40.

41.

POSTER 7: HARVESTING OF AGED MATERIALS FROM NPPS VISITOR NAME/ORG: ~tJ{ /.Jo j ~rt.tA""' I? 5 q,,AI;,. /IJ#f };' o~ I I.a bf BUSINESS CARD: ~YES ONO EMAil,: j.{,JML@ J-'>'tdtt11,3ql/ Please describe your interest in harvesting components that were aged in representative light water reactor (LWR) environments in nuclear power plants (NPPs). ls your interest related to subsequent license renewal (SLR) and NPP long.term operation (L TO)? ~ r,efe~r""' Nl't/-~,.j... ( Clj.'~,.. t/~r..,4/}of\\ /'IDt,.l,ly. c.ori~r--el~. -c.,.,I -Y (.,, 'e'fJ" 1 ~f 1-t,,(..,..,,;/.e /v*,*"J. tpAtr-ef.e l.,.,v'td~J lo,r."'fii/,'~N'r 6e.5 i,, A1eHc-,+c\\ 1"1.,./er1-t rnrP,;fje~ fi..11"- ~j f1***rdf.ltnlrot eY:p.,.il<>I\\, si?-... o,~, ef~. /

1. Do you expect to have harvestable components that NRC should be aware of? How so?

When? 0 Within S years O S-10 years O sometime in future O not likely

2. Please comment on the things that stand out in your mind about harvesting components.

I' 1., ~ of l T}.-f!..,.,,..~.;.,.,.:a./ 4,s-J o.'1J/,r :rrtVf,'afeJ (M~fe ~ ~ff; 1!. ~~'!, 1 :rt.,"'r -t>.:r f'c?J'drfitf,ire. e.~87 '-JMr-k..... f ~ tfu,.;a'H f,-...(c-l1~r,.J,. 1red,1, /.,~,. C rv,_._ J;,...Jpl,'tza ( c..J,A.,J MAkrio/ c/q/r; I. frt<flcf 'H""~{ vdlt 4ff~~f ""cl Al!/> L-1"0. ~t.,.,..4t-;.

3. Would you like NRC to have a public meeting on harvesting NPP components? Other

~ 0-" ~ suggestions? -:../ '?-9,.... ~J, c;,1/ (,*,f fosJ'ible ~rify5 1~ ~Q7,,)4/ h.~r"t/trf:,,,f!J. 1' I

4. Please rate the topics on a scale from 1 to S (5 being highest) in terms of interest to you:

Reactor pressure vessel embrittlement Electrical cable qualification and condition assessment Irradiation-assisted degradation of reactor internals Concrete structures and containment degradation Availability of reliable inservice inspection (ISI) techniques Creating a harvesting database [ ] [ ] [~] ITT l [ ] More coordination between NRC and industry on harvesting and SLR research [Yl [7'] [ ] Other industry activities Other areas NRC should focus on? Please provide any other comments or feedback that may be important to NRC's work on harvesting of aged materials from NPPs. Return to: NRC Staff at Poster 7 across from Salon D Name By: March 15, 2018 Date ..J'" p

POSTER 7: HARVESTING OF AGED MATERIALS FROM NPPS VISITOR NAME/ORG: /1 e r ~ YV\\. Q.__ 5S", ~ BUSINESS CARD: QA'Es ONO Please describe your interest in harvesting components that were aged in representative light water reactor (LWR) environments in nuclear power plants (NPPs). Is your interest related to subsequent license renewal (SLR) and NPP long-term operation (LTO)? SL /Z

1. Do you expect to have harvestable components that NRC should be aware of? How so?

When? 0 Within 5 years O 5-10 years O sometime in future IRf not likelr 0i"\\./+ -,- f<:=--~ L,ul.{> s--f,'r\\ 5 ~ () YrR Vl C( ~

2. Please comment on the things that stand out in your mind about harvesting components.

(< ~~ +~.. /\\~o-l.; q_,-f.; 6"V"\\ ~ (ct~ ci5 <Yr'- :"-5~ $~ Ct-#~ s 'i:c.1.-J

3. Would you like NRC to have a public meeting on harvesting NPP components? Other suggestions?

'y .JJ,,,1._ I,.~ ~ s,, l C <i-<? I;;

4. Please rate the topics on a scale from 1 to S (5 being highest) in terms of interest to you:

Reactor pressure vessel embrittlement [~ ] ,c<S; Electrical cable qualification and condition assessment l rt Irradiation-assisted degradation of reactor internals {SJ Concrete structures and contairunent degradation [ 4J Availability of reliable inservice inspection (ISi) techniques "ft] Creating a harvesting database ff] More coordination between NRC and industry on harvesting and SLR research [t./] Other industry activities ( ] Other areas NRC should focus on? Please provide any other comments or feedback that may be important to NRC's work on harvesting of aged materials from NPPs. Return to: NRC Staff at Poster 7 across from Salon D Name \\ By: March 15, 2018 Date

POSTER 7: HARVESTING OF AGED MATERIALS FROM NPPS VISITORNAME/ORG: I/hi~ liviPt-/ ~/ Z,t/i~~e..<>/ ~c(e'k-J~ ~ ~ 7 BUSINESS CARD: c6YEs ONO EMAIL: lMt~b,,.h-!Jea@~.Ciiff Please describe your interest in harvesting components that were aged in representative light water reactor (LWR) environments in nuclear power plants (NPPs). Is your interest related to subsequent license renewal (SLR) and NPP long-term operation (LTO)?

1. Do you expect to have harvestable components that NRC should be aware of? How so?

When? Q( Within 5 years D 5-10 years D sometime in future D not likely

2. Please comment on the things that stand out in your mind about harvesting components.

3. Would you like NRC to have a p blic meeting on harvesting NPP components? Other suggestions?

4. Please rate the topics on a scale from 1 to 5 (5 being highest) in terms of interest to you:

Reactor pressure vessel embrittlement f?t1,;. lti S v-r,~ ~ro'tf ~pJi/ vf ] Electrical cable qualification and condition assessment [ ] Irradiation-assisted degradation of reactor iµtemals rvf Concrete structures and containment degradation [ v( Availability of reliable inservice inspection (ISi) techniques [ ] Creating a harvesting database [ ] More coordination between NRC and industry on harvesting and SLR research [ t{' Other industry activities [ ] Other areas NRC should focus on?

• -r n4t~:R kce SWJt/f7 t*f CI-Bfc~/4 Please provide any other comments or feedback that may be important to NRC's work on harvesting of aged materials from NPPs.

Return to: NRC Staff at Poster 7 across from Salon D Name By: March 15, 2018 Date

POSTER 7: HARVESTING OF AGED MATERIALS FROM NPPS VISITORNAME/ORG: D::-.u,c:\\ V, ft\\:\\\\ ec / u*.r3,'o iq_ tecl, ( BUSINESS CARD: !XI YES ONO EMAIL: /1"', \\ \\ ~ ')D. ~ i. "C C.-(' ~ r i..;;;. V:se \\ e ('.'\\l~ Please describe your interest in harvesting components that were aged in representative light water reactor (LWR) environments in nuclear power plants (NPPs). Is your interest related to subsequent license renewal (SLR) and NPP long-term operation (LTO)?

1. Do you expect to have harvestable components that NRC should be aware of? How so?

When? D Within 5 years D 5-10 years D sometime in future D not likely

2. Please comment on the things that stand out in your mind about harvesting components. -f-~c.c -the. Ma.. i'.5 co11~cW t' /\\-{c Qct..t'CJn.~ble,tr<.orm-i-l.tk,v1

- t-\\DCv S'k.~r<.OJ '{. 1, 1 - ~l"t{_(c,n:Jh.'y-{a /),~;,ft.(lcl~: - T111-leorA4.f.tol\\"'i cc,,o,~1 /\\"'f... LlQ'l,

3. Would you like NRC to have a public meeting on harvesting NPP components? Other suggestions?

4. Please rate the topics on a scale from 1 to 5 (5 being highest) in terms of interest to you:

Reactor pressure vessel embrittlement [ SJ Electrical cable qualification and condition assessment (> ] Irradiation-assisted degradation of reactor internals ['-1 ] Concrete structures and containment degradation [5] Availability of reliable inservice inspection (ISi) techniques [5] Creating a harvesting database [ t1 More coordination between NRC and industry on harvesting and SLR research LL{ ] Other industry activities [ ] Other areas NRC should focus on? Please provide any other comments or feedback that may be important to NRC's work on harvesting of aged materials from NPPs. Return to: NRC Staff at Poster 7 across from Salon D Name By: March 15, 2018 Date

POSTER 7: HARVESTING OF AGED MATERIALS FROM NPPS VISITOR NAME/ORG: G tr,J trO l rt N N vc l E¥1~ LA-fo c(lfrT Cf'2...l ES BUSINESS CARD: 0 YES O NO EMAIL: ~l~e:,@>~~. ~CE, Please describe your interest in harvesting components that were aged in representative fV\\ 6' \\ f-\\..f light water reactor (LWR) environments in nuclear power plants (NPPs). Is your interest (fl related to subsequent license renewal (SLR) and NPP long-term operation (LTO)? ~ ~.

1. Do you expect to have harvestable components that NRC should be aware of? How so?

When? lbJ Within 5 years D 5-10 years D sometime in future D not likely

2. Please comment on the things that stand out in your mind about harvesting components.

, o..ffer 00 '{fS ~ ~e ~ve dtCPMm*1$\\~ <'..J'IL'S N R\\J (UVj._ hcu,-c CU" M~J~v-e.

3. Would you like NRC to have a public meeting on harvesting NPP components? Other (J\\ n, ~

suggestions? -j)'ff:lv~~.,. I

4. Please rate the topics on a scale from 1 to 5 (5 being highest) in terms of interest to you:

Reactor pressure vessel embrittlement Electrical cable qualification and condition assessment Irradiation-assisted degradation of reactor internals Concrete structures and containment degradation Availability of reliable inservice inspection (ISI) techniques Creating a harvesting database [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ More coordination between NRC and industry on harvesting and SLR research [ Other industry activities [ ] Other areas NRC should focus on? Please provide any other comments or feedback that may be important to NRC's work on harvesting of aged materials from NPPs. Return to: NRC Staff at Poster 7 across from Salon D Name By: March 15, 2018 Date

Note to requester: Attachment to email immediately follows. Yellow highlighted portions were in the version of the document provided

---

.....ito the FOIA team.

From: Sent: To: Cc:

Subject:

Attachments:

All, Purtscher, Patrick Tuesday, May 31, 2016 7:38 AM Hiser, Matthew; Iyengar, Raj; Frankl, Istvan; Hull, Amy Tregoning, Robert FW: 2016-NRR-UNR-Draft-May 2016 abh rev.docx 2016-NRR-UNR-Draft-May 2016-Enclosure-CLEAN-FINAL.DOCX I think the draft UNR is OK as is, we don't need an example in the draft at this point. The larger scale of testing was meant to cover the whole range of potential testing configuration, larger coupons to full-scale test, depending on the circumstances.

Pat From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 2:58 PM To: Iyengar, Raj <Raj.lyengar@nrc.gov>; Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: 2016-NRR-UNR-Draft-May 2016 abh rev.docx Hi, Sorry I'm a little late to this conversation on a Friday before Memorial Day! I agree with capturing Pat's suggestion on specimen size in Task E. I did have one edit to remove the reference to "small-scale specimens and coupons" in Task C, since the specimen size comment is being incorporated into Task E. See tracked changes in t he attached. My thoughts on this topic in general: Looking at K/size effects in irradiated materials is different from what I thought Pat's original proposal was for "testing of larger-scale specimens". To me, looking at K/size effects may involve repeat tests on 0.25T, a.ST and 1T CT specimens (for example), to see the effects of specimen size and determine K validity as specimens size decreases. When Pat was describing "larger-scale testing" I thought he was envisioning full-size piping mockups or something of that nature, which is far different than varying CT specimen size. Pat, can you clarify what you are envisioning? For the K/size effect question, I know EPRl's Primary Systems Corrosion Research (PSCR) is already planning and sponsoring testing on the Zorita materials to look at K/size effects by testing multiple CT specimen sizes. The results from that project may at least partially address Pat's suggestion. For this whole discussion on what to include in t he UNR regarding specimen size or large vs small-scale testing, I think it would probably be appropriate to get Rob's perspective and insight on what we need to be focusing on from his SL technical perspective. Hope everyone has a great weekend and see you next week! Thanks! 1

Matt From: Iyengar, Raj Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 12:23 PM To: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Re: 2016-NRR-UNR-Draft-May 2016 abh rev.docx

Steve, Sorry for confusing you. What I meant by disposition document was the deliverable under Task B. This is the disposition of EMDA issues and offering recommendations on less-resolved issues.

I am OK with the draft. No additional input from m e. Raj From: Frankl, Istvan Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 12:19 PM To: Iyengar, Raj; Purtscher, Patrick; Hull, Amy; Hiser, Matthew

Subject:

RE: 2016-NRR-UNR-Draft-May 2016 abh rev.docx Thanks, Raj. I also like your Task E implementation of Pat's input. You mentioned in your email below that "This will be important for the disposition document." This is why I asked question on public comments (my understanding is that the disposition document addresses these comments) I will not send the drafts to DLR until later today. This will allow all contributors to "reflect". If you need more time, I can hold off until Monday.

Thanks, Steve From: Iyengar, Raj Sent: Friday, May 27, 201612:18 PM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy

<Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Re: 2016-NRR-UNR-Draft-May 2016 abh rev.docx Thanks, Pat. We cain pursue this further next week. All, Have a wonderful long week and Happy M emorial Day! Raj 2

From: Purtscher, Patrick Sent: Friday, May 27, 201612:12 PM To: Iyengar, Raj; Frankl, Istvan; Hull, Amy; Hiser, Matthew

Subject:

RE: 2016-NRR-UNR-Draft-May 2016 abh rev.docx I think section E is appropriate place to mention the size effects. I think one example could be the K/size criterion issue for IASCC crack growth that is discussed extensively in NUREG/CR-7027. Pat From: Iyengar, Raj Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 12:04 PM To: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Re: 2016-NRR-UNR-Draft-May 2016 abh rev.docx

Steve, I have attached a revised version of the enclosure that includes some of Pat's comments. The assessment of appropriate testing is referenced in Task E.

On the "gap" of small-scale vs. large scale testing is not new. There has been ample work. But, for components experiencing IAD, there may not be a full understanding. I do not think there was a public comment on this for GALL-SLR. But, I could be wrong. As you had suggested, we can an internal alignment on Pat's idea and pursue it with NRR. There are at least couple of options - Task E (emergent need) from this UNR or IAD UNR. Perhaps, there are morre options. For now, I have added a phrase (highlighted) in the deliverable of Task E. "Such issues may include, but not restricted to, providing an assessment of effect of specimen size on the prediction of component performance, technical support for aging management program audits, public meetings related to communication efforts, and confirmatory reviews of licensee submittals." Raj From: Frankl, Istvan Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 11:27 AM To: Iyengar, Raj; Purtscher, Patrick; Hull, Amy; Hiser, Matthew

Subject:

RE: 2016-NRR-UNR-Draft-May 2016 abh rev.docx

Raj, Was this issue raised during the public comment period of the GALL-SLR or SRP-SLR?

3

If the identification of a gap in EMDA is new, it needs to be communicated to RES/DE management before we send specifics on it in a draft document to DLR. The EMDA is a RES deliverable, so obviously, RES/DE management should be briefed on it before we notify our counterparts in NRR. Perhaps, you or Pat could add wording to the draft that will allow us to be more specific in our response. Any thoughts? Steve From: Iyengar, Raj Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 11:11 AM To: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Re: 2016-NRR-UNR-Draft-May 2016 abh rev.docx

Steve, I just sent another approach. I realized we need to address Pat's idea soon. This will be important for the disposition document. We can also consider his idea in Task B, as part of the recommendations that we will be providing.

I will look over all of Pat's changes and incorporate them (except the one on testing) in Task C. Raj From: Frankl, Istvan Sent: Friday, May 27, 201611:05 AM To: Iyengar, Raj; Purtscher, Patrick; Hull, Amy; Hiser, Matthew

Subject:

RE: 2016-NRR-UNR-Oraft-May 2016 abh rev.docx

Raj, I agree with your overall assessment. However, I recommend that we (and RES/DE management) should first align with Pat's recommendations and then we discuss our recommendation with DLR either during our review of their final draft (before they submit the draft UNR for NRR management review/ approval), or during the drafting of the RES response.

Also, are there other revisions/changes from Pat that should be implemented in our final draft?

Thanks, Steve From: Iyengar, Raj Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 10:49 AM To: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy

<Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Re: 2016-NRR-UNR-Draft-May 2016 abh rev.docx Pat/Steve, 4

1 looke*d into the additions proposed by Pat (highlighted in yellow). These are very valuable thoughts and should be pursued under the new UNR for IAD. I believe that is in progress. This really does not fit the objective of developing a general database for ex-plant materials (metals, concrete and cables). Further, these points were not vetted with DLR during our staff and management briefings on this UNR. I would prefer not to surprise them by inserting things like this, which are not directly addressing the objective. If you still insist, I will add these to the final version. Raj The EMDA ranking of each aging-related degradation phenomena incorporates multiple factors that may not be adequately resolved by additional coupon testing of ex-plant materials. Part of this user need will be to examine where testing of larger-scale specimens may be appropriate to provide validation of the prediction of component performance from coupon testing. Deliverable: RES should develop a strat egic database for strategic harvesting t hat covers t he four topical areas outlined in SRM on SECY 14-0016, which containsing information on:

• research gaps for SLR that may be best addressed by harvesting due to challenges in simulating actual service conditionsunique and significant materials aging degradation diverse sources (operat ing experience, other nuclear facilities, other long-lived industrial plants, other materials organizations such as ASM and NACE),
• assessment of appropriate testing program that would reduce the concern associated with the EMDA

ranking, From: Frankl, Istvan Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 10:22 AM To: Iyengar, Raj; Purtscher, Patrick; Hull, Amy; Hiser, Matthew

Subject:

RE: 2016-NRR-UNR-Draft-May 2016 abh rev.docx

Raj, I have not yet sent the final revs to DLR, so please consider incorporating Pat's inputs into the final version (this may require copy and paste into t he final rev you sent me late yesterday).

Thanks, Steve 5

From: Iyengar, Raj Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 10:04 AM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov> Cc: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Re: 2016-NRR-UNR-Draft-May 2016 abh rev.docx

Pat, St eve has t he final version. Your points can be included in the response t hat we provide.

What do you think? Raj From: Purtscher, Patrick Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 9:23 AM To: Iyengar, Raj; Hull, Amy; Hiser, Matthew Cc: Frankl, Istvan

Subject:

RE: 2016-NRR-UNR-Draft-May 2016 abh rev.docx I added some additional comments on the harvesting to be considered. Pat From: Iyengar, Raj Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 11:15 AM To: Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov> Cc: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: 2016-NRR-UNR-Draft-May 2016 abh rev.docx Amy/Matt, I have incorporated Matt's revisions to task c. I have also provided responses to your comments. Based on our discussion this AM. I would recommend a different UNR for the AMP audits and the strategic harvesting task (task c here), because of the longer time-frame that may be needed. Besides, these two activities may spill over beyond the receipt of first SLR application (later 2018). This major purpose of this UNR to bring a closure to the EMDA issues, to the extent possible (and recommend further technical activities for unresolved or new emergent issues), through workshops/meetings (Task A) and through disposition documents prepared by RES staff (Task B), before the first application comes in. Please feel free to make your final recommendations/suggestions to the comment boxes and send the document to Steve. Also feel free to add/revise language as you see fit. No need to put that on track changes. I I Not sure if I will be here this PM. (b)(6),..

• • Thank so much for your help and support.

Raj 6

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 8:33 PM To: Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Iyengar, Raj <Raj.lyengar@nrc.gov> Cc: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: 2016-NRR-UNR-Draft-May 2016 abh rev.docx Hi Raj and Amy, Please find attached (whenever this email gets to you!) my edits of the harvesting section. I am also ccing Pat Purtscher to provide any input on Task C. Thanks! Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Fngineer US Nuclea1 Regulalory Commi:.~ion I Onice of Nuclear RcgulalOry Rc~carch Di, i\\ion of h1ginccring I Corro~ion :ind Mc1:illurgy Branch Phone: 301-415-2454 I Office: TWFN 10062 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Hull, Amy Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 7:45 AM To: Iyengar, Raj <Raj.lyengar@nrc.gov>

Subject:

2016-NRR-UNR-Draft-May 2016 abh rev.docx Raj, my two cents worth. 7

User Need Evaluate the Aging Management of Systems, Structures, and Components for Subsequent License Renewal

Background:

Although the NRC staff can accept subsequent license renewal (SLR) applications now, the review would be based on guidance provided in NUREG-1800, Revision 2, "Standard Review Plan for Review of License Renewal Applications for Nuclear Power Plants" and NUREG-1 801, Revision 2, "Generic Aging Lessons Learned {GALL) Report - Final Report." Because this guidance applies to plants operating from 40-60 years, additional review would be needed to ensure that the applicant addressed issues anticipated during 60-80 years of plant operation for SLR. Such reviews would be longer and more resource-intensive. To improve the efficiency of SLR application reviews, the NRC staff has undertaken several activities to revise the guidance documents. These activities include reviews of aging management practices, plant audits, technical information exchanges with industry and Department of Energy (DOE), and confirmatory research. In cooperation with the DOE Light Water Reactor Sustainability {LWRS) Program, the NRC completed NUREG/CR-7153, "Expanded Materials Degradation Assessment (EMDA), Vol. 1-5" (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML14279A321, ML14279A331, ML14279A349, ML14279A430, ML14279A461) to identify the most significant technical issues for nuclear power reactor operation beyond 60 years. The EMDA ranked the significance, current knowledge, and uncertainty associated with aging-related degradation phenomena that could affect systems, structures, and components (SSCs) over 80 years of operation. As outlined in the staff requirements memorandum (SRM) on SECY 14-0016, the major technical issue areas are: Reactor pressure vessel neutron embrittlement at high fluence; Irradiation-assisted stress corrosion cracking of reactor internals and primary system components; Concrete and containment degradation; and Electrical cable qualification and condition assessment. The NRC staff conducted several audits to investigate the effectiveness of aging management programs (AMPs). The findings are documented in the report titled, "Summary of Aging Management Program Effectiveness Audits to Inform Subsequent License Renewal: R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant and Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit 1" (ML13122A007). The development of SLR guidance was based on NUREG-1800 and NUREG-1801, the understanding gained from the audits, NUREG/CR-7153 (EMDA), an evaluation of domestic and international operating experience of nuclear plants, lessons learned from staff review of previous license renewal applications, and assessment of recent research findings. Draft SLR guidance documents were issued in December 2015, as draft "Generic Aging Lessons Learned for Subsequent License Renewal (GALL-SLR) Report," (NUREG-2191, Volumes 1 and 2) and draft "Standard Review Plan for Review of Subsequent License Renewal Applications for Nuclear Power Plants" (SRP-SLR) (NUREG-2192). Since the draft guidance documents were issued, the staff has held several public meetings with stakeholders and the public to discuss the proposed revisions and bases for the revisions. The most recent meetings were held on January 21 and February 19, 2016. Going forward, the NRC staff will continue to lead outreach activities to stakeholders and the public in order to

provide information on the proposed changes to the guidance documents, solicit feedback on the documents, and revise the documents, as appropriate, to reflect stakeholder and public feedback. The final guidance documents are expected to be issued in mid-2017. To support the review of an SLR application, an applicant will need to demonstrate how the effects of aging will be managed, including those associated with the technical issues listed above. Although the industry is conducting research to address these major technical issues for SLR, not all the research will be completed before the first application is submitted. For those issues that the industry has not yet developed a generic technical basis to support its resolution, the NRC will request applicants to address the technical issues with plant-specific programs in their SLR applications. The staff will review these plant-specific programs that address the SLR technical issues, but anticipates a longer application review process in these cases. The requested research described below would provide information to support the staff in effectively evaluating AMPs and developing staff positions on the technical issues identified in EMDA reports. This effort will also augment the staff's preparedness for the evaluation of the feasibility of future applications for an SLR period. These requested products should !build upon analysis methods, tools, and expertise developed as part of ongoing research activities and new research activities focused specifically on aging effects during an SLR period. Description of Scope and Tasks A. Hold NRC/industry workshop(s) on status of domestic and international research activities and operating experience to address and evaluate the status of materials degradation issues identified in the EMDA reports for SLR. Technical Need: In February 2008, the NRC and DOE first co-sponsored a "Workshop on U.S. Nuclear Power Plant Life Extension Research and Development" (ADAMS Accession Number ML080570419), which requested stakeholder input into aging management research areas for "Life Beyond 60." Since then, there have been multiple workshops/meetings on the research activities and operating experience that may impact aging management of SSCs for an SLR period. These meetings have been helpful in facilitating technical discussions, disseminating knowledge and information, enabling the understanding of technical challenges, and paving the path forward for resolution of the challenges and issues related to materials degradation during the SLR period. As the NRC staff prepares for the review of SLR applications, there is a need for continued engagement with domestic industry, DOE and other federal organizations, academia, international partners, and interested public stakeholders through workshops focused on the status and resolution of major technical issues outlined in the SRM and identified in EMDA. Deliverable: RES staff should facilitate several workshops/meetings on operating experience from the initial license renewal period, research results on materials degradation issues, and aging management of SSCs during the SLR period. These meetings should be specifically targeted toward the resolution of technical issues for effective aging management of SSCs during the SLR period. RES staff should provide an annual technical letter report summarizing the understanding gained through the workshops/meetings. The summary should include the status of domestic and international research activities in addressing materials degradation issues and aging management practices during the SLR period. The report should also discuss (1) areas of progress and issues resolution, (2) areas of insufficient progress that may warrant additional NRC-driven

interactions, and (3) any newly identified technical issues that should be considered. Schedule: The effort should last no more than 36 months from the period of inception of this user need request. B. Provide RES staff assessments of the current knowledge and disposition of materials degradation issues identified in the EMDA reports Technical Need: As mentioned earlier, the EMDA reports identified significant technical issues for nuclear power reactor operations beyond 60 years related to materials degradation. These issues fall under the following four topical areas, as outlined in SRM on SECY 14-0016: Reactor pressure vessel neutron embrittlement at high fluence; Irradiation-assisted stress corrosion cracking of reactor internals and primary system components; Concrete and containment degradation; and Electrical cable qualification and condition assessment. The NRC, DOE, and industry are addressing the key technical issues related to materials degradation at NPPs. In order to gain better understanding of the materials aging and degradation mechanisms and their implications of structural and component integrity, DOE and the industry have initiated numerous research activities on the four major technical areas. The NRC staff conducts confirmatory research, through several user need requests on specific technical issues, to independently verify licensee data, determine safety margins, and explore uncertainties. In addition, the NRC research will support and increase the efficiency of staff review of SLR applications. To fully support the staff review of the SLR applications, RES should develop staff assessments of the current knowledge and disposition of materials degradation issues related to the four major technical areas. The assessments should also include recommendations on the need for: any interim staff guidance (ISG) to address aging management issues, and new regulatory guidance and/or revision of existing regulatory guides (RGs) to address uncertainties in knowledge and/or potential non-conservativism. Deliverable: Deliver a technical letter report that summarizes the current knowledge and disposition of materials degradation issues identified in EMDA. The report should also include recommendations on the need for any new or revised guidance to address component integrity of aging structures. Schedule: The effort should last no more than 36 months from the period of inception of this user need request. The initial draft report should be completed by the end of FY 2018. C. Develop and implement a long-term strategy for obtaining information on materials degradation from decommissioned NPPs, as well as from ex-plant components from operating plants. Technical Need: The NRC performs confirmatory research to inform and develop the technical basis for regulatory decisions related to aging management programs for

SLR. Historically, this research has included testing small scale specimens or coupons SA-virgin materials under simulated aging conditions, as well as testing and characterization of ex-plant materials harvested from nuclear power plants. Ex-plant materials are valuable because they have been exposed to actual in-service plant operating conditions (temperature, irradiation, coolant, etc.), unlike virgin materials tested under simulated conditions in the lab. Testing ex-plant materials also reduces the uncertainty associated with the applicability of the aging conditions. Therefore, this effort is expected to provide fundamental insights on reactor materials degradation and information addressing potential technical issues or identified gaps to support anticipated future NRC needs. It will also inform the value of existing databases based on simulated aging conditions by assessing their applicability to in-service conditions. Based on the recent experience of recovering materials from decommissioned plants, such as Zion, Crystal River and Zorita (Spain), the efforts of planning, coordination and eventual harvesting of these materials could be resource-intensive and time-challenging. Future efforts to retrieve materials from decommissioned plants should be focused on the highest value SSCs by proactively d,eveloping a strategic database for obtaining unique and significant materials aging degradation information from ex-plant components. Such a database will enable the NRC to focus its harvesting efforts and expeditiously obtain materials and components from plants to be decommissioned in the near future and develop information and knowledge to assess the efficacy of the AMPs. Deliverable: RES should develop a database covering the four topical areas outlined in SRM on SECY 14-0016 and containing information on: research gaps for SLR that may be best addressed by harvesting due to challenges in simulating actual service conditions, and materials that can be harvested from to-be-decommissioned NPPs and ex-plant components from operating plants to better inform the NRC's AMPs and aging-related regulatory oversight and to better plan research activities. RES should deliver periodic reports assessing the effectiveness of such programs and recommending any improvements for the SLR period. Schedule: The effort should last no more than 36 months from the period of inception of this user need request. D. Continue to Develop Domestic and International Partnerships to Share Expertise, Capabilities and Resources Related to Aging Management Research for Long-Term Operations (L TO) Technical Need: Various domestic and foreign research organizations, government agencies, utilities and research organizations are presently engaged in aging management research, the results of which may be of value to the NRC regarding plant operations during the SLR period. Additionally, the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) is engaged with various international research organizations to develop data on aging mechanisms/effects. As such, it benefits the NRC to be engaged in domestic and international research partnerships in order to evaluate all available operating experience and relevant research, leverage resources and minimize unnecessary

duplication of efforts. It would be advantageous to the NRC to develop partnerships with these entities such that the various research programs could be better coordinated and focused on high-priority needs. Deliverable: Continue to develop agreements with domestic and international partners to collaborate on aging management research that results in information to help inform agency decisions regarding SLR and long-term operations. Integrate as appropriate the results of these collaborative research and information exchanges from international partnerships into Tasks A and B. Provide an annual summary of international collaborative research results and status of interactions (e.g., references to meeting minutes, presentations, technical reports, etc.), highlighting international activities and results that may affect SLR. Schedule: The effort should continue until the closure of this user need request. E. Provide technical assistance, as needed, for preparation of review of SLR applications. Technical Need: As the NRR staff prepares for the anticipated SLR application in FY18, technical assistance from RES staff on emergent issues may be needed. Such issues may include, but not restricted to, providing an assessment of effect of specimen size on the prediction of component performance, technical support for aging management program audits, public meetings related to communication efforts, and confirmatory reviews of licensee submittals. Schedule: This effort, as needed, should continue until the closure of this user need request.

From: Sent: To:

Subject:

Moyer, Carol Wednesday, November 30, 2016 10:02 AM Hiser, Matthew FW: 42 NUSSC Day 1 FYI, Kathryn plugged your workshop in Vienna this week. From: Thomas, Brian Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 9:58 AM To: Brock, Kathryn <Kathryn.Brock@nrc.gov>; Weber, Michael <Micha,el.Weber@nrc.gov>; Hackett, Edwin <Edwin.Hackett@nrc.gov> Cc: Coffin, Stephanie <Stephanie.Coffin@nrc.gov>; Tappert, John <John.Tappert@nrc.gov>; Abu-Eid, Boby <Boby.Abu-Eid@nrc.gov>; Collins, Daniel <Daniel.Collins@nrc.gov>; Moyer, Carol <Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov>; Layton, Michael <Michael.Layton@nrc.gov>; Pstrak, David <David.Pstrak@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: 42 NUSSC Day 1 Thanks Kathryn. Good plug for our research sessions at the RIC and for opportunities to further our collaboration on research. From: Brock, Kathryn Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2016 3:07 AM To: Thomas, Brian <Bri!!n,ThQm!!~nrc.gov>; Weber, Michael <Michael.Weber@nrc.gov>; Hackett, Edwin <Edwin.Hackett@nrc.gov> Cc: Coffin, Stephanie <Stephanie.Coffin@nrc.gov>; Tappert, John <John.Tappert@nrc.gov>; Abu-Eid, Boby <Boby.Abu-Eid@nrc.gov>; Collins, Daniel <Daniel.Collins@nrc.gov>; Moyer, Carol <Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov>; Layton, Michael <Michael.Layton@nrc.gov>; Pstrak, David <David.Pstrak@nrc.gov>

Subject:

42 NUSSC Day 1 Hello. 42 NUSSC kicked off in the afternoon, so we are really just getting started. The afternoon was spent discussing general business, with a welcome from Greg Rzentkowski (Director NSNI). Greg gave us a summary of the Senior Regulators Meeting including a discussion on the focus on safety/security interface, regulatory readiness, and the concept of strength in depth. NUS SC Chair Fabien Feron gave a summary of the CSS meeting, which was consistent with the information provided by Michele Sampson. Fabien spoke of the need to have a common standards development process, a common glossary, and a holistic review of the complete collection of safety guides. More to come on those topics, I'm sure. There was another demonstration of the IT Platform, NSS-OUI, and a thank you to the USA and Japan for supporting the tool development. I expressed my support of the tool and that we are starting to use it more. Another exciting IT discussion was related to the possibility of remote access to the standards meetings. I believe this was piloted by EPReSC and RASSC, so I will follow up with my colleagues. This may be helpful to us if we choose to have a support staff member participate in the meetings from DC - it gives the option of reducing travel costs on a second traveler and it gives the opportunity for others to hear the standards committees in action. ln the morning I had a follow up meeting with Ed Bradley and several Directors responsible for research in fuel cycle, waste technology, materials, reactors, and knowledge management. These folks are excited about 1

potential collaborative efforts with NRC and will be providing us some specific areas to consider where research collaboration may be possible. I told them about the RIC and the March meeting on harvesting of ex-plant material for research purposes. They were excited to hear about the RIC, especially the sessions on leveraging international research. That's all for now. Enjoy your day. Kathy 2

Subject:

Location: Start: End: Show Time As: Recurrence: Meeting Status: Organizer: Resources: Ex-Plant Materials Harvesting Workshop HQ-TWFN-P2AUD-300p Tue 03/07/2017 7:00 AM Tue 03/07/2017 6:00 PM Tentative (none) Not yet responded Hiser, Matthew HQ-TWFN-P2AUD-300p Reserving as placeholder for workshop.

Subject:

Location: Start: End: Show Time As: Recurrence: Meeting Status: Organizer: Resources: Ex-plant Materials Harvesting Workshop HQ-TWFN-P2AUD-300p Thu 03/16/2017 1:00 PM Thu 03/16/2017 7:00 PM Tentative (none) Not yet responded Hiser, Matthew HQ-TWFN-P2AUD-300p Reserving as placeholder for workshop around RIC.

Subject:

Location: Start: End: Show Time As: Recurrence: Meeting Status: Organizer: Resources: Ex-plant Materials Harvesting Workshop HQ-TWFN-P2AUD-300p Fri 03/17/2017 7:00 AM Fri 03/17/2017 6:00 PM Tentative (none) Not yet responded Hiser, Matthew HQ-TWFN-P2AU D-300p Reserving as placeholder for workshop around RIC.

Subject:

Location: Start: End: Show Time As: Recurrence: Meeting Status: Organizer: Resources: Ex-Plant Materials Harvesting Workshop HQ-TWFN-P2AUD-300p Wed 03/08/2017 7:00 AM Wed 03/08/2017 6:00 PM Tentative (none) Not yet responded Hiser, Matthew HQ-TWFN-P2AUD-300p Reserving as placeholder for workshop.

From: Sent: To:

Subject:

Hi Gracie, Hiser, Matthew Wednesday, September 14, 2016 3:01 PM Vera, Graciela Ex-plant Materials Harvesting Could you schedule a briefing with Brian Thomas on Ex-Plant Materials Harvesting? Please include the following participants: Brock, Kathryn Tregoning, Robert Thomas, Brian Purtscher, Patrick Frankl, Istvan It looks like there are available times on September 27 or 28. Thanks! Matt Matthew Hiser Materia ls Engineer US Nuc lear Regulatory Commission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-415-2454 I Office: TWFN 10062 Matthew. Hise r@nre.gov 1

From: Hull, Amy Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2015 2:22 PM Iyengar, Raj; Hiser, Matthew To:

Subject:

cross-cutting topic... : Specific Questions for Internals and Piping Materials for Deep-dive meetings ... I will have to do that tomorrow morning. I have to leave in 10 minutes for another meeting. From: Hull, Amy Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2015 8:22 AM To: Iyengar, Raj <Raj.lyengar@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Rao, Appajosula <Appajosula.Rao@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov> Cc: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>; Prokofiev, louri <louri.Prokofiev@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Specific Questions for Internals and Piping Materials for Deep-dive meetings I am making 2 changes this morning 1 Adding a cross-cutting line to account for discussions we need to have with EPRI, LWRS, and NEI concerning our new work on prioritization of strategic harvesting opportunities. This is a followup from the Materials TIE presentation Matt H and I made a few months ago in which industry Qeople said they were interested in participating. (2) revised line for Ni alloy DMWs in BMI (followup from AMP Effectiveness Audit at Ginna and SLR SME panel discussions for AMP XI.M11 Bon NI alloys) - this is louri's contribution that he talked to Raj about From: Iyengar, Raj Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2015 10:46 PM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Rao, Appajosula <Appajosula.Rao@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov> Cc: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Specific Questions for Internals and Piping Materials for Deep-dive meetings

All, Please review the word document on the specific questions related to internals and piping materials. Rob expressed an interest in meeting with you all to seek alignment on the questions. Because I w ill not be in before Noon tomorrow, please go ahead with the meeting (Perhaps, one of you could schedule the meeting for tomorrow AM). If not, we can meet after 1 PM tomorrow.

I have included only those sub-issues that require a deep-dive meeting. I have not included sub-issues related to Alloy 600/690, and the CS - BAC sub-issue. If I have missed any, please let me know. I need to get questions from DLR (at least on the leaching issue). I believe BT/KB would like to see these questions tomorrow PM. We have already settled down on the questions related to Cables and Concrete. This is the last major issue that would warrant a deep-dive meeting. I have also attached the table (with Rob's edits). Thanks a lot for your willingness to put up with me.

Raj 2

Subject:

location: Start: End: Show Time As: Recurrence: Recurrence Pattern: Meeting Status: Organizer: Required Attendees: Resources: Ex-Plant Harvesting Coordination Meeting HQ-TWFN-10A73-8p Mon 11/20/2017 10:30 AM Mon 11/20/2017 11 :30 AM Tentative Weekly every 2 week(s) on Thursday from 2:30 PM to 3:30 PM Not yet responded Hiserr, Matthew Purtscher, Patrick; Audrain, Margaret; Tregoning, Robert HQ-TWFN-10A73-8p Rescheduling for Monday so we can all attend. Setting up a standing every other week meeting on harvesting to help us stay on track and keep making progress. Topics: Sources of Materials Prioritization of Data Needs PNNL TLR

Subject:

Location: Start: End: Show Time As: Recurrence: Recurrence Pattern: Meeting Status: Organizer: Required Attendees: Ex-Plant Harvesting Coordination Meeting 10th floor huddle Thu 12/07/2017 10:30 AM Thu 12/07/2017 11 :30 AM Tentative Weekly every 2 week(s) on Thursday from 2:30 PM to 3:30 PM Not yet responded Hiser, Matthew Purtscher, Patrick; Audrain, Margaret; Tregoning, Robert Setting up a standing every other week meeting on harvesting to help us stay on track and keep making progress. Topics: Sources of Materials Prioritization of Data Needs PNNL TLR

Subject:

Location: Start: End: Show Time As: Recurrence: Recurrence Pattern: Meeting Status: Organizer: Required Attendees: Ex-Plant Harvesting Coordination Meeting 10th floor huddle Mon 12/11/2017 1:00 PM Mon 12/11/2017 2:00 PM Tentative Weekly every 2 week(s) on Thursday from 2:30 PM to 3:30 PM Not yet responded Hiser, Matthew Purtscher, Patrick; Audrain, Margaret Setting up a standing every other week meeting on harvesting to help us stay on track and keep making progress. Topics: Sources of Materials Prioritization of Data Needs PNNL TLR

Subject:

Location: Start: End: Show Time As: Recurr,ence: Recurrence Pattern: Meeting Status: Organizer: Required Attendees: Resources: Ex-Plant Harvesting Coordination Meeting HQ-TWFN-1 OA 73-8p Tue 01/09/2018 2:00 PM Tue 01/09/2018 3:00 PM Tentative Weekly every 2 week(s) on Thursday from 2:30 PM to 3:30 PM Not yet responded Hiser, Matthew Purtscher, Patrick; Audrain, Margaret; Tregoning, Robert HQ-TWFN-10A73-8p Setting up a standing every other week meeting on harvesting to help us stay on track and keep making progress. Topics: Sources of Materials Prioritization of Data Needs PNNL TLR

Subject:

Location: Start: End: Show Time As: Recurrence: Meeting Status: Organizer: Required Attendees: Ex-Plant Harvesting 10th floor huddle room Thu 08/18/2016 11 :00 AM Thu 08/18/2016 11:30 AM Tentative (none) Not yet responded Hiser, Matthew Frankl, Istvan; Tregoning, Robert; Purtscher, Patrick I think it would be good to get everyone on same page regarding next steps for the harvesting program. We have an early draft of the PNNL deliverable, with the final version expected in early 2017. I'd like to discuss that work as well as the workshop that was discussed with NRAJ last week and been discussed previously. Thanks,! Matt 1

From: Sent: To: Cc:

Subject:

Iyengar, Raj Thursday, May 18, 2017 9:22 AM Moyer, Carol Frankl, Istvan; Martinez Rodriguez, Erick RE: Draft Notes for EPRI mtg 6/ 6 Update from the AM meeting (per Office TA): Talking points at a high-level (only strategy and vision) - Programmatic details could be addressed later through other exchanges. From: Moyer, Carol Sent: Thursday, M ay 18, 2017 9:15 AM To: Iyengar, Raj <Raj.lyengar@nrc.gov> Cc: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>; Martinez Rodriguez, Erick <Erick.MartinezRodriguez@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Draft Notes for EPRI mtg 6/6 OK, thank you, Raj. From: Iyengar, Raj Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 9:12 AM To: Moyer, Carol <Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov> Cc: Frankl, Istvan <l~tvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>; Martinez Rodriguez, Erick <~ri~k.M~r!_inezRodriguez@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Draft Notes for EPRI mtg 6/6

Carol, I have a number of things to do today. I will see what I can do.

CMS can provide its input to Erick. I can add to it later, if needed. CIB staff has already developed one-pagers for RG1.99 and xLPR. The topics on Adv. Man. And Gen IV materials come from EPRI. EPRI will be providing brief to our management on those two topics. I have a meeting with Steve Bajorek on IAP 2. I will ask him what Mike Case wants. As you know that topics on IAPs is led by Mike Case. We can certainly provide Brian some talking points on our efforts. Raj From: Moyer, Carol Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 6:17 PM To: Iyengar, Raj <Ra j.lyengar@nrc.gov> Cc: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>; Martinez Rodriguez, Erick <~ri.£1~...ME.rti,:iezRodriguez@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Draft Notes for EPRI mtg 6/6 Importance: High

Raj,

I have been drafting some notes for the EPRI-NRC management meeting on 6/6, but I don't want to duplicate your efforts on this. Can we combine what we have collected so far, and then see what is missing? There are topics here that clearly fall within CIB's scope, e.g., RPV embrittlement (RG 1.99), and some that belong to Ian's branch. Also, I let Steve Bajorek know that I would draft some notes on Advanced Reactors, but that I would be looking to him to fill in status on the computational codes. Steve let me know that Brian would like to see draft notes by Thursday (tomorrow), so I hope that we can discuss this in the morning.

Thanks, Carol Carol E. Moyer Sr. Materials Engineer U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research MS: T-10A36 Washington, DC 20555-0001 carol.moyer@nrc.gov 301-415-2153 2

Subject:

Location: Start: End: Show Time As: Recurrence: Recurrence Pattern: Meeting Status: Organizer: Required Attendees: Resources: Ex-Pilant Harvesting Coordination Meeting HQ-TWFN-10A73-8p Wed 10/18/2017 9:00 AM Wed 10/18/2017 10:00 AM Tentative Weekly every 2 week(s) on Thursday from 2:30 PM to 3:30 PM Not yet responded Hiser, Matthew Purtscher, Patrick; Audrain, Margaret; Tregoning, Robert HQ-TWFN-1 OA 73-8p I' ll be off Thursday afternoon - any chance we can move this to Wednesday morning? Setting up a standing every other week meeting on harvesting to help us stay on track and keep making progress. Topics: Sources of Materials Prioritization of Data Needs PNNL TLR

Subject:

Location: Start: End: Show Time As: Recurrence: Recurrence Pattern: Meeting Status: Organizer: Required Attendees: Ex-Plant Harvesting Coordination Meeting 10th floor huddle Thu 10/19/2017 9:30 AM Thu 10/19/2017 10:30 AM Tentative Weekly every 2 week(s) on Thursday from 2:30 PM to 3:30 PM Not yet responded Hiser, Matthew Purtscher, Patrick; Audrain, Margaret; Tregoning, Robert I'll be off Thursday afternoon - any chance we can move this to Thursday morning? Setting up a standing every other week meeting on harvesting to help us stay on track and keep making progress. Topics: Sources of Materials Prioritization of Data Needs PNNL TLR 1

From: Sent: To:

Subject:

Hiser, Matthew Thursday, October 19, 2017 9:31 AM Tregoning, Robert Ex-Plant Harvesting Coordination Meeting Meg is in, so we'll meet - I can call you on the same number. Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-415-2454 I Office: TWFN 10062 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

From: Sent: To:

Subject:

Hi Meg, Hiser, Matthew Thursday, October 19, 2017 10:13 AM Audrain, Margaret Ex-Plant Harvesting Coordination Meeting The names Rob mentioned at ANL are Omesh Chopra and Bill Shack. I'm sure Bogdan will know who they are; my understanding is both authored numerous NU RE Gs over the years... Thanks! Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Conunission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-415-2454 I Office: TWFN 10062 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

From: Sent: To:

Subject:

Attachments: Hi Steve, Hiser, Matthew Friday, December 01, 2017 3:33 PM Frankl, Istvan; Tregoning, Robert; Purtscher, Patrick; Audrain, Margaret DE Briefing on Harvesting Harvesting One Pager 12-1-17.docx Note to requester: Attachment to email document immediately follows. I have attached a draft one-pager that could be used to brief Brian and Chris on the harvesting efforts in the context of their questions regarding the ANL travel. Do you mind if I go ahead and schedule something with them for next week? Meg, Pat, and Rob, please feel free to edit/ comment on this draft one-pager as necessary. Thanks! Matt

Ex-Plant Materials Harvesting One-Pager Motivation and Objective: Ex-plant materials are valuable because they have been exposed to actual in-service plant operating conditions (temperature, irradiation, coolant, etc.) o Generally, research involves accelerated, simulated aging conditions in a lab which may not be as representative of actual in-service aging o Highly representative materials (actual plant components) and aging conditions reduces the uncertainty associated with the applicability of research findings. With plants shutting down both in the U.S. and Europe, there are increasing opportunities to harvest components from decommissioning plants. Insights from ex-plant harvesting would support regulatory decisions for subsequent license renewal (SLR), and could have implications for the current license period o There is a task in the new UNR for SLR from NRR/DLR requesting RES to investigate opportunities for harvesting where appropriate. Past Activities: Workshop in March 2017 o NRC staff hosted a 2-day workshop with interested stakeholders, including domestic and international utilities and research organizations, to discuss benefits and challenges associated with ex-plant harvesting. o Sessions covered motivation for harvesting, data needs, sources of materials, lessons learned, the practical aspects of harvesting, and harvesting decision-making and planning o The discussion focused on the importance of clearly identifying the need and purpose for performing a harvesting project. All participants agreed harvesting is a complex and expensive proposition, but one that can be worthwhile if the need is clearly defined and addressed. PNNL Report on Harvesting Criteria o PNNL has produced a draft final report for NRC on criteria for harvesting decision-making and planning o Provides overview of past harvesting efforts and lessons learned as well as suggestions for approach to prioritize data needs for harvesting PLiM o NRC staff provided a presentation, poster, and paper for the recent PLiM conference in October 2017. Path Forward: Focused on two parallel efforts: o Developing alignment within NRC on prioritization of harvesting data needs Use criteria identified in PNNL report establish effective prioritization scheme for relevant areas: RPV, RPV internals and other metals, electrical components, concrete o Developing a database identifying sources of materials for harvesting Start with lab-based "boneyards" of prior harvest ed materials Visits to ANL, PNNL, and ORNL (leveraged with already planned travel) support this activity Coordinate with DOE NSUF Nuclear Fuel and Materials Library (NFML) run by INL as appropriate and beneficial

From: Sent: To:

Subject:

Matt, Oberson, Greg Thursday, June 09, 2016 11 :48 AM Hiser, Matthew contact Al Ahluwalia You could contact Al about the Korea plant material harvesting: kahluwal@epri.com 1

From: Sent: To: Cc:

Subject:

Importance: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status:

Amy, Frankl, Istvan Monday, June 06, 2016 3:02 PM Hull, Amy Hiser, Matthew COR Change for Strategic Harvesting Contract with PNNL High Follow up Flagged Are you OK with Pat assuming COR duties for subject contract?

You will continue to be retained as Technical Monitor. Please let me know ASAP.

Thanks, Steve

From: Sent: To:

Subject:

Matt/Amy: Tregioning, Robert Wednesday, November 18, 2015 10:55 AM Hiser, Matthew; Hull, Amy DLR user need So NRR\\DLR agreed to add the harvesting task to UNR 2010-006. Please verify with Steve that he wants you to start working on this with DLR staff (Bennett/Hiser).... RT Robert Tregoning Technical Advisor for Materials US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Two White Flint North, M/S T-10 A36 11545 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 ph: 301-415-2324 Blackberry: I I JpJ{§) fax: 301-415-6671

Subject:

Location: Start: End: Show Time As: Recurrence: Meeting Status: Organizer: Required Attendees: Resources: Discuss PLiM Presentation on Harvesting HQ-0WFN-08B02-12p Thu 10/12/2017 2:00 PM Thu 10/12/2017 3:00 PM Tentative (none) Not yet responded Hiser, Matthew Hiser, Allen; Tregoning, Robert; Moyer, Carol; Hull, Amy; Purtscher, Patrick HQ-OWFN-08B02-12p

From: Sent: To:

Subject:

Hi Matt, Moyer, Carol Thursday, July 27, 2017 10:31 AM Hiser, Matthew Decommissioning meeting next June Just FYI, I came across an advertisement for this meeting on Decommissioning, to be held next June in TN: http://www.exchanqemonitor.com/evtx/decommisioninq-2018/ This appears to be a business/commercial meeting, not a technical conference. But I thought it might be good to know about it, for scheduling & networking purposes, related to your harvesting work. Carol Carol Moyer Sr. Materials Engineer RES/DE/CMB carol.moyer@nrc.gov 301-415-2153

From: Sent: To: Cc:

Subject:

Attachments: Hi Mita, Darrell, and Eric, Hiser, Matthew Friday, May 15, 2015 8:21 AM Focht, Eric; Murdock, Darrell; Sircar, Madhumita Hull, Amy Ex-Plant Materials Harvesting title and time: June materials meeting Note to requester: Attachment to this email document is immediately following. I am working with Amy Hull in my brranch on an effort associated with strategic harvesting of ex-plant materials. This effort is just getting underway, but we would like to present the concept at an NRG-industry materials meeting in early June (see attached email). The purpose of this effort is to develop a more systematic proactive "strategic" approach to ex-plant material harvesting, rather than the more reactive opportunistic approach to date. It is important to share this concept with industry, since they will be vital in providing connections/communication to allow future harvesting projects to take place. I am putting together a slide or two on the reactor internals materials harvesting project at Zorita that I am involved with. I understand each of you have been / are involved with other harvesting efforts at Zion and Zorita on cables, concrete, and neutron absorbers. If you could just provide a slide or two with a high-level overview of the harvesting project and at least briefly touch on how the harvesting opportunity came together, that would be great. Thanks! Matt 1

From: Sent: To: Cc:

Subject:

Hull, Amy Friday, May 15, 2015 7:44 AM Tregoning, Robert Hiser, Matthew; Frankl, Istvan title and time: June materials meeting Strategic Approach for Obtaining Material and Component Aging Information Amy Hull & Matt Hiser 30 minutes, Matt will talk 15 minutes about current approach to ( and results from) ex-plant harvesting and then I will talk 15 about where we are going From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2015 3:43 PM To: Hull, Amy

Subject:

June materials meeting Amy: I just need a title and an allotted time for your Ex-plant Material Database presentation for the June meeting. Can you send me something either today or early tomorrow? Thanks so much, Rob Robert Tregoning Technical Advisor for Materials US Nuclear Regulatory Commission 21 Church Street, M/S CS-5A24 Rockville, MD 20850 ph: 301-251-7662 Blackberry:,---... -.*.-.... -..... -..... ! Jb)(§) fax: 301-251-7425

From: Sent: To:

Subject:

person Frankl. Steve Hiser, Matt Hull, Amy Tregoning, Rob Kanney. Joe Steve Bloom approved availability of Bernie, Heather, Bennett Murdock, Daryl Burke, John Mike Benson Oberson, Greg Cumblidge, Steve; Dave Alley Bob Hardies Gary Stevens Darrell Dunn or John Wise (Csontos branch) Watson, Bruce Amy B. Hull, Ph.D Senior Materials Engineer RES/OE/CMB (office T10*D4g) US Nuclear Regulatory Commission 11545 Rockville Pike Rockville, Maryland 20852 Telephone: (301) 415-2435 e*mail. amy.hull@nrc.gov Hull, Amy Tuesday, November 10, 2015 3:11 PM Hiser, Matthew Bloom approved time of Heather, Bernie, Bennett NRC affiliation Why? CMB Chair (amy asked his interest earlier} CMB Member (alternate COR, technical monitor); Zorita ex-plant harvesting CMB Member (COR, TM) RES/DE Sr advisor for work RES/ORA Member (technical monitor); LTRP NRR/DLR/RSRG Bernie - knows plants Heather - knows regional folks Bennett - plant audits, OpE RES/DE electrical RES/DE concrete RES/DE/CIB CODAP POC; database development RES/DE/CMB Zion questionnaire; EMDA; ex-plant harvesting NRR/DE Member (PNNL & PMMD background} NRR/DE Member NRR/DE Member N MSS/DSFM/RMB Member (decommissioned plant availability) NMSS Recommended by Steve Bloom 1

From: Sent: To: Cc:

Subject:

Attachments: Hull, Amy Monday, March 05, 2018 8:47 AM Hiser, Allen; Moyer, Carol; Hiser, Matthew Frankl, Istvan; Rudland, David; Ruffin, Steve; Frankl, Istvan attached: RIC Harvesting & AM Posters RIC Poster 6 on AM_20180213.pptx; RIC Poster 8 on Harvesting_20180213.pptx Note to requester: Attachments to See attached. I also included the AM poster. this email document are immediately following. From: Hiser, Allen Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2018 3:58 PM To: Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Moyer, Carol <Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov> Cc: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>; Rudland, David <David.Rudland@nrc.gov>; Ruffin, Steve <Steve. Ruffi n@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RIC Harvesting Poster Importance: High Can I get a copy of the RIC harvesting poster?

Thanks, Allen

Review of Additive Manufacturing by Direct Metal Laser Melting A. Hull, T. Herrity, and C. Moyer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC} Background and Motivation The NRC has been informed that parts created by additive manufacturing (AM) are being considered for applications in the operating fleet as early as calendar year 2018. In 2017, industry prototyping efforts involved use of the direct metal laser melting (DMLM) method to manufacture parts for reactor components. The Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research is beginning to evaluate the technology to gain insight into any technical issues that must be addressed to assure safety and reliability of specific DMLM-produced components that may be accepted by the NRC, including design, precursor materials, finished material properties, structural integrity, nondestructive evaluation. and quality assurance. This welding-based process may be susceptible to, for example, porosity, systematic defects. and anisotropy of properties not currently addressed for conventionally manufactured components. On November 28-29, 2017, the NRC held a public meeting entitled, "Additive Manufacturing for Reactor Materials and Components." Presentations from 28 speakers representing American and international industry, EPRL NEI, DoD facilities. DOE and National Laboratories. ASME. ASTM. ANSI, FAA. NASA. and NIST are available in ADAMS (Accession No. ML17338A880). DMLM Process Demonstration Specimen at GE Power Advanced Manufacturing Works, Greenville, SC. C. Moyer. December 11. 2017. Current Activities The NRC is developing a strategic plan to address the use of additive manufacturing for reactor materials and components. The NRC plans to leverage ongoing research and evaluation of this technology being performed by Federal counterparts. The NRC strategic plan will focus on topic areas of interest identified at the Additive Manufacturing for Reactor Materials and Components public meeting: Quality of AM materials and components for nuclear power plants Codes and standards development for AM Properties and structural performance Service performance/aging degradation Regulatory infrastructure Westinghouse's DMLM Examples: Thimble Plugging Device. Advanced Debris Filtering Bottom Nozzle, B. Cleary, November 28, 2017. Path Forward AM has been identified as a technique that the nuclear industry may use in the future. Prevailing questions are: How will AM be used in nuclear power plants. and when? What is the regulatory infrastructure for determining how safe it is? NRC areas of interest include the quality, properties. and structural performance of AM parts, including their inspectability. The service performance and aging degradation of AM parts are critical. It will be essential to compare the performance of parts from AM and those from conventional manufacturing processes. Challenges to be addressed include the limited understanding of acceptable ranges of variation for key manufacturing parameters. limited understanding of key failure mechanisms and material anomalies, the potential for systematic defects. cybersecurity considerations. lack of industry databases, and lack of industry specifications and standards. The development of codes and standards for AM is key to successful implementation. ASTM International SAE International

• Ste l~IUJUIKHl.ll, MITA Ml0!(4llll..lG1-G 1111A AmericaMakes International Organization Standardization American Wei.ding Society Aswciationfor the Advancement ofM@,(ftcal Instrumentation MetalPov,00' 100ustr1es Federation AAMI m

Amencaa Societyof Mechanical Engineers IEE Institute of £1ectr1caland £lectrool~Eflilnee1> IPC* lo>sodaUoo QPC, Connecth19 E!ectroolcs Industries ~ -- Standards Development Organizations involved with AM Standardization, J. McCabe, November 29, 2017

Harvesting of Aged Materials from Nuclear Power Plants M. Hiser0, P. Purtscher0, P. Ramuhallib, A.B. Hull0, and R. Tregoning0 ; 0U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), bPacific Northwest National Laboratory Background and Motivation Recent developments in the nuclear industry include stronger interest in extended plant operation and plans to shut down a number of nuclear power plants (NPPs). In the United States, there is strong interest in extending NPP lifespans through subsequent license renewal (SLR) from 60 to 80 years. Extended plant operation and SLR raise a number of technical issues that may require further research to understand and quantify aging mechanisms. U.S. utilities and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) have focused on the aging of systems, structures, and components and in particular four key SLR issues: reactor pressure vessel embrittlemenf, irradiation-assisted stress-corrosion cracking of reactor internals, concrete structures and containment degradation, and electrical cable qualification and condition assessment. Meanwhile, in recent years, a number of NPPs, both in the United States and internationally, have shut down or announced plans to shut down for various reasons, including economic, political, and technical challenges. Unlike in the past when there were very few plants shutting down, these new developments provide opportunities for harvesting components that were aged in representative light-water reactor environments. In a third related development. economic challenges and limited budgets have restricted the resources available to support new research, including harvesting programs. Given this constrained budget environment, aligning interests and leveraging with other organizations is important to allow maximum benefit and value for future research programs. Current Activities The NRC has recently undertaken an effort, with the assistance of Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, to develop a strategic approach to harvesting aged materials from NPPs. Because of limited opportunities, past harvesting efforts have been reactive to individual plants shutting down and beginning decommissioning. Given the expected availability of materials from numerous plants and anticipated research needs to better understand aging out to 80 years of operation, the NRC is pursuing a more proactive approach to prioritize the data needs best addressed by harvesting and identify the best sources of materials to address high-priority data needs for regulatory research. The first step in this strategic approach is to prioritize data needs for harvesting. A data need describes a particular degradation scenario and should be defined with as much detail as appropriate in terms of the material (alloy, composition, etc.) and environment (temperature. fluence, chemistry, etc.). Potential Criteria for Harvesting Prioritization A number of criteria may be considered when prioritizing the data needs for harvesting, including the following: , Applicability of harvested material for addressing critical gaps _ Harvesting for critical gaps is prioritized over less essential technical gaps. , Ease of laboratory replication of the degradation scenario _ For example, simultaneous thermal and irradiation conditions are difficult to replicate, and accelerated aging may not be feasible for a mechanism sensitive to dose rate.

• Unique field aspects of degradation

_ For example, unusual operating experience or legacy material (fabrication methods, etc.) is no longer available. , Fleet-wide vs. plant-specific applicability of data _ There is greater value in addressing an issue applicable to a larger number of plants. , Harvesting cost and complexity _ For example, harvesting unirradiated concrete or electrical cables is less expensive and less complex than harvesting from the reactor internals or reactor pressure vessel.

• Availability of reliable inservice inspection (ISi) techniques for the material/component

_ If mature inspection methods exist and are easy to apply, harvesting may be less valuable. , Availability of materials for harvesting , Timeliness of the expected research results relative to the objective. A j it.t ' /'::,* I / lifting operation for irradiated materials transport cask Harvesting Database The NRC is pursuing the development of a database for sources of materials for harvesting, which could include both previously harvested materials and those available for future harvesting. This database would allow for aligning high-priority data needs to the available sources of materials. The level of detail for the database should be appropriate for the factors influencing decisionmaking. The NRC is interested in engaging with other organizations in developing the database. Path Forward In the NRC's experience, harvesting can yield highly representative and valuable data on materials aging, but these efforts will be challenging. Having a clearly defined objective and early engagement with other stakeholders are keys to success. As specific harvesting opportunities are identified through this strategic approach, the NRC welcomes opportunities for cooperation and leveraging of resources with other interested research organizations. Plate A (41.22" wide) Plate C (7.8" wide) Example of reactor internals harvesting plan

From: Sent: To:

Subject:

From: Hull, Amy Hull, Amy Friday, May 19, 2017 10:42 AM Hiser, Matthew Appendix 2 has what I wanted ---- sorry,...finishing now, 3rd version lost on citrix... [eom]: pis will you send me the draft summary report?: 3 sections revised -- CMB update 20170517. Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 10:37 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov> (b )(6)

Subject:

commenfinishing now, 3rd version lost on citrix.... : I will take along printout to! !and get any comments back to you by 8am tomorrow morning..... [eom]: pis will you send me the draft summary report?: 3 sections revised -- CMB update 20170517.docx ... a main thing, I think it would be useful to attach the agenda to the summary report as an appendix, and to have a table of contents at the front (since it is already 26 pages). This will be archived in ADAMS and you want to have the information easily retrievable in the future. I will send you the detailed corrections but as it stands it does not include title of presentations and attaching the agenda would avoid having to write this in. From: Hull, Amy Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2017 8:31 AM (b)(6) To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov::>... ***'

Subject:

I will take along printout toj land get any comments back to you by 8am tomorrow morning..... [eom]: pis will you send me the draft summary report?: 3 sections revised -- CMB update 20170517.docx From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2017 10:42 AM To: Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: pis will you send me the draft summary report?: 3 sections revised -- CMB update 20170517.docx Hi Amy, Sure thing - here you go © Please take a look and provide any comments or edits. Thanks! Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Fnginccr US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Oflice of Nuclear Regulatory Research Di, i~ion of Fngineering I Corro~ion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-415-2454 I Office: TWFN 10062

Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Hull, Amy Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2017 10:34 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

pis will you send me the draft summary report?: 3 sections revised -- CMB update 20170517.docx Strategic Approach for Obtaining Material and Component Aging Information (Amy Hull, Pat Purtscher, Matt Hiser) (LTRP) Strategic harvesting is one of the new tasks in the new SLR UNR that will replace NRR-2010-006. Staff are working on specific task for Strategic Harvesting in NRR-2017 -006. Final deliverable expected by early 2017. Final report publication will wait until after harvesting workshop in March. Proceedings from the Ex-Plant Materials Harvesting Workshop, held on March 7-8, are compiled in a CMB SharePoint site http://fusion.nrc.gov/res/team/de/cmb/LTO/default.aspx?RootFolder=%2Fres%2Fteam%2Fde%2Fcmb%2FLTO% 2FProqram%20Documents%2FStrategic%20Approach%20for%200btaininq%20Material%20and%20Component %20Aqinq%20lnformation&folderCTID=Ox012000A4119D2C08121 A4CAE71 D67 AEB499BF9&View={A08F4584 -F7E9-4960-9890-37F16055A 16F}. Good frank discussion witln external parties from DOE, EPRI, and international stakeholders on benefits and challenges of harvesting. CMB staff preparing workshop summary report (expected by end of May) and follow-up on action items with .interested workshop attendees focused on a database for sources of materials and prioritizing data needs for harvesting. Pradeep Ramuhalli, PNNL contractor, visited RES/DE/CMB staff concerning this project on 4/18/2017. This was a side-trip for another NOE/OLM project funded by DOE related to advanced reactors. One-pager submitted for DE management review. From: Hull, Amy Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2017 10:28 AM To: Frankl, Istvan (lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov) <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>; Moyer, Carol <Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov> Subject : 3 sections revised -- CM B update 20170517.docx 2

From: Hull, Amy Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 12:01 PM Frankl, Istvan To:

Subject:

answer plus more.... : ACTION: Topics for NRC/lndustry Materials Meeting in June Categories: Strategic R&D ex-plant materials (1) At the 3/13/2014 NRC/NEI quarterly meeting, both EPRI and PWROG mentioned that they were completing the review of their documents from the perspective of SLR. At that meeting, I mentioned the upcoming June meeting and how that would be a most welcome presentation (listing of references that both groups will revise for SLR, we need to make sure that our references in SLRGOs are consistent with that). (2) Here are my notes from our discussion last Thursday. Please read below and let me know if I do not adequately capture your thoughts. I can give the presentation anytime after May 12 (after NEI and NESCC presentations). Please can you direct me to where I can get access to the PWSCC briefing slides? I guess they are on Gdrive somewhere. 4/16/2015 Steve Frankl initiated discussion about Mgt briefing on SLR Somewhat parallel to PWSCC briefing just completed (amy action - get slides!) 40 slides, maybe 45 minutes with 15 minutes for discussion Briefing on entire scope of RES activity with license renewal & aging management o Historic o Where now o RES deliverables for DLR Talk about Commission requests o Be more prepared During recent mgt retreat, SLR was singled out on gap analysis and action plans o Relationship between regulatory & technical (research) issues o Look at gaps in process o Possible UNR revision or addition Build program o Discuss action plans about how going forward o Resource needs (additional staff for CMB) o Relationship of CMB with other parts of RES (ORA and DE (Rudland, Burke, Sydnor, etc)) o New SOW on harvesting ex-plant materials & database of research prioritization o How to get more out of our MOUs with DOE LWRS and EPRI L TO o International participation in programs (IAEA, CSNI, IFRAM, etc) From: Frankl, Istvan Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 5:19 PM To: RES_DE_CMB

Subject:

ACTION: Topics for NRC/Industry Materials Meeting in June 1

All, Please review Rob's request below and identify topics that we want to make sure are covered during subject materials meeting. Please provide inputs to me no later than COB Wednesday.

Thanks, Steve

---

Original Appointment-----

From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2015 10:38 AM To: Tregoning, Robert; Rudland, David; Frankl, Istvan; Rosenberg, Stacey; Alley, David; Karwoski, Kenneth; Mitchell, Matthew

Subject:

Topics for NRC/Industry Materials Meeting in June When: Thursday, April 23, 2015 9:00 AM-10:00 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & canada). Where: HQ-0WFN-09B02-12p All: Purpose is to identify topics that we want to make sure are covered during the materials meeting. Please come to the meeting with your recommendations after polling your staff. The draft topic list will then be shared with industry to finalize the meeting agenda. Meeting is a little later than normal this year, but this is the earliest date/time that everyone is available.

Cheers, Rob 2

From: Sent: To:

Subject:

Attachments: Hiser, Matthew Wednesday, November 08, 2017 4:33 PM Purtscher, Patrick; Audrain, Margaret; Tregoning, Robert Ex-Plant Harvesting Coordination Meeting Harvesting Needs Prioritization 11-8-17.xlsx Updated criteria titles and "ot her metals" spreadsheet per the feedback received last week. Let's try to run these "other metals" ideas and discuss at our next meeting. Thanks! Matt 1 Note to Requester: Attachment to this email document is immediately following.

Criteria Title Criticalness of Technical Gap Addressed Difficulty of Laboratory Replication Uniqueness Field Aspects of Degradation Applicability to US Operating Fleet Absence of Available Inspection Methods Lower Confidence in Relevant AMP Harvesting cost and complexity Timeliness of results Availability of materials for harvesting Description Harvesting to address critical gaps should be p1ioritized over less essential technical gaps Degradation mechanisms that are harder to replicate with simulated aging conditions would be of higher priority for harvesting. For example, simultaneous thermal and irradiation conditions are difficult to replicate outside of the plant environment. Alternatively, accelerated aging may not be feasible for a mechanism sensitive to dose rate. These two degradation mechanisms may be best evaluated using harvested materials. For example, legacy mate1ials (e.g., fabrication methods, composition) that are no longer available, but may play an important role in a potential degradation mechanism, would have a higher priority than harvesting materials that can be obtained from other sources. There is greater value in developi11g knowledge to address an issue that may be applicable to a larger number of plants compared to one that may only affect a relatively small number of plants. lf mature in pection methods exist and are easy to apply to monitor degradation, harvesting may be less valuable. lf inspection methods do not exist, harvesting may be essential to ensure confidence in the assessment of age-related degradation in that particular component. The less confidence that NRC staff has in the effectiveness of the relevant AMP, the higher priority for harvesting. Activities with higher costs and complexity are less attractive than similar activities with lower costs and that are simpler to execute.. For example, harvesting unirradiated concrete or electrical cables is less expensive and less complex than harvesting from the RPV intema.ls or the RPY. The ability of a potential harvesting program to provide timely results to support either a technical or regulatory need is important. Having high confidence that results will be timely increases the priority. The availability of materials to harvest for a particular data need is clearly essential and increases the priority. Scoring Guidance H = High MH = Medium-high M = Medium ML= Medium-low L= Low

METALS PurpoM I Tuting Planned Technic.al Knowl,edge G.ain,ed Likely extent d¥0i<I sweang in Void sweHit1g, meCNnieal PWRs dulll"lg t!:JcleodOO OC**iOl'I I ttQh nuence,eacso, inliemals....__ie$.. IASCC al'ld.....,_t on cnel<fta Ft.ldUr'e toughnet.S ~'* a1 real Thermtlllly aged u......_,,ted Fraclure leughne:H.....:1 OClftdiitionSIO~b CASS """°Mrucue aoc:elerated--.. data ~t,e~(1*2dp,i) Fraclure: ll)ughne:ss.....:1 F~ lOugMe$$,::f;lta ft$1M' limit CASS mietos.tru<:b'e 1--"fi.11'....... aLaior'I Def:enYline wf'lel'let sec mliga~on methods are~.i~niting Me(alllc.c:omiponents'Mlh NOE aod clesWctive SCC. etfeciiwness of flOE at deteCllonand..._._ Metallicoomponeolswllh NOE and desaructrve Detennne wheller fatlgl.8 Raws an, ir'litiM fa-- life ~r:ninaton IDrRsent in hioh*-,.,...,. localbons Crltl~H of T.chnleal GapAddreu.d Scor* Comme-nt Fas<l.ltl~ IOf _._,.....,;on Yalidatst..Que life Difficulty of Labor-.tory Replication Unlqueon.a Flekl.l5pecl5 of Degradation Seo,.. Comment ViQge QQtnPOSi'lions .,.,l'ffli$tieff8diali0r condibOns VnageQQtnPO$illOt'1$ ~~bCffllldialiOr V.Uge coqroSitiOt'ls .,.,te.ticfllodil!lliOr condiliOr'IS Actual~$ dNOE_..,millg;ilion ll!lftWOnmenessenllal Vfllage corr1)06dions and re.aislN; bad Ing conditions Tec.hnic:-11 Criteri.a AppliCifbilitY to us Ope~ting Fleet Score Comment ~ieablebPWRsMOretttan BWR$ (lagher temps l!ll'ld Absence of A'Rlilable ll'ISpec.tion Methods ~lo,VC-, $Wellil'lg; MRP0227 -viSual~lit,c l.ower Confidence In Relennt S I AMP CO<*,.vengel Score CQfflrl'lflnl S:wne conMel'lce n MRP022710i1Wiliy i$Sue$a'll~time 8ffi5for PrioritY Vt/f!IYhigl'ICO$l, bu'ltaclcQl dN i$ signrttant d'l;)llenge, 11::> Vety .-.."'111.-declsiOf'S IHietl M:lderale CO$l, but wrcud veauy~seOOtlficlel"lcen .-ge set o,.-cceie'**' l!lging KghOOSl.bulWOl.lefirletease c.:WI<lencien r~ -.iiion IHietl lb;ler* CO$l, bull wrcud we,atly lnctease oonlcSence In Nt>E and -~~tion methods Med&lm Moderale C06l M WOIAct 119atly lf09ase ~., ~119 liM cabilatJOnS Mem:.m TBO l80 I I

Need Description METALS Purposa / Testing Planned Measure fluence. Technical Knowledge Gained RPV - H1!11 nuence & high shirt vessel with wen-established unirr&diated proper1ie$ toughne5s, & chemistry as Through thickness section 10 a function of through-vafldate Quence & attenua1ion thi1;kne$S posilion Enable measuremeni of both the Charpy transrtioo RPV - Samples from wtualty curve and master oorve any vessel transition temperature TO models Pmvld8S data suppor'llng evoluUon from the use of coneladve (Charpy-based) to dlrect measurement (fracture toughness-based) approaches Altornatlve to Priority/ Unique.aspects of ISi Benefit I Significance Cost Harvestino? Value Basis for Priority harvested materials availablilitv? Hl!Jl cost not justilled by benefit Increases confidence gN'en surveil lance specimens Vintage compositions in e.xisting regulatory and well-estabfished and irradiattOfl ,eapp,o,ach High No LOW emritllement trend correlations conditions Hl!Jl cost not justified by benefit Increases confidence given surveillance specimens Vintage compositions in existing regulatory and well-established and realisOc irradia6on 8J)Pf08ch lf,gt, No LOW emrittlement trend correlations oondi6ons

Need Description ELECTRICAL l ow and medium voltage cables Cables protected with nre ,etardant coaling 1 E MOVs from haNioh and mild ec,vironmenls 1 E Ail operated valves; 4160 1E breakers 1 E Molded case breakers

• aov. 2sov oc. 125 voe.

1 E Relays lrom mild envitonment GE - HFA. Agastat timing 1'8lays, an)' from Westinghouse, Potter Brumfield, Stutllers Dunn etc.. Batteries Eleclrical penetrations Fire researd'l lnterest Electrical enclosures Distribubon: swi1digear, MCCs. LCs I Conttol: Horseshoe. SSCP. ASP. etc. Purposa / Testing Planned Technical Knowledge Gained Altornatlve to Priority/ Benefit I Significance Cost Harvestino? Value Basis for Priority Medium Medium Low Low Low Low HIGH Unique.aspects of ISi harvested materials availablilitv?

Altornatlve to Priority/ Need Description Purposa / Testing Planned Technical Knowledge Gained Benefit I Significance Cost Harvestino? Value Basis for Priority METALS CONCRETE Fills data gap for Struc.ture-s exposed to high Change in properties due extend~ ~anl ~iation to irradi1;1tion etfects Loss of strength due to irradiation operation Medium Post-tensioned structures Corrnslon of relnfo,cing steel, tenoon, liner, embedment Spent fuel pooJ and 11arisfe.r canai..boric acid attaclo. on concrete in PWR:s Allall Aggregate Reaebon lal'Q8 structural sections fot Eff8cts of concrete aging testing on structural capacity Medium Medium "-19d,um Validat8 assumpbons of aging eff8clS at larger scales High HIGH LOW LOW LOW LOW LOW Unique.aspects of ISi harvested materials availablilitv?

From: Sent: To:

Subject:

Attachments: Matt: Tregoning, Robert Tuesday, September 04, 2018 9:59 AM Hiser, Matthew Copy of Harvesting Needs Prioritization 8-31 -18 rlt.xlsx Copy of Harvesting Needs Prioritization 8-31-18 rlt.xlsx Note to requester: Attachment to this email is immediately following. Here's. my stab at RPV. There are certainly several other rows that could be added to list, but I'll let Mark take first stab at that.

Cheers, Rob

Criteria Title Crilicalness of Technical Gap Addressed Description Harvesling 10 address crilical gaps should be prioritized over less csscnlial 1cchnical gaps Scoring Guidance H = high risk significance / little to no available data MH = Medium-high risk significance / limited data available M = Moderate risk significance / some data available ML = low to moderate risk slgnficance / sufficient data available for regulatory decisions H = High MH = Medium-high M = Medium L = Low risk significance / large amount ML= Medium-low lmporlnncc of Hmves1cd Materials over Laboralory Aging Applicabili1y 10 US Operating Fleet Key considera1ions arc the ease of labornlory rcplica1ion of aging mechanism and unique field aspecls of the aging mechanism. Degradalion mechanisms that arc harder 10 rcplicalc wilh simulaled aging conditions would be ofi,igher priority for harvesting. For example, simu\\1aneous 1hcrmal and irradiation condi1ions arc diflicult to replicate outside of the plant environment. Alternatively, accelerated aging may nol be feasible for a mechanism scnsilivc 10 dose rate. These two degradation mechanisms may be best evaluated using harves1ed mlilerials. ror unique field aspecls, legacy materials (e.g., fabrication methods, composition) thal arc no longer available, but may play an iml)onant role in a polcntial degradation mechanism, would have a higher priority than harvesting materials I hat can be ob1aincd from 01hcr sources wi1h representative properties. There is grcnler value in developing knowledge lo address an issue !hat may be applicable to a larger number of plants compared to one I hat may only affccl a relatively small number of plants. of data available L = Low H = Nearly impossible to replicate service envlroment / critically Important to use* harvested materials MH = Challenging to replicate service envlroment I important to use harvested materials M = Possible with some limitations to replicate service envlroment I moderately important to use harvested materials ML= Not challenging to replicate service enviroment / less important to use harvested materials L = Very easy to replicate service enviroment I not important to use harvested materials H = All plants MH = AIIPWRs M = All BWRs or most PWRs ML = 15 plants L = <5 plants H = No or very limited inspection methods available/ low confidence in AMPs lf ma1urc inspcclion mcthods cxisl and arc easy to apply to monitor MH = Limited Inspection methods degradation, harvesting may be less valuable. If inspection methods available/ low-to-moderate confidence Regulatory Considernlions Related do 1101 exist, harvesting may be essenlial 10 ensure confidence in lhe In AMPs to Inspections an.d AMPs asscssmcnl ofagc-rcla1cd dc:grnda1ion in 1hat panieular M = Some inspection methods available Harvesting cos1 and complexity Timeliness of rcsullS Availability of materials for harvesting component The less confiden.ce 1ha1 NRC staff has in the / moderate confidence In AMPs effecliveness of 1he relcvanl AMP, the higher priorily for harvesting. ML = Good inspection methods available/ medium-high confidence In AMPs Activities with higher costs and complexity are less attractive than similar ac1ivilics wi1h lower costs and that arc simpler 10 execute.. For example, harvesting unirradiated concrete or eleclrical cables is less expensive and less complex lhan harvcsling from the R PY internals or the RPV. The ability of a potential harvesting program to provide timely results 10 support either a technical or regula1ory need is impo,1an1. Having high confidence 1ha1 results will be timely increases lhe priority. The availability of materials to harvest for a particular data need is clearly csscnlial and increases lhc priorily. L = Effective, well-accepted Inspection H = Highly Irradiated (>5 dpa) MH = Lightly irradiated/ contaminated M = Minimal contamination or high effort unirradiated ML = Unirradiated, moderate effort expected L = Unirradiated, low effort expected

Need Oescrfptlon RPV Pu,pose I Tasting Planned RPV - tigt, ftuence & high Measure fluenca. Basic Info shift wssel with well-tougtv,,ess. & chemistry as Through thickness section io es1abllshed urwradiated a funcbon of tl'lrough-vatdale fkJence & attenuabon nrrV><>rtie5 thidcne5S Do:sition models Enat:. measurement ol bolh the Ch~ transition RPV - Samples from wtualty curve and ma*r curve I anv vessel tran~ tem,_..,.hse TO Provides data 5141porting eY~ from the uss of oorrelaliwl: (Charpy-based) to dired measurement (fl'aeu-e 1ooghM:ss-based) a"""'""--hes Technk:.al Criteria Proiect Soecific Regl.btory Conslder,tloni Cost I Complolity Av11llablflty of Related to Inspections e,nd Score Avere,ge Basis f<< Technkal Priority "'::~:: 5 of materlals for h.arvestlno AMPs S<:o,.. C~nt Score Comment Score Comment Score Commit1u M M This WOf1(. has been done belore ""'""'od-wt:n. Should klcus oo higer flue~ to Yfriy that n,,e ate.ruatioo trends m.ain&ained. MH I befieve that enough data has been devek>ped from both test and siJVeb)ce t.t... There are ncx many stu<ies that wradial& 6 ID 9 inches of steel so, from that standpon. getting specimens from an RPV ars Important tor studytng atten.J.atioo M The onty real.cfYantage tn rny rrind for having vessel material for this study is that h&re are no queslliOns aboul1he MH Whie the information Should be genericalty aPQricable, if~ for soma reason.. 11a resutts are onty applicable 10 *high ftuence'" materials/locations, th.rs might resul in les.s relevaooe IO lower tlU8f'IC8 plants finc1Ud1ng BWRsl. Ml My ltdonnation deveklped ~ beaenericail"'...-...w,.,ble tJIL The attenuaoon models helve the least amc;IUl1 of supporting inf0ffll3tion compared to othet aspeds re&aledioRPV ambc'itlktm9nl. However. 5tudies IO 08te have a>nservativism of existing atttenuatlan models used inrera112tr.v i:u1~s. M We h8Ve 8$ good~ ccnfid&nce in RPV emblittlemeot than wtuaHy any other degradation that we study. The cdy"reaJ M - ML Score COfl'k'l'lent The attanuatiOn study it sightly more irnp()f"wlflt to me. juSt because there are fewer such studies that have been done. Bang able to confirm expected trends at hq,er I\\Jeocs NMMS would therefore be useful. MH WMe ifs always useful to have more data, especially on RPV materials, I feel that OUI" models anaay nave a good lechnic:1111 ha~$. MH The resuls would be trnely iflhey are deYeloped Mateool is imldiated bekwe 2024 Of' wtueh will al'led al so to QOinc:ide aspectS of specimen with ttie preparatiOn and adcitit;ni~ OCher than Zion 1esting Furtler, lnlormatkln ~rial$, rm lalongspeamens at being collected nalawa.-aof several through-from industfy oihef RPVs that lhlckness locabons surviallance are avalat* for wiU increlitSe cost 1..........,81Tl$ h.llve-51:nl. Material is irradiated The results Olher than Zion whfch will affect al would be tmely materiars. rm aspects of specimen if lhey 8re nol awaire ol prepa,at.aon and daYeloped olher RPVs that lestina. before 2024 Of are avaiable for

Basic Info Technk:.al Criteria Proiect Soecific Pu,pose I Tasting Criticalness of Technical Importance of Harvested Regl.btory Conslder,tloni Cost I Complolity Timeliness of Av11llablflty of Need Oescrfptlon Planned Technical Knowle4ge Gained Gap Addressvd l/lat&rials ovvr Laboratory Aging AppUcabllity to US Operating Fleet Related to Inspections and Score Average Basis f<< Technkal Priority resulb materlals for AMPs h.arvestlno METALS S<o,. CCll'l'\\l'Mnt Score Comment Score Comment Score Commtt1t Score Comment EPRI pe,forming R&D on Laboratory repicatkln 'llf!:'Y NOE fo<-swelklg; cifficut to impossible IO MRP-227 uses prwna,rily Signilicance of void swelling at Likety extenl d void swelling in Fillsdatagapfof aclieYe fluences with visual testing, which co!Ad higher ftuences is uncertain, Very Ngh cosl 1of VOid ~ ling, meet\\aniea! PWRs during extended opeta11on extended pla,. representative irradlatJOn APl)lcable to high-nuence detect void sweu.ng once and inspectiO(ls may cjetect hl!1"Y"""'- I ~ ftuence reclCIQr internals prnnariio,,5, IASCC and impillC:I on aadtina M - con<ilioo,; MH components in most PWRs MH fairtv~~nt 3.75 onset cfsiariificenideorad.ltion VH internals TBO Would greatty inaease Moderate cost for Purpose Ol 'NOl1t WOt..6::1 be conlid&ncs in large set of eontamriated. but Frac,,,,-e 1oughness daia in real Validate to p,o,,iide real-world ec:oeterated aging data with not irradiated, Thermally aged ~tt!d F raetura toughness and concitions to compari!!t IO aoc:eler.illled agng vaidation Of ac::ot!IGrated Most applieabla to a subset Of No ISi method avaiabkl to testing of urwtaciatsd primary stsem CASS miet05VUclure ~,ed_.......dala clata H 1,,.....,......, in Lab MC.tW. M PWRs H meais1Xe loss of FT 4.25 materials M May be possible. but cfifficui to reQlica!e long-High cost for Modera:e nvence (1 ~2 dpa) Fracture toughness and Fracture loug'Wle$$ daia near limi1 Confirm reg<N!Ory tenn aging and irradialion Mosi applicable to a subset of No ISi method availat:ite to Wovld increase contidenoe n itradialed CASS miCl'ostruciure ,enilirinnfurtherevaluation ML OOsio> MH *ff-M PWRs H measure loss of FT 3.5 ; r-..,latory POSition H 1,-nts Moderate cost for Determine whether sec mitigation Purposed this work is IO contaminated. but methods ace etleclive al preventing Validate NOE and Purpose Of 'NOl1t woi.Ad be assess SJspection and not inadiated. Metallic compooents with NOE and deslnJdive sec; elfectiv..,.ss of NOE at mitigotionm-top,u.,idereal-world mtigationmethod Increase confidence in NOE prim3fy stsem exalTW\\cltion detec:b::lc°landsizinQ MH e,ffediveness MH vaidallon Of lab testinQ H A~toi!llli,lants Ml effectiveness 3.75 and mmnamn methods M 1,-nts ModeratEI 00$1 lor conuminated, but Purpose Ol 'NOl1t WOl.*i bi!!t Fatigue calcul.atiOns in!Otm notffadiated, Metallic compooents with NOE and cJesWCUve Determine wheiher fatigue flaws are Validate faligue life to pn)'o'ide reaJ.wortd sampling W'ISJ;Jections of Increase cori6dence in fatigue primwy stsem li'nitina bt........ hfe exanh.bon oresent,n......,.. usaoe locahons... melhodoloa,es... valdabon of lab tesbno H A~toalclants ML Im"""' ~l)8 locabons 3.25 ife ca1culabons M '-nts

Need Description El.£CTRICAL Low and medlum voltage cables Cables ptOlacted With fira reaardant coating 1E MOVs from harsh and mild enwonments tE Air operated valves; 4160 1E breakatS 1E Molded case breakers 480V, 250V DC, 125 VDC. 1E Relays from mid environment GE - HFA. Agasta1 tirniog relays, any from Westinghouse, Potter Brumliekl, Stuther.i Dunn ' dr_ Batteries EJecttical DAn&trabonS Electrical enclosures Distribution: switchgear, MCCs. LCs I Control: Horseshoe. SSCP. AS? etc. Purpose / Testing Planned Basic Info Technical Knowledge Gained Criticalness. of Technical Gap Addressed Score Comment Importance of Harvested Materials over Laboratory An... Score Comment Technical Crite..ia Regulatory Conskferations Applicability to US Operating Fleet Rel ated to Inspections and Score Average AMPs Score Comment Score Comment Cost / Comple:xity Basis for Priority Score 1 Comment Pro*ect s - 1fic nmelines.s. of Avti\\.abilrty of materials for results harvestina

Need Description CONCRETE Structixes exposed 10 tjgh radiation Post-tens.oned structures Cocros.ion of reinlorang steel. tendon, liner, embedment ~t fuel pool and ttanster canal*bonc acid attack on concrete in PWRs Alkali Aggregate Reaction LMge structu,al sacUons for testing Purpose / Testing Planned Basic Info Technical Knowledge Gained Criticalness. of Technical Gap Addressed Score Comment Importance of Harvested Materials over Laboratory An... Score Comment Technical Crite..ia Regulatory Conskferations Applicability to US Operating Fleet Related to Inspections and Score Average AMPs Score Comment Score Comment Cost / Comple:xity Basis for Priority Score 1 Comment Pro*ect s-1fic nmelines.s. of Avti\\.abilrty of materials for results harvestina

From: Sent: To:

Subject:

Attachments: Hiser, Matthew Friday, December 01, 2017 2:51 PM Tregoning, Robert; Audrain, Margaret; Purtscher, Patrick Data Needs Prioritization Harvesting Needs Prioritization 12-1-17.xlsx Note to requester: Attachment to this email is immediately following. Here's the new version with updated criteria and scoring guidance per our discussion on Monday. Let's try to work the examples with this version before the next meeting on Wednesday. Thanks! Matt

Criteria Title Cri1icalness of Technical Gap Addressed Description l-larves1ing 10 address cri1ical gaps should be prioritized over less csscnlial technical gaps Scoring Guidance H = high risk significance / little to no available data MH = Medium-high risk significance/ limited data available M = Moderate risk significance / some data available ML = low to moderate risk slgnflcance / sufficient data available for regulatory decisions H = High MH = Medium-high M = Medium L = Low risk significance/ large amount ML= Medium-low Key considerations arc 1hc case of laboralory replication of aging mechanism and unique field aspects of the aging mechanism. Degrada1ion mechanisms that are harder to replicate with simulated aging conditions would be of higher priority for harvesting. For example, simultaneous thennal and irradiation conditions arc diflicult to replicate outside of the pla11t environment. Altematively, lmportance ofH.arvesled accelerated aging may nol be feasible for a mechanism sensitive to Materials over Laboratory Aging dose rate. These two degradation mechanisms may be best evaluated using harvested mate1ials. For unique field aspects, legacy materials (e.g., fabrication methods, composition) that arc no longer available, but may play an impo11ant role in a potential degradation mechanism, would have a higher priority than harvesting matc,ials that can be obtained from other sources with representative pro1Jcr1ics. of data available L = Low H = Nearly impossible to replicate service envlroment / critically Important to use harvested materials MH = Challenging to replicate service envlroment / Important to use harvested materials M = Possible with some limitations to replicate service envlroment / moderately important to use harvested materials ML= Not challenging to replicate service enviroment / less important to use harvested materials L = Very easy to replicate service onvirnmont / nnt imnnrf!:lnt tn 11c:o Applicability to US Operating Fleet H =All plants There is greater value i11 developing knowledge 10 address,111 issue MH = All PWRs that may be applicable to a larger number of plants compared to one M = All BWRs or most PWRs that may only affect a relatively small number of plants. ML= 15 plants H = No or very limited Inspection methods available/ low confidence in AMPs If mature inspection methods exist and arc easy 10 apply to monitor MH = Limited inspection methods degradation. harvesting may be less valuable. If inspection methods available/ low-to-moderate confidence Regulatory Considerations Related do not exist, harvesting may be essential to ensure confidence in the In AMPs 10 Inspections ai,d AMPs assessment of age-related degradation in that particular M = Some inspection methods available Harvesting cost and complexity Timeliness of resultS Availability of materials for harvcstinc component.The less confidence that NRC staff has in the / moderate confidence in AMPs effectiveness of the rclcvunt AMP. the higher prio,ity for harvesting. ML = Good inspection methods available / medium-high confidence in AMPs Activities with higher costs and complexity are less attractive than similar uctivities with lower costs and that urc simpler to execute.. For example, harvcs1ing unirradia1cd concrete or electrical cables is less expensive and less complex than harvesting from the RPV internals or the RPV. The ability of a potential harvesting program to provide timely results to support either a technical or regulatory need is important. I laving high confidence that results will be timely increases the ptiotity. The availability of materials to harvest for a particular data need is clcarlv essential and increases the oriotitv. L = Effective, well-accepted Inspection H = Highly Irradiated (>5 dpa) MH = Lightly irradiated / contaminated M = Minimal contamination or high effort unirradiated ML= Unlrradlated, moderate effort expected L = Unirradiated, low effort expected

Need Description METALS Purpose I Testing Planned Vold swelllng. mechanical Hiah ftuenoe reactor internals rvnt-11Ac::, IASCC Thermaty aged UfWT3dlated Fracture too~ ess and CASS microstructure Moderat.efluenoe (1*2dpa) Fracture toughless and l r-11.ee mi-*- **~*,,,,. Metallic components with NOE and de$tructlve known Haws exal'rinatlon Metallic components with NOE and destructive Jiimitma f.,.tw.,... life P.XRmim:iticm Basic Info Technical Knowledge Gained Likely extenl of void swelling WI PWRs during extended operation

• nn Fracture toughness data in real concitions to oom paie to Frac:ture toughness data near limit p _

........ -,.-~ -

• ~"'*..........

Determine whether sec mitigation metl'IOds ate effecti~ at pr'8YeftbnQ sec: effectiveness o1 NOE at Determine whether fatigue flaws are --nt in hiah usROe ~ .. ~ Critie~lnu.s of Technic.,I Gap Addressed Score Comment iffll>O.Unet of Huvu tt d Materials over Laboratory An'- Score Comment Technical Criteria Rt11ulatory Contldt l'IIIOM Applicability to US Operating Fleet Related to Inspections and AMP* Score Comment Score Convnent Protect s-*tic Cost I Complexity Score Average Basis for Priority Score Comment TBD TBO

Need Description METALS Purpose/ Testing Planned RPV - High ftLJeflce & high Measure ftuence, Technical Knowledge Gained shift yessel with well* toughness, & chemistry as Through thk:kness sectioo to established unirradiated a function of through* validate fluenoe & atteriuation Ol'onArtjej; thir:kne!I...,;; noJi.itinn models Enable measurement of both the Charpy transition RPV

• Samples from virtually curve and master curve any vessel transition temperature TO Provides data supporting evotutlon from the use of cortelatl... e (Charpy-based) to direct measurement (fracture toughness-based) approaches Altornalive to Priority /

Unique aspects of ISi Benefit I Significance Cost Harvestino? Value Basis for Priority harvested materials availablilitv? Increases confidence in e,cisting regulatory approach H;gh No lnaeases confidence In existing regulatory approach High No High cost not justified by benefit given surveillance specimens Vintage compositions and well-estabUshed and irradiation LOW emrittlemeni trend c.n,relRtinns conditions High cost not Justified by benefit given surveillance specimens Vintage composltlons and well-established and reallstlc irradiation LOW emrittlement trend co,relations conditions

Need Description ELECTRICAL Low and medium vol.age

cablee, Cables pro1eciecl with rue

,etardant coallll!l 1 E MOVs rrom harsh and mlld envlronmeflts 1E AA operated vatves; 4160 1E breakers 1 E Molded case breakers 480V. 250VDC. 125VDC. 1 e. Relays from mild environment GE - HFA, Agastat timing relays. any from Westinghouse, Potter Brumfield, Stuthers Dunn

• le Batteries Eleclrical penetrations Fire research interest E.Jectrical enctosures Distribution: switchgear, MCCs, LCs I Control; Horseshoe. SSCP. ASP. etc.

Purpose/ Testing Planned Technical Knowledge Gained Altornalive to Priority / Benefit/ Significance Cost Harvestino? Value Basis for Priority Medium Medium Medium Low Low Low Low HIGH Unique aspects of ISi harvested materials availablilitv?

Need Description METALS CONCRETE Structures exposed to high radiaoon Post.tensioned structures Corrosion of reinforcing steel, tendon. liner. embedment $pent fuel pool and lransfer canal-boric: ac:id attack Of1 wnc:rele in PWRs Altai! Aggregate Reaction large structural sec.tions for testing Purpose/ Testing Planned Change in properties due to irradia6on effects Effects of concrete aging on structural capacity Altornalive to Priority / Unique aspects of ISi Technical Knowledge Gained Benefit I Significance Cost Harvestino? Value Basis for Priority harvested materials availablilitv? Fins data gap for extended plant Loss of strength due to irradiation ooerallon High HIGH Medium LOW Medium LOW Medium LOW Medium LOW Validate assumpllons of aging effects at laroer scales H,gh LOW

From: To: Subject : Date: Importance: Thanks, Pat. Frankl Istvan Purtscher Patrick RE: CONTRACTOR INADVERTENTLY RELEASED A DRAFT REPORT TO THE PUBLIC Friday, September 28, 2018 11 :27:03 AM High Note to requester: Highlighted portions of this email document were in the original document provided to the FOIA team. I agree with Sandra's highlighted statement below. We need to close the loop with PNNL on this ASAP. This is very important given the fact that t he released report was not marked draft and did not have disclaimer. As discussed, I need stat us update on this before noon Monday so I can report on this to DE management at t he DE weekly meet ing at 1 PM. Steve From: Purtscher, Patrick Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 8:55 AM To: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Audrain, Margaret <Margaret.Audrain@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Allen <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

FW: CONTRACTOR INADVERTENTLY RELEASED A DRAFT REPORT TO THE PUBLIC Latest st at us. Pat From: Nesmith, Sandra Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2018 5:33 PM To: OPA Resource <OPA.Resource@nrc.gov> Cc: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick Purtscher@nrc gov>

Subject:

CONTRACTOR INADVERTENTLY RELEASED A DRAFT REPORT TO THE PU BLIC One of our contractors, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), inadvertently released a draft report on their public website that was still incorporating comments from RES and NRR. This report was placed on their public website back in December 2017; however, staff in RES were just made aware of this at a public meeting yesterday. I don't think that the report contained any proprietary information or anything that could potentially be harmful to the NRC, but it did have incomplete information and included many statements about critical gaps in our knowledge related to aging components and structures that could be construed as NRC position. PNNL has taken the report down and is working to find out what happened. However, is there anything more that we should do or ask PNNL to do, such as put out a notice that a draft report was inadvertently released, etc.? I'm not sure of everything that we do when this happens here at NRC. Patrick Purtscher is the COR for this particular contract so I

have also copied him on this email, and I am also including the email exchange below. Any advice you could provide would be greatly appreciated. Thanks Sandra R. Nesmith Operations Branch B Acquisition Management Division Office of Administration Mail Stop: TWFN 7839 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 (301) 415-6836 Sandra.nesmith@nrc.gov From: Nesmith, Sandra Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2018 2:05 PM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick Purtscher@nrc gov>

Subject:

RE: issue with PNN L NRC-HQ-60-15-T-0023

Patrick, I will have a short meeting with my boss about this later on this afternoon when she is available; however, I am thinking that PNNL should at least put out some type of notice tha 1 the report wasn't final and was inadvertently released. I have to check to see what w would do it happened here. They should also let us know what steps they will take in the future to ensure this doesn't haimen again.

I will be in touch. Sandy From: Purtscher, Patrick Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2018 1:29 PM To: Nesmit h, Sandra <Sandra.Nesmit h@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: issue with PNNL NRC-HQ-60-15-T-0023 It will be public once it is completed. The draft was started before GALL-SLR was complete and included many statement about critical gaps in our knowledge related to aging components and structures. The text implies that material harvesting from decommissioned and/or operating plants has to be done before SLR applications can be accepted. Pat From: Nesmith, Sandra

Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2018 1:23 PM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: issue wit h PNNL NRC-HQ-60-15-T-0023 Patrick I haven't had this happen before so I will have to check with some of the other contracting officers here in AMO. Was there any information that could potentially be harmful to the NRC? Would this report have been released to the public once final? From: Purtscher, Patrick Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2018 1:01 PM To: Nesmit h, Sandra <Sandra Nesmith@nrc gov>

Subject:

issue with PNNL NRC-HQ-60-15-T-0023 Hi, You were listed as the contract officer on this task order with PNNL. I took over as COR in May 2016. PNNL is finishing a report to complete phase 1 and PNNL released to the public by accident. I am not sure how we should proceed. Are they any precedents for how to address this? Pat 415-3942 Good evening, From: Purtscher, Patrick Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2018 3:51 PM To: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>; Alley, David <David.Alley@nrc.gov>; Ruffin, Steve <Steve.Ruffio@nrc.gov> Cc: Hiser, Allen <Allen Hjser@nrc.gov>; Rud land, David <David Rudland@nrc gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Audrain, Margaret <Margaret.Audra i n@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: RES Follow-up on Gunter question during today's public meeting re. PNNL harvest ing report

All,

Looks like PNNL publications folks have pulled it back from a public listing. PNNL is not sure how it got loose, but apparently somewhere along the way it got listed in the system as unlimited distribution and was posted to OSTI. PNNL is still trying to figure out what went wrong and how it got past the multiple checks they have in place to avoid precisely this issue. We should talk more about this tomorrow. Paat From: Frankl, Istvan Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2018 2:43 PM To: Alley, David <David.Alley@nrc.gov>; Ruffin, Steve <Steve.Ruffio@nrc.gov> Cc: Hiser, Allen <Al!en,Hiser@nrc.gov>; Rud land, David <David,Rudlaod@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert Tregoning@nrc gov>; Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick Purtscher@nrc gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew Hiser@nrc gov>; Audrain, Margaret <Margaret Audrain@nrc gov>

Subject:

RES Follow-up on Gunter question during today"s public meeting re. PNNL harvesting report Importance: High All: This morning it was brought to my attention that during today"s public meeting Gunter referenced the PNNL report on harvesting. Needless to say that RES staff was quite taken aback by this. As you're aware, this report is still in draft form and is currently incorporating comments from both RES and NRR. We've gone back and found that, unbeknownst to RES, the report was placed on the PNNL public website back in December 2017. What Gunter has is therefore an early version of the draft report that doesn't include several rounds of NRG comments. However, there is no indication within the report released on the website that the report is still a draft and the inside cover also indicates, correctly, that the work was done under NRG sponsorship. This leaves the impression, as reinforced by Gunter, that the contents of the report could be construed as NRG position. RES is taking the follow immediate action.

1. We are working with PNNL to get the report removed from the public website as soon as possible.

2. We are trying to determine how this happened and what remediation steps are appropriate for this particular action.

3. Based on our findings, we will be recommending procedural changes in how PNNL releases information to the public for NRG-sponsored research.

Thanks, Steve}}